Viewing the message boards in:
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?

Options
12346»

Replies

  • Posts: 1,207 Member
    I still stand by that. I still believe it is a superior method of eating.

    Conventional eating patterns negate many of the benefits of fasting. You could argue this all day but all eating patterns have their drawbacks. Ultimately the amount of benifits that appear to be gained from IF over a little dip in testosterone (which you will find with any prolonged dieting) make it superior.

    If you stay in a deficit long enough to get below double digits of body fat (for me) then you will see a dip in testosterone anyway so I don’t really see how that makes any difference

    I'm well aware, I just got tested at a 628 ng/dL total but 88 ng/dL bioavailable T. In relative terms, my total T is in the 90th percentile for my age, even into the top quarter if compared to the peak age of 19 year olds, but my biovailable is between the average of men in their 70s, and men in their 80s.
    Which is why I find it a bit curious that they collected measure of free testosterone per the protocol, but they did not report it at all.

    And while I likely am in the single digits, the subjects were losing I think 2.3 kg in an 8 (or was it 12) week study...

    It seems a rather different footing to be saying now IF is the diet of the best compromises. I'd say all diets are compromises on something, and it will be a matter of individual preferences and desires that determines the best diet - that is impossible to say IF is necessarily going to be superior, as individuals are individuals.
  • Posts: 6,067 Member
    I'd say all diets are compromises on something, and it will be a matter of individual preferences and desires that determines the best diet

    Hit the nail on the head...
  • Posts: 2,226 Member
    edited July 2019
    Testosterone impacts things besides strength. When I get towards single digit BF%, strength changes aren't what I initially notice about the changes in testosterone.

    Do you feel failing to report free testosterone, particularly given it looks like they collected it, was not a design issue?

    You don't feel there was a problem with no preliminary maintenance period? The loss seems to be because the IF group wasn't eating at maintenance when developing their base diet. Yet without a preliminary maintenance period, the researchers suggested adiponectin increased activity was behind the weight loss.
    Like, I'm not sure what is interesting that people in a slight deficit that stayed in it lost a small about of weight

    Sorry for my belated reply to your post.

    Never thought about it, your comment about them failing to report free testosterone. Haven't read the study in a while, maybe I'll go back and review it.

    Testosterone isn't the panacea of optimum male health, it's one of several markers and yes I understand the significance of free testosterone in relation to total testosterone. Years ago, I spent some time studying testosterone to better understand my readings. Estradiol and SBGH lab results are also relevant measures. A client physician recently told me that you've got to look at lab results in totality and that when you place a greater emphasis on a single measure, you're evaluation is short-sighted. I agree. I'm not a science type in fact my claim to fame is that I dodged science classes in high school and college but I've read to know more in the context of my health.

    Has your lower free testosterone adversely impacted you achieving your fitness, health and wellness goals? I doubt it.

    Never thought about your comment about no preliminary maintenance period.

    It's easy to punch holes in all research studies. It's something we all do. I'm comfortable doing my n=1 evaluations of diet and exercise and what they do for my body and have decided IF is a valuable tool in my fitness, health and wellness toolbox. I don't think it's the best for all but it's the best for me. Your mileage may vary.

    Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

  • Posts: 182 Member
    Yeh well like I said, we don’t agree on those points.

    1. I generally think trying to reduce inflammation simpliciter is a bad dietary goal. Almost anytime someone uses inflammation in a generic sense, I'm leery of what they're about to try to sell. Just for example, inflammation is actually seems part of the process involved in muscle building - if my goal is increasing muscle, it seems I don't want to reduce that inflammation, do I?
    2. Too strong a claim - I'd be fine with it can help, but I guarantee there are individuals that if you put them on IF, they're going to burn less. I believe the strongest proposed advantage in this regard is hypothesized as an increase in movement that happens when fasting. If that is the actual advantage, that's something a person can train themselves to do - just move around more.
    3. Again, this is the kind of claim that I'd go with it can help. Say someone's hormonal issues is hypoglycemia - I'm thinking this really isn't a way to help that problem.
    4. I'm skeptical of claims of there being a greater beneficial autophagy claim above what happens with weight loss in general.
    5. I'd say nobody could make that claim because there isn't enough research yet to say what a better, balanced microbiome is. Frankly, I'm very skeptical that microbiome is actually causative in health and not just a marker of health.
    6. Alright, where's the telomere data for IFers then?
    7. Again, this isn't the kind of claim one can make universally. It could accomplish every thing one of the above but if it has adherence problems for someone, a diet that elicits adherence and puts the person in a healthy weight category is one I'd predict produces better health marker outcomes.

  • Posts: 182 Member
    Again like I said we don’t agree so...
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    The problem is claiming that IF is superior because of alleged "helps reduce inflammation" and the rest leads to the question "compared to what?" -- any way of eating that is not IF? Very unlikely. Some other ways of eating that are likely not the norm or not the norm among health conscious people? Maybe, but you might do better focusing on other things (like food choice or amount) vs. timing.

    Certainly with things like inflammation and microbiome, to pick just a couple, food choice is likely much more significant. From what I've read of the anti aging folk (whom I am skeptical of, but whatever), daily IF is seen as less of an issue than occasional fasting (which means different things, could be weekly 24 hours, could be rarer occasional fasts) plus a beneficial diet (i.e., lower protein, lots of veg, among other things).

    So again I think the focus on "eating in a window" as the OneTrueThing is really odd.

  • Posts: 215 Member
    I do a 14/10 IF...I don’t think it really has an impact on my body that differs from when I was not doing this, as I’m still eating the same amount of calories and the same foods. I enjoy eating larger meals in shorter time frames personally.

    I think the one benefit to my IF is that having the fast schedule gets me to bed sooner and gets me a better, longer night of sleep, which was a huge issue for me before. And, I just think it’s because my food is on a schedule, so at 9:30 pm when I begin my fast, I’m also thinking bedtime is an hour away. So, I think just forcing a schedule on an eating gets me to force a schedule on my sleeping...

    So while I feel more energetic, productive, and healthy when I moved to IF, I think that’s due to having a more regimented schedule and sleeping consistently and more during this time.
  • Posts: 1,894 Member
    mmapags wrote: »

    Objective data as opposed to hucksters YouTube videos. Nice work!

    BTW, I've seen the video posted above before. A thought that went through my mind while viewing it was, "would you buy a used car from this guy?" But that's just me...

    No lol - no judgement though! :D
  • Posts: 1,207 Member
    So what might surprise some as coming from me, a positive study for IF - although the study's results were actually negative - as in no difference.

    In a study of women following TRF (the literature term for most forms of IF) during resistance training, it was found that there was no difference in hypertrophy outcomes between TRF and non-TRF.
    https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ajcn/nqz126/5527779

    I'm interested to see if there will be any more studies like this. I don't know how well I could do IF during maintenance, but it would be nice to see it isn't worth concerning myself about getting spaced out protein feedings.
  • Posts: 23 Member
    It works well for me lost 20 lbs in the last three months, I will keep going........
This discussion has been closed.