How to not mess up hormones when starting IF?
Options
Replies
-
I think that I've seen people pretty much in agreement with the following:
1) many of the studies of the benefits of intermittent fasting were rat studies.
1a) Did you know that rat/mouse students are usually done only on male animals?
2) of the studies done in human beings, many were done only on men and/or postmenopausal women
3) the few studies that have included female organisms have found inconsistent results for women, many of them don't show positive results and some do show possible negative results for women/female mice.
That's not exactly "woo."5 -
Based on my experience, the first time I practiced IF during Lent 2009, I lost 17 lbs. in 40 days not counting calories. What I learned from that experience is how hard it is to eat the calories one can eat in a normal eating pattern unless you're practicing gluttony. And, if you are practicing gluttony, you're not going to achieve weight loss no matter what eating schedule protocol you follow.
There are some credible studies, in my opinion about IF that don't involve rats. I've shared at least one in the past, one that involved men who regular lifted weights for strength training. I read the study carefully and thought it was convincing pro-IF. Of course, there are studies that support the opposite. It's the nature of research and will always be.
Bottom line, it's rather easy to eat less with a restricted feeding window, unless you're a glutton.12 -
pierinifitness wrote: »Based on my experience, the first time I practiced IF during Lent 2009, I lost 17 lbs. in 40 days not counting calories. What I learned from that experience is how hard it is to eat the calories one can eat in a normal eating pattern unless you're practicing gluttony. And, if you are practicing gluttony, you're not going to achieve weight loss no matter what eating schedule protocol you follow.
There are some credible studies, in my opinion about IF that don't involve rats. I've shared at least one in the past, one that involved men who regular lifted weights for strength training. I read the study carefully and thought it was convincing pro-IF. Of course, there are studies that support the opposite. It's the nature of research and will always be.
Bottom line, it's rather easy to eat less with a restricted feeding window, unless you're a glutton.
What have you found in relation to women's hormones?3 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »pierinifitness wrote: »Based on my experience, the first time I practiced IF during Lent 2009, I lost 17 lbs. in 40 days not counting calories. What I learned from that experience is how hard it is to eat the calories one can eat in a normal eating pattern unless you're practicing gluttony. And, if you are practicing gluttony, you're not going to achieve weight loss no matter what eating schedule protocol you follow.
There are some credible studies, in my opinion about IF that don't involve rats. I've shared at least one in the past, one that involved men who regular lifted weights for strength training. I read the study carefully and thought it was convincing pro-IF. Of course, there are studies that support the opposite. It's the nature of research and will always be.
Bottom line, it's rather easy to eat less with a restricted feeding window, unless you're a glutton.
What have you found in relation to women's hormones?
I need to know too.
To add, I am not a glutton. What do you mean by glutton? that is a derogatory term.3 -
pierinifitness wrote: »Based on my experience, the first time I practiced IF during Lent 2009, I lost 17 lbs. in 40 days not counting calories. What I learned from that experience is how hard it is to eat the calories one can eat in a normal eating pattern unless you're practicing gluttony. And, if you are practicing gluttony, you're not going to achieve weight loss no matter what eating schedule protocol you follow.
There are some credible studies, in my opinion about IF that don't involve rats. I've shared at least one in the past, one that involved men who regular lifted weights for strength training. I read the study carefully and thought it was convincing pro-IF. Of course, there are studies that support the opposite. It's the nature of research and will always be.
Bottom line, it's rather easy to eat less with a restricted feeding window, unless you're a glutton.
WHOA! Have you never encountered calorie dense food before?
Different people have different amounts of calories available to them. It is ridiculous to assert that eating past your deficit in a small window of time requires gluttony. A single entree from some restaurants will do it for some people and that is hardly binge eating. Also many people, myself included, practice high volume low calorie consumption for part of our calories. It is not uncommon for me to eat over 2 pounds of vegetables and nearly a pound of fish for lunch. Is that gluttony? I could easily replace those low calorie options with something higher and sail right past my maintenance for the day.
While I don't hold myself to some sort of OMAD protocol I do eat almost all of my daily calories for lunch and it still very much requires mindful eating which I do with the assistance of calorie counting.
If you have a very high TDEE and a restricted diet maybe it would require some level of gluttony for you but I don't think you should make generalizations like gluttony about other people.13 -
pierinifitness wrote: »Based on my experience, the first time I practiced IF during Lent 2009, I lost 17 lbs. in 40 days not counting calories. What I learned from that experience is how hard it is to eat the calories one can eat in a normal eating pattern unless you're practicing gluttony. And, if you are practicing gluttony, you're not going to achieve weight loss no matter what eating schedule protocol you follow.
There are some credible studies, in my opinion about IF that don't involve rats. I've shared at least one in the past, one that involved men who regular lifted weights for strength training. I read the study carefully and thought it was convincing pro-IF. Of course, there are studies that support the opposite. It's the nature of research and will always be.
Bottom line, it's rather easy to eat less with a restricted feeding window, unless you're a glutton.
Eh, I seriously doubt it's hard to overeat in a 18:6 pattern for a lot of people. That's really just noon to 6, which is the main time a lot of people eat without a window. Same for any other window one might pick. I find it easier to eat 3 (sometimes 2) meals a day, however spread, than to have snacking within any period, since I find meals filling and grazing not. There are people who are exactly the opposite. Does that make them the glutton, or me? Or does it mean we are all smart to find what works for us.
I can't imagine eating all my calories in one meal (for anything but an extreme deficit) and for me it would mean I'd have to be stuffing myself uncomfortably or eating a nutritionally poor diet vs what I normally eat -- does that mean I'm more or less of a glutton than someone who enjoys OMAD?
Maybe it's better not to impose offensive judgments on people because a particular eating strategy works better or worse for them. I find eating 3 meals a day a very easy pattern to maintain on but I don't call people who find other patterns easier "gluttons." Weird that someone feels the need to do that kind of thing.14 -
pierinifitness wrote: »Based on my experience, the first time I practiced IF during Lent 2009, I lost 17 lbs. in 40 days not counting calories. What I learned from that experience is how hard it is to eat the calories one can eat in a normal eating pattern unless you're practicing gluttony. And, if you are practicing gluttony, you're not going to achieve weight loss no matter what eating schedule protocol you follow.
There are some credible studies, in my opinion about IF that don't involve rats. I've shared at least one in the past, one that involved men who regular lifted weights for strength training. I read the study carefully and thought it was convincing pro-IF. Of course, there are studies that support the opposite. It's the nature of research and will always be.
Bottom line, it's rather easy to eat less with a restricted feeding window, unless you're a glutton.
My TDEE is around 1800 cals. So you're saying I must be a glutton if I can eat 1800 calories between noon and six?
The stereotype of overweight people having to be undisciplined, lazy, and/or gluttonous is unnecessarily cruel and counterproductive.16 -
pierinifitness wrote: »Based on my experience, the first time I practiced IF during Lent 2009, I lost 17 lbs. in 40 days not counting calories. What I learned from that experience is how hard it is to eat the calories one can eat in a normal eating pattern unless you're practicing gluttony. And, if you are practicing gluttony, you're not going to achieve weight loss no matter what eating schedule protocol you follow.
There are some credible studies, in my opinion about IF that don't involve rats. I've shared at least one in the past, one that involved men who regular lifted weights for strength training. I read the study carefully and thought it was convincing pro-IF. Of course, there are studies that support the opposite. It's the nature of research and will always be.
Bottom line, it's rather easy to eat less with a restricted feeding window, unless you're a glutton.
You lost weight therefore anyone who doesn't is a glutton. That's exactly what the short version of this post reads. I would much rather see members posting information about how to stay within their calorie goals regardless of their way of eating and/or choices of volume or calorie dense foods.
Your post does nothing but enforce a mind set geared towards an eating disorder.15 -
Came back here for a visit after my post yesterday and was surprised at all my "fan mail" post replies. It seems like my choice of the glutton work struck a nerve with some. I think I have a good understanding of the glutton word but the posts here had me doubting. So, I decided to do an internet search and confirm a good definition. This is what I found:
Gluttony - habitual greed or excess in eating - so, a glutton is one who practices gluttony.
I'm a glutton in remission. Despite my first adult fitness, health and wellness journey in my mid 30's (in the late 1980's) and keeping a good bodyweight for over 35 years, I did fall off the wagon a couple years ago and slowly added 35 lbs. that weren't necessary. I did so by dropping my guard and being a glutton, eating in excess of what my body needed to maintain a healthy weight. Consequently, I gained weight, as in excessive weight. It's a perfect example of CICO, something that is constantly preached here at MFP. And, everyone who has gained excessive weight - 25. lbs. 50 lb. 100 lbs. or hundreds of lbs. did so by a habitual greed or excess in eating. In other words, being a glutton and practicing gluttony.
Sometimes, the truth hurts but words have a precise meaning, generally, and I chose to be as precise as I could when making my comments yesterday.
Not trying to be politically correct, just frank. It doesn't mean that someone who's a glutton is a bad person, just that they're a glutton. I was a glutton but now my gluttony is in remission. Could I become a glutton again. You betcha and probably so could everyone here who is on a path of achieving their ideal weight or who have done so by diligently practicing eating the correct amount of food, of managing what can be an unregulated desire to eat an excessive amount of food for whatever reason.
Now, someone asked me what my comment had to do about female hormones. I probably got off original topic as did others and for that I ask for your forgiveness. But, and this will result in more stones being thrown at me, this female hormone stuff is not a free card to hang your hat on with regard to weight gain. Men have hormones too. You don't hear me going around blaming my weight gain on my hormones. Nope, it's because I am or was a glutton. Now given, hormones can wreck havoc with one's body and us guys can have our testosterone which can contribute to us being ballistic at times, even get into fights, exhibit road rage, you name it. We all have a responsibility to manage our emotions and thoughts and be responsible for our conduct as a human being. If I eat like a glutton, I'll gain weight and I won't be blaming it on my hormones. Nor will I cry about it because I've gained a few lbs. and attribute it to my hormones. This hormone thing blame game is a woo at it's finest.
I'm practicing OMAD right now for Lent 2019 and am eating during a 2-hour window. Since I don't have any additional weight that I choose to lose, I'm eating enough calories to maintain my weight and I have thus far with three weeks under my belt. Now, if I was a glutton and practicing OMAD, which is possible, I'd gain weight. CICO is CICO as so many here constantly remind others. And, yes I agree, that it's possible to be a glutton during a short feeding window.
I've got an action=packed work day so won't be able to check back and reply to any new comments. Enjoy your day.
8 -
@pierinifitness this was more in regards to IF and female hormones.... how long periods without food could potentially affect menstrual cycles and fertility. No one is blaming anything on weight gain. I would love to be able to control and manage my fertility with my weight alone. Oh how lovely that would be!!
And by your definition I am a glutton every time I bulk (and have to eat a excessive amount of food despite being full all the time) otherwise I would not look how I do in my profile photo. So I am thankful for the ability to do that.8 -
@pierinifitness this was more in regards to IF and female hormones.... how long periods without food could potentially affect menstrual cycles and fertility. No one is blaming anything on weight gain. I would love to be able to control and manage my fertility with my weight alone. Oh how lovely that would be!!
This. OP was asking how to make sure IF didn't mess up her hormones, and you posted that the only way to not lose weight on IF is to be a glutton. Your follow up post is even farther off thread topic, while suggesting that in addition to being gluttons, women are trying to blame weight gain on female hormones.
*
Just as an FYI to anyone reading who might also misunderstand the point of the OP, weight change (up or down) can sometimes throw off a woman's hormones, causing changes in monthly cycle and other physical characteristics. Losing weight quickly can cause a woman to lose her period and affect fertility. And there was the suggestion at some point in the media that women who fast for certain lengths of time might also throw off their hormone balance, causing changes to their cycles and fertility.
As many women do standard 16:8 and 5:2, I doubt it's a universal problem, but it's understandable that a woman who has experienced hormonal imbalance conditions or is currently interested in becoming pregnant would be concerned and ask the community for more info8 -
Your comment was: "What I learned from that experience is how hard it is to eat the calories one can eat in a normal eating pattern unless you're practicing gluttony. And, if you are practicing gluttony, you're not going to achieve weight loss no matter what eating schedule protocol you follow."
On the definition of gluttony: in casual conversation, yes, it means habitual excess in eating. That does not merely meaning "eating too many calories and gaining weight." It's commonly used to refer to eating huge amounts of food at a time (ironically) and gorging on expensive or wasteful things. A really good example of classic gluttony (in pretty much all ways) is Petronius' Dinner With Trimalchio section in the Satyricon (working title for Great Gatsby was Dinner With Trimalchio, btw, and Petronius was Nero's arbiter of taste, as well as an author of this truly bizarre novel that is fascinating for its insights into certain aspects of Roman culture).
More broadly, it's one of the seven deadly sins, and again the definition is more broad than merely eating. In particular, it is the sinful the overindulgence and overconsumption of anything. Excessive means both more than one needs (so habitually overeating to the point of obesity can be included -- but I note that you chose a word with an inherent moral connotation). The more significant use of the term is excessive in the sense of using more than your share, causing others to go without, not being willing to share with others. (And importantly again, this is not merely, or primarily, about food.)
According to St. Thomas Aquinas and others, gluttony would also include thinking about food excessively, over-anticipation of meals, and -- again similar to the conversational usage -- too much focus on fancy, costly, indulgent foods.
What I personally found incorrect in what you said was the idea that one cannot overeat when doing IF unless one is gluttonous, as if this were different from other ways of eating. If you were not trying to claim that was something different in general (and to insult those for whom IF doesn't work, or who find that they can easily gain on IF, not sure what you were trying to say -- I think you did not communicate it well).
FOR ME, it's FAR easier to gain weight (to mindlessly overeat) if I graze for a period of time on higher cal foods than if I eat 3 meals a day that basically fit my usual meal templates. I would find it very difficult to gain weight if I ate mindfully and only at regular meals (even if they are spread over the day, as mine are -- at 6, 12, and 9, usually). However, in contrast to you, I don't insist that someone for whom my preferred and easy schedule does not work must therefore be practicing gluttony. (An example of what I (unlike you) do not say: "what I learned from my experience in losing and maintaining weight is how hard it is to eat the calories in 3 standard time meals that one can following some other eating patterns unless you are practicing gluttony." See, that would be to suggest that anyone who tended to overeat on 3 meals = glutton, and that would not be correct. But it's precisely the same as what you said.)
I suppose you could argue that you only meant that no one gains weight without being a glutton, and while I think that's needlessly moralizing about the issue and not helpfully addressing the reasons many people find it easy to overeat without realizing how many calories they are consuming, I might have objected to that less. But that wouldn't explain why you were drawing a contrast between IF (IF works for everyone who is not a glutton) and other ways of eating. In theory, if eating more calories than you burn = gluttony in your mind, everyone who gains is a glutton and IF or no makes no difference. Just don't be a glutton. (But since that ignores the context and history of the word glutton, I would say it's a poor or uneducated word choice if that's the intended meaning.)11 -
On the hormone thing, I haven't studied it, so I would look into it if planning to do a more extreme version of IF, but given how many people routinely skip a meal and the variety of human eating patterns I can't imagine that merely eating in an 8 hour window would be a problem if you are eating enough and a well-balanced diet with enough fat.
I would be more concerned about extensive fasts, and I would be very careful that you don't pick a pattern that causes you to eat too low (or a less healthy diet to get in all the cals in a short window).3 -
Your comment was: "What I learned from that experience is how hard it is to eat the calories one can eat in a normal eating pattern unless you're practicing gluttony. And, if you are practicing gluttony, you're not going to achieve weight loss no matter what eating schedule protocol you follow."
On the definition of gluttony: in casual conversation, yes, it means habitual excess in eating. That does not merely meaning "eating too many calories and gaining weight." It's commonly used to refer to eating huge amounts of food at a time (ironically) and gorging on expensive or wasteful things. A really good example of classic gluttony (in pretty much all ways) is Petronius' Dinner With Trimalchio section in the Satyricon (working title for Great Gatsby was Dinner With Trimalchio, btw, and Petronius was Nero's arbiter of taste, as well as an author of this truly bizarre novel that is fascinating for its insights into certain aspects of Roman culture).
More broadly, it's one of the seven deadly sins, and again the definition is more broad than merely eating. In particular, it is the sinful the overindulgence and overconsumption of anything. Excessive means both more than one needs (so habitually overeating to the point of obesity can be included -- but I note that you chose a word with an inherent moral connotation). The more significant use of the term is excessive in the sense of using more than your share, causing others to go without, not being willing to share with others. (And importantly again, this is not merely, or primarily, about food.)
According to St. Thomas Aquinas and others, gluttony would also include thinking about food excessively, over-anticipation of meals, and -- again similar to the conversational usage -- too much focus on fancy, costly, indulgent foods.
What I personally found incorrect in what you said was the idea that one cannot overeat when doing IF unless one is gluttonous, as if this were different from other ways of eating. If you were not trying to claim that was something different in general (and to insult those for whom IF doesn't work, or who find that they can easily gain on IF, not sure what you were trying to say -- I think you did not communicate it well).
FOR ME, it's FAR easier to gain weight (to mindlessly overeat) if I graze for a period of time on higher cal foods than if I eat 3 meals a day that basically fit my usual meal templates. I would find it very difficult to gain weight if I ate mindfully and only at regular meals (even if they are spread over the day, as mine are -- at 6, 12, and 9, usually). However, in contrast to you, I don't insist that someone for whom my preferred and easy schedule does not work must therefore be practicing gluttony. (An example of what I (unlike you) do not say: "what I learned from my experience in losing and maintaining weight is how hard it is to eat the calories in 3 standard time meals that one can following some other eating patterns unless you are practicing gluttony." See, that would be to suggest that anyone who tended to overeat on 3 meals = glutton, and that would not be correct. But it's precisely the same as what you said.)
I suppose you could argue that you only meant that no one gains weight without being a glutton, and while I think that's needlessly moralizing about the issue and not helpfully addressing the reasons many people find it easy to overeat without realizing how many calories they are consuming, I might have objected to that less. But that wouldn't explain why you were drawing a contrast between IF (IF works for everyone who is not a glutton) and other ways of eating. In theory, if eating more calories than you burn = gluttony in your mind, everyone who gains is a glutton and IF or no makes no difference. Just don't be a glutton. (But since that ignores the context and history of the word glutton, I would say it's a poor or uneducated word choice if that's the intended meaning.)
I refreshed before I posted my reply which said "if you are so greedily consumed by your desire to eat that you would take food from a hungry person you are a glutton."4 -
Well, that would be a much shorter and better way to say basically the same thing!2
-
The assertion that a person cannot gain weight on IF without engaging in gluttony is patently false. There are many people that bulk on IF without engaging in gluttonous behavior.
Gluttony, being inherently a moralistic term which was not part of the OP's question, has nothing to do with hormones, so I have to wonder why it would be brought into the discussion in the first place.
Regadless, under that theology, if a person were advocating IF on the idea that it made them more virtuous than other people who are not IF practitioners, it would be reasonable to think that person was falling into the error of Pride, another cardinal sin. Further, they would be failing to practice the cardinal virtue of Faith due to their putting that value on the materialistic idea of an eating pattern rather than the divine.
But, again, that's well away from the original scope of the OPs question.
10 -
ummmm are there not meta analyses that measure these hormonal changes in women.. I dont have any of the problems hormonally, but IF has worked for me. Thats a fact I can attest to. Other people i know in real life have experienced the same thing...men and women..To the OP..I hope that you are able to find some solid answers....
Love,
Lee
[edited by MFP mods]5 -
I am not working out at this time but I have worked out fasted before. It increases autophagy whether you may believe it or not.11
-
Fasting is healing to the body. I know you people dont agree, but you dont have to because I see the good results and positive effects in me..😁15
-
lleeann2001 wrote: »I am not working out at this time but I have worked out fasted before. It increases autophagy whether you may believe it or not.
I think you can intermittently fast instead going days without food. If you feel some benefit great, I feel benefit to actually eating.
However I don't think you should be promoting what you are doing in the main forums.14
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K 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
- 918 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions