Activity
Mon
Wed
Fri
Sun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
What is this?
Less
More

Memberships

Mind and Body Solutions

327 members • Free

16 contributions to Mind and Body Solutions
Vitamin B12 "normal" levels may be neither normal nor safe for the aging brain
I've argued for years that the threshold for B12 deficiency is set too low, and new research from the Annals of Neurology makes that case more forcefully than ever. Researchers at UCSF enrolled 231 healthy older adults with B12 levels considered entirely normal by current standards and found that participants with lower levels of the form of B12 your cells can actually absorb and use (called holotranscobalamin) showed slower nerve signaling in the visual pathway, slower cognitive processing that became more pronounced with age, and more areas of white matter damage visible on brain MRI. Neurological changes were measurable at levels the medical system considers acceptable. The current US deficiency cutoff was not based on clinical outcomes; it was calculated as a statistical threshold using population averages. In my clinical practice, I saw this pattern repeatedly: patients with cognitive and neurological complaints whose primary care doctors had reassured them their B12 was "normal," but whose homocysteine, holotranscobalamin, and methylmalonic acid levels told a very different story. Those functional markers reveal whether B12 is actually reaching cells and being used, and very few physicians test for them. In addition, for people who eat a lot meat and animal products, their B12 levels tend to be higher above 2000. There is not issue at all with levels that high. Actually, this new study support the fact that higher B12 levels is important in the elderly.
1 like • 25d
Dr Serge, are there more than 1 B12 and if so, which one is best?
NEAT Movement can fire up your metabolism!
What is NEAT Movement? NEAT stands for Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis — basically, all the calories you burn through everyday movement outside of structured workouts. This includes things like: - Walking around the house - Taking the stairs - Cleaning - Gardening - Standing instead of sitting - Playing with your kids or pets - Pacing while on the phone - Parking farther away - Stretching or moving throughout the day The truth is, your daily movement matters more than most people realize. You don’t have to spend hours in the gym to improve your health, boost metabolism, or support fat loss. Small movements done consistently throughout the day add up in a big way. NEAT can: - Increase daily calorie burn - Improve energy levels - Support weight management - Reduce stiffness and joint pain - Improve circulation and blood sugar regulation - Help combat the negative effects of sitting too long One workout a day is great — but movement throughout the day is powerful. Simple Ways to Increase NEAT: ✔ Take short walking breaks ✔ Stand while working or talking on the phone ✔ Do household chores with intention ✔ Stretch between tasks ✔ Walk after meals ✔ Choose movement whenever possible
1 like • 25d
I like the fact I don't have to spend hours at the gym
What Your doctor was Never Told about Psychiatric Drugs
For decades, doctors were trained on a version of psychiatric drug data that had been filtered, reframed, and in some cases ghostwritten. The full record tells a different story. In the early 1990s, a drug called Paxil was being taught to American doctors as a breakthrough. Cleaner than older antidepressants. Safer. More precise. The science, they were told, was settled. It wasn't. And the evidence for that was sitting inside the FDA's own files -- available through the Freedom of Information Act -- for anyone who knew to look. When a pharmaceutical company seeks approval for a psychiatric drug, it submits its complete clinical trial data to the FDA -- not summaries, not press releases, the raw results. These are documents the public almost never sees. In the late 1990s, psychologist Irving Kirsch used the Freedom of Information Act to obtain the FDA's complete trial records for the most widely prescribed antidepressants in America: Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft, Celexa, and Effexor. What he found was not what doctors were being taught: ~50% of submitted antidepressant trials failed to show benefit over placebo 1.8 pts average drug–placebo difference on depression rating scale (3 pts = clinically perceptible) 75–80% of improvement in trials occurred in the placebo group, not the drug group The FDA reviewers noticed. On Paxil, an FDA medical reviewer wrote that the drug showed minimal improvement over placebo. In a Prozac FDA statistical review, the clinical significance of the observed difference was questioned. On Celexa, a reviewer wrote that the effect size is small. That language exists in the approval documents. It was not transmitted to medical schools. "Many trials failed. Average benefits were small. Placebo did most of the work. Clinical relevance was questioned by FDA scientists themselves. And yet doctors were taught that antidepressants correct a chemical imbalance." In 1998, GlaxoSmithKline completed a clinical trial testing Paxil in adolescents. The trial had a number: Study 329. The data were unambiguous -- the drug failed to outperform placebo on its primary measures, and adolescents on Paxil experienced significantly higher rates of suicidal thoughts and attempts.
3 likes • May 21
After being on antidepressants for many years, I'm thrilled to see they finally have a successful remedy; placebo. Miss Debbie has me headed in the right direction with nutrition not even a placebo. But Power to the Placebo!! 😆
Peptide therapy: quick fix but at what cost?
While peptide therapy is often discussed for its potential benefits, several documented risks and concerns have been identified regarding its impact on the body. These range from common physiological side effects to serious theoretical risks associated with growth-signaling compounds. The evidence that peptide therapy is "bad" for the body generally falls into four categories: 1. Growth Signaling and Cancer Risks The most significant long-term concern involves peptides that stimulate growth hormones or cell repair (such as BPC-157, GHRPs, or CJC-1295). - Tumor Promotion: Because these peptides promote cell division and the growth of new blood vessels (angiogenesis), there is a theoretical risk that they could accelerate the growth of undiagnosed or "dormant" cancer cells. - IGF-1 Levels: Peptides that increase Insulin-like Growth Factor-1 (IGF-1) have been linked in some research to a higher risk of certain cancers, as IGF-1 is a known driver of cellular proliferation. - 2. Adverse Physiological Side Effects Different peptides can trigger a variety of immediate or chronic physical issues: - Hormonal Imbalance: Synthetic peptides can disrupt the body's natural feedback loops. For example, overuse of growth hormone secretagogues can cause the body to stop producing its own growth hormone or lead to insulin resistance and elevated blood sugar levels. - Gastrointestinal Distress: FDA-approved peptides, such as GLP-1 agonists (e.g., semaglutide), commonly cause nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea, and, in rare cases, pancreatitis or bowel obstruction. - Cardiovascular Strain: Some peptides may increase blood pressure, cause water retention (edema), or lead to joint pain and "carpal tunnel-like" symptoms due to fluid buildup. - Immunogenicity: The body may recognize synthetic peptides as foreign invaders, triggering an immune response that creates "anti-drug antibodies." This can lead to allergic reactions or neutralize the body's own natural version of that peptide.
1 like • May 16
Found this on YouTube which claims an increase in the aging process from peptides https://youtu.be/E0V7jgubOfc?si=KZCI6vZVHrZYpFV1
Doing more types of exercise, not just more exercise, could help you live longer
We've long known that regular physical activity reduces the risk of premature death, but a large prospective study in BMJ Medicine adds an important nuance: variety matters independently of how much you exercise overall. Following over 111,000 participants from the Nurses' Health Study and Health Professionals Follow-Up Study for up to 34 years, researchers found that people who consistently engaged in the widest range of physical activities had 19% lower all-cause mortality compared to those with the least variety, even after controlling for total activity volume, with benefits extending across cardiovascular disease, cancer, and respiratory disease. This resonates with what I counseled patients throughout my clinical career: mixing different types of movement keeps you from burning out on any single activity, and it ensures you're stimulating different physiological systems, cardiorespiratory fitness, muscular strength, flexibility, and coordination, rather than repeatedly stressing the same pathways. Walking, running, tennis, weight training, rowing, stair climbing, and cycling all showed benefits; swimming was the exception, likely because self-reported duration poorly captures actual intensity. If your current routine leans heavily on one activity, consider this good motivation to branch out. The benefits of movement compound when you diversify.
1 like • May 2
Dr Serge, do u think we should do different exercises rather than getting our 6000+ steps per day...I'm not trying to get out of acquiring 6000+ steps a day but it does get boring 😁
1-10 of 16
Tommy Fruge
3
28points to level up
@tommy-fruge-8743
Christian Life Coach, Texas State Certified Peer Specialist, and Vietnam Veteran.

Active 8d ago
Joined Oct 21, 2025
Powered by