by Joan Kent | Jun 10, 2013 | Health and Wellness, Master Instructor Blog
By Team ICG® Master Trainer Joan Kent
Have you ever felt as if your legs weren’t recovered enough for the day’s training? Do you ever look for quick ways to bring your legs back to full capacity, e.g., ice, massage, cross-training, stretching, so you can work hard again?
This post is about glutamine and its effects on recovery.
Glutamine is an amino acid, one of the most abundant amino acids in the body. It’s released when muscles contract. A long, hard training can deplete glutamine by 25% to 30% or more.
The significance of this is that glutamine is a fuel used not only by muscles, but also by immune cells. The immune system manages recovery of all types: illness, injury, surgery, and training. Glutamine is a fuel source for cells that line the GI tract, which guards against microorganisms that cause disease. In addition, glutamine facilitates glycogen synthesis, which is highly important after training.
For both optimal health and optimal recovery, glutamine needs to be replaced after training.
The obvious way to replace glutamine is through food selection. Since glutamine is an amino acid, many protein foods contain it. Examples of glutamine-containing proteins are: beef, fish, chicken, pork, eggs, egg whites, milk, yogurt, ricotta cheese, and cottage cheese.
Some vegetables also contain glutamine: Brussels sprouts, carrots, celery, kale, parsley, spinach, cabbage and others. Raw vegetables work better than cooked.
Glutamine can also be found in fruits: apples, apricots, avocado, bananas, cantaloupe, dates, figs, grapefruit, oranges, papaya, peaches, pears, persimmon, pineapple, and strawberries.
The long fruit list doesn’t contradict my previous posts that recommend minimizing sugars, including fructose, the sugar in fruit. I suggest limiting the number of fruit servings per day to one or two, and choosing your fruits from the above list to help with glutamine replacement.
Other foods that contain glutamine are: beans, soy, peanuts and other legumes; wheat, barley, beetroot, corn, nuts (small amount).
If you’ve been training hard enough to feel that you’re not recovering fully — even with these foods in your training diet — you might want to go with a glutamine supplement. I’m most familiar with glutamine powder, although it’s also sold in tablet form. If you use a supplement, try taking 1 heaping teaspoon (5 grams, the usual recommended dosage) before bed. Mix the powder into about an ounce of water and drink it, then drink a full glass of fresh water. Glutamine powder has worked well for me, but I’d like to hear from you if you give it a try.
One of the benefits of taking glutamine before bed is that it can trigger a release of human growth hormone. HGH is a complex topic, but it has been shown to have immune benefits and to aid in cell and muscle recovery.
by Amy Macgowan | May 14, 2013 | Health and Wellness, Instructor Training
Angelina Jolie and I have something in common. I just wish it was her beautiful lips! (She can keep Brad…he looks too scrappy and old these days, with all his facial hair).
Angelina released this article today; My Medical Choice which tells candidly of her decision to undergo a prophylactic double mastectomy.
MY MOTHER fought cancer for almost a decade and died at 56. She held out long enough to meet the first of her grandchildren and to hold them in her arms. But my other children will never have the chance to know her and experience how loving and gracious she was.
We often speak of “Mommy’s mommy,” and I find myself trying to explain the illness that took her away from us. They have asked if the same could happen to me. I have always told them not to worry, but the truth is I carry a “faulty” gene, BRCA1, which sharply increases my risk of developing breast cancer and ovarian cancer.
My doctors estimated that I had an 87 percent risk of breast cancer and a 50 percent risk of ovarian cancer, although the risk is different in the case of each woman.
I made the same decision in 2005.
Some called me brave, as they have called Angelina. I really don't consider myself brave. My mom had the same procedure in the 1970's and modeled calm, factual and, yes, perhaps brave behavior. My sister and I were never freaked out (as teenage girls this was quite something), or questioned her decision. I truly believe she is still with us today because she chose (fully supported by my dad and her doctors) to have this surgery. Although her reconstruction did not go as planned, she never complained, or regretted having the surgery. She and my dad continue to have a great relationship to this day and have been a solid example of what marriage can be (57 years this coming October).
After many months of constant trips to my OB/GYN for mammograms, ultrasounds, aspirations and biopsies, I started researching prophylactic mastectomy for myself. My wonderful husband and doctor were on board. Unfortunately my insurance company was not! I found a plastic surgeon that would do both my mastectomy and reconstruction in his same day surgery center so I would not have to pay hospital fees, as John and I were paying for everything out-of-pocket.
I would love to say all went well in one surgery, but it didn't. Our bodies natural response to foreign objects is to encapsulate, or scar, around it. I chose, as Angelina did, to reconstruct with implants. I encapsulated three times, thus needing three additional minor surgeries to correct this. My surgeon was quite wonderful and did two out of the three at no additional cost. He thought I was brave as well…
My sister Mary is three year's younger than I am. She had the surgery four years ago. Once again, with the full support of her husband and doctor.
It's hard to believe it has already been 8 years. I have never, ever looked back. Having prophylactic mastectomy was one of the very best decisions I have ever made. John has thanked me on more than one occasion. I also received an interesting call from my oldest daughter. She was watching a morning show in which they were interviewing one of the hosts that was extremely emotional about the same surgery I had. Abby said, “Mom, you never made a big deal about it. Even when you had to go back for corrective surgery, you just did it.”
I am glad this is what she remembers. She helped me a lot the first night I came home and it wasn't super pretty! I want both Abby and Carly to know they are empowered to make their own decisions regarding their health and there are good options available. Yes, it was surgery, and yes, it changed my body, but reconstruction options are great, and surgery doesn't have to be scary. I don't have the constant worry anymore- at the doctor for diagnostics just waiting for the time the biopsy is not benign. To me, and for us, it was completely worth it.
For me, it wasn't brave, just smart. I'm glad Angelina went public so more women know they have this option.
If you have any questions, or would like to talk to me about this, please reach out to me at: amyjo@groupfitnessradio.com
by Joan Kent | Apr 15, 2013 | Health and Wellness, Master Instructor Blog
By Team ICG® Master Trainer Joan Kent
Last month, a participant in the weight management program for which I’m the nutritionist asked me about cottonseed oil. He was confused because the statements he found were strongly divided between positive and negative. It occurred to me that you might have students who wonder about it, too, so it could be worthwhile to post some information on health factors around cottonseed oil.
Based on the research I was able to do in the time I had available to look into it, I can tell you that the positive comments about cottonseed oil come primarily from companies that make or distribute it. The other sources tend to rate it negatively.
The drawbacks of cottonseed oil appear to fall in different categories. One drawback is its saturated fat component. While other saturated fats have some “redeeming” health value — organic coconut oil and butter, for example, both contain a healthful fat called lauric acid — cottonseed oil has no similarly redeeming nutritional value.
Another drawback involves the pesticides cottonseed oil is likely to contain. They’re there because pesticides are used in the growing of cotton, and regulations for cotton crops differ from those for food crops.
There’s also the fact that, in most cases, cotton crops are genetically modified (GMO). As many of you know, considerable bad news surrounds GMO products, especially when they're eaten, but maybe that’s a post for another week. Suffice it to say that GMO farming is an experiment for which we’re the subjects, and the long-term effects are not yet known. Many countries refuse to sell GMO foods, but the U.S. hasn’t gone in that protective direction.
Because it’s inexpensive, cottonseed oil is used in many products: potato chips, Crisco shortening, cereals, mayonnaise, salad dressings, baked goods, cake frostings, margarine, snack foods, sauces, and the like. The fact that most of these products are on the junky side could be considered another drawback of the oil.
Finally, cottonseed oil is high in omega-6 fats, as well as in saturated fat. Omega-6s have been getting plenty of bad press for the past several years, but, in and of themselves, aren't necessarily bad. However, the products that contain cottonseed oil tend to be highly insulin-triggering, and cottonseed oil would be, as well, since it contains saturated fat, which triggers insulin.
Insulin can affect the body’s enzymes that process the cottonseed oil-containing foods. That in turn could accelerate the formation of series 2 prostaglandins, as described in a previous post. Series 2 prostaglandins are associated with inflammation and other negative health effects. So that’s when and how omega-6 fats become harmful.
Based on these factors, I’d suggest taking a cynical view of the positive reviews of cottonseed oil, as they represent vested interests. Limit foods that contain cottonseed oil whenever possible and advise your students to do the same.
by Joan Kent | Jan 14, 2013 | Health and Wellness, Master Instructor Blog
Image from http://www.lifetime-weightloss.com – click to read an additional article supporting this post.
By Team ICG® Master Trainer Joan Kent
A while ago, based on some long-held suspicions, I ran a PubMed search on weight gain and weight loss to assess the accuracy of a widely held belief. The belief, as the above title suggests, is that weight management hinges on the so-called “simple arithmetic” of calories in and calories out.
Even with the limited time I had for the search, I still located approximately 35-40 articles in various science journals that seem to challenge the calorie theory. I’ve categorized the results below, but need to start with a caveat. Most of the studies cited in this post were done on animals. (I’ve indicated specifically when the subjects were human.)
Some people will object because of that. For their benefit, I’d like to make two points: 1) Studies of this type would be unethical to perform on human subjects. No review board anywhere would approve research that involves locking people in a room, taking all control of their food intake away from them, and forcing them to gain or lose weight. 2) Are you truly prepared to state that weight management centers on calories in/calories out in the human body, while it’s Anything Goes with animals? Knowledgeable veterinarians, for example, have confirmed that the metabolic effects of Cushing’s disease, including the role of hormones in weight gain, are identical in humans and dogs.
So what happened in the studies? To sum it up, dietary factors were found to disrupt the link between calorie intake and weight, and different nutrients and hormones affected the weight outcome.
Fat content of the diet affected weight gain and loss.
– Rats on high-fat diets developed severe obesity without overconsumption of calories (4 studies).
– Mice showed greater weight gained per calories consumed (called “feeding efficiency”) on high-fat versus low-fat diets (1 study).
– Calorie-restricted, isocaloric diets of 10% and 50% fat both reduced body weight in rats, but body fat was higher in the 50% group (1 study).
– Total fat intake, rather than calorie intake, correlated with weight gain and was due principally to the saturated fat component (1 study).
– Saturated fat is associated with greater weight gain than unsaturated fat (2 studies). [This makes no sense from a calorie standpoint, since all fats contains 9 calories per gram. But saturated and unsaturated fats affect hormones differently, as mentioned briefly in a previous ICG® post on Cholesterol.]
– Fecal analysis showed people who consume nuts regularly excrete more fat, suggesting a discrepancy in gross calorie intake and calories absorbed (1 study).
Sugar content of the diet affected weight gain and loss.
– Abdominal fat deposits were caused by high-sucrose, isocaloric diets in rats, although the rats showed no differences in weight gain when compared with controls (1 study).
– Rats fed sucrose plus standard chow did not eat more calories than controls, but gained significantly more weight per calorie consumed (feeding efficiency) and had higher body fat than controls (1 study).
– Severe obesity developed in rats on a high-sugar diet and in rats on a high-fat diet, although controls eating standard chow ate significantly more calories than either the sugar group or the fat group (1 study).
– In a study of human identical twins, the dietary factor isolated as causing a difference in BMI between twins was sugar intake (1 study).
Nutrients affected sugar-induced weight gain.
– The protein content of a high-sucrose diet was inversely related to the effects of sucrose on weight gain and feeding efficiency (1 study). [Protein triggers the release of glucagon; its effects oppose those of insulin. More on insulin below.]
– Minerals added to a standard chow-plus-sucrose diet did not change calories, but decreased weight gain and feeding efficiency and improved glucose tolerance (1 study).
Insulin, a “fat storage” hormone, is a factor in weight gain.
– Rats injected with insulin gain weight with no change in diet or calorie intake (standard textbooks).
– Diet-induced insulin resistance preceded obesity development in rats (1 study).
– Insulin resistance functions as an adaptive mechanism to prevent further weight gain in obese human subjects (3 studies).
– A good night’s sleep vs. restless sleep altered hormone balance. Restless sleep caused fat storage to increase (2 studies). 

 [This result seems contradictory in light of calorie balance: Wouldn’t tossing and turning all night burn more calories than sleeping soundly?]
– The 24-hour rate of fat oxidation by skeletal muscle may be determined either by genetics or by diet. Insulin-triggering foods lower it (2 studies).
– High fructose intake induces high insulin levels, which can cause weight gain (5 studies).
– Chronic stress increases insulin and decreases brain dopamine, norepinephrine and beta-endorphin. The changes shift food preferences to carbs (specifically sugar) and fats, leading to weight gain (9 studies).
What appears to be a balance of calories in/calories out is often the result of a change in diet composition. That, in turn, changes the hormonal response. Hormones can affect weight more profoundly than calories. (More about hormones in a future post.)
Despite the documentation, some of you will believe this, some will not. What I hope is you’ll avoid telling your students that weight management is just simple arithmetic. Instead, please suggest that they shift their diets in a more healthful direction.
by John | Nov 4, 2012 | Health and Wellness
Today is Daylight Saving Time change day here in the USA. After setting your clocks back an hour it's suggested that you should test the smoke alarms in your home > replacing the batteries if not hard wired.
But what about the battery in the AED in your Club or Studio?
I was sadden by reading this over at Pedal-On and it prompted me to write this post.
We have an AED on site. We are required to be CPR certified and CPR certifications generally now include instruction on the AED. When, however, a member had a (sadly, fatal) heart attack in our gym last summer, however, the AED's batteries were dead. Training to use the AED will only get you so far if they are not properly maintenanced.
Most AED's that I'm familiar with have a blinking light that indicates it's ready status > but does anyone actually check it?
This website has more information about AED maintenance.
Don't be shy in suggesting to your club owner or manager that today is a good time to confirm that your AED will be ready if needed.
by Jim Karanas | Oct 15, 2012 | Health and Wellness, Master Instructor Blog
By Team ICG® Master Trainer Jim Karanas –
Many factors contribute to osteopenia and osteoporosis in cyclists. Both conditions are associated with low bone mineral density and a reduction in the bone mass that is sufficient to interfere with its support function.
Osteogenic loading refers to the stress placed on the skeletal system in order to produce bone growth. This article may surprise you.
One of the culprits in cycling-related osteopenia or osteoporosis is the nature of the exercise itself. Cycling is a low-impact sport that puts little mechanical load on the bones. That may be helpful for someone who has joint problems, but it's the weight-bearing aspect of exercise that signals bone to create more mass. Without such stress, bones don't get stronger and consequently become more prone to injury.
A recent study in the journal Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise found that competitive male road cyclists had significantly lower bone mineral density in their spines than a control group of men who were moderately physically active while doing other recreational activities. The cyclists were also more likely to have osteopenia or osteoporosis than those in the control group.
I recently discovered that commonly promoted exercise strategies for counteracting bone loss have had fairly limited success, particularly regimens that subject the skeleton to only mild activity, such as walking. I had always thought that, if I complemented my daily cycling with walking and modest strength conditioning, I wouldn’t be susceptible to decreasing bone density. I was wrong.
There’s no doubt that mechanical loading of bone has substantial potential to induce bone formation, but the traditionally recommended exercise regimens for cyclists have met with mixed results at best. What I recently learned is that those options are fairly ineffective for increasing bone formation.
The U.S. Surgeon General states that increases in bone mineral density that are sufficient to prevent or reverse osteoporosis are stimulated by maximum loading on the musculoskeletal system. Such loads are normally associated with impact loading, the kind that occurs with gymnastics. Women gymnasts have been found to have much stronger bones than women long-distance runners.
Conventional resistance training does not typically yield loading at a high enough level to produce more than a nominal increase in bone mass. Imagine my chagrin when I discovered that running, walking and resistance training are only minimally effective in staving off the osteopenia that I’m prone to because I love to ride bikes and teach indoor cycling.
Heinonen et al (1996) found that unexpectedly high bone-mineral densities (BMD) occurred in women gymnasts. A typical gymnastic dismount or vault produces enormous skeletal impact (about 18 body weights). Subsequent studies of impact loading showed similar results.
So the research shows — and I haven’t heard this anywhere in the cycling world — that multiples of body weight loaded onto the axial skeleton are what’s necessary to produce significant gains in BMD. Not running, definitely not walking, not conventional strength training, but dismounts off the high bar that slam 18 times my body weight through my skeletal system. That’s what I need to be doing one to two times per week.
Fortunately, as Managing Director for the Indoorcycling Group of North America, I was recently invited to test a new technology at Performance Health Systems in Chicago. It’s called bioDensity™ (www.biodensity.com).
The product is exciting and seems to serve a market need for all indoor cyclists. bioDensityâ„¢ makes possible a safe, self-induced, osteogenic loading stimulation up to many multiples of body weight — the kind of loads normally associated with impact activities, such as gymnastics. DEXA scans have shown an average 4.5% bone mass gain for individuals in the program for 3 years. Regular, proper use of the bioDensityâ„¢ System enables the user to achieve the required maximum loading safely, which therefore helps to combat osteoporosis.
ICG® has no professional affiliation whatsoever with Performance Health Systems. They are producing a product that we feel will help keep our customers healthy.
My sole purpose here was to make you aware of what I was completely unaware of (and even misinformed about by popular literature) and to suggest that you investigate a possible solution that will keep your bones healthy while you keep riding.
