9246 Members
52 Forums
45854 Topics
761963 Posts
Max Online: 279 @ 06/26/12 12:39 PM
|
|
|
#747060 - 05/31/12 05:01 AM
Re: Intermittent Fasting
[Re: BeMyValentine]
|
The Black Orlov
Registered: 03/15/09
Posts: 4190
|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15741046http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16899414http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12724520http://www.ajcn.org/content/86/1/7.fullthere is actually a good amount of unbiased science that supports IF. There are many different ways to accomplish it, but the science fell heavily on the side of episodic deprivation without a reduction in overall calories ie: you're not eating less, you're just eating differently. The benefits were seen across the board and ONLY DECREASED when calories overall were decreased. Benefits include, but are not limited to: increased insulin sensitivity, increased cardiovascular health, lowering of inflammatory markers, increased metabolism, stabilization of the central nervous system, fewer lesions in the hippocampal region of the brain etc. etc. etc. It is a tool like any other. Yes, it's true that you can find "science" that backs any "diet" but again...this isn't a diet. And the science that supports it is pretty unbiased and consistent. Basically it's not a diet, it's a way to eat. It doesn't restrict food groups, but you can choose to if you like within the context of IFing.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#747061 - 05/31/12 05:10 AM
Re: Intermittent Fasting
[Re: BeMyValentine]
|
The Black Orlov
Registered: 03/15/09
Posts: 4190
|
I've heard about this but I just don't see how I'm going to do 20/4 if and work 50+ hours a week. I think i'd break down after a few days. I'll do a trial fast this weekend though. it really is important to understand why you're doing it as well as the various methodologies out there. There are a zillion ways to IF. Some fast one day a week. Some fast seasonally for religious reasons-it's still IF! Others fast every day until a certain time. Some people give themselves a window in which to eat-as in they only eat from 12-5 each day. Others restrict every other day, and still others stagger their calories. I think like any tool it can be abused or used incorrectly. The key is going into any plan you choose with as much information as possible. For me, I CAN fast daily and eat my caloric needs in a 5 hour window. That doesn't give me the benefits I'm looking for, where as alternating days does. There is a ton of information out there. As I said, for me this is about mental function, clarity and decreasing inflammation from an autoimmune disease. Calorie restriction gives me the best results, but there are issues with that long term. This allows me to restrict every other day which gives me 90% of the benefits of restricting daily. It also doesn't put me in a continuous caloric deficit (which though it's been shown to increase longevity is not something I'm terribly interested in long term. Prolonged deprivation will also slow metabolism so if it's not something you're committing to for the duration it's not the best idea.) I was in a situation where I only experienced excellent health if I was doing significant deprivation. I knew it couldn't last so I turned to IF, something I had done in the past with only great results. I know it's a good choice *for me.*
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#747062 - 05/31/12 05:22 AM
Re: Intermittent Fasting
[Re: e.taylor]
|
The Millenium Star
Registered: 03/27/03
Posts: 7888
Loc: My house
|
Basically it's not a diet, it's a way to eat. Exactly!! It's not something you would do to lose weight, then resume normal overeating. It's a lifestyle change, and has been proven to provide numerous health benefits.
_________________________
I'm still hot!! Only now, it comes in flashes. 
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#747172 - 05/31/12 01:30 PM
Re: Intermittent Fasting
[Re: sparklee]
|
Connoisseur
Registered: 06/26/11
Posts: 1660
Loc: Minnesota
|
I wasn't following this until I saw a reference to ratio in the preview that caught my eye. Ohhhhh, fasting for hours, not days. So that got me to read.
All of my life I've only eaten once a day, at dinner. Even when I was a kid, I pushed around my lunch at school and didn't really eat it because I just didn't want it.
Food doesn't even occur to me all day, then in the evening my brain fires the word "dinner" at me and I have dinner. Then a few hours later my brain fires the word "chocolate" at me and I have 4 Hershey Kisses or Dove square thingees. Then I'm content for the next 20 hours.
If I have an active day, like when I'm camping or touring a city and I've walked an additional 10 miles, I'll do a light lunch or some snacks along the way. But about 90% of my life, I only eat in the evening. Or if I have a lunch meeting and eat early, I won't want dinner that night because I'm not hungry.
From the time I was old enough to be lectured as a child, I've heard how awful and unhealthy this is. I have been up and down in weight a few times in my life without ever changing my eating or exercise habits (my body changes with emotions and stress). In either direction, people blame it on only eating once a day. When I'm heavy I hear, "Your body thinks it's starving and is storing fat, that's so unhealthy." When I'm thin I hear, "You don't eat enough calories, that's so unhealthy."
Now you guys are telling me that it's healthy after all???????? I'm so confuuuuuused!!!!!!
I'm in my mid-40s and have always just listened to my body and responded to what it wants (mostly it wants Mountain Dew, but that's a whole 'nother subject).
_________________________
Sharp mind, soft belly.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#747192 - 05/31/12 03:13 PM
Re: Intermittent Fasting
[Re: Hadley]
|
The Black Orlov
Registered: 03/15/09
Posts: 4190
|
I wasn't following this until I saw a reference to ratio in the preview that caught my eye. Ohhhhh, fasting for hours, not days. So that got me to read.
All of my life I've only eaten once a day, at dinner. Even when I was a kid, I pushed around my lunch at school and didn't really eat it because I just didn't want it.
Food doesn't even occur to me all day, then in the evening my brain fires the word "dinner" at me and I have dinner. Then a few hours later my brain fires the word "chocolate" at me and I have 4 Hershey Kisses or Dove square thingees. Then I'm content for the next 20 hours.
If I have an active day, like when I'm camping or touring a city and I've walked an additional 10 miles, I'll do a light lunch or some snacks along the way. But about 90% of my life, I only eat in the evening. Or if I have a lunch meeting and eat early, I won't want dinner that night because I'm not hungry.
From the time I was old enough to be lectured as a child, I've heard how awful and unhealthy this is. I have been up and down in weight a few times in my life without ever changing my eating or exercise habits (my body changes with emotions and stress). In either direction, people blame it on only eating once a day. When I'm heavy I hear, "Your body thinks it's starving and is storing fat, that's so unhealthy." When I'm thin I hear, "You don't eat enough calories, that's so unhealthy."
Now you guys are telling me that it's healthy after all???????? I'm so confuuuuuused!!!!!!
I'm in my mid-40s and have always just listened to my body and responded to what it wants (mostly it wants Mountain Dew, but that's a whole 'nother subject). while what you're describing in spirit is IF, unless I'm misunderstanding it isn't in such a way that sounds health giving-does that make sense? IF is generally fairly intentional, and incorporates a set number of calories or food choices. Not in the sense of saying "low carb" or "low fat" or any other buzzwords....but if you're restricting calories in any way they need to be fairly nutrient dense. If you don't eat enough for a prolonged period of time you WILL slow your metabolism. That is true. If you restrict too much your body will go into preservation mode or "starvation" mode. That is true. That's not IF. IF isn't restricting food for weeks at a time. AND it's been shown to increase metabolism when done properly. Again, it's something you need to understand (if it interests you.) Most people DO have a knee jerk reaction and say "I could never fast! I need to eat!" You're not NOT eating when you IF. You're just changing the timing of your food.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#747199 - 05/31/12 04:08 PM
Re: Intermittent Fasting
[Re: e.taylor]
|
Fiend
Registered: 04/06/12
Posts: 116
|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15741046http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16899414http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12724520http://www.ajcn.org/content/86/1/7.fullthere is actually a good amount of unbiased science that supports IF. There are many different ways to accomplish it, but the science fell heavily on the side of episodic deprivation without a reduction in overall calories ie: you're not eating less, you're just eating differently. The benefits were seen across the board and ONLY DECREASED when calories overall were decreased. Benefits include, but are not limited to: increased insulin sensitivity, increased cardiovascular health, lowering of inflammatory markers, increased metabolism, stabilization of the central nervous system, fewer lesions in the hippocampal region of the brain etc. etc. etc. It is a tool like any other. Yes, it's true that you can find "science" that backs any "diet" but again...this isn't a diet. And the science that supports it is pretty unbiased and consistent. Basically it's not a diet, it's a way to eat. It doesn't restrict food groups, but you can choose to if you like within the context of IFing. I apologize that im being a party pooper, but the science above gives no claim to any purported benefit of this lifestyle in HUMANS. in fact, if you read the last paper which does talk about human trials, the evidence is very variable, and some benefits were only observed in MEN, not women. Also, if you want to throw the animal model in, even though time and time again in medical research it is seen that animal response doesnt equal human response, they saw that the benefits as listed above that were observed at 3 weeks were totally reversed at 8 weeks and the animals actually gained weight, suggesting that they started overcompensating for lack of food (metabolism slowed, they overate, who knows) More research in humans is needed for longer periods to make this a scientifically viable lifestyle. Till then if it works for you thats cool but its all your personal experience, but more power to you. Off the box now.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index