INTERMITTENT FASTING - A LIFESTYLE MAKEOVER
Replies
-
GaleHawkins wrote: »
That is because you went ZERO carb for the day. Carbs are the driver of most all cravings. Hungry is real so we do not die but cravings are not so much.
I don't have cravings and I eat plenty of carbs (about 45-50%). The last time I recall having a real craving was when I was vegetarian for Lent and started thinking about my planned Easter dinner with lamb (and it was the lamb I was thinking about, not the potatoes or dessert). Obviously, that was some months ago. Occasionally I really want a particular food item or meal, but I wouldn't call it a craving, and it's something I can choose to fit in or not.
The idea that I was "keto" or "fat adapted" (more than usual) because I fasted for a day makes no sense. We all know there's an adjustment period before one is fully keto. It doesn't just kick in the minute you miss a usual breakfast.2 -
That's great that it works for you. But many people in this thread are saying the opposite.
Any how many do you think that are saying the opposite have gone 90 days eating <50 grams of carbs daily?
I am not saying people should go low carb. I am just saying do not make a negative statement about a way of eating that one has not tried that is known to be medically safe for 100 years for all age groups.1 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »
Can we all just agreed a caloric deficit is REQUIRED to lose fat and there is no white or black magic that will cause FAT LOSS so we do have have to repost and repost that statement?
We understand that concept very well, it's you constantly talking about nothing but carbs in spite of that that makes us scratch our heads.3 -
Carbs cause cancer?
There was nothing in my post about carbs causing cancer so I do not understand your question.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »
I was wrong. IF is only ZERO carb if you will think about it.
I don't think you can determine a person's carb percentage or keto status based on how they eat for a day (and the 500 calories on a fasting day need not be LCHF in a 5:2 day), let alone 16 hours or whatever. That's like claiming I'm keto now because between dinner and breakfast (occasionally lunch) I eat nothing.The major way to make fat the fastest is carbs. The best way to lose fat is the inverse.
Simply not accurate. Our bodies can quite efficiently store fat as fat. Our bodies can easily burn fat (and will) on any macro percentage.Technically the fastest way to make fat is to eat High Carb and High Fat at the same time. Processed food can work well to fatten up on for this reason. A Big Mac comes to mind especially chased down with sugar water.
So a BigMac=processed, but McD's sausage is not processed, according to you? So basically it's just the bread that counts as "processed"?2 -
stevencloser wrote: »
We understand that concept very well, it's you constantly talking about nothing but carbs in spite of that that makes us scratch our heads.
The thread is about going without carbs protein and fats for a period of time.
0 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »
I've read that a dozen times, I need a translator.
Translation:
"I do not have the time, energy, or patience to engage in this yet again."
tl;dr:
5 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
I don't have cravings and I eat plenty of carbs (about 45-50%). The last time I recall having a real craving was when I was vegetarian for Lent and started thinking about my planned Easter dinner with lamb (and it was the lamb I was thinking about, not the potatoes or dessert). Obviously, that was some months ago. Occasionally I really want a particular food item or meal, but I wouldn't call it a craving, and it's something I can choose to fit in or not.
The idea that I was "keto" or "fat adapted" (more than usual) because I fasted for a day makes no sense. We all know there's an adjustment period before one is fully keto. It doesn't just kick in the minute you miss a usual breakfast.
I agree with you. This is why Keto long term or IF short term is NOT of interest to many for improving weight or lab numbers.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »
Why do think over eating of carbs increases one risk of developing cancer but over eating of fats does not increase the risk of developing cancer then?
Gale, I have no idea why you are moving from one subject to another like skipping stones.
Are you actually saying that someone on a high vegetable diet with mid to high carb volumes has a higher cancer rate than someone eating high fat/high protein?
Those studies that demonstrate some sort of correlation at high levels of added sugar/carbs are not partition analysis and they do not, in any way, make suggests that for the person controlling calories there is a beneficial effect to eliminating carbs as your posts here suggest.4 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »
I lost my carb cravings after not eating them for two weeks.
I asked you this before, and you did not answer. If you were just craving "carbs," why did you not eat low calorie foods that are mostly carbs and also happen to have a decent amount of micros. Like broccoli or carrots or tomatoes or even blueberries? That's what I would do if plagued with this "carb craving" that people talk about.
I've never once craved carbs, though. Sometimes I desire a specific food item. My most general craving is for meat, and even there it's usually more specific (I could really go for some roasted chicken breast or steak or salmon).0 -
Carbs cause cancer?
Overeating increases the risk of several types of cancer. Period.
Macros overeaten don't matter. Extra weight itself is much more of a verifiable risk factor for cancer than any macro.
If I must, I can post reputable sources for this.5 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »
I lost my carb cravings after not eating them for two weeks.
I still get hungry but I just make sure on any day my total carbs are <50 grams in the process of feeding my hunger. I can now go 12 hours without eating and still function. When I lived on a high carb diet after 4 hours I had to eat or drink more carbs to kind of function. Fat is more like diesel fuel where carbs is more of a flash fuel like gasoline.
What, this makes no sense. You just told me a few minutes ago that why I can fast no problem for a day is that I am eating no carbs. But when you would go 4 hours without eating, you too were eating no carbs during that period. How are those 4 hours different from my first 4 hours on a fasting day?6 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »
I was wrong. IF is only ZERO carb if you will think about it.
IF and Keto are functionally the same. You are withholding carb intake in IF and greatly reducing carbs to do keto.
The major way to make fat the fastest is carbs. The best way to lose fat is the inverse.
Technically the fastest way to make fat is to eat High Carb and High Fat at the same time. Processed food can work well to fatten up on for this reason. A Big Mac comes to mind especially chased down with sugar water.
My last "meal" of the day is about 80 grams of carbs with a teaspoon of fat. Every single day. I eat this about 7:00 at night.
I don't eat again the next day until 1:00 or 2:00 in the afternoon. The first thing I eat then? A banana.
No cravings.
I relate all of this to point out the fact that making sweeping statements about carbs and cravings won't hold to be universally true and isn't necessarily a good idea in a debate.
I'll leave your remarks about "making" fat and carbs to the more scientifically minded to explain why you're oversimplifying. Denovo lipogenesis isn't really an efficient metabolic thing that just happens for kicks and giggles.4 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »
I agree with you. This is why Keto long term or IF short term is NOT of interest to many for improving weight or lab numbers.
So if you agree with me now, you admit that you were wrong to claim that one must be LCHF to successfully fast?4 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
I drink a lot of Fairlife. Can I get in on this action?2 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
What, this makes no sense. You just told me a few minutes ago that why I can fast no problem for a day is that I am eating no carbs. But when you would go 4 hours without eating, you too were eating no carbs during that period. How are those 4 hours different from my first 4 hours on a fasting day?
I have no way of knowing our differences. You may be able to fast for a day just because that is your decision. That is not something that I ever remember trying.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »
If one is eating Carbs, Protein or Fats in the IF window then one is NOT doing IF period. It is when you are going ZERO carbs that is giving you the health gains of doing IF.
No Zero Carb window = No IF period.
??????
Intermittent Fasting means to fast... intermittently. It's not about macros. It's about going without calorie intake (other than perhaps a very small amount of cream or milk in coffee/tea) for a window of time.
Where did you learn your definition of IF? I've never heard it before.7 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »
I have no way of knowing our differences. You may be able to fast for a day just because that is your decision. That is not something that I ever remember trying.
So when you told me a page or so ago that I can successfully fast "because you went ZERO carb for the day" you misrepresented your own view? I see.4 -
I think this is the point...by extending the period of zero carbs an extra few hours, we extending the mild form of ketosis and that effects our appetite and fat burn...no?
Like I said, I accept that MOST of the benefits of IF are that it's a tool to keep calories down, but there are extra benefits I think.
You are always burning fat and storing it as well based on your energy balance. Fat cells are always releasing and storing fat and no benefit has been found long-term past the normal caloric deficit.5 -
CorneliusPhoton wrote: »
I think that it's the fiber that gives us satiety. Candy doesn't do that.
Fibre helps but there are different mechanisms for satiety depending on what you are eating. Candy would have low satiety.0 -
Gale, you need to stop turning every thread into a carb thread.
1. This thread is NOT about "not eating carbs" like you stated
2. Carbs don't "increase the chances of cancer" (not a single study isolated carbs from the standard American diet, whatever that means, to control for macronutrient consumption in isolation)
3. Low carb does is not any better or worse than any other caloric restriction method for weight loss once you move away from what works for the individual (and if you really like studies that don't control for variables, vegetarians and vegans in particular tend to have lower BMI)
4. Keto does not increase the mitochondrial density or slow down aging at its own merit, and as a matter of fact most long-lived people eat a moderate to high carb diet.
5. Carbs make you hungry, but they don't make everyone hungry and in fact for some they promote satiety. Your personal experience is not universal.
6. McDonald's sausage is as processed as McDonald's burger and is not the best choice if you are chasing "X increases cancer risk" studies.
7. No one here is "saying negative things about keto". This thread has nothing to do with keto.
8. Put those pamphlets down and stop derailing the thread. Go start your own and talk about carbs all you want.22 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »
Can we all just agreed a caloric deficit is REQUIRED to lose fat and there is no white or black magic that will cause FAT LOSS so we do have have to repost and repost that statement?
integrateddiabetes.com/Articles/insu/insulin%20&%20weight%20gain%20edited.pdf
"“Why does insulin cause weight gain?”
Insulin is a hormone that promotes the uptake of
sugar (glucose) by almost all of the body’s cells,
including muscle, liver and fat cells. At any
given time, our cells are also burning glucose
for fuel. If our fuel intake (calories eaten) is
greater than our energy expenditure (calories
burned), we tend to store more glucose than we
burn. Muscle and liver cells store this extra
glucose in a form called “glycogen”, which is a
very dense, compact form of glucose. Fat cells
store the extra glucose as fat."
I think most of you understand "Insulin" does NOT cause weight gain but that it "Enables" weight gain if one is over eating any source of calories be it C,P or F.
Carbs is the main driver of Insulin production in healthy people. IF works well because one is doing ZERO carbs in the IF window so insulin levels drops yet the body "requires" energy so it flips to burning fat because of the lack of glucose.
Low insulin level means low fat storing hormone level so we are not likely to store fact.
Our BMR still requires energy to maintain where is low, normal or high. Due to the being zero carb due to IF the body flips to burning fat. NO MAGIC is involved unless you call being Flex Fuel Ready magic.
Carbs are NO evil but are the main driver of Insulin production. Protein drives it about half as much as carbs. Fats functionally is not an Insulin driver.
Eating High Fat is NO magic but I thing all of you understand if 80% of my calories are coming from FATS vs. 80% Carbs that my Insulin levels are not going to peak as high after a meal and STOP my fat loss program as much.
Again this is all simple physiology. We have about 30 hormones that enable life. Insulin is but one and some of them impact our Insulin levels.
I agree we need a deficit with no black or white magic, absolutely.0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
Fibre helps but there are different mechanisms for satiety depending on what you are eating. Candy would have low satiety.
For example, increased insulin increases your leptin, which in turn makes you less hungry.3 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »
Lol.
First off, fat does trigger insulin release. It just happens at a slower rate and at much lower concentrations but it is there.
Second, habitual coffee intake results in increased fasting insulin concentration (probably through mechanism of decrease in insulin sensitivity).
And all along you are forgetting about insulin sensitivity. It's not only the concentration in the body that matters but the uptake and impact.
Enjoy that coffee.
Not to mention that if you increase insulin sensitivity in muscle that also increases it in fat cells. I'll take mine two cream two sugar please!1 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »
My last "meal" of the day is about 80 grams of carbs with a teaspoon of fat. Every single day. I eat this about 7:00 at night.
I don't eat again the next day until 1:00 or 2:00 in the afternoon. The first thing I eat then? A banana.
No cravings.
I relate all of this to point out the fact that making sweeping statements about carbs and cravings won't hold to be universally true and isn't necessarily a good idea in a debate.
I'll leave your remarks about "making" fat and carbs to the more scientifically minded to explain why you're oversimplifying. Denovo lipogenesis isn't really an efficient metabolic thing that just happens for kicks and giggles.
Yes there are few if any universally true statements about how to eat. I know what is currently working for me only. IF is just going without any calories for a window of time. It seems to work well for many and perhaps of zero value to others. I am not debating about how another should eat. It is the overeating that is the main problem. If IF help then it helps.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »
For example, increased insulin increases your leptin, which in turn makes you less hungry.
Unless you have reduced leptin sensitivity which means you are probably obese and have insulin insensitivity as well. Unfortunately, things tend to magnify like that.
1 -
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »
So if you agree with me now, you admit that you were wrong to claim that one must be LCHF to successfully fast?
I claim fasting is nothing more than a window of time without carbs, proteins and fats. Water is OK to drink in my view. I know there are egg, etc fast but that is not true fasting but just a limited macro.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »
Yes there are few if any universally true statements about how to eat. I know what is currently working for me only. IF is just going without any calories for a window of time. It seems to work well for many and perhaps of zero value to others. I am not debating about how another should eat. It is the overeating that is the main problem. If IF help then it helps.
Well, now I'm confused.
Because I can't see what your other statements about carbs and IF have to do with what you've said here.
To say the least about carbs and cancer, which have nothing at all to do with IF.
Very, very confusing.7 -
ericromzek wrote: »
Your body does not burn stored adipose tissue fat while there is elevated insulin running through your body.
That is incorrect. Insulin inhibits lipolysis, it does not stop it completely. Obviously, because you always have insulin in your blood.3
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.9K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions