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.
Intermittent Fasting/Clean Fasting Debate
Options
Replies
-
lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »Can I take a step back and ask a question regarding the "nonsense"?
What exactly is nonsensical?- Is it the idea that hormone levels cycle throughout the day?
- Is it that insulin levels are naturally lower in the morning?
- Is it that certain foods/substances can trigger insulin spikes?
- Is it that these hormone cycles have an impact on weight management?
- Is it all of it?
- Is it something else?
As it pertains to this thread (to stay on topic), I think what's specifically being called into question is the "clean fasting" nonsense:
1) That IF is only effective if you "clean fast".
2) That anything with flavor spikes insulin.
3) That your body cannot heal in the presence of insulin.
4) That it takes 3 weeks for your body to "adjust and start healing itself".
And subsequently:
5) That the body needs a "rest" from feeding.
I haven't seen any of your points addressed or argued either way.
I never said it was only effective with a clean fast. It's what the clean fast does. sorry I'm not good at explaining stuff. I'm trying but everything gets so jumbled in my brain, it's hard.
Anytime you start a diet your body has to adjust to it. I'm not sure what's so crazy about that.
"The science behind it is really cool. But only when you clean fast."
This sounds like you're claiming that IF has specific documented benefits and those benefits are only available to those who are "clean fasting."
As in the science behind IF with clean fasting is cool.
You have not been able to produce a single piece of science so far.
I haven't been able to or I'm just not because I don't have to lol if you actually wanted to know you would research it yourself.
All the research in the world isn't going to give us insight into what specific things you were thinking of when you made that claim. You're asking us to do research to figure out what you meant.
One of the first things I said when i posted about clean fasting was to research it yourself. Pretty easy to do.
People are asking what you meant. Since the research is easy to do, it should be very easy for you to post links to what made your mind up. Then we can all discuss the same information and progress in the conversation.
All you've done so far is cite Dr Axe and post a blog link. If those aren't the things that convinced you that "clean fasting" has specific benefits, what did?13 -
janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »Can I take a step back and ask a question regarding the "nonsense"?
What exactly is nonsensical?- Is it the idea that hormone levels cycle throughout the day?
- Is it that insulin levels are naturally lower in the morning?
- Is it that certain foods/substances can trigger insulin spikes?
- Is it that these hormone cycles have an impact on weight management?
- Is it all of it?
- Is it something else?
As it pertains to this thread (to stay on topic), I think what's specifically being called into question is the "clean fasting" nonsense:
1) That IF is only effective if you "clean fast".
2) That anything with flavor spikes insulin.
3) That your body cannot heal in the presence of insulin.
4) That it takes 3 weeks for your body to "adjust and start healing itself".
And subsequently:
5) That the body needs a "rest" from feeding.
I haven't seen any of your points addressed or argued either way.
I never said it was only effective with a clean fast. It's what the clean fast does. sorry I'm not good at explaining stuff. I'm trying but everything gets so jumbled in my brain, it's hard.
Anytime you start a diet your body has to adjust to it. I'm not sure what's so crazy about that.
"The science behind it is really cool. But only when you clean fast."
This sounds like you're claiming that IF has specific documented benefits and those benefits are only available to those who are "clean fasting."
As in the science behind IF with clean fasting is cool.
You have not been able to produce a single piece of science so far.
I haven't been able to or I'm just not because I don't have to lol if you actually wanted to know you would research it yourself.
All the research in the world isn't going to give us insight into what specific things you were thinking of when you made that claim. You're asking us to do research to figure out what you meant.
One of the first things I said when i posted about clean fasting was to research it yourself. Pretty easy to do.
People are asking what you meant. Since the research is easy to do, it should be very easy for you to post links to what made your mind up. Then we can all discuss the same information and progress in the conversation.
All you've done so far is cite Dr Axe and post a blog link. If those aren't the things that convinced you that "clean fasting" has specific benefits, what did?
A lot of hours on google and talking to my doctor.15 -
lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »Can I take a step back and ask a question regarding the "nonsense"?
What exactly is nonsensical?- Is it the idea that hormone levels cycle throughout the day?
- Is it that insulin levels are naturally lower in the morning?
- Is it that certain foods/substances can trigger insulin spikes?
- Is it that these hormone cycles have an impact on weight management?
- Is it all of it?
- Is it something else?
As it pertains to this thread (to stay on topic), I think what's specifically being called into question is the "clean fasting" nonsense:
1) That IF is only effective if you "clean fast".
2) That anything with flavor spikes insulin.
3) That your body cannot heal in the presence of insulin.
4) That it takes 3 weeks for your body to "adjust and start healing itself".
And subsequently:
5) That the body needs a "rest" from feeding.
I haven't seen any of your points addressed or argued either way.
I never said it was only effective with a clean fast. It's what the clean fast does. sorry I'm not good at explaining stuff. I'm trying but everything gets so jumbled in my brain, it's hard.
Anytime you start a diet your body has to adjust to it. I'm not sure what's so crazy about that.
"The science behind it is really cool. But only when you clean fast."
This sounds like you're claiming that IF has specific documented benefits and those benefits are only available to those who are "clean fasting."
As in the science behind IF with clean fasting is cool.
You have not been able to produce a single piece of science so far.
I haven't been able to or I'm just not because I don't have to lol if you actually wanted to know you would research it yourself.
All the research in the world isn't going to give us insight into what specific things you were thinking of when you made that claim. You're asking us to do research to figure out what you meant.
One of the first things I said when i posted about clean fasting was to research it yourself. Pretty easy to do.
People are asking what you meant. Since the research is easy to do, it should be very easy for you to post links to what made your mind up. Then we can all discuss the same information and progress in the conversation.
All you've done so far is cite Dr Axe and post a blog link. If those aren't the things that convinced you that "clean fasting" has specific benefits, what did?
A lot of hours on google and talking to my doctor.
It's time for a new doctor.
[edited by MFP Mods]10 -
lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »Can I take a step back and ask a question regarding the "nonsense"?
What exactly is nonsensical?- Is it the idea that hormone levels cycle throughout the day?
- Is it that insulin levels are naturally lower in the morning?
- Is it that certain foods/substances can trigger insulin spikes?
- Is it that these hormone cycles have an impact on weight management?
- Is it all of it?
- Is it something else?
As it pertains to this thread (to stay on topic), I think what's specifically being called into question is the "clean fasting" nonsense:
1) That IF is only effective if you "clean fast".
2) That anything with flavor spikes insulin.
3) That your body cannot heal in the presence of insulin.
4) That it takes 3 weeks for your body to "adjust and start healing itself".
And subsequently:
5) That the body needs a "rest" from feeding.
I haven't seen any of your points addressed or argued either way.
I never said it was only effective with a clean fast. It's what the clean fast does. sorry I'm not good at explaining stuff. I'm trying but everything gets so jumbled in my brain, it's hard.
Anytime you start a diet your body has to adjust to it. I'm not sure what's so crazy about that.
"The science behind it is really cool. But only when you clean fast."
This sounds like you're claiming that IF has specific documented benefits and those benefits are only available to those who are "clean fasting."
As in the science behind IF with clean fasting is cool.
You have not been able to produce a single piece of science so far.
I haven't been able to or I'm just not because I don't have to lol if you actually wanted to know you would research it yourself.
All the research in the world isn't going to give us insight into what specific things you were thinking of when you made that claim. You're asking us to do research to figure out what you meant.
One of the first things I said when i posted about clean fasting was to research it yourself. Pretty easy to do.
People are asking what you meant. Since the research is easy to do, it should be very easy for you to post links to what made your mind up. Then we can all discuss the same information and progress in the conversation.
All you've done so far is cite Dr Axe and post a blog link. If those aren't the things that convinced you that "clean fasting" has specific benefits, what did?
A lot of hours on google and talking to my doctor.
The same Google that led you to that Dr. Axe link? Do you see the issue here?
Access to information is useless without a corresponding willingness and/or ability to critically evaluate that information. Hours on Google are also capable of convincing people that lizard people are the secret power behind all world governments and religions.18 -
lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »Can I take a step back and ask a question regarding the "nonsense"?
What exactly is nonsensical?- Is it the idea that hormone levels cycle throughout the day?
- Is it that insulin levels are naturally lower in the morning?
- Is it that certain foods/substances can trigger insulin spikes?
- Is it that these hormone cycles have an impact on weight management?
- Is it all of it?
- Is it something else?
As it pertains to this thread (to stay on topic), I think what's specifically being called into question is the "clean fasting" nonsense:
1) That IF is only effective if you "clean fast".
2) That anything with flavor spikes insulin.
3) That your body cannot heal in the presence of insulin.
4) That it takes 3 weeks for your body to "adjust and start healing itself".
And subsequently:
5) That the body needs a "rest" from feeding.
I haven't seen any of your points addressed or argued either way.
I never said it was only effective with a clean fast. It's what the clean fast does. sorry I'm not good at explaining stuff. I'm trying but everything gets so jumbled in my brain, it's hard.
Anytime you start a diet your body has to adjust to it. I'm not sure what's so crazy about that.
"The science behind it is really cool. But only when you clean fast."
This sounds like you're claiming that IF has specific documented benefits and those benefits are only available to those who are "clean fasting."
As in the science behind IF with clean fasting is cool.
You have not been able to produce a single piece of science so far.
I haven't been able to or I'm just not because I don't have to lol if you actually wanted to know you would research it yourself.
All the research in the world isn't going to give us insight into what specific things you were thinking of when you made that claim. You're asking us to do research to figure out what you meant.
One of the first things I said when i posted about clean fasting was to research it yourself. Pretty easy to do.
I googled "clean fast", and aside from websites telling how to clean my house fast, I found the link you posted upthred. I read it, and considering there is no science to back up what he says and what he says is at odds with basic science and human biology, I then applied critical thinking and quickly realized he was a quack.18 -
janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »Can I take a step back and ask a question regarding the "nonsense"?
What exactly is nonsensical?- Is it the idea that hormone levels cycle throughout the day?
- Is it that insulin levels are naturally lower in the morning?
- Is it that certain foods/substances can trigger insulin spikes?
- Is it that these hormone cycles have an impact on weight management?
- Is it all of it?
- Is it something else?
As it pertains to this thread (to stay on topic), I think what's specifically being called into question is the "clean fasting" nonsense:
1) That IF is only effective if you "clean fast".
2) That anything with flavor spikes insulin.
3) That your body cannot heal in the presence of insulin.
4) That it takes 3 weeks for your body to "adjust and start healing itself".
And subsequently:
5) That the body needs a "rest" from feeding.
I haven't seen any of your points addressed or argued either way.
I never said it was only effective with a clean fast. It's what the clean fast does. sorry I'm not good at explaining stuff. I'm trying but everything gets so jumbled in my brain, it's hard.
Anytime you start a diet your body has to adjust to it. I'm not sure what's so crazy about that.
"The science behind it is really cool. But only when you clean fast."
This sounds like you're claiming that IF has specific documented benefits and those benefits are only available to those who are "clean fasting."
As in the science behind IF with clean fasting is cool.
You have not been able to produce a single piece of science so far.
I haven't been able to or I'm just not because I don't have to lol if you actually wanted to know you would research it yourself.
All the research in the world isn't going to give us insight into what specific things you were thinking of when you made that claim. You're asking us to do research to figure out what you meant.
One of the first things I said when i posted about clean fasting was to research it yourself. Pretty easy to do.
People are asking what you meant. Since the research is easy to do, it should be very easy for you to post links to what made your mind up. Then we can all discuss the same information and progress in the conversation.
All you've done so far is cite Dr Axe and post a blog link. If those aren't the things that convinced you that "clean fasting" has specific benefits, what did?
A lot of hours on google and talking to my doctor.
The same Google that led you to that Dr. Axe link? Do you see the issue here?
Access to information is useless without a corresponding willingness and/or ability to critically evaluate that information. Hours on Google are also capable of convincing people that lizard people are the secret power behind all world governments and religions.
Sorry hit post to soon and it wouldn't let me on.
A lot of hours on google. Not clicking the first link and agreeing with it. I don't blindly follow anyone or anything. I also read multiple people's stories having done it. My doctor is the same man who has time and again told me not to do fad diets and the like. He wouldn't let me do something if he even slightly thought bad of it.
I never understood people who asked for sources. If i didn't understand something I wouldn't ask for sources.. I'd research it myself.
Hours on Google can't convince you of that unless you're really into conspiracy theories.18 -
Most people don't ask for sources because they don't understand the topic. They ask for sources to see what science backs it and where the info is coming from.16
-
lyssamichelle wrote: »I never understood people who asked for sources. If i didn't understand something I wouldn't ask for sources.. I'd research it myself.
Hours on Google can't convince you of that unless you're really into conspiracy theories.
The problem is that unless you apply some critical thinking and learn how to vet your sources, you can be led down some awfully strange rabbit holes (as in the Dr. Axe link you posted earlier). There are a lot of people who blog about very bizarre things - doesn't make them true in the least.
I can find plenty of "evidence" on the internet that the Earth is flat. There are entire websites devoted to it. But if I apply a little common sense and dig into other sources, it's obvious that those people are completely deluded and deliberately ignoring established science.6 -
singingflutelady wrote: »Most people don't ask for sources because they don't understand the topic. They ask for sources to see what science backs it and where the info is coming from.
It would literally take me the same amount of time to find the right links as it would for some to do it themselves though.12 -
lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »Can I take a step back and ask a question regarding the "nonsense"?
What exactly is nonsensical?- Is it the idea that hormone levels cycle throughout the day?
- Is it that insulin levels are naturally lower in the morning?
- Is it that certain foods/substances can trigger insulin spikes?
- Is it that these hormone cycles have an impact on weight management?
- Is it all of it?
- Is it something else?
As it pertains to this thread (to stay on topic), I think what's specifically being called into question is the "clean fasting" nonsense:
1) That IF is only effective if you "clean fast".
2) That anything with flavor spikes insulin.
3) That your body cannot heal in the presence of insulin.
4) That it takes 3 weeks for your body to "adjust and start healing itself".
And subsequently:
5) That the body needs a "rest" from feeding.
I haven't seen any of your points addressed or argued either way.
I never said it was only effective with a clean fast. It's what the clean fast does. sorry I'm not good at explaining stuff. I'm trying but everything gets so jumbled in my brain, it's hard.
Anytime you start a diet your body has to adjust to it. I'm not sure what's so crazy about that.
"The science behind it is really cool. But only when you clean fast."
This sounds like you're claiming that IF has specific documented benefits and those benefits are only available to those who are "clean fasting."
As in the science behind IF with clean fasting is cool.
You have not been able to produce a single piece of science so far.
I haven't been able to or I'm just not because I don't have to lol if you actually wanted to know you would research it yourself.
All the research in the world isn't going to give us insight into what specific things you were thinking of when you made that claim. You're asking us to do research to figure out what you meant.
One of the first things I said when i posted about clean fasting was to research it yourself. Pretty easy to do.
People are asking what you meant. Since the research is easy to do, it should be very easy for you to post links to what made your mind up. Then we can all discuss the same information and progress in the conversation.
All you've done so far is cite Dr Axe and post a blog link. If those aren't the things that convinced you that "clean fasting" has specific benefits, what did?
A lot of hours on google and talking to my doctor.
The same Google that led you to that Dr. Axe link? Do you see the issue here?
Access to information is useless without a corresponding willingness and/or ability to critically evaluate that information. Hours on Google are also capable of convincing people that lizard people are the secret power behind all world governments and religions.
Sorry hit post to soon and it wouldn't let me on.
A lot of hours on google. Not clicking the first link and agreeing with it. I don't blindly follow anyone or anything. I also read multiple people's stories having done it. My doctor is the same man who has time and again told me not to do fad diets and the like. He wouldn't let me do something if he even slightly thought bad of it.
I never understood people who asked for sources. If i didn't understand something I wouldn't ask for sources.. I'd research it myself.
Hours on Google can't convince you of that unless you're really into conspiracy theories.
There is nothing bad about IF that would cause your doctor to warn you away from it (absent, of course, specific medical conditions) and if you feel that "clean fasting" (i.e. no sweeteners) is helping you, there's nothing bad about that either. Sort of a "couldn't hurt, might help" scenario.
The pushback you are getting is because, other than people saying stuff, there is no actual evidence that "clean fasting" the way you are describing it is helpful for anything.
I really hope your way of eating is helping you - I've know several people who get the "mind jumble" you describe and it's not easy to deal with. Best of luck to you!10 -
lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »Can I take a step back and ask a question regarding the "nonsense"?
What exactly is nonsensical?- Is it the idea that hormone levels cycle throughout the day?
- Is it that insulin levels are naturally lower in the morning?
- Is it that certain foods/substances can trigger insulin spikes?
- Is it that these hormone cycles have an impact on weight management?
- Is it all of it?
- Is it something else?
As it pertains to this thread (to stay on topic), I think what's specifically being called into question is the "clean fasting" nonsense:
1) That IF is only effective if you "clean fast".
2) That anything with flavor spikes insulin.
3) That your body cannot heal in the presence of insulin.
4) That it takes 3 weeks for your body to "adjust and start healing itself".
And subsequently:
5) That the body needs a "rest" from feeding.
I haven't seen any of your points addressed or argued either way.
I never said it was only effective with a clean fast. It's what the clean fast does. sorry I'm not good at explaining stuff. I'm trying but everything gets so jumbled in my brain, it's hard.
Anytime you start a diet your body has to adjust to it. I'm not sure what's so crazy about that.
"The science behind it is really cool. But only when you clean fast."
This sounds like you're claiming that IF has specific documented benefits and those benefits are only available to those who are "clean fasting."
As in the science behind IF with clean fasting is cool.
You have not been able to produce a single piece of science so far.
I haven't been able to or I'm just not because I don't have to lol if you actually wanted to know you would research it yourself.
All the research in the world isn't going to give us insight into what specific things you were thinking of when you made that claim. You're asking us to do research to figure out what you meant.
One of the first things I said when i posted about clean fasting was to research it yourself. Pretty easy to do.
People are asking what you meant. Since the research is easy to do, it should be very easy for you to post links to what made your mind up. Then we can all discuss the same information and progress in the conversation.
All you've done so far is cite Dr Axe and post a blog link. If those aren't the things that convinced you that "clean fasting" has specific benefits, what did?
A lot of hours on google and talking to my doctor.
The same Google that led you to that Dr. Axe link? Do you see the issue here?
Access to information is useless without a corresponding willingness and/or ability to critically evaluate that information. Hours on Google are also capable of convincing people that lizard people are the secret power behind all world governments and religions.
Sorry hit post to soon and it wouldn't let me on.
A lot of hours on google. Not clicking the first link and agreeing with it. I don't blindly follow anyone or anything. I also read multiple people's stories having done it. My doctor is the same man who has time and again told me not to do fad diets and the like. He wouldn't let me do something if he even slightly thought bad of it.
I never understood people who asked for sources. If i didn't understand something I wouldn't ask for sources.. I'd research it myself.
Hours on Google can't convince you of that unless you're really into conspiracy theories.
Someone who is passionate and educated on a subject is usually able to provide information for those who want to learn more. They tend to remember learning about it themselves and are able to recall the specific studies, arguments, or sources that convinced them that a certain approach or POV was correct. If someone has good reasons for believing what they believe, sharing the justification for their belief isn't a hardship. It's actually relatively easy for people with a solid argument to recreate the learning that took place to get them there.
You don't follow anything blindly. Okay. So what convinced you?
Maybe you should start asking people for sources when they recommend things to you. It's an excellent tool to help you evaluate their argument and you're able to bypass simply having faith in what people tell you. Your doctor, for instance. Did you ask him why he thought IF was a good idea? Maybe it would have been helpful for you to understand how he came to his conclusion that it was a good idea for you to do it. Not only would you have a better understanding of your own way of life, it would be easy for you to communicate why you're doing it to people who have never met your doctor and have no reason to be impressed by what he does or doesn't recommend.
If someone tells you something that doesn't seem quite right, asking "Why do you think that?" is usually much more productive than just doing your own research.
11 -
janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »Can I take a step back and ask a question regarding the "nonsense"?
What exactly is nonsensical?- Is it the idea that hormone levels cycle throughout the day?
- Is it that insulin levels are naturally lower in the morning?
- Is it that certain foods/substances can trigger insulin spikes?
- Is it that these hormone cycles have an impact on weight management?
- Is it all of it?
- Is it something else?
As it pertains to this thread (to stay on topic), I think what's specifically being called into question is the "clean fasting" nonsense:
1) That IF is only effective if you "clean fast".
2) That anything with flavor spikes insulin.
3) That your body cannot heal in the presence of insulin.
4) That it takes 3 weeks for your body to "adjust and start healing itself".
And subsequently:
5) That the body needs a "rest" from feeding.
I haven't seen any of your points addressed or argued either way.
I never said it was only effective with a clean fast. It's what the clean fast does. sorry I'm not good at explaining stuff. I'm trying but everything gets so jumbled in my brain, it's hard.
Anytime you start a diet your body has to adjust to it. I'm not sure what's so crazy about that.
"The science behind it is really cool. But only when you clean fast."
This sounds like you're claiming that IF has specific documented benefits and those benefits are only available to those who are "clean fasting."
As in the science behind IF with clean fasting is cool.
You have not been able to produce a single piece of science so far.
I haven't been able to or I'm just not because I don't have to lol if you actually wanted to know you would research it yourself.
All the research in the world isn't going to give us insight into what specific things you were thinking of when you made that claim. You're asking us to do research to figure out what you meant.
One of the first things I said when i posted about clean fasting was to research it yourself. Pretty easy to do.
People are asking what you meant. Since the research is easy to do, it should be very easy for you to post links to what made your mind up. Then we can all discuss the same information and progress in the conversation.
All you've done so far is cite Dr Axe and post a blog link. If those aren't the things that convinced you that "clean fasting" has specific benefits, what did?
A lot of hours on google and talking to my doctor.
The same Google that led you to that Dr. Axe link? Do you see the issue here?
Access to information is useless without a corresponding willingness and/or ability to critically evaluate that information. Hours on Google are also capable of convincing people that lizard people are the secret power behind all world governments and religions.
Sorry hit post to soon and it wouldn't let me on.
A lot of hours on google. Not clicking the first link and agreeing with it. I don't blindly follow anyone or anything. I also read multiple people's stories having done it. My doctor is the same man who has time and again told me not to do fad diets and the like. He wouldn't let me do something if he even slightly thought bad of it.
I never understood people who asked for sources. If i didn't understand something I wouldn't ask for sources.. I'd research it myself.
Hours on Google can't convince you of that unless you're really into conspiracy theories.
Someone who is passionate and educated on a subject is usually able to provide information for those who want to learn more. They tend to remember learning about it themselves and are able to recall the specific studies, arguments, or sources that convinced them that a certain approach or POV was correct. If someone has good reasons for believing what they believe, sharing the justification for their belief isn't a hardship. It's actually relatively easy for people with a solid argument to recreate the learning that took place to get them there.
You don't follow anything blindly. Okay. So what convinced you?
Maybe you should start asking people for sources when they recommend things to you. It's an excellent tool to help you evaluate their argument and you're able to bypass simply having faith in what people tell you. Your doctor, for instance. Did you ask him why he thought IF was a good idea? Maybe it would have been helpful for you to understand how he came to his conclusion that it was a good idea for you to do it. Not only would you have a better understanding of your own way of life, it would be easy for you to communicate why you're doing it to people who have never met your doctor and have no reason to be impressed by what he does or doesn't recommend.
If someone tells you something that doesn't seem quite right, asking "Why do you think that?" is usually much more productive than just doing your own research.
I can't communicate properly. About anything. Ever. Speaking in general is a hardship for me. You have no idea how hard it is for me. So for me, researching for myself is easier. So is telling people flat out to research for themselves to cut things short and save my head. Because everything is too much.
My doctor and I did talk about it. He used big words. Basically said the health benefits of it were great for me.6 -
lyssamichelle wrote: »I do not know why people claim that the IF research that has been done is garbage...how do you know??? Can you guarantee me that every bit of IF research is done by a quack???
BBC has a great documentary called the Science of Fasting.
Personally I think giving your body a rest from eating is a good thing (and I don't mean just while you are sleeping).
Honestly, I think it has to do with what people have been told to think. And a laziness at finding the truth. If someone where actually curious...like me.. they'd Google it themselves.
My doctor, who is the first one to say not to do something, said it was good. I would trust my doctor over someone on a message board lol
HAHAHAHA! Sorry..... trust your doctor on matters of nutrition? Nope.... I would trust Anvil over a doctor. Mine told me, a 400lbs 6'2-3" man to eat 1600 cals a day and exercise hard!! LOL4 -
I think you can find both good and bad research for anything...the 5 small meals a day way of eating, I have yet to see any research that shows that it is a better way vs another way. Regardless that would never work for me...no interest in doing that. IF worked for me because I know myself well enough to know that counting points/calories, fat grams, etc. etc. will not be sustainable and in doing IF it seemed to work for me.1
-
I think you can find both good and bad research for anything...the 5 small meals a day way of eating, I have yet to see any research that shows that it is a better way vs another way. Regardless that would never work for me...no interest in doing that. IF worked for me because I know myself well enough to know that counting points/calories, fat grams, etc. etc. will not be sustainable and in doing IF it seemed to work for me.
Ironically, no one here would advocate you must or even should eat 5 meals or xx number of meals.
What has happened over the past several years is moving extremes; a few years ago people would argue that eat more times a day is good to stoke your metabolism... Now they advocate less meals/fasting for improved insulin sensitivity.
Ultimately, it comes down to personal preference and adherence.9 -
I think you can find both good and bad research for anything...the 5 small meals a day way of eating, I have yet to see any research that shows that it is a better way vs another way. Regardless that would never work for me...no interest in doing that. IF worked for me because I know myself well enough to know that counting points/calories, fat grams, etc. etc. will not be sustainable and in doing IF it seemed to work for me.
Yeah, if someone tried to claim that eating five small meals a day provided unique benefits, I would be skeptical of that claim too.
8 -
psychod787 wrote: »lyssamichelle wrote: »I do not know why people claim that the IF research that has been done is garbage...how do you know??? Can you guarantee me that every bit of IF research is done by a quack???
BBC has a great documentary called the Science of Fasting.
Personally I think giving your body a rest from eating is a good thing (and I don't mean just while you are sleeping).
Honestly, I think it has to do with what people have been told to think. And a laziness at finding the truth. If someone where actually curious...like me.. they'd Google it themselves.
My doctor, who is the first one to say not to do something, said it was good. I would trust my doctor over someone on a message board lol
HAHAHAHA! Sorry..... trust your doctor on matters of nutrition? Nope.... I would trust Anvil over a doctor. Mine told me, a 400lbs 6'2-3" man to eat 1600 cals a day and exercise hard!! LOL
So what did you do then instead of what he suggested?
Personally, i did my own research and tried out several diets. I did that because the average doctor has little to no education in the field. In fact, my wife goes to one of the top electrophysiologist in the field, several GI doctosrs, and a team of other types of doctors for a bunch medical issues and i keep getting asked to come work for them. I also have trained a lot of people on this board, including getting several men sub 10% and women to 14% bf.
Also i actively challenge my current beliefs (even though some think otherwise) and evolve how i think. After being on MFP for 9 years, i have been able to work through a lot of these issues, maintain weight and now drive towards new goals.
8 -
janejellyroll wrote: »I think you can find both good and bad research for anything...the 5 small meals a day way of eating, I have yet to see any research that shows that it is a better way vs another way. Regardless that would never work for me...no interest in doing that. IF worked for me because I know myself well enough to know that counting points/calories, fat grams, etc. etc. will not be sustainable and in doing IF it seemed to work for me.
Yeah, if someone tried to claim that eating five small meals a day provided unique benefits, I would be skeptical of that claim too.
If people look back around 2013, you would see that argument.... Along with the paleo one.5 -
janejellyroll wrote: »I think you can find both good and bad research for anything...the 5 small meals a day way of eating, I have yet to see any research that shows that it is a better way vs another way. Regardless that would never work for me...no interest in doing that. IF worked for me because I know myself well enough to know that counting points/calories, fat grams, etc. etc. will not be sustainable and in doing IF it seemed to work for me.
Yeah, if someone tried to claim that eating five small meals a day provided unique benefits, I would be skeptical of that claim too.
Maybe a bit of a sidebar, but it depends on the context. Eric Helms has recently cited research (I think it was his own, but not sure and not at my computer right now) that for bodybuilders/people trying to maximize muscle protein synthesis, the most optimal approach is meals with 30-50g protein spaced 3-4 hours apart throughout the day.
A specialized context for very specific purposes, but evidence-based research nonetheless.2 -
janejellyroll wrote: »I think you can find both good and bad research for anything...the 5 small meals a day way of eating, I have yet to see any research that shows that it is a better way vs another way. Regardless that would never work for me...no interest in doing that. IF worked for me because I know myself well enough to know that counting points/calories, fat grams, etc. etc. will not be sustainable and in doing IF it seemed to work for me.
Yeah, if someone tried to claim that eating five small meals a day provided unique benefits, I would be skeptical of that claim too.
Maybe a bit of a sidebar, but it depends on the context. Eric Helms has recently cited research (I think it was his own, but not sure and not at my computer right now) that for bodybuilders/people trying to maximize muscle protein synthesis, the most optimal approach is meals with 30-50g protein spaced 3-4 hours apart throughout the day.
A specialized context for very specific purposes, but evidence-based research nonetheless.
Dr. Brad Schoenfeld has the same recommendation based on his latest research for those trying to maximize muscle gain.1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 388 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
- 916 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions