The Pursuit Of Happiness

Many people nowadays seem to struggle with being happy and satisfied with themselves and their lifes. While this may have several different reasons, I would like to point out one main mistake, that in my opinion most people who aren't happy make in their approach on life: Especially in extremely industrialized and economically rich countries, society seems to suggest that striving for wealth is the only way to achieve satisfaction in life. What they don't understand is, that the people dictating those dogmas have fundamental interest in you earning more money for consuming more of their products in order to make them richer, rather than providing you a promising idea of how to be happy. So if money can't buy happiness, what makes people satisfied with life?

It's Love. While enforced Materialism (above the range of poverty) has been shown to be inversely correlated with Life-Satisfaction, to achieve Happiness, putting Love first seems to be the smartest idea.

Look forward to see your family, instead of drooling over your new I-Phone.

Merry Christmas



1. Diener, E. and S. Oishi: 2000, ‘Money and happiness: Income and subjective wellbeing
across nations’, in E. Diener and E.M. Suh (eds.), Subjective Well-being
across Cultures (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).

Exercise makes you more intelligent and improves your grades!

This is seriously interesting stuff. I will not promote Exercising in this article for personal, philosophical reasons or self-praise for those of you who are already regularly physically active. I will just have you have a look at some solid, recent data. Really, this is going to be a tough one for those who refuse to exercise...

Let's start of with some easy facts:

Peter S. Eriksson and Maria Åberg (2006): Effects Of Exercise On Plasticity And Cognition In The Adult Human Brain

This is really a very simple and yet powerful study: 36 000, 18yr old cohorts in Sweden between 1983 and 2004 were tested for their Cardiovascular Fitness and Intelligence and the result was a clear correlation (98%) between both abilities (similar results were observerd for Strength, by the way). Certainly you guys are rather critical and don't buy things like this too easily: "Henning, this doesn't mean that Fitness causes the higher intelligence. More intelligent people could simply be smart enough to choose to exercise more, since they are aware of the zillions of positive effects on their health." Although this already implies something cool about the relationship between one's IQ and "making the right choices" - I agree. You are completely right, this study doesn't provide any prove of exercise being the reason for altered intelligence. But you already knew that I wouldn't get excited like this, if I hadn't have some data for you which leaves almost no room for arguing... :

Henriette van Praag, Tiffany Shubert, Chunmei Zhao, and Fred H. Gage (2005): Exercise Enhances Learning and Hippocampal Neurogenesis in Aged Mice

Now this is stunning! Let me give you a brief summary: Y refers to young mice without access to exercise and YR refers to young mice with access to exercise (O and OR is the equivalent for old mice). The data above shows, that the mice with access to a wheel increased their Cell Number in the controlled area of the Hippocampus almost 4 (!) times as much as the non exercising group. The Hippocampus is the critical area in the brain for short- and long term learning as well as for spatial navigation. The truly amazing thing about it is though, that the same applies for old mice: Until now we thought that increases in brain-mass and neurogenesis in mammals is limited to the early ages of development. This still seems to be true to some degree, but only as long as this mammal doesn't exercise...

Still: "Dude, where is the prove that this applies for humans as it does for rats? Why should our brain work the same way like in rodents?" Here we go:

Chaddock, L., Erickson, K. I., Prakash, R. S., Kim, J. S., Voss, M. W., VanPatter, M., et al. (2010). A neuroimaging investigation of the association between aerobic fitness, hippocampal volume, and memory performance in preadolescent children.

This graph is showing the differences in Hippocampus-size between 10yr old kids with either lower or higher fitness. This is strong evidence for the hypothesis that exercising is eventually turning on different growth factors (BDNF), which alter the rate of existing neurons to survive (this is i.e. particularly interesting for preventing diseases like Alzheimer) and at the same time promoting the build up of new neurons and synapses in the brain. That those effects of exercise indeed directly carry-over to the increased ability to learn was already found by Woo and Sharpe (2003) (1), as well as by Rebok and Plude (2001) (2). I believe I don't have to tell anybody what a better memory means for your learning success and thus the outcome of i.e. your exams, as well as in any other situation in life.


If this stuff isn't make you want to work-out today, I can't think of anything else...



PS: When you are further interested in the mechanisms behind it, I can recommend this paper which I already mentioned earlier in the first Graph as a good start into the subject: Effects of Exercise on Plasticity and Cognition in the Adult Human Brain



References:

1. Woo, E., & Sharps, M. J. (2003). Cognitive aging and physical exercise. Educational
Gerontology, 29, 327-337.


2. Rebok, G. W., & Plude, D. G. (2001). Relation of physical activity to memory functioning in
older adults: the memory workout program. Educational Gerontology, 27, 241-260.

Genetics

Ladies and Gentleman, the next time you are bothering about your "lousy genetics" as a reason for unsatisfying performance or progress, I want you to remember those two guys. Let me introduce you two twins, Otto and Ewald from Germany:

   

Obviously, both of them share the exactly same Genotype, thus their Phenotype is completely different: One of them is a skinny runner with a great Mitochondria density, that comes along with a huge Heart that is capable of pumping tremendous amounts of Blood through the Body to deliver Oxygen to the working muscles. The other one carries around 20Kg more Muscle Mass and is potentially able to Clean and Jerk three times the weight that his twin-brother could move, while he will probably lose any match against him on the track with a distance that lasts longer than 200m. We see two physiologically completely different types of human beings, having accomplished body-types that require entirely contradictory adaptations, while they had the same "tools" to build them. So what does this mean to you? This means that apparently within any Genotype there is an extremely significant possibility to express those genes in different ways, allowing you to potentially achieve excellence in any goal you pursue. It is not about your parents, it is about your will and dedication.

You are what you eat!

Most people aren't really aware of what they eat. They are just feeding themselves what they feel for and buying products they like. Unfortunately what someone may feel he "likes to eat" doesn't happen as an actual response of the physiological needs of the body - it is just a learned habit. That is, because it is literally impossible for us to distinguish the actual demands of our body.

So most of us just lean on the things we learned to like via our sociocultural environment and, particularly, the media. The media is used by companies to advertise their products, therefore they effectively try to tell you what you have to like. While this is absolutely mandatory and legit, as they have to sell their products in order to make profit, pay the employee and keep the economy moving, you can be sure that they are interested in your money and certainly not in your health or performance. That is, as a human being that knows the facts of life, your own responsibility!

So if you don't like to live and appear unhealthy, start to think about what you add to the cart and what you will ingest, instead of beeing an empty, remote controlled lemming!

Beweg dich!

 In einigen meiner letzten Beiträge hatte ich bereits über die Bedeutung von einer "negativen Energiebilanz" zum erfolgreichen Abnehmen berichtet. Das heißt, um es nochmals kurz zusammenzufassen, dass man mehr Energie verbrauchen muss, als man zuführt. So veranlasst man den Körper dazu seine vorhandenen Reserven zum Ausgleich der Bilanz heranzuziehen. Das sollten im Optimalfall die Körperfettdepots sein, welche für den Körper normalerweise leicht zugängliche und effektive Quellen zur Energiegewinnung darstellen.

Doch ist es tatsächlich so einfach? Weniger essen und man nimmt ab bis die Bauchmuskeln komplett herausgemeißelt scheinen und das Hüftgold sich vollständig in Luft aufgelöst hat? Bis zu einem gewissen Grade, je nach Ausgangssituation, ist Abnehmen ohne Bewegung möglich. Aber gerade die Ausgangssituation spielt in dem Fall eine entscheidend Rolle und die meisten Diätenden müssen schnell frustriert feststellen, dass einzig und allein tagtäglich zu hungern nicht zur gewünschten Bikini-Figur führt.

Grund hierfür ist unsere RMR (Resting Metabolic Rate), oder zu deutsch unser "Energieumsatz im Ruhezustand". In einem anderen Artikel hatte ich bereits erwähnt, dass der Verbrauch sich dahingehend im Alltag ohnehin stark in Grenzen hält. Im Falle einer Diät ändert sich die Situation jedoch nochmals radikal und der Körper ist in der Lage seinen Energieverbrauch um weitere 15% zu mindern (1). Dies tritt überraschenderweise auch ohne den Verlust von Magermasse in einer Diät auf (2). Das bedeutet, dass offenbar die Einschränkung der Kalorienzufuhr selbst bereits den gesenkten Energieverbrauch erklärt und nicht wie vielleicht anzunehmen die physiologischen Folgen die aus der verminderten Nahrungszufuhr resultieren!

Das erklärt, wieso kleine Veränderungen im Ernährungsverhalten sowohl eine Abnahme an Körpergewicht, als auch eine Zunahme nur sehr kurzfristig begünstigen und das Gewicht schnell stagniert. Die einzige Möglichkeit im Falle einer Diät wäre also eine noch weitere, radikalere Einschränkung der Kalorienzufuhr. Dies ist angesichts der sehr geringen Menge die von vielen Diätenden zu diesem Zeitpunkt bereits nur noch konsumiert wird allerdings wenig praktikabel und erfolgsversprechend. Der auf wenig Aktivität und eine geringe Menge an Fettfreier-Masse zurückzuführende, geringe Kalorienverbrauch, der sich in einer Diät noch weiter reduziert ist führt hier bei vielen schon sehr nah an die Grenze zum vollständigen Fasten.

Viel effektiver und gesünder ist an der Stelle eine weitere Steigerung der Aktivität oder spätestens hier überhaupt erst der Beginn von bewusster körperlicher Aktivität für jene, die bislang versucht haben ihre Ziele allein über die Ernährung zu erreichen. Auf diese Art und Weise kann man die Rate des verbrannten Fettes signifikant erhöhen und den Gewichtsverlust massiv beschleunigen (1).

Die, die bisher darüber grübeln weshalb sie trotz ihrer bescheidenen Nahrungsaufnahme nicht ihre Figur-Ziele erreichen, sollten also ernsthaft das Sporttreiben in Erwägung ziehen, statt sich dem Essen vollständig zu entsagen und irgendwann entnervt die Genetik für ihr Scheitern verantwortlich zu machen.

Quellen:

1. JE Whatley, WJ Gillespie, J Honig, MJ Walsh, AL Blackburn and GL Blackburn (1994). Does the amount of endurance exercise in combination with weight training and a very-low-energy diet affect resting metabolic rate and body composition? Am J Clin Nutr May 1994 vol. 59 no. 5 1088-1092 .

2. A Geliebter, MM Maher, L Gerace, B Gutin, SB Heymsfield and SA Hashim (1997).  Effects of strength or aerobic training on body composition, resting metabolic rate, and peak oxygen consumption in obese dieting subjects. Am J Clin Nutr September 1997 vol. 66 no. 3 557-563.

Nachbrenneffekt

Um einen möglichst starken "EPOC" (Excess Post-Exercise Oxygen Consumption) zu erzeugen ist es nowendig während des Trainings eine besonders große Sauerstoffschuld einzugehen. Dafür sollte man sich solange wie möglich im anaeroben Bereich der Energiebereitstellung befinden, welches man erreicht indem man mit hohen Intensitäten, großer Ausbelastung und geringen bis gar keinen Pausen arbeitet. Auf diese Art und Weise kann man über die Zeit des eigentlichen Trainings hinaus, durch die anhaltende Störung der Homöostase, Energie verbrennen ohne sich weiter betätigen zu müssen (1). Es gibt verschiedenste Möglichkeiten sich diesen Effekt im Training zu Nutzen zu machen, man kann jedoch alle als Variationen des "Intervalltrainings" (vgl. "Dauermethode") zusammenfassen.

Trotz der offensichtlichen Vorteile sollte man eines beachten, wenn das eigentliche Ziel nicht eine Steigerung der sportlichen Leistungsfähigkeit und Regeneration im anaeroben Bereich, sondern ein möglichst großer Kalorienverbrauch ist: Bei zwei vom Umfang her identischen Trainings fällt die Gesamtzahl an verbrannter Energie größer aus, wenn man die Pausen länger werden lässt. Der Nachbrenneffekt ist zwar erwartungsgemäß geringer, aber die längere Dauer der dosierteren Belastung verbraucht insgesamt trotzdem mehr Kalorien (2) und ist weniger stressend für das Nervensystem.

1.Gore CJ and Withers RT (1990). The effect of exercise intensity and duration on the oxygen deficit and excess post-exercise oxygen consumption. European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology Volume 60, Number 3, 169-174, DOI: 10.1007/BF00839153.

2.Haltom RW, Kraemer RR, Sloan RA, Hebert EP, Frank K, Tryniecki JL. (1999). Circuit weight training and its effects on excess postexercise oxygen consumption. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1999 Nov;31(11):1613-8.

Yesterday ...