Iirc people who've lost extreme amounts of weight often develop very slow metabolisms.
I'm not really arguing about that. As long as you don't make drastic changes all at once.
Sounds more reasonable.
Add ing to the end and it becomes a means to an end. Diet-ing to achieve an end.
I've done research it's not conveniently accessible to me. I don't think the idea that intermittent fasting is healthier than diet-ING is very controversial.
I'm not a doctor or researcher, just sharing my opinion/experience. Fasting can also be dangerous, giving people a feeling of temporary control over food issues. As part of a healthy lifestyle it's good. Its definitely no joke tho.
I didnt mean to be rude, what I meant was that dieting can be an endless cycle. Seems straightforward to simply eat fewer calories to lose weight (or more to gain it) but its rarely so easy to do a simple thing.
I don't think we have that much to disagree about.
what exactly do you mean by "slow metabolism" here? the rate at which food is turned into energy? the way unneeded energy is stored? passive caloric needs? heart activity and blood pressure? you're being kinda vague
the idea that IM fasting is healther than a simple calory restrictive diet is actually very controversial, almost no researcher would agree with it. I myself actually don't doubt that IM fasting is a healthier way to lose weight, I merely said that the scientific literature is not in accordance with this claim. my personal opinion matters little in this discussion and when I give advice to others I try to discredit it as much as possible.
fasting is not dangerous because it gives people the feeling of control, though that may be one small factor.
"real" fasting aka health fasting is dangerous because you're utterly depriving your body of any energy (calories) for days (or weeks), which in turn means that
your body will literally start to dissolve its own muscles (and later on, fat). this doesn't go for IM fasting, because you're still eating calories. but proper fasting (water fasts) have exactly this idea at their core. which is very dangerous if you don't do it in accordance with a medical professional.
I actually did a water fast for an entire week and it was a great experience, I wouldn't however recommend it to someone who isn't completely healthy. I did lose some muscle mass, and more importantly, some fat due to it, but bounced back relatively quick. I primarily did it for the experience and to see if it had any effects on my asthma. water fasting as a weight loss tool is not very good at all, that is what IM fasting is for.
no worries, you're not rude at all. your concern is true, too, for many people dieting is an endless cycle. i won't deny that at all. however this is no longer about the efficiency of the diet, but rather about what comes after the diet. it's fundamentally a psychological problem, not one of nutrition.
yes, I also think we agree on most points. when I present the current state of research and say that researchers in general think calory-restrictive diets are both healthier and more effective than IM fasting as a weight-loss tool, it doesn't mean that this is the final verdict, that I personally agree, or that those scientists are correct. just stating that this is the conclusion most studies and metastudies have come to, thus far. I am actually convinced that in the next 5 to 10 years we'll see some revolutionary insight on the benefits of fasting. it is a seriously underreported topic of research.
