@zack-vegas
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
1. Milk should be fine to break the “fast,” but back in my IF days, I was never concerned with what food was best to break the fast, because it was so short. It was basically a later breakfast for me, which is a compound word of break and fast, so even the overnight fast while sleeping has been recognized traditionally. Also, the “sugar fast” isn’t a real fast, as you are consuming calorie containing foods in significant quantities. People would often use fruit to break a longer fast (that lasted days), but you can eat fruit during a “sugar fast.”
2. Additional salt is fine.
3. I don’t see any problem with using coffee and sugar. I use it, and Indigo Nili did as well. I think possible stress reactions caffeine gives you is from not having enough carbs or glycogen with any consumed coffee or caffeine.
Exercise could be done whenever. The biggest issue with any sort of exercise is usually if there is enough carbohydrate/sugar to fuel the workout. That shouldn’t be an issue during a sugar fast, or during regular eating periods. People use sugary drinks as workout beverages all the time, Gatorade built a whole company/brand on consuming sugar and salt during and after exercise. The Wall Street Journal even had an article back in 2014 talking about high level professional athletes who used soda during their training and games-
JRK- Just thinking about “The Biggest Loser” contestants…. I wonder if they might have had better outcomes if they had some sort of “Post Weight Loss Therapy,” like how bodybuilders do PCT. They probably needed some metabolic therapy previous to the show, as well. If they had gotten some things to correct metabolism (like maybe supplemental thyroid, testosterone, and something to limit stress hormones like cortisol, and such), they might not have had serious regain, and may have continued to get into better shape after the show. I think it does show that extreme weight loss methods can make broken metabolisms worse, if especially since nothing was probably done to address either before or after.
That’s one thing that was cool to hear from Cole Robinson of The Snake Diet mention…. he said the reason he finds this diet so effective is that people aren’t battling hunger, they have energy, and their body temperature goes up. He even mentioned you’re going back to your “child like self.” It’s from minutes 17-22 in the interview he did with Mark Bell (be warned, Cole does curse quite a bit in the interview). It’s cool that people are experimenting with a lot of Ray Peat’s ideas, even if they didn’t hear the idea from Peat.
The diet that Indigo Nili did was pretty close to “The Emergence Diet” that Brad Marshall was talking about, only she used lots of sugar in place of Brad’s idea to mainly use starch. I like that this is spurring on some “Peaty” type of approaches that we can potentially use ourselves, or inspire us to some use the framework with some tweaks.
One thing I’ve heard Jay suggest is that a weight loss diet should be more sustainable. But there is an inherent problem with this, as weight loss, at ANY rate, is simply not sustainable in the long term. At some point, you will either plateau at some weight, or die.
But this isn’t really a “problem.” Wearing a cast, for example, isn’t “sustainable,” and if you do so for years, the affected limb would atrophy, and maybe fall off or need to be amputated. But this doesn’t mean that casts aren’t useful. When people use a cast, they use it for a short period, like 6-12 weeks, and discard it after healing. It’s not needed for the rest of life, or even an extended period of time like years, But that doesn’t mean it isn’t useful.
Why can’t a portion of weight loss be fast and unsustainable, while only being used for a short duration? Hours, days, or weeks?
Truthfully, we do unbalanced or unsustainable things every day. If you are driving west on I-10, for example, that is “unsustainable,” as eventually, you would drive straight into the Pacific Ocean. But guess what? No cars actually do that, and the number of cars that have driven west on I-10 and ended up in the Pacific Ocean eventually is very low, like less than 0.001%, and was likely completely unrelated to the freeway driving.
How come there isn’t the same idea in weight loss? Really, there are two main, overarching goals for anyone who wants to lose weight and be weight stable at a lower weight-
1. Shed the excess pounds (specifically fat and certain water weight)
2. Fix a broken metabolism so that the new weight is easily maintained.
Most weight loss solutions focus on goal 1 and get some short term success, but ignore goal 2 (or are very ineffective at achieving it), so they fail long term. But there is no reason that you can’t use a tool that’s very effective at the first goal, and then eventually switch to something else later. Like using a cast to heal before embarking on a physical training program.
I think this idea of the Sugar Diet/Sugar Fasting can be similar to using a cast. It may help people lose a fair amount of weight quickly. It might help to lower FFAs in the blood, get cells back to using more glucose for fuel, and get glycogen stores full. It might help to get body temperature up in some people.
Right now, I am only experimenting with the short term sugar fast idea a couple times a week (like maybe a 16-19 hour sugar window, similar to the old IF structure). I am NOT planning on doing it for years or decades, especially with low protein. I don’t even think the low protein idea is necessary, based on the William Brown experiment. I don’t even think most days have to be super low fat, either, especially if you are using a lot of coconut oil.
But I do like this as a tool that can be experimented with. I might even try longer “sugar windows” as certain points, just to see what happens, and if they are useful.
Well, how much Spirulina are you going to take per dose? If you were planning on something like 50g a day, that would be close to the RDA (which is 18mg) for iron there alone. Most supplements seem to suggest something in the neighborhood of 1-3 grams a day. That would be 0.28-0.84 mg of iron from that supplement, which is much more manageable.
However, if you are concerned about iron, it’s probably best to get an iron panel with ferritin. My guess is that yours would be high (or “high normal”) since you have a history with cancer, and high body iron is associated with that, and likely causal. Getting Ferritin to that near deficiency area (roughly 30-60ng/dl) is helpful at preventing cancer and most other degenerative diseases. Blood donation/phlebotomy remains the most effective and reliable way to lower ferritin.
One thing I learned recently is that, while blood cancers are permanent deferrals for blood donation, most others aren’t. They will defer you during active treatment, and for one year after the end of treatment, but if the cancer is in remission, they might allow you to donate. You can always call the Red Cross or another blood donation center to see if you would be eligible, if that is something you are interested in.
JRK- Absolute legitimate concerns, which I did hint at in my original post. However, I do think this idea opens the door to some more experimentation, and could be experimented with in ways that even Peat himself would think reasonable. Trying out a “sugar fasting” day isn’t too extreme, as this is in line with the idea of “carbo loading” that body builders do, and somewhat similar to an idea Peat even mentioned, in using some sugar/sugary foods instead of straight fasting over a period of 24 hours or less.
The testimonial video of Indigo Nili I posted also seems pretty reasonable, as she tried the concept out for about 2 weeks, was averaging over 2000 calories a day, and noted some very cool improvements (like more energy, better skin, and weight loss).
Back on the old RPF, there are people who experimented with very low fat and high sugar diets for extended periods of time. TheBigPeatoski, for example, mentioned using two six week stints of very low fat, reasonable protein, and high sugar to lose a bunch of weight, and improve metabolism.
Also, there were sugar extremists out there even when Keto and Carnivore were all the rage. Durian Rider, for example, but you could probably name other “fruitarian” influencers. Compared to that, the Sugar Diet (as promoted by Mark Bell and Cole Robinson) is more reasonable, as they are regularly including meat based protein.
Having said all that, I am going to do some experimenting with “Intermittent Sugar Fasting,” using similar windows that I did back when I did IF. I’ll make sure any evening meal has something like 15-20 grams of fat, maybe from Coconut Oil (I am also experimenting with a very high CO intake, while trying to minimize all other fats). If it goes well with occasional uses, I might do a two week experiment similar to what Indigo tried.
Here’s a woman who experimented with this idea in a reasonable way for 2 weeks, and had some impressive results. She says she heard about it from Mark Bell (who has been one of the big promoters of it), but also mentions the video that Mike Fave put out-
Here’s a short piece by “Catholic Vote” that explores some of the facts that back up Secretary Kennedy’s statement, with sources including congressional testimonial and a piece from The New York Times-
Analysis: Why RFK said ‘HHS became a collaborator’ in child sex trafficking
<span class=”atwho-inserted” contenteditable=”false” data-atwho-at-query=”@J”>@J.R.L</span>- Nice. This is one good way to go about it, the incremental approach. Really, there shouldn’t be any true objections to it. If vaccines are truly “safe,” then they should breeze by placebo controlled trials, right? This incremental approach is probably wise in this area.
In a recent cabinet meeting, Secretary Kennedy made a pretty explosive allegation, that HHS was involved with trafficking 300,000 children during the Biden Administration, which he also says has now ended-
Interestingly, not much from the Mass Satanic Media to attempt to debunk this claim. They probably know that it is better off to just ignore it.
<span class=”atwho-inserted” contenteditable=”false” data-atwho-at-query=”@li”>@Lilac</span>, yep, that quote is pretty clear. While I clearly disagree with that at this point, there was a point, in my paleo days, where I pretty much agreed with that statement. Although, really, I hadn’t seen any studies to really back that statement up. I didn’t actually watch that Lustig presentation until after I had been following Peat’s ideas for a while, and realized the studies that Lustig used to “prove” his point were either very flimsy or completely out of context, and in no way backed up Lustig’s positions. So, Secretary Kennedy’s stance is not really surprising, although a bit disappointing.
Still, Secretary Kennedy seems open to actual research, and there is far more evidence to absolve sugar than to bash it. Sugar consumption was actually higher when RFK Jr. was a kid when diabetes was rare, so that right there should give pause. Humans have also been consuming sugar in large quantities for over a century, so it obviously isn’t an acute poison in even high daily amounts, and there is very weak evidence to suggest it’s a chronic poison. The things that have gone up drastically since RFK Jr. was a child was primarily high PUFA seed oils, and iron. Both are likely causal in diabetes. Anyway, with the team around RFK Jr, I’m sure he will modify his stance on sugar over time.
And also, I suggest again to Americans on this forum to write to Secretary Kennedy, and try and draw his attention to some of the issues and studies that show that sugar is either neutral or beneficial. Remember, the Secretary serves ALL Americans, and that would include you, so you have every right to write to any and all of your public servants. Again, just be respectful when doing so.
<span class=”atwho-inserted” contenteditable=”false” data-atwho-at-query=”@cari”>@Cari</span> Here’s a clip from Fox News titled “RFK Jr encourages Americans to get measles vaccine amid outbreak,” but listening past the headline, it doesn’t sound all that “positive” to me-
If you listen to the critical voices at MicroSoftNBC, they (correctly) point out that he only stated that people should consult with their doctors to understand their options around the MMR vaccine. And then, of course, proceeded to bash him for that-
Remember, Secretary Kennedy serves ALL of the American people, many of which are firm believers in vaccines of all sorts. This is clearly demonstrated by the numbers that show more than half of Americans opt for a yearly flu vaccine. While I would personally love to see Secretary Kennedy come out and expose the absolute fraud that is virology, while simultaneously banning all vaccines for so called “viral” diseases, and only even considering vaccines for conditions caused by provably real microorganisms like bacteria and fungi, the reality is that the overwhelming majority (probably in the area of 95%) believe in virology and that viruses are real, and not just the lab creations of virologists. So he would be widely ridiculed and dismissed, and such an action would probably force his resignation or firing. Or he might even pay the same price that John Magafuli did.
Secretary Kennedy has to walk a fine line, as the pharmaceutical companies exert a lot of power over the government, and the media. And most people aren’t ready for even parts of the truth. Having said all that, I think he has been doing a fantastic job, and I am not worried about recommendations that he kinda has to make, especially when they aren’t “full throated.”
Author
