INTERMITTENT FASTING - A LIFESTYLE MAKEOVER
Replies
-
I really don't understand why people feel the need to disagree on a weight loss forum. I thought the whole point of this site was to encourage and motivate. If the "IF-plan" is working for someone, don't try to pick it apart. Not everything has to be broken down and scrutinized for your entertainment. To the original poster, keep on doing whatever works for you. If someone tries to discredit it...it's more "their" problem than yours. For me, I'm going to continue trying the plan for 8 weeks. ~ Namaste
My apologies. I was under the impression that most people, including yourself would want the correct information.14 -
I really don't understand why people feel the need to disagree on a weight loss forum. I thought the whole point of this site was to encourage and motivate. If the "IF-plan" is working for someone, don't try to pick it apart. Not everything has to be broken down and scrutinized for your entertainment. To the original poster, keep on doing whatever works for you. If someone tries to discredit it...it's more "their" problem than yours. For me, I'm going to continue trying the plan for 8 weeks. ~ Namaste
The thing is, it's in anyone's benefit to know why a certain thing works, because if for whatever reason it stops working they would know how to troubleshoot and fix it. If someone doing 8/16 manages to eat too many calories within those 8 hours after the novelty wears off, they'd be confused and spiral down the most frustrating path of "panic! metabolism is slowing down and I'm helpless!", which isn't encouraging or motivating. Now, knowing that it's essentially about calories, they would calmly assess their intake and decide what to do about it. It's also helpful to know that there are many tools to create a calorie deficit that may work for a certain individual, which empowers them and helps them adapt to situations. Knowledge is the best kind of encouragement and motivation.9 -
I really don't understand why people feel the need to disagree on a weight loss forum. I thought the whole point of this site was to encourage and motivate. If the "IF-plan" is working for someone, don't try to pick it apart. Not everything has to be broken down and scrutinized for your entertainment. To the original poster, keep on doing whatever works for you. If someone tries to discredit it...it's more "their" problem than yours. For me, I'm going to continue trying the plan for 8 weeks. ~ Namaste
*sick guitar riff*SpoilerHOLIER THAN THOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU3 -
StealthHealth wrote: »
I love this post and attitude!
I like to think of having a bag of dietary tools (of which IF is one - I'm a big fan but agree with the sentiment that it's just a way of managing calories) that I can use for time to time as the situation dictates.
This is how I feel also. I do IF, and it works. But I'm not locked into it. I would rather concentrate most of my calories at dinnertime with family, so IF allows me to have a nice sized meal.
I got tired of the 6 small meals I used to eat on another plan and was constantly hungry. 250 calories as a meal doesn't seem like a true "meal" to me so I often felt deprived. With IF I'm not hungry in the mornings so it isn't much of a big deal to just have lunch and dinner.7 -
I really don't understand why people feel the need to disagree on a weight loss forum. I thought the whole point of this site was to encourage and motivate. If the "IF-plan" is working for someone, don't try to pick it apart. Not everything has to be broken down and scrutinized for your entertainment. To the original poster, keep on doing whatever works for you. If someone tries to discredit it...it's more "their" problem than yours. For me, I'm going to continue trying the plan for 8 weeks. ~ Namaste
I was merely giving you an explaination for why you lost 5 lbs in a week and you seemingly responded in a sacarstic way. At least that is how i read it. If it wasn't intended that way i do apologize.
Encouragement comes in many fashions and if you see many of my post you would know that. I am glad that you like this protocol but don't expect to lose 5 lbs a week.
Regardless of being thin or big, energy balance still is required. Yes for some people, particularly those with PCOS, IR, etc... hormones can be a contributor. In the aforementioned cases carbs can cause decreases to metabolism which make it more difficult to achieve a deficit. But when it comes to beginner weight losses, especially when modifying carbs, the previous explainations are mainly why you saw huge losses.5 -
One more thing to add; if people never correct you or me, how are we expected to become a better version of ourselves? I learned a lot by smarter people than me correcting my non sense. I continue to learn by people calling me out on my non sense. I readily admit i am not the most knowledgeable person here but i do feel i have a solid foundation. So i am not sure about others but i am always trying to get smarter than i was today.13
-
I really don't understand why people feel the need to disagree on a weight loss forum.
Because...people
I thought the whole point of this site was to encourage and motivate.
Who says? Maybe it's to educate or shock people into changing, maybe it's to learn from those who get science. External motivation is weak, Some think encouragement is for children. Some of us prefer to have adult conversations with all the nuances.
If the "IF-plan" is working for someone, don't try to pick it apart. Not everything has to be broken down and scrutinized for your entertainment.
Nobody's picking it apart but they are not allowing some to attribute unsubstantiated claims cos blogs and feels say so ...that's a good thing
To the original poster, keep on doing whatever works for you. If someone tries to discredit it...it's more "their" problem than yours. For me, I'm going to continue trying the plan for 8 weeks. ~ Namaste
8 -
StealthHealth wrote: »
for the record: I'm a fan of IF and use it frequently but...
The two bolded sections are in contradiction: IGF-1 is anabolic and helps to build muscle so a lower value is detrimental if muscle growth (the bold bit in your last para) is important.
It's also worth mentioning that, despite having searched the review papers and studies (I'm not a professional researcher so take that into account), read (the summaries only I'm afraid) all the refs in Mosley's 5:2 book my, and been involved in several discussions on the topic on these forums - I've yet to see any convincing, isocalorific, human, studies which demonstrate the often quoted benefits of fasting. Again, I'm a fan and user, but IMHO it's just calories in-calories out which drive composition changes - not meal timing or frequency.
Fasting is popular and used in medical treatments and so I would expect more studies (hopefully human with calorific control) and I strongly suspect that these will show benefits over the same number of calories spread out throughout the day. But, at the moment my searches have not turned up any hard evidence.
Same. I've basically been doing 16:8 constantly for years, while being overweight, while losing, while maintaining, because I've never been too fond of eating right after getting up. Insulin is also anabolic btw.1 -
One more thing to add; if people never correct you or me, how are we expected to become a better version of ourselves? I learned a lot by smarter people than me correcting my non sense. I continue to learn by people calling me out on my non sense. I readily admit i am not the most knowledgeable person here but i do feel i have a solid foundation. So i am not sure about others but i am always trying to get smarter than i was today.
That's the lemon I remember5 -
stevencloser wrote: »
Same. I've basically been doing 16:8 constantly for years, while being overweight, while losing, while maintaining, because I've never been too fond of eating right after getting up. Insulin is also anabolic btw.
Another one who's been doing 16:8 for years, but I just never thought to put a label on it. It's just the way of eating that seems to work best for me, after much trial and error and listening to what my body prefers.
I remember when the hype was all about, "Breakfast is the most important meal of the day!" I've never been hungry in the morning, but I used to force myself to have breakfast until I realized how stupid it was to be eating when I wasn't in the slightest bit hungry. And I've discovered that once I *do* eat something (regardless of what time of day that first occurs) it seems to awaken the sleeping eating beast in me, so that, once awakened, it tends to troll me for food for the rest of the day. The longer I can keep that sucker asleep, the easier it is for me to stay within my calorie allotment.
I will have my coffee in the morning (because coffee!) but generally have my first meal of the day between 12 and 1 pm. Because that's when I'm actually hungry. By eliminating a breakfast that I rarely want, this leaves enough calories in the rest of my day to have a nice lunch, an afternoon snack, a good dinner, and room left over for a few treats in the evening.10 -
rainbowbow wrote: »
Because, science. It's not a "problem" or an "attack"; its intellectual discussion on a topic where nonsense and woo woo are generally given free reign.
The great thing about MyfitnessPal is that it opens users up to discussions they might not have with their friends, coworkers, family, or others who are generally ignorant about biology, nutrition, kinesiology, and more.
Scientific views change ALL the TIME. That's why eggs are good for you, eggs are bad for you. That's also why my low fat diet of the 90s which I did lose weight, is now gone and a high fat diet rage has replaced it.
It's also been written that scientists were paid to "blame" the US obesity problem on fat by the sugar industry.
Please don't ask for citations, as I spend very little time reading scientific research, for reasons stated above.
So, I take the science with a grain of salt and just through trial and error, do what works for me.
The only science I truly believe in through real life trial and error, is it doesn't matter if you eat fat, sugar, flour, meat, no meat, or snicker bars, the answer to weight loss is quite simply burning more calories than you consume, and each person has to find their own way as to how to stick to that mathematical equation.
For some people it mean eliminating one of the above food/macro groups. Or eating more of one of the above food groups/macronutrients.
My "way" is IF, and I've been practicing it for 35 years and have always maintained a healthy BMI--if you believe in that broad "science".
11 -
-
frankiesgirlie wrote: »
Scientific views change ALL the TIME. That's why eggs are good for you, eggs are bad for you. That's also why my low fat diet of the 90s which I did lose weight, is now gone and a high fat diet rage has replaced it.
It's also been written that scientists were paid to "blame" the US obesity problem on fat by the sugar industry.
Please don't ask for citations, as I spend very little time reading scientific research, for reasons stated above.
So, I take the science with a grain of salt and just through trial and error, do what works for me.
The only science I truly believe in through real life trial and error, is it doesn't matter if you eat fat, sugar, flour, meat, no meat, or snicker bars, the answer to weight loss is quite simply burning more calories than you consume, and each person has to find their own way as to how to stick to that mathematical equation.
For some people it mean eliminating one of the above food/macro groups. Or eating more of one of the above food groups/macronutrients.
My "way" is IF, and I've been practicing it for 35 years and have always maintained a healthy BMI--if you believe in that broad "science".
I have nothing else to say.6 -
One more thing to add; if people never correct you or me, how are we expected to become a better version of ourselves? I learned a lot by smarter people than me correcting my non sense. I continue to learn by people calling me out on my non sense. I readily admit i am not the most knowledgeable person here but i do feel i have a solid foundation. So i am not sure about others but i am always trying to get smarter than i was today.
But I have no way of knowing if they are smarter??
1 -
frankiesgirlie wrote: »
Please don't ask for citations, as I spend very little time reading scientific research, for reasons stated above.
Lol - the discussion should definitely be over at this point.4 -
Chase down another study that contradicts the last one published.....crickets ****churping****....
We'll wait.0 -
0
-
frankiesgirlie wrote: »
Well one you would have to look through scientific literature to see if you can prove your statements against theirs or look at sourced data they provided. The inability to produce data that would support your position against theirs may indicate that you do have the most current information or understand the sematics.
Or in doubt if it comes from me its true 83% of the time
5 -
83%? Not too shabby.0
-
Do you have evidence to support this claim?
<runsawayquickly>2 -
frankiesgirlie wrote: »
Scientific views change ALL the TIME. That's why eggs are good for you, eggs are bad for you. That's also why my low fat diet of the 90s which I did lose weight, is now gone and a high fat diet rage has replaced it.
It's also been written that scientists were paid to "blame" the US obesity problem on fat by the sugar industry.
Please don't ask for citations, as I spend very little time reading scientific research, for reasons stated above.
So, I take the science with a grain of salt and just through trial and error, do what works for me.
The only science I truly believe in through real life trial and error, is it doesn't matter if you eat fat, sugar, flour, meat, no meat, or snicker bars, the answer to weight loss is quite simply burning more calories than you consume, and each person has to find their own way as to how to stick to that mathematical equation.
For some people it mean eliminating one of the above food/macro groups. Or eating more of one of the above food groups/macronutrients.
My "way" is IF, and I've been practicing it for 35 years and have always maintained a healthy BMI--if you believe in that broad "science".
Good points @frankiesgirlie .
It would be nice if there was solid dieting science out there that factored in all the human differences but that is not likely to happen.
Trial and error is about as good as it gets. Sure the science that we have is very helpful but just can not be used in cookie cutter manner. Even for the same person the best way of eating can change from time to time.3 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »
Good points @frankiesgirlie .
It would be nice if there was solid dieting science out there that factored in all the human differences but that is not likely to happen.
Trial and error is about as good as it gets. Sure the science that we have is very helpful but just can not be used in cookie cutter manner. Even for the same person the best way of eating can change from time to time.
The science is very clear.
Total calories consumed over long periods of time are all that matter. How one accomplishes a calorie deficit, maintains one, or chooses to eat in order to stay on one are up to interpretation.
We know that meal timing does not have an effect on the way our bodies assimilate and use energy over long periods of time. These, however, are generally considered important factors in maintaining satiety and thus staying on a calorie deficit.
As i stated in my previous posts, these are undeniable facts. Trying to do anything special outside of the above, or trying to say that it is "the only way" are silly. The only factors that matter are total calories consumed.
We are the same species, and not considering some sort of outlying medical condition, eating the foods you enjoy so that you can sustain a calorie deficit and eating at the timed intervals which keep you most satiated is all that matters.
No one was attacking the OP, just simply saying that she is not receiving extra benefits from eating within a short period of time. Just as those who eat 10 meals, 6 meals, 3 meals, and so on have no advantage.6 -
frankiesgirlie wrote: »
Scientific views change ALL the TIME. That's why eggs are good for you, eggs are bad for you. That's also why my low fat diet of the 90s which I did lose weight, is now gone and a high fat diet rage has replaced it.
It's also been written that scientists were paid to "blame" the US obesity problem on fat by the sugar industry.
Please don't ask for citations, as I spend very little time reading scientific research, for reasons stated above.
So, I take the science with a grain of salt and just through trial and error, do what works for me.
The only science I truly believe in through real life trial and error, is it doesn't matter if you eat fat, sugar, flour, meat, no meat, or snicker bars, the answer to weight loss is quite simply burning more calories than you consume, and each person has to find their own way as to how to stick to that mathematical equation.
For some people it mean eliminating one of the above food/macro groups. Or eating more of one of the above food groups/macronutrients.
My "way" is IF, and I've been practicing it for 35 years and have always maintained a healthy BMI--if you believe in that broad "science".
Those weren't scientific views though, that was the media pushing woo and fearmongering. Now, you see that sort of junk of FB, tumbr, instagram and blogs.
You take real proven evidence with a grain of salt....oh dear.
Ps...fat and sugar are not to blame for obesity, too many calories are. I've been morbidly obese and I sure as hell won't blame either for that. I blame me. I shoved the food into my mouth. Sugar and fat didn't just dive on in there. I used to believe in woo until I started reading scientific studies and applied the science to myself. Yes, CICO actually works. I have to weigh my food and log diligently for it to work, but it works. Diets such as low carb and even IF are a way of achieving CICO.
I do IF (I eat within a 6 hour window. All it does is help me adhere to my calorie intake since I have a smaller window in which I cram all my calories.
Do you have proof for the following statement that you made?:
It's also been written that scientists were paid to "blame" the US obesity problem on fat by the sugar industry.
5 -
It was in the Huffington Post and NPR about 2 days ago.
3 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »frankiesgirlie wrote: »83%? Not too shabby.
Disappointed in both of you for not knowing where that statistic comes from.
0 -
Disappointed in both of you for not knowing where that statistic comes from.
Is it because 83% of statistics are made up on the spot?2 -
cerise_noir wrote: »
Those weren't scientific views though, that was the media pushing woo and fearmongering. Now, you see that sort of junk of FB, tumbr, instagram and blogs.
You take real proven evidence with a grain of salt....oh dear.
Ps...fat and sugar are not to blame for obesity, too many calories are. I've been morbidly obese and I sure as hell won't blame either for that. I blame me. I shoved the food into my mouth. Sugar and fat didn't just dive on in there. I used to believe in woo until I started reading scientific studies and applied the science to myself. Yes, CICO actually works. I have to weigh my food and log diligently for it to work, but it works. Diets such as low carb and even IF are a way of achieving CICO.
I do IF (I eat within a 6 hour window. All it does is help me adhere to my calorie intake since I have a smaller window in which I cram all my calories.
Do you have proof for the following statement that you made?:
It's also been written that scientists were paid to "blame" the US obesity problem on fat by the sugar industry.
Actually, I am positive science was involved, but what people don't look at are the parameters and bounds of the study. I have no doubt that IF works and the studies would support that. But it doesn't work based on many of the parameters that people think. It works by calorie control.2 -
Alatariel75 wrote: »
Is it because 83% of statistics are made up on the spot?
Exactly.3 -
frankiesgirlie wrote: »I've been an intermittent faster for about 35 years. I came to practice it organically because I noticed in high school if I ate breakfast I had trouble staying awake during my first two classes, so I first stopped eating breakfast, then later stopped eating lunch. My family thought of me as a skinny big eater because I was thin but ate a big dinner, and then snacked while watching tv.
I didn't have a name for it back then but later in life (around 2000,I think) someone told me they read a book that was about how I ate.
It was "the warrior diet" by Ori Hofmekler.
I read it, and I'm not sure if his science or premise is correct, but it's how I've always eaten.
I've never been overweight as far as BMI, but have yo yoed up and down 15 or so lbs. at 5'9".
I'm currently at about 150 with a goal of 140ish.
I do believe that I lose weight with it for 2 reasons. It gives me more energy during my daily fast, I do a daily 16:8, and therefore I move more in general and workout more. Plus, the compacted time frame makes a deficit easier.
The times I have gained back the weight has still been about not watching my calories though, not some "magical" IF science. At least that's what I believe.
It does make it easier for me to eat at a deficit, but I don't know if it effects my weight loss in any other way other than calorie goal compliance.
I had a problem with sleep earlier this year and was sleeping no more than 2-3 hours per night and I found it impossible to fast at that time.
But now that my sleep is back to normal Im back on IF and am working on losing the last 10 lbs with it.
It's not for everybody, that's for sure.
But if it seems to be working for you I encourage you to continue OP.
I never had any kind of problems with it, but I've read that some woman do.
Good luck to you!
I used to do this same type of fasting, started while in college. Not intentionally, somehow I never felt hungry after having evening tea. And I didn't know this was IF until recently.
Unlike you I eat breakfast, lunch and snacks in between and with evening tea but absolutely nothing afterwards. I was never overweight, but had gained 10 to 15 pounds during the last two years when I started snacking/eating more in the evenings. That's when I started calorie counting and found MFP. Calorie counting and a bit of exercising has helped me reach my goal weight.
1 -
rainbowbow wrote: »
The science is very clear.
Total calories consumed over long periods of time are all that matter. How one accomplishes a calorie deficit, maintains one, or chooses to eat in order to stay on one are up to interpretation.
We know that meal timing does not have an effect on the way our bodies assimilate and use energy over long periods of time. These, however, are generally considered important factors in maintaining satiety and thus staying on a calorie deficit.
As i stated in my previous posts, these are undeniable facts. Trying to do anything special outside of the above, or trying to say that it is "the only way" are silly. The only factors that matter are total calories consumed.
We are the same species, and not considering some sort of outlying medical condition, eating the foods you enjoy so that you can sustain a calorie deficit and eating at the timed intervals which keep you most satiated is all that matters.
No one was attacking the OP, just simply saying that she is not receiving extra benefits from eating within a short period of time. Just as those who eat 10 meals, 6 meals, 3 meals, and so on have no advantage.
I understand how you currently feel about IF. Once I felt the same way about IF. After studying the science behind IF and actually trying IF I came to understood scientifically how it can work and that it did actually work to help me lose weight.
How many times a week did you do IF and for how many months if you are speaking on the subject from real personal experience before you decided IF did not work for you?
No one is saying that one can defeat CICO with IF. One's hormone levels are for real a factor in the ease to store/loose fat.
5
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 395.6K Introduce Yourself
- 44.1K Getting Started
- 260.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.3K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 446 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.2K Motivation and Support
- 8.2K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 1.3K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.9K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions