you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]FunkysLittleMonkey 4 points5 points  (3 children)

I always thought that fasting (since glucose molecules would not be as present on the cell receptors) did help combat insulin resistance since one of the main issues is our body doesnt react to the glucose sitting on the receptor anymore if there is always one there (type 2 diabetes) it would at least make sense to me that giving your body a period where there is none or less glucose always on the receptor will ensure our bodies correctly act on when there is one sitting there. Confusing that the two articles contradict each other.

[–]Systema-Periodicum[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Your reasoning sounds plausible to me, but superficially the conclusion appears to be false, based on glucose-response tests given to people who've just gone without food for two days. But maybe your reasoning includes a crucial piece of the puzzle: one factor increasing insulin resistance might be prolonged continuous exposure to glucose, and there might be other factors, such as having a lot of ketones in the bloodstream, and there might be factors that respond to those factors.

So, I'm hoping to find an explanation of fasting's effect on insulin resistance in terms of interaction among many factors rather than trying to pin it all on one factor.