Leave a Comment:

7 comments
Daniel F says December 10, 2015

Gread podcast. A few thoughts:

— It needs to be emphasized that for most of the period of the “fast”, you aren’t really in autophagy: digestion is slow, and until your body has really processed the food, the beneficial effects are probably not kicking in. At the point where you have held out for, say 16 hours, it is really worth trying to push it to 18, since those two hours are probably the most beneficial.

— personally, when I can summon the willpower, I prefer to do a single 24-36 hour fast once a week rather than IF three or more days a week. For me, it had a very powerful effect on body composition.

— given all the information there is out there about IF now, it is absurd that anyone is still doing long-term “calorie restriction”. It’s kind of missing the forest for the trees. Yes, you are getting the benefits of fasting, but you are making your day-to-day life miserable and probably weakening yourself in the process. IF and weightlifting / HITT / etc. work well together. CR and intense exercise do not.

Reply
    P. D. Mangan says December 10, 2015

    Thanks, Daniel. You point 1 is correct. The so-called “post-absorption” phase, after the food is digested, is when autophagy kicks in, so while we don’t know for sure, it’s possible that you could get as much benefit out of the last 2 hours of an 18 hour fast as you did from the entire previous 16 hours.

    Personally I’ve never done a fast of more than 24 hours, and even one that length is uncommon for me. For me it seems to get in the way of other priorities, but if it works for your body comp that’s great. As I’ve noted before, we simply don’t have a lot of controlled studies, for example 16 hour vs 36 hour fast effect on body comp. Maybe some day we will.

    Also agree about calorie restriction. I’m not aware if some or any of the CR people have gone to fasting instead, but they should. I think I failed to mention some of the other potential drawbacks of CR in my podcast: the potential for brittle bones and weak immune systems. As far as I can see, fasting is in every way superior to CR.

    Reply
Daniel F says December 10, 2015

Typo in first word of my comment….. /face palm

Reply
BillyPilgrim says December 11, 2015

Not to nitpick, but the learned ones pronounce it
autophage
au… like in auto
to… as in toffee (emphasis/accent on this syllable)
pha… as in fudge
ge… as in gee whiz

You pronounce it with emphasis on pha as in fate.
I love your blog and check it every day – I’m down 18 pounds of lard in five weeks.

Billy Pilgrim

Reply
    P. D. Mangan says December 11, 2015

    Hey Billy, glad to hear about your weight loss. I’ve discussed that very question about the pronunciation of autophagy before with someone. Conclusion: one does not say au tó mo bile. Same prefix, same number of syllables. Conclusion: I’m right, they’re wrong!

    Reply
Rob H says December 12, 2015

Hi Dennis,

Great podcast! Also links in with the podcast you did with Jay Campbell a while back. Listening to this made me think of something that I don’t think has been explored before: not only is timing extremely important, but I get the feeling it is the sudden CONTRAST, or shock, between opposing ‘states’ (to quote Tony Robbins!) that may be an extremely important consideration. A few examples being: short duration, super-slow high intensity 1 set strength training; Whey protein/ BCAAs immediately after a fasted workout; HIIT/ sprints; extremely cold showers. Maybe even vit D/ nitrous oxide levels received when going out in midday sun in the summer. Probably the same for fasting too.

Now this makes me think, if this is holds true, then to dial-up the contrast one may also consider ramping up the bad stuff, just prior to bringing on the good stuff rapidly. For example, looking at an ‘alternate day fasting’ (ADF) approach – it has been shown that the subjects could literally eat more or less anything they wanted on the ‘off’ days and still get the health benefits. And along the same lines, Tim Ferriss’s ‘slow carb diet’ actively encourages 1 day a week when you eat what the hell you want – for both mental AND physiological reasons.

It is becoming apparent to me that the good stuff comes from the intensity of the contrast: eg anabolism vs catabolism, hormesis whereby a powerfully negative short, sharp shock leads to positive adaptations. And in a dietary context, just maybe it is important to ramp up the impact of ‘negative eating’ (in terms of a short, sharp shock) just before flipping into either fasting or a ‘low carb/ high fat’ type approach – in order to maximise the contrast and ‘shocking’ the body to adapt rapidly. I don’t believe that this aspect (ie ramping up the negatives prior to introducing the positives) has really been considered yet: maybe scope for a future Rogue Health post??

Reply
    P. D. Mangan says December 12, 2015

    Thanks, Rob, glad you liked the podcast. Some of this info I have is so ingrained in me, second nature, that when I do a podcast 9 or write a post) I have to stop and ask myself where to begin, what is it that listeners/readers don’t know and need to know.

    The idea of contrast you mention is interesting. HIT is certainly an example. I recall Tim Ferriss’s slow carb diet with the cheat days – the only problem I have with that is I’m not sure if it works. Ferriss advocated this to keep insulin sensitivity and metabolism normal, and while I’ve never tried it myself, I don’t know of anything in the scientific literature about this.

    But certainly the contrast seems important – the case of cold showers, BCAAs, and so on. Interesting idea. Alternation: feasting/fasting, anabolism/catabolism, sleep/awake, ketosis/carb-burning, exercise/rest, heat/cold.

    Reply
Add Your Reply