IF vs "diet"
 

I am interested in knowing more about IF. I have heard fasting is bad for your body because once you stop fasting the weight will come back!

But then I heard the same thing about dieting... I am currently calorie counting somewhat successfully. I am down 6 pounds in 2 weeks.

I just need some input thanks!

Originally Posted by Andrbeck:
I am interested in knowing more about IF. I have heard fasting is bad for your body because once you stop fasting the weight will come back!

But then I heard the same thing about dieting... I am currently calorie counting somewhat successfully. I am down 6 pounds in 2 weeks.

I just need some input thanks!

Fasting is completely different than intermittent fasting (IF.)

Fasting over short periods is not bad for your body. I don't know much about long term fasting so I can't comment on it.

Our bodies are well adapted to going for short periods of time without food. There may be health benefits to short term fasting but the studies so far are mostly in rats. I like intermittent fasting because it allows me to eat larger more satisfying meals.

See the intermittent fasting for more details but all you're doing when you intermittently fast is condense the period of time that you eat. Calories still matter. You can gain weight while intermittently fasting or lose weight it simply depends on the number of calories you ingest.

For me I'm still calorie counting while I'm doing IF. IF is just another tool I've found to help me stay on plan. I really enjoy being able to eat bigger meals in a shorter time span then trying to force myself to eat 5 or 6 smaller meals over the course of a day. I get full now, where as when eating smaller meals, I never really felt full at all. I eat my full range of calories, I just consume then in a shorter time span. My eating window is 2pm to 8pm. I eat a big lunch at 2, a big dinner at 5:30ish and then I can enjoy a couple snacks from 7:30 to 8.

I don't really know if it's having any added effects on the amount of weight I'm losing because I committed myself to staying off the scale this whole month.

As far as weight coming back. It doesn't really matter how a person loses weight if they are losing it at a decent pace and in a healthy way. The problem with people gaining it back is because once they reach their goal weight they go back to eating the way they did that made them gain all the weight in the first place.

I haven't done a great deal of research on IF, but what's been shared on the other thread has been positive and has lead me to determine that there may be a lot of benefits to this way of life.

intermediate fasting isn't really fasting. it's just only eating during a short time span each day. it's basically a form of dieting where rather then spreading your meals out and eating through out the day you have a controlled binge once or sometimes twice a day. it's a way for people who know that they are going to "pig out" when they eat to do it without going over their calories. XD

Originally Posted by niafabo:
intermediate fasting isn't really fasting. it's just only eating during a short time span each day. it's basically a form of dieting where rather then spreading your meals out and eating through out the day you have a controlled binge once or sometimes twice a day. it's a way for people who know that they are going to "pig out" when they eat to do it without going over their calories. XD

The main purpose of intermittent fasting is to allow oneself to simplify their lives. You don't have to think about eating or food until your eating window. Larger meals are more satisfying so you're less hungry or not at all hungry which again allows you to not think about food. I read you don't find restricting calories difficult but for those of us do IF is a great way to help stay compliant to our caloric goals.

It has nothing to do with pigging out or a controlled binge unless you're talking about people attempting to gain weight while following an IF protocol which in the context that we're discussing here is irrelevant.

For example, when I am bulking and need to eat 4,000 calories in my eating window thus the meals are quite large. I still wouldn't call it controlled binging or pigging out but to the casual observer it would probably look that way.

Originally Posted by JohnP:
The main purpose of intermittent fasting is to allow oneself to simplify their lives. You don't have to think about eating or food until your eating window. Larger meals are more satisfying so you're less hungry or not at all hungry which again allows you to not think about food. I read you don't find restricting calories difficult but for those of us do IF is a great way to help stay compliant to our caloric goals.

It has nothing to do with pigging out or a controlled binge unless you're talking about people attempting to gain weight while following an IF protocol which in the context that we're discussing here is irrelevant.

For example, when I am bulking and need to eat 4,000 calories in my eating window thus the meals are quite large. I still wouldn't call it controlled binging or pigging out but to the casual observer it would probably look that way.

didn't mean to offend you JohnP but the most common thing I hear is small meals don't satisfy me I need to eat a lot to fill full so being able to eat my whole daily allowance in one sitting makes me feel a lot better does sound a little like i need to eat a ton (aka "pig out") in order to feel full so eating all at once makes it easier to keep within my calorie range. i'm sure it's much more complex then that but i was just trying to simplify. i didn't mean to say they would eat everything in the house or anything and go over their calorie limit. sorry if it came off that way.

i have been doing IF for a few days now, and i find myself eating a lot less calories than i would of normally ate when i was trying to make myself eat "balanced" and i know i can eat between the hours of 3pm-9pm so no more crazy late night snacks...i never was able to cut myself off before, but for some reason it works..probably because im just not hungry..but like i said its only been a few days but that has been my experience so far.

Originally Posted by niafabo:
didn't mean to offend you JohnP but the most common thing I hear is small meals don't satisfy me I need to eat a lot to fill full so being able to eat my whole daily allowance in one sitting makes me feel a lot better does sound a little like i need to eat a ton (aka "pig out") in order to feel full so eating all at once makes it easier to keep within my calorie range. i'm sure it's much more complex then that but i was just trying to simplify. i didn't mean to say they would eat everything in the house or anything and go over their calorie limit. sorry if it came off that way.

No worries I'm not offended I still don't think you understand the point.

If someone is going to eat 1200-1600 calories in a day and wants to split that into 5-6 meals they are going to be eating some pretty pitiful meals. Some people probably do well utilizing this grazing method but recent research shows that people are more satisfied with fewer larger meals.

Furthermore I don't know anyone who eats all their caloires in a single meal. I'm not saying there isn't someone who does that but most people who IF eat 2-3 meals.

I've also read every post in the intemittent fasting thread and haven't seen anyone mention they need to eat a ton to feel full. Just plenty of people who don't like the grazing method because they're simply always hungry.

Originally Posted by JohnP:
No worries I'm not offended I still don't think you understand the point.

If someone is going to eat 1200-1600 calories in a day and wants to split that into 5-6 meals they are going to be eating some pretty pitiful meals. Some people probably do well utilizing this grazing method but recent research shows that people are more satisfied with fewer larger meals.

Furthermore I don't know anyone who eats all their caloires in a single meal. I'm not saying there isn't someone who does that but most people who IF eat 2-3 meals.

I've also read every post in the intemittent fasting thread and haven't seen anyone mention they need to eat a ton to feel full. Just plenty of people who don't like the grazing method because they're simply always hungry.

well the two or three meals thing doesn't sound all that different then how most people eat anyways. i usually eat 3 times a day. my schedule: 7-8 i eat a 300-400 calorie breakfast. 1-3 i eat a 100-200 calorie lunch. and 5-7 i eat a 600-800 calorie dinner and if for whatever reason i'm still hungry after that i will eat another 50-200 calorie snack. if you choose the right foods it is easy to make pretty hearty meal which is not at all like grazing. my typical breakfast for example includes one over easy egg, one turkey sausage, and one piece of double fiber bread (300 calories) which keeps me full late into the afternoon usually. lunch you can have like two cups of spinach and a cup of lettuce and tons of veggies and a few slices of turkey and still keep it around 200 as long as you don't use dressing, and 600-800 calories makes for a very hearty dinner most of the time i don't even use my other snack because i just don't want to eat anymore. don't know where people get the idea that having 3-4 meals a day means that you have to graze.

Thanks for the input!! I would love to try it but I do think I would "pig out". I just love food too much.

Originally Posted by niafabo:
well the two or three meals thing doesn't sound all that different then how most people eat anyways. i usually eat 3 times a day. my schedule: 7-8 i eat a 300-400 calorie breakfast. 1-3 i eat a 100-200 calorie lunch. and 5-7 i eat a 600-800 calorie dinner and if for whatever reason i'm still hungry after that i will eat another 50-200 calorie snack..

You eat 300-400 calories and then go 10 hours on only 100-200 calories. That is amazing. I'm impressed. Seriously. If I ate a 100-200 calorie lunch, snack, or whatever it would only do one thing. Make me hungry and by 3-4 I would be ravenous.

I'm on 1200 a day and for me my meals were unsatisfying, probably because unlike niafabo I was not able to be self-disciplined enough save enough calories for a full 600-cal dinner. :D As a snacker and grazer I *had* to save calories for mid-afternoon snacking that I knew I would do, so meals would be around 200-300 calories. I love eating, so eating a small meal like that would only prompt me to think about the next snack/meal.

In my situation, it's easy to overindulge for lunch or dinner. I got lax about CC'ing on IF and spent a few too many calories on brownies several days in a row. For me I did have the mentality of just getting a bonus at work and going on a spending spree of things I don't need, and like niafabo said, for me it was a controlled binge, but that was me doing it the WRONG way. I gained a pound back and have since stopped that nonsense- really tightening the belt on counting my calories and spending them wisely. I've been eating large, healthy lunches but not overdoing it (600-700) and then not really that hungry for a massive dinner, which means I only eat small amounts of healthy food and always stay at or under my calorie intake. It still requires planning and discipline, not just an all-out binge if you want to do it right.

I think it really just depends on the individual, his or her own preferences and strengths/weaknesses. For some smaller meals might work, for me IF is a good arrangement.

Originally Posted by JohnP:
You eat 300-400 calories and then go 10 hours on only 100-200 calories. That is amazing. I'm impressed. Seriously. If I ate a 100-200 calorie lunch, snack, or whatever it would only do one thing. Make me hungry and by 3-4 I would be ravenous.

but you go like 18 hours without eating doing IF. XD

i dunno i guess the main thing that bothers me about it is i don't think anyone in their right mind would force their children to only eat 2-3 hours a day. if you wouldn't teach your kids that's the healthy way to live then why would you do it.

I could not imagine telling my child that he couldn't eat from this time to this time and he could ONLY eat from this time to this time. Haha. He would be the devil!!

On IF do you drink water during your off time?

I like cc'ing I try to have 3 meals a day and a small small snack or two a day. Normally my breakfast is small (100-200) then I will have a banana or some carrots. Then I have a small lunch (200-300) then if I am really hungry I will hve an apple and then for dinner I eat whatever my fiance makes I just make sure I eat a small portion and I try to stop eating 3 hours before I go to bed.

Originally Posted by niafabo:
but you go like 18 hours without eating doing IF. XD

i dunno i guess the main thing that bothers me about it is i don't think anyone in their right mind would force their children to only eat 2-3 hours a day. if you wouldn't teach your kids that's the healthy way to live then why would you do it.

I have a two year old and he has his daily schedule, but if a meal time rolls around and he just doesn't appear hungry, I don't force the issue. I am sure, too, as he gets older and is running around in the yard and playing with friends, meals will be missed and made up for later in the day.

I think IF is more about learning that you don't need to eat every two hours. It is a good way to get back in touch with hunger cues.