5:2, discuss.

2»

Replies

  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    herrspoons wrote: »
    WalkingAlong wrote: »
    I've read the article and her studies and her book. What do you see in it that supports your assertion that it doesn't work for most people and they'll just yoyo?

    Dr. Mercola's article is comparing complete fasting to intermittent fasting, and shows that IF works as well as CF. Dr. Varady's study does not consider long term (i.e. two years plus) effects, only six months on the diet and then a six month transitional period.

    Here's the NHS's view, which considering they don't have a book to sell, is probably a good deal more impartial. The bottom line is that there is no hard evidence to support IF as an effective and long term means of controlling weight. That doesn't mean it isn't - merely that there isn't enough evidence that it's any better or worse than a more even calorie restriction diet.

    http://www.nhs.uk/news/2013/01January/Pages/Does-the-5-2-intermittent-fasting-diet-work.aspx

    Given that there are a number of people in this topic who have admitted that 5:2 worked initially, but then they put the weight back on, I'm not convinced it has legs.
    And how many people following every day calorie restriction either fail to get to goal weight or fail to maintain that goal weight long term?
    About 90% perhaps? Whatever plan people follow the stats aren't good.

    You will find that what works for some doesn't work for other in terms of long term adherence. IF in its various forms is a tool that works really well for some.

    The other thing you don't seem to realise that many people who have succeeded with 5:2 have previously failed with the more traditional diets. People like me.

    Maybe don't knock it until you have either researched it or tried it?
    You are entitled to your opinion of course and it's all good discussion but I do wonder why people take against the various forms of IF.
    Is it a fear of hunger? Fear of something that doesn't follow the traditional "3 square meals a day" routine?

  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    herrspoons wrote: »
    The bottom line is that there is no hard evidence to support IF as an effective and long term means of controlling weight. That doesn't mean it isn't - merely that there isn't enough evidence that it's any better or worse than a more even calorie restriction diet.

    See it really is not better or worse than any other weight control method, it is better or worse for certain people, though. It comes down to personal habits and what a person thrives on. Someone may be fine with a small portion of pumpkin pie, or with the crust off, but I'm not, so it makes this method better for ME and some other people.
    herrspoons wrote: »
    Given that there are a number of people in this topic who have admitted that 5:2 worked initially, but then they put the weight back on, I'm not convinced it has legs.

    By that logic, not a single diet in existence has legs. Most diets fail in most cases the moment a person stops paying attention to their intake during maintenance.



  • fluffyasacat
    fluffyasacat Posts: 242 Member
    herrspoons wrote: »

    Given that there are a number of people in this topic who have admitted that 5:2 worked initially, but then they put the weight back on, I'm not convinced it has legs.

    If you'd like to compare the adherence and maintenance stats of IF with full-time reduced calorie intake you might see if differently . It's very common to put weight back on after dieting.
  • WalkingAlong
    WalkingAlong Posts: 4,926 Member
    sijomial wrote: »
    You are entitled to your opinion of course and it's all good discussion but I do wonder why people take against the various forms of IF.
    Is it a fear of hunger? Fear of something that doesn't follow the traditional "3 square meals a day" routine?
    I think there is a lot of ingrained fear of hunger/fasting in people in general and here on this site it's like magnified. So many people post about metabolic damage, loss of LBM, eating disorders, starvation mode and all else, it just blows an already feared concept further out of proportion.

    I was a little leary of Johnson's and Mosley's claims, being they are a plastic surgeon (who sells supplements) and a medical-degreed journalist, both selling books. But you can't really fake peer reviewed study results like Varady's in order to market future books. NIH funded her latest long-term study. I don't think they fund just anything.

  • WalkingAlong
    WalkingAlong Posts: 4,926 Member
    I understand. I didn't have headaches or hunger pangs, but I've been dieting for 6 months so I think the headache stage from reduced calories ended back in April. I've never had hunger pangs.

    I decided to try high fat today to see how it felt. It's 6pm and I've had 240 calories total of coconut oil and almond butter and I feel fine. I can still have a small meal today. Tomorrow I can eat without logging or like I'm on a diet. It's well worth it to me, especially after 4 months of daily, level calorie restriction, logging everything. :D
  • Graelwyn75
    Graelwyn75 Posts: 4,404 Member
    I try to follow a 14/10 or 16/8 protocol, sometimes 18/6.
    It works best for me.
  • luciewhitefield25
    luciewhitefield25 Posts: 70 Member
    I have been doing 16:8 since mid August and have lost 1lb of a stone! Love it - couldn't recommend it more! I have never been a breakfast lover anyway so I guess that helps but eating within that time period and missing breakfast gives me lower cals for the day so I can still eat normal for the rest of the day without feeling restricted.. best part is I can have the same dinner as everyone else and not feel left out or worrying if we eat out!

    Don't get me wrong I have the odd days where maybe on a Sunday mid-morning we will go out for a cafe breakfast but once in a while doesn't hurt! :)
  • fluffyasacat
    fluffyasacat Posts: 242 Member
    luciewhitefield25 wrote: »
    I have been doing 16:8 since mid August and have lost 1lb of a stone!

    What's 1lb of a stone? I can work with kgs, lbs, stone, but this one is new to me.
  • jamesblood13
    jamesblood13 Posts: 175 Member
    fluffyasacat wrote: »
    luciewhitefield25 wrote: »
    I have been doing 16:8 since mid August and have lost 1lb of a stone!

    What's 1lb of a stone? I can work with kgs, lbs, stone, but this one is new to me.

    Possibly 1lb off a stone. So 13lbs?
  • fluffyasacat
    fluffyasacat Posts: 242 Member
    jamesblood13 wrote: »
    fluffyasacat wrote: »
    luciewhitefield25 wrote: »
    I have been doing 16:8 since mid August and have lost 1lb of a stone!

    What's 1lb of a stone? I can work with kgs, lbs, stone, but this one is new to me.

    Possibly 1lb off a stone. So 13lbs?

    That may well be it, James.

Categories