detox

dexty

Hi all,
I was on a cruise recently and attended a detox seminar that was interesting and certainly made me look at things in a different light. I am fairly fit, do a good bit of cycling/swimming/soccer but no matter what I do I never lose that chest and stomach fat. In fact I’ll lose muscle quicker and get weaker. (the usual complaint!)
What the seminar said is that the body needs to be detoxed, in particular the liver. Basically the idea is that there is too many toxins in my body for the lymph system to cope with so the toxins leak from the lymph nodes and attach them to the fat cells on the stomach and chest (because that’s where most of the lymph nodes are for men). Then a layer of water surrounds those toxins and therefore no matter how much exercise you do, you cant get access to burn those fat cells because they are encased by the water and toxins. So u have to detox before you can burn those fat cells. So they say it’s not fat, it’s water retention. They put me on a body composition analyser which works out that I have 8lbs of water retention that needs to be ‘detoxed’. Anyway , it got me thinking and I want to investigate this theory more. They recommend a 180 day detox programme that is based around Alkaline based algae/seaweed tablets (I think) to return the pH of the body from being acidic. I think the name of the products are Elemis (http://www.timetospa.com/body-and-detox/herbal-supplements/elemis-enhancement-program-3-months-detoxification-and-revitalization-plan/)
Also cutting out coffees (400 chemicals per cup) and soda's particulary diet sodas which stay in your body for 18 months)
So has anyone ever used tried or used this or have any other thoughts/view recommendations on any of the above? I’m 6’ 2” @ 200 lbs and according to the test my body fat is at 20% so obviously I want to get this down for cycling. Cheers D

abcdggs

Not trying to be negative here, and i'm open to correction but it sounds like magic beans to me... As far as i'm concerned the best way to lose fat is to exercise. basically all you need to do is increase your metabolism to a rate higher than you're consuming food.

ednwireland

dexty wrote: »

Also cutting out coffees (400 chemicals per cup)

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmm 400 lovely deleicious chemiclicals nothing like a quick espresso before a ride

Lumen

The combination of the phrase "detox" with product sales sets off my bull**** meter.

You'd probably get better results from taking a holiday somewhere you can actually ride a bike.

Do they have turbo trainers on cruise ships?

ronanmac

There is certainly merit in the detox theory, although I would be wary of the branded product approach. The organs that seem to benefit most from detox are the liver and the kidneys. I won't go into too much detail as any talk of detox will always tend to provoke a serious level of scepticism, but as someone who runs long distance and does some cycling, my weight averaged 14.5 stone, 14 while training and 15 stone when I started a series of cleansing detoxes just after Christmas 2008. I now weigh just over 11 stone, without being overly fussy regarding what I eat, and my running has improved hugely since... Just another point of view!

desertcircus

Nonsense on stilts. Detox is pseudo-medical garbage of the highest order. Take another look at the page you've linked to: there's no actual explanation of how it's meant to do what they claim it'll do. There's not even an indication of what kind of results you might expect, or any information about appropriate testing. Anything that could actually introduce a drastic change in your body's workings would be regulated to within an inch of its life and available only from trained pharmacists following a doctor's prescription; the fact that it's sold by a spa company.

They've also talked about "toxins" somehow attaching to fat cells and retaining a layer of water: how? What toxins are these? This is presumably a highly specific chemical compound that can attach itself to fat molecules and somehow get water to stick to it on the other side: what's the name of it? How does the chemical reaction work? What compound in the tablets negates this reaction, and how? If they can't tell you anything more specific than "toxins", the odds are pretty good that they have no idea what they're talking about.

Last thing - don't worry overly about coffee and Diet Coke. 400 chemicals sounds bad, but if you don't know what any of them are, then how can you judge whether they're good or bad? Aspirin is a chemical compound, so is salt. 400 chemicals simply means you've got coffee with a rich, complex aroma and taste, nothing more. As for the diet drinks: if you type in "diet soft drinks 18 months" and Google it, not a single hit in the first two pages (most of which go into some detail on public health policy regarding soft drinks) actually mentions anything about it staying in your system for that long.

Summary: it's gibberish. Save yourself the money, drink a coffee now and again, and don't bother with it. Maybe you won't lose the belly, but at least you'll be a few quid better off than the poor saps who bought it, lost no extra weight, and are now $300 poorer than you.

Planet X

I love McDonalds Chicken Nuggets. Only 38 ingredients in each one.

coolbeans

Where's the science? Sounds like a load of codswallop to me. Eat less, move more and cutting out the ****e in your diet is the most proven way to lose weight. Don't be drawn in by snake oil sales men peddling the latest miracle cure. If you can commute to work do so as allocating specific times in your day for exercise alone makes it more difficult to follow through on your goals long term. Commuting fulfills two objectives in that you get to work on time and you get a work out.

CramCycle

dexty wrote: »

Hi all,
I am fairly fit, do a good bit of cycling/swimming/soccer but no matter what I do I never lose that chest and stomach fat.

It is incredibly important to have a bit of fat on your body to remain metabolically healthy. There are several people known as metabolically Healthy Obese who are perfectly fine with high levels of fat due to differences in their fat cells which secrete a different cytokine profile and are generally smaller size per fat cell

the toxins leak from the lymph nodes and attach them to the fat cells on the stomach and chest

Found alot of holistic places that say this but when you go to scientific research I can't find any. This is between someone trying to sound sciencey like an episode of CSI/House or a gross misreprenstation of the facts. I've worked in metabolic research for 6 years. If you can find a reference to a reasonably believable paper or a nod to a research team I'll rethnink my statemen but until then, my opinion, bullcrap to lure in the average Joe, no offense intended.

Lumen

dexty wrote: »

I am fairly fit, do a good bit of cycling/swimming/soccer but no matter what I do I never lose that chest and stomach fat. In fact I’ll lose muscle quicker and get weaker. (the usual complaint!)

You're doing it wrong. If you were doing it right you could look like this and still come 4th in the TdF:



..and although that's obviously not a healthy weight for any extended period of time, I bet he didn't get like that from eating seaweed tablets.

abcdggs

^^Name?^^

blorg

abcdggs wrote: »

^^Name?^^

Bradley Wiggins

abcdggs

i thought he was a sprinter...

eightyfish

dexty wrote: »

What the seminar said is that the body needs to be detoxed, in particular the liver. Basically the idea is that there is too many toxins in my body for the lymph system to cope with so the toxins leak from the lymph nodes and attach them to the fat cells on the stomach and chest (because that’s where most of the lymph nodes are for men).

This is absolute total tripe. Honestly, they are trying to con money out of you. I'd recommend you read Bad Science by Ben Goldacre. It's really good. Here's a few articles of his on the detox myth.

blorg

ednwireland wrote: »

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmm 400 lovely deleicious chemiclicals nothing like a quick espresso before a ride

Why stop at one when you could have 10?

Everyone is different but I don't buy it, I lost lots of weight with a severe excess of coffee and diet soda. Eat less and exercise more. The last stone/couple of pounds are the hardest.

blorg

abcdggs wrote: »

i thought he was a sprinter...

No, but he was a track cyclist albeit specialising in endurance events. On the track these are very short, Wiggins won medals in the 4km individual pursuit for example while the Tour is 3,600km, and has more hills. He went all out on an effort to lose weight and [url=completely change his body makeup in order to compete in the Tour de France.

Here he is on his way to gold in Beijing:

dexty

dexty wrote: »

Also cutting out coffees (400 chemicals per cup)

AAAAHHHHH! Serious pet hate of mine right there, the use of the word "chemicals" to persuade people that something is bad for them. With, the exception of the plasma in stars, EVERYTHING IN THE UNIVERSE IS COMPOSED OF CHEMICALS, be they elements or compounds. Every single food stuff on earth from KFC fried chicken to organic free range brocolli contains hundreds of differnet chemical species. Chemicals are what everyone is composed of. The only way to avoid eating chemicals is to not eat at all, or eat plasma.

abcdggs

What is plasma made of?

Lumen

Deleted User wrote: »

AAAAHHHHH! Serious pet hate of mine right there, the use of the word "chemicals" to persuade people that something is bad for them. With, the exception of the plasma in stars, EVERYTHING IN THE UNIVERSE IS COMPOSED OF CHEMICALS, be they elements or compounds. Every single food stuff on earth from KFC fried chicken to organic free range brocolli contains hundreds of differnet chemical species. Chemicals are what everyone is composed of. The only way to avoid eating chemicals is to not eat at all, or eat plasma.

This is true, however KFC is still an abomination against good taste, if nothing else.

abcdggs

abcdggs wrote: »

What is plasma made of?

Ions. It may also count as being chemical, I'm not 100% sure tbh, I'm no physicist.

Lumen

Deleted User wrote: »

Ions. It may also count as being chemical, I'm not 100% sure tbh, I'm no physicist.

Chemistry is physics.

Lumen

Lumen wrote: »

This is true, however KFC is still an abomination against good taste, if nothing else.

I know, any place that refers to their meals as "buckets" can hardly be described as classy.

DirkVoodoo

Deleted User wrote: »

I know, any place that refers to their meals as "buckets" can hardly be described as classy.

I have still never had KFC, I really want to try it though. Eating chicken out of a bucket is appealing.

I'm getting addicted to those chicken wings from the canal bank cafe, yum yum!

And now I'm hungry...

Lumen

Lumen wrote: »

Chemistry is physics.

We should end this.

abcdggs

An ion is just a particle with a charge,
seeing as we're going for the comedic cartoons

niceonetom

Sea weed? pfff. Have you any idea of the kind of toxins that accumulate in algae? They basically filter sea water which is, as all certified scienticians know, 98% chemicals and 1% granny pee. Good luck!

I've moved on crystal therapy now. My rose quartz is entirely chemical free and completely natural.

abcdggs

cdaly_

Lumen wrote: »

Chemistry is physics.

abcdggs

can we get the thread title changed to "ridiculing detox"?

kumate_champ07

I detox every day. It's called urination

ROK ON

Lumen wrote: »

This is true, however KFC is still an abomination against good taste, if nothing else.

Sorry Lumen. I don't care what it is actually composed of (chicken, rat, greyhound whatever) but for sheer glutinous delight you can't beat devouring an entire bucket of KFC.

dexty

ok many thanks for all the advice, I think I’ll try to 'detox' naturally by eating even more healthily and more km's, it's that last bit to shift is the problem like u say.

Yeah Lumen, they have those 'Le Mond' spinning bikes on the ship gym, did 4 classes, they were tough but really brought me on.

I suppose my main aim is to lose a bit of body fat (off my stomach and chest), without in any way compromising performance/recovery/improvement. I did my first 100K yesterday and want to take enough carbs and protein on board to recover properly but at the same time not too many to store fat.

I rehydrate with LF milk (immediately) and plenty of Alpen/Fruit&fibre/brown bread tuna sandwiches over the next couple of days. A little and often like you say. My cycling has improved greatly over the last month or 2, I was even really strong at the end of yesterday, so my recovery seems to be working well at increasing performance. It would just be nice to shed a bit of body fat at the same time! It’s probably best to continue improving like I am (doing @200-250Km’;s a week) and let the decrease in BF happen over time as I get fitter,

Cheers, D

CramCycle

dexty wrote: »

I rehydrate with LF milk (immediately) and plenty of Alpen/Fruit&fibre/brown bread tuna sandwiches over the next couple of days. A little and often like you say. D

Do you drink LF milk all the time?

If so, why not Full fat milk? Milk has a low fat content anyway and low fat milk is often supplemented with additional Amino acids eg palmitate to improve stability which can in fact lead to increased Insulin Secretion and increase in weight gain. if you are looking to lose weight, I realise it sounds counter intuitive but Full fat milk is probably best,.

That said if it's only for rehydration than that's fine.

eightyfish

CramCycle wrote: »

Milk has a low fat content anyway and low fat milk is often supplemented with additional Amino acids eg palmitate to improve stability which can in fact lead to increased Insulin Secretion and increase in weight gain.

Really? That's interesting if true. Would need some proper evidence though. I drink LF Supermilk. Any links to more info on this?

CramCycle

Palmitate induced Insulin secretion is well documented. Google scholar will attest to this.

If your into your science and know much about the Pancreas, this should be of interest:
[HTML]http://ajpendo.physiology.org/cgi/content/abstract/290/3/E416[/HTML]

But to be honest this in the cases of alot of milk intake or those who are predisposed genetically to a high cholesterol level or have other contributing factors, taken from the "Linus Pauling Institute"

High insulin secretion, over the necessary, is already well known to contribute to weight gain, sort of the damned if you do, damned if you don't problems with T2DM treatment.

Like I said if it's only for rehydration purposes than it should be fine.

niceonetom

Also, an insulin spike is exactly what you are trying to get if you are drinking the milk for recovery after training.

CramCycle

niceonetom wrote: »

Also, an insulin spike is exactly what you are trying to get if you are drinking the milk for recovery after training.

Where did you get your Science degree?

An insulin spike is not what you are looking for. I no their are several reports from Companies in weight gain/muscle building magazines saying this but even in their world this is an issue that isn't completely believed. Pre training drinks/food will spike your insulin secretion and the exercise itself will spike your insulin sensitivity (more effective). Purposely trying to spike Insulin without trying to bulk weight is a bit redundant if your looking to lose a few pounds IMO. Over longer cycles, the little snacks a lot of the time is the way to go.

I recommend reading up on the metabolic effects of Insulin before jumping on the body builder band wagon.

As for the Low fat supermilk, I'm not sure, I don't know what the make up of it is.

niceonetom

CramCycle wrote: »

I no their are several reports from Companies in weight gain/muscle building magazines saying this but even in their world this is an issue that isn't completely believed...

I got my science degree from the same place that taught you to spell. When you're being condescending it's very important to use the correct their/there/they're (and to know your know from your no), how else are we to take you seriously?

My comment had nothing to do with weight loss. It was explicitly about recovery from training for cyclists. I've read all over the place that a mix of carbs and proteins after exercise is beneficial in speeding recovery and stimulating muscle repair, and that the protein synthesis needed for this is triggered by insulin. Chocolate milk is very fashionable now as a cheap and readily available alternative to recovery drinks tha come in powder form.

This is not controversial stuff. It's well documented and fairly widely accepted in endurance athletics.

CramCycle

I wasn't trying to be condescending. I think we got our wires crossed. You sound like you know what your talking about, so I presumed sciencey type, but that your taking a very one sided view. That's what i was trying to point out. You made a statement with no reference as to why. IMO, it completely depends on the type of excercise and the desired after effect. You made it sound like in every and all cases an insulin spike is necessary/beneficial. When alot of research would say the opposite.

My comment had nothing to do with weight loss. It was explicitly about recovery from training for cyclists. I've read all over the place that a mix of carbs and proteins after exercise is beneficial in speeding recovery and stimulating muscle repair, and that the protein synthesis needed for this is triggered by insulin.

In my original post I was referring to weight loss (I know it's slightly off topic but I though the OP mentioned shifting a bit of weight).

In my original message i was actuall talking about prolonged exposure to high levels of certain amino acids, hence why I asked do you drink it all the time and said for rehydration it's fine.

That said in any reasonablly metabolically healthy person you will have a basal level circulating at all times anyway and the increase in insulin sensitivity through excercise should be fine without trying to induce an insulin spike. if you are trying to bulk up then an insulin spike, through whatever means is beneficial, otherwise it should be fine.

Since your Insulin Sensitivity will be higher after a bout of high, mild or low intensity excercise it is more important to have small amounts often to continually hold up your Blood Glucose levels, which will slow down Glycogen usage (not halt) and give you the ability to recover more rapidly afterwards.

These studies that you linked to, are generally right but some aren't well referenced and alot seem to be sponsored by sport drinks with no statement of "no conflict".

This is not controversial stuff. It's well documented and fairly widely accepted in endurance athletics.

To be honest it depends on your specific level of fitness at the time you are preparing to do the excercise. If I was to follow an olympic athletes routine for a short while just before a big event I would guarantee I would fail.

And I think rehydration is an important factor here.

The better shape you are in, typically the better your insulin sensitivity is and there fore it maybe alot more beneficial to get this insulin spike, as your insulin secretion levels will pry be lower due to better glycaemic control. but in someone like me who is in, IMO, average shape there are no, at least noticeable, benefits to the insulin spike.

As for the spelling/english, sorry about that, I am a bit stupid when it comes to using the language, no excuses.

niceonetom

CramCycle wrote: »

I wasn't trying to be condescending.

Well, for future reference, if you're trying not to be condescending don't ask people who you think disagree with you for their qualifications. It will usually be taken as a shorthand for saying the other person lacks the authority to disagree, and will rarely be taken well. If you disagree do so on the issues, not on the other poster's right to reply.

If you say you merely thought I sounded too knowledgeable to be a layman, well fair enough, though I think that's a very disingenuous claim.

CramCycle wrote: »

You made it sound like in every and all cases an insulin spike is necessary/beneficial. When alot of research would say the opposite.

No I said:

niceonetom wrote: »

Also, an insulin spike is exactly what you are trying to get if you are drinking the milk for recovery after training.

I don't see how "for recovery after training" can be confused for "in every and all case".

I was, in my fist post, just countering this:

CramCycle wrote: »

High insulin secretion, over the necessary, is already well known to contribute to weight gain, sort of the damned if you do, damned if you don't problems with T2DM treatment.

Like I said if it's only for rehydration purposes than it should be fine.

because it seems to imply that high insulin levels are to be avoided (in any and all circumstances). They're not. There are specific times when elevated insulin is a good thing and those specific times (recovery, primarily) are pretty frequent to many of the posters and readers of this board. That's all I was pointing out.

dexty

Many people actually use milk as their ride drink?

I pulled into a shop the other day and didn't fancy anything on offer so bought a litre of milk and filled my 2 bottles!

I think the LF supermilk is the same as LF but with added vitimins, not sure if any better though

CramCycle

niceonetom wrote: »

Well, for future reference, if you're trying not to be condescending don't ask people who you think disagree with you for their qualifications. It will usually be taken as a shorthand for saying the other person lacks the authority to disagree, and will rarely be taken well. If you disagree do so on the issues, not on the other poster's right to reply.

It's a sciencey joke, I realise not funny, but it's just something that is jokingly thrown around the lab and I honestly meant no offence. My boss says it to me/I say it back, it's only a bit of messing, nothing offensive intended.

niceonetom wrote: »

If you say you merely thought I sounded too knowledgeable to be a layman, well fair enough, though I think that's a very disingenuous claim.

I neither have the time or the energy to be disingenuous. I can be sarcastic when it's been a long day but that's about it.

niceonetom wrote: »

I don't see how "for recovery after training" can be confused for "in every and all case".

My bad i misread it.

They're not. There are specific times when elevated insulin is a good thing and those specific times (recovery, primarily) are pretty frequent to many of the posters and readers of this board. That's all I was pointing out.

I never said elevated insulin levels were a bad thing, again misinterpretation as when the phrase spike was used I took it in lamens terms as a sudden jump, whereas I presumed most reading this would be doing long stunts, where your levels would already be elevated, in conjunction with increases of glucagon to free up glycogen stores and other cytokines from nucleated tissue providing both positive and negative effects.

I was actually referring to T2DM here and not to the average layman where an excess of insulin has as many upsides as downsides in the progression of the illnesss/syndrome/disease. Mainly focusing on the over the necessary amounts, due to insulin insensitivity. My apologies again i was pointing out that those who are not in prime condition, like myself, don't need an insulin spike as our insulin sensitivity will already be increased due to the exercise and our basal levels will suffice.

IMO, Foods with high glycaemic indexes are not necessary to improve recovery in these cases, which I am only guessing is what your insinuating someone take to get a insulin spike. Rehydration would be more important and muscle restoration through Glycogen would be as a side product of any milk intake without a huge insulin spike. I realise people will disagree with me here but my thinking is that the insulin spike also elevates the level of adipocytes that are activated by insulin and take in nutrients as well. With a low glycaemic index food there is less of a spike and the already more insulin sensitive muscle cells will make use of the available nutrients to a much more beneficial end.

Also because I think this was missed because I didn't explain it properly was that the negative effects of certain amino acids in high quantities is a long and gradual effect, including alpha cell hyperplasia, mild hyper insulin secretion, which then lead to problems in the long run. again this would be due to an excess of sports drinks/LF milk etc. I think I pointed out that as a rehydration product or something to slow down the breaking down of Glycogen stores it's fine.

Do you drink LF milk all the time?

If so, why not Full fat milk? Milk has a low fat content anyway and low fat milk is often supplemented with additional Amino acids eg palmitate to improve stability which can in fact lead to increased Insulin Secretion and increase in weight gain. if you are looking to lose weight, I realise it sounds counter intuitive but Full fat milk is probably best,.

That said if it's only for rehydration than that's fine.

Sorry if I got side tracked and took away from the thread by not reading your messages properly.

I think my point before the side track was that unless an olympic athlete, I'd go for FF milk but there are plenty of papers out there for either side. The low fat milk side gets more because many researchers, fitness experts are not notified of changes to the milk because the components being added are technically just elevations of amino acids that are there anyway or they believe these additives to be inconsequential. Hence why most studies go with LF milk and do not look at FF at all.

dexty wrote: »

Many people actually use milk as their ride drink?

I pulled into a shop the other day and didn't fancy anything on offer so bought a litre of milk and filled my 2 bottles!

I think the LF supermilk is the same as LF but with added vitimins, not sure if any better though

Also I drink the Supermilk as well for long rides, I quite like it

Nor am I trying to claim to be a knowledgeable person, I'm only going on what I know about cell metabolism. i am far from an expert as you have no doubt concluded :eek: