# Fasting vs Calories in/out



## incision (May 23, 2010)

Calories in and out is an oversimplified concept. The human body doesn't work this way. Check out this clip. Dr. Jason Fung is a diet expert and also a kidney specialist.

The reason why I believe him is my recent struggle with keeping weight on for no discernible reason (went down to a BMI of 17.1 before I reacted from concern). I did manage to control the weight loss by eating larger portions with fatty meats but my norm is to eat one or two meals a day, hence a form of unintentional fasting with no food for 19 - 24 hours on a daily basis. And no, it wasn't an eating disorder or self-abuse.


----------



## Handsome Dyke (Oct 4, 2012)

Your story doesn't have anywhere near enough details to support whatever you are saying. We have no idea how many calories you were eating before and after the weight loss started and no idea what your caloric needs are/were.


----------



## incision (May 23, 2010)

Anon Pervathon said:


> Your story doesn't have anywhere near enough details to support whatever you are saying. We have no idea how many calories you were eating before and after the weight loss started and no idea what your caloric needs are/were.


Watch the clip. My situation was a throw away.


----------



## cuddle bun (Jun 2, 2017)

I didn't watch the video but just anecdotally I know that alternating fasting and feasting makes it very easy for me to lose weight. It is much easier for my brain to delay instead of limit.


----------



## pwowq (Aug 7, 2016)

Duo said:


> Calories in and out is an oversimplified concept. The human body doesn't work this way. Check out this clip. Dr. Jason Fung is a diet expert and also a kidney specialist.
> 
> The reason why I believe him is my recent struggle with keeping weight on for no discernible reason (went down to a BMI of 17.1 before I reacted from concern). I did manage to control the weight loss by eating larger portions with fatty meats but my norm is to eat one or two meals a day, hence a form of unintentional fasting with no food for 19 - 24 hours on a daily basis. And no, it wasn't an eating disorder or self-abuse.


In the grand scheme kcal in and out is what it's about, in combo with kcal used. (in general terms: better cardiovascular function, the more efficient the body is at 'saving' energy gained from food -> hence if don't regularly change workout scheme you have to change diet in order to retain what you have done)

Workout, fasting, diet, what you do in a day must be considered as a whole package because it all effect the metabolism.


----------



## cuddle bun (Jun 2, 2017)

Intermittent fasting does create a calorie deficit but it's also about ease and compliance and enjoyment. For me intermittent fasting results in fewer food cravings and less decision fatigue compared to daily calorie restriction. And I enjoy that. Maybe for someone else daily calorie restriction is easier - physically I can't picture that because food limits make me feel panic and delaying my next meal doesn't. But I've heard from some people that daily calorie restriction is easier for them and I believe them. The one that's easier - or even enjoyable - is the one that's more likely to stick as a lifelong habit.


----------



## NAC (Nov 16, 2015)

This is second time I see someone in here praising the dear Dr. Fung.
"The human body doesn't work this way."









That sentence alone emits a strong vibe of denial. There's thousands of well documented and impartial health studies based on CICO(calories in, calories out), which proves the theory to the point that I'd even argue that it's overdone and reached a point of silliness.

His main criticism is that people basically suck at following through with a weight lose, when basing it on CICO, eventually failing to maintain it; regaining the weight.
That doesn't mean that CICO is false or that it isn't still the best way to think about weight management.

https://health.spectator.co.uk/9107942/
His conclusions on exercising are equally useless.

A cherry picking bozo.

* *














Move on.


----------



## incision (May 23, 2010)

pwowq said:


> In the grand scheme kcal in and out is what it's about, in combo with kcal used. (in general terms: better cardiovascular function, the more efficient the body is at 'saving' energy gained from food -> hence if don't regularly change workout scheme you have to change diet in order to retain what you have done)
> 
> Workout, fasting, diet, what you do in a day must be considered as a whole package because it all effect the metabolism.


Did you watch the clip, relative to a two compartment model for energy storage, the impacts of insulin, etc?



cuddle bun said:


> Intermittent fasting does create a calorie deficit but it's also about ease and compliance and enjoyment. For me intermittent fasting results in fewer food cravings and less decision fatigue compared to daily calorie restriction. And I enjoy that. Maybe for someone else daily calorie restriction is easier - physically I can't picture that because food limits make me feel panic and delaying my next meal doesn't. But I've heard from some people that daily calorie restriction is easier for them and I believe them. The one that's easier - or even enjoyable - is the one that's more likely to stick as a lifelong habit.


Yup. I've never struggled with weight my entire life and only struggled with weight retention, relatively recently. 



NAC said:


> <snip>


Did you watch the clip? If not, do so.


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

Intermittent Fasting can probably work great for many people, but there are certain difficulties to it due to our modern way of life. 

Calories in-calories out isn't wrong, it's that most people are not willing to change their lives forever, they only want to lose weight and then go back to eating what they did before. Obesity is a public health issue, it is related to our way of life in its entirety - sedentary lifestyle & abundance of high calorie food- . On a social level we must tackle this with education and maybe even regulation. On an individual level is both education & psychological approach & trying different methods (including fasting and low caloriers/macro manipulation) because not everyone can do well on every diet.

I blame both doctors and colleagues dietitians (I am an RD myself) who go by old knowledge + profit. Dr Fung isn't any different in that regard, he is trying to sell books and raise his reputation, which is why he is focusing on advertising fasting instead of approaching the issue from a big-picture perspective "fasting is the only way! Buy my book to learn how for 59.99$!"


----------



## angularvelocity (Jun 15, 2009)

Fasting isn't sustainable, although fasting would need to be defined. While calories in/out can make sense numerically, it is under an assumption that every calorie is the same. UC Davis published studies in rat models describing high fat diets vs high fructose diets and demonstrated that fructose is the more likely cause of metabolic syndrome. The calorie in/out model also does not include the effects of insulin. Things are more complex than just inputs and output calories.


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

angularvelocity said:


> Fasting isn't sustainable, although fasting would need to be defined. While calories in/out can make sense numerically, it is under an assumption that every calorie is the same. UC Davis published studies in rat models describing high fat diets vs high fructose diets and demonstrated that fructose is the more likely cause of metabolic syndrome. The calorie in/out model also does not include the effects of insulin. Things are more complex than just inputs and output calories.


You can have metabolic syndrome and never eat a high fructose diet too. The thing about HFCS is that it delivers unnaturally high concentrations of fructose at once in the liver which has to convert it to glucose so it can enter the general blood supply, which eventually leads to fatty liver, visceral fat and insulin resistance. This can happen irrelevantly of obesity so we see more people in their 40s who are slightly overweight to obese and have signs of metabolic syndrome. But it can happen due to obesity without the consumption of HFCS too. 

I agree that fasting can be unsustainable, which is why it's a personalized choice of diet rather than a fit-for all as this doctor suggests.


----------



## angularvelocity (Jun 15, 2009)

Red Panda said:


> You can have metabolic syndrome and never eat a high fructose diet too.


I'd like clarification on this (just for personal knowledge). If you ate only vegetables and meat, is it possible to get metabolic syndrome? From my understanding, excessive carbohydrate diets, especially HFCS, will cause metabolic syndrome. This is magnified when there is a lack of fiber to reduce the influx of glucose into the blood stream. 



Red Panda said:


> The thing about HFCS is that it delivers unnaturally high concentrations of fructose at once in the liver which has to convert it to glucose so it can enter the general blood supply, which eventually leads to fatty liver, visceral fat and insulin resistance. This can happen irrelevantly of obesity so we see more people in their 40s who are slightly overweight to obese and have signs of metabolic syndrome.


Agreed on the metabolic pathway.


----------



## Squirt (Jun 2, 2017)

@Duo what about fasting made you think about your own situation? I am not linking the two very well.



NAC said:


> This is second time I see someone in here praising the dear Dr. Fung.
> "The human body doesn't work this way."
> 
> That sentence alone emits a strong vibe of denial. There's thousands of well documented and impartial health studies based on CICO(calories in, calories out), which proves the theory to the point that I'd even argue that it's overdone and reached a point of silliness.
> ...


The thing about fasting is that it is flexible - fasting is simply_ not eating constantly_. It could be 7 hours, 16 hours, 24 hours, whatever - just not eating when you don't need to eat. He states this in the video, for anyone bothering to watch it. It is like CICO advanced edition, where you actually look at how the body uses energy, not just total input/output. Fasting isn't overturning the CICO paradigm, it's refining how energy expenditure and storage can be managed over longer periods of time, instead of daily (to point out one assumption, why do we assess our caloric intake/expenditure in a 24 hour window? Does that reflect caloric intake/expenditure over say, 18 days?).

I found it enlightening when looking through dozens of articles about how appetite is regulated and finding conflicting research, big gaps in causation studies, calls for "more research", inconclusive results, incorrect and overturned assumptions etc. on something as seemingly straight-forward as "what makes you feel hungry." 

One finding that is consistent with both research and experience is that the feeling of hunger caused by ghrelin is not tied to insulin or blood glucose, but a circadian rhythm trained by the expectation of food. So many people think that if they don't eat when their stomach growls it is the end of the world - when this is a _trained response_. Eating food is a habit.

When it comes to diet, people need to observe their own situation to watch their health, and find what works and what doesn't for them. Studies can be helpful, but research is always moving in different directions, finding blind spots, and overturning previously held beliefs. We should be mindful of this before deciding that that status-quo is a foregone conclusion.


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

angularvelocity said:


> I'd like clarification on this (just for personal knowledge). If you ate only vegetables and meat, is it possible to get metabolic syndrome? From my understanding, excessive carbohydrate diets, especially HFCS, will cause metabolic syndrome. This is magnified when there is a lack of fiber to reduce the influx of glucose into the blood stream.


OK first of all, we have to describe what metabolic syndrome is. It is basically the existence of 1) insulin resistance 2) visceral adiposity 3) dyslipidemia and 4) endothelial dysfunction. MS is the precursor to type 2 diabetes and heart disease.

I don't know if it's been documented because there aren't many people who eat only meat and veggies for long enough, but in theory it's possible yes. 

Insulin resistance is caused by a high amount of circulating free fatty acids, which reduce sensitivity in the muscles and they can't uptake glucose with the same efficiency anymore. 

Visceral fat [fat deposits around the organs] has been found to increase production of proinflammatory factors like TNfA (tumor necrosis factor A) and IL-6 (interleukin-6) [these are molecules of the immune system that fight infections]. These chemical signals increase insulin resistance and cause inflammation in the circulatory system that lead to compromised endothelial function - > heart disease. At this point we also have pathological function of the blood pressure control (renin-angiotensin system) that leads to hypertension which is generally a huge cause of blood vessel damage

Dislypidemia (high triglycerides, high LDL low HDL) starts with the suppression of lipolysis by insulin, which makes the tissue release more free fatty acids into the circulation which go into the liver and are made into triglycerides and LDL. The LDL produced in this case is the dangerous one (small and dense) which is easily affected by inflammatory factors --> atherosclerosis + endothelial dysfunction [inner surface of the blood vessels] -> heart disease

This is the most basic stuff about how MS works. There are plenty of people who are overweight to obese and don't have MS so there are genetic factors involved in this. There is evidence that stress increases visceral fat deposits due to cortisol. 
Like I said there are probably not a lot of studies involving meat + veggie diets because not many people adhere to such a diet long enough. But the evidence we have so far point to a diet rich in plants and with less meat and animal fat [and processed carbs] consumption as being better for preventing metabolic syndrome. I can look into it more later when I have the time but don't expect much with this. Paleo diets are a new trend and don't evidence to support them as being healthy, only cherry picking of specific factors that they assume will make the diet healthy, which in many cases contradict actual evidence [like the case of legumes].


----------



## Squirt (Jun 2, 2017)

Red Panda said:


> OK first of all, we have to describe what metabolic syndrome is. It is basically the existence of 1) insulin resistance 2) visceral adiposity 3) dyslipidemia and 4) endothelial dysfunction. MS is the precursor to type 2 diabetes and heart disease.
> 
> I don't know if it's been documented because there aren't many people who eat only meat and veggies for long enough, but in theory it's possible yes.
> 
> ...


Genetic factors and also probably gut micro biome, considering they are the primary producers of fatty acids in the gut, and are intimately involved in inflammatory responses, and rely on a plant/fiber-rich diet for functional diversity.

In short, probably best to eat a variety of nutritious foods. Hahahaha.


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

Squirt said:


> Genetic factors and also probably gut micro biome, considering they are the primary producers of fatty acids in the gut, and are intimately involved in inflammatory responses, and rely on a plant/fiber-rich diet for functional diversity.
> 
> In short, probably best to eat a variety of nutritious foods. Hahahaha.


I'm not familiar with such a connection or don't remember. Fatty acids produced in the gut are usually consumed by the gut epithelium for replenishment and keeping the cells healthy. So I'm not sure how it could connect to metabolic syndrome. Keeping the immune system healthy probably does contribute though.
And yea, the usual "whole foods diet" is probably the best approach.


----------



## shazam (Oct 18, 2015)

It's 9ood to 9o with out food for a while because it's 9ood for the body. If you're hun9ry and drink coffee that's 9ood for you too.


----------



## Squirt (Jun 2, 2017)

Red Panda said:


> I'm not familiar with such a connection or don't remember. Fatty acids produced in the gut are usually consumed by the gut epithelium for replenishment and keeping the cells healthy. So I'm not sure how it could connect to metabolic syndrome. Keeping the immune system healthy probably does contribute though.
> And yea, the usual "whole foods diet" is probably the best approach.


http://pol.gu.se/digitalAssets/1380/1380853_tremaroli_b--ckhed_nature_2012.pdf



> In addition, SCFAs can regulate gene
> expression by binding to the G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs)
> GPR41 (also known as FFAR3) and GPR43 (also known as FFAR2).
> Signalling through these receptors affects several different functions
> ...





> The altered gut microbiota can stimulate CCL5 secretion, which
> can result in increased permeability and influx of microbial components. In
> the liver, lipopolysaccharide and bacterial DNA activate the receptors, TLR4
> and 9, *leading to increased tumour-necrosis-factor-α (TNFα) secretion and
> ...


It's so complicated but so interesting!


----------



## incision (May 23, 2010)

Squirt said:


> @*Duo* what about fasting made you think about your own situation? I am not linking the two very well.


Apparently, my natural eating habits are what people consider intermittent fasting.


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

Squirt said:


> http://pol.gu.se/digitalAssets/1380/1380853_tremaroli_b--ckhed_nature_2012.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks! 
Yea nutrition science is really complicated and mind blowing and a struggle to keep up with I won't lie.
Gut health is really important in so many things and we've just started to understand it. All signs point that we need a primarily plant based diet to keep everything healthy and functional. I'm gonna read this soon, thanks again!


----------

