Been Absent for a while

[divedragon]

Hey all,

I haven't been around much lately primarily due to huge work requirements and long hours.  Getting to a point where I hope to participate a little more.

For those who don't know me, I've been using fitbit about a year and half.  I began at 240 and I've been hanging around the 190-195 range since December.  My goal is 180.  I'm also a huge propoenent of Intermittent fasting for both weight loss and general health.

My disipline for both exercise and fasting waned quite a bit with the heavy work load and so I found my weight had crept up a bit to 197.  I also learned another gotcha on fasting in relationship to alcohol consumption.  I had moved to the point of adopting a Low Carb High Fat diet in support of IF, but was not loosing any weight.  While I had moved back to a 20:4 fasting regiment, I was also consuming more alcohol in the form of various whiskey as when consumed on the rocks has no carbs.  What I didn't take into account was the alcohol literally causes the body to hault all other digestive activities until it metabolizes the alcohol.

What this meant for me was if I had 5-6 oz of whiskey in the evening along with a 1200 calorie meal, the meal didn't start digesting for as much as 12 hours later - a time when I should have already depleated my glycogen stores and moved towards ketosis.  It can take 1-2 hours per oz to metabolize the alcohol.  It typically takes 8-12 hours to fully digest a meal.  So even if I take the lower numbers: 5 hours metabolize alcohol plus 8 hours for food, that's 13 hours minimum, leaving only 7 hours of fasting - AT MOST and probably less.

So I did a reboot starting with a 7 day water fast which I completed this past Sunday night and Sunday morning I was at 190.3 (during my fast, I did 20-30 minutes of resistence exercise each day).  I ate a LCHF meal Sunday evening.  Monday I tested my blood and was solidly in ketosis (I had entered ketosis initially the previous Monday afternoon).  I did not eat Monday, but I did eat dinner Tuesday night (48 hour fast) and it was very good.  Cheese stuffed mushrooms, salad w/blue cheese, ribeye steak and a lobster tail.  I tested my blood twice today:  6:30 am ketone=2.8 and 1pm ketone =2.9 - optimal fat burning and both time blood sugar was 85.  With the diet and fasting, I'm staying in a state of ketosis, so I should continue my weight loss through the week.

I was empty on Sunday when I weighed, meaning there were little to no contents in my digestive system.  Eating again will add in the weight of the "waste" left from the food, so I don't expect to see the scale drop, but am hoping it will remain the same.  If it does, that means I lost fat equal to the amount of food waste remaining as part of the digestive process.

My new IF plan is to fast M-W-F, eat dinner only on T-TH and eat normally on the weekend.  If I do it correctly, I should never come out of ketosis and continue my weight loss.  This will give me 2- 48 hour fast periods and 1-36 hour fast period during the week.

For those new, why so much fasting?  There are many posts here by me and others that discuss this in detail, but bottom line is "Eat Less, move more" is a method destined for failure.  It doesn't work.  As long as your body depends on glucose for all its energy, it will use that and reduce the metabolic rate to conform to the amount of glucose you consume - metabolic syndrom.  The reason it doesn't happen when you fast is your body changes energy source to ketones.  With plenty of ketones available, it has no need to cut your metabolic rate and in fact increases it.  In addition to the weight lose, other benefits include: increased insulin sentitivity, increased growth hormone, increased stem cell production, protection against age related cognitive diseases, improved immune system function and even the possibility of cancer prevention/cure (cancer cells can only live on glucose). 

If you are interested in learning more about fasting, send me a personal message.  I'd be happy to provide copies of my research into this subject.  I post my progress and self-experimentation to both test my own beliefs and in hopes it may help someone else.  Anyway, good to be back and I look forward to catching up with what's been going on.

[Bobbinyc]

@divedragon  Wow! That's a lot of research and discipline.  I am glad it seems to be working for you.  I know someone doing the ketosis plan but was advised to do so under medical supervision.  She lost quite a bit until she had to stop - kidney issue.  But now does a modified version.  I don't have nearly that level of mental energy or discipline for it.  So far, cutting out the "junk" and eating healthy has helped.  Will see where that goes.

[Dominique]

---

@divedragon wrote:

"Eat Less, move more" is a method destined for failure.  It doesn't work.

---

What doesn’t work (for weight loss) is eating more than you expend. What works is the opposite.

There is nothing magical about intermittent fasting, or about ketosis: if intermittent fasting manages to put you in a caloric deficit (which appears to be the case for you), you will lose weight. If a ketogenic diet manages to put you in a caloric deficit, you will lose weight. But you can also lose weight by doing the exact opposite of intermittent fasting (eating many smaller meals every three hours or so), or the opposite of a ketogenic diet (high carb, low fat), as long as you eat less than you expend. Calories (energy balance) are the first and foremost factor that affects weight loss.

"Eat Less, move more" can work for weight loss, again if it puts you in a caloric deficit. There are many ways to implement a deficit, we just have to find those that work best for us. Intermittent fasting and ketosis appear to suit your preferences and lifestyle well, but other people can achieve the same results doing very different things. 

[divedragon]

Dominique, I have read many of your post and I have great respect for the assistance you've offered others.  I do; however, have to disagree with your position on IF.  I know you are not opposed to the IF methodolgy, but you regard it as a method to restrict calories.  There actually is something magical about that trancends normal calorie restriction.  A calorie is not just a calorie and the abstanance of calories causes changes in our bodies that simple calorie restriction doesn't provide.  That difference is in the source of the energy our bodies use.

If we eat constantly (I'm not saying in abundance, just constantly) our primary source of fuel is glucose.  When we fast, that changes to ketones.  When we derive our energy from glucose and then we restrict the amount of glucose we allow, our bodies adjust to the lower form.  This is metabolic syndrom often called "starvation mode". 

If; however, we allow our bodies to convert to ketones for energy, then is adjust to amount of ketones it can create.  What I'm trying to convey is, once your body realizes it has as much energy as it requires by breaking down the fat, it doesn't need to restrict it's metabolism to compesate for fewer calories in.  In fact, studies show metobolic rate INCREASES during fasting.  And there is more magic to it than just weight loss.

When fasting, our cells enter a stressed condition, but his is not bad.  It's a survial mechanism.  Once it realizes we don't have to digest food, it switches to other survial mechanisms, to wit: cleaning up the body.  We enter a state known as autophagy which is where the dead and dying cells are consumed and eliminated from the body.  Stem cell production increases along with growth hormones.  These work together to start building in new cells to replace the ones that been eliminated.  Many white blood cells are eliminated and new ones made, ultimately increasing our immune system.  Even new nurons are created which is why cutting edge researchers in nuroscience are starting to talk about fasting as a way to ward off or even reverse alzheimer and parkenson's diseases. 

There is one other benefit to the fasted state that is only now getting a lot of attention.  Cancer cells can ONLY survive on glucose.  They are unable to use ketones for energy.  Strong evidence is emerging that fasting can increase the effectiveness of cancer treatments and there is speculation that it may prevent and even cure milder or early forms.

Another study showed that even without calorie restriction as part of IF, overall weight it maintained, but the ratio of lean muscle mass increases - absent of exercise. 

I know from my experience, my body more quickly switches from glucose to ketone use.  I use a blood test meter to measure both sugar and ketone levels.  For example, when I began my most recent 7 day fast, I was not in ketosis on Sunday near midnight to Monday when I last ate (travel!).  By 2 pm on Monday, I was in ketosis.  BTW, the last food I ate was two cookies (can you say glucose!).

IF has become a lifestyle change for me, not just as a weight loss tool, but as an overall health tool.  It is, when viewed in light of convential wisdom, magical, but only so in that it takes advantage of how our bodies were designed to function, not how we have adapted our lifestyle to function.  It has certainly worked magic for me!

[divedragon]

---

@Bobbinyc wrote:

@divedragon  Wow! That's a lot of research and discipline.  I am glad it seems to be working for you.  I know someone doing the ketosis plan but was advised to do so under medical supervision.  She lost quite a bit until she had to stop - kidney issue.  But now does a modified version.  I don't have nearly that level of mental energy or discipline for it.  So far, cutting out the "junk" and eating healthy has helped.  Will see where that goes.

---

It's a one step at a time sort of thing, Bobbinyc.  Up until Octover 2015, I always did the traditional, low calorie diet and exercise program.  When I did the fasting, it was the 16:8 protocol where I just skipped breakfast and ate a late lunch.  That evolved to a 20:4 schedule.  It wasn't until March of this year I attempted an 8 day continuous fast.  I won't lie and say it wasn't without it's challenges, but the feeling of empowerment afterwards was wonderful.  But then I fell off the wagon due to work/life challenges and gained a bit back.   I just did a 7 day fast followed by a week of MWF fasting and am back down to a solid 190.  I'm by no means perfect and the times when my disipline waned, I stopped or gained (stress eating).

What drives me is not the weight loss, but the metabolic gain achieved by the process.  Stress is part of it, but it will change your relationship with food.  I did, as I mentioned, a 7 day fast.  I broke it on a Sunday night, but chose to fast Monday and most of the day Tuesday, only eating dinner - but boy was it a dinner!  Longhorn steakhouse where I had Cheese Stuffed mushrooms, salad with blue cheese dressing, 11 oz ribeye and a lobster tail with steamed brocoli.  Couldn't eat it all and finished as my Thrusday evening meal (along with some cottage cheese and chicken salad).  Longhorn is mediocre food, but when you're hungry it becomes great food!!!  Great thing is, I stayed in ketosis all week.

Obviously, when you've fasted for 7 days, your body is empty of all 'waste' and other things eating leave behind, so when you start eating again, you would see a 'weight gain'.  That isn't necessarily a gain of excess fat.  Since I continued to do IF vs full fasting, the food I ate 'refilled' those stores of partially digested mass.  The cool thing is, at the end of this week, I weighed the same after refilling the void, so I had continued to loose what I estimate was about 2-4 lbs.

I wish you tremendous luck on whatever diet and exercise plan you decide on.  If I can be of any assistance whatsoever, please don't heasitate to contact me. 

[fitmissjen]

Wow, that is some interesting reading.

I don't have the mental discipline to stick to something like that, but it sounds like it really works for you. Which is awesome!

I see you said you completed a 7 day water fast. Now, you may laugh at this question, but i'm not very familiar with fasting, but does this mean you went 7 days with ONLY consuming water...? Or are you just on very limited calories?

I have many more questions i would like to ask, but that one really stood out haha

[Dominique]

---

@divedragon wrote:

There actually is something magical about that trancends normal calorie restriction.  A calorie is not just a calorie and the abstanance of calories causes changes in our bodies that simple calorie restriction doesn't provide.  That difference is in the source of the energy our bodies use.

---

Ketosis is a state achieved after reducing carbohydrates to a very low level (20-50 grams) for 2-3 days. Eliminating all macronutrients for seven days (total fast) will obviously meet the requirements and put you into ketosis. If your goal was to be in ketosis, you could have achieve this with a less extreme approach.

Now, even if you are in ketosis, a calorie is still a calorie. If you eat a given amount of food in a ketogenic diet, this will have the same effect on weight loss as eating the same amount of food, but with a different macronutrient split (e.g. high carb, low fat). Splitting macronutrients is mostly a matter of personal preferences (some people prefer LCHF, other HCLF etc.), just like meal timing (intermittent fasting vs. many smaller meals spread during the day) is also a matter of personal preferences: eating 1500 calories of a low carb high fat diet during the "eating window" of some IF protocol will have the exact same effect on weight loss as eating 1500 calories of a high carb low fat diet in five evenly spaced meals of 300 calories each (common protocol for bodybuilders).

Changing the main source of energy (e.g. from carbs to fat) doesn’t do away with the laws of thermodynamics. You will still need to eat less than you expend in order to lose weight. There are several community members who follow a ketogenic diet and count calories (@RubyH comes to mind): I’m sure they can testify their weight loss is driven by their caloric deficit.

[RubyH]

@Dominique, i beg to differ, I chose to have a deficit, but, I frequently find myself full before I get to my limit, on any given day I could be over my limit or under it, but it balances out, the differences is healthy fats, they fill you up much faster than carbs ever will and for a lot less food and it is a very efficient fuel system. LCHF works for me primarily because I am either insulin resistant or carb resistant and one or the other creates a state of inflammation in my body leading my own body to turn on itself and attack it. With LCHF I don't have the inflammation or the attacks, but I choose to work to a deficit as in all my years of dieting I've always had one but I could achieve the same just counting my carbs, my dietician however requires me to write detailed lists of all my macros including sodium, fats, protein, carbs, fibre and calories and that is why I keep a spreadsheet, easy to print off a weeks copy. Following LCHF as I do because HCLF never worked for me, I just got sicker and bigger, I am beginning to believe them that if your are eating enough healthy fats with your meals and a moderate amount of protein you can almost forget a deficit, however for those with eating disorders I would advise a deficit along with a keto calculated macro split.

[divedragon]

@Dominique

I know the common belief is a calorie is a calorie, but it actually isn't.  In terms of physics, it is a definate measure of the energy released when burned, so in that sense a calorie is a calorie, but in physiology, more variables exist that change how a give calorie sources is burned.  A fat calorie does not invoke much of an insuline response when consumed and it's not convered to glucose by the digestive process as are carbohydrates and, for that matter, protein.  The fat needs to go through glycogenisis in the liver where it is broken down much the same way as internal fat stores in the body and mostly produces the ketones for energy. 

Technically, ketosis is a state of fat oxidation brought on by the reduction in blood glucose levels below what is necessary to sustain current activity.  Reduction in carbohydrates is one pathway to get there.  You can enter or stay in ketosis even if your calorie consumption is at least equal to your expenditure, espeically if your carbs are low and your fats are high - 70-80%.  Dietary fat is broken down the same way stored fat is broken down and doesn't become blood glucose.

I have a lot of goals when I fast and it's not just about fat loss.  Fasting increases my growth hormones, stem cell production, lowers my blood pressure and heart rate, increases my metabolism, reduces inflammation and a host of other positive health related benefits. 

Following my 7 day fast, I broke it on Sunday night, but then returned to fasting Monday.  On Tuesday, I went to dinner and ate things like cheese stuffed mushrooms, a salad with blue cheese dressing, a blue cheese encrusted 11 oz rib eye, steamed brocolli and a butter drenched lobster tail.  I tested my blood the next morning at 5:30 am and my blood ketone level was 2.9 and blood glucose was 87 - solidly in ketosis.  I fasted again Wed and ate Thursday night again...braised beef shank over cauliflower mashed faux potatoes, salmon among other things.  Friday morning, I was at 1.9 ketones and 94 on blood glucose - still in ketosis.  At the end of my 7 day fast, I weighed myself at 190.  Obviouly after a fast, your digestive track is virtually empty so when you start to re-feed, weight is going to be added by the food you now have taken in.  My goal was to stay in ketosis and continue to lose fat so that by the end of the week after re-charging my digestive tract I would still weigh about the same - this was accomplished as I actually weighed 0.3 lbs less.

I ate 3 meals both Saturday and Sunday and lowest my ketone level got was 1.2 and glucose peaked at 102.  As I write this, I just tested my blood ketone level and got a 1.7 (ketosis begins at 0.6 and optimal zone is 1.5-3.0)

The science actually doesn't support your argument that IF and calorie restriction have the same effect on weight loss.  Not long term anyway.  The key here is that as long as you have a steady supply of glucose, your body will adjust it's metabolism to match what you're consuming in the form of glucose/carbs.  If you restrict the amount, rather than turn to ketones as a supplement, it instead slows down the metabolism.  In fasting, once the body converts to burning the fat, the supply is only limted by the amount of your stores and metabolism actually increases.

BTW, the biggest segment of the population adopting IF are bodybuilders.  They found they can actually add muscle while loosing fat.  IF or nutrient timing is all about the hormonal response just as is obesity and T2D.

---

@Dominique wrote:

---

@divedragon wrote:

There actually is something magical about that trancends normal calorie restriction.  A calorie is not just a calorie and the abstanance of calories causes changes in our bodies that simple calorie restriction doesn't provide.  That difference is in the source of the energy our bodies use.

---

Ketosis is a state achieved after reducing carbohydrates to a very low level (20-50 grams) for 2-3 days. Eliminating all macronutrients for seven days (total fast) will obviously meet the requirements and put you into ketosis. If your goal was to be in ketosis, you could have achieve this with a less extreme approach.

Now, even if you are in ketosis, a calorie is still a calorie. If you eat a given amount of food in a ketogenic diet, this will have the same effect on weight loss as eating the same amount of food, but with a different macronutrient split (e.g. high carb, low fat). Splitting macronutrients is mostly a matter of personal preferences (some people prefer LCHF, other HCLF etc.), just like meal timing (intermittent fasting vs. many smaller meals spread during the day) is also a matter of personal preferences: eating 1500 calories of a low carb high fat diet during the "eating window" of some IF protocol will have the exact same effect on weight loss as eating 1500 calories of a high carb low fat diet in five evenly spaced meals of 300 calories each (common protocol for bodybuilders).

Changing the main source of energy (e.g. from carbs to fat) doesn’t do away with the laws of thermodynamics. You will still need to eat less than you expend in order to lose weight. There are several community members who follow a ketogenic diet and count calories (@RubyH comes to mind): I’m sure they can testify their weight loss is driven by their caloric deficit.

---

[divedragon]

---

@fitmissjen wrote:

I see you said you completed a 7 day water fast. Now, you may laugh at this question, but i'm not very familiar with fasting, but does this mean you went 7 days with ONLY consuming water...? Or are you just on very limited calories?

I have many more questions i would like to ask, but that one really stood out haha

---

@fitmissjen

I went 7 days consuming only water, black coffee or unsweetened ice tea.  Zero calories between midnight sunday night to (very close) to midnight the following Sunday. 

Since breaking the 7 day fast, I continue with Intermittent fast as follows:  During the week I fast 42 hours from end of dinner Sunday night until start of dinner Tuesday night, then again until Thrusday night.  And finally, from end of dinner Thursday night to breakfast Saturday morning when I eat 3 full meals on each Saturday and Sunday.

I'm trying to do at least 1 - 7 day fast each quarter of the year for health reason as a lifestyle choice.