Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Fasting
Options
Replies
-
AlabasterVerve wrote: »There's research that supports type 2 diabetes being reversible - the Newcastle study and bariatric surgery comes to mind - very low calorie diets both. It stands to reason fasting could provide the same results. If anecdotal evidence is to be believed eating low carb can get you the same results.
It's not a matter of "letting your guard down" it's a matter of not eating *kitten* food that makes people fat and sick. Don't do that and you'll reverse or prevent a whole host of diseases.
All foods that could possibly spike your blood sugar = *kitten* food that makes people fat and sick, got it.2 -
...0
-
My doctor years ago had told me about curing the diabetes with weight loss and I remember having the same disagreement with some others on that old message board. I had lost 125 pounds by healthy dieting, writing everything down on paper, measuring everything and walking. I was told my diabetes was cured. But when i re-gained the weight a year later, the diabetes had reared it's ugly head back upon me. Now I'm prepping for bariatric surgery and hope it will be gone for good. I'm sick of multiple injections a day, finger-sticks, and diabetes pills. Hoping I get a lasting "cure" this time. I'm even hoping to get off of about half my medication regimen for my other consequences of becoming morbidly obese.0
-
I have watched several seasons of the Biggest Loser and you are incorrect, they do teach people how to make sustainable choices, how to plan meals, how to cook healthy...Again, Jason Fung. Fewer calories is failed science perpetuated by ignorance and greed. Doomed to fail. Think biggest loser. They always gain it back
The contestants on Biggest Loser gain the weight back because they aren't taught how to make sustainable changes that last. If intermittent fasting works for you, that's because you're still eating fewer calories. Not a failed science.
0 -
Type II diabetes can be reversed by using Dr. Fung's method. Cured? Yes, if you stay thin. If you gain all your weight back, the Type II diabetes will return. It's not the only way to do it but it's a very good way. Ask me how I know. Countless people lose weight and end up with normal glucose and A1c levels and stop taking diabetes medicine. And no longer have type II diabetes. People who knock Fung's book and have not read it, are just plain full of it.3
-
I have watched several seasons of the Biggest Loser and you are incorrect, they do teach people how to make sustainable choices, how to plan meals, how to cook healthy...Again, Jason Fung. Fewer calories is failed science perpetuated by ignorance and greed. Doomed to fail. Think biggest loser. They always gain it back
The contestants on Biggest Loser gain the weight back because they aren't taught how to make sustainable changes that last. If intermittent fasting works for you, that's because you're still eating fewer calories. Not a failed science.
They have nutrition knowledge but no practical experience related to maintenance. The show duration is focused on severe calorie restriction, they don't have dietitian check-ins for the people sent home.0 -
Type II diabetes can be reversed by using Dr. Fung's method. Cured? Yes, if you stay thin. If you gain all your weight back, the Type II diabetes will return. It's not the only way to do it but it's a very good way. Ask me how I know. Countless people lose weight and end up with normal glucose and A1c levels and stop taking diabetes medicine. And no longer have type II diabetes. People who knock Fung's book and have not read it, are just plain full of it.
I've read enough analyses of Fung's work by people who know far more about it than I do to know that he's a woo peddler and a junk scientist. He's widely regarded as a fraud by most legitimate science/evidence-based sources.4 -
People who knock Fung's book and have not read it, are just plain full of it.1
-
For what it's worth my uncle got off his diabetes meds by losing 60lbs avoiding sugar but still eating carbohydrates. No special diet or timing. He exercised and ate less. There are many roads to the same destination; some of them less bumpy. js4
-
Again, Jason Fung. Fewer calories is failed science perpetuated by ignorance and greed. Doomed to fail. Think biggest loser. They always gain it back
The contestants on Biggest Loser gain the weight back because they aren't taught how to make sustainable changes that last. If intermittent fasting works for you, that's because you're still eating fewer calories. Not a failed science.
Thats not how IF works, you can eat fewer calories or your daily calories in a shorter time window. For those who are insulin resistant the IF allows the body a longer period of time to bring insulin down and burn body fat. There is so much mis-information out there.1 -
And there are still so many other physiological mechanisms not in play in that scenario as well.
Such as what? You keep throwing out the vague term of physiological mechanisms. What specifically does the body do during the fasted state that would negate overeating by hundreds of calories?
Exactly! Over eating no matter eating one meal or ten a day will cause for weight gain. This comes up so often, people constantly look for a reason to over eat and justify it.0 -
You are probably not insulin resistant. For those of us whose metabolism (ie sensitivity to insulin) takes longer for insulin levels to return to normal (lower than after eating) fasting allows the body to burn its own fat for energy, not store away more fat. Everyone is different, if you have good sensitivity to insulin then IF might not be as much benefit to you as someone whos metabolism has slowed, or has become insulin resistant. Extremely interesting thread and seeing what everyone feels about IF.0 -
Again, Jason Fung. Fewer calories is failed science perpetuated by ignorance and greed. Doomed to fail. Think biggest loser. They always gain it back
The contestants on Biggest Loser gain the weight back because they aren't taught how to make sustainable changes that last. If intermittent fasting works for you, that's because you're still eating fewer calories. Not a failed science.
Thats not how IF works, you can eat fewer calories or your daily calories in a shorter time window. For those who are insulin resistant the IF allows the body a longer period of time to bring insulin down and burn body fat. There is so much mis-information out there.
No. IF works because it increases compliance to your calorie goal by reducing your eating window. If fasting burned more bodyfat, everyone would be doing therapeutic starvation.
Also @malibu927 is correct. The contestants on Biggest Loser regain weight as what they do is unsustainable and they do not learn moderation or good eating habits on the show.2 -
trigden1991 wrote: »Again, Jason Fung. Fewer calories is failed science perpetuated by ignorance and greed. Doomed to fail. Think biggest loser. They always gain it back
The contestants on Biggest Loser gain the weight back because they aren't taught how to make sustainable changes that last. If intermittent fasting works for you, that's because you're still eating fewer calories. Not a failed science.
Thats not how IF works, you can eat fewer calories or your daily calories in a shorter time window. For those who are insulin resistant the IF allows the body a longer period of time to bring insulin down and burn body fat. There is so much mis-information out there.
No. IF works because it increases compliance to your calorie goal by reducing your eating window. If fasting burned more bodyfat, everyone would be doing therapeutic starvation.
Also @malibu927 is correct. The contestants on Biggest Loser regain weight as what they do is unsustainable and they do not learn moderation or good eating habits on the show.
Nope, this is where people are missing it. For people who do not have an issue with insulin sensitivity, simply reducing calories will work with or without IF. IF works best for people with insulin sensitivity since it gives a longer period of time for the insulin to come down to normal/low levels allowing people then to burn body fat. If you dont have this problem it is hard for you to understand and easy for you to say, just lower calories and any means by doing so will work.
1 -
You are probably not insulin resistant. For those of us whose metabolism (ie sensitivity to insulin) takes longer for insulin levels to return to normal (lower than after eating) fasting allows the body to burn its own fat for energy, not store away more fat. Everyone is different, if you have good sensitivity to insulin then IF might not be as much benefit to you as someone whos metabolism has slowed, or has become insulin resistant. Extremely interesting thread and seeing what everyone feels about IF.
So if your belief is that being IR allows you to gain fat even if not eating in a calorie surplus, where do you get the energy that fuels your body when the calories you consume are being stored to fat instead of used? Let's say your maintenance calories are around 2200, you eat 1800, and you are not fasting but eating 3 meals a day and maybe a snack.
Also, I actually think it's wrong that people who are IR end up storing more fat. The problem people with IR have is that their cells are resistant to insulin (hence the name) and they therefore have more problems bringing glucose and protein where it is supposed to go. It's harder to store in in the muscles as energy, it's harder to get protein to the muscles for repair and muscle building, and it's harder to store whatever glucose may be in excess of what's needed for fuel, storage, and filling glycogen stores, to become fat. Because the insulin is less able to do it's job more is created and it sticks around longer and -- I think relevant -- people don't have the normal reaction to insulin which is a decrease in appetite/satiation, but it doesn't seem to make sense that it would cause additional or easier gaining of fat. I think it really may make it harder not to overeat, especially since low energy often feels like hunger.5 -
For what it's worth my uncle got off his diabetes meds by losing 60lbs avoiding sugar but still eating carbohydrates. No special diet or timing. He exercised and ate less. There are many roads to the same destination; some of them less bumpy. js
As I recall Fung recommends fasting because it was a method that worked for people who were failing at regular dieting (the other roads). You could say it's a magic feather for weight loss but it also comes with some real measured benefits to hormones.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
You are probably not insulin resistant. For those of us whose metabolism (ie sensitivity to insulin) takes longer for insulin levels to return to normal (lower than after eating) fasting allows the body to burn its own fat for energy, not store away more fat. Everyone is different, if you have good sensitivity to insulin then IF might not be as much benefit to you as someone whos metabolism has slowed, or has become insulin resistant. Extremely interesting thread and seeing what everyone feels about IF.
So if your belief is that being IR allows you to gain fat even if not eating in a calorie surplus, where do you get the energy that fuels your body when the calories you consume are being stored to fat instead of used? Let's say your maintenance calories are around 2200, you eat 1800, and you are not fasting but eating 3 meals a day and maybe a snack.
Also, I actually think it's wrong that people who are IR end up storing more fat. The problem people with IR have is that their cells are resistant to insulin (hence the name) and they therefore have more problems bringing glucose and protein where it is supposed to go. It's harder to store in in the muscles as energy, it's harder to get protein to the muscles for repair and muscle building, and it's harder to store whatever glucose may be in excess of what's needed for fuel, storage, and filling glycogen stores, to become fat. Because the insulin is less able to do it's job more is created and it sticks around longer and -- I think relevant -- people don't have the normal reaction to insulin which is a decrease in appetite/satiation, but it doesn't seem to make sense that it would cause additional or easier gaining of fat. I think it really may make it harder not to overeat, especially since low energy often feels like hunger.
There are many reasons / benefits for IF. Now specifically to your comment about IR end up storing more fat, that is absolutely true. With elevated insulin levels the body blocks fat burning and any excess sugar/carbs are stored in the fat cells. The "resistant" part also means the body does not manage insulin effectively and has to produce more and more to do exactly what you stated (,,,bringing glucose and protein where it belongs...) With the elevated insulin levels (exactly what I said) the body will not burn fat - Period! Therefore IF helps bring down insulin levels because your not introducing carbs/sugars (insulin spikers).0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
You are probably not insulin resistant. For those of us whose metabolism (ie sensitivity to insulin) takes longer for insulin levels to return to normal (lower than after eating) fasting allows the body to burn its own fat for energy, not store away more fat. Everyone is different, if you have good sensitivity to insulin then IF might not be as much benefit to you as someone whos metabolism has slowed, or has become insulin resistant. Extremely interesting thread and seeing what everyone feels about IF.
So if your belief is that being IR allows you to gain fat even if not eating in a calorie surplus, where do you get the energy that fuels your body when the calories you consume are being stored to fat instead of used? Let's say your maintenance calories are around 2200, you eat 1800, and you are not fasting but eating 3 meals a day and maybe a snack.
Also, I actually think it's wrong that people who are IR end up storing more fat. The problem people with IR have is that their cells are resistant to insulin (hence the name) and they therefore have more problems bringing glucose and protein where it is supposed to go. It's harder to store in in the muscles as energy, it's harder to get protein to the muscles for repair and muscle building, and it's harder to store whatever glucose may be in excess of what's needed for fuel, storage, and filling glycogen stores, to become fat. Because the insulin is less able to do it's job more is created and it sticks around longer and -- I think relevant -- people don't have the normal reaction to insulin which is a decrease in appetite/satiation, but it doesn't seem to make sense that it would cause additional or easier gaining of fat. I think it really may make it harder not to overeat, especially since low energy often feels like hunger.
There are many reasons / benefits for IF. Now specifically to your comment about IR end up storing more fat, that is absolutely true. With elevated insulin levels the body blocks fat burning and any excess sugar/carbs are stored in the fat cells. The "resistant" part also means the body does not manage insulin effectively and has to produce more and more to do exactly what you stated (,,,bringing glucose and protein where it belongs...) With the elevated insulin levels (exactly what I said) the body will not burn fat - Period! Therefore IF helps bring down insulin levels because your not introducing carbs/sugars (insulin spikers).
I think you didn't really answer my question (I'm not IR, for the record). I asked: "So if your belief is that being IR allows you to gain fat even if not eating in a calorie surplus, where do you get the energy that fuels your body when the calories you consume are being stored to fat instead of used? Let's say your maintenance calories are around 2200, you eat 1800, and you are not fasting but eating 3 meals a day and maybe a snack."
Also, insulin is what ALLOWS fat storage. IR means it's harder to store fat and requires more insulin. It doesn't seem to follow that you end up storing more fat, all else equal.3 -
So cool @lemurcat12 Thanks for hearing me out. I am IR resistant for sure. I do believe in the CICO no matter what diet you may be on. Either I mistyped something or it was mis-interpreted. The IF thread point I was trying to make is that it gives a person who is IR a better chance at weight loss by allowing longer period of time to burn body fat. Over a time period a calorie deficit will work on a LCHF diet a Low Fat Diet a Paleo diet etc... You may say "hold on buddy if that is true then why bring up the whole IR debate to begin with". Because the example of the biggest loser contestants gaining all their weight back issue reverts back to my original point. When you see the contestants you pretty much can tell 99.9% of them are Insulin Resistant. Their bodies dont bring down the insulin to burn and maintain a healthy weight. They are sugar/carb burners, they over eat because once the blood sugar gets low they get very hungry and have to eat more, and like you said the IR person has to produce more and more insulin to accomplish its task, the whole time it is socking away more and more calories to fat and the cycle repeats and repeats until the next thing you know it your are obese - thats what happened to me. Now the biggest loser contestants go into a shocking calorie deficit, through diet and exercise. The diet is low fat (a whole separate conversation). Once they are off the short term terrible shock to their bodies, their body is craving those carbs/sugars and they give in. No IF will overcome someone eating 5,000 calories a day, even if it is once a day. So the opposite is true and I went through the thread I was trying to see where I communicated that if you are in a calorie deficit you will gain weight, I couldnt find it. If you are in a caloriie deficit you will lose weight because during the time we ALL fast (ta da: sleeping) your body can tap the fat reserve, because if your calorie deficient you most likely have not over spiked insulin. GREAT STUFF here!0
-
So cool @lemurcat12 Thanks for hearing me out. I am IR resistant for sure. I do believe in the CICO no matter what diet you may be on. Either I mistyped something or it was mis-interpreted. The IF thread point I was trying to make is that it gives a person who is IR a better chance at weight loss by allowing longer period of time to burn body fat. Over a time period a calorie deficit will work on a LCHF diet a Low Fat Diet a Paleo diet etc... You may say "hold on buddy if that is true then why bring up the whole IR debate to begin with". Because the example of the biggest loser contestants gaining all their weight back issue reverts back to my original point. When you see the contestants you pretty much can tell 99.9% of them are Insulin Resistant. Their bodies dont bring down the insulin to burn and maintain a healthy weight. They are sugar/carb burners, they over eat because once the blood sugar gets low they get very hungry and have to eat more, and like you said the IR person has to produce more and more insulin to accomplish its task, the whole time it is socking away more and more calories to fat and the cycle repeats and repeats until the next thing you know it your are obese - thats what happened to me. Now the biggest loser contestants go into a shocking calorie deficit, through diet and exercise. The diet is low fat (a whole separate conversation). Once they are off the short term terrible shock to their bodies, their body is craving those carbs/sugars and they give in. No IF will overcome someone eating 5,000 calories a day, even if it is once a day. So the opposite is true and I went through the thread I was trying to see where I communicated that if you are in a calorie deficit you will gain weight, I couldnt find it. If you are in a caloriie deficit you will lose weight because during the time we ALL fast (ta da: sleeping) your body can tap the fat reserve, because if your calorie deficient you most likely have not over spiked insulin. GREAT STUFF here!
Look up substrate utilization. The idea of "sugar burners" is a complete myth. Elevated insulin does not stop fat burning, it inhibits it, meaning it slows it. Very, very rarely does your body ever completely stop doing something for something else. If you are in a calorie deficit, your body can't physically put on more fat than it uses, it's right there in the description of what a calorie deficit is. Someone with IR is not going to put on fat if they're eating a deficit, even if they spaced out their entire day's calories from the moment they get up to the moment they go to bed, never putting the fork down.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