The Alternate Day Diet.
Options
Replies
-
WalkingAlong wrote: »Here is a link to the google scholar results for 'varady and modified fasting'.
Though now you will scan the abstracts only and say, "She didn't study lbm or dementia! She used poor methods because she studied SAMPLES!" Others have studied other aspects. No, I don't have their names memorized and don't need to for them to exist.
The books on it were written by two MDs and a PhD in nutrition who teaches at a major university. They're not just making stuff up but I'm not going to dig out the books and re-type their bibliographies to help you try to debunk an entire field of study because it's not the diet that appeals to you personally.
Credentials of the authors doesn't really matter, because their studies can still be shotty. E.g. a renowned author could put out a study with some really major new findings, and then universities around the world will try replicating it to no avail but because it is a well respected author, they might assume "oh, we just conducted the study wrong" and no one publishes the null findings. OR if someone DOES publish the null findings, then no one actually reads it. Null findings are pretty rare for journals.
Also your link is a search engine results page. Link to the specific article(s) you are referring to. How are we supposed to know WHICH of these articles you are even referring to?0 -
Two of us in this thread reported info about our own results, though if you want to see details you might have to click on a profile or two.I wish one of these posts would be past tense, like "I wanted to lose 10 pounds in 30 days, did IF using method X and did it". Instead we get wishful thinking before the OP even starts.
There are plenty of threads where people discuss their successes with IF. Though there are far more threads that are people just asking about because they're considering it.
0 -
Nobody wants to debunk any studies, or to prove anyone wrong, but it is reasonable to ask for you to post peer reviewed studies to back up your claims.WalkingAlong wrote: »Here is a link to the google scholar results for 'varady and modified fasting'.
Though now you will scan the abstracts only and say, "She didn't study lbm or dementia! She used poor methods because she studied SAMPLES!" Others have studied other aspects. No, I don't have their names memorized and don't need to for them to exist.
The books on it were written by two MDs and a PhD in nutrition who teaches at a major university. They're not just making stuff up but I'm not going to dig out the books and re-type their bibliographies to help you try to debunk an entire field of study because it's not the diet that appeals to you personally.
As Kat said, we all do a form of IF every day, which is from our last meal at night to our next meal the next day. For most of us, this is about ten to fifteen hours.
Thank you, Ana, for taking the time from your busy schedule to post some studies.
I therefore conclude that while some people find great benefits in intermittent fasting, and it clearly works for some and not others, it is not superior as to health benefits.
0 -
WalkingAlong wrote: »Here is a link to the google scholar results for 'varady and modified fasting'.
Though now you will scan the abstracts only and say, "She didn't study lbm or dementia! She used poor methods because she studied SAMPLES!" Others have studied other aspects. No, I don't have their names memorized and don't need to for them to exist.
The books on it were written by two MDs and a PhD in nutrition who teaches at a major university. They're not just making stuff up but I'm not going to dig out the books and re-type their bibliographies to help you try to debunk an entire field of study because it's not the diet that appeals to you personally.
anna already beat you to it and appears that the IF prevents cancer assertion is bunk...
At least for rats lol. And if it wasn't found in rats, there's not a great likelihood that different results would be found in humans.
But even when something IS found in rats or other animals it doesn't mean it also translates to human physiology.
This is a video that spoke about longevity genes, and that calorie restriction can help with longevity. But it'd be a really big restriction for long-term (I think 40% is what they said?). However, near 11-min mark the research about some compound in wine was showing promise for prolonging life via this specific gene, but in class our prof turned off the video and then said that the studies did not pan out for humans (or possibly for the animals being studied, I can't quite remember).
So again, null findings.
Idk why the video won't show. Here's the link:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=ZZMsIao2Jlo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZMsIao2Jlo 0 -
It's clear nobody is challenging the validity of personal success with IF. It's your claims outside of your personal experience that are being challenged.WalkingAlong wrote: »
Two of us in this thread reported info about our own results, though if you want to see details you might have to click on a profile or two.I wish one of these posts would be past tense, like "I wanted to lose 10 pounds in 30 days, did IF using method X and did it". Instead we get wishful thinking before the OP even starts.
There are plenty of threads where people discuss their successes with IF. Though there are far more threads that are people just asking about because they're considering it.
0 -
I'm sure all readers are glad you settled that with your advanced analysis and credentials.I therefore conclude that while some people find great benefits in intermittent fasting, and it clearly works for some and not others, but it's probably not superior when it comes it providing health benefits.
With all due respect.
0 -
WalkingAlong wrote: »
I refuse to engage with you, I'm sorry. You don't understand the most fundamental basics of information literacy.WalkingAlong wrote: »Here is a link to the google scholar results for 'varady and modified fasting'.
Though now you will scan the abstracts only and say, "She didn't study lbm or dementia! She used poor methods because she studied SAMPLES!" Others have studied other aspects. No, I don't have their names memorized and don't need to for them to exist.
The books on it were written by two MDs and a PhD in nutrition who teaches at a major university. They're not just making stuff up but I'm not going to dig out the books and re-type their bibliographies to help you try to debunk an entire field of study because it's not the diet that appeals to you personally.
Credentials of the authors doesn't really matter, because their studies can still be shotty. E.g. a renowned author could put out a study with some really major new findings, and then universities around the world will try replicating it to no avail but because it is a well respected author, they might assume "oh, we just conducted the study wrong" and no one publishes the null findings. OR if someone DOES publish the null findings, then no one actually reads it. Null findings are pretty rare for journals.
Also your link is a search engine results page. Link to the specific article(s) you are referring to. How are we supposed to know WHICH of these articles you are even referring to?
LOL your argument got shredded and that is what you come back with…??? She actually posted the studies not just a "random google scholar search"…
wow….-2 -
Definitely, just like ANY method used to sustain one's caloric deficit is not any healthier than the other. It's all about what someone will stick to. I stick to IIFYM because I love eating junk. Someone else does IF because they really like eating in large quantities but obviously cannot do this for an entire day.
Nobody wants to debunk any studies, or to prove anyone wrong, but it is reasonable to ask for you to post peer reviewed studies to back up your claims.WalkingAlong wrote: »Here is a link to the google scholar results for 'varady and modified fasting'.
Though now you will scan the abstracts only and say, "She didn't study lbm or dementia! She used poor methods because she studied SAMPLES!" Others have studied other aspects. No, I don't have their names memorized and don't need to for them to exist.
The books on it were written by two MDs and a PhD in nutrition who teaches at a major university. They're not just making stuff up but I'm not going to dig out the books and re-type their bibliographies to help you try to debunk an entire field of study because it's not the diet that appeals to you personally.
As Kat said, we all do a form of IF every day, which is from our last meal at night to our next meal the next day. For most of us, this is about ten to fifteen hours.
Thank you, Ana, for taking the time from your busy schedule to post some studies.
I therefore conclude that while some people find great benefits in intermittent fasting, and it clearly works for some and not others, it is not superior as to health benefits.
0 -
WalkingAlong wrote: »
I'm sure all readers are glad you settled that with your advanced analysis and credentials.I therefore conclude that while some people find great benefits in intermittent fasting, and it clearly works for some and not others, but it's probably not superior when it comes it providing health benefits.
With all due respect.
Nope. Just common sense.
0 -
WalkingAlong wrote: »
I refuse to engage with you, I'm sorry. You don't understand the most fundamental basics of information literacy.WalkingAlong wrote: »Here is a link to the google scholar results for 'varady and modified fasting'.
Though now you will scan the abstracts only and say, "She didn't study lbm or dementia! She used poor methods because she studied SAMPLES!" Others have studied other aspects. No, I don't have their names memorized and don't need to for them to exist.
The books on it were written by two MDs and a PhD in nutrition who teaches at a major university. They're not just making stuff up but I'm not going to dig out the books and re-type their bibliographies to help you try to debunk an entire field of study because it's not the diet that appeals to you personally.
Credentials of the authors doesn't really matter, because their studies can still be shotty. E.g. a renowned author could put out a study with some really major new findings, and then universities around the world will try replicating it to no avail but because it is a well respected author, they might assume "oh, we just conducted the study wrong" and no one publishes the null findings. OR if someone DOES publish the null findings, then no one actually reads it. Null findings are pretty rare for journals.
Also your link is a search engine results page. Link to the specific article(s) you are referring to. How are we supposed to know WHICH of these articles you are even referring to?
Dude, you post a link with plenty of results that popped up, adn you refuse to specify WHICH ARTICLE you are pulling your information from. This leads me to believe that you are not pulling your information from ANY of these articles.
For those interested, the link that WA posted and looking at the abstracts of a handful (because again, no specific information for WHICH article specifically she is referring to), none of them refer to cancer or any other diseases other than obesity and they basically are all saying "hey if you IF then you will be able to change your body composition (although your likelihood of getting these results are greatly increased if you are a rat)"-1 -
I just don't think you'll drop 10 in less than a month. I'd suggest 5:2 over ADF, because I looked up reviews of both. People who did both 5:2 and ADF (tried ADF after doing 5:2) found that they didn't see significant improvement in weight loss by going to ADF and that they freaked out a bit because they stopped pooping. It seemed strange, but it was a consistent opinion on the various sites I checked.0
-
I did 4:3 fasting (so 4 days eating normal, 3 days 500 kcal) and it worked a treat for me, and weirdly I felt less hungry on my "normal" days. I advise you try it, but still track your "normal" days as it's easy to go off the rails thinking you've "earned" it!
It's not a quick fix, expect gentle weight loss, but I find it very manageable and it helped me build the RIGHT habits to east sensibly.
That said, I'm still fat
! -1 -
I just don't think you'll drop 10 in less than a month. I'd suggest 5:2 over ADF, because I looked up reviews of both. People who did both 5:2 and ADF (tried ADF after doing 5:2) found that they didn't see significant improvement in weight loss by going to ADF and that they freaked out a bit because they stopped pooping. It seemed strange, but it was a consistent opinion on the various sites I checked.
5:2 is 5 days at maintenance, 2 at 500, correct? And with this ADF I guess it's 6 days at maintenance and one day at 400 calories?
If my maintenance is 2500, then doing 5:2 I'd be eating around 1930 calories.
Doing ADF I'd be eating about 2200 calories. Considering many people don't weigh their food and may actually be eating above maintenance when "eating normally" I can see how ADF wouldn't provide weight loss results when 5:2 would. I would not do either though personally, I prefer eating a lot of calories every day. But I also don't have a ridiculously low calorie goal, so maybe if I had been eating 1200 calories for months now I'd consider something like this.0 -
I just don't think you'll drop 10 in less than a month. I'd suggest 5:2 over ADF, because I looked up reviews of both. People who did both 5:2 and ADF (tried ADF after doing 5:2) found that they didn't see significant improvement in weight loss by going to ADF and that they freaked out a bit because they stopped pooping. It seemed strange, but it was a consistent opinion on the various sites I checked.
5:2 is 5 days at maintenance, 2 at 500, correct? And with this ADF I guess it's 6 days at maintenance and one day at 400 calories?
If my maintenance is 2500, then doing 5:2 I'd be eating around 1930 calories.
Doing ADF I'd be eating about 2200 calories. Considering many people don't weigh their food and may actually be eating above maintenance when "eating normally" I can see how ADF wouldn't provide weight loss results when 5:2 would. I would not do either though personally, I prefer eating a lot of calories every day. But I also don't have a ridiculously low calorie goal, so maybe if I had been eating 1200 calories for months now I'd consider something like this.
I think ADF and 5:2 are the same thing…
I think 5;2 you eat like 200 calories on two days, and then maintenance on five days…*I think*0 -
I just don't think you'll drop 10 in less than a month. I'd suggest 5:2 over ADF, because I looked up reviews of both. People who did both 5:2 and ADF (tried ADF after doing 5:2) found that they didn't see significant improvement in weight loss by going to ADF and that they freaked out a bit because they stopped pooping. It seemed strange, but it was a consistent opinion on the various sites I checked.
5:2 is 5 days at maintenance, 2 at 500, correct? And with this ADF I guess it's 6 days at maintenance and one day at 400 calories?
If my maintenance is 2500, then doing 5:2 I'd be eating around 1930 calories.
Doing ADF I'd be eating about 2200 calories. Considering many people don't weigh their food and may actually be eating above maintenance when "eating normally" I can see how ADF wouldn't provide weight loss results when 5:2 would. I would not do either though personally, I prefer eating a lot of calories every day. But I also don't have a ridiculously low calorie goal, so maybe if I had been eating 1200 calories for months now I'd consider something like this.
I think ADF and 5:2 are the same thing…
I think 5;2 you eat like 200 calories on two days, and then maintenance on five days…*I think*
maybe the only difference is the number of calories on your fast days or the number of fast days?0 -
obscuremusicreference wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »obscuremusicreference wrote: »If you think that works for you and you won't binge, try it. That said, I don't know how someone that small can lose 10 pounds in that time unless you drink a lot of soda/sodium and are going cold turkey in addition to this diet.
Good luck!
wait, what???
I agree that losing 10LBS in a SHORT amount of time is absurdly hard, but... what about soda/sodium? what?
*if she consumes a lot now and goes cold turkey so she loses that water weight
that is not really weight loss….water weight loss does not equal fat loss …just stop, seriously.
0 -
I just don't think you'll drop 10 in less than a month. I'd suggest 5:2 over ADF, because I looked up reviews of both. People who did both 5:2 and ADF (tried ADF after doing 5:2) found that they didn't see significant improvement in weight loss by going to ADF and that they freaked out a bit because they stopped pooping. It seemed strange, but it was a consistent opinion on the various sites I checked.
5:2 is 5 days at maintenance, 2 at 500, correct? And with this ADF I guess it's 6 days at maintenance and one day at 400 calories?
If my maintenance is 2500, then doing 5:2 I'd be eating around 1930 calories.
Doing ADF I'd be eating about 2200 calories. Considering many people don't weigh their food and may actually be eating above maintenance when "eating normally" I can see how ADF wouldn't provide weight loss results when 5:2 would. I would not do either though personally, I prefer eating a lot of calories every day. But I also don't have a ridiculously low calorie goal, so maybe if I had been eating 1200 calories for months now I'd consider something like this.
I think ADF and 5:2 are the same thing…
I think 5;2 you eat like 200 calories on two days, and then maintenance on five days…*I think*
Google is your friend.
Varady's diet is 4:3. 4 days at TDEE and 3 days on 500-600 kcal
http://www.eoddiet.com/
5:2 is 500-600 kcal 2 days and 5 days at TDEE.
http://thefastdiet.co.uk/
0 -
VerySpecialSnowflake wrote: »I just don't think you'll drop 10 in less than a month. I'd suggest 5:2 over ADF, because I looked up reviews of both. People who did both 5:2 and ADF (tried ADF after doing 5:2) found that they didn't see significant improvement in weight loss by going to ADF and that they freaked out a bit because they stopped pooping. It seemed strange, but it was a consistent opinion on the various sites I checked.
5:2 is 5 days at maintenance, 2 at 500, correct? And with this ADF I guess it's 6 days at maintenance and one day at 400 calories?
If my maintenance is 2500, then doing 5:2 I'd be eating around 1930 calories.
Doing ADF I'd be eating about 2200 calories. Considering many people don't weigh their food and may actually be eating above maintenance when "eating normally" I can see how ADF wouldn't provide weight loss results when 5:2 would. I would not do either though personally, I prefer eating a lot of calories every day. But I also don't have a ridiculously low calorie goal, so maybe if I had been eating 1200 calories for months now I'd consider something like this.
I think ADF and 5:2 are the same thing…
I think 5;2 you eat like 200 calories on two days, and then maintenance on five days…*I think*
Google is your friend.
Varady's diet is 4:3. 4 days at TDEE and 3 days on 500-600 kcal
http://www.eoddiet.com/
5:2 is 500-600 kcal 2 days and 5 days at TDEE.
http://thefastdiet.co.uk/
Assuming my TDEE is 2500.
Varady: 1640 or 1685 calories/day on average (way too low, and way too large of a deficit unless I were obese)
5:2 : 1930 or 1960, which would be doable for me. But not great when I am within 10-15lbs from my goal.
Of the two I would recommend 5:2 over Varady simply based on caloric intake.0 -
I have good experience with IF. I'm loosing weight and it's helped versus binge problems. I don't feel deprived, I can eat what I want within TDEE the next day. It's not one size fits all, for me it works well.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 394 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 943 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions