Intermittent Fasting Support Group?

I take Scivation Xtend Blue Raspberry, and in my humble opinion it tastes awesome, like drinking a Jolly Rancher or something. I've heard their watermelon flavor is good too, I'll probably try it next.

I purchased the Xtend "Apple" and I found it to be vile!! It was so sickeningly sweet...which is strange because I love sweets. I may just be being a wimp though because the others in my household insisted it wasn't that bad.

Has anyone tried a 36 hour fast ? and would you recommend it ?

Yes, I have done quite a few 36 hour fasts. It's little different from a 24 hour fast. I haven't ever quantified it with multiple trials or anything, but I feel like when I do a 36 hour fast I get a little bump in weight loss, as would make sense. My research has indicated that if anything, the longer you go the more your body will burn fat and less it will burn muscle, until such time as your body starts running out of available fat (literal starvation), at which point it has no choice but to burn a lot of muscle. I see no reason to recommend against a 36 hour fast, nor have I heard anyone specifically give a reason why you couldn't, except that it might be socially inconvenient to skip that many meals. The reason a lot of people do 16 or 19 or 24 hour fasts is for convenience. If you can handle 36 hours, more power to you. The only proviso might be if you already have a very low body fat percentage, then you might be flirting with a lot of muscle loss and shorter fasts would probably serve you better.

Brad Pilon's take on longer than 24 hour fasts is not that they are necessarily bad, but that the extra benefits are not necessarily worth the extra struggle some people have with that extra time fasting. That being said, there is extra benefit, but not as much more as the 18-24 hour stretch brings. In other words the longer the fast the less the extra returns after about the 24 hour point, but there are still additional benefits.

I have done both, but find sleeping while already having fasted for the whole day is difficult for me currently. I used to be able to do it, but currently cannot. Maybe in the future I will be able to again. If you can do it, all power to you as it won't hurt.

I purchased the Xtend "Apple" and I found it to be vile!! It was so sickeningly sweet...which is strange because I love sweets. I may just be being a wimp though because the others in my household insisted it wasn't that bad.

I find the Blue Raspberry so good I have occasionally been tempted to have some even when I'm not planning to work out that day, lol. I might be an extreme case...I am kind of a raspberry fiend.

I'm very interested in this IF stuff but haven't really been exposed to it much past this forum. Any suggestions for where I can do some reading/education? I dont really like jumping into things without knowing how its affecting my body. I like details.
Currently, I'm focused on keeping a calorie defecit but I've also focused on upping proteins and eating cleaner. I do plenty of cardio, but could probably up my weight training. I've had fairly steady weight loss over the last 2 months. About 3-4 lbs a month. But I'd really like to double that. I think, from my initial reading of all your posts, incorporating IF might help. What are the benefits of going 16/8 daily vice 24 hr fasts 1-2 times a week? Do they accomplish the same thing or does 1 work differently than the other? Again, I like educating myself so any webistes/books that you could point me to to do that would be appreciated. Thanks!

I'm very interested in this IF stuff but haven't really been exposed to it much past this forum. Any suggestions for where I can do some reading/education? I dont really like jumping into things without knowing how its affecting my body. I like details.
Currently, I'm focused on keeping a calorie defecit but I've also focused on upping proteins and eating cleaner. I do plenty of cardio, but could probably up my weight training. I've had fairly steady weight loss over the last 2 months. About 3-4 lbs a month. But I'd really like to double that. I think, from my initial reading of all your posts, incorporating IF might help. What are the benefits of going 16/8 daily vice 24 hr fasts 1-2 times a week? Do they accomplish the same thing or does 1 work differently than the other? Again, I like educating myself so any webistes/books that you could point me to to do that would be appreciated. Thanks!

Hey Nancy_hc

Check out this website: http://www.leangains.com/2010/04/leangains-guide.html

That is one very popular method of going about fasting which is 16/8 daily. Martin Berkhan, the proprietor of that site, has a very good reputation for being science-based, examining new research, that sort of thing. Lots you can learn from him.

This E-book is also good: http://www.eatstopeat.com/index6.shtml

It's 40 dollars, but if you are interested in the science behind fasting, and dispelling any worries or misconceptions you may have about it, this is probably the best, most easily digestible source you will find. I know it looks like a scam website, but a lot of people here have read it (including myself) and vouch for it. EatStopEat is a 24 hour fasting program 1-2 times/week.

Which is better is very debatable. They work on the same principles. ESE's benefit is that it is very flexible and minimalist, while Leangains has a lot of other corollary guidelines in its program as far as what to eat, when to workout, how to change what you eat in relation to when you work out, what kinds of exercises will benefit you most, etc. Leangains-style fasting can still be adapted however you like too, though, it just won't be strictly in line with what has worked for Martin and his clients.

Some people feel like the 16/8 schedule is easier because you basically just have to skip breakfast in the morning, which isn't that hard compared to the 24 hour schedule. However, your metabolism changes more in the 24 hour fast, and research has shown that your fat burning increases steeply between 18-24 hours. You miss some of that with a 16 hour fast, though if you look at Martin's clients, his method is clearly very effective regardless.

Kind of a toss up in my opinion. I'd just go with what works for you. I find longer fasts easy and convenient, so I use them and just take Martin's advice here and there where I can apply it. Sometimes I end up doing a Leangains-style fast when my coworkers really want to go out to lunch on a day I had planned to do a 24hr fast. It's whatever :P

Not entirely true. The site has guidelines for people who workout in the morning to prevent excessive catabolism. Gives very broad guidelines on some macros to shoot for. Martin likes to use RPT style lifting but it is definitely not the only method. As long as you focus on the big compound lifts and continual improvement (weight or reps) then that is fine.

The one thing I do like with LG over ESE is that after a week or so you are in a routine again and the crazy hunger levels don't happen in the morning. When I did the 24hr fasts, as they were so random it seems to be a big shock to the system ie. people listening to my stomach growling from other offices

Those are exactly the kind of guidelines I'm talking about, lol. Check the "Key Points" heading under the link I posted for more examples and schedules and such. By contrast, Brad has essentially no advice whatsoever about diet on feeding days other than the vague "Eat more fruits and vegetables, use spices instead of salt and sugar, and don't worry too much otherwise about what you eat. Eat normally and forget the fast happened" He also has little to no advice about workout timing, and practically none about workout content except that it be weight bearing/resistance exercise. I'm not saying that's better or worse than Martin, just pointing out the difference in approach. If you read some of his blog posts, it's clear that Martin is actually fairly rigid with his personal clients. It also quite apparently works, though.

I personally don't notice the shocks to my system you're talking about, but that may be because I started out doing every other day 24 hour fasts, and so got into a rhythm with that over several months before I stepped down to more infrequent fasts now. In fact, even now I am actually in a rhythm, I'm doing 2 feeding days to 1 fasting day, but I'm more flexible with moving the fasting day around sometimes if need be.

Brad Pilon's take on longer than 24 hour fasts is not that they are necessarily bad, but that the extra benefits are not necessarily worth the extra struggle some people have with that extra time fasting. That being said, there is extra benefit, but not as much more as the 18-24 hour stretch brings. In other words the longer the fast the less the extra returns after about the 24 hour point, but there are still additional benefits.

I have done both, but find sleeping while already having fasted for the whole day is difficult for me currently. I used to be able to do it, but currently cannot. Maybe in the future I will be able to again. If you can do it, all power to you as it won't hurt.

My understanding from his book was that the 18-24 hour period is the time of greatest *acceleration* of fat burning and muscle sparing benefits. From the graphs I've seen in the book, it appears that fat burning continues to accelerate after that time, so benefits should continue to increase, just not at as steep a rate as in the 18-24 hour period. The way I look at it is, I've spent 24 hours getting to this favorable hormonal state, may as well take advantage of it for as long as possible. I haven't seen anywhere that he argued that the benefits become less after 24 hours, only that it's less flexible/convenient and you may be more likely to burn out and give up. If anything, I've seen research that shows that up to about 72 hours, the body continues to trend toward maximum fat burning and muscle sparing, entering more and more into ketosis. At that point it levels out for the long haul until fat is almost entirely used up, at which point protein in muscle is sacrificed much more liberally.

For me, I have little to no difficulty pushing through to 36 hours (more frequently it's 32, actually, but 36 is no problem). My hunger does not increase the longer I go, it's pretty stable after a certain point. The only reason I don't more often is that I can't really work out on my fast day unless I cut it short at 24 hours so I can get a post-workout meal in me. I feel like I'm wasting the workout somewhat if I don't, since my aim currently is muscle building and not fat loss.

I did not say that they stopped, just that they increase was not necessarily worth it for the difficulty many would have fasting that long. The increases continue up to 72 hours for most and they the metabolism starts to slow at about that point. I didn't say it was not good, just that the return for the time goes down.

Wow, I've missed a lot.

I'm back to the ESE style.
LG was just not working out for me, with my varied exercise schedule & such.

weight loss is easy. Create a calorie deficit through diet (and preferably exercise)

Fat loss requires:
calorie deficit through diet and exercise
adequate protein (I aim for 1g/lb of BW minimum)
resistance training

These are to promote the preservation of lean body mass.

The above is the case for "normal" eating patter or IF.

haha no probs

Doing some low intensity cardio after weights is generally good for recovery also. Personally, I do my "cardio" on my off days as I enjoy just going for walks/runs down the beach (and mma training when I'm not injured!) But whatever fits your schedule really.

I didn't quite understand the timing of your meals though. I have no idea what time it is where you are