In praise of the warrior diet [Re: How do CRONERS feel?]

[Guest guest]

Suzy: good for you for finding something that works for you!! And hopefully

you've helped others who might be able to use this.

But there's no " one size fits all " . Many of us could not go all day without

eating - and I am among them. The handful of times I've tried fasting all

day have resulted in illness (dizziness, nausea and misery).

So remember we're all individuals.

on 3/4/2004 10:39 AM, Suzy P at suzy_pod@... wrote:

> I've really becom! e convinced that this is the long term solution to a CR'ed

> way of life and the purpose of my post is to encourage people to give it a

> try.

[Guest guest]

Suzy P wrote:

> Hi Bernadette, I am a newbie and am always trying different approaches

> to CR. I just recently switched to the " warrior style " of eating ie.

> one large meal a day, at about 7:00 in the evening. I have not been

> following this long enough to give you a thorough assessment however

> what I've really noticed at this point is that for the first time

> (perhaps ever) I feel really free from food and now do not think much

> about it. What's more is that I feel great during the day--alert and

> extremely productive.

While this is certainly unusual (I think others, but a minority, do the

same), It seems to fit some of the mice studies we have talked about.

Speaking personally, I do not get very hungry if I do not eat until

late, but If I do eat then my hunger seems normal, i.e. it exists. I am

considering a similar idea for myself at a later point.

> I look forward to my dinner (but do not obsess over it), I always

> feel that I have earned it and I eat to my fullest content. I easily

> manage on about 1200 calories a day, whereas before, eating three

> small meals with this calorie limit, I was always hungry, or perhaps

> its more accurate to say that I was never fully satisfied (and always

> thinking about/planning my next meal).

My experience is similar, on those times I have fasted.

> I've really become convinced that this is the long term solution to

> a CR'ed way of life and the purpose of my post is to encourage people

> to give it a try. I first heard of this 'one meal a day' regimen

> quite some time ago but thought 'no way', far too restrictive for me,

> when in fact I now believe it to be much easier than a more consistent

> approach where one is always undereating.

it also would seem to me to lead to a more balanced diet, less meat,

more veggies maybe. although one could eat more meat at the one eating

time.

> Also, I wanted to mention that Ori Hofmekler's book (and much of the

> warrior diet info) is very targeted towards a male audience but I

> think that this approach has much to offer women. If you aren't

> already familiar with it I would encourage you to give it a quick read

> or search " warrior diet " on the net.

Thanks for an interesting post Suzy

positive Dennis

[Guest guest]

Interesting.

Does he address this question: That is, " grazing' is supposed to be

healthier than eating a large meal at one sitting? Some experts feel that

one large meal a day is a strain on the heart/digestive system and that it's

better to eat several small meals. Or is your 1200 cal not considered that

large of a meal?

on 3/4/2004 12:44 PM, Suzy P at suzy_pod@... wrote:

> Hi Francesca, you're right, this approach may not suit

> you and if you've tried it and are convinced of that,

> then of course you should continue to do what works

> for you. Before really giving it a try, however, I

> too thought that there is just no way that I could

> live like this--quite frankly I'm suprised at how much

> easier (than my old approach to CR) I'm finding it to

> be. I usually just have water, green tea (one cup) or

> a fresh juice (green vegetable only) during the

> undereating phase as I find that this minimizes my

> hunger but Ori Hofmekler (author of the Warrior Diet)

> allows one to eat raw veggies, small amounts of

> protein and even fruit during the undereating phase.

> Perhaps this approach might be better suited to you

> and some others?

> Suzy.

[Guest guest]

Said to be a strain because the body must work hard to digest such a large

volume of food at one time. Couldn't find any studies on this but I'm

almost sure I've heard of some. Al Pater????

on 3/4/2004 2:11 PM, Suzy P at suzy_pod@... wrote:

> I don't know if this would be a

> strain on the heart but I'm also not sure why it would

> be since you are eating the same # of calories per day

> that you would be while on any CR regime.

[Guest guest]

Just my take. I ALWAYS rebel when I hear phrases like "rests the digestive system" and "never has theopportunity to heal/clean itself", "strain on the heart", "making the system stronger and more efficient".

Show me some science backing it up. Think about it. The digestive system is designed to process stuff in batches of whatever size goes in unless it's just too much food for the amount of enzymes that can be secreted. At the levels we eat, the batch sizes are small if we eat 5 meals or one meal.

The heart is "stressed" if we run. Is that good or bad? Depends on the person's health. Probably bad if he has CAD. Exercise the body and it becomes LESS stressful to exercise - it adapts.

Regards.

----- Original Message -----

From: Suzy P

Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 1:11 PM

Subject: Re: In praise of the warrior diet [Re: [ ] How do CRONERS feel?]

Yes, he feels that 'grazing' never rests the digestivesystem and therefore the body never has theopportunity to heal/clean itself. This flies in theface of conventional wisdom--we would think that thewarrior approach would ruin your metabolism but heclaims that the undereating/overeating cycle doesexactly the opposite. 1200 calories is definitely alarge meal (referred to as overeating) and this dietdoes stress the system. I think that this is thewhole point--making the system stronger and moreefficient (kind of like how runners carb deprive andthen load before a race). He also recommendsexcercising/training during the undereating phase(just before eating). I don't know if this would be astrain on the heart but I'm also not sure why it wouldbe since you are eating the same # of calories per daythat you would be while on any CR regime. Suzy.

[Guest guest]

Hi Suzy:

Well, if you believe there is " ample " evidence of the benefits could

you please supply us with a few serious sources you find persuasive?

I am willing, even eager, to be persuaded.

But just like JW, I am afraid I am not persuaded by phrases

like " rests the digestive system " and " never has the opportunity to

heal/clean itself " , or " strain on the heart " , or " making the system

stronger and more efficient " .

In other words, do you know of any evidence in mammals that those

fasting are measurably healthier, and/or live longer, than those of

the same species who do not fast, while consuming the same total

calories?

If there is such evidence it will certainly be a great help to this

group to be aware of it. Thanks.

Rodney.

................ I'm sure, however, that you can find ample

scientific evidence on the benefits of fasting .............

[Guest guest]

Hi Suzy,

Actually, I think I asked the question before "what are the benes...." and did not get a logical or scientific answer. Fasting loses nitrogen, except for maybe a day, and that is documented in Modern Nutrition.

Some questions:

When should a person not fast? {perhaps if they are 20# below nominal.} What's the exact point? Do we have studies to show that?

Do we have studies showing the long term effects of fasting say for 14 days?

Are the "benefits" of fasting (other than weight loss) worse/better than the "benefits" of remaining obese?

Some excerpts on starvation from the only text to which I have access online:

Goldman: Cecil Textbook of Medicine, 21st ed., Copyright © 2000 W. B. Saunders Company

Chapter 226 - PROTEIN-ENERGY MALNUTRITION

METABOLIC RESPONSE TO STARVATION

The adaptive response to starvation involves specific metabolic alterations that enhance the chance for survival by increasing the use of body fat as a fuel, sparing the use of glucose, minimizing body nitrogen losses, and decreasing energy expenditure. A marked shift in fuel use occurs during the first day of starvation. By 24 hours of fasting, the use of glucose as a fuel has decreased; only 15% of liver glycogen stores remain, and the rates of hepatic glucose production and whole-body glucose oxidation have decreased. Conversely, endogenous fat stores become the body's major fuel, and the rates of adipose tissue lipolysis, hepatic ketone body production, and fat oxidation are increased. After 3 days of fasting, the rate of glucose production is reduced by half and the rate of lipolysis is more than double the values found at 12 hours of fasting. The increase in fatty acid delivery to the liver, in conjunction with an increase in the ratio of plasma glucagon to insulin, enhances hepatic ketone body production. By 7 days of fasting, plasma ketone body concentrations have increased 75-fold and ketone bodies provide 70% of the brain's energy needs. In contrast to fatty acids, ketone bodies can cross the blood-brain barrier and provide a water-soluble fuel derived from water-insoluble adipose tissue triglycerides. The use of ketone bodies by the brain greatly diminishes glucose requirements and thus spares the need for muscle protein degradation to provide glucose precursors. Furthermore, thyroid hormone inactivation and plasma ketones inhibit muscle protein breakdown and prevent rapid protein losses. If post-absorptive protein breakdown rates were to continue throughout starvation, a potentially lethal amount of muscle protein would be catabolized in less than 3 weeks. As fasting continues, the kidney becomes an important site for glucose production; glutamine, released from muscle, is converted to glucose in the kidney and accounts for almost half of the total glucose production. The resting metabolic rate decreases by approximately 15% at 7 days.

Adaptation is maximal during more prolonged starvation (>14 days of fasting). At this time, adipose tissue provides more than 90% of the daily energy requirements. Total glucose production has decreased to 75 g/day and provides fuel for glycolytic tissues (40 g/day) and the brain (35 g/day). Muscle protein breakdown has decreased to less than 30 g/day, which causes a marked decrease in urea nitrogen production and excretion. The diminished urea load to the kidneys decreases urine volume to 200 mL/day, thereby minimizing fluid requirements. Resting energy expenditure is decreased by approximately 25%.

BODY COMPOSITION.

All body tissue masses are affected by undernutrition, but fat mass and muscle mass are the most affected. In lean adults, these two tissues account for almost two thirds of body weight. Therefore, the loss of weight that occurs in malnourished patients is principally due to loss of muscle and fat mass. Body adipose tissue can be almost completely depleted and up to half of muscle mass can be consumed before death from starvation occurs.

GASTROINTESTINAL TRACT.

Starvation and malnutrition cause structural and functional deterioration of the intestinal tract, pancreas, and liver. The total mass and protein content of the intestinal mucosa and pancreas are markedly reduced. Mucosal epithelial cell proliferation rates decrease and intestinal mucosa becomes atrophic with flattened villi. Synthesis of mucosal and pancreatic digestive enzyme is reduced.

ENERGY METABOLISM.

Starvation and undernutrition decrease basal energy expenditure because of diminished organ size and function, increased conversion of active thyroid hormone to its inactive form, decreased sodium pump activity, decreased protein turnover, decreased body core temperature, absence of shivering and non-shivering thermogenesis, and suppression of sympathetic nervous system activity. Energy is also conserved by the onset of fatigue, which causes a decrease in physical activity.

DEATH FROM STARVATION

At the terminal phase of starvation, body fat mass, skeletal muscle mass, and the size of most organs are markedly decreased. During this final phase of starvation, body fat stores are nearly depleted, energy derived from body fat decreases, and muscle protein catabolism is accelerated. The mechanism(s) responsible for death from starvation in humans is not well understood, but many patients ultimately succumb to infection. It has been suggested that humans are subject to lethal levels of body weight loss (loss of 40% of body weight), protein depletion (loss of 30 to 50% of body protein), fat depletion (loss of 70 to 95% of body fat stores), or body size (body mass index of 13 kg/m2 for men and 11 kg/m2 for women). The duration of survival depends on the amount of available endogenous fuel and the amount of lean tissue. Data from Irish Republican Army hunger strikers demonstrate that death occurs in lean men after approximately 2 months of starvation when more than 35% (25 kg) of body weight is lost. Obese persons can survive much longer periods of starvation because of their increased fat stores and lean tissue mass. The longest reported fast is that of a severely obese (207 kg) man, who safely lost 61% (126 kg) of his initial weight after completing a 382-day fast in which he ingested only acaloric fluids, vitamins, and minerals.

REFEEDING.

The goal of feeding severely malnourished patients can be divided into three phases: (1) prevention of further deterioration and correction of life-threatening abnormalities, (2) restoration of normal organ function and metabolism, and finally (3) repletion of deficient nutrient stores.

REFEEDING COMPLICATIONS.

Refeeding can be harmful and even cause death because of impaired organ function and depleted nutrient stores from previous starvation. The adverse consequences caused by initiating feeding too aggressively are known as the "refeeding syndrome" and usually occur within the first 5 days. Refeeding syndrome complications include fluid overload, electrolyte imbalances, glucose intolerance, cardiac arrhythmias, and diarrhea.

CARDIAC ARRHYTHMIAS.

Sudden death from ventricular arrhythmias can occur during the first week of refeeding in severely malnourished patients and has been reported in conjunction with severe hypophosphatemia. A prolonged QT interval may contribute to the rhythm disturbances.

GASTROINTESTINAL DYSFUNCTION.

Alterations in gastrointestinal tract function limit the ability of the gastrointestinal tract to digest and absorb food. Mild diarrhea after initiating oral/enteral feeding usually resolves and is not clinically important if fluid and electrolyte homeostasis can be maintained. However, in some severely malnourished patients, oral feeding is associated with severe diarrhea and death. Therefore, aggressive fluid and electrolyte replacement and a search for enteric pathogens should be considered in patients with prolonged or severe diarrhea.

I don't find anything here I would call a benefit.

Regards.

From: Suzy P

Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 12:39 PM

Subject: Re: In praise of the warrior diet [Re: [ ] How do CRONERS feel?]

I believe that his book is based upon personal experience. I'm sure, however, that you can find ample scientific evidence on the benefits of fasting. jwwright <jwwright@...> wrote:

Just my take. I ALWAYS rebel when I hear phrases like "rests the digestive system" and "never has theopportunity to heal/clean itself", "strain on the heart", "making the system stronger and more efficient".

Show me some science backing it up. Think about it. The digestive system is designed to process stuff in batches of whatever size goes in unless it's just too much food for the amount of enzymes that can be secreted. At the levels we eat, the batch sizes are small if we eat 5 meals or one meal.

The heart is "stressed" if we run. Is that good or bad? Depends on the person's health. Probably bad if he has CAD. Exercise the body and it becomes LESS stressful to exercise - it adapts.

Regards.

[Guest guest]

Hi Suzy,

Actually, I think I asked the question before "what are the benes...." and did not get a logical or scientific answer. Fasting loses nitrogen, except for maybe a day, and that is documented in Modern Nutrition. A book was offered before and I didn't see any benes in that book other than maybe weight loss.

Some questions:

When should a person not fast? {perhaps if they are 20# below nominal.} What's the exact point? Do we have studies to show that?

Do we have studies showing the long term effects of fasting say for 14 days?

Are the "benefits" of fasting (other than weight loss) worse/better than the "benefits" of remaining obese?

Regards.

----- Original Message -----

From: Suzy P

Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 12:39 PM

Subject: Re: In praise of the warrior diet [Re: [ ] How do CRONERS feel?]

I believe that his book is based upon personal experience. I'm sure, however, that you can find ample scientific evidence on the benefits of fasting. jwwright <jwwright@...> wrote:

Just my take. I ALWAYS rebel when I hear phrases like "rests the digestive system" and "never has theopportunity to heal/clean itself", "strain on the heart", "making the system stronger and more efficient".

Show me some science backing it up. Think about it. The digestive system is designed to process stuff in batches of whatever size goes in unless it's just too much food for the amount of enzymes that can be secreted. At the levels we eat, the batch sizes are small if we eat 5 meals or one meal.

The heart is "stressed" if we run. Is that good or bad? Depends on the person's health. Probably bad if he has CAD. Exercise the body and it becomes LESS stressful to exercise - it adapts.

Regards.