Exactly. And I think it also applies solely within fasting. Contrast these Silicon Valley guru types who are fasting mostly for the nootropic effects versus, say, someone fasting to lower their insulin resistance are likely to engage in different behaviors during their fasting. Which repertoire you engage in will constrain your body's allocation of resources in (perhaps very subtly) different ways. It wouldn't surprise me if we saw different overall health outcomes if they were 2 arms of a clinical trial.
I remember, during my chemo, other patients at the clinic talking about how they were too exhausted to work. I'm lucky in that my job is programming, which can be exhausting, but in a different way than, say, bartending or managing a team of people. Many of my fellow clinic goers complained of "chemo brain", a kind of fog that got in the way of thought. I suffered it a bit, but I don't think as much as they did. Perhaps it was my ability to continue using my brain without needing to engage my body in any strenuous way, that prevented me from suffering as much "chemo brain"? Of course the code I worked on during that time probably sucks .... but probably not much more than how sucky my normal code is. But this is also where the chemo-fasting analogy breaks down. May of the "keto" people argue that the body has a natural alternative to energizing tissues of the body and fasting engages those pathways. Chemo may not (or may be less efficient at) trigger(ing) those pathways. If that's true, then perhaps fasting either 1) isn't as good as chemo against various types of cancer or 2) is way safer than chemo against side-effects of the treatment ... or perhaps both. On 09/04/2017 02:01 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote: > "In order to *perform* as a whole body, whatever supplements you're providing > to promote one thing over another, you are also curtailing everything else. > The body reacts to extreme exercise in the same way it reacts to fasting, by > restricting which systems get the extra juice." > > > Right, all that is not permitted is forbidden. I suppose if it must be very > extreme (to work -- if it would), then there is a real risk of injury or > overuse that come sooner or later and then the trouble-making diversification > of the microenvironments would start again. -- ␦glen? ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
