Shame you had to be all sarcastic and obnoxious about it, I was just asking for evidence.
Don't just throw out studies because they not in Nature, it's not the only journal in which good science happens. A mouse study has weaknesses too.
I'm not surprised if artificial sweeteners have such...
There is no causal link shown here, but it might exist.
Responsible, scientific dieticians have said for years: don't take vitamin supplements unless you know you for a fact that you need them and never megadose.
You got evidence for that? That's a pretty strong claim, especially given that there are several different sweeteners out there and how hard it is to prove a causal link in diet studies.
This study suggests the opposite: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2900484/
I should think so, as long as you're eating a decent diet that favours healthy gut flora - high fibre, veg, low sugar, low processed food etc.
If you're necking down chicken nuggets and potato waffles then it won't help much.
Kefir smoothies are nice I think, just like a yoghurt drink...
Rise in blood pressure, increased hair shedding, libido drop after a while. Those are the ones I noticed. Of course I've no real idea about long term sides or serious hidden ones.
It works well, like a mild roid. Increases muscles and strength, speeds fatloss. Ideal for recomps. As long as you're willing to take the sides, like anything else really
Yeah I would also imagine it's partly down to how long you were fat for. Skin that has been stretched, and had cell turnover for like 10 years ain't gonna snap back if you lose 100lbs.
My guess is that the rate of weight loss is likely to be the least important factor out of the things we've...
The evidence that ones gut flora is way more important then previously thought just keeps growing and it seems that it's really come into the public consciousness now with diet books etc hitting the shelves.
I've been interested in this for a while having had gut problems caused by long term...
You know I wonder if this is actually true. I hear it said a lot but I can't find any real proof of it. I've known older women lose weight slowly and end up with baggy skin and I've seen some younger fat dudes totally transform in under a year and not have it at all. Age would seem to be the...
But that's exactly what these people ARE doing. They are effectively removing the sex division and ruining the sport for normal women.,
You said " Lol at all the "Oh, what do you tell your daughter that's competing against her??" posts. The same thing you tell your son that gets beat by bigger...
.
So why have separate sports divisions for women and men at all then?
A woman can't qualify for Wimbledon anymore because 2nd rate male competitors are thrashing them? Well then tough shit, men are bigger, faster, better competitors right?
OK chief whatever you say. You keep taking everything literally and have a nice day.
Yes I know. I also read the papers.
But as I say, the previous level of 10nmol/L is way higher than about 99% of current female athletes who are in the 0.1 – 2.8 nmol/L range. So they'd still be 3x higher...
Don't be a dickhead.
How we got here isn't just down to the IAAF and even if they do reinstate the suppresors, the limit was way over what most women athletes have. So it's still unfair if they stick to that.
"how did we get here" is a turn of phrase, ie. "how has it come to this?" - an...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.