Fasting on Yom Kippur



Once upon a time, our fellow Alan Turley rambled on about "Re: Fasting on Yom Kippur." Our champion
De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nursing retorts, thusly ...

Here is one for Alan: Achieving good Nutrition is an Art, NOT a Science!

Ha, ... Hah, Ha!

You can not have a conversation with a broken record. Just thought that you might want to know. :)

>On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 15:03:30 GMT, Richard Schulman wrote:
>
>>First of all, someone who starts off all his posts with an automated adolescent formula like the
>>above is clearly not interested in reasonable discussion or being taken for anything other than
>>a clown.
>
>If you intend to engage John in a considered debate of his assertions, make sure that you have
>extra time. You will waste a lot of it or as much as you choose to invest in him.
>
>If you have been only recently subjected to John's blather, you might yet have the impression that
>some expression of interest on your part will persuade him to engage in meaningful dialogue. You
>are mistaken.
>
>John repeatedly demonstrates himself to be either hopelessly addled or willfully ignorant of the
>topics of which he speaks, and his only real expressions of quasi-original thought are
>pre-adolescent verbal abuses aimed at anyone redirecting him. Sadly, even these are a poor excuse
>for reasoned responses.
>
>Engage him, and he will respond with asinine comments and affected laughter. Question him, and he
>may either ignore you, respond with non sequitors and baseless rebuttal, or accuse you of
>unreasonable bias. Tell him he is wrong, and he will throw intellectual feces at the forum until
>you reach the only effective solution. Ignore him.
>
>Unfortunately, even scrupulous disregard of John raises issues, since absence of rebuke frees him
>for what he really wants. He wants to be seen as a knowledgeable guide in your forum, which he will
>use to push his health care views as though educated on the topic. Ignoring him licenses him to
>talk, though he is a clear example of who should not.
>
>@~
 
Once upon a time, our fellow Richard Schulman rambled on about "Re: Fasting on Yom Kippur." Our
champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...

>First of all, someone who starts off all his posts with an automated adolescent formula like
>the above is clearly not interested in reasonable discussion or being taken for anything other
>than a clown.

Gee, and here I thought that I was doing it to **** anal science geeks really off?

Ha, ... Hah, Ha!
 
Once upon a time, our fellow Richard Schulman rambled on about "Re: Fasting on Yom Kippur." Our
champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...

>First of all, someone who starts off all his posts with an automated adolescent formula like
>the above is clearly not interested in reasonable discussion or being taken for anything other
>than a clown.

We just had a thread where everyone agreed that people mostly top post because nobody writes
anything worth quoting. :)

Just thought that you might want to know. :)

Actually, my header is cross-posting friendly.

Just my opinion. But, I am *right* as usual!
 
What happened to your web-site, John? Did it die?

John 'the Man' <[email protected]> blathered on in message
news:<[email protected]>..
> Once upon a time, our fellow RK rambled on about "Re: Fasting on Yom Kippur." Our champion
> De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nursing retorts, thusly ...
>
> >> Of course, it is best, if you are muscular rather than fat.
>
> >Depends on whether you can tell the diference between mean life span and maximum life span.
>
> Did you hear the one about RK?
>
> He thinks that he is going to live past the age of 120!
>
> Ha, ... Hah, Ha!
>
> He thinks that we should take his nutty CR claims seriously, because they all are going to live
> past the age of 120. Frankly, I think that qualifies him for the funny farm. :(
>
> Ha, ... Hah, Ha! Maybe somebody should let RK in on the joke?
>
> "... you have my sympathies" Science Officer Ash to Ripley, in the movie ALIEN.
 
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 04:08:17 GMT, John 'the Man' <[email protected]> wrote:

[cut]

Thank God for kill files. John 'the Jerkoff' must be setting an alltime record for the number set in
his honor.
---
Richard Schulman Remove antispamming "-xyz" for email reply
 
"Tim Tyler" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Jeff <[email protected]> wrote or quoted:
>
> > I don't think fasting has any health benefits. It can disturb bowel
function
> > (nothing to **** out, but bowel function usually is not badly disturbed,
so
> > you miss a ****) and can cause blood sugar to go down (esp. for people
with
> > diabetes on meds). I don't think the risks are that great, though.
> >
> > I don't think fasting is good for you. There are better ways to lose
weight.
> > And it does not cleanse the body of anything. So I don't see any health benefits.
>
> Fasting on alternate days is effective at prolonging life - since it results in calorie
> restriction.

This is no better than eating half as much as you would on a nonfast day every day.

DUH

Jeff
 
Once upon a time, our fellow Richard Schulman rambled on about "Re: Fasting on Yom Kippur." Our
champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...

>Thank God for kill files. John 'the Jerkoff' must be setting an alltime record for the number set
>in his honor.

I hate to inform you, but I have been going by John 'the Man' for quite a few years now. :)
--
It would be nice if commoners would first learn to navigate the web as well as newsgroups and their
newsreaders before becoming a royal pest.

May I suggest that you use your brain to your advantage once in a while? Figure out how to use your
newsreader. Buy a newsreader that actually works! Mine does. Beggars can not be choosy.

Ergo, YOU own the problem. :)
 
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 19:38:45 GMT, Alan Turley <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 15:03:30 GMT, Richard Schulman wrote:
>
>>First of all, someone who starts off all his posts with an automated adolescent formula like the
>>above is clearly not interested in reasonable discussion or being taken for anything other than
>>a clown.
>
>If you intend to engage John in a considered debate of his assertions, make sure that you have
>extra time. You will waste a lot of it or as much as you choose to invest in him.
>
>If you have been only recently subjected to John's blather, you might yet have the impression that
>some expression of interest on your part will persuade him to engage in meaningful dialogue. You
>are mistaken.
>
>John repeatedly demonstrates himself to be either hopelessly addled or willfully ignorant of the
>topics of which he speaks, and his only real expressions of quasi-original thought are
>pre-adolescent verbal abuses aimed at anyone redirecting him. Sadly, even these are a poor excuse
>for reasoned responses.
>
>Engage him, and he will respond with asinine comments and affected laughter. Question him, and he
>may either ignore you, respond with non sequitors and baseless rebuttal, or accuse you of
>unreasonable bias. Tell him he is wrong, and he will throw intellectual feces at the forum until
>you reach the only effective solution. Ignore him.
>
>Unfortunately, even scrupulous disregard of John raises issues, since absence of rebuke frees him
>for what he really wants. He wants to be seen as a knowledgeable guide in your forum, which he will
>use to push his health care views as though educated on the topic. Ignoring him licenses him to
>talk, though he is a clear example of who should not.

I second this and I could not agree more with your advice and your thoughts. But I learned early in
life to choose the battles to fight carefully. And John is not "worthy" enough. I just put him into
my killfile again every time he chooses an other email address (of fakes it or whatever) and that is
that. I sure hope that any newcomer quickly sees him as what he is.

Richard, if you look up the reason for a killfile in your newsreader in its online help, you'll
probably find Johns picture there. Don't waste your time.

Regards,

Andy
 
Jeff <[email protected]> wrote or quoted:
> "Tim Tyler" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>> Jeff <[email protected]> wrote or quoted:

>> > I don't think fasting is good for you. There are better ways to lose weight. And it does not
>> > cleanse the body of anything. So I don't see any health benefits.
>>
>> Fasting on alternate days is effective at prolonging life - since it results in calorie
>> restriction.
>
> This is no better than eating half as much as you would on a nonfast day every day.
>
> DUH

That is debatable - see papers like:

``The Protective Effects of Dietary Restriction Can be Dissociated From Calorie Intake''

- http://www.americanaging.org/past_meetings/AGE02/abslist.htm

``Intermittent fasting dissociates beneficial effects of dietary restriction on glucose metabolism
and neuronal resistance to injury from calorie intake.

- http://timtyler.org/pmid/?n=12724520

...for more details.

Regular fasting is very good for the health of individuals that practice it - it slows the aging
process and prevents the onset of diseases.

It is possible to debate whether it is /quite/ as good for you as a similar CR regime - but either
are a whole lot better than eating in an "ad lib" fashion.
--
__________
|im |yler http://timtyler.org/ [email protected] Remove lock to reply.
 
Once upon a time, our fellow Andi B. rambled on about "Re: Fasting on Yom Kippur." Our champion
De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...

>Richard, if you look up the reason for a killfile in your newsreader in its online help, you'll
>probably find Johns picture there. Don't waste your time.

Actually, if you had a clue about what you were talking about you would already know that I had to
educate Alan Turley about the differences between an art and science. :(

You see, Alan Turley is really quite stupid and is just a typical money grubbing male nurse who has
a god complex because he is totally under paid and under appreciated by his employer.

I know different. Alan is just a typical arrogant science geek who has more attitude than brains.

Just my opinion. But, I am *right* as usual!
 
John 'the Man' wrote:

> Once upon a time, our fellow Richard Schulman rambled on about "Re: Fasting on Yom Kippur." Our
> champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...
>
> >First of all, someone who starts off all his posts with an automated adolescent formula like the
> >above is clearly not interested in reasonable discussion or being taken for anything other than
> >a clown.
>
> We just had a thread where everyone agreed that people mostly top post because nobody writes
> anything worth quoting. :)
>
> Just thought that you might want to know. :)
>
> Actually, my header is cross-posting friendly.
>
> Just my opinion. But, I am *right* as usual!

""right"...spelled TRITE..B-0b1
 
Once upon a time, our fellow B-Ob1 rambled on about "Re: Fasting on Yom Kippur." Our champion
De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...

> ""right"...spelled TRITE..B-0b1

Talking about yourself ... Ob-1?

"... you have my sympathies" Science Officer Ash to Ripley, in the movie ALIEN.
 
On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 09:12:10 GMT, Tim Tyler <[email protected]> posted:

>Jeff <[email protected]> wrote or quoted:
>> "Tim Tyler" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>>> Jeff <[email protected]> wrote or quoted:
>
>>> > I don't think fasting is good for you. There are better ways to lose weight. And it does not
>>> > cleanse the body of anything. So I don't see any health benefits.
>>>
>>> Fasting on alternate days is effective at prolonging life - since it results in calorie
>>> restriction.
>>
>> This is no better than eating half as much as you would on a nonfast day every day.
>>
>> DUH
>
>That is debatable - see papers like:
>
>``The Protective Effects of Dietary Restriction Can be Dissociated From Calorie Intake''
>
> - http://www.americanaging.org/past_meetings/AGE02/abslist.htm
>
>``Intermittent fasting dissociates beneficial effects of dietary restriction on glucose metabolism
>and neuronal resistance to injury from calorie intake.
>
> - http://timtyler.org/pmid/?n=12724520
>
>...for more details.
>
>Regular fasting is very good for the health of individuals that practice it - it slows the aging
>process and prevents the onset of diseases.
>
>It is possible to debate whether it is /quite/ as good for you as a similar CR regime - but either
>are a whole lot better than eating in an "ad lib" fashion.

Supposition. A rat's ad libitum is not the same thing as a human's ad libtum.
 
Actually, a fast such as Muslims do it, rarely results in loss of calorie restriction, since the two
meals eaten before and after are larger than normal. Of course, Ramadan is a great time to tlose
weight if you are fat. The normal Ramadan diet consists mainly of complex carbs.
 
John 'the Man' <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Once upon a time, our fellow Richard Schulman rambled on about "Re: Fasting on Yom Kippur." Our
> champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nursing retorts, thusly ...

What the f--- is that supposed to mean?

>
> >>And, no research on rats has ever gotten them to lift weights and engage in body building.
>
> >More clowning.
>
> I will repeat it again for the benefit of the intellectually challenge science geeks on these ngs.
>
> Rats don't lift weights and engage in body building.
>

Rats don't smoke cigarettes, either.

Just thought that you might want to know. :)
 
Once upon a time, our fellow RK rambled on about "Re: Fasting on Yom Kippur." Our champion
De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...

>What the f--- is that supposed to mean?

Ah! The Academic mind at work. :()
 
John 'the Man' <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> Once upon a time, our fellow RK rambled on about "Re: Fasting on Yom Kippur." Our champion
> De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...
>
> >What the f--- is that supposed to mean?
>
> Ah! The Academic mind at work. :()

Answer the question.
 
John 'the Man' <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> Once upon a time, our fellow RK rambled on about "Re: Fasting on Yom Kippur." Our champion
> De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...
>
> >What the f--- is that supposed to mean?
>
> Ah! The Academic mind at work. :()

Answer the question.
 
> > Fasting on alternate days is effective at prolonging life
> > - since it results in calorie restriction.
>
> This is no better than eating half as much as you would on a nonfast day every day.

For equal number of calories over the long term: Is it possible that EOD allows the body to detox
more efficiently? Is it possible that EOD tricks the body in a higher conservation mode because a
full day without food seems more severe than reduced calorie everyday?