The FastDay Forum

We all know about the calorie count for fasting days but for those of you who 16:8 AND calorie count - do you reduce your calories on a 16:8 day - for example, knock off a third for skipping a meal? Or do you eat two bigger meals the equate to roughly the same amount of calories that you would consume on a normal "three meals a day" day?

I've always found that I'm fine sticking to 500 cals on a fasting day but on a 16:8 day I end up eating a bigger lunch and a bigger tea.

I guess it's all about the mindset, but I'm one of those who is always really hungry the day after a fast - and if I do two fasts with a day in between, that middle day is a REAL test of my resolve to stick to my calorie allowance!!!

Same as you, Domane!!

For 16:8, I just eat anything I want within reason inside an 8 hour window every day and this happily maintained my weight loss for 6 months until Christmas/New Year and a surprisingly sociable January. So I might have to revert to 5:2 in February but waiting till the end of this month to see how things pan out.

Eat what you need is my approach, the 16+ hours without should look after the health benefits for us...
Sometimes I find it better to over-eat before a heavy exercise/race day, and with a carby emphasis, just to make sure of full tanks..

Hi:

16:8 is not a calorie restriction weight loss way of eating. Under 16:8, you can eat as much of anything you want during the 8 hour eating window. Therefore, just like any other non-diet day, you have to watch what you eat so you don't go over your TDEE. If you wish, you can eat less than your TDEE, if you want you can eat more. In that regard, I've never figured out how it is different from any other non-diet day, but I guess if it helps some people control their eating there is certainly nothing wrong with it. Some avid followers on this site have reported (even warned) that if you don't watch your calories, you can start regaining weight following 16:8, so the bottom line is keep track of what you eat to get the result you want.

Some people also feel that by not eating for 16 consecutive hours a person derives some kind of health benefit. I have not seen any solid scientific evidence of that. People's eating habits (say, lots of carbs before bed) and metabolisms make it unclear that people that follow 16:8 automatically gain health benefits from doing it. I'd say the jury is still out on that aspect of it.

Probably better 19:5 (Fast 5) but 16:8 is not so difficult and keeps me familiar with the hungry feeling a couple of days a week. Without regular blood tests I cannot say there is a health benefit but I don't see why there should not be...

[carorees]

This study shows that extending the overnight fast to 18 hours increases lipid oxidation (i.e.fat burning) compared with a 12 hour fast. This indicates that insulin levels fall (otherwise lipid oxidation would not increase). The reduction in insulin helps to improve insulin sensitivity, so at least some health benefits accrue from having a daily eating window.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2202174

Like Pete, I generally fast more than 16 hours, usually 17 or 18 hours. I find it does reduce my appetite and I'm averaging 1400kcal per day, compared with around 1800 on non-fat days when I was just doing 5:2. My TDEE is calculated at 1600. Of course I'm also reducing carbs but I certainly don't feel deprived our constantly hungry.

From the MM FastDiet book reference to a Salk Institute study of two groups of mice eating the exact same amount of food - one nibbling their day away, the other on 16:8 ...

Nibblers - developed high cholesterol, high glucose, liver damage

16:8 - 28% less weight, less liver damage...

Causal factor? constantly elevated insulin level, stuck in fat-storing mode.

[carorees]

Would be a supportive study if it wasn't for the fact that 16 hours fasting for a mouse is like a week or so fasting for a human. Sadly we can't extrapolate this study to humans. It supports fasting in general but not 16:8.