In a recent paper on the role of mitochondria and type II diabetes, the researchers conclude that:

Under certain insulin-resistant conditions, reduced oxidative phosphorylation capacity, submaximal ADP-stimulated oxidative phosphorylation and/or content of mitochondria have been observed in insulin-responsive tissues, such as skeletal muscle, liver and heart. Impaired mitochondrial plasticity, that is, response to metabolic regulation, seems to be characteristic of many insulin-resistant patient groups. Whereas inherited mitochondrial abnormalities have been associated with insulin resistance, acquired metabolic alterations typical of insulin resistance, such as hyperglycemia, hyperinsulinemia and hypertriglyceridemia, can also promote the production of ROS and damage mitochondria in insulin-responsive tissues. Of note, some successful interventions to decrease insulin resistance also improve features of mitochondria, making these organelles attractive candidates for novel therapeutic approaches.

In other words, it’s better to have as much mitochondria as you can get. But what are these little gadgets called mitochondria?

In cell biology, a mitochondrion (plural mitochondria) is a membrane-enclosed organelle found in most eukaryotic cells.[1] These organelles range from 0.5 to 1.0 micrometer (μm) in diameter. Mitochondria are sometimes described as “cellular power plants” because they generate most of the cell’s supply of adenosine triphosphate (ATP), used as a source of chemical energy.[2] In addition to supplying cellular energy, mitochondria are involved in a range of other processes, such as signaling, cellular differentiation, cell death, as well as the control of the cell cycle and cell growth.[3] Mitochondria have been implicated in several human diseases, including mitochondrial disorders[4] and cardiac dysfunction,[5] and may play a role in the aging process. The word mitochondrion comes from the Greek μίτος mitos, thread, + χονδρίον chondrion, granule.

In other words, they are the little power-producing pac men within your muscles. Important little dudes to be sure.

Now, what is one of the best ways to go about increasing the total number of these gizmos so that you can enjoy more ATP meaning, energy, insulin sensitivity and a host of other metabolic goodies?

Strength train.

Several studies on resistance training have been shown to significantly increase the total amount of mitochondria within the skeletal muscles. One in particular, “SuperSlow or Hypertrophy Resistance Training: do they affect skeletal muscle mass and strength differently?”, showed a significant increase. Their findings:

The myofibrillar content of type I muscle fibres declines with both modes of resistance training (thereby to a greater extent with the SuperSlow regime) whereas it levels off in type IID fibres (with even a light increase with the SuperSlow mode). Both fibre types significantly increase their mitochondrial content and with it their aerobic capacity. In type I fibres this is mainly due to both a highly significant increase of the intermyofibrillar mitochondria and the hypertrophy mode of resistance training. In type IID fibres both subpopulations of mitochondria contribute to the overall increase of the mitochondrial amount. Furthermore, this training effect on mitochondria may point to a fibre shift towards type IIA.

In other words, if you want to maximize your mitochondria, get up off your ever-flattening keesters my good, good friends and start pumping iron – preferably slowly and intensely.

And truth be told, whether you have T2D or not, hit the weights 1-2 times a week to pump up your mitochondria making yourself a stronger, more enduring and healthier you!

Blogs are fun places to read all sorts of wacky comments. Frequently the comments are more fun and sometimes more informative than the blog itself.

Today I received a really wacky comment to my blog on the ridiculously biased movie Forks Over Knives. I thought it would be fun to share the exchange.

The commenter’s statements, written word for word, are in quotes. My responses are below them followed by three ***.

What I find so very interesting is that, like many vegans, they fail to use Google or some other search engine to see if what they are saying is based on any, um, facts. Let the games begin!

“Mr. Fred Hahn, please speak based on facts. The only argument I’ve heard from you is that eating meat has been a staple part of human beings’ diet. Not enough.”

***Not enough for what Khaled? Science has shown conclusively that animal matter has been a part of the human diet since the paleolithic era. It is how we grew larger brains and eventually became the dominant ape on the planet.

“As human beings evolve, so does science and technology. You should listen to the scientific data. And if you really believe in evolution, let me point out 2 things for you…”

***I don’t *believe* in evolution. Evolution is a proven fact. HOW we evolved exactly is debated, but we, like every other living thing on the planet, has and continues to evolve.

“First, amongst all the animals on earth, the ones with teeth patterns similar to ours are herbivores.”

***This is patently false.

http://www.brianpeskin.com/BP.com/elements/herbivorecarnivorechart.jpg

“Second, any carnivorous animal has a digestive tract which is at MOST 3 times it’s bodies’ length. Human beings’ digestive tract is almost 12 times his height. The meat is quickly processed, then begins to rot in our bodies.”

****This too is patently false. And we are omnivores btw. Q:Where do you come up with this info? (There is something called Google you know.) The main problem is not so much the length of the colon, but the type of digestive process. Our bacterial flora, like other meat eaters, is putrefactive. The herbivores is fermentative.

“Regarding vegan diets, you only manage to say that it doesn’t provide enough protein and lacks a few other nutrients. Do you have any proof of its’ ill-affects?”

***Vegan diets lack, among other things, iron, B12 and adequate amino acids and in the right ratio. This is more than enough evidence to show you it is deficient and therefore will cause ill-effects unless you supplement. If you get hit by a car at 80 miles an hour, you WILL be injured. I don’t need any more evidence than that.

“I’d like to see some.”

***Go to your local GP and ask them to tell you how their pure vegan patients fare, specifically, the ones that do not supplement with vitamins D, B12, selenium or iron (oh right, they’d be the dead ones). Ask them specifically if they see a trend in them towards anemia and high blood glucose. But careful! The answer might surprise you.

“And btw, is it possible for human beings to live on an exclusively animal-based diet. No! But is it possible for human beings to live on an exclusively plant-based diet. Hell yes!”

***You have it exactly opposite. Ever heard of the Inuit? The Masai? Name me ONE culture, past or present, that lives/lived exclusively on plant matter (meaning, no bugs, shellfish, or supplements).

“One final point: While it’s true that for several thousands of years human beings’ ate meat, it doesn’t prove that it’s optimal. You see, in those years, getting enough plant-based foods was not easy. The diet was based on whatever you could find around you. But today, you can find absolutely any vegetable and fruit you like. Times have changed, Fred.”

***Indeed times have changed. We now experience more disease, obesity, diabetes, etc. than ever before. As our country had decreased its fat consumption and increased its carbohydrate consumption, we have become a nation of obese diabetics riddled with heart disease and cancer. All of which were absent PRIOR to the advent of agriculture.

All that said, realize that eating plants is perfectly fine. Plant matter can provide some nutrients. But edible plant matter is only available at certain times of the year and certainly not everything that is plant matter is edible to us very much UNLIKE an herbivore. Deer, goats, sheep can eat a huge variety of forest matter. Cows, horses, etc. eat grass all day long and live well.

Since YOU say you are an herbivore and seem to suggest humans will thrive eating as one, I’d like to see you eat ONLY grass, pine needles, fruit tree leaves, sapling bark, etc., and after say 6 months, see what your health status is. If you’re right, you should be the picture of robust human health. If I’m right, you’ll be in the hospital in 6 hours.
__________________________________________________________

The next time a vegan or a vegetarian (whatever that really is) tosses the “Humans are herbivores!” mantra at you, refer them to the chart above. I think I’m going to make a poster out of it and put it up in my gym.

Food author Michael Pollan is quoted as saying:

Eat food, not too much, mostly plants.

I say:

Eat food, mostly animal matter, and don’t worry about the amount.

Carbohydrates ARE sugars.

My super tall friend Andreas Eenfeldt M.D., a pro-low carb, high fat diet physician posted the 60 Minutes segment on sugar called Is Sugar Toxic which aired a few weeks ago.

While it was great to see a segment on the evils of sugar aired on such a popular show, sadly, it fell short of hitting the bullseye.

Dr. Sanjay Gupta asks Dr. Robert Lustig in the beginning of the segment “Do you think sugar is toxic?” Dr. Lustig replies “I believe so, yes.” I have a problem with this answer. It’s as though Dr. Lustig wants to take the limelight. Why respond by saying “I believe so?” The question is not asked to learn about Dr. Lustig and his personal beliefs.

It would have been far better and more accurate for him to have said in reponse: “Research seems to indicate that this may very well be true especially if excessive amounts of sugars and carbohydrates are ingested. This leads to chronically elevated blood glucose levels – the real cause of systemic inflammation and several metabolic disorders.”

But truth be told, sugar is not toxic per se. If you eat a grain of sugar is this toxic to your body? Heck no. What is toxic is chronically high levels of blood glucose caused by excessive sugar and carbohydrate intake. Total carbohydrate intake, not sugar itself, is the issue.

60 Minutes did a good job with the segment. They managed to demonize sugar rich foods like syrup, soda, honey (I’m not so convinced a tad of honey is so bad) and Wonder bread. But I think we all know that added sugars and sugary foods are not so good for us. If you polled a thousand people and asked them if Coca Cola, Ring Dings, Wonder Bread, Sno-Balls, Snickers bars, etc. were good or bad, I don’t think a single person would say that any of these foods were good or healthy. In fact, I’d bet my MedX leg press machine that every single one of the people polled would not only say that these foods are bad, but that they are not really food at all.

The info on cancer was tremendous I thought. I’ve been reading a lot on this and the work of Dr. Seyfried and colleagues is pioneering how we treat this dread disease.

All in all I’d say it was a good piece but it missed hitting the bulls-eye which is TOTAL carbohydrate/sugar intake not just the sugar or fructose itself.

Thoughts?

Anabolic steroids are, unfortunately, used by many athletes and body builders to enhance their muscularity and strength. In professional sports their use is illegal. But they are legal in pro body building.

The drugs have come a long way since their beginning. No one knows for sure when athletes and specifically body builders began using them but there seems to be no debate that their use was fairly widespread in the 1960’s and onward. The body builders of yesteryear like Arnold, Lou, Zane and Franco couldn’t even stand on the stage with the ‘roided out monter’s of today let alone win a contest. Take a look at the top pic of a modern body builder and an old timer from the 1970’s Franco Colombu:

Franco is impressive, but he wouldn’t stand a chance in a contest of size and muscularity.

There are a few people who poo-poo their effect, stating that these drugs don’t do all that much for building size and strength and would have you believe that their training is what has made them into the montsters they are. Sure the drugs help they’ll say, but they are but a small boost to their hard work and gym ethic of these athletes. This of course is absurd.

Take a look at Gunter Schlierkamp back in the 1980’s.

And look at him today off the juice:

Just a bit different, no? He looks like a normal guy who lifts weights.

Here’s my arm in comparison:

So believe me when I say that anabolic steroids are the reason for the size of these body builders – just in case you were wondering. Not exactly the most informative blog of mine to date, but I felt it had to be said.

Mike after 8 months of low carb eating and 1-2 weekly strength sessions.

Thanks to Google’s key word search, I receive a half dozen interesting but frustrating articles on childhood obesity on a daily basis. Every single one of them says the same darn thing – eat less fat, eat whole grains, exercise more, blah blah blah. Drives me nuts!

Childhood obesity is easily solved. What I mean is, there is no mystery surrounding the solution if you are up on your reading on low carb diets. It’s just a matter of obeying science. If we (Michelle Obama this means you too!) would ignore the current weight loss dogma (low fat, whole grains, swapping soda for juice, etc.) and promote a low carbohydrate, real food eating plan instead, viola! No more obese people.

And for those of you who are about to stick their thumbs in their ears, wiggle their fingers and scream at me: “But Fred! What about all the people who eat lots of carbs like the Kitavans and aren’t fat! So there!” let me say this: I don’t give a hoot about them.

FACT: The only way you can become obese is by eating lots of carbs. If you don’t, you can’t, as in CAN’T.

As for exercise, lack of exercise hasn’t a thing to do with obesity. If this was understood, there would be a lot less pressure on obese kids as well. Do fat newborns move less in the womb? Are skinny, inactive kids sneaking in hours on the treadmill when no one is looking? C’mon.

I am so sick of the nonsense, if anyone’s library would like a free copy of my book Strong Kids Healthy Kids, I’ll ship it.

Or, are you being outsmarted by those who profit heavily from those who are diabetic?

Why aren’t there pictures of meat and green leafy veggies on the cover?

Food for thought.

Heck no.

Zoe Harcombe dishes out the facts:

The raw data actually shows deaths rates falling with increased meat consumption up to the third or fourth quintile – and this is before all the other variables have been allowed for. This would suggest that meat consumption has a protective effect while weight, alcohol, calorie intake, lack of exercise and so on are all taking their toll.

‘Nuff said. Thanks Zoe for saving me a lot of time trying to respond to this nonsense. You did it better than I EVER could.

I am now hearing in the wind that 30 minutes a week of exercise is too time consuming. I find this hard to believe but hey, some people have full time jobs, 47 kids, second jobs, pets, lawns, nails to polish, cigars to smoke, etc.

I’m here to tell ya’ll that a mere 5 minutes is enough. 5 minutes. 5. V. Five.

Here are the exercises you do:

Chest press or bench press or push ups
Squats or leg press
Pull downs or chin ups or one arm rows

That’s it. Each exercise should take you about 1-2 minutes to reach complete muscle fatigue. Each of the exercises can be seen in this video. In the video, the chest press is the 2nd exercise, the leg press is the 5th and the pull down is the 1st.

Serious Strength Personal Training Studios from Serious Strength on Vimeo.

These three exercises will not win you a body building trophy, but they will indeed build muscle and strength in a big way. I’m not the only one talking about this either.

After you do these three, go home and eat a good protein rich meal. If you train at home, go eat a protein rich meal. Keep the carbs low and stick to veggies as much as you can.

No more excuses now.

And you don’t have to be in shape to get started you hockey-pucks! START to get in shape.

Peace.

Not smart.

Actually, it’s worse than stupid, it’s really stupid.

Here’s why.

But before I explain, let me say that I didn’t say that trainers who teach functional training are stupid. I also didn’t say that people who engage in functional training are stupid.

I said, functional training is stupid. And it’s dangerous. And needless, worthless, etc.

According to Richard Schmidt, Ph.D, motor learning principles clearly dictates that skill improvement at a task is best achieved by perfect practice of that skill or task. In other words, if you want to excel at your golf drive, don’t hit golf balls standing on a wobble board.

What the...?

That makes sense, right?

Says Dr. Schmidt:

A common misconception is that fundamental abilities can be trained through various drills or other activities. The thinking is that, with some stronger ability, the athlete will see gains in performance for tasks with this underlying ability.

For example, athletes are often given various “quickening” exercises, with the hope that these exercises would train some fundamental ability to be quick, allowing quicker response in their particular sports.

Coaches often use various balancing drills to increase general balancing ability, eye movement exercises to improve vision, and many others. Such attempts to train fundamental abilities may sound fine, but usually they simply do not work. Time, and often money, would be better spent practicing the eventual goal skills.

There are two correct ways to think of these principles. First, there is no general ability to be quick, to balance, or to use vision. Rather, quickness, balance, and vision are each based on many diverse abilities, so there is no single quickness or balance ability, for example, that can be trained.

Second, even if there were such general abilities, these are, by definition, genetic and not subject to modification through practice. Therefore, attempts to modify an ability with a nonspecific drill are ineffective. A learner may acquire additional skill at the drill which is, after all, a skill itself, but this learning does not transfer to the main skill of interest.

Our muscles allow us to function. The stronger we make our muscles, the better they will function. If we want to be good at a function, like golf, tennis, arm wrestling, etc., we must practice that function as perfectly as possible. It is not a smart idea, nor will it work in your favor to do things like this:

This will not improve your golf drive. Or anything else for that matter save for doing THAT.

Resistance training is designed for one thing and one thing only – getting stronger. Of course, there are a million and one ways to perform resistance training. My suggestion, no matter what your preferred flavor is, do it safely. If you hurt yourself in the weight room, your pet skill or sport will suffer. That said, don’t do it in a manner that simulates a sport or skill.

Keep resistance training and skill practice separate and distinct.

I hope I have saved many of you from hours of wasted effort engaging in these nonsensical practices.

Remember:

Muscles function. The stronger they are, they better they will function.
Practice makes perfect but only if the practice is perfect to begin with.

Click on the pic to see it better from the source. It is just GREAT! Had to share it. Enjoy.