5 ms·

>I'm actually trying out an intermittent fasting diet right now for weight loss. I'm just always skeptical of new fad diets when they start claiming all sorts o

>I'm actually trying out an intermittent fasting diet right now for weight loss. I'm just always skeptical of new fad diets when they start claiming all sorts of health benefits beyond weight loss. Weightloss. To me, still means in < out. I tried everything (keto, atkins, low carb, high carb, paleo) and intermittent fasting just seems to work for me. I fast (skip breakfast/lunch and drink coffee) and start eating when I get back home out of work. I love it because I build up a 'caloric buffer', for when something unexpected happens (random cake/donuts/birthday). IF allows me to adjust my calories at the end of the day as I see fit.

adwf 12y ago
Exactly, it's all about "in < out". But it's the psychology that has me trying the intermittent approach. I don't eat excessively normally, so any weight gain I have is due to being 100-200 calories over on a vaguely consistent basis, which leads to weight gain in the long term. I figure I can stick to a diet better when it's only 1 day in 4 when I have to cut calories. Whereas if I was any good at cutting a moderate amount of calories every day, I probably wouldn't need to be dieting in the first place! ;)
- mrfusion 12y ago
  Yeah, I've come to the conclusion that any diet based on will power just won't work. I've done will-power based diets for up to 8 months before but ultimately I just give in again. That's why I'm hopeful IF might help.
  - vinceguidry 12y ago
    I lost 40 pounds eating once a day and walking. 205-165. It was the quickest, most dramatic weight loss I ever experienced. For three months nobody could see me without remarking on how much better I looked. Yes, it will help.
    - s_q_b 12y ago
      240 -> 195 in three months with portion control and no snacking. For me, I charted what I was eating and when for three weeks before starting. Then I broke down the calories in my diet by origin. Then I rebalanced slightly by adding more green vegetables (I was eating virtually none), and reduced the portions of each other category by around %30-%50, bringing me about 500 calories below my basal metabolic rate. One slice of pizza, not two, half a sandwich rather than a whole, a salad once every couple days. Even without removing snack foods, changing the amount I put on a plate radically altered my caloric consumption without me really noticing. Now that I'm at a healthy weight (I should note I'm very tall so a healthy weight is 190-205ish for me), I brought consumption levels back up to slightly above BMR, and will probably increase more as I start weight training. On a side note, soda and Doritos were regular staples in my diet. When I stopped I noticed that there's a sort of "withdrawal" when you stop eating these hyper-engineered processed foods. Might be the brain not receiving the expected jolt of positive feedback from a high caloric treat. Either that or something in processed foods really affects my body chemistry. All I know is that for weeks in the middle the sight of a bowl of Lays made me feel both tempted and queasy.
mrfusion 12y ago
Do you think you'd do better or worse with a 5:2 diet? Want to do IF too but I haven't decided on an approach yet. Also this NPR article [1] seemed to imply 12 hours of fasting per 24 hours would be enough. That's actually simply skipping breakfast which is really easy. [1] http://www.sciencefriday.com/segment/12/05/2014/you-are-when-you-eat.html#path/segment/12/05/2014/you-are-when-you-eat.html http://www.sciencefriday.com/segment/12/05/2014/you-are-when...
- ggrothendieck 12y ago
  There is a site and free self published e-book of about 60 pages (hard copy is available too) on an IF diet in which one fasts for all but 5 hours a day for the purpose of weight loss. The book describes the author as a retired medical doctor and former researcher in the Metabolism branch of the National Cancer Institute. Cancer is not discussed in the book although there is a brief section on physiology and the three mechanisms throught to underlie the effect. See http://www.fast-5.org/ http://www.fast-5.org/
stoicy 12y ago
The "in < out" is as silly as saying that Bill Gates is rich because more money enters into his bank account than leaves from it. Both are tautologies and don't explain anything, and are not the root cause. It's always the root cause that really matters, not the side effects. People get fat because they eat the wrong food, of which the effect of making them hungry and eat even more is only one of the many detrimental effects of unsuitable food for us or other animals. I don't write this to change your mind, but hope that if someone else reads this, at least this might give them some encouragement, so that they might persist through to read about the issue themselves. It really is not easy to swim against the current. Our bodies are far more than a simple caloric furnace. But luckily fatness, cancer and a myriad of other metabolic diseases resolve themselves once and for all without calorie counting when one starts to eat correctly. That is, plenty of animal fats, meat, eggs and fish, and very little carbohydrates of any kind. Large portions and infrequently. This makes and keeps you healthy, and you cannot overeat even if you try. Simple and elegant, which is always a prerequisite for any correct theory about nature.
- JeremyNT 12y ago
  > People get fat because they eat the wrong food, of which the effect of making them hungry and eat even more is only one of the many detrimental effects of unsuitable food for us or other animals. Counter anecdote: I "got fat" eating slightly too much relatively healthy, mostly home prepared food over a long period of time. I lost weight by noting how much I ate and reducing intake while continuing to eat the same food. I know some people who eat only fast food and maintain a healthy weight because they have a good sense of how many calories they require. It's probably true that some people eat diets that condition them to eat too much, but you can't simply claim something as broad as "people get fat because they eat the wrong food" and be done with it. The parent's "in < out" generalization may be broad, but at least it's true.
- Lewton 12y ago
  Reasonable post up until the point where you claimed eating right cures cancer
  - 12y ago

adwf 12y ago

Exactly, it's all about "in < out". But it's the psychology that has me trying the intermittent approach. I don't eat excessively normally, so any weight gain I have is due to being 100-200 calories over on a vaguely consistent basis, which leads to weight gain in the long term. I figure I can stick to a diet better when it's only 1 day in 4 when I have to cut calories. Whereas if I was any good at cutting a moderate amount of calories every day, I probably wouldn't need to be dieting in the first place! ;)

mrfusion 12y ago
Yeah, I've come to the conclusion that any diet based on will power just won't work. I've done will-power based diets for up to 8 months before but ultimately I just give in again. That's why I'm hopeful IF might help.
- vinceguidry 12y ago
  I lost 40 pounds eating once a day and walking. 205-165. It was the quickest, most dramatic weight loss I ever experienced. For three months nobody could see me without remarking on how much better I looked. Yes, it will help.
  - s_q_b 12y ago
    240 -> 195 in three months with portion control and no snacking. For me, I charted what I was eating and when for three weeks before starting. Then I broke down the calories in my diet by origin. Then I rebalanced slightly by adding more green vegetables (I was eating virtually none), and reduced the portions of each other category by around %30-%50, bringing me about 500 calories below my basal metabolic rate. One slice of pizza, not two, half a sandwich rather than a whole, a salad once every couple days. Even without removing snack foods, changing the amount I put on a plate radically altered my caloric consumption without me really noticing. Now that I'm at a healthy weight (I should note I'm very tall so a healthy weight is 190-205ish for me), I brought consumption levels back up to slightly above BMR, and will probably increase more as I start weight training. On a side note, soda and Doritos were regular staples in my diet. When I stopped I noticed that there's a sort of "withdrawal" when you stop eating these hyper-engineered processed foods. Might be the brain not receiving the expected jolt of positive feedback from a high caloric treat. Either that or something in processed foods really affects my body chemistry. All I know is that for weeks in the middle the sight of a bowl of Lays made me feel both tempted and queasy.

mrfusion 12y ago

Do you think you'd do better or worse with a 5:2 diet? Want to do IF too but I haven't decided on an approach yet. Also this NPR article [1] seemed to imply 12 hours of fasting per 24 hours would be enough. That's actually simply skipping breakfast which is really easy. [1] http://www.sciencefriday.com/segment/12/05/2014/you-are-when-you-eat.html#path/segment/12/05/2014/you-are-when-you-eat.html http://www.sciencefriday.com/segment/12/05/2014/you-are-when...

ggrothendieck 12y ago
There is a site and free self published e-book of about 60 pages (hard copy is available too) on an IF diet in which one fasts for all but 5 hours a day for the purpose of weight loss. The book describes the author as a retired medical doctor and former researcher in the Metabolism branch of the National Cancer Institute. Cancer is not discussed in the book although there is a brief section on physiology and the three mechanisms throught to underlie the effect. See http://www.fast-5.org/ http://www.fast-5.org/

stoicy 12y ago

The "in < out" is as silly as saying that Bill Gates is rich because more money enters into his bank account than leaves from it. Both are tautologies and don't explain anything, and are not the root cause. It's always the root cause that really matters, not the side effects. People get fat because they eat the wrong food, of which the effect of making them hungry and eat even more is only one of the many detrimental effects of unsuitable food for us or other animals. I don't write this to change your mind, but hope that if someone else reads this, at least this might give them some encouragement, so that they might persist through to read about the issue themselves. It really is not easy to swim against the current. Our bodies are far more than a simple caloric furnace. But luckily fatness, cancer and a myriad of other metabolic diseases resolve themselves once and for all without calorie counting when one starts to eat correctly. That is, plenty of animal fats, meat, eggs and fish, and very little carbohydrates of any kind. Large portions and infrequently. This makes and keeps you healthy, and you cannot overeat even if you try. Simple and elegant, which is always a prerequisite for any correct theory about nature.

JeremyNT 12y ago
> People get fat because they eat the wrong food, of which the effect of making them hungry and eat even more is only one of the many detrimental effects of unsuitable food for us or other animals. Counter anecdote: I "got fat" eating slightly too much relatively healthy, mostly home prepared food over a long period of time. I lost weight by noting how much I ate and reducing intake while continuing to eat the same food. I know some people who eat only fast food and maintain a healthy weight because they have a good sense of how many calories they require. It's probably true that some people eat diets that condition them to eat too much, but you can't simply claim something as broad as "people get fat because they eat the wrong food" and be done with it. The parent's "in < out" generalization may be broad, but at least it's true.
Lewton 12y ago
Reasonable post up until the point where you claimed eating right cures cancer
- 12y ago