Extended fasting

[LittleGreyCat]

Just being inquisitive...

Don't you have to be careful that the body doesn't 'eat' muscle? I have read of someone on here who has achieved massive weight loss, but now has reduced muscle mass because of starving himself too much. Reduced muscle mass lowers the metabolism?

When I used to do silly diets, I cut down protein because I don't really enjoy protein much, I know now that was a huge mistake.

Or is 7 days without food OK? How long would you leave it before doing the next 7 day spell? I am not sure I could do it, I would be very weak, although I do enjoy One Meal A Day - OMAD.

Your body does need certain nutrients to maintain muscle and if it doesn't get them it has to recycle muscle from the body, so you will lose muscle mass on an extended water fast.

I assume that this is why bone broth is included, and why @bulkbiker includes butter and cream for a certain amount of protein.

If you lose a lot of weight then your body is also likely to shed some muscle which was used to carry around the extra fat and is no longer necessary.

 

[zand]

Thanks @bulkbiker and @LittleGreyCat you have helped me to understand it better. So as far as I am concerned a short fast may be on the cards in the future, but I will have to work my way up slowly. At present I am happy just doing OMAD and keto and while those work I won't be rushing into changing anything, but never say never...
Thank you both

 

[zand]

I think I would do another 5 day fat fast in preference to a full fast. That way I would be sure to keep my metabolism boosted as I would actually be consuming more calories not less. I got into ketosis after around 24- 36 hours of my first fat fast and the weight fell off me.

 

[eddie07]

As I see it the body has an innate intelligence that has evolved over a very long period of time.
I believe that the body will use up all the non essential resources such as the fats and recycle excess proteins. This may result in some degree of muscle loss. This is essentially autophogy in a nutshell.
The body is intelligent enough to know that muscle is essential in it's ability to survive by going out to hunt for food. So in my view muscle loss is not an issue.
And once I start eating the body will build new and stronger cells.
Refeeding syndrome is a cause for concern as the experts don't give specific advice on how to safely break the fast.
My plan is to break my fast if I feel unwell in any way by drinking some broth followed by some green vegetables such as spinach or lettuce.
And then introduce proteins such as eggs or some nuts.
I read somewhere that it may take between 3 and 5 days to get back to normal eating.
An interesting experiment and experience.

 

[smw99]

Nice one.. Decent drop in FBG.. everything going in the right direction. keep it up!

I did a 24 hour fast yesterday for the first time inspired by everything I have read here and on dietdoctor.com . FBG this morning was a beautiful 4.2!

 

[bulkbiker]

I did a 24 hour fast yesterday for the first time inspired by everything I have read here and on dietdoctor.com . FBG this morning was a beautiful 4.2!

Ooo nice one.. what is it usually?

 

[bulkbiker]

Refeeding syndrome is a cause for concern as the experts don't give specific advice on how to safely break the fast.

So far as I am aware 7 days shouldn't really cause any problems apart from mild indigestion.. I once finished a 7 day fast with a full on keto sunday lunch.. I soon found out why it is usually advised to start off with something small first. I was stuffed for a good 24 hours with a few digestive issues..

 

[eddie07]

Thanks for putting my mind at rest.

 

[eddie07]

Update day 3
FBG at 7.00am 4.7
Weight 63.0kg BMI 21.8 Fat 27.2%
Yesterday Monday 29th
Walked 8.8 miles and burnt 2461 calories
Consumed 235 calories. Fat 21.3g, carbs 3.4g and proteins 4.4g comprising of:
Coffee 4 mugs, butter 26g, bone broth 305g sea salt 3g and apple cider vinegar 20g.
Not too hungry and energy levels fair.

 

[kokhongw]

Fasting for up to 40 days has been done safely 50 years ago...for weightloss

This was a 14 days supervised fast...
https://pmj.bmj.com/content/postgradmedj/44/507/58.full.pdf

And coincidentally they noticed...

We seems to have progressed little in our understanding and appreciation of the benefits of fasting since then...

 

[zand]

Of course glucose levels fell when people were starved. Of course they lost weight. That's not rocket science is it? I am surprised anyone even bothered to study that.

What concerns me isn't the period of fasting itself. It's what happens afterwards. My own experience with very low cal diets has been disastrous. My metabolism was slow for many years afterwards, not to mention being deficient in some vitamins and minerals. I don't think the possibility of long term problems is worth the short term boost (in weight loss and lower BGs) that this gives.

The heading is 'Total fasting in the treatment of obesity'. Short fasts and low cal diets and diet drinks have all helped me on the way to becoming morbidly obese, which was where I was when I joined this forum about 5 years ago. I fail to see how starving the body and sending it into starvation mode for as long as 40 days is going to do any long term good. The body just learns to survive on less and puts on weight more easily afterwards. I can tell you the all too easy weight gain after a period of severe calorie restriction is soul destroying after all that hard work.

 

[eddie07]

Quite agree that fasting for 40 days and nights could potentially be damaging to health bearing in mind our current diet.
Moreover the dieticians and medical practitioners advise consuming around 50 to 60% of carbohydrates.
Following a modern dietary guidelines and then going on a long fast will damage health.
I have been doing intermittent fasting for a number of years following Dr Michael Mosley 's guidance. Whilst I got my HBA1C down to normal my FBG levels were still too high.
Then last year I stumbled on the keto diet on this site and everything made complete sense.
I now have the tools and knowledge to control my blood sugar levels and I can let myself indulge in some high carb food occasionally as a treat.
Fasting for me is an experiment that will reduce my HBA1c levels further.

 

[ringi]

Refeeding syndrome is a cause for concern as the experts don't give specific advice on how to safely break the fast.

From the little I understand, "Refeeding syndrome" is due to glycogen stores in muscle all being refilled fast at the same time and resulting in a blood electrolyte (I think potassium) imbalance. So avoid carbs after a fast. Bone broth may also reduce the risk and a little-added table salt would do no harm.

I think nearly all reported cases of "Refeeding syndrome" have been in people who were at a low BMI.

 

[eddie07]

Yes thanks I'll follow your advice

 

[Pipp]

From the little I understand, "Refeeding syndrome" is due to glycogen stores in muscle all being refilled fast at the same time and resulting in a blood electrolyte (I think potassium) imbalance. So avoid carbs after a fast. Bone broth may also reduce the risk and a little-added table salt would do no harm.

I think nearly all reported cases of "Refeeding syndrome" have been in people who were at a low BMI.

Yes, carbs would be the last thing to reintroduce.
Start slowly with light protein such as fish or chicken, with green veg. One meal first day, gradually increasing over several days.

 

[Mbaker]

This diabetes journey is ever evolving for me. I started on low GI high exercise with good results, but hard-ish work, then LCHF with about three quarters of the previous exercise and Intermittent Fasting - better results . Now Keto / Keto with extra protein, heavier weights mainly, Intermittent Fasting and some extended fasting - improved post prandial - no issues with fasting blood sugars / gluconeogenesis for me.

I flirted with liking the Newcastle Diet, until I realised that the metabolic rate drops and you have to exist on a third less food (with exercise) indefinitely.

If I had my time over again I would have gone straight to multi-day extended fasting. I believe the initial pain going from a carb burner to Ketosis after a few days would have been worth it for me, as I am a bit type a'ish with my personality. I can't say for sure but I believe I would have achieved in 6 to 8 weeks (or less) what took 9 months (with better insulin response, blood sugars and blood pressure). With hindsight I would have done 5 day fasting, a day and a half of mild refeeding of bone broth first refeed, plain scrambled eggs second and last feed for that day, next morning smoked salmon. Then back on another 5 day fast and repeat 2 more times, followed by assessment. Or I would have checked myself into the place in either Germany or Russia who have been reversing Type 2 (and other conditions) for decades doing professionally monitored extended fasting, a reference film is The Science of Fasting on Amazon

(P.S. just found on YouTube)

 

[bulkbiker]

My own experience with very low cal diets has been disastrous. My metabolism was slow for many years afterwards, not to mention being deficient in some vitamins and minerals.

But we must remember that caloric restriction and fasting are not the same thing. Very low cal diets are indeed dangerous and that is my main beef with the ND. Fasting, certainly for up to a week, is different and has a different metabolic impact. On the third day the metabolism has been observed to speed up a bit as an incentive to go out and find food so the metabolic slow down from not eating enough doesn't happen in the same way. I too wouldn't recommend unsupervised 40 day fasts but shorter ones should be fine for most.

 

[johnme]

Isn't the social pressure unbearable for longer fasts? The longest I've managed is 23 hours by which time the 'you must have something' brigade have worn me down. I have managed to recently convince my wife that no breakfast won't kill me, but further would need nerves of steel.

 

[bulkbiker]

Isn't the social pressure unbearable for longer fasts? The longest I've managed is 23 hours by which time the 'you must have something' brigade have worn me down. I have managed to recently convince my wife that no breakfast won't kill me, but further would need nerves of steel.

I had dinner this evening with some friends who were apparently stunned that I hadn't eaten for 23 hours..to them it seemed almost beyond belief. Others have told me that its impossible that I haven't eaten for 7 days even when they have seen me reduce in size from 23 to 15 stone of the course of year. But I tend to fast when I have no social engagements and hubby "gets it" so have no problems when at home.

Edit to add the husband of the couple we had dinner with has however adopted a reduced carb way of eating (given up pasta, bread, potatoes and rice but still has beer) and has dropped 2 stone without trying.. he's the lightest since his teens partly down to my example. The wife too has also lost about a stone.

 

[zand]

But we must remember that caloric restriction and fasting are not the same thing. Very low cal diets are indeed dangerous and that is my main beef with the ND. Fasting, certainly for up to a week, is different and has a different metabolic impact. On the third day the metabolism has been observed to speed up a bit as an incentive to go out and find food so the metabolic slow down from not eating enough doesn't happen in the same way. I too wouldn't recommend unsupervised 40 day fasts but shorter ones should be fine for most.

When I did a 6 day water fast (due to having flu) my weight stayed the same, it was then that I stopped reducing calories and started to increase them instead.