Intermittent Fasting - are there any side effects?
Replies
-
ldeoprecor wrote: »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.
Differences in metabolism usually end up affecting ci, co, or both. They don't affect energy balance dynamics.2 -
stanmann571 wrote: »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.
Most of what I've seen is all over the place, so I think anyone claiming clear advantage is full of it (I don't mean you, obviously). I'd love to read the studies to see the rationale. Personally I've seen more (which I am also skeptical of and, more significantly, think is outweighed by what works for a person's lifestyle) suggesting that morning eating is positive vs. actual eating window makes a huge difference.
Here's a discussion of studies relating to eating window and meal timing: http://caloriesproper.com/meal-timing-and-peripheral-circadian-clocks/3 -
richarebello 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
Honestly, whether there is some extra advantage to IF or not, that's only relevant if you can comfortably stick to it. You are still young and have an awesome opportunity to figure out a way to eat that you will be able to easily and enjoyably hit the correct calories for the rest of your life. Struggling to get to your goal weight and then having no idea how to maintain it will just set you on the yo-yo path for the long haul.
Set your goal to lose 1 lb per week and start logging, accurately and consistently. Focus on how you feel from day to day, how easy or how much of a struggle it was to hit your calorie goal, how much energy did you have. You will start to see patterns - I do better when I eat more protein. I feel like crap on days I don't eat breakfast. When I try not to snack in the afternoon I'm too sleepy and make bad choices at dinner. If I eat too close to bedtime I can't sleep. Stuff like that. Then just start tweaking what you're doing until you figure it out.
Also make sure 1200 cals is appropriate for you. That is the absolute minimum, and at the very least you should be logging your exercise and eating back at least some of those calories.
There are probably lots of different variations on meal timing and schedules, macro distribution, etc that have subtle benefits, and I'd bet the amount of benefit is different for diff people depending on all sorts of other variables that there is no possible way to track. So focus on what you can, and good luck :drinker:3 -
richarebello 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
Honestly, whether there is some extra advantage to IF or not, that's only relevant if you can comfortably stick to it. You are still young and have an awesome opportunity to figure out a way to eat that you will be able to easily and enjoyably hit the correct calories for the rest of your life. Struggling to get to your goal weight and then having no idea how to maintain it will just set you on the yo-yo path for the long haul.
Set your goal to lose 1 lb per week and start logging, accurately and consistently. Focus on how you feel from day to day, how easy or how much of a struggle it was to hit your calorie goal, how much energy did you have. You will start to see patterns - I do better when I eat more protein. I feel like crap on days I don't eat breakfast. When I try not to snack in the afternoon I'm too sleepy and make bad choices at dinner. If I eat too close to bedtime I can't sleep. Stuff like that. Then just start tweaking what you're doing until you figure it out.
Also make sure 1200 cals is appropriate for you. That is the absolute minimum, and at the very least you should be logging your exercise and eating back at least some of those calories.
There are probably lots of different variations on meal timing and schedules, macro distribution, etc that have subtle benefits, and I'd bet the amount of benefit is different for diff people depending on all sorts of other variables that there is no possible way to track. So focus on what you can, and good luck :drinker:
Thanks so much for the advice! @kimny72 .
Will follow this and figure out the patterns. The last thing I'd want to do is reach a yo yo phase.2 -
ldeoprecor 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.
No...but energy balance by far and away is what is most important...all that other stuff is pretty much majoring in the minors. The "benefits" aren't particularly material or meaningful for the average Joe/Jane trying to lose a little weight.2 -
"richarebello 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
There are probably lots of different variations on meal timing and schedules, macro distribution, etc that have subtle benefits, and I'd bet the amount of benefit is different for diff people depending on all sorts of other variables that there is no possible way to track. So focus on what you can, and good luck :drinker:
I completely agree, and I would also like to add that there are also benefits that differ depending on trackable variables that produce results that aren't always consistent with the research. For example, there is a subtle benefit on paper to doing high intensity interval training. When I attempted that, I noticed a steep decrease in my NEAT. I was moving less on days I attempted HIIT and my overall calorie burn was about 100-120 calories lower than a sedentary day. That decrease in activity wiped out any EPOC and exceeded it into the other direction of burning less, so in my case it was something I hated that did the exact opposite of what you would expect it to do - it decreased my calories burned. Who cares if it increased my EPOC when it didn't produce actual increase in overall calorie burn, it had a very bad effort to benefit ratio so it had to go.
On the other hand, I introduced walking around the house while waiting for stuff and just randomly. Yes, it's a detail and it only gives me about 100 extra calories, that's like a banana, not worth it right? Wrong. I do it without thinking, it doesn't take any mental effort, and I get an extra snack out of it, so it's completely worth it to me because it has a great effort to benefit ratio. Someone else may find it a hassle to run around like a headless chicken every time they put something in the microwave, so for them it would not be a good addition to their routine because it would have a bad effort to benefit ratio.
This is real life, this isn't a lab. Life is made of individuals, research papers are made of averages under controlled conditions that don't always account for the mental (or even some physical) sides of it.2 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »ldeoprecor 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.
No...but energy balance by far and away is what is most important...all that other stuff is pretty much majoring in the minors. The "benefits" aren't particularly material or meaningful for the average Joe/Jane trying to lose a little weight.
I wonder if he ever heard of black box systems...2 -
What are dangers of eating less? Can’t think of any. I do 1550 cal, one meal a day. Working just fine.
2 -
rfrenkel77 wrote: »What are dangers of eating less? Can’t think of any. I do 1550 cal, one meal a day. Working just fine.
Malnutrition is a danger of eating less. 1550 plus I am assuming you are exercising is not a healthy approach to weight loss.4
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.7K Getting Started
- 260.1K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.8K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 415 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.9K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.6K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.5K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions