Floating around social media the last few days I’ve seen several articles on either side of the “diet” coin:

“Why you shouldn’t diet in 2018”

“Top 6 Diets of 2018”

“Don’t diet this January”

You may have a goal to be healthier and take care of yourself this year – many people do, and that’s great! So, should you “diet”?

A lot of nutrition and fitness coaches will tell you that diets never work and that you need only listen to your body, feed it when it wants food, and don’t when it doesn’t (often called intuitive eating). That works really well for people who are in tune with their bodies, have normally established hunger cues, and like to eat healthful foods. Unfortunately, that’s not the case for many of the clients I work with. These habits and hunger cues can be learned, but it takes time and it’s a frustrating road for a lot of people. Everyone is different, which is why I’ve learned to avoid all or nothing statements like “diets never work.”

At some point, this kind of comes down to semantics.

You can call it a diet, you can call it a lifestyle change, you can call it an eating plan, but ultimately what matters is whether or not it works with and for YOU.

I’ve seen people try strict diet plans that don’t fit their lifestyles, fight tooth and nail to stick to them, and feel totally defeated when they can’t seem to make it work. I’ve also seen people try to eat intuitively without any boundaries or guidelines and flounder, frustrated that they don’t seem to be making any progress.

On the other hand, when people find the right balance of structure and freedom to fit their lifestyles – it’s magic. They have a plan that is tailored to work with their unique personalities, budgets, families, and favorite foods. They are achieving their goals and they’re happy and feel great doing it. This is the elusive magical unicorn of healthful eating.

It can be a daunting task to find your own magical unicorn, so I’ve compiled some tips to help you out. Without further ado, here are 5 ways to know if an eating plan is right for you:

1. It’s not miserable/exhausting.

It makes me sad that I even have to say this, but it happens all the time. People put themselves through psychological and physical torture because they think it’s the only way to achieve their health goals – not so! The right plan will not make you sad and miserable, or be so labor intensive that you can barely keep up. If you love all kinds of food, for example, paleo wouldn’t be a good choice – you’ll be miserable saying no to so many things you love. If you have eaten breakfast your entire life and are hungry every few hours, intermittent fasting probably isn’t for you (you can read about my experience with that here). If you hate numbers and don’t like tedious tracking, don’t count calories! You’ll hate it!

Choose or design a plan that works with your individual preferences and quirks.

2. You’re not hungry all the time.

We’re trying to make your body healthy and happy. Constant underlying hunger is not conducive to either of those goals. ‘Nuff said.

3. It doesn’t restrict your social life.

Your eating plan should work beautifully into your social life. You should never skip out on girls’ or guys’ night because you are “on a diet.” You may end up ordering differently than you have in the past (or not!) but your social life is a huge part of a healthy life too. Don’t let an overly restrictive eating plan intended to make you healthier screw up other aspects of your health. You can read about my experiences with a social life-crushing diet here. It’s not worth it, trust me.

4. It includes all the foods you enjoy except legitimate allergies or intolerances, at least some of the time.

There is absolutely no reason to cut out entire categories of foods to lose weight. Certain medical conditions excepted, you should never have a list of foods you’re “not allowed” to eat. First of all, psychologically, you’re setting yourself up for the trap of only wanting what you “can’t” have. Second, why be more restrictive than is necessary? The ideal plan is the least restrictive plan that still heads you toward your goals. You may eat certain things less often and in smaller portions, but avoid plans that label foods as “good/allowed” and “bad/not allowed.”

5. You’re making progress.

Obviously, your plan needs to be making you healthier or what’s the point? Now I need to stress something very, very important here. Very important. Huge. Please don’t skip over this:

Progress comes in many forms, and most of them are not on the scale.

Please, please, please don’t gauge your success or failure only on your weight. A healthful eating plan should improve your health in so many other ways: Are you eating more vegetables? Do you have more energy? Do you sleep better? Is your skin clearer? Do you find yourself snacking less after dinner? Do your clothes fit better? Is your mindset more positive? Do you have less pain?

All of these are potential benefits of improved eating habits, and they’re nothing to sniff at! Be aware of them, because weight can be a fickle mistress, but health is so, so much more than weight.

So before you start a new eating plan this year, make sure it fits these criteria. As always, if you feel overwhelmed or lost at the idea of trying to find an eating plan that works for you, find a dietitian who can help you find a plan that fits your life. If you’re in Washington state, I’d be honored to work with you! Click here if you’re interested.

Have a happy, healthy new year!

Based on my experience with intermittent fasting, I have discovered a few characteristics of a person who might really thrive on intermittent fasting. Check out the list below to see if you might be one of them!

Likely Good Candidates:

• Absent or minimal hunger cues or doesn’t mind being hungry – I often hear “I often forget to eat” or “I could go all day without eating”
• Not usually hungry in the morning/prefers to skip breakfast
• Dislikes the structure of tracking calories daily
• Prefers limiting intakes significantly sometimes and not regulating at all at other times
• Schedule that allows eating at “unconventional” times (for 16:8 protocol)
• Goals might include: weight loss, decreased inflammation, reduced risk for chronic diseases like diabetes, heart disease, Alzheimer’s

Likely Not Good Candidates:

• Frequent hunger (every 3-4 hours or less)
• Regular breakfast eater
• Prefers more structured eating regimen
• Prefers moderating intakes a little each day to an “all or nothing” mindset
• Goals might include: weight loss, muscle gain, reduced risk for chronic diseases like diabetes, heart disease, Alzheimer’s

If you want to learn more about creating a personalized plan to meet your goals and fit your lifestyle, visit my practice website and set up an appointment!

I’ve been busy researching, reading, and compiling more information from scientific studies done on intermittent fasting and its potential benefits. This is part two, but you can go here to read about more research on fasting or here if you’re not sure what intermittent fasting is all about.

Can intermittent fasting…

…improve blood sugars and prevent/manage diabetes?

• Animals that ate intermittently exhibited resistance to diabetes and improved blood glucose and insulin sensitivity, even if they did not achieve caloric restriction (Anson et al 2003; Duan et al 2003)
• Animals on daily caloric restriction have lower fasting blood glucose, fasting insulin, reduced inflammatory markers, and improved insulin sensitivity (Lane, Ingram, Roth 1999; Imai 2010; Hursting et al 2003; Lane et al 1995; Wang et al 2007; Bonkowski et al 2006; Okauchi et al 1995; Walford et al 1999; Walford et al 2002; Wang et al 2007; Kalani et al 2006)
• Human results on intermittent fasting are mixed:
  • One study found no change in glucose but lower fasting insulin after 22 days of intermittent fasting (Hielbronn et al Jan 2005).
  • One study found that, while fasting, subjects with diabetes had higher blood sugar levels (Saada et al 2010).
  • Another found that after 22 days of intermittent fasting, women’s bodies showed more difficulty clearing blood glucose but that there was no difference in men. Men also had a decreased insulin response, but women didn’t. (Hielbronn et al Mar 2005).
  • Another study found no change in glucose or insulin in men after 14 days of intermittent fasting (Halberg et al 2005).
  • Two studies found that in humans, insulin sensitivity is more improved with fasting than with caloric restriction (Varady & Hellerstein 2007; Harvie et al 2010)
• Humans on caloric restriction showed lower fasting insulin levels, improved insulin sensitivity, and lower blood glucose. (Hielbronn et al 2006; Weiss et al 2006; Fontana et al 2004).
• The boiled-down verdict: Animals show improvements in blood glucose, insulin sensitivity, and resistance to diabetes with both intermittent fasting (without caloric restriction) as well as caloric restriction (without intermittent fasting). In humans, research on intermittent fasting and blood sugars delivers mixed messages, which probably means there are other factors involved that we don’t understand yet. There might be a gender difference in the blood glucose response to intermittent fasting. Several studies showed that daily caloric restriction can improve fasting insulin levels, insulin sensitivity, and blood glucose in humans.

…treat asthma?

• In one study, intermittent fasting reduced airway resistance, reduced inflammation, and improved the medicinal effects of albuterol in patients with asthma. (Johnson et al 2007)
• The boiled-down verdict: We need more research, but intermittent fasting may have some promising benefits for those with asthma.

…decrease risk of heart disease?

• In animals, caloric restriction has led to lower triglycerides, better cholesterol panels, and reduced inflammatory markers (Edwards et al 1998; Wang et al 2007; Kalani et al 2006; Lane, Ingram, Roth 1999).
• Animals on intermittent fasting and caloric restriction have lower blood pressures and heart rates (Tikoo et al 2007; Wan et al 2003; Lane, Ingram, Roth 1999; Wang et al 2007; Fontana et al 2004; Mager et al 2004).
• In humans, similar improvement is seen in cholesterol, inflammatory markers, and blood pressure with caloric restriction via intermittent fasting (Harvie et al 2011, Varady et al 2009; Walford et al 1999, Walford et al 2002).
• The boiled-down verdict: It seems you can protect your heart with lowered cholesterol, inflammation, and blood pressure by reducing calories, either by eating a little less every day or by intermittent fasting.

…slow cancer?

• Animals that eat intermittently exhibit slowed tumor growth, improved the effectiveness of chemotherapy, and reduced side effects of chemotherapy (Berrigan et al 2002;Lee at al 2012).
• In mice, intermittent fasting without caloric restriction reduced the occurrence and growth of lymphoma (Descamps et al 2005).
• Several studies show that animals with tumors had slower tumor growth and lived longer when calorically restricted with adequate protein, vitamin, and mineral intakes (Weindruch et al 1986; Pashko & Shwartz 1996; Pugh et al 1999; Imai 2010; Hursting et al 2003); however, one study showed mice had no slowing of tumor growth when on caloric restriction (Keenan et al 1997).
• Reviews of animal research conclude that the cancer prevention/slowing benefits are similar between intermittent fasting and calorie restriction (Varady & Hellerstein 2007).
• The boiled-down verdict: Research on the benefits of caloric restriction for cancer is mixed. Intermittent fasting may slow tumor growth and improve the effects of cancer treatment in animals. We need more research to know how these effects may transfer over to humans.

And just like that, 3 weeks of intermittent fasting is over. In the last week, I changed the structure of my intermittent fasting a little bit. I followed a pre-made intermittent fasting plan that had a 12 pm – 8 pm eating window and planned meals and workouts. The workouts were more targeted for fat loss and not for muscle building (which were my goals with my previous workouts). Changing the workouts allowed me to aim for slightly lower calorie goals since losing fat requires fewer calories than gaining muscle.

Let’s review the entire three weeks, shall we?

How it Went:

Unfortunately, I did not enjoy the experience of intermittent fasting. I’m a lifelong breakfast eater – can’t even remember ever skipping one – so not eating until 10 am or noon (depending on my window) was pretty miserable. I was super hungry, weak, and tired in the mornings, and I noticed that I was more tired as the three weeks went on. I’m not sure if this was related to the eating schedule itself or not, because I also realized that throughout the three weeks I ate fewer vegetables than normal. This was sort of an interesting “side effect” of the eating schedule. Because I was trying to fit all my macros in a small window (and was full throughout most of that window), I ate vegetables less often because I didn’t have space for them! For the most part, vegetables have very few macronutrients (carbs, protein, or fat) and a lot of micronutrients (vitamins and minerals). I often recommend clients increase vegetable intake to help with fullness without adding a lot of calories or macronutrients – the opposite happened here! I was so full throughout the eating window that I strayed away from veggies and towards things that were going to help me meet my macro goals. As a result, my vitamin and mineral intake was much lower than normal, and could definitely have caused my tiredness.

One positive change I noticed is that I liked not eating later in the evening. There are reasons to avoid eating close to bedtime, and having a set time that my eating window “closed” prevented me from going to bed on a stomach full of energy I didn’t need, as well as habitual (not hunger-driven) nighttime snacking and desserts. I usually felt pretty good in the evenings.

As a side note, I love to cook and eat food in general, but I tended not to look forward as much to eating because I was either hungry and waiting to eat or full and had to eat anyway. Eating this way was much less enjoyable and satisfying for me than intuitive eating on a schedule that works well for my body.

What I Learned:

While reviewing the research on intermittent fasting this week, I discovered that researchers have almost exclusively studied alternate day or 5:2 fasting protocols rather than the 16:8 protocol that I followed. If you’re confused about what those protocols mean, check out this post. I wish I would have read through more research before I started, because I might have followed those protocols instead just to match the research.

From a dietitian’s perspective, I learned that there are certain people with certain goals who are good candidates for intermittent fasting and for whom it might work wonderfully. In fact, throughout my time on this diet I met several people (or found out about people I already knew) who use intermittent fasting to regulate their intakes and benefit their health. I plan to summarize characteristics of those folks in an upcoming post! The research is clear that intermittent fasting is one way to achieve quite a few health goals (though there are other ways!). In my practice, I will keep intermittent fasting as another option in my dietitian “tool belt” to help create plans that best match each client’s personality, lifestyle, and goals.

How I did and What Changed:

Overall in 3 weeks, I lost 3.6 lbs, 1.75″ from my waist, 1″ from my thighs and 1.6% body fat. Not too shabby!

The third week is on its own because when I changed my workouts, my calorie and macro needs changed. The meal plan I used that week must have been built on different macro targets than I had set, because I ended up higher on fat and lower on carbs and protein in general. I did the best at hitting my macro goals in the second half of week two, when I broke my needs down into a schedule with macro goals at each meal. It’s important to note here, though, that in the research studies, they often did not track macros or make sure that subjects were meeting their calculated macro needs. In fact, in many of the human studies, the subjects often did not end up meeting their calculated calorie needs.

There are a lot of health claims around the benefits of intermittent fasting. As there is so much to say about this topic, I had to split the research into two parts. I am sure this is nowhere near a comprehensive compilation, but I have done my best to boil down the results of a variety of research studies on the potential benefits of intermittent fasting.

One major thing to note as you read through this is that there are a lot of documented health benefits to eating less than we usually do, or in scientific terms, caloric restriction. Most studies on intermittent fasting restricted intakes to 0-50% of the participants’ calorie needs for 2-4 days per week. On the rest of the days, they could eat as much as they wanted. Some studies on intermittent reported subjects overall caloric intake, others didn’t, so it can be tough to make that distinction. In general, when animals are on an intermittent fasting regimen, they eat enough on feeding days to compensate and usually do not end up restricting calories (Anson et al 2003; Descamps et al 2005). Humans, however, usually do not eat enough to compensate and end up restricting calories via intermittent fasting (Harvie et al 2011; Heilbronn et al 2005; Catennaci et al 2016). In other words, the results in many of the human studies could be based on the fact that calories were restricted by fasting, not by anything special about fasting itself. We need more research to distinguish between the two!

Can intermittent fasting…

…cause fat loss?

• Animals on both intermittent fasting and caloric restriction lose fat (Anson et al 2003; Lane, Ingram, Roth 1999; Pashko & Shwartz 1996; Duan et al 2003). One study on mice showed that even though the mice on intermittent fasting averaged the same amount of calories as the normally-fed mice, they did weigh a little less (Anson et al 2003).
• Humans lose fat with intermittent fasting too, though most humans who followed intermittent fasting ended up eating fewer calories overall, also achieving caloric restriction (Harvie et al 2011; Heilbronn et al 2005; Catennaci et al 2016). It is relevant to note here that in studies that asked subjects about their hunger levels, subjects were more hungry on an intermittent fasting diet.
• In one study, women who restricted calories via intermittent fasting lost more body weight than women on daily caloric restriction (Harvie et al 2013). In both cases, their calories were restricted.
• One study found no difference in metabolism (measured by resting metabolic rate (RMR)) between those who had intermittently fasted and those who did not (Heilbronn et al 2005).
• Studies on caloric restriction show that subjects tend to lose muscle mass while losing fat, but can prevent this by eating a high-protein diet while restricting calories (Piatti et al 1994). Two studies have shown that while intermittent fasting, subjects lost fat and were able to maintain muscle mass while eating a lower protein diet (Bhutani et al 2010; Catennaci et al 2016).
• The boiled-down verdict: Fat loss can be achieved by eating less overall, either through eating a little bit less each day or fasting (eating ~25% of your daily needs) every other day or a couple of days per week. Based on limited research, it seems you can maintain muscle while losing fat, either by restricting calories and eating plenty of protein, or by restricting calories using intermittent fasting. It’s possible that weight loss could be faster when calories are restricted via intermittent fasting, but more research is needed to confirm that.

…preserve brain function?

• Animals that eat intermittently experienced slower progression of age-related memory loss and  neurodegenerative diseases (Parkinson’s, Hungtington’s, and Alzheimer’s) (Anson et al 2003; Halagappa et al 2007; Duan et al 2003). This is also seen with caloric restriction in both animals and humans (Imai 2010;Hursting et al 2003; Pitsikas et al 1990; Halagappa et al 2007; Yu and Mattson, 1999).
• Mice on calorie restriction via intermittent fasting had less brain damage during and after a stroke than mice who ate all they wanted (Arumugam et al 2009).
• The boiled-down verdict: In mice, it’s possible to prevent and slow brain aging, damage, or diseases by eating less overall, either through eating a little bit less each day or fasting every other day. We need more research to know how this applies to humans.

…help you live longer?

• Animals that eat intermittently (every other day) can live more than 30% longer than those who eat daily (Goodrick et al. 1983; Anson et al 2003,  Duan et al 2003).
• Mice lived 35-60% longer when on caloric restriction but meeting protein, vitamin, and mineral needs (Weindruch et al 1986; Imai 2010; Hursting et al 2003; Canto & Auwerx 2009; Keenan et al 1997, Pugh et al 1999)
• The boiled-down verdict: As long as macronutrient, vitamin, and mineral needs are met, both intermittent fasting and caloric restriction can promote longevity in animals. Human research on longevity is really tricky (and expensive), so that’s lacking.

Check out this post to learn about the research on intermittent fasting and diabetes, cancer, asthma, and more!