So IF is working for me, but when I explain to others I am following Intermittent Fasting, they seem to get hung up on the word “fasting”. Fasting to some has a religious context and to others it has a self-deprivation context. And I don’t really mean depriving myself in either a religious or restrictive way.
I explain that I’m really just shifting the time window in which I eat. Eating seems to be more to the point than Fasting as well. I know that one is half-empty and the other is a half-full way of viewing the same cup of water, but it has me wondering. More from a perceptual and “marketing” basis.
I’m wondering. Why isn’t the term for this caloric restriction approach called Time-Shifted Eating instead of Intermittent Fasting? Is there something in the word fasting that has better meaning than simply saying Time-Shifted or perhaps Time-Restricted Eating?
Time restricted makes sense to me.For me caloric restriction is not the focus. I can pack away a lot of calories even in a short window. The focus is more to do with giving your body longer breaks between digestion cycles. There is no chance to burn fat with frequent eating.
There’s no real reason except that the “intermittent fasting” terminology got used in popular books/videos/etc., so people got used to it. “Time-Restricted Eating” or TRE is often used in clinical/research contexts, usually to specifically describe fasting windows of less than 24 hours.
Edit to add: For example, this study uses “intermittent fasting” to refer to 5:2 fasting or ADF, and “time-restricted feeding” to refer to 16:8. Not every study defines these terms the same way.
I agree that “fasting” is kind of a trigger word for many people who aren’t informed about IF — people often jump to the conclusion that you’re starving yourself.