Pahla B - 5-0 Method

susiemcmac

I just stumbled across Pahla B and her 5-0 Method - has anyone used her method? It really just talks about eating as close to the exact amount of calories calculated to lose weight every day (more than MFP says for me), working out moderately every day, drinking enough water, getting enough sleep and working on mindset. Sounds pretty good to me as a woman in her 50s with belly fat to lose - anyone have success?

musicfan68

I looked at her site - it isn't any harder to lose weight at 50 or older than it is any other time. It comes down to the fact that as we age, we become way more sedentary. Eating the correct calories and getting exercise is free. MFP can do the same thing for you for nothing.

AnnPT77

I remember her being discussed here before, but I've never done her program. It didn't sound unreasonable as a program, based only on how it was described, but I agree with the person above that much of the rhetoric around age or menopause being special problems is more marketing than science. (Lots of trainers/companies are marketing around that concept lately, it seems like.)

If her programs give a person a flat number of calories to eat every day (day with or without exercise), then I'd expect it to be a higher number than MFP would give the same person for the same weight loss rate. That's because MFP expects you to log exercise when you do it, eat the calories then, so calories aren't the same every day, and the final number MFP gives a person who exercises is more calories than their base goal.

Both methods account for exercise, one just averages it it (TDEE method certainly, and possibly Pahla B's method, too?), and the other adds it when it's done (MFP's method). Either one can work, in the right conditions.

Appropriate calories for sensibly moderate weight loss, sound nutrition, and exercise that starts with a small but manageable challenge and progresses from there: Those are the basics, for anyone. The exercise and nutrition are technically not directly required for weight loss (that's calories, directly), but nutrition and activity are essential for well-rounded health, so worth including, and of course can matter for appearance if there are goals beyond simply being thinner.

ETA P.S. If it matters, I'm typing the above as a 66 y/o woman, reasonably active, who became much fitter (starting from near zero) in my 40s (already menopausal from chemotherapy), lost from obese to healthy weight at 59-60, so "weight loss and fitness for older menopausal women" is kind of the territory where I live myself. 😉

debrag12

and this is different to MFP or any other weight loss idea why?

JBanx256

Apparently this Pahla chick isn't familiar with, or totally disregards actual science:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34385400/

Or, another perfectly logical explanation is that she is aware of the science and is perfectly happy to lie to you to get your money.

Hmmm.

Not really seeing the appeal, regardless of which way you slice it...

susiemcmac

Thanks everyone. Her stuff is free (although there is a paid option). I think I'm more curious about the "moderate" exercise. I feel like I work out hard - 4-5 times a week for about an hour - and notice it's harder for me to recover or I'm much more "sore" than I was in my 30s and 40s. Wondering if "moderate" is enough.

AnnPT77

susiemcmac wrote: »

Thanks everyone. Her stuff is free (although there is a paid option). I think I'm more curious about the "moderate" exercise. I feel like I work out hard - 4-5 times a week for about an hour - and notice it's harder for me to recover or I'm much more "sore" than I was in my 30s and 40s. Wondering if "moderate" is enough.

I do agree, from the completely subjective "how I feel" standpoint, that I'm less resilient in my 60s than I was in my 20s.

That means I need to be more conscious of:
* avoiding injuring (because I de-train faster during breaks),
* including adequate body-system-specific recovery in my plans (not doing the exact same workout day after day, oversimplifying),
* keeping up my routine of being active (avoiding long breaks/interruptions), and
* watching out for the effects of other sources of stress (poor sleep, high psychological stress, under-nutrition, stupid-fast weight loss goals, and many other such things).
* Etc.

In some sense, even in someone very fit, some level of physical decline is likely to come eventually, with aging. What isn't a good idea, at least for me, is to let that turn into low expectations. The longtime fit people I know who are 10+ years older than me - so in their 70s/80s - are healthier and more energetic than 40- and 50-somethings I know who have bought into "age = decline" to the point where they have low expectations of themselves, essentially give up. (The fit older folks often are able to have higher quality of life than the overweight/inactive younger ones, too, but that's a whole different rant.)

I think it's increasingly important to exercise in a smart way, as we age. It always would've been an important thing to do - would lead to better results at any age - but the price paid for poorly-managed workouts is lower when young, I think: When young, the price looks more like slower progress than if training had been smarter, while at some point in aging the price may look more like faster decline.

In general, exercising very hard most every day is not the best plan for increasing fitness. As an oversimplified generality, training at a mix of intensities, with adequate recovery in the mix, is a better plan. (By "adequate recovery" I don't mean necessarily full rest days from any/all activity).

In that context, yes, absolutely, moderate exercise is beneficial, even essential as part of a multi-intensity mix. Even at elite athletic levels, athletes in many sports are spending a large fraction of workout time at moderate intensity . . . moderate for them, as people of crazy-high, true outlier fitness level. It's easy to be deceived, as a Joe or Jane Average, looking at an elite workout routine, to think those folks are working all the time at high intensity . . . because that intensity (cycling speed, or volume of training, or lifts, or whatever) that's their moderate level is our unimaginably intense level.

Moderate exercise is good, but not necessarily "enough", depending on one's goals. Some relatively small amount of pretty-intense exercise in the mix is also useful, for someone who has the base fitness to support that intensity. (High intensity exercise is not a great idea for true beginners.)

I'm kind of a slacker on that high-intensity front, I admit, but I know the theoretical background that says to include some. I do, but probably not enough for best results.

The above is pretty oversimplified, but I think reasonably valid at that super-generalized level. I'm not in any position to suggest a program for you ( . . . unless maybe you're a rower, and even then there are better sources). But if you're doing the same workout 4-5 times a week, I'd suggest mixing activities more, considering which body systems are stressed, and alternating with activities that stress different systems. If you're working at peak intensity 4-5 days a week, I'd suggest including more moderate activity in the mix, taking highly intense exercise down to 1-2 days at most.

Just my ignorant opinions as an active li'l ol' lady, though. 😉

JaneGSN2

I hate to jump into another groups chatting...

But @debrag12 you have signed up for BLC48 and are on the Resolute Renegades team and I have been trying to reach you (we start the challenge Wed Jan 5th, but don't worry you can jump in a little late).

Please friend me (there seems to be a problem with MFP messages going to people who are not friends already), send me an MFP message, and come join our chat thread at: BLC48 Renegades chat thread

Sorry everyone else for the interruption.

claireychn074

susiemcmac wrote: »

Thanks everyone. Her stuff is free (although there is a paid option). I think I'm more curious about the "moderate" exercise. I feel like I work out hard - 4-5 times a week for about an hour - and notice it's harder for me to recover or I'm much more "sore" than I was in my 30s and 40s. Wondering if "moderate" is enough.

It depends on what you mean by “enough” and “moderate”. Without being pedantic, your moderate may well be someone else’s hard! There are a few things to unpack here: if you’re concerned mostly with recovery but want to keep the volume then you could consider fewer but longer sessions (no idea what you do so that might not be feasible). Or you could change things up to do some harder sessions 2-3 times a week and gentle sessions 1-2 times. You may also need to look at your diet - personally I find my recovery is slower if I don’t get enough protein. So on heavy lifting days I will max out my protein but not be as obsessive on rest days (probably not scientific but works for me!).

So ultimately you need to decide what you want to achieve, how many sessions you would like to do and how much being sore affects you. I’m 47 so I totally understand the longer recovery time - I’ve definitely had to do fewer sessions each week to recover, but they are usually longer so that I can still hit my personal aims.

paperpudding

JBanx256 wrote: »

Apparently this Pahla chick isn't familiar with, or totally disregards actual science:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34385400/

Or, another perfectly logical explanation is that she is aware of the science and is perfectly happy to lie to you to get your money.

Hmmm.

Not really seeing the appeal, regardless of which way you slice it...

How so?

from what is described in OP, her program sounds based on reasonable premises and not really that different from MFP or other sensible weight loss systems.

Sure ,there is probably a bit of fancying up to appeal to a target demographic (in this case women over 50) as there is with all programs wanting you to buy something you could access otherwise for free (no different to MFP wanting me to upgrade to premium, for example) - but not seeing where the unawareness of science or lying comes in.

Kupla71

I did lose about 15 lbs following Pahla B’s 5-0 method. I focused on calorie counting as I do in mfp and almost daily moderate exercise. I just stuck with it and had good results. Then I stopped for some reason and have been struggling to lose much. I think it just gave me structure and I knew if I followed it I would lose weight. I have just started up with it again since my gym closed. Covid! Hoping to continue with my weight loss. I think if you’re looking to make big gains in fitness it’s not going to help that much but if your goal is to lose weight it’s worth a try.

makattack220

Hi @susiemcmac - wanted to weigh in as someone who actually is familiar with Pahla's method like @Kupla71. (Not that there aren't some good contributions from others above...) I'd echo what @Kupla71 said. I found Pahla in March 2021 and did her program for 3 months and lost 15lbs. I'm not over 50 and not menopausal. I was exercising and logging before I started with her method. Pahla says openly this works for anyone and yes, all her resources are free (excepting her paid personal coaching group - but what certified coach isn't charging for personal coaching...?). No, this is nothing new but she simplifies it. The reason I liked Pahla was because it was different than the "move more, eat less" that I kept taking to extremes and that wasn't working. Pahla just sticks to the basics: stick to your calorie budget, drink enough water, get enough sleep, move your body daily, and do the mindset work. A lot of people on here clearly know "the basics" but some of us need reminders or to see it simply laid out together in a way that makes sense. As soon as I started eating enough calories, doing a daily moderate workout and sleeping/drinking water, weight started immediately coming off. It plateaued out a bit but then once I started actually doing the mindset work, my weight started moving again. Her podcasts really helped me with the unhealthy mindset I had towards my body. Her workouts are good, stackable if needed, free and she encourages modifying to make sure you're doing "moderate for you." (As someone with knee and hip issues I appreciate that you don't have to do lots of lunges or roll around on the floor...) She also talks about mindset work during the workouts. I'm not into frou-frou stuff but I seriously didn't realize I was trying to shame myself into losing weight and I needed help to see that. Now I know that I needed to work on my mindset just as much as my eating/workout habits. I lost a loved one in June and stopped logging in MFP and following the basics for a few months as I struggled with the loss. Once I got myself together, I started back to Pahla's basics and I also tried Noom thinking I really needed a coach (it didn't work for me, I can share more with you on that if you want). I had gained a lot of the weight back but now I'm losing weight again. Is her method different/new/innovative? No, but isn't that why it works? It's just putting the basics together and focusing on mindset work. I think using MFP to log and using the basics and free resources Pahla offers is a great combo. Wish you the best with your fitness journey! Feel free to message/friend me if you'd like.

AnnPT77

paperpudding wrote: »

JBanx256 wrote: »

Apparently this Pahla chick isn't familiar with, or totally disregards actual science:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34385400/

Or, another perfectly logical explanation is that she is aware of the science and is perfectly happy to lie to you to get your money.

Hmmm.

Not really seeing the appeal, regardless of which way you slice it...

How so?

from what is described in OP, her program sounds based on reasonable premises and not really that different from MFP or other sensible weight loss systems.

Sure ,there is probably a bit of fancying up to appeal to a target demographic (in this case women over 50) as there is with all programs wanting you to buy something you could access otherwise for free (no different to MFP wanting me to upgrade to premium, for example) - but not seeing where the unawareness of science or lying comes in.

I get where Banx is coming from: The marketing is pretty eye-roll-y. Quote from Pahla B's main web page:

Weight loss is different for women of a “certain age” and the ways we used to eat and exercise don’t work anymore!

My friend, I’ve got the knowledge you need.

From: https://pahlabfitness.com/

If one cuts her a little slack for needing some kind of "I've got the magic" marketing hook, it's not 100% grievous IMO.

Reading between the lines even on that main page, there's a flavor of "most of us have long done kind of dumb stuff to lose weight, and we got away with it when we were higher-resilience young'uns, but these days we can't afford that punitive nonsense, plus it's more likely to be counterproductive".

From what little I can tell without doing the program (not my jam), the program itself looks reasonable, and is free.

Also, read that study Banx linked. It's encouraging, a good counter to the "age is doom" nonsense in the diet/fitness blogosphere.

paperpudding

oh I dont think age is doom and I dont have any intention of doing Pahla's program myself

Ann you are basically saying same as me - apart from the magic hook or what I called the fancying up to appeal to your target demographic - the program itself seems quite reasonable.

Even more so since reading makattack's well presented experience of doing it.

so, in short, it is just basic stuff but presented in a way that resonates with some people

Sounds reasonable.

amwiggler

Hi, I found out about Pahla through a MyFitnessPal group. Very much at appropriate weight and an athletic person until menopause, then gained 30 pounds in 5 years despite best efforts and have been fighting to lose (with various techniques) for the past 3 years - max loss 12 pounds which I always gained back (about 3 times). Pahla is not my style, but I started her at the beginning of December and am steadily losing a pound a week. Per Happy Scale, I have not been better than @ .7 a week for the past year or two. Here’s what I think works for me - she is clear that it is about calories in period. Period. No eating back exercise, no carrying calories over days, no special food, macros, anything. Strip it down and focus on weight loss if that’s what you want. Eat the same thing every day (whatever you like on target for calories). I basically copy each day into the next and adjust here and there for different meals (when I do mix it up, like dinner), but I am within 25 calories of the 5-0 calculated goal every day. So far, every single day. It’s about 500 calories more than I ever set in my earlier efforts, and about 500 more than mfp recommends but I do not subtract exercise either - I just eat to that goal. For me, keeping it to just that - hit the calorie goal and don’t worry about anything else - seems to be making it more manageable. Agree with all of the perspectives posted, but I think all the “do this AND do that” of the other programs got me off balance. Getting down to the core - calories in - has helped me a lot.

78dvtmpg7m

I just started a couple of days ago and feel like her method is what I need to stay on track. For someone who was always a steady weight for most of my life, then hit menopause, I just keep gaining weight even with using mfp. With hormone/estrogen imbalance she gives you the science also behind what is happening at this life stage. Her motivation, low intensity and thoughtful and so many free workouts are very helpful.