Who had success with 5:2 fast diet?
Replies
-
As someone who probably owns the MFP record for receiving woo’s, I’m going to give you some good advice; ignore them and continue to post your thoughts and opinions not worrying or being flustered about getting woo’s.8
-
@sijomial I read you so I just checked and I got a woo for saying I fast too
narsed
@glitzy467xx I'm fasting today so I thought I'd let you know how I stay under 500 cals. I drink water for most of the day - occasionally I'd start out with a Boost or Immune tea but as they're only 1 cal I don't sweat it. I don't eat breakfast or lunch as I've found that once I have food my hunger kicks in and I need to postpone my fast day. For my evening meal I have a salad and a protein, usually chicken or nuts. I weigh everything and try to keep the food as simple as I can. The calories in dressings/coatings all add up. I then busy myself, starting with washing the dishes and I'll keep cleaning the kitchen until I've had enough. I get a shower and pamper myself, then treat myself with a snack using up any remaining calories.
I share my house with a husband & kids and there's usually other people there too. At first I struggled to not eat when I could smell food and now I cook for people and it doesn't bother me - I refuse to taste anything as that's my trigger. I can be in my work canteen surrounded by others eating and still remain strong. It does take lots of practise and will power for me but I feel it's completely worth it.
6 -
@sijomial this thread just reminded me, what do your protein goals look like on the fasting days? I always thought about this plan but didn't want to risk a super low protein intake on those low days. Just curious what you do or what the recommendation is. Thanks!!
@sardelsa
Good question.
Protein is going to be low on a fasting day as men only get 600 cals to play with for the low day but both my (very small) meals always featured protein as the "star" of the meal, often fish as a calorie efficient and tasty way to maximise my intake.
But one low protein day at a time is irrelevant in the great scheme of things, people don't just use the amino acids they have eaten that day.
Overall I found 5:2 supported a very heavy cardio and strength regime extremely well as the vast majority of my exercise was done (and recovered from) when fully fuelled at maintenance calories on the 5 normal eating days. I didn't get the horrible downturn in strength, energy levels and recovery that afflicts some people training hard in an everyday deficit. The fairly common question "how do I modify my training when cutting?" never occurred to me - I just had to schedule it sensibly.4 -
I can’t help but imagine that people who give woos are not much different to online trolls. They seem to intentionally seek out topics that they disagree with just so they can woo and harass people with different points of view, I guess it makes them feel superior in some small minded way.
You got the woo simply because you do intermittent fasting and that person has come to this thread to woo anyone who fasts or says anything positive about it. Weird disagreeable people, not worth caring about.
@Luciicul
Fasting is such a common thing world-wide (especially for religious reasons) that to dismiss the whole subject as BS or "too good to be true" (to give the official woo meaning on these forums) without engaging to state what their objection is just strikes me as peculiar.
I try and give a balanced report of my 5:2 experience as just like all diets there are pros, cons and individual preferences.
3 -
@sijomial, enjoyed reading your experience with 5:2, thanks for sharing.1
-
Great thanks @sijomial !
Oh and another question. Why are the low days a set amount and not based on maintenance calories? So for women it is 500 right. Is that set in stone or a guideline? If I did 500 on two days plus maintenance on the other five days I would be in a pretty extreme deficit.. so I'd be losing almost 1.5lb per week. I have played around with my calorie cycling and before a vacation I tried out having two low days of 1000 calories which worked out perfectly and allowed me to lose 1lb per week, plus it allowed me to get at least 0.8-1g protein easily.0 -
glitzy467xx wrote: »MichelleSilverleaf wrote: »jennlynne2018 wrote: »You could try it and see if it works for you. No reason to be afraid. I do wonder if eating at a regular deficit is hard for you and can trigger a binge, how are you going to handle the fasting days of very low calories?
I wondered this too. OP it may help to try and identify what's throwing you off instead. Are you perhaps being too restrictive? Is your aimed deficit too high? Are you cutting out things you enjoy that you think you have to cut out? How much do you have to lose to get to your desired goal weight?
Currently I weigh 60kg. My goal weight is 55kg. I think the problem is that I spent too much time not doing much. If I get busy daily, then I will stick to my calorie goal. Right now I’m on holiday. Uni starts back on September. I feel like the days are going slow. I spent too much time being at home. I think if I find a job or something, then I might be able to stick with my goal. 😎
I don't have experience w/ 5:2 or IF in general, but wanted to add that if you feel boredom is an issue - why not use the extra time you have to find some new active hobbies (if you are mobile and able to exercise and/or be more active in general). This can be coupled with the fasting program if you decide to proceed, but also can be a sustainable healthy habit to build for when you go back to university and help with your weight loss overall by giving you an extra calorie burn as well as other positive benefits.0 -
Great thanks @sijomial !
Oh and another question. Why are the low days a set amount and not based on maintenance calories? So for women it is 500 right. Is that set in stone or a guideline? If I did 500 on two days plus maintenance on the other five days I would be in a pretty extreme deficit.. so I'd be losing almost 1.5lb per week. I have played around with my calorie cycling and before a vacation I tried out having two low days of 1000 calories which worked out perfectly and allowed me to lose 1lb per week, plus it allowed me to get at least 0.8-1g protein easily.
It's originally 25% of a person's average TDEE, simplified to 500 for women and 600 for men. If you're burning over 3000 calories, you can have 750 calories twice a week in theory.
ETA: Ultimately, it's whatever weekly deficit you're trying to achieve divided by two days, the numbers aren't set in stone.3 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »Great thanks @sijomial !
Oh and another question. Why are the low days a set amount and not based on maintenance calories? So for women it is 500 right. Is that set in stone or a guideline? If I did 500 on two days plus maintenance on the other five days I would be in a pretty extreme deficit.. so I'd be losing almost 1.5lb per week. I have played around with my calorie cycling and before a vacation I tried out having two low days of 1000 calories which worked out perfectly and allowed me to lose 1lb per week, plus it allowed me to get at least 0.8-1g protein easily.
It's originally 25% of a person's average TDEE, simplified to 500 for women and 600 for men. If you're burning over 3000 calories, you can have 750 calories twice a week in theory.
Thanks, that makes sense!
That would be about 1.3lb per week loss, if I wanted to lose less I could either add more to my maintenance days or low days which is exactly what I did. I would imagine if maintenance was lower it would be less.0 -
glitzy467xx wrote: »thanks everyone! I wanna try it but I’m scared if it messes up my hormones
Actual, the studies show exactly the opposite compared to a constant diet.
Hormones with only 2 days of diet and 5 days at maintenance were exactly normal - which is probably why it's can be very helpful longterm - depending on ability to follow it.
I'll also mention since you are talking about doing this on MFP, which uses a totally different system for getting a calorie deficit.
You can NOT use MFP as designed with 5:2 - you'll be undereating more than the avg 22% deficit it causes.
Because the diet looked at average maintenance calories - that's exercise and everything and good estimate of daily activity. Considered a TDEE method.
But MFP uses non-exercise activity level daily (and I'd bet majority underestimate that), and exercise added on when done. Considered a NEAT method. Though it includes a few other acronyms.
If you picked your activity level correctly, sedentary is a bump on a log for work, and the evening, and weekends - no kids, pets, or household duties really. Lightly-Active is what most with activity tracker discover they are before even being inspired to move more or exercise.
You'd set MFP to maintain - and eat that goal 5 days weekly, plus whatever exercise you log the way the system is designed.
Then take 1/4 that base eating goal and just eat that on the 2 days - with no exercise on those days.3 -
@sardelsaamusedmonkey wrote: »Great thanks @sijomial !
Oh and another question. Why are the low days a set amount and not based on maintenance calories? So for women it is 500 right. Is that set in stone or a guideline? If I did 500 on two days plus maintenance on the other five days I would be in a pretty extreme deficit.. so I'd be losing almost 1.5lb per week. I have played around with my calorie cycling and before a vacation I tried out having two low days of 1000 calories which worked out perfectly and allowed me to lose 1lb per week, plus it allowed me to get at least 0.8-1g protein easily.
It's originally 25% of a person's average TDEE, simplified to 500 for women and 600 for men. If you're burning over 3000 calories, you can have 750 calories twice a week in theory.
ETA: Ultimately, it's whatever weekly deficit you're trying to achieve divided by two days, the numbers aren't set in stone.
I don't think the quarter of TDEE allowance was backed up by anything particularly scientific.
TBH the whole 5:2 book was a bit liberal with its interpretation of science (a lot of cherry picking and taking study conclusions out of context). But whatever the science the concept worked for me and my wife in terms of easier adherence to a sensible weekly calorie goal.
Strangely I seemed very sensitive to the fasting day calories, 600 was really hard for me but 650 was merely hard.
I'm very much a guideline not a rule person and for the sake of 50 cals it simply wasn't worth me making things tougher for myself.
1 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »Great thanks @sijomial !
Oh and another question. Why are the low days a set amount and not based on maintenance calories? So for women it is 500 right. Is that set in stone or a guideline? If I did 500 on two days plus maintenance on the other five days I would be in a pretty extreme deficit.. so I'd be losing almost 1.5lb per week. I have played around with my calorie cycling and before a vacation I tried out having two low days of 1000 calories which worked out perfectly and allowed me to lose 1lb per week, plus it allowed me to get at least 0.8-1g protein easily.
It's originally 25% of a person's average TDEE, simplified to 500 for women and 600 for men. If you're burning over 3000 calories, you can have 750 calories twice a week in theory.
Thanks, that makes sense!
That would be about 1.3lb per week loss, if I wanted to lose less I could either add more to my maintenance days or low days which is exactly what I did. I would imagine if maintenance was lower it would be less.
And just to add to this, I've seen people who were using 5:2 to lose weight switch to "6:1" in maintenance, eating a bit over maintenance on 6 days and then eating in the 500-800 calorie range on day 7. So if your TDEE is high enough, theoretically just one fasting day could cover say a 0.5lb rate of loss I suppose.0 -
@sardelsaamusedmonkey wrote: »Great thanks @sijomial !
Oh and another question. Why are the low days a set amount and not based on maintenance calories? So for women it is 500 right. Is that set in stone or a guideline? If I did 500 on two days plus maintenance on the other five days I would be in a pretty extreme deficit.. so I'd be losing almost 1.5lb per week. I have played around with my calorie cycling and before a vacation I tried out having two low days of 1000 calories which worked out perfectly and allowed me to lose 1lb per week, plus it allowed me to get at least 0.8-1g protein easily.
It's originally 25% of a person's average TDEE, simplified to 500 for women and 600 for men. If you're burning over 3000 calories, you can have 750 calories twice a week in theory.
ETA: Ultimately, it's whatever weekly deficit you're trying to achieve divided by two days, the numbers aren't set in stone.
I don't think the quarter of TDEE allowance was backed up by anything particularly scientific.
TBH the whole 5:2 book was a bit liberal with its interpretation of science (a lot of cherry picking and taking study conclusions out of context). But whatever the science the concept worked for me and my wife in terms of easier adherence to a sensible weekly calorie goal.
Strangely I seemed very sensitive to the fasting day calories, 600 was really hard for me but 650 was merely hard.
I'm very much a guideline not a rule person and for the sake of 50 cals it simply wasn't worth me making things tougher for myself.
The 5:2 diet principles were based on the every other day diet, he basically took the concept and modified it. Because the studies that lead to developing the every other day diet were using 25% of TDEE, that's what he used for 5:2. It's just how he came up with these numbers, that's all. Why the studies used 25%? Because it felt like a good number to use to produce a good calorie deficit but allow for at least one decent meal. Nothing magical about the number itself.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
thecrossbar wrote: »You can NOT use MFP as designed with 5:2 - you'll be undereating more than the avg 22% deficit it causes.
I just want to point out that premium let's you set specific calorie goals for different days...so it can be done on MFP. I have had success with fasting in the past, so when I get closer to goal, I want to switch to 5:2. As it is I already have a set calorie goal different than MFP's calculation, and I don't eat activity calories except on rare occasion as I'm very active for work and don't want to add an extra 1,000 kcal some days 😂
If you are unable to eat your activity calories, then fasting may not be for you. You're under eating as is if you are not eating activity calories, so introducing even more calories to eat on non-fast days could make your deficit very steep if you fail to eat those as well.1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.2K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.4K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 440 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.9K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions