Intermittent fasting for women
nebaru
Posts: 8 Member
Any women would like to share their experience with intermittent fasting. I tried for 2 weeks and decreased my BF% by ~1% but it was pretty challenging. Anybody tried it for longer? My main issue was being distracted by thoughts of food around 9-10 am. I fasted from 8pm to 12 pm.
0
Replies
-
0
-
I've done IF in one form or another since 2012. I did alternate day IF (JUDDD), for the weight loss phase (rotated between maintenance level calorie days and then very low 'fasting' calorie days of under 500 calories).
I did 5:2IF for the transition period between the weight loss phase and maintenance (I still lost some weight during this time as well)
And then I did 16:8IF as part of my maintenance plan, for the past few years (eating window 11am-7pm).
IF has helped me reach my goals, but I decided to take a break from it because I'm bored with it. I officially stopped yesterday and I ate something yesterday at 10am and it felt really weird lol. But, IF worked for me and I'm glad that I used it. I'll probably come back to it at some point as well.
0 -
I couldn't stand IF. I rather have more frequent meals and the bad breath was terrible. At the end of the day, it will provide no greater fat loss than an equivalent diet eating throughout the day. It's all about total calorie consumption.0
-
I do it all the time. I can't eat when I'm working so usually I just eat near my calorie budget before work since I hate eating late. I don't really call it fasting, I just call it "eating when I can cook for myself" instead of stressing over a healthy dinner outside1
-
I personally can't do it because i started having some disordered eating/bingeing. Although if it works for you i say go for it!0
-
I just started IF; two weeks in and I'm liking it. I think it works for me because I tend to be lazy. I don't want to count calories. I don't want to stress over which foods I'm allowed. Basically, all I have to remember is which day I'm fasting and not eat at work that day. I make sure I have plenty of water (sometimes tea or coffee). I have a reminder on my work calendar set up to remind me every hour to get up, move, and drink. I haven't experienced any need to binge eat or had any other negative side effects. Frankly, I think this calorie reduction method (I hate the word diet) can be helpful for some people. But it's not for everyone; different strokes for different folks.
0 -
I just started IF; two weeks in and I'm liking it. I think it works for me because I tend to be lazy. I don't want to count calories. I don't want to stress over which foods I'm allowed. Basically, all I have to remember is which day I'm fasting and not eat at work that day. I make sure I have plenty of water (sometimes tea or coffee). I have a reminder on my work calendar set up to remind me every hour to get up, move, and drink. I haven't experienced any need to binge eat or had any other negative side effects. Frankly, I think this calorie reduction method (I hate the word diet) can be helpful for some people. But it's not for everyone; different strokes for different folks.
You still need to restrict/track your calorie intake while doing IF if you want to lose weight. IF is just a fancy way to manipulate calories, it's not a weight loss plan in itself.
With ADF-JUDDD/5:2IF the calorie restrictions are built into the plan. With 16:8IF there are no calorie restrictions built in so you have do the calculations and figure out what your calorie deficit needs to be for your goals. You can definitely gain weight while doing IF without being mindful of your calorie intake (had this happen to me this past winter, after I stopped tracking my calories, still doing IF).0 -
I started 16:8 four weeks ago but did need to take almost a week off of it last week due to travel. So it is way too soon to say how it has helped my weight loss, but regardless I do like it and plan to keep at it. I mostly enjoy having larger meals, 2 per day instead of 3 smaller. It was a bit rough the first week and I didn't make it (or push it) to the full 16 on most days either, just tried to work with my body's natural hunger responses. After that first week it got way easier and going until noon takes little or no effort. I would just caution those who push it while being really hungry, we should work with our bodies not against. Give it time. I also don't due the bulletproof coffee stuff, too many calories for too few nutrients IMO. Plus it gave me serious gut rot, lol.0
-
I'm trying it out myself. My main concern is the hormone imbalance it can create in women. Anyone know about this? & what's up with us suppose to consume minimal nuts & fruits? It's hard to be restricted from foods That are normally my go to healthy snacks. I definitely still drink coffee in the AM cause the warmth fills me up & the caffeine suppresses the appetite.0
-
I'm trying it out myself. My main concern is the hormone imbalance it can create in women. Anyone know about this? & what's up with us suppose to consume minimal nuts & fruits? It's hard to be restricted from foods That are normally my go to healthy snacks. I definitely still drink coffee in the AM cause the warmth fills me up & the caffeine suppresses the appetite.
Where did you hear about this? I have never heard of either. Nuts are a very good snack and so is fruit. Nuts, and really any unsaturated fat, has been linked to lowering cholesterol and fruit is high in nutrients.0 -
I'm trying it out myself. My main concern is the hormone imbalance it can create in women. Anyone know about this? & what's up with us suppose to consume minimal nuts & fruits? It's hard to be restricted from foods That are normally my go to healthy snacks. I definitely still drink coffee in the AM cause the warmth fills me up & the caffeine suppresses the appetite.
I've never heard about the nuts thing (and I've been a part of the IF scene for several years now). As for hormonal issues-the verdict is still out on that one. There's not a lot of research available yet, and some women have reported issues with missed periods/early menopause etc. But to pinpoint these things on IF is sketchy. There's nothing concrete out there that says one way or the other. For me personally, I haven't had any issues, but each person may react differently to IF so it's one of those things you just have to experiment with and see how it goes.0 -
I tried it but my appetite was uncontrollable. I also love to eat so I felt too deprived. Scheduled meals have given me better results personally. I wish I had the success that others have had with it. I might try it again for maintenance later.0
-
At the end of the day, it will provide no greater fat loss than an equivalent diet eating throughout the day. It's all about total calorie consumption.
This is true. Most "diets" are just gimmicks to get you to eat less. For weight loss, it pretty much all boils down to how many calories you consume in a 24-hour period in comparison to how many you burned, regardless of the times you ate, the macro ratios, etc.1 -
I'm trying it out myself. My main concern is the hormone imbalance it can create in women. Anyone know about this? & what's up with us suppose to consume minimal nuts & fruits? It's hard to be restricted from foods That are normally my go to healthy snacks. I definitely still drink coffee in the AM cause the warmth fills me up & the caffeine suppresses the appetite.
I have heard this too, trying to find where. If I recall correctly it is based only on one study by a female doc or scientist who compared the results from a group of men and women. I believe it addressed longer periods of fasting like the 5:2 diet or the 3 day fast. The men did much better then the women, but women showed good results too. The takeaway for women (if I recall correctly!) was inconclusive but that it MIGHT not be ideal for women to do longer term fasting. I don't remember the specifics about hormones though, it might just have been the theory as to why men performed better - assuming women natural hold onto fat more than men due to biological reasons. Since I have no interest in doing more than the 16:8, which seems perfect normal and not an extreme range, I really didn't find the study all that compelling for my situation. If I find it, I will post it!
Also, IF is not a diet specific plan. The core reasoning is to eat your normal diet - whatever that may be - during the window. The restrictions of nuts, fruit or any other category of food would be a separate logic.0 -
I started IFing unintentionally when I was close to hitting maintenance.
I was tired of eating small meals all day so I experimented with eating larger meals less frequently while eating the same calorie amount. Just in a smaller eating window.
It worked very well for me. I adapted quickly and enjoyed eating much more satisfying meals and I also experienced fat loss at a quicker rate as time went on as well. Especially in my stubborn fat areas.
I've been eating this way for over 3 years now, I'm in perfect health, never lost my cycle or had any issues. I can not see myself ever going back to eating all day.1 -
At the end of the day, it will provide no greater fat loss than an equivalent diet eating throughout the day. It's all about total calorie consumption.
This is true. Most "diets" are just gimmicks to get you to eat less. For weight loss, it pretty much all boils down to how many calories you consume in a 24-hour period in comparison to how many you burned, regardless of the times you ate, the macro ratios, etc.
The way I understand it the theory of IF is more about which type of fuel your body will burn - fat vs sugar, and not about burning more fuel overall on the same amount of calories. (Although, I don't doubt many doing IF will misinterpret that.)0 -
KarlynKeto wrote: »At the end of the day, it will provide no greater fat loss than an equivalent diet eating throughout the day. It's all about total calorie consumption.
This is true. Most "diets" are just gimmicks to get you to eat less. For weight loss, it pretty much all boils down to how many calories you consume in a 24-hour period in comparison to how many you burned, regardless of the times you ate, the macro ratios, etc.
The way I understand it the theory of IF is about which type of fuel your body will burn - fat vs sugar, and not about burning more fuel overall on the same amount of calories. (Although, I don't doubt many doing IF will misinterpret that.)
Over the span of 24hrs, the amount of fat vs sugar burned will be fairly equal.0 -
KarlynKeto wrote: »At the end of the day, it will provide no greater fat loss than an equivalent diet eating throughout the day. It's all about total calorie consumption.
This is true. Most "diets" are just gimmicks to get you to eat less. For weight loss, it pretty much all boils down to how many calories you consume in a 24-hour period in comparison to how many you burned, regardless of the times you ate, the macro ratios, etc.
The way I understand it the theory of IF is about which type of fuel your body will burn - fat vs sugar, and not about burning more fuel overall on the same amount of calories. (Although, I don't doubt many doing IF will misinterpret that.)
Over the span of 24hrs, the amount of fat vs sugar burned will be fairly equal.
Maybe, but there are many who feel otherwise. For reference, here is a good one page summary with graphs that explains what people are trying to achieve on IF. In the end of a few months the difference may only be slight, but many do swear by it - and it has other benefits people like too.
burnfatnotsugar.com/intermittent-fasting.html
0 -
I do the alternate day one and I always come back to it because it's been the easiest eating strategy for me. No hormonal issues so far outside the usual (I have PCOS). In fact, I feel pretty good on it.0
-
I fast from about 9-10pm until lunch the next day. So a little less than the typical 16/8 window.
The reason I do this is mainly because I prefer to eat a larger meal at night (I can "save" some calories by not having breakfast and eat them later), and it's easier for me to be hungry for a few hours in the morning while I am busy at work than when I am sitting at home at night. After my fasting window, I basically have meals and snacks coming at me frequently the rest of the day, which I love! And I end the day with one large meal.
Not really anything complicated behind it in my mind, it just makes it easier for me to stick with a calorie deficit. I still track everything and aim to hit my calorie and macro goals. I know of many other people who also modify their eating windows while losing weight for the same reason.0 -
KarlynKeto wrote: »KarlynKeto wrote: »At the end of the day, it will provide no greater fat loss than an equivalent diet eating throughout the day. It's all about total calorie consumption.
This is true. Most "diets" are just gimmicks to get you to eat less. For weight loss, it pretty much all boils down to how many calories you consume in a 24-hour period in comparison to how many you burned, regardless of the times you ate, the macro ratios, etc.
The way I understand it the theory of IF is about which type of fuel your body will burn - fat vs sugar, and not about burning more fuel overall on the same amount of calories. (Although, I don't doubt many doing IF will misinterpret that.)
Over the span of 24hrs, the amount of fat vs sugar burned will be fairly equal.
Maybe, but there are many who feel otherwise. For reference, here is a good one page summary with graphs that explains what people are trying to achieve on IF. In the end of a few months the difference may only be slight, but many do swear by it - and it has other benefits people like too.
burnfatnotsugar.com/intermittent-fasting.html
The benefits from protocols like leangains, 5:2 or any other type of fasting are mainly a great control of calories. It is a legitimate eating pattern and I know many swear by it, but if calories and macros are held constant, then results should be the same. The biggest thing is, recognizing the method that works best for you because if you can't stick with it, you won't achieve your goals.0 -
KarlynKeto wrote: »KarlynKeto wrote: »At the end of the day, it will provide no greater fat loss than an equivalent diet eating throughout the day. It's all about total calorie consumption.
This is true. Most "diets" are just gimmicks to get you to eat less. For weight loss, it pretty much all boils down to how many calories you consume in a 24-hour period in comparison to how many you burned, regardless of the times you ate, the macro ratios, etc.
The way I understand it the theory of IF is about which type of fuel your body will burn - fat vs sugar, and not about burning more fuel overall on the same amount of calories. (Although, I don't doubt many doing IF will misinterpret that.)
Over the span of 24hrs, the amount of fat vs sugar burned will be fairly equal.
Maybe, but there are many who feel otherwise. For reference, here is a good one page summary with graphs that explains what people are trying to achieve on IF. In the end of a few months the difference may only be slight, but many do swear by it - and it has other benefits people like too.
burnfatnotsugar.com/intermittent-fasting.html
The benefits from protocols like leangains, 5:2 or any other type of fasting are mainly a great control of calories. It is a legitimate eating pattern and I know many swear by it, but if calories and macros are held constant, then results should be the same. The biggest thing is, recognizing the method that works best for you because if you can't stick with it, you won't achieve your goals.
For those of us doing the shorter fasts under 24 hours, it really is about weight management and hopefully achieving some health benefits too, so yes - finding what works is key. IF has other possible benefits too, though clearly more research needs to happen. There is growing research that the longer term fasts of 24 to 72 hours also has some measurable health benefits for people with more chronic conditions using our body's natural process of autophagy. Dr Colin Champ has some good info, including a presentation on Youtube. There is also Professor Longo in southern Cal who is studying the HGH (human growth hormone) relation with this method. I find it all fascinating, although still not tempted to try it.
0 -
I have done IF and it worked well for me. I get very hungry when I eat in the morning, so IF allowed me to have better control in order to stay within my calorie goal each day. Plus it allowed me to have calories left for a snack each evening, which I always crave.0
-
I am into week 3 of 5:2 IF . So far it's been great. No hormonal changes whatsoever. I find it easier to stick to than regular deficit.1
-
5:2 is working well for me so far. IF with a 16:8 or similar set up doesnt fit my lifestyle because breakfast is my favorite meal and I need it to feel good plus dinner is our family time in the evening. It's much easier for me to skip lunch. I think psulemon's point is on the mark.KarlynKeto wrote: »KarlynKeto wrote: »At the end of the day, it will provide no greater fat loss than an equivalent diet eating throughout the day. It's all about total calorie consumption.
This is true. Most "diets" are just gimmicks to get you to eat less. For weight loss, it pretty much all boils down to how many calories you consume in a 24-hour period in comparison to how many you burned, regardless of the times you ate, the macro ratios, etc.
The way I understand it the theory of IF is about which type of fuel your body will burn - fat vs sugar, and not about burning more fuel overall on the same amount of calories. (Although, I don't doubt many doing IF will misinterpret that.)
Over the span of 24hrs, the amount of fat vs sugar burned will be fairly equal.
Maybe, but there are many who feel otherwise. For reference, here is a good one page summary with graphs that explains what people are trying to achieve on IF. In the end of a few months the difference may only be slight, but many do swear by it - and it has other benefits people like too.
burnfatnotsugar.com/intermittent-fasting.html
The benefits from protocols like leangains, 5:2 or any other type of fasting are mainly a great control of calories. It is a legitimate eating pattern and I know many swear by it, but if calories and macros are held constant, then results should be the same. The biggest thing is, recognizing the method that works best for you because if you can't stick with it, you won't achieve your goals.
0 -
Works great for me. I don't follow any exact hours I just skip breakfast and have my first meal around 3 pm or later if I'm not hungry and last by 10 pm. It's great I get to eat big portions and still stay within my calories1
-
I have a couple of questions... Is IF also, when you fast for a period of time every day? Say, your eating window is 9AM to 6PM (for me that means a good lunch but no dinner). Also, does IF lower your metabolism?0
-
I have a couple of questions... Is IF also, when you fast for a period of time every day? Say, your eating window is 9AM to 6PM (for me that means a good lunch but no dinner). Also, does IF lower your metabolism?
Yes, this is called IF. It's not really different from any other calorie control strategy with a reasonable calorie budget. It will lower your metabolism the same way any other diet would, and that's because your metabolism is lowered when you lose weight, simply because you are smaller. There is no way around that.0 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »I have a couple of questions... Is IF also, when you fast for a period of time every day? Say, your eating window is 9AM to 6PM (for me that means a good lunch but no dinner). Also, does IF lower your metabolism?
Yes, this is called IF. It's not really different from any other calorie control strategy with a reasonable calorie budget. It will lower your metabolism the same way any other diet would, and that's because your metabolism is lowered when you lose weight, simply because you are smaller. There is no way around that.
I've heard / read that a small meals every few hours are the best way to ensure you are always burning something. But that tactic doesn't work for me because I forget while IF seems easier.0 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »I have a couple of questions... Is IF also, when you fast for a period of time every day? Say, your eating window is 9AM to 6PM (for me that means a good lunch but no dinner). Also, does IF lower your metabolism?
Yes, this is called IF. It's not really different from any other calorie control strategy with a reasonable calorie budget. It will lower your metabolism the same way any other diet would, and that's because your metabolism is lowered when you lose weight, simply because you are smaller. There is no way around that.
I've heard / read that a small meals every few hours are the best way to ensure you are always burning something. But that tactic doesn't work for me because I forget while IF seems easier.
This is a myth. Eating multiple small meals is the same as eating one or two big meals when it comes to weight loss and metabolism.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
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions