Jump to content
BANGKOK 20 June 2019 20:03
WaveHunter

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

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

How much protein do you feel the body can assimilate in one meal?

I am not sure but I am pretty sure its less then what I need for one day. For you it might be easier as you don't need as much. (less body-weight)

 

I am just saying that eating one time is not optimal for muscle building and repair. If you got other goals then its great.

 

Below a link but even there they don't want to pin them on a number. But there is some good information there.

 

https://www.muscleforlife.com/the-truth-about-protein-absorption-how-often-you-should-eat-protein-to-build-muscle/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, WaveHunter said:

So, are you saying it takes a PhD to read and use your brain?  C'mon, be real buddy! 

 

I suppose you are also saying that if one has a PhD in nutrition, that makes them an acknowledged authority? 

 

Most of the PhD's and MD's I know of have very little contemporary knowledge of the current state of ongoing research into the link between nutrition and disease states that are now being recognized to have a metabolic basis. 

 

Many are still mired in the dogma of the 1980's citing the virtues of carbohydrates as a foundation for good nutrition based on the now totally debunked "food pyramid"!

 

There are plenty of world-renowned scientists pursuing this line of study that advocates that many diseases such as obesity, Diabetes type-2, many types of cancers, neuro degenerative diseases sucvh as Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, and ALS seem to have a metabolic basis that was never suspected before.  Some have even received Nobel prizes for their research in this field.

 

So, this is no fad, no Facebook Group BS, no guru-speak, except for those who try to monetize on this legitimate research.  This is the real deal!

 

And FYI, Autophagy is VERY MUCH related to nutrition!  How do you think Yoshinori Ohsumi induced the autophagic response in all of his landmark studies, for which he was awarded the Nobel Price in 2016?  He did it by limiting nutrients, so that selective (damaged) proteins would be catabolized and recycled! 

 

Guess what?  That's the exact same thing that happens when you enter into ketosis during a fast!  Restoring the balance between fat metabolism and carbohydrate metabolism is what keto-adaptation is all about, and it is brought about by fasting, and YES, autophagy plays a very big role!

 

How many PhD nutritionist or medical doctors are even aware of Ohsumi's work or any of the other cutting edge research that's occurring today in this field?  Not many.  You obviously do not either if you can make such a silly comment about autophagy not being related to nutrition! 

 

Basic understanding of the metabolic sciences as well as the current state of research and how they apply to healthy (or unhealthy) states is not rocket science, nor does it take a PhD to appreciate.

 

Maybe you should stop being so damn lazy, using the excuse that only a PhD can understand these things, and become better informed before making such silly and CLEARLY inflammatory comments.

 

So, are you saying it takes a PhD to read and use your brain?  C'mon, be real buddy! 

Basically you are saying you have no education in nutritional science and probably also no work experience?

And still you think you are capable to go through tons of research material and judge what is right and wrong about it?

Thats why I mentioned i smelled the Dunning-Kruger effect so strongly. 

 

I suppose you are also saying that if one has a PhD in nutrition, that makes them an acknowledged authority? 

Having a PhD in a certain field doesn't make someone an acknowledged authority, but if you have your leg broken you still go to a hospital and not to the local fruit seller for help. Why is that? Probably because the educational background of the medical staff in the hospital guarantees they have some basic knowledge about the subject. That doesn't mean they are always right, but you get a better bet there than with the fruit seller. So i rather belief people with a PhD in nutritional science than a random person on Thaivisa with no educational background in that field who claims to know how things work. 

 

How many PhD nutritionist or medical doctors are even aware of Ohsumi's work or any of the other cutting edge research that's occurring today in this field?  Not many.

Actually quite a few of the ones i follow, mostly because his work is being hyped by BS-artists selling miracle diets (which is probably why you looked into autophagy in the first place), and the people who actually work in the nutritional science fields like to call that out on social media and start discussions with the followers of the BS-artists. Not that those discussions last long as one has a PhD in that specific field of research and the other is just blindly following what others say or what they "researched" themselves.

 

You obviously do not either if you can make such a silly comment about autophagy not being related to nutrition! 

In that case, can you explain a bit of how Ohsumi did his research?

How many people was this tested on, how were the health results measured, how much weight did they lose?

Oh wait, his research is not done on humans but on cells. 

And sure humans are made out of cells, but you can't look at what a cell does in a laboratory and assume that will work exactly the same on a human as a whole. And that is exactly what you are doing. 

 

Basic understanding of the metabolic sciences as well as the current state of research and how they apply to healthy (or unhealthy) states is not rocket science, nor does it take a PhD to appreciate.

Indeed, agree there. The basic understanding tells us that calories in vs calories out will determine most of your results.

Its that simple... If you gain weight you need to eat less, if you lose too much weight you need to eat more.

It aint rocket science and it has been common knowledge for ages now.

That is until people started selling autophagy, butter in your coffee, and whatever diet is popular now.

 

Maybe you should stop being so damn lazy, using the excuse that only a PhD can understand these things, and become better informed before making such silly and CLEARLY inflammatory comments.

Have a bit of respect for people who actually do research and know what they are talking about (not me, but the people doing years of study to get their PhD and a spot in a university to teach and do research). Just because you got google and can find research papers doesn't mean in any way that your knowledge and understanding is even close to theirs. They are dedicating their lives to furthering humankind and you are just selectively picking up research papers that confirm your existing bias and think you are helping others with that. If you are really that up-to-date and knowledgable, apply for a job at a university or research center and get your own papers published so there is solid evidence for what you state instead of just cutting and pasting other people's work and ending up with a incoherent rant on a Thailand based forum.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, WaveHunter said:

back up what you say with science based information, not simply your unsupported personal opinion!

I don't need to google it to know that our body need "energy" and that if you don't get any "energy" you will not last very long. (about 2-3 months?)

Medias often showed people doing hunger-strike and needing medical assistance after just 1 or 2 months.

 

1 hour ago, WaveHunter said:

People do it all the time for religious reasons.

I you are talking about Ramadan, it's completely different as it's a succession of day fasts, but they eat every evening

 

1 hour ago, WaveHunter said:

Then there is the case of Angus Barbieri, who fasted for 382 days for medical reasons back in the mid-60's

It's also very different as he was in hospital and received the "energy" required by his body as pills and injections. A bit like someone in a long coma.

 

Here we were talking about water fasting, and I am curious to see what someone would look like after nothing else than water during 7 weeks... 

 

Edited by Pattaya46

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, WaveHunter said:

Oh yeah, as to your second question.  I eat once a day; I am a firm believer in this (for me, not necessarily for anyone else, though I believe many people might benefit from it).  If I am unusually active during the day, I will supplement with fruit if I feel I need it, but basically one-meal-a-day is all I need to feel energetic and healthy, even when trying to ride competitively.

 

If I were to make a point about all of this it would be that I think it's important to "think outside of the box" and not just accept old dogma as the unwavering truth, especially when it comes to a subject that is so much in a state of flux as nutrition is. 

 

The "food pyramid" of the early 1980's is a perfect example of such dogma that ultimately become completely debunked, but is still mostly responsible for the epidemic levels of obesity we see today, and also in the epidemic rise in Diabetes Type 2 ... in children!!! That is something that was unheard of before the 1980's!

Yes u sound kinda agitated or patronizing  Hopefully that is not a side effect of u food plan?  If doing one meal a day non stop then that’s more then enough of fasting. Seems Ur regime is a good example how not too fast for us..

How are ur hormone levels cooping this food regime? U measure them?

How does a one meal a day looks like for u?

Share this post


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

Wave Hunter, you obviously do not have an understanding of human physiology and biochemistry. I could have an honest conversation about ketones and glucose metabolism if some were to ask. It appears you are getting false information.

I have nothing against fasting as long as the person stays hydrated. It eliminates some calories, but isn't a cure all.

Why don't you back up your claim that I don't know what I'm talking about instead of making an empty accusation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, robblok said:

I am not sure but I am pretty sure its less then what I need for one day. For you it might be easier as you don't need as much. (less body-weight)

 

I am just saying that eating one time is not optimal for muscle building and repair. If you got other goals then its great.

 

Below a link but even there they don't want to pin them on a number. But there is some good information there.

 

https://www.muscleforlife.com/the-truth-about-protein-absorption-how-often-you-should-eat-protein-to-build-muscle/

This has actually been on my mind as well and I am thinking of switching to two meals per day, specifically to address protein partitioning BUT I think many people misunderstand how protein metabolism really works and think that the body must immediately put it to use, and that it is only capable of assimilating very small amounts per meal.

 

The popular consensus that you can only assimilate 20-30 grams of protein at any given meal is incorrect and therefore the notion that dietary protein intake must be spread out over many meals is also exaggerated.

 

These incorrect assumptions are based on the fact that there are a limited number of transporter cells and receptor in the small intestine which therefore restricts how many amino acids can be moved into the blood, which in itself is indeed correct.

 

However there are some flaws to the assumption that the body can not assimilate more than 30 grams per meal.

 

Amino acids and some peptides are able to self-regulate their time in the intestines.  For example, the digestive hormone CCK (choleccystokinin) will slow down the contraction of intestines in response to protein intake. 

 

CCK gets released when you eat dietary protein and slows down digestion of protein, otherwise you would absorb all of you dietary protein too quickly and your liver wouldn't be able maintain a steady stream of amino acids into the blood over the 24 hour period and would simply end up getting burned for energy.  CCK prevents that from happening.

 

So, let's say you eat a meal consisting of a steak containing 100 gram of protein.  Due to the actions of CCK, the amino acids are going to be assimilated over a period of many hours without wasting them away. 

 

It basically means that if you consume more protein than is needed to trigger protein synthesis right now, it is gong to slow down the digestion of the extra protein, and then it is going to gradually release the amino acids into the blood stream as your protein synthesis gets lower over time.

 

Furthermore, some amino acids can actually be temporarily stored inside the muscle cell for future use, whether it be for maintaining amino acid homeostasis or for energy production.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0954422499000025

 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/23660725_Urea_nitrogen_salvage_mechanisms_and_their_relevance_to_ruminants_non-ruminants_and_man

 

Triggering muscle synthesis is regulated mostly by leucine.  It requires about 2 grams of leucine to activate muscle protein synthesis.  You can get that from 20-30 grams of complete protein sources. Protein synthesis spikes rely

 

To be sure there is a lot of scientific debate about how much protein is optimal under various circumstances (i.e.: sedentary vs strength training) but a lot of research is showing that the timing of meals is not really that important beyond a certain point.  What is clear is that 30 grams is not a valid ceiling per meal at all, and there are research studies of intermittant fasters that show levels of over 60 grams, even as high as 79 grams in one study which resulted in no negative effects to muscle growth or homeostasis over a 24 hour period.

 

(see https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19776143)

 

Again, this is all highly individual-dependent.  What works best for one person may not be best for another.

 

Edited by WaveHunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Destiny1990 said:

Yes u sound kinda agitated or patronizing  Hopefully that is not a side effect of u food plan?  If doing one meal a day non stop then that’s more then enough of fasting. Seems Ur regime is a good example how not too fast for us..

How are ur hormone levels cooping this food regime? U measure them?

How does a one meal a day looks like for u?

OK, Listen.  It's kind of obvious you are participating here just to be inflammatory and attempting to stir things up in a negative way, while not contributing anything useful to this thread or any serious people participating in it.  I think we're done here.

 

Not only that but your lazy grammar and spelling make it hard to even understand your thoughts, if you even have any.

Edited by WaveHunter
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

This has actually been on my mind as well and I am thinking of switching to two meals per day, specifically to address protein partitioning BUT I think many people misunderstand how protein metabolism really works and think that the body must immediately put it to use, and that it is only capable of assimilating very small amounts per meal.

 

The popular consensus that you can only assimilate 20-30 grams of protein at any given meal is incorrect and therefore the notion that dietary protein intake must be spread out over many meals is also exaggerated.

 

These incorrect assumptions are based on the fact that there are a limited number of transporter cells and receptor in the small intestine which therefore restricts how many amino acids can be moved into the blood, which in itself is indeed correct.

 

However there are some flaws to the assumption that the body can not assimilate more than 30 grams per meal.

 

Amino acids and some peptides are able to self-regulate their time in the intestines.  For example, the digestive hormone CCK (choleccystokinin) will slow down the contraction of intestines in response to protein intake. 

 

CCK gets released when you eat dietary protein and slows down digestion of protein, otherwise you would absorb all of you dietary protein too quickly and your liver wouldn't be able maintain a steady stream of amino acids into the blood over the 24 hour period and would simply end up getting burned for energy.  CCK prevents that from happening.

 

So, let's say you eat a meal consisting of a steak containing 100 gram of protein.  Due to the actions of CCK, the amino acids are going to be assimilated over a period of many hours without wasting them away. 

 

It basically means that if you consume more protein than is needed to trigger protein synthesis right now, it is gong to slow down the digestion of the extra protein, and then it is going to gradually release the amino acids into the blood stream as your protein synthesis gets lower over time.

 

Furthermore, some amino acids can actually be temporarily stored inside the muscle cell for future use, whether it be for maintaining amino acid homeostasis or for energy production.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0954422499000025

 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/23660725_Urea_nitrogen_salvage_mechanisms_and_their_relevance_to_ruminants_non-ruminants_and_man

 

Triggering muscle synthesis is regulated mostly by leucine.  It requires about 2 grams of leucine to activate muscle protein synthesis.  You can get that from 20-30 grams of complete protein sources. Protein synthesis spikes rely

 

To be sure there is a lot of scientific debate about how much protein is optimal under various circumstances (i.e.: sedentary vs strength training) but a lot of research is showing that the timing of meals is not really that important beyond a certain point.  What is clear is that 30 grams is not a valid ceiling per meal at all, and there are research studies of intermittant fasters that show levels of over 60 grams, even as high as 79 grams in one study which resulted in no negative effects to muscle growth or homeostasis over a 24 hour period.

 

(see https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19776143)

 

Again, this is all highly individual-dependent.  What works best for one person may not be best for another.

 

Yes but 1 !!!! meal is something totally different. But i posted you the article they said no muscle loss for people who just had 1 meal. But I was talking about gaining muscle. It just does not look optimal at all. Again personal choice and depends on goals and all. 

 

If you read what i posted they exposed the 30 gram its more then that. But how much more is not known and we can't store protein so i prefer to eat protein multiple times a day.  Again I am not your average person with average needs. For my situation 1 time eating is not optimal at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

OK, Listen.  It's kind of obvious you are participating here just to be inflammatory and attempting to stir things up in a negative way, while not contributing anything useful to this thread or any serious people participating in it.  I think we're done here.

 

Not only that but your lazy grammar and spelling makes it hard to even understand your thoughts, whatever they might be.

What are you eating and drinking exactly  in a one meal a day program? 

How is your testosterone level while fasting so intense?

Does your fasting lowers or improves your libido?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, WaveHunter said:

I'm not going to get into a silly debate with you.  This thread is for people who are interested in discussing the SCIENCE underlying fasting and keto-adaptation, not simply dieting to loose a few pounds.

 

If that's not you, and you have nothing positive or constructive to contribute to the thread...that's fine. 

 

I'm sure that ignorance can be bliss for some people.  That's not meant to be mean-spirited; there's nothing wrong with just following someone else's prescribed diet to loose a few pounds if that's all you are interested in.  However, this thread is NOT about dieting; it is about health issue that go far beyond loosing a few pounds, and some people want to explore this subject on a deeper, more scientific basis.  This thread is for those kind of people.

 

Rubbish. This thread is not yours only, it's an open forum, and other posters can voice their opinion as they see fit. Some of which make sense. So get off your high horse and contribute.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, robblok said:

Yes but 1 !!!! meal is something totally different. But i posted you the article they said no muscle loss for people who just had 1 meal. But I was talking about gaining muscle. It just does not look optimal at all. Again personal choice and depends on goals and all. 

 

If you read what i posted they exposed the 30 gram its more then that. But how much more is not known and we can't store protein so i prefer to eat protein multiple times a day.  Again I am not your average person with average needs. For my situation 1 time eating is not optimal at all.

Yes but like I said, it seems that up to at least 79 grams can be assimilated form a single meal, based on that study of intermittent fasters.  I have nothing scientific to support the following comment but it seems to me that if that were so, than two meals per day would allow for all the daily protein needs to be met, even if your needs approached  150 grams (2 x 79 grams).

 

Maybe I'm incorrect but I don't think anybody other than a competitive body builder needs more than 150 grams per day.  What do you think? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Destiny1990 said:

What are you eating and drinking exactly  in a one meal a day program? 

How is your testosterone level while fasting so intense?

Does your fasting lowers or improves your libido?

All tested regularly; all are OPTIMAL!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, WaveHunter said:

All tested regularly; all are OPTIMAL!

What do you eat and drink in a week time?

Surely you have a food schedule?

Share this post


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

Rubbish. This thread is not yours only, it's an open forum, and other posters can voice their opinion as they see fit. Some of which make sense. So get off your high horse and contribute.

I agree that this is an open forum but I started this thread and it was intended to explore the scientific basis of fasting by intelligent people who are seeking to share and debate pertinent information, NOT be a forum for troll-like posts that only seek to incite unproductive arguments and be personal attacks on others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

Yes but like I said, it seems that up to at least 79 grams can be assimilated form a single meal, based on that study of intermittent fasters.  I have nothing scientific to support the following comment but it seems to me that if that were so, than two meals per day would allow for all the daily protein needs to be met, even if your needs approached  150 grams (2 x 79 grams).

 

Maybe I'm incorrect but I don't think anybody other than a competitive body builder needs more than 150 grams per day.  What do you think? 

The study was talking about NO muscle loss, not what was optimal for growing muscle. Given that we can't store protein its best to get it during the day from different sources that digest at different speeds. That is of course for people wanting to get extra muscle or have the best possible repair of their muscles. 

 

I am in general not going over 150 grams per but I am no competitive bodybuilder. I would say they use far more. If you ever seen what people like Stan Efferding and others ate. They ate up to 5000 calories a day and a big part of that was protein. So they certainly eat more then 150 grams. The only reason I am not higher in protein (besides I am not sure it will help nor do I think I can build a lot of muscle anymore) is that i keep my total calories low thus protein too. 

 

I hope to retrain my slow metabolism after my fat loss phase but I plan to take over a year for it. This year will be my year, no sickness, and a year where I want to be lean and then slowly eat more to try and keep at the same weight (have been studies showing its possible if done slowly). But who knows what happens. Just want to make sure I don't have to get back to losing fat again. So no more problems this year (i hope). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...