I think I read about that on bay.com, the part about how much energy you can burn from fat. But I don't believe it. We can try to reason through the whole thing. To begin with, I guess you'd have to actually look critically at the study that was supposedly done to prove it, the methods that were used, etc., then draw your conclusions from there to tell wether it was actually a legit study or not.
Originally Posted by Gorbag
That's just to begin with. But we really can reason through it. You can store 2000 calories worth of glycogen, probably plenty more dependent on your muscularity. So that pretty much leaves you safe unless you're going too low on the carbs and exercising A LOT.
Second of all, how much do you really think you can burn in a workout? You'd probably burn several hundred calories after a HARD hour long endurance workout. Most people won't even come close. Because they don't workout that hard. How much do they really burn? Probably 500 at the most.
Also, if there really was any truth to such statements, starving people would die before all their fat was gone. But they don't. All the fat goes away first, then muscle, then you die.
I suppose I could come up with some more points to support my argument, but I'm lazy. I don't disagree just for arguments sake; I'm just trying to keep it real. Believing in such nonsense only perpetuates fear of food and unnecessary excessive compulsive dieting, that which is undesirable and was also nonexistent during paleolithic times. We don't want that, we want freedom.
You are writing a rather long posting without seeing the context of the thread! We are talking about intermittent fasting where a person work out in the morning and eat in the late afternoon and in a calorie deficit. Do you really think that a relative lean woman stores 500 gram of glycogen (2000 kcal) in her body when going for her early morning workout without eating? And since you admit that you are a lazy person, I am not going to do the homework for you, just let me say that people can die from starvation, i.e. various types of illness related to not getting enough energy for their bodies demand, even if they still have fat stored on their body, especially if they also work hard. That’s because of the humans limited capacity to release body fat fast enough to cover the urgent demands…
Originally Posted by Ripped
I have to agree with Ripped. I'm sure there will be some back lash from IF supporters but IMO fasting is just another way to severely reduce your calories and fixate on a pre existing issues with food and here's why:
So and as an IF'r if you don't feel that you've worked out hard enough, do you still consume the volume of calories you would if you feel you had a really good work out? What happens if your tired that day? Sick? Do you decide it would be better the do with out the carb load because you might gain a percentage point in body fat?
What about when you kill it in the gym and go for your feast but think well yesterday I didn't eat as much and today I blew up the weights, maybe I should lower X and try that for a few days and see what happens.
Starving your body for the "perfect" physique is never a good idea. Because perfection is a societal phenomenon that has absolutely nothing to do with reality. Do you really think that paleo man would value a person in their tribe with 3% body fat who doesn't have the energy stores to hunt for the big kill over some one who has 8-12% but can run down an antelope?
Perfection is a magazine cover of airbrushed illness.
To be frank, it's dangerous to fast post-workout. Because eating healthy foods is very important after a workout. Try to avoid this in order to stay away from any future health effects.
Originally Posted by jefferson123
I fast all day after lifting.
As long as daily macro met
I think that may be a spam bot?
Originally Posted by diene
I think jefferson123 may be a spam bot.
Jeferson123 is the smartest spam bot I've ever read.