|
|
|
|
|
|
by broscillator
877 days ago
|
|
|
> Don't mix eating with philosophy, I think this is kind of a trap. It assumes that there is a default mode under which we're operating, and that something like IF is straying from a natural order. But you're already obeying a philosophy of eating. The philosophy that you go out and buy things that will likely induce a lot of craving for more, the cultural norm that you will eat at times that are appropriate for the company you work at, etc. Essentially you are eating by someone else's philosophy. > which I later figured was probably the body releasing a bunch of hormones or something in response to a sustained unhealthy calorie deficit. This sounds pseudo-sciency to me. |
|
|
Yeah, not claiming that my hunches are any more scientifically valid, but that is my best guess from what I've read.
I agree and I do think it's good to take some degree of control over it, especially with the already unnatural environment we're subjected to. I just think there is another side to the IF story that isn't told as often.
I think people who are naturally good at sticking to things and are already interested in self optimisation etc are probably more prone to overdoing it and doing extreme diets like one meal a day or 30 bananas a day. The "intermittent" in IF is a bit misleading in my opinion, because none of the youtubers I was watching back in the day seemed to mention taking a break from it. It was basically choose an eating window like 6-10h and then stick to it rigidly, which to me doesn't really capture what I assume these people are going for - something more like the random periods of extended fasting that we might have undergone as hunter-gatherers.