Limit your eating to a 9-12 hour period?

marcjacobson

NY Times Magazine had article that suggests eating only within a 9-12 hour period...without too much regard to calories...(no pigging out)...still results in weight loss. Worth trying with MFP, too. I think. What do you think?

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/01/15/a-12-hour-window-for-a-healthy-weight/?_r=0

Daiako

IF: Intermentient Fasting. Its a thing around here, in various forms (5:2, 8:16, OMAD)

I eat between noon and 10pm ish, and eat basically whatever, and have maintained in the 135-138 area pretty easily for a few months. For loss I find calorie counting is best, personally

blankiefinder

I just eat at a deficit and have maintained a 1.5 lb loss per week for the last 5 months. I eat whenever I want.

bingfit221

I don't try to IF it just happens with my work schedule. I do NOT eat breakfast. It doesn't do the trick for me. Normally, it's a snack about 3-4 hours after waking, then lunch, and dinner at about 7. Every day just happens to fall into 9-12 hours. I like it this way.

girlviernes

I have had a loose goal to follow a 12 hour eating window based on this research. However, if I am under calories and hungry I will often eat later. I think it may be helpful for humans to eat in a 12 hour window, but it is not essential.

kyta32

Studies done in mice, proposed mechanism is regulation of circadian rhythm. Applicable to humans? With everything we do to mess up our circadian rhythms, I'm not sure if just eating during the day will be enough to fix things. It certainly isn't necessary to lose weight, but if it helps, why not? Since I started dieting, and eating regular meals to manage hunger, I find I'm really not interested in food after 10pm anyways.

RodaRose

I never eat breakfast and eat late lunch and supper.

keithw2013

IMO works best limiting to 6-7 hours per day like from 1:00pm till 8:00pm.

JillyCornwall

If I eat what I want I can easily eat enough to put weight on in 2 meals, I eat between 8-9am and 6-7pm so I can't see how a 9-12hr window can help me lose weight. 6hr window possibly.

tigerblue

The fewer hours you are eating, likely the fewer calories you will eat. I think that is how it is supposed to work.


Probably not the best plan for those with families, unless you can watch your family eat while you sit and starve.

For me personally, I would rather spread my calories out during the same time period as my family. My goal when I started was to cause as little upset to my family's meals and schedule, while still losing. And to not eat different food than my family at family meals (just less of it).

When I was in my big losing phase ( I am currently five years out from a 40+ lb loss. I regained some, and I'm trying to lose 10 lbs of that now. I really got too low at my lowest.), I ate dinner at 8pm or later, and I still had a steady loss, because I saved my calories by eating a light breakfast, lunch, and snack, and stayed under my goal. It really worked well, because I didn't have to worry about getting hungry after dinner. Even now, if I eat early--like 5 or 5:30, I have a hard time not wanting a large snack late. So for me eating dinner late was perfect. (And my breakfast was always at 7am.)

My family's schedule has changed a bit, now, and we eat around 7 pm, but I never want to be an early dinner person.

I guess my point is, timing of eating is not important, unless it helps you eat fewer calories.

rybo

It works for many many people. For some it doesn't. Try it and see which category you fall into.

dbmata

9-12 hours? That's like... so only eat when the sun is out?

I think a lot of people already do that.

Robbnva

dbmata wrote: »

9-12 hours? That's like... so only eat when the sun is out?

I think a lot of people already do that.

Pretty sure a lot of people don't eat like that. Most people who work normal jobs can't stick to that 12 hour window, I know I certainly couldn't.

girlviernes

I usually have breakfast around 8, lunch at 12, and dinner between 5 and 7:30. I'll often eat dinner at work and then work another hour or two.

maxit

NY Times Magazine had article that suggests eating only within a 9-12 hour period...without too much regard to calories...(no pigging out)...still results in weight loss. Worth trying with MFP, too. I think. What do you think?

That has been my routine for 50 years LOL and let me tell you that the "window" does not matter nearly as much as what is consumed during it.

keziak1

I am following this approach. A book on the subject recommends exercising during the fasting period, typically in the morning before the first meal of the day at noon.

jnv7594

maxit wrote: »

NY Times Magazine had article that suggests eating only within a 9-12 hour period...without too much regard to calories...(no pigging out)...still results in weight loss. Worth trying with MFP, too. I think. What do you think?

That has been my routine for 50 years LOL and let me tell you that the "window" does not matter nearly as much as what is consumed during it.

^^^ This. I have always skipped breakfast. In fact, I used to often skip breakfast and lunch, and then I would eat whatever I wanted in the evening. That's how I got to almost 300 pounds, lol. It's not the time frame of course. It's the "eating whatever I want" in terms of calories part. Of course, I'm sure that's why you mentioned "no pigging out." I used to eat excessive calories in the evening...I probably don't even want to know how many. Honestly, I don't think it matters what time of the day you eat as long as you eat at a deficit. I still skip breakfast. I usually don't eat my first meal until around noon, and I eat my supper (and the majority of my calories) between 9 and 10 p.m. I didn't even know this was considered a form of fasting until I read it on the boards here. I do this because it works for me as I am usually more hungry in the evenings. It keeps me from binging at night and exceeding my calories. But before I settled into this habit, I used to make myself eat breakfast, and then ate throughout the day. I lost weight both ways, but the first way, the way I eat now, just fits in better with my own personal lifestyle.

obscuremusicreference

I'm doing 16:8 in conjunction with counting (I am naturally able to 16:8 pretty easily and gained the weight while with people who ate breakfast and lunch). I hope they start testing it out in humans because it confirms my bias. Humans didn't eat around the clock until very recently--even wealthy ones. I feel like eating early in the day kick-starts my appetite and I snack more at night than I do with 16:8!

obscuremusicreference

Also what is up with the spam flags, this is an article not a garcinia ad.

MorganMoreaux

obscuremusicreference wrote: »

I'm doing 16:8 in conjunction with counting (I am naturally able to 16:8 pretty easily and gained the weight while with people who ate breakfast and lunch). I hope they start testing it out in humans because it confirms my bias. Humans didn't eat around the clock until very recently--even wealthy ones. I feel like eating early in the day kick-starts my appetite and I snack more at night than I do with 16:8!

I'm that way too lol. If I eat breakfast then I eat continuously thought the day, right up until I go to bed. If I skip breakfast and lunch and wait until dinner then I don't eat nearly as much, and I don't voraciously snack until bedtime.

lemurcat12

It's not possible for me, since I like eating breakfast and dinner and for various reasons have to eat at times such that they are usually no more than 9 hours apart.

But it's worth noting that this seems to be talking about natural ways of restricting intake. I don't see any reason to think that my personal losses would be greater if I changed my eating patterns.

The article I read was about mice, but even if about humans my guess is that it's like a lot of these studies where it might contribute to knowledge about how these things work, but the practical weight-loss applications are limited. Typically the differences are relatively mild and on average--that does not mean much for how it would work for an individual, or why. On eating times I think how it affects your own hunger and energy levels and what is sustainable for you is always going to be the most significant factor.

That said, I think IF is worth trying for those interested (and more easy to comply with eating windows, same). But I have found that I lose fine on my own life-demanded window, and so I worry that people overthink these things and make weight loss more burdensome or complicated than it need be.

jgnatca

Not safe for a diabetic, who doesn't ever want to go more than twelve hours without eating.