Circadian clock and transient period vs number of meals

(Omar) #1

Human circadian clock is synched with the earth solar day which is 24 hours

and the food transient period is about that long. Some people more and some people less.

So our bodies designed to have about 24 hours to remove all food poisons. Shall we introduce in more poisons before the previous poisons removed?

Doesn’t it implies that it will be more natural and beneficial that we should eat one meal a day.?

If not that will mean our organs that identify, filter, and dispose poisons have no resting period. Maybe they are designed that way.

(Joey) #2

Interesting thoughts re: circadian rhythm.

True enough, that the earth’s daily rotation drives many of the biological patterns we witness for all of Earth’s life. But there are also Lunar cycles that have an effect (tides, night’s darkness, etc.) along with countless seasonal cycles for both animals and plants.

So I’m not quite convinced that our eating (nourishment) ought to be a “once daily” event simply because that coincides with one full spin of the Earth around its own axis.

After all, we don’t perform most other essential functions only once per earthly spin. So why should food be a OMAD event?

I’m also not quite tracking with the “food poison” concept…

Sure, there are waste products that we don’t use (fiber, biological byproducts, etc.), but we don’t expel those only once per day either (unless you have a bladder of steel). I think of food as a resource, not a toxin to be removed - so I’m unclear on why we need to limit ourselves to taking in this life-giving resource only once until the next sunrise.

An interesting idea, but not following the premise, so the conclusion leaves me a bit confused. :vulcan_salute:

(Omar) #3

Not sure what is so difficult to track there

Regarding poisons, yes food have lots of poisons and our bodies struggling to dispose them. I am not only talking pesticides, or preservatives. Processed foods contain various chemicals to be able to process the food and extract oil from seeds. Let alone mercury found in fish and heavy metals that find their way to our drinking water. We are not yet talking about excessive hormones fed to animals to make them larger or genetically engineered soy beans or other genetically engineered foods.

(Joey) #4

Perhaps I struggle unnecessarily? :man_shrugging:

So if it weren’t for the poisons in our food, we could safely eat more frequently than OMAD? Still finding the logic difficult. :thinking:

(p.s. - FWIW, most of the toxins you describe don’t get excreted daily. They accumulate over the years. OMAD wouldn’t seem to solve that problem.)

(Omar) #5

It maybe the language issue

By poisons I meant toxins.

In all cases I am not talking scientifically, It is just that I found it interesting that Hindu and Bohdan monks, as well as wise men from Ayurveda and ancient medicine eat OMAD.

Some people in this forum including myself feel that we benefited from OMAD. In my case I do not have much weight to lose, but my ability to focus and concentrate improve with OMAD.

I am not saying it should be the only way as well.

(Joey) #6

Lots of good reasons for individuals to embrace OMAD - health, self-discipline, spiritual pursuit, and more. I’m not knocking the benefits of OMAD for some individuals at some points in their lives.

I simply remain uncomfortable with the notion that the focus of eating should be about the need to excrete toxins. I consider food to be a gift, a joy, a pleasure - and good food is a prerequisite to good health. Not something to be minimized in frequency in order to get rid of toxins.

My guess is that those spiritual-oriented monks are not carnivores - they’re eating plenty of (complex) carbs. As a result, their self-control in not eating more than once daily is more about asceticism, i.e., not a natural hormon-driven satiety.

Sure, since cutting out the carbs, sometimes I do wind up eating only OMAD; some days I’m just not that hungry. But being fairly trim, this doesn’t happen too often. As such, despite the lean physique I’d likely make an awful monk or swami. :roll_eyes:

#7

I will agree with the underlying premise that we evolved to be active during the light and inactive during the dark. I will further agree that most routine ‘maintenance’ and ‘repair’ occurs while we’re inactive during the dark, so it’s important to sleep long enough to give maintenance/repair time to do whatever it needs to do. During the active time I don’t think our specific eating pattern matters much. I think our evolution primarily, if not exclusively, in the state of ketosis for millions of years enabled our species to eat when there was something to eat and and survive varying periods when there was little or nothing to eat.

That said, eating a primarily plant-based/carb-centric diet since the early Holocene dropped a greasy wrench into everything. Ketosis is our natural/normal metabolic state. We evolved and thrived in ketosis for several million years. BUT, with the demise of the mega-fauna at the end of the last glacial max and the start of the Holocene, our species was faced with an existential threat. Our recent farmer ancestors adapted by cultivating and selectively breeding assorted plants to make them (somewhat) edible, but the changes imposed on our metabolism by doing so are challenging.

(Joey) #8

Unless I missed something, I didn’t see that as the underlying premise. I thought the premise was that “we need to excrete toxins.” Therefore we are “best off eating only once a day.” That’s why I was sharing my skepticism. :thinking:

#9

Handling toxins is the job of my body, just like communicating its needs towards me.
I don’t find it natural to starve and I am unable to do so by my own will so if my body wants food 5 times a day, I eat 5 times a day (I hate that but what can I do? I must get my nutrients even with my tiny meals). My body still will have 16-20 hours left alone but it’s quite personal that I like it this way. Many people eat every 12 hours or in a very different way and it works for them. Each to their own.

I personally prefer OMAD but it’s not realistic for me to do every day and I am aware not everyone can eat big enough meals for OMAD, little enough meals for OMAD, there are circumstances and preferences.

#10

I don’t even see the logic in it. I admittedly know little about how the body handles toxins, I don’t know if it’s better to get the same amount (or more if the circumstances are unfortunate… less if fortunate) of toxins at once instead of in multiple doses…
But it doesn’t matter to me anyway. If my body can’t be forced to swallow more food and my meal becomes too tiny, I must eat a bit later.

#11

Premise (as I read the OP) seems to me based on the daily light/dark rhythm:

Human circadian clock is synched with the earth solar day which is 24 hours

and the food transient period is about that long. Some people more and some people less.

So our bodies designed to have about 24 hours to remove all food poisons. Shall we introduce in more poisons before the previous poisons removed?

I interpret ‘removing poisons’ as part of nocturnal maintenance and repair. Which is why I think the frequency and timing of eating during the day is irrelevant. I say this contra the OP opinion that seems to ignore the daily light/dark rhythm and emphasizes eating intervals.

(Omar) #12

The logic is simple

Let the toxin be removed before introducing new toxins

#13

I have no idea how that works so it says me nothing… My body does it all the time in the background I suppose.

(Joey) #14

Simple enough. Thanks for this.

I find it unrealistic is to assume the body can only do one thing at a time. But to each her/his own assumptions. :wink:

#15

The logic is even simpler. First, how are you defining ‘toxins’? Second why are you eating them? In so far as a ketogenic way of eating emulates the way our ancestors ate for several million years, ingestion of ‘toxins’ - however defined - should be next to nil. e.g. I drink keto coffee every morning as my first meal. Am I consuming ‘toxins’? If so, do you think it requires 24 hours of abstinence to process and excrete the toxic elements?

(Omar) #16

:sweat_smile:

Coffee is one of the most heavily pesticided crop

https://www.coffeehabitat.com/2006/12/pesticides_used_2/

(Joey) #18

Indeed it is! :face_with_hand_over_mouth:

Of course in the end, we’re all gonna’ die regardless. But still, this reminds me of this clever gem from Dr. Ted Naiman’s book…

BreakfastFoodPyramid
BreakfastFoodPyramid.jpg1764×1732 291 KB

(Joey) #19

Perhaps your “24 hour” question is the crux of our discussion thus far.

#20

I eat OMAD for reasons different than most which is that I have a ton of food anxiety for a lot of reasons and it’s easier for me to just do it all at once.

I look to animals for guidance in a lot of things. They simply eat when they are hungry and when it’s available, so I think humans can too. Also, they don’t waste any parts of what they do eat. There are some differences in their world and ours now though, in that we have food available at every corner 24/7, most of which I wouldn’t even call food. For this reason I think we have to use our intelligence and experience to know what’s going to nourish us and make us feel our best physically and mentally.

(Bacon is a many-splendoured thing) #21

Or alternatively, don’t eat food with toxins in it.