INTERMITTENT FASTING - A LIFESTYLE MAKEOVER
Options
Replies
-
-
And one of his premises - that if you eat 1/2 pounds of food, you will gain 1/2 lb of weight, is simply wrong. I am pretty sure that during my 107lb weight loss, that I have eaten 107 lbs of food. according to this guy, I should have remained the same weight. He doesnt understand digestion, calorie burn, satiation or quite frankly, a whole lot else.5
-
Actually even the bus and onion thing is bizarre - if I want to go across town, it doesnt matter how little it costs, the onion isnt going to get me there.0
-
cross2bear wrote: »And one of his premises - that if you eat 1/2 pounds of food, you will gain 1/2 lb of weight, is simply wrong. I am pretty sure that during my 107lb weight loss, that I have eaten 107 lbs of food. according to this guy, I should have remained the same weight. He doesnt understand digestion, calorie burn, satiation or quite frankly, a whole lot else.
I don't think he actually advocates that. I think he used it as an example of a silly thing to believe if you are going for thermodynamics and likened it to calorie counting so it sounds silly by default. He failed miserably, though, and only managed to show his laughable ignorance. The body DOES count calories in a sense. Calories ARE the common currency of the body. The body deals in energy because that's how it runs, and one of the ways we measure energy is calories. BAM! There is your currency. More energy than your body needs? Store it. Less energy than your body needs? Use stores. He is in serious need for an editor who understands the basics of science. Scratch that, he needs a ghostwriter who understands science enough to manipulate the words in a convincing manner with much higher quality examples to get his ideas across.2 -
Well, if you eat 1/2 lb of lettuce, you will be 1/2 lb heavier. Until your body finishes processing it and excretes the waste. Same thing with 1/2 lb of beef, of 1/2 lb of Oreos, etc. That he doesn't seem to understand - at all - how the body actually processes anything is I don't even know what to call it.3
-
Thanks everyone - lots of interesting reading, discussions and debates here.
I found not doing IF last weekend and having breakfast in the morning just made me hungry and want to eat all day, so more calories going in for sure. I'm just going to stick to IF this weekend as my body seems 'happier' following this regime.
Fasting isn't going to work for everyone - especially for those who think they can then eat more, or eat bad foods in their eating window and still lose weight! However, it is working for me and my body seems to naturally be craving vegetables and protein now rather than carbs.
I do think others like me who aren't naturally attracted to exercise and fitness in general may also benefit from IF - maybe not for anyone who eats a lot of sweet stuff though, as it seems from other posts on here that they find themselves really hungry the whole time - maybe change what you are eating first to more protein, fats and veggies, cut out the obvious sugars and then try IF.
I don't have any 'scientific proof' of what its doing or not doing to my body, but if you do need to lose weight too then maybe just try it for yourself and see whether it works for you.5 -
How do u stop the cravings?
I was really good with the fasting and then got sick and now im totally off of it and really need to get back on it... advise?1 -
Crikey I love food and right now I'm imagining some New Zealand Vogels toast with lashings of butter, avocado and cheese on it or peanut butter and honey - so thats what I'm going to have in exactly 7 minutes - perhaps not that good for the calorie counting but hey it is the weekend
Honestly though, I have been happy with a black coffee and water all morning until now. I really do think its because I have been eating more fats and meats in my eating window that I don't have any hunger cravings at all when fasting. I'm enjoying eating simple tasty things like minced chicken with eggs, spinach, garlic etc fried in some olive oil with Sriracha sauce, or a salad of spinach, beetroot, feta and walnuts with some sliced lamb and a dressing of olive oil, lemon and balsamic vinegar.
I think so long as the food is really flavoursome I don't need so much of it.3 -
ChristinaOne21 wrote: »Thanks everyone - lots of interesting reading, discussions and debates here.
I found not doing IF last weekend and having breakfast in the morning just made me hungry and want to eat all day, so more calories going in for sure. I'm just going to stick to IF this weekend as my body seems 'happier' following this regime.
Fasting isn't going to work for everyone - especially for those who think they can then eat more, or eat bad foods in their eating window and still lose weight! However, it is working for me and my body seems to naturally be craving vegetables and protein now rather than carbs.
I do think others like me who aren't naturally attracted to exercise and fitness in general may also benefit from IF - maybe not for anyone who eats a lot of sweet stuff though, as it seems from other posts on here that they find themselves really hungry the whole time - maybe change what you are eating first to more protein, fats and veggies, cut out the obvious sugars and then try IF.
I don't have any 'scientific proof' of what its doing or not doing to my body, but if you do need to lose weight too then maybe just try it for yourself and see whether it works for you.
It can be a viable option. I'm pretty much method agnostic when it comes to diets, for me as long as it works and it's not harmful then do what works for you. Best of luck to you.
5 -
^Exactly. Cutting a meal out of my day lowers my overall calories, so I like it. But for someone who compensates later it won't work.2
-
MannymanGomez wrote: »Since our body only cares about insulin, we better learn the insulin effect of foods.
Just no. Not even wrong.
2 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »MannymanGomez wrote: »Since our body only cares about insulin, we better learn the insulin effect of foods.
Just no. Not even wrong.
So you agree it is all about Insulin.?0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »MannymanGomez wrote: »Since our body only cares about insulin, we better learn the insulin effect of foods.
Just no. Not even wrong.
So you agree it is all about Insulin.?
It's far from that simple.3 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »MannymanGomez wrote: »Since our body only cares about insulin, we better learn the insulin effect of foods.
Just no. Not even wrong.
So you agree it is all about Insulin.?
It's far from that simple.
Exactly. Considering the plethora of hormones and enzymes that come into the equation when it comes to weight management, it woulf be hugely ignorant to single out one specific hormone. Multiple hormones and enzymes supress hsl and cause lipogenesis.3 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »MannymanGomez wrote: »Since our body only cares about insulin, we better learn the insulin effect of foods.
Just no. Not even wrong.
So you agree it is all about Insulin.?
It's far from that simple.
So true.
There are a lot of cool sounding theories about different ways of eating but today they are more belief systems than hard reproduce able hard scientific facts. What that can be "proven" in a lab may or not apply to the non standard humans. Uncontrollable varies (humans) gives science a fit.
I may find a Way Of Eating that works for me today. I can not say it will or will not work for another human with any validity. I can not even say with validity that what works to give me the best health today will work for me three years down the road. We are dynamic creatures, not static so the best WOE for even me is forever subject to changing.
Thought science we can better understand the WOE that may work best for us but it is only through Trial and Error can we really know the best Way Of Eating for each of us. There are no magic macros that universally fit mankind.
Personally I do find the more I stay away from heavily processed foods the better it is for my health but others may not.2 -
I am no scientist. And generally speaking, I believe weight loss or gain is determined by calories an and calories out.
But I have used IF, or a version of it, off and on for about five months. Here are my observations:
First, there are a lot of things I like about a 16:8 eating schedule. Especially, I find it easier to eat at a deficit when practicing this type of IF. I find that it fits my hunger patterns well, since I am not terribly hungry in the morning , but I have a very hungry time around 3 pm. If I move my breakfast to 3 pm, and then don't eat my 3 pm usual snack, I have already helped keep my deficit.
I have tried both keeping a very strict fast (only water and black coffee) and being more flexible and allowing half and half (30-60 calories) to my coffee.
I cannot explain this with CICO, but I only experience weight loss if I do the strict fast with absolutely nothing but clear liquids. Even if I keep my total daily calories and activity mostly the same (of course we are not in a lab here, and I may be more active one day, and more lazy the next, but my workout schedule is pretty consistent).
So I have to conclude that there might be something hormonal or metabolic going on here other than CICO.
And I have long been a supporter of CICO!!! But the results here make me wonder. Because CICO is not explaining what is happening with my body.
Maybe there is more to all this than we think, and more than the scientists know. After all, 15 years ago scientists were telling me that without a doubt, eating fat would kill me. Now the story is very different.
So I'm waiting to see what the science will tell us in a few years.6 -
I commend you for getting back on the nutrition horse! I have been a fan of IF for a couple of years and follow about a 9/14 hour lifestyle. I did kind of get dizzy by all the things you've changed in a week - only because it's hard making (and keeping) so many changes so quickly. Hope this will last....but there's a good chance you will lose some momentum and find yourself falling back into old habits. Don't quit completely or get mad at yourself. I find that working on 1 or 2 bad habits at a time can help you really get rid of them for good and not quick fixes that make you so miserable that you go back to your former bad habits. Good luck - remember it's a journey....you need to find your best lifestyle to make it a lifestyle, and not just a quick fix.
3 -
I am no scientist. And generally speaking, I believe weight loss or gain is determined by calories an and calories out.
But I have used IF, or a version of it, off and on for about five months. Here are my observations:
First, there are a lot of things I like about a 16:8 eating schedule. Especially, I find it easier to eat at a deficit when practicing this type of IF. I find that it fits my hunger patterns well, since I am not terribly hungry in the morning , but I have a very hungry time around 3 pm. If I move my breakfast to 3 pm, and then don't eat my 3 pm usual snack, I have already helped keep my deficit.
I have tried both keeping a very strict fast (only water and black coffee) and being more flexible and allowing half and half (30-60 calories) to my coffee.
I cannot explain this with CICO, but I only experience weight loss if I do the strict fast with absolutely nothing but clear liquids. Even if I keep my total daily calories and activity mostly the same (of course we are not in a lab here, and I may be more active one day, and more lazy the next, but my workout schedule is pretty consistent).
So I have to conclude that there might be something hormonal or metabolic going on here other than CICO.
And I have long been a supporter of CICO!!! But the results here make me wonder. Because CICO is not explaining what is happening with my body.
Maybe there is more to all this than we think, and more than the scientists know. After all, 15 years ago scientists were telling me that without a doubt, eating fat would kill me. Now the story is very different.
So I'm waiting to see what the science will tell us in a few years.
Hormones can cause slight, but not significantly large changes, in the CO portion. However, one thing hormones can do is increase or decrease water retention and those difference can be very large. Unfortunately, weight is just too gross of a measure to really figure out what is happening.
As for 15 years ago scientist telling you eating fat would kill you is not correct. Maybe the media told you that or a well-meaning doctor (or most likely a guru with no real background) but science has never said this.2 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »I am no scientist. And generally speaking, I believe weight loss or gain is determined by calories an and calories out.
But I have used IF, or a version of it, off and on for about five months. Here are my observations:
First, there are a lot of things I like about a 16:8 eating schedule. Especially, I find it easier to eat at a deficit when practicing this type of IF. I find that it fits my hunger patterns well, since I am not terribly hungry in the morning , but I have a very hungry time around 3 pm. If I move my breakfast to 3 pm, and then don't eat my 3 pm usual snack, I have already helped keep my deficit.
I have tried both keeping a very strict fast (only water and black coffee) and being more flexible and allowing half and half (30-60 calories) to my coffee.
I cannot explain this with CICO, but I only experience weight loss if I do the strict fast with absolutely nothing but clear liquids. Even if I keep my total daily calories and activity mostly the same (of course we are not in a lab here, and I may be more active one day, and more lazy the next, but my workout schedule is pretty consistent).
So I have to conclude that there might be something hormonal or metabolic going on here other than CICO.
And I have long been a supporter of CICO!!! But the results here make me wonder. Because CICO is not explaining what is happening with my body.
Maybe there is more to all this than we think, and more than the scientists know. After all, 15 years ago scientists were telling me that without a doubt, eating fat would kill me. Now the story is very different.
So I'm waiting to see what the science will tell us in a few years.
Hormones can cause slight, but not significantly large changes, in the CO portion. However, one thing hormones can do is increase or decrease water retention and those difference can be very large. Unfortunately, weight is just too gross of a measure to really figure out what is happening.
As for 15 years ago scientist telling you eating fat would kill you is not correct. Maybe the media told you that or a well-meaning doctor (or most likely a guru with no real background) but science has never said this.
Maybe I should say "science" (in quotes!). Because it seems like the medical/nutrition community takes research and then makes statements that are only partly based on that research! I take it all with a grain of salt (but how large a grain??--because the "science" conclusion on sodium is still up in the air!)
Scientists are making new discoveries every day. Perhaps one day something will further explain the role of hormones, and specifically insulin, in weight loss and nutrition (and thus also further explain what is behind IF).
My point is just that true science continues to emerge with new discoveries every day, and scientists (and doctors) don't know all.
And also, that the human body is unique, dynamic and changing, and that makes conclusions that apply to every situation every time difficult. It seems there is always an exception. Perhaps that is because of some biological drive for preservation of the species that makes our systems elastic.
Just philosophizing. And thinking outside the box.
5 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »I am no scientist. And generally speaking, I believe weight loss or gain is determined by calories an and calories out.
But I have used IF, or a version of it, off and on for about five months. Here are my observations:
First, there are a lot of things I like about a 16:8 eating schedule. Especially, I find it easier to eat at a deficit when practicing this type of IF. I find that it fits my hunger patterns well, since I am not terribly hungry in the morning , but I have a very hungry time around 3 pm. If I move my breakfast to 3 pm, and then don't eat my 3 pm usual snack, I have already helped keep my deficit.
I have tried both keeping a very strict fast (only water and black coffee) and being more flexible and allowing half and half (30-60 calories) to my coffee.
I cannot explain this with CICO, but I only experience weight loss if I do the strict fast with absolutely nothing but clear liquids. Even if I keep my total daily calories and activity mostly the same (of course we are not in a lab here, and I may be more active one day, and more lazy the next, but my workout schedule is pretty consistent).
So I have to conclude that there might be something hormonal or metabolic going on here other than CICO.
And I have long been a supporter of CICO!!! But the results here make me wonder. Because CICO is not explaining what is happening with my body.
Maybe there is more to all this than we think, and more than the scientists know. After all, 15 years ago scientists were telling me that without a doubt, eating fat would kill me. Now the story is very different.
So I'm waiting to see what the science will tell us in a few years.
Hormones can cause slight, but not significantly large changes, in the CO portion. However, one thing hormones can do is increase or decrease water retention and those difference can be very large. Unfortunately, weight is just too gross of a measure to really figure out what is happening.
As for 15 years ago scientist telling you eating fat would kill you is not correct. Maybe the media told you that or a well-meaning doctor (or most likely a guru with no real background) but science has never said this.
Maybe I should say "science" (in quotes!). Because it seems like the medical/nutrition community takes research and then makes statements that are only partly based on that research! I take it all with a grain of salt (but how large a grain??--because the "science" conclusion on sodium is still up in the air!)
Scientists are making new discoveries every day. Perhaps one day something will further explain the role of hormones, and specifically insulin, in weight loss and nutrition (and thus also further explain what is behind IF).
My point is just that true science continues to emerge with new discoveries every day, and scientists (and doctors) don't know all.
And also, that the human body is unique, dynamic and changing, and that makes conclusions that apply to every situation every time difficult. It seems there is always an exception. Perhaps that is because of some biological drive for preservation of the species that makes our systems elastic.
Just philosophizing. And thinking outside the box.
I imagine one of the issues could be logging as well, but I haven't seen any research that shows any advantage for any timing, including IF, but individuals may notice some difference that may not be a result of what they think they are. These things could include: water fluxuations, less ability to absorb calories when eaten in a large meal, and logging differences (i.e. since you eat more food at one time you might be better at logging and not forgetting).
However, as long as it works for you then stick with it.3
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 911 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions