Quote:
I’d be extremely skeptical of using rat studies to draw conclusions about humans when it comes to fertility.
The human and rat reproductive strategies are completely different. Humans have 1 or 2 babies per year. Rats gestate in 3-4 weeks, have up to a dozen babies in expectation that half of them will die, and are ready to be impregnated within 72 hours of delivery.
OBVIOUSLY female rats would get a little freaked out if there weren’t food around for a few hours… because their lives run at 1/16 of human scale. If you were a rat and you didn’t have food available, and were faced with the prospect of generating 10 ratlings in 3 weeks, I’m sure you’d shut that whole thing down until you found food, too. And I’m sure it would stress you out.
Humans, on the other hand, have a reproductive system that’s extremely tolerant of the metabolic up/down regulations that happen in the face of more/less macronutrients.
It HAS to work that way. Otherwise we’d miscarry whenever the hunt didn’t go so well, and that would be a ridiculous and needless expense of energy.
I’m not trying to discount anecdotal reports of IF not going so well for women. I have no doubts that IF is not for everyone.
But let’s at least start looking at the actual reasons why, and not throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
For instance, most women try to do a low-fat / high-protein / moderate carb version of IF for whatever reason. And that is disastrous for hormones for women, absolutely.
Signed,
a woman who has been very successfully IFing for over a year on a high-fat / moderate protein / carbs-only-after-training diet, and got pregnant the first time she didn’t use protection.
(Comment from Naomi Most) -This sums up some of the issues with the rodent study. Also, the rats were eating bad quality food AND were calorie restricted, neither of which I do or recommend when TTC.