Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intermittent Fasting for Fast Weight Loss, Better Health & Supreme Fitness

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by pklopp View Post
    Take a look at the posts in my signature, they should help you out.

    Bottom line, if you are serious about weight loss, you probably want to fast 48 hours a week. I have, did, do. Again, check the threads in my sig for the precise details.

    -PK
    ugh 48. I have done some 24s. I havent read your stuff yet but I will. I did read some other stuff on bulletproof exec I think it was, on prolonged fasting and bought some extra supplements but just can't bring myself to try it yet. I am doing good to do what I do, but maybe this is what I need to do to help push things along.
    65lbs gone and counting!!

    Fat 2 Fit - One Woman's Journey

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by gopintos View Post
      ugh 48. I have done some 24s. I havent read your stuff yet but I will. I did read some other stuff on bulletproof exec I think it was, on prolonged fasting and bought some extra supplements but just can't bring myself to try it yet. I am doing good to do what I do, but maybe this is what I need to do to help push things along.
      I'm about to tell you something that will probably sound completely crazy, but the first 24 hours of any fast are the hardest. I just broke my 48+ hour fast this morning at breakfast ( break fast ) and the only reason I ate was because I planned to eat, not because I was actually hungry. I was hungry, however, during the first 24 hours.

      Fasting progresses through three general phases:

      Phase I is a transitional phase lasting about 48 hours during which your body transitions from glucose to fat based metabolism. This involves draining liver glycogen stores which takes about 24 hours, and is followed by some proteolysis driving gluconeogenesis which tops out at about 48 hours and then subsequently declines.

      Phase II is a steady state phase lasting several weeks, during which, your body is literally a fat burning machine. The longest medically supervised fast lasted over a year. Yes, the subject was a morbidly obese male, but the takeaway is that phase II depends entirely on how much excess energy stores you are carrying around.

      Phase III is a terminal phase that you enter when you have exhausted your fat stores, and need to resort to massive proteolysis to keep yourself alive. In this phase, weight loss is extremely rapid and unless you eat, you will die. Nobody enters phase III inadvertently ... you are pretty much in a famine ridden geographical region, or depriving yourself for political reasons.

      You can achieve fairly dramatic body recomposition if you get into phase II, but I would worry about proteolysis and sacrificing muscle tissue too much to recommend going beyond 3 days. For my part, since I only eat once a day around dinner time, as my last meal prior to breaking the fast this morning at 7:00 AM was Sunday at somewhere between 6 and 7 PM, depending on how you do the math, I was fasting for approximately 60 hours.

      If you look through the threads in my sig you will find plenty of anecdotal reports from others confirming that the first 24 hours are the hardest and it gets significantly better afterwards. Ironically, you've already done the hard work by getting several 24s under your belt.

      -PK
      My blog : cogitoergoedo.com

      Interested in Intermittent Fasting? This might help: part 1, part 2, part 3.

      Comment


      • #93
        I've just completed my second 24hours fast this week and trough both of them I felt as if on thermogenics - extremely high energy levels, sweating lots, headache, etc. Is this common? Couldn't find anyone relating anything similar.

        Comment


        • #94
          Thank you for all the info. I guess I did say, and have said before I would do whatever I needed to, I just didnt know what that was. I guess maybe now I do

          OK, today is what, Wednesday? 48 would be Friday. I can do that. (or try) I will eat supper and then report back in 48 hours
          65lbs gone and counting!!

          Fat 2 Fit - One Woman's Journey

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by gopintos View Post
            Thank you for all the info. I guess I did say, and have said before I would do whatever I needed to, I just didnt know what that was. I guess maybe now I do

            OK, today is what, Wednesday? 48 would be Friday. I can do that. (or try) I will eat supper and then report back in 48 hours
            I use coffee to help cut my appetite ... it may help.

            -PK
            My blog : cogitoergoedo.com

            Interested in Intermittent Fasting? This might help: part 1, part 2, part 3.

            Comment


            • #96
              Well, I had all good intentions. But I ate about 20 hours in. And I am not sure why. I wasnt really that hungry, then sat down for a little break and the Chew was on, and they were eating Watermelon. And it looked good and I have watermelon in the frig. And I fixed lunch for the kids, and I was okay with that too. But then I started to get sort of hungry. I was torn between more coffee and just eating something. So anyways, I ate.

              I am happy to say that I am .3lbs short of losing 50lbs. So that inspired me this morning and I thought if I kept that in mind, I could do this 48 hr bit. 2.5 pounds this first week of June. I am happy with all that but just behind where I want to be by the first part of August. So I will try again. I need to reread I think, so it is fresh in my mind why I want to try.
              65lbs gone and counting!!

              Fat 2 Fit - One Woman's Journey

              Comment


              • #97
                Gonna see where things take me today. I dont know if I can make it 48 going into weekend. I also got to thinking, I wonder if the CT has anything to do with it. I have been CTing this week and a bit hungrier once I start eating. Still within the upper end of my calorie range though.

                I was also wondering how supplements come into play on a 48. 24 no big deal, just have them with my one meal. Most are once daily with meal. But my multi says take 2 but I split it up, and a couple of others like fish oil, take 1 with meal twice daily. So I was just wondering what you do about supplements. Thanks!
                65lbs gone and counting!!

                Fat 2 Fit - One Woman's Journey

                Comment


                • #98
                  Thought I might shoot for 48 today. I dont know that I will make it past lunch though

                  Mostly I just wanted to bump this thread, as I was wondering about at what point does one need to supplement like with BCAA, or if I should still take my regular supplements like fish oil, etc. since those say to take with a meal. Thanks!
                  65lbs gone and counting!!

                  Fat 2 Fit - One Woman's Journey

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    I do a Lean Gains type fast only with the workout towards the end of the meal window. Have gotten kind of tired of IF actually.

                    Comment


                    • Again doing some odd research on health and stumbled on this,
                      The study discusses benefits of fasting to health, longevity etc., but one comment triggered memory regarding many women commenting that they had difficulty with fasting, there may be a good reason for that:
                      Another diabetes risk factor that has shown a sex-specific effect is glucose tolerance. After 3 wk of ADF, women but not men had an increase in the area under the glucose curve (36). This unfavorable effect on glucose tolerance in women, accompanied by an apparent lack of an effect on insulin sensitivity, suggests that short-term ADF may be more beneficial in men than in women in reducing type 2 diabetes risk. However, because minimal data and no longer-term studies are available to support this important hypothesis
                      Alternate-day fasting and chronic disease prevention: a review of human and animal trials
                      "There are no short cuts to enlightenment, the journey is the destination, you have to walk this path alone"

                      Comment


                      • Last week I made it to 36. I did some 24's also. The trouble I have, is fixing meals for everybody else. The kids eat/snack what seems like all day long. And then preparing dinner for DH. I think when I broke my 36 it was after I fixed the kids some lunch, but I can't really remember.

                        I did a 24 yesterday, and I wasnt really all that hungry until I ate a little bit of sauerkraut, then I got sort of hungry.

                        My am wondering the affect of eating low calorie when breaking these fasts. What I mean is, I ate after a 24 hour fast, but only had 657 calories. I may not make it to 24 today, maybe 19 - at 12 now and I am sure I will eat more than that today so that will probably average it out, but what if it is still on the low side, like 1200 or less?

                        I am pleased with my results. Last week, I wanted to get off 4lbs that I had gained from the weekend. I know not fat but still I wanted it gone. It took all week, well 5 days to lose it, plus 2lb more. Yesterday, coming off the weekend, I was 1.5 heavy and I know it wasnt fat but I did a 24 and now this morning I am down 2.9lb.

                        So after the ups and downs, I am closing in on 54lbs gone!
                        65lbs gone and counting!!

                        Fat 2 Fit - One Woman's Journey

                        Comment


                        • This is interesting stuff. Back in my 20s, I used to eat one meal a day. I usually had two lattes throughout the day (which meant I was getting a fair amount of whole milk), and then eat whatever I wanted for my evening meal. I didn't do it for health - it was mostly because my schedule was hectic (school, work, partying), food on campus was disgusting, and it was easy.

                          My then SO (who was about twice my size) would look at me as we'd equally split an extra large pizza with everything and wonder where the hell I put it.

                          I notice that as I continue to listen to my body, my first meal gets later in the day, but I'm not necessarily eating my last food later at night.

                          Shutting out the noise of CW is a very good thing.
                          "Right is right, even if no one is doing it; wrong is wrong, even if everyone is doing it." - St. Augustine

                          B*tch-lite

                          Who says back fat is a bad thing? Maybe on a hairy guy at the beach, but not on a crab.

                          Comment


                          • Just a quick question on IF:

                            I'm a new father ( 7 weeks old ) and my wife and I have gone primal for about 4 weeks now, we both love it.

                            But I get up every morning with the baby around 5-6am, having last eaten around 6-7pm the night before, and I don't eat until my wife wakes up around noon.

                            Basically, every day I'm fasting for about 14-18 hours. Is this too much? Is this going to inhibit my body from burning fat because it's seen more as a "Starvation" and my body wants to hold onto fat?

                            I'm really never starving, but I'm worried it's messing up my metabolism by going so long without eating on a daily basis.

                            Thanks, folks!

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by lotus View Post
                              Basically, every day I'm fasting for about 14-18 hours. Is this too much? Is this going to inhibit my body from burning fat because it's seen more as a "Starvation" and my body wants to hold onto fat?
                              I don't think so. That's basically the Leangains recommendation (general recommendation is 16 hours fast, 8 hour eating window for men). And it works for many people, myself included. I've been doing a 16+ hour fast daily for about two years now. I didn't have any weight to lose when I started, but I'm even leaner now than I was if anything.

                              Just don't force it too much. If you start feeling off or anxious and stuff, it might be a sign that you need to eat more or more frequently.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Omni View Post
                                Another diabetes risk factor that has shown a sex-specific effect is glucose tolerance. After 3 wk of ADF, women but not men had an increase in the area under the glucose curve (36). This unfavorable effect on glucose tolerance in women, accompanied by an apparent lack of an effect on insulin sensitivity, suggests that short-term ADF may be more beneficial in men than in women in reducing type 2 diabetes risk. However, because minimal data and no longer-term studies are available to support this important hypothesis

                                Alternate-day fasting and chronic disease prevention: a review of human and animal trials
                                Researchers have a very interesting way of speaking that requires deciphering for most of us. But we can pierce the academic veil if we're patient.

                                So, a glucose tolerance test consists of administering a bolus of glucose to a subject and then monitoring them to see how quickly it clears the blood stream. You sample the blood glucose periodically, and then you generate a curve from that. Since curves are difficult to compare directly, researchers sum up the total value of their observations to compute "the area under the curve", a number that makes things a bit more comparable.

                                Time
                                Bob glucose (mg/dL)
                                Judy glucose (mg/dL)
                                0
                                3
                                3
                                1
                                2
                                3
                                2
                                2
                                1
                                Area Under Curve
                                7
                                7
                                In the above hypothetical example, note that both Bob and Judy have the same area under the curve, although their overall response is different in that for Judy, it takes a while for the glucose to clear her system, but then it does so more quickly towards the end than it does for Bob. The key takeaway here is that this area under the curve notion is a summary statistic which is doesn't necessarily convey a whole lot of information. The devil is in the interpretation details.

                                If we intend to make decisions based upon study results, we also need to make sure that the study participants are fairly representative of the general population. For instance, we wouldn't necessarily want to radically change our lifestyles based on studies where herbivorous animals were fed a carnivorous diet with resulting adverse effects.

                                With that in mind, let's take a look at some of the characteristics of the subjects under study in reference [36] from above.


                                A couple of things immediately strike me about this, and I've highlighted them above. First notice that the males in this study are pretty fat relative to the females, given that they have roughly the same body fat percentage, which is very unusual for the general population, as women tend to carry more body fat in interesting places ( for the most part )

                                The second thing that jumps out is that the males have double the fasting insulin levels of the females, and yet, they have about the same blood glucose levels. In other words, relative to the women in this study, the men are significantly hyperinsulinemic. Given that this is the case, would we not expect a different response among the men and women to an ADF intervention? Would the results have been the same if the researchers had studied hyperinsulinemic men compared to hyperinsulinemic women? How about hyperinsulinemic men vs. normoinsulinemic men? If we want those questions answered, we'll need to do the studies ourselves, unfortunately.

                                But setting all this aside, the research seems to suggest that the women cleared glucose less rapidly after the ADF regime. Why would this be the case? Well, one simple answer would be that they are adapted to oxidizing fat ( ketone adapted ) and are reserving glucose for tissues the depend on it for their survival. If this were the case, ketone oxidizing tissues would become physiologically insulin resistant, giving us the observed glucose tolerance results. This would have been a very simple thing to rule out by merely testing the subjects for ketones in the blood, but unfortunately these researchers did not do so.

                                Animal studies, on the other hand, found that ADF, as expected, caused a doubling of ketone bodies ( aceto-acetate and beta-hydroxy butyrate ) due to increased fatty acid oxidation:

                                Also noted by Anson et al was a doubling of the plasma concentrations of beta-hydroxybutyrate in the ADF group but no change in the control group.
                                Lastly, this study did not control for several confounding factors, including the subject levels of physical activity, nor their diets:

                                Subjects had different levels of physical activity, with seven being sedentary, three being moderately active (exercise one to two times per week), and six being quite active (exercise three or more times per week).
                                It is well known that moderate activity is glycolytic in nature, which means that those subjects that were "quite active" would be glucose sponges. Since we are not told by the researchers who the "quite active" subjects were, if we were to assume that they were all male, that in and of itself would be enough to skew the glucose tolerance test.

                                On each feasting day, subjects were informed that they could eat whatever they wished.
                                So we don't know what the subjects ate when they weren't fasting. We don't know the caloric intake, the macronutrient breakdown, nor the meal timing ... all of which potentially play a role in glucose clearance rates. Note, for example that a carbohydrate heavy diet predisposes one to rapid glucose clearance whereas a fat heavy diet does the opposite.

                                While I'm not a big fan of ADF, if I were a female practitioner for whom this approach worked, I would certainly not change my ADF regimen on the basis of this study.

                                -PK
                                My blog : cogitoergoedo.com

                                Interested in Intermittent Fasting? This might help: part 1, part 2, part 3.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X