I recently wrote about sarcopenia, or muscle loss surpassing what is typical with age.

Sarcopenia: What You Need to Know

SARCOPENIA IS AGE-RELATED PROGRESSIVE LOSS of muscle mass and strength. Researchers posit that a sedentary lifestyle here: medium.com

Fighting Muscle Loss

In my article, I discussed ways to fight back against muscle loss.

1. Exercise. I am always physically active life. My physical activity includes resistance training.
2. Eat well. I eat a relatively balanced, healthy diet incorporating 25 to 35 grams of high-quality protein in each main meal.
3. Routine physicals. I regularly see a healthcare provider.

Supplements for Optimizing Your Muscle Mass

With my recent turn to over-60 bodybuilding, I use these evidence-based supplements:

• Creatine. This substance can help me increase or maintain muscle mass.

• Whey protein is a central supplement to my diet, helping me preserve muscle mass. I currently consume about one gram per pound.
• Vitamin D. This supplement helps me maintain my bones and muscles.

New Study Examines Sarcopenia and Early Mortality

Researchers recently reported the results of a population-based cohort study published in JAMA Network Open.

They wanted to better understand the prevalence of more than usual muscle loss with age.

Here is how they defined sarcopenia: Subjects had it if they had a low handgrip strength and low skeletal muscle mass.

They measured muscle mass in the legs (including the pelvis) and arms (including the shoulders).

Study Results: Sarcopenia and Early Mortality

Here are the results after ten years of follow-up:

Subjects with sarcopenia had a nearly 1.3 times higher risk of early mortality (than those without the condition). Those with sarcopenia and obesity had a three times higher risk for all-cause mortality.

Age and sex did not affect the findings.

Takeaway Messages

The investigators concluded that we might use low muscle strength as a first step to diagnose sarcopenia.

The study suggested that non-drug interventions — including diet and exercise training — can help delay sarcopenia onset.

I could not find a consideration of specific causes of death in the study.

Finally, because most subjects had European ancestry, we do not know if we can broadly generalize the research findings.

My Take

A greater amount (than usual) of muscle loss is not uncommon.

In this study, 13 percent had low muscle function.

The early mortality risk for obese individuals with sarcopenia is quite disturbing.

The good news?

As we develop better screening tools (such as testing hand grip), we can intervene with helpful lifestyle recommendations.

The post Is Age-Related Muscle Loss Linked to Early Mortality? appeared first on Medika Life.

Get regular physical activity, and you can reduce your risk of becoming obese, developing diabetes, suffering from cardiovascular disease, dodge particular cancers, and more. But how does exercise work its physiological magic?

First, we’ll review some of the health benefits of regular physical activity. Second, we’ll turn to a new study that sheds light on how moving affects our physiology at a basic level.

Physical activity and cardiovascular disease

Many of us lead sedentary lifestyles, at least in the United States. Unfortunately, not getting regular physical activity is an independent risk factor for the early development of coronary heart disease.

Unfortunately, much of the evidence supporting the risk-reducing properties of exercise comes from long-term observational studies that demonstrate this:

Those who get regular physical activity have much less coronary heart disease and a lower risk of experiencing cardiac arrest.

Let’s compare the least active among us with the most active. I live in King County, Washington (USA). There, researchers from the University of Washington performed a population-based case-control study to examine the associations between regular high-intensity and moderate-intensity leisure-time physical activity and primary cardiac arrest.

The investigators looked at 333 patients with primary cardiac arrest, aged 25 to 75, attended by paramedics. Controls were randomly selected from the same community and matched for age and sex. None of the subjects had a history of heart disease, major health problems, or self-reported poor health.

The researchers interviewed partners of patients and controls to assess participation in 15 high-intensity and six moderate-intensity physical activities during the previous year.

Here are the relative risk reductions by activity type:

• Gardening for more than 60 minutes per week appeared to be associated with a drop in risk by two-thirds.
• Walking for exercise for more than 60 minutes per week appeared to be associated with a nearly three-quarters risk reduction.
• Engaging in high-intensity activities appeared to be associated with a drop in risk by two-thirds.

Unfortunately, I did not see absolute risk reduction numbers. However, here is some context: Globally, cardiac arrest takes more lives than colorectal cancer, breast cancer, prostate cancer, influenza, pneumonia, auto accidents, HIV, firearms, and house fires combined. In one year alone, 350,000 Americans die from cardiac arrest.

A sedentary lifestyle is an independent risk factor for cardiac arrest. Of course, exercise is not completely free of potential perils. Physical activity can have rare adverse effects, including heart attack, heart rhythm problems, sudden death, and rhabdomyolysis.

Rhabdo happens when damaged muscle tissue releases its proteins and electrolytes into the blood. These substances can damage the kidneys and heart and lead to permanent disability or even death.

Physical activity and weight

Exercise is important to prevent obesity; sedentary behavior is associated with weight gain. For older or obese adults, higher activity levels (compared to young adults) appear necessary to prevent weight gain.

A study of 34,000 females (with an average age of 54) consuming a usual diet had an average weight gain of 2.6 kilograms (5.7 pounds) over 13 years.

Compared with females doing more than 420 minutes per week of exercise (an average of one hour daily), those engaging in less activity gained significantly more weight.

Physical activity appeared inversely related to weight gain only among normal-weight individuals. To maintain normal body weight in mid-life, the females in the study needed higher levels of physical activity (about 60 minutes daily).

Once overweight, physical activity alone (without controlling caloric intake) did not prevent weight gain.

The available research findings suggest that physical activity protects against obesity regardless of an individual’s genetic predisposition to it.

Physical activity and life expectancy

Physical inactivity is associated with a reduced life expectancy. A retrospective study published in JAMA addresses this issue. The study explores the link between long-term mortality and various levels of cardiorespiratory fitness.

Cardiorespiratory fitness measures how well your heart and lungs pump blood and oxygen during prolonged exercise. The more fit you are, the higher your cardiorespiratory fitness.

Over 122,000 patients at the Cleveland Clinic (USA) had exercise testing on a treadmill to measure cardiorespiratory fitness for the research investigation. The subjects ranged in age from 18 to over 80, with an average age of 53. The results?

Cardiorespiratory fitness appeared to be associated with living longer. The higher the fitness, the higher the survival rate, regardless of age. The connection appeared to be especially strong among older individuals and those with high blood pressure. Moreover, the survival benefit continued to increase with no upper limit.

Physical activity — How it works its magic

Physical activity is a wonderful way to help maintain and restore good health. Despite numerous studies demonstrating this relationship, the molecular mechanisms underlying the benefits remain incompletely elucidated.

A new paper by researchers at Harvard Medical School (USA) and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (USA) in Cell Metabolism illuminates the complex physiological response to exercise.

The Harvard/MIT team combined modern single-cell technologies with advanced computational biology and artificial intelligence to look at how three metabolic tissues respond to exercise and high-fat diet-induced obesity at a single-cell resolution. This project is a first-of-its-kind research investigation.

The researchers discovered opposite responses to exercise and obesity across all three tissues.

Goodyear and colleagues focused on three tissues, including two kinds of white adipose tissue (fat) and skeletal muscle taken from mice. The rodents were either trained or sedentary and consumed either a healthy or high-fat diet (the latter aiming to mimic a typical Western diet).

Here are the four mice groups:

• Regular diet/sedentary
• Regular diet/active
• High-fat diet/sedentary
• High-fat diet/active

The mice consumed the diet for six weeks. The active mice had free access to a running wheel for three weeks.

After three weeks of exercise, researchers used single-cell RNA sequencing. Here are the findings:

Genes regulating extracellular matrix* remodeling and circadian rhythm appeared to be regulated by exercise and obesity in all three tissue types. Obesity up-regulated extracellular modeling, while exercise down-regulated them. Conversely, exercise up-regulated circadian-related pathways, and obesity down-regulated them.

• The extracellular matrix is the “non-cellular portion of a tissue. It is a collection of extracellular material produced and secreted by cells into the surrounding medium. The extracellular matrix provides structural and biochemical support to the surrounding cells.”

Here is co-first author, Pasquale Nigro, Ph.D.:

“With respect to the circadian rhythm, we saw very quiet cells that weren’t metabolically active with the high-fat diet group. We discovered that exercise reversed this. It seemed that, when the circadian system is up-regulated, cells become re-activated.”

My take — Physical activity

Unless there is a medical contraindication, we should all try to achieve and maintain high fitness levels.

Current guidelines recommend 150 to 300 minutes per week of moderate aerobic activity (such as walking, running, swimming, or biking), 75 minutes of vigorous activity, or a mix of both. Experts also recommend twice-weekly resistance training to strengthen muscles.

Unfortunately, only about one in five adults and teens in the United States gets enough exercise to maintain good health. We can do better.

Thank you for joining me in this look at the effects of obesity and exercise on fat and muscle.

The post Obesity and Exercise Have Opposite Effects on Muscle and Fat appeared first on Medika Life.

Today we explore how you can promote your bone health. I recently wrote about how vitamin D supplementation may not be associated with a lower risk of bone fractures:Vitamin D: What? It Doesn’t Prevent Bone Fractures?VITAMIN D SUPPLEMENTS DO NOT REDUCE FRACTURE RISK, at least among adults in midlife and older adults. That is the…medium.com.

But what can you do to optimize your bone strength? Let’s examine exercise — types and duration — that can help you dodge bone issues. First, a look at poor bone health.

Poor bone health

Bone is living tissue, one that constantly breaks down and replaces itself. Osteoporosis happens when the new bone formation does not keep up with the bone loss.

Osteoporosis results in bones becoming brittle and weak — even mild stresses such as coughing may result in a fracture. Fractures secondary to osteoporosis commonly occur in the spine, wrist, or hip.

Osteoporosis strikes men and women and can affect individuals of any race. The highest risk is among older women who are past menopause.

Your osteoporosis risk hinges, at least partly, on how much bone mass you attained in your youth. Our peak bone mass has an inherited genetic component, and mass varies by ethnicity. The higher your peak bone mass, the lower the odds you’ll get osteoporosis.

Bone density peaks at about 30 years of age. Women lose bone mass more rapidly than men. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osteoporosis

I approach osteoporosis risk-reduction with a two-pronged approach: 1) maximizing peak bone mass; and 2) minimizing bone loss.

Osteoporosis risk-reduction — Peak bone mass

To optimize your peak bone mass, have a healthy lifestyle during the bone-forming years, especially adolescence. Here are the components:

• Nutrition. Adequate calcium and vitamin D intake are important. Children ages 9 to 18 should consume about 1300 milligrams of calcium daily, preferably from calcium-rich or calcium-fortified foods. A meta-analysis of 19 randomized trials showed a small increase in total body mineral content in children receiving calcium supplementation (300 to 1200 milligrams daily) compared with those taking a placebo.
• Physical activity. Exercise promotes bone health. On the other hand, excessive physical activity can harm bone health.
• Avoid smoking. While cigarettes damage bones, quitting can improve bone density (within one year of cessation).
• Avoid alcohol. Chronic heavy alcohol use, especially during adolescence and young adult years, can dramatically hurt bone health, increasing the future risk of osteoporosis.
• Avoid eating disorders. For example, anorexia nervosa, an increasingly common eating disorder in female adolescents, is linked with drops in bone mineral density and increased fracture risk.

Nutritional disorders in adolescence (such as inflammatory bowel disease, cystic fibrosis, and celiac disease) can interfere with bone formation. In addition, congenital disorders such as cystic fibrosis appear associated with low bone mass.

Osteoporosis risk-reduction — Minimizing bone loss

Alas, I am beyond peak bone mass time. My goal is to stabilize my bone mineral density (BMD) or reduce my rate of bone loss.

The United States Surgeon General’s Report on Bone Health and Osteoporosis suggests adopting a pyramid approach to preventing osteoporosis. Doing this means that we focus on physical activity, nutrition, and fall prevention. The second tier of risk reduction includes addressing diseases and drugs associated with bone loss. The third tier involves the use of bone-building drugs.

Let’s start with tier one:

• Physical activity and bone health. Do you do weight-bearing physical activity? Doing so can improve bone mineral density modestly for pre-and postmenopausal women and men. The Surgeon General suggests we aim for 30 minutes on most days of the week. An added benefit? You may improve your muscle tone and reduce your chances of falling.

Weight-Bearing Exercise: 8 Workouts for Strong BonesHere are the latest weight-bearing workout trends. What are the best ways to exercise and improve your bone health when…www.webmd.com

• Nutrition and bone health. The optimal intake (diet plus any supplements) of vitamin D and calcium is not established for men or premenopausal women, with many advocates suggesting about 1000 milligrams of calcium. The World Health Organization recommends 500 mg of calcium daily, and the United Kingdom sets the goal at 700 mg.

Interestingly, in 1997, an Institute of Medicine (USA) panel lifted the recommended level for calcium intake from 800 to 1200 milligrams daily for women over 50. The panel based this recommendation based on calcium balance studies lasting only weeks.

We don’t have evidence that consuming that amount of calcium reduces the risk of breaking a bone. The recommendation remains, however. The optimal amount for men or premenopausal women is not known.

What about vitamin D? The 2018 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) concluded that “there was insufficient evidence to assess the benefits and harms of calcium and vitamin D supplementation for the primary prevention of fracture in men and premenopausal women.”

The panel recommended against supplementation with 400 international units of vitamin D (and 1000 milligrams or less of calcium) for the primary prevention of fractures in postmenopausal women. It concluded that there is no good evidence to assess the benefits and harms of higher doses.

Individuals at higher risk of being low in vitamin D (such as older individuals confined indoors) may benefit from higher doses. If you take vitamin D supplements, you may wish to consider adding vitamin K:Top 6 Sources of Vitamin KVITAMIN K IS AN ESSENTIAL NUTRIENT central to bone and heart health and blood clotting. You have heard about the roles…medium.com

One potential downside of calcium supplementation? You may raise your risk of kidney stones. Those in the landmark Women’s Health Initiative study who took calcium and vitamin D had a higher risk of kidney stones compared with those taking a placebo. Getting that calcium through food may be best, as high dietary levels may protect against kidney stones.Healthy Foods High in CalciumYour body holds an abundance of calcium. Around 99% of this mineral is stored in your bones and teeth.www.webmd.com

Of course, you shouldn’t smoke (for numerous reasons). Cigarette use is linked with reduced bone mineral density and a higher fracture probability.

Excessive alcohol consumption (more than two United States drinks or three United Kingdom units) harms bone health for many reasons.

Finally, I won’t review pharmaceutical agents (such as hormonal replacement therapy for menopausal women) that help to fight bone loss.

Oh, one more thing: Resistance training may also help you dodge premature death:

Weight-lifting and LongevityRUN, SWIM, JOG, OR WALK. So many cry out for all of us to get more physical activity. But are we being remiss in not…medium.com

The post Are You Destroying Your Bones? appeared first on Medika Life.