Exploitation and no lunch hour.

Sambucus_Nigra

GotToChange wrote: »

Well, I see thread continues - but thank goodness is becoming less interesting.
I cannot believe that posters are still actually aiming sometimes vituperative) responses to the OP, who I Imagine is long gone.

I wonder if, unlucky (and before anyone says so, soooo unlikley) enough to end up in similar circumstances, you would find yourself as likely to simply "suck it up" - I do not believe anyone who says that they would. It is has degenerated into patronising at best and outright bull**** at worst.

I'm at a loss to determine what the actual problem is. If people are so fed up with the situation that employers can let their employees work 6 hours before giving them a 20 minute break then perhaps vote for a different government or campaign to get this changed.

adouglasmhor

Emmzi wrote: »

Come on then. Where are the links to the peer reviewed scientific tests showing this? What are your "facts" based on?

Tests NOT funded by the diet industry, btw!

Here's an alternate view that is just as valid.

http://www.leangains.com/2010/10/top-ten-fasting-myths-debunked.html

But the truth is that scientists don't yet fully understand everything there is to know about the body and food. Anyone who tells you otherwise is lying.

Follow the money and you can usually find out why.

Fine if it works for you by placebo or whatever, but don't push indoctrinated non-science until you have done your research. Come back with some and I'll happily engage in debate.

Here's one from your own link

We conclude that there is increased proteolysis and oxidation of leucine on short-term fasting even though glucose production and energy expenditure decreased.

That means muscle being digested as leucine is an Amino acid.##

Nice article though.

adouglasmhor

Or this not that recent but not unrelated.

"The reported changes in urinary hydroxyproline are variable, but they do suggest that prolonged food deprivation leads to an increase in the breakdown rate of collagen. How much this reflects the use of collagen as a protein source for gluconeogenesis, and how much comes from the skeleton as a result of immobility (especially after sugergy) is impossible to say. It does not appear to be due to the effect of acidosis on the skeleton, since it is not affected by the administration of alkali. The combined effects of loss of protein and fat produce considerable changes in body composition, with a reduction of lean body mass in relation to body water. In initial starvation the rapid weight loss is largely due to loss of sodium and water; however with prolonged starvation body water and extracellular fluid volume decline less than that of lean tissue and sodium is conserved. The continuing breakdown of lean tissues is associated with increased urinary excretion of potassium and zinc, and the eventual fall in the K/N ratio to below 3 (the normal ratio in muscle) is compatible with the breakdown of non-muscular sources of protein such as collagen.

As starvation continues energy requirements also fall. This is partly due to decreasing physical activity; but there is all a fall in the levels of tri-iodothyronine with a subsequent reduction in metabolic rate. The other most important hormonal change is a decrease in insulin secretion.

In summary, the fat (and the normal) person when deprived of food switches over to being a ketone-body burner. This spares protein breakdown and allows continued survival. With prolonged starvation, the rate of weight loss decreases, fluid is selectively retained, and the metabolic rate falls.

In practice, the effects of starvation are rarely as simple as this, since food deprivation usually occurs against a background of injury or infection, or as part of complex picture of protein energy malnutrition."

~Vol. 1, p. 1277, 1278, ?Nutrition?

Oxford Textbook of Medicine, 3rd Edition, edited by D.J.Weatherall, et al., c1996, ISBN 0192621408

Emmzi

adouglasmhor wrote: »

Here's one from your own link


That means muscle being digested as leucine is an Amino acid.##

Nice article though.

That's actually not directly my link but this article which is a single study of only 6 "healthy young men", so not statistically significant or representative of the population at large, after a 3 day fast, so not comparable to the OPs situation or indeed a slimming world recc of 3 meals a day

http://www.ajcn.org/content/46/4/557.abstract

Try again, no cherry picking of studies and selective facts.

Emmzi

adouglasmhor wrote: »

Or this not that recent but not unrelated.

I don't own the text book but this one needs a time frame again to assess relevance. I suspect by "starvation" they don't mean an 8 hour or less time frame. But I don't know because the research leading to the summary isn't quoted.

ILW

Emmzi wrote: »

I don't own the text book but this one needs a time frame again to assess relevance. I suspect by "starvation" they don't mean an 8 hour or less time frame. But I don't know because the research leading to the summary isn't quoted.

Starvation is not going 5 hours without a meal, that is just possible feeling a little peckish.

adouglasmhor

Starvation can be going long term with insufficient meals as well as going without food altogether.

I can go into ketosis after 2 hours of cardio and aerobic exercise, my sweat smells like a cat's litter tray. I know that is antecedence but I believe my own experiences. I cna't do this amount of exercise on a full stomach so all I can do is make sure I supplement and rpace aminos.

When not doing vigorous exercise I can easily go for 5 hours plus without eating as long as I drink a lot of water.

paulmapp8306

Question - if you cant go 5 hours without substinance before you get too week from low blood sugar levels, especially given you can have a decent meal before that and also after it- how the hell do people survive in Africa where the environmental conditions are much harder - there physical exertions are harder and they have little or no food for long periods.

Just face it - the OP is talking rubbish. What the body "needs" to survive and to perform physical activity is a LOT less than we - in the over fed, over indulgent, and lazy western societies seem to think. Thats just fact. While there may be valid points about what you eat - when you et - how much you eat etc to be at the pinical of health and fitness - that is a LONG way beyond what you need to work and survive.

MoneySavingMamma

I think the volunteering part of the job is not the OP doing it out the goodness of his heart, to be better than someone sitting on their sofa all day. I think it is a 'work trial' so he is still receiving benefits, but works for the employer for 4weeks so they can truely see what he is like & if he is suitable for permanant employment. Therefore he must follow rules etc & cannot just go for a break when he feels like it otherwise he will be in trouble with Jobcentre & quite obviously not get the job..

LadyMissA

MoneySavingMamma wrote: »

I think the volunteering part of the job is not the OP doing it out the goodness of his heart, to be better than someone sitting on their sofa all day. I think it is a 'work trial' so he is still receiving benefits, but works for the employer for 4weeks so they can truely see what he is like & if he is suitable for permanant employment. Therefore he must follow rules etc & cannot just go for a break when he feels like it otherwise he will be in trouble with Jobcentre & quite obviously not get the job..

but there may not even be a job at the end and there doesn't have to be as it's the Work Programme and they can make you do these things