Even Intermittent Fasting Reduces Insulin Sensitivity (in The Obese)

[haidut]

The title of this thread is misleading because the patients were obese. That should be in the title:

"These patients were 56.9 6 1.0 years old and had controlled type 2 diabetes for 8.4 6 0.7 years, 7.7 6 0.1% (61 6 0.8 mmol/mol) HbA1c, and were overweight or obese, with an average BMI of 28.2 6 0.6 kg/m2."

The diet was 20% fat and 7% fiber, I wouldn't expect to get good results with that either, and it doesn't even say exactly what they ate:

"The energy and content of all test meals had the same macronutrient content and compo- sition (701 6 8 kcal; 20% fat, 54% carbo- hydrates, 26% protein, 7% fiber)."

And because it misuses the word "fasting." Intermittent "fasting" is not really fasting. It's a reduced calorie diet/feeding "window."

Ketogenic diets, intermittent "fasting" and medically supervised water only fasting in appropriately selected individuals are not all the same thing. They are all completely different and should not be lumped together. That's unscientific.

Only "dry" fasting and water-only fasting are true fasts but dry fasting is only done by weird hippies who lie about what they are really doing because it's impossible to do a dry fast for more than a few days. Water is needed for hydration and elimination of metabolic waste products through the kidneys. Intermittent "fasting" won't do anything for insulin resistance if one continues to eat high fat.

Energy usage of the body comes in 5 stages:

1. Directly from the food in your stomach/GI.
2. Glycogen from your liver.
3. Glycogen from your muscles.
4. Ketosis: from your adipose tissues (fat deposits).
5. Starvation: from your vital organs and tissues.

We take 2-3 days to reach stage 4 and that’s when actual fasting begins. To reach stage 5, it takes the typical person 40 days, depending on body reserves, and we would look anorexic from having lost most of our fat. There is a temporary loss of some protein before stage 4 begins. Water only fasting at stage 4 is a powerful way to restore insulin sensitivity but it most likely needs a few more days, about 10, which is really about 7 days from when stage 4 began.

Fasting is not "starving." Starvation only begins once labile fat reserves are depleted and muscle and organ tissue is then catabolized for sugar (glucose).

"Fasting is a scientific method of ridding the system of diseased tissue, and morbid matter, and is invariably accompanied by beneficial results. Starving is the deprivation of the tissues from nutriment which they require, and is invariably accompanied by disastrous consequences. The whole secret is this: fasting commences with the omission of the first meal and ends with the return of natural hunger, while starvation only begins with the return of natural hunger and terminates in death. Where the one ends the other begins. Whereas the latter process wastes the healthy tissues, emaciates the body, and depletes the vitality; the former process merely expels corrupt matter and useless fatty tissue, thereby elevating the energy, and eventually restoring the organism that just balance we term health."-Hereward Carrington

Medically Supervised Water-only Fasting In The Treatment Of Hypertension

Low Fat Diet/fasting Reverses 42 Yr Old Woman's Cancer, Published In British Medical
Jounral

Man Lives Off His Fat Stores For 382 Days

.

I changed the title.

 

[kayumochi]

Maybe a day or two of water fasting would be better than a daily feeding window ...

 

[chispas]

By adjusting the load you can reach failure just as in any other weight lifting. But you can do it more accurately and go less into the overtraining zone. The slow speed gives you control.

The slow speed might give you some control, but it does not maximise control. Sounds like what you are doing is fairly straightforward, like a push up or overhead press. The movements don't have a large requirement for stability. So your slow manner of doing them is really not that significant for you to progress.

The muscles in your eyeballs are almost exclusively fast twitch, so I don't know how you intend to segregate your eyeball fibres from your investment in Ray Peat's opinions.

 

[Such_Saturation]

The slow speed might give you some control, but it does not maximise control. Sounds like what you are doing is fairly straightforward, like a push up or overhead press. The movements don't have a large requirement for stability. So your slow manner of doing them is really not that significant for you to progress.

The muscles in your eyeballs are almost exclusively fast twitch, so I don't know how you intend to segregate your eyeball fibres from your investment in Ray Peat's opinions.

I'm using some amount of weight, although certainly less than what you would use for normal lifting. The muscle does the same work, just spread out over more time, so you have finer control on how far you want to take it. The muscles that stabilize the movement also get a workout (more than normal).

 

[InterrogaOmnia]

But you are training that kind of fiber which is poor in mithochondria... so you will end up with less and less of the other fibers.

This training would still increase the total amount of slow twitch fibers regardless, would it not? It's just that fast twitch has the greatest growth potential.

 

[chispas]

I'm using some amount of weight, although certainly less than what you would use for normal lifting. The muscle does the same work, just spread out over more time, so you have finer control on how far you want to take it. The muscles that stabilize the movement also get a workout (more than normal).

Look at how unstable this exercise is:



This stabilisation is what fast twitch muscles almost entirely do. It's difficult to train this way because the resistance is moving in several planes in a very random way due to the elasticity of the bands.

If you don't train this sort of way (I'm not trying to argue it's useful for everyone), you won't be maximising your potential stability, or improve the rate of contractile force production.

If you were right about the advantages of your slow method, Usain Bolt could become a better sprinter by walking slowly and deliberately, instead of actually sprinting.

I understand the premise of doing some stuff slow so that the fast stuff is accurate (I think ballet training is a bit like this) but we can't deny the physical reality. Muscles must contract fast to generate lots of force. Calcium is one of the players in making it happen. But not everyone needs to generate a lot of physical force day-to-day. You can deadlift 240kg using little force, but a lot of torque, as my previous video comparison shows.

The slow eccentric movement you described sounds rather low on force - you are mostly just bracing against gravity plus the weight of the apparatus (barbell or dumbbell or whatever you're using).

It would be great if you were right, then I could be as slow as a sloth, yet fantastically stable and accurate, and amazingly good at fast, high force movements despite never training in this way. It's like immaculate muscle capacity with zero effort!

Please be forthcoming with the evidence anytime soon.

 

[Such_Saturation]

I understand the premise of doing some stuff slow so that the fast stuff is accurate (I think ballet training is a bit like this) but we can't deny the physical reality. Muscles must contract fast to generate lots of force. Calcium is one of the players in making it happen. But not everyone needs to generate a lot of physical force day-to-day. You can deadlift 240kg using little force, but a lot of torque, as my previous video comparison shows.

The slow eccentric movement you described sounds rather low on force - you are mostly just bracing against gravity plus the weight of the apparatus (barbell or dumbbell or whatever you're using).

It would be great if you were right, then I could be as slow as a sloth, yet fantastically stable and accurate, and amazingly good at fast, high force movements despite never training in this way. It's like immaculate muscle capacity with zero effort!

Please be forthcoming with the evidence anytime soon.

Seems you don't understand. I am not after strength, or size, or explosive force. I am after increasing the number of mitochondria in my muscle tissue.

 

[chispas]

Seems you don't understand. I am not after strength, or size, or explosive force. I am after increasing the number of mitochondria in my muscle tissue.

For what purpose? And how will you know when you've reached your goal?

 

[Agent207]

Look at how unstable this exercise is:



This stabilisation is what fast twitch muscles almost entirely do. It's difficult to train this way because the resistance is moving in several planes in a very random way due to the elasticity of the bands.

If you don't train this sort of way (I'm not trying to argue it's useful for everyone), you won't be maximising your potential stability, or improve the rate of contractile force production.

If you were right about the advantages of your slow method, Usain Bolt could become a better sprinter by walking slowly and deliberately, instead of actually sprinting.

I understand the premise of doing some stuff slow so that the fast stuff is accurate (I think ballet training is a bit like this) but we can't deny the physical reality. Muscles must contract fast to generate lots of force. Calcium is one of the players in making it happen. But not everyone needs to generate a lot of physical force day-to-day. You can deadlift 240kg using little force, but a lot of torque, as my previous video comparison shows.

The slow eccentric movement you described sounds rather low on force - you are mostly just bracing against gravity plus the weight of the apparatus (barbell or dumbbell or whatever you're using).

It would be great if you were right, then I could be as slow as a sloth, yet fantastically stable and accurate, and amazingly good at fast, high force movements despite never training in this way. It's like immaculate muscle capacity with zero effort!

Good post, very well explained.

Seems you don't understand. I am not after strength, or size, or explosive force. I am after increasing the number of mitochondria in my muscle tissue.

And happens there's no better way to increase mitochondria activity than training as he says. Mitochondria is a tool, why do you want it for if you're not interested in the tasks its involved to deploy, ie. strength, speed, explosiveness...?

 

[Such_Saturation]

speed, explosiveness

These are achieved by anaerobic glycolysis. Respiration isn't fast enough for that.

 

[chispas]

Respiration isn't fast enough for that.

I'm not sure if you are right about this. There hasn't been a lot of research into mitochondrial function in fast and slow twitch muscles, but this is an overview of the main factors involved:

http://ajpcell.physiology.org/content/302/4/C629

You can get the full text for free.

"Maximal respiratory capacity of mitochondria from predominantly fast versus slow muscles has been measured in several species including cats, rabbits, rats, and fish. In general, studies performed on isolated mitochondria have reported little to no fiber type difference for maximal ADP-stimulated respiration in the presence of substrates feeding the respiratory chain at the level of complex I (e.g., pyruvate-malate, glutamate-malate, 2 oxoglutarate), complex II (succinate) as well as complex IV (46, 61, 101, 120). Data from our laboratory (79) (Fig. 1A) and others (6, 85) have shown that these results hold true in saponin permeabilized fiber bundles where mitochondrial morphology is preserved (83). These similar findings from both isolated and permeabilized preparations demonstrate that the lack of fiber type differences in isolated organelles (where only 20–40% of total muscle mitochondria are retrieved after homogenization) is not confounded by the possibility of selection bias during mechanical isolation of mitochondria."

 

[Such_Saturation]

I'm not sure if you are right about this. There hasn't been a lot of research into mitochondrial function in fast and slow twitch muscles, but this is an overview of the main factors involved:

http://ajpcell.physiology.org/content/302/4/C629

You can get the full text for free.

"Maximal respiratory capacity of mitochondria from predominantly fast versus slow muscles has been measured in several species including cats, rabbits, rats, and fish. In general, studies performed on isolated mitochondria have reported little to no fiber type difference for maximal ADP-stimulated respiration in the presence of substrates feeding the respiratory chain at the level of complex I (e.g., pyruvate-malate, glutamate-malate, 2 oxoglutarate), complex II (succinate) as well as complex IV (46, 61, 101, 120). Data from our laboratory (79) (Fig. 1A) and others (6, 85) have shown that these results hold true in saponin permeabilized fiber bundles where mitochondrial morphology is preserved (83). These similar findings from both isolated and permeabilized preparations demonstrate that the lack of fiber type differences in isolated organelles (where only 20–40% of total muscle mitochondria are retrieved after homogenization) is not confounded by the possibility of selection bias during mechanical isolation of mitochondria."

Well just look at the movement. You have to stop earlier with your method, right? Because the muscle will burn and just stop working completely for a few seconds. So that means lactic acid (respiration failure) and perhaps reliance on some kind of recharge mechanism that only uses mitochondria to refill the fuel tank, but not to do the actual work in real time. So the tank must empty periodically to sustain that kind of intensity. It is not a self-sustaining system. Now of course there seem to be middle of the road fibers with mixed characteristics, so I don't know which exercise would use the very fastest ones, but I suspect reaching maximal loads would require those fibers.

Now your quote says that the mitochondria tend to have the same qualities across fiber types, but what about the sheer number of them? That's also desirable. All the conventional info about the different fibers I find on google says that the slower fibers have the most mitochondria.

Now, focusing on the kinds of fiber that do use mitochondria to work. Ray Peat says that muscles should ideally be the part of the body doing the fat burning. And @tyw also says that burning PUFA quickly can even limit the harm from it.

substantial differences exist between mitochondria from slow and fast muscle with respect to their capacity to oxidize fatty acids and glycerol-3-phosphate

So perhaps the slowest fibers of all would be really the most desirable, health-wise. And then we can still get size gains if we wish to have them. I'm saying maybe lifting super slow is a good way to get these fibers (and using lower weights, but this part can sort itself out, because you won't be able to lift heavy at that speed even if you wanted to).

Also look at lower free radical production in slower fibers, quoting from your article:

free radical leak expressed as a percentage of total electron flux through the respiratory chain was 3.5-fold greater in mitochondria from the white gastrocnemius compared with that of the soleus muscle (79). A broader examination of two fast dominant versus two slow dominant muscles confirms the existence of this fiber type difference in H2O2 release (Fig. 2A) (82).

Finally, having more control on how much work your muscles are doing (by spreading it out temporally) will let you much more easily thread the line between under-training and over-training (a Peat no-no), as well as avoid eccentric movement (another big Peat no-no) when the weights are going down with gravity.


To me, all signs suggest that fast, very strong movements, require the sacrifice of normal, solid function, in exchange for a momentary "unnatural" performance, which is in itself unsustainable over any other term than short. And in its extreme form, these movements require the regression to a primitive form of energy production, anaerobic glycolysis. It is a state of emergency. Now, you may criticize any of these points and the philosophy behind them, but in a Ray Peat context they all hold each other up and they all go towards the same direction of discourse that I am pointing out. Which is that of a slower, more relaxed movement that uses ALL of the machinery of the cell, promoting and reinforcing the structure of the organism and multiplying its energy. So you can see why I felt comfortable expressing such an opinion on the actual website that is inspired by Ray Peat's ideas.

 

[chispas]

Well just look at the movement. You have to stop earlier with your method, right? Because the muscle will burn and just stop working completely for a few seconds. So that means lactic acid (respiration failure) and perhaps reliance on some kind of recharge mechanism that only uses mitochondria to refill the fuel tank, but not to do the actual work in real time. So the tank must empty periodically to sustain that kind of intensity. It is not a self-sustaining system. Now of course there seem to be middle of the road fibers with mixed characteristics, so I don't know which exercise would use the very fastest ones, but I suspect reaching maximal loads would require those fibers.

Now your quote says that the mitochondria tend to have the same qualities across fiber types, but what about the sheer number of them? That's also desirable. All the conventional info about the different fibers I find on google says that the slower fibers have the most mitochondria.

Now, focusing on the kinds of fiber that do use mitochondria to work. Ray Peat says that muscles should ideally be the part of the body doing the fat burning. And @tyw also says that burning PUFA quickly can even limit the harm from it.



So perhaps the slowest fibers of all would be really the most desirable, health-wise. And then we can still get size gains if we wish to have them. I'm saying maybe lifting super slow is a good way to get these fibers (and using lower weights, but this part can sort itself out, because you won't be able to lift heavy at that speed even if you wanted to).

Also look at lower free radical production in slower fibers, quoting from your article:



Finally, having more control on how much work your muscles are doing (by spreading it out temporally) will let you much more easily thread the line between under-training and over-training (a Peat no-no), as well as avoid eccentric movement (another big Peat no-no) when the weights are going down with gravity.


To me, all signs suggest that fast, very strong movements, require the sacrifice of normal, solid function, in exchange for a momentary "unnatural" performance, which is in itself unsustainable over any other term than short. And in its extreme form, these movements require the regression to a primitive form of energy production, anaerobic glycolysis. It is a state of emergency. Now, you may criticize any of these points and the philosophy behind them, but in a Ray Peat context they all hold each other up and they all go towards the same direction of discourse that I am pointing out. Which is that of a slower, more relaxed movement that uses ALL of the machinery of the cell, promoting and reinforcing the structure of the organism and multiplying its energy. So you can see why I felt comfortable expressing such an opinion on the actual website that is inspired by Ray Peat's ideas.

From the top, there's two different movements. Deadlifts and cleans are not the same movement. They enlist different fibres and this results in different proficiencies. Also, just because I'm moving fast doesn't mean I'm moving heavy weights. Moving slow will be similar to moving heavy. These factors are tied together by the laws of motion physics.

You are right, the fast twitch do fatigue a lot faster. You're also right that the fast twitch uses glycolysis - I wasn't arguing against this. I think the slow twitch have more mitochondria because they are the backup to the high speed muscles. Also note that slow twitch can be made to speed up their rate of contraction via the application of proteolytic enzymes and creatine, but fast twitch don't seem to get much faster under these conditions.

I doubt that fast exercise conducted for the use of training the fast twitch fibres is really going to result in an energy emergency. The reason I think this, is that the slower twitch fibres preserve their glycogen through fast movement training. It's possible to do a couple of hours of fast, moderately heavy weightlifting training, and then be surprised to find the energy to continue on to do slow, heavy deadlifts, even beating personal records.

I think using up all the slow twitch glycogen from the start of the workout will ultimately lead to an energy emergency, but not the other way around. Once the backup is cooked, you are toast. Try starting your workout with slow movements, and then follow it up with fast ones. All of the plentiful mitochrondria you supposedly trained will not help you one iota, and you will be exhausted.

This seems reasonable to me.

You seem to want to be a mitochrondrial millionaire, but without the capacity to spend your wealth.

 

[Hitoshi]

I didnt bother reading the replies

Of course IR occurs when the obese fast, because they are liberating their fat-assness for energy. It is physioligical IR.
This is a good thing.

 

[Such_Saturation]

I didnt bother reading the replies

they are liberating their fat-assness for energy.

LOL /thread

 

[Ideonaut]

By adjusting the load you can reach failure just as in any other weight lifting. But you can do it more accurately and go less into the overtraining zone. The slow speed gives you control.

I like this idea and will try it, Such. I wouldn't assume that slow training would mean slow performance later, but maybe he has evidence. The ultimate in slowness, isometric training, doesn't lead to slow performance that I know of. I've wondered, BTW, how isometrics fit into Peat's scheme of concentric exercise good/ eccentric bad.

 

[Such_Saturation]

I like this idea and will try it, Such. I wouldn't assume that slow training would mean slow performance later, but maybe he has evidence. The ultimate in slowness, isometric training, doesn't lead to slow performance that I know of. I've wondered, BTW, how isometrics fit into Peat's scheme of concentric exercise good/ eccentric bad.

Performance... do you guys earn your living as human forklifts or something?

 

[chispas]

I like this idea and will try it, Such. I wouldn't assume that slow training would mean slow performance later, but maybe he has evidence. The ultimate in slowness, isometric training, doesn't lead to slow performance that I know of. I've wondered, BTW, how isometrics fit into Peat's scheme of concentric exercise good/ eccentric bad.

Isometric contraction isn't comparable to slow contraction because you push your muscles to 99%.

Such is standing around lifting very lightly, very slowly, fairly easily, believing great things are happening. I wouldn't waste my time. If his method results in more mitochondria, bodybuilders and powerlifters would hypothetically have the most.

 

[Such_Saturation]

Isometric contraction isn't comparable to slow contraction because you push your muscles to 99%.

Such is standing around lifting very lightly, very slowly, fairly easily, believing great things are happening. I wouldn't waste my time. If his method results in more mitochondria, bodybuilders and powerlifters would hypothetically have the most.

It isn't easy or super light. It's difficult and I use about 60% of maximal.

 

[zztr]

In combat sports they go on about puffed up fighter syndrome. It's well known that slow work with weights can outright reduce hand speed and punching power. The added muscle mass also kills endurance, such that the fighter runs out of gas early.

Explosive stuff with medicine balls and dumbbells is preferred. I found shot putting a great way to train. Also beating a tire with a sledgehammer as hard as you can.

The problem with the clean and jerk and most barbell stuff is everyone hurts themselves eventually.