View Full Version : Radio Frequency Slimming Machines
Prae,certainly some competitors could be using these devices to get shredded?Surely your wife knows a few things about them?
Praetorian
08-09-2014, 10:33 PM
I wouldnt out too much faith in those.
P
Apparently the science backs it up?
Apparently the science backs it up?
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3664404/
There is also CoolSculpting,which freezes fat which is then eliminated naturally.
Praetorian
09-09-2014, 07:43 PM
Proof is in the pudding..not a study...show me before and after of someone using only that for fat loss. You dont think every person in the fitness industry would be using this if it worked?
P
Proof is in the pudding..not a study...show me before and after of someone using only that for fat loss. You dont think every person in the fitness industry would be using this if it worked?
P
Roberta Segar who is a former powerlifting champion and owner of a Gold's franchise here in Calgary has a swanky clinic on the south side and she offers CoolSculpting.Thibodeau over a T-Nation offered some thoughts about fat manipulation and raising the temperature in certain parts of the body a little ways back.Maybe those old fashioned butt belts and steam chambers had some merit?The RF waves heat the water in the cells,the fat cells die....cool sculpting freezes them,and they die....
steve_d
10-09-2014, 12:17 PM
Roberta Segar who is a former powerlifting champion and owner of a Gold's franchise here in Calgary has a swanky clinic on the south side and she offers CoolSculpting.Thibodeau over a T-Nation offered some thoughts about fat manipulation and raising the temperature in certain parts of the body a little ways back.Maybe those old fashioned butt belts and steam chambers had some merit?The RF waves heat the water in the cells,the fat cells die....cool sculpting freezes them,and they die....
Money to be made by doing stuff that make people feel is an easy way. Doesn't mean it works! People will always shell out lots of money on miracle marketing type stuff. Even most of the supplements on the market or overpriced stuff that won't do 90% of what it claims it will. For those that get benefit, most is due to placebo, or being in the right mind set. IE - take this supplement, and all of a sudden you feel compelled to eat right and exercise. So did the supplement work? Well, sorta - if it made you do what you couldn't do otherwise.
If those techniques worked, you'd hear about it WAY more. And everyone and their neighbour would be trying to make money off of it. I hear more about an acai berry than I do these fat melting freezing techniques -therefore likely as effective as a berry.
They were approved for use in 2012 iirc.
Looks like gypsy magic to me
Praetorian
10-09-2014, 09:50 PM
Roberta Segar who is a former powerlifting champion and owner of a Gold's franchise here in Calgary has a swanky clinic on the south side and she offers CoolSculpting.Thibodeau over a T-Nation offered some thoughts about fat manipulation and raising the temperature in certain parts of the body a little ways back.Maybe those old fashioned butt belts and steam chambers had some merit?The RF waves heat the water in the cells,the fat cells die....cool sculpting freezes them,and they die....
She makes money on it and that the argument that it works....really? I always take Tnation articles with a grain of salt...some great authors i love but a tonne of hokey pokey shit too.
I dont buy it sorry...marketing hype...and oh yes there is a study out there to prove everything works....but how relevant is it?
P
Here is another use,treating skin laxity,you might have noticed this as you passed the big five oh Prae.:)
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3030214/
steve_d
12-09-2014, 07:05 AM
Here is another use,treating skin laxity,you might have noticed this as you passed the big five oh Prae.:)
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3030214/
Just because I am slightly curious... I went and looked at this paper in some detail...
The statistical analysis section doesn't describe in enough detail what was done. The methods are weak in terms of what I do. It might be standard for this type of journal but doesn't make it right. They are vague in what they refer to as a 'good result'. They make use of the wrong statistical tests. They report statistical results using notation that isn't standard. It isn't all bad though. Had they used proper methods, they likely would have similar findings. However with a sample of 33, and reporting only a subset of 'results' out of what seems to be an endless number of possible comparisons, you have to wonder how much of the analysis was data fishing as opposed to formal tests that the study was initially powered to detect. In any case, even if the effects true, I am not completely convinced of the clinical relevance of the differences they found. Table 1 would seem that on average the differences were hovering around minor to visible change, but nowhere near an obvious change to significant change. Same with patient satisfaction being in the 'low to somewhat range' on average.
Rather than showing means here, if they showed '% of the 33 people who were satisfied / highly satisfied' you would likely have results <10-20%. And of those, it is likely that the effects were due to placebo in most. You sign up for a study and expect good things, and perpahs modify your lifestyle in just the slightest of ways enough to actually not the minor differences seen.
I was however impressed that they noted greater change with greater temperature. So it obviously biologically plausible for the effects to be there... The problem is it doesn't seem in this case that you can do too much to combat mother nature using this type of treatment keeping everything else constant. A larger study might be helpful to make more conclusive statements, although I am still guessing the effect size to be on the low end of what people would want to see. Certainly much lower than going on even a very non-strict diet for a few months. In fact, most of the results could be reproduced after 3-4 weeks of dieting. Or even just 3-4 days of drinking more water!
Just because I am slightly curious... I went and looked at this paper in some detail...
The statistical analysis section doesn't describe in enough detail what was done. The methods are weak in terms of what I do. It might be standard for this type of journal but doesn't make it right. They are vague in what they refer to as a 'good result'. They make use of the wrong statistical tests. They report statistical results using notation that isn't standard. It isn't all bad though. Had they used proper methods, they likely would have similar findings. However with a sample of 33, and reporting only a subset of 'results' out of what seems to be an endless number of possible comparisons, you have to wonder how much of the analysis was data fishing as opposed to formal tests that the study was initially powered to detect. In any case, even if the effects true, I am not completely convinced of the clinical relevance of the differences they found. Table 1 would seem that on average the differences were hovering around minor to visible change, but nowhere near an obvious change to significant change. Same with patient satisfaction being in the 'low to somewhat range' on average.
Rather than showing means here, if they showed '% of the 33 people who were satisfied / highly satisfied' you would likely have results <10-20%. And of those, it is likely that the effects were due to placebo in most. You sign up for a study and expect good things, and perpahs modify your lifestyle in just the slightest of ways enough to actually not the minor differences seen.
I was however impressed that they noted greater change with greater temperature. So it obviously biologically plausible for the effects to be there... The problem is it doesn't seem in this case that you can do too much to combat mother nature using this type of treatment keeping everything else constant. A larger study might be helpful to make more conclusive statements, although I am still guessing the effect size to be on the low end of what people would want to see. Certainly much lower than going on even a very non-strict diet for a few months. In fact, most of the results could be reproduced after 3-4 weeks of dieting. Or even just 3-4 days of drinking more water!
Certainly diet will always be the main factor in bringing about change.Problem being when you get older the skin might not tighten up enough to your liking,Zane mentioned this years ago.These modalities may be more suited to delivering the finishing touches.Getting body fat low enough to clearly reveal the midsection can introduce changes in the face of an older person that may not be desirable.I see this as touch up work.
steve_d
12-09-2014, 08:46 AM
Certainly diet will always be the main factor in bringing about change.Problem being when you get older the skin might not tighten up enough to your liking,Zane mentioned this years ago.These modalities may be more suited to delivering the finishing touches.Getting body fat low enough to clearly reveal the midsection can introduce changes in the face of an older person that may not be desirable.I see this as touch up work.
for sure. Can only defy getting older so much though. Is it worth it? To some maybe! Maybe I'll change my tune when I hit my 40s... Although I'd rather get the body fat low + add some botox to my face instead of staying a bit plumper and relying on this for my waist... Or just stay the same and wear a shirt :)
for sure. Can only defy getting older so much though. Is it worth it? To some maybe! Maybe I'll change my tune when I hit my 40s... Although I'd rather get the body fat low + add some botox to my face instead of staying a bit plumper and relying on this for my waist... Or just stay the same and wear a shirt :)
Botox scares me to death.Snow in Calgary.Weight climbing.....
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.1 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.