Fasting Diets Are Gaining Acceptance

ernestrodgers82

sijomial 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.

Christine_72

ernestrodgers82 wrote: »

sijomial 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...

stevencloser

ernestrodgers82 wrote: »

sijomial 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.

ARGriffy

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!

StealthHealth

Jruzer wrote: »

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!

sijomial

ernestrodgers82 wrote: »

sijomial 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.

amusedmonkey

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.

Tyler2020Mike

I may have to try this in the future.

lemurcat12

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.

ernestrodgers82

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?

amusedmonkey

ernestrodgers82 wrote: »

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?

The way I cook my foods is different. My fast days are essentially low fat high protein. For example: on normal days when I make a stew I would add a tablespoon or so of oil and little to no meat (not a big fan) plus extra potatoes. On fast days I only use a teaspoon of oil, if any, and replace some of the potatoes with lean meat (predominantly skinless chicken breast). Another example: on normal days I would do 2 eggs+1 white with extra cheese and bread for an omelet, on fast days I would do 1 egg+2 whites with a slice or two of low fat turkey cold cuts and half the bread, and just enough oil for it to not stick. I also utilize soups a lot, the brothy 50 calorie kind, on fast days and have them with my meals to help bulk up my meal size.

nvmomketo

I practice IF but nothing structured. I eat all my calories in a 12-4 hour window, and I have at least one day per week at ~ 100-500 kcals.

I eat a ketogenic diet so fasting is quite complimentry. I don't get that blood sugar crash or the hangries that I would if I ate higher carb. I might get a bit hungry but there is no dip in energy if I haven't eaten for 12 or 60 hours.

hamelle2

The words "intermittent fasting" can sound faddish or unhealthy to some folks. It really is neither. Some people feel great eating 5-6 small meals throughout the day or eating a huge breakfast or not eating after 7pm. I feel great eating between 6pm-10pm. Because I have found a way to stay within my calories and also feeling satisfied has made me a very happy gal.

dwaterfield

I've recently started doing 5:2 because I had plateaued for several weeks. Well, my version of 5:2. I'm basically following my recommended calories 5 days a week and skipping breakfast and lunch 2 days a week and then eating a normal dinner (about 800 calories). I think the extended period of time (dinner one night until dinner the next) without calories is making a difference. I'm off my plateau and back to losing steadily over the last two weeks.

Now it's also possible that my plateau would have ended anyway and all this is doing is helping me keep my calories within limits, but it seems to be working so I'm going to stick with it for a while.

BoaRestrictor

I used to do 20:4 but stopped simply because eating 1500 calories in 4 hours was really hard, but I did feel pretty good on IF 20:4 and I'm a female, I might go back to it. Now I guess I go 12:12 which isn't IF but I try to have breakfast at 6AM and not eat past 6PM (and no not because of the 3 hours before bed myth).

cblack8

IF gave me a lot of wonderful tools. None of the structured plans worked for me but just trying to only eat 500 calories one day or go 24 hours without eating taught me so much (I couldn't do either of those for a single day). I'm much more aware of when my body needs food as opposed to just wanting it and I know I start to get dizzy and tired if I really need to eat. It also made me really look at my schedule to figure out what works best for me which was huge. I eat 200-300 calories during the week at work (filling things: oatmeal, soup, etc.) and that leaves me 1000 calories for dinner. I then eat at maintenance on the weekends and I've been steadily losing weight while not affecting the parts of my lifestyle that are really important to me.

I would recommend giving different plans a shot and then going with what works best for you!

ElizabethOakes2

Did it as part of research for my book. Lasted 3 days. My husband went out and came back with a huge pile of Indian take-out and told me to eat it or I could sleep in the yard. (He was joking about the yard part. ... i think... though we did have a lovely hammock at the time.)
I need to keep my calorie intake even throughout the day, or I become a candidate for a 5150 psych admit.

PaulaWallaDingDong

Jruzer wrote: »

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.

That would be awesome. Unfortunately, it could just as easily become the new "only way to lose weight."

ernestrodgers82

I don't know how many of you follow Kris Gunnars of Authority Nutrition. She just wrote a review of The Military Diet. One thing she did write was the diet wasn't technically an IF diet because three "meals" are eatin. Here's a link to her review http://clicks.aweber.com/y/ct/?l=Oo6T2&m=h7Y44AHXRM2fnbk&b=WocKaCoVJ.7PBeR0NBqnbA

japfume

I tried IF just to simplify meal plans, but I try to eat plant based and high fiber, there's just no way to eat that much volume and fiber in a narrow window. I think it's more ideal for people on a high protein or keto diet.