Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Medicine Science

Fasting Can Improve Overall Health By Causing Circadian Clocks In the Liver and Skeletal Muscle To Rewire Their Metabolism, Study Finds (sciencedaily.com) 216

Posted by BeauHD from the money-saving-diets dept.
An anonymous reader quotes a report from ScienceDaily: In a University of California, Irvine-led study, researchers found evidence that fasting affects circadian clocks in the liver and skeletal muscle, causing them to rewire their metabolism, which can ultimately lead to improved health and protection against aging-associated diseases. The study was published recently in Cell Reports. The research was conducted using mice, which were subjected to 24-hour periods of fasting. While fasting, researchers noted the mice exhibited a reduction in oxygen consumption (VO2), respiratory exchange ratio (RER), and energy expenditure, all of which were completely abolished by refeeding, which parallels results observed in humans.

"The reorganization of gene regulation by fasting could prime the genome to a more permissive state to anticipate upcoming food intake and thereby drive a new rhythmic cycle of gene expression. In other words, fasting is able to essentially reprogram a variety of cellular responses. Therefore, optimal fasting in a timed manner would be strategic to positively affect cellular functions and ultimately benefiting health and protecting against aging-associated diseases." This study opens new avenues of investigation that could ultimately lead to the development of nutritional strategies to improve health in humans.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Fasting Can Improve Overall Health By Causing Circadian Clocks In the Liver and Skeletal Muscle To Rewire Their Metabolism, Stud More

Fasting Can Improve Overall Health By Causing Circadian Clocks In the Liver and Skeletal Muscle To Rewire Their Metabolism, Stud

Comments Filter:

  • What no anteaters? (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Shouldn't UC Irvine be testing on anteaters, not rats?
  • The newest diet fad is "intermittent fasting". 20 years ago it was "skipping breakfast" and was bad for you.

    "1,500 years ago, everybody knew that the Earth was the center of the universe. 500 years ago, everybody knew that the Earth was flat. And 15 minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow."

    • I follow this new fad called "I only eat when I'm hungry".

      I got to tell you, so far it's really going greaH&goyLUKHgZZZzzzz....

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by js290 ( 697670 )
      The old religions have known about fasting for millennia. Science is way behind.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward

        In the VERY old days, periods of fasting were unavoidable. So, naturally, humans built some myths around it, as they did around basically everything. They sanctify the mundane as a psychological mechanism for coping with the existential emptiness of our existence.

        The old religions simply inherited those myths.

        It's really not surprising that they would, nor that our bodies would have some baked-in responses to this recurring survival need.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by x0ra ( 1249540 )
          or you can assume that our body evolved mechanism to deal with the recurring lack of food and periods of fast might be where you are the sharpest. This would definitively be required to be able to find food. To the opposite, the constant influx of food is not "natural" to the body.
          • "Natural" is irrelevant. The digestion of food generates free radicals; that's bad. By limiting the amount of time that the body is exposed to free radicals, and limiting their quantity, health improves. That's accomplished by choosing the right foods, not eating too much, and having extended periods in which no food is ingested. Apparently, the lower end of the range for "extended" is about 14 hours, although the research on this is rather sparse so far.

        • You are a moron who can't think for himself, a blithering parrot repeating obnoxious atheistic mythology

      • Re:Don't like the science? Wait a few years (Score:5, Interesting)

        by jma05 ( 897351 ) on Thursday January 17, 2019 @01:42AM (#57975826)

        The fasting traditions in religion didn't make health claims.
        Fasting causes acidosis, which leads to mild euphoria.
        People also fast to promote the odds of transcendental experiences.
        It was an act of discipline.

        But no religion had the liver, let alone circadian clocks in mind.
        I wouldn't say religion *knew* fasting. It used it for an entirely different purpose.

        • Exacto mundo. Finally some sense.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by epine ( 68316 )

        The old religions have known about fasting for millennia. Science is way behind.

        Great, if you had a handy decoder ring to help separate the few things they got right from all the other batshit they didn't.

        The modern definition of "known about" means that you have substantive evidence where you don't need to resort to a telepathic-genie powered decoder ring.

        We know that Einstein's correction to Newton improves on Newton's original predictions of celestial motions. This will never change. We might come up wit

    • Re:Don't like the science? Wait a few years (Score:5, Informative)

      by Ichijo ( 607641 ) on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @11:18PM (#57975590) Journal

      500 years ago, everybody knew that the Earth was flat.

      False [wikipedia.org].

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Synon ( 847155 )
      Only one way to find out... I started the "fad" a couple weeks ago, restricting my eating time to 8 hours a day and 16 hours of fasting with some 24+ hours fasts thrown in here and there. I'm less concerted about weight loss and more focused on cholesterol and an A1C that puts my blood glucose levels on the edge of pre-diabetic. I'm decently fit and athletic, healthy diet, middle of the "healthy weight" for my height and sex. I plan to fast this way every day for 3 months, though still keeping my typical di

      • Only one way to find out... I started the "fad" a couple weeks ago, restricting my eating time to 8 hours a day and 16 hours of fasting with some 24+ hours fasts thrown in here and there. I'm less concerted about weight loss and more focused on cholesterol and an A1C that puts my blood glucose levels on the edge of pre-diabetic. I'm decently fit and athletic, healthy diet, middle of the "healthy weight" for my height and sex. I plan to fast this way every day for 3 months, though still keeping my typical di

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by thomst ( 1640045 )

      doubledown00 pointed out:

      The newest diet fad is "intermittent fasting". 20 years ago it was "skipping breakfast" and was bad for you.

      This is purely anecdotal evidence, of course, but I'm an insuliin-dependent, Type II diabeitc. I've been "daytime fasting" (fasting a minimum of 16 hours each day) for about 8 months now.

      My weight is down about 40 lbs since I began this regimen. Just as importantly, I now need only half as much insulin per day as I did before I began fasting during the day. In fact, I have to be especially careful with my Lantus intake, because hypoglycemia is a fucking drag.

      Oh, and I "cheat" on wee

    • Re:Don't like the science? Wait a few years (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Kokuyo ( 549451 ) on Thursday January 17, 2019 @02:12AM (#57975872) Journal

      Today people still believe that people 500 years ago believed the world to be flat.

    • The 'breakfast is the most important meal" was a marketing propaganda by breakfast cereal companies. Stuffing yourself in the morning with high carb cereals leads to obesity especially kids who eat sweetened cereals. Eat when you are hungry and in moderation. There is no need to religiously eat at certain times of day. This is an artifact of the Industrial Revolution where you only had time to eat before work and during the official lunchtime. Cut out the high carb foods and sugary drinks and you'll find it

    • Science can be a liar, sometimes!

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by rednip ( 186217 )
      The idea that 'everyone thought that the earth was flat 500 years ago' is a myth. The ancient greeks knew that that the world is roughly round; Pythagoras wrote as much in 600 BC. Christopher Columbus was ridiculed because he believed that the world was half the size that most who had studied the subject believed. They were right, if he hadn't run into 'the west indies' rather than India as he planned, the famous explorer would be nothing more than a footnote at best. https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by skam240 ( 789197 )

      Following that logic, everything we know is false because it could be falsified some day.

      That's stupid. You work with the best data you have available to you.

  • I have noticed (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Beeftopia ( 1846720 ) on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @10:59PM (#57975552)

    I have noticed that dropping my calories way down for a day leads to dramatically improved sleep. FWIW, YMMV, etc.

    • I have noticed that dropping my calories way down for a day leads to dramatically improved sleep

      I have noticed that dropping MY calories way down, say to 0, permanently leads to DRAMATICALLY improved sleep -- why, I'm dead to the world.

  • Fasting worked wonders for my health. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Cobratek ( 14456 ) on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @11:18PM (#57975586) Homepage
    This was worth logging in for.

    I was overweight and staring down 50, so I did some research and decided to try it.

    I did a 7 day water fast followed by a mostly keto style diet, but really just sticking to food that's been on the planet for longer than 100 years, no processed chemical foods. I lost maybe 10 pounds during that week but the weight just kept falling off.  Down from 40's to 34's and even 32's after about 9 months of sticking to real food, cut back(not out) on sugar and bread.  My blood panels showed no problems with cholesterol etc after eating bacon and eggs for breakfast for months.  homemade soups etc for dinner.

    Fasting is part of a natural cycle, your body uses the time when digestion is shut down to heal itself.

    Don't believe me, prove me wrong.

    • Re:prove me wrong (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      >Don't believe me, prove me wrong.

      That's not how it works. YOU make a claim, YOU provide proof.
      Your post was fine until that last sentence.

      Besides, it's impossible to prove that what worked for you won't work for others.
      You probably understand that your body might be an exception as well, just because it worked for you it won't necessarily work for others.

      This is all anecdotal, which is just fine. Just don't start asking for "disproving proof" when you provide none in the first place.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Cobratek ( 14456 )
        my statement is meant as more of a "don't do what I did without doing your own research" and less a demand for others to refute it.

        english, not my best subject but whatever

    • Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)

      by Pinky's Brain ( 1158667 )

      Having been a fatso a priori eliminates you as someone suitable to give diet advice, dieting maybe ... but not diet.

      Leave healthy people alone and stick with your own, fatties.

    • but really just sticking to food that's been on the planet for longer than 100 years

      I can't remember us synthesising new food in labs (except maybe vegan not burgers). Your choice is arbitrary and doesn't help understanding of the issues at play.

    • I did something similar with intermittent fasting and was able to achieve my goals. I was turning 40 and tipped the scales at around 240 lbs. I read A LOT , watched a bunch of YouTube videos, scoured health forums to get an idea of what worked for others. Unfortunately, my doctor was useless in this regard so I relied on the Internet to give some guidance

      Here's my routine .. DISCLAIMER: This worked for me, it might not work for you. YMMV:

      - Start off on Atkins/Keto diet. Cut out all sugars/carbs.

      • Here's my routine .. DISCLAIMER: This worked for me, it might not work for you.

        - Restrict diet to 1,100 calories daily. Track this via the FitBit app. If it didn't have a barcode or wasn't in the FitBit database, I didn't eat it

        That was the only thing you needed to do to lose weight. And you don't need the disclaimer; it works for everybody unless they are terrible at counting kcal.

        • Well, I'd like to think the working out helped my health too. I mean, I saw actual, tangible results in terms of my weight lifting ability and ability to run / cycle / climb stairs without getting winded. I don't think that would have been possible on a diet-only strategy

          Also, I don't fully understand the biological process behind the intermittent fasting but I can only talk about my personal results, hence the YMMV. I think with a reduction in caloric intake, there's a corresponding decrease in met

          • Well, I'd like to think the working out helped my health too. I mean, I saw actual, tangible results in terms of my weight lifting ability and ability to run / cycle / climb stairs without getting winded. I don't think that would have been possible on a diet-only strategy>

            Correct, but I wasn't talking about fitness level, just weightloss.

            Also, I don't fully understand the biological process behind the intermittent fasting but I can only talk about my personal results, hence the YMMV. I think with a reduction in caloric intake, there's a corresponding decrease in metabolism. That is, your body realizes you're intaking far fewer calories than normal and it makes certain adjustments so going from 2,400 calories to 1,100 calories works for a while, but then your body just gets used to 1,100 so your weight loss either plateaus or slows down.

            That doesn't happen. The body doesn't 'get used' to fewer kcal, it drops in response to less total mass of you demanding energy. It will never cross to 1100 kcal, even if you're a short woman. Even if you're comatose. Your organs, brain and body heat require energy and it must come from bodyfat or what you're eating.

            If anybody drops their daily kcal to 1100 they will lose weight, regardless of exercise, medications, genetics, type of food, g

  • Probabilistic structure for fasting http://bit.ly/2ivHC5d [bit.ly]

  • for making a rodent healthier.

    primates? who knows....

  • Those mice were "being starved."
  • https://lifehacker.com/intermi... [lifehacker.com] Often I'll read a topic somewhere else and see it show up on Slashdot hours or days later. When I saw this I was sure it was the post I'd read earlier in the day. Imagine my surprise to find it had the opposite conclusion.

    • That article does not counter the claims of this study. Most of the claims are also dubious.

      "There's not much research". No, but there isn't much research on keto, paleo, or most other diets. The reason is that human long term trials are difficult to get right and expensive. There is a reason most diets are hyped at first as being "special" but when science catches up they turn out to be no better than a similarly calorie restricted diet.

      "It's hard to do". Depends on the regimen and your body. Time-restrict

  • Cant eat as much, cant buy as much alcohol or drugs... Ummm... ya. :)

    • Cant eat as much, cant buy as much alcohol or drugs...

      Actually, the healthy stuff is more expensive. I picked up 1lb of grass-fed 90% ground beef [jonescreekbeef.com] at Walmart earlier this evening, and it's $6/lb. The ground lips-and-assholes in the opaque tube (because they don't want you seeing what it looks like until you've bought it) costs about half as much, but who knows how that vile sludge ever got approved for human consumption. It pretty much also holds true for hot dogs, chicken nuggets, and anything else they can fill with animal parts that should've gone into pe

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Xarius ( 691264 )

        "healthy food is expensive" is a lie for the most part. It just takes slightly longer to make than an instant meal.

        In the UK you can get a bag of 7 or 8 carrots for 60p, a bunch of bananas for less than £1, a bag of onions for less than £1, most vegetables are very cheap. Some fruit are expensive but that depends on the season. You might be talking £1.60 for a bag of bananas.

        1kg of lentils for less than £2. 1kg of chopped tomatoes for less than £3. 1kg of spinach for less than

        • Extending this, outside of the holidays a whole frozen turkey around here in the US costs a bit over $1/lb, sometimes discounted under that. So a big old 16lb turkey can be had for under $20, sometimes as low as $12-$14. Roast it, cut it up, break down the skeleton and boil it with herbs and veg for stock, and for all of $20 you're going to get about 8 lbs of turkey meat and 2 gallons of soup stock.

          For each meal add some potatoes and some vegetables, and you're talking a solid 6-8 meals for a family of four

  • "Therefore, optimal fasting in a timed manner would be strategic to positively affect cellular functions and ultimately benefiting health and protecting against aging-associated diseases."

    Why keep us in suspense? What is the freaking optimal fasting and timing? Tell us already. Just like the local news people. "There is a killer tornado bearing down on you, we'll tell you how to survive at 11."

    I assume, like many a mouse study, that there is a giant gulf between the results one gets with experiments on

    • Suspense? Why would they know that yet? They've just barely confirmed there appears to be more than just a correlative affect.
  • Oh, please, people, stop, you're killing me..
  • I hope all these studies are not tied to religions that preach fasting.

  • The real payload:

    We demonstrate that the transcriptional response to fasting operates through molecular mechanisms that are distinct from time-restricted feeding regimens.

    Note that while the genetic pathways may be distinct, this is not the same as saying that establishing a TRE practice (easy, if you start with a broad 12-hour restriction window) won't later help you adapt to an actual fasting practice.

    Nor does this state that the genetic response to TRE is less beneficial than the genetic response to actu

Slashdot Top Deals

Every nonzero finite dimensional inner product space has an orthonormal basis. It makes sense, when you don't think about it.

Close