Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Whens the latest you should eat before going to bed? & intermittent fasting page

  1. #1
    sting's Avatar
    sting is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    176

    Whens the latest you should eat before going to bed? & intermittent fasting

    Primal Fuel
    With intermittent fasting getting popular these days just wondering when one does intermittent fasting your basically eating in a 6-8 hour window and usually late evening, meaning your likely to sleep with a fair amount of food still not broken down, which some say is harder on the metabolism.

    Some articles that i have come across online, and i might be wrong since i finished school at 14y old (ahh yes i should have listened to them when they kept pushing me to concentrate on school.

    in b4 my spelling sux duh!

    There was a study posted by Mark How Often Should You Eat? | Mark's Daily Apple

    Here is the study which i think might be misleading since the obese chosen were only consuming 700 calories per day, which basically had them in starvation mode, which one is not a normal intake of foods and two misleading since the body is starving throughout the day which might be the reason in itself for study conclusion. Link Increased meal frequency does not promote greater ... [Br J Nutr. 2010] - PubMed - NCBI

    Dr Briffa wrote a article on another study re How often should we eat and intermittent fasting and its impact on insulin - again this study is misleading Link How often should we eat? | Dr Briffa's Blog - A Good Look at Good Health

    Why?

    Dr. Briffa wrote: Theory dictates, therefore, that very regular eating might keep insulin levels chronically (persistently) elevated and increase our risk of running into weight issues. On the other hands, less frequent eating may count in our favour. (according to this study)

    One of the things that the researchers measured was the ‘oxidation’ (metabolism) of fat and carbohydrate. They hypothesised that eating 3 meals a day might shift metabolism from sugar towards fat for the reasons discussed above. In this study, though, they did not see such a shift.

    However, other differences were seen between the diets. Notably, the amount of sugar that appeared in the bloodstream was lower when the individuals were eating the 3-meal-a-day regime. This suggests that the lower meal frequency enjoyed better blood sugar control overall (a good thing), and something that the authors suggest may contribute to improved weight control over time.

    But there’s more: the reduced eating frequency was also found to lead to improvements in the resting metabolic rate compared to the more frequent eating. This, in theory, may also assist weight control efforts in the longer term.

    The other notable difference was that when eating 3 times a day (compared to eating 14 times a day), individuals were less hungry and felt more sated. The authors comment that:
    OK Lets break this down but firstly lets see what they were given to eat for this study
    On one occasion, the men were fed a diet (15 per cent protein, 30 per cent fat, 55 per cent carbohydrate) for 36 hours, with the food split into three meals a day. On another occasion the same food was eaten, but this time it was split into 14 portions each day
    Hmm so here we have a study who's conclusion is that insulin was lower eating less (3) meals a day No $h1t!! read below why..

    However, other differences were seen between the diets. Notably, the amount of sugar that appeared in the bloodstream was lower when the individuals were eating the 3-meal-a-day regime. This suggests that the lower meal frequency enjoyed better blood sugar control overall (a good thing), and something that the authors suggest may contribute to improved weight control over time.
    They were feeding the group a high carb diet (55% carbs) low fat - obviously their insulin is going to be higher feeding them 14 times throughout the day not giving the insulin time to drop, did they forget insulin high = sugar burner and fat storing, while insulin low = fat burner? Obviously they did!

    Also said "contribute to improved weight control over time" again >> insulin high = sugar burner fat storing while insulin low = fat burner? Obviously they did!

    Moar
    But there’s more: the reduced eating frequency was also found to lead to improvements in the resting metabolic rate compared to the more frequent eating. This, in theory, may also assist weight control efforts in the longer term.
    Hmm wonder what high insulin levels throughout the day might do to the metabolic rate ..doh!

    Moar
    The other notable difference was that when eating 3 times a day (compared to eating 14 times a day), individuals were less hungry and felt more sated. The authors comment that
    Hmm 14 meals which equaled same calories consumed by group eating 3 more larger meals.

    How big were the meals??? did it go something like, here doggy doggy here one bit that's enough come back 2 hours...?

    Under all that Dr. Briffa wrote: The [different] responses between smaller and larger eating occasions may simply be due to the inability of the body to detect the size of a smaller eating occasion as an adequate physiological load, reducing or eliminating the eating related responses typically observed when larger eating occasions occur.

    Or to put it another way, the small ‘meals’ were not big enough to properly satisfy the appetite.

    Hmm

    Chris Kresser wrote: So, while I agree that IF is part of our heritage, and that it can be helpful in certain situations, I don’t believe it’s an appropriate strategy for everyone.

    Why? Because fasting can elevate cortisol levels. One of cortisol’s effects is that it raises blood sugar. So, in someone with blood sugar regulation issues, fasting can actually make them worse.

    I’ve seen this time and time again with my patients. Almost all of my patients have blood sugar imbalances. And it’s usually not as simple as “high blood sugar” or “low blood sugar”. They often have a combination of both (reactive hypoglycemia), or strange blood sugar patterns that, on the surface, don’t make much sense. These folks aren’t eating a Standard American Diet. Most of them are already on a paleo-type or low-carb diet. Yet they still have blood sugar issues.

    In these cases, cortisol dysregulation is almost always the culprit. When these patients try intermittent fasting, their blood sugar control gets worse. I will see fasting blood sugar readings in the 90s and even low 100s, in spite of the fact that they are eating a low-carb, paleo-type diet.
    Link Intermittent fasting, cortisol and blood sugar

    Thoughts?

  2. #2
    Ryancarter1986's Avatar
    Ryancarter1986 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    London uk
    Posts
    517
    Read carb back loading and he points out its actually more beneficial to eat carbs later at night .


    London

  3. #3
    fkjr2's Avatar
    fkjr2 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    164
    I do the warrior diet and also back load after evening lift

    I usually hit bed on full stomach

    I prefer it

  4. #4
    Ryancarter1986's Avatar
    Ryancarter1986 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    London uk
    Posts
    517
    I can't believe sometimes I wake up so ripped & toned From the amount of carbs & food I have


    London

  5. #5
    slowcooker's Avatar
    slowcooker is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    498
    You should have at least enough time to swallow before falling asleep

  6. #6
    sting's Avatar
    sting is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    176
    Reason i started this thread was mainly to get opinions on IF vs more meals per day.

    The theory is that having more meals throughout the day gets a slow metabolism working, compared to one or two bigger meals later in the day (IF) which ask the body to work harder while sleeping after having consumed more food later in the day.

    Have read the the body needs 9 to 12 hours to breakdown the food it has just consumed, so eating more frequently doesn't allow it that time and only clogs it up instead, which makes sense in away, but than you have the other argument of having smaller meals quickening up the metabolism.

  7. #7
    Neckhammer's Avatar
    Neckhammer is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    7,148
    Read up here http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread29011.html

    Then you might wanna do a search for part I and part II also.

    Once you got that down I bet you have answered at least a few of your question. And hopefully raised a few more.

  8. #8
    oxide's Avatar
    oxide is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    MD/VA/DC
    Posts
    1,106
    PrimalCon New York
    IF are generally 14 hr for women, 16 hr for men.
    Calculate your own timing from there.
    5'0" female, 43 years old. Started Primal October 31, 2011, at a skinny fat 111.5 lbs. Low weight: 99.5 lb on a fast. Current weight: skinny-fat 106.5 lbs because of sugar cheating.

    MY PRIMAL: I (try to) follow by-the-book primal as advocated by Mark Sisson, except for whey powder and a bit of cream. I aim for 80-90 g carb/day and advocate a two-month strict adjustment for newbies. But everybody is different and other need to tweak Primal to their own needs.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •