81–90 of 169 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have a source that shows BMR does not reduce with TRE?
Multiple hacker news stories have been published about Herman Ponzter and double water studies. https://researchblog.duke.edu/2021/03/24/duke-researcher-bus...
“More effective” in what capacity? Adherence. > The mean (SD) reduction in energy intake was -313 (509) kcal/d for TRE, -197 (426) kcal/d for CR, and -16 (439) kcal/d for controls So — the time restricted eating group reduced calories more than the group that counted calories; but the resulting weight loss has the same cause: reduced calorie intake compared to before. If there’s a take away here, it’s possibly that a…
I've been doing intermittent fasting for years now, and I've not continued to lose weight past a small initial drop. Only way I can lose weight is if I also start restricting calories.
“More effective” in what capacity? Adherence. > The mean (SD) reduction in energy intake was -313 (509) kcal/d for TRE, -197 (426) kcal/d for CR, and -16 (439) kcal/d for controls So — the time restricted eating group reduced calories more than the group that counted calories; but the resulting weight loss has the same cause: reduced calorie intake compared to before. If there’s a take away here, it’s possibly that a…
I think for a lot of people (me included), the primary advantage is in ease of measurement. It's hard to count calories accurately. It's very easy to look at the clock and determine if it's between 1300-1900 hours
Latest I've heard is that it all boils down to calories and that intermittent fasting (time restricted eating or 8/16)makes you lose muscle faster due to low protein during the fasting period. Better to eat less calories and consume small amounts of protein throughout the day. https://youtu.be/G3-EW7nWCbU I tried IF a couple times in my life. First time, coupled with lots of endurance exercise, worked great but I was…
if this is the reason, then wouldn't adjusting your macros to ensure enough protein mitigate this?
“More effective” in what capacity? Adherence. > The mean (SD) reduction in energy intake was -313 (509) kcal/d for TRE, -197 (426) kcal/d for CR, and -16 (439) kcal/d for controls So — the time restricted eating group reduced calories more than the group that counted calories; but the resulting weight loss has the same cause: reduced calorie intake compared to before. If there’s a take away here, it’s possibly that a…
Calorie restricting for a long time will let your body adapt to live with that. I'm curious what the result would be if you add a cheatmeal every 3-4 days. Note: This is regulated by leptin as far as I know - https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/articles/22446-leptin > Leptin’s main function is to help regulate the long-term balance between your body’s food intake and energy use (expenditure). Leptin helps inhibit (…
“More effective” in what capacity? Adherence. > The mean (SD) reduction in energy intake was -313 (509) kcal/d for TRE, -197 (426) kcal/d for CR, and -16 (439) kcal/d for controls So — the time restricted eating group reduced calories more than the group that counted calories; but the resulting weight loss has the same cause: reduced calorie intake compared to before. If there’s a take away here, it’s possibly that a…
The only challenge of intermittent fasting for the masses if anyone happens to need to take medication in the morning that requires some food. Moving the eating window isn't always ideal.
The problem with most diet/fitness advice is that it comes from fit+healthy people who've never had serious weight/health problems, and for whom it's all easy.
“More effective” in what capacity? Adherence. > The mean (SD) reduction in energy intake was -313 (509) kcal/d for TRE, -197 (426) kcal/d for CR, and -16 (439) kcal/d for controls So — the time restricted eating group reduced calories more than the group that counted calories; but the resulting weight loss has the same cause: reduced calorie intake compared to before. If there’s a take away here, it’s possibly that a…
I've done both. I can attest that intermittent fasting, at least for me, is WAY more sustainable ... and actually makes maintaining a calorie deficit easier too. Hunger is a weird thing. People tend to assume that if you don't eat you'll just get hungrier and hungrier. The reality is that hunger comes in waves. If you can ride out a wave of hunger for 30 - 45 minutes it goes away. And the longer you don't eat, the le…
The hunger goes away when I'm sleeping and I'm not hungry in the morning - Lunch at 11 or 12.
It's really hard to eat too many calories in the 8 hour window, unless I drink sodas and stuff my face with candy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think for a lot of people (me included), the primary advantage is in ease of measurement. It's hard to count calories accurately. It's very easy to look at the clock and determine if it's between 1300-1900 hours
but you still have to avoid overeating when doing IF. It's not like you get to just eat to fullness and ignore calorie counts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've done both. I can attest that intermittent fasting, at least for me, is WAY more sustainable ... and actually makes maintaining a calorie deficit easier too. Hunger is a weird thing. People tend to assume that if you don't eat you'll just get hungrier and hungrier. The reality is that hunger comes in waves. If you can ride out a wave of hunger for 30 - 45 minutes it goes away. And the longer you don't eat, the le…
It's very interesting once you experiment with it. I had a much easier time fasting between 8pm -> 5pm, then from 8pm to noon.
Our bodies are so absurdly adaptive to just about anything we can throw at them. And so it makes sense, in some weird way, that if you're going to do something - doing it to an extreme degree can make things easier than going half way, since you optimize for the adaptive response from your body.