I found this interesting. I wonder if 2, 24 hour fasts would be as good as 1, 36 hour fast a week.
Fasting vs calorie restriction study
I hate when they call something “heart healthy”. “a CR heart-healthy diet of increased intake of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and liquid plant oils and minimal intakes of processed foods, added sugars, salt, and alcohol (65% carbohydrate intake, 20% fat, and 15% protein)”. I’d guess any “heart healthiness” comes from the lack of processed foods and sugars, and reduced alcohol might help.
I’ll have to look more into what they mean about “intermittent fasting”, which I think includes reduced-calorie days with a shorter time window.
This is what they say: " In comparison, the IF approach used in our laboratory is a modified IF regimen, which allows consumption of 20% to 25% of energy needs on scheduled fasting days (1-2/wk), combined with a P (IF-P) meal plan consisting of 35% to 45% carbohydrate, 20% to 30% fat, and 30% to 35% protein for 5 or 6 days weekly [(3)]."
So, it’s like a low calorie 36 hours.
Still good, but not really 36 hours of fasting.
At one time, I was doing 36 hour fasts (real ones), usually with body weight training at about 32 hours, twice per week. It does work, though it also caused me some lowered metabolism.
The IP-P is a bit like the 5:2 “intermittent fasting”. Never understood the charm but I just can’t eat a tiny food and stop there. Full fasts are way better but each to their own, I know some people love 5:2, with high protein or not (as high as it’s possible. 5:2 says 400 kcal for women? that’s below my minimum protein and I try to minimize protein since ages and I am quite successful nowadays. I just have a higher need for satiation, it seems). I still don’t know what that does to the body but we should be able to handle it for a single day, it’s just unnecessary suffering to many. Especially with carbs. Yeah I have problems with the carbs in both diets, it can drastically change the results (and make these starvation diets even more hellish for people like me).
True fasting was great for me even on high-carb as my body got relief and eventually went into ketosis so the carb interference went away. So fasting can mitigate the problem with carbs. Even if a lower-carb diet may (or may not) help with fasting.
Yeah, I don’t know if it’s a blood sugar issue but I can’t eat a small amount to keep fasting the way I hear others do. It makes me ravenous and feel like crap
This study is similar to the fasting mimicking diet, although there they eat low carbohydrate and low calorie for a week (or 5 days?) and then eat normally for 3 weeks.
I was thinking of trying something similar to what they did in the study, because I’m made to drive into work 2 days a week. That’s 2+ hours in a car doing no work. So, what I do is not eat lunch (normally, don’t eat breakfast), and work through lunch to make up the time missed. I don’t exercise on those days, either. I’m eating my one “meal” during a short window when I get home, but I don’t restrict myself.
I was thinking of trying to limit my calories on those days to 700-800, using ham or something lean but high protein, plus maybe a bit of liverwurst to help with nutrition. The idea is to get some of the benefits of fasting without actually fasting that long.
I was going to try this on this week, but it’s my birthday, so the family wanted to celebrate that. Couldn’t really fast during that.
I will try this next week, though, and I’ll be interested to see if I can do it. My guess is that I won’t be able to do it, because once I eat, I get hungry. I tried Maria Emmerich’s high protein, lower calorie diet, and had to eat more than what she recommended for someone my size.
Happy Birthday, Bob! Now I remember today is mine but it’s a normal day for me this time. Maybe we will do something later, maybe on Sunday.
I am curious how much food will be enough for you, good luck! I may try it too (without a target calories, simply eating my minimum protein in a very lean way and we will see), I don’t eat as much as I did in the past and I have developed nice lean recipes (and I can appreciate lean protein sources without immediately adding a lot of extra fat) so first the first time ever, I can see how low I can go (high protein is non-negotiable for my body, it just used to bring too much fat as I was totally unable to avoid that)! I will skip lunch too if I can do it, it makes things easier.
Do you mean would 2 fasts in one week (68 hours in one week) be as good as a single 36 hour fast in one week? Why wouldn’t it be better or at least the same?
As Bob M quotes their protocol,
Except for being based on restricting intake to " 20% to 25% of energy needs on scheduled fasting days" that sounds like the Zone diet: 40% Calories from carbs, 25% from fat and 35% from protein only differs from the Zone in that was 40-30-30 (%), but that was a common modification. I did that for years before going fully keto 10 years ago.
It’s a switch. Not eating when well-fasted is usually easy (for a while). Stopping when hungry and eating… Near impossible. Especially that my mental and physical parts are in agreement: I must keep eating as that is the right thing to do in that situation.
I even get hungry somewhat soon after a decent-sized meal under normal conditions. So I just try to stay well-fasted for a long time after waking. That’s not nearly as hard as eating a small meal.
My method is 16 to 18 hour intermittent fasting daily, eating only real food an what my body requires, and a daily walk, and also yard work. I am 77 snd my weight is stable at what I weighed at age 21 at the time I graduated from Navy boot camp, one of the times I was the most fit.
I don’t eat factory processed food, or fast food. I don’t take prescription drugs.