The FastDay Forum

i also disagree that it's hard to do a vegan low-carb without soy. i know plenty of people who do it. it involves lots of beans and quinoa.

70% of the calories in quinoa are from carbs, so I don't see that being low carb.

i also disagree that it's hard to do a vegan low-carb without soy. i know plenty of people who do it. it involves lots of beans and quinoa.

70% of the calories in quinoa are from carbs, so I don't see that being low carb.

good point. i am conflating paleo and low-carb, i suppose. these folks are paleo vegans.

i also disagree that it's hard to do a vegan low-carb without soy. i know plenty of people who do it. it involves lots of beans and quinoa.

Wow! I'd really love to know how they're doing it and not finding it hard!

If one is going for 20g carb, or even 40g for that matter, beans and quinoa will (as far as I can calculate) blow a very large hole in one's carb allowance... I googled to the point of despair yesterday e.g. http://lowcarbdiets.about.com/od/CarbsI ... Quinoa.htm Even the dreaded Atkins corporation admit that vegan phase 1 is impossible.

Cheers, FatDog

I think people get Low GI carbs mixed up with carbs. A lot of these 'low carb' regimes are talking Low GI carbs - after all vegies are carbs and these are advocated on these diets.

Oops, I missed your later post @badtzmaru5: but as a matter of interest, have you any idea what level of carbs your paleo vegan friends manage? Ta, FatDog

With a diet, you try to lose and maintain any weight loss with what you eat. With IF, you do it by how you eat. They are very different approaches.

The diet approach causes weight loss but has been proven ineffective for most when it comes to maintaining those losses.

I am convinced that IF allows a person to both lose weight and maintain their weight loss, and I see no reason to overlay any weight loss diet on an IF regime.

Time will tell which way works better over the long term, but I personally know diets don't work for me. It was time to try something new, and I decided on IF. I'm done dieting!

When I read the study cited previously that showed that people lost more rapidly on paleo and felt less hungry than with the Mediterranean diet, as I recall, it was for a relatively short time--16 weeks. Low carb has also been shown to be extremely effective.

I don't think--no, I know that I could not do that as a life style. I don't eat a lot of carbs, but I couldn't/wouldn't avoid them permanently. I think it sets one up for failure.

However, I can and will do a version of 5:2 for the rest of my life. It is not hard; it is not complicated; it is absolutely doable. It is a no brainer for me.

With a diet, you try to lose and maintain any weight loss with what you eat. With IF, you do it by how you eat. They are very different approaches.

The diet approach causes weight loss but has been proven ineffective for most when it comes to maintaining those losses.

I am convinced that IF allows a person to both lose weight and maintain their weight loss, and I see no reason to overlay any weight loss diet on an IF regime.

Time will tell which way works better over the long term, but I personally know diets don't work for me. It was time to try something new, and I decided on IF. I'm done dieting!

Correct me if i am wrong.. 5:2 IF is not a diet right. Sometimes i say 5:2 and diet in the same breath only cause for me i use the term "diet" to mean some sort of controlled eating which it is.

Just this morning i was emailing someone about what i was doing and happent to substitute WOE for diet and that came natural but most people dont know what WOE is

well the name of the book is "the fast diet", but yeah, diet can mean different things. Everyone is on a diet by one definition.

I think the temporary denial of 5:2 is what makes it work, for me anyway. It makes dieting easier, and I'm hoping it will make maintenance easier, seeing as there is a maintenance plan practically built in.

I imagine there are studies, but I wonder about the ability of people to maintain on low carb. I think Atkins recommends gradually upping your amount of carbs until you find where you can maintain. I never managed that even though I was successful at losing weight on Atkins. I think I tend to overindulge after so much denial.

I don't think this suggested way to go would realistically work for a lots of people. Checking out a book I have "The Paleo Diet"by Loren Cordain I was in agreement until the foods to avoid section. While I can see the sense with some food intolerances to reduce wheat and dairy and processed foods, giving up legumes was where I just thought nah. I hasten back to my 5:2 ways

Mary Ann

I imagine there are studies, but I wonder about the ability of people to maintain on low carb. I think Atkins recommends gradually upping your amount of carbs until you find where you can maintain. I never managed that even though I was successful at losing weight on Atkins. I think I tend to overindulge after so much denial.

I participated in a 2 1/2 year study sponsored by the U.S. National Institutes of Health that compared Atkins to DASH (low fat) diets. They did up the amount of carbs, and found that weight gain started as low as 45g per day, while some folks didn't start gaining until they ate over 250g per day carbs.

In my opinion, the problem with Atkins or any other diet is that it makes you eat some foods you may not like, and prevents you from eating foods you may love. So when you get off the diet (for any reason) you go back to eating like always, with the same result - weight gain.

With IF, you can continue eating what you love to eat, and don't have to eat food you really don't enjoy that much - you just eat less.

Pure genius.

Here in Sweden Low carb and 16:8 is very, very popular. Many follow a diet called LCHF - Low Carb High Fat.

I followed LCHF for 3 years - I kept a healty weight but got a lot of other issues - vitamin deficiencies, cravings. A diet that excludes so many things is not for me is my conclusion. Paleo is a lot more allowing so I switched to that - gained lots of weight and now I'm on 5:2 since a couple of months back.

This journey has taught me a lot about how my body and metabolism works so I do make healthier choices today. I eat less carbs than before LCHF and I chose them wisely. But I do have pasta, sour dough bread, potatoes, sweets and such - but not every day.

LCHF advocates that your daily intake should be around 75% fat, 20% protein and 5 % carbs. I would guess I'm on 60/25/15 now instead.

In my experience individuals who follow the low carb/paleo type diet over an extended period tend to have high cholesterol levels and high creatinine levels. This would suggest that while they may be useful for a short term fix they may be less healthy in the long run.

My Hat! 75 % fat! I cannot imagine that unless I convert it to bacon, eggs, and no toast, tomato , mushrooms, baked beans or spinach. I love my brekkie with those lovely extras. And somehow I imagine the 75% fat (as mentioned) as the bacon fat which is lovely in really small amounts. But, a bit squeamishy if not leavened to use an old fashioned expression...

With a diet, you try to lose and maintain any weight loss with what you eat. With IF, you do it by how you eat. They are very different approaches.

The diet approach causes weight loss but has been proven ineffective for most when it comes to maintaining those losses.

IF and 5:2 does determine what you eat by checking calorie intake and also TDE's on feast days to find out whats normal. The "how we eat" is probably not the right term - it's more about the SCHEDULING OF EATING with some moderation on what you eat.

5:2 is still a diet, when the word "diet" translates loosely to what you put in your mouth and importantly WHEN.