Fungicide

Sycophants, be warned. There is no safe quarter for you on this blog.

**'The Intensive Dietary Management Program' (IDM) is now being marketed as 'The Fasting Method' (TFM), but it's still the same protocol. So, when I mention IDM, in this article, it also refers to TFM. Brenda Zorn is no longer involved with IDM.**

This post is not about how fungus, pesticides, fungicides, candida, etc. makes you fat, because there is only one thing that makes you fat - blood glucose dysregulation. Everything else is quackery.

Instead, I wrote this post because some people are understandably confused about, super popular, fasting guru Dr. Fung. They have asked me for a no BS breakdown of what to make of him. Should they follow his advice or not? It seems like every month a new "low carb" advocate is born, but few have captured everyone's imagination like Fung has. So, let's analyze the Fung phenomenon more closely, since it seems like no one has been able to do so effectively and clearly, so far.

There is a lot to criticize, when it comes to Fung, but let's first put things in perspective, since a lot of the backlash causes more confusion than not. Which Fung criticism is on point and which is not? Read on and I'll tell you.

Dr. Fung and Gary Taubes, have both been the most hated men in the diet sphere, for quite awhile now, simply because they had the cojones to point at the "so called weight loss experts" - dietitians, nutritionists, weight loss doctors - and tell them "YOU FAILED!". Your research, expertise, studies and treatments have all been an utter, dismal failure, as they haven't been able to make a single person lose a pound. The world became obese under your watch.

You can imagine how these "so called experts" felt about them apples. They predictably became hostile, defensive and prepared to take up arms against the "radical" Fung and Taubes. The people who run the coaching, weight loss programs and clinics, that use the advice of these "so called experts", also went to war, since their bread and butter is on the line. Literally. On the outer edge of this crowd of warriors, are all the blog readers/followers, who don't like dietary restrictions, so they also joined the battle. For this reason, every time that the name of Fung or Taubes comes up, a crowd of calories in/calories out (CICO) soldiers follow them with pitchforks and torches in hand. This is where the majority of the criticism is coming from.

The reality is that Fung and Taubes were absolutely correct in calling these "so called experts" out. The buck has to stop somewhere and since these "so called experts" haven't put a single dent in the obesity epidemic, the buck stops right at their door. After all, they are the ones who claimed to have it "all figured out". But, when someone tries to hold them accountable, they quickly pass the buck on to their patients and blame them instead of taking responsibility for what they got wrong. I am not saying that the patients are completely dough eyed innocents, but they sure as hell aren't to blame for the failures of the "so called experts".

When someone like me, an uneducated homemaker, running a blog and group, can tell you more about obesity than a "so called expert", you know things are in dire straights. Yes, these "so called experts" are idiots. They are complete bumbling, slack jawed ones at that. It's a title that's well deserved and they have worked hard to earn it. They have been researching obesity, since the 1950's and have come up with zero effective treatments.

So, the hissy fit that ensued by the "so called experts" has caused a barrage of dumb Fung criticisms, that all fall apart, since they are focused on defending the failed treatment strategy of CICO, instead of offering any legitimate subject of contention. And this will continue, because the "so called experts" simply have nothing else to offer the obese and they are desperately trying to save face. Well, there is no more face to save. They can't save their face, any better than they can save their ass.

The useless criticisms against Fung, made by these "so called experts" and their followers, are always easily stomped down when one diabetic rises up and claims - “Fung helped me get better, something you could never do.” Argument over. The diabetic, making this statement, is absolutely correct. A "low carb" doctor, who they found online, helped them more than the "so called experts". It's just too bad that the diabetic is unaware that Fung can't help them enough and the "so called expert" won't be able to explain why not. This is because there can be no arguments between a clueless diabetic and an equally clueless CICO diet coach.

Let's review what the common Fung criticisms are and why they fail:

• Criticism # 1: Insulin: "Fung blames big bad insulin for everything." Well, insulin is a master hormone, so when it malfunctions, you better believe it is going to cause something big and bad. Insulin is a growth hormone, not an obesity hormone. It is not exclusive to obesity, but it is absolutely required to grow fat. So, Fung got insulin, for the most part, correct. 
• Criticism # 2: Calories: "Fasting is just another form of caloric restriction. Calories always affect weight." If you eat while fasting or practice extended fasting, then yes, it is caloric restriction, but we will get to that shortly. Calories always affect weight, but not obesity as obesity is a condition of energy partitioning. It is this partitioning that drives metabolic disease and this is why calories have not been able to solve obesity, even though the "math" predicts they should.

So, both arguments are BS and since they both fail, the "so called experts" resort to whine about how Fung called them "names". Um yeah, you deserve way more than name calling. You deserve to be defunded, lose your degrees and get put out to pasture.

So, let's stop the "so called experts" pity party and get down to business, as there is plenty wrong with Fung, without mentioning either of the above criticisms. If you delve into obesity research, you will see where Fung goes wrong. Let’s go through some true criticisms of Fung, according to the complete and current knowledge of obesity, rather than cherry picked data.

Before I begin, let me be clear, that many obesity researchers also believe that CICO is the proper treatment for obesity and will defend it to the end, but we aren't concerned with that. We want to know what they actually found, in their research, as that's where the substance is. So, let's spray some fungicide on the fungus amongst us.

Wrong #1 - Using intermittent fasting studies as proof that all fasting is beneficial.

This, in my opinion, is the most egregious transgression, because it basically equates to lying and causes massive confusion. You can not use data from one protocol and apply it to every protocol you pull out of your behind.

There's plenty of data showing that intermittent fasting is nothing like extended fasting. Intermittent fasting is very beneficial, but extended fasting is very detrimental. This is not being made clear to clients of the 'Intensive Dietary Management Program' (IDM). In fact, IDM encourages extended fasting protocols and then hides behind intermittent fasting studies.

Their very own peer reviewed paper was published using an intermittent fasting protocol, but yet they continue to encourage extended fasting "behind closed doors". You can't just make your paper look acceptable, so it gets peer reviewed and published, and then use it to push protocols that aren't even represented in it. You also can't use the outcomes of an intermittent fasting protocol to suggest that extended fasting will yield the same results.

Wrong #2 - Electrolytes.

This is why some people following their protocol have ended up with serious complications and even at the hospital.

Electrolytes are extremely important and you can't just flippantly tell clients to "listen to their bodies" and stop fasting if "they feel bad". Everyone handles electrolytes differently. You can't solve electrolyte imbalances by "sucking on salt" and "drinking more water". That's not how it works. Specific electrolyte recommendations should be given, so that people can supplement accordingly.

Electrolytes can drop to dangerous levels in heart tissue, before you ever get a low serum reading. Some people experience no symptoms, until they suffer a bout of atrial fibrillation (AFIB). Others experience permanent nerve damage that is irreversible.

You know how you can prevent these electrolyte complications from arising during treatment? Stop encouraging extended fasting.

Wrong #3 - Intermittent fasting is great, but extended fasting is where the money is.

This is basically a bait and switch tactic. They publicly claim - on their page, their blog, their group, their book - that fasts longer than 24 hours are not recommended, but yet continuously hold fasting challenges that can go on for weeks. They certainly don't discourage extended fasting, as their "educators" continuously promote it. When someone speaks up about it, they quickly hide behind the fine print.

Case in point is their "Zorn Fast", which is run by Brenda Zorn, one of their "educators". This is a 10 day fast, which is hidden behind the "you choose how long to go" fine print. Everyone knows that the people, who follow this foolishness, will go for the 10 days, as that's what's promoted. This fast is now being hidden behind a paywall, most likely due to backlash. Well, if you want to look like Zorn, then join her fast.

Again, this is clearly not putting into practice what they preach. It's not nice to try and appear safe and sound when under public scrutiny, but continue to use extreme and fad practices when not.

Many people that have read 'The Obesity Code' book, claim that the protocol "worked for them". Of course. That's because the book only uses an intermittent fasting approach, while IDM members are encouraged to do extended fasts. This causes confusion amongst clients, as some do not see results, while others do.

Why is this being done? We can only speculate. At the core, though, it's usually all about money. They might not want to lose clients by preventing them from fasting, as long as they want. There was quite a bit of outrage when they announced their "only 24 hour fasts" post. This is ultimately their fault, as they have not educated their followers about the potential negative effects of fasting. Maybe they want clients to obtain quick results and tell their friends. Maybe it makes good "click bait" to have a "Join A 20 Day Fasting Challenge!" headline. Charlatans do this all the time. Jimmy Moore has been known to eat blocks of butter, just to prove "Fat is good!". It's peacocking, plain and simple - "Hey, look at me! I'm doing everything they tell you not to!"

But, at the end of the day, it might mean more money for them, but it's ultimately your health that's on the line. Don't become part of someone else's sensationalized headlines. You aren't getting paid for it.

Wrong #4 - Lower blood glucose is not the same as blood glucose regulation.

I have drilled this fact continuously, into every reader's head, in my posts. Lowering blood glucose is not indicative of proper blood glucose regulation. Blood glucose will lower, when you fast, but these are all temporary effects. Blood glucose will go right back up, once you begin to eat again. The same goes for weight loss. So, unless you can fast forever, you are just kicking the can down the road.

Lowering your blood glucose does not mean that your body is regulating its blood glucose properly. The Fung protocol is obsessed with blood glucose numbers, as a way to encourage people "to continue fasting", but chasing symptoms is not treatment.

Worse, a lot of people with metabolic syndrome and diabetes experience extreme lows in blood glucose, the longer they fast, and then their blood glucose rises again when they eat. So the disparities in blood glucose highs and lows, which caused the metabolic adaptation to begin with, is now being reinforced rather than reversed. You are getting worse, not better. This is why I have seen so many of these people with "low blood glucose" while fasting, end up with worsening diabetes. 

Wrong #5 - Insulin as primary.

Yes, insulin plays a major role in obesity/diabetes, but it is not the be all/end all of metabolic problems. There are many other hormones that are at play and their regulation worsens with fasting.

Just because fasting has a temporary beneficial effect on insulin levels, does not mean it's providing any benefits for insulin function and the regulation of other hormones. Many other hormones become more dysregulated with fasting and normalizing them is much more complicated than it is to just lower insulin. Cause in point - leptin. Leptin doubles down its under expression with fasting. This is why we see so many of their clients, still obese or more obese, even after years of continuous fasting and why they persistently keep the focus on insulin alone.

Wrong #6 - Protein.

Tsk, tsk. This is an old weight loss trick. Trying to get quick results through the diminishment of lean muscle mass is what the CICO crowd has been doing for years. But, the obese need to lose fat, not muscle, so this shortcut won’t work.

Protein is the only macronutrient that does not contribute to fat mass, so restricting it is counterproductive, as protein is what builds muscle mass. Diabetics need more muscle mass and less fat mass, so making them fear protein is the worst thing that can be done to them. Building muscle is not optional.

Autophagy has nothing to do with obesity and metabolic dysfunction, so bringing it up to an obese person, who simply wants to lose weight and improve their metabolism, is nothing more than deflection. The obese do not need more useless subject matter to get side tracked with, unless you are trying to put their focus elsewhere, so they don't notice they continue to be obese. - "I don't do it for weight loss, I do it for health gains, like autophagy." Well, autophagy is failing at your fat mass.

As a side note, the whole "excess skin" issue has been debunked. The body does not significantly break down skin proteins. Rather, it preferentially breaks down musculoskeletal proteins. So, people who lose weight and are not left with skin problems have:

• Lost weight naturally and very slowly.
• Have great genetics and are still young.
• Haven't lost enough weight for skin to even be an issue.

Wrong #7 - Lean body mass loss.

You absolutely do not lose lean muscle mass when your fast is intermittent, but you absolutely do lose it when it's extended. This has been proven time and time again in starvation studies. But you don't even have to go to starvation studies to know this. Just ask body builders at a local gym. 

Again, intermittent fasting studies are being used to promote all fasting, but not all fasting is created equal.

Wrong #8 - Exercise.

Without exercise there is no homeostasis of energy flux, in the fat mass, and this will continue to cause abnormal hormonal levels and function. Neglecting to recommend an exercise regimen and telling clients that it's not needed, is leaving out a very important piece of the puzzle.

Exercise affects glucose clearance, ceramide flux, insulin levels, leptin/adiponectin signaling, adrenal counter regulation, you know, everything that is involved with obesity/diabetes, but that Fung fails to mention, as it doesn't fit the narrative.

Wrong #9 - Dietary fat's effect on insulin.

Giving the impression that dietary fat is a "free food" is wrong, dumb and ignorant. Dietary fat does not raise bolus (postprandial) insulin, but it does raise basal (fasting) insulin, which is the insulin you should be trying to lower. Only giving people half the story is not good enough.

For a protocol that claims "It's the insulin, stupid.", many functions of insulin are being left out of the equation and never addressed. While they myopically focus on short term insulin response, from diet, they never mention the body's over all long term insulin demand, which is heavily influenced by the amount of energy the body is trying to keep in storage, while it uses the energy from diet.

That’s why obese people don’t need insulin stimulation from carbohydrates and/or fat, which only contributes to the storage and withholding of excess energy. They instead need insulin stimulation from protein, which builds lean body mass, not more fat mass. Eating excess fat only contributes to more storage and more withholding of energy, especially when there already is excess body fat. Obese people always have a higher insulin demand because of their excess body fat. Piling excess dietary fat, on top of that, only makes things worse. Not better.

There is something unethical about luring in obese people with the promise of an "all you can eat" fat fest. That's every disordered eater's dream come true, but weight loss doesn't work that way. It never has and it never will.

Wrong # 10 - Fasting while eating.

This is where CICO defenders get their ammunition, because in this context, they are absolutely correct.

Fasting protocols that include the drinking of tea, coffee and bone broth are completely ludicrous. That is not fasting and you can't just redefine 'fasting' to fit your narrative. Eating while fasting is called snacking and that equates to caloric restriction. They are basically defining a very low calorie liquid diet as 'fasting'. But, fasting is defined as not consuming anything, but water. There is only ONE way to fast - Not eating or drinking anything, but water.

You know how you can prevent having to eat while fasting? Stop encouraging extended fasting.

Wrong #11 - Overreaching.

You should always perfect one thing, before you jump to the next. If you don't, then you become a "jack of all trades and master of none".

Fung is a nephrologist. He is not a cancer specialist, obesity researcher, longevity expert or salt miner. It doesn't matter how many patients he can lower blood glucose for. I am sure Victoza can brag the same success, but with larger stats.

So, why is he overreaching into fields that he knows nothing about? There can only be one explanation: Income diversification. Great for him, but bad for you, since you aren't getting the accurate and complete information, you need, from the people who have the clinical experience to give it.

Wrong #12 - Lower weight is not the same as weight management.

I have said it once and I'll say it again "The obese who don't get to lean are only less obese, but obese nonetheless." You can lose some weight following much safer protocols and not be left fatter, by volume, in the end.

Losing weight using starvation protocols only helps the body become more efficient at gaining fat. We have seen this occur with CICO, since the 1980's. All those people who lost all that weight in 1982, by "getting physical" and eating bagels with fat free cream cheese, have intractable obesity today. They are most likely also diabetic and missing a leg. 

Wrong # 13 - Fasting as the easy way out.

I get that people don't like to follow carbohydrate restriction. Especially when they are so sick and obese, that they have lost any will or hope of getting better. Giving up cookies, at that stage in life, can be difficult. After all, for some that "cure" is worse than the disease.

But, coming up with the lazy alternative of not eating at all, isn't the right solution to a complex problem. After all, everyone will have to eat again, at some point. So, not only does fasting show lack of creativity, but also a lack of will. It's almost akin to throwing in the towel. They could have also wired the patients jaws shut or used surgical adhesive, to prevent them from eating, and it would have been just as effective. It is very easy to teach a person how not to eat, but much harder to teach them how to eat.

To this day, a complete and proper dietary protocol is not provided by IDM. Vague, general recommendations like a list of "healthy foods" or the "keto diet" is the only dietary advice given. Suggestions to chug down olive oil and copious amounts of medium chain triglyceride (MCT) oils are the norm. Their dietary recommendations are ever changing, as they include whatever "fad diet" is popular at the current moment. The main mantra continues to be that "fasting can be applied to any diet".

Um, no it can't. It's ridiculous to even suggest this, knowing what we all know about how the body handles different fuels and their affects on metabolic hormones. So, their primary dependance remains on fasting, but fasting won't solve metabolic dysfunction.

Wrong # 14 - Partnering with charlatans.

Going into business with known obese people, that pedal out bad information, is not a good look for a doctor or a "medical" clinic that wants to be taken seriously. I am sure that Fung is aware of the ridiculous advice that is being delivered by characters like Jimmy Moore and The 2 Keto Dudes. Fung is not stupid. He is actually very smart. He's a genius really, since he built an empire on an ancient concept that didn't work then and won't magically work now, especially when it's misapplied as a treatment for obesity.

Because of the bad advice, given by these low carb "celebrity" fools, Fung was forced to write a blog post, one time, to correct people who were chugging down jugs of fat. Great post on leptin, but after he wrote it, he went quiet and actually joined these fools. What happened?

The explanation that these popular rotund people, will help "get the word out" is not good enough. This looks more like good marketing than good intentions. First, "the word" is not new and was already out, for whoever wanted to find it, as countless books have been written about fasting before Fung's. Second, it's not good to appear lazy, once again, by going after someone else's audience, especially when those sources are questionable. Third, carbohydrate restriction already has a bad rapport in mainstream nutritional circles. Pairing up with people who look like they should be on the cast of 'My 600 Lb. Life', is not going to improve matters. If anything, it's making things worse. So, instead of "getting the word out" and building credibility, they knocked the low carb movement further down the hole, it has been trying to crawl out of for years. Atkins must be spinning in his grave.

The collaboration with this known circus, was the beginning of the end, as far as I was concerned. I thought that I was following a science based protocol. Come to find out, it wasn't very science based, and to add insult to injury, it was fraught by obese people eating jars of ghee and promoting nonsense at sales booths during Keto Con. Con being the operative word. No thank you. I didn't sign up to join a never ending fat cruise, where everyone just gets fatter. I want to help people, for real, not for money.

Wrong # 15 - Misrepresentation.

There is no magic pill. This last issue is not Fung's fault, as he has never claimed to have a magic pill. This issue is the fault of his misguided followers, who unfortunately, aren't corrected often enough or at all.

Fung is not the creator of fasting. Like I have mentioned above, fasting is old news and the reason it never took hold is because it was not effective for long term weight control back then, and it won't be now.

Fung is also often applauded for telling the obese that they don't have to eat, all of the time, but that is also old news. The obese have been told to stop eating many, many times, in the past, and because they couldn't, they were instead told to just eat less. Again, another lazy way to address the complex problem of obesity.

So, Fung's protocol is not the only lazy method, or the first one, to give up on obesity. Everyone has given up on obesity, since its cure is boring, unmarketable, certainly not profitable and absolutely not followed, as it consists of only one thing - Proper blood glucose regulation.

So, there you have it folks. Now, when you read criticisms of Fung, on blogs and pages, you will know how to separate the real from the BS.