
Intermittent Fasting Is Gaining Acceptance - igonvalue
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/03/07/intermittent-fasting-diets-are-gaining-acceptance/
======
doublerebel
I'll add one more anecdote for IF. I've been doing it for 3 years and for me
it's been the most effective way to get in and stay in shape. Coffee with a
bit of milk or cream in the morning keeps me until 1-3pm (I've never gone full
bulletproof coffee, but coffee definitely helps.) As others have mentioned, a
run feels really good toward the end of the fast.

Heavy olympic lifting hasn't been a problem but I only lift on high calorie
days, and not more than 4 times a week. If you are into the Leangains flavor
of IF, lifting is _the_ recommended way to do IF. I find that in my and my gfs
case, lifting has been far more effective than cardio.

I grew up with a mother as an aerobics instructor and I live in a very active
Seattle, so I've seen and tried all number of diets and workout regimens. With
IF I have the most energy and the fastest results. It's also reasonably easy
to work into real life situations (travel, dinners at friends' houses, etc.).

I will say that using a calorie and exercise counter is very very helpful when
starting or resuming IF. Otherwise it is far too easy to mis-estimate calories
in or out. I use Fatsecret app. And to calculate target calorie in/out, there
is a great tool here at 1percentedge [1]. (Unfortunately it's in Flash,
contacting the author to port to a mobile app is on my long list...)

[1]:
[http://www.1percentedge.com/ifcalc/](http://www.1percentedge.com/ifcalc/)

~~~
miseg
I do IF, with milk in my tea and coffee before lunch, and then break the fast
at lunch time.

I think I better watch my milk input, particularly on non-lifting days (I'm a
real amateur lifting), since it's probably bringing me out of "fasted" state
according to my body. I drink a five cups of tea/coffee by lunch time.

~~~
rsync
In response to both of you, I really don't think that you have "fasted" in a
particular period if you are consuming calories at all.

You're certainly restricting calories and I'm sure it's a positive step,
healthwise, etc., but ...

If we have a goal of depleting the energy stores in our liver, you're
interrupting (and perhaps) sabotaging that.

OR, if we are trying to restrict calories into a certain time window, you've
opened up that window with the butter and the milk. You're no longer in the
16, you're in the 8 (so to speak).

~~~
doublerebel
It is a common misconception that any calories >0 break the fast. However, all
IF coaches agree that the threshold for most people is around 50 calories [1].
Knowing this, I only take a splash of cream or milk in my coffee.

[1]:
[http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread36172.html](http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread36172.html)

------
Lazare
I've been doing IF (the "one meal per day" form) for a while now, mostly
because I find it helps me focus during the day.

When I used to eat breakfast, I'd be productive in the morning, until I
started getting distracted by craving lunch. Then I'd eat lunch, and end up
sleepy and groggy afterwards while I digested.

Now that I'm used to IF, I feel more productive; I spend less time at work
thinking about food, and I miss that whole post-lunch carb crash thing.

Obviously it's just anecdotal, possibly all psychosomatic, etc., etc. But I
like it.

~~~
jonnathanson
I'm with you. Breakfast has always felt very skippable for me. My body doesn't
seem to crave it in any way. I'd grown up listening to the conventional
wisdom: eat a hearty breakfast, or else you'll be so hungry you'll snack all
morning and afternoon. But I never really found that to be the case. Really, I
experienced the opposite effect, as you've described. Whenever I eat
breakfast, I find myself hungry again anywhere from 30 to 60 mins later. When
I don't eat breakfast, my hunger sort of quiets down and doesn't reemerge
until later.

~~~
pc2g4d
I basically never eat breakfast and see no negative effect, but when I tell
people this they immediately get concerned about my wellbeing. The "breakfast
is the most important meal of the day" idea is deeply ingrained in our
culture.

~~~
hackaflocka
A conspiracy theory states that breakfast is the most blah blah was invented
by the agri-lobby to up the sales of cereal etc.

~~~
tdkl
""[I]n many ways, the breakfast is the most important meal of the day, because
it is the meal that gets the day started," Lenna F. Cooper, B.S., writes in a
1917 issue of Good Health, the self-proclaimed "oldest health magazine in the
world" edited by none other than Dr. John Harvey Kellogg, the co-inventor of
flaked cereal. "It should not be eaten hurriedly, and all the family, so far
as possible, should partake of it together. And above all, it should be made
up of easily digested foods, and balanced in such a way that the various food
elements are present in the right proportions. It should not be a heavy meal,
consisting of over five to seven hundred calories," Cooper's article
continues.

Granted, Kellogg did hold an M.D. degree, but there's no denying he had a
product to sell."

[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/06/breakfast-most-
impo...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/06/breakfast-most-important-
history_n_5910054.html)

~~~
jschwartzi
"It should not be a heavy meal, consisting of over five to seven hundred
calories" is still good advice. That's about how big my breakfast is. Yes, I
weigh it and count the calories.

------
js2
I've been following the 5:2 fast since Jan 1, and running 60-80 miles per
week. I've run my 3 best marathons in this time, including a PR. (I'm not
crediting the diet for this, just saying that the diet hasn't hurt my
performance.)

I'm mostly doing it as an experiment for myself, after talking with a friend
who did it last year, and watching the BBC Documentary on the diet (Eat, Fast,
and Live Longer). I thought running on days that I partial fast would be
unbearable, but I've felt fine. As well, on my non-fast days for the past two
weeks, I'm trying to consume all my meals within 8 hours (1 PM - 9 PM).

I enjoy the discipline the diet requires. Also, somewhat like running a
marathon, fasting days are a little bit about putting up with discomfort. I am
definitely hungry toward the end of fasting days. Oddly, when I wake up the
next morning my hunger has gone away, and I usually don't eat till 1 PM, as
mentioned above.

Stats: 44 y/o male, 5'8", 140-145 lbs, down from 145-150. I'd like to be in
the 135-140 range for racing purposes.

~~~
brooklyndavs
Your experience is interesting to me. I'm a runner as well and I end up doing
several races per year including a marathon, a few 1/2s, few 5k and 10ks. Do
you do any interval training or long runs on the days you fast? What do you do
about post run nutrition replacement and do you do glucose replacement during
your longer runs? I'd love to shave off a few pounds for racing reasons as
well. I always find myself eating more as I up my milage anyway so my weight
usually stays constant.

~~~
js2
Fasting days (Mon/Wed) are recovery runs. I usually run long on the weekend,
and do my workouts on Tue (intervals) and Thu (tempo), but before breaking my
fast.

My Tue interval day may include a 12 mi AM run of 2 mi w/u, 8 x 1000M at 8K
pace w/600M RI, 2 mi c/d and 4 mi PM recovery run. My Thu tempo is usually
something like a 10 mi AM run of 2 mi w/u, 6 mi at HMP, 2 mi c/d, then
possibly a 4 mi PM recovery run.

Sunday is my cheat day. But there's only so much ice cream you can eat in one
day. :-)

During long runs, I usually carry 21 oz of sports drink.

Post-marathon recovery drink: Guinness Float (that would be Guinness draught
and a scoop of vanilla.)

My plan this year is to run a marathon each month, and 3000 miles total. So
far so good.

~~~
corin_
I have never heard of a Guiness Float before, but seeing as I like both
Guiness and Coke Floats... I want to try it as soon as I stop my short-term
keto diet! What's it like?

------
fomoz
I've been doing Leangains style IF for the past four years. I'd like to share
a few quick tips.

If anyone here wants to try intermittent fasting, do it for the sake of
convenience. I don't eat breakfast or lunch, I just eat when I get home from
work or after weight training. On weekends I break my fast earlier than on
weekdays.

I wouldn't say you should do it for the "benefits" if it doesn't fit your
lifestyle. Right now all we know is that it's not bad for you. It does work
pretty well for hunger control, which can help if your goal is weight loss.

Also, don't live by the clock. It's OK to eat outside your feeding window, you
might get hungry later during the day and the next day you might get hungry
earlier.

Here's a guide if you're looking for a place to start:
[http://www.leangains.com/2010/04/leangains-
guide.html](http://www.leangains.com/2010/04/leangains-guide.html)

Here's a good article if you have general questions about IF:
[http://www.leangains.com/2010/10/top-ten-fasting-myths-
debun...](http://www.leangains.com/2010/10/top-ten-fasting-myths-
debunked.html)

~~~
dorfsmay
> It's OK to eat outside your feeding window

Everybody's different, I use meal time and IF in part to limit what I eat. I
have to because I love everything about eating, the taste, the feeling of
eating, the socialising environment, etc. . I ccan eat anything at any time,
and have a bottom less stomach.

~~~
fomoz
Leangains IF assumes that you track your macros. I was just talking about your
feeding window influencing hormonal entrainment (ghrelin).

------
woofiefa
For years I have been eating only evening meal, so I fast between 22 and 24
hours. I started doing this because it was very convenient for me to do so. I
did not know anything about possible health benefits doing it, I was actually
afraid to do any research if I would find out that eating only once a day was
very dangerous and bad for you, but it fitted so well with my lifestyle that I
wanted to continue no matter what.

A side effect is that I never feel really hungry anymore, even if I have been
fasting for more than 25 hours. Before I could eat at noon and a few hours
later be extremely hungry again. I really enjoy my evening meal complete with
dessert, but I don't feel that deep hunger, almost pain, anymore.

Most of the time I only drink while eating and this can be a problem,
especially in the summer and on the days I jog, as I can become very confused
after not drinking for so many hours. As long as I stay hydrated everything is
great, so I need to become better at that.

------
ardit33
Having done IF myself, where I would eat between noon and 8pm and skip
breakfast during a 'cutting phase', my experience:

* 'IF' is great if you are "cutting" and trying to achieve a lower body weight or maybe just maintaining what you have.

* 'IF' is not good or practical if you are going through a traditional bulk phase

* The feeling of alertness, energy and maybe slight 'high' during the morning, is real.

* Not sure if it is better or worse at preserving muscle than just lowering your calories (and having 3-4 regular meals). I did lose some muscle mass (as well as body fat) when I did it.

The strongest point of intermittent fasting is that it is very easy to
practice. Just skip breakfast, (and no snacks) and have full normal/regular
meals between noon and 8pm.

~~~
volker48
I feel like IF would be detrimental to maintaining muscle mass during a cut.
You really want to keep a steady stream of amino acids to prevent catabolism
of muscle tissue even when reducing total caloric intake. Usually you cut fat
first during a cut. You want to keep carbs to fuel your workouts and you want
to keep the protein flowing to prevent muscle loss.

~~~
minionslave
From my limited knowledge of human physiology .I don't think 24h is enough to
trigger catabolism. You still have some fat reserves, and if you exercise/lift
during the cut, you probably will even gain muscle. YMMV

~~~
wdewind
The word "trigger" is not really useful in this situation because catabolism
is not triggered, it just means muscle breakdown is happening at a higher rate
than muscle synthesis (both of which are constant). This happens under a lot
of different situations, and can temporarily go back and forth a lot. You
certainly enter net catabolism long before your fat reserves are depleted
(else cutting would be simple: just stop eating until you're pure hard
muscle).

There are ways to temporarily spike muscle synthesis, and one of them is
eating a protein rich meal. This specific mechanism has a refractory period in
the order of magnitude of hours. Intermittent fasting robs you of the ability
to spike muscle synthesis as many times per day as you could otherwise.

This effect is not massive. Your body is pretty good at optimizing this stuff.
But when you are cutting, in particular, or trying to bulk without putting on
significant fact, these minor optimizations can add up.

------
reasonattlm
Valter Longo's work is probably the most robust and human-targeted on this
topic, since his group is trying to get fasting and calorie restriction past
the FDA as an adjuvant treatment for cancer. His breakthrough here is arguably
as much the medical diet as a way to pull for-profit Big Pharma interest and
funding into this field as the actual science.

Still, intermittent fasting is still far behind straight calorie restriction
in terms of data and level of conviction that the output has a certain set of
effects under a given set of circumstances. The interesting thing to my eyes
is that the gene expression studies show that fasting and calorie restriction
at similar overall intake of calories produce overlapping but in some ways
quite different gene expression changes. Short-lived species have a much
larger response in terms of health and longevity to all these things in
comparison to long-lived species such as ourselves, however.

All in all it's quite the interesting area of research, especially now that
the scientific community is making significant progress towards biomarkers of
biological aging (such as DNA methylation pattern).

Here's a good introductory paper or two for human CR:

Will calorie restriction work in humans? -
[http://impactaging.com/papers/v5/n7/full/100581.html](http://impactaging.com/papers/v5/n7/full/100581.html)

NIH study finds calorie restriction lowers some risk factors for age-related
diseases - [http://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-study-
finds...](http://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-study-finds-
calorie-restriction-lowers-some-risk-factors-age-related-diseases)

And an interview with Longo on the thrust of his work on intermittent fasting
and CR:

[http://michelsonmedical.org/2014/12/26/igf-1-fasting-
discuss...](http://michelsonmedical.org/2014/12/26/igf-1-fasting-discussion-
valter-longo/)

------
mcculley
I've been practicing intermittent fasting for almost a year now. It works fine
for me. I generally eat no breakfast or lunch. I drink only water throughout
the day. I run a 5k every morning on an empty stomach with no ill effects. It
really helps keep my body fat low and makes me conscious and deliberate about
what I eat.

The only exceptions are meals I eat for social reasons (e.g., work lunch
meetings) and mornings on which I run a road race and want to ensure I'm at
peak performance. I find that when I do break the fast, I'm more hungry
sooner.

~~~
marvin
Does your concentration suffer throughout the day due to low blood sugar? Did
it at first?

~~~
laxatives
Anecdotally, low blood sugar only seems to bother me when I am not physically
fit. Similarly, I only get hunger pangs when I've eaten too much and haven't
exercised. After a few weeks of steady endurance training both of these things
went away. If I am really hungry, it presents less as pain or weakness than a
very empty stomach. If I'm not training regularly, my stomach is rarely ever
that empty. I'm always hungry, which leads to constant snacking and eating big
meals. Exercising even lightly on a regular basis, there's a much stronger
feedback loop where your body has an opportunity to let you know you've over
eaten or eaten a poor mix of nutrients.

All of this is probably limited to light resistance/endurance training. This
sort of goes out the window while lifting weights, at least for me. Then its
very hard for me not to eat a ton. I think the fascination with protein is
totally misguided though. Some people think they need 200g/day when probably
30g is sufficient.

One thing I really embraced in college was ketosis. I hardly ate, aside from a
few well earned feasts. But its extremely hard to maintain if you don't have
the freedom to work out multiple times a day and carbs are a convenient and
cheap source of calories.

------
Florin_Andrei
I strongly doubt we are evolutionarily adapted to a steady regimen of 3 meals
a day every day. I think it's virtually certain that our biochemical engine is
optimized for something a lot closer to "intermittent fasting".

~~~
ajross
That's pseudoscience. Irregular eating is normal for hunter/gatherer
societies, and most animals like our ancestors that sit in a scavenger niche.
We know (or have good evidence that; I followed a link once and am too lazy to
look up the research) our gut has adapted just in the 10k year period after
the advent of agriculture. Agrarian societies are built around grain storage
and rationing. They absolutely have regular access to calories.

That doesn't prove anything, of course. But it does argue that you should be
careful with that kind of "it's the way our bodies are intended to work"
logic. To a large extent, we're already adapted to "modern" eating styles.

~~~
Florin_Andrei
I'm getting a bit tired of seeing the "pseudoscience" label slapped on an
argument every single time evolutionary biology is mentioned. I understand why
one might want to do this occasionally, but I feel the pendulum has swung too
far in the other direction, and now the label is being abused.

This is basically the new "correlation is not causation" meme equivalent. Yes,
correlation indeed does not equate causation in a strict sense. But given a
large enough number of samples, it becomes the domain of statistical analysis,
and then causation can be solidly inferred with a well determined degree of
confidence.

So be careful when repeating trendy memes. Trendy does not equate truthful.

Anyway, to provide some kind of answer: Seeing how studies keep coming in,
showing that I.F. is beneficial in a number of different ways, seems to
suggest that this regimen is, indeed, better overall for your health than 3
meals a day every day. The jury is probably still out, but perhaps getting
close to returning for a decision now.

Also, the 10k year "adaptation" is a weak argument. We've adapted in some
ways, yes - lactose tolerance, etc. In other ways the intracellular
biochemistry has not changed. 10k years is a short time after all; it allows
some adaptations but it's too quick for big changes. Our distant ancestors
very likely did not live on a steady caloric input, and the time is too short
for us to have adapted completely to a different feeding pattern.

Yes, I agree it's hard to know for sure, that's why I used expressions such as
"virtually certain" and "strongly doubt". Both suggest a degree of
uncertainty. I was not making it into a science, by any means.

TLDR: Nuance, instead of binary logic.

~~~
waterhouse
Hmm, I'm tempted to think this is an analogue of Muphry's law, where someone
correcting someone's grammar is likely to make grammar mistakes himself. (Or,
at least, that we are much more likely to notice if he has.)

Getting a large enough number of samples is not enough to show that a
correlation implies a causation. It merely demonstrates that a perceived
correlation is real and is not the result of random sampling error. Take a few
samples, and you'll see a strong correlation between wearing a cast and having
broken bones; take an enormous number of samples, and you'll prove the
correlation is real, and you'll show the precise magnitude of the correlation
with small error bars; but you'll never prove that wearing a cast causes
broken bones. To prove causation, you need a causative theory, and evidence
that distinguishes it from competing causative theories.

Though perhaps you are thinking of situations where the only plausible
causative theories are "A and B are unrelated" and "A causes B".

------
guhcampos
My personal anecdote is a bit different. I don't have a breakfast on a daily
bases since I can remember, for the simple reason that I wake up a little bit
nauseous every day, and it takes me a couple hours to actually feel like
eating anything, so I just go on and wait for lunchtime.

It's never helped me lose weight, and I can't really correlate to any
improvements in my everyday life. It got me on a daily Pantoprazole regime
though, since the long periods without food have skyrocketed my gastritis.

So, as most of the stuff out on the Internet, don't go doing it just because
everybody else is. Try it, and see if it fits you. Don't overdo it and you
should be fine.

~~~
e40
_It got me on a daily Pantoprazole regime though, since the long periods
without food have skyrocketed my gastritis._

I highly recommend you look into Pepcid Complete. I took Prilosec for years
and it has some interesting side effects that even the experts don't know what
they mean: it turns the lining of your stomach from smooth to all bumpy. I
know I'm describing it badly, but when I had an endoscopy before and after
being on Prilosec I noticed it in the pictures my Dr. showed me. When I asked
him he said "no one knows what effect those will have on you long term." And
this was from the premier Gastroenterologist in my area.

I immediately looked for an alternative.

The thing about Pepsid Complete (available at Costco for ~$20 for 100) is it
has a weaker proton pump inhibitor and an antacid. I only take them when I
need them and I take them far less than I did Prilosec.

Drug side effects are the dirty secret of the pharma industry. The FDA is just
too weak to demand better and longer term studies on drugs.

Very related:

[http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2004/10/25/high-
prices](http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2004/10/25/high-prices)

~~~
soft_dev_person
Or just take a Calcium/Magnesium 2:1 (try 500/250mg daily) supplement with
vitamin D. Better ratio, no anti-histamin. Vitamin D helps the body utilize
the minerals.

My better half had serious acid reflux, but no longer use prescription meds
since taking these daily.

------
stevenkovar
I've done intermittent fasting (specifically, the 'Leangains' protocol) for 6
years now, and it's treated me very well. The biggest benefit to me is that it
makes diet adherence much easier, and keeps my macronutrient intake top-of-
mind, which has a sort of trickle-down effect in my overall health.

Coupled with intense fasted weight lifting or sport activity, I feel great
whether I am cutting or bulking. I can play 90 minutes of soccer while fasted
and feel more energetic than anyone else on the field.

For anyone interested in starting: ease into it, track your calories and
protein/fats/carbs to get a sense of what ratios make you feel better / lose
bodyfat more effectively, and keep in mind caffeine and alcohol will feel more
potent. Some people find the first few days uncomfortable, but wait for the
one week mark before making any judgments (or 1-month if you're comfortable
gathering more data).

~~~
bcook
I have always preferred avoiding digestion when physical exertion is imminent.
The harder I work, the less hungry I become.

People have mentioned to me that I may have a food allergy, or some other type
of disorder that makes digestion a problem. Have you considered this?

~~~
stevenkovar
It's not so much that I feel better exercising while fasted; it's that I don't
feel inhibited exercising while fasted. However, the hunger-dampening effect
of working out is common[0]:

> "There are two important hormones involved in provoking appetite: ghrelin
> and peptide YY. Ghrelin is a hormone that stimulates hunger while peptide YY
> suppresses it. Aerobic and anaerobic exercise, such as weight training, both
> stimulate an increase in the peptide YY hormone. This is the primary reason
> healthy people have a feeling of fullness post-workout."

After reflecting for a moment, I realize I experienced that sensation more
often before I started intermittently fasting.

[0] [http://www.livestrong.com/article/405012-exercise-loss-of-
ap...](http://www.livestrong.com/article/405012-exercise-loss-of-appetite/)

------
agentgt
I have being doing IF now for a 4 months and out of all the various dieting
methods I have tried over the years I'm very impressed so far.

I only do one meal a day (big lunch around 2pm) and then a protein shake and
maybe a beer at 8ish. I like that I can have a beer every day.

I have noticed a couple of things with diet:

* shockingly you can still workout hard while starving.

* it seems to help regulate and improve bowel movements (TMI but if I eat healthy and frequently I kill several trees w/ toilet paper consumption).

* it doesn't seem to work as well if you been skipping breakfast your whole life.

* it doesn't seem to work on females.

Of course these are limited observations.

~~~
TallGuyShort
And you do this every day? Not what I picture when I hear "intermittent" \-
the article mentions the 5:2 plan, but I'm curious what other schedules are
common. I've always skipped 2 meals monthly as religious observance, but I'm
seriously considering 5:2 to try out health benefits.

~~~
agentgt
No on the weekends I sort of do a refeed to regain leptin and what not so I
eat 2 calorie dense meals and follow the 8 hour regimen.

During the week I just find I need to start shutting it down earlier or
tapering down.. or else. So I do a casein protein shake (just casein) and a
beer (usually the beer is prior) as my second meal.

I don't think there is any magic except that I'm doing something that I can
maintain (the beer being my treat to help maintain follow through).

Oh I forgot. Sometimes on Friday I will wait till 8:00pm to eat (24 hour
fast). A guy on reddit does this and he/she calls it "Fast Fridays". The idea
being Fridays and the weekends are usually a calorie fest. I like it for it
practicality and for the catchy name.

------
valine
> The scientific community remains divided about the value of intermittent
> fasting. Critics say that the science is not yet strong enough to justify
> widespread recommendations for fasting as a way to lose weight or boost
> health...

Its always strange when ancient practices like fasting are so poorly
understood.

~~~
x5n1
That's because they were not done for any good reason. By this I mean some
person with mental problems started a cult told everyone to start fasting for
"religious" reasons and people followed. Obviously we don't pay much attention
to that these days. Just like we don't investigate the scientific benefits of
sanctified food.

~~~
15charlimit
Barely worth responding to, but many of dietary restrictions imposed by early
religions had very real benefits, such as Hebrews with pork (Trichinella).

It's beyond foolish to flippantly dismiss knowledge offhand because you
dislike or are prejudiced against the source.

~~~
corin_
They may have had real benefits, but not scientifically understood benefits,
and by now they are followed for religious tradition rather than because
research has been done showing that it's a good idea. Pork is a good example,
as far as I'm aware there aren't people recommending avoiding pork (while
still eating other meats) for health reasons, just for religious reasons.

The person you replied to worded it rudely about religions, but I agree with
his overally point in that I want to hear from scientists not religious
leaders when it comes to health advice, regardless of how sensible the
religious advice was when it first came into existence.

~~~
x5n1
Considering all the other problems that have been caused by religion, I think
being a bit critical of it is more than justified. I am not going around
oppressing millions if not billions of people with bad ideas that are quite
literally based in mental problems.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJM5mipwebw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJM5mipwebw)

~~~
corin_
I'm an atheist, and I have many criticisms of many religions, but imposing
dietry restrictions on those who wish to follow them isn't one of them. I'd
also suggest that being constructively critical in a debate is fine, posting
comments like yours that I refered to is only going to make religious people
dislike you and won't change a single opinion, other than making you and other
people who already agree with you feel smug.

(For the record, while I wouldn't necessarily agree with a statement of
"religions have done more good than harm", I do think they can and have done
good in some areas. A religion that promotes good morals and tolerance,
without preaching the negatives that you and I dislike, is fine with me, even
if I don't personally believe in everything they believe in. And on a personal
note, I'm thankful for some of the wonderful music and other art that religion
has inspired and/or funded over the years.)

------
andreirailean
I've been eating mostly in the 5pm-10pm window for the last 6 months after
watching a few TED talks and related videos. Adjustment took about a week or
two. I don't feel hunger during the day but when u get home I eat all I want.
Lost 10 kilos and am feeling great. Every other morning I go for a 4K run and
every day I go for a swim in the ocean. Don't feel any hunger after the run or
swim.

I cook breakfast for my family a few times a week and have no cravings while
smelling or handling food.

The good things about IF are

\- more free time - breakfast and lunch can be spent having fun

\- no 3.30itis after lunch - productive all day long

\- less money spent

The bad:

\- socially awkward. Most social gatherings involve eating. All celebrations
are eat-feasts.

All in all it's a positive experience and feels more natural.

I've been thinking "eat less, exercise more" for a while. But only when I
started doing IF I really understood what it means: 80% eat less, 20% exercise
more. And exercise must come before food - having a big meal, then going for a
walk is not as good for you as doing it the other way around. Run first, eat
second - like the lions do it.

You have to eat way less and exercise just a little more and your body will
adjust. IF is much easier than going for controlled portions. Because "limbic
hunger" (look it up).

~~~
swah
> The bad: socially awkward. Most social gatherings involve eating. All
> celebrations are eat-feasts.

I found the opposite: since I can skip breakfast and lunch, going out at night
and having beers and snacks without reaching my daily limits is possible.

------
SilasX
I had just been reading _Antifragile_ by Nassim Taleb and he theorizes that
fasting works by exploiting your body's "anti-fragility" and need for
stressors by periodically starving it of some resource, which forces it to
adapt in a way that improves the overall system (eg by economizing). For
similar reasons, he recommends a diet of "different nutrients at different
meals" rather than making each meal balanced in itself: you rotate what your
body has to economize on.

Not saying he necessarily has a justifiable basis for believing this: in a lot
of the book, he really comes off as a know-it-all everyone-else-is-stupid
crank :-/

~~~
bcheung
That's a generalization but there are a few concepts that fit.

1) autophagy causes the body to consume cancerous and senescent damaged cells

2) by lowering metabolism free radical production is decreased

3) inflammatory effects from insulin don't happen if insulin is not being
released into the blood stream

------
escoz
I've been eating LCHF for almost 4 years now, I started doing it to lose
weight, but I feel so much better when on diet that is hard to stop. When I'm
firm on the diet, I can easily go a full day without any food, and not feel
any hunger or mood swings. It's great.

------
henriquemaia
I've known (and have been following a form of fasting diet) about this since I
watched this documentary: Eat, Fast and Live Longer (BBC Horizon,
2012-2013)[1]

> Michael Mosley has set himself a truly ambitious goal: he wants to live
> longer, stay younger and lose weight in the bargain. And he wants to make as
> few changes to his life as possible along the way. He discovers the powerful
> new science behind the ancient idea of fasting, and he thinks he's found a
> way of doing it that still allows him to enjoy his food. Michael tests out
> the science of fasting on himself - with life-changing results.

You can watch it here: [http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xvdbtt_eat-fast-live-
longer...](http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xvdbtt_eat-fast-live-longer-
hd_shortfilms)

[1]
[http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01lxyzc](http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01lxyzc)

------
miseg
> Critics say that the science is not yet strong enough to justify widespread
> recommendations for fasting as a way to lose weight or boost health, and
> that most of the evidence supporting it comes from animal research.

Should that not be the other way around, that more research is needed before
recommending you eat three large meals a day plus snacks?

------
danielodio
Amazing to see IF & Ketogenic entering the mainstream.

I was on the verge of metabolic syndrome, with a 38 inch waist, high
triglycerides and high cholesterol.
[http://go.DanielOdio.com/health](http://go.DanielOdio.com/health) In 10
months of IF I've lost 60 pounds.
[http://go.DanielOdio.com/fasting](http://go.DanielOdio.com/fasting)

I've also experimented with Ketosis for four months
[http://go.DanielOdio.com/ketosis](http://go.DanielOdio.com/ketosis) and now
with "Blue Zones"
[http://go.DanielOdio.com/guide](http://go.DanielOdio.com/guide)

Love seeing so much of this gaining a broader audience.

------
voraciousg
These are dangerous as they naturally lead to a fast/binge type eating pattern
. if you're not careful you'll Indoctrinate yourself into a new hell.

I've been lifting and experimenting with my nutrition for over a decade. Just
be careful, it goes from regime to disorder quick.

~~~
wastedhours
I did the "no breakfast/no dinner/reasonable lunch" thing for about 6 months -
I'd also flag you have to be ultra careful when trying to "normalise" your
eating habits too.

I intended to lose about 2 1/2 stone, but ended up losing 3 because I was
fighting my body's urge to EAT ALL THE THINGS and slowly bring intake back up
when going back to three meals a day.

------
d357r0y3r
I got really into IF about 6 years ago. It was a pretty good way to drop about
30 pounds of fat.

That said - at least for me - I'm not sure it helped my eating patterns in
general.

For some background, I got up to about 305 lbs when I was ~19 (about 9 years
ago), then lost a bunch of weight over a year and a half or so. Got down to
about 180 (way too skinny). I really like food. I eat way too fast, and I eat
way too much, and I love eating junk food.

So, for me, IF was kind of a way to compartmentalize what was essentially
binge eating. I'd push my fasting periods further and further into the
evenings, sometimes going til 4-7 PM, then having an absolute blowout meal.

Eventually I stopped doing IF. Well, kind of. I still don't eat breakfast. I
got less extreme with it.

------
TheRealmccoy
People have been advocating, skipping breakfast since long, like more than a
century.

There is this book, published in 1900 by a doctor named, Mr.Edward Dewey, the
title of which is - The No Breakfast Plan and the Fasting-Cure.

I have read this book, and it amazes me how logical, everything that doctor
has explained.

I don't have breakfast.

Here is the link to the book on Gutenberg -
[http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/27128](http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/27128)

------
roymurdock
I would be interested to see the body of research on the effects of Ramadan (1
month of fasting, both food and liquid until sunset) on the health of those
who fast.

The effects on the economy were clear from what I observed in Afghanistan - at
least 5% potential GDP loss due to reduced working hours, shutdown of public
services, overall latency of business transactions during this time. An actual
study across different observing countries would be intriguing.

------
bcheung
I really wish there was more scientific research around extended fasting.
There's so little research and much of it doesn't wait long enough for
ketoadaptation.

I've done extended water fasts as well. 18 days of just water is the longest
I've done and I felt like I could have gone longer.

~~~
minionslave
The longest I have fastest for was 48 hours. It was wonderful. Those first few
bites of food were heavenly.

I'm probably gonna try doing that today

~~~
corin_
Did a 48 (actually a few hours more I guess) water fast ending yesterday and
haven't had carbs since, am quite low on calories yesterday/today and still
feeling absolutely fine and not hungry. Definitely will repeat again in the
future (and staying off carbs for at least a few weeks, hopefully).

~~~
hackaflocka
Did a 48. I got a runner's high by the end of it, and lost some stubborn belly
fat. Important to stay well-hydrated.

------
shanev
Nearly every health-related article that makes it to the top of Hacker News
these days is stuff that was discussed in the Paleo community 5+ years ago.
Earlier today was the benefits of a high fat ketogenic diet in regards to
cancer, and now IF. Good to see you guys catching up!

~~~
austinjp
Confirmation bias is real :)

An experiment: list every topic/theory discussed by paleo enthusiasts. How
many are currently supported by evidence? How many have been soundly refuted?
How frequently does the evidence shift in either case?

------
Taylor_OD
I've been using the time restricted Intermittent Fasting for the last month or
two. I drink coffee in the morning with some creamer but other than that I
don't eat until 12:30 (Lunch) and eat again around 7:00PM or 8:00PM at night.

Honestly, Its not all that different than my old eating habits except now I've
cut out breakfast (which I only really ate because it is, "the most important
meal of the day")

I use to wrestle in college and maintain my weight via exercise but now I work
in an office and this is the only diet I've been able to find that allows me
to workout a normal amount and maintain a decent weight.

------
RikNieu
I've tried IF on-and-since since 2010. While I found it pretty useful for
weight loss, I constantly felt foggy and dased mentally, even after months of
going at it.

My body(or brain, I guess) works better when I eat small amounts of protein
every four hours or so.

------
the_af
> _Mark Mattson, a neuroscientist at the National Institute on Aging in
> Maryland, has not had breakfast in 35 years._

But... but.. breakfast is the best part of my day :( Thanks for ruining it,
pseudoscientific celebrity fad of the moment!

~~~
hackaflocka
I love breakfast too... I just eat it for dinner :-)

------
tdkl
Here's a nice resource that explains 16/8 IF pretty good :
[http://antranik.org/intermittent-fasting/](http://antranik.org/intermittent-
fasting/)

------
ctrijueque
Im been doing this but skipping dinner instead of breakfast. I don't eat
anything after 14 p.m until next morning around 6 a.m.

Few first days was hard, lots of cravings, but after a week/week and a half I
get used to it.

I feel more healthy (yeah, I know, I know...) than ever. And I'm losing weight
at a steady pace (without the usual hights/lows, etc.

------
amgin3
I've been doing this for years, not because I want to, but because I'm too
poor not to.

------
pjc50
Seemingly everyone is talking about this in the context of 'gains' as part of
a high-exercise lifestyle. What about the rest of us on the bare minimum of
exercise? Is it possible that simply skipping breakfast has all these health
benefits?

~~~
tdkl
Well eat if you're hungry and don't if you aren't. Just don't eat because
"it's time", "it's socially accepted" or any of this shit. Also hungry doesn't
mean "I haven't had food in my mouth in less then 3 hours".

That's the gist of it, but we humans have to complicate it, because
"complicated" is supposedly more scientific then "simple".

------
ljk
been doing it for a few months now. it's pretty interesting that the first
week i get hungry the whole day from not eating breakfast, but now I go on
with the day without breakfast or lunch, and only drink water through the day
and I don't get hungry or cravings.

Also none of that afternoon food coma from lunch!

Still not sure if IF just makes it easier to eat less or there's really
something behind it(enough evidence from both sides, like how good/bad egg is
for you) but it's worked for me so far

------
mordocai
I've been doing 16/8 IF for most of my life and didn't realize it had a name
or was something that people talked about...

------
dayaz36
As a Bahai that is currently fasting, it's nice to see science and religion
agree!

------
TurboHaskal
Enjoy your cold hands, socially awkward encounters and binge eating sessions.

------
ChemicalWarfare
"Mark Mattson, a neuroscientist at the National Institute on Aging in
Maryland, has not had breakfast in 35 years. "

and his squat+dl+bench total is?

~~~
mgob
Who cares? The /r/fitness inspired idea that strength training is the end-all-
be-all for health and fitness needs has really gotten out of control.

~~~
ChemicalWarfare
It's not the "be all end all" deal, but an objective measurement of progress
(or lack thereof) nonetheless. The question might be "what's his 100m dash
time" or anything else really.

Nothing in that article indicates any positive improvement as a result of this
self-imposed IF for no apparent reason :)

------
saiko-chriskun
everybody here is crazy

------
daxfohl
tag: things_that_will_have_no_effect_on_your_life_but_you_think_might

(edit: I eat two meals a day, except sometimes I'm hungry in the morning and
then I _do_ often get hungry again soon afterward too and end up eating 4-5
meals that day, but I think everyone's metabolism is different, and moreover
different at different times, and feel more harm than good can often come out
of these studies, especially when presented to data-centric people like HN
readers). (Not to mention, I think a lot of it doesn't matter _at all_
(searching for "Douglas Adams Nutrition" diatribe but not finding it).

------
ha8o8le
I don't think it's possible for the average person to fast in any of the ways
suggested here. I think the best thing to do is have a light dinner without
carbs and a healthy breakfast. If you do this daily it will be like a daily
intermittent fast as you can have a large lunch to indulge yourself. This way
you can actually stick to it. I have been doing this for years and am very
fit. I made a video showing what I ate for lunch each day while losing weight
to prove it works [https://youtu.be/v0hYofwTIiw](https://youtu.be/v0hYofwTIiw)

~~~
paganel
> I don't think it's possible for the average person to fast in any of the
> ways suggested here.

I'm quite an average person (or at least I'd like to think so) but for many
years I did what that first guy from the article did, i.e. not having
breakfast nor lunch, I was eating most of the calories for the day during
dinner. Not sure how that has affected my health, at least now I'm back at
having breakfast again, but the culture of "three big meals a day" is
certainly not the be-all and end-all of nutrition.

I also cannot eat meat before 4 or 5 PM, I can't understand how people can
have things like English breakfast so early in the morning. I also love
fruits, if it were to me I'd eat fruits all day, every day.

