I just finished a 48 hour intermittent fast (IF)

[robblok]

4 hours ago, WaveHunter said:

Glad we agree that muscle loss when keto-adapted is a myth.  Most people don't understand this and criticize keto on this basis. 

 

Just to be clear though, it's not entirely a myth.  You have to be in a ketogenic state long enough for hormonal changes to occur or else you can indeed loose muscle. You must be "keto-adapted", not merely in ketosis.

 

Merely getting into ketosis is not the same as becoming keto-adapted.  If you water fast to get into ketosis, and do it from a carb-fed state, it takes at least 3 days in order for glycogen stores in the liver to be depleted, and during that time proteins will be catabolized. If you don't fast but just do a ketogenic diet, it will take even longer.  The longer it takes to get fully into ketosis, the more protein will be catabolized.

 

During a water fast, It's not a big deal in terms of muscle loss because the autophagic response to fasting will mostly spare essential proteins (like muscle) and scavenge for less important (dysfunctional) intracellular proteins, but the longer it takes you to get into ketosis, the more essential proteins will start to become catabolized. 

 

It's not really a big issue though.  Even if it takes you a week to get into ketosis, the actual muscle you will loose can easily be restored by a week or two back in the gym.

 

The big issue for most people though is repeatedly go in and out of ketosis even in the most minor way (i.e.: cheat by eating a cookie)  If you do this on a regular basis, you risk burning unacceptable amounts of muscle.  To become truly keto-adapted, you have to commit to doing it right, or not doing it at all.

 

As for keto being "optimal" or not for muscle growth, I think that would really depend on an individual's circumstances and goals.

 

Keto is never optimal for muscle growth, but not everyone wants muscle growth if maximum muscle is what you want then keto is not the tool.

 

Having said that if you like keto do it even if its not optimal. I do exercises that are NOT optimal for certain muscles but I do them as i prefer them over the other exercise that might be better.  Its all about consistency and if keto is your thing then why moan if you gain less muscle, who knows if you did not do keto you might have gained fat as you don't know how to eat otherwise.

 

Point being optimal and best is nice but consistency rules.

 

I am trying to learn kettle bell swings as they are the best burn for calories.. but if I dont like them them i would not do them even if not optimal.

 

Unfortunately i won't be training for a week. My body is breaking down, almost every exercise I do is giving me trouble. I pull muscles all the time at this moment. Maybe after 4 months of non stop pushing the enveloppe its time for a week of deload. I hate it I dont want it but today when i tried training the first exercise gave me trouble in my back.. then the second in my chest.. and my strength was going down. So maybe its time for a week of not training. 

 

This is actually the first time ever that i noticed something like this. But also I never pushed it as hard as I did now with this program and the extra loaded carries plus being on a caloric deficit. 

[Kohsamida]

On 4/15/2019 at 12:10 PM, FracturedRabbit said:

1. Atkins isn't Keto
2. The references are at least ten years old; science has moved on. I could provide you with endless references to the benefits of low carb diets.
3. Still not provided a reference to long term health problems of keto/low carb. Don't bother, I have friends who have been on it for years and are extremely healthy, and I am massively more healthy than I was two years ago.
4. Gregor is all about a plant based diet, that it is fine if that is your thing; but plant based eating has the same potential problem with carbs (see graphic).

Here's a fact. Excessive carbohydrate intake (irrespective of nutrition source) leads to insulin resistance, leads to metabolic syndrome, leads to diabetes (and heart disease and Alzheimer's). Limiting your carbohydrate intake is good for your health.

To Fractured Rabbit and anyone else living in Jomtien/Pratumnak:  Can any of you recommend restaurants that can accommodate keto or low-carb?

 

Just moved here and need help finding a place.  I don’t care if they focus on keto menus (and doubt any restaurants in Thailand do), but just want to find a place that I can say “low carb”, and they’ll make a low carb meal for me without looking at me funny.

[Kohsamida]

15 hours ago, robblok said:

Keto is never optimal for muscle growth, but not everyone wants muscle growth if maximum muscle is what you want then keto is not the tool.

 

Having said that if you like keto do it even if its not optimal. I do exercises that are NOT optimal for certain muscles but I do them as i prefer them over the other exercise that might be better.  Its all about consistency and if keto is your thing then why moan if you gain less muscle, who knows if you did not do keto you might have gained fat as you don't know how to eat otherwise.

 

Point being optimal and best is nice but consistency rules.

 

I am trying to learn kettle bell swings as they are the best burn for calories.. but if I dont like them them i would not do them even if not optimal.

 

Unfortunately i won't be training for a week. My body is breaking down, almost every exercise I do is giving me trouble. I pull muscles all the time at this moment. Maybe after 4 months of non stop pushing the enveloppe its time for a week of deload. I hate it I dont want it but today when i tried training the first exercise gave me trouble in my back.. then the second in my chest.. and my strength was going down. So maybe its time for a week of not training. 

 

This is actually the first time ever that i noticed something like this. But also I never pushed it as hard as I did now with this program and the extra loaded carries plus being on a caloric deficit. 

Sounds like over-training to me.  Taking a week off sounds smart.

 

Kettlebells are great though!  I’ve been using them for about 4 years now.  Believe it or not I started using them when i was having real painful lower back problems and an MRI revealed three ruptured disks!  It was so bad I consulted a neurosurgeon.  After reviewing my MRI, he said it wasn’t bad enough for surgery and suggested I try kettlebells to rehab my back!

 

At first I was dumbfounded by his advice but he also had ruptured disks from martial arts (which is how I probably got mine since I’ve been doing that aggressively for 10 years now).  He assured me it was the best way to fix my issues, and when he patiently explained the biomechanics of how the lower back works, and the unique way that kettlebell swings interacted, I was sold.  He referred me to a really good KB coach and the rest is history. 

 

Well, long story short, he was right!  In my opinion, whether or not you have back problems, Kettlebells is one of the best all around exercise systems there is because it not only can fix back issues but is an excellent all around systems of resistance and aerobic training there is.

 

The only thing I’d suggest is that you find a seriously competent coach in the beginning to teach you proper swing technique.  You can really screw up your back if you don’t.  No video off YouTube is going to take the place of an experienced coach.

 

BTW, there is a really good online KB store in Bangkok selling high-quality kettlebells at very reasonable cost, and they can probably refer you to a coach/trainer in your area.  The web address is https://www.bangkokkettlebells.com/

 

Thats where I bought mine when I moved here.  The ones sold on Lazada are crap and ridiculously over-priced.

[robblok]

12 minutes ago, Kohsamida said:

Sounds like over-training to me.  Taking a week off sounds smart.

 

Kettlebells are great though!  I’ve been using them for about 4 years now.  Believe it or not I started using them when i was having real painful lower back problems and an MRI revealed three ruptured disks!  It was so bad I consulted a neurosurgeon.  After reviewing my MRI, he said it wasn’t bad enough for surgery and suggested I try kettlebells to rehab my back!

 

At first I was dumbfounded by his advice but he also had ruptured disks from martial arts (which is how I probably got mine since I’ve been doing that aggressively for 10 years now).  He assured me it was the best way to fix my issues, and when he patiently explained the biomechanics of how the lower back works, and the unique way that kettlebell swings interacted, I was sold.  He referred me to a really good KB coach and the rest is history. 

 

Well, long story short, he was right!  In my opinion, whether or not you have back problems, Kettlebells is one of the best all around exercise systems there is because it not only can fix back issues but is an excellent all around systems of resistance and aerobic training there is.

 

The only thing I’d suggest is that you find a seriously competent coach in the beginning to teach you proper swing technique.  You can really screw up your back if you don’t.  No video off YouTube is going to take the place of an experienced coach.

 

BTW, there is a really good online KB store in Bangkok selling high-quality kettlebells at very reasonable cost, and they can probably refer you to a coach/trainer in your area.  The web address is https://www.bangkokkettlebells.com/

 

Thats where I bought mine when I moved here.  The ones sold on Lazada are crap and ridiculously over-priced.

I use kettlebells already got iron master quick lock ones. I wanted to learn a good kettlebell swing from a coach but have no idea where. It was already on my to do list.

 

And yes I think its over training so i am going to slow down a bit for a week.  I use the Kettlebells for loaded carries. I can add or subtract weight from them. 

[Kohsamida]

23 minutes ago, robblok said:

I use kettlebells already got iron master quick lock ones. I wanted to learn a good kettlebell swing from a coach but have no idea where. It was already on my to do list.

 

And yes I think its over training so i am going to slow down a bit for a week.  I use the Kettlebells for loaded carries. I can add or subtract weight from them. 

You might want to call that Bangkok KB store for a referral to a coach/trainer.  The owner was telling me that they sell KB's to most of the gyms in Thailand, and he sounds really enthusiastic about kettlebells (not just a merchant) so I'm guessing they'd be a good source for a referral.

[VincentRJ]

Hey! I've learned something. I didn't know what a kettlebell is. I searched the internet and found the following detailed article with lots of advice.

https://scdn.onnit.com/digital-downloads/ebooks/BeginnersGuideToKettlebells.pdf

 

The article begins with the following, amusing statement.

"We’re willing to bet that most people get interested in the kettlebell for one reason: it looks damn cool." ????

 

But the article, with videos, then goes on to give what appears to be very informative advice.

[Kohsamida]

1 hour ago, VincentRJ said:

Hey! I've learned something. I didn't know what a kettlebell is. I searched the internet and found the following detailed article with lots of advice.

https://scdn.onnit.com/digital-downloads/ebooks/BeginnersGuideToKettlebells.pdf

 

The article begins with the following, amusing statement.

"We’re willing to bet that most people get interested in the kettlebell for one reason: it looks damn cool." ????

 

But the article, with videos, then goes on to give what appears to be very informative advice.

They do provide a pretty amazing and versatile aerobic workout that, in my opinion, give you the best aerobic workout for the least time spent.  In my opinion, much better than a treadmill, elliptical trainer or stationary bike.  That might not seem obvious at first but once you use them, you'll understand it can be a killer aerobic workout if you want it to be!

 

You can also use them for resistance training that will work out every muscle in your body.  I have two sets in varying weight-pairs and it basically eliminates my need to have a gym membership.  That might not be the case for someone who's really into heavy-duty body-builder style resistance training (though I guess it's possible if you get heavier weight sets) but for general conditioning they are awesome. 

 

Pretty amazing considering that all they are is a big blob of iron with a handle attached ????

 

Kettlebells were popularized to the world pretty much by a Russian, Pavel Tsatsouline through his program called "Enter The Kettlebell"  You can see it in its' entirely on YouTube at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKx8xE8jJZs&t=1250s.  Great video and he is an excellent teacher, but warning, the guy is a real trip..."Comrade" ????

 

 

[FracturedRabbit]

4 hours ago, Kohsamida said:

To Fractured Rabbit and anyone else living in Jomtien/Pratumnak:  Can any of you recommend restaurants that can accommodate keto or low-carb?

 

Just moved here and need help finding a place.  I don’t care if they focus on keto menus (and doubt any restaurants in Thailand do), but just want to find a place that I can say “low carb”, and they’ll make a low carb meal for me without looking at me funny.

We (my wife is low carb too, apart from durian season..) tend to eat at home more than we used to. However:

1. If we go to a standard Thai restaurant my wife tells them not to use MSG. We avoid fried food and of course no rice.

2. Most big chain restaurants offer dishes which are low carb, although you will have to spot them, they won't know what you mean. Black Canyon actually has a Keto Menu, which is very surprising, but it is presently only offered in Bangkok. 

3. Places that offer breakfast menus are OK, get them to change out some of the carby stuff or just leave it out. We go to Bake n Brew where they will swap stuff around if you ask, and I have my daily carbs there with a slice of their excellent sourdough bread (my wife brings a little tub of grass fed butter along to smother on it).

4. Zen for a sashimi treat.

5. Tree tales in Naklua has a good menu of healthy food.

 

It seemed a bit daunting at first, but you eat low carb in many places. The most risky are the Thai food outlets because of msg, the hidden sugar and dubious oil.

[bkk6060]

On 4/20/2019 at 4:04 PM, FracturedRabbit said:

We (my wife is low carb too, apart from durian season..) tend to eat at home more than we used to. However:

1. If we go to a standard Thai restaurant my wife tells them not to use MSG. We avoid fried food and of course no rice.

2. Most big chain restaurants offer dishes which are low carb, although you will have to spot them, they won't know what you mean. Black Canyon actually has a Keto Menu

 

It seemed a bit daunting at first, but you eat low carb in many places. The most risky are the Thai food outlets because of msg, the hidden sugar and dubious oil.

Msg is actually a protein and most quality oils have zero carbs. I use a lot of EV olive oil.

The sugars yes in many food prep here.

[WaveHunter]

19 minutes ago, bkk6060 said:

Msg is actually a protein and most quality oils have zero carbs. I use a lot of EV olive oil.

The sugars yes in many food prep here.

To be honest, I've never fully understood why MSG is considered to be so bad. I know that there is a lot of anecdotal accounts that link it with headaches, heart palpitations, nausea, etc... , but all the scientific research studies I've seen have found no definitive link to these things. 

 

I know that some link obesity to use of MSG, and I guess that would seem logical since it makes food taste better, thus you eat more, but again, the scientific studies that have been conducted on this have mixed results at best, and no proof that MSG has a direct causal link to obesity.  Here are a couple of the studies I know of:

 

Not in favor of a causal link:  https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/british-journal-of-nutrition/article/monosodium-glutamate-is-not-associated-with-obesity-or-a-greater-prevalence-of-weight-gain-over-5-years-findings-from-the-jiangsu-nutrition-study-of-chinese-adults/A25C050A0EA8F80DD1BEC8C8E601A011

 

In favor of a link, but if you read the study, it is really an associative link, not a causal one:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2610632/

 

So, does anybody have any opinion on this?  I've always been curious to know if there is really a science-based reason to avoid MSG or not.

 

[FracturedRabbit]

2 hours ago, bkk6060 said:

Msg is actually a protein and most quality oils have zero carbs. I use a lot of EV olive oil.

The sugars yes in many food prep here.

Unfortunately you won't find quality oils being used in typical Thai restaurants.

[cheeryble]

The source of the MSG myth is one letter written by one doctor who didn't seem to know anything about quality evidence.

[WaveHunter]

1 hour ago, cheeryble said:

The source of the MSG myth is one letter written by one doctor who didn't seem to know anything about quality evidence.

Can you expand on your comment?  Very ambiguous the way you wrote it.  "Myth" in favor of,  or against MSG?  What doctor are you referring to?  Can you provide a link to "letter" you refer to?

[WaveHunter]

21 hours ago, FracturedRabbit said:

Unfortunately you won't find quality oils being used in typical Thai restaurants.

Do you ever find it odd that when you go into Tesco or Foodland there is an entire aisle devoted exclusively to oils, and none of them are "premium" or what seem to be healthy types?

[WaveHunter]

5 hours ago, FredGallaher said:

Long term fasting can result in muscle mass.

When glycogen storage in depleted the liver starts converting amino acids to glucose (gluconeogenesis). That way we are able to maintain fasting blood sugar (FBS) of about 80mg/dl.  FBS levels are needed to maintain consciousness. That's why some people past out or get dizzy when they haven't eaten for a long time. Therefore, amino acids convert to glucose to maintain a satisfactory FBS level. 

Taking Testosterone supplements in counterintuitive because testosterone uses excess amino acids to produce more muscle. Taking testosterone while fasting is a waste of time. 

I have tried to present this in the simplest terms. The entire process is quite complex. Short term fasting is OK to lose some weight but be aware that extending the fast will also result in muscle loss. 

In the absence of glucose, fats are incompletely metabolized and form ketone bodies. Ketone bodies are excreted in the urine and do not contribute to the FBS level. 

 

 

 

As usual, you are spewing half-truths and grossly outdated mis-information, and presenting your unsubstantiated personal opinions as actual facts.  That's not a nice thing to do.

 

To say that testosterone works merely by using "excess amino acids to produce more muscle" is an incredibly misleading remark and an incomplete oversimplification.  Furthermore, It's kind of rich that you claim to understand exactly how testosterone works when some of the smartest scientists in the world still do not understand the underlying mechanisms.

 

What is actually known about how T is related to body composition is more far-reaching and complex than its' effect only on striated muscle! 

 

Until recently, the dominant hypothesis had been that testosterone administration improves net muscle protein balance by stimulating muscle protein synthesis, decreasing muscle protein degradation, and improving the reutilization of amino acids (which is, I guess, what you were driving at.) 

 

However, this doesn't explain all of the observed effects of T on body composition (as shown on attached list); hence, the mechanisms by which testosterone induces skeletal muscle mass remain poorly understood.  Therefore, whether there is any causal relationship between testosterone use and fasting is UNKNOWN!

 

Thus, for you to claim that fasting while using testosterone is a counterproductive or a waste of time is simply uninformed and biased nonsense with absolutely no underlying science to support it!

 

Observed effects of T on body composition

(from Journal of Gerontology: 2003, Vol. 58A, No. 12, 1103–1110)

 

Modern research is placing much more emphasis on testosterone's effect to increase neurotransmitters, which encourage tissue growth, and also how it interacts with nuclear receptors in DNA, which causes protein synthesis.  I don't know of any research that show a negative effect of fasting on these mechanisms.  Do you?  If you do, prove it!

 

Now, on to your assertion that fasting will result in muscle loss.  The simple answer is NO it will not to any significant degree.  You have not done your homework unless you are using textbooks and research from 30 years ago!

 

Here is a graph by Dr. Kevin Hall from the NIH in the book “Comparative Physiology of Fasting, Starvation, and Food Limitation”.   This is probably the single most well regarded physiological study into human starvation response".  It clearly and concisely shows what happens as one enters into the fasted state.

 

It depicts macronutrient oxidation rates as glycogen stores become depleted (the horizontal scale is days):

 

 

As can plainly be seen, as ketone bodies are produced thereby mobilizing fat stores in response to carb depletion, there is a slight up-spike in protein oxidation until ketone bodies have had a chance to ramp up (up to about 72 hours into the fasted state).  In numbers, where you see the up-spike in protein, approximately 75 grams per day are being catabolized but after 72 hours of fasting, it stabilizes to about 10-20 grams per day, even if fasting continues up to 30 days (as in this study).

 

Why does this happen?  This is because after 72 hours hours, the ketone bodies are now providing ample fuel directly to the brain, and are also mobilizing stored body fat and allowing for rapid conversion to fatty acids to fuel the body.  It is simply an evolutionary starvation response that allowed our ancient ancestors to survive long periods without food.  If, as you allude, they lost significant muscle mass, they would not have survived, and we would not be here today!

 

There's more to this though.  It's true that some proteins are catabolized BUT they are not necessarily striated muscle!  In fact, the body protects essential proteins when in the fasted state.  Instead less important proteins are targeted.  Specifically, damaged and dysfunctional intracellular proteins and substances are targeted, while more essential proteins like striated muscle and the heart for instance are spared.

 

This is referred to as autophagic response.  I know the term "autophagy" has become a mumbo-jumbo catch phrase and has led to all sorts of fad diets and such, but the underlying science is quite sound.  In fact, the scientist who discovered and documented the actual mechanism and the relationship that fasting plays in it, Dr. Yoshinori Ohsumi, was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2016 for his groundbreaking work, so this is very REAL SCIENCE, not unsubstantiated mumbo-jumbo!

 

Also, other metabolic factors come into play during advanced stages of fasting like the release of growth hormone.  The significance of this is that when feeding resumes, the GH allows for fast replacement of catabolized intracellular proteins and organelles with fresh and optimally functioning new ones, and it also allows for the fast replacement of striated muscle in very short order with just some trips to the gym to stimulate protein synthesis.

 

Here is the overall metabolic stages of a nutritional fast.

 

There are countless records of people doing extended fasts without significant muscle loss.  In fact one man fasted for over one year with no significant muscle loss or any other debilitating effects (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angus_Barbieri's_fast).

 

I'm guessing none of this will change your view (based on your past responses when I provide science-based fact to support my words), but that's OK; you're entitled to believe whatever you wish.  I am only replying so that other's who read your post will have another viewpoint to consider.

 

I don't mean to sound testy but I get annoyed when people make unsubstantiated claims as you have just done, and do not differentiate between their own personal opinions and actual facts.  You really should get up to date on current science because what you are saying sounds like you are reading text books and scientific research from 30 years ago!

 

Maybe you should stop marking all my posts with inflammatory "sad", "confused", or "ha-ha" emoticons, and join the 21st century of fact-based science.  Not a criticism; just a suggestion.

[robblok]

@wavehunter

 

You always tell me that fasting does not slow metabolism. However if you look at your own graph the beginning he is taking around 2500 calories 1250 carbs,750 fat, 500 proteins.

 

But on day 5 he is only burning 1150 + 250 (proteins) making it 1400 

 

So one of your reference studies shows quite a decrease in metabolic rate or am i reading this graph wrong ?

[robblok]

6 minutes ago, FredGallaher said:

Wavehunter,

I know you are very passionate about your beliefs, however, you miss the point of convincing others by being too verbose. Your audience misses your points because of not being focused and clear. Normally in scientific writing, we state our hypothesis first, tell how we reached our opinions, etc. That way if someone wants to read details it's up to them. You write way too much, in an argumentative style, and do not accept you could be wrong.  What you write is of course partially true but not based on scientific consensus. Science is not about arguing your point, but convincing others based on clear facts. 

Scientific research needs to be duplicated and validated to be accepted. Some studies fall apart when validation is attempted and fall by the wayside. Please be aware that just because of someone (including me) publish something, it doesn't mean that it will stand the test of time. 

 

Yes you can find studies pro something and against something and often it has to do with the setup of the study and sometimes mistakes are just made.

 

Its real hard as you have to validate research of others and really have to know what they did.

 

I would love to see a half year low carb vs normal carb in a closed study. Meaning in house. But inhouse studies are real expensive so we will probably never see it. 

 

Personally i often get confused with studies and studies are often misused to claim things that are not true. 

[robblok]

3 hours ago, FredGallaher said:

That's why there are scientific journals. You don't need to personally validate but need to go to respected journals. Try the Journal of Nutritional Science or Journal of Nutrition. Both are recognized sources.

That does not mean they setup every test good. I read so much about bad set up studies that are then used to defend (insert a diet). To really know you have to read how a study is setup. It differs quite a lot if they use people who are diabetic or healthy people age of people matters ect ect. So many variables and if you yourself don't read the exact setup you will never know.

Sorry I don't trust people anymore not even respected journals everyone makes mistakes and everyone has agenda's. 

 

https://anabolicminds.com/articles/tip-keto-and-bodybuilding-dont-mix-40376/

 

look at the link for instance there you see keto lovers using studies for diabetic people and the people were not fasted enough. You will only truly know if people are trying to use the wrong arguments if you really look at the setup of the study that is used. Makes it real hard.

 

Then for instance remember how you were told not to eat the yellow of eggs and limit eating egs (cholesterol), new studies catch up with older studies. To truly know what is right or wrong one really has to have a bit of base knowledge and the will to really read through it. Failing that one has to find a good source of non bias people who interpret studies. 

[WaveHunter]

3 hours ago, FredGallaher said:

Wavehunter,

I know you are very passionate about your beliefs, however, you miss the point of convincing others by being too verbose. Your audience misses your points because of not being focused and clear. Normally in scientific writing, we state our hypothesis first, tell how we reached our opinions, etc. That way if someone wants to read details it's up to them. You write way too much, in an argumentative style, and do not accept you could be wrong.  What you write is of course partially true but not based on scientific consensus. Science is not about arguing your point, but convincing others based on clear facts. 

Scientific research needs to be duplicated and validated to be accepted. Some studies fall apart when validation is attempted and fall by the wayside. Please be aware that just because of someone (including me) publish something, it doesn't mean that it will stand the test of time. 

 

I agree with you, I am often too verbose which is to my detriment but science is about truth, and what you said was clearly not factual but only unsubstantiated personal opinion.

 

I was simply countering your mis-information and half-truths, no disrespect intended.

 

Everyone of course is entitled to personal opinion but, with all due respect, you didn’t present it as that way, but attempted to convince others that there was a scientific basis to what you said.

 

I’m  under no illusion of winning a popularity contest when I reply to posts that get under my skin like the one you posted, but hopefully, if someone is curious about the topic, they’ll explore the factual basis of what you said, and what I said, and then decide for themself.

 

Yes, I am VERY passionate about nutrition and the metabolic sciences, and I know many other people are as well.  Many facets of these fields are a mystery even to the leading scientists, and thus there is much controversy on many topics.  

 

Varying hypotheses and vigorous debate are natural and healthy BUT only if they are firmly supported by scientific fact, NOT outdated information, half-truths or unsubstantiated personal opinion.

 

My goal was not to attack you personally but simply to defend the truth.  My goal when I post is not to convince others of my point of view but simply to provide verifiable. science-based facts so they can decide for themselves.

 

 

 

[WaveHunter]

3 hours ago, FredGallaher said:

That's why there are scientific journals. You don't need to personally validate but need to go to respected journals. Try the Journal of Nutritional Science or Journal of Nutrition. Both are recognized sources.

Did you not see that practically ALL of the links in my posts are to such peer-reviewed journals.  THAT’S where I get all of my information. I mean no disrespect to mainstream info-trainmen this sources like Dr. Berg or Dr. Oz, or many of the So-called health gurus on the net, but they usually provide only cherry-picked sound bites to support their agenda.

 

If a view can not be substantiated by rigorous and well documented “scientific method” type studies, then it is only personal opinion.

[WaveHunter]

4 hours ago, robblok said:

@wavehunter

 

You always tell me that fasting does not slow metabolism. However if you look at your own graph the beginning he is taking around 2500 calories 1250 carbs,750 fat, 500 proteins.

 

But on day 5 he is only burning 1150 + 250 (proteins) making it 1400 

 

So one of your reference studies shows quite a decrease in metabolic rate or am i reading this graph wrong ?

Can you cut & paste the graphs you’re referring to?

[WaveHunter]

18 minutes ago, robblok said:

That does not mean they setup every test good. I read so much about bad set up studies that are then used to defend (insert a diet). To really know you have to read how a study is setup. It differs quite a lot if they use people who are diabetic or healthy people age of people matters ect ect. So many variables and if you yourself don't read the exact setup you will never know.

Sorry I don't trust people anymore not even respected journals everyone makes mistakes and everyone has agenda's. 

 

https://anabolicminds.com/articles/tip-keto-and-bodybuilding-dont-mix-40376/

 

look at the link for instance there you see keto lovers using studies for diabetic people and the people were not fasted enough. You will only truly know if people are trying to use the wrong arguments if you really look at the setup of the study that is used. Makes it real hard.

 

Then for instance remember how you were told not to eat the yellow of eggs and limit eating egs (cholesterol), new studies catch up with older studies. To truly know what is right or wrong one really has to have a bit of base knowledge and the will to really read through it. Failing that one has to find a good source of non bias people who interpret studies. 

Totally agree with you that many scientific studies fall apart upon critical scrutiny, either due to poor design or deliberate attempt to support a hidden agenda.

 

However, peer-reviewed journal are still the best source for scientific facts.  It’s up to the reader to decide, but I’d much rather get my information from sources like that than some dopey health guru on YouTube.

[robblok]

12 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

Can you cut & paste the graphs you’re referring to?

This graph, if you look at what the subject was eating and burning at the start and then later there is a considerable drop in metabolic rate. 

 

Begin 1250 cals from cab (red line), 750 from fats (green) and 500 from protein (blue) 2500

 

Day 5 you see 1150 (and it goes even lower later on) from protein you then go to 250 and carbs is below that even. Say 1500 cals on day five compared to 2500 cals day one.

 

This from your own research a much respected source as you yourself says. 

[FracturedRabbit]

21 hours ago, WaveHunter said:

Do you ever find it odd that when you go into Tesco or Foodland there is an entire aisle devoted exclusively to oils, and none of them are "premium" or what seem to be healthy types?

If I go into any supermarket I find that almost everything on sale is processed crap. Even the real food is of dubious origin or possibly awash with chemicals. 

[WaveHunter]

22 minutes ago, robblok said:

...Then for instance remember how you were told not to eat the yellow of eggs and limit eating egs (cholesterol), new studies catch up with older studies. ....

Now don’t get me started...LOL!  This is one of my pet peeves that people still have this notion that cholesterol is EVIL.???? 

 

Much of the recent unbiased research I’ve seen is indicating that cholesterol is not the danger to health that many think it is.  I’ve seen many convincing scientific studies that make me believe this...and NO, they are not studies supported by the National Egg Council if there is such an organization, which there probably is.

 

My point is, nutrition and the metabolic sciences has always been, and will continue to be a huge mystery but science based research is vigorous and unrelenting.  Accepted dogma is often such, nit because it is scientifically based but simply because it sounds logical.  That’s a bad thing!

 

People used to believe in the “food pyramid” and that carbohydrates should be the foundation of healthy nutrition.  It seemed logical but has proven to be grossly incorrect, and the concurrent rise of obesity while thus dogma was in place is proof enough of that.

 

I think everyone has a responsibility to NOT simply accept dogma, but to research science-based facts and decide for themselves what is best for “here and now”, and remain open-minded if and when new information presents itself.

[robblok]

11 minutes ago, FracturedRabbit said:

If I go into any supermarket I find that almost everything on sale is processed crap. Even the real food is of dubious origin or possibly awash with chemicals. 

Try finding safe vegetables here ????  I mean pesticide wise. I am sure you read the newspaper articles that sometimes pop up here on Thaivisa. 

 

I am taking frozen vegetables from makro to hopefully avoid the problem. But mainly I buy my own meat and veggies and make my own food. 

[WaveHunter]

5 minutes ago, robblok said:

This graph, if you look at what the subject was eating and burning at the start and then later there is a considerable drop in metabolic rate. 

 

Begin 1250 cals from cab (red line), 750 from fats (green) and 500 from protein (blue) 2500

 

Day 5 you see 1150 (and it goes even lower later on) from protein you then go to 250 and carbs is below that even. Say 1500 cals on day five compared to 2500 cals day one.

 

This from your own research a much respected source as you yourself says. 

Thus graph is not depicting metabolic rate; it shows oxidation rate of macronutrients (I.e.: where the body is deriving energy and how much is being used to maintain homeostasis).

 

The take-away is that ketones and stored fat minimize protein catabolism after about 72 hours.

 

Note that the body will always be in a homeostatic state as long as there is ample fat reserves to allow ketone bodies to be produced...except for the initial period of a fast when ketones have yet to ramp up.

 

Thus, if the body is in a homeostatic state, resting metabolic rate will be unaffected by the fast.  This is a scientific certainty.  If you google around you can find plenty of valid studies that support this.

[robblok]

1 minute ago, WaveHunter said:

Thus graph is not depicting metabolic rate; it shows oxidation rate of macronutrients (I.e.: where the body is deriving energy and how much is being used to maintain homeostasis).

 

The take-away is that ketones and stored fat minimize protein catabolism after about 72 hours.

 

Note that the body will always be in a homeostatic state as long as there is ample fat reserves to allow ketone bodies to be produced...except for the initial period of a fast when ketones have yet to ramp up.

 

Thus, if the body is in a homeostatic state, resting metabolic rate will be unaffected by the fast.  This is a scientific certainty.  If you google around you can find plenty of valid studies that support this.

I disagree you see the oxidation rate go down thus less calories being burned. Just read it how I read it and how it should be read.

 

The take away is a that it switches to fat but drops enormously. So you do your own cherry picking believing other studies but not this one that clearly show a drop but you do use this study to back up other claims. Sorry that just does not fly by me.

 

Oxidation rate is metabolic rate. You are guilty of cherry picking too mate. 

 

The take away your metabolic rate goes down during the fast. it shows it clearly in the graph from the respected study.  

 

lets agree to disagree here.

[WaveHunter]

7 minutes ago, robblok said:

Try finding safe vegetables here ????  I mean pesticide wise. I am sure you read the newspaper articles that sometimes pop up here on Thaivisa. 

 

I am taking frozen vegetables from makro to hopefully avoid the problem. But mainly I buy my own meat and veggies and make my own food. 

Yep!  That’s the case here in Pattaya too.  I can’t believe how hard it is to eat healthy around here!  Up in Chiang Mai it was quite different.  They have a HUGE farmers market called Muang Mai Market.  It’s spread over a number of city blocks.  Local farmers cart their fruits, vegetables, and even freshly slaughtered meats in daily.  Some of the best, most healthy and most delicious food you could imagine.

[WaveHunter]

13 minutes ago, robblok said:

I disagree you see the oxidation rate go down thus less calories being burned. Just read it how I read it and how it should be read.

 

The take away is a that it switches to fat but drops enormously. So you do your own cherry picking believing other studies but not this one that clearly show a drop but you do use this study to back up other claims. Sorry that just does not fly by me.

 

Oxidation rate is metabolic rate. You are guilty of cherry picking too mate. 

 

The take away your metabolic rate goes down during the fast. it shows it clearly in the graph from the respected study.  

 

lets agree to disagree here.

No, you are interpreting it incorrectly.  The person is in a homeostatic state.  The graph is not depicting a overall deficit but rather a re-distribution of where the energy is coming from.  

 

Can’t you see that?  As glycogen is depleted and carb oxidation obviously must fall, oxidation of ketones and stored body fat make up for it, and as a result, protein oxidation only spikes at the start (around 75 grams per day) but then stabilizes to around 10-20 grams per day afterwards. 

 

Theres no cherry-picking going on here.  You are misinterpreting what the graph is telling you.