NoS and intermittent fasting

No Snacks, no sweets, no seconds. Except on Days that start with S. Too simple for you? Simple is why it works. Look here for questions, introductions, support, success stories.

Moderators: Soprano, automatedeating

Bssh
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 5:46 pm
Location: London

NoS and intermittent fasting

Post by Bssh » Thu Jun 13, 2013 10:54 am

Hello all. I'm new here but not to NoS. I've had a few messages regarding intermittent fasting so I thought I'd simply write a little about the way I'm doing it in a post.

This is not about IF as that can be Googled, but it's a summary of how I lost 68lbs and how I'm maintaining the weightloss.

I did 2x24 hour fasts to lose weight and now I maintain weight by taking a flexible approach - some weeks I do a day's fasting (ending with a light dinner in the evening), others I do daily 16:8 (eating window 8 hours), yet others I skip the odd meal to give my digestion an extended break eg no lunch. Throughout it all I don't snack as per NoS. So I'm able to maintain my weightloss yet still reap the health benefits of fasting. Win win :-)

I find NoS extremely compatible with IF because it works on the same principle of giving digestion an extended break. And I love how both WOEs (way of eating) take the emphasis off food when not eating. These days, when it's not time to eat, I am free (mentally, emotionally and physically) to do other things.
Start BMI 36, current BMI 19, goal BMI 19.
Losing by combining intermittent fasting with NoS.

noni
Posts: 613
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 2:01 pm

Post by noni » Thu Jun 13, 2013 12:29 pm

When I was fasting 2 days a week alone, I didn't lose any weight because I made up for lost calories. When I combined it with No S, the weight started coming off.

User avatar
reinhard
Site Admin
Posts: 5918
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 7:38 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA
Contact:

Post by reinhard » Thu Jun 13, 2013 1:49 pm

Thanks for letting us know about how you combined No-s and IF -- very impressive results! And there's certainly a lot of historical precedent for fasting in many/most/maybe even all religious traditions. My fear is that it might be an easy avenue of abuse to those with serious eating disorders (think A Hunger Artist), but it sounds like you have a good handle on it.

Thanks also, Noni, for chiming in with your experience. The danger of overcompensating for fasts, which I understand is a big issue for many Muslims in Ramadan, for example, is nicely limited with No-s.

Reinhard

Bssh
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 5:46 pm
Location: London

Post by Bssh » Thu Jun 13, 2013 5:22 pm

Reinhard and Noni, yes I love how NoS prevents overeating on non-fast days.
Start BMI 36, current BMI 19, goal BMI 19.
Losing by combining intermittent fasting with NoS.

heatherhikes
Posts: 181
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 5:57 pm
Location: uetliberg

Post by heatherhikes » Thu Jun 13, 2013 9:10 pm

Hello Bssh,

thanks for sharing your experiences with us. I am doing something similar right now.
I have a question: How do you eat on S-days? Are they off-days for you, and have they improved quicker because of the IF? Appreciating your taking the time out to answer :)
_____________
H.

Bssh
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 5:46 pm
Location: London

Post by Bssh » Fri Jun 14, 2013 9:09 am

Hi. My S days fall on the weekend when I don't fast at all. But the routine of fasting has reduced my appetite and I've become accustomed to not grazing so on S days I naturally leave quite long gaps between eating episodes (so to speak). I don't actually snack much on S days now but I do enjoy a delicious dessert or two :-)
Start BMI 36, current BMI 19, goal BMI 19.
Losing by combining intermittent fasting with NoS.

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Mon Jun 17, 2013 6:44 pm

Do you mean you did 2 24-hour fasts each week in the beginning? And now when you skip the odd lunch, is it because you aren't hungry for lunch or because you just pick a day to do that? When you do 16:8, do you have three meals and no snacks?
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

Bssh
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 5:46 pm
Location: London

Post by Bssh » Mon Jun 17, 2013 7:36 pm

Yes, I did 2x24 hour fasts whilst in weightloss mode then once I lost all my excess weight I became more flexible with my fasting pattern (because I still want the health benefits of giving digestion a break and allowing the body to "repair" itself).

If I skip a meal it's not due to lack of hunger, it's due to wanting a longer fasting period.

If I do a 16:8 day I have 2 well-portioned meals (lunch and dinner) and no snacking.

I never snack regardless of whether I'm fasting or not, except on S days.
Start BMI 36, current BMI 19, goal BMI 19.
Losing by combining intermittent fasting with NoS.

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Tue Jun 25, 2013 10:41 am

Bssh wrote:Yes, I did 2x24 hour fasts whilst in weightloss mode then once I lost all my excess weight I became more flexible with my fasting pattern (because I still want the health benefits of giving digestion a break and allowing the body to "repair" itself).
Earlier this year I posted a link to an article about IF. Afterwards I watched the video about this book and decided to try it for the health benefits. Any weight loss would be a bonus. I did it for about 2 months and got sidetracked when my daughter came to visit. Still haven't got back to it, but I didn't find it especially difficult to do. Thinking about food while fasting caused more problems than actually being hungry.

My daughter is moving back here and will arrive Sunday. She'll be with me for about a week before her belongings arrive. So I'm planning to start again after she gets into her own place.
Last edited by wosnes on Tue Jun 25, 2013 11:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

Bssh
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 5:46 pm
Location: London

Post by Bssh » Tue Jun 25, 2013 11:02 am

Yes, the Dr Mosley book (and the original Horizon domcumentary he did) made me try IF in the first place. I'm in Britain and IF has become very popular here due to that book.

All the best to you if you embark on the IF journey. I do find it wonderfully complementary with NoS.
Start BMI 36, current BMI 19, goal BMI 19.
Losing by combining intermittent fasting with NoS.

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Tue Jun 25, 2013 5:54 pm

But if IF cannot be implemented when other people are involved... well, WADR, that seems problematic. However, I have had some times when I lost my appetite for 24 hours and even 36. But I was always spending almost all my time alone.

In any case, I continue to be intrigued.
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Tue Jun 25, 2013 7:10 pm

oolala53 wrote:But if IF cannot be implemented when other people are involved... well, WADR, that seems problematic. However, I have had some times when I lost my appetite for 24 hours and even 36. But I was always spending almost all my time alone.

In any case, I continue to be intrigued.
I don't think that it cannot be done when other people are involved. I just didn't anticipate in advance that my schedule is different when my daughter is here.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

Bssh
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 5:46 pm
Location: London

Post by Bssh » Tue Jun 25, 2013 7:21 pm

I have a child and husband and houseguests at various times and I manage to IF. There are so many variations of IF that I manage to find something that suits. Most of the time it's a 24 hour fast like 5:2 or Eat Stop Eat but I often do shorter fasts when I have houseguests or skip a meal or not fast at all that week. It's all very flexible - just like the different S days :)
Start BMI 36, current BMI 19, goal BMI 19.
Losing by combining intermittent fasting with NoS.

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Tue Jun 25, 2013 8:16 pm

Bssh wrote:I have a child and husband and houseguests at various times and I manage to IF. There are so many variations of IF that I manage to find something that suits. Most of the time it's a 24 hour fast like 5:2 or Eat Stop Eat but I often do shorter fasts when I have houseguests or skip a meal or not fast at all that week. It's all very flexible - just like the different S days :)
I didn't fast at all the week she was here. Maybe it was because it was still a pretty new habit, but I had trouble getting back to it.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

mabelsfriend
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 6:09 pm
Location: Iowa

Post by mabelsfriend » Wed Jun 26, 2013 4:25 pm

Thanks for posting your experience, Bssh. I've been experimenting with IF off and on for awhile now-- both 24 and 16:8. I think 24 is the best method for me, and have been thinking of 24 X 3/week (MWF) until I lose my extra 50 pounds and then dropping to 24 X 1 or 2 to maintain, combining with No S and moderate exercise.

Do you mind sharing how long it took you to lose the 68 pounds? I know every person is different, but just wondering how it went for you. . . .

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Wed Jun 26, 2013 4:59 pm

Very interesting thread and insights from all. I've read about the TV documentary and also watched videos from it. I'm intrigued also; as I've said elsewhere I have sort of done 16:8 on S days without trying to. Normally my husband doesn't eat until dinner, and I've found myself just going along with him mainly so I won't whine, I'm hungry! if we're out and about. But I'm completing my 21-day first go at this, so maybe I'll try some sort of IF once I think about this some more. @Bssh, yes if you don't mind sharing it would be interesting to hear your "timeline".
I'm a Mac

Bssh
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 5:46 pm
Location: London

Post by Bssh » Wed Jun 26, 2013 6:27 pm

My Timeline:

Feb 2012-Jan 2013
46 lbs lost calorie counting (eating at 10-15% below my maintenance calories)
Jan 2013-Apr 2013
22 lbs lost doing 5:2 (fasting on 500 cals twice a week, normal eating all other days) & NoS
Start BMI 36, current BMI 19, goal BMI 19.
Losing by combining intermittent fasting with NoS.

User avatar
Jethro
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 6:31 pm

Post by Jethro » Fri Jun 28, 2013 10:25 pm

if you eat the same on days you don't fast, you should lose weight.

I like this idea.
"Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."
- Vince Lombardi

Sometimes you need to take one step back for every two steps forward.

Time heals everything!

90% of a diet is 60% mental

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Sat Jun 29, 2013 7:13 am

If you eat the same as what on the days you don't fast? You mean if you don't compensate by eating more on non-"fast" days? Yes, for overall reduced food intake, all of fasting depends on not overdoing it when not fasting. As my No S years go on, that kind of compensation seems to happen less and less.
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

User avatar
Jethro
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 6:31 pm

Post by Jethro » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:47 pm

oolala53 wrote:If you eat the same as what on the days you don't fast? You mean if you don't compensate by eating more on non-"fast" days? Yes, for overall reduced food intake, all of fasting depends on not overdoing it when not fasting. As my No S years go on, that kind of compensation seems to happen less and less.
Let me make it clear for you. Everyday you eat x number of calories. You eat ZERO calories 1-2 days of the week while eating x calories on the remaining 5 days, you will create a calorie deficit, and lose weight.

In other words, don't stuff yourself on your eat days. Eat the same.

Capish?
Last edited by Jethro on Sat Jun 29, 2013 4:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."
- Vince Lombardi

Sometimes you need to take one step back for every two steps forward.

Time heals everything!

90% of a diet is 60% mental

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Sat Jun 29, 2013 3:57 pm

I think that's what I said. I have no problem capishing the theory.
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

noni
Posts: 613
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 2:01 pm

Post by noni » Mon Jul 01, 2013 3:06 pm

Oolala,

I've been doing the 2x24hr (or close to it) fast each week since last August, but I never count calories. When I lose a few more pounds I hope to do this only 1x each week for maintenance. But I'm not very active so I don't have such hopes. It's not too hard, tho' and I actually look forward to the next 3-meal N-day! For me, it's No S with a mod.

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Mon Jul 01, 2013 6:27 pm

I think there's a lot of value in any routine way to limit access to food that allows a person flexibility for social or other reasons and doesn't include SA. Calorie reduction can happen without counting them. Or has for me up to now.


I'm thinking of making some kind of systematic mod on Mondays and Thursdays. I don't do well with 24-hour imposed fasts, but applaud those who do! Not sure what it will be, but I can feel I'm eating a bit more than I need with my 3 meals but am not happy with the thought of tiny meals or eating off a saucer, which is about what it would have to be for me now.

A former yoga instructor of mine has fasted one day a week for over 30 years. He was never overweight and didn't do it for that reason. Certainly less crazy than the opposite.
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

Bssh
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 5:46 pm
Location: London

Post by Bssh » Mon Jul 01, 2013 6:31 pm

Looking forward to hearing more about your Monday/Thursday mod oolala :)
Start BMI 36, current BMI 19, goal BMI 19.
Losing by combining intermittent fasting with NoS.

User avatar
~reneew
Posts: 2190
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 9:20 pm
Location: midwest US

Post by ~reneew » Mon Jul 01, 2013 10:08 pm

I have been doing NoS off and on for quite a while and seem to maintain on it long-term mainly because I tend to not actually do it all of the time. I seem to "do" it probably 2-3 days a week. Weekends de-rail me and then I have a hard time getting on track again, or I jump the tracks early in anticipation of it. :roll: When I do loose (once 26 pounds and once 34 pounds) I was doing IF (I called it double good days). I read and re-read a book called The diet Alternative by Diane Hampton. I love her book. I also try to wait for hunger and my favorite book on that right now is The Eden Diet. I have great success eating only one meal (dinner) a day but my problem I think, is that I tend to try to do it every day M-F. Than I fail and eat my frustrations. I don't think I've ever tried it for say, 2 days a week. Hmmm... I do thrive with rules if they are personally doable. I've been thinking on it way too long and I may just institute a Tuesday/Thursday one-meal-a-day rule. My biggest problem is the 2 S days. If only I had never seen the "except on days that strt with S" and had only seen "except sometimes on days that start with S". Anyway, I want to give this a set rule guideline and give it a try again! Thanks!
I guess this doesn't work unless you actually do it.
Please pray for me

noni
Posts: 613
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 2:01 pm

Post by noni » Tue Jul 02, 2013 12:22 pm

I read Diane Hampton's book some time ago as well. If I remember correctly she eats just two meals everyday. Breakfast and dinner. She skips lunch as it's more calorie laden than her breakfasts.

User avatar
~reneew
Posts: 2190
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 9:20 pm
Location: midwest US

Post by ~reneew » Wed Jul 03, 2013 2:31 am

But she does recommend one meal a day for very overweight people. It's near the back of the book.
I guess this doesn't work unless you actually do it.
Please pray for me

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Wed Jul 03, 2013 6:52 am

With all due respect, she can recommend all she wants, and even if it seems smart because a person is very fat and "needs" to take off weight faster, or even because there are physical benefits to following the advice, the results of the last hundred years are in: such tactics may lose people weight in the short run, but they do not lead to permanent satisfaction with eating less. (People who truly take their health problems seriously have a greater chance than others, but even they notoriously don't follow beneficial regimes.)

When the focus becomes what leads to permanent reduction in food intake, a lot of even very good health admonitions fall to the wayside.

in my mind, the way No S helps protect against the pendulum swing after a fast makes combining it with versions of IF a lot more promising than most "diets" out there.
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

leafy_greens
Posts: 426
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 8:18 pm

Post by leafy_greens » Wed Jul 03, 2013 1:58 pm

I don't believe in fasting. As someone mentioned a while back, if Reinhard had called the 6 hours between meals "fasting," maybe his system would be more popular. On the surface, fasting sounds like a quick fix (and very virtuous) but it's not sustainable.
"No S IS hard... It just turns out that everything else is harder." -oolala53

mabelsfriend
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 6:09 pm
Location: Iowa

Post by mabelsfriend » Wed Jul 03, 2013 3:53 pm

Historically, people have fasted intermittently much longer than they've had access to three meals a day. Also people fast all the time for religious reasons. In my research on the topic, I've found people who have been fasting intermittently for 10, 20, 30 years. It is sustainable, as is No S. Both are good ways to restrict calories--- it just comes down to a matter of individual preference. While fasting is not easy for me, it is easier than any other method I've tried. Right now I'm combining it with No S and it's going well so far.

Fasting may be increasing in popularity right now, but it's not a fad. It's been around for all of human history.

User avatar
Jethro
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 6:31 pm

Post by Jethro » Wed Jul 03, 2013 4:14 pm

oolala53 wrote:When the focus becomes what leads to permanent reduction in food intake, a lot of even very good health admonitions fall to the wayside. .
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but do you mean permanent reduction on food intake = less weight = less health?
"Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."
- Vince Lombardi

Sometimes you need to take one step back for every two steps forward.

Time heals everything!

90% of a diet is 60% mental

leafy_greens
Posts: 426
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 8:18 pm

Post by leafy_greens » Wed Jul 03, 2013 4:53 pm

People who have fasted for religious reasons or lack of food access, did not do it for weight loss. Religious reasons are temporary and for the glory of something other than yourself. Those who have lack of access to food could probably care less about their weight and are just worried about surviving. Most likely, these fasters survived, but who knows what the lasting effects were on their weight, dieting mentality or propensity for binging once they were re-introduced to normal volumes of food. I would like to know that, before promoting their kind of diet.

Fasting is probably not something that would be recommended by any medical doctor, unless you were under their supervision. Diets such as those "hospital diets" are not for long term use. Most people who have tried hospital diets probably got them off a fax machine, not from a hospital or doctor.

There are rare (which is why you had to find them) people who obviously can thrive on fasting by themselves, but the majority of people would suffer from a binge eating backlash if they tried fasting as a permanent way of eating. I would not call fasting, for the average person, a good way to restrict calories. I believe that fasting for weight loss is no different than binging and purging, but to each his own.

No S does promote fasting - between meals. It does not necessarily restrict calories though. Hence the slow, or no, weight loss for many No S participants.
"No S IS hard... It just turns out that everything else is harder." -oolala53

mabelsfriend
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 6:09 pm
Location: Iowa

Post by mabelsfriend » Wed Jul 03, 2013 5:15 pm

All you need to do is read some of the latest research that's being done on fasting (particularly in the last 10 years). While certainly more research needs to be done, that that has already been completed shows very promising links between fasting and good health--- reduction in insulin levels, lower risk of heart disease and diabetes, and more. In other words, it's about more than weight loss.

I don't care if you or anyone else fasts or not. I believe there is certainly more than one way to get healthy and lose weight. I'm just saying we should keep an open mind and read the new research that's being done. And, by the way, fasting does not have to lead to binging, nor does it remotely resemble an eating disorder when done the right way. It (along with No S) has actually taught me that it's OK to be hungry, even for several hours, and that I don't have to have access to food 24/7 to live well. It's also taught me to truly appreciate my food when I do eat. Those are the exact same ideas that No S espouses.

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Wed Jul 03, 2013 7:01 pm

My quote feature doesn't work so here's Jethro's question: Please correct me if I'm wrong, but do you mean permanent reduction on food intake = less weight = less health?

Not at all! I am making no claims for better or worse health with reduced eating. I am simply saying that if a person thinks s/he needs to eat less food permanently for whatever reason, his/her odds of success go up by making the BEHAVIOR the target.

I'd guess, but can't prove, that the majority of Americans would improve their health by reducing their eating, even if it doesn't result in large weight losses. The odds go up for better health with weight loss, but there are exceptions. I think the odds for success definitely justify the effort involved in changing the behavior.
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

User avatar
Jethro
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 6:31 pm

Post by Jethro » Wed Jul 03, 2013 8:38 pm

oolala53 wrote:My quote feature doesn't work so here's Jethro's question: Please correct me if I'm wrong, but do you mean permanent reduction on food intake = less weight = less health?

Not at all! I am making no claims for better or worse health with reduced eating. I am simply saying that if a person thinks s/he needs to eat less food permanently for whatever reason, his/her odds of success go up by making the BEHAVIOR the target.

I'd guess, but can't prove, that the majority of Americans would improve their health by reducing their eating, even if it doesn't result in large weight losses. The odds go up for better health with weight loss, but there are exceptions. I think the odds for success definitely justify the effort involved in changing the behavior.
OK! 8)
"Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."
- Vince Lombardi

Sometimes you need to take one step back for every two steps forward.

Time heals everything!

90% of a diet is 60% mental

Bssh
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 5:46 pm
Location: London

Post by Bssh » Wed Jul 03, 2013 9:12 pm

Fasting is definitely not for every one - bingeing is a risk which is why IF isn't recommended to those with eating disorders. But I don't have ED tendencies, moreover I have read enough scientific research into the benefits of IF to convince me that I am doing this primarily for health.
Start BMI 36, current BMI 19, goal BMI 19.
Losing by combining intermittent fasting with NoS.

noni
Posts: 613
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 2:01 pm

Post by noni » Thu Jul 04, 2013 3:40 am

I was ready to throw No S to the wind for the second time, so I tried IF twice a week. It helped me stay on No S because I was able to keep my focus. On IF days, I always eat a meal. I have been doing this for almost a year.

Bssh
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 5:46 pm
Location: London

Post by Bssh » Thu Jul 04, 2013 7:24 am

I'm with Noni. I find IF very sustainable for the longterm and know several people in real life and online who've been successfully following IF for years. It's a disciplined way of regulating eating that suits many (though obviously not all) people and is very complementary to NoS (in my experience).

For those interested in the health benefits, here's the documentary by Dr Moseley:

http://vimeo.com/54089463
Start BMI 36, current BMI 19, goal BMI 19.
Losing by combining intermittent fasting with NoS.

mabelsfriend
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 6:09 pm
Location: Iowa

Post by mabelsfriend » Thu Jul 04, 2013 12:39 pm

My experience sounds exactly like noni's, except I haven't yet been fasting as long. I eat dinner everyday-- either before or after my fast begins or ends. On non-fast days I eat 3 meals-- trying to make them healthy--- and on S Days I eat 3 meals with the occasional treat.

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Thu Jul 04, 2013 1:08 pm

leafy_greens wrote:
Fasting is probably not something that would be recommended by any medical doctor, unless you were under their supervision.

There are rare (which is why you had to find them) people who obviously can thrive on fasting by themselves, but the majority of people would suffer from a binge eating backlash if they tried fasting as a permanent way of eating.
It's speculated that part of the reason the Greeks, who have traditionally had low rates of heart disease, hypertension, diabetes and various cancers, is not only due to what they eat, but also how they eat. The Greek Orthodox religion has about 180 days of fasting each year. Some days just eliminate meat, others are more restrictive, even including abstinence from olive oil. Every Wednesday and Friday are fasting days. There are longer periods of fasting around Advent and Lent and other religious holidays.

Most medical doctors don't recommend eating "only" 3 meals a day, either. I almost did a spit take when I heard Dr. Oz express concern that someone on his show ate only 3 meals daily without snacking. He didn't believe that they couldn't get enough calories and/or nutrients without snacking. They are people who should not fast, but it's not an unhealthy practice for most people. Quite the opposite, in fact; it can improve health.

Some researchers believed that people would binge eat the day after a fast, but it didn't happen. They found that people eat about 10% more the day after a fast and tend to make better food-related decisions on non-fasting days.

When I started reading about IF and before I decided to try it, I realized I'd been doing it about once a week for a while. I'd have a day when I just didn't feel like eating dinner, so I followed my instincts. I didn't eat from lunch one day to lunch the next day. I noticed that I had a generalized feeling of increased well-being after I did this.

You may recall that about a week ago I had a day when I was nauseated and had a stomach ache. I sipped ginger ale and nibbled on saltines all day. The next day not only were my symptoms gone, I felt better in general.

I decided to incorporate IF into my routine primarily for the health benefits. Any weight loss would be a welcome side effect. I fell off the IF wagon for about a month, but it wasn't a strong habit yet (I had to think "today is a fasting day") I still do, but I've climbed back on the wagon and I'm feeling great.

Today would normally be a fasting day for me, but since it's a holiday, I'll fast tomorrow.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

User avatar
~reneew
Posts: 2190
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 9:20 pm
Location: midwest US

Post by ~reneew » Fri Jul 05, 2013 3:31 pm

We all fast all night long, thus the word "breakfast". It is normal. 2 meals a day (morning and evening) were normal in biblical times whether you are religious or not. Also, the Bible says "when we fast..." not if we fast. I fast to break the eat-whenever cycle when it seems to get a hold of me. Eating one meal a day is not bad at all. Hunger is not terrible, it's normal.
I guess this doesn't work unless you actually do it.
Please pray for me

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Fri Jul 05, 2013 4:59 pm

With all due respect, fasting during sleep and wakefulness are not the same thing. No conscious effort is needed not to eat during sleep.

But it's also true that when someone commits to a certain number of meals a day, feeds herself adequately at those meals, and goes through a period of habit- forming, which can take much longer than people want it to, it takes much less conscious effort to keep to those meals.
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

jos22
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri May 13, 2011 12:21 pm
Location: Australia

Intermittent Fasting

Post by jos22 » Sun Jul 07, 2013 8:50 am

Hi,
I have not posted in a long while but have been following this discussion with interest.
I have been fasting successfully since 7 June and I have lost just over 14 pounds doing alternate day fasting and No S. I have found that the fasting has finally regulated my weekends as i think it has reigned in my appetite. Previously I had really struggled with 'wild' weekends and subsequently no weight loss. I am finding this way of eating quite easy as I am never more than 24hours away from a normal day. My fasting days are Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Bingeing has been as issue for me in the past but I can honestly say that I have not felt the urge to binge at all. I am also feeling motivated by the health benefits I've read about fasting.

I realise that 3 fasts per week is a lot but the results have been great. Once I attain my goal weight I intend to fast one day a week and follow No S the rest of the time. I am going on a 3 week trip to Italy in August where I intend to follow No S without fasting!

I will post again before my trip to update on my progress.

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:47 pm

I wasn't trying to do IF in my 21-day habit-building phase, and I'm not sure if I will do it on a regular basis now, but the few times I've ended up doing it, I'm surprised because it's not that hard! You get waves of hunger, but they go away. I'm not gonna starve to death, that's for sure. I actually did an IF day on Independence Day. I knew we were going to a cookout; it being an S day and all, I thought, well, I know I'm going to want some of everything there, including dessert, so here's a chance to regulate my intake ahead of time, let's see how it goes. And I was fine!

I don't know if this is from No S or the few IF days, but I've lost about 4 lbs. this month. I'm happy! One thing, though: I do not want to impose extra rules upon myself so as to make my body rebel. The couple of times this month that I have stuffed myself, I did not feel good afterward. Note to self! I LOVE the idea of "good enough". I LOVE the idea of not having to follow crazy diets. I LOVE the feeling of not craving sweets because I can have them any time -- on S days. Funny how that craving goes away real fast when you do away with "forbidden foods"! This is so brilliant!
I'm a Mac

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Sun Jul 07, 2013 3:46 pm

I have not had the experience of consistently having hunger go away in a workable amount of time, especially on workdays. But more power to those who do! Keep up with us. I'd like to follow this over the next 6 months or so.
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

Bssh
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 5:46 pm
Location: London

Post by Bssh » Sun Jul 07, 2013 7:07 pm

jos22 yes yes to IF regulating appetite. I've found that too. I tried NoS a year ago (before IF) but just kept stumbling over appetite control which kept leading me to snack. After doing IF for a few months, I found my appetite had regulated (something to do with the hormones insulin, leptin and ghrelin I think) and not snacking became much easier, more normal, so much so that I actually don't have much impulse or desire to snack on S Days either - my body doesn't really differentiate between N and S days.

I must stress, this is my experience with IF; it won't necessarily be another person's experience.
Start BMI 36, current BMI 19, goal BMI 19.
Losing by combining intermittent fasting with NoS.

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Sat Jul 13, 2013 4:02 pm

Bssh wrote:jos22 yes yes to IF regulating appetite. I've found that too. I tried NoS a year ago (before IF) but just kept stumbling over appetite control which kept leading me to snack. After doing IF for a few months, I found my appetite had regulated (something to do with the hormones insulin, leptin and ghrelin I think) and not snacking became much easier, more normal, so much so that I actually don't have much impulse or desire to snack on S Days either - my body doesn't really differentiate between N and S days.

I must stress, this is my experience with IF; it won't necessarily be another person's experience.
Bssh, I'm finding a similar feeling on S Days. The psychological relief of knowing that I can have S's on S Days is HUGELY liberating, with the result of S days being pretty much like N days. This is so unbelievably wonderful! Today being Saturday, home with my husband who doesn't eat breakfast or lunch as a rule, like I've said earlier, I'm just going to go with "his flow" and it's not bothering me whatsoever. I was sort of hungry when I woke up, but ignored it. Last evening our dinner was huge paninis with chips (crisps) and huge calories. So I can live off all of that today anyway and I don't mind a bit. OK, so I haven't got the healthful food thing down yet. I don't care. This whole experience since I started on 5 June is amazing psychologically. I haven't cheated yet. I don't even feel like I want to. Cheating is no longer necessary or even tempting me. So far. But it seems not likely to tempt me either. Just wow.
I'm a Mac

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Sat Jul 13, 2013 10:53 pm

Being at this a little over a month, it's hardly worth saying you "still" haven't gotten the healthy food thing down. You're just getting going! Having gotten to the point at which you don't feel like cheating is already terrific progress. Isn't it fun/

I have days on which i can go all day until dinner without much besides coffee, but today wasn't one of them. I am visiting a friend so my schedule is influenced by someone else, which can sometimes be an advantage, but I had to delay lunch longer than I wanted and then felt very compelled to have some fruit mid-afternoon. We are supposed to go to dinner early. I've had days on which I would have been able to skip the mid-afternoon snack, but it started to feel like unproductive torture, which I am not into!
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Mon Jul 15, 2013 6:50 pm

oolala53 wrote:Being at this a little over a month, it's hardly worth saying you "still" haven't gotten the healthy food thing down. You're just getting going! Having gotten to the point at which you don't feel like cheating is already terrific progress. Isn't it fun
Haha, you're right! I'm definitely still a beginner. So my daughter's fitness plan is accepting members starting tomorrow -- you can be on the presale list to sign up early before the class maxes out, and get a discount -- but I'm not sure that I want to do it now. I really think I need to stick with this and even though her plan stresses building good habits, well, I think there isn't anything better than this for building good habits. Plus, they want you to eat protein and veg for every meal, and a couple of snacks per day. Protein for breakfast is pretty much accepted, but veg would be very hard for me to choke down in the morning. And snacks? Hey, that's what I'm trying to get away from!
I'm a Mac

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Mon Jul 15, 2013 7:07 pm

One of the problems with "healthy eating" is that everyone has a different definition of what that means. Even the "experts" don't agree and most have studies to back up their point of view. Many of those studies are wrong -- studies can be set up to prove anything.

When I got frustrated with their conflicting opinions I started looking at how healthy populations have eaten. I can't duplicate their ways exactly, but I can adapt it to fit my circumstances.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:33 pm

Yes, you've gotta go with what has historically "worked", definitely. This plan also wants you do make different smoothies, ones that you can drink *while* you're working out, ones that you drink after you've worked out, etc. Well -- that might be OK for my 35-year-old daughter, but geez-o-pete, I'm really not sure I want to commit to being a gym rat *and* consume stuff that I don't even find appetizing. So healthy eating, for me, is simply improving on what I already know to be healthy, however long that takes. I already know what is accepted, time-tested wisdom as far as food intake. I'm reeeeallly getting tired of following the latest diet/food fad.
I'm a Mac

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Mon Jul 15, 2013 11:01 pm

Another part of the problem is that we've been misinformed about what we "know to be healthy."

I'm sure you know about the French Paradox: that the French, who eat more butter and other saturated fats than we do have lower rates of heart disease. We figure there has to be a reason -- like maybe the fact that they consume red wine.

I know that back when the primary fats in our diets were butter, lard, and beef tallow, our rates of heart disease were much lower than they are now. Even the rise in population doesn't account for the increase in the rates of heart disease. Because of a comment on another forum, I searched when rates of heart disease began to increase.

The more highly industrialized vegetable oils were included in our diets (starting early in the 20th century), the higher the incidence of heart disease. They skyrocketed when the "experts" told us to use more of those in cooking and limit saturated fats.

Turns out the old Chiffon margarine commercial was right: "It's not nice to fool Mother Nature."
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

User avatar
Jethro
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 6:31 pm

Post by Jethro » Tue Jul 16, 2013 12:33 am

wosnes wrote:Another part of the problem is that we've been misinformed about what we "know to be healthy."

I'm sure you know about the French Paradox: that the French, who eat more butter and other saturated fats than we do have lower rates of heart disease. We figure there has to be a reason -- like maybe the fact that they consume red wine.

I know that back when the primary fats in our diets were butter, lard, and beef tallow, our rates of heart disease were much lower than they are now. Even the rise in population doesn't account for the increase in the rates of heart disease. Because of a comment on another forum, I searched when rates of heart disease began to increase.

The more highly industrialized vegetable oils were included in our diets (starting early in the 20th century), the higher the incidence of heart disease. They skyrocketed when the "experts" told us to use more of those in cooking and limit saturated fats.

Turns out the old Chiffon margarine commercial was right: "It's not nice to fool Mother Nature."
Whenever something disproves the official dogma it's labeled a "paradox." :shock:
"Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."
- Vince Lombardi

Sometimes you need to take one step back for every two steps forward.

Time heals everything!

90% of a diet is 60% mental

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Tue Jul 16, 2013 11:32 am

Yes, exactly. My definition of what's historically worked, is whatever people were eating when they were healthier, even if it's animal fats or whatever. I keep trying to remember how my grandmother ate, and even my mom; both of them lived until well into their 90s. As far as veg oil goes, I only use olive oil and peanut oil. I heard that grapeseed oil was supposed to be good for you, but I discovered it has a lot more Omega-6 fats in it than you're supposed to have. Not too clear on that though; I know you're supposed to have less of a percentage of Omega-6 to Omega-3, but I don't want to get obsessive about it either.
I'm a Mac

jw
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2013 7:27 pm
Location: PA

Post by jw » Tue Jul 16, 2013 12:12 pm

And I just read a news story yesterday that omega 3 oils, especially from supplements, are now associated with a higher incidence of prostate cancer. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-204_162-575 ... ncer-risk/

The recommendations of one magic health ingredient change with the breeze -- I wonder if omega-3's only came to be considered healthy to counteract the overdoses of omega 6's in vegetable oil that were the recommended health food of the decade before! I use olive oil and butter or ghee.

I am following this IF thread with great interest. I tried it a few years ago and experienced no hunger but bouts of short temper! I am still in my first 21 days, though, and don't want to risk the really good balance I am feeling with No S so far!
"The second you overcomplicate it is the second it becomes the thing for which it is a corrective." -- El Fug

carolz
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2011 5:54 pm
Location: Alexandria, VA

Post by carolz » Tue Jul 16, 2013 1:44 pm

Great thread. I tried The Fast Diet a few months ago. I lost a few pounds in the first two weeks but after the third week, I gained everything back and freaked myself out, worrying I was screwing up my metabolism, so I stopped.

I had been thinking of going back to No S again because it's the only thing that really makes sense. I'm so sick of falling prey to every new diet under the sun. Trying to stop that. I was thinking of trying the Fast Diet again and doing No S on the non-fast days, as others have mentioned. But I decided instead to just do vanilla No S, and after only a few days I feel much better - more in control of my eating. I get into trouble when I complicate No S; as others have said, No S is simple but it's not easy.

Maybe I'll consider combining IF with No S a few months down the road but right now, it's vanilla No S all the way baby!

(I have to say that I'm glad I did the fasting thing because it taught me I can go a lot longer without eating than I thought. It actually makes No S easier this time around.)

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Tue Jul 16, 2013 2:27 pm

The French eat a higher proportion of their intake from those fats than Americans (and Italians), but they average less intake total (than Americans). Lead-ins to articles are fond of saying "How can the French eat ALL that cheese and those pastries and still be thin?" It turns out they average about an ounce of cheese a day, less than the cheese in a quesadilla. Anne Barone said she remembers French women spreading a quarter of a teaspoon of butter on their morning bread. Pastries are small, less sweet, not eaten in multiples, and not every day, as I understand. Etc.
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Tue Jul 23, 2013 12:51 am

OK, you experienced IF-ers. I had been toying with the idea of doing a 24-hour fast after having occasional days of 16-hour and sometimes even 19-hour ones that kind of came on by themselves. It was not easy at all. I finally left work early and made it only to 23 hours. I was very hungry and could not concentrate on anything that took any real brain power after 11:30 a.m. Thankfully, I had nothing really crucial I had to do at work, so I could continue the fast. I've had other times where it happened on its own, but this was not like that. It would be exaggerating to call it torture, but it reminded me a lot of being on a diet, especially a sense of resentment!

I'm not necessarily going to give up on the idea but I think it's important to know that there may be some tough hours on the learning curve, just as there was in No S. I just never had to fight the good fight for so many hours!

However, my experience with No S has toughened me enough, even with my whining, to be willing to give it some more tries to see if it gets easier. And, I'll monitor how easy (or not) it is to experience in coming weeks my traditional 4-6 hour N day fasts and hope I haven't set in motion a domino-binge effect.
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Tue Jul 23, 2013 5:51 am

Hoo boy, the feeling didn't go away after a normal meal. I finally opted two hours later to have a salad with some avocado that I had thought to put in my previous meal and forgot, so I called the first meal a late lunch and the second dinner. I feel I'm still compliant with No S. I may try again next Monday.
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

finallyfull
Posts: 354
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 6:10 pm

finallyfull

Post by finallyfull » Tue Jul 23, 2013 12:01 pm

oolala, I find it fascinating that you've had a 19 hour fast that "kind of came on by itself" -- yet when you did it on purpose, when it didn't feel right, the pendulum swung back on you. I would imagine that 19 hours is probably plenty, and only when your body is ready. ?

noni
Posts: 613
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 2:01 pm

Post by noni » Tue Jul 23, 2013 1:33 pm

Oolala, There is a 19 hour fast diet out there, but it's every day. The 24 hour fast is 1 or 2 days each week. I've only done the 24 hour fast. I been doing this 2Xweekly for nearly a year. But, many times my dinner schedule demands less time, like 21 hours, especially in the summer. We like to eat together as a family and I have 4 other people to think about. This used to be a source of frustration for me (as I noticed that the scale was in my favor the longer the fast), but instead of 'kicking against the goads', I was going to be satisfied with skipping lunch and dinner the following day and not worrying about the whole 24 hrs. Last night it went to 25 1/2 hours. That happens, too, at times!

It is hard at first, but the stomach doesn't growl as much as I think it would. It's just a matter of WANTING to eat. It's easier now, but there are still days that are more challenging. For instance, on my normal fasting day my daughter and her children unexpectantly came over and stayed for lunch and I prepared it for them. I would have eaten with them except I'm going on vacation soon and didn't want to skip the fast. (If I were going to France, maybe I could've eaten:))

I did this fast without NoS before and I didn't lose weight. I made up the eating on other days. No S gave me sensible rules to follow. I actually feel like it's a treat to have an N day after a fast.

Now I must admit that my S days are gluttonous for the most part, but in all fairness to the fasting, I have done No S alone before for about 6 months with my S-days gluttonous as well. The poster Bssh, reportedly has good S days and feels the fasting has helped her with that. Unfortunately, that is not MY case.

It's a mod on No S, and if this mod doesn't work for you, you can always go back to Vanilla. That's how I figure it for myself. If I'm going to drop something it's going to be the fasting...not No S.

I wish you well in whatever you decide to do!

User avatar
Jethro
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 6:31 pm

Post by Jethro » Tue Jul 23, 2013 9:55 pm

oolala53 wrote:OK, you experienced IF-ers. I had been toying with the idea of doing a 24-hour fast after having occasional days of 16-hour and sometimes even 19-hour ones that kind of came on by themselves. It was not easy at all. I finally left work early and made it only to 23 hours. I was very hungry and could not concentrate on anything that took any real brain power after 11:30 a.m. Thankfully, I had nothing really crucial I had to do at work, so I could continue the fast. I've had other times where it happened on its own, but this was not like that. It would be exaggerating to call it torture, but it reminded me a lot of being on a diet, especially a sense of resentment!

I'm not necessarily going to give up on the idea but I think it's important to know that there may be some tough hours on the learning curve, just as there was in No S. I just never had to fight the good fight for so many hours!

However, my experience with No S has toughened me enough, even with my whining, to be willing to give it some more tries to see if it gets easier. And, I'll monitor how easy (or not) it is to experience in coming weeks my traditional 4-6 hour N day fasts and hope I haven't set in motion a domino-binge effect.
Do one or two fasts per week. Start with 16 hour and increase time gradually, 1/2 to 1 hours per week, two weeks, month, whatever is most comfortable to you. Anything at or over 16 hours is good.

Remember fasts are from meal to meal (i.e. lunch to lunch), thus you eat every day. :wink:
"Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."
- Vince Lombardi

Sometimes you need to take one step back for every two steps forward.

Time heals everything!

90% of a diet is 60% mental

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Wed Jul 24, 2013 3:38 am

Of course! I can ease my way into 24 hours. I had already done several 16-hour fasts just by not having to be at work this last 7 weeks, so I had discretion over my time. It may be harder now that I'm back at work because I won't get to choose when I can eat, or at least to stop and savor my food, which has been quite important to my satiety. But I'm not going to do it every day. I'll let the 24-hour fasts go until I'm a little more systematic about the shorter ones.
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

Bssh
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 5:46 pm
Location: London

Post by Bssh » Mon Jul 29, 2013 7:41 pm

Just seen your post oolala. 24 hour fasts (done only once or twice a week) get easier over time but (minimum) 16 hour fasts also (purportedly) reap health benefits so I often do these if I can't make longer fasts.

I'm just back from holiday where all my days were S Days but I didn't have much inclination to snack much (much like my weekends). I think IF has helped me regulate my eating habits and appetite like nothing else.
Start BMI 36, current BMI 19, goal BMI 19.
Losing by combining intermittent fasting with NoS.

User avatar
Jethro
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 6:31 pm

Post by Jethro » Mon Jul 29, 2013 8:52 pm

IF benefits per Dr. Mercola

Intermittent Fasting May Provide Comparable Health Benefits to Calorie Restriction

While the research supporting calorie restriction is compelling, it’s not a very popular dietary strategy for most people, for obvious reasons. Many are simply not willing to deprive themselves of calories to the extent needed to prompt the beneficial effects.

An alternative that is much more acceptable is intermittent fasting, which can be as simple as restricting your daily eating to a narrower window of time of say 6-8 hours (this equates to 16-18 hours worth of fasting each and every day).

Recent research suggests that sudden and intermittent calorie restriction appears to provide many of the same health benefits as constant calorie restriction, including extending lifespan and protecting against disease. For instance, intermittent fasting leads to:

Increased insulin sensitivity and mitochondrial energy efficiency – Fasting increases your leptin and insulin sensitivity along with mitochondrial energy efficiency, and thereby retards aging and disease, which are typically associated with loss of insulin sensitivity and declined mitochondrial energy.
Reduced oxidative stress – Fasting decreases the accumulation of oxidative radicals in the cell, and thereby prevents oxidative damage to cellular proteins, lipids, and nucleic acids associated with aging and disease.
Increased capacity to resist stress, disease and aging – Fasting induces a cellular stress response (similar to that induced by exercise) in which cells up-regulate the expression of genes that increase the capacity to cope with stress and resist disease and aging.

Intermittent Fasting Switches Your Body to Fat-Burning Mode… With Radical Improvements to Your Gut

If you want to give intermittent fasting a try, consider starting gradually. You can delay breakfast as long as possible and extend the time every day before you eat breakfast until you are actually skipping breakfast. Make sure you stop eating and drinking anything but water three hours before you go to sleep, and restrict your eating to an 8-hour (or less) time frame every day. In the 6-8 hours that you do eat, have healthy protein, minimize your carbs like pasta, bread, and potatoes and exchange them for healthful fats like butter, eggs, avocado, coconut oil, olive oil and nuts — essentially the very fats the media and “experts†tell you to avoid.

This will help shift you from carb-burning to fat-burning mode. Once your body has made this shift, it is nothing short of magical as your cravings for sweets, and food in general, rapidly normalizes and your desire for sweets and junk food radically decreases -- if not disappears entirely.

Remember, it typically takes a few weeks for most to shift from burning carbs to fat-burning mode. Once you succeed and switch to fat-burning mode, you'll be easily able to fast for 18 hours and not feel hungry. The “hunger†most people feel is actually cravings for sugar, and these will disappear once you successfully shift over to burning fat instead.

Another phenomenal benefit that occurs is that you will radically improve the beneficial bacteria in your gut, as occurs with calorie restriction. Along with improving your immune system, you will sleep better, have more energy, have increased mental clarity and concentrate better. Essentially, every aspect of your health will improve as your gut flora becomes balanced.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/artic ... ction.aspx
"Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."
- Vince Lombardi

Sometimes you need to take one step back for every two steps forward.

Time heals everything!

90% of a diet is 60% mental

Graham
Posts: 1570
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 9:58 pm
Location: London, UK

Post by Graham » Tue Jul 30, 2013 8:49 am

I'm confused: Dr Mercola suggests getting into fasting by delaying then skipping breakfast but I also saw this in the news recently: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-204_162-575 ... ck-in-men/ This was just one of many reports of a study that showed the increased heart disease risk for men who skip breakfast. Perhaps the negative effect is only present if you skip breakfast every day rather than just once or twice a week? Still, it seems to point to breakfast skipping as risky rather than beneficial.

On a personal note, as a sometime IF'er, I'd love to see that increased energy I keep hearing about - absolutely not the case with me. Maybe that only applies to people who've normalised excess blood sugar levels. Whenever someone writes a book on something like this, you can assume it worked for them, but we aren't all the same.

Despite the discomfort of fasting, I like the overall effect. It puts a brake on my body's tendency to grow ever fatter. If I didn't have pressing matters to attend to the lack of inclination to do anything whilst fasting wouldn't matter much either.

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Tue Jul 30, 2013 9:38 am

Graham wrote:I'm confused: Dr Mercola suggests getting into fasting by delaying then skipping breakfast but I also saw this in the news recently: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-204_162-575 ... ck-in-men/ This was just one of many reports of a study that showed the increased heart disease risk for men who skip breakfast. Perhaps the negative effect is only present if you skip breakfast every day rather than just once or twice a week? Still, it seems to point to breakfast skipping as risky rather than beneficial.

On a personal note, as a sometime IF'er, I'd love to see that increased energy I keep hearing about - absolutely not the case with me. Maybe that only applies to people who've normalised excess blood sugar levels. Whenever someone writes a book on something like this, you can assume it worked for them, but we aren't all the same.

Despite the discomfort of fasting, I like the overall effect. It puts a brake on my body's tendency to grow ever fatter. If I didn't have pressing matters to attend to the lack of inclination to do anything whilst fasting wouldn't matter much either.
I saw that study mentioned on the news, too. I wonder who paid for it -- likely someone who will benefit from people eating breakfast. Studies like that are why I don't pay much attention to studies anymore.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

Bssh
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 5:46 pm
Location: London

Post by Bssh » Tue Jul 30, 2013 10:43 am

I saw that study too. And wondered who sponsored it... I think the fact that the study's breakfast skippers tend to drink more alcohol, exercise less and eat more junk later on (as cited in the research) has more of a role to play in their ill health than the fact that they skipped a meal.
Start BMI 36, current BMI 19, goal BMI 19.
Losing by combining intermittent fasting with NoS.

Graham
Posts: 1570
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 9:58 pm
Location: London, UK

Post by Graham » Tue Jul 30, 2013 11:45 am

This report on the study answers the "who paid for it?" question, plus a reasonable analysis of its strengths and shortcomings: http://www.nursingtimes.net/home/behind ... entID=4530

Whilst confounding influences can't be ruled out, there is no strong reason to assume the breakfast skippers are smokers and boozers is there? They are all health professionals, after all. (I just noticed, the researchers controlled for smoking, alcohol consumption and exercise - therefore they aren't relevant to the influence of breakfast skipping in this study)

User avatar
Jethro
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 6:31 pm

Post by Jethro » Tue Jul 30, 2013 12:10 pm

Skipping breakfast may increase risk for heart attack in men was an observational study, not a randomized clinical trial. These comments from the article summarize its flaws:

"Pascal6662 says:
Correlation does not imply causation!
reply

dw778 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Exactly. This "study" does not begin to understand or describe a causal relationship between skipping breakfast and heart attacks! It's highly unlikely that timing of meals matters much, and there are so many factors involved in the risk of heart attacks. I skip meals when I am stressed and rushed...and probably that is why some men do so! There are plenty of studies that link stress to heart disease and heart attacks. People with busy, hectic lives may also not eat healthily on a regular basis. The correlation is just that, and therefore this article is totally misleading - I would urge people not to think that eating a big, greasy breakfast is better than skipping one once in a while!

Scimajor says:
This long term study has several problems. I will list two of them.

1. Participants were asked about their breakfast habits ONCE at the start of the study. Presumably people were assumed to never change their breakfast habits.

2. "....when accounting for factors like body mass index, smoking, alcohol consumption and other factors, the findings were mostly attenuated, and the connection between breakfast intake and cardiovascular risk was no longer meaningful."

In other words, while the media has latched onto this study, the link between heart aliments and skipping breakfast is either exceedingly small or not there at all.

That, ladies and gents, is why studies MUST be extensively peer reviewed.
reply

dw778 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Yes. This "news" is floating around everywhere right now, and the study, in regard to skipping breakfast, lacks rigor and precision. And even the conclusion being attributed to it is incorrect - a causal link is not being demonstrated here at all."



A red flag to any study is when it uses the word may rather than will.

And isn't strange that it doesn't apply to women?
"Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."
- Vince Lombardi

Sometimes you need to take one step back for every two steps forward.

Time heals everything!

90% of a diet is 60% mental

El Fug
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 4:22 pm

Post by El Fug » Thu Aug 01, 2013 6:23 am

The beauty of No-S is that it's a habit-based lifestyle that deliberately eschews dieting of any type, particularly fad diets, such as IF. As with all fad diets, we are being bombarded with conflicting studies cited by adherents of IF and detractors of IF, and this will continue for a while. The science is not settled on much of any of this stuff, though all of the factions claim that it is. If IF were the preferred dieting method of mainstream docs like Oz, you can bet that this thread would be all about eating multiple meals a day.

At the "diet" cocktail party, No-S is the sober agnostic sitting in the corner far away from the blather of drunken paranoiacs and zealots spouting off and passing out.

Broca
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 7:46 pm

Post by Broca » Thu Aug 01, 2013 10:11 am

El Fug said "At the "diet" cocktail party, No-S is the sober agnostic sitting in the corner far away from the blather of drunken paranoiacs and zealots spouting off and passing out."

I love it!!!!

Bssh
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 5:46 pm
Location: London

Post by Bssh » Thu Aug 01, 2013 12:00 pm

I disagree of course, but each to their own :D
Start BMI 36, current BMI 19, goal BMI 19.
Losing by combining intermittent fasting with NoS.

El Fug
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 4:22 pm

Post by El Fug » Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:11 pm

Bssh wrote:I disagree of course, but each to their own :D
I'm assuming you disagree with my characterization of IF as a fad diet, not my complimentary words about No S. IF has all the hallmarks of a fad diet: It's grown rapidly in popularity over the last five years or so; you can buy many different books on how to implement this diet; its adherents make great claims about its efficacy and about how it's a more "natural" way to eat; millions will follow it for a while and then get discouraged; etc.

I haven't read Reinhard's book (frankly, I don't want to). The genius of No S is that it simply restates for all of us in the Western world how we know we should be eating anyway. It doesn't introduce any new fancy moves. Don't eat sweets. Don't snack between meals. And don't eat massive portions. Except on weekends and holidays you're allowed to. The second you overcomplicate it is the second it becomes the thing for which it is a corrective.

Bssh
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 5:46 pm
Location: London

Post by Bssh » Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:28 pm

:-) I heard you the first time.
Start BMI 36, current BMI 19, goal BMI 19.
Losing by combining intermittent fasting with NoS.

El Fug
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 4:22 pm

Post by El Fug » Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:33 pm

Bssh wrote::-) I heard you the first time.
I'm writing for others as well. I've been nonplussed looking over this forum. The orthorexic reflex to overcomplicate, overanalyze and overdo every aspect of food intake is what got most people into trouble in the first place.

I apologize for jumping into your thread to be a contrarian, but I feel the need to yell, "Stop! You're doing it again!"

Bssh
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 5:46 pm
Location: London

Post by Bssh » Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:39 pm

Sorry, I was being flippant.

Fasting is part of my culture (India) and loads of family members have been fasting on and off for decades so I disagree with your "fad" statement. And I agree that NoS rocks!

But I'll continue to do both because they make sense to me.
Start BMI 36, current BMI 19, goal BMI 19.
Losing by combining intermittent fasting with NoS.

El Fug
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 4:22 pm

Post by El Fug » Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:46 pm

Bssh wrote:Sorry, I was being flippant.

Fasting is part of my culture (India) and loads of family members have been fasting on and off for decades so I disagree with your "fad" statement. And I agree that NoS rocks!

But I'll continue to do both because they make sense to me.
Yes, continue doing what works for you. You're doing great! I really mean it.

IF is definitely a fad diet, at least here in the States. Fasting is not a part of the dominant culture here at all (quite the contrary). There's nothing wrong with implementing IF, per se. Maybe it works wonders. But the thing is, most "diets" work wonders if you can maintain them. The maintenance part is where most diets break down. And, again, Reinhard has come up with an elegant solution to the maintenance problem.

jw
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2013 7:27 pm
Location: PA

Post by jw » Thu Aug 01, 2013 6:49 pm

"The second you overcomplicate it is the second it becomes the thing for which it is a corrective."

Nice!

Re: IF -- I used to never want breakfast, back when I was a skinny young thing. Automatic 17-18 hour IF. Uncomplicated! Natural! Felt great and I did it for years. But when I tried a low carb IF regimen a few years ago, I became very bad-tempered and had to stop. Now No S feels uncomplicated and natural to me.
"The second you overcomplicate it is the second it becomes the thing for which it is a corrective." -- El Fug

El Fug
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 4:22 pm

Post by El Fug » Thu Aug 01, 2013 9:33 pm

jw wrote:"The second you overcomplicate it is the second it becomes the thing for which it is a corrective."

Nice!

Re: IF -- I used to never want breakfast, back when I was a skinny young thing. Automatic 17-18 hour IF. Uncomplicated! Natural! Felt great and I did it for years. But when I tried a low carb IF regimen a few years ago, I became very bad-tempered and had to stop. Now No S feels uncomplicated and natural to me.
You naturally skipped breakfast. Then you probably read somewhere that breakfast is the most important meal of the day. So you started eating breakfast. Then you got turned onto low-carb IF, but it was different than skipping breakfast because now it was an actual regimen.

I'm with you -- No S is the simplest, most elegant, unregimented non-diet around. It may not be as effective at "melting the fat away" as some approaches, but it's built to last. I'm really looking forward to the next time I have to get my blood checked for cholesterol and the rest. Ultimately I do this for long-term health -- the nice change in body aesthetics is a bonus.

Dhack
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 8:47 pm

Post by Dhack » Thu Aug 01, 2013 9:35 pm

In my own experience, I naturally do a few longer "fasts" by skipping breakfast when I am just not hungry for it. Sometimes I skip dinner because I had a large lunch and wasn't hungry (although this is much more rare).

But if I wake up and say, "ok, I am not eating dinner today." I turn into a 2 year old! "Wah! I'm going to STARVE if I don't eat dinner!" ;)

IF is great for me when it happens on it's own: lots of energy and focus. It's terrible for me when I force it: lots of clock watching (when can I eat??). I also feel edgy and bingey and crabby (not to mention hungry :) )

Thanks,
D

jw
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2013 7:27 pm
Location: PA

Post by jw » Fri Aug 02, 2013 12:59 am

El Fug, that is exactly what happened!

Dhack, I think we have had the same experience: unintentional fasting is not a problem for us, because at the time of the fast, our focus is not on food or self-denial.

All respect to Bssh, who is feeling comfortable and getting great results with something I would find really difficult -- intentional fasting.
"The second you overcomplicate it is the second it becomes the thing for which it is a corrective." -- El Fug

finallyfull
Posts: 354
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 6:10 pm

Post by finallyfull » Fri Aug 02, 2013 1:10 am

I love the civility on this forum. Is there some secret civility "system" at work behind the scenes that Rinehardt has implemented without us knowing. Can it be implemented elsewhere?

El Fug
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 4:22 pm

Post by El Fug » Fri Aug 02, 2013 3:08 am

finallyfull wrote:I love the civility on this forum. Is there some secret civility "system" at work behind the scenes that Rinehardt has implemented without us knowing. Can it be implemented elsewhere?
Civility on the Internet? That reminds me of that great line from Dr. Strangelove:

Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!

Tessytwinkle
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2012 9:14 pm

Post by Tessytwinkle » Fri Aug 02, 2013 9:22 am

Wow. What an interesting thread. I have tried IF 5:2. It was hard to do and it brought on my gout attacks. But it did teach me that I could get very hungry and if I stuck it out then that desperate feeling of hunger goes away. Sadly I do not feel IF is right for me because it also focuses my mind too much on food. What I love about NoS is that it has the potential to become a habit. Putting food into the background and giving me the chance to be a 'normal eater'. Something I desperately need on a long term basis. So IF is not for me but good luck to anyone who finds it helps them.

Graham
Posts: 1570
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 9:58 pm
Location: London, UK

Post by Graham » Fri Aug 02, 2013 10:53 am

All this discussion got me re-reading all the "why fasting is so good for you" stuff. This website has a good faq covering the ancillary benefits of fasting on top of weight-loss : http://thefastdiet.co.uk/ and I'm feeling encouraged.

The thing about the No S diet supporting food sanity is true - if it helps you lose weight or just stay at a weight you're happy with, then there is an argument for staying away from IF (as well as an argument to do occasional fasting anyway for the biochemical benefits). The problem is, for some people, vanilla No S just isn't enough to achieve weight-loss.

There's a lot to be said for IF - like No S it requires no extra spending, no special diet items, and it is simple. It may be that an IF "fad" becomes a trend, and eventually a cultural norm, and if it did, who but the food manufacturers would be sorry?

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Fri Aug 02, 2013 11:51 am

Tessytwinkle wrote:Wow. What an interesting thread. I have tried IF 5:2. It was hard to do and it brought on my gout attacks. But it did teach me that I could get very hungry and if I stuck it out then that desperate feeling of hunger goes away. Sadly I do not feel IF is right for me because it also focuses my mind too much on food. What I love about NoS is that it has the potential to become a habit. Putting food into the background and giving me the chance to be a 'normal eater'. Something I desperately need on a long term basis. So IF is not for me but good luck to anyone who finds it helps them.
I don't know why, but I'm surprised that fasting aggravated your gout.

When I started IF I used The Fast Diet. Reading about it and watching the video got me interested in IF. You don't completely abstain from food, but eat much less than you normally would.

I found that not only was I so focused on what I could eat that I was thinking about food constantly, but also the minimal intake seemed to make me constantly hungry. I switched to just not eating for 24 hours and found that much easier to do. I do drink plenty of water and some coffee or tea. I've occasionally had some clear broth or tomato/V8 juice. That gets me through the day.

The last 2-4 hours are the most difficult and I find myself counting down the time until I can eat. Keeping myself busy distracts me enough that it's not as bad as it could be.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

User avatar
BrightAngel
Posts: 2093
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 4:22 pm
Location: Central California
Contact:

Post by BrightAngel » Fri Aug 02, 2013 1:02 pm

Chiming in about my own IF exerience,
Beginning in 2006 through 2013, (7 years)
I've spent quite a lot of time experimenting with that concept.
I've run long personal experiments with these (plus variations):
QOD; JUDDD-Alternate Day Fasting; Fast5; EatStopEat; 8 hr diet; the Fast Diet 5/2.

During the first few years, I found that each of these effectively helped with weight control
.....except for the times when the process kicked me into a Binge/Fast cycle...,
but over time, it was like my body caught on, and negatively adjusted my metabolism to the cycling process.
so that successful IF no longer proved beneficial,
in that successfully eating very low-calorie on intermittent days, alternating normal calorie days,
provided me with weight-control results even worse than successfully eating low-calorie every day.

At this point, there doesn't appear to be anything new in IE for me to try,
and right now I'm a bit burned out on it.
However, Intermittent Fasting works for some and not for others....
(just like every other Diet/Day-of-Eating/Lifestyle/Nondiet/FoodPlan etc.)
Many of you might in interested in this article.

http://www.diethobby.com/blog.php?ax=v&nid=807
BrightAngel - (Dr. Collins)
See: DietHobby. com

Bssh
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 5:46 pm
Location: London

Post by Bssh » Tue Aug 06, 2013 9:50 am

BrightAngel I really enjoyed that Huffington article you copy and pasted on your blog. I totally agree with it.

The problem with Dr Mosley's 5:2 book (and all related articles, interviews and promotions) was its advice to eat "normally" on non-fast days. The book focused attention on eating healthily on fast days but not on non-fast days and therein lies the problem for many.

I know enough about nutrition to eat well and moderately on non-fast days, but some other IFers see 5:2 as an excuse to eat whatever they want 5 days a week and then wonder why a) they cant lose weight and/or b) they still feel unhealthy.

I think other IF proponents such as Brad Pilon, Martin Berkhan and Mark Sisson focus on healthy eating across the entire week but it's the 5:2 "Fast Diet" that has caught the media attention. I hope future editions of The Fast Diet book rectify this.
Start BMI 36, current BMI 19, goal BMI 19.
Losing by combining intermittent fasting with NoS.

Graham
Posts: 1570
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 9:58 pm
Location: London, UK

Post by Graham » Tue Aug 06, 2013 10:26 am

Ah yes, eat "normally". Dr Mosley's life appears well-ordered, he's a well-educated, affluent family man, with plenty of environmental cues to keep him eating sensibly on non-fasting days. Was he assuming all his readers would be the same?

I find eating "normally" tricky some days. I recall someone on this forum saying recently how important visual cues were to regulate eating, but I began thinking about how visual cues don't work at all for some people with addictive or obsessional issues (like people who over or under-eat!)

Anorexics, for example, have a very distorted perception of their own body size and visual cues tell them to keep starving. Visual distortions seem to be part of some people's food issues. I'm thinking such people would be better off weighing their food, or calorie counting rather than letting their eyes tell them how much to eat.

germanherman
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2006 8:49 am
Location: northern germany

Post by germanherman » Tue Aug 27, 2013 3:14 pm

El Fug wrote:
Bssh wrote::-) I heard you the first time.
I'm writing for others as well. I've been nonplussed looking over this forum. The orthorexic reflex to overcomplicate, overanalyze and overdo every aspect of food intake is what got most people into trouble in the first place.

I apologize for jumping into your thread to be a contrarian, but I feel the need to yell, "Stop! You're doing it again!"
Thx for this El Fug.

I thought the same.

I made a trinity of everyday-systems (NO-S, Shovelglove, Urban Ranger) my absolut baseline. I'm certain, that the continuity of this approach is based on its simplicity. There is no room for overthinking.

When i wake up i move my "shovelglove". It is a habbit, very much like brushing my theeth.

Keep it simple.
Spend over 450 Dollar on some Systems, Gadgets and courses = Zero Results

Spend 15 Bucks for a Shovelglove + NoS-Diet= ;)

German by nature

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Tue Aug 27, 2013 4:19 pm

Found Should you be Fasting or Is It a Fad while looking for something else on The Stonesoup
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

User avatar
bonnieUK
Posts: 352
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 2:37 pm
Location: Near London, UK

Post by bonnieUK » Tue Aug 27, 2013 6:41 pm

wosnes wrote:Found Should you be Fasting or Is It a Fad while looking for something else on The Stonesoup

Interesting article, thanks Wosnes.

I have dabbled with IF too and found the same thing as her, sometimes it is good for mental clarity but many times it leads to anxiety / irritability and then fatigue (after the anxiety has gone!).

I've since discovered that plain vanilla No S confers the same "mental clarity" benefits for me as long as I'm also laying off honey and dried fruits and not filling my plate too much :)

guille
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2010 8:54 pm
Location: mexico

Post by guille » Mon Sep 09, 2013 4:49 am

its funny, i found the no-s diet thanks to IF.

some years ago when i was cheking eat stop eat i did feel there was something missing, it was too easy to over eat as a compensation for the fasting, and looking for a solution, i dont remember where, i found someone sugestiong the no-s diet.

i do think the base should always be the no-s diet, i mean there may be some people that can start doing both from the begining and do great, but that was not my case, i ended up failing in both, IF and the no-s diet. sometimes i did no-s with eat stop eat, sometimes one with out the other, sometimes one meal a day, sometimes two, and in the end i ended up doing nothing.

that being said i do see the potencial of using both, but for me IF would be after the no-s diet, ones the no-s d is a habit, and that takes a while.

it can not be denied that for those cases that are not losing weight with the no-s diet but mantaining it, the addition of IF could be an interesting option.

i may give it a chance later, but only when the no-s diet becomes second nature, and im still not there.

i also should note that my health improved a lot while i did IF. one of the reasons i may be tempted to give it a go again...eventualy.

guille
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2010 8:54 pm
Location: mexico

Post by guille » Mon Sep 09, 2013 5:06 am

and i forgot to mention, there are some people in IF that consider that a 14 hour fasting is very healty too, and with less stress. if you think about it, most people in the no-s lifestyle fast 14 hours most days... if you eat each of you 3 meals every 5 hours or even less...well you do the math

Miyabi
Posts: 60
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2009 11:36 pm
Location: Connecticut shoreline

Post by Miyabi » Mon Sep 09, 2013 5:45 pm

Apologies if this has already been posted:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-we ... 57043.html

Dr. Weil could have lifted his entire article from the front page of the NoS website. About halfway down he says: "Frankly, today in America, simply eating three meals with no snacks might be called a form of intermittent fasting, if only by way of contrast. If we were able to return to this once-common practice, I believe we would be healthier for it."

So maybe NoS'ers are already IF'ers....

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Wed Sep 11, 2013 11:20 am

I've had a hectic workweek and ended up not being hungry at all for dinner, and busy enough not to care. I'm thinking I sure like this form of IF better than imposing it. Who knows what will happen in a year? But I started with 3 fasts a day.
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

Bssh
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 5:46 pm
Location: London

Post by Bssh » Wed Sep 11, 2013 12:30 pm

I like the idea of 3 fasts a day, in between the 3 main meals :-)

I've been very busy and not on this site much, but am still managing my week well on combination of NoS and 2 IF days (24 hours). Working great for me and I love the combination. Losing around 1-2lbs a week (weightloss is still my goal).
Start BMI 36, current BMI 19, goal BMI 19.
Losing by combining intermittent fasting with NoS.

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Wed Sep 11, 2013 1:57 pm

oolala53 wrote:I've had a hectic workweek and ended up not being hungry at all for dinner, and busy enough not to care. I'm thinking I sure like this form of IF better than imposing it. Who knows what will happen in a year? But I started with 3 fasts a day.
I've had the same experience, but it was that experience that made me realize I could do IF. This whole week is being something like that but not necessarily by choice. Not only is it too danged hot to think about cooking, I'm taking care of my daughter's dogs and cats. By the time I get home from the late afternoon/early evening session with them, I'm not interested in cooking or eating. Last night's dinner was cheese, crackers and fruit.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

herbsgirl
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 4:08 am

Post by herbsgirl » Mon Nov 04, 2013 4:15 pm

I am bumping this up as I am doing 16/8

So far I have noticed


-cravings have went down ALOT


- food is delicious!


-Belly fat is coming off
SW 218.2 10-14-13
1 mo 193.4
2 mo 178.8
3 mo 162.8
4 mo 151.4
5 mo 146.2
72 lbs lost in 19 wks 5' 6.5" 31 years old BMI 23.1
counting bites go to: countyourbites . blogspot . com

Post Reply