Catalyst Athletics Forums

Catalyst Athletics Forums (http://www.catalystathletics.com/forum/index.php)
-   General Nutrition (http://www.catalystathletics.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   cons of the regular IF (http://www.catalystathletics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1612)

Eva Claire Synkowski 09-19-2007 05:40 PM

cons of the regular IF
 
ive read that some ppl approach IF with more of a random schedule, i.e., intermittent, intermittent fasting.

besides the fact that a regular IF schedule doesn't really mimic HG patterns, are there health drawbacks (e.g., slower metabolism?) with a daily IF routine, such as the fast-5 (or for me, the slowish-8) that im overlooking?

Troy Archie 09-19-2007 07:26 PM

I hate to say it but I've found my metabolism to have slowed down quite a bit.

The question we have to ask ourselves now is, is having a slower metabolism a bad thing? You could easily look at in a different direction that now your metabolism is more efficient...

Eva Claire Synkowski 09-19-2007 07:56 PM

yeah, that's exactly why i asked. got on the scale today at the gym - up another 5 lbs suposedly. a little surprised, considering body comp is pretty good and metcon performance hasn't suffered. ive been sticking to ~14 blks P/C (and a TON of fat), so def a little surprised. perhaps im not as dialed in with food as i think....

don't really care too much about weight, but at 6 ft, 185 lbs (15% bf???).... getting through 100 pull-up type workouts.... takes a while.

Troy Archie 09-19-2007 08:20 PM

I'm in the same boat. Pulling in about 2300cal and have been steadily gaining. I've also ditched the multi-meal ideology too. On fast days I'll have 1 maybe 2 meals. Eat days I'll eat 3 meals...I'm still a bit skeptical though on the small multi meal=faster metabolism though.

Allen Yeh 09-20-2007 04:17 AM

Eva,

The thing I've noticed is that when you've been following IF for a bit you need less food than you used to. I think some people said it was due to you use less calories for digestion than you used to following the multi-meal approach.

Is this weight measurement in comparison to your last weeks weight?

I've been following IF since January and went from 195 to 185 without cutting my calories too much (then with my wifes surgery and stuff the last few months I'm up past 198) I'm back to clean eating now though and losing weight again. I've actually been wondering about the metabolism thing for a while now as my body temp is a little bit lower than it used to be. I don't think I've lost much if any muscle compared to where I was last year at this time.

Mike ODonnell 09-20-2007 05:29 AM

You'll need less food to maintain weight...so yes you probably need to cut down on the fat calories....which is a good thing considering now you spend less time eating, still keep the same muscle, burn fat...and oxidize less food creating less free radical damage and slowing down the aging process. Not a bad deal if you ask me!

I'm not sure if the fasting really slows down the metabolism per say. The lowered body temp could be in response to doing less digestion all day long or built in survival mechanism when on a more reduced calorie diet (as seen below from PubMed, which is more on CR but same can be said for IF I am sure)

Quote:

Indirect calorimetry showed that 24-hr energy expenditure was reduced by approximately 24% during short-term CR. The temporal association between reduced body temperature and energy expenditure suggests that reductions in body temperature relate to the induction of an energy conservation mechanism during CR. These reductions in body temperature and energy expenditure are consistent with findings in rodent studies in which aging rate was retarded by CR, now strengthening the possibility that CR may exert beneficial effects in primates analogous to those observed in rodents.
You also use your food more efficiently so you can assimulate more protein from less grams per day than you are used to. Your themogenesis digestive part of your metabolism is dropping, I think there have been studies to show the T3 levels do not until you start fasting over 2+ days.

Again...all good problems to have considering the health and longevity benefits gained.

Eva Claire Synkowski 09-20-2007 06:08 AM

im sold on the host of health/longevity benefits... i guess i just wouldn't mind that occurring at 170-175 lbs (more from a BW metcon performance standard than anything).

i guess im a little surprised at the increase in weight at 14 blks.... which doesn't seem like that much food. but ill try dialing back the carbs to sub-zone proportions, definitely cutting out some of the nuts/nut butters, and eating a little more ad lib (i.e., don't have to have 14 blks!)

allen,
i havent been weighing myself very regularly at all. i started IF in april and weighed myself weekly for the inital 2 months. was 170-175. checked again in july-ish on a couple different scales... was 180. then hadn't weighed myself til last night.... 185. all while body comp has improved.

i guess im also sold the zone w/extra fat + IF is the recipe for mass gain!

thanks for the responses!

Yvana van den Hork 09-20-2007 07:59 AM

Eva, if you read my thread on Ramadan-like IF you'll see I chose for that approach as the Fast-5 made me feel very cold. Other people have noticed they start overeating too much once the fast is over, though this depends very much on how low blood sugar level will drop (too low and you'll be ravenous).

Even the 2x/day approach didn't stop me from feeling cold. Only adding back in a 3rd meal at 6pm so taking a 12hr fast overnight plus a 6-8hr fast in day time seems to work best.

It is said that for some IF can even increase maintenance, due to catecholamine release. For me it meant that thyroid downregulated metabolism too much.
I don't really believe that a body gets more efficient in absorbing foods when being given 1 or 2 meals, since the 'bolus' is getting bigger.
I do believe it's a good idea to give the gut time to rest, hence why I like skipping lunch after having kickstarted metabolism with breakfast in the morning. It's not like that I felt the need for eating coz' I'm hungry, which I'm not.. just the mantra 'eat your breakfast or ' .. except that it's a LC-breakfst not kiddie cereal w milk :cool:

Robb Wolf 09-22-2007 02:03 PM

EC-
I've noticed a nutrient partitioning effect...i eat less than i did previously, run lean and have more muscle mass. Up to ~172 which is fairly heavy for me. Strength up, met-con up. you may be experiencing something like this as well.

Yvana van den Hork 09-24-2007 02:07 AM

Please tell this ignorant person : what's exactly metcon?
Is it a kind of device that measures metabolic activity levels and translates it into a certain caloric maintenance number?


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:06 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.