Merged Intermittent Fasting -- Good Idea or Not?

dlorde said:
I've rarely dieted, but over the years, when my weight starts creeping up, I've fasted for 24 hours and this seems to 'reset' my appetite control, perhaps partly by making me more aware of what and when I eat.
Click to expand...

bruto said:
I suspect that very light eating and even fasting might be good for one, and I know that many people claim a spiritual boost as well. I've always been pretty lucky and can go at least for most of a day without caring much what or whether I eat. But I would add one word of caution for certain people: if you use dangerous machinery, fasting for a longer time can be a really bad idea. I did try this once long ago, but gave it up after a short trial simply because it became obvious in obvious ways that people who routinely use things like circular saws and axes and excavators, or who ride bicycles on narrow public highways, should not get involved in any regimen that makes them weak or dizzy or makes their blood sugar go wacko.
Click to expand...

Kaylee said:
I really like that idea. I doubt that I will take up fasting on a regular basis, but I think I will give that approach a try the next time my appetite starts growing in leaps and bounds. :)
Click to expand...


Well, I had a few weeks where I found it very difficult to eat within my calories allocation (Maintenance less 500 calories for a l lb loss per week).

I wasn't able to fast for an entire day but I did skip breakfast and lunch for a few days than let myself eat within a 5 hour window to about up to 1800 calories or less (a little more than maintenance less than 500 calories for me). I didn't let myself eat as much as I wanted as that could have easily have been 3000 calories or even more -- I can really chow down if I don't exercise any restraints.

It seemed to help -- it was just nice to feel pleasantly full again but since I compressed my eating within a few hours I was still getting whatever nutrients I needed for the day but not eating enough to gain weight or even significantly cut into my continuing to lose weight.

I'm not constantly thinking about food at the moment so I'm glad I did this.

I would not be able to do this on an everyday basis because until I ate at around 4, 5PM I was feeling a little spacey as per Bruto's post.

But I may decide to do this on the weekend or on my days off if I start having trouble staying within my calorie budget again.
 
Last edited:
Explorer said:
If this diet catches on widely, the diet food manaufacturers are going to get very worried. Their preparations are relatively expensive, and no doubt also highly profitable.

I have tried the 5/2 now for three weeks and it seems to work for me.

On the fast days, I restrict my intake to 600 calories which are taken from protein enriched food like eggs and bacon around mid morning. The rest of the day I top up with tea and spring water. I do this on two consecutive days. A friend told me that consecutive days are not the way to do it, but it seems that insufficient research so far has been carried out to come to any firm recommendations.

Overall, I have lost about 7 lbs in those three weeks, and feel much better, although this feeling may be simply a placebo effect. I am impressed enough to carry on, and am finding that the fast days get easier after three weeks.
Click to expand...

Glad its working for you. :)
 
Last edited:
pakeha said:
<snip>



All the best with the blood sugar test!
About the evening binging- try binging on unlimited raw endive with a vinaigrette 'dip'.
Click to expand...

Thanks!

I couldn't find any endives in my grocery stores. And I'm surprised because they tend to have a large variety.

But I looked up endives and saw that they have a bitter taste. I've sort of stumbled unto eating bitter or sour things at the end of a meal, esp after dinner to help curb my appetite.

I'm not sure if its the substance or the taste or both that helps .. but it does seem to help. Or perhaps its what I'm not eating that helps -- foods that taste sour or bitter are not high in carbs, and they are most definitely not refined sugars. :) Or perhaps its the combination. {shrug}
 
zooterkin said:
On the topic of reduced calorie diets (as opposed periodic fasting), looks like the benefits may not apply to primates.
Click to expand...

Eddie Dane said:
Boy, that guy who tried living on a minimum of calories must feel stupid now.

Very interesting, though.
Click to expand...


Yes, but i thought all along that the main benefit was to allow people to age well? What's the point of living longer if you spend it bedridden?

And per the article --

But even with the latest data, Kaeberlein thought it was still too early to dismiss calorie restriction entirely. “There are still reasons to be optimistic that caloric restriction or drugs mimicking its beneficial effects will enhance healthy aging in people,” he said.
Click to expand...
 
While reading the forums and blogs about restricted windows for eating I came across some comments that this dietary approach reminded some of the Heller's carbohydrate frequency restriction program.

So I checked out a couple of books at random from the library to see what this was about and I agree with those comments.

Basically instead of restricting all food intake for a few hours each day -- only foods high in carbohydrates are restricted to one meal a day, preferably breakfast per the Heller's book published in 2010. However, if you really don't like eating breakfast, than you can select another meal.

For the other two meals and afternoon and evening snacks -- the Heller's encourage people to eat non-starchy vegetables, protein and foods low in carbs and saturated fats.

I don't care for their style of writing, it's a little too hyperbolic for me, but they do explain why they think their approach works. They don't provide traditional cites but they do reference studies by scientists and the magazines they were published in by month and year. So ... with some work one could probably verify their assertions.

If one didn't want to cut back on eating to just a few hours a day but still wanted to try to reduce insulin spikes this seems like an interesting approach.

I honestly don't think I could do it, but I think I could have fewer foods high in carbohydrates for most of the day. And I have been drifting towards having less foods high in carbohydrates for dinner even before I read their books, making this decision by eliminating foods that I think have made me hungry at night.
 
Kaylee said:
While reading the forums and blogs about restricted windows for eating I came across some comments that this dietary approach reminded some of the Heller's carbohydrate frequency restriction program.

So I checked out a couple of books at random from the library to see what this was about and I agree with those comments.

Basically instead of restricting all food intake for a few hours each day -- only foods high in carbohydrates are restricted to one meal a day, preferably breakfast per the Heller's book published in 2010. However, if you really don't like eating breakfast, than you can select another meal.

For the other two meals and afternoon and evening snacks -- the Heller's encourage people to eat non-starchy vegetables, protein and foods low in carbs and saturated fats.

I don't care for their style of writing, it's a little too hyperbolic for me, but they do explain why they think their approach works. They don't provide traditional cites but they do reference studies by scientists and the magazines they were published in by month and year. So ... with some work one could probably verify their assertions.

If one didn't want to cut back on eating to just a few hours a day but still wanted to try to reduce insulin spikes this seems like an interesting approach.

I honestly don't think I could do it, but I think I could have fewer foods high in carbohydrates for most of the day. And I have been drifting towards having less foods high in carbohydrates for dinner even before I read their books, making this decision by eliminating foods that I think have made me hungry at night.
Click to expand...
Oh, if you want to explore changing macronutrient ratios look for cyclic ketogenic or targeted ketogenic approaches on the web. These will generally be used alongside specific resistance training programs. The former means a ketogenic diet cycling with high carbohydrate days (as an example, 5 days keto two days carb feasting) and the latter just means ketogenic dieting while adding carbohydrates around intense exercise.

Unlike the original poster's video, though, I don't think I've ever seen any claims over those of reducing Calorie intake below maintenance for these approaches, though.
 
Kaylee said:
Yes, but i thought all along that the main benefit was to allow people to age well? What's the point of living longer if you spend it bedridden?
Click to expand...

Yes, AIUI the primate study debunked caloric restriction for life extension, not for health benefits.
 
Kaylee said:
...But many of the bloggers and posters on 'teh webz' are currently saying that fasting doesn't lower one's MR until you go past the 72 hour mark. I haven't come across a link to any original studies yet -- that's on my to do list when I have time. ... Again, I have no links to the original studies -- but many posters and bloggers are saying that one of the hormonal effects of intermittent fasting is to lower the blood sugar levels and thus insulin spikes and therefore the chances of acquiring diabetes type 2.

A casual perusal of the diet forums showed this belief to be the number 2 reason why people are choosing this diet. (First one appearing to be so they don't have to think about food and choices the rest of the day.) I know, I know the plural of anecdotes is not facts. Still I find the discrepancy surprising. ..
Click to expand...

Any luck finding studies to back this up?

zooterkin said:
On the topic of reduced calorie diets (as opposed periodic fasting), looks like the benefits may not apply to primates.
Click to expand...

I read that, too.

Kaylee said:
...I couldn't find any endives in my grocery stores. And I'm surprised because they tend to have a large variety.
Click to expand...

They are great raw or grilled, braised or baked.
I've never tried them boiled, steamed or juiced to date.
Endives are available here year round and are quite inexpensive but as always, Kaylee, YMMD.

For binging, then, what ever veggie is cheap and cheerful, low in calories and available in your area.
Lambs' lettuce?
 
I cannot fast the morning, it makes me irritable and clumsy (more-so than usual).

So, I eat a bowl of All-Bran, a breakfast cereal only slightly less boring than animal feed.

This keeps me going until lunch. If I don't make it, I'll snack on an apple.

Now, unfortunately the kitchen in the building where I work has been moved.
it is now where the air circulation system sucks in air, and spreads scents all through the building.
At ten every morning they start making bacon. Bacon!
The ultimate in olfactory food-porn.

I spend two ours of the morning being really restless.
 
Kaylee said:
I was very surprised also. I also thought that fasting would lower one's metabolism rate and make it even more likely that one would gain weight.
Click to expand...
AIUI, the opposite is true - metabolic rate increases to mobilize glycogen and fat reserves.

But many of the bloggers and posters on 'teh webz' are currently saying that fasting doesn't lower one's MR until you go past the 72 hour mark.
Click to expand...
Last I heard was that, in a healthy individual, starvation metabolic reduction doesn't kick in for several (around eight) days. Up to that point, metabolism is breaking down fat reserves to provide energy for finding more food. Beyond that point, it's aimed at preserving core function.

Sorry I don't have references to hand - I remember the figures becausethey surprised me, but I don't recall the source, other than it seemed to be authoritative.
 
cosmicaug said:
Oh, if you want to explore changing macronutrient ratios look for cyclic ketogenic or targeted ketogenic approaches on the web. These will generally be used alongside specific resistance training programs. The former means a ketogenic diet cycling with high carbohydrate days (as an example, 5 days keto two days carb feasting) and the latter just means ketogenic dieting while adding carbohydrates around intense exercise.

Unlike the original poster's video, though, I don't think I've ever seen any claims over those of reducing Calorie intake below maintenance for these approaches, though.
Click to expand...

At the moment I'm more interested in understanding appetite control better. The Hellers (author of books mentioned upthread) claim that how frequently one has carbohydrates per day will influence the various hormones that control the sensation of appetite. ETA: That is, they assert that most people with appetite and insulin resistance issues don't necc. have to cut back a lot of their high carbohydrates in quantity as long as they just cut back on how frequently they eat them. That is why in their books they recommend restricting carbs (except for the non-starchy vegs) to just one meal per day. Warning: This is my interpretation of a couple of their books -- I could be wrong. /end ETA

My understanding of ketogenic diets is that its a high fat, average protein and extremely low carbohydrate diet that fools the body into thinking that its starving and therefore forces the body into burning fat. I also understand that this type of diet was originally designed for epileptics and is beneficial for them, but I don't recall why. I recognize that I have limited time to learn about diets in general, so I'm focusing on what I think will help me. Epilepsy isn't my issue and I'm not keen on the idea of a very high fat diet, so will probably not look into this further -- at least not for now. Maybe later if I have more time just for the heck of it though.

But I am interested in anything that can help me manage my appetite better because I think that will be the key towards helping me continue to lose weight, and ultimately to maintaining my weight loss.

icerat said:
it's quite simple really -

The best "diet" is whichever one you'll stick to.
Click to expand...

See above. FWIW, I don't think that most people who are overweight or even obese are so because of a self-discipline issue. I think most people don't understand how their appetite can be manipulated and if they had a better understanding of that ... I think there would be less of a weight problem in industrial societies.
 
Last edited:
pakeha said:
Any luck finding studies to back this up?
Click to expand...

Nope. I see a lot of references to studies in the general media supporting both sides of the issue but not that many with real citations that would allow to easily look up the actual articles. There is also the matter of the pay wall and my not being willing at the moment to take a day or two off to go to the brick and mortar public libraries or one private local library that I know of that allows free access to the walk-in public where I could have access to the various databases.

I am interested, but since I think its unlikely that I would use this tactic anyway -- I'm not willing to take the time off to look into it.
 
Last edited:
Eddie Dane said:
I cannot fast the morning, it makes me irritable and clumsy (more-so than usual).

So, I eat a bowl of All-Bran, a breakfast cereal only slightly less boring than animal feed.

This keeps me going until lunch. If I don't make it, I'll snack on an apple.

Now, unfortunately the kitchen in the building where I work has been moved.
it is now where the air circulation system sucks in air, and spreads scents all through the building.
At ten every morning they start making bacon. Bacon!
The ultimate in olfactory food-porn.

I spend two ours of the morning being really restless.
Click to expand...

Wow, that is really tough. Any chance that the kitchen will be moved back or that the air circulation system will be modified? Surely the company managers must realize that this is very distracting and a problem.

About your breakfast ... I use to have a neighbor who was a nutritionist. After she heard me moaning and groaning about how I ate breakfast every day but was still starving by 10:30 AM and in agony until noon, she suggested that I include more protein and fat in my breakfast. Like you I use to have a bowl of cereal every morning. Apparently the milk did not have enough protein and fat, esp since I was probably using 1 or 2% back then. So upon her advice I added either an egg or yogurt (plain with my own added chopped up fruit instead of the sugary syrupy junk) and that helped a lot. The biological explanation is that the protein and fat take longer to digest so this delays the appetite hormones from signaling that its time to eat again.

Since then I've also added a half-cup of non-starchy cooked vegetables to the menu. That has helped even more, though I don't know the science behind that. Perhaps getting more micro-nutrients in at the beginning of the day was enough to have a dampening effect on my appetite?
 
Last edited:
Kaylee said:
My understanding of ketogenic diets is that its a high fat, average protein and extremely low carbohydrate diet that fools the body into thinking that its starving and therefore forces the body into burning fat.
Click to expand...
It may be that such a diet may help you control hunger better than other macronutrient compositions (while not necessarily being particularly helpful to others). If that's so, it may be a good choice.

Other than that, it's not magic. Its advocates say it is (essentially) magic and some studies show greater weight loss on ketogenic diets but, somehow, this effect disappears with higher quality & longer duration studies. The ketogenic state results in water loss via more than one mechanism. This shows up as a weight loss advantage in shorter duration studies. The effect is not real (in the sense of it having nothing to do with greater fat loss).

As an aside, I'd also be, in general, very weary of anyone telling you about activity x being better for weight loss than activity y due to preferential fat burning. The important measure is total Calories burned (or consumed, in the other side of the equation). That you are using up a greater proportion of fatty acids for energy during a certain activity (for instance, sleeping versus hard sprints) is not what matters. Thus (obviously) sprinting will be better for fat loss than the equivalent time of sleeping even though the sprinting itself will be powered predominantly by glycogen breakdown rather than fatty acid breakdown.

To understand why, you have to understand what happens when you are not engaging in those activities. In the case of hard sprints you are creating a glycogen deficit which needs to be made up for. Glycogen stores will be replenished from dietary carbohydrates (gluconeogenesis is also possible but should be negligible under normal circumstances). The carbohydrates which are going into the formation of glycogen would have gone into the formation of fats if there had been no glycogen shortage due to the hard sprinting. Thus an activity which does not predominantly rely on fat breakdown for energy can be helpful in fat loss.

The moral of the story is that the notion that you must be in the aerobic zone to optimize fat loss* is poppycock and that it all boils down to Calories in versus Calories out.


* Don't get me wrong, if being there is what allows you to exercise because you can't handle anything more intense or because you can't handle anything more intense for a long enough period to produce as big of a difference, then you should aim for the aerobic zone. In the end it's what you can stick to in the long term. In any case, most fat loss is about diet (but I've digressed enough already).
Kaylee said:
I also understand that this type of diet was originally designed for epileptics and is beneficial for them, but I don't recall why. I recognize that I have limited time to learn about diets in general, so I'm focusing on what I think will help me. Epilepsy isn't my issue and I'm not keen on the idea of a very high fat diet, so will probably not look into this further -- at least not for now. Maybe later if I have more time just for the heck of it though.
Click to expand...
Under ketogenic diets, by definition, the brain is deriving its energy from ketone bodies. How this may help control epileptic symptoms is anyone's guess. I've never run into an explanation (but it's not like I've looked for one and its possible that the explanation is out there).
 
My neighbour and his wife, a couple in their '60s, are trying this intermittent fasting. Monday and Tuesday are their fasting days (where they have very reduced caloric intake). So far in a month, he has lost around 10 lbs and claims that it has been no hardship.

He is slightly overweight but has significantly high cholesterol. He is not due to have another cholesterol test for a couple of months. He will know whether the intermittent fasting is beneficial then.
 
Last edited:
I have been following the 5:2 intermittent fasting diet for a couple of months now and it seems to be doing wonders for me. I'm not doing it for weight loss but more for the healthy lifestyle aspect. Thought I would resurrect this thread to see how others are doing.

Are those who were on it still on it? if so are you seeing any benefits? if not why did you stop? Anyone thinking of starting?

look forward to your replies:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom