Fasting Diets Are Gaining Acceptance
ernestrodgers82
Posts: 208 Member
I saw an article in today's New York Times about fasting diets like the "5:2 Diet." Do you practice a fasting diet? If so, which one? Here's a link to the article http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/03/07/intermittent-fasting-diets-are-gaining-acceptance/?_r=0.
0
Replies
-
I did IF for a few months. Not the 5:2 method, but I would reduce my eating window to 4-6 hours a day. It wasn't at all for me, I got really bad blood sugar crashes and lost my period. I was probably around 18-19 % BF so not low enough to justify that bad of a reaction. Of course, studies on IF for women are inconclusive at the moment. Some women have great results with no side effects, and others (like myself) develop hormonal and blood sugar issues. Luckily everything stabilized as soon as I went back to eating normally.
I would definitely recommend trying it out though and seeing if it's for you! Especially since you're a male, I've only heard good things about IF for men!0 -
I've done 5:2 off and on for a few years, with good results. It's a good way to create a calorie deficit, but I don't know about the rest of the hype.
0 -
I tried 5:2 for 2 months and my hair started to fall out, I had huge mood swings, headaches, break outs and felt like death a lot. I kept thinking my body would adjust eventually but it just got worse so I stopped.0
-
I lost the majority of my weight doing alternate day fasting, 500calories every second day.0
-
I eat 2 main meals a day (I don't eat breakfast). And then small snacks up to 11:30pm. I can't do 5:2 (I end up overeating), but I could do a 16 hour fast and eat within an 8 hour period.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
annette_15 wrote: »I tried 5:2 for 2 months and my hair started to fall out, I had huge mood swings, headaches, break outs and felt like death a lot. I kept thinking my body would adjust eventually but it just got worse so I stopped.
I guess 5:2 / ADF might work well for light eaters, but there ain't no way in the world I'm eating 500 calories per day twice a week. Even if a study came out tomorrow saying it made you lose weight twice as fast, I'd settle for continuing to lose the weight slowly rather than put myself through that kind of misery. My adherence would be zero and satiety would be even lower. Uh uh.
[ETA:] I actually do (more or less) adhere to an 18:6 or 16:8 eating pattern most of the time, although I don't intentionally do it under the umbrella of intermittent fasting. It's just the eating pattern I'm most comfortable with. I get up in the morning, have coffee, don't usually eat anything until around noon'ish, and am usually done eating after dinner (whatever time that ends up being, usually somewhere between 6:00 - 8:00 pm). There are no scientifically proven benefits to meal timing or eating/not eating after any particular hour (with very few, specific exceptions).0 -
I'm practicing IF. I eat lunch, a snack, and then dinner. My eating window is between 1pm and 9pm. So far so good. I work out fasted because that time works best for me. I haven't noticed anything weird with my body and I hope it stays that way since I really like IF!0
-
LadyTalulah wrote: »I did IF for a few months. Not the 5:2 method, but I would reduce my eating window to 4-6 hours a day. It wasn't at all for me, I got really bad blood sugar crashes and lost my period. I was probably around 18-19 % BF so not low enough to justify that bad of a reaction. Of course, studies on IF for women are inconclusive at the moment. Some women have great results with no side effects, and others (like myself) develop hormonal and blood sugar issues. Luckily everything stabilized as soon as I went back to eating normally.
I would definitely recommend trying it out though and seeing if it's for you! Especially since you're a male, I've only heard good things about IF for men!
Wow, that was a bad reaction. It seems to make sense that it would be more natural to eat in a narrow window of time but I'm sure that my mood would be pretty sour if I went too long without a meal.0 -
annette_15 wrote: »I tried 5:2 for 2 months and my hair started to fall out, I had huge mood swings, headaches, break outs and felt like death a lot. I kept thinking my body would adjust eventually but it just got worse so I stopped.
I guess 5:2 / ADF might work well for light eaters, but there ain't no way in the world I'm eating 500 calories per day twice a week. Even if a study came out tomorrow saying it made you lose weight twice as fast, I'd settle for continuing to lose the weight slowly rather than put myself through that kind of misery. My adherence would be zero and satiety would be even lower. Uh uh.
[ETA:] I actually do (more or less) adhere to an 18:6 or 16:8 eating pattern most of the time, although I don't intentionally do it under the umbrella of intermittent fasting. It's just the eating pattern I'm most comfortable with. I get up in the morning, have coffee, don't usually eat anything until around noon'ish, and am usually done eating after dinner (whatever time that ends up being, usually somewhere between 6:00 - 8:00 pm). There are no scientifically proven benefits to meal timing or eating/not eating after any particular hour (with very few, specific exceptions).
That bird is making me dizzy0 -
That's me. I'm a total Richard nickname if I'm starving.ernestrodgers82 wrote: »LadyTalulah wrote: »I did IF for a few months. Not the 5:2 method, but I would reduce my eating window to 4-6 hours a day. It wasn't at all for me, I got really bad blood sugar crashes and lost my period. I was probably around 18-19 % BF so not low enough to justify that bad of a reaction. Of course, studies on IF for women are inconclusive at the moment. Some women have great results with no side effects, and others (like myself) develop hormonal and blood sugar issues. Luckily everything stabilized as soon as I went back to eating normally.
I would definitely recommend trying it out though and seeing if it's for you! Especially since you're a male, I've only heard good things about IF for men!
Wow, that was a bad reaction. It seems to make sense that it would be more natural to eat in a narrow window of time but I'm sure that my mood would be pretty sour if I went too long without a meal.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
My husband has eaten one large meal for his entire adult life (he's 50 now) and he has a tough manual job. His weight has been stable and he has enough energy. My brother is the same way.
I personally can't do it regularly as I get too hangry.0 -
ernestrodgers82 wrote: »LadyTalulah wrote: »I did IF for a few months. Not the 5:2 method, but I would reduce my eating window to 4-6 hours a day. It wasn't at all for me, I got really bad blood sugar crashes and lost my period. I was probably around 18-19 % BF so not low enough to justify that bad of a reaction. Of course, studies on IF for women are inconclusive at the moment. Some women have great results with no side effects, and others (like myself) develop hormonal and blood sugar issues. Luckily everything stabilized as soon as I went back to eating normally.
I would definitely recommend trying it out though and seeing if it's for you! Especially since you're a male, I've only heard good things about IF for men!
Wow, that was a bad reaction. It seems to make sense that it would be more natural to eat in a narrow window of time but I'm sure that my mood would be pretty sour if I went too long without a meal.
"more natural"?
That's a basic fallacy. I could argue that there are plenty of examples of foraging sapiens that eat small amounts continually when food is available.
Forget "natural".
Eating style and frequency of meals is secondary to amount of calories eaten.
If you like IF do it. If you don't, avoid it. It can be a useful tool for some people.
Add me to the nope train.
Personally I stick to 3-5 meals a day (only one large).
I've tried IF and it leads to either over restriction or disordered eating patterns for me. It feels like heavy restriction and I then tend to over compensate. I'm usually closer to 14:10-16:8 breakfast tends to be <200 cals.0 -
I like fasting and have used various styles at different times in my life (including 5:2). I've used fasting during phases of weight loss, maintenance, and bulking.
Note: I continue to calorie count and pay close attention to macros even when fasting.
I have noticed that people who eat higher fat diets seem to fair better on fasting protocols than those who naturally eat higher carbohydrate and (probably related) those that train for distance/endurance events tend to struggle more than those who train for strength.
If you are interested in it, give it a go but if it doesn't appeal or you try it and it doesn't feel good then forget it and move on. Other methods of managing your food are available.0 -
I actually do (more or less) adhere to an 18:6 or 16:8 eating pattern most of the time, although I don't intentionally do it under the umbrella of intermittent fasting. It's just the eating pattern I'm most comfortable with. I get up in the morning, have coffee, don't usually eat anything until around noon'ish, and am usually done eating after dinner (whatever time that ends up being, usually somewhere between 6:00 - 8:00 pm).
I have exactly the same eating pattern.There are no scientifically proven benefits to meal timing or eating/not eating after any particular hour (with very few, specific exceptions).
This!
0 -
I do a 14-16:10-8 split every day depending on when my eating window can begin. It's usually 16:8 though. Everyone has different opinions and knows what works for them, but personally I find a 5:2 weekly split a bit too extreme. I know for me I am far too active both in exercise and daily activity to only eat 500 calories two days per week.
It's generally recommended that women who want to get into IF try a 14:10 daily split due to the differences in their hormones. Some women can handle a 16:8 split and others cannot. That's why my window is flexible for 14:10. If for some reason I'm in my 14th or 15th hour out of the 16 and I start feeling off, I'll break my fast early and change my eating window from 8 hours to 9 or 10 for that day. It rarely happens, but when it does I listen to my body.
I'm not currently trying to lose weight, though. I used IF when I was losing weight, but I still use it now because of the other benefits I get from it. My hunger levels are under control; small meals every few hours just don't do it for me. I don't have as many cravings, especially for sugary things. I eat most of my calories when I get home from work which is beneficial because I get to feast and because it keeps me asleep at night. With the small meals thing I used to wake up often during the night and could rarely achieve a good night's rest.0 -
I find myself fasting in the evening lately by accident as it is the only way for me to stick to my calories lately.
I have a really fantastic sponsored canteen at the office so I eat a hearty breakfast and a delicious lunch and don't have a bean left over for dinner, so I just go without - maybe a cup of coffee. I used my "Dinner" section of my diary lately to log late afternoon snacks or after lunch desserts.
I was surprised how little I cared about not having dinner. Does not bother me in the least, even if my partner eats in front of me (I bring him home delicious things from my canteen or he cooks himself). I just don't feel all that hungry in the evenings and I go to sleep just fine.
I would be far more stressed about skipping lunch or breakfast as I am most hungry at those times and there is the most temptation around me.0 -
It took me a while to face the reality of my new pattern though - I was eating small dinners in February because I thought I had to or something - pushing me over my calories. I didn't lose any weight in Feb as a result.
I have embraced the "not eating at night is fine, who cares" philosophy and am now losing again.
My weight loss has, of course, nothing to do with meal timing, just to do with calories running dry. It just turns out that calories running dry also looks a lot like IF, in retrospect
1 -
I typically fast for 10 hours a day (stared with blood work and I never stopped) and I calorie cycle (but my low is 1600). 500? Definitely not for me.0
-
I did 5:2 to lose my weight and found it far easier to adhere to a weekly calorie goal that way rather than every day calorie restriction. Effectively just "dieting" twice a week.
By the way it's recommended as 600 for men (approximately a quarter of an average male's TDEE).
It's very much a personal thing but I'm much happier and therefore adherence is much easier if I eat in an irregular fashion day to day. Everyday calorie restriction just bores me to death and ultimately frustrates me into giving up - seems an endless process as opposed to the thought "it's only until tomorrow".
I've also maintained on 5:2, 6:1 and also tried 16:8 - I like experimenting! Finding what works is very individual.
Currently losing a little bit of weight ahead of the cycling season and alternating between roughly maintenenace one day and a deficit the next.0 -
To my mind, one advantage of the wider acceptance of intermittent fasting will be the slaying of the "eat many small meals to keep your metabolism stoked" myth. Once people realize they have a lot more dietary freedom than they realized, they can adapt their eating patterns to their circumstances and be more successful.
I don't practice "real" IF, but during weekdays I usually eat ~400 kcal between midnight and 6 PM, and about ~2000 kcal between 6 PM and midnight. That darn well suits me better than 6x400 kcal meals.0 -
I did 5:2 to lose my weight and found it far easier to adhere to a weekly calorie goal that way rather than every day calorie restriction. Effectively just "dieting" twice a week.
By the way it's recommended as 600 for men (approximately a quarter of an average male's TDEE).
It's very much a personal thing but I'm much happier and therefore adherence is much easier if I eat in an irregular fashion day to day. Everyday calorie restriction just bores me to death and ultimately frustrates me into giving up - seems an endless process as opposed to the thought "it's only until tomorrow".
I've also maintained on 5:2, 6:1 and also tried 16:8 - I like experimenting! Finding what works is very individual.
Currently losing a little bit of weight ahead of the cycling season and alternating between roughly maintenenace one day and a deficit the next.
All good suggestions. I may try The Military Diet, which is a 4:3 diet and what I hope is an experience similar to yours. Thank you for the comment.0 -
ernestrodgers82 wrote: »I did 5:2 to lose my weight and found it far easier to adhere to a weekly calorie goal that way rather than every day calorie restriction. Effectively just "dieting" twice a week.
By the way it's recommended as 600 for men (approximately a quarter of an average male's TDEE).
It's very much a personal thing but I'm much happier and therefore adherence is much easier if I eat in an irregular fashion day to day. Everyday calorie restriction just bores me to death and ultimately frustrates me into giving up - seems an endless process as opposed to the thought "it's only until tomorrow".
I've also maintained on 5:2, 6:1 and also tried 16:8 - I like experimenting! Finding what works is very individual.
Currently losing a little bit of weight ahead of the cycling season and alternating between roughly maintenenace one day and a deficit the next.
All good suggestions. I may try The Military Diet, which is a 4:3 diet and what I hope is an experience similar to yours. Thank you for the comment.
The military diet?? Eat what you want in your designated eating hours.
The military diet is BS, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the military...
0 -
ernestrodgers82 wrote: »I did 5:2 to lose my weight and found it far easier to adhere to a weekly calorie goal that way rather than every day calorie restriction. Effectively just "dieting" twice a week.
By the way it's recommended as 600 for men (approximately a quarter of an average male's TDEE).
It's very much a personal thing but I'm much happier and therefore adherence is much easier if I eat in an irregular fashion day to day. Everyday calorie restriction just bores me to death and ultimately frustrates me into giving up - seems an endless process as opposed to the thought "it's only until tomorrow".
I've also maintained on 5:2, 6:1 and also tried 16:8 - I like experimenting! Finding what works is very individual.
Currently losing a little bit of weight ahead of the cycling season and alternating between roughly maintenenace one day and a deficit the next.
All good suggestions. I may try The Military Diet, which is a 4:3 diet and what I hope is an experience similar to yours. Thank you for the comment.
The military diet is crap. It's a diet that looks like the foods were chosen by opening a random page of the USDA database, it's so arbitrary.
Eat proper foods. Get nutrition.0 -
If I fast I get horrific headaches that can last up to a few days, my body politely telling me to eat! I work on my feet so sometimes dont get a chance to eat/ are too manic to realise I've not eaten for 10 hours bit it gives me tiredness, hangry and as I said, headache!0
-
To my mind, one advantage of the wider acceptance of intermittent fasting will be the slaying of the "eat many small meals to keep your metabolism stoked" myth. Once people realize they have a lot more dietary freedom than they realized, they can adapt their eating patterns to their circumstances and be more successful.
good point!
0 -
ernestrodgers82 wrote: »I did 5:2 to lose my weight and found it far easier to adhere to a weekly calorie goal that way rather than every day calorie restriction. Effectively just "dieting" twice a week.
By the way it's recommended as 600 for men (approximately a quarter of an average male's TDEE).
It's very much a personal thing but I'm much happier and therefore adherence is much easier if I eat in an irregular fashion day to day. Everyday calorie restriction just bores me to death and ultimately frustrates me into giving up - seems an endless process as opposed to the thought "it's only until tomorrow".
I've also maintained on 5:2, 6:1 and also tried 16:8 - I like experimenting! Finding what works is very individual.
Currently losing a little bit of weight ahead of the cycling season and alternating between roughly maintenenace one day and a deficit the next.
All good suggestions. I may try The Military Diet, which is a 4:3 diet and what I hope is an experience similar to yours. Thank you for the comment.
Hell no to the so-called Military Diet!!
Eat food you like in the correct amount over the course of a week in the eating pattern that suits you.
Why eat someone else's choice of food? That's just misery and restriction for no good reason.
Especially the frankly bizarre choices and combinations found in the case of the Military Diet.
0 -
I do it on and off. I tend to do best on it both weight loss and mood wise out of all the diets I cycle through. I do the every other day kind, but don't exactly eat 500 calories. I eat anywhere between 800 and 1200 on my fast days depending on how much exercise I do and maintenance on non-fast days.0
-
I may have to try this in the future.0
-
Among the other comments about the Military Diet (it's stupid, the food choices are revolting, and it makes false claims), it's not really a 4:3 fasting plan. A 4:3 plan is the idea that you eat at maintenance on Sunday, Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday and "fast" (eat at a substantial deficit based on the planned deficit for the week, often around 500 calories, but I think it would be more for people with higher TDEE) on the other 3 days.
The Military Diet is simply 3 days in a row.0 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »I do it on and off. I tend to do best on it both weight loss and mood wise out of all the diets I cycle through. I do the every other day kind, but don't exactly eat 500 calories. I eat anywhere between 800 and 1200 on my fast days depending on how much exercise I do and maintenance on non-fast days.
I think your approach is wise. Do you simply restrict the amount of food you're eating or are your food choices different?0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions