5:2

Options
13»

Replies

  • Orphia
    Orphia Posts: 7,097 Member
    Options
    I think one reason people scoff at it is that people (like a cow-orker of mine) starve themselves on their fast days, and gorge themselves on the other days, and end up with CI>CO not CI<CO.

    I think 5:2 is good for some people if it's combined with accurate calorie counting.

    Does MFP let you set your calorie goals per different days?
  • bpetrosky
    bpetrosky Posts: 3,911 Member
    Options
    Orphia wrote: »
    I think one reason people scoff at it is that people (like a cow-orker of mine) starve themselves on their fast days, and gorge themselves on the other days, and end up with CI>CO not CI<CO.

    I think 5:2 is good for some people if it's combined with accurate calorie counting.

    Does MFP let you set your calorie goals per different days?

    I think it does in Premium.

    But it's not hard to do with regular MFP. You could quickadd a set amount in the morning on the low days and remove it when you're done, or just count up to the lower threshold.
  • Qskim
    Qskim Posts: 1,145 Member
    Options
    PrizePopple wrote: »
    mrsbaldee wrote: »
    ProjectSYD wrote: »
    draznyth wrote: »
    ProjectSYD wrote: »
    Annie_01 wrote: »
    ProjectSYD wrote: »
    PrizePopple wrote: »
    ProjectSYD wrote: »
    Ang108 wrote: »
    ProjectSYD wrote: »
    You shouldn't be doing stupid diet fads. People who do those things are misinformed. Just burn more calories than you consume and don't think there's some miracle.

    Man this thread deserves a face palm.

    You are the one who is misinformed uninformed.
    5.2 is an accepted way of eating at a deficit, which means in plain English that it can be a way to burn more calories than a person takes in....just like any other way to achieve a deficit . For some people it works, for others not so much.....just like everything else. It's nothing special, it's not magic, it is not a fad; it is just one of the several ways to achieve a caloric deficit
    For the last 2 years and 3 month it has worked well for me and so far I have lost 65 pounds....a planned .5 pounds a week, right on schedule.

    I'm informed, I understand how it works. I understand your views inthe subject but my stance stays the same. I've tried things like this, you can't maintain eating like that forever. I've lost 16 lbs in a month just keeping track of what I eat and eating regularily. I understand portion sizes and can confidently eat enough to maintain my weight if I wanted (but I don't)


    I don't think these fasting diets do that. But like I said, this is my opinion.

    Please refrain from making personal attacks towards other users note forum as it's against the ToS. I did not make any assumptions that you were uninformed an I'd appreciate it if you showed me the same courtesy.


    My stance is the same though, this thread deserves a face palm.

    Then you might want to preface things like this comment "It doesn't teach you how to eat properly. Sure you might lose weight but you can't live the rest of your life like that." ... with "I THINK" or "I FEEL". 5:2 is very much an accepted form of creating a caloric deficit, as are things like 16:8 and 14:10 (the latter of which I tend to gravitate towards naturally myself). Just because it's not your speed doesn't make it face palm worthy.

    I understand the concept. And if it makes you more comfortable in the future I will make sure to add "I thinks" to my post.

    The work was once believed to be flat, it was widely accepted. We now know it to be round. However, recent science has suggested it may be both flat and round. (Check out Vsauce on youtube for the scientific explanation)

    My issue with fasting is when you fast you lower your metabolic rate and so even though you're creating a deficit you don't lose as much as you would normally throughout a day. Also when you start eating again you're body needs time to adjust and you may gain the weight back. When you're in starvation mode your body typically will eat away at muscle before fat which is also not a good thing.
    http://www.m.webmd.com/diet/fasting

    If you feel that strongly about the diet then by all means continue to do it. You're not in the wrong for doing it I'm just trying to shed some light on some of the potential dangers with these kinds of things

    And face palm worthiness is subjected to the person giving the face palm. I strongly think any diets involving some trick to lose weight deserve a face palm.

    So you think that in 1 day you will lower your metabolic rate? In 1 day you think that you will go into starvation mode and start eating your muscles?

    Okay...

    Actually I know this to be true. That isn't an opinion but a fact that helped me come to my opinion. Opinions are conclusions one comes to upon being presented with facts.

    Your bodies metabolism changes when you sleep, and throughout the day. When you sleep you burn less calories than you do when you're awake.

    Eating breakfast will speed up your metabolic rate, it's like putting keys in the inition of your car and turnin the car on.

    I can send you some links to sources but I need to find them - add me if you want and I'll message you them. I really gotta get to bed though, good luck with the weightloss!

    so you don't like IF

    neither do I

    so what

    it doesn't make it any less useful or effective

    ? Not sure I understand your post friend. Sorry.
    mrsbaldee wrote: »
    This thread lifts my 5:2 soul... I remember the days fighting on here for the 5:2 to be seen as a legit method and not a fad..

    It helped that I came prepared to back up my stance...

    If I wasn't prepared to do that...I'd keep my thoughts to myself or slink away and do a little educating or rest my metabolism or something.
    mrsbaldee wrote: »
    This thread lifts my 5:2 soul... I remember the days fighting on here for the 5:2 to be seen as a legit method and not a fad..

    It helped that I came prepared to back up my stance...

    If I wasn't prepared to do that...I'd keep my thoughts to myself or slink away and do a little educating or rest my metabolism or something.

    Maybe fad was a poor choice in words. I do disagree with it. I've tried IF and it really worked short term but the yoyo affect it had on my body when I stopped was horrible as well as it was painful to go through.

    See, now here's a better answer! Personal discomfort with the method is a fair enough repellant. As most fasters would say...if you can't then don't. Just don't assume how it affected you applies to all.

    But again personal dislike for the method does not equate into the entire method being "face palm worthy" or the people who utilize the method "misinformed". To stomp into a thread making sensational claims because a specific method of caloric restriction didn't work for you is asinine at best. I'm no fan of 5:2 myself because those two low days would make me a total B, but like I said I gravitate towards 14:10 myself so I totally get how it would work for some and not others.

    Don't disagree re face palming..that's why I said what I quoted by SYD was a better answer...
  • wannabeskinnycat
    wannabeskinnycat Posts: 205 Member
    Options
    Orphia wrote: »
    I think one reason people scoff at it is that people (like a cow-orker of mine) starve themselves on their fast days, and gorge themselves on the other days, and end up with CI>CO not CI<CO.

    I think 5:2 is good for some people if it's combined with accurate calorie counting.

    Does MFP let you set your calorie goals per different days?

    Yeah I've heard others claim to be doing 5:2 but eating more cals than they did before :) It's like they've got permission to pig out.

    MFP doesn't let me submit anything less than 1200 so I add a block of cals, submit then delete them.

  • senecarr
    senecarr Posts: 5,377 Member
    Options
    ProjectSYD wrote: »
    The work was once believed to be flat, it was widely accepted. We now know it to be round. However, recent science has suggested it may be both flat and round. (Check out Vsauce on youtube for the scientific explanation)

    Not really. By the time people were sophisticated enough to contemplate the Earth's shape past what they could see, the curvature was noted. You can't build something the size of the pyramids without understanding the ground you're working on has a natural curvature.
    Christopher Columbus wasn't doubted because the merchant classes of the day thought the earth flat - they did it because they actually had a fair idea how round the earth actually was - without North America as pit stop, traveling purely by water to India would take so long for a boat back then that you'd likely starve.
  • Annie_01
    Annie_01 Posts: 3,096 Member
    Options
    Strange...all of ProjectSYD's posts are missing.

    OP...good luck if you try 5:2. I basically came up with my own plan that is based off of 5:2. I eat 5 days a week at a smaller deficit off of my TDEE and the 2 days at a larger deficit. I found the 500 calories a bit low for me so those 2 days I eat between 800-1000. At the end of the week I end up with 1 1/2lb deficit.
  • thankyou4thevenom
    thankyou4thevenom Posts: 1,581 Member
    Options
    I love this thread.

Categories