[TigerMandingo]

TG thanks for the responses. Three days is doable, for sure. The only thing I'm concerned about is I'm already thin, I'm 6'3 160 lbs. Losing any more weight doesn't make sense. Although I guess a 3 day fast wouldn't be that much of a big deal.

[Tail Gunner]

(04-28-2018 11:12 AM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  

TG thanks for the responses. Three days is doable, for sure. The only thing I'm concerned about is I'm already thin, I'm 6'3 160 lbs. Losing any more weight doesn't make sense. Although I guess a 3 day fast wouldn't be that much of a big deal.

Last year, when I water fasted for two weeks (followed by a one week re-feeding period), I began my fast at 173 pounds and I lost exactly twenty pounds dropping to 153 pounds. I had not weighed that little since high school. The re-feed consisted of several days of juice and broth followed by eating only organic vegetables (raw and cooked) and towards the end of the stay some healthy grains and beans. I immediately popped up to 158 just from the juice and broth and I was at 163 by the time that I left the fasting clinic. The point is that your body will quickly adapt to your ideal weight, even if you eat a healthy diet of mostly organic vegetables. If you want to gain weight, eat raw nuts. They are healthy and very calorie dense.

[Nacho]

I concur with TG after having done many water fast myself. Fasting is literally one of the best investments and tools anyone can utilize for superior health. The key is to get past the first three days. It takes some willpower because you will have hunger pangs the first few days. Keep in mind this is not starvation, it's a mental game at this point as the body adjusts.
After you have a few 10-14 day fast completed, a one day - once a week water fast is great for maintenance. The physical, mental, and even spiritual benefits are amazing. Ascetics through the centuries have practiced and realized this as well.

[Jack Gignac]

(04-04-2018 07:38 PM)Bain Wrote:  

In the last 12 months I have done two - 10 day water fasts and one 9 day water fast. ( was planning to do 10 but work called). In my last 9 day fast, I ate for a week and then went to my doctor to do my annual check up. I had a blood test done. I got the results and the doctor was surprised how perfect my blood test came out. Lowest cholesterol, good blood sugar, thyroid problems disappeared, psa fine, B12 fine etc.

So water fasting is a secret way to get good internal health in a short period. Of course after you must maintain a healthy diet and exercise program or else the benefits of the fast disappear soon.

10 day water fasting is not easy but it is not difficult either. One needs to gradually build up to it. Start with one day water fasts. I have been doing a one day dry fast once a week -- on Mondays usually for almost 10 years now.

The first three days of the fast are the most difficult. After that though they become more easy and detoxification usually begins after the third or forth day.

If you want to achieve good internal health in a short period, this maybe something to consider.

If you have a medical condition, you need to consult with your doctor first. But long fasting tends to often cure many medical ailments.

I did 10 days last september + 4 days juice feasting on tops. been suffering with something similar to 'post finasteride syndrome' from using ru58841 and the side effects are/were really bad so I was willing to give it a try

it without a doubt pushed my body closer to 'recovery' so to speak.

when we're sick a lot of times we lose appetite as our body wants to pool resources towards recovery rather than digestion.

it was dangerous and I couldn't afford going to a clinic to do it so I had to do it on my own. was very scary but I was feeling so bad that I was willing to risk my life for a possible recovery. When you can't sleep, feel blunted emotions and your dick stops working there's not a lot I wouldn't do to get these functions back.

[asdfk]

I find it naive to assume that fasting is going to be always beneficial for health, period.

Anyone who is going to attempt longer fasts (72 hours+) or regular (weekly) fasts longer then 24 hours should be aware there are certain situations in which fasting might not be appropriate.

Be it certain cancers that get stimulated in a fasted state (they do exist) or hormonal fluctuations that might cause trouble if exposed to them too often, there are situations where fasting might screw you up.

For guys in the US: schedule your water fast after your yearly physical, after your metabolic markers and CBC were drawn. Ask your doctor if he sees any reason to not do an extended or often repeated water fast. This will prevent the most obvious fuckups...

...but also realise we know fairly little about how regular fasting affects health and disease. Many ailments are in the body for years before they come symptomatic and those are most likely to respond to food deprivation.

For example, after a fast, when you resume eating, autophagy is suppressed for some time. Populations that come out of a famine often show overt infections when they start to refeed whereas infections were suppressed during the fasted state.

This implies that if you have some chronic infection you might not notice it during fasting but it might roar it's ugly head when you start eating again.

Although fasting is going to be helpful for many people you should be aware there are risks. If your health is not optimal I'd tread lightly, until there's more data.

[Tail Gunner]

(06-02-2018 04:24 AM)asdfk Wrote:  

Ask your doctor if he sees any reason to not do an extended or often repeated water fast. This will prevent the most obvious fuckups...

I would only add that most allopathic doctors know absolutely nothing about fasting and many will probably try to dissuade you from fasting (out of ignorance) even if you are a good candidate for fasting. So, you may need to rely on your own good sense after performing your own due diligence.

(06-02-2018 04:24 AM)asdfk Wrote:  

For example, after a fast, when you resume eating, autophagy is suppressed for some time. Populations that come out of a famine often show overt infections when they start to refeed whereas infections were suppressed during the fasted state. This implies that if you have some chronic infection you might not notice it during fasting but it might roar it's ugly head when you start eating again.

I have never heard of this particular theory (either that autophagy is suppressed for some time after a fast (versus simply returning to its normal pre-fasting state) or that a chronic infection may reactivate after a fast). If true, this is very interesting. Do you happen to have a web link or some other source that you can cite?

(06-02-2018 04:24 AM)asdfk Wrote:  

Many ailments are in the body for years before they come symptomatic and those are most likely to respond to food deprivation.

Although fasting is going to be helpful for many people you should be aware there are risks. If your health is not optimal I'd tread lightly, until there's more data.

I agree with the first two sentences. I agree with the third sentence to the extent that "tread lightly" means seeking all available information before proceeding with a fast, but not if it means forgoing fasting just out of an abundance of caution. The percentage of people who can be injured by fasting is rather small while the benefits are great. The people who are most sick often achieve the greatest benefits (obviously someone who has advanced cancer or some other wasting disease -- and is therefore already weak and physically fragile -- should not fast).

[asdfk]

Tail Gunner, the majority of men in the West are overweight and develop one or more chronic health condition between 40-50 years of age. The average man is not so robust as you might think.

Paul Jaminets book The Perfect Health Diet discusses the pathogen-host hypothesis in some detail and provides references in their chapter on fasting.

I agree that most doctors are not knowledgable about fasting, nutrition or preventive medicine. But there are two responses a doctor might give:

1. You have XYZ, fasting will make this worse
2. I don't like the idea of fasting and I don't want you to do it

Ignore 2, listen to 1. If a doctor provides you with good arguments why you should not fast in your specific situation, you should not do it or at least get a second opinion.

[Bain]

With mass marketing of food by greedy food corporations who care little about people's health and first priority is profits, the world has already been brain washed into thinking how fasting is dangerous for one's health even to the point of paranoia. This thread itself displayed the paranoia a bit.

Trying to convince a person fasting is a good and healthy practice is met with irrational skepticism. Most will not try fasting bc first they get afraid -- and second fasting is very difficult to do when initially trying it.

So if you don't want people to try fasting that is easy to do. Just scare them a little.

If you want people to try and fast you will have a uphill challenge.

The reality I think is 99% of people will benefit by doing a fast.

However, as said before eating properly is the real solution. If you fast and then go back to poor eating, the benefits of the fast will all be gone.

Each person has to be responsible and accountable how they use fasting. It is only a tool after all.

[GreenManaleshi]

(04-22-2018 09:16 AM)ball dont lie Wrote:  

I don't want to clutter up a wonderful fasting discussion with other stuff but I might as well talk about this. My doctor's suggestion was simply to take antibiotics forever. At least a year. That is western medicines answer to dry eyes causing styes.

I started developing dry eyes about 8 years ago for seemingly no reason. Turns out it was my thyroid, which was fucked. Fast forward to 8 years later after having thyroid cancer, a thyroid removal, and replacement dose, and now no more dry eyes (or skin)

So if you are having weight issues, or are older, maybe get your thyroid checked and make sure your TSH is in range.

[GreenManaleshi]

(06-02-2018 04:24 AM)asdfk Wrote:  

Be it certain cancers that get stimulated in a fasted state (they do exist)

If you have any legit pubmed links to that I'd love to see it. Everything I've ever come across has shown fasting inhibits tumor growth in animal and human studies through a variety of pathways.

Ketogenic diets are also good for most cancer inhibition, but not all. Some varieties switch from glucose to amino acids, lactate, acetate, and macromolecules. So it's not a 100% solution.

But if you are taking in no nutrients, I cant see how that would actively promote growth of any tissue mass, let alone cancer. Again, might not kill cancer, but promote it? IGF1 and other possible cancer prompting hormones are typically suppressed during fasting as well.

[GreenManaleshi]

(04-22-2018 03:59 PM)CaptainChardonnay Wrote:  

Thanks TG. I use a Berkey system. I'm considering a soft dry fast actually just to see what will happen.

I found this guy on youtube with some good videos explaining how fasting works scientifically

That guy is a stud. Seems to really know his shit.

   

[Dulceácido]

I can hardly believe this thread is still going....

BUT

I said the same thing about intermittent (food) fasting and I was completely wrong about that, and I admit it.

But, I've done water fasts before--not by choice--and there was nothing healthy about it. Anything that warns you to "use extreme caution" and "stay home and don't leave the house," I just have an even more hard time processing.

[Bain]

(06-02-2018 09:25 PM)Dulceácido Wrote:  

But, I've done water fasts before--not by choice--and there was nothing healthy about it. Anything that warns you to "use extreme caution" and "stay home and don't leave the house," I just have an even more hard time processing.

Fine example of fear throwing rationality out the window. lol.

[Dulceácido]

(06-02-2018 09:38 PM)Bain Wrote:  

(06-02-2018 09:25 PM)Dulceácido Wrote:  

But, I've done water fasts before--not by choice--and there was nothing healthy about it. Anything that warns you to "use extreme caution" and "stay home and don't leave the house," I just have an even more hard time processing.

Fine example of fear throwing rationality out the window. lol.

Wait... Your fear or my rationality--which has gone out the window? I've almost died of thirst 3 times. Literally.

So am I afraid or irrational?

[Teutatis]

(06-02-2018 09:19 PM)GreenManaleshi Wrote:  

I found this guy on youtube with some good videos explaining how fasting works scientifically

So much stupidity, pseudo science and misinformation, that's a stud for you? Just because this roid monkey is an expert in pining doesn't mean he's an expert on other subjects.

[GreenManaleshi]

(06-02-2018 09:58 PM)Teutatis Wrote:  

(06-02-2018 09:19 PM)GreenManaleshi Wrote:  

I found this guy on youtube with some good videos explaining how fasting works scientifically

So much stupidity, pseudo science and misinformation, that's a stud for you? Just because this roid monkey is an expert in pining doesn't mean he's an expert on other subjects.

Jealous much? Guy is lean, muscular, good looking, has a successful business and channel, looks to have a happy wife and family, been on TV etc.

But no doubt your personal achievements are much more impressive. Just so many alphas here it makes me tingle.

Also that's not the quote and video I posted - some other guys posted that video. I was referring to the information in the video I posted.

[Dulceácido]

(06-02-2018 10:08 PM)GreenManaleshi Wrote:  

(06-02-2018 09:58 PM)Teutatis Wrote:  

(06-02-2018 09:19 PM)GreenManaleshi Wrote:  

I found this guy on youtube with some good videos explaining how fasting works scientifically

So much stupidity, pseudo science and misinformation, that's a stud for you? Just because this roid monkey is an expert in pining doesn't mean he's an expert on other subjects.

Jealous much? Guy is lean, muscular, good looking, has a successful business and channel, looks to have a happy wife and family, been on TV etc.

But no doubt your personal achievements are much more impressive. Just so many alphas here it makes me tingle.

I'm kinda an expert at interpreting things people actually mean when they use nuanced language. I'm pretty sure he was saying, "this guy is full of complete shit."

[Teutatis]

(06-02-2018 10:08 PM)GreenManaleshi Wrote:  

Jealous much? Guy is lean, muscular, good looking, has a successful business and channel, looks to have a happy wife and family, been on TV etc.

But no doubt your personal achievements are much more impressive. Just so many alphas here it makes me tingle.

Yes, I admit I'm jealous of a guy who literally says your body magically creates its own water from fat and breathing and still makes money and people take him seriously. My own personal achievements are nothing compared to that.

I guess if we can't trust a "lean, muscular, good looking, has a successful business and channel, looks to have a happy wife and family, been on TV" guy who can we trust?

[Dulceácido]

(06-02-2018 10:35 PM)Teutatis Wrote:  

(06-02-2018 10:08 PM)GreenManaleshi Wrote:  

Jealous much? Guy is lean, muscular, good looking, has a successful business and channel, looks to have a happy wife and family, been on TV etc.

But no doubt your personal achievements are much more impressive. Just so many alphas here it makes me tingle.

Yes, I admit I'm jealous of a guy who literally says your body magically creates its own water from fat and breathing and still makes money and people take him seriously. My own personal achievements are nothing compared to that.

I guess if we can't trust a "lean, muscular, good looking, has a successful business and channel, looks to have a happy wife and family, been on TV" guy who can we trust?

I'm gonna put my credibility on the line again: there's no fucking way this guy is telling the truth. He's a guy promoting his youtube channel, nothing more, nothing less. Ironically, he's the same guy that talks about intermittent fasting in a lot of videos, which has worked for me in weight loss and strength gain, but that's not even close to the same thing.

How am I gonna fast on food and water and still go this route?

The only thing that sustains me in my (food) fasting time is water and coffee. Like I said, I won't try to send this into a debacle; the situation without my own observations, but even living at the extremes of fasting, I can't foresee an advantage to no water or liquid.

My body has metabolized ALL the food I've eaten in the afternoon. I'm screaming for water. I need it. I need to push out the stuff I just digested, especially the toxins.

I'm not saying it's total shit, but I am saying that, especially in the morning (technically, my afternoon), I've been without anything for more than 13 hours. My body has been working without the help of anything--and I only consumed one meal. Shit needs to get dispelled. Can't do that without, at least, fluids.

[asdfk]

Quote:

So if you don't want people to try fasting that is easy to do. Just scare them a little. (...) The reality I think is 99% of people will benefit by doing a fast.

I'm not trying to scare anyone. I started doing monthly water fasts myself and I love it. I just dispute the statement that unsupervised fasting is good for 99% of people. For 99% of adults aged 18-65 without chronic health conditions, maybe. That's excluding a lot of people and is far from 99% of the population.

The decision to fast is by definition made in circumstances of uncertainty. Science has shown benefits in specific situations but long-term safety has not been demonstrated.

I'm not pulling this out of my ass. It's based on conversations with academics who are way smarter then me but who I obviously can't name here. These are the people actively researching these issues and I trust their judgement but it's up to anyone else to ignore them.

I don't mean to discourage anyone or steal the shine of the regular fasters. However, I do want to encourage readers to look at their health situation and make an educated decision to the extent this is possible when the research to confirm the safety of fasting isn't there. There's always a trade-off and sick people should not try to be pioneers unless they have exhausted other options. Yes, fasting has been around for a long time but empirical scrutiny is just starting up and again quoting a academic I spoke with: "it could go either way."

(06-02-2018 08:54 PM)GreenManaleshi Wrote:  

(06-02-2018 04:24 AM)asdfk Wrote:  

Be it certain cancers that get stimulated in a fasted state (they do exist)

If you have any legit pubmed links to that I'd love to see it. Everything I've ever come across has shown fasting inhibits tumor growth in animal and human studies through a variety of pathways.

I asked this exact question to someone working in the field. He explained to me that one of the properties of cancer is that it indeed can switch fuel sources and that a ketogenic diet or fasting will not automatically cure or kill pre-cancerous growth. In some cases it might make matters worse. Even if 95% of all cancers are glucose-dependent, do we really want to recommend fasting if 5% of cancers will see accelerated growth?

Again, this comes from someone actually working in the field so I didn't go very deep myself beyond my conversation with him. However, I did see studies showing that certain mutations from for example melanoma will see stimulated growth under starvation / ketogenic diet. You could find them if you wanted, here's a place you can start:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20...141359.htm

[Dulceácido]

As a scientist, this thread is so fucking insulting. I think some posters should be banned. The amount of complete nonsense spouted here without any validity makes me cringe.

You think it's dangerous to spout shit about the (((JQ)))?

But you can post this stuff? This is actually dangerous and harmful.

[Bain]

(06-03-2018 06:25 AM)Dulceácido Wrote:  

As a scientist, this thread is so fucking insulting. I think some posters should be banned. The amount of complete nonsense spouted here without any validity makes me cringe.

You think it's dangerous to spout shit about the (((JQ)))?

But you can post this stuff? This is actually dangerous and harmful.

Do you think this kind of post will get some rational discussion happening. If you stick to facts you might some interesting feed back that everyone can benefit from. Sorry for the chuckle but lol.

[Tail Gunner]

(06-03-2018 06:25 AM)Dulceácido Wrote:  

As a scientist, this thread is so fucking insulting. I think some posters should be banned. The amount of complete nonsense spouted here without any validity makes me cringe.

You think it's dangerous to spout shit about the (((JQ)))?

But you can post this stuff? This is actually dangerous and harmful.

I agree with Bain. If you want to generate a rational discussion, provide some specific examples of this "dangerous and harmful" information along with some definitive proof of error -- instead of hamster ranting.

Your status as a scientist, alone, has absolutely no influence among well-read thinking men. Scientists, as a group, long ago sacrificed their objectivity on the alter of greed and political correctness. And this applies to both scientists working for Monsanto and to scientists working for the Sierra Club.

When scientists abandoned their strict enforcement of the scientific method and the search for the objective truth in favor of money and grants or to push a political political agenda, they lost their credibility. As a group, they are now barely held in greater esteem than journalists -- and rightly so.

Many people read threads such as this one to improve their health after having been fed a pack of lies their entire lives by scientists and the medical establishment about so-called "healthy" eating practices, which in truth causes the disease process to occur. Eating the Standard American Diet is far more dangerous than water-only fasting. So how about ranting about that? You are purposefully making the perfect the enemy of the good.

[asdfk]

Quote:

You are purposefully making the perfect the enemy of the good.

Lol. Bro, you are doing the exact same as him by declaring all scientists morally corrupt assholes.

There are incredibly smart, ethical and driven scientists out there who slave away in their fucking labs to ge to the truth. Their name is being tarnished by the behaviour of their colleagues. Doesn't take away that their work, not ours, has changed our world for the better.

[Tail Gunner]

(06-03-2018 11:33 AM)asdfk Wrote:  

Quote:

You are purposefully making the perfect the enemy of the good.

Lol. Bro, you are doing the exact same as him by declaring all scientists morally corrupt assholes.

There are incredibly smart, ethical and driven scientists out there who slave away in their fucking labs to ge to the truth. Their name is being tarnished by the behaviour of their colleagues. Doesn't take away that their work, not ours, has changed our world for the better.

A rational discussion demands reading comprehension.

Quote:

Your status as a scientist, alone,

Quote:

Scientists, as a group, long ago sacrificed their objectivity

Quote:

As a group, they are now barely held in greater esteem than journalists

I carefully couched my language to avoid doing exactly what you claim that I am doing ("declaring all scientists morally corrupt assholes."). I even added bold-face to the word "alone." At some point, you need to take responsibility for carefully reading what others have written before making false claims.

It is beyond dispute that scientists, as a group, have lost their unique historical status as arbiters of the truth because of the ever-increasing number of scientists who cast aside the scientific method in exchange for money, grants, and political correctness. Nothing that I said declared that there are not many fine professional scientists -- just as there are still many fine journalists. Nice attempt at inserting a big stench-ridden red herring to the debate.

The point of my post -- that Dulceácido's status as a scientist, alone, is irrelevant unless he offers reasoned examples and proof of error -- is unassailable.