The FastDay Forum

I find I can manage a fast day quite comfortably if I allow myself 600 calories rather than 500. My weight loss is slow, but I find 500 calories makes for a miserable, uncomfortable day for me, whereas 600 means I can get through so much easier. Am I cheating? Am I ruining the whole idea and not fasting properly? Do others also do the 600 calorie thing? My TDEE is 1600 cals, so really I should only eat 400 I think

Sue

I can only speak for myself (my weightloss speaks for itself, though!) and say that, at first, I stuck rigorously to 500 cals, but like you found it too rigid. So I went onto 600 (even 700 some days), but then did some weeks at 3 days. So, rather than 5 2 every week, it went
5 2, 5 2, 4 3 etc.
Yes, the loss was probably slower than it might have been, but for me, more sustainable.
It's your body, after all! Good luck!

Go with whatever works for you. If you're happy with slow weight loss, then all you're doing is making it easier. This is a GOOD thing It means you won't dread fast days, you'll keep fasting long term, and you also have a buffer if you ever want to speed the weight loss up.

I think it's better to do something that works for you, if the so-called 'right' way is making it harder for you to get through the fast days - because that way you're far more likely to be able to stick with it. My understanding is that the 500 cal thing is a vaguely arbitrary figure, based on the daily needs of an 'average' woman being 2000 cals so a quarter of that (?). Mind you, what's 'average'?! I know if I ate 2000 cals a day I'd PILE weight on. So - if you're losing weight and feeling ok eating a bit more then good for you, I say!

Thanks for replies. I know the science is in early days, but do you think it adversely affects the 'repair' aspect of fasting to go over the 500 calories.
I do think the 600 cals is more sustainable for me. I started off sticking to 500 cals, but really was thinking I wouldn't be able to continue indefinitely, as I was dreading the fast days, and actually feeling ill and unable to concentrate at work on occasions.

Sue

Hi Soobidoobs,

My understanding of the whole thing, and I may be wrong here, is that it is the fasting that affords any long term health benefits, if they do exist and I REALLY hope they do. Calorie restriction also does it and I can't remember all the ins and outs of it and that is what getting old does for your brain so, don't get old, that is even more important than getting slim!

Ballerina x

I seem to remember that 500 was plucked out of the air rather than having a scientific basis. I doubt if I stick to 500 and my weight loss is acceptable to me-which is what counts.

I also found 500 non-do-able and have done 600 on 2 days a week from the start. Plus I eat large amounts of green veggies without counting their calories, so my 600 may be more like 700 or so. My weight loss has been slower than the average according to the forum stats, but I'm very happy with the results.

I eat anything between 480 (rare) and 550 calories and don't beat myself up about it. i'm losing, I feel good, so I'm happy.

I find I can happily survive off anything from 300>500 on my fasts. I have made some curries and frozen them down. Some of those come in at 160 cals approx, then I add some steamed veg or cauli rice and lucky to hit 200 for the whole lot (excluding soup for lunch).

Another week I might get be more like 450, I just try to mix it up alot.

Home made soup for lunch for the winter months though, salads and other goodies in the summer !

I never go hungry after my evening meal (thankfully!)

As mentioned, 25% is really the 5:2 "rule" which comes out to 500 cal for a 2000 cal diet.

Some of the early research looked at 25 to 40% of TDEE on iasting days and saw the same benefit. The ADF studies chose the 25% number, presumably because it is the most extreme and would show the biggest effect (if there were any) -- get the most bang for your study. If you fast 2 days a week, the 25% also should give you an expected lose of about 1lb a week, which is both a healthy rate AND fast enough that most people will like.

So, IMO anything up to 40% of your TDEE has some science to back it up as being good for your health. Is it "as good"? They don't know, but does it really matter? Not being miserable is a HUGE DEAL.

Over time your tolerance may change. When I started, I wasn't as strict on my 25% if I wasn't feeling good on it and I needed 2 meals plus a couple 50cal snacks. Now, I do fine on fewer calories today without any snacks and only eat every 12hrs. What is easy for my now that I've adapted would have been miserable when I started! If I hadn't adapted, I wouldn't have forced it.

I also mostly do 600 calories and even 700 sometimes. Like you, I am miserable on 500. So be it. I have been at a plateau of 20 lbs. lost for 4 months and recently reduced my TDEE to 1800 so I'm hoping that will kick the loss in again. 2o lbs. is 10% loss but I'd like more.
Good Luck!

Thanks again for your interesting answers. I shall continue with my 600 cals - decision made, but will maybe try to reduce gradually down to 500 and see how it goes.