Cool, my own anecdata matches yours. I also tend to have a daily fast until well into sundown, consuming only fresh ginger tea with lemon during the sunlit hours. Albeit sometimes if I'm truly famished I will eat something light (banana, baby carrots, etc) but it doesn't happen often. Been basically doing this pattern for 2+ years, and I definitely notice my mind staying clearer during the fast, and I am in the best physical condition of my life, running faster times and lifting heavier weights than ever. Those interested should check out "the warrior diet", which seems to suggest following a similar feeding routine.
Interesting seeing this, I recently was at a life balance seminar for work where they tried to encourage people to eat more often through the day. They discouraged going without food for a while and cited that sumo-wrestlers would use a technique of only eating at night in order to gain their massive amounts of weight.
Different strokes for different blokes. What may work for some may not work others. I never thought about getting into sumo wrestling (although, never ruled it out either). Rather than heeding the advice of 'eat-more!' Or 'eat-less!' I'd recommend just do trial and error and evaluate what works best for you individually over time. I didn't always follow this lifestyle, just gradually iterated into it after a great deal of introspection to see what works for me at the current moment. To that end, I have found regular fasting to be an important part of the balance.
>sumo-wrestlers would use a technique of only eating at night in order to gain their massive amounts of weight.
It's worth pointing out that the typical 'gains' diet for a sumo-wrestler contains dishes that are optimized to pack absurd amounts of calories into a meal. This is stuff that nobody outside that particular culture would generally eat.
I'd ask you the same question I asked jsonmez2--what does a typical meal look like? Do you find you're able to get everything you need in one meal? Any other tips?
I find it interesting that this is the traditional Buddhist monk meal plan, eat once a day, although it's lunch rather than dinner. There are several reasons for it that are all aimed at keeping monks' minds focused on their job which is practicing the Dhamma. One of those reasons is to limit energy intake so that monks don't have a lot of physical energy to get them into trouble thinking about things monks shouldn't be thinking about. So it's curious how you can maintain high energy levels and keep yourself ripped eating that way.
There are some cultural adaptations of the monk meal plan. Monks in some countries even eat three full meals per day due to the diet they follow. I'm referring to the traditional meal plan of one meal per day at lunch.
I really don't understand the mentality that eating and/or cooking is a "waste of time". Not picking on you specifically it is a common idea and part of the idea behind products like Soylent. I prefer to enjoy the moments of preparing my food and eating it.
> I really don't understand the mentality that eating and/or cooking is a "waste of time". Not picking on you specifically it is a common idea and part of the idea behind products like Soylent. I prefer to enjoy the moments of preparing my food and eating it.
I think it's best summed up as "people enjoy different things."
An example for you: I'm a cyclist. I love to assemble and work on my bikes, because I derive enjoyment from the process of working on the things I will use. This is incredibly similar conceptually to a cook who enjoys cooking their meals; it's not a "waste" of time for either of us, because in each case we derive satisfaction from the act of working on the thing we will eventually enjoy.
I also really enjoy eating (good) food. And so you might think that I would share the same interest in food preparation that I have in bicycle maintenance, but I absolutely do not. I cannot stand cooking, for reasons that I could not really articulate. It simply does not quite manage to tickle the right parts of my brain.
Left to my own devices I'd probably subsist mostly on "good enough" food that requires little or no preparation (such as nuts and fruit). I understand Soylent from this perspective, and the intermittent fasting / one meal a day thing makes a great deal of sense to me as well.
I think it just comes down to frequency, "necessity" of an activity, and context.
Someone might like driving, but are they going to enjoy driving to and from a work environment every day of the week? Perhaps. They might enjoy it so much that they love it. And the work might make it worthwhile. But making that thing a requirement seems like an easy way to transform it into something that's just not as fun as go-where-you-want-when-you-want free drive.
I think it just comes down to whether or not you you're forced into doing something as a means to an end. Cooking for subsistence rather than for pleasure, for example.
If dishes cleaned themselves I would cook more. I don't mind cooking but I hate having to clean dishes so I avoid cooking anything that dirties more than two dishes.
Cooking leaves me with two options:
1) Clean immediately after preparing my meal. Food is now cold and unenjoyable, but dishes are done!
2) Put off cleaning dishes until after my meal and food has settled so I can actually enjoy my food and the result of my labor. Food is now stuck to the pots/pans and things need to be scrubbed rather than rinsed. God help me if it was oatmeal I had forgotten about for 30~ minutes. That stuff turns into glue!
So I buy Soylent. I prepare it when I get home. I give the blender a quick rinse and I'm done. Since it is better cold than warm I can put it in the fridge and forget about it until I'm hungry.
If you're going to bother filling each cooking utensil with water you're better off giving them a quick rinse with a spray faucet. As it's faster to spray each utensil than to fill each container. Your "simple" method is a worse version of method 1 and doesn't actually solve the problem.
I handwashed dishes for 9 years. I also cooked dinner for the family (my mother and three sisters, stepfather was usually still at work) daily. I was also left with the dishes (as we did not have a mechanical dishwasher).
Not liking to cook has fuck all to do with not knowing how to cook. People who make that assumption and then are judgmental about people who dislike to cook piss me off. My issue is not that I've never cooked in my life or that I don't cook.
Sure, I could solve this by getting frozen lasagna and baking it for an hour ten. Absolutely no cleaning involved there! But that isn't cooking so much as preparing a pre-made meal.
What's something you don't like doing so I can judge and belittle you for it?
I understand that some folks don't like dishwashing. Just countering the hyperbole that gets thrown around. I too washed dishes for a decade. I didn't end up resentful and angry.
i'm a food guy, but i only really "enjoy" cooking on the weekends when i can take hours to do it, or try totally new things without having worked all day (more energy and mental horsepower to dedicated to it).
for example 80% of my weekdays are: 2 eggs s.s.u. in the morning for breakfast. chicken leg and vegetable seared and roasted for 30 mins. in cast iron and a basic salad for dinner. lunch is the same 5 or 6 restaurants that i know are cheap fast and healthy around my office, or i skip if i'm too busy.
i do fast occasionally when i've overeaten as part of my weight management strategy. i think the main reason i couldn't fast at lunch is social/habitual. also, friday team lunches are more elaborate.
Don't forget the cultural aspects. Cultures like the French or Italian enjoy more their food moments. In their ultra efficient society, the Americans — generalization warning! — don't think is really an important social moment. No mystery that Soylent is an American thing.
Same here. During the week at work, I drink water and/or tea or coffee with the occasional blob of coconut oil during the day (not technically fasting). I work out in the mornings and have a plentiful meal around 18:00 in the evening.
On weekends I tend to eat a big breakfast and small dinner instead.
I prefer to eat at home in a relaxing environment, where I can enjoy the food. Eating at work just isn't something I can enjoy.
This has been working for me for well over a year. YMMV, of course.
I agree that with one meal a day you likely don't need to count calories. Then again, I can easily consume 5000 calories of more if left unchecked. So I built my own IF-specific tracker (shameless plug).
What does a general meal look like for you? I want to get into this kind of eating schedule--it really fits my lifestyle and routine--but I'm concerned about being able to get the calories and nutrients I need from just a single meal. Any other tips?
For anyone having issues seeing the content on mobile, the abstract is this:
"Although major research efforts have focused on how specific components of foodstuffs affect health, relatively little is known about a more fundamental aspect of diet, the frequency and circadian timing of meals, and potential benefits of intermittent periods with no or very low energy intakes. The most common eating pattern in modern societies, three meals plus snacks every day, is abnormal from an evolutionary perspective. Emerging findings from studies of animal models and human subjects suggest that intermittent energy restriction periods of as little as 16 h can improve health indicators and counteract disease processes. The mechanisms involve a metabolic shift to fat metabolism and ketone production, and stimulation of adaptive cellular stress responses that prevent and repair molecular damage. As data on the optimal frequency and timing of meals crystalizes, it will be critical to develop strategies to incorporate those eating patterns into health care policy and practice, and the lifestyles of the population."
Abstract of the abstract:
Emerging findings from studies of animal models and human subjects suggest that intermittent energy restriction periods of as little as 16 h can improve health indicators and counteract disease processes.
That includes sleep? If you sleep 8 hours, awaken at 6 AM, then eat at 2 PM, it's a 16-hour restriction period?
I naturally go longer than that without eating each day. If you skip breakfast and lunch times, and include the hours you're asleep, it's easy to "fast" for closer to 20 hours or more every day.
I wouldn't force that though, I think everyone is different, living different lifestyles, and their optimal eating cycles will reflect that. When I'm working primarily sedentarily on the computer, then I'd rather work all day and eat quickly in one sitting at the end of the day. But if I'm spending all day doing manual labor outside in the sun, I'll naturally want to eat and drink more in between.
That's correct. Lots of people do 16/8 fasting. It's easy to get used to skipping breakfast and having your first meal 5 or 6 hours after you wake up and then only eat in the following 8 hour window.
I use intermittent fasting as a very effective way to keep my total daily caloric intake in check. If there are side benefits on health that is a cherry on top.
A typical day for me would be up at 7 am. 2 or 3 cups of strong black coffee until noon. I'll eat two main meals of ~800 calories at noon & 5:30pm and then sprinkle 1000 calories worth of snacks all throughout my eating window until 8pm. I stay very satiated all day in this fashion...much more so than if I were to eat breakfast first thing in the morning.
It's not a negative. My line of thinking on it right now is if it feels so easy, then I wonder if it's stressing my body the same way anymore. Maybe a bit more randomness in my eating pattern might shake things up.
This groks with everything I've learned about dieting and exercise. Some people like to work out in the afternoon because their bodies are at peak-warm-up. While I like to exercise first thing in the morning because my body has to find energy in my fat stores after fasting through eight hours of sleep.
Try weighing yourself before bed and when you wake up. You'll find you lose a pound or more for exhaling carbon in your sleep:
Here's how it works for me: go to bed at 9, get up at 5am, skip breakfast, and put off lunch until 1pm (drink lots of tea during the day). What I've found is that I can't eat enough calories between 1pm and 9pm to gain weight.
I think these researchers are on to something. Different dieting techniques work for different people, so it's good to have lots of options.
"Try weighing yourself before bed and when you wake up. You'll find you lose a pound or more for exhaling carbon in your sleep"
I've tried this a bunch of times and have seen up to two pounds difference on rare occasions!
A significant fraction of the weight loss is due to water loss though.
(and technically it's carbon dioxide, not "carbon", although with climate change being blamed on "carbon" we may have already lost the war on that misnomer!)
There's an on-going timing-of-eating study going on at UPenn [1] that is looking for volunteers. They provide you with 4 months of food (you get a say in what you get) and they tell you when to eat it (though not how much or exactly what). As well as compensation. If you're in the Philladelphia area, it might be interesting to participate or to save money doing this for a good cause. This is the kind of study we need more of and it's hard to get volunteers to give that big a commitment. I don't believe that they're testing fasting, though.
Thank you for the heads up! I just reached out to volunteer.
On a related note, it would be fantastic to have a resource to discover research volunteer opportunities like this. It's almost impossible to find these types of research projects without having someone tip you off!
I've switched to two meals a day with approximately 11hrs in between for about 1 year now. I also noticed a much higher sensitivity to insulin: If I eat sugary snacks now I experience a much bigger drop in blood sugar levels. I get really tired about 1.5 hrs after eating three cookies. Interestingly it only lasts only for about 30 minutes and I'm back to normal. I can only imagine what would have happened to people from 200 years ago if they were exposed to our sugar levels...
The difficulty with adapting these studies is that culture can have a great influence in meal frequency and timing.
In America, the typical schedule is to have a large breakfast, get in your car to work, have a light/medium lunch, then drive back home for a large dinner with the family.
When I lived with my family in Italy, where cities are denser and families are closer, things were completely different: breakfast was espresso, and eating anything more than a croissant was rare. Around 1 the country shuts down with an audible clank as everyone goes home for a huge lunch with the family. After work is dinner, but it tends to be much smaller than lunch.
It can also vary depending on the part of Italy. Dinners were much larger in inland Rome than coastal Gaeta, although Romans tend to stay out much later, so it makes sense to have the extra calories.
Ultimately, it's an optimization problem that will never be solved. Even if there is an optimal meal method, most people will reject it because their personality/culture values pleasure above efficiency. What's the point of being healthy if you're not happy?
Another related article about reduced energy intake that adds some social commentary:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3518570/
"Energy Intake and Exercise as Determinants of Brain Health and Vulnerability to Injury and Disease"
i'm too lazy to read all the papers on this subject, so indulge me: Do any measure brain "output"?
i bet earlier humans would eat a lot, then walk for miles until finding another spot, or stuff them on seals and then sleep on some warm cave and do nothing until the hunger was bad enough to justify another hunt on the cold outside, etc. I doubt you can live that way with a 9-5 job.
I did a 15 days total fast (ie no food, only water) last year. As far as I can tell my brain output remained the same, I could function plainly as a dev.
I was not 100% physically (say 80%), but nothing major (I'm not practicing any sport though).
This is fascinating to me. How much wait did you lose? Did your hunger stay at approximately the same level? Did eating destroy your system after your fast?
After 2 or 3 days, I wasn't hungry anymore, it was just my brain that wanted the comfort of eating especially when I was bored. But if you manage to get over the first days, the willpower needed to go on until the end is not that great.
Physically I could have done at least 15 more days but I would have needed to have a busy life. When idle my brain was tricking me, I ended watching a lot of cooking videos on Youtube, preparing all the good meals I would do once I restarted to eat.
I felt weak in the morning, but once I started to drink about one liter (about a quart) of water after waking up it disappeared.
I lost 11.8kg (about 26 pounds) but of course I regained everything once I stopped the fasting. I didn't fast for weight loss (though I wouldn't have minded if the loss was permanent, I'm clearly overweight) but for the supposed global health benefits. Honestly I didn't see much change, it was a bit disappointing.
Before this long fast I was fasting every Monday and had done a successful 3 days fast. However since then, I wasn't able to fast even one day a bit like my willpower is gone.
I have been able to maintain a large degree of muscle and I am pretty ripped.
Easy to adopt your lifestyle to and then you don't really have to count calories anymore.
Plus, I never have to waste time eating or cooking breakfast or lunch.