|
so your n=1 datapoint says skipping breakfast is good. let you lose two stone.
my n=1. never ate breakfast. lunch at 1 was first meal of the day. improved my diet, started eating breakfast, lost more than 3.5 stone.
as 3.5>2, that proves that's its better to have breakfast than not
now obviously that argument is stupid. as stupid as telling people to skip eating breakfast. you can have none or three breakfasts.what you eat will have a much great effect than whether or not you ate 6 or 16 hours before.
broad sweeping statements like those are problem with half the fitness advice in the world today. based on a small sample size, and then applied to the masses.
(and i believe in intermittant fasting, in fat adaption, in sugar spiking, but it's jsut daft to tell people to skip breakfast and feel better. get your overall diet right, not when you eat your meals. )
your brother didn't lose weight cause he started to fast. he lost it cause he stopped eating pies and crap. do you honestly believe if he ate the same amount as before, but just ate it between 1pm and 6pm, and fasted the rest of the day he's have lost weight? likewise, if you took what you eat now, which is 2000 (presumably healthy calories), and spread it over 8am to 8pm, you think you'd gain weight? |
|