Alan Aragon on Intermittent Fasting
AnvilHead
Posts: 18,343 Member
Best thing I've read yet. Intermittent Fasting (IF) has become quite the fad lately and a lot of hocus-pocus has been ascribed to it that's not supported by science:
Alright, time for a rant, this time intermittent fasting (IF) gets the spotlight.... I'm sick and tired of hearing about all of these cute, magical qualities IF has beyond allowing some people to better sustain a net caloric deficit for the goal of weight or fat loss. Is it more convenient for some people to eat less frequently? Yes. Is it more sustainable for some people to enjoy larger meals when they eat? Yes. Can it be a simpler, less meticulous way toward a net caloric deficit for some people to include fasting days in a given ad libitum week? Yes. Is IF the magic, universal solution for every dieter? Hell no.
Per the recent claims in various herpaderp vids & other media from gurus & quacks -- does IF have special effects on body comp "buhcuz increased growth hormone"? No. The growth hormone increase as a result of IF is merely the body's stress/survival response to the physiologically 'sensed' threat of famine/starvation. It's the equivalent of the emergency lights of a building turning on when the main power is down. I've said this before, but some folks fail to grasp that skipping meals does not have a net anabolic effect. Maximizing muscle growth is not going to come from nothing but breathing and prayers all day.
Lastly, has the WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE in human research shown special health effects of IF compared to more linear deficits? Overall, the answer is no. Have IF studies on rodents shown cardiometabolic benefits? Yes. Have these benefits panned out in the body of human research comparing IF vs linear patterns? Sorry, but no. In the largest systematic review of IF research to-date, Seimon et al compared the effects of intermittent energy restriction (IER) to continuous energy restriction (CER). They found that overall, the two diet types resulted in “apparently equivalent outcomes” in terms of bodyweight reduction and body composition change. In addition, neither IER or CER was superior to the other at improving glucose control/insulin sensitivity.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26384657
Another recent systematic review & meta-analysis, this time on long-term outcomes in IF vs linear dieting, Headland et al concluded the following: "...neither intermittent or continuous energy restriction being superior with respect to weight loss. [...] Blood lipid concentrations, glucose, and insulin were not altered by intermittent energy expenditure in values greater than those seen with continuous energy restriction."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27338458
The take-away: if you prefer to practice some variant of IF and are successfully making or maintaining progress on it, then good for you, stick with it. If you prefer a more conventional or linear dietary pattern with a higher meal frequency and are doing well on it - good for you, stick with that, because the claims of IF's supposed *superiority* do not have strong scientific support.
55
Replies
-
I have abused IF and I know others do as well. Already eating at a significant deficit and then push it even lower twice a week under the guise of IF. Then brag about how amazing IF is. When done that way it is an eating disorder. So it is prone to that. Some of the magic is not healthy. I think most people who practice it do it more responsibly, but if someone claims better results compared to the same deficit spread across more days, they are not eating at maintenance on the other days.14
-
I do intermittent fasting, but it's not magic. I think logging my food intake has had more effect on weight loss than the eating schedule. It is easier for me to prepare just one or two meals a day.
7 -
I'm curious as to whether diet breaks / refeeds count as intermittent fasting, and the science / hormones that make refeeds more beneficial than IF.
@Nony_Mouse1 -
I'm curious as to whether diet breaks / refeeds count as intermittent fasting, and the science / hormones that make refeeds more beneficial than IF.
@Nony_Mouse
Nope, not the same imho, at least for the daily eating window style. I would think leptin levels stay up better on a 5:2 style of IF, that would make sense to me. It takes a few days at a deficit for your leptin to start falling in response to a perceived food shortage, and it takes at least two days back at energy balance for that to come back up, assuming plenty of delicious carbs in those two days). With the other forms, you're still at a deficit every day, so leptin is still going to fall, because your body will still perceive it as a food shortage.
With diet breaks and/or refeeds, there is no super aggressive deficit on deficit days, just normal sized, so I would count that as a benefit purely because the thought of only eating 500 cals, even for a day, makes me want to cry. But other people do it just fine, so it is once again a what suits the individual thing.
I certainly don't think diet breaks and refeeds provide any health benefits over straight caloric restriction (other than possibly sanity!), but there is evidence starting to emerge, such as from the recent MATADOR study, that it may be a smarter way to diet in terms of mitigating adaptive thermogenesis. Zip, zero, nada other health claims though.
And there's a whole thread on that stuff, so let's not derail Anvilhead's one
4 -
Thanks, Nony. Nope, I don't want to derail. Just thought it was worth a mention.3
-
I'm curious as to whether diet breaks / refeeds count as intermittent fasting, and the science / hormones that make refeeds more beneficial than IF.
@Nony_Mouse
I think the answer to that question is nuanced because intermittent fasting can be run at a deficit, at maintenance or at a surplus, depending on one's needs. It's simply a pattern of eating. The effect it may have upon leptin levels and/or adaptive thermogenesis will be driven by the deficit (or lack thereof). The effects of leptin falling and adaptive thermogenesis are chronic (happening over days/weeks/months), whereas IF is more of an acute thing (the gap between meals on a day-to-day basis). While none of the studies Alan referenced specifically reference leptin or AT, I'd postulate that under isocaloric conditions, there would be no difference in results between IF or a "conventional" eating pattern - the overall caloric intake being the prime driver of any results.
A refeed/diet break is a different thing that's done for a different reason than IF, but you could conceivably run a diet break on an IF pattern if you so desired - again, the difference being the caloric deficit (or lack thereof, in the case of a refeed/diet break). So a refeed/diet break could "count" as intermittent fasting (if you chose to eat in that pattern), or it could not (if you chose not to) - but there's no outright interconnection between the two.
I hope that makes sense.11 -
I'm curious as to whether diet breaks / refeeds count as intermittent fasting, and the science / hormones that make refeeds more beneficial than IF.
@Nony_Mouse
I think the answer to that question is nuanced because intermittent fasting can be run at a deficit, at maintenance or at a surplus, depending on one's needs. It's simply a pattern of eating. The effect it may have upon leptin levels and/or adaptive thermogenesis will be driven by the deficit (or lack thereof). The effects of leptin falling and adaptive thermogenesis are chronic (happening over days/weeks/months), whereas IF is more of an acute thing (the gap between meals on a day-to-day basis). While none of the studies Alan referenced specifically reference leptin or AT, I'd postulate that under isocaloric conditions, there would be no difference in results between IF or a "conventional" eating pattern - the overall caloric intake being the prime driver of any results.
A refeed/diet break is a different thing that's done for a different reason than IF, but you could conceivably run a diet break on an IF pattern if you so desired - again, the difference being the caloric deficit (or lack thereof, in the case of a refeed/diet break). So a refeed/diet break could "count" as intermittent fasting (if you chose to eat in that pattern), or it could not (if you chose not to) - but there's no outright interconnection between the two.
I hope that makes sense.
Awesome explanation. Back to your thread.1 -
I'm curious as to whether diet breaks / refeeds count as intermittent fasting, and the science / hormones that make refeeds more beneficial than IF.
@Nony_Mouse
I think the answer to that question is nuanced because intermittent fasting can be run at a deficit, at maintenance or at a surplus, depending on one's needs. It's simply a pattern of eating. The effect it may have upon leptin levels and/or adaptive thermogenesis will be driven by the deficit (or lack thereof). The effects of leptin falling and adaptive thermogenesis are chronic (happening over days/weeks/months), whereas IF is more of an acute thing (the gap between meals on a day-to-day basis). While none of the studies Alan referenced specifically reference leptin or AT, I'd postulate that under isocaloric conditions, there would be no difference in results between IF or a "conventional" eating pattern - the overall caloric intake being the prime driver of any results.
A refeed/diet break is a different thing that's done for a different reason than IF, but you could conceivably run a diet break on an IF pattern if you so desired - again, the difference being the caloric deficit (or lack thereof, in the case of a refeed/diet break). So a refeed/diet break could "count" as intermittent fasting (if you chose to eat in that pattern), or it could not (if you chose not to) - but there's no outright interconnection between the two.
I hope that makes sense.
Much better said than me, I was more interested in pizza
3 -
Honestly, the herpaderp (I love that Aragon used that term) around IF never stops amusing me.
I noticed sometime back in the 90's that eating breakfast set my appetite off for the day and if I just drank coffee instead, I ate less throughout the day. It just became an easy way for me to control my appetite. Now, my portions were still too big at this point in my life, but that's another story.
Fast forward to now, and suddenly this thing I've been doing all these years has all this pseudoscientific mumbo jumbo nonsense attached to it. Man, it's just skipping breakfast to control my appetite, not the second coming.23 -
I love the work that Alan Aragon does.7
-
The facebook post that made him write this up was hilarious. I just watched for like 5 seconds as some gymbro brought out a muffin pan and started talking about "fat wells".5
-
stevencloser wrote: »The facebook post that made him write this up was hilarious. I just watched for like 5 seconds as some gymbro brought out a muffin pan and started talking about "fat wells".
It looked like a parody, which makes it worse.1 -
Thanks for posting this!1
-
stevencloser wrote: »The facebook post that made him write this up was hilarious. I just watched for like 5 seconds as some gymbro brought out a muffin pan and started talking about "fat wells".
What was funnier was the claim that IF'ing would make it so those fat wells would never fill up again. Because magic. And cling wrap.
It was truly the derpiest derp in the sea of derp I've ever seen on the subject.7 -
IF is clearly not a magic way of eating for weight loss.
Iv eaten this way (no breakfast, lunch around 4pm and dinner around 9pm) for over 15 years.......I still got fat! very fat!
If IF was magic id be a size 8 stunner by now lol
6 -
MoveitlikeManda wrote: »IF is clearly not a magic way of eating for weight loss.
Iv eaten this way (no breakfast, lunch around 4pm and dinner around 9pm) for over 15 years.......I still got fat! very fat!
If IF was magic id be a size 8 stunner by now lol
Unfortunately there are plenty of woo hucksters who have adopted IF as their new magic pill and are promoting all kinds of breathless, sensational, pseudoscientific nonsense about it.1 -
MoveitlikeManda wrote: »IF is clearly not a magic way of eating for weight loss.
Iv eaten this way (no breakfast, lunch around 4pm and dinner around 9pm) for over 15 years.......I still got fat! very fat!
If IF was magic id be a size 8 stunner by now lol
Unfortunately there are plenty of woo hucksters who have adopted IF as their new magic pill and are promoting all kinds of breathless, sensational, pseudoscientific nonsense about it.
Last month they were pushing keto.
Six months ago—paleo and crossfit.
Best defense against hucksters (and Russian trollbots): stop being a gullible rube.
7 -
MoveitlikeManda wrote: »IF is clearly not a magic way of eating for weight loss.
Iv eaten this way (no breakfast, lunch around 4pm and dinner around 9pm) for over 15 years.......I still got fat! very fat!
If IF was magic id be a size 8 stunner by now lol
Unfortunately there are plenty of woo hucksters who have adopted IF as their new magic pill and are promoting all kinds of breathless, sensational, pseudoscientific nonsense about it.
Last month they were pushing keto.
Six months ago—paleo and crossfit.
Best defense against hucksters (and Russian trollbots): stop being a gullible rube.
Now you need to do 5:2 paleo keto and stick the landing; anything else and you will swell up like a balloon, only heavier...
4 -
MoveitlikeManda wrote: »IF is clearly not a magic way of eating for weight loss.
Iv eaten this way (no breakfast, lunch around 4pm and dinner around 9pm) for over 15 years.......I still got fat! very fat!
If IF was magic id be a size 8 stunner by now lol
Unfortunately there are plenty of woo hucksters who have adopted IF as their new magic pill and are promoting all kinds of breathless, sensational, pseudoscientific nonsense about it.
Last month they were pushing keto.
Six months ago—paleo and crossfit.
Best defense against hucksters (and Russian trollbots): stop being a gullible rube.
IF/keto for diet and HIIT for exercise. That will just about complete the woo bingo card.
8 -
MoveitlikeManda wrote: »IF is clearly not a magic way of eating for weight loss.
Iv eaten this way (no breakfast, lunch around 4pm and dinner around 9pm) for over 15 years.......I still got fat! very fat!
If IF was magic id be a size 8 stunner by now lol
Unfortunately there are plenty of woo hucksters who have adopted IF as their new magic pill and are promoting all kinds of breathless, sensational, pseudoscientific nonsense about it.
Last month they were pushing keto.
Six months ago—paleo and crossfit.
Best defense against hucksters (and Russian trollbots): stop being a gullible rube.
IF/keto for diet and HIIT for exercise. That will just about complete the woo bingo card.
Add in some ACV for good measure 7 -
MoveitlikeManda wrote: »IF is clearly not a magic way of eating for weight loss.
Iv eaten this way (no breakfast, lunch around 4pm and dinner around 9pm) for over 15 years.......I still got fat! very fat!
If IF was magic id be a size 8 stunner by now lol
Unfortunately there are plenty of woo hucksters who have adopted IF as their new magic pill and are promoting all kinds of breathless, sensational, pseudoscientific nonsense about it.
I didnt even know IF was a thing, to me that was just my eating pattern, never ate breakfast as a kid either my mum used to go mad me lol
I guess at least now Im "in fashion", if only my clothes fit too Id be well away 3 -
stevencloser wrote: »The facebook post that made him write this up was hilarious. I just watched for like 5 seconds as some gymbro brought out a muffin pan and started talking about "fat wells".
And the dude who made that dumpster fire of a video has the nerve to have the word "science" in his brand name.
It's ridiculous how people will latch on to a buzzword and use it to sell something drastically different from what they offer.
"Hey I'm an evidence based practitioner in fitness and all of my recommendations are backed by science. Ok now go stand on that bosu ball and don't eat after 6pm"
10 -
Why you giving away my secrets!!stevencloser wrote: »The facebook post that made him write this up was hilarious. I just watched for like 5 seconds as some gymbro brought out a muffin pan and started talking about "fat wells".
And the dude who made that dumpster fire of a video has the nerve to have the word "science" in his brand name.
It's ridiculous how people will latch on to a buzzword and use it to sell something drastically different from what they offer.
"Hey I'm an evidence based practitioner in fitness and all of my recommendations are backed by science. Ok now go stand on that bosu ball and don't eat after 6pm"
3 -
ooOo.. IF again.
yay Alan! 0 -
CarvedTones wrote: »I have abused IF and I know others do as well. Already eating at a significant deficit and then push it even lower twice a week under the guise of IF. Then brag about how amazing IF is. When done that way it is an eating disorder. So it is prone to that. Some of the magic is not healthy. I think most people who practice it do it more responsibly, but if someone claims better results compared to the same deficit spread across more days, they are not eating at maintenance on the other days.
I admit to struggling with this right now. I have been maintaining my weight goal for 15 years, and recently started pushing the limits as to how long I can go without food (hours, not days to be clear). The problem is I am used to eating a certain volume of food, and have a hard time eating enough when the window is shortened, I am just coming out of a two week cold and am 6 pounds under goal which is way too low for me. I'm struggling with the knowledge that I have to eat more and gain some, even if it is a little.2 -
AnvilHead, you've hit the nail on the head with IF. Technically, most people do it wrong. Intermittent does not mean every single day. IF has morphed into simply skipping meals every single day. IF is now JNE. Just not eating. Skipping meals every day and eating later in the day is not magic.
IF doesn't boost your metabolism or turn you into a lean fat burning machine when all of your calories are saved for the dinner meal or afternoon eating window.
For those with metabolic dysfunction, ingesting the entire day's calories in the eating window or at dinner results in increases in fasting glucose levels and increases in insulin responses to large afternoon or evening meals.
The metabolism is naturally slowing down around 4 in the afternoon or with the sunset. There's no metabolic advantage to eating everything later rather than sooner or throughout the day.
8 -
AnvilHead, you've hit the nail on the head with IF. Technically, most people do it wrong. Intermittent does not mean every single day. IF has morphed into simply skipping meals every single day. IF is now JNE. Just not eating. Skipping meals every day and eating later in the day is not magic.
What is the right way to achieve nothing special in return?
8 -
For me the "eating window" has helped. I have been struggling with losing 30 to 40 lbs for the last four or five years. When I discovered this way of eating it helped me in regards to controlling my eating. Yes I work out a lot (always have but still gained weight) but eating was a struggle I would start each day with the intention of okay this is the day you are going to control your eating only to blow it for any stupid reason and try and restart the next day. You keep doing that day after day for years and the weight will come on very easily.
When I discovered this back in March I thought why not? I am also not interested in counting points/calories, etc.
So I started on March 27th and two months later down 15 lbs, I have averaged about 7 lbs a month weight loss.
I have not been at this weight since 2012. I like the flexibility of it and it is a great way for me to control my calories.
I basically do not eat after supper (so for me that is 5:30 to 6:00 and skip breakfast), I am learning moderation and will still have chips, chocolate, ice cream but in moderation only.
For me IF has helped me greatly. I do the 6 hour eating window every day. I just struggled before as I would have one or two good days then slack off and have a week of non stop eating...
My perspective on it is for me it has helped but it is not for everybody...some people are really disciplined and it is easy for them to eat in moderation I was not and am learning how to do that and this is helping me.2 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Honestly, the herpaderp (I love that Aragon used that term) around IF never stops amusing me.
I noticed sometime back in the 90's that eating breakfast set my appetite off for the day and if I just drank coffee instead, I ate less throughout the day. It just became an easy way for me to control my appetite. Now, my portions were still too big at this point in my life, but that's another story.
Fast forward to now, and suddenly this thing I've been doing all these years has all this pseudoscientific mumbo jumbo nonsense attached to it. Man, it's just skipping breakfast to control my appetite, not the second coming.
That's why I do 14/10. / breakfast skipping... sets my hunger signals all crazy eating first thing. Allows me bigger meals and occasional indulgences so far.3
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions