Intermittent Fasting
Replies
-
Do you all do “clean” fasting or “dirty” fasting? I still put cream in my coffee with some almond milk. I’m trying to slowly limit it over time to go to strictly black coffee. Also I try to do 18:6.0
-
wannabesmaller2017 wrote: »Do you all do “clean” fasting or “dirty” fasting? I still put cream in my coffee with some almond milk. I’m trying to slowly limit it over time to go to strictly black coffee. Also I try to do 18:6.
Define "clean" or "dirty" using universally accepted definitions as it relates to nutrition.3 -
wannabesmaller2017 wrote: »Do you all do “clean” fasting or “dirty” fasting? I still put cream in my coffee with some almond milk. I’m trying to slowly limit it over time to go to strictly black coffee. Also I try to do 18:6.
Can't speak to clean vs dirty as I'm not sure what that means in the context of IF.
My first 3 months on IF, I was extremely strict with it. Absolutely not one calorie of anything outside the window, and that included almond milk for coffee, etc. I drank it black, no sugar or sweetener. In the last 5-6 months, things have loosened up a bit. I'll occasionally have cream in my coffee, and if I'm really feeling a hunger pang, I'll have some blackberries or something. I don't think it's possible to be fully strict with an IF regimen forever; at some point, accommodations must be made.
But I do think that, as a learning / break in experience, doing strict IF with zero calories outside the eating window is a good way to get introduced to the concept, and most importantly, to learn to just be hungry once in a while. This is an invaluable skill that pays off 24x7: the ability to say to oneself "I'm pretty hungry right now, but it isn't time to eat, so I'm just gonna be hungry." This is a form of Spartan discipline that is alien to people of a certain BMI (myself certainly not having been an exception early in 2019), and in my mind, the hugest payoff of IF - learning to just be hungry some of the time without responding with food. So if someone said "For two months I'm going to be hard-core about it and not have a single calorie outside my eating window" I'd probably say "Sounds like a good idea."
But I don't think it's something you can keep up forever. It's more of an initiation thing than a lifestyle thing. Eventually, real life will intrude and then the question becomes, does your IF program have enough flex that it can accommodate the randomness of life and bounce back, or are the rules so strict that once it crashes, it crashes. Flexibility is very important.
8 -
Wow! I'm surprised. Usually there's a plethora of folks on here enforcing "Calories In / Calories Out" and that's all that matters, etc., etc. Truth be told I do both a 16:8 fast, eating only between 10am and 6pm, AND a 5:2 fast where I eat 800 calories or less on two non-consecutive days a week. This (somehow) aided me in losing the last 20+ pounds of my 55 lb. weight loss after my weight loss had stalled for quite some time.
"Enforcing" Calories in / Calories out? CICO is a mathematical principle. An energy equation and nothing more. It doesn't need to be 'enforced' any more than gravity or the heliocentric model of our solar system. They're just facts14 -
I have a question for all. Hopefully someone can answer it.
I work 12 hour shifts 7a-7p Sun-Wed and exercise those days from about 4:30-5:30. What would be the best time to fast? Is it okay to workout and not eat afterwards?0 -
I've noticed that since starting IF, I'm just, well, not hungry. That's crazy for me, since I am a notorious grazer. If food is available, it should be in my stomach.
I'm not sure about you guys, but if that's the case for you too, it's probably where the caloric deficit is coming from. I'm also becoming full much quicker. I've been told IF can destroy the female hormonal balance though, so I'm doing it on an every-other-day basis. It's surprisingly easy not to eat until after noon.6 -
NightTrane_79 wrote: »I have a question for all. Hopefully someone can answer it.
I work 12 hour shifts 7a-7p Sun-Wed and exercise those days from about 4:30-5:30. What would be the best time to fast? Is it okay to workout and not eat afterwards?
Only you can answer that question. You may not be able to easily do any on days you work or you might find it incredible easy because work distracts you.
Eating food is first and foremost about acquiring energy to fuel your bodily processes and your ability to move. If you feel sluggish and you are unable to perform your job well that is no good. If you feel fatigued and you cannot exercise the way you want that is also bad.
Losing weight is about finding a balance between creating a small energy deficit that forces your body to use stored energy to compensate while leaving you with enough energy to navigate your day. If the deficit is too steep your body will react negatively and it will begin to slow you down in an effort to preserve itself because at a certain point your body will stop using fat and start using lean body mass like muscle to help cover the energy shortage.
Meal timing is not really that important to weight loss. It might, however, be important for energy management and to avoid feeling miserably hungry too often. You may be very dependent right now on how and when you get food. You may not be.
The best way is to experiment. You could try eating 2 hours later than normal or stop eating 2 hours earlier than normal and see how that feels for a week then build on it or perhaps decide to go a different path.
There are many different ways to create a calorie deficit. This one is popular because it is easy for some people to implement. It may also be popular because it may help some people let go of notions that specific food is required to lose weight and you must deprive yourself of all treat food.
Weight loss is not assured. In fact, from experience, I can tell you that weight gain is entirely possible. I have been doing what the internet now calls 18:6 for most of my life because it came naturally. I have gained a lot of weight in that time. Now that I practice portion management I have lost a lot of weight.4 -
I do a 14/10 fast. I did some research and found some information that suggested this one to be better for women. It has really helped me recognize my hunger signals. I use IF in conjunction with CICO and I've found good success so far. Almost 20 lbs down since January!5
-
I started a 16/8 intermittent routine at the beginning of the new year. So far I have lost 13.5 lbs. and it's been really easy. I have also increased my aerobic exercise which of course has contributed to the weight loss. Using the Fitness Pal calorie counter has helped immensely! Weigh, measure religiously, document and the weight comes off!2
-
I am doing 16:8 IF and I am losing slower maybe because i chose to only use .5 pounds a week. Just recently changed it 1 lb will see if I can sustain it.1
-
Hello everyone. I'm Missy and I just turned 44. I was a member of MFP years ago when I had to get my weight back on track after having kids (please ignore the fact that they are both teens right now - smashes head on wall). I joined about 5 years back and lost 35+lbs....then our whole family took a 2 week vacation to Florida in Nov of '18 and had a blast, and I put on about 5-10lbs...not much, but then Christmas came and you know the story. The motivation just wasn't there.
But now....there is a different story. At the suggestion of my Dr., I have gone off my acid reflux meds cold turkey; in turn, I have cut out most chocolate....ok, chocolate after dinner, to be honest, most sugar, bananas and other citrus fruit. I have also cut out alcohol during the week and have stuck to my intermittent fasting plan.
3 years ago, I started off with 16:8, but found I wasn't losing weight with that ratio, so I dropped to 20:4 which made my heel spur go away and my heartburn/acid reflux improve greatly. Since that time, I go between 20:4 and 22:2.
I would like to gain a few friends that can make this journey with me....maybe make weight loss a bit more fun. So, if we have something in common, feel free to add me and we can help each other!0 -
NightTrane_79 wrote: »I have a question for all. Hopefully someone can answer it.
I work 12 hour shifts 7a-7p Sun-Wed and exercise those days from about 4:30-5:30. What would be the best time to fast? Is it okay to workout and not eat afterwards?
Only you can answer that question. You may not be able to easily do any on days you work or you might find it incredible easy because work distracts you.
Eating food is first and foremost about acquiring energy to fuel your bodily processes and your ability to move. If you feel sluggish and you are unable to perform your job well that is no good. If you feel fatigued and you cannot exercise the way you want that is also bad.
Losing weight is about finding a balance between creating a small energy deficit that forces your body to use stored energy to compensate while leaving you with enough energy to navigate your day. If the deficit is too steep your body will react negatively and it will begin to slow you down in an effort to preserve itself because at a certain point your body will stop using fat and start using lean body mass like muscle to help cover the energy shortage.
Meal timing is not really that important to weight loss. It might, however, be important for energy management and to avoid feeling miserably hungry too often. You may be very dependent right now on how and when you get food. You may not be.
The best way is to experiment. You could try eating 2 hours later than normal or stop eating 2 hours earlier than normal and see how that feels for a week then build on it or perhaps decide to go a different path.
There are many different ways to create a calorie deficit. This one is popular because it is easy for some people to implement. It may also be popular because it may help some people let go of notions that specific food is required to lose weight and you must deprive yourself of all treat food.
Weight loss is not assured. In fact, from experience, I can tell you that weight gain is entirely possible. I have been doing what the internet now calls 18:6 for most of my life because it came naturally. I have gained a lot of weight in that time. Now that I practice portion management I have lost a lot of weight.
On the bolded above. To be clear I was not referring to your metabolism. I was referring to fatigue.1 -
deannalaverty wrote: »I've noticed that since starting IF, I'm just, well, not hungry. That's crazy for me, since I am a notorious grazer. If food is available, it should be in my stomach.
I'm not sure about you guys, but if that's the case for you too, it's probably where the caloric deficit is coming from. I'm also becoming full much quicker. I've been told IF can destroy the female hormonal balance though, so I'm doing it on an every-other-day basis. It's surprisingly easy not to eat until after noon.
I experienced the same thing. When I started IF 8 months ago, I was amazed at how much my hunger disappeared and my grazing behavior stopped. I suspected it might be one of those "shiny new thing" diet things, wherein you have a great first month and think you've finally found the magic bullet and then it kinda falls apart when the excitement dies down. But all these months later, with the caveat that I've had a few major binges and plenty of lesser grazing sessions along the way, I'd have to say that IF has held its own for me as an appetite suppressant and a 90 % reducer of grazing. I am hardly ever hungry at all, either that or I've gotten used to just being hungry and ignoring it sometimes. I do 17:7 and no diet I've ever tried has been half as effective or lasted half as long as this one, and it's still going very strong.2 -
I do , i dont eat for the first 6 to 7 hours after i woke up the morning every day , just drinking a lot of water , 2 or 3 cup of black coffee , that realy help me with my diet plan , i already tried a 4 days water fasting before but its was very hard to manage ,0
-
This content has been removed.
-
hobbitses333 wrote: »18:6 MOST days. Now 70 lbs down...I have been obese all my adult life, tried and failed SOOO many diets. I have lost more than ever since discovering IF and it is staying off. 19 months in....still have more to lose. With this tool I can excitedly say this will be the year I reach 100 lbs lost.
It really has changed my relationship with food. I enjoy it now instead of hating it. I can easily turn down sub par food and "goodies". It's not worth the calories. Once I got used to fasting different lengths of time (14 to 20, to a very occasional 72 hour fast) I can control when I eat. Sometimes I am busy and just have time for some water and I can eat enough later...no problem. Sometimes I am around a lot of food for a period of time (camping, weddings, trips to see family) and I eat a bit more and gain a few lbs....no problem. It just comes off again pretty quickly once I get back to it. It has really helped me take a lot of anxiety around eating out of my life.
Health markers, GI issues and inflammation has improved immensely... some will say it was the fasting, others will say it was the weight loss....either way, I will take it!
Intermittent Fasting - in and of itself - will have had little or nothing to do with your improved health and everything to do with the fact that you have lost the weight. Kudos to you for that!
But know that you would likely have experienced the same improvements had you successfully used any other method of calorie reduction. There's no magic or special benefits to IF - it's just another method that some people find helps them reduce their caloric intake to lose weight.
For the record, I've been doing IF for four decades. Long before it was a 'thing' or even had a fancy name. I've just never been a breakfast person. Give me a cup of coffee and I'm good until noon!
Over that time, I gained weight, maintained weight and lost weight eating in this same pattern, because weight management really *is* all about the amount of calories consumed, and nothing at all to do with when they're consumed.
5 -
This content has been removed.
-
hobbitses333 wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »hobbitses333 wrote: »18:6 MOST days. Now 70 lbs down...I have been obese all my adult life, tried and failed SOOO many diets. I have lost more than ever since discovering IF and it is staying off. 19 months in....still have more to lose. With this tool I can excitedly say this will be the year I reach 100 lbs lost.
It really has changed my relationship with food. I enjoy it now instead of hating it. I can easily turn down sub par food and "goodies". It's not worth the calories. Once I got used to fasting different lengths of time (14 to 20, to a very occasional 72 hour fast) I can control when I eat. Sometimes I am busy and just have time for some water and I can eat enough later...no problem. Sometimes I am around a lot of food for a period of time (camping, weddings, trips to see family) and I eat a bit more and gain a few lbs....no problem. It just comes off again pretty quickly once I get back to it. It has really helped me take a lot of anxiety around eating out of my life.
Health markers, GI issues and inflammation has improved immensely... some will say it was the fasting, others will say it was the weight loss....either way, I will take it!
Intermittent Fasting - in and of itself - will have had little or nothing to do with your improved health and everything to do with the fact that you have lost the weight. Kudos to you for that!
But know that you would likely have experienced the same improvements had you successfully used any other method of calorie reduction. There's no magic or special benefits to IF - it's just another method that some people find helps them reduce their caloric intake to lose weight.
For the record, I've been doing IF for four decades. Long before it was a 'thing' or even had a fancy name. I've just never been a breakfast person. Give me a cup of coffee and I'm good until noon!
Over that time, I gained weight, maintained weight and lost weight eating in this same pattern, because weight management really *is* all about the amount of calories consumed, and nothing at all to do with when they're consumed.
Okay so what you are really saying in a nutshell is you think it was because of the weight loss. I dont disagree with it and never said I did either.
Didn't say you did.
I was responding to what I had bolded from your previous post, namely:Health markers, GI issues and inflammation has improved immensely... some will say it was the fasting, others will say it was the weight loss....either way, I will take it!
The only part fasting played into your scenario was that you lost weight because of it. The fasting - in and of itself - did not afford you any extra benefits. It created a calorie deficit for you which, in turn, facilitated the weight loss. My point was that the same results can also be achieved through *any* method that restricts calories, which isn't limited solely to fasting.
Getting into a healthy weight range by whatever method one chooses can only be accomplished through a reduction in caloric intake. And improved health markers such as you have experienced are the most common (and most awesome!) side effects of doing so. But it is a direct result of having lost the weight rather than the method chosen to do so. 3 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »hobbitses333 wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »hobbitses333 wrote: »18:6 MOST days. Now 70 lbs down...I have been obese all my adult life, tried and failed SOOO many diets. I have lost more than ever since discovering IF and it is staying off. 19 months in....still have more to lose. With this tool I can excitedly say this will be the year I reach 100 lbs lost.
It really has changed my relationship with food. I enjoy it now instead of hating it. I can easily turn down sub par food and "goodies". It's not worth the calories. Once I got used to fasting different lengths of time (14 to 20, to a very occasional 72 hour fast) I can control when I eat. Sometimes I am busy and just have time for some water and I can eat enough later...no problem. Sometimes I am around a lot of food for a period of time (camping, weddings, trips to see family) and I eat a bit more and gain a few lbs....no problem. It just comes off again pretty quickly once I get back to it. It has really helped me take a lot of anxiety around eating out of my life.
Health markers, GI issues and inflammation has improved immensely... some will say it was the fasting, others will say it was the weight loss....either way, I will take it!
Intermittent Fasting - in and of itself - will have had little or nothing to do with your improved health and everything to do with the fact that you have lost the weight. Kudos to you for that!
But know that you would likely have experienced the same improvements had you successfully used any other method of calorie reduction. There's no magic or special benefits to IF - it's just another method that some people find helps them reduce their caloric intake to lose weight.
For the record, I've been doing IF for four decades. Long before it was a 'thing' or even had a fancy name. I've just never been a breakfast person. Give me a cup of coffee and I'm good until noon!
Over that time, I gained weight, maintained weight and lost weight eating in this same pattern, because weight management really *is* all about the amount of calories consumed, and nothing at all to do with when they're consumed.
Okay so what you are really saying in a nutshell is you think it was because of the weight loss. I dont disagree with it and never said I did either.
Didn't say you did.
I was responding to what I had bolded from your previous post, namely:Health markers, GI issues and inflammation has improved immensely... some will say it was the fasting, others will say it was the weight loss....either way, I will take it!
The only part fasting played into your scenario was that you lost weight because of it. The fasting - in and of itself - did not afford you any extra benefits. It created a calorie deficit for you which, in turn, facilitated the weight loss. My point was that the same results can also be achieved through *any* method that restricts calories, which isn't limited solely to fasting.
Getting into a healthy weight range by whatever method one chooses can only be accomplished through a reduction in caloric intake. And improved health markers such as you have experienced are the most common (and most awesome!) side effects of doing so. But it is a direct result of having lost the weight rather than the method chosen to do so.
You are going way beyond the oft-espoused view on MFP threads that "Fasting doesn't contribute anything to weight loss beyond helping some people eat less calories", and taking a position that fasting literally has no benefits at all, for weight loss or anything else, aside from helping some people eat less.
You're entitled to your view, but many, including many doctors, would strongly disagree.4 -
I do intermittent fasting. I started out just stopping eating at 7pm and skipping breakfast at the end of last year. I moved up to a 16:8. Then I moved up to 18:6, and then 20:4. Now I'm up to alternate day fasting (36 hours every other day). I've lost 20 lbs this year so far and that's with a week vacation thrown in where I basically ate all I wanted and only did a 16:8.
I like IF because I don't feel like I have to restrict myself from eating. I've lost my 20 lbs since January eating stuff that regular dieters would never eat (like cake, cheese fries, bacon cheeseburgers, etc.). I mean generally I eat healthy but I like being able to eat what I want without restrictions. I've also found that fasting gets easy once you start doing it. I have no issues whatsoever skipping a day now.3 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »hobbitses333 wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »hobbitses333 wrote: »18:6 MOST days. Now 70 lbs down...I have been obese all my adult life, tried and failed SOOO many diets. I have lost more than ever since discovering IF and it is staying off. 19 months in....still have more to lose. With this tool I can excitedly say this will be the year I reach 100 lbs lost.
It really has changed my relationship with food. I enjoy it now instead of hating it. I can easily turn down sub par food and "goodies". It's not worth the calories. Once I got used to fasting different lengths of time (14 to 20, to a very occasional 72 hour fast) I can control when I eat. Sometimes I am busy and just have time for some water and I can eat enough later...no problem. Sometimes I am around a lot of food for a period of time (camping, weddings, trips to see family) and I eat a bit more and gain a few lbs....no problem. It just comes off again pretty quickly once I get back to it. It has really helped me take a lot of anxiety around eating out of my life.
Health markers, GI issues and inflammation has improved immensely... some will say it was the fasting, others will say it was the weight loss....either way, I will take it!
Intermittent Fasting - in and of itself - will have had little or nothing to do with your improved health and everything to do with the fact that you have lost the weight. Kudos to you for that!
But know that you would likely have experienced the same improvements had you successfully used any other method of calorie reduction. There's no magic or special benefits to IF - it's just another method that some people find helps them reduce their caloric intake to lose weight.
For the record, I've been doing IF for four decades. Long before it was a 'thing' or even had a fancy name. I've just never been a breakfast person. Give me a cup of coffee and I'm good until noon!
Over that time, I gained weight, maintained weight and lost weight eating in this same pattern, because weight management really *is* all about the amount of calories consumed, and nothing at all to do with when they're consumed.
Okay so what you are really saying in a nutshell is you think it was because of the weight loss. I dont disagree with it and never said I did either.
Didn't say you did.
I was responding to what I had bolded from your previous post, namely:Health markers, GI issues and inflammation has improved immensely... some will say it was the fasting, others will say it was the weight loss....either way, I will take it!
The only part fasting played into your scenario was that you lost weight because of it. The fasting - in and of itself - did not afford you any extra benefits. It created a calorie deficit for you which, in turn, facilitated the weight loss. My point was that the same results can also be achieved through *any* method that restricts calories, which isn't limited solely to fasting.
Getting into a healthy weight range by whatever method one chooses can only be accomplished through a reduction in caloric intake. And improved health markers such as you have experienced are the most common (and most awesome!) side effects of doing so. But it is a direct result of having lost the weight rather than the method chosen to do so.
You are going way beyond the oft-espoused view on MFP threads that "Fasting doesn't contribute anything to weight loss beyond helping some people eat less calories", and taking a position that fasting literally has no benefits at all, for weight loss or anything else, aside from helping some people eat less.
You're entitled to your view, but many, including many doctors, would strongly disagree.
Personally, I agree with the poster you quoted point of view. I have read a lot of research on IF including a meta analyses that show, at this date, no benefit beyond a tool for calorie control. There have been some studies in mice that indicate some additional benefits but have not been proven in humans to date. And mice studies, while being helpful at pointing out directions for future research, fail in humans about 80% of the time. There is some corollary indication that IF helps with insulin sensitivity. To date, that is pretty much it.
If you have any quality research you have come across that shows benefits beyond calorie control, please post it. I would love to see it. But, a caution, I would not use doctor's as a proof source for anything regarding nutrition. They have very little training in nutrition generally and are as susceptible to misinformation and trendy woo as anyone. Below is a meta analysis of IF that is interesting.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4924195/
From the conclusions (CER is continuous energy restriction, IER is intermittent energy restriction)This review confirms that in the little long term evidence available, IER achieves weight loss but there was no evidence that it provided superior management in comparison to CER.
So, what benefits exactly are you claiming the poster you quoted is ignoring?4 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »hobbitses333 wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »hobbitses333 wrote: »18:6 MOST days. Now 70 lbs down...I have been obese all my adult life, tried and failed SOOO many diets. I have lost more than ever since discovering IF and it is staying off. 19 months in....still have more to lose. With this tool I can excitedly say this will be the year I reach 100 lbs lost.
It really has changed my relationship with food. I enjoy it now instead of hating it. I can easily turn down sub par food and "goodies". It's not worth the calories. Once I got used to fasting different lengths of time (14 to 20, to a very occasional 72 hour fast) I can control when I eat. Sometimes I am busy and just have time for some water and I can eat enough later...no problem. Sometimes I am around a lot of food for a period of time (camping, weddings, trips to see family) and I eat a bit more and gain a few lbs....no problem. It just comes off again pretty quickly once I get back to it. It has really helped me take a lot of anxiety around eating out of my life.
Health markers, GI issues and inflammation has improved immensely... some will say it was the fasting, others will say it was the weight loss....either way, I will take it!
Intermittent Fasting - in and of itself - will have had little or nothing to do with your improved health and everything to do with the fact that you have lost the weight. Kudos to you for that!
But know that you would likely have experienced the same improvements had you successfully used any other method of calorie reduction. There's no magic or special benefits to IF - it's just another method that some people find helps them reduce their caloric intake to lose weight.
For the record, I've been doing IF for four decades. Long before it was a 'thing' or even had a fancy name. I've just never been a breakfast person. Give me a cup of coffee and I'm good until noon!
Over that time, I gained weight, maintained weight and lost weight eating in this same pattern, because weight management really *is* all about the amount of calories consumed, and nothing at all to do with when they're consumed.
Okay so what you are really saying in a nutshell is you think it was because of the weight loss. I dont disagree with it and never said I did either.
Didn't say you did.
I was responding to what I had bolded from your previous post, namely:Health markers, GI issues and inflammation has improved immensely... some will say it was the fasting, others will say it was the weight loss....either way, I will take it!
The only part fasting played into your scenario was that you lost weight because of it. The fasting - in and of itself - did not afford you any extra benefits. It created a calorie deficit for you which, in turn, facilitated the weight loss. My point was that the same results can also be achieved through *any* method that restricts calories, which isn't limited solely to fasting.
Getting into a healthy weight range by whatever method one chooses can only be accomplished through a reduction in caloric intake. And improved health markers such as you have experienced are the most common (and most awesome!) side effects of doing so. But it is a direct result of having lost the weight rather than the method chosen to do so.
You are going way beyond the oft-espoused view on MFP threads that "Fasting doesn't contribute anything to weight loss beyond helping some people eat less calories", and taking a position that fasting literally has no benefits at all, for weight loss or anything else, aside from helping some people eat less.
You're entitled to your view, but many, including many doctors, would strongly disagree.
Confused as to where I said (or implied) that fasting doesn't have benefits at all? I clearly said that it *does* help some people reduce their caloric intake and lose weight. I also know that fasting is done for religious purposes, for example. But my post was in reference to weight reduction only and, as such, to my knowledge, there has been zero human-relevant scientific evidence that IF somehow increases the rate of loss over-and-above what an identical calorie deficit using a method other than IF would produce.4 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »hobbitses333 wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »hobbitses333 wrote: »18:6 MOST days. Now 70 lbs down...I have been obese all my adult life, tried and failed SOOO many diets. I have lost more than ever since discovering IF and it is staying off. 19 months in....still have more to lose. With this tool I can excitedly say this will be the year I reach 100 lbs lost.
It really has changed my relationship with food. I enjoy it now instead of hating it. I can easily turn down sub par food and "goodies". It's not worth the calories. Once I got used to fasting different lengths of time (14 to 20, to a very occasional 72 hour fast) I can control when I eat. Sometimes I am busy and just have time for some water and I can eat enough later...no problem. Sometimes I am around a lot of food for a period of time (camping, weddings, trips to see family) and I eat a bit more and gain a few lbs....no problem. It just comes off again pretty quickly once I get back to it. It has really helped me take a lot of anxiety around eating out of my life.
Health markers, GI issues and inflammation has improved immensely... some will say it was the fasting, others will say it was the weight loss....either way, I will take it!
Intermittent Fasting - in and of itself - will have had little or nothing to do with your improved health and everything to do with the fact that you have lost the weight. Kudos to you for that!
But know that you would likely have experienced the same improvements had you successfully used any other method of calorie reduction. There's no magic or special benefits to IF - it's just another method that some people find helps them reduce their caloric intake to lose weight.
For the record, I've been doing IF for four decades. Long before it was a 'thing' or even had a fancy name. I've just never been a breakfast person. Give me a cup of coffee and I'm good until noon!
Over that time, I gained weight, maintained weight and lost weight eating in this same pattern, because weight management really *is* all about the amount of calories consumed, and nothing at all to do with when they're consumed.
Okay so what you are really saying in a nutshell is you think it was because of the weight loss. I dont disagree with it and never said I did either.
Didn't say you did.
I was responding to what I had bolded from your previous post, namely:Health markers, GI issues and inflammation has improved immensely... some will say it was the fasting, others will say it was the weight loss....either way, I will take it!
The only part fasting played into your scenario was that you lost weight because of it. The fasting - in and of itself - did not afford you any extra benefits. It created a calorie deficit for you which, in turn, facilitated the weight loss. My point was that the same results can also be achieved through *any* method that restricts calories, which isn't limited solely to fasting.
Getting into a healthy weight range by whatever method one chooses can only be accomplished through a reduction in caloric intake. And improved health markers such as you have experienced are the most common (and most awesome!) side effects of doing so. But it is a direct result of having lost the weight rather than the method chosen to do so.
You are going way beyond the oft-espoused view on MFP threads that "Fasting doesn't contribute anything to weight loss beyond helping some people eat less calories", and taking a position that fasting literally has no benefits at all, for weight loss or anything else, aside from helping some people eat less.
You're entitled to your view, but many, including many doctors, would strongly disagree.
Confused as to where I said (or implied) that fasting doesn't have benefits at all. I do know that fasting is done for religious purposes, for example. My post was in reference to weight reduction only and, as such, there has been zero evidence that IF somehow increases the rate of loss over-and-above what an identical calorie deficit using a method other than IF would produce.
I agree there's little compelling evidence that IF produces more weight loss than the same calories eaten in another way. But when you get to inflammation, GI issues, and some health markers like fasting glucose and other indicators of metabolic syndrome - that's another thing, which, as I read it, was the point you were responding to.
My doc recommended IF not for weight loss but for fasting glucose, BP and assorted other things, and they improved immediately, waaaaaay before I put serious weight loss on the board. Exactly as he said they would. On days when I'm not doing IF, my BP is 10-12 points higher at bedtime and my pulse is anywhere from 5-20 points faster. You've got to think all that extra internal pounding adds up to something over time and that not making the body work so hard to digest food all the time and at night has benefits.
I am in @hobbitses333 's camp: whatever is causing the weight loss with my IF regimen, I'm happy with it, and if it's 100 % calories, so be it, as is probably the case -- no problem with that but there are other benefits to IF besides making weight loss via calorie control easier.5 -
My doc recommended IF not for weight loss but for fasting glucose, BP and assorted other things, and they improved immediately, waaaaaay before I put serious weight loss on the board. Exactly as he said they would. On days when I'm not doing IF, my BP is 10-12 points higher at bedtime and my pulse is anywhere from 5-20 points faster. You've got to think all that extra internal pounding adds up to something over time and that not making the body work so hard to digest food all the time and at night has benefits.
This idea that your body works less hard to digest food when fasting doesn't make a lot of sense in that you are eating the same amount of food. It takes less time to digest smaller meals than larger and, of course, aspects of the digestion process take quite a long time, so will be occurring during one's fasting period.
I do think there's some shown benefit if one has issues with IR, but my reading indicates that if one cares about those benefits they seem to come more from eating earlier than longer windows (same with digestion), and yet the vast majority of those claiming that their way of eating is better than other people's due to IFing are eating later in the day. (I also think if someone goes from an uncontrolled diet to a controlled one, which typically happens when IF is combined with intentional weight loss, there are all kinds of reasons quick improvements might happen.)
I also understand that for you it helped with not snacking late into the evening (which for some does create digestion issues and sleep issues, as well as often excess cals), but many who have specific problems with excess snacking (in the evening or otherwise) find it just as easy to control (or more so) by eating only at mealtimes. For example, I stopped snacking by, well, deciding I would not snack. During most of my weight loss I was eating at 6, noon, and 9, but likely spent the same amount of total time eating and not eating as anyone else who ate the same amount of food, whatever the pattern. I am currently experimenting with TRE where I don't eat later than 5 most days (I start eating a bit later on days where I go out, but because I eat before the theater or symphony on those days I stop eating at 7 anyway). I am currently liking this, in particular not eating so close to bed as I do think my sleep is better and I also go to bed earlier, but I haven't noticed any other benefits (weight loss is no easier -- it was very easy with my prior schedule and I only have vanity weight now -- and I have never had blood pressure or IR issues anyway). I find it quite easy to skip breakfast (but for my desire to workout in the morning), but nothing I've read suggests that it would have been generally accepted to improve my health were I to stop eating my breakfast and lunch (which were about 2/3 of my cals) and instead move those cals to closer in time to when I was eating dinner. For someone for whom that's an easier schedule, great, but to claim one should do that no matter what because it's inherently healthier goes way beyond what anyone currently can say and also is contradicted by other studies (of which I am also skeptical) that having more cals earlier in the day can be beneficial.4 -
What, like Fung? Fung will say absolute tripe like fasting prevents loose skin from massive weight loss. I mean, he's a doctor and disagrees with the idea of IF having no benefits above a deficit.snickerscharlie wrote: »hobbitses333 wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »hobbitses333 wrote: »18:6 MOST days. Now 70 lbs down...I have been obese all my adult life, tried and failed SOOO many diets. I have lost more than ever since discovering IF and it is staying off. 19 months in....still have more to lose. With this tool I can excitedly say this will be the year I reach 100 lbs lost.
It really has changed my relationship with food. I enjoy it now instead of hating it. I can easily turn down sub par food and "goodies". It's not worth the calories. Once I got used to fasting different lengths of time (14 to 20, to a very occasional 72 hour fast) I can control when I eat. Sometimes I am busy and just have time for some water and I can eat enough later...no problem. Sometimes I am around a lot of food for a period of time (camping, weddings, trips to see family) and I eat a bit more and gain a few lbs....no problem. It just comes off again pretty quickly once I get back to it. It has really helped me take a lot of anxiety around eating out of my life.
Health markers, GI issues and inflammation has improved immensely... some will say it was the fasting, others will say it was the weight loss....either way, I will take it!
Intermittent Fasting - in and of itself - will have had little or nothing to do with your improved health and everything to do with the fact that you have lost the weight. Kudos to you for that!
But know that you would likely have experienced the same improvements had you successfully used any other method of calorie reduction. There's no magic or special benefits to IF - it's just another method that some people find helps them reduce their caloric intake to lose weight.
For the record, I've been doing IF for four decades. Long before it was a 'thing' or even had a fancy name. I've just never been a breakfast person. Give me a cup of coffee and I'm good until noon!
Over that time, I gained weight, maintained weight and lost weight eating in this same pattern, because weight management really *is* all about the amount of calories consumed, and nothing at all to do with when they're consumed.
Okay so what you are really saying in a nutshell is you think it was because of the weight loss. I dont disagree with it and never said I did either.
Didn't say you did.
I was responding to what I had bolded from your previous post, namely:Health markers, GI issues and inflammation has improved immensely... some will say it was the fasting, others will say it was the weight loss....either way, I will take it!
The only part fasting played into your scenario was that you lost weight because of it. The fasting - in and of itself - did not afford you any extra benefits. It created a calorie deficit for you which, in turn, facilitated the weight loss. My point was that the same results can also be achieved through *any* method that restricts calories, which isn't limited solely to fasting.
Getting into a healthy weight range by whatever method one chooses can only be accomplished through a reduction in caloric intake. And improved health markers such as you have experienced are the most common (and most awesome!) side effects of doing so. But it is a direct result of having lost the weight rather than the method chosen to do so.
You are going way beyond the oft-espoused view on MFP threads that "Fasting doesn't contribute anything to weight loss beyond helping some people eat less calories", and taking a position that fasting literally has no benefits at all, for weight loss or anything else, aside from helping some people eat less.
You're entitled to your view, but many, including many doctors, would strongly disagree.
Oh, he also says skeptics have no reason to criticize Paltrow's Goop for selling jade eggs - literally said there's no study on jade eggs, so skeptics are excessive in saying it is wrong to use them. Not exactly a stellar case for why doctors should be listened to about diet or how to use scientific reasoning.5 -
My doc recommended IF not for weight loss but for fasting glucose, BP and assorted other things, and they improved immediately, waaaaaay before I put serious weight loss on the board. Exactly as he said they would. On days when I'm not doing IF, my BP is 10-12 points higher at bedtime and my pulse is anywhere from 5-20 points faster. You've got to think all that extra internal pounding adds up to something over time and that not making the body work so hard to digest food all the time and at night has benefits.
This idea that your body works less hard to digest food when fasting doesn't make a lot of sense in that you are eating the same amount of food. It takes less time to digest smaller meals than larger and, of course, aspects of the digestion process take quite a long time, so will be occurring during one's fasting period.
I do think there's some shown benefit if one has issues with IR, but my reading indicates that if one cares about those benefits they seem to come more from eating earlier than longer windows (same with digestion), and yet the vast majority of those claiming that their way of eating is better than other people's due to IFing are eating later in the day. (I also think if someone goes from an uncontrolled diet to a controlled one, which typically happens when IF is combined with intentional weight loss, there are all kinds of reasons quick improvements might happen.)
I also understand that for you it helped with not snacking late into the evening (which for some does create digestion issues and sleep issues, as well as often excess cals), but many who have specific problems with excess snacking (in the evening or otherwise) find it just as easy to control (or more so) by eating only at mealtimes. For example, I stopped snacking by, well, deciding I would not snack. During most of my weight loss I was eating at 6, noon, and 9, but likely spent the same amount of total time eating and not eating as anyone else who ate the same amount of food, whatever the pattern. I am currently experimenting with TRE where I don't eat later than 5 most days (I start eating a bit later on days where I go out, but because I eat before the theater or symphony on those days I stop eating at 7 anyway). I am currently liking this, in particular not eating so close to bed as I do think my sleep is better and I also go to bed earlier, but I haven't noticed any other benefits (weight loss is no easier -- it was very easy with my prior schedule and I only have vanity weight now -- and I have never had blood pressure or IR issues anyway). I find it quite easy to skip breakfast (but for my desire to workout in the morning), but nothing I've read suggests that it would have been generally accepted to improve my health were I to stop eating my breakfast and lunch (which were about 2/3 of my cals) and instead move those cals to closer in time to when I was eating dinner. For someone for whom that's an easier schedule, great, but to claim one should do that no matter what because it's inherently healthier goes way beyond what anyone currently can say and also is contradicted by other studies (of which I am also skeptical) that having more cals earlier in the day can be beneficial.
Maybe fasting is like using pulleys? Less force needed. Oh wait, work stays the same. 2 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »hobbitses333 wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »hobbitses333 wrote: »18:6 MOST days. Now 70 lbs down...I have been obese all my adult life, tried and failed SOOO many diets. I have lost more than ever since discovering IF and it is staying off. 19 months in....still have more to lose. With this tool I can excitedly say this will be the year I reach 100 lbs lost.
It really has changed my relationship with food. I enjoy it now instead of hating it. I can easily turn down sub par food and "goodies". It's not worth the calories. Once I got used to fasting different lengths of time (14 to 20, to a very occasional 72 hour fast) I can control when I eat. Sometimes I am busy and just have time for some water and I can eat enough later...no problem. Sometimes I am around a lot of food for a period of time (camping, weddings, trips to see family) and I eat a bit more and gain a few lbs....no problem. It just comes off again pretty quickly once I get back to it. It has really helped me take a lot of anxiety around eating out of my life.
Health markers, GI issues and inflammation has improved immensely... some will say it was the fasting, others will say it was the weight loss....either way, I will take it!
Intermittent Fasting - in and of itself - will have had little or nothing to do with your improved health and everything to do with the fact that you have lost the weight. Kudos to you for that!
But know that you would likely have experienced the same improvements had you successfully used any other method of calorie reduction. There's no magic or special benefits to IF - it's just another method that some people find helps them reduce their caloric intake to lose weight.
For the record, I've been doing IF for four decades. Long before it was a 'thing' or even had a fancy name. I've just never been a breakfast person. Give me a cup of coffee and I'm good until noon!
Over that time, I gained weight, maintained weight and lost weight eating in this same pattern, because weight management really *is* all about the amount of calories consumed, and nothing at all to do with when they're consumed.
Okay so what you are really saying in a nutshell is you think it was because of the weight loss. I dont disagree with it and never said I did either.
Didn't say you did.
I was responding to what I had bolded from your previous post, namely:Health markers, GI issues and inflammation has improved immensely... some will say it was the fasting, others will say it was the weight loss....either way, I will take it!
The only part fasting played into your scenario was that you lost weight because of it. The fasting - in and of itself - did not afford you any extra benefits. It created a calorie deficit for you which, in turn, facilitated the weight loss. My point was that the same results can also be achieved through *any* method that restricts calories, which isn't limited solely to fasting.
Getting into a healthy weight range by whatever method one chooses can only be accomplished through a reduction in caloric intake. And improved health markers such as you have experienced are the most common (and most awesome!) side effects of doing so. But it is a direct result of having lost the weight rather than the method chosen to do so.
You are going way beyond the oft-espoused view on MFP threads that "Fasting doesn't contribute anything to weight loss beyond helping some people eat less calories", and taking a position that fasting literally has no benefits at all, for weight loss or anything else, aside from helping some people eat less.
You're entitled to your view, but many, including many doctors, would strongly disagree.
Confused as to where I said (or implied) that fasting doesn't have benefits at all. I do know that fasting is done for religious purposes, for example. My post was in reference to weight reduction only and, as such, there has been zero evidence that IF somehow increases the rate of loss over-and-above what an identical calorie deficit using a method other than IF would produce.
I agree there's little compelling evidence that IF produces more weight loss than the same calories eaten in another way. But when you get to inflammation, GI issues, and some health markers like fasting glucose and other indicators of metabolic syndrome - that's another thing, which, as I read it, was the point you were responding to.
My doc recommended IF not for weight loss but for fasting glucose, BP and assorted other things, and they improved immediately, waaaaaay before I put serious weight loss on the board. Exactly as he said they would. On days when I'm not doing IF, my BP is 10-12 points higher at bedtime and my pulse is anywhere from 5-20 points faster. You've got to think all that extra internal pounding adds up to something over time and that not making the body work so hard to digest food all the time and at night has benefits.
I am in @hobbitses333 's camp: whatever is causing the weight loss with my IF regimen, I'm happy with it, and if it's 100 % calories, so be it, as is probably the case -- no problem with that but there are other benefits to IF besides making weight loss via calorie control easier.
I stated above that there is some corollary evidence for improvement of insulin sensitivity and that would translate into improved BG. My n=1 is similar in that my BG numbers, both fasting and BG and the even more important maker, A1c both improved after starting IF and have remained good for 5 years. I also lost 25 more lbs over the next 2 years. So, I'm sure that was a major factor in keeping those numbers good.
But when you get into the rationale re: the bolded above, I think you are headed solidly into woo territory. I've never seen any evidence to back up the idea of the body over working or needing rest from digestion processes.
You keep referencing these "other benefits". Are you talking about the link to improved BG and insulin sensitivity? If not, what are these "other benefits" you speak of?2 -
I am not sure if there will ever be further benefits proven in humans beyond what we know already. I am not even sure I want them to find more because the thought that comes to mind is what has benefits for some may have negatives for some as well.1
-
snickerscharlie wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »hobbitses333 wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »hobbitses333 wrote: »18:6 MOST days. Now 70 lbs down...I have been obese all my adult life, tried and failed SOOO many diets. I have lost more than ever since discovering IF and it is staying off. 19 months in....still have more to lose. With this tool I can excitedly say this will be the year I reach 100 lbs lost.
It really has changed my relationship with food. I enjoy it now instead of hating it. I can easily turn down sub par food and "goodies". It's not worth the calories. Once I got used to fasting different lengths of time (14 to 20, to a very occasional 72 hour fast) I can control when I eat. Sometimes I am busy and just have time for some water and I can eat enough later...no problem. Sometimes I am around a lot of food for a period of time (camping, weddings, trips to see family) and I eat a bit more and gain a few lbs....no problem. It just comes off again pretty quickly once I get back to it. It has really helped me take a lot of anxiety around eating out of my life.
Health markers, GI issues and inflammation has improved immensely... some will say it was the fasting, others will say it was the weight loss....either way, I will take it!
Intermittent Fasting - in and of itself - will have had little or nothing to do with your improved health and everything to do with the fact that you have lost the weight. Kudos to you for that!
But know that you would likely have experienced the same improvements had you successfully used any other method of calorie reduction. There's no magic or special benefits to IF - it's just another method that some people find helps them reduce their caloric intake to lose weight.
For the record, I've been doing IF for four decades. Long before it was a 'thing' or even had a fancy name. I've just never been a breakfast person. Give me a cup of coffee and I'm good until noon!
Over that time, I gained weight, maintained weight and lost weight eating in this same pattern, because weight management really *is* all about the amount of calories consumed, and nothing at all to do with when they're consumed.
Okay so what you are really saying in a nutshell is you think it was because of the weight loss. I dont disagree with it and never said I did either.
Didn't say you did.
I was responding to what I had bolded from your previous post, namely:Health markers, GI issues and inflammation has improved immensely... some will say it was the fasting, others will say it was the weight loss....either way, I will take it!
The only part fasting played into your scenario was that you lost weight because of it. The fasting - in and of itself - did not afford you any extra benefits. It created a calorie deficit for you which, in turn, facilitated the weight loss. My point was that the same results can also be achieved through *any* method that restricts calories, which isn't limited solely to fasting.
Getting into a healthy weight range by whatever method one chooses can only be accomplished through a reduction in caloric intake. And improved health markers such as you have experienced are the most common (and most awesome!) side effects of doing so. But it is a direct result of having lost the weight rather than the method chosen to do so.
You are going way beyond the oft-espoused view on MFP threads that "Fasting doesn't contribute anything to weight loss beyond helping some people eat less calories", and taking a position that fasting literally has no benefits at all, for weight loss or anything else, aside from helping some people eat less.
You're entitled to your view, but many, including many doctors, would strongly disagree.
Confused as to where I said (or implied) that fasting doesn't have benefits at all. I do know that fasting is done for religious purposes, for example. My post was in reference to weight reduction only and, as such, there has been zero evidence that IF somehow increases the rate of loss over-and-above what an identical calorie deficit using a method other than IF would produce.
I agree there's little compelling evidence that IF produces more weight loss than the same calories eaten in another way. But when you get to inflammation, GI issues, and some health markers like fasting glucose and other indicators of metabolic syndrome - that's another thing, which, as I read it, was the point you were responding to.
My doc recommended IF not for weight loss but for fasting glucose, BP and assorted other things, and they improved immediately, waaaaaay before I put serious weight loss on the board. Exactly as he said they would. On days when I'm not doing IF, my BP is 10-12 points higher at bedtime and my pulse is anywhere from 5-20 points faster. You've got to think all that extra internal pounding adds up to something over time and that not making the body work so hard to digest food all the time and at night has benefits.
I am in @hobbitses333 's camp: whatever is causing the weight loss with my IF regimen, I'm happy with it, and if it's 100 % calories, so be it, as is probably the case -- no problem with that but there are other benefits to IF besides making weight loss via calorie control easier.
I stated above that there is some corollary evidence for improvement of insulin sensitivity and that would translate into improved BG. My n=1 is similar in that my BG numbers, both fasting and BG and the even more important maker, A1c both improved after starting IF and have remained good for 5 years. I also lost 25 more lbs over the next 2 years. So, I'm sure that was a major factor in keeping those numbers good.
But when you get into the rationale re: the bolded above, I think you are headed solidly into woo territory. I've never seen any evidence to back up the idea of the body over working or needing rest from digestion processes.
You keep referencing these "other benefits". Are you talking about the link to improved BG and insulin sensitivity? If not, what are these "other benefits" you speak of?
The part you bolded was the last sentence in a paragraph noting that on days when I do IF my blood pressure and pulse readings at night are lower than otherwise. Try it for yourself - BP & pulse measurement - take them at night on both IF and non-IF days a few times and compare the numbers. You might be in for a pleasant surprise. 128/80 vs 118/76 for me, on my most recent IF and non-IF day.
Improvement in insulin sensitivity is well worth the ticket to the IF dance for anyone with creeping BG / A1C. To me that is the key "other benefit".
My acid reflux disappeared the day I started IF and the only time it returned was after a three day trip in which I wasn't doing IF at all. It went away as soon as I got back on the IF train. My GI tract seems to really like IF. Many people have experienced similar GI results, according to the various boards out there, and improvement with IBS.
These are the other benefits of which I speak. I'd be content with just the obvious main benefit of calorie discipline; these are nice extras.3 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »
What, like Fung? Fung will say absolute tripe like fasting prevents loose skin from massive weight loss. I mean, he's a doctor and disagrees with the idea of IF having no benefits above a deficit.snickerscharlie wrote: »hobbitses333 wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »hobbitses333 wrote: »18:6 MOST days. Now 70 lbs down...I have been obese all my adult life, tried and failed SOOO many diets. I have lost more than ever since discovering IF and it is staying off. 19 months in....still have more to lose. With this tool I can excitedly say this will be the year I reach 100 lbs lost.
It really has changed my relationship with food. I enjoy it now instead of hating it. I can easily turn down sub par food and "goodies". It's not worth the calories. Once I got used to fasting different lengths of time (14 to 20, to a very occasional 72 hour fast) I can control when I eat. Sometimes I am busy and just have time for some water and I can eat enough later...no problem. Sometimes I am around a lot of food for a period of time (camping, weddings, trips to see family) and I eat a bit more and gain a few lbs....no problem. It just comes off again pretty quickly once I get back to it. It has really helped me take a lot of anxiety around eating out of my life.
Health markers, GI issues and inflammation has improved immensely... some will say it was the fasting, others will say it was the weight loss....either way, I will take it!
Intermittent Fasting - in and of itself - will have had little or nothing to do with your improved health and everything to do with the fact that you have lost the weight. Kudos to you for that!
But know that you would likely have experienced the same improvements had you successfully used any other method of calorie reduction. There's no magic or special benefits to IF - it's just another method that some people find helps them reduce their caloric intake to lose weight.
For the record, I've been doing IF for four decades. Long before it was a 'thing' or even had a fancy name. I've just never been a breakfast person. Give me a cup of coffee and I'm good until noon!
Over that time, I gained weight, maintained weight and lost weight eating in this same pattern, because weight management really *is* all about the amount of calories consumed, and nothing at all to do with when they're consumed.
Okay so what you are really saying in a nutshell is you think it was because of the weight loss. I dont disagree with it and never said I did either.
Didn't say you did.
I was responding to what I had bolded from your previous post, namely:Health markers, GI issues and inflammation has improved immensely... some will say it was the fasting, others will say it was the weight loss....either way, I will take it!
The only part fasting played into your scenario was that you lost weight because of it. The fasting - in and of itself - did not afford you any extra benefits. It created a calorie deficit for you which, in turn, facilitated the weight loss. My point was that the same results can also be achieved through *any* method that restricts calories, which isn't limited solely to fasting.
Getting into a healthy weight range by whatever method one chooses can only be accomplished through a reduction in caloric intake. And improved health markers such as you have experienced are the most common (and most awesome!) side effects of doing so. But it is a direct result of having lost the weight rather than the method chosen to do so.
You are going way beyond the oft-espoused view on MFP threads that "Fasting doesn't contribute anything to weight loss beyond helping some people eat less calories", and taking a position that fasting literally has no benefits at all, for weight loss or anything else, aside from helping some people eat less.
You're entitled to your view, but many, including many doctors, would strongly disagree.
Oh, he also says skeptics have no reason to criticize Paltrow's Goop for selling jade eggs - literally said there's no study on jade eggs, so skeptics are excessive in saying it is wrong to use them. Not exactly a stellar case for why doctors should be listened to about diet or how to use scientific reasoning.
1. Fung is a quack
2. Fung is a doctor
Therefore 3, All doctors are quacks?
I looked up Paltrow's jade egg thing and wish I hadn't
2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.2K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 422 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions