T-Lab
New Member
"The intermittent energy restriction group was advised to consume 400/600 kcal (female/male) on two non-consecutive days."
i think this is a different strategy than the op was asking about.
id favor results over transient lab numbers.
and I'm not sure why its "my" little 8 week initial greater fast loss, i didn't post the study. and who's "cutting" for much more than 8 weeks?
you can also maintain and gain by periodically fasting. the discussion has shifted to things that weren't even in the op's question.
You are right that is a different method but not the only one I have read showing that calories equated, results are similar.
Who’s “cutting” for more than 8 weeks? Any person with more than 8-16 lbs to lose. Which is the majority of America. Or how about anyone competing in bodybuilding. At 8 weeks out you should already be very lean. And take it further from there. A good coach would have a 16 week plan. Play with variables far enough out that you aren’t guessing and cutting last minute lbs when you get to 8 weeks. So I would say the majority of people trying to lose weight. 8 weeks is more like a mini cut for someone who is already very lean and doesn’t have that much to lose.
But up to this point the majority of evidence I have seen, shows that calories equated, IF and Keto do not have superior fat loss results compared to traditional calorie restriction. That study does seem to show some results. I’d like to see if there is a growing body of evidence to support it. But to me it’s just one possible way to do it. There may be some long term health benefits which I have yet to see anything solid on. But IMO bottom line is people should just use whatever method makes sense for them and they can stick to.
