活力藥師網

生理期減肥法

by

網路上不知道能什麼時候開始流行所謂生理期減肥法，一時之間好像變成女性朋友不可不知的重大議題，但是生理期真的能夠對減肥有幫助嗎???

我們就來探討一下吧，生理期對女性朋友相當重要，有經驗的醫療人員甚至可以從月經的狀態來推斷女性朋友的健康狀態，月經正常的女性朋友一定是滿臉春風，那我們就來分析一下吧!!

  1. 濾泡期 – 從月經來的第一天開始，大約10~14天，這段時間的新陳代謝比較好，盡量避免攝取過多熱量的食物，多多補充含鐵食物。
  2. 排卵期 – 當濾泡成熟以後，會開始排卵，排出卵以後的濾泡，就開始變成黃體，也就開始進入黃體期
  3. 黃體期 – 大約是第14天到第28天.

這是月經週期教科書的分法，正常的月經週期為28天，在這28天中該怎麼控制體重呢??

  1. 經期(生理期：正常是七天,這段時間會因為水分的滯留，而使身體顯得臃腫，而且也會食慾變的比較好，甚至還有些人會變的很想吃甜食.
  2. 瘦身期 – 生理期後一周最適合減肥，加強飲食控制最易看到成效，但是我懷疑那是因為之前的水腫，而使水分排出，所以會減少一到兩公斤，感覺上能在一個星期內減少一到兩公斤很棒，其實你如果比較一下，體重應該跟經期前差不多才對。
  3. 緩慢期 – 生理期後第二周要好好控制食慾並增加運動量，多吃富含高纖維食物。
  4. 停滯期 – 生理期前一周幾乎已經沒有效果了，飲食一定要清淡一點，不然等到生理期你又會胖了。

經過這樣的分析，個人認為生理期減肥法有點是安慰自己的想法，但是也有人有效，因為信念是成功的不二法門!!!

 

下一篇威而鋼犀利士樂威壯的使用方式

你也許會喜歡以下文章

威而鋼犀利士樂威壯的使用方式

by

威而鋼，犀利士，樂威壯可以說是老男人的寶物，這個寶物帶在身邊，一但需要發揮效果的時候，那可真是呼風喚雨，玩ｉｔ的都知道什麼是百年老問題，什麼sendmail要怎麼開relay啦，awstats要怎麼安裝呀，相同的，我通常一天要回答很多次這樣的問題﹔到底這三種藥哪種好，我曾經跟一個輝瑞的業務聊天，她說威而鋼市佔率高，是因為威而鋼真的好；我當場就告訴她，威而鋼賣的好是因為禮來的行銷濫，拜耳是根本沒有行銷可言，你們輝瑞銀子多，誰不曉得你們在市場上都用錢把醫生砸到父母的名字都忘了．

高藥師簡單的來分一下這三種藥，今天不講藥理也不說學術，要真正的從實用面來出發，我把這三種藥分成快硬久，也就是說威而鋼硬，犀利士久，樂威壯快；如果以使用場所來分，威而鋼在家用，犀利士去大陸用，樂威壯在夜店用；以使用頻率來分，威而鋼大概一個禮拜用一次，犀利士一個月用一次，樂威壯可以天天用．以使用者的年齡來分，威而鋼大概是五十歲以上使用，犀利士大約三十歲到五十歲，樂威壯什麼年紀都可以用．

至於安全性的問題，這些藥物都在美國應過大型的臨床試驗，死亡率都非常低，都可以安心使用。

有任何問題歡迎E-mail來問,謝謝!!!

 

下一篇菌種的介紹

你也許會喜歡以下文章

益生菌系列三之菌種的介紹

by

說起這益生菌，市場上可說是五花八門，但不是所有的菌種都有一樣的效果，所以今天高藥師就來介紹一下益生菌的菌種

Lactobacillus paracasei，也就是LP菌，益生菌的先鋒，市場上第一個打益生菌的樂亦康，就是主要添加LP菌，但是在LP菌的這麼多菌株中，並不是每一菌株都有效，經過長時間的實驗，才確定Lactobacillus paracasei 33，這一株菌，有最棒的效果，稱之為Lp33，也因為良好的效果，統一集團才把這個Lp33菌加入他們的優酪乳裡面，你到7-11都可以買到。

Lactobacillus Fermentum，也就是LF菌，根據一篇2005年的醫學報導，Lactobacillus Fermentum用於治療異位性皮膚炎之效果相當優良，實驗中有26個病患服用LF菌，27個服用安慰劑。(但根據我個人經驗，效果很爛，千萬不要買含有此菌種的產品）

Clin Exp Allergy. 2005 Dec ;35 (12):1557-64 16393321
Clinical effects of probiotics are associated with increased interferon-gamma responses in very young children with atopic dermatitis.
Background We recently demonstrated that administration of probiotics resulted in significant clinical improvement in very young children with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD). The purpose of this study was to determine the underlying immunological effects that are associated with these apparent clinical benefits. Methods Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) were isolated from children (n=53) at baseline and at the end of an 8-week supplementation period during which they received a probiotic (Lactobacillus fermentum PCCtrade mark) (n=26) or a placebo (n=27). A further sample was collected at 16 weeks (8 weeks after ceasing the supplement). Cytokine (IL-5, IL-6, IL-10, IL-13, IFN-gamma and TNF-alpha) responses to allergens (egg ovalbumin (OVA), beta lactoglobulin (BLG), house dust mite (HDM)), vaccines (tetanus toxoid (TT)), diphtheria toxoid (DT)), intestinal flora (heat-killed Lactobacillus (HKLB)), heat-killed Staphylococcus aureus (HKSA), Staphylococcus aureus enterotoxin B (SEB) and mitogen (phytohaemaglutinin (PHA)) were compared. Results The administration of probiotics was associated with a significant increase in T-helper type 1(Th1-type) cytokine IFN-gamma responses to PHA and SEB at the end of the supplementation period (week 8: P=0.004 and 0.046) as well as 8 weeks after ceasing supplementation (week 16: P=0.005 and 0.021) relative to baseline levels of response. No significant changes were seen in the placebo group. The increase in IFN-gamma responses to SEB was directly proportional to the decrease in the severity of AD (r=-0.445, P=0.026) over the intervention period. At the end of the supplementation period (week 8) children receiving probiotics showed significantly higher TNF-alpha responses to HKLB (P=0.018) and HKSA (P=0.011) but this was no longer evident when supplementation ceased (week 16). Although IL-13 responses to OVA were significantly reduced in children receiving probiotics after 8 weeks (P=0.008), there were no other effects on allergen-specific responses, and this effect was not sustained after ceasing supplementation (week 16). There were no effects on vaccine-specific responses, or on responses to any of the stimuli assessed. Conclusion The improvement in AD severity with probiotic treatment was associated with significant increases in the capacity for Th1 IFN-gamma responses and altered responses to skin and enteric flora. This effect was still evident 2 months after the supplementation was ceased. The lack of consistent effects on allergen-specific responses suggests that the effects of probiotics may be mediated through other independent pathways, which need to be explored further.

Lactobacillus Rhamnosus GG，也就是LGG菌，是相當有名的一隻菌株，是屬於鼠李糖乳酸桿菌的菌種，醫學上對於它的研究資料相當的多。芬蘭的科學家曾經在世界知名的Lancet研究期刊l發表了重要的研究成果，他們選定具有異位性體質家族病史的159位孕婦，其中治療組孕婦在生產前2-4週就需每日服用二顆內含一百億單位的LGG菌，產後如有餵母奶的婦女仍需繼續服用，若沒餵母奶的嬰兒則開始餵食LGG菌至嬰兒六個月大。結果共有132位孕婦完成研究並追蹤直到其小孩滿二歲為止，研究發現，餵食益生菌治療組的64位婦女的小孩中只有15位在二歲前出現異位性皮膚炎的症狀；而對照組68位婦女的小孩則有31位在二歲前出現異位性皮膚炎，因此服用LGG菌似乎具有顯著的預防異位性皮膚炎發生的效果。

Lactobacillus johnsonii，也就是LJ菌，我稍微搜尋一下，並沒有國際醫學上的發表，但是在國內台大有做實驗，只是不知道這樣的報告能不能算數。不過在我的臨床經驗，對於蕁麻疹，異位性皮膚炎還不錯。

Lactobacillus paracasei Collins et al. 1989, sp. nov.
Type strain: strain ATCC 25302 = CCUG 32212 = CIP 103918 = DSM 5622 = IFO (now NBRC) 15889 = JCM 8130 = LMG 13087 = NCIMB 700151 (formerly NCDO 151).
Reference: COLLINS (M.D.), PHILLIPS (B.A.) and ZANONI (P.): Deoxyribonucleic acid homology studies of Lactobacillus casei, Lactobacillus paracasei sp. nov., subsp. paracasei and subsp. tolerans, and Lactobacillus rhamnosus sp. nov., comb. nov. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol., 1989, 39, 105-108.

—> Lactobacillus paracasei nom. rejic.
Reference: DICKS (L.M.T.), Du PLESSIS (E.M.), DELLAGLIO (F.) and LAUER (E.): Reclassification of Lactobacillus casei subsp. casei ATCC 393 and Lactobacillus rhamnosus ATCC 15820 as Lactobacillus zeae nom. rev., designation of ATCC 334 as the neotype of L. casei subsp. casei, and rejection of the name Lactobacillus paracasei. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol., 1996, 46, 337-340.
Original article in IJSEM Online

Note 1: According to Rule 56a of the International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria (1990 revision), only the Judicial Commission can place a name on the list of rejected names. Therefore, this proposal is provisional and needs to be awarded by the Judicial Commission.

Note 2: In a previous paper, Dellaglio et al. 1991 [1] requested that ATCC 334 be designated in place of ATCC 393 as the neotype of Lactobacillus casei subsp. casei and that Lactobacillus paracasei be rejected as a synonym of Lactobacillus casei, as the latter would be defined by the proposed neotype. The Judicial Commission concluded that there is not enough basis for concern about confusion leading to serious consequences in industrial microbiology to justify awarding an exception to the Rules and voted to deny the request [2].
References:
1 DELLAGLIO (F.), DICKS (L.M.T.), Du TOIT (M.) and TORRIANI (S.): Designation of ATCC 334 in place of ATCC 393 (NCDO 161) as the neotype strain of Lactobacillus casei subsp. casei and rejection of the name Lactobacillus paracasei (Collins et al., 1989). Request for an opinion. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol., 1991, 41, 340-342.
2 WAYNE (L.G.): Actions of the Judicial Commission of the International Committee on Systematic Bacteriology on requests for opinions published between January 1985 and July 1993. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol., 1994, 44, 177-178.

Note 3: The proposal of Dicks et al. 1996, is sustained by Mori et al. 1997 [1], and by the Subcommittee on the taxonomy of Bifidobacterium, Lactobacillus and related organisms [2, 3].
References:
1 MORI (K.), YAMAZAKI (K.), ISHIYAMA (T.), KATSUMATA (M.), KOBAYASHI (K.), KAWAI (Y.), INOUE (N.) and SHINANO (H.): Comparative sequence analyses of the genes coding for 16S rRNA of Lactobacillus casei-related taxa. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol., 1997, 47, 54-57.
Original article by Mori et al. 1997 in IJSEM Online
2 BIAVATI (B.): International Committee on Systematic Bacteriology. Subcommittee on the taxonomy of the Bifidobacterium, Lactobacillus and related organisms. Minutes of the meetings, 26 and 29 August 1996, Budapest, Hungary. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol., 2001, 51, 257-258.
Original article by Biavati 2001 in IJSEM Online (PDF Format)
3 KLEIN (G.): International Committee on Systematic Bacteriology. Subcommittee on the taxonomy of Bifidobacterium, Lactobacillus and related organisms. Minutes of the meetings, 22 and 23 September 1999, Veldhoven, The Netherlands. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol., 2001, 51, 259-261.
Original article by Klein 2001 in IJSEM Online (PDF Format)

Note 4: Dellaglio et al. request that the strains of Lactobacillus casei and Lactobacillus paracasei Collins et al. 1989 be united into a single taxon, Lactobacillus casei.
Reference: DELLAGLIO (F.), FELIS (G.E.) and TORRIANI (S.): The status of the species Lactobacillus casei (Orla-Jensen 1916) Hansen and Lessel 1971 and Lactobacillus paracasei Collins et al. 1989. Request for an Opinion. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol., 2002, 52, 285-287.
Original article in IJSEM Online

Lactobacillus paracasei subsp. paracasei Collins et al. 1989, subsp. nov.
Type strain: strain ATCC 25302 = CCUG 32212 = CIP 103918 = DSM 5622 = IFO (now NBRC) 15889 = JCM 8130 = LMG 13087 = NCIMB 700151 (formerly NCDO 151).
Reference: COLLINS (M.D.), PHILLIPS (B.A.) and ZANONI (P.): Deoxyribonucleic acid homology studies of Lactobacillus casei, Lactobacillus paracasei sp. nov., subsp. paracasei and subsp. tolerans, and Lactobacillus rhamnosus sp. nov., comb. nov. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol., 1989, 39, 105-108.

Note: The taxon Lactobacillus paracasei subsp. paracasei Collins et al. 1989, encompasses the type strain of Lactobacillus casei subsp. alactosus Mills and Lessel 1973 (Approved Lists 1980) and the type strain of Lactobacillus casei subsp. pseudoplantarum Abo-Elnaga and Kandler 1965 (Approved Lists 1980).

Lactobacillus fermentum Beijerinck 1901, species.
Type strain: strain ATCC 14931 = CCUG 30138 = CIP 102980 = DSM 20052 = IFO (now NBRC) 15885 = JCM 1173 = LMG 6902 = NCCB 46038 = NCIMB 11840 (formerly NCDO 1750) = NRRL B-4524.
Synonyms: “Bacillus δ” von Freudenreich 1895, “Bacillus casei δ” von Freudenreich and Thöni 1904, “Lactobacterium fermentum” (Beijerinck 1901) van Steenberge 1920.
Etymology: L. neut. n. fermentum (nominative in apposition), that which causes fermentation, leaven, ferment.
References: SKERMAN (V.B.D.), McGOWAN (V.) and SNEATH (P.H.A.) (editors): Approved Lists of Bacterial Names. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol., 1980, 30, 225-420. [BEIJERINCK (M.W.): Sur les ferments lactiques de l’industrie. Archives Néerlandaises des Sciences Exactes et Naturelles (Section 2), 1901, 6, 212-243.]

Lactobacillus johnsonii Fujisawa et al. 1992, sp. nov.
Type strain: strain ATCC 33200 = CCUG 30725 = CIP 103620 = DSM 10533 = JCM 2012 = VPI 7960.
Reference: FUJISAWA (T.), BENNO (Y.), YAESHIMA (T.) and MITSUOKA (T.): Taxonomic study of the Lactobacillus acidophilus group, with recognition of Lactobacillus gallinarum sp. nov. and Lactobacillus johnsonii sp. nov. and synonymy of Lactobacillus acidophilus group A3 (Johnson et al. 1980) with the type strain of Lactobacillus amylovorus (Nakamura 1981). Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol., 1992, 42, 487-491.

Lactobacillus rhamnosus (Hansen 1968) Collins et al. 1989, comb. nov.
Type strain: strain ATCC 7469 = CCUG 21452 = CIP A157 = DSM 20021 = IFO (now NBRC) 3425 = JCM 1136 = LMG 6400 = NCAIM B.01147 = NCCB 46033 = NCIMB 6375 (formerly NCDO 243) = NCTC 12953 = NRRL B-442 = VKM B-574.
Basonym: ¤ Lactobacillus casei subsp. rhamnosus Hansen 1968 (Approved Lists 1980).
Reference: COLLINS (M.D.), PHILLIPS (B.A.) and ZANONI (P.): Deoxyribonucleic acid homology studies of Lactobacillus casei, Lactobacillus paracasei sp. nov., subsp. paracasei and subsp. tolerans, and Lactobacillus rhamnosus sp. nov., comb. nov. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol., 1989, 39, 105-108.

Note: In the paper by Collins et al. 1989, Lactobacillus rhamnosus is proposed as a new species.

 

下一篇其他疾病造成的便秘

你也許會喜歡以下文章