7 ms·

Is alternate-day fasting superior to calorie restriction in lean adults?

25 points by lxm 5y ago

aaroninsf 5y ago
A shame they didn't look at IF+CR and IF-only groups. In my circles IF is much more common than something like ADF, but, that could be noise.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
phyrex 5y ago
Tl;dr no it’s not, calorie restriction wins in terms of fat loss. Very interesting article!
newaccount2021 5y ago
let's solve this once and for all: 1. try to eat healthy, mostly-natural foods (and you know what is healthy and what isn't) 2. don't eat too much 3. exercise every day. sweat is a good indication it's not THAT hard folks, go look at pics from the 1910s, obesity was almost nonexistant also: 1. there is no way to be in shape while eating crappy food all the time 2. there is no way to be in shape and never exercise at all
- mam3 5y ago
  > there is no way to be in shape while eating crappy food all the time Even the great arnold says in his interviews that he was mostly eating burgers while training for mr olymptia
- adventured 5y ago
  > there is no way to be in shape while eating crappy food all the time While I agree with most of what you said, that point is false. The obscene Michael Phelps five hour swimming diet included, among the 10k-12k daily carb heavy calories, such things as: "Three slices of sugar coated French toast." "Three chocolate-chip pancakes." "Half a kg of pasta." "Two large ham and cheese sandwiches with mayonnaise on white bread" "Energy drinks that supplied him with another 1,000 calories." (which means they were sugar heavy) "Half a kg of pasta" "An entire pizza" The reason he could be in such amazing shape while eating that garbage, is because he was burning it off with the five hours of daily swimming. https://www.aspirechannelswim.co.uk/blog/michael-phelps-12-000-calorie-diet https://www.aspirechannelswim.co.uk/blog/michael-phelps-12-0...
  - hkt 5y ago
    Damn, I want this guy's diet. Also, his olympic swimming performance. I'll start with the diet
  - newaccount2021 5y ago
    do you really need me to say "you're not Michael Phelps"?? this no different than ultrarunner Dean Karnazes who would eat an entire pizza...but he also was doing so while running 100 miles in one shot you are not these people
- manwe150 5y ago
  Why not simplify it even more, and add: 4. Be born with genetics that avoid this common issue Also, obesity used to be a status symbol, as a proxy for power, in many cultures. It wasn’t impossible before 1910, just likely more difficult to attain. And it seems unlikely that people in 1910 and before ate particularly “healthy,” as we define the term in 2010, since the modern abilities to produce and distribute food weren’t yet available. So perhaps remove point 1, if we want to be historically accurate?
  - chillwaves 5y ago
    > It wasn’t impossible before 1910, just likely more difficult to attain. Find that hard to believe. It's not like there were meaningful economic restrictions from eating enough calories to get fat prior to 1910. More likely, people were just more active and food was less addictive.
- outworlder 5y ago
  > exercise every day. sweat is a good indication No it isn't. It's very person and weather dependent.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- Zababa 5y ago
  > there is no way to be in shape and never exercise at all Outside of physical jobs, I don't think people were exercising all that much in the 1910s. Working out for everyone seem like a recent thing.
  - newaccount2021 5y ago
    walking five miles to work
goda90 5y ago
>Another factor to consider is that this was a study in “lean” adults, and it is possible that results would be different if the investigators included people who actually need to lose weight. This just kind of reads like "which of these diets leads to healthy individuals becoming even more healthy", and the answer was none of them. There's got to be diminishing returns on healthy practices.
yupper32 5y ago
Once again, the only diets that work, work because you take in fewer calories than you burn. Calorie counting restricts calories (obviously). Fasting restricts calories (and hopefully enough to lose weight). Keto often ends up lowering calorie intake, because you feel more full on fewer calories. Exercise burns calories, helping contribute to weight loss (or at minimum, slowing weight gain, all things the same). etc. etc. There's no magic in Keto or IF. It's mostly just calories in, calories out. Anything else that it's doing is minimal enough to not worry about it. The only thing that matters is finding something that works for you. If that's Keto, great. If that's IF, great. If that's just old-fashioned calorie counting, great.
- _zamorano_ 5y ago
  It's not. That idea is obsolete and is very easy to prove. Take patient A in a control room and make him eat 2000K calories a day. Take patient B into the exact same environment, eating the same calories. Apply insulin shots only to patient B Patient B will get fat, and patient A won't, eating the exact same calories.
  - everdrive 5y ago
    That's not what the OP is suggesting, though. "calories in, calories out" does not mean that my 2,000 calories is the same as someone else's 2,000 calories. It means that if I am gaining weight eating 2,000 calories a day, I will eventually lose weight if I eat fewer and few calories. (ie, I may not lose weight at 1,900 calories per day, but I would absolutely lose weight at 500 calories per day.)
  - slimbods 5y ago
    That's great if we all live in control rooms. The part 'calories in calories out' misses is that what you eat, how you eat, where you eat, how your body reacts to what you eat, who you eat with, where you live, what food is available, the price of food....all impacts how much you eat.
    - paco3346 5y ago
Invictus0 5y ago
People that have never fasted before seem to think it is the hardest thing anyone could ever do. However once you've done it a couple times, you realize it's not a big deal at all, and sometimes you will even want to fast just for fun.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
bionhoward 5y ago
I like to fast for other benefit in terms of time, money, cleanliness -- not just for fat loss. Seems odd to run a study on lean adults and compare fat loss numbers as a goal. If they're lean, why optimize for fat loss?
soneca 5y ago
Only 3 weeks, only 36 people, mixing men and women, all already lean. I don’t think any result here is relevant to any generalized conclusion, only to inform further research.
david-gpu 5y ago
Losing a few pounds over a few weeks is easy, particularly if somebody is controlling how much food you take. The problem is what happens after, when you are under free living conditions: will you be able to maintain that weight loss, or will you grow increasingly hungry, tired and cold until you start eating again? We have all lost weight only to regain it after a year. For that reason I'm most interested in interventions that work under free living conditions (ad libitum) and in the long run (2+ years), at least anecdotally.

25 points by lxm 5y ago

A shame they didn't look at IF+CR and IF-only groups. In my circles IF is much more common than something like ADF, but, that could be noise.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

phyrex 5y ago

Tl;dr no it’s not, calorie restriction wins in terms of fat loss. Very interesting article!

newaccount2021 5y ago

let's solve this once and for all: 1. try to eat healthy, mostly-natural foods (and you know what is healthy and what isn't) 2. don't eat too much 3. exercise every day. sweat is a good indication it's not THAT hard folks, go look at pics from the 1910s, obesity was almost nonexistant also: 1. there is no way to be in shape while eating crappy food all the time 2. there is no way to be in shape and never exercise at all

mam3 5y ago
> there is no way to be in shape while eating crappy food all the time Even the great arnold says in his interviews that he was mostly eating burgers while training for mr olymptia
adventured 5y ago
> there is no way to be in shape while eating crappy food all the time While I agree with most of what you said, that point is false. The obscene Michael Phelps five hour swimming diet included, among the 10k-12k daily carb heavy calories, such things as: "Three slices of sugar coated French toast." "Three chocolate-chip pancakes." "Half a kg of pasta." "Two large ham and cheese sandwiches with mayonnaise on white bread" "Energy drinks that supplied him with another 1,000 calories." (which means they were sugar heavy) "Half a kg of pasta" "An entire pizza" The reason he could be in such amazing shape while eating that garbage, is because he was burning it off with the five hours of daily swimming. https://www.aspirechannelswim.co.uk/blog/michael-phelps-12-000-calorie-diet https://www.aspirechannelswim.co.uk/blog/michael-phelps-12-0...
- hkt 5y ago
  Damn, I want this guy's diet. Also, his olympic swimming performance. I'll start with the diet
- newaccount2021 5y ago
  do you really need me to say "you're not Michael Phelps"?? this no different than ultrarunner Dean Karnazes who would eat an entire pizza...but he also was doing so while running 100 miles in one shot you are not these people
manwe150 5y ago
Why not simplify it even more, and add: 4. Be born with genetics that avoid this common issue Also, obesity used to be a status symbol, as a proxy for power, in many cultures. It wasn’t impossible before 1910, just likely more difficult to attain. And it seems unlikely that people in 1910 and before ate particularly “healthy,” as we define the term in 2010, since the modern abilities to produce and distribute food weren’t yet available. So perhaps remove point 1, if we want to be historically accurate?
- chillwaves 5y ago
  > It wasn’t impossible before 1910, just likely more difficult to attain. Find that hard to believe. It's not like there were meaningful economic restrictions from eating enough calories to get fat prior to 1910. More likely, people were just more active and food was less addictive.
outworlder 5y ago
> exercise every day. sweat is a good indication No it isn't. It's very person and weather dependent.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
Zababa 5y ago
> there is no way to be in shape and never exercise at all Outside of physical jobs, I don't think people were exercising all that much in the 1910s. Working out for everyone seem like a recent thing.
- newaccount2021 5y ago
  walking five miles to work

goda90 5y ago

>Another factor to consider is that this was a study in “lean” adults, and it is possible that results would be different if the investigators included people who actually need to lose weight. This just kind of reads like "which of these diets leads to healthy individuals becoming even more healthy", and the answer was none of them. There's got to be diminishing returns on healthy practices.

yupper32 5y ago

Once again, the only diets that work, work because you take in fewer calories than you burn. Calorie counting restricts calories (obviously). Fasting restricts calories (and hopefully enough to lose weight). Keto often ends up lowering calorie intake, because you feel more full on fewer calories. Exercise burns calories, helping contribute to weight loss (or at minimum, slowing weight gain, all things the same). etc. etc. There's no magic in Keto or IF. It's mostly just calories in, calories out. Anything else that it's doing is minimal enough to not worry about it. The only thing that matters is finding something that works for you. If that's Keto, great. If that's IF, great. If that's just old-fashioned calorie counting, great.

_zamorano_ 5y ago
It's not. That idea is obsolete and is very easy to prove. Take patient A in a control room and make him eat 2000K calories a day. Take patient B into the exact same environment, eating the same calories. Apply insulin shots only to patient B Patient B will get fat, and patient A won't, eating the exact same calories.
- everdrive 5y ago
  That's not what the OP is suggesting, though. "calories in, calories out" does not mean that my 2,000 calories is the same as someone else's 2,000 calories. It means that if I am gaining weight eating 2,000 calories a day, I will eventually lose weight if I eat fewer and few calories. (ie, I may not lose weight at 1,900 calories per day, but I would absolutely lose weight at 500 calories per day.)
- slimbods 5y ago
  That's great if we all live in control rooms. The part 'calories in calories out' misses is that what you eat, how you eat, where you eat, how your body reacts to what you eat, who you eat with, where you live, what food is available, the price of food....all impacts how much you eat.
  - paco3346 5y ago

Invictus0 5y ago

People that have never fasted before seem to think it is the hardest thing anyone could ever do. However once you've done it a couple times, you realize it's not a big deal at all, and sometimes you will even want to fast just for fun.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

bionhoward 5y ago

I like to fast for other benefit in terms of time, money, cleanliness -- not just for fat loss. Seems odd to run a study on lean adults and compare fat loss numbers as a goal. If they're lean, why optimize for fat loss?

soneca 5y ago

Only 3 weeks, only 36 people, mixing men and women, all already lean. I don’t think any result here is relevant to any generalized conclusion, only to inform further research.

david-gpu 5y ago

Losing a few pounds over a few weeks is easy, particularly if somebody is controlling how much food you take. The problem is what happens after, when you are under free living conditions: will you be able to maintain that weight loss, or will you grow increasingly hungry, tired and cold until you start eating again? We have all lost weight only to regain it after a year. For that reason I'm most interested in interventions that work under free living conditions (ad libitum) and in the long run (2+ years), at least anecdotally.