The FastDay Forum

Started the fasting method to reduce weight and continued with one normal meal daily for 7 days.

On the first day I felt unwell but continued for the week although by accident rather than design. The second day I felt good but over the week how I felt alternated daily. Then I read about the effect of prolonged fasting where it said that it causes loss of muscle in addition to loss of fat so tried to return to normal eating but found it hard so retreated to fasting again. To attempt a meal five hours after having one, such as lunch and dinner when on this regimen, was too much so abandoned dinner and had an orange instead which felt about right.

During the course of the first week on fasting I felt more energised and was able to accomplish more manual tasks around the house. My weight during this period dropped by 2.5 lbs and my waist-line reduced. My taste buds became more sensitive allowing more enjoyment of food. Remarkably, my blood pressure which more lately has been showing readings of 140/80 had dropped to 110/63 with a pulse rate averaging 75. Until this point I had not exercised nor have I done so for around five years so a sedentary life style.

I read Michael Mosley's book, The Fast Diet, three times in succession and on each reading gained more information from it; points that seemed unimportant initially carried more weighting on further readings. From this present experience and those of the past it has become manifest that fasting seems to be a crucial feature to a healthier and happier life.

It has been an interesting week.

Carorees, your caveat is appreciated and I accept what you say but I am experimenting with fasting although doing so blindly. If I use how I feel as the gauge to how fasting is affecting me then I am feeling remarkably well, fit, and energised, so currently there is a reluctance to alter. It is my intention to go on a maintenance regimen at some stage. Experiments with nematodes highlighted the feature that cells had memories from antiquity and would retreat into a preservation mode when a famine threatened (so stopping the loss of weight) and hence the success of the 5:2 fast. Two days would prevent the cells from entering this preservation phase. In this experiment, I am attempting through altering the times of meals, to prevent the cells from entering the preservation mode which dieters often encounter. Taking antioxidants, as I do regularly, should reduce triglyceride levels. I am not, as yet, exhibiting symptoms of ketosis. The diet which I am on is principally protein and saturated fats but not solely. Inevitably, at my advanced stage to life, bodily changes do occur so hopefully the fasting will slow this feature. I am in relatively good health for my age, that is, in comparison to contemporaries but have no desire to live a life of frailty if it can be avoided, nor do I seek longevity nor the phantom of loneliness that accompanies advanced old age.

It is interesting how our experiences and readings should differ so much. Previously I was a vegetarian for 18 years yet had to have an emergency quadruple by-pass. After this I abandoned vegetarianism and have been remarkably well since on a high saturated fat and protein diet; that was 21 years ago. Indeed I eat very few vegetables and hardly any fruit. I suffer severely from nocturnal cramp which antioxidants control, especially those of pine bark and grape seed extract so they do appear to be doing some good.

The study you mentioned of rats on a high fat diet may be faulty or biased depending on who paid the piper. Research on plaque that is now judiciously marginalised found that plaque consisted of a massive 70% from polyunsaturated fats, 23% from saturated fats, and 7% from other sources. When it is considered that saturated fat in its structure consists of both poly and mono unsaturated fats it might be appreciated that saturation is not the culprit but is bodily healthy. It was known that among arctic explorers that to survive both animal protein and saturated fats were essential and indeed imperative which is why they took cans of pemmican. Captain Scott in his wisdom sought the best medical advice before his expedition and was told to remove the fat from the pemmican even though its benefit was recognised by past explorers and his crew failed to survive but this moot point is too readily ignored.

Polyunsaturated fats are potent suppressors of the immune system and so too is sugar and when it is considered that cruciferous vegetables suppress the thyroid then who among us is on a healthy diet? It will be recognised that the Inuits on a traditional diet had healthy hearts but little is said that their lives were shorter than those of us on a Western style diet. The reason for this is that their high marine diet consisting principally of polyunsaturated fat kept their blood thin but this resulted in their arteries ballooning causing deaths through aneurysms and sometimes bleeding to death owing to the thinness of their blood. Those features are ignored in research that is funded by food companies.

After my cardiac operation I suffered for a while from angina which was too easily blamed on my heart but later I discovered a connection between angina symptoms and the intake of polyunsaturated fat in my diet; when I ramped down on the polyunsaturated fat the angina almost disappeared. Later I discovered that there was a connection between the remaining angina symptoms (which were not now as severe) and the intake of monounsaturated fat in my food. Monounsaturated fat, like most of our food, is nutritious but its downside is hidden from us. Olive oil, a monounsaturated fat, is sold or contained in dark bottles to reduce the rapidity of its rancidity; it is this rancidity that causes masses of those wee free radicals that are harmful to the body and which antioxidants soak-up. On ramping down on olive oil and monounsaturated fats I never again suffered from angina.

Previously vegetable oil (polyunsaturated) was used to make paint but with the introduction of crude oil the vegetable oil business almost collapsed and it had to find a method of making a positive out of a negative. On discovery of its nutritious value it was introduced into our diet but like paint when it is subjected to heat and oxygen it hardens and when vegetable oil enters our bodies it too is subjected to the heat and oxygen of our bodies and it does harm at the cellular level. It might be found that the Mediterranean diet's benefits are not from the olive oil but more probably from the larger amount of antioxidants and especially from the high consumption of red wine.

With a suppressed immunity and the high intake of soft and fruit drinks it might be found that this is what causes most cancers and especially breast cancers. It might also be found that apricot kernels and coconut oil helps to kill cancers but no one is likely to be told about those benefits as they are not commercially profitable. It sure is a cockeyed society in which we live.

Incidentally, today I have abandoned the continuous daily dieting and now attempting the 5:2 as recommeded.

I have had breast cancer and have never consumed soft and fruit drinks in any quantity. My preferred drink has always been water. I can't drink fruit juices as they affect my skin, and I don't like diluting type juices.
I believe it to be caused by the chemicals they are adding to our foods.
It's not natural for bread to last 3 weeks....just one example.
I refuse to have any guilt over my breast cancer.
Sorry if I offend anyone but.....shit happens!

Bellalou, you have not offended and I understand your anger. The mention made of the long term toxic effect of soft and fruit drinks causing cancer was not intended to imply that it was the only substance. I share your views about additives. You may wish to view this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMKGFq7vTr4 I wish you well.

With the mention made of certain fats causing plaque in the arteries there should have been added that there exists indications that it is only in the presence of carbohydrates in the diet that this occurs. Although foods containing carbohydrates are delicious and delightful it would appear that their long-term or heavy consumption is problematic health-wise.

Having been on the fasting diet for around 10 days and having decided today to join the 5:2 brigade I returned to normal eating only to discover problems. My stomach rebelled! Initially it rebelled when during the course of the afternoon I ate a bar of kitKat when afterwards I felt unwell. Previously I enjoyed chocolate and liked KitKat with my afternoon cuppa (some times) but not on this occasion. At dinner I had a small cooked meal and enjoyed it but 7 hours later my stomach was still struggling to digest it! My stomach seemed to be telling me that it enjoys those periods of daily fasting so the quandary is, do I become a slave to science and follow the 5:2 regimen or do I listen to my stomach and how I feel? During the past 10 days I felt good and energetic and there were occasions when I felt really good, but not today, so I am back to fasting tomorrow (indeed I have already started) and, hopefully, the return to that feel good feature.

It possibly should be added that the only adverse side effects of fasting was withdrawing from it. During the days of fasting not only did I feel well but on some days I felt great, like being in my late teens or early twenties. My energy levels noticeably increased and so did physical activity. My memory and recall improved. I slept better and required shorter sleep. Feeling hungry was a feature but it soon dispersed. When eating three meals daily at regular intervals it must be a challenge to the stomach to be reprogrammed. I cannot think of anything detrimental during fasting. Fasting fascinates me but then it is early days.

We will return!

Jennings and Caroline - thanks you so much for this excellent thread, the most interesting by a country mile, that I have read in the last 6 mths in this area.

Thank you skippyscuffleton for the compliment which almost made me blush. Glad, however, that you found the comments interesting.

After struggling last evening trying to digest a small dinner and suffering from bile I chose to retreat back to fasting. I slept well and upon awakening felt 'top of the morning' and ready to boldly face the day, indeed, I feel rather good. Interestingly my weight kept reducing and after 12 days on this regime have lost 5 lbs. Upon attempting to return to normal eating, although not successfully, my blood pressure reading rose to 135/74 and has remained at this level for the past two days. It is now lunch time and I am feeling a tad hungry but then the goodlady is at the stove cooking and it smells delicious. The stomach is like a pet that needs re-training after being fed regularly almost every four hours of its life. When the stomach is happy then I am happy.

Meantime, it is nice to feel good and optimistic and not burdened by life's problems.

Thank you for your reply.
I'm afraid I do tend to overreact when I read all the stuff saying breast cancer is due to poor diet, being overweight, drinking too much etc etc.
I have always kept my weight within normal ( albeit the higher end of normal) range and have exercised regularly, and eaten healthily.
I know all the above things are contributing factors, but it really upsets me when you read in the press or hear on television that they cause breast cancer.
I'm still your friend...honest lol.

While you restrict your information to Pub Med Carorees I cull mine from any source that appears reputable. The saturated fats mentioned are not artificial; I try to avoid all synthetic foods. Some years ago on tv it was shown that Kellogg corn flakes had less nutrition in them than their cardboard packaging so what did the company do, it turned this negative into a positive by the addition of synthetic vitamins. When it is considered that probably all processed food have synthetic vitamins added then how can we know that we are not overdosing? Neither are synthetic vitamins natural to the body. If you have not viewed Dr Terry Wahl's videos on YouTube then you might find it interesting to do so. Those who regularly have cereal with skimmed milk for breakfast are doing themselves a disfavour as the nutritional value is almost negative.

I have not heard of an over-active immune system. Presumably you would be referring to auto-immune diseases; if so then microwave cooking is one of the offenders. Microwaves alter the structure of protein which has the effect of allowing undigested protein into the blood stream (from the stomach) which somehow confuses the immune system so in addition to it attacking this undigested protein which it sees as an enemy, it also attacks the body (my best interpretation). The high consumption of grains in the diet on a log-term basis may have a similar impact.

All polyunsaturated fats (but less so with monounsaturated fats) are 'potent' immune suppressors and this was discovered by medical research yet your doctor is not about to tell you this. During the early days of organ transplants when it was found that the body rejected the transplanted organs a search was done for substances that would suppress the immune system and stop it from attacking the transplanted organs and polyunsaturated fats were discovered to be the most potent. Polyunsaturated fats thin the blood, suppress the immune system, and thin the sheathing surrounding the blood vessels causing them eventually to balloon. Fish oil, while nutritious, is also polyunsaturated so probably should be consumed only in minute amounts. The powerful food industry ensure that this information is marginalised

Sugars too (which includes carbohydrates) have an immediate suppressive impact on the immune system. Logically, if those items were ramped-down in the diet one should be much healthier. Fat, incidentally, does not increase weight but carbohydrates do. The body uses carbohydrates for energy before resorting to the use of fat which it stores for periods of famine and hence the benefit of the 5:2 diet which appears to allow the body to utilise its stored fat. The technique is to keep carbohydrates low in the diet and fasting appears to address this desired effect and has no connection to counting calories.

Many seeds of fruits, apples, oranges, plums, 'bitter' apricots, etcetera, are known to contain the poison cyanide. In its natural form (when in the seed) cyanide is harmless yet while in its purified state it kills. The interesting feature about this harmless form of cyanide is that it kills cancers while leaving healthy cells untouched and your GP is not about to tell you this; it would wipe out an entire industry if it was generally known and accepted.

Coconut has the same fatty-acid profile as human breast milk. One of those fatty-acids is lauric acid which has an interesting property; it destroys films of protein that hide cancers and viruses from the immune system. A combination of coconut (its oil is recommended but almost any of its products will do) and bitter apricot kernels with the addition of high dosages of Q10, should help to rid the body of cancer; it is certainly worthy of trying.

Jennings - It would be helpful to have links or references to your sources with regard to some of the claims you make. I side with Carorees with regard to peer reviewed studies. Anyone can make claims without the necessary rigour of a scientific study.

Carorees- in a previous post you mentioned being overweight as one of the most significant factors in health, but there was a publication last year about the benefits of exercise being more significant than weight.

http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.1001335
Higher exercise levels led to increases in longevity regardless of whether the participants were normal weight, overweight or obese. The data also showed that being overweight and active actually resulted in greater longevity than being normal weight and active. It was only when BMI levels increased to over 30 that weight became an apparent significant factor.

There are a few criticisms to the study, the first being that the data were self-reported and the second being that BMI can be a misleading figure in people who are active, especially with regard muscle weight. A point in the study's favour is the number of people included in the study, over 650,000.

As with most things I think we need to find what works for each of us, there will never be one way of eating and exercising that works for all.

I am not in the field ladies of having to justify what I say by quoting its scientific research results. The article you quoted DrLCH is simply a group of people endeavouring to justify their existence in society. In summary it says that 'exercise may bring about extra years of life' (end of story). The fault of this research lies in the age of those who participated in the study. Most people on entering advanced age have a drop in energy levels when being a sofa spud is more desirable and beneficial but this moot point was omitted. Numerous studies on the benefit of exercise have been undertaken when a few had opposing conclusions which have been judiciously ignored. In another video by Michael Mosley it was concluded that one minute's exercise about twice weekly was all that was required to be fit. I do not propose to be an authority on dietetics nor physical activity but I am an amateur enthusiast with 17 years of intensive reading, observation, and experimentation, and considerably more of general reading and I am certainly not about to get burdened by masses of notes simply to please others. If you are unable to accept what others say then the problem is yours. No one, as yet, has studied what an extended life would be like so why concern one's self about longevity; what is important is the quality of life and its enjoyment. The principal method which society has advanced over the past two centuries is not through scientific research but rather from advances in technology. Without technology science would not be where it is today. When a GP provides medication it is the practice to accept on its face value without having references to its bone fide.

"When you are up to your arse fighting alligators you forget that your initial task was to drain the swamp!"

Jennings - I continue to find your posts fascinating and well written. Since starting 5:2 I have had an interesting, unintended, on going journey into diet, weight-loss and the links between diet and good health. It is so interesting to hear the perspectives of someone like yourself who has experimented and tested on your good self over many years.

From your above post my next area of investigation will be polyunsaturated fats and suppression of the "immune system."
I am also interested to learn more of the apparent negative health consequences of a high protein high saturated fat diet. My own view is that this kind of diet is perhaps what we should be aiming for.

Your above mention to polar explorers and diet sparked a memory I've held from a Borge Ousland lecture back in '97? where he made mention of eating extra olive oil to increase his fat mass prior to his astonishingly fast trans antarctic solo jaunt. You may be interested to read the following from his Alone to the north pole book, prior to the expedition "I had bottles of olive oil in the kitchen and car, and would take a mouthful after every meal. This worked well for a while, but in the end the inevitable happened-I got a bad stomach. The fat content was extremely high and perhaps too much of one sort. When I began to drink cream instead, things got a lot better."

Hi Jennings, I was almost "buying" but when I read:

Many seeds of fruits, apples, oranges, plums, 'bitter' apricots, etcetera, are known to contain the poison cyanide. In its natural form (when in the seed) cyanide is harmless yet while in its purified state it kills. The interesting feature about this harmless form of cyanide is that it kills cancers while leaving healthy cells untouched and your GP is not about to tell you this; it would wipe out an entire industry if it was generally known and accepted.

Well, nope I don't think so.