Large study on Intermittent Fasting not very promising

If the options are force yourself to only eat in a prescribed window vs. eat whatever you want whenever you want there would definelty be advantages to IF. If it's an equal calorie type study I can see why there may be no advantage.

Been doing IF since 2012...does this mean I need to go back to 8 meals a day?

quote:

---

Been saying it for 10+ years, no advantage to IF, keto, or any other forms of dieting other than compliance

---

Hopefully in relation to fat loss is what you mean. Because there is 100% issues with bloat on carbs which can hinder total weight loss for some. Keto also has benefits outside of weight loss such as using different energy pathways.

IF also lets my stomach (suspected IBS) rest and recover from foods. I don't feel as terrible during the day.

quote:

---

Hopefully in relation to fat loss is what you mean. Because there is 100% issues with bloat on carbs

---

Carbs are not good for long-term healthspan. I know 777 argues that simply not being fat takes care of like 99% of that, but I don't agree. Particularly with cancer and Alzheimer's.

quote:

---

If the options are force yourself to only eat in a prescribed window vs. eat whatever you want whenever you want there would definelty be advantages to IF.

---

That is the advantage of IF for some, like with keto, many tend to lower energy intake without lowering output.

But there are many cases where IF has lead to an eating disorder. like many things with nutrition, there are not one size fits all for helping with compliance.

quote:

---

If it's an equal calorie type study I can see why there may be no advantage.

---

Equal calories means equal results once calories and protein are equated, at least in terms of fat loss. At least in general. Macro and caloric timing help a little bit, but its within the margin of error for most of these studies...5% or less.

quote:

---

The IF zealots will still scream for their cause with crap about "anti-aging," "improved digestion," and "autophagy," all of which can still be improved through sensible diet, any exercise, and plenty of quality sleep.

---

autophagy is increased to essentially the same levels from a caloric deficit as IF induces. Now when you start getting into long dry fasting etc...well there are no studies on that yet.

I do believe for some it helps digestion, but for others the larger meals, kill their digestion. Like I said above, like many things with nutrition, there are no one size fits all.

The only rules really are... energy intake should match goals and performance needs. Macros breakdown should do the same. I.E a guy who doesn't lift does not need the same amount of protein as the guy who is bodybuilding...is it going to hurt him to eat like that...nope, but he should eat to stay in compliance first.

quote:

---

Been doing IF since 2012...does this mean I need to go back to 8 meals a day?

---

No it means if IF is helping you reach your goals, you should continue to do it. Understanding that IF is not going to be the best for muscle building or maintaining muscle during a caloric deficit and also understanding that none of that shite matters if you are not staying compliant.

quote:

---

Weight loss being the only pertinent vector in this claim?

---

said weight loss....should have said fat loss. and yes that being the only pertinent vector.

quote:

---

Hopefully in relation to fat loss is what you mean. Because there is 100% issues with bloat on carbs which can hinder total weight loss for some. Keto also has benefits outside of weight loss such as using different energy pathways.

IF also lets my stomach (suspected IBS) rest and recover from foods. I don't feel as terrible during the day.

---

Only was speaking of fat loss. I also find IF helps my very pussified stomach. Keto also tends to help me so long as I don't over do it on certain veggies.

But again, some find the opposite and that smaller meals helps them and doesn't feel like they are weighed down.

Also for many, the larger meals tends to stretch the stomach to where they feel the do not look as good when very lean. Martin Berkham talked about it on patreon once.

quote:

---

Carbs are not good for long-term healthspan. I know 777 argues that simply not being fat takes care of like 99% of that, but I don't agree. Particularly with cancer and Alzheimer's.

---

I wouldn't say 99%, but 90+ %. Layne had a study a year or so ago that he posted many of the benefits attributed to keto and IF actually came from the caloric deficit itself. This was in relation to Cholesterol, Triglycerides, Blood pressure and resting blood sugar.

AS far as Cancer and Alzheimers....I will say we are in agreement, but I nor you have any proof. We only have antidotes and theories. Its why I don't bring it up.

Same with DNP(opposite what many others think), personally if I was diagnosed terminal cancer, stage 4 or 5, I am going strict strict carnivore(grass fed/finished and cage free only) and on DNP on top of whatever the doctors wanted to do.

Just like I think the sarm GW 1516 is a miracle health drug at low doses. The conspiracy theorist in me thinks they killed the studies by ODing the rats on GW as its much more profitable to treat disease than prevent disease.

But I usually do not post that and I would advise nobody and I mean nobody to follow the above advice and to only do what their doctors want.


In the end my thoughts have always stayed pretty much the same....Everyone that is not an athlete or striving to gain muscle should eat at or below their maintenance calorie level.

Unless you participate in a sport that requires tons of carbs, 90%+ of others would do best if they kept carbs to 100g or lower a day. But if you prefer to eat carbs over fat and it helps you stay compliant, do it.

If lifting, protein should stay as high as you can keep it to stay in compliance. If not a lifter and one doesnt like protein, one should eat in the .6 to .8 per gram of bodyweight.


Overall I tend to like the following breakdown for lifters for slow fat loss, but again all about compliance

Calories- BW * 10
Protein- BW* 1.25 or higher
Carbs- 100g a day
Fat- makes up rest of calories

quote:

---

I use to think so as well but a ton of places that have the highest concentration of centenarians (people of 100+ yrs old) have a heavy carb based diet. So there has to be something to that.

---

Carb is a very wide ranging term. All carbs arent the same just as all fats and proteins arent the same. Cheesecake is full of carbs, just as carrots are. The difference is one is a no fiber, highly processed baked good, and the other is a fiber rich, natural food.

I don’t know why people continue to make weight loss more difficult than needed.

Weight loss has be solved. Calories in vs out. I was pushing 3 bills and got as low as 153 before I upped my calories over my equilibrium point in order to try and gain in the gym. Got up to about 175-180 then backed off again and now I’m at about 163.

People use these diets all as some elaborate plan to achieve a calorie deficit. I don’t care what new age diet you’re trying, if you eat above your equilibrium you will gain weight and your health markers will get worse over time. Go below your equilibrium and ‘magically’ you will lose weight and your blood pressure etc will follow

Whatever diet strategy that works for you in achieving a calorie deficit, go for it, but to believe it has some magic trick for fat loss and it’s not just the calories is quite simply wrong.

quote:

---

Been saying it for 10+ years, no advantage to IF, keto, or any other forms of dieting other than compliance.

---

Yuuuuup.

I think 2600 is a good goal for your size to gain mass. Maybe a tad low but you should be good.