Not sure why this got such a negative reception, intermittent fasting has been shown to have multiple benefits.
Its probably closer to what we spent generations evolving towards than the typical diet of shoving processed meats + Big Gulps in your face hole 19 hours a day.
I'm going to venture a guess is that the reason is it solves nothing, it simply batches the effort.
You cannot fast forever. At some point you need to average your TDEE (lets say 2k calories). Intermittent fasting means you go from eating 2k calories in like 4 meals across ~16hrs to as few as 1 meal in 15 minutes (OMAD). I'd suggest the longest sustainable (ie, doesnt _eventually_ result in starvation) intermittent fast would be a 1:1 fast where you're eating 4k calories on the day you eat.
Saves a lot of ceremony, but you still have to eat the same amount of food.
If you are in an equilibrium and do not want to lose weight that may be true. But I think in many countries that is rather the exception than the norm.
sure, but even at a modest caloric deficit of 10% (~200 calories per day) using my own stats (200lb 25% body fat) I carry only about 175K calories in total (you cant lose all your fat and live to tell th etale). That would bring me down to a hard to sustain 9.9% bodyfat in under 2 yrs (about 615 days by my quick math).
So yeah, even in short order it has to get to equilibrium.
The point is that in some countries a high percentage of people are overeating all the time. They can easily do with a caloric deficit, for a long, long time.
This is what I think of every time someone makes an "Americans fat" comment. Sure, that's true, but if you honestly believe a 20-30% obesity rate is good then I don't know what to say. Y'all are headed the same direction pretty fast.
Plus, it varies across the US. In Washington, for example, the rate (while high) is under 30%, while West Virginia is over 40%.
Because for people struggling to prepare meals getting used to fasting can be seriously dangerous. It doesn't take long to learn ignoring hunger, add potential psychosomatic symptoms that mess with your weight and you're in deep shit really fast.
Indeed. As someone who (in the past) struggled a lot with eating, fasting would not have been a solution - it was the entire problem!
This is the first cookbook I've read that seems to get the effort level vaguely right for a meal you still might be able to make after not eating or drinking anything for 40+ hours. In fact, the "literal depression cooking" meal is close to what most of my meals were, but I rarely even had cheese to add.
Its probably closer to what we spent generations evolving towards than the typical diet of shoving processed meats + Big Gulps in your face hole 19 hours a day.
That's kind of two extremes though, isn't it? You fast, or eat crap?
And people get all upset about eating animal fat in quantities equal to protein, but that's what we did until the 70s. Then we stopped, and everyone ended up overweight.
So I agree, traditional diets seem best, and maybe a fast or two. But if we fast, it should be in the late winter, and we should faten up in the late summer/fall too, yes?
That's most inline with humans prior to cities/agriculture.
Then again, we have what... 20,000? 50,000? generations of humanity using animal husbandry, and farming, to change that cycle?
I'd like to see a source for that, my experience is you need to be pushing 4-5 days before it's really risky. Let's assume the individuals are intelligent enough to take in basic electrolytes. eg: There are mixes made for this purpose such as LMNT
Its probably closer to what we spent generations evolving towards than the typical diet of shoving processed meats + Big Gulps in your face hole 19 hours a day.