[QUOTE=WorkInProgress]
Here is a cite to the health benefits of fasting. Unfortunately, it does not contain links to the studies.
http://www.rawfoodinfo.com/articles/art_fastinghealthbenefits.html
.
[/QUOTE]
Site is a combo of bullshit and half truths. It is true that in mice a reduction in calories leads to a longer mouse life. That is not really “fasting”, that’s “eating less” (“eating less” was achived by every-other day feeding), and damn straight, Americans would be healthier if they ate less. But humans are not tiny rodents either.
Here is a thread over in IMHO about “fasting”
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=8660289#post8660289
and my post: "Yes, it’s called starving, and it is bad for you: "Famine response - Wikipedia
After 2-3 days of starvation, the liver begins to synthesize ketone bodies from precursors obtained from fatty acid breakdown. The brain uses these ketone bodies as fuel, thus cutting its requirement for glucose. After fasting for 3 days, the brain gets 30% of its energy from ketone bodies. After 4 days, this goes up to 70%.
The consumption of ketone bodies by the brain relieves some of the glucose requirement but does not abolish it altogether. The brain retains some need for glucose, because ketone bodies can be broken down for energy only in the mitochondria, and mitochondria are often too big to travel down the long thin processes of neurons to reach the synapses.
In fact, the production of ketone bodies cuts the brain’s glucose requirement from 120 g per day to about 30 g per day. Of the remaining 30 g requirement, 20 g per day can be produced by the liver from glycerol (itself a product of fat breakdown). But this still leaves a deficit of about 10 g of glucose per day that must be supplied from some other source. This other source will be the body’s own proteins.
After several days of fasting, all cells in the body begin to break down protein. This releases amino acids into the bloodstream, which can be converted into glucose by the liver. Since much of our muscle mass is protein, this phenomenon is responsible for the wasting away of muscle mass seen in starvation.
However, the body is not able to selectively decide which cells will break down protein and which will not. In effect, all cells will break down protein, and essential cells (such as lung cells) are just as likely to be broken down as nonessential cells (such as muscle cells). The problem is that proteins are essential to the structure and metabolism of the cell. Most cells can not tolerate the loss of very much protein. Furthermore, about 2-3 g of protein has to be broken down to synthesise 1 g of glucose - so to make 10 g of glucose, about 20-30 g of protein is broken down each day to keep the brain alive.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/e...6851&dopt=Books
The effects of nutritional manipulation on immune function have been extensively studied in animals, but few studies have examined dietary restriction in humans. Obese patients enrolled in a protein-sparing, calorically restricted diet were monitored over a 3-month period with in vitro examination of mitogen- and antigen-induced lymphocyte blastogenesis. The sera from these patients were evaluated for effects on neutrophil chemotaxis, phagocytosis and microbial killing. Significant changes in body weight, triglycerides and glucose occurred during the diet, and most patients exhibited urinary ketosis. The diet was associated with increased blastogenesis in unstimulated cultures and in varicella and candida antigen-stimulated cultures, but blastogenesis was unchanged for phytohemagglutinin, concanavalin A, SK-SD and histoplasma. In assays of serum effects on neutrophil function, patients with urinary ketosis had depression of chemotaxis and microbial killing but not phagocytosis when compared to baseline or nonketotic patients. This study indicates that long-term caloric restriction is associated with significant effects on in vitro lymphocyte stimulation and with significant serum effects on normal neutrophil function.
Of course, fasting for a day or two should be OK, and in fact dudes often have to do this before some tests or procedures. And, going on a 'Fast" for one item in your diet- like “no booze for a month” or “no caffience for a week” is a good way to see how deeply these habits are ingrained."
It is not impossible that humans might live longer if they ate only every other day. But from what I remember of the experiment the mice just sat around also. Not many of us have that luxury, we either have to use our muscles or our brains. It’d be sad if we found that humans on such a diet lived an extra 10 years but lost 10% of intelligence.
That being said- most of us eat too damn much (I am one) and cutting back on those “Double-bacon-cheesburgers with large fries” meals would have many of us living longer- and healthier lives.