Brain Dump
May. 9th, 2007 10:59 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sinanjuI'm still doing the IF (Intermittent Fasting) thing, though I haven't talked about it (or anything else, really) of late. I intend to continue it indefinitely. I've taken a couple of days off recently, eating normally for two or three days in a row before going back to fasting. It's a lifestyle, not a rigid regimen; I can do that.
As long as I don't "treat" myself so often that I essentially stop. I don't think that'll be a problem though. I like the discipline of fasting every other day. It's good for my health and it may be good for my longevity, though a recent report suggests that the life-extending properties fo caloric restriction (or IF) may not apply to larger mammals. It definitely works on rats and other small animals. But a recent study with dogs suggests that while animals in the calorie-restricted group lived longer on average than their control group couterparts, the longest lived animals in the experimental group didn't live significantly longer than the longest-lived animals in the control group. But they did experience the reduced incidence of disease and overall health improvements seen in smaller mammals--so that still seems to hold true.
Fasting gives me more free time on the days I don't eat. Not so much in the morning, since I don't generally eat breakfast anyhow. But my lunch hours at work are free. I've been going to the library instead of out to lunch on fast days.
I've been reading about HIIT (High Intensity Interval Training), another subject I discovered on Steve's blog. It's essentially aerobic exercise in which you alternate between moderate efforts at whatever your exercise of choice happens to be and intense activity. For instance, jogging alternated with sprinting for 30 seconds or so each. Experimental studies indicate that this sort of exercise results in far more dramatic weight loss than ordinary aerobic exercise.
Why? Because our bodies are fundamentally lazy; a survival trait for our ancestors who had to work hard to keep themselves fed. Burning the absolute minimum number of calories meant you could survive longer when food was hard to come by. If you exercise at a consistent, regular level of activity, your body adapts to that and manages your calorie consumption as efficiently as possible. Interval training seems to disrupt this effect, preventing your body from "fine tuning" your metabolism. The end result is that you end up burning more calories all the time.
So I may try adding this to my exercise repetoire...now that I've started running again. Yes, I've been a slothful slacker. Having gone running in probably two months. No excuses. Just laziness. But I went out running tonight after work and did pretty well for a lazy bastard who hasn't run in two months. My legs are rather sore now from the unaccustomed exercise, but too bad for them! It's time to get back to it.
And also time to try adding some HIIT as well. Maybe try a few minutes of interval training to the end of my run, see how it feels. I may also have to start weighing myself so I can track whether it seems to be making any difference. (Mostly I don't worry about my weight; if my clothes start feeling a little tight, time to work harder; if they're feeling a little looser, go me!) But if I'm gonna be scientific about this, I suppose I ought to use a more objective measure.
Speaking of objective measures, I just took my blood pressure. We have a BP machine here at home. First reading was 146/84. Wow, way higher than I expected. So I concentrated on relaxing. Visualize calm waters. Imagine my blood vessels relaxing and opening up. Take it again a minute later. Now it's 120/80. Better. Question is, is it that easy to screw around with my blood pressure, or is it simply that the machine isn't terribly accurate? I don't usually take it twice in the span of a couple of minutes so I don't know. I'll have to play around with this and see.
As long as I don't "treat" myself so often that I essentially stop. I don't think that'll be a problem though. I like the discipline of fasting every other day. It's good for my health and it may be good for my longevity, though a recent report suggests that the life-extending properties fo caloric restriction (or IF) may not apply to larger mammals. It definitely works on rats and other small animals. But a recent study with dogs suggests that while animals in the calorie-restricted group lived longer on average than their control group couterparts, the longest lived animals in the experimental group didn't live significantly longer than the longest-lived animals in the control group. But they did experience the reduced incidence of disease and overall health improvements seen in smaller mammals--so that still seems to hold true.
Fasting gives me more free time on the days I don't eat. Not so much in the morning, since I don't generally eat breakfast anyhow. But my lunch hours at work are free. I've been going to the library instead of out to lunch on fast days.
I've been reading about HIIT (High Intensity Interval Training), another subject I discovered on Steve's blog. It's essentially aerobic exercise in which you alternate between moderate efforts at whatever your exercise of choice happens to be and intense activity. For instance, jogging alternated with sprinting for 30 seconds or so each. Experimental studies indicate that this sort of exercise results in far more dramatic weight loss than ordinary aerobic exercise.
Why? Because our bodies are fundamentally lazy; a survival trait for our ancestors who had to work hard to keep themselves fed. Burning the absolute minimum number of calories meant you could survive longer when food was hard to come by. If you exercise at a consistent, regular level of activity, your body adapts to that and manages your calorie consumption as efficiently as possible. Interval training seems to disrupt this effect, preventing your body from "fine tuning" your metabolism. The end result is that you end up burning more calories all the time.
So I may try adding this to my exercise repetoire...now that I've started running again. Yes, I've been a slothful slacker. Having gone running in probably two months. No excuses. Just laziness. But I went out running tonight after work and did pretty well for a lazy bastard who hasn't run in two months. My legs are rather sore now from the unaccustomed exercise, but too bad for them! It's time to get back to it.
And also time to try adding some HIIT as well. Maybe try a few minutes of interval training to the end of my run, see how it feels. I may also have to start weighing myself so I can track whether it seems to be making any difference. (Mostly I don't worry about my weight; if my clothes start feeling a little tight, time to work harder; if they're feeling a little looser, go me!) But if I'm gonna be scientific about this, I suppose I ought to use a more objective measure.
Speaking of objective measures, I just took my blood pressure. We have a BP machine here at home. First reading was 146/84. Wow, way higher than I expected. So I concentrated on relaxing. Visualize calm waters. Imagine my blood vessels relaxing and opening up. Take it again a minute later. Now it's 120/80. Better. Question is, is it that easy to screw around with my blood pressure, or is it simply that the machine isn't terribly accurate? I don't usually take it twice in the span of a couple of minutes so I don't know. I'll have to play around with this and see.