I just finished a 48 hour intermittent fast (IF)

[partington]

5 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

The following general article includes detoxification as one of the benefits of fasting, with lots of references to scientific studies at the end. But I couldn't see any article which specifically addressed the detoxification issue in its title, and I haven't had time to wade through the articles, which might have a paywall.
https://www.libifit.com/autophagy-and-intermittent-fasting/

 

Here is the author of this article in case you believe it has any scientific value:  in one case for example this (probably imaginary) author states that autophagy increases effectiveness of chemotherapy in ovarian cancer. She (?) then references a study that simply refers to cells in a dish and not any treatment of human beings, and fails to spot that the reference says that INHIBITION (that is prevention of) of autophagy makes these cells more susceptible to killing by chemotherapeutic drugs, ie she gets the study backwards!

[VincentRJ]

1 hour ago, partington said:

Here is the author of this article in case you believe it has any scientific value:  in one case for example this (probably imaginary) author states that autophagy increases effectiveness of chemotherapy in ovarian cancer. She (?) then references a study that simply refers to cells in a dish and not any treatment of human beings, and fails to spot that the reference says that INHIBITION (that is prevention of) of autophagy makes these cells more susceptible to killing by chemotherapeutic drugs, ie she gets the study backwards!

Well, you'd better inform the author of her mistake. We all make mistakes or misunderstand something now and again. ????

 

When I did a search for scientific studies that had specifically addressed the detoxification effect of fasting, I couldn't find any, or at least I couldn't find any that included the word 'detoxification' in the title, but I came across Melinda's article which I thought summarized the over all benefits of fasting quite well, so that's why I quoted it.

 

From my own general understanding of fasting, I would be surprised if there is any reliable scientific evidence which shows that fasting does not contribute towards, or enhance the body's natural processes of detoxification.

[robblok]

5 hours ago, partington said:

Here is the author of this article in case you believe it has any scientific value:  in one case for example this (probably imaginary) author states that autophagy increases effectiveness of chemotherapy in ovarian cancer. She (?) then references a study that simply refers to cells in a dish and not any treatment of human beings, and fails to spot that the reference says that INHIBITION (that is prevention of) of autophagy makes these cells more susceptible to killing by chemotherapeutic drugs, ie she gets the study backwards!

I love your posts, far to few of those that actually read the studies. Its what i mean often studies are misused to show benefits that are not there. Giant step of comparing some cells in a testtube to a human being.  Then having it interpret wrongly and nobody notices. 

 

I have long since given up on miracle cures and certain diets that are better then others. Its just calories in VS calories out (if you have dropped the processed crap). 

 

I have tried many supplements and diets that promised a lot. Few delivered what promised. I still take supplements but just a few that i know that work (proven with research and feeling it myself) Creatine is a good example of something that works so does berberine. 

 

But nothing is really magical, usually it helps with a few percent. 

[WaveHunter]

18 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

I have no objection to your disagreeing. That's fine. However, for me, the issue is the quality of the evidence in support of your disagreement. I'm surprised you claim that fasting has no benefits for detoxification. Are you of this view because there are no scientific studies that have been carried out on this specific issue, or because there are specific scientific studies that debunk the claim?

 

The following general article includes detoxification as one of the benefits of fasting, with lots of references to scientific studies at the end. But I couldn't see any article which specifically addressed the detoxification issue in its title, and I haven't had time to wade through the articles, which might have a paywall.
https://www.libifit.com/autophagy-and-intermittent-fasting/

 

To quote:

"Are you struggling to detoxify your body naturally? Is a detox diet or a juice cleanse not working out for you? No need to worry. There is a proven process to help cleanse and detox your body. It involves autophagy and intermittent fasting and it helps to rid your body of harmful toxins, ignite weight loss, and renew your body."

 

 

 

 

That water fasting is a way to burn off fat is surely indisputable. Nothing could be more certain. I've never come across any example of anyone not losing weight, or burning off excess fat after fasting. The longer you fast, the more weight or fat you lose. There's a documented case of an extremely obese person fasting for more than a whole year in order to get back to a normal weight, but under medical supervision of course, being prescribed vitamin supplements, or injections, now and again.

 

It's impossible not to lose weight if you fast. There are no failures. But there are people who fail to fast. There's the distinction.
 

I think you're missing my point.  First of all, the body is capable of dealing with environmental toxins (even fat soluble ones) without fasting. 

 

Secondly, autophagy has nothing to do AT ALL with detoxing the body.  Autophagy simply describes the breaking down and recycling of proteins (RNA), not environmental toxins.  Autophagy is a process that actually goes on 24/7 in your body.  During a fast however, the process is ramped up markedly for the following reason.

 

When you fast, the body MUST catabolize protein in the absence of carbs to fuel the body until ketone bodies allow stored body fat to be accessed for fuel.  On a water-only fast, it takes about 72 hours for sufficient ketone bodies to be produced that will allow stored body fat to provide sufficient fuel for the body and brain. 

 

It is during that interim time that autophagy catabolizes proteins in a ramped up mode.  Since it is highly selective as to what type of proteins are catabolized, the body seeks out damaged, dysfunctional proteins to use rather than use essential proteins like prime mover-muscles and the heart.

 

THAT is autophagy; and that is all that it is.

 

The quote you referenced is exactly the kind of GuruSpeak that leads people to believe that autophagy is some magical cure-all.  It is not.  Don't read third-party stuff like that if you really want to understand autophagy and its' relationship to fasting.  Google the man who won the Nobel Prize for his groundbreaking work on the subject, Yoshinori Ohsumi.

 

As for the strategy of fasting to loose weight.  It has been proven to be a bad strategy UNLESS it is followed up with a sound nutritional plan.  Most people who casually try to fast without a post-fast plan of action only stick with it for a couple of days when the hunger pangs are still strong.  As a result, they break the fast by binging on food. 

 

What's even worse is that during the initial phase of a fast the metabolism slows down greatly, so all the calories they consume are stored as fat to an even greater degree than normal.  The end result is they have even more stored body fat than when they started the fast!

 

Opinions can vary but if you really look into the true SCIENCE behind fasting and autophagy, these two points points I am making are pretty clear, and pretty incontrovertible.

[brokenbone]

after the one month one meal a day starvation,

i actually dont suffer hunger any longer.

i realized i dont actually need to eat much.

i still eat only one meal, but i crave snacks

so i take a slice of salami with either a tomato slice or half a boiled egg every now and then, no hunger and no suffering

[WaveHunter]

16 hours ago, partington said:

I don't know if you know but this is meaningless. RNA is not any kind of protein, good or bad. RNA is ribonucleic acid, which has no structural relationship with protein at all...

I did not say that RNA is a type of protein.  However there is an ABSOLUTE structural relationship between RNA and proteins, and it’s a crucial one when it comes to understanding the connection between dysfunctional metabolic states and disease.  

 

I’m speaking specifically of messenger RNA.  Proteins are synthesized from RNA strands through a process called translation.   The breakdown and Recycling of proteins AND THEIR ASSOCIATED RNA (as well as other intra cellular materials) are what occurs in autophagy.

 

It is the dysfunctional RNA that’s linked with many metabolic based diseases but there is a link between the proteins synthesized by these RNA strands.

 

One of the most important areas of research associated with autophagy is in the causal relationship between dysfunctional RNA & proteins, and the capacity of autophagy to mediate these dysfunctions.  (See Emerging connections between RNA and autophagy).  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27715443

 

You should understand I am not writing a detailed treatise here.  I’m making comments with a broad brush, and expect that anyone with an interest will do their own googling and reading to get all the details.

[robblok]

12 hours ago, WaveHunter said:

I think you're missing my point.  First of all, the body is capable of dealing with environmental toxins (even fat soluble ones) without fasting. 

 

Secondly, autophagy has nothing to do AT ALL with detoxing the body.  Autophagy simply describes the breaking down and recycling of proteins (RNA), not environmental toxins.  Autophagy is a process that actually goes on 24/7 in your body.  During a fast however, the process is ramped up markedly for the following reason.

 

When you fast, the body MUST catabolize protein in the absence of carbs to fuel the body until ketone bodies allow stored body fat to be accessed for fuel.  On a water-only fast, it takes about 72 hours for sufficient ketone bodies to be produced that will allow stored body fat to provide sufficient fuel for the body and brain. 

 

It is during that interim time that autophagy catabolizes proteins in a ramped up mode.  Since it is highly selective as to what type of proteins are catabolized, the body seeks out damaged, dysfunctional proteins to use rather than use essential proteins like prime mover-muscles and the heart.

 

THAT is autophagy; and that is all that it is.

 

The quote you referenced is exactly the kind of GuruSpeak that leads people to believe that autophagy is some magical cure-all.  It is not.  Don't read third-party stuff like that if you really want to understand autophagy and its' relationship to fasting.  Google the man who won the Nobel Prize for his groundbreaking work on the subject, Yoshinori Ohsumi.

 

As for the strategy of fasting to loose weight.  It has been proven to be a bad strategy UNLESS it is followed up with a sound nutritional plan.  Most people who casually try to fast without a post-fast plan of action only stick with it for a couple of days when the hunger pangs are still strong.  As a result, they break the fast by binging on food. 

 

What's even worse is that during the initial phase of a fast the metabolism slows down greatly, so all the calories they consume are stored as fat to an even greater degree than normal.  The end result is they have even more stored body fat than when they started the fast!

 

Opinions can vary but if you really look into the true SCIENCE behind fasting and autophagy, these two points points I am making are pretty clear, and pretty incontrovertible.

I put something in bold and underline that I have trouble believing. I eat carbs and other people do too and we still lose fat. (got a flat belly to prove it now). So in reality it does not take the body so long to start using body fat as fuel. It starts right away and almost always happen.

The way you write it down makes no sense at all it would mean our body takes 72 hours to switch between fuel sources. IF that was true then nobody would be able to burn fat on a normal diet.

 

Proteins are usually the last fuel used especially muscle (if you make sure your body knows it needs the muscle or keep your testosterone high)

[WaveHunter]

2 hours ago, robblok said:

I put something in bold and underline that I have trouble believing. I eat carbs and other people do too and we still lose fat. (got a flat belly to prove it now). So in reality it does not take the body so long to start using body fat as fuel. It starts right away and almost always happen.

The way you write it down makes no sense at all it would mean our body takes 72 hours to switch between fuel sources. IF that was true then nobody would be able to burn fat on a normal diet.

 

Proteins are usually the last fuel used especially muscle (if you make sure your body knows it needs the muscle or keep your testosterone high)

I am not saying you must be in full-blown ketosis (i.e.: 72 hours of fasting) in order to burn excess body fat, but ketone bodies MUST be released in order for the body to access stored body fat and use it as fuel. 

 

Ketone bodies can not be released in the presence of insulin or when stored glycogen can be accessed by the body.  This is simply a matter of metabolic science. You can only burn fat when glycogen stores have been depleted or your body needs more energy than the glycogen stores can provide.  So, yes, you can burn fat without being in full-blown ketosis BUT ketone bodies must be released as a precursor for that to happen.  In simple terms, ketone bodies are like the key that unlocks stored body fat and allows it to be used as fuel. 

 

It's a misnomer to equate fat loss with caloric balance (i.e.: less calories in than out and you will burn fat).  The truth is, you will only burn fat when the body can not get sufficient glycogen for its' needs. It is the excess carbs that need to be cut, not the calories.  Cut the carbs and you minimize insulin release, and you deplete stored glycogen which leads to the release of ketone bodies and activation of fat stores for fuel.   

 

Regarding autophagy, until sufficient ketone bodies are produced, fat stores can not be accessed sufficiently to meet the body's and brain's needs, therefore you will also catabolize proteins.  That is not a bad thing; it is a good thing.  The reason is because that is how the body is able to recycle "bad" dysfunctional proteins and other dysfunctional intracellular materials such as rogue RNA.  True, you will burn some essential proteins like mover-muscles during this interim period of fasting, but the body tries to be selective as possible, sparing the essential proteins as much as possible and using the "junky" ones primarily.

 

This is all science-based information; nothing mysterious or open to debate about it.

[robblok]

4 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

I am not saying you must be in full-blown ketosis (i.e.: 72 hours of fasting) in order to burn excess body fat, but ketone bodies MUST be released in order to access stored body fat and use it as fuel.  Ketone bodies can not be released in the presence of insulin or when stored glycogen can be accessed by the body.  Thus, you can only burn fat when glycogen stores have been depleted (or your body needs more energy than the glycogen stores can provide.  In simple terms, ketone bodies are like the key that unlocks stored body fat and allows it to be used as fuel. 

 

It's a misnomer to equate fat loss with caloric balance (i.e.: less calories in than out and you will burn fat).  The truth is, you will only burn fat when the body can not get sufficient glycogen for its' needs.  Diets based purely on caloric deficit are rarely successful.  It is the excess carbs that need to be cut, not the calories.  Cut the carbs and you minimize insulin release, and you deplete stored glycogen which leads to the release of ketone bodies and activation of fat stores for fuel.   

 

Until sufficient ketone bodies are produced, fat stores can not be accessed sufficiently to meet the body's and brain's needs, therefore you will also catabolize proteins.  That is not a bad thing; it is a good thing.  The reason is because that is how the body is able to recycle "bad" proteins of other dysfunctional intracellular materials (RNA).  True, you will burn some essential proteins during this interim period of fasting, but the body tries to be selective as possible, sparing the essential proteins as much as possible and using the "junky" ones primarily.

 

This is all science-based information; nothing mysterious or open to debate about it.

your making a huge mistake in your reasoning. Not science based at all. Either we don't understand each other or your spreading B.S.

 

Keto Myth: If you want to burn fat, you need to be in ketosis

Truth: Being in ketosis is not the same as being able to burn fat. All being ketosis means is that there is a certain level of ketones in your bloodstream, which isn’t a requirement for burning fat for fuel.

 

You dont need ketones to burn fat otherwise people on high carb diets would not be able to lose fat and they do. So your wrong in what your saying. I think you were hit by the Keto bandwagon. 

 

I looked all over and everywhere they state you can burn fat without being in ketosis so you can burn fat without there having to be any ketones.

 

https://www.livestrong.com/article/491976-what-happens-if-i-eat-sugar-in-ketosis/

[jvs]

23 hours ago, robblok said:

I have tried many supplements and diets that promised a lot. Few delivered what promised. I still take supplements but just a few that i know that work (proven with research and feeling it myself) Creatine is a good example of something that works so does berberine.  

I have sold many supplements,many people are looking for a shortcut,guess what,its not there.

Supplements do help certain people(athletes)not to be confused by people who work out a few times per week and go party in the weekend.

Who is the person benifitting the most?The guy who sells it!

[robblok]

3 minutes ago, jvs said:

I have sold many supplements,many people are looking for a shortcut,guess what,its not there.

Supplements do help certain people(athletes)not to be confused by people who work out a few times per week and go party in the weekend.

Who is the person benifitting the most?The guy who sells it!

Yes the person selling it makes the most money and benefits. However there are supplements like creatine that works, berberine has been tested and shown to work. There are more that work and a whole lot that does not work. 

 

Not sure if I am an athlete, I can only say i workout harder then most and don't party int he weekends. Supplements only help when all other things are in order already. (and then only certain supplements) 

 

I personally like examine.com where they really investigate supplements. 

 

[jvs]

Two weeks ago i decided to try a real fast for the first time in my life.

Ann went to see her relatives and i thought it was a good time to try it.

Only drank one cup of black coffee in the morning and only water the rest of the day.I found it very easy to do and never got really hungry.

I made sure i was busy doing something else during the hours we usually eat.

Yes i lost weight(63kg before and 61.5 at the end)

I was surpised what happened when i did start eating again the third day.Could not stop eating!!Hungry all the time and it took me 3 days to feel normal again.Weight is around 63 kg again.

Looks like there is an ideal weight for ones body if you learn to listen to it.

I am the same weight now as when i was 16.

[jak2002003]

Quote

They found that keto diets don’t allow the body to properly use insulin, so blood sugar isn’t properly controlled. That leads to insulin resistance, which can raise the risk for type 2 diabetes.

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/keto-diet-may-increase-type-2-diabetes-risk#2

 

[jvs]

1 minute ago, robblok said:

Yes the person selling it makes the most money and benefits. However there are supplements like creatine that works, berberine has been tested and shown to work. There are more that work and a whole lot that does not work. 

 

Not sure if I am an athlete, I can only say i workout harder then most and don't party int he weekends. Supplements only help when all other things are in order already. (and then only certain supplements) 

 

I personally like examine.com where they really investigate supplements. 

 

Yes Rob you may hyave a point but every body does not respond the same way,something you read online may or may not work for you.If you really want it to work for you you are open to the placebo effect.If you really want to know you need a lot of bloodtests done on a regular basis.

I would call you a serious hobby sporter but not an athlete,that is something totally different.You would probably have to be a professional for that these days.

Keep up the good work,it will pay off and keep you focussed.

 

[robblok]

4 minutes ago, jvs said:

Yes Rob you may hyave a point but every body does not respond the same way,something you read online may or may not work for you.If you really want it to work for you you are open to the placebo effect.If you really want to know you need a lot of bloodtests done on a regular basis.

I would call you a serious hobby sporter but not an athlete,that is something totally different.You would probably have to be a professional for that these days.

Keep up the good work,it will pay off and keep you focussed.

 

 

There is indeed the placebo effect, but with creatine its been demonstrated that it works and it works for me too. There is other stuff that I have found to work and a lot more stuff that i found not to work. I am quite sceptical about supplements but i would be foolish if i thought all of them would not work. 

 

I am certainly not a professional, and I would have to workout a lot more to gain athlete status. But for now it works. I don't rely on supplements but it sure helps against cramps to supplement with certain stuff. (depends on how much you sweat)

[robblok]

13 minutes ago, jvs said:

Two weeks ago i decided to try a real fast for the first time in my life.

Ann went to see her relatives and i thought it was a good time to try it.

Only drank one cup of black coffee in the morning and only water the rest of the day.I found it very easy to do and never got really hungry.

I made sure i was busy doing something else during the hours we usually eat.

Yes i lost weight(63kg before and 61.5 at the end)

I was surpised what happened when i did start eating again the third day.Could not stop eating!!Hungry all the time and it took me 3 days to feel normal again.Weight is around 63 kg again.

Looks like there is an ideal weight for ones body if you learn to listen to it.

I am the same weight now as when i was 16.

There is such a thing as a set point for weight problem is it easily shifts upwards but they so far have not found proof of how to manipulate it downwards.

 

 

[direction BANGKOK]

There is a ton of very convincing science that fasting does all sorts of good stuff, including prolonging life, decreasing risk of cancer, increased cognitive abilities. 

 

Just look up Dr. Valter Longo. He has talks on tedx i believe. I personally believe this is going to be a mojor area of change in the next 10 to 20 years. 

 

There was a great line in a woody allen movie, something like "everything our parents told us was good for us is actually bad...".

 

It is turning out, that eating three meals a day, no matter the quality or nutritional value, is much less healthy than eating very sporadically (eg once a day)... all other things being equal. It makes sense too is the insane part, your body just simply does not know how to handle a constant supply of food as well as it does when you have food deprivation. It has been known forever as well, that deprivation of food is beneficial at every level of organism(1), even a damn amoeba. If you constantly feed yourself, even the finest diet, you are setting yourself up for disaster... so do not fool yourself. 

 

1. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081013111940.htm

[WaveHunter]

5 hours ago, robblok said:

your making a huge mistake in your reasoning. Not science based at all. Either we don't understand each other or your spreading B.S.

 

Keto Myth: If you want to burn fat, you need to be in ketosis

Truth: Being in ketosis is not the same as being able to burn fat. All being ketosis means is that there is a certain level of ketones in your bloodstream, which isn’t a requirement for burning fat for fuel.

 

You dont need ketones to burn fat otherwise people on high carb diets would not be able to lose fat and they do. So your wrong in what your saying. I think you were hit by the Keto bandwagon. 

 

I looked all over and everywhere they state you can burn fat without being in ketosis so you can burn fat without there having to be any ketones.

 

https://www.livestrong.com/article/491976-what-happens-if-i-eat-sugar-in-ketosis/

I was wrong to say that ketone bodies are the key that "unlocks" stored fat.  They are a critical component but actually I should have said that high insulin levels are the "lock" that prevents accessing stored body fat.  In the presence of significant insulin, you will absolutely NOT be able to access stored body fat.  If you keep your carb intake high, you will not shed one ounce of stored fat.

 

Ketone bodies still play a significant role.  If you are on a diet, no matter what type of diet it is, if it is aggressive enough to deplete glycogen stores, ketone bodies play a critical role.  If you aggressively diet but don't do it properly (i.e.: fail to enter into ketosis), you're going to have serious problems in the form of essential protein (muscle) loss and severe lethargy at the very least.  Ketone bodies prevent this from happening.

 

Here's my point...hopefully explained better:

It's true that stored fat can be released through the adipose tissue without being in ketosis.  Stored fat in adipose tissue is released from the fat cells into the blood as free fatty acids and glycerol when insulin levels are low and glucagon and epinephrine levels in the blood are high. It will occurs between meals or during strenuous exercise, when blood glucose levels are likely to fall. 

 

Here is the important part:

While it's true that most fo the cells of the body can survive off of fatty acids, created from the breakdown of stored body fat, the brain and liver can not.  Fatty acids cannot pass through the blood-brain barrier.  This is where ketone bodies enter the picture; they can!  The liver, in order to keep supplying the brain with glucose, must convert amino acids, glycerol, pyruvate, and lactate into glucose. This process is called gluconeogenesis.  The end result is ketone bodies!

 

Without them, your brain will become starved of fuel.  Many people who undertake a water fast don't know what they are doing.  During the initial 3-4 days of a water fast, the metabolism will slow down greatly, primarily to protect the brain.  It's only after sufficient ketone bodies can provide adequate fuel to the brain does the metabolism start to ramp up.  

 

Anybody who's fasted more than 72 hours recognizes this in the form of greater energy, absence of hunger, and less lethargy.  However for those who end a fast before this happens, they will usually binge on food since hunger is still significant, and because the metabolism has slowed significantly, almost all of the consumed calories will be stored as fat.

 

So, ketosis is really the key to successful fasting if you are hoping to shed significant amounts of adipose tissue.  I don't subscribe to fasting for weight loss personally but it's a valid strategy for many people, such as those in life-threatening stages of type-2 diabetes for instance. 

 

Finally, I just want to say that I am not trying to convert anybody over to being on the "keto bandwagon".  I am just sharing science-based information that I have learned about.  I do A LOT of reading on the subject, and ALL OF IT is from trusted sources such as medical textbooks, PubMed, medical journals, or original research white papers.  Some of the information gets pretty complex and I'm not the best writer so sometimes I don't make my points clearly.

 

I want to be clear though; I trust absolutely nothing that comes from mainstream info-tainment sources like LiveStrong or the myriad of health-gurus on YouTube.  Some of them are actually OK but they are NOT the ORIGINAL source; rather they are interpreting original research, and sometimes bending the facts to meet their own agenda.

 

[robblok]

13 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

I was wrong to say that ketone bodies are the key that "unlocks" stored fat.  They are a critical component but actually I should have said that high insulin levels are the "lock" that prevents accessing stored body fat.  In the presence of significant insulin, you will absolutely NOT be able to access stored body fat.  If you keep your carb intake high, you will not shed one ounce of stored fat.

 

Ketone bodies still play a significant role.  If you are on a diet, no matter what type of diet it is, if it is aggressive enough to deplete glycogen stores, ketone bodies play a critical role.  If you aggressively diet but don't do it properly (i.e.: fail to enter into ketosis), you're going to have serious problems in the form of essential protein (muscle) loss and severe lethargy at the very least.  Ketone bodies prevent this from happening.

 

Here's my point...hopefully explained better:

It's true that stored fat can be released through the adipose tissue without being in ketosis.  Stored fat in adipose tissue is released from the fat cells into the blood as free fatty acids and glycerol when insulin levels are low and glucagon and epinephrine levels in the blood are high. It will occurs between meals or during strenuous exercise, when blood glucose levels are likely to fall. 

 

Here is the important part:

While it's true that most fo the cells of the body can survive off of fatty acids, created from the breakdown of stored body fat, the brain and liver can not.  Fatty acids cannot pass through the blood-brain barrier.  This is where ketone bodies enter the picture; they can!  The liver, in order to keep supplying the brain with glucose, must convert amino acids, glycerol, pyruvate, and lactate into glucose. This process is called gluconeogenesis.  The end result is ketone bodies!

 

Without them, your brain will become starved of fuel.  Many people who undertake a water fast don't know what they are doing.  During the initial 3-4 days of a water fast, the metabolism will slow down greatly, primarily to protect the brain.  It's only after sufficient ketone bodies can provide adequate fuel to the brain does the metabolism start to ramp up.  

 

Anybody who's fasted more than 72 hours recognizes this in the form of greater energy, absence of hunger, and less lethargy.  However for those who end a fast before this happens, they will usually binge on food since hunger is still significant, and because the metabolism has slowed significantly, almost all of the consumed calories will be stored as fat.

 

So, ketosis is really the key to successful fasting if you are hoping to shed significant amounts of adipose tissue.  I don't subscribe to fasting for weight loss personally but it's a valid strategy for many people, such as those in life-threatening stages of type-2 diabetes for instance. 

 

 

I can agree a lot better with what you posted there. It just did not make sense that you had to be in ketosis to get rid of fat. Otherwise I would never have lost my fat, I am certainly NOT in ketosis.

 

I knew of course about insulin, insulin is both good and bad. We need it to build muscle and to shuttle nutrients in the body but its bad for fat loss. You can still eat carbs as long as your insulin levels come down. 

 

That ketones are important during a fast is something I also understand. (never really thought much about it but knew about the blood brain barrier).

 

 

 

[WaveHunter]

10 minutes ago, robblok said:

I can agree a lot better with what you posted there. It just did not make sense that you had to be in ketosis to get rid of fat. Otherwise I would never have lost my fat, I am certainly NOT in ketosis.

 

I knew of course about insulin, insulin is both good and bad. We need it to build muscle and to shuttle nutrients in the body but its bad for fat loss. You can still eat carbs as long as your insulin levels come down. 

 

That ketones are important during a fast is something I also understand. (never really thought much about it but knew about the blood brain barrier).

 

 

 

Glad we're closer in agreement and glad this thread seems to be thriving with lively exchange of ideas!!????  You do know though that ketone bodies are readily released anytime your glycogen stores are depleted?  You might not consider yourself in ketosis at times, and certainly not in full-blown ketosis, but in fact they are playing a metabolic role 24/7.  Same is true with autophagy.  You don't need to be fasting for them to be "doing their thing"  The biochemical & physiological processes of metabolism are pretty fascinating in their own rite.   Just FOOD for thought  ????

[robblok]

4 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

Glad we're closer in agreement ????  You do know though that ketone bodies are readily released anytime your glycogen stores are depleted?  You might not consider yourself in ketosis at times, and certainly not in full-blown ketosis, but in fact they are playing a metabolic role 24/7.  Just FOOD for thought  ????

I am not sure i deplete all of my glycogen stores, currently i sip some lemonade during my training (heavily diluted) To keep my energy up a bit. I also started doing (heavy / medium / light) days. 

 

I was going heavy all the time (think close to failure on my exercises). It took me a minimum of 30 minutes or more of lying down after a training session to have any power back and function normally. I think it was over training or under eating. 

 

So I just added a bit of lemonade during the training and made sure I had days I did not go that close to failure.  I was one of those people who thought that anything below 100% was slacking. 

 

Now i see myself progressing again (adding weight to the bar) and feeling normal after a workout. I still need a bit of time to recover if I have a heavy workout (close to failure) but less before.

 

I am not sure if it means i burned through all my glycogen or not.

 

I am just happy that i am still losing fat and much easier than before (other times that i needed to lose weight). Almost no hunger pangs and a far more constant shrinking of the belly. Though at times it look like it was stuck and then came down all of a sudden. (read about that too its normal).

 

I am curious if i might be finally be able to get where i want to go. I do know that the way i do it now is easier as before. 

 

Might be the berberine or the inulin / physilium husk. I am not really sure what is giving me the improved weight loss. 

 

[brokenbone]

7 hours ago, robblok said:

There is such a thing as a set point for weight problem is it easily shifts upwards but they so far have not found proof of how to manipulate it downwards.

 

 

i think the fat cells just go flaccid during diet

and the body/brain want to refill.

i think if you do a liposuction and remove those fat cells altogether you are set

[WaveHunter]

2 hours ago, robblok said:

I am not sure i deplete all of my glycogen stores, currently i sip some lemonade during my training (heavily diluted) To keep my energy up a bit. I also started doing (heavy / medium / light) days. 

 

I was going heavy all the time (think close to failure on my exercises). It took me a minimum of 30 minutes or more of lying down after a training session to have any power back and function normally. I think it was over training or under eating. 

 

So I just added a bit of lemonade during the training and made sure I had days I did not go that close to failure.  I was one of those people who thought that anything below 100% was slacking. 

 

Now i see myself progressing again (adding weight to the bar) and feeling normal after a workout. I still need a bit of time to recover if I have a heavy workout (close to failure) but less before.

 

I am not sure if it means i burned through all my glycogen or not.

 

I am just happy that i am still losing fat and much easier than before (other times that i needed to lose weight). Almost no hunger pangs and a far more constant shrinking of the belly. Though at times it look like it was stuck and then came down all of a sudden. (read about that too its normal).

 

I am curious if i might be finally be able to get where i want to go. I do know that the way i do it now is easier as before. 

 

Might be the berberine or the inulin / physilium husk. I am not really sure what is giving me the improved weight loss. 

 

Despite advances in our understanding of how the body works, there is so much that is just plain unknown.  When it comes to training regimes and nutrition, who's really to say what's best.  I think the best we can do is approach it all the way you are doing; experiment and see how your body responds.  Everybody is different.  What works for one person may not be optimal for another. 

 

I read about the pure science of these things simply because it fascinates me, but like you, I also try and apply what I learn to make me healthier.  It all boils down to trial & error, and lots of dead-ends, but also some successes.  It's so much better to learn by doing instead of just blindly following someone else's advice, I think.

 

All I can say for certain is that the body is an amazing machine.  When you delve into its' working; the biochemical and physiological mechanisms, I am just in awe!  That's the main reason I get off on learning what I can about it ???? 

 

To me, it sure sounds like you doing it the right way though, so congrats on that!

 

[robblok]

13 hours ago, WaveHunter said:

Despite advances in our understanding of how the body works, there is so much that is just plain unknown.  When it comes to training regimes and nutrition, who's really to say what's best.  I think the best we can do is approach it all the way you are doing; experiment and see how your body responds.  Everybody is different.  What works for one person may not be optimal for another. 

 

I read about the pure science of these things simply because it fascinates me, but like you, I also try and apply what I learn to make me healthier.  It all boils down to trial & error, and lots of dead-ends, but also some successes.  It's so much better to learn by doing instead of just blindly following someone else's advice, I think.

 

All I can say for certain is that the body is an amazing machine.  When you delve into its' working; the biochemical and physiological mechanisms, I am just in awe!  That's the main reason I get off on learning what I can about it ???? 

 

To me, it sure sounds like you doing it the right way though, so congrats on that!

 

How I wish i knew what i know now when i was young. I would have made such good gains. Too bad it was just a bit before internet that i was young. So much information on it now. 

 

I have tried and tested many things to see what works for me and what works not. So far this works best this time. Its funny how many things I have tried to see what works. I was not against keto, tried it. I tried most things to see how i respond to it.

 

Thing is all those science facts don't often explain how it works for real. It helps us but we never know how much of a difference there is. Same with supplements. 

 

Training wise I have no real preference though I am now slowly thinking that full body is better then a split. But again people can debate about that for ages. But with training I never really thought that the program mattered that much but that it was more about the effort put into the training.

 

This time I am getting real close, my goal is of course clear defined lower abs (upper abs is easy and done already). Sad part is my lower abs are just a slab of muscle (some have extra muscle heads there). Its funny to see all the different builds people have some have an 8 pack others 6 pack and there are variations there too. Even though we are all human. Thing is most important thing is low fat to get there. 

 

But its hard to gauge how far you are as all the pics online are taken in good light, usually after a few days of dropping all the water in the body (diuretics) and looking best for a photo shoot. So to see how someone like that looks normally is hard. 

 

Its not vanity (ok part of it) but mainly that i need a goal to work towards too. Without a goal to work to I just would not be into it as much. 

 

I have given up goals for lifting weights as its inevitable that those go down with time. But you can keep your body looking good much longer.

 

 

[WaveHunter]

22 hours ago, jak2002003 said:

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/keto-diet-may-increase-type-2-diabetes-risk#2

 

Perfect example of info-tainment website BS from author with self-serving agenda.  There is ABSOLUTELY no credidible research that supports this REDICULOUS notion!

[WaveHunter]

22 hours ago, jvs said:

Two weeks ago i decided to try a real fast for the first time in my life.

Ann went to see her relatives and i thought it was a good time to try it.

Only drank one cup of black coffee in the morning and only water the rest of the day.I found it very easy to do and never got really hungry.

I made sure i was busy doing something else during the hours we usually eat.

Yes i lost weight(63kg before and 61.5 at the end)

I was surpised what happened when i did start eating again the third day.Could not stop eating!!Hungry all the time and it took me 3 days to feel normal again.Weight is around 63 kg again.

Looks like there is an ideal weight for ones body if you learn to listen to it.

I am the same weight now as when i was 16.

There’s scientific fact to support what you experienced.  The body does have a set point for body fat percentage that varies from one person to the next.  It’s sort of like the body’s built-in “fat thermostat ????

 

It’s referred to as Body Set Weight (BSW), and it’s an important concept to understand because it completely contradicts the commonly accepted and antiquated notion that loosing weight is merely a matter of adjusting calories in vs calories out; the CICO concept.

 

A really good articles that explains the science behind this is here:  https://medium.com/@drjasonfung/controlling-the-bodys-fat-thermometer-12e2e69e94dd

 

That’s why fasting is NOT a good strategy for weight loss unless you have a well conceived post-fast nutritional plan.  Even if you do, it’s still going to take a lot of will power and time to make it happen.  

 

At least, if you are armed with an understanding of the REAL science underlying weight loss, you're going to be more likely to succeed.

[WaveHunter]

34 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

There’s scientific fact to support what you experienced.  The body does have a set point for body fat percentage that varies from one person to the next.  It’s sort of like the body’s built-in “fat thermostat ????

 

It’s referred to as Body Set Weight (BSW), and it’s an important concept to understand because it completely contradicts the commonly accepted and antiquated notion that loosing weight is merely a matter of adjusting calories in vs calories out; the CICO concept.

 

A really good articles that explains the science behind this is here:  https://medium.com/@drjasonfung/controlling-the-bodys-fat-thermometer-12e2e69e94dd

 

That’s why fasting is NOT a good strategy for weight loss unless you have a well conceived post-fast nutritional plan.  Even if you do, it’s still going to take a lot of will power and time to make it happen.  

 

At least, if you are armed with an understanding of the REAL science underlying weight loss, you're going to be more likely to succeed.

This is one of the main reasons why calorie-reduction diets are rarely successful.  Read this article if you really want to understand the science behind loosing excess body fat.

 

Bottom line...Loosing excess body fat is NOT ABOUT CUTTING CALORIES; it’s more involved.  Read article to understand.

[robblok]

47 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

There’s scientific fact to support what you experienced.  The body does have a set point for body fat percentage that varies from one person to the next.  It’s sort of like the body’s built-in “fat thermostat ????

 

It’s referred to as Body Set Weight (BSW), and it’s an important concept to understand because it completely contradicts the commonly accepted and antiquated notion that loosing weight is merely a matter of adjusting calories in vs calories out; the CICO concept.

 

A really good articles that explains the science behind this is here:  https://medium.com/@drjasonfung/controlling-the-bodys-fat-thermometer-12e2e69e94dd

 

That’s why fasting is NOT a good strategy for weight loss unless you have a well conceived post-fast nutritional plan.  Even if you do, it’s still going to take a lot of will power and time to make it happen.  

 

At least, if you are armed with an understanding of the REAL science underlying weight loss, you're going to be more likely to succeed.

Nothing new there, read it before and he does not come up with an answer to the problem. That is ok because nobody has found a way to reset the body set point.

 

And it still is calories in vs calories out (but its not a mathematical formula the body can slow down). In the end everyone loses the fat else people could not die from lack of food. 

 

But he is right about a few things like eating less processed carbs and less sugars. But that is almost accepted by everyone. Mind you he did not put down all carbs.

 

I often think that guys like him have a far more moderate view then what they write down. He is exaggerating things at times to get a point across going into generalities. (like its easier to say all carbs are bad then to confuse people with carbs that actually are not that bad and that is about amounts and when you take them)

 

 

[WaveHunter]

1 hour ago, robblok said:

Nothing new there, read it before and he does not come up with an answer to the problem. That is ok because nobody has found a way to reset the body set point.

 

And it still is calories in vs calories out (but its not a mathematical formula the body can slow down). In the end everyone loses the fat else people could not die from lack of food. 

 

But he is right about a few things like eating less processed carbs and less sugars. But that is almost accepted by everyone. Mind you he did not put down all carbs.

 

I often think that guys like him have a far more moderate view then what they write down. He is exaggerating things at times to get a point across going into generalities. (like its easier to say all carbs are bad then to confuse people with carbs that actually are not that bad and that is about amounts and when you take them)

 

 

While you can not change the set point, you can still control body fat. It’s like a person who is an alcoholic.  He/she can quit drinking successfully but will always need to be on guard to avoid relapse.  The obese person can loose weight sucesfully but will need to have a science based nutritional plan for the long term, and not just think that a weight loss diet is all that’s necessary.  

 

I think the value of Fung’s article is that it debunks CICO (calories in/calories out).  When you factor in all of the biochemical and physiological processes that contribute to obesity, excess calories are really only a very small part of the problem.  

 

Too many people fail to loose body fat when they only focus on calories.  It’s not excess calories that cause accumulation of excess body fat.  Rather, it is the excess insulin that those calories create that is the real problem.   Insulin’s only job is to signal the body to store fat, and in the presence of insulin it is impossible for stored fat to be accessed as fuel. So, the focus of an effective weight loss diet should be on insulin, not calories.  The reason this is so important has to do with how different macronutrients effect insulin response.

 

if you look at insulin response studies it’s plain to see that carbs elicit a dramatic insulin response compared to fats.  Proteins can also elicit a high insulin response because excessive dietary protein is converted to carbs, and most people eat far more protein the body actually needs, so in essence, excessive protein is just as bad as carbs!

 

So, the best diet to loose weight is one low in carbs, much lower in protein than many people think, and relatively high in “good” fats.

 

There is nothing unhealthy about a fat-rich diet, despite what we have been led to believe over the last couple of decades.  Good fats are essential to health as are moderate amounts of proteins.  The only macronutrient for which there is no need, in terms of survival, are carbs, as strange as that may sound!  Again, this is not guru-speak.  Real science supports this fact.

 

Of course, for the sake of performance and a sense of well being, carbs are important but there are “good” carbs and there are “bad” carbs.

 

Avoiding the bad ones like processed foods or anything containing HFCS (high fructose corn syrup) which are in Practically EVERY processed food on the shelves of supermarkets is what’s really important.

 

IMHO, the best way to loose excess body fat is simply to control carb intake above all else, and have a consciously planned healthy lifestyle and nutritional plan to replace your old one.  It should be based on sound science, not crazy fad diets.  

 

Fasting can be a good way to make a break from a bad lifestyle and jump start a healthier one but I just don’t think it’s a good strategy for long term weight loss.

[robblok]

12 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

While you can not change the set point, you can still control body fat. It’s like a person who is an alcoholic.  He/she can quit drinking successfully but will always need to be on guard to avoid relapse.  The obese person can loose weight sucesfully but will always need to avoid over-eating once the weight has been lost.  

 

I think the value of Fung’s article is that it debunks CICO (calories in/calories out).  Too many people fail to loose body fat when they only focus on calories.  It’s not excess calories that cause accumulation of excess body fat; it is excess insulin caused by excessive amounts of dietary carbohydrates.  Excess insulin causes fat to be stored and fat can not be utilized as fuel in the presence of insulin.

 

if you look at insulin response studies it’s plain to see that carbs elicit a dramatic insulin response compared to fats.  Furthermore, excessive protein (beyond what the body actually needs) are converted to carbs.  So, the best diet to loose weight is one low in carbs, much lower in protein than many people think, and relatively high in “good” fats.

 

There is nothing unhealthy about a fat-rich diet, despite what we have been led to believe over the last couple of decades.  Good fats are essential to health as are moderate amounts of proteins.  The only macronutrient for which there is no need, in terms of survival, are carbs, as strange as that may sound!  

 

Of course, for the sake of performance and a sense of well being, carbs are important but there are “good” carbs and there are “bad” carbs.  Avoiding the bad ones like processed foods or anything containing HFCS (high fructose corn syrup) which are in Practically EVERY processed food on the shelves of supermarkets are the ones to avoid.

 

So, IMO the best way to loose excess body fat is simply to control carb intake above all else, and have a consciously planned healthy lifestyle and nutritional plan based on sound science, not crazy fad diets.  Fasting can be a good way to make a break from a bad lifestyle and jump start a healthier one but I just don’t think it’s a good strategy for long term weight loss.

I almost 100% agree.

 

But about the carbs and CICO. One has to eat loads of carbs to keep producing insulin. If you eat just a normal portion of carbs you don't have that much insulin. So by eating less (means less carbs too) means less insulin.

 

I think its hard to be producing too much insulin from carbs if your at a caloric deficit. So you will lose fat the CICO way. I still believe CICO is true.. just not as mathematically as people think. The body can slow down.

 

I think best way is to eat healthy non processed foods and on a caloric deficit. The rest is up to personal preference.

 

I understand what your saying about the body setpoint and always struggling. Though as i said this time its not a struggle not even when losing weight. I think this is a good basis for when i am done losing weight. Ill eat the same way as now.. just a bit more.