If you want to skip the fantasy-fun read below. Just explain to me the mechanism for which estrogen involves with "fat" and "Bloating"...?!? A finger point to specific reference information will do as well... How important is estrogen in the manufacture and maintenance of fat tissue? If at all..?
Its an interesting conundrum to which there are certain indicators that usually prompt me to consider adjusting my TRT dose or incorporating ADEX. As ASIDE from constantly noting nip sensitivity, the biggest indicator is always just a fat jelly type bloat which shows up the worst in the chin and face... A BIG FAT JELLY-FACE is what I tend to notice when E2 gets above 60 for extended periods..
I would like to know more about the relationship of Estrogen and body fat. Especially when you consider that the body is like 80+% WATER. And body fat is probably more like 95% water... Or something like that. So when you consider that the only thing holding the body together is FAT, it quickly becomes interesting conversation. When you consider that fat cells are basically a bunch of mini-water balloons to which the balloon is the FAT in the cell wall holding in the "air", which is the water.
Are fat people all high estrogen folks. Or did the fat cause the estrogen.?
(Does water want to escape the fat wall? Does pressure build up? Does the body increase its demand for fat or change the way it metabolizes/METASITICIZES fat cells when the pressure gets too high? Does this promote new fat cell proliferation in order to ameliorate the situation? Does it work extra hard in fat reinforcement to contain the water, or does the pressure purge thru the cellular membrane promote the proliferation of new fat cells.?? Just how bad is it to go on a fat bender??!?)
But in short, consider that if you disabled the body's fat operational processing, you would basically wind up laying on the floor in the form of about 5 pails of water to every one pail of elements as minerals and metals. And NOTHING IN BETWEEN... So interestingly enuff, with consideration of BODY FAT which is the plague of modern sedentary man, it appears to be the primary glue that holds us together. The long carbon chains right?? Then again I bet bone has some pretty long carbon bonds too, and probably the longest. Molecularly these factors that constitute FAT appear to related to tissue density beyond the state of water/ which some call liquid. But I gander to prospect that they are not one in the same. Another topic..
Even scarier is that for every day we live in an calorie surplus of any magnitude and that we are not exerting physical workloads, we are putting resources like GH, stem cells, and other factors TO THE PRODUCTION ON NEW FAT CELLS. As opposed to building new muscle. And we are talking FAT HYPERPLASIA, and not just hypertrophy. Not to discount that most of the FAST ACTING up and down activity of fat cells would appear to be hypertrophy based. It is alarming that the more practice the body gets at generating NEW fat cells, the better it gets at it.
I recall when I first started getting my first belly area fat cells in my early twenties that the initial fat growth would push the boundaries of the existing fat cells and you could feel some of them growing or bloating up to almost the size of a marble as individual "fat pods"/ But its like they are "cells" as larger cellular conglomerates - really... I'm not sure what to call them. But they definitely deserve a name of their own. Clearly they are not "Cells" and are really a conglomeration thereof. And, they seemed to amass in spherical shaped groups with limits to their growth. As life went on I stopped noticing the large fat type orbs in the abdominal wall as I assumed the body had finally been convinced to generate new fat cells. Thus to maintain the grand sum level of fat the body was determined to possess, no longer relied on blowing up existing fat "pods" to max capacity. Keep in mind I was very athletically oriented up thru 20's, and that I have no doubt that this can occur at any younger age if sedentary lifestyle exists.
I wonder what determines the size of what a cluster of fat cells can grow to?? Do you think maybe it has to do with how long that calorie excess and fat generation period lasted?? That possibly the size of these groups of fat cells has to do with time intervals to which these "seal off" and stop growing when the excess calorie period ends?
And so which would be worse to have?. A predominance of larger fat cell groupings, or a bazillion new fat cells that did not have a lot of time to 'group up"...? In my experience to have a bunch of fat cells not grouped together makes for a larger bloat potential BLOW UP in periods of caloric excess AS TEMP HYPETROPHY.. Or lack of work demand. (The two concepts should not be confused as one-in-the-same)... Keep in mind I am not even differentiating between internal fat under the abdominal wall, etc. and general adipose tissue on top of muscle tissue exterior... I'm not pretending to be qualified to and truly this topic is far beyond the skillset of most if not all physicians.
Clearly we can see where they have attempted to use certain drugs which are designed to break down the body fats' ability to contain and hold this water as "Fat" with drugs like DNP. --- OBVIOUSLY ---- They draw the line at the action of these drugs as if their activity were to go too far, you might wind up as a pool of jelly on the floor. Clearly this process is manifested as heat as excess energy production and thermal output when these bonds break down as seen in DNP overdoses. And no, the body wont melt away to be placed in buckets or water and minerals AS death occurs and all biological activity SLOWS.. I use the term SLOWS because if left laying there on the floor in a closed environment you might be able to be placed in buckets with enough TIME...
So what would the "fat" decompose into? Carbon? After all they did call us "Carbon units" in the first Star Trek movie LOL... So I guess that would just go in the "mineral Bucket" aside from the water buckets...?
Its an interesting conundrum to which there are certain indicators that usually prompt me to consider adjusting my TRT dose or incorporating ADEX. As ASIDE from constantly noting nip sensitivity, the biggest indicator is always just a fat jelly type bloat which shows up the worst in the chin and face... A BIG FAT JELLY-FACE is what I tend to notice when E2 gets above 60 for extended periods..
I would like to know more about the relationship of Estrogen and body fat. Especially when you consider that the body is like 80+% WATER. And body fat is probably more like 95% water... Or something like that. So when you consider that the only thing holding the body together is FAT, it quickly becomes interesting conversation. When you consider that fat cells are basically a bunch of mini-water balloons to which the balloon is the FAT in the cell wall holding in the "air", which is the water.
Are fat people all high estrogen folks. Or did the fat cause the estrogen.?
(Does water want to escape the fat wall? Does pressure build up? Does the body increase its demand for fat or change the way it metabolizes/METASITICIZES fat cells when the pressure gets too high? Does this promote new fat cell proliferation in order to ameliorate the situation? Does it work extra hard in fat reinforcement to contain the water, or does the pressure purge thru the cellular membrane promote the proliferation of new fat cells.?? Just how bad is it to go on a fat bender??!?)
But in short, consider that if you disabled the body's fat operational processing, you would basically wind up laying on the floor in the form of about 5 pails of water to every one pail of elements as minerals and metals. And NOTHING IN BETWEEN... So interestingly enuff, with consideration of BODY FAT which is the plague of modern sedentary man, it appears to be the primary glue that holds us together. The long carbon chains right?? Then again I bet bone has some pretty long carbon bonds too, and probably the longest. Molecularly these factors that constitute FAT appear to related to tissue density beyond the state of water/ which some call liquid. But I gander to prospect that they are not one in the same. Another topic..
Even scarier is that for every day we live in an calorie surplus of any magnitude and that we are not exerting physical workloads, we are putting resources like GH, stem cells, and other factors TO THE PRODUCTION ON NEW FAT CELLS. As opposed to building new muscle. And we are talking FAT HYPERPLASIA, and not just hypertrophy. Not to discount that most of the FAST ACTING up and down activity of fat cells would appear to be hypertrophy based. It is alarming that the more practice the body gets at generating NEW fat cells, the better it gets at it.
I recall when I first started getting my first belly area fat cells in my early twenties that the initial fat growth would push the boundaries of the existing fat cells and you could feel some of them growing or bloating up to almost the size of a marble as individual "fat pods"/ But its like they are "cells" as larger cellular conglomerates - really... I'm not sure what to call them. But they definitely deserve a name of their own. Clearly they are not "Cells" and are really a conglomeration thereof. And, they seemed to amass in spherical shaped groups with limits to their growth. As life went on I stopped noticing the large fat type orbs in the abdominal wall as I assumed the body had finally been convinced to generate new fat cells. Thus to maintain the grand sum level of fat the body was determined to possess, no longer relied on blowing up existing fat "pods" to max capacity. Keep in mind I was very athletically oriented up thru 20's, and that I have no doubt that this can occur at any younger age if sedentary lifestyle exists.
I wonder what determines the size of what a cluster of fat cells can grow to?? Do you think maybe it has to do with how long that calorie excess and fat generation period lasted?? That possibly the size of these groups of fat cells has to do with time intervals to which these "seal off" and stop growing when the excess calorie period ends?
And so which would be worse to have?. A predominance of larger fat cell groupings, or a bazillion new fat cells that did not have a lot of time to 'group up"...? In my experience to have a bunch of fat cells not grouped together makes for a larger bloat potential BLOW UP in periods of caloric excess AS TEMP HYPETROPHY.. Or lack of work demand. (The two concepts should not be confused as one-in-the-same)... Keep in mind I am not even differentiating between internal fat under the abdominal wall, etc. and general adipose tissue on top of muscle tissue exterior... I'm not pretending to be qualified to and truly this topic is far beyond the skillset of most if not all physicians.
Clearly we can see where they have attempted to use certain drugs which are designed to break down the body fats' ability to contain and hold this water as "Fat" with drugs like DNP. --- OBVIOUSLY ---- They draw the line at the action of these drugs as if their activity were to go too far, you might wind up as a pool of jelly on the floor. Clearly this process is manifested as heat as excess energy production and thermal output when these bonds break down as seen in DNP overdoses. And no, the body wont melt away to be placed in buckets or water and minerals AS death occurs and all biological activity SLOWS.. I use the term SLOWS because if left laying there on the floor in a closed environment you might be able to be placed in buckets with enough TIME...
So what would the "fat" decompose into? Carbon? After all they did call us "Carbon units" in the first Star Trek movie LOL... So I guess that would just go in the "mineral Bucket" aside from the water buckets...?
