Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intermittent fasting more effective than calorie restriction

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–169 of 169 posts

Re: Intermittent fasting more effective than calorie restriction

#161

Post by bevesce- »

grecy wrote: post #105
bgroat wrote: post #19

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

The incredible thing is you don't really need to count calories, you just have to avoid complete garbage. As Michael Pollan says "Eat food, mostly greens, not too much". Don't eat anything processed, don't eat anything with more than one ingredient and only eat meat with at most one meal, and ideally quite a small portion. Completely and utterly ignore things like icecream, chocolate, soda, candy, chips, anything dee…

The only problem is that is a miserable way to live entire life

Re: Intermittent fasting more effective than calorie restriction

#162

Post by ac29 »

tempsy wrote: post #99
jitl wrote: post #8

“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 main benefit of fasting generally is autophagy (forcing your body to eat dead/old/mutated cells) and increased HGH secretion. Given that cancers are literally mutated cells, forcing your body to do an occasional cell cleanup seems potentially like a good idea.

I looked briefly into this and it seems that while there is evidence that intermittent fasting may be useful in preventing cancer and may be useful as an adjunct cancer treatment (in addition to chemotherapy and/or other treatments), the effect is largely from weight loss, not other mechanisms. Review article here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9530862/

From the conclusion:

"There is presently little evidence that intermittent fasting, without any reduction in body weight and proper balanced diet and exercise, can enhance cancer outcomes."

So, while the details in this review are interesting, the conclusions seem to come down to basic health advice: maintain a healthy weight, eat a healthy diet, and get exercise. Seems like good advice for pretty much everyone.

Re: Intermittent fasting more effective than calorie restriction

#163

Post by QuantumGood »

lazide wrote: post #144
bavarianbob wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more that one experiments with these diet changes, I think, the more one reveals how untrue that phrase "most important meal of the day" becomes. I feel unstoppable if I skip breakfast, lethargic if I don't.

Probably depends a lot on what (and how much) you eat for breakfast too? If I don't have some kind of protein in the AM, I quickly start having mental/emotional issues (and end up with recovery problems due to exercise, including pain). Trying to make up for it at lunch is a losing battle.

Glutathione worked for me

Re: Intermittent fasting more effective than calorie restriction

#164

Post by ozim »

pengaru wrote: post #79
mym1990 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intermittent fasting has no strict minimum that you have to fast, it can be 10-12 hours and still be intermittent fasting.

By that definition everyone who sleeps engages in intermittent fasting.

That is why people joke that it is fancy name for not eating breakfast.

Well I suppose not eating on purpose vs just being slob or not having time for it is kind of different.

Re: Intermittent fasting more effective than calorie restriction

#165

Post by stevenwoo »

pc86 wrote: post #81
stevenwoo wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Multiple hacker news stories have been published about Herman Ponzter and double water studies. https://researchblog.duke.edu/2021/03/24/duke-researcher-bus...

This is the first I've ever heard someone talk about "publishing" a "hacker news story."

I think my brain was searching for "posted" but I was about to step away from my computer and "published" was the only word that came to me then.

Re: Intermittent fasting more effective than calorie restriction

#166

Post by tempsy »

ac29 wrote: post #162
tempsy wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main benefit of fasting generally is autophagy (forcing your body to eat dead/old/mutated cells) and increased HGH secretion. Given that cancers are literally mutated cells, forcing your body to do an occasional cell cleanup seems potentially like a good idea.

I looked briefly into this and it seems that while there is evidence that intermittent fasting may be useful in preventing cancer and may be useful as an adjunct cancer treatment (in addition to chemotherapy and/or other treatments), the effect is largely from weight loss, not other mechanisms. Review article here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9530862/ From the conclusion: "There is presently little e…

intermittent fasting isn't long enough to trigger autophagy

autophagy takes at least a few days. wouldn't really considered IF to even really be "fasting" at all. it's just a fancy term for skipping breakfast.

Re: Intermittent fasting more effective than calorie restriction

#167

Post by kraig911 »

kstrauser wrote: post #45
kraig911 wrote: post #40

If you're a diabetic like me I'd recommend don't do intermittent fasting. I almost died. My blood sugar goes from 300+ to 50ish some days and when I tried this I never felt hunger. I felt like I was about to slip in a coma all day.

That's interesting! How long were your fasts?

Basically I was trying to skip lunch. I'd wake up and eat oatmeal, and some protein (usually yogurt) and I'd try and make it to dinner time. No Bueno.

Re: Intermittent fasting more effective than calorie restriction

#168

Post by pc86 »

aidenn0 wrote: post #101
pc86 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intermittent fasting doesn't suddenly change the laws of thermodynamics. Of course if you still eat 2,500 calories a day you will likely gain weight unless you already have a lot of muscle (but if you do, you likely know what you're doing enough that you're not reading this article actually hoping to learn anything). The point is that IF makes it easier to reduce calories, in part psychologically but also in part bec…

Oh, how I wish I could restrict my eating to 2,500 calories a day; I have a pretty high metabolism, but I manage to out-eat it.

> how I wish I could restrict my eating to 2,500 calories a day

You can.

Re: Intermittent fasting more effective than calorie restriction

#169

Post by thirdsun »

shunyaekam wrote: post #142

Anyone tried intermittent fasting while working out regularly? How did your schedule look?

I'm a cyclist that rides anywhere between 200 and 500 Km a week (depending on the season) and does IF 20-4 from monday to friday. I usually eat after work at 4 PM.

You can absolutely do low intensity workouts in a fasted state and I regularly do so after work. In fact it helps burning fat reserves. Just don't overdo it.

On weekends, when I do my longer and/or more intensive rides I make sure to fuel properly though. I simply ignore fasting on those proper cycling days.

Post reply on HN