The FastDay Forum

Hello - It's been a while since I've actively fasted. I found it very difficult towards the end of my first attempt but am back to try again. I think I need to ease myself back into it so am starting with once a week only - starting today. I'm sooooo hungry but I know I have to keep at it until tonight.

Wish me luck and good luck to everyone fasting today!

[Tracieknits]

Welcome back Dands! I had to stop fasting in June because my thyroid went bonkers, so I am easing back into it as well.

Drink a cup of tea or broth or bovril and I find that helps a LOT with the midafternoon slump

[Debs]

Good luck from someone else who lapsed too, but you're back on the horse which is a good start!

Welcome back @dands And the very best of luck with your new attempt of fasting, this WOL seriously works we just need to do our bit along the way for it to work it's magic on you. Sue

Hello there, @dands - it's my anecdotal observation from several forums that it sometimes takes more than one attempt at a fasting WOL to settle down comfortably with it. However, when people do return to fasting, they generally have a clearer idea of what might work to support them this time and they re-boot successfully.

Your incremental return to fasting (6:1 initially) sounds eminently sensible.

If you found useful support by posting here regularly last time, will you be doing it again?

Best wishes for integrating fasting into your WOL.

Thanks everyone. I should really update my profile as I'm sure my BMI has increased (I know it has) but don't feel up to doing that today. I mustn't overload on caffeine either today as I know that was one of my mistakes last time. I think Bovril cubes are the way to go.

ssure - looking at your signature makes me think of my husband. He's lean but with high cholesterol so is now looking to see if he has quite a lot of visceral fat. In fact he's booked in for a "bodpod" test next week. I may have a bodpod test too once I know the results of his.

Hope first day went ok dands x
Good idea to ease back in

Yes, I wouldn't think someone with a BMI of 21 would need to lose weight.

ssure - looking at your signature makes me think of my husband. He's lean but with high cholesterol so is now looking to see if he has quite a lot of visceral fat. In fact he's booked in for a "bodpod" test next week. I may have a bodpod test too once I know the results of his.

It was certainly an eye-opener for me, @dands. If it's your DH's cholesterol, rather than BP etc., which is high, it's difficult to predict if that's a proxy for visceral fat so I'll be interested to see his results.

The thing was, because my BodPod results were so implausible (42% body fat at a BMI of <23), absolutely nobody believed them - including an obesity researcher who specialises in TOFI public health. So, after much prevarication, I had a Dxa scan to confirm/refute the results - and, it confirmed them. The difference seems to be that I have no indication/biomarkers of metabolic disease and, even at the time that I had the BodPod analysis, I had a small waist so it was incompatible that I should somehow have masses of visceral fat in the usual places.

Now, ultimately, my results were/are outliers because I have such a scant amount of muscle mass*, not because I have an unthinkable amount of body fat (tho' I have reduced the body fat, as confirmed by my last Dxa). That said, I don't think there's useful public health guidance out there and the only decent, accessible anthropometric data set is Shah & Braverman (albeit that doesn't pretend to be diagnostic but does illustrate how the majority of some demographics such as post-menopausal women can be within a 'normal' BMI but overweight/obese by body fat level).

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Ad ... ne.0033308

*Irritatingly, even tho' my analysis was done in a university research dept. and the results were passed via a researcher and other academic for scrutiny/comment, the BodPod report doesn't tell you that there's an issue with your muscle mass, you have to work it out from your results for yourself. And, sadly, that's not straightforward as there isn't a table of 'desirable muscle mass/LBM' levels altho' there are several for obesity and body fat levels...

Thanks everyone, first fast done and dusted although I found it to be quite a slog. My second fast is today as I missed last week entirely. I feel very sluggish and quite demotivated. Perhaps a long walk with the children in the buggy is what's needed today.

ssure - interestingly my husband's BP has also been increasing and he's experienced a few episodes of severe headaches and when we've checked, his blood pressure has been high. The bodpod showed that his body fat was only slightly under "high risk" at 29.6% (high risk being 30%). The tester ran the test 3 times as he couldn't believe someone so slim could have such a high result. He said he's only seen a result like that once before.

Needless to say this has confirmed our suspicions enough to have a radical overhaul of our eating/drinking habits. Neither of us are overweight - the fasting was to primarily embrace the health benefits and maybe lose a couple of kilos as a secondary benefit - and our diet on the whole has been very good but we still have to make changes. The old adage is certainly true here, "don't judge a book by its cover" or by its BMI!

Welcome back Dands and good luck. I must have one of the lowest BMIs on the forum and one of the highest cholesterol levels but my G.P. is not worried so therefore neither am I because, unlike your husband, I have very low blood pressure so perhaps I am one of the lucky ones.

Ballerina x

ssure - interestingly my husband's BP has also been increasing and he's experienced a few episodes of severe headaches and when we've checked, his blood pressure has been high. The bodpod showed that his body fat was only slightly under "high risk" at 29.6% (high risk being 30%). The tester ran the test 3 times as he couldn't believe someone so slim could have such a high result. He said he's only seen a result like that once before.

That is high for a chap unless he (like me) has a low LBM (unlikely).

It will be interesting to see if your DH's high BP is related to visceral fat literally pressurising some of the organs in the abdominal cavity and trunk. Does your DH's GP have an opinion?

NB: the test should be run 3 times anyway in order to check the results are in line with each other and for calibration purposes. Was the BodPod test in a research dept. in a uni. somewhere or a Sports Club?

The thought of his visceral fat possibly pressurising his organs is quite distressing. He hasn't been to the GP yet as we want to implement the changes first, get re-tested and then make a decision. His BP has been normal for most of his life - he has only recently had a few high readings. I do wonder if this is part of his genetic inheritance as his mother has high blood pressure and he already has familial high cholesterol. The tester said that the only way to determine levels of visceral fat was through an MRI scan and of course we don't want to irradiate him unnecessarily. The test was performed at the University of Westminster.

Ballerina, my BP has always been on the very low side of normal too - I'm hoping our children will inherit my BP and cholesterol levels and not his!

The tester said that the only way to determine levels of visceral fat was through an MRI scan and of course we don't want to irradiate him unnecessarily. The test was performed at the University of Westminster.

I guessed it was Uni. of Westminster and it sounds like the same chap - in which case, I can only say that he has a short memory And, it's interesting that he has again made those comments in defence of his readings as tho' x3 is unusual as opposed to standard practice.

Yes, MRI* or a body volumetric scan would be good but they're virtually unobtainable for the general public in the UK (I will spare you my usual Public Health rant on this topic). You can get a good reading as to your visceral/abdominal fat by having a Dxa - but you need to choose the provider wisely and be prepared to drill down as to what they include in the report. Dxa is available but eye-wateringly expensive.

I will say that that chap gave me a by rote warning about visceral fat tho' I had a waist of <26 inches at that time. Bizarre and outlying as my results are, I never did believe it was visceral fat as it would have need to have been very oddly distributed. As it turns out, I was correct but I am an outlier, and it's not that odd for a woman to have more subcutaneous fat. Plus, I don't (nor did I then) have high BP or other biomarkers of metabolic syndrome etc.

I do wonder if this is part of his genetic inheritance as his mother has high blood pressure and he already has familial high cholesterol

Absolutely none of my business and there's no need to respond but if you mean that your DH has familial hypercholesterolemia then I hope that he is receiving appropriate guidance. (If you don't mean familial hypercholesterolemia then ignore this.)

*NB: if he mentioned MRI and radiation then he mis-spoke as MRI uses strong magnets, not ionising radiation, to produce the images. I will say that MRI provides very pretty slices at designated areas to give a good volume approximation of fat distribution but then you'd have to pick where you think the VF might be located - e.g., liver, spleen, kidneys, lower abdomen etc. etc.

Hmm, I've just asked my DH and he said the tester mentioned a scan, radiation....nothing about an MRI so I must have just made that up! Either way, anything eye wateringly expensive is just not possible at the moment.

He's been on statin since 2007 and has regular blood tests to monitor his levels. We tried for a while to keep it down with diet and exercise and just faced a constant uphill struggle. The GP said it was best to get on Statin at a young age to give him the best chance.