The FastDay Forum

Bee, I find it difficult to understand your point. If you are interested in a cure for cancer and the politics that prohibit natural cures then buy and read this book: http://www.amazon.co.uk/World-without-C ... 072&sr=8-1

The only difference Carorees between you and I is how we perceive what we hear and see; we are not in disagreement.

skippyscuffleton; Could it be that in this debate with the others what we are witnessing is a feature of gender? There is also an appalling attitude that prevails in the cloisters of academe that if one does not possess tertiary or quaternary education (or those which come after this) that somehow they are unable to read or write sentences in English. It also appears that only those with a doctorate degree who can speak with authority even if it is beyond their own specialisation. We sure do live in a cockeyed society.

You might find this article on the immune suppressive effects of polyunsaturated fats interesting: http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/immuni ... TD1uaMkoec. Here is a slightly more interesting article: http://www.naturalnews.com/035015_PUFAs ... acids.html. There are many other articles and some of the supporting information arises from other sources not directly connected to scientific studies such as the feeding of farm animals etcetera.

There is fear of animal protein and saturated fat but it is an irrational fear that has been fanned by the propaganda of the vegetable oil industry. Here is a video that could interest you: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvKdYUCUca8. Contrary to the cherished views of others cholesterol is not harmful; this view has been propagated by the pharmaceutical companies from questionable research (and 'paid' peer reviews) to sell their products and the GPs are their pill-pushers.

In Michael Mosley's video his body scan showed internal fat which is suggested as harmful yet it is probably helpful in periods of famine when the body and its organs survive on it. It could be the long-term weight the body is carrying which stresses it or it could be something else but I doubt if it is the fat per se.

You are probably learning that only the paranoid in society survive.

Last evening I stopped my daily fasting and currently contemplating the 5:2 regimen. On breaking the fast proved to be difficult but today, back on a normal diet, I have felt okay.

Roy Walford who wrote the book '120 year diet' based on calorie restriction research results and who practiced what he discovered which included fasting was the Guru of the anti-ageing movement during his life; he was quite a character. His diet was principally (but I do not know if it was solely) a vegetarian one; regrettably he failed to reach his 80th year having suffered from health problems for a few years prior to his passing. He regularly fasted yet failed to live to his 80th birthday so today's science may not be as conclusive as some would like to believe. See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEZzp3czvyY. Having said this the two longest living men in the UK (one just recently passed over) reached the age of 110 and both were vegetarians. One still runs in the London Marathon to my knowledge.

A close friend of mine is 100 years of age. I avoided saying old as she just recently ceased driving but continues to look after herself and her large hillside garden. She has never interested herself in dieting; has maintained excellent health throughout her life yet had a life of suffrage. Her desire today is to join her own generation who have all passed on; she has friends but is lonely and feels abandoned at not being able to join them. Who then is interested in longevity but, good health, yes!

What I meant was I'm not into conspiracy theories.

Having said that, being that I see alot of older people in the course of my work and also knowing how the elderly are generally treated here in the UK I'm not too interested in living past the time that I can care for myself.

Jennings - the article I posted was a side point to something Carorees said. I disagree with your final point, not all areas have advanced through technology alone. Medicine is one field that has advanced a great deal through scientific research and I think you will find that a lot of technology has derived from scientific findings.

Bee, I am being accused of being a conspirator. What this conveys is your level of ignorance to what is occurring in society. You sound as if you are one of life's innocents.

Carorees, I doubt if I said that polyunsaturates had an anti-inflammatory effect or that sugar was inflammatory or that I made any connection of saturated fats to an overactive immune system, indeed, I am not convinced that immune systems can be overactive; over-taxed possibly but surely never overactive? The point you are seeking to make is a little indistinct.

DrLCH, I fail to understand how you arrived at the conclusion that medicine advanced without the aid of technology when the opposite is manifest. Allopathic medicine is probably not older than the industrial age although the history of medicine, as is popularly known, is ancient. This introductory video, if you have not already seen it, may be of interest to you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDP3KKVb ... sults_main

I have already made mention to Roy Walford and his research findings. He too trod the same path as Michael Mosley but over his life time. His specialisation was calorie restriction although life extension was his principal aim and in this regard he also undertook fasting on a regular basis and ate highly nutritious meals. He wrote a number of books on ageing and was fairly certain that he would live longer than he did. Here is a video and summary of his life. Sadly he had health problems from around his mid 70s.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-PzhyTlODc

What is amazing is that today's scientists have not advanced further with their research in this field. All that appears to have changed is the method of approach to the study but the results are the same so be prepared to be disillusioned while Dr Mosley makes his fortune.

It looks as if science is stuck on a spiral.

What do you think science is? It is a methodology fit understanding the world. Observations are made, something is tested and then you reach a conclusion based on the results. Every human every day does this and quite a few non human species as well. No technology would have been built without using the scientific method.

It appears to me that you have a very narrow perception of science in medicine. I am only just beginning my investigation into the effects of fasting and would defer to carorees' knowledge of it and the peer reviewed research over anacdotes. But the claim you made earlier about how science is not advancing medicine in general is uninformed. Just our basic understanding of diseases and disease causing agents has advanced enormously, regardless of the technology used (which often just make or work faster, not necessarily changing the actual work that much), let alone the development of new ways of treating those diseases.

[quote="carorees"]


One of the ways that both fasting and ketogenic diets can help reduce cancer risk is to make the body use fat as a fuel and so run off ketones rather than glucose. This downregulates these pathways and cancer cells cannot use ketones as a fuel and so cannot multiply or survive. Coconut oil is often used in ketogenic diets so I suspect that is how it would work. I don't know about apricot kernels but as many plants produce poisons (hence hormesis as I discussed before) I wouldn't be surprised if they contain some kind of toxin that might kill cancer cells preferentially. The problem with many anti-cancer drugs that work through a particular metabolic pathway is that the cancer cells, like bacteria, can become resistant as they find another pathway to use instead .


Thanks for this information Carorees - really interesting and will be investigating further.

DrLCH, try not to sound so naive. When our ancestors discovered tools and weapons it was through expediency and hardly through science and the same situation prevails today; even the petri dish is a piece of technology and, indeed, as can be observed here, the computer and the Internet has given a voice to the inarticulate who use it for cathartic purposes. Try not to sound so didactic as if your knowledge is more valuable than that of others. Note too the closing of ranks by the females as if they suffer from penal envy or the Electra complex; society's Lilliputians. I would be more interested in how you are managing the 5:2 diet than having to defend myself against shark attacks.

"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars that we are underlings but in our selves."

I have enjoyed reading this thread, as an intelligent discussion, up until now.

I merely state the obvious, but will now leave this thread.

I can't help but think that maybe it's not the 52 diet that is causing your stomach upset .. It sounds more likely to be food intolerance/ allergy that is the problem. You feel good when fasting & then introduce your normal diet & get a reaction from something your body doesn't like. It could be worth cutting out certain foods for a while & see if it makes a difference.

Sorry I was responding to page one of this thread. Completely didn't notice it was several pages long !! Oops.

[Moogie]

*puts on Site Admin hat*

Jennings, while I appreciate that your posts are indeed very well written and bringing about an interesting, intelligent conversation I do feel that sometimes your responses to people are a little less than sensitive & considerate (a few p's & q's never hurt anybody). I can't see that anybody has been rude to you, merely requesting further reading or stating their opinion on your views. In response you seem to take their opinions as accusations or insults where it does not seem any such thing is intended.

Please would everyone bear in mind that when it comes to text on a screen it can be very difficult to read tone or intent. We all have a different way with words and before anybody jumps to conclusions about anything in their reply it is worth confirming the intent of the original post with the author before resorting to borderline rude responses.

I'm going to give Jennings the benefit of the doubt here and assume that he has not meant any disrespect in his replies any more than the users who questioned his statements, just that he has a different way with words that are easily misunderstood by others. I would however like to make it known to him, in case he was not aware, that several of his statements seem to convey a thinly veiled degree of sexism against women that may be intended somehow jovially on his part but do not come across that way in the reading. Now I'm no feminist, in fact I'm a more old fashioned female than my years would suggest, but I don't think those kind of comments are necessary here. Gender isn't the issue - weight loss, health & fasting are.

In my life I have had a fair bit of experience with highliy intelligent folk (not that I am one of these!) and have heard first hand on many occasions how their choice of words in rebuttal can come across as offensive or inconsiderate of the other person's feelings - even though this is not the intent.

So please everyone, let's not let this turn sour, everyone has been getting on so well We all have our views & information to contribute and there's no need for bitterness of any kind.

Time for bed now, please forgive any typos and my relatively average wording! Just trying to keep the peace and help folks to get along

Thanks for reading!

*removes Site Admin hat*

(...and no, you can't see the hat. It's embarrassing! Yes, it does exist.)

Well stated Moogie but surely an unnecessary caveat. With Carorees reaction to removing her posts tends to indicate that she has been emotionally wounded and has submitted an official complaint. The problem I am encountering on this thread arises from apparently strident females otherwise I adore women and their femininity. Any innuendo that sounded like an attack was intended solely to those attacking my comments rather than addressing the topic. I do, however, wish Carorees success in her endeavours.

[Moogie]

*puts Admin Hat back on*

I am not here to get into an argument about this (I'm sure we all have experience with how pointless it is to get into arguments online, and have better things to do with our time!) but I will say it clearly was necessary for me to post that, due to the direction this topic was heading. Hopefully it can get back on track now.

If Caroline has chosen to withdraw from this discussion by deleting her posts, well you can read into that what you like but as previously stated without her expressing her intent anything anyone else reads into the action are purely conjecture. I can state for the record that I have not received a complaint from Caroline and that as she is a member of staff she would have no need to complain as she has the ability to act on any problems as she deems necessary.

I am glad that you can see how your innuendo sounded like an attack. The problem I have with the situation is that other users did not attack you personally, as you say they were responding to (or attacking as you saw it) your comments. It seems unneccessary and somewhat out of line therefore to be posting things in response which clearly come across as attacks against users as opposed to attacks against their comments.

I hope this is the last time I have to put my Admin Hat on for a while now. Jennings has clarified that his intent was not to attack anyone although he sees how it could be taken that way. Nobody seems to have attacked him directly. It seems to be a bit of a mountain from a molehill of misunderstanding, so let's all please try to get along, be polite & refrain from insults.

Thank you.*removes Admin Hat*

A puerile, reactionary, and dogmatic response. You might seriously consider abandoning your dieting when you will probably feel better and less tetchy, indeed, it is almost guaranteed.