Intermittent Fasting is by far most overrated fad in the fitness community right now

[Carolina Slim]

As long as you recognize that the calorie deficit is fueling your fat loss and not IF that's giving you some kind of made up metabolic advantage, then eat however/whenever you want to bruh.

to me, IF = caloric deficit. I never cut so easily until I started this manner of eating.

 

[MMS]

while i used to completely agree with this, if you understand the idea of chemical equilibria the game changes considerably once you get in the 12% body fat range

IF definitely has its merits, but in terms of an obese person no the difference is negligible

 

[Turbulent]

while i used to completely agree with this, if you understand the idea of chemical equilibria the game changes considerably once you get in the 12% body fat range

IF definitely has its merits, but in terms of an obese person no the difference is negligible

i don't know all the technical stuff but that's what i keep hearing as well. basically what the OP said is true for weight but not necessarily true for fat. it's possible (although i never read proof of this) that IF helps for fat loss and from what i remember reading about it, it had something to do with insulin spikes and some type of hormone your body produces to balance everything out.

but yes, i also remember reading this only starts working once you reach 12-10% bf.

 

[MMS]

i don't know all the technical stuff but that's what i keep hearing as well. basically what the OP said is true for weight but not necessarily true for fat. it's possible (although i never read proof of this) that IF helps for fat loss and from what i remember reading about it, it had something to do with insulin spikes and some type of hormone your body produces to balance everything out.

but yes, i also remember reading this only starts working once you reach 12-10% bf.

its the fact that as you lose more and more fat, the body will fight to preserve it

thats why even when folks get under 10% bodyfat they will rarely stay under

fat is a pretty stable molecule, and requires perfect conditions to get rid of it once you dont have much left

 

[Roid Jones]

Is it overrated yes, is it a fad yes, but it does work as others here will attest too, my only issue with it (and most things in the fitness community) is the mentality that path A is the way and ONLY way to get to a desired goal.

 

[Spliff]

Wait so you're saying that eating throughout the day will hamper how your body utilizes fat for fuel? Even if you are eating at a caloric deficit?

Yes. More specifically: carbohydrates. A persons respiratory quotient can tell you how their body is using energy. Healthy values are 0.7(fat use) - 1.0 (carbohydrate use). After a meal, your RQ is 1. You shift towards 0.7 the longer you go without eating. You're somewhere in the 0.7-0.8 range at 16hr mark.

But notice how I said eating throughout the day "CAN" hamper and not "WILL" hamper fat utilization. There are ways to mimic fasting while eating throughout the day. Small meals consisting of protein with little tag-along fats (PSMF meals) can mimic fasting. 16hrs of PSMF with 8hrs of carb refeeds will get you damn near identical results as 16hr fasts with 8hrs of eating. Very low calories mimics fasting, so very low calories followed by severe overeating mimics intermittent fasting. Explaining how to not fukk these approaches up is more indepth than saying "don't eat until ___."

, you will not be able to find ONE study that supports anything you just said. NOT ONE. Why? Because every thing you just said is pure bro science.

I didn't just find one. I found one that reviews 11 others.

Intermittent versus daily calorie restriction: whic... [Obes Rev. 2011] - PubMed - NCBI

Oh hey look, guess what popular intermittent fasting website decided to translate that for those not versed in scientific literature...

Spoiler

Intermittent Fasting For Weight Loss Preserves Muscle Mass? | Intermittent fasting diet for fat loss, muscle gain and health

Me and this guy are on the same diet pretty much. He gets down to 5% bodyfat without fasting, without cutting carbs, and without doing all the bro science shyt commonly advocated but not supported by any science whatsoever.

Week 8 of Cutting - Ogus vs Jones - YouTube

vvlog june 20 //IIFYM// video featuring, macronutrients, diet websites, sludge - YouTube

His BF is high enough right now to allow loose dieting. He's what, 25 weeks out now? Last I checked, Ogus carb cycles when he gets low. Similar boat, as I touched on earlier.

Like I said, IF isn't the only option. There are many ways to get from 10% to 5-6%, especially when yohimbine and other supplements are on the menu. High carb dieting is even an option with appropriate training. Different approaches work best for different people, and it seems IF is working best for the vocal majority.

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

Let me break this down even more.

During a fast, you'll obviously burn more fat than if you were eating rather than fasting. So, during a 16 hour fast, you'll burn more fat than would be the case if you didn't fast.

But when you eat during your 8 hour window, you'll be back to where you would have been sans fast, assuming an isocaloric diet.

Now do you see the problem with the logic? It all balances out at the end of the day.

At the end of the 24-hour period, or as long as it would take to assimilate the nutrients, there would be no difference in the thermic effect of food. The total amount of energy expended by TEF would be identical in each scenario. Meal frequency does not affect total TEF. You cannot "trick" the body in to burning more or less calories by manipulating meal frequency

Again I dont think anyone is saying you will burn more fat on IF than without if all calories are equal. There are some pretty compelling studies but I don't buy into much of that

The point is its harder to eat excess calories within a limited time frame, which helps keep you on track. You are assuming that people adhere to diets which is patently false. IF makes it a lot easier to stick to a diet.

 

[dj-method-x]

Yes. More specifically: carbohydrates. A persons respiratory quotient can tell you how their body is using energy. Healthy values are 0.7(fat use) - 1.0 (carbohydrate use). After a meal, your RQ is 1. You shift towards 0.7 the longer you go without eating. You're somewhere in the 0.7-0.8 range at 16hr mark.

But notice how I said eating throughout the day "CAN" hamper and not "WILL" hamper fat utilization. There are ways to mimic fasting while eating throughout the day. Small meals consisting of protein with little tag-along fats (PSMF meals) can mimic fasting. 16hrs of PSMF with 8hrs of carb refeeds will get you damn near identical results as 16hr fasts with 8hrs of eating. Very low calories mimics fasting, so very low calories followed by severe overeating mimics intermittent fasting. Explaining how to not fukk these approaches up is more indepth than saying "don't eat until ___."



I didn't just find one. I found one that reviews 11 others.

Intermittent versus daily calorie restriction: whic... [Obes Rev. 2011] - PubMed - NCBI

Oh hey look, guess what popular intermittent fasting website decided to translate that for those not versed in scientific literature...

Spoiler

Intermittent Fasting For Weight Loss Preserves Muscle Mass? | Intermittent fasting diet for fat loss, muscle gain and health

Did you even read what the paper said? Did you even read what Martin said about it? He pointed out that the paper did not mention what kind of exercise was used in the different groups. Even HE (the man who brought IF to popularity) says that that is a major weakness of that paper and it's conclusion.

A few of the CR trials that were used to arrive at the 75% / 25% figure included exercise, one included growth hormone administration and another one used a high-protein diet. Only one of the IF trials included exercise.

As you may understand, this is a major weakness when attempting to formulate a good estimate of the amount of weight lost and fat and muscle respectively. While the author is aware of this, he briefly skims over the issue (in the discussion), saying that results may vary depending on subject population, etc., but it is truly a major weakness of the paper and its conclusions....

Strangely there is no mention of the exercise regimens that were used in a few of the CR-trials.

Furthermore, as if there aren't enough confounders present as it is, there's the issue of how body composition was measured. In order to assess and track changes in body composition during weight loss studies, researchers use different methods of measuring. The most basic method of tracking changes in body composition involves a pair of calipers in the hands of a professional, but this is not commonly used nowadays. Instead, body composition is usually measured by bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

Even Martin Berkham knows that study is useless. There is not a credible figure in the fitness community that will agree that Intermittent Fasting allows for more fat to be burned in comparison to good old regular calorie restriction except for people who are trying to get paid pimping IF, like Martin Berkham. Why is this? Because the science jury is still out on IF. Alan Aragon also breaks down multiple studies on IF and why most of them are crud.

An Objective Look at Intermittent Fasting - AlanAragon.com - Fitness Based on Science & Experience

His BF is high enough right now to allow loose dieting. He's what, 25 weeks out now? Last I checked, Ogus carb cycles when he gets low. Similar boat, as I touched on earlier.

Wrong, Ogus keeps his carbs high the entire time he is dieting.

Like I said, IF isn't the only option. There are many ways to get from 10% to 5-6%, especially when yohimbine and other supplements are on the menu. High carb dieting is even an option with appropriate training. Different approaches work best for different people, and it seems IF is working best for the vocal majority.

Alan Aragon pretty much sums up my response to your last statement perfectly.

In the world of fitness, recommendations for improving performance and body composition often gain blind acceptance despite a dearth of objective data. This is common in a field where high hopes and obsessive-compulsive tendencies are united with false appeals and incomplete information. In order to be proven effective beyond the mere power of suggestion, supposed truths must be put through the crucible of science. Drawing conclusions from baseless assumptions is a good way to get nowhere - fast.

 

[dj-method-x]

Again I dont think anyone is saying you will burn more fat on IF than without if all calories are equal. There are some pretty compelling studies but I don't buy into much of that

Spliff is saying exactly that

IF makes it a lot easier to stick to a diet.

How is fasting easier than eating whenever is convenient for you?



I don't fast, I eat 3-4 big meals a day. I eat them whenever I want to. I'm not sure how going through some arbitrary fasting window sometime during the day where I'm forcing myself not to eat is any easier than what I'm currently doing.

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

How is fasting easier than eating whenever is convenient for you?



I don't fast, I eat 3-4 big meals a day. I eat them whenever I want to. I'm not sure how going through periods of the day where I'm forcing myself not to eat is any easier than what I'm currently doing.

This is within the context of cutting

Eating whenever its convenient = more opportunities to eat more than your daily calorie allotment = undermining cutting efforts/progress

Plus in my experience its more psychologically doable to have 2-3 big meals while cutting rather than a bunch of little ones... easier to have 2-3 big meals within an 8 hour window than 1 meal every 6-7 hours

Keeping eating within an 8-10 hour window = limiting the ability to stray from one's mealplan/calories. In a bulk it also helps keep you from pigging out. Now I suppose here is the part where you chastise people for not being able to stick to a diet w/o having a schedule. To which I ask, why get so worked up about how the next man eats?

 

[dj-method-x]

This is within the context of cutting

Eating whenever its convenient = more opportunities to eat more than your daily calorie allotment = undermining cutting efforts/progress

Plus in my experience its more psychologically doable to have 2-3 big meals while cutting rather than a bunch of little ones... easier to have 2-3 big meals within an 8 hour window than 1 meal every 6-7 hours

This is completely anecdotal. For instance, I find it much easier to eat a big meal at breakfast, a big meal at lunch, and a big meal postworkout (around evening). The point of this thread is to say that there is no metabolic advantage of me skipping breakfast and moving the calories that I would have ate during breakfast into some arbitrary feeding window because Martin Berkham says so. The key is finding what works for you.

Keeping eating within an 8-10 hour window = limiting the ability to stray from one's mealplan/calories. In a bulk it also helps keep you from pigging out. Now I suppose here is the part where you chastise people for not being able to stick to a diet w/o having a schedule. To which I ask, why get so worked up about how the next man eats?

Why would you expect a person who cannot stick within there mealplan or calories to be able to FAST for 16+ hours a day everyday?



Having discipline, dedication, and being consistent are important in ANY diet. Intermittent Fasting doesn't get around this.

But hey, if fasting is convenient for you, and helps you reach your caloric deficit then by all means do it. But lets not act is if somehow it provides some magic metabolic advantage over energy balance because it doesn't.

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

Man you are hyped as hell over this shyt. Its not that serious.

For me, cutting out breakfast was a huge boon to making progress on cuts. It was a lot harder to get the nutrients I needed w/breakfast. Switching to IF worked. So contrary to your all caps screaming in the first post, I did "NEED TO DO INTERMITTENT FASTING TO ACCOMPLISH THIS." Youre backpedaling... first you say people dont need IF, then you say people should do what they want... stop posting so emotionally man, other people doing IF has no effect on you

 

[Dooby]

This is completely anecdotal. For instance, I find it much easier to eat a big meal at breakfast, a big meal at lunch, and a big meal postworkout (around evening). The point of this thread is to say that there is no metabolic advantage of me skipping breakfast and moving the calories that I would have ate during breakfast into some arbitrary feeding window because Martin Berkham says so. The key is finding what works for you.



Why would you expect a person who cannot stick within there mealplan or calories to be able to FAST for 16+ hours a day everyday?



Having discipline, dedication, and being consistent are important in ANY diet. Intermittent Fasting doesn't get around this.

But hey, if fasting is convenient for you, and helps you reach your caloric deficit then by all means do it. But lets not act is if somehow it provides some magic metabolic advantage over energy balance because it doesn't.

Fasting is easier because it really prevents snack and reckless eating. Especially right before you go to bed which can be the worst time to have stuff in your stomach if you're trying to lose weight.

 

[dj-method-x]

Fasting is easier because it really prevents snack and reckless eating. Especially right before you go to bed which can be the worst time to have stuff in your stomach if you're trying to lose weight.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with eating before bed and I challenge you to find me one study that proves what you said is anything but idiotic. I

Exposing the medical myth: "Don't eat before bed" - That's Fit

And I don't fast, but I don't snack often. My anecdotal evidence versus yours.

 

[dj-method-x]

Man you are hyped as hell over this shyt. Its not that serious.

For me, cutting out breakfast was a huge boon to making progress on cuts. It was a lot harder to get the nutrients I needed w/breakfast. Switching to IF worked. So contrary to your all caps screaming in the first post, I did "NEED TO DO INTERMITTENT FASTING TO ACCOMPLISH THIS." Youre backpedaling... first you say people dont need IF, then you say people should do what they want... stop posting so emotionally man, other people doing IF has no effect on you

Supporters of IF in this thread went from, "Intermittent Fasting burns more fat than any other dieting protocol" to "hey man it works for me." But I'm back peddling?

Sigh....