Fasting?

I want to include fasting as well as food logging and calorie restriction in my weight loss plan. Any tips?
«1

Replies

  • JeromeBarry1
    JeromeBarry1 Posts: 10,182 Member
    How much weight do you want to lose?
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,027 Member
    What do you mean by fasting? Are you talking about one of the Intermittent Fasting schedules or something more extreme?

    All you HAVE to do to lose weight is eat at a deficit. Some people do find that easier when they follow certain eating schedules.
  • malibu927
    malibu927 Posts: 17,567 Member
    How long of a fast are you considering and how often?
  • elizabethbettycooper
    elizabethbettycooper Posts: 38 Member
    edited November 2017
    @
  • purplebobkat
    purplebobkat Posts: 68 Member
    I do IF, 16:8 & I've found it easier as my hunger has reduced..... Lost 89lbs so far.

    Its not for everyone. If you decide to give it a go, start slowly & if you feel bad stop.... Like any diet.

    But its the only diet I've ever done that i can see doing forever, so it will help me maintain as well as lose.

    Good luck :smile:
  • notreallychris
    notreallychris Posts: 506 Member
    edited November 2017
    tyrindor wrote: »
    All fasting will achieve is lower numbers quicker on the scale because you will burn muscle just as much as fat. You'll look bad in the mirror even at your ideal weight, and it's much harder to regain muscle back to fix it than it is to lose fat properly in the first place! That's also assuming you don't end up in the hospital, which isn't uncommon when you fast or use those "liquids only" diets.

    Just diet properly, 1-2 pounds a week. 3 tops. Ignore the fads and the gimmicks, you'll just end up less healthy and gain it right back.

    Ignore this. Not enough info to go crazy here. OP didn't say they are fasting for a month. I do IF and I'm gaining muscle.
  • maibuddee
    maibuddee Posts: 11 Member
    I've been doing 20:4. I've seen lots of weight loss and I've been lifting heavier at the gym. It's a good way of preventing myself from overeating during the day, and I have more energy now too! There are a few different IF protocols - I recommend you look into them first.
  • RoxieDawn
    RoxieDawn Posts: 15,490 Member
    tyrindor wrote: »
    All fasting will achieve is lower numbers quicker on the scale because you will burn muscle just as much as fat. You'll look bad in the mirror even at your ideal weight, and it's much harder to regain muscle back to fix it than it is to lose fat properly in the first place! That's also assuming you don't end up in the hospital, which isn't uncommon when you fast or use those "liquids only" diets.

    Just diet properly, 1-2 pounds a week. 3 tops. Ignore the fads and the gimmicks, you'll just end up less healthy and gain it right back.
    aburrison1 wrote: »
    Look on Facebook and research Keto Diet and Dr. Jason Fung’s Fasting group. You will find some very interesting information about fasting and maintaining protein. It is not what you think and the old myths about losing muscle mass when one fasts is dispelled. There are a lot of great groups and they have a great deal of information.

    :neutral: OP ignore both of these posts, a lot of misinformation.

    Can you describe what type of fasting you would like to do?
  • toxikon
    toxikon Posts: 2,384 Member
    Short answer: your body doesn't really care WHEN you get your calories unless you're extremely athletic.

    If you want to eat 1500 calories a day, you could eat them all for dinner, spread them out into little 300-calorie meals or anything else in-between. Calories are all that matter for weight-loss, meal timing isn't relevant. Find what works for you.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Like others said, what kind of fasting?

    If you just mean eating within a window, yes, that helps some people feel more satiated or control calories more easily.

    I think it's confusing that people group things like eating within an 8 hour (or even 4 hour) window (which isn't fasting even a full day or really fasting in any respect, although I think it can be worthwhile and helpful) with crazy things like Fung recommends such as multi-day fasts.

    I used to regularly eat just lunch and dinner and it was fine, no biggie, although I currently like eating breakfast (and "fasting" between meals, LOL). I also have done day long (36 hour, really) fasts for religious reasons and found that worthwhile but not for dieting, of course. A friend does 5:2 and loves it, and I think that can work for people too (or the somewhat similar eat-stop-eat thing).

    I don't see why it would be a good idea to do a multi-day fast as in completely without food (although I don't think 2-3 days would hurt you, I just think it's pointless and for some could start a bad cycle of fasting and bingeing depending on the mindset and reasons). Better to focus on less extreme ways to lose, IMO, that are actually not going to feel like deprivation or unpleasant.

    Some of the fasting stuff (not IF, of course) seems like people want to do something that sounds impressive just to show they are bad-kittens or whatever. IMO, that's not really a sensible approach to weight loss -- you shouldn't make it as hard for yourself as possible for bragging rights, but focus on things that make it easier.
  • vingogly
    vingogly Posts: 1,784 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    Like others said, what kind of fasting?

    If you just mean eating within a window, yes, that helps some people feel more satiated or control calories more easily.

    I've been skipping lunch and having light snacks mid-morning and mid-afternoon; reason is, I want more calories for evening hours when I tend to snack and nibble after dinner. It's a strategic move to do what lemurcat12 is saying and has nothing to do with some "magical" effect of not eating at a certain time.

    I tried IF for a short while for the same reason, but it was too difficult for me. Skipping lunch and eating more calories later is easier. :smile:
  • estherdragonbat
    estherdragonbat Posts: 5,285 Member
    vingogly wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    Like others said, what kind of fasting?

    If you just mean eating within a window, yes, that helps some people feel more satiated or control calories more easily.

    I've been skipping lunch and having light snacks mid-morning and mid-afternoon; reason is, I want more calories for evening hours when I tend to snack and nibble after dinner. It's a strategic move to do what lemurcat12 is saying and has nothing to do with some "magical" effect of not eating at a certain time.

    I tried IF for a short while for the same reason, but it was too difficult for me. Skipping lunch and eating more calories later is easier. :smile:

    I hear that. I'm a night owl and used to snacking while at the computer. I don't skip lunch, but I do try to keep back about 90-150 calories or so; enough for 2 cups of Skinny Pop popcorn and a veggie dog. If I have more to play with, I'll eat more but it's no longer "mindless" nibbling. It's planned.
  • CarvedTones
    CarvedTones Posts: 2,340 Member
    I have done 5:2 IF which is 5 days of normal eating and 2 of very low calories (like 600 or so). the 2 days can't be back to back. So there is another level of confusion 16:8 is hours, 5:2 is days. Has the OP left the building?
  • Carlos_421
    Carlos_421 Posts: 5,132 Member
    I did a 21 day water fast for spiritual reasons and it did not have significant effect on my muscle mass. I recorded my exercise benchmarks pre and post fast, and there was barely a difference.

    These are the sort of ridiculous claimants that show up as soon as the subject of fasting is raised.

    I do not see how what ashleyallossery said was ridiculous. People have extended fasts all the time. The record is a 382 day fast that was monitored and showed very good therapeutic value. You can read the study here.

    The ridiculous part was the claim about not losing any muscle mass. Over a 21 day period, atrophy would certainly occur.