Is Intermittent Fasting really as easy as people claim?

Nathanae

Hi there,

I am looking for people (preferably women who want to lose weight) with experience of IF.

I have started a bit over a week ago and found it okay so far. I'm doing 16/8 (eating window 9:30-17:30, but the last two days I tried pushing that a bit and went 17.5/6.5 and 18.2/5.7, because it's the weekend and I don't have to have as much energy. Also, I heard somewhere the benefits start at 16hours and exponentially get better.)

My worry is, though: Can I just eat whatever I like (like I had chocolate, cereal and yoghurt and biscuits, smoothies, and big meals! (not all at once and not obscene amounts (well, to people here maybe -.-)), but it wasn't like I was "on a diet"-eating then), or do I still have to count and log calories in the feeding window? I did for the first two days, which resulted in me overthinking and undereating again - which caused my last diet to be very successful but also an emotional rollercoaster of undereating and binging and in the end, yoyo-ing back way past where I started. I decided to stop since I worried that the double strain of logging AND having an eye on the clock would make it less sustainable for me.


Sorry, this is a confusing post so far. I think what I mostly mean is to ask successful 16/8 IF-veterans: how much did you restrict and/or monitor your food intake during the feeding time or is it really "anything goes as long as you have only tea, water and black coffee for 16 hours afterwards"? How much did you actually lose and how quick was the process? (I know that quick isn't best because of sustainability and saggy skin, but I have NO idea what to expect from this! Is IF done casually more a "I want to lose 4 pounds"-kind of diet or "I need to drop 20kilos (40 pounds) before my [random big event in 5 months time]!"-kind of diet? It seems to be poplular among bodybuilding men, so I'd like to hear from a regular woman who doesn't go to the gym or doesn't have moderate workouts more than 2-3 times a week.

.... and how many calories breaks a fast? (because depending on which kind of coffee you select, even pure black unsweetened coffee is mostly listed to have some calories on mfp but most websites so far said it was okay to have it during fasting).

It's only been 9 nights of fasting, and I don't spend the entire 8 hours eating, but I still wonder if I'm overeating because I am worried about having to push back breakfast (I didn't really skip it most days, just had it later)... I haven't had the big "first-week-of-diet-water-weight-loss" that I usually have, so I'm worried I'm doing it wrong! I may have made mistakes like taking zinc supplements that tasted too sweet to be completely fine or took some powder supposed to suppress hunger, which has also like 3 calories, which seems extremely low, but I have now idea how delicate the fasting itself is!

The time frame and intensity seems unclear to me as well. Some people said they did the 16/8 only a couple days a week, some say it's a lifestyle and you should do low-carb in the feeding window as well... I find the entire thing very loosely defined so far and am still trying to figure out what I have to do and what the result can be?

hope someone will reply and share their experience.

lalalacroix

Weight loss happens when you are in a calorie deficit. There are no magical weight loss benefits to IF. When I did IF a couple years ago I did lose weight but that was because I was in a calorie deficit. I highly recommend weighing/measuring and logging your intake.

cmriverside

Hm.

Well, I've eaten 16:8 for most of my adult life, so 40 years. I'm female.

It used to have no name. It's just a common way for a lot of people to eat. I postpone breakfast until I've been up 3-4 hours. I eat two largish meals and a snack or two during the middle part of the day and into early evening then I stop eating a few hours before bed.

I gained, lost and am now maintaining.

It's about calories in < calories out.

That's it. You still have to know that part.

There is no magical *thing* that happens at 16.1 hours to cause better/faster weight loss. It's just a schedule that helps some people manage their food and calories.

earlnabby

There is nothing magic about IF and yes, it is very loosely defined because there is no one way to do IF. IF just means meal timing and you can combine it with anything else you want. It is one of many ways to stay within your calorie goal so whether it works or not depends more on a person's hunger signals than anything else.

I can't do it. Among other things, I am T2Dm and if I don't eat 4-5 times a day I get low blood sugar. (I manage the disease by diet and exercise, no medication of any kind).

I am the type of person who is likely to binge so, even if I didn't have diabetes, I would be more likely to eat way too much when I do eat only 1-2 meals a day.

Nathanae

earlnabby wrote: »

There is nothing magic about IF and yes, it is very loosely defined because there is no one way to do IF. IF just means meal timing and you can combine it with anything else you want. It is one of many ways to stay within your calorie goal so whether it works or not depends more on a person's hunger signals than anything else.

I can't do it. Among other things, I am T2Dm and if I don't eat 4-5 times a day I get low blood sugar. (I manage the disease by diet and exercise, no medication of any kind).

I am the type of person who is likely to binge so, even if I didn't have diabetes, I would be more likely to eat way too much when I do eat only 1-2 meals a day.

I had that problem during my restriction diet - I just ate snacks every 1-2 hours to be at a baseline and not get hangry or binge-y (which I still did because I think I restricted to much and obsessed). For me, it wasn't because of a medical condition, though. just what I preferred to be "safe" despite the restriction. I was surprised how doable IF was for me this last week. I expected to do much worse!

Fatty_Nuff

I tried fasting while asleep 11-7 but didn't lose a pound.

earlnabby

Nathanae wrote: »

earlnabby wrote: »

There is nothing magic about IF and yes, it is very loosely defined because there is no one way to do IF. IF just means meal timing and you can combine it with anything else you want. It is one of many ways to stay within your calorie goal so whether it works or not depends more on a person's hunger signals than anything else.

I can't do it. Among other things, I am T2Dm and if I don't eat 4-5 times a day I get low blood sugar. (I manage the disease by diet and exercise, no medication of any kind).

I am the type of person who is likely to binge so, even if I didn't have diabetes, I would be more likely to eat way too much when I do eat only 1-2 meals a day.

I had that problem during my restriction diet - I just ate snacks every 1-2 hours to be at a baseline and not get hangry or binge-y (which I still did because I think I restricted to much and obsessed). For me, it wasn't because of a medical condition, though. just what I preferred to be "safe" despite the restriction. I was surprised how doable IF was for me this last week. I expected to do much worse!

The point is that meal timing means nothing as far as weight loss. Eat the size meals that satisfy you in the time frame that also satisfies you.

Nathanae

earlnabby wrote: »

The point is that meal timing means nothing as far as weight loss. Eat the size meals that satisfy you in the time frame that also satisfies you.

I actually heard that it is supposed to make a difference because of the way the entire system gets a shutdown to do stuff like burn fat which it doesn't do as effectively if you have insulin spikes all the time. So they quoted studies comparing IF to similar caloric diets and that IF would have more of a positive effect than consuming the same calories with less than 16 hours break in between. He did refer to people who work specifically on body composition though.

And I do get that I can't binge and expect to lose weight. My hope so far is that the time limit is also limiting evening-snacking-time and therefore bring an automatic calorie restriction. I'm just still hesitant about logging calories again because I felt like it was really bad for my mental health last time as well as social connections. I do have very few friends around as it is. It doesn't help to avoid them to not have to guess-log any food you may eat somewhere else or alienate them by obsessing over food-prep or eating.

mmapags

Nathanae wrote: »

earlnabby wrote: »

The point is that meal timing means nothing as far as weight loss. Eat the size meals that satisfy you in the time frame that also satisfies you.

[BI actually heard that it is supposed to make a difference because of the way the entire system gets a shutdown to do stuff like burn fat which it doesn't do as effectively if you have insulin spikes all the time. [/b]So they quoted studies that similar diets would have more of a positive effect than consuming the same calories with less than 16 hours break in between. He did refer to people who work specifically on body composition though.

And I do get that I can't binge and expect to lose weight. My hope so far is that the time limit is also limiting evening-snacking-time and therefore bring an automatic calorie restriction. I'm just still hesitant about logging calories again because I felt like it was really bad for my mental health last time as well as social connections (I do have few friends as it is, it doesn't help to avoid them to not have to guess-log any food you may eat somewhere else) or alienate them by obsessing over food-prep or eating.

Re the bolded: studies don't show any of that to be true. For those that are Insulin Resistant, there is a benefit of increasing insulin sensitivity. Bottom line: it's just an eating schedule. It either helps you with calorie control and compliance or it doesn't.

As a point of information, I've practiced it on and off for almost 10 years and have read lots of the available research.

lemurcat2

Nathanae wrote: »

I actually heard that it is supposed to make a difference because of the way the entire system gets a shutdown to do stuff like burn fat which it doesn't do as effectively if you have insulin spikes all the time. So they quoted studies comparing IF to similar caloric diets and that IF would have more of a positive effect than consuming the same calories with less than 16 hours break in between. He did refer to people who work specifically on body composition though.

Not really. There are some studies that show that timing has some effect on calories burned, but it's a small one, and also seems to be more limiting calories to the morning. I'm not sure I buy it, but it would have something to do with circadian rhythm.

Point is that even if there was an effect it wouldn't be that large, and just eating in an 8 hour window wouldn't accomplish anything if you still overeat.

Some people may find that restricting their eating times helps with satiety and naturally causes them to reduce calories. For me, eating only 3 meals per day (no snacking) does if I am also mindful, focus on mostly nutrient-dense, home cooked meals, so on. But I could easily overeat this way if I didn't also monitor what I ate some.

I gained a lot of weight at one point when I had a job where I worked late and ate out a lot. I would usually not eat anything until 1 or 2 (I used to just not be hungry in the mornings, and plus I didn't want to waste time making breakfast), and had dinner at work at around 8 (if you were staying late the work for pay for you to order in), and didn't eat much of anything else or at home, and yet I gained, because my meals, especially dinner, was high cal (it was a bit of a "I'm stuck here and have no life, so I deserve it" thing).

The time frame and intensity seems unclear to me as well. Some people said they did the 16/8 only a couple days a week, some say it's a lifestyle and you should do low-carb in the feeding window as well... I find the entire thing very loosely defined so far and am still trying to figure out what I have to do and what the result can be?

I think you are conflating 2 different kinds of IFing. One kind is just eating to a schedule (16/8 or whatever, some versions eat only once a day, but I couldn't do that). Another kind is eating only 500 calories 2 days a week and then to maintenance (or without counting for some people) on the other days.

Some low carb people also IF, but you don't need to low carb to IF, IF is a schedule.

It sounds to me like you have a tendency to over-thinking it (common at the beginning, I'm sure I did too), so rather than trying to feel like you have to do everything perfectly, why not pick a calorie goal, log, and make it a priority to come close to or hit the goal, so as to help with the feeling that it's better to go overboard in the restricting. Try putting those calories within your window and see how it feels.

Duck_Puddle

I have been inadvertently doing IF pretty much my whole life. That’s just what matches when I’m hungry.

When I followed an “anything goes” approach during my eating window-I ended up morbidly obese.

When I followed ate fewer calories than I burned in the day, I lost weight.

I have found that my change in weight is entirely dependent on the number of calories I consume vs the number of calories I burn. The fact that I eat all of my calories within a shorter timeframe has done exactly nothing to change basic CICO math.

Smacfit_

I do IF but I track my macro/cals intake. I eat between 12pm and 6pm. You cant really just eat whatever you want (ie too many cals) I've tried that before during IF and it didnt work. I eat a large meal at 12, a large ish (300 cal) filling snack at 3 and dinner at 6. Love IF!

zeejane03

I'm a female who did an IF protocol during my active weight loss phase. I did alternate day IF, which means I alternated between very low calorie days and then maintenance level calorie days. Within my calorie targets I ate whatever I wanted-mostly highly processed foods, fast food several times a week, no fruit, very little veggies etc. Lost the excess weight and improved my health markers.

For the first few years of maintenance I did 16:8 IF, but still kept track of my calorie intake and still kept within my calorie targets. During that time I experimented quite a bit with my food choices-everything from 'primal' to the Nutritarian woe (very low fat vegetarian).

I'm now almost 6 years into maintenance and no longer do IF, just got bored with it.

Wyandotty

I've just found that when I eat breakfast, I tend to be hungrier throughout the day and want snacks and a large lunch. When I just have some tea and drink water in the mornings, I can have a smaller lunch/no snacks and still feel satisfied. So, IF is a tool for lowering my calorie intake by reducing appetite stimulation. That's it.

kadimcnair

For me, since starting IF in October, I have lost more quality weight than when I did Weight Watchers or just logged calories. In my research and experience, the longer you go without food (or calories) the more your body has to rely on stored fat. So for me, I have lost a lot of weight in my stomach and hips. From January 18th, 2018 to October 13th, 2018, I lost 44 lbs on weight watchers. I saw a slight change but was seriously bummed and shocked that I didn't look that much different than before. In October I began IF. I eat from noon to 6, sometimes 7pm. I eat the same amount of calories (I ALWAYS track) and have lost 25 lbs from October to now. Just from IF, I have dropped 4 sizes and lots of inches. I am happy with the IF lifestyle. It works for me. It can work for everyone BUT if you are still eating too many calories, nothing will work.

Good luck.

Chef_Barbell

kadimcnair wrote: »

For me, since starting IF in October, I have lost more quality weight than when I did Weight Watchers or just logged calories. In my research and experience, the longer you go without food (or calories) the more your body has to rely on stored fat. So for me, I have lost a lot of weight in my stomach and hips. From January 18th, 2018 to October 13th, 2018, I lost 44 lbs on weight watchers. I saw a slight change but was seriously bummed and shocked that I didn't look that much different than before. In October I began IF. I eat from noon to 6, sometimes 7pm. I eat the same amount of calories (I ALWAYS track) and have lost 25 lbs from October to now. Just from IF, I have dropped 4 sizes and lots of inches. I am happy with the IF lifestyle. It works for me. It can work for everyone BUT if you are still eating too many calories, nothing will work.

Good luck.

What's "quality weight"? :huh:

Duck_Puddle

kadimcnair wrote: »

For me, since starting IF in October, I have lost more quality weight than when I did Weight Watchers or just logged calories. In my research and experience, the longer you go without food (or calories) the more your body has to rely on stored fat. So for me, I have lost a lot of weight in my stomach and hips. From January 18th, 2018 to October 13th, 2018, I lost 44 lbs on weight watchers. I saw a slight change but was seriously bummed and shocked that I didn't look that much different than before. In October I began IF. I eat from noon to 6, sometimes 7pm. I eat the same amount of calories (I ALWAYS track) and have lost 25 lbs from October to now. Just from IF, I have dropped 4 sizes and lots of inches. I am happy with the IF lifestyle. It works for me. It can work for everyone BUT if you are still eating too many calories, nothing will work.

Good luck.

I’m really glad that IF is working for you. It’s great to find ways of eating that fit our preferences and help us achieve our goals.

I want to point out that it’s fairly common for there to not be significant visual or size changes earlier on in the weight loss process and that later losses yield a much more significant visual and size change. This is because 1-you’ve got less fat to lose and it’s point where you’ll begin to lose that “stubborn belly” fat and 2-you’re just smaller so what was a negligible change before now makes more of an impact (think of taking paper towels off a roll and how much more difference it makes in the size of the roll when it’s smaller).

People not following IF will experience similar results as they lose more weight.

lemurcat2

Oh, on the 5/2 version, I have a friend who does it. She was never overweight but did it to lose vanity lbs and loved it because she found it very easy, so kept doing it to maintain. How she does it is that she eats whatever she wants on the 5 days (although she doesn't have a tendency to binge or a bad diet at all), and then counts calories (to reach only 500) on the other 2. She says it's nice since for her she can eat the amounts she wants on the other days without her weight creeping up.

I suspect it could work better for someone less overweight, though, and that if you were someone with more to lose or more food issues it might not work or might work only with counting so you knew you were eating at maintenance on the 5 days and not way above.

hawkmancody

Personally I'm just not hungry till evening so I usually eat one meal(around 6-7 pm)I do however have to be careful or i can go way over my calories if im not keeping track.

rheddmobile

I got to be morbidly obese eating only a single meal per day, so I can tell you for sure there is no special magic to IF. If you eat too many calories during your window, you will gain weight. Oh, and also I became a diabetic, so it doesn't magically protect you from diabetes either. IF is just one way of restricting calorie intake, and if doing it doesn't help you restrict calories, it may not be the right approach for you.

jennifer_417

I've done IF at different times. There were times that I did very well and times that I was entirely unable to sustain it. It tensed to fluctuate depending on my schedule and various life circumstances. Having said that, some people do very well and some people can't. There's no shame either way.

You do still have to eat fewer calories than you burn to lose weight.