The FastDay Forum

Interesting reading all thi
I suppose the big question is: is this diet just a way of cutting calories,.in which case eating500 twice and 1000 then 1500 will work but I agree is just a cal counting diet
Or is there something more to it.when you read the book it's seems to be what they are saying.
Fast two days ,then eat normally and the weight will go
The big question is.what is normal?
For me being a chronic dieter normal could be a very restricted diet leading to starvation mode and no weight loss
For someone else normal could be a pig out and weight GAIN
So how to eat on normal days is the BIG question? What we need is feedback from people doing the diet and what is working.

I don't see how I can lose with a TDEE of 1500 without calorie counting. I have tried just counting on 2 days but the weight loss dried up. Looking at my TDEE it makes sense as 1500 equates to 10500 over the week. If we are to go with the usual formula of 3500C = 1lb that leaves 7000. Take off 1000 for 2 fast days and there's only enough left to average 1200 a day for the rest of the week! Its easy to exceed that if you don't monitor your intake. For me at least an increase in exercise is not an option. I came into this thinking that I would lose weight on only 2 days a week of counting but its never going to happen.

Yeah, it's a bummer isn't it Miffy? My TDEE on this forum has been calculated as 1744 and on iifym (with the one where you put in your body fat %) it comes out at 1640. I've worked out that if I want to lose just 0.5 lb per week then I would also have to stick to around 1200 cals on two days in addition to the two fast days if I want to consume a 'normal' amount of 2000 cals on Fri/Sat/Sun. I think for me, I've probably been eating just slightly over my TDEE for several years which is why the weight has crept up; therefore it is going to take an equally long time to reverse the effects. I am trying to up my exercise to raise my TDEE a bit but appreciate that's difficult for some people.

Yup Madge it sure is! I have lost 4 stone in all. the first with SW, the second counting calories and most of the rest doing low carb. Low carb does suit me as it tends to off-set the dreadful lethargy of my FMS and it corrected my pre-diabetes but I was so excited when I saw the 5:2 thinking that maybe I could eat a more varied diet and still lose. I'm so sick of counting every mouthful and just wanted to be able to chill a bit! Getting seriously disillusioned and thinking that maybe I need to fast for health benefits and try some other way of losing weight.

And thats a minor example, a lot of us have a TDEE nearer to 1500, so the deficit can equate to 1/2lb or less per week. But that presuposes the only way this WOE works is a calorie deficit. There are other effects too, that make if more effective for weight loss.

... Where 5:2 may make a difference is for the minority of the population who perhaps have thyroid, insulin, etc problems ... I'd guess that perhaps the proportion of people on this board with these sorts of problems may be higher than in the general population.
...

A lot of the research and anecdotal evidence is that the 5:2 regime does have more of an affect on the body/metabolism/weight loss than the simple reduction in calorie intake would account for - Can I ask why you dispute this and seem to imply it's a simple 'energy in - energy out' type equation ? Not wanting to cause an argument, just interested on how you've come to that conclusion.

Its just another return to the old 'are all calories equal' argument isn't it?

Beckygirl I do the exactly the same as you - two 500cal fasts, one half fast & 4 days not counting calories at all & I've found it's works for me - 20lbs lost in 15 weeks.
I only started the half fast because I enjoy(?) fasting at work & I work 3 days. My body now seems to want to fast on work days(routine?) so that's what I do - nothing or just cup a soup at work then on a half fast - I eat normally at night.
I really think there's something to this not eating the same amount of calories everyday.

I know I'm lucky that I've continued to lose 1lb a week ( even after 3 meals out this week oops!)
I feel I'm listening to my body more & knowing when I am hungry or just thirsty,bored or just habit.
I haven't mentioned the health benefits yet - I don't have thyroid or insulin problems but I do have a chronic illness & I've noticed that my energy levels have improved & I get a feelgood feeling on fast days - like its a treat for my body - giving it a rest from eating. Never thought I'd ever say that 5 months ago

I am 'sort of' following the plan... I fast 2 days @ 500 Calories, with a third day where I fast all day but evening meal is not restricted to 500 calories (I call it my 'half-fast')... However the other 4 feed days I do not count.

How long have you been doing this Beckygirl? And did you evolve into doing it this way. And is it working for you?

I still like the idea of

500 2 days
1000 1 day
1500 all other days (but unlike my original post not actually calorie counting but watching it.

I guess life is such that there will be the odd 2000 day here and there

Interesting reading all thi
I suppose the big question is: is this diet just a way of cutting calories,.in which case eating500 twice and 1000 then 1500 will work but I agree is just a cal counting diet

I probably expressed the opening post wrong. I didnt mean I actually calorie count on those other 3 days as that would drive me nuts too.

I must admit i havent actually ever calorie counted on my feast days.

Thanks @kencc - I've tried a few TDEE calculators now and my do they vary (the fitness forums are full of rows about them!). I'm a really weird shape so I guess the TDEE calculators just don't fit me - many of the forum commentators reckoned that it's best to work it out from your actual intake / weight change figures.

I did 5:2 for six weeks in the summer last year and abandoned it, rather too easily, when my weight started to go up - at that time I hadn't realised that my TDEE was probably rather less than the 'standard' 2000cals!

This time I hope to stick with it for good - I'm as much after the anti-brain-ageing effects as the weight loss really.


But, just to kick the weight loss off with a bang, I'm starting with the 4:3. Twelve days in and nearly 4lbs off (weighed-in yesterday). I'm not going with any calculator's TDEE or the 25% thereof on lo-cal days as my 1700cal feed and 500cal fast seems to be working ok (in spite of several excessive feed days!). I'm counting calories on feed days just now to make sure I've a good idea of what 1700cals gets me, but hope to stop that soon (though I'm finding it rather fun in a nerdy sort of way - no doubt the novelty will wear off).


@miffy: have you thought of trying 4:3? that would give a deficit of 3000cals a week even if you do 500cal on fast days (rather than 1500/4=375). Then if you find your feed day 1500cals impossible to do and go over by, say, 250cals you'd still have a deficit of 2000cals, which should give you more than half a pound down each week?

One thing I've really noticed is the damage that liquid calories can inflict on one's allowance, particularly milk (and vino too but that's only on feed days!) - I find that avoiding these can make my calories go into much more filling things. Oh, and don't mention high carb things like brown rice: I mean 25g uncooked = 93cals bah humbug!

Hi Fatdog
Thanks for your input. I had decided to try 4:3 this week. I can't seem to cope below 500 on fast days. I have odd days when I get down to around 450 but not every time. I'm thinking that if I do 2 x 500 plus 1 × 600 I could average 1350 on my feed days and still save the 3500 needed to lose a pound a week.

I don't have any drinks that could contribute to my calories. I don't use milk in any drinks. I have back tea and coffee, water and just one glass a day of a sugarfree soft drink. I don't eat any grains or potatoes.

I wouldn't mind a slow loss if it was fairly steady but right now its soul destroying. I really wanted to get away from constantly counting every scrap that goes into my mouth. I did do well initially on low carb but the weight loss had dried up and I was so desperate for the odd piece of fruit. All the hype about 5:2 is misleading for those of us with other health issues.

But if you follow that to it’s logical conclusion ... if fasting produces such magical effects on the body's metabolism then there'd be no need to cut total calories for the week. Fast for 2 days a week and then you can eat more than normal on all the other 5 days to bring total weekly calories back to the amount you were eating previously ... the increased metabolism from the fasting effect would still give you weight loss of 1/2lb even though you consume the same total number of calories for the week? Perhaps even better, fast for 3 days a week and pig out on the other 4 days and consume even more calories than before and still lose weight?

Hi,

I think this is the crux of the 5:2 idea - Speaking solely for myself, I've definitely not managed/controlled calories on the feed days but have lost a couple of stone, despite being very active and having a 'healthy' diet prior to trying this out. Obviously - this is not scientific and under lab conditions but my gut feel is that the affect is more than a simple calorie deficit - I doubt whether my weekly calorie intake is much different now compared with before. In fact, I'm certain that some weeks, I've consumed a lot more than a standard 'pre 5:2' week.

There is a lot of hype about this at the moment, no doubt about that - and separating the good data and information from the bluff (and profiteering) is tricky.

Strangely, I was very very sceptical before starting this and did believe that any benefits that people claimed were simply due to a weekly calorie reduction (no bad thing, if this approach means it's easier to stick to than a conventional diet - there's no problem with that) - having seen some remarkable results for relatively little effort, I'm not so sure now !

It sounds like a great plan in theory but I would find it hard to practice.

I'd never been on a calorie counting diet before the Fast Diet and this works for me because I don't mind counting calories for 2 days of the week. I couldn't calorie count for the rest of the time as, for me, it becomes onerous and restrictive. I love the freedom this diet affords. On the plan you propose I may lose more than the 1 lb a week I have been losing since I started but I know I will get to my target weight in 8 weeks so I am more than happy to carry on with the 5:2.

Best of luck with your new regime though x x

Thanks kencc
I have been reading so much about TDEE and beginning to feel that this was all jut becoming another calorie counting diet
I am small and my TDEE ranges from 1000 tp 1500 depending on what site I use
Frankly I couldn't do 1000 and dont feel like getting onto the counting cals obsession
I like the idea of 4:3 and then eating normally hoping that the fasting has speeded up my metabolism
Anyway,I feel really good and have lost a few cm
Also in this for health reasons,family history of diabetes,heart disease and dementia:(

@Kencc

Eeek! Which TDEE calculator did you use for this please? ........

The iifym.com one I use (default settings) gives 2088 for this scenario; if the lady is a slug, like me, and does little exercise then it's closer to your figure at 1822.

If the iifym one is that much out (~200cals) and I have to revise my TDEE downwards I'm going to be *horribly hungry* Cheers!

Sorry to give you some bad news but, although the IIFYM website might look impressive, its TDEE online calculator looks to me as if it's got a major error somewhere. It uses the Mifflin-St Jeor formula, which is good because it's far more up-to-date compared to the 100 year old Harris-Benedict formula, however it seems IIFYM have made an error when turning that into an online calculator.

Using my example, I've re-calculated by hand using the actual the Mifflin-St Jeor formula and still come up with a TDEE of 1850cals. One of the accurate online calculators might be http://www.calculator.net/calorie-calculator.html . Using my example but for a gastropod instead of 'lightly active', gives a TDEE of 1620cals.

Kencc

Have I opened up a can of worms?

Im trying to follow your principles and it does seem to make sense. Can you clarify or post some easy to follow reference links to your calculation in relation to calculating TDEE's. When I google these names there are a lot of sites but Im looking for something easy to follow. Maybe there is something on this site

i.e. where you say


"although the IIFYM website might look impressive, its TDEE online calculator looks to me as if it's got a major error somewhere. It uses the Mifflin-St Jeor formula, which is good because it's far more up-to-date compared to the 100 year old Harris-Benedict formula, however it seems IIFYM have made an error when turning that into an online calculator.

Using my example, I've re-calculated by hand using the actual the Mifflin-St Jeor formula and still come up with a TDEE of 1850cals. One of the accurate online calculators might be http://www.calculator.net/calorie-calculator.html . Using my example but for a gastropod instead of 'lightly active', gives a TDEE of 1620cals."