Intermittent Fasting - are there any side effects?

2

Replies

  • Richbelle1
    Richbelle1 Posts: 44 Member
    jjpptt2 wrote: »
    richarebello wrote: »
    So @amusedmonkey assuming I stick to my 1200 calorie plan and workout, will IF facilitate the weight-loss ? That's essentially what I wanted to know.
    If I can use it to stick to my calorie goal, focus in my macros AND benefit from the hormone manipulation, then isn't it a win-win ?

    No. 1200 cals in 6-8 hours vs 1200 cals in 12-14 hours makes no difference to weight loss.

    Oh dayum. Then maybe I should just schedule my eating and ensure I don't snack in between. As opposed to going to bed hungry and waking I'm starving
  • jjpptt2
    jjpptt2 Posts: 5,650 Member
    richarebello wrote: »
    @jjpptt2 @amusedmonkey @lemurcat12 I've been following this YouTube page by Thomas Delauer. He uses extensive scientific studies to prove the benefits of IF. Which is what I'm basing my knowledge on. Now I'm inclined to think he's a quack.

    I'm not familiar with the name, but a quick google search shows he's got a LOT of stuff for sale in various places. That makes me skeptical.

    Regardless, his science may be right (it opposes most of what I think I know, but that doesn't mean I can't still learn a thing or two), but does it apply to you and your situation? The stuff world class athletes do and the principles by which they eat and train are completely valid. But they have nothing to do with me or my situation, so they are useless to me.
  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    richarebello wrote: »
    So @amusedmonkey assuming I stick to my 1200 calorie plan and workout, will IF facilitate the weight-loss ? That's essentially what I wanted to know.
    If I can use it to stick to my calorie goal, focus in my macros AND benefit from the hormone manipulation, then isn't it a win-win ?

    It will facilitate weight loss if that way of eating makes you less likely to overeat. Of course you should use tools you find useful to your advantage. For what it's worth, I do IF sometimes and find it useful. It's just important to understand WHY it's useful, and the answer is: because some people find dieting easier when they do IF so they stick to their calories better. Hormone manipulation is not well supported, and even if it was, it doesn't necessarily make much difference. That would be not seeing the forest for the trees. Simplifying weight loss is better because it keeps you focused on the most important part, that is calorie deficit and habit building.
  • Richbelle1
    Richbelle1 Posts: 44 Member
    jjpptt2 wrote: »
    richarebello wrote: »
    @jjpptt2 @amusedmonkey @lemurcat12 I've been following this YouTube page by Thomas Delauer. He uses extensive scientific studies to prove the benefits of IF. Which is what I'm basing my knowledge on. Now I'm inclined to think he's a quack.

    I'm not familiar with the name, but a quick google search shows he's got a LOT of stuff for sale in various places. That makes me skeptical.

    Regardless, his science may be right (it opposes most of what I think I know, but that doesn't mean I can't still learn a thing or two), but does it apply to you and your situation? The stuff world class athletes do and the principles by which they eat and train are completely valid. But they have nothing to do with me or my situation, so they are useless to me.

    Well he claims that it's applicable to just about everyone. And discusses why women should do IF slightly differently because of increased estrogen levels becoming an issue during the fasting period.
    But yeah, like I said, if there's literally no difference between calorie control thought the day vs calorie control in 8 hours, then I might as well give myself a break and eat like I did.
  • stanmann571
    stanmann571 Posts: 5,727 Member
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    richarebello wrote: »
    So @amusedmonkey assuming I stick to my 1200 calorie plan and workout, will IF facilitate the weight-loss ? That's essentially what I wanted to know.
    If I can use it to stick to my calorie goal, focus in my macros AND benefit from the hormone manipulation, then isn't it a win-win ?

    It will facilitate weight loss if that way of eating makes you less likely to overeat. Of course you should use tools you find useful to your advantage. For what it's worth, I do IF sometimes and find it useful. It's just important to understand WHY it's useful, and the answer is: because some people find dieting easier when they do IF so they stick to their calories better. Hormone manipulation is not well supported, and even if it was, it doesn't necessarily make much difference. That would be not seeing the forest for the trees. Simplifying weight loss is better because it keeps you focused on the most important part, that is calorie deficit and habit building.

    I don't do IF, I do generally eat a very large (1/2-2/3 of my daily allowance) dinner, because I like to eat. I could eat like that at every meal or even 4 meals a day. But I've adapted and adjusted.
  • jjpptt2
    jjpptt2 Posts: 5,650 Member
    edited March 2018
    richarebello wrote: »
    jjpptt2 wrote: »
    richarebello wrote: »
    @jjpptt2 @amusedmonkey @lemurcat12 I've been following this YouTube page by Thomas Delauer. He uses extensive scientific studies to prove the benefits of IF. Which is what I'm basing my knowledge on. Now I'm inclined to think he's a quack.

    I'm not familiar with the name, but a quick google search shows he's got a LOT of stuff for sale in various places. That makes me skeptical.

    Regardless, his science may be right (it opposes most of what I think I know, but that doesn't mean I can't still learn a thing or two), but does it apply to you and your situation? The stuff world class athletes do and the principles by which they eat and train are completely valid. But they have nothing to do with me or my situation, so they are useless to me.

    Well he claims that it's applicable to just about everyone. And discusses why women should do IF slightly differently because of increased estrogen levels becoming an issue during the fasting period.
    But yeah, like I said, if there's literally no difference between calorie control thought the day vs calorie control in 8 hours, then I might as well give myself a break and eat like I did.

    I look at it this way (I draw a lot of parallels with weight loss to finances, as that's something most people understand).

    If my goal is to save money for a new car, I know I can save $500/month. I can put that $500 under my mattress, in a savings account that earns .01%, or in some other low-yield investment and hope to get .05% return. Am I better off spending my time and energy saving that $500, or trying to figure out which investment option is the best? Whether or not I save that $500 each month will have a significant impact on my ability to save for a new car. Whether or not I invest it at .05% or .01% or .1% is essentially irrelevant.
  • sueami1
    sueami1 Posts: 15 Member
    I researched it some. For women, it's definitely worth searching intermittent fasting and hormonal effects. There are a significant number of anecdotal reports of hormonal disregulation, not that anecdotes = proof, but it was enough to concern and dissuade me.
  • jjpptt2
    jjpptt2 Posts: 5,650 Member
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    My personal rule of thumb: dieting is hard enough, no need to make it harder. Find the easiest way that keeps you in a deficit consistently and you will have the best results. This way may change or you may decide to tweak some stuff along the way to make it even easier, but it's important to make sustainability and long term weight maintenance your goal and push away any information clutter outside of pure curiosity. As someone who's lost a lot of weight I can tell you the more you complicate it the harder you make it for yourself. The worst diet that you are able to keep up is much better than the best diet that you can't stick to, because weight loss benefits outweigh any minute differences diets can produce for most people.

    Great post!

    Quoting for greatness and emphasis.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,294 Member
    Nama_Slay wrote: »
    richarebello wrote: »
    Hey guys ,
    I've been reading a lot about intermittent fasting and it seems to have sooo many benefits.
    Has anyone tried it? Are there any cons? Especially for women.
    Would appreciate any advice!
    Thanks!

    I practice IF along with keto! Many benefits to both, however everyone's body responds differently. Do your research on IF, there's alot of great info out there. My goal is to drop BF% not necessarily weigh.. I drink my BCAA'S because I work out alot, and do fasted cardio at times. Best of luck!

    BCA's don't really do much at all, and fasted cardio may actually be less helpful the energized cardio, as you can't push as hard or as long. probably only make a difference if you are doing cardio for 45+ minutes in duration, or at high intensity though.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,294 Member
    Nama_Slay wrote: »
    jjpptt2 wrote: »
    richarebello wrote: »
    @Nama_Slay would I need to take BCAAs if I'm only interested in weight loss and work out like thrice a week?
    All the info I've found on IF is that it's magical. So I just wanted to know the flipside from people who've tried it

    No. BCAAs were a buzz supplement a while back, but newer information is showing them to be largely pointless - they don't really do anything.

    Everyone has their own opinion, but Thanks!

    FYI: Facts =/= opnion
  • jodifrancis256
    jodifrancis256 Posts: 2 Member
    I did it for 6 months. Didn't want to lose weight really except for a tiny bit of fat. I really wanted to tone

    . I worked out in the morning 3 x a week and 3 x a week in the evening. I didn't track regularly and tried to eat healthily with the occasional treat Worked really well for the first three months.. as i used to skip breakfast a lot anyway.

    However; i had a couple of really busy months at work and upped the number of hours between meals from 12 - 14 to 16. It completely messed me up.. my sleep suffered my eczema flared, i developed IBS for the first time ever (haven't had it since) and I am almost positive that it was down to the IF as it calmed down again after stopping..

    Main issue for me was i was getting up at 5 am and not eating until 2pm. I had dinner quite late as i was never hungry after a lunch at 3pm. I was also consuming way way more sugar.

    I think it works but you have to be really in tune with your own biological needs and if you work out in the morning take a vit supplement and bcaas as it helps you get your nutritional needs.

    I still practice some form of intermittent fasting - i eat dinner at 8pm/ 9pm roughly and don't eat breakfast until 9.. it suits my biological clock and my body is quite happy ( I am studying so have got a little softer but not too much so.) But i would recommend letting your GP know what you are doing (and keep an eye on your periods too..)

    As mentioned before: on other posts- it is all about calories. I used to prefer having big dinners so it worked okay for me.. (12 hours no longer) but now i have a low cal breakfast (as i wake at 5am - waiting that long for lunch was problematic).


  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    My personal rule of thumb: dieting is hard enough, no need to make it harder. Find the easiest way that keeps you in a deficit consistently and you will have the best results. This way may change or you may decide to tweak some stuff along the way to make it even easier, but it's important to make sustainability and long term weight maintenance your goal and push away any information clutter outside of pure curiosity. As someone who's lost a lot of weight I can tell you the more you complicate it the harder you make it for yourself. The worst diet that you are able to keep up is much better than the best diet that you can't stick to, because weight loss benefits outweigh any minute differences diets can produce for most people.

    Yes, I agree with this.

    You may well find that IF helps, so if you think you might like it (many people find it easier to have a smaller eating window), I'd give it a chance, but I wouldn't drive yourself crazy with rules that you think you need to follow to maximize losses -- the differences are non-existent to small, and sustainability is the key! I really like 3 meals a day and find it way easier if I don't snack (and so have larger and more satisfying meals), so do that. But others will like different things and what you enjoy may also change over time.
  • Azercord
    Azercord Posts: 573 Member
    The thing I found with IF: I'm naturally a volume eater, I like to eat big meals. I used to eat 5-7 small meals a day, I was hangry all the time, it sucked. I tried out IF and easily fell into 16/8-18/6 and I loved the 2 big meals and 1 small snack. I'm hardly hungry and as long as I don't try to push past 20 hours I don't get hanrgy.

    I started doing IF while I was losing weight and I do think it can help with managment and I have continued into mantenance. I've been doing IF for 3 ish years now.

    I will also say it isn't for everyone. If you fall into it naturally then go for it but if you are fighting to stay in your window don't do it. IF isn't for everyone and no even at 3 years I haven't seen any amazing side effects of IF other than not wanting to kill everyone around me because I'm hungry. Keep things simple, don't fight what your body wants to do naturally, don't expect miracles, but yes it is worth giving a try.
  • stanmann571
    stanmann571 Posts: 5,727 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    ldeoprecor wrote: »
    But, to say that there is no difference between 1200 calories in a restricted time frame and an open time frame is ignorant. Multiple peer reviewed studies support the efficacy of IF. It's not just a gimmick to keep your calories lower.

    Oh? Then link some that address the two options I gave and genuinely control calories so they are equal, and show a meaningful difference. I'm interested and would review them. The main studies I've seen are the opposite -- some show that eating most calories just before bed (or in the evening) have a negative effect on weight loss, although other studies disagree with that.

    The studies I've seen referenced show a statistically significant, but not particularly meaningful 5-7% advantage Meaning that at best, in a 4-6 hour IF window 2140 calories is equivalent to 2000 calories over a 16-18 hour window.

    Interesting, yes, statistically significant, yes. Meaningful, No not really. And not really applicable or useful for someone getting 1200 calories. Much more meaningful or interesting for someone whose daily requirements run in the 3500-5000 range, because at that point, additional efficiencies kick in due to digestive pathway speed and metabolic limitations.

    But it's really an apples to oranges... or Oranges to Cantaloupes comparison.
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,013 Member
    edited March 2018
    ldeoprecor wrote: »
    jjpptt2 wrote: »
    @jjpptt2
    But yeah, like I said, if there's literally no difference between calorie control thought the day vs calorie control in 8 hours, then I might as well give myself a break and eat like I did.

    But, that is the point of IF. There IS a difference.

    Unfortunately, you're asking this question on MyFitnessPal, where ANYTHING that goes beyond CICO is bunk according to most people on the forum. That being said, it is true that if you're consuming more calories that you burn, that you aren't going to lose weight.

    But, to say that there is no difference between 1200 calories in a restricted time frame and an open time frame is ignorant. Multiple peer reviewed studies support the efficacy of IF. It's not just a gimmick to keep your calories lower.

    To those that disagree, I have a question. Do you honestly believe the incredibly complex metabolism process can be summed up by just CICO? That our bodies react in the EXACT same way to all different diets, meal types, food types etc? Of course it is true that weight loss cannot happen without a calorie deficit. But to claim that anything beyond CICO is just a gimmick to lower your calorie content shows a remarkable lack of thought beyond a MFP sound bite.

    The bolded is a gross oversimplification of the discussions we have here.

    It is never the point that anything outside of CICO is considered bunk. The point is generally that focusing on CICO is ultimately the key to weight loss, other stuff could be relevant but is almost always inconsequential and can be sussed out focusing on calories and real-world results anyway.

    And when we talk about CICO we are ALWAYS talking about weight, health is an entirely different and commonly acknowledged story. :neutral:

    I've seen some studies that show it's possible there are some minor advantages to a smaller eating window, but nothing that proved anything. Would love it if you could link to some of the ones you are referencing, maybe I missed them.

Categories