• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Fasting

I just heard a neurosurgeon from Baltimore extolling the virtues of fasting on BBC Radio 4.

It seems he'd been doing an experiment on some rodents, two days on food, two days off. vs a control group.

He said they'd found the 'fasting' group had better blood pressure, blood sugar control, lower indicators for disease etc and went on to hypothesise that mammal metabolism has a longer history of that kind of diet profile. He's probably right that humans ate a bit like that a few thousand years ago, but mice?

My main reservation was whether his experiment really is comparable to a 'religious fast'. I'd have described the two day on, two day off thing as sporadic eating myself.
 
Kumar said:

Ask Rolfe, if most of animals discontinue or reduce their intake on any disorder.
Click to expand...

Rolfe will answer herself, but it does rather depend.

In any case, it doesn't mean its good for them. Some animals will go on to die of starvation or the effects of it on their organs (well without good vetinary intervention).

Kumar, why is it you so clearly want this to work?
 
Rolfe has Kumar on ignore, and he's staying there. Until he's prepared to accept that the scientists around here just possibly might be right when they explain to him that homoepathy has no effect. I expect hell to freeze over first.

I heard that programme too, and I've heard similar suggestions before. It's still got nothing to do with flushing out unidentified toxins though.

Rolfe.
 
Fasting lowers your metabolic rate and therefor slows the rate with wich your body would get rid of any toxins.
 
geni said:
Fasting lowers your metabolic rate and therefor slows the rate with wich your body would get rid of any toxins.
Click to expand...

Good logic. The whole detox thing is woo nonsense anyway.

I was generally interested in the fasting is good for you line. I was skeptical, but that neurosurgeon may have had a point.
 
Paul C. Anagnostopoulos said:
Apparently these would be all the toxins bound up in your fat, which you have to start burning in order for the liver to extract said toxins and excrete them through your pores.
Click to expand...

That seems terribly jumbled.

Sweat does eliminate waste products, no doubt about it. So does urine. But there are only a few liver-metabolized products that are excreted, most notably bilirubin and biliverdin.

Fasting doesn't do much. Except that a low carbohydrate intake results in the depletion of glycogen from the liver, and once that's done, fat will be metabolized in the muscles. and the other gunk will be excreted eventually. This, however, requires a fair amount of anaerobic exercize.

There's no mechanism by which just fasting will make "toxins" magically disappear from stored fat or will make the undesired things from fat go into the bloodstream for elimination.
 
What about sheded skin particles, hair & nails eliminating waste products & toxins?
 
My mother used to fast, to get rid of toxins.
My wife: How does it work?
Mother: No idea basically. It just felt like the toxins was purged due to the strain she felt.
My wife: No wonder, your not getting any energy from food. Your cells are dying.
All from my imperfect memory. My wife probably said it better than I remember it.
 
I have a question for you knowledgable folks out there.....disregarding the notion that fasting aids in some sort of ambiguous "detox," is there any chance that not being occupied with digesting and metabolizing food increases the rate or efficiency at which cells or organs regenerate and heal?
It seems to make sense that, in the absence of a bloodstream laden with fat molecules from our last big mac, the efficiency of nutrient distribution, oxygen uptake, etc might be improved. Would this explain why animals placed on calorie restricted diets live longer?
It does seem to make sense that digestion would take a lot out of a body, so to speak, over time.
I admit full ignorance as to human physiology and metabolism, but would like some informed opinions/speculation/knowledge.
 
Rolfe said:
No, it really doesn't, or at least not in any more than trace quantities.
Click to expand...
Really? I'm pretty sure that sweat can significantly reduce the amount of DHMO in your body.
 
If anything, fasting should Increase the levels of toxins in your body since you will start breaking down proteins and fat generating ammonia and acids. According to my wife who knows a lot more about this than I do.
 
Vitnir said:
If anything, fasting should Increase the levels of toxins in your body since you will start breaking down proteins and fat generating ammonia and acids. According to my wife who knows a lot more about this than I do.
Click to expand...

But we already break down proteins and fat every day in our stomachs...wouldn't this generate the same ammonia and acids? Why would resorting to our stored proteins and fats result in more of these compounds?
Anyways, isn't it true that for the first several days of fasting one relies on glycogen rather than proteins and fat?
 
Paul C. Anagnostopoulos said:
Okay, what's up with fasting and eliminating toxins from the body?

Here's what someone on another forum told me:

I asked how your body flushes out the toxins:


~~ Paul
Click to expand...

Others have touched on this, but I would ask:


" Exactly what toxins are you referring to ? "
 
Is fasting a good thing? Can it heal, or prevent disease? Personally, I think there is something to it. It happens to be my own best remedy for an afflication I seem to get about once every two years which happens to be Gout. And I've discovered that it can work very quickly -- within one or two days and is a whole lot cheaper, safer and longer lasting than the drugs your doctor might prescribe. What toxins does it eliminate? Probably uric acid crystals for one. As to more serious afflications, I dunno. But it seems to me if your body says "don't eat," you shouldn't eat.
 
Doghouse Reilly said:
But we already break down proteins and fat every day in our stomachs...wouldn't this generate the same ammonia and acids? Why would resorting to our stored proteins and fats result in more of these compounds?
Anyways, isn't it true that for the first several days of fasting one relies on glycogen rather than proteins and fat?
Click to expand...
I would prefer someone else answered this but AFAIK the bulk of energy in a healthy diet comes from carbohydrates. Denying the body of that source of energy proteins and fat must be used to a much higher degree. If a person eats an excess of carbohydrates the body has no need of breaking down proteins and fat unless its needed as building blocks.

And glycogen? Isn't that something the liver only has a supply of that lasts a few minutes at most?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom