No problem bro. Just remember that your food need to be completely digested before going to bed. Thus, the 3-4 hours before your bed time.

No such thing. The digestive system never goes to sleep.

---

Added on November 5, 2010, 11:20 amThe reason is to help control food intake/calories. Many people tend to still eat heavy supper or eat all sorts of tidbits after dinner. So asking them to stop eating after XYZ o'clock is just a way to avoid eating too much.

Then again, the better choice is to eat some fruits (instead of some junk) if you're hungry at night: apples are very filling.

This post has been edited by iamyuanwu: Nov 5 2010, 11:20 AM

@Night

Thanks..!!

@Imyuanwu

so, u mean..I'm allowed to take heavy supper as long as it's not junk foods?..I mean...I can take 5 bananas, maybe 3 apples...and a bowl of brown rice(and boiled chicken breasts)...

huahuahua

oh, my weight is 70 kg - 71 kg, my height around 175cm I think...and currently I'm using Nitro-Tech and Lipo-6

This post has been edited by El Sol: Nov 5 2010, 01:34 PM

Yeah. No problem, if you don't feel uncomfortable or anything. Anyway, why would you want to eat such heavy supper for?

my mouth wanna eat..hahaha

lol my mom told me tat last time XD

I really thought cold water cant trim down fats. As what ive heard it is better not to drink cold water after eating. i only drink cold water and nothing more

myth:

drink milk can stop gastric pain.

I'm not sure about this, cos once i asked doctor about this(i'm suffer from gastric), and the doctor told me it's not true, but this is the thing people will tell me whenever i have gastric pain =S

Any expert out there can tell me the real truth?

Actually the milk they're referring to is Milk of Magnesia (google up)

Hello.

Is there any medication/herbs/etc that can ease bowel movement?

Aloe vera gel (can be a little strong. Just be careful)
or
psyllium husk.

Water (I'm serious! Because a lot of people are constipated because they dont drink enough)

For medications, Google up 'Lactulose'

Another question.

I'm having a problem of visit the toilet (peeing) very frequently (every 30 min ++) after drinking a cup of less-sugar-content coffee/tea/milo/mineral water. I've read somewhere in this section (can't find where), it says it's related to kidney problem and the only way to cure is taking some sort of chinese traditional medication.

Is this true that going to pee frequently related to kidney problem?

I've got my work cut out for me... carefully reading all these and correcting for errors.

Page 1

@ darklight79

>> Lol... here's another myth. BCAA's are a waste of money. There're BCAA's everywhere in the protein rich food we eat AND our whey protein. This evidence has been presented by a prominent member of bb.com forums who holds a Masters in Nutrition.

>> Those people who tell you otherwise are definitely just trying to sell their products.

◘ I believe you might be misunderstanding how amino acids and proteins work. I'll be happy to send you a book I've written on this if you want to contact me.

All complete proteins have all 20 amino acids. That's very true... chicken, fish, beef - why protein powder is also a complete protein, and thus will have all aminos.

However, each of those amino acids performs a separate job. For example, arginine is involved in the dilation of blood vessles, gamma amino butyric acid or GABA helps to shut off the brain and let you sleep, Taurine produces stomach bile and works together with GABA to help you sleep, and tryptophan is involved in the production of seretonin.

When you take any of these aminos individually, they will perform an exaggerated function of their given tasks. Eating protein gives you arginine, which does help regulate growth hormone release, but taking arginine pills gives you even MORE growth hormone release!

BCAAs are involved in muscle repair and recovery. Taking more BCAAs means getting more recovery.

If you are ever confused about supplements, I do write things like these: http://kaseybrownfitness.blogspot.com/2010...no-explode.html ... where I give you a step-by-step break down of exactly what's in the product and precisely how it works.

Page 1

@ diablokun

>> But while it's true that the heterocyclic aromatic amines (HAAs) contained in the blackened edges of barbecue food are carcinogenic, there has been no evidence produced which links barbecued food to cancer.

◘ For this and ALL OTHER COMMENTS ABOUT CANCER, please read the following:

http://kaseybrownfitness.blogspot.com/2010...ses-cancer.html

Please no more about cancer. If anyone mentions the C word again, just direct them to that post plzkthx.

>> Myth
It's OK to skip breakfast.
Truth
Breakfast is a very important meal. When we're sleeping, we are also 'fasting' for an average of about eight hours, so it's essential to 'break' this fast. Although people who skip breakfast catch up on their energy requirements later in the day, they're unlikely to get all the vitamins and minerals that a simple breakfast can provide. Try porridge with honey for a wholesome but filling meal.

◘ Fat does not make you fat. Calories make you fat. A banana is loaded with calories. For inactive people, it may be considered "fattening".

Of course that doesn't mean you'll get fat eating them. Just means you'll get more calories and you *could* get fat a lot easier.

@ Fireball9

>> Actually, poor hygiene IS a factor, just not the main factor. Poor hygiene allows overgrowth of organisms, including those responsible for Acne. Of course, there are factors such as hormones, genetics, etc.

◘ Hyperkerotinization is the chief cause of acne... and while poor hygene may play a role, its usually a small one.

http://kaseybrownfitness.blogspot.com/2010...g-research.html - I know it looks like I'm promoting my blog, but these seriously are topics I've discussed in detail already.

>> Actually, both are truth. Eating fats will lead to increase accumulation of fats in the body. Direct effect. Yes, calories and carbs will also be converted into fat. So both are truth.

◘ See above. Fat does not make you fat.

@ UglyOrgan

>> everything in moderate is the best way to go..for healthier life!

◘ So cigarette smoke in moderation? Snake bites in moderation? Exposure to nuclear radiation in moderation?

@ Fireball9 - (I'm trying not to pick on you dude, but you got a lot of things slightly off)

>> Anyway, there's different types of fats that most people aren't aware of.

◘ There are only 2 primary kinds of fat, when dealing in nutrition science. Saturated fats, which is a carbon chain fully surrounded by hydrogen, and unsaturated, in which the carbon chain is not fully surrounded by hydrogen.

Of Saturated fats there are 2 types: naturally occurring saturated fats, and trans fats. Trans fats are artificially created with high temperatures, lots of heat, the presence of hydrogen, and some form of catalyst (copper, zinc, or any reactive metal). There are also naturally occurring transfats like CLA - conjugated linoleic acid, which do are beneficial and not harmful, as artificial transfats are.

Man made trans fats are more carcinogenic than cigarette smoke.

Of Unsaturated fats there are primarily 3 kinds: Omega 3, Omega 6, and Omega 9. The first two are essential, the last isn't.

Cholesterol is a steroid-alcohol compound. NOT a fat.

LDL stands for "low density lipocytes", which is a cholesterol carrier, NOT a fat.

Now lets look at your statements.

>> Of course the more read ones like you would know, but most people have the idea of fats as the ones from meat, all the trans fat which are high in LDL.

◘ Trans fats are not high in LDL.

>> That of course, is proven to be hazardous to health, and people are always promoting good fats, monosats, which contain HDL which is good.

◘ No I'm sorry, "good fats" are not high in HDL. Neither do they by themselves promote higher levels of HDL. This goes deeper into nutrition science and I'm afraid I might bore everyone if I talk on this longer.

>> You also mentioned meat + fat, which means you're talking about trans fat here, which is high in LDL.

◘ Again, meat + fat does not = trans fat. I'm sorry but I really dont know where you're getting your information from.

End of page 1. And if I didn't say anything about your comment, that means I probably agree whole heartedly with it.

---

Added on December 20, 2010, 2:44 amPage 2

@ solsekuin44

>> I used to be like this.. I asked the doctor, he said maybe I have a high metabolism. Whatever you eat becomes energy, not stored as fat.

◘ That's not quite how it works. Then people who eat anything and remain thin are not eating anything. I've met lots of people who were skinny as hell, who told me "yea I eat everything and I still cant gain weight!"

When I ask what they eat... "A bag of chips in the morning and a sandwich at night"



Seriously, part of me wants to go "HOLY CRAP ARE YOU KIDDING YOU ATE A WHOLE SANDWICH BY YOURSELF???" What nonsense.

You wanna gain weight?

Go to McDonalds and eat 2 large fries and a double cheese burger.

3 hours later eat 2 peanut butter and jelly sandwhiches plus a can of tuna with some crackers.

3 hours later eat an entire bag of Mr Potato with 2 jelly donuts and some chicken breasts.

3 hours later eat a bucket of chicken at KFC.

Now you just said you can eat anything. So do that. THEN come here and tell us about your weight, and I dont want to hear another word about this "super fast metabolism" garbage. Metabolism schmotabolism. You're not eating enough. Period.

PS - before anyone tells me that diet is bad, it's an example of what I used to follow back in my hardcore bodybuilding days. I did leave out spinach, broccoli, peas, unions, carrots, tomatoes, etc from the example but then I'm trying to keep it simple.

@ Jamis

>> but why..... when i consume less fat...moderate carbs, moderate protein i gain fat? Wont it burn my body fat when my fat source is low?

◘ No man, that's not how it works. The type of fuel you use is based more on activity level than on nutrient intake.

Hard and fast activity burns glucose / glycogen / sugar.

Moderate, slow activity burns fat.

It doesn't matter what you eat... those are the fuel sources used for those activities.

@ tracieMoo

>> is it true that when you are in the BMI healthy range it's harder to lose any more weight?

◘ No. Ignore the BMI. It was developed in the mid 1800s, and it was NEVER meant to measure individual health and fitness.

And fat loss never comes "harder" if you know how to do it right.

@ ipodnani

>> I always take a late night shower and some of my peers told me that if you shower at late night or something you will get a heart or lung related diseases ? I dont think it is relevant but im curious .

◘ Sickness is caused by germs and viruses, not the time of day you get wet.

---

Added on December 20, 2010, 2:56 amPage 3

ugh... some crazy stuff on this page.

@ Raikkonen

>> Sit ups can easily tone those upper abs but lower abs and oblique are difficult.
Always add diet & cardio.

◘ The sliding filament theory of muscular energetics shows us that you cannot target the "lower abs" apart from the upper abs in any meaningful way. You cannot make your lower abs "more muscular" by doing lower ab exercises. When you do upper ab movements, you are still using your lower abs.

>> My question is; 'Oblique crunch are crucial?'

◘ No.

@ Ronin_Amin

>> guys, have you ever heard of pink muscles? it supposed to be a combination of red and white muscles, red being the muscles for explosive power and white for endurance.

◘ God... WHAT??! Dude are you trolling us? Or did someone troll you and you came here with your troll info?

First, there's no such thing as "pink muscle". All muscle has a mix of red and white fibers, with none being completely red or completely white.

Secondly you got it perfectly backwards. WHITE muscles are for explosive power. RED muscles are for endurance.

@

>> will eating right before you sleep increase your weight?

◘ A belly full of carbs just before you sleep can interfere with the somatotrophin hormone released during the first few hours of sleep. It's not a good idea to eat lots of carbs then go to bed.

However, you can eat plenty of protein and veggies, as these have very few calories and very few carbs.

@ beat~

>> does weight-lifting/bodybuilding stunt body height growth?

◘ No.

>> like when ur on the age where body start to grow, around 12-18 or more?....

◘ No.

>> heard alot of ppl saying this, but just about all doesnt have any proven fact to support this.
so what u all think?

◘ No.

Plus iamyuanwu gave a spectacular answer.

@ Kobe8Bryant

>> Washing hair at night will cause headaches? Myth or fact.

◘ Please...

I cant believe the next 4 posts were about that.


◘

---

Added on December 20, 2010, 2:58 amk need to sleep... will address more things tomorrow.

---

Added on December 22, 2010, 11:01 pmPage 4

@ entryman

>> Anyway, please help mythbust at this discussion http://forum.lowyat.net/topic/1445723

◘ I've talked about multivitamins on my blog, here: http://kaseybrownfitness.blogspot.com/2010...-budget_14.html

From the link:

-----

First, a word about vitamins from food vs vitamins from supplements, and about "natural" vs "processed".

Vitamin C pills tend to be popular here in Malaysia. Lots of people buy those vitamin C candies you see at the 7 Eleven when they're sick and think it's good for them. The vitamin C you get from an orange is what we might call "conjugated vitamin C", and the stuff you get from that pill is "ascorbic acid". An analogy can help you quickly see the difference.

Lets say you bought a Ferrari, but then we removed the windows, rear view mirrors, hood cover, radiator, removed the bucket seats and replaced them with actual buckets, and took out the stereo, air condition and heating, and scraped off all the paint (ascorbic acid). Would it still drive? Sure. It'll get you from point A to point B. But would you WANT to drive it? ... probably not. Especially when there's a brand new Ferrari sitting right next to it that hasn't been torn apart (conjugated vitamin C) for nearly the same price. Does an orange really cost that much more than a pack of C candies?

Conjugated vitamins have stuff that go with them, like bioflavonoids, phytochemicals, and anti-oxidants that you sometimes dont get from the pill version. It's for this reason that you really should try to get your minimum daily requirements of vitamins and minerals from food, and use multivitamins just to make sure you've "covered all bases" or to get an excess of a particular vitamin that might improve performance.

So to my Western readers, don't write me asking if you can just skip eating vegetables and take a multivitamin instead. Remember, the word "supplements" means "to add on to", not "to take the place of".

Now to address this "natural" vs "processed (unnatural)" nonsense.

My Asian readers have this notion that everything has to be natural, because if its found in nature, it must be good. I disagree. Some of the things you find nature aren't good for you at all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_poisonous_plants

Not even a little.

Would you rather have natural milk, or processed milk? Natural unprocessed milk straight from a cow could be deadly. You have no idea what parasites that cow has, what diseases it has or how many of those were passed into it's milk. I'd settle on processed milk, which was screened for parasites and diseases long before it reached the supermarket, filtered, pasteurized, and treated so it's safe to drink.

Using a bit of common sense goes a long way. Not everything natural is good, and not everything processed is bad, and some things work either way. Caffeine, for instance, is still caffeine regardless of whether it comes in coffee or in a pill. The structure and function isn't changed in any meaningful way and it still provides all its benefits regardless of which source you get it from.
-----

@ Sayoshi

>> will weightlifting cause a person with high blood pressure to get worse or better? or its totally insignificant?

◘ Elevated blood pressure can be helped by regular exercise, though the person should stay away from weight training until the blood pressure is back to normal. Aerobics, swimming, cycling, things like that, at low or moderate intensity, is fine.

If the person has very high blood pressure, they should completely avoid exercise and see a doctor immediately.

@ mfrfi3

>> myth : drinking 100plus and etc after exercise will refresh your body.

>> truth : all the carbonated water are bad for health due to its acidity that can cause illness. drinking alkaline water is the solution.

◘ mfrfi3, that's how how illness works. Illness is caused by germs and viruses, not by the acidity of your food. Further, your stomach is already acidic and will always remain that way. Your lower intestines are alkaline, and will always remain that way. Your blood acidity is governed by internal regulators and is not affected at all by your diet.

If 100 plus caused illness, why do millions of people drink it and they dont get ill?

@sneakerfanatics

>> A person that is eating 5000 calories worth of Nasi Lemak would certainly look very different than a person that consumes 5000 calories worth of fish, veggies and fruits! The theory is as simple as that.

◘ Sneaker, that's not how macronutrition works. Of the people you mentioned, both would look very overweight. Both would still be fat.

The person who consumed the second option - fish, veggies, and fruits - may be healthier, but he would be just as overweight.

>> Start eating healthy and you'll notice a difference right away!

◘ But what's "healthy"? After all, what's good to eat for Ronnie Coleman is not good to eat for Alicia Silverstone. What's good to eat for a power lifter is not good to eat for a marathon runner. What's good to eat for one person can even change from day to day, and even within the same day, based on what he's about to do!!!

>> Cut out any processed foods

◘ What's wrong with processed foods?

>> & sugar from your diet

◘ What's wrong with sugar?

@ xzeey3636

>> If just want to gain weight and simply eat all the junk foods.

◘ MYTH: Avoid junk food.

TRUTH: There's no such thing as "junk food", because what's junk for you may be required by me. If I just finished a hardcore bodybuilding workout, then I need all the sweet-sugary foods and fizzy drinks I can get a hold of to stimulate glycogen over-compensation and trigger muscle growth.

>> it'll only "spoil" our health and body.

◘ No it will not.

@ beast_doadore

>> Where can I get the proper information regarding on how to train a lean body (personally no prefer too strong body) and how the proper way to use the machine in Gym..thanks!

◘ If you'd like, you can sign up for my fitness certification course and I'll teach you everything there is to know about gym machines, barbells, dumbbells, exercises, nutrition, etc etc. At the end there's an exam, and if you pass, you can become a certified instructor! But the real value here is what you learn from the course.

And yes, practical is included. We dont just read about the exercises, we actually do them so I can coach you on the proper technique. Email or message me for more.

@ Ajita

>> I've heard that if you sweat a lot and easily during workouts, meaning that you burn alot of calories?

◘ No. Sweating has no impact on fitness... (think I mentioned that before.)

>> One thing that bug me as well was...while I was doing treadmill with my friend at the gym....he barely sweat at all while I soaked myself up.

◘ He's better at running than you. No big deal. Practice more and get better than him!

@ El Sol

>> eat lots of brown rice is OK..?? especially when I want to loss weight...??

>> is it Ok if I eat a lot..of Brown rice, bananas, apples at night?....

◘ There's a biiiiiiiiig long post from me over in the nutrition thread, at http://forum.lowyat.net/topic/1518200/+1080 . Go see! I explained the "eating at night" thing.

---

Added on December 22, 2010, 11:22 pmPage 5

@ stephengrey

>> I really thought cold water cant trim down fats. As what ive heard it is better not to drink cold water after eating. i only drink cold water and nothing more

◘ Cold water will not do anything to trim down fats. Drinking a gallon of cold water will not even burn 2 calories.

You can drink all the cold water you want after eating. This cannot hurt you.

@ chloelingeelin

>> I'm not sure about this, cos once i asked doctor about this(i'm suffer from gastric), and the doctor told me it's not true, but this is the thing people will tell me whenever i have gastric pain =S

◘ It's not true. It depend on what's causing your gastric trouble, but I cant off hand think of anything that would be corrected by milk. Some people may feel comforted after drinking milk, but this is probably psychological.

Alrighty! That appears to be the last of em.

This post has been edited by Kasey Brown: Dec 22 2010, 11:22 PM

Hmm, the perhaps the first statement was slightly inaccurate to begin with, i.e. reaches the throat and well before reaching stomach it has become body temp. Anyway I don't buy the turning fats into solids idea. By the way, is there any link to studies done that measured the temperature of water passing through from the mouth till the stomach and the timing? Would certainly be great

Could you relate the effects of cold water as to why it is common knowledge in TCM (chinese medicine) that drinking cold water long term will weaken the kidneys?

>> Could you relate the effects of cold water as to why it is common knowledge in TCM (chinese medicine) that drinking cold water long term will weaken the kidneys?

◘ Because traditional Chinese medicine was wrong. Didn't some of these ancient cultures have it that disease was caused by curses, demons, and magical forces rather than germs and viruses?

Are you sure you're not confusing between Chinese medicine and Chinese superstition? Feel free to post the sources of your input.

-----
su·per·sti·tion
   /ˌsupərˈstɪʃən/ [soo-per-stish-uhn]
–noun
1. a belief or notion, not based on reason or knowledge, in or of the ominous significance of a particular thing, circumstance, occurrence, proceeding, or the like.

2. a system or collection of such beliefs.

3. a custom or act based on such a belief.

4. irrational fear of what is unknown or mysterious, esp. in connection with religion.

5. any blindly accepted belief or notion.
-----

^^^ That's almost what I mean, yes. There is no evidence at all that cold water weakens the kidneys, and no reason to even consider that as a possibility. So then why is it "common knowledge" in traditional Chinese medicine? Unless someone simply made it up and everyone else decided to agree... much like how black cats are bad luck or if your nose itches then someone's talking about you. Right, superstition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_Chinese_medicine

From the link:

"TCM therapy largely consists of Chinese herbal medicine, acupuncture, dietary therapy, and tui na massage. The health promoting aspects of qigong and taijiquan are also closely associated with it."

^^^ qigong is found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qigong - it's described as exercises that manipulate "qi", a mystical magical energy which surrounds us all. There is no proof or evidence supporting the qi hypothesis, yet it is widely accepted as being part of TCM - again, superstition.

Back to the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_Chinese_medicine link:

"Main aspects of TCM's concept of the human body, health, and disease, are yin and yang, the Five Elements (五形, pinyin: wǔxíng), the zàng-fú (脏腑) organs, qì, xuě (血, ‘’blood‘’), meridians and the liù yín (六淫, lit. ‘’six excesses‘’, usually translated with Six Exogenous Pathogenic Factors)."

I'm sorry but none of this has any evidence, none of it has any proof, none of it is substantiated in research literature, and it is simply not grounded in reality. There is no proof that all these magical energies surround us - like the yin and yang, or the qi, or The Force from Star Wars.

Also, the "5 elements"? Check it out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wu_Xing

From the link:

"The system of five phases was used for describing interactions and relationships between phenomena."

Now scroll up and read again that first definition of "superstition"

Disease is caused by germs and viruses, not by all this hocus pocus. I'm sure if I went through lengths I could find all sorts of erroneous claims from TCM other than cold water = bad kidneys.

With that said, it doesn't mean absolutely everything come from Chinese Medicine, traditional or not, is hocus pocus (but a lot of it undeniably is). For example we've studied ginseng, an herb often prescribed by TCM, and we've isolated it's active chemical constituents, called "gensinosides", which are responsible for its health benefits. We know scientifically that it works and what its health benefits are. We know that Chinese martial arts develops the body, but this is because of the stress it places on muscles and joints and the physiological laws surrounding these events which determine how the person will adapt - and not because of some 'magical energy' coming from the martial arts or anywhere else. Such things make for pretty awesome movies, and I'd like to believe it was all real, but in reality there is no evidence for many of TCM's claims and yet it's widely accepted - thereby making it largely superstitious in nature.

Generally, TCM doctors will say that cold water weaken kidneys. That's why I'm asking for the western link for example the ginseng that was studied. Luckily ginseng was studied if not you would have said it's stupid to pay that much money for some ugly looking root. Perhaps in this case cold water and its effects have not been studied through methods that western science can comprehend. I'm not concluding if it's true or not, just keeping an open mind.

And as to the "magical energy", that should be "qi gong". Well I certainly am not sure about it but it again is a common practice/exercise. And to its extreme level, documented on (i forgot was it discovery channel or natgeo), the programme where they test martial arts.

During then I watched them test the qi gong, they (scientists) were baffled as to why sharp spears (very obvious that it MUST pierce through, based on all the speed and pressure measurements) couldn't. This was tested on the body's supposedly weak spot, the "hole" situated between the collarbones and the adam's apple. Yes at the end of the show the scientist did mention something along the lines that said they had no explanation.

Therefore, please don't jump to conclusions about stuff that you don't actually have confirmation on, until it is proved otherwise.

This post has been edited by entryman: Dec 29 2010, 05:59 PM

Alrighty, let me go ahead and correct this.

>> in
◘ my
>> usual
◘ format.

I need to get that ◘ trademarked...

>> Generally, TCM doctors will say that cold water weaken kidneys.

◘ It doesn't. They might as well say rainy days cause warts, or eating mayonnaise gives you hairy feet, or eating pickles gives you bigger ears. It's just silly. There's nothing about cold water that ever could or would affect your kidneys. I'd sooner believe wearing T shirts makes the wind blow harder.

>> That's why I'm asking for the western link for example the ginseng that was studied.

◘ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21187161

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21185898

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21184395

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21179735

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21178302

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21167926

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21165417

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21165202

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21152855

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21143430

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21143131

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21141503

I've briefly scanned over these and tried to exclude any bad studies (where the research reached fallacious conclusions, or performed the experiment improperly). An example of bad science can be found here: http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/0170.htm - where the author clearly has no f*ing clue what he's talking about.

From the link:

"However, research examining the effects of ginseng on physical capacity has produced very conflicting results. As Mel Williams points out in his fine new book, The Ergogenics Edge (published by Human Kinetics Publishers), many of the pro-ginseng studies were carried out in the 1960s and 1970s - and were pretty deeply flawed."

Check the dates on -=ANY=- of the studies I listed above. This page was written by yet another "health guru" who wants to be seen as an expert without doing any of the work actual experts have to do, and just wants to gain attention by being the person who says the opposite of what everyone else says without doing any research at all into the matter.

Anyway, if you want something slightly less scientific-y...

http://www.cornermark.com/ginseng/ginseng_...h_benefits.html

http://www.chiro.org/nutrition/ginseng.shtml

Is that enough research for you?

>> Luckily ginseng was studied if not you would have said it's stupid to pay that much money for some ugly looking root. Perhaps in this case cold water and its effects have not been studied through methods that western science can comprehend. I'm not concluding if it's true or not, just keeping an open mind.

◘ http://kaseybrownfitness.blogspot.com/2010...ong-part-2.html

From the link:

-----
Open mindedness is not when you give equal weight to every silly idea anyone comes up with. That's closer to gullibility or naivete. Open mindedness is when you are willing to change your mind should someone present a compelling fact-based argument and show you the evidence supporting their case.
-----

Do you see the flaw in your reasoning? I could say Diet Coke cures AIDS!

BUT IT MIGHT!!! You cant prove that it DOESN'T cure AIDS! Maybe it does in some mysterious way your science cant comprehend!

-Or-

Typing the letter "s" too many times gives you prostate cancer. IT MIGHT!!! You cant prove that it DOESNT give you prostate cancer! Maybe it does in some mysterious way your science cant comprehend!

-Or-

I have an invisible dragon in my house. I JUST MIGHT!!! You cant prove that I dont, and maybe blablabla science cant understand!

Here's a brief summary of how scientific investigation works. The person making the affirmation must provide evidence for his affirmation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_burden_of_proof

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof

It's not up to anyone else to prove his affirmation doesn't work. It's up to HIM to prove his affirmation DOES work. Until then we will naturally assume his claim is not true, in the same way you'd treat my invisible dragon claim is not true. When he finally provides some evidence, THEN everyone elses job to try to discredit his statement, because if we cannot discredit it, then his statement is probably true and we can use it to construct a theory. The more we test it and the more we try to prove it wrong, the stronger and more reliable the theory becomes when we continuously fail to prove it wrong.

If we find holes in his theory, it doesn't mean we all celebrate and go "nya nya nya-nya nyaaaaa!!! You were wrong you were wrong!!!" It means we find out where the theory doesn't measure up, and try to change the theory using the new information we gathered from previous experiments to improve it.

You can make any wild fantastic imaginative superstitious claim you want. Saying "science cant understand it" does not count as a valid form of argument. Science can only test and make affirmations about the natural world. It cannot test to prove there is NOT an invisible dragon in my house. You can say there's magical energies all around us if you like, but because we cant test for this we cant prove or disprove it, and the default position is that there aren't any such things until you can bring evidence to support it.

Now if you want to believe such things anyway, despite all lack of evidence, you're very much free to. You live in a free country where you're protected by a constitution and can freely believe anything you want, no matter how crazy or silly it might be. You can even believe that a giant magical invisible sky potato long ago decreed that man shall eat only veggies and no meats, for eating meats is a sin.

BUT!

You cant bring such nonsense to the scientific front and try to place it as a health advisory and expect to be taken seriously. "But their MIGHT be a magical sky potato!" - Sure. Believe that if you want. It's not going to be treated seriously until you can show us at least some reason to take it seriously, and the way to do that is to provide evidence to support your claims.

>> And as to the "magical energy", that should be "qi gong". Well I certainly am not sure about it but it again is a common practice/exercise.

◘ Right. In Africa they have a man dressed in magical rings go out to the center of a field and dance until it rains. I'm certainly not sure about it but it's a common practice/exercise. Of course we know exactly it rains and the science of meteorology is extremely well documented and understood, but hey it's still a common practice/exercise.

>> And to its extreme level, documented on (i forgot was it discovery channel or natgeo), the programme where they test martial arts.

◘ AH YES!!! The Discovery Channel! This is the same TV show that has Monster Quest?

... where they try to find Big Foot and the Loch Ness monster? Did they ever find unicorns??? Oh I hope they find at least a few fairies! Sorry but this isn't a scientifically valid source of reference when it sounds more like Harry Potter.

I mean lets be serious they even have a show called "Ghost Hunters". GHOST HUNTERS!!!... who you gonna call? Ghost Busters!!! (really... you really want to use this as a reference???)

>> During then I watched them test the qi gong, they (scientists) were baffled

◘ They tend to go out of their way to find "scientist" with "degrees" from unaccredited colleges that would never be allowed to work in any university. I cant remember how many times they had some hand waving dope talking about the City of Atlantis or Nostradamus treating all of his own opinions as though it were fact. I'm sure they've got a team of such scientist on call anytime they need to "investigate" some pseudo-scientific hogwash like mystical energies or aliens or demons or how the world's gonna end in 2012 because some ancient tribal calender just happened to end on that date - to stand around and act surprised and baffled.

... because that's what gives them ratings. Actual science is boring. Psuedo-MAYBE-IF-science is what the general public enjoys watching.

>> as to why sharp spears (very obvious that it MUST pierce through, based on all the speed and pressure measurements) couldn't. This was tested on the body's supposedly weak spot, the "hole" situated between the collarbones and the adam's apple.

◘ http://phun.physics.virginia.edu/demos/nail_bed.html - while this isn't quite the same as your description, it goes to show that what you're talking about probably does have a scientific explanation. However I've got only 25 minutes of internet time left and dont have time to go looking for it.

If you insist, I'll come back and see what I can find later when I got time.

>> Yes at the end of the show the scientist did mention something along the lines that said they had no explanation.

◘ Lets suppose for a moment that there genuinely was "no explanation". That doesn't make your supposition of magical energies anymore correct and does not give an ounce of weight to your argument. There was a conversation between Aristotle and a fool (in case your history is fuzzy, this was around 2,300 years ago, and Aristotle was the top scientist of his time).

Fool: The stars are tiny lanterns that are lit up at night by pink and purple fairies.

Aristotle: That's not true. We've never seen any such fairies, and cannot prove the stars are in fact, lanterns.

Fool: OH YEA??? Well what are the stars then, smart guy???

Aristotle: I dont know. Perhaps they are -

Fool: HAW HAW! See you dont know! You cant say its not fairies then!

^^^ This discussion exemplifies how some people see rational debate as analogous to a football game, where if one side doesn't have an answer then the other side wins by default. That's not how it works.

If we have no explanation, then there may be an unending list of possible reasons behind what we observe. Any number of crazy explanations can be thrown at it, but this doesn't help increase our understanding of what we see. We wouldn't know what the stars actually were until we began studying them, seeing consistent movements from them, and taking into account that the earth revolved around the sun (people in Aristotle's time actually figured this out), and began constructing testable theories to explain what we see. The same goes for why the spear wouldn't cut his throat.

Although I'm fairly certain an explanation for that exists somewhere. I'd just have to search for it.

>> Therefore, please don't jump to conclusions about stuff that you don't actually have confirmation on, until it is proved otherwise.

◘ The default position is a negative until your affirmation can be backed up by observable evidence.

This post has been edited by Kasey Brown: Dec 30 2010, 06:41 AM