# Weight watchers 2022



## steveindenmark (31 Jan 2022)

A thread for those trying to lose a bit of weight in 2022. Sensible hits, tips and recipies are very welcome. Its not easy losing weight regardless of what weight you are starting at and what goal you are trying to reach. These posts are also to encourage others.

Like many times in the past my New Years resolution was to lose some weight and firm up a bit. Usually I fail in the first month because changes to my diet and lifestyle is too drastic for me to handle.

This year, I have taken another approach. Its made up by reading many posts on many sites and working out an easy way to tackle this.

I realised that there were regular foodstuffs that I like and eat, even when I am not hungry. I call it "go to food". I did not want to cut them out completely. But it was obvious they needed reducing quite a bit.

My Goto foods were

Burger King....twice a week
Sugar
Cake
Milk
Biscuits
Cheese
Pringles
Breakfast cereal with lots of milk.
Coffee with sugar...at least 6 mugs before lunch

All of the above have been cut down. I have had one bowl of breakfast cereal, visited Burger King once. I restrict my coffee to 2 cups a day. My weekly milk intake has gone from four liters to 1 and half liters. I have had no cheese, Pringles or biscuits in January.

The changes in my diet have not been difficult.

The odd thing is that I have reduced my cycling significantly this month. It has been wet, cold, windy and miserable for most of January. Then my works gym closed due to Covid. So I put my weight loss down to diet rather than excercise.

The other thing I did was weigh myself first thing every morning and record it. That was a daily reminder to stop cheating or pat myself on the back. It is a suprise how your weight fluctuates from day to day. It is like one step forward, two steps back. But I can see I am reaching my goal, without a lot of effort.

My goal is to lose 5kg by the end of April. It may not seem a lot. But I wanted an achievable goal instead of something that would demoralise me. If I reach 5kg, it will give me the confidence to go a bit further

I have lost 2.4kg in January. That is just by cutting back on the go to food. I dont mind new recipies. But I do not want to get into fancy diet or protein drinks.

Here is a look at my journey for January.


----------



## Julia9054 (31 Jan 2022)

Al has been doing Michael Mosley’s fast 800 diet. Very low carbs + calorie restriction. As is usual for him he has approached it like the chemist and chef that he is. Complete with spreadsheet. He has lost 15lbs since Christmas, 13cm off his middle and his blood pressure has dropped 20points. He has been making some delicious evening meals. We cycled up a massive hill near Hebden Bridge yesterday - he was up it like a rat up a drainpipe easily beating me. Normally he struggles with hills and I beat him so he was very pleased with himself. 
I tried his diet for 6 days as an experiment. Lost 3lbs (which was my excess Christmas weight) and 2cm from my waist but Gawd it was hard. I love my carbs and craved sugar and bread. Going forward though it has taught me that I don’t need to have things like porridge, yoghurt and coffee quite so sweet so that is my change going forward.


----------



## All uphill (31 Jan 2022)

Like you, @steveindenmark I would like to lose about 5kg in a sustainable way. I'm currently 77kg.

We have started using smaller plates for our main meal, and not having second helpings. The other change, which is much more difficult, is no bed time comfort eating.

Good luck!


----------



## steveindenmark (31 Jan 2022)

All uphill said:


> Like you, @steveindenmark I would like to lose about 5kg in a sustainable way. I'm currently 77kg.
> 
> We have started using smaller plates for our main meal, and not having second helpings. The other change, which is much more difficult, is no bed time comfort eating.
> 
> Good luck!


Yes. I try not to eat after 6pm. But that is something that needs work. 😁 Having 2 plates of food for dinner is a Danish hobby. Again, I get a C- for that. But I want to make small changes, otherwise I will just give up.


----------



## Once a Wheeler (31 Jan 2022)

This works for me:


Click here for details. At its simplest, forget about food for two days a week and otherwise carry on as normal. No pain, good gain. Worth a try.


----------



## bonzobanana (31 Jan 2022)

I've lost just over 15kg in January but I have a lot to lose and have been using fasting and intermittant fasting as well as reducing sugar. I'm hoping to lose just over 10kg in February and another 10kg in March. I should add I was hit hard with covid and in hospital 4 times in total 3 of those needing oxygen and have had poor lung capacity for most of 2021 and only at the end of 2021 did my lung capacity start improving again and because of inactivity put on a lot of weight over already being overweight. Anyway I'm aiming to get to 95-100kg which I've found the best weight for me, I'm 6'2" rugby player type build. Hopefully by the summer I will be at my ideal weight. Each month I'm lowering the weight loss goal which should bring me to the final weight in about 5-6 months. Obviously the big issue is maintaining the weight loss. I'm planning to use what I call the Sturmey Archer diet. I.e. 3 speed diet, when I want to lose a lot of weight, 1 meal a day, lose slowly 2 meals a day and when I'm happy with my weight 3 meals a day.


----------



## icowden (1 Feb 2022)

I've been using this bad boy:
https://www.nhs.uk/better-health/lose-weight/

6lbs so far with a relapse mid Jan as it was the wife's birthday and my daughter made the world's most calorific sticky toffee pudding birthday cake.

I found it useful for the first two or three weeks just because it makes you think about the calories you are taking in and helps adjust your meal sizes so that you aren't gorging yourself. I haven't logged in a bit because I find it a little time consuming but I'm sticking to the meal sizes. 

For example - I know that I can have a 45g bowl of frosties with 150ml of milk and then a slice of lightly buttered toast for my breakfast. I also now know which sandwich fillings tend to be lighter and which heavier (avoid italian meats 😂) etc. Then I just make sure my main meal isn't too heavy and it all seems to work. No cider except on special occasions or when I have been really good. Don't drink tea or coffee so no need to budget for milk etc.

I tend to prefer to buy a regular meal that's a bit lighter (e.g. M&S stuffed capelletti pasta) than diet meals. I also looked at foods that have a good satiety index so that I am less inclined to snack.


----------



## Fat Lars (6 Feb 2022)

This is not for everyone and anyone trying this should check it out with their doctor first. IMO if you limit your weight loss to no more than 8 lbs a month or so then you are less likely to suffer from a lower metabolic rate in the long term. I read this week that those participants in "The biggest loser" American TV show after 6 years have still not recovered their starting metabolic rate. Of course you should check with your doctor if this applies to you


----------



## bonzobanana (6 Feb 2022)

Fat Lars said:


> This is not for everyone and anyone trying this should check it out with their doctor first. IMO if you limit your weight loss to no more than 8 lbs a month or so then you are less likely to suffer from a lower metabolic rate in the long term. I read this week that those participants in "The biggest loser" American TV show after 6 years have still not recovered their starting metabolic rate. Of course you should check with your doctor if this applies to you


I personally think its critical to maintain exercise through weightloss, it tells the body you need your muscle mass and it has to take energy from fat. I lost 1.6kg last week. I was hoping to lose 2.5kg but have to accept the further in the diet you go the harder it gets to lose. However for the week my muscle mass has gone up 0.3kg over the week according to my smart scales. I know the smart scales uses an algorithm to assess your weight but from the data I've seen its broadly accurate. I did have a fasting period of 3.5 days but to be honest I found that too long and I'm going back to 2.5 days. I start fasting on Wednesday and have my first meal on Friday afternoon. I feel like I need to keep up the electrolytes though so will be looking to purchase some of those. I have informed my doctor and I guess when you have a lot of weight to lose they seem more accepting of more severe dieting methods as got approval. When I do eat typically at least 2 meals a week are incredibly nutritious salads with nutritional yeast, olive oil dressing and lots of very good fresh food items.

I'll admit I did do a very long difficult walk of about 3 miles when I had been fasting 3 days and was totally drained so over did it. Once I started eating again I soon recovered but still felt I pushed myself too far, its all a learning experience of what you can do.


----------



## Fat Lars (6 Feb 2022)

I always supplement with electrolytes and other stuff during a fast. And every other day the rest of the time. That's not to say that everyone should do so. This should not be taken as giving out medical advice. There may be some stupid people around who haven't got enough brains to work anything out with any degree of rationality.


----------



## icowden (6 Feb 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> I personally think its critical to maintain exercise through weightloss, it tells the body you need your muscle mass and it has to take energy from fat.


I read this fairly recently


View: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Presto-Pounds-Disappear-Other-Magical/dp/1501140183


Penn's friend Ray asserted the exact opposite - that during weight loss, no exercise was permitted. Admittedly this was a fairly extreme weight loss programme which was aimed at reprogramming the whole palette / diet, but it's a fun and interesting read.


----------



## Fat Lars (7 Feb 2022)

icowden said:


> I read this fairly recently
> 
> 
> View: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Presto-Pounds-Disappear-Other-Magical/dp/1501140183
> ...



From what I've experienced and read is that exercise is very important to the whole health situation. It is a vital ingredient of the whole journey towards a healthy weight and metabolic condition. The paradox is that exercise can induce weight gain. You don't feel hungry while you are exercising or immediately afterwards but will gain an appetite later. IMO weight loss is best approached by doing what makes you healthy and depends very much on the individual. It's a long term thing. IMO if you lose too much too quickly then your metabolic rate will drop and that is not what you want.
2lbs a week is a good target to aim for and lift weights, walk, do HIIT, cycle regularly. Doing exercise with a keto diet and IF ticks all the boxes. Did I mention consult your doctor and it's not for everyone? No.
Please consult your doctor before embarking on any weight loss diet. Keto is not widely acclaimed and there are other diets available.


----------



## icowden (7 Feb 2022)

Fat Lars said:


> From what I've experienced and read is that exercise is very important to the whole health situation.


From Presto (CrayRay is Ray Cronise):


> If I was losing almost a pound a day for three months without exercising, wouldn’t I have lost even more if I’d thrown in a jog or two? CrayRay says no, that weight loss and muscle building (that’s what exercise does, build muscles) are two very different things. CrayRay’s books and papers explain the no-exercise part of the plan in language like this: “Losing excess adipose tissue and gaining muscle are two completely different physiologies. Weight loss requires a restriction, or deficit. Muscle gain requires fuel and nutrients to support activity and the repair of tissue. Hypertrophy happens when one stresses the muscle, tearing down tissue. Through a process called hormesis, the tissue grows back stronger after the stress.” Exercise is for bodybuilding, and I had more than enough body—about a third more body than was good for me. What I needed was a building moratorium. I wouldn’t get out of exercise forever. Exercise is important for good health. But I wouldn’t do any until I hit target weight. Exercise wouldn’t help me with weight loss; I couldn’t outrun my mouth.


Or in other words if you exercise and diet at the same time, your body doesn't really know what it should be doing. In the CrayRay potato diet, no exercise, get cold, sleep a lot.


----------



## bonzobanana (8 Feb 2022)

icowden said:


> From Presto (CrayRay is Ray Cronise):
> 
> Or in other words if you exercise and diet at the same time, your body doesn't really know what it should be doing. In the CrayRay potato diet, no exercise, get cold, sleep a lot.



One issue is if you exercise you gain muscle mass which is heavier than fat so can gain weight. We collect carbon from the air as we breathe with carbon dioxide and if your body thinks you need more muscle mass you can gain it without eating just like breathing on plants has been shown to accelerate their growth as you give them a rich source of carbon dioxide. However in the long term having more muscle mass has to be serviced by the body so you consume more calories and the body will only create so much muscle mass. I feel if you wish to reduce your fat levels then fasting and exercise is ideal. I know that if I stop the exercise I will lose muscle mass which has happened to me in the past while dieting alone. I think from the start of my diet to current my BMR has gone from about 1950 to 2070 so just resting doing nothing I now need 120 extra calories. Well 120x365 is about 44,000 calories over the year and there are 3,500 calories in a pound of human fat. So about 13-14 pounds of fat lost everything else being equal just by maintaining the same food and exercise over the year but having higher BMR assuming that food and exercise maintained your weight at the same level. The body becomes less efficient with more muscle mass which is why the body will try to lose muscle mass especially if not a lot of food is being eaten.

Besides the body needs glucose to operate and exercise consumes more glucose so more fat will be converted to glucose. 

I personally think the issue is that there are many variables in the human body that can give a confusing picture and show strange weight gains when you are not expecting it but ultimately if you intermittantly fast or just fast and exercise you will have weight loss long term. That has certainly been my experience.


----------



## Julia9054 (8 Feb 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> We collect carbon from the air as we breathe with carbon dioxide


We really don’t. Unless you’ve worked out how to photosynthesise


----------



## bonzobanana (8 Feb 2022)

Julia9054 said:


> We really don’t. Unless you’ve worked out how to photosynthesise



Tbe human body still needs carbon dioxide to breathe, yes we convert oxygen into carbon dioxide but the human body still needs carbon dioxide to function in addition to the oxygen. 


_The human breathing mechanism actual revolves around CO2, not oxygen. Without carbon dioxide, humans wouldn't be able to breathe. It’s only when CO2 gets concentrated do you have to worry._

https://learn.kaiterra.com/en/air-a...his is an important fact,t be able to breathe.


----------



## Julia9054 (8 Feb 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> Tbe human body still needs carbon dioxide to breathe, yes we convert oxygen into carbon dioxide but the human body still needs carbon dioxide to function in addition to the oxygen.
> 
> 
> _The human breathing mechanism actual revolves around CO2, not oxygen. Without carbon dioxide, humans wouldn't be able to breathe. It’s only when CO2 gets concentrated do you have to worry._
> ...


We don’t need to breathe in carbon dioxide to function. Tissues produce carbon dioxide in respiration which is then carried in the blood where it affects the pH. The more carbon dioxide in the blood - from increased respiration - the lower the pH. Chemoreceptors located in the medulla, carotid arteries and aorta detect lowered pH and send signals to the diaphragm to increase breathing rate. At normal levels in the atmosphere, carbon dioxide does not move from the air in our lungs into the blood.


----------



## Etern4l (19 Feb 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> One issue is if you exercise you gain muscle mass which is heavier than fat so can gain weight. We collect carbon from the air as we breathe with carbon dioxide and if your body thinks you need more muscle mass you can gain it without eating just like breathing on plants has been shown to accelerate their growth as you give them a rich source of carbon dioxide. However in the long term having more muscle mass has to be serviced by the body so you consume more calories and the body will only create so much muscle mass. I feel if you wish to reduce your fat levels then fasting and exercise is ideal. I know that if I stop the exercise I will lose muscle mass which has happened to me in the past while dieting alone. I think from the start of my diet to current my BMR has gone from about 1950 to 2070 so just resting doing nothing I now need 120 extra calories. Well 120x365 is about 44,000 calories over the year and there are 3,500 calories in a pound of human fat. So about 13-14 pounds of fat lost everything else being equal just by maintaining the same food and exercise over the year but having higher BMR assuming that food and exercise maintained your weight at the same level. The body becomes less efficient with more muscle mass which is why the body will try to lose muscle mass especially if not a lot of food is being eaten.
> 
> Besides the body needs glucose to operate and exercise consumes more glucose so more fat will be converted to glucose.
> 
> I personally think the issue is that there are many variables in the human body that can give a confusing picture and show strange weight gains when you are not expecting it but ultimately if you intermittantly fast or just fast and exercise you will have weight loss long term. That has certainly been my experience.



The issue with longer fasts is that they tend to down-regulate metabolism, increasing the risk of the yo-yo effect.

Maintaining a very low calorie keto diet/pseudo-fast is actually not that hard after 2-3 days once ketosis kicks in, the question is: will the weight loss be at least maintained 2-3 months on. I believe research shows that unfortunately the answer in most cases is: no.

Yet, the initial effects can be spectacular enough that a stable number of miracle diet peddlers manage to do well for themselves on the back of the serious problem people are trying to deal with.


----------



## Noodle Legs (19 Feb 2022)

A good old fashioned calorie deficit works for me. No “plans,” “diets” or “cutting out carbs/fats/other foods.” No foods are labelled “good, bad or other” and I eat what I want without judgement, that’s not to say I gorge on crappy junk food all the time but if I want a cake/pastry etc etc then I’ll have one and not feel bad. I’m just mindful that I remain in a deficit if I want to shed fat/weight.


----------



## bonzobanana (19 Feb 2022)

Etern4l said:


> The issue with longer fasts is that they tend to down-regulate metabolism, increasing the risk of the yo-yo effect.
> 
> Maintaining a very low calorie keto diet/pseudo-fast is actually not that hard after 2-3 days once ketosis kicks in, the question is: will the weight loss be at least maintained 2-3 months on. I believe research shows that unfortunately the answer in most cases is: no.
> 
> Yet, the initial effects can be spectacular enough that a stable number of miracle diet peddlers manage to do well for themselves on the back of the serious problem people are trying to deal with.



It's a fair point but my muscle mass seems to be going up not down as I am exercising (according to my smart scales) and without going into details one of my very minor medical issues seems to be improving quite dramatically. I have had a bit of a pause though as got so bored of it for a few days but I'm back on the fasting now. I'm generally super pleased with the progress and how I'm feeling.

I'm not going to preach to others about what works or doesn't because I know different systems work for different people. I lost a lot of weight previously quite a few years ago and that was aided by a cycling commute and being a fairly physical job. I then went into a more stressful office environment and the weight went back on mostly as I was on a keyboard almost all day. It was an incredibly unhealthy environment for lots of reasons.

We shall see how it goes and if I reach my goals and can maintain the weight loss. After having soo much lung damage due to covid I'm just so pleased to be able to exercise again after getting back most of my lung capacity and starting to remove some of the additional weight caused by lack of activity due to covid. I'm not recommending my route to anyone you have to find what works for you. I do think occasional fasting at least is super healthy for the body as it puts the body into a repair cycle autophagy which you just don't get when constantly eating.


----------



## Etern4l (19 Feb 2022)

Noodle Legs said:


> A good old fashioned calorie deficit works for me. No “plans,” “diets” or “cutting out carbs/fats/other foods.” No foods are labelled “good, bad or other” and I eat what I want without judgement, that’s not to say I gorge on crappy junk food all the time but if I want a cake/pastry etc etc then I’ll have one and not feel bad. I’m just mindful that I remain in a deficit if I want to shed fat/weight.



I had been trying to get that to work for several years. Some nice results at the beginning (or at one of the few "new beginnings") but ultinately didn't work for me long term.

In contrast, I lost 20 kg and significantly improved my health over the past 2 years without any calorie counting. The trick was to adopt a sustainable, healthy diet, that does not really require the admin overhead.


----------



## Etern4l (19 Feb 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> It's a fair point but my muscle mass seems to be going up not down as I am exercising (according to my smart scales) and without going into details one of my very minor medical issues seems to be improving quite dramatically. I have had a bit of a pause though as got so bored of it for a few days but I'm back on the fasting now. I'm generally super pleased with the progress and how I'm feeling.
> 
> I'm not going to preach to others about what works or doesn't because I know different systems work for different people. I lost a lot of weight previously quite a few years ago and that was aided by a cycling commute and being a fairly physical job. I then went into a more stressful office environment and the weight went back on mostly as I was on a keyboard almost all day. It was an incredibly unhealthy environment for lots of reasons.
> 
> We shall see how it goes and if I reach my goals and can maintain the weight loss. After having soo much lung damage due to covid I'm just so pleased to be able to exercise again after getting back most of my lung capacity and starting to remove some of the additional weight caused by lack of activity due to covid. I'm not recommending my route to anyone you have to find what works for you. I do think occasional fasting at least is super healthy for the body as it puts the body into a repair cycle autophagy which you just don't get when constantly eating.



Good luck, and just in case of any trouble along the way, rest assured there is/are good alternatives to starvation.

Yes, that's my understanding of the main benefit of fasting. Reputable providers/proponents also refrain from making any bold claims about the impact on weight loss. I have also been doing these periodically, with the clear understanding that my weight loss effort will temporarily get harder afterwards.

Always good to hear about the various approaches people take. I wish someone told me exactly what I know now several years ago. Unfortunately, the amount of noise in the space turns the whole thing into a painful and longwinded trial and error exercise. One good filter I would suggest is to outright discard any diets promising rapid weight loss in a short period of time. Another obvious one is to reject anything not backed up by rigorous academic research.


----------



## potsy (19 Feb 2022)

I've managed to shift around 8lbs so far in 2022, and am probably now as light as I've been as an adult. 

Had plateaued after losing over 4st in the last 14-15 months, so am pleased things are going in the right direction again. 

Have been on the 16 hour fasting thingy for a couple of weeks now and that seems to suit me at the minute, fits in quite well with my work shift and have adapted my off days accordingly.


----------



## bonzobanana (19 Feb 2022)

Etern4l said:


> Good luck, and just in case of any trouble along the way, rest assured there is/are good alternatives to starvation.
> 
> Yes, that's my understanding of the main benefit of fasting. Reputable providers/proponents also refrain from making any bold claims about the impact on weight loss. I have also been doing these periodically, with the clear understanding that my weight loss effort will temporarily get harder afterwards.
> 
> Always good to hear about the various approaches people take. I wish someone told me exactly what I know now several years ago. Unfortunately, the amount of noise in the space turns the whole thing into a painful and longwinded trial and error exercise. One good filter I would suggest is to outright discard any diets promising rapid weight loss in a short period of time. Another obvious one is to reject anything not backed up by rigorous academic research.



Obviously fasting isn't starvation in fact you can often feel really, really good while fasting, intermittant fasting could be one or two meals a day within a window of lets say 4 hours and fasting up to 3 days is perfectly safe and backed up by a lot of science. The human body was never designed for 3 meals a day with snacks in between that is a modern approach based on easy food availability. Most animals get food much less regularly. That's why autophagy isn't really working in a lot of people and why so many people have insulin resistance as their bodies have lost the ability to use their own fat stores they rely on constantly eating food for glucose but that isn't healthy in itself. Huge amount of medical data about the benefits of fasting but then I'm sure there are huge amounts of data on the other side based on different teams and studies. Take a sensible approach and make sure when you do eat it is incredibly nutritious with good fibre etc and you won't go far wrong it can also help you clear out matter with regard the exhaust process so to speak. It's all positive really just slowing down the frequency of eating either to lose weight or enable many other health benefits. If you have weight to lose you can do it more often but if for those who haven't can do it very rarely just for the other benefits. Autophagy has been shown to consume damaged cells etc which could have become cancerous so that is a huge benefit in itself. Don't get me wrong though I look forward to the times I'm not fasting in fact food seems to taste better after a fast.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41418-019-0474-7


----------



## Etern4l (19 Feb 2022)

potsy said:


> I've managed to shift around 8lbs so far in 2022, and am probably now as light as I've been as an adult.
> 
> Had plateaued after losing over 4st in the last 14-15 months, so am pleased things are going in the right direction again.
> 
> Have been on the 16 hour fasting thingy for a couple of weeks now and that seems to suit me at the minute, fits in quite well with my work shift and have adapted my off days accordingly.


Have been sticking close to 16:8 as well. The only downside I am aware of is that it increases the risk of developing gallstones. Likely applies more to people eating cholesterol-rich diets though.


----------



## Ridgeway (19 Feb 2022)

Decided not to try to loose weight until the clocks change. Happy that it dips slightly but focusing on fitness and i find it hard to slash calories and punish my body at the same time. So i may loose 2kgs ish but really im working on overall fitness, FTP, core and flexibility. Once the clocks change and i can increase the monthly KM’s i will then focus a bit more on calories reduction. My target is <70kgs (currently 76kg). I would normally get to 73kgs by June but it will take another little effort to make that additional 3kgs step. And if my winter training has worked then my power to weight should be good for this years mountain challenges


----------



## Etern4l (19 Feb 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> Obviously fasting isn't starvation in fact you can often feel really, really good while fasting, intermittant fasting could be one or two meals a day within a window of lets say 4 hours and fasting up to 3 days is perfectly safe and backed up by a lot of science. The human body was never designed for 3 meals a day with snacks in between that is a modern approach based on easy food availability. Most animals get food much less regularly. That's why autophagy isn't really working in a lot of people and why so many people have insulin resistance as their bodies have lost the ability to use their own fat stores they rely on constantly eating food for glucose but that isn't healthy in itself. Huge amount of medical data about the benefits of fasting but then I'm sure there are huge amounts of data on the other side based on different teams and studies. Take a sensible approach and make sure when you do eat it is incredibly nutritious with good fibre etc and you won't go far wrong it can also help you clear out matter with regard the exhaust process so to speak. It's all positive really just slowing down the frequency of eating either to lose weight or enable many other health benefits. If you have weight to lose you can do it more often but if for those who haven't can do it very rarely just for the other benefits. Autophagy has been shown to consume damaged cells etc which could have become cancerous so that is a huge benefit in itself. Don't get me wrong though I look forward to the times I'm not fasting in fact food seems to taste better after a fast.
> 
> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41418-019-0474-7



Fasting is actually synonymous with starvation - please refer to the definition and "Stages of starvation":

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starvation

Even IF is technically stage II starvation, which indeed can be very well tolerated. 

Reducing frequency of eating is also recommended by some prominent experts, no argument there.

As mentioned/agreed earlier, there is good research on the effects of autophagy. Benefits of fasting in terms of long term weight loss are less clear.


----------



## filk (19 Feb 2022)

steveindenmark said:


> A thread for those trying to lose a bit of weight in 2022. Sensible hits, tips and recipies are very welcome. Its not easy losing weight regardless of what weight you are starting at and what goal you are trying to reach. These posts are also to encourage others.
> 
> Like many times in the past my New Years resolution was to lose some weight and firm up a bit. Usually I fail in the first month because changes to my diet and lifestyle is too drastic for me to handle.
> 
> ...


Eat mainly protein and fat (they often come together anyway - eg eggs, steak etc). Prioritise nutrient dense foods, eg, organ meats, meat. Ref Matt Lalond of Harvard re his studies. Never eat food out of cardboard boxes. Generally dump cereals, breads, wheat based products. Control Insulin, or it will Control you. 
Eat in an 8 hour window, water, tea, coffee only in the interim. No alcohol! It can be hard at the start, It will get easier.
weight train three times a week, focusing upon compound movements eg squat, bench press, OH Press, pull ups, deadlifts and variations thereof. Seek to increase the weight lifted over time. Kettlebells swings, snatches for muscle endurance and power too. Some carbs post workout too. Rice, sweet potatoes, et al, even cake at this time. 
Prioritise sleep, quantity and quality. 
Cardio a couple of times a week, separate from weight sessions. Use HR monitor if possible to stay within the zone whereby you can still talk, but not sing. Rowing works for me! Sometimes cardio is not necessary. Weights gives great cardio. Try 20 squats at 50% of body weight and see how your heart rate elevates. 
These will help drive up Testosterone, improve insulin Sensitivity and reset many other hormones that are probably out of kilter if you are carrying fat, especially the dangerous stuff on the belly. Waist to Height ratio is an excellent single marker of current status and progress. 
Possible supplementation to include Magnesium, zinc, Vit D, K2. 
Be strict for 30 days and assess how you look, feel and perform at that point, not before.
The liberation of toxins from fat cells as you starve them can lead to some cold and flu like symptoms which will pass quickly. 
Body composition is more driven by what we eat, Exercise for Longevity.


----------



## Julia9054 (19 Feb 2022)

filk said:


> Try 20 squats at 50% of body weight and see how your heart rate elevates


Just watch your knees. I increased weight too quickly and now - having successfully cured my twingeing hip - now have a twingeing left knee!


----------



## filk (19 Feb 2022)

True.
Squats should be progressed slowly initially. When advanced though I do find squats help with knee pains. 
All assuming correct technique of course.


----------



## Etern4l (19 Feb 2022)

filk said:


> Eat mainly protein and fat (they often come together anyway - eg eggs, steak etc).





filk said:


> Longevity.


Longevity? Good Dr Atkins used to recommend that sort of diet. Dropped at 72 after a long history of cardiovascular disease, unfortunately (but now rather predictably). Anyone who has been following this kind of dietary advice long term, would do well to keep their blood tests current and find a good cardiologist (but probably best to just go with a safer bet diet-wise - fortunately, there is no need to compromise health in order to be lean).


----------



## filk (19 Feb 2022)

He slipped on ice and fell.


----------



## Etern4l (19 Feb 2022)

filk said:


> He slipped on ice and fell.



"He was admitted to Weill Cornell Medical Center, where he underwent surgery to remove a blood clot from his brain, but fell into a coma. He died on April 17, at age 72.[12][13][4]"

While it's possible that a blood clot formed as a direct result of trauma, more likely it was already there and became dislodged as a result of the fall. Especially given that the trauma was relatively minor (it wasn't the direct cause of death) and what we now know about his medical history:

"A report from the New York medical examiner's office leaked a year after his death said that Atkins had a history of heart attack, congestive heart failure and hypertension, and that at the time of his death he weighed 258 pounds (117 kg).[12] "

Even if he didn't die of the blood clot then, he had been in a miserable state already.

One dreads to consider how many people suffered and died prematurely since the 70s as a result of following his diet (and the various derivatives). What did he think was going to happen once people start packing fat and cholesterol into their bodies?


----------



## Noodle Legs (20 Feb 2022)

Etern4l said:


> I had been trying to get that to work for several years. Some nice results at the beginning (or at one of the few "new beginnings") but ultinately didn't work for me long term


Calorie deficit ALWAYS works because it’s the ONLY way to lose weight.

But exactly how you achieve that calorie deficit is up to you.

*Don’t confuse Calorie Counting and Calorie Deficit as being one and the same*- counting calories is just one way of achieving a deficit as are things like slimming world/weight watchers or fads like Atkins/ Keto/ etc etc. *They all work because they create a deficit- pure and simple*.
But too often these fads like to mask this simple fact to keep you buying in to their products, pills, potions, books by using a lot of buzz words and scientific jargon. These plans may well be created by nutritionists, Ph.D’s or even people with other fancy letters after their name so it’s easy to assume they must know what they’re talking about and they probably do, but remember they’re also selling a product.


----------



## Etern4l (20 Feb 2022)

Noodle Legs said:


> Calorie deficit ALWAYS works because it’s the ONLY way to lose weight.
> 
> But exactly how you achieve that calorie deficit is up to you.
> 
> ...



Apologies, I did assume you meant to advocate calorie counting, otherwise (as you said), it's trivially obvious that caloric deficit is required to achieve weight loss.

BTW One of the many problems with "calorie counting" , apart from the additional overhead, is the huge difficulty of accurately estimating the net caloric deficit/excess. The only practical way of estimating this outside of lab setting is a posteriori with a huge lag, ideally a month, due to the natural variance of weight measurements.

Still, it can be helpful for beginners to get a rough idea of the amount of nominal calories the consumed foods contain, as understanding caloric density of foods is useful.

(I would be OK without the highlights in bold, probably best to assume readers are adults who don't need such comprehension aids)


----------



## Saluki (20 Feb 2022)

I follow the Bodycoach plan. Not always doing Joe’s workouts as I do have my gym membership. It’s not like a regular gym, with machines, mirrors, judgment etc. Its free weights, class based, 4 main coaches and a big bucket of enthusiasm and support. It’s a hoot, my go to happy place.
I found arm muscle the other day. It’s probably been there a while, but I had not noticed it. Post menopause, weight is a pain to shift, but I am strong, fit but a bit too squidgy.
I’d like to shift 4kg by the end of May, or go from size 14 and back to a 12. Depression and a disappointing relationship has taken its toll.

Bodycoach food rocks, by the way.


----------



## Etern4l (20 Feb 2022)

Saluki said:


> I follow the Bodycoach plan. Not always doing Joe’s workouts as I do have my gym membership. It’s not like a regular gym, with machines, mirrors, judgment etc. Its free weights, class based, 4 main coaches and a big bucket of enthusiasm and support. It’s a hoot, my go to happy place.
> I found arm muscle the other day. It’s probably been there a while, but I had not noticed it. Post menopause, weight is a pain to shift, but I am strong, fit but a bit too squidgy.
> I’d like to shift 4kg by the end of May, or go from size 14 and back to a 12. Depression and a disappointing relationship has taken its toll.
> 
> Bodycoach food rocks, by the way.



Interesting, looks like a more diet focused version of 8fit which I've been using for the adaptive workout plans when I can't get to the gym.
Both can actually tailor the meals to the specific higher-level dietary requirements, which is key. What I've found about the 8fit recipes though, is that, while delicious, they are too elaborate to be practical in the heat of action and on the daily basis. Occasionally helpful during weekends though.


----------



## Noodle Legs (20 Feb 2022)

Etern4l said:


> BTW One of the many problems with "calorie counting" , apart from the additional overhead, is the huge difficulty of accurately estimating the net caloric deficit/excess.


Agreed, there’s a lot of trial and error involved. You can only go off what food packets and fitness trackers/apps tell you unless you have access to a lab. 

When I started to lose weight I used to calorie count, and it was a bit frustrating logging everything down and all that so I can see why people give up with it. But it did seem to work for me. It’s particularly key when doing this method that people are brutally honest about their calorie intake/expenditure, which ties in to taking full responsibility for what they put in their mouth. 
I’m more of a mindful eater these days so I don’t follow a diet as such nor count calories, and yes my weight fluctuates a little as a result but I understand why that is happening and I’m at peace with that.


----------



## Etern4l (20 Feb 2022)

Noodle Legs said:


> Agreed, there’s a lot of trial and error involved. You can only go off what food packets and fitness trackers/apps tell you unless you have access to a lab.
> 
> When I started to lose weight I used to calorie count, and it was a bit frustrating logging everything down and all that so I can see why people give up with it. But it did seem to work for me. It’s particularly key when doing this method that people are brutally honest about their calorie intake/expenditure, which ties in to taking full responsibility for what they put in their mouth.
> I’m more of a mindful eater these days so I don’t follow a diet as such nor count calories, and yes my weight fluctuates a little as a result but I understand why that is happening and I’m at peace with that.



Agree mindful eating is one of the key components. But, to be fair, perhaps a bit of calorie counting does help at the beginning. Could be viewed as taking driving lessons. Of course, the key is to adopt a healthy diet which facilitates maintenance of proper weight without too much reliance on fighting hunger, which is occasionally needed with any diet, but unsustainable long term. To use the driving analogy, one would want to complete the lessons and get the driving licence, but then - from the health and safety perspective - it's best adopt a safe driving style and continue sticking to the rules instead of pushing the envelope and midnight drag racing on public roads. OK, perhaps not the best metaphor for midnight binging on booze, fries, steaks and burgers


----------



## All uphill (20 Feb 2022)

Noodle Legs said:


> Agreed, there’s a lot of trial and error involved. You can only go off what food packets and fitness trackers/apps tell you unless you have access to a lab.
> 
> When I started to lose weight I used to calorie count, and it was a bit frustrating logging everything down and all that so I can see why people give up with it. But it did seem to work for me. It’s particularly key when doing this method that people are brutally honest about their calorie intake/expenditure, which ties in to taking full responsibility for what they put in their mouth.
> I’m more of a mindful eater these days so I don’t follow a diet as such nor count calories, and yes my weight fluctuates a little as a result but I understand why that is happening and I’m at peace with that.


I like that.

Mindful eating and being at peace with the results.

Sounds proper grown-up!


----------



## glasgowcyclist (20 Feb 2022)

icowden said:


> I've been using
> https://www.nhs.uk/better-health/lose-weight/



My wife and I started using that last year and between March and Christmas I lost 11kg while she lost 22kg. It was the easiest thing we’ve ever done and just came down to portion control. We still ate all of the foods we liked, only with a lowered daily calorie ceiling.

Over that time she has put together a stack of printed recipes with calorie amounts already included, so we know what every meal gives us without having to count the components each time.

Definitely the most effective method my wife has ever used. She’s so pleased to be back to the size she’s happy at (10) which she hasn’t been for 30 years.


----------



## Saluki (20 Feb 2022)

Etern4l said:


> Interesting, looks like a more diet focused version of 8fit which I've been using for the adaptive workout plans when I can't get to the gym.
> Both can actually tailor the meals to the specific higher-level dietary requirements, which is key. What I've found about the 8fit recipes though, is that, while delicious, they are too elaborate to be practical in the heat of action and on the daily basis. Occasionally helpful during weekends though.


I do a lot of batch cooking, using my multi cooker. For instance, my sausage and lentil stew (delicious by the way) for tea last night was made up to 4 portions. 1 for tea, 1 for tomorrow’s lunch at work and 2 for the freezer. I do this a lot with my low carb lasagne, low carb shepherds pie, fish pie etc. also with chilli, shakshuka, curry etc. I batch cook very few ‘carb refuel meals, except for maybe 2 or 3 portions of overnight oats.
The Bodycoach app, gives me loads of recipe choice for general and refuel meals, snacks too. 5 full workouts and 2 short workouts for every cycle, with all my macros worked out as I am way too lazy to do that.
There are many ‘lean in 15’ type recipes there. I have no need to spend hours in the kitchen.


----------



## bonzobanana (20 Feb 2022)

Etern4l said:


> Fasting is actually synonymous with starvation - please refer to the definition and "Stages of starvation":
> 
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starvation
> 
> ...



*Starvation*_ is a severe deficiency in caloric energy intake, below the level needed to maintain an organism's life_

That doesn't apply because there isn't malnutrition. You are reducing the frequency of eating which the body copes very well with. The human body is designed to cope easily without food for a few days and if you have fat reserves its no problem. You are just bringing the body back to a more natural eating frequency intermittantly just so you lose a bit of weight etc. Ultimately you are a allowing a few additional processes to operate that are suppressed by eating frequently so a huge amount of health benefits before you even consider the health benefits of losing weight. Fasting is not starvation as can be seen above 'severe deficiency' doesn't apply because you are nowhere near a level that could impact your life. In fact many of those processes will clean the body of toxins and destroy damaged cells so can enhance your health and extend your life. If you take your definition of fasting being starvation then just about every creature on this planet is starving and facing starvation because natural wild animals tend to eat far less frequently than us especially carnivorous or omnivore animals. They use a bit of body fat, then they eat, then they eat again, then there might a gap where they consume their own body fat etc, that is the natural process. 

I guess its a question of modern lifestyle vs our natural evolved biology does the modern lifestyle of easy food availability improve our health or hinder it. Is it ok to just remove the natural times where animals don't have access to food or does that improve our health by having frequent food with the body always digesting food. I would say the evidence is strong for some fasting being very beneficial and a great aid to weight loss naturally.


----------



## Fat Lars (20 Feb 2022)

When it comes to losing weight, keeping it off in the long term, maintaining a healthy lifestyle and living a long life then we are all experts. The thing is we may all be experts but we cannot all be right. Winning the argument on here doesn't make you right particularly when you can get shut down by someone who doesn't agree with you, leaving the floor open so to speak. 
So if you are very slim, very fit, take no medications and are very healthy with no aches or pain or diseases or medical conditions of any sort then you might have a handle on a lifestyle which is worthy of serious consideration. A keto diet with IF and regular exercise ticks all the boxes for me. The key is metabolic health and concerns a hormone called insulin.


----------



## Etern4l (20 Feb 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> *Starvation*_ is a severe deficiency in caloric energy intake, below the level needed to maintain an organism's life_



Yeah, so for example 800kcal energy intake instead of 2000kcal could easily be construed as severe, and cannot be carried out indefinitely without the loss of the organism's life.



bonzobanana said:


> That doesn't apply because there isn't malnutrition.



There obviously is malnutrition in terms of macronutrients. That's the whole point of it, especially if the goal is to trigger autophagy. The organism is starved, so it breaks down its own tissue, so that it can later be rebuilt anew.



bonzobanana said:


> You are reducing the frequency of eating which the body copes very well with. The human body is designed to cope easily without food for a few days and if you have fat reserves its no problem. You are just bringing the body back to a more natural eating frequency intermittantly just so you lose a bit of weight etc.



Well, the body can cope, however, the way it does it has been determined by the evolution. If you put a contemporary Westerner in a time machine and drop them into the tundra 10,000 years ago, they would start "fasting" naturally straight away. Suppose they manage to acquire some food, they obviously are not going to waste it, so will eat as much as they can (which would usually not be a lot anyway). That's great, they would increase their chances of survival as a result.

If you subject the same person to fasting in the contemporary setting with abundant supply of food, when they come out of the fast they are likely to overeat and regain weight to compensate. Same mechanism, very different outcome due to the the environment change.



bonzobanana said:


> Ultimately you are a allowing a few additional processes to operate that are suppressed by eating frequently so a huge amount of health benefits before you even consider the health benefits of losing weight.



Well, the main process is actually called starvation response.



bonzobanana said:


> If you take your definition of fasting being starvation then just about every creature on this planet is starving and facing starvation because natural wild animals tend to eat far less frequently than us especially carnivorous or omnivore animals. They use a bit of body fat, then they eat, then they eat again, then there might a gap where they consume their own body fat etc, that is the natural process.



That depends on the species and their environment, but yes - many have to go through periods of starvation, some don't survive.

You can find more information in the following book:
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=yD02C44uIDUC&pg=PA15&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

As you can see right at the beginning, some researchers use the terms "starvation" and "fasting" interchangeably, some not. However, there is not a strict universally adopted rule on how to differentiate between the two.



bonzobanana said:


> I guess its a question of modern lifestyle vs our natural evolved biology does the modern lifestyle of easy food availability improve our health or hinder it. Is it ok to just remove the natural times where animals don't have access to food or does that improve our health by having frequent food with the body always digesting food. I would say the evidence is strong for some fasting being very beneficial and a great aid to weight loss naturally.



It's not even a question - there is overwhelming evidence of the currently prevailing Western lifestyle (particularly the fast food-based variety) being detrimental to health. Over 40% of Americans, the main authors of the Western lifestyle, are obese, something like 70% are overweight or worse. Britain looks only a little better.

Unfortunately, while there are some benefits of fasting in terms of cardiovascular health and potentially cell rejuvenation following starvation response (a lot of the research on that topic is based on indirect measures or animal studies), the research I have seen seems to suggest maintaining weight rapidly lost during a fast presents a considerable change. Anecdotally, I have observed this to be very much the case.

BTW I just spotted your post earlier. You reported losing 15kg in one month and hoping to lose a further 10kg per month. FYI The usually recommended safe and maintainable rate of weight loss is roughly up to about 2kg/month (0.5 kg/week).


----------



## icowden (20 Feb 2022)

glasgowcyclist said:


> My wife and I started using that last year and between March and Christmas I lost 11kg while she lost 22kg. It was the easiest thing we’ve ever done and just came down to portion control. We still ate all of the foods we liked, only with a lowered daily calorie ceiling.


I found that you also learn a little bit. For example, I learned that instead of italian salami (which I love), it's better to have say Ham, and have salami as more of a special occasion meat. Also interesting that quite often I can get really good calorie counts for filling meals using proper food rather than buying "count on us" or "balanced for you" ready meals. The only thing I don't like is that it can get a bit monotonous - I've pretty much stopped recording in the app, and just go for <400 cals breakfast c600 cals lunch and <800 cals dinner. No ciders, except for special occasions, no snacks and I only drink squash anyway so drinks are free. My wife prefers to go for lower calorie meals and have a glass of wine or a gin in the evening. It still works.


----------



## Etern4l (20 Feb 2022)

Fat Lars said:


> When it comes to losing weight, keeping it off in the long term, maintaining a healthy lifestyle and living a long life then we are all experts. The thing is we may all be experts but we cannot all be right. Winning the argument on here doesn't make you right particularly when you can get shut down by someone who doesn't agree with you, leaving the floor open so to speak.
> So if you are very slim, very fit, take no medications and are very healthy with no aches or pain or diseases or medical conditions of any sort then you might have a handle on a lifestyle which is worthy of serious consideration. A keto diet with IF and regular exercise ticks all the boxes for me. The key is metabolic health and concerns a hormone called insulin.



I mean it's a complex issue but we can in theory benchmark various approaches in terms of uncontroversial objective metrics, such as:
1. Do practitioners achieve healthy weight and manage to keep it off long term?
2. Do practitioners enjoy optimal long term cardiovascular health? (Atkins, keto, paleo et al likely fail this sanity check)
3. What is the impact of the diet on the expected life span of practitioners? (ditto, as a consequence of 2. )

In practice, the body of rigorous research data regarding many diets is lacking, posing a risk to adopters.


----------



## Etern4l (20 Feb 2022)

icowden said:


> I found that you also learn a little bit. For example, I learned that instead of italian salami (which I love), it's better to have say Ham



There are many issues with both foods, the primary one being that both are highly processed, and in this case actually classed as carcinogenic by the WHO.


----------



## icowden (20 Feb 2022)

Etern4l said:


> There are many issues with both foods, the primary one being that both are highly processed, and in this case actually classed as carcinogenic by the WHO.


It rather depends on the Ham and the Salami I think you will find. For example the Wiltshire cured ham in my fridge is from a pork leg using curing salt. If you buy one of those sad looking boxes of square ham pieces that's a very different kettle of fish. Both are "processed" but only the latter is "highly processed". 

I also didn't say that I eat ham every day. So the volume is also is important, I tend to alternate between ham, cottage cheese, chicken, pastrami and just try to minimise high calorie meats such as salami and prosciutto cotto.

Everything in reasonable amounts. My wife eats more salad, I eat more fish... que sera sera


----------



## Julia9054 (20 Feb 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> clean the body of toxins


You have a liver and kidneys for that.


Fat Lars said:


> if you are very slim, very fit, take no medications and are very healthy with no aches or pain or diseases or medical conditions of any sort then you might have a handle on a lifestyle which is worthy of serious consideration


Or more likely a lucky set of genes.


----------



## Etern4l (20 Feb 2022)

icowden said:


> It rather depends on the Ham and the Salami I think you will find. For example the Wiltshire cured ham in my fridge is from a pork leg using curing salt. If you buy one of those sad looking boxes of square ham pieces that's a very different kettle of fish. Both are "processed" but only the latter is "highly processed".



Right, the key is to avoid highly-processed foods. Unfortunately, that can be quite a challenge given those harmful foods are ubiquitous and low cost. One must try though, I guess, we only at present have one body available to us per lifetime. The good news is that we have learned a lot in a recent decade or two, and thus have an informational advantage over past generations. Would be a shame not use it.



icowden said:


> I also didn't say that I eat ham every day. So the volume is also is important, I tend to alternate between ham, cottage cheese, chicken, pastrami and just try to minimise high calorie meats such as salami and prosciutto cotto.
> 
> Everything in reasonable amounts. My wife eats more salad, I eat more fish... que sera sera



Clearly, the "everything in moderation" approach is not optimal, but indeed, the less you are exposed the more you can limit the damage.


----------



## Etern4l (20 Feb 2022)

Julia9054 said:


> You have a liver and kidneys for that.



Strictly speaking, they would need to be all in place and healthy/optimally functioning too. Sadly not everyone has the luxury. Probably best to limit the toxin input where possible in the first place.


----------



## icowden (20 Feb 2022)

Etern4l said:


> Right, the key is to avoid highly-processed foods. Unfortunately, that can be quite a challenge given those harmful foods are ubiquitous and low cost. One must try though, I guess, we only at present have one body available to us per lifetime. The good news is that we have learned a lot in a recent decade or two, and thus have an informational advantage over past generations. Would be a shame not use it.


My grandma is 104 this year. She managed this without notably having any fad diets or trying to avoid processed food. It's almost like there may be more to life than avoiding bacon.


----------



## Etern4l (20 Feb 2022)

icowden said:


> My grandma is 104 this year. She managed this without notably having any fad diets or trying to avoid processed food. It's almost like there may be more to life than avoiding bacon.



Best to think of this example as an outlier, and thus not necessarily a good basis for deriving optimal dietary policy. There are some centenarian smokers, yet these days nobody argues with smoking posing significant health risk.
You may be a lucky outlier too, the only way to find out is to follow your grandma's bacon diet and find out. For science!


----------



## Fat Lars (20 Feb 2022)

Etern4l said:


> I mean it's a complex issue but we can in theory benchmark various approaches in terms of uncontroversial objective metrics, such as:
> 1. Do practitioners achieve healthy weight and manage to keep it off long term?
> 2. Do practitioners enjoy optimal long term cardiovascular health? (Atkins, keto et al likely fail this check)
> 3. What is the impact of the diet on the expected life span of practitioners? (ditto, as a consequence of 2. )
> ...


We totally disagree. CVD is not caused by fat clogging arteries or high LDL Cholesterol. Neither is processed meat carcinogenic. This is the mainstream view as perpetuated by vested interests. Cancer in humans is based on observational studies over a long period. Epidemiology studies can infer correlation but not causation. Red meat eaters answering questionnaires about their red meat eating habits might have confounders like smoking, less active and drink alcohol more not covered in the questionnaire and get it wrong . Such as saturated fat and heart disease.
In 2015 the International Agency for Research on Cancer ranked processed red meat in Group 1 along with Asbestos, Tobacco and Mustard Gas and various nuclear fuels like plutonium. Their evidence was based on 14 cohort studies, taking base line data on day 1 and then follow it up years later. 8 out of the 14 studies showed no link at all. 5 out of the 14 showed no statistical significance. 1 out of 14 found statistical significance showed 1.85 higher risk. This was a study of Eventists in America mainly vegeterians from thier religion. The red meat eaters tended to smoke more, dink more, and more likely to be overweight. Plus nearly all processed red meat is eaten with a bun, fizzy drinks, and high sugar sauces. Eating processed red meat is a marker of bad health and not a maker of bad health. The relative risk is 1.18. Anything under 2 is t considered weak even with the confounders. Contrast the epidemiology study re lung cancer and smoking the relative risk is 10-30.


----------



## Fat Lars (20 Feb 2022)

Julia9054 said:


> You have a liver and kidneys for that.
> 
> Or more likely a lucky set of genes.


Cute answer.

I wasn't always so lucky. I've developed my luck by virtually eliminating the arthritis in my knackered knees caused by sporting injuries. No further need for a walking stick on country walks, no nore pain, and i can get up from the ground by using just one leg instead of previously needing to grab a piece of furniture.

So all of the nay sayers what is your medical and physical condition. Are you overweight or obese ? I think the proof of the pudding is in the eating as long as its keto.


----------



## Fat Lars (20 Feb 2022)

That concludes my input. You are the experts not me. What do I know?


----------



## Etern4l (20 Feb 2022)

Fat Lars said:


> We totally disagree. (1) CVD is not caused by fat clogging arteries or high LDL Cholesterol. (2) Neither is processed meat carcinogenic.


I stopped reading there. Apart from your concerning self-reference in plural:

On point 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronary_artery_disease

The picture on the right says more than a 1000 words.

On point 2. https://www.cancer.net/cancer-types/colorectal-cancer/risk-factors-and-prevention 

Who might have a vested interest in designating red meat and processed foods as risk factors here? The meat and processed foods mega-industries? Big pharma? Medical professionals? Unbelievable.


----------



## Fat Lars (20 Feb 2022)

Etern4l said:


> I stopped reading there. Apart from your concerning self-reference in plural:
> 
> On point 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronary_artery_disease
> 
> ...


Wikipedia. 

Give me a break. Loads and loads of tosh.


----------



## Etern4l (20 Feb 2022)

Fat Lars said:


> Wikipedia.
> 
> Give me a break. Loads and loads of tosh.



Sure, never mind the 141 references under the article.. Well, the alternative at hand are your naked highly controversial statements.


----------



## Julia9054 (20 Feb 2022)

Etern4l said:


> Strictly speaking, they would need to be all in place and healthy/optimally functioning too. Sadly not everyone has the luxury. Probably best to limit the toxin input where possible in the first place.


With my biologist’s head on, my issue is with the concept of a toxin. Actual definition being a poisonous substance but people usually mean the byproducts of our own metabolism (dealt with more than adequately by functioning liver and kidneys) or, even more vaguely, foods that are not particularly good for our health in large quantities.


----------



## Etern4l (20 Feb 2022)

Julia9054 said:


> With my biologist’s head on, my issue is with the concept of a toxin. Actual definition being a poisonous substance but people usually mean the byproducts of our own metabolism (dealt with more than adequately by functioning liver and kidneys) or, even more vaguely, foods that are not particularly good for our health in large quantities.



Great point, moreover toxins are substances produced by living organisms (rather than any poisonous substances). I would not be personally too concerned about our bodies being a danger to ourselves by way of excreting toxins. To be fair, however, what was probably meant earlier is "toxic chemicals". In that case there is obviously a serious problem, and mostly a foodborne one, e.g. heavy metals, dioxins, pesticides, PCBs, or perhaps even PFOA, PTFE, benzopyrene etc. In that context, the comment on a benefit of fasting in terms of toxic chemical removal might not be groundless? One would hope that at least some of the said chemicals would be released from cells destroyed through autophagy and then excreted with some nonzero probability. In reality though, even if some viable exit routes for those toxic chemical exist, unless one becomes a Himalayan monk for a decade, the proportion of cells "recycled" through autophagy is probably too small to significantly move the needle. Still, I guess every little helps!

Again, seems much more sensible to just try and prevent those harmful substances from entering our systems in the first place. This would bring us to the question: which foods are most likely to be contaminated (put another way: what are the foods with highest expected concentrations of toxic chemicals)?


----------



## icowden (21 Feb 2022)

Etern4l said:


> On point 2. https://www.cancer.net/cancer-types/colorectal-cancer/risk-factors-and-prevention



Yes, that looks pretty conclusive.


> Current research consistently links eating more red meat and processed meat to a higher risk of the disease.





> A diet rich in fruits and vegetables and low in red meat may help reduce the risk of colorectal cancer.


Not.

At best, even Cancer.net puts the food risk on the low side, unless you have co-morbidities. For example, if you are obese, inactive, smoke 20 a day, have IBD and are over 60, then your risk is way up. On the other hand, if you are fairly fit, don't smoke, don't weigh 300 pounds and like some ham and bacon occasionally, I think it's probably OK.

Oh and this?


> You may be a lucky outlier too, the only way to find out is to follow your grandma's bacon diet and find out. For science!


This is just being obtuse. No-one suggested a bacon diet. What I suggested is what most doctors and dieticians will advise. Try to eat better, improve your food habits, but an occasional helping of a little of what you really like isn't going to kill you.


----------



## Fat Lars (21 Feb 2022)

This is a video from Youtube. It features Dr Ken Berry. it contains all the references at the bottom. He particularly talks about The WHO study re red meat and processed red meat causes cancer which has been mentioned. Just imagine it is me saying all this. I wouldn't want any of the smear mongerers coming along and discrediting the guy, who is a hero of mine.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qwyjo-NgQsE


----------



## bonzobanana (21 Feb 2022)

Etern4l said:


> Great point, moreover toxins are substances produced by living organisms (rather than any poisonous substances). I would not be personally too concerned about our bodies being a danger to ourselves by way of excreting toxins. To be fair, however, what was probably meant earlier is "toxic chemicals". In that case there is obviously a serious problem, and mostly a foodborne one, e.g. heavy metals, dioxins, pesticides, PCBs, or perhaps even PFOA, PTFE, benzopyrene etc. In that context, the comment on a benefit of fasting in terms of toxic chemical removal might not be groundless? One would hope that at least some of the said chemicals would be released from cells destroyed through autophagy and then excreted with some nonzero probability. In reality though, even if some viable exit routes for those toxic chemical exist, unless one becomes a Himalayan monk for a decade, the proportion of cells "recycled" through autophagy is probably too small to significantly move the needle. Still, I guess every little helps!
> 
> Again, seems much more sensible to just try and prevent those harmful substances from entering our systems in the first place. This would bring us to the question: which foods are most likely to be contaminated (put another way: what are the foods with highest expected concentrations of toxic chemicals)?



When I quoted toxins earlier it was in relation to the known effects of autophagy removing toxins and actually improving liver function. I didn't think this was anyway debatable because so much data supports it. Fasting leads to autophagy and autophagy has many positive effects on the body according to a lot of research done with both people and animals. If you are interested in the benefits of fasting and autophagy then google the studies done. Ultimately a thread like this might make you aware of the benefits but until you have read some of the studies you may not be convinced by them. 

_Autophagy also seems to play an essential role in the immune system by cleaning out toxins and infectious agents.

There is evidenceTrusted Source that autophagy may improve the outlook for cells with infectious and neurodegenerative diseases by controlling inflammation.

Another review articleTrusted Source explains that autophagy helps to protect cells against incoming microbes.

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/autophagy_


----------



## Julia9054 (21 Feb 2022)

Autophagy is a natural cellular process which occurs all the time to remove or recycle the products of cellular metabolism. The article you link to takes a typically cautious approach and is not a ringing endorsement of attempting to increase autophagy by either fasting or by inducing cellular inflammation through exercise. Increasing autophagy may have negative as well as positive effects. The article makes the point that most of the research has so far been done in animals and further studies need to be done in order to extrapolate the results to humans.
Here is a screenshot of the article summary if others don’t want to read the whole article


----------



## icowden (21 Feb 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> Fasting leads to autophagy and autophagy has many positive effects on the body according to a lot of research done with both people and animals.


That's the bit that none of your studies support. Autophagy as a process is documented and researched in those papers. What is less clear is whether we can usefully *increase* autophagy either through fasting or exercise, and that even if you can. whether that increase necessarily assists across the body or whether it is only certain areas that are stimulated.

As your last link says:



> Researchers have linked autophagy to several positive health effects. They also *believe *that a person *might* be able to induce autophagy by fasting.


----------



## Etern4l (21 Feb 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> When I quoted toxins earlier it was in relation to the known effects of autophagy removing toxins and actually improving liver function. I didn't think this was anyway debatable because so much data supports it. Fasting leads to autophagy and autophagy has many positive effects on the body according to a lot of research done with both people and animals. If you are interested in the benefits of fasting and autophagy then google the studies done. Ultimately a thread like this might make you aware of the benefits but until you have read some of the studies you may not be convinced by them.
> 
> _Autophagy also seems to play an essential role in the immune system by cleaning out toxins and infectious agents.
> 
> ...



Just on the toxin cleanup point, there are no specific references regarding this particular effect in the article.

"Autophagy also seems to play an essential role in the immune system by cleaning out toxins and infectious agents."

We don't know what the author, apparently a PhD holder, meant by "toxins" and what evidence, if any, is available.


----------



## bonzobanana (21 Feb 2022)

Etern4l said:


> Just on the toxin cleanup point, there are no specific references regarding this particular effect in the article.
> 
> "Autophagy also seems to play an essential role in the immune system by cleaning out toxins and infectious agents."
> 
> We don't know what the author, apparently a PhD holder, meant by "toxins" and what evidence, if any, is available.



I'm confused by your reply isn't toxins just a general description for toxic substances and could be anything really that is damaging to the human body and needs to be removed. I thought there were 100s maybe 1000s of such substances that the human body can absorb through pollutants, processed food and just perhaps naturally occuring materials we don't want in our body maybe metals and pollens. Our body removes some of these anyway but the point is Autophagy has been shown to improve this function. There is a lot of sources on this page but often it takes time to find the actual papers. Why would he even attempt to list toxins which surely would be different for different people?

https://www.bluezones.com/2018/10/f...y-nobel-prize-winning-research-on-cell-aging/


----------



## Etern4l (21 Feb 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> I'm confused by your reply isn't toxins just a general description for toxic substances and could be anything really that is damaging to the human body and needs to be removed. I thought there were 100s maybe 1000s of such substances that the human body can absorb through pollutants, processed food and just perhaps naturally occuring materials we don't want in our body maybe metals and pollens. Our body removes some of these anyway but the point is Autophagy has been shown to improve this function. There is a lot of sources on this page but often it takes time to find the actual papers. Why would he even attempt to list toxins which surely would be different for different people?
> 
> https://www.bluezones.com/2018/10/f...y-nobel-prize-winning-research-on-cell-aging/


No, strictly speaking toxins are harmful substances produced by living organisms, as opposed to naturally occurring or man-made. Please review our earlier discussion with @Julia9054.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxin

Still, it's a bit of a finer point - if we correct this and use the boarder term "toxic substances", it would be good to see research regarding the effect of autophagy on their concentrations in human tissue (or at least animal tissue).


----------



## bonzobanana (21 Feb 2022)

icowden said:


> That's the bit that none of your studies support. Autophagy as a process is documented and researched in those papers. What is less clear is whether we can usefully *increase* autophagy either through fasting or exercise, and that even if you can. whether that increase necessarily assists across the body or whether it is only certain areas that are stimulated.
> 
> As your last link says:



There is more data here;

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3106288/


----------



## bonzobanana (21 Feb 2022)

Etern4l said:


> No, strictly speaking toxins are harmful substances produced by living organisms, as opposed to naturally occurring or man-made. Please review our earlier discussion with @Julia9054.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxin
> 
> Still, it's a bit of a finer point - if we correct this and use the boarder term "toxic substances", it would be good to see research regarding the effect of autophagy on their concentrations in human tissue (or at least animal tissue).



Thats a fair point I missed that. Does seem like I'm not alone in making that mistake as toxins as a term looks more broadly used than it should be. What is the general term for toxic particles of any origin because I'm sure in many articles that is the term they are looking for when they just use toxins.


----------



## Julia9054 (21 Feb 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> There is more data here;
> 
> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3106288/


“Just says in mice”


----------



## Etern4l (21 Feb 2022)

bonzobanana said:


> There is more data here;
> 
> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3106288/



Thanks, a bit as per Julia, the best I could find is this:

"For example, in vitro models have shown that starvation in neuronal cell lines can remove *toxic molecules* and damaged mitochondria from neurons.22–24"

OK, in vitro is a start. The first paper is a broad overview, just scanned but missed any info on removal of those exogenous toxic substances I mentioned earlier. Just looking at the tiles the second paper deals with Parkinson's specifically, whereas the third seems to regard Alzheimer's.
Haven't read properly, and it wouldn't do much good if I did , but judging by the summaries a lot of evidence points to neuroprotective benefits of autophagy, which is great. That said, removal of novel man-made toxic chemicals such as PCBs etc. could be a tougher proposition, as obviously the human body has had close to zero chance to evolve such mechanisms. Heavy metals could be interesting though, as this is something our distant forefathers might have had to deal with.


----------



## Fat Lars (22 Feb 2022)

To autophagy or not to autophagy that is the question. 

Never mind the other benefits of fasting; reduction of inflammation, the increase in HGH, the boosting of cognitive function, the weight loss, and for all you athletes out there an increase in VO2.


----------



## potsy (22 Feb 2022)

Anyone else losing the will to live reading this thread now?


----------



## Pat "5mph" (22 Feb 2022)

potsy said:


> Anyone else losing the will to live reading this thread now?


*Mod Note:*
I see what @potsy means.
I could separate the various Keto and other of topic posts in a new thread, but it's quite time consuming because I'm not familiar with the subject.
Of course, of topic answers to the op could be avoided, cheers


----------



## Etern4l (22 Feb 2022)

Fat Lars said:


> To autophagy or not to autophagy that is the question.
> 
> Never mind the other benefits of fasting; reduction of inflammation, the increase in HGH, the boosting of cognitive function, the weight loss, and for all you athletes out there an increase in VO2.



Research confirms 16:8 is about as affective as mild caloric restriction for weight loss, but that's pretty low on autophagy. The benefits of longer fasts in terms of sustained weight less are more questionable (to put it mildly), but happy to be proved otherwise by some serious research, as I have tried it many times and would love it if it somehow worked for sustained weight loss (given all the other benefits).

Edit: I refreshed and noticed another another page of posts, including some pretty ridiculous ones plus the mod advice above. Yeah, it's def enough. Carpe adipem et cibum keto folks!


----------



## Fat Lars (23 Feb 2022)

Etern4l said:


> Research confirms 16:8 is about as affective as mild caloric restriction for weight loss, but that's pretty low on autophagy. The benefits of longer fasts in terms of sustained weight less are more questionable (to put it mildly), but happy to be proved otherwise by some serious research, as I have tried it many times and would love it if it somehow worked for sustained weight loss (given all the other benefits).
> 
> Edit: I refreshed and noticed another another page of posts, including some pretty ridiculous ones plus the mod advice above. Yeah, it's def enough. Carpe adipem et cibum keto folks!


Like i've said before we completely disagree. There it is.


----------

