What am I missing about "Over the long term, a slow metabolism can sabotage your weight-loss efforts"?
That sentence was not from the study that was cited; it was a bit of editorializing by the Livestrong author.It's true that, other things being equal, a slow metabolism will make losing weight more difficult; and it's also true that fasting* slows your metabolism. It doesn't follow, however, that fasting won't cause you to lose a lot of weight. When you fast, other things aren't equal: your calorie consumption plummets. I linked to a
pic earlier of people who were part of a starvation study. They were extremely skinny.
Everybody at Auschwitz was also extremely skinny. Sure, their metabolisms slowed, but when you reduce your metabolism by 30% while reducing your caloric intake by 90%, the result is massive fat loss.That said, voluntary starvation is a very poor method of weight loss. I don't think anybody is recommending that. But that's not primarily because it slows your metabolism; it's primarily because it totally sucks and is impossible to stick to. (And involuntary starvation sucks even worse.)____*Note: I am talking about long-term fasting, which isn't very relevant to intermittent fasting. As far as I know, fasting for less than a couple days doesn't slow your metabolism. I thought that long-term fasting was the subject of your original post on this tangent, but I may have been mistaken about that.