Fast-5 Diet and Lifestyle: [fast5] Re: so FULL (Dr. Herring?)

Thursday, May 21, 2009

[fast5] Re: so FULL (Dr. Herring?)

I haven't had a chance to review the paper in detail, but it's interesting and potentially useful stuff. The figure the authors derive seems rather low to me and I have to see if they allowed for induction -- the ability of cells to build up production of a product over time by increasing the enzyme "workforce" available to do the work. Since the calculations were based on a real-life study, I would guess that's included but want to be sure.

In regards to other comments, I agree that "use it or lose it" applies in general to muscle bulk, whether one is on a standard eating schedule or an alternative. What little data there is regarding IF supports preservation of LBM if nutrition intake is adequate (as in Mattson's study). It also makes sense that ultra-lean individuals would have less fat to draw fuel from; however they probably became ultra-lean through rigorous exercise which is likely to have enhanced both glycogen and fat metabolic capacities beyond the norm, and an increased number of mitochondria may enhance their metabolic efficiency.

There's a great need for more research to answer these questions definitively and without bias.

Bert

Bert Herring
Fast-5 Corporation

--- In fast5@yahoogroups.com, Phil Voelker <mail4pvoelker@...> wrote:
>
>
> Okay - I would REALLY love to hear Dr. Herring's take on the factoids listed on Lyle McDonald's website.
>
> Here's the disconnect for me, with an initial caveat that I understand full well that research is ongoing and NO ONE really has all the complete answers:
>
> The idea that leaner individuals lose more lean body mass (LBM) than heavier individuals, to me, is inconsistent with some of the information I've read (including Fast5) stating that LBM is really only catabolized once you've been fasting for around 72 hours. Also, the same research indicates that test subjects that weight trained experienced only a negligible LBM loss even on an 800 calorie diet.
>
> I feel that Lyle McDonald's article (and the study he's referencing) are really interesting; I just wonder if the LBM loss is really only an issue for someone with really low bodyfat ( I don't know, like well under 10%?). According to the way I interpret the F5 book, someone wouldn't really experience a significant loss in muscle mass unless they really had no fat in their system to draw from during their fasting period. One of the reasons I appreciate mcDonald's article is because he's the first to admit that there's not enough data to create a gospel out of what he's written (likewise Dr. Herring), but I can't help but think that for a weight and cardio-training individual that fat loss would remain simliar, with other calories being diverted to muscle repair and LBM essentially being protected.
>
> --- On Sat, 5/16/09, Rick Stewart <rstewart@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: Rick Stewart <rstewart@...>
> Subject: [fast5] Re: so FULL
> To: fast5@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, May 16, 2009, 5:13 AM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks for that link Daniel. That's an interesting idea. According to the article, if I have 15 lbs of fat to lose I multiply 15x31 to get 461. This tells me I can be in a caloric deficit of 461 calories before my body begins to use lean tissue for fuel. Hmmm...
>
> -Rick Stewart
>
> --- In fast5@yahoogroups. com, "Daniel Lurie" <dl1021@> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 13 May 2009 10:21:29 -0400, Rick Stewart <rstewart@ .> wrote:
> >
> > > But like Daniel mentioned, once your bodyfat gets rather low, you would
> > > need to get more food from outside sources.
> >
> > I've read from Lyle McDonald that bodyfat can only contribute 31 calories/lb/ day, so that is the theoretical limit to how much you can cut calories without shedding muscle, bone, etc. Those figures are based on starvation studies, so it may or may not be totally applicable here.
> >
> > http://www.mindandm uscle.net/ node/228
> >
> > --
> > Thanks,
> > Daniel Lurie
> >
>