>>35456617
IF isn't starvation. you still eat.

>>35456657
yea but if i only eat from 4pm to 8 pm it is ok? like 2 big meals

When the sticky says "starvation mode," it just means going below your BMR on a daily basis. When you eat doesn't really matter.

>>35456985
so i can go 20 hours fasting and if i eat the normal calorie intake in the window time im ok, i guess?
thanks

>>35456985
>going below your BMR on a daily basis

That's literally how to lose weight though, it doesn't necessarily mean you're starving

The only thing wrong in the sticky, it will not mess up your metabolism and you will not go into starvation mode until you are on the verge of death.

http://www.leangains.com/2010/10/top-ten-fasting-myths-debunked.html

>the earliest evidence for lowered metabolic rate in response to fasting occurred after 60 hours (-8% in resting metabolic rate). Other studies show metabolic rate is not impacted until 72-96 hours have passed (George Cahill has contributed a lot on this topic).

>Seemingly paradoxical, metabolic rate is actually increased in short-term fasting. For some concrete numbers, studies have shown an increase of 3.6% - 10% after 36-48 hours (Mansell PI, et al, and Zauner C, et al). This makes sense from an evolutionary perspective. Epinephrine and norepinephrine (adrenaline/noradrenaline) sharpens the mind and makes us want to move around. Desirable traits that encouraged us to seek for food, or for the hunter to kill his prey, increasing survival. At some point, after several days of no eating, this benefit would confer no benefit to survival and probably would have done more harm than good; instead, an adaptation that favored conservation of energy turned out to be advantageous. Thus metabolic rate is increased in short-term fasting (up to 60 hours).

>>35456617
Your body is made to survive in the wilds where it was common not to eat in hours or even days and have big meals, that's why IF is no problem.
Sticky advice against eating almost nothing, like 500 kcal a day or so, that is little even for women, if you do so during various days you will lose muscle, while if you have just a little caloric deficit, you will lose fat while maintain muscle, or if you're totally new, you could even gain muscle on caloric deficit.

>>35457008

Unless you're in a coma, BMR and TDEE are different things.

real talk has anyone noticed benefits with intermittent fasting?

ok one more question, i have 2 choices, i either fast for 20 hours and get the workout done in a fasted state or i start eating after 16 hours and then i do the workout, doing the workout in a fasted state is obviously better, but by how much? i'm willing to go for 20 hours with 4h window but i need to know if the difference its worth it

>>35457447

Real talk, no

Decrease in strength combined with no real change in body composition

>>35456617
When in doubt, always go with the sticky. Always.

4chan is full of retards spouting absolute shit they know nothing about and /fit/ is no exception.

>>35457447
dude IF its just another tool, its a great tool but you wont go from fatty to greek god only by doing IF, do it while also eating healthy, workout (properly) and you should see that IF helps alot, not only it helps you getting lower bf easier than dieting but it also has health benefits, once you get over the "being hungry all the time" stare you'll never go back

>>35457507
well obviously I know that it's not magic but is there truth to the idea that not eating for 16 hours for example will help?

usually people say meal timing doesn't matter so that's why I'm confused

>>35457534
well the thing with IF its that its hard to understand but easy to do, of fucking course that not eating 16 hours will help, in that time your body will use its fat to survive (you wont die chill) and after 16 hours you stock up again, its 16 hours because you get the most out of it in 16 hours, the body can last much longer than that, people have been doing this since ancient time, hell, i bet even you did it sometime, like when you slept alot woke up eat and sleep again, thats if, just read more about it man, dont take it from 4chan.

>>35457447
IF on a 2 day cycle worked wonders for me, usually when I cut I can feel that I loose muscle tone (as in how hard it is) after a while, but with IF I actually made gains while loosing about 30% more fat than when I just did a normal cut with the same amount of calories.

How I did it was
>eat breakfast day 1
>no more food day 1
>skip breakfast day 2
>eat lunch day 2
>lift
>eat dinner day 2
>repeat

So I went about 36h with no food at a time, 3 times a week. OF cause my dinner was about 4000 kcal on the second day to keep my average intake slightly below maintenance.