Better Humans

The thing is calorie restriction usually leads to full weight re-gain, usually quickly [1, 2], potentially leading to a worse body composition after the diet. The same is not true of fasting [2] - speculatively due to the effect of HGH during fasting which is known to change body composition, reducing fat percentage and increasing lean muscle mass. HGH production is not meaningfully increased by calorie restriction - it's pulsatile and regulated by the presence of any food intake at all almost no matter how small.

Further, there's a string of evidence that alternate day fasting yields substantially improved biomarkers of health (triglycerides, insulin, etc) even if total caloric intake averaged over the two days remains the same (i.e. every second day you eat 2x what you need) and weight does not change.

Weight watchers is an abject failure by their own metrics in a study they published. Their calorie restricted diets are less effective than doing nothing, but being generous, they work for 0.2% of participants who have clearly demonstrated an intent to change their bodies [3]. On the other hand, eat nothing for 36 hours and you're down 1 pound of fat, and it's not likely to come back.

That's what all that talk of yoyo dieting is, and a case can be made that its why the Minnesota Starvation Experiment led to such bad outcomes. They weren't fasting, they were eating a reduced calorie diet - they may have been much better off eating nothing. Contrast that outcome to this,…

I've always understood abstract thinking to be of broad nature, generalities, non-specific, a vastness.

The idea that abstract thinking is devoid of specifics has never struck me as a prohibition that you can't get to abstract thinking by starting with examples and metrics. Looking for patterns, mind mapping, and tabletop exercises all seem like ways to take concrete thinking elements and bridge them to the abstract.

In doing so, I think there are some specific areas to watch for, namely the influence of cognitive bias.
I'm a big fan of the Cognitive bias cheat sheet which has been covered on HN in the past, https://betterhumans.coach.me/cognitive-bias-cheat-sheet-55a472476b18

I also believe that the concept of multidisciplinary approaches can be one of abstract thinking -- when you begin your exploration of a topic from the viewpoint of a discipline you have not mastered, your mind is more likely to be able to explore concepts and solutions which are not bound by fact -- you simply don't know the facts and principles of these foreign disciplines intimately.

And just as disciplinary viewpoint can provide interesting triggers in abstract thinking, so can applying empathy and imagination. The best books on things like this are often written for children. Try "The Book of Think: Or how to solve a problem twice your size" (Burns, 1976).

This is fantastic. In a reply, you mentioned that you were interested in writing more about your setup and findings. I would love to pay you for a full article from you on this for Better Humans. See our "Write for Us" page here with instructions on submitting a proposal, or drop me a note via email - I'm terrie at coach.me. https://betterhumans.coach.me/write-for-better-humans-4c6c9884fc08
I have been looking for someone with experience monitoring and using their blood sugar data to manage diabetes, so I hope to hear from you!