Anyone else doing internment fasting?
Options
Replies
-
How is eating from 8 am- 6pm now called IF? That's what doctors and ADA have ALWAYS recommended - to stop eating after 6/7 p.m. So...is this just another one of those things that are no different than the rest but has a fancy new name?4
-
Three pages and NO ONE has made a joke about "internment fasting" which would seem like a pretty easy target.
I am tremendously disappointed--both in myself and this community.3 -
It really isn't ONLY about calorie deficit, it is so much more complex than that. IF automatically gives you some reduction in calories, but the more important part of the equation is eating frequency.The key to weight loss is amount of time in a fasted state. If you're not in a fasted state you're not burning fat. That is why IF helps. From what I understand it takes somewhere around 12 hours after your last intake of food.
I do a daily 23 hour fast and lose an average of 3 pounds per week, 160 in total.
In the past focusing only on calories and exercise I could never get past 20-30 pounds. It works in the short run but is not sustainable for most. There is ample evidence of that.
The other benefit to an IF plan like one-meal-per-day which is what I do, is that it's easy and liberating. No more obsession with calories. Clears your mind and frees up time and money. It changed my life.
The key to weight loss is a calorie deficit. And unless you have 150 pounds to lose, you should not be losing 3 pounds a week.
The simple example I use is that lets suppose 1600 calories per day gives me a nice calorie deficit.
If calories are all that matter then I should see the same results whether I eat one 1600 calorie meal per day as I would if I eat 500 calories three times over the course of many hours of the day plus a tiny 100 cal snack. It won't. The second case leaves one always wanting more and with much less time in a fasted state.
No.7 -
Things like IF and LCHF are just strategies, different tools in the toolbox. It's like running with different brands of shoes. You might be more comfortable with a certain brand/model of shoe, but it doesn't change the essential nature of running. Proselytizers of one strategy are like those insufferable boors who kept pushing "minimalist" shoes on everybody.10
-
I'm close to 60 and have been intermittent fasting for a couple of months and have lost over 10 lbs. This has occurred while working out harder than I was before I started. The only problems was the amount of hunger/eating I was doing during the eating part of the day, and that's why I'm back here.0
-
Lone_wolf46 wrote: »So, will the same amount of calories be consumed daily whether fasting or not?
Yes that is the way it is supposed to go, at least for my fast ( I call it a fast but it's really just how I eat, it works for me and has for years now, helps me control night eating), which is 16 hours on 8 hours off and I consume 1400 calories or more within that time period. I also exercise 5 days a week and eat back those calories as well.0 -
Things like IF and LCHF are just strategies, different tools in the toolbox. It's like running with different brands of shoes. You might be more comfortable with a certain brand/model of shoe, but it doesn't change the essential nature of running. Proselytizers of one strategy are like those insufferable boors who kept pushing "minimalist" shoes on everybody.
But they are how feet were made! Everyone needs to wear them all the time! [/sarcasm]
I do 5:2 fasting. It's mostly just an experiment to see if it helps/hinders my goals (which is actually to mostly maintain for right now). And it allows me to eat more during non-fasting days. Which I like.0 -
It really isn't ONLY about calorie deficit, it is so much more complex than that. IF automatically gives you some reduction in calories, but the more important part of the equation is eating frequency.The key to weight loss is amount of time in a fasted state. If you're not in a fasted state you're not burning fat. That is why IF helps. From what I understand it takes somewhere around 12 hours after your last intake of food.
I do a daily 23 hour fast and lose an average of 3 pounds per week, 160 in total.
In the past focusing only on calories and exercise I could never get past 20-30 pounds. It works in the short run but is not sustainable for most. There is ample evidence of that.
The other benefit to an IF plan like one-meal-per-day which is what I do, is that it's easy and liberating. No more obsession with calories. Clears your mind and frees up time and money. It changed my life.
The key to weight loss is a calorie deficit. And unless you have 150 pounds to lose, you should not be losing 3 pounds a week.
The simple example I use is that lets suppose 1600 calories per day gives me a nice calorie deficit.
If calories are all that matter then I should see the same results whether I eat one 1600 calorie meal per day as I would if I eat 500 calories three times over the course of many hours of the day plus a tiny 100 cal snack. It won't. The second case leaves one always wanting more and with much less time in a fasted state.
Completely incorrect - Time in fasted state is not what drives weight loss - it's net calorific balance.
Re: your example. A 1600 calories deficit in one meal or spread over the day will yield the same results - meal timing makes no difference.The second case leaves one always wanting more and with much less time in a fasted state.
Wanting more is subjective and irrelevant to the argument since you've specified that the hypothetical day contains 1600 calories, no more and no less.5 -
Not always at the same rate though. Carb's are by far the preferred fuel, once the carb's are used up fat burning takes over and goes way up.tashygolean730 wrote: »The key to weight loss is amount of time in a fasted state. If you're not in a fasted state you're not burning fat. That is why IF helps. From what I understand it takes somewhere around 12 hours after your last intake of food.
I do a daily 23 hour fast and lose an average of 3 pounds per week, 160 in total.
In the past focusing only on calories and exercise I could never get past 20-30 pounds. It works in the short run but is not sustainable for most. There is ample evidence of that.
The other benefit to an IF plan like one-meal-per-day which is what I do, is that it's easy and liberating. No more obsession with calories. Clears your mind and frees up time and money. It changed my life.
Your body is always burning and storing fat. If it isn't you need to go to hospital. Please share your ample evidence. Peer reviewed controlled studies on humans, not internet blogs.
7 -
You can vary the timing and your diet to whatever end you desire.Muscleflex79 wrote: »The key to weight loss is amount of time in a fasted state. If you're not in a fasted state you're not burning fat. That is why IF helps. From what I understand it takes somewhere around 12 hours after your last intake of food.
I do a daily 23 hour fast and lose an average of 3 pounds per week, 160 in total.
In the past focusing only on calories and exercise I could never get past 20-30 pounds. It works in the short run but is not sustainable for most. There is ample evidence of that.
The other benefit to an IF plan like one-meal-per-day which is what I do, is that it's easy and liberating. No more obsession with calories. Clears your mind and frees up time and money. It changed my life.
how do you explain people who use IF to maintain or bulk ???
I've been only on the weight loss side of the coin so a much different objective, but have read about bodybuilders using IF as well. I could be mistaken but I was under the impression they did so more to burn fat and cut, not so much to bulk up. But you'd have to ask those who do it about what specific routine they use.
Ok, I'll answer my question for you - the only difference in losing vs. gaining is the calorie intake - someone eating at a calorie deficit (whether following IF or not) will lose weight and someone eating at a surplus (IF or not) will gain. as others have said, there is nothing magical about IF that makes you lose weight in the absence of a calorie deficit.1 -
Not always at the same rate though. Carb's are by far the preferred fuel, once the carb's are used up fat burning takes over and goes way up.tashygolean730 wrote: »The key to weight loss is amount of time in a fasted state. If you're not in a fasted state you're not burning fat. That is why IF helps. From what I understand it takes somewhere around 12 hours after your last intake of food.
I do a daily 23 hour fast and lose an average of 3 pounds per week, 160 in total.
In the past focusing only on calories and exercise I could never get past 20-30 pounds. It works in the short run but is not sustainable for most. There is ample evidence of that.
The other benefit to an IF plan like one-meal-per-day which is what I do, is that it's easy and liberating. No more obsession with calories. Clears your mind and frees up time and money. It changed my life.
Your body is always burning and storing fat. If it isn't you need to go to hospital. Please share your ample evidence. Peer reviewed controlled studies on humans, not internet blogs.
Yeah still no. Again if there's so much scientific evidence. Please provide it. I've studied it for years and I've never seen a legit case that remotely proves anything you claim.5 -
Not always at the same rate though. Carb's are by far the preferred fuel, once the carb's are used up fat burning takes over and goes way up.tashygolean730 wrote: »The key to weight loss is amount of time in a fasted state. If you're not in a fasted state you're not burning fat. That is why IF helps. From what I understand it takes somewhere around 12 hours after your last intake of food.
I do a daily 23 hour fast and lose an average of 3 pounds per week, 160 in total.
In the past focusing only on calories and exercise I could never get past 20-30 pounds. It works in the short run but is not sustainable for most. There is ample evidence of that.
The other benefit to an IF plan like one-meal-per-day which is what I do, is that it's easy and liberating. No more obsession with calories. Clears your mind and frees up time and money. It changed my life.
Your body is always burning and storing fat. If it isn't you need to go to hospital. Please share your ample evidence. Peer reviewed controlled studies on humans, not internet blogs.
Of course fat burning takes over but not at a greater calorific rate than that of the previous glycogen usage rate!! The energy conversion rate is dependent upon the energy usage- not the fuel type.2 -
Yes. I basically skip breakfast. I'm not doing it currently, but I have in the past, and it really helps me stay within my calories. I'm not the kind of person who likes snacking a lot. I like big meals, so IF works perfectly for me. I mostly do 16/8 when I notice my weight inching up a bit. It keeps me in check
0 -
Yeah thanks, I've been hearing this about calories all my life and have heard the comment that there is nothing magical about IF from numerous people on this thread. I'm sure nobody claimed it was magical, but whatever.Muscleflex79 wrote: »
You can vary the timing and your diet to whatever end you desire.Muscleflex79 wrote: »The key to weight loss is amount of time in a fasted state. If you're not in a fasted state you're not burning fat. That is why IF helps. From what I understand it takes somewhere around 12 hours after your last intake of food.
I do a daily 23 hour fast and lose an average of 3 pounds per week, 160 in total.
In the past focusing only on calories and exercise I could never get past 20-30 pounds. It works in the short run but is not sustainable for most. There is ample evidence of that.
The other benefit to an IF plan like one-meal-per-day which is what I do, is that it's easy and liberating. No more obsession with calories. Clears your mind and frees up time and money. It changed my life.
how do you explain people who use IF to maintain or bulk ???
I've been only on the weight loss side of the coin so a much different objective, but have read about bodybuilders using IF as well. I could be mistaken but I was under the impression they did so more to burn fat and cut, not so much to bulk up. But you'd have to ask those who do it about what specific routine they use.
Ok, I'll answer my question for you - the only difference in losing vs. gaining is the calorie intake - someone eating at a calorie deficit (whether following IF or not) will lose weight and someone eating at a surplus (IF or not) will gain. as others have said, there is nothing magical about IF that makes you lose weight in the absence of a calorie deficit.
Wow, a very closed minded group this is, all parroting the same failed unproven strategies. Every scientific study that I have seen does not show CICO alone as THE simple answer for effective long term control of weight.
I post in OMAD REVOLUTION, a more open minded group in case anyone is interested.
13 -
I did it for a while and it worked for a bit but after a couple weeks of that I've been getting super distractedly hungry. I think i'll do Intermittent Fasting intermittently, but it doesn't work for me as a long-term thing. You do you, it's kindof a cool experiment and it seems to work for some people.0
-
Not always at the same rate though. Carb's are by far the preferred fuel, once the carb's are used up fat burning takes over and goes way up.tashygolean730 wrote: »The key to weight loss is amount of time in a fasted state. If you're not in a fasted state you're not burning fat. That is why IF helps. From what I understand it takes somewhere around 12 hours after your last intake of food.
I do a daily 23 hour fast and lose an average of 3 pounds per week, 160 in total.
In the past focusing only on calories and exercise I could never get past 20-30 pounds. It works in the short run but is not sustainable for most. There is ample evidence of that.
The other benefit to an IF plan like one-meal-per-day which is what I do, is that it's easy and liberating. No more obsession with calories. Clears your mind and frees up time and money. It changed my life.
Your body is always burning and storing fat. If it isn't you need to go to hospital. Please share your ample evidence. Peer reviewed controlled studies on humans, not internet blogs.
No.
At rest your body uses mostly fat for fuel. Carbs are brain and exercise fuel.4 -
I've been doing IF for a few years now. I saw a program by the author of the 5:2 book - Dr. Michael Mosely and looked into it further. I'm part of a great forum about it. There's lots of information here and people doing all sorts of different kinds of IF. It took off early in Europe/Australia but took a while to catch on here in the U.S.
Here is the forum if anyone is interested. https://www.fastday.com/3 -
Yeah thanks, I've been hearing this about calories all my life and have heard the comment that there is nothing magical about IF from numerous people on this thread. I'm sure nobody claimed it was magical, but whatever.Muscleflex79 wrote: »
You can vary the timing and your diet to whatever end you desire.Muscleflex79 wrote: »The key to weight loss is amount of time in a fasted state. If you're not in a fasted state you're not burning fat. That is why IF helps. From what I understand it takes somewhere around 12 hours after your last intake of food.
I do a daily 23 hour fast and lose an average of 3 pounds per week, 160 in total.
In the past focusing only on calories and exercise I could never get past 20-30 pounds. It works in the short run but is not sustainable for most. There is ample evidence of that.
The other benefit to an IF plan like one-meal-per-day which is what I do, is that it's easy and liberating. No more obsession with calories. Clears your mind and frees up time and money. It changed my life.
how do you explain people who use IF to maintain or bulk ???
I've been only on the weight loss side of the coin so a much different objective, but have read about bodybuilders using IF as well. I could be mistaken but I was under the impression they did so more to burn fat and cut, not so much to bulk up. But you'd have to ask those who do it about what specific routine they use.
Ok, I'll answer my question for you - the only difference in losing vs. gaining is the calorie intake - someone eating at a calorie deficit (whether following IF or not) will lose weight and someone eating at a surplus (IF or not) will gain. as others have said, there is nothing magical about IF that makes you lose weight in the absence of a calorie deficit.
Wow, a very closed minded group this is, all parroting the same failed unproven strategies. Every scientific study that I have seen does not show CICO alone as THE simple answer for effective long term control of weight.
I post in OMAD REVOLUTION, a more open minded group in case anyone is interested.
Post links - I'm here to learn.4 -
Yeah thanks, I've been hearing this about calories all my life and have heard the comment that there is nothing magical about IF from numerous people on this thread. I'm sure nobody claimed it was magical, but whatever.Muscleflex79 wrote: »
You can vary the timing and your diet to whatever end you desire.Muscleflex79 wrote: »The key to weight loss is amount of time in a fasted state. If you're not in a fasted state you're not burning fat. That is why IF helps. From what I understand it takes somewhere around 12 hours after your last intake of food.
I do a daily 23 hour fast and lose an average of 3 pounds per week, 160 in total.
In the past focusing only on calories and exercise I could never get past 20-30 pounds. It works in the short run but is not sustainable for most. There is ample evidence of that.
The other benefit to an IF plan like one-meal-per-day which is what I do, is that it's easy and liberating. No more obsession with calories. Clears your mind and frees up time and money. It changed my life.
how do you explain people who use IF to maintain or bulk ???
I've been only on the weight loss side of the coin so a much different objective, but have read about bodybuilders using IF as well. I could be mistaken but I was under the impression they did so more to burn fat and cut, not so much to bulk up. But you'd have to ask those who do it about what specific routine they use.
Ok, I'll answer my question for you - the only difference in losing vs. gaining is the calorie intake - someone eating at a calorie deficit (whether following IF or not) will lose weight and someone eating at a surplus (IF or not) will gain. as others have said, there is nothing magical about IF that makes you lose weight in the absence of a calorie deficit.
Wow, a very closed minded group this is, all parroting the same failed unproven strategies. Every scientific study that I have seen does not show CICO alone as THE simple answer for effective long term control of weight.
I post in OMAD REVOLUTION, a more open minded group in case anyone is interested.
Do you see the irony in saying calories are unproven while claiming there's so many studies confirming the things you say all the while not showing a single one?7 -
Yeah thanks, I've been hearing this about calories all my life and have heard the comment that there is nothing magical about IF from numerous people on this thread. I'm sure nobody claimed it was magical, but whatever.Muscleflex79 wrote: »
You can vary the timing and your diet to whatever end you desire.Muscleflex79 wrote: »The key to weight loss is amount of time in a fasted state. If you're not in a fasted state you're not burning fat. That is why IF helps. From what I understand it takes somewhere around 12 hours after your last intake of food.
I do a daily 23 hour fast and lose an average of 3 pounds per week, 160 in total.
In the past focusing only on calories and exercise I could never get past 20-30 pounds. It works in the short run but is not sustainable for most. There is ample evidence of that.
The other benefit to an IF plan like one-meal-per-day which is what I do, is that it's easy and liberating. No more obsession with calories. Clears your mind and frees up time and money. It changed my life.
how do you explain people who use IF to maintain or bulk ???
I've been only on the weight loss side of the coin so a much different objective, but have read about bodybuilders using IF as well. I could be mistaken but I was under the impression they did so more to burn fat and cut, not so much to bulk up. But you'd have to ask those who do it about what specific routine they use.
Ok, I'll answer my question for you - the only difference in losing vs. gaining is the calorie intake - someone eating at a calorie deficit (whether following IF or not) will lose weight and someone eating at a surplus (IF or not) will gain. as others have said, there is nothing magical about IF that makes you lose weight in the absence of a calorie deficit.
Wow, a very closed minded group this is, all parroting the same failed unproven strategies. Every scientific study that I have seen does not show CICO alone as THE simple answer for effective long term control of weight.
I post in OMAD REVOLUTION, a more open minded group in case anyone is interested.
Lots of people do IF here and love it. It works for them. But for the most part, they know what it is and what it isn't. That's not closed-minded. And CICO IS the lone solution. Getting the correct balance for your goals and preferences is another story, but it's ALL CICO whether you like it or not.10
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