• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

Fasting for days to eliminate allergy permanently?

water fasting allergy

  • Please log in to reply
53 replies to this topic

#31 sthira

  • Guest
  • 2,008 posts
  • 406

Posted 02 June 2018 - 10:26 AM

I blood-tested for baseline. I fasted "water- and black coffee-only" for 14-days (350-hours). I followed a refeeding strategy (...kale smoothies, avocados...) for three-days. Then I re-tested blood markers (a confounder is I'm longterm CRed +/- 15%). Here are my WBC results for N=1:

Pre-Fast White Blood Cell Count:
4.8 10E3/mcL

Date:
Fri 3/30/18 05:00 p.m
Reference Range:
4.2 10E3/mcL - 9.1 10E3/mcL

Post-Fast White Blood Cell Count:
4.2 10E3/mcL

Date:
Weds 4/18/18 03:27 p.m.
Reference Range:
4.2 10E3/mcL - 9.1 10E3/mcL
  • Informative x 3

#32 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 02 June 2018 - 09:17 PM

 

Fast begin Sa 10th (March)
Fast end Mo 12th
Break Tu 13th - Th 15th.
Fast begin Fr 16th
Fast end fr 18th.
Break Mo 19th - We 21th
Fast begin Th 22th
Fast end Sa 24th
Break Su 25th - Tu 27th
Fast begin We 28th
Fast end fr 30th
Break Sa 31th - Mo 2th (April)
Fast begin Tu 3th
Fast begin Th 5th
 
I ended my fast on midnight (12pm) the 5th of April (so it was the 6th of April but I had not slept yet) and ate a piece of chicken (which I am allergic to). Although it was a small quantity, 1-2g, it should still evoke an allergic reaction. I did not get an allergic reaction.
I have continued every day to eat a few grams of chicken to see if I experience an allergic reaction. I have eaten some right now as well.
 
BEFORE I did this fasting experiment I didn't always experience allergic reactions to foods I am allergic to. Sometimes the reaction is not there or it is delayed for minutes to an hour. 
An example of this is raw eggs, it burns my tongue and produces an allergic reaction similar to chicken but not as strong, yet sometimes I can eat raw eggs and not experience much or any allergic reaction. 
 
It is well known that a fast can remove allergic reactions to things one usually is allergic to (people who fast know this) but is the lack of allergic reaction permanent in my case? We'll find out and I will report back.

 

I've used an expanded protocol and it does work, but it's definitely not permanent. Matt's will likely come back to some degree. My allergies were off the hook to the extent that I would have had full blown inverse psoriatic arthritis that would have been too difficult to diagnose to even hope for a diagnosis or getting a therapy that would work, and even so, the therapies are all life shortening as they raise the incidence of cancer. Anyways, I was able to greatly diminish my symptoms to the point where I don't even need the meds to keep it under control. It's back to keeping lifestyle changes. I even still eat a few things that I have allergic susceptibility to and it doesn't trigger the autoimmune symptoms. Short of gene therapy, I wouldn't expect to completely abolish my allergies, but I can most certainly get control over them. I'm a firm believer that allergies are genetic and predictable depending on how much data and education you have access to and even absent that, you can still know which ones give you a stronger immune system, and which ones give you a dysfunctional allergic immune system.

 

Lifestyle management is everything and allergies aren't always the direct answer. I'm neither allergic to milk or lactose intolerant, but I have a different metabolic insufficiency for something downstream of lactose metabolism that I can take an enzyme for and it even makes me look more attractive to do so. Every little thing adds up and complete solutions are, until we have access to gene therapy, going to be more complicated. It's not a matter of things not working in humans, it's a matter of getting all the effectors sorted. That said, I wonder how much Matt's allergies are related to actual allergic reactions, not saying they aren't, but it could be that decreased protein intake make protein metabolism fast enough that the immune system just doesn't have access to enough of the allergen to develop a response. Or if it comes from a downstream metabolism, whether those metabolic pathways will get access to it and will produce it at all. There are simply tons of methods for manipulating immune function. 



#33 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 02 June 2018 - 09:20 PM

In case it hasn't been said yet, blood cells don't last but several days, it is more likely that this will take 6 days of fasting though. But your white blood cells share their information on what to attack, so more of them will be normalized, but you will still be susceptible to getting the allergy again, and this is likely only for allergies that you can control as environmental allergies are more difficult to stay away from.

Ill informed? Really? I share novel information that everyone can understand and get tagged with ill informed? Maybe if I was a PhD who was milking my job, I wouldn't be able to understand this... but that's not what I am...


  • Agree x 1

#34 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 02 June 2018 - 09:25 PM

11 - 21 days for most people.

This could also be the case, and I've discussed how the term of the fast can affect the results, but a 6-7 day fast should still be capable of progressively reducing symptoms if you keep repeating the process. It's also potentially dangerous to not eat for more than 7 days as I've read that starving for this long can cause brain damage.


  • Cheerful x 1

#35 ninjamonk69

  • Guest
  • 12 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Earth
  • NO

Posted 02 June 2018 - 11:20 PM

This could also be the case, and I've discussed how the term of the fast can affect the results, but a 6-7 day fast should still be capable of progressively reducing symptoms if you keep repeating the process. It's also potentially dangerous to not eat for more than 7 days as I've read that starving for this long can cause brain damage.

 

Strange i never seen a case of brain damage from fasting that short period of time. Some people have done several months and turned out fine.The longest fast ever done was 382 days. I would suggest checking out Loren Lockman director at tanglewood wellness center and has been coaching and supervising fasts since 1997 with over 2000 people with water only fasts averaging 24 days with extremely high success rate. He also has youtube channel with excellent information about fasting and the human body through years of first hand experience with himself and many others. I personally done 7 days, 11 and 21 and all felt amazing but i am already quite healthy so i don't need to do it as long.

 

I guess when you start to feel amazing is a good indication that you're healed but a few more days just to be sure wouldn't hurt. Especially if you have the time off.


Edited by ninjamonk69, 02 June 2018 - 11:22 PM.

  • Agree x 2
  • Disagree x 1

#36 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 03 June 2018 - 02:42 PM

Looks like you're right about 3 weeks. Survival is possible, but so is complication. I suppose in a supervised setting it's doable.



#37 ceridwen

  • Guest
  • 1,292 posts
  • 102

Member Away
  • Location:UK

Posted 03 June 2018 - 06:54 PM

I thought that people could go without food for 40 days

#38 ninjamonk69

  • Guest
  • 12 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Earth
  • NO

Posted 04 June 2018 - 04:01 AM

I thought that people could go without food for 40 days

 

The longest i have seen or herd from an average person to fast on pure water only is 53 days under Loren Lockman but that record which is over a year was assisted with some supplements and yeast more information here http://cristivlad.co...out-food-study/


Edited by ninjamonk69, 04 June 2018 - 04:02 AM.


#39 Believer

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 437 posts
  • -21
  • Location:Mood-dependent

Posted 04 June 2018 - 09:49 AM

Did I mention it yet? The fast has actually enhanced my allergies. My allergic reactions shortly after the fast were much stronger than they usually are. And now, months later slightly less strong but I have reactions I wouldn't normally have.


  • Informative x 1

#40 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 05 June 2018 - 04:32 AM

Did I mention it yet? The fast has actually enhanced my allergies. My allergic reactions shortly after the fast were much stronger than they usually are. And now, months later slightly less strong but I have reactions I wouldn't normally have.

I've heard that fasting can condition one's metabolism into being slower. Perhaps you've down regulated metabolic rate and now fewer allergens are getting digested in other processes? Perhaps a change in BMI has affected hormones that virilize the immune system?



#41 Researchgrounded

  • Life Member
  • 28 posts
  • 32
  • Location:na
  • NO

Posted 30 June 2018 - 11:57 PM

xEVA,

 

Have you found any references to the "once a week 36h fast" protocol you mentioned? 

 

Is this part of the protocol you mentioned that was was pioneered in Russia in the 1970s?

 

I have tried searching for both but have not found peer-reviewed literature on these so far.  

 

I am well-versed on the contemporary literature such as Valter Longo's FMD research

 

Thanks!


  • Agree x 1

#42 John250

  • Guest
  • 1,451 posts
  • 109
  • Location:Temecula
  • NO

Posted 13 July 2018 - 04:25 PM

If I could do it I would fast for 72 hours to completely restore my immune system, neurotransmitters, etc. a 72 hour fast has been proven to do this but man it would be so hard.

#43 sthira

  • Guest
  • 2,008 posts
  • 406

Posted 13 July 2018 - 08:26 PM

If I could do it I would fast for 72 hours to completely restore my immune system, neurotransmitters, etc. a 72 hour fast has been proven to do this but man it would be so hard.


Actually, the first few days are the hardest. Surprisingly fasting is more psychological habit-breaking than it is your body's energy levels. Depending upon you specifically, though, and what's going on with you. If you're healthy, you may find that after a few days your eating habits relax, your body begins to feel better. It's something like sleep. Except with food widely available 24-7, many have lost the body's natural regenerative processes (that are mysterious) that occur during fasts. Longo speculates that historically humans fasting without food was normal (like all other creatures on earth) and we evolved adaptation responses. Or, when we fast, metabolic switches occur that shift us from a state of growth and procreation toward repair and rest.

Fasting for 72-hours is no doubt healthy for already healthy people. But this idea that fasting 72-hours water only (or a calorie-reduced mimic diet) will "completely restore my immune system" is an exaggeration. The exageration was born out rodent data, and is likely wishful thinking that such a short fast for us would have such profound effects. When a rodent fasts for one day, that's something more like a human fasting for a week to ten days, or even longer.

But this is mostly unclear, since not much of anything has been gathered for HEALTHY HUMANS undertaking fasts. Untranslated Russian into English data may exist. Goldhamer and company at True North have some data. And of course Longo and FMD (for cancer patients) has shown us some tantalizing preliminary data. Tantalizing meaning prolonged fasting itself may have benefits independent of calorie restriction. It's still unknown to what extent, obviously.

#44 sthira

  • Guest
  • 2,008 posts
  • 406

Posted 13 July 2018 - 08:57 PM

I blood-tested for baseline. I fasted "water- and black coffee-only" for 14-days (350-hours). I followed a refeeding strategy (...kale smoothies, avocados...) for three-days. Then I re-tested blood markers (a confounder is I'm longterm CRed +/- 15%). Here are my WBC results for N=1:

Pre-Fast White Blood Cell Count:
4.8 10E3/mcL

Date:
Fri 3/30/18 05:00 p.m
Reference Range:
4.2 10E3/mcL - 9.1 10E3/mcL

Post-Fast White Blood Cell Count:
4.2 10E3/mcL

Date:
Weds 4/18/18 03:27 p.m.
Reference Range:
4.2 10E3/mcL - 9.1 10E3/mcL


This was a confusing set of numbers, sorry :-(

I retested WBC again, nearly three months after the 14-day fast, and here's the n-1.

Pre-fast (3/30/2018)
WBC: 4.8 (Ref Range 4.2 -- 9.1)

Fast for 14 days (4/1/2018 - 4/15/2018) water and coffee only

Post-fast (4/18/2018)
WBC: 4.2 (Range 4.2 -- 9.1)

Three months later (7/12/2018)
WBC: 4.8 (Range 4.2 -- 9.1)

As you can see, my white blood cell count was low to begin with, got a little lower during a 14 day fast, and then returned to baseline.

So my WBC didn't seem to move higher or lower from this fast. This is likely meaningless. I'd of course like to get a panel of tests that may be indicative of benefits or detriments of fasting. Or even skin biopsies -- Eek!

But I don't know if anyone is clear yet about which biomarkers are most relevant. How do we know what to test? How do we see, e.g., before and after, if what we're doing to ourselves through self-experimentation is beneficial for anti-aging?

Expensive question, complex answer

#45 John250

  • Guest
  • 1,451 posts
  • 109
  • Location:Temecula
  • NO

Posted 13 July 2018 - 09:55 PM

Omg you went 14days I didn’t even think that was possible. Props to you.

#46 sthira

  • Guest
  • 2,008 posts
  • 406

Posted 13 July 2018 - 10:11 PM

Omg you went 14days I didn’t even think that was possible. Props to you.


Thanks, but, sincerely, props are not necessary. It's not that big of a deal. You can do it, too. If you're generally healthy, prolonged fasting is more of a social and scheduling inconvenience than a physiological hardship. If you're generally healthy, you'd be amazed at how well you'll adapt to this kinda thing. Of course you'll need practice -- it's like a kinda peculiar exercise. You evolved to do it. Or kinda like sleep. Except unlike exercising and sleep, fasting has been forgotten in a society of food abundance.
  • Agree x 1

#47 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,837 posts
  • 720
  • Location:Austria

Posted 14 July 2018 - 10:59 AM

Thanks, but, sincerely, props are not necessary. It's not that big of a deal. You can do it, too. If you're generally healthy, prolonged fasting is more of a social and scheduling inconvenience than a physiological hardship. If you're generally healthy, you'd be amazed at how well you'll adapt to this kinda thing. Of course you'll need practice -- it's like a kinda peculiar exercise. You evolved to do it. Or kinda like sleep. Except unlike exercising and sleep, fasting has been forgotten in a society of food abundance.

 

Agree, it usually isn't a big deal, especially when young and healthy. As sthira already said, only the first 3 days one feels hungry. When I was young (22) I wanted to fast and out of opportunity combined it with a hunger-strike in front of the local parliament, and camping in the forest behind. Lasted 21 days without difficulty.

 

Only fasted a further time for 1 week 20 years later. This time, though not any more difficult, but with serious chronic disease, it fired backwards. Seems in that week my metabolism got really good at gluconeogenesis, and I lost fasting blood sugar control for a whole year afterwards (about 122 mg/dl fasting glucose, though with 141 postprandials only).
 



#48 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 14 July 2018 - 06:55 PM

This was a confusing set of numbers, sorry :-(

I retested WBC again, nearly three months after the 14-day fast, and here's the n-1.

Pre-fast (3/30/2018)
WBC: 4.8 (Ref Range 4.2 -- 9.1)

Fast for 14 days (4/1/2018 - 4/15/2018) water and coffee only

Post-fast (4/18/2018)
WBC: 4.2 (Range 4.2 -- 9.1)

Three months later (7/12/2018)
WBC: 4.8 (Range 4.2 -- 9.1)

As you can see, my white blood cell count was low to begin with, got a little lower during a 14 day fast, and then returned to baseline.

So my WBC didn't seem to move higher or lower from this fast. This is likely meaningless. I'd of course like to get a panel of tests that may be indicative of benefits or detriments of fasting. Or even skin biopsies -- Eek!

But I don't know if anyone is clear yet about which biomarkers are most relevant. How do we know what to test? How do we see, e.g., before and after, if what we're doing to ourselves through self-experimentation is beneficial for anti-aging?

Expensive question, complex answer

What are the technical details of the particular WBC test that you took? Could the minimum readable value be 4.2?



#49 xEva

  • Guest
  • 1,594 posts
  • 24
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 15 July 2018 - 12:37 AM

xEVA,

 

Have you found any references to the "once a week 36h fast" protocol you mentioned? 

 

Is this part of the protocol you mentioned that was was pioneered in Russia in the 1970s?

 

I have tried searching for both but have not found peer-reviewed literature on these so far.  

 

I am well-versed on the contemporary literature such as Valter Longo's FMD research

 

Thanks!

 

Sorry I did not see it til now. 

No, once a week 36h fast is not the Russian protocol developed in the 1960-70s. Rather, this is recommended to do for a month or so before initiating a real fast, -- which lasts 2-3 weeks, on water only, with initial purge (MgSO4) and then daily enemas and light physical activity (hiking or walking in a park  ~10 km a day) <-- that's the gist of the fasting phase of the Russian protocol, which is followed by the refeeding phase.  



#50 Researchgrounded

  • Life Member
  • 28 posts
  • 32
  • Location:na
  • NO

Posted 15 July 2018 - 02:03 AM

eEVA, interesting protocol.

From your original description though it sounds like even the weekly 36 hours fasts have helped autoimmunity without the longer fasts, provided that they are carried out every week without exception for a long time?

I understood this from your comment that: “What I never saw fail was a regular once a week 36h fast. After 6 months there is a noticeable improvement and after a year often it's gone (talking about chronic conditions that could not be helped at all).” So, even these can help autoimmunity by themselves? Do
You know of any published work on those 36 hour fasts? You seem to be speaking from first hand experience

Sthira and Pamoja, indeed it must be mind over matter, but carrying out your intention with resolve to the finish, you two both probably have more willpower than you give yourself credit for - very impressive!

Edited by researchgrounded, 15 July 2018 - 02:06 AM.


#51 xEva

  • Guest
  • 1,594 posts
  • 24
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 15 July 2018 - 03:57 AM

eEVA, interesting protocol.

From your original description though it sounds like even the weekly 36 hours fasts have helped autoimmunity without the longer fasts, provided that they are carried out every week without exception for a long time?

I understood this from your comment that: “What I never saw fail was a regular once a week 36h fast. After 6 months there is a noticeable improvement and after a year often it's gone (talking about chronic conditions that could not be helped at all).” So, even these can help autoimmunity by themselves? Do
You know of any published work on those 36 hour fasts? You seem to be speaking from first hand experience
 

 

don't see how a "chronic conditions that could not be helped" translates to "autoimmunity" -? in my experience "autoimmunity" is a terms docs use when they can't find the real cause.

 

and there maybe some published work on weekly fasting days. Isn't it called intermittent fasting?  But my special interest was in long fasts and metabolism of various phases of starvation. 



#52 Researchgrounded

  • Life Member
  • 28 posts
  • 32
  • Location:na
  • NO

Posted 15 July 2018 - 01:49 PM

Hi xEva,

I mistakenly inferred it from the thread name. I think of chronic disease as long-term managed but not eliminated, as opposed to in contrast acute medicine with full recovery such as from infection or hopefully - if curable - cancer. I am also, like you, curious about prolonged ( > 1-2 days) fasts!

Additionally, for shorter term “intermittent fasting” ( I acknowledge, in deference to Dr Valter Longo ambiguity here in counterdistinction to the verbiage TRF if within 1-2 days, and otherwise PF for longer fasts)...... and specifically for weekly 36 hour fasts you mentioned, what chronic conditions and diagnoses have you seen yield doing this for six months?

Your observation is very interesting—Which clinic / venue did you observe these weekly 36 hour fasts in?

Edited by researchgrounded, 15 July 2018 - 02:00 PM.


#53 sthira

  • Guest
  • 2,008 posts
  • 406

Posted 15 July 2018 - 05:00 PM

Sthira and Pamoja, indeed it must be mind over matter, but carrying out your intention with resolve to the finish, you two both probably have more willpower than you give yourself credit for - very impressive!


Well, hard to pat myself on the back when this fasting thing was passed to me by ancestors trying to survive food deprivation. Where I stay -- big urban American place -- fasting is counter-culture, freaky stuff to the 'burb people mowing their lawn right now; but fasting seems to be gaining acceptance here and there. Thanks Fung, Longo, Goldhamer, Clapper, Fontana... More unbiased, disinterested fasting science would help us. Should anyone fast at all? If maybe, then when, why, how much, and how safe is it for healthy people to go it alone? Must we really pay the thousands to be in some clinic? Of course, it depends....

On your own, fasting for a presumably healthy person is a practice. And like any other skill acquisition fasting comes with advances, setbacks, one step forward, two steps backwards. So if you think it's good for you, go gently.

I realize we're practicing potentially woo-woo nonsense within a pretty sick culture (obesity, diabetes, opioid addiction, depression epidemic...) Slowly and consistently is how to learn to play the tuba, though. Unlike tuba blowing, your body evolved to fast naturally, all on its weird little own. No tuba dates back hundreds of thousands of years. Music does, though, so fasting is maybe more like music? Or sleep. Or running around the block a few times. I'll shut up now.
  • Informative x 1

#54 xEva

  • Guest
  • 1,594 posts
  • 24
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 05 October 2018 - 05:29 AM

Hey Believer, I was reading an old adrenal support forum (https://forums.phoen...-problem.43829/) and some people there describe food allergies just like yours.  Apparently, low cortisol may result in allergies to food. So you may want to check your adrenals. Besides cortisol, adrenals also produce mineralocorticoids that regulate electrolytes, and you seem to have problems with that too (from your other thread).

 

Now, there are many different reasons for low cortisol, from dysfunctional adrenals to normal adrenals in conjunction with a faulty enzyme that should convert intermediate substances to final products (like cortisol or aldosterone). Or it could be due to a faulty feedback loop involving other glands. In other words, you need to see a specialist.  Good luck!


Edited by xEva, 05 October 2018 - 05:33 AM.






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: water fasting, allergy

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users