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

Intermittent fasting: The good things it did to my body

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 151 posts

Re: Intermittent fasting: The good things it did to my body

#61

Post by venomsnake »

hatu wrote: post #51

Here's the thing I don't like about fasting - how are you supposed to work out while you're fasting? I can't imagine going to the gym eating 500 calories a day without passing out.

Not a problem at all. You lose some peak performance but barely any endurance on short fasts.

When I was getting ready for the prom I was working out, swimming and fasting for two weeks (only protein 200-400 calories). It was uncomfortable but totally manageable.

Warriors have waged whole wars depraved of adequate nutrition.

Re: Intermittent fasting: The good things it did to my body

#62

Post by Nimi »

bobowzki wrote: post #33
stickydink wrote: post #3

I don't think we're even close to really understanding how the body works here. I'm not obese, but I gain weight from eating a little more, very easily. Last summer, I followed a Keto ("ultra low carb, high fat, medium protein") diet for about 4 months. After the first week of feeling terrible, a well-known side effect, I felt perfectly fine. It felt like I was binge eating, I limited what I could eat and just went m…

I'm a physician. While it's good to lose weight (at least if you are overweight), keep in mind that losing weight is not the only interesting outcome. Any diet might have long term side effects. Such as an increased risk of cancer, arteriosclerosis etc. Also remember that weight loss is not the only benefit of exercise. That said, congrats on losing weight. Now start exercising :-)

I'd be curious to read be your response to this - genuinely asking here (skip to 37:30)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1RXvBveht0

Re: Intermittent fasting: The good things it did to my body

#63

Post by dm3 »

Theodores wrote: post #39

A lot of the diets mentioned on this thread are a long way from the diet used in this article. Note it is not mentioned in the article, however it is mostly vegetables with some fish. That is a long way from 'chipotle'!!! It is worth bearing in mind that a lot of things we consider to be food really does not want to be food. Grains want to be carried away by the wind to plant themselves somewhere else. Their ancestor…

> like some of those American Indian tribes that tried and failed to build corn-based civilisations in pre-Columbian times

Do you imply that corn had negative effect on Indians? From what I've read [1] it actually allowed Indians to maintain their population levels without having irrigation technology comparable to one developed in middle East and Europe.

[1] http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/technology-world-civilization

Re: Intermittent fasting: The good things it did to my body

#64

Post by notdrunkatall »

AltanS wrote: post #32
sn0v wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you notice any long term (lasting) effects after those four months? Also, any particular reason you stopped? Thanks.

Maybe I can answer this question, been on a ketogenic diet for over a year now. As mentioned above there is an adaptation period to the diet that can take up to 4 weeks. During that time symptoms can be flu like, this is caused by an initial hormonal change due to low blood glucose levels and in return a low and stable insulin level. Because of this the kidney excretes more sodium, potassium and water, leading to low…

HGH? Human Growth Hormone? Just curious, what benefit does this provide?

Re: Intermittent fasting: The good things it did to my body

#65

Post by halflings »

beagle3 wrote: post #44
sfjailbird wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pregnant women are exempt from fasting during ramadan.

So are Jewish woman on Yom Kippur - but many of them still fast; enough to change date-of-birth distribution for Jews and health-of-newborns for Muslims.

Yup but that changed a lot these last years. Some women used to be "ashamed" of the fact that they couldn't fast like other people did, but now (with TV, more education, etc.) they know that Islam prohibits that (as it can endanger the baby) and it's bad for both them and their babies.

Re: Intermittent fasting: The good things it did to my body

#66

Post by notdrunkatall »

awjr wrote: post #20
dualogy wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What did wheat do to you? Are you a celiac, or are there other reasons one might be interested in avoiding it?

I think it was a combination of issues: 1) If I eat a carb rich meal, I will happily go for a nap. Anecdotal evidence, had spaghetti carbonara with garlic bread at the weekend. Fell asleep watching a film for the first time in about a year. I can create the same effect with potato or rice. I don't like it. It wastes my time. 2) After eating a lot of bread I can feel extremely bloated and uncomfortable. I potentially…

>I switched from beer (ale) to cider and find I have no morning after 'bowel' effects.

I started having these problems about a year ago for no apparent reason. I'm going to have to give this a try, thanks!

Re: Intermittent fasting: The good things it did to my body

#67

Post by brassybadger »

Interesting to see how mainstream intermittent fasting has become. It's worth noting where it started.

A few years ago a few hardcore fitness fanatics started playing with the idea of using controlled fasting for weight loss and/or body recomposition. Two people that should be mentioned are Lyle McDonald[1] and Martin Berkhan[2]. Martin especially made IF popular via his blog, laying out the principles he used as a fitness consultant with his clients.

Most research (and especially the commercial IF knockoffs) only take some part of these principles, but the "diet" part is only part of the picture when it comes to body recomposition. It's almost worthless without the rest (high intensity, low volume weight training, basic compound movements, progressive overload, no focus on cardio).

Quite a few people/company are trying to rip off customers via their IF programs knockoffs and supplements. If you want give IF a shot, read through Martin's blog, and try the original Leangains protocol.

[1] http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/ [2] http://www.leangains.com/

Re: Intermittent fasting: The good things it did to my body

#68

Post by dhimes »

AltanS wrote: post #58
jimeuxx wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People like Attia live in a parallel universe where there are healthy populations on Earth that eat no carbs and East Asia doesn't exist. My Japanese is good enough now to explain to my wife's active octogenarian grandparents why rice is going to give them heart disease and diabetes. In all seriousness, the world of online nutrition is a nasty and insane place. There's a lot of dogma and cognitive dissonance in somet…

There's a lot of scientific evidence supporting a ketogenic lifestyle, distinguishing this movement from fad diets and Attia from a Guru status. If you're interested I would recommend the following book: http://amzn.com/0983490708

Better would be peer-reviewed journal articles. A lot of books have a tendency to promote the views of the author over providing a balance of information.

Re: Intermittent fasting: The good things it did to my body

#69

Post by lambda »

nkuttler wrote: post #47
tokenizer wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding the diet above, which limits your sugar intake to 20 grams a day, what are some potential consequences of starving your body of sugars? Sounds good in theory (sugar is bad), but it sounds stressful (body starts producing ketones due to suck a lack of sugar, flu like symptoms for a week).

Producing ketones is perfectly normal. The flu-like symptoms can usually be avoided by easing into a low-carb/keto diet and/or ingesting sodium, chicken broth is normally recommended at the early stages. Potential consequences of reduced carb intake are weight loss. It can be used to treat type 2 diabetes, epilepsy, a wide range of neurological disorders, some cancers (yeah, really), and much more. I'm not aware of a…

Here's a study that shows that while low-carb diets achieved effects faster (involved more weight loss in the first 6 months), after a year the difference in weight was negligible. Low carb diets led to higher levels of LDL cholesterol, which is generally considered to be bad, though were also correlated with better levels of HDL cholesterol, which are considered to be good. http://www.ceb-institute.org/fileadmin/upload/refman/arch_in...

Here is a a long term study that shows that low carbohydrate, high protein diets were correlated with higher mortality rates. It's an observational, not a controlled study, so the usual caveats apply, but it's definitely some evidence that there's no automatic win for low-carb, high protein diets: http://folk.ntnu.no/lyngbakk/artikler/trichopoulou.pdf

I'm pretty sure I've seen another study that linked long-term use of low-carb, high protein diets with increased incidence of cancer, but I can't find that study at the moment.

Re: Intermittent fasting: The good things it did to my body

#70

Post by g8oz »

Theodores wrote: post #39

A lot of the diets mentioned on this thread are a long way from the diet used in this article. Note it is not mentioned in the article, however it is mostly vegetables with some fish. That is a long way from 'chipotle'!!! It is worth bearing in mind that a lot of things we consider to be food really does not want to be food. Grains want to be carried away by the wind to plant themselves somewhere else. Their ancestor…

>>like some of those American Indian tribes that tried and failed to build corn-based civilisations in pre-Columbian times.

Umm taking into account the Aztec, Maya, Inca and all the aboriginal nations that preceded and co-existed with them I would like to disagree with the failure part. It is as possible to build a civilization from corn as it was from rice and wheat.

Oh also, this whole "grains are bad for you because of our caveman roots" thing has to be the least provable piece of speculation passing around the Internet these days. It is backed by few facts and much smugness.

I like to speculate too though. I think the problem with corn is the petroleum refining style approach that is taken with it. If you read up about it corn is treated as almost like a chemical feedstock. The resulting "products" are a public health disaster hidden from scrutiny by the money of Archer Daniels Midland etc and politicians from the Corn Belt.

The problem with wheat is the post WWII intensive breeding programs designed to maximize yield and gluten content. Gluten makes a easier feedstock for bakers and food product manufacturers. It also counts towards protein measurements and that directly relates to price. Many governments like Saudi Arabia that buy wheat for their entire nation look for higher protein levels and bumping gluten is a nice shortcut. I believe these market driven wheat modifications have produced unexamined changes and proteins that negatively affect the health of a significant percentage of the population. I believe in the coming years we will see a movement promoting the revival of "heritage" strains of wheat like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Fife_wheat.

Post reply on HN