What do you eat?

[2FUNKY]

She's an actual human woman who rides mountain bikes. Pretty crazy, huh?

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

They mail order those? Sweet!

[riser4]

She's an actual human woman who rides mountain bikes. Pretty crazy, huh?

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Upgraded!

[Danno]

Fwiw, I do my IF with coffee that has heavy cream. Fuck if I know if it really counts as IF (I've read suggestions that up to 50 calories is fine, but I don't think that's been studied).I lost tons of weight and kept it off which seemingly means it's working.

[ötzi]

eta: Also, be diligent about getting good outdoor light exposure, especially within 1-2 hours of waking and within around an hour of sunset.

Dan, curious about the amount of time and amount of skin exposure recommended.

[zion zig zag]

Dan, curious about the amount of time and amount of skin exposure recommended.

I could be wrong, but I think the skin exposure is more an issue with Vit D production, whereas serotonin and melatonin production are triggered from the retina.

[Dantheman]

I could be wrong, but I think the skin exposure is more an issue with Vit D production, whereas serotonin and melatonin production are triggered from the retina.

Correct. Also immensely important for dopamine production. For regulating circadian rhythm it's all about exposing your retinas to bright outdoor light, especially at low sun angles early and late in the day. Actually, it's all about exposing a very particular subset of retinal cells to bright outdoor light (melanopsin-expressing, intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells). Even people who are functionally blind due to cataracts, age-related macular degeneration, etc. still benefit immensely from outdoor light exposure.

https://webvision.med.utah.edu/book/...anglion-cells/
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles...21.636330/full


eta: That all said, I suppose I should chime in on the recommended exposure. In full direct sunlight as little as 2-3 minutes is sufficient but go with 5-10 minutes to be really safe. Add 5-10x that amount if through a window or windshield (glasses are fine if you wear them). If it's cloudy out, 20-30 minutes. Even on the gloomiest rainy shitfuck day outdoor light intensity is 10-100x higher than typical indoor lighting. Mid-day, high sun angle light isn't that effective for setting circadian rhythm but is still good for telling your brain that it's daytime and it should be producing the proper suite of neurotransmitters and nueromodulators. Lots of bright outdoor light during the day also makes you less sensitive to the negative effects of bright light at night if you can't avoid it.

[shera]

Phish I'm sorry you're hurt, nice you have a girl to keep you company though. Srsly I can't imagine you as a fatty, hahaha.

I try to do 16/8 but I am hungry, sigh. I've been taking a tablespoon of mct oil to try to hold off. Maybe that breaks the fast though?

Dan you are using a lot of syllables there. Going out in the sun sounds ok though.

[ötzi]

Thanks Dan, but from a lay, practical perspective, wtf are we talking about here? 5 minutes just being outside in the morning and evening, an hour twice a day looking toward the sun directly, or something in between (or completely different)?

[Dantheman]

Dan you are using a lot of syllables there. Going out in the sun sounds ok though.

I like to understand the underlying biological mechanism. Without it sometimes these recommendations can appear utterly nonsensical.

Thanks Dan, but from a lay, practical perspective, wtf are we talking about here? 5 minutes just being outside in the morning and evening, an hour twice a day looking toward the sun directly, or something in between (or completely different)?

For a minimum recommended dose, 5 minutes outside w/o sunglasses facing the sun morning and evening goes a long, long way. More doesn't hurt, and the longer you're out the less important facing the sun directly is. Sunglasses are fine if you're going to be out for extended periods and/or at mid-day (too much UV is still bad for your eyes). Obviously, sunglasses are fine if it's so bright you're uncomfortable, you're driving into the sun or otherwise need them for safety reasons, etc. Just don't put sunglasses on the moment you leave the house, especially early and late in the day, and whenever possible try to get some bright light into your eyeballs as soon as possible after waking.

[Whiteroom_Guardian]

Phish I'm sorry you're hurt, nice you have a girl to keep you company though. Srsly I can't imagine you as a fatty, hahaha.

I try to do 16/8 but I am hungry, sigh. I've been taking a tablespoon of mct oil to try to hold off. Maybe that breaks the fast though?

Dan you are using a lot of syllables there. Going out in the sun sounds ok though.

Thanks. I'm far from fat, but want that little 8lb belly gone. I'm certainly in better shape now than when I lived in CO and drank all my food.

[Ski to Be]

When I really want to lose wait I just go under a 1000 calories a day and of those I make sure that I get protein so that I don't lose muscle which keeps your metabolism up. I do coffee in the morning really light on creamer and a protein bar than a healthy lunch and a protein shake for dinner. You will feel hungry. You just have to embrace that feeling kind of like being sore from working out. I will munch on mini carrots sometimes and avoid sugar. I have always been able to lose 5 pounds a week on this routine and then moderate once I get to my target weight. Bare in mind that I am very active and have more than average muscle mass so your results may vary.

[GiBo]

Fwiw, I do my IF with coffee that has heavy cream. Fuck if I know if it really counts as IF (I've read suggestions that up to 50 calories is fine, but I don't think that's been studied).I lost tons of weight and kept it off which seemingly means it's working.

I do that too. A little half and half and even a tablespoon of brown sugar. No food until about 12:30. I otherwise eat what I want, although pretty sensibly. I drink too much (4 a night), but I stay relatively fit doing this. When I quit the drinks, I start losing weight. So when I need to drop 5lbs or so, I just stop drinking during the week.

[nortonwhis]

@WG
When i was injured i was pretty anal about my diet. I was a chubby kid and didnt want to go back to that side of life. I did IF all though it wasnt by design or wasnt really known to me back then. Have 2 black coffees only before a breakfast of oatmeal and berries around 12-1. An apple and green tea thru the afternoon. A long walk home from work when it wasnt snowing and then a fairly early light dinner of salad/veggies and protein around 6 with some fruit for dessert. Just eat fresh foods, stay away from the processed stuff and you'll be fine. As mentioned its important to cut your portions, but not so much that your body can't heal. I also did 1 outing each week with the boys for pizza and beers. Cut out alcohol completely other than that.
Also don't sweat if you gain a few pounds. You'll lose it

[Dantheman]

I do that too. A little half and half and even a tablespoon of brown sugar. No food until about 12:30. I otherwise eat what I want, although pretty sensibly. I drink too much (4 a night), but I stay relatively fit doing this. When I quit the drinks, I start losing weight. So when I need to drop 5lbs or so, I just stop drinking during the week.

Did you mean a teaspoon? A tablespoon of sugar in one cup of coffee sounds sickenly sweet and almost certainly breaks the fast. And 4 drinks per night, wow. I'm not saying you're an alcoholic, nor do I really GAF, but that definitely has a significant impact on your sleep quality.

[GiBo]

Did you mean a teaspoon? A tablespoon of sugar in one cup of coffee sounds sickenly sweet and almost certainly breaks the fast. And 4 drinks per night, wow. I'm not saying you're an alcoholic, nor do I really GAF, but that definitely has a significant impact on your sleep quality.

It's a 20 oz travel cup. I dump some half and half in it and a kitchen spoon of brown sugar. I like it black too, so maybe I should do that for a couple of weeks and see if I shed some flab.

Hmmm. I didn't really think a couple of Coors lights while making dinner and a couple of glasses of wine with dinner was a big deal. I feel pretty good in the morning. Maybe I should go on break and see if I go from just feeling good to on fire. Although to be honest, I haven't noticed a huge difference when I've went on the wagon before.

[Dantheman]

20 oz makes more sense. On the booze all I can tell you is that the data cited in the chapter of Why We Sleep that discusses alcohol was pretty damning.

[John_B]

Hey Dan, I don't know enough about this to contribute to a discussion but the NYT just published an article titled "Scientists find no benefit to time-restricted eating"

Here is the text. I work in a scientific field so I'm well familiar with not just chasing the newest research/news article but I'm curious what you or others have to say relating to this?

NYT: The weight-loss idea is quite appealing: Limit your eating to a period of six to eight hours each day, during which you can have whatever you want.

Studies in mice seemed to support so-called time-restricted eating, a form of the popular intermittent fasting diet. Small studies of people with obesity suggested it might help shed pounds.

But now, a rigorous one-year study in which people followed a low-calorie diet between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. or consumed the same number of calories anytime during the day has failed to find an effect.

The bottom line, said Dr. Ethan Weiss, a diet researcher at the University of California, San Francisco: “There is no benefit to eating in a narrow window.”

The study, published on Wednesday in the New England Journal of Medicine, was led by researchers at Southern Medical University in Guangzhou, China, and included 139 people with obesity. Women ate 1,200 to 1,500 calories a day, and men consumed 1,500 to 1,800 calories daily. To ensure compliance, participants were required to photograph every bit of food they ate and to keep food diaries.

Both groups lost weight — an average of about 14 to 18 pounds — but there was no significant difference in the amounts of weight lost with either diet strategy. There also were no significant differences between the groups in measures of waist circumference, body fat and lean body mass.

The scientists also found no differences in such risk factors as blood glucose levels, sensitivity to insulin, blood lipids or blood pressure.

“These results indicate that caloric intake restriction explained most of the beneficial effects seen with the time-restricted eating regimen,” Dr. Weiss and his colleagues concluded.

The new study is not the first to test time-restricted eating, but previous studies often were smaller, of shorter duration and without control groups. That research tended to conclude that people lost weight by eating only during a limited period of time during the day.

Editors’ Picks
Why Those Moments of Care for Liza Minnelli and Joni Mitchell Felt Different
In ‘Deaf Utopia,’ Nyle DiMarco Dreams of Integrating the Deaf and Hearing Worlds
A Daughter Tries to Make Sense of Her Mother’s Suicide
Dr. Weiss himself used to be a true believer in time-restricted eating and said that for seven years he had eaten only between noon and 8 p.m.

In previous research, he and his colleagues asked some of the 116 adult participants to eat three meals a day, with snacks if they got hungry, and others were instructed to eat whatever they wanted between noon and 8 p.m. Participants lost a small amount of weight — an average of two pounds in the time-restricted eating group, and 1.5 pounds in the control group, a difference that was not statistically significant.

In an interview, Dr. Weiss recalled he could hardly believe the results. He asked the statisticians to analyze the data four times, until they told him further work wouldn’t change the results.

“I was a devotee,” he said. “This was a hard thing to accept.”

That experiment lasted just 12 weeks. Now, it looks like even a one-year study has failed to find a benefit in time-restricted eating.

Dr. Christopher Gardner, director of nutrition studies at the Stanford Prevention Research Center, said he wouldn’t be surprised if time-restricted eating nonetheless worked on occasion.

“Almost every type of diet out there works for some people,” he said. “But the take-home supported by this new research is that when subjected to a properly designed and conducted study — scientific investigation — it is not any more helpful than simply reducing daily calorie intake for weight loss and health factors.”

Weight-loss experts said time-restricted diets are unlikely to go away. “We don’t have a clear answer yet” about whether the strategy helps people lose weight, said Courtney Peterson, a researcher at the University of Alabama at Birmingham who studies time-restricted eating.

She suspects the diet might benefit people by limiting the number of calories they have an opportunity to consume each day. “We just need to do larger studies,” Dr. Peterson said.

Dr. Louis J. Aronne, director of the Comprehensive Weight Control Center at Weill Cornell Medicine in New York, said that, in his experience, some people who have trouble with calorie-counting diets do better if they are told simply to eat only during a limited period of time each day.

“While that approach hasn’t been shown to be better, it doesn’t appear to be worse” than calorie counting, he said. “It gives patients more options for success.”

The hypothesis behind time-restricted eating is that circadian genes that are thought to increase metabolism are turned on during daylight hours, said Dr. Caroline Apovian, co-director of the Center for Weight Management and Wellness at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston.

The question for researchers, she added: “If you overeat a bit during daylight hours, are you more able to burn those calories rather than store them?” Dr. Apovian said she would like to see a study that compared a group of subjects who overate all day to a time-restricted eating group of subjects who also overate.

She said she would still recommend time-restricted eating to patients, she said, even though “we don’t have proof.”

For Dr. Weiss, he said he was persuaded by his own study and said the new data reinforced his conviction that time-restricted eating offers no benefit.

“I started eating breakfast,” he said. “My family says I am a lot nicer.”

[shera]

I was listening to a podcast about intermittent fasting and they were saying that there are two kinds of physical motion through the digestive tract, one to move the food through and the other to slough lining cells, like a cleanup operation. And you have to stop eating for long enough to let that happen. Also there is autophagy and ketosis and probably other benefits that Dan can name (with syllables!)

I'm convinced it's beneficial and if people get hangry in the morning maybe it means they've got a sugar/carb addiction. I get hungry but it's more my belly complaining (grehlin?) and not low blood sugar.

[zion zig zag]

For a minimum recommended dose, 5 minutes outside w/o sunglasses facing the sun morning and evening goes a long, long way. More doesn't hurt, and the longer you're out the less important facing the sun directly is. Sunglasses are fine if you're going to be out for extended periods and/or at mid-day (too much UV is still bad for your eyes). Obviously, sunglasses are fine if it's so bright you're uncomfortable, you're driving into the sun or otherwise need them for safety reasons, etc. Just don't put sunglasses on the moment you leave the house, especially early and late in the day, and whenever possible try to get some bright light into your eyeballs as soon as possible after waking.

“As soon as possible after waking”
Does the sun have to be above the mountains, ie, direct light? Because even this time of year that’s 2-2.5 hours after I wake up and if we go to year-around DST I’ll be up 5 hours before I can see direct sunlight some days.

[Mazderati]

Looks like direct light is optional.

[The AD]

Just saw this in the NY Times today:
Scientists Find No Benefit to Time-Restricted Eating
In a yearlong study, participants who confined meals to certain hours lost no more weight than those who ate at any time.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/20/h...ted-diets.html

[buttahflake]

You guys should try the Scarsdale Diet, bunch of fucking hen’s up in here.
Take a lap

[Dantheman]

Hey Dan, I don't know enough about this to contribute to a discussion but the NYT just published an article titled "Scientists find no benefit to time-restricted eating"

Here is the text. I work in a scientific field so I'm well familiar with not just chasing the newest research/news article but I'm curious what you or others have to say relating to this?

Got to keep this brief as I have shit to do today, and with the caveats that I haven't read the actual study and the media is famous for misinterpreting research:

They controlled for total calories so it's not surprising that weight loss did not differ. This is an extremely consistent finding in weight loss research--high-carb, low-carb, small meals, big meals, none of it matters for weight loss if total calories are controlled. Given the fairly impressive amount of weight loss between both groups (14-18 lbs) it's also not surprising that blood glucose, lipids, etc. all improved--those things always improve when people lose weight and eat low-calorie diets of any kind.

This is one study. The totality of evidence still indicates that IF is beneficial for overall health in real-world conditions. Listen to Satchin Panda's interview with Rhonda Patrick (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-R-eqJDQ2nU) or some of his TED Talks. Huberman also did a deep dive into IF that cites a boatload of research (https://hubermanlab.com/effects-of-f...ss-and-health/). FWIW, most of the benefits seem to come from delaying eating 1-2 hours after waking and stopping eating 2-3 hours before bed (definitely no later than 8 pm, and even that is pushing it IMO). It seems to be very important to enter sleep in an at least somewhat fasted state.

“As soon as possible after waking”
Does the sun have to be above the mountains, ie, direct light? Because even this time of year that’s 2-2.5 hours after I wake up and if we go to year-around DST I’ll be up 5 hours before I can see direct sunlight some days.

Direct light ideally, but we are in a unique situation with big mountains directly to our east that hasn't been directly addressed in research. If I were to speculate I'd say that if it's after the "official" sunrise time but the sun isn't over the mountains yet the amount of photons entering your eyeballs is probably equivalent to a cloudy day.

[NW_SKIER]

I was always told as a kid to never look into the sun.

[Whiteroom_Guardian]

Day two of IF. Feel quite good in the AM.