The FastDay Forum

I have always been a bit of a bad girl then @carorees because before fasting I was an evening snacker although I never liked a big meal after 7. I think Dr Herring suggested 5 - 10 pm as it fitted in better with working families eating together at night, but he does say to go for the most convenient 5 consecutive hours. I have moved my 5 hours forward to 3 to 8 now. I'll give some thought to 2 to 7. Firstly, I don't think I will have suffered sufficiently if I don't have to last until 3 and secondly I will be still out on my long rambles come summer and will have less eating time when I get home (which is supposed to be a good thing, right? )

Breakfast @nursebean? You can have your cereals, scrambled egg, greasy fry up or what your heart desires, sometime in the 5 hours. On this WOE you could have it at 8 in the morning, so long as you then finish lunch by one, and then that's your lot until tomorrow. It's not a popular choice of window, but one person on the Facebook group mentioned doing it.

I remember someone saying they did it this way but I just know I could not do it because I can't sleep if I'm hungry and as I'm never hungry on rising it makes sense, for me, to have my window after midday, that's the beauty of this way of life, do whatever suits you

Ballerina x

cause it had the word 5 in the title i thought it was a cute way of saying 5:2

ahh i am wrong this is eating in a 5 hour window.

not for me im afraid. love love 5:2 or 4:3 better as i can have either 4 or 5 full feasting days and much less onerous and sustainable (in my opinion of course) i.e you are less likely to drop of the wagon like Weight watchers or other crash diets

if it works for you guys and can keep it up and its not bad for health then keep going of course.

[quote="Juliana.Rivers"]
love 5:2 or 4:3 better as i can have either 4 or 5 full feasting days and much less onerous and sustainable (in my opinion of course) i.e you are less likely to drop of the wagon like Weight watchers or other crash diets

An eating window isn't a crash diet or I could never do it and it certainly isn't for everyone, just as 4:3 is not for me but it works for many and that's all that matters.

Ballerina x

love 5:2 or 4:3 better as i can have either 4 or 5 full feasting days and much less onerous and sustainable (in my opinion of course) i.e you are less likely to drop of the wagon like Weight watchers or other crash diets

An eating window isn't a crash diet or I could never do it and it certainly isn't for everyone, just as 4:3 is not for me but it works for many and that's all that matters.

Ballerina x

What i meant was is that the 5 hour eating window seemed extreme and thats just my opinion and if one can do it it does show determination and resilience.

With my sis for instance if I said she coudn't eat for 19 hours at a time she would just not begin.

Indeed the ability for her not to skip breakfast and lunch with traditional 5:2 is why she is still doing this

I kind of by accident on fast days do 16:8 cause its about 16 hours before i have my first meal. But a 5 hour window would mean i couldnt eat till say 6pm the day of a fast which i would find hard to sustain. and doing it daily would be impossible for me.

But do agree we are all so different. only reason i popped in here is my funny realisation that i thought fast-5 was another name for 5:2 fasting. doh

love 5:2 or 4:3 better as i can have either 4 or 5 full feasting days and much less onerous and sustainable (in my opinion of course) i.e you are less likely to drop of the wagon like Weight watchers or other crash diets

An eating window isn't a crash diet or I could never do it and it certainly isn't for everyone, just as 4:3 is not for me but it works for many and that's all that matters.

Ballerina x

What i meant was is that the 5 hour eating window seemed extreme and thats just my opinion and if one can do it it does show determination and resilience.

With my sis for instance if I said she coudn't eat for 19 hours at a time she would just not begin.

Indeed the ability for her not to skip breakfast and lunch with traditional 5:2 is why she is still doing this

I kind of by accident on fast days do 16:8 cause its about 16 hours before i have my first meal. But a 5 hour window would mean i couldnt eat till say 6pm the day of a fast which i would find hard to sustain. and doing it daily would be impossible for me.

But do agree we are all so different. only reason i popped in here is my funny realisation that i thought fast-5 was another name for 5:2 fasting. doh

To be honest I thought doing it every day was a big ask when I first came across it, but I didn't go into it cold turkey; I had been doing 5:2 for 4 months with 36 hour liquid fasts, so to me being able to feast 7 days a week was sinful luxury! It's all a matter of taste ( or not tasting ) as @Ballerina says, I could never do ADF or 4:3, with or without the 500 cals.

Whatever works for each of us. Another pound down.

Like Barbarita I find an eating window is the easiest thing I've ever done and I can see that I eased myself into it, not deliberately, but because it was what came naturally to me. I never want to eat in the mornings and I feel better for not nibbling late in the evenings, nothing extreme there. The freedom from counting calories and planning meals is fantastic.

Ballerina x

I mix and match, which works well for me. One 36 hour zero cal fast per week, short eating window if I'm going out for a meal, low carb if I'm eating at home. And learnt via ideas on the forum, plus trial and error.

Like you @Minumonline my diet may seem a little chaotic but there is a degree of structure in there, and yes, I think your mix and match is a great idea. On Mondays I try to eat nothing, just drinks, then as the week goes on I eat more each day but always within my window and rarely break my fast with carbs, by the time Sunday comes round and I have stuffed myself I am then desperate to not eat on Mondays. never, ever thought I'd be desperate for a day without food but it happens. The great thing is I love this way of life, it really suits me and that is the main thing.

Ballerina x

[Debs]

I'd like to do it, but getting up at 4.45am I feel like dinner at 11!!!!. I do try and exercise restraint and am ok on a fast day, but not sure I could do it every day. At home I can without any problem, especially if I am going out for dinner

We have all certainly come a long way since good old strict 5:2. i remember a certain heated discussion that i think i started about 10 months agoasking just what is the "true 5:2" method and questioning why all the variations..at the time "eating windows" was never discussed as an option.

I can dig it up for you but i might incite people so best refrain

We have all certainly come a long way since good old strict 5:2. i remember a certain heated discussion that i think i started about 10 months agoasking just what is the "true 5:2" method and questioning why all the variations..at the time "eating windows" was never discussed as an option.

I can dig it up for you but i might incite people so best refrain

I remember being of the opinion that there was no such thing as 'true 5:2' as what we were all doing was Intermittent Fasting in all it's various forms. 5:2 was merely the personal preference of one man but he certainly brought it to prominence for which I will be forever grateful and 16/8 was definitely around, I know because I was doing it and posting about it. In fact the link on my signature was first posted on the 30th of May 2013 and it had been a topic in threads for a while before that.

Ballerina x

[carorees]

I mix and match, which works well for me. One 36 hour zero cal fast per week, short eating window if I'm going out for a meal, low carb if I'm eating at home. And learnt via ideas on the forum, plus trial and error.

I believe that this is the best way to go...that's what naturally thin people do anyway: some days they skip a meal, some days they eat like crazy, some days they have just small meals.

Once you have the understanding of how IF works, you can mix it up according to what fits your current circumstances.

I find that using the eating window method I have days with a pretty low calorie count that are almost 'proper' fast days (700-800 cal) and then other more hungry days when I have maybe 1800 cal, with most days coming in around 1200-1500.

We have all certainly come a long way since good old strict 5:2. i remember a certain heated discussion that i think i started about 10 months agoasking just what is the "true 5:2" method and questioning why all the variations..at the time "eating windows" was never discussed as an option.

I can dig it up for you but i might incite people so best refrain

I remember being of the opinion that there was no such thing as 'true 5:2' as what we were all doing was Intermittent Fasting in all it's various forms. 5:2 was merely the personal preference of one man but he certainly brought it to prominence for which I will be forever grateful and 16/8 was definitely around, I know because I was doing it and posting about it. In fact the link on my signature was first posted on the 30th of May 2013 and it had been a topic in threads for a while before that.

Ballerina x

I stand corrected. I think i have selective perception in forums so never really undetstood the 16:8 thing till late last year.

There is a strict 5:2 for some in the forum I guess. or 4:3 a strongly related cousin.. I still think that is the case even 1.5 years after the program aird. People may have slight variations but overall principle of 2 x 1/4 TDEE days or 3 X 1/4 TDEE days is my "hook" and will be for life. Keeps it simple for me. Thanks MM.

I better step quietly out of this tent and head back to the 4:3 and Nearly there tents before someone kicks me out of here.