Meals

1356

Replies

  • nutmegoreo
    nutmegoreo Posts: 15,534 Member
    nutmegoreo wrote: »
    nutmegoreo wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    The answer to your question is shown in the following study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27737674. This study demonstrates how "intermittent fasting", or IF, works.

    By limiting your "eating window" to a limited time span, you create a "fasting" period for the remainder of the day, which allows your body to go into efficient fat-burning.

    So, for example, in the study above, the "eating window" was within an 8-hr time period. This is also known as intermittent fasting.

    For me, it's a very effective strategy. I've noticed a huge difference if I eat within the established eating window. Also, note that there is also no reduction in food intake. Whatever food you were planning to eat that day is not reduced...just needs to be within the feeding window. I get such huge gains in weight loss for virtually little effort with intermittent fasting.

    So, yes. Meal timing is associated to weight loss effectiveness.

    I've done IF for years now but if I don't also regulate my calorie intake I gain weight. IF is not a weight loss plan in itself and you still have to be eating at the correct calorie deficit for your weight loss goals while doing it. What many people find though is that doing an eating window is a simple way to help keep calories in check. If I eat in the morning I tend to graze the rest of the day. But, when I break my fast at noon or later then I don't graze/snack and it's easier to hit my calorie targets.

    The effectiveness of intermittent fasting has to do with it's ability to improve insulin sensitivity and reboot metabolism. For example, this is shown in the following study, where those with deranged metabolisms demonstrated greater improvement of weight loss through intermittent fasting: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20921964

    Right. ;)

    Nope. Your metabolism does not need rebooting, and not everyone is insulin sensitive. Fasting is personal preference and works for some people, and not for others.

    That study you posted was done on "Thirty-four resistance-trained males," but did not provide weight, age, etc. How does that even apply here? In fact, the question was general with no details as to whether the OP is a "resistance-trained" male. All we know is he's 19 years old.
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    The answer to your question is shown in the following study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27737674. This study demonstrates how "intermittent fasting", or IF, works.

    By limiting your "eating window" to a limited time span, you create a "fasting" period for the remainder of the day, which allows your body to go into efficient fat-burning.

    So, for example, in the study above, the "eating window" was within an 8-hr time period. This is also known as intermittent fasting.

    For me, it's a very effective strategy. I've noticed a huge difference if I eat within the established eating window. Also, note that there is also no reduction in food intake. Whatever food you were planning to eat that day is not reduced...just needs to be within the feeding window. I get such huge gains in weight loss for virtually little effort with intermittent fasting.

    So, yes. Meal timing is associated to weight loss effectiveness.

    I've done IF for years now but if I don't also regulate my calorie intake I gain weight. IF is not a weight loss plan in itself and you still have to be eating at the correct calorie deficit for your weight loss goals while doing it. What many people find though is that doing an eating window is a simple way to help keep calories in check. If I eat in the morning I tend to graze the rest of the day. But, when I break my fast at noon or later then I don't graze/snack and it's easier to hit my calorie targets.

    The effectiveness of intermittent fasting has to do with it's ability to improve insulin sensitivity and reboot metabolism. For example, this is shown in the following study, where those with deranged metabolisms demonstrated greater improvement of weight loss through intermittent fasting: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20921964

    Right. ;)

    Nope. Your metabolism does not need rebooting, and not everyone is insulin sensitive. Fasting is personal preference and works for some people, and not for others.

    That study you posted was done on "Thirty-four resistance-trained males." How does that even apply here?

    I posted two studies, one of men and the other women, as well as different metabolic performance levels. Demonstrates IF works along a spectrum of types.

    Nobody said it didn't work.

    It works for some people, not for everyone. And,it will only work as to weight loss if you're in a calorie deficit.

    You'll catch me intermittently fasting in a cold day in hell because that type of eating plan does not work for me when it comes to calorie control, which is the one necessary component to weight loss.

    Not sure why you responded with "nobody said it didn't work". All I did was respond to your previous concern, that one of the studies was done on resistance trained males. And all I said was I also provided another study on women with different metabolic type...demonstrating effectiveness of IF across various conditions. Your MFP profile says that your weight is creeping back. So, not sure what you mean by your strategy working for you. Just saying.

    Did you read the paragraph after that one, or were you just looking for something specific to attack on a personal level?

    I've been primarily staying out of this because these conversations become circular. IF works as long as you remain in a calorie deficit. It can be helpful for a number of specific scenarios. I have seen people who feel that their BED is better managed with IF. If a person tends to prefer a larger meal, having a smaller window will reduce the amount of grazing. It can take some time to adapt to different eating hours than one is used to, but it can work. Whether IF works for an individual, it is still the calorie deficit that leads to weight loss.

    What "paragraph after that one" are you referring to?

    The paragraph after the one you are referring to in her profile in the text of yours that I highlighted.

    I have no idea what you are talking about.

    Reread her profile.
  • fruttibiscotti
    fruttibiscotti Posts: 990 Member
    nutmegoreo wrote: »
    nutmegoreo wrote: »
    nutmegoreo wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    The answer to your question is shown in the following study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27737674. This study demonstrates how "intermittent fasting", or IF, works.

    By limiting your "eating window" to a limited time span, you create a "fasting" period for the remainder of the day, which allows your body to go into efficient fat-burning.

    So, for example, in the study above, the "eating window" was within an 8-hr time period. This is also known as intermittent fasting.

    For me, it's a very effective strategy. I've noticed a huge difference if I eat within the established eating window. Also, note that there is also no reduction in food intake. Whatever food you were planning to eat that day is not reduced...just needs to be within the feeding window. I get such huge gains in weight loss for virtually little effort with intermittent fasting.

    So, yes. Meal timing is associated to weight loss effectiveness.

    I've done IF for years now but if I don't also regulate my calorie intake I gain weight. IF is not a weight loss plan in itself and you still have to be eating at the correct calorie deficit for your weight loss goals while doing it. What many people find though is that doing an eating window is a simple way to help keep calories in check. If I eat in the morning I tend to graze the rest of the day. But, when I break my fast at noon or later then I don't graze/snack and it's easier to hit my calorie targets.

    The effectiveness of intermittent fasting has to do with it's ability to improve insulin sensitivity and reboot metabolism. For example, this is shown in the following study, where those with deranged metabolisms demonstrated greater improvement of weight loss through intermittent fasting: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20921964

    Right. ;)

    Nope. Your metabolism does not need rebooting, and not everyone is insulin sensitive. Fasting is personal preference and works for some people, and not for others.

    That study you posted was done on "Thirty-four resistance-trained males," but did not provide weight, age, etc. How does that even apply here? In fact, the question was general with no details as to whether the OP is a "resistance-trained" male. All we know is he's 19 years old.
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    The answer to your question is shown in the following study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27737674. This study demonstrates how "intermittent fasting", or IF, works.

    By limiting your "eating window" to a limited time span, you create a "fasting" period for the remainder of the day, which allows your body to go into efficient fat-burning.

    So, for example, in the study above, the "eating window" was within an 8-hr time period. This is also known as intermittent fasting.

    For me, it's a very effective strategy. I've noticed a huge difference if I eat within the established eating window. Also, note that there is also no reduction in food intake. Whatever food you were planning to eat that day is not reduced...just needs to be within the feeding window. I get such huge gains in weight loss for virtually little effort with intermittent fasting.

    So, yes. Meal timing is associated to weight loss effectiveness.

    I've done IF for years now but if I don't also regulate my calorie intake I gain weight. IF is not a weight loss plan in itself and you still have to be eating at the correct calorie deficit for your weight loss goals while doing it. What many people find though is that doing an eating window is a simple way to help keep calories in check. If I eat in the morning I tend to graze the rest of the day. But, when I break my fast at noon or later then I don't graze/snack and it's easier to hit my calorie targets.

    The effectiveness of intermittent fasting has to do with it's ability to improve insulin sensitivity and reboot metabolism. For example, this is shown in the following study, where those with deranged metabolisms demonstrated greater improvement of weight loss through intermittent fasting: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20921964

    Right. ;)

    Nope. Your metabolism does not need rebooting, and not everyone is insulin sensitive. Fasting is personal preference and works for some people, and not for others.

    That study you posted was done on "Thirty-four resistance-trained males." How does that even apply here?

    I posted two studies, one of men and the other women, as well as different metabolic performance levels. Demonstrates IF works along a spectrum of types.

    Nobody said it didn't work.

    It works for some people, not for everyone. And,it will only work as to weight loss if you're in a calorie deficit.

    You'll catch me intermittently fasting in a cold day in hell because that type of eating plan does not work for me when it comes to calorie control, which is the one necessary component to weight loss.

    Not sure why you responded with "nobody said it didn't work". All I did was respond to your previous concern, that one of the studies was done on resistance trained males. And all I said was I also provided another study on women with different metabolic type...demonstrating effectiveness of IF across various conditions. Your MFP profile says that your weight is creeping back. So, not sure what you mean by your strategy working for you. Just saying.

    Did you read the paragraph after that one, or were you just looking for something specific to attack on a personal level?

    I've been primarily staying out of this because these conversations become circular. IF works as long as you remain in a calorie deficit. It can be helpful for a number of specific scenarios. I have seen people who feel that their BED is better managed with IF. If a person tends to prefer a larger meal, having a smaller window will reduce the amount of grazing. It can take some time to adapt to different eating hours than one is used to, but it can work. Whether IF works for an individual, it is still the calorie deficit that leads to weight loss.

    What "paragraph after that one" are you referring to?

    The paragraph after the one you are referring to in her profile in the text of yours that I highlighted.

    I have no idea what you are talking about.

    Reread her profile.

    You read it. Have fun.

  • fruttibiscotti
    fruttibiscotti Posts: 990 Member
    nutmegoreo wrote: »
    nutmegoreo wrote: »
    nutmegoreo wrote: »
    nutmegoreo wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    The answer to your question is shown in the following study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27737674. This study demonstrates how "intermittent fasting", or IF, works.

    By limiting your "eating window" to a limited time span, you create a "fasting" period for the remainder of the day, which allows your body to go into efficient fat-burning.

    So, for example, in the study above, the "eating window" was within an 8-hr time period. This is also known as intermittent fasting.

    For me, it's a very effective strategy. I've noticed a huge difference if I eat within the established eating window. Also, note that there is also no reduction in food intake. Whatever food you were planning to eat that day is not reduced...just needs to be within the feeding window. I get such huge gains in weight loss for virtually little effort with intermittent fasting.

    So, yes. Meal timing is associated to weight loss effectiveness.

    I've done IF for years now but if I don't also regulate my calorie intake I gain weight. IF is not a weight loss plan in itself and you still have to be eating at the correct calorie deficit for your weight loss goals while doing it. What many people find though is that doing an eating window is a simple way to help keep calories in check. If I eat in the morning I tend to graze the rest of the day. But, when I break my fast at noon or later then I don't graze/snack and it's easier to hit my calorie targets.

    The effectiveness of intermittent fasting has to do with it's ability to improve insulin sensitivity and reboot metabolism. For example, this is shown in the following study, where those with deranged metabolisms demonstrated greater improvement of weight loss through intermittent fasting: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20921964

    Right. ;)

    Nope. Your metabolism does not need rebooting, and not everyone is insulin sensitive. Fasting is personal preference and works for some people, and not for others.

    That study you posted was done on "Thirty-four resistance-trained males," but did not provide weight, age, etc. How does that even apply here? In fact, the question was general with no details as to whether the OP is a "resistance-trained" male. All we know is he's 19 years old.
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    The answer to your question is shown in the following study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27737674. This study demonstrates how "intermittent fasting", or IF, works.

    By limiting your "eating window" to a limited time span, you create a "fasting" period for the remainder of the day, which allows your body to go into efficient fat-burning.

    So, for example, in the study above, the "eating window" was within an 8-hr time period. This is also known as intermittent fasting.

    For me, it's a very effective strategy. I've noticed a huge difference if I eat within the established eating window. Also, note that there is also no reduction in food intake. Whatever food you were planning to eat that day is not reduced...just needs to be within the feeding window. I get such huge gains in weight loss for virtually little effort with intermittent fasting.

    So, yes. Meal timing is associated to weight loss effectiveness.

    I've done IF for years now but if I don't also regulate my calorie intake I gain weight. IF is not a weight loss plan in itself and you still have to be eating at the correct calorie deficit for your weight loss goals while doing it. What many people find though is that doing an eating window is a simple way to help keep calories in check. If I eat in the morning I tend to graze the rest of the day. But, when I break my fast at noon or later then I don't graze/snack and it's easier to hit my calorie targets.

    The effectiveness of intermittent fasting has to do with it's ability to improve insulin sensitivity and reboot metabolism. For example, this is shown in the following study, where those with deranged metabolisms demonstrated greater improvement of weight loss through intermittent fasting: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20921964

    Right. ;)

    Nope. Your metabolism does not need rebooting, and not everyone is insulin sensitive. Fasting is personal preference and works for some people, and not for others.

    That study you posted was done on "Thirty-four resistance-trained males." How does that even apply here?

    I posted two studies, one of men and the other women, as well as different metabolic performance levels. Demonstrates IF works along a spectrum of types.

    Nobody said it didn't work.

    It works for some people, not for everyone. And,it will only work as to weight loss if you're in a calorie deficit.

    You'll catch me intermittently fasting in a cold day in hell because that type of eating plan does not work for me when it comes to calorie control, which is the one necessary component to weight loss.

    Not sure why you responded with "nobody said it didn't work". All I did was respond to your previous concern, that one of the studies was done on resistance trained males. And all I said was I also provided another study on women with different metabolic type...demonstrating effectiveness of IF across various conditions. Your MFP profile says that your weight is creeping back. So, not sure what you mean by your strategy working for you. Just saying.

    Did you read the paragraph after that one, or were you just looking for something specific to attack on a personal level?

    I've been primarily staying out of this because these conversations become circular. IF works as long as you remain in a calorie deficit. It can be helpful for a number of specific scenarios. I have seen people who feel that their BED is better managed with IF. If a person tends to prefer a larger meal, having a smaller window will reduce the amount of grazing. It can take some time to adapt to different eating hours than one is used to, but it can work. Whether IF works for an individual, it is still the calorie deficit that leads to weight loss.

    What "paragraph after that one" are you referring to?

    The paragraph after the one you are referring to in her profile in the text of yours that I highlighted.

    I have no idea what you are talking about.

    Reread her profile.

    You read it. Have fun.

    I did read it. Your dig at her was unwarranted.

    Help me understand where the requisite information that either aligns or refutes the points provided by the studies I provided to help answer the question the OP had regarding meal timing?

  • snickerscharlie
    snickerscharlie Posts: 8,582 Member
    "Deranged metabolism." LOL.
  • fruttibiscotti
    fruttibiscotti Posts: 990 Member
    "Deranged metabolism." LOL.

    It's a term used to describe the spectrum of deranged metabolic conditions. Some are mild, while others more severe. These conditions either stem from or become root causes to other medical conditions. Some examples include cancer, obesity and organ failure. Examples shown:

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22710702
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3712861
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25628247
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,360 Member
    edited December 2016
    The answer to your question is shown in the following study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27737674. This study demonstrates how "intermittent fasting", or IF, works.

    By limiting your "eating window" to a limited time span, you create a "fasting" period for the remainder of the day, which allows your body to go into efficient fat-burning.

    So, for example, in the study above, the "eating window" was within an 8-hr time period. This is also known as intermittent fasting.

    For me, it's a very effective strategy. I've noticed a huge difference if I eat within the established eating window. Also, note that there is also no reduction in food intake. Whatever food you were planning to eat that day is not reduced...just needs to be within the feeding window. I get such huge gains in weight loss for virtually little effort with intermittent fasting.

    So, yes. Meal timing is associated to weight loss effectiveness.

    I've done IF for years now but if I don't also regulate my calorie intake I gain weight. IF is not a weight loss plan in itself and you still have to be eating at the correct calorie deficit for your weight loss goals while doing it. What many people find though is that doing an eating window is a simple way to help keep calories in check. If I eat in the morning I tend to graze the rest of the day. But, when I break my fast at noon or later then I don't graze/snack and it's easier to hit my calorie targets.

    The effectiveness of intermittent fasting has to do with it's ability to improve insulin sensitivity and reboot metabolism. For example, this is shown in the following study, where those with deranged metabolisms demonstrated greater improvement of weight loss through intermittent fasting: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20921964

    Feel free to cite a study which shows you can "reboot" metabolism, and by what means. I've never seen anything outside the realm of pure woo which talks about "rebooting" metabolism.

    And insulin sensitivity is improved simply by losing weight/fat - as are many other health conditions/markers.
  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,917 Member
    kami3006 wrote: »
    The article on males has nothing to do with weight loss and the article with women says IER is as effective as CER. Neither show that it's better than any alternatives.

    From the study:

    Last observation carried forward analysis showed that IER and CER are equally effective for weight loss: mean (95% confidence interval ) weight change for IER was -6.4 (-7.9 to -4.8) kg vs -5.6 (-6.9 to -4.4) kg for CER (P-value for difference between groups = 0.4). Both groups experienced comparable reductions in leptin, free androgen index, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, total and LDL cholesterol, triglycerides, blood pressure and increases in sex hormone binding globulin, IGF binding proteins 1 and 2. Reductions in fasting insulin and insulin resistance were modest in both groups, but greater with IER than with CER; difference between groups for fasting insulin was -1.2 (-1.4 to -1.0) μU ml(-1) and for insulin resistance was -1.2 (-1.5 to -1.0) μU mmol(-1) l(-1) (both P = 0.04).

    So, the data shows is that both IER and CER resulted in weight loss...with greater loss in the IER group.

    ...With a p-value of 0.4. Since you throw around studies I assume you know what that means?
  • fruttibiscotti
    fruttibiscotti Posts: 990 Member
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    The answer to your question is shown in the following study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27737674. This study demonstrates how "intermittent fasting", or IF, works.

    By limiting your "eating window" to a limited time span, you create a "fasting" period for the remainder of the day, which allows your body to go into efficient fat-burning.

    So, for example, in the study above, the "eating window" was within an 8-hr time period. This is also known as intermittent fasting.

    For me, it's a very effective strategy. I've noticed a huge difference if I eat within the established eating window. Also, note that there is also no reduction in food intake. Whatever food you were planning to eat that day is not reduced...just needs to be within the feeding window. I get such huge gains in weight loss for virtually little effort with intermittent fasting.

    So, yes. Meal timing is associated to weight loss effectiveness.

    I've done IF for years now but if I don't also regulate my calorie intake I gain weight. IF is not a weight loss plan in itself and you still have to be eating at the correct calorie deficit for your weight loss goals while doing it. What many people find though is that doing an eating window is a simple way to help keep calories in check. If I eat in the morning I tend to graze the rest of the day. But, when I break my fast at noon or later then I don't graze/snack and it's easier to hit my calorie targets.

    The effectiveness of intermittent fasting has to do with it's ability to improve insulin sensitivity and reboot metabolism. For example, this is shown in the following study, where those with deranged metabolisms demonstrated greater improvement of weight loss through intermittent fasting: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20921964

    Feel free to cite a study which shows you can "reboot" metabolism, and by what means. I've never seen anything outside the realm of pure woo which talks about "rebooting" metabolism.

    And insulin sensitivity is improved simply by losing weight/fat - as are many other health conditions/markers.

    There are several studies out there...different types of subjects used. Here's an example https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2405701

  • fruttibiscotti
    fruttibiscotti Posts: 990 Member
    kami3006 wrote: »
    The article on males has nothing to do with weight loss and the article with women says IER is as effective as CER. Neither show that it's better than any alternatives.

    From the study:

    Last observation carried forward analysis showed that IER and CER are equally effective for weight loss: mean (95% confidence interval ) weight change for IER was -6.4 (-7.9 to -4.8) kg vs -5.6 (-6.9 to -4.4) kg for CER (P-value for difference between groups = 0.4). Both groups experienced comparable reductions in leptin, free androgen index, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, total and LDL cholesterol, triglycerides, blood pressure and increases in sex hormone binding globulin, IGF binding proteins 1 and 2. Reductions in fasting insulin and insulin resistance were modest in both groups, but greater with IER than with CER; difference between groups for fasting insulin was -1.2 (-1.4 to -1.0) μU ml(-1) and for insulin resistance was -1.2 (-1.5 to -1.0) μU mmol(-1) l(-1) (both P = 0.04).

    So, the data shows is that both IER and CER resulted in weight loss...with greater loss in the IER group.

    ...With a p-value of 0.4. Since you throw around studies I assume you know what that means?

    Yes, I know what it means.
    And this is the direct quote from the paper:
    "Reductions in fasting insulin and insulin resistance were modest in both groups, but greater with IER than with CER"
    If you refute this, I look forward to your published, peer-reviewed article.
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,360 Member
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    The answer to your question is shown in the following study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27737674. This study demonstrates how "intermittent fasting", or IF, works.

    By limiting your "eating window" to a limited time span, you create a "fasting" period for the remainder of the day, which allows your body to go into efficient fat-burning.

    So, for example, in the study above, the "eating window" was within an 8-hr time period. This is also known as intermittent fasting.

    For me, it's a very effective strategy. I've noticed a huge difference if I eat within the established eating window. Also, note that there is also no reduction in food intake. Whatever food you were planning to eat that day is not reduced...just needs to be within the feeding window. I get such huge gains in weight loss for virtually little effort with intermittent fasting.

    So, yes. Meal timing is associated to weight loss effectiveness.

    I've done IF for years now but if I don't also regulate my calorie intake I gain weight. IF is not a weight loss plan in itself and you still have to be eating at the correct calorie deficit for your weight loss goals while doing it. What many people find though is that doing an eating window is a simple way to help keep calories in check. If I eat in the morning I tend to graze the rest of the day. But, when I break my fast at noon or later then I don't graze/snack and it's easier to hit my calorie targets.

    The effectiveness of intermittent fasting has to do with it's ability to improve insulin sensitivity and reboot metabolism. For example, this is shown in the following study, where those with deranged metabolisms demonstrated greater improvement of weight loss through intermittent fasting: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20921964

    Feel free to cite a study which shows you can "reboot" metabolism, and by what means. I've never seen anything outside the realm of pure woo which talks about "rebooting" metabolism.

    And insulin sensitivity is improved simply by losing weight/fat - as are many other health conditions/markers.

    There are several studies out there...different types of subjects used. Here's an example https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2405701

    I don't see a "reboot" mentioned anywhere.
  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,917 Member
    kami3006 wrote: »
    The article on males has nothing to do with weight loss and the article with women says IER is as effective as CER. Neither show that it's better than any alternatives.

    From the study:

    Last observation carried forward analysis showed that IER and CER are equally effective for weight loss: mean (95% confidence interval ) weight change for IER was -6.4 (-7.9 to -4.8) kg vs -5.6 (-6.9 to -4.4) kg for CER (P-value for difference between groups = 0.4). Both groups experienced comparable reductions in leptin, free androgen index, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, total and LDL cholesterol, triglycerides, blood pressure and increases in sex hormone binding globulin, IGF binding proteins 1 and 2. Reductions in fasting insulin and insulin resistance were modest in both groups, but greater with IER than with CER; difference between groups for fasting insulin was -1.2 (-1.4 to -1.0) μU ml(-1) and for insulin resistance was -1.2 (-1.5 to -1.0) μU mmol(-1) l(-1) (both P = 0.04).

    So, the data shows is that both IER and CER resulted in weight loss...with greater loss in the IER group.

    ...With a p-value of 0.4. Since you throw around studies I assume you know what that means?

    Yes, I know what it means.
    And this is the direct quote from the paper:
    "Reductions in fasting insulin and insulin resistance were modest in both groups, but greater with IER than with CER"
    If you refute this, I look forward to your published, peer-reviewed article.

    It appears you do not know what a p-value of 0.4 in a comparison means after all.
  • fruttibiscotti
    fruttibiscotti Posts: 990 Member
    Noel_57 wrote: »
    There are several studies out there...different types of subjects used. Here's an example https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2405701
    "Out there" where? Your source never uses that terminology, because it doesn't exist. Metabolism does not need to be "rebooted". That is fad science, Frankenstein had a rebooted metabolism. that's about it.

    Out there, as in peer-reviewed, scientific studies. Not "opinions" without data or facts, which seems to be in an overwhelming supply on MFP.

  • fruttibiscotti
    fruttibiscotti Posts: 990 Member
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    The answer to your question is shown in the following study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27737674. This study demonstrates how "intermittent fasting", or IF, works.

    By limiting your "eating window" to a limited time span, you create a "fasting" period for the remainder of the day, which allows your body to go into efficient fat-burning.

    So, for example, in the study above, the "eating window" was within an 8-hr time period. This is also known as intermittent fasting.

    For me, it's a very effective strategy. I've noticed a huge difference if I eat within the established eating window. Also, note that there is also no reduction in food intake. Whatever food you were planning to eat that day is not reduced...just needs to be within the feeding window. I get such huge gains in weight loss for virtually little effort with intermittent fasting.

    So, yes. Meal timing is associated to weight loss effectiveness.

    I've done IF for years now but if I don't also regulate my calorie intake I gain weight. IF is not a weight loss plan in itself and you still have to be eating at the correct calorie deficit for your weight loss goals while doing it. What many people find though is that doing an eating window is a simple way to help keep calories in check. If I eat in the morning I tend to graze the rest of the day. But, when I break my fast at noon or later then I don't graze/snack and it's easier to hit my calorie targets.

    The effectiveness of intermittent fasting has to do with it's ability to improve insulin sensitivity and reboot metabolism. For example, this is shown in the following study, where those with deranged metabolisms demonstrated greater improvement of weight loss through intermittent fasting: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20921964

    Right. ;)

    Nope. Your metabolism does not need rebooting, and not everyone is insulin sensitive. Fasting is personal preference and works for some people, and not for others.

    That study you posted was done on "Thirty-four resistance-trained males," but did not provide weight, age, etc. How does that even apply here? In fact, the question was general with no details as to whether the OP is a "resistance-trained" male. All we know is he's 19 years old.
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    The answer to your question is shown in the following study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27737674. This study demonstrates how "intermittent fasting", or IF, works.

    By limiting your "eating window" to a limited time span, you create a "fasting" period for the remainder of the day, which allows your body to go into efficient fat-burning.

    So, for example, in the study above, the "eating window" was within an 8-hr time period. This is also known as intermittent fasting.

    For me, it's a very effective strategy. I've noticed a huge difference if I eat within the established eating window. Also, note that there is also no reduction in food intake. Whatever food you were planning to eat that day is not reduced...just needs to be within the feeding window. I get such huge gains in weight loss for virtually little effort with intermittent fasting.

    So, yes. Meal timing is associated to weight loss effectiveness.

    I've done IF for years now but if I don't also regulate my calorie intake I gain weight. IF is not a weight loss plan in itself and you still have to be eating at the correct calorie deficit for your weight loss goals while doing it. What many people find though is that doing an eating window is a simple way to help keep calories in check. If I eat in the morning I tend to graze the rest of the day. But, when I break my fast at noon or later then I don't graze/snack and it's easier to hit my calorie targets.

    The effectiveness of intermittent fasting has to do with it's ability to improve insulin sensitivity and reboot metabolism. For example, this is shown in the following study, where those with deranged metabolisms demonstrated greater improvement of weight loss through intermittent fasting: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20921964

    Right. ;)

    Nope. Your metabolism does not need rebooting, and not everyone is insulin sensitive. Fasting is personal preference and works for some people, and not for others.

    That study you posted was done on "Thirty-four resistance-trained males." How does that even apply here?

    I posted two studies, one of men and the other women, as well as different metabolic performance levels. Demonstrates IF works along a spectrum of types.

    Nobody said it didn't work.

    It works for some people, not for everyone. And,it will only work as to weight loss if you're in a calorie deficit.

    You'll catch me intermittently fasting in a cold day in hell because that type of eating plan does not work for me when it comes to calorie control, which is the one necessary component to weight loss.

    Not sure why you responded with "nobody said it didn't work". All I did was respond to your previous concern, that one of the studies was done on resistance trained males. And all I said was I also provided another study on women with different metabolic type...demonstrating effectiveness of IF across various conditions. Your MFP profile says that your weight is creeping back. So, not sure what you mean by your strategy working for you. Just saying.

    Whoa. LOL! Feeling better about yourself now?

    To be exact, my profile says:
    I joined My Fitness Pal for support on this "getting healthier" journey. My highest weight was 220 when I was in my twenties, right after my mother passed away. When I was 40, I lost all the weight. However, weight started creeping back on over the last five years, 33 pounds to be exact, and I decided to get back on track.

    I have lost 44 pounds, been maintaining for a few years now, and I think I might be exactly where I need to be. I am n longer afraid of the bulk/cut process.
    I suppose for people who like to take digs, I should preface that first paragraph with a date. Right?

    Oh, I think you forgot to read the paragraph after that, which has been true for the last three years and is true today. ;);)

    So.....

    Your premise is that intermittent fasting works and you've posted studies which you believe back up your claim.

    I tell you nobody is saying that it DOES NOT work. What people, including me, are basically saying that (1) what works for one person may not work for another and (2) for any plan to work for weight loss you have to eat at a calorie deficit. In other words, if you are eating at a surplus on IF (or any other way of eating) you will not lose weight.

    Your studies do not apply to more than the smaller groups of people, such as those resistance training dudes. :)

    There were dudes in the obese women doing IF study I provided? Really? Where?
  • fruttibiscotti
    fruttibiscotti Posts: 990 Member
    kami3006 wrote: »
    The article on males has nothing to do with weight loss and the article with women says IER is as effective as CER. Neither show that it's better than any alternatives.

    From the study:

    Last observation carried forward analysis showed that IER and CER are equally effective for weight loss: mean (95% confidence interval ) weight change for IER was -6.4 (-7.9 to -4.8) kg vs -5.6 (-6.9 to -4.4) kg for CER (P-value for difference between groups = 0.4). Both groups experienced comparable reductions in leptin, free androgen index, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, total and LDL cholesterol, triglycerides, blood pressure and increases in sex hormone binding globulin, IGF binding proteins 1 and 2. Reductions in fasting insulin and insulin resistance were modest in both groups, but greater with IER than with CER; difference between groups for fasting insulin was -1.2 (-1.4 to -1.0) μU ml(-1) and for insulin resistance was -1.2 (-1.5 to -1.0) μU mmol(-1) l(-1) (both P = 0.04).

    So, the data shows is that both IER and CER resulted in weight loss...with greater loss in the IER group.

    ...With a p-value of 0.4. Since you throw around studies I assume you know what that means?

    Yes, I know what it means.
    And this is the direct quote from the paper:
    "Reductions in fasting insulin and insulin resistance were modest in both groups, but greater with IER than with CER"
    If you refute this, I look forward to your published, peer-reviewed article.

    It appears you do not know what a p-value of 0.4 in a comparison means after all.

    I look forward to reviewing your published explanation on what to do with the null hypothesis under the condition of p value 0.4. Could be a very entertaining read.

  • fruttibiscotti
    fruttibiscotti Posts: 990 Member
    Noel_57 wrote: »
    Out there, as in peer-reviewed, scientific studies. Not "opinions" without data or facts, which seems to be in an overwhelming supply on MFP.
    Still waiting for your data or facts that use the words "rebooting the metabolism".
    Noel_57 wrote: »
    Out there, as in peer-reviewed, scientific studies. Not "opinions" without data or facts, which seems to be in an overwhelming supply on MFP.
    Still waiting for your data or facts that use the words "rebooting the metabolism".

    I already provided published articles that demonstrated how metabolic markers were shifted in the positive direction.

  • nutmegoreo
    nutmegoreo Posts: 15,534 Member
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    The answer to your question is shown in the following study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27737674. This study demonstrates how "intermittent fasting", or IF, works.

    By limiting your "eating window" to a limited time span, you create a "fasting" period for the remainder of the day, which allows your body to go into efficient fat-burning.

    So, for example, in the study above, the "eating window" was within an 8-hr time period. This is also known as intermittent fasting.

    For me, it's a very effective strategy. I've noticed a huge difference if I eat within the established eating window. Also, note that there is also no reduction in food intake. Whatever food you were planning to eat that day is not reduced...just needs to be within the feeding window. I get such huge gains in weight loss for virtually little effort with intermittent fasting.

    So, yes. Meal timing is associated to weight loss effectiveness.

    I've done IF for years now but if I don't also regulate my calorie intake I gain weight. IF is not a weight loss plan in itself and you still have to be eating at the correct calorie deficit for your weight loss goals while doing it. What many people find though is that doing an eating window is a simple way to help keep calories in check. If I eat in the morning I tend to graze the rest of the day. But, when I break my fast at noon or later then I don't graze/snack and it's easier to hit my calorie targets.

    The effectiveness of intermittent fasting has to do with it's ability to improve insulin sensitivity and reboot metabolism. For example, this is shown in the following study, where those with deranged metabolisms demonstrated greater improvement of weight loss through intermittent fasting: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20921964

    Right. ;)

    Nope. Your metabolism does not need rebooting, and not everyone is insulin sensitive. Fasting is personal preference and works for some people, and not for others.

    That study you posted was done on "Thirty-four resistance-trained males," but did not provide weight, age, etc. How does that even apply here? In fact, the question was general with no details as to whether the OP is a "resistance-trained" male. All we know is he's 19 years old.
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    The answer to your question is shown in the following study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27737674. This study demonstrates how "intermittent fasting", or IF, works.

    By limiting your "eating window" to a limited time span, you create a "fasting" period for the remainder of the day, which allows your body to go into efficient fat-burning.

    So, for example, in the study above, the "eating window" was within an 8-hr time period. This is also known as intermittent fasting.

    For me, it's a very effective strategy. I've noticed a huge difference if I eat within the established eating window. Also, note that there is also no reduction in food intake. Whatever food you were planning to eat that day is not reduced...just needs to be within the feeding window. I get such huge gains in weight loss for virtually little effort with intermittent fasting.

    So, yes. Meal timing is associated to weight loss effectiveness.

    I've done IF for years now but if I don't also regulate my calorie intake I gain weight. IF is not a weight loss plan in itself and you still have to be eating at the correct calorie deficit for your weight loss goals while doing it. What many people find though is that doing an eating window is a simple way to help keep calories in check. If I eat in the morning I tend to graze the rest of the day. But, when I break my fast at noon or later then I don't graze/snack and it's easier to hit my calorie targets.

    The effectiveness of intermittent fasting has to do with it's ability to improve insulin sensitivity and reboot metabolism. For example, this is shown in the following study, where those with deranged metabolisms demonstrated greater improvement of weight loss through intermittent fasting: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20921964

    Right. ;)

    Nope. Your metabolism does not need rebooting, and not everyone is insulin sensitive. Fasting is personal preference and works for some people, and not for others.

    That study you posted was done on "Thirty-four resistance-trained males." How does that even apply here?

    I posted two studies, one of men and the other women, as well as different metabolic performance levels. Demonstrates IF works along a spectrum of types.

    Nobody said it didn't work.

    It works for some people, not for everyone. And,it will only work as to weight loss if you're in a calorie deficit.

    You'll catch me intermittently fasting in a cold day in hell because that type of eating plan does not work for me when it comes to calorie control, which is the one necessary component to weight loss.

    Not sure why you responded with "nobody said it didn't work". All I did was respond to your previous concern, that one of the studies was done on resistance trained males. And all I said was I also provided another study on women with different metabolic type...demonstrating effectiveness of IF across various conditions. Your MFP profile says that your weight is creeping back. So, not sure what you mean by your strategy working for you. Just saying.

    Whoa. LOL! Feeling better about yourself now?

    To be exact, my profile says:
    I joined My Fitness Pal for support on this "getting healthier" journey. My highest weight was 220 when I was in my twenties, right after my mother passed away. When I was 40, I lost all the weight. However, weight started creeping back on over the last five years, 33 pounds to be exact, and I decided to get back on track.

    I have lost 44 pounds, been maintaining for a few years now, and I think I might be exactly where I need to be. I am n longer afraid of the bulk/cut process.
    I suppose for people who like to take digs, I should preface that first paragraph with a date. Right?

    Oh, I think you forgot to read the paragraph after that, which has been true for the last three years and is true today. ;);)

    So.....

    Your premise is that intermittent fasting works and you've posted studies which you believe back up your claim.

    I tell you nobody is saying that it DOES NOT work. What people, including me, are basically saying that (1) what works for one person may not work for another and (2) for any plan to work for weight loss you have to eat at a calorie deficit. In other words, if you are eating at a surplus on IF (or any other way of eating) you will not lose weight.

    Your studies do not apply to more than the smaller groups of people, such as those resistance training dudes. :)

    There were dudes in the obese women doing IF study I provided? Really? Where?

    The obese women study is irrelevant to a 19 y/o male such as the OP.