Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness > Diet and Weight Loss
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 08-27-2018, 08:51 AM
 
Location: SW Missouri
15,853 posts, read 34,999,650 times
Reputation: 22693

Advertisements

Typically, I eat once a day around 4 pm or sometimes later depending on how busy I am. I work HARD physically and this schedule has been one that I adopted because I found that eating bogs me down terribly. On those rare occasions when I do eat something during the day I regret it.

Currently, I am eating more than I should as demonstrated by the extra 15 pounds I am packing around.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-27-2018, 09:37 AM
 
Location: McAllen, TX
5,947 posts, read 5,390,179 times
Reputation: 6741
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djkingman View Post
This is an interesting documentary. Free if you have Amazon Prime. The Science of Fasting
I haven't seen that one yet but there is another one which I highly recommend also on Prime and this one is simply called "Fasting".

Here's the trailer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKaxPnn_ijk
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2018, 09:58 AM
 
4,927 posts, read 2,869,420 times
Reputation: 5057
Quote:
Originally Posted by gguerra View Post
I haven't seen that one yet but there is another one which I highly recommend also on Prime and this one is simply called "Fasting".

Here's the trailer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKaxPnn_ijk
Thanks for posting that. I really like Dr. Fung's videos and have watched I think most of them. If anyone has suggested that his research is flawed, I have not seen it. Nor anything suggesting that IF/OMAD is dangerous or doesn't work--as long as you get the proper nutrients and don't break the fast by adding, for example, sugar or dairy to drinks during the fast.

So, if I understand this, insulin is lowered during the fast and the body burns fat. The dead miscellany in the cells is cleaned out, cancer cells may be inhibited, the liver loses fat, and a whole bunch of other possible results that are positive. More mental clarity.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2018, 05:23 PM
 
Location: Vallejo
21,602 posts, read 24,739,140 times
Reputation: 18842
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaraZetterberg153 View Post
Thanks for posting that. I really like Dr. Fung's videos and have watched I think most of them. If anyone has suggested that his research is flawed, I have not seen it. Nor anything suggesting that IF/OMAD is dangerous or doesn't work--as long as you get the proper nutrients and don't break the fast by adding, for example, sugar or dairy to drinks during the fast.

So, if I understand this, insulin is lowered during the fast and the body burns fat. The dead miscellany in the cells is cleaned out, cancer cells may be inhibited, the liver loses fat, and a whole bunch of other possible results that are positive. More mental clarity.
It's not research.

A lot of medicine isn't research. It's clinical. Take the statement "sugar causes diabetes." That's not a scientific statement. We really have no idea what causes diabetes. We know it's associated with genetics, with a hundred or so genes being associated with increased likelihood. We know it's partially lifestyle, diet and exercise. High fat consumption, high sugar consumption, lack of exercise, and obesity are all associated with higher incidence of diabetes. Association, however, is not the same thing as causation. All we can say scientifically is sugar is associated with diabetes. That doesn't mean a clinical statement of don't eat excess sugar as it causes diabetes is per se wrong. It just means it's a clinical statement and not a scientific one. It's associated with, but there's plenty of obese people who eat way too much sugar and don't exercise and never get diabetes and plenty of people who eat well, get exercise, maintain appropriate weight who do get diabetes.

Jason Fung as far as I know doesn't do much, if any research. He makes a hypothesis, points to a few studies that lend it credibility, misrepresents studies where that would lend his hypothesis credibility, and calls it a day. He exists in the realm of pop culture pseudoscience. Honestly, nothing wrong with that -- minus the misrepresenting which there is something very, very wrong with. Minus the misrepresentation probably most of medicine is based on pseudoscience as the human body is so complex and poorly understood there's not really much of a choice in medicine. There's a ton of value in telling people to exercise, eat right, not be obese even if we frankly have no idea what causes type 2 diabetes. You have to make some clinical conjectures off what limited science there is.

The farther you go out on the limb and away from science, though, the more snake oil you get. Excessive sugar intake causes diabetes isn't going out to the very end of the limb. It's not a scientific statement but it's a smaller step out on the limb based on the science that high sugar intake is correlated with increased incidence of diabetes.

IF does not slow down the metabolism while persistent caloric deficit is going out on that limb. Science does not support that statement. In fact, it tends to do the opposite. Science shows that fasting for as little as 24 hours DOES slow down the metabolism. Maybe it does slow it down less than persistent caloric deficit. Maybe it slows it down more. Maybe there's research on it out there that I have just never come across.

As far as cancer, periodic fasting and caloric restriction are both not that far out on the limb. There's a good hundred years of research into caloric restriction in cancer treatment and development, mostly in animal studies. Of course, weight loss is usually not desired in cancer treatment. The opposite actually if you're talking about chemo/radiation therapies. Periodic fasting isn't as well studied but looks promising. Fast mimicking of may produce the same results, or better results, can caloric restriction without the caloric restriction and weight loss. It may help minimize the side effects of radiation and chemo therapies. Key word in either case is may. While they're not standard, it's not like they aren't used in traditional medicine. That's part of the clinical part of medicine as opposed to the purely scientific part of it.

Breaking a fast with any specific type of food is just snake oil. Break it with whatever you darn well feel like breaking it with. A lot of it is just GI-related. You probably don't want to break a 30-day fast with a 1,200 calorie burger with fries and three pints of beer at the local gastro pub. It probably won't go so well. If you want to break it with a glass of tea with some honey though or some fresh fruit, yeah, those are actually commonly recommended. Sugar is very easy to digest which is why it's recommended. That's just for GI reasons though. Dairy is a bit harder but if you tolerate it there's no reason not to. Don't break it on two pints of Ben and Jerry's but some cottage cheese works fine for many people.

Last edited by Malloric; 08-27-2018 at 05:45 PM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2018, 09:04 AM
 
Location: McAllen, TX
5,947 posts, read 5,390,179 times
Reputation: 6741
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malloric View Post
Science shows that fasting for as little as 24 hours DOES slow down the metabolism. Maybe it does slow it down less than persistent caloric deficit. Maybe it slows it down more. Maybe there's research on it out there that I have just never come across.
Maybe, maybe, maybe doesn't add up.

Intermittent fasting promotes adipose thermogenesis and metabolic homeostasis via VEGF-mediated alternative activation of macrophage

Fasting has been practiced for centuries by numerous cultures around the world for both health and religious reasons. MAYBE they could be all wrong about it?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2018, 11:27 AM
 
4,927 posts, read 2,869,420 times
Reputation: 5057
Quote:
Originally Posted by gguerra View Post
Maybe, maybe, maybe doesn't add up.

Intermittent fasting promotes adipose thermogenesis and metabolic homeostasis via VEGF-mediated alternative activation of macrophage

Fasting has been practiced for centuries by numerous cultures around the world for both health and religious reasons. MAYBE they could be all wrong about it?
Very amusing video, IF positive:

5 Reasons Why women Should NOT Intermittent Fast | IF for Today's Aging Woman
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=80mWv_rocvg

Last edited by KaraZetterberg153; 08-28-2018 at 11:55 AM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2018, 11:55 AM
 
Location: McAllen, TX
5,947 posts, read 5,390,179 times
Reputation: 6741
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaraZetterberg153 View Post
Very amusing video, IF positive:


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=80mWv_rocvg
It certainly does not fit everybody especially if you are not fat which is clearly demonstrated by the woman doing the video. She has no need to to do it period. I also don't think it has anything to do with gender. There will always be skeptics and people that are against it. I will say this, the results speak for themselves. Same goes for Keto. The link I posted is not biased however, it is a true scientific study. It's probably too scientific for most.

Just curious, did you watch the whole thing? I did not but I jumped to the 17-minute mark and she contradicts the title of the video. She says that women have every right to do IF? Is she saying women should or should not fast? Sorry I'm not a woman and I did not watch the whole thing.

Edit: OK, I get it now. You said IF positive and mistook it for "if it is positive" not "intermittent fasting positive", ?

Last edited by gguerra; 08-28-2018 at 12:05 PM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2018, 12:07 PM
 
4,927 posts, read 2,869,420 times
Reputation: 5057
Quote:
Originally Posted by gguerra View Post
It certainly does not fit everybody especially if you are not fat which is clearly demonstrated by the woman doing the video. She has no need to to do it period. I also don't think it has anything to do with gender. There will always be skeptics and people that are against it. I will say this, the results speak for themselves. Same goes for Keto. The link I posted is not biased however, it is a true scientific study. It's probably too scientific for most.
I like that paper you posted and reposted it on my Facebook page. Weight loss is not the most pressing concern if you go by all the YouTube videos on the subject (of IF). Even slender people can have fatty liver, cancer, dementia and a host of other things.

Clearing the body of the work of digestion for a fast every day seems to have a lot of benefits. The hard part, for me, is getting my assistant to grocery shop for me in this new way, with no items with sugar, no wine, and the accumulated habits that have to be dropped. I went through my kitchen and cleaned out all the sugar and processed foods. Hard to give up, say, strawberry preserves, but in the trash it went. My life is more important than my habits.

Right: the five points of the video I just posted are tongue-in-cheek. I think she pulls it off remarkably well.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2018, 02:40 PM
 
Location: Vallejo
21,602 posts, read 24,739,140 times
Reputation: 18842
Quote:
Originally Posted by gguerra View Post
Maybe, maybe, maybe doesn't add up.

Intermittent fasting promotes adipose thermogenesis and metabolic homeostasis via VEGF-mediated alternative activation of macrophage

Fasting has been practiced for centuries by numerous cultures around the world for both health and religious reasons. MAYBE they could be all wrong about it?
Yes, the problem with maybe. Human sacrifices have been practiced for centuries by numerous cultures around the world. That doesn't mean it's the answer to global warming. But as I said, unlike human sacrifices or the effect of IF versus CR (caloric restriction) on BMR, IF/CR are both studied and show benefits in things like certain metabolic disorders (mainly diabetes) and cancer prevention and treatment. That's a ton we don't know about them but also much we do know. And that's what that study is looking at which is primarily does IF in a mostly isocaloric state provide benefits similar to CR in vascular endothelial growth factor and WAT (white adipose tissue) browning.

That's important because VEGF is instrumental in a host of things from metabolic disorders to cancer to stroke prevention and recovery. Browning is the process of turning WAT into BAT. BAT is oxidized WAT. That's important because WAT is much more correlated with things like certain metabolic disorders and certain cancers. On the other hand, it's not all good as browning can exacerbate hypermetabolic disorders like Graves' disease.

WAT and BAT are both fat though, so specific to fat loss browning WAT doesn't mean fat loss. It just means less WAT and more BAT. Indeed, if you look at the mice in the study those on the high fat IF diet had more fat to lean mass than the mice fed a normal diet with no IF. That's probably mostly because they ate more calories. Despite the attempt to create an isocaloric state in a 2:1 IF it wasn't. On a high-fat diet the mice ate more than on a regular diet. They could have done an isocaloric study, but it would have been a different study. That particularly study looked at unrestricted versus a 2:1 IF.

That would really be a separate study and we're talking about mice so you can't tell them to eat past satiety like you could with humans. You'd have to do a restricted diet in mice to make it isocaloric. Eg if a mouse usually wants to eat 100 calories a day, you provide 80 calories a day to the non-fasting group and 120 calories a day on feeding days to the fasting mice. Hopefully they eat it all which would mean both groups eat 240 calories every three days and then you could look at the results. But that wasn't the point of the study. The point was to see whether IF would prompt similar results to CR. And it did. There was more VEGF and browning than was expected after accounting for that the IF mice ate less than the non-IF mice (regular to regular, high fat to high fat diets) That's what I meant by IF has shown promising results in studies.

Of course, there's the caveat that a mouse is not a human. Animal studies are very useful but it does not mean that one animal (a human) will react in the same way to another animal (a mouse). They probably would not react in the same way, but likely in a similar way. That is humans on a 2:1 IF would likely (see study for rational of why) also see positive results for browning and VEGF beyond the effect from calorie restriction. That is on a 2:1 IF a person may eat 2,800 calories on feeding days for a three-day average of 1,866 calories per day versus a non-IF average of 2,000 calories per day and it's likely there would be more VEGF and browning than in a group that just restricted their calories from 2,000 to 1,866. It should also go without saying that VEGF and browning are not weight loss or BMR, but I'll just explicitly say that anyway.

Last edited by Malloric; 08-29-2018 at 03:05 PM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2018, 03:17 PM
 
Location: The Driftless Area, WI
7,112 posts, read 4,950,204 times
Reputation: 17437
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaraZetterberg153 View Post
. It seems to me that the Nobel committee doesn't give prizes for inaccurate research.

Better check this out: https://matteroffactsblog.wordpress....a-nobel-prize/


Don't forget they also gave Peace Prizes to Yasir Arafat and Barack Obama. Anybody can make an occasional mistake, I guess.


In regards fasting: H.sapiens evolved in a pretty tough neighborhood- equatorial East Africa--long, brutally hot dry season and short wet rainy season. He was a hunter (maybe originally a scavenger) and would supplement his diet with the occasional weed. He didn't eat breakfast (food around the cave would attract predators at nite) and only got to eat every few days or so when he could make a kill (or find one). His metabolism evolved to be efficient under those circumstances.


The problem is, he didn't usually lived long enough for this metabolism to have much of an effect on his longevity and therefore on the evolution of longevity. We've inherited this, but it's hard to tell if it means anything for us in terms of health. It may, just by chance. Or it may not. So many other factors seem to be involved.


Research on mice says that calorie deprivation prolongs their life-- that doesn't necessarily extrapolate to us. Research also says critically ill obese pts have higher survival rates than critically ill thin pts. What do you do??? [Answer: whatever feels good to you. It probably doesn't really make a difference.]
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness > Diet and Weight Loss
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top