3 ms·

I'm wary of fad diets, but why shouldn't IF be sustainable long term? Many groups (e.g. for religious reasons) do fasting regularly, and have done it for mille

I'm wary of fad diets, but why shouldn't IF be sustainable long term? Many groups (e.g. for religious reasons) do fasting regularly, and have done it for millennia. At worst, IF just limits your food intake, but it does not seem like it would provide you with an unbalanced diet.

distantaidenn 4y ago
I've been doing IF for 20 years. I read the science way back when, and it made sense to me -- I never looked back. Early breakfast always made me feel queasy, anyway (since childhood), so it wasn't much of a jump. I typically don't eat until dinner. I'll alter this for special occasions, or if I didn't eat enough the day prior. Sometimes I'll just plain forget to eat until 21:00 or so, if I'm busy on a project. I follow this pattern about 5-6 days a week. As for my blood glucose levels, based on the continuous monitoring devices I've used, it's pretty stable. I may see a slight dip in the afternoon, then returns to baseline and stabilizes. After a meal, it will rise for about 30 minutes (within normal parameters), then back to baseline. IF is anything but a fad diet and shouldn't be lumped in with such. If anything, one could argue that IF is one of (if not) the original eating patterns based on the lifestyles our hunter/gatherer ancestors and modern nomadic cultures. The modern concept of 3 squares a day might in fact be the fad. Food has only been plentiful since the agriculture revolution about 12,000 years ago. Before then, it was feast and famine. For anyone on the fence, I say give it a try (after consulting with your physician). The more studies we are seeing about this pattern, the more benefits we are discovering.
- probablynish 4y ago
  Can I ask which continuous monitoring device you use? I'm looking for one to see how my blood sugar fluctuates throughout the day. The good ones seem to be behind a prescription wall, so I was considering the freestyle libre.
  - distantaidenn 4y ago
    Freestyle Libre : https://www.freestyle.abbott/us-en/home.html https://www.freestyle.abbott/us-en/home.html They're a bit pricey if you buy them direct (sans insurance). It feels like you have an additional sense when wearing it.
    - lytefm 4y ago
      There are also a few startups (in the US e.g. Levels, Veri) which offer more insights than just using the libre sensor „as it is“. Unless you already know a lot about metabolic health, I'd recommend going that route over just getting the sensor.
- riffraff 4y ago
  I don't mean to sound negative, do what works for you, and everyone else should absolutely give IF a try. But "works for me" and "there are many studies that prove it's useful" is what everyone says about whatever diet they are currently doing. I have seen the same (on this forum too!) for keto, paleo, vegetarian, piscitarian, vegan, carnivore, mediterranean. The "it's how our ancestors ate!" claim is also applied to all of the above. Only time will tell which diet sticks, and which one was a fad.
steve_adams_86 4y ago
I’m not an authority on this so my comment is layman internet garbage, but my somewhat-researched understanding is that IF is only problematic when it exacerbates existing issues. Examples could be eating disorders or conditions where fasting can cause acute issues. Some studies suggest the benefits are significant, others suggest they’re neutral, but I’ve yet to find anything indicating that it’s innately risky to fast intermittently. Me not being aware of studies showing harm doesn’t mean it’s not possible, but it seems unlikely at this point. I’ve been doing it for the better part of 10 years or so and I always regret it when I stop. Fasting in general appears to be good for people when it’s controlled and done sensibly. In the developed world it really does seem we do more harm to ourselves with what we do consume rather than what we don’t. Less is more (health) with common western diets.
- lytefm 4y ago
  I'm no authority either, but I've worked in the field of metabolic health for a couple of years and read a few dozen studies and books on the topic. You're pretty much correct: The most relevant contraindication for any kind of fasting are eating disorders like anorexia. Also, don't try out fasting if you're taking metabolism related medication without consulting with your doctor. A lot of research suggests that most lifestyle diseases that are prevalent in the developed world (like obesity, diabetes, heart attack, even some types of cancer and possibly also neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimers) can be prevented and sometimes treated with a dietary intervention. The optimal diet seems to be whole foods and mostly plant-based (though some people seem to thrive on meat) with occasional fasting periods. It makes a lot of sense from an evolutionary perspective: Our ancestors didn't have all that sugary and industrially processed food and often spend extended periods fasting and searching/hunting for food. Processed foods highjack our preference for calorie rich, sweet and savory food but are often deficient in nutrients.

distantaidenn 4y ago

I've been doing IF for 20 years. I read the science way back when, and it made sense to me -- I never looked back. Early breakfast always made me feel queasy, anyway (since childhood), so it wasn't much of a jump. I typically don't eat until dinner. I'll alter this for special occasions, or if I didn't eat enough the day prior. Sometimes I'll just plain forget to eat until 21:00 or so, if I'm busy on a project. I follow this pattern about 5-6 days a week. As for my blood glucose levels, based on the continuous monitoring devices I've used, it's pretty stable. I may see a slight dip in the afternoon, then returns to baseline and stabilizes. After a meal, it will rise for about 30 minutes (within normal parameters), then back to baseline. IF is anything but a fad diet and shouldn't be lumped in with such. If anything, one could argue that IF is one of (if not) the original eating patterns based on the lifestyles our hunter/gatherer ancestors and modern nomadic cultures. The modern concept of 3 squares a day might in fact be the fad. Food has only been plentiful since the agriculture revolution about 12,000 years ago. Before then, it was feast and famine. For anyone on the fence, I say give it a try (after consulting with your physician). The more studies we are seeing about this pattern, the more benefits we are discovering.

probablynish 4y ago
Can I ask which continuous monitoring device you use? I'm looking for one to see how my blood sugar fluctuates throughout the day. The good ones seem to be behind a prescription wall, so I was considering the freestyle libre.
- distantaidenn 4y ago
  Freestyle Libre : https://www.freestyle.abbott/us-en/home.html https://www.freestyle.abbott/us-en/home.html They're a bit pricey if you buy them direct (sans insurance). It feels like you have an additional sense when wearing it.
  - lytefm 4y ago
    There are also a few startups (in the US e.g. Levels, Veri) which offer more insights than just using the libre sensor „as it is“. Unless you already know a lot about metabolic health, I'd recommend going that route over just getting the sensor.
riffraff 4y ago
I don't mean to sound negative, do what works for you, and everyone else should absolutely give IF a try. But "works for me" and "there are many studies that prove it's useful" is what everyone says about whatever diet they are currently doing. I have seen the same (on this forum too!) for keto, paleo, vegetarian, piscitarian, vegan, carnivore, mediterranean. The "it's how our ancestors ate!" claim is also applied to all of the above. Only time will tell which diet sticks, and which one was a fad.

steve_adams_86 4y ago

I’m not an authority on this so my comment is layman internet garbage, but my somewhat-researched understanding is that IF is only problematic when it exacerbates existing issues. Examples could be eating disorders or conditions where fasting can cause acute issues. Some studies suggest the benefits are significant, others suggest they’re neutral, but I’ve yet to find anything indicating that it’s innately risky to fast intermittently. Me not being aware of studies showing harm doesn’t mean it’s not possible, but it seems unlikely at this point. I’ve been doing it for the better part of 10 years or so and I always regret it when I stop. Fasting in general appears to be good for people when it’s controlled and done sensibly. In the developed world it really does seem we do more harm to ourselves with what we do consume rather than what we don’t. Less is more (health) with common western diets.

lytefm 4y ago
I'm no authority either, but I've worked in the field of metabolic health for a couple of years and read a few dozen studies and books on the topic. You're pretty much correct: The most relevant contraindication for any kind of fasting are eating disorders like anorexia. Also, don't try out fasting if you're taking metabolism related medication without consulting with your doctor. A lot of research suggests that most lifestyle diseases that are prevalent in the developed world (like obesity, diabetes, heart attack, even some types of cancer and possibly also neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimers) can be prevented and sometimes treated with a dietary intervention. The optimal diet seems to be whole foods and mostly plant-based (though some people seem to thrive on meat) with occasional fasting periods. It makes a lot of sense from an evolutionary perspective: Our ancestors didn't have all that sugary and industrially processed food and often spend extended periods fasting and searching/hunting for food. Processed foods highjack our preference for calorie rich, sweet and savory food but are often deficient in nutrients.