intermittent fasting

Options
2»

Replies

  • J72FIT
    J72FIT Posts: 5,948 Member
    Options
    Wowza. Okay, here we go...

    1. There's no such thing as "starvation mode." It's a myth. There is such a thing as metabolic adaptation, but that's a whole other thing and nothing you need to worry about right now (or ever).

    2. You do not need to fast to lose weight. Cut it out with these fad diets and keep it simple: moderate calorie deficit and exercise. If you pick up heavy things and put them back down, even better.

    3. Your metabolism is probably not slow. "I have a slow metabolism" is an excuse for being overweight that just won't cut it around here. You became overweight just like the rest of us - by eating too much.

    4. Weight loss is calories in vs. calories out. Meal timing makes NO difference. If you're eating 1500 calories per day, you can spread that over 6 meals at 2 hour intervals or you can eat it all at once and you'd still get the same results.

    5. You need these threads:

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1235566-so-you-re-new-here?hl=so+you're+new
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1080242-a-guide-to-get-you-started-on-your-path-to-sexypants

    ^^This. Intermittent Fasting (although I would nit pick and say it is not a fad diet) is basically a "protocol" of eating.

    Exactly, not a fad diet... more like an eating pattern...
  • williams969
    williams969 Posts: 2,528 Member
    Options
    I don't do intermittent fasting on purpose...it just happens to be the way I like to eat. I'm not hungry in the mornings, but I like to eat at night. I don't eat until 12 and then have dinner at 5:30 and a late night snack right before 8:00. So every day I technically "fast" from 8 p.m. until 12 p.m. the next day.

    I like that it gives me a shorter window of opportunity to get my calories in. If I start eating when I wake up and have to space out 1300 calories from 7 AM to 8 PM, I would fail, no question. That is just the way I prefer to eat, and the way I get the best results. It really doesn't matter what time you eat, as long as you stay within your calories for the day.

    I'm another "accidental" IF-er. Actually, it was just in the last week or so that I realized--"Hey, I AM an IF-er! And...it's NOT weird." I've never been a big breakfast at 6 or 7 am person (sometimes, but it's rare). Sure, there's one day every few weeks where I really want a McMuffin, but for the most part (and I will never give up am coffee, EVER lol), I'm breaking my fast around 11am or noon. I stop eating for the night around 7 or 8pm. It's natural for me.

    It's not something I advertise, either, maybe for the sometimes negative feedback from others who don't fully understand it. In fact, my diary "looks" totally normal--breakfast, lunch, snacks, dinner, etc. are all there. It's just the "when" that may be different than others' schedules. No biggie--it works for me. I still eat the same deficit as anyone else would--just makes me more compliant with it.
  • taiyola
    taiyola Posts: 964 Member
    Options
    I have done IF a couple of times as 5:2. This was mainly because I kept over-eating, even when I wasn't hungry. I found it helped a lot for making me realise when I was hungry.

    I would do it again - it's a tool for me to use when I start to get greedy and eat for the sake of it cos I'm bored etc!
  • WalkingAlong
    WalkingAlong Posts: 4,926 Member
    Options
    I'm breaking my fast around 11am or noon. I stop eating for the night around 7 or 8pm.
    I'm not sure I'd call that intermittent fasting so much as just 'skipping breakfast'. I think that's how a huge part of the world eats.
  • williams969
    williams969 Posts: 2,528 Member
    Options
    I'm breaking my fast around 11am or noon. I stop eating for the night around 7 or 8pm.
    I'm not sure I'd call that intermittent fasting so much as just 'skipping breakfast'. I think that's how a huge part of the world eats.

    I guess I'm confused, then. Is that not 16:8 IF?
  • Tydeclare44
    Tydeclare44 Posts: 572 Member
    Options
    I've never done IF but have read up a lot about it. From what I've heard, This should be more about convenience in lifestyle rather than weight loss. The main point (again, form what I've seen) Is the fact that you can getup in the morning and just go, don't have to worry about bringing 6 tupperwares with you, and then eat your calories when you are allotted. Naturally, this will lead to weight loss from satiation and your body cleaning your proverbial cupboards for energy. But like I said, I wouldn't chose this strictly for weight loss. If it doesn't seem like it would fit in your daily life, I wouldn't start it
  • WalkingAlong
    WalkingAlong Posts: 4,926 Member
    Options
    I guess I'm confused, then. Is that not 16:8 IF?

    I guess you're right. It's how I tend to eat naturally, too, that's part of why it doesn't seem like a fasting protocol to me.

    http://dailyburn.com/life/health/intermittent-fasting-methods/
  • libbydoodle11
    libbydoodle11 Posts: 1,351 Member
    Options
    bump to read later
  • williams969
    williams969 Posts: 2,528 Member
    Options
    I guess I'm confused, then. Is that not 16:8 IF?

    I guess you're right. It's how I tend to eat naturally, too, that's part of why it doesn't seem like a fasting protocol to me.

    http://dailyburn.com/life/health/intermittent-fasting-methods/

    I think there's a point to be made about the "naturallness" so to speak of different protocols. A given eating style should be sustainable and well matched to the person. Even 5:2, JUDDD, etc. can fit very well to certain people's lifestyles.

    How many people we know that like to "bank" calories during the week for a bigger feast on, say, a weekend night out. Those EOD/5:2 protocols may be right up their alley, and can feel like a natural way of eating for them. It's not my thing, but that doesn't discount it, nonetheless.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    Options
    Can I get the short version on this?

    Sure!

    "Starvation mode isn't meaningful until you're already skinny and looking like a starvation victim."
  • WalkingAlong
    WalkingAlong Posts: 4,926 Member
    Options
    I guess I'm confused, then. Is that not 16:8 IF?

    I guess you're right. It's how I tend to eat naturally, too, that's part of why it doesn't seem like a fasting protocol to me.

    http://dailyburn.com/life/health/intermittent-fasting-methods/

    I think there's a point to be made about the "naturallness" so to speak of different protocols. A given eating style should be sustainable and well matched to the person. Even 5:2, JUDDD, etc. can fit very well to certain people's lifestyles.

    How many people we know that like to "bank" calories during the week for a bigger feast on, say, a weekend night out. Those EOD/5:2 protocols may be right up their alley, and can feel like a natural way of eating for them. It's not my thing, but that doesn't discount it, nonetheless.
    Sustainable for the period of the fast? I'd agree. I don't agree with the people that say "the way you lose the weight is the way you need to maintain it".
  • AlyssaJoJo
    AlyssaJoJo Posts: 449 Member
    Options
    Once I stopped listening to the " You HAVE to eat Breakfast everyday" bs I found that I naturally did 16:8 for the most part. Now I'm thinking with winter coming up doing 5:2. I feel like I can easily add it into my life - right now I'm mostly just researching it to make sure I have all the facts - but I'm pretty sure with in the next couple of weeks I'm going to start it.
  • La5Vega5Girl
    La5Vega5Girl Posts: 709 Member
    Options


    Exactly, not a fad diet... more like an eating pattern...

    ^^ I agree with this ^^
  • nicsflyingcircus
    nicsflyingcircus Posts: 2,426 Member
    Options
    I guess I'm confused, then. Is that not 16:8 IF?

    I guess you're right. It's how I tend to eat naturally, too, that's part of why it doesn't seem like a fasting protocol to me.

    http://dailyburn.com/life/health/intermittent-fasting-methods/

    This is how I eat naturally as well, in general, though I often have coffee in the morning, with half and half.
  • williams969
    williams969 Posts: 2,528 Member
    Options
    I guess I'm confused, then. Is that not 16:8 IF?

    I guess you're right. It's how I tend to eat naturally, too, that's part of why it doesn't seem like a fasting protocol to me.

    http://dailyburn.com/life/health/intermittent-fasting-methods/

    This is how I eat naturally as well, in general, though I often have coffee in the morning, with half and half.

    :drinker: Cheers! I can easily forgo food until lunchtime, but you'll have to pry my morning cuppa joe from my cold, dead hands!
  • Marbella29660
    Marbella29660 Posts: 71 Member
    Options
    Wowza. Okay, here we go...

    1. There's no such thing as "starvation mode." It's a myth. There is such a thing as metabolic adaptation, but that's a whole other thing and nothing you need to worry about right now (or ever).

    2. You do not need to fast to lose weight. Cut it out with these fad diets and keep it simple: moderate calorie deficit and exercise. If you pick up heavy things and put them back down, even better.

    3. Your metabolism is probably not slow. "I have a slow metabolism" is an excuse for being overweight that just won't cut it around here. You became overweight just like the rest of us - by eating too much.

    4. Weight loss is calories in vs. calories out. Meal timing makes NO difference. If you're eating 1500 calories per day, you can spread that over 6 meals at 2 hour intervals or you can eat it all at once and you'd still get the same results.

    5. You need these threads:

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1235566-so-you-re-new-here?hl=so+you're+new
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1080242-a-guide-to-get-you-started-on-your-path-to-sexypants

    This lady is on the money, take it or leave it. Your choice!
  • La5Vega5Girl
    La5Vega5Girl Posts: 709 Member
    Options
    Once I stopped listening to the " You HAVE to eat Breakfast everyday" bs I found that I naturally did 16:8 for the most part. Now I'm thinking with winter coming up doing 5:2. I feel like I can easily add it into my life - right now I'm mostly just researching it to make sure I have all the facts - but I'm pretty sure with in the next couple of weeks I'm going to start it.

    yes, I still find a lot of people who cringe when they find that I do not eat breakfast.
  • FatAsianNerd
    FatAsianNerd Posts: 600 Member
    Options
    Marbella29660 wrote: »
    Wowza. Okay, here we go...

    1. There's no such thing as "starvation mode." It's a myth. There is such a thing as metabolic adaptation, but that's a whole other thing and nothing you need to worry about right now (or ever).

    2. You do not need to fast to lose weight. Cut it out with these fad diets and keep it simple: moderate calorie deficit and exercise. If you pick up heavy things and put them back down, even better.

    3. Your metabolism is probably not slow. "I have a slow metabolism" is an excuse for being overweight that just won't cut it around here. You became overweight just like the rest of us - by eating too much.

    4. Weight loss is calories in vs. calories out. Meal timing makes NO difference. If you're eating 1500 calories per day, you can spread that over 6 meals at 2 hour intervals or you can eat it all at once and you'd still get the same results.

    5. You need these threads:

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1235566-so-you-re-new-here?hl=so+you're+new
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1080242-a-guide-to-get-you-started-on-your-path-to-sexypants

    This lady is on the money, take it or leave it. Your choice!

    NOPE. She fails to factor in the importance of insulin sensitivity and blood glucose regulation.

    Also, IF isn't really considered a "diet," but more like an eating pattern.

    I call it the Intermittent Anorexic method, and it's definitely worked for me. LOL.

Categories