Author: Sorting Last Post on Top Message:
ERICWS SparkPoints: (8,307)
Fitness Minutes: (22,220)
Posts: 1,537
1/9/13 3:58 P

If you have self-discipline, you can do it.

I think I could do it from a self-discipline standpoint, and am tempted to try it. But I work out early in the morning, and don't feel good if I work out on a completely empty stomach- i feel better working out about 30-45 minuted after a light breakfast......

TOMMYGUN81 SparkPoints: (5,693)
Fitness Minutes: (4,047)
Posts: 81
1/9/13 3:23 P

The problem with this "diet" is that it gives you so much damn room for screwing it up. Not eating anything after 4pm? Good luck! Even if you do manage to do that on some days, the minute you cave and eat something you'll go right back to your non-healthy-living habits.

I've been there, man!

BREWMASTERBILL SparkPoints: (31,080)
Fitness Minutes: (12,713)
Posts: 4,110
1/9/13 10:04 A

Oh boy, I just ran into the particulars of the "8 hour diet". They've completely screwed it up, as usual. They've thrown in some absolute garbage like this gem:

"extended eating interval throws our digestive system off-kilter and messes with the many hormones and enzymes that manage it. Our bodies can't process the food we eat, and those calories end up where they shouldn't—around our bellies and butts."

lol ... "throws off". It's funny to me because there are staunch advocates here of 5-6 meals per day. This book says it "throws off" our digestive system. Which one is right? I say neither. Both camps are firmly in the broscience realm.

Here is the idea. One CAN potentially manage eating less when limited to an 8 hour window. The frequency with which one eats within that window is probably of little to no consequence. It's a great way for some to manage eating less and maybe a poor way for others.

Where the 5-6 meal camp and the IF camp go wrong is implying some sort of measurable and decisive edge across the board. Whether that is a metabolic edge, an anabolic edge or otherwise is completely baseless and those advocating it should be viewed with a skeptical eye.

BREWMASTERBILL SparkPoints: (31,080)
Fitness Minutes: (12,713)
Posts: 4,110
1/8/13 10:30 A

Indeed. I don't tout anything as working for everyone across the board. Another thing to consider is that while it may "work" for people scientifically, adherence is quite another topic. For example, eating less WORKS for people scientifically, but clearly we have a serious adherence problem. emoticon

ERICWS SparkPoints: (8,307)
Fitness Minutes: (22,220)
Posts: 1,537
1/8/13 10:18 A

There are always questions about these kinds of things, and what might work for one person might be a disaster for others.

I think this concept is surging into the mainstream media right now- this is the hot diet concept for 2013, as shown by heavy pushes from Men's Health and Men's Fitness in the last 2 months. if those supermarket rack rags pick this up, there must be something going on here.

AZRAEL1842 SparkPoints: (183)
Fitness Minutes: (0)
Posts: 6
1/8/13 8:56 A

It has worked for me when I was younger. I would only have one meal on certain day and I did loss weight. Perhaps a habit I should fall back into.

BREWMASTERBILL SparkPoints: (31,080)
Fitness Minutes: (12,713)
Posts: 4,110
1/8/13 6:57 A

I don't know. Google is your friend. I don't consider SparkPeople or the mainstream media reliable sources for dissecting and understanding scientific studies.

COBRACOMMANDER SparkPoints: (14,620)
Fitness Minutes: (31,721)
Posts: 367
1/7/13 10:20 P

Not saying that article and its extensive bibliography are wrong but is there a mainstream media or even a SparkPeople article about it, I wonder.

BREWMASTERBILL SparkPoints: (31,080)
Fitness Minutes: (12,713)
Posts: 4,110
1/4/13 1:15 P

No truth to that. It's a myth.

Links to science and stuff.

examine.com/faq/do-i-need-to-eat-six-times
-a-day-to-keep-my-metabolism-high.html


Edited by: BREWMASTERBILL at: 1/4/2013 (13:16)
COBRACOMMANDER SparkPoints: (14,620)
Fitness Minutes: (31,721)
Posts: 367
1/4/13 11:46 A

I thought less meals per day makes your body think it needs to store more fat. Not sure if that is what I need.

Truth to that?

TRINITYROYAL Posts: 2,399
1/2/13 3:37 P

I've eaten like that pretty much all my life. I didn't know it had a label, just thought I was strange. I usually have breakfast sometime between 11 am and 1 pm, have lunch around 2:30-ish, and dinner between 5:30 and 6:30 or so. I work out first thing in the morning, usually at 5 am or so, but don't notice any ill effects from not eating before I work out.

I drink tea with milk in the morning, so I suppose the milk in the tea keeps me going until I get hungry around mid-day.

When the "Breakfast-Is-The-Most-Important-Meal-Of-T
he-Day" people tried to force me to eat something first thing in the morning when I was a child, I usually spent the next hour or two in the school nurse's office hurling, so they learned to leave me alone. It also taught me to listen to my body.

BREWMASTERBILL SparkPoints: (31,080)
Fitness Minutes: (12,713)
Posts: 4,110
1/2/13 1:52 P

The thing is, you don't have to do it every day. But ya, working out fasted isn't something I do very well. I work out at night, so I consume my largest meal right after workout (and consume a decent sized snack right before the workout). Doesn't work for everyone though, I understand.

ERICWS SparkPoints: (8,307)
Fitness Minutes: (22,220)
Posts: 1,537
1/2/13 12:21 P

I saw what may be a variatoon of this concept with the "8-Hour Diet"- article in recent men's health magazine.

Basically- eat your day's worth of calories within an 8-hour period, and fast the remaining 16 houres. Thus, for example, skip breakfast(?!), start at 10 am, and eat nothing after 6 pm.....

This would be hard for me, as I usually eat about an hour before a workout, meaning I eat breakfast at 5:30-6 am. i'd have to be done for the day eating-wise by 2 pm then, or learn how to exercise w/o eating.......

MRMRMMR Posts: 5,152
12/15/12 7:36 P

i really shouldn't be doing that but i can do it for for a whole week so will usually have mine around same time every day so its a full 24 hours before eating

TOMMYGUN81 SparkPoints: (5,693)
Fitness Minutes: (4,047)
Posts: 81
12/6/12 2:47 P

I just never saw the point.

The only time I fast is when I've binged way too much the previous week. For example, during Thanksgiving week I went way overboard every day, so the Friday after Thanksgiving I decided to eat nothing, and the same for Saturday. I just had to clean up my bowels and start fresh again. It sort of worked, and I slowly built back up to my current 1500-1600 caloric range.

WARMSTRONG2 SparkPoints: (171,773)
Fitness Minutes: (71,654)
Posts: 6,556
12/6/12 8:52 A

I used to try it but found that I just eat too much when I get off the fast and for me slow and steady seems to work best.

FATBASTICH Posts: 782
12/5/12 6:39 P

I do, but I do it for spiritual reasons rather than weight loss.

BREWMASTERBILL SparkPoints: (31,080)
Fitness Minutes: (12,713)
Posts: 4,110
12/5/12 2:19 P

True. This basically for fat loss, recomposition. In a bulk mode, I prefer eating as much as I can, which usually means whenever the urge strikes me, eat.

ARMSPORTS Posts: 1,310
12/5/12 2:12 P

I think it is a fine for fat loss and general health. Not so good for building muscle though, so it really depends to a great degree on your goals.

RIVETPA Posts: 1,177
12/5/12 10:52 A

sometimes I do that - only out of necessity... a few days before PayDay or when I have no food in the apartment.

I think of those as "real world" reasons for intermittent fasting.

BREWMASTERBILL SparkPoints: (31,080)
Fitness Minutes: (12,713)
Posts: 4,110
12/5/12 10:08 A

If you're not familiar with the term, it basically means limiting your meal frequency to once or twice a day. It's not even something you do every day, but I do it probably 5 days a week. I think some of the biological benefits are pretty well documented (I can provide studies, if interested), but aside from that, it helps tremendously with adherence and overall well being.

On my IF days, I will skip breakfast, sometimes lunch (or have a really small lunch). I'll eat about 30g carbs, 20g pro before a workout, hit it hard, eat like a king afterwards.

It ain't all roses. Skipping breakfast was never a problem for me, but lunch was a challenge. I overcame that and now I can pretty much fast 18-20 hours without much challenge.

Another great benefit for me is improved stability after meals. I was one of those folks who would get the sleepies after a meal of any size and any macronutrient makeup. The 5 or 6 meal a day plan was a disaster. It claims to stabilize blood glucose, but I experienced quite the opposite. Now when I do eat 3 meals, I don't get sleepy afterwards.

Another helpful thing, especially when I skip lunch, I can now use that "gained" hour for an exercise bout. I split work an hour earlier and hit the track or gym.

Oh ya, and the planning is great. I don't have to worry about what to eat 3-5 times a day. For busy people, it helps.

Obviously, you're own mileage may vary with this, but consider it if you're having problems making 3 or more meals per day work for you.

Page: 1 of (1)  




Other The Guys' Lounge Topics:

Topics: Last Post:
LOGIN OR TRIVIA 1/15/2011 2:32:30 PM
No wonder I'm huge!!! 7/20/2013 6:04:52 AM
Free Weights or Plate Machines? 7/13/2011 5:38:06 AM
I need some help with my diet plan. 6/22/2011 8:21:53 AM
Killing 2 Birds With 1 Stone 7/13/2013 10:32:49 AM

Diet Resources: diet plateau breakers | hcg diet plateau breaker | diet plateau tips