Guest guest Posted April 20, 2003 Report Share Posted April 20, 2003 I would ask him where's the proof/research? But as a matter of fact, I do that. I can't eat a lot at one sitting anymore (a good thing since I can no longer gorge myself as in pre-CRON days) and I find that several small meals instead of 3 large ones helps me to stick to the diet and helps assuage hunger. on 4/19/2003 9:03 PM, nutrinaut at neologisticscald@... wrote: > A doctor once told me that it's beneficial to your health if you eat > small portions 5 or 6 times a day. What do you think? > Jef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 20, 2003 Report Share Posted April 20, 2003 " nutrinaut " <neologisticscald@p...> wrote: > A doctor once told me that it's beneficial to your health if > you eat small portions 5 or 6 times a day. What do you think? Pro-grazing: The Breakfast / Lunch / Dinner Ritual http://www.doctoryourself.com/nibbling.html Nibbling Versus Gorging: Prolonged Carbohydrate Absorption http://bestlowcarbs.com/article1071.html Anti-grazing: ``In affluent societies, in addition to increased dietary fat and sucrose intake, there has also been the adoption of a pattern of frequent snacking that results in a quasi-continuous postprandial state for most of the day (12 ,13) . This prevents the attainment of low basal interprandial insulin levels even in normal individuals. Consequently, subsequent meal-induced insulin release occurs against a background of an already high, basal insulin concentration, conditions that are now known to be conducive to further insulin-mediated stimulation of VLDL-TAG secretion (32 33 34) . There is substantial evidence that as a result, insulin stimulation of hepatic VLDL-TAG secretion may be sufficiently chronic to induce muscle insulin resistance.'' - http://www.nutrition.org/cgi/content/full/131/8/2074 ....and from: Meal size and frequency affect neuronal plasticity and vulnerability to disease: cellular and molecular mechanisms: ``It has been assumed that all of the benefits of DR feeding regimens are the result of a reduction in cummulative calorie intake (Weindruch and Sohal 1997). However, we have recently documented a clear dissociation between caloric intake and beneficial effects of DR in a study that compared the effects of periodic fasting (alternate day feeding) and limited daily feeding on various physiological parameters and neuronal vulnerability to excitotoxicity in C57BL/6 mice (Anson et al., submitted). We had noted that, in contrast to Sprague-Dawley rats which lose weight when maintained on a periodic fasting regimen, C57BL/6 mice did not lose weight. Measurement of food intake revealed that on the days they had access to food the C57BL/6 mice on the periodic fasting regimen consumed twice as much food as mice fed ad libitum(Table 4). Remarkably, however, the mice on periodic fasting exhibited 'anti-aging' physiological changes equal to or greater than those maintained on the reduced calorie diet, including decreased plasma insulin and glucose levels, and reduced body temperature. Moreover, levels of the ketone body -hydroxybutyrate were increased in the mice on the periodic fasting regimen, but not in the mice on the limited daily feeding regimen, suggesting a change in cellular energy metabolism pathways (Anson et al., submitted). Periodic fasting was more effective than limited daily feeding in protecting hippocampal neurons against excitotoxic injury. These findings suggest that increasing the time interval between meals is beneficial, even when the size of the meals are increased to a level that results in no overall decrease in caloric intake. The findings just described, while surprising, provide strong support for the hypothesis that many of the beneficial effects of DR are the result of a mild cellular stress response. Indeed, we have found that periodic fasting is much more effective than limited daily feeding in increasing the expression of HSP-70 and neurotrophic factors in the brain (W. Duan, Z. Guo and M. P. Mattson, unpublished data).'' http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/links/doi/10.1046/j.1471- 4159.2003.01586.x/full/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 20, 2003 Report Share Posted April 20, 2003 Hi Jef, Yes, I've been told this as well. It helps insulin levels (I've read) and this helps a general well-feeling throughout the day. I'm trying to stay on 1200 and slowly progress upwards, this works best for me, and it is a constant struggle! Hopefully I hope to taper off at 1800-2000. How is everyone else doing as well? Have a great Sunday all! . Protect your PC - Click here for McAfee.com VirusScan Online Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 20, 2003 Report Share Posted April 20, 2003 : The usual procedure is to start at 1800-2000 and see how you do before cutting calories further. Sounds like you're starting at the wrong end. on 4/20/2003 10:09 AM, Freeman at jarv57@... wrote: > > > Hi Jef, > Yes, I've been told this as well. It helps insulin levels (I've read) and this > helps a general well-feeling throughout the day. I'm trying to stay on 1200 > and slowly progress upwards, this works best for me, and it is a constant > struggle! Hopefully I hope to taper off at 1800-2000. How is everyone else > doing as well? Have a great Sunday all! > . > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 20, 2003 Report Share Posted April 20, 2003 Hello and CR All, Just so that is not frightened away -- Many of us can verify that we started out on our CR programs by doing exactly the same thing that is doing! Maybe we were fools, but we are still doing CR years later! Anybody can call you a fool, and maybe that's the best term for me! CR is tough enough without others trying to change our approach. I started out fast -- by fasting -- which was most comfortable for me. I continue doing it to this day, 4 years later. I love CR and fasting, which for me controls my appetite wonderfully, and prevents food abuse too. Few on this List have abused food the way I have over my pitiful lifetime! CR finally helped me to gain control over my appetite. But everyone is different. One man's meat is another man's poison! Many things in life are simply judgments that other people pass upon us, beyond our control, with their right to do so -- especially on a public List! But let's do try to be polite and kind too. Some judgments about " right and wrong " on CR are opinion, unless they are backed up by CR research in humans (and/or primates). In fact, there is little scientific CR work available for humans. human CR, and it is real and exciting! So be encouraged ! Charge on, and modify your strategy as it meets your needs and personality. A jump-start program of CR can be very motivating! For those of us who started CR that way, our counsel is this: Keep on keeping on! Consult Dr. Walford's books on CR, consult your physician for evaluation, and stick around other CRONies who are happy to support and encourage you! Keep up the good work! -- Warren she is starting. did the same as shi > On 20 Apr 2003, Francesca Skelton wrote: > > : The usual procedure is to start at 1800-2000 and see > how you do > before cutting calories further. Sounds like you're starting at the wrong > end. > > > on 4/20/2003 10:09 AM, Freeman at jarv57@... wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Jef, > > Yes, I've been told this as well. It helps insulin levels (I've > read) and this > > helps a general well-feeling throughout the day. I'm trying to > stay on 1200 > > and slowly progress upwards, this works best for me, and it is > a constant > > struggle! Hopefully I hope to taper off at 1800-2000. How is > everyone else > > doing as well? Have a great Sunday all! > > . > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 20, 2003 Report Share Posted April 20, 2003 Warren and : I apologize if I sounded impolite. I was quoting from BT120Y Diet . We also have several " files " to help newbies who are starting out. Just click on the word " files " in the left hand margin of our home page. : I hope you didn't take offense - we're here to help!!! on 4/20/2003 3:36 PM, Warren at warren.taylor@... wrote: > Hello and CR All, > > Just so that is not frightened away -- > > > One man's meat is another man's poison! Many things > in life are simply judgments that other people pass > upon us, beyond our control, with their right to > do so -- especially on a public List! But let's do > try to be polite and kind too. > > Some judgments about " right and wrong " on CR are > opinion, unless they are backed up by CR research > in humans (and/or primates). In fact, there is > little scientific CR work available for humans. > human CR, and it is real and exciting! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2003 Report Share Posted April 22, 2003 Although it's probably better to cut back slower as Francesca said - like Warren, I started out at the extreme - for me, at 900 KCals a day. I had a very long history of dieting and knew from experience that I would not lose weight unless I dropped that low. For me, it shifts me into some different physical state. I am hungry for a week, and then my hunger goes away and I feel great. This did not happen for me if I just cut back 100 calories a day at a time - I stayed hungry and felt crummy. I then shifted up from 900 as I got close to my below set point goal. When I started to gain, I backed off a little. Now I find that it is easier to down and up adjust by 100 calories at a time. 900 is too low for me and I can't easily sustain that any more. I think if you have a lot of weight to lose, as I did, you can cut back more drastically and your body can take it. You do need to worry about burning fat too quickly and releasing too many toxins into your body for it to process. I would stay at a pound a week or less - so this is 500 KCals below your required calories per day. The first month on 900 KCals, I lost something like 7 pounds, but I lost less than 5 pounds a month for 3-4 months after that and was quickly down to 2 pounds a month by month 5. In my opinion, if you are already pretty slim - or even average - you need to take it much slower. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.