8 ms·

I’ve been doing IF with some interruptions for about 10 years. It’s absolutely changed my life because before that I was steadily gaining about 5-20lbs per year

I’ve been doing IF with some interruptions for about 10 years. It’s absolutely changed my life because before that I was steadily gaining about 5-20lbs per year and it had really added up over my 20s. Now I’m 39 in the best shape of my life. So I’m invested in this technique, but I really believe the primary and possibly exclusive benefit is simply calorie restriction. In a typical “diet” you attempt to restrict calories by remove foods from your diet. The problem is, cravings are real, abstinence doesn’t work, and there are always new foods and new temptations. On an IF regimen, you restrict calories by removing eating hours from your day. You don’t have to abstain from anything. Temptation is managed by just having a little patience until your next meal. Possibly there is a deeper truth to why this lifestyle works but I personally like the simplicity of it. It’s like a rate limiter, for daily food intake.

jimmaswell 5y ago
> cravings are real, abstinence doesn’t work, and there are always new foods and new temptations If IF worked for you that's great, but you shouldn't imply every other diet doesn't work. In my case all I did was track calories of everything I ate (Lose It app, highly recommended) while maintaining a normal eating schedule. Down 105lbs so far. For me I feel like if I just ate whatever I wanted in specific timeframes it'd still be too easy to eat 3000-4000 calories.
- claaams 5y ago
  I was like that too but eventually after doing one meal a day Ive been feeling full on anywhere from 1200-2200 calories. Really depends on the food where I'm at and what's around. But you're absolutely right, there's not one BEST method for everyone. I personally cannot stand the minutiae of calorie counting and measuring portions so it's not good for me. I will measure portions to learn to eyeball things but yeah, can't do it every time I put food on a plate.
  - jimmaswell 5y ago
    For me it feels uncomfortable eating something I can't track accurately, like it's going to actually have 5 times the calories I think it would, since that's the story for so much food. Like once I was hungry after a dinner and there was stuffing left, so I had some assuming it was a lighter food, then I looked it up and it's actually extremely calorie dense.
- freediver 5y ago
  I think what the OP meant is that IF has all the benefits in one, simple to use format. You do not need any apps, you do not need to count calories and you do not need remove food you love from the menu. And while it may sound that you would try to overcompensate for not eating during specific timeframes, what happens in reality is that your body responds by wanting less food, not more.
- encoderer 5y ago
  That’s fair, in my head I was singling out food-restrictive options like no-carb fad diets. Navigating this world of abundance with our ancient brains is hard so however you do it, congratulations
- hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
  I think what the comment you are replying to is saying, and which I agree with after trying IF, is that IF works simply by making it easier to restrict calories for the average person, not that other methods are impossible or can't work. I mean, just take your example. Counting calories for everything you eat is a significant amount of work, and it's really easy to cheat if you're feeling hungry ("Oh, look, my app says that an 'average' blueberry muffin is only 250 cals, so that's what I'll put in, despite this muffin being the size of my head"). With IF, all you have to think about is whether you're in your feeding window. You can still cheat, but there is no ambiguity about it, so for many people (or, fine, at least for me) it's easier to keep with it. I found myself getting super hungry during my fasting period, but I knew I just had to wait until my feeding period, and I actually found it difficult to overeat during my feeding period because I would just eat until I was full and then would "run out of time" to overeat.
  - jimmaswell 5y ago
    It doesn't feel like work to me after I'm used to it, just a part of life. I'd only be cheating myself if I cheated on it, so I always err on overestimating. I also track protein to make sure I get at least 170g, so that's an additional benefit.
    - aksss 5y ago
      170g of protein?? Are you also doing a carnivore diet or keto?
      - hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
        "gram of protein per pound of bodyweight" is a fairly standard macro ratio in the fitness community. 170g of protein is only 680 cals, so plenty of room left over for carbs and fat.
        jimmaswell 5y ago
        Right, and in my case I was only going for .8 grams per pound. It's hard to do without going over on calories without a lot of meals being skinless chicken breast.
- rootusrootus 5y ago
  > Lose It app, highly recommended It has become such an annoying nag though. If they offered a reasonable one-time payment -- not even for premium features, just to make it stop nagging -- I'd pay it. But no, they want me to subscribe. No thanks.
  - jswzz 5y ago
    my folks lost a ton of weight using Noom. I'd try that if Lose It annoys you.
    - rootusrootus 5y ago
      I'll take a look at that. I have occasionally considered writing my own simple logger that fit my needs (I don't need a really fancy database of nutrients, my diet is somewhat repetitive, so the basic FDA stuff would be fine) and then releasing it for free. That's a lot more work than just paying Lose It, but I really don't care much for software subscriptions for every little app.
      - logosmonkey 5y ago
        I used to use lose it but swapped to fat secret. Its database isn't as good as lose it but it's getting better and it doesn't nag. I found Noom infuriatingly naggy and when I went to cancel there were multiple guilt trip prompts I had to OK through before they would cancel my free trial which turned me 100% against them.
  - aksss 5y ago
    I have same reaction to payment plans. I fully understand the business goal of recurring revenue, but several times in last few months I’ve opted for workarounds/alternates rather than paying a subscription for a product where I would have just paid a flat fee if available.
hh3k0 5y ago
> You don’t have to abstain from anything. I mean, you _do_ abstain from eating. But I always found it easier to abstain from something entirely rather than to do it in moderation.
- chiefalchemist 5y ago
  > But I always found it easier to abstain from something entirely rather than to do it in moderation. Not a knock or being troll-y but that sound like a religion. As in, funny how patterns established in religion are just as effective outside that context.
  - hh3k0 5y ago
    I hope I am not oversharing but I definitely need my patterns to cope, I have ADHD so perhaps it is related to that. Maybe something along the lines of lessening the impact my poor impulse control has on my life by avoiding situations in which I could act impulsively. For example, I do not buy sweets and pretty much never have any at home because ignoring them in the store is easier than ignoring them at home. For me, it is an Herculean task to start a bag of sweets _without_ also finishing it in one sitting… but buying no sweets in the store? That is easy peasy lemon squeezy.
- encoderer 5y ago
  Ok I am not a philosopher but is it really “abstinence” if you only have to wait 8 hours?
  - vadfa 5y ago
    For some fat people, yes. That's why they are fat: they can't stop snacking.
    - jimmaswell 5y ago
      I never snacked when I weighed 100lbs more, there are just too many damn calories in everything.
markus_zhang 5y ago
Thanks for sharing. Does that mean if I do IF I can still consume the same calories I consume right now, just in a shorter period? BTW what does your IF plan look like? I'm thinking about between 4pm (needs a coffee around 2 or 3) and 8am but not sure if it actually is IF.
- pbhjpbhj 5y ago
  The idea is you can eat whatever, but when you come to it there's a natural limit for most people then you feel full and don't want to eat more. If you imagine it to extremes, if you put all your food for the day on a plate and gave yourself 1 hour how much could you eat if you weren't trying to make yourself sick? For most people of you only eat between noon-8pm, say (”18-6”) then you'll reduce your calorie intake naturally. Couple it with appropriate exercise and you'll lose weight (doesn't mean you'll be healthier necessarily though!).
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- vishnugupta 5y ago
  > I'm thinking about between 4pm (needs a coffee around 2 or 3) and 8am This is (called 16-8, 16hr fast and 8hr eating window) is actually a recommended way to start IF. I've been on it for ~4 months and can second the effectiveness of weight loss. About the calorie intake; a funny side effect is that I'm now naturally less hungry even during the 8hr window so the calorie intake has automatically reduced. I was wondering why would that be and then learned about insulin resistance and things began to fall in place. Now I'm doing 16-8 IF and close to zero added sugar diet (which is painfully difficult in Indian cuisine, more so during this festival season :-|).
hsn915 5y ago
I used to be way overweight. A few years ago I lost a lot of weight by basically walking a lot and doing intemittent fasting. Then I stopped it and started to slowly gain more weight. Now I'm on an IF regiment again. Now, I really doubt it's the calorie restriction that's at work here. The human body is not a simple physical machine. It's a complex system. A simple machine would be some like like a car that has a set amount of energy needed and simple mechanism to switch energy source when one of them is almost depleted. A complex machine is one that responds to the environment and changes its internal behavior. For example, it can decide to activate or shutdown internal systems that use energy in order to conserve energy. It can decide to let go of conserving energy and just make sure the body has a lot of energy for performing the current activity. Common wisdom says that the body goes in hunger mode if you restrict calories. But I don't think that's what's going on. Because you also restrict calories on IF. Instead I think that when you consistently eat low calorie meals, it activates some mechanism in your body that's meant to conserve energy when you are living through some sort of a famine, or something like that. (another possibility: instead of a famine, it thinks you became a low status individual within your tribe). But when you do IF you typically eat normal size, filling meals, so this mechanism never gets triggered. Further more, there's probably no mechanism in your brain that thinks that going for many hours without food is a bad thing. Quite the opposite: it's just the normal expected thing. So if you do some exercise while in a fasted state, even though you are technically low on calories, your brain probably thinks you might be hunting for food so it will make sure you can utilize all the energy you need and some more. > The problem is, cravings are real, abstinence doesn’t work, I'm not sure what you mean here? Surely fasting is abstinence, is it not? You can at any time decide to open the fridge and eat something. You can decide at any time to go to the nearby convenience store and buy something to eat.
- jokethrowaway 5y ago
  There are studies on this and, from what I can remember, meal frequency didn't seem to have an impact on weight loss or muscle gain. You don't need to eat 6 meals or 1 per day to lose weight, just do whatever makes it easy for you to consume the amount of calories you want. I agree that doing 1-2 big meal makes it easier to eat little calories because you can stuff yourself up to a point.
refurb 5y ago
Temptation is managed by just having a little patience until your next meal. My hypothesis is this is the key. I do something similar to IF. I’ll eat two meals before 10am then won’t eat until 7pm or so. It’s not that I don’t get hungry it’s that I kind of don’t care? It’s not a big deal and I can wait until the next meal. Overcoming the psychological “need” to eat is a big part of it.
- nick_ 5y ago
  I like this approach. My understanding of my metabolism (and I suspect most others') is that if I eat a fair amount all morning, my body is fueled up and can therefore spend energy without worry of conservation to survive starvation. If I skip breakfast, my body and especially my mind seem slower and weaker for the entire day. I feel like I have to drag myself through the day rather than be pushed. And, when I do get hungry later in the day it's very difficult to ignore. I suspect this is because my body is worried about food. Is metabolic economics a thing?
  - _0w8t 5y ago
    There is unexplained difference regarding body energy usage if one eats most calories before noon or in the evening. With the former body spends like 100-200 more calories than with the latter. This is independent of sleeping patterns, what one eats and what one is doing. Even if one works night shifts, the same pattern persists. And it is not clear where exactly the extra energy is spent.
    - aksss 5y ago
      Wait, so about that night shift.. you mean “before noon” isn’t a relative reference to a period of time after waking, it’s an absolute reference to time of day regardless of when sleep takes place? That’s interesting.. irrespective of latitude (sunlight hours)?
      - _0w8t 5y ago
        Yes, this is in reference to absolute time as measured by highest point of Sun. The effect is so puzzling that there were plans to see if it exists in polar regions during winter time the last time I read about it.
fortran77 5y ago
> abstinence doesn’t work Well, it does. I don't like to feed the myth believed by overweight people that they won't lose weight if they simply started eating 2000 kCal/day. It's psychologically hard, sure (for some) but it would work. However, it's often easier to eat "nothing" than a little -- especially of high-carb products. It's easier to eat no tortilla chips than to have "just one". And getting used to a np-food period of the day similarly helps to stop the cravings.
- tonyedgecombe 5y ago
  People have been banging that drum for decades, meanwhile the developed world is becoming increasingly obese. It's quite clear that telling people they should just eat less doesn't work.
jokethrowaway 5y ago
The problem I noticed with IF or other "diets" which don't track calories in some way, is that people may tend to eat a lot more once they start doing physical activity, negating the weight loss benefit or gaining too much fat. The method I recommend nowadays is to keep your diet as constant as possible, then replace meals or snacks with protein rich, lower calories alternatives until you're satisfied with your protein intake (depending on your weight) and you hit a maintenance diet and , as in your weight doesn't change averaged over two weeks, while doing your normal training regimen (which should include some incremental resistance training for muscle gaining or preservation and some cardio for heart health). Then you have the choice of adding a 200 calories protein rich snack if you're trying to build muscle, removing a snack for 200 calories (if you can manage that) or adding some daily cardio consuming an extra 200 calories (like a 20m cardio class, 2x20 minutes walk, a martial arts class, gymnastic skill-work). You should always weight your self to keep track of things. Eventually you'll weight will stabilise to a new low or a new high and you can go through the process again. In this way, you don't really count calories, you just roughly know that you'll have a few eggs for breakfast, some pasta for lunch, meat or fish for dinner.
redisman 5y ago
What meal do you skip? My problem is that I can’t skip breakfast or I get lightheaded (I’ve passed out working out before breakfast multiple times). And I feel like during the work day I need glucose for my brain to function.
- jswzz 5y ago
  If you're gonna work out early in the AM it does make sense to have some kind of fruit or light snack right before. Or you can drink BCAAs during the workout to keep you energized. Just don't let that turn into eating a proper breakfast at like 6am otherwise you're going to end up eating an extra 500+ calories a day.
- dsizzle 5y ago
  I find breakfast the easiest meal to skip, and putting sleep in there and skipping late nate snacks makes a 16 hr fast fairly easy. My wife is like you though, so obviously it depends on the person.
- amelius 5y ago
  I had the same problem, but it gets easier if you train it. I recently started cycling for 1h in the morning without having breakfast, and after a few days it became quite easy. Just don't try to convince yourself that it is somehow a bad thing to skip breakfast. Breakfast only makes you hungry for the rest of the day. I'm doing 16h/8h intermittent fasting, and I only feel slightly hungry on some days in the last 1h before my feeding window.
- encoderer 5y ago
  I skip breakfast aside from one cup of unsweetened coffee and on the other end I brush my teeth for the night with my daughter when she goes to bed at 8pm.
- ravar 5y ago
  At some point your body starts making modest amounts of ketones overnight/until you eat, so you can still be productive without eating.
halfmatthalfcat 5y ago
You still have to abide by Calories In, Calories Out though. If you're eating 3000+ kcals but doing IF, you're still going to gain weight.
jb1991 5y ago
Didn’t work in my case. I could fast 16 - 18 hours a day without difficulty. But I made up for it in what I ate in the remaining. Always felt hungry and ate more than I should when not fasting. Still gained weight. Tried IF for months without losing weight, and actually gained a little.
- tootie 5y ago
  Same. I toughed it out for almost 6 months because your body is supposed to adjust but mine never did. I was doing 12-8 and some days I was so hungry I would start getting blurry vision by 11am. Didn't lose an ounce either.
  - jamesmontalvo3 5y ago
    It’s fascinating how different peoples’ bodies are. Maybe try a slight variation? My father in law has been restricting his food intake to 600 calories per day a few days a week for years, and it’s done wonders for him. The exact numbers might not matter; 700 calories twice a week may be better for you, for example. I’m just thinking this might be good for you if you need some constant (but low) calorie intake.
- ec109685 5y ago
  36 hours was the key for me because you can’t make up for that the next day (eat at night and then nothing the next day until the following morning). If I stick to that once a week, I am good. Otherwise, not.
saruken 5y ago
I've been meaning to get into IF forever. Do you mind sharing what system/method in particular has worked for you?
thhyjjoiffd 5y ago
Your intuition is pretty close to the science: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaDmSEVPZiM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaDmSEVPZiM
theodorewiles 5y ago
I’ve lost 20 lbs on IF and this is spot on. It’s just a lot easier (for me) to eat way less. I just only eat after 5pm every day. Much much less for me to think about vs any other diet. Its tough at first but mind and body adapted after a few weeks.
edanm 5y ago
I agree with everything you wrote, and kudos for finding something that works for you. I'll point out that IF didn't work for me, at least after an initial small drop of bodyweight (2-3kg IIRC). As you said, the reason IF works is the same reason any diet works - it helps restrict calories. But in my case, there were a few problems: 1. I was soon adjusting to the "eating window" and was eating extra portions, cramming in dessert before the window closed, etc. This meant I wasn't eating less calories. 2. I found it very inconvenient to stick to - family dinners, going out to nice restaurants for celebrations, etc caused issues. A different approach worked much better for me, namely tracking calories using MyFitnessPal, and learning to eat more satiating foods (low calorie density foods as some call them). And especially "anabolic" recipes as they are known around YouTube (basically, low calorie high protein foods). This gave me way more flexibility, for one thing, but also a much better understanding of how food and energy work - what kind of substitutions are "free" from a food-enjoyment perspective, but super helpful to lose weight. But like you said - whatever diet is sustainable for you and causes you to eat less calories is a diet that will work.

jimmaswell 5y ago

> cravings are real, abstinence doesn’t work, and there are always new foods and new temptations If IF worked for you that's great, but you shouldn't imply every other diet doesn't work. In my case all I did was track calories of everything I ate (Lose It app, highly recommended) while maintaining a normal eating schedule. Down 105lbs so far. For me I feel like if I just ate whatever I wanted in specific timeframes it'd still be too easy to eat 3000-4000 calories.

claaams 5y ago
I was like that too but eventually after doing one meal a day Ive been feeling full on anywhere from 1200-2200 calories. Really depends on the food where I'm at and what's around. But you're absolutely right, there's not one BEST method for everyone. I personally cannot stand the minutiae of calorie counting and measuring portions so it's not good for me. I will measure portions to learn to eyeball things but yeah, can't do it every time I put food on a plate.
- jimmaswell 5y ago
  For me it feels uncomfortable eating something I can't track accurately, like it's going to actually have 5 times the calories I think it would, since that's the story for so much food. Like once I was hungry after a dinner and there was stuffing left, so I had some assuming it was a lighter food, then I looked it up and it's actually extremely calorie dense.
freediver 5y ago
I think what the OP meant is that IF has all the benefits in one, simple to use format. You do not need any apps, you do not need to count calories and you do not need remove food you love from the menu. And while it may sound that you would try to overcompensate for not eating during specific timeframes, what happens in reality is that your body responds by wanting less food, not more.
encoderer 5y ago
That’s fair, in my head I was singling out food-restrictive options like no-carb fad diets. Navigating this world of abundance with our ancient brains is hard so however you do it, congratulations
hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
I think what the comment you are replying to is saying, and which I agree with after trying IF, is that IF works simply by making it easier to restrict calories for the average person, not that other methods are impossible or can't work. I mean, just take your example. Counting calories for everything you eat is a significant amount of work, and it's really easy to cheat if you're feeling hungry ("Oh, look, my app says that an 'average' blueberry muffin is only 250 cals, so that's what I'll put in, despite this muffin being the size of my head"). With IF, all you have to think about is whether you're in your feeding window. You can still cheat, but there is no ambiguity about it, so for many people (or, fine, at least for me) it's easier to keep with it. I found myself getting super hungry during my fasting period, but I knew I just had to wait until my feeding period, and I actually found it difficult to overeat during my feeding period because I would just eat until I was full and then would "run out of time" to overeat.
- jimmaswell 5y ago
  It doesn't feel like work to me after I'm used to it, just a part of life. I'd only be cheating myself if I cheated on it, so I always err on overestimating. I also track protein to make sure I get at least 170g, so that's an additional benefit.
  - aksss 5y ago
    170g of protein?? Are you also doing a carnivore diet or keto?
    - hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
      "gram of protein per pound of bodyweight" is a fairly standard macro ratio in the fitness community. 170g of protein is only 680 cals, so plenty of room left over for carbs and fat.
      - jimmaswell 5y ago
        Right, and in my case I was only going for .8 grams per pound. It's hard to do without going over on calories without a lot of meals being skinless chicken breast.
rootusrootus 5y ago
> Lose It app, highly recommended It has become such an annoying nag though. If they offered a reasonable one-time payment -- not even for premium features, just to make it stop nagging -- I'd pay it. But no, they want me to subscribe. No thanks.
- jswzz 5y ago
  my folks lost a ton of weight using Noom. I'd try that if Lose It annoys you.
  - rootusrootus 5y ago
    I'll take a look at that. I have occasionally considered writing my own simple logger that fit my needs (I don't need a really fancy database of nutrients, my diet is somewhat repetitive, so the basic FDA stuff would be fine) and then releasing it for free. That's a lot more work than just paying Lose It, but I really don't care much for software subscriptions for every little app.
    - logosmonkey 5y ago
      I used to use lose it but swapped to fat secret. Its database isn't as good as lose it but it's getting better and it doesn't nag. I found Noom infuriatingly naggy and when I went to cancel there were multiple guilt trip prompts I had to OK through before they would cancel my free trial which turned me 100% against them.
- aksss 5y ago
  I have same reaction to payment plans. I fully understand the business goal of recurring revenue, but several times in last few months I’ve opted for workarounds/alternates rather than paying a subscription for a product where I would have just paid a flat fee if available.

hh3k0 5y ago

> You don’t have to abstain from anything. I mean, you _do_ abstain from eating. But I always found it easier to abstain from something entirely rather than to do it in moderation.

chiefalchemist 5y ago
> But I always found it easier to abstain from something entirely rather than to do it in moderation. Not a knock or being troll-y but that sound like a religion. As in, funny how patterns established in religion are just as effective outside that context.
- hh3k0 5y ago
  I hope I am not oversharing but I definitely need my patterns to cope, I have ADHD so perhaps it is related to that. Maybe something along the lines of lessening the impact my poor impulse control has on my life by avoiding situations in which I could act impulsively. For example, I do not buy sweets and pretty much never have any at home because ignoring them in the store is easier than ignoring them at home. For me, it is an Herculean task to start a bag of sweets _without_ also finishing it in one sitting… but buying no sweets in the store? That is easy peasy lemon squeezy.
encoderer 5y ago
Ok I am not a philosopher but is it really “abstinence” if you only have to wait 8 hours?
- vadfa 5y ago
  For some fat people, yes. That's why they are fat: they can't stop snacking.
  - jimmaswell 5y ago
    I never snacked when I weighed 100lbs more, there are just too many damn calories in everything.

markus_zhang 5y ago

Thanks for sharing. Does that mean if I do IF I can still consume the same calories I consume right now, just in a shorter period? BTW what does your IF plan look like? I'm thinking about between 4pm (needs a coffee around 2 or 3) and 8am but not sure if it actually is IF.

pbhjpbhj 5y ago
The idea is you can eat whatever, but when you come to it there's a natural limit for most people then you feel full and don't want to eat more. If you imagine it to extremes, if you put all your food for the day on a plate and gave yourself 1 hour how much could you eat if you weren't trying to make yourself sick? For most people of you only eat between noon-8pm, say (”18-6”) then you'll reduce your calorie intake naturally. Couple it with appropriate exercise and you'll lose weight (doesn't mean you'll be healthier necessarily though!).
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
vishnugupta 5y ago
> I'm thinking about between 4pm (needs a coffee around 2 or 3) and 8am This is (called 16-8, 16hr fast and 8hr eating window) is actually a recommended way to start IF. I've been on it for ~4 months and can second the effectiveness of weight loss. About the calorie intake; a funny side effect is that I'm now naturally less hungry even during the 8hr window so the calorie intake has automatically reduced. I was wondering why would that be and then learned about insulin resistance and things began to fall in place. Now I'm doing 16-8 IF and close to zero added sugar diet (which is painfully difficult in Indian cuisine, more so during this festival season :-|).

hsn915 5y ago

I used to be way overweight. A few years ago I lost a lot of weight by basically walking a lot and doing intemittent fasting. Then I stopped it and started to slowly gain more weight. Now I'm on an IF regiment again. Now, I really doubt it's the calorie restriction that's at work here. The human body is not a simple physical machine. It's a complex system. A simple machine would be some like like a car that has a set amount of energy needed and simple mechanism to switch energy source when one of them is almost depleted. A complex machine is one that responds to the environment and changes its internal behavior. For example, it can decide to activate or shutdown internal systems that use energy in order to conserve energy. It can decide to let go of conserving energy and just make sure the body has a lot of energy for performing the current activity. Common wisdom says that the body goes in hunger mode if you restrict calories. But I don't think that's what's going on. Because you also restrict calories on IF. Instead I think that when you consistently eat low calorie meals, it activates some mechanism in your body that's meant to conserve energy when you are living through some sort of a famine, or something like that. (another possibility: instead of a famine, it thinks you became a low status individual within your tribe). But when you do IF you typically eat normal size, filling meals, so this mechanism never gets triggered. Further more, there's probably no mechanism in your brain that thinks that going for many hours without food is a bad thing. Quite the opposite: it's just the normal expected thing. So if you do some exercise while in a fasted state, even though you are technically low on calories, your brain probably thinks you might be hunting for food so it will make sure you can utilize all the energy you need and some more. > The problem is, cravings are real, abstinence doesn’t work, I'm not sure what you mean here? Surely fasting is abstinence, is it not? You can at any time decide to open the fridge and eat something. You can decide at any time to go to the nearby convenience store and buy something to eat.

jokethrowaway 5y ago
There are studies on this and, from what I can remember, meal frequency didn't seem to have an impact on weight loss or muscle gain. You don't need to eat 6 meals or 1 per day to lose weight, just do whatever makes it easy for you to consume the amount of calories you want. I agree that doing 1-2 big meal makes it easier to eat little calories because you can stuff yourself up to a point.

refurb 5y ago

Temptation is managed by just having a little patience until your next meal. My hypothesis is this is the key. I do something similar to IF. I’ll eat two meals before 10am then won’t eat until 7pm or so. It’s not that I don’t get hungry it’s that I kind of don’t care? It’s not a big deal and I can wait until the next meal. Overcoming the psychological “need” to eat is a big part of it.

nick_ 5y ago
I like this approach. My understanding of my metabolism (and I suspect most others') is that if I eat a fair amount all morning, my body is fueled up and can therefore spend energy without worry of conservation to survive starvation. If I skip breakfast, my body and especially my mind seem slower and weaker for the entire day. I feel like I have to drag myself through the day rather than be pushed. And, when I do get hungry later in the day it's very difficult to ignore. I suspect this is because my body is worried about food. Is metabolic economics a thing?
- _0w8t 5y ago
  There is unexplained difference regarding body energy usage if one eats most calories before noon or in the evening. With the former body spends like 100-200 more calories than with the latter. This is independent of sleeping patterns, what one eats and what one is doing. Even if one works night shifts, the same pattern persists. And it is not clear where exactly the extra energy is spent.
  - aksss 5y ago
    Wait, so about that night shift.. you mean “before noon” isn’t a relative reference to a period of time after waking, it’s an absolute reference to time of day regardless of when sleep takes place? That’s interesting.. irrespective of latitude (sunlight hours)?
    - _0w8t 5y ago
      Yes, this is in reference to absolute time as measured by highest point of Sun. The effect is so puzzling that there were plans to see if it exists in polar regions during winter time the last time I read about it.

fortran77 5y ago

> abstinence doesn’t work Well, it does. I don't like to feed the myth believed by overweight people that they won't lose weight if they simply started eating 2000 kCal/day. It's psychologically hard, sure (for some) but it would work. However, it's often easier to eat "nothing" than a little -- especially of high-carb products. It's easier to eat no tortilla chips than to have "just one". And getting used to a np-food period of the day similarly helps to stop the cravings.

tonyedgecombe 5y ago
People have been banging that drum for decades, meanwhile the developed world is becoming increasingly obese. It's quite clear that telling people they should just eat less doesn't work.

jokethrowaway 5y ago

The problem I noticed with IF or other "diets" which don't track calories in some way, is that people may tend to eat a lot more once they start doing physical activity, negating the weight loss benefit or gaining too much fat. The method I recommend nowadays is to keep your diet as constant as possible, then replace meals or snacks with protein rich, lower calories alternatives until you're satisfied with your protein intake (depending on your weight) and you hit a maintenance diet and , as in your weight doesn't change averaged over two weeks, while doing your normal training regimen (which should include some incremental resistance training for muscle gaining or preservation and some cardio for heart health). Then you have the choice of adding a 200 calories protein rich snack if you're trying to build muscle, removing a snack for 200 calories (if you can manage that) or adding some daily cardio consuming an extra 200 calories (like a 20m cardio class, 2x20 minutes walk, a martial arts class, gymnastic skill-work). You should always weight your self to keep track of things. Eventually you'll weight will stabilise to a new low or a new high and you can go through the process again. In this way, you don't really count calories, you just roughly know that you'll have a few eggs for breakfast, some pasta for lunch, meat or fish for dinner.

redisman 5y ago

What meal do you skip? My problem is that I can’t skip breakfast or I get lightheaded (I’ve passed out working out before breakfast multiple times). And I feel like during the work day I need glucose for my brain to function.

jswzz 5y ago
If you're gonna work out early in the AM it does make sense to have some kind of fruit or light snack right before. Or you can drink BCAAs during the workout to keep you energized. Just don't let that turn into eating a proper breakfast at like 6am otherwise you're going to end up eating an extra 500+ calories a day.
dsizzle 5y ago
I find breakfast the easiest meal to skip, and putting sleep in there and skipping late nate snacks makes a 16 hr fast fairly easy. My wife is like you though, so obviously it depends on the person.
amelius 5y ago
I had the same problem, but it gets easier if you train it. I recently started cycling for 1h in the morning without having breakfast, and after a few days it became quite easy. Just don't try to convince yourself that it is somehow a bad thing to skip breakfast. Breakfast only makes you hungry for the rest of the day. I'm doing 16h/8h intermittent fasting, and I only feel slightly hungry on some days in the last 1h before my feeding window.
encoderer 5y ago
I skip breakfast aside from one cup of unsweetened coffee and on the other end I brush my teeth for the night with my daughter when she goes to bed at 8pm.
ravar 5y ago
At some point your body starts making modest amounts of ketones overnight/until you eat, so you can still be productive without eating.

halfmatthalfcat 5y ago

You still have to abide by Calories In, Calories Out though. If you're eating 3000+ kcals but doing IF, you're still going to gain weight.

jb1991 5y ago

Didn’t work in my case. I could fast 16 - 18 hours a day without difficulty. But I made up for it in what I ate in the remaining. Always felt hungry and ate more than I should when not fasting. Still gained weight. Tried IF for months without losing weight, and actually gained a little.

tootie 5y ago
Same. I toughed it out for almost 6 months because your body is supposed to adjust but mine never did. I was doing 12-8 and some days I was so hungry I would start getting blurry vision by 11am. Didn't lose an ounce either.
- jamesmontalvo3 5y ago
  It’s fascinating how different peoples’ bodies are. Maybe try a slight variation? My father in law has been restricting his food intake to 600 calories per day a few days a week for years, and it’s done wonders for him. The exact numbers might not matter; 700 calories twice a week may be better for you, for example. I’m just thinking this might be good for you if you need some constant (but low) calorie intake.
ec109685 5y ago
36 hours was the key for me because you can’t make up for that the next day (eat at night and then nothing the next day until the following morning). If I stick to that once a week, I am good. Otherwise, not.

saruken 5y ago

I've been meaning to get into IF forever. Do you mind sharing what system/method in particular has worked for you?

thhyjjoiffd 5y ago

Your intuition is pretty close to the science: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaDmSEVPZiM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaDmSEVPZiM

theodorewiles 5y ago

I’ve lost 20 lbs on IF and this is spot on. It’s just a lot easier (for me) to eat way less. I just only eat after 5pm every day. Much much less for me to think about vs any other diet. Its tough at first but mind and body adapted after a few weeks.

edanm 5y ago

I agree with everything you wrote, and kudos for finding something that works for you. I'll point out that IF didn't work for me, at least after an initial small drop of bodyweight (2-3kg IIRC). As you said, the reason IF works is the same reason any diet works - it helps restrict calories. But in my case, there were a few problems: 1. I was soon adjusting to the "eating window" and was eating extra portions, cramming in dessert before the window closed, etc. This meant I wasn't eating less calories. 2. I found it very inconvenient to stick to - family dinners, going out to nice restaurants for celebrations, etc caused issues. A different approach worked much better for me, namely tracking calories using MyFitnessPal, and learning to eat more satiating foods (low calorie density foods as some call them). And especially "anabolic" recipes as they are known around YouTube (basically, low calorie high protein foods). This gave me way more flexibility, for one thing, but also a much better understanding of how food and energy work - what kind of substitutions are "free" from a food-enjoyment perspective, but super helpful to lose weight. But like you said - whatever diet is sustainable for you and causes you to eat less calories is a diet that will work.