The FastDay Forum

[carorees]

As I've noted above, the animal research suggests that long-term, fasting may not be good for health, but the animal studies have used very long fasting periods relative to the metabolic rate of the animals in question, so we don't know what effect many years of IF will have on us. We do know that many years of being obese is very bad though, so my guess is that any IF regimen allows weight maintenance will be good relative to not maintaining a healthy body weight. As to which IF regimen is best we won't know for years and years!

This thread has amused me greatly, with many leaping to the defence of Michael Mosely. I've never been a big fan of him personally although he has made many programmes that I find interesting. I find him a bit smarmy for some reason.

However, I don't really think that he's tried to pass off Krista Varady's research as his own. It was always pretty clear that her work concentrated on ADF and that these methods of calorie restriction had been practiced by others for years (inlcuding 5:2 - I'm pretty sure that the Prophet Muhammad fasted Monday and Thursday long before Michael Mosely had heard of it!). Even I had toyed with ADF and full fasting in the past given some of the reported health benefits.

Given the uptake of the diet following the Horizon programme and the momentum that it started to gain, it was inevitable that some form of commercial activity would follow despite the science of 5:2 not being fully understood. It was for that reason that I got myself tested on the diet to see what it was doing for me. If it didn't show the improvement in health markers that were suggested were possible from the limited data, then I would have ditched it and found the changes that did. And the beauty is that due to the wonderful BBC and NHS, this didn't cost me a penny!

Krista Varady was also therefore bound to come out with a diet book at some stage to build on her research and I'm sure will benefit from the Moselyesque media storm that a small spat can create. Lots will buy both books and I'm sure that her publishers and their publicists will be well aware of this.

The bottom line is that it would appear that not eating sometimes is good for you and it's up to the individual to find the system that meets their needs and lifestyle.

Well said Alymoosh

Alymoosh, good post; I hear what you're saying, but...I looked through Mosley's book, and while on the surface he's interviewing researchers about different forms of intermittent fasting, he definitely IS weaving his own 2 day fasting into the formula, even though there were no studies done. I didn't get it in the first read, but I did when I reread it, after reading Varady's protest. It was done very subtly and cleverly, so it was just too easy to lump all forms of fasting together - which is a big mistake in my opinion.

Also of interest, I read an interview with Varady done back in early March, and she was complaining about it even then, although not as loud! Of course she was probably writing her book back then, but so what! I say the more we get informed the better.

Caroline, you brought up a great point in having a baseline plan and sticking to it. Thank you Caroline, if you're reading this! That will keep me sane when special occasions come up, like they're bound to in life.

For example, I've definitely jumped into alternate day fasting, but if an occasion comes up where I have to eat, if only to be sociable if for no other reason, I will do it. But my fasting schedule will be alternate days (4 days a week), and three a week for "those days" as they arise.

Caroline, you brought up a great point in having a baseline plan and sticking to it. Thank you Caroline, if you're reading this! That will keep me sane when special occasions come up, like they're bound to in life.

For example, I've definitely jumped into alternate day fasting, but if an occasion comes up where I have to eat, if only to be sociable if for no other reason, I will do it. But my fasting schedule will be alternate days (4 days a week), and three a week for "those days" as they arise.

Yes, its about having a plan but not beating yourself up when life gets in the way isn't it? I always try to bear in mind what I read on one of the Paleo sites which is to have a plan you want to achieve and go for it, but as long as you manage it about 80% of the time then you should be successful. You don't need to be perfect all the time. Life is too short for that!

5:2 isn't Mosely's though. It has been around for years (well over 1000) and was the option he went for as it is the least hassle, whilst it still gave him the health improvements he was looking for. The Horizon programme made that clear as he stepped through the various forms of CR that people practice (full time CR, 3 days fasts, ADF and finally 5:2) and spoke to researchers in each area individually.
Make no mistake though, I'd agree that Varady is a a proper researcher and Mosely is a TV presenter in this case. But neither can really lay much claim (nor do I think that they really think they do) to ways of eating that have existed for a long, long time.
This is book publicity for both of them........ And look.... I'm adding to it!

A question for Carorees, something I've been puzzling over. The animal research which you mentioned suggesting that long term fasting might not be good for health, and other types of research about the same subject - does that involve going without food altogether? We are not fasting completely with this WOE, just cutting down on our food intake for two or three days each week, does that really count as a proper fast?

5:2 is not long term fasting at all. Long term fasting by definition is going without food for longer than the two consecutive days that you might fast on 5:2. And long term fasting is considered, by all medical authorities and researchers, to be safe only when done under the direct supervision of a doctor. So rest easy - no matter how long you plan to be on 5:2 (or even 4:3) - and I'm planning on doing it for a lifetime - it's NOT long term fasting!

[carorees]

5:2 is not long term fasting at all. Long term fasting by definition is going without food for longer than the two consecutive days that you might fast on 5:2. And long term fasting is considered, by all medical authorities and researchers, to be safe only when done under the direct supervision of a doctor. So rest easy - no matter how long you plan to be on 5:2 (or even 4:3) - and I'm planning on doing it for a lifetime - it's NOT long term fasting!

Sorry! Wherever I've written "long-term fasting" please replace with "long-term intermittent fasting" I should have made myself clearer

[carorees]

The jury is still out about the long term effects (for good or ill) of intermittent fasting, I'm afraid!

Thanks for your reply Caroline, but I'm still wondering if eating 500 calories in a day really considered fasting? And would it have the same effects on our bodies as not eating anything at all?
(Sorry if you've already explained this elsewhere)

[carorees]

Tricky question. Surely eating 500 cals in 36 hours is different from eating nothing, as is eating 500 in one meal vs splitting it into two or more mini meals but how your body handles these events will vary from person to person. How should we define fasting I wonder? Many have tried but with no consensus! Likewise, the long-term effects of whatever eating pattern you choose will vary, but we don't even have any benchmark for that, whereas we do have at least some information about short-term effects (up to 3 months) and some anecdotal info about medium term effects (1 year). Sadly, I can find no info on long-term effects of Islamic Mon/Thurs fasting, which would be soooo useful!

Personally I don't consider 500 cals as fasting - I just use that term because Mosley does. Fasting for me is no food - I used to do this annually for years for several days. I see 5:2 and 4:3 as dieting 2 or 3 days a week

I have a hard time believing IF by eating 500-700 kcal two days a week would be long term detrimental to your health.

Hasn't there been plenty of studies indicating how severe daily calorie restriction delays the ageing process? From memory it would mean something like living on 1200-1500 kcal/day, near starvation, clearly not something most people would be willing to tolerate for the rest of their life.

If those assumptions are true, it seems unlikely 500-700 kcal just two days a week would hurt your longevity prospects. But of course, we won't know for many years.

From memory it would mean something like living on 1200-1500 kcal/day, near starvation, clearly not something most people would be willing to tolerate for the rest of their life.

Hey, Michael, watch out who you are calling starving!!

At my goal weight (which I think I'll reach in a few weeks - I'm close), my TDEE will be 1250 to 1400 Kcal, depending on whether I'm a light activity person or a medium activity person. Believe me, I won't be anywhere near starvation!