The intermittent fasting technique has been shown not to work well for women. I'm curious whether the gynostemma treatment will also show a gender difference. It wasn't part of the original article.
FYI NIH now requires all new studies to address sex as a biological variable. Any future GS studies funded by NIH will have to report subgroup comparisons by gender.
Double blind study gynostemma produces weight loss
Moderator: Global Moderator
Re: Double blind study gynostemma produces weight loss
Maddy,
Well I'm not female, but the other 3 people I know who've lost weight on gynostemma are, so you should be fine.
A quick search on intermittent fasting reveals that male and female bodies deal with any kind of periods without food very differently. Women's bodies are designed to protect reproduction and periods of time without food could jeopardize a fetus. The fact that you don't have one at the moment is irrelevant.
Well I'm not female, but the other 3 people I know who've lost weight on gynostemma are, so you should be fine.
A quick search on intermittent fasting reveals that male and female bodies deal with any kind of periods without food very differently. Women's bodies are designed to protect reproduction and periods of time without food could jeopardize a fetus. The fact that you don't have one at the moment is irrelevant.
Re: Double blind study gynostemma produces weight loss
What is the rationale for compressing the time over which food is consumed? This would seem to run directly counter to the idea that eating very small amounts of food continually throughout the day ("grazing") tends to keep blood glucose levels from spiking.
Re: Double blind study gynostemma produces weight loss
"run directly counter to the idea that eating very small amounts of food continually throughout the day ("grazing") tends to keep blood glucose levels from spiking"Maddy wrote:What is the rationale for compressing the time over which food is consumed? This would seem to run directly counter to the idea that eating very small amounts of food continually throughout the day ("grazing") tends to keep blood glucose levels from spiking.
1. As far as I know that is not considered a good idea given what is known today. Current science dogma not infrequently is found wrong. Best I remember the reasons have more to do with having a longer time without food i.e. even for women, not eating any more times per day than you need to is probably best. I've forgotten theory but should be easy to find given intermittent fasting is trendy.
2. Ways to avoid spiking glucose:
--Food choice and eating higher glycemic foods last in a meal
--vinegar before meals
--some kinds of fiber before meals (forget details)
3. What you really care about is spiking insulin. Some things e.g. animal protein don't spike glucose, but spike insulin. This is why some people (not I) advocate a vegan diet.
CUtting down on animal protein (for you) and replacing fat with olive oil/avocado might be worthwhile.
Re: Double blind study gynostemma produces weight loss
I can think of some other, purely practical, reasons why grazing may not be the best idea, based upon my anecdotal experience over the last several weeks:Benko wrote:Maddy wrote: "run directly counter to the idea that eating very small amounts of food continually throughout the day ("grazing") tends to keep blood glucose levels from spiking"
1. As far as I know that is not considered a good idea given what is known today.
(1) It's easy to underestimate the amount of food you're consuming when you're grabbing a piece of cheese or a handful of almonds all day.
(2) You never break the habit of going to the refrigerator every time there's a break in the action.
(3) If tracking progress with a glucose monitor, it makes the picture very confusing.