sen no sen
Did I talk about vaccines?
It is a response started on vital water and therefore lagged.
Dental ailments are not just simple hygiene problems, far from it!
Many people suffer from heaving, deviance and other orthodontic problems ... wisdom teeth make more than one unhappy patient scream, the reasons are more genetic than hygienic!
Genetics has a good back and is being replaced by the viruses and microbes of yesterday responsible for all the ills of this earth. However this genetics intervenes only for a limited part in our modern ills. It is weird that wisdom teeth do not make people suffer - sometimes annoy - people with a healthy lifestyle and even more VG.
Antibiotics exist in nature, long live the scoop!
Glad you learn something new
Catholic University of Louvain
Pharmacology and pharmacotherapy of anti-infectives
General pharmacology - Definition and origin of antibiotics
Antibiotics are defined as molecules capable of inhibiting growth or even killing bacteria, without affecting the host (eukaryotic cells). The main sources of antibiotics are fungi, but sometimes also bacteria. Fully synthetic antibiotics have also been available for a number of years.
Penicillin, the first antibiotic for clinical use, is produced by Penicillum notatum and its fortuitous discovery results from Fleming's observation of the inhibitory power of a colony of this fungus against S. aureus during accidental contamination of a Petri dish.
It was long believed that the production of antibiotics by fungi was a way for them to protect themselves against bacterial infection. Without denying this potential role, we now know that microorganisms in general produce numerous molecules with very variable pharmacological action. This production of molecules of no apparent interest would result from a potential for microorganisms to "try" very varied syntheses (secondary metabolites), until the moment when one of the molecules obtained gives them an advantage in the environment in which they develop. This notion has been used successfully to isolate a very large number of molecules of major interest in medicine from various natural sources.
Starting from natural molecules, however, chemical modifications are often made to improve the activity and / or modify essential pharmacokinetic parameters. Today, most antibiotics in clinical use are therefore obtained by semi-synthesis. Recently, however, advances in chemistry have made it possible to achieve total synthesis of several of them under satisfactory economic conditions.
However, it is only very recently in history that we have used them effectively.
Or excessively! Before the formulation "
Antibiotics are not automatic These were used in all sauces like the new miracle drug until we noticed a self-resistance decreasing or canceling the effect of successive catches. Natural antibiotics cannot be taken in excess when taken in the daily diet.
Janic wrote:
sen no sen
how many days have you fasted to express yourself like this? Do you rely on experience as well as other fasters where is it the result of some theoretical readings?
Yes I know friends who practice fasting (they do this during a seminar).
I have been confirmed a decrease in muscle mass (very temporary, fortunately) following the practice
a prolonged fast.
But well a large part of the fasters are not high level sportsmen, that does not pose them more problem than that.
There is confusion, most of the time between fasting and consecutive inactivity. Any inactivity decreases muscle volume (especially when it is very developed), but this is independent of fasting. Now we should agree from when does a prolonged fast begin?
From my experience, I know that even a low-calorie diet has effects on muscle mass if you do not pay particular attention to food (diet rich in protein).
Another preconceived idea! A low-calorie diet only plays on the storage of energy (fat, sugar) that has nothing to do with the protein level. Now if you consider that lowering sugars and fats without lowering the usual protein level is overprotein then we are not talking about the same thing.
Quote:
Obviously when the body has nothing more to consume it will do with what is left. But don't believe it happens after 3 days or more
I never said that the body used up its reserves after 3 days.
I mentioned that there was no impact on muscle mass within 3 days, shade.
So that beyond three days (theorem / reciprocal) there is an impact on muscle mass, which I contest from experience, specialized works on the question and confirmed by the work of the American scientist in the documentary cited.
On a prolonged fast there is a decrease in muscle mass, that's all I try to say from the start.
And I say the opposite: who is right? You who have never done it and therefore checked or we regular or occasional practitioners of these fasts?
Quote:
However, therapeutic fasts are precisely modulated according to the declared pathologies and therefore do not present any health risk, quite the contrary!
Fasting poses no health risk if it is practiced with medical supervision.
There, you will have trouble finding competent medics on the subject! However, a preliminary examination is still advised to detect any incompatible pathologies.
It is a practice which has its pros and cons, its advantages and disadvantages.
What are the disadvantages?
Fasting is becoming very fashionable in recent times, there are no people who offer internships, however, it should be remembered that fasting is a practice that is not trivial.
Many people want to fast to lose weight when in the long run it is not a very effective method.
There I can only prove you right. Fasting is not a method of losing weight, but a therapy applied to particular pathologies whose weight loss is the icing on the cake, not the cake itself! In addition, fasting is also used to gain weight during excessive underweight.
