TheFast Diet
Options
Replies
-
There are so many benefits but the best is that I haven't had a single panic attack is 7 weeks since I started.
The joys of being in control
Congratulations. Long may all of that continue.0 -
Hmmm.0
-
Hmmmm????0
-
Gosh what a to & fro thread! I wouldn't dream to criticise any healthy eating pattern, as far as I'm aware we still have freedom of choice? When someone asks for advice it can be given in bucket loads & they can then make a choice, do their own research & follow what they feel is achievable, sustainable & acceptable to them. We all share the same goal to find a plan that helps achieve a healthy weight & healthy lifestyle whatever that maybe :-)0
-
Huh. Yeah, I s'pose. I was using it in a general sort of age/height/caloric intake sense. But I'm a prescriptivist at heart, so shame on me.May I just quibble with that bit (and the next bit too, plus the IF is ED, but that would be opinion).
Homeostasis can occur at any weight, any bodyfat% etc. It does not mean being at ideal weight etc. it just means at equilibrium. And a person who has weighed 20 stones for 10 years has achieved it!
Also, I don't personally think IF is an ED, but it's a not-uncommon belief.0 -
16:8 and the warrior diet are calorie restricted ways of eating, as should all diets because its a lifestyle thing, so you have a pointless.... point here.
No, not all diets are calorie restricted nor should they be. Go and look up the definition of 'diet' .I don't work because I don't want to. I don't need to. I don't claim benefits, I never have, never will. (even if I did, it wouldn't be any of your business).
Ahhhh still living off Mum & Dad then. I get ya. So then, instead of sitting here arguing all day, why not toddle off and do something constructive with your life? You're certainly not helping anyone here and frankly you appear to be about as welcome in this thread as a dose of the clap.
For a start, everyone here is for weight loss, complains they dont lose weight, an efficient diet you will count calories. simple.
Secondly, keep assuming how i live, its funny, but i saved up money from a job i had a few years ago, so lucky me huh? 0 -
Hmmmm????
Not so surprising turn of events in this thread. 0 -
:happy:0
-
Id say not to fast.when i started my journey 117 lbs ago i chose to fast. I didnt plan a start or end date i just wanted to lose weight.i lasted 21 days and losr 30 lbs and then i had felt faint and gave up with the fast.i was going to gradually being calories in but then couldnt stop eating.i gained 10 lbs back within 3 days and then it took awhile for my body to lose weight with food.so for 5-10 lbs id say no bc it will come back fast and probably add 50
-
How did you fast?0
-
Id say not to fast.when i started my journey 117 lbs ago i chose to fast. I didnt plan a start or end date i just wanted to lose weight.i lasted 21 days and losr 30 lbs and then i had felt faint and gave up with the fast.i was going to gradually being calories in but then couldnt stop eating.i gained 10 lbs back within 3 days and then it took awhile for my body to lose weight with food.so for 5-10 lbs id say no bc it will come back fast and probably add 5
Hi, no offense, but I don't think you understand how the word 'fast' is used in the IF sense. On the 5:2 plan, you choose 2 NONCONSECUTIVE days (did you read that, Ritchie?) to create your calorie deficit for the week. For women, that is generally 500 cals, and for men- 600. The other 5 days you eat at maintenance.
So you are not going without ANY food for days at a time. You don't even eat at zero cals for one day, or even 16 hours. You can spread your 500/600 cals over the day or eat them all at once- your choice.0 -
Doesn't work for me. When a plan tells me I can eat as much as I feel like without gaining weight if I only eat between such and so hours or on such and so days I seem to take it as a challenge. :sad:
That is not how it works. You don't get to eat as much as you like on the non fast days. You still eat at maintenance or less on those days. There are many myths and misconceptions floating around.0 -
I'd rather do a strict fast than eat 600 cal in a day.
5:2 falls in this weird valley between LeanGains and not even bothering to diet, which I could see leading to eating disorders right-quick (that's if you don't consider any form of IF to be an ED, which some do.)
Just as there are newbie muscle gains, IMO there are also newbie fat losses. When someone is so far from homeostasis, any form of dieting will work. IF was originally implemented by folks flirting with single-digit bodyfat. It's since ballooned (herp) in both adoption and implementation. Just as the latter is often poorly justified (i.e. that uber-coffee nonsense), so is the former.
As to the OP, 200 cal isn't much of a distinction to forestall metabolic stagnation. Maybe up the calories on one of your workout days.
I'm glad you picked up on the fact that the OP has hit a plateau, and cycling calories can often help forestall metabolic stagnation.
Hence the 500 days vs maintenance days. And if she simply ups her calories on some days, without lowering on the other days, then she will decrease her calorie deficit for the week. And as Ritchie has stated so many times, calorie deficit is what causes weight loss.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!
Wait who is eating 1200 over 48 hours? IS that what you think 5:2 is? Um no.
Monday fast day.... Tuesday AND Wednesday normal TDEE....Thursday fast day....... Friday, Saturday AND Sunday normal TDEE days. Where is someone fasting for 48 hours? Do you have a new timezone I don't know about?
4:3...... Every 3rd day is a fast day..... no 2 days in a row. Once again.... I have no idea how you came up with it.
600 for MEN..... 500 for WOMEN. I go less.... I go for 0 on my 3 fast days each 7 days..... cause that is self control right there. Good right? I broke my almost 1yr plateau.... I lost fat.... gained a whole crapload of energy and I still don't manage to over eat on normal days.... I physically cant. I have a great relationship with food, always have.
You are stuck on one MENtality...... that would be the testosterone in you making it hard to think.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!
Wait who is eating 1200 over 48 hours? IS that what you think 5:2 is? Um no.
Monday fast day.... Tuesday AND Wednesday normal TDEE....Thursday fast day....... Friday, Saturday AND Sunday normal TDEE days. Where is someone fasting for 48 hours? Do you have a new timezone I don't know about?
4:3...... Every 3rd day is a fast day..... no 2 days in a row. Once again.... I have no idea how you came up with it.
600 for MEN..... 500 for WOMEN. You are stuck on one MENtality...... that would be the testosterone in you making it hard to think.
Ok, same thing applies, no human needs to eat 500 calories in one day, what is your point? It's a pointless strategy.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!
Wait who is eating 1200 over 48 hours? IS that what you think 5:2 is? Um no.
Monday fast day.... Tuesday AND Wednesday normal TDEE....Thursday fast day....... Friday, Saturday AND Sunday normal TDEE days. Where is someone fasting for 48 hours? Do you have a new timezone I don't know about?
4:3...... Every 3rd day is a fast day..... no 2 days in a row. Once again.... I have no idea how you came up with it.
600 for MEN..... 500 for WOMEN. You are stuck on one MENtality...... that would be the testosterone in you making it hard to think.
Ok, same thing applies, no human needs to eat 500 calories in one day, what is your point? It's a pointless strategy.
Point is where did you get 48 hours from? Who is eating 1200 in 48 hours? If you cant even get that right then you really do need to go learn more.0 -
jeesh 5 pages ...of back and forth banter ...you kinda forget about the OP in all this mess you guys need a talkshow...5:2 ...4:3 Tdee IF over and out!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!
Wait who is eating 1200 over 48 hours? IS that what you think 5:2 is? Um no.
Monday fast day.... Tuesday AND Wednesday normal TDEE....Thursday fast day....... Friday, Saturday AND Sunday normal TDEE days. Where is someone fasting for 48 hours? Do you have a new timezone I don't know about?
4:3...... Every 3rd day is a fast day..... no 2 days in a row. Once again.... I have no idea how you came up with it.
600 for MEN..... 500 for WOMEN. You are stuck on one MENtality...... that would be the testosterone in you making it hard to think.
Ok, same thing applies, no human needs to eat 500 calories in one day, what is your point? It's a pointless strategy.
Point is where did you get 48 hours from? Who is eating 1200 in 48 hours? If you cant even get that right then you really do need to go learn more.
Just because it doesn't really matter whether its over 48 hours or 24 hours - it doesn't need to happen. It doesn't hold any relevance to the situation, a human shouldn't be eating 500 calories in 24 hours either.0 -
Bump to follow punch up tomorrow ROFL0
-
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!
Wait who is eating 1200 over 48 hours? IS that what you think 5:2 is? Um no.
Monday fast day.... Tuesday AND Wednesday normal TDEE....Thursday fast day....... Friday, Saturday AND Sunday normal TDEE days. Where is someone fasting for 48 hours? Do you have a new timezone I don't know about?
4:3...... Every 3rd day is a fast day..... no 2 days in a row. Once again.... I have no idea how you came up with it.
600 for MEN..... 500 for WOMEN. You are stuck on one MENtality...... that would be the testosterone in you making it hard to think.
Ok, same thing applies, no human needs to eat 500 calories in one day, what is your point? It's a pointless strategy.
Point is where did you get 48 hours from? Who is eating 1200 in 48 hours? If you cant even get that right then you really do need to go learn more.
Just because it doesn't really matter whether its over 48 hours or 24 hours - it doesn't need to happen. It doesn't hold any relevance to the situation, a human shouldn't be eating 500 calories in 24 hours either.
Says who?
You?
Is this all because YOU would not be able to do it?
Give me PROOF that nobody should be able to do it. I know when people have surgery they dont eat.... you saying they should?0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions