Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

What Is the Best Source of Info on Intermittent Fasting?

ucimigrate

Active member
Hi Everyone,

1. There seems to be so much conflicting information on Intermittent Fasting.

What is the best conclusive evidence that it works, and works better than simply cutting calories alone?

Any research or actual data, not anecdote?

Where are the advantages that make the difficult parts more doable?

2. My guess is that humans do not like any rule that literally rules over them and stymies their autonomy and self-expression. As the 1990's and 2000's rolled around with "six meals a day" idea, the IF camp seems to want to defy this.

I think the rule is the same "if you take in less energy than you consume, over a long period of time, all people eventually start using stored fat for energy".

Yes, there are many "if's" "buts" and inter-individual differences, but the point is the same: to lose your weight, you must have a caloric deficit.

3. Can anyone supply evidence tell me why they personally do IF?

4. In my own life, I find IF too difficult.

To me, it would be psychological. When I have tried, I feel terrible giving up eating for up to an entire day, or only eating protein.

I end up giving up, as not eating carbohydrates every two hours makes me feel anxious, trouble concentrating, etc.

On the other hand, the feast days certainly are fun.

5. If I really get obsessive, I can see how I can modify fasting to simply eating less of certain foods.

For example, have a small pre-workout drink, eat a high protein, high carb meal after a heavy workout, and eat protein and vegetables the rest of the day.

Twice a week, I can have a cheat meal of moderate proportions.

This would allow my muscles to be fed (especially before and after a workout), and give me sufficient energy the rest of the day. This will still allow cheating, etc.
 
If you find IF too difficult what makes you want to do it, or believe in it?
You even wrote --> 4. In my own life, I find IF too difficult.
Simply eat what suits your schedule best, at the end of the day your lifestyle and personal preference should be used to adhere to your dietary intake. Focus on what you need to do to achieve your goal (Surplus/Deficit) and be consistent.

Research shows more feedings spaced out is superior for muscle protein synthesis
Invalid Link Removed

The reason people do IF is because
1) They find it suits their lifestyle
2) It helps them stay consistent
3) They are not hungry in the mornings and eat later in the day
 
Thanks guys.

To me, the main reason I would try, yet again, is the metabolic advantage of this, or any other method.

1. We know "caloric deficit or surplus", over a long period of time, determines weight gain or weight loss.

2. However, since the 1970's, there have been so many methods of doing it to get more benefit, physically and psychologically, from this.

Tom Venuto of "Burn the Fat, Feed the Muscle" suggested a 50-30-20 cheat meals, especially if you are lean.
Body for Life suggested a 40-40-20 diet, with "Free Days"

Atkins, although his writings were not medically sound, did point out that ketosis and ketones had a metabolic advantage, as it takes more energy to process them than in glycolysis.

Intermittent fasting (such as LeanGains.com), tries to say that the short-term fasting does not reduce muscle within five days, and that the feasting can actually be good.

3. So, I know I need to exercise more and diet, but want to do it most directly, intelligently.

4. Currently, I think a Tom Venuto, Burn the Fat, Feed the Muscle, low fat diet is good.

But, I would try intermittent fasting, if it got results.
 
Thanks guys.

To me, the main reason I would try, yet again, is the metabolic advantage of this, or any other method.

1. We know "caloric deficit or surplus", over a long period of time, determines weight gain or weight loss.

2. However, since the 1970's, there have been so many methods of doing it to get more benefit, physically and psychologically, from this.

Tom Venuto of "Burn the Fat, Feed the Muscle" suggested a 50-30-20 cheat meals, especially if you are lean.
Body for Life suggested a 40-40-20 diet, with "Free Days"

Atkins, although his writings were not medically sound, did point out that ketosis and ketones had a metabolic advantage, as it takes more energy to process them than in glycolysis.

Intermittent fasting (such as LeanGains.com), tries to say that the short-term fasting does not reduce muscle within five days, and that the feasting can actually be good.

3. So, I know I need to exercise more and diet, but want to do it most directly, intelligently.

4. Currently, I think a Tom Venuto, Burn the Fat, Feed the Muscle, low fat diet is good.

But, I would try intermittent fasting, if it got results.
 
ucimigrate said:
But, I would try intermittent fasting, if it got results.
Click to expand...

which brings me back to your first post
You find IF too "difficult", but want to try IF.

If you adhere to a caloric deficit you will reach your goal, as pointed out spreading out meals has a larger advantage to Muscle Protein Synthesis. Again what you feel best to your lifestyle and day to day basis should always reign supreme.
If you find IF too difficult in the long run you are going to make more stress on yourself and your lifestyle decisions, which could yield less success.

Do what is easiest, not what is most "DIfficult".
Judging by how many posts you make in the training section your biggest issue is paralysis by analysis. You try to micromanage so many things taking you away from seeing the big picture.
 
Intermittent fasting is a bit like interval training, where you alternate between periods of effort and periods of rest. Here, however, the effort does not mean to run out of breath, but rather not or almost not eat. And to catch your breath, the intermittent faster eats normally between periods of abstinence from food. There is more and more talk about this method in the media, not least because of the successful book The Obesity Code published about a year ago by Dr. Jason Fung.
 
look up some of hairygrandpa's old logs...some good info there.
 
I've been following a ketogenic diet for 25 years, I then added in intermittent fasting 10 years ago ...unfortunately the majority of information online is horribly pathetic and full of fairy dust and void of any science. Ignore Dr Fung at all costs.

Ask me any questions you have.
 
I like IF. First I don’t like breakfast and I have a hard time keeping food down early in the morning. Also I do cardio first thing in the morning and I find it more effective in a fasted state.
 
I like IF. First I don’t like breakfast and I have a hard time keeping food down early in the morning. Also I do cardio first thing in the morning and I find it more effective in a fasted state.
 
Thanks guys.

To me, the main reason I would try, yet again, is the metabolic advantage of this, or any other method.

1. We know "caloric deficit or surplus", over a long period of time, determines weight gain or weight loss.

2. However, since the 1970's, there have been so many methods of doing it to get more benefit, physically and psychologically, from this.

Tom Venuto of "Burn the Fat, Feed the Muscle" suggested a 50-30-20 cheat meals, especially if you are lean.
Body for Life suggested a 40-40-20 diet, with "Free Days"

Atkins, although his writings were not medically sound, did point out that ketosis and ketones had a metabolic advantage, as it takes more energy to process them than in glycolysis.

Intermittent fasting (such as LeanGains.com), tries to say that the short-term fasting does not reduce muscle within five days, and that the feasting can actually be good.

3. So, I know I need to exercise more and diet, but want to do it most directly, intelligently.

4. Currently, I think a Tom Venuto, Burn the Fat, Feed the Muscle, low fat diet is good.

But, I would try intermittent fasting, if it got results.
 
You get results from
1) Sustaining a deficit or surplus
2) Adhering to what works best for your lifestyle & schedule
3) Rinse/Repeat the above two

How you choose to do that is a personal preference.
Just because you eat in a window doesn't mean it's going to make a drastic change to someone who finds "IF" too difficult.
 
ucimigrate said:
Thanks guys.

To me, the main reason I would try, yet again, is the metabolic advantage of this, or any other method.

1. We know "caloric deficit or surplus", over a long period of time, determines weight gain or weight loss.

2. However, since the 1970's, there have been so many methods of doing it to get more benefit, physically and psychologically, from this.

Tom Venuto of "Burn the Fat, Feed the Muscle" suggested a 50-30-20 cheat meals, especially if you are lean.
Body for Life suggested a 40-40-20 diet, with "Free Days"

Atkins, although his writings were not medically sound, did point out that ketosis and ketones had a metabolic advantage, as it takes more energy to process them than in glycolysis.

Intermittent fasting (such as LeanGains.com), tries to say that the short-term fasting does not reduce muscle within five days, and that the feasting can actually be good.

3. So, I know I need to exercise more and diet, but want to do it most directly, intelligently.

4. Currently, I think a Tom Venuto, Burn the Fat, Feed the Muscle, low fat diet is good.

But, I would try intermittent fasting, if it got results.
Click to expand...
I'm keto 25 years, Fasting 10 years. Trust me there's no one more anxious than me for some study showing the magic or superiority of these vs just caloric restriction. But it doesn't exist.

Unfortunately you're falling for the bullsh*it zealtory and sadly some of the fools making these claims are Dr's so it makes them seem credible.

That being said there is evidence of various increased health markers above and beyond caloric restriction alone. But not fat loss.

As far as fasting vs caloric restriction, anecdotally for me it's a night and day difference with the fasting but then again I did not compare diet's in a metabolic ward situation.

But fasting changes behaviors... behaviors that lead to you "consuming less calories".

But I think in the long term especially with metabolic adaptations and becoming an efficient fat burner so to say, I'd give the edge to fasting..tiny edge.

But nothing you'd notice in a real world setting atleast nothing I'm conformable saying it's proven...yet.
 
Thanks.

1. As far as this info, some of it was left on the clipboard. Hence the identical posting. Thanks for being tolerant.

2. Yes, I agree that I need to do some S.M.A.R.T. goal setting and do.

While "Body for Life" is over-hyped, their goal setting process (visualization, specific/measurable goals, timeframe of 12 weeks, processes you need to do, etc.) help.
 
Thanks.

1. As far as this info, some of it was left on the clipboard. Hence the identical posting. Thanks for being tolerant.

2. Yes, I agree that I need to do some S.M.A.R.T. goal setting and do.

While "Body for Life" is over-hyped, their goal setting process (visualization, specific/measurable goals, timeframe of 12 weeks, processes you need to do, etc.) help.
 
Long story short, IF has not been proven to be anymore effective than traditional caloric restriction. Sounds like you’re interested in banging your head against the wall here, for no real reason. If it’s not for you, then don’t do it.
 
You asked for advice...so here is mine.

If you are going to judge a diets effectiveness based on weight loss alone, only 1 thing matters:

1. Eat fewer calories than you burn (aka - a deficit).

If you are going to judge a diet based on fat loss alone, only 2 things matter:

1. Eat fewer calories than you burn (aka - a deficit).
2. Sufficient protein.

The absolute fastest way to lose weight will be to fast. The absolute fastest way to lose bodyfat and minimize the loss of lean tissue is something like a PSMF. If you want the most scientific, clinically proven, extreme diet method - these are your options. Entire countries of starving people have proven out the weight loss method, and the fat loss method has been used in clinical situations among the morbidly obese for decades. IF, Keto, South Beach, Mediterranean, whatever diet - has not been used in these settings. On some level, they are all gimmicks - although I hate to say outright gimmicks because there is some validity to having multiple ways to achieve a caloric deficit if it helps you find a method of eating that you can stick to.

Now, if you're judging on long-term health - the above all changes potentially. If you're 5'8'' and 350 pounds, then yeah, a period of PSMF may be very healthy for you in the short term, but in the long term you will have to adjust to a healthier way of eating.

If you're talking about needing to lose 30 pounds, then just create a deficit and there's no need to overthink it. Be reasonable and follow the basics -

1. Don't eat anything you don't measure.
2. Don't eat anything you don't log.

If you're not losing weight and you have done these two things - then you can adjust. If you're not losing weight and you're not doing these 2 things, then start doing these 2 things - because you don't know where you're going wrong because you haven't been accurate enough to be sure you're in a deficit or what your caloric intake is to begin with.

If you want to try IF, try it. If it doesn't work for you, or you find it to be too hard, then don't do it and try something else (like the basics maybe).
 
Resolve10 said:
Naw man. That isn't science. It is super cherry picked and he would not be who I would go to for (if I wanted more) information on fasting.
Click to expand...
Fung is a fraud. He's a kidney Dr that doesn't even realize the studies he uses to back up his claims actually prove him wrong.
 
DieselNY said:
Fung is a fraud. He's a kidney Dr that doesn't even realize the studies he uses to back up his claims actually prove him wrong.
Click to expand...
Find this funny mate.
For the OP you have two differing opinions here, check out the science (there is plenty published online) and decide for yourself.
 
Last edited:
The Solution said:
If you find IF too difficult what makes you want to do it, or believe in it?
You even wrote --> 4. In my own life, I find IF too difficult.
Simply eat what suits your schedule best, at the end of the day your lifestyle and personal preference should be used to adhere to your dietary intake. Focus on what you need to do to achieve your goal (Surplus/Deficit) and be consistent.

Research shows more feedings spaced out is superior for muscle protein synthesis
Invalid Link Removed

The reason people do IF is because
1) They find it suits their lifestyle
2) It helps them stay consistent
3) They are not hungry in the mornings and eat later in the day
Click to expand...
Totally agree with the solution....wtf dude lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top