The “great fool theory” suggests that there are many people like me and I am not a unique example. My observation at the gym is that there are many older people like me. Outside of the gym I see the vast majority of older people leading sedentary lifestyles and buying carts of junk food from Costco and Walmart.
No, I do not think I am (n=1)
“In contrast, exercise could be the most effective intervention for sarcopenia in older persons”
You’ve created a straw man and I am the biggest advocate for exercise you could possibly find.
We are debating the benefits of fasting.
You included time-restricted feeding (TRF) and I am also debating that. The evidence is just too strong as a search will provide that. I do a one or two-day fast occasionally when I feel the need to get my system in balance.
You also imply that sarcopenia is a given for older people and I dispute that.
Show me a peer reviewed paper that shows a benefit of TRF.
So you have as much muscle mass as when you were 30?
Here you can see the World Masters Weightlifting records decrease with every age category after 45. These are athletes who are specifically training to maximise (retain) strength.
Example from the Super Heavyweight category:
40 - 358
45 - 345
50 - 310
55 - 278
60 - 250
65 - 218
70 - 185
75 - 157
80 - 95
The data doesn’t lie but I’m sure your cognitive dissonance will find a way to reject it 
Yes, but they were much over the normal muscle mass, and most didn’t get there without any questionable supplements. I see a withering of muscles at the gym from bodybuilders using steroids etc. I think a normal healthy male that has not been overly disposed to building muscle mass in the past will be able to maintain their muscles through diet and exercise. I have also seen at my gym, that those older males that have retired and started resistance put on muscle mass as I have.
In any case, I have not lost muscle mass and I am not (n=1)
Here are the World Masters track cycling records:
The best proxy for muscle mass is probably the Flying 200m. Same trend.
Interesting debate going on here. I believe sarcopenia will happen to everyone as we age. The primary goal that I think we are all focused on… is to slow down the process. Eating healthy, working out regularly…and IF or TRE and/or rapamycin…it ll helps. The benefit(s) of IF, TRE & rapamycin is that they enable autophagy to function…which is a critical component of increasing healthspan and delaying the onset of age-related diseases.
You do realise that stating something as fact doesn’t make it so? There is evidence that you need over three days of fasting to induce autophagy.
My word…I’m surprised to hear you make that statement. Have you looked into the tremendous volume of scientific literature that explains the importance of autophagy? In my book Rapamycin, mTOR, Autophagy & Treating mTOR Syndrome , I created the term mTOR Syndrome, which stands for the situation that occurs in people who constantly over-express mTOR and get very little time in autophagy. I think under-activation of autophagy is a major contributing factor to the epidemic of epidemics that most of humanity is now experiencing.
I suspect the question is if you are already taking rapamycin, what is the benefit of the additional autophagy that you get from TRF or fasting… I think this is still an open question, though I think many people are betting that there is added benefit from the fasting or TRF driven autophagy.
I agree…it is still an open question…but over the next few years, we will get TONS of data from the PEARL trial and all the input from people on rapamycin.news. I personally think the benefits of combining rapamycin &with TRE or IF will be additive.
My god I hope you’re paying Brian for book advertising? You’ve plugged it 4 times on this thread alone.
Yet again you’ve created a straw man. I didn’t say that fasting doesn’t induce autophagy, I simply said “ There is evidence that you need over three days of fasting to induce autophagy”… So you can say with a high degree of confidence that TRF does not induce autophagy.
In my book, ‘Why fasting is a fad that won’t last’ I discuss how fasting leads to deterioration in body composition, increases fragility, raises risk of osteoporosis… and doesn’t extend lifespan.
Anything done inappropriately or to excess can be harmful. I hope more people begin to learn the importance of fasting and increasing time in autophagy…and how rapamycin can help.
Part of the problem is semantics.
Do I believe sarcopenia is the general rule with aging? Yes
Do I believe it is inevitable for some people? Yes
Do I believe some people can have more muscle mass at 80 than 50? Yes
Do I believe many people can avoid sarcopenia? Yes
Do I believe people who develop excessive muscle mass when they are younger will lose a good deal of it in old age? Yes
Do I believe time-restricted feeding is good for most old people? Yes
Do I believe in extended fasting for older people? No
Can You Build Muscle When You’re Older?
“I learned this in my mid-50s, when I went back to the gym after a sedentary period. At some point, I realized I was able to do more push-ups than I’d ever tried to do. So I set a goal to do 56 on my 56th birthday. It was hard, but I gradually got stronger, and it happened.”
“Other research confirms what Harrington told me: It’s never too late to start, and anyone can get stronger. One example: People in their 90s, after a 12-week strength-building program, gained strength, power and muscle mass. They were then able to walk faster (which other research has linked to living longer) and get out of chairs more easily.”
“Older and stronger: Progressive resistance training can build muscle, increase strength as we age”
Older and stronger: Progressive resistance training can build muscle, and increase strength as we age
Congratulations, you’ve really broken new ground here: younger people have more strength and endurance than older people- a (duh) level fact agreed upon by every person with an IQ high enough to sustain life.
That said, choosing juiced up steroid abusers who likely won’t live past 65 to make your point isn’t exactly bolstering the view that you stick with rational, well thought out arguments.
This will be my last reply to you, as I think you just enjoy arguing. It’s like debating someone (most people, btw) who has done zero research yet thinks it’s insane to take an “immunity crushing” transplant drug like Rapamycin.
You say my evolutionary argument is wrong because early man lived until 40? Good point, as they had access to plenty of doctors, antibiotics and nuclear imaging, etc; and we, of course, often die from combat with nearby tribes and, of course, who doesn’t know someone who recently lost their life being eaten by an animal or on the hunt? Yep, apples and apples comparison.
Of course, my point, which you avoided, is a simple one: Did our bodies evolve to deal with food scarcity being the norm, or not? Clearly they did. Your logic is that the human body, evolved from inception to ~100 years ago has magically and positively adapted in a few decades of 24/7 access to food; making eating multiple times per day the ideal. Really? There is no way you believe this if you’re a rational person.
Your view is that TRF (the norm through all of human evolution) is somehow dangerous. This defies logic and critical thinking at the most basic level. There is NO WAY our bodies have adapted to endless food- that evolutionary change will take, what, 100’s of thousand of years… Want even more evidence: look at obesity. If we had evolved to deal with our current feeding dynamic, our bodies wouldn’t be storing fat for times of famine.
I don’t know about you, but if I ate everything I wanted, I’d weigh 2x what I do now- maybe more. Being fit isn’t normal now. It takes a LOT of disciple to be fit. It’s not natural, because we are programmed to eat our fill. We fight this every day. btw, the fight is a lot easier with IF. My glucose/insulin aren’t spiking several times a day- another benefit of TRF that research and even mainstream doctors admit. You, of course, won’t see this as a benefit of TRF because… you take Rapamycin and fasting bad!
You clearly never fasted or you did it wrong. ANYONE who has fasted (yes, I know, millions of n=1 in your mind) can tell you that your body composition is improved after it normalized post fasting.
“fasting leads to deterioration in body composition, increases fragility, raises risk of osteoporosis… and doesn’t extend lifespan.”. Eagerly awaiting your proof of all of the above.
Part of your “thesis” is that Rapamycin produces the maximum amount of autophagy and benefits possible, and therefore anything combined with rapamycin is net zero, at best, and likely a negative. Your Rapamyin silver bullet theory strikes me as a tad bit optimistic, bordering on cult-like. Yeah, there is NO WAY fasting could be additive to Rapamycin. Also, there is only 1 type of autophagy. Oh wait… that’s not correct. Dry fasting vs water fasting produces different results. But, never mind that, you’re taking Rapamycin, so anything else autophagy related is irrelevant.
You clearly haven’t done any research into fasting. Curious as to your opinion: Is fasting a positive for the gut microbiome, a negative or neutral? Never mind, I know your answer: it doesn’t matter, I’m taking Rapamycin.
We get it- you really don’t wanna fast. Got it. Why are you hanging out in a thread titled, “Question about fasting protocols”? Perhaps you’re arguing with yourself- trying to build the case to yourself that you don’t need to fast because… you don’t want to fast. Confirmation bias is strong with you.
I’ll let you speculate on evolution, I just follow the data:
The studies compared intermittent fasting against usual eating (in seven studies); energy restriction diets (eight studies); and usual eating and energy restriction diets (three studies). The studies lasted from four weeks to six months. Results were reported after three months (short-term), and between three and 12 months (medium-term).
We didn’t find any data on mortality, cardiovascular mortality or risk of stroke, heart attack or heart failure.
We found that people may lose more weight by intermittent fasting than by usual eating over three months (evidence from 7 studies in 224 people); but not when compared against energy restriction diets for three months (10 studies; 719 people) or longer (3 to 12 months; 4 studies; 279 people).
We also found that intermittent fasting did not appear to affect blood sugar levels when compared against usual eating over three months (3 studies; 95 people); energy restriction diets over three months (9 studies; 582 people); or energy restriction diets over 3 to12 months (4 studies; 279 people).
Although there are also a few opinions that I value:
“I think most of the benefit of TRF is accrued through calorie restriction… Was there something magical about not eating?… I think the answer today is, ‘no’. … When people talk about how TRF is helping them lose weight and manage insulin resistance I think that it’s all due to reduced caloric intake.
The not atypical TRF scenario I see is… at the end of a year they’ve lost 5 pounds… Then you do a DEXA scan on them and realise, well you’ve lost 10 pounds of lean tissue and gained 5 pounds of fat mass…Nothing has moved in the right direction…”
Surely you’re not going to accuse PA of confirmation bias? He was previously a big advocate of fasting…
