99 replies to this topic

[normalizing]

when it comes to fasting i keep thinking of those super skinny models who starve themselves all the time and do you think they are healthier for doing this? because a lot of reports show models that starve themselves, are actually quite unhealthy and might be due to maybe drug use??

[Nate-2004]

when it comes to fasting i keep thinking of those super skinny models who starve themselves all the time and do you think they are healthier for doing this? because a lot of reports show models that starve themselves, are actually quite unhealthy and might be due to maybe drug use??

 

Do you have any excess body fat? If not, do not fast, ever. Extended fasting is for people with storage to burn. Intermittent fasting is probably ok so long as there is still something to convert to energy.  Also, you need plenty of basic nutrients when fasting on an extended basis. Unfortunately I don't know how to get those basic nutrients as so many of them are lipid soluble and only bioavailable with fatty foods. This is why I'd probably go with the fasting mimicking diet instead.

Edited by Nate-2004, 21 February 2018 - 01:32 PM.

[xEva]

Do you have any excess body fat? If not, do not fast, ever. Extended fasting is for people with storage to burn. Intermittent fasting is probably ok so long as there is still something to convert to energy.  Also, you need plenty of basic nutrients when fasting on an extended basis. ...

Who says?  And what do you mean by "excess" and  "extended"? How about a guy with really excessive weight who fasted for a year? (just google for this well-known paper from ~ 1970s).

 

what you're saying rather shows your own anxieties about fasting. But nobody forces you to fast longer than a couple of days you're comfortable with. It's not right though to wrap your own fears in the form of imperative statements that end with "ever".

 

Re starting weight, BMI of 19, and even 18 is plenty to last 2-3 weeks -- this is not an invitation, but a statement of fact, meaning that it has been done,  successfully, and not just once (read the forums). There are even reports by people with the starting BMI of 16-17  who fasted as long as 2 weeks and one almost 3 (that is one of those very rare reports when a person reached the final phase of fasting; he said that on about day 19 the sudden return of hunger was so overwhelming that he could think of nothing else).

 

So, returning to "excess fat", let's see how much fat is needed.  We assume that ~150g of fat contain enough calories for a day. That's about how much weight is lost daily on an extended fast, after the adaptation.  It's true that at the onset the weight loss is far greater, but it's also true that most of it is water, glycogen, +muscles unfortunately too. But after the full adaptation it's mostly fat and that's why a person loses only 200g or less. 

 

Here is body fat calculator: http://bmi-calories....alculator.html 

I plugged in the numbers for a 40-y.o. skinny male, only 48 kg, height 172 cm (BMI of 16), and it gives 6.9% fat or 3.3 kg. This hypothetical skinny guy should easily last 2 weeks (just saying, not recommended )

 

Edited by xEva, 22 February 2018 - 07:58 PM.

[normalizing]

http://www.imdb.com/...ref_=fn_al_tt_1

there is a movie about a man fasting to death;

[Nate-2004]

Yeah I'm not going to recommend anyone with less than 10% body fat do any kind of straight, extended water fasting. That just sounds dangerous, regardless if some people have done it. If they've got cancer then the FMD might be an option. Jason Fung who's all about fasting pretty much says the same thing.

Edited by Nate-2004, 23 February 2018 - 02:07 PM.

[Kalliste]

Yeah I'm not going to recommend anyone with less than 10% body fat do any kind of straight, extended water fasting. That just sounds dangerous, regardless if some people have done it. If they've got cancer then the FMD might be an option. Jason Fung who's all about fasting pretty much says the same thing.

 

That sounds wrong. In our evolutionary history starvation must have been a frequent occurrence. We know this is a fact. That goes all the way back to Cambrium, food was never abundant all the time. Just like working your muscles, working your hunger is essential. This is why Caloric Restriction / Fasting are superior to every supplement uncovered so far and is only close to physical workouts in terms of health effects.

 

[sthira]

Yeah I'm not going to recommend anyone with less than 10% body fat do any kind of straight, extended water fasting. That just sounds dangerous, regardless if some people have done it. If they've got cancer then the FMD might be an option. Jason Fung who's all about fasting pretty much says the same thing.

It depends on the individual, how generally healthy is that 10% body fat person, how healthy is their diet and lifestyle, how controlled and thoughtful is their fast, how does that individual refeed, and what is their habitual diet? Blanket generalizations don't work.

I've read two of Fung's books about fasting, they're good, read them; but keep in mind that his audience is primarily people who have metabolic disorders as result of obesity. Fung doesn't write or say too much about healthy people who are using fasting and CR as an attempt to manipulate aging like most of us here at Longecity. We who attempt are experimenting with it.

... In our evolutionary history starvation must have been a frequent occurrence. We know this is a fact. That goes all the way back to Cambrium, food was never abundant all the time. Just like working your muscles, working your hunger is essential. This is why Caloric Restriction / Fasting are superior to every supplement uncovered so far and is only close to physical workouts in terms of health effects.

I agree with this; but it's tricky because while indeed while controlled fasting and CR (in conjunction with RDA-seeking optimal nutrition) "are superior to every supplement uncovered so far" that doesn't mean fasting and CR will reverse aging in otherwise healthy people. And this is what we want: to reverse aging. Because our ancestors were forced to eat less and then our species naturally selected better coping capacities to deal with food scarcity (e.g., ketosis) doesn't mean that we healthy modern people can use fasting to extend longevity.

In nearly every species studied, CR extends longevity. But very few of us can cut calories by 20-40% for decades, and so we will continue to not know if longterm CR extends LS in otherwise healthy people. The people attempting to do so are the first to tell you it's an experiment while we await clinical trials for something better. But the obvious advantages of CR over CR-mimetics, is that CR is less expensive, is doing things to the body that no one understands yet, and it has more animal evidence to support it.

[xEva]

Totally agree with you guys   Frequent bouts of fasting is so much part of our history that, I think, our physiology evolved to rely on these occurrences for efficient 'upkeep and maintenance'.

 

It is also true that fasting does not reverse aging in people over 55. This was the consensus of the oldtimers on the Russian fasting forum, based on self-observation, which, funny enough, was later confirmed in a paper on epigenetic clock that mentioned yet another epigenetic paper (that's why I'm not gonna look for that reference). It said that at approx. age 55, the aging process --as measured by epigenetic changes-- suddenly accelerates.  It struck me that an old anecdotal evidence and the latest advances in science that measure such subtleties as gene expression, converged on the same number.

 

Re "rejuvenation",  its assessment is a subjective thing of course. At any age, a fast will make a fat and sickly person leaner and healthier, which may give an appearance of rejuvenation. But the rejuvenation that was talked about on the fasting forum, was the return of a "youthful pink complexion". I was told by the oldtimers, it tends to start to diminish (diminish in how long it lasts after a fast) at ~45, and then, gradually disappears at 55 or so. 

 

That's a fascinating observation, especially if we consider aging process as a gradual damping of innate repairs (sort of a persistent and ever growing in strength paracrine signal 'don't bother fixing that!') and fasting is known as a strong stimulus for all kinds of innate repairs --  but why only before 55? Don't get me wrong, the oldtimers continue their fasting practice well into their 70s, because, as they say, it makes them feel and function better afterwards. But why not also to look younger, as was the case before they turned 55?

 

Ah! it just occurred to me that our idea of how a person should look during ages 25-45 is tinted by a large number of unhealthy people around. IOW, what if fasting never makes anyone look younger but only makes them look just right for their age?  This could only mean that most people look older than they should, presumably due to stressful and unhealthy lifestyle. This affects our idea of how a person should look at a particular age and => what is rejuvenation 

Edited by xEva, 10 March 2018 - 12:12 AM.

[BieraK]

Totally agree with you guys   Frequent bouts of fasting is so much part of our history that, I think, our physiology evolved to rely on these occurrences for efficient 'upkeep and maintenance'.

 

It is also true that fasting does not reverse aging in people over 55. This was the consensus of the oldtimers on the Russian fasting forum, based on self-observation, which, funny enough, was later confirmed in a paper on epigenetic clock that mentioned yet another epigenetic paper (that's why I'm not gonna look for that reference). It said that at approx. age 55, the aging process --as measured by epigenetic changes-- suddenly accelerates.  It struck me that an old anecdotal evidence and the latest advances in science that measure such subtleties as gene expression, converged on the same number.

 

Re "rejuvenation",  its assessment is a subjective thing of course. At any age, a fast will make a fat and sickly person leaner and healthier, which may give an appearance of rejuvenation. But the rejuvenation that was talked about on the fasting forum, was the return of a "youthful pink complexion". I was told by the oldtimers, it tends to start to diminish (diminish in how long it lasts after a fast) at ~45, and then, gradually disappears at 55 or so. 

 

That's a fascinating observation, especially if we consider aging process as a gradual damping of innate repairs (sort of a persistent and ever growing in strength paracrine signal 'don't bother fixing that!') and fasting is known as a strong stimulus for all kinds of innate repairs --  but why only before 55? Don't get me wrong, the oldtimers continue their fasting practice well into their 70s, because, as they say, it makes them feel and function better afterwards. But why not also to look younger, as was the case before they turned 55?

 

Ah! it just occurred to me that our idea of how a person should look during ages 25-45 is tinted by a large number of unhealthy people around. IOW, what if fasting never makes anyone look younger but only makes them look just right for their age?  This could only mean that most people look older than they should, presumably due to stressful and unhealthy lifestyle. This affects our idea of how a person should look at a particular age and => what is rejuvenation 

That sounds very interesting. With time, I am increasingly convinced that aging is a perfect mixture of epigenetic changes + accumulation of damage. "Nature" produces epigenetic changes in critical periods. As happens with the neuronal prunning in certain critical ages where the brain eliminates unnecessary connections, aging occurs in specific periods that tend to be the same for everyone, with the exception of some individuals for whom those changes occur with greater delay.

Someone knows how this happens? I want to search about ways of preventing o reversing such epigenetic changes due to the aging "clock". I'm 30 and it is so difficult to reverse aging in this age. I look young for my age because there is much people that look so bad in their 30s but looking of 24 - 25 being 30 is more difficult as looking 35 and being 40, 41, 42. For people in my age the more we can do is to slow aging. I have felt the critical periods when "something" changes in your body, I felt it at 16, then at 23 - 24 and I started to feel it at 29 - 30. For now Fasting+Vegan like diet+Supplements is doing the job. 

Whats working well recently is the combination of NAD boosters and Na-R-ALA. And obviously fasting mimicking diet cycles. Some c60 for boosting stem cell repair.
Na-R-ALA worth every penny.   

Edited by BieraK, 12 June 2019 - 06:08 AM.

[xEva]

That sounds very interesting. With time, I am increasingly convinced that aging is a perfect mixture of epigenetic changes + accumulation of damage. "Nature" produces epigenetic changes in critical periods. As happens with the neuronal prunning in certain critical ages where the brain eliminates unnecessary connections, aging occurs in specific periods that tend to be the same for everyone, with the exception of some individuals for whom those changes occur with greater delay.

Someone knows how this happens? I want to search about ways of preventing o reversing such epigenetic changes due to the aging "clock". I'm 30 and it is so difficult to reverse aging in this age. I look young for my age because there is much people that look so bad in their 30s but looking of 24 - 25 being 30 is more difficult as looking 35 and being 40, 41, 42. For people in my age the more we can do is to slow aging. I have felt the critical periods when "something" changes in your body, I felt it at 16, then at 23 - 24 and I started to feel it at 29 - 30. For now Fasting+Vegan like diet+Supplements is doing the job. 

Whats working well recently is the combination of NAD boosters and Na-R-ALA. And obviously fasting mimicking diet cycles. Some c60 for boosting stem cell repair.
Na-R-ALA worth every penny.   

 

re:  Someone knows how this happens? I want to search about ways of preventing o reversing such epigenetic changes due to the aging "clock".

 

no one knows yet (though hypotheses abound). And rest assured, when someone finds out, that will be the planetary level news. But at 30 I would not worry about it. Seems you have plenty of time ahead and will get the answers you want in your lifetime.