Fasting Diet 'Regenerates Diabetic Pancreas' (bbc.com) 166
According to a new study published in the journal Cell, a certain type of fasting diet can trigger the pancreas to regenerate itself. Of course, the researchers advise people not to try this without medical advice. BBC reports: In the experiments, mice were put on a modified form of the "fasting-mimicking diet." It is like the human form of the diet when people spend five days on a low calorie, low protein, low carbohydrate but high unsaturated-fat diet. It resembles a vegan diet with nuts and soups, but with around 800 to 1,100 calories a day. Then they have 25 days eating what they want -- so overall it mimics periods of feast and famine. Previous research has suggested it can slow the pace of aging. But animal experiments showed the diet regenerated a special type of cell in the pancreas called a beta cell. These are the cells that detect sugar in the blood and release the hormone insulin if it gets too high. There were benefits in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes in the mouse experiments. Type 1 is caused by the immune system destroying beta cells and type 2 is largely caused by lifestyle and the body no longer responding to insulin. Further tests on tissue samples from people with type 1 diabetes produced similar effects.
Re:Lifestyle disease (Score:5, Insightful)
You *chose* to eat a ********CORN-BASED******** diet and then you blame ********EVERYONE ELSE******** when you get diabetes.
Yes you can. For 30 years, we had public institutions telling people that they should eat a diet based on grains and starch. That was finally exposed as bogus nonsense unsupported by evidence. We can't just shove all the blame onto the individuals who followed the advice of the "experts".
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes we should be lumping it on the sugar industry. Oh wait, all that money they spent to skew nutrtitional advice is "speech".
Re: (Score:1)
WTF. Nutrition experts seem to change their mind every 10 years.
Do we know what's healthy and what's not? Is there any way to be sure?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: public institutions (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps it depends on exactly how well you read the reports. When I read the reports I *never* got the idea that they were recommending refined flours, sugar, or other similar sources of sugar or starch. The closest I can come is a recommendation for baked potatoes...which is still sort of valid, though now we (or at least I) worry more about the starch.
Cholesterol is an interesting example, though. Lots of "experts" believed that cholesterol was a very bad thing, despite the fact that the myelin sheathe
Re: (Score:2)
When I read the reports I *never* got the idea that they were recommending refined flours, sugar, or other similar sources of sugar or starch. The closest I can come is a recommendation for baked potatoes...which is still sort of valid, though now we (or at least I) worry more about the starch.
Here's a story [whale.to] from Luise Light, who was a leading nutritionist at the USDA when the "Food Pyramid" was originally adopted. After the nutritionists submitted their recommended guidelines to the Secretary of Agriculture, here's what happened:
When our version of the Food Guide came back to us revised, we were shocked to find that it was vastly different from the one we had developed. As I later discovered, the wholesale changes made to the guide by the Office of the Secretary of Agriculture were calculated to win the acceptance of the food industry. For instance, the Ag Secretaryâ(TM)s office altered wording to emphasize processed foods over fresh and whole foods, to downplay lean meats and low-fat dairy choices because the meat and milk lobbies believed itâ(TM)d hurt sales of full-fat products; it also hugely increased the servings of wheat and other grains to make the wheat growers happy. The meat lobby got the final word on the color of the saturated fat/cholesterol guideline which was changed from red to purple because meat producers worried that using red to signify âoebadâ fat would be linked to red meat in consumersâ(TM) minds.
Where we, the USDA nutritionists, called for a base of 5-9 servings of fresh fruits and vegetables a day, it was replaced with a paltry 2-3 servings (changed to 5-7 servings a couple of years later because an anti-cancer campaign by another government agency, the National Cancer Institute, forced the USDA to adopt the higher standard). Our recommendation of 3-4 daily servings of whole-grain breads and cereals was changed to a whopping 6-11 servings forming the base of the Food Pyramid as a concession to the processed wheat and corn industries. Moreover, my nutritionist group had placed baked goods made with white flour â" including crackers, sweets and other low-nutrient foods laden with sugars and fats â" at the peak of the pyramid, recommending that they be eaten sparingly. To our alarm, in the âoerevisedâ Food Guide, they were now made part of the Pyramidâ(TM)s base.
Light's account of this has appeared elsewhere in lots of sources. Although we probably can't verify every one of her personal memories, it seems clear that the nutritional guidelines WERE deliberately altered to emphasize processed foods, including starches and sugar
Re: (Score:2)
I've read that, and certainly there was lots of political interference. And the whole "food pyramid" thing was (and is) bad. But when I read the reports of what was actually recommended I didn't come away thinking that processed food was particularly healthy, or the highly refined starch was good for you. I did come away thinking they were unfairly down on cholesterol on scant evidence, as was later proved correct.
The "food pyramid" is really a marketing device, and I don't see how anyone can take it as
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The article specifically includes diabetes 1.
Also nobody has been blamed here.
Although I wholeheartedly agree with you that the current Standard American Diet is a pile of shit, your comment is heartless towards people with diabetes type 1.
Re: (Score:2)
Goddamn that a serious case of conspiracy-theory typing style you got there.
Have you been probed by aliens or something?
Re: (Score:2)
No, you won't see teeth evolved to crush grain. You will see teeth evolved to eat vegetables and fruit (among other things). Also tubers. But grains were not edible before the invention of fire and grinding (with stones, not teeth). (Well, green oats are edible, but you can't get much food that way, it takes too long. And I don't believe oats grow where we evolved anyway.)
It's been guessed, I don't know how reliably, that the first reason we started growing grain was to feet to cattle, and the second r
Great, just what I need (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Type 1 diabetic here. If your extra pancreas works alright, I'd be happy cut it out of..er, take it off your hands.
Re: (Score:1)
Type 1 diabetic here. If your extra pancreas works alright, I'd be happy cut it out of..er, take it off your hands.
I assume the claims are regarding type 2. Kind of the opposite disease to type 1. No alpha cells, vs no beta cells.
But I'll keep a spare pancreas on ice in case I need one in the future.
Re: (Score:1)
Ah, you assume wrong.
http://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674%2817%2930130-7
These results indicate that a FMD [Fast Mimicking Diet] promotes the reprogramming of pancreatic cells to restore insulin generation in islets from T1D patients
Re: (Score:1)
Good catch - The study appears to be a load of crap. They are claiming cell regrowth for type 1s, yet show no data on amino peptide production which is the standard test in showing if insulin production is happening or not. My guess would be zero amino peptide production before, zero amino peptide production after.
You didn't read the study or didn't comprehend what you read. Insulin production was expressed in this study as the organism's ability to clear exogenous glucose as is done in standard glucose tolerance testing. On top of that the major testing protocol for differentiating between type 2 diabetes and type 1 diabetes is the presence and amount of C-peptide which is an indicator of endogenous insulin production. (as opposed to insulin delivered from a needle which by it's very nature is devoid of C-peptide.)
O
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Aspirin (Score:1)
But acceptance of this idea might depend on one's 'conservancy' and 'traditionality'.
Re: (Score:1)
A homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) was performed to estimate steady-state -cell function (%B) and insulin sensitivity (%S), as previously described (Hsu et al., 2013, Matthews et al., 1985). The results indicate that the reversal of hyperglycemia was mainly caused by an induction of steady-state -cell function (%B)...
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: I assume (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Considering the rise of pancreatic cancer as a cause of death, most folks would gladly have a spare laying around.
Wouldn't more pancreatic cells increase the risk of pancreatic cancer?
Re: (Score:1)
Not unheard of (Score:5, Interesting)
We already know that the liver will regenerate itself, and no special dietary restriction is necessary (though you do have to be kind to your liver).
If you cut a chunk off of someone's liver, it will grow back. We've learned this from Hepatitis C patients who have Stage 3 fibrosis or even cirrhosis. Cure the Hepatitis C (which is possible now with the new, expensive, drugs) and the liver will come back from the functionally near-dead. It was once believed to be a one-way process, but it turns out it's not.
There might be light but it is not the big picture (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:There might be light but it is not the big pict (Score:4, Informative)
And we have the HFCS to thank for this unfortunate condition
The link between HFCS and diabetes is very, very weak. It is more myth than reality. One study [webmd.com] found a correlation at the national level between countries that use a lot of HFCS and also have higher levels of type 2 diabeties, but that is a weak link with very few data points that could have a lot of other explanations rather than direct causality. AFAIK, no study has found a causal link between HFCS and diabetes in humans. If the link was really as strong as many corn critics claim, then it would be very easy to show causality, yet that hasn't happened. I am very interested in this topic, so if someone can cite a study, I would be very interested to see it.
Disclaimer: I try to avoid HFCS (and other sugar as well), but I am not a fanatic about it.
Re:There might be light but it is not the big pict (Score:5, Informative)
Furthermore HFCS and cane [table] sugar are essentially the same thing and both are highly processed. In the case of cane sugar the glucose and fructose molecules are bound together creating a crystalline structure whereas with HFCS the molecules do not share a bond and therefore the substance is much more pliable.
Really eating any excessive amounts of any type of sugar is bad a person's health but there is a huge financial incentive for producers of cane sugar to discredit the much cheaper HFCS even though they're both highly processed, plant based and, practically, have identical chemical composition.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The author is essentially correct. HFCS and sucrose, are so similar in their biological effect, that they are for practical purposes identical. HFCS consists of free glucose and fructose in an approximately 50:50 ratio (there is a some variability, but infrequently enough to be relevant). Sucrose is a molecule with a glucose and fructose group covalently bonded, hence an exactly 50:50 ratio. The time scale for hydrolysis of the glucose-fructose bond in sucrose is as fast, if not faster, than the time scale
Re: (Score:1)
If all refined sugar consumption is lumped together, then there is a strong correlation between population sugar consumption and population prevalence of T2 diabetes. Additionally, changes in population t2 diabetes prevalence follow and correlate with changes in population sugar consumption.
Right. The causal relationship between HFCS and T2, insofar as there is one, is probably economic: by making it cheaper to increase the amount of sugar in processed foods, HFCS encourages consumers to increase the sugar in their diet. Maybe.
Where people in the US might once have been buying the occasional 6.5-ounce bottle of Coca-Cola as a treat, for example, the declining cost of the stuff meant that in 1955 Coke could introduce the 10- and 12-ounce "King Size" and 26-ounce "Family Size" bottles. And avera
Check out Dr. Joel Fuhrman's approach (Score:3)
https://www.drfuhrman.com/shop... [drfuhrman.com]
"After I was diagnosed with diabetes, my brother recommended I read Dr. Fuhrman's book The End of Diabetes. I started to read it right away and applied what I learned from it to my own life. By the time I was able to see my doctor -- three weeks later -- I had already lost 15 pounds, my blood glucose levels had returned to normal and the doctor said he had planned on putting me on meds but, after reviewing my new numbers, he would hold off for three more months. By that appo
Re:Check out Dr. Joel Fuhrman's approach (Score:5, Informative)
This comment sums up an alternative to the Fuhrman approach that is more fat heavy: ... based on what I've read and the lectures I've listened to over the last year, I'd say that the low carb, high (healthy) fat, moderate protein (LCHF) diet works for more people with type 2 diabetes than Fuhrman's diet, BUT his diet DOES work well for type 2 diabetics too. Which diet works best for you likely will be influenced by what your ancestors ate. If you enjoy eating grass-fed, pastured meat, free range poultry and eggs, and wild seafood, try the LCHF diet first. If you prefer a whole food, plant-based diet (vegan or vegetarian) try Fuhrman's diet first. Of all the books written on the low carb diet, Mark Hyman's book, The Blood Sugar Solution, is probably the best because it goes into greater detail on all aspects of a healthy diet, not just low carb. ..."
https://www.amazon.com/review/... [amazon.com]
"
Basically, the "Fat makes you fat" meme (which led to eating lots of refined carbs) has been terrible for our health! Our brains are mostly fat. Healthy fats are an important part of any diet, although we can argue about the best sources of them.
The "Banting diet" (later variant is the Dukan diet) builds on that protein/fat alternative -- but a problem with that approach healthwise is that too much protein and meat from badly raised animals can cause other health issues in the long-term (as well as ethical issues). Of course, it still may be better to get rid of diabetes first anyway you can and then worry about preventing cancer later when you feel better...
I also think Fuhrman is probably low on his iodine and vitamin D recommendations. And his general advice may not be a good match some few people with specific needs from genetics or microbiomes.
In general, Fuhrman's history as a world-class athlete in training may also bias him towards expecting so much that some people give up entirely (so, there is social / psychological aspect of all this that is somehow missed -- perhaps intentionally) whereas they may have done better with a lesser approach. I also agree it is very easy to backslide when only one family member makes the change and is constantly confronted with other people in their space with SAD eating habits.
Another interesting discussion with a specific disagreement with Fuhrman vs. McDougall even within broad agreement:
http://lanimuelrath.com/mcdoug... [lanimuelrath.com]
"The similarities between these 2 doctors and their dietary approaches are far greater than their differences."
Re:There might be light but it is not the big pict (Score:5, Interesting)
You write "RIght now the only thing that works, is a very strict diet (calorie and carb controlled) and a very rigorous physical training for a long-long years time, to reprogram the insulin receptors." Fortunately, that is not completely true.
I could write an entire thesis here about why this is so, but others already have done so extensively. Just google for "Reverse type 2 diabetes" or LCHF and look out for a website called dietdoctor dot com. Enjoy opening a pandora's box of information.
You might not believe this low carb - high fat (LCHF) moderate protein diet for reversing type 2 diabetes, but what's the harm in trying? In the Netherlands, we are already a few steps further, one of the largest healthcare insurance providers is now providing full coverage for LCHFas an effective and cheap treatment for type 2 diabetes. That has to tell you something.
It's a little-known fact that the current dietary guidelines, primarily based on very weak 50-year-old scientific evidence, are actually driving the non-communicable diseases such as type 2 diabetes and fueling the obesity epidemic. This is why you need to go to places like dietdoctor [dietdoctor.com] to find your information and you cannot rely on information from webmd or the mayo clinic. The authors Nina Teicholz and Gary Taubes have written great books about this. Again, enjoy opening a pandora's book.
Re: (Score:2)
The simpler more processed a carbohydrate is, the more Gloucester it will deliver. Eating minimally processed carbohydrates with lots of fiber and good fat is key. The problem with our diet is that we eat fat with no fiber, like meat, or sugar with no fiber, like potato
Re: (Score:2)
> . One has more trouble eating a pound of butter than a pound of sugar
While you have a point, your question might be somewhat misleading. A pound of sugar has roughly 1300 calories. a pound of fat roughly 1800. And you might be surprised by the amount of fat in many popular foods.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Now shooting Insulin 4-5 times every day, in a vicious circle.
If you have a working pancreas and need to take insulin, I suggest eating less of the foods, that raise your glucose levels in the first place. You don't have to go extreme, you don't have to eat foods that make you feel sick. You can cook tasty satiating foods, with just less of rice, pasta, potatoes, and such things.
You can make adjustments in steps you feel comfortable with.
Re: (Score:1)
Further beta-cell regeneration is only necessary in type 1 diabetes, which is covered in the article [cell.com], although I feel also there is a suggestion that the damage to the beta-cells could be caused by the high levels of insuline that have to be produced from the time the insuline resistance kicks in in those mice.
The insulin resistance which type 2 sufferers suffer from, can be reversed by a 'not so very strict diet' [ncl.ac.uk] for about 6 to 8 weeks only
Re: (Score:3)
I'm confused... not eating takes too much time...?
Re: (Score:2)
It seems reasonable that a fasting diet might help this, also, however. But 5 days a month is a bit extreme. I could do it a few times, but I think I know myself well enough to say I probably wouldn't be able to continue doing it. And from my past experience 1000 calories a day is harder to handle than a complete fast (except water).
What I'm trying is an extremely restricted carbohydrate diet. I even consider Oat bran to be high in carbohydrates. Wheat bran, however, and wheat germ are essentially free
Re: (Score:2)
I concur with everything you stated -- except about the difficulty of a proper diet and exercise to help you with your type 2 diabetes. I have a close friend that is type 2 and now no longer needs meds thanks to a careful diet. I have other friends and family members that fall into the pre-diabetic range as well and type 2 diabetes is in our families.
Insulin resistance has multiple factors, but diet and exercise is almost always effective. IR is mostly a metabolic issue with muscle tissue -- and just 30
See Dr. Mark Hyman's big picture approach too (Score:2)
Dr Hyman's "The Blood Sugar Solution" book mentioned earlier (in a Dr. Fuhrman comment):
http://bloodsugarsolution.com/ [bloodsugarsolution.com]
One of several books he wrote:
https://www.amazon.com/Mark-Hy... [amazon.com]
A review on his very latest book"Eat Fat, Get Thin: Why the Fat We Eat Is the Key to Sustained Weight Loss and Vibrant Health":
https://www.amazon.com/Eat-Fat... [amazon.com]
"I was a member of Dr. Hyman's beta test group for this book and my results were miraculous. I was an insulin dependent type 2 diabetic with high blood pressure. I have be
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not entirely sure what you mean. Is keeping a job to pay rent considered poor "life choices"? Or is having a family in the first place rather than being single and child-free considered poor "life choices"?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
is having a family in the first place rather than being single and child-free considered poor "life choices"?
Perhaps it's time for the first world to consider child insurance. It's not fair for the rest of us to have to foot the bill for the breeders' decisions.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The socialist state IS the insurance. :)
But breeders, who are placing a greater load upon the system, actually get a deduction for each rug rat. They're expected to pay less in taxes because they're producing offspring we don't need, unless we're short on low-information voters.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Remind me again, how exactly did you come to exist on this earth? Oh yeah, that's right, those darned breeders.
Yeah, and look at how badly the world needs me! Why, if they and others like them hadn't brought billions of people onto this planet (just since I was born) the world would have positively ended by now!
Granted, I wouldn't be here, but I would never have been here so consequently I wouldn't miss it. There wouldn't be an I to be upset about it. Unless you subscribe to some belief about magical sky spirits who come down and inhabit all good christian babies at the time of conception (or similar) then it's irra
The state could require breeders to be insured (Score:2)
True, you'd have to be in VHEMT to say breeders ought not to exist. But in the same way that many U.S. states require drivers of motor vehicles to carry liability insurance, generally privately underwritten, the state could require breeders to carry unemployment insurance that covers the full cost of the child's upbringing, also probably privately underwritten.
Re: (Score:2)
Is keeping a job to pay rent considered poor "life choices"?
Having a day job is no excuse to eat like crap and not exercise. Cut out the sugar and other refined foods, and get 10-15 a day of exercise, and you'll be doing better than the majority of the population.
Re: (Score:2)
There are many single, and poor, parents who are quite stressed for time. A 7-11 sandwich, a bottle of soda, and a bag of chips is just the sort of meal that many parents can afford the _time_ for when they're on the run to work, day care, and ordinary medical or educational meetings for their family.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a bullshit excuse for eating like crap.
Re: (Score:2)
Even a $1.50 Banquet frozen dinner has a serving of vegetables.
Re: (Score:2)
Great, but next time swap the sugar soda with water - or at the very least - diet soda, swap the bag of chips with some baby carrots, and now you are much better off without spending any more time.
Re: (Score:2)
There is a reason I chose that specific combination. It's a very cheap lunch bundle at the local 24 hour store, and does not include options for either fresh vegetables or bottled water.
Re: (Score:1)
Here's an interesting presentation [youtube.com] regarding HFCS/fructose.
Cancer? (Score:1)
tee hee "fasting diet" (Score:2)
That's not fasting. That's a modified fast. Wimps and their half-arsed fasts.
Re: (Score:2)
In trolling mode today?
American fasting diet? (Score:2, Troll)
WTF is this description of the fasting diet?
Since when did it become an unsaturated fats feast?
That's certainly not what it is supposed to be. The fasting, or 5 and 2 diet involves simple calorie reduction to around 500 calories 2 of every 7 days..
Hell.. 1000 calories is nothing like fasting.. you can easily live on that 365 days a year..
Has this also been Americanised into irrelevance?
I suppose a diet has to be easy to be marketable and therefore profitable right? Who cares if it is no longer effec
Re:American fasting diet? (Score:4, Informative)
The daily recommendations for caloric intake is 2000 calories. This is for average person who probably doesn't exist. But still it is a good baseline.
1000 calories is a fasting condition for many people as it is usually the amount of calories you burn all day just surviving. If you actually get out of bed and do stuff you will burn more calories. At the gym for an hour work out I can burn about 900-1300 calories.
The thing is you probably eat more then you think. Unless you measure every item you eat and record its calories. You are probably eating more calories then you think due to having bigger portions adding additional sides, that snak you may have during the day. You may still be slim but chances are you are taking in over 1000 calories.
Sure a person can survive for a long time on 1000 calories but the body is on starvation mode so it will try to limit your activity to prevent you from burning good body parts.
Re: (Score:1)
The daily recommendations for caloric intake is 2000 calories. This is for average person who probably doesn't exist.
Pfft. The average nonexistent person can get by just fine on 0 calories day. It's not like they'll starve into existence.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
What are you, a smurf? Or perhaps I sense some developing anorexia...
Re: (Score:2)
For me I weight more than 180lbs (I have a stocky build). So sustained sustained strenuous activities actually burn more calories. Also weight training causes you to burn more calories over the course of a day
Re:American fasting diet? (Score:4, Informative)
Hell.. 1000 calories is nothing like fasting.. you can easily live on that 365 days a year..
Baseline for zero activity adult patients is 1800 calories per day. This assumes a hospitalized patient in bed all day. 1000 calories is just over half of what you need so it IS "fasting" even if it's not "starvation". You can NOT survive 365 days a year on 1000 calories per day.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Baseline for zero activity (Score:5, Informative)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... [nih.gov]
Appropriate energy intake for critically ill mechanically respirated patients ~1900kcal/day. That is adjusted for the body weights etc.
https://health.gov/dietaryguid... [health.gov]
Shows that 1000kcal is appropriate for a sedentary 3 year old, 2400kcal for an average 18 year male and 2000kcal for average 18 year female. That is for moderately active people, sedentary people need less and those with high activity need more.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... [nih.gov]
Appropriate energy intake for critically ill mechanically respirated patients ~1900kcal/day. That is adjusted for the body weights etc.
https://health.gov/dietaryguid... [health.gov]
Shows that 1000kcal is appropriate for a sedentary 3 year old, 2400kcal for an average 18 year male and 2000kcal for average 18 year female. That is for moderately active people, sedentary people need less and those with high activity need more.
No wonder I wax hungry all the time on the 1,200 calorie diets they put me on as a teenager!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
What? A 1200 calorie a day diet for a teenager is child abuse.
I certainly felt so, LOL!
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re: not what it is supposed to be (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if that is why the words "a certain type of fasting diet can trigger the pancreas to regenerate itself" were chosen, and not just "a fasting diet can trigger..."
Re: (Score:2)
Exercise and eat a vegetable-based diet (not KFC, etc).
know nothing about diabetes ?
Re: (Score:1)
People's ignorance never ceases to amaze me.
Next we'll have someone advocating for a grain based diet to help with diabetes.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: vegetarian (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
By my rough calculation, 100g is less than a quarter pound. If you want it exact, Google will do the conversion.
Re: (Score:1)
And, do you really think that's all meat?
Re: (Score:1)
But still, I can't believe that pound/4 is all real meat. Let alone anything like organic...
Actually it's about 450/4=112.5 g, slightly over 100 g indeed.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Starting today I'll ignore all threads from the moment Trump is mentioned.
Bring your political frustration somewhere else please.
Re: (Score:1)
Meta-complaints about Trump are also blocked - I'm blocking myself!
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Of course you can not load mice 1000+ calories per day.
You can if you wrap them in electrical tape first.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't be stickler, taking everything out of context just like the bleeding heart liberals, because it gives you a talking platform.
Hehe, ironic...
RTFA. They DID try it on people. (Score:2)
RTFA. Then follow the link to the paper. They DID try it on humans. Worked reasonably well (though the sample was small so it was more "does this maybe work on people, too? Is it worth a big study to check?" rather than "do all the results reproduce in people just like mice or are they quantitatively different in THIS way?").
Interestingly, they used a proprietary commercial boxed Fasting Mimicing Diet - L-Nutra's ProLon (Developed by a team including a USC Davis professor specializing in gerontology and
Re: (Score:2)
In the United States, you can choose to live in another state that does allow medical marijuana.
Re: (Score:1)
Until you get busted by the Trump administration because "state's rights" are only valid for discrimination agaibst minority groups and for deregulating polluters.
Trump doesn't plan to pursue Rx pot (Score:2)
From a story in The Morning Call [mcall.com]:
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
I'd suggest moving to another state if you want to stop this.
And grow a garden in a healthy piece of soil.
Re: (Score:3)
It is amazing how much healthy practice gets incorporated into religion. Fasting is important for Muslims and Bhuddists. I'd wager it is not a coincidence.
So do observant Muslims and Buddhists (and Jews [slashdot.org]) on the Standard American Diet have statistically significant lower incidences of diabetes?
Re: (Score:3)
The answer seems to be no, at least for muslims.
From http://care.diabetesjournals.o... [diabetesjournals.org]: "The prevalence of diabetes in several countries with large Muslim populations appears to be similar to the rates observed in western countries and increasing by 10% per year as a result of urbanization and socioeconomic development."
I haven't the patience to search for research on other religions. I do know (from Indian colleagues with diabetes) that South-East Asian populations are genetically predisposed towards a g
Re: (Score:1)