IF does work well for me, but I have always understood it is a tool that works better for me because of my psychology. I have always found it easier to not eat at all versus trying to eat just a little and then stop. I also have a huge appetite and with "normal" size meals rarely feel satiated. With IF I can eat larger meals, feel more satiated, but still eat less over the day.
@albundy3929 Your body is meant to feast and famine. Your body can handle any amount of protein any time. Have you ever heard of competitive eating? The RDA of protein is 50 grams per day that's it. Your body either needs the protein or it doesn't its that simple. Your body only stores carbs and fats it never stores protein. It's almost impossible to not get enough protein a day in any developed country because even plants have protein.
I'd never had normal bloodglucose till I started IF, it'd always been much higher. I basically eat the same amount of food, AND the same food as if I didn't do IF, yet here I am, losing weight, having a relatively good blood picture, and I could go on. I'm not saying it's magic, but how is this possible then? 🤔 I'd really like to know. Is it the placebo effect? Well, as long as it works for me, I won't stop. 😅 But it'd be good to know how this is possible if it doesn't do anything.
@@ivan7dora My best guess would be that you are consuming less calories but don't realize it, and if you are losing weight then that would more than likely explain your improved blood glucose.
This is me too but since I workout in the early morning I'm not sure how smart is it to wait so long to eat. Otherwise I'd be on one meal a day. Definitely a night eater!
This study seems to confirm that intermittent fasting isn't magic but a good tool. I used it for over 5 years to help maintain my weight when I used the technique to originally to lose weight. It made sense to me and my brain liked having specific times when to eat and when not to eat. I switched over to more smaller meals a day as I started to work out and I wanted to spread my protein over a longer period of time and that works for me as well
I really hate this bullshit but and I hate to admit that yeah - what helps me maintain is simply having no dinner but only very light either oats or a protein shake after 2pm.
If it causes people to spontaneously reduce intake without proportionally impacting hunger, this will be referred to as "magic" by many people who previously struggled. It's a figurative expression, not meant as "DnD is actually real guys, go find a wizard!!"
I think the reason the health industry constantly rags on intermittent fasting, is that it's free. There is no way to make money off of someone doing it.
Started a month ago with intermittent fasting. So far it gives me good result. Especially my brain seems to like it; my concentration is better and also energy levels are better throughout the day. Maybe it also have to do with less stress in the morning routine. I always prepared healthy meals in the morning, so had to reserve half an hour for that incl eating it. Now have an hour free time to go for a walk or something. And that's the most important thing; it makes me feel good and there are too many variables for that to measure.
Yo Layne, Thanks for inspiring me. I remember watching some of your videos many years ago and remember not liking you because you said something I perceived as negative about low-carb diets. I had just started on a ketogenic diet at that time, hah. I recently finished my bachelor's in nutrition and health, where I did an extended course in quantitative statistics by choice, lol. I've been watching some of your videos lately and realized that the reason I didn't like them before was because I didn't fully understand empiricism and how to analyze and use quantitative studies. But anyway, you probably won't read this, so I'm gonna cut the story short and just say: Watching your videos recently has sparked my interest in nutritional and fitness coaching again, and I just wanted to thanks, and thank you for doing what you do.
@4:40 Doc, the results do not "cancel" each other out, as 3 out of 4 favour time restricted eating (TRE)! The most important parameter is HOMA-IR which directly checks Insulin Resistance. The study shows that this categorically decreases with TRE towards the safe range below 2.5. Thus TRE is better for IR individuals, who are most at risk for diabetes.
Fasting does work for me, it helps me eat less, and control my calories even better, its not for everyone, after a week i do not crave sugar anymore, and i eat far less. But there is no magic there, you still need caloric deficiency, its like anything fasting plus calorie surplus you will gain weight and fat.
I did IF for a while. Lost a chunk of weight. Not because I think some IF voodoo working on hormones or blood sugar. Just that I more easily fell into a calorie deficit with it. Long-term, IF wasn't sustainable for me and social desires. I've since moved to a balanced, non-time-restricted approach (using Carbon Coach by the way!). To your point, find what works for you and what gets you into a calories deficit if weight loss is goal so that you can stick with it.
@@Swoop2565 If you consume the same amount of calories its doesnt matter if you do IF or not. So if you diet and do IF, then stay at maintanance calories u should not expect serious weight gain with or without IF
Yeah, worked for me for a period, then it didn't. Had to move onto a plan that sped up digestion. I do have borderline hypothyroidism, which too meant I really needed to speed up digestion
@@Swoop2565 Hi there - My weight didn't increase when I switched from IF to balanced diet. I was worried about that! As part of the switch, I started using an app to track calories to maintain a calorie deficit as part of weight loss goals. After time using that app, I switched to Dr. Layne's app for tracking. Once I reach my weight loss goals, I'll use the balanced diet and calorie tracking for maintenance. I've been able to drop 25% of my body weight.
People can quibble about the specific parameters of this study, but the bottomline is if there was a hugely beneficial impact to TRE or "Circandian Clock" eating it would show up SOMEWHERE in the outcome data. If you need absolutely perfect specific parameters to see any sort of outcome effect, it's just not very powerful.
@@Seanonyoutube there have been studies that Layne and others have shared in the past that showed no difference in lipid panels. Jason Fung's claims about intermittent fasting fixing obesity and lipids seem to be pretty much debunked. It sucks because I followed intermittent fasting for years and now giving it up because it doesn't seem to be any better than plain calorie restriction.
@@mementomori29231 i stick to intermittent fasting and OMAD with great success since years. Why ? it's just much easier FOR ME to keep a caloric deficit and not overeat. My hunger is non existent in the windows i usually not eat. Traditional diets with more frequent meal = i personally get more hungry all the time and i get more chances to make errors with more frequent meals . Recently i also challenge myself with a 3 days fast = i actually lost fat mass and kept it off, without loosing muscle ( or well at least my strength stayed exactly the same ) . But yhea stick to what feels and works good for you .
@@mementomori29231 it can still have other benefits like improved sleep quality, or even lower long term risk of cancer. not everything comes down to just a couple of blood tests. The takeaway for me is to find a sustainable pattern that works for the individual while still providing adequate time for digestion before bed.
IMO the main benefits of intermittent fasting are limiting how many times you spike your insulin per day, and tricking yourself into eating less. The 2nd one doesn't work for everyone, but the insulin benefit still remains. I think people are arguing about it in the wrong way. Strictly speaking intermittent fasting does NOT help you lose weight, i.e. if you have the same amount of caloric intake while intermittent fasting vs. not it won't have a different result - it isn't a magic wand. But if a certain schedule of eating can trick you into eating less.. then it sort of does help you lose weight. This is a pretty hard thing to research/prove though since everyone is so different. Some people will end up being hungry less if they break up their day into tiny meals throughout the entire day, some people can wake up and not be hungry until 3 or 4 pm. And everything inbetween.
The main reason why IF works is because it aids in reducing appetite, which in turn leads to reduced calories. That's the point of going on IF. If you equate the calories - of course you are not going see the weight-loss benefits (compared to reduced calorie diet).
It makes sense if you are not hungry in the morning. The mindset of "fasting" prevents you from consuming unnecessary calories and even might save you some time.
Glad to the results of this study. My body can handle IF and I hate when some youtube doctors act like it has to be part of the medical treatment when dealing with certain medical issues.
2 meals per day, Low carb, mostly carnivore works best for me for maintaining weight. No calorie counting. Roughly 14-16 hour fasting period most days.
Losing carbs helped me eat more protein, i was not getting enough protein at all. I do intentioned fasting some days of the week, and the meals other days, with a 24 hour period where i don't eat. Gives me more time to go for a walk during my work day. But i think for me cycling the eating window is the best. Keeps my energy up and I'm losing weight.
Very interesting and topical for me. First, because I recently started following IF. Not because I was looking to lose weight or restrict calories. Rather, because I listened to a podcast with a scientist who discussed the research supporting its benefits for brain health and preventing cognitive degeneration as we age. Second, as a coach, I always tell my clients that calories are king when it comes to weight loss and that there’s nothing magical about any particular diet out there. Pick the one that works best for your lifestyle and food preferences.
Disagree. Why do people burn more fat and others store more fat? Because when you eat and what you eat are as important as how many calories you eat. Why? Because even though calories are important, your hormones determine what your body does with those calories. Some foods trigger different hormones and some people can increase the CO of CICO more hardcore. Your body is a complex thermodynamic system, not some sort of scale that says, 'you must absolutely eat 2100 calories. Any more and you will gain weight. Any less and you will continually lose.' CICO is the gun but hormones pull the trigger. This is why someone eating 2500 calories can be torching fat while others on a strict, 1100 calorie diet are stalling big time. Case in point. I was always gaining weight usually eating between 1600-1800 calories on an average. When I tried keto, I was told to increase my calories to 2200! I ended up losing MORE fat in a FASTER time then when I was eating a high carb diet before. So hormones are very important because you have no idea how many calories your body will really store or burn on a given day.
I just enjoy the challenge and mental toughness of fasting. Yes, it’s helped me lose weight and keep it off over the past 2 years, but that pales in comparison to the satisfaction I get from overcoming something outside my comfort zone, and show more appreciation for the food I eat. I feel humans have gotten too comfortable in modern times, and need to be humbled in some form.
Great breakdown. I appreciate you doing the heavy lifting in these studies for the average Joe. Would love to see another study where cortisol levels are measured to ascertain how stress is managed with the two strategies. Thank you for your work!
I feel like fasting slows your metabolism down. I used to be able to eat more calories without gaining weight when I was “fueling the fire” rather than having just one or two big meals while fasting. Just my personal experience with it though idk if any kind of studies agree with this
Yes, I have seen fitness guys showing studies on how your body adapts to lower calorie intake and makes you spend less energy in Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis (NEAT) in order to compensate for eating less. Check out Jeff Nippard or Jeremy Ethier on this topic.
As a volume eater, eating one meal at night makes me feel more satiated with the same calories and simply makes it easier for me to stay at maintenance. It's also convenient for my lifestyle.
I sometimes use OMAD to drop a couple of kilos quickly when I feel like things are getting out of control. It works very well but is very difficult to adhere to long term
It is an interesting study in terms of physics but pointless when it comes to behaveral recommendations. A better study design would be, to look if group a vs group b lose more fat mass with IF over a time period compared to not IF or to specific forms of diets, if that would be your goal. But the study shows: if you run a prison, you can feed the people whenever and how often you like.
Excellent video! I do intermittent fasting only because its a lot easier for me then eating small meal all day, but some people claim about intermittent fasting are ridiculous.
IF by not eating breakfast makes me overeat on junk later on the day. I noticed that eating a good breakfast with legumes and vegerables/ fruits helps me snack and eat junk food way less. So that's what I'll stick with.
14-15 hr is underdosing the intervention. Of course it's not going to work when compared to a longer period isocalorically. 15hr won't get your insulin low enough for long enough for you to actually enter ketosis and break down fat, therefore any weight loss benefit you can get from it could only be the result of calorie restriction. And calorie restriction while insulin is moderate to high means lowering your metabolic set point (see e.g. Biggest Loser study that Jason Fung talks about) making weight loss harder to maintain after your leptin and ghrelin snap back like a rubber band.
Idk my chiro taught me how to use myfitness pal, track macros, how to progressive overload my workouts, and did a great job using evidence based tools. He also gave me resources like layne to look into. Idk maybe don’t throw all of them under the bus as a general absolute statement. If it weren’t for my chiro idk what path I would be down, my MD at the time just told me to stop deadlifting and said I shouldn’t be consuming red meat. 🤷🏻♂️
@@johncip I’m not sure. I may have. The only confirmation I need is the reflection in the mirror and the numbers on the scale. So many variables unconsidered by the trial it seems inconclusive to me.
Both ways work good for managing calories but I will say IF works well for me because it’s easier to manage calories and hunger also I don’t feel so bloated all the time it makes me feel lighter during the day and I can be more active
Q if you happen to see this one day: I know it's been proven that there's pretty much zero health benefits of IF vs regular caloric restriction on your channel, but what about hunger? Does IF cause people to be less hungry in general vs eating throughout the day? Genuinely curious
I like human randomized control trials like this. It shows what Dr. Norton has been saying all along. I follow my own protocol of TRF OMAD twice a week and TRF 16/8 maybe once a week, but I used to do 16/8 every day and OMAD twice a week prior to listening to Dr. Norton. Six years ago, my primary focus was fat loss, and the Keto diet helped with that tremendously. After living overweight for most of my adult life, Keto seemed like the answer- and sure enough it worked. That said, I can also tell you that I was in a caloric deficit and incorporated regular strength training into my weekly routine for the first time. Today, my focus has changed from fat loss to adding muscle, and I do not want to hinder muscle growth. The reason I still do OMAD is because they are the days I get to eat a lot at dinner time and yet still not exceed my basal metabolic rate :). I also have experienced multiple times where fasting helps prevent bloat and/or water retention in the cells, especially around the midsection. I can see more vascularity while on a fast. Of course, it is only temporary and after I eat that effect goes away for the most part.
Skiping breakfast was good for me. I feel more focused, and I tend to eat less. Plus, I'm less stressed now as I have more time to go to work and fewer choices to make. I've never had something that worked so well for me, I'm losing weight and I can't eat as much. I think he's right, we have to find what is easier for us as a lifestyle. I don't feel like I have to eat all the time, I don't even like that. I prefer fewer times, slow and calm.
I did IF for about a few weeks. I went from 88 kg to 82 kg... 16 to 18h fasts and a 1 hr walk on each fast cycle. I could only drink green tea and black coffee... but oh boy, it wasn't pleasant. When you're working in front of a computer and the hunger pangs set in, it gets brutal really fast. I not only felt hungry but I felt weak. Probably not doing that again
Good study . IF 16/8 & OMAD helped me loose 14 kg with ease and get shredded at almost 40 ys , after years of a plateau. It's just much easier for me to keep a caloric deficit and not overeat . It's ease to adhere and my hunger disappears during my windows i'm not used to eat . And i feel much less bloated rather than eating more frequent. I love and feel better doing cardio / sports fasted state. ( though i prefer a good meal for anaerobic activity like weight lifting ) . So i think it's a great tool people should try out , if other diet models didn't work out for them like it happened to me.
What an incredible adherence, damn! Great study...so basically it doesn't really matter in regards to fat loss and some health markers. That one in terms of reduced movement was on my mind for a while now and I used it as a possibility for when people stuff themselves with like OMAD or very short eating windows, cool that they measured that.
One study does not make things gospel. There are many other studies done (A few most recently on using the 16: 8 IF protocol) that show considerable differences in other areas and health markers in favour of IF. You can cherry pick any study to make it support what you like (That saturated fat causes heart disease for example). What does the weight of the evidence say?
Good to know that there isn't a significant difference, as I use IF to stick to my planned overall daily cals/macros intake (I find it quite easy to not eat until noon, and stop eating after 7pm), but also 'break' IF on my gym/wt training days (3x/wk) when I do the gym session 9-10pm and then have a protein shake afterwards. But while this study focuses on the impact of IF on wt loss and insulin/glucose, there are also 'supposed' to be benefits from IF around triggering autophagy -- which might help with both 'loose skin' mitigation during/after wt loss, and reducing cell senescence and extending lifespan and/or healthspan. Probably be a long time before we get any decent empirical data on that, as both effects are over the long term, so hard to get a study with compliance and a control group to participate (or be funded) for the length of time that would be required (12 weeks wouldn't tell you anything). ps. the best benefit of IF for me was to make it easy to avoid 'snacking' after dinner or between meals -- my lifelong overweight issue was mostly due to indulging in snacks, dessert, lollies etc. "between meals" -- by three main meals per day were actually quite healthy and wouldn't have led to weight gain by themselves.
I think of fasting as a way of getting into a habbit of eating less which is a major benefit Simply skipping dinner will help you eat less as you dont notice the hunger when your asleep, you sleep better due to not having to digest heavy food while lying down and sleeping and you tend to eat healthier foods
The major problem I see in this study is that they used a 10-hour window. Intermitente fasting should be above 16 hours. They need to redo it if they are really interested in relevant findings.
Based on my review of numerous videos and studies, I’ve come to understand that intermittent fasting (IF) functions as a versatile tool, with its effectiveness largely determined by the duration of the fast. In my view, the length of the fasting window plays a critical role in shaping the metabolic outcomes. For example, a typical 16:8 fasting schedule-where you fast for 16 hours and eat during an 8-hour window-primarily serves as a caloric deficit tool. After just a few days, fasting leads to a natural suppression of ghrelin, the hunger hormone, which reduces appetite and makes it easier to consume fewer calories. This caloric restriction helps foster weight loss. However, when the fasting window is extended beyond this, and assuming physical activity levels are maintained, intermittent fasting transitions into a more potent fat-burning tool. The longer fast, in this context, enhances fat oxidation and may trigger physiological changes that promote fat loss more effectively than shorter fasting windows. Thus, IF can serve different functions depending on how it is applied and how long the fasting period is sustained.
8am to 6pm feeding window is what I normally do… IF is approx 12pm to 6pm window. It’s all individual anyways. Calories in seems to rule no matter what.
I'm a carbon diet coach subscriber, and I'm unsure if there is any way to account for this, but man water retention throws off everything. Here is currently what I'm doing: - 6 days a week to lifting (ppl*2) - walking 8-10k steps per day - Carbon has me on 2200ish calories, which I adhere to. I track all my calories and prep my own food. I am 6 foot 1 and 200 pounds. This week I have gained nearly 4 pounds and I have no idea how. I know Carbon is going to want to lower my calories, but I really don't think that's the issue. I think, because it's summer time and I'm drinking more water, that this is merely water weight. Not sure how to go about weighing myself as I do it early in the morning consistently.
I believe there are some studies showing people down regulating their neat, while simultaneously reporting increased neat (reporting that they are moving more), while wearing an accelerometer showing that they down regulated their neat by an extremely large amount. But they thought they were moving more because they did a little bit of exercise in the morning, or some such. People start exercise, feel wonderful about themselves tell the world, report to researchers that they’re moving all the time because they have memories of themselves exercising. But their hypothalamus takes over and they move less, extremely unbeknownst to themselves.
I wish there was a magical formula for weight loss and better health but it always seems to come down to being in a calorie deficit. For those of us that struggle with appetite and portion control it's a brutal reality.
So basically if youre super slim and have very low body fat and are unhealthy theres no way to get healthy apart from a calorie deficit and losing even more weight?
@@Macgee826 If you are super slim with low body fat why would you need to be in a calorie deficit? You would obviously have other issues that need to be addressed.
@@Macgee826 If you are overweight like me absolutely. Every one of my ailments is tied to being overweight and the only way to lose it is being in a calorie deficit. Doesn't matter what I eat or when, if I'm not in a deficit I'm not losing weight. Sadly, that is the equation. If you are super slim already you've got other issues as they aren't weight dependent.
Thank you for staying intellectually honest about this. Yes, intermittent fasting helps users lose weight, but it is due to a reduction in calories and has nothing to do with insulin.
Stop eating for 12 weeks and I guarantee you’ll lose weight. Then eat only carbs for 12 weeks without letting your insulin drop low enough to allow fat oxidation and you’ll gain weight. The details of this study are weak at best. There’s no reference to how many calories they were eating what the macros were how much exercise they were limited to what their baseline insulin levels were fasting insulin or any other important markers for fasting and fat oxidation. This video reads like a tabloid magazine
If you blood glucose spikes insulin will drive it down and if you like me i will be starving in about two hours. If I eat low carb, I don't get a spike and it keeps insulin low and I can go 24 hours without eating again that is how I can eat less calories than I used to and not be hungry all day. Hunger always wins so keep that insulin low and become insulin sensitive.
@@jackiesmith-nq8in 💯 agreed. While you might eat less I personally believe that a calorie saved is a calorie earned. Like money, stored calories shouldn’t be discounted when it comes to intake.
One problem is that some people's adherence is to overeating, leading to a high prevalence of obesity. Without effective methods to limit intake or increase physical activity, we leave it up to chance or habit, resulting in poor outcomes. None of these tools are magic bullets. What intermittent fasting does is set parameters, similar to those we have for our workday, study time, and gym time. When we adhere to those, we see results. Oftentimes, when a person doesn't set aside a specific time to complete a task, it doesn't get done. Even using the Carbon Diet Coach requires adherence. If you don't take the time to accurately input the necessary data, your results will likely be poor. This is primarily because you're once again leaving it to chance that you probably hit your macros and consumed the allotted amount of calories.
I really like Dr Layne Norton's takeaway, and it's the same takeaway I would have: IF can potentially be a great tool for weight loss if it happens to work for you, and at the same time, I have become more wary of claims that IF provides unique health benefits not seen in a more simple calorie restriction protocol. I think for the research to be more conclusive, we would need to look at other protocols such as a smaller feeding windows and fasts where a few days a week you fast the whole day. The timing for the feeding window also adds an additional variable, although my feeling is that it's not particularly significant, especially if we would hypothetically expect morning feedings to be better and didn't see that in this study. In general, I would say that this is a mark against the idea that any IF protocol somehow provides unique health benefits (with more research needed for other IF protocols). This absolutely makes me apprehensive about making claims about unique health benefits for larger feeding windows as seen in this study.
I F made me eat more total calories per day for some reason I eat less in total for the day if I eat a big breakfast and find it easy to stay in calorie deficit state
@@hanskazan7403 . Bro 😎 each to their own to stay consistent If I fast until 1pm for example and my calorie intake target is 3000 I tend to eat my first meal and then still feel hungry and eat rubbish high calorie foods and struggle to stay under 3000 deficit If I eat huge 800 cal breakfast at about 9am I tend to not be hungry again until about 3 or 4pm and find it easy to stay under the 3000 calorie limit . And I’m 95kg under 10% bf all year around from eating this way All the best bro
It all makes sense when you look at it from an energy perspective, which is why athletes eat carbs for what they are about to do. Intermittent fasting may be Better if it was centered around exercise needs. Then the spontaneous drop in activity would not be as big a problem.
I like to fast just because it gives me a mental break from thinking about food. Humans waste so much mental energy thinking about what we are gonna eat and every now and then it's nice to just say fuck it.
I still do IF for the practicality and effectiveness of limiting calories in my day. Fewer opportunities, fewer unsatiated hunger states. It's just a caloric restriction behavioral tool for me which allows me to still eat dinner with my family and young children. It's too bad that a lot of the "magic" hope put into fasting has been deflated but it's STILL the only caloric restriction tool that works for me.
I do IF because eating smaller meals doesn't satisfy me and I end up eating more. But if I eat a large portion in 1 to 1.5 hours between 4 pm to 6 pm. I will be full the entire day. Tried it for 2 years and even tried going back to regular meals for several weeks. I calculate that if i eat 3 meals a day, I actually eat nearly 500 to 1000 calories more than just 1 big meal. So yeah IF is basically calorie restriction for me.... Just an easier one.
I think there really isn't a debate whether IF or general caloric restriction is better for weight loss if you are at the same caloric deficit in both. I believe the question is more about does keeping the body at a constant state of ketosis (which is generally achieved via 16-18 hours of fasting minimum) promote fat burning more effectively than general caloric deficit. Mind you, I am not a strict proponent of IF or think it's the only solution. Everyone should do what works best for them and IF works for a lot of people as you said. But to be fair I don't think this study addresses the ketosis aspect of IF. IF is just another way of assuring caloric defecit if done under 16 - 18 hours. There should be nothing different about it anyways. The interesting metabolic debate starts when fasting exceeds the 16-18 hour mark and presumably ketosis kicks in.
The only eason I do intermittent fasting is I spontaneously reduce my calorie intake. The reason for that is I have a problem with snacking, if I have long periods of the day where I can't snack it helps a lot
Did anyone actually beleive that intermittent fasting, while on the same caloric intake, would result in fat loss? I don't beleive to have ever heard that argument. I started intermittent fasting as a tool to make being on a calorie deficit much easier.
For me, eating between 8.00 and 18.00 is not really intermittent fasting. It is how I had been eating most of my life and never really lost any weight. I started to lose weight when I began to eat 2 (large) meals per day. First one is my breakfast, second & last one is around 1PM / 2PM. I do not think it was about calories (I never really ate too much of calories), but finally - my body started to use my fat as fuel, as for 18-20 hours per day no insulin spikes in my blood diverted it from using it... I guess the study should go for 6-8 feeding window to see the real impact...
Who says it magically makes calories not matter? Caloric deficiency is literally equivalent to weight loss, excluding water/salt/glucose balance and food passing through ones bowels. Which is why the dismissal of the feeding behaviour in the beginning is misguided. Feeding behaviour clearly matters, even if this study also seems useful in isolating it.
Nothing wrong with fasting if it's your preferred method to lose weight. It's no more or less effective than any other mode of energy deficit. If you want to retain muscle however...
It’s really good for people who are habitual snackers, especially the OMAD variant. It’s hard to eat enough calories to gain weight in one sitting with whole foods. It can be hard even with crappy food sometimes. I found it hard to get in enough food for my goals. I was surprised that I wasn’t hungry after a week or so of doing it. But it ultimately wasn’t for me. It was really nice only preparing one meal and having one round of dishes to wash up though.
We all know CICO is how weight loss works. Would be more helpful to have a video addressing the autophagy, growth hormone, etc potential benefits of fasting. Maybe there is a video already?
IF (and low carb but not really Keto) is working for me cause I will tend to eat more per day otherwise. At night I would snack, or eat an extra meal or whatever. And IF keeps me focused on eating healthy when I do eat because I have a game plan and goals to stick to. The issue that I had when I did it 5 years ago was that it was really effective and got almost too thin, but after 5 months I didnt stick with it anymore and gained the weight back, so I may need to figure out a new game plan if I can't stick with it.
IF isn't just about calories and losing weight. As a person that had his immune system crumble after a disease that took a toll on all aspects of my health I can assure you, it has a lot more health benefits than just getting rid of those extra pounds. I've been monitored by a dietician and a doctor, put on meds and told that there was low probability of me gaining full health again, changing my diet, not utterly focusing on fat percentage or vanity gains or listening to some UA-cam "doctors", has restored me to about 90% health. Quitting alcohol all together, adopting a plant based diet (still eating dairy for important nutrients) and taking natural supplements tried and tested by eastern medicine has restored my life to the better. Any UA-camr using a "Dr." in their channel name are usually quacks, especially if they bash other Dr. UA-camrs or methods, it's usually done for views. Some methods and advices are all good and well, just be aware of those "Doctors"
Oh yes... Any "Dr. UA-camr" that is trying to sell you an app or any supplements, making bold statements for views or citing some singular "scientific studies" backing his views, without citing other studies, is usually cherry picking for his own information bias.
Seems like there are plenty of respected doctors (Dr. Satchin Panda, Dr. Valter Longo etc) who have done plenty of research in this area that show benefits to some form of fasting. This study's 10 hour eating window is kind of a joke - that is not fasting, that's a normal diet. However, the degree to which it helps seems to be miniscule compared to the main lever you pull in just restricting calories - which is much easier to do if you do intermittent fasting. Whatever works for you is what works, I guess. Eating tiny unsatisfying meals throughout the day, dealing with all the cooking/prep and cleanup, while working a job and having other responsibilities sounds like it would be harder to stick to than 2 meals or whatever a day. That's just me though.
How does this correlate to the time restricted feeding window study by Dr Satchin Panda (seen in interview w Dr Rhonda Patrick, discussed about 40min in)? My understanding was that the IF mice gained less fat and increased lean mass more than the mice that eat whenever they want (calories equated), does this new study cover body composition results or just the weight changes? Genuinely curious, thank you!
Caloric deficiency is a key without doubt and Int. Fasting can aid that. Moreover, there are other health benefits of fasting compared to regular eating that shouldn't be ignored, such as reversing prediabetes.
@@ladagspa2008 You do understand that everyone is "fasting" for 8h when they sleep, since they don't eat on that timeframe? However most bodies won't get trained to even produce enough ketones, if the general fasting windows aren't long enough to begin with. So I'd argue they don't really do fasting if they eat more than once a day.
IF does work well for me, but I have always understood it is a tool that works better for me because of my psychology. I have always found it easier to not eat at all versus trying to eat just a little and then stop. I also have a huge appetite and with "normal" size meals rarely feel satiated. With IF I can eat larger meals, feel more satiated, but still eat less over the day.
@albundy3929 Your body is meant to feast and famine. Your body can handle any amount of protein any time. Have you ever heard of competitive eating? The RDA of protein is 50 grams per day that's it. Your body either needs the protein or it doesn't its that simple. Your body only stores carbs and fats it never stores protein. It's almost impossible to not get enough protein a day in any developed country because even plants have protein.
@@albundy3929 i eat 200 gram protein in a 8 hour eating window
I'd never had normal bloodglucose till I started IF, it'd always been much higher. I basically eat the same amount of food, AND the same food as if I didn't do IF, yet here I am, losing weight, having a relatively good blood picture, and I could go on. I'm not saying it's magic, but how is this possible then? 🤔 I'd really like to know. Is it the placebo effect?
Well, as long as it works for me, I won't stop. 😅 But it'd be good to know how this is possible if it doesn't do anything.
@@ivan7dora My best guess would be that you are consuming less calories but don't realize it, and if you are losing weight then that would more than likely explain your improved blood glucose.
This is me too but since I workout in the early morning I'm not sure how smart is it to wait so long to eat. Otherwise I'd be on one meal a day. Definitely a night eater!
This study seems to confirm that intermittent fasting isn't magic but a good tool. I used it for over 5 years to help maintain my weight when I used the technique to originally to lose weight. It made sense to me and my brain liked having specific times when to eat and when not to eat. I switched over to more smaller meals a day as I started to work out and I wanted to spread my protein over a longer period of time and that works for me as well
This study had no subjects who actually fasted at all. It means nothing and proves nothing.
Exactly the same way my eating evolved as well brother
@@joelnye6399no true IF
I really hate this bullshit but and I hate to admit that yeah - what helps me maintain is simply having no dinner but only very light either oats or a protein shake after 2pm.
If it causes people to spontaneously reduce intake without proportionally impacting hunger, this will be referred to as "magic" by many people who previously struggled. It's a figurative expression, not meant as "DnD is actually real guys, go find a wizard!!"
The last 5 minutes are super important. If it works for you, that's all that matters
what so special about the last 5 minutes?
@@artemikethe app pitch?
I think the reason the health industry constantly rags on intermittent fasting, is that it's free. There is no way to make money off of someone doing it.
I still attribute a large part of my weight loss success to IF. Worked like magic for me 😅. 25 kg in 4 mos.
Even gandalf would be impressed with fastings power.
Started a month ago with intermittent fasting. So far it gives me good result. Especially my brain seems to like it; my concentration is better and also energy levels are better throughout the day.
Maybe it also have to do with less stress in the morning routine. I always prepared healthy meals in the morning, so had to reserve half an hour for that incl eating it. Now have an hour free time to go for a walk or something.
And that's the most important thing; it makes me feel good and there are too many variables for that to measure.
Yo Layne,
Thanks for inspiring me. I remember watching some of your videos many years ago and remember not liking you because you said something I perceived as negative about low-carb diets. I had just started on a ketogenic diet at that time, hah. I recently finished my bachelor's in nutrition and health, where I did an extended course in quantitative statistics by choice, lol.
I've been watching some of your videos lately and realized that the reason I didn't like them before was because I didn't fully understand empiricism and how to analyze and use quantitative studies. But anyway, you probably won't read this, so I'm gonna cut the story short and just say: Watching your videos recently has sparked my interest in nutritional and fitness coaching again, and I just wanted to thanks, and thank you for doing what you do.
@4:40 Doc, the results do not "cancel" each other out, as 3 out of 4 favour time restricted eating (TRE)! The most important parameter is HOMA-IR which directly checks Insulin Resistance. The study shows that this categorically decreases with TRE towards the safe range below 2.5. Thus TRE is better for IR individuals, who are most at risk for diabetes.
Fasting does work for me, it helps me eat less, and control my calories even better, its not for everyone, after a week i do not crave sugar anymore, and i eat far less. But there is no magic there, you still need caloric deficiency, its like anything fasting plus calorie surplus you will gain weight and fat.
So you are lean and maintain it
That is the whole point and why fasting is a gimmick.
@@donwinston fasting isn't a gimmick really, just terribly over hyped.
I did IF for a while. Lost a chunk of weight. Not because I think some IF voodoo working on hormones or blood sugar. Just that I more easily fell into a calorie deficit with it. Long-term, IF wasn't sustainable for me and social desires. I've since moved to a balanced, non-time-restricted approach (using Carbon Coach by the way!). To your point, find what works for you and what gets you into a calories deficit if weight loss is goal so that you can stick with it.
Question : did you put back on some weight after IF…not that it’s a bad thing…it’s your preference …just curious to know if your weight increased?
@@Swoop2565 If you consume the same amount of calories its doesnt matter if you do IF or not. So if you diet and do IF, then stay at maintanance calories u should not expect serious weight gain with or without IF
@@Pellegrino1exactly what I was gonna say.
Yeah, worked for me for a period, then it didn't. Had to move onto a plan that sped up digestion. I do have borderline hypothyroidism, which too meant I really needed to speed up digestion
@@Swoop2565 Hi there - My weight didn't increase when I switched from IF to balanced diet. I was worried about that! As part of the switch, I started using an app to track calories to maintain a calorie deficit as part of weight loss goals. After time using that app, I switched to Dr. Layne's app for tracking. Once I reach my weight loss goals, I'll use the balanced diet and calorie tracking for maintenance. I've been able to drop 25% of my body weight.
People can quibble about the specific parameters of this study, but the bottomline is if there was a hugely beneficial impact to TRE or "Circandian Clock" eating it would show up SOMEWHERE in the outcome data. If you need absolutely perfect specific parameters to see any sort of outcome effect, it's just not very powerful.
Did they even look at lipids?
@@Seanonyoutube there have been studies that Layne and others have shared in the past that showed no difference in lipid panels.
Jason Fung's claims about intermittent fasting fixing obesity and lipids seem to be pretty much debunked. It sucks because I followed intermittent fasting for years and now giving it up because it doesn't seem to be any better than plain calorie restriction.
@@mementomori29231 i stick to intermittent fasting and OMAD with great success since years. Why ? it's just much easier FOR ME to keep a caloric deficit and not overeat. My hunger is non existent in the windows i usually not eat. Traditional diets with more frequent meal = i personally get more hungry all the time and i get more chances to make errors with more frequent meals . Recently i also challenge myself with a 3 days fast = i actually lost fat mass and kept it off, without loosing muscle ( or well at least my strength stayed exactly the same ) . But yhea stick to what feels and works good for you .
@@mementomori29231 it can still have other benefits like improved sleep quality, or even lower long term risk of cancer. not everything comes down to just a couple of blood tests. The takeaway for me is to find a sustainable pattern that works for the individual while still providing adequate time for digestion before bed.
IMO the main benefits of intermittent fasting are limiting how many times you spike your insulin per day, and tricking yourself into eating less. The 2nd one doesn't work for everyone, but the insulin benefit still remains.
I think people are arguing about it in the wrong way. Strictly speaking intermittent fasting does NOT help you lose weight, i.e. if you have the same amount of caloric intake while intermittent fasting vs. not it won't have a different result - it isn't a magic wand. But if a certain schedule of eating can trick you into eating less.. then it sort of does help you lose weight. This is a pretty hard thing to research/prove though since everyone is so different. Some people will end up being hungry less if they break up their day into tiny meals throughout the entire day, some people can wake up and not be hungry until 3 or 4 pm. And everything inbetween.
The main reason why IF works is because it aids in reducing appetite, which in turn leads to reduced calories. That's the point of going on IF. If you equate the calories - of course you are not going see the weight-loss benefits (compared to reduced calorie diet).
I’ve been doing intermittent fasting for 9 years now 😊
It makes sense if you are not hungry in the morning. The mindset of "fasting" prevents you from consuming unnecessary calories and even might save you some time.
Glad to the results of this study. My body can handle IF and I hate when some youtube doctors act like it has to be part of the medical treatment when dealing with certain medical issues.
Congrats on 400k
2 meals per day, Low carb, mostly carnivore works best for me for maintaining weight. No calorie counting. Roughly 14-16 hour fasting period most days.
Ditto. Getting to this for maintenence was my challenge. Dropping weight initially was pretty easy.
Same here 💪 best I have felt in years.
What carbs do you eat? I’m trying out fruits for now.
Losing carbs helped me eat more protein, i was not getting enough protein at all. I do intentioned fasting some days of the week, and the meals other days, with a 24 hour period where i don't eat. Gives me more time to go for a walk during my work day. But i think for me cycling the eating window is the best. Keeps my energy up and I'm losing weight.
Very interesting and topical for me. First, because I recently started following IF. Not because I was looking to lose weight or restrict calories. Rather, because I listened to a podcast with a scientist who discussed the research supporting its benefits for brain health and preventing cognitive degeneration as we age. Second, as a coach, I always tell my clients that calories are king when it comes to weight loss and that there’s nothing magical about any particular diet out there. Pick the one that works best for your lifestyle and food preferences.
Disagree. Why do people burn more fat and others store more fat? Because when you eat and what you eat are as important as how many calories you eat. Why? Because even though calories are important, your hormones determine what your body does with those calories. Some foods trigger different hormones and some people can increase the CO of CICO more hardcore. Your body is a complex thermodynamic system, not some sort of scale that says, 'you must absolutely eat 2100 calories. Any more and you will gain weight. Any less and you will continually lose.' CICO is the gun but hormones pull the trigger. This is why someone eating 2500 calories can be torching fat while others on a strict, 1100 calorie diet are stalling big time. Case in point. I was always gaining weight usually eating between 1600-1800 calories on an average. When I tried keto, I was told to increase my calories to 2200! I ended up losing MORE fat in a FASTER time then when I was eating a high carb diet before. So hormones are very important because you have no idea how many calories your body will really store or burn on a given day.
If IF works for you, do it. For most, time restriction is a good tool because it creates the necessary boundary. But yep, it's no magic bullet
I just enjoy the challenge and mental toughness of fasting. Yes, it’s helped me lose weight and keep it off over the past 2 years, but that pales in comparison to the satisfaction I get from overcoming something outside my comfort zone, and show more appreciation for the food I eat. I feel humans have gotten too comfortable in modern times, and need to be humbled in some form.
Great breakdown. I appreciate you doing the heavy lifting in these studies for the average Joe.
Would love to see another study where cortisol levels are measured to ascertain how stress is managed with the two strategies.
Thank you for your work!
I love this guy! He doesn't take any sides, integrity!
Oh, please. He always takes side and uses only the studies that support his theories. Pretty much what every diet and fitness influencer does.
I feel like fasting slows your metabolism down. I used to be able to eat more calories without gaining weight when I was “fueling the fire” rather than having just one or two big meals while fasting. Just my personal experience with it though idk if any kind of studies agree with this
I agree. It sets you up to store body fat.
Yes, I have seen fitness guys showing studies on how your body adapts to lower calorie intake and makes you spend less energy in Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis (NEAT) in order to compensate for eating less. Check out Jeff Nippard or Jeremy Ethier on this topic.
Yes. Thank you. Honestly, whatever helps you get to healthy eating, do it.
As a volume eater, eating one meal at night makes me feel more satiated with the same calories and simply makes it easier for me to stay at maintenance. It's also convenient for my lifestyle.
"Diet agnostic". Gonna use that.
Same
I sometimes use OMAD to drop a couple of kilos quickly when I feel like things are getting out of control. It works very well but is very difficult to adhere to long term
The hook is always at the end!! MY APP!!!!
It is an interesting study in terms of physics but pointless when it comes to behaveral recommendations. A better study design would be, to look if group a vs group b lose more fat mass with IF over a time period compared to not IF or to specific forms of diets, if that would be your goal. But the study shows: if you run a prison, you can feed the people whenever and how often you like.
Excellent video! I do intermittent fasting only because its a lot easier for me then eating small meal all day, but some people claim about intermittent fasting are ridiculous.
Which claims in particular are ridiculous?
@@Macgee826 have you watch the video?
@@superyouinc4033 im asking you though or do you just take laynes word on everything?
@@Macgee826 No I don't take Laynes word on everything but I don't care to debate with you.
@@superyouinc4033 thats cool,all i hear when layne speaks is blah blah blah!
IF by not eating breakfast makes me overeat on junk later on the day. I noticed that eating a good breakfast with legumes and vegerables/ fruits helps me snack and eat junk food way less. So that's what I'll stick with.
14-15 hr is underdosing the intervention. Of course it's not going to work when compared to a longer period isocalorically. 15hr won't get your insulin low enough for long enough for you to actually enter ketosis and break down fat, therefore any weight loss benefit you can get from it could only be the result of calorie restriction. And calorie restriction while insulin is moderate to high means lowering your metabolic set point (see e.g. Biggest Loser study that Jason Fung talks about) making weight loss harder to maintain after your leptin and ghrelin snap back like a rubber band.
But doctors of chiropractic are nutrition experts.
You're assuming these quacks are even doctors 💀
LOL
the best of them is now retired Russel Oneill he is great at screwing up your body and lying when you complain about is malpractice.
Idk my chiro taught me how to use myfitness pal, track macros, how to progressive overload my workouts, and did a great job using evidence based tools. He also gave me resources like layne to look into. Idk maybe don’t throw all of them under the bus as a general absolute statement. If it weren’t for my chiro idk what path I would be down, my MD at the time just told me to stop deadlifting and said I shouldn’t be consuming red meat. 🤷🏻♂️
Chiros can be knowledgeable and helpful, it just won't be BECAUSE they're chiros.
They should have also reported on fat loss not just weight loss
So much we Don’t know about this trial that could explain the non-result. I’m sticking with IF, Fung and Berg!
Wise man!
If the study's results had confirmed your existing beliefs, would you still have said "so much we don't know about this trial?"
@@johncip I’m not sure. I may have. The only confirmation I need is the reflection in the mirror and the numbers on the scale. So many variables unconsidered by the trial it seems inconclusive to me.
Great study. I do IF because it’s easier for me to maintain my calorie intake rather then eat throughout the day 👍
10 hours is not time restricted feeding. It just isn’t.
Both ways work good for managing calories but I will say IF works well for me because it’s easier to manage calories and hunger also I don’t feel so bloated all the time it makes me feel lighter during the day and I can be more active
Fascinating study thanks for shedding light on it!!!!
Q if you happen to see this one day: I know it's been proven that there's pretty much zero health benefits of IF vs regular caloric restriction on your channel, but what about hunger? Does IF cause people to be less hungry in general vs eating throughout the day? Genuinely curious
I like human randomized control trials like this. It shows what Dr. Norton has been saying all along. I follow my own protocol of TRF OMAD twice a week and TRF 16/8 maybe once a week, but I used to do 16/8 every day and OMAD twice a week prior to listening to Dr. Norton.
Six years ago, my primary focus was fat loss, and the Keto diet helped with that tremendously. After living overweight for most of my adult life, Keto seemed like the answer- and sure enough it worked. That said, I can also tell you that I was in a caloric deficit and incorporated regular strength training into my weekly routine for the first time.
Today, my focus has changed from fat loss to adding muscle, and I do not want to hinder muscle growth. The reason I still do OMAD is because they are the days I get to eat a lot at dinner time and yet still not exceed my basal metabolic rate :). I also have experienced multiple times where fasting helps prevent bloat and/or water retention in the cells, especially around the midsection. I can see more vascularity while on a fast. Of course, it is only temporary and after I eat that effect goes away for the most part.
Love the content and the info as always , thank you 🙏
Skiping breakfast was good for me. I feel more focused, and I tend to eat less. Plus, I'm less stressed now as I have more time to go to work and fewer choices to make. I've never had something that worked so well for me, I'm losing weight and I can't eat as much.
I think he's right, we have to find what is easier for us as a lifestyle. I don't feel like I have to eat all the time, I don't even like that. I prefer fewer times, slow and calm.
autophagy can begin after how many hours fasting
I did IF for about a few weeks. I went from 88 kg to 82 kg... 16 to 18h fasts and a 1 hr walk on each fast cycle. I could only drink green tea and black coffee... but oh boy, it wasn't pleasant.
When you're working in front of a computer and the hunger pangs set in, it gets brutal really fast. I not only felt hungry but I felt weak.
Probably not doing that again
@@thx500 best leaving it to the ones who feel energised in a fasted state🤙
Good study . IF 16/8 & OMAD helped me loose 14 kg with ease and get shredded at almost 40 ys , after years of a plateau. It's just much easier for me to keep a caloric deficit and not overeat . It's ease to adhere and my hunger disappears during my windows i'm not used to eat . And i feel much less bloated rather than eating more frequent. I love and feel better doing cardio / sports fasted state. ( though i prefer a good meal for anaerobic activity like weight lifting ) . So i think it's a great tool people should try out , if other diet models didn't work out for them like it happened to me.
What an incredible adherence, damn! Great study...so basically it doesn't really matter in regards to fat loss and some health markers. That one in terms of reduced movement was on my mind for a while now and I used it as a possibility for when people stuff themselves with like OMAD or very short eating windows, cool that they measured that.
One study does not make things gospel. There are many other studies done (A few most recently on using the 16: 8 IF protocol) that show considerable differences in other areas and health markers in favour of IF. You can cherry pick any study to make it support what you like (That saturated fat causes heart disease for example). What does the weight of the evidence say?
Good to know that there isn't a significant difference, as I use IF to stick to my planned overall daily cals/macros intake (I find it quite easy to not eat until noon, and stop eating after 7pm), but also 'break' IF on my gym/wt training days (3x/wk) when I do the gym session 9-10pm and then have a protein shake afterwards. But while this study focuses on the impact of IF on wt loss and insulin/glucose, there are also 'supposed' to be benefits from IF around triggering autophagy -- which might help with both 'loose skin' mitigation during/after wt loss, and reducing cell senescence and extending lifespan and/or healthspan. Probably be a long time before we get any decent empirical data on that, as both effects are over the long term, so hard to get a study with compliance and a control group to participate (or be funded) for the length of time that would be required (12 weeks wouldn't tell you anything).
ps. the best benefit of IF for me was to make it easy to avoid 'snacking' after dinner or between meals -- my lifelong overweight issue was mostly due to indulging in snacks, dessert, lollies etc. "between meals" -- by three main meals per day were actually quite healthy and wouldn't have led to weight gain by themselves.
I did it for 6 months then stopped. Don’t know if it really did anything
I think of fasting as a way of getting into a habbit of eating less which is a major benefit
Simply skipping dinner will help you eat less as you dont notice the hunger when your asleep, you sleep better due to not having to digest heavy food while lying down and sleeping and you tend to eat healthier foods
The major problem I see in this study is that they used a 10-hour window. Intermitente fasting should be above 16 hours. They need to redo it if they are really interested in relevant findings.
just like diets. Whatever works for you and helps you meet your goals is key. Interesting info though, good food for thought!!
Nice work and video, Layne. Thanks for sharing this.
Based on my review of numerous videos and studies, I’ve come to understand that intermittent fasting (IF) functions as a versatile tool, with its effectiveness largely determined by the duration of the fast. In my view, the length of the fasting window plays a critical role in shaping the metabolic outcomes.
For example, a typical 16:8 fasting schedule-where you fast for 16 hours and eat during an 8-hour window-primarily serves as a caloric deficit tool. After just a few days, fasting leads to a natural suppression of ghrelin, the hunger hormone, which reduces appetite and makes it easier to consume fewer calories. This caloric restriction helps foster weight loss.
However, when the fasting window is extended beyond this, and assuming physical activity levels are maintained, intermittent fasting transitions into a more potent fat-burning tool. The longer fast, in this context, enhances fat oxidation and may trigger physiological changes that promote fat loss more effectively than shorter fasting windows. Thus, IF can serve different functions depending on how it is applied and how long the fasting period is sustained.
8am to 6pm feeding window is what I normally do… IF is approx 12pm to 6pm window. It’s all individual anyways. Calories in seems to rule no matter what.
I'm a carbon diet coach subscriber, and I'm unsure if there is any way to account for this, but man water retention throws off everything. Here is currently what I'm doing:
- 6 days a week to lifting (ppl*2)
- walking 8-10k steps per day
- Carbon has me on 2200ish calories, which I adhere to. I track all my calories and prep my own food. I am 6 foot 1 and 200 pounds.
This week I have gained nearly 4 pounds and I have no idea how. I know Carbon is going to want to lower my calories, but I really don't think that's the issue. I think, because it's summer time and I'm drinking more water, that this is merely water weight. Not sure how to go about weighing myself as I do it early in the morning consistently.
I believe there are some studies showing people down regulating their neat, while simultaneously reporting increased neat (reporting that they are moving more), while wearing an accelerometer showing that they down regulated their neat by an extremely large amount.
But they thought they were moving more because they did a little bit of exercise in the morning, or some such.
People start exercise, feel wonderful about themselves tell the world, report to researchers that they’re moving all the time because they have memories of themselves exercising. But their hypothalamus takes over and they move less, extremely unbeknownst to themselves.
I wish there was a magical formula for weight loss and better health but it always seems to come down to being in a calorie deficit. For those of us that struggle with appetite and portion control it's a brutal reality.
So basically if youre super slim and have very low body fat and are unhealthy theres no way to get healthy apart from a calorie deficit and losing even more weight?
@@Macgee826 If you are super slim with low body fat why would you need to be in a calorie deficit? You would obviously have other issues that need to be addressed.
@@gregorygreene1940 but you cant get healthy unless in a calorie deficit,is that not pretty much what you said?
@@Macgee826 If you are overweight like me absolutely. Every one of my ailments is tied to being overweight and the only way to lose it is being in a calorie deficit. Doesn't matter what I eat or when, if I'm not in a deficit I'm not losing weight. Sadly, that is the equation. If you are super slim already you've got other issues as they aren't weight dependent.
@@gregorygreene1940 my comnent did not apply to you then as you have fat to spare which is the ideal scenario for improving health markers!
Thank you for staying intellectually honest about this. Yes, intermittent fasting helps users lose weight, but it is due to a reduction in calories and has nothing to do with insulin.
Stop eating for 12 weeks and I guarantee you’ll lose weight. Then eat only carbs for 12 weeks without letting your insulin drop low enough to allow fat oxidation and you’ll gain weight. The details of this study are weak at best. There’s no reference to how many calories they were eating what the macros were how much exercise they were limited to what their baseline insulin levels were fasting insulin or any other important markers for fasting and fat oxidation. This video reads like a tabloid magazine
If you blood glucose spikes insulin will drive it down and if you like me i will be starving in about two hours. If I eat low carb, I don't get a spike and it keeps insulin low and I can go 24 hours without eating again that is how I can eat less calories than I used to and not be hungry all day. Hunger always wins so keep that insulin low and become insulin sensitive.
@@jackiesmith-nq8inyou are right
@@jackiesmith-nq8in 💯 agreed. While you might eat less I personally believe that a calorie saved is a calorie earned. Like money, stored calories shouldn’t be discounted when it comes to intake.
@@jeremyp6161 im pretty sure lower insulin levels help promote effect.
One problem is that some people's adherence is to overeating, leading to a high prevalence of obesity. Without effective methods to limit intake or increase physical activity, we leave it up to chance or habit, resulting in poor outcomes. None of these tools are magic bullets. What intermittent fasting does is set parameters, similar to those we have for our workday, study time, and gym time. When we adhere to those, we see results. Oftentimes, when a person doesn't set aside a specific time to complete a task, it doesn't get done.
Even using the Carbon Diet Coach requires adherence. If you don't take the time to accurately input the necessary data, your results will likely be poor. This is primarily because you're once again leaving it to chance that you probably hit your macros and consumed the allotted amount of calories.
If you Eat less calories automaticly it works.
I really like Dr Layne Norton's takeaway, and it's the same takeaway I would have: IF can potentially be a great tool for weight loss if it happens to work for you, and at the same time, I have become more wary of claims that IF provides unique health benefits not seen in a more simple calorie restriction protocol. I think for the research to be more conclusive, we would need to look at other protocols such as a smaller feeding windows and fasts where a few days a week you fast the whole day. The timing for the feeding window also adds an additional variable, although my feeling is that it's not particularly significant, especially if we would hypothetically expect morning feedings to be better and didn't see that in this study.
In general, I would say that this is a mark against the idea that any IF protocol somehow provides unique health benefits (with more research needed for other IF protocols). This absolutely makes me apprehensive about making claims about unique health benefits for larger feeding windows as seen in this study.
I F made me eat more total calories per day for some reason
I eat less in total for the day if I eat a big breakfast and find it easy to stay in calorie deficit state
thats stupid makes no sense
@@hanskazan7403 .
Bro 😎 each to their own to stay consistent
If I fast until 1pm for example and my calorie intake target is 3000 I tend to eat my first meal and then still feel hungry and eat rubbish high calorie foods and struggle to stay under 3000 deficit
If I eat huge 800 cal breakfast at about 9am I tend to not be hungry again until about 3 or 4pm and find it easy to stay under the 3000 calorie limit .
And I’m 95kg under 10% bf all year around from eating this way
All the best bro
Solid & non-biased info!
It all makes sense when you look at it from an energy perspective, which is why athletes eat carbs for what they are about to do. Intermittent fasting may be Better if it was centered around exercise needs. Then the spontaneous drop in activity would not be as big a problem.
The reason I do I intermittent fasting is to improve insulin sensitivity.
Listen this guy has been against intermittent fasting for a very long time. Clearly he was waiting for the specific study.
I like to fast just because it gives me a mental break from thinking about food. Humans waste so much mental energy thinking about what we are gonna eat and every now and then it's nice to just say fuck it.
I still do IF for the practicality and effectiveness of limiting calories in my day. Fewer opportunities, fewer unsatiated hunger states. It's just a caloric restriction behavioral tool for me which allows me to still eat dinner with my family and young children. It's too bad that a lot of the "magic" hope put into fasting has been deflated but it's STILL the only caloric restriction tool that works for me.
I do IF because eating smaller meals doesn't satisfy me and I end up eating more. But if I eat a large portion in 1 to 1.5 hours between 4 pm to 6 pm. I will be full the entire day.
Tried it for 2 years and even tried going back to regular meals for several weeks. I calculate that if i eat 3 meals a day, I actually eat nearly 500 to 1000 calories more than just 1 big meal.
So yeah IF is basically calorie restriction for me.... Just an easier one.
I think there really isn't a debate whether IF or general caloric restriction is better for weight loss if you are at the same caloric deficit in both.
I believe the question is more about does keeping the body at a constant state of ketosis (which is generally achieved via 16-18 hours of fasting minimum) promote fat burning more effectively than general caloric deficit.
Mind you, I am not a strict proponent of IF or think it's the only solution. Everyone should do what works best for them and IF works for a lot of people as you said. But to be fair I don't think this study addresses the ketosis aspect of IF. IF is just another way of assuring caloric defecit if done under 16 - 18 hours. There should be nothing different about it anyways. The interesting metabolic debate starts when fasting exceeds the 16-18 hour mark and presumably ketosis kicks in.
Thanks Layne!
I did Ramadan fasting this year in Toronto and I lost 15 lbs. I did a lot of cardio before breaking the fast
The only eason I do intermittent fasting is I spontaneously reduce my calorie intake. The reason for that is I have a problem with snacking, if I have long periods of the day where I can't snack it helps a lot
IFs health benefits outweigh the weight loss benefit and is the reason I think most people should do it (if they want)
What benefits outweigh the weight loss benefits?
@@ladagspa2008the other ones other than weightloss
Did anyone actually beleive that intermittent fasting, while on the same caloric intake, would result in fat loss?
I don't beleive to have ever heard that argument. I started intermittent fasting as a tool to make being on a calorie deficit much easier.
It was no different between the groups because they eat carbs.
Haha yes it was the evil carbs fault 😂
Boom. 💥
For me, eating between 8.00 and 18.00 is not really intermittent fasting. It is how I had been eating most of my life and never really lost any weight. I started to lose weight when I began to eat 2 (large) meals per day. First one is my breakfast, second & last one is around 1PM / 2PM. I do not think it was about calories (I never really ate too much of calories), but finally - my body started to use my fat as fuel, as for 18-20 hours per day no insulin spikes in my blood diverted it from using it...
I guess the study should go for 6-8 feeding window to see the real impact...
We need a comprehensive nutrition roundtable/debate. Or a 64 person grand MMA tournament to crown someone a winner.
Who says it magically makes calories not matter? Caloric deficiency is literally equivalent to weight loss, excluding water/salt/glucose balance and food passing through ones bowels.
Which is why the dismissal of the feeding behaviour in the beginning is misguided. Feeding behaviour clearly matters, even if this study also seems useful in isolating it.
Nothing wrong with fasting if it's your preferred method to lose weight. It's no more or less effective than any other mode of energy deficit.
If you want to retain muscle however...
It straight up doesn't burn any more calories and it also isn't a diet. It's a diet protocol. It's a joke, honestly.
It’s really good for people who are habitual snackers, especially the OMAD variant. It’s hard to eat enough calories to gain weight in one sitting with whole foods. It can be hard even with crappy food sometimes.
I found it hard to get in enough food for my goals. I was surprised that I wasn’t hungry after a week or so of doing it. But it ultimately wasn’t for me. It was really nice only preparing one meal and having one round of dishes to wash up though.
We all know CICO is how weight loss works. Would be more helpful to have a video addressing the autophagy, growth hormone, etc potential benefits of fasting. Maybe there is a video already?
Small cohort. All obese. Very limited value. If this is really “the IF study” you’ve been waiting for, your bar is too low.
Great video! Very useful.
Informative as always, thank you. FTA! ✊
Good vid LN! IF is a good tool for changing blood lipids especially triglycerides. I'd like to see a study on that.
Is there a benefit associated with autophagy associated with IF or is that a myth? Can autophagy be measured? 🤔
IF (and low carb but not really Keto) is working for me cause I will tend to eat more per day otherwise. At night I would snack, or eat an extra meal or whatever. And IF keeps me focused on eating healthy when I do eat because I have a game plan and goals to stick to. The issue that I had when I did it 5 years ago was that it was really effective and got almost too thin, but after 5 months I didnt stick with it anymore and gained the weight back, so I may need to figure out a new game plan if I can't stick with it.
IF isn't just about calories and losing weight.
As a person that had his immune system crumble after a disease that took a toll on all aspects of my health I can assure you, it has a lot more health benefits than just getting rid of those extra pounds.
I've been monitored by a dietician and a doctor, put on meds and told that there was low probability of me gaining full health again, changing my diet, not utterly focusing on fat percentage or vanity gains or listening to some UA-cam "doctors", has restored me to about 90% health.
Quitting alcohol all together, adopting a plant based diet (still eating dairy for important nutrients) and taking natural supplements tried and tested by eastern medicine has restored my life to the better.
Any UA-camr using a "Dr." in their channel name are usually quacks, especially if they bash other Dr. UA-camrs or methods, it's usually done for views.
Some methods and advices are all good and well, just be aware of those "Doctors"
Oh yes... Any "Dr. UA-camr" that is trying to sell you an app or any supplements, making bold statements for views or citing some singular "scientific studies" backing his views, without citing other studies, is usually cherry picking for his own information bias.
Seems to just be an effective way for some people to restrict calories… rather than the window itself being the beneficial element of it.
Great vid. I don't think you will be as Big as TDL.
Would love to hear a discussion with Delauer, T. 😊
The article costs $37.
Seems like there are plenty of respected doctors (Dr. Satchin Panda, Dr. Valter Longo etc) who have done plenty of research in this area that show benefits to some form of fasting. This study's 10 hour eating window is kind of a joke - that is not fasting, that's a normal diet. However, the degree to which it helps seems to be miniscule compared to the main lever you pull in just restricting calories - which is much easier to do if you do intermittent fasting. Whatever works for you is what works, I guess. Eating tiny unsatisfying meals throughout the day, dealing with all the cooking/prep and cleanup, while working a job and having other responsibilities sounds like it would be harder to stick to than 2 meals or whatever a day. That's just me though.
I agree completely and a shame it was really just weight loss focussed rather than health.
Diet agnostic is definitely a term I will be using in the future!
Lost 56 pounds in 3/4 months on balanced OMAD.
but but this one study says if is just the same as eating all day so get wrecked
@enzogonzales608 lol, settle down, bro. Stay alpha, not beta.
If I ate 5 mars bars a day for 12 weeks or 5 avocados a day for 12 weeks (same number of calories) would health outcomes be the same ?
How does this correlate to the time restricted feeding window study by Dr Satchin Panda (seen in interview w Dr Rhonda Patrick, discussed about 40min in)? My understanding was that the IF mice gained less fat and increased lean mass more than the mice that eat whenever they want (calories equated), does this new study cover body composition results or just the weight changes? Genuinely curious, thank you!
You’re comparing a study done in mice (which does not translate well to humans) to a human randomized controlled trial? Its not even a question amigo.
@@JJSOFLO good point, I wasn't sure
I eat once a day. It really simplified my life.
Caloric deficiency is a key without doubt and Int. Fasting can aid that. Moreover, there are other health benefits of fasting compared to regular eating that shouldn't be ignored, such as reversing prediabetes.
No, fasting will reverse prediabetes the same as any other diet with same calories. Did you watch the video?
@@ladagspa2008 You do understand that everyone is "fasting" for 8h when they sleep, since they don't eat on that timeframe? However most bodies won't get trained to even produce enough ketones, if the general fasting windows aren't long enough to begin with. So I'd argue they don't really do fasting if they eat more than once a day.