I just finished a 48 hour intermittent fast (IF)

[robblok]

17 hours ago, WaveHunter said:

I probably should have composed my thoughts better than I did.  I guess what I meant was that insulin in itself is not the problem but insulin insensitivity is.  Insulin release is of course a vital part of a healthy functioning body.  Excessive amounts of insulin are not. 

 

Cutting down the number of times you eat per day gives the metabolic process a rest for lack of a better way to put it, and I think that's just as important as what typed of carbs you eat since many people are really eating non-stop throughout the day. 

 

For the typical SAD person, maybe it's just a  little snack here and there but the typical snack (i.e.: a can of coke or a candy bar results in massive insulin release. All those little snacks throughout the day coupled with 3 formal meals is a recipe for metabolic disaster IMHO.

 

There's no nutritional advantage to eating multiple times per day, contrary to what the food company might say.  The same is true for the performance supplement industry who promote the idea of protein shakes and the like.  All of these things are unnecessary.  Most people do NOT need supplemental protein no matter how hard they exercise beyond what they get form a properly balanced diet, and excessive protein is simply converted to glucose anyway which only results in more insulin release and conversion to stored fat.

 

How many times you eat per day is a personal thing.  For me, I eat twice a day; a modest breakfast that's primarily carb-based (fruit), and then my main meal for the day around 6pm that's well balanced but low in carbs.  If I'm doing some sort of strenuous exercise (long bike ride) I'll supplement with carbs. 

 

I think it's the healthiest way to eat FOR ME, and I feel good eating that way.  Each to their own of course.  I just think people need to THINK about nutrition and consciously decide what they are putting in their bodies, and how much.  Most don't, and I don't think kids are taught anything that's really science-based about nutrition in school.  Maybe they should ????

 

I know the difference between insulin and insulin insensitivity. But insulin insensitivity happens because of too much insulin. 

 

Yes cutting down gives it a rest (IF your not in KETO already) and are eating carbs with your meals. Otherwise if you control the insulin spikes already there is no problem. Giving your metabolism a break is only useful if you are indeed having an insulin problem by eating too many carbs and too many times.

 

I eat 3 meals a day and take a 1 or 2 shakes a day to make sure my protein stays high. I agree that protein shakes are not needed for people who don't exercise a lot. However there is plenty of proof that the body can use 1,5 gram per KG of bodyweight of protein. There are even higher numbers floating around but i disregard those. For bodybuilders and people like me proteins are absolutely needed. So my protein shakes help me to get proteins while staying low in calories. So they are certainly useful. Its an easy way to get protein without all the extra calories.

 

You do know its really really hard to store protein as fat. It almost does not happen. I can tell you one thing for me high protein helps me recover faster and build muscle. I notice it if I don't take enough proteins my recovery slows down. That being said I am of course on a caloric deficit so recovery is not optimal. 

 

Protein shakes work.. for those who need proteins but don't need the calories that come with it. Could i take a piece of chicken breast to replace a shake.. certainly the difference in calories would not be too much but it would mean too much chicken and id get bored. But now with a good diet it certainly works. I always take more protein shakes when I am on a diet.

 

I think you should never compare those of us who do actually workout hard to gain muscle and lift heavy weights with people who don't. Just like that carbs are useful then so are extra proteins.

Edited March 7, 2019 by robblok

[WaveHunter]

19 hours ago, brokenbone said:

i drop 0.5 kg/day on 1 meal per day,

but annoyingly when i take 2 dishes a day nothing happen.

tomorrow i will have lost 20kg

I am a little dubious that you are loosing 0.5 kg/day of ACTUAL body fat.  On a water fast (no food at all), the average actual loss of stored body fat per day is around 0.5 kg/day at most. 

 

If you introduce any food containing an appreciable amount of carbohydrates (greater than 50 grams), your body will not go into ketosis and your body will not be able to access stored body fat sufficiently to meet the energy needs of your body. 

 

Therefore, your body will have no choice but to catabolize protein at a very high rate, converting it to glucose to meet the body's fuel needs through gluconeogenesis.

 

If you have been doing this for over 40 days (20kg/0.5 kg/day), it is not fat you are loosing, and it is not even water you are loosing.  You are catabolizing massive amounts of vital proteins; you are doing SERIOUS harm to your health.  Stop!

[robblok]

45 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

I am a little dubious that you are loosing 0.5 kg/day of ACTUAL body fat.  On a water fast (no food at all), the average actual loss of stored body fat per day is around 0.5 kg/day at most. 

 

If you introduce any food containing an appreciable amount of carbohydrates (greater than 50 grams), your body will not go into ketosis and your body will not be able to access stored body fat sufficiently to meet the energy needs of your body. 

 

Therefore, your body will have no choice but to catabolize protein at a very high rate, converting it to glucose to meet the body's fuel needs through gluconeogenesis.

 

If you have been doing this for over 40 days (20kg/0.5 kg/day), it is not fat you are loosing, and it is not even water you are loosing.  You are catabolizing massive amounts of vital proteins; you are doing SERIOUS harm to your health.  Stop!

To lose a pound of fat (in the most optimal situation almost impossible to do) you would only burn fat and to burn half a kg of fat you need to have a deficit of about 4000 calories. The guy is eating one meal lets say 500 calories. So he would have to be be burning 4500 calories on a day. This is highly unlikely (it could be true if he were to exercise hard or something, like your 2 hour rides).

 

So its far more likely that he is burning muscle (proteins). There is far less calories in a kilo of muscle so its quite possible he is burning muscle instead of fat. I don't think its water because after 40 days we can assume all energy stored in carbs (and the water that goes with it) are gone already. 

 

I would LOVE to lose half a kg of fat per day.. it is just not going to happen (for me). However if you are really overweight to start with I mean seriously fat then at the beginning it might be possible to lose half a kg because if your seriously overweight your BMR would be higher too to support all the weight.

[WaveHunter]

2 hours ago, robblok said:

I know the difference between insulin and insulin insensitivity. But insulin insensitivity happens because of too much insulin. 

 

Yes cutting down gives it a rest (IF your not in KETO already) and are eating carbs with your meals. Otherwise if you control the insulin spikes already there is no problem. Giving your metabolism a break is only useful if you are indeed having an insulin problem by eating too many carbs and too many times.

 

I eat 3 meals a day and take a 1 or 2 shakes a day to make sure my protein stays high. I agree that protein shakes are not needed for people who don't exercise a lot. However there is plenty of proof that the body can use 1,5 gram per KG of bodyweight of protein. There are even higher numbers floating around but i disregard those. For bodybuilders and people like me proteins are absolutely needed. So my protein shakes help me to get proteins while staying low in calories. So they are certainly useful. Its an easy way to get protein without all the extra calories.

 

You do know its really really hard to store protein as fat. It almost does not happen. I can tell you one thing for me high protein helps me recover faster and build muscle. I notice it if I don't take enough proteins my recovery slows down. That being said I am of course on a caloric deficit so recovery is not optimal. 

 

Protein shakes work.. for those who need proteins but don't need the calories that come with it. Could i take a piece of chicken breast to replace a shake.. certainly the difference in calories would not be too much but it would mean too much chicken and id get bored. But now with a good diet it certainly works. I always take more protein shakes when I am on a diet.

 

I think you should never compare those of us who do actually workout hard to gain muscle and lift heavy weights with people who don't. Just like that carbs are useful then so are extra proteins.

There are vastly different opinions on how much protein people actually need in order to be healthy.  If the goal goes beyond fitness and involves trying to gain muscle, the opinions vary even more.

 

If the goal is to gain muscle, then the average recommended intake of protein ranges from 1 gram/kg (LBM) to 2.2 grams/kg (LBM - Lean body weight, not total body weight).

 

So there is actually a huge variance on the number depending on which scientific study you look at.  Most of the more well controlled studies seem to put the number somewhere between 1.6-2.2 grams...if your goal is to grow new muscle.

 

So, let's say your LBM is 60 kg, that means you should be taking in 96 - 132 grams of protein per day.  A simple nutritious meal plan should easily be able to meet those needs without having to resort to post-workout protein shakes, even for a dedicated body builder, but certainly for the average guy who works out in the gym a few days a week.

 

And the thing is, the body is very precise about the quantities and types of amino acids it absorbs from the diet.   It uses ONLY what it actually needs.  Excess amounts of dietary protein ARE indeed converted into glucose through gluconeogenesis, and whatever amount of that newly formed glucose that is not used as energy is then stored as fat.  So, "converting" protein to fat is actually very easy to do, and that's the problem with over-doing it with protein.

 

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with getting those proteins from a shake if that's your thing but most of those shakes have a lot more than protein in them and usually there's a HUGE amount of sugar in them.  So, for most people who consume them, they are really more likely to only store body fat as the end result, not really gain muscle as a result of using them.

 

I just believe that a balanced healthy meal plan is the better way to go.  I mean, have you ever read the ingredients label on some of those protein shakes?  If you can't pronounce the name of the ingredient, I always think that's a red flag...know what I mean ????

 

 

 

[Beatriz]

On 8/7/2018 at 11:27 AM, meechai said:

I once went 16 days

Not a total fast as I had the lemon water with cayenne & a teaspoon of maple syrup

 

Back then it was called the Master Cleanse By Stanley Burroughs

 

It was not a big deal as with any fast the truth is after day one you are not hungry at all

Yes you miss taste for sure but not hungry

 

I had also fasted 6 days a few times before with just water.

 

As for muscle loss I noticed none & on day 9 or 10? of the 16 day run I did also shovel 14 tons of 3/4" gravel at my home so it was not like I was

weak at all.

 

I don't know now in hindsight what all was gained except great mental clarity & the knowledge that we have more than we need to survive many days without eating.

 

I will say this & not to be too explicit that you do have a bowel movement every day so that makes you wonder how full of it we are

without even refilling.

 

 

You mean , we are so full of shit?

[WaveHunter]

19 minutes ago, robblok said:

To lose a pound of fat (in the most optimal situation almost impossible to do) you would only burn fat and to burn half a kg of fat you need to have a deficit of about 4000 calories. The guy is eating one meal lets say 500 calories. So he would have to be be burning 4500 calories on a day. This is highly unlikely (it could be true if he were to exercise hard or something, like your 2 hour rides).

 

So its far more likely that he is burning muscle (proteins). There is far less calories in a kilo of muscle so its quite possible he is burning muscle instead of fat. I don't think its water because after 40 days we can assume all energy stored in carbs (and the water that goes with it) are gone already. 

 

I would LOVE to lose half a kg of fat per day.. it is just not going to happen (for me). However if you are really overweight to start with I mean seriously fat then at the beginning it might be possible to lose half a kg because if your seriously overweight your BMR would be higher too to support all the weight.

Water fasting will indeed result in about 0.5 kg actual fat loss per day.  I just completed a 72 hour water fast and now several days afterwards I am maintaining an actual 2kg weight loss on the scale even though I am eating normally now and well hydrated.

 

The thing is though, I do not consider water fasting a good strategy if weight loss is your goal.  I do regular monthly 72 hour fasts like this for entirely different reasons that have nothing to do with shedding pounds.  Beyond 72 hours, a fast really does not result in sustainable weight loss IMHO.  I've done extended fasts a couple of times, and, at least for me, I tended to regain most of the weight over time.

Edited March 7, 2019 by WaveHunter

[brokenbone]

i have actually been dropping more then 0.5 kg a day

except the few days i tried to eat an extra meal,

like for instance this morning i had lost 1.1 kg over night,

but i do spice it up with 2,4-dinitrophenol & spicy food.

i found i can have a couple of yogurt with no

effect on weight loss.

yes, i dont doubt i drop in muscles too,

but i reached my limit of being fat, needs must.

i expect loss to go down in this month as i'm reaching for

sixpack, so that is why i understate loss, to get an average

[robblok]

1 minute ago, WaveHunter said:

There are vastly different opinions on how much protein people actually need in order to be healthy.  If the goal goes beyond fitness and involves trying to gain muscle, the opinions vary even more.

 

If the goal is to gain muscle, then the average recommended intake of protein ranges from 1 gram/kg (LBM) to 2.2 grams/kg (LBM - Lean body weight, not total body weight).

 

So there is actually a huge variance on the number depending on which scientific study you look at.  Most of the more well controlled studies seem to put the number somewhere between 1.6-2.2 grams...if your goal is to grow new muscle.

 

So, let's say your LBM is 60 kg, that means you should be taking in 96 - 132 grams of protein per day.  A simple nutritious meal plan should easily be able to meet those needs without having to resort to post-workout protein shakes, even for a dedicated body builder, but certainly for the average guy who works out in the gym a few days a week.

 

And the thing is, the body is very precise about the quantities and types of amino acids it absorbs from the diet.   It uses ONLY what it actually needs.  Excess amounts of dietary protein ARE indeed converted into glucose through gluconeogenesis, and whatever amount of that newly formed glucose that is not used as energy is then stored as fat.  So, "converting" protein to fat is actually very easy to do, and that's the problem with over-doing it with protein.

 

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with getting those proteins from a shake if that's your thing but most of those shakes have a lot more than protein in them and usually there's a HUGE amount of sugar in them.  So, for most people who consume them, they are really more likely to only store body fat as the end result, not really gain muscle as a result of using them.

 

I just believe that a balanced healthy meal plan is the better way to go.  I mean, have you ever read the ingredients label on some of those protein shakes?  If you can't pronounce the name of the ingredient, I always think that's a red flag...know what I mean ????

 

 

 

I think there is some bias about protein shakes in your post as the facts you state about them containing sugar is wrong (unless your talking about weight gainers but these are not protein shakes but a combo of carbs and proteins to gain weight for hard gainers)

 

The numbers your quoting are close to what i know, so no argument there. My problems are more with the fact that you think there is sugar in shakes. Maybe years and years ago but normal protein shakes have no added sugars. They usually don't have carbs at all. I have two types of shakes, one a normal unflavored whey protein and the other a flavored casein protein. Both have no sugars in them at all. 

 

I have read it was quite hard to convert protein into fat but the article might be bias. It really does not matter much for me as I seldom go too high. I have enough trouble hitting the mark (protein wise) as it is. I have been diagnosed with a slow thyroid, once i got medicine for it but i stopped taking them as it killed my sleep. So my metabolic rate is not that high that is why i use shakes to keep calories down while trying to lose weight. 

Later when I am at the desired fat percentage, i will drop the shakes and increase normal foods as i can eat more calories then. For me shakes are a supplement something to make life easier. I don't see them as better or worse as normal foods. Its about convenience. Most of the time I take no post workout shake pre workout is supposed to be better (if it matters at all). What matters for me is the carbs in the meal before my workout.

 

I added the label of the casein (the unflavored whey has even less in it) no sugars or carbs in there at all. The reason i take casein is two fold (it gets nice and thick especially when you add inulin and physilium husk plus its a nice slow protein. Because its so thick when i take it (i also add some MCT oil) it fills me up good and als combats hunger.

[robblok]

2 minutes ago, brokenbone said:

i have actually been dropping more then 0.5 kg a day

except the few days i tried to eat an extra meal,

like for instance this morning i had lost 1.1 kg over night,

but i do spice it up with 2,4-dinitrophenol & spicy food.

i found i can have a couple of yogurt with no

effect on weight loss.

yes, i dont doubt i drop in muscles too,

but i reached my limit of being fat, needs must.

i expect loss to go down in this month as i'm reaching for

sixpack, so that is why i understate loss, to get an average

Are you sure your not an other user that I know. 

 

So you are on DNP.. yes that changes things a bit in metabolic burn. Personally I have no idea how you are surviving. I have done DNP (did not get the fat loss you are getting but as I said my BMR is slow to start with so an increase on a slow BMR is less as on a high BMR)

 

I hope your drinking enough water, when I used DNP i could not even go out at all. Doing DNP for period that you are talking about is quite long. I admire your endurance (i am not advocating people to use DNP). I won't use it again. 

 

My problem with DNP was also that I stopped training I did not have the power to do much. I was on 200 mg a day (have done 400 mg for a short time). 

 

I was fat at the time looking for a quick solution, it worked but i suffered a lot. Now i prefer to go slower and keep it on longer. Plus I am not fat anymore so I can accept things going slower.

 

Be real careful with the stuff, if misused it could be your last post. Having said that there are many people who have used it.

[robblok]

@ALL

 

Happy to see some life on this part of the forum.

[WaveHunter]

2 minutes ago, brokenbone said:

i have actually been dropping more then 0.5 kg a day

except the few days i tried to eat an extra meal,

like for instance this morning i had lost 1.1 kg over night,

but i do spice it up with 2,4-dinitrophenol & spicy food.

i found i can have a couple of yogurt with no

effect on weight loss.

yes, i dont doubt i drop in muscles too,

but i reached my limit of being fat, needs must.

i expect loss to go down in this month as i'm reaching for

sixpack, so that is why i understate loss, to get an average

Keep in mind that actual body fat loss is a very tricky thing to gauge.  Throughout the day, your body weight (measured on a scale) can vary tremendously.  I can easily have my body weight change by over 2kg throughout a day if I go for a really long bike ride.  Even if sedentary, it can vary more than you might imagine. 

 

I think it's important to track your weight (on the scale) at the same time every day and pay more attention to trend over time rather than the day-to-day number.  And only one time a day; don't be obsessed and be jumping on the scale multiple times a day.

 

Even better is to use a scale that measure body fat percentage.  Even though they are incredibly inaccurate, they do help you see how you are trending over time, and that can be a very helpful tool.

 

I just bought one from China (AliExpress) that's so cool LOL.  It was very cheap (about US$20) because it connects to my smartphone by Bluetooth, so the phone, not the scale is providing the calculations.  It provides not only body weight and bodyfat percentage but also provides BMI, Visceral Fat, Body Water, Skeletal Muscle, Muscle Mass, Bone Mass, Protein, BMR, and Metabolic Age.  I'm still googling to figure out how accurate all these metrics can be measured on a device like this but it sure is fascinating...and all for only 20 bucks ????

 

[WaveHunter]

20 minutes ago, robblok said:

I think there is some bias about protein shakes in your post as the facts you state about them containing sugar is wrong (unless your talking about weight gainers but these are not protein shakes but a combo of carbs and proteins to gain weight for hard gainers)

 

The numbers your quoting are close to what i know, so no argument there. My problems are more with the fact that you think there is sugar in shakes. Maybe years and years ago but normal protein shakes have no added sugars. They usually don't have carbs at all. I have two types of shakes, one a normal unflavored whey protein and the other a flavored casein protein. Both have no sugars in them at all. 

 

I have read it was quite hard to convert protein into fat but the article might be bias. It really does not matter much for me as I seldom go too high. I have enough trouble hitting the mark (protein wise) as it is. I have been diagnosed with a slow thyroid, once i got medicine for it but i stopped taking them as it killed my sleep. So my metabolic rate is not that high that is why i use shakes to keep calories down while trying to lose weight. 

Later when I am at the desired fat percentage, i will drop the shakes and increase normal foods as i can eat more calories then. For me shakes are a supplement something to make life easier. I don't see them as better or worse as normal foods. Its about convenience. Most of the time I take no post workout shake pre workout is supposed to be better (if it matters at all). What matters for me is the carbs in the meal before my workout.

 

I added the label of the casein (the unflavored whey has even less in it) no sugars or carbs in there at all. The reason i take casein is two fold (it gets nice and thick especially when you add inulin and physilium husk plus its a nice slow protein. Because its so thick when i take it (i also add some MCT oil) it fills me up good and als combats hunger.

Whey is cool.  I thought you were referring to the more processed shakes like those made by EAS (Myoplex) for instance.  Still think that a good meal plan eliminates the need for supplemental protein (and inflated expense...especially in a place like here in Thailand).

Edited March 7, 2019 by WaveHunter

[robblok]

4 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

Whey is cool.  I thought you were referring to the more processed shakes like those made by EAS (Myoplex) for instance.  Still think that a good meal plan eliminates the need for supplemental protein (and inflated expense...especially in a place like here in Thailand).

I think the inflated prices are not that bad. I pay 800bt for 1 kg of whey (can go cheaper). That works out to 27 baht for a shake. Pork tenderloin cost about 200 bt for a kg so its 4 times cheaper. But 27 bt is not that much especially for someone like me who does not frequent the bar scene or drinks alcohol (i do but almost never). 

 

Its not price that does it fore me, as I said the moment the weight loss phase is done, i will eat more and less shakes. 

 

I would never ever touch those processed shakes, there would be no point for me. I take this to get the most proteins for the least calories. By taking one of those other shakes I would be better of with a meal.

 

I aim for 160 grams of protein a day (sounds low i know). No more then that. 

[WaveHunter]

Just in case anyone else is interested in the scale.  I've had it for a few weeks and thinks it's great ???? Well made and the app works well too.  For US$20, I sure can't complain. 

 

I used to be SO wary of goods made in China but after living here in Thailand for a year and often having no alternative but to purchase many thing I need on Lazada or AliExpress, I find AliExpress to be a fair and reliable source for many things, and in general much better than Lazada!

 

Here is the link:  https://www.aliexpress.com/item/GASON-S4-LED-Bathroom-Digital-Body-floor-Scale-Fat-Scalesmart-weighing-support-Android4-3-IOS7-0/32796058463.html?spm=a2g0s.9042311.0.0.3da24c4d6KeYPX

 and a couple of snapshots

Edited March 7, 2019 by WaveHunter

[brokenbone]

19 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

Keep in mind that actual body fat loss is a very tricky thing to gauge.  Throughout the day, your body weight (measured on a scale) can vary tremendously.  I can easily have my body weight change by over 2kg throughout a day if I go for a really long bike ride.  Even if sedentary, it can vary more than you might imagine. 

 

I think it's important to track your weight (on the scale) at the same time every day and pay more attention to trend over time rather than the day-to-day number.  And only one time a day; don't be obsessed and be jumping on the scale multiple times a day.

 

Even better is to use a scale that measure body fat percentage.  Even though they are incredibly inaccurate, they do help you see how you are trending over time, and that can be a very helpful tool.

 

I just bought one from China (AliExpress) that's so cool LOL.  It was very cheap (about US$20) because it connects to my smartphone by Bluetooth, so the phone, not the scale is providing the calculations.  It provides not only body weight and bodyfat percentage but also provides BMI, Visceral Fat, Body Water, Skeletal Muscle, Muscle Mass, Bone Mass, Protein, BMR, and Metabolic Age.  I'm still googling to figure out how accurate all these metrics can be measured on a device like this but it sure is fascinating...and all for only 20 bucks ????

 

yes, i always measure in the morning, on the same scale.

i figure i have been on diet almost one month now,

and will be done with it in another month,

after which i will stick to 2 meals per day with an occasional glance at the scale

[WaveHunter]

11 minutes ago, brokenbone said:

yes, i always measure in the morning, on the same scale.

i figure i have been on diet almost one month now,

and will be done with it in another month,

after which i will stick to 2 meals per day with an occasional glance at the scale

I'm not so sure about your numbers but still...Congrats! ????  Irregardless of how you diet, being able to stick with one for almost a month is a good sign I think.  So many people try the latest fad diets, loose a bit a weight and then just binge out after a few days winding up with more body fat than when they started. 

 

What works for one person might not work for another but if you have managed to stick with your diet for almost a month then it is probably a good one for you ????

 

Edited March 7, 2019 by WaveHunter

[robblok]

21 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

Just in case anyone else is interested in the scale.  I've had it for a few weeks and thinks it's great ???? Well made and the app works well too.  For US$20, I sure can't complain. 

 

I used to be SO wary of goods made in China but after living here in Thailand for a year and often having no alternative but to purchase many thing I need on Lazada or AliExpress, I find AliExpress to be a fair and reliable source for many things, and in general much better than Lazada!

 

Here is the link:  https://www.aliexpress.com/item/GASON-S4-LED-Bathroom-Digital-Body-floor-Scale-Fat-Scalesmart-weighing-support-Android4-3-IOS7-0/32796058463.html?spm=a2g0s.9042311.0.0.3da24c4d6KeYPX

 and a couple of snapshots

I have a bit more expensive one made in the US but like you said they are worthless. Not for the general population but for people who carry more muscle as average. I can say without a doubt in in that group.

 

Thing is what these scales do is send a current through your body get a reading from that. Then look in a table and look up what your fat percentage is. The problem is that the tables are made for the general public. Not for athletes. 

 

So it gets a reading, will look in the table for a guy they measured that has the same age as you similar weight and a similar reading and then say that i what you have. That is nice if your average. So its not really helpful. I read countless of debates about scales like this. (and the more expensive ones). I have been looking for a DEXA fat scan in Thailand (in the west there are hospitals / universities that do this).

 

Now I don't look at my weight anymore, i take a tape measure and check my waist to see if im making progress. 

 

Before I would stand on some scales every day at the same time. It would record the weight in an app give an fat estimate and all. It just does not work for me. I took creatine wham.. reading were totally off again. So for me its not good. But for the average person it might just work good.

[robblok]

16 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

I'm not so sure about your numbers but still...Congrats! ????  Irregardless of how you diet, being able to stick with one for almost a month is a good sign I think.  So many people try the latest fad diets, loose a bit a weight and then just binge out after a few days winding up with more body fat than when they started. 

 

What works for one person might not work for another but if you have managed to stick with your diet for almost a month then it is probably a good one for you ????

 

Yes the problem is binging when back on a certain weight. I never had that problem. My problem usually happend if i got sick or for some other reason had to stop training, then my eating would change.  But in general it would not amount more then 5 kg that would have to come off then again. I always made sure it never got too bad.

[WaveHunter]

1 hour ago, robblok said:

The problem is that the tables are made for the general public. Not for athletes. 

Actually, many scales that measure body fat percentage use TWO different lookup tables; one for "regular" people and one for "athletes".  You can select which one to use in the scale set-up.

 

My scale has this feature, and you are right, it can make a BIG difference, depending on your fitness level. 

 

If I measure using the "regular" mode I get  BF reading about 5% more than if I set it on "Athlete" mode.  I have a feeling though as you become more fit (see below about resting heartrate), the discrepancy diminishes. 

 

The way to decide whether to use "Athlete" or regular mode is this (according to Tanita, who is probably the biggest maker of these type of scales) :  

 

If you are an adult who, after a long period of intense physical activity, have a resting heart rate of approximately 60 beats per minute or less, you probably should use the "Athlete" Mode.  If not, you should use the "Regular" mode. 

 

So, even though I would normally think of myself as "athletic", my resting heart rate is greater than 60 BPM so I use the regular setting. If I get it down to 60 (which is actually a goal for me), I'll switch to "Athlete" mode ????

 

WHY DO I THINK THEY ARE A GOOD THING?  I think their value is not so much in their accuracy but rather, it's a way for monitoring progress over time.  So, if you are trying to improve a metric like body fat percentage, you can see over time how you are doing. 

 

Truth is though, they are not really THAT far off.  I have skin calipers and the reading I get from the scale is pretty close, depending on what time of day you do the scale measurement.  So, if you pick the right time of day, your day-to-day reading shouldn't be that far off, for the most part.

 

 

Edited March 7, 2019 by WaveHunter

[robblok]

1 minute ago, WaveHunter said:

Actually, many scales that measure body fat percentage use TWO different lookup tables; one for "regular" and one for "athlete".  You can select which one to use.  Mine has this feature, and you are right, it does make a BIG difference.  If I measure on "regular" I get  BF reading about 7% more than if I set it on "Athlete".

 

The way tp decide whether to use "Athlete" or regular is this:  

 

If you are an adult who, after periods of intense physical activity, have a resting heart rate of approximately 60 beats per minute or less, you probably should use the "Athlete" Mode.  If not, you should use the "Regular" mode. 

 

I don't consider them accurate in terms of measuring actual metrics but what I find them valuable for is for monitoring progress over time, so if you are trying to improve a metric like body fat percentage, you can see over time how you are doing.

 

 

Mine had that too.. was still of by a large margin. But I do have a lot of extra muscles. 

 

The tables just don't work for bodybuilders, that is a fact. Maybe it works ok for "normal" athletes. 

 

You do know how those tables are created. They take people of a certain age and weight and check what the current gives as reading. Then they measure these people either hydro-statically or with a dexa scan to get the real fat percentage. So then they lock the fat percentage of that guy with that age and that measurement to the table. If you have the same age and height and reading they assume you have the same body as that person. That is what it actually is. So I am not sure if they would give a consistent margin of error or that the margin could change. 

 

I got a fat caliper too and a measuring tape, for me those two are most important. Normally i store my body fat around my waist. Its also always the last fat to go. So by measuring it there i know if i make progress or not. Plus I have become quite good at visual inspection to see if things are going the way I want to go. 

 

I would of course much rather stand on some scales knowing that the error would be the same all the time and just look for progress. However with my scales that did not work. The percentage varied widely (i weighed at the same time in the morning). 

 

Now i just don't stress anymore and give it time. So far the non stress give it time method has been working great. Hopefully the last time, I hope that this year I can keep on exercising and eating right.

 

In short I am not sure that my scales (fitbit aria 2) give a consistent wrong readout. My experience was that it varied too widely and by taking for instance creatine (adds water and stored energy to muscles) the readings would change again. If i was convinced I would be stepping on the scales every day. 

 

Thing was that i got frustrated by no progress as weight loss is not linear (often) so now I do it an other way for ME that is better. For you the scales might work great.

[WaveHunter]

4 minutes ago, robblok said:

Mine had that too.. was still of by a large margin. But I do have a lot of extra muscles. 

 

The tables just don't work for bodybuilders, that is a fact. Maybe it works ok for "normal" athletes. 

 

You do know how those tables are created. They take people of a certain age and weight and check what the current gives as reading. Then they measure these people either hydro-statically or with a dexa scan to get the real fat percentage. So then they lock the fat percentage of that guy with that age and that measurement to the table. If you have the same age and height and reading they assume you have the same body as that person. That is what it actually is. So I am not sure if they would give a consistent margin of error or that the margin could change. 

 

I got a fat caliper too and a measuring tape, for me those two are most important. Normally i store my body fat around my waist. Its also always the last fat to go. So by measuring it there i know if i make progress or not. Plus I have become quite good at visual inspection to see if things are going the way I want to go. 

 

I would of course much rather stand on some scales knowing that the error would be the same all the time and just look for progress. However with my scales that did not work. The percentage varied widely (i weighed at the same time in the morning). 

 

Now i just don't stress anymore and give it time. So far the non stress give it time method has been working great. Hopefully the last time, I hope that this year I can keep on exercising and eating right.

 

In short I am not sure that my scales (fitbit aria 2) give a consistent wrong readout. My experience was that it varied too widely and by taking for instance creatine (adds water and stored energy to muscles) the readings would change again. If i was convinced I would be stepping on the scales every day. 

 

Thing was that i got frustrated by no progress as weight loss is not linear (often) so now I do it an other way for ME that is better. For you the scales might work great.

You're right, Tanita makes a point of saying that these scales are currently NOT intended for bodybuilders, but as I mentioned, such athletes still find them valuable to establish a baseline and for trending purposes to track progress of reaching a desired body fat percentage.  Here is what they say:

 

At this time, populations of professional athletes and body builders have not been studied to establish a separate mode for this unique group. Professional athletes and body builders are advised that since the models have not been designed with them specifically in mind, they may obtain a higher than normal body fat reading. Despite this fact, many of these elite athletes have used the Tanita Body Fat Monitor/Scales successfully to gauge their progress of losing body fat. The great repeatability of the product enables one to establish a baseline and use the product for "trending purposes" to assess loss or gain in body fat over time.

 

[robblok]

28 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

You're right, Tanita makes a point of saying that these scales are currently NOT intended for bodybuilders, but as I mentioned, such athletes still find them valuable to establish a baseline and for trending purposes to track progress of reaching a desired body fat percentage.  Here is what they say:

 

At this time, populations of professional athletes and body builders have not been studied to establish a separate mode for this unique group. Professional athletes and body builders are advised that since the models have not been designed with them specifically in mind, they may obtain a higher than normal body fat reading. Despite this fact, many of these elite athletes have used the Tanita Body Fat Monitor/Scales successfully to gauge their progress of losing body fat. The great repeatability of the product enables one to establish a baseline and use the product for "trending purposes" to assess loss or gain in body fat over time.

 

If the reasons were consistently wrong (meaning with the same difference all the time) then I would have loved it because I don't care about the actual percentage but about change. However my scales (comparable with Tanita) did not give the same deviation all the time. 

 

I am a techie i love computers / stuff like genetic testing (done one for fitness) but this device has not satisfied my needs.

 

To be clear I am no professional bodybuilder, I am not huge but most "normal" people would classify me as one. 

[Artisi]

10 -'Here's my feedback about a 48 hour fast that I did from 7 pm on Friday evening through to 7pm on Sunday evening, (I've just finished this fast).'

 

When you have fastest for 10 -15 days you might have something to discuss. 48 hours is not fasting, the body doesn't even recognise it's in a fasting state for 4 maybe 5 days. 

 

If interested in fasting for health -look up the publication "Therapeutic Fasting"  by Arnold Devries

Edited March 7, 2019 by Artisi

[WaveHunter]

47 minutes ago, robblok said:

If the reasons were consistently wrong (meaning with the same difference all the time) then I would have loved it because I don't care about the actual percentage but about change. However my scales (comparable with Tanita) did not give the same deviation all the time. 

 

I am a techie i love computers / stuff like genetic testing (done one for fitness) but this device has not satisfied my needs.

 

To be clear I am no professional bodybuilder, I am not huge but most "normal" people would classify me as one. 

Maybe you should try one of these newer types.  I used to have a Tanita scale that I paid a fortune for about ten years ago and had the same misgivings. 

 

This new unit I bought from AliExpress uses more body parameters than the Tanita did (i.e.: more than just height and weight), and the computed numbers seem to stay pretty consistent from day to day, and like I said, the BF% pretty closely matches what I get with skin calipers.

 

I really like all the additional metrics besides just showing weight and body fat percentage.  As I said, I'm not sure how accurate it shows these metrics but still, it's kind of cool to be able to track them as a trend over time. 

 

For only US$20 it seems worthwhile, if all it does is motivate me towards my goals.

 

Also, considering that it is really measuring electrical impedance, I always do my measurements after a shower in the evening and after I have thoroughly dried off.  I don't know if it really makes a difference or not but I think after a sweaty workout even if you are dry, you still have salt and body oil on you so that could effect reading in an inconsistent way.  Maybe, maybe not LOL!!

 

Edited March 7, 2019 by WaveHunter

[robblok]

35 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

Maybe you should try one of these newer types.  I used to have a Tanita scale that I paid a fortune for about ten years ago and had the same misgivings. 

 

This new unit I bought from AliExpress uses more body parameters than the Tanita did (i.e.: more than just height and weight), and the computed numbers seem to stay pretty consistent from day to day, and like I said, the BF% pretty closely matches what I get with skin calipers.

 

I really like all the additional metrics besides just showing weight and body fat percentage.  As I said, I'm not sure how accurate it shows these metrics but still, it's kind of cool to be able to track them as a trend over time. 

 

For only US$20 it seems worthwhile, if all it does is motivate me towards my goals.

 

Also, considering that it is really measuring electrical impedance, I always do my measurements after a shower in the evening and after I have thoroughly dried off.  I don't know if it really makes a difference or not but I think after a sweaty workout even if you are dry, you still have salt and body oil on you so that could effect reading in an inconsistent way.  Maybe, maybe not LOL!!

 

Hi, I will consider it as i said I don't care much about the actual numbers more about consistency. 

[VincentRJ]

On 3/1/2019 at 12:59 PM, WaveHunter said:

I have done two long-term water fasts just out of curiosity for what really happens.  My longest fast was for ten days.  I did it after reading Hall’s white papers that ive mentioned before, “Comparative Physiology of Fasting, Starvation, and Food Limitation”

 

What I found was just what was described in these studies; that once the body fully shifts over to utilizing stored body fat for fuel, and once the associated hormonal changes also occur, such as increased production of nor-adrenalin, cortisol, and growth hormone, there is ample energy for the body to function normally.  

 

Of course, you’re not going to have explosive energy but you are perfectly capable of conducting day to day normal activities with no feeling of fatigue at all, and any mental lassitude subsides.  Fact is, I felt really good once this occurred.

 

This doesn’t happen immediately though.  You go through a period of several days of fatigue while the production of ketone bodies and hormones ramp up, and yes it can be quite uncomfortable, but then you wake up one morning and strangely, you feel refreshed and energetic.  

 

This happened to me both times I fasted by the 5th or 6th days, and continued thereafter.  I admit it was surprising to me, but it’s true, and the science that explains it is sound.

Hi WaveHunter,
This is a fascinating thread. The first time I read about the benefits of fasting was a few years ago when I came across a news report of a scientific study which suggested that fasting could be as effective in curing cancer as radiation and chemotherapy, but without the side effects. The study also implied that fasting in conjunction with chemotherapy and radiation could be the most effective treatment of all. However, it's difficult to confirm this with human experiments because of ethical issues. Any doctor who uses unconventional treatments that results in the death of the patient, could lose his license and/or be taken to court, even though many cancer patients die despite being given conventional treatment.

 

Other claimed benefits of fasting, which I find fascinating, are the the body's ability to create new or additional brain cells for the purpose of helping the person to identify possible food supplies, in the interests of basic survival.

 

Also, as I think you've already mentioned in this long thread, the body has its own intelligence. It's not stupid. When consuming its own fat supplies and protein, it will also consume the defunct white blood cells rather than the fully functioning white cells. When one begins eating again, those defunct white blood cells that have been consumed, are regenerated as new, fully functioning cells, resulting in an enhanced immune system, so I believe.

 

I've fasted many times during the past few years, since first reading of the benefits. However, most of my fasts have been between 24 and 72 hours. I've fasted only once for a full 4 days, and I ended that fast, rather disappointedly, because of previous social commitments. I didn't initially intend to fast for 4 days, but after the third day I was not overcome with hunger and felt I could fast for another day without trouble. After the fourth day, I also felt I could continue fasting for yet another day or more. I wish I had done so, despite the social commitments.

 

Since you seem to be very knowledgeable on this issue of fasting, I'd like to ask you if you've come across any reliable evidence that fasting for a significant period, such as 10 or 11 days, can cure Tinnitus.

 

I'm 76 years old, am quite fit and physically active, and have no medical problems apart from a moderate degree of Tinnitus, which I suspect I got from using my chainsaw too much, wearing ear muffs of insufficient quality.
It's not a major problem for me. I've got used to it, but I did come across a personal comment on a forum some time ago that someone who was suffering from Tinnitus cured his problem by fasting for 10 or 11 days.

[WaveHunter]

On 3/7/2019 at 8:21 PM, VincentRJ said:

Hi WaveHunter,
This is a fascinating thread. The first time I read about the benefits of fasting was a few years ago when I came across a news report of a scientific study which suggested that fasting could be as effective in curing cancer as radiation and chemotherapy, but without the side effects. The study also implied that fasting in conjunction with chemotherapy and radiation could be the most effective treatment of all. However, it's difficult to confirm this with human experiments because of ethical issues. Any doctor who uses unconventional treatments that results in the death of the patient, could lose his license and/or be taken to court, even though many cancer patients die despite being given conventional treatment.

 

Other claimed benefits of fasting, which I find fascinating, are the the body's ability to create new or additional brain cells for the purpose of helping the person to identify possible food supplies, in the interests of basic survival.

 

Also, as I think you've already mentioned in this long thread, the body has its own intelligence. It's not stupid. When consuming its own fat supplies and protein, it will also consume the defunct white blood cells rather than the fully functioning white cells. When one begins eating again, those defunct white blood cells that have been consumed, are regenerated as new, fully functioning cells, resulting in an enhanced immune system, so I believe.

 

I've fasted many times during the past few years, since first reading of the benefits. However, most of my fasts have been between 24 and 72 hours. I've fasted only once for a full 4 days, and I ended that fast, rather disappointedly, because of previous social commitments. I didn't initially intend to fast for 4 days, but after the third day I was not overcome with hunger and felt I could fast for another day without trouble. After the fourth day, I also felt I could continue fasting for yet another day or more. I wish I had done so, despite the social commitments.

 

Since you seem to be very knowledgeable on this issue of fasting, I'd like to ask you if you've come across any reliable evidence that fasting for a significant period, such as 10 or 11 days, can cure Tinnitus.

 

I'm 76 years old, am quite fit and physically active, and have no medical problems apart from a moderate degree of Tinnitus, which I suspect I got from using my chainsaw too much, wearing ear muffs of insufficient quality.
It's not a major problem for me. I've got used to it, but I did come across a personal comment on a forum some time ago that someone who was suffering from Tinnitus cured his problem by fasting for 10 or 11 days.

Regarding fasting & cancer, there is growing evidence of a link between excessive sugar in the diet, and cancer.  I'm not going to go into all the details since it's a very complex subject but if you google you can find out more. 

 

To put it VERY simply, there is a growing body of evidence that in order for cancer cells to proliferate, they need sugar to do it; cut out the sugar and you essentially are starving the cancer cells. 

 

Again, I'm vastly oversimplifying this link; you really need to dive into the research to understand this concept and how fasting fits into the picture, but it is being very actively and seriously studied by some of the most well regarded researchers out there!

 

Im my own opinion, there seems to be a lot of potential benefits to periodic fasting, and very few drawbacks, provided you have no serious pre-existing health conditions. Personally I am attracted to it for its' connection to autophagy. 

 

A VERY EFFECTIVE WATER FAST needn't be that long.  Most of the autophagy-related benefits typically occur within 72 hours and very few additional benefits occur after that so I do a fast like this once a month.  It's a little uncomfortable but no big deal, and I always feel better for it afterwards.

 

I do NOT think fasting is an appropriate strategy for weight loss (except for jump-starting a longer term SCIENCE-BASED weight-loss diet (i.e.: not fad diet). 

 

Sustainable weight loss is much more about changing bad nutrition habits, not shedding pounds. 

 

It is a PROVEN fact that Calorie-restriction is not a very effective dieting strategy.  You deprive yourself for a while and then end up gaining all the lost weight back since you just go back to your old habits.  Worse still, since severe calorie restriction slows the metabolism, once you begin to eat as you did before the diet, you'll gain back even more weight than you started with!

 

 Loosing excess body fat isn't all that mysterious and really has more to do with eating healthy (plant-based in my personal opinion) and exercising regularly, than it has to do with cutting calories.

 

I am into plant-based nutrition (as opposed to a lot of animal proteins, although I still enjoy an occasional steak). 

 

It's a personal choice; It makes me feel better to eat this way, and I also find it to be very filling so I'm never concerned about how many calories I am eating. 

 

Living a long life isn't a great thing if you feel you are depriving yourself.  I simply make a conscious effort to avoid most processed foods, especially those with sugar (especially high fructose corn syrup HFCS).

 

I NEVER feel deprived eating this way.  Fact is I LOVE eating and usually feel pretty stuffed after a meal. 

 

Fact is, I have no problem at all maintaining very low body fat percentages (9-12) and excellent lipid profiles.  That was NOT the way things were before I changed my ways.

 

Each to his own if it leads to a long and happy life ????

 

Edited March 10, 2019 by WaveHunter

[VincentRJ]

4 hours ago, WaveHunter said:

Regarding fasting & cancer, there is growing evidence of a link between excessive sugar in the diet, and cancer.  I'm not going to go into all the details since it's a very complex subject but if you google you can find out more. 

 

To put it VERY simply, there is a growing body of evidence that in order for cancer cells to proliferate, they need sugar to do it; cut out the sugar and you essentially are starving the cancer cells. 

 

Thanks for your reply. The message that I've got, from reading the summaries and abstracts of scientific studies on fasting, is that the human body understands how to react to a deprivation of food, in order to survive. It learned how to do that through a long evolutionary process when the body got used to adapting to the frequent famines that occurred naturally and unavoidably in the past, in the absence of modern agriculture and transport.

 

However, cancer cells have no clue how to survive in the absence of food, whether sugar or not. So they tend to die when one fasts. It makes sense to me.

 

I do NOT think fasting is an appropriate strategy for weight loss (except for jump-starting a longer term SCIENCE-BASED weight-loss diet (i.e.: not fad diet). 

Sustainable weight loss is much more about changing bad nutrition habits, not shedding pounds.

 

I agree partially, but it depends on the definition of fasting. The first meal of the day is quite logically called 'breakfast'. In other words, a breaking of the regular fast that most people do every 24 hours, between the last meal before they go to bed and the first meal of the next day.

 

I imagine that overweight people probably have both a dinner early in the evening and a supper later in the evening, so their regular period of fasting might be only 8 or 9 or 10 hours a day. Others might eat nothing after 7 pm and have breakfast at 8 am, so their regular fasting is 13 hours a day. Perhaps not a significant difference. However, I find it very relevant (and inspiring) that the ancient Romans, traditionally, ate just one meal a day, as did many ancient cultures, such as the ancient Jews. The one meal was usually around mid-day, or in the early evening, so the period of regular fasting would have been about 23 hours a day, for most Romans, including the soldiers in the very successful army. (But not of course the wealthy, upper class, many of whom gorged themselves silly  ????  ).

 

In view of the above, I would say a good strategy for losing weight, if long periods of fasting are beyond your will power, is to move towards that 'one meal per day' habit. Initially, for the first few days, you will probably eat a larger meal than usual, say each evening, because you are so hungry. But after a while, as your stomach begins to shrink, you will eat a normal size meal, and gradually lose weight.

 

I used to be overweight by about 25 kg a few years ago. A combination of fasting and complete abstinence from beer and wine for a whole year, fixed that. I haven't put the weight back on because I usually eat just one major meal a day, occasionally two in the form of a small brunch, but never three.

 

However, WaveHunter, you didn't answer my question, repeated below, about the fasting cure for Tinnitus.
{quote]Since you seem to be very knowledgeable on this issue of fasting, I'd like to ask you if you've come across any reliable evidence that fasting for a significant period, such as 10 or 11 days, can cure Tinnitus.[/quote]

 

Have you any information on this?

 

[WaveHunter]

20 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

Thanks for your reply. The message that I've got, from reading the summaries and abstracts of scientific studies on fasting, is that the human body understands how to react to a deprivation of food, in order to survive. It learned how to do that through a long evolutionary process when the body got used to adapting to the frequent famines that occurred naturally and unavoidably in the past, in the absence of modern agriculture and transport.

 

However, cancer cells have no clue how to survive in the absence of food, whether sugar or not. So they tend to die when one fasts. It makes sense to me.

 

 

 

 

I agree partially, but it depends on the definition of fasting. The first meal of the day is quite logically called 'breakfast'. In other words, a breaking of the regular fast that most people do every 24 hours, between the last meal before they go to bed and the first meal of the next day.

 

I imagine that overweight people probably have both a dinner early in the evening and a supper later in the evening, so their regular period of fasting might be only 8 or 9 or 10 hours a day. Others might eat nothing after 7 pm and have breakfast at 8 am, so their regular fasting is 13 hours a day. Perhaps not a significant difference. However, I find it very relevant (and inspiring) that the ancient Romans, traditionally, ate just one meal a day, as did many ancient cultures, such as the ancient Jews. The one meal was usually around mid-day, or in the early evening, so the period of regular fasting would have been about 23 hours a day, for most Romans, including the soldiers in the very successful army. (But not of course the wealthy, upper class, many of whom gorged themselves silly  ????  ).

 

In view of the above, I would say a good strategy for losing weight, if long periods of fasting are beyond your will power, is to move towards that 'one meal per day' habit. Initially, for the first few days, you will probably eat a larger meal than usual, say each evening, because you are so hungry. But after a while, as your stomach begins to shrink, you will eat a normal size meal, and gradually lose weight.

 

I used to be overweight by about 25 kg a few years ago. A combination of fasting and complete abstinence from beer and wine for a whole year, fixed that. I haven't put the weight back on because I usually eat just one major meal a day, occasionally two in the form of a small brunch, but never three.

 

However, WaveHunter, you didn't answer my question, repeated below, about the fasting cure for Tinnitus.
{quote]Since you seem to be very knowledgeable on this issue of fasting, I'd like to ask you if you've come across any reliable evidence that fasting for a significant period, such as 10 or 11 days, can cure Tinnitus.[/quote]

 

Have you any information on this?

 

I can not say that I've run across any science-based evidence that fasting can have a positive effect on Tinnitus but I believe there might be a connection to the occurrence of Tinnitus to sudden and drastic changes in health lifestyles.  My belief is entirely anecdotal and I can find nothing that's science based to support it, but here's my thoughts.

 

I actually suffered from tinnitus myself for about a year.  It started to occur right after I made some major changes in my lifestyle.  I was a heavy cigarette smoker, and also smoked marijuana pretty heavily for about 10 years.  My nutrition was a joke.  Finally one day I started having chest pains and actually thought I was having a heart attack!  I went to the Emergency room and they determined I was OK (no heart attack) but they ran a bunch of blood tests and told me I was headed for serious trouble; lipids were horrible, blood pressure was seriously high, and I was pre-diabetic.

 

Needless to say, I knew it was time to clean up my act, and I was scared enough to actually take action.

 

I quit smoking entirely (cold turkey) and started learning more about good nutrition.  A good friend gave me a book called "How Not To Die"  by Dr. Michael Gregor.  Morbid title, I know, but it sort of became my bible for learning to eat more healthy.  Within weeks I was following a plant-based diet.  

 

The lifestyle changes I made were MAJOR and immediate.  It was during this period of time that I developed Tinnitus.  As I'm sure you know, dcotors were of little help and most of the information I found online was pretty unfounded and a waste of time.  There was an endless amount of BS on the internet, and I explored many of the treatment options like Chinese medicine (acupuncture, herbal remedies, etc) all to no avail, and just resigned myself to learning to live with it.

 

Well, it went on for about a year, sometimes severe and sometimes minor, but after about a year it just seemed to resolve itself.  Along with the Tinnitus, I was also having episodic panic attacks.  They were actually far more disturbing than the Tinnitus.  However, over time these things just seemed to resolve themselves.  

 

I can't say for a fact that there was a connection between my lifestyle change and these things but I kind of think there was a connection.  I think the transition from a poor health-lifestyle to a better one was a severe shock to body AND MIND, and the Tinnitus and the panic attacks were a manifestation of that change.

 

Sometimes, the body is far more capable of healing itself than any doctor could possible be even if it seems to be a mysterious and circuitous process;  As Voltaire's famous quote goes,  “The art of medicine consists of amusing the patient while nature cures the disease.”

 

I don't know if this is of any help or not but thought I'd share it for what it's worth. 

Edited March 11, 2019 by WaveHunter

[VincentRJ]

19 hours ago, WaveHunter said:

 

Well, it went on for about a year, sometimes severe and sometimes minor, but after about a year it just seemed to resolve itself.  Along with the Tinnitus, I was also having episodic panic attacks.  They were actually far more disturbing than the Tinnitus.  However, over time these things just seemed to resolve themselves.  

 

I can't say for a fact that there was a connection between my lifestyle change and these things but I kind of think there was a connection.  I think the transition from a poor health-lifestyle to a better one was a severe shock to body AND MIND, and the Tinnitus and the panic attacks were a manifestation of that change.

 

Sometimes, the body is far more capable of healing itself than any doctor could possible be even if it seems to be a mysterious and circuitous process;  As Voltaire's famous quote goes,  “The art of medicine consists of amusing the patient while nature cures the disease.”

 

I don't know if this is of any help or not but thought I'd share it for what it's worth. 

Thanks for contributing your own personal story. I can now live in hope that my Tinnitus might one day mysteriously disappear for whatever, possibly unknown, reason. ????

 

My story's a bit different. I never experienced any major shock when changing my lifestyle and eating habits, possibly because I've always had a tendency to eat wholesome foods and take vitamin supplements. My gradual increase in weight seems to have coincided with my increased drinking of wine and beer when living and working in the hot climate of Northern Australia where beer was a terrific thirst quencher.  ????  However, the shift to a more sedentary job would also have contributed.

 

When I later attempted to stop drinking, perhaps to prove to myself that I wasn't an alcoholic, but also because I was aware of the claimed negative health effects of excessive drinking, and of the benefits of at least giving the body a rest from alcohol consumption for a certain period now and again, I noticed that after a month or so of complete abstention, I had lost a significant amount of weight, despite eating as normal.

 

When I resumed drinking again, I noticed that I began putting the weight back on. However, it wasn't until I later came across the BMI method of determining more precisely how much one is overweight, that I realized, with a shock, that I was carrying the equivalent of a 20kg suitcase (spread over my body) with every step that I took. ????

 

I decided to get my weight down from around the usual 95kg to the BMI recommendation of around 75kg, for my height of 1.8 metres. (This calculation doesn't apply to body-builders of course. But I'm not a body builder. My exercise consists of regular walks which include brief periods of jogging, usually uphill now and again to get myself really out of breath and panting hard, and working on my property, cutting down trees, pushing wheel barrows, lifting heavy logs, and so on.)

 

Because I'd had practice in stopping drinking before, I was able to stop for a whole year without much problem. In addition I went on periodic fasts, initially for 23 hours, and then longer as I got used to it.
However there's one other factor I should mention that might have made my fasting much easier. Saffron.
Around this time that I was reading about the benefits of fasting, I also came across a 'double blind' scientific study on the benefits of Saffron in reducing the effects of macular degeneration as one gets older.

 

The group of elderlies that were taking the real 'saffron extract' pills showed a noticeable improvement in their eyesight after a few months, compared with those who were taking the placebo. Since I'm interested in Photography and value my eyesight, I began taking regular quantities of Saffron filaments. It was only later, when searching for the best price on the internet (because Saffron can be very expensive) that I came across the fact that most people were using Saffron supplements to reduce their appetite, to make it easier to cut down on their food intake and lose weight.