Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet
Yes being in a negative caloric state was the norm however that doesn't mean it should be mimicked. Fasting, as I understand it, can cause a reduction in your post-fast metabolism. It creates a circle where the more you fast the easier it is to put the weight back on. It's less noticeable when you're younger because the metabolism is at a higher starting point. It's why for example a lot of inactive people gain more weight when they go off some low caloric fad diet.
In the end it's about burning as much or more than what you're consuming and managing insulin as well as corrtisol (sp?) levels.
|
Being in a negative caloric state long term could never have been the norm, there would have been feasting along with the fasting, so caloric sufficiency would be the long term trend. Our ancestors certainly went through constant cycles of abundance and lack, in your scenario they would have become fat and lethargic. Fasting doesn't cause any metabolic slowdown, that is caused by chronic caloric insufficiency aka "dieting". Eating to satiety then fasting is the direct opposite of chronic calorie deprivation, and the hormonal response is entirely different as well.
Agree with the last paragraph, controlling hormone levels is the key to it.