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.
I just posted on this very topic recently. It was a 1917 issue of "Good Health" which first coined the phrase.
"Breakfast is the most important meal of the day". The editor of the publication was JH Kellogg, the co-inventor of flaked cereal.
I suspect that many people from the early 20th century actually needed it more than we do in modern times. Getting sustenance from sugar and grains however has never really been a good idea in my opinion.
Interesting story about "How Breakfast Got It's Healthly Repuation". In that link there were studies that say skipping breakfast can increase type 2 diabetes, when type 2 diabetes can be prevented, reversed, and cured using the Keto diet and intermittent fasting. Skipping breakfast is one of the easiest ways to get the 16 hour fasting period that you need to do intermittent fasting.
The high sugars and grains are a recent addition to the American diet. People didn't eat that way 100 years ago and farther back in time.
I suppose you could eat breakfast, lunch, and skip dinner. That would be more difficult to do for most people. The Huffington Post might not be a very good source for information because they tend to be very biased about a lot of things, but maybe it's OK for stories not too closely related to politics.
Interesting story about "How Breakfast Got It's Healthly Repuation". In that link there were studies that say skipping breakfast can increase type 2 diabetes, when type 2 diabetes can be prevented, reversed, and cured using the Keto diet and intermittent fasting. Skipping breakfast is one of the easiest ways to get the 16 hour fasting period that you need to do intermittent fasting.
I suppose you could eat breakfast, lunch, and skip dinner. That would be more difficult to do for most people. The Huffington Post might not be a very good source for information because they tend to be very biased about a lot of things, but maybe it's OK for stories not too closely related to politics.
If it was the National Enquirer, I would automatically discount the article but I don't think that the information is made-up BS just because it's from the Huffington post, especially when they cite their sources. So whether it's political or not is irrelevant, to me anyway.
I've never been a breakfast person, ever, even since I was a kid. I've always skipped it anyway. I guess that came from the fact that I was a night owl and did not wake that early and was never hungry at that time anyway.
Quote:
The high sugars and grains are a recent addition to the American diet. People didn't eat that way 100 years ago and farther back in time.
My point exactly and this recent addition seems to correlate with a drastic increase in obesity and related problems which we are now plagued with.
I started 5:2 in 2013. I only remember that because I started not too long after I was laid-off. I was the highest weight I had ever been. (I've never been big, but I was teetering the line and just hit that official "overweight" mark by a pound according to BMI, which I was not happy about and wasn't feeling good about myself.)
I never followed it exactly---I did have my coffee calories, then I didn't eat and I ate my calories at the end of the day. For women, they said 500, but because I am pretty tall I did 600 and occasionally, I would go to 700 if I felt like I needed it.
The reason this diet worked for me: (a) I didn't have to eat low calorie every day. The idea is that you eat low calorie twice per week so that you eat normal amount of calories (let's say 1900/day for you) every other day. It makes for a slow but realistic weight loss. (b) It was strictly calorie-in, calorie-out and I used MFP to count these calories so I never really restricted what foods I was eating. I will never give up junk food and that's a reality.
I ended up losing 40-45 pounds. I actually ended up in the other direction, teetering a pound or two away from underweight. I was actually really happy with my weight at that time. I maintained for another year or so before I started slowly putting weight back on but that had nothing to do with the fasting---it had all to do with the fact that I had been watching my calories maintaining and then I had stopped. What I was doing for maintenance was fasting once per week and then having a day where I didn't pay attention to calories at all. Then the other five days I would count calories, staying at my "2,000 per day" normal. But as soon as I stopped behaving, the weight slowly came back on over time.
Also, I did this diet and lost weight without working out. My only workout was walking, which I do A LOT of sometimes, but that was it.
HOWEVER, I never put all of the weight back on---I've always kept 20-25 pounds off, which puts me in the center of normal weight on the BMI scale.
I actually went back on this diet last week. I would like to drop down again. My family will complain that I am too thin (which they say already, but they can talk to me when they're not "morbidly obese") and I will not care because I like it better that way.
I kind of do what you do only I don't fast and never go that low. I can't give up things either. I basically eat lower calorie (1500) six days per week, sometimes 5. One day a week I eat who knows how many...probably 4,000. I track my calories daily, it's second nature to me at this point. It's all about trial and error. I found that it's what I did over time, i.e. a week, that determined loss. Once I figured out what the magic number was to get that deficit to achieve weight loss, I stuck to that plan and lost pretty much a pound a week. I hit a plateau once, but otherwise it was a pound a week lost until the 70 lbs was gone. I originally wanted to lose 50, but when I hit that goal, I decided to go for another goal of fitting in my wedding dress.
Interesting story about "How Breakfast Got It's Healthly Repuation". In that link there were studies that say skipping breakfast can increase type 2 diabetes, when type 2 diabetes can be prevented, reversed, and cured using the Keto diet and intermittent fasting. Skipping breakfast is one of the easiest ways to get the 16 hour fasting period that you need to do intermittent fasting.
The high sugars and grains are a recent addition to the American diet. People didn't eat that way 100 years ago and farther back in time.
I suppose you could eat breakfast, lunch, and skip dinner. That would be more difficult to do for most people. The Huffington Post might not be a very good source for information because they tend to be very biased about a lot of things, but maybe it's OK for stories not too closely related to politics.
People ate grains 100 years ago. Even hunter gatherer communities consume starches.
Also you don't have to fast or follow keto to lose weight or be in good health. It's just one of many methods to achieve results. There are many societies where meat protein isn't readily available and they aren't fat.
Glad it worked for you, but you don't have to do it.
1st time on this particular thread.
Scrolled through the posts and it seems virtually everything will work for some people. It also seems there is no "one size fits all" approach to weight loss.
What works best for me is what I call the fit test. I own several pairs of trousers that all have the same waist size. All of them are also cut in a fashion that "fit" me identically or as close as possible.
Since I don't own a scale I have to rely on how my pants feel when I put them on. If they get tight, I will simultaneously reduce my caloric intake and increase my physical activity. Neither is very drastic; maybe knock back the calories by 300 - 400 per day. Easily enough done simply by cutting out that cinnamon roll or those two beers in the evening.
Likewise increasing my physical activity slightly will fool the body (at least mine) into thinking it needn't employ those pesky evolutionary measures to conserve calories when it thinks we're in famine conditions. During most of our history and pre-history the problem was taking in sufficient calories and not trying to blow them off. This is one of the reasons diet alone has had such an abysmal record for taking and keeping weight off.
So that's what I do for about a week to ten days and it works for me. The important thing about this method is jumping on it right away. This may not for many of you, but I have also tried intermittent fasting and the last time I did, I went into the emergency room from insulin shock.
1st time on this particular thread.
Scrolled through the posts and it seems virtually everything will work for some people. It also seems there is no "one size fits all" approach to weight loss.
What works best for me is what I call the fit test. I own several pairs of trousers that all have the same waist size. All of them are also cut in a fashion that "fit" me identically or as close as possible.
Since I don't own a scale I have to rely on how my pants feel when I put them on. If they get tight, I will simultaneously reduce my caloric intake and increase my physical activity. Neither is very drastic; maybe knock back the calories by 300 - 400 per day. Easily enough done simply by cutting out that cinnamon roll or those two beers in the evening.
Likewise increasing my physical activity slightly will fool the body (at least mine) into thinking it needn't employ those pesky evolutionary measures to conserve calories when it thinks we're in famine conditions. During most of our history and pre-history the problem was taking in sufficient calories and not trying to blow them off. This is one of the reasons diet alone has had such an abysmal record for taking and keeping weight off.
So that's what I do for about a week to ten days and it works for me. The important thing about this method is jumping on it right away. This may not for many of you, but I have also tried intermittent fasting and the last time I did, I went into the emergency room from insulin shock.
Calorie reduction diets fail about 99% of the time in the longer term, you sound like you’re the 1% exception! Can you expand on the insulin shock that you experienced doing intermittent fasting? I’ve never heard of an insulin shock for people doing intermittent fasting. So, I’d like to hear more details about that incident. Did you gradually switch to intermittent fasting over several months, or did you drastically switch to intermittent fasting? Were you also combining a Keto, high fat, low carb diet with the intermittent fasting? Are there other underlying health issues that could have contributed to the insulin shock?
Calorie reduction diets fail about 99% of the time in the longer term, you sound like you’re the 1% exception! Can you expand on the insulin shock that you experienced doing intermittent fasting? I’ve never heard of an insulin shock for people doing intermittent fasting. So, I’d like to hear more details about that incident. Did you gradually switch to intermittent fasting over several months, or did you drastically switch to intermittent fasting? Were you also combining a Keto, high fat, low carb diet with the intermittent fasting? Are there other underlying health issues that could have contributed to the insulin shock?
I have done intermittent fasting more than once, primarily for fasting blood tests. The one which drove me into insulin shock was after a full workout and I only ate a slice of roast chicken and (if I'm remembering this correctly) an egg afterward, retired for the night and then had to go into work early to fix a problem that required immediate attention. Still, it should not have happened.
I did not go into any intermittent fasts gradually, nor did I fast longer than the 18 hour fast that sent me to the hospital. I also did not combine any other diet and, during this particular time didn't even need to employ the "let's get back into my jeans" diet that I usually employ.
The only underlying health issue I have that could have predisposed me to my unfortunate experience is I tend to run hypoglycemic anyway. It's just that I can generally get into some sugar source before really bad things happen. This one time I couldn't.
Calorie reduction diets fail about 99% of the time in the longer term, you sound like you’re the 1% exception! Can you expand on the insulin shock that you experienced doing intermittent fasting? I’ve never heard of an insulin shock for people doing intermittent fasting. So, I’d like to hear more details about that incident. Did you gradually switch to intermittent fasting over several months, or did you drastically switch to intermittent fasting? Were you also combining a Keto, high fat, low carb diet with the intermittent fasting? Are there other underlying health issues that could have contributed to the insulin shock?
I thought that the exception was 2 percent :P well count me in that two percent as well. Also count me in as someone who reduced calories while simultaneously working out. Finally, count me in as one of those people who believe that for long term weight management, exercise and diet is the way to go. If you're losing weight, you are reducing calories. Period. Whether you count calories or not, you've lost weight because your intake is less than your body needs. Calorie deficit. You can gain weight if you eat more than your body needs on any diet, whether it's Keto, the Cocoa Puffs diet, or whatever other diet regime is out there. For some, keto isn't for them so I guess the diet "failed"...or maybe it's because it's not the right diet for those people? I could never deal with the restrictions of keto and I'd probably "fail" because at some point I'd break and say I'm tired of caring about net carbs, carbs, am I getting enough fat, am i in ketosis, or whatever. For people like me, those diets wouldn't work. Just like a diet that said eat no meat, fat, or whatever.
As for fasting, again, that works for some. Doesn't work for me. Most importantly I work out and it does me no good not eating. I need fuel. The only time I do fasted cardio is early in the morning and no food directly impacts my performance. Maybe if I was just sitting around all day every day but that's not me, so I need more meals.
I have done intermittent fasting more than once, primarily for fasting blood tests. The one which drove me into insulin shock was after a full workout and I only ate a slice of roast chicken and (if I'm remembering this correctly) an egg afterward, retired for the night and then had to go into work early to fix a problem that required immediate attention. Still, it should not have happened.
I did not go into any intermittent fasts gradually, nor did I fast longer than the 18 hour fast that sent me to the hospital. I also did not combine any other diet and, during this particular time didn't even need to employ the "let's get back into my jeans" diet that I usually employ.
The only underlying health issue I have that could have predisposed me to my unfortunate experience is I tend to run hypoglycemic anyway. It's just that I can generally get into some sugar source before really bad things happen. This one time I couldn't.
Hope this helps,
FV
There are multiple causes for hypo and insulin shock is not necessarily the cause unless of course you have been diagnosed by a doctor. If that is the case, you need to be careful if and when you do IF. I am a diabetic and take medication and very rarely get hypo. Only if I fast for many hours, like 20 or more and then exercise and even then it's not common. My problem is "hyper" not "hypo".
If I were you I certainly would not be fasting and then exercising especially if you already know this. If you want to exercise try eating a piece of candy or some fruit before you do that.
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.
