Data driven fasting.
How are you defining that, please?
So basically if you feel hungry test yourself and if BG is above what you want for your normal range, don't eat
Thanks. That’s helpful. There was a member here who blogged about that for some time, a couple of years or so ago. Not sure if she’s around much any more, but it was @AllieRainbow
I don’t do this in such a structured way, but tend to follow the mantra, ‘eat if hungry, don’t if not’. Don’t measure BG as I’ve got to the point where I can distinguish real hunger from just feeling a bit peckish or wanting something in my mouth. If I’m not sure, I’ll tend to calculate my macros rather than look at blood glucose. The other day, for example, I’d eaten 2 full meals (my general practice) and felt hungry and wasn’t sure why. My macros revealed I’d taken in less than 1,000 calories and very little fat so I decided it likely was hunger!
It is basically eating to your meter as ian says above.
So basically if you feel hungry test yourself and if BG is above what you want for your normal range, don't eat.
From what the book says it helps you stop over eating as you fast to you BG reading and not a set time, This helps stop the binge eating that people can experience after fasting.
As help keeps your metabolism in check as well.
Lots of people see great results for weight loss
just wondering what anyone experience is when it comes to BG.
Though I don't have any experience of this plan,
Hi Guys,
I have just been reading about Data driven fasting.
Has anyone tried it, If so how was it, did you get results?
Yet you feel qualified to write a long and evidence free post about it?
Sorry but the phrase "don't knock it until you've tried it" comes to mind here.
Actually, it isn't. When Ian speaks of eating to his meter, he is referring specifically to carb content. He's not choosing to go without eating; rather, he is substituting foods with a lower-carb content.
There are going to be many reasons why a diabetic might be out-of-range. However, unless someone is really far higher than 'normal', the idea to skip meals is perhaps not ideal. In fact, on the contrary, many find that eating food actually stems the increase of blood sugars.
And this idea seems to 'miss the forest, for the trees'. Control of blood-sugar levels would ideally come from a multi-tiered approach, to include adequate sleep, rest, hydration, movement, exercise, getting a 'bit of sun', reduction of screen-time etc. In addition to this, reduction of stress is important, whether it be by spending more time-in-nature and/or cultivating a feeling of gratitude. Assuming a general shift to whole, or minimally-processed foods, getting as many of those non-dietary 'ducks' in a row as possible will provide the kind of (w)holistic support structure for a healthful life. And within such a healthful framework (and given the 'appropriate' amount of time), such conditions as overweight, obesity and other metabolic dysfunction will disappear.
A huge part of the reason why most people get overweight in the first place, is due to the denying of hunger signals (Normally of feeling satiated). This might be a quick-fix, but I think it's much better to cultivate practices for a long-term solution.
Of course, I'm not suggesting that we blindly heed every call to eat. It'll take a certain amount of effort to cultivate the non-dietary healthful practices. But more than that, it'll take time and effort to chip away at all the deeply-ingrained habits, triggers and emotional foibles that drive 'us' to eat when we have no real need.
Learning to detect and appropriately respond to our body's signals and feedback systems (Of which hunger and satiation are just one) is our birth-right, imo. This plan is the antithesis of that.
This doesn't make sense to me. Binge-eating is a very distinct problem, and not to be confused with general over-eating.
People who are prone to bingeing are not going to be stopped by a reading on a meter. And even though binge-eating is not really driven by hunger, I can't think of a better way to set up a potential binge than to make ones self unnecessarily hungry.
Curious as to how.
Not eating when hungry will do that
If weight-loss is an immediate priority for someone, and this idea is the one that clicks, then good for them. But there is no magic bullet, here. As with all weight-loss or gain, there has to a manipulation of energy balance (Our evolutionary survival depended on it). Ultimately, and at the end of however many days, it comes down to each individual as to whether a plan will work for them. If this is the one that 'clicks' for certain people, then great.
Though I don't have any experience of this plan, there are evidently a lot of people following a predominantly whole-foods/minimally-processed diet (whether plant-based or keto), along with cultivating non-dietary health practises, who have taken control of their BG.
All my reservations as to whether it's ideal, aside, i've no doubt that those who stick to such a plan could (assuming an energy deficit) lose weight and reduce BG numbers.
_____________________________
Anyway....In case it wasn't clear: This is just my opinion, and not an attack on either you or they who came up with the plan.
Are you going to try it?
What were you reading..I have heard of the regime but didn't know anyone had written on the subject.
It's similar to a regime followed by someone I follow on twitter who did it with weight.. if their weight was above a certain level in the morning that became a fasting day if not they would eat.
CheersActually, @Andy_Warlow it wasn’t a blog, it was a thread: https://www.diabetes.co.uk/forum/threads/type-2-fasting-experiment-to-lower-bg.149942/
This is the 1st page,
So give you an idea of what the plan is trying to acieve.
Intermittent fasting has helped many people lose weight, lower their blood glucose, and reverse Type 2 Diabetes without the hassle of tracking their food. But, disappointingly, for many others, fasting doesn't provide the results they had hoped for.
When we get ravenously hungry after not eating for an extended period, many of us reach for energy-dense, nutrient-poor foods and meals that quickly undo all the benefits of fasting.
To ensure long-term success, you need to find the minimum effective dose of fasting. Your mission is to achieve your goals without pushing your body so hard that it rebels, trapping you like a fly in amber, in an endless cycle of binge-restrict-binge.
As with many things in life, when it comes to fasting, more isn't always better. You need just enough restriction to ensure you're moving towards your goal at a sustainable rate.
With Data-Driven Fasting (DDF), you'll learn how to 'gamify' the fat loss process with a few simple measurements to guide your progress over the long term. By measuring the things that matter, you personalise and optimise your eating schedule to create your desired outcome.
Data-Driven Fasting is a powerful, time-proven tool that has guided many people towards their fat loss and blood glucose goals without tracking calories or following a rigid fasting window designed for someone else.
We are thrilled with the results of thousands of people who have used Data-Driven Fasting to fine-tune their eating routine! To learn how to leverage the powerful insights provided by your blood sugars, read on!
Thanks! This does offer a bit more clarity.
Intermittent-fasting can definitely be a useful tool in the toolbox, but again it's no magic-bullet. Plenty of people use IF while in maintenance, on an ongoing basis, which serves to demonstrate that IF without energy manipulation (intentional or otherwise) does not guarantee weight-loss.
In this quote: "when it comes to fasting, more isn't always better. You need just enough restriction to ensure you're moving towards your goal at a sustainable rate.", if we substitute the word "fasting" for "dieting", the sentence still makes sense. Appealing to people to lose weight at a slower, more consistent pace makes a whole lot of sense.
I'm not knocking IF, as I understand (I have a lot of my own experience with it). There are definitely ways in which it can help people with weight-loss. But people can easily lose out if they push it too far, and try to emulate what others' are doing. OMAD, for example, might be fine for the guy/girl who is already super-disciplined and more on top of their 'game'. However, someone who is obese, who uses food for far more than energy and nutrition could end up with issues. In that sense, the book would appear to have a great message.
The part of your post which I took issue with, and which informed the majority of my initial post, was this line:
"...basically if you feel hungry test yourself and if BG is above what you want for your normal range, don't eat."
Is that in the book, or is that just your interpretation?
Bare in mind the book is 168 pages and I haven't finished it yet.
But basically the book is a form of intermitting fasting. Is test your blood sugars and if they are higher than the level you want them or your own set point, Hold off of eating. is my understanding of the book so far.
this is interesting as, if I dont eat, my numbers climb and climb into the teens eventually by tea time, as my body just keeps dumping glucose. No idea why. Hence my morning fasting levels never coming down below around 8, even after 9+ years of reasonable blood sugar levels and diet controlled type 2.Bare in mind the book is 168 pages and I haven't finished it yet.
But basically the book is a form of intermitting fasting. Is test your blood sugars and if they are higher than the level you want them or your own set point, Hold off of eating. is my understanding of the book so far.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?