A cure for pesky muscularity : LC Research/Media Forum : Active Low-Carber Forums

#1 ^

Tue, Nov-27-18, 13:05

teaser

Senior Member

Posts: 15,075

Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches

BF:
Progress: 104%

Location: Ontario

A cure for pesky muscularity

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releas...81126093217.htm

Quote:

Weight loss procedure shrinks both fat and muscle

Left gastric artery embolization, a novel interventional procedure used to treat obesity, leads to the loss of both fat and muscle, according to a new study presented today at the annual meeting of the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA). Researchers said the loss of muscle mass is concerning and underscores the importance of proper nutritional counseling after the procedure.

Obesity is a major health issue worldwide, linked with serious conditions like heart disease, cancer and diabetes. First-line treatments such as diet and exercise often don't work, leading many patients to opt for gastric bypass surgery. The surgery, which reduces the size of the stomach, has been effective in treating obesity, but carries with it significant costs and potential complications.

Currently under investigation in clinical trials, left gastric artery embolization is a less invasive option to surgery. In the procedure, microscopic beads are injected under imaging guidance into the artery that supplies blood to the stomach. The beads block blood flow to the stomach and reduce the production of ghrelin, a hormone that stimulates hunger. Early studies have shown that embolization is effective in helping people lose weight, but information is lacking on how it might change a patient's composition of muscle and fat.

"There has been lots of research focused on the efficacy of gastric artery embolization for weight loss," said the study's lead author, Edwin A. Takahashi, M.D., vascular and interventional radiology fellow at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn. "However, there has been no data on what is contributing to the weight loss, whether the patients are losing fat, as desired, or muscle mass, or some combination of the two."

To learn more, Dr. Takahashi and colleagues studied CT scans of 16 overweight or obese patients who had undergone left gastric artery embolization to treat gastrointestinal bleeding. CT scans, when used in conjunction with special software, allow for measurements of body composition based on the different densities of tissues like fat and muscle.

The scans were done before and approximately 1.5 months after the procedure. The results were compared to those of a control group of 16 outpatients who did not undergo left gastric artery embolization but had CT scans at two different time periods for nonspecific abdominal pain.

All 16 individuals experienced significant weight loss after the embolization procedure, losing an average of 6.4 percent of their body weight over 1.5 months. Body mass index, a measure of body weight relative to a person's height, dropped by 6.3 percent.

While the weight loss was not surprising to the researchers, the changes in body composition were. The skeletal muscle index, a measure of the amount of muscle that connects to the skeleton and helps move the limbs, fell by 6.8 percent. Skeletal muscle is important to health, and loss of it can impair physical function and metabolism and put a stuperson at higher risk of injury.

"The significant decrease in the amount of skeletal muscle highlights the fact that patients who undergo this procedure are at risk for losing muscle mass and need to be managed accordingly after procedure," Dr. Takahashi said. "We must make sure they receive adequate nutrition to minimize the amount of muscle tissue they lose."

The patients also lost a significant amount of body fat. Their overall body fat index dropped by an average of 3.7 percent. However, much of the fat loss was subcutaneous, or the fat that lies directly under the skin. Visceral fat, the more dangerous fat surrounding the organs and associated with serious health problems like heart disease and diabetes, did not decrease significantly over the course of follow-up.

The researchers plan to expand their studies in the future to include people who are specifically undergoing embolization as a treatment for obesity.

You can reduce ghrelin by changing let's call it metabolic input. Or less stupidly, food.

But that's giving the body an environment that requires less ghrelin... lowering ghrelin by interfering with physiology? GHRelin got its name because it's a "growth hormone releasing" peptide. You could see that relating to the effect on muscle mass here, also to the effects on visceral fat (maybe not as obvious, but it involves the switch in the body and the liver from glucose and fat as fuel, fat of faty acids to oxidation versus triglyceride synthesis etc.).

Sponsored Links

#2 ^

Tue, Nov-27-18, 13:47

Ms Arielle Ms Arielle is offline

Senior Member

Posts: 19,219

Plan: atkins, carnivore 2023
Stats: 200/211/163 Female 5'8"

BF:
Progress: -30%

Location: Massachusetts

This is a barbaric procedure!!!!! How is this safer and more effective than a change in foods?

#3 ^

Tue, Nov-27-18, 16:55

Calianna

Senior Member

Posts: 1,891

Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63

BF:
Progress: 50%

Quote:

All 16 individuals experienced significant weight loss after the embolization procedure, losing an average of 6.4 percent of their body weight over 1.5 months. Body mass index, a measure of body weight relative to a person's height, dropped by 6.3 percent.

While the weight loss was not surprising to the researchers, the changes in body composition were. The skeletal muscle index, a measure of the amount of muscle that connects to the skeleton and helps move the limbs, fell by 6.8 percent. Skeletal muscle is important to health, and loss of it can impair physical function and metabolism and put a stuperson at higher risk of injury.

"The significant decrease in the amount of skeletal muscle highlights the fact that patients who undergo this procedure are at risk for losing muscle mass and need to be managed accordingly after procedure," Dr. Takahashi said. "We must make sure they receive adequate nutrition to minimize the amount of muscle tissue they lose."

The patients also lost a significant amount of body fat. Their overall body fat index dropped by an average of 3.7 percent. However, much of the fat loss was subcutaneous, or the fat that lies directly under the skin. Visceral fat, the more dangerous fat surrounding the organs and associated with serious health problems like heart disease and diabetes, did not decrease significantly over the course of follow-up.

Do they even realize what's happening?

They lost 6.8% of their most important, most needed muscle. They only lost 3.7% of their fat. For the kids keeping score, that's almost twice as much muscle lost as fat lost.

And worse than that, it was the wrong kind of fat they lost - the dangerous visceral fat is still hanging on.

Quote:

The researchers plan to expand their studies in the future to include people who are specifically undergoing embolization as a treatment for obesity.

And yet they're still doing this procedure?! What are they thinking - "Lets see how many more people fall for the hype of the latest and greatest WLS procedure, and how badly it affects them"

I'm not seeing the up-side to this procedure, not at all, unless scale weight lost (no matter where it comes from) is the ONLY important result.

#4 ^

Tue, Nov-27-18, 21:15

M Levac

Senior Member

Posts: 6,498

Plan: VLC, mostly meat
Stats: 202/200/165 Male 5' 7"

BF:
Progress: 5%

Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada

So, restrict blood supply to the stomach and the intended effect is reduced ghrelin in the hope that it leads to reduced food intake, which it does. Invariably, reduced food intake leads to loss of both fat and muscle mass, regardless of how reduced food intake was achieved. Have these idjits not studied the mountains of papers written on that single subject, cuz the article sounds like they're totally surprised?

On a different note, I wanted to cite the Minnesota semi-starvation experiment about that, but then I read this on wiki and thought maybe it could serve as argument against the procedure and instead favor trying to feed these patients real genuine food and see how that works out before messing them up with any kind of surgery:

Quote:

One of the crucial observations of the Minnesota Starvation Experiment discussed by a number of researchers in the nutritional sciences—including Ancel Keys—is that the physical effects of the induced semi-starvation during the study closely approximate the conditions experienced by people with a range of eating disorders such as anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa. As a result of the study it has been postulated that many of the profound social and psychological effects of these disorders may result from undernutrition, and recovery depends on physical re-nourishment as well as psychological treatment.

Here it's "re-nourishment", but really we're talking a priori nourishment. I mean, what the hell were these people eating? Doesn't anybody wonder if the stuff they put in their mouth was actually food?

On this forum we all went through this questioning of what we put in our mouth. It's even the first question we ask when somebody comes in here to ask for help saying "low-carb is not working and I don't know what to do". The reason it's the first question is because we know very well it's the easiest way to make low-carb not work. Dude, I just ate the whole cake and I dunno why low-carb doesn't work anymore. I mean, LOL, right?

About ghrelin and low-carb. I bet if we looked, we'd find it drops like a rock when we go low-carb, especially when we cut out sugar and wheat.

#5 ^

Tue, Nov-27-18, 22:09

Ms Arielle Ms Arielle is offline

Senior Member

Posts: 19,219

Plan: atkins, carnivore 2023
Stats: 200/211/163 Female 5'8"

BF:
Progress: -30%

Location: Massachusetts

Exactly.

#6 ^

Thu, Nov-29-18, 16:25

mike_d

Grease is the word!

Posts: 8,475

Plan: PSMF/IF
Stats: 236/181/180 Male 72 inches

BF:disappearing!
Progress: 98%

Location: Alamo city, Texas

Biohack your Genes!

Quote:

Crispr-Cas9, allows scientists to precisely target and edit pieces of the genome. Crispr is a guide molecule made of RNA, that allows a specific site of interest on the DNA double helix to be targeted. The RNA molecule is attached to Cas9, a bacterial enzyme that works as a pair of "molecular scissors" to cut the DNA at the exact point required. This allows scientists to cut, paste or delete single letters of genetic code. According to BioViva and to interviews with its CEO, Elizabeth Parrish, Parrish received two DNA therapies last year, one to protect against the loss of muscle mass, and one to lengthen her telomeres. The recent announcement claims that the telomere-lengthening therapy is already working ...

BioViva has two experimental therapies, both based on legitimate science "CRISPR-Cas9", and both with at least a chance of working. Neither has yet been proven to work in humans, but both are plausible IMO

Quote:

Nasa biochemist: Josiah Zayner, 36, recently made headlines by becoming the first person to use the revolutionary gene-editing tool Crispr to change his own genes.

"Blade Runner?"

Quote:

Part way through a talk on genetic engineering, Zayner pulled out a syringe apparently containing DNA and other chemicals designed to trigger a genetic change in his cells associated with dramatically increased muscle mass. He injected the DIY gene therapy into his left arm, live-streaming the procedure on the internet.

Quote:

I chose to start with the gene for myostatin [a protein that regulates muscle growth], because it has been extensively studied, and it produces an obvious change if it has worked.

Before we can travel to the stars we must change our inner space.

Last edited by mike_d : Fri, Nov-30-18 at 11:09.