Voluntary Human Extinction Movement

The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement (VHEMT) is an environmental movement that calls for all people to abstain from reproduction to cause the gradual voluntary extinction of mankind. CRAZY RITE?? VHEMT supports human extinction primarily because, in the group's view, it would prevent environmental degradation. The group states that a decrease in the human population would prevent a significant amount of man-made human suffering. The extinctions of non-human species and the scarcity of resources required by humans are frequently cited by the group as evidence of the harm caused by human overpopulation. Here you can see how stupid they are!
VHEMT was founded in 1991 by a sic man named Les U. Knight, an activist who became involved in the environmental movement in the 1970s and thereafter concluded that human extinction was the best solution to the problems facing the Earth's biosphere and humanity. He is 1 of the persons that dose not believe in human kind. Knight publishes the group's newsletter and serves as its spokesperson. Although the group is promoted by a website and represented at some environmental events, it relies heavily on coverage from outside media to spread its message. Or maybe he wanted to be in the center of atention. Many commentators view its platform as unacceptably extreme, though other writers have applauded VHEMT's perspective. In response to VHEMT, some journalists and academics have argued that humans can develop sustainable lifestyles or can reduce their population to sustainable levels. Others maintain that, whatever the merits of the idea, because of the human reproductive drive mankind will never voluntarily seek extinction.

When i saw that such a group existed i could not believe it, so i had to write about it.
Have fun all.

A nothere games closes and makes room for Diablo 3 Online!

I opened my computer, closed a few programs i didnt want to use, opend firefox and was gone check my email and then it happend, i saw a mesage from gamepot. Who are they? well they were the last persons alive to hold a mir2 server. What is mir2? Its the first MMORPG I had ever played,  it was more then 10 years ago if u can believe it. The game is in 800/600 mode only playable or in small window, but it has alot of great features, i used to once love that game and now the last trace of MIR in english anounced it was closing! Very sad!

I could not help but to think evry ending is a new beginning. So I managed to cheer myself up, watching a Diablo 3 in beta 20min preview. I was amased to see all the aspects of Diablo 3 beeing improved. Skills are beter in Diablo 3 then in diablo 2. Game play is made more fun in Diablo 3 then in Diablo 2. It is easyer to pic up gold in Diablo 3. Monsters look beter in Diablo 3. Story in Diablo 3 is a nice continuation of the story of Diablo 2. Diablo 3 of course will also be played online! That is a great aspect. It took a while from Diablo 2 release till it was playable online. Diablo 3 will also be a friendly game where u fight togethere, and join forces to achieve greatness. About pvp on Diablo 3 site u can find:   ''While Diablo III is designed primarily for cooperative multiplayer, we are building in support for competitive player-vs.-player gameplay as well. We’re focusing on team-based PvP in an arena setting, and we are being careful to avoid PvP features that can easily lead to griefing, such as the ability to go hostile at will. We also plan to integrate Battle.net’s matchmaking system, a progression-based ranking system, and more''. So yes i still think its gone be the best game released till now. Not only that but i went and found the best offer for the game, it comes from the bigest online reseler of course, and that is Amazon. So to offer u good quality I keep the Link on top of my blog from now on.

Tokio in Tränen, aber was kann DE lernen?

Tokio - Nach der Reaktorkatastrophe im japanischen Fukushima dringen dort radioaktive Substanzen offenbar in immer tiefere Bodenschichten ein. Nach einer Studie, über die die Nachrichtenagentur Kyodo am Mittwoch berichtete, war drei Monate nach dem GAU im März vergangenen Jahres der Boden in einer Tiefe von fünf Zentimetern betroffen. Jetzt sei nach letzten Schätzungen davon auszugehen, dass die Verseuchung inzwischen bereits Schichten in einer Tiefe von 10 bis 30 Zentimetern erreicht habe. Verantwortlich dafür sei nach Einschätzung der japanischen Atomenergieagentur möglicherweise versickerndes Regenwasser. Der Wissenschaftler Haruo Sato, der an einem Forschungszentrum der Agentur tätig ist, sei deshalb zu dem Schluss gekommen, dass Radioaktivität umso tiefer in den Boden eindringen würde, je länger mit der Dekontaminierung des Boden gewartet werde. Am 11. März 2011 wurde Japan von einem gewaltigen Erdbeben der Stärke 9,0 erschüttert. Ein dadurch ausgelöster Jahrhundert-Tsunami riss mehr als 15.800 Menschen in den Tod, mehr als 3000 weitere werden noch immer vermisst. Insgesamt haben mehr als 340.000 Menschen ihr Zuhause verloren. Im Kernkraftwerk Fukushima Daiichi kam es zum GAU. Weite Gebiete nahe der Atomruine sind noch immer so verstrahlt, dass eine Rückkehr der Menschen als höchst ungewiss gilt.

       Hamburg - Wenn der Atomunfall, der sich nach Erdbeben und Tsunami im japanischen Fukushima ereignete, in Deutschland passieren würde, würde der Katastrophenschutz kläglich versagen: Radioaktive Stoffe würden weit größere Räume verseuchen als bislang angenommen, und ganze Städte müssten evakuiert werden - dies sei "nicht in der Notfallplanung vorgesehen", heißt es nach SPIEGEL-Informationen in einer bislang unveröffentlichten Studie des Bundesamts für Strahlenschutz (BfS). Die Fachleute des Bundesamts hatten verschiedene Atomunfälle simuliert. Sie kombinierten Wetterdaten aus dem Jahr 2010 für die Kernkraftwerke Philippsburg 2 und das mittlerweile stillgelegte AKW Unterweser mit Unfallverläufen, die denen in Japan vor einem Jahr ähneln. In Deutschland gingen Experten bislang davon aus, dass nur "über mehrere Stunden oder Tage" radioaktive Stoffe freigesetzt würden.
Das Kraftwerk Fukushima Daiichi blies dagegen mehrere Wochen lang Strahlenstoffe in die Umwelt. "Es ist ein völlig neues Szenario", sagt Wolfgang Weiss, Vorsitzender des Uno-Strahlenkommittees UNSCEAR.
Deutsche Grenzwerte sind um ein Vielfaches höher als in Japan. Die BfS-Forscher spielten Szenarien über jeweils 15, 25 oder 30 Tage durch. Dabei wurden große Gebiete verstrahlt, für die keine Evakuierungspläne existieren. Menschen bis zu 100 Kilometer vom AKW Philippsburg entfernt dürften ihre Häuser nicht mehr verlassen. In dem Szenario wechselten die Windrichtungen häufig, die Notfallmaßnahmen kämen daher schnell an ihre Grenzen. Die Studie verdeutlicht auch ein grundsätzliches Problem: In deutschen Notfallplänen gelten sogenannte Eingreifrichtwerte - wenn sie überschritten werden, muss der Staat handeln. Diese Grenzwerte sind um ein Vielfaches höher als die Grenzwerte, welche die japanischen Behörden anwandten. Kritiker monieren, das Bundesumweltministerium habe die Ergebnisse seit vergangenem Jahr unter Verschluss gehalten. Das Ministerium bestreitet das; die "Annahmen, die der Studie zugrunde liegen", würden nun geprüft, die Studie selbst werde später veröffentlicht, heißt es in einer Stellungnahme des Ministeriums.
   Und die wissen das UND WAS MACHEN SIE?

Virtconomics I recommend becouse I like Virtconomics

http://www.virtconomics.com/recruit/zhakzquy5eahzhk6rufb

The time has come at last to give out a new recomendation, i played the game for more then 2 weeks and i like it, so now i consider its worth giving it a recommendation, becouse i like virtconomics.. Anno1777 is a game i recomended before, on the right u can find the post about it and if u forgot here is the link: http://www.anno1777.com/index.php?i=259888.

Now virtconomics is very similer to Anno1777 but its not identical, there are a few difrent features. The style is more buisiness I would say. 1 of the big difrences u all will like i think is, like the most of the games out there it requires only email activation of acount. 7 Anno1777also made u send a sms in europe, that means 10 cent...

It was to keep Persons from making 100 acounts....

Here is also only 1 acount allowed for 1 person allowed. I play both games, but I will also rite a small startupguild here in this post about Virtconomics. WHY?? well i wane be nice and offer u a good start and maybe u will register whit this link: http://www.virtconomics.com/recruit/zhakzquy5eahzhk6rufb

So lets get down to it. In Virtconomics u need to make money. To keep that money, u have to check if what u buy will bring u more money then u payed for it. It sounds so simple but its not. Best think u can do is, EACH DAY to work. That is best think u can do, but it has to be each day, and the recompensation for that will come in a few weeks. Of course u get some cash each time, but the real bonus comes couse u grow ur economical score. So besicly here is the text discription: The shown salary is the one you are able to get after a day of work having the maximum productivity (100). The productivity is calculated using the economical score and the influence. The economical score is increasing by 2 points after every day of work and is decreasing daily by 1 point.The corection to this is: u will see the salary for 1h there in the game, u work 8h, so u will get 8x wage x Productivity%. U wane raise ur Productivity so u get more money each time u work. To raise the influence read the FAQ of the game, it tell u how u can do that very clearly. So beside working at the begining if u got the time, there is 1 mor thing u can do that will bring u alot more money then working at the begining, but dont forget work each day so that u will raise economical score for later on. What u do is, search for the cheapest way to raise ur energy and so u will raise ur Influence.... AND THEN u go to Meetings. For a meeting u choose a person u want to meet whit from the list. Choose 1 that is at least 20h not loged in acount, if u choose 1 month not loged in acount its cool to. Why? u need to be shure u got more Influence then him, and then u win the meeting, and u get money from the state. So this is how u can make alot of money at the start. For example i can buy food for 5E the cheapest, it raises my influence and i get 2.7E from the meeting that i win. The food gives me enuff influence to win like 5 meetings or so..... After each meeting ur influence drops a bit, so at the second meeting i will only be geting 2.6E but its still enuff rite? A meeting also takes time, during which u can not work or go on a nothere meeting, 

the time is 20 til 35min depending on ur Influence. U need to find out how much food costs in ur contry, if u can make a profit going to meetings after eating food... and then start saving... after a few weeks u can pm me in game if u still need tips. My game nick is: bond007  .

http://www.virtconomics.com/recruit/zhakzquy5eahzhk6rufb

Hope u all liked this, and have fun!

Late night eating, YES OR NO?

This is the longest article yet so be rdy for this ok? Take a deep breath and here it is:

If late night eating interferes with fat loss, why do people who eat more in the evening lose more fat than people who don't? If carbs become fattening after 6 PM, how come people who eat more carbs after 6 PM lose more fat than those who eat them earlier in the day? If we should "eat breakfast like a king, lunch a queen, dinner like a pauper", then why does breakfast skipping and nightly feasts lead to fat loss and improved blood lipids? If eating late is bad for you, why does almost every controlled study show that eating later in the day is better than eating earlier in the day? And if the above statements are true, why do people still believe that late night eating is bad for you...?
     It's commonly believed that it's better to eat more earlier in the day and less later in the day; eating late can supposedly interfere with fat loss and/or cause unwanted weight gain. In a nutshell, this myth is summed up by the saying that you should "eat breakfast like a king, lunch a queen, dinner like a pauper." You will often find proponents of broscience clinging to the notion that carbs somehow become more fattening after 6 P.M. This is nonsense of course. But the facts are actually more interesting than what I've previously stated; in controlled studies, late eating patterns are superior for fat loss and body composition. One pressing question first: Why is the late night eating myth still around if there are studies showing the exact opposite..? "Is it ok to eat dinner 1-2h before bedtime? Note that every damn meat eating mammal goes to sleep after consuming massive amounts of food e.g lions, dogs, bears but apparently somewhere down the line, nutritionist´s came up with the conclusion that we somehow evolved. So it would be nice if someone came with some evidence that you shouldn´t eat before bed. I really don't understand why not, could you please explain?" Yes, how did nutritionists arrive at the conclusion that eating before bedtime is bad for you?
     The late night eating myth is mainly another consequence of mistaking correlation for causation in dietary epidemiology. There are plenty of observational studies that have found a positive association between calories consumed in the evening and a higher BMI in the general population. This association is solely attributed to the fact that Average Joe's who like to eat more in the evening also consume more calories overall. In this study, it was deducted from food logs that late eaters consumed on average 248 calories more than the other group. Similar relationships are commonly found in other observational studies on meal patterns. People who skip breakfast, skip meals and eat late at night are on average fatter and worse off than people who eat breakfast, regular meals and eat less in the evening. This has nothing to do with meal timing per se, but the lifestyle that goes in hand with "dysregulated" eating habits. Meal pattern with omission of breakfast or breakfast and lunch was related to a clustering of less healthy lifestyle factors and food choice leading to a poorer nutrient intake. Late night eating is not only correlated to a higher calorie intake, but also less sleep time and more sedentary activities, i.e. watching TV and more time spent in front of the computer, which are additional confounders that can predispose people to weight gain. The imagined hazards of late night eating might also be the result of the scientific literature on shift-workers and metabolic health. Shift-workers are predisposed to a myriad of health disorders; obesity, poor mental health, cardiovascular disease, peptic ulcers and gastrointestinal problems (likely a result of chronic stress). The negative effects of shift-work on health is mainly the result of a compromised diet, sleep deprivation, and stress - these tend to go hand in hand. However, it's possible that feeding under conditions of a disrupted circadian rhythm and an irregular meal pattern is an independent factor in the predisposition towards poor health amongst shift-workers.
     Humans can adapt to a wide variety of feeding regimens depending on the habitual meal pattern. This entrainment takes place on a cellular level and is regulated by ghrelin, a hormone that increases during meal times and prepare your metabolism to best handle a nutrient load. Similarly, the circadian rhythm - when you awake and go to sleep - is regulated by daylight and habitual sleep/wake-cycle, and adapts your metabolism accordingly. Simply put, your body expects a certain routine every day, depending on habitual diet patterns and sleep/wake cycles, and adjusts its hormonal profile and metabolism accordingly. If this pattern is haphazardly and constantly shifted back and forth, and never allowed to adapt, as is the case with many shift-workers - it's very possible that it would be an independent factor in predisposing people to disease and health disorders. The hormonal profile of shift-workers tend to be less favorable than non-shift workers, for example. It should be noted that permanent shift-workers, i.e. those who always work nights, or work nights on consecutive days, are better off than other shift workers, which is partly be explained by re-entraining the circadian rhythm; it seems that an "unpredictable" pattern, i.e. rotating day and night-shifts is the main culprit, as the circadian rhythm is constantly desynchronized. However, given the many confounders present amongst shift-workers, i.e. stress, sleep loss, calorie intake, it's hard to isolate which factor does what, i.e. is feeding during biological night worse than sleep deprivation, etc.
     The aforementioned studies are of no interest to us. We are interested in controlled studies, not dietary epidemiology and observations in the general population. If you use dietary epidemiology to tell people how they should be eating you get this: The USDA Dinner Plate. When you use controlled studies to draw a conclusion, you get something that looks a little bit more like this. Throw some veggies in there and you're all set. Controlled studies answers questions like "I'm on a 2000 calorie diet. How will fat loss be impacted if I eat most of those calories in the later part of the day versus the earlier part of the day?" That's what interesting to us, so let's look into this now. In all of these studies, calories were controlled and fixed for all groups. The only variable that differed was the temporal daily distribution of calorie intake. In late meal patterns, 67-100% of total daily caloric intake was eaten between 6 PM and bed time, and this was compared against an early meal pattern with an opposite pattern. Starting with the earliest study and working myself down to the latest study, I'll briefly summarize the results, comment on the validity of the study, and interject whatever else of interest I find in each study. Note that I will not include studies on Ramadan fasting. In loosely controlled studies on Ramadan fasting, fat loss and improvements in health markers is commonly found. This is a paradoxical and interesting finding, simply for the fact that people eat in the middle of the night, shortly before bedtime, along with a concomitant increase in intake of sugary treats and baked goods (and sometimes total calorie intake). However, these are rarely calorie-controlled studies, i.e. participants do not have strict guidelines about what they should eat, which is why I will not include them in this review.


Study #1

Chronobiological aspects of weight loss in obesity: effects of different meal timing regimens.  Results: In the very first calorie-controlled study on meal timing from 1987, it was found that weight loss did not differ when participants ate their daily calorie intake in the morning (10 AM) or evening (6 PM). While it's interesting to note that lipid oxidation (fat burning) was consistently higher in the PM-group, the duration of the study (15 days) was very short, which makes it hard to draw any meaningful conclusion from it. Aside from lipid oxidation, there were no differences in cortisol levels, blood pressure or resting energy expenditure between the groups.

Study #2

The role of breakfast in the treatment of obesity: a randomized clinical trial. Results: In this well-designed 12-week study, participants were habitual breakfast eaters and non-breakfast eaters, who were assigned a breakfast or non-breakfast diet. Interestingly, fat loss was greatest among ex-breakfast eaters who followed the breakfast skipping diet. This group ate lunch and supper and consumed 2/3 of their daily calorie intake at supper (6 PM or later). In contrast, baseline breakfast skippers who were put on a breakfast diet got more favorable results than those who continued the breakfast skipping pattern. The implication of these seemingly paradoxical findings might be related to impulse-control; dysregulated eating habits, such as breakfast skipping, tend to go hand in hand with uninhibited and impulsive eating. Eating breakfast might therefore be of benefit for those with poor self-control, such as the ex-breakfast skippers in this study. On the other hand, more favorable results were had with breakfast skipping amongst the "controlled" eaters (habitual breakfast eaters). This group would be more representative of us, meaning people who are used to count calories, follow an organized diet and not just mindlessly eat whatever is in front of us. There were no differences between groups in regards to the weight loss composition (75% fat / 25% lean mass) or resting metabolic rate. Interesting tidbit: The breakfast eating groups showed a slight increase in depression-induced eating whereas the subjects in the no-breakfast group showed a slight decrease. Furthermore, subjects in the breakfast group saw the diet as more restrictive than the no-breakfast group. Quote: ...the larger meal size of the no-breakfast group caused less disruption of the meal patterns and social life than did the smaller meal sizes in the breakfast condition. Perhaps it was these favorable effects on their social life that also resulted in the no-breakfast groups showing superior compliance rates at the follow-up 6 months later (81% vs 60%).

Study #3

Weight loss is greater with consumption of large morning meals and fat-free mass is preserved with large evening meals in women on a controlled weight reduction regimen.

Results: In this study participants alternated between two 6-week phases of the same diet of which 70% of the daily caloric intake was eaten in the morning or evening respectively. Larger morning meals caused greater weight loss compared to evening meals, but the extra weight lost was in the form of muscle mass. Overall, the larger evening meals preserved muscle mass better and resulted in a greater loss in body fat percentage. The greater weight loss associated with the AM [morning] pattern that we found in our study was due primarily to loss of fat-free mass, which averaged about 1 kg more for the AM pattern than for the PM pattern. An interesting study with a few glaring limitations, mainly the small sample size (10 participants) and the way body composition was measured (total body electrical conductivity, which is somewhat similar to BIA discussed in "Intermittent Fasting for Weight Loss Preserves Muscle Mass?"). This study also included weight training 3x/week, which was a serious confounder in this specific study design. Given that the PM-group consumed a greater percentage of their calorie intake post-workout, this study might simply show the benefits of nutrient timing, and not bigger PM meals per se.
AM-Setup:
Breakfast, 8-8.30 AM: 35% of total daily calorie intake
Weight training (circuit style), 9-9.30 AM
Lunch, 11-12 PM: 35%
Dinner, 4.30-5 PM: 15%
Evening snack, 8-8.30 PM: 15%
PM-Setup:

Breakfast, 8-8.30 AM: 15% of total daily calorie intake

Weight training (circuit style), 9-9.30 AM 

Lunch, 11-12 PM: 15% 

Dinner, 4.30-5 PM: 35%

Evening snack, 8-8.30 PM: 35%

As you can see, the PM-setup is quite similar to the "One Pre-Workout Meal" protocol of Leangains. Finally, the researchers speculate on the muscle sparing effects of the PM-pattern: Certain endocrine influences might have contributed to the difference in fat-free mass change between the meal patterns. Growth hormone secretion displays an endogenous rhythm that is partially linked with the sleep cycle. At night pulsatile secretion increases after 1-2 hours of sleep, with maximal secretion occurring during stages 3 and 4 of sleep. Although the effect of prolonged changes in dietary intake or meal patterns on growth hormone release are not known, it is conceivable that a greater flux of dietary amino acids with the large evening meals, coupled with the known protein anabolic effect of growth hormone, might combine to favor deposition of lean tissue.
Study #4

Influence of meal time on salivary circadian cortisol rhythms and weight loss in obese women. Results: Using almost the exact same setup as the aforementioned study by Sensi & Capani (1987), it was found that splitting the daily calorie intake evenly into five meals consumed every other hour between 9 AM-8 PM, eating all calories in the morning (9-11 AM), or in the evening (6-8 PM) did not affect weight loss, metabolic rate or cortisol differently. The limitations here are once again a very short study duration for each phase (18 days). Quote for those worrying about cortisol and fasting: At the end of the stages studied, we found no significant changes in the circadian rhythm of cortisol secretion regardless of the timing of diet ingestion, even after 22 h of fasting. It might be worth noting that nitrogen loss, which is a rough marker for muscle loss, was not affected by eating time or meal frequency; there was no difference between the 5-meal phase or the 22-hour fasting phases with one AM/PM-meal.
Study #5

Greater Weight Loss and Hormonal Changes After 6 Months Diet With Carbohydrates Eaten Mostly at Dinner. In this latest and well-designed 6-month study on calorie distribution throughout the day, participants who ate most of their daily carb-intake at dinner (8 PM or later) lost more fat, experienced greater fullness throughout the diet, and saw more favorable hormonal changes than those who ate their carbs earlier in the day.
Background: This study was founded on the premise that the diurnal peak in leptin can be altered, as noted during the month of Ramadan. Previous studies have described a typical diurnal pattern of leptin secretion that falls during the day from 0800 to 1600 hours, reaching a nadir at 1300 hours and increases from 1600 with a zenith at 0100 hours. Ironically, this crucial hormone responsible for satiety is at its highest levels when individuals are sleeping. It was hypothesized that consumption of carbohydrates mostly in the evening would modify the typical diurnal pattern of leptin secretion as observed in Muslim populations during Ramadan.  Simply put, the goal of this study was to see whether it was possible to shift leptin secretion to strategically induce greater satiety and diet adherence during the morning and noon of the next day, instead of having leptin peak during night time (as it does on a standard diet)....it was predicted that the diet would lead to higher relative concentrations of leptin starting 6–8 h later i.e., in the morning and throughout the day. This may lead to enhanced satiety during daylight hours and improve dietary adherence. Note that leptin displays significant latency in response to carbs; if you eat carbs before you go to sleep, you won't be experiencing the peak until you wake up in the morning (an added bonus is that you sleep good with some carbs pre-bedtime). This study also sought to examine the effect of the experimental diet on adiponectin.

Adiponectin is considered to be “the link between obesity, insulin resistance, and the metabolic syndrome”. Adiponectin plays a role in energy regulation as well as in lipid and carbohydrate metabolism, reducing serum glucose and lipids, improving insulin sensitivity and having an anti-inflammatory effect. Adiponectin’s diurnal secretion pattern has been described in obese individuals (particularly with abdominal obesity), as low throughout the day. * Low adiponectin = bad. High adiponectin = good. * When insulin is low, adiponectin is high, but adiponectin also follows a diurnal pattern; low during night time, high during daytime (in normal weight individuals)....it was also hypothesized that adiponectin concentrations would increase throughout the day improving insulin resistance, diminishing symptoms of the metabolic syndrome and lowering inflammatory markers. * In the obese, chronically high insulin causing chronically low adiponectin is a problem as it increases insulin resistance and inflammation. By omitting carbs during the earlier part of the day, the researcher's hypothized that this would increase adiponectin and improve health markers more than the conventional diet.
   Setup: Both groups received the same diet divided into breakfast, lunch, dinner and as three "snacks" (morning, afternoon, night):

1300-1500 kcal
45-50% carbs
30-35% fat
20% protein

Group A received the carbs evenly split throughout the meals and snacks. Group B received the great majority of the total carb allotment (~170 g) at dinner. There are no details concerning the exact macronutrient amounts provided at each meal but the full-text paper contains the menus of each respective group. I would estimate that approximately 100-120 g carbs were consumed at dinner in group B.
Results: Both groups lost weight and saw improvements on several health markers, but group B lost more weight (-11 kg vs -9 kg), body fat (-7% vs -5%), stayed fuller and more satiety, and improved their hormonal profile more than group A:

Hunger scores were lower and greater improvements in fasting glucose, average daily insulin concentrations, and homeostasis model assessment for insulin resistance (HOMAIR), T-cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, C-reactive protein (CRP), tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), and interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels were observed in comparison to controls. As predicted, the big carb-rich dinner was able to alter leptin and adiponectin in a way that might have favored greater fullness and a better hormonal profile: The experimental diet modified daily leptin and adiponectin concentrations compared to those observed at baseline and to a control diet. A simple dietary manipulation of carbohydrate distribution appears to have additional benefits when compared to a conventional weight loss diet in individuals suffering from obesity. But what I found most interesting, at least for those of us who want to maintain low body fat, was that the carb-rich dinner increased average leptin levels compared to the standard diet: Our experimental diet might manipulate daily leptin secretion, leading to higher relative concentrations throughout the day. We propose that this modification of hormone secretion helped participants experience greater satiety during waking hours, enhance diet maintenance over time and have better anthropometric outcomes. Perhaps this is why me, and many others with me, have found Leangains/intermittent fasting to be such an easy way of staying lean once you've reached your goals. This study was solid, but for some reason there was no mention of how body fat percentage was measured. Similarly, calorie intake was not set individually and according to energy needs. However, given that everyone had the same job (police officer), it's fair to assume that physical activity did not vary much on an individual basis. Furthermore, sample size was very large (78 participants), which makes it unlikely that the results were confounded by these factors.
Summary
Dietary epidemiology commonly find associations between certain meal patterns and higher BMI / body fatness. However, this association can solely be attributed to lifestyle-related factors and eating behaviors; snacking in front of the TV in the evening, making poor food choices in general, and so forth. People who eat more in the evening simply eat more calories, which explains why they weigh more.  Calorie-controlled studies looking at the effects of distributing a fixed caloric load differently throughout the day are scarce; I have listed all of them above. These tell a much different story than the one found in dietary epidemiology. While short-term studies (15-18 days) do not find a statistically significant difference between early and late meal patterns, long-term studies (>12 weeks) show that late eating patterns produce superior results on fat loss, body composition and/or diet adherence. This might be explained by more favorable nutrient partitioning after meals due to hormonal modulation. I understand that these facts might be hard to swallow for some people, given everything we've heard about late night eating being bad, fattening, and so forth. But then again, we hear a lot of strange things in the fitness and health community. Rarely do these old wives' tales mix with reality; think of all the myths about fasting, alcohol and meal frequency, for example. 

That's all for tonight. I hope you've enjoyed the article and will rest easy knowing there's nothing bad about late night eating and big meals before bedtime.

The miracle substance: monosodium glutamate

What is the name of the substance that makes it 3x as likey to get fat?

    Alot of food products and so called low fat products, that are recomended as late night snack or as desert have a lot of chemicals in them, and a large number of those chemicals are adicting.
Monosodium glutamate is the best example. This chemical acording to a study made by the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill increases the probability that u would become fat, whitout changing the dayly calories intake or the physical effort.
    UNC  and Chinease researchers made a study on over 750 chinease man and women whit the age of 40 til 59 years, in 3 vilages from the  north and south of china. Most of the ppl involved in the study were making there dinner at home, whitout industrial food and/or chemicals. For the study 82% of the ppl were given monosodium glutamate to use in there food. Also they were divided into 3 groups. The group which used the most monosodium glutamate had 3 times as much ppl whit overweight as normal. Monosodium glutamate is used as flavor intensifier in the most of the food products we find in the supermarkets. So it was hard to make a research on ppl. That is why a few chinease vilages were chosen, where they don’t use industrial products that contain also othere chemicals.
      Very shortly explained, this means we should avoid eating anything that contains monosodium glutamate, so that we wont get fat. The best way to avoid monosodium glutamate is not to buy  proccesed food products at all. Its hard I know, but its healthy! Anything that is fresh and not proccesed is great!
Or more detailed explenation:
     Our large profit-driven food companies have found that manufactured free glutamic acid, in the form of monosodium glutamate (MSG), hydrolyzed vegetable proteins, etc., etc., when added to our processed foods, masks off flavors and makes the blandest and cheapest foods taste wonderful. The story is fascinating. For thousands of years kombu and other seaweeds have been added to foods in Japan to enhance flavor. In 1908 a Japanese scientist discovered that the active ingredient in kombu is glutamic acid and then the use of its sodium salt, monosodium glutamate, began in Japan. During the Second World War American quartermasters realized that Japanese army rations tasted great. Following the war, they introduced monosodium glutamate, the flavor enhancing ingredient in the Japanese rations, to the food industry; and the world-wide use of processed free glutamic acid began to explode. Since free glutamic acid is cheap and since its neurotoxic nerve stimulation enhances so wonderfully the flavor of basically bland and tasteless foods, such as many low-fat and vegetarian foods, manufacturers are eager to go on using it and do not want the public to realize any of the problems.  An excellent NOHA lecture on the dangers and hidden sources of processed free glutamic acid was given at Evanston’s Whole Foods Market on February 14, 2000, by NOHA Board Member Jack Samuels. He is president of the Truth in Labeling Campaign.
Glutamic acid is a neurotransmitter that excites our neurons (not just in our tongues). This electrical charging of neurons is what makes foods with added free glutamic acid taste so good. Unfortunately, the free glutamic acid can cause problems in many people. Actually, our brains have many receptors for glutamic acid and some areas, such as the hypothalamus,1 do not have an impermeable blood-brain barrier, so free glutamic acid from food sources can get into the brain, injuring and sometimes killing neurons. At least 25 per cent of the U.S. population react to free glutamic acid from food sources. Today, we recognize that those reactions range from mild and transitory to debilitating and life threatening. Please see Table 1.
. . . free glutamic acid from food sources can get into the brain, injuring and sometimes killing neurons
       Glutamic acid is widely distributed in proteins. When we eat it bound as part of whole, unprocessed proteins, it helps nourish us as it has for millennia. Glutamic acid bound as part of whole, unprocessed protein does not cause problems in people who react to the free glutamic acid in manufactured food, where it is hidden in ingredients with about 40 different names.
       Monosodium glutamate and other forms of free glutamic acid can be manufactured cheaply and sometimes it is even just a byproduct of other food processes. For example, the brewer’s yeast from the brewing industry contains free glutamic acid. Since free glutamic acid is cheap and since its neurotoxic nerve stimulation enhances so wonderfully the flavor of basically bland and tasteless foods, such as many low-fat and vegetarian foods, manufacturers are eager to go on using it and do not want the public to realize any of the problems. In 1999 in an article in a peer-reviewed journal, NOHA Board Member Adrienne Samuels, PhD, wrote a history of the many deceptions used by those manufacturers, "The Toxicity/Safety of Processed Free Glutamic Acid (MSG): A Study in Suppression of Information."² She points out "how easily truth can be hidden and how seemingly isolated incidents actually can be badly flawed research, direct suppression of information, and dissemination of biased information orchestrated by one group or industry."
According to Dr. Samuels, the evidence of toxicity is overwhelming. Exposed laboratory animals suffer brain lesions and neuroendocrine disorders. Scientists studying retinal degeneration in mice treated with free glutamic acid have noted that these mice also became grotesquely obese following administration of free glutamic acid. The vulnerable hypothalamus in our brains regulates weight control, as well as other endocrine functions. When the brain is deluged with more free glutamic acid than it can handle, scientists know that problems and diseases can develop. For example, they know that a diverse number of disease conditions such as ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, a progressive degeneration of neurons and motor cells of the brain), Alzheimer’s disease, seizures, and stroke are associated with the glutamate cascade. 

What we will be tomorow, starts today!

KONY 2012

BECOUSE IT IS SO IMPORTANT, I WILL WRITE THIS ENTIRE ARTICLE WHIT CAPS LOCK ON, I KNOW MAYBE IT WILL BOTHERE A FEW PPL, BUT I AM SORRY, THIS IS BY FAR MORE IMPORTANT THEN ME, MORE IMPORTANT THEN U, MORE IMPORTANT THEN ALL THE THINGS WE DO IN A DAY, I WILL POST THE LINK TO THE 30MIN FILM ON YOUTOUBE 3 TIMES IN THIS ARTICLE: http://www.youtube.com/user/invisiblechildreninc
SO HAVE U HEARD ABOUT KONY 2012? IF NOT WATCH THE VIDEO, THERE ARE ALOT OF CRIMES THAT CAN BE COMITED, BUT I THINK THAT RAPING CHILDREN, MAKING CHILDREN KILL, MAKING CHILDREN TOURCHER OTHERE PPL IS THE WORST. SO THIS IS WHY I AM ASKING WHO EVER READS THIS TO PLS TAKE UR TIME AND WATCH THE VIDEO, IF POSSIBLE EVEN REGISTER AND HELP http://www.youtube.com/user/invisiblechildreninc . BUT THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS TO WATCH A 30MIN FREE VIDEO, FROM WHICH I OR THE MAKERS DONT HAVE ANY PERSONAL FINANCIAL GAIN OR INTEREST, THIS COULD BE ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT 30MIN U SEND OF UR LIFE, I KNOW THIS, BECOUSE LIKE U I LIVE FAR FROM UGANDA, AND I DIDNT KNOW ABOUT THIS TILL I SAW THIS VIDEO. WE ALL LOVE THE HAPPY ENDS IN THE FILMS WE SEE AT THE CINEMAS, WHERE THE WORLD GETS SAVED, OR THE GIRL. NOW IS THE TIME TO MAKE OUR OWN HAPPY END, WE CAN CHANGE SOMETHING. ITS ELECTION YEAR IN USA, TALK TO ANYONE U KNOW FROM THE USA, TELL THEM TO WATCH THE VIDEO AND THEN DO SOMETHING. U CAN HELP!!! http://www.youtube.com/user/invisiblechildreninc
PLS DONT FORGET THE FUTURE OF THE ALOT OF INOCENT CHILDREN IS IN UR HANDS AND ALSO FOR EVIL TO WIN, ITS ENUFF IF THE GOOD STAND AND WATCH AND DO NOTHING.