Intermittent fasting for women

I've done IF in one form or another since 2012. I did alternate day IF (JUDDD), for the weight loss phase (rotated between maintenance level calorie days and then very low 'fasting' calorie days of under 500 calories).

I did 5:2IF for the transition period between the weight loss phase and maintenance (I still lost some weight during this time as well)

And then I did 16:8IF as part of my maintenance plan, for the past few years (eating window 11am-7pm).

IF has helped me reach my goals, but I decided to take a break from it because I'm bored with it. I officially stopped yesterday and I ate something yesterday at 10am and it felt really weird lol. But, IF worked for me and I'm glad that I used it. I'll probably come back to it at some point as well.

I do it all the time. I can't eat when I'm working so usually I just eat near my calorie budget before work since I hate eating late. I don't really call it fasting, I just call it "eating when I can cook for myself" instead of stressing over a healthy dinner outside

I just started IF; two weeks in and I'm liking it. I think it works for me because I tend to be lazy. I don't want to count calories. I don't want to stress over which foods I'm allowed. Basically, all I have to remember is which day I'm fasting and not eat at work that day. I make sure I have plenty of water (sometimes tea or coffee). I have a reminder on my work calendar set up to remind me every hour to get up, move, and drink. I haven't experienced any need to binge eat or had any other negative side effects. Frankly, I think this calorie reduction method (I hate the word diet) can be helpful for some people. But it's not for everyone; different strokes for different folks.

I started 16:8 four weeks ago but did need to take almost a week off of it last week due to travel. So it is way too soon to say how it has helped my weight loss, but regardless I do like it and plan to keep at it. I mostly enjoy having larger meals, 2 per day instead of 3 smaller. It was a bit rough the first week and I didn't make it (or push it) to the full 16 on most days either, just tried to work with my body's natural hunger responses. After that first week it got way easier and going until noon takes little or no effort. I would just caution those who push it while being really hungry, we should work with our bodies not against. Give it time. I also don't due the bulletproof coffee stuff, too many calories for too few nutrients IMO. Plus it gave me serious gut rot, lol.

coalz wrote: »

I'm trying it out myself. My main concern is the hormone imbalance it can create in women. Anyone know about this? & what's up with us suppose to consume minimal nuts & fruits? It's hard to be restricted from foods That are normally my go to healthy snacks. I definitely still drink coffee in the AM cause the warmth fills me up & the caffeine suppresses the appetite.

Where did you hear about this? I have never heard of either. Nuts are a very good snack and so is fruit. Nuts, and really any unsaturated fat, has been linked to lowering cholesterol and fruit is high in nutrients.

I tried it but my appetite was uncontrollable. I also love to eat so I felt too deprived. Scheduled meals have given me better results personally. I wish I had the success that others have had with it. I might try it again for maintenance later.

coalz wrote: »

I'm trying it out myself. My main concern is the hormone imbalance it can create in women. Anyone know about this? & what's up with us suppose to consume minimal nuts & fruits? It's hard to be restricted from foods That are normally my go to healthy snacks. I definitely still drink coffee in the AM cause the warmth fills me up & the caffeine suppresses the appetite.

I have heard this too, trying to find where. If I recall correctly it is based only on one study by a female doc or scientist who compared the results from a group of men and women. I believe it addressed longer periods of fasting like the 5:2 diet or the 3 day fast. The men did much better then the women, but women showed good results too. The takeaway for women (if I recall correctly!) was inconclusive but that it MIGHT not be ideal for women to do longer term fasting. I don't remember the specifics about hormones though, it might just have been the theory as to why men performed better - assuming women natural hold onto fat more than men due to biological reasons. Since I have no interest in doing more than the 16:8, which seems perfect normal and not an extreme range, I really didn't find the study all that compelling for my situation. If I find it, I will post it!

Also, IF is not a diet specific plan. The core reasoning is to eat your normal diet - whatever that may be - during the window. The restrictions of nuts, fruit or any other category of food would be a separate logic.

DanSTL82 wrote: »

psulemon wrote: »

At the end of the day, it will provide no greater fat loss than an equivalent diet eating throughout the day. It's all about total calorie consumption.

This is true. Most "diets" are just gimmicks to get you to eat less. For weight loss, it pretty much all boils down to how many calories you consume in a 24-hour period in comparison to how many you burned, regardless of the times you ate, the macro ratios, etc.

The way I understand it the theory of IF is more about which type of fuel your body will burn - fat vs sugar, and not about burning more fuel overall on the same amount of calories. (Although, I don't doubt many doing IF will misinterpret that.)

psulemon wrote: »

KarlynKeto wrote: »

DanSTL82 wrote: »

psulemon wrote: »

At the end of the day, it will provide no greater fat loss than an equivalent diet eating throughout the day. It's all about total calorie consumption.

This is true. Most "diets" are just gimmicks to get you to eat less. For weight loss, it pretty much all boils down to how many calories you consume in a 24-hour period in comparison to how many you burned, regardless of the times you ate, the macro ratios, etc.

The way I understand it the theory of IF is about which type of fuel your body will burn - fat vs sugar, and not about burning more fuel overall on the same amount of calories. (Although, I don't doubt many doing IF will misinterpret that.)

Over the span of 24hrs, the amount of fat vs sugar burned will be fairly equal.

Maybe, but there are many who feel otherwise. For reference, here is a good one page summary with graphs that explains what people are trying to achieve on IF. In the end of a few months the difference may only be slight, but many do swear by it - and it has other benefits people like too.

burnfatnotsugar.com/intermittent-fasting.html

I fast from about 9-10pm until lunch the next day. So a little less than the typical 16/8 window.
The reason I do this is mainly because I prefer to eat a larger meal at night (I can "save" some calories by not having breakfast and eat them later), and it's easier for me to be hungry for a few hours in the morning while I am busy at work than when I am sitting at home at night. After my fasting window, I basically have meals and snacks coming at me frequently the rest of the day, which I love! And I end the day with one large meal.
Not really anything complicated behind it in my mind, it just makes it easier for me to stick with a calorie deficit. I still track everything and aim to hit my calorie and macro goals. I know of many other people who also modify their eating windows while losing weight for the same reason.