The Mayo Clinic and WebMD aren't up to date on their research. I'm not trying to attack you. It's simply that research proves their assertions incorrect, and there is a LOT of it.

Metabolic rate increased after 48 hours of no food (not that anyone practicing Intermittent Fasting does this on any kind of regular basis):
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2405717

Metabolic rate increased in days 1-4 of 84 hrs without food (again, not something that a fasting diet teaches you to do, but it's sufficient to make the point):
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10837292

There are literally hundreds of peer-reviewed research papers you can find on places like Pubmed that have to do with fasting, its benefits (AND the negatives of it), and the results that people have with such diets. It very well may BE a "fad," but that doesn't make it ineffectual.

There are an incredibly large number of very smart people who have gone out of their way to research these kinds of diets very thoroughly, and they freely display the information, as well as links to all of the research so that you can see for yourself, on their websites. Alan Aragon, Martin Berkhan, Lyle McDonald . . . all great minds that support IF protocols. Alan Aragon was even offered the job as the team nutritionist for the L.A. Kings. A "snake oil" salesman he is not.

I'm simply saying that you should do a bit more research than just a cursory scan of the internet before making such declarative statements. We should all be perpetual students. And it's okay to be wrong. It's just not okay to continue to be obstinate in the face of evidence. And if newer, better research begins to come out that shows IF to be a bad thing, I'll have no choice but to agree. We haven't reached that point, though.

So, if you want, leangains.com, alanaragonblog.com, bodyrecomposition.com are all good places that you can go to easily and quickly find all kinds of scientific information showing why such diets work, how to do them properly and how to avoid the pitfalls of them.

I think you were the one that suggested the shredded wheat to me. If so, thanks. Works like a charm. I eat the little ones with a good amount of cinnamon.

Today I had a container of Odwalla berry juice, vanilla yogurt over sliced strawberries with cinnamon, two tuna sandwiches (mustard and sliced tomato/jalapeno/cucumber on high fiber toasted wheat bread) and a bowl of mini wheats cereal sprinkled with cinnamon. I did snack on some pan roasted unsalted peanuts.

I bought a juicer. My magic formula is 2 apples, 2 pears

I almost shit out an actual boot.

Nice. I was thinking of getting a juicer. There are so many out there though and I don't want to get a crappy one. I'm going to do some research. And...good night.

I just eat oranges and apples. It slides out with no mess. It's kind of awesome.

High fiber makes for some tough tear jerking shits.

Eh, off and on. I didn't start doing it until I was sub 220. It has been instrumental in getting and staying around the 180 mark. It's a very valuable weight management tool if you like to eat shitty food. I just bought a package of chocolate covered oreos.

I know what works for me. Fasting ****ing rocks.

Eh, I am just at that point where I'm a little overweight. I'm 5'10" 200 lbs.

Doesn't sound very big, but I am a little overweight. I run often, but I eat horribly. Soda's junk food (hmmm T Bell), snacks like little debbies and doughnuts are my absolute weakness. I can't quit them and don't know how to substitute it.
I can lose weight fairly fast because I like to run about 10 miles a week as a stress reliever, but I gain it all back. I simply can't keep my weight down consistently.

Then try fasting, mi amigo.

And I would absolutely dump the sugary soda regardless of all else.

What is a good substitute for soda?

Diet soda.

I gotcha. What are some good diet soda's that don't taste like shit?

FWIW I love Pepsi next and it has 60% less sugar and like half the calories. I might stick to that.