Results 1 to 40 of 40

Thread: *** ARTICLE *** Decreasing insulin resistance and increasing sensitivity

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    17,443

    *** ARTICLE *** Decreasing insulin resistance and increasing sensitivity

    I came across an interesting article regarding being able to decrease resistance to insulin and become more sensitive. In our game, we ideally want to be very insulin sensitive meaning we do not need to secrete much to get the desired response within our cells.

    Anyway, this article is geared towards diabetics but that doesn't mean it's irrelevant. It's a bit lengthy but worth reading:

    ************************************************** *********

    Can Insulin Sensitivity Be Restored?

    Insulin sensitivity can be restored to its original state, well, perhaps not to its original state, but you can restore it to the state of about a 10-year-old.

    One of my first experiences with this, I had a patient who literally had sugars over 300. He was taking over 200 units of insulin, and he was a bad cardiovascular patient, so I put him on a low-carbohydrate diet.

    He was an exceptional case, after one month to six weeks he was totally off of insulin. He had been on over 200 units of insulin for 25 years. He was so insulin resistant, but one thing good about it is that when you lower that insulin, that insulin is having such little effect on him that you can massively lower the insulin and its not going to have much of an effect on his blood sugar. Two hundred units of insulin is not going to lower your sugar any more that 300 mg/deciliter.

    You know that the insulin is not doing much, so we could rapidly take him off the insulin and he was actually cured of his diabetes in a matter of weeks. He became sensitive enough and was still producing a lot of insulin on his own. Then we were able to measure his own insulin. It was still elevated, and it took a long time, maybe six months or longer, to bring that insulin down.

    It will probably never get to the point of the sensitivity of a 10-year-old, but yes, your number of insulin receptors increases and the activity of the receptors, the chemical reactions that occur beyond the receptor, occur more efficiently.

    How to Increase Insulin Sensitivity

    You can increase sensitivity by diet, which is one of the major reasons to take omega-3 oils. We think of circulation as that which flows through arteries and veins, and that is not a minor part of our circulation, but it might not even be the major part. The major part of circulation is what goes in and out of the cell.

    The cell membrane is a fluid mosaic. The major part of our circulation is determined by what goes in and out. It doesn't make any difference what gets to that cell if it can't get into the cell. We know that one of the major ways that you can affect cellular circulation is by modulating the kinds of fatty acids that you eat. So you can increase receptor sensitivity by increasing the fluidity of the cell membrane, which means increasing the omega-3 content, because most people are very deficient.

    They say that you are what you eat and that mostly pertains to fat because the fatty acids that you eat are the ones that will generally get incorporated into the cell membrane. The cell membranes are going to be a reflection of your dietary fat and that will determine the fluidity of your cell membrane. You can actually make them over fluid.

    If you eat too much and you incorporate too many omega-3 oils then they will become highly oxidizable (so you have to eat Vitamin E and monounsaturates as well).

    There was an interesting study pertaining to this where they had a breed of rat that was genetically susceptible to cancer. Researchers fed them a high-omega-3 diet, plus iron, without any extra Vitamin E and they were able to almost shrink down the tumors to nothing because tumors are rapidly dividing. This is like a form of chemotherapy, and the membranes that were being formed in these tumor cells were very high in omega-3 oils. The iron acted as a catalyst for that oxidation, and the cells were exploding from getting oxidized so rapidly. So omega-3 oils can be a double-edged sword. In fact, most food is a double-edged sword.

    Like oxygen and glucose, food keeps us alive and kills us. Eating is the biggest stress we put on our body and that is why in caloric restriction experiments you can extend life as long as you maintain nutrition. This is the only proven way of actually reducing the rate of aging, not just the mortality rate but the actual rate of aging.

    It has actually been shown by quite a number of papers that resistance training for insulin resistance is better than aerobic training. There are a variety of other reasons too. Resistance training is referring to muscular exercises. If you just do a bicep curl, you immediately increase the insulin sensitivity of your bicep. Just by exercising you are increasing the blood flow to that muscle, and one of the factors that determines insulin sensitivity is how blood can get there. It has been shown conclusively that resistance training will increase insulin sensitivity.

    Protein’s Role

    Now, back to the macronutrients. As I said before, you don't want very much in the way of non-fiber carbs, but fiber carbs are great. You are going to get some non-fiber carbs though. Even if you just eat broccoli you are going to get some non-fiber carbs. That is OK since for the most part you are getting something that is really pretty good for you.

    Protein is an essential nutrient. You want to use it as a building block because your body requires protein to repair damage and replenish enzymes. All of the encoded instructions from your DNA are to encode for proteins. That is all the DNA encodes for. You need protein, but you want to use it as a building block. I don't believe in going over and above the protein that you need to use for maintenance, repair and building blocks.

    I don't think you should be using protein as a primary fuel source, though your body can use protein very well as a fuel source. It is good to lose weight while using it as a fuel source because it is an inefficient fuel source. Protein is very thermogenic, meaning it produces a lot of heat, which means that less of it is going into stored energy and more is being dissipated--just like throwing a log into a fireplace. Your primary fuel should be coming from fat.

    You can calculate the amount of protein a person requires or at least estimate it by their activity level. The book "Protein Power" actually went very well in to this. You have to calculate how much protein is required by activity level and lean body mass. There is still some gray area as to how many grams per kilogram of lean body mass, depending on the activity that person requires.

    It can range anywhere from one to two grams of protein per kilogram of lean body mass, maybe even a little bit higher if someone is really active. You don't want to go under that amount for very long. It is better to go over than to go under that amount for very long.

    If you can cure a diabetic of diabetes, you can do the same thing to a so-called non-diabetic person and still improve that person. I want to improve my insulin sensitivity just as much as I do my diabetics because insulin sensitivity is going to determine, for the most part, how long you are going to live and how healthy you are going to be. It determines the rate of aging more so than anything else we know right now.

    Supplements

    What about supplements such as Chromium?

    All of my diabetics go on 1,000 mcg of chromium, some a little bit more if they are really big people. The amount is usually 500 mcg for a non-diabetic, though it depends on their insulin levels.

    I use a lot of supplements. What you really want to do is to try to convert the person back into being an efficient burner of fat. Earlier we talked about when you are very insulin resistant and you are waking up in the morning with an insulin level that is elevated, you cannot burn fat but instead are burning sugar.

    One of the reasons that sugar goes up so high is because that is what your cell is needing to burn, but if it is so insulin resistant it requires a blood sugar of 300 so that just by mass action some can get into the cell and be used as fuel. If you eliminate that need to burn sugar, you don't need such high levels of sugar even if you are insulin resistant.

    You want to increase the ability of the cells in the body to burn fat and make that glucose burner into a fat burner. You want to make a gasoline-burning car into a diesel-burning car. Did anyone ever look at the molecular structure of diesel fuel in your spare time? It looks almost identical to a fatty acid. There is a company right now that can tell you how to alter vegetable oil to use in your Mercedes. It's just a matter of thinning it out a little bit. It is a very efficient fuel.

    Triglycerides

    You can look at other variables that will give you some idea too, such as triglycerides. If people are very sensitive to high levels of insulin, they come in with insulin levels of 14 and they have triglycerides of 1000. You would treat them just as you would if they had an insulin level of 50. It gives you some idea of the effect of the hyperinsulinemia on the body.

    You can use triglycerides as a gauge, which I often do. The objective is to try to get the insulin level just as low as you possibly can. There is no limit. They classify diabetes now as a fasting blood sugar of 126 or higher. A few months ago it might have been 140. It is just an arbitrary number. Does that mean that someone with a blood sugar of 125 is non-diabetic and fine? If you have a blood sugar of 125 you are worse than if you had a blood sugar of 124--same with insulin. If you have a fasting insulin of 10, you are worse off than if you had an insulin of 9. You want to get it just as low as you can.

    Does This Apply to Athletes?

    With athletes, think about the effect of carbohydrate loading before an event. What happens if you eat a bowl of pasta before you have to run a marathon? What does that bowl of pasta do? It raises your insulin. What is the instruction of insulin to your body?

    To store energy and not burn it. I see a fair amount of athletes and this is what I tell them, you want everybody, athletes especially, to be able to burn fat efficiently. So when they train, they are on a very low-carbohydrate diet. The night before their event, they can stock up on sugar and load their glycogen if they would like.

    They are not going to become insulin resistant in one day. Just enough to make sure, it has been shown that if you eat a big carbohydrate meal that you will increase your glycogen stores, that is true and that is what you want. But you don't want to train that way because if you do you won't be able to burn fat, you can only burn sugar, and if you are an athlete you want to be able to burn both.

    Few people have problems burning sugar if they are athletes, but they have lots of problems burning fat, so they hit the wall. And for certain events, like sprinting, it is less important, truthfully for their health it is very important to be able to burn fat, but a sprinter will go right into burning sugar. If you are a 50-yard dash person, whether you can burn fat or not is not going to make a huge difference in your final performance.

    Beyond your athletic years, if you don't want to become a diabetic, and don't want to die of heart disease and don't want to age quickly, it is certainly not going to do you any harm to be able to burn fat efficiently in addition to sugar.

    Vanadyl Sulfate

    Vanadyl Sulfate is an insulin mimic, so that it can basically do what insulin does by a different mechanism. If it went through the same insulin receptors, then it wouldn't offer any benefit, but it doesn't, it actually has been shown to go through a different mechanism to lower blood sugar, so it spares insulin and then it can help improve insulin sensitivity. To really lower a person’s insulin, I give 25 mg 3 times a day temporarily.

    Glutamine Powder

    I also put people on glutamine powder. Glutamine can act as a brain fuel, so it helps eliminate carbohydrate cravings while they are in that transition period. I like to give it to them at night, and I tell them to use it whenever they feel they are craving carbohydrates. They can put several grams into a little water and drink it and it helps eliminate carbohydrate cravings between meals.

    A high-protein diet will increase an acid load in the body, but not necessarily a high-fat diet. Vegetables and greens are alkalinizing, so if you are eating a lot of vegetables along with your protein it equalizes the acidifying effect of the protein. I don't recommend a high-protein diet; I recommend an adequate protein diet.

    Fat in the Diet

    I think you should be using fat as your primary energy source, and fat is kind of neutral when it comes to acidifying or alkalinizing. In general, over 50 percent of the calories should come from fat, but not from saturated fat. When we get to fat, the carbohydrates are clear-cut. No scientist out there is really going to dispute what I've said about carbohydrates.

    There is the science behind it. You can't dispute it. There is a little bit of a dispute as to how much protein a person requires. When you get to fat, there is a big gray area as to which fat a person requires. We just have one name for fat, we call it fat or oil. Eskimos have dozens of names for snow and east Indians have dozens of names for curry. We should have dozens of names for fat because they do many different things. And how much of which fat to take is still open to a lot of investigation and controversy.

    My take on fat is that if I am treating a patient who is generally hyperinsulinemic or overweight, I want them on a low-saturated-fat diet, because most of the fat they are storing is saturated fat. When their insulin goes down and they are able to start releasing triglycerides to burn as fat, what they are going to be releasing mostly is saturated fat. So you don't want them to take anymore orally. There is a ration of fatty acids that is desirable if you took them from the moment you were born, but we don't. We are dealing with an imbalance here that we are trying to correct as rapidly as we can.

    Most of us here have enough saturated fat to last the rest of our life. Truthfully. Your cell membranes require a balance of saturated and poly-unsaturated fat, and it is that balance that determines the fluidity. As I mentioned, your cells can become over-fluid if they don't have any saturated fat.

    Saturated fat is a hard fat. We can get the fats from foods to come mostly from nuts. Nuts are a great food because it is mostly mono-unsaturated. Your primary energy source ideally would come mostly from mono-unsaturated fat. It's a good compromise. It is not an essential fat, but it is a more fluid fat. Your body can utilize it very well as an energy source.

    Grain-Fed Animals are not Healthy

    Animal proteins are good for you, but not the ones that are fed grains.

    Grain-fed animals are going to make saturated fat out of the grains. Saturated fat in nature occurs to a very tiny degree. In the wild there is very little saturated fat out there. If you talk about the Paleolithic diet, we didn't eat a saturated fat diet. Saturated fat diets are new to mankind. We manufactured a saturated fat diet by feeding animals grains. You can consider saturated fat to be second-generation carbohydrates. We eat the saturated fats that other animals produce from carbohydrates.

    Zone was a good diet compared to the American diet. Is it an optimal diet? No. Is it optimal for what is known today about nutrition? It is not. Initially the author spoke about how it made no difference if you got your carbohydrate from candy or vegetables.

    What he is doing now is changing his recipes so that the 40 percent carbohydrates are coming primarily from vegetables, and the carbohydrates are going way down because he knows that if they don't, it's not as good a diet.

    I recommend 20 percent of calories from carbs, depending on the size of the person, 25 percent to 30 percent of calories from protein, and 60 percent to 65 percent from fat. You can get beef that is not grain-fed.

    Insulin is Not the Only Cause of Disease

    There are other considerations in disease, such as iron. We know that high iron levels are bad for you. If a person's ferritin is high, red meat is out for a while until the level goes down.

    There is a great deal of difference between a non-grain-fed cow and a grain-fed cow.

    Non-grain fed will have only 10 percent or less saturated fat. Grain-fed can have over 50 percent.

    Also, a non-grain-fed cow will actually be high in omega-3 oils. Plants have a pretty high percentage of omega-3, and if you accumulate it by eating it all day, every day for most of your life, your fat gets a pretty high proportion of omega-3. I would try for 50 percent oleic fat, and the other fats would depend on the individual, but about 25 percent of the other two.

    In a heavy diabetic I would probably go down on the saturated fat and go 60 percent oleic, and 1 to 1 on the omega-6 to 3 ratio--that would be therapeutic. The maintenance ratio would be about 2.5 to 1 for the omega-6 to 3 ratio. I would try to do most of this through diet. There are some practicalities involved. I would ask the person if they like fish and if they practically puke in front of me they are going on a tablespoon of cod liver oil, the best brand is made by Carlson, which doesn't taste fishy at all.

    Most people end up going on a supplement of omega-3 oils because they are not going to eat enough fish to get an adequate amount. It is a little hard to get that much entirely from diet.

    Sardines are a very good therapeutic food. They are baby fish so they haven't had time to accumulate a bunch of metal. They are smoked so they are not cooked and the oil is not spoiled in them. You have to eat the whole thing, not the boneless and skinless. You need to eat all the organs as they are high in vitamins and magnesium.

    DNA Glycates

    If people are worried about chromosomal damage from chromium, what they should really be worried about instead is high blood sugar. DNA repair enzymes glycate as well. Insulin is by far your biggest poison. They disproved that study that was against chromium many times. They showed that it only happens if you put cells in a petrie dish with chromium but in vivo studies prove otherwise. The lowering of insulin is going to be better than any possible detriment of any of the therapies you are using. Insulin is associated with cancer, everything.

    Insulin should be tested on everybody repeatedly. It isn’t strictly because there haven't been drugs until recently that could effect insulin, so there is no way to make money off of it. Fasting insulin is one way to look at it, not necessarily the best way, but it is a way that everybody could get it done. Any family doctor can measure a fasting insulin.

    There are other ways to measure insulin sensitivity that are more complex. We use intravenous insulin and watch how rapidly the blood sugar crashes in a fasting state in 15 minutes, and that assesses insulin sensitivity. Then you give them dextrose to make sure they don't crash any further. There are other ways that are utilized to directly assess insulin sensitivity, but you can get a pretty good idea just by doing a fasting insulin.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    USA and many other places
    Posts
    11,408
    I am confused and overwhelmed between this and the other article today.

    From what I understand you are saying it is better to increase insulin sensitivity. I always thought being insulin sensitive could lead to insulin resistance thus lead to diabetes 2. Please correct me on this or clarify. Why would I want to become more insulin sensitive?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    819
    Quote Originally Posted by SlimmerMe View Post
    I am confused and overwhelmed between this and the other article today.

    From what I understand you are saying it is better to increase insulin sensitivity. I always thought being insulin sensitive could lead to insulin resistance thus lead to diabetes 2. Please correct me on this or clarify. Why would I want to become more insulin sensitive?
    If you increase your insulin sensetivity you need less insulin to do a job.

    If you are "sensetive" to something it means a little does alot.

    Insulin resistence is the exact opposite of this situation. You need alot to do a little...

    We want to improve isnulin resistance by increasing ones sensetivity to insulin.


    Alot of people get confused by the wording. Being insulin sensetive is a good thing... Alot of people throw the term around on boards meaning they cant eat carbs ect ect that is bro science and they dont know what they are talking about, its just a matter of getting the correct terminology.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    USA and many other places
    Posts
    11,408
    Quote Originally Posted by n00bs View Post
    If you increase your insulin sensetivity you need less insulin to do a job.

    If you are "sensetive" to something it means a little does alot.

    Insulin resistence is the exact opposite of this situation. You need alot to do a little...

    We want to improve isnulin resistance by increasing ones sensetivity to insulin.


    Alot of people get confused by the wording. Being insulin sensetive is a good thing... Alot of people throw the term around on boards meaning they cant eat carbs ect ect that is bro science and they dont know what they are talking about, its just a matter of getting the correct terminology.
    Thank you and great explanation and I was sure hoping this was the case. A mere terminology.
    Last edited by SlimmerMe; 04-12-2011 at 08:48 PM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    17,443
    I have strong reason to believe I am extremely insulin resistant. Genetics may have played a role to begin with, or not - I'll never know. But I do believe that years of abuse to my body has created this problem for me. Horrible food choices, sugar sugar sugar, carbs carbs carbs, I must've had high insulin levels for 10 years straight.

    I am on a mission to try and somewhat restore insulin sensitivity. I am sure I won't be able to get back to what I might have had as a teenager, but anything would be helpful at this point.

  6. #6
    jimmyinkedup's Avatar
    jimmyinkedup is offline Disappointment* Known SCAMMER - Do Not Trust *
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Scamming my brothers
    Posts
    11,285
    Quote Originally Posted by gbrice75 View Post
    I have strong reason to believe I am extremely insulin resistant. Genetics may have played a role to begin with, or not - I'll never know. But I do believe that years of abuse to my body has created this problem for me. Horrible food choices, sugar sugar sugar, carbs carbs carbs, I must've had high insulin levels for 10 years straight.

    I am on a mission to try and somewhat restore insulin sensitivity. I am sure I won't be able to get back to what I might have had as a teenager, but anything would be helpful at this point.
    The prob I have with this article is the demographic it applies to. It does , however,contain some good info. I would not recommend supplementing with Chromium or vandyl. Both are proving to be essentially useless in non diabetics and both have issues re toxicity.
    I do however like supplementing with fish oil and ALA as well as that i incorporate 2+ TBS of cinnamon/day into my diet. These things all seem to help insulin sensativity and have hard data supporting the effects in healthy people.
    As you prob know Gbrice i have often referred to the fact thnat i feel i am insulin resistant and have to adjust my diet accordingly. I also supplement accordingly.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    17,443
    Quote Originally Posted by jimmyinkedup View Post
    The prob I have with this article is the demographic it applies to. It does , however,contain some good info. I would not recommend supplementing with Chromium or vandyl. Both are proving to be essentially useless in non diabetics and both have issues re toxicity.
    I do however like supplementing with fish oil and ALA as well as that i incorporate 2+ TBS of cinnamon/day into my diet. These things all seem to help insulin sensativity and have hard data supporting the effects in healthy people.
    As you prob know Gbrice i have often referred to the fact thnat i feel i am insulin resistant and have to adjust my diet accordingly. I also supplement accordingly.
    Agreed, which is why I added a 'disclaimer' of sorts. But as you mentioned, much of the info is still relevant, to 'normal' people and particularly people in this game.

    I am also working on fine tuning my diet to somewhat equalize this issue.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    USA and many other places
    Posts
    11,408
    Quote Originally Posted by gbrice75 View Post
    I have strong reason to believe I am extremely insulin resistant. Genetics may have played a role to begin with, or not - I'll never know. But I do believe that years of abuse to my body has created this problem for me. Horrible food choices, sugar sugar sugar, carbs carbs carbs, I must've had high insulin levels for 10 years straight.


    I am on a mission to try and somewhat restore insulin sensitivity. I am sure I won't be able to get back to what I might have had as a teenager, but anything would be helpful at this point.
    Same here.....same exact feeling. That is why I monitor my A1C to make sure now.

    Quote Originally Posted by jimmyinkedup View Post
    The prob I have with this article is the demographic it applies to. It does , however,contain some good info. I would not recommend supplementing with Chromium or vandyl. Both are proving to be essentially useless in non diabetics and both have issues re toxicity.
    I do however like supplementing with fish oil and ALA as well as that i incorporate 2+ TBS of cinnamon/day into my diet. These things all seem to help insulin sensativity and have hard data supporting the effects in healthy people.
    As you prob know Gbrice i have often referred to the fact thnat i feel i am insulin resistant and have to adjust my diet accordingly. I also supplement accordingly.
    Good to know. Thanks.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Barbados
    Posts
    20,774
    Quote Originally Posted by jimmyinkedup View Post
    The prob I have with this article is the demographic it applies to. It does , however,contain some good info. I would not recommend supplementing with Chromium or vandyl. Both are proving to be essentially useless in non diabetics and both have issues re toxicity.
    I disagree.

    Furthermore, please post studies which show chromium toxicity in humans.
    -Corey "Narkissos" Springer

    Published Author.
    Owner of :
    Apollo Fitness Barbados etc
    Blogger

    Quote Originally Posted by texasmk4
    Nark is like intel, Brilliant inside and awsome outside :-)
    Quote Originally Posted by Narkissos
    Here's a little-known-secret, that most people won't tell you: In the sphere of fitness, everything works.
    Every(intelligent)thing works (once aptly and consistently applied)
    It really is that simple.
    This is the perpetual bodybuilding paradigm
    **No Source Checks**
    Contact Me

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Vegas
    Posts
    457
    Your primary fuel should be coming from fat.

    Ok this seems counter to everthing I have ever heard. That being said during the recent challenge I noticed that I lost lots of fat when I ate primarly fish and eggs for my protien source. as opposed to chicken and beef.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    17,443
    Quote Originally Posted by VegasRenegade View Post
    Your primary fuel should be coming from fat.

    Ok this seems counter to everthing I have ever heard. That being said during the recent challenge I noticed that I lost lots of fat when I ate primarly fish and eggs for my protien source. as opposed to chicken and beef.
    Again, this is a blanket statement that does not apply to everybody. Look at the article by Lyle McDonald just posted yesterday - forgive me but I forget who the OP was. There are individuals who fare better with a higher carb diet, and vice versa. Not everyone will see your results by reducing carbs and bringing up fats. If that were the answer for the masses, it would have long since been founded and implemented - we'd all be walking around with single digit bodyfat.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Barbados
    Posts
    20,774
    Quote Originally Posted by gbrice75 View Post
    Again, this is a blanket statement that does not apply to everybody. Look at the article by Lyle McDonald just posted yesterday - forgive me but I forget who the OP was. There are individuals who fare better with a higher carb diet, and vice versa. Not everyone will see your results by reducing carbs and bringing up fats. If that were the answer for the masses, it would have long since been founded and implemented - we'd all be walking around with single digit bodyfat.
    Bingo.

    btw, YGPM... I hope the reading material proves useful.
    -Corey "Narkissos" Springer

    Published Author.
    Owner of :
    Apollo Fitness Barbados etc
    Blogger

    Quote Originally Posted by texasmk4
    Nark is like intel, Brilliant inside and awsome outside :-)
    Quote Originally Posted by Narkissos
    Here's a little-known-secret, that most people won't tell you: In the sphere of fitness, everything works.
    Every(intelligent)thing works (once aptly and consistently applied)
    It really is that simple.
    This is the perpetual bodybuilding paradigm
    **No Source Checks**
    Contact Me

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    17,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Narkissos View Post
    Bingo.

    btw, YGPM... I hope the reading material proves useful.
    Thx again, I'm certain it will.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Deep Down South
    Posts
    23,624
    only thing i kind of disagree with is the cancer part. if it were that easy with cancer, then i would not have a job. way too many things happening on the inside and outside of a cell to be that simple. great article and it puts other things into perspective, especially about insulin.

  15. #15
    jimmyinkedup's Avatar
    jimmyinkedup is offline Disappointment* Known SCAMMER - Do Not Trust *
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Scamming my brothers
    Posts
    11,285
    Quote Originally Posted by Narkissos View Post
    I disagree.

    Furthermore, please post studies which show chromium toxicity in humans.
    Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
    I will say this - In my experience both are useless. This is backed up in all the more recent research stating neither one has an effect in non diabetics. To take it further chromium has no effect peiod , even in diabetics , unless the individual is defficient. Pretty tough since it is so abundant in many foods.
    As far as toxicity while it is difficult given the availibitly of chromium in supplements - there is a likelyhood of contamination and possibility of more dangerous form being used when claims of safer forms are listed as ingredients. This is not as far fetched as it may sound. Do I really need to post studies of toxicity of other forms of chromium this statement may refer to ?

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    819
    Quote Originally Posted by 00ragincajun00 View Post
    only thing i kind of disagree with is the cancer part. if it were that easy with cancer, then i would not have a job. way too many things happening on the inside and outside of a cell to be that simple. great article and it puts other things into perspective, especially about insulin.
    Oncologist?

  17. #17
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Barbados
    Posts
    20,774
    Quote Originally Posted by jimmyinkedup View Post
    Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
    I will say this - In my experience both are useless. This is backed up in all the more recent research stating neither one has an effect in non diabetics. To take it further chromium has no effect peiod , even in diabetics , unless the individual is defficient. Pretty tough since it is so abundant in many foods.
    There is an abundance (understatement really) of research to the contrary.

    So, yes... I'd love to see the studies. This is a learning community is it not?

    Quote Originally Posted by jimmyinkedup View Post
    As far as toxicity while it is difficult given the availibitly of chromium in supplements - there is a likelyhood of contamination and possibility of more dangerous form being used when claims of safer forms are listed as ingredients. This is not as far fetched as it may sound.
    A 'likelihood' of contamination? That's a far cry from your earlier claim that supplemental chromium is toxic.

    There's a 'possibility of contamination' with every food we eat, and every supplement we ingest. This does not inherently make our foods and supplements 'toxic'. That statement is irresponsible.

    Quote Originally Posted by jimmyinkedup View Post
    Do I really need to post studies of toxicity of other forms of chromium this statement may refer to ?
    Other forms of chromium are not being discussed here.

    So yes... post the studies which show dietary/supplemental chromium toxicity.
    -Corey "Narkissos" Springer

    Published Author.
    Owner of :
    Apollo Fitness Barbados etc
    Blogger

    Quote Originally Posted by texasmk4
    Nark is like intel, Brilliant inside and awsome outside :-)
    Quote Originally Posted by Narkissos
    Here's a little-known-secret, that most people won't tell you: In the sphere of fitness, everything works.
    Every(intelligent)thing works (once aptly and consistently applied)
    It really is that simple.
    This is the perpetual bodybuilding paradigm
    **No Source Checks**
    Contact Me

  18. #18
    jimmyinkedup's Avatar
    jimmyinkedup is offline Disappointment* Known SCAMMER - Do Not Trust *
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Scamming my brothers
    Posts
    11,285
    Quote Originally Posted by Narkissos View Post
    There is an abundance (understatement really) of research to the contrary.

    So, yes... I'd love to see the studies. This is a learning community is it not?



    A 'likelihood' of contamination? That's a far cry from your earlier claim that supplemental chromium is toxic.
    maybe you need to re read my ealrier claim as it is not even close to this - i belive i said "issues with toxicity"
    There's a 'possibility of contamination' with every food we eat, and every supplement we ingest. This does not inherently make our foods and supplements 'toxic'. That statement is irresponsible.
    It is not irresponsible - do some research into it and discover the likelyhood of contamination when this mineral is involved. You statement here is made in ignorance. I donbt mean that in a nasty way but in the clinical sense of the word ie: lack of knowledge on the topic


    Other forms of chromium are not being discussed here.

    So yes... post the studies which show dietary/supplemental chromium toxicity.
    The point is it has been discovered that other forms of chromium have been used in supps that supposedly contain less toxic forms - so we HAVE to discuss that - that was my point
    *LOL* Well first ill clarify EXACTLY what i said. I said i believe vandyl and chromium are both useless in non diabetics and both have issues with toxicity. Vandyl im sure you cannot and will not dipute this. I pointed out other issues with chromium and potential toxicity. Please do not take what i said out of context and make it into something else. I clearly explained why i said what i said ...if you want to turn my staements into something else the onus will fall upon you to justify or discredit your distorted perception of my statements. As far as studies well on chromium i posted about 15 of them in a thread in the supp forum showing its worthless. Vandyl has also been shown useless in non diabetics.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12500990

    Another:
    "Halberstam et al gave 100 mg of vanadyl sulfate daily for three weeks to obese type 2 diabetic patients as well as non-diabetic subjects. There was an obvious decrease in fasting plasma glucose and a significant improvement in insulin sensitivity in the type 2 diabetic patients. There was, however, no change detected in the obese non-diabetic subjects."

    Another:

    "Oral vanadyl sulfate improves insulin sensitivity in NIDDM but not in obese nondiabetic subjects.

    Diabetes (UNITED STATES) May 1996, 45 (5) p659-66


    We compared the effects of oral vanadyl sulfate (100 mg/day) in moderately obese NIDDM and nondiabetic subjects. Three-hour euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic (insulin infusion 30 mU / m / min) clamps were performed after 2 weeks of placebo and 3 weeks of vanadyl sulfate treatment in six nondiabetic control subjects (age 37 +/- 3 years; BMI 29.5 +/- 2.4 kg/m2 ) and seven NIDDM subjects (age 53 +/- 2 years; BMI 28.7 +/-1.8 kg/m2). Glucose turnover ([3-3 H]glucose), glycolysis from plasma glucose, glycogen synthesis, and whole-body carbohydrate and lipid oxidation were evaluated. Decreases in fasting plasma glucose (by approximately 1.7 mmol/l) and HbAlc (both P < 0.05) were observed in NIDDM subjects during treatment; plasma glucose was unchanged in control subjects. In the latter, the glucose infusion rate (GIR) required to maintain euglycemia (40.1 +/- 5.7 and 38.1 +/- 4.8 micromol / kg fat-free mass FFM / min) and glucose disposal (Rd) (41.7 +/- 5.7 and 38.9 +/-4.7 micromol / kg FFM / min were similar during placebo and vanadyl sulfate administration, respectively. Hepatic glucose output (HGO) was completely suppressed in both studies. In contrast, in NIDDM subjects, vanadyl sulfate increased GIR approximately 82% (17.3 +/- 4.7 to 30.9 +/- 2.7 micromol / kg FFM / min, P < 0.05); this improvement in insulin sensitivity was due to both augmented stimulation of Rd (26.0 +/-4.0 vs. 33.6 +/- 2.22 micromol / kg FFM / min, P < 0.05) and enhanced suppression of HGO (7.7 +/- 3.1 vs. 1.3 +/- 0.9 micromol / kg FFM / min, P < 0.05). Increased insulin-stimulated glycogen synthesis accounted for >80% of the increased Rd with vanadyl sulfate (P < 0.005), but plasma glucose flux via glycolysis was unchanged. In NIDDM subjects, vanadyl sulfate was also associated with greater suppression of plasma free fatty acids (FFAs) (P < 0.01) and lipid oxidation (P < 0.05) during clamps. The reduction in HGO and increase in Rd were both highly correlated with the decline in plasma FFA concentrations during the clamp period (P < 0.001). In conclusion, small oral doses of vanadyl sulfate do not alter insulin sensitivity in nondiabetic subjects, but it does improve both hepatic and skeletal muscle insulin sensitivity in NIDDM subjects in part by enhancing insulin's inhibitory effect on lipolysis. These data suggest that vanadyl sulfate may improve a defect in insulin signaling specific to NIDDM."


    There are countless more that show the same exact thing.
    How about you post some studies on healthy humans showing a positive effect re: vanadyl?


    Look Nark you and I have been down this road before. The fact is we disagree - and thats ok. You dont like it when someone disagrees with you ...but thats too bad. I dont like it all the time either.
    You also took some of my statements out of context. I hope i clarified so your misinterpretaions are waylayed

    Different things work for diff people - I can accept that. I stated my opinions and provided data that supports them. Please in the future if you wish for clarification of any statements i make do not ignorantly refer to them as irresponsible. I will go out of my way to clarify anything i post , thoroughly and respectfully - provided that is how the requests are made.
    Last edited by jimmyinkedup; 04-13-2011 at 11:07 PM.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    IN THE GYM
    Posts
    1,450
    Real good post

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    california
    Posts
    4,136
    I believe I am insulin resistant also. I have contemplated using insulin to see if I can spike it that way but worried about long term consequences. I took a blood sugar test one time after eating a ton of junk food and my friend (who sells the pin prick tests) said I am super low and that I should see a doctor. Only thing is I had a beer and my doc said that it can lower the result. This thread reminded me to get it checked out.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Deep Down South
    Posts
    23,624
    Quote Originally Posted by n00bs View Post
    Oncologist?
    i work with one. i do breast cancer research. and that is not a joke. love my job, just no money in it.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    17,443
    Quote Originally Posted by 00ragincajun00 View Post
    i work with one. i do breast cancer research. and that is not a joke. love my job, just no money in it.
    ^ ^ such a shame. The people who SHOULD be making money in this country don't. We'll pay an athlete MILLIONS though. Fvcked up society for sure.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    ON THE SHORT BUS.
    Posts
    63,652
    Interesting.
    I am def insulin resistant. I.e I can eat an entire pack of oreos and not gain a pound. And I crave sugars all day long.

    I HAVE had my blood glucose checked many times by my doc and levels always come back normal.

    Lately I have been trying to work on lowering the resistance by...

    -Switching up my training.
    -Adding different forms of cardio (which I never do) But focusing on High Intesnsity short bouts of it.
    -Doing Intermittent Fasting.
    -Including more soluble fiber into my diet.
    -Cutting out sugars of course.

    All of which I feel are helping to a great degree.

    Would like to add In some ALA soon as well.

    I also have some chromium and HCA but havent taken them yet.

    Waiting to see results from this cut Im in the middle of. Then Ill see if I want to add them in.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Barbados
    Posts
    20,774
    Quote Originally Posted by jimmyinkedup View Post
    *LOL* Well first ill clarify EXACTLY what i said. I said i believe vandyl and chromium are both useless in non diabetics and both have issues with toxicity. Vandyl im sure you cannot and will not dipute this. I pointed out other issues with chromium and potential toxicity. Please do not take what i said out of context and make it into something else. I clearly explained why i said what i said ...if you want to turn my staements into something else the onus will fall upon you to justify or discredit your distorted perception of my statements. As far as studies well on chromium i posted about 15 of them in a thread in the supp forum showing its worthless. Vandyl has also been shown useless in non diabetics.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12500990
    Here are 40+ Chromium studies on diabetics as well as non-diabetics: http://www.getnarked.net/forum/showthread.php?t=5459 (*Admin* feel free to remove said link, if posting it goes against any of the board rules. *Admin* I apologize in advance as well)

    Again: I asked you to post studies to validate your stance... because that is what contributing members in a learning community do --> They provide reading material.

    I do it all the time. You're not above doing so.


    Quote Originally Posted by jimmyinkedup View Post
    Look Nark you and I have been down this road before. The fact is we disagree - and thats ok. You dont like it when someone disagrees with you ...but thats too bad. I dont like it all the time either.
    Clearly you have an issue. I don't have a problem "when someone disagrees with" me... I have a problem with people who make irresponsible statements.

    You cannot find a study which points to supplemental chromium toxicity in humans (the statement i found irresponsible), because there are none.

    No need to be condescending about it either. You're entitled to your opinion... everybody is.

    Regards,
    -Corey "Narkissos" Springer

    Published Author.
    Owner of :
    Apollo Fitness Barbados etc
    Blogger

    Quote Originally Posted by texasmk4
    Nark is like intel, Brilliant inside and awsome outside :-)
    Quote Originally Posted by Narkissos
    Here's a little-known-secret, that most people won't tell you: In the sphere of fitness, everything works.
    Every(intelligent)thing works (once aptly and consistently applied)
    It really is that simple.
    This is the perpetual bodybuilding paradigm
    **No Source Checks**
    Contact Me

  25. #25
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Barbados
    Posts
    20,774
    Quote Originally Posted by 00ragincajun00 View Post
    i work with one. i do breast cancer research. and that is not a joke. love my job, just no money in it.
    Rough brother.

    Much respect!
    -Corey "Narkissos" Springer

    Published Author.
    Owner of :
    Apollo Fitness Barbados etc
    Blogger

    Quote Originally Posted by texasmk4
    Nark is like intel, Brilliant inside and awsome outside :-)
    Quote Originally Posted by Narkissos
    Here's a little-known-secret, that most people won't tell you: In the sphere of fitness, everything works.
    Every(intelligent)thing works (once aptly and consistently applied)
    It really is that simple.
    This is the perpetual bodybuilding paradigm
    **No Source Checks**
    Contact Me

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Deep Down South
    Posts
    23,624
    Quote Originally Posted by Narkissos View Post
    Rough brother.

    Much respect!
    thanks bro. got to save the tatas! the whole world revolves around them! and GB, thanks to you also. its hard on dem streets!

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    17,443
    Quote Originally Posted by dukkitdalaw View Post
    Interesting.
    I am def insulin resistant. I.e I can eat an entire pack of oreos and not gain a pound. And I crave sugars all day long.

    I HAVE had my blood glucose checked many times by my doc and levels always come back normal.

    Lately I have been trying to work on lowering the resistance by...

    -Switching up my training.
    -Adding different forms of cardio (which I never do) But focusing on High Intesnsity short bouts of it.
    -Doing Intermittent Fasting.
    -Including more soluble fiber into my diet.
    -Cutting out sugars of course.

    All of which I feel are helping to a great degree.

    Would like to add In some ALA soon as well.

    I also have some chromium and HCA but havent taken them yet.

    Waiting to see results from this cut Im in the middle of. Then Ill see if I want to add them in.
    You posted some good info above, yet all I got out of it is the bold - and I hate you!!!

    If that's related to insulin resistance, I wouldn't mind that. I would venture to guess it has more to do with you having a very efficient metabolism moreso than insulin resistance.

    I've found it has caused me to easily store bodyfat but extreme difficulty to add lean mass. Almost as if my fat cells are much more fluid than my muscle cells. I don't know if this is even possible, but my 'symptoms' would indicate it is.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    ON THE SHORT BUS.
    Posts
    63,652
    Quote Originally Posted by gbrice75 View Post
    You posted some good info above, yet all I got out of it is the bold - and I hate you!!!

    If that's related to insulin resistance, I wouldn't mind that. I would venture to guess it has more to do with you having a very efficient metabolism moreso than insulin resistance.
    I've found it has caused me to easily store bodyfat but extreme difficulty to add lean mass. Almost as if my fat cells are much more fluid than my muscle cells. I don't know if this is even possible, but my 'symptoms' would indicate it is.
    Has to be partly both.

    If I can eat all this and not raise my insulin... then the slin isnt shuttling said junk food into storage. Which is good. But also bad.
    I wont gain weight (fat)... but I wont gain weight (muscle) when I do eat proper foods. lol

    But also... my metabolism burns the junk off.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    3,238
    Quote Originally Posted by 00ragincajun00 View Post
    thanks bro. got to save the tatas! the whole world revolves around them! and GB, thanks to you also. its hard on dem streets!
    Respect too, however I'm a Hiney Man myself, butt until there's Hiney Cancer I'll keep supporting saving the TaTa's (even though my wife doesn't have any) She is however a Cancer survivor, ten years ago with a grapefruit size mass removed from her shoulder, successfully with no further signs. Until last month with elevated levels of something(cancer in her girlparts) we prayed over her and went in for the recommended further testing and they found "no evidence of cancer"

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    17,443
    Quote Originally Posted by dukkitdalaw View Post
    Has to be partly both.

    If I can eat all this and not raise my insulin... then the slin isnt shuttling said junk food into storage. Which is good. But also bad.
    I wont gain weight (fat)... but I wont gain weight (muscle) when I do eat proper foods. lol

    But also... my metabolism burns the junk off.
    Good point, and actually kind of contradictory to my situation which is very very interesting. Yours makes perfect sense. I am having a hard time figuring out how I can store bodyfat SO efficiently, yet am very inefficient at adding LBM. Insulin resistance could explain the inefficiency of LBM gains. But storing bodyfat - genetically predisposed?

  31. #31
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    USA and many other places
    Posts
    11,408
    I would think insulin resistant is why there are so many high BF diabetics instead of LBM diabetics. Correct me if I am wrong.

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    ON THE SHORT BUS.
    Posts
    63,652
    Quote Originally Posted by gbrice75 View Post
    Good point, and actually kind of contradictory to my situation which is very very interesting. Yours makes perfect sense. I am having a hard time figuring out how I can store bodyfat SO efficiently, yet am very inefficient at adding LBM. Insulin resistance could explain the inefficiency of LBM gains. But storing bodyfat - genetically predisposed?
    Well to me, for your situation it would make sense that lets say; your insulin is always high... so a bigger percentage of what you do intake DOES get shuttled into fat stores.

    Hence, some of your food goes to building muscle, and the rest (probably most) goes into fat storage.

    On top of you most likely not having the added benefit of an efficient metabolism... it compounds and you have your problem.

  33. #33
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    ON THE SHORT BUS.
    Posts
    63,652
    Have you ever checked you Blood Glucose levels?

    First thing in the morning and after meals?

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    17,443
    ^ ^ keep in mind that a majority of these people are also not eating specifically to BE lean, whereas we are. They are generally eating a typical 'american diet' - at least the Americans are!

  35. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    17,443
    Quote Originally Posted by dukkitdalaw View Post
    Have you ever checked you Blood Glucose levels?

    First thing in the morning and after meals?
    Not specifically, not on purpose. I recently had a physical with complete bloodwork (after a cycle) and at the time wasn't concerned with this, not even sure if it's tested during routine blood work or not. But I do plan on getting tested ASAP.

  36. #36
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    ON THE SHORT BUS.
    Posts
    63,652
    Quote Originally Posted by gbrice75 View Post
    Not specifically, not on purpose. I recently had a physical with complete bloodwork (after a cycle) and at the time wasn't concerned with this, not even sure if it's tested during routine blood work or not. But I do plan on getting tested ASAP.
    Def do. Theyll make ya fast then get blood taken.

  37. #37
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    USA and many other places
    Posts
    11,408
    "A1C" blood test will determine your average glucose levels over a 3 month period of time which is a great way to tell if you are insulin resistant and no fasting required....

  38. #38
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Deep Down South
    Posts
    23,624
    Quote Originally Posted by tbody66 View Post
    Respect too, however I'm a Hiney Man myself, butt until there's Hiney Cancer I'll keep supporting saving the TaTa's (even though my wife doesn't have any) She is however a Cancer survivor, ten years ago with a grapefruit size mass removed from her shoulder, successfully with no further signs. Until last month with elevated levels of something(cancer in her girlparts) we prayed over her and went in for the recommended further testing and they found "no evidence of cancer"
    that is a great story tbody and congrats to her! she is lucky to have someone like you for support! but there is colon cancer, and that includes the hiney!

  39. #39
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    17,443
    Quote Originally Posted by dukkitdalaw View Post
    Well to me, for your situation it would make sense that lets say; your insulin is always high... so a bigger percentage of what you do intake DOES get shuttled into fat stores.

    Hence, some of your food goes to building muscle, and the rest (probably most) goes into fat storage.

    On top of you most likely not having the added benefit of an efficient metabolism... it compounds and you have your problem.
    I missed this before, but BINGO. I believe you're right sir, thanks for the clarity!!

    Now to address it...

  40. #40
    jimmyinkedup's Avatar
    jimmyinkedup is offline Disappointment* Known SCAMMER - Do Not Trust *
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Scamming my brothers
    Posts
    11,285
    Insulin resiatnce is when insulin is less effecftive at lowering blood sugars. It results in high blood sugar , fat gain , and diffuicultly losing wieght. Not the ability to eat whatever you want and stay lean like some people on here i hate (EH.......hmm... dukkit. j/k bro how u been ?).
    It also can result in many other undesirable conditions like high trigylcerides and increased risk for heart disease.
    Insulin resistance is the opposite of insulin sesativity and is NOT desirable in any way shape or form.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •