I hadn't seen this, though, where the fat loss effects didn't replicate in ob/ob (but there were other benefits) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-39380-2 …
-
-
Replying to @KetoCarnivore
Mmmm, but this study literally found caloric restriction along with weight loss for IF
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
Right, but what I'm trying to say is if it were shown that IF causes weight loss even without CR, then how is it obvious that CR caused weight loss when both are at play? Of course weight loss always involves a caloric deficit. I don't think it's typically the "cause", though.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @KetoCarnivore
But I don't think that has been shown, certainly not outside of a few rodent studies that arguably have failed to replicate. In humans, AFAIK there's no good evidence that IF causes weightloss sans caloric restriction
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
Fair, though I think it's suggestive. Regardless, I think you're confusing CR with caloric deficit. No one I know claims that you didn't expend more calories than you took in if you lost weight. That's a different way of stating the result, not the cause.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @KetoCarnivore
Nah, the whole argument for IF as the "best" dietary pattern relies on the idea that it causes weight reduction independent of a calorie deficit. I don't think that's been demonstrated at all, a far simpler explanation is that it's just another way of cutting calories
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
I can definitely imagine IF being used that way. I didn't mean to defend it as best! I'm just arguing with the principle that a dietary strategy that results in caloric deficit means any fat lost was because of caloric deficit.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @KetoCarnivore
Sure, but I think it's fair to say that the most likely explanation of weight loss in a dietary pattern that causes you to eat less is the eating less rather than some speculative and unproven mechanism
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @GidMK
It depends. If the cause of eating less is actually just that you're not allowed to eat most of the time, then that's not very interesting, but if you stop wanting to eat as much, then the cause of that change in wanting becomes exactly the interesting part.--
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @KetoCarnivore @GidMK
-- If you're overweight and still hungry, that's actually kind of odd, don't you think? A diet that is *causing* you to use your own fat efficiently, should of course make you *want* to eat less. The fact that CR generally doesn't is fascinating.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
Interesting thought, but I would argue that the evidence that IF reduces appetite is, at best, inconsistent. Might do so for some people, but on average it's very unclear
-
-
-
Replying to @KetoCarnivore
Yeh that's very true. No good definition, although the theory is similar for all methods
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.