Intermittent fasting 2 days vs. 1 day per week
41–50 of 91 posts
Re: Intermittent fasting 2 days vs. 1 day per week
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could you elaborate a little about your regimen? Each time I attempted water fasting, the next day I was basically famished ( and needless to say, any progress made was lost ).
How far did you get? In my experience, the first day is by far the most difficult. I find that it's most effective to start fasting on days where I am going to be occupied with something, since I don't think about food when I'm active. I'd be miserable if I attempted to fast on a day where I was lounging around watching TV.
I will be trying again soon, but this time around I think I will need to properly plan it ( initial attempts were basically spur of the moment things ).
Re: Intermittent fasting 2 days vs. 1 day per week
#43> protein pacing diet for the remaining five/six days/week (Protein pacing refers to 4–6 meals/day evenly-spaced, where each meal contains 25–40g of protein) > During fasting days, participants fasting for one day/week were allowed to consume 400 Kcal/day, while participants fasting for two consecutive days were allowed 500 Kcal/day. During non-fasting days the dietary regimen provided 1350 and 1700 kcals/day for wom…
Re: Intermittent fasting 2 days vs. 1 day per week
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been adding 0% greek yogurt to my breakfast - nice way to sneak some protein in there. I had no idea how low cal/ high protein that stuff was until recently.
Low fat cottage cheese has almost as favorable a protein to calorie ratio in case you want some variety. Also you can buy egg whites in a carton and that’s a pure complete protein. I like to chop up some vegetables fill up a muffin tin with those and egg white, and bake little fritata type snacks.
Re: Intermittent fasting 2 days vs. 1 day per week
#45> protein pacing diet for the remaining five/six days/week (Protein pacing refers to 4–6 meals/day evenly-spaced, where each meal contains 25–40g of protein) > During fasting days, participants fasting for one day/week were allowed to consume 400 Kcal/day, while participants fasting for two consecutive days were allowed 500 Kcal/day. During non-fasting days the dietary regimen provided 1350 and 1700 kcals/day for wom…
> Also something I was wondering, the repeated emphasis on short-term benefits has me wonder how the participants did after the trial. This right here is the first and most important reason to be skeptical of any study on weight loss. None of these things ever turn out to do anything useful on a time horizon that matters. If you want to know how to lose weight for a few weeks you don't need a peer reviewed journal, j…
It's (always) worth skimming the article, or at least the headline. From the subheadline:
> *Given the same energy intake and expenditure*, intermittent fasting two days versus one day per week increases weight loss in overweight men and women
This study isn't saying "2 day IF is a miracle weight-loss cure and you should just do it bada bing bada boom weight loss solved". It's holding everything constant except the number of fasting days, and finding that it's (quite dramatically) more effective in the short-term.
This is a data point, not a weight-loss plan. It doesn't call for "skepticism", just careful reading and limited application (or for a start, reading the article/headline at all).
Nutrition is intensely complicated and devilishly difficult to study. But for scientifically-literate people who take it seriously, data points like this shed light on limited portions of the "solution space". This is crucial to mapping out the space enough to understand how to improve your own diet; it's not amenable to an impatient approach that expects every study to be a magic bullet.
Even ignoring the signal that this provides, the absolute minimum value of this study is that somebody who's already doing a time-limited IF-1 diet can switch to a time-limited IF-2 diet. That's valuable in and of itself.
> If you want to know how to lose weight for a few weeks you don't need a peer reviewed journal, just go get a "women's health" magazine and read about several ways that really do probably work to lose weight in that timespan.
With the same improvement in hunger levels, hormone profile, and cardiometabolic health (all mentioned in the for both the control and treatment)? I highly doubt it. Even assuming that IF isn't sustainable[1], people do have short-term weight loss goals sometimes, and IF provides a path to do so that keeps metabolic and hormonal health in mind relative to traditional crash dieting.
[1] I've been doing it for....five years now? Not only did I lose a reasonable amount of weight early on, it's been helpful for maintaining during a life phase of suddenly-expanding waistlines among my peers. Plus it's trivial to dial it up slightly when I do feel the need to tighten up a little.
Re: Intermittent fasting 2 days vs. 1 day per week
#461700 cal/day seems quite low and I would think would result in weight loss continuing also on non-fasting days.
2000 is not at all accurate for most Americans sedentary lifestyle.
Re: Intermittent fasting 2 days vs. 1 day per week
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
Minimum for normal people should be 0.8*kg/day and muscle building gains top out at around 1.6*kg/day. If these people are fat then just 1.0*kg/day could be 125g/day.
They targeted a BMI > 27.5, which could be ‘fat’ or it could be ‘a little soft’, or it could be someone who’s really swole. For reference a 27.5 BMI is 5’9” at 186lbs. I can attest that when I’m well muscled, nobody thinks I’m fat at 186, but when I’m not yolked, I look like a tad doughy. The average adult male in the US has a BMI of 26.6 btw…
The average adult male is in terrible shape.
FWIW, people who exercise regularly should combine waist to height ratio (WHtR) with BMI. If you're BMI is high, but your WHtR is <0.5, then you're good. Otherwise, you're at risks for heart disease and stroke, even if you "look" healthy.
Re: Intermittent fasting 2 days vs. 1 day per week
#48Re: Intermittent fasting 2 days vs. 1 day per week
#49Having water fasted many times, I swear this has something to do with burning all the stored glycogen. I have no backing other than what I’ve experienced myself. I get really hungry for a week after a fast and continue to lose weight or stay the same. Anecdotally, I’ve chalked this up to as long as your glycogen bank isn’t full, you can pretty much eat whatever you want. Water fasting is glorious btw.
Could you elaborate a little about your regimen? Each time I attempted water fasting, the next day I was basically famished ( and needless to say, any progress made was lost ).
Re: Intermittent fasting 2 days vs. 1 day per week
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Also something I was wondering, the repeated emphasis on short-term benefits has me wonder how the participants did after the trial. This right here is the first and most important reason to be skeptical of any study on weight loss. None of these things ever turn out to do anything useful on a time horizon that matters. If you want to know how to lose weight for a few weeks you don't need a peer reviewed journal, j…
> This right here is the first and most important reason to be skeptical of any study on weight loss. None of these things ever turn out to do anything useful on a time horizon that matters. It's (always) worth skimming the article, or at least the headline. From the subheadline: > *Given the same energy intake and expenditure*, intermittent fasting two days versus one day per week increases weight loss in overweight…