08-09-07 07:38 AM - Post#334622    

When I heard about the Warrior Diet, something didn't sound right. The plan was basically eat very little all day and eat everything you want at night. We all know people who do this and this is usually an example of how not to diet. Still a couple things kept me from dismissing it completely: time savings, and a lot of positive testimonials.

So, I look into it a little more. The book sucks. Long on silly filler, short on science and specific instructions. But, it's a Dragon Door product, and that company has such a following that they could put out a Manure and Maggots diet and their devotees would be clamoring about how it cleared up their acne, cured their back problem, and made them taller. (PS, the Dragon Door crowd tends to be strong but skinny, not a real muscular crowd.)

Anyway, there's only one way to find out for sure, so I try it, and aside from saving time it did nothing good for me.

Now time goes by and here and there I start hearing about what people are calling intermittent fasting which the Warrior Diet is close to. The Fast Five book is in my opinion much better than the Warrior Diet - more science and practical instructions.

I have had some pretty good results doing the Fast Five thing Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. I fast all day, then after work have a preworkout shake (Gatorade, whey, and BCAAs). Then I go to the gym, warm up, do some short intense cardio, then hit the weight pile - 60 - 90 minutes. Then afterwards a nice dinner - not junk, but not strict either - yes, I have a potato AND dessert :)

Then the rest of the week I just eat a healthy balanced diet. If I don't work out on Saturday I might fast Sunday too. Doing this I have been able to hit some PRs in the gym (for cardio and weights), feel good, shed some fat, and save some time.

I don't think it would turn out so great when I'm working out more, or if I was focused on gaining weight. It's a good fit when time is short.

The most important test a lifter has to pass is the test of time. -Jon Cole

08-09-07 07:45 AM - Post#334626    

THanks for that link Byron - although I like eating too much to push myself into the long fasts, I read through a lot of the book and there's loads of interesting, scientific explanations which are easy for a non-scientific person to understand (I like the parts on the different types of hunger, for example).
Maybe one day...

Go confidently in the direction of your dreams. Live the life you have imagined. Henry David Thoreau

08-09-07 08:04 AM - Post#334634    

Rosie, if you do try it at some point I think you may be pleasantly surprised that it isn't very hard.

I am one of those people that, if I skip breakfast, I am not as hungry when lunchtime rolls around. On the fast days I usually get hungry for a short while around 1:00 then it passes and I'm fine, even if work runs late that day.

The most important test a lifter has to pass is the test of time. -Jon Cole

08-09-07 08:19 AM - Post#334638    

Byron,

Interesting stuff.

I read a review, some time back on the "Warrior Diet". I never attempted it, nor did I buy the book.

I have been interested in fasting for some time, as a way of controlling weight and also for the health benefits. Notice, I said interested in, not a practitioner of.

I have read a lot of the writings of Paul Bragg and believe he makes a compelling case for fasting.

I have long planned to fast one day a week. The fast would begin, say, from Sunday after dinner to breakfast on Tuesday. It would be a water only fast. Assuming eating remained constant on the other days, I think this could be quite efficient. I do not think that it would interfere with my training.

I have never undertaken this program. Though I believe it would be worthwhile, at the moment of truth, I rationalize my way out of doing it. "I'll start this next year" I tell myself. That tomorrow has yet to come.

I have known two people who have done this sort of thing. One was a physical education professor in college. At around 50, she looked absolutely spectacular. The other person, also a woman, looked great and incredibly youthful as well. She was in her 40's.

I think for many of us - weight trainers that is -there is a fear of things like fasting, cardio, etc. I know that at times I have harbored those fears. There is that voice in the back of my head saying "you'll get small and weak".

Thinking rationally, I believe that after many years of weight training, lifting and looking as if I lift has become part of my identity. I don't want to cling to that identity to my detriment. I recall Dr. Ken saying something to the effect of -who cares how much you can bench if you are in the cemetery?

Do I want to maintain strength, even gain? Absolutely. However, if I can undertake a few things to safeguard my health, as best I can, I believe I should do it.

I simply have not started fasting one day a week out of weakness. I hope one day to overcome that. I believe the benefits would be worth the effort.

In any event, interesting stuff.

08-09-07 08:28 AM - Post#334648    

I recently tried the Warrior Diet, more specifically his 'anti-estrogenic' diet and found that as the weeks went on my evening meal became larger and larger. I didn't have much energy or motivation for my workouts either.

Trying this for just a couple days per week sounds like it might be a better approach for me, may have to give it another try in Sept.

Thanks for the info and link.

08-09-07 08:56 AM - Post#334676    

• Quote:

ROTFLOL, I like your sense of humor, ccrow.

I read the fast five book when it was first posted here. I recall the author claims there's initial period of about 2 weeks for the body to settle in with kethosys. don't you diminish that affect with doing it 3 days/week rather than continuosly?

08-09-07 09:33 AM - Post#334701    

Hey anybody that wants the Warrior Diet book, I'm selling' it real cheap, for say... fitty cent! I'm not kidding, I actually boneheaded it and bought this paperweight some years back!

The only thing "Warrior" abut it is you could fling it at someone if you were really desperate to defend yerself and it might give you a chance to run for the hills!! But then, that wouldn't make you much of a Warrior would it?! ;>)

Age: 59

08-09-07 09:44 AM - Post#334704    

On the intermittent fasting and meal order note:

Charles Atlas (Angelo Siciliano) used to have a very light breakfast...something like a lemon squeezed in hot water. Lunch was be light, also...a salad, maybe? Dinner would be his big meal...where he would eat things like steak or chops and a soup, salad or both.

This apparently, worked well for him...until he was older. To be blunt...he got fat (comparatively speaking.) He blamed his love of Italian foods. The meal order may have had something to do with it.

The old adage is to have breakfast like a king, lunch like a prince and dinner like a pauper.

Regarding fasting...fasting for a day once a month or even once a week, certainly doesn't hurt you. It may even benefit you - if only to exercise the self-discipline necessary to do it.

Wicked

"I'm in good shape for the shape I'm in." "Jesus said to him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man comes to the Father, but by me." John 14:6

08-09-07 09:47 AM - Post#334706    

Portion control will always matter.

Mark it Zero.

Intermittant Fasting
08-09-07 09:56 AM - Post#334715    

• Wicked Willie Said:

The only problem with that adage in practice is that you'll want to go back to bed after breakfast, take a nap after lunch and probably drink yourself to death after dinner...which I guess is fine if you really are royalty.

I think it's better to eat heavy when you have a lot of time to devote to rest. That's why the old European style of eating a light breakfast and spending several hours at the dinner table with good company always appealed to me.

"When [defeat] comes, I won't even notice. I'll be too busy looking good."

Edited by Yeti on 08-09-07 10:00 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

08-09-07 10:17 AM - Post#334722    

Yeti,

I too find it appealing to eat heavy and then rest. I resist doing it because I believe it is not healthful. This study may shed some light:

http://www.cbass.com/Everymealcounts.htm#And

It is probably best to get in some activity - light activity, after a meal.

Additionally, eating a heavy meal and then lying down my exacerbate acid reflux.

I have to go with the adage Wicked stated. I think it is probably the most healthful approach. Maybe not the most pleasurable, but the most healthful.

08-09-07 10:18 AM - Post#334724    

When bulking keep this in mind: Eat until sleepy, sleep until hungry.

Mark it Zero.

08-09-07 11:22 AM - Post#334744    

• Traveler Said:

I'll agree with that. I usually eat a pretty hearty breakfast every day, even though I can only down so much food in the morning. About two hours later i've already logged in a couple miles of walking, from commuting to work to doing my daily duties at the office, which doesn't involve sitting at a desk. This is light activity. What I wouldn't advocate is exercising right after a meal, when the body's chief concern is digestion. The body can't multitask; start exercising and you put the body in sympathetic mode, your body starts using stored energy; whatever you ate thirty minutes ago is useless. That's why I've never understood why some people will carb up before a workout. Eat, wait a couple hours before exercising. Looking at that study you posted, the subjects did wait 2 hours before exercising.

For me, it's impossible to get enough total calories for the day by making breakfast the biggest meal of the day. The body just isn't particularly hungry in the morning. If I were overweight, this might be the best appoach, but I'd rather feel satisfied after a long day of activity by eating heartily in the evening rather than starving myself.

I've read that in Roman times people would often only eat bread in the mornings (that's all they could afford), then work long hours. At night they would eat a big dinner (though probably not as big as today's average meal) where they would replenish their stores for the next day. I'm willing to bet nobody had heart disease back then, except the rich who ate frequently.

"When [defeat] comes, I won't even notice. I'll be too busy looking good."

Re: Intermittant Fasting
08-09-07 04:11 PM - Post#334963    

My late FIL use to eat just like that. He would get up and be at work by 5am .. work to 6pm without eating a thing .. be home by 7pm and eat non stop til bedtime. And he never weighed more then 160 lb soaking wet.

Peace ~ Bear

08-09-07 04:13 PM - Post#334970    

Barney, was he "skinny fat" or toned/muscular?

Of all the things ive lost,I miss my mind the most. http://www.fitday.com/WebFit/PublicJournals .html?Owner=jamie%28IRL%29

08-09-07 04:18 PM - Post#334974    

• Jamie(IRL) Said:

He was just a skinny guy. His arms were fairly muscular, however, from years of manual labor.

Peace ~ Bear

08-09-07 04:46 PM - Post#335012    

I think there are things you have to re-think with this type of diet. When you're eating smaller, more frequent meals, a good rule is to eat for what you're going to be doing for the next few hours. Activity after your meals is a big deal.

But with this diet I don't think it is a problem eating one meal a day at night. If you're going to do something like this one-meal- a- day plan, you are going to deliberately spend time running off stored energy. The muscle mag mentality is that this is a bad thing because you'll burn muscle.

But, if you are ever going to lose any fat, you're going to have to burn some stored energy! So you have to get over that. Also, you have to believe that what muscle gets used for energy is rapidly replenished, it is only a very temporary loss. I have spoken to a fair number of people and really there just doesn't seem to be a problem losing muscle when eating this way.

I personally am convinced that burning stored energy sources is a good thing. I think it will lower blood sugar (even on the regular-diet days) improve insulin sensitivity, lower triglycerides, lower LDL and improve HDL, and burn bodyfat.

The human body was not made for this land of plenty where it never goes hungry!

The most important test a lifter has to pass is the test of time. -Jon Cole

08-09-07 05:31 PM - Post#335032    

• ccrow Said:

Thats what I continue to think when I go about or hear people talk about the 6 meal a day thing.

Truthfully, I rarely follow the 6 meal a day thing. I find that Im not hungry every three hours.

Its strange that there is such a wide spectrum to the nutrition world. Athletes seem to follow very different eating plans, ranging from 6-8 small meals daily, cutting and bulking periodically, to eating one or two meals a day. Many fighters still follow the classic three meal a day diet.

You know what? Im beginning to think that theres too much hype around nutrition, that we worry too much about it. Also, I am beginning to think that we compensate not enough time in the gym (lets face it, bodybuilding tends to not be too intense) with calorie counting etc. Finally, I am starting to think that it is not the amount of food we eat that matters, but the type of food we eat. Its probably no big deal or knew news, but its a revelation for me.

Of all the things ive lost,I miss my mind the most. http://www.fitday.com/WebFit/PublicJournals .html?Owner=jamie%28IRL%29

08-09-07 07:41 PM - Post#335088    

This is pretty intriguing to me, too. I'm one who literally trained myself to eat breakfast after decades of disinterest in food in the morning. Dave convinced me that was wrong; guess I'd have to sneak this one by him. :~)

08-10-07 03:42 PM - Post#335556    

So... I skipped breakfast this morning and had some cottage cheese mixed with Bomber Blend for lunch. Easy peasy. Byron, do you think there's any value in regular -- maybe even daily -- 14-hour fasts? Or do you think it takes the full 19 to be valuable?

Also, I'm not clear on the difference between this and the Warrior Diet -- are these the same, just written up differently?

08-10-07 04:24 PM - Post#335591    

The Warrior Diet is very vague about eating "a little" during the day, which I suspect is a point of failure for many. I think there is probably a lot of individual variation in how strict you have to be all day, and how long you have to fast.

I keep in mind that almost everyone fasts for 8-10 hours a day overnight

I am also sure that not every day is alike, you're more active some days than others, you come in with energy store fuller on some days than others.

The most important test a lifter has to pass is the test of time. -Jon Cole

08-10-07 04:25 PM - Post#335592    

Couple other things to throw out there. One thing to watch out for: easy on the caffeine on the fast days! The body produces a fair amount of epinephrine on the fast days, and most people notice they are surprisingly energetic. Some people even notice better mental acuity, and I think there is something to it.

The most important test a lifter has to pass is the test of time. -Jon Cole

08-10-07 04:29 PM - Post#335595    

Another thing about the intermittent system: the idea is NOT to eat all the calories you didn't eat during the day at dinner! You'll feel great with a nice dinner, doesn't have to be a feeding frenzy. The in between days, it seems like people get good results eating maintenance calories or slightly more, but clean.

The most important test a lifter has to pass is the test of time. -Jon Cole

08-10-07 04:41 PM - Post#335609    

• ccrow Said:

Bingo.

Mark it Zero.

08-10-07 05:17 PM - Post#335638    

I too only eat when hungry, 2 times per day, around 10:30am and 7:30pm.

Ironically my goal is to gain weight, muscle that is.

I believe that my body will operate more efficiently now with 2 meals, burn fat better, and due to having the food assimilate and digest better, the increase in muscle mass will accelerate.

T

08-10-07 09:09 PM - Post#335707    

Say, did you guys see this?

"We have the technology to measure a person's entire genome in a single blood sample and use that information to predict how they respond to various dietary interventions. We've done this in our studies and have made progress in understanding the genetic factors that contribute to variable responses to low-carbohydrate diets in weight loss, fat loss, and other health markers."

It's from the Low Carb Guru interview with Dr. Jeff Volek over at T-Mag.

Jeff goes on to add, "For now, most people won't have access to genetic testing and so the best advice I can give is to become an experimentalist. There are many ways to restrict carbohydrate, and you have to experiment with different approaches and monitor the results — just like a scientist would do in the lab. In the end, it doesn't matter what the science or the experts say; you should do what works best for you."

All in all, he believes most of us should be lower in the lower-carb range.

08-10-07 09:50 PM - Post#335723    

I started a variation of the Fast Five today.... I limited my eating to between the hours of noon and 7 pm, and plan to see how this works for a week or two. That's a 17-hour fast. I do my weight lifting at mid-morning, three days a week, and I'm hestitant to wait much beyond noon to eat something on those days. Perhaps eventually I'll try pushing the first feeding until 2 pm on non-lifting days, making a full 19-hour fast.

We shall see. I have really stalled out on getting much more fat loss on the five meal a day thingie, just want to mix it up a bit and see what happens.

08-10-07 10:46 PM - Post#335732    

Here's a paper discussing some of the same thoughts in this thread that may be of interest relating to feast-famine and overall health ...

http://jap.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/96/1 /3

Trance

Intermittant Fasting
08-11-07 11:34 AM - Post#335887    

Excellent article Trance, thanks for posting. It is so technical it isn't easy to wade through, but here is what I gather the authors are saying:

The normal cycle of our pre-agricultural ancestors waved between feast & rest / fast & work.

The in modern life the cycle is broken, it's almost all feast & rest - food is readily available in unlimited quantities and life is mostly sedentary.

Our bodies are made for some fast & work; there are certain biological processes that shut down without the fast & work, and diseases (metabolic syndrome, heart disease, diabetes, etc.) result.

Now if I follow them, they are saying that just exercise can fix the broken cycle (at the end of the article).

I certainly agree with the conclusion that exercise will improve things, and maybe that's enough. But why wouldn't fasting be a good idea too?

This part in particular:

• Quote:

This to me says that fasting would improve the use of fat as an energy source, improve insulin sensitivity, and prevent spare protein from gluconeogenisis - which would all be good.

Any thoughts?

The most important test a lifter has to pass is the test of time. -Jon Cole

08-11-07 11:38 AM - Post#335888    

Another thing I was thinking about when experimenting with this type of diet.

Might it make more sense to start with a long fast (19 hours or more), then see if you get the same good effects going to a shorter one? I say this because we know the beneficial effects don't really kick in under 10 hours, most people fast ten hours overnight. So when does the desired effect start to kick in? What if it starts at the 16 hour mark?

The most important test a lifter has to pass is the test of time. -Jon Cole

Intermittant Fasting
08-11-07 11:41 AM - Post#335889    

I missed the Fast 5 discussion the first time around, but inadvertantly ended up performing short fasts out of necessity. So when I saw the original discussion recently, I was immediately intrigued. I was previously eating Fiber 1 + Cheerios + blueberries + 1% milk for breakfast, followed by a salad with raw veggies and chicken or lean beef or a whole wheat bread sandwich with chicken breast or beef. Sounds relatively clean, but for quite some time I was unable to lose any fat. I'm sure I was just eating too much in general. I tend to have a huge appetite with monstrous carb cravings. Also, I had a big problem with falling asleep during all-day meetings that I am attending at work. Starting at about 1/2 hr after eating, I would be dozing off in the meeting for at least an hour. I just could not stay awake in these meetings! So I slowly cut back on what I was eating for breakfast and lunch.

Now I am eating very little to nothing in the morning, often just chai tea. If I work out in the morning, I will drink some Gatorade since it seems to help me recover. If I am hungry at lunchtime or when the meeting breaks for lunch, I will usually have 1/2 a sandwich with 1/2 an apple and a couple of pretzels. If I'm not terribly hungry, I will wait and eat my food later in the afternoon, say around 3.

If my schedule permits, I go to the gym to work out at lunch and have a gatorade afterwards, then have the above lunch around 3-3:30.

I usually work at my 2nd job in the evening, and have dinner there around 7-8pm, usually the other 1/2 of my sandwich and 1/2 apple, plus maybe some yogurt. I only have a 15 min. break in which to eat on those days. If I'm genuinely hungry when I get home from work around 10:30pm, I will have a snack. On weekend days, if I'm working at my 2nd job, I usually eat a little more for energy.

I'm basically eating as little as my hunger will allow, and the result is my hunger levels have stabilized and carb cravings are much reduced. I have lost a few scale lbs, maybe 7 or so, and even better, I'm wearing smaller pants. :-) I actually feel stronger and have more energy for my workouts than when I was eating more. I've been hitting the gym as often as possible, sometimes twice a day if I don't have a meeting. I usually try to lift during one session and do cardio during the other. I don't work out at all when I have meetings scheduled, since due to my work schedule, I often can get only approx. 5 hrs sleep before hitting the gym. It is virtually impossible for me to stay awake during a boring, all-day meeting after getting only 5 hrs sleep and working out.

I had been doing the eat-5-to-6-times-a-day for so long that it was hard to make the mental shift. I'm pleasantly surprised to find that this new style of eating is working so well for me. Once I made the mental decision that it was OK for me to be hungry, and actually necessary for me to go hungry at times in order to lose fat, everything went smoothly.

I guess we are all different. As my favorite running author George Sheehan said, we each are an experiment of one.

-Ardena




Edited by Ardena on 08-11-07 01:25 PM. Reason for edit: correct quote

08-11-07 11:44 AM - Post#335892    

GREAT info Ardena, thanks for passing this along!

The most important test a lifter has to pass is the test of time. -Jon Cole

08-11-07 11:44 AM - Post#335893    

If i want to lose fat i just cut back. Works everytime.

It don't matter

08-11-07 11:09 PM - Post#336094    

Long time no chat. Nice article, Trance and Byron thanks for the explanation!

I've been experimenting with fasting protocols for some time as well. Three things which seem to help the process:

1. Intermittent ~feasting~ seems to give a metabolic reset (and probably a psychological one too).

2. Heeding your warning to limit caffiene-- it may also help to have 1-2 cups at strategic times for the appetite blunting effects as well as a little bit of pre-work out energy.

3. Keep what little you do eat of the highest quality.

I err on the low-carb side for my protein and omegas. Noticed some hair loss and more delicate skin when I flipped to the higher-carb side (a la raw foods).

I also want to note that this is an 'advanced' diet. Many people simply can't read their bodies very well-- and this kind of eating style requires that you tune in, listen and follow some intuitive cues. A basic understanding of human nutrition is essential for troubleshooting. IOLers for the most part are well prepared for such an endeavor. Your neighbor or hairstylist may not be.

~Jan

"We ask ourselves, 'Who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, and famous?' Actually, who are you not to be?" ~Marianne Williamson

Intermittent Fasting
08-12-07 09:10 AM - Post#336178    

Jan:

Are there particular supplements that you recommend taking while experimenting with such a fasting protocol? And would you be willing to quantify what "erring on the low carb side" means for you, i.e. how many carbs?

Thanks so much.

Kim



Edited by Kim on 08-12-07 09:11 AM. Reason for edit: because their and there are not the same

08-12-07 10:54 AM - Post#336205    

Ardena...great input. Thanks.

Good to see you Jan and as always very good info.

I've been curious about this approach. I know Dan said one time it's best to always be a bit hungry. Seems to me this is what tell us we are burning fat....not sure about that but its a good mental fix.

I've been tempted to switch to this style of eating for the next couple of months because of work schedule and new training schedule.

I think it's worth a try.

Art

08-12-07 11:07 AM - Post#336209    

Good stuff Byron. Thanks.
Art

08-12-07 12:16 PM - Post#336239    

• ccrow Said:

Byron, the cholesterol factor benefits, are you referring here to the fasting element or just that having lower bodyfat will improve LDL/HDL in most people?

08-12-07 08:49 PM - Post#336388    

This is one of those unsubstantiated inferences I was trashing on earlier, but there is some supporting data out there.

Crude version of cholesterol metabolism: you make LDL out of excess calories. You make HDL to bring the LDL back to the liver and use it. This is normally a slow process, takes like maybe five DAYS. Probably because if you're already feeding your face your body never really needs to get around to burning off LDL, it is never a priority.

In the language of the article Trance posted, LDL is associated with feast and rest, HDL is associated with work and fast.

If you make yourself a hungry, your body will get after that LDL, make some HDL and burn it.

The most important test a lifter has to pass is the test of time. -Jon Cole

08-13-07 10:54 AM - Post#336557    

And Cajin sums up the entire discussion. :-)

• cajinjohn Said:

08-13-07 11:12 AM - Post#336563    

I'm thinking Dave's 3 day Tuna & Water diet followed with a Colon Blow session is where it's at.

http://www.colonblow.com

Mark it Zero.

08-13-07 11:15 AM - Post#336565    

Do you colonblow Dan?

Best thread ever! :)

08-13-07 11:20 AM - Post#336568    

• bulch Said:

Hell yes.

Mark it Zero.

08-13-07 12:14 PM - Post#336609    

Just a thought, would it not be better to eat a large meal in the morning, and fast for the afternoon and evening?

Of all the things ive lost,I miss my mind the most. http://www.fitday.com/WebFit/PublicJournals .html?Owner=jamie%28IRL%29

08-13-07 12:26 PM - Post#336619    

Alan Aragon on intermittent fasting

"Despite its purported physiological and psychological benefits, scientific data is far from unanimously supporting it. Are there any physiological advantages to increasing or decreasing meal frequency? What are the downsides to intermittent fasting? Are there detrimental effects of resistance training in a fasted state? Are there unique health advantages to fasting that neither exercise nor caloric restriction accomplish? Anecdotal data is fraught with suggestion-driven bias, so this paper will focus on what's been demonstrated objectively in scientific research."

08-13-07 12:37 PM - Post#336623    

So, to add to the discussion, I'm on day 4 of the fasting, only 'til noon, though. What's happened is my daily calories dropped from ~1,300 to ~1,000 by skipping breakfast, and the later meals are, by instinct not planning, more carefully chosen. It's harder to get enough protein with lower calories, which means some carbs have been exchanged for protein.

If my weight drops from a stable 137 -- and how could it not? -- we won't know if it's the fasting, the lower calories or the lower carbs that turned the tide.

08-13-07 01:12 PM - Post#336652    

• DanMartin Said:

If I want a good colonblow, I just double my intake of brewers yeast. Only takes about 10-15 minutes for a full volcanic eruption.

Kyle E.

Performance, Health, and Longevity

08-13-07 01:14 PM - Post#336654    

• Jamie(IRL) Said:

No, unless you want to feel groggy all day; your liver will be more receptive to hearty food later in the day. If part of the theory behind intermittent fasting stems from how our ancestors evolved, then waking up and feasting would make no sense. A day was probably more like wake, hunt/forage all day, eat, sleep, repeat.

"When [defeat] comes, I won't even notice. I'll be too busy looking good."

08-13-07 01:37 PM - Post#336659    

• Laree Said:

Well in a sense we know it's the lower calories, because although various diets may be interesting none violate the third law of thermodynamics.

If any diet works for weight loss, you are burning more calories than you eat. But if it lets you achieve that with less discomfort, it has a much better chance of being a stable sustainable change.

There's more than one way to cut calories! If you find a way that makes you feel good, mentally sharp, physically fit, these are all big advantages. If it is workable, practical, and comfortable, it is much more likely to be sustainable. And of course most important, if it benefits your health, that's the main thing.

The most important test a lifter has to pass is the test of time. -Jon Cole

08-13-07 03:03 PM - Post#336684    

Laree:

May I ask what is your personal protein quota for the day? While I'm being nosy, what macronutrient ratio do you tend to follow, in general? (before Intermittent Fasting experiement, that is.)

Thanks! --kim