Anonymous wrote:I’m doing this now for 8 days. I have lost 1.5 lbs and feel more energy, alertness, better memory. Similar age to OP and female. OP, do you have mood swings on this? How do you manage? I’ve read this part can be harder for women. But the overall benefits make me want to find a way forward.

I haven’t noticed any mood swings-if anything I’m happier-more spontaneous dance sessions in the kitchen &
joking around. I definitely have more energy too, and sleep better. I also rarely think about food, it really is just fuel to me now. I just open frig and pick something veggies and protein.

I’m doing this now for 8 days. I have lost 1.5 lbs and feel more energy, alertness, better memory. Similar age to OP and female. OP, do you have mood swings on this? How do you manage? I’ve read this part can be harder for women. But the overall benefits make me want to find a way forward.

The same idiots who followed the "low fat" trend of the 90s, follow the "low carb" trend of today.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apple is not a crappy snack. You need to change your disordered relationships with food.

+10000

Only in America will someone choose bacon over an apple as "diet" food because of "carbs." The fattest nation is also the most paranoid over things like apples, beans, and sweet potatoes. Likely not a coincidence.

I am a European actually and ate kale regularly when many Americans didn’t know what it was. And I like it. But I don’t like apples and never did. Not because they have carbs, it’s just not my thing but I forced myself to eat them for “snacks” (which, it turns out, I don’t need at all). Not anymore and yes, that is absolutely less disordered than eating things I don’t like because they are “healthy”.

That's great and all, but I think you know that disliking one thing isn't what people are talking about when it comes to abstaining from carby (nutritious) fruits and vegetables.

Genuinely, what nutrients do most fruits (ex. an apple) provide that you cannot get from green leafy vegetables, which are low-carb? You do know that those of us who eat low-carb aren’t just eating bacon all day, right? I eat more veggies because I replace the grains with them. I don’t neee to eat corn or potatoes or bananas or whatever to be healthy. I eat tons of salads, kale, broccoli, cauliflower, cabbage, green beans, cucumbers, celery, etc. The list goes on.

High carbs fruits and veggies have ton of benefits, some not found in leavy veggies. Nobody needs a truckload of bananas in a day, but health benefits of eating a banana, citrus fruits, berries, mangoes, etc are many.
Dates:
Calories: 277
Carbs: 75 grams
Fiber: 7 grams
Protein: 2 grams
Potassium: 20% of the RDI
Magnesium: 14% of the RDI
Copper: 18% of the RDI
Manganese: 15% of the RDI
Iron: 5% of the RDI
Vitamin B6: 12% of the RDI

Brocolli:
Nutrient
Amount in 1 cup broccoli (76g)
Daily adult requirement
Energy (calories)
24.3
1,800–3,000
Carbohydrate (g)
4.78 g, including 1 g of sugar
130
Fiber (g)
1.82
25.2–33.6
Calcium (milligrams [mg])
35
1,000–1,200
Phosphorus (mg)
50.9
700
Potassium (mg)
230
4.700
Vitamin C (mg)
40.5
75–90
Folate (micrograms [mcg])
49.4
400
Vitamin A (mcg)
6.08
700–900
Beta-carotene (mcg)
70.7
No data
Lutein and zeaxanthin (mcg)
566 mcg
No data
Vitamin E (mg)
0.11
15
Vitamin K (mcg)
77.5
90–120

Potatoes are one of the best foods there is, we just choose to make them drenched in oil and make them into a heart attack!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apple is not a crappy snack. You need to change your disordered relationships with food.

+10000

Only in America will someone choose bacon over an apple as "diet" food because of "carbs." The fattest nation is also the most paranoid over things like apples, beans, and sweet potatoes. Likely not a coincidence.

I am a European actually and ate kale regularly when many Americans didn’t know what it was. And I like it. But I don’t like apples and never did. Not because they have carbs, it’s just not my thing but I forced myself to eat them for “snacks” (which, it turns out, I don’t need at all). Not anymore and yes, that is absolutely less disordered than eating things I don’t like because they are “healthy”.

That's great and all, but I think you know that disliking one thing isn't what people are talking about when it comes to abstaining from carby (nutritious) fruits and vegetables.

Genuinely, what nutrients do most fruits (ex. an apple) provide that you cannot get from green leafy vegetables, which are low-carb? You do know that those of us who eat low-carb aren’t just eating bacon all day, right? I eat more veggies because I replace the grains with them. I don’t neee to eat corn or potatoes or bananas or whatever to be healthy. I eat tons of salads, kale, broccoli, cauliflower, cabbage, green beans, cucumbers, celery, etc. The list goes on.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Come back with an update 2 years from now after doing keto.

Why? I’ve been doing keto/a little looser low carb (more like 40-50g for maintenance) for years now and it is not difficult. It is second nature now and feels great. I normally don’t believe in nutrition science, but I have a gluten intolerance and it just feels so much better not to eat grains of any sort. I eat so many wings, burgers, etc. that I can always, always find something to eat and not feel deprived.

You seem to be proud of this. It is really, really not something to be proud of.

Um, okay. I was just sharing my experience in response to a post that implied it’s difficult to stay on keto/low carb long-term. It’s not true in my case. But everyone should definitely do what works for them. That’s the whole point of this post - OP shared something that is working for them. I’m sorry you guys feel the need to tell people they’re wrong and to be so disparaging about someone’s success.

I really think some scientists came up with IF to make Americans stop eating 24 hours a day! Simple because a ton of people forgot the principles of how to live a good healthy life. I recall in my childhood that I had breakfast, went to school, came home when younger around noon, ate lunch around 1pm, then had dinner at 7pm. Dinner, in my country, was a small meal. Sandwich with yogurt, or open-face sandwich with one piece of lunch meat with butter or mayo on it. Then I moved to the States in my 20s and was busy with college, so I ate mostly at night and had a muffin during the day, and dinner became the main large meal of the day. All of a sudden, grandma's cooking was not there and one chicken did not feed our family of five, but I could have half a chicken for myself. People ate sandwiches with ton of lunch meat on it, and as a college student starving by 7pm, I had half a baguette with cheese and ham and mayo and I loved, loved it! But, heck, I was 20ish and could pig out with little to no weight gain.
Guess what? At almost 50, I can't do that anymore! But, my body wants it regardless of my age and hormones, because it was used to it. IF comes in handy to curb those cravings. Today I am not eating, at all, since last night till tomorrow morning. I am not hungry at all, I ate plenty yesterday. So, for that sure, IF is good, because it thought me that I don't need such a large volume of food to be fine. But, for weight loss purposes, IF without calorie counting is useless. So, we now have scientists some real ones, some pseudo scientists hoping to teach people that you don't have to eat all day long, something we all knew even in the 80s, but forgot because we got addicted to sugar. So, if it helps with food addiction, go for it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apple is not a crappy snack. You need to change your disordered relationships with food.

+10000

Only in America will someone choose bacon over an apple as "diet" food because of "carbs." The fattest nation is also the most paranoid over things like apples, beans, and sweet potatoes. Likely not a coincidence.

I am a European actually and ate kale regularly when many Americans didn’t know what it was. And I like it. But I don’t like apples and never did. Not because they have carbs, it’s just not my thing but I forced myself to eat them for “snacks” (which, it turns out, I don’t need at all). Not anymore and yes, that is absolutely less disordered than eating things I don’t like because they are “healthy”.

That's great and all, but I think you know that disliking one thing isn't what people are talking about when it comes to abstaining from carby (nutritious) fruits and vegetables.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We seriously need a new forum about this. There’s a post similar to this every day.

you are eating fewer calories so you are losing weight.

+1

That's all it is. It's great that it's working, but 'eat less move more' is and has always been the gold standard.

But eating less on a consistent basis is HARD. It is very hard in fact - very few people lose weight and stay there.

People like me like IF because it makes eating less easier and therefore sustainable. I am not sure if it's biology or psychology, probably a combination of both. But here are the facts: I was a person who would eat a "healthy" meal at 12 and then despair that a crappy snack (apple) is 3 hours away. It felt impossible to wait so long (and for what) and I would often break down and binge. I can now easily go 20 hours without food (though I am not forcing myself - it just happens sometimes). I just don't think about food that much - and that alone is a life-saver. I also don't feel particularly hungry - I would register hunger maybe once during 20 hours. (I am OP of the other thread).

That's great that it's working for you and I genuinely mean that. But posts like yours are why people say it's a form of disordered eating / for people who can't self-regulate. if you 'despair' about a 'crappy snack' and binge eat, you don't have a healthy relationship with food. Not sure why so many IF'ers refuse to acknowledge that.

But she doesn't despair and binge. That is the point. She has a healthy relationship with food NOW.....while intermittent fasting.

..because she has an eating disorder. No one is saying it doesn't work for her. Just that it's the latest method for the disordered eaters to try to regain control.

I really think coming on an internet thread and calling out eating disorders when you have so few facts is a special kind of crazy. There is nothing healthy or helpful about your attitude.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We seriously need a new forum about this. There’s a post similar to this every day.

you are eating fewer calories so you are losing weight.

+1

That's all it is. It's great that it's working, but 'eat less move more' is and has always been the gold standard.

But eating less on a consistent basis is HARD. It is very hard in fact - very few people lose weight and stay there.

People like me like IF because it makes eating less easier and therefore sustainable. I am not sure if it's biology or psychology, probably a combination of both. But here are the facts: I was a person who would eat a "healthy" meal at 12 and then despair that a crappy snack (apple) is 3 hours away. It felt impossible to wait so long (and for what) and I would often break down and binge. I can now easily go 20 hours without food (though I am not forcing myself - it just happens sometimes). I just don't think about food that much - and that alone is a life-saver. I also don't feel particularly hungry - I would register hunger maybe once during 20 hours. (I am OP of the other thread).

That's great that it's working for you and I genuinely mean that. But posts like yours are why people say it's a form of disordered eating / for people who can't self-regulate. if you 'despair' about a 'crappy snack' and binge eat, you don't have a healthy relationship with food. Not sure why so many IF'ers refuse to acknowledge that.

Believe it or not, not all IFers have the same relationship with food. Not sure why people must come in these threads and scream “disordered” every time. It’s so obnoxious.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We seriously need a new forum about this. There’s a post similar to this every day.

you are eating fewer calories so you are losing weight.

+1

That's all it is. It's great that it's working, but 'eat less move more' is and has always been the gold standard.

But eating less on a consistent basis is HARD. It is very hard in fact - very few people lose weight and stay there.

People like me like IF because it makes eating less easier and therefore sustainable. I am not sure if it's biology or psychology, probably a combination of both. But here are the facts: I was a person who would eat a "healthy" meal at 12 and then despair that a crappy snack (apple) is 3 hours away. It felt impossible to wait so long (and for what) and I would often break down and binge. I can now easily go 20 hours without food (though I am not forcing myself - it just happens sometimes). I just don't think about food that much - and that alone is a life-saver. I also don't feel particularly hungry - I would register hunger maybe once during 20 hours. (I am OP of the other thread).

That's great that it's working for you and I genuinely mean that. But posts like yours are why people say it's a form of disordered eating / for people who can't self-regulate. if you 'despair' about a 'crappy snack' and binge eat, you don't have a healthy relationship with food. Not sure why so many IF'ers refuse to acknowledge that.

But she doesn't despair and binge. That is the point. She has a healthy relationship with food NOW.....while intermittent fasting.

..because she has an eating disorder. No one is saying it doesn't work for her. Just that it's the latest method for the disordered eaters to try to regain control.

What science is there behind keto? The same science that made us into sugar addicts?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apple is not a crappy snack. You need to change your disordered relationships with food.

+10000

Only in America will someone choose bacon over an apple as "diet" food because of "carbs." The fattest nation is also the most paranoid over things like apples, beans, and sweet potatoes. Likely not a coincidence.

I am a European actually and ate kale regularly when many Americans didn’t know what it was. And I like it. But I don’t like apples and never did. Not because they have carbs, it’s just not my thing but I forced myself to eat them for “snacks” (which, it turns out, I don’t need at all). Not anymore and yes, that is absolutely less disordered than eating things I don’t like because they are “healthy”.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Come back with an update 2 years from now after doing keto.

Why? I’ve been doing keto/a little looser low carb (more like 40-50g for maintenance) for years now and it is not difficult. It is second nature now and feels great. I normally don’t believe in nutrition science, but I have a gluten intolerance and it just feels so much better not to eat grains of any sort. I eat so many wings, burgers, etc. that I can always, always find something to eat and not feel deprived.

You seem to be proud of this. It is really, really not something to be proud of.