Intermittent Fasting
michelleborda1
Posts: 8 Member
Good day to all:
I know there is a thread about Intermittent Fasting, but I wanted to inquire to the general board to get more feedback.
We have all been told that breakfast is the most important meal of the day, and to not starve yourself...in order to keep the metabolism working.
Any thoughts on fasting? I have been reading about the 16 hour fast, then 8 hours of feed. That works with my schedule.
I have a cousin who has leaned out, abs, shredded with intermittent fasting. She does eat whole feeds, and exercises.
Thanks.
I know there is a thread about Intermittent Fasting, but I wanted to inquire to the general board to get more feedback.
We have all been told that breakfast is the most important meal of the day, and to not starve yourself...in order to keep the metabolism working.
Any thoughts on fasting? I have been reading about the 16 hour fast, then 8 hours of feed. That works with my schedule.
I have a cousin who has leaned out, abs, shredded with intermittent fasting. She does eat whole feeds, and exercises.
Thanks.
2
Replies
-
There's good science behind IF. I'd encourage you to watch Dr. Mark Mattson's youtube videos, he knows what he's talking about. Whether you can make it work for you is easier said than done. A lot of people just can't not eat for that long, try as they might.
I love it and it works great for me.3 -
IF is merely establishing an "eating window." But, weight loss is ALWAYS about calories in vs. calories out. If this style of eating helps you stay consistent, then it works for you. If this style of eating helps makes you cranky and leads to binges, then it doesn't work for you.
Skipping breakfast won't stop (or slow) your metabolism.
Here's a link to the group: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/group/49-intermittent-fasting2 -
hello - i was overweight and lost 60 lbs by working-out at the gym, doing cardio, watching my food intake, and doing I.F. i did an 18/6 method. i loved it and it worked VERY well for me. i ended up gaining my weight back after a pregnancy (loss) + two surgeries, and i can't get back into IF for some reason. it's not agreeing with me like last time. i used to work-out fasted (plus i would have BCAA before hitting the gym, then protein shake/bar directly after work-out) but now i feel faint if i try that. i think i am going to ease back into it, doing a 12/12, then a 14/7, then moving to a 16/8 then finally get back to 18/6 if i can.1
-
For me IF was the missing piece of the puzzle and i haven't never seen better results following any other protocol. Now everyone will throw the conventional wisdom of calories in vs calories out at you, at that is a valid fact in and by itself, but you simply cant ignore the beneficial hormonal changes that you get from IF. Just avoiding the morning insulin spike makes wonders for your appetite, and being in fasting mode will increase the release of androgens.
Anyway we can discuss the science of it for hours but the most important question is, does it work for you? I personally prefer to eat big and eat at night, so the 16 hour fast schedule makes perfect sense for me. If such an eating schedule can help you stay within your calories and doesnt discourage you from workout out then go for it.5 -
double post0
-
IF is merely establishing an "eating window." But, weight loss is ALWAYS about calories in vs. calories out.
You blithely say this, like everybody here says it. Like a mantra! But the whole idea of the science of IF is that there's more going on than that. And this is real science, not bro science.
10 -
85Cardinals wrote: »
You blithely say this, but the whole idea of the science of IF is that there's more going on than that. And this is real science, not bro science.
^^i agree with this^^
there are some hormonal things that go along with I.F. that go beyond simply CICO. i used to be really well educated on it when i did it before, will have to get out my school books again.
2 -
85Cardinals wrote: »IF is merely establishing an "eating window." But, weight loss is ALWAYS about calories in vs. calories out.
You blithely say this, like everybody here says it, but the whole idea of the science of IF is that there's more going on than that. And this is real science, not bro science.
So you are saying that if your maintenance is 2000 calories and you IF and eat 2500 calories, you will not gain or possibly even lose weight due to some special property of IF ?
Please enlighten us.0 -
Thank you all for your insight on this. When I was my most comfortable weight, I did intermittent fasting which many thought was starvation, it just didn't have a real name back then. I was "schooled" instead to eat every few hours, small meals, clean, years ago.
I have that pesky 7 pounds I want to lose. I have been reading up on this and purchased a book from Lyle McDonald after I watched his one hour youtube that touches upon women, weight, and IF.
When you do the fasting, does it exclude coffee? I am talking black, with a tiny bit of cream, half a cup to get the morning started.
Thanks again.
0 -
Start with this...
Notice where meals/nutrient timing falls... not overly important. If IF helps you keep cals in check, then go for it. If not, then don't.
If you've already got a good handle on cals and macros and want to try nutrient timing for added benefit, go right ahead.6 -
85Cardinals wrote: »IF is merely establishing an "eating window." But, weight loss is ALWAYS about calories in vs. calories out.
You blithely say this, like everybody here says it, but the whole idea of the science of IF is that there's more going on than that. And this is real science, not bro science.
So you are saying that if your maintenance is 2000 calories and you IF and eat 2500 calories, you will not gain or possibly even lose weight due to some special property of IF ?
Please enlighten us.
More like you'll get slightly better results from running a 500 deficit compared to a regular eating schedule.2 -
85Cardinals wrote: »IF is merely establishing an "eating window." But, weight loss is ALWAYS about calories in vs. calories out.
You blithely say this, like everybody here says it, but the whole idea of the science of IF is that there's more going on than that. And this is real science, not bro science.
So you are saying that if your maintenance is 2000 calories and you IF and eat 2500 calories, you will not gain or possibly even lose weight due to some special property of IF ?
Please enlighten us.
well i think everyone has enough common sense to know that if you eat 10,000 calories a day and do I.F. that you will gain. it's just another tool in your arsenal.2 -
michelleborda1 wrote: »When you do the fasting, does it exclude coffee? I am talking black, with a tiny bit of cream, half a cup to get the morning started.
Yes, coffee with creamer is the only thing that I have from when I wake up to about 1:00pm (outside of sparkling water, which I drink constantly). My first meal is a pretty light one (usually a frozen Amy's meal) and dinner is heavier, lots of veggies and a good portion of protein.
And I save room in my daily calories for that one mixed drink in the evenings, too - Maxing out around 1250 calories per day.
0 -
Yes, do try it. I am one of many success stories. And yes, "calories in, calories out" is in fact the main thing. And yes, a shorter eating window does somewhat seem to lend itself to a consistently easier time meeting calorie targets. But what the overly simplistic posts fail to account for are the HORMONAL BENEFITS of intermittent fasting. Consider this: who has an easier time losing weight, a younger man, or an older man? Why? Testosterone (HORMONE). How about a woman with thyroid problems? Why can't she lose weight? HORMONES. Why is stress bad for weight loss? Cortisol (which is a HORMONE). If you eat a bunch of small meals all day, you are releasing a lot of insulin (HORMONE)--and becoming less sensitive to its affects. BAD. You can also regulate your hunger hormone (ghrelin) on this schedule. But don't take my word for it. Try it. Read up on it yourself.12
-
I've done IF in one form or another since 2012. Meal timing is irrelevant in terms of weight loss. How many calories you consume is the important thing.0
-
85Cardinals wrote: »IF is merely establishing an "eating window." But, weight loss is ALWAYS about calories in vs. calories out.
You blithely say this, like everybody here says it, but the whole idea of the science of IF is that there's more going on than that. And this is real science, not bro science.
So you are saying that if your maintenance is 2000 calories and you IF and eat 2500 calories, you will not gain or possibly even lose weight due to some special property of IF ?
Please enlighten us.
More like you'll get slightly better results from running a 500 deficit compared to a regular eating schedule.
Research proves otherwise. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21410865
Taking overall caloric intake into account, there won't be any real statistical difference. I am not discounting IF as that is the diet protocol some have found they can utilize to adhere to their diet. And as others have stated, it's a tool available for use. But to say it has some special bio-hacking properties which cause faster or more weightloss comparatively to some other diet that creates the same deficit has not been proven in studies.
If you can link to real studies stating otherwise, please respond accordingly, as I, as well as I'm sure others, are always open to new evidence.
0 -
Intermittent fasting is also considered a fat loss tool, not just a weight loss tool. Intermittent fasting is believed to burn more FAT and retain more LEAN mass compared to eating throughout the day at the same calorie deficit.5
-
I fast from 1030pm to 830am. Except on weekends. Then I fast from midnight till 830. It has worked wonders for me.4
-
You should check out Martin Berkhan (leangains.com) and Lyle McDonald (bodyrecomposition.com)... both have a huge amount of information. If you like understanding the why, etc... check them out. Love reading both of them.
And here's Berkhan on Top Ten Fasting Myths. He talks about the myth that skipping breakfast is damaging to your metabolism or will cause you to be overweight.
3 -
I don't always eat breakfast, but when I do, it's delicious2
-
I don't believe fasting is good for your body. I have done it several times and it only causes my metabolism to slow down.0
-
If you eat a bunch of small meals all day, you are releasing a lot of insulin (HORMONE)--and becoming less sensitive to its affects. BAD. You can also regulate your hunger hormone (ghrelin) on this schedule. But don't take my word for it. Try it. Read up on it yourself.
Insulin can also be regulated by limiting carb intake even without IF, but good point. With IF if you are a carb eater you experience that insulin increase fewer times a day.0 -
If I eat break-fast between 11a & 1p I tend not to go over my calorie budget. If I start eating at 7am I end up going well over my calories for the day. It's hard for me to stop eating at 2 or 3 hundred calories at a time, I feel satisfied at about 6 or 700. If I don't satisfy my hunger by the end of the night I will eventually binge and eat at the very least 6 or 700 calories of the quickest thing I can eat, usually a quick "junk" food, because I'm not making dinner twice lol. IF works nicely for me, I don't know if it's true for any one else.6
-
SugarySweetheart wrote: »I don't believe fasting is good for your body. I have done it several times and it only causes my metabolism to slow down.
1 -
85Cardinals wrote: »IF is merely establishing an "eating window." But, weight loss is ALWAYS about calories in vs. calories out.
You blithely say this, like everybody here says it, but the whole idea of the science of IF is that there's more going on than that. And this is real science, not bro science.
So you are saying that if your maintenance is 2000 calories and you IF and eat 2500 calories, you will not gain or possibly even lose weight due to some special property of IF ?
Please enlighten us.
No, I didn't say that. Go talk to Mark Mattson, IF is science. I guarantee he knows more about how human bodies work than you do. But I admire your audacious smugness!
1 -
The health benefits of IF go far beyond just being used as a weight loss tool. As usual, people try to make it what they want. You can lose, gain or maintain weight while on the various IF protocols. Since this is primarily a weight loss site many people try to use it for that, but that isn't the only reason to try IF. I haven't needed to lose weight for years but it's been one of the best things I've done with my eating habits.3
-
The health benefits of IF go far beyond just being used as a weight loss tool. As usual, people try to make it what they want. You can lose, gain or maintain weight while on the various IF protocols. Since this is primarily a weight loss site many people try to use it for that, but that isn't the only reason to try IF. I haven't needed to lose weight for years but it's been one of the best things I've done with my eating habits.
I've done IF in various forms since 2012 but I don't feel that it's done anything for me health wise, except help me with my weight goals. What do you think it's done for you? (genuinely curious).0 -
ReaderGirl3 wrote: »The health benefits of IF go far beyond just being used as a weight loss tool. As usual, people try to make it what they want. You can lose, gain or maintain weight while on the various IF protocols. Since this is primarily a weight loss site many people try to use it for that, but that isn't the only reason to try IF. I haven't needed to lose weight for years but it's been one of the best things I've done with my eating habits.
I've done IF in various forms since 2012 but I don't feel that it's done anything for me health wise, except help me with my weight goals. What do you think it's done for you? (genuinely curious).
As you've stated, the benefits aren't tangible in the sense that you actually feel them for most people. The benefits occur more on a cellular and hormonal level. My reference to it being the best thing I've done falls into a practicality standpoint with simplifying my eating down to 2 meals, and significantly decreasing my hunger while maintaining energy levels.4 -
85Cardinals wrote: »85Cardinals wrote: »IF is merely establishing an "eating window." But, weight loss is ALWAYS about calories in vs. calories out.
You blithely say this, like everybody here says it, but the whole idea of the science of IF is that there's more going on than that. And this is real science, not bro science.
So you are saying that if your maintenance is 2000 calories and you IF and eat 2500 calories, you will not gain or possibly even lose weight due to some special property of IF ?
Please enlighten us.
No, I didn't say that. Go talk to Mark Mattson, IF is science. I guarantee he knows more about how human bodies work than you do. But I admire your audacious smugness!
I am not disputing IF as a diet protocol. I am not disputing it will not work to cause someone to lose weight if a caloric deficit is created. I am not disputing that some people find they adhere to their diet utilizing said protocol. I am disputing, until provided with linked researched evidence, that it "bio-hacks" the body causing a overall statistically measurable greater weight loss compared to any other diet creating the same caloric deficit. This espousing of hormone manipulation to create greater loss comparatively is logically no different than Gary Taubes shilling of carbohydrate/insulin being the reason we are fat, and not the surplus of calories we ingest.
The Mark Mattson reference only proved to me promising research in using IF to improve an aspect of health, more specifically, neurological health. Not the efficacy of IF as a greater tool (outside of adherence) to use for weightloss compared to regular caloric restriction. We could have used this same conversation to promote keto for other health aiding research just as easily.
I can just as easy throw out names that know how the body works too like Eric Helms, Alan Aragon, Dr. Mike Israetel, Dr. Stu Phillips, and Dr. Brad Shoenfeld who rely on evidence and research to form and draw conclusions. Again, I would be, and I hope you would too, be remiss if all I did were to take someone's word for it without seeing/reading some linked research studies on the assertion and being able to draw my own conclusions after.1 -
So interesting discussion of this study......
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/22608008/
Can be found here....
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10353773/intermittent-fasting-help-me-logic-this-article/p1
Also, just as a lol aside...Bob Harper (host of Biggest Loser), in response to that study that showed Biggest Lower contestants had metabolic slowdown, recommended IF:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bob-harper-addresses-that-biggest-loser-study-on-slow-metabolism_us_5736212ee4b077d4d6f30c9d
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.5K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions