Welcome to The Fast Diet › The official Fast forums › Body › Science of intermittent fasting › Related Science articles people might be interested to read
This topic contains 976 replies, has 69 voices, and was last updated by penguin 3 weeks ago.
Viewing 50 posts - 101 through 150 (of 997 total)
17 Apr 16
That looks interesting Cinque. I’ve just been reading too ( in denial about lawn mowing). This article was referenced in the one on intermittent fasting that you put on Page 1 of this thread, the article by most of the big names, including Dr M, Walter Longo, Krista Varady et al.
It looks at hunger and circadian rhythms, explains why we so often get the “evening munchies”. Interestingly it also says that you get hunger for particular foods ( never green veg😊). I’ve pasted the PDF as the article is free. If you can’t open it, shorten the header to the reference number.
Cinque, that’s very interesting and will spur us on to keep maintaining our lost weight. It’s encouraging to know that it is after all possible to lower one’s “set point” again and not be fighting the hunger gremlins for ever.
Simcoeluv, yes, Ancel Keys has a lot to answer for. But one good thing is that he didn’t destroy data, merely ignored it if it clashed with his views, so the data is still there for re-analysis. The sad thing though is that he made it so difficult for research to pursue some of the important hypotheses.
23 Apr 16
Fructose alters hundreds of brain genes, which can lead to a wide range of diseases
However, the researchers discovered good news as well: An omega-3 fatty acid known as docosahexaenoic acid, or DHA, seems to reverse the harmful changes produced by fructose.
A new study has suggested that planned lapses in self-control can help you stick with your goals over time.
24 Apr 16
I like that research Cinque. We can have five lapses a week!
Ha! Exactly right Apricot!
Researchers have found a ‘striking’ new side effect from eating fast food.
The danger, the researchers believe, isn’t necessarily a result of the food itself, but rather the process by which the food is prepared. The findings were published in Environmental Health Perspectives, a journal funded by the National Institutes of Health.
26 Apr 16
Our gigantic problem with portions: why are we all eating too much?
For most people eating has become a form of social entertainment. We no longer eat because we are hungry. You can see it in many of the posts on this forum. “I had good intentions but there was this party that I had to go to. Or a friend from out of town dropped by and we had lunch etc etc.” So social activity and eating are now one in the same. If I have a social activity and it happens to fall on my fast day, I still go to the occasion but I don’t eat or drink (alcohol). I still socialise, I just don’t eat. My friends now know this and don’t get upset when I politely refuse a piece of chocolate cake, or a nice wine, some even tease me by making Mmmmmmm sounds as they eat their deserts. All good fun.
When we eat a meal, we take for granted that we should feel full afterwards. But eating a diet high in sugar and fat makes it harder for our body to tell if we are full or not.
30 Apr 16
Thanks Salma for this one:
Why you shouldn’t exercise to lose weight, explained with 60+ studies
The fact exercise does not help much with weight loss is finally getting some press. There is an important side story that goes with this information.
Some popular ‘fitness trackers’ take your estimated TDEE and then start adding calories burned to that number. The implication is and many believe that they can ‘eat those calories back’ because they have burned them as a result of their exercise and daily activities. But those numbers are largely wrong, and people that eat the calories back often don’t get the ‘expected result’ of weight loss, or even weight maintenance. http://www.foxnews.com/health/2016/03/21/fitness-trackers-bad-at-keeping-tabs-on-how-much-energy-burn.html and http://www.cnbc.com/2014/07/14/users-complain-of-weight-gain-with-fitness-bands.html
The bottom line is just don’t believe that you have actually burned the number of calories the tracker says you have burned. This goes not only for wearables, but also for the burned calorie counters on exercise machines. They seem so accurate, but they are anything but.
I always feel like such a killjoy when I try to explain that exercise thing to people. Just doesn’t work that way.
A postscript on the wearables….
I had a Fitbit and took it on a trip to Peru in October. While at Machu Picchu, I watched in horror as the steps added up as we ascended higher and higher…in a bus. I lost it and never looked back.
Another device to ignore is the body fat indicator on scales. Research shows they are so inaccurate and inconsistent as to be virtually worthless.
Simcoeluv, re Body fat, are they simply inaccurate or not even reliable as an indicator of going in the right direction? Fung says they are useful for the latter.
Research shows not an indicator for even direction.
It’s not research, but I remember a lady on a site that was all ready to lose weight with 5:2. She bought a scale with a body fat indicator. After week one, she was posting asking why her body fat was rising even though she was ‘doing everything right’. After week two, when she admittedly had lost some weight, she was complaining her body fat was going up even more. After a third week of increasing her body fat, she quit 5:2 because it did not work. Along the way, she admitted her body fat was varying significantly by day. Of course, body fat does not vary much on a daily basis if it is being measured accurately.
In any event, when it comes to weight loss I believe the body fat percentage will take care of itself as weight is lost. I believe it is hard enough for the average person to lose weight, much less to try to manage, or even worry about, body fat percentage along the way.
2 May 16
The Biggest Losers – and regainers due to, apparently, slowed metabolism.
3 May 16
Well, we can close down this website and go back to eating as usual. Nothing can be done. We are wasting our time trying to lose weight. It is OK to weigh whatever weight you are.
After you lose weight, you will automatically eat over your TDEE and regain it all and more. The research on the biggest losers is compelling.
I also have a nice bridge for sale at a bargain price. I’ll even take my payment in potato chips and beer!
I would love to hear Jason Fung’s take on this
That is a really interesting article Heron! It will be so interesting to follow it up. Factors like the amount of exercise, the speed of weight loss, etc as well as getting a bigger group to follow….
Let’s hope that further research shows that 5:2 fasting doesn’t have the same results!
Dr. Fung believes in the set point theory. I do not.
…but doesn’t he also believe that one can reset the set point?
I don’t recall him taking that position in either his lectures or blogs. I have not read his book, so it may be in there.
simcoeluv, yep,…he does. Here’s a glimpse from his website, where he talks about how to get past Body Set Weight, or BSW. https://intensivedietarymanagement.com/smash-the-fat-calories-part-xi/
Hmm, Dr Fung…world leading expert on treatment of diabetes etc by dietary intervention… Simco…some bloke who posts a lot on the 5:2 diet forum…
No contest 😊
Are you sure? Dr Fung does not have a chance against Simco’s authoritative statements! We all would be lost without Simco’s firm guidance. LOL! 😀
And here’s the answer to my question about Jason Fung and Biggest Loser.
Exercise is an interesting issue, isn’t it? If we are focusing mainly on weight loss then it seems clear that it isn’t on its own really very helpful. However, there seem to be some connected issues. One is of course blood pressure, where regular exercise seems to have been shown to be helpful. The other is in the management of sugars and triglycerides in the blood and the production, or over production of insulin, which is part of the obesity issue. This team have done a couple of studies of these areas: here’s one. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24848492 (the whole paper is free access, click the link below the abstract)
Keeping insulin steady rather than spiking seems to help reduce hunger cycles, so something that helps such a process may well help us to remain more easily on a diet, especially if we are continuing to eat sweet things with fructose in on our non fast days. ( I must say that I’ve found it helpful to come right off sweet stuff other than fruit, and that only higher fibre fruits.) The team used fructose I believe partly to limit the study variables, and partly because high fructose corn syrup is considered a problem additive to food. So exercise may well help where other sugars in the diet are concerned.
I just finished reading the ny times article about the biggest loser; wait, I didn’t actually finish it…I got too depressed. Seriously, it was like “game of thrones” meets “the biggest loser”. I’m looking for inspiration here. Hoping that 5:2 is about as far as you get from the biggest loser. Also, the biggest loser contestants are seriously abused on that show. I believe the winner from the first season was urinating blood before his final weigh in. ( I’m an American so I’m talking about the American version. Is there a UK version? So, maybe I’m talking myself off a ledge here. What do I need you people for?(kidding). I’ve been doing 5:2 for a few weeks now and lost about 8 lbs. (and 3 inches off waist). Have about 30 lbs of “baby weight” to go. (An aside , why is it called baby weight? 3rd baby is 10 months. Isn’t it just um, my weight now?) so, I’m rambling but I’m wondering if I should try ADF to speed things up? Although thought of ADF is more depressing than nytimes article. But I read the article where dr varadys criticized Michael Mosley for using her ADF research for his 5:2 method. But I like 5:2!!!! Is it all pointless? Am I just killing my metabolism? Thoughts?:)
I’m pretty sure I was one of the first, if not the first, poster on this site recommending that people review Dr. Fung’s lecture series – even before he became ‘famous’. His personal review of the existing research with an end goal of finding a better way to treat his patients is nothing but admirable and informative, and the resulting ‘treatment program’ that combined treatments that have been effective in treating Type 2 for decades (fasting and HFLC) is just as effective but much more ‘doable’ than either program individually. His efforts to publicize the results of his research review seem to be making headway, and I hope they proceed much further than they have. I am doing everything I can to ‘spread the word’. However, my M.D. acquaintances still brush off the program as a fad and view Dr. Fung as just another internet quack trying to make a buck on a worthless diet (just like another famous quack – Dr. Atkins). The medical profession is pretty slow to adopt new ideas. In the U.S., anyway, any time they vary from the ‘accepted’ treatment protocol and something goes wrong, they get sued. I guess in other countries, if they vary from the government mandated protocols they get fired. Doctors prefer not to have either problem. I personally feel every M.D should be required to watch Dr. Fung’s lecture series (or read his book, assuming it contains the same or more information). If they did, they would have 1000 times more information on nutrition than any of them currently do and could treat their patients with a bit more knowledge and, perhaps, fewer worthless pills.
As for the set point theory, it remains just that – a theory. There are alternative explanations that also can explain the results of the research sited. Research on the topic is only in its infancy. At this point, the jury is out. It is not central to Dr. Fung’s thesis, and if it is proven there are other explanations for the observed results his basic findings and results will not be undermined. But it can be unpopular to disagree with the current reigning guru of the day (not that Dr. Fung does not deserve guru status!).
By the way, did any of you notice that Dr. Fung pointed out that the research that formed the basis of the current ‘probiotic’ trend has been retracted because it was fraudulent – made up? I believe something similar happened to the research that started the ‘gluten sensitivity’ and gluten free trend (not made up, just wrong). But if you don’t follow the subject, and just depend on what is in front of you today from the internet or where ever, you may not know there is other information out there that might otherwise modify your view on whatever the subject may be.
As I have said before (and I truly live by the example), there was a time when you could have attended the greatest university on earth and studied under the greatest professors that had ever lived and completely understood what they were teaching you – and you would have graduated absolutely and positively knowing that the earth was flat. Things are not always as stated, and things change.
But for right now, on this weight loss site, I believe the less you eat, the more you lose!
simcoeluv, thank heavens all that nonsense about saturated fat is on its way out too.
I am so happy for you that you obtain all of that great knowledge! And I am so grateful for you teaching us, simple folks, all of your wisdom.
As usual – you are soooo right: “The less you eat, the more you lose” – come on, who could argue here?!
4 May 16
Erm, I can argue with this and have done so elsewhere on this site. 500/600 cals on FD, right? Or 800 daily for 8 weeks on the BSD. There’s plenty of scientific evidence that you can eat the same number of cals but lose more on some foods than others, and keep it off more readily longer term. Hence the additional advice in The Blood Sugar Diet about carbs (reducing) and fats (increasing), plus advice on complexity of foods.
I’ve just watched the recent interview with Dr Michael Mosley that was suggested as a sticky note at the top of the topics. Here’s a direct link. Brilliant summary of issues and science, well worth 36 mins viewing. When you get onto the page scroll down for the interview link.
6 May 16
Salt! Interesting information and explanation!
7 May 16
I’ve just come across this paper, slightly older than some things we’ve been reading but none the less some interesting and solid discussion on the topic of loss (or not) of muscle mass on diets.
8 May 16
Fat Labradors give clues to obesity epidemic
Discovered this thread and spent the day following some very interesting links — thank you so much for putting it all in one place.
Thanks, Cinque: That was our beloved lab to a T. Kobie. Overweight, and always hungry, but a big bone structure. He had cancer in various internal areas and the biggest spleen the Vet had ever seen when we reluctantly put him down at age 12 with no good prognosis with medical treatment. He was the most neurotic dog I’ve ever had. Chewed through a (down) quilt, sheet set, mattress pad, and into the mattress one day when I was at work. Separation anxiety they told us. For an example. Plenty of other chewing damage spread throughout the house and throughout the years. And you know what? I have never loved a dog more, because he was wonderful with the little grand kids. And he was courageous when he thought we were being harmed. Loved him. Miss him still, and always will. I still can’t bring myself to get another dog.
Thankyou Lolly, I am so pleased, that is just what I hoped this thread would be.
Northern Dawn, my heart goes out to you. Labradors are such dears and losing a loved one does leave you scarred. Hopefully they can get rid of the bad health genes, now they are identified, and make our four legged friends healthier.
Yes, a fascinating article. There’s one sentence in it too that suggests that the training treats actually increase this problem over the genetic issue for 25% of labs. Wonder if that’s in the research paper itself in more detail?
My first dog was a black lab, I loved her dearly. Really appreciate how you feel, Northern Dawn. My most recent dog was a Saluki who lived to be 15, dying last year, a high age for that breed. She was always slim, in youth to the point where I worried and spoke to the vet ( who reassured me of her health), and in old age I had trouble keeping weight on her as she would eat half her food then walk away. I got crafty with her favourite snacks between meals (cat food on toast anyone?) and the snacking helped her put weight on a bit, a message for me I felt, though at the time I did little about my own snacking. Both my salukis have been such a contrast foodwise to other dogs I’ve had. But I fear the general message is that while genes count it’s also what you do, in this case with food.
I returned to this thread with a bit from Dr Eades’ blog on why people plateau on low carb and other diets.
His blogs make good reading. Here’s one also that brings together links for several of his guidance blogs over time, useful if you are doing low carb as well as 5:2.
There’s a link to a post about Leptin as well as a few other good ones.
9 May 16
Just been reading the post from the website above about Leptin and the way that having lots of triglycerides in the blood seems to block Leptin from the brain, creating hunger.
…and in relation to the item on Leptin, above, here’s what Dr Eades says in reply to a note from someone about intermittent fasting and Leptin. Most interesting.
but does the leptin study correlate with thought-to-be favorable effects of intermittent fasting, as far as judging from leptin feedback cycle, it actually follows that prolonged lack of eating shall ( should?) bring about continuous hunger (apparently muffled for IF veterans) and, what’s more, overstimulation of the Arcuate Nucleus.
Will you please clarify (read: allay my fears)?
I’ll try to allay them. Fasting, i.e., going without food for short periods of time, decreases triglyceride levels, which bring about an increased transport of leptin to the brain where it decreases hunger. Starvation, on the other hand, increases triglycerides and blunts the effects of leptin. People who IF are fasting, not starving, so, if anything, their hunger response decreases because of their substantially decreased triglyceride levels.
Hope your fears are allayed.
10 May 16
John Oliver does a wonderful picking apart of popular science, explaining why there’s so much bunk being passed off as real research — and why a lot of that information seems contradictory. Well worth 20 minutes to listen to.
Very funny and very close to the truth. Scientists must publish or they perish. This places them under extreme pressure to “find” something even when the results are inconclusive or benign. There is NO funding for replication of already published work. Try running the concept of asking for funding to repeat already published work past your departmental group leader and see what they say. Results are picked up by the media and transformed into eye catching headlines. Sad but true. Never let the truth get in the way of a good story. Most science is incremental and very boring to the general population. Due to ethical reasons most human based studies can only correlate something against something else (i.e you can go around killing people and then examine their liver if your doing a liver disease study for example). Most people misinterpret a correlation as meaning “cause and effect”. Sun flare activity has increased in the last 50 years. Obesity has increased in the last 50 years. The two are positively correlated. But you then cant go and say sun flare activity causes obesity.
There’s also the issue of the null hypothesis, which new research has to effectively disprove. And the null h should be made up of a hypothesis that’s been well proven. However, with over 50 years of distorted research strands courtesy of Ancel Keys and others who may have been funded by Big Food, Big Agri and Big Drugs, the null hypothesis became the high carb, low fat model. That’s why it’s taking so long to shift. This is a very simplistic analysis, but with much truth none the less. And it’s mixed up with other things too, such as what mouse chow and experimental foodstuff for both mice and humans in research actually consist of ( and how you get from experimental mouse foods to human ones to test the same things). Nutrition is so difficult to research.
This is a useful paper, again on the topic of weight gain and maintenance.
He’s a youtube clip from Eric Berg. Pretty easy to follow language and basically saying the same thing as Jason Fung.
11 May 16
This is interesting, about the work of John Yudkin in the UK and his response to Ancel Keys. Hyperlipid, whose blog spot this is, writes in a very interesting way, though sometimes he gets very technical. But usually has comprehensible stuff.
You must be logged in to reply.
Username or Email:
Track your weight and measurements, BMI and TDEE with our new tracker.
The Fast books are available throughout the world and in many different languages. Buy a copy today.
Michael is touring Australia this September! Here's a link to dates and tickets. Hope to see you there.
Michael Mosley gives an update for 2019, current research in the field and announces a tour starting in February.
Michael looks at the Horizon special, "What's the Right Diet for You" and tells us which diet they say is best for him.
• All featured posts •
in Weight loss • updated 4 minutes ago by therealwil78
in Weight loss • updated 3 hours, 13 minutes ago by Brads27
in Weight loss • updated 5 hours, 25 minutes ago by Purple Vegie Eater
• All recent topics •
Copyright © 2020 Michael Mosley and Mimi Spencer
Technical questions or problems with the site? Please email our technical contact.