Home   |   Contact   |   Help

Get Our Newsletter
Sign up for our free newsletter to get training tips and stay up to date on Catalyst Athletics, and get a FREE issue of the Performance Menu journal.

Go Back   Catalyst Athletics Forums > Nutrition > General Nutrition

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-19-2007, 07:20 PM   #11
Stuart Mather
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 81
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Battaglia View Post
Although you may feel fine on this 2 hour feeding regimen initially, it will eventually catch up to you and your health will be drastically hindered. Take it from me, I've been there before. ....keep a 5-6 hours window for eating. Good luck with your test results, I'm sure they will be favorable.

If you can consume sufficient healthy (unprocessed low carb) calories in 2 hrs (one hour... ten minutes...?) why will such an IF approach necessarily hinder your health (whatsoever, let alone drastically)?. I would have thought it would only enhance it. Emphasis of course on the sufficient healthy calories.

For instance I can easily eat the best part of half a roast chicken and big green salad washed down with a strawberry/ goat yog/ whey protein isolate/casein protein isolate/2 raw egg/cream/ginger/cinnamon smoothie, in three quarters of an hour without bolting it. And with some left over to wash down supps.

I've only done this maybe ten times in 8 months of IF'ing. I like eating too much . But what's the metabolic catch?

Stuart.
Stuart Mather is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2007, 07:40 PM   #12
Ale Dileo
New Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Italy
Posts: 31
Default

Allen :

if you come in naples save some time for Costiera Amalfitana (Capri,Sorrento,..) , .. really beautiful

Stuart :

yes, i confirm i'm IFing everyday since march. Regarding my job .. how can explain? i go all day 'round with my van charging drink dispensers (water,cola,coffee,...)
Ale Dileo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2007, 10:11 PM   #13
Greg Battaglia
Senior Member
 
Greg Battaglia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 269
Default

Stuart, I was implying that it may become difficult to eat enough calories in a 2 hour window, especially if you're on a Paleo diet. This is just my experience. If it works for you, then more power to ya. The main reasons it didn't work for me were insufficient calorie intake and eating too fast, thus packing in a lot of calories (although not enough to sustain me through the under eating phase) in a short time frame, causing all shorts of strange side effects like indigestion, heart burn, rapid or irregular heart beat, dizziness, dehydration, etc. Recently I've given up IF altogether (other than an occasional full day fast after a few days of hearty eating) and have seen a complete amelioration of all of these symptoms. Not to get off topic, but MY personal goal is to live as long as possible and in as good health as possible. No centenarian has ever been shown to eat one meal a day. They just eat natural food in moderation, enjoy a good social/family life, have low levels of stress, and work their butts off in jobs that they enjoy. As for your question pertaining to the possible reason why a small eating window may be bad: I feel as though loading the stomach up with tons of food in a short time period is an overload to the system in every possible way. Digestion, heart health, blood sugar and insulin levels all go haywire when you stuff yourself. That's why I say go with a longer eating window, so you can eat more moderate meals spread evenly throughout the window while still consuming all the calories you need without stuffing yourself. I think a lot of people were going to the extreme when eating every 2 hours was fashionable. They would carry around containers of food everywhere they went, like loonies. I think a lot of people are doing the same with If, absolutely gorging on large quantities of food expecting to live to be 100. The take-home message that I've gotten from IF, and really just all the research on dietary restriction in genera, is to not eat too much, and to not worry if food is not available. It shouldn't be a chronic stressor. Basically, I like what Art D. has to say. Just my 2 cents. If you get great results with what you're doing I'm jealous, because a small feeding window would do wonders for my social and school life.
Greg Battaglia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 02:59 AM   #14
Allen Yeh
Senior Member
 
Allen Yeh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 4,246
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ale Dileo View Post
Allen :

if you come in naples save some time for Costiera Amalfitana (Capri,Sorrento,..) , .. really beautiful
Um sure! so...is that a place nearby?
__________________
"And for crying out loud. Don't go into the pain cave. I can't stress this enough. Your Totem Animal won't be in there to help you. You'll be on your own. The Pain Cave is for cowards.
Pain is your companion, don't go hide from it."
-Kelly Starrett
Allen Yeh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 07:39 AM   #15
Mike ODonnell
Senior Member
 
Mike ODonnell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,596
Default

Interesting thought....if you can put down 2100 calories in 2 hours....is there a point of diminishing returns when it comes to the IF window? For example if your goal is to lose fat and you are planning on taking in 1500 cal a day....does a 5 hour window of digestion better utilize the food for fuel vs a 2 hour window which may in fact have less impact on your fat burning efforts? Does a smaller window have more negative effects on your T4-T3 output/conversion ratio? Etc...etc....all answers that I do not know but you would have to experiment for yourself.....

Eating 2100 cal in 2 hours would be like me eating a large pizza every day and nothing else....sounds like a great idea but I just don't think it would be good for fat loss and muscle gain...or maybe I need to try it...Hmmmm...Guinness and Beer diet.....TM coming!
__________________
Fitness Spotlight
The IF Life
Mike ODonnell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 07:57 AM   #16
Stuart Mather
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 81
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Battaglia View Post
As for your question pertaining to the possible reason why a small eating window may be bad: I feel as though loading the stomach up with tons of food in a short time period is an overload to the system in every possible way. Digestion, heart health, blood sugar and insulin levels all go haywire when you stuff yourself. That's why I say go with a longer eating window, so you can eat more moderate meals spread evenly throughout the window while still consuming all the calories you need without stuffing yourself. .
Yes I see your point Greg. Which may be why the 'eating window' approach to IF'ing is really not such a good idea after all compared to the 24/ 24 split where the eating 24 is moderate food intake all day (or the way I was doing it for most of the 8 months I've been IF'ing - dinner on the fast day and then normal meals the following day until dinner at the 23'rd hr leading into another 24 hr fast. My body got really used to the 24 hr fast. I was doing it on alternate days for nearly five months. I changed a couple of weeks ago to an eating window every day approach. Maybe the intermittency of alternating a day of normal eating with a longer fast day is the better approach, in terms of never having to eat large meals. I mean regular fasting obviously has health (and perhaps longevity) benefits. And large meals probably do have considerable metabolic drawbacks.

Perhaps the ideal may be moderate meals on the eat days, with plenty of small snacks in between , then a long fast day.

Just a point about DeVany's randomization imperative. He's not applying it to sleep is he? One night a good long sleep and the next burning the midnight oil?

Stuart
Stuart Mather is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 10:31 AM   #17
Jeff Bearden
New Member
 
Jeff Bearden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 21
Default

Greg,

I read the article you wrote on HumanaNatura.org on "Feast-Fast Eating For Superior Health". So, are you saying you don't believe that concept to be healthy anymore?
Jeff Bearden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 12:05 PM   #18
Greg Battaglia
Senior Member
 
Greg Battaglia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 269
Default

Stuart-
I think you're right on the money. Not only intuitively, but based on all of the documentaries that I've seen on contemporary H/G's, it appears that after they fast they don't go absolutely crazy with their first meal. They seem to eat a moderate quantity when breaking the fast, and then continue to eat plentifully for the next day or so until their food supply runs short. This makes sense too, because in the studies done on rodents, they similarly would have had plenty of time to relax and reload on calories in a moderate and enjoyable fashion. Coming from my own experience, I find that any time I eat heartily for a good 24-48 hours I actually feel ready for a fast, I'm sort of excited about it, I feel ambitious for the "hunt". When I eat one meal a day I feel drained and weak during the under eating phase and bloated and lethargic after the over eating phase. It's a lose-lose situation, your performance sucks, and you feel like shit after eating. I think the much longer feeding windows are more appropriate for folks like us that chase performance and well-being once we're already lean. Which brings me to the next topic.......

Jeff-
Good question, and I'm glad you ask so I can clarify. I still believe that the method I discuss in my article is valid, assuming several circumstances:
1) The dieter is eating a lower calorie diet (say, anything below 2000 calories/day) so that the method prevents the deleterious effects of gorging while still getting the benefits of IF and CR.

2) The dieter is overweight and needs to slim down before concentrating on performance and sustained well-being (thus, adhering to the above statement in #1.

3) The dieter, after losing all necessary weight, still feels good on this method. In this case it can be continued. It's all dependent on how the individual responds to this method long-term. If it works, then certainly stick with it.

4) The dieter doesn't care about bodyweight or gaining muscle mass (or any mass for that matter)

I try to liken this method, in the If world, to the initial stages of the Zone diet . A Zone dieter first starts out with a low level of fat intake (and a low calorie intake, consequentially) which helps the individual to lean out and get to a healthy weight. However, once optimal leanness is met, if the low calorie, low-fat Zone diet is continued performance begins to suffer. To combat this, the dieter will begin the "Athletes Zone" which consists of basically increasing fat blocks until performance begins to increase again. The same applies to IF, in my opinion. I think we can start to use the one meal a day plan for beginners that want to lean down until performance begins to suffer. Then, increase the feeding window in such a manner that will allow 1) adequate calories for performance and 2) Prevent the deleterious effects of gorging by allowing more moderate meals spread throughout the window.

On a final note, Mark Lundegrun, the creator of Humana Natura, has contacted me in praise of the method I've outlined on his website. He claims to have increased his energy and well-being significantly by eating one meal a day. He said he usually eats only about 1500 calories a day total. He's healthy and content with looking and feeling great, despite the fact that he's not an elite athlete. This method obviously works for him, just as the beginners Zone works for some people, when others need to convert to the athletes Zone for increased performance, etc. I think some will find that one meal a day works great for them long-term, but most (myself included) will need to eventually increase the feeding window until we can get enough calories, and in proper doses, until things improve again.

PS
This conversation has inspired me to give IF one last try before I throw it in the scrap heap. I've tried the EOD method and found it too intense. I'm going to give Art D's Every Third Day (ETD) method a try starting tomorrow and I'll keep you posted on how it goes. So basically, my breakdown is gonna look like this:

Day 1: Eat Ad Lib
Day 2: Eat Ad Lib
Day 3: Eat nothing

Start over
Greg Battaglia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 01:14 PM   #19
Mike ODonnell
Senior Member
 
Mike ODonnell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,596
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Battaglia View Post
This conversation has inspired me to give IF one last try before I throw it in the scrap heap. I've tried the EOD method and found it too intense. I'm going to give Art D's Every Third Day (ETD) method a try starting tomorrow and I'll keep you posted on how it goes. So basically, my breakdown is gonna look like this:

Day 1: Eat Ad Lib
Day 2: Eat Ad Lib
Day 3: Eat nothing

Start over
Greg any particular reason you don't try an intermittent small daily fasting window (aka the fast five or whatever approach....6 hours...8 hours...). Anything would of course give benefit while still giving plenty of time for small meals. I could NOT go a day without food....I would eat off my hand personally....so yes I agree a 24 fast is too intense but I can manage a daily window and every day can be different for me depending on my schedule and exercise...2-7pm...5-10pm....1-9pm.....etc...
__________________
Fitness Spotlight
The IF Life
Mike ODonnell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 01:21 PM   #20
Leo Soubbotine
Senior Member
 
Leo Soubbotine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 779
Default

Mike - I found it a lot easier to go 24/24 than Fast 5 or even Fast 9. May be because I was doing the morning till afternoon hours.

8am to 5 pm or 10 am to 3pm - I was pretty hungry every day.
With 24 hours - it's much easier for me.
Leo Soubbotine is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:49 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Subscribe to our Newsletter


Receive emails with training tips, news updates, events info, sale notifications and more.
ASK GREG

Submit your question to be answered by Greg Everett in the Performance Menu or on the website

Submit Your Question
WEIGHTLIFTING TEAM

Catalyst Athletics is a USA Weightlifting team of competitive Olympic-style weightlifters with multiple national team medals.

Read More
Olympic Weightlifting Book
Catalyst Athletics
Contact Us
About
Help
Newsletter
Products & Services
Gym
Store
Seminars
Weightlifting Team
Performance Menu
Magazine Home
Subscriber Login
Issues
Articles
Workouts
About the Program
Workout Archives
Exercise Demos
Text Only
Instructional Content
Exercise Demos
Video Gallery
Free Articles
Free Recipes
Resources
Recommended Books & DVDs
Olympic Weightlifting Guide
Discussion Forum
Weight Conversion Calculator