Question for Will. "Fat Fasts"

In article <116vhhsnqf5bnff RemoveThis @news.supernews.com>,
"Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2 RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:

> OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:
> :: In article <116v6ktikfv7jdf RemoveThis @news.supernews.com>,
<snipped>
> ::
> :: But, back to my question, I understand why low carb works and the
> :: basic metabolic reasons why it does, but I don't really understand
> :: how and why
> :: fat fasting works. If it was just a matter of lowering calorie
> :: intake,
> :: then going down to zero calories and fasting should work even faster
> :: but remarkably, it does not. At least not in my personal experiences,
>
> Well, personally, I think straight fasting works better.

Personal experience?
How long have you actually ever fasted for?
Just curiosity, not trying to argue.

> But obviously
> you're getting no nutrition. A fat fast will provide some. Not many can do
> a straight fast for long, but you can survive better on about 1000 kcals per
> day, for a certain length of time, as all that fat results in slow digestion
> and won't stimulate much appetite...you can also argument that it helps to
> avoid a starvation response (ie, slowing down of the metabolism) if you
> believe that jazz...

It also gives you bad breath due to the ketones. <lol>

>
> ::
> :: I'm trying to understand the biochemistry behind it and was
> :: wondering if anyone knew?
> :: --
>
> I somehow don't think you're find a definitive answer..you may find one that
> appeals to your way of thinking, however.

No, that's not what I'm wanting. Not at all!

Protein is converted to glucose and other nutrients in the liver by a
process called Gluconeogenesis. The body has to work harder to convert
protein into glucose for energy rather than convering carb's into energy
which is much easier for the body to do. This is why low carbing appears
to work so very well for so many people.

It lowers serum lipid levels too.

I was curious as to how and why a fat fast works as it's not just the
low calorie level at work here...

And for the record, it does NOT seem to lower serum lipid levels like a
mostly protein diet does. At least not for me, but a single person is
hardly a scientific study.

I know better than that!

I'm wondering if anyone else has messed with Fat fasting and what their
results have been?
--
Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-bitch." -Jack Nicholson
 >> Stay informed about: Question for Will. "Fat Fasts" 

In article <116vhteoc0m3k9c.RemoveThis@news.supernews.com>,
"Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote:

> OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:
> :: In article <116v6sb5mkut306.RemoveThis@news.supernews.com>,

<snipped>
> ::
> :: So is eating just fat encourages the body to burn more body fat, but
> :: how?
> :: Why does it work better than a total fast?
>
> I would not say 'eating fat encourages the body to burn more fat'......but
> eating mostly fat (like on a FF) means your fuel systems will need to rely
> more heavily (almost exclusively) on the fat burning pathways....rather than
> carb burning pathways...once you get shifted over, and you undereat, your
> body is primed for using fat as fuel. So it attacks bodyfat. This works
> really well for the IR, though, because those carbs really can screw you
> up....

That's kinda what I thought, but was curious about the metabolic
mechanisms if you know what I mean, or does anyone really know?
I HAVE tried to do some searches but I might not be asking Google the
right questions.

>
> At least, that's my understanding...go ask over at ASDLC.

??? ASDLC ???

>
> Oh...I still don't believe the FF works better than straight fasting...even
> though I'm not disputing your experience...I'm just suggesting it's hard to
> make conclusive statements from the experiences of one person....

I won't argue with that...

I'm wondering if anyone else has ever fooled with it?

One major difference I noted between the two is that MOST of the weight
lost from a total fast comes back. This did not happen with a fat fast.
I imagine that a good part of that was intestinal weight.

But again, I'm only one person.

I doubt that you'd get many volunteers for starvation studies. <G>


>
>
--
Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-bitch." -Jack Nicholson
 >> Stay informed about: Question for Will. "Fat Fasts" 

Roger Zoul wrote:
>
> I don't think anyone other than Atkins has ever recommended the FF.
> I have not heard of any research finding on it. Most would not take
> it seriously, I don't think. It is rather extreme, if you ask me.
> But probably no more so than a PSMF.

Hypocaloric, high-protein diets are nothing new in the world of crash
dieting. Google "stillman diet." During my teens, back in the early
1970s, I lost quite a bit of fat in a short period of time by using
that method.

Kneller's Fat Fast applied a higher percentage of fat than contemplated
by the Stillman Diet, although a higher fat content does tend to sneak
in when consuming nothing but high-protein foods. From my
understanding of it, McDonald's Protein-Sparing Modified Fast adds some
vegetables with only a minor contribution of digestible carbohydrates;
the additional fiber is a good idea, and the insulinogenic response is
likely to be minimal.
 >> Stay informed about: Question for Will. "Fat Fasts" 

OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:
:: In article <116vhhsnqf5bnff.TakeThisOut@news.supernews.com>,
:: "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote:
::
::: OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:
::::: In article <116v6ktikfv7jdf.TakeThisOut@news.supernews.com>,
:: <snipped>
:::::
::::: But, back to my question, I understand why low carb works and the
::::: basic metabolic reasons why it does, but I don't really understand
::::: how and why
::::: fat fasting works. If it was just a matter of lowering calorie
::::: intake,
::::: then going down to zero calories and fasting should work even
::::: faster but remarkably, it does not. At least not in my personal
::::: experiences,
:::
::: Well, personally, I think straight fasting works better.
::
:: Personal experience?
:: How long have you actually ever fasted for?
:: Just curiosity, not trying to argue.

just 36 hours....and not for the express purpose of losing weight, just for
mental discipline. But the reason I say I think fasting works better is
simply because I have held calories really low (under 1500) for several days
while exercising and I find I lose weight well - assuming I don't end up in
a binge.

::
::: But obviously
::: you're getting no nutrition. A fat fast will provide some. Not
::: many can do a straight fast for long, but you can survive better on
::: about 1000 kcals per day, for a certain length of time, as all that
::: fat results in slow digestion and won't stimulate much
::: appetite...you can also argument that it helps to avoid a
::: starvation response (ie, slowing down of the metabolism) if you
::: believe that jazz...
::
:: It also gives you bad breath due to the ketones. <lol>
::
:::
:::::
::::: I'm trying to understand the biochemistry behind it and was
::::: wondering if anyone knew?
::::: --
:::
::: I somehow don't think you're find a definitive answer..you may find
::: one that appeals to your way of thinking, however.
::
:: No, that's not what I'm wanting. Not at all!
::
:: Protein is converted to glucose and other nutrients in the liver by a
:: process called Gluconeogenesis. The body has to work harder to
:: convert
:: protein into glucose for energy rather than convering carb's into
:: energy
:: which is much easier for the body to do. This is why low carbing
:: appears
:: to work so very well for so many people.

?? Really? where did you learn this?

LCing works for a very simple reason.....it reduces BG swings in people who
have become IR....the cycles of low BG induced appetite disappear...and
people eat less food without feeling overly hungry. It really has little to
do with the body spending more energy converting protein to carbs.

::
:: It lowers serum lipid levels too.
::

For me it did, over time.

:: I was curious as to how and why a fat fast works as it's not just the
:: low calorie level at work here...
::

But it is mainly the low calorie level...because if you don't limit calories
you won't lose...

:: And for the record, it does NOT seem to lower serum lipid levels
:: like a
:: mostly protein diet does. At least not for me, but a single person is
:: hardly a scientific study.

Are you referring to the FF or LCing? If the latter, you have to give it
time...6 months to a year is typical, regardless of what Atkins said. My
numbers went up, then leveled back down.

::
:: I know better than that!
::
:: I'm wondering if anyone else has messed with Fat fasting and what
:: their results have been?

Some over in ASDLC have....ask there.

:: --
:: Om.
::
:: "My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-bitch."
:: -Jack Nicholson
 >> Stay informed about: Question for Will. "Fat Fasts" 

OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:
:: In article <116vhteoc0m3k9c DeleteThis @news.supernews.com>,
:: "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2 DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
::
::: OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:
::::: In article <116v6sb5mkut306 DeleteThis @news.supernews.com>,
::
:: <snipped>
:::::
::::: So is eating just fat encourages the body to burn more body fat,
::::: but how?
::::: Why does it work better than a total fast?
:::
::: I would not say 'eating fat encourages the body to burn more
::: fat'......but eating mostly fat (like on a FF) means your fuel
::: systems will need to rely more heavily (almost exclusively) on the
::: fat burning pathways....rather than carb burning pathways...once
::: you get shifted over, and you undereat, your body is primed for
::: using fat as fuel. So it attacks bodyfat. This works really well
::: for the IR, though, because those carbs really can screw you up....
::
:: That's kinda what I thought, but was curious about the metabolic
:: mechanisms if you know what I mean, or does anyone really know?
:: I HAVE tried to do some searches but I might not be asking Google
:: the
:: right questions.
::

I don't think anyone other than Atkins has ever recommended the FF. I have
not heard of any research finding on it. Most would not take it seriously,
I don't think. It is rather extreme, if you ask me. But probably no more so
than a PSMF.

:::
::: At least, that's my understanding...go ask over at ASDLC.
::
:: ??? ASDLC ???

Sorry. alt.support.diet.low-carb.

::
:::
::: Oh...I still don't believe the FF works better than straight
::: fasting...even though I'm not disputing your experience...I'm just
::: suggesting it's hard to make conclusive statements from the
::: experiences of one person....
::
:: I won't argue with that...
::
:: I'm wondering if anyone else has ever fooled with it?

Some over on ASDLC have.

::
:: One major difference I noted between the two is that MOST of the
:: weight
:: lost from a total fast comes back. This did not happen with a fat
:: fast.
:: I imagine that a good part of that was intestinal weight.

?? If you really lose bodyfat, then it won't come back unless you overeat.
I'd never do a total fast for 7 days, though. But I could do 1500 kcals of
LC for 7 days. I think it would work just as well as a FF for that length,
adjusting for calories.

::
:: But again, I'm only one person.
::
:: I doubt that you'd get many volunteers for starvation studies. <G>

If you pay me enough, I might try for 36 hours
 >> Stay informed about: Question for Will. "Fat Fasts"