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.
Please help with this argument- Intermittent fasting related
Replies
-
It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
That's not true. That there's no monetary cost for IF doesn't mean there is no cost. You yourself have indicated it was costing you recovery.
If someone said to you "look, here's thing X. I have no research that it works, but I like to feel it does, you should try it - oh btw it might screw up your exercise routine and blow your whole training week this week", how would you feel about them suggesting it and saying "oh, and best part it costs nothing!"?
Beyond training, I have listened to dieticians that feel IF can lead people towards binge behaviors.7 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
That's not true. That there's no monetary cost for IF doesn't mean there is no cost. You yourself have indicated it was costing you recovery.
If someone said to you "look, here's thing X. I have no research that it works, but I like to feel it does, you should try it - oh btw it might screw up your exercise routine and blow your whole training week this week", how would you feel about them suggesting it and saying "oh, and best part it costs nothing!"?
Beyond training, I have listened to dieticians that feel IF can lead people towards binge behaviors.
To be fair though isn't that true of anyway of eating? Weighing and calorie counting can also cause eating disorders. My son joined this site a few years ago...tried calorie counting. He ended up under eating and then binging which he had never done before. He had to quit. He also can not do IF/TRE because he would spend his time waiting to eat and then eat during the whole window. The only thing that seems to work for him is portion control and staying active.
5 -
-
No, not while being fair. Asking it "to be fair" gives a connotation they're equally likely. A person could be on any way of eating and end up developing an eating disorder. That's different than saying it is a behavior that leads to it. I've listened to dietitians actually discuss concerns with the actual eating patterns of IF being a recreation of bingeing cycles. There is a type of binge called an objective binge - while a subjective binge is about feelings, objective binges have requirements about time and calories. Almost anyone practicing OMAD meets the calories and time window for an objective binge incident.magnusthenerd wrote: »It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
That's not true. That there's no monetary cost for IF doesn't mean there is no cost. You yourself have indicated it was costing you recovery.
If someone said to you "look, here's thing X. I have no research that it works, but I like to feel it does, you should try it - oh btw it might screw up your exercise routine and blow your whole training week this week", how would you feel about them suggesting it and saying "oh, and best part it costs nothing!"?
Beyond training, I have listened to dieticians that feel IF can lead people towards binge behaviors.
To be fair though isn't that true of anyway of eating? Weighing and calorie counting can also cause eating disorders. My son joined this site a few years ago...tried calorie counting. He ended up under eating and then binging which he had never done before. He had to quit. He also can not do IF/TRE because he would spend his time waiting to eat and then eat during the whole window. The only thing that seems to work for him is portion control and staying active.4 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
That's not true. That there's no monetary cost for IF doesn't mean there is no cost. You yourself have indicated it was costing you recovery.
If someone said to you "look, here's thing X. I have no research that it works, but I like to feel it does, you should try it - oh btw it might screw up your exercise routine and blow your whole training week this week", how would you feel about them suggesting it and saying "oh, and best part it costs nothing!"?
Beyond training, I have listened to dieticians that feel IF can lead people towards binge behaviors.
It wasn’t costing me anything lol. It stopped being a suitable plan based on the changes to my workout schedule. I didn’t force myself to stick to a plan that was no longer working and jeapordize my fitness progress as you implied. I stopped IF. No cost.
To your other points -
1. There is research and it is mostly promising and positive but it isn’t enough to be conclusive
2. IF does not have to ruin anyone’s training schedule. Most can workout around their eating window, does your training schedule get ruined if you skip a meal? It stopped working for me personally because I run in the morning and do another workout most evenings, but that’s just me personally and I did not continue the plan at that point so I find the question silly and overly argumentative
3. I’m a recovering bulimic. When I did IF it in no way triggered my past disordered thinking.
It’s not for you. That’s great! But to be so determined to prove it is for no one is wrong.2 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »
Most people might - most people are also ignorant of how inapplicable rodent research is - and it is less applicable when it comes to diet than cancer.It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
A lot of people here on MFP, particularly in the debate section understand this about rodent studies. If you posted cancer cure research on rats here, it would probably get some "ah, interesting", not "well we have a cure".
The “ah, interesting” and maybe a “we should study this more” was exactly the response I had hoped for and expected from this community when I posted the IF study where the men showed some health improvements despite zero change in weight. No one was looking for a “we found a cure” or “it’s magic” response.3 -
It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
To the bolded: Actually, no.
Speaking as survivor of advanced cancer, and someone who has followed research fairly closely as a consequence, I would not react that way at all.
Overwhelmingly, most "promising" drug trials in vitro or in animals come to naught, or are found to be positively dangerous. I don't want a quick progression to human trials; I think the current US process overall is pretty good (with various stages of trials, proceeding from repeated/successful in vitro, to repeated/successful animal trials, to safety trials in the most extreme populations (frankly, people who are likely to die soon anyway), to trials about dosage and side effects, and finally to double-blind trials (if at all possible) comparing the new drugs to the most effective current treatments. This takes quite a while. Sometimes people die who could've benefitted . . . in the rare cases where the drug proves out. And other lives are saved by not putting out some dangerous treatment before the evidence is in.
And I certainly would not be advocating that people around me try some new treatment, or telling people that they will experience definite, specific benefits, based on an early animal trial and not much else.
The difference here is that IF is (in most healthy people) likely to be harmless at worst, so there's no reason not to try it, if it sounds doable for a particular person. It's still the case, IMO, that advocating that IF has definite, specific benefits based on a mouse study and one's n=1 experience, is not a reasonable thing to do.
I have any number of health practices that I think work well for me, and that are likely to be harmless in any relatively healthy person, that I don't try to tell other people will assuredly have the benefits I seek from them, because the proof just isn't there. If I over-advocate for things, beyond where the science sits in my best understanding, I make the whole body of people who do what I do look like we're dishonest or lacking in insight. That doesn't make converts. IMO, the most effective advocate is the one who tells the balanced story as best they are able.
Further, I've frequently described my oddball health practices on threads here, pointing out why I'm trying them, why I think they're safe (with any conditions I know of, if there are any), being very clear that there's no proof (or limited evidence) and that it's speculative. I can't recall every being attacked for these oddball views; at most sometimes people have asked questions about my thinking, and I've answered. NBD. Sometimes they say they don't want to try those things, because reasons. Also NBD.
I'd also note that - even though I personally wouldn't consider IF at this stage because it wouldn't suit me at all - I have suggested it on threads as something other people might want to try, if they think it might help them.
Eventually, there may be sound evidence that IF has the benefits its early advocates expect of it, in humans. We aren't there yet.
But no one said that others should try it or that they would experience “definite” benefits. You’re getting ahead of yourself there. People ONLY pointed out that there is some promising research around potential health benefits that aren’t limited to weight loss.
My mother survived stage 3 colon cancer. I had skin cancer found very early and eliminated in a single procedure. I would be excited to see something new being explored and researched because that’s how advancement is made. It all has to start somewhere.
Just my two cents
I'd suggest that attributing looking younger after weight loss without caveats/qualifications, to doing IF would be attributing "definite" benefits to it. JMO, though.
I know that you didn't make that attribution. I should've been more clear that I was responding to you on the research study aspect, and to the thread overall with some of the rest of the post. Apologies for that unclarity. :flowerforyou:
Weight loss made me look older 🤷♀️
5 -
It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
To the bolded: Actually, no.
Speaking as survivor of advanced cancer, and someone who has followed research fairly closely as a consequence, I would not react that way at all.
Overwhelmingly, most "promising" drug trials in vitro or in animals come to naught, or are found to be positively dangerous. I don't want a quick progression to human trials; I think the current US process overall is pretty good (with various stages of trials, proceeding from repeated/successful in vitro, to repeated/successful animal trials, to safety trials in the most extreme populations (frankly, people who are likely to die soon anyway), to trials about dosage and side effects, and finally to double-blind trials (if at all possible) comparing the new drugs to the most effective current treatments. This takes quite a while. Sometimes people die who could've benefitted . . . in the rare cases where the drug proves out. And other lives are saved by not putting out some dangerous treatment before the evidence is in.
And I certainly would not be advocating that people around me try some new treatment, or telling people that they will experience definite, specific benefits, based on an early animal trial and not much else.
The difference here is that IF is (in most healthy people) likely to be harmless at worst, so there's no reason not to try it, if it sounds doable for a particular person. It's still the case, IMO, that advocating that IF has definite, specific benefits based on a mouse study and one's n=1 experience, is not a reasonable thing to do.
I have any number of health practices that I think work well for me, and that are likely to be harmless in any relatively healthy person, that I don't try to tell other people will assuredly have the benefits I seek from them, because the proof just isn't there. If I over-advocate for things, beyond where the science sits in my best understanding, I make the whole body of people who do what I do look like we're dishonest or lacking in insight. That doesn't make converts. IMO, the most effective advocate is the one who tells the balanced story as best they are able.
Further, I've frequently described my oddball health practices on threads here, pointing out why I'm trying them, why I think they're safe (with any conditions I know of, if there are any), being very clear that there's no proof (or limited evidence) and that it's speculative. I can't recall every being attacked for these oddball views; at most sometimes people have asked questions about my thinking, and I've answered. NBD. Sometimes they say they don't want to try those things, because reasons. Also NBD.
I'd also note that - even though I personally wouldn't consider IF at this stage because it wouldn't suit me at all - I have suggested it on threads as something other people might want to try, if they think it might help them.
Eventually, there may be sound evidence that IF has the benefits its early advocates expect of it, in humans. We aren't there yet.
But no one said that others should try it or that they would experience “definite” benefits. You’re getting ahead of yourself there. People ONLY pointed out that there is some promising research around potential health benefits that aren’t limited to weight loss.
My mother survived stage 3 colon cancer. I had skin cancer found very early and eliminated in a single procedure. I would be excited to see something new being explored and researched because that’s how advancement is made. It all has to start somewhere.
Just my two cents
I'd suggest that attributing looking younger after weight loss without caveats/qualifications, to doing IF would be attributing "definite" benefits to it. JMO, though.
I know that you didn't make that attribution. I should've been more clear that I was responding to you on the research study aspect, and to the thread overall with some of the rest of the post. Apologies for that unclarity. :flowerforyou:
Weight loss made me look older 🤷♀️
Me, too. My wrinkles are no longer plumped out.
Still wouldn't trade it for anything.6 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
That's not true. That there's no monetary cost for IF doesn't mean there is no cost. You yourself have indicated it was costing you recovery.
If someone said to you "look, here's thing X. I have no research that it works, but I like to feel it does, you should try it - oh btw it might screw up your exercise routine and blow your whole training week this week", how would you feel about them suggesting it and saying "oh, and best part it costs nothing!"?
Beyond training, I have listened to dieticians that feel IF can lead people towards binge behaviors.
To be fair though isn't that true of anyway of eating? Weighing and calorie counting can also cause eating disorders. My son joined this site a few years ago...tried calorie counting. He ended up under eating and then binging which he had never done before. He had to quit. He also can not do IF/TRE because he would spend his time waiting to eat and then eat during the whole window. The only thing that seems to work for him is portion control and staying active.
I wanted to add one more thing to this before leaving the conversation only because binging was brought up. As someone in recovery for binge/purge cycles (bulimia) I did find IF helpful. While I had no big improvements to my health outside of weight loss it did help me to plan my meals and to associate my larger evening meal differently to break the binge cycle. My big dinner provides about half of my calories and nutrients for the day and is always pre-planned carefully.
Speaking only for myself, when carefully planning my food in a smaller window of time for the day the compulsion was eliminated. It helped me to be more mindful and intentional about what I consumed in my large evening meal. Before that when I had tried smaller meals through out the day I never felt satisfied and still struggled with binging every evening.
When I did IF my food window was strictly 2-10pm. I’ve never eaten breakfast and eating too early makes me feel ill so it came naturally. I’d have a large meal at 2pm, a snack around 5, then a large dinner at 7 or 8 followed by a treat before bed. When I stopped doing IF I moved my 2pm meal up to around 10-11am, I run at 7am and am starving a few hours after. On days I don’t run I still usually wait until 1-2pm to eat my first meal. I also still only eat a snack before my evening workout since I can’t workout on a full stomach and save my largest meal for after. I will probably always be a two meal a day eater. It works better for me. Large meals leave me more satisfied and I stay within my calories easier. It doesn’t trigger my past eating disorder nor had it cost me anything. A lot of people eat like this who have never heard of 16:8 or IF6 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
That's not true. That there's no monetary cost for IF doesn't mean there is no cost. You yourself have indicated it was costing you recovery.
If someone said to you "look, here's thing X. I have no research that it works, but I like to feel it does, you should try it - oh btw it might screw up your exercise routine and blow your whole training week this week", how would you feel about them suggesting it and saying "oh, and best part it costs nothing!"?
Beyond training, I have listened to dieticians that feel IF can lead people towards binge behaviors.
It wasn’t costing me anything lol. It stopped being a suitable plan based on the changes to my workout schedule. I didn’t force myself to stick to a plan that was no longer working and jeapordize my fitness progress as you implied. I stopped IF. No cost.
That there was no cost to you doesn't mean that being told it's very important or better to a significant amount to use IF vs other, easier schedules is not problematic for others. And I disagree that no one was claiming it's best for everyone. I recall many comments in the various threads to that effect, as well as ones suggesting a moral virtue to that way of eating vs. others, or people claiming health detriments from other ways of eating.
Re:1. There is research and it is mostly promising and positive but it isn’t enough to be conclusive
The research I've seen is all over the place. Some shows no positive effects, some shows there may be some (but it might differ depending on the people involved), some show negative effects from some ways of doing it (i.e., eating most calories late), some show that the benefits are likely associated with circadian rhythms, so different from how most think of it, etc. It's possible there may prove to be some effects beyond it making it easier for some to limit cals, but I think we are far from there, and I seriously doubt that the effects will turn out to be such that they apply to all or outweigh using the schedule that you find works best with your lifestyle. I'm in favor of research, though, just not premature claims about what it shows.2. IF does not have to ruin anyone’s training schedule. Most can workout around their eating window, does your training schedule get ruined if you skip a meal? It stopped working for me personally because I run in the morning and do another workout most evenings, but that’s just me personally and I did not continue the plan at that point so I find the question silly and overly argumentative
I feel better and am less likely to overeat later if I eat breakfast after a morning run. From my reading of the research, the most promising form of IF is eating earlier in the day -- skipping dinner rather than breakfast -- so most days my workout schedule wouldn't be a problem (I sometimes swim after work and it would be then). However, dinner is the meal I most enjoy cooking and eating at home and usually the meal I eat with others, and sacrificing it for a bigger (but more rushed) breakfast and a bigger lunch eaten alone at work wouldn't work for me at all. Obviously this doesn't apply to all, but it's a real consideration for many.3. I’m a recovering bulimic. When I did IF it in no way triggered my past disordered thinking.
That doesn't mean it wouldn't for others.It’s not for you. That’s great! But to be so determined to prove it is for no one is wrong.
I haven't seen anyone saying it's not for anyone. I have seen people challenging the notion that it's the best way of eating, period, or that it's more healthy in general or that it's ideal for all.
I probably do it around 2-3 days a week (not on purpose, just because that fits my schedule on those days). I don't do the pattern that seems most promising from the research, I skip breakfast (easy for me if I don't run in the morning), workout later in the day, and have lunch and an earlier than normal dinner (often a larger lunch or dinner). I have my own preferred schedule on other days (3 meals, no snacking) and I do find the schedule I choose makes it easier or harder for me, so I can see how IF would make it easier (or in some cases harder) for others. So I think trying it is great if it seems appealing and I believe those who claim it helped them. I don't believe it's something that should be promoted as the best way for all or inherently better than other ways of eating, or something all need to try to do if they can, etc. And again, that's what I think the disagreements typically are about on these threads.5 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
That's not true. That there's no monetary cost for IF doesn't mean there is no cost. You yourself have indicated it was costing you recovery.
If someone said to you "look, here's thing X. I have no research that it works, but I like to feel it does, you should try it - oh btw it might screw up your exercise routine and blow your whole training week this week", how would you feel about them suggesting it and saying "oh, and best part it costs nothing!"?
Beyond training, I have listened to dieticians that feel IF can lead people towards binge behaviors.
It wasn’t costing me anything lol. It stopped being a suitable plan based on the changes to my workout schedule. I didn’t force myself to stick to a plan that was no longer working and jeapordize my fitness progress as you implied. I stopped IF. No cost.
That there was no cost to you doesn't mean that being told it's very important or better to a significant amount to use IF vs other, easier schedules is not problematic for others. And I disagree that no one was claiming it's best for everyone. I recall many comments in the various threads to that effect, as well as ones suggesting a moral virtue to that way of eating vs. others, or people claiming health detriments from other ways of eating.
Re:1. There is research and it is mostly promising and positive but it isn’t enough to be conclusive
The research I've seen is all over the place. Some shows no positive effects, some shows there may be some (but it might differ depending on the people involved), some show negative effects from some ways of doing it (i.e., eating most calories late), some show that the benefits are likely associated with circadian rhythms, so different from how most think of it, etc. It's possible there may prove to be some effects beyond it making it easier for some to limit cals, but I think we are far from there, and I seriously doubt that the effects will turn out to be such that they apply to all or outweigh using the schedule that you find works best with your lifestyle. I'm in favor of research, though, just not premature claims about what it shows.2. IF does not have to ruin anyone’s training schedule. Most can workout around their eating window, does your training schedule get ruined if you skip a meal? It stopped working for me personally because I run in the morning and do another workout most evenings, but that’s just me personally and I did not continue the plan at that point so I find the question silly and overly argumentative
I feel better and am less likely to overeat later if I eat breakfast after a morning run. From my reading of the research, the most promising form of IF is eating earlier in the day -- skipping dinner rather than breakfast -- so most days my workout schedule wouldn't be a problem (I sometimes swim after work and it would be then). However, dinner is the meal I most enjoy cooking and eating at home and usually the meal I eat with others, and sacrificing it for a bigger (but more rushed) breakfast and a bigger lunch eaten alone at work wouldn't work for me at all. Obviously this doesn't apply to all, but it's a real consideration for many.3. I’m a recovering bulimic. When I did IF it in no way triggered my past disordered thinking.
That doesn't mean it wouldn't for others.It’s not for you. That’s great! But to be so determined to prove it is for no one is wrong.
I haven't seen anyone saying it's not for anyone. I have seen people challenging the notion that it's the best way of eating, period, or that it's more healthy in general or that it's ideal for all.
I probably do it around 2-3 days a week (not on purpose, just because that fits my schedule on those days). I don't do the pattern that seems most promising from the research, I skip breakfast (easy for me if I don't run in the morning), workout later in the day, and have lunch and an earlier than normal dinner (often a larger lunch or dinner). I have my own preferred schedule on other days (3 meals, no snacking) and I do find the schedule I choose makes it easier or harder for me, so I can see how IF would make it easier (or in some cases harder) for others. So I think trying it is great if it seems appealing and I believe those who claim it helped them. I don't believe it's something that should be promoted as the best way for all or inherently better than other ways of eating, or something all need to try to do if they can, etc. And again, that's what I think the disagreements typically are about on these threads.
The person I responded to in that reply was saying it was dangerous and suggesting people should not do it - hence not for anyone.
2 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »
No, not while being fair. Asking it "to be fair" gives a connotation they're equally likely. A person could be on any way of eating and end up developing an eating disorder. That's different than saying it is a behavior that leads to it. I've listened to dietitians actually discuss concerns with the actual eating patterns of IF being a recreation of bingeing cycles. There is a type of binge called an objective binge - while a subjective binge is about feelings, objective binges have requirements about time and calories. Almost anyone practicing OMAD meets the calories and time window for an objective binge incident.magnusthenerd wrote: »It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
That's not true. That there's no monetary cost for IF doesn't mean there is no cost. You yourself have indicated it was costing you recovery.
If someone said to you "look, here's thing X. I have no research that it works, but I like to feel it does, you should try it - oh btw it might screw up your exercise routine and blow your whole training week this week", how would you feel about them suggesting it and saying "oh, and best part it costs nothing!"?
Beyond training, I have listened to dieticians that feel IF can lead people towards binge behaviors.
To be fair though isn't that true of anyway of eating? Weighing and calorie counting can also cause eating disorders. My son joined this site a few years ago...tried calorie counting. He ended up under eating and then binging which he had never done before. He had to quit. He also can not do IF/TRE because he would spend his time waiting to eat and then eat during the whole window. The only thing that seems to work for him is portion control and staying active.
Okay...not a problem...
0 -
Think what you want and feel free to not do IF or anything else you don't believe in. Interesting that the anti-IF crowd are so bothered by it. If you don't believe in it why do you care so much about it?
I don't think there are people bothered by IF, it's more when wild claims are made about certain WOE's. In this case I'll go with.....because you said it slows aging based off of the "guess your age thread".... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯10 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
That's not true. That there's no monetary cost for IF doesn't mean there is no cost. You yourself have indicated it was costing you recovery.
If someone said to you "look, here's thing X. I have no research that it works, but I like to feel it does, you should try it - oh btw it might screw up your exercise routine and blow your whole training week this week", how would you feel about them suggesting it and saying "oh, and best part it costs nothing!"?
Beyond training, I have listened to dieticians that feel IF can lead people towards binge behaviors.
It wasn’t costing me anything lol. It stopped being a suitable plan based on the changes to my workout schedule. I didn’t force myself to stick to a plan that was no longer working and jeapordize my fitness progress as you implied. I stopped IF. No cost.
That there was no cost to you doesn't mean that being told it's very important or better to a significant amount to use IF vs other, easier schedules is not problematic for others. And I disagree that no one was claiming it's best for everyone. I recall many comments in the various threads to that effect, as well as ones suggesting a moral virtue to that way of eating vs. others, or people claiming health detriments from other ways of eating.
Re:1. There is research and it is mostly promising and positive but it isn’t enough to be conclusive
The research I've seen is all over the place. Some shows no positive effects, some shows there may be some (but it might differ depending on the people involved), some show negative effects from some ways of doing it (i.e., eating most calories late), some show that the benefits are likely associated with circadian rhythms, so different from how most think of it, etc. It's possible there may prove to be some effects beyond it making it easier for some to limit cals, but I think we are far from there, and I seriously doubt that the effects will turn out to be such that they apply to all or outweigh using the schedule that you find works best with your lifestyle. I'm in favor of research, though, just not premature claims about what it shows.2. IF does not have to ruin anyone’s training schedule. Most can workout around their eating window, does your training schedule get ruined if you skip a meal? It stopped working for me personally because I run in the morning and do another workout most evenings, but that’s just me personally and I did not continue the plan at that point so I find the question silly and overly argumentative
I feel better and am less likely to overeat later if I eat breakfast after a morning run. From my reading of the research, the most promising form of IF is eating earlier in the day -- skipping dinner rather than breakfast -- so most days my workout schedule wouldn't be a problem (I sometimes swim after work and it would be then). However, dinner is the meal I most enjoy cooking and eating at home and usually the meal I eat with others, and sacrificing it for a bigger (but more rushed) breakfast and a bigger lunch eaten alone at work wouldn't work for me at all. Obviously this doesn't apply to all, but it's a real consideration for many.3. I’m a recovering bulimic. When I did IF it in no way triggered my past disordered thinking.
That doesn't mean it wouldn't for others.It’s not for you. That’s great! But to be so determined to prove it is for no one is wrong.
I haven't seen anyone saying it's not for anyone. I have seen people challenging the notion that it's the best way of eating, period, or that it's more healthy in general or that it's ideal for all.
I probably do it around 2-3 days a week (not on purpose, just because that fits my schedule on those days). I don't do the pattern that seems most promising from the research, I skip breakfast (easy for me if I don't run in the morning), workout later in the day, and have lunch and an earlier than normal dinner (often a larger lunch or dinner). I have my own preferred schedule on other days (3 meals, no snacking) and I do find the schedule I choose makes it easier or harder for me, so I can see how IF would make it easier (or in some cases harder) for others. So I think trying it is great if it seems appealing and I believe those who claim it helped them. I don't believe it's something that should be promoted as the best way for all or inherently better than other ways of eating, or something all need to try to do if they can, etc. And again, that's what I think the disagreements typically are about on these threads.
The person I responded to in that reply was saying it was dangerous and suggesting people should not do it - hence not for anyone.
I've been reading that poster on this topic for a while now, and I don't think that's what he believes. Here, what he said is that there can be costs for trying it for some. And just as some claim there is some research that indicates positive effects (like I said, I agree, but some indicates no positive effects and some indicates negative effects too, it's all over the place and often depends on the specifics of the people involved and the type of IF), he noted that some dieticians are concerned that IF can lead people [presumably some people] towards binge behaviors."
So I don't think he was saying it is not for anyone. In fact, from other posts I'm positive it wasn't.4 -
Seven pages over wether or not to eat breakfast...9
-
-
magnusthenerd wrote: »It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
That's not true. That there's no monetary cost for IF doesn't mean there is no cost. You yourself have indicated it was costing you recovery.
If someone said to you "look, here's thing X. I have no research that it works, but I like to feel it does, you should try it - oh btw it might screw up your exercise routine and blow your whole training week this week", how would you feel about them suggesting it and saying "oh, and best part it costs nothing!"?
Beyond training, I have listened to dieticians that feel IF can lead people towards binge behaviors.
It wasn’t costing me anything lol. It stopped being a suitable plan based on the changes to my workout schedule. I didn’t force myself to stick to a plan that was no longer working and jeapordize my fitness progress as you implied. I stopped IF. No cost.
To your other points -
1. There is research and it is mostly promising and positive but it isn’t enough to be conclusive
2. IF does not have to ruin anyone’s training schedule. Most can workout around their eating window, does your training schedule get ruined if you skip a meal? It stopped working for me personally because I run in the morning and do another workout most evenings, but that’s just me personally and I did not continue the plan at that point so I find the question silly and overly argumentative
3. I’m a recovering bulimic. When I did IF it in no way triggered my past disordered thinking.
It’s not for you. That’s great! But to be so determined to prove it is for no one is wrong.
You don't value your performance? If you value it and IF was making it worse, that means IF had a cost to you. If you changed your workout schedule because it was better, you are signalling that it was costing you something. IF was a trade-off you couldn't afford.
To the enumerated points (thank, I tend to like that format)
1. I think you missed my earlier point. When two out of three studies show no effect, that's not promising, that's actually likely to be a statistical anomaly, particularly given the bias against publishing negative results in science.
2. It would really depend on the schedule. Some people train multiple sessions a day, best spaced far apart because of competing modalities such as people doing endurance and strength/hypertrophy training. IF would obviously not work well with such schedules. Again, that one could make it work with a schedule doesn't mean the act of making it work is not a cost. I get the impression that you just want to narrow the concept of cost to something more like monetary to be "silly and overly argumentative". I'm not saying costs mean something isn't worth paying the cost for, so you don't need to fight the term cost being applied. Calorie-counting has a cost. Training has a cost.
3. Okay, good for you, and? I know of heroin addicts that take heroin again without triggering addiction spirals. I don't think it follows taking heroin isn't a problematic behavior for people with or even without a history of heroin use.
I don't even know where you came up with I'm determined to prove IF is wrong every one. Look over the thread, find one spot where I said that, or something that could paraphrase to that. I also doubt you could find me ever saying there shouldn't be more research on it. I don't think you'll ever find me in a position disagreeing with the idea of more research - science is never done, and I do enjoy science. I have dozens of studies I'd like to see happen somewhere out in diet and exercise physiology research. You know what is really "overly argumentative"? Assigning people positions they don't hold. I use to skip breakfast. Heck, when I started losing weight, I alternate day fasted as an eating pattern. In terms of did I lose weight, yes it was working for me.
I think if you look through the board there should be at least one if not multiple posts where I've said it can be fine as a psychological method for some people to generate a calorie deficit.
I take great umbrage at people over selling it. Not so much on this board, but I personally have a certain moral disgust for people like Dr. Fung who are profiting off lying and overselling to people.magnusthenerd wrote: »
Most people might - most people are also ignorant of how inapplicable rodent research is - and it is less applicable when it comes to diet than cancer.It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
A lot of people here on MFP, particularly in the debate section understand this about rodent studies. If you posted cancer cure research on rats here, it would probably get some "ah, interesting", not "well we have a cure".
The “ah, interesting” and maybe a “we should study this more” was exactly the response I had hoped for and expected from this community when I posted the IF study where the men showed some health improvements despite zero change in weight. No one was looking for a “we found a cure” or “it’s magic” response.
See my previous stance on research of all kinds.
Case in point, take a look at this comment in a prior thread on IF. I think you'll have a more productive discussion with me viewing me as an interlocutor interested in truth, over a debate - I take debate more for moral issues. I think debating empirical facts with a vested opinion is silly and good way to end up holding false beliefs. I try to hold less and less wrong beliefs:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/comment/44042940/#Comment_440429406 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
That's not true. That there's no monetary cost for IF doesn't mean there is no cost. You yourself have indicated it was costing you recovery.
If someone said to you "look, here's thing X. I have no research that it works, but I like to feel it does, you should try it - oh btw it might screw up your exercise routine and blow your whole training week this week", how would you feel about them suggesting it and saying "oh, and best part it costs nothing!"?
Beyond training, I have listened to dieticians that feel IF can lead people towards binge behaviors.
It wasn’t costing me anything lol. It stopped being a suitable plan based on the changes to my workout schedule. I didn’t force myself to stick to a plan that was no longer working and jeapordize my fitness progress as you implied. I stopped IF. No cost.
To your other points -
1. There is research and it is mostly promising and positive but it isn’t enough to be conclusive
2. IF does not have to ruin anyone’s training schedule. Most can workout around their eating window, does your training schedule get ruined if you skip a meal? It stopped working for me personally because I run in the morning and do another workout most evenings, but that’s just me personally and I did not continue the plan at that point so I find the question silly and overly argumentative
3. I’m a recovering bulimic. When I did IF it in no way triggered my past disordered thinking.
It’s not for you. That’s great! But to be so determined to prove it is for no one is wrong.
You don't value your performance? If you value it and IF was making it worse, that means IF had a cost to you. If you changed your workout schedule because it was better, you are signalling that it was costing you something. IF was a trade-off you couldn't afford.
To the enumerated points (thank, I tend to like that format)
1. I think you missed my earlier point. When two out of three studies show no effect, that's not promising, that's actually likely to be a statistical anomaly, particularly given the bias against publishing negative results in science.
2. It would really depend on the schedule. Some people train multiple sessions a day, best spaced far apart because of competing modalities such as people doing endurance and strength/hypertrophy training. IF would obviously not work well with such schedules. Again, that one could make it work with a schedule doesn't mean the act of making it work is not a cost. I get the impression that you just want to narrow the concept of cost to something more like monetary to be "silly and overly argumentative". I'm not saying costs mean something isn't worth paying the cost for, so you don't need to fight the term cost being applied. Calorie-counting has a cost. Training has a cost.
3. Okay, good for you, and? I know of heroin addicts that take heroin again without triggering addiction spirals. I don't think it follows taking heroin isn't a problematic behavior for people with or even without a history of heroin use.
I don't even know where you came up with I'm determined to prove IF is wrong every one. Look over the thread, find one spot where I said that, or something that could paraphrase to that. I also doubt you could find me ever saying there shouldn't be more research on it. I don't think you'll ever find me in a position disagreeing with the idea of more research - science is never done, and I do enjoy science. I have dozens of studies I'd like to see happen somewhere out in diet and exercise physiology research. You know what is really "overly argumentative"? Assigning people positions they don't hold. I use to skip breakfast. Heck, when I started losing weight, I alternate day fasted as an eating pattern. In terms of did I lose weight, yes it was working for me.
I think if you look through the board there should be at least one if not multiple posts where I've said it can be fine as a psychological method for some people to generate a calorie deficit.
I take great umbrage at people over selling it. Not so much on this board, but I personally have a certain moral disgust for people like Dr. Fung who are profiting off lying and overselling to people.magnusthenerd wrote: »
Most people might - most people are also ignorant of how inapplicable rodent research is - and it is less applicable when it comes to diet than cancer.It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
A lot of people here on MFP, particularly in the debate section understand this about rodent studies. If you posted cancer cure research on rats here, it would probably get some "ah, interesting", not "well we have a cure".
The “ah, interesting” and maybe a “we should study this more” was exactly the response I had hoped for and expected from this community when I posted the IF study where the men showed some health improvements despite zero change in weight. No one was looking for a “we found a cure” or “it’s magic” response.
See my previous stance on research of all kinds.
Case in point, take a look at this comment in a prior thread on IF. I think you'll have a more productive discussion with me viewing me as an interlocutor interested in truth, over a debate - I take debate more for moral issues. I think debating empirical facts with a vested opinion is silly and good way to end up holding false beliefs. I try to hold less and less wrong beliefs:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/comment/44042940/#Comment_44042940
It in no way affected my performance. If you had read my posts completely you’d know that. When I switched my training and got more hungry I stopped IF.
I’m done with this thread now. The condescending personal attacks are beyond what I’m willing to deal with, especially on a support site.4 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
That's not true. That there's no monetary cost for IF doesn't mean there is no cost. You yourself have indicated it was costing you recovery.
If someone said to you "look, here's thing X. I have no research that it works, but I like to feel it does, you should try it - oh btw it might screw up your exercise routine and blow your whole training week this week", how would you feel about them suggesting it and saying "oh, and best part it costs nothing!"?
Beyond training, I have listened to dieticians that feel IF can lead people towards binge behaviors.
It wasn’t costing me anything lol. It stopped being a suitable plan based on the changes to my workout schedule. I didn’t force myself to stick to a plan that was no longer working and jeapordize my fitness progress as you implied. I stopped IF. No cost.
To your other points -
1. There is research and it is mostly promising and positive but it isn’t enough to be conclusive
2. IF does not have to ruin anyone’s training schedule. Most can workout around their eating window, does your training schedule get ruined if you skip a meal? It stopped working for me personally because I run in the morning and do another workout most evenings, but that’s just me personally and I did not continue the plan at that point so I find the question silly and overly argumentative
3. I’m a recovering bulimic. When I did IF it in no way triggered my past disordered thinking.
It’s not for you. That’s great! But to be so determined to prove it is for no one is wrong.
You don't value your performance? If you value it and IF was making it worse, that means IF had a cost to you. If you changed your workout schedule because it was better, you are signalling that it was costing you something. IF was a trade-off you couldn't afford.
To the enumerated points (thank, I tend to like that format)
1. I think you missed my earlier point. When two out of three studies show no effect, that's not promising, that's actually likely to be a statistical anomaly, particularly given the bias against publishing negative results in science.
2. It would really depend on the schedule. Some people train multiple sessions a day, best spaced far apart because of competing modalities such as people doing endurance and strength/hypertrophy training. IF would obviously not work well with such schedules. Again, that one could make it work with a schedule doesn't mean the act of making it work is not a cost. I get the impression that you just want to narrow the concept of cost to something more like monetary to be "silly and overly argumentative". I'm not saying costs mean something isn't worth paying the cost for, so you don't need to fight the term cost being applied. Calorie-counting has a cost. Training has a cost.
3. Okay, good for you, and? I know of heroin addicts that take heroin again without triggering addiction spirals. I don't think it follows taking heroin isn't a problematic behavior for people with or even without a history of heroin use.
I don't even know where you came up with I'm determined to prove IF is wrong every one. Look over the thread, find one spot where I said that, or something that could paraphrase to that. I also doubt you could find me ever saying there shouldn't be more research on it. I don't think you'll ever find me in a position disagreeing with the idea of more research - science is never done, and I do enjoy science. I have dozens of studies I'd like to see happen somewhere out in diet and exercise physiology research. You know what is really "overly argumentative"? Assigning people positions they don't hold. I use to skip breakfast. Heck, when I started losing weight, I alternate day fasted as an eating pattern. In terms of did I lose weight, yes it was working for me.
I think if you look through the board there should be at least one if not multiple posts where I've said it can be fine as a psychological method for some people to generate a calorie deficit.
I take great umbrage at people over selling it. Not so much on this board, but I personally have a certain moral disgust for people like Dr. Fung who are profiting off lying and overselling to people.magnusthenerd wrote: »
Most people might - most people are also ignorant of how inapplicable rodent research is - and it is less applicable when it comes to diet than cancer.It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
A lot of people here on MFP, particularly in the debate section understand this about rodent studies. If you posted cancer cure research on rats here, it would probably get some "ah, interesting", not "well we have a cure".
The “ah, interesting” and maybe a “we should study this more” was exactly the response I had hoped for and expected from this community when I posted the IF study where the men showed some health improvements despite zero change in weight. No one was looking for a “we found a cure” or “it’s magic” response.
See my previous stance on research of all kinds.
Case in point, take a look at this comment in a prior thread on IF. I think you'll have a more productive discussion with me viewing me as an interlocutor interested in truth, over a debate - I take debate more for moral issues. I think debating empirical facts with a vested opinion is silly and good way to end up holding false beliefs. I try to hold less and less wrong beliefs:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/comment/44042940/#Comment_44042940
It in no way affected my performance. If you had read my posts completely you’d know that. When I switched my training and got more hungry I stopped IF.
I’m done with this thread now. The condescending personal attacks are beyond what I’m willing to deal with, especially on a support site.
I saw no attacks, let alone personal ones?10 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
That's not true. That there's no monetary cost for IF doesn't mean there is no cost. You yourself have indicated it was costing you recovery.
If someone said to you "look, here's thing X. I have no research that it works, but I like to feel it does, you should try it - oh btw it might screw up your exercise routine and blow your whole training week this week", how would you feel about them suggesting it and saying "oh, and best part it costs nothing!"?
Beyond training, I have listened to dieticians that feel IF can lead people towards binge behaviors.
It wasn’t costing me anything lol. It stopped being a suitable plan based on the changes to my workout schedule. I didn’t force myself to stick to a plan that was no longer working and jeapordize my fitness progress as you implied. I stopped IF. No cost.
To your other points -
1. There is research and it is mostly promising and positive but it isn’t enough to be conclusive
2. IF does not have to ruin anyone’s training schedule. Most can workout around their eating window, does your training schedule get ruined if you skip a meal? It stopped working for me personally because I run in the morning and do another workout most evenings, but that’s just me personally and I did not continue the plan at that point so I find the question silly and overly argumentative
3. I’m a recovering bulimic. When I did IF it in no way triggered my past disordered thinking.
It’s not for you. That’s great! But to be so determined to prove it is for no one is wrong.
You don't value your performance? If you value it and IF was making it worse, that means IF had a cost to you. If you changed your workout schedule because it was better, you are signalling that it was costing you something. IF was a trade-off you couldn't afford.
To the enumerated points (thank, I tend to like that format)
1. I think you missed my earlier point. When two out of three studies show no effect, that's not promising, that's actually likely to be a statistical anomaly, particularly given the bias against publishing negative results in science.
2. It would really depend on the schedule. Some people train multiple sessions a day, best spaced far apart because of competing modalities such as people doing endurance and strength/hypertrophy training. IF would obviously not work well with such schedules. Again, that one could make it work with a schedule doesn't mean the act of making it work is not a cost. I get the impression that you just want to narrow the concept of cost to something more like monetary to be "silly and overly argumentative". I'm not saying costs mean something isn't worth paying the cost for, so you don't need to fight the term cost being applied. Calorie-counting has a cost. Training has a cost.
3. Okay, good for you, and? I know of heroin addicts that take heroin again without triggering addiction spirals. I don't think it follows taking heroin isn't a problematic behavior for people with or even without a history of heroin use.
I don't even know where you came up with I'm determined to prove IF is wrong every one. Look over the thread, find one spot where I said that, or something that could paraphrase to that. I also doubt you could find me ever saying there shouldn't be more research on it. I don't think you'll ever find me in a position disagreeing with the idea of more research - science is never done, and I do enjoy science. I have dozens of studies I'd like to see happen somewhere out in diet and exercise physiology research. You know what is really "overly argumentative"? Assigning people positions they don't hold. I use to skip breakfast. Heck, when I started losing weight, I alternate day fasted as an eating pattern. In terms of did I lose weight, yes it was working for me.
I think if you look through the board there should be at least one if not multiple posts where I've said it can be fine as a psychological method for some people to generate a calorie deficit.
I take great umbrage at people over selling it. Not so much on this board, but I personally have a certain moral disgust for people like Dr. Fung who are profiting off lying and overselling to people.magnusthenerd wrote: »
Most people might - most people are also ignorant of how inapplicable rodent research is - and it is less applicable when it comes to diet than cancer.It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
A lot of people here on MFP, particularly in the debate section understand this about rodent studies. If you posted cancer cure research on rats here, it would probably get some "ah, interesting", not "well we have a cure".
The “ah, interesting” and maybe a “we should study this more” was exactly the response I had hoped for and expected from this community when I posted the IF study where the men showed some health improvements despite zero change in weight. No one was looking for a “we found a cure” or “it’s magic” response.
See my previous stance on research of all kinds.
Case in point, take a look at this comment in a prior thread on IF. I think you'll have a more productive discussion with me viewing me as an interlocutor interested in truth, over a debate - I take debate more for moral issues. I think debating empirical facts with a vested opinion is silly and good way to end up holding false beliefs. I try to hold less and less wrong beliefs:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/comment/44042940/#Comment_44042940
It in no way affected my performance. If you had read my posts completely you’d know that. When I switched my training and got more hungry I stopped IF.
I’m done with this thread now. The condescending personal attacks are beyond what I’m willing to deal with, especially on a support site.
I saw no attacks, let alone personal ones?
Totally agree. On a couple of these types of comments I've wondered whether I'm reading the same thread that the person who posts them is.6 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
That's not true. That there's no monetary cost for IF doesn't mean there is no cost. You yourself have indicated it was costing you recovery.
If someone said to you "look, here's thing X. I have no research that it works, but I like to feel it does, you should try it - oh btw it might screw up your exercise routine and blow your whole training week this week", how would you feel about them suggesting it and saying "oh, and best part it costs nothing!"?
Beyond training, I have listened to dieticians that feel IF can lead people towards binge behaviors.
It wasn’t costing me anything lol. It stopped being a suitable plan based on the changes to my workout schedule. I didn’t force myself to stick to a plan that was no longer working and jeapordize my fitness progress as you implied. I stopped IF. No cost.
To your other points -
1. There is research and it is mostly promising and positive but it isn’t enough to be conclusive
2. IF does not have to ruin anyone’s training schedule. Most can workout around their eating window, does your training schedule get ruined if you skip a meal? It stopped working for me personally because I run in the morning and do another workout most evenings, but that’s just me personally and I did not continue the plan at that point so I find the question silly and overly argumentative
3. I’m a recovering bulimic. When I did IF it in no way triggered my past disordered thinking.
It’s not for you. That’s great! But to be so determined to prove it is for no one is wrong.
You don't value your performance? If you value it and IF was making it worse, that means IF had a cost to you. If you changed your workout schedule because it was better, you are signalling that it was costing you something. IF was a trade-off you couldn't afford.
To the enumerated points (thank, I tend to like that format)
1. I think you missed my earlier point. When two out of three studies show no effect, that's not promising, that's actually likely to be a statistical anomaly, particularly given the bias against publishing negative results in science.
2. It would really depend on the schedule. Some people train multiple sessions a day, best spaced far apart because of competing modalities such as people doing endurance and strength/hypertrophy training. IF would obviously not work well with such schedules. Again, that one could make it work with a schedule doesn't mean the act of making it work is not a cost. I get the impression that you just want to narrow the concept of cost to something more like monetary to be "silly and overly argumentative". I'm not saying costs mean something isn't worth paying the cost for, so you don't need to fight the term cost being applied. Calorie-counting has a cost. Training has a cost.
3. Okay, good for you, and? I know of heroin addicts that take heroin again without triggering addiction spirals. I don't think it follows taking heroin isn't a problematic behavior for people with or even without a history of heroin use.
I don't even know where you came up with I'm determined to prove IF is wrong every one. Look over the thread, find one spot where I said that, or something that could paraphrase to that. I also doubt you could find me ever saying there shouldn't be more research on it. I don't think you'll ever find me in a position disagreeing with the idea of more research - science is never done, and I do enjoy science. I have dozens of studies I'd like to see happen somewhere out in diet and exercise physiology research. You know what is really "overly argumentative"? Assigning people positions they don't hold. I use to skip breakfast. Heck, when I started losing weight, I alternate day fasted as an eating pattern. In terms of did I lose weight, yes it was working for me.
I think if you look through the board there should be at least one if not multiple posts where I've said it can be fine as a psychological method for some people to generate a calorie deficit.
I take great umbrage at people over selling it. Not so much on this board, but I personally have a certain moral disgust for people like Dr. Fung who are profiting off lying and overselling to people.magnusthenerd wrote: »
Most people might - most people are also ignorant of how inapplicable rodent research is - and it is less applicable when it comes to diet than cancer.It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
A lot of people here on MFP, particularly in the debate section understand this about rodent studies. If you posted cancer cure research on rats here, it would probably get some "ah, interesting", not "well we have a cure".
The “ah, interesting” and maybe a “we should study this more” was exactly the response I had hoped for and expected from this community when I posted the IF study where the men showed some health improvements despite zero change in weight. No one was looking for a “we found a cure” or “it’s magic” response.
See my previous stance on research of all kinds.
Case in point, take a look at this comment in a prior thread on IF. I think you'll have a more productive discussion with me viewing me as an interlocutor interested in truth, over a debate - I take debate more for moral issues. I think debating empirical facts with a vested opinion is silly and good way to end up holding false beliefs. I try to hold less and less wrong beliefs:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/comment/44042940/#Comment_44042940
It in no way affected my performance. If you had read my posts completely you’d know that. When I switched my training and got more hungry I stopped IF.
I’m done with this thread now. The condescending personal attacks are beyond what I’m willing to deal with, especially on a support site.
You said IF with your training time "interfered with recovery". I'm not entirely clear what that means if it wasn't impacting performance because I take it that being recovered is a component of performance. I apologise for what isn't clear about it to me.
I do find it interesting to complain about someone failing to read cautiously when you've called me against IF when all I've said is the research isn't there to show special benefits.
My comments on viewing me as interlocutor over a debater are genuine, not condescending, but I admit the language is pretentious enough to come off that way. My apologies.6 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
That's not true. That there's no monetary cost for IF doesn't mean there is no cost. You yourself have indicated it was costing you recovery.
If someone said to you "look, here's thing X. I have no research that it works, but I like to feel it does, you should try it - oh btw it might screw up your exercise routine and blow your whole training week this week", how would you feel about them suggesting it and saying "oh, and best part it costs nothing!"?
Beyond training, I have listened to dieticians that feel IF can lead people towards binge behaviors.
It wasn’t costing me anything lol. It stopped being a suitable plan based on the changes to my workout schedule. I didn’t force myself to stick to a plan that was no longer working and jeapordize my fitness progress as you implied. I stopped IF. No cost.
To your other points -
1. There is research and it is mostly promising and positive but it isn’t enough to be conclusive
2. IF does not have to ruin anyone’s training schedule. Most can workout around their eating window, does your training schedule get ruined if you skip a meal? It stopped working for me personally because I run in the morning and do another workout most evenings, but that’s just me personally and I did not continue the plan at that point so I find the question silly and overly argumentative
3. I’m a recovering bulimic. When I did IF it in no way triggered my past disordered thinking.
It’s not for you. That’s great! But to be so determined to prove it is for no one is wrong.
You don't value your performance? If you value it and IF was making it worse, that means IF had a cost to you. If you changed your workout schedule because it was better, you are signalling that it was costing you something. IF was a trade-off you couldn't afford.
To the enumerated points (thank, I tend to like that format)
1. I think you missed my earlier point. When two out of three studies show no effect, that's not promising, that's actually likely to be a statistical anomaly, particularly given the bias against publishing negative results in science.
2. It would really depend on the schedule. Some people train multiple sessions a day, best spaced far apart because of competing modalities such as people doing endurance and strength/hypertrophy training. IF would obviously not work well with such schedules. Again, that one could make it work with a schedule doesn't mean the act of making it work is not a cost. I get the impression that you just want to narrow the concept of cost to something more like monetary to be "silly and overly argumentative". I'm not saying costs mean something isn't worth paying the cost for, so you don't need to fight the term cost being applied. Calorie-counting has a cost. Training has a cost.
3. Okay, good for you, and? I know of heroin addicts that take heroin again without triggering addiction spirals. I don't think it follows taking heroin isn't a problematic behavior for people with or even without a history of heroin use.
I don't even know where you came up with I'm determined to prove IF is wrong every one. Look over the thread, find one spot where I said that, or something that could paraphrase to that. I also doubt you could find me ever saying there shouldn't be more research on it. I don't think you'll ever find me in a position disagreeing with the idea of more research - science is never done, and I do enjoy science. I have dozens of studies I'd like to see happen somewhere out in diet and exercise physiology research. You know what is really "overly argumentative"? Assigning people positions they don't hold. I use to skip breakfast. Heck, when I started losing weight, I alternate day fasted as an eating pattern. In terms of did I lose weight, yes it was working for me.
I think if you look through the board there should be at least one if not multiple posts where I've said it can be fine as a psychological method for some people to generate a calorie deficit.
I take great umbrage at people over selling it. Not so much on this board, but I personally have a certain moral disgust for people like Dr. Fung who are profiting off lying and overselling to people.magnusthenerd wrote: »
Most people might - most people are also ignorant of how inapplicable rodent research is - and it is less applicable when it comes to diet than cancer.It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
A lot of people here on MFP, particularly in the debate section understand this about rodent studies. If you posted cancer cure research on rats here, it would probably get some "ah, interesting", not "well we have a cure".
The “ah, interesting” and maybe a “we should study this more” was exactly the response I had hoped for and expected from this community when I posted the IF study where the men showed some health improvements despite zero change in weight. No one was looking for a “we found a cure” or “it’s magic” response.
See my previous stance on research of all kinds.
Case in point, take a look at this comment in a prior thread on IF. I think you'll have a more productive discussion with me viewing me as an interlocutor interested in truth, over a debate - I take debate more for moral issues. I think debating empirical facts with a vested opinion is silly and good way to end up holding false beliefs. I try to hold less and less wrong beliefs:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/comment/44042940/#Comment_44042940
It in no way affected my performance. If you had read my posts completely you’d know that. When I switched my training and got more hungry I stopped IF.
I’m done with this thread now. The condescending personal attacks are beyond what I’m willing to deal with, especially on a support site.
I saw no attacks, let alone personal ones?
People see what they want to see...8 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
That's not true. That there's no monetary cost for IF doesn't mean there is no cost. You yourself have indicated it was costing you recovery.
If someone said to you "look, here's thing X. I have no research that it works, but I like to feel it does, you should try it - oh btw it might screw up your exercise routine and blow your whole training week this week", how would you feel about them suggesting it and saying "oh, and best part it costs nothing!"?
Beyond training, I have listened to dieticians that feel IF can lead people towards binge behaviors.
It wasn’t costing me anything lol. It stopped being a suitable plan based on the changes to my workout schedule. I didn’t force myself to stick to a plan that was no longer working and jeapordize my fitness progress as you implied. I stopped IF. No cost.
To your other points -
1. There is research and it is mostly promising and positive but it isn’t enough to be conclusive
2. IF does not have to ruin anyone’s training schedule. Most can workout around their eating window, does your training schedule get ruined if you skip a meal? It stopped working for me personally because I run in the morning and do another workout most evenings, but that’s just me personally and I did not continue the plan at that point so I find the question silly and overly argumentative
3. I’m a recovering bulimic. When I did IF it in no way triggered my past disordered thinking.
It’s not for you. That’s great! But to be so determined to prove it is for no one is wrong.
You don't value your performance? If you value it and IF was making it worse, that means IF had a cost to you. If you changed your workout schedule because it was better, you are signalling that it was costing you something. IF was a trade-off you couldn't afford.
To the enumerated points (thank, I tend to like that format)
1. I think you missed my earlier point. When two out of three studies show no effect, that's not promising, that's actually likely to be a statistical anomaly, particularly given the bias against publishing negative results in science.
2. It would really depend on the schedule. Some people train multiple sessions a day, best spaced far apart because of competing modalities such as people doing endurance and strength/hypertrophy training. IF would obviously not work well with such schedules. Again, that one could make it work with a schedule doesn't mean the act of making it work is not a cost. I get the impression that you just want to narrow the concept of cost to something more like monetary to be "silly and overly argumentative". I'm not saying costs mean something isn't worth paying the cost for, so you don't need to fight the term cost being applied. Calorie-counting has a cost. Training has a cost.
3. Okay, good for you, and? I know of heroin addicts that take heroin again without triggering addiction spirals. I don't think it follows taking heroin isn't a problematic behavior for people with or even without a history of heroin use.
I don't even know where you came up with I'm determined to prove IF is wrong every one. Look over the thread, find one spot where I said that, or something that could paraphrase to that. I also doubt you could find me ever saying there shouldn't be more research on it. I don't think you'll ever find me in a position disagreeing with the idea of more research - science is never done, and I do enjoy science. I have dozens of studies I'd like to see happen somewhere out in diet and exercise physiology research. You know what is really "overly argumentative"? Assigning people positions they don't hold. I use to skip breakfast. Heck, when I started losing weight, I alternate day fasted as an eating pattern. In terms of did I lose weight, yes it was working for me.
I think if you look through the board there should be at least one if not multiple posts where I've said it can be fine as a psychological method for some people to generate a calorie deficit.
I take great umbrage at people over selling it. Not so much on this board, but I personally have a certain moral disgust for people like Dr. Fung who are profiting off lying and overselling to people.magnusthenerd wrote: »
Most people might - most people are also ignorant of how inapplicable rodent research is - and it is less applicable when it comes to diet than cancer.It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
A lot of people here on MFP, particularly in the debate section understand this about rodent studies. If you posted cancer cure research on rats here, it would probably get some "ah, interesting", not "well we have a cure".
The “ah, interesting” and maybe a “we should study this more” was exactly the response I had hoped for and expected from this community when I posted the IF study where the men showed some health improvements despite zero change in weight. No one was looking for a “we found a cure” or “it’s magic” response.
See my previous stance on research of all kinds.
Case in point, take a look at this comment in a prior thread on IF. I think you'll have a more productive discussion with me viewing me as an interlocutor interested in truth, over a debate - I take debate more for moral issues. I think debating empirical facts with a vested opinion is silly and good way to end up holding false beliefs. I try to hold less and less wrong beliefs:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/comment/44042940/#Comment_44042940
It in no way affected my performance. If you had read my posts completely you’d know that. When I switched my training and got more hungry I stopped IF.
I’m done with this thread now. The condescending personal attacks are beyond what I’m willing to deal with, especially on a support site.
I saw no attacks, let alone personal ones?
Totally agree. On a couple of these types of comments I've wondered whether I'm reading the same thread that the person who posts them is.
Everybody who doesn't agree with every word I say is a "hater."13 -
Just caught up on this thread. It’s been... interesting. I agree I feel like some people must be reading different comments than me. I see no hostility, condescension, or outright dismissal of IF as a viable solution for some people.9
-
WinoGelato wrote: »Just caught up on this thread. It’s been... interesting. I agree I feel like some people must be reading different comments than me. I see no hostility, condescension, or outright dismissal of IF as a viable solution for some people.
So much this.5 -
sheesh... i talked to my friend about this thread and we are both amazed at the fire behind it.
In the end, its too early to say that doing extended periods of fasting work magic other than forcing a timed calorie deficit.
5 -
raven56706 wrote: »sheesh... i talked to my friend about this thread and we are both amazed at the fire behind it.
In the end, its too early to say that doing extended periods of fasting work magic other than forcing a timed calorie deficit.
Politics, religion and diet...4 -
raven56706 wrote: »sheesh... i talked to my friend about this thread and we are both amazed at the fire behind it.
In the end, its too early to say that doing extended periods of fasting work magic other than forcing a timed calorie deficit.
Politics, religion and diet...
Weird how the moral parts of diet seep in so that the empirical parts become argumentative.
I suppose there's a remnant of the time when someone's food choices were far more impactful on others - you want to eat that raw rancid meat? Well you're going to get the rest of the tribe sick at worst, and in the more mild case, at least slow us down heading to the next camp site.4 -
NorthCascades wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
That's not true. That there's no monetary cost for IF doesn't mean there is no cost. You yourself have indicated it was costing you recovery.
If someone said to you "look, here's thing X. I have no research that it works, but I like to feel it does, you should try it - oh btw it might screw up your exercise routine and blow your whole training week this week", how would you feel about them suggesting it and saying "oh, and best part it costs nothing!"?
Beyond training, I have listened to dieticians that feel IF can lead people towards binge behaviors.
It wasn’t costing me anything lol. It stopped being a suitable plan based on the changes to my workout schedule. I didn’t force myself to stick to a plan that was no longer working and jeapordize my fitness progress as you implied. I stopped IF. No cost.
To your other points -
1. There is research and it is mostly promising and positive but it isn’t enough to be conclusive
2. IF does not have to ruin anyone’s training schedule. Most can workout around their eating window, does your training schedule get ruined if you skip a meal? It stopped working for me personally because I run in the morning and do another workout most evenings, but that’s just me personally and I did not continue the plan at that point so I find the question silly and overly argumentative
3. I’m a recovering bulimic. When I did IF it in no way triggered my past disordered thinking.
It’s not for you. That’s great! But to be so determined to prove it is for no one is wrong.
You don't value your performance? If you value it and IF was making it worse, that means IF had a cost to you. If you changed your workout schedule because it was better, you are signalling that it was costing you something. IF was a trade-off you couldn't afford.
To the enumerated points (thank, I tend to like that format)
1. I think you missed my earlier point. When two out of three studies show no effect, that's not promising, that's actually likely to be a statistical anomaly, particularly given the bias against publishing negative results in science.
2. It would really depend on the schedule. Some people train multiple sessions a day, best spaced far apart because of competing modalities such as people doing endurance and strength/hypertrophy training. IF would obviously not work well with such schedules. Again, that one could make it work with a schedule doesn't mean the act of making it work is not a cost. I get the impression that you just want to narrow the concept of cost to something more like monetary to be "silly and overly argumentative". I'm not saying costs mean something isn't worth paying the cost for, so you don't need to fight the term cost being applied. Calorie-counting has a cost. Training has a cost.
3. Okay, good for you, and? I know of heroin addicts that take heroin again without triggering addiction spirals. I don't think it follows taking heroin isn't a problematic behavior for people with or even without a history of heroin use.
I don't even know where you came up with I'm determined to prove IF is wrong every one. Look over the thread, find one spot where I said that, or something that could paraphrase to that. I also doubt you could find me ever saying there shouldn't be more research on it. I don't think you'll ever find me in a position disagreeing with the idea of more research - science is never done, and I do enjoy science. I have dozens of studies I'd like to see happen somewhere out in diet and exercise physiology research. You know what is really "overly argumentative"? Assigning people positions they don't hold. I use to skip breakfast. Heck, when I started losing weight, I alternate day fasted as an eating pattern. In terms of did I lose weight, yes it was working for me.
I think if you look through the board there should be at least one if not multiple posts where I've said it can be fine as a psychological method for some people to generate a calorie deficit.
I take great umbrage at people over selling it. Not so much on this board, but I personally have a certain moral disgust for people like Dr. Fung who are profiting off lying and overselling to people.magnusthenerd wrote: »
Most people might - most people are also ignorant of how inapplicable rodent research is - and it is less applicable when it comes to diet than cancer.It"'s funny to me how the people who believe that IF is only a way of scheduling when you eat and who believe that weight loss is just about CICO are so dismissive of the possibity of any other benefits from IF than just weight loss.
It's seems that the argument is that, since there is no scientifically acceptable proof that there are other benefits, there can't possibly be any other benefits, which is pure nonsense. There can be benefits that just haven't been proven yet
I know that since I started doing IF over 3 months ago that I have been better able to control my wt, even when I haven't strictly followed my IF schedule and have not strictly limited my cal intake, which contradicts the premise that it's only about scheduling and CICO
I'm not trying to make the case that there actually are other benefits to IF but to dismiss any possibilty that there "may" be other benefits is shortsighted and bigoted
Agreed. Every person who dismisses the current studies because most were conducted on rodents or the human sample size was small is doing exactly this. If it were cancer research and a drug was found that eliminated tumors in mice within weeks wouldn’t most people view that as incredibly promising and be excited to see more human trails happen ASAP? I think so
Every time I post any of the confirmed studies the majority of responses on MFP (including in this thread) dismiss them as insufficient and basically invalid with no mention of the promise found or need to look into it more. It’s ridiculous to me.
No one has said IF is best for everyone. It isn’t magic. And it doesn’t cost anyone anything to try and see if they experience additional benefits.
I personally stopped doing IF when I started running early morning. Waiting too long to eat after interfered with my recovery. When I did IF it was an easy way for my to stay in my calories and I found that I got better sleep when I did IF. I experienced none of the health benefits being explored in the studies I posted in this thread - I don’t believe that proves they don’t exist for anyone though. I think, like anything, more research is needed and NOTHING will work for everyone universally the same.
A lot of people here on MFP, particularly in the debate section understand this about rodent studies. If you posted cancer cure research on rats here, it would probably get some "ah, interesting", not "well we have a cure".
The “ah, interesting” and maybe a “we should study this more” was exactly the response I had hoped for and expected from this community when I posted the IF study where the men showed some health improvements despite zero change in weight. No one was looking for a “we found a cure” or “it’s magic” response.
See my previous stance on research of all kinds.
Case in point, take a look at this comment in a prior thread on IF. I think you'll have a more productive discussion with me viewing me as an interlocutor interested in truth, over a debate - I take debate more for moral issues. I think debating empirical facts with a vested opinion is silly and good way to end up holding false beliefs. I try to hold less and less wrong beliefs:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/comment/44042940/#Comment_44042940
It in no way affected my performance. If you had read my posts completely you’d know that. When I switched my training and got more hungry I stopped IF.
I’m done with this thread now. The condescending personal attacks are beyond what I’m willing to deal with, especially on a support site.
I saw no attacks, let alone personal ones?
Totally agree. On a couple of these types of comments I've wondered whether I'm reading the same thread that the person who posts them is.
Everybody who doesn't agree with every word I say is a "hater."
4
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
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K 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
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions