5 ms·

Interesting how this time restricted eating seems to differ from perspectives in the intermittent fasting community. Intermittent Fasting folks tend to espouse

Interesting how this time restricted eating seems to differ from perspectives in the intermittent fasting community. Intermittent Fasting folks tend to espouse avoiding caloric intake for long periods of time every day, but they're fine with black coffee/tea (since it doesn't trigger an insulin response). But here Dr. Panda seems to believe that even coffee would compromise the fasting window: https://youtu.be/iywhaz5z0qs?t=1h15m15s https://youtu.be/iywhaz5z0qs?t=1h15m15s There goes that 7am cup of coffee...

will_brown 8y ago
Definitely if you trigger insulin response it is safe to say you break a fast, but any caloric intake breaks the fast, even without insulin response. I’m not sure that video supports your conclusion that coffee/tea breaks the fast, seems to me it’s more of a maybe. I personally appreciated the acknowledgement of the microbiome. The idea that simply...we don’t know and don’t understand the interactions of the microbiome. The example given was artificial sweetener that most every Keto/paleo/low carb/IF advocate would say is ok...well no,it’s probably not because even with zero calorie and no insulin response the interaction with the microbiome likely breaks the fast and is an over all negative (unhealthy) interaction.
- coldtea 8y ago
  >Definitely if you trigger insulin response it is safe to say you break a fast, but any caloric intake breaks the fast, even without insulin response. "Breaks a fast" is meaningless without specifying what we mean by that. If we mean "breaking fast = you eat something with calories" then yes, but then it's a tautology. If we mean "insulin response", then there would be other criteria for breaking a fast. Even traditional religious and cleansing fasts allowed lots of different foods (e.g. plants) and were still considered fasts. Fast is not some one-size-fits-all word that means "absolutely no calories" during it.
  - will_brown 8y ago
    >Breaks a fast" is meaningless without specifying what we mean by that. If we mean "breaking fast = you eat something with calories" then yes, but then it's a tautology. Yes...that is how definitions work. Consuming calories triggers a metabolic response and breaks a fast. That is the generally accepted definition of breaking a fast. There are types of fasts dry fast, water fast, intermittent fast. But the fast part is consistent and means no calories/no metabolic response. The idea some religion somewhere ate plants only a called it a fast, doesn’t make it a fast. If I consume nothing but sugar and went around calling it a sugar fast, that doesn’t change the definition of fast. Similarly if you have a diet that doesn’t trigger insulin, that is a Dietary ketosis. If you are fasting you will also enter ketosis but since it’s induced through fasting not diet we call it fasting ketosis.
    - coldtea 8y ago
      >The idea some religion somewhere ate plants only a called it a fast, doesn’t make it a fast. Actually it does. It might not make it "a period of no food consumption at all", but it does make it a fast. It's not the etymology or scholarly definition of words that dictates their meaning, but how they are actually used by the people speaking a language. The word fast (and it's analogous in different languages) has been in use for centuries/millennia longer than people actually knowing what a "metabolic response" is -- so such a concern couldn't be part of how they used the term unless until very recently. As Wikipedia puts it: "Fasting is the willing abstinence or reduction from some or all food, drink, or both, for a period of time". Notice the "some or all food"? Here's how the fast period is defined for catholics for example: "For Roman Catholics, fasting, taken as a technical term, is the reduction of one's intake of food to one full meal (which may not contain meat on Ash Wednesday and Fridays throughout Lent) and two small meals (known liturgically as collations, taken in the morning and the evening), both of which together should not equal the large meal. Eating solid food between meals is not permitted. Fasting is required of the faithful between the ages of 18 and 59 on specified days. Complete abstinence of meat for the day is required of those 14 and older. Partial abstinence prescribes that meat be taken only once during the course of the day. Meat is understood not to include fish or cold-blooded animals."
    - Broken_Hippo 8y ago
mark_l_watson 8y ago
I just signed up and installed their iOS app. You are correct: drinking coffee or tea in the morning starts the non-fasting period. This will be rough for me because I usually have coffee at 5:30am, read or study for 90 minutes, then have breakfast and go to work. I will shift my morning coffee to when I have breakfast. I have been non-fasting and fasting with an even split of 12 hours / 12 hours per day, so this will be an adjustment.
- coldtea 8y ago
  >This will be rough for me because I usually have coffee at 5:30am, read or study for 90 minutes, then have breakfast and go to work. Or you can ignore their advice (others advice otherwise anyway), and still drink coffee as part of your fasting... It's not like any of this is particularly scientific...
- browsercoin 8y ago
  > drinking coffee or tea in the morning starts the non-fasting period major bummer. I almost entirely rely on caffeine while I'm fasting and it inhibits my appetite.
mrfusion 8y ago
But 8am to 6pm would be a ten hour window. So you could have your coffee and a big breakfast. That wouldn’t be so bad. It really just mirrors the advice our lacrosse coaches have been telling us all along. Don’t snack at night.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

will_brown 8y ago

Definitely if you trigger insulin response it is safe to say you break a fast, but any caloric intake breaks the fast, even without insulin response. I’m not sure that video supports your conclusion that coffee/tea breaks the fast, seems to me it’s more of a maybe. I personally appreciated the acknowledgement of the microbiome. The idea that simply...we don’t know and don’t understand the interactions of the microbiome. The example given was artificial sweetener that most every Keto/paleo/low carb/IF advocate would say is ok...well no,it’s probably not because even with zero calorie and no insulin response the interaction with the microbiome likely breaks the fast and is an over all negative (unhealthy) interaction.

coldtea 8y ago
>Definitely if you trigger insulin response it is safe to say you break a fast, but any caloric intake breaks the fast, even without insulin response. "Breaks a fast" is meaningless without specifying what we mean by that. If we mean "breaking fast = you eat something with calories" then yes, but then it's a tautology. If we mean "insulin response", then there would be other criteria for breaking a fast. Even traditional religious and cleansing fasts allowed lots of different foods (e.g. plants) and were still considered fasts. Fast is not some one-size-fits-all word that means "absolutely no calories" during it.
- will_brown 8y ago
  >Breaks a fast" is meaningless without specifying what we mean by that. If we mean "breaking fast = you eat something with calories" then yes, but then it's a tautology. Yes...that is how definitions work. Consuming calories triggers a metabolic response and breaks a fast. That is the generally accepted definition of breaking a fast. There are types of fasts dry fast, water fast, intermittent fast. But the fast part is consistent and means no calories/no metabolic response. The idea some religion somewhere ate plants only a called it a fast, doesn’t make it a fast. If I consume nothing but sugar and went around calling it a sugar fast, that doesn’t change the definition of fast. Similarly if you have a diet that doesn’t trigger insulin, that is a Dietary ketosis. If you are fasting you will also enter ketosis but since it’s induced through fasting not diet we call it fasting ketosis.
  - coldtea 8y ago
    >The idea some religion somewhere ate plants only a called it a fast, doesn’t make it a fast. Actually it does. It might not make it "a period of no food consumption at all", but it does make it a fast. It's not the etymology or scholarly definition of words that dictates their meaning, but how they are actually used by the people speaking a language. The word fast (and it's analogous in different languages) has been in use for centuries/millennia longer than people actually knowing what a "metabolic response" is -- so such a concern couldn't be part of how they used the term unless until very recently. As Wikipedia puts it: "Fasting is the willing abstinence or reduction from some or all food, drink, or both, for a period of time". Notice the "some or all food"? Here's how the fast period is defined for catholics for example: "For Roman Catholics, fasting, taken as a technical term, is the reduction of one's intake of food to one full meal (which may not contain meat on Ash Wednesday and Fridays throughout Lent) and two small meals (known liturgically as collations, taken in the morning and the evening), both of which together should not equal the large meal. Eating solid food between meals is not permitted. Fasting is required of the faithful between the ages of 18 and 59 on specified days. Complete abstinence of meat for the day is required of those 14 and older. Partial abstinence prescribes that meat be taken only once during the course of the day. Meat is understood not to include fish or cold-blooded animals."
  - Broken_Hippo 8y ago

mark_l_watson 8y ago

I just signed up and installed their iOS app. You are correct: drinking coffee or tea in the morning starts the non-fasting period. This will be rough for me because I usually have coffee at 5:30am, read or study for 90 minutes, then have breakfast and go to work. I will shift my morning coffee to when I have breakfast. I have been non-fasting and fasting with an even split of 12 hours / 12 hours per day, so this will be an adjustment.

coldtea 8y ago
>This will be rough for me because I usually have coffee at 5:30am, read or study for 90 minutes, then have breakfast and go to work. Or you can ignore their advice (others advice otherwise anyway), and still drink coffee as part of your fasting... It's not like any of this is particularly scientific...
browsercoin 8y ago
> drinking coffee or tea in the morning starts the non-fasting period major bummer. I almost entirely rely on caffeine while I'm fasting and it inhibits my appetite.

mrfusion 8y ago

But 8am to 6pm would be a ten hour window. So you could have your coffee and a big breakfast. That wouldn’t be so bad. It really just mirrors the advice our lacrosse coaches have been telling us all along. Don’t snack at night.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]