Some questions about intermittent fasting - help?

Rannoch3908
Rannoch3908 Posts: 177 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
So over the last 20 years of trying to lose weight in every possible way I have found not much works. But what I did find that has successfully worked since last Sept and helped me lose 33lbs so far without feeling deprived is intermittent fasting.

I practice a 19:5 approach - I can start snacking around 3pm each day (fruits, eggs, veggies).
Then I have a nice big dinner around 630

But some questions for those who also do IF:
I stopped drinking coffee in morning because I need creamer -- what are some other options for energy?

I assume zero calorie drinks like Mio Energy, Monster Zero, etc don't break the fast since they are zero calories?

Replies

  • Redordeadhead
    Redordeadhead Posts: 1,188 Member
    Have you tried any flavoured coffee black, or just freshly ground coffee? I have to say I've grown to like black coffee a lot, although I didn't initially.

    It doesn't answer your question but I also wanted to check, are you getting enough calories in a day with a 630kcal dinner and snacks of fruit, veg and eggs?
  • lgfrie
    lgfrie Posts: 1,449 Member
    Been doing IF for almost two years. I started on May 9 of 2019. So far so good; I really like the approach, both for weight loss and for maintenance, and I feel better physically when doing IF regardless of how it impacts my weight. Better, more consistent energy level.

    I started out very strictly with IF, meaning NO calories outside my noon to 8 pm eating window. I think that's kind of hard to maintain long-term and that it may be better to have a system one can live with than one that seems "perfect". While I generally think calorie avoidance outside the eating window is a good habit for people who want to do IF, I do allow myself coffee creamer in the morning now. It hasn't impacted anything, other than for me to be happy that I'm getting a proper cup of coffee to get the day started, and to have 30 less calories available for my eating window.

    I think it comes down to creating a version of IF that works for you and can keep working for you. The nice thing about IF is that since it's just an eating schedule, it can easily be tailored and customized to meet your needs, which will likely change over time.

    I mainly do 17:7 these days - it's the right length of time between my two main meals to avoid snacking. 8 hours was too long. I do agree 19:5 is an interesting approach, although I haven't been able to really make short eating windows of that nature work for myself.

    Good luck.
  • BarbaraHelen2013
    BarbaraHelen2013 Posts: 1,941 Member
    Redordeadhead wrote: »
    Have you tried any flavoured coffee black, or just freshly ground coffee? I have to say I've grown to like black coffee a lot, although I didn't initially.

    It doesn't answer your question but I also wanted to check, are you getting enough calories in a day with a 630kcal dinner and snacks of fruit, veg and eggs?

    I think she’s saying her dinner is around 6:30pm not 630 calories. Just to stop the thread going down the ‘OMG eat MORE!’ Rabbit hole! 😉
  • Rannoch3908
    Rannoch3908 Posts: 177 Member
    630 was the time for dinner.

    My dinner is normally 800 calories.

    I also eat a pear, mango, avocado, larabar, some grapes, and pinneapple chunks + two boiled eggs.

    I have not tried flavored coffee...

    The reasons I am doing IF include:
    -- Hoping to continue burning fat stores all day instead of food I eat.
    -- Normally not hungry till afternoon.
    -- Saves money on breakfast and lunch
    -- Once I eat during day my progress at work tasks slows down.
  • Redordeadhead
    Redordeadhead Posts: 1,188 Member
    BarbaraHelen2013 wrote: »
    Redordeadhead wrote: »
    Have you tried any flavoured coffee black, or just freshly ground coffee? I have to say I've grown to like black coffee a lot, although I didn't initially.

    It doesn't answer your question but I also wanted to check, are you getting enough calories in a day with a 630kcal dinner and snacks of fruit, veg and eggs?

    I think she’s saying her dinner is around 6:30pm not 630 calories. Just to stop the thread going down the ‘OMG eat MORE!’ Rabbit hole! 😉

    Ahhh got it, thanks!
  • bubus05
    bubus05 Posts: 121 Member
    I have been doing iF nearly a year now-16/8- and always start my day with coffee with a TBS double cream. If coffee is your thing in the morning I wouldn't worry too much about the state of ketosis, double cream has zero carbs and very little fat or protein in a single TBS, I think it is unlikely to kick you out of ketosis, though I admit I never actually measured my ketosis or blood sugar level after drinking my coffee. Keto experts will tell you a 'bullet proof coffee' such as coffee with butter is fine, by that logic I replaced the butter with heavy cream, and for me it works fine. Energy drinks that have either aspartame, stevia or erythritol are ok too moderately taken. The danger i think that too much caffein might push one's adrenalin level to dangerous levels.
  • xxzenabxx
    xxzenabxx Posts: 948 Member
    Rannoch3908 wrote: »
    So over the last 20 years of trying to lose weight in every possible way I have found not much works. But what I did find that has successfully worked since last Sept and helped me lose 33lbs so far without feeling deprived is intermittent fasting.

    I practice a 19:5 approach - I can start snacking around 3pm each day (fruits, eggs, veggies).
    Then I have a nice big dinner around 630

    But some questions for those who also do IF:
    I stopped drinking coffee in morning because I need creamer -- what are some other options for energy?

    I assume zero calorie drinks like Mio Energy, Monster Zero, etc don't break the fast since they are zero calories?

    I think it’s totally fine if you have coffee with creamer because it’s probably only 30-50 calories which shouldn’t make a difference to your total calories in the long run. I don’t do IF but I kinda do- I eat a small piece of fruit at 8am then do my workout and then eat breakfast at 11am. I try to have dinner by 8pm so I’m just condensing all my main calories in a 14-15 hour window which has helped me with adherence and hunger. I can also do this sort of structure for the rest of my life. I’m not strict about it at all and it’s the flexibility that also makes it easier to stick to.
  • MichelleMcKeeRN
    MichelleMcKeeRN Posts: 450 Member
    I dabble in IF. I am trying a round of keto at the moment for some quick weight loss. I notice that when I drink an energy drink, even a sugar free energy drink, like a bang, it does affect my ketones.
    I read some people that do IF are ok with coffee with cream in the morning during a fasting period. Others disagree.
    Right now, I do 2 oz toasted coconut almond milk and 2 grams coconut oil blended in 8 oz of coffee. It foams up nicely, like a latte.
    Green tea might be a good choice. Or bone broth. Some people online say bone broth during a fast is ok while others disagree.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    Rannoch3908 wrote: »
    630 was the time for dinner.

    My dinner is normally 800 calories.

    I also eat a pear, mango, avocado, larabar, some grapes, and pinneapple chunks + two boiled eggs.

    I have not tried flavored coffee...

    The reasons I am doing IF include:
    -- Hoping to continue burning fat stores all day instead of food I eat.
    -- Normally not hungry till afternoon.
    -- Saves money on breakfast and lunch
    -- Once I eat during day my progress at work tasks slows down.

    The last three reasons are good reasons to do IF, but just be aware that if your circumstances change you will burn fat stores when you're in a deficit whether you're eating during a small window of the day or throughout the day. It's the deficit that creates the demand for your body to use stored fat. If you're doing IF and eating more than you need, you'll store fat even if you're not eating until later in the day.
  • NVintage
    NVintage Posts: 1,463 Member
    edited March 2021
    From what I've read, some cream will raise insulin levels a bit, but not enough to break a fast. Alternative sugars, however, are associated with "central adiposity gain" and might increase appetite. Might want to research this more, as the main study I read was on erythritol, and maybe some are better than others.
  • NVintage
    NVintage Posts: 1,463 Member
    Erythritol is a pentose-phosphate pathway metabolite and associated with adiposity gain
    in young adults
    Author(s): Katie C. Hootman, Jean-Pierre Trezzi, Lisa Kraemer, Lindsay S. Burwell,
    Xiangyi Dong, Kristin A. Guertin, Christian Jaeger, Patrick J. Stover, Karsten Hiller
    and Patricia A. Cassano
    Source: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of
    America , Vol. 114, No. 21 (May 23, 2017), pp. E4233-E4240
    Published by: National Academy of Sciences
    Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26483334
  • Iwannabeapunkrockmom
    Iwannabeapunkrockmom Posts: 61 Member
    I love IF because as a mother of five, it just really simplifies my day (less meals to plan).

    I have to take some heavy duty meds 12 hours apart during my fasting time and I take it with gummy vitaminsn and supplements (multi, mag, and l.theanine) that add up to about 80 calories. So I guess I'm technically breaking my fast at those times, but it's like necessary, so I just do it. It hasn't seen to impact my appetite one way or another (I learn towards never having an appetite). And my weight loss continues to go down 1-2 pounds a week.

    That said, have you tried tea? There are so many flavors and many of them are naturally delicious without needing cream or sugar. It might not be as much caffeine, but it'll give you a boost.
  • LivingtheLeanDream
    LivingtheLeanDream Posts: 13,342 Member
    edited March 2021
    The creamer wont have any impact on your IF, I've been doing IF for the best part of a year, haven't been overly strict with it but I enjoy a little milk in my tea first thing, can't do the black tea or coffee thing. There's nothing miraculous about IF for weight loss, its just a means of keeping the calories down - I used to enjoy a 300 calorie breakfast, but was finding weight creep happening after being in maintenance for years, IF sorted that with the removing of that one meal and it feels pretty easy to do.
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 14,300 Member
    edited March 2021
    "Therefore, endogenous production of erythritol from glucose" does not sound like the erythritol floating in my protein bar.

    At some point of time I used to add five creams and four sugars into my coffee! Worked it down to triple triple. Eventually Double-Double. Then two creams. After starting to log switched them to milk. Within the year the coffee was black.

    It has been 7 years.... The other day they gave me a coffee with one cream and one sugar and I truly literally spat out that thing that was so _off_ compared to what I was expecting.

    You burn fat 24/7. Fat has the least amount of thermal effect of food, in other words it takes the least amount of effort to store fat as fat.

    Regardless of what you burn as fuel at any one particular minute, your total fuel during your 1440 daily minutes comes from the combination of your food intake and your existing energy reserves.

    The difference of long-term adherence versus any tiny, if it even exists, benefit of shading your food towards making high thermic effect choices (and yes I will even include protein in that) is the difference between the fact that long-term adhearance means you have succeeded vs burning a couple of more calories what means nothing if you don't also achieve long term adherence!

    Our nurse who does keto for some quick weight loss... a reminder that manipulating water weight through glycogen depletion during the induction phase of keto does result in the reduction of total weight, but when you reintroduce carbs the glycogen replenishes! Neither the initial high weight loss or the subsequent disproportionate 5o calories consumed weight gain are related to actual fat level changes. But the scale yo yo does play with people's brains...
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    I do coffee with IF until night time meals.

    The small amount of cream causes no response to my blood sugar, therefore no getting hungry or such. Pretty easy to compare days, or more correctly the difference between early coffee and late coffee.

    Coffee actually an appetite suppressant in right amount.
    I guess too much could cause some jitters for extra calorie burn. Ya - not purpose.

    The reason some "gurus" about IF state you cannot have any calories at all it it'll ruin some of the magical effects they claim happen on IF. Responses with no studied backup to the claims.

    Ditto's to burning fat stores isn't happening like you think.
    It all adds up the same no matter how you do it.

    Eat a small meal and if insulin goes up, you stop stored fat release (you'll still burn fat you ate) - for the short time it's up due to small meal.
    Then it drops and back to fat release.

    Eat a big meal and with insulin up - fat release stopped for much longer time, than back to normal eventually.
    The times add up, the differences in fat release and burn are inconsequential between the methods if the calorie deficit is the same.
    Obviously your ability to deal with that level of calories can be effected by what you eat, when you eat, and shoot, even what you eat first in a meal.
  • Rannoch3908
    Rannoch3908 Posts: 177 Member
    So is this not true from Harvard?
    IF makes intuitive sense. The food we eat is broken down by enzymes in our gut and eventually ends up as molecules in our bloodstream. Carbohydrates, particularly sugars and refined grains (think white flours and rice), are quickly broken down into sugar, which our cells use for energy. If our cells don’t use it all, we store it in our fat cells as, well, fat. But sugar can only enter our cells with insulin, a hormone made in the pancreas. Insulin brings sugar into the fat cells and keeps it there.

    Between meals, as long as we don’t snack, our insulin levels will go down and our fat cells can then release their stored sugar, to be used as energy. We lose weight if we let our insulin levels go down. The entire idea of IF is to allow the insulin levels to go down far enough and for long enough that we burn off our fat.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    Rannoch3908 wrote: »
    So is this not true from Harvard?
    IF makes intuitive sense. The food we eat is broken down by enzymes in our gut and eventually ends up as molecules in our bloodstream. Carbohydrates, particularly sugars and refined grains (think white flours and rice), are quickly broken down into sugar, which our cells use for energy. If our cells don’t use it all, we store it in our fat cells as, well, fat. But sugar can only enter our cells with insulin, a hormone made in the pancreas. Insulin brings sugar into the fat cells and keeps it there.

    Between meals, as long as we don’t snack, our insulin levels will go down and our fat cells can then release their stored sugar, to be used as energy. We lose weight if we let our insulin levels go down. The entire idea of IF is to allow the insulin levels to go down far enough and for long enough that we burn off our fat.

    FYI - the source for that statement is from a blog which is published under the header of Harvard Medical School. It would be a mistake to think that's anything like Harvard's official position on fasting, the author is simply someone who is publishing on that site. You'd still want to use the same standards for evaluating the reliability of claims, including the evidence, as you would for anything published anywhere.

    (In fact, even if this was Harvard's official position, you'd still want to use critical thinking to evaluate it and want to take a look at the evidence that was supporting the claim).
  • NVintage
    NVintage Posts: 1,463 Member
    edited March 2021
    As to breaking the fast - who cares? What is the downside of breaking the fast?
    because while some people use IF only to restrict calories, others are interested in the added health benefits that might occur after fasting for 12 hrs...
    "The metabolic switch occurs when glycogen stores in the liver are depleted, generally 12 h after the cessation of food intake, and adipose tissue lipolysis increases to produce more fatty acids and glycerol."
    "In those regimens that do not involve true fasting (see Table 1), the “metabolic switch” mechanism would not engage and presumably the mechanism of action is simply decreased caloric intake. Other potential mechanisms of health benefits from fasting are under study currently. These include the potential impact of intermittent fasting on inflammation, reactive oxygen species, blood pressure, and cholesterol levels [13,16], some of whose changes may occur simply due to weight loss but that may potentially also be impacted through mechanisms that are independent of weight change."

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6521152/
    ccrdragon wrote: »
    NVintage wrote: »
    Erythritol is a pentose-phosphate pathway metabolite and associated with adiposity gain
    in young adults
    Author(s): Katie C. Hootman, Jean-Pierre Trezzi, Lisa Kraemer, Lindsay S. Burwell,
    Xiangyi Dong, Kristin A. Guertin, Christian Jaeger, Patrick J. Stover, Karsten Hiller
    and Patricia A. Cassano
    Source: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of
    America , Vol. 114, No. 21 (May 23, 2017), pp. E4233-E4240
    Published by: National Academy of Sciences
    Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26483334

    That study does not say what you seem to be implying. First, the study that you are pointing to has nothing to do with consumption of erythritol - it has to with the body producing erythritol as a byproduct of glucose metabolism. Second, it was an observational study that did not measure the amount of erythritol that the study participants consumed - the only thing that they did was take a blood sample to measure the levels of serum erythritol (as a metabolite) at the start and end of the semester and then measure the differences in the levels.

    But to your original point, yes, some people do have increased appetite as a result of consuming artificial sweeteners, but the number of people who do is very small compared to the number of people who regularly consume the artificial sweeteners.

    As to breaking the fast - who cares? What is the downside of breaking the fast?

  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    NVintage wrote: »
    As to breaking the fast - who cares? What is the downside of breaking the fast?
    because while some people use IF only to restrict calories, others are interested in the added health benefits that occur after fasting for 12 hrs...
    "The metabolic switch occurs when glycogen stores in the liver are depleted, generally 12 h after the cessation of food intake, and adipose tissue lipolysis increases to produce more fatty acids and glycerol."
    "In those regimens that do not involve true fasting (see Table 1), the “metabolic switch” mechanism would not engage and presumably the mechanism of action is simply decreased caloric intake. Other potential mechanisms of health benefits from fasting are under study currently. These include the potential impact of intermittent fasting on inflammation, reactive oxygen species, blood pressure, and cholesterol levels [13,16], some of whose changes may occur simply due to weight loss but that may potentially also be impacted through mechanisms that are independent of weight change."

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6521152/
    ccrdragon wrote: »
    NVintage wrote: »
    Erythritol is a pentose-phosphate pathway metabolite and associated with adiposity gain
    in young adults
    Author(s): Katie C. Hootman, Jean-Pierre Trezzi, Lisa Kraemer, Lindsay S. Burwell,
    Xiangyi Dong, Kristin A. Guertin, Christian Jaeger, Patrick J. Stover, Karsten Hiller
    and Patricia A. Cassano
    Source: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of
    America , Vol. 114, No. 21 (May 23, 2017), pp. E4233-E4240
    Published by: National Academy of Sciences
    Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26483334

    That study does not say what you seem to be implying. First, the study that you are pointing to has nothing to do with consumption of erythritol - it has to with the body producing erythritol as a byproduct of glucose metabolism. Second, it was an observational study that did not measure the amount of erythritol that the study participants consumed - the only thing that they did was take a blood sample to measure the levels of serum erythritol (as a metabolite) at the start and end of the semester and then measure the differences in the levels.

    But to your original point, yes, some people do have increased appetite as a result of consuming artificial sweeteners, but the number of people who do is very small compared to the number of people who regularly consume the artificial sweeteners.

    As to breaking the fast - who cares? What is the downside of breaking the fast?

    I think the issue is that there isn't much research that triggering this "metabolic switch" is necessary or required for weight management or good health in general. So even it it was true that a packet of Equal in your coffee or a splash of milk in your tea stopped it from happening, what's the downside?
  • lgfrie
    lgfrie Posts: 1,449 Member
    Rannoch3908 wrote: »
    So is this not true from Harvard?
    IF makes intuitive sense. The food we eat is broken down by enzymes in our gut and eventually ends up as molecules in our bloodstream. Carbohydrates, particularly sugars and refined grains (think white flours and rice), are quickly broken down into sugar, which our cells use for energy. If our cells don’t use it all, we store it in our fat cells as, well, fat. But sugar can only enter our cells with insulin, a hormone made in the pancreas. Insulin brings sugar into the fat cells and keeps it there.

    Between meals, as long as we don’t snack, our insulin levels will go down and our fat cells can then release their stored sugar, to be used as energy. We lose weight if we let our insulin levels go down. The entire idea of IF is to allow the insulin levels to go down far enough and for long enough that we burn off our fat.

    The thing is, anyone that's been doing IF for a long time and tried both IF and non IF knows that IF doesn't really have an impact on weight loss, separate from caloric intake.

    I've been doing IF for almost two years. During that time, though, I've had periods when I wasn't doing IF, like a week here, a few weeks there, and last summer I took about 6 weeks off. Also I had a blood glucose scare and did serious low carb for a while, so I've got some n=1 data on that too (my BG has since dropped back below 100 and now I'm back on carbs, because they taste good).

    Anyway, I think it's possible that IF has a tiny, tiny, TINY impact on the rate of weight loss, in a positive way, but we're talking like "a little". So instead of losing 6 lbs in a month, maybe I lost 6.25 lbs in an IF month. Could just be margin of error. Could be real but nearly immaterial. And low carb made absolutely no difference at all in my weight loss. My spreadsheet could just as well not include macros for all the difference carbs make to my weight loss, which is to say "none".

    I don't think anyone who's done IF or Keto for a long time has experienced something different. These techniques do not impact weight loss except - and this is the important part - insofar as they help you control your calories.

    And so, the question becomes, since, in the real world, people on IF or low carb schemes lose weight almost precisely in accordance with their calories in and out, then what is all that mumbo jumbo about insulin and fat stores and cells releasing this and hormones doing that even mean? Pretty much nothing.
  • NVintage
    NVintage Posts: 1,463 Member


    That's interesting! I've been looking into why so many people regain weight back after a calorie restrictive diet, and one study showed, among other things, that the glucose and leptin levels were lower( after the diet) in those that didn't regain. And so that's one reason I'm interested in IF having the potential for lowering insulin and glucose levels. I do agree that there's not enough research yet. My specialty is anthropology not nutrition, though, so take what I think about it with a grain of salt!:)
    lgfrie wrote: »
    Rannoch3908 wrote: »
    So is this not true from Harvard?
    IF makes intuitive sense. The food we eat is broken down by enzymes in our gut and eventually ends up as molecules in our bloodstream. Carbohydrates, particularly sugars and refined grains (think white flours and rice), are quickly broken down into sugar, which our cells use for energy. If our cells don’t use it all, we store it in our fat cells as, well, fat. But sugar can only enter our cells with insulin, a hormone made in the pancreas. Insulin brings sugar into the fat cells and keeps it there.

    Between meals, as long as we don’t snack, our insulin levels will go down and our fat cells can then release their stored sugar, to be used as energy. We lose weight if we let our insulin levels go down. The entire idea of IF is to allow the insulin levels to go down far enough and for long enough that we burn off our fat.

    The thing is, anyone that's been doing IF for a long time and tried both IF and non IF knows that IF doesn't really have an impact on weight loss, separate from caloric intake.

    I've been doing IF for almost two years. During that time, though, I've had periods when I wasn't doing IF, like a week here, a few weeks there, and last summer I took about 6 weeks off. Also I had a blood glucose scare and did serious low carb for a while, so I've got some n=1 data on that too (my BG has since dropped back below 100 and now I'm back on carbs, because they taste good).

    Anyway, I think it's possible that IF has a tiny, tiny, TINY impact on the rate of weight loss, in a positive way, but we're talking like "a little". So instead of losing 6 lbs in a month, maybe I lost 6.25 lbs in an IF month. Could just be margin of error. Could be real but nearly immaterial. And low carb made absolutely no difference at all in my weight loss. My spreadsheet could just as well not include macros for all the difference carbs make to my weight loss, which is to say "none".

    I don't think anyone who's done IF or Keto for a long time has experienced something different. These techniques do not impact weight loss except - and this is the important part - insofar as they help you control your calories.

    And so, the question becomes, since, in the real world, people on IF or low carb schemes lose weight almost precisely in accordance with their calories in and out, then what is all that mumbo jumbo about insulin and fat stores and cells releasing this and hormones doing that even mean? Pretty much nothing.
    janejellyroll wrote: »
    NVintage wrote: »
    As to breaking the fast - who cares? What is the downside of breaking the fast?
    because while some people use IF only to restrict calories, others are interested in the added health benefits that occur after fasting for 12 hrs...
    "The metabolic switch occurs when glycogen stores in the liver are depleted, generally 12 h after the cessation of food intake, and adipose tissue lipolysis increases to produce more fatty acids and glycerol."
    "In those regimens that do not involve true fasting (see Table 1), the “metabolic switch” mechanism would not engage and presumably the mechanism of action is simply decreased caloric intake. Other potential mechanisms of health benefits from fasting are under study currently. These include the potential impact of intermittent fasting on inflammation, reactive oxygen species, blood pressure, and cholesterol levels [13,16], some of whose changes may occur simply due to weight loss but that may potentially also be impacted through mechanisms that are independent of weight change."

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6521152/
    ccrdragon wrote: »
    NVintage wrote: »
    Erythritol is a pentose-phosphate pathway metabolite and associated with adiposity gain
    in young adults
    Author(s): Katie C. Hootman, Jean-Pierre Trezzi, Lisa Kraemer, Lindsay S. Burwell,
    Xiangyi Dong, Kristin A. Guertin, Christian Jaeger, Patrick J. Stover, Karsten Hiller
    and Patricia A. Cassano
    Source: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of
    America , Vol. 114, No. 21 (May 23, 2017), pp. E4233-E4240
    Published by: National Academy of Sciences
    Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26483334

    That study does not say what you seem to be implying. First, the study that you are pointing to has nothing to do with consumption of erythritol - it has to with the body producing erythritol as a byproduct of glucose metabolism. Second, it was an observational study that did not measure the amount of erythritol that the study participants consumed - the only thing that they did was take a blood sample to measure the levels of serum erythritol (as a metabolite) at the start and end of the semester and then measure the differences in the levels.

    But to your original point, yes, some people do have increased appetite as a result of consuming artificial sweeteners, but the number of people who do is very small compared to the number of people who regularly consume the artificial sweeteners.

    As to breaking the fast - who cares? What is the downside of breaking the fast?

    I think the issue is that there isn't much research that triggering this "metabolic switch" is necessary or required for weight management or good health in general. So even it it was true that a packet of Equal in your coffee or a splash of milk in your tea stopped it from happening, what's the downside?

  • anawake13
    anawake13 Posts: 99 Member
    I have used IF as a part of my overall plan and it has helped. I do mine a bit differently than most. I do not keep to a regimented schedule as it impacts the family. Rather I start my fast after dinner whenever that may be then eat nothing for the next 16 to 18 hours. It may not be as productive as other methods but still helps
  • lgfrie
    lgfrie Posts: 1,449 Member
    anawake13 wrote: »
    I have used IF as a part of my overall plan and it has helped. I do mine a bit differently than most. I do not keep to a regimented schedule as it impacts the family. Rather I start my fast after dinner whenever that may be then eat nothing for the next 16 to 18 hours. It may not be as productive as other methods but still helps

    That's the "kitchen is closed" strategy. As in "after dinner, the kitchen is closed." For me, that's been 99 % of the benefit of IF right there. In fact I really don't care about the morning part anymore.

Categories