Intermittent Fasting

fankity flank

Anyone here tried Intermittent Fasting for weight loss and/or additional health benefits?

The idea is that you "feed" (eat what you want, within reason) during an 8 hour window every day - so for example 12pm to 8pm.

You would then "fast" (drink water only) during the following 16 hour period - so in this example you would stop eating at 8pm, and fast until 12pm the following day.

If you exercise in the morning the body should burn energy from the fat stores first, but that's only if you wish to lose weight.

I've read that there are additional health benefits also, a positive effect on your digestive system and metabolism...

Anyone any experience?

silverharp

Its something I incorporate. I don't think I ever missed a meal up until last year, for me I find it easier to do during the week, so often I wouldn't eat breakfast and or lunch as I'd be busy at work anyway. I find it gives me a different perspective on eating, not to mention frees up time in the morning or at lunchtime. I generally find that come the evening I wouldn’t be hungry arriving home and wouldnt have had any sugar high/lows during the day.
Clearly no point spoiling all the good work eating junk food everyday , come the weekend for me having a nice healthy breakfast is a treat

fankity flank

Thanks for your feedback, I've been doing it for a few months, but kinda let things go in the run up to and during Christmas.

For me the fasting period is easy as I'm not a big breakfast person anyway. Problem I have is that I go mad when "feeding time" hits, eating a lot of snacks along the way. And at 5 minutes to 8pm I'm stuffing biscuits into my mouth ahead of the fast!

I think I know what you mean about changing perspective on eating. Nowadays we don't know what it is like to feel hunger any more. Our ancestors relied on hunger to keep them focused and sharp for the hunt, in order to stay alive. So it's good to go without for little while, and it feels good to be giving the body regular breaks from food.

I just need to make better choices on what I eat during that 8 hour period...

silverharp

fankity flank wrote: »

Thanks for your feedback, I've been doing it for a few months, but kinda let things go in the run up to and during Christmas.

For me the fasting period is easy as I'm not a big breakfast person anyway. Problem I have is that I go mad when "feeding time" hits, eating a lot of snacks along the way. And at 5 minutes to 8pm I'm stuffing biscuits into my mouth ahead of the fast!

I think I know what you mean about changing perspective on eating. Nowadays we don't know what it is like to feel hunger any more. Our ancestors relied on hunger to keep them focused and sharp for the hunt, in order to stay alive. So it's good to go without for little while, and it feels good to be giving the body regular breaks from food.

I just need to make better choices on what I eat during that 8 hour period...

Its not a scales where you can balance one thing with another ;-) , youd be better off having a cheat day and keep the IF days clean. A lot of people doing IF tend to eat lower carb as it aids satiety though should be possible on any sustainable diet. When I started I used to make up a salad with egg and avocado for lunch at work or just bring a couple of hard boiled eggs with me, go out for a walk and I wouldn’t think about food again til the evening.
This weekend I made up a bone broth with oxtail from the butcher, the aim is to bring it into work occasionally or just to have on tap at home.

Macy0161

fankity flank wrote: »

Anyone here tried Intermittent Fasting for weight loss and/or additional health benefits?

There's some studies that show some additional benefits that have potential, but not proven as far as I can tell. I'm not dismissing, just saying not proven.

For weight loss, IF works if you're in overall calorie deficit, and is a method to achieve the deficit. It wouldn't be sustainable for me, but weight loss is all about a method that's sustainable for you.

fankity flank

fankity flank wrote: »

............

The idea is that you "feed" (eat what you want, within reason) during an 8 hour window every day - so for example 12pm to 8pm.

................

If you exercise in the morning the body should burn energy from the fat stores first, but that's only if you wish to lose weight............

The idea is that by not eating breakfast you introduce a calorie deficit.
If you eat your maintenance cals in the 8 hr window every day no fat will be burned. If anyone thinks otherwise they are contradicting the law of conservation of energy

It's really, really conceptually simple.

fankity flank

Augeo wrote: »

The idea is that by not eating breakfast you introduce a calorie deficit.
If you eat your maintenance cals in the 8 hr window every day no fat will be burned. If anyone thinks otherwise they are contradicting the law of conservation of energy

It's really, really conceptually simple.

I think we all get the concept, and I suppose using simple maths you are more likely to reduce calorie intake if you're only eating within an 8 hour window.

But there is way more to it than that.

By your rationale it does not matter WHEN you eat in relation to a work out. By your rationale metabolism, insulin/blood sugar levels have no impact on how quickly your body burns fat, whether through exercise or day to day activities.

There's quite a lot of science out there that says this all has a massive impact on weight loss (and general health).

While not as conceptually simple, it's still pretty straightforward.

My question was whether anyone has tried Intermittent Fasting and has seen results

fankity flank

fankity flank wrote: »

....
My question was whether anyone has tried Intermittent Fasting and has seen results

Unless someone has maintained the same calorie intake and exercise regime with & without intermittent fasting the question is a tad open ended.

Personally I implemented a 700/800 daily kcal deficit for 6 months & lost 1.5 lbs/week..... I really don't think intermittent fasting would have changed the bottom line too much TBH.

You're intermittent fasting for a few months.... what's your average calorie deficit? What's your maintenance cals?

fankity flank

Augeo wrote: »

Unless someone has maintained the same calorie intake and exercise regime with & without intermittent fasting the question is a tad open ended.

Personally I implemented a 700/800 daily kcal deficit for 6 months & lost 1.5 lbs/week..... I really don't think intermittent fasting would have changed the bottom line too much TBH.

I guess you're right, one would need to have tried a few methods in order to compare!

But your focus is on weight loss, whereas I'm also looking into the long term health benefits as well.

We were told for years that breakfast was the most important meal of the day, and to "eat little and often", but now there is some evidence to suggest that it may be better to skip breakfast altogether, and essentially starve the body for a controlled period of time.

fankity flank

Augeo wrote: »

You're intermittent fasting for a few months.... what's your average calorie deficit? What's your maintenance cals?

Sorry, to answer your question.

I'm probably not a good test case, as I said I let things go a little before/during/after xmas, and during the feeding times I wasn't eating very well.

That said, I had a knee operation mid last year and as a result wasn't very active during this time. Yet I pretty much maintained the same weight.

Outkast_IRE

I try to fast for almost a 24hr period twice a week. I generally do dinner to dinner, I find it grand once you get used to it.

It does help maintain a healthy weight, I had a back and knee injury last year so didn't get out running as much as I usually do and had virtually no weight gain .

Have also had bloods done at a few stages in the last 2 years and all insulin levels , cholesterol levels etc are spot on .

People in work used to look at me a bit funny if they asked why I wasn't having lunch etc and I said I was fasting , but more and more I think podcasts and similar are talking about it and a few others in work have started trying it out.

Outkast_IRE

Outkast_IRE wrote: »

I try to fast for almost a 24hr period twice a week. I generally do dinner to dinner, I find it grand once you get used to it. ............

Do you know what calories are in your dinner typically?
Again, as I mentioned previously I do think the calorie intake is key.

Macy0161

Augeo wrote: »

Again, as I mentioned previously I do think the calorie intake is key.

So does the proven science.

There's some studies that suggest other benefits, but they haven't been confirmed yet - Enough for some of the qualified people I take heed of (such as Danny Lennon) to follow some form of IF, but not enough for them to go as far as recommend it at this stage.

Macy0161

Macy0161 wrote: »

So does the proven science. ............

Indeed, my opinion is based on the application of the scientific theory to myself
I've tracked calories, introduced a deficit and watched the weight come off in line with the expected weight loss.
Also I've maintained bodyweight on maintenance cals for months and months.

Most folk I encounter toying with intermittent fasting seem to have no idea what their maintenance calories or calorie intake actually are.

silverharp

Augeo wrote: »

Indeed, my opinion is based on the application of the scientific theory to myself
I've tracked calories, introduced a deficit and watched the weight come off in line with the expected weight loss.
Also I've maintained bodyweight on maintenance cals for months and months.

Most folk I encounter toying with intermittent fasting seem to have no idea what their maintenance calories or calorie intake actually are.

Its not something I track. If I want to maintain weight, OMAD during the week works, if I want to drop weight some version of alternate day fasting works. I treat exercise as being not worth counting in terms of weight management. Other than that I keep to a no sugar no grains diet and eat to satiety when I do eat. I don’t feel I am being restricted so happy to rotate on this for the rest of my life

silverharp

silverharp wrote: »

........... if I want to drop weight some version of alternate day fasting works.................

Because you're introducing a calorie deficit
It's the deficit, not the fast that facilitates the weight loss

silverharp

Augeo wrote: »

Because you're introducing a calorie deficit
It's the deficit, not the fast that facilitates the weight loss

that's a given, why does it even need to be mentioned? Im more interested in what is attached to the calories. Primarily I see myself as being on an insulin controlled diet. The act of fasting should naturally look after the quantity side of things.

silverharp

silverharp wrote: »

that's a given, why does it even need to be mentioned? .......

Because of stuff like the following.......that suggests a 12 hour ish fast will divert your energy take from fat stores.

fankity flank wrote: »

..........

If you exercise in the morning the body should burn energy from the fat stores first, but that's only if you wish to lose weight..........

silverharp

Augeo wrote: »

Because of stuff like the following.......that suggests a 12 hour ish fast will divert your energy take from fat stores.

Not all energy is stored the same way, the body works off glycogen first and then fat, that’s not controversial is it?

silverharp

silverharp wrote: »

.............. that’s not controversial is it?

Did I suggest it was?

I was merely remarking (again) that fat will only be dipped into when there's a calorie deficit. ............ ie intermittent fasting without a calorie deficit will not promote weight loss.

HappyAsLarE

The reason it’s easier to achieve a calorie deficit through fasting is because your basal metabolic rate is higher when fasting then when eating regularly (calorie intake being equal). In fact your basal rate increases after a significant fast. This is an evolutionary selection to give us energy to help us find food.

HappyAsLarE

Augeo wrote: »

Did I suggest it was?

I was merely remarking (again) that fat will only be dipped into when there's a calorie deficit. ............ ie intermittent fasting without a calorie deficit will not promote weight loss.

It’s not binary. You always derive energy from glycogen, fat and protein. The proportions change.

Alf Veedersane

HappyAsLarE wrote: »

The reason it’s easier to achieve a calorie deficit through fasting is because your basal metabolic rate is higher when fasting then when eating regularly (calorie intake being equal). In fact your basal rate increases after a significant fast. This is an evolutionary selection to give us energy to help us find food.

By how much does your BMR increase?

Alf Veedersane

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

By how much does your BMR increase?

......... and what's a "significant fast"

If you consider that approx 70% of your calorie usage is burned by keeping the lights on so to speak ........... 2500 RDA kcals for a person.......... 1750 kcals for just pottering about......... increase that by 10% and you're looking at 175kcals extra burned ............ now I really doubt intermittent fasting brings about anywhere near a 10% increase in calorie usage through BMR or anything else. Maybe 2 % at most.

SuperRabbit

Where did you get the 2% figure?

I like the idea of having your last meal no later than 8pm on a Saturday night then not eating breakfast till 12 the next day, you get to fast and hardly notice it. Loads of people naturally skip breakfast anyway and you could end up with acid reflux in your sleep, burning your oesophagus if you eat dinner late. Wouldn't do it every day though because i get hangry if i don't have breakfast

Problem Of Motivation

Augeo wrote: »

Most folk I encounter toying with intermittent fasting seem to have no idea what their maintenance calories or calorie intake actually are.

Might that be because some people do it for the health benefits as opposed to weight loss? You'd drive yourself mad trying to count all the calories.

Alf Veedersane

Problem Of Motivation wrote: »

Might that be because some people do it for the health benefits as opposed to weight loss? You'd drive yourself mad trying to count all the calories.

Be that as it may, the health benefits might not be there if you're still eating too much

Macy0161

Problem Of Motivation wrote: »

Might that be because some people do it for the health benefits as opposed to weight loss? You'd drive yourself mad trying to count all the calories.

Potential health benefits.

IF would drive me mad and destroy my relationships with my family because I'd be too hangry. Just the same as excluding food groups probably would too.

There's no silver bullet for weight loss/ maintenance - you just have to find the way that works for you. Calorie counting works for me. IF works for others. Low carb works for others. So be it. One method isn't "better" than any other - once you're in deficit you'll lose weight.

Penn

Problem Of Motivation wrote: »

You'd drive yourself mad trying to count all the calories.

Yes and no. Logging everything into MyFitnessPal for the first few weeks and trying to balance your calorie intake can be annoying and it is possible to become a bit obsessive about it. But after those first few weeks, it just becomes routine and you have a fair idea of what you can and can't have calorie-wise in advance to get you in or around your target. Once it becomes routine it's very easy to stick to.

SuperRabbit

Unless you genuinely don't know what is high and low calorie food, personally I'd avoid calorie counting like the plague. It's not particularly helpful and it's potentially dangerous.

I'd say it's useful to know stuff like foods that are surprisingly high in calories (e.g. avocado... just have half) or surprisingly low in calories (you can eat all the mushrooms you want), other than those lists you probably know what is good and what is a "very sometimes" food.

I think there are food diary apps that allow you to hide the calorie number?

Everyone is different of course, if it works for you and doesn't cause you any mental health problems then great

Alf Veedersane

SuperRabbit wrote: »

It's not particularly helpful and it's potentially dangerous.

Not sure how it's not helpful and it's unhelpful to say it's potentially dangerous. Far more people can calorie count without having any mental health issues than those that might.

Its not for you, which is fine. Just give the hyperbole a rest