Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Intermittent Fasting - Is it a good idea?
Replies
-
@cemetree - I have been doing IF for about 5 years now and it had the opposite effect on me. I’m muuuuch less hungry now whereas before I was hungry all the time while eating more.
I usually eat around 1pm and stop eating around 10pm. I don’t limit myself to 2 meals. I may also have some snacks. But, I’m never hungry outside my window. Just food for thought.
1 -
Nah not for me. Food is fuel
1 -
I've read many of the benefits of IF come from letting the liver etc complete their cycle of digestion/elimination, clearing the decks so the body has a clean sheet to start again, rather than constantly being reset to start by constant snacking. I don't remember the duration of the cycle, I don't think I'm not far out putting it at 6 hours. So as long as one does not have midnight feasts and may be clears 8 to 12 hours "over night", of not eating, one can also achieve benefits. Primarily do what is right for you, in this no one else matters14
-
I ran no dinner for a while during losing weight. I eventually found it wasn't particularly helpful, and after back and forth with the research analysis on it, I felt I'd rather getting in more meals in day to get that little bit of protein synthesis going on. I'm not sure that it makes a difference to preserving or gaining muscle, but I'm very confident it won't hurt it, so I err on that side.2
-
IF has an insane amount of health benefits if done correctly. Plus it helps keep your calories down.24
-
lukejoycePT wrote: »IF has an insane amount of health benefits if done correctly. Plus it helps keep your calories down.
Not necessarily - IF is my natural eating pattern and I have lost weight, gained weight and maintained weight eating that way... it all comes down to calories in the end.9 -
I always feel that if it's not a sustainable thing, it's probably not worth doing. Int fasting is one of those I feel that you're (probably) not going to do 1, 5, 10+ years for now. I also believe it's all based on calories in and eating less for your desired outcome, not really based on fasting or not fasting for a few hours.3
-
lukejoycePT wrote: »IF has an insane amount of health benefits if done correctly. Plus it helps keep your calories down.
Not necessarily - IF is my natural eating pattern and I have lost weight, gained weight and maintained weight eating that way... it all comes down to calories in the end.
of course, i agree but i merely meant that if you are tracking calories that by not eating for the fasting window allows for the calories to be consumed later meaning it makes its easier to stick within a calorie goal.4 -
cheryldumais wrote: »Thought this was well written and wanted to hear others' thoughts on it.
https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/intermittent-fasting-guide#benefits
That is a great article on the subject.
Doing one's own n=1 trial is the only way I know to answer that question for each person.10 -
I have done the 5/2 diet in the past, and it worked for me. In fact, I'm going to start doing it again. I like the feeling of being hungry all day- makes me feel appreciative of all that I have been given. Some people are hungry every day, so for me it's also a spiritual thing. I also don't drink wine on the 2 fasting days, and I love wine. I eat no more than 500 calories on these days. Sometimes I go a little over on my normal days (I get 1350 calories) so it evens out.5
-
JohnnytotheB wrote: »I always feel that if it's not a sustainable thing, it's probably not worth doing. Int fasting is one of those I feel that you're (probably) not going to do 1, 5, 10+ years for now. I also believe it's all based on calories in and eating less for your desired outcome, not really based on fasting or not fasting for a few hours.
Why wouldn't it be sustainable? Lots of people just naturally skip breakfast and end up eating in a window that these days could be called IF.lukejoycePT wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »IF has an insane amount of health benefits if done correctly. Plus it helps keep your calories down.
Not necessarily - IF is my natural eating pattern and I have lost weight, gained weight and maintained weight eating that way... it all comes down to calories in the end.
of course, i agree but i merely meant that if you are tracking calories that by not eating for the fasting window allows for the calories to be consumed later meaning it makes its easier to stick within a calorie goal.
I would find many types of IF harder to control cals on than how I currently eat.
I eat at around 6:30, 12, and 9. This is because I like breakfast, I like having a home cooked dinner, I get home late, and I want to have as many meals at home (vs. at my office desk) as possible. I also find it easier to get in the protein, veg, and calories I want with three meals (I'll have two if I plan to have an extra big dinner, for example going out).
If I replaced my 3 meals, no snacking with a window, even a 6 hour window, and snacked freely within that window, FOR ME I'd likely eat more, feel less satisfied, and eat more poorly.
2 big homecooked meals would hypothetically work for me, but not if I have to eat one of them at my desk. Also, I enjoy breakfast and would find it easier to skip eating in the evening, but that would mean sacrificing my favorite and most social meal, dinner.
So for these reasons, I find 3 meals a day more satisfying and a better fit with my schedule. I think IF is great for those whom it works for, but I hate how the propaganda for it makes people feel like they have to mess with schedules that work for them and try to fit to some trendy way of eating to be healthy. It's too much -- on the whole people should figure out what makes it easier for THEM and that the benefits of an easy to adhere to schedule (for them) are going to supersede whatever benefits hypothetically could come from the supposedly best schedule that is being pushed (and the evidence is all over the place and not particularly compelling at this point anyway).
I think there possibly are some benefits to occasional fasting and learning that minor hunger is not an emergency. I've fasted for religious reasons and will skip breakfast when it works better for my personal schedule, as noted above.9 -
@cemetree - I have been doing IF for about 5 years now and it had the opposite effect on me. I’m muuuuch less hungry now whereas before I was hungry all the time while eating more.
I usually eat around 1pm and stop eating around 10pm. I don’t limit myself to 2 meals. I may also have some snacks. But, I’m never hungry outside my window. Just food for thought.
I think there may be individual differences (many people report not being hungry in the morning and that eating makes them hungry all day), but I think a lot of it may be habit. You think about food when you are used to eating.
I find that when I eat 3 meals, no snacking, I don't think about food between my meals (beyond maybe a hmm, what should I have for dinner type of thought). If I get out of that habit, I feel more like I want to eat all day again.4 -
JohnnytotheB wrote: »I always feel that if it's not a sustainable thing, it's probably not worth doing. Int fasting is one of those I feel that you're (probably) not going to do 1, 5, 10+ years for now. I also believe it's all based on calories in and eating less for your desired outcome, not really based on fasting or not fasting for a few hours.
Why wouldn't it be sustainable? Lots of people just naturally skip breakfast and end up eating in a window that these days could be called IF.lukejoycePT wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »IF has an insane amount of health benefits if done correctly. Plus it helps keep your calories down.
Not necessarily - IF is my natural eating pattern and I have lost weight, gained weight and maintained weight eating that way... it all comes down to calories in the end.
of course, i agree but i merely meant that if you are tracking calories that by not eating for the fasting window allows for the calories to be consumed later meaning it makes its easier to stick within a calorie goal.
I would find many types of IF harder to control cals on than how I currently eat.
I eat at around 6:30, 12, and 9. This is because I like breakfast, I like having a home cooked dinner, I get home late, and I want to have as many meals at home (vs. at my office desk) as possible. I also find it easier to get in the protein, veg, and calories I want with three meals (I'll have two if I plan to have an extra big dinner, for example going out).
If I replaced my 3 meals, no snacking with a window, even a 6 hour window, and snacked freely within that window, FOR ME I'd likely eat more, feel less satisfied, and eat more poorly.
2 big homecooked meals would hypothetically work for me, but not if I have to eat one of them at my desk. Also, I enjoy breakfast and would find it easier to skip eating in the evening, but that would mean sacrificing my favorite and most social meal, dinner.
So for these reasons, I find 3 meals a day more satisfying and a better fit with my schedule. I think IF is great for those whom it works for, but I hate how the propaganda for it makes people feel like they have to mess with schedules that work for them and try to fit to some trendy way of eating to be healthy. It's too much -- on the whole people should figure out what makes it easier for THEM and that the benefits of an easy to adhere to schedule (for them) are going to supersede whatever benefits hypothetically could come from the supposedly best schedule that is being pushed (and the evidence is all over the place and not particularly compelling at this point anyway).
I think there possibly are some benefits to occasional fasting and learning that minor hunger is not an emergency. I've fasted for religious reasons and will skip breakfast when it works better for my personal schedule, as noted above.
I completely agree, fasting isn't for everyone. Ultimately its about sustainability and happiness. Just because something is excellent for your physical health doesn't mean it is required. I disagree that it's a trend, humans have been fasting for 1000's of years.5 -
Bit of a weasel wording there. I can say anything has benefits if done correctly.lukejoycePT wrote: »IF has an insane amount of health benefits if done correctly. Plus it helps keep your calories down.
Amputating legs has insane health benefits if done correctly, e.g., when it saves someone's life because being alive is an insane health benefit compared to being dead.
The overall impression I get on IF is that there are a lot of health benefits touted that end up reducing to be the benefits that come from achieving a healthier body fat.
I'm also a bit leery of people that overly tout its benefits. I've seen shucksters like Fung claim autophagy and low protein keto means the morbidly obese can lose weight without having loose skin - that none of his patients ever have loose skin. I've yet to see him publish his remarkable finds in a dermatology journal.15 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »
Bit of a weasel wording there. I can say anything has benefits if done correctly.lukejoycePT wrote: »IF has an insane amount of health benefits if done correctly. Plus it helps keep your calories down.
Amputating legs has insane health benefits if done correctly, e.g., when it saves someone's life because being alive is an insane health benefit compared to being dead.
The overall impression I get on IF is that there are a lot of health benefits touted that end up reducing to be the benefits that come from achieving a healthier body fat.
I'm also a bit leery of people that overly tout its benefits. I've seen shucksters like Fung claim autophagy and low protein keto means the morbidly obese can lose weight without having loose skin - that none of his patients ever have loose skin. I've yet to see him publish his remarkable finds in a dermatology journal.
I don’t know what you mean by Weasel wording.. sounds like your trying to insult me but okay...
And yes is stand by if it’s done right. Fasting for a few hours is not going to give you the results required. You have to follow the protocol in order for it to kick in, that’s why when you sleep, even though you are technically fasting it’s really fasting now is it!
That’s a big leap.... Fungs claims about excess skin to fasting is BS. People have been fasting for 1000’s of years. Fung didn’t invent it.
Lastly, I use it, my clients use it and they notice a difference, lean or not.14 -
lukejoycePT wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »
Bit of a weasel wording there. I can say anything has benefits if done correctly.lukejoycePT wrote: »IF has an insane amount of health benefits if done correctly. Plus it helps keep your calories down.
Amputating legs has insane health benefits if done correctly, e.g., when it saves someone's life because being alive is an insane health benefit compared to being dead.
The overall impression I get on IF is that there are a lot of health benefits touted that end up reducing to be the benefits that come from achieving a healthier body fat.
I'm also a bit leery of people that overly tout its benefits. I've seen shucksters like Fung claim autophagy and low protein keto means the morbidly obese can lose weight without having loose skin - that none of his patients ever have loose skin. I've yet to see him publish his remarkable finds in a dermatology journal.
I don’t know what you mean by Weasel wording.. sounds like your trying to insult me but okay...
And yes is stand by if it’s done right. Fasting for a few hours is not going to give you the results required. You have to follow the protocol in order for it to kick in, that’s why when you sleep, even though you are technically fasting it’s really fasting now is it!
That’s a big leap.... Fungs claims about excess skin to fasting is BS. People have been fasting for 1000’s of years. Fung didn’t invent it.
Lastly, I use it, my clients use it and they notice a difference, lean or not.
Counting calories to maintain a deficit for a few hours won't yield results either, but if done correctly...people will also notice a difference...
On the 1000s of years thing...I've seen that brought up a few times. I think there's a huge difference between choosing to fast today in the midst of an over abundance of food, and the forced fasts our ancestors endured due to the fact that, well, they had to fight and kill their food, or it would eat them occasionally, ya know? 6 -
I try to fast between 11PM and 6AM the following morning.
This seems to work well for me.22 -
lukejoycePT wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »
Bit of a weasel wording there. I can say anything has benefits if done correctly.lukejoycePT wrote: »IF has an insane amount of health benefits if done correctly. Plus it helps keep your calories down.
Amputating legs has insane health benefits if done correctly, e.g., when it saves someone's life because being alive is an insane health benefit compared to being dead.
The overall impression I get on IF is that there are a lot of health benefits touted that end up reducing to be the benefits that come from achieving a healthier body fat.
I'm also a bit leery of people that overly tout its benefits. I've seen shucksters like Fung claim autophagy and low protein keto means the morbidly obese can lose weight without having loose skin - that none of his patients ever have loose skin. I've yet to see him publish his remarkable finds in a dermatology journal.
I don’t know what you mean by Weasel wording.. sounds like your trying to insult me but okay...
And yes is stand by if it’s done right. Fasting for a few hours is not going to give you the results required. You have to follow the protocol in order for it to kick in, that’s why when you sleep, even though you are technically fasting it’s really fasting now is it!
That’s a big leap.... Fungs claims about excess skin to fasting is BS. People have been fasting for 1000’s of years. Fung didn’t invent it.
Lastly, I use it, my clients use it and they notice a difference, lean or not.
My understanding is "weasel wording" is using ambiguous or vague wording that would essentially be true in all circumstances but make what you're saying sound authoritative. It's an advertising term. By saying "when done correctly" it puts you in a place where if anyone claims the strategy didn't work for them, you can just say "well, you probably weren't doing it correctly".
I find this stuff fascinating, but why would our bodies be programmed to start working better after a specific number of hours of fasting had passed? What would be the evolutionary advantage to making us pass up food in a world where, if we wait too long, there might not be food available at that point and we would risk going too long without food? It would be like the Universe asking us to play chicken!15 -
Keep in mind IF doesn't always mean skipping breakfast. I do 16:8 but I do eat breakfast and stop eating by 4pm. I'm very hungry in the morning after my workout and not as hungry in the evenings. You can plan your meals around the schedule that works best for you.10
-
magnusthenerd wrote: »
Bit of a weasel wording there. I can say anything has benefits if done correctly.lukejoycePT wrote: »IF has an insane amount of health benefits if done correctly. Plus it helps keep your calories down.
Amputating legs has insane health benefits if done correctly, e.g., when it saves someone's life because being alive is an insane health benefit compared to being dead.
The overall impression I get on IF is that there are a lot of health benefits touted that end up reducing to be the benefits that come from achieving a healthier body fat.
I'm also a bit leery of people that overly tout its benefits. I've seen shucksters like Fung claim autophagy and low protein keto means the morbidly obese can lose weight without having loose skin - that none of his patients ever have loose skin. I've yet to see him publish his remarkable finds in a dermatology journal.
The weasel wording also is kind of preposterous if you view it in a different light. Eg. "not eating (fasting) if done correctly." How does one not eat correctly for a period of hours? And what would the incorrect way look like vs. the correct way?8 -
Well I could have asked if correctly is an analytic or synthetic truth, but that seems to get even less understanding from people.lukejoycePT wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »
Bit of a weasel wording there. I can say anything has benefits if done correctly.lukejoycePT wrote: »IF has an insane amount of health benefits if done correctly. Plus it helps keep your calories down.
Amputating legs has insane health benefits if done correctly, e.g., when it saves someone's life because being alive is an insane health benefit compared to being dead.
The overall impression I get on IF is that there are a lot of health benefits touted that end up reducing to be the benefits that come from achieving a healthier body fat.
I'm also a bit leery of people that overly tout its benefits. I've seen shucksters like Fung claim autophagy and low protein keto means the morbidly obese can lose weight without having loose skin - that none of his patients ever have loose skin. I've yet to see him publish his remarkable finds in a dermatology journal.
I don’t know what you mean by Weasel wording.. sounds like your trying to insult me but okay...
And yes is stand by if it’s done right. Fasting for a few hours is not going to give you the results required. You have to follow the protocol in order for it to kick in, that’s why when you sleep, even though you are technically fasting it’s really fasting now is it!
That’s a big leap.... Fungs claims about excess skin to fasting is BS. People have been fasting for 1000’s of years. Fung didn’t invent it.
Lastly, I use it, my clients use it and they notice a difference, lean or not.
I understand the term has a connotation of dishonesty because that is one of the more common reasons to call something weasel words. It just means putting a qualifier on something that acts as an escape clause.
Like saying "we can get there on time, if we're just fast enough" - well sure, by definition, there is always a fast enough that will get there on time for any time greater than 0. In such a case, "fast enough" is a weasel word - a lot of people would not accept it when it is used to implie breaking the speed limit, or traveling faster than 186,000 miles per second.
I didn't say Fung invented IF. He's just making far reaching claims with it. With friends like that, people that want IF taken seriously should make modest claims.5 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »
Doing one's own n=1 trial is the only way I know to answer that question for each person.
I agree.9 -
pierinifitness wrote: »I have an issue with it suggesting that IF inherently "causes" weight loss; you still need a caloric deficit. Just because someone skips breakfast doesn't guarantee a deficit.
I fail to see where the article suggested that IF inherently causes weight loss. What is said was "intermittent fasting can help you lose weight and belly fat, without having to consciously restrict calories." I believe this is a true statement for many who have given IF a fair shot. Having fewer hours to eat can effectively result in eating less without the need to count calories. This was my experience during Lent 2009, the first time I tested the IF waters I didn't count calories. I did during my most recent OMAD experience only because I'm now in disciplined calorie counting mode even in maintenance.
Actually, I lost more weight during Lent 2009 not counting calories than I did during my recent experience.
Now some people here will repeatedly say how they gained weight doing IF which I believe takes binging and mindlessly eating excessively. For those people, they have food issues that IF isn't a tool to address.
My two cents.
I don't think it necessarily takes binge eating or mindlessly eating. Most people aren't particularly calorie aware. I used to never eat breakfast or consume anything other than coffee until lunch time and I slowly gained 40 Lbs over 8 years effectively doing IF. I certainly wasn't binge eating or just mindlessly eating all kinds of foods. I had lunch, a couple afternoon snacks, and dinner. I also drank more regular soda than I do now. It's not too difficult to be a bit over your calorie requirements even if you're doing IF, especially if you were a sedentary desk jockey like myself. My average gain was about 5 Lbs per year.11 -
Hungry_Shopgirl wrote: »I find it interesting that for a lot of people IF=skipping breakfast. Breakfast is my favorite meal of the day so when I IF I stop eating by 4, so I skip dinner and the eat-all-the-sweet-snacks-before-bed danger zone. Fasting between 4pm and 7ish the next morning works best for me. I love that I can feel very full midday, make sure I get all my nutrition and cals in, and then forget about food for the rest of the day. I have more time too now that I'm only prepping and cleaning basically 2 meals a day.
I would wager that for many, if not most, dinner is a family event type of thing whereas breakfast is more of a you do you kind of thing while everyone is getting ready for work and school and whatnot rather than a sit down together and have a meal kind of thing. Probably for most, dinner is the only meal of the day that is eaten together as a family.7 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »pierinifitness wrote: »I have an issue with it suggesting that IF inherently "causes" weight loss; you still need a caloric deficit. Just because someone skips breakfast doesn't guarantee a deficit.
I fail to see where the article suggested that IF inherently causes weight loss. What is said was "intermittent fasting can help you lose weight and belly fat, without having to consciously restrict calories." I believe this is a true statement for many who have given IF a fair shot. Having fewer hours to eat can effectively result in eating less without the need to count calories. This was my experience during Lent 2009, the first time I tested the IF waters I didn't count calories. I did during my most recent OMAD experience only because I'm now in disciplined calorie counting mode even in maintenance.
Actually, I lost more weight during Lent 2009 not counting calories than I did during my recent experience.
Now some people here will repeatedly say how they gained weight doing IF which I believe takes binging and mindlessly eating excessively. For those people, they have food issues that IF isn't a tool to address.
My two cents.
I don't think it necessarily takes binge eating or mindlessly eating. Most people aren't particularly calorie aware. I used to never eat breakfast or consume anything other than coffee until lunch time and I slowly gained 40 Lbs over 8 years effectively doing IF. I certainly wasn't binge eating or just mindlessly eating all kinds of foods. I had lunch, a couple afternoon snacks, and dinner. I also drank more regular soda than I do now. It's not too difficult to be a bit over your calorie requirements even if you're doing IF, especially if you were a sedentary desk jockey like myself. My average gain was about 5 Lbs per year.
To use this as an example and applying math to the example - 5 lbs in a year is an extra 17,500 calories (approximately) for the year (3500 calories per pound multiplied by 5 lbs). Sounds like a lot, right? So break it down - 17,500 calories in a year is an extra 48 calories a day (17,500 / 365) above their maintenance calories.
I don't know of anybody outside of @pierinifitness who would call 48 calories a day a binge or mindless eating or even a very minor eating disorder.16 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »
Bit of a weasel wording there. I can say anything has benefits if done correctly.lukejoycePT wrote: »IF has an insane amount of health benefits if done correctly. Plus it helps keep your calories down.
Amputating legs has insane health benefits if done correctly, e.g., when it saves someone's life because being alive is an insane health benefit compared to being dead.
The overall impression I get on IF is that there are a lot of health benefits touted that end up reducing to be the benefits that come from achieving a healthier body fat.
I'm also a bit leery of people that overly tout its benefits. I've seen shucksters like Fung claim autophagy and low protein keto means the morbidly obese can lose weight without having loose skin - that none of his patients ever have loose skin. I've yet to see him publish his remarkable finds in a dermatology journal.
The weasel wording also is kind of preposterous if you view it in a different light. Eg. "not eating (fasting) if done correctly." How does one not eat correctly for a period of hours? And what would the incorrect way look like vs. the correct way?
This is all getting a little out of hand. IF protocols typically sit around the 16 hour fast windows or 24 - 48 hour fasts. Anything under 10 (I think) is regarded as less affective. I admit I’m not sure as to why but would hazard a guess that this is the time it takes to fully digest all food and allow the body adequate time to complete the beneficial processes in the stomach, liver and other areas.
Some people would say even drinking black coffee is breaking a fast as the liver has to produce enzymes to break down the caffeine etc.
I find it strange that on these forums everyone is solely focused on calories which is just one piece of this whole puzzle.19 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »pierinifitness wrote: »I have an issue with it suggesting that IF inherently "causes" weight loss; you still need a caloric deficit. Just because someone skips breakfast doesn't guarantee a deficit.
I fail to see where the article suggested that IF inherently causes weight loss. What is said was "intermittent fasting can help you lose weight and belly fat, without having to consciously restrict calories." I believe this is a true statement for many who have given IF a fair shot. Having fewer hours to eat can effectively result in eating less without the need to count calories. This was my experience during Lent 2009, the first time I tested the IF waters I didn't count calories. I did during my most recent OMAD experience only because I'm now in disciplined calorie counting mode even in maintenance.
Actually, I lost more weight during Lent 2009 not counting calories than I did during my recent experience.
Now some people here will repeatedly say how they gained weight doing IF which I believe takes binging and mindlessly eating excessively. For those people, they have food issues that IF isn't a tool to address.
My two cents.
I don't think it necessarily takes binge eating or mindlessly eating. Most people aren't particularly calorie aware. I used to never eat breakfast or consume anything other than coffee until lunch time and I slowly gained 40 Lbs over 8 years effectively doing IF. I certainly wasn't binge eating or just mindlessly eating all kinds of foods. I had lunch, a couple afternoon snacks, and dinner. I also drank more regular soda than I do now. It's not too difficult to be a bit over your calorie requirements even if you're doing IF, especially if you were a sedentary desk jockey like myself. My average gain was about 5 Lbs per year.
To use this as an example and applying math to the example - 5 lbs in a year is an extra 17,500 calories (approximately) for the year (3500 calories per pound multiplied by 5 lbs). Sounds like a lot, right? So break it down - 17,500 calories in a year is an extra 48 calories a day (17,500 / 365) above their maintenance calories.
I don't know of anybody outside of @pierinifitness who would call 48 calories a day a binge or mindless eating or even a very minor eating disorder.
It was so slow that it was also very easy to just ignore and chalk it up to getting older too. I never really felt fat and my self perception was that I hadn't really changed much over the years...then I saw a picture of myself that my mom took at a family function and I was like, "whoa!!!...I got fat"7 -
lukejoycePT wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »
Bit of a weasel wording there. I can say anything has benefits if done correctly.lukejoycePT wrote: »IF has an insane amount of health benefits if done correctly. Plus it helps keep your calories down.
Amputating legs has insane health benefits if done correctly, e.g., when it saves someone's life because being alive is an insane health benefit compared to being dead.
The overall impression I get on IF is that there are a lot of health benefits touted that end up reducing to be the benefits that come from achieving a healthier body fat.
I'm also a bit leery of people that overly tout its benefits. I've seen shucksters like Fung claim autophagy and low protein keto means the morbidly obese can lose weight without having loose skin - that none of his patients ever have loose skin. I've yet to see him publish his remarkable finds in a dermatology journal.
I don’t know what you mean by Weasel wording.. sounds like your trying to insult me but okay...
And yes is stand by if it’s done right. Fasting for a few hours is not going to give you the results required. You have to follow the protocol in order for it to kick in, that’s why when you sleep, even though you are technically fasting it’s really fasting now is it!
That’s a big leap.... Fungs claims about excess skin to fasting is BS. People have been fasting for 1000’s of years. Fung didn’t invent it.
Lastly, I use it, my clients use it and they notice a difference, lean or not.
I find this stuff fascinating, but why would our bodies be programmed to start working better after a specific number of hours of fasting had passed? What would be the evolutionary advantage to making us pass up food in a world where, if we wait too long, there might not be food available at that point and we would risk going too long without food? It would be like the Universe asking us to play chicken!
It is important to bring up that fasting has been done for 1000’s of years because from a evolutionary point of view we are conditioned to live quite comfortably without food for long periods of time. It has been shown that after a certain time of non eating your body suddenly switches to its hunter gatherer mode and you find yourself more alert with improved cognitive performance. This was purely so we can could hunt food more efficiently. But it also made room for other functions that body intakes when in a fasted stay.
remember breakfast hasn’t been something we’ve done for long.. after all it was invented by companies trying to sell us food. People who say they can’t do it are not really being honest with themselves, a more accurate reply would be, I don’t want to because I enjoy eating breakfast.
There are so many things the body does and improves when I’m a state of discomfort. Half our issues today are based on the fact we don’t make ourselves uncomfortable. We sit for far too long. Everything is too convenient. Even down to having hot water.22 -
I also skip dinner, and stop eating by 3pm at the latest every day. I really enjoy being able to eat 2 larger meals, as opposed to 3+ small ones, and find for me that I am no longer feeling deprived, or thinking about food all the time.4
-
lukejoycePT wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »
Bit of a weasel wording there. I can say anything has benefits if done correctly.lukejoycePT wrote: »IF has an insane amount of health benefits if done correctly. Plus it helps keep your calories down.
Amputating legs has insane health benefits if done correctly, e.g., when it saves someone's life because being alive is an insane health benefit compared to being dead.
The overall impression I get on IF is that there are a lot of health benefits touted that end up reducing to be the benefits that come from achieving a healthier body fat.
I'm also a bit leery of people that overly tout its benefits. I've seen shucksters like Fung claim autophagy and low protein keto means the morbidly obese can lose weight without having loose skin - that none of his patients ever have loose skin. I've yet to see him publish his remarkable finds in a dermatology journal.
I don’t know what you mean by Weasel wording.. sounds like your trying to insult me but okay...
And yes is stand by if it’s done right. Fasting for a few hours is not going to give you the results required. You have to follow the protocol in order for it to kick in, that’s why when you sleep, even though you are technically fasting it’s really fasting now is it!
That’s a big leap.... Fungs claims about excess skin to fasting is BS. People have been fasting for 1000’s of years. Fung didn’t invent it.
Lastly, I use it, my clients use it and they notice a difference, lean or not.
I find this stuff fascinating, but why would our bodies be programmed to start working better after a specific number of hours of fasting had passed? What would be the evolutionary advantage to making us pass up food in a world where, if we wait too long, there might not be food available at that point and we would risk going too long without food? It would be like the Universe asking us to play chicken!
It is important to bring up that fasting has been done for 1000’s of years because from a evolutionary point of view we are conditioned to live quite comfortably without food for long periods of time. It has been shown that after a certain time of non eating your body suddenly switches to its hunter gatherer mode and you find yourself more alert with improved cognitive performance. This was purely so we can could hunt food more efficiently. But it also made room for other functions that body intakes when in a fasted stay.
remember breakfast hasn’t been something we’ve done for long.. after all it was invented by companies trying to sell us food. People who say they can’t do it are not really being honest with themselves, a more accurate reply would be, I don’t want to because I enjoy eating breakfast.
There are so many things the body does and improves when I’m a state of discomfort. Half our issues today are based on the fact we don’t make ourselves uncomfortable. We sit for far too long. Everything is too convenient. Even down to having hot water.
See now I've got to bow out of this because you've lost me completely. Your body suddenly switches to "hunter gatherer mode"? People who say they can't skip breakfast are not being honest? I feel confident people ate a morning meal before there were food companies. Unless you can show me some amazing sources that anthropogists and medical researchers I know have never seen, or wow me with the various degrees you've earned that led you to those conclusions, of course. Have a great day.21
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
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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