Intermittent fasting

glennowill

Has anybody here tried intermittent fasting? For those who don't know, the idea is to break your day into a fasting window and a feeding window. The most popular is referred to as 16:8, where you fast for 16 hours and have a feeding window of 8 hours. I don't do it super seriously, but I do enjoy doing the 16:8 method. I find I'm not too hungry in the morning so it's easy for me to wait until 11am or Noon to eat. I like it because you have more calories to work with and for me, from a mental standpoint, makes hunger less of a big deal.

Al_Howard

The last thing I read, yesterday, was that the jury's still out. They said more data is needed. You know these science guys, never satisfied. Thank God. We'd still be in the stone age. LOL

crewahl

Being told there’s some thing or some time I can’t eat triggers my deprivation gland. As a result, fasting would just get an “e” and transition to “feasting”.

Hard pass here, I’m afraid. “A man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do . . . “

podkey

Time of day seems to make little if any difference in eating per se. I don't intentionally do intermittent fasting but it is about 12 hours between dinner and my morning meal. My morning meal which I might call breakfast is NOT within an hour of arising so technically not defined as "breakfast". I usually get up early and eat 2-3 hours later. When working and commuting 14 miles each way to work over the hills I had one piece of dry toast and coffee and then lunch at 11 a.m. Anecdotally I seem to do slightly better eating my veggie omelet a couple of hours after arising these days. My wife would starve doing this, but it is normal for me these days.
One of the headlined articles "proving" that eating late was bad was just that, bad science. This study in Spain actually found that it made no difference to have that food at 9 or 10 o'clock at night. They rationalized saying that those who ate a later LUNCH struggled more with weight. In the fine print they argued that since many folks in Spain eat more for lunch that using lunch timing made more sense to look at. I cynically feel they did that data digging to justify the grant money spent.

It wouldn't bother me to eat 16 hours after dinner but typically it is more like 12 hours.

I think you should just do what works for you and you alone.
I agree that I am not normally hungry until 11 a.m. either.

misterhub

I have no issue with people eating on their own timeframe. I generally eat a late breakfast. For years I didn’t eat breakfast at all. So, if it suits your purposes, then do it. I have a friend who used intermittent fasting successfully.

That said, I don’t think time of consumption is critical to success. It’s still a calorie deficit that is important. But, if the frame of an intermittent fast helps, then I think you’re fine.