Is Intermittent Fasting really as easy as people claim?

2

Replies

  • lin_be
    lin_be Posts: 393 Member
    Silentpadna wrote: »
    AnnabellaxRinger wrote: »
    Nathanae wrote: »
    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.

    I did this same type of post, OP and I will tell you that people who don't IF will tell you constantly that you have to be in a calorie deficit - which is fine. I'll add you and we can discuss it further, since the forums aren't the best platform for this (as you'll soon find). I'm on day like 16-18 (can't keep track) of 16:8 and even with breaking my fast twice, I'm down 14 pounds and although I'm not overeating, I'm not "under my necessary caloric intake" either.

    I also started a group for women who are into IF - so if you're interested, I'll send you a request to add!

    Here's the thing. You absolutely cannot in any way shape or form not obey the laws of nature. You have to be under your maintenance calories (which it appears you've interchanged here with "necessary caloric intake") over the long term in order to burn stored energy (mostly fat, but also other tissue). You cannot create energy. You can only use it or store it for later use. Your source of energy is from the food you eat or from your tissue. It cannot come from nothing.

    It may sound trivial and obvious, but the problem with attributing fat loss to anything other than an energy deficit is that when people fail (or succeed), they won't really know why.

    IF deserves neither the credit nor the blame for fat loss or lack of fat loss. It is simply a way of eating and nothing more.

    For what it's worth, when I'm strictly working on cutting, I use IF as a method of eating so as to allow myself bigger meal portions for satiety - to control hunger. It is a tool, not a diet. There is no magic. It's not insulin spikes or lack thereof. It simply helps control my energy intake so that I use all of my food energy and some of my stored energy each day. If you don't use what you eat, you store it. If you use exactly what you eat (maintenance), you neither burn stored energy or add stored energy.

    People respond to things like this because claiming that it's not about calories is patently false.

    Preach!
  • stricklee11
    stricklee11 Posts: 218 Member
    I did IF twice. The first time, I lost 15 pounds in a month? The second time, I actually gained 6 pounds. IF is a bit tough for me to do as I can't function without breakfast and work an 8-5 job. That means that my window was always 7-3pm which was not optimal for me as I am a 3 square meals type gal. I think IF works best if the feeding window does not interfere with your normal feeding schedule.
  • LynnJ9
    LynnJ9 Posts: 414 Member
    ladystrick11 wrote: »
    I did IF twice. The first time, I lost 15 pounds in a month? The second time, I actually gained 6 pounds. IF is a bit tough for me to do as I can't function without breakfast and work an 8-5 job. That means that my window was always 7-3pm which was not optimal for me as I am a 3 square meals type gal. I think IF works best if the feeding window does not interfere with your normal feeding schedule.

    If I did IF and ate my first meal at 10:30, I could eat until 6:30 pm. If I get stuck in meetings until 7 pm, do I stop even though I may have only eaten 600 calories?
  • Silentpadna
    Silentpadna Posts: 1,306 Member
    Silentpadna wrote: »

    ... If you use exactly what you eat (maintenance), you neither burn stored energy or add stored energy.

    I actually need to clarify this because somebody (like me) will notice the error and nitpick like I'm about to do.

    It would be more accurate to say this:

    "If you use exactly what you eat (maintenance) over a given period of time, whatever stored energy you burn will be made up in stored energy added".


    Obviously your body is not a perfect machine with minute by minute input = output. So your body is using available energy from wherever it can in the moment. Over a given window, if Input > Output, then Input - Output = Excess energy stored (in the form of fat and lean tissue - like muscle). If Output > Input, then Output - Input = Excess energy burned (from stored energy in the form of fat and lean tissue).

    So if your body is not digesting processing food (an oversimplification), it's likely burning fat. In any case, the body's means of managing energy is a complex, and amazing thing. But even with that, it cannot create its own. The energy balance is still a law of nature that we cannot violate.
  • CarvedTones
    CarvedTones Posts: 2,340 Member
    Of course it's true; if it wasn't then they wouldn't be allowed to put it on the internet, right? :laugh:
  • HoneyBadger302
    HoneyBadger302 Posts: 2,085 Member
    Calories are still going to be king.

    I chose a variation of IF that works for me, and helps keep me in a (very small) deficit regardless of if it's a normal work week, or I'm traveling for work, at the track, or at a race weekend. I chose this plan because, when I'm on the road all the time, keeping accurate calorie counts was nearly impossible. This helped keep me from gaining, and I still had a very slow loss.

    If I want to lose at an appreciable rate, however, I still need to watch calories and eat within those limits. There's no magic window of time that will overrule how much you consume when you are eating.
  • Cahgetsfit
    Cahgetsfit Posts: 1,912 Member
    Not an IF er here but I'd say that you'd still need to track what you're eating so that you don't go over your calorie goals. Coz if you do, you will get fat regardless of how many hours you fast.

    That being said, I know one woman who has very successfully been doing 5:2 IF for the last few years and she no longer really logs her food but she knows that on her very low calorie days all she can eat is like a few carrot sticks during the day and one small meal at dinner to make sure she's under the 500 cal limit (or whatever it is, i'm not sure I can't remember, she did tell me when I was asking ages ago). It's kind of become intuitive for her, but she did track it when she started. Also the non-fasting days because we all know how easy it is to go way over in calories!!!

  • Panini911
    Panini911 Posts: 2,325 Member
    LynnJ9 wrote: »
    ladystrick11 wrote: »
    I did IF twice. The first time, I lost 15 pounds in a month? The second time, I actually gained 6 pounds. IF is a bit tough for me to do as I can't function without breakfast and work an 8-5 job. That means that my window was always 7-3pm which was not optimal for me as I am a 3 square meals type gal. I think IF works best if the feeding window does not interfere with your normal feeding schedule.

    If I did IF and ate my first meal at 10:30, I could eat until 6:30 pm. If I get stuck in meetings until 7 pm, do I stop even though I may have only eaten 600 calories?

    to stop would be very unhealthy. you need to eat all your calories, if you can`t fit them in your narrow window change the window a little or eat more often within that window. or bigger meals. but to function and maintain your body you need to eat all teh calories recommended by MFP (and add exercise cals) because that is what you should eat to LOSE the weight.
  • elisa123gal
    elisa123gal Posts: 4,333 Member
    I did it for a little while and considered it a fad and quit. I think people who binge and can't control their eating find it most helpful to have a small eating window .. they are all or nothing personalities.
  • LynnJ9
    LynnJ9 Posts: 414 Member
    Panini911 wrote: »
    LynnJ9 wrote: »
    ladystrick11 wrote: »
    I did IF twice. The first time, I lost 15 pounds in a month? The second time, I actually gained 6 pounds. IF is a bit tough for me to do as I can't function without breakfast and work an 8-5 job. That means that my window was always 7-3pm which was not optimal for me as I am a 3 square meals type gal. I think IF works best if the feeding window does not interfere with your normal feeding schedule.

    If I did IF and ate my first meal at 10:30, I could eat until 6:30 pm. If I get stuck in meetings until 7 pm, do I stop even though I may have only eaten 600 calories?

    to stop would be very unhealthy. you need to eat all your calories, if you can`t fit them in your narrow window change the window a little or eat more often within that window. or bigger meals. but to function and maintain your body you need to eat all teh calories recommended by MFP (and add exercise cals) because that is what you should eat to LOSE the weight.

    Thank you. I wish my schedule would accommodate this style of eating. I know I would love to eat fewer meals with more calories.
  • nowine4me
    nowine4me Posts: 3,985 Member
    IF can be a great tool, and I do believe there are benefits to fasting (beyond weight loss). But NO, it doesn’t give you a license to eat whatever you want in the 8 hour window. You still need to be in a deficit
  • SeptemberFeyre
    SeptemberFeyre Posts: 178 Member
    The eight hour window in intermittent fasting is definitely not anything goes. For me it helps me eat less calories because three meals are put into a compact 8 hours.
  • CarvedTones
    CarvedTones Posts: 2,340 Member
    edited January 2019
    nowine4me wrote: »
    IF can be a great tool, and I do believe there are benefits to fasting (beyond weight loss). But NO, it doesn’t give you a license to eat whatever you want in the 8 hour window. You still need to be in a deficit

    I read this article:
    https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/fasting-benefits

    that makes all sorts of claims that seem suspect but they link to references. I followed a few and they are actual peer reviewed studies. Some are small and many are on animals with the assumption that it may also happen with humans. A skeptic could probably find a study that refutes the findings of each of them. It is very difficult to know what to believe.

    Bring on the woos (even though I said I am not sure whether to believe it or not). :laugh:
  • tbilly20
    tbilly20 Posts: 154 Member
    I agree with many who have said IF can contribute to weight loss, but that is only in conjunction with a negative calorie intake delta against expetiture.

    To me this seems like an unsustainable fad. Are you going to eat this way the rest of your life? My guess is no. Once you start eating at different times, for one reason or another, your “diet” has the potential to be shot.

    It seems far better to simply say you are going to stay within a certain calorie window over the whole day, and it doesn’t matter when you eat those calories.

    To me IF seems like a solution for people who want to feel hungry and weigh themselves when they have the least amount of food in their bodies. That is not real weight loss; just cheating the scale to feel better about yourself. Real improvement requires actual effort.
  • snickerscharlie
    snickerscharlie Posts: 8,578 Member
    CarvedTones wrote: »
    nowine4me wrote: »
    IF can be a great tool, and I do believe there are benefits to fasting (beyond weight loss). But NO, it doesn’t give you a license to eat whatever you want in the 8 hour window. You still need to be in a deficit

    I read this article:
    https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/fasting-benefits

    that makes all sorts of claims that seem suspect but they link to references. I followed a few and they are actual peer reviewed studies. Some are small and many are on animals with the assumption that it may also happen with humans. A skeptic could probably find a study that refutes the findings of each of them. It is very difficult to know what to believe.

    Bring on the woos (even though I said I am not sure whether to believe it or not). :laugh:

    Click-bait title of the blog: "8 Health Benefits of Fasting Backed By Science" sure is catchy, isn't it?

    If they were *truly* "backed by science" words like "could" and "may" in these apparently 'proven' benefits wouldn't exist. That should be your first clue and, imo, completely negates anything else this blog has to say. It's completely contradictory.

    Animal studies do not always translate well when replicated on humans, and the small amount of human studies noted here are extremely limited and not proof of anything at this point.

    To be clear, I've been doing IF for over 4 decades, so I'm obviously a fan. The only benefit that I've seen is that it can help me control my caloric intake for weight management. Nothing more.

    Tl;dr? The best that can be garnered from this is that there might be the potential for some benefits. Might be potential. That's it. But these theories (because, at this point, that's really all they are) need to be subjected to rigorous human trials before "8 Health Benefits of Fasting Backed By Science" has a hope of becoming anything more than just disingenuous, misleading click-bait fodder.

  • CarvedTones
    CarvedTones Posts: 2,340 Member
    snickerscharlie wrote: »
    CarvedTones wrote: »
    nowine4me wrote: »
    IF can be a great tool, and I do believe there are benefits to fasting (beyond weight loss). But NO, it doesn’t give you a license to eat whatever you want in the 8 hour window. You still need to be in a deficit

    I read this article:
    https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/fasting-benefits

    that makes all sorts of claims that seem suspect but they link to references. I followed a few and they are actual peer reviewed studies. Some are small and many are on animals with the assumption that it may also happen with humans. A skeptic could probably find a study that refutes the findings of each of them. It is very difficult to know what to believe.

    Bring on the woos (even though I said I am not sure whether to believe it or not). :laugh:

    Click-bait title of the blog: "8 Health Benefits of Fasting Backed By Science" sure is catchy, isn't it?

    If they were *truly* "backed by science" words like "could" and "may" in these apparently 'proven' benefits wouldn't exist. That should be your first clue and, imo, completely negates anything else this blog has to say. It's completely contradictory.

    Animal studies do not always translate well when replicated on humans, and the small amount of human studies noted here are extremely limited and not proof of anything at this point.

    To be clear, I've been doing IF for over 4 decades, so I'm obviously a fan. The only benefit that I've seen is that it can help me control my caloric intake for weight management. Nothing more.

    Tl;dr? The best that can be garnered from this is that there might be the potential for some benefits. Might be potential. That's it. But these theories (because, at this point, that's really all they are) need to be subjected to rigorous human trials before "8 Health Benefits of Fasting Backed By Science" has a hope of becoming anything more than just disingenuous, misleading click-bait fodder.

    It definitely bothered me that one of tier claims was increased weight loss and higher metabolism, which I think have both been pretty thoroughly debunked. The longevity claim is hard to be sure about. Lots of anecdata seems to indicate that it applies to humans to a lesser degree, but most of the examples are of people who have a lifestyle that includes abstinence from smoking and/or drinking and mental conditioning that helps them handle what little stress they have very well.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories