The FastDay Forum

I wanted your views about that.

Concerning my own personal experience, I really prefer back to back fasts. I discovered that my body has changed the most because of back to back fasts. Also, they help me to keep focus. With every other day fasts, I got bored pretty easily, was finding excuses to not fast which wasn't the case with back to back fasts, everything was planned and even my body seemed to “know” it and was ready for it.

Last week, I also accidentally did 3 fasts in a row. It really was an accident, OH should have come on Tuesday but went on Wednesday instead and I never eat during the day when we see each other. I already did my Monday and Tuesday fasts so… Anyway, a few days later I noticed some changes in my body. My thighs and stomach has visibly shrinked as well as my upper arms. That doesn't mean it will become a regular thing but I may do it once in a while….

So, did you do back to back and every other day fasts and what works best for you ? (if you saw any difference at all, that is…)

Thanks !

Blimey Manderley, don't fade away altogether m'dear :0@ !
Eating too little or nothing for too long, for example three consecutive days, will have your body hitting starvation mode and many nasty things may occur. @carorees will hopefully be along to admonish you shortly x

Oh don't worry I still have plenty meat on my bones, especially stomach, butt and thighs

Since the beginning I almost always do my fasts back to back, I find it easier that way and I really don't think my body went on starvation mode, I never binged or anything like that. Plus, I see my GP regularly, my blood pressure and analysis are fine and I am never sick or anything like that (except a few colds now and then)

I like this question Manderley, so thanks for raising it. On balance, I prefer back to back but only if I'm in control of my environment as if I'm travelling (which happens a lot as you know), it can be tough. I have been doing a couple of back to back fasts eating only apples and felt great afterwards. I plan them at weekends when I don't have too many distractions. I found EOD too hard to maintain although I can manage 4:3 quite easily when I out my mind to it.

I did back to back the first three months and lost a lot, so it was very effective for me. However, I never changed strategy, so I have nothing to compare. In term of psychology I also liked back to back: focussed time of fasting (which was no problem for me, also did not feel much difference between the first and the second day), and after that five days to really enjoy food. I would say that after those two days I would really not fancy a third one!

Your body seems to be shrinking more only because successive facts burn off glycogen in muscles and liver. An Atkins diet does this too during the first week. But it isn't body fat you are losing, and it comes right back if you eat more than 70 g of carbs.

The body fat comes off depending on the calorie deficit, and it does that slowly. I've often noticed what seems like a few week lag between when I cut the cals and when the scale shows the loss. I have read that water takes the place of fat in fat cells for a while, though I'm not sure if that is true.

Fasting on successive days may, over time, slow your metabolism, one reason 5:2 might be better long term.

I reached my goal a long time ago now and I have a very low BMI since then (under 19) so it's not about losing weight. I don't put on weight either (and don't want to), everything is really smooth and steady. However, my body keeps shrinking, in a good way, the muscles are more defined, the extra skin is slowly going away so I must do something right I suppose. Right for me anyway as everybody has to find what's works for him/her as it is a very personal journey

Also, I see my GP very very regularly, about twice a month, because I was underweight for a while (only 2 kgs but these were really hard to gain and it took me weeks to do so). He's the one who weight me and calculate my BMI. He's very protective (he knows me since I was 14) and, believe me, would make my life hell if he thought I was doing something wrong

I would think it would take a lot more than 3 back to backs to enter starvation mode. I've done two fast days back to back before and found it quite easy and the first one I ate nothing except a few wild strawberries. It was strange not feeling hungry the next day. As long as it's working for you, you feel healthy and you're eating good nutritious food on your non fast days, then keep doing what you're doing I would say

Fasting on successive days may, over time, slow your metabolism, one reason 5:2 might be better long term.

What would be the difference doing 5:2 on successive days compared to separate days? Your body has 5 successive days of normal eating to make sure that metabolism 'stays on track'. Always thought that that would be enough and no difference from spells of 3 and 2 days between separate fasts.

I'm doing ADF at the moment and can definitely say this is the best way for me. In terms of results, sustainability , ease etc. I'm def losing inches and the pounds are moving too. I have done back to backs with good initial weight loss, but, have found it goes back on quicker. ADF has quit my need to binge on feast days.
Minsdad is currently doing a 2 on 2 off pattern ( that is a back to back, followed by 2 feast days and repeat)and that is really working for him, inches and pounds. I don't think I could sustain that as I am v grumpy by the end of day 2. We have both done 5:2, 4:3 and have now found what individually suits.

I am really impressed by Minsdad I can easily do 2 back to back fasts in a week but couldn't do what he does

It really is a question of personality I suppose. I tried doing 16:8 for a while as I know it works wonders for some people here but, really, I couldn't. I love breakfast and the idea of not taking it at all wasn't not a good thought and, as someone said, one has to find something sustainable enough to do for the rest of ones life....

So, right now I do back to back fasts as I find it easier that way, maybe in a year or 2 I will do my fasts differently, I don't know. The biggest danger, for me, is to get bored. It's the only thing that would make me stop fasting

I would think it would take a lot more than 3 back to backs to enter starvation mode. I've done two fast days back to back before and found it quite easy and the first one I ate nothing except a few wild strawberries. It was strange not feeling hungry the next day. As long as it's working for you, you feel healthy and you're eating good nutritious food on your non fast days, then keep doing what you're doing I would say

You're right. The metabolic rate actually goes up and even after 3 days of fasting, it's still higher than normal. For women, it then starts to fall, but for men, even after 3 days, the metabolic rate is still climbing.



Here's a short piece I wrote on a research paper about this: http://www.hungerfitness.com/starvation-mode-real-myth/


Basically I agree. If all the other days are filled with nutritious foods and you stay active, I would think you'd be fine. Though if given the chance, I'd probably take a weak multi-vitamin or something on the fasting days. Maybe a few fish oil capsules as-well to help with the absorption of fat soluble vitamins. It won't really break the fast and should definitely make sure you aren't robbing your body of necessary nutrients.

The food and supplement companies have really done a number on us all. Basically brainwashing most of the planet think that we need to keep ourselves fed just about 24/7 or we'll be unhealthy and weak. And considering the billions or perhaps even trillions of dollars spent on global food and supplement marketing, it's basically impossible to ever reverse this trend. You can't walk 10 feet or turn on any electronic device without getting some ad showing you pictures of food or something, lol.

Ah, the modern life.

I would not draw any conclusion from one study. For starters, who did they study? College students? Post menopausal women? Obese people? Fit people trying to lose the last two pounds? People who had lost a lot of weight in the past?

All of these subgroups will get very different results when metabolism is studied. Average the results of any group of dieters together and you lose the data that shows you that variation.

I would not draw any conclusion from one study. For starters, who did they study? College students? Post menopausal women? Obese people? Fit people trying to lose the last two pounds? People who had lost a lot of weight in the past?

All of these subgroups will get very different results when metabolism is studied. Average the results of any group of dieters together and you lose the data that shows you that variation.

Agreed, a single study is poor evidence. Though there are more, I haven't had the time to compile it all. For example:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2405717 - 48h fasting

Starvation led to considerable alterations in basal metabolism including a significant (mean 3.6%) increase in resting metabolic rate.

And:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10837292 - 3 days of fasting

Resting energy expenditure increased significantly from 3.97 +/- 0.9 kJ/min on day 1 to 4.53 +/- 0.9 kJ/min on day 3 (P < 0.05).

As far as I can tell, it's obviously different between men and women, obese and lean, young and old, but the trends seem fairly consistent in general. Or at the very least, "Starvation mode" is not even close to being as significant as it's often portrayed in the fitness media.

Most fitness sites still regularly advise people to eat every 3 hours or their metabolism will grind to a halt. Now, any way you twist it, that's horrible nonsense, lol.

But again, I agree with your point. A single study is poor evidence and there are many variables.

I will only talk about what I know, my OH and mine experiences but, even when we fast, and he fasts regularly for 30 something years, we never experience any weakness or even are more tired than on a feast day. The only side effect, in my case anyway, is that I get cold easily. Well, it was that way at the beginning anyway....

Maybe it's because of what and how we eat on a feast day, I have no idea. I take some fish oil capsules from time to time (when the seasons change, for a month) but it's something I do for years now so it shouldn't change a lot, I suppose.

The fact that I never diet before may also have something to do with how well my body deals with the fast. Could it be a possibility ?,n