I certainly hope so. I want this book to end already. That's probably not a good sign.
The point is that I wrote, and writing is not a sprint, it's a marathon.
In life news, I've decided that I'm going to give intermittent fasting a try. I started doing the research on it after a friend of mine begged for diet help,
By the way, and this is totally related, if any doctor promotes a starvation diet for their clients, GET RID OF THAT DOCTOR! They have no business practicing medicine, and I am FURIOUS at her. Not only does chronically under-eating calories prove to be absolutely ineffective when trying to lose weight; it's dangerous for the body and counter-productive. It drops the BMR (Basal Metabolic Rate), and so weight loss simply stops. And even if (and that's a big 'if') the weight is lost, returning to a regular amount of calories means that all the weight returns and then some. Because you've fucked your metabolism.
Having consistently struggled with my weight, and ruined my metabolism with a completely ineffective starvation diet, hearing doctors recommend it makes me so, so, so angry. It's the worst thing you could ever do. Ever.
Anyway, I was researching weightloss for my friend to see if I could help him at all – once my rage at his doctor calmed a little (it's back just thinking about it) – and I came across Intermittent Fasting. I've heard about it for a little while before this, but I ignored it for the most part. My research, however, seems to reveal that it's not as gimmicky as many diets out there.
For starters, it's not a diet. It's an eating pattern. Essentially, you eat for roughly eight hours in a day, and fast the rest. There's no counting calories, or particular food restrictions. The hope is, of course, that persons practicing I.F. would make sensible choices while eating, like limiting sugar intake, and not eating a colossal number of calories. Have a salad, not a bag of chips. That kind of thing.
Starvation is absolutely discouraged. In fact, most of the research I've come across makes sure to point out that though the eating window is much narrower, the number of calories should not be restricted, keeping the metabolism healthy. So, for myself, my BMR is roughly 1400 calories. If I was completely sedentary, I would need to consume about 1700 calories to keep myself healthy and maintain my current weight. For the record, that's 500 calories more than calorie restrictive diets say I should eat. In fact, they had me eating 200 calories beneath my estimated BMR. That's suuuuuper unhealthy. That's basically eating less than the calories I would burn if I spent all day asleep.
I started it yesterday. We'll see how it goes, but for the first day, it wasn't hard at all. I have timed it, after all, so that I'll be fast asleep when the worst of the hunger would ordinarily hit. I woke up this morning no more hungry than I usually am of a morning, so that's one thing I don't have to worry too much about.
As I do a fair amount of exercise in a day, despite spending most of it at my desk, I am now aiming to keep my calories around 2000 in a day. That's so much more than I was, when I was trying to lose weight by dieting (calorie restriction). I'm not sure I got there yesterday, given how much food that is, but I'm super glad to be focussing on eating healthy instead of trying to stop myself from eating things even if they're healthy and I'm really hungry.... Unless I'm in the fasting state. Then I'm allowed only black coffee or any kind of tea as long as there are no additives (including 'flavours') as those would break the fast.
This stuff is probably boring for all of you. I'm sorry. It's just that I've struggled since I can remember, and I've done so much damage to myself in the trying. Researching this stuff has been really interesting to me, and heartening, actually.
And no one worry. If I find that I don't feel good, or start getting sick, trying this out, I will stop. I've learnt from my mistakes. Right, I have to learn French now.