I’ve always wondered what people mean by “toxins.” It seems like such a non-specific term. Anyone know, specifically, the names of any “toxins” that the body has been shown to store?
As far as the headaches on the pulse fast, I think there are other reasons that are more likely than releasing toxins (which the pulse fast might not even do…especially since we don’t know what “toxins” really are in the first place or if they even exist.)
[quote]BulletproofTiger wrote:
[quote]wakiki wrote:
This is very interesting…
I did my first Pulse Fast yesterday and when I came home to shower I noticed skin rash on my upper body… especially my chest and upper abdomen. I imagine it is due to toxins being released of some sort. Today, it seems to be slowly getting better.
Anybody else experience this?[/quote]
Yeah I hadn’t much thought about it previous to this thread, but it makes complete sense that increasing fat loss beyond what the body is accustomed to (eating at maintenance calories vs. exercising while in calorie deficit, especially in ketosis, and IMO ESPECIALLY on Pulse Fast ™ days) would increase the toxin load on your system to a level that you are not accustomed to handling. You’re rash could be entirely not related though.[/quote]
I don’t think there is any evidence of increased “toxin load” from dropping a pound or two or some other small amount of bodyfat.
And it doesn’t make sense.
If for example, the amount of bodyfat is reduced to 95% as much fat as had previously been present – which would be a nice accomplishment for one day – then the concentration of highly fat soluble, highly water insoluble toxins would increase by approximately 5%.
But not just for that day, and not only on account of having achieved the loss in one day.
That higher concentration would be the case for a long time after having reduced bodyfat to this amount, and the same increase would have occurred whether that loss of 5% of the fat (not 5% bodyfat percentage, but 5% of the fat) was accomplished in one day or one month.
What next: a new theory that we shouldn’t be lean because losing fat increases levels of some toxinsm, if they were previously consumed? A nice excuse anyway!
I don’t understand your math. How are you able to estimate the percentage increase of the concentration of highly fat soluble, highly water insoluble toxin? I was under the assumption that toxins released into the blood stream would find their way back into a fat cell, even in a calorie deficit. Also, under a calorie baseline, it would seem that (in general) that fat soluble toxins would remain in a fat cell (assuming no calorie deficit), thus “normal” blood levels would be very low, depending on how hydrophobic a particular toxin is… please explain if I am incorrect in my assumptions.
For example, I know that for a drug test, even though THC (or whatever metabolites are tested) is supposed to clear in something like 2 weeks (differs based on the source), levels can be detected for a much longer length of time if the person has been in a caloric deficit at any time in the few days leading up to the test (because the caloric deficit would seemingly break down fat cells for energy and the accompanying drug metabolites would be released). The theory of drinking various juices might actually help a person pass a drug test from the sugar in the juice by increases the storage hormone insulin, and preventing the release of the metabolites. Again please let me know if I’m wrong.
Assuming that blood levels of fat soluble toxins that have been long present should be minimal under normal circumstances (I would say nearly zero, but I know there is some level of fat cell breakdown on a regular basis), then an increase in fat loss (much higher than the normal breakdown of fat cells under a caloric stasis) would dramatically increase, as a percent, the blood level of various fat soluble toxins that had been stored for a while.
Is it your premise that if my theory is correct then that would mean that the toxins would continuously remain in the blood stream once released, unless bound to fiber or some substance like chlorella, etc.?
Where a chemical is in one phase (for example, dissolved in fat) at a different chemical potential – one can simplify this fairly accurate by saying when it’s at a different percentage of saturation with regard to solubility in that phase – than it is in a phase where it is in extensive contact and mass readily transfers, then you have mass transfer from the phase at the higher chemical potential to the phase where it is at lower chemical potential, until the phases are at the same chemical potential.
As a simple example, let’s say you have a compound dissolved in an oily phase such as isopropyl myristate, you add water so these phases are in contact with each other, and you have some agitation (stirring for example.) Very quickly, enough compound moves from the IPM phase to the water phase until both are at the same chemical potential, or (closely enough) percent saturation.
About 1 minute is all I used in my research. It’s a fast process.
The reason why free toxin levels increase in the blood as fat is lost is that the percent saturation in the fat increases, due to there being the same amount of toxin but less fat.
We don’t know the percent solubility that we started with, but call it X.
Upon quickly losing 5% of the body’s fat, now the concentration is increased to 1/0.95, or about 105%, of what it had been.
This results, due to the above fact regarding equilibration and mass transfer, to some toxin moving from the lipid phase to aqueous phase. The free aqueous concentration will increase likewise, by the same percentage as the increase in concentration in the lipid phase.
Your question on how long the toxin remains is more easily dealt with in terms of the total amount in the body. The amount in the blood will be a result of that, and of the above regarding equilibration.
So it becomes a matter of how rapidly it is removed from the body. Roughly speaking this will be proportionally faster relative to the concentration of the toxin. So yes, when toxin levels in the blood – from previously consumed toxins – are increased due to loss of a substantial percentage of the fat that had been in the body, rate of loss increases as well. Some of this may be from increased loss in the urine if the toxin is capable at all of being made significantly water soluble; some will be from increased loss via elimination in the stool; and some will be from increased rate of loss in shed skin.
Great explanation. I had to read it twice, but it was clear. As you alluded to before, for the toxins being processed through the liver (enterohepatic circulation) having chlorella fairly consistently in the GI tract might aid elimination. Milk thistle might be a good idea (especially since it’s so cheap).
Any other ways to optimize removal? I’d guess adequate fiber and having vitamin d levels optimized would be a good idea as well (Vit D is correlated with intracellular glutathione which lessens the injuries caused by various toxins).
Your posting on this was quite interesting and had me thinking about it last night. I agree that frequent use of chlorella, logically anyway, likely could make an important difference (of course there had been various things stating that it is of use, but sometimes there are such statements about things that really are not right, and to me it’s nice when something makes sense as well.)
Also I was wondering if frequent use of Olestra might not help a bit. It certainly increases, by a large percentage, fat output in the feces, and so would tend to carry out some fat-soluble toxins that otherwise would be recycled. The effect would be small, as it’s only a small percentage of total fat in the body, but we’re talking about toxins that may ordinarily take years to clear, so even a small effect could be a signficant advantage.
That is pure guesswork though as to whether there would be an effect large enough to be of any practical significance, and as for myself I’m not planning on using the Olestra 
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Your posting on this was quite interesting and had me thinking about it last night. I agree that frequent use of chlorella, logically anyway, likely could make an important difference (of course there had been various things stating that it is of use, but sometimes there are such statements about things that really are not right, and to me it’s nice when something makes sense as well.)
Also I was wondering if frequent use of Olestra might not help a bit. It certainly increases, by a large percentage, fat output in the feces, and so would tend to carry out some fat-soluble toxins that otherwise would be recycled. The effect would be small, as it’s only a small percentage of total fat in the body, but we’re talking about toxins that may ordinarily take years to clear, so even a small effect could be a signficant advantage.
That is pure guesswork though as to whether there would be an effect large enough to be of any practical significance, and as for myself I’m not planning on using the Olestra :)[/quote]
…imagines diapers being part of the new “Olestra Supercharged PulseFast V-Diet”… hahaha And then Chris Shugart will be forever known simply as “Chris Shart”
Interesting theory though! Gets me thinking.
[quote]wakiki wrote:
This is very interesting…
I did my first Pulse Fast yesterday and when I came home to shower I noticed skin rash on my upper body… especially my chest and upper abdomen. I imagine it is due to toxins being released of some sort. Today, it seems to be slowly getting better.
Anybody else experience this?[/quote]
Wakiki : Yes! I was searching the threads for “rash after Pulse Fast”. Heres my experience: I have pulsed two times in two weeks so far. The day after the first pulse fast I noticed a rash around my neck and in the direct center of my chest bone. I thought it was from a new shirt I wore that day…blochy red something that looks like a clothing reaction or detergent reaction. It took two days to disappear. Then Sunday I pulse fasted again and this morning I noticed the rash again on same center of chest, and a bit on my neck. Though not as bad as the first fast. I’m going to hit up a Mod to inquire…
[quote]brandon76 wrote:
[quote]wakiki wrote:
This is very interesting…
I did my first Pulse Fast yesterday and when I came home to shower I noticed skin rash on my upper body… especially my chest and upper abdomen. I imagine it is due to toxins being released of some sort. Today, it seems to be slowly getting better.
Anybody else experience this?[/quote]
Wakiki : Yes! I was searching the threads for “rash after Pulse Fast”. Heres my experience: I have pulsed two times in two weeks so far. The day after the first pulse fast I noticed a rash around my neck and in the direct center of my chest bone. I thought it was from a new shirt I wore that day…blochy red something that looks like a clothing reaction or detergent reaction. It took two days to disappear. Then Sunday I pulse fasted again and this morning I noticed the rash again on same center of chest, and a bit on my neck. Though not as bad as the first fast. I’m going to hit up a Mod to inquire…
[/quote]
Sorry to hear about your experiences, but we know of no ingredient within the Pulse Fast plan which would cause that kind of reaction. As for it being some type of “detox” effect, maybe. Much depends on your previous diet.
Many times when someone begins a new regimen, of any sort (exercise or nutrition), they start doing other new things at the same time, and that could be where the problem is coming from.
One man for instance, began taking tribulus around the same time he joined a new gym and started showering there. He developed athlete’s foot and believed it was the result of the tribulus! Luckily, he found the true culprit of his misfortune.
I really hope you can find the cause of your skin troubles because it would be a shame to miss out on all the benefits the Pulse Fast has to offer.
Best of luck,
Mod Red
Thanks ModRed, its a minor situation. I will continue to monitor. It could just be a body chemistry reaction from the low calorie fasting, also I take two HOT-ROX with the Fast. (V-Diet while Pusle Fasting) This could be causing a body temp reaction as well.
I remember reading an article (sorry I couldn’t find it upon writing this) pertaining to this. Apparently they found that in the test sample of adults who were undergoing fat metabolisation (after having the weight for a long period of time) had raised levels of pesticides and other toxins in their blood which had not been used since the 70s.
Pretty conclusive evidence that fat cells store toxins; personally I also notice that whenever I diet, regardless of how clean it is, I definitely get a significant increase in acne and do get headaches, all of which disappears within a week of going back up to maintenance cals.
[quote]wakiki wrote:
This is very interesting…
I did my first Pulse Fast yesterday and when I came home to shower I noticed skin rash on my upper body… especially my chest and upper abdomen. I imagine it is due to toxins being released of some sort. Today, it seems to be slowly getting better.
Anybody else experience this?[/quote]
I’m not aware of the ingredients in a Pulse Fast, however, this sounds very much like niacin flush. Niacin is a lipid lowering agent and stimulates growth hormone.
<---------- Not a Dr.
Dr. P,
Interesting however if it was deemed something to the effect of a Niacin Flush would the “rash areas” linger for a couple days, then recede?
Thanks for clarifying the Dr.