I am a Little Confused. Please Help.

Awkward30

Truly shocking? Truly shocking?

What is truly shocking is that someone can drop by, share personal experience and some sound advice because someone needs it, and get this unbelievable amount of people just go crazy on him. I am not dismissing the benefits of intermittent fasting. I don't question your own decisions. But I won't be silent while people throw me around like that. You keep referring to the 5 meal concept as if it were a total crock. Let me tell you something. Serious people in medicine and nutrition have been talking about frequent meals for at least 2 decades. Long before Atkins became popular and then faded as the myth it was. Long beft cae any of the crazy fads you see every 6 months were even in the imagination of any of their creators, people were experiencing the benefits of SMALL FREQUENT meals. If you think fasting will do something for you or the OP, by all means share it. In the meantime I'd appreciate if you respect me and keep in mind my advice was directed at a woman who wants to lose 80+ lbs and clearly stated that she's under eating on a regular basis because she's not hungry. Keep in mind I didn't start the thread... I was just helping.

What was so shocking anyway. You people are so unhappy following your fad crap that you can't imagine the idea of someone being happy and suggesting a lifestyle long lasting change that will make someone happy. The fact that you have a pathetic life is no excuse to make others miserable.


P.S. I'm editing this because I just read your leangains reference. You're following HIS advice like you just converted to a different religion. Seems like a lot of people that replied to my post are in the same boat. I'm going to clarify. The guy tries to prove a point, and in many cases his arguments sound like they make sense. I'm not going to say he's completely wrong. The guy is trying to make a living by selling his system anyway... Who else sold b.s... let me think.. Atkins... well. I'm not saying he's like Atkins... at least not completely. But he bases many of his counter arguments on the morally questionable nature of some people who think differently or on the lack of evidence for the opposing view. For crying out loud the lack of evidence on the truth of something doesn't automatically make the opposite view true by default. He's selling fasting, people who believe in starvation mode would never buy into fasting frequently unless they're brainwashed to stop believing starvation mode is real.

In my personal opinion and experience starvation mode is real. Most serious people in medicine and nutrition believe so too. And people that were close to me and severely overweight who often starved themselves because of their excess weight always failed to achieve anything. Doing things in the way we've come to find out that works.. made 2 out of 3 people I'm thinking about drop at least 60 lbs. All they had to do is eat with some structure, excersise, and avoid dropping under 80% of their caloric requirement, and that was to start with the main topic at hand since the OP wanted to eat too few calories.

I like this article because it is on women specifically. Of note, they were postmenopausal. Since not everyone may be familiar with primary sources, I bolded the things I think are most important to understanding why this is relevant
Menopause. 2012 Aug;19(8):870-876.
Short- and long-term effects of continuous versus intermittent restrictive diet approaches on body composition and the metabolic profile in overweight and obese postmenopausal women: a pilot study.
Arguin H, Dionne IJ, Sénéchal M, Bouchard DR, Carpentier AC, Ardilouze JL, Tremblay A, Leblanc C, Brochu M.
Source
From the 1Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Division of Kinesiology, Laval University, Quebec, Quebec, Canada; 2Faculty of Physical Education and Sports, University of Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada; 3Research Centre on Aging, Social Services and Health Centre, University Institute of Geriatrics of Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada; 4Faculty of Kinesiology and Recreation Management, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada; and 5Centre de Recherche Clinique Étienne-Le Bel, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke (CHUS), Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE:
The objective of this study was to compare changes in body composition and the metabolic profile between women taking an intermittent diet (ID) and women taking a continuous diet (CD).
METHODS:
Twenty-five obese postmenopausal women were randomized to an ID (n = 13) or a CD (n = 12). In the ID, 5-week energy restriction periods were followed by 5-week weight stabilization periods. In the CD, 15 weeks of energy restriction was followed by 5 weeks of weight stabilization. Outcome measures before, during, and after weight loss, as well as after a 1-year follow-up, were body weight and composition, waist circumference, resting metabolic rate, and fasting lipid and glucose levels.
RESULTS:
Body weight, waist circumference, percentage fat mass, and fat mass decreased significantly and similarly in both groups (P < 0.0001). Both groups showed similar overall decreases in plasma total cholesterol and triglycerides (all P < 0.05). Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol improved significantly in the CD group only, whereas fasting glucose decreased significantly in the ID group only. High-density lipoprotein cholesterol and resting metabolic rate remained stable in both groups. Fasting plasma triglyceride and glucose levels were the only metabolic variables to further improve after the fifth week of the protocol. At the 1-year follow-up, both interventions were associated with successful and similar weight loss maintenance and improvements in fasting plasma glucose levels.
CONCLUSIONS:
The ID resulted in similar short- and long-term changes in body composition and metabolic profile compared with a CD. Most improvements occurred during the first 5 weeks of treatment in both interventions.

nt J Obes (Lond). 2011 May;35(5):714-27. Epub 2010 Oct 5.
The effects of intermittent or continuous energy restriction on weight loss and metabolic disease risk markers: a randomized trial in young overweight women.
Harvie MN, Pegington M, Mattson MP, Frystyk J, Dillon B, Evans G, Cuzick J, Jebb SA, Martin B, Cutler RG, Son TG, Maudsley S, Carlson OD, Egan JM, Flyvbjerg A, Howell A.
Source
Genesis Prevention Centre, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK. michelle.harvie@manchester.ac.uk
Abstract
BACKGROUND:
The problems of adherence to energy restriction in humans are well known.
OBJECTIVE:
To compare the feasibility and effectiveness of intermittent continuous energy (IER) with continuous energy restriction (CER) for weight loss, insulin sensitivity and other metabolic disease risk markers.
DESIGN:
Randomized comparison of a 25% energy restriction as IER (∼ 2710 kJ/day for 2 days/week) or CER (∼ 6276 kJ/day for 7 days/week) in 107 overweight or obese (mean (± s.d.) body mass index 30.6 (± 5.1) kg m(-2)) premenopausal women observed over a period of 6 months. Weight, anthropometry, biomarkers for breast cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular disease and dementia risk; insulin resistance (HOMA), oxidative stress markers, leptin, adiponectin, insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-1 and IGF binding proteins 1 and 2, androgens, prolactin, inflammatory markers (high sensitivity C-reactive protein and sialic acid), lipids, blood pressure and brain-derived neurotrophic factor were assessed at baseline and after 1, 3 and 6 months.
RESULTS:
Last observation carried forward analysis showed that IER and CER are equally effective for weight loss: mean (95% confidence interval ) weight change for IER was -6.4 (-7.9 to -4.8) kg vs -5.6 (-6.9 to -4.4) kg for CER (P-value for difference between groups = 0.4). Both groups experienced comparable reductions in leptin, free androgen index, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, total and LDL cholesterol, triglycerides, blood pressure and increases in sex hormone binding globulin, IGF binding proteins 1 and 2. Reductions in fasting insulin and insulin resistance were modest in both groups, but greater with IER than with CER; difference between groups for fasting insulin was -1.2 (-1.4 to -1.0) μU ml(-1) and for insulin resistance was -1.2 (-1.5 to -1.0) μU mmol(-1) l(-1) (both P = 0.04).
CONCLUSION:
IER is as effective as CER with regard to weight loss, insulin sensitivity and other health biomarkers, and may be offered as an alternative equivalent to CER for weight loss and reducing disease risk.


There is a lot of research showing that various types of intermittent fasting is fine. Please cite some sources for your statements so I may evaluate them. I like to make informed health decisions and would change my opinion if presented with sufficient information to warrant it.

Award,

Thank you for taking the time to share that information.

I dropped by in this thread to help the OP. Nothing else. As as said in my unusually long post (in which I covered healthy food, smoking, lifestyle changes, long term goals, my own experience, and some tips I intended specifically for her), I mentioned that when I go into unhealthy living I completely abandon anything related to fitness, I said I had been totally inactive for 2 years (enough to be completely unaware of this relatively new IF thingy). I wasn't aware of its existence. As I said I just wanted to help the OP with her situation. She was confused and clearly stated she had a rough time eating because she's not hungry (and there might be many reasons for that), she didn't understand a lot of basics, plus she needed more support than cold hard facts, or research references to anything really. I simply shared some personal stuff and tried to give her the best advice I could.

The next thing I know, I was under attack for no good reason. People just got very crazy on me. And I just don't want to argue, I really don't. I started by saying this was meant for the OP, explaining I didn't deny their way could work as well, I mean, I really tried being nice after all hell broke loose. All I got was more confrontation and people quoting this leangains website. At some point I got really upset. I went to the website, I read some of it. I don't say the guy is wrong. A lot of people seem to be happy, and many others appear to get good results. I personally found a way to make the 5 meals deal work for me (not only I can manage to do it comfortably but I also get results). I couldn't imagine myself trying to go for 8 hours with no food, just not going to happen. However if it's your cup of tea and it works.. by all means. Bottom line is, many people need lifestyle changes when it comes to food.. according to some numbers 2/3 of the american population. If that is in the form of IF, paleo diet, raw diet, eating 5 times a day, eating 9 times a day, vegan, frutarian.... it's just a matter of preference, they are all healthy choices if done right and come with good sleep and exercise.

At some point I mentioned how the guy basically tries to destroy all conventional wisdom. I don't agree with it. Things shouldn't be my way or the highway. What works for me might not work for you, etc, etc. I for once could tolerate the drug Chantix to quit smoking, many others can't. Am I going to throw bricks at a guy who says the thing doesn't work? Of course not. However people were acting like if they were fighting for their religion, or as if they were in a political debate. Scroll up and back, that was never my intention.

I do't thing I need to quote any of my research, since I don't intend to prove anything. As long as you have enough C-P-F in your diet, and have a number of calories in a healthy range, I think you can do whatever suits you.

I wasn't attacking you, I just have a huge problem with people telling other people that they need to do things a certain way. That includes people that say fasting is the only way to go. However, if you read the leangains site, you'll see he says that there are a lot of benefits, but that the lifestyle is not for everyone.

Anyways, my main point is just that meal frequency doesn't matter.

yarwell

FFS can't you reply without quoting the whole damn thing you're replying to !

Marmitegeoff

To help with the smoking, NOT a lecture. I have not touched tobacco in 40 years, before that I was on 80+ per day plus a pipe in the evenings.

I carried an open pack with me all the time to prove that I was giving up because "I wanted to" and not because "I had not got any". This was way before all the modern help, patches etc. But it worked for me, and means that you can stop when you want, not at a particular time/date, when you have finished your last one in the pack.

It is a bit of a peculiar idea but it worked for me and is the second best thing that I have done. before you ask married for getting on for 40 years is the first :>).

jamit82

I wasn't attacking you, I just have a huge problem with people telling other people that they need to do things a certain way. That includes people that say fasting is the only way to go. However, if you read the leangains site, you'll see he says that there are a lot of benefits, but that the lifestyle is not for everyone.

Anyways, my main point is just that meal frequency doesn't matter.

I know you weren't attacking me. You made a very smart and valuable contribution. That's the reason I replied to it in such detail. I know leangains has to have something to it, a lot of people see to love it. I just couldn't give advice to the OP on a program I didn't know then. Even if I had known it, my advice would be based on what I know and what has worked for me. I couldn't give her advice on say, paleo diet, right?

My only problem with the leangains website is that it basically invalidates something that has worked for a lot of people. It really looks like some people take it like some sort of cult. That's why other posters (again, not you) attacked me sin such a way.


On a side note, meal frequency may or may not have scientific, or metabolic, or what ever other benefits you might think of, but it does help people who need some structure, it helps people with a lot of little things like cravings, eating better quality food... it has a lot of benefits to it besides the metabolic impact (even if it really doesn't exist). That was again, in part, what I meant to provide the OP with.

everhard

hi SaundraPino,
about carb, and diabete, you could join one of the group here like Type 2 Diabetes Support Group
And you can also have a look at web site specialize like http://www.diabeticlivingonline.com/.
So if you're afraid of borderline diabete because of family history and being overweight, i can tell you this :
You see, i've been an almost type 2 for a little more than a year now, because of my obesity and i've also learned that some of my family, mexican indian side, have diabete type 2 too ( they were also obese). Right now, I'm under medication ( really small one: one pill a day) and i've lost 16 lb. And i'm eating carb ( as my friend, you can have a look at my diary ^^). Last blood test, my glucose number were fine. No more type 2... My uncle in mexico as done the same : lost lots of weight, cardio, an a small medication and type 2 is no more in sight. But we have to be aware that it could came back if we regain too much weight or eat too much "bad carb". Hope this will help you. Have a nice day!

SaundraPino

Goodness what an overload LOL

In reply to every one first of all you are ALL entitled to your opinion, but I will say just because someone has a different one from you does NOT give you the right to attack each other. I asked for opinions and you do NOT have to agree with everyone.

I have read all the material, even contradicting just to get an overview. I will say I will not be eating 5 meals a day as I struggle with just 3. I snack only to get close to my calorie goal. I know the opinions on this, but I have to do what is best for me right???

Over the last few days I have found that carbs are not by biggest problem, but salt is. I am working on it.

I agree with everyone in a way and I will be using different tips from all.

Malicent--- I had to read your first post a couple of times before it really clicked what you were trying to say. You made me realize that there is a reason that when I don't eat all day I gorge myself at night, eat unhealthy etc. I am currently eating 3 meals, and I find myself going a bit smaller at night because of it, and have more energy. You also answered my question of why the heck I would eat calories I burned, which really was mind boggling for me. Thank you.

Originalcookiemonster--- I was just doing cardio period, and I am glad you brought it up. I have added a mix of strength exercises to my regimen, and I am glad I did. (especially after you brought up the loose skin.)

Jamit82---- I have had the problem of starting a regimen, losing weight, getting stressed, losing faith or whatever and I go back completely as well. I have been there!! When it comes to being to serious about our body, dieting etc. I don't think there is a to serious when we have horribly unhealthy habits. You out eating breakfast into perspective for me. I love the way you worded it saying that my body will have been 7 hours without food, and now thinking about it. I would usually eat my last meal around 7PM and wouldn't eat until 1PM the next day which is 18 hours without eating. As for the water, I have no problem with how much I drink. I usually am a little closer to 1 gallon a day, as I don't drink anything else. As for the exercise living in AZ you have a point LOL. I think for me "it's to hot" it has been an excuse for so long I have to break myself of it.

Sunlover89--- Eating from 4PM-8PM I don't think would work for me, as my biggest problem is gorging myself when I am hungry. It might be an option for the future, but as for now I need to learn control first *blush*

Hendrix7--- If you have nothing nice to say, don't say anything at all. You didn't give any advice what so ever, you just took hits at people that were trying to help. They are called OPINIONS for a reason. You don't have to agree.

Angel759--- Thank you. What you said made sense.

Kingscrown--- You sound very similar to where I am at right now eating wise, as for the exercise I am working on it. Thanks

T34418l3angel----Thank you, I will do what I need for me, and what works best.

uclown2002--- I read the links, and thank you for that, but there is NO REASON to be rude. Everyone is entitled to their opinions!!

mcdiver--- Thank you for the link to help me quite smoking. I did not find it preachy at all, as I will take any and all advice on this. THANKS!!

bulbadoof---- I have been using your advice of sneaking calories into my food, and it really has helped!! I would have never thought of it LOL as I had been trying to make really low calorie meals. Thank you. I have always heard how bad carbs were etc but you made me really see them as an energy source. (my mom was a diet fanatic and always told us to stay away from carbs, but thinking about it, it really didn't help her LOL). Thanks

Award30--- I do like my muscle LOL. Thanks for the research as well. It put the different options into perspective, even if I'm not post menopausal LOL. I think after I fet my binging under control, this can be a real option for me.


Again thanks to everyone for the responses, and help, and I think I covered everyone.

Awkward30

FFS can't you reply without quoting the whole damn thing you're replying to !

People weren't reading it and then typing unsubstantiated "But you NEED breakfast or your metabolism dies!"

So by quoting it a few times there is hope that someone might read it and not type a blatantly untrue statement. Or worse yet, substantiate it with an incorrect explanation of the thermic effect of feeding. That pisses me off most because they lead the reader to think that they know what they are talking about, when they are actually mis-understanding the concept