Connect with us

Awareness

Can Baby Powder Cause Ovarian Cancer? 3 Natural Alternatives If You Don’t Want To Use It Anymore

Published

on

Do you use baby powder?

advertisement - learn more

Have you thought twice about its safety?

For years, without knowing, and blindly trusting, many of us apply harmful chemicals to our delicate parts, such as our bottoms, feet, armpits, and groin — anywhere that is moist and emits odour. Unfortunately, the talc in baby powder destroys our delicate skin and microbial community and confuses our immune system, sprouting cancer in reproductive organs.

Massive lawsuits were recently awarded to cancer sufferers by Johnson & Johnson, the formulators of baby powder.

On August 21, 2017, a jury in California recently ordered Johnson & Johnson to pay $417 million to a woman who says she developed terminal ovarian cancer as a result of using the company’s baby powder. And in February 2016, a Missouri court ordered Johnson & Johnson to pay $72 million in damages to the family of Jackie Fox, a woman who died of ovarian cancer.

Both lawsuits said the cancer was linked to their longtime habit of applying baby powder. Two other Missouri court cases against Johnson & Johnson went in favour of the women who sued, leaving the company on the hook for $197 million. And more than 2,500 lawsuits are pending in the state.

advertisement - learn more

Nearly $700 million dollars has been paid out to women who have suffered serious illness and death for simply using something many of us have not been properly informed comes with serious health consequences.  We assume that just because it’s advertised as safe for our babies that it is.

My goal in this article is to give you the full disclosure you haven’t received, and talk about the hero woman of this story who died in the process of getting the truth out.

How Can We Protect Ourselves From This?

  • Let’s distinguish between: What’s proclaimed vs. not disclaimed?
  • When will these lawsuits be enough for us to listen?
  • What to use instead that’s safer and perhaps more effective

The same people who have repeatedly brainwashed us through marketing luxury purses, perfumes, prescriptions, people, and products that poison us more than beautify us, because you’re not enough without them, are the same people who are echoing the same in studies, saying “The research is not enough to prove that talc is toxic enough to cause ovarian cancer.”

Who are these people? The 1% in charge of virtually every message we hear from the skewed media and news, and so-called beauty and health products.

So what’s the problem with talc? 

#1 Let’s Distinguish — Proclaimed vs. Disclaimed

What’s Proclaimed (aka What We’re Told):

Talcum powder is made from talc, a mineral made up mainly of the elements magnesium, silicon, and oxygen. As a powder, it absorbs moisture well and helps cut down on friction, making it useful for keeping skin dry and helping to prevent rashes. It can be found in powdered cosmetics, deodorants, and more. 

What’s Not Proclaimed (aka the Dark Truth About Talc):

Talc is a powdered native hydrous magnesium silicate sometimes containing a small portion of aluminum silicate. Talc can be contaminated with asbestos fibers, posing risks for respiratory toxicity and cancer. Studies by the National Toxicology Panel demonstrated that cosmetic-grade talc free of asbestos is a form of magnesium silicate that also can be toxic and carcinogenic — so much so that it is banned in the EU as well as in Canada, both of whom place much more scrutiny on the ingredients allowed in their food and drug products.

So why are these things not banned in America?

One word: greed.

We’re the lab rats.

Although many attempts have been made by doctors, researchers, and attorneys since the first discovery of its potential threat to our ovaries, J&J still refused to change the formula.

Dr. Daniel Cramer, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, has served as a paid consultant on several ovarian cancer cases against Johnson & Johnson, and published one of the first studies noting an association between talc and ovarian cancer in 1982.  It found a 92% increased risk for ovarian cancer with women who reported genital talc use.

“This story goes back a long, long way, back into the ’70s when people noted that ovarian cancer had many similarities to asbestos exposure,” he says. “Meanwhile another group in England found talc that was deeply embedded in ovaries and said there might be a story here.”

According to the EWG on this site, 23,653 studies in PubMed science library may include information on the toxicity of this chemical.

In 1993, The United States National Toxicology Program concluded “talc is a carcinogen.” Then, in 1996, the condom industry stopped dusting condoms with talc at the request of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which was the direct result of the scientific concern about the ovarian cancer risk from vaginal exposure to talc.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer, part of the World Health Organization, also called talc a possible carcinogen in 2010.

In spite of this overwhelming evidence, they continued to aggressively market the powder. The internal documents obtained in the lawsuits reveal the company knew years ago that “Retrospective studies have implicated talc use in the vaginal area with the incidence of ovarian cancer.”

Yet, even after paying over half a billion dollars in lawsuits that Johnson & Johnson baby powder had a direct link to these womens’ cancers, they deny the toxicity of their product and continue to stand behind it.

“Several decades of medical research do not support the hypothesis that use of talcum powder causes ovarian cancer,” said Dr. Hal Lawrence, chief executive officer of the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

Other Risk Factors of Baby Powder — Hormonal Chaos?

Talc aside, another group of chemicals called Phthalates are commonly found in baby lotions and powders. This class of ingredients, also abundantly formulated in cosmetics, is among 70,000 other registered chemicals that have hormonal effects on the body.

These factors are called xenoestrogens, foreign estrogens that mimic the functions of our natural estrogens. When they enter our body, they attach themselves to our cells’ receptor sites, taking over our naturally produced estrogens’ functions to control growth and development, negatively affecting our breasts, skin, menstruation, and fertility.

Over time, high exposure to these ‘fake estrogens’ can promote unnatural growth in tissues such as fibroids, cysts, tumours and weight gain. It also wreaks havoc on the endocrine system, leaving women with a myriad of hormonal health imbalances, one of the most common conditions I see today in my practice. PMS, heavy bleeding, cancer, PCOS, infertility, acne, mood swings, chronic fatigue, weight gain, and more are all too misunderstood by the medical community and thought to have unknown causes. Research suggests it’s caused by a condition called Estrogen Dominance, however, the result of an accumulation of chemicals in the body. Essentially, all the products we use on a daily basis and the effects of their ingredients stack up over time.

So the next time you read a study that says “not toxic in small doses,” ask yourself how much these small doses of various products add up over years of use.

We’re putting hundreds of different products, full of xenoestrogens, onto our bodies. When applied to the skin, they are far more potent than those ingested orally, because they travel directly to the tissues instead of passing through the liver. So even if talc weren’t the issue, as per Johnson & Johnson’s representatives, perhaps you should consider seeking alternatives due to these negative ramifications.

Studies are now showing that one in two men, and one in three women in this generation are estimated to have cancer, and over 75% of America is now overweight or obese, at least in part because of the hormonal imbalances caused by xenoestrogens, we should all aim to reduce our exposure as much as possible. Read how here.

#2 When Will These Lawsuits Be Enough for Us to Listen?

The Scary Truth:

Johnson & Johnson knew about the risk since the early 1980s, and even before, yet did not protect its customers.

The medical community is nevertheless claiming to ‘not know’ the cause of ovarian cancer — but I beg to differ.  Overwhelming proof shows that for most cancers today, the underlying cause is manmade chemicals, environmental toxins, and in a large proportion of cancers, xenoestrogens.

My question to you is, when will it be enough?

How many kids ‘dying too young’ of cancer need we witness?

How exhausted, hormonally imbalanced, diseased, and infertile do we need to become?

How many lawsuits, how many women have to suffer, how many loved ones die, before we wake up and learn from their losses?

Ms. Echeverria, who was too sick to testify in court, started using Johnson’s baby powder when she was 11 and continued after being diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2007, unaware that some studies had linked talc to cancer, said her lawyer, Mark Robinson. She stopped using it after hearing news reports of a verdict in another lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson, he said, and now wanted to warn other women.

“She told me, ‘I’m not doing this for myself,’ ” Mr. Robinson said. “She knows she’s going to die. She’s doing this for other women. She wants to do something good before she leaves.”

And good she did, as a warrior champion of ovaries and baby butts everywhere.

Now let’s talk alternative solutions.

Thankfully, there are plenty of other choices you can use instead that you probably already have in your kitchen!

#3 Three Healthy and Beautifying Alternatives

  1. Baking Soda (aluminum free)
  2. Arrowroot (Paleo baking soda) – comes from plants
  3. Diatomaceous earth – comes from fossilized diatoms, aka algae

Baking Soda?

Sodium Bicarbonate works very effectively to absorb odour. Apply it just as you would baby powder. As with all things, however, you should test out a little at a time to see how your body reacts, especially because these are sensitive areas. Be sure to purchase the kind without aluminum so your heavy metal levels don’t look like the below chart. I test for heavy metal toxicity in my online nutrition company, and often see metals in excess of safe ranges, which negatively impacts our health, causing auto immune disease, neurological damage, and brain disfunction, and has ties to virtually every symptom you can think of.

What Is Arrowroot?

Arrowroot is derived from several tropical South American plants. Tapioca starch is derived from the crushed up pulp of the South American cassava plant, a woody shrub. I bought it long ago to use in my vegan and paleo recipes as alternatives to flour and cornstarch that otherwise are genetically modified and filled with heavy metals, which leech minerals such as zinc, Vitamin C, and iron from our body. Since zinc is perhaps the most important mineral to boost immune health, we want to stay as free from GMO ingredients as possible, to combat cancer.

What Is Diatomaceous Earth?

Diatoms are hard-shelled algae that come from bodies of water and have a high silica content, which makes it good for hair and skin use. It’s been called a miracle dust.

Benefits of Diatomaceous Earth:

  • Better digestive health
  • Healthier colon
  • Better food absorption
  • Clearer skin
  • Healthier hair and nails
  • More energy
  • Lower Candida levels
  • Kills parasites and worms in the body (works for dogs too)

This miracle powder also works as a ‘deodorant’ to decrease odour. You can also use it in hair to ditch dandruff and also sprinkle it into your shoes (instead of talc) for foot fungus.

If you are going to buy it, make sure it’s food grade diatomaceous earth. You can get a huge 10 pound bag for around $20.

Closing Points and Takeaways

It’s our job to pay attention and be mindful of the things we put on, in, and around our body. We must stop assuming that decades old FDA regulations are in place to protect us. It is impossible to test for reactions of not only how one unique person would react to these harsh ingredients, but also how two or thousands of combinations react inside of the body. So it’s on us to research and test ourselves.

I am still surprised to hear how many people don’t realize that what you apply to your skin becomes a part of you, just as any bite of food you take does. Your skin eats too, and these applied toxins become a burden to our organs of elimination.

I’ve worked with thousands of clients and this is the most under-addressed topic, which most don’t consider could have such a drastic impact on health.

You could eat the perfect diet, and have the perfect exercise/yoga/rest routine, but if you’re slathering toxins like talc to your body, your odds of disease, fat, fatigue, and frustration are still very high.

Bottom Line:  If we love on our skin-biome and treat it well, it can keep us energetic and happy, reduce pain and disease, and lessen the signs of aging. The best two ways to do this are to feed our body probiotics (this is the brand I use), and then consume food for these bugs with prebiotics such as leafy greens and fermented foods. I teach this, step by step, in my four-week online program, The Warrior Cleanse.  Then, stop consuming and applying things to the skin and body that destroy the ‘good guys’ within it.

For a great resource on what products are safe to put on your body, check out the free online resource, Environmental Working Group at EWG.org.

For more empowering articles just like this, and how to steer clear of these toxins, check out my website, Facebook page, and Youtube channel for all things hormones/cleansing and fat burning fitness!

Cleanse your Body, Heal your Hormones, Ignite your Life!

 

Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!

Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!

You can stream conscious media 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, and documentaries and guided programs.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media that you won't see anywhere else.

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Awareness

Some Doctors Claim Babies Should Share Their Mother’s Bed Until The Age Of 3

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A study involving 16 infants monitored the babies while they slept in their mother's bed. It's not the only study examining the benefits of close contact between mother and child shortly after birth.

  • Reflect On:

    How much of what we do today in a conventional way, especially with regards to childbirth, is the best way to do it?

When it comes to parenting, everyone seems to have an opinion, and rightfully so, especially if you are yourself a parent. But what about controversial topics? Is there a right or wrong way to raise your children? Are there certain things that you should or should not be doing? Of course, some things are more important than others. But new advice given by a paediatrician suggests children should sleep in bed with their mothers until they reach the age of three. 

Dr. Nils Bergman, from the University of Cape Town, South Africa, argues that for optimal development, healthy newborns should sleep on their mother’s chest for at least their first few weeks. After that, he believes they should stay in bed with mom and dad until they are three or even four years old.

Because there has been a lot of fear propaganda created around the risk of cot death — the notion that a parent might roll over and suffocate their child — co-sleeping is generally not advised, and in fact, a recently published British study found that almost two-thirds of the cases of SIDS occurred when the bed was being shared.

But, according to Dr.Bergman, “When babies are smothered and suffer cot deaths, it is not because their mother is present. It is because of other things: toxic fumes, cigarettes, alcohol, big pillows and dangerous toys.”

A study involving 16 infants monitored the babies while they slept in their mother’s bed. It found that the baby’s heart was under three times as much stress when he or she slept alone. While sleeping in a cot, they had a more disrupted sleep and their brains were less likely to cycle and transition between the two types of sleep, called active and quiet.

In the cots, only 6 of the 16 babies had any quiet sleep at all, and their sleep quality was much worse.

advertisement - learn more

Dr. Bergman continued to explain how changes to the brain that are brought on by stress hormones can actually make it more difficult to form relationships and close bonds later in life.

Another study published in the journal Biological Psychiatry monitored results from 73 premature infants receiving Kangaroo Care, or skin-to-skin contact with their mothers, and another three premature infants received standard incubator care. The subjects of the study were monitored over a 10-year period, and the results were as follows:

KC increased autonomic functioning (respiratory sinus arrhythmia, RSA) and maternal attachment behavior in the postpartum period, reduced maternal anxiety, and enhanced child cognitive development and executive functions from 6 months to 10 years. By 10 years of age, children receiving KC showed attenuated stress response, improved RSA, organized sleep, and better cognitive control. RSA and maternal behavior were dynamically interrelated over time, leading to improved physiology, executive functions, and mother–child reciprocity at 10 years.

The National Childbirth Trust supports bed sharing provided the parents have not been drinking, smoking, or using drugs, or if they are obese, chronically ill, or suffer from chronic exhaustion, all of which could cause them to roll over onto the baby or otherwise impact their health.

Overall, it’s a very controversial issue. Many swear by bed sharing, and it certainly used to be standard practice before cribs became so common and affordable. There are many upsides to this, but it is also important to be aware of and consider the potential dangers.

We all know babies need to be snuggled and cuddled and given love; they need to feel safe and secure, and how could they possibly feel this all alone in another room in a crib? When you actually think about it, it seems pretty backwards.

Every parent is just doing what they feel is best for their baby, but the opinions of others tend to get in the way. We’ve all heard those comments like, Oh you shouldn’t pick up that baby, you need to let them cry, they are going to have attachment issues, how are they going to develop their independence? Well, they are babies; they can’t care for themselves and they need to be taken care of. It is a natural urge for the mother to take care of her child.

What are your thoughts on this? Did you co-sleep with your child? Did you ever feel it was unsafe? Do you prefer your child to sleep in a crib? Let us know!

Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!

Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!

You can stream conscious media 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, and documentaries and guided programs.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media that you won't see anywhere else.

Continue Reading

Awareness

Yale Study Reveals 1 in 3 Drugs Have Safety Issues Even After FDA Approval

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association conducted by a team of researchers from Yale University discovered that nearly one in three drugs that the that the FDA tests and approves ends up having safety issues.

  • Reflect On:

    Are prescription drugs as safe as they're marketed to be?

In 2014, Harvard University stated that prescription drugs are the 4th leading cause of death, yet pharmaceutical companies continue to hide behind their profits and promote their products as safe. Doctors and even their patients are willing to turn a blind eye to many of the adverse side effects of drugs, opting for the “bandaid” effect they provide instead of seeking alternative treatments and preventative methods.

A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association and conducted by a team of researchers from Yale University studied the effectiveness of the FDA’s drug approval process. The team discovered that nearly one in three drugs that the FDA tests and approves ends up having safety issues.

Research Finds Serious Issues With FDA Drug Approval Process

In order to establish whether or not pharmaceutical drugs are safe for consumers, the FDA implements drug testing and clinical trials. These trials typically test fewer than 1,000 patients over a short timeframe, usually around six months or less. The Yale researchers suggested that safety issues could only truly be detected if more patients were studied over a longer period of time, speaking to the ineffectiveness of the FDA’s testing.

To identify how to effectively determine any safety issues with pharmaceutical drugs, the Yale researchers studied data on new drugs approved between 2001 and 2010, with follow up through 2017. Their findings proved that approximately 32% of new drugs approved by the FDA had notable safety issues.

A shocking 71 of the 222 drugs approved within this timeframe were withdrawn, had a “black box” warning regarding the side effects, or required a safety announcement to the public about newfound risks. This begs the question: Why are these drugs being approved in the first place if they warrant so many safety concerns?

“That is very rarely a drug withdrawal, but more commonly a black box warning, or drug safety communication issued by the FDA to let physicians and patients know that new safety information has been determined,” explained Associate Professor of Medicine and Public Health Dr. Joseph Ross, who led the research team.

advertisement - learn more

The researchers also specified characteristics of pharmaceuticals that were more likely to pose a higher risk of safety issues to patients, including biologic therapies and drugs that were approved through the FDA’s accelerated approval pathway. The accelerated approval process often uses surrogate endpoints, which means that the researchers measured a factor other than survival, such as tumour size, to figure out whether the drugs should be approved.

“This [finding on surrogate endpoints] has the greatest relationship to policy today,” Ross further elaborated. “In the 21st Century Cures Act, there’s a push to have the FDA move to further support the use of surrogate markers … [but] they’re more likely to have concerns in the post-market setting.”

“While the administration pushes for less regulation and faster approvals, those decisions have consequences,” Ross stated. The Yale team’s previous studies exposed that the FDA approval process for drugs is much faster than that of other government organizations in Europe, which is interesting given the nature of the business in both countries. Prices of drugs are far higher in America than they are abroad, and Americans take a lot more drugs, meaning U.S. pharmaceutical companies make a lot more money.

The timing of this study is interesting too, as the FDA has been facing increased pressure lately to quicken the drug approval process. “It shows that there is the potential for compromising patient safety when drug evaluation is persistently sped up,” said Ross. “At the very least, the study should inform ongoing debate about premarket drug evaluation,” the researchers concluded.

Dr. Caleb Alexander, co-director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Drug Safety and Effectiveness, weighed in on the study, commending the researchers for their work. “It’s important to keep in mind that the post-approval safety issues cover the spectrum from relatively minor to serious,” Alexander said.

“A good next step would be to dig into the extremely serious safety problems, determine whether the FDA could have flagged them sooner and how they might have been missed,” he continued.

“All too often, patients and clinicians mistakenly view FDA approval as [an] indication that a product is fully safe and effective,” Alexander explained. “Nothing could be further from the truth. We learn tremendous amounts about a product only once it’s on the market and only after use among a broad population.”

Dr. Alexander makes a great point: Just because a drug is approved by the FDA, doesn’t mean it’s safe. In an ideal world, FDA approval would mean that the drug is entirely safe to use, but the reality is that the testing is not extensive enough to even determine the safety of the drug, let alone guarantee it.

Far too often, people place their doctors and health care practitioners on pedestals and fail to conduct their own research. Though I am not qualified to professionally advise anyone on their health, I certainly do not trust everything that my doctor recommends, which is largely because no doctor knows everything there is to know about health. It’s up to you to figure out your own health, not your doctor.

Though doctors can provide wonderful advice and can help immensely when diagnosing and treating illnesses, they can also drastically hinder your health. However, that’s not necessarily their fault, it’s often yours. The onus is on you to conduct your own research, get multiple professional opinions if need be, and ensure you are making informed decisions.

Further Proof of Misconduct at the FDA

In journalism, embargo refers to a “back-room deal” in which journalists and their sources agree not to publish an article prior to a specific date or time. The FDA goes one step further by implementing a “closely held embargo,” which gifts the organization complete control over all new FDA information privy to exposure for the American public.

The FDA’s use of the “close embargo” reveals that the institution likely wants to prevent reporters from leaking information. The biggest concern seems to be that, when officials begin giving the go-ahead for this special access, it makes it much easier for the agency to prevent stories they don’t like from being exposed.

The FDA hinders the public’s right to know about scientific fraud and misconduct as well. In an article for Slate wrote:

For more than a decade, the FDA has shown a pattern of burying the details of misconduct. As a result, nobody ever finds out which data is bogus, which experiments are tainted, and which drugs might be on the market under false pretenses. The FDA has repeatedly hidden evidence of scientific fraud not just from the public, but also from its most trusted scientific advisers, even as they were deciding whether or not a new drug should be allowed on the market. Even a congressional panel investigating a case of fraud regarding a dangerous drug couldn’t get forthright answers. For an agency devoted to protecting the public from bogus medical science, the FDA seems to be spending an awful lot of effort protecting the perpetrators of bogus science from the public.

You can read more about that in the following CE article:

FOIA Investigation Unearths Documents Showing How The FDA  Manipulates Media & Science Press

The FDA also works hand-in-hand with pharmaceutical companies, which you can read about in the following CE article:

Merck & The FDA Caught ‘Fast Tracking’ The Approval Of HPV Gardasil Vaccine Without Scientific Approval

To make matters worse, pharmaceutical companies also hold close ties to doctors, which you can learn about here:

This Website Tells You How Much Big Pharma Pays Your Doctor To Prescribe Drugs

To be clear, 128,000 people die every year in the U.S. from drugs prescribed to them, which is being done under the approval of the FDA and doctors. The reality is, drug companies make a lot of money from selling prescriptions, and so do those involved with them, including doctors.

At the end of the day, the medical industry is a booming business, one that thrives off sick people. These companies actually benefit when their drugs cause adverse effects, because they then have additional reasons to sell you even more drugs. The system is designed to help you in one way, and then disadvantage you in another. In essence, they want you healthy, but not too healthy, and until we educate ourselves and take control of our health, we will continue to perpetuate this cycle.

Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!

Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!

You can stream conscious media 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, and documentaries and guided programs.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media that you won't see anywhere else.

Continue Reading

Awareness

Intermittent Fasting Is Great, But Alternate-Day Fasting Is Having A Big Impact On My Body

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    I started alternate day fasting a few months ago. I've lost a healthy chunk of fat from my body and my weight has stabilized. Fasting is a great way to boost your health and help your body utilize its fat stores.

  • Reflect On:

    The science of fasting is very interesting, and it shows that fasting can be used as a therapeutic intervention for multiple diseases and/or to simply be healthier. Is it ignored by medicine because it doesn't generate a profit?

Several years ago I remember coming across an old study from 2013 about caloric restriction, emphasizing how it extends life span and prevents as well as helps to reverse several age-related diseases in a variety of species. This was very intriguing to me, especially given the fact that humans have been bombarded with the idea that we need to eat at least three meals a day, plus snacks in order to be healthy and fit. Fast forward to today, and fasting has become quite popular, and this is thanks to a wealth of research that’s emerged showing that not only caloric restriction, but fasting, has a number of health benefits.

Fasting has been shown to extend life, protect against neurodegenerative and age-related diseases, ‘starve’ certain cancer cells, reverse and manage type two diabetes, trigger new stem cell generation and help people lose weight. If done for a long enough time, although we don’t quite know exactly how long, fasting also actives autophagy, the body’s self-cleaning system, which allows the cell to get rid of old cell machinery, breaking them down into smaller parts to be reused by the cell. Fasting stimulates the production of ketone bodies in the blood, which have also been shown to have a number of benefits and is one of many mechanisms by which fasting benefits the body.

Fasting Is Beneficial

When you eat food, that food is converted into glycogen which your body then burns. When you fast, your body uses up stored fat for energy after its glycogen reserves are depleted, and the process of the body switching from burning glucose to efficiently burning fat is something that seems to have been built into our biology, meaning we are designed to go short, or even prolonged periods of time without any food, and that this ‘stress’ on the body actually benefits us in many ways.

There is absolutely no evidence that, for the average person, fasting can be dangerous. In fact, all evidence points to the opposite. If you’re on prescription medication, or experience other medical problems, then there are obviously exceptions. But it’s quite clear that the human body was designed to go long periods of time without food, and that it’s completely natural.

If you want to learn more about the science of fasting, there is plenty of research out there. Sifting through scholarly articles on the subject will yield many interesting results. You can find a number of lectures on Youtube as well. The main takeaway for me after studying fasting and its mechanisms for fifteen years now is that it’s an extremely healthy and safe practice with a number of health benefits, and I wanted to share my current experience instead of simply diving deep into the science of it all.

My Alternate-Day Fasting Experience

I have found that the research directly correlates with my experience of fasting on a regular basis, and it’s something I’ve been doing for fifteen years. I have done a lot of prolonged fasts in my life, weekly fasts, as well as many periods of intermittent fasting where I condense my eating period to a time of 5-8 hours. But only within the past few months have I tried alternate-day fasting, and so far it’s the fasting method that’s been the most successful for me. Everybody is different, and at the end of the day you just have to find what works for you.

advertisement - learn more

I’ve always put on weight quite easily, and have had no problem storing food. Perhaps it’s genetics, my family has a strong and long history of type two diabetes, hinting to the idea that insulin levels in my family can remain high, thus making it impossible to access my fat stores. Obviously, fasting drops your insulin levels, allowing your body to access and burn its fat reserves which, again, has been shown to have a tremendous amounts of benefits.

Alternate-day fasting has given me something consistent to go with when it comes to maintaining and stabilizing my weight. For me, intermittent fasting just wasn’t doing it, I found I could not eat what I enjoy without packing on extra fat and slowly increasing my weight. I also did many prolonged fasts, which helped me drop my extra fat, but then I’d put it back on. This was true for me even whilst eating a healthy, whole grain fully plant-based diet.

With alternate-day fasting, I do not gain weight, and my energy levels have increased to the point where I am now working out at the end of every fast. I’ve never experienced so much energy an I’ve never felt so alert. I had a glimpse of it with intermittent fasting, but the period without food just wasn’t long enough for me, I feel, to really tap into the benefits of fasting.

Simple Schedule

So what does alternate-day fasting look like? It’s when you eat one day, and then fast the next. Simple.

So, for example, what I do is I will eat on a Monday, and then have my last meal in the evening. Then, I wait until Wednesday morning to eat again. So, I am doing 36-40 hour fasts, quite often. What recommended alternate-day fasting looks like is eating on Monday, and then not eating until 24 hours after, or Tuesday night. Or, eating on Monday, and then restricting your calorie intake the next day to only 500 calories., and then repeat throughout the week.

I’ve been fasting for a quite a long time, so my body is quite fat adapted. It’s not difficult for me to fast and when I do I do not feel hungry at all, which means my body has adapted itself to ‘consuming’ it’s stored energy. I am at the point where alternate-day fasting for me usually means not eating for at least 40 hours and after a workout, and every now and then I will extend my fast to 72 or more hours and throw in a workout at the end those fasts as well. The food I eat during my eating periods is, again, a whole foods plant-based diet.

Related CE Article going into more detail: What Working Out In A Fasted State (Not Eating) Does To Your Muscles

Weight Loss

That’s how I do it, and doing it this way I dropped nearly 20 pounds before eventually stabilizing my weight. I usually do alternate-day fasting, but every now and then I will eat two days in a row here and there. So I am not extremely strict on myself, but then again, my fasting periods are longer and I believe it’s easier for me simply because I am well adapted to the practice, and my body type and perhaps my genetics helps me have an easier time with it.

If you’re looking to shed some fat from your body, it’s something I recommend you try, it’s great because it forces you to enter into a fat period for a longer state than intermittent fasting, and allows you to utilize more of your fat reserves.

You can look at alternate-day fasting as an ‘extreme’ form of fasting, although there is nothing extreme about it and it’s completely safe. If you’re someone who has never fasted before, I recommend you start off with intermittent fasting, as fasting alone for someone who has never practiced it can be quite difficult at first until your body gets used to it.

Resources

If you’re looking for some great resources on this topic beyond simply reading and searching for scholarly peer-reviewed publications on the subject via online journal databases (there are lots), you can visit Dr. Jason Fung’s website blog here. There are a lot of great informative articles on the subject there.

Another great resource is Krista Varady, PhD, a Professor of Nutrition at the University of Illinois, Chicago. Her research focuses on the efficacy of intermittent fasting for weight loss, weight maintenance, and cardio-protection in obese adults. Her work is funded by the NIH, American Heart Association, International Life Sciences Institute, and the University of Illinois. She has published over 70 publications on this topic, and is also the author of a book for the general public, entitled the “Every Other Day Diet”.

Her “book for the general public,” The Every-Other-Day Diet: The Diet That Lets You Eat All You Want (Half the Time) and Keep the Weight Off is a great place to start.

Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!

Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!

You can stream conscious media 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, and documentaries and guided programs.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media that you won't see anywhere else.

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Pod

Elevate your inbox and get conscious articles sent directly to your inbox!

Choose your topics of interest below:

You have Successfully Subscribed!