Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Intermittent fasting for beginners https://www.dietdoctor.com/intermittent-fasting
• What is intermittent fasting?
• Weight loss
• Benefits
• How to
• FAQ
• Get started
• Learn more
• Free trial
It's more than just weight loss due to calorie restriction. It's also more than calories in/calories out.
Quote:
During fasting, cells activate pathways that enhance intrinsic defenses against oxidative and metabolic stress and those that remove or repair damaged molecules.
Last edited by KaraZetterberg153; 02-05-2020 at 11:12 AM..
Intermittent fasting for beginners https://www.dietdoctor.com/intermittent-fasting
• What is intermittent fasting?
• Weight loss
• Benefits
• How to
• FAQ
• Get started
• Learn more
• Free trial
It's more than just weight loss due to calorie restriction. It's also more than calories in/calories out.
I am not discounting IF but you may want to vet your sources a little bit more. This is a pay for site to promote their opinions. So they are not exactly unbiased since they are trying to sell you something.
I am not discounting IF but you may want to vet your sources a little bit more. This is a pay for site to promote their opinions. So they are not exactly unbiased since they are trying to sell you something.
No, sometimes you have to look at the ideas presented, apart from any attempt to monetize them. I've never spent a dime on IF books or other materials. In other words, the ideas presented need to be vetted, not necessarily the source. Or to put it another way, concepts aren't automatically invalid because of the source. A logical fallacy is accepting or denying validity, based on sources.
This is hard for some people to understand sometimes, but it is the centerpiece of scientific method. Which, hilariously, is missed by some posters touting scientific method.
I am not discounting IF but you may want to vet your sources a little bit more. This is a pay for site to promote their opinions. So they are not exactly unbiased since they are trying to sell you something.
There are no doubts that there are benefits to IF mainly adherence. But the main question is: Are the benefits from IF listed from the OP just a simple fact of being in a caloric deficit or the actual act of time restricted eating?
But yea you are correct, the source straight from their website says that they support low-carb nutrition. They are obviously biased to low carb diets as they sell memberships to view their meal plans. It would be nice for the OP to link information from a non-biased source not trying to make a buck.
No, sometimes you have to look at the ideas presented, apart from any attempt to monetize them. I've never spent a dime on IF books or other materials. In other words, the ideas presented need to be vetted, not necessarily the source. Or to put it another way, concepts aren't automatically invalid because of the source. A logical fallacy is accepting or denying validity, based on sources.
This is hard for some people to understand sometimes, but it is the centerpiece of scientific method. Which, hilariously, is missed by some posters touting scientific method.
And the ideas have already been vetted if you look at the litany of scientific research. Intermittent fasting is nothing more than a time restricted way to control caloric intake. Shown to be neither better nor worse than traditional caloric restriction.
If intermittent fasting works for you the best than GREAT!!! Keep doing it. But don't for one second think that IF somehow provides a magical benefit over normal continuous caloric restriction.
But yea you are correct, the source straight from their website says that they support low-carb nutrition. They are obviously biased to low carb diets as they sell memberships to view their meal plans. It would be nice for the OP to link information from a non-biased source not trying to make a buck.
I don't need a membership or meal plan to figure out how to do low carb or IF.
The number of carbs is on just about everything, or I can Google it. Then I just need to add 'em up.
IF is even easier... I just need a watch and the ability to tell time.
I can do it!!
Why do we need a new thread on IF every day, it's been done so many times all the studies show NO Advantage over any other calorie controlled diet.
Actually low carb has been shown to have advantages. It's just they're only short-term and the meta studies I've seen show no advantage beyond 9 to 12 months.
IF or time restricted feeding doesn't work for me. I don't do regimented schedules. On the other hand why it works for many people very much does work for me. I like big meals. Eating twice a day works for me much better than eating three smaller meals. OMAD wouldn't, but then I eat about 2,600 calories a day and even for me eating 2,000 plus calories in one meal is difficult. I could do it but I eat a lot of low density food. My mixing bowl salads, for example, there's no way. They're huge already. I might do two tomatoes, cucumber, bell pepper, two carrots, an avocado, can of kidney beans, two big handfuls of spring mix, and some cheese. There's no way I could eat two monster salads in one meal though. I could do eat a 3/4 pound cheese burger, large french fries, couple pints of beer, and then have some brownie alamode to finish it off. That isn't exactly a great diet, however.
Actually low carb has been shown to have advantages. It's just they're only short-term and the meta studies I've seen show no advantage beyond 9 to 12 months.
IF or time restricted feeding doesn't work for me. I don't do regimented schedules. On the other hand why it works for many people very much does work for me. I like big meals. Eating twice a day works for me much better than eating three smaller meals. OMAD wouldn't, but then I eat about 2,600 calories a day and even for me eating 2,000 plus calories in one meal is difficult. I could do it but I eat a lot of low density food. My mixing bowl salads, for example, there's no way. They're huge already. I might do two tomatoes, cucumber, bell pepper, two carrots, an avocado, can of kidney beans, two big handfuls of spring mix, and some cheese. There's no way I could eat two monster salads in one meal though. I could do eat a 3/4 pound cheese burger, large french fries, couple pints of beer, and then have some brownie alamode to finish it off. That isn't exactly a great diet, however.
Why do a diet just for the short term? Why not do something that is going to be sustainable for the long run?
Why do a diet just for the short term? Why not do something that is going to be sustainable for the long run?
Depends what you want to do. I ate myself fat and wanted to lose weight. I set a goal of losing a pound a week, lost it a bit faster. That's a non-sustainable diet by definition. You cannot go about losing a pound a week indefinitely. The carbs were simply the most logical thing to restrict. I eat a lot more rice, pasta, and potatoes now. They're my "filler" calories. Cheap, healthful, caloric but not particularly nutritious. Since then it's just been maintenance. It's been almost ten years now so I think it's pretty sustainable. If you just need to lose a few pounds going for a more sustainable approach but I was fat may make sense. I wanted to lose 50 pounds, not 5.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
