Intermittent Fasting (IF), science or pseudo-science? In this vid I cover the essential issues of IF people need to know.

Review Paper Of Interest Mentioned In the Vid:

Meal frequency and timing in health and disease

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America


Although major research efforts have focused on how specific components of foodstuffs affect health, relatively little is known about a more fundamental aspect of diet, the frequency and circadian timing of meals, and potential benefits of intermittent periods with no or very low energy intakes. The most common eating pattern in modern societies, three meals plus snacks every day, is abnormal from an evolutionary perspective. Emerging findings from studies of animal models and human subjects suggest that intermittent energy restriction periods of as little as 16 h can improve health indicators and counteract disease processes. The mechanisms involve a metabolic shift to fat metabolism and ketone production, and stimulation of adaptive cellular stress responses that prevent and repair molecular damage. As data on the optimal frequency and timing of meals crystalizes, it will be critical to develop strategies to incorporate those eating patterns into health care policy and practice, and the lifestyles of the population.

Full Paper HERE

  1. Kent Ingram 8 years ago

    Nicely done, Will! I don’t think there are many, if any, dietary programs that fit everybody, like a cookie-cutter. I wouldn’t do the IF program, personally. If my stomach gets too empty and my blood sugar gets low, I’ve been known to get temperamental and cranky. If it’s not that, then I get drowsy. If I’m physically active, EVERYTHING works better. That could be the key for a lot of people, who knows?

    • Author
      Will Brink 8 years ago

      I’d be starving personally, but it’s also possible after a few weeks your hunger signaling and the metabolic changes would help with that. If I go more then 3-4 hours without food, I get hungry myself,

  2. Sandra Wheatley 8 years ago

    I could not read the entire article because I don’t subscribe, but I understand the premise perfectly. I have struggled with my weight throughout my adult life. Though breakfast was not natural for me, I tried to get some healthy food into my system to “jump start my metabolism.” I am not naturally hungry until about noon or 1:00, and I am an early riser.
    One day, I injured my back doing yard work….it was a stupid and sudden twist of the body that rendered me useless for about 4 weeks. During that time, I was lying in my certain comfortable position while everyone emptied out of my house in the morning to get on with their day. During this time, I didn’t fix myself food until I was hungry at about 2 PM….then, I went to the kitchen and ate a bowl of Cheerios. Odd choice because I am not a cereal eater. Then, I ate a normal dinner…some protein, veggies, a little starch. My serving size is what I consider normal. Also, there were some afternoons that I ate a small frozen custard…..
    In less than 6 weeks, I lost 18 pounds. Now, I am a person who can struggle on weight watchers and take 4 to 5 weeks to lose the first 10 pounds! Yikes. Throughout all of my years of various diets, it had never occurred to me to go for a long period of time ( 9PM to 2PM) without eating….At this time, I was simply too sore to go and rummage through the fridge, so I waited this long to eat.
    I now believe that eating more meals each day is unhealthy for me. The additional meals not only increase my caloric intake for the day, but make my body much less efficient in burning fat. Using common sense, I would not advocate my eating schedule for children, teenagers, folks with sugar problems, or those blessed with high metabolic processes, but for me, this seems to be the ticket to weight loss.
    I am 52 years old and I believe that my body simply does not need frequent meals, and importantly needs to have a longer period of fasting. In fact, I feel that I consumed approximately 1/3 fewer calories during my injured period, so naturally that led to weight loss. More importantly, if I had consumed 1/3 fewer calories on a plan of grazing throughout the day, I would not have lost the weight so quickly. I know this because I have cut calories while eating more frequently and have not had the same results.
    My family thought I was crazy when I shared my theory three years ago. Now, I see that the benefits of this type of eating schedule are being documented.
    I consider myself carb sensitive and my old school of thought was that carbs were the major culprit. I still believe that the best, nutritious eating comes from foods that pack nutrition and are as close to a natural form as possible – a diet of lean proteins, fruit, veggies, beans, etc. makes sense to me. Clearly, the whole Cheerio thing was not what I consider healthy. It was simply handy while I was laid up. Interestingly, I consumed more carbs that typical, and still lost weight. I concluded that waiting so long between meals was the real key to jumpstart my metabolism.
    I am not a scientist, I’m a CPA with limited knowledge about the human digestive system. I just know that cutting out breakfast and not eating a single morsel of food until after noon works for me. I can go to the gym on an empty stomach and do everything I need to do without the drama of fainting or breaking out in a cold sweat. I conclude that my body enjoys that period of fasting, and sets up a more efficient response to the food I eat.
    I now believe that eating nutritious foods after a reasonable fasting period is a wonderful concept that has merit. I am not suggesting that one method suits all, but for my body type and metabolic challenges, this works. It seems like the number of calories consumed will always be the main aspect in a weight loss plan, but keeping a long fasting period between meals speeds up the weight loss process.
    Thank you for your research.
    Sandra Wheatley
    San Antonio, TX

  3. Claudine 8 years ago

    It won’t let me view the paper unless I sign up and pay for the subscription. How do I go about getting hold of the paper without having to do the above. Thanks. Or is there a summary you’re able to share with me. Thanks 🙂

    • Author
      Will Brink 8 years ago

      The summary is essentially the vid and the abstract below it. The link took you to the full paper, but now is forcing people to purchase it to read. I suspect the amount of traffic I sent over there triggered that perhaps. It was free!

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.



I'm not around right now. But you can send me an email and I'll get back to you soon.


Log in with your credentials

Forgot your details?