As is so often the case, entrepreneurial scams contain a kernel of science. Stanley Meyer's HHO is one example. The alternate-day fasting diet presented in that video may be another, particularly in the absence of controlled studies of survival rates, demonstrated cancer cures, and so forth.
The potential role of IGF-1 in cancer has long been suspected. William Daugaday, referenced in many articles as the discoverer of IGF-1, and others were clearly aware of that association decades ago.* Moreover, protein restriction probably reduces IGF-1 (
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2673798/). (Kinda makes one wonder about another fad diet espoused by
Adkins that resulted in all the advertising for "low carb" foods, doesn't it?)
The hard part is to separate the solid science from inflated and distorted claims. That is where the video fails. What are the long-term results of alternate-day fasting versus exercise, simple protein restriction, total caloric restriction, healthy life style, and so forth? What is the effect on survival versus a laboratory value (IGF-1)? Such studies can be done (see ncbi.nlm link, above). Unfortunately, Mosley ignores the scientific need for such studies and uses instead his public prominence to promote another fad.
As alluded to just above, another risk the public and many physicians succumb to is treating laboratory results as if there is a direct cause-and-effect correlation between the value and the health of the individual. Total cholesterol is one such result. There is no question that pathologic cholesterol levels are associated with significantly increased risk of cardiovascular death. The problem is that cholesterol levels may simply be the indicator for an underlying disorder in many patients. Hence, reducing cholesterol though diet and exercise may have minimal effect on life expectancy (see the original
Framingham study). C-reactive protein is another popular marker.
Here is a link to several others. Ischemia-modified albumin determined by cobalt binding ability is one of the newer ones. Does that mean restriction of cobalt intake should be practiced to improve health? That is the trap to which I refer, and unfortunately, it is all too often practiced by scam artists on the unsuspecting public. The part that bothers me the most is when well-meaning physicians also treat the numbers instead of the patient.
John
*Even in folk medicine, there is the adage to "starve a fever" (
https://www.dukehealth.org/health_library/health_articles/feed_a_cold ). Or, is it the other way around?