So Is Jason Fung right...or wrong...is insulin even a factor in losing weight...and other issues.

bubus05

I am honestly curious what our own experts on MyFitnesspal think about the guy who is kind of famous or infamous-depending on whether you believe him or not- with his views on IF, fasting and keto. He is in favour of all of these three strategies though his favourite subject seems to be fasting, so is he wrong?
On a number of posts and replies I have seen these kinds of statements 'Fung was debunked by experts with more knowledge' or 'as soon as I've seen him mention I bailed'. Whenever I mention any of these three strategies and say why I think they work I get debunked that is for sure. I was suggested to ask the community what they really think so here it is.
First my own views. I think IF, fasting, keto work. At least in my own experience they do. From almost morbid obese at 285 lbs went to 190 lbs in twelve months, not super slim, but kind of healthy weight. I am a 50 year old relatively healthy male at 5.8. I have done all three but I have to admit lately I do have cheat days with high carbs, surprisingly even for me high carbs have not really effected my weight loss, if anything I felt I had more energy to put more pressure on my trainings. The only thing I have been very consistent is being in calorie deficit. I admit Fung got me into doing keto combined with fasting, so I am kind of grateful to him. His views on how insulin levels effect weight loss seemed credible so I tried to follow his advice and I feel I am successful, never felt better. Honestly, after years of unsuccessful attempts at losing weight here is a guy who explains how to do it and it works, a damn miracle in my book. And than I read on these pages I am wrong and Fung is wrong. That he is debunked by experts. WTF??? So I went to see the other argument. What I found is that essentially both sides argue the same thing except that, Fung says you go low insulin than you start burning fat and than you will lose weight. The other side says no he is wrong, you go into calorie deficit than your insulin level go down and than you start burning fat and than you will lose weight. The question of what came first the egg or the chicken...Both sides seem to be right, with one side claiming the insulin level is not that important it is the calorie deficit that is important. True, Fung doesn't speak of the importance of calorie deficit though, what he is saying is that with weight loss one's metabolism will necessarily go down so you can't really rely on that. That makes sense too, but the argument about CICO also makes sense. So I am at a loss why I lost the weight TBH. Fung seems to be right- i mean his strategy worked for me- but he seems to be wrong too, which is it...
I am curious to hear you guys sharing your views on the subject.

wunderkindking

I think they work!

I think they work because you eat less when you do them.

I think if they're a sustainable thing for you and easier to stick to than something more broad then go forth.

It has jack all to do with anything more magical than 'you eat fewer calories' though.

wunderkindking

and, yes, with weight loss your metabolism goes down. Becuase you're smaller. Good news though: YOU ARE STILL EATING FEWER CALORIES. It doesn't just... stop burning calories so if what you are eating is less than you need to maintain a higher weight, even if it drops you keep losing. Then what you're eating is enough for your new size with your new metabolism... you maintain.

snickerscharlie

Fung *is* a quack. Do some research to discover why.

Lietchi

I'm not a scientist, so I can't answer the insulin part. I just know that I lost 55lbs without fasting and without keto (200-250gr of carbs a day on average).
I did a very mild IF for the 6 or 9 months of my weight loss: I found it easier to stick to my calorie goal when I skipped breakfast. Then I realized I was low on protein, so I started eating a high protein breakfast. No difference in weight loss between the two strategies. Just basic CICO.

yirara

bubus05 wrote: »

First my own views. I think IF, fasting, keto work. At least in my own experience they do. From almost morbid obese at 285 lbs went to 190 lbs in twelve months, not super slim, but kind of healthy weight. I am a 50 year old relatively healthy male at 5.8.

thanks for asking!

I can't answer the insulin part, but I'm sure someone will chime in. Important is here: It worked for you. You lost about 2lbs per week, which is great success. Would the same work for someone else? For some it would, for others it wouldn't because not everyone thrives on keto, not everyone can fast and not everyone can do IF because that's their genetic make. However, eating less than what the body burns over a period of time works for everyone, and likewise everyone will gain weight if eating structurally above maintenance calories regardless of their macro and meal timing preferences.

ninerbuff

Protein is insulinogenic. If Fung stance is that insulin is the culprit of why fat doesn't get burned, then how does he back track on protein? He even states that whey and diary proteins can make you fatter due to higher insulin response.

I'm NOT against fasting (I do a mini one myself), I just think Fung is SELECTIVE in how he addresses obesity and weight loss. He tells you some truth, but not the whole truth.

IMO, Fung is a good marketer. Create a problem and make the cure. RESULT=CASH

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

cwolfman13

He's not quite into Dr. Oz territory, but he comes closer pretty much everyday. Insulin isn't some devil thing...it's necessary and is a chemical hormone that directs energy to every cell in your body...to say it is the "fat hormone" or whatever is either zero understanding or purposefully misleading...I'd go with the latter. Insulin directs energy to every cell in your body...it is also the chemical hormone most responsible for building muscle.

Part of the problem is that he supposes that either everyone is sick and insulin resistant...or that even if you're not, you should be eating in this certain way. Why would an otherwise healthy person want to inhibit the body from doing what it's supposed to do? For a diabetic, the problem is that insulin response is actually inadequate to bring down blood glucose levels...so the choice is to either take insulin (if insulin was so "bad" why would people have to take it as a prescription) or take measures to keep blood glucose levels down...ie IF and Keto.

Basically, for an otherwise healthy person, his rhetoric is just that...and frankly, even for a diabetic, what he prescribes isn't necessary. My dad was a type II and controlled that with diet and didn't ever do IF or Keto.

AnnPT77

As a thought experiment:

If Fung is correct at some deep universal human physiological level, how does *anyone* ever lose weight and remain at a healthy weight long term, without doing *any* of IF, fasting, or keto?

Many people here (I'm one), and (for example) in the US National Weight Control Registry say that they've lost weight and kept it off long term without using IF, fasting or keto.

How is that possible? Do you believe we're mistaken about (or misrepresenting) what we do, or our results?

There are any number of articles critiquing Fung's theories in detail, at a research-findings level, from mainstream RDs, other academics, well-credentialed trainers, and more. They're not hard to find.

But the core question is above: How do you explain results from those who didn't follow Fung's "essential" methods?

I have no doubt that IF, fasting, keto can be effective. I don't even doubt the self-reports of those who find them near-magical tools. But the Fung-theory underpinnings simply don't pass the common sense sniff test, for me, because other methods work, too.

FitAgainBy55

Unless you have metabolic syndrome or insulin resistance the answer is no -- it doesn't matter.

My sample of one experience is: I've followed the CICO model on both high carb and lower carb diets. At my lowest adult weight I was eating ~300 grams of carbs per day, most of them simple carbs like bread and pasta. My weight has always matched the CICO model regardless of my carb intake. I'm in weight loss mode now and eating far fewer carbs and hardly any simple carbs and the weight loss still matches the same CICO model.

ninerbuff

Also if we're being OBJECTIVE, ANY WEIGHT LOSS PLAN works if the person adhere's to it's program. Liquid diet, low carb, Keto, fasting, water diet, Nutrisystem, Weight Watchers..............................they all have testimonials and successful stories of people who ADHERRED to the program. What's the ONE FACTOR that's consistent with all............................calorie deficit.

And if one can stick with the program they lost weight with for life, they'll likely keep it off. Unfortunately, only about 10% of people who use certain programs are able to.

Which is why for most of us here who comment and advise members on here take a more sensible approach of moderation in selection of weight loss plan for individuals. And that approach will be one where people can still enjoy food and drink and learn how to be in control of calories.


A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

ninerbuff

Oh check his net worth too. He's apparently worth a little over 1.2 million. I'd keep writing about pseudoscience too if I kept making that money. Regardless of what detractors say. It's like religion...............there's always going to be followers and those who'll pay.


A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

bubus05

AnnPT77 wrote: »

As a thought experiment:

If Fung is correct at some deep universal human physiological level, how does *anyone* ever lose weight and remain at a healthy weight long term, without doing *any* of IF, fasting, or keto?

Many people here (I'm one), and (for example) in the US National Weight Control Registry say that they've lost weight and kept it off long term without using IF, fasting or keto.

How is that possible? Do you believe we're mistaken about (or misrepresenting) what we do, or our results?

There are any number of articles critiquing Fung's theories in detail, at a research-findings level, from mainstream RDs, other academics, well-credentialed trainers, and more. They're not hard to find.

But the core question is above: How do you explain results from those who didn't follow Fung's "essential" methods?

I have no doubt that IF, fasting, keto can be effective. I don't even doubt the self-reports of those who find them near-magical tools. But the Fung-theory underpinnings simply don't pass the common sense sniff test, for me, because other methods work, too.

I dont believe you are mistaken or that you are misrepresenting what you do. I respect your opinion and everyone's opinion here. I kind of came to the conclusion that what works for some may or may not work for others, there is no absolute best when it comes to how to lose weight, except maybe the issue of calorie deficit, we all seem to agree on that. I can't even explain how I lost what I lost, I am happy nevertheless, much less how others lose with say a high carb diet. Whatever works works...
I agree with the above posts, this industry is a cash cow, and Fung is taking full advantage of it.

kshama2001

bubus05 wrote: »

AnnPT77 wrote: »

As a thought experiment:

If Fung is correct at some deep universal human physiological level, how does *anyone* ever lose weight and remain at a healthy weight long term, without doing *any* of IF, fasting, or keto?

Many people here (I'm one), and (for example) in the US National Weight Control Registry say that they've lost weight and kept it off long term without using IF, fasting or keto.

How is that possible? Do you believe we're mistaken about (or misrepresenting) what we do, or our results?

There are any number of articles critiquing Fung's theories in detail, at a research-findings level, from mainstream RDs, other academics, well-credentialed trainers, and more. They're not hard to find.

But the core question is above: How do you explain results from those who didn't follow Fung's "essential" methods?

I have no doubt that IF, fasting, keto can be effective. I don't even doubt the self-reports of those who find them near-magical tools. But the Fung-theory underpinnings simply don't pass the common sense sniff test, for me, because other methods work, too.

I dont believe you are mistaken or that you are misrepresenting what you do. I respect your opinion and everyone's opinion here. I kind of came to the conclusion that what works for some may or may not work for others, there is no absolute best when it comes to how to lose weight, except maybe the issue of calorie deficit, we all seem to agree on that. I can't even explain how I lost what I lost, I am happy nevertheless, much less how others lose with say a high carb diet. Whatever works works...
I agree with the above posts, this industry is a cash cow, and Fung is taking full advantage of it.

As long as there is a calorie deficit, anyone will lose weight on any combination of macros or eating protocols. If someone only has access to a set number of calories which equals a calorie deficit for them, they will lose weight.

Since most of us have access to many, many more calories than we need, the issue becomes ADHERENCE to that calorie deficit.

Keto and IF made it easier for you to adhere to a calorie deficit and that's great. We're happy for you.

However, you'll get pushback if you suggest it is the ONLY way, or that there is something special about it for the general public. There really isn't.

sijomial

A critique from someone with relevant education as opposed to a kidney doctor.....
Layne Norton - BS in Biochemistry (hons) and PhD Nutritional Sciences (hons)

One of his WTF series (what the fitness!) debunking Fung's claims comprehensively.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3hkAzYzfV8&feature=youtu.be



BTW - please, oh please, just stop saying "do xyz to start burning fat". You started burning fat the day you were born and will burn fat until you die.
After a carb heavy breakfast and a sports carb drink I was measured at burning 95% of my energy from fat when at rest.

karinkane2

His approach has worked for me. I liked his book because it referenced so many studies that weren't his own.

There are so many advice plans and programs out there that aren't based on anything but the author's personal opinion or experience, or one study of a few people, or QAnon type "research" that's basically some google searches for social posts written by influencers or bloggers hoping to make a few dollars (a current pet peeve of mine). His program is based on a lot of practical experience (his own, at his clinic) and a lot of outside scientific studies that he didn't create.

I've just started this year, but have lost about 10lbs doing intermittent fasting and eating a mostly Medi diet. It's higher fat (50-60% most days), but certainly not keto. I didn't really get that the book was recommending a keto diet, either. I eat a lot of beans and lentils and quinoa, as the book suggested, so the overall % of calories from carbs that I'm eating is usually about the same as the % from protein.

I also thought a lot of it was really just common sense. You overate, or have been overeating for years? Eat less. That's not a surprise. I think anyone who's followed nutrition at all would also agree that sugar and high glycemic foods also are a problem, which is sort of his second principle. And if eating less, and cutting back on sugar doesn't work, then he suggests intermittent fasting. That also makes sense to me, just because there doesn't seem to be any good reason for eating 3 squares a day plus snacks. I work in marketing, and know the history behind a lot of the ideas like "breakfast is the most important meal of the day". They were created by advertisers selling products. We study those campaigns and how successful they are.

There's also a lot more he could be doing if this were just a cash grab. I feel like we'd see all sorts of licensed products out there, like Atkins, Weight Watchers, etc do, or at least a better website!

Long story short, I agree with you. His program has worked really well for me, at least as far as weight loss and fitness go. Along with the weight loss, I'm running at about 2 min/mile faster than I was a couple of months ago (and doing that in the morning without eating breakfast), and generally feel a lot better mentally. So my experience matches yours. I'd say if it works for you, keep it up!

And if others have found something else that works - great! Keep that up, and all the best to all of us!

wunderkindking

People get weird ideas about food.

My husband, bless him, is a *chemical engineer* - ie: he is not under or uneducated. He became completely and utterly convinced that by air frying carrots - without adding anything, just sliced carrots in an air fryer - that they were going to have many more calories.

Not more calories per volume/weight, but more calories than those same carrots had at raw weight.

Because they tasted better.

wunderkindking

And while I am spamming this thread:

I don't doubt that every program out there will work for some people. I also don't think any single PROGRAM has any incentive to want to see people reach long term success (Ie: you need the program for it to be sustainable/know what's up OR you have to go back to the program when you fell off and buy more products/information), believe the weight loss industry is predatory and like heck will any of them get my money.

I can COUNT just fine by myself, and if I fall off going back is free and not putting money back into the pockets of an industry preying on people and incentivized to see people fail and/or stay ignorant.

33gail33

bubus05 wrote: »

I am honestly curious what our own experts on MyFitnesspal think about the guy who is kind of famous or infamous-depending on whether you believe him or not- with his views on IF, fasting and keto. He is in favour of all of these three strategies though his favourite subject seems to be fasting, so is he wrong?
On a number of posts and replies I have seen these kinds of statements 'Fung was debunked by experts with more knowledge' or 'as soon as I've seen him mention I bailed'. Whenever I mention any of these three strategies and say why I think they work I get debunked that is for sure. I was suggested to ask the community what they really think so here it is.
First my own views. I think IF, fasting, keto work. At least in my own experience they do. From almost morbid obese at 285 lbs went to 190 lbs in twelve months, not super slim, but kind of healthy weight. I am a 50 year old relatively healthy male at 5.8. I have done all three but I have to admit lately I do have cheat days with high carbs, surprisingly even for me high carbs have not really effected my weight loss, if anything I felt I had more energy to put more pressure on my trainings. The only thing I have been very consistent is being in calorie deficit. I admit Fung got me into doing keto combined with fasting, so I am kind of grateful to him. His views on how insulin levels effect weight loss seemed credible so I tried to follow his advice and I feel I am successful, never felt better. Honestly, after years of unsuccessful attempts at losing weight here is a guy who explains how to do it and it works, a damn miracle in my book. And than I read on these pages I am wrong and Fung is wrong. That he is debunked by experts. WTF??? So I went to see the other argument. What I found is that essentially both sides argue the same thing except that, Fung says you go low insulin than you start burning fat and than you will lose weight. The other side says no he is wrong, you go into calorie deficit than your insulin level go down and than you start burning fat and than you will lose weight. The question of what came first the egg or the chicken...Both sides seem to be right, with one side claiming the insulin level is not that important it is the calorie deficit that is important. True, Fung doesn't speak of the importance of calorie deficit though, what he is saying is that with weight loss one's metabolism will necessarily go down so you can't really rely on that. That makes sense too, but the argument about CICO also makes sense. So I am at a loss why I lost the weight TBH. Fung seems to be right- i mean his strategy worked for me- but he seems to be wrong too, which is it...
I am curious to hear you guys sharing your views on the subject.

I get your confusion - MFP will never agree with anything that isn't straight CICO - and anything else that works towards weight loss ONLY works because it puts you in a calorie deficit. I think there is a little more nuance with regards to the influence of hormones, metabolism, gut health etc than that - but I don't know that it is enough to make a huge difference in the "real world" - because yes any calorie deficit diet will result in weight loss.
I am not familiar with Dr Fung but my own personal doctor does believe that gut health and hormones are an important factor for metabolism and weight loss (she is a gp but has specialized practice in chronic illness and funcitonal nutrition). So while I do trust her opinion, it is hard to not have doubts creep in when you hang around here and it is constantly drilled into your head that those things don't matter. It's a conundrum for sure. But what I am doing is working for me (for my health and weight loss) so I'll just stick with it.

lgfrie

If you eat over your maintenance calories, you'll gain weight, no matter what other diet tactics you deploy.

If you eat under your maintenance calories, you'll lose weight, no matter what other diet tactics you deploy.

If there were two people, A and B, both 250 pounds and trying to get to 200, and you had to bet which one would get there, and A's methodology is to eat a 500 calorie per day deficit, and B's is to do keto and IF without cutting calories, I highly recommend you put your money on A.

Some things like IF (which I have done more or less continuously for 18 months) help people lose weight, but it's important to distinguish between "things that help you stay in a calorie deficit, which causes you to lose weight" vs "things other than calorie restriction that directly cause weight loss." I do not believe the latter exist, except perhaps at the tiniest margins where it doesn't much matter.

Nor does anyone else believe it, deep down. Everyone knows you need to say no to the chocolate chip cookies if you want to get into those college jeans, and it has nothing to do with macros or Fung. I found parts of the Fung book interesting, but in the end, if you read Fung while munching on carrot sticks, you're good to go, and if you read Fung while eating a 24 oz rib eye, you're not.

cwolfman13

karinkane2 wrote: »

His approach has worked for me. I liked his book because it referenced so many studies that weren't his own.

There are so many advice plans and programs out there that aren't based on anything but the author's personal opinion or experience, or one study of a few people, or QAnon type "research" that's basically some google searches for social posts written by influencers or bloggers hoping to make a few dollars (a current pet peeve of mine). His program is based on a lot of practical experience (his own, at his clinic) and a lot of outside scientific studies that he didn't create.

I've just started this year, but have lost about 10lbs doing intermittent fasting and eating a mostly Medi diet. It's higher fat (50-60% most days), but certainly not keto. I didn't really get that the book was recommending a keto diet, either. I eat a lot of beans and lentils and quinoa, as the book suggested, so the overall % of calories from carbs that I'm eating is usually about the same as the % from protein.

I also thought a lot of it was really just common sense. You overate, or have been overeating for years? Eat less. That's not a surprise. I think anyone who's followed nutrition at all would also agree that sugar and high glycemic foods also are a problem, which is sort of his second principle. And if eating less, and cutting back on sugar doesn't work, then he suggests intermittent fasting. That also makes sense to me, just because there doesn't seem to be any good reason for eating 3 squares a day plus snacks. I work in marketing, and know the history behind a lot of the ideas like "breakfast is the most important meal of the day". They were created by advertisers selling products. We study those campaigns and how successful they are.

There's also a lot more he could be doing if this were just a cash grab. I feel like we'd see all sorts of licensed products out there, like Atkins, Weight Watchers, etc do, or at least a better website!

Long story short, I agree with you. His program has worked really well for me, at least as far as weight loss and fitness go. Along with the weight loss, I'm running at about 2 min/mile faster than I was a couple of months ago (and doing that in the morning without eating breakfast), and generally feel a lot better mentally. So my experience matches yours. I'd say if it works for you, keep it up!

And if others have found something else that works - great! Keep that up, and all the best to all of us!

In an otherwise healthy person, high GI foods aren't a problem at all. Look at blue zones...the healthiest populations in the world...they eat high carbohydrate diets to include numerous high GI foods like potatoes and rice, etc. Vegans don't seem to have a whole lot of issue with high carbs and high GI foods either. Outside of being insulin resistant, the GI of a particular food is irrelevant to an otherwise healthy person.

That's part of the problem with Fung...the GI of a potato is completely irrelevant to an otherwise healthy person...there is no reason for a healthy person to avoid high GI foods like potatoes or rice or whatever. Not everyone is sick. There is no reason that a healthy person needs to suppress the things that the human body is supposed to be doing. I mean really...my body is functioning just as it should...but hey...maybe I should alter that by suppressing insulin?

N=1...I lost 40 Lbs pretty easily back in 2012/13 and never did IF or Keto or fasting or worried about insulin, etc. I'm in the process of dumping 20 Lbs of COVID fat at the moment and also zero issues. I had rice with my broccoli beef on Friday night...I had potatoes in my green chile stew last night for dinner...I had pancakes and eggs this morning for breakfast and I'm losing weight just fine.