Fasting.....

kristencarder21
kristencarder21 Posts: 14 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
I heard that fasting can boost ur metabolism.

What do you all think??

Replies

  • arditarose
    arditarose Posts: 15,573 Member
    How would taking away as much fuel for your body as you can help boost metabolism?

    If you have weight to lose, use this app to help set up your calorie deficit. Your metabolism doesn't need to be boosted, you need to consume less than you burn.
  • bpetrosky
    bpetrosky Posts: 3,911 Member
    It doesn't boost your metabolism. There is no reason that should work. You just eat less for a period of time.
  • mkakids
    mkakids Posts: 1,913 Member
    edited March 2016
    It wont help your metabolism, but It can help to create a deficit. For some people, Intermitent Fasting (IF) or 5:2 fasting are easier to adere to than a constant daily deficit.

    I practice IF, & only eat between 12/1 and 8/9.
  • kristencarder21
    kristencarder21 Posts: 14 Member
    Ok. It didn't sound right to me either. And I wanted ask more people before I decide to try it.
  • arditarose
    arditarose Posts: 15,573 Member
    mkakids wrote: »
    It wont help your metabolism, but It can help to create a deficit. For some people, Intermitent Fasting (IF) or 5:2 fasting are easier to adere to than a constant daily deficit.

    I practice IF, & only eat between 12/1 and 8/9.

    OP if you were talking about this kind of fasting, it is one way some feel comfortable getting into a deficit.
  • rn000
    rn000 Posts: 20 Member
    edited March 2016
    Hey OP, if you're interested in finding out more about how fasting can increase your metabolism, here's an article to hopefully give you some insight!

    http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/71/6/1511
  • dhoggnz
    dhoggnz Posts: 1 Member
    anyone who says fasting is a good idea is wrong. Your body will go into starvation mode and start burning muscle. Sure you might weigh less, but you wont look any better. Better to up the protein have a moderate deficit and then you will lose fat - no way around it.
  • rn000
    rn000 Posts: 20 Member
    Hey Dhogg, I wouldnt be so quick to say people are "wrong" unless you have some evidence to help your argument. Have you yourself tried intermittent fasting? Did you know that while fasting, your body releases up to 2000 percent more human growth hormone to help you retain muscle? Here's a link to the article I got that figure from: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/04/110403090259.htm

    I'm first to say fasting isnt for everyone, especially if you have certain medical conditions. However I wouldnt disregard it without doing your research first.
  • malibu927
    malibu927 Posts: 17,562 Member
    dhoggnz wrote: »
    anyone who says fasting is a good idea is wrong. Your body will go into starvation mode and start burning muscle. Sure you might weigh less, but you wont look any better. Better to up the protein have a moderate deficit and then you will lose fat - no way around it.

    Starvation mode doesn't work like that. If you take in fewer calories than you burn, regardless of the amount, you'll lose weight. Although the greater deficit will burn muscle mass, yes.
  • Orphia
    Orphia Posts: 7,097 Member
    Some people have success with intermittent fasting (IF).

    What works is whatever you can stick to.

    Either way, keeping to a calorie deficit makes you lose weight.

    You can lose or maintain weight using IF or just keeping to your daily limit on MFP.
  • MichelleLea122
    MichelleLea122 Posts: 332 Member
    rhema000 wrote: »
    Hey OP, if you're interested in finding out more about how fasting can increase your metabolism, here's an article to hopefully give you some insight!

    http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/71/6/1511

    Seriously bro are you really linking a study to how short-term starvation increases resting energy expenditure? This is all sorts of wrong. Did you even read the study, or just copy the first thing relevant result from google?

    First of all this study is from 16 years ago. Second the study discovered that although the subjects' metabolism increased over a 1 to 2 day period, this increase subsided during the 3rd and 4th days of the study. In fact by day 4, subjects experienced a decline in energy expenditure despite elevated levels of norepinephrine. Within the article they speculate that this was due to the body transitioning to prolonged starvation mode. Furthermore the study actually mentions how previous studies have shown that prolonged starvation slows one's metabolism as "the result of adaptive mechanisms aimed at conserving body mass".
  • rn000
    rn000 Posts: 20 Member
    Hey Michelle. Not sure why you're being so aggressive..

    If you knew about intermittent fasting, you'd know that the fasting period actually does not last anywhere near 3 or 4 days like it did in the study, instead it is usually a 16-20 hour fast, so getting to day 4 where energy expenditure declines won't happen. And I dont know about you, but the way the human body responds to stimuli does not change in 16 years, so the age of the study in this case is irrelevant.

    I'm just sharing what I have found about intermittent fasting, and I'm willing to listen to more constructive criticism than "did you even read the study, or copy the first thing from google". Cheers
  • Winter_Girl92
    Winter_Girl92 Posts: 39 Member
    I practise IF but not for any specific benefit. I just find it easier to keep a deficit when I only eat two meals a day. I like big meals so this well for me. I have never really been a breakfast eater anyway.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    dhoggnz wrote: »
    anyone who says fasting is a good idea is wrong. Your body will go into starvation mode and start burning muscle. Sure you might weigh less, but you wont look any better. Better to up the protein have a moderate deficit and then you will lose fat - no way around it.

    @dhoggnz
    Sorry but that is utter nonsense.
    I did 5:2 and it worked very well in terms of slow steady weight loss with no muscle loss.
    There's also loads of seriously well defined and muscular people who do the Leangains style of fasting.
  • spacecadetz06
    spacecadetz06 Posts: 19 Member
    I found it works well. I still have my 500 calls def, I just don't eat from 1800 till 1000, to be fair it's not ideal for everyone, especially if you have no discipline or lifestyle dosnt suit it.
  • MichelleLea122
    MichelleLea122 Posts: 332 Member
    edited March 2016
    rhema000 wrote: »
    Hey Michelle. Not sure why you're being so aggressive..

    If you knew about intermittent fasting, you'd know that the fasting period actually does not last anywhere near 3 or 4 days like it did in the study, instead it is usually a 16-20 hour fast, so getting to day 4 where energy expenditure declines won't happen. And I dont know about you, but the way the human body responds to stimuli does not change in 16 years, so the age of the study in this case is irrelevant.

    I'm just sharing what I have found about intermittent fasting, and I'm willing to listen to more constructive criticism than "did you even read the study, or copy the first thing from google". Cheers

    I don't have anything against intermittent fasting. My main issue with your original post is that you left a link for a study claiming starvation increases metabolic rate with no explanation of the results whatsoever.

    A lot of people new to health and fitness will simply read the words, "Resting energy expenditure in short-term starvation is increased" and link together fasting and metabolism boost. Even if this is conditionally true, you didn't provide any explicit information on intermittent fasting nor how to properly implement it. Now I know your intention was not to promote starvation, but do you see how dangerous it is to post studies like that without any sort of explanation?
  • rn000
    rn000 Posts: 20 Member
    edited March 2016
    Point taken Michelle, I did assume that the original poster heard about intermittent fasting already, and wasn't sure if there were actually metabolic benefits associated with it. I do see where you are coming from, however next time maybe ask for context or further explanation, there are many ways to get your point across rather than coming at people guns blazing

Categories