HST and Eat/Stop/Eat

Totentanz,

My schedule allows me to workout at 5am right after I wake up. This is why the IF program doesn't really work for me I don't think? I usually have a post workout protein/creatine shake at 6am and then sime instant oatmeal at work around 7am, and nothing until lunch around noon. Lunch is sensible, turkey sanwich, pretzels, boiled eggs, fruit, and maybe low-fat cottage cheese. Dinner is between 5-6pm and usually whatever the my family is having, sometimes not the healthiest.

My concern with IF is that I'd have to eat right after my workout, and eat a nice, healthy, big breakfast which just isn't feasable for me as I go straight to work after my workout. I also don't want to start the feeding window earlier than 10am so that I can eat dinner with my family.

If I were to go with IF, could I get away with only having the shake post workout and then a small breakfast and shake at 10am then lunch and dinner at regular times?

I'm currently in the process of my first 24 hour fast on Eat/Stop/Eat (its actually going well so far, only about 4 hours left to go). I like this fast because I can fast on days I don't do HST.

Any opinions would be greatly appreciated. I'm really thinking that I will stick with IF of some sort or another for a while and see the results I can get.
 
If you did IF, just don't eat around the workout. Workout at 5 am, then start eating at 10 AM or whenever. That's totally fine. I've done a fasted workout with no protein shake before or after, and it worked fine. If you really must, you could take some EAAs or something around the workout but I don't think it is necessary.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Totentanz. I just completed my first 24 hour fast yesterday with E/S/E. I really thought it would be worse than it was. I didn't have any real ''hunger'' pangs and my energy was up all day. Felt pretty good at the 24 hr fast mark actually. I think I am going to stick with E/S/E for a while and see how my results are. I like the idea of IF as well but E/S/E is pretty simple to keep up with. Just don't eat for 2 days a week. Bonus I was down 2lbs this morning as well.
 
I have lost 9kg (about 20 pounds) following an if protocol (renegade diet) in 2 months with one cheat day per week. I can't accurately say how much has been muscle, i don't trust bia measures and I'm not very good with the calipers, but I'd say I've lost max 2 kg of muscle. Current bf is around 16-17%

I started with 2 weeks of 15s, which I know it's not recommended while dieting, but after a long time off I wanted to give a smooth ramp up to my muscles. I might have saved some muscle starting on the 10s.

The most important thing is that it has been remarkably easy eating if style, I suffer a bit on weekend mornings but that's it.

If interested i can provide macros, diet, training and even pictures :-)

Sent from my GT-P7500 using Tapatalk 2
 
Keep us updated, I'm interested in your progress, i believe we started at a common place ;)
After a while fat loss stalls so I'm thinking of adding a 24h fast to my weekly if protocol. It would start on Friday evening right after my cheat night :)
Would it be ok considering i train Friday around 6pm (fast would start around 10pm)


Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2
 
Ironkid said:
Keep us updated, I'm interested in your progress, i believe we started at a common place ;)
After a while fat loss stalls so I'm thinking of adding a 24h fast to my weekly if protocol. It would start on Friday evening right after my cheat night :)
Would it be ok considering i train Friday around 6pm (fast would start around 10pm)


Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...


From what I've veen reading I think you would be fine. Totentanz is the resident expert on IF here and I'm sure he will have an opinion on your timing as well.

For me, the 24 hour fast just worked better for my lifestyle. I workout first thing in the morning at 5am. The 8 hour feeding window option with IF just would have been a little tougher I think. I may end up trying it if I don't get good results with E/S/E but so far I think it's going well consindering it's only been a week.

I HST train M/W/F early am and do light cardio on T/Th/Sat with Sunday off. I begin my first 24 hr fast after dinner on Wednesday night through dinner on Thursday. My second 24 hr fast begins after dinner on Saturday night and continuest through dinner on Sunday.
 
5 1/2 lbs down. Fasting 24hrs beginning tonight after dinner around 6pm. 7 days ago was at 211lbs, 205 1/2 lbs this morning. Would love to get down to 195-197lbs and see if I lost any strength or muscle mass. So far I've had no problems keeping up with the weight increases in my HST routine. Currently in middle of my 1st week of 10's and increasing with each workout.
 
It's been mentioned in this thread that I should lift heavy while on E/S/E. Beginning with the 10's and skipping 15's. I plan to do this as I'm in my 10's right now. I will drop to 8's and then down to 5's. Question I have is when I begin my next HST cycle. Should I go rep ranges 10/8/6/5? Otherwise I'd be only doing a six week program if I went 10/8/5? I guess I could do four weeks of 5's but by the end of my 2nd week i'm typically maxed out on all of my lifts.

Is a week of SD necessary if I'm feeling good after completing a cycle?
 
2 1/2 weeks in to E/S/E and I am down 11 lbs. Started at 212 and was right at 201 this morning. Goal next week is to drop to under 200. I think the loss will start to slow down now. Was about 7-8 lbs in the first week and a half anf 3 lbs in the last week. Hope to be around 199 next Friday.

I've really liked the program. I don't feel like I've lost any strength or muscle at this point. I think the program is working nicely. It would probably work even better if I really counted and kept on top of my diet on regular days. I don't eat junk by any means, but also don't eat above maintenance either. I just try to eat sensible and throw in as much protein as I can. I don't think I get the .7-1 gram per lb but probably more like .5 grams per lb.
 
I would never recommend 24hr fasting for anyone regularly lifting weights. 16hrs is the max and I think 12hrs is better - where the first meal of the day can be a protein+fat meal.
 
Blade said:
I would never recommend 24hr fasting for anyone regularly lifting weights. 16hrs is the max and I think 12hrs is better - where the first meal of the day can be a protein+fat meal.
Click to expand...

Why not? So far in I haven't experienced any muscle or strength loss, just weight loss(fat/water) I'm guessing. From a lot of what I've read your body really begins to start burning fat between the 18-22 hour mark of a fast. I don't see how a 16 hour fast would be the most beneficial.
 
Your body is burning fat all the time. If you have a lot of fat to cover a deficit, you can get away with a 24hr fast. Are there better ways to lose fat? Yes, I do believe so - there is no need for longer fasts, but if it makes diet adherence better for you - then go ahead. I would limit fasting to 16hrs and for someone lean - 12hrs.
 
Blade said:
Your body is burning fat all the time. If you have a lot of fat to cover a deficit, you can get away with a 24hr fast. Are there better ways to lose fat? Yes, I do believe so - there is no need for longer fasts, but if it makes diet adherence better for you - then go ahead. I would limit fasting to 16hrs and for someone lean - 12hrs.
Click to expand...

I'm curious if there is any evidence or scientific facts behind your theory? I'm not saying I disagree, in fact it makes logical sense what you are saying. I just wonder if there have been any studies done to prove that a shorter fast actually is better than a 24 hour fast. The only evidence I read mentioned the 18-22 hour mark as the target time for getting the most out of a fast.
 
Ketone production increases during a longer fast, that's why you end up burning more fat.
At the same time gluconeogenesis increases, so you end up burning more muscles too.
 
misev said:
Ketone production increases during a longer fast, that's why you end up burning more fat.
At the same time gluconeogenesis increases, so you end up burning more muscles too.
Click to expand...

Does glucogeogenesis burn muscle? I thought ketosis was muscle sparing because glucogeogenesis will feed primarily from fatty acids....

I'm puzzled now :confused:

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2
 
Ketosis is burning fat yes, but gluconeogenesis is burning protein. Since you're fasting, this protein comes from muscles normally.
In the first 24 hours of a fast gluconeogenesis is rather high (especially if you're active).
You need 2-3 days of fasting until gluconeogenesis drops down to minimal levels and you become efficient at ketosis.

So I'd rather follow Blade's advice of fasting less than 24 hours, or if you are very fat then it might be more optimal to go on a prolonged fast of a several days.
But fasting is a tricky business so take care and do your research..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top