amazing
even though I did not understand anything.
It’s a tiny rotating machine made of protein molecules. It has a fan blade structure that moves like a waterwheel but uses proton flow instead of water to go. The shaft has a bent end that pushes against three chambers, kind of like a rotary engine and as it rotates, it sucks in ADP then crushes it against a phosphor molecule to make ATP, and then spits it out in the last chamber before repeating.
It’s a little motor… complete with blades, shaft, rotor, chambers, and it’s what makes us go.
And then to make the protons on one side more than the other, there are other parts that basically “pump” them back from one side to the other… basically creating a “battery” with positive and negative charge on opposite sides… a battery to make the motor go round…
All the Krebs cycle and other chemistry is just describing the way the molecules & charges flow, but it’s so dry compared to the awesomeness of these very cool molecular machines. We’re made of tiny nanobot like parts…
Just had to share
That’s pretty awesome. I don’t totally get how it works, but it’s truly a thing of beauty. I gotta figure out how to make that a screen saver…
Phase 2 - day 1
Electrodermal is just the place where I store my ketone info since the apple health app doesn’t capture ketones.
Here’s the average over the phase 1 fast:
Feeling good but I might have caught a cold from my little one. Hopefully the UV therapy will help boost my immune system and fasting always helps.
On protein to maintain muscle and muscle as the “organ of longevity”…
And protein cycling to create a growth stimulus without the risks of mToR driven illness… basically cyclic is good, chronic is bad.
Thanks. This interview has kind of blown my mind and made me rethink the actual-fasting concept.
I got his ‘longevity diet’ but I think I meant to get the ‘fasting-mimicking diet’.
I don’t agree with everything he says but some elements are informative. He’s particularly cautious about “long” fasts (over a day) because of some isolated research that showed some risk… it’s not enough to dissuade me because there’s plenty of other literature and my n=1 that supports longer fasts.
Mike brings on experts with differing backgrounds and sometimes conflicting perspectives. I like to listen to all and then draw out the common threads.
The biggest takeaway here is the concept of inflammation and mToR anabolic signaling as being both good and bad, … it depends. The difference between building muscle and developing cancer is that one is short burst cyclic (that the body evolved for) and the other is chronic with no relief.
It’s like an ocean wave… it needs to come and go… like breathing. It works on natural rythms, not extremes that don’t release. The question is what rhythm? How long and what’s in the regimen?
Debate with the wife on whether my fast is a 4/3 or a 5/2…
I don’t eat Sun night - Friday evening so that’s 5 days to her.
But I eat three times on three days a week: Fri night, Saturday night and Sunday night… so that’s 3 days of eating to me.
Maybe it’s 4.5/2.5? Seems complicated… or I could do hours 119 fasted + 49 fed? But I’m not feeding for 49 hours continuously…
119 + 1 + 23 + 1 +23 + 1 ?
Hmmmm
mike is passionate for knowledge.
He is neutral for knowledge. If he find a better opinion he will shift his views.
Phase 2, Day 2
So 4.6lb water+food flux in one day.
Last night ended at 67G, 1.4K, 2.7GKI
This morning at 82G, 1.2K, 3.8GKI
So might be seeing a dawn effect that’s pushing GKI over 3.
Feeling the cold but not the deep chill just yet.
I’ll put a plug in for 96:48. It’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Technically it’s 3 days of feasting and 3 days of fasting because the 4th day is OMAD. From hours fasted perspective however, it’s pretty close to 120. When you say “3 days fasting and 3 days feasting” it sounds so balanced and reasonable compared to 2:5. You’re wife will be very happy. The difference between 3:3 and 2:5 is that you get an extra night of sleep in the feasted state, and that’s when muscle is built.
If I start on a Monday, I’ll eat at 6:00pm and then fast until 6:00pm on Friday (96hrs). Then I feast until 6:00pm on Sunday (48hrs). It’s a great balance between anabolism and autophagy. I’m blown away by how much muscle I’ve gained in the past 3 months.
That doesn’t add up to a week though … you’re missing a day and I’m OMAD on all days I eat, not just the one I break the fast on.
It is 119 hours (5 days) of continuous feeding + 3 OMAD meals on three days over 48 hours (2 days really). You’re right that I’m sleeping while fed for three nights… so 3 nights fed.
Maybe I should look at it like a vacation schedule “5 days continuous fasted + 3 nights OMAD fed each week”
Nope. It’s 6 days. My priority is the anabolism/catabolism balance it offers. I don’t have the same feasting and fasting days every week, which I really like.
There’s definitely no right or wrong way to go about it. It really just depends on what your priorities are. For me, my #1 priority is fat loss, 2nd is muscle gain, third is autophagy.
I need to eat Friday, Saturday and Sunday if I’m going to eat at all. That’s so I can spend some family time with the wife and kids.
I eat so infrequently that when I do, it matters who I eat with and why… back to primal purpose of social gatherings to feast together
It also matters because my eating gives my wife a sense of satisfaction that I take away when I fast. It’s as if I deprive her of the deep enjoyment of feeding me…
there’s something cultural there too… similar to how grandmas just need to feed kids and grandkids to get a sense of purpose and meaning … and love.
So my goals are similar… mental clarity, energy, fat loss, muscle gain, loose skin, autophagy (probably in that order), but my feeding dates are set. I can choose to skip a week of feeding to keep my body on its toes.
You’re counting Sunday night twice. No wonder it doesn’t add up.
Just count the hours of fast and divide by 24. I’m with your wife. It’s a 5 day fast. When you do things in the midst of a day instead of just from morning, it creates some confusion that way. Kind of like rounding errors.
Yes. Technically it’s 4.95 days fasted and 2.05 days fed. I’ll round to the nearest single digit:
4.9 / 2.1 weekly fast to feed days
Would that make sense to most people?
I don’t know who most people are. Most people I know think a week of eating only cabbage is a great idea and you’ll die without whole grains or if you eat too many eggs. So it might be beyond them. People who are keto fasters probably will get it, though!
So is the proper convention to call it out fast:feed or feed:fast? or is it like the date and depends on whether it’s the US or the rest of the world? LOL
I ask because I call it 5:2 and Don calls it 2:5 with a 5 day fast… since there’s no set syntax for fasting, I figure we can make it up starting with what’s most popular - that’s how languages get made anyway.