Calorie Counter

You are currently viewing the message boards in:

Please help with this argument- Intermittent fasting related

13468912

Replies

  • PWHFPWHF Posts: 194Member, Premium Member Posts: 194Member, Premium Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    PWHF wrote: »
    Annie_01 wrote: »
    PWHF wrote: »
    earlnabby wrote: »
    PWHF wrote: »
    In the 'guess your age thread' I'm being pegged as 8-12 years younger than I am. Been doing IF for 2.5 years now.

    I am usually pegged as about 10 years younger than I am and I have never done IF. Your point?

    Apparently IF slows ageing - that's the point

    IMO...for what it's worth...exercise will do more for slowing down the aging process than eating within a certain window. Combine that with a healthy diet that is appropriate for what you are trying to accomplish then that will assist in hopefully aid in slowing down that aging process.

    For me...and I speak only for me...it is not about looking younger it is about feeling younger and being able to stay mobile as I age. Then there is that "bucket list" that I still want to accomplish.

    I do IF/TRE/SkipBreakfast/Whateveryouwanttocallit. It fits my lifestyle and has helped me get to where I want to be. I am under no illusions though that it is some mystic way of eating that will make me look 20 years younger...I am 67 and I own every wrinkle that I have.

    I didn't start doing it for anti-aging reasons either I did it to burn as much fat as possible (Leangains). The fact that people regularly tell me I look a lot younger than I am I credit to IF seeing as there is research saying that it does that. maybe it doesn't and maybe it's the lifting - or a combination of both. I don't really care as long as it works.

    The fact that the notion of IF having any benefits at all appears to be upsetting people is interesting though... If you know what works for you why care so much about what other people are doing?

    The wellness industry is full of people trying to convince people to do stuff based on their n=1 experience that they might not even be interpreting correctly. There are myriad variables that affect aging, and "looking" younger doesn't actually mean you are healthier or going to live longer. Too many people waste too much time making decisions based on other people's random experiences, rather than just focusing on the facts.

    And I did IF for awhile. Now I'm not, but I'm totally open to going back to it. Most of the people in this thread do IF or have done it in the past. We just kind of have a thing about people taking blog postings and a mouse study and selling it as "research suggests". And people who stay overweight for years because they are trying to follow a plan someone sold to them as "better" with little proof.

    Betty White credits vodka and hot dogs, so that's what I'm going with. It's just as likely to be correct :drinker:

    Hey if it works... You gotta experiment until you find what works for you. Took me years to get to heavy lifting + IF (with correct cals/macro deficit/surplus). I've only ever cut on it and it's been very effective, going to bulk with it from next week which will be interesting.
  • CSARdiverCSARdiver Posts: 6,163Member Member Posts: 6,163Member Member
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    mbaker566 wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    PWHF wrote: »
    Annie_01 wrote: »
    PWHF wrote: »
    earlnabby wrote: »
    PWHF wrote: »
    In the 'guess your age thread' I'm being pegged as 8-12 years younger than I am. Been doing IF for 2.5 years now.

    I am usually pegged as about 10 years younger than I am and I have never done IF. Your point?

    Apparently IF slows ageing - that's the point

    IMO...for what it's worth...exercise will do more for slowing down the aging process than eating within a certain window. Combine that with a healthy diet that is appropriate for what you are trying to accomplish then that will assist in hopefully aid in slowing down that aging process.

    For me...and I speak only for me...it is not about looking younger it is about feeling younger and being able to stay mobile as I age. Then there is that "bucket list" that I still want to accomplish.

    I do IF/TRE/SkipBreakfast/Whateveryouwanttocallit. It fits my lifestyle and has helped me get to where I want to be. I am under no illusions though that it is some mystic way of eating that will make me look 20 years younger...I am 67 and I own every wrinkle that I have.

    I didn't start doing it for anti-aging reasons either I did it to burn as much fat as possible (Leangains). The fact that people regularly tell me I look a lot younger than I am I credit to IF seeing as there is research saying that it does that. maybe it doesn't and maybe it's the lifting - or a combination of both. I don't really care as long as it works.

    The fact that the notion of IF having any benefits at all appears to be upsetting people is interesting though... If you know what works for you why care so much about what other people are doing?

    The wellness industry is full of people trying to convince people to do stuff based on their n=1 experience that they might not even be interpreting correctly. There are myriad variables that affect aging, and "looking" younger doesn't actually mean you are healthier or going to live longer. Too many people waste too much time making decisions based on other people's random experiences, rather than just focusing on the facts.

    And I did IF for awhile. Now I'm not, but I'm totally open to going back to it. Most of the people in this thread do IF or have done it in the past. We just kind of have a thing about people taking blog postings and a mouse study and selling it as "research suggests". And people who stay overweight for years because they are trying to follow a plan someone sold to them as "better" with little proof.

    Betty White credits vodka and hot dogs, so that's what I'm going with. It's just as likely to be correct :drinker:

    One of the oldest ladies in the world credit whiskey, cigarettes, and the company of men.

    Winston Churchill lived to 90 despite all sorts of bad habits, and as for looking young, everyone compares his appearance with newborns!

    (For those who may be dense, obviously this is tongue in cheek.)

    Clearly my pipe/cigar data will be foundational for future generations. My pappy lived to the respectable age of 96 and credited moonshine, oatmeal, and pickled pig's feet.
  • CSARdiverCSARdiver Posts: 6,163Member Member Posts: 6,163Member Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    PWHF wrote: »
    Annie_01 wrote: »
    PWHF wrote: »
    earlnabby wrote: »
    PWHF wrote: »
    In the 'guess your age thread' I'm being pegged as 8-12 years younger than I am. Been doing IF for 2.5 years now.

    I am usually pegged as about 10 years younger than I am and I have never done IF. Your point?

    Apparently IF slows ageing - that's the point

    IMO...for what it's worth...exercise will do more for slowing down the aging process than eating within a certain window. Combine that with a healthy diet that is appropriate for what you are trying to accomplish then that will assist in hopefully aid in slowing down that aging process.

    For me...and I speak only for me...it is not about looking younger it is about feeling younger and being able to stay mobile as I age. Then there is that "bucket list" that I still want to accomplish.

    I do IF/TRE/SkipBreakfast/Whateveryouwanttocallit. It fits my lifestyle and has helped me get to where I want to be. I am under no illusions though that it is some mystic way of eating that will make me look 20 years younger...I am 67 and I own every wrinkle that I have.

    I didn't start doing it for anti-aging reasons either I did it to burn as much fat as possible (Leangains). The fact that people regularly tell me I look a lot younger than I am I credit to IF seeing as there is research saying that it does that. maybe it doesn't and maybe it's the lifting - or a combination of both. I don't really care as long as it works.

    The fact that the notion of IF having any benefits at all appears to be upsetting people is interesting though... If you know what works for you why care so much about what other people are doing?

    The wellness industry is full of people trying to convince people to do stuff based on their n=1 experience that they might not even be interpreting correctly. There are myriad variables that affect aging, and "looking" younger doesn't actually mean you are healthier or going to live longer. Too many people waste too much time making decisions based on other people's random experiences, rather than just focusing on the facts.

    And I did IF for awhile. Now I'm not, but I'm totally open to going back to it. Most of the people in this thread do IF or have done it in the past. We just kind of have a thing about people taking blog postings and a mouse study and selling it as "research suggests". And people who stay overweight for years because they are trying to follow a plan someone sold to them as "better" with little proof.

    Betty White credits vodka and hot dogs, so that's what I'm going with. It's just as likely to be correct :drinker:

    I need to consult her and do some comparative analysis to my scotch, beer, bacon plan.

    I mean, we can add 10 more mice to my experiment <nods>.

    I feel confident Ms. White would wholeheartedly support your plan as well!

    I smell a sit-com!
  • lemurcat2lemurcat2 Posts: 3,488Member Member Posts: 3,488Member Member
    Annie_01 wrote: »
    PWHF wrote: »
    Annie_01 wrote: »
    PWHF wrote: »
    earlnabby wrote: »
    PWHF wrote: »
    In the 'guess your age thread' I'm being pegged as 8-12 years younger than I am. Been doing IF for 2.5 years now.

    I am usually pegged as about 10 years younger than I am and I have never done IF. Your point?

    Apparently IF slows ageing - that's the point

    IMO...for what it's worth...exercise will do more for slowing down the aging process than eating within a certain window. Combine that with a healthy diet that is appropriate for what you are trying to accomplish then that will assist in hopefully aid in slowing down that aging process.

    For me...and I speak only for me...it is not about looking younger it is about feeling younger and being able to stay mobile as I age. Then there is that "bucket list" that I still want to accomplish.

    I do IF/TRE/SkipBreakfast/Whateveryouwanttocallit. It fits my lifestyle and has helped me get to where I want to be. I am under no illusions though that it is some mystic way of eating that will make me look 20 years younger...I am 67 and I own every wrinkle that I have.

    I didn't start doing it for anti-aging reasons either I did it to burn as much fat as possible (Leangains). The fact that people regularly tell me I look a lot younger than I am I credit to IF seeing as there is research saying that it does that. maybe it doesn't and maybe it's the lifting - or a combination of both. I don't really care as long as it works.

    The fact that the notion of IF having any benefits at all appears to be upsetting people is interesting though... If you know what works for you why care so much about what other people are doing?


    Okay...here is what I think...again for what it's worth. The vast majority of people that join MFP or any site that deals with weight loss is looking for that mystic miracle cure that will cause them to lose weight quickly and painlessly. They will grab on to anything that sounds like it might give them the mystic miracle sure that they are looking for regardless if it sounds to good to be true or even if it is healthy or is suitable for them. Most of these people will fail because they didn't do the research nor take the time to see if it fits their lives. They end up miserable and eventually give up and go their own way to find they next mystic miracle cure or they give up entirely on weight loss and gain even more.

    I think many people in these "great debates" feel as if they are trying to help those people.

    Pretty much. I think the main point that is made is that there's no one-size-fits-all way to do it, so finding what works for you is the most important thing rather than buying into a notion that whatever the current fad is MUST be followed or else you cannot succeed.

    I struggled with trying to eat lots of meals at one point (when that was in fashion) and psyched myself out of just starting plenty of times trying to figure out first whether I was supposed to eat before or after a workout and what. I've found that trying to follow rules from someone other than me doesn't work, and understanding it's just calories plus whatever I find, based on my own experience, works best is the way to go. Based on some comments in some of the IF threads, I get the sense that some people feel -- and are being told -- that if you don't like IF, then you are a failure or aren't doing it right, and that's a bad message.

    Your message I agree with, as I've said lots of times I would consider IF a schedule that is easier for some people (including me on some days) and not too different than my own preference for always eating no more than 3 meals, no snacking, as for me snacking tends to = mindless eating. I'm not sure why eating in a narrower window is perceived as so much easier for some than just not snacking but there's no reason why I should, since what works for me works for me and what works for you works for you. I totally believe that the narrow eating window is easier for some and that some find they are hungrier if they eat in the morning. I just don't believe -- and of course you have never said -- that eating in a window makes one superior or healthier or more disciplined or is the only way to learn to deal with mild hunger, etc.
    I get it even though it might be nice to hold a reasonable conversation that doesn't turn in to an all out battle. It is what it is when you are dealing in the world of the internet!

    I think most of the people you are probably talking about -- including me! -- are actually trying to have a reasonable conversation and I'm not sure why you think otherwise or feel that it's wrong to make the points we are. What I think it not helpful is making comments about the discipline or eating habits of those for whom IF was not the end-all cure-all of overeating, and that tends to come from the more extreme IF advocates, IME. And certainly I don't see anything negative about defending others from those kinds of comments.
  • SCoil123SCoil123 Posts: 2,085Member Member Posts: 2,085Member Member
    sgt1372 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.
  • SCoil123SCoil123 Posts: 2,085Member Member Posts: 2,085Member Member
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    SCoil123 wrote: »
    sgt1372 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.

    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
Sign In or Register to comment.