Jump to content

Water Only Fasting...Should you do it / How should you do it.


WaveHunter

Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

The issue I have with (legalised) vaping - whilst the weaning off process works for some - is that it doesn't enforce the actuality that longevity will be shortened.

 

Once longevity  - or the shortness of it - is accepted as being the key to a healthier and longer life, a positive mindset is put in place to quit smoking. 

 

As a comparison, it's like trying to sell life assurance when there's no end product to show.  How I would achieve a 'sale' is to inform smokers that harm to the body can be (mainly) reversed - lungs would clear, and clogged arteries would open up again if a healthy nutritious lifestyle is pursued.

 

As an aside, there are practitioners and case studies which indicate - for those suffering heart disease - a nutrition change by converting to a plant-eating regime by eliminating all dairy products from a diet, would be successful. This includes forgoing meat, fish, milk, yogurts, eggs and cheese. Vegan type nutrition could effectively resolve heart disease.   Read - How Not To Die - by Michael Greger MD, whose grandmother's case study, set him on a doctor's path to longevity.

   

Sorry, I don't follow your line of reasoning at all.  It seems to go without saying that anyone who decides they want to quit smoking has already decided they want to improve their quality of life.  They already have the positive mindset but are incapable of overcoming what is actually a very powerful addiction for many people (some say more addictive than heroin).  Vaping seems to have helped more people break their addiction to cigarettes than any other strategy to date.

 

Addressing you aside about Gregor and Veganism, I'm very familiar with Gregor and with Vegan lifestyle.  I've been a practicing Vegan in the past, and while I agree with much of what Gregor says, and some aspects of the Vegan lifestyle, I no longer see either Gregor's recommendations or the Vegan lifestyle as a panacea for everyone, and while I think highly of Gregor and many Vegans that I know,  there's also much I disagree with coming from both sources.

 

Everyone is different and no two person's genetics or nutritional needs are identical.  I don't think a person should just blindly accept any sort of set dogma from a single source. One size does not fit all when it comes to nutrition and metabolic health IMHO.

 

I believe in what some people call "fingerprint medicine".  I think it's an individual's personal responsibility to get to know their own body and then adopt a nutritional lifestyle that specifically addresses its' own very unique and special needs.

 

To be sure it takes a lot of commitment and experimentation to do this but in my experience (and I have tried plenty of nutritional plans and been on plenty of diets), my ultimate success only came from this approach. 

 

I invented nothing new; my personal nutritional guidelines incorporate elements of what Gregor says, Vegan principles, Paleo principles, ketogenic principles, you name it.  The point is, it works for me. 

 

Everybody should find what works for them.  The goal shouldn't be to live as long as possible; it should be to have the highest possible quality as life for as long as you can.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 279
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The reasoning is in the 'enforcement' of 'wanting to quit smoking' in terms of what would be the end result - either increasing or decreasing longevity - as being more than experimenting with ways of how to do this.

 

It's pretty clear, IMO. For example if I said you were going to die tomorrow if you don't quit smoking today, it certainly focus your mind on the end result, and the last thing you'd be doing is waving around a vaping pipe.

 

BTW, it's Greger not Gregor - and it's not a regime I would follow because while it could work, I'm not convinced a plant-based regime is the be all and end all of nutrition guidance. I added the paragraph to indicate that for those suffering from heart disease could find it useful to read Greger's real life story, rather than just experiments on rats!

 

As you said, each person is different and needs to find his/her nutrition path.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

The reasoning is in the 'enforcement' of 'wanting to quit smoking' in terms of what would be the end result - either increasing or decreasing longevity - as being more than experimenting with ways of how to do this.

 

It's pretty clear, IMO. For example if I said you were going to die tomorrow if you don't quit smoking today, it certainly focus your mind on the end result, and the last thing you'd be doing is waving around a vaping pipe.

 

BTW, it's Greger not Gregor - and it's not a regime I would follow because while it could work, I'm not convinced a plant-based regime is the be all and end all of nutrition guidance. I added the paragraph to indicate that for those suffering from heart disease could find it useful to read Greger's real life story, rather than just experiments on rats!

 

As you said, each person is different and needs to find his/her nutrition path.  

OK I see your point but someone's desire to quit smoking has to come from within.  I'm talking about people who already have the genuine and sincere desire to quit smoking but can not overcome the addiction.  With addictions like this, it's not simply a matter of will power.  As I said, smoking is considered by many authorities to be as addictive as heroin.  Anything that can help a person to break such a destructive habit is a good thing in my book.

 

And though this is quite off-topic to say, I think the Thai authorities who instituted this ban are not acting in the best health interests of the public by doing this.  It's more than obvious to me that the real reason is to protect tax revenue generated from the sale of tobacco, and I personally think that is despicable! 

 

From a health standpoint, if anything should be banned it should be tobacco products,  but when it comes to the huge profits involved, you sure know that's not going to happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Kohsamida said:

OK I see your point but someone's desire to quit smoking has to come from within.  I'm talking about people who already have the genuine and sincere desire to quit smoking but can not overcome the addiction.  With addictions like this, it's not simply a matter of will power.  As I said, smoking is considered by many authorities to be as addictive as heroin.  Anything that can help a person to break such a destructive habit is a good thing in my book.

 

And though this is quite off-topic to say, I think the Thai authorities who instituted this ban are not acting in the best health interests of the public by doing this.  It's more than obvious to me that the real reason is to protect tax revenue generated from the sale of tobacco, and I personally think that is despicable! 

 

From a health standpoint, if anything should be banned it should be tobacco products,  but when it comes to the huge profits involved, you sure know that's not going to happen.

I agree with the Thai government's need to protect tax revenue from tobacco sales. Yes, it is despicable.

 

i guess we could bat around the smoking issue for days, and I fully understand where you're coming from. I accept that the highly addictive nature of nicotine cannot be readily overcome in today's society, if at all. Even death pictures on cigarette packets don't deter smokers, and if vapor pipes work it's a big step forward.

  

My suggestion will, in all likelihood, not be workable, but it's worth a try on an individual basis. Counselling, if you like to call it.

 

Cheers for now, I'm off to rest.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, jak2002003 said:

Great post and I agree with what you say.

 

I have successfully lost weight and got to my target weight now and it took me less than a year and very little effort, and never feeling hungry or forcing myself to go without food.  Did not do any fasting, juicing, gym workouts, keto, atkins, paleo, gluten free, carbohydrate elimination, or eat 'superfoods'.  Still drank moderate amount of alcohol, still ate late at night before bed, still ate rice, bread and potatoes etc.  

 

All I did was realise that a lot of the food I was eating was not healthy, and also loaded with calories mostly from sugar because I was eating a lot of processed foods, and got into a bad habit of eating junk food snacks like bars of chocolate, sweets, cakes, and pastries every day (although never in massive quantities).  I had also become more sedentary.  

 

So I decided to stop eating the junk stuff and replaced them with healthier options.  I also cut down my portion sizes at meal times, and increased my activity.  Just did more relaxing cycling rides and walked more... no gym or running machines.

 

It was hard to resist the temptation of the junk food for a few weeks simply out of my old habits.  However, after I got into the habit of eating normal food the cravings stopped.  It's about changing habits I think is key.  I used to eat even if I was not hungry and then feel too full and bloated. 

 

Now I only eat if I am hungry.  Usually 2 meals a day.  If I want to have a TV night and munch on comfort food I go for fruit (I am crazy for jackfruit) and nuts, or a home made sandwich.  

 

Occasionally I will decide to have a cake, ice cream or chocolate bar if I am in the mood.  But this is not more than once a week. I found I no longer go crazy for them, no longer get cravings to go eat them, and I don't get the same 'buzz' when I am eating them.. they don't taste anything special anymore.  I find my jackfruit, som tam or jungle curry much more delicious!!

That was a terrific post, and BTW, congratulations! Most people who have spent time struggling to lose excess body fat and eventually succeed seem to be people who become frustrated with the dogma associated with caloric reduction diets, and start thinking "out of the box" for themselves. 

 

It shouldn't come as a surprise that most people can resolve their weight issues simply by refraining from processed foods high in carbs (sugar), excessive snacking throughout the day (food grazing), and most importantly, just being attuned to your body since it really tells you everything you need to know if you pay attention to how it reacts to various types of foods. 

 

Calorie counting needn't be (and should not be) a part of that equation IMO.  Your body is very good at letting you know when you've eaten enough if hormonal satiety response is not being blunted by excessive junk-food style carbohydrates.

 

Unfortunately many people can't or won't take responsibility for their own metabolic health.  Instead they are attracted to shortcut types of fad diets promising to melt away the pounds without any effort or sacrifice, or fundamental changes in nutritional lifestyle.

 

Effort and some sacrifice are necessary for any worthwhile health changes but the good part, as you said, is that things get much easier as you progress, and it doesn't really take that long before you no longer miss the foods that got you into trouble in the first place.

 

It's really a wonderful feeling you get from eating healthy and most people who discover this through lifestyle change rarely return to their old unhealthy ways, and most of them could kick themselves in the *ss for waiting as long as they did to finally figure this out.  It's not rocket science; it's just plain common sense.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of sensible advice here, if only the people who need it would read it.

 

I stopped eating sugar after the obligatory military medical checkup, for all males of age 18.

The doctor in charge didn't believe that my weight is 72kg, he looked at me and said : "this must be an error, your weight is 62. you don't have a lot of muscle like other guys, you look thin".

Back home my scales showed 72, I started looking for healthy diets on internet and found out that sugar gives you weight, AND destroys teeth, by taking minerals out of them for digesting sugar.

All my life I had problems with teeth, and right there I finally found why! Why nobody have told me before?

Years later I watched BBC documentary from NHS dentists all saying the same. Like babies have tooth decay from left overnight straws in mouth, with surrogate-milk that contains sugar.

 

I replaced the daily habit of drinking tea with sweets, with just eating 1-2 apples.

I lost 10kg in 1 month. Never had tooth decay again. So ***** simple!

 

I find Thailand climate awesome, when the body has almost no fat your optimal outside temperature goes up, for me personally 27C is cold. +28-31 OK. Can not stand aircon.

I don't sweat and don't drink all day. Went up to tiger temple in Krabi without water. I get it later while drinking coconuts in the evening, can do from 5 to 10, with a 1.5h break.

 

About dry fasting, I just felt what my body told me.

One day I got home late, so I missed my only meal. And it felt so good inside, nice and cold, no pain, like a winter morning with clear skies and snow glittering in sunlight.

I didn't want to disturb it so I've skipped drinking the juice, and unknowingly got into dry fast. I woke up 5am with burning pain in stomach, like small demons having a mini hell-party. Tried to drink orange juice, but 30min later it came back from mouth, and with pitch-black blobs of something nasty. 8 days of water fasting just don't have same effect.

 

Later when I read about it I understood that it is more effective, somewhere 3 times more powerful than water-fasting.

I just like it because the digestive tract can shut off completely for internal cleaning. Water still keeps it online/awake, interfering with the process, putting it on hold.

 

My goal, however crazy it is, is to be free from the need to eat physical food. As I kid I asked my mom about a pill that will keep me full for a whole day so I can just play and never go to toilet. Always was picky about food, always thin.

I still want this, to be able to travel with no need for home, fruit stalls, dishes trinkets, toilets. Life would be so awesome.

Just spend all day doing what you really want, freedom.

 

Juicing oranges by hand is not expensive, I bought small plastic juicer for like 20thb, 60b for a measuring 1L decanter, 15b plastic mesh filter.pljuice.thumb.jpg.1063af1305a1da6dabd4120c7c11aea8.jpg

 

I try to trust my body above reading science articles, however I do have a ph.d in radiobiology and enjoy understanding of how things work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let food be thy medicine, and let medicine be thy food.”  This famous quote is often attributed to Hippocrates.  Its in question if he actually said this back in 400 B.C., but it’s a great quote nonetheless.  

 

Nutrition, both good and bad has a profound effect on health.  Unfortunately, today we live in a world of highly processed food containing things like high fructose corn syrup, and foods stripped of natural (and healthy) essential fats.  We’ve been led to believe that fats are bad and carbs should be the foundation of a healthy diet.

 

It’s no wonder there’s an epidemic of obesity today.  The body is normally a highly tuned metabolic machine but highly processed foods screw it up.  

 

They wreak havoc with precise hormonal balances and blunt satiety mechanisms so we consume far more “bad” foods than we should, and our body's ability to derive energy from food is greatly compromised.  Instead of powering the body efficiently, it gets stored as body fat.  And worse, these type of foods, if consumed regularly, greatly diminish our ability to access stored fat.  As a result, body fat just accumulates.

 

I’m saying this simply because the topic of this thread is about water fasting, and the value of water fasting is in dealing with this dilemma.

 

Water fasting should not be thought of as a weight loss diet.  Rather, it’s a way to reset metabolic mechanisms that have gotten screwed up as a result of eating foods that are not good for us.

 

Obviously, the best nutritional strategy is to avoid bad foods in the first place but if that’s not the case, simply adopting better nutritional practices may not work for many people because bad eating habits become highly addictive, not only psychologically  but physiologically as well.

 

In simple terms, water fasting is like a reset button.  It’s a way to quickly restore metabolic hormonal balance and restore the body’s ability to properly metabolize stored body fat.

 

Water fasting is most effective at doing this in a short time frame.  72 hours is all the time it takes for most people.  Going beyond that is not necessary or beneficial.

 

The other principal benefit of such short term fasting is that it enhances the natural process of autophagy, a metabolic mechanism that purges dysfunctional and damaged intracellular materials and serves as a dynamic recycling system that produces new building blocks and energy for cellular renovation and homeostasis.

 

Im writing this simply to dissuade people from thinking of water fasting as a fad style diet, and try to encourage people to explore science-based information about the true benefits of water fasting to see if it might be right for them...because that is really what this thread was supposed to be all about.

 

Science strongly supports this notion of water fasting, and I can say from 1st hand experience that it works amazingly well for me.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/7/2019 at 6:51 PM, FracturedRabbit said:

The clue is in the title "water fasting".  The only think you ingest is water, as much as you like. Black coffee is OK too!

if you are undertaking a fast for betterment of your health, not some airy fairy nonsense - why would you put coffee into your system, as coffee - a stimulant  is the most abused drug in the world.

  

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Artisi said:

if you are undertaking a fast for betterment of your health, not some airy fairy nonsense - why would you put coffee into your system, as coffee - a stimulant  is the most abused drug in the world.

  

All things in moderation.

 

Coffee has been around for a long time and blamed for many ills — from stunting your growth to causing heart disease — but newer research shows that it may actually have health benefits.

 

Recent studies have generally found no connection between coffee and an increased risk of heart disease or cancer.

 

In fact, some studies have found an association between coffee consumption and decreased overall mortality and possibly cardiovascular mortality.

 

Studies have shown that coffee may have health benefits, including protecting against Parkinson's disease, type 2 diabetes and liver disease, including liver cancer. Coffee also appears to improve cognitive function and decrease the risk of depression.

 

There’s really no reason to believe that a cup of coffee in the morning is going to compromise your health.  Of course, excessive consumption is another matter. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is some reasonable information in here but more of crap than good data. Going without food for 1 -2 - 3 day is  ok if it makes YOU feel 'better' but completely useless in terms of fasting, the body doesn't even realise it is in a fasting situation for probably 5 or 6 days, after which time the bodies stored energy is then made available for survival and a true fasting situation commences. 

Fasting for return of good health is nothing new and has always been practiced, it is well documented, understood and used for combating chronic disease.

If interested do some research on Herbert Shelton USA, Keki Sidhwa UK,  Alec Burton Aust. these are some of the top people in the world who have dedicated their lives to rejuvenating people back to good health, in many cases after conventional medicine have given up on the patient.

 

 

  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Kohsamida said:

All things in moderation.

 

Coffee has been around for a long time and blamed for many ills — from stunting your growth to causing heart disease — but newer research shows that it may actually have health benefits.

 

Recent studies have generally found no connection between coffee and an increased risk of heart disease or cancer.

 

In fact, some studies have found an association between coffee consumption and decreased overall mortality and possibly cardiovascular mortality.

 

Studies have shown that coffee may have health benefits, including protecting against Parkinson's disease, type 2 diabetes and liver disease, including liver cancer. Coffee also appears to improve cognitive function and decrease the risk of depression.

 

There’s really no reason to believe that a cup of coffee in the morning is going to compromise your health.  Of course, excessive consumption is another matter. 

not arguing that here maybe some health benefits in coffee, I partake a little myself  -- but during a fast, not that 1-2-3 days is a fast anyway - why use it, just remove all stimulants , or should we promote a bottle of beer or a few shots on whiskey as they have a few benefits for some people 😉      

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Artisi said:

not arguing that here maybe some health benefits in coffee, I partake a little myself  -- but during a fast, not that 1-2-3 days is a fast anyway - why use it, just remove all stimulants , or should we promote a bottle of beer or a few shots on whiskey as they have a few benefits for some people 😉      

With all due respect you don't seem to understand the underlying metabolic science of the fasted state.  A 3 day fast is actually optimal for metabolic health.  Anything longer than 72 hours is overkill unless the purpose is for rapid weight loss and that should only be undertaken in cases of morbid obesity, where there are life-threatening complications resulting from being obese (i.e.: advanced stage diabetes), and only under the supervision of a physician well versed in long-term fasting protocols and overseeing nutritional lifestyle changes that MUST follow the fast.

 

Fasting is nothing more than a fad diet if the sole intention is to loose weight for vanity reasons.  It will fail like any other weight-loss diet unless nutritional lifestyle changes are made.  For otherwise healthy individuals, short-term periodic water fasting is only an adjunct to nutritional lifestyle changes so that weight loss dieting becomes unnecessary in the long-term.  It's a way to basically reset metabolic hormonal balance and restore the body's ability to efficiently metabolize stored body fat that have been compromised by poor nutritional habits.

 

Coffee intake on a short term fast does not effect the efficacy or safety of the fast, and helps a lot of people deal with psychological and physiological transitory symptoms of entering into the fasted state (i.e.: "keto flue").

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some posters on here have clearly done lots of research before arriving at conclusions that work for them so i thought I would seek advice. Literally daily, I read diet stuff-some from journalists with a page to fill, some from scientists and so called scientists, with often contradictory advice.

I can happily buy into more fruit/fibre and less processed/red meat, sugar. makes sense.

I am a senior (sounds better than old man!) recovering from a bout of illness resulting in 9 months inactivity, messed up immune system and microbiome. 178cm, my weight went up to 83.4, and my blood sugar and ldl were too high.

For 2-3 months I have been following 16:8 which worked well for friends. Last meal about 8pm, first next day about 2pm, and gym before that on most days. The principle is that after 12 hours, the body starts using up fat if denied new calorific input. And importantly to me I find 16:8 easy to sustain, and probably have 1 less meal a day. 

But my weight is stuck stubbornly just above 80kg so BMI still not below 25. I will find out the impact on ldl/blood sugar shortly but I feel stronger and fitter and mentally more alert.

After reading that caffeine/coffee 'heats up' brown fat which is a 'good thing'(!), I now have coffee around 9am instead of later, before my first meal.

Now some people and scientists insist that breakfast is a vital meal to kickstart the metabolism, which is clearly at odds with 16:8 advocated by others.

So, I am not looking for fads that, for me, would make life not worth living, but for input on the above and other steps I should consider to achieve lower bmi. Actually not even sure these are sensible questions but we shall see!

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Kohsamida said:

With all due respect you don't seem to understand the underlying metabolic science of the fasted state.  A 3 day fast is actually optimal for metabolic health.  Anything longer than 72 hours is overkill unless the purpose is for rapid weight loss and that should only be undertaken in cases of morbid obesity, where there are life-threatening complications resulting from being obese (i.e.: advanced stage diabetes), and only under the supervision of a physician well versed in long-term fasting protocols and overseeing nutritional lifestyle changes that MUST follow the fast.

 

Fasting is nothing more than a fad diet if the sole intention is to loose weight for vanity reasons.  It will fail like any other weight-loss diet unless nutritional lifestyle changes are made.  For otherwise healthy individuals, short-term periodic water fasting is only an adjunct to nutritional lifestyle changes so that weight loss dieting becomes unnecessary in the long-term.  It's a way to basically reset metabolic hormonal balance and restore the body's ability to efficiently metabolize stored body fat that have been compromised by poor nutritional habits.

 

Coffee intake on a short term fast does not effect the efficacy or safety of the fast, and helps a lot of people deal with psychological and physiological transitory symptoms of entering into the fasted state (i.e.: "keto flue").

 

Let me clarify, my  understanding of fasting is a state of no food for a period of time ranging 5,10,15,20 days or more for rehabilitation of poor health / illness, anything else is a diet fad with little real benefit in the longer term. 

What you and many others are talking about is not eating for 2 - 3 days, it has its benefits for some people but has absolutely nothing to do with fasting for return of good health. If I sense a cold or similar coming on, I will not eat for 2/3 to allow the body to concentrate on the bug and not having to concentrate on digesting food, the bodies first priority. 

 

Fasting is only for loosing weight for vanity is pure nonsense.

 

I would suggest a little research on long term fasting in the case of illness and its benefits. 

As for saying I don't seem to understand the metabolic science of the fasted state, is incorrect. 

 

Not trying to start an argument here about fasting and health, I learnt more than 30 years to say what I have to say - if people want to listen that's good - if not, I'll just keep it to myself and look after my own well being. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, beau thai said:

Some posters on here have clearly done lots of research before arriving at conclusions that work for them so i thought I would seek advice. Literally daily, I read diet stuff-some from journalists with a page to fill, some from scientists and so called scientists, with often contradictory advice.

I can happily buy into more fruit/fibre and less processed/red meat, sugar. makes sense.

I am a senior (sounds better than old man!) recovering from a bout of illness resulting in 9 months inactivity, messed up immune system and microbiome. 178cm, my weight went up to 83.4, and my blood sugar and ldl were too high.

For 2-3 months I have been following 16:8 which worked well for friends. Last meal about 8pm, first next day about 2pm, and gym before that on most days. The principle is that after 12 hours, the body starts using up fat if denied new calorific input. And importantly to me I find 16:8 easy to sustain, and probably have 1 less meal a day. 

But my weight is stuck stubbornly just above 80kg so BMI still not below 25. I will find out the impact on ldl/blood sugar shortly but I feel stronger and fitter and mentally more alert.

After reading that caffeine/coffee 'heats up' brown fat which is a 'good thing'(!), I now have coffee around 9am instead of later, before my first meal.

Now some people and scientists insist that breakfast is a vital meal to kickstart the metabolism, which is clearly at odds with 16:8 advocated by others.

So, I am not looking for fads that, for me, would make life not worth living, but for input on the above and other steps I should consider to achieve lower bmi. Actually not even sure these are sensible questions but we shall see!

Totally get where you're coming from!  There's so much BS out there about nutrition, and most of it is just plain nonsense posted by people with hidden, self-serving agendas (usually financially based).  When it comes to metabolic health, I am a firm believer is what's termed "fingerprint medicine".  No two people have the same precise nutritional needs.  Everyone's body reacts differently to various foods.  It makes no sense to me for a person to adopt a particular nutritional dogma advocated by this health guru or that guru.  I think it's the responsibility of every individual to do two things; 1) becoming knowledgable about very basic metabolic science from reliable science-based sources (not YouTube health Gurus), and then learn to listen to your own body to discover how it reacts to various foods.  It will tell you everything you need to know if you truly attuned to it. 

 

The body will tell you in no uncertain terms if it reacts well or not to a particular food if you are attuned to what it's trying to tell you.  It takes time and commitment to master this, as opposed to blindly following someone else's weight loss dieting protocol.  Your goal should not merely be to lose weight but to establish a nutritional strategy that is correct specifically for you within the context of universally accepted sound nutritional principles.  Those two things go hand-in-hand.  For example,  I think it's a sound nutritional guideline to avoid heavily processed foods in which essential (healthy) fats have been stripped and replaced with refined sugar based carbohydrates.  But, when it comes to whether or not you should eat red meats, I think the jury is out on that one.  For some it might cause issues, for others...not so much.

 

Personally, I went through a period of time dealing with near-obesity and like most I was attracted to all sorts of weight-loss diets.  None of them worked in the long-term.  The reason is that weight-loss diets are NOT the key to shedding excess body fat.  Changing your nutritional lifestyle is the key!  You can't just adopt someone else's strategy; you have to find one that is right specifically for you.  It takes some time and involves some trial and error, and most importantly it takes learning to be attuned to what your body is telling you but if you stick it out, it seems to work well.  At least it did for me.  I was in a real mess art one point in my life.  My doctor informed me I was pre-diabetic and hypertensive (BP was 180/120).  He put me on statins and drugs to control blood sugar none of which helped.  It was only when I decided to take responsibility for my own health that I discovered that changing my nutrition lifestyle was the real key, and it not only worked but worked very quickly.

 

I think the thing to appreciate is that the body is actually a finely tuned and self-correcting metabolic machine when it is properly nourished.  The problem is that in our modern-day world much of what is consumed is processed foods that have been stripped of natural (and essential fats) and replaced with things like high fructose corn syrup.  HFCS is in everything these days!  It wreaks havoc on metabolic hormonal balance and our bodies ability to efficiently metabolize stored body fat.  As a result, many people just accumulate more and more body fat.  Insulin insensitivity becomes an issue, and livers become engorged in fat.  That's when things start going really bad.  The insidious thing is that most people have no real symptoms all of this is happening.  Most will attribute increased weight with simply getting older.  Symptoms of "fatty liver" usually won't present themselves until your doctor gives you the unwelcome news that you are pre-diabetic.

 

Today, I don't ascribe to any nutritional dogma at all.  My nutritional strategy is made up of elements from Vegan and Paleo that seem to work well for me  but the over-riding factor is simply "listening" to my body; how it reacts to various foods.  Personally I find that two meals a day is optimal for me.  I don't limit any food groups at all, and I don't count calories.  I DO manage my macronutrient ratio carefully.  I keep carbs relatively low and try to think of them only as fuel for the body, not tempting foods that I might end up mindlessly grazing on while watching TV.

 

Bottom line, Gain a true understanding of the basic principles of metabolic science, and then through trial & error find those foods that your body works best with, add a dose of plain old common sense, and I think it would be hard for anyone not to vastly improve their metabolic health in very short period of time...like weeks, not months or years!  I found this to be true for myself, and don;t see any reason why it can't be true for everyone else

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...