Is Fasting ok?

wowisforstuds1238
wowisforstuds1238 Posts: 77 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
I am really hoping someone can clarify something for me. I care about hitting my macros everyday, but at the same time there are days I just am not hungry. Is it ok not to eat and not reach my macros during those days when I don’t feel like eating?
«1

Replies

  • MissBraeBee
    MissBraeBee Posts: 40 Member
    Well, I tried intermitent fasting before and I was told you have to eat at least your minimum calories(average male is around 1700 and female is 1200 I believe) just be careful about that, maybe if you arent really hungry, I would say try a liquid meal replacement or a protein shake? Hoping someone can answer better then me to make it more clear!
  • jennacole12
    jennacole12 Posts: 1,167 Member
    I guess it depends what your goals are, if they are to lose I think it is ok but I would make sure to at least hit my protein target. Also, if you do that every now and again figure out if it makes you eat over your macros on the subsequent days... if that is the case I would stick to my macro target +\- 5g.
  • wowisforstuds1238
    wowisforstuds1238 Posts: 77 Member
    Thanks. Yeah It doesn’t happen to me like ever, but I also don’t want to feel like I’m force feeding myself when I simply am not feeling hungry. I am just hoping if I don’t get my macros for today it’s not a big deal. I’m sure this will pass, I may be hungry tonight lol just so far today I haven’t felt hungry and didn’t want to eat. In regards to working out I agree, but I also just started back at the gym so my workouts aren’t really extreme. Just novice lifting and cardio every day.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 34,204 Member
    wowisforstuds1238 wrote: »
    Thanks. Yeah It doesn’t happen to me like ever, but I also don’t want to feel like I’m force feeding myself when I simply am not feeling hungry. I am just hoping if I don’t get my macros for today it’s not a big deal. I’m sure this will pass, I may be hungry tonight lol just so far today I haven’t felt hungry and didn’t want to eat. In regards to working out I agree, but I also just started back at the gym so my workouts aren’t really extreme. Just novice lifting and cardio every day.

    The rare lighter-eating day (light on both calories & macros) in response to reduced perceived reduced hunger? Not going to be a problem. (If it were me, I'd consider what might have triggered it, if anything: Could be useful to have a theory.)

    I think the thing for a person to watch out for would be getting a little jolt of reward if the scale is down next day (from fewer carbs/less sodium so a little less water retained, plus lower digestive contents), then letting that reward become a seduction to feel less hungry for more days, more often. I'm not suggesting that you, personally, are at any risk in that regard. I'm just suggesting generically that for someone who *was* at risk for dysfunctional eating behavior, that could be putting one toe on the slippery slope.

    No, I'm not saying that I think sensible planned fasting periods are "dysfunctional eating" within an overall pattern of adequate average calories (sensible weight loss rate) and overall adequate nutrition. That would be silly.

    BTW, I feel exactly the same way, even during weight loss, about having the rare day where one eats much more than usual, because of feeling more hungry than usually. That has the same slippery-slope potential, off the other side of the path: See limited consequences, start doing it more often . . . etc. Ditto for being under minimum macro goals on the rare day, at sensible calories. Nutrition is important, but bodies don't reset at midnight.

    Sensible nutrition/calories on an overall basis, as averaged over a short span of days, is fine.

  • Theo166
    Theo166 Posts: 2,564 Member
    wowisforstuds1238 wrote: »
    I am really hoping someone can clarify something for me. I care about hitting my macros everyday, but at the same time there are days I just am not hungry. Is it ok not to eat and not reach my macros during those days when I don’t feel like eating?

    It seems your question is about hitting macro targets, not fasting.

    This depends a bit on your personality. For me I'm ok with going under some days, and a bit over on other days. However, if you are missing a macro consistently, you should examine both your targets and your go-to daily foods.

    When I kept missing my protein target I read up, adjusted my macros, and added protein powder to my kitchen.
  • lgfrie
    lgfrie Posts: 1,449 Member
    Probably better to look at it in terms of calories than fasting. You should really try to eat all your calories each day. Or macros, if you prefer to look at it that way. One day of not being hungry and undereating won't kill you, but that shouldn't be habitual, because it isn't good for you. WHEN you eat the food is irrelevant as long as you're eating the food and getting proper nutrition. Eat it all at noon if you want. I eat between noon and 7:30 and that seems to be fine for me. I wouldn't worry about the schedule, but getting your proper nutrition and caloric intake is worth keep up with.
  • lemurcat2
    lemurcat2 Posts: 7,885 Member
    Basically like others have said -- if you occasionally aren't that hungry and eat below your cals, even very little, that's okay, although if you have a much larger weekly deficit than planned I would think twice about what is going on. If this is something that is a common occurrence, and you are regularly having days where you have no desire to eat anything, even if you have not planned them into your week (one day fasts over the course of a week is a version of IF, so something different), I would question what is going on. It doesn't seem healthy to just not want to eat anything for a whole day, such that I might question whether this is related to weight loss in some way (some idea in your head that it is better not to eat if you aren't feeling like you absolutely have to) or if there might be a health issue.
  • bubus05
    bubus05 Posts: 121 Member
    Highly debated subject. I am doing it myself once a week a 36 hour fast and for me it works wonders. I am pretty comfortable doing it but it took a while to get used to it, and I probably wouldn't recommend it to someone who has never done it. I count my calories on a weekly base more or less, and it definitely helps to keep the numbers down. On my feast days though I certainly make up for the lost macros and calories to be sure.
    Fasting is fine IMHO, but needs to be controlled, one has to understand the body's reaction. Before I started going the distance i did some massive research on the subject to learn, you have to know what you are doing otherwise it
    can get dangerous.
  • Poobah1972
    Poobah1972 Posts: 943 Member
    janejellyroll wrote: »
    Nobody here disagrees with fasting, the key is making sure that people are meeting their needs for nutrition and calories, that's all. Many people can do that while incorporating either some form of IF or longer fasts.

    The issue is that some people make claims for fasting that aren't supported by evidence and that some people advocate for using fasting in a potentially harmful way. Both of those will get called out (appropriately, IMO). But if someone is just using fasting because it makes them easier for them to hit a calorie goal or if they're fasting for spiritual/religious reasons . . . that's never an issue here.

    That may be so, but I got more disagree's then grains of salt in the shaker thus far. *It's all good* ;)
  • dragon_girl26
    dragon_girl26 Posts: 2,187 Member
    Poobah1972 wrote: »
    janejellyroll wrote: »
    Nobody here disagrees with fasting, the key is making sure that people are meeting their needs for nutrition and calories, that's all. Many people can do that while incorporating either some form of IF or longer fasts.

    The issue is that some people make claims for fasting that aren't supported by evidence and that some people advocate for using fasting in a potentially harmful way. Both of those will get called out (appropriately, IMO). But if someone is just using fasting because it makes them easier for them to hit a calorie goal or if they're fasting for spiritual/religious reasons . . . that's never an issue here.

    That may be so, but I got more disagree's then grains of salt in the shaker thus far. *It's all good* ;)

    I'm also guessing several of those disagrees came from folks who read the thread you created about this (I did not hit the disagree button, FTR)
  • mkculs13
    mkculs13 Posts: 679 Member
    I heard someone refer to "intermittent fasting" (IF) as meaning, you're just not stuffing your face all the time. That made me laugh but I tend to fast b/c that's the way I eat--morning coffee holds me for a long time; I'm just not hungry. Then I eat most of my calories, most days, within a relatively short window, like 6 to 8 hours. And I sometimes just forget to eat when working on something engaging, so my morning fast stretches out longer than usual. I get really hungry when I forget to eat, but I find that b/c I don't overeat anymore, my stomach is satisfied with a normal meal and I'm back on my usual pattern. I've been this way when thin and when overweight. I was doing it long before IF became a thing. I suspect that it is more natural, following the pattern of one's body signals--which works great if tempting foods are not around. I can't ignore tempting foods and now that my kids are out of the house, those foods are, too. If I really want something, I go buy a signal serving. And b/c I'm lazy, I often choose not to go b/c laziness trumps craving. My whole point in this long essay is, find what works for you. Keep the wisdom of others in mind and catch yourself if you start repeating their mistakes--or find yourself repeating your own. Good luck.
  • paperpudding
    paperpudding Posts: 9,281 Member
    dragon_girl26 wrote: »
    Poobah1972 wrote: »
    janejellyroll wrote: »
    Nobody here disagrees with fasting, the key is making sure that people are meeting their needs for nutrition and calories, that's all. Many people can do that while incorporating either some form of IF or longer fasts.

    The issue is that some people make claims for fasting that aren't supported by evidence and that some people advocate for using fasting in a potentially harmful way. Both of those will get called out (appropriately, IMO). But if someone is just using fasting because it makes them easier for them to hit a calorie goal or if they're fasting for spiritual/religious reasons . . . that's never an issue here.

    That may be so, but I got more disagree's then grains of salt in the shaker thus far. *It's all good* ;)

    I'm also guessing several of those disagrees came from folks who read the thread you created about this (I did not hit the disagree button, FTR)


    yes, that.

    or who disagreed on purpose in responce to provocative "I bet I get disagrees!" statement.

    I did not disagree here - but I will disagree with posts I feel give incorrect information or make unfounded claims or extrapolations (it works for me so everyone should do it! )

  • wowisforstuds1238
    wowisforstuds1238 Posts: 77 Member
    Thanks guys! Yeah I got my appetite back later that night, but I was just curious. I appreciate all you guys post and opinions. Very novice in my journey to regain my health here and just wanted to make sure that if I go 1 day here or there not feeling hungry that it’s not a big deal. What I didn’t want to do was feel like I’m having to force feed myself just to hit my macros when literally my body was telling me I wasnt hungry. That make sense? And in those times on those days I feel that way, I just needed to know I’m not the only one that gets like that sometimes.
  • lemurcat2
    lemurcat2 Posts: 7,885 Member
    Yeah, it's no big deal to eat under your cals or not to hit your macros once in a while. I read your initial post as if you were saying you weren't eating anything all day (fasting), because you just weren't hungry.
  • wowisforstuds1238
    wowisforstuds1238 Posts: 77 Member
    Yeah it was just for part of the day was all and Like I said I don’t think I hit my macros for that day and I was definitely calorie Deficient for that day. I ended up having to sub in some candies ( which I actually didn’t even eat) just to make my 1200 minimum calorie eaten a day just to be able to post my diary. I think everything is fine now. I started a new post to refresh thread if any of you want to comment on that as well.
  • wunderkindking
    wunderkindking Posts: 1,615 Member
    On the topic of appetite - I have, to my own surprise, gradually shifted to a one meal a day/IF sort of schedule. I'm not rigid, I'm not doing it on purpose as a strategy. I just now ONLY seem to get hungry at between 4 and 5 p.m. My calories are fine. I have never liked or wanted breakfast. I just seem to have gradually lost my desire for lunch.

    It is what it is.
  • wowisforstuds1238
    wowisforstuds1238 Posts: 77 Member
    As long as you hitting your daily caloric intake and trying to hit those macros. It doesn’t really matter when or what you do right?
  • thelastnightingale
    thelastnightingale Posts: 725 Member
    wowisforstuds1238 wrote: »
    As long as you hitting your daily caloric intake and trying to hit those macros. It doesn’t really matter when or what you do right?

    As long as the calories you consume are fewer than the calories you burn, you'll lose weight. To an extent, it doesn't matter when you eat them, but if, taking an extreme example, you eat all of your calories for the day in the morning you'll probably feel uncomfortably full and lethargic for the whole day then suddenly starving in the evening. So, I'd say it doesn't really matter, as long as you listen to your body (if you do listen, it will tell you when it's eaten too much and when it's really hungry).

    If you're doing any exercise, planning the timing of when you eat can also affect your workout. Everyone is different here - I know some people who need to fuel a few hours beforehand and others who would be sick if they did, and so plan to eat immediately afterwards.

    If you vary the timing of when you eat from day to day, to be blunt, the timing of your bowel movements is not going to be consistent, so this may make you think you've gained/lost more than you really have, depending on how often and when you weigh. You'll be able to track your progress over time anyway, trends will always reveal the real truth, but if you're the sort of person to get freaked out by an unexpected result, it's something to bear in mind.

    Hitting your macros isn't essential for weight loss (just the calories) but balancing those macros can make you feel more satisfied. Skimping on protein for example may be a bad idea if you struggle with feeling full and/or if you work out a lot.

    So... itsortofdoesntreallymatterwhenorwhatyoudo. But it sort of does too.
  • wowisforstuds1238
    wowisforstuds1238 Posts: 77 Member
    I thought the key to losing weight was staying under your BMR and being in a caloric deficit. 3500 calories= 1 pound of fat so theoretically if you went into a 500 deficit all week you could still lose a pound of fat without even having to exercise at all, not so much having to eat less then you burn? Can you clarify that statement in more detail plz?
  • lemurcat2
    lemurcat2 Posts: 7,885 Member
    edited February 2021
    wowisforstuds1238 wrote: »
    I thought the key to losing weight was staying under your BMR and being in a caloric deficit. 3500 calories= 1 pound of fat so theoretically if you went into a 500 deficit all week you could still lose a pound of fat without even having to exercise at all, not so much having to eat less then you burn? Can you clarify that statement in more detail plz?

    It's staying under your TDEE, not your BMR. (Your BMR is what you burn if perfectly still but for necessary bodily functions, as if in a coma. TDEE is the sum of all calories you actually burn in a day, regardless of how they are burnt.) But yeah, a 500 cal deficit from your TDEE over the course of a week = 1 lb loss (on average!) even without intentional exercise.

    When people say "eat less than you burn," they typically are referring to what your body burns from any source (exercise, other activity, digestion and bodily functions), not just exercise burn.
  • thelastnightingale
    thelastnightingale Posts: 725 Member
    When I talk about what you burn, I mean the calories you expend. You expend calories just from breathing, you don't need to exercise to burn calories (but you'd burn significantly more calories from going to the gym than simply sitting on the couch). To clarify, I mean you need to eat fewer calories than you use up in whatever activity you do (and even being in a coma counts as 'activity' for this purpose).

    I know they're not wholly accurate, but I use a fitness tracker to measure what I burn in a day, i.e. it tells me how many calories I use up on the days when I do nothing and the days when I'm more active. My calorie goal, therefore, is more dynamic - lazy Sundays like today don't net me any extra calories, but if I do a lot of movement, I 'earn' some additional calories from exercise and eat a bit bit more on those days.

    I have been a couch potato for the last 11 months and have still lost over 2 stone. Exercise is for health, strength and definition. Weight loss is all about what you eat. In an ideal world, you'd do both. Depends what your goals are, really.

    That 3,500 calories thing is just an estimate - take it with a pinch of salt.

    Personally, I think a 500 deficit is a good number to aim for because it is realistic and has a margin built in. I mean, if you aim for a 250 deficit, if you get some of your weighing a little bit wrong, you may well eat up to maintenance or worse, eat over. With a 500 deficit, even allowing for errors, you're likely to have some sort of deficit.

    A 750 deficit (which may be capped anyway if you're small enough/short enough) is just aggressive. The more aggressive a target, the harder it is to keep it up.
  • wowisforstuds1238
    wowisforstuds1238 Posts: 77 Member
    How do you determine your TDEE or whatever. I dont know, but let me give you my stats. I’m 38. 5’ 6” and I currently weigh 218. Don’t exactly know my BF% but my scale says 29%. But I don’t really know exactly

Categories