IF - Catabolic state or HGH release page 2

[ChocoTaco369]

Ask yourself how long human beings have had refrigeration and preserved foods. You'll likely reach the conclusion I did - for 99.99% of human evolution, we couldn't store food well and it would have been impossible to eat within a short time of waking up with any notable regularity. It would likely take hours on average to hunt and gather breakfast, so the traditional "breakfast" is probably a late lunch. If our metabolism slowed down with intermittent fasting, we would have died off as a species eons ago. If you want something that is unnatural for humans, look into "grazing" and what we currently consider "breakfast" - it's human nature to skip breakfast and eat a huge dinner with no snacking, but "doctors" and "nutritionists" recommend the exact opposite. Which seems correct to you?

It takes something like 72+ hours of fasting before the metabolic rate downregulates noticeably. From what I've read, ~16 hours seems to be a good fast for health. However, I'd recommend against CHRONIC FASTING. Forcing yourself to IF every single day isn't healthy unless you simply do not get hungry. Females seem to be more prone to the negative effects of chronic fasting than men. YMMV. I don't eat til ~12:30pm daily because I don't get hungry til ~11:00am, so I see no reason to eat if I'm not hungry. If you're starving by 8:00am and force yourself to adhere to some arbitrary 16 hour fasting window, I'd advise against that outside of irregular occasions. Every now and again I think it's healthy for all of us to go hungry for a long time (24+ hours), but that shouldn't be a routine IMO.

[WeldingHank]

I still get the "that can't be good for you" at work all the time, when I don't order lunch with them, or bring anything to have. I just nod, or say "whatever you say". Though, 2 of them eat every 3 hours and have been trying to lose weight for the last 9 months and have been mostly unsuccessful.

[StackingPlates]

...so the traditional "breakfast" is probably a late lunch.

So by skipping breakfast in favor of the late lunch then the late lunch in this case is a breakfast...wait, what?

[WeldingHank]

so by skipping breakfast in favor of the late lunch then the late lunch in this case is a breakfast...wait, what?

mind=blown!

[otzi]

Ask yourself how long human beings have had refrigeration and preserved foods. You'll likely reach the conclusion I did - for 99.99% of human evolution, we couldn't store food well and it would have been impossible to eat within a short time of waking up with any notable regularity. It would likely take hours on average to hunt and gather breakfast, so the traditional "breakfast" is probably a late lunch.

While I agree with 100% of what you wrote, I think most pre-paleo, paleo, and later people planned ahead and left some supper to be eaten in the morning...leftovers if you will. If they were cooking their meat, they could pick at the bones/marrow next morning. I have kind of changed my thinking to believe we evolved to eat upon awakening due to the fact that leptin levels and some other key hunger hormones are in the 'feed me now' state early in the morning. When reading the accounts of the Inuit, they always had a big feast of frozen fish upon waking, then went about their day hunting and fishing.

That said, I tend to IF through breakfast every day and 42 hours once a week. It makes me feel fantastic and lets me control my hunger like never before.

[DeeDub]

...hunger hormones are in the 'feed me now' state early in the morning.

Perhaps what we're interpreting as "feed me now" actually meant "go hunt now" to them...?

Just a thought.

[gopintos]

left some supper to be eaten in the morning...leftovers if you will.

I like the concept also, cuz I IF most days until lunch time. But quite a few things dont need refrigeration. (fruit, nuts, veggies, etc.) A number of those do need to be cooked some how though, like eggs. And I don't how long we have had fire, but baked goods were still okay back in the day, as were fresh ground grains for this or that, right? Maybe that isnt far enough back though.

[sakura_girl]

If our metabolism slowed down with intermittent fasting, we would have died off as a species eons ago.

Can you clarify why that is? The first thought that comes to mind is that slower metabolisms = survival for longer periods since you're subsisting on your own fat for longer. Or does the destruction of your organs cause too many problems for that to work well?

[Laconophile]

Perhaps what we're interpreting as "feed me now" actually meant "go hunt now" to them...?

Just a thought.

Probably both, if you have leftovers it makes sense to eat them ASAP before they spoil (except in cold climates). If you don't have leftovers it makes sense to hunt.

[otzi]

I like the concept also, cuz I IF most days until lunch time. But quite a few things dont need refrigeration. (fruit, nuts, veggies, etc.) A number of those do need to be cooked some how though, like eggs. And I don't how long we have had fire, but baked goods were still okay back in the day, as were fresh ground grains for this or that, right? Maybe that isnt far enough back though.

You cook eggs? Just kidding, me, too. We are all so far removed from our ancestors it's hard to say what they did. Seems like if you got up at the crack of dawn, in the cold air, you'd want to eat something to get your metabolism cranking for the hard day ahead. We sleep in late, get up to a warm house, take a hot shower, and worry about when and what to eat for breakfast.