Calorie Counter

You are currently viewing the message boards in:

Intermittent Fasting - Is it a good idea?

1234568

Replies

  • valeriedayresvaleriedayres Posts: 1Member Member Posts: 1Member Member
    I started IF about 2 months ago and I love it. Dinner is usually between 6 and 8pm (we're more flexible with our schedule in the summer), I wake at 5/6am, workout almost daily, 30min to 2 hours depending on my schedule, and break-fast between 10am and 1pm. I try to listen to my body's hunger cues and some days I can go longer than others. I always have coffee and water prior to my first meal. I don't find that my workout performance has been compromised in any way not do I experience any sort of brain fog, it's quite the opposite actually! I highly recommend!
  • J72FITJ72FIT Posts: 5,289Member Member Posts: 5,289Member Member
    Oddly enough, I usually eat my last meal (a dessert) between 9pm - 10pm. I wake up at 5am and don't usually have breakfast until after I've trained at around 9am - 10am. So I have gone 12 hours without eating as it stands...
  • magnusthenerdmagnusthenerd Posts: 797Member Member Posts: 797Member 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 dont feel anything about it, in fact I don’t care. Anything in the universe has it’s positives and negative outcomes. I’ve not come across anything that doesn’t. This doesn’t effect my that’s for sure

    Personally I do 16:8 Sunday to Friday
    Calorie/ carb cycling
    And on Saturdays I fill my boots.

    Lost 16lbs in 6.5 months doing that.
    Never get tired in the gym.
    Increased strength every week.
    Lost fat every week.
    Don’t feel like i am begrudging myself of treats. So I’ve not experienced any decrease in anything like that yet. But it’s totally possible.

    Love how you focus on the negatives tho.

    So how do you feel about this cited study:
    ^ Moro, Tatiana, Grant Tinsley, Antonino Bianco, Giuseppe Marcolin, Quirico Francesco Pacelli, Giuseppe Battaglia, Antonio Palma, Paulo Gentil, Marco Neri, and Antonio Paoli. Effects of eight weeks of time-restricted feeding (16/8) on basal metabolism, maximal strength, body composition, inflammation, and cardiovascular risk factors in resistance-trained males Journal of Translational Medicine 14, no. 1 (October 2016).

    In particular, how do you feel about TRF lowering Total Testosterone and IGF-1 significantly?
    My recollection was you said something like IF was superior for everything. Now you're saying everything is just trade offs?

    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.
  • J72FITJ72FIT Posts: 5,289Member Member Posts: 5,289Member 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...
  • pierinifitnesspierinifitness Posts: 2,345Member, Premium Member Posts: 2,345Member, Premium Member
    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.

    edited July 23
  • lukejoycePTlukejoycePT Posts: 149Member, Premium Member Posts: 149Member, Premium Member
    Yeh well like I said, we don’t agree on those points.
    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.

    My lower free testosterone is a consequence of my fitness goals - hard to say that it directly impacts them as it isn't separable from being in a deficit while at a lower body fat percentage - I'll be getting a DEXA next week, but I'm guessing I'm around 8% based on prior scans. So currently both limit me to only maintaining strength and lean mass, rather than gaining.
    In terms of wellness goals? Well, I don't know that I have a goal about it, but I do have some psychological / physiological changes that I do notice, probably more prominent in a way because I was above 15% last year, and I think around there is an inflection point where testosterone peaks while in the 12-15% range. Though the changes that feel odd to me about single digits would probably put me more in the average range anyway.

    The YMMV is about where I put a lot of nutrition and health science. Even well evidence positions are going to report a mean, and there's no guarantee a person is in the mean of responders. That's also why I end up with qualms about the over-touting I tend to see about IF, particularly from the gurus.

    Just last weekend I happened to see multiple videos on YouTube, including one from an MD (sadly), claiming skin removal surgery is a sham and you can just fix loose skin from massive weight loss by doing IF. It is a shame that people have to take a strategy for setting up a deficit that helps some psychologically, and try to sell it as a miracle.

    Sadly, I’ve seen this “info” ages ago, it just throws bad shade to IF. Excess skin is not something you can avoid if you are very over weight. No matter how you look at it IF is a positive thing for someone to try in their attempt at a healthy lifestyle change.

    What we can agree on...

    1. IF or no IF you will lose weight if you eat in a calorie deficit
    2. IF or no IF eat the right amount of protein and you will see minimal muscle loss ( if you resistance train you may see an increase)
    3. IF or no IF, consistency is key and if you stick with something long enough you’ll see the results required.

    Things we don’t agree on...
    1. IF helps reduce inflammation in the body
    2. IF helps burn more fat than conventional methods
    3. IF helps those with hormonal issues
    4. IF helps with the regeneration and clearing of dead cell from the body
    5. IF allows the gut to heal and produce a better, balanced microbiome
    6. IF fights aging, other diseases etc.
    7. Is the most beneficial method of eating because of the above.

    We can argue these issues all day but we can agree it will make no difference. I respect your opinion. I don’t agree with it.

    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.

Sign In or Register to comment.