The Warrior Diet?

There's actually a diet based around undereating all day and binging at night? I think I'm misunderstanding something here; can anyone explain this diet?

Original Post by spirochete:

ahaha they can make a diet book around anything.

I'm marketing the Cat Food Diet where you can eat all the cat food you want all day and whatever you want for dinner. The premise is you either get really sick and lose weight or you don't eat anything until dinner and not get enough calories and lose weight

My supplements are in the pet food aisle and cost $15/can

 Can I have all the wild caught mice I can eat? prrrrrrrrr....

Honestly - that is a load of garbage about giving your body a break from digesting food.  If you are eating anything you are digesting.  Plant matter just breaks down faster. 

Original Post by melkor:

Two friends of mine lived the lifestyle, and I've spoken to Brad Pilon who did a version of Intermittent Fasting for his Eat/stop/Eat book - and it's still crap. It's just some mental trickery to make you cut calories below maintenance, the nutrient partitioning claims are nonsense, and I note that the average paleolithic lifespan was 35 years which I find to be a very persuasive argument against trying to read too much into "natural" or "evolutionary" arguments.

 It may be 100% natural and organic, but so is cobra venom.

 What Brad Pilon says and where he makes sense is that for a lot of people doing intermittent fasting and/or his Eat/stop/eat periodic fasting serves as a substitute for calorie-counting for people who feel like measuring and maintaining some nutritional awareness feels too obsessive.

 Nice strawman argument.  It's crap because you say its crap?  There is actually quite a bit of medical research into intermittant fasting as well as links to studies and other research by Ori Hofmekler who wrote the Warrior Diet.   Just like with any other study, there is information on both sides of the issue.  Some claim its great, others claim it isn't.    To dismiss it out of hand as 'crap' is ignorance.  To each their own.

Here is an interesting article on why cutting calories isn't the holy grail that everyone seems to prop it up as:

http://www.dragondoor.com/articler/mode3/327/

"The human body (like other animals), carries survival mechanisms which regulate utilization of fuel and generation of energy, in response to changes in environmental conditions. Our basal (basic) metabolic rate (BMR) fluctuates according to changes in physical activity, food availability and overall calorie intake.

For instance, low calorie intake generally promotes a BMR decline whereas high calorie intake generally promotes an overall increase in BMR. Since calorie counting is based on a fixed BMR (many health clubs provide machines that check BMR), it often fails to provide a real life measurement of energy balance (surplus or deficit of calories)."

It's a false dilemma to say that anyone who would try the Warrior Diet must not be able to do calorie counting or are having issues eating the right foods.   I did calorie counting for a while and noticed that almost all 'calorie reduced' foods were stuffed with chemicals.   It seems rather comical that people scoff at the idea of eating natural (preferably organic) foods while avoiding processed foods as much as possible. 

No diet is perfect and there is no one right way of eating.  If whoever is reading through these posts are comfortable what you are doing now, thats great.  For those who have an open mind as to what might work even better, I'd say check it out.

Good luck :)

Original Post by madamq:

Honestly - that is a load of garbage about giving your body a break from digesting food.  If you are eating anything you are digesting.  Plant matter just breaks down faster. 

More strawmen!  

http://www.everydiet.org/diet/warrior-diet

"The undereating phase of the Warrior Diet is supposed to prepare and alert the SNS to potential stress, resulting in the generation of energy and ultimately the burning of fat. While undereating, the body is forced to use fat storage as a source of fuel for maximum metabolic efficiency - thus promoting weight-loss.

The overeating phase of the Warrior Diet recognizes the role of the PSNS in regulating digestion, elimination and other metabolic activities that slow you down. Eating during the day stops this process and blocks the body’s ability to remove toxins and waste from the body. Since detoxification is imperative for health and to delay aging, eating occurs mainly at night."

Original Post by littlecalypso:

There's actually a diet based around undereating all day and binging at night? I think I'm misunderstanding something here; can anyone explain this diet?

Unfortuantely, there is no 'binging' at night; you do not simply stuff your face with pizza just because its 6 pm.   You do, however, make smart choices and simply eat until you are satiated.  No specific portions, counting calories or carbs.   

Feel free to Google 'Warrior Diet' or 'Anti-Eestrogenic Diet' and you'll see a lot of articles, reviews, as well as the basic principles of the diet.

Original Post by curlygirl126:

I actually looked into this diet.  In theory it makes sense.  But...in the real world I found that I just can't live this way.  And any "diet" that is not reasonable in real life just isn't an option for me.  The good thing about calorie-count is that you can still incoporate no-nos occasionally if you do it within the framework of your maximum intake.  Sure, some people could be successful on this diet, but I'm not one of them and I guarentee that 95% of people out there wouldn't do well on this diet either.  We live in a different world now.  That's my opinion on the matter. 

 There are some that have tried Warrior Diet or Anti-Estrogenic Diet and did not like it or found it was not for them.  Yet predominantly I've seen that people who've learned about the principles and have given it a try really like it.  It's difficult for me to understand how eating fresh veggies, fruit, small amounts of protein during the day and having a satisfying dinner is seen as difficult.  I'd say finding and preparing small meals throughout the day would be much more time consuming.   I guess it depends on each person.

As with any kind of 'diet' or way of eating, no one is perfect.  If I decide to eat breakfast or lunch occasionally, I am not magically thrown under a bus and have to start all over.  In fact, due to increased metabolism, I rarely see any bumps in the road from 'cheats'.  I guess the main idea is that with a way of eating where I dont miss food during the day or feel hungry or deprived, I do not need to think about the emotional aspects of cheating or being left out.  For the most part I have more energy and am happy with the fruits and vegetables I snack on.

Everyone needs to find what works for them and stick with it.  The whole idea though is to not dismiss something out of hand because it sounds foolish, especially when most or all of the information about a particular way of eating is anecdotal and in many cases outright wrong.

Good luck to you :)

Original Post by kvalhion:

Original Post by melkor:

Two friends of mine lived the lifestyle, and I've spoken to Brad Pilon who did a version of Intermittent Fasting for his Eat/stop/Eat book - and it's still crap. It's just some mental trickery to make you cut calories below maintenance, the nutrient partitioning claims are nonsense, and I note that the average paleolithic lifespan was 35 years which I find to be a very persuasive argument against trying to read too much into "natural" or "evolutionary" arguments.

 It may be 100% natural and organic, but so is cobra venom.

 What Brad Pilon says and where he makes sense is that for a lot of people doing intermittent fasting and/or his Eat/stop/eat periodic fasting serves as a substitute for calorie-counting for people who feel like measuring and maintaining some nutritional awareness feels too obsessive.

 Nice strawman argument.  It's crap because you say its crap?  There is actually quite a bit of medical research into intermittant fasting as well as links to studies and other research by Ori Hofmekler who wrote the Warrior Diet.   Just like with any other study, there is information on both sides of the issue.  Some claim its great, others claim it isn't. 

No, it's crap because any reasoned critique of it when digging into the supposed science behind it discovers a whole lot of nothing, unsourced claims and a couple mice studies.

 Intermittent fasting has a whole lot of hot air and not much science to back it up, though the closest to optimal one can come if one insists on trying it would be the Leangains approach from Martin Berkhan, not the half-baked version from Ori Hoffmeker.

That just made me laugh so hard.

Original Post by melkor:

No, it's crap because any reasoned critique of it when digging into the supposed science behind it discovers a whole lot of nothing, unsourced claims and a couple mice studies.

 Intermittent fasting has a whole lot of hot air and not much science to back it up, though the closest to optimal one can come if one insists on trying it would be the Leangains approach from Martin Berkhan, not the half-baked version from Ori Hoffmeker.

 You are certainly entitled to your opinion, just as the author of the 'reasoned critique' is entitled to his.  You'll note that the person who wrote the critique is not a scientist or nutritionist or a doctor.  They are simply someone who preaches the 'precise nutrition' approach to eating and likes to debate about the Warrior Diet on Dragon Door's health forums.   You'll also notice that he is not providing any sort of proof that the Warrior Diet's claims are false.  He's basically saying "well I just don't believe it.  That can't be true."   He has a point that there may not be a lot of specific scientific research to reference, however this is likely due to taking a new or different approach to eating, one that is not in the mainstream. 

I suspect you googled 'warrior diet', found a reference where it critiqued it and posted the link.  Did you honestly read the entire article?   I really have no interest in convincing you to eat this way; however misinformation and mocking of something that people do not understand is rather unfortunate.

In regards to intermittant fasting in general, like I said, you'll find some people who love it, some people who doubt it.   Here is one where research supports the benefits of occasional IF:

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/fasting/

Numerous animal and human studies done over the past 15 years suggest that periodic fasting can have dramatic results not only in areas of weight (fat) loss, but in overall health and longevity as well. A recent article in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition gives a great overview of these benefits which include decreases in blood pressure, reduction in oxidative damage to lipids, protein and DNA, improvement in insulin sensitivity and glucose uptake, as well as decreases in fat mass.

Beyond insulin sensitivity, it appears that caloric restriction and intermittent fasting may “turn on” certain genes that repair specific tissues that would not otherwise be repaired in times of surplus. One could surmise that this adaptation serves to allow certain cells to live longer (as repaired cells) during famine since it’s energetically less expensive to repair a cell than to divide and create a new one. That might help explain some of the extended longevity seen in animal studies using caloric restriction and/or intermittent fasting (read about here, here, and here). Intermittent fasting has also been shown to reduce spontaneous cancers in animal studies, which could be due to a decrease in oxidative damage or an increase in immune response.

Finally, I am making no claims that the warrior diet or intermittant fasting is a magic pill where life is suddenly wonderful.  I am merely stating that from a common sense perspective, it offers a choice that many people have found beneficial.  Not eating any 'heavy' foods during the day, for a lot of people, is more convenient and gives them more energy.  Looking forward to a large meal at night is also more convenient and gratifying. 

I see a lot of posts on 'Calorie Count' about people obsessing over food, counting every carb and every calorie, weighing themselves once or more than once a day, losing weight then a lot of times 'falling off the wagon'.   I see people severely restricting caloric intake which science shows decreases metabolism and sets people up for a rebound effect.   If there is a way of eating that seems beneficial and convenient for a lot of people who have tried it, why not put it out there and let people decide for themselves?

Take it easy :)

I have been following this for the past couple of years and suits me so much better than all the restrictions I used to put on myself. The main thing I think that hasnt been made clear is that by having the longer break from food you lose sugar cravings because insulin is not triggered so the body, appetite stays calm and you actually feel real hunger later in the day. But because you havent had the sugar and rubbish surging all day you actually fancy really healthy foods and the thought of the sickly stuff you may have eaten before is way to sickly to consider! Of course on the odd days on holiday etc. when I have breakfast and lunch the old cravings come back but only after a couple of days so for me its clear how much calmer my body and cravings are doing Warrior eating.

Also I used to have alot of problems with acid indigestion and even had a duodenal ulcer. That has completely stopped after many years of assuming it was how I would always be. The break just lets your stomach heal up from excess acid.

There's so much more, the energy etc. but sure its all been written above.

Also I think the little and often eating is great if you are very active but if you have a more sedentary job as I do, then you really dont need all that food blocking concentration etc.

This looks like an interesting and motivating diet for a healthy person.  Perfect for a 35 year old cave-person who hunts elk with their bare hands.

But for an obese person with health problems it is a disaster.

I embarked on weight loss because of uncontrolled high blood sugar.  I was given a guidebook designed to control calorie consumption AND reduce blood sugar spikes.  The recommendation is 3 small meals and 3 snacks.  This steers a person away from both hypo- and hyperglycemia.  The binge/starve regime does the exact opposite.  It might be an effective way to reduce calories but it's a blood sugar rollercoaster.

Original Post by thhq:

This looks like an interesting and motivating diet for a healthy person.  Perfect for a 35 year old cave-person who hunts elk with their bare hands.

But for an obese person with health problems it is a disaster.

I embarked on weight loss because of uncontrolled high blood sugar.  I was given a guidebook designed to control calorie consumption AND reduce blood sugar spikes.  The recommendation is 3 small meals and 3 snacks.  This steers a person away from both hypo- and hyperglycemia.  The binge/starve regime does the exact opposite.  It might be an effective way to reduce calories but it's a blood sugar rollercoaster.

There's no one right way to eat, so saying one way is better than another is a bit disingenuous.    If eating 3 small meals and 3 small snacks allows you to feel energetic, not have cravings, lose weight and be healthy, then that is great!  Definitely stick with it.

What I want to avoid is misinformation about other ways of eating.  To say that the method of eating that the Warrior Diet promotes is a 'blood sugar rollercoaster" is just plain false.   There are quite a few diabetics who thrive on the Warrior Diet and have done so well with it that insulin medication is no longer necessary for them.   That may not be everyone's story, but it still applies.

Remember that during the day you are eating primarily vegetables which does not spike blood sugar.  The fruits you eat should be low on the glycemic index as well.  When you get to the evening meal, you eat a large salad composed of many fresh vegetables -- again not a major blood sugar spike.   After those enzymes are at work digesting, you eat your protein and cooked vegetables meal.  Once again, no starchy sugars or anything to invoke a major insulin response.  At the end of the meal , you have three different choices:  fats (nuts, seeds), carbs (healthy carbs, such as brown rice, beans, etc) or alcohol.  You never mix the last three.

Thus in the end you are likely to be at a caloric deficit because nothing you are eating is very high in calories, save the protein.  You also do not spike blood sugar.   To call this way of eating as "starve then binge" is false.  There's simply more to it.  Works for some, not for others. :)

If anyone is curious, check out a recent post by a diabetic about the Warrior Diet on Dragon Door's forum:

http://kbforum.dragondoor.com/nutrition-forum /135714-diabetic-thank-you-warrior-diet-long. html

"Thus in the end you are likely to be at a caloric deficit because nothing you are eating is very high in calories, save the protein.  You also do not spike blood sugar.   To call this way of eating as "starve then binge" is false.  There's simply more to it.  Works for some, not for others. :)"

That is all patent nonsense in my case, kvalhion, and I sincerely hope that you are not writing a prescription for other diabetics.  On this diet I would have been hypoglycemic a lot of the time.  The downward sugar spikes are as bad as the upward ones.  If your blood sugar is out of control this diet is a loaded gun.

Edit: I'm not interested in quibbling or baiting you with my comments.  Like I said earlier, this looks like a motivational plan for healthy people.  But it's not exactly a textbook diet for diabetes treatment.

Original Post by thhq:

That is all patent nonsense in my case, kvalhion, and I sincerely hope that you are not writing a prescription for other diabetics. 

It may be 'patent nonsense' for you, but speaking to diabetics who have had success on the warrior diet means it wasn't nonsense for them, and also shows that being diabetic doesn't automatically exclude people from this way of eating.

In any case, I am not prescribing anything to anyone.  I am merely sharing information on something that has worked for me and for others.  Like you've done, you make your own decisions and draw your own conclusions.  I've no problem with that. :)

Here's a few quotes from the author of the Warrior Diet in regards to diabetics in case you (or others) are interested:

"There are special cases, such as with those who are insulin resistant and hypoglycemic [have low blood glucose]. Low blood sugar raises cortisol levels, and a primary function of cortisol is to raise blood sugar. That may explain why older men, who are more prone to suffer from insulin resistance, may also suffer from elevated cortisol and thus may feel the need to eat or drink carbs before training. But to deal seriously with insulin resistance, hypoglycemia and diabetes, you need to decrease the body’s exclusive dependence on carb fuel before, during and even after exercise, and instead gradually shift into primal fat fuel, meaning that it’s based mostly on monounsaturated oils. The Warrior Diet trains the body to improve its capacity for using fat fuel and therefore increase its ability to stabilize insulin and cortisol levels before, during and after exercise."

JB: Do certain medical conditions, such as diabetes, preclude the use of the Warrior Diet? 

OH: The Warrior Diet can be modified according to personal needs. For those with insulin resistance or diabetes, it’s best to gradually train the body to shift from carb fuel to primal-fat fuel. Fatty liver and hyperinsulinemia are the leading causes of insulin resistance and diabetes. In other words, accumulation of lipids, metabolites and toxins in the liver, as well as oversecretion of insulin from eating too often and too much overprocessed carb, are the major cause of impaired insulin activity and diabetes. The Warrior Diet special applications help remove lipids and toxins from the liver while stabilizing insulin. In any case, someone who has a medical condition or is taking drugs to treat illness should consult a physician before starting any type of diet. "

Have a good weekend. :)

Original Post by thhq:

"Thus in the end you are likely to be at a caloric deficit because nothing you are eating is very high in calories, save the protein.  You also do not spike blood sugar.   To call this way of eating as "starve then binge" is false.  There's simply more to it.  Works for some, not for others. :)"

 

That is all patent nonsense in my case, kvalhion, and I sincerely hope that you are not writing a prescription for other diabetics.  On this diet I would have been hypoglycemic a lot of the time.  The downward sugar spikes are as bad as the upward ones.  If your blood sugar is out of control this diet is a loaded gun.

Edit: I'm not interested in quibbling or baiting you with my comments.  Like I said earlier, this looks like a motivational plan for healthy people.  But it's not exactly a textbook diet for diabetes treatment.

 

But there are no downward sugar spikes, I only get that when I eat little and often and are then on a rollercoaster. For me any cravings are only based on the last meal so if that was very small or nothing then there is nowhere to drop from. As soon as I eat little and often I could eat twice as much those days because insulin is triggered (which as you know is also a fat storing hormone - so by staying without insulin you are in fat burning mode all day).

I would think if you have the diabetes that you need to inject for then you inject according to your meal so would be the same and if type 2 then this would stop the insulin sensitivity?

I would definately say that both schools of thought, little and often and IF (not binge eating, it is nothing like that because you are not desperate, more calm and choosing heathier stuff), are correct and scientific but work in different ways and suit different people. The little and often is great for very active and IF for less active during day in my opinion as the more active you are you need to ensure you dont empty your glycogen stores so you end up eating more anyway.

I wish I had known about IF years ago when I struggled with the traditional dieting so good to let others know it exists in case it suits them - especially good for women who get hormonal sugar cravings.

joannedm, we're talking about Type 2 diabetes, with no insulin treatment.  And yes hypoglycemia (the downward spikes - under 80 mg/L blood glucose) will send you into a coma.  The easy way to induce hypoglycemia is to go without eating for an extended period of time.  A standard Type 2 diet includes lots of small meals/snacks spaced pretty closely, and testing blood glucose all the time.  At the outset I was running them 3 times a day.  Since I've lost weight it is no longer a problem and I haven't run one for months.

I'm not saying that it would be impossible to modify the Warrior diet into something safe for diabetics.  But it would require intense blood sugar monitoring.