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

Intermittent fasting may make little difference to weight loss, review finds

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 65 posts

Re: Intermittent fasting may make little difference to weight loss, review finds

#51

Post by seethishat »

data-ottawa wrote: post #43
bulbar wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You lose weight by reducing calories intake. That's well known and what the review, unsurprisingly, has shown. Methods like intermittent fasting work by providing a framework that makes it easier for people to achieve that.

It’s not black and white though. The body does adapt and respond to just reducing calories in or fasting. It’s better to do portion control, consume fiber and better calories, and exercise to increase metabolism. That all balances the calories out side of the equation in ways where fasting itself won’t. https://theconversation.com/its-time-to-bust-the-calories-in... https://theconversation.com/is-weight-loss-as-simpl…

What is the purpose of increasing fiber? Is it to make you feel full longer?

Re: Intermittent fasting may make little difference to weight loss, review finds

#52

Post by freehorse »

Imo what many discussions on IF miss is that one of the most challenging aspects in dieting, including in studies/interventions, is adherence rates. You can make a lot of different diets that are more healthy and/or have lower calories than a baseline diet of somebody and lead to losing weight, but the biggest challenge is how one adheres to them.

My experience with IF is that it makes it easier to schedule meals as well as to deal with whatever insatiety feelings come from reducing calories, and this made it easier for me to stay with IF diet than with other diets. I have read research where adherence is significantly higher in IF groups, other where it is lower. Essentially, adherence is firstmost about what works for a specific person. If the diet logistics don't work for you personally, it matters little what statistics say. The point (of any diet for weight loss/management) is always to reduce/control calories intake.

Re: Intermittent fasting may make little difference to weight loss, review finds

#53

Post by slowmovintarget »

bartwr wrote: post #19

It's hilarious that people describe their anecdotal experience of being in a calorie deficit as a proof that "intermittent fasting works". This was never the question, but whether intermittent fasting brings additional weight loss benefits as compared to calorie deficit with frequent meals. My anecdotal experience from 20y of bodybuilding and doing ~3 cuts a year: for cutting, I tried IF, 6 meals a day, low fat, low…

Intermittent fasting isn't for weight loss, it's for insulin sensitivity management.

Re: Intermittent fasting may make little difference to weight loss, review finds

#54

Post by eska »

Most of the studies they looked at did not use the most robust methods and included small numbers of people, making it difficult to work out the true effects.

Not a good sign for a meta study. When you average garbage you still get garbage.

As for my personal experience, I looked at scientific papers 5 years ago (no, intermittent fasting isn’t some new social media fad). The consensus back then was that it only slightly increases the speed at which one loses weight, but it helps significantly with adherence to a diet. This was a game changer for me too. With just attempts to control my caloric deficit I failed because I ended up snacking. With intermittent fasting (the strict variant of only eating once after work in my case) I simply had no appetite from the morning until my meal. I also didn’t have cravings before sleep.

Re: Intermittent fasting may make little difference to weight loss, review finds

#55

Post by matwood »

haxel wrote: post #36
mh2266 wrote: post #28

How do people that do this exercise? are they mostly sedentary? I mostly ride bikes for exercise and need fuel at least every hour on a ride or else I will bonk out. My output is 500kcal/hour based on power meter, a 4 hour ride would be 2000kcal, it's not doable without some food intake.

I also ride bike, and used to bonk, but it didn't take long for my body to adapt to using fat as fuel. Half the battle was mental: accepting that I truly didn't need to eat anything; my body already had all the fuel it needed. Then I could wake up, ride hard for hours (hilly terrain), and feel no need to eat until the afternoon.

Agreed that it's mostly mental. Missing a meal isn't starvation, and the body/mind adapt.

I do IF and do most of my physical activity before my first meal every day. It was hard at first, but now it's when I have the most energy and clarity.

Re: Intermittent fasting may make little difference to weight loss, review finds

#56

Post by matwood »

alexjplant wrote: post #50
bartwr wrote: post #19

It's hilarious that people describe their anecdotal experience of being in a calorie deficit as a proof that "intermittent fasting works". This was never the question, but whether intermittent fasting brings additional weight loss benefits as compared to calorie deficit with frequent meals. My anecdotal experience from 20y of bodybuilding and doing ~3 cuts a year: for cutting, I tried IF, 6 meals a day, low fat, low…

> Anything else and more is sectarianism and people bragging about their choices not having verified their true claimed efficacy or benefits. Everybody's looking for a silver bullet and wants to advocate for their specific one by tearing competing theories down. The reason that IF works is because it's more difficult to eat at a caloric surplus when you can only fill your stomach for 8 hours a day. Full stop. There m…

I agree with you 100%. You gotta find what works for you. Also the 80/20. I do IF, but I'm not going to skip brunch with friends.

Re: Intermittent fasting may make little difference to weight loss, review finds

#57

Post by ASalazarMX »

eska wrote: post #54

Most of the studies they looked at did not use the most robust methods and included small numbers of people, making it difficult to work out the true effects. Not a good sign for a meta study. When you average garbage you still get garbage. As for my personal experience, I looked at scientific papers 5 years ago (no, intermittent fasting isn’t some new social media fad). The consensus back then was that it only sligh…

> The consensus back then was that it only slightly increases the speed at which one loses weight, but it helps significantly with adherence to a diet.

This is my experience as well. IF didn't teach me how or what o eat, it taught me not to snack after the last meal of the day, and after losing around 10% of my weight (still obesity grade II), the weight-loss effect was lost. It didn't work for long-term weight loss, it just established a new equilibrium. Also, there's a bounce back if you stop it.

Currently, I'm on Mounjaro (diabetes type II likely caused by obesity and genetics), and IF meshes wonderfully with it, since mounjaro forces you to eat less or feel miserable. So far I've reached obesity grade I (aka plain obesity), and the effect has been very consistent over time, no new equilibrium reached yet.

So, for me, IF is not for weight loss, but it helps if you combine it with a proven method for weight loss.

Re: Intermittent fasting may make little difference to weight loss, review finds

#58

Post by ActorNightly »

bulbar wrote: post #34
ActorNightly wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with recuing calorie intake is that it can also lead to lethargy, where you burn even less calories, and reducing intake even more means you arent getting vital nutrients.

That's not wrong but often not that drastic. Reducing NEAT (non exercise activity) on reduced calories is person dependent and can be quite significant. The body however is quite robust. For a healthy person, there's no acute risk associated to significantly reduce the calories intake for a few months. You should take care to have a balanced diet, of course.

Depends on the person. Ive known people that have tried fasting and it wasn't working - but they literally were just coming home from work and going to sleep.

Re: Intermittent fasting may make little difference to weight loss, review finds

#59

Post by xracy »

At some point, we as a society are going to come to grips with the fact that only like 5% of the population is capable of actually losing and maintaining weight-loss.

The rest is just all new "fad diets" that cycle every 3 years as people go through the cycle of trying them, seeing results, failing to maintain them "forever" (which is what they'd have to do), and then putting the weight back on.

Every single diet has this problem (Even GLP-1s from what I have seen). The human body seems to have some mechanism by which it attempts to maintain it's current weight. But we all continue to be incredibly prone to "this new fad diet actually works!"

Re: Intermittent fasting may make little difference to weight loss, review finds

#60

Post by ranger_danger »

DharmaPolice wrote: post #14
ranger_danger wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you know that spreading that one meal out throughout the day wouldn't have the same effect? I bet you'd have more energy as well. Unless you have tested this, I find it hard to believe that this isn't really just a caloric deficit compared to whatever you were doing before losing weight, assuming the same activity level.

It probably would have the same effect, but the point is that a lot of people find it easier to stick to one meal a day (or similar) than multiple smaller meals.

> a lot of people find it easier to stick to one meal a day (or similar) than multiple smaller meals

I am highly skeptical of this take... is there any science behind it?

Post reply on HN