Intermittent fasting bros... it's over

Intermittent fasting bros... it's over

Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68

Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68

Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >reddit

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous
  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Holy shit... I just started this week. Should I stop?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      it's too late for you, anon... you're already 91% dead

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Its just skipping breakfast not eating for a full day is better

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      no you moron, correlation =/= causation
      of course people who do IF are gonna have higher rates of cardiovascular issues, most likely they are fat and trying to lose weight or DID lose weight and are now healthy but with some damage from when they were big. I fricking hate s*yence

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        you can see the BMI, race, CVS and cancer status off study participants

        https://i.imgur.com/ZvDXyac.png

        20k participants is pretty good
        BMI for normal eating (>16h category) was about the same as BMI for the other categories
        There's a pretty obvious relationship for cardiovascular mortality the more you restrict eating windows 8 vs 8-10 vs 10-12 vs 12+

        The cancer stats are pretty interesting. Starting off the more restrictive eating windows show a lower % cancer when the study started, and about the same rate of cancer mortality. For people who already have cancer mortality is 50% lower in the 8h eating window but the same is true for the 16+h window

        all groups had about the same mean BMI, and they were all fat

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          By what metrics are we measuring cardiovascular disease risk? Their cholesterol rises slightly as their body metabolizes stored fat? Oh noes! That's gonna give you a heckin heart attack! There is no world in which fasting causes disease.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            measured by cardiovascular mortality in each group

            https://i.imgur.com/ZvDXyac.png

            20k participants is pretty good
            BMI for normal eating (>16h category) was about the same as BMI for the other categories
            There's a pretty obvious relationship for cardiovascular mortality the more you restrict eating windows 8 vs 8-10 vs 10-12 vs 12+

            The cancer stats are pretty interesting. Starting off the more restrictive eating windows show a lower % cancer when the study started, and about the same rate of cancer mortality. For people who already have cancer mortality is 50% lower in the 8h eating window but the same is true for the 16+h window

            you could argue that the 8 hour group is sketchy as it only includes 414 people of which 50 died by the end of the study but the other groups are pretty sizeable and still exhibit the same relationship

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >fat person temporarily fast trying to lose weight
            >increases cholesterol
            >doesn't keep off weight and gets fat again

            many such cases
            now frick off kid

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >they were all fat
          Great so this entire gay ass study has nothing to do with me
          Post saged, thread hidden, if digits you kys today

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah, you should. No joke if you don't stop you will die.
      But after about 16 hours you can start again. But you have to stop 8 hours later at the latest.
      It's fricking maddening but people have been doing it for thousands of years apparently.
      I miss when I had chlorophyll and could spend my time leisurely.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >if you don’t stuff your face 24/7 you will literally die

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >linked
    Controlling factors? Like the fact that most people doing IF are fatties?
    Post a link to the actual study, you lazy, brain-dead, b***h Black person homosexual

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      https://newsroom.heart.org/news/8-hour-time-restricted-eating-linked-to-a-91-higher-risk-of-cardiovascular-death

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >The increased risk of cardiovascular death was also seen in people living with heart disease or cancer.
        >Among people with existing cardiovascular disease, an eating duration of no less than 8 but less than 10 hours per day was also associated with a 66% higher risk of death from heart disease or stroke.
        >Time-restricted eating did not reduce the overall risk of death from any cause.
        >An eating duration of more than 16 hours per day was associated with a lower risk of cancer mortality among people with cancer.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >An eating duration of more than 16 hours per day was associated with a lower risk of cancer mortality among people with cancer

          Lmfao, no shit you live longer when you eat enough to keep yourself healthier as cancer steals from you internally.

          Where there's smoke there's fire, but IF ain't it.

          What's the correlation for vaxxed vs to unvaxxed? Oh there is no actual study.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Factors that may also play a role in health, outside of daily duration of eating and cause of death, were not included in the analysis.
        lol
        lmao

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        https://i.imgur.com/ZvDXyac.png

        20k participants is pretty good
        BMI for normal eating (>16h category) was about the same as BMI for the other categories
        There's a pretty obvious relationship for cardiovascular mortality the more you restrict eating windows 8 vs 8-10 vs 10-12 vs 12+

        The cancer stats are pretty interesting. Starting off the more restrictive eating windows show a lower % cancer when the study started, and about the same rate of cancer mortality. For people who already have cancer mortality is 50% lower in the 8h eating window but the same is true for the 16+h window

        true <8 had 2x to 3x more black people compared to other groups but smokers were about the same % as the >16 group
        >combined occurence of CVD and cancer in this group is the lowest of all groups.
        lmao, no it was 2x higher
        combined occurrence of CVD and cancer was (31+19)/414 = 12%
        same stat for >16 was (52+41)/1509 = 6%

        anyway, the <8 group was the smallest with just over 400 participants so we can't be sure if it's really a 80% increase but there's an obvious increase of 15% in the 10-12hour group and 25% in the 8-10h eating group

        [...]
        probably, these are just avg overweight people eating avg diets while drinking and smoking
        [...]
        true, this was just presented at a cardiologist conference, hasn't been reviewed

        ......
        People have been fasting since before Jesus, what the frick is all this?
        >hey, fasting is very popular these days.
        >we as doctors need to find a flaw and tell everybody!
        >let's go get random people in the streets (in Murricah) and test them

        https://i.imgur.com/9AmRDUs.jpg

        >science now says you're going to die because it just does bro
        >yes, as long as you give me the same team again and let all information flow through me, yes, of course I can replicate my findings most of the time

        If you don't believe me you are a racist planet destroyer

        Bro, why you fighting Jupiter? It's a cool planet that protects the inner system

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      20k participants is pretty good
      BMI for normal eating (>16h category) was about the same as BMI for the other categories
      There's a pretty obvious relationship for cardiovascular mortality the more you restrict eating windows 8 vs 8-10 vs 10-12 vs 12+

      The cancer stats are pretty interesting. Starting off the more restrictive eating windows show a lower % cancer when the study started, and about the same rate of cancer mortality. For people who already have cancer mortality is 50% lower in the 8h eating window but the same is true for the 16+h window

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        The <8h group has the highest % of men, blacks and smokers, all of which are risk factors for disease and cancer. Despite all of this the combined occurence of CVD and cancer in this group is the lowest of all groups.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          true <8 had 2x to 3x more black people compared to other groups but smokers were about the same % as the >16 group
          >combined occurence of CVD and cancer in this group is the lowest of all groups.
          lmao, no it was 2x higher
          combined occurrence of CVD and cancer was (31+19)/414 = 12%
          same stat for >16 was (52+41)/1509 = 6%

          anyway, the <8 group was the smallest with just over 400 participants so we can't be sure if it's really a 80% increase but there's an obvious increase of 15% in the 10-12hour group and 25% in the 8-10h eating group

          don't tell me they restricted and then binged goyslop lol

          probably, these are just avg overweight people eating avg diets while drinking and smoking

          >not peer reviewed
          okay

          true, this was just presented at a cardiologist conference, hasn't been reviewed

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Not reading that essay

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        What a moronic study, <8 hours is the smallest group of all by a large margin with the highest percentage of smokers and blacks, how disingenious can headlines get?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          that's just reddit clickbait, the point is there's a relationship

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            No, the study doesn't control nearly enough to say that. Plus it's all self-reported. Another bullshit survey clickbait that doesn't really have any practical value.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Not only is it self reported, subjects were split into eating habit groups based on two days of self reported eating habits
              Two days
              It's not worth the paper it's printed on

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah, for smokers and probably already overweight African Americans. They don't exactly eat the healthiest.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Literally every animal trial showed a 20% lifespan increase through intermittent fasting and every crazy old population center in the world is full of people who do it. The fact that the AHA backed it up when they still maintain that Canola oil is healthy for you says it all for me.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          it could still be better for healthy people just not obese bloatlords on the avg American diet. It's not even peer-reviewed yet, I'm sure there'll be more talk about this

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          We’re not mice that have been inbred and raised in labs for 500 generations, are we?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Insert antisemitic analogy here LOL.
            ~~*Those people*~~ have so many genetic issues it might actually be the case for them...

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I wonder if this is guys who work long hours who don't eat all day and when they do it's fast food.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Timeline
        >wait I have to only eat at certain times? OK ill give it a shot
        >it's been weeks, I'm sick of this
        >haha its after 6pm so I can eat all the mcdonalds I want
        >frick it, if I just treat myself it's not going to show up in their gay observational study, I'll just lie

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >50% participants were men
        >54.8% had eating window less than 8h
        >59% had eating window more than 16h
        Someone pls explain to braincell how these numbers make any sense, they add up to well over 100% and you cant fall into more than 1 category

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          It means
          "Of the participants with an eating window less than 8h, 54.8% were men"
          not
          "54.8% of the male participants had an eating window less than 8h"
          "

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        duration of study? seems like all associations through what they think are relevant lab values?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Study participants were followed for a median length of 8 years and maximum length of 17 years.
          the conclusions were driven by CVD & cancer deaths in each time-restricted eating group
          https://newsroom.heart.org/news/8-hour-time-restricted-eating-linked-to-a-91-higher-risk-of-cardiovascular-death

          Yeah, for smokers and probably already overweight African Americans. They don't exactly eat the healthiest.

          yep, average BMI in the study is halfway between overweight and obese, but this is pretty much the western average now kek

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            am I that old? has fasting been that mainstream for that many years? wonder how all the fasting advocates are going to cope with this.
            regardless, I have terrible experience with fasting and I guarantee I've done more extreme types than anybody else in this thread. it wasn't until after that I learned why it messed me up.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >wonder how all the fasting advocates are going to cope with this
              It's easy because it's a nonsense study.

              > and I guarantee I've done more extreme types than anybody else in this thread. it wasn't until after that I learned why it messed me up.
              You lyin homie

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              > wonder how all the fasting advocates are going to cope with this.
              By ignoring it because it’s bullshit. There are lots of problems with the study already detailed above. Logically it doesn’t make sense either. How did ancient humans survive while not eating 3-4 meals a day

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                it's not that crazy
                it's 3% chance of CVD death for a normal diet vs 4% to 6% chance for time-restricted diets over a 8 to 16 year timespan

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Study doesn't actually show that, though.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                how so?

                So is it not a serious difference and therefore who cares, or does it btfo fastinggays? You can’t have both.

                it's still 10% to 25% higher chance of CVD, but those people should be more concerned about their weight, drinking and smoking

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >how so
                They fail to demonstrate the time-restricted diet actually was what it's claimed to be, and that they controlled for confounding factors. I don't believe they found a statistically significant number of people to perform disciplined intermittent fasting for the duration of the study, much less verified.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                So what is there for fasting advocates to even cope about? You say it’s minor yourself, and they have bigger things to worry about.

                Also that assumes the study isn’t bullshit. Which it is.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                So is it not a serious difference and therefore who cares, or does it btfo fastinggays? You can’t have both.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                It's the complete opposite result of pretty much every other study in the field, seems pretty crazy

                >how so
                They fail to demonstrate the time-restricted diet actually was what it's claimed to be, and that they controlled for confounding factors. I don't believe they found a statistically significant number of people to perform disciplined intermittent fasting for the duration of the study, much less verified.

                >I don't believe they found a statistically significant number of people to perform disciplined intermittent fasting for the duration of the study, much less verified.
                They didn't even try, they took just two days worth of self reported survey data and pretended that it reflects the daily habits of the survey respondents ten years later
                Absolutely disgraceful chinkscience

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            The conclusions were driven by the crack pipe
            Study participants were divided into time restricted eating groups based on two days worth of survey data, then followed up on 8 years later
            Dangerously stupid, but you can't expect much more from a pack of changs

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        10-12 group has 15% higher cardiovascular hazard ratio by end of study. Baseline shows 18% higher pre-existing CVD rates than control (9.1/7.7)

        8-10 group shows 25% cardio hazard ratio. Baseline shows 30% higher pre-existing CVD rates than control (10.1/7.7)

        <8 group shows 90% cardio hazard ratio. 60% more smokers than control, 10% higher pre-existing CVD and only 400 participants.

        This is the power of science

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >~~*Studies*~~ Show anything remotely healthy leads to death.

    Modern soience in a nutshell

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Whoever claimed fasting was healthy? Not even the ancients claimed that.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >your heart requires you to eat all day

        Yeah no thanks

        You don't know your history, anon. Not surprising as I I think the average IQ on this board has to be no more than 80.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    don't tell me they restricted and then binged goyslop lol

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >not peer reviewed
    okay

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    ~~*reddit science*~~
    kys OP

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Always do the opposite of what israelites say

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      this

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/C5okKKx.jpg

      this

      "Jews" said DON'T eat rat poison because you might die, so you better do it, anons!

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Don't capitalize the j.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >what is DNP

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >capitalized the "jews"
        found ya !

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    i read the paper, 70% of participants were smokers LMAO

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Does the same experts also recommend eating butter over canola oil?

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Oh my gooodness I sleep for 8 hours every day !!!! OH NO

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      You eat spiders while you sleep.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        fake and gay

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          In your case it's wieners.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Midnight snack bros, we eatin' good.

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    How the FRICK, could not eating for 16 hours damage your heart? Is it because imsince it's going all the time it needs a constant supply of readily available energy or bits end up starving and dying off or some such?

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The only redditor I know irl
    Is a fricking moron that can’t even fricking wire a pc

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Meanwhile mice that only eat every other day live 30% longer.

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    8 hour fast is what every single person on the planet does when sleeping anyways. What a dogshit study

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/JHUyQsl.png

      Oh my gooodness I sleep for 8 hours every day !!!! OH NO

      Midnight snack bros, we eatin' good.

      morons it's a 8 hour eating window meaning a 16 hour fast every day

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Fasting seems like peak midwit. It SOUNDS good based on a rudimentary understanding of history and biology but it’s not necessarily backed up by real world experience beyond the idea that if you don’t eat you’ll obviously lose weight

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    hmm sounds like ((they)) are trying to keep you fat and weak

  20. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I don’t care about fasting one way or the other but I find it kind of funny so many fasting anons refuse to even consider that the study is right and there are drawbacks to fasting simply because they don’t want to believe it

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Maybe because some of us are actually health professionals who understand the effects of eating on a schedule, as opposed to saying it’s better for you to have a midnight snack. Come in dude, it’s just common sense.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Parroting memes doesn't make you a health professional.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        imagine this is your healthcare professional, no better than the other morons

        [...]
        [...]
        morons it's a 8 hour eating window meaning a 16 hour fast every day

        who didn't bother to check the study and still thinks that 8 hour time restricted eating means an 8 hour fasting a day

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Wait, are you fricking serious. Is this why I haven't been losing weight?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Welcome to IST. Memes reign supreme here, evidence doesn't matter at all.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >refuse to even consider that the study is right and there are drawbacks to fasting
      It doesn't make any sense that there would be drawbacks so the sensible assumption is that there are other factors affecting this one study's results.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      we have studies that say everything is good or bad, fats were unhealthy a few decades ago

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I don’t fast (unless you count skipping breakfast some days) but logically it doesn’t make sense why it would negatively affect you. Why would your heart need food throughout the day? You aren’t starving, your body has plenty of fuel. Humans through the majority of history didn’t eat 3 meals a day at fixed intervals. Most predators don’t eat consistently. Why on earth would hearts evolve to fail more frequently if you don’t eat every couple hours?

  21. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
  22. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    How?

  23. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >keto schizo thread
    i swear you fricking kids deserve to be killed.
    We've known this shit for decades.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      have a nice day, Moxyte.

  24. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >People actually thought starving yourself was healthy

    Meme dieters always make me laugh, what next silly bandwagon will they hop next?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >People actually thought starving yourself was healthy
      compared to constant digestion and raised insulin? are bodies were never designed to constantly ruminate,snack and digest like some obese cow

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Better than shutting down your thyroid.
        I am hypothyroid due to IF only. I have to take t3+t4 daily.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Assuming you really have thyroid problems, it's 100% not due to IF

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            look up ray peat

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              You would have to present much more evidence that IF is somehow damaging, to offset the millenia if not geological ages (warrior diet) that IF has been used with success all over the world

              What's happening with people doing IF and having thyroid problems is that their diet is catastrophic, and lacking the right nutrients. Many such cases in Murica.

              The study presented by OP is utterly manipulative, as proved many times ITT, and burgers enjoy terrible diets, which create problems, IF or not

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        foragers can eat all day, like a cow, and seem to live forever.

        the rest of us can get by eating once a day or less.

  25. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >salt is unhealthy
    >eating red meat is bad
    >eating dairy is bad
    >eggs are bad for your heart
    >saturated fat will kill you
    >not eating every 3 hours like some fat woman is bad
    >seed oils are perfectly okay
    yeah, i think your science is fake and gay

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      How are seed oils bad?

  26. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Is the world getting raided by "studies" today? There have been so many studies that say eggs are bad again, vitamin D is bad, fasting is bad, working out bad, sleeping bad

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Is the world getting raided by "studies" today? There have been so many studies that say eggs are bad again, vitamin D is bad, fasting is bad, working out bad, sleeping bad
      do not heed any of these bullshit studies

  27. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    rip people who sleep 8 hours a day
    time to switch to a biphasic sleep pattern

  28. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    even better

  29. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >FASTING GOOD
    >FASTING BAD
    >EGGS GOOD
    >EGGS BAD
    >RED MEAT GOOD
    >RED MEAT BAD

    if you're still unironically believing mainstream science and nutrition advice then you need to have a good word with yourself

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >all scientists are one homogenous group
      ok incel

  30. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    this whole study is awful lol
    >no peer review
    >73% of the people involved drink (which afaik they didn't quantify what "drinking" is, could be one drink a week or a fifth a day)
    >28.7 BMI average
    >combination of normal people, people with cvd, and people with cancer
    in conclusion: more diet fearmongering
    STOP LOSING WEIGHT GOY

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >no peer review

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >believe le studies, sisters!!! science is heckin awesome!

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      also would have been really funny if they presented vax status among the participants though that would have shown something they don't want you to see

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >shitting an a flu vaccine
        Are still people talking about "muh vax le bad"?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >awful study
      >73% of the people involved drink (which afaik they didn't quantify what "drinking" is, could be one drink a week or a fifth a day)
      >28.7 BMI average
      pretty representative of the average American kek

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Why is the 12-16 hour eating window sample size 10x bigger than most other sample sizes? What a dumb study. People were paid to crunch these numbers and run the whole thing.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        because that's the normal time window most people eat kek

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Okay, so it is fake and gay. Thank you, anon.

  31. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    God will have no mercy for the journalists on Judgment Day, he will spare no expense to make them pay accordingly

  32. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >science now says you're going to die because it just does bro
    >yes, as long as you give me the same team again and let all information flow through me, yes, of course I can replicate my findings most of the time

    If you don't believe me you are a racist planet destroyer

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      where's the star of david?

  33. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    anyone who calls not eating breakfast "time restricted eating" or "intermittent fasting" is a moron

  34. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >91%
    >This would make it on par, if not worse than smoking is for your heart

    I'm not even going to look it up or click it. Common sense tells me that its bullshit and everyone on that site needs to die.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >have a motor running 24/7
      >common sense is that it shouldn't care if you're constantly keeping it fueled or not

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Anon does your car suffer damage if your gas tank is below half full? Does it run better when over half full? Does it get damaged at all unless it runs dry?

        I can even argue a vehicle would run better with a less full tank because it weighs less, but the difference is inconsequential.

  35. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >The study’s limitations included its reliance on self-reported dietary information
    >it needs to be emphasized that categorization into the different windows of time-restricted eating was determined on the basis of just two days of dietary intake
    >no peer review
    They are unironically hacks

  36. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I've been eating like that my entire life, I'm not gonna make it to my 40s

  37. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    he was right again

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      eventually the world will learn. it's too bad Kyle M isn't actually pursuing science and his thesis of the dangers of fat metabolism.

  38. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >lose weight AND die early
    b***h you just talked me INTO it

  39. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Skipping breakfast is le death!
    Don't be silly. this is ridiculous.

  40. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Bugs, pods and owning nothing is good for you.

  41. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    1400 years of billions of muslims doing 12h dry fasting for a month every years will beg to differ, fasting is le bad, unlike meme diets, scamsuppliments and fat acceptance

  42. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    why do Black folk call it fasting? its starving
    no shit its bad for you lmao

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Starving
      >1.(of a person or animal) suffer severely or die from hunger.
      >2. cause (a person or animal) to suffer severely or die from hunger.
      Not eating for day doesn’t even constitute starving. Anyone saying otherwise is fat or moronic, probably both.

      >t doesn’t fast but isn’t fat or moronic

  43. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    studies show that replying to op, 80 posts into a thread is mindless Black person homosexual behaviour

  44. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Anything that says heart disease or immune system stuff is just a vaccine cover up

  45. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >reddit NPR science article
    Right. What were we talking about again?

  46. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    This is why 500% of my diet consists of weekly covid booster injections. Apparently a new study came out and the miracle drug cures heart disease, ahhh the wonders of science.

  47. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >can't just skip dinner, wake up thinner, it'll shut down your heart
    >have to eat exactly 2 calories of food every waking minute to lose weight or your heart will explode

    Maybe it's better I'm naturally slightly heavy set? Have we gotten the general dedicated to making anons' hearts stop taken down yet?

  48. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I did cardio on a fast and I turned all pale and felt like I was gonna die

    Fasting. Not even once

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I do cardio almost daily and I am fasting and OMAD for almost a week already, are you that moronic and your motivation is so high you go full moron mode and force yourself to lose weight as fast as possible? Also it takes some time for the body to adapt from a high caloric diet to suddenly fasting and dropping a high amount of calories can make you feel like shit for some time. I was dropping for a month from 2k to 1.5k and then from 1.5k for another month, then to 1k and now about 500 calories but ONLY for a week or 10 days(because 7 is not a nice number)and because I'm close to my ideal weight and then I'll start bulking so 3 months in total will finish my cutting, start slow and then while your body adapts you can go further but stop being moronic and go all in to fail and then stop doing it "because it's bad"

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >cardio + omad
        My brother
        I've been pleased with the fat loss

  49. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I don't care what israelites have to say

  50. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I did healthy omad for two years and gained 50 pounds

  51. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >starving yourself is le bad
    ask Ronnie Coleman what lifting heavy weights did for his joints

  52. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Makes no evolutionary sense. The body did not evolve with constant sources of food to allow for eating all day, at least for men. It’s different for women but men would have been out hunting for food, not eating for 99.9% of human history.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      we didn't evolve to live to 100, just long enough to procreate

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        once you dont have preditors or in species competition, evolution starts working opposing cancer and age, it's why elephants and whales live a long time.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        That’s also bullshit. If you made it through childhood you were very likely to live into your 50s and 60s. People didn’t die at 20-30 from natural causes

  53. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
  54. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    welp im dead

  55. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >science

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Well uh, steroids?

  56. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >bed at 22:00
    >wake up at 06:01
    Oh shit, gotta eat breakfast-ACK

  57. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >EGG BAD
    >VITAMIN D BAD
    >SUPPELMENTS BAD
    >WHEY BAD
    >ITF BAD
    WHY WONT I FRICKING DIE THEN FRICK

  58. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >many fat people try IF
    >they die by heart disease because they're fat
    >IF linked to heart disease!!!

  59. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >has been intermittent fasting the past 10 years for supposed anti aging benefits

    What's going through his mind right now?

  60. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >EverythingScience

  61. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >The Association receives funding primarily from individuals; foundations and corporations (including pharmaceutical, device manufacturers and other companies) also make donations and fund specific Association programs and events
    That's all I needed to read.

  62. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    OP is right, you morons are gonna die soon

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Adults are not supposed to have fatty cheeks. That's for babies. So he doesn't look like a baby anymore.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >why does this picture of someone when they’re younger look younger

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        it's also a low resolution telephoto vs high resolution wide angle, different lighting and he's thinner on the right. That image is either bait or made by a moron

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Black never cr-ACK

  63. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    kek fasting homosexuals BTFO yet again. the hits keep coming for those fat losers

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >doesnt read it

  64. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Been fasting a lot recently
    >Blood pressure was literally text book perfect yesterday

    Works for me

  65. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    This is a Chinese study funded by the Chinese government and looked at bug subjects. I have a feeling it might be different for lardass Americans, where overeating is the biggest contributor of mortality,

  66. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Why do you dipshits seethe so much?
    It's worth studying what effects restricted eating windows might have. They ran a really big study. They found some interesting correlations. Obviously, you'd need to a different study design to show restricted eating windows cause any of these bad outcomes. I'd think, if you're interested in IF, you'd be interested in how healthy people who practice it for a long time are, just like if you're interested in lifting, you'd want to know whether people who train a lot or a little tend to be bigger.
    Since IF isn't a very good way to restrict calories (basic experience and common sense could tell you that), I thought the main sell these days was the longevity stuff. But the evidence for that was weak. Maybe there are health risks of IF, too. Seems worth studying.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >I'd think, if you're interested in IF, you'd be interested in how healthy people who practice it for a long time are
      yeah, only thing is this ~~*study*~~ only looks at two days worth of dietary habits and then draws wild conclusions about health outcomes ten years later
      >Since IF isn't a very good way to restrict calories (basic experience and common sense could tell you that)
      if is literally the easiest calorie restriction regime to stick to
      tl;dr your an moron

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Lots of the other guys are being morons.
        >it’s not true because…. I don’t want it to be reeeeeeee!!!!!1!!!
        But criticism like this is fair. I don’t have a dog in this fight one way or another but it’s weird how emotionally invested people are in an easily changeable dietary choice that you presumably would want to change if it’s actually a net negative. But if anon is right maybe they did make some mistakes in conducting the study

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