Rachel, to your point regarding "someone who is hungry" -
Here's the thing: there is no way to take in more calories than the body needs and expect to lose weight. I do agree with the high fat / low sugar crowd in that there are other mechanisms at play, but being that this is a fasting forum I think that diet specifics are, for the most part, best evangelized elsewhere.
For me, a binge eater, fasting addresses the "hungry" statement. Perfectly? No. Do the food choices made in the window impact the feeling of hunger? Certainly. Obviously none of us are starving if we have excess body fat, assuming no other medical issues. Quite simply, it's not a matter of believing in telling someone who's hungry to cut more calories; it's a matter of helping someone who is overweight manage the way they address food so that they can have a better relationship with their appetite.
Freedom - well, we all have freedom to eat whenever and whatever we want. I guess what I'm saying is that freedom with respect to Fast-5 doesn't mean an absence of self-control, it means that there are no specific foods that one needs to adhere to in order to acheive measurable results. I do believe that I can eat more if I avoid sugar and flour and not impact my weight negatively. Not infinitely more, LOL - but more. I also believe that when I eat a lot of concentrated calories, namely sugar, that it impacts my hunger when I'm fasting. Simply put - if the emphasis is on carbs and sugar during my feeding, then the next day my fasting is more difficult. So, I just see it as a cost-benefit analysis. I won't waste my sugar-eating on Twinkies and soda, but if I'm confronted with an awesome pie or some homemade pasta, I just might suffer the consequences gladly.
Fast-5 doesn't erase the way your body responds to food. It just educates you on HOW your body uses fuel, whether it's stored fat or food - and gives you tools to maximize your ability to take the emphasis away from dieting and put more emphasis on living your life. Just like anything else, just because you have more information doesn't mean that you'll automatically take the informed path. It just means that as you move forward you'll have a better understanding of why those pants are either tighter, or more loose. :-)
It's also entirely reasonable to point out that without doing Fast-5, someone like Beth's husband would have gained even more.
From: Rachel <rachelsayshello@yahoo.com>
To: "fast5@yahoogroups.com" <fast5@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 1:32 PM
Subject: Re: [fast5] Re: Having trouble after a year!
To: "fast5@yahoogroups.com" <fast5@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 1:32 PM
Subject: Re: [fast5] Re: Having trouble after a year!
Thank you. I don't believe in telling someone who is hungry to cut their calories even more.
If there's no freedom in Fast-5, then why do it?
From: Barnaby Walker <barnabywalker@gmail.com>
To: fast5@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 12:29 PM
Subject: [fast5] Re: Having trouble after a year!
To: fast5@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 12:29 PM
Subject: [fast5] Re: Having trouble after a year!
And those of us in the Low Insulin school, don't follow Calorie In Calorie Out.
The Body doesn't boil down to a simple Physics problem of fueling a furnace. The Hormone Insulin enters the picture, and affects Fat loss.
Fasting places the body in a low insulin state.
Low Carb diets work for the same reason.
http://www.garytaubes.com/2010/12/calories-fat-or-carbohydrates/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNYlIcXynwE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Akz9B-zMS-4
Barnaby
--- In fast5@yahoogroups.com, David Nyman <david@...> wrote:
>
> I would certainly endorse what Phil says about calories-in, calories-out.
> Despite observations others have made about "good" or "bad" food categories
> - and I won't dispute that these concerns may be relevant to other health
> issues - when it comes to weight loss energy balance is by far the most
> important factor. If weight is not going down over a reasonable period,
> then either less food must go in, more energy must be expended, or both.
> All the properly controlled research studies (crucially, those not
> dependent on self-reporting) have confirmed an almost straight-line
> relationship between energy balance and weight. Of course, this shouldn't
> really surprise anybody, as the converse would violate basic laws of physics
> (like perpetual motion!). So as Phil says, "whatever you want" doesn't
> translate to "as much as you want". To put it another way, if you are both
> wise and fortunate, you can have anything you want, but not everything you
> want.
>
> Fast 5 isn't a magic bullet that robs food of its calorific value. Rather
> it's a strategy for limiting calorie intake based on the observation that
> the fewer opportunities we have to eat, the less often we can fall prey to
> temptation. But a five-hour eating window (or even less) is no barrier to
> the capacities of a dedicated glutton (speaking as one myself) and hence a
> degree of control is still necessary, especially when there is still weight
> to be shed. Don't forget - unfair though it may feel - that as we lose
> weight we need fewer calories than before to maintain our slimmed-down
> bodies. Even now, when I have been at my target weight for years, and
> exercising typically for an hour a day, if I lapse into eating as much as I
> (sometimes) want, the pounds begin to creep back. But, even though I still
> have to practice a degree of limitation, IF still works for me because my
> daily four or five-hour window still feels more satisfyingly like a "feast"
> than a larger number of calories spread over the whole day.
>
> David
>
> On 21 September 2011 16:06, Beth <beth@...> wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > My husband has been doing fast 5 for about a year now, primarily to lose
> > weight (he is in good health otherwise). Weight loss has stopped completely.
> > He lost 30 pounds over the first 6 months, then nothing. Now he has actually
> > gained back 5 pounds. he needs to lose another 50 pounds.
> >
> > He has eaten outside his window maybe 3 to 5 times the entire year, that's
> > it. His window is early in the day, he has tried to change it but been
> > unsuccessful due to business lunches etc, and whereas it used to be easy, he
> > now finds himself hungry in the evenings, although he doesn't give in and
> > eat. He doesn't eat particularly healthy, but one of the things that
> > attracted him to this lifestyle was that he could eat whatever he wants. He
> > gets very little exercise also, but I can guarantee you that would be the
> > most diffcult thing for him to change.
> >
> > He is so frustrated with hunger and lack of weight loss, I told him I would
> > ask you guys for any ideas.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Beth
> >
> >
> >
>
The Body doesn't boil down to a simple Physics problem of fueling a furnace. The Hormone Insulin enters the picture, and affects Fat loss.
Fasting places the body in a low insulin state.
Low Carb diets work for the same reason.
http://www.garytaubes.com/2010/12/calories-fat-or-carbohydrates/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNYlIcXynwE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Akz9B-zMS-4
Barnaby
--- In fast5@yahoogroups.com, David Nyman <david@...> wrote:
>
> I would certainly endorse what Phil says about calories-in, calories-out.
> Despite observations others have made about "good" or "bad" food categories
> - and I won't dispute that these concerns may be relevant to other health
> issues - when it comes to weight loss energy balance is by far the most
> important factor. If weight is not going down over a reasonable period,
> then either less food must go in, more energy must be expended, or both.
> All the properly controlled research studies (crucially, those not
> dependent on self-reporting) have confirmed an almost straight-line
> relationship between energy balance and weight. Of course, this shouldn't
> really surprise anybody, as the converse would violate basic laws of physics
> (like perpetual motion!). So as Phil says, "whatever you want" doesn't
> translate to "as much as you want". To put it another way, if you are both
> wise and fortunate, you can have anything you want, but not everything you
> want.
>
> Fast 5 isn't a magic bullet that robs food of its calorific value. Rather
> it's a strategy for limiting calorie intake based on the observation that
> the fewer opportunities we have to eat, the less often we can fall prey to
> temptation. But a five-hour eating window (or even less) is no barrier to
> the capacities of a dedicated glutton (speaking as one myself) and hence a
> degree of control is still necessary, especially when there is still weight
> to be shed. Don't forget - unfair though it may feel - that as we lose
> weight we need fewer calories than before to maintain our slimmed-down
> bodies. Even now, when I have been at my target weight for years, and
> exercising typically for an hour a day, if I lapse into eating as much as I
> (sometimes) want, the pounds begin to creep back. But, even though I still
> have to practice a degree of limitation, IF still works for me because my
> daily four or five-hour window still feels more satisfyingly like a "feast"
> than a larger number of calories spread over the whole day.
>
> David
>
> On 21 September 2011 16:06, Beth <beth@...> wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > My husband has been doing fast 5 for about a year now, primarily to lose
> > weight (he is in good health otherwise). Weight loss has stopped completely.
> > He lost 30 pounds over the first 6 months, then nothing. Now he has actually
> > gained back 5 pounds. he needs to lose another 50 pounds.
> >
> > He has eaten outside his window maybe 3 to 5 times the entire year, that's
> > it. His window is early in the day, he has tried to change it but been
> > unsuccessful due to business lunches etc, and whereas it used to be easy, he
> > now finds himself hungry in the evenings, although he doesn't give in and
> > eat. He doesn't eat particularly healthy, but one of the things that
> > attracted him to this lifestyle was that he could eat whatever he wants. He
> > gets very little exercise also, but I can guarantee you that would be the
> > most diffcult thing for him to change.
> >
> > He is so frustrated with hunger and lack of weight loss, I told him I would
> > ask you guys for any ideas.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Beth
> >
> >
> >
>
__._,_.___
MARKETPLACE
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment