The FastDay Forum

Pariah wrote: My hubby and I are doing 5:2 for the past 8 months. No complaints from his side. The success of this diet is because you can eat anything you like on other days and not miss any particular food except for the diet days. I for one have never before been able to lose more than 2 kilos and go on a diet for more than a months getting more kilos back in a shorter time. I will not touch any other diet that says eat this food with that or omits any food from diet. I keep thanking Dr MM every day and my son for informing me about his program 8 months ago. It has been a blessing for me, my husband and many of my friends who have seen the result on us. Thanks again MM.

I've put it out there at work that that is what I am doing, especially as all the miserable guys at work are already failing with their dull, new year diets! So I have to succeed, but I am confident that I will.

wildmissus wrote: This time last year I told a few people about 5:2 who completely rubbished it. I'm now at a healthy BMI and they......well they have either not lost anything or have put weight on and the biggest culprit has just started 5:2ing a couple of weeks ago! Mmmm......

I'm sure to anyone who hasn't tried it, 5:2/IF does sound just like another fad. I think it has to be experienced to be appreciated. But that's no excuse to rubbish it before trying it. I guess you're the proof she needed, @wildmissus

One of the main things that is being criticised is the rapid weight loss (leads to rapid weight gain), and the money spent. So why on earth is 5:2 in that article?! It's sloooow weight loss, which means slow weight gain, and you don't have to buy the books to access the information. Buying the books is a choice, and is probably made up for by buying less in your food shops!

3 words leapt out at me at the beginning of the article; "lacked the application".

'Nuf said, really.

cblasz wrote: He says that most diets make it harder to eat and that's why you lose weight on them. But, the Fast diet is actually the opposite. It makes it easier for you to eat most days!

I don't agree with that, since I began 5:2 in June, my appetite has changed a lot, I eat way less than before. Before that, between February and June, I was
on a more traditional diet and, yes I was losing weight but I was so frustrated because of all the things I wasn't allowed to eat that I was starving all the time.I was eating less not by choice but because the food was tasteless and it was a chore. Now I eat less because I am quickly full and I don't need anymore. Big big difference.....

I hate when they get the basics wrong. Why are they saying that 4:3 is the Every Other Day diet? 4:3 is fasting 3 days a week, not every other day.

When will people understand that 5:2 is a simple way for us to get into the 'eat less' camp without having to constantly deprive ourselves? Argh! We're not giving up entire food groups, forcing ourselves to eat only raw foods or only foods which occur naturally... 5:2 is so simple - and we're not having to buy books or pay out for fancy foods or expensive weekly membership fees to get weighed and judged by others.

The NHS Choices Live Well website advises: “It can be tempting to put your faith in one of the countless schemes that promise rapid, easy weight loss. Unfortunately, even if these fad diets do help you to lose weight you are unlikely to maintain a healthy weight in the months and years afterwards.”

Well thank goodness we don't promise rapid weight loss Defo not a fad then, we mostly seem to be doing alright at sticking with it and keeping the weight off I know I'll never be fat again.

I think that the author has lumped in 5:2/4:3 with other weight loss diets without really looking at what it is and isn't. the original MM programme and book does not just focus on weight loss - indeed weight loss seems to have been almost a by-product of what he was really researching, which was the other health benefits such as blood sugars, visceral fat etc. I guess since then people (including myself!) have leapt on fasting as a weight loss tool, but it does not necessarily need to be that way, as many use it to maintain a healthy weight and others are merely doing it for the health benefits and couldn't care less what they weigh.

I have certainly found this the easiest 'diet' to do - I have ditched counting calories even on fast days (although I usually have a rough idea). I have not spent a single penny on 5:2 'merchandise' so MM has made no money out of me (I saw the book in a free book box at work so someone else bought it!) I try to eat nutritious, energy-rich foods most of the time and fully enjoy 'treat' foods in small quantities (although I have certainly pushed that boundary recently!).

However, in a way I agree with the general gist of the article in that ultimately what will help you sustain a healthy weight loss is a balanced diet containing plenty of fruit & veg and lots of exercise. I do think that for some, the carb thing makes a difference, so everyone has to find a combination of foods that works for them and makes them feel good. Some people do use 5:2 and other, crazier diets as a quick fix tool for weight loss and these are the folks that will be disappointed in the long term. If they do not change their eating habits overall then weight loss will not be sustainable.

I do expect more thorough research from the Independent!

The last sentence said it all:
"Better still, of course, to avoid putting the weight on in the first place. "

This guy has obviously never been fat.

The point with this WOL is more than just weight loss! This idiot clearly knows nothing about the diet! I heard about it and dismissed it straight away...then I read the book and changed my mind! No it's not a short term fix, and I'm still careful on feed days...but it works and it makes me feel better in more ways than just the fact I'm losing weight. I'm so annoyed reading this article!

We all know it works ,