The FastDay Forum

He was gaining weight on about 3100 calories before he started, with about 30% carbs. So switching to the low carb diet would have created a short term water loss offsetting the fat gain of the extra calories anyway.

You have a good point about the nuts, apart from finding half of them coming out intact at the other end there are studies that show almonds having an effect on the calorie intake from other foods too.

If he'd done this from an initial steady state on the same nutrition in a metabolic chamber we might have learned something, as it is it creates more heat than light but perhaps adds something to "the conversation".

He was gaining weight on about 3100 calories before he started, with about 30% carbs. So switching to the low carb diet would have created a short term water loss offsetting the fat gain of the extra calories anyway.

Looking at the chart he has on day 15, it looks like he maintained weight for about 8 weeks, which could be the water-loss offsetting fat gain you are talking about, and the slope of the line from 8-14 weeks isn't far from the slope of the predicted weight gain. The difference in slope, I would guess, could be partially explained by counting undigestible stuff (like fiber) as calories.

What doesn't make sense is how his waist measurement is falling. Any ideas how that could be happening?

I'm not nearly as scientifically-minded as some of you guys, but all I know is that I eat thousands of calories on my non-fast days, and still lose weight, as long as my carb intake is low.

I do the 5:2 WOE for the health benefits, and, before starting it, kept my weight down by doing Atkins.

Dhana asked me to outline a typical day's eating, which I will do, later today.

What doesn't make sense is how his waist measurement is falling. Any ideas how that could be happening?

I wish I could define my waist, let alone measure it !

Perhaps he's depleting subcutaneous fat and putting it on somewhere else ? Or does the depletion of glycogen and water affect the liver size. Don't know.

It is quite common to find people talking of inch loss but no weight loss, including 5:2 dieters. The trite answer of putting on muscle which is higher density than fat doesn't seem to fit a calorie deficit scenario where muscle development is unlikely.

Dhana - you wanted me to let you know how many calories I eat on non-fast days. I haven't completely worked everything out yet, but I've roughly added up 2,700.

I still have to calculate the carbs, but there won't be many in the foods which I will have eaten by the end of today.

"Calories in, calories out" certainly doesn't apply, because I can lose weight without moving off the sofa, even on this volume of calories!!

Unread postby PhilT » 04 Jun 2013, 01:54

It is quite common to find people talking of inch loss but no weight loss, including 5:2 dieters. The trite answer of putting on muscle which is higher density than fat doesn't seem to fit a calorie deficit scenario where muscle development is unlikely.

I agree it is unlikely, but the video I posted a link to above included a man that ate twice his TDEE daily for a month and put virtually all of his weight gain on as muscle. His metabolic rate increased 30% in one month. During it all, he was prohibited from exercising, so the calories were converted to muscle, instead of fat, 'naturally'.

Maybe that can happen as calories are reduced?

I have almost given up trying to predict the impact of any given course of eating on a given individual. The body is a chemical factory with its own, unique, leader. And the leader is quirky!

Does anyone know the end result for the guy eating 5000 cals a day and getting thinner?

Hi dhana, it seems to be here. Of course the results are not statistically significant (n=1)!

How could his waist shrink when he put on nearly 3 pounds? Why didn't he gain more than that eating so much? Here's a thought Izzy, did your measurements change for the better, despite gaining 3 lbs. ? No, sorry, just reread your post about the tightening waistband. I wish I could advise you on what to do to start losing weight again, but I really don't know. From what you've said your weight should be going down, at the very least plateauing, not going up. Hope it's just a blip. Anyway, if I ate like our young man I would have gained much, much more then he did.....unless it really is as simple as a calorie is not a calorie school of thought. On that note I'm off to buy more nuts!

I have long believed that a calorie is not just a calorie because if I dare eat normal bread brown or white I put on weight exponentially, mm big word for me, so I do wish I had the will power to follow his way of eating but I have the sweetest tooth in the world so would struggle.

Unread postby PhilT » 04 Jun 2013, 01:54

It is quite common to find people talking of inch loss but no weight loss, including 5:2 dieters. The trite answer of putting on muscle which is higher density than fat doesn't seem to fit a calorie deficit scenario where muscle development is unlikely.

I agree it is unlikely, but the video I posted a link to above included a man that ate twice his TDEE daily for a month and put virtually all of his weight gain on as muscle.

Sure, but tht was in a calorie surplus where muscle development is a possibility.

Would it make a difference that he's a naturally thin person (ectomorph)?

He may be one of those lucky people whose body converts excess calorie intake into muscle not fat -.see the Horizon 'Why are thin people not fat?' programme - at 49:00, if you don't want to watch the whole thing. But there aren't many of them and they probably don't include any of us!

Tomtank, I looked again at Dr Briffa's website and found this link reporting a small-scale study in which people on a 'very low carb' diet maintained their metabolic rate much better than those on 'low GI' or 'low fat' diets. Here is the Pubmed abstract. This would be one reason why you can eat more on an Atkins diet...

However none of the above can fully explain why Sam Feltham gained such little weight, and his limescale analogy is quite unscientific. The only real answers can be either that he was burning off a really huge amount of additional calories or he was excreting them. (Or that he cheated.)

Sorry, haven't read this entire thread but I'm a 'calorie is a calorie' guy, at least for weight loss...and I think this study will agree with me.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/tw ... index.html

Now, I'm talking about weight loss only...not long term health benefits or diet sustainability.

Hi Dominic - I have posted several times to say that I can eat around 3,000 calories a day, sitting on my backside, and still lose weight.

That's only if I keep the carbs down though! Calories in, calories out - where does that fit into the equation?

hi Izzy - the amount of carbs does vary between people, depending on their metabolic-resistance levels.

Some can eat loads, and still lose weight, whereas others can only eat a few, before the weight starts piling back on.