13 ms·

The fact that leptin, not food, restored high-power mode makes me wonder if we could use leptin to increase dieting efficacy. I’ve read that there are limits t

The fact that leptin, not food, restored high-power mode makes me wonder if we could use leptin to increase dieting efficacy. I’ve read that there are limits to how much weight you can lose per week, no matter how much you restrict your caloric intake. Beyond a certain point, your body senses the deficiency and decreases your metabolism. If a person could restrict calories AND receive leptin injections, they could lose weight faster. (note, I am thinking about this in terms of helping the morbidly obese in dire circumstances.)

givemeethekeys 4y ago
Or they could water fast (under medical supervision). After a couple of days they won't feel the need to eat. They will lose a ton of weight.
- jhardy54 4y ago
  > I’ve read that there are limits to how much weight you can lose per week, no matter how much you restrict your caloric intake. Beyond a certain point, your body senses the deficiency and decreases your metabolism.
  - nebulousthree 4y ago
    The point is that there's a distinct physiological difference between no calories and some calories
  - bergenty 4y ago
    That’s only true to a certain extent. After a certain point, no calories just equals rapid fat burning
    - guerrilla 4y ago
      No, not just fat, but all kinds of tissue including muscle.
      - donkarma 4y ago
        Muscle is only burned when you are out of fat.
        Enginerrrd 4y ago
        This is not true at all. There's perhaps a preference toward fat but muscle wasting absolutely occurs during fasting, and often at a relatively significant rate. If you were to "run out of fat" entirely, you'd simply die with fairly significant caloric reserves in the form of muscle. This is not what is observed.
        gilmore606 4y ago
        This is very much not true; I lost over 100lbs and saw the evidence in myself, before I adjusted and started eating a high protein low calorie diet. If you don't consume protein and don't work out, you will lose muscle mass, even if you have fat to burn. This is because muscle tissue is expensive to maintain; the body tends to reduce it if it's not being used.
        LegitShady 4y ago
        your body is constantly using protein to maintain your muscle. When you starve your body of protein, you lose the ability to maintain your muscle, and your body begins to lose muscle as well, even though it does a bunch of stuff to try to stave that off.
        chiefalchemist 4y ago
        Right. So you're not actually burning muscle - instead of fat - per se. Instead muscle wastes as the body isn't maintaining it. While it's not a controlled study, History Channel's "Alone" (reality survivalist show) always touches on lack of food and its affects.
        DiggyJohnson 4y ago
        This just seems like a roundabout way of saying: water fasting results in loss of muscle and fat tissues. By the internal logic of this thread, and since I don’t see any way to intake protein on a water diet, where is the nuance?
blowski 4y ago
I don’t understand this obsession with finding secret tricks to dieting. The root problem is the abundance of cheap, overly processed food being advertised to people with a lack of willpower. Until we tackle those core problems, everything is pointless, because finding a workaround means enabling yet more of the bad behaviour.
- PartiallyTyped 4y ago
  It often isn't lack of will power, but other issues. Nobody wants to be overweight or obese, but people suffer from all sorts of other issues that make it harder for them to get their life in order.
  - Firmwarrior 4y ago
    I dunno man, I've been super fat all my life, except in college when I decided to get in shape I developed a healthy diet and healthy habits, and was able to get down to a healthy weight.. but staying there required a constant influx of willpower. If I only ate enough food to stay at a low weight, I was hungry all the time. (Eventually I ballooned back out, although now I'm losing weight again since I've realized that Morbid Obesity is no place for old men) I think there is a systems issue at work. My body is just calibrated to hog food until it gets pretty fat, and then it'll stay there unless I do something out of the ordinary. Telling fat people to get their shit together can work, the same way telling poor people to learn to code works. (I don't think that thin people are thin because they're hungry all the time and they overpower those urges, the same way poor people aren't necessarily all bad people who piss away all their money)
    - Enginerrrd 4y ago
      Yeah this aligns pretty well with the research. There's a lot we don't know. But it definitely does appear that a lot of obese people have some sort of homeostatic miscalibration on where their body's set point is for weight. The mechanisms involved there are numerous and complex. It's quite possible that there's something simple going on that could be adjusted in the future to get a person's weight set point down, and from there it's quite likely that they will be able to autoregulate. Conversely, it's really hard for any intervention to succeed long-term when a person's weight doesn't match this internal set point.
throwaway09223 4y ago
"Beyond a certain point, your body senses the deficiency and decreases your metabolism. " As far as I'm able to tell this is a myth. There isn't any scientific evidence supporting it, and quite a bit which implies it is impossible - if a body could run itself more efficiently then it would by default. Calorie consumption is necessary to sustain life. This myth is usually perpetuated by people who believe they are on calorie restricted diets, but who are actually eating more than they think.
- guerrilla 4y ago
  > This myth is usually perpetuated by people who believe they are on calorie restricted diets, but who are actually eating more than they think. Nonsense, the only places I've seen it are in popular scientific literature and in official recommendations, from dieticians and physical therapists. I don't know whether it's true or not, but my guess is you're probably wrong. The less someone eats, the more tired and weaker they feel, so they less they'd do, so the less energy they'd use. All kinds of feedback loops like that could happen. So it's definitely plausible.
  - throwaway09223 4y ago
    "Popular" scientific literature, dieticians and physical therapists are demonstrably, profoundly unreliable sources. Besides, if you look around for opinions about the "starvation mode myth" you will find there is actually a lack of consensus. If you believe this is wrong then I suggest trying to articulate why you believe it is wrong, rather than appealing to cherry-picked non-authority opinions. The vast majority of calories our bodies burn are upkeep related and this upkeep does not change significantly based on our diet. Exercise is certainly a factor, but it is orthogonal to the question of whether our bodies somehow stop burning calories while continuing to operate itself. Most people in these extreme circumstances do not significantly exercise at all. Calorie restricted diets in a clinical setting where calorie inputs are strictly controlled will reduce weight 100% of the time.
    - dahfizz 4y ago
bebna 4y ago
Just use a cheat day. This will help to keep the metabolism up and also psychological, because if you got desire to eat X, just put it on the cheat day list and eat it at that day. (If you keep fulfill your desires at the cheat day regularly, u develop trust in your list, which makes it even more effective). You shouldn't go under 1 cheat day a week. See 4 hours body book for sources.
- Enginerrrd 4y ago
  That probably won't work for everyone. Personally, the times I've had to diet down to a lower bodyweight, I find it MUCH easier to maintain that diet with 100% adherence. If I just abstain from calorically dense foods entirely, and mentally remove those things from the list I consider food, it's MUCH, MUCH easier for me to maintain the prescribed diet. Otherwise, I will crave those foods. But if I just create a wall in my brain where I no longer consider such things food, it's way easier for me to stick to with way less willpower. It's like my brain recalibrates and shifts the whole baseline to a healthier level, rather than having to use willpower alone to keep my eating where it needs to be.
- blindmute 4y ago
  At the levels most people will be dieting, around 500 calorie deficit per day or less, you will wipe out an entire week of dieting with one cheat meal. This is how people stay fat. Cheat meals are idiotic and unsustainable. Just stop eating crap, and deal with it. Once per month if you must.
  - layer8 4y ago
    You’re implying a cheat meal of 7 x 500 = 3500 kcal. That’s… a lot.
    - blindmute 4y ago
      It's really not that much when you're fat. A Domino's medium pizza is over 1600 calories and I can eat that as a thin person. Add in soda, dessert, etc. And if you have a 'cheat day' which is a common pattern, then it's trivial.
yieldcrv 4y ago
I read that the differences between metabolism speeds are nearly insignificant. Is where somewhere I can go to understand more about that? The general understanding between "fast" and "slow" metabolism seems to be a magic used to rationalize anything about the body, while one of my golden rules is to never trust any scale that lacks a base unit.
- CSMastermind 4y ago
  > while one of my golden rules is to never trust any scale that lacks a base unit. BMR is a very real thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basal_metabolic_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basal_metabolic_rate > It is reported in energy units per unit time ranging from watt (joule/second) to ml O2/min or joule per hour per kg body mass J/(h·kg). There has been plenty of research into this, see this study into the variance among people for example: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15534426/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15534426/ If you do the math, you'll find that the resting number of calories people burn will vary by a few hundred per day based on their metabolism. I agree that there is too much woo around the science of weight loss but at the same time we don't need to act like there aren't real facts that we do know.
  - yieldcrv 4y ago
    I asked and you delivered. I wasn't claiming there was an absence, I'm claiming that the general understanding isn't quantifying anything. Thanks, this looks like a good starting point.
Nowado 4y ago
There's research in neurodietetics, for example https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3105244/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3105244/ I can't quite tell how strong each and every paper in the field is, nor would this be the place to do it, but what I recognize as their foundational observation that Holocaust survivors brains were roughly the same size as of normally fed people, while other organs shrunk, is quite striking.
narrator 4y ago
Weight loss is such a well explored topic with high commercial demand that anything you've thought of has probably already been done. As far as drugs to speed up weight loss there's DNP, which actually works. It's justifiably banned though because it is easy to overdose on and die from overheating. Not a good way to go. Morbidly obsese can just water fast. /r/fasting on Reddit is full of success stories.
- jasonhansel 4y ago
  There's also semaglutide, which was recently approved for weight loss. It's quite safe and reasonably effective, though using it currently requires a once-weekly injection and your insurance may not cover it. (Rybelsus is a version of semaglutide available in tablet form, but it hasn't officially been approved for obesity yet.)
JamesBarney 4y ago
This isn't true. Your metabolism does slow down but it never slows down 1 cal per cal of food restriction. You always lose more weight the less you eat.
1123581321 4y ago
This diet trick does exist and it’s called eating eggs. :) The protein and fat in conjunction with leptin are highly satiating and are easier and cheaper to feed than the macros and chemicals individually.
- 4ad 4y ago
  Eggs are completely non-satiating to me. I eat 20 eggs in one sitting and I feel hungry.
  - 1123581321 4y ago
    Well, not all of us can be Gaston. Most people cannot do that regularly without feeling full much sooner, and even you are better served eating those eggs than trying to feel full from massive quantities of starches.
  - SamPatt 4y ago
    20 eggs in one sitting? Surely this is exaggeration? I make a three egg omelette a few times a week, and it's quite filling. I could probably do six eggs without making myself sick, but not a dozen and definitely not 20.
    - pugz 4y ago
      Like you, I have three egg omelettes a few times a week. The mental image of someone eating twenty eggs and still being hungry made me laugh out loud.
      - shawabawa3 4y ago
        Reminds me of a story from my wife's grandmother She was a doctor and had an obese patient who was struggling to lose weight, he complained that he had changed his diet to be very healthy but it still didn't help gm: "ok let's start with breakfast, what do you usually eat?" patient: "oh, just a plain omelette - I don't even use butter or oil!" gm: "ok that sounds good, tell me exactly how you prepare it" patient: "well, I crack 12 eggs into a pan..." Apparently they saw they were sold by the dozen and thought that was the suggested serving size
ren_engineer 4y ago
>if we could use leptin to increase dieting efficacy it's called a refeed and bodybuilders have been doing it for decades to drop fat while maintaining muscle mass, you don't need leptin injections some recent studies have backed up the bro science as well >The researchers reported that 19 participants in the continuous diet group completed the study and lost an average of 9.1 kg furthermore, 17 participants in the intermittent diet group completed the study and lost an average of 14.1 kg (4).Hence, the authors concluded that greater weight and fat loss was achieved in the intermittent diet group (4)
- sydthrowaway 4y ago
  What is a refeed?
  - jonahx 4y ago
    Eating normal or excess calories, usually for a day.
    - jolmg 4y ago
      Apparently specifically high carb, low fat.
      - desmosxxx 4y ago
        Yep. Carbs cause a larger release of leptin than either fat or protein. Of course, at some point the leptin system breaks down, probably due to desensitized receptors. But in a negative calorie state, you can take advantage of your leptin sensitivity. UD 2.0 by Lyle McDonald is a good basic program that is built off the premise of carb cycling (and the effects on leptin and insulin).
- hammock 4y ago
  How frequently does one need to refeed?
  - 4y ago
staticassertion 4y ago
That seems particularly important. Leptin is naturally released by fat cells, so I wonder how this would have impacted overweight mice, who may have already been naturally releasing this leptin - assuming that's how leptin works. But also, no one should be fasting and eating nothing - they should make sure they're getting the necessary vitamins and minerals. Taking more leptin could make sense.
junofan 4y ago
It’s leptin rescue for mice in torpor. Likely no applicability to humans.
adfjalkfja 4y ago
> I’ve read that there are limits to how much weight you can lose per week, no matter how much you restrict your caloric intake. I've been fasting here and there and I'm down from 130Kg to 98Kg in about 5 months. Apparently your body handles that sense of deficiency better if you fast vs multiple small meals. Something about that large meal letting you experience the "I'm so full" feeling. There's a study in the NEJM where they tested 3 meals a day vs one. The participants ended up at the same weight at the end, but with smaller waists and less belly fat for one meal a day. It's all interesting albeit frustrating stuff... Edit: https://sa1s3.patientpop.com/assets/docs/151222.pdf https://sa1s3.patientpop.com/assets/docs/151222.pdf I might be remembering the results wrong as I can't find the details in that study, I'm going off this video mainly https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thgVz3837l0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thgVz3837l0 If I'm wrong about the results it seems the other benefits make it worthwhile anyway, preventing diabetes etc
- mrits 4y ago
  My own personal experience with fasting has shown that I can be quite functional without food. However, I can't really learn. So while I could code a whole day I couldn't read a new programming book.
Natsu 4y ago
I've noticed that when I'm tired mentally, closing my eyes for a while even if I don't sleep makes me feel better. I wonder if that's related by letting that part of the brain power down for a bit?
- Hnrobert42 4y ago
  Yeah. Maybe my mom’s claim that she was just resting her eyes was valid. We always suspected she was unwilling to admit she was napping.
NicoJuicy 4y ago
Yes, Leptin is the reason why cheat meals every 4 days are a win. Note : i absolutely loved the book of "Tom Venuto - Burn the fat, feed the muscle".

givemeethekeys 4y ago

Or they could water fast (under medical supervision). After a couple of days they won't feel the need to eat. They will lose a ton of weight.

jhardy54 4y ago
> I’ve read that there are limits to how much weight you can lose per week, no matter how much you restrict your caloric intake. Beyond a certain point, your body senses the deficiency and decreases your metabolism.
- nebulousthree 4y ago
  The point is that there's a distinct physiological difference between no calories and some calories
- bergenty 4y ago
  That’s only true to a certain extent. After a certain point, no calories just equals rapid fat burning
  - guerrilla 4y ago
    No, not just fat, but all kinds of tissue including muscle.
    - donkarma 4y ago
      Muscle is only burned when you are out of fat.
      - Enginerrrd 4y ago
        This is not true at all. There's perhaps a preference toward fat but muscle wasting absolutely occurs during fasting, and often at a relatively significant rate. If you were to "run out of fat" entirely, you'd simply die with fairly significant caloric reserves in the form of muscle. This is not what is observed.
      - gilmore606 4y ago
        This is very much not true; I lost over 100lbs and saw the evidence in myself, before I adjusted and started eating a high protein low calorie diet. If you don't consume protein and don't work out, you will lose muscle mass, even if you have fat to burn. This is because muscle tissue is expensive to maintain; the body tends to reduce it if it's not being used.
      - LegitShady 4y ago
        your body is constantly using protein to maintain your muscle. When you starve your body of protein, you lose the ability to maintain your muscle, and your body begins to lose muscle as well, even though it does a bunch of stuff to try to stave that off.
        chiefalchemist 4y ago
        Right. So you're not actually burning muscle - instead of fat - per se. Instead muscle wastes as the body isn't maintaining it. While it's not a controlled study, History Channel's "Alone" (reality survivalist show) always touches on lack of food and its affects.
        DiggyJohnson 4y ago
        This just seems like a roundabout way of saying: water fasting results in loss of muscle and fat tissues. By the internal logic of this thread, and since I don’t see any way to intake protein on a water diet, where is the nuance?

blowski 4y ago

I don’t understand this obsession with finding secret tricks to dieting. The root problem is the abundance of cheap, overly processed food being advertised to people with a lack of willpower. Until we tackle those core problems, everything is pointless, because finding a workaround means enabling yet more of the bad behaviour.

PartiallyTyped 4y ago
It often isn't lack of will power, but other issues. Nobody wants to be overweight or obese, but people suffer from all sorts of other issues that make it harder for them to get their life in order.
- Firmwarrior 4y ago
  I dunno man, I've been super fat all my life, except in college when I decided to get in shape I developed a healthy diet and healthy habits, and was able to get down to a healthy weight.. but staying there required a constant influx of willpower. If I only ate enough food to stay at a low weight, I was hungry all the time. (Eventually I ballooned back out, although now I'm losing weight again since I've realized that Morbid Obesity is no place for old men) I think there is a systems issue at work. My body is just calibrated to hog food until it gets pretty fat, and then it'll stay there unless I do something out of the ordinary. Telling fat people to get their shit together can work, the same way telling poor people to learn to code works. (I don't think that thin people are thin because they're hungry all the time and they overpower those urges, the same way poor people aren't necessarily all bad people who piss away all their money)
  - Enginerrrd 4y ago
    Yeah this aligns pretty well with the research. There's a lot we don't know. But it definitely does appear that a lot of obese people have some sort of homeostatic miscalibration on where their body's set point is for weight. The mechanisms involved there are numerous and complex. It's quite possible that there's something simple going on that could be adjusted in the future to get a person's weight set point down, and from there it's quite likely that they will be able to autoregulate. Conversely, it's really hard for any intervention to succeed long-term when a person's weight doesn't match this internal set point.

throwaway09223 4y ago

"Beyond a certain point, your body senses the deficiency and decreases your metabolism. " As far as I'm able to tell this is a myth. There isn't any scientific evidence supporting it, and quite a bit which implies it is impossible - if a body could run itself more efficiently then it would by default. Calorie consumption is necessary to sustain life. This myth is usually perpetuated by people who believe they are on calorie restricted diets, but who are actually eating more than they think.

guerrilla 4y ago
> This myth is usually perpetuated by people who believe they are on calorie restricted diets, but who are actually eating more than they think. Nonsense, the only places I've seen it are in popular scientific literature and in official recommendations, from dieticians and physical therapists. I don't know whether it's true or not, but my guess is you're probably wrong. The less someone eats, the more tired and weaker they feel, so they less they'd do, so the less energy they'd use. All kinds of feedback loops like that could happen. So it's definitely plausible.
- throwaway09223 4y ago
  "Popular" scientific literature, dieticians and physical therapists are demonstrably, profoundly unreliable sources. Besides, if you look around for opinions about the "starvation mode myth" you will find there is actually a lack of consensus. If you believe this is wrong then I suggest trying to articulate why you believe it is wrong, rather than appealing to cherry-picked non-authority opinions. The vast majority of calories our bodies burn are upkeep related and this upkeep does not change significantly based on our diet. Exercise is certainly a factor, but it is orthogonal to the question of whether our bodies somehow stop burning calories while continuing to operate itself. Most people in these extreme circumstances do not significantly exercise at all. Calorie restricted diets in a clinical setting where calorie inputs are strictly controlled will reduce weight 100% of the time.
  - dahfizz 4y ago

bebna 4y ago

Just use a cheat day. This will help to keep the metabolism up and also psychological, because if you got desire to eat X, just put it on the cheat day list and eat it at that day. (If you keep fulfill your desires at the cheat day regularly, u develop trust in your list, which makes it even more effective). You shouldn't go under 1 cheat day a week. See 4 hours body book for sources.

Enginerrrd 4y ago
That probably won't work for everyone. Personally, the times I've had to diet down to a lower bodyweight, I find it MUCH easier to maintain that diet with 100% adherence. If I just abstain from calorically dense foods entirely, and mentally remove those things from the list I consider food, it's MUCH, MUCH easier for me to maintain the prescribed diet. Otherwise, I will crave those foods. But if I just create a wall in my brain where I no longer consider such things food, it's way easier for me to stick to with way less willpower. It's like my brain recalibrates and shifts the whole baseline to a healthier level, rather than having to use willpower alone to keep my eating where it needs to be.
blindmute 4y ago
At the levels most people will be dieting, around 500 calorie deficit per day or less, you will wipe out an entire week of dieting with one cheat meal. This is how people stay fat. Cheat meals are idiotic and unsustainable. Just stop eating crap, and deal with it. Once per month if you must.
- layer8 4y ago
  You’re implying a cheat meal of 7 x 500 = 3500 kcal. That’s… a lot.
  - blindmute 4y ago
    It's really not that much when you're fat. A Domino's medium pizza is over 1600 calories and I can eat that as a thin person. Add in soda, dessert, etc. And if you have a 'cheat day' which is a common pattern, then it's trivial.

yieldcrv 4y ago

I read that the differences between metabolism speeds are nearly insignificant. Is where somewhere I can go to understand more about that? The general understanding between "fast" and "slow" metabolism seems to be a magic used to rationalize anything about the body, while one of my golden rules is to never trust any scale that lacks a base unit.

CSMastermind 4y ago
> while one of my golden rules is to never trust any scale that lacks a base unit. BMR is a very real thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basal_metabolic_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basal_metabolic_rate > It is reported in energy units per unit time ranging from watt (joule/second) to ml O2/min or joule per hour per kg body mass J/(h·kg). There has been plenty of research into this, see this study into the variance among people for example: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15534426/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15534426/ If you do the math, you'll find that the resting number of calories people burn will vary by a few hundred per day based on their metabolism. I agree that there is too much woo around the science of weight loss but at the same time we don't need to act like there aren't real facts that we do know.
- yieldcrv 4y ago
  I asked and you delivered. I wasn't claiming there was an absence, I'm claiming that the general understanding isn't quantifying anything. Thanks, this looks like a good starting point.

Nowado 4y ago

There's research in neurodietetics, for example https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3105244/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3105244/ I can't quite tell how strong each and every paper in the field is, nor would this be the place to do it, but what I recognize as their foundational observation that Holocaust survivors brains were roughly the same size as of normally fed people, while other organs shrunk, is quite striking.

narrator 4y ago

Weight loss is such a well explored topic with high commercial demand that anything you've thought of has probably already been done. As far as drugs to speed up weight loss there's DNP, which actually works. It's justifiably banned though because it is easy to overdose on and die from overheating. Not a good way to go. Morbidly obsese can just water fast. /r/fasting on Reddit is full of success stories.

jasonhansel 4y ago
There's also semaglutide, which was recently approved for weight loss. It's quite safe and reasonably effective, though using it currently requires a once-weekly injection and your insurance may not cover it. (Rybelsus is a version of semaglutide available in tablet form, but it hasn't officially been approved for obesity yet.)

JamesBarney 4y ago

This isn't true. Your metabolism does slow down but it never slows down 1 cal per cal of food restriction. You always lose more weight the less you eat.

1123581321 4y ago

This diet trick does exist and it’s called eating eggs. :) The protein and fat in conjunction with leptin are highly satiating and are easier and cheaper to feed than the macros and chemicals individually.

4ad 4y ago
Eggs are completely non-satiating to me. I eat 20 eggs in one sitting and I feel hungry.
- 1123581321 4y ago
  Well, not all of us can be Gaston. Most people cannot do that regularly without feeling full much sooner, and even you are better served eating those eggs than trying to feel full from massive quantities of starches.
- SamPatt 4y ago
  20 eggs in one sitting? Surely this is exaggeration? I make a three egg omelette a few times a week, and it's quite filling. I could probably do six eggs without making myself sick, but not a dozen and definitely not 20.
  - pugz 4y ago
    Like you, I have three egg omelettes a few times a week. The mental image of someone eating twenty eggs and still being hungry made me laugh out loud.
    - shawabawa3 4y ago
      Reminds me of a story from my wife's grandmother She was a doctor and had an obese patient who was struggling to lose weight, he complained that he had changed his diet to be very healthy but it still didn't help gm: "ok let's start with breakfast, what do you usually eat?" patient: "oh, just a plain omelette - I don't even use butter or oil!" gm: "ok that sounds good, tell me exactly how you prepare it" patient: "well, I crack 12 eggs into a pan..." Apparently they saw they were sold by the dozen and thought that was the suggested serving size

ren_engineer 4y ago

>if we could use leptin to increase dieting efficacy it's called a refeed and bodybuilders have been doing it for decades to drop fat while maintaining muscle mass, you don't need leptin injections some recent studies have backed up the bro science as well >The researchers reported that 19 participants in the continuous diet group completed the study and lost an average of 9.1 kg furthermore, 17 participants in the intermittent diet group completed the study and lost an average of 14.1 kg (4).Hence, the authors concluded that greater weight and fat loss was achieved in the intermittent diet group (4)

sydthrowaway 4y ago
What is a refeed?
- jonahx 4y ago
  Eating normal or excess calories, usually for a day.
  - jolmg 4y ago
    Apparently specifically high carb, low fat.
    - desmosxxx 4y ago
      Yep. Carbs cause a larger release of leptin than either fat or protein. Of course, at some point the leptin system breaks down, probably due to desensitized receptors. But in a negative calorie state, you can take advantage of your leptin sensitivity. UD 2.0 by Lyle McDonald is a good basic program that is built off the premise of carb cycling (and the effects on leptin and insulin).
hammock 4y ago
How frequently does one need to refeed?
- 4y ago

staticassertion 4y ago

That seems particularly important. Leptin is naturally released by fat cells, so I wonder how this would have impacted overweight mice, who may have already been naturally releasing this leptin - assuming that's how leptin works. But also, no one should be fasting and eating nothing - they should make sure they're getting the necessary vitamins and minerals. Taking more leptin could make sense.

junofan 4y ago

It’s leptin rescue for mice in torpor. Likely no applicability to humans.

adfjalkfja 4y ago

> I’ve read that there are limits to how much weight you can lose per week, no matter how much you restrict your caloric intake. I've been fasting here and there and I'm down from 130Kg to 98Kg in about 5 months. Apparently your body handles that sense of deficiency better if you fast vs multiple small meals. Something about that large meal letting you experience the "I'm so full" feeling. There's a study in the NEJM where they tested 3 meals a day vs one. The participants ended up at the same weight at the end, but with smaller waists and less belly fat for one meal a day. It's all interesting albeit frustrating stuff... Edit: https://sa1s3.patientpop.com/assets/docs/151222.pdf https://sa1s3.patientpop.com/assets/docs/151222.pdf I might be remembering the results wrong as I can't find the details in that study, I'm going off this video mainly https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thgVz3837l0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thgVz3837l0 If I'm wrong about the results it seems the other benefits make it worthwhile anyway, preventing diabetes etc

mrits 4y ago
My own personal experience with fasting has shown that I can be quite functional without food. However, I can't really learn. So while I could code a whole day I couldn't read a new programming book.

Natsu 4y ago

I've noticed that when I'm tired mentally, closing my eyes for a while even if I don't sleep makes me feel better. I wonder if that's related by letting that part of the brain power down for a bit?

Hnrobert42 4y ago
Yeah. Maybe my mom’s claim that she was just resting her eyes was valid. We always suspected she was unwilling to admit she was napping.

NicoJuicy 4y ago

Yes, Leptin is the reason why cheat meals every 4 days are a win. Note : i absolutely loved the book of "Tom Venuto - Burn the fat, feed the muscle".