Current Events > Anyone try intermittent fasting?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Gonna try it out this week. 16 hours fasting and 8 hour feast period. Only thing that sucks ass is that I work early from 5AM-130 so my feast period will be 9AM-5 so I'm not totally drained at work.

The one thing that scares me is the one day you're supposed to do a 24 hour fast. Should I try one week or so of 16/8 before I incorporate that 24 hour one in?
---

No. Depending on body fat, you can go 40ish days or more without food before harm to your body sets in.

I go days without eating all the time. Helps reset my system.
---

I did the intermittent fasting diet for years before knowing it was even a thing. Otherwise known as the "skip breakfast and have a late lunch because you have a full time job" diet.

Works, but it's not magic. You just eat less calories and still enjoy satisfying dinners.
---

pres_madagascar posted...

No. Depending on body fat, you can go 40ish days or more without food before harm to your body sets in.

I go days without eating all the time. Helps reset my system.

I'm not that mentally/physically/spiritually hardened to go days without eating at a time so I wanna get started with this intermittent fasting
---

Oh god I read the topic title as "fisting".
---

__Fiale__ posted...

Oh god I read the topic title as "fisting".

xD y u do dis
---

pinky0926 posted...

I did the intermittent fasting diet for years before knowing it was even a thing. Otherwise known as the "skip breakfast and have a late lunch because you have a full time job" diet.

Works, but it's not magic. You just eat less calories and still enjoy satisfying dinners.

---

pinky0926 posted...

I did the intermittent fasting diet for years before knowing it was even a thing. Otherwise known as the "skip breakfast and have a late lunch because you have a full time job" diet.

Works, but it's not magic. You just eat less calories and still enjoy satisfying dinners.

Isn't that the worst way to do it? Having breakfast is better for losing weight.
---

LightHawKnight posted...

Isn't that the worst way to do it? Having breakfast is better for losing weight.

If you are an athlete and you need to tweak your diet and exercise plan to the ultimate minutia in order to squeeze out an extra 2% more optimal performance then yes, meal timing is an important consideration.

For the vast majority of people the overwhelmingly more important factor is whatever lifestyle you can keep up consistently, which is why intermittent fasting works so well. It's simply because it's very difficult to overeat when you only have one meal a day (or a small window of time in which to eat).

If you're eating throughout the day it's easier to slightly overshoot each meal and end up with a huge surplus by the end.
---

GOATTHlEF posted...

My doctor said it was a bad idea when I brought it up with him. Being more active and watching what you eat is a much better idea.
Unless you are NEET who never goes outside, it's going to cause you major energy issues mareep

False

I'm on day 8 of doing 16/8. Not trying to lose weight, just doing it for good health. It's pretty easy so far, though some mornings I feel more tired than usual. And I did some yard work over the weekend and it wore me out more than it should have.

I've read about autophagy which is supposed to be the best benefit of fasting. Sounds like you experience it a little bit during IF, but you need to fast 3-5 days to really experience autophagy. I don't think I'm that strong, especially since I don't have much body fat.
---

GOATTHlEF posted...

My doctor said it was a bad idea when I brought it up with him. Being more active and watching what you eat is a much better idea.
Unless you are NEET who never goes outside, it's going to cause you major energy issues mareep

It seems like doctors and nurses are against it because they didn't learn about it in school.
---

pinky0926 posted...

LightHawKnight posted...

Isn't that the worst way to do it? Having breakfast is better for losing weight.

If you are an athlete and you need to tweak your diet and exercise plan to the ultimate minutia in order to squeeze out an extra 2% more optimal performance then yes, meal timing is an important consideration.

For the vast majority of people the overwhelmingly more important factor is whatever lifestyle you can keep up consistently, which is why intermittent fasting works so well. It's simply because it's very difficult to overeat when you only have one meal a day (or a small window of time in which to eat).

If you're eating throughout the day it's easier to slightly overshoot each meal and end up with a huge surplus by the end.

But it is actually proven that you eat less during the day if you have breakfast.
---

The one thing that scares me is the one day you're supposed to do a 24 hour fast.

scares me

lol
---

LightHawKnight posted...

But it is actually proven that you eat less during the day if you have breakfast.

That varies from person to person. I for one, never eat breakfast. On the few occasions that I do, I don't eat any less at other meals.
---

EndOfDiscOne posted...

GOATTHlEF posted...

My doctor said it was a bad idea when I brought it up with him. Being more active and watching what you eat is a much better idea.
Unless you are NEET who never goes outside, it's going to cause you major energy issues mareep

It seems like doctors and nurses are against it because they didn't learn about it in school.

GPs and nurses have a lot of pressure - internal and external - to be the ultimate gurus on all things physiological, but there's frankly a lot they're not formally trained or experienced on. Diet plans being one of them.
---

LightHawKnight posted...

pinky0926 posted...

LightHawKnight posted...

Isn't that the worst way to do it? Having breakfast is better for losing weight.

If you are an athlete and you need to tweak your diet and exercise plan to the ultimate minutia in order to squeeze out an extra 2% more optimal performance then yes, meal timing is an important consideration.

For the vast majority of people the overwhelmingly more important factor is whatever lifestyle you can keep up consistently, which is why intermittent fasting works so well. It's simply because it's very difficult to overeat when you only have one meal a day (or a small window of time in which to eat).

If you're eating throughout the day it's easier to slightly overshoot each meal and end up with a huge surplus by the end.

But it is actually proven that you eat less during the day if you have breakfast.

That was a horrible study that observed eating habits of regular people, the type of person that skips breakfast is also the same type of person that gorges later in the day and stays up late at night snacking on doritos. The person with a good morning routine that preps a real, healthy breakfast is more likely to be healthier in general.

However if you take those healthy people and tell them to eat within an 8 hour window, you'll find that they will naturally eat less. There are plenty of studies with these guidelines that demonstrate this.

The layman that skips breakfast is typically a shittier eater but that correlation does not indicate causation.

LightHawKnight posted...

But it is actually proven that you eat less during the day if you have breakfast.

None of this is proven. Most of it works on poorly formed research on small data pools.

Mostly it appears to be variable on person. Just like how some people who take up exercise end up putting on weight (because they get exponentially more hungry and pursue food as a reward) whereas others lose weight because they feel more pressure to control their diet.

It's entirely variable. I for one 100% eat more if I eat more regularly. I simply can't do lots of small meals throughout the day. It's easier for me to ignore food entirely than it is to eat small amounts at a time.
---

I'm kinda skinny, I'd feel like crap if I fasted
---

I'm trying OMAD (One Meal A Day). Kinda like a step above intermittent fasting.
---

it depends on the person, its either harmful or beneficial.
---

Awesome posted...

it depends on the person, its either harmful or beneficial.

Big if true
---

FlyingForever posted...

Awesome posted...

it depends on the person, its either harmful or beneficial.

Big if true

yeah, its not even a case of trial and error because during the trial you can do big damage and dont even know it for years. its similar to going low/no carb, some people can just not tolerate a lack of carbs in the diet and need it to function healthily.
---

pinky0926 posted...

EndOfDiscOne posted...

GOATTHlEF posted...

My doctor said it was a bad idea when I brought it up with him. Being more active and watching what you eat is a much better idea.
Unless you are NEET who never goes outside, it's going to cause you major energy issues mareep

It seems like doctors and nurses are against it because they didn't learn about it in school.

GPs and nurses have a lot of pressure - internal and external - to be the ultimate gurus on all things physiological, but there's frankly a lot they're not formally trained or experienced on. Diet plans being one of them.

Eh. I dont make diet plans for patients, thats what dieticians are for. IMO weightloss and weight gain is still an in/out formula. I really dgaf how my patients lose weight when they need to lose weight but the bottom line is that regardless of how you choose to lose weight, you will never not be benefitted by being more physically active. Im hesitant to recommend diets where people are focusing solely on fasting/calories because i want them to be physically active as well.

I typically also dont recommend intermittent fasting to folks who are trying to cut weight while lifting/making gains because theoretically they would have higher cortisol levels, but from what Ive read the jury is still out how much actually that effects things
---

Awesome posted...

FlyingForever posted...

Awesome posted...

it depends on the person, its either harmful or beneficial.

Big if true

yeah, its not even a case of trial and error because during the trial you can do big damage and dont even know it for years. its similar to going low/no carb, some people can just not tolerate a lack of carbs in the diet and need it to function healthily.

You're not going to do any damage to your body because you didn't eat potatoes in the last 24 hours, lmao
---

Awesome posted...

yeah, its not even a case of trial and error because during the trial you can do big damage and dont even know it for years.

What sort of big damage can you do? I'm curious; I don't know much about this stuff.
---

EndOfDiscOne posted...

Awesome posted...

yeah, its not even a case of trial and error because during the trial you can do big damage and dont even know it for years.

What sort of big damage can you do? I'm curious; I don't know much about this stuff.

I think there's a perception that "intermittent fasting" is like fasting for ramadan or something, and not just restricting your eating window to a smaller amount of time during the day while still maintaining a consistent and balanced diet.

We're so gluttonous in the west that we've got to the point where people are entertaining the idea that not eating every 4 hours is dangerous. It's pretty funny.
---

EndOfDiscOne posted...

Awesome posted...

yeah, its not even a case of trial and error because during the trial you can do big damage and dont even know it for years.

What sort of big damage can you do? I'm curious; I don't know much about this stuff.

it can screw up your thyroid and liver function. fasting like low carb can lower your metabolism, but in some people where it works it can do the opposite.

the rule to follow is if you have any of stomach fat at all and arent completely ripped there then you have some signs of insulin resistance and you should lower your carb intake. its either fat there or you are retaining water which shows something is impaired in the body.
---

pinky0926 posted...

Awesome posted...

FlyingForever posted...

Awesome posted...

it depends on the person, its either harmful or beneficial.

Big if true

yeah, its not even a case of trial and error because during the trial you can do big damage and dont even know it for years. its similar to going low/no carb, some people can just not tolerate a lack of carbs in the diet and need it to function healthily.

You're not going to do any damage to your body because you didn't eat potatoes in the last 24 hours, lmao

im not even talking about it like that and you are laughing.
---

pinky0926 posted...

EndOfDiscOne posted...

Awesome posted...

yeah, its not even a case of trial and error because during the trial you can do big damage and dont even know it for years.

What sort of big damage can you do? I'm curious; I don't know much about this stuff.

I think there's a perception that "intermittent fasting" is like fasting for ramadan or something, and not just restricting your eating window to a smaller amount of time during the day while still maintaining a consistent and balanced diet.

We're so gluttonous in the west that we've got to the point where people are entertaining the idea that not eating every 4 hours is dangerous. It's pretty funny.

some people actually do need to eat every 2-3 hours to maintain their basic metabolic rate yes, nothing standard american diet about that. like some people have poor liver function naturally and dont store good amounts of glycogen.
---

GOATTHlEF posted...

My doctor said it was a bad idea when I brought it up with him. Being more active and watching what you eat is a much better idea.
Unless you are NEET who never goes outside, it's going to cause you major energy issues mareep

My boss does intermittent fasting and hes in amazing shape and doesnt have energy issues considering he does Spartan runs.
---

sktgamer_13dude posted...

GOATTHlEF posted...

My doctor said it was a bad idea when I brought it up with him. Being more active and watching what you eat is a much better idea.
Unless you are NEET who never goes outside, it's going to cause you major energy issues mareep

My boss does intermittent fasting and hes in amazing shape and doesnt have energy issues considering he does Spartan runs.

if you do intermittent fasting or low carb for long periods of time like 6 months to a year the only reason why the person can be feeling great is because they are running on adrenaline and cortisol. after that is where their health starts to fail unless they stop what they are doing.
---

Awesome posted...

some people actually do need to eat every 2-3 hours to maintain their basic metabolic rate yes, nothing standard american diet about that. like some people have poor liver function naturally and dont store good amounts of glycogen.

For the purposes of general discussion do we need to add the caveat *but some people are exceptions' every time?

Yes, some people can also eat 6000 calories a day just to maintain a slim appearance due to conditions like cystic fibrosis. I didn't think that was really relevant to the discussion of whether intermittent fasting is a bad idea.
---

instead of a fad diet, why not just actually count calories and set your macros? It will get you in shape faster than starving yourself for 16 hours a day.
---

EvalAngell posted...

instead of a fad diet, why not just actually count calories and set your macros? It will get you in shape faster than starving yourself for 12 hours a day.

counting calories can screw up your metabolism also and harm your thyroid, its best to just eat whatever food and see how you are feeling and looking then adjust.
---

Awesome posted...

EvalAngell posted...

instead of a fad diet, why not just actually count calories and set your macros? It will get you in shape faster than starving yourself for 12 hours a day.

counting calories can screw up your metabolism also and harm your thyroid, its best to just eat whatever food and see how you are feeling and looking then adjust.

dot dot motherfucking dot
---

pinky0926 posted...

Awesome posted...

some people actually do need to eat every 2-3 hours to maintain their basic metabolic rate yes, nothing standard american diet about that. like some people have poor liver function naturally and dont store good amounts of glycogen.

For the purposes of general discussion do we need to add the caveat *but some people are exceptions' every time?

Yes, some people can also eat 6000 calories a day just to maintain a slim appearance due to conditions like cystic fibrosis. I didn't think that was really relevant to the discussion of whether intermittent fasting is a bad idea.

yes because life is about variety and the problem in the health industry and with the information being given on the internet is that something works for everybody and should be followed directly which is not true.
---

pinky0926 posted...

Awesome posted...

EvalAngell posted...

instead of a fad diet, why not just actually count calories and set your macros? It will get you in shape faster than starving yourself for 12 hours a day.

counting calories can screw up your metabolism also and harm your thyroid, its best to just eat whatever food and see how you are feeling and looking then adjust.

dot dot motherfucking dot

great thing about the internet is that there is always somebody who has an attitude and has to pick an argument about something you write.

so ill stop wasting my time and just write this about intermittent fasting and low carb: after maybe one week of doing it, when you are in periods where you are not eating and start to feel brain fog and cold or are urinating a lot then you are running on either cortisol or adrenaline or both which means your body is panicking and setting functions to retain consciousness. if you go maybe 4 hours without eating and you start to feel that way then it means you definitely have poor liver function and shouldnt even think about fasting or going low carb. even if you heal the liver and improve the amount of glycogen storage it still means that fasting or low carb might not be for you. and if you have low amounts of body fat then you absolutely have no reason to willingly fast unless you want to get bdnf release.
---

Awesome posted...

great thing about the internet is that there is always somebody who has an attitude and has to pick an argument about something you write.

That's because your advice is really weird

You're providing particular advice that a specialist might give to someone with hyperthyroidism...to people who almost certainly don't have hyperthyroidism.

That's like telling people how best to swing a golf club with only one arm when they clearly have two that work just fine. Why u do dis

Having no idea at all about your calories and just going by feel is terrible advice for most people for the purpose of losing weight.
---

life is too damn short for this kinda bull shit
---

EvalAngell posted...

instead of a fad diet, why not just actually count calories and set your macros? It will get you in shape faster than starving yourself for 16 hours a day.

The concept behind IF is that your insulin levels are down after ~12 hours of eating. That's when you burn fat. The other way to get your insulin down is to avoid carbs.
---

pinky0926 posted...

EndOfDiscOne posted...

Awesome posted...

yeah, its not even a case of trial and error because during the trial you can do big damage and dont even know it for years.

What sort of big damage can you do? I'm curious; I don't know much about this stuff.

I think there's a perception that "intermittent fasting" is like fasting for ramadan or something, and not just restricting your eating window to a smaller amount of time during the day while still maintaining a consistent and balanced diet.

We're so gluttonous in the west that we've got to the point where people are entertaining the idea that not eating every 4 hours is dangerous. It's pretty funny.

Maybe I don't know enough about Ramadan, but isn't it pretty similar to that sort of fasting? As far as I know during Ramada muslims can still eat between sunset and sunrise but fast between sunrise and sunset. Though maybe they don't drink water during their fast time?
---

Wow, I didn't realize CE was inhabited by dozens of nutritionists
---

KILBOTz posted...

Maybe I don't know enough about Ramadan, but isn't it pretty similar to that sort of fasting? As far as I know during Ramada muslims can still eat between sunset and sunrise but fast between sunrise and sunset. Though maybe they don't drink water during their fast time?

That was actually just be being kinda ignorant about how Ramadan works

The point remains though; intermittent fasting isn't putting your body into starvation mode as people like to suggest.
---

pinky0926 posted...

Awesome posted...

great thing about the internet is that there is always somebody who has an attitude and has to pick an argument about something you write.

That's because your advice is really weird

You're providing particular advice that a specialist might give to someone with hyperthyroidism...to people who almost certainly don't have hyperthyroidism.

That's like telling people how best to swing a golf club with only one arm when they clearly have two that work just fine. Why u do dis

Having no idea at all about your calories and just going by feel is terrible advice for most people for the purpose of losing weight.

the calorie in calorie out rule is not true and has been disproven as something to follow thats why.

giantblimpN7 posted...

Wow, I didn't realize CE was inhabited by dozens of nutritionists

its funny because there are a lot of nutritionists in the world that actually make their clients even worse, and then they have to resort to the internet and look around and try things for themselves and it starts to work for them.

what im saying again is that everybody is different and to not just blindly follow advice from people (yes that includes doctors) because aside from doctor knowledge on immediate life saving treatment and medication then they just will get you more ill because they also do the opposite of what im trying to preach.

if i listened to the doctors in my life time id be dead or 300 pounds right now, thats how bad a lot of them are.
---

Awesome posted...

the calorie in calorie out rule is not true and has been disproven as something to follow thats why.

This is how to perfectly encapsulate why no one should take you seriously on this topic at all
---

pinky0926 posted...

KILBOTz posted...

Maybe I don't know enough about Ramadan, but isn't it pretty similar to that sort of fasting? As far as I know during Ramada muslims can still eat between sunset and sunrise but fast between sunrise and sunset. Though maybe they don't drink water during their fast time?

That was actually just be being kinda ignorant about how Ramadan works

The point remains though; intermittent fasting isn't putting your body into starvation mode as people like to suggest.

it takes a long time for the body to get into starvation mode, thats like two weeks of not eating which is not what intermittent fasting is about.

the reason why people get fat during ramadan is because they are restricting intake of water which slowly gets you more ill and ill.
---

EvalAngell posted...

instead of a fad diet, why not just actually count calories and set your macros? It will get you in shape faster than starving yourself for 16 hours a day.

Nah man we gotta take diet advice from comedian podcasts.
---

pinky0926 posted...

Awesome posted...

the calorie in calorie out rule is not true and has been disproven as something to follow thats why.

This is how to perfectly encapsulate why no one should take you seriously on this topic at all

you and others are still in the the stone age if you believe in calories in and calories out.

nothing what i have wrote in this topic is false. i continue to write back and forth like an idiot on the internet in situations like this.
---