Fasting 19 hours a day

WalkingAlong wrote: »

sheermomentum wrote: »

WalkingAlong wrote: »

I wouldn't say IF is a "complex eating schema" or takes any higher "levels of dietary restraint" than the typical calorie counting dieter.

It's associated with health benefits, though.
http://authoritynutrition.com/10-health-benefits-of-intermittent-fasting/

Bottom line: it may or may not be associated with health benefits. Certainly its working for some of us.

The association is a statistical fact, in many studies beyond the scope of that link.

It may or may not be causal. That's up to each reader decide.

I suppose I should have said more precisely: based on the studies cited, I don't think we can say that repeated intermittent fasting for periods of less than 24 hours is associated with health benefits. I say this because the cited studies don't address this behavior. You may well know that it is, if you have more familiarity with the topic. I don't. The article containing the citations isn't really precise about what it wants to claim in that regard either. One study has people alternating full fasting days and eating days and measure one prospective benefit. Another study has people fasting for 5 full days and measures another. And so on.

Not a big deal. I just don't think we can go further than to say there may be benefits, based on that particular evidence. And I suppose I do think its important to remember that PubMed is vast and its contents can support any number of contradictory findings.

Asher_Ethan wrote: »

psulemon wrote: »

If it fits into your lifestyle, then go for it. Overall, total calories will determine weight loss rather than the timing of those nutrients and the number of meals; macronutrients and training will determine health and whether is is fat loss or weight loss. I tried 16:8 for awhile and it just didn't fit into my lifestyle and could never get adapted to the very long fast.

All this. I tried the 16:8 as well and it didn't fit my lifestyle either. But if my kids were grown and my job hours were always the same I would definitely give it a try.

This. When you're responsible for feeding everyone else and are subject to multiple people's schedules, IF is that much more inconvenient. That's why I never really got going with it. I can easily eat a calorically responsible portion of everybody dinner, but not eating at all when I have to stand there and make breakfast in the morning isn't gonna work. Plus I could never give up my coffee in all it's sugary creamy decadence.

llrmacdougall wrote: »

CoffeeNCardio wrote: »

Asher_Ethan wrote: »

psulemon wrote: »

If it fits into your lifestyle, then go for it. Overall, total calories will determine weight loss rather than the timing of those nutrients and the number of meals; macronutrients and training will determine health and whether is is fat loss or weight loss. I tried 16:8 for awhile and it just didn't fit into my lifestyle and could never get adapted to the very long fast.

All this. I tried the 16:8 as well and it didn't fit my lifestyle either. But if my kids were grown and my job hours were always the same I would definitely give it a try.

This. When you're responsible for feeding everyone else and are subject to multiple people's schedules, IF is that much more inconvenient. That's why I never really got going with it. I can easily eat a calorically responsible portion of everybody dinner, but not eating at all when I have to stand there and make breakfast in the morning isn't gonna work. Plus I could never give up my coffee in all it's sugary creamy decadence.

I switched to black. The kids eat I clean up, pack lunches and out the door. I workout. Shower than eat!

If you are used to eating at a certain time your body will expect food and be hungry. Once you get on a different schedule. It's fine. You don't get hungry anymore. ... The only time I do is if I didn't eat enough the day before. I will wake up hungry and I eat. (I have 3 at two different schools)

IF isn't for everyone. I have a bodybuilder friend that would kill people if she doesn't eat first thing. Haha!
We are all genetically different. What works for one won't always work for another even with macros calories etc. There is a lot of trial and error. But with anything you need to stick with something long enough to know if it's working or not.

It also helps to actually want to do the thing

I do it on occasion, especially if I will be eating out a few days in a row like if I am travelling or such. 20hrs fasting, 4 hrs eating. It puts me in a 1400-1700cal range and works well on those days. I never use it for long enough to find out more than the fact that it helps me maintain when my food choices are less than optimal.

I just eat for 4 hours and fast for 20. I can easily maintain my weight or even lose on it.

Eating more calories in a condensed period of time makes me go to sleep on a happy stomach and it's pretty much impossible to overeat.

Huge meals are just so much more satisfying.

Either way, do whatever works for your appetite control. It's about calories, macros, micros and overall health at the end of the day.