Need help with weight? Intermediate fasting is the answer!!!
Replies
-
tayloralanj wrote: »This is a timely string. I've been attempting to adhere to a 18:6 at least during the week (Mon-Fri) and then be sensible on the weekend but it's hard making bacon and eggs and pancakes for the fam at 0800 and then waiting until 3 or 4 pm to eat.........I digress.
Unrelated but related, I listened to this guy from Wet Wolf Training go down a list of fad diets and IF was included along with Paleo, Warrior Diet and I think Atkins. Just made me think about what I've been trying to do with IF. Also, if one eats a certain way or conducts themselves a certain way, or dresses a certain way and does it all the time and it just works for them, is it a fad? And I guess if it's out of the "norm", it becomes a disorder.
And, drink water people!
I think everyone should just stop naming things. The only reason to name how you eat is to market it (whether you're selling it, convincing others to do it, or just bragging). Everyone should eat foods and at times that help them reach their goals, gives them the energy they need, keeps them satiated, works with any medical needs, and fits whatever moral stance they may have. Why bother naming it?
I guess the only reason is when it's easier for having dinner at a friend's house: "hey, I'm vegan, so can you prepare foods that work with that? I'll bring a few dishes too." Of course, even that doesn't always work though. My sister-in-law is currently "vegetarian", so I proposed a meal with all sorts of veggies and protein from plant sources, and her response was that she doesn't really like vegetables. Right. She should have just told me all she eats is cheese and pasta...0 -
tayloralanj wrote: »This is a timely string. I've been attempting to adhere to a 18:6 at least during the week (Mon-Fri) and then be sensible on the weekend but it's hard making bacon and eggs and pancakes for the fam at 0800 and then waiting until 3 or 4 pm to eat.........I digress.
Unrelated but related, I listened to this guy from Wet Wolf Training go down a list of fad diets and IF was included along with Paleo, Warrior Diet and I think Atkins. Just made me think about what I've been trying to do with IF. Also, if one eats a certain way or conducts themselves a certain way, or dresses a certain way and does it all the time and it just works for them, is it a fad? And I guess if it's out of the "norm", it becomes a disorder.
And, drink water people!
I think everyone should just stop naming things. The only reason to name how you eat is to market it (whether you're selling it, convincing others to do it, or just bragging). Everyone should eat foods and at times that help them reach their goals, gives them the energy they need, keeps them satiated, works with any medical needs, and fits whatever moral stance they may have. Why bother naming it?
I guess the only reason is when it's easier for having dinner at a friend's house: "hey, I'm vegan, so can you prepare foods that work with that? I'll bring a few dishes too." Of course, even that doesn't always work though. My sister-in-law is currently "vegetarian", so I proposed a meal with all sorts of veggies and protein from plant sources, and her response was that she doesn't really like vegetables. Right. She should have just told me all she eats is cheese and pasta...
"Cheese and pasta diet" sounds awesome to me, but I guess it would somehow fit the definition of disordered eating.
0 -
Traveler120 wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »
IF does not qualify as Disordered.Traveler120 wrote: »Intermittent fasting=Starve/Binge cycle=Disordered eating
How about just eating normally, managing calories and getting off one's butt and exercising?
No matter what someone does, someone else will say it is "disordered." People seem to think this word is like "clean" or "moderation" where everyone gets to make up their own definitions. It's not.
IF doesn't exclude exercise, either. Like anything else, one can choose to exercise or not.
http://www.eatright.org/resource/health/diseases-and-conditions/eating-disorders/what-is-disordered-eating
-According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-Text Revision), disordered eating is defined as "a wide range of irregular eating behaviors that do not warrant a diagnosis of a specific eating disorder."-
Rigid food restriction to certain days or windows eg X hrs, which is what intermittent fasting is, IS in fact considered one of the many signs or habits of disordered eating patterns even though it doesn't rise to the level or severity of a clinical eating disorder. The fact that it's generally accepted, popular and 'works', doesn't change this fact.
What if I just don't feel like eating breakfast and instead consume my calories from Noon onward? All of a sudden I'm labeled as disordered?
Then you'd be following your body's natural cues for hunger and satiation which is NORMAL. Intermittent fasting on the other hand requires you to eat within a certain time frame regardless of what your body needs. If you're hungry during fasting hours, you're supposed just suck it up and count down the hours until your next feeding window. And then, when it's time and you start eating, you're trying to cram your calories in within that period.
What if you're full and you've only eaten half the amount? You've got to fit your macros in, right? So you keep eating, even after your body tells you it's satisfied. That sounds like disordered eating to me.
If I need to eat 1700 calories to create a deficit, from a weight loss standpoint, it doesn't matter what time I eat it, the deficit will be the same. But if I choose to IF within say 6 hr window, that's a huge volume of food to eat in a short time. It's essentially bingeing because I'm forced to eat past the point of fullness, even though I'm not overeating my calories. What part of all this starve/binge process is normal and natural? NONE of it.
What's normal is allowing oneself to respond to hunger and fullness naturally. That's how people get fat in the first place because they don't know how to listen to their bodies and keep eating even after they've already eaten.
There is more than 1 method to control calories in. A different method does not = eating disorder.
The problem with "I only eat when I'm hungry" approach. Hunger cues have nothing to do with adequate nutrition. The board is full of posts from people who can't possibly reach their 1200 calorie minimum because they are "too full."
Often times these women are eating lots of fat-free (fiberous) green veggies and drinking lots of water. This is "filling" for some, but it doesn't support lean muscle mass.
Lack of portion control and mindless eating are a couple of habits that encourage obesity. 5:2 or 16:8 address those habits. It's simply another method of controlling calories in.
Your method is not built for life after dieting. Hey, let's go for ice cream......no I can't because I don't have hunger pangs right now.0 -
Traveler120 wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »
IF does not qualify as Disordered.Traveler120 wrote: »Intermittent fasting=Starve/Binge cycle=Disordered eating
How about just eating normally, managing calories and getting off one's butt and exercising?
No matter what someone does, someone else will say it is "disordered." People seem to think this word is like "clean" or "moderation" where everyone gets to make up their own definitions. It's not.
IF doesn't exclude exercise, either. Like anything else, one can choose to exercise or not.
http://www.eatright.org/resource/health/diseases-and-conditions/eating-disorders/what-is-disordered-eating
-According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-Text Revision), disordered eating is defined as "a wide range of irregular eating behaviors that do not warrant a diagnosis of a specific eating disorder."-
Rigid food restriction to certain days or windows eg X hrs, which is what intermittent fasting is, IS in fact considered one of the many signs or habits of disordered eating patterns even though it doesn't rise to the level or severity of a clinical eating disorder. The fact that it's generally accepted, popular and 'works', doesn't change this fact.
What if I just don't feel like eating breakfast and instead consume my calories from Noon onward? All of a sudden I'm labeled as disordered?
Then you'd be following your body's natural cues for hunger and satiation which is NORMAL. Intermittent fasting on the other hand requires you to eat within a certain time frame regardless of what your body needs. If you're hungry during fasting hours, you're supposed just suck it up and count down the hours until your next feeding window. And then, when it's time and you start eating, you're trying to cram your calories in within that period.
What if you're full and you've only eaten half the amount? You've got to fit your macros in, right? So you keep eating, even after your body tells you it's satisfied. That sounds like disordered eating to me.
If I need to eat 1700 calories to create a deficit, from a weight loss standpoint, it doesn't matter what time I eat it, the deficit will be the same. But if I choose to IF within say 6 hr window, that's a huge volume of food to eat in a short time. It's essentially bingeing because I'm forced to eat past the point of fullness, even though I'm not overeating my calories. What part of all this starve/binge process is normal and natural? NONE of it.
What's normal is allowing oneself to respond to hunger and fullness naturally. That's how people get fat in the first place because they don't know how to listen to their bodies and keep eating even after they've already eaten.
How do you determine if you are truly hungry, or if you're just accustomed to eating on a set schedule? How do you decipher if it is that fact that you are thirsty as opposed to hungry? What if I were to eat a piece of gum and all of a sudden my "hunger cues" disappear... was I really hungry?
How about taking individual goals into consideration? If my goal is to add size or mass (which requires a caloric surplus), I would need to eat regardless of if I am full.
What about if eating with an intermittent fasting approach allows you to adhere to overall diet more appropriately and perform better? What if I'm unable to make it to the gym until late at night, and it would be more beneficial to time my meals around that workout as opposed to blowing my calories early in the day?
You are not STARVING by not eating for 16 hours. People in poor countries are starving, not people like us who haven't eaten for a shortened, intermittent period of time.
Blanket statements and applications are stupid without context.0 -
I am currently on day 5 of IF doing the 16/8 Leangains and it is working wonders for me. At only 5'0", 1200 is all I'm allowed calorie wise if I want to lose weight. Maintance is not much higher. By the time I got through breakfast and lunch there were hardly any calories left for dinner. It was hard fitting dessert or a treat in anywhere and banking calories at only1200 a day is nearly impossible. I was starting to get depressed and on on the verge of giving up. Not only did IF get me through my plateau, I'm am now able to enjoy a big dinner with my family, have room for dessert, all while staying within my calorie range. I'm also finding it much easier to focus on macros this way.
Is IF the answer to weight loss? No! CICO is the answer. Is IF for anyone? No! It may not suite everyone's lifestyle. With that said, I encourage everyone to read about it, get informed and experiment with it, if it doesn't suite you then keep doing what your doing. As long as your at a calorie deficit you will lose weight with or without IF.0 -
Traveler120 wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »
IF does not qualify as Disordered.Traveler120 wrote: »Intermittent fasting=Starve/Binge cycle=Disordered eating
How about just eating normally, managing calories and getting off one's butt and exercising?
No matter what someone does, someone else will say it is "disordered." People seem to think this word is like "clean" or "moderation" where everyone gets to make up their own definitions. It's not.
IF doesn't exclude exercise, either. Like anything else, one can choose to exercise or not.
http://www.eatright.org/resource/health/diseases-and-conditions/eating-disorders/what-is-disordered-eating
-According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-Text Revision), disordered eating is defined as "a wide range of irregular eating behaviors that do not warrant a diagnosis of a specific eating disorder."-
Rigid food restriction to certain days or windows eg X hrs, which is what intermittent fasting is, IS in fact considered one of the many signs or habits of disordered eating patterns even though it doesn't rise to the level or severity of a clinical eating disorder. The fact that it's generally accepted, popular and 'works', doesn't change this fact.
What if I just don't feel like eating breakfast and instead consume my calories from Noon onward? All of a sudden I'm labeled as disordered?
Then you'd be following your body's natural cues for hunger and satiation which is NORMAL. Intermittent fasting on the other hand requires you to eat within a certain time frame regardless of what your body needs. If you're hungry during fasting hours, you're supposed just suck it up and count down the hours until your next feeding window. And then, when it's time and you start eating, you're trying to cram your calories in within that period.
What if you're full and you've only eaten half the amount? You've got to fit your macros in, right? So you keep eating, even after your body tells you it's satisfied. That sounds like disordered eating to me.
If I need to eat 1700 calories to create a deficit, from a weight loss standpoint, it doesn't matter what time I eat it, the deficit will be the same. But if I choose to IF within say 6 hr window, that's a huge volume of food to eat in a short time. It's essentially bingeing because I'm forced to eat past the point of fullness, even though I'm not overeating my calories. What part of all this starve/binge process is normal and natural? NONE of it.
What's normal is allowing oneself to respond to hunger and fullness naturally. That's how people get fat in the first place because they don't know how to listen to their bodies and keep eating even after they've already eaten.
Those are your perceptions. Interim fasting is one of many techniques to address ones goals. The plan only alters eating patterns in which your body will adjust accordingly. This is no different than a person who generally eats 3 meals a day and has been told to increase it to eating 6x a day.
Also, it is your perception that 1700 calories is a lot. I was able to do IF 16:8 with 2500-3000 calories. It's called eating the right nutrient dense foods to achieve that goal. And while you may not eat big, some of us can. What I did discover, IF wasn't for me. I like breakfast. But what I have also discovered, I like 3 large meals as opposed to 6 small meals.. for me, volume is everything.
I would also like to point out that a person can modify their natural cues by adjusting their frequency of eating. Its why it takes about a week to adjust to the new eating pattern. After that, it just becomes second nature.0 -
How many people stop eating at an arbitrary time at night because Dr. Oz/Oprah/someone told them to? How is this any different? Or do they all have an "eating disorder," too?0
-
This content has been removed.
-
When I first started dieting, I had messed up hunger signals.
I hardly think this is anything unique among the overweight and obese. We confuse "wanting to eat" and "being used to eating" and "feeling like having some of that" with being hungry.
One of the tools I used to help me learn to differentiate real hunger amid all that other noise and to get a handle on my appetite was IF.
As time passed and I increased my activity, I became hungrier earlier in the day, and following the hunger signals I'd finally learned to appreciate, I stopped practicing it.
The thing is, we all eat within a window of time. IF'ers just eat in varying windows. I still tend to eat breakfast later than the average person, for example. Some might consider me an IF'er still.0 -
How many people stop eating at an arbitrary time at night because Dr. Oz/Oprah/someone told them to? How is this any different? Or do they all have an "eating disorder," too?
I don't snack because I tend to be hungrier and want more food when I'm in the habit of snacking. I naturally want and eat less if I eat only three meals a day.
Guess that makes me someone with an ED too! ;-)
And co-sign the comments about lots of people having hunger signals that are messed up or determined by schedule. On an identical (healthy) breakfast, I'll find myself wanting food soon after arriving at work IF I'm in the habit of snacking then. Once I'm not in that habit anymore, I find that I'm not hungry until lunch.0 -
Echoing what others have said and that everyone needs methods tailored to their personality/body so it's not THE answer, but simply an answer. That said, it's been my answer. I never would have gotten this far without having the myths surrounding intermittent fasting dispelled on this forum for me. And yeah, I get off my butt and exercise too.0
-
Heck, if I ate to my hunger cues--wait, I did that and that's how I got fat. At least I thought I was hungry every time I ate something.
I have to be aware now of whether I'm truly hungry or just bored or thirsty or just want a cookie for the heck of it. That's not an eating disorder, it's being aware of what and how much I am eating during the day. It works best for me to eat between 12:00 and 6:00 every day. (although I have been known to eat a small treat later in the evening if I still have calories left.
) 0 -
-
Personally I adore fasting. It's helped me understand my cues for hunger/ thirst, aided me in losing weight and enabled me to feel so much better than I did this time a year ago.
Not for everyone, sure, but you could say the same about anything.0 -
While I, too, follow my hunger, it's not the only way to diet. IF is one of many ways to deprive yourself of the calories you need so that your body will have to burn some fat for energy. There are many ways and everyone is entitled to choose their own. I support IF. There are many ways of dieting I might support that I think are ridiculous or possibly not the safest way to go about it, but I don't think IF is either unsafe (in any way) or ridiculous. It's just not what I happen to do.Traveler120 wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »
IF does not qualify as Disordered.Traveler120 wrote: »Intermittent fasting=Starve/Binge cycle=Disordered eating
How about just eating normally, managing calories and getting off one's butt and exercising?
No matter what someone does, someone else will say it is "disordered." People seem to think this word is like "clean" or "moderation" where everyone gets to make up their own definitions. It's not.
IF doesn't exclude exercise, either. Like anything else, one can choose to exercise or not.
http://www.eatright.org/resource/health/diseases-and-conditions/eating-disorders/what-is-disordered-eating
-According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-Text Revision), disordered eating is defined as "a wide range of irregular eating behaviors that do not warrant a diagnosis of a specific eating disorder."-
Rigid food restriction to certain days or windows eg X hrs, which is what intermittent fasting is, IS in fact considered one of the many signs or habits of disordered eating patterns even though it doesn't rise to the level or severity of a clinical eating disorder. The fact that it's generally accepted, popular and 'works', doesn't change this fact.
What if I just don't feel like eating breakfast and instead consume my calories from Noon onward? All of a sudden I'm labeled as disordered?
Then you'd be following your body's natural cues for hunger and satiation which is NORMAL. Intermittent fasting on the other hand requires you to eat within a certain time frame regardless of what your body needs. If you're hungry during fasting hours, you're supposed just suck it up and count down the hours until your next feeding window. And then, when it's time and you start eating, you're trying to cram your calories in within that period.
What if you're full and you've only eaten half the amount? You've got to fit your macros in, right? So you keep eating, even after your body tells you it's satisfied. That sounds like disordered eating to me.
If I need to eat 1700 calories to create a deficit, from a weight loss standpoint, it doesn't matter what time I eat it, the deficit will be the same. But if I choose to IF within say 6 hr window, that's a huge volume of food to eat in a short time. It's essentially bingeing because I'm forced to eat past the point of fullness, even though I'm not overeating my calories. What part of all this starve/binge process is normal and natural? NONE of it.
What's normal is allowing oneself to respond to hunger and fullness naturally. That's how people get fat in the first place because they don't know how to listen to their bodies and keep eating even after they've already eaten.
You're wrong about this "IF = Disordered" business, but I'm not going to keep up a "No, it's not!", "Yes, it's is!" argument. Disagree again, I won't quibble. But you'll still be wrong.
0 -
IF does not deprive calories and this is not a diet and no it is not the answer.
It is a name given to an eating schedule to choose to break fast at anytime you see fit. And put an end time to your eating before bed...
That's all it is..0 -
Iron_Feline wrote: »
+10 -
I fast while I sleep.0
-
-
Alatariel75 wrote: »Is intermediate fasting slightly more complicated than simple fasting, but not quite at the level of professional fasting?
**snort**
0 -
Traveler120 wrote: »
If I need to eat 1700 calories to create a deficit, from a weight loss standpoint, it doesn't matter what time I eat it, the deficit will be the same. But if I choose to IF within say 6 hr window, that's a huge volume of food to eat in a short time. It's essentially bingeing because I'm forced to eat past the point of fullness, even though I'm not overeating my calories. What part of all this starve/binge process is normal and natural? NONE of it.
I can think of many meals/snacks/foods that would be calorie dense that would not have me feeling full to the breaking point. And it wouldn't even be considered a binge. It would be considered a lovely meal with a lovely dessert. I guess that's disordered though.
I'm sorry but the baby. Those cheeks!!!!!!!! 0 -
I support whatever safe, sane, and consensual method adults want to employ
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions