Flexibility of Intermittent Fasting

Discussion in 'Diet & Nutrition' started by colby2152, Jan 23, 2008.

  1. colby2152

    colby2152 New Member

    Earlier this month, I hawked at the idea of an IF diet. My main worry is how to handle the weekends. After reading many articles on Lyle's site, I believe much more flexibility may be at hand with an IF diet.

    IF can be strictly done Monday through Friday. The weekend can be treated as IF on a WO (if working out of course), partial fast (first few hours after waking up), or a general caloric restriction (cutting of course).

    What do you guys think? Bluejacket?
     
  2. bluejacket

    bluejacket New Member

    much like HST i believe IF has a few "rules" (and even they arent much of a rule) and a lot of options and flexibility to suit many needs.

    the main point as i see it is...........get as many calories around your w/o time as possible. if your lifestyle/personality/temperment permits you can go full IF (8/16) and then basically its 100% of intake around your w/o. some cant or dont want to hack that so then you start moving too a more TKD type of diet where you try to get most of your cals(carb specific) around w/o but are still having other meals thru the day as you need.

    obviously you can tweak it almost anyway you want (week-ends, off days, etc) as long as your still hitting your calorie goals.

    i am unsure as to the benefits of IF eating on off days (since you have no w/o to base it around) other then to maintain a "style" of eating..........much easier on the hunger aspect to IF everyday then every other. i will say there does appear to be some differance and/or benefit b/c my weekly maint. cal total on IF is higher then when eating normally.

    the BIG question for you and anyone wanting to try it out is.......is this for me? i have had physical jobs in the past that i would have never considered this approach. i have read about plenty of folks who have given IF a fair shot (couple of weeks) and just hated it or had to modify the approach to suit their needs. i think its worth a shot to try whatever approach you think will work best for you. most likely you will be hungry during the fast the 1st couple days but then again its only hunger, weve all been there. i would def. give it at least a week even if your convinced it sucks.

    personally i took to it pretty quickly and didnt have any real issues but im certainly not one of those guys writting in claiming " im never hungry! boundless energy! awesome w/o's! lost 5lbs of fat and gained 10lbs of muscle at the same time!"

    good luck
     
  3. colby2152

    colby2152 New Member

    I was waiting to hear from you bluejacket, so thank you for your response! That is the answer I wanted, and as you say, as long as I hit my caloric goals for the week, then I should be fine. I want to experiment with my caloric wave loading for a few weeks, and then I will try a modified IF diet during the week.

    Question: It is recommended that I eat 2g carb per lb bw and 1g/lb bw for protein on the days I workout. That right there is 2880 kcals, and my maintenance level on a workout day is anywhere between 2800 and 3100 kcals. Obviously, I will have some fat intake with this. Do I have to stick to these carbohydrate numbers, or could I bend the rules here too? Going 1 to 1.5 g/lb bw would be much better.
     
  4. bluejacket

    bluejacket New Member

    colby,

    i do think doing your wave loading idea then giving IF a try will be a good way of easing into it.

    as far as your question goes. ill tell you what i did and you can take it for what its worth as diff. folks approached it differantly.

    my goal was a trial run at IF for re-comp as i had already cut (and signifigantly, using ud 2.0). on w/o days i hit maint+3-500 cals (M,W,F) carbs around bwx2 (usually a little over)and pro at a little over bwx1. fat was mostly tag along and EFA's but came in typically around 50-60g a day. off days (T,TH) were maint-7-500 with carbs 100 to 150g and pro bwx1.5 fat again was around 50g. weekends were at maint. cal levels with carb and pro levels in between the two examples given and fat still modest but sometimes a little higher (if we ate out etc).

    results were i dropped from around 10-12% to around 9% and lost 1.5lbs total over the course of a month which i must add was during thanksgiving and the weeks leading up to christmas. if (more like when) i were to do it again i would prob. try to keep the carbs at 100g on off days not be as loose on the weekends but i was coming off a (relatively) long cut and a little tired of being so strict.

    the easiest part of this approach is that once your fast is over you have @8hrs to eat a lot of food ..........especially for someone on a diet. personally i felt i was only "dieting" for part of an afternoon (didnt get hungry in the AM) and then it was like starting a modest cheat day for the rest of the night and i was seeing real results despite already being pretty lean (again relative).

    for straight up cutting you may want to be more aggressive with the cal deficit for the week but personally i would take it out of the "off days" and weekends as well as the amount of carbs (unless your fat intake is pretty hi). remember the whole point of IF approach is food around a w/o so going for a surplus (but not crazy) around then is OK as long as your non-w/o days make up for it and then some. its still about cal deficit overall.

    thats all i can think of right now

    good luck
     
  5. colby2152

    colby2152 New Member

    <div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">the easiest part of this approach is that once your fast is over you have @8hrs to eat a lot of food ..........especially for someone on a diet. personally i felt i was only &quot;dieting&quot; for part of an afternoon (didnt get hungry in the AM) and then it was like starting a modest cheat day for the rest of the night and i was seeing real results despite already being pretty lean (again relative).</div>

    This is what I like about the IF scheme. I think you convinced me to go the IF route either at the end of this cycle, or during my next cycle!
     
  6. bluejacket

    bluejacket New Member

    well i hope it works for you. keep reading over at lyles (IF for dummies is currently running) as its about the only place where a real discussion is going on the pro's and con's. martins site is nice but he rarely updates it so.........

    im hoping by this summer ill have some pretty good notes/info on how my winter IF bulk went and get a thread started about it if there is interest.

    good luck with your current plan.....ill be reading.
     
  7. quadancer

    quadancer New Member

    Haven't had time to study on it, but are there any studies or info about catabolism on this diet?
    Fasting is about the scariest prospect out there to me.
     
  8. TunnelRat

    TunnelRat Active Member

    <div>
    (bluejacket @ Jan. 23 2008,16:11)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">remember the whole point of IF approach is food around a w/o so going for a surplus (but not crazy) around then is OK as long as your non-w/o days make up for it and then some. its still about cal deficit overall.</div>
    Okay, now that is helpful! [​IMG]

    The point is to concentrate most food intake around the workout. I wasn't clear on that before. Otherwise, IF just seemed like skipping breakfast.
     
  9. bluejacket

    bluejacket New Member

    <div>
    (quadancer @ Jan. 23 2008,18:07)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Haven't had time to study on it, but are there any studies or info about catabolism on this diet?
    Fasting is about the scariest prospect out there to me.</div>
    quad,

    i doubt there are any studies that deal specifically with this diet but there are studies that deal with fasting/starvation (that sounds like fun) and wgt loss/metabolic change etc. ive read some of them but i do not have links.........im not a &quot;save the science abstract for further study&quot; type of guy.  

    the basic point ive taken from what ive read (scientific and non-scientific) is that the studies DO NOT support the idea that you must eat every couple hours to avoid catabolism, keep your muscles nourished or even to effect your metabolism to any great degree.

    its really all about the calories in -vs- calories out.

    perhaps someone like totz who has some IF exper. as well as a good handle on the scientific aspect has some info. to share? maybe even dan........
     
  10. leegee38

    leegee38 Member

    These guys maintained bodyweight:


    Halberg N, Henriksen M, Söderhamn N, Stallknecht B, Ploug T, Schjerling P, Dela F.
    Dept. of Muscle Research Centre, The Panum Institute, University of Copenhagen, Denmark. [email protected]

    Insulin resistance is currently a major health problem. This may be because of a marked decrease in daily physical activity during recent decades combined with constant food abundance. This lifestyle collides with our genome, which was most likely selected in the late Paleolithic era (50,000-10,000 BC) by criteria that favored survival in an environment characterized by fluctuations between periods of feast and famine. The theory of thrifty genes states that these fluctuations are required for optimal metabolic function. We mimicked the fluctuations in eight healthy young men [25.0 +/- 0.1 yr (mean +/- SE); body mass index: 25.7 +/- 0.4 kg/m(2)] by subjecting them to intermittent fasting every second day for 20 h for 15 days. Euglycemic hyperinsulinemic (40 mU.min(-1).m(-2)) clamps were performed before and after the intervention period. Subjects maintained body weight (86.4 +/- 2.3 kg; coefficient of variation: 0.8 +/- 0.1%). Plasma free fatty acid and beta-hydroxybutyrate concentrations were 347 +/- 18 and 0.06 +/- 0.02 mM, respectively, after overnight fast but increased (P &lt; 0.05) to 423 +/- 86 and 0.10 +/- 0.04 mM after 20-h fasting, confirming that the subjects were fasting. Insulin-mediated whole body glucose uptake rates increased from 6.3 +/- 0.6 to 7.3 +/- 0.3 mg.kg(-1).min(-1) (P = 0.03), and insulin-induced inhibition of adipose tissue lipolysis was more prominent after than before the intervention (P = 0.05). After the 20-h fasting periods, plasma adiponectin was increased compared with the basal levels before and after the intervention (5,922 +/- 991 vs. 3,860 +/- 784 ng/ml, P = 0.02). This experiment is the first in humans to show that intermittent fasting increases insulin-mediated glucose uptake rates, and the findings are compatible with the thrifty gene concept.

    PMID: 16051710 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
     
  11. quadancer

    quadancer New Member

    That looks promising and all, but I still wondered what their cortisol and nitrogen levels may have been...in my limited understanding of catabolism. And does insulin-mediated glucose uptake rates have anything to do with protein synthesis?
    And what the results would be if this were done on trained subjects as well.
    Seems like that study just opens more questions than it solves, unless I'm just not understanding it.
     
  12. dkm1987

    dkm1987 New Member

    <div>
    (bluejacket @ Jan. 23 2008,19:44)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"><div>
    (quadancer @ Jan. 23 2008,18:07)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Haven't had time to study on it, but are there any studies or info about catabolism on this diet?
    Fasting is about the scariest prospect out there to me.</div>
    quad,

    i doubt there are any studies that deal specifically with this diet but there are studies that deal with fasting/starvation (that sounds like fun) and wgt loss/metabolic change etc. ive read some of them but i do not have links.........im not a &quot;save the science abstract for further study&quot; type of guy.  

    the basic point ive taken from what ive read (scientific and non-scientific) is that the studies DO NOT support the idea that you must eat every couple hours to avoid catabolism, keep your muscles nourished or even to effect your metabolism to any great degree.

    its really all about the calories in -vs- calories out.

    perhaps someone like totz who has some IF exper. as well as a good handle on the scientific aspect has some info. to share? maybe even dan........</div>
    There are a ton of studies on intermittant fasting, the problem is there isn't a lot on IF and training in humans.

    I've been studying fasting of all types for years now (it was my first topci of passion), if you want studies let me know.
     
  13. If you alternate lifting and cardio each day, so you follow the fasting plan on cardio days too?
     
  14. colby2152

    colby2152 New Member

    <div>
    (etothepii @ Jan. 24 2008,09:08)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">If you alternate lifting and cardio each day, so you follow the fasting plan on cardio days too?</div>
    Yes, I believe so. Your calories are much less on the cardio days. However, each of those days you are fasting for 16 total hours.

    <div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I've been studying fasting of all types for years now (it was my first topci of passion), if you want studies let me know. </div>

    Open up the can of worms! [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  15. bluejacket

    bluejacket New Member

    etothepii,

    check out colbys other thread on &quot;wave loading calories&quot;. it has some good discussion as well as some links to the IF basics if your interested.


    the basic IF template (from martin berkhan) follows the 16/8 - fast/eat sched everyday. you can read the rest of the details but it really is basically common sense eating and lifting (depending on goals) just in a differant time frame.
     
  16. quadancer

    quadancer New Member

    The reasons for my question(s) is due to the belief that after a certain amount of time, the body goes into catabolism when not fed. As a BB'er of sorts, I'd sort of like to avoid losing hard earned mass, and fasting seems to be that very mechanism most likely to cause this.
    Matter of fact, I'd like to know ALL of the things that cause catabolism. Maybe I'll find out with Coach Hale's new book. Ordered it tonite.
     
  17. colby2152

    colby2152 New Member

    I'm not the best on researching this type of stuff, but this what I have gathered from pubmed...

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed....VDocSum
    <div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Effect of intermittent feeding with high-fat diet on changes of glycogen, protein and fat content in liver and skeletal muscle in the laboratory mouse.
    Krízová E, Simek V.

    Department of Comparative Animal Physiology and General Zoology, Faculty of Science, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic.

    After 8 weeks of intermittent fasting, mice fed both a standard laboratory diet and a high-fat diet became hyperphagic and showed an increased amount of glycogen storage in the liver. An important effect of the adaptation to intermittent feeding with a high-fat diet seems to be an activation of the oxidation of lipids. Lipid oxidation prevails over lipogenesis so that the protein levels in the liver and skeletal muscle are preserved and maintained constant.</div>

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed....VDocSum
    <div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Metabolic and structural adaptations to exercise in chronic intermittent fasted rats.
    Favier RJ, Koubi HE.

    Laboratoire de Physiologie, UA 621 and 181 Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Lyon, France.

    The effect of repetitive alternance of 3 days fasting and 3 days refeeding on morphological and biochemical ability to perform exercise was investigated in adult male rats. At the end of 10 wk of chronic intermittent fasting, the rats had consumed 20% less food but were able to maintain their initial body weight. Intermittent fasted rats (IF) had significantly lower carcass fat but had maintained the percent contribution of proteins to total carcass weight. The relative mass of liver, heart, kidney, and muscles was not affected by such dietary manipulation. Both glycolytic and oxidative enzyme capacities were reduced in IF rat muscles. In response to exercise (2 h of swimming), control rats displayed hypoglycemia, whereas IF rats were able to maintain plasma glucose level in spite of a reduced energy supply from liver (low glycogen stores) and adipose tissue (low plasma free fatty acid levels). This had been obtained by accumulating glycogen and triglycerides in muscles and by deriving energy for muscular contraction from the in situ breakdown of these energetic substrates. In addition, although IF rats displayed a markedly reduced liver protein content, the liver exercise-induced protein breakdown was abolished in these animals.

    PMID: 3381913 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]</div>

    It's just rats though.. [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  18. dkm1987

    dkm1987 New Member

    <div>
    (quadancer @ Jan. 24 2008,19:24)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">As a BB'er of sorts, I'd sort of like to avoid losing hard earned mass, and fasting seems to be that very mechanism most likely to cause this.</div>
    Not neccessarily true.

    In order for changes in muscle tissue to truly take effect there must be some early changes in genes and this hasn't been seen in normal subjects who fast for brief periods (40 hours).

    In one study the subjects showed no changes at the completion of a 40 hour fast in myogenic or atrogenic genetic markers vs the levels of the markers at 3 hours into the fast.

    Indicating that there is no difference between 40 hours of fasting and the normal changes seen when one were to eat every 3 hours.

    Another aspect one must look at is proteolysis and again what is seen in studies is largely different than what is reported in the BB community. For instance it is assumed that in brief periods of starvation that there is an immediate increases in proteolysis and that this is acheived via catabolzing muscle structure, this isn't necessarily true as the majority of gluconeogenic amino acid concentrations come from unbound serum aminos.

    Lastly there is evidence that in brief fasting myosin mRNA is heightened, this would have a positive impact on what occurs during re-feeding as the increased mRNA would facilitate rapid recovery once availability of substrate is resumed.

    Granted these are very short term fasting changes and what occurs in longer term fasting periods is different but then you have to look at many other substrates and variables that contribute, glycogen levels, ketones, fatty acids and of course the individual Lean vs. Obese, active vs. sedentary, the differences in activity type and so forth.

    As far as studies there are many.

    Read the works of Cahill, Forbes, Dulloo, Owens, Hall for starters.
     
  19. quadancer

    quadancer New Member

    Oh Gawd, teacher is gonna make us STUDY again... [​IMG]
    So it's saying that (basically for US, BB'ers and PL'ers) that short fasts aren't catabolic after all, and because of myosin mRNA increases, recovery abilities are enhanced and nullify any detrimental effects of the fast?
    I'm not totally sure what &quot;once availability of substrate is resumed&quot; means, but I think it means nutrition availability once refeed is performed. I apologise for my lack of education here. Went to work out of the 11th grade.
     
  20. dkm1987

    dkm1987 New Member

    <div>
    (quadancer @ Jan. 26 2008,12:05)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Oh Gawd, teacher is gonna make us STUDY again...  [​IMG]
    So it's saying that (basically for US, BB'ers and PL'ers) that short fasts aren't catabolic after all, and because of myosin mRNA increases, recovery abilities are enhanced and nullify any detrimental effects of the fast?
    I'm not totally sure what &quot;once availability of substrate is resumed&quot; means, but I think it means nutrition availability once refeed is performed. I apologise for my lack of education here. Went to work out of the 11th grade.</div>
    No they are catabolic in the true definition of the term but what we are truly talking here when looking at even a day or two of total starvation is in the neighborhood of grams and most likely fractions thereof. Is that truly even noticable?

    Not I'm not saying go out and starve yourself for weeks on end, I'm saving that for my book (which has been in the process of writing now for 2 years, much akin to the HST Book) [​IMG]
     

Share This Page