Intermittent fasting is a technique of consciously extending the time between meals as a way to decrease insulin production (which is connected to glucose and yes, to weight, including maintenance. For insulin resistant people it can be very useful and healthy. There is research supporting it, see "The obesity Code".
Anorexia is psychological and while it perhaps can look like fasting, actually has complicated psychological, emotional and biological drivers

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You people who say "just eat when you are hungry" as though nobody has ever thought about that sound like privileged idiots who have functioning bodies.

Let me tell you about my body. I have an autoimmune issue that took many years to diagnose, and it'd hard to treat. I am always hungry. ALWAYS. My body does not do or understand satiation. If I ate when I am hungry like you seem to think everyone should do, I could consume 3000-6000 calories a day, easily. I digest very quickly, my body holds on to body fat like there is a famine coming, and I will be ready to eat again maybe 45 minutes after a full meal.

IF works for me because it is a simple black and white rule that I can live by that prevents excess calorie consumption. Am I restricting myself? Absolutely! Am I hungry during the fasting hours? Yes, of course, but I am hungry during the eating hours too, so that's not new. I have no idea if this is an eating disorder or not, but as my body doesn't understand satiation, it's already disordered so one more disorder is NBD.

I get so sick of the sanctimonious twits who have no idea what some of us live with on a daily basis.

If you don't mind sharing, what is your autoimmune disorder? I have a friend who has the same problem but has never been diagnosed with anything.

It's a form of Hashimoto's. I would not say it's under total control now, but it's better than it was before I started treatment. At least I know what's going on and can try to work around it.

Personally after going through the process I think there are many people with autoimmune disorders that just stump the doctors.

Anonymous wrote:You people who say "just eat when you are hungry" as though nobody has ever thought about that sound like privileged idiots who have functioning bodies.

Let me tell you about my body. I have an autoimmune issue that took many years to diagnose, and it'd hard to treat. I am always hungry. ALWAYS. My body does not do or understand satiation. If I ate when I am hungry like you seem to think everyone should do, I could consume 3000-6000 calories a day, easily. I digest very quickly, my body holds on to body fat like there is a famine coming, and I will be ready to eat again maybe 45 minutes after a full meal.

IF works for me because it is a simple black and white rule that I can live by that prevents excess calorie consumption. Am I restricting myself? Absolutely! Am I hungry during the fasting hours? Yes, of course, but I am hungry during the eating hours too, so that's not new. I have no idea if this is an eating disorder or not, but as my body doesn't understand satiation, it's already disordered so one more disorder is NBD.

I get so sick of the sanctimonious twits who have no idea what some of us live with on a daily basis.

If you don't mind sharing, what is your autoimmune disorder? I have a friend who has the same problem but has never been diagnosed with anything.

I think it's a spectrum and not so black/white. Some people restrict calories in a way that is healthy in an effort to lose weight; some people take it to the extreme and develop anorexia. Same with IF, some people do it in a healthy way, and some take it to an extreme.

I do see a link between IF and orthorexia, especially in men. I've known men who continued with IF even though they felt terrible on it, sometimes for years. Some people have cleverly marketed IF as the way cavemen/hunters ate, and people adopt it fearing that if they don't, they will get fat and die of cancer.

I remember hearing one sad case where a father did extreme fasting, often for 24-72 hours at a time, and his teenage daughter picked up the habit. He talked about how proud he was that she was denying herself food even though she was hungry because it proved how tough she is.

You people who say "just eat when you are hungry" as though nobody has ever thought about that sound like privileged idiots who have functioning bodies.

Let me tell you about my body. I have an autoimmune issue that took many years to diagnose, and it'd hard to treat. I am always hungry. ALWAYS. My body does not do or understand satiation. If I ate when I am hungry like you seem to think everyone should do, I could consume 3000-6000 calories a day, easily. I digest very quickly, my body holds on to body fat like there is a famine coming, and I will be ready to eat again maybe 45 minutes after a full meal.

IF works for me because it is a simple black and white rule that I can live by that prevents excess calorie consumption. Am I restricting myself? Absolutely! Am I hungry during the fasting hours? Yes, of course, but I am hungry during the eating hours too, so that's not new. I have no idea if this is an eating disorder or not, but as my body doesn't understand satiation, it's already disordered so one more disorder is NBD.

I get so sick of the sanctimonious twits who have no idea what some of us live with on a daily basis.

Anonymous wrote:
IF does not restrict calories.

I eat the exact same food but at 11, 2 and 6 instead of 9, 12 and 7.


But the data suggests that IF works because within a limited window people eat less - hence, fewer calories. Yes, you may eat the same food, but perhaps because you're compressing consumption, the overall quantity is less. I did IF for several months and I lost 15 pounds pretty quickly eating "anything I wanted" in the window I ate (b/w 2 PM - 6 PM). But there's only so much food I could consume in that time ....

No people forget that it is not just how many calories but also how your metabolism is burning and storing those calories. For example I may burn fewer calories lifting weights for 15 minutes than doing cardio but I build more muscle lifting weights and that muscle burns more calories over time. There may be the same calories in one food item that is all protein vs one item that is all carbs but your body does more to convert the protein than the carbs. If I fast and have used up any available carbs then my body has to convert fat for fuel. This requires more calories than just stuffing some carbs in my mouth for a snack for quick carbs.

People who do calorie restriction with the traditional higher carb, low fat , low cali diets everyday end up lowering their metabolism. With IF you burst the calories within the window and do not get into the lowered metabolism.

I'm not saying that eating fewer calories isn't part of the equation but it is not the only part. So many people struggle and fail because that is all they do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if you don't understand the difference between a dieting method and a life threatening mental illness, DCUM can't help you.

+1000

The stupidity of the OP is astounding. Anorexia is under-eating- not consuming calories to need your body's needs. IF is eating during a specific time frame which can also be combined with calorie restriction.

Btw, the idea that people have to eat 3 meals a day is completely arbitrary. It's also a remnant of a time when society was mostly agrarian. The point is to consume enough calories to meet your body's needs. You can do that in 1 big meal, 3 meals, 4-6 small meals, etc...

Personally, I'm not hungry in the morning so I don't eat breakfast. I'm the hungriest in the afternoon, so I eat a big lunch-it's my biggest meal of the day. Hunger-wise, I can go either way about dinner but I like eating dinner so I usually eat a light dinner.

I have been eating this way since I was old to have a say over my meals. That was long before I knew what IF was.

Dammit. Why is this so hard to understand. Not eating because your aren’t hungry is cool. Not eating because you ‘cant’ is an entirely different ball game.

I am sorry, but what do you think a diet is? It is a set of rules by which people eat. According to you we should all just follow our eating urges and whether that puts us at 130 pounds or 300 pounds at least we do not have an eating disorder. People make changes and follow rules to improve their health and how they look at feel. I may choose to eat 1600 calories a day and I have learned about health benefits from eating with a limited eating window so I will eat all of those calories within a 8-10 hour window. I also have learned that exercise is good for me so I joined a gym and I make a plan to go there 4 times a week and put that in my schedule. Those are a lot of rules, none of them unhealthy. But, according to you, I would have an eating disorder because i am doing all those things because of following rules, not my “feelings”.

Why is that you are completely wrong so hard to understand?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if you don't understand the difference between a dieting method and a life threatening mental illness, DCUM can't help you.

+1000

The stupidity of the OP is astounding. Anorexia is under-eating- not consuming calories to need your body's needs. IF is eating during a specific time frame which can also be combined with calorie restriction.

Btw, the idea that people have to eat 3 meals a day is completely arbitrary. It's also a remnant of a time when society was mostly agrarian. The point is to consume enough calories to meet your body's needs. You can do that in 1 big meal, 3 meals, 4-6 small meals, etc...

Personally, I'm not hungry in the morning so I don't eat breakfast. I'm the hungriest in the afternoon, so I eat a big lunch-it's my biggest meal of the day. Hunger-wise, I can go either way about dinner but I like eating dinner so I usually eat a light dinner.

I have been eating this way since I was old to have a say over my meals. That was long before I knew what IF was.

Dammit. Why is this so hard to understand. Not eating because your aren’t hungry is cool. Not eating because you ‘cant’ is an entirely different ball game.

I love IF! I’ve lost 80 lbs in a year doing it. I do 16:8, but I’m hoping to tighten my window to 18:6. My body is pretty trained. Very rarely am I hungry before 1pm and I just seem to get full eating much less food. I do make adjustments for special occasions or if I get hungry unexpectedly. But it works great for me. I don’t consider it a diet, it’s a lifestyle. If it’s not for you, move on.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IF does not restrict calories.

I eat the exact same food but at 11, 2 and 6 instead of 9, 12 and 7.

But the data suggests that IF works because within a limited window people eat less - hence, fewer calories. Yes, you may eat the same food, but perhaps because you're compressing consumption, the overall quantity is less. I did IF for several months and I lost 15 pounds pretty quickly eating "anything I wanted" in the window I ate (b/w 2 PM - 6 PM). But there's only so much food I could consume in that time ....

That's because your eating window is tiny. You're doing 20-4. Most people who practice IF do 16-8 or 14-10.

Anonymous wrote:OP, if you don't understand the difference between a dieting method and a life threatening mental illness, DCUM can't help you.

+1000

The stupidity of the OP is astounding. Anorexia is under-eating- not consuming calories to need your body's needs. IF is eating during a specific time frame which can also be combined with calorie restriction.

Btw, the idea that people have to eat 3 meals a day is completely arbitrary. It's also a remnant of a time when society was mostly agrarian. The point is to consume enough calories to meet your body's needs. You can do that in 1 big meal, 3 meals, 4-6 small meals, etc...

Personally, I'm not hungry in the morning so I don't eat breakfast. I'm the hungriest in the afternoon, so I eat a big lunch-it's my biggest meal of the day. Hunger-wise, I can go either way about dinner but I like eating dinner so I usually eat a light dinner.

I have been eating this way since I was old to have a say over my meals. That was long before I knew what IF was.

Anonymous wrote:IF does not restrict calories.

I eat the exact same food but at 11, 2 and 6 instead of 9, 12 and 7.

But the data suggests that IF works because within a limited window people eat less - hence, fewer calories. Yes, you may eat the same food, but perhaps because you're compressing consumption, the overall quantity is less. I did IF for several months and I lost 15 pounds pretty quickly eating "anything I wanted" in the window I ate (b/w 2 PM - 6 PM). But there's only so much food I could consume in that time ....

OP, if you don't understand the difference between a dieting method and a life threatening mental illness, DCUM can't help you.

I couldn't care less if people skip breakfast. It's creating rules around it that strikes me as problematic. If you're not hungry for breakfast, then don't eat it. But I don't buy for a second that everyone, or even most people doing IF are just naturally not hungry. If they were, they wouldn't need to label their eating with anything. They'd just eat when they're hungry. That's not IF.

Oh I totally believe that if people eat ONLY when they are actually hungry that IF isn't a big deal. I have been a meal skipper my whole life because I am always busy and hate breakfast foods. I hated breakfast as a child, I hated it as a young adult and still do not like to eat in the morning. In the morning, I just want a cup of coffee and to get on my way. I just don't get hungry until the end of the day so I often skip lunch. When I did or do eat lunch it isn't because I am actually hungry. The same thing with snacking. I'll occasionally smack if its something tasty but I am not eating the chips because I'm hungry.

People have driven me nuts my whole life about how can I skip breakfast. They are shocked to learn I skip breakfast and lunch. I've had nutritionist friends lecture me on how I must be destroying my metabolism and even though I'm not fat at some point it will catch up if I don't re-adjust and start eating 3 meals and grazing. Guess what -now they are ALL doing IF to lose weight.

I think way more people eat not because they are actually hungry but because they :

a enjoy the taste and its a pleasurable activity for them
b.) they confuse being thirsty with being hungry
c.) they have had it drilled into them that they must eat breakfast and lunch
d.) they use eating as a mental break from work or whatever activity they need a break from doing

IF would not be so easy for so many if real hunger was involved.

OP, you probably already know many of these, but this link has some of the warning signs to look for. Just something to keep an eye on, depending on how it goes for your step-daughter. There are some PPs who seem to manage IF easily and others who don't (and at least one who is aware of the mental impact of shortening the eating time). Hopefully your step-daughter is in the former group. Good for you for looking out for her.

https://www.nationaleatingdisorders.org/learn/by-eating-disorder/anorexia/warning-signs-symptoms