Quote from Henrik on July 13, 2023, 4:44 pm

Quote from El on July 9, 2023, 10:57 am

Quote from Henrik on July 9, 2023, 8:27 am

Quote from El on July 9, 2023, 12:49 am

Quote from Henrik on July 6, 2023, 6:13 am

 

We are all different because we all have varied backgrounds as well as epigenetics gifted to us from our parents' varied backgrounds.  This goes well beyond and includes nutrient shortages.  By the time we notice serious shortages, we are beyond just replacing what has been missing.  Sure we need to replace the missing nutrient.  It will take much more than just that though.  Case in point in healing starved POW's.  After WW2, many were killed by simply feeding them all they wanted.  Starved liver, pancreas, everything did not have the enzymes to digest, metabolize and detox all that food.  Took a few deaths before docs realized cachexic folk needed trickle feed.  Having missed protein and lipid in diet makes for shortages in proteases and lipases in pancreas and liver.  So people were fed nutrient rich tiny servings and kept hungry for awhile until they gradually built up digestive and metabolic speed to handle a more regular diet.  Even then, such folk frequently end up looking like Audrey Hepburn the rest of their days.

 

 

Im not going to join the general discussion of this but want to point out that the statement about trickle refeeding is blatantly wrong. I think the best indicator is the Minnesota Starvation Experiment that was done during the late fazes of WWII to find out how to best refeed war-victims. It showed that it was absolutely necessary to OVERFEED the victims:

"Enough food must be supplied to allow tissues destroyed during starvation to be rebuilt … our experiments have shown that in an adult man no appreciable rehabilitation can take place on a diet of 2000 calories [actually 2000 kcal (8368 kJ)] a day. The proper level is more like 4000 [4000 kcal (16,736 kJ)] daily for some months. The character of the rehabilitation diet is important also, but unless calories are abundant, then extra proteins, vitamins and minerals are of little value (20 )".

https://academic.oup.com/jn/article/135/6/1347/4663828

 

La observación posterior de las víctimas de la guerra en realidad confirmó esto y las tasas de mortalidad de la realimentación lenta fueron MUCHO más altas.

Esta es también la base de la investigación actual sobre realimentación.

 

So why has Grant been on a diet of no more than 2000 calories for more than seven years and is he fine?

I don't understand your question? Was that question ment for me? - Grant has as far as I know never been dying of starvation

He has written that he eats those calories a day.

Yes indeed. But what does that have to do with recovering from starvation? He had kidney problems and exema primarly, not anorexia..