Tact is useless in a battle for one's health........I only care about results. I don't care what anyone thinks about me. I only have to like me and I love me some me.

 

FOCUS ON WHAT MATTERS NOT HOW I DELIVER IT................It my path and I have created it. If you dont like the water do not drink it.

 

lessons = blessings. blessings = lessons. Perspective is everything

 

I know you don't care. Innovators and revolutionaries never have time for tactfulness, (or even editing as SJoshua seems to have pointed out, lol, your son must have gotten too expensive??). It is as it probably should be. "Focus on what matters, not how it was delivered." Yep.

 

He is missing the medical physics level effects. The effects he talks about are downstream of these. It is a biochemistry/physiology analysis rather than a quantam/medical physics level analysis. Many factors are missing in his analysis of the original sources and his understanding of practice.

 

I do strongly agree with you that everyone who can should study Tesla in some detail. (Jack has suggested this before too BTW) If for no other reason than that he was clearly the principal architect of the modern world. (For both good and bad.) I think he was definitely both a genius and a lunatic. His life was a fascinating combination of innovation and tragedy, much like the modern technological world that he basically created. He was hands-down in my opinion the most important inventor of the modern era. Few today realize the degree to which this man shaped the 20th century and all of our lives. Whether we like it or not, we are all basically his "children." And its probably true that studying his life and science in detail might help us figure out novel ways of going through this because there is no going back now...

 

"With aging, multiple processes occurring within muscle tissue, such as denervation, changes in the hormonal and inflammatory environment, mitochondrial dysfunction, and changes in the expression of regulatory factors affecting the fate of satellite cells, combine to produce losses in the bulk properties of muscle tissue such as muscle mass and strength."

From: http://tinyurl.com/qj4lfu3

I'd like to fork this discussion here:
"This definitely starts to occur as we age, and it seems inevitable. However, I personally feel that the regular definitions are too sketchy.

For me personally, I define this as only one thing: a shift in muscle fiber composition to contain more Type 1 rather Type 2 fibers."

I think denervation is a significant element of the definition for sarcopenia. A close 3rd would be loss of function. The 3 can be seen in a feedback loop: as denervation proceeds, the ability to move or activate muscle fibers decrease, as the ability to move muscle fibers decrease, the size of muscle fibers decreases (w/ apparent preference for one type of muscle fiber over the other-- see paper for details) which contributes to denervation... etc. The protein blend (bump up certain fractions especially leucine) along with training stimulus (pick what turns your turbine or otherwise is easier to do than not do) along with intention for enervation and one would be addressing the top 3 elements of sarcopenia. The interesting thing about intention is the involvement of the mind/nervous system with acting on muscle fibers. I visualize, for example, reaching toward my muscles or feeling the ground contacting the whole of the bottom of my foot while lifting. Intent. One JK description in particular is part of my visualization process these days: signal conduction occurring as a result of plasma shifting of electron clouds along the nerve fibers. Does popping (Gotthaus mechanism?) the end piece of the plasma shift into the muscle fiber provide a signaling mechanism in the ubiquitin marking system? Does the "ubiquitin-proteosome pathway" (cf above paper) get its coordinating to the next several levels of order-making from this QED plasma shift? Does my intention "observe" the probability function and physically perform signal transduction through QED?

There are definitely anecdotal reports of the mental aspects of training and their influence on performance and muscle growth. Is this where "with a thought you can change your self" comes in?

 

The challenge with the group you refer to is that the gradient from what is available is way too steep and has too many blanks to fill in. As I see it, the main goal here is to apply as much as possible to the current and soon to emerge practical application to human health. I have plenty of friends playing with all of the things you mention including the person who just showed up for tea who lives somewhere in the boonies with a huge shop and stays up late reading and scratching his head over Russell, Keely, Pound, Schauberger, etc.. I have other friends out in the woods too...None of them have much practical to say about how to address a given health issue or how to d/dx it. This is a relative exercise with acknowledgement of the ideal scene as part of it....gradient is everything in application....

To play with analogies a little more, my friends and I were discussing a piece of machinery that another friend had attempted to engineer. The customer, also a friend, has now asked the friend drinking tea with me to fix the other person's design. We laughed about the thankless task of repairing and modifying a flawed design and how typically "the last one who touched it owns it...". Well in modern healthcare and management, every body that a practitioner sees or a person has is more or less in the same category as that machine. It would be nice to just build bodies and healthcare from the ground up with a better design, but we are stuck in the middle of multiple overlapping cycles and interests that must be navigated to simultaneously clear old dogmas and beliefs while simultaneously building new paradigms and applying them in vivo. This is much more complicated than building free energy machines from the ground up. In theory, all bodies are "free energy machines" and they are all broken and miss-engineered at this point driving down broken pot-holed roads. To point to the design and R+D departments when one needs the engine rebuilt and body repaired is not helpful. It is the rare design engineer who can repair and re-engineer his own, let alone other people's designs ongoing...

 

Case in point. A friend designed this in the early 90's. It has 24 hand wrapped scalar resonators that allow one to run nano and pico-currents through many areas of the body and back through feedback loops that modify the current based upon what they "sense". He still asks me what to do when he gets the flu. He knew/knows a number of the people on your list personally.

http://www.aichidenshi.jp/product/product_01.html

 

My ramblings on all that was more so due to the interconnectedness of all this stuff. I like complexity, so for me, this is a non-issue. If you go to Jason Verbelli's youtube channel, you can see the practicality of all these researchers work. For instance, I hypothesize I can (almost for free) power my home in the next year or two, while working on a self-sustaining biodome built into the ground (how's that for magnetism? haha); actually, this is an idea I wanted to post about here - there are people building homes in or under the ground for $50-5000, I'd imagine that'd be a great environment hack lol.

I think that we can apply all their research and make it more concise and readable for lay people, it just takes others to do the work and synthesize it in a fashion that Dr. Kruse has with Becker, Ling, Delecea (is that the name?), etc. Jason Verbelli is doing this rather well, even going to physics, biophysics, etc. conferences and lecturing people, despite having no classical training and education in this stuff.

I understand what you're saying though

 

The "multiple factors characterise" sarcopenia part is what I don't like , because that means researchers use the word "sarcopenia" to mean a lot of different things.

So let's:

(1) Pull apart specific mechanisms of the disease state, instead of labelling the whole thing as "sarcopenia", because this definition is too unspecific given the Quantum Health perspective

(2) always bear in mind that the ultimate goal is to preserve the ability to use the muscles for functional movement. eg: climb a tree with good core stability

Let's define "loss of function" as any of:

- the inability for a muscle contractile units to fire strongly enough
- the inability to send the correct nervous impulse to a muscle

Which leads to being able to being unable to move in the way that the person "wants to".

Overall muscle size is a derived side effect; You have to discuss specific mechanisms as to why muscle size is increased or decreased, and those mechanisms dictate whether or not the person is able to get more "real-life muscle function" as a result.

----

Denervation is a big problem, and I think it is the first problem in a line of cascading issues that lead to ability to lose muscle function.

I think that this is independent of fiber type changes.

I also think that the mechanisms that lead to functionally relevant denervation are independent of fiber type changes and muscle size.

First, we should talk about the actual mechanism, which is dysfunction of the motor unit, specifically the axons and the axon terminals. These are the necessary components to signal to a muscle for contraction (and relaxation ) to occur.


....

We should now ask: How would a motor neuron fail?

In my mind, it's either:

(a) De-myelination of the axon => inability to transmit signal from the motor neuron to the muscle (all the blogs talking about de-myelination apply here . Especially the link between nn-EMF, iodine, and ketosis in EE7)

(b) Malfunction at the axon terminal (see image below)



These do not seem like inevitable malfunctioning to me . It just seems like another standard failure cascade when you put age-related loss of redox potential together with a lot environmental stress. Studies that do not take into account environmental stress will give an incomplete picture ....

-----

Now, the ultimate test of nervous impulse is "signalling sensitivity" from the nervous system to the muscles.

This is hard to measure, because the impulses are so quick, and they are electro-chemical in nature. I think if you had a something like a continuous imaging MRI over a muscle, you could actually see how much impulse is attempted to be stimulated, and then how much resulted effect in the motor unit you see.

NOTE: Just like you can get Leptin Resistance, you can also get nervous signalling resistance, and IMO it all comes back down to de-myelination of the nervous system.​

Most of the studies regarding sarcopenia will take a snapshot of the muscle, and then see if it "looks like it is denervated". This usually correlates well with actual lose of nervous system signalling sensitivity, but we need to take a look at the specific measure.

Some diseases like ALS that show definite loss of motor neurons. This is definitely a sign of things going wrong with denervation.

There are studies which look at this sort of motor neuron loss -- http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0531556513000260

My opinion: This sort of "sarcopenia" is a spectrum disorder between healthy and ALS states. I think everything in the MS blog applies here, and the same broad disease treatment protocol should be put into play -- http://jackkruse.com/organizational-structural-failure-10-multiple-sclerosis/


Back to studies, this is a rat study, but also shows how you can have the same amount of signalling with fewer neurons, due to greater axon branching increasing the innervation ratio -- http://biomedgerontology.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2013/09/27/gerona.glt135.short

The innervation ratio is basically a measure of how many muscle fibers a single motor axons signals to.​

There is huge variation between muscle groups, ranging from 200 in the deltoids (shoulder), to up to 2,000 in the gastrocnemius (calves).​

Cites for in situ studies of actual human muscle:
- http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1748-1716.1959.tb01678.x/abstract
- http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00238380
​

Out on a limb alert (logical speculations): Could it be that Type 2 fibers need a greater innervation ratio than Type 1 fibers to function properly? (since Type 2 fibers don't have magnetism-generating mitochondria)

If this were true (and I'm saying that it is, but let's ask a plausible "what if" question here) => then decreased innervation ratio is completely expected with a shift in fiber type from Type 2 to Type 1 fibers. This would then mean that "apparent denervation" due to fiber type changes are not harmful.

----
Treatment

At the end of the day, it's still coming back to lack of nervous system functionality as the primary issue with actual loss of muscle function. This just sounds like the same old age-related loss of myelination that Jack has been harping on for years now.

The usual protocols that Jack recommends to restore nervous system health is a pre-requisite here IMO, waaaay ahead of trying to use exercise or diet to fix these issues. Again it comes back to light and circadian cycles .

Note: Josh Ferber and Jack have discussed before how you can "short circuit" the system with exercise if signalling is not right. The March Q&A went a little bit into how TENS units can harm or hurt depending on context. This is why you need to be your own doctor, and also hopefully have a real doctor there to help along with a highly personal-context-specific treatment protocol.​

However, assuming healthy nervous system signalling to muscles, then I think the key is to fire those nervous pathways frequently and strongly. This means "heavy lifting" (measured by percent of 1RM, which is the best proxy for fiber recruitment), in all planes of the body, without metabolic fatigue. @Danco3636 is the best example on these forums of someone who is older, and who is doing well with exercise (but he's a male, and the female context will differ ....)

----

Thoughts manifest as nervous impulses. So yes, I do think your thoughts can affect the fate of your muscles

----

As an end note, I have speculations on why would the body prefer Type 1 fibers over Type 2 as it ages, and how that ties into Ubiquination. I think I need more time to think

....

 

http://www.jonathanfields.com/brain-buff-research-thoughts-on-strength-fitness-weight-loss/

"Building muscle, it turns out, is not nearly as mechanical as we thought. And, in fact, a recent study by Erin M. Shackell and Lionel G. Standing at Bishop’s University reveals you may be able to make nearly identical gains in strength and fitness without lifting a finger!

That study measured the strength gains in three different groups of people. The first group did nothing outside their usual routine. The second group was put through two weeks of highly focused strength training for one specific muscle, three times a week. The third group listened to audio CDs that guided them to imagine themselves going through the same workout as the exercising group, three times a week.

And, the results blew everyone away.

The control group, who didn’t do anything, saw no gains in strength. The exercise group, who trained three times a week, saw a 28% gain in strength. No big surprises there. But, the group who did not exercise, but rather thought about exercising experienced nearly the same gains in strength as the exercise group (24%). Yes, you read that right!"

I discussed this with Ray Peat before, and he stated that he's done this to a lesser extent and quantified it. Really interesting stuff. I have seen studies in the past indicating that simply viewing your muscles activate while doing an exercise causes increases in muscle activation and muscle protein synthesis, though the studies were too short in length to show any objective measurements on long term strength/muscle gains. Pairing this all with the images you shared above, it would make sense how nerve impulses directly impact muscles, and if one does this appropriately, they can potentially even aid in muscle strength and all that.

 

I tend to agree, and I tend to think this has great implications for getting people from diseased states back to healthy baselines. I'm pretty sure there are studies where people had one arm in a cast, and both training the other arm, or just visualising training of the cast-bound arm, resulted in no muscle being lost at all!

You're probably not going to deadlift triple your bodyweight with thought alone, but I most people don't even consider the "power of thought".

...

 

Now, sit in a cold tub while you "visualize "training a muscle and you've got something!

 

cold increases magnetism.......and cold can build muscle strength without ever lifting a weight.

There was no Gold's Gyms until the last 80 yrs.

Type 2 fibers have a difference.........it is mitochondria density

Cardiac muscle even more so.........

Been sayin' it for ten years.........no one gets it becuase they dont understand how cold links to mitochondria and now cold is magnetic effect.

 

I can personally attest to cold increasing strength. CT does it for me. I exercise hardly ever now, but have plenty of strength, more so than when I was lifting heavy back in the day.

 

Well it is kind of odd to me that doing CT in the Pacific 1-2x a day allows me to maintain a pretty decent level of strength, endurance and cardio. If I choose I can out pace my U16 rugby players in conditioning despite not doing a lot of training maybe some isometrics once a week, bodyweight stuff and occasional leisurely bike ride at the beach. I'm no Ben Greenfield but hey less is more, right? Now if I could only create a water gym in the Pacific I probably could get stronger, faster and shredded! Lol.

 

i am also sick of banging my head against the table trying to get muscle-loading-oriented people see sense.