I've decided to try it.

Now instead of saying "Next week I'm going to start my new diet", I say "Next week I'm going to start fasting."


(typing with a bag of mini donuts on my lap)

I don't see what the big deal is. I fast for at least a few hours every day.

Don't knock it until you try it.

I fast regularly... between meals.

Why is it called fasting when time goes so slow while doing it? It should be called letharging....

I tried it but it made me hungry.

Fasting, whew, had me worried there for a minute...

I've recently lost 70lbs.

Among the changes I've made, I don't eat anything after 10pm, or before 10am.

Apparently that's fasting.

For my whole life, I've never been a "breakfast person," so the mornings are easy, and Coffee Break is 10:15 typically at work.

It's the evening meal, and then not eating or drinking after it (beyond water), that have been key.

More "fasting" than that, I think is rather excessive.

If you're interested in the empirical evidence supporting fasting, there's an interesting video on Amazon Prime Video called The Science of Fasting. Very interesting about the benefits of a 4-12 day fast, and how it is the norm for us to occasionally fast due to our evolution, and how having a constant calorie supply is abnormal for us physiologically. Especially interesting in how it provides secondary benefits such as resistance to diseases like cancer, or so say the scientists. It's worth a look.

Religious reasons to fast too. Been a while since I've been in the Bible, but fasting is in there.

quote:

Originally posted by sigcrazy7:
If you're interested in the empirical evidence supporting fasting, there's an interesting video on Amazon Prime Video called The Science of Fasting. Very interesting about the benefits of a 4-12 day fast, and how it is the norm for us to occasionally fast due to our evolution, and how having a constant calorie supply is abnormal for us physiologically. Especially interesting in how it provides secondary benefits such as resistance to diseases like cancer, or so say the scientists. It's worth a look.

We can all agree that there are no naturally occurring supermarkets, much less fast food chains, but let's be realistic. People aren't ever going to just voluntarily fast regularly for "4-12 days." Of course science says we can survive it, it was necessary to get us all the way here.

quote:

Originally posted by radioman:
Religious reasons to fast too. Been a while since I've been in the Bible, but fasting is in there.

I don't remember reading about you in the Bible, and Religious reasons to fast are even dumber than the scientific ones.

News flash, everyone! You don't need as much food as you crave, and we're not evolutionary built to handle 24/7 abundant food. Well... Duh.

quote:

Originally posted by arcwelder76:
I've recently lost 70lbs.

Among the changes I've made, I don't eat anything after 10pm, or before 10am.

Apparently that's fasting.

For my whole life, I've never been a "breakfast person," so the mornings are easy, and Coffee Break is 10:15 typically at work.

It's the evening meal, and then not eating or drinking after it (beyond water), that have been key.

More "fasting" than that, I think is rather excessive.

You know he was kidding, right?

quote:

Originally posted by Oregon:
You know he was kidding, right?

It's 2017.

If you're going to "kid" or "be sarcastic" in text, you best make an effort to clarify your intent.

Otherwise, what you typed into the internet will be interpreted as written. This is the reality.

Things are different in 2018

I started intermittent fasting recently. Became fascinated with the topic. I do it for health reasons, I think doing it for weight loss reasons alone is a bit of a misapplication though it can help with food timing, burning more fat, and meeting daily calorie goals.

Fasting isn't about eating less, (it isn't eating at all!), it is simply timing calories differently to maximize the time spent in a fasted state allowing for fat burning after the glycogen stores are depleted as well as giving the body a chance to get rid of unwanted cell materials.

It helps me meet daily calorie goals a lot easier. If I were shooting for 2400/day with 3 meals that would be B 400, L 800 and D 1200. With fasting I could do L 1000 and large 1400 cal dinner.

I have done a 2 day fast, it was no biggie. I'd like to try a 5 day next.

I saw the Netflix documentary as well, it was very interesting if a bit dry and a little dated.

This video is good as well https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9Aw0P7GjHE

quote:

Originally posted by arcwelder76:

quote:

Originally posted by Oregon:
You know he was kidding, right?

It's 2017.

If you're going to "kid" or "be sarcastic" in text, you best make an effort to clarify your intent.

Otherwise, what you typed into the internet will be interpreted as written. This is the reality.

It is 2018. And in this day and age, I hope one is savvy enough to understand satire, especially if it is ended with a .

I do intermittent fasting, intermittently.

I typically do a 16-hour fast/8-hour feeding window (sometimes it's more like 18/6) a few times a week. It's not bad. Drinking plain coffee or tea (I prefer tea) can blunt any hunger pangs.

I've also done weekly 24-hour fasts with good results.

I don't believe in extended fasts, though, as that can trigger starvation mode and cause the body to start breaking down muscle and storing the energy as fat, as well as screw with your basal metabolic rate.

I stop eating at 5pm. Hunger will hit at 8pm but I push through it. Sleep is far better with an empty tummy; hunger cycles are important to the body. I'm not hungry when I wake up, but get hungry within a couple hours.

My 'diet' was thrown off last night; two plates of kielbasa and sausage, potatoes mashed with lots of butter, at 6:30pm. Standard fare for me years ago ... but last night? I felt like shit a couple hours later. Mint tea at 2am ... feeling better now, but will stick to fruits and raw veggies for a couple days.

In reading the post of henryarnaud, I see my fast is similar. I'm probably nailing 16 hours half the time, 14 hour fast most of the time.

There's a pretty good book out titled "Eat Stop Eat" that describes the program I've done successfully in the past.

Basics of the diet is that the guy was a grad student working on his thesis centered around the Mediterranean diet, and he noted a theme. Turns out most of the locals were Orthodox and had numerous prescribed fasting days, and so regardless of the diet most folks were eating, there was a majority doing intermittent fasting. After further investigation he discovered that these brief fasts of 18-24 hours release glycogen, which (roughly speaking) have an inverse effect to fat storage and release as insulin, so therefore were of benefit. Going over 24 hours will trigger metabolic shutdown mechanisms, and counter your intended effects.

The author boiled it down to eating in moderation, avoiding an unnecessarily high sugar intake, and fasting two to three times a week. For the purposes of the diet, a fast is 18 hours or more.

I personally took this info and began to tweak it, and found that if I eat an early dinner (finish before 6pm) and then go to bed earlyish that night, then skip breakfast and eat after 12 the next day (or 18 hours after the last meal), it satisfied the needs of the fast and accomplished my goals. However, I found that I needed to do it 3 times a week (usually starting after the evening meal on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday) to really get the full benefit. I was losing ~ 2 lbs a week, 3 if I combined the fasting with a modified low carb diet (whole grain breads, steel cut oats, no sugar, etc). Overall I lost around 50 lbs on the slabsides plan.

quote:

Originally posted by slabsides45:
Going over 24 hours will trigger metabolic shutdown mechanisms, and counter your intended effects.

Not true, especially if you stay active, keep working out. When fasting our bodies release hormones to tamp down hunger and increase metabolism to fuel your search for more food.

Caloric restriction is what really slows down your metabolism. Since you are eating, your body is trying to get by on what you are giving it and it is not enough.

When you are truly fasting, you aren't giving it anything so it has to first turn to glycogen stores, then fat. Fat has 3500 cals per lb, so if you are just 5lbs over your lowest safe BF level (say 4.5% for a male), you still have a week's worth of calories on board.

Studies also show lean muscle loss is minimal during a long fast (again, if you stay active, keep working out).

On a serious note I did the 10 to 10 thing years ago and it did make a big difference.


I'm a habit eater and that's not a good thing. Eating on a schedule during the work week because that's what you do. Then the weekend comes and ill go a day , day and a half without eating without even noticing.

quote:

Originally posted by arcwelder76:

quote:

Originally posted by sigcrazy7:
If you're interested in the empirical evidence supporting fasting, there's an interesting video on Amazon Prime Video called The Science of Fasting. Very interesting about the benefits of a 4-12 day fast, and how it is the norm for us to occasionally fast due to our evolution, and how having a constant calorie supply is abnormal for us physiologically. Especially interesting in how it provides secondary benefits such as resistance to diseases like cancer, or so say the scientists. It's worth a look.

We can all agree that there are no naturally occurring supermarkets, much less fast food chains, but let's be realistic. People aren't ever going to just voluntarily fast regularly for "4-12 days." Of course science says we can survive it, it was necessary to get us all the way here.

As is stated in the documentary, the fasts are done in clinics, under medical care and for specific reasons. Yes, people are voluntarily doing it, particularly those who are about to undergo chemotherapy. I recommended the video to those who are interested in the science of fasting, what occurs to the body during a fast.

If you are interested in this, I recommend you watch it.