TheFast Diet
Replies
-
You really have no clue do you? Do you not think that people on 5:2 know self control on their normal days? IS that why I'm currently 13000 calories UNDER net this week alone? Yeah cause I must not be able to control myself right?
If you knew anything about it (and clearly you do not) then you would know that it not only makes you want to eat less on your normal TDEE days, but you learn to eat only when HUNGRY & not when you are told you should eat or when you think you are hungry. You learn what hunger feels like & then use that to sustain yourself.
Go back to your weights & 16:8....... oh wait.... that's the one where you pig out for 8 hours. Self control...hows that working for ya?
You obviously can't control yourself, no, otherwise you'd be eating the same 7 days a week and not being ridiculous.
16:8 removes all hunger pangs as it is, if you need anymore you have a mental issue with food.
Self control working out for me? Yep, I'm in fairly good shape, I was down to 4 days a week of 1350 calories a day whilst having raised calories 3x a week, and managed to get down to 10% bodyfat - when you can come even CLOSE to that, we can probably continue a conversation.0 -
As for the OP
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9Aj6hRYg4A
Watch this. Explains it better & don't listen to Ritchie. He's a 24yo who has 'clients' even though he has no qualifications in anything (apart from playing games) and thinks that people like Doctors, Professors & real teachers with real qualifications know less than him.
Not seen the amount of people complaining about their doctors, nutrionists etc lately?
You should go over to the "Why do you guys over-complicate everything" thread - you'd fit in well there. 0 -
I don't think Ritchie was incorrect in the sense the OP was stating that their goal was weight loss, and science would dictate that a calorie deficit would be the ultimate reason for losing weight. Be it through IF or not, calorie deficit is the reason for a loss.I have 5-10 pounds more to lose.
OP what ever works for you and try to think sustainable.
Finally, someone with sense appears.0 -
Now, answer this for me, if you will:
If I eat 15,000 calories over 7 days - 2142 calories a day for 7 days.
or
If I eat 15,000 calories over 5 days - 3000 calories for 5 days. (but do 5:2) so remove 1200 of those calories so i eat 600 twice a week.
Would fat loss be the same (providing that is the calories of a deficit)?
What? Do you really expect a meaningful answer? In short I cannot know as I have no baseline data, no bodpod measure etc etc.
5:2 numbers don't go like that, so that is an invalid assumption for a start.
The question is meaningless and unanswerable without a science lab, a meaningful cohort etc.0 -
Now, answer this for me, if you will:
If I eat 15,000 calories over 7 days - 2142 calories a day for 7 days.
or
If I eat 15,000 calories over 5 days - 3000 calories for 5 days. (but do 5:2) so remove 1200 of those calories so i eat 600 twice a week.
Would fat loss be the same (providing that is the calories of a deficit)?
What? Do you really expect a meaningful answer? In short I cannot know as I have no baseline data, no bodpod measure etc etc.
5:2 numbers don't go like that, so that is an invalid assumption for a start.
The question is meaningless and unanswerable without a science lab, a meaningful cohort etc.
The answer is no, the fat loss will be the same.
The calories taken in is the same.
Bye.0 -
And if you truly believe that you have only shown that you lack a lot of information and have a very poor understanding of physiology.
Nice dismissal but your grammar still undermines your point!0 -
And if you truly believe that you have only shown that you lack a lot of information and have a very poor understanding of physiology.
Nice dismisaal though!
You can't even be serious anymore, you must be trolling.0 -
You really have no clue do you? Do you not think that people on 5:2 know self control on their normal days? IS that why I'm currently 13000 calories UNDER net this week alone? Yeah cause I must not be able to control myself right?
If you knew anything about it (and clearly you do not) then you would know that it not only makes you want to eat less on your normal TDEE days, but you learn to eat only when HUNGRY & not when you are told you should eat or when you think you are hungry. You learn what hunger feels like & then use that to sustain yourself.
Go back to your weights & 16:8....... oh wait.... that's the one where you pig out for 8 hours. Self control...hows that working for ya?
You obviously can't control yourself, no, otherwise you'd be eating the same 7 days a week and not being ridiculous.
16:8 removes all hunger pangs as it is, if you need anymore you have a mental issue with food.
Self control working out for me? Yep, I'm in fairly good shape, I was down to 4 days a week of 1350 calories a day whilst having raised calories 3x a week, and managed to get down to 10% bodyfat - when you can come even CLOSE to that, we can probably continue a conversation.
Wait....let me tell you a few things.
1. 1200 calories for 7 months.... not one calorie over. Lost 30kg
2. 1300 calories to stay there...lost another 5kg without trying
3. eat the same thing EVERY SINGLE DAY for the last 560 days in a row. Not once have I gone over in calories.
4. Since starting here on the 8th Feb 2012 I have lost all the weight I planned & then some. All without having to worry about going over cause I have some damn fine self control & a damn fine attitude towards food & working out.
5. Workout every single day despite having a back injury, bad knees & a few other things like shin splints and a nice achillies tendon tear..... yeah I run 10km with all that & more.
6. I got fat cause I was lazy & drank my calories in the form of Coke..... not from over eating or lack of control. Plus a back injury that didn't help.
7. 4:3 (eat normal TDEE 1800 4 days a week) and then reduce it to 0 calories 3 days a week....cause THAT is how much self control I have..... is nothing. It's not hard & hunger pangs are welcome...it teaches you to LEARN what hunger is like.
Try eating when hungry, not because you have an 8 hour window to pig out. You have no idea what hunger pangs are like. Even on 600 calories you would not. I'm 4 days a week of your calories all the time.....because I can never make it to NET. I'm just not hungry enough to force it.
You need to learn more about more things rather than thinking you are always right. You are young.... you have no clue. Go back and play minecraft or something.... you can learn about hunger pangs there your hearts go down.
My job is done. I'm off to bed cause I got a hunger to enjoy tomorrow.0 -
No Richie I am not trolling.
I despair of you ever understanding that you have a limited viewpoint and a general misunderstanding. Life is not as simple as you choose to state it. The human body is not as simple either. You cannot reduce life to a computer code of 'is' or 'is not'. You have the basics but not the details.
Then again, I should know better. You have infinitely more patience and time to repeat yourself than I have.0 -
You really have no clue do you? Do you not think that people on 5:2 know self control on their normal days? IS that why I'm currently 13000 calories UNDER net this week alone? Yeah cause I must not be able to control myself right?
If you knew anything about it (and clearly you do not) then you would know that it not only makes you want to eat less on your normal TDEE days, but you learn to eat only when HUNGRY & not when you are told you should eat or when you think you are hungry. You learn what hunger feels like & then use that to sustain yourself.
Go back to your weights & 16:8....... oh wait.... that's the one where you pig out for 8 hours. Self control...hows that working for ya?
You obviously can't control yourself, no, otherwise you'd be eating the same 7 days a week and not being ridiculous.
16:8 removes all hunger pangs as it is, if you need anymore you have a mental issue with food.
Self control working out for me? Yep, I'm in fairly good shape, I was down to 4 days a week of 1350 calories a day whilst having raised calories 3x a week, and managed to get down to 10% bodyfat - when you can come even CLOSE to that, we can probably continue a conversation.
Wait....let me tell you a few things.
1. 1200 calories for 7 months.... not one calorie over. Lost 30kg
2. 1300 calories to stay there...lost another 5kg without trying
3. eat the same thing EVERY SINGLE DAY for the last 560 days in a row. Not once have I gone over in calories.
4. Since starting here on the 8th Feb 2012 I have lost all the weight I planned & then some. All without having to worry about going over cause I have some damn fine self control & a damn fine attitude towards food & working out.
5. Workout every single day despite having a back injury, bad knees & a few other things like shin splints and a nice achillies tendon tear..... yeah I run 10km with all that & more.
6. I got fat cause I was lazy & drank my calories in the form of Coke..... not from over eating or lack of control. Plus a back injury that didn't help.
7. 4:3 (eat normal TDEE 1800 4 days a week) and then reduce it to 0 calories 3 days a week....cause THAT is how much self control I have..... is nothing. It's not hard & hunger pangs are welcome...it teaches you to LEARN what hunger is like.
Try eating when hungry, not because you have an 8 hour window to pig out. You have no idea what hunger pangs are like. Even on 600 calories you would not. I'm 4 days a week of your calories all the time.....because I can never make it to NET. I'm just not hungry enough to force it.
You need to learn more about more things rather than thinking you are always right. You are young.... you have no clue. Go back and play minecraft or something.... you can learn about hunger pangs there your hearts go down.
My job is done. I'm off to bed cause I got a hunger to enjoy tomorrow.
The majority of those steps you have listed just show even more ridiculous behaviour, like
5. Workout every single day despite having a back injury, bad knees & a few other things like shin splints and a nice achillies tendon tear..... yeah I run 10km with all that & more.
7. 4:3 (eat normal TDEE 1800 4 days a week) and then reduce it to 0 calories 3 days a week....cause THAT is how much self control I have..... is nothing. It's not hard & hunger pangs are welcome...it teaches you to LEARN what hunger is like
Just ridiculous, it's not even worth me talking about it, be real please.
"Try eating when hungry, not because you have an 8 hour window to pig out. You have no idea what hunger pangs are like. Even on 600 calories you would not. I'm 4 days a week of your calories all the time.....because I can never make it to NET. I'm just not hungry enough to force it."
Actually, my window is custom - I chose 6 hours,, does that make me more of a pig?
I eat 2550 calories in 2 meals, and I enjoy it. I also understand that I could eat those 2550 calories over 6 meals and it would have the same FAT effect. This is where you are being silly, again.
I eat two meals because its simple, I don't have fasting days because its unnecessary. You still haven't given me a reason as to why you'd do it, why does anyone NEED to feel hunger? What a stupid thing to say.. lol.
You're just silly, your avi shows that too, weird behavior. Whatever you did (drink coke or eat) you consumed too many calories, that's lack of control.0 -
No Richie I am not trolling.
I despair of you ever understanding that you have a limited viewpoint and a general misunderstanding. Life is not as simple as you choose to state it. The human body is not as simple either. You cannot reduce life to a computer code of 'is' or 'is not'. You have the basics but not the details.
Then again, I should know better. You have infinitely more patience and time to repeat yourself than I have.
May aswel be trolling because I can't take what you're saying seriously. Weight loss is as simple as I choose to state it. As is the human body. We're all the same (medical conditions aside).0 -
It works, but I don't recommend it because it's unnecessary. It is no different than just counting your calories and being in a weekly deficit.
But it won't work if you eat too much during the 5 days, so personally I say stay away from it, its pointless.
I've hit a plateau. I eat 1,200 calories on days I don't work out and 1,400 on days I do. I'm just wondering if I need a shock to my metabolism.
Then this might be a great plan for you. Some people can stay on the same calorie level thruout their weightloss and never plateau. But others will find their body adjusts to the calorie level more quickly and they find themselves having to continue lowering their calorie level to continue losing. You can only go so far before you start hurting your health.
I was fine for 9 months on a set calorie level, then the weight loss slowed drastically. I figured this would happen at some point, and knew I would have to change things up when it did. I started the 5:2 this week, and finally broke thru with a half pound loss.
You still need to count calories every day, but you just spread them out over the week. 2 days at 500, then add some extra calories to the other 5 days. I am doing one day at maintenance, and the other 4 between 1200-1400.
The higher cal days help replenish the hormone levels, or so I hear. Leptin? not exactly certain about the science behind it, but it is working for many people, and as long as you don't have your 500 days right next to each other, it won't hurt you to have the low days 2 days a week.
If you have any health concerns, I would clear it with your doctor first.0 -
Because people are attempting 5:2 for fat loss. Just like the OP said in her post about her plateau.
It will result in fat loss - just like any other calorie deficient diet.Normal IF would be 16:8. That is the IF people SHOULD be doing, if any. I care about my health, sure, but these same people that care about their health are over weight, so logic is flawed.
Errr, no - 16:8 is simply one form of IF. Now I can see that you've got yourself all distracted on that point by spending too many hours staring at the muscled up gentleman on the front of the Leangains site with rose-tinted fanboy contacts in, but in fact you'll find that the form of fasting that has had most studies on is alternate day fasting...so if we were going to apply a nonsensical adjective like 'normal', you'd really have to go for that one.
Now at this point I'll hold my hand up and say that I'm not doing any kind of fasting - but as your username, your profile photo and most of all your style of posting irritates me...and I was at a bit of a loose end waiting for some pastry to blind bake, I thought I may as well come help the fasting people bat you around a little 0 -
Because people are attempting 5:2 for fat loss. Just like the OP said in her post about her plateau.
It will result in fat loss - just like any other calorie deficient diet.Normal IF would be 16:8. That is the IF people SHOULD be doing, if any. I care about my health, sure, but these same people that care about their health are over weight, so logic is flawed.
Errr, no - 16:8 is simply one form of IF. Now I can see that you've got yourself all distracted on that point by spending too many hours staring at the muscled up gentleman on the front of the Leangains site with rose-tinted fanboy contacts in, but in fact you'll find that the form of fasting that has had most studies on is alternate day fasting...so if we were going to apply a nonsensical adjective like 'normal', you'd really have to go for that one.
Now at this point I'll hold my hand up and say that I'm not doing any kind of fasting - but as your username, your profile photo and most of all your style of posting irritates me...and I was at a bit of a loose end waiting for some pastry to blind bake, I thought I may as well come help the fasting people bat you around a little
16:8, has no effect on fat loss, though. Which is why I don't tell anyone,, or the OP to do it. So regardless of anything you say to me whether you or anyone else recommends 5:2 (fat loss is what the OP wanted) - it's pointless to mention it to her.
It's funny though, i like how you comment on my picture (which obviously is of me) and that you have a vendetta because you don't like the way I post (with common sense and useful information) so you get your panties in a bunch
I forgive you though, its ok.0 -
OP: I've had some success with 5:2 so far (only been on it for a couple of weeks). I prefer to only have to count calories two days a week on 5:2 rather than having to count calories every day using a traditional approach. Sometimes different approaches work for different people, so it may be worth a try.0
-
You really have no clue do you? Do you not think that people on 5:2 know self control on their normal days? IS that why I'm currently 13000 calories UNDER net this week alone? Yeah cause I must not be able to control myself right?
If you knew anything about it (and clearly you do not) then you would know that it not only makes you want to eat less on your normal TDEE days, but you learn to eat only when HUNGRY & not when you are told you should eat or when you think you are hungry. You learn what hunger feels like & then use that to sustain yourself.
Go back to your weights & 16:8....... oh wait.... that's the one where you pig out for 8 hours. Self control...hows that working for ya?
You obviously can't control yourself, no, otherwise you'd be eating the same 7 days a week and not being ridiculous.
16:8 removes all hunger pangs as it is, if you need anymore you have a mental issue with food.
Self control working out for me? Yep, I'm in fairly good shape, I was down to 4 days a week of 1350 calories a day whilst having raised calories 3x a week, and managed to get down to 10% bodyfat - when you can come even CLOSE to that, we can probably continue a conversation.
Whoa, wait a minute here.
Are you saying that you ate one calorie level for 4 days a week, (1350 for a body builder is crazy low), then increased your cals for the other 3 days a week, and you lost BODY FAT?
Wow, that kinda sounds like IF.
Why did you not simply eat the same amount every day. Don't you know that you would have lost the same amount doing that, and you wouldn't have had to cut your cals on those 4 days? That is just ridiculous and completely unnecessary.
Hypocrite much?0 -
Oooh Debbie. I went out to knock my bread back and you beat me to it!
Richie does 5:2 (OK 4:3), you read it here first. My job is done. Bye.
Sorry to everyone, I stooped, felt a little bit childish 0 -
You really have no clue do you? Do you not think that people on 5:2 know self control on their normal days? IS that why I'm currently 13000 calories UNDER net this week alone? Yeah cause I must not be able to control myself right?
If you knew anything about it (and clearly you do not) then you would know that it not only makes you want to eat less on your normal TDEE days, but you learn to eat only when HUNGRY & not when you are told you should eat or when you think you are hungry. You learn what hunger feels like & then use that to sustain yourself.
Go back to your weights & 16:8....... oh wait.... that's the one where you pig out for 8 hours. Self control...hows that working for ya?
You obviously can't control yourself, no, otherwise you'd be eating the same 7 days a week and not being ridiculous.
16:8 removes all hunger pangs as it is, if you need anymore you have a mental issue with food.
Self control working out for me? Yep, I'm in fairly good shape, I was down to 4 days a week of 1350 calories a day whilst having raised calories 3x a week, and managed to get down to 10% bodyfat - when you can come even CLOSE to that, we can probably continue a conversation.
Whoa, wait a minute here.
Are you saying that you ate one calorie level for 4 days a week, (1350 for a body builder is crazy low), then increased your cals for the other 3 days a week, and you lost BODY FAT?
Wow, that kinda sounds like IF.
Why did you not simply eat the same amount every day. Don't you know that you would have lost the same amount doing that, and you wouldn't have had to cut your cals on those 4 days? That is just ridiculous and completely unnecessary.
Hypocrite much?
Yes I would have lost the same weight eating the same everyday, but as you stated, I'm a bodybuilder so I wanted three days a week where i trained so I could eat a much higher amount of carbohydrates because of energy levels and because I didn't have to re-feed weekly (I like how you pointed this out though, proves your little knowledge on the subject but you've chimed in anyway).
I said I do IF, you obviously chose to ignore it, or as usual didn't read properly.
So no, not being a hypocrite and don't tell me what is "low" for a bodybuilder, my weekly caloric intake was fine; also you have no idea what it takes to get to 10% or lower Bodyfat as a 5'6 male who is fairly sedentary..
but look, i succeeded. did you?0 -
Oooh Debbie. I went out to knock my bread back and you beat me to it!
Richie does 5:2 (OK 4:3), you read it here first. My job is done. Bye.
Sorry to everyone, I stooped, felt a little bit childish
I do 5:2? No I don't, check my diary, I don't do 4:3 either.0 -
Wow. That was entertaining...0
-
Wot, no irony or sarcasm, Richie?
Look, this is silly. We disagree. I have a different understanding than you do. I consider your opinion to be lacking in science and experience.
You have lost a lot of weight and you must feel like the bee knees, and rightly so, you loss has been amazing.
But please. do try to be less irritating and so very, very certain. I am sure that if you could lighten up a little you could achieve a lot more. I was serious when I said that I think it is a pity that you seem to be wasting some pretty well honed research skills. That is a skill that I wish more of my students could grow.
Good luck in whatever you choose to do jobwise, Richie (if I remember right you are resting between jobs?). I hope you decide to get a really good formal education to back up your obvious passion.0 -
Wot, no irony or sarcasm, Richie?
Look, this is silly. We disagree. I have a different understanding than you do. I consider your opinion to be lacking in science and experience.
You have lost a lot of weight and you must feel like the bee knees, and rightly so, you loss has been amazing.
But please. do try to be less irritating and so very, very certain. I am sure that if you could lighten up a little you could achieve a lot more. I was serious when I said that I think it is a pity that you seem to be wasting some pretty well honed research skills. That is a skill that I wish more of my students could grow.
Good luck in whatever you choose to do jobwise, Richie (if I remember right you are resting between jobs?). I hope you decide to get a really good formal education to back up your obvious passion.
Thanks for the comments on my weight loss. But that will still not change anything, lol.
I don't feel like the "bees knees". I just know what I am talking about, that is it.. I want to help people, which I do.
I have trained several people, all had the same results as me, no 5:2, no fad diets, just science. If that isn't science and experience then I don't know what is.
I don't want to get a formal education (a certificate) on my passion, it means nothing to me. I am educated already.0 -
You really have no clue do you? Do you not think that people on 5:2 know self control on their normal days? IS that why I'm currently 13000 calories UNDER net this week alone? Yeah cause I must not be able to control myself right?
If you knew anything about it (and clearly you do not) then you would know that it not only makes you want to eat less on your normal TDEE days, but you learn to eat only when HUNGRY & not when you are told you should eat or when you think you are hungry. You learn what hunger feels like & then use that to sustain yourself.
Go back to your weights & 16:8....... oh wait.... that's the one where you pig out for 8 hours. Self control...hows that working for ya?
You obviously can't control yourself, no, otherwise you'd be eating the same 7 days a week and not being ridiculous.
16:8 removes all hunger pangs as it is, if you need anymore you have a mental issue with food.
Self control working out for me? Yep, I'm in fairly good shape, I was down to 4 days a week of 1350 calories a day whilst having raised calories 3x a week, and managed to get down to 10% bodyfat - when you can come even CLOSE to that, we can probably continue a conversation.
Whoa, wait a minute here.
Are you saying that you ate one calorie level for 4 days a week, (1350 for a body builder is crazy low), then increased your cals for the other 3 days a week, and you lost BODY FAT?
Wow, that kinda sounds like IF.
Why did you not simply eat the same amount every day. Don't you know that you would have lost the same amount doing that, and you wouldn't have had to cut your cals on those 4 days? That is just ridiculous and completely unnecessary.
Hypocrite much?
Yes I would have lost the same weight eating the same everyday, but as you stated, I'm a bodybuilder so I wanted three days a week where i trained so I could eat a much higher amount of carbohydrates because of energy levels and because I didn't have to re-feed weekly (I like how you pointed this out though, proves your little knowledge on the subject but you've chimed in anyway).
I said I do IF, you obviously chose to ignore it, or as usual didn't read properly.
So no, not being a hypocrite and don't tell me what is "low" for a bodybuilder, my weekly caloric intake was fine; also you have no idea what it takes to get to 10% or lower Bodyfat as a 5'6 male who is fairly sedentary..
but look, i succeeded. did you?
And you have no idea what it takes for a 50 yr old partially disabled female to lose weight. So we are even.
And I have lost 53 pounds so far, so yes, even with my limitations, I AM succeeding. And not pissing everyone off in the meantime.
And I thought your job here was done a few posts back?
You go ahead and continue your fun. I have to leave. But I'm sure this will still be going on when I get home this afternoon.
:flowerforyou:0 -
You really have no clue do you? Do you not think that people on 5:2 know self control on their normal days? IS that why I'm currently 13000 calories UNDER net this week alone? Yeah cause I must not be able to control myself right?
If you knew anything about it (and clearly you do not) then you would know that it not only makes you want to eat less on your normal TDEE days, but you learn to eat only when HUNGRY & not when you are told you should eat or when you think you are hungry. You learn what hunger feels like & then use that to sustain yourself.
Go back to your weights & 16:8....... oh wait.... that's the one where you pig out for 8 hours. Self control...hows that working for ya?
You obviously can't control yourself, no, otherwise you'd be eating the same 7 days a week and not being ridiculous.
16:8 removes all hunger pangs as it is, if you need anymore you have a mental issue with food.
Self control working out for me? Yep, I'm in fairly good shape, I was down to 4 days a week of 1350 calories a day whilst having raised calories 3x a week, and managed to get down to 10% bodyfat - when you can come even CLOSE to that, we can probably continue a conversation.
Whoa, wait a minute here.
Are you saying that you ate one calorie level for 4 days a week, (1350 for a body builder is crazy low), then increased your cals for the other 3 days a week, and you lost BODY FAT?
Wow, that kinda sounds like IF.
Why did you not simply eat the same amount every day. Don't you know that you would have lost the same amount doing that, and you wouldn't have had to cut your cals on those 4 days? That is just ridiculous and completely unnecessary.
Hypocrite much?
Yes I would have lost the same weight eating the same everyday, but as you stated, I'm a bodybuilder so I wanted three days a week where i trained so I could eat a much higher amount of carbohydrates because of energy levels and because I didn't have to re-feed weekly (I like how you pointed this out though, proves your little knowledge on the subject but you've chimed in anyway).
I said I do IF, you obviously chose to ignore it, or as usual didn't read properly.
So no, not being a hypocrite and don't tell me what is "low" for a bodybuilder, my weekly caloric intake was fine; also you have no idea what it takes to get to 10% or lower Bodyfat as a 5'6 male who is fairly sedentary..
but look, i succeeded. did you?
And you have no idea what it takes for a 50 yr old partially disabled female to lose weight. So we are even.
And I have lost 53 pounds so far, so yes, even with my limitations, I AM succeeding. And not pissing everyone off in the meantime.
And I thought your job here was done a few posts back?
You go ahead and continue your fun. I have to leave. But I'm sure this will still be going on when I get home this afternoon.
:flowerforyou:
It takes the same as everyone else who is not disabled.. to eat less. Good job on your success thus far.0 -
Wow indeed! So let me get this straight Ritchie comes along and states that a calorie deficit is the cause of weight loss, be it IF or not just as long as it IS a calorie deficit a loss will be had. Now everyone is entitled to their opinion but from what I have gathered the only benefit of IF is from a psychological standpoint nothing more. Nobody has seemed to present any actual scientific data to disprove Ritchie's argument besides well name calling and stating he is doing IF himself.
Does that sum it up?
Does IF argument have any real tangible evidence to prove that it is somehow superior to lets says just having a calorie deficit besides psychological or personal preference factors?0 -
ROFL at person who thinks zero calorie fasting for 16 hours a day is wonderful and restricting to 600 a day twice a week is pointless and ridiculous. :laugh:
I've nothing against Leangains, perfectly valid choice, but to champion one form of IF over another makes zero sense.
Both methods work just like both methods suit different people.0 -
ROFL at person who thinks zero calorie fasting for 16 hours a day is wonderful and restricting to 600 a day twice a week is pointless and ridiculous. :laugh:
I've nothing against Leangains, perfectly valid choice, but to champion one form of IF over another makes zero sense.
Both methods work just like both methods suit different people.
I said several times neither lead to any form of accelerated fat loss. That is what the topic is about. No human should be eating 1,200 calories over 48 hours.
Good day!0 -
16:8, has no effect on fat loss, though. Which is why I don't tell anyone,, or the OP to do it. So regardless of anything you say to me whether you or anyone else recommends 5:2 (fat loss is what the OP wanted) - it's pointless to mention it to her.
You'd lose weight on 16:8 if you were calorie deficient over the course of a week; just like you'd lose weight on 5:2, ADF, 18:6 or any other of the many, many IF variations. What you're doing isn't special and what 5:2 people are doing isn't special. It's simply which variation fits people's lifestyle the best and is therefore easiest to sustain. So you coming here to tell these people that them doing 5:2 is completely un-necessary and stupid whilst you are doing 16:8 fasting yourself has Olympus style amounts of irony.It's funny though, i like how you comment on my picture (which obviously is of me) and that you have a vendetta because you don't like the way I post (with common sense and useful information) so you get your panties in a bunch
I don't have a vendetta - a vendetta implies some long-running revenge whereas I'm simply messing with you here and now, but by tomorrow (more likely this evening) I'll have forgotten you even exist. Why am I doing it? Because you came on to a thread about a perfectly normal diet plan that you seem to have issues with and you ridiculed people. My 'panties' certainly aren't in a bunch though, I'm having fun.0 -
Oh dear! Richie, you are in a very dangerous place. Please do NOT train people without insurance and public liability - which you won't get easily without a certificate.
PLEASE do not dismiss the idea of this.
And Ophidion, there is lots of IF science. Richie has given none of it credence, as he states he prefers his own experience and considers it to be science!!!
There are many links to IF science on one of the 5:2 groups and a quick google for 'endocrinology and fasting' will get you thousands of hits on gold standard research, human and animal rather than magazine/blog style mash ups.
There do seem to be some additional health benefits to the intermittent fasting that a level/consistent calorie restriction do not confer. Only Richie has got hung up on fat loss.0 -
Well that's good as I don't only eat 1,200 over 48 hours. Your maths are off matey.ROFL at person who thinks zero calorie fasting for 16 hours a day is wonderful and restricting to 600 a day twice a week is pointless and ridiculous. :laugh:
I've nothing against Leangains, perfectly valid choice, but to champion one form of IF over another makes zero sense.
Both methods work just like both methods suit different people.
I said several times neither lead to any form of accelerated fat loss. That is what the topic is about. No human should be eating 1,200 calories over 48 hours.
Good day!
Over 48 hours I would be eating about 3,000 calories depending on exercise.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions