[mcs5309]

My only concern for raising serum ferritin >100 would be increased inflammation and feeding gut pathogens.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9356804

[mcs5309]

@DrMariano 3210 wrote:

In general, a good diet is a nutrient dense diet. This means there is a large amount of nutrients (such as vitamins, minerals, essential fats, amino acids, etc.) per calorie in the diet.

Non-nutrient dense diets tend to lead to obesity, diabetes, heart disease, mental illness, and other serious illnesses.

Regarding raw food, the idea is to get as many nutrients as possible since cooking or processing may cause the loss of nutrients. However, this has to be balanced against safety. For example, most meats need to be cooked in order to kill disease-causing germs. Aside from creating variations in taste, cooking may be necessary to maintain food safety.

Regarding combining principles, the idea again is to maximize nutrition. For those who are vegetarian, it is important to combine beans and grains, for example, to maximize amino acid availability in the food since a vegetarian diet may be deficient in up to six amino acids. Some diets – such as the traditional Eskimo and traditional Masai diets – don’t combine foods. They are primarily all meat or animal product diets. They are highly nutrient dense diets. Meats may not be fully available in some areas or an all meat diet may not be palatable to many, thus combining meats with non-meat foods is more desirable for many. I think no matter what combination one is considering, the important point is to choose the direction of greater nutrient density.

Again, though, what is your opinion based on the food combining theory that proteins should never be eaten simultaneously with carbs, and fruits should be eaten alone because the enzymes, digestion rates, and pH for each differ?
http://tuberose.com/Food_Combining.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_combining

Do other omnivorous mammals or our ancestors practice food combining? My own personal feeling is the we never evolved to somehow practice this strict ritual of separating food groups like this and that a HEALTHY digestive system is more than capable of adequately breaking down and assimilating both macro and micro-nutrients from many different food groups eaten at the same time. I find the ritual highly contradictory in that no one foods is exlcusive to one of the three macro-nutrients.
http://healthinmotion.wordpress.com/2007/12/23/facts-and-fears-about-the-food-combining-myth/

Also, most of those of us on resistance training diets are told never to eat carbs or fruits alone and without eating protein at the same time because of the insulin surge from these carbs which leads to fat deposition.

[mcs5309]

Out of curiosity, have you used the Secretropin Rx [[url]http://secretropinrx.com][/url] and seen any results with patients from it?

Some anecdotal links on those who’ve experimented with it:
http://anabolicminds.com/forum/igf-1-gh/121785-secretropin.html
http://anabolicminds.com/forum/igf-1-gh/121785-secretropin.html

Dr. Mark Gordon video:
http://www.ihealthtube.com/aspx/viewvideo.aspx?v=a3f6b18955f0e9f7

I still would wonder how it compares in terms of efficacy and safety as well when compared to the tried and proven rHGH.

[mcs5309]

I hear what you’re saying with respect to the proven “track record” or HGH, however, the concept of these various peptides (mostly injectable forms) in terms of long term side effects and lack of negative feedback as compared with HGH sounds promising.

In fact, John Crisler DO no longer uses HGH, not just because of the legal issues, but feels HGH restoration is the way to go as opposed to replacement:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpLfRaP34_E
(According to Crisler, GHRP-2 & GHRP-6 are listed as supplements).

Datbtrue’s link are the most comprehensive links I’ve seen on peptides yet:
http://www.professionalmuscle.com/forums/peptides-growth-factors/37381-dats-cjc-1295-ghrp-6-basic-guides.html
http://www.professionalmuscle.com/forums/peptides-growth-factors/37381-dats-cjc-1295-ghrp-6-basic-guides.html#post435292

Other informative links on these peptides:

Sermorelin:
http://forum.mesomorphosis.com/mens-health-forum/sermorelin-better-alternative-human-134255000.html
http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00675506
http://www.testosteronetherapy.com/html/sermorelin_advantages.html

GHRP-2:
http://www.ghrp2.com/ghrp2.php

GHRP-6:
http://peptide-guide.com/GHRP-6.html
http://www.napsgear.net/hgh-peptides-c45/ghrp-6-p429
link removed at request of Kane Smith

CJC-1295:
http://peptide-guide.com/CJC-1295_.html
http://anabolicminds.com/forum/igf-1-gh/50813-cjc-1295-8-a.html
http://forum.lef.org/default.aspx?f=36&m=63967

[mcs5309]

@shan_e_wilson 2715 wrote:

I have been tanning now for about a month and a half and feel good after I do it. Before this, I was hardly ever in the sun. I have heard talk that tanning beds can possibly cause DNA change. Does anyone know any information about this or if this should really be a concern?

Do you think it is safer using tanning beds or just being in the sun?

Shannon

Well, I think of it this way. All living land-dwelling creatures of the world, including man, have evolved for millions of years adapted to the specific spectrum of UVR (UV radiation) as provided by natural sunlight (although it’s somewhat altered now). Tanning beds are a synthetic recreation of that spectrum in 2 known wavelengths, UVA and UVB. Anytime you replicate and isolate an ingredient in nature, it’s no longer something our genetics recognize as having adapted to. Same principle with that of Vitamin C that naturally occurs in whole food, and the synthetic, lab-created replication, ascorbic acid. Despite what others say, the body is vastly intelligent and does recognize the difference, especially when the one ingredient is separated from the vast and complex array of synergistic co-factors that all play an integral role in its bioavailability when it’s in its natural, unseparated whole state.

I used a bed for many years before I realized that it was making me feel gradually worse after each session. Of course, using any bed with a magnetic ballast is not a good idea because of the EMF it throws off. I now only expose myself to natural sunlight. There are some “more natural” and safer (i.e., electronic ballast) alternative tanning beds that Dr. Mercola has come out with, however, there is nothing better than the real thing, IMO.

That is not to say natural sunlight cannot damage one’s skin and DNA from repeated excessive exposure to the point of sunburn. Humans have to therefore use prudence and regulate exposure, as other creatures have fur or feathers for protection/deflection of UVR.

Skin aging and skin cancer are largely a myth created by our corrupt medical establishment (under the tyranny of the FDA) to sell lotions and drugs which actually make the situation worse, and have even been proven to CAUSE malignancies instead of preventing them. Only people that are super fair-skinned and maladapted to sun exposure, those with certain dermatologic conditions, or those that eat a diet of junk (processed foods & drinks of any kind) have to worry about skin cancer and aging. UVR reacts with the toxins from processed foods (especially refined fats and carbs) in the body and will eventually damage DNA, leading to skin cancer. Processed substances, including the topical sunscreens, should always be avoided, period. UVR just speeds up the free radical process by which these synthetic toxins do their damage.

Think about it in another light (no pun intended) – if the dangers from sunlight were as treacherous as the media would have us believe, then why weren’t ancient people dying from skin cancer that worked and lived in it all day and why is skin cancer unheard of in civilizations south of the equator where UVR is many times more intense than in the northern hemisphere?

We all need some degree of natural sunlight – EVERY DAY!

[Author]

Posts