LOCKED TOPIC

Every other day fasting (EODF) - the restriction diet with PROVEN benefits.

  I caught wind of this diet from a family member who lost 60 lbs in just 8 months.  I saw the extreme weight loss with my own eyes, so I had to ask how it was done! He's very intelligent and does a LOT of research on something before he'll try it to ensure it's not detrimental to one's health, and/or if it's beneficial enough to even bother with.  It turns out, the diet not only ensures you'll lose weight, tests show it could extend your life, decrease the risks for cancer and other diseases, as well as some other great health benefits. 

  I've seen SO many people blindly knock this diet before even reading about ANY studies that have been done - that's simply ignorant!  Just google Every Other Day Fasting, and read about it for yourself.

  I started the diet last week, and I've already lost a few lbs.  It's very simple - just eat every other day.  Most people say, "That's crazy, just eat responsibly every day, and you'll lose weight without fasting".  Well, it isn't that easy unfortunately.  I've tried that for months - I'd eat pretty responsibly EVERY day, and just stay the same weight.  Sure, it's not as bad as gaining weight, but I want to lose it!  And I just don't have the time to exercise EVERY day, or even 3 days a week.  This diet makes it possible to lose a lot of weight without killing yourself with exercising... just a little bit a few days a week seems to do the trick for me.

  On your "off" days, you're only allowed sugarless liquids (water is obviously preferred), and I've read chewing sugarless gum can help abate some of the hunger pangs.  But here's the good part - a reward for skipping a whole day of eating - you get to eat whatever you want on your ON days.  Believe it or not, you won't want to pig out either.  I thought I would want to gorge myself, but the morning after my OFF day (full day of not eating), my hunger was pretty much about the same as it has always been after a full day of normal eating.  You'll still get full after a normal meal - your stomach (organ) is still the same size! ;)  It's just nice to not have to count calories on your eating days, so having a few cookies, or a bowl or ice cream is just fine.

  I can say right off the bat, it's very difficult... especially the first few OFF days.   Hunger is a very very strong desire, which is obviously hard-coded into our brains to ensure our survival.  It takes a lot of discipline - out of sight, out of mind has worked for me... don't think about or look at any food all day long.  If you happen to catch a glance of some food, just look away and think of something else.  And most importantly, drink drink drink to stay hydrated and try to make yourself at least feel a little full.

 * You should obviously consult your doctor before trying this diet, just for the simple fact that you might have some underlying issues that would prevent you from doing it safely...everyone's different.  But from what I've read, most doctors are fine with it, and some even recommend it due to the health benefits.

 Has anyone else tried the diet?  If so, what were your experiences with it, and what were your losses?

 ~Joe

Original Post by siciliano31:

  I've seen SO many people blindly knock this diet before even reading about ANY studies that have been done - that's simply ignorant!  Just google Every Other Day Fasting, and read about it for yourself.

I googled it, got blogs and forum posts, not a single study.  Maybe you could provide some of these studies since your so well researched...

Back in the seventies, my folks (well, really, my father) tried something like this, but with only one day of fasting per week.  He did lose weight, because he had about a 14% deficit.  Of course, he was the kind of guy who could give up his before dinner scotch and soda and one glass of whole milk a day and lose weight.  He didn't eat on Mondays, and he was almost impossible to live with on those days, and his work suffered because he was very unproductive on those days.  I think he lasted about a month before giving up.  I think my mother lasted about a day.

The thing I ask myself about any change in eating plan is "Can I imagine happily doing this for the rest of my life?".  If the answer is no (and fasting is a resounding no!) then I won't consider doing it.  Far better, for me, to make sustainable changes that will get me to goal weight, and keep me there.  My mantra is eat (real) food, not too much, mostly plants, and move more.  Simple, sustainable, healthy.  And it works.

Uh, is this spam? You sound like you're trying to market some revolutionary new product...?

Secondly...How exactly does it extend your life and decrease your chances for cancer???? Can I see some proof please? The causes of cancer haven't even been 100% proven, so how exactly do you prove that this is a preventer?

Third, if it is SO hard to do, and takes a LOT of discipline, how is it easier than eating healthy on a daily basis? It sounds like you didn't have the discipline to eat at a deficit on a daily basis, so it doesn't sound like this will work out in the long run. If you were educating yourself and truly eating "pretty responsibly" all these months, you would have seen results.

Also, maybe for a couple weeks you don't feel like binging on your "ON" days, but I honestly don't feel that after a few weeks of this people won't be binging on the days they can eat. After all, the majority of folks out there who are overweight, got that way by over-eating. I think this would just lead to an unhealthy eating pattern of binging on Food days which would mean that you would ALWAYs need the fast day to counteract the binge, meaning you're stuck in a cycle of Binge, Fast, binge, fast. You can never go back to eating normally, even after reaching the weight loss goal. I know that you say you're not super hungry right now, but I don't see that as sustainable. Plus, like dkenworthy said, what a grouch you will be on your fasting days!  

Sorry...I have to pipe up when I sense a Snake Oil salesmen in our presence. When it appears too good to be true, it usually is.

How is this post even still up.  IT PROMOTES STARVATION 50% of the time...which I think, and correct me if I'm wrong, is against CC's Guidelines.

Plus siciliano31 sounds like a sleezey salesman.

DIET GIMMICKS DON'T WORK.  Eating sensibly eveyday (even though the OP negates this statement) just isn't that hard, easier than starving yourself, I'd say.

Aside from the fast-binge cycle possibilities, which annkatcom already covered, I don't see how this diet would help anyone in the long run. 

A diet is a temporary measure and therefore only a temporary fix.  As soon as the diet is over, the vast majority of people will gain the weight back because they haven't learned to eat responsibly and stay active during their normal, everyday lives.  That behavior is associated with dieting, not living. 

And in this case, it's not even associated with dieting.  There is nothing in this diet that teaches how to get and stay healthy.  Eating whatever you want and not exercising are what cause weight problems in the first place.  A solution that ignores those problems isn't going to actually solve anything.  People (and I include myself in this) have to learn to change those bad habits.  The only way to lose weight and keep it off is to learn to view eating healthy and staying active as simply part of living your life. This diet ignores both of those things.

I can't see any studies on this diet, but I know there are studies available showing that people who lose weight slowly by changing to healthier habits are much more likely to keep the weight off.  I don't want to just be thin, I want to get healthy and stay that way. I don't see this diet helping with that.

Original Post by floggingsully:

Original Post by siciliano31:

  I've seen SO many people blindly knock this diet before even reading about ANY studies that have been done - that's simply ignorant!  Just google Every Other Day Fasting, and read about it for yourself.

I googled it, got blogs and forum posts, not a single study.  Maybe you could provide some of these studies since your so well researched...

 

  This isn't an actual study, but it directly references one...

  http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/40 242/title/Possible_anticancer_power_in_fastin g_every_other_day

  And this site references some actual animal studies... this is right on the front page: "Graph adapted from: Weindruch R, et al. (1986). "The retardation of aging in mice by dietary restriction: longevity, cancer, immunity and lifetime energy intake." Journal of Nutrition, April, 116(4), pages 641-54" 

  http://www.crsociety.org/ 

Original Post by thermal:

How is this post even still up.  IT PROMOTES STARVATION 50% of the time...which I think, and correct me if I'm wrong, is against CC's Guidelines.

Plus siciliano31 sounds like a sleezey salesman.

DIET GIMMICKS DON'T WORK.  Eating sensibly eveyday (even though the OP negates this statement) just isn't that hard, easier than starving yourself, I'd say.

  Saleman?  LOL What exactly am I selling????  Please, think before you go slinging stupid accusations around.  I'm just trying to help people out if they can't seem to lose weight on your typical conformist "eat well every day" diets.  The same thing doesn't work for everyone!!!

  Starvation?????? Haha! Fasting is not starvation.  You have no idea what starvation is... go visit a third world country for a month, then you'll know what starving really is.  How sad is this... I'm sorry, I didn't realize you were too privelaged to fast.

  No one is trying to sell diet books, pills, or anything... it's a very simple concept that requires buying nothing...caloric restriction is well documented and studied - learn how to use the internet and do some research.  Like I said, I'm just trying to help people lose weight.  I have no other motive for posting this - I'm not selling anything, which should be obvious to anyone with even average intelligence.

 Jeez...it's funny how people react so negatively when someone is just trying to help them out.  Do some research.

http://www.crsociety.org/

 There's plenty of info at that link, just as one example.  Yeah there may be some links that say "read these recommended books" - just ignore it, there's plenty of free info. 

Original Post by siciliano31:

This isn't an actual study, but it directly references one...

  http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/40 242/title/Possible_anticancer_power_in_fastin g_every_other_day

  And this site references some actual animal studies... this is right on the front page: "Graph adapted from: Weindruch R, et al. (1986). "The retardation of aging in mice by dietary restriction: longevity, cancer, immunity and lifetime energy intake." Journal of Nutrition, April, 116(4), pages 641-54" 

This article is somewhat misrepresenting the original article.  For example, "On the fasting days, mice were fed 15 percent of their required calories from either the high- or low-fat food." does not indicate that the mice were not eating at all on their "fasting" days.

Original Post by susiecue:

Original Post by siciliano31:

This isn't an actual study, but it directly references one...

  http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/40 242/title/Possible_anticancer_power_in_fastin g_every_other_day

  And this site references some actual animal studies... this is right on the front page: "Graph adapted from: Weindruch R, et al. (1986). "The retardation of aging in mice by dietary restriction: longevity, cancer, immunity and lifetime energy intake." Journal of Nutrition, April, 116(4), pages 641-54" 

This article is somewhat misrepresenting the original article.  For example, "On the fasting days, mice were fed 15 percent of their required calories from either the high- or low-fat food." does not indicate that the mice were not eating at all on their "fasting" days.

 If you have the time, read the entire study.  This is the problem with most people - they neglect to do the research, and just dismiss all claims with no reason. 

http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/reprint/116/4/641

 With regard to the "feeding days" and "fasting days": one of the groups of mice had a 55% caloric restriction, which is essentially eating half the time, aka, every other day.  They also lived a much longer life than the mice that simply ate whenever they wanted to.

While I'm not the biggest fan of Siciano31's idea, I feel I need to rise to his defense.

1.  He is not promoting any type of product and has nothing to sell - he is simply conveying and idea.

2.  One element of this concept does make sense - and that is the concept of giving the digestive system "a break" - I know this is kind of a "Fit for Life" idea, but constantly overeating leads to a buildup of digestive material in the stomach and intestines, which leads to all sorts of problems.

3.  I realize that eating 1500 - 1800 calories in a way is "giving the digestive system a break" - in that you never really overeat to begin with.

4.  For me, the upshot of Sicilano's post is that having a "way lower" calorie day could be beneficial - and I would tend to accept this as a general premise, even if I wouldn't accept that going super-low cal (say, 500 calories) every other day would be beneficial.

Thanks for the post Siciliano - I enjoyed reading it.

Original Post by joestephens:

While I'm not the biggest fan of Siciano31's idea, I feel I need to rise to his defense.

1.  He is not promoting any type of product and has nothing to sell - he is simply conveying and idea.

2.  One element of this concept does make sense - and that is the concept of giving the digestive system "a break" - I know this is kind of a "Fit for Life" idea, but constantly overeating leads to a buildup of digestive material in the stomach and intestines, which leads to all sorts of problems.

3.  I realize that eating 1500 - 1800 calories in a way is "giving the digestive system a break" - in that you never really overeat to begin with.

4.  For me, the upshot of Sicilano's post is that having a "way lower" calorie day could be beneficial - and I would tend to accept this as a general premise, even if I wouldn't accept that going super-low cal (say, 500 calories) every other day would be beneficial.

Thanks for the post Siciliano - I enjoyed reading it.

   Thank you... finally someone is actually THINKING about what I said instead of immediately retaliating as if I've attacked someone. ;)

   By the way, this "diet" was originally intended primarily to prolong life, and prevent disease, not to lose weight.  It seems the reasons why CR has these effects is still unknown. 

   I obviously won't do this my whole life - when I reach my target weight, I'll simply just eat a lot less on my "OFF" days, instead of fasting altogether. 

   If it promotes life extension, I, for one, am all for it!!

I am open to all diets. I love reading and researching health and nutrition. However, this diet just doesn't seem to make sense in the long term sense. You cannot go the rest of your life just eating every other day. Right now it may be working because your so psyched about it and its something new, however how do you think you will feel a couple of months or a year from now.

If you are really into this diet, maybe you should research the Calorie Restriction diet. It would probably be a bit healthier and it is still restricting food just not all day every other day. Calorie restriction promotes the same health benefits as this diet seems to.

You are definitely losing weight faster because you are starving yourself. Losing weight isn't hard. It is calories in vs calories out. It is only hard when you are not mentally prepared to take on the task. That is when you start looking to these radical diets.

I would personally like to know how long you stay on this plan.

I think the reason so many get "excited" about any diet that premotes not eating is the INTERNET. People think most anything they read on a somewhat Oficial looking page is correct and real (no this is not a knock on the OP, its a knock on people and the internet). People dont use common sence anymore, if its in print its OK, or alwasy right (its not). I have been here for a couple years and honestly credit it as helping me lose the weigth i have. I am one who likes to read all the ideas, hear all sides.  So many here think we all have the same exact body and the "standard" will alwasy work. Its just not the case. Some people can eat 3000+ a day and not gain, some can eat 1800 and gain (both are the extremes). All the knowledge here is a GUIDELINE most of us can use, and any drastic changes (less calories or fasting) should all be done when you have consulted a DOCTOR.

I myslef have read the studies on mice, very interesting. They have some studies on monks who do fasting somelace too (sorry goggle didnt help me so I have no links). The ones I read had some facts on nutrition also. there was some coralation that fasting had some longer life benafits. I cant remeber exactly but I think there was something about them all being at healthy wieghts, eating well balanced diets and active too (the last three might have been all it took to live longer). But the fasting did not seem to hurt them.

The one thing i see as flawed here (opinion only), if skipping a day, but then eating what you want works, why wouldnt the standard "eat correct amount and healthy"work?  All you are doing is cutting your calories down, So would you eat 1800 on your on days then? or 3000? Wouldnt just cutting back a few more calories on normal days do the same? Or is it all about the 24 hours without food, is there some benafit that your body is suposed to gain from this? I can see this working for some possibly, a very few. I sure wouldnt try it untill it was a last resort so to speak. Again, I know sometimes the "correct way" doesnt work for people. But working in an office full of dieters who all say "I cant lose, but I eat right and not to much!" then seeing them eat a good meal on monday, tuesday, then on wednesday eating Mcdonalds, thursday good meal, friday Burgerking, etc, can only imagine waht they do at night.. Most just simply DONT follow the rules. I myslef had this problem, I ate what I was assuming was correct, but when I FINALLY wrote very scrap of food down, i found my 1500 calories soon turned into closer to 2200+ hence i didnt lose and didnt gain. In my opinion this is the #1 reason people dont lose. Assuming you sorta guess what you are eating just wont work. A simple sandwhich, bread chease, meat, butter, all adds up really fast! (opps this is off track).

If somebody actually tries this (and consults a doctor!!!!!) i would be interested in the results. Again, i think it would be close to impossible for me, If i miss my meger breakfast I almost always break down and eat a snack before lunch. I cant see anyway i could make a full day.

I've researched the physiological effects of fasting thoroughly as I fast every now and then for spiritual reasons, to gain greater awareness and to get in control over my bad habits and create new good habits. I consider myself well informed on the benefits and risks of fasting. However, I don't recommend fasting for weight loss as you will most likely gain the weight back unless you have some major self discipline. I'm positive to the health benefits of fasting though.

The every other day fasting is one form of intermittent fasting (IF) and I haven't tried it as it seems a bit extreme in the long run and not something I could see myself doing for long. Another variant of IF is to eat all your normal kcals within a condensed time window every day, say lunch and dinner, and you supposedly get all the benefits from a regular fast. This is what I'm currently doing as I find it fits my lifestyle and I lean to this eating behavior naturally. When I started my weight loss journey I ate five-six meals per day but it wasn't a lifestyle that I could see myself keeping for a long time as it made me constantly think about food and it was just too much work and planning overall. It also made me feel guilty if I accidentally skipped a meal from lack of time.

It's working fine for me so far and I find that I have an easier time to listen to the signals my body sends me about its needs and it has decreased my sweet cravings. IF won't fit everyone as we are all different, but for me it has given me a more relaxed relationship to food. Choosing healthy, nutrition dense foods is vital with IF as well.

Original Post by siciliano31:

  I started the diet last week, and I've already lost a few lbs.  It's very simple - just eat every other day.  Most people say, "That's crazy, just eat responsibly every day, and you'll lose weight without fasting".  Well, it isn't that easy unfortunately.  I've tried that for months - I'd eat pretty responsibly EVERY day, and just stay the same weight.  Sure, it's not as bad as gaining weight, but I want to lose it!  And I just don't have the time to exercise EVERY day, or even 3 days a week.  This diet makes it possible to lose a lot of weight without killing yourself with exercising... just a little bit a few days a week seems to do the trick for me.

I know this is probably copypasta that's gonna be deleted soon, but this part really made me giggle.  Like we all somehow have these wonderful, lazy lives with copious hours set aside for grueling workouts.

Original Post by siciliano31:

    the diet not only ensures you'll lose weight, tests show it could extend your life, decrease the risks for cancer ... some other great health benefits. 

Wow, got any land in florida for sale?

I started the diet last week, and I've already lost a few lbs. ...

I think if we look between your ears, we'll find out from where they are missing.

Most people say, "eat responsibly every day...". 

I've tried that for months - I'd eat pretty responsibly EVERY day, and just stay the same weight.   Sure, it's not as bad as gaining weight, but I want to lose it! 

Sounds like you have no idea what you are doing - instead of trying to get a calorie deficit, you were eating at maintenance level and can't understand why you aren't losing?  And the key is obviously "pretty" responsibly. 

And I just don't have the time to exercise EVERY day, or even 3 days a week.  This diet makes it possible to lose a lot of weight without killing yourself with exercising... just a little bit a few days a week seems to do the trick for me.

So in other words, you want a quick weightloss without breaking a sweat.   Good plan.  I think I saw that on an infomercial at 3am once.

  On your "off" days, you're only allowed sugarless liquids (water is obviously preferred), and I've read chewing sugarless gum can help abate some of the hunger pangs. 

Way to go - starve yourself except for laxatives.

  I can say right off the bat, it's very difficult... especially the first few OFF days.   Hunger is a very very strong desire, which is obviously hard-coded into our brains to ensure our survival.  It takes a lot of discipline - out of sight, out of mind has worked for me... don't think about or look at any food all day long.  If you happen to catch a glance of some food, just look away and think of something else. 

Crazy, restrictive diets simply don't work.  Real, maintainable weightloss calls for a lifestyle change.  On a positive note, I'm still chuckling as I picture you ducking and rolling in a panic everytime you see a billboard for McDonalds.

most doctors are fine with it, 

No, they aren't.  Any doctor is going to tell you to eat less and exercise.

You say your friend of a friend's cousin's, brother's uncle (or whatever) lost 60lbs in 8 months.  Great.  Calls us back in 2 years when they have gained it all back.

A healthy, balanced diet with 30 minutes of activity is a good idea for everyone.  Maybe you won't lose 5lbs a week, but you'll be healthier and live longer.

Mice are not people.  Part of their life cycle is rapid reproduction.  Underfeeding them causes them to not reproduce.  That alone would extend their life.

Now there is new research, from the National Institutes of Health, that being underweight causes as many fatalities as being overweight.

See This Report  It's a long term study that included 10s of thousands of people since 1971.  Any study of longeveity in people must be done over decades, not the few months in the life a lab mouse.

(snip) MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Number of excess deaths in 2000 associated with given BMI levels. RESULTS: Relative to the normal weight category (BMI 18.5 to <25), obesity (BMI > or =30) was associated with 111,909 excess deaths (95% confidence interval [CI], 53,754-170,064) and underweight with 33,746 excess deaths (95% CI, 15,726-51,766). Overweight was not associated with excess mortality (-86,094 deaths; 95% CI, -161,223 to -10,966). The relative risks of mortality associated with obesity were lower in NHANES II and NHANES III than in NHANES I. CONCLUSIONS: Underweight and obesity, particularly higher levels of obesity, were associated with increased mortality relative to the normal weight category. The impact of obesity on mortality may have decreased over time, perhaps because of improvements in public health and medical care. These findings are consistent with the increases in life expectancy in the United States and the declining mortality rates from ischemic heart disease. (snip)

Original Post by siciliano31:

   Thank you... finally someone is actually THINKING about what I said instead of immediately retaliating as if I've attacked someone. ;)

You act as if this is the first time we've ever seen a post like this before.  The truth is, every 6 months or so we get one of these threads. It's not a new idea. But it's still not a good one.

Original Post by amethystgirl:

You act as if this is the first time we've ever seen a post like this before.  The truth is, every 6 months or so we get one of these threads. It's not a new idea. But it's still not a good one.

No, it definitely isn't a new idea, evidenced by the fact that the article you cite was written in 1986.  As other posters have pointed out, this is a study in mice, not humans.  The other reference you provided says that there have been three small studies in people, without saying the results were.

Without wishing to question your sincerity, one mice study and three small clinical studies does not amount to "proven" evidence.

the diet not only ensures you'll lose weight, tests show it could extend your life, decrease the risks for cancer ... some other great health benefits.

Wow, got any land in florida for sale?

 Ok 67alecto, I think I've just about had it with you simpletons accusing me of trying to sell something, and attempting to insult me.  I'm merely conveying an idea.  It's NOT my idea, it's been around for years; I have NOTHING to gain from sharing this idea.  Go try to insult all the doctors that have done studies on CR and alternate day fasting...there are many such studies which you can find if you have half a brain and know how to search the internet.

This is just one example, of many:

Intermittent fasting dissociates beneficial effects of dietary restriction on glucose metabolism and neuronal resistance to injury from calorie intake, R. Michael Anson, et al., PNAS May 13, 2003 vol. 100 no. 10 6216–6220

And just in case you were wondering, here are the author's credentials:

B.A.
Biochemistry, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, MD USA
Ph.D.
Biology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
Postdoctoral
Nutritional and Molecular Physiology Unit, LNS, National Institute on Aging, NIH, MD, USA

So, you're basically saying you know more than a DOCTOR (just one of many) that has studied biochemistry and nutritional physiology for years?

Do me a favor...put on this silly hat, and go sit in the corner for a little while...dunce.