A beginner's guide to intermittent fasting (2012) • Hacker News Board

Re: A beginner's guide to intermittent fasting (2012)

#181

Post by telchior » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 5:46 PM UTC

dhimes wrote: post #128

Once again I'll post my contra-indications. I tried intermittent fasting twice; the second time I got my doc to go along with ordering a second blood test after six months. My glucose and cholesterol were both worse . I gained a few points. FWIW, I skipped breakfast most of my adult life, but after having kids (well, my wife actually birthed them) I remained overweight. Exercising and using fitbit to monitor calories…

Keto diets are notorious for this -- some people are, apparently, genetically unsuited to extremely low carb diets and their body responds by ballooning cholesterol levels and possibly some other issues (has been a while since I read about it). So they recommend that people getting on that particular diet do both self-monitoring and blood tests.

You could be experiencing some form of that. A lot of these ideas are very poorly studied and may be missing negative effects that occur in a minority.

Re: A beginner's guide to intermittent fasting (2012)

#182

Post by prometheus76 » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 5:50 PM UTC

rockdiesel wrote: post #173

prometheus76 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Warrior Diet recommended for your dinner meal to be a meat and vegetable stew of some kind most of the time.

I'll admit it's been 15 years since I originally read Warrior Diet, but I thought it advocated a massive salad as the first part of your dinner followed by the protein source? I don't recall much mention of stew in the book, but like I said it's been ages since I read it. Not challenging you. Just curious since it has been so long since I read it and I'm trying to jog my memory.

I think we're both right, because the author recommended what you're saying: eat a big salad first, then try to have your protein source be a stewed meat of some kind so that the nutrients in the meat wouldn't be lost by the cooking process. They would be captured by the water in the stew, and more bio-available because they've been cooked.

Re: A beginner's guide to intermittent fasting (2012)

#183

Post by mewse-hn » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 6:02 PM UTC

allmodelsRwrong wrote: post #133

The wording here always confuses me, why is it called intermittent fasting? Isn't all fasting already intermittent otherwise it would be called starving right?

Yes, all fasting is intermittent or else it becomes death by starvation which is something different.

I think the term "fasting" has become more severe since the term breakfast became commonplace. It comes with baggage that implies religion (fasting during Ramadan), medicine (fasting before surgery), or protest (fasting due to hunger strike).

They needed a term to reduce the severity and it probably could just have been "moderate fasting" or "scheduled fasting". "Intermittent fasting" won because the English language is cromulent.

Re: A beginner's guide to intermittent fasting (2012)

#184

Post by puchatek » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 6:16 PM UTC

dorfsmay wrote: post #152

puchatek wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're completely discounting the effects of fasting on insulin levels. Low levels of insulin are correlated with higher rates of lipid oxidisation. Not that this effect will outweigh e.g. an additional banana you devour because you're famished after fasting. But it is there. Counting calories is a good help in making sure you don't nullify it. ( https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/biochemistry-genetics-a... )

Sure, but how much effect do all those "side effects" have in comparison to a significant calorie deficit or surplus? How applicable are those effect to the average person who wants to keep their eating to something relatively simple? Do you think that any of those effects will be enough to maintain your weight if you consistently eat a 500 calorie surplus? My issue is that a lot of people start doing "intermittent f…

I would be very surprised if 500 kcal didn't register because of IF. Is that the claim though? I've been doing 5:2 for years and there they say "eat normally" on the off days. Don't overeat/compensate.

Re: A beginner's guide to intermittent fasting (2012)

#185

Post by sasawpg » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 6:33 PM UTC

vidarh wrote: post #140

JKCalhoun wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My sense is that conventional dietary wisdom comes from an agricultural heritage — where we spent all damn day working the fields. Without that intensive labor, three meals seems to make less sense.

It was eye-opening once I started tracking my calorie intact and adjusting until I was in balance to realise just how far off typical dietary advice was for me. Especially as I was actively powerlifting at the time, and forums were full of advice about the massive amounts of food I "needed". UK NHS still say 2000kcal for women and 2500 for men, but for me after actually counting and tracking my weight at different in…

> ... the balance was ~1800-2000 when exercising 5 times a week including 3x1 hour long weightlifting sessions.

I see you added a couple more details to your post. Weight lifting sessions really aren't that productive as far as calorie burn is concerned. I pulled a random 30m weight workout and my avg HR was just over 50% resulting in approximately 130kCal/hr burned (estimated based on HR, actual could be a bit higher but unlikely to be higher than 200/hr), which does not come even close to cycling. My average calorie burn for a recovery ride is about 500kCal/hr, 575kCal/hr for endurance, 750kCal/hr for tempo and 975kCal/hr for threshold. Recovery/endurance are sustainable basically for an entire day (barring discomfort and boredom), tempo for 3-5hrs and threshold for > 2500kcal was on the high end of my bulking intake when I wanted to add weight for my lifting.

I would be surprised if I averaged less than 2500, though I haven't tracked in a long time. I can always feel when my intake isn't enough. My workout related output is 5000-7500+/week which is probably higher than average, though the low end is fairly well in-line with someone who runs/rides 5+ times per week. To your point, 2500 for an 'average' male is more than likely on the very high side.

Re: A beginner's guide to intermittent fasting (2012)

#186

Post by robotcookies » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 6:37 PM UTC

Some advice if you find it hard to skip meals - you can drink things like coffee, tea or water. Skip the sugar of course, but it helps your stomach feel less empty to have liquids.

Many people are accustomed to having their stomach full all the time and associate the feeling of an empty stomach with something being wrong. I had a friend who couldn't go three hours without eating and said she would feel faint. It's kind of like how some people feel dirty for not showering every morning even if they aren't actually that dirty. But you can learn to stop associating these things. I have been intermittent fasting for years and don't even notice an empty stomach now.

Re: A beginner's guide to intermittent fasting (2012)

#187

Post by SOLAR_FIELDS » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 6:54 PM UTC

Nathanael_M wrote: post #170

SOLAR_FIELDS wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The beautiful thing about OMAD (I’ve used it to lose weight quite effectively several times) is that it’s rather difficult to go over your TDEE in one meal no matter what you eat. In fact, when you are trying to maintain a weight instead of lose, you often have to make a concerted effort to make even the minimum amount of calories to maintain. It’s possible to lose weight eating nothing but an entire frozen pizza eve…

Well maybe I'll give it a shot for a while. I've been skipping breakfast (mostly out of routine necessity), but I find I end up just eating a second supper late at night. I'm effectively shifting breakfast to lunch time. Did you find any substantial cost savings?

Nothing dramatic - you eat less of course but if you’re the kind of person that cooks bigger meals and then eats the leftovers you either need to adjust how much you cook or plan to throw more away. It also lets you plan your one meal better so you often end up choosing something healthier since you’re putting more thought into the meal.

Everyone has different times they prefer to eat but I found for myself eating between 2-4 pm was the ideal time for me to avoid getting hungry in the evening and still be able to work well in the morning.

It takes about 3-5 days to adjust your body hunger chemicals so you end up having to fight through a bit of hunger the first few days but after that it goes away.

One downside is the inconvenience that it sometimes puts on interactions with others who might like to enjoy meals with you at times that don’t sync with your schedule. It would probably not work as a lifestyle for a salesman who did business meals, for instance.

Re: A beginner's guide to intermittent fasting (2012)

#188

Post by aYsY4dDQ2NrcNzA » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 7:07 PM UTC

JKCalhoun wrote: post #83

random_upvoter wrote: post #9

For decades of my adult life I skipped breakfast, going against all conventional dietary wisdom. Having 3 meals a day just felt like turning my body into a conveyor belt that produces faeces. Now I feel kinda vindicated. A few times I traveled with a friends who did the breakfast - lunch - dinner thing and after two or three days I had to opt out of either breakfast or dinner. I remember asking "how do you even manag…

My sense is that conventional dietary wisdom comes from an agricultural heritage — where we spent all damn day working the fields. Without that intensive labor, three meals seems to make less sense.

When I was a teenager, my family went to a family reunion and stayed with some relatives who had a farm.

They ate four meals a day.

Re: A beginner's guide to intermittent fasting (2012)

#189

Post by stjohnswarts » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 8:31 PM UTC

gilbetron wrote: post #106

Just started doing this (again) two weeks ago and am down 4 lbs already. All I do is skip breakfast, and be a little aware not to gorge when lunch/dinner comes around, and then stop snacks (other than maybe a pickle or something) after dinner. It really depends on the person, for my wife, she just calorie counts and can shed the pounds with little problem. I can't stand being constantly hungry and not eating until I'…

I skip breakfast as well but I have to admit I put a little extra half and half in my coffee, but half and half is pretty low on glycemic load anyway.

Re: A beginner's guide to intermittent fasting (2012)

#190

Post by stjohnswarts » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 8:40 PM UTC

farcaster wrote: post #162

This might be an individual reaction to fasting, but I always have headaches when I don't eat properly (skip meals, etc). Is this something that I would have to get used to when eating less?

I got used to it by doing 12-12 then 14-10 then 16-8 then 18-6. I believe I did 10 days on each phase as 1 week seemed too "quick". It was just my moderate way of weaning myself off breakfast. I have tried the 24 hour fasts and I just can't make it and not be miserable.