Yeah, fortunately went away. For me it would always appear after like 30s of being on the page, meaning I would have to reload all the time while reading comments. Effective way for me to break out of the mindless scrolling though. I'm almost said they unfucked it.
makes it sound like this is unrelated to soy specifically and more about displacing less healthful things (like higher saturated fat and caloric animal sources)
its bad framing to label this as "degenerative" and "screwed up" as nowadays we learn that there are probably more age-related. As you say, they correlate very poorly with pain.
Most people don't exercise to preserve muscle mass and function and especially don't do full range of motion resistance training, most of this is probably preventable.
This is well known for spine issues in general: MRI is super unspecific, and the older you get, the more interesting things you can find on the scans. Even if you're fully asymptomatic. So such findings are now better reframed as age-related changed rather than pathologies.
The fact that every radiologist will highlight different things also doesn't help.
This is in fact one reason why you don't want an MRI if the outcome does not change what you do (i.e. sports related injuries or non specific low back pain). You will just nocebo yourself into thinking you have problems that are not real, because the belief in the answer donut is so strong.
My understanding is that it doesnt even do that, because it creates false negatives for the so called skinny fat body type: significant visceral fat mass, which is what we are concerned about, but not much muscle or peripheral fat mass, thereby not being flagged by BMI screens, even though they are at risk.
Does it? I think strength may be related to pain if you're very weak, and statistically there are big confounders (i.e. people who are weak also have other conditions that exacerbate pain experience). But past a certain point I don't think the evidence suggests that strength itself is protective. Otherwise, competitive lifters would never experience back pain for instance, but they still do. Pain is multifactorial, and strength is not the only determinant by far.
Adhesions are not really a thing as far as i know. Biggest priority is strength and cardiovascular training and maintaining a good body composition and stress level. Then I'd think about stretching.
I guess it's technically cool, but one should be aware that there is no such thing as "good posture" or no accepted definition that lends itself to good science.
slouching isnt bad, remaining in the same posture for a long time is, or at least it can lead to discomfort. people that sit up straight all the time still get back pain. i slouch all the time and i don't. The popular attachment to specific configurationa of your joints that look aeathetically acceptable os orthorexia, not science.
Great, your one of the few. Statistics are pretty clear that most people cannot willpower their way out of their food seeking behaviours. They are to a large extent not under your concious control.
correcting satiety signaling on a chemical level more directly addresses the problem in those folks.
yes, the food environment is the main problem, in a way, but only because it punishes having a certain set of chemical and lifestyle parameters and rewards others.
> Daher habe die Bundesnetzagentur die CUII gebeten, die Überprüfung mutmaßlich urheberrechtsverletzender Seiten künftig gerichtlich vornehmen zu lassen.
this is not a requirement, they're just asking. The BNetzA just wants to not deal with it apparently.
I live in a population where 90% of physical therapists will do placebo manual treatments and susbcribe to unscientific ideas about imbalances and "moving wrong".
My point is that there is nothing a priori about it, its just a question of what your goal is, what you are adapted to do and how the resistance curve of the movement is set up.
If you have a cardiovascular system that can grind through 20RM squat sets and you like it, go off. It'll be hard for most people due to the large amount of muscle mass recruited, but on the other hand, if you can load a lateral raise 5RM with acceptable range of motion, why the hell not. It just doesn't work well with dumbbells in particular.
thats a different thing tho. the term "stretch mediated hypertrophy" is used loosely in many places and i think originally refers to really just hypertrophy caused by the stretch. iirc the lengthened partial gains are not thought to be caused by this mechanism.
akshually theres quite some interesting data on this. it has been shown that stretching alone can indeed produce hypertrophy (in birds and humans), but the required protocols are so intense that you wont want to do them (i think its hours in incredibly uncomfortable positions), so dynamic exercise still wins.
One would also expect it not to do as much for strenght, since adaptations are somewhat specific to the training.