Tyler Parr’s original (2001) in Medical Hypotheses article doesn’t seem to have been much cited by anyone in the field since it’s publication. Medical Hypotheses is an interesting journal, it is editor as opposed to peer-reviewed and their criteria for inclusion is somewhat different:
“Traditionally, editorial review is the main alternative to peer review. A scientist editor or editorial team applies a sieve, with varying degrees of selectivity, to research submissions. Strictly, this process should not attempt to predict whether ideas and facts are “true,” because truth can be established only in retrospect. Instead, editorial selection works within constraints of subject matter on the basis of factors such as potential importance and interest, clarity and appropriateness of expression, and broad criteria of scientific plausibility. Even probably untrue papers may be judged worth publishing if they contain aspects (ideas, perspectives, data) that are potentially stimulating to the development of future science.” (Charlton, 2007). Charlton is the editor.
The journal acts as a podium for new ideas but makes no claims as to their correctness. I’m not in a position to evaluate his research however I’d caution against Parr’s protocol since too little is known about the middle and long term effects of following it. Additionally Parr’s research seems based on hearsay (28 people who followed his protocol (Parr, 2001)) and on himself - and the article does not seem to contain much quantitative information (blood assays, etc). Moreover, the whole thing seems a bit hit and run because he has not published since then. The research may very well be valuable but as I said I’d advise caution. Just my opinion, maybe others better informed, can provide some additional information.
Parr, T.B., 2001. A new technique to elevate night time growth hormone release and a potential growth hormone feedback control loop. Medical Hypotheses, 56(5), 610-613. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1054/mehy.2000.1161