Thread

Replies (42)

↩ replying to npub1wq7j...p27n
Also, you must not have read the article because the second paragraph describes subjecting them to regular fasting regimes, not lifelong caloric deficit. I don't believe lifelong caloric deficit is even possible nor is it mentioned in the article. Lastly, you can gain muscle and then maintain it on a caloric deficit anyways, it's what body builders do every season. So even your initial assertion is wrong. Now I know that is a little different, but you can build muscle and not gain weight too. I feel like you're way over simplifying the process of muscle gain and retention and the essence of this article is that obesity is bad
πŸ›‘οΈ
↩ replying to AU9913
3-7 day fasts are known to stimulate stem cells to replicate and regenerate tissue... it is related to the process of ketosis, and apoptosis and autophagy (burning fats, cells committing suicide and cells consuming other cells)... something that i would mention is that all of these processes depend on adequate levels of iodine and not excessive levels of fluorine and bromine fasts are a good thing to do, at least a few times a year, i think, but the benefits of maintaining adequate levels of iodine can't be overstated... i had massive results with it and it affected my nerves and immune system in really good ways i was just made aware that it is a critical element in the chain that enables ketosis and without ketosis you don't really make good use of fats for energy, speaking of calories... i mean, combine raising iodine levels and after 3 days of fasting you will experience a massive metabolic boost that makes you able to tolerate cold a lot easier and increases endurance and strength
↩ replying to AU9913
"Some mice were placed on calorie-limited diets, another group followed intermittent fasting regimens, and others were allowed to eat freely." Sounds like only some of the mice were fasted intermittently, others had calories restricted. I'm certainly open to the benefits of intermittent fasting and have experimented with it myself. Having practiced (natural) bodybuilding for years in the past I was never able to maintain muscle mass whilst restricting calories. This may just speak to my lack of talent as a bodybuilder. Pros are typically still using some sort of exogenous testosterone derivative while dieting for competition so I don't think that's a good example. As a competitive weightlifter in multiple weight classes for over 15 years I feel I have a good understanding of how my body reacts to various dietary interventions and in my experience anything but brief caloric restriction leads to loss of both fat and muscle (not to mention strength). BTW the Cambridge Dictionary's definition of frail seems to cover both our usages. image
↩ replying to AU9913
The 1 day per week intermittent fasting group appears the most interesting to me as overall caloric intake was maintained but body weight slightly reduced (possible improvement in body composition?) and some measured health benefits. To me the loss of lean mass (and probable hunger) experienced by the 40% and 20% caloric restriction groups (if applicable to humans) would considerably reduce quality of life while increasing the risk of hospitalisation and early death from falling injuries in later life. Each to their own I suppose. My preference would be to live an averagely long life with a high capacity over a long life with compromised capacity.
β€œ …processes beyond simple metabolic regulation drive how the body responds to limited-calorie regimes. What mattered most for lengthening lifespan were traits related to immune health and red-blood-cell function. Also key was overall resilience, presumably encoded in the animals’ genes, to the stress of reduced food intake.”
This is tough for me, because I’m a big do you believe what the studies say or your own lying eyes kinda guy. About a year and a half ago I tried going on a rather intense caloric reduction protocol. I was eating about 1,000-1,400 calories a day as a 6’2”, 170 lb male. Over the next 5 months I gradually fell to a low of 138 lbs, I had literally no energy, was waking up in panic attacks in the middle of the night at least twice a week, and was in a terrible mental state. I should mention, for about 2.5 months I completely cut out all dairy, meat, and eggs, maybe this is where I went wrong. Either way, like many have taught throughout history, I have learned that their are equilibriums you must find for yourself, you know when you are straying too far outside equilibrium because you feel it. Error on the side of eating less, for sure, but I have found a balanced day with lots of movement trumps everything else for me personally.
Eating less junk and more nutrient dense food! Also, according to human design there's other factors that are worth exploring that are highly individual based on a person's design. Here's three very different determinations to three different constitutions and food is not the only variable to properly absorbing the nutrients. image Or
image image
In this episode we discuss: -How the largest body of evidence cited in favor of hormesis actually doesn’t support it at all -Why caloric restriction is NOT responsible for slowing aging and extending lifespan (and what is actually responsible) -The many factors that confound the calorie restriction research (including differences between organisms, poor research design, amino acid restriction, PUFA, endotoxin, and more)
The sad thing is we have only data from mice. Mice die after not eating for 2-4 days. We humans are very special, as our brains need a lot of energy (20 percent of our energy needs go to our brain), so to survive we had to develop the ability to be more ketogenic than most animals and the ability to store fat and use autophagy (e.g., dogs die if they have more than 12 percent body fat, due to heart failure; humans can withstand much, much more fat). As a result, we can last without food for much longer than mice. So the findings there are often not directly translatable. We have a lot of data about lean body mass being correlated with health, but the longevity data is simply not there. I would be cautious with filling in the blanks prematurely here... at least the way we humans process protein and our needs are completely different from those of rodents. Check out Prof. Layman's research on this topic.