intermittent fasting critis

meerkat70

Unfortunately IF seems to be going much the same way as the low carb movement in some of the exaggerated and cherry picked claims that are made on its behalf.

This is *exactly* it for me. I see no problem with the practice. But when people start claiming it's a source of eternal youth, cures cancer and will fix global poverty, I start to get a little agitated.

darrensurrey

What I would like to know is whether IF helps those at the lower end of the BF range eg 14%.

myofibril

What I would like to know is whether IF helps those at the lower end of the BF range eg 14%.

If it suits your preferences as an individual then absolutely.

darrensurrey

What I would like to know is whether IF helps those at the lower end of the BF range eg 14%.

If it suits your preferences as an individual then absolutely.

You mean it might not work for some?

clobercow

That's simply not true, clober. There's a pretty consistent evidence base for many weightloss related practices. For instance, we know how cals in and out work, we understand the relative benefits of protein intake, carb reduction, resistance training, endurance work, HIIT.

However, with IF, there aren't just weightloss claims (which really can be explained largely through overall calorie reduction) there are also claims around the impact on ageing, for instance. There's pretty much NO human trial based evidence for this. There're are also no human trials comparing weightloss from IF vs weightloss from ordinary cal reduction.

I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but there's no evidence base. Again, I'm not suggesting anyone should stop on the basis of this, and if you're benefiting from it, that's absolutely great, and I'm genuinely happy for you. But don't be suggesting that critics haven't 'done their homework', since reading up on this practice is pretty challenging, given that there's not much out there to read.....

Actually, I think weight loss is not as simple as calories in vs calories out. There is plenty of evidence that suggests that hormonal behaviors and how individual foods effect them matter just as much. Food addiction is a real problem for obesity and health, and has little to do with calories in vs calories out.. Caloric deficit makes sense to an extent, but It's overly simplistic. I agree that carb reduction is critical and resistance training is important as well and drastically underestimated in its effects.

Clearly what I said is anecdotal and is what I believe. I also suggested that it could be placebo and it's clearly my opinion. So I don't see any "bad news" so to speak. However, I also disagree with what you said. For decades the normal american diet was breakfast at 8:00am and dinner at 6:00pm. It has come clear, that as this normality started disappearing decades ago, obesity started to grow. That is a different topic though. I haven't checked, but there has to be a study somewhere that has something similar. After all, that is 14 hours between those two meals and does fall under the definition of IF that is commonly used and is very close to a normal diet frequency.

There are many areas of human anthropology that can support not eating for as little as 12 hours to as many as days at a time as being normal. So knowing that and what you're saying may be technically true, my body tells me that what I'm doing is a good thing and it's responding very positively. I feel better than I ever have, especially better than when I tried other diets just based on the overly simplistic calories in vs calories out. I wont say that you're wrong, just that I disagree and I will recommend this to others. It's up to each person to find out if doing something as simple as moving breakfast a couple of hours later, or moving dinner a couple of hours earlier is right for them. The same thing goes for low carb, or extended fasts which I also benefit from.

myofibril

What I would like to know is whether IF helps those at the lower end of the BF range eg 14%.

If it suits your preferences as an individual then absolutely.

You mean it might not work for some?

Yep, it might not work for everyone. It sits well with some people, not so well with others. Ultimately, it's about what you can adhere to and what you emotionally invest in...

I do think people should experiment with different eating regimes to find which one suits them better. "There are many roads which lead to Rome" and so on.

However, don't get sidelined by the idea that any one approach is significantly better on an inherent basis for all.

darrensurrey

What I would like to know is whether IF helps those at the lower end of the BF range eg 14%.

If it suits your preferences as an individual then absolutely.

You mean it might not work for some?

Yep, it might not work for everyone. It sits well with some people, not so well with others. Ultimately, it's about what you can adhere to and what you emotionally invest in...

I do think people should experiment with different eating regimes to find which one suits them better. "There are many roads which lead to Rome" and so on.

However, don't get sidelined by the idea that any one approach is significantly better on an inherent basis for all.

Thanks. But you're saying it can work for some with lower levels of bodyfat?

myofibril

Thanks. But you're saying it can work for some with lower levels of bodyfat?

For sure.

meerkat70

Thanks. But you're saying it can work for some with lower levels of bodyfat?

For sure.

Though, again, this is based on the 'hey, why not give it a go' principle, rather than on any evidence base.

darrensurrey

Thanks. But you're saying it can work for some with lower levels of bodyfat?

For sure.

Though, again, this is based on the 'hey, why not give it a go' principle, rather than on any evidence base.

Thanks... and thanks. Yes, appreciate the above was with the caveat that it might not work for many.

Alohathin

Thanks. But you're saying it can work for some with lower levels of bodyfat?

For sure.

Though, again, this is based on the 'hey, why not give it a go' principle, rather than on any evidence base.

I understand your skepticism. There is a lot of hyperbole, as with any "new and improved" idea. I don't fall for all the pretty claims, either.

But I am trying it, and I do prefer it to the 5-6 meals a day, if only for convenience.

I haven't really noticed a difference in my energy level...good or bad...nor have I felt less satiated at any time of the day. So, as long as that continues, and the scale keeps registering lower numbers, I'm going to stick to it.

clobercow

Thanks. But you're saying it can work for some with lower levels of bodyfat?

For sure.

Though, again, this is based on the 'hey, why not give it a go' principle, rather than on any evidence base.

Your point is clear. You can be critical all you want with other peoples actions, but it's still up to the person. I like to form my opinions around facts, but when facts are lacking (since you so clearly pointed out multiple times), sometimes we want to be adventurous and just try something new. The warning buzzer can keep going off, but it can be tuned out, especially for someone like me that sees clarity in the path that is warned against.

meerkat70

Your point is clear. You can be critical all you want with other peoples actions, but it's still up to the person. I like to form my opinions around facts, but when facts are lacking (since you so clearly pointed out multiple times), sometimes we want to be adventurous and just try something new. The warning buzzer can keep going off, but it can be tuned out, especially for someone like me that sees clarity in the path that is warned against.

How strange, clober. I don't think I've been 'critical of other peoples' actions' at any point in this thread. Quite the opposite, I feel.

I'm also not sure anyone has 'warned against' any path.

JNick77

Your point is clear. You can be critical all you want with other peoples actions, but it's still up to the person. I like to form my opinions around facts, but when facts are lacking (since you so clearly pointed out multiple times)

I can respect your opinion of doing what works for you and there's nothing wrong with that. Not all things work for everybody and you have to find what works for you. Something like IF isn't for anybody, however; make no mistake about it there is a lot of fact-base behind the value of 16/8 IF. There is also plenty of support for eating multiple small meals throughout the day, just as you can support low-carb, carb-cycling etc. There are plenty of proven fact-based ways to manage your diet and IF is just one of them.

So far I am digging the16/8 IF but that's not to say that at some point I wouldn't go back to distributing my calories across 5 or 6 meals thoughout the day either because I was also very successful that way. I had lost 30lbs doing that but I've plateaued and I want to give IF a whirl.

There's no use being critical (not directed at any one individual here) of other's choices or being rude to anybody in this thread. This thread is not to debate the value or fact-based behind IF because it's already been proven. Let's use this as a support thread for those using IF.

Alright, off to CA. Eat smart, work hard folks... later.

meerkat70

Your point is clear. You can be critical all you want with other peoples actions, but it's still up to the person. I like to form my opinions around facts, but when facts are lacking (since you so clearly pointed out multiple times)

I can respect your opinion of doing what works for you and there's nothing wrong with that. Not all things work for everybody and you have to find what works for you. Something like IF isn't for anybody, however; make no mistake about it there is a lot of fact-base behind the value of 16/8 IF. There is also plenty of support for eating multiple small meals throughout the day, just as you can support low-carb, carb-cycling etc. There are plenty of proven fact-based ways to manage your diet and IF is just one of them.

So far I am digging the16/8 IF but that's not to say that at some point I wouldn't go back to distributing my calories across 5 or 6 meals thoughout the day either because I was also very successful that way. I had lost 30lbs doing that but I've plateaued and I want to give IF a whirl.

There's no use being critical (not directed at any one individual here) of other's choices or being rude to anybody in this thread. This thread is not to debate the value or fact-based behind IF because it's already been proven. Let's use this as a support thread for those using IF.

Alright, off to CA. Eat smart, work hard folks... later.

Could you provide links to some of that evidence base, please? As I pointed out above, there's evidence of 'no difference' between it and other calorie reduction. Did you have something else to add?

Again, since I don't seem to be making this point clearly enough, I'm not being critical of IF, and if it works for individuals, more power to them. I just don't think that claims it is 'better' (other than perhaps 'better for you', or 'fits better with your lifestyle') are founded in evidence.

clobercow

double post

clobercow

Deleted. Not worth the hassle.

meerkat70

Deleted, since the cranky post has been deleted and my reply doesn't make much sense any more.

billyh333

What I would like to know is whether IF helps those at the lower end of the BF range eg 14%.

that's why i tried it was stuck at like around 10 percent then I did the if my fat melted away now i am in the 7 range.

billyh333

And if you guys are so anti intermittent fastin start your own post talking crap on it that's the best advice.

rogerbosch

I started IF today (16/8)… Feels good! I'm just wondering if I can eat up my calories, they now seem so many.
I started this because I felt lousy and without energy especially in the afternoon… Besides I was gaining weight, in spite of my deficit. I think that might be because I've also started taking creatine lately, but still…

Hopefully IF will help me to reach my goal.

meerkat70

And if you guys are so anti intermittent fastin start your own post talking crap on it that's the best advice.

Who are these guys you are referring to?

Smuterella

And if you guys are so anti intermittent fastin start your own post talking crap on it that's the best advice.

I'm trying to work out if this even qualifies as a sentence...

Prahasaurus

I got in to it because I was already doing it too- just didn't know skipping breakfast had a name!

Needs more love...

--P

asgumbs86

Completely agree but then how would you suggest one does their homework tho??? Your saying that there is much studies or factual evidence about it??? But what is factual evidence based on, trying to measure variations while trying to control specific environments. So unless they locked someone up for a specific period of time and exactly controlled their calories, exercise, sleep and every single day to day activity the only homework one can do is the same as others on here. And that is to try it but i would have advise to anyone trying it to clearly define what your goals are before you do it. There are quite a few studies claiming that they tried similar diets to control epilepsy. I feel that a diet, lifestyle or training program is a guide but its down to the individual to adapt and make it their own to suite themselves.

And from the comments and very good interlectual responses that your putting forward, i think you realise that. I do understand what your saying and where your coming from and your just trying to warn some people so that they don't go to far and seriously damage their health, because if taken too far is a likely possiblity, and i agree their are certain things which people should take into account as to whether it would be fessiable to live a type of fasting lifestyle because it may have a determental effect on them.

Which is why they should clearly define what their goals are first and take a good look at whether it could work for them. Thankyou for giving me another angle on things, really apreciate it.

MoreBean13

I got in to it because I was already doing it too- just didn't know skipping breakfast had a name!

Needs more love...

--P

???:huh:

evaleung87

Thanks for the post and all the comments.. found it fascinating and I'm open and willing to give this a go

Can anyone offer advice which IF would be best suited to me? I am 5ft3'' and weigh about 118lbs and trying to get down to 112lbs but I've been plateauing the last few months much to my frustration.

I will start IF on Monday 20th.

whiskeycharged

Thanks for the post and all the comments.. found it fascinating and I'm open and willing to give this a go

Can anyone offer advice which IF would be best suited to me? I am 5ft3'' and weigh about 118lbs and trying to get down to 112lbs but I've been plateauing the last few months much to my frustration.

I will start IF on Monday 20th.

I would suggest starting with lean gains 14 x 10. See how that works for you first and adjust after, if necessary.

I started with 16 x 8 and now also do a lot of 20 x 4. It just fit my schedule better.

asgumbs86

Totally up to you evaleung87, its how extreme you want to go, if you want to go extreme you can try the warrior diet 4 hrs of eating and 20hrs of not eating, or intermittient IF like the kind from my blog 8 hr window and 16 hrs of fasting.

Warrior i think i may try later in the year so i can't really comment but I do IF most weekends when i can control my food in take alot better. And then carb cycle in the week. Which seems to work well for me.

Just be clear on your goals, warrior if not taking on enough protein and amino acids can take muscle (same as anything else really) as well but if your goals are just weight loss then it doesn't matter so much and you'll probably see gains quickier but bigger shock to your body until it gets used to it (for some people). But for me IF seems to be working quite well.

Hope what i wrote helped.

mcrowe1016

Why is 14 X 10 recommended for women? What is the difference?