Intermittent Fasting Question
Replies
-
I don't routinely IF, but found it to be really helpful on a recent vacation.
I ate one large meal at a restaurant each evening and otherwise just coffee in the morning. Didn't feel overly hungry, and felt no guilt over wonderful meals each night. Actually lost weight while thoroughly enjoying myself in New Orleans!1 -
Here is my personal anecdotal experience:
I naturally don't eat after 6 (after 5 in daylight saving). I just lose the desire to eat when it starts getting dark. That's how I eat now and that's how I've always eaten. I'm also lazy in the morning. Too lazy to prepare food. So for most of my adult life where breakfast was not prepared for me I've eaten my breakfast after 10 am most of the time and sometimes skipped it altogether. My weight surpassed 300 pounds eating that way, and dipped under 200 pounds eating that way. The difference? To reach a lighter weight I had to count calories.
My usual way of eating (what I learned later was called intermittent fasting) did not protect me against blood pressure, high blood sugar, or high cholesterol. It did not make me automatically thinner than other people. It did not magically rearrange my hormones or give me a higher metabolism (if anything, I burn fewer calories than is expected for my weight). You know what resolved my metabolic syndrome? Weight loss. It had to be deliberate and I had to count calories. You know what resolved my lower metabolism? Increased activity. I have to work harder to achieve a higher burn, but knowing I can have a higher burn is empowering and it's much simpler to go for a walk that burns hundreds of calories than chasing a potential extra 10 calorie burn here or there through overcomplicated regimens that may or may not give us what we're looking for.
Some people find that some changes to their eating schedule or food types helps them achieve a deficit easier. Try it and see, it may be the case for you. The research on the matter is interesting, but I wouldn't rely on it with all the confounding factors involved. It has been hammered into our brains and research was shoved in our faces that people who skipped breakfast tended to be fatter. Now research is being shoved in our faces that people who skip breakfast lose weight. Could it be simply that the change in schedule, in whichever direction, affects spontaneous calorie intake? Who knows. The only thing we can reliably know and trust is our personal experience with how easy/hard something makes it for us personally to achieve a caloric deficit. If weight loss is easier, it's more likely to happen. No reason to overcomplicate things or get lost in minutia.1 -
It's just a tool to help you create a calorie deficit by limiting the amount of time you eat. If you succeed doing it, then it's good.
That's only partly correct. There does seem to be a fair bit of science that suggests the IF regime increases metabolism, lowers insulin levels, increases HGH and so on - all of which can assist in weight loss. If you're interested, there is plenty of reputable studies into this type of activity - when compared to some of the 'fad' type diets that have sprouted over the years.
If you’re going to provide the information, it’s courtesy to link to the studies as well. But IME, I lost exactly the same doing IF than not.
I assume most people can use Google to research topics of interest, but here's a good start: https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/10-health-benefits-of-intermittent-fasting#section1
I'm not going to link to all 44 references to studies or articles that are on that page.
While we're on the subject of providing references, can you post anything reliable that says Intermittent Fasting is just a tool to help you create a calorie deficit by limiting the amount of time you eat?
6 -
It's just a tool to help you create a calorie deficit by limiting the amount of time you eat. If you succeed doing it, then it's good.
That's only partly correct. There does seem to be a fair bit of science that suggests the IF regime increases metabolism, lowers insulin levels, increases HGH and so on - all of which can assist in weight loss. If you're interested, there is plenty of reputable studies into this type of activity - when compared to some of the 'fad' type diets that have sprouted over the years.
If you’re going to provide the information, it’s courtesy to link to the studies as well. But IME, I lost exactly the same doing IF than not.
I assume most people can use Google to research topics of interest, but here's a good start: https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/10-health-benefits-of-intermittent-fasting#section1
I'm not going to link to all 44 references to studies or articles that are on that page.
While we're on the subject of providing references, can you post anything reliable that says Intermittent Fasting is just a tool to help you create a calorie deficit by limiting the amount of time you eat?
"You can Google it yourself" and "Well can you Prove the opposite" are the most unscientific, copout answers in dialogue history.6 -
stevencloser wrote: »It's just a tool to help you create a calorie deficit by limiting the amount of time you eat. If you succeed doing it, then it's good.
That's only partly correct. There does seem to be a fair bit of science that suggests the IF regime increases metabolism, lowers insulin levels, increases HGH and so on - all of which can assist in weight loss. If you're interested, there is plenty of reputable studies into this type of activity - when compared to some of the 'fad' type diets that have sprouted over the years.
If you’re going to provide the information, it’s courtesy to link to the studies as well. But IME, I lost exactly the same doing IF than not.
I assume most people can use Google to research topics of interest, but here's a good start: https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/10-health-benefits-of-intermittent-fasting#section1
I'm not going to link to all 44 references to studies or articles that are on that page.
While we're on the subject of providing references, can you post anything reliable that says Intermittent Fasting is just a tool to help you create a calorie deficit by limiting the amount of time you eat?
"You can Google it yourself" and "Well can you Prove the opposite" are the most unscientific, copout answers in dialogue history.
+10 -
stevencloser wrote: »It's just a tool to help you create a calorie deficit by limiting the amount of time you eat. If you succeed doing it, then it's good.
That's only partly correct. There does seem to be a fair bit of science that suggests the IF regime increases metabolism, lowers insulin levels, increases HGH and so on - all of which can assist in weight loss. If you're interested, there is plenty of reputable studies into this type of activity - when compared to some of the 'fad' type diets that have sprouted over the years.
If you’re going to provide the information, it’s courtesy to link to the studies as well. But IME, I lost exactly the same doing IF than not.
I assume most people can use Google to research topics of interest, but here's a good start: https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/10-health-benefits-of-intermittent-fasting#section1
I'm not going to link to all 44 references to studies or articles that are on that page.
While we're on the subject of providing references, can you post anything reliable that says Intermittent Fasting is just a tool to help you create a calorie deficit by limiting the amount of time you eat?
"You can Google it yourself" and "Well can you Prove the opposite" are the most unscientific, copout answers in dialogue history.
+2 You can google non-credible pros and cons for any topic. "You can google it" is a complete non-starter.1 -
The thing that I found - and continue to find - is that, while Google is indeed your friend and mine, there is sooooo much crappola out there. It is interesting to note that you can pretty much find any article to backup whatever point you want to make. Just look hard enough (and sometimes you do not have to do that).
Just because someone wrote something on some web site does not make it correct. For whatever reason (and I know the reason - critical thinking in this awesome land of our's - just does not happen all that often anymore...shoot, blame it on public education) we want to believe things just because we read it.
Anyway, I have my favorite sources for information and they are pretty good at backing up what they say with science. Did I spell that word correctly? LOL! And pretty much whatever is in there I *tend* to believe. But that is just me....0 -
stevencloser wrote: »It's just a tool to help you create a calorie deficit by limiting the amount of time you eat. If you succeed doing it, then it's good.
That's only partly correct. There does seem to be a fair bit of science that suggests the IF regime increases metabolism, lowers insulin levels, increases HGH and so on - all of which can assist in weight loss. If you're interested, there is plenty of reputable studies into this type of activity - when compared to some of the 'fad' type diets that have sprouted over the years.
If you’re going to provide the information, it’s courtesy to link to the studies as well. But IME, I lost exactly the same doing IF than not.
I assume most people can use Google to research topics of interest, but here's a good start: https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/10-health-benefits-of-intermittent-fasting#section1
I'm not going to link to all 44 references to studies or articles that are on that page.
While we're on the subject of providing references, can you post anything reliable that says Intermittent Fasting is just a tool to help you create a calorie deficit by limiting the amount of time you eat?
"You can Google it yourself" and "Well can you Prove the opposite" are the most unscientific, copout answers in dialogue history.
You're completely missing the point here. If you bothered to read back to my original post, I said that there seemed to be a fair bit of science suggesting there is actual benefits (because science) if people cared to look for it. I'm not banging a drum either way, and was making an observation based on what I'd read about IF. I really don't give a rats *kitten* if people Google it or don't, but if they did bother to invest a little time in some research about a topic (weight loss) that could potentially be life-saving or at least life-changing, then they might find that useful time spent.
And if you bothered to analyse any number of the rubbish posts on these forums, you would find plenty of people who are very vociferous in support of their chosen 'diet' - many of which don't have any scientific backing at all. Same goes for @mph323 and @mmapags . +1 and +2 to you guys
My real objection was to the School-Ma'am attitude of @malibu927 who didn't like the fact that I didn't reference my post, academic style. This is social media, not university.5 -
stevencloser wrote: »Jigglypuff9363 wrote: »One thing I'd read about IF is that our bodies will burn from recently eaten meals. When you have longer periods where there is no food being eaten, our bodies will take from our fat stores for energy. When you do eat, you eat the same amount of calories, just within a smaller time period depending on what schedule you are on.
Here's an easy to understand article on it, but you can Google it and find many articles about it.
https://www.nerdfitness.com/blog/a-beginners-guide-to-intermittent-fasting/
And because you take in the same amount of calories it doesn't matter. If you go to your bank and deposit 10 dollars every hour for 10 hours, do you have more money in your account than if you went once and deposited 100?
except if the bank charges you a fee to take the money out, you would get less. Gluconeogenesis is only 67% efficient. You lose more depositing calories into the fat bank fat and then taking it back out again than just using it as it comes in. Might not lose a lot more but there is a fee. You can easily out-eat that fee if not careful.6 -
IF isn't for everyone. I figure you need to get the calorie consumption down one way or another. What is easier for you, eat small meals and not get full and feel that pain or skip eating altogether for a longer time (and feel that pain) and then be able to eat tell full, or share the pain a little both ways simulteneously? I've done a 20:4 and then eat ad libitum in the eating window and that has been WAY easier than the small meals. I have a small enough window that I still get a deficit but I still get to eat tell full each day. That is a sustainable plan for me. Always eating small meals and stopping before full would not be very sustainable for me. I also don't have the hassle of weighing or counting calories.
I've lost 55-lbs doing the 20:4 method starting over two years ago (lost most of it the first 5-months and mostly maintained after that doing a 16:8).
I've got a co-worker who mixed the two approaches by doing a 16:8 and some portion control. He eats about a 600 cal lunch, a 200-cal afternoon snack, a moderate dinner, and a late evening snack. He lost 70-lbs in 4-months doing that!
Do what works for you and what is sustainable because we are in this for the long-haul!0 -
'The Scientific Guide to Intermittent Fasting' by Michael VanDerschelden is a good book to answer all your questions1
-
stevencloser wrote: »It's just a tool to help you create a calorie deficit by limiting the amount of time you eat. If you succeed doing it, then it's good.
That's only partly correct. There does seem to be a fair bit of science that suggests the IF regime increases metabolism, lowers insulin levels, increases HGH and so on - all of which can assist in weight loss. If you're interested, there is plenty of reputable studies into this type of activity - when compared to some of the 'fad' type diets that have sprouted over the years.
If you’re going to provide the information, it’s courtesy to link to the studies as well. But IME, I lost exactly the same doing IF than not.
I assume most people can use Google to research topics of interest, but here's a good start: https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/10-health-benefits-of-intermittent-fasting#section1
I'm not going to link to all 44 references to studies or articles that are on that page.
While we're on the subject of providing references, can you post anything reliable that says Intermittent Fasting is just a tool to help you create a calorie deficit by limiting the amount of time you eat?
"You can Google it yourself" and "Well can you Prove the opposite" are the most unscientific, copout answers in dialogue history.
You're completely missing the point here. If you bothered to read back to my original post, I said that there seemed to be a fair bit of science suggesting there is actual benefits (because science) if people cared to look for it. I'm not banging a drum either way, and was making an observation based on what I'd read about IF. I really don't give a rats *kitten* if people Google it or don't, but if they did bother to invest a little time in some research about a topic (weight loss) that could potentially be life-saving or at least life-changing, then they might find that useful time spent.
And if you bothered to analyse any number of the rubbish posts on these forums, you would find plenty of people who are very vociferous in support of their chosen 'diet' - many of which don't have any scientific backing at all. Same goes for @mph323 and @mmapags . +1 and +2 to you guys
My real objection was to the School-Ma'am attitude of @malibu927 who didn't like the fact that I didn't reference my post, academic style. This is social media, not university.
This is a website about the topic with possibly the most amount of BS surrounding it. Demanding facts and proof is exactly the right thing to do.1 -
stevencloser wrote: »It's just a tool to help you create a calorie deficit by limiting the amount of time you eat. If you succeed doing it, then it's good.
That's only partly correct. There does seem to be a fair bit of science that suggests the IF regime increases metabolism, lowers insulin levels, increases HGH and so on - all of which can assist in weight loss. If you're interested, there is plenty of reputable studies into this type of activity - when compared to some of the 'fad' type diets that have sprouted over the years.
If you’re going to provide the information, it’s courtesy to link to the studies as well. But IME, I lost exactly the same doing IF than not.
I assume most people can use Google to research topics of interest, but here's a good start: https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/10-health-benefits-of-intermittent-fasting#section1
I'm not going to link to all 44 references to studies or articles that are on that page.
While we're on the subject of providing references, can you post anything reliable that says Intermittent Fasting is just a tool to help you create a calorie deficit by limiting the amount of time you eat?
"You can Google it yourself" and "Well can you Prove the opposite" are the most unscientific, copout answers in dialogue history.
You're completely missing the point here. If you bothered to read back to my original post, I said that there seemed to be a fair bit of science suggesting there is actual benefits (because science) if people cared to look for it. I'm not banging a drum either way, and was making an observation based on what I'd read about IF. I really don't give a rats *kitten* if people Google it or don't, but if they did bother to invest a little time in some research about a topic (weight loss) that could potentially be life-saving or at least life-changing, then they might find that useful time spent.
And if you bothered to analyse any number of the rubbish posts on these forums, you would find plenty of people who are very vociferous in support of their chosen 'diet' - many of which don't have any scientific backing at all. Same goes for @mph323 and @mmapags . +1 and +2 to you guys
My real objection was to the School-Ma'am attitude of @malibu927 who didn't like the fact that I didn't reference my post, academic style. This is social media, not university.
Her request was both reasonable and inoffensive in my view. I've read a lot of the literature on IF. I practice it. But I've never seen any proven weight loss advantage other than compliance.
You are fairly new but already you have observed that there is lots of, as you put it "rubbish' post on these forums. That is why proof sources are asked for from those making claims. To help sort out the good stuff from the nonsense. Why this should bother you is beyond me.
ETA: Took a look at the link you provided. The info there is pretty much all correlation and not causation as far as I could see(to be fair, didn't read all 44 studies). Correlation =/= causation. It was the fairly typical click-bait woo that you see in those types of articles. Belly fat? Prevents cancer? Prevents Alzheimers? Heart disease?
Wow! who knew. If IF was proven to do any of that, wouldn't every doctor on the planet be recommending it? And you wonder why proof sources were requested?0 -
I too practice IF and have read some of the supporting literature, but have found nothing that shows anything causative. I agree with mmapags that there's nothing in the literature to support a weight loss benefit outside of compliance.
IF is very en vogue right now and natural breakfast skippers like me are having a right chuckle to ourselves because we've been doing it for years. The unfortunate thing is that unscrupulous charlatans are making all sorts of outrageous claims about a very natural thing that happens for some people: when they eat in the morning, it turns on their appetite switch for the day and they're hungrier throughout the day. When they skip breakfast, this doesn't happen and they have much better control of their appetites.
I've observed this with my children, who I let eat to their natural hunger cues. My daughter is a natural breakfast eater. My son is not. Since I've homeschool them, this isn't an issue.
My husband can eat breakfast and go hours and hours between meals. I cannot. I, however, am just fine waking every day at 4:30, having tea, and then not eating anything until around 2:00 every afternoon.
It's a shame that people are trying to monetize a simple fact about human appetite regulation by dressing it up with a bunch of outlandish claims.4
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions