The Alternate Day Diet.
Replies
-
No. With all due respect, you are making certain claims that IF has effects on lean muscle mass and prevents diabetes and other diseases, therefore the onus is on you to provide peer linked reviews showing same.WalkingAlong wrote: »
The books listed above cite the studies. Or do a google search on 'varady and modified fasting'. Mosley's or Johnson's web sites might have some info, Mosley's BBC special probably does, too. Or read up on CRON or longevity and fasting.
Citations for peer reviewed studies, please.WalkingAlong wrote: »LilyOfTheValley008 wrote: »Still don't understand why people would subject themselves to intermittent fasting instead of a consistent calorie deficit.
I don't have any experience with the IF method myself, but it definitely seems like a diet which could easily spiral someone out of control and lead to binges. But if you'd like to give it a go, it's your decision end of the day
There are also valid health reasons for choosing it over a stable daily deficit. Studies have found it preserves more lean mass than daily dieting and leads to improvements in overall health. There is evidence that it can help prevent diabetes, dementia, cardiovascular disease and cancer.
0 -
There's not much onus on me with several books by authorities written on it and the studies easily found.
I'm not suggesting any and all should do it, unlike the "just calorie restrict daily" crowd. I just answered the question, "Why would anyone try it?" Some do it for the evidence of other health benefits.
Reading books is valuable but if one prefers internet as their sole source of info, Eat Stop Eat or Leangains probably has good info on the LBM effects.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Mmmmmm......WalkingAlong wrote: »There's not much onus on me with several books by authorities written on it and the studies easily found.
I'm not suggesting any and all should do it, unlike the "just calorie restrict daily" crowd. I just answered the question, "Why would anyone try it?" Some do it for the evidence of other health benefits.
Reading books is valuable but if one prefers internet as their sole source of info, Eat Stop Eat or Leangains probably has good info on the LBM effects.
With all due respect, I'm not going to go searching for my own sources because I did not make certain claims. You, on the other hand, are saying that intermittent fasting prevents cancer and other diseases and preserves lean muscle mass, implying that IF is somehow superior to other dietary methods.
0 -
WalkingAlong wrote: »There's not much onus on me with several books by authorities written on it and the studies easily found.
I'm not suggesting any and all should do it, unlike the "just calorie restrict daily" crowd. I just answered the question, "Why would anyone try it?" Some do it for the evidence of other health benefits.
Reading books is valuable but if one prefers internet as their sole source of info, Eat Stop Eat or Leangains probably has good info on the LBM effects.
If they are easily found, why don't you just go easily find them and post the links? Clearly if you cannot do this then the references you are speaking of either a) don't exist or b) are not adequate (not peer-reviewed, biased research paid for by companies, really poor experimental measures used, etc)0 -
I wish one of these posts would be past tense, like "I wanted to lose 10 pounds in 30 days, did IF using method X and did it". Instead we get wishful thinking before the OP even starts.
On a side note, I'd say we all IF to a degree unless we eat in our sleep. Stretching the "fasting" part to 16 hours wouldn't take much if you slept in or didn't eat breakfast, then went to bed early. So stretching it a bit more might be doable too. IDK.
Also, if you just look at your calorie deficit on a weekly basis I suppose you could pretty much eat the total amount of calories whenever you want, *if* you could actually do it.
The hardest part of the OP's hope/desire is the amount though, isn't it, considering how little she has to lose? But those folks on the TV show Survivor often do it even if they are slim to begin with. Starve on an island by just eating a bit of rice for 30 days. Likely they gain it all back afterwards, or at least some, especially if they didn't want to lose. That first guy, Rich whats-his-name, kept it off for a while at least. Wonder he's doing now?
0 -
BTW, because WalkingAlong wasn't willing to post the specific references she is pulling her information from, I just searched "intermittent fasting cancer" in my university's library database. Here are some results from the first page only (some of the links on that page did not pertain to this topic at all so they are of course omitted)
"Effect of intermittent fasting on prostate cancer tumor growth in a mouse model."
Prostate Cancer And Prostatic Diseases [Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis] 2010 Dec; Vol. 13 (4), pp. 350-5. Date of Electronic Publication: 2010 Aug 24.
Part of abstract: Mice were randomized to either ad libitum Western Diet (44% carbohydrates, 40% fat and 16% protein) or ad libitum Western Diet with twice-weekly 24 h fasts (IF)...Overall, there was no difference in mouse survival (P=0.37) or tumor volumes (P ≥ 0.10) between groups. Mouse body weights were similar between arms (P=0.84). IF mice had significantly higher serum IGF-1 levels and IGF-1/IGFBP-3 ratios at killing (P<0.001). However, no difference was observed in serum insulin, IGFBP-3 or tumor phospho-Akt levels (P ≥ 0.39). IF did not improve mouse survival nor did it delay prostate tumor growth
So this was mice, they've yet to do this with humans because, you know, ethics and all with killing off the mice and injecting cancer cells. They also did not mention anything about eating at maintenance or below it, since I'm sure this was not a concern for this particular study.
"Annual Fasting; the Early Calories Restriction for Cancer Prevention."
BioImpacts. Dec2012, Vol. 2 Issue 4, p213-215. 3p.
this one did not provide a good abstract. no mention of methods, hypothesis, or results/conclusions. It is legitimately 2 pages long, but I don't have time to read that as I have other assignmnets to work on. And there was no study in this article actually, no experiment.
"Effect of Intermittent Fasting With or Without Caloric Restriction on Prostate Cancer Growth and Survival in SCID Mice"
PROSTATE; JUL 1, 2010, 70 10, p1037-p1043, 7p.
METHODS. We conducted a pilot study by injecting 105 male individually-housed SCID mice with LAPC-4 cells. When tumors reached 200 mm(3), 15 mice/group were randomized to one of seven diets and sacrificed when tumors reached 1,500 mm(3): Group 1: ad libitum 7 days/week; Group 2: fasted 1 day/week and ad libitum 6 days/week; Group 3: fasted 1 day/week and fed 6 days/week via paired feeding to maintain isocaloric conditions to Group 1; Group 4: 14% CR 7 days/week; Group 5: fasted 2 days/week and ad libitum 5 days/week; Group 6: fasted 2 day/week and fed 5 days/week via paired feeding to maintain isocaloric conditions to Group 1; Group 7: 28% CR 7 days/week. Sera from mice at sacrifice were analyzed for IGF-axis hormones.
RESULTS. There were no significant differences in survival among any groups. However, relative to Group 1, there were non-significant trends for improved survival for Groups 3 (HR 0.65, P = 0.26), 5 (0.60, P = 0.18), 6 (HR 0.59, P = 0.16), and 7 (P = 0.59, P = 0.17). Relative to Group 1, body weights and IGF-1 levels were significantly lower in Groups 6 and 7.
CONCLUSIONS. This exploratory study found non-significant trends toward improved survival with some intermittent fasting regimens, in the absence of weight loss. Larger appropriately powered studies to detect modest, but clinically important differences are necessary to confirm these findings.
0 -
Here is a link to the google scholar results for 'varady and modified fasting'.
Though now you will scan the abstracts only and say, "She didn't study lbm or dementia! She used poor methods because she studied SAMPLES!" Others have studied other aspects. No, I don't have their names memorized and don't need to for them to exist.
The books on it were written by two MDs and a PhD in nutrition who teaches at a major university. They're not just making stuff up but I'm not going to dig out the books and re-type their bibliographies to help you try to debunk an entire field of study because it's not the diet that appeals to you personally.0 -
And more
Weight Cycling and Cancer: Weighing the Evidence of Intermittent Caloric Restriction and Cancer Risk
CANCER PREVENTION RESEARCH; NOV, 2011, 4 11, p1736-p1742, 7p.
An effect of either intermittent caloric restriction or fasting in protecting against cancer is not supported by the majority of rodent carcinogenesis experiments. Collectively, the data argue against weight cycling and indicate that the objective of energy balance-based approaches to reduce cancer risk should be to strive to prevent adult weight gain and maintain body weight within the normal range defined by body mass index.
Intermittent Fasting in Diabetic Patients. (English)
Journal of Korean Diabetes; 2013, Vol. 14 Issue 4, p163-165, 3p
This one might not be in English for the article though
Preliminary findings indicate that intermittent fasting may be associated with increased lifespan, decreased mortality from cancers and cardiovascular diseases, improved insulin sensitivity, and reduced oxidative stress and inflammation. However, some of the data still remain controversial. No human studies have examined the effects of intermittent fasting in diabetics. Studies examining intermittent fasting in diabetic patients have encountered problems with compliance, malnutrition, and hypoglycemia rather than seeing benefits of weight loss. Regular meals (at least three meals each day) and a balanced diet are crucial in the management of blood sugar levels in diabetic patients.0 -
WalkingAlong wrote: »Here is a link to the google scholar results for 'varady and modified fasting'.
Though now you will scan the abstracts only and say, "She didn't study lbm or dementia! She used poor methods because she studied SAMPLES!" Others have studied other aspects. No, I don't have their names memorized and don't need to for them to exist.
The books on it were written by two MDs and a PhD in nutrition who teaches at a major university. They're not just making stuff up but I'm not going to dig out the books and re-type their bibliographies to help you try to debunk an entire field of study because it's not the diet that appeals to you personally.
anna already beat you to it and appears that the IF prevents cancer assertion is bunk...0 -
WalkingAlong wrote: »Here is a link to the google scholar results for 'varady and modified fasting'.
Though now you will scan the abstracts only and say, "She didn't study lbm or dementia! She used poor methods because she studied SAMPLES!" Others have studied other aspects. No, I don't have their names memorized and don't need to for them to exist.
The books on it were written by two MDs and a PhD in nutrition who teaches at a major university. They're not just making stuff up but I'm not going to dig out the books and re-type their bibliographies to help you try to debunk an entire field of study because it's not the diet that appeals to you personally.
Credentials of the authors doesn't really matter, because their studies can still be shotty. E.g. a renowned author could put out a study with some really major new findings, and then universities around the world will try replicating it to no avail but because it is a well respected author, they might assume "oh, we just conducted the study wrong" and no one publishes the null findings. OR if someone DOES publish the null findings, then no one actually reads it. Null findings are pretty rare for journals.
Also your link is a search engine results page. Link to the specific article(s) you are referring to. How are we supposed to know WHICH of these articles you are even referring to?0 -
Two of us in this thread reported info about our own results, though if you want to see details you might have to click on a profile or two.I wish one of these posts would be past tense, like "I wanted to lose 10 pounds in 30 days, did IF using method X and did it". Instead we get wishful thinking before the OP even starts.
There are plenty of threads where people discuss their successes with IF. Though there are far more threads that are people just asking about because they're considering it.
0 -
Nobody wants to debunk any studies, or to prove anyone wrong, but it is reasonable to ask for you to post peer reviewed studies to back up your claims.WalkingAlong wrote: »Here is a link to the google scholar results for 'varady and modified fasting'.
Though now you will scan the abstracts only and say, "She didn't study lbm or dementia! She used poor methods because she studied SAMPLES!" Others have studied other aspects. No, I don't have their names memorized and don't need to for them to exist.
The books on it were written by two MDs and a PhD in nutrition who teaches at a major university. They're not just making stuff up but I'm not going to dig out the books and re-type their bibliographies to help you try to debunk an entire field of study because it's not the diet that appeals to you personally.
As Kat said, we all do a form of IF every day, which is from our last meal at night to our next meal the next day. For most of us, this is about ten to fifteen hours.
Thank you, Ana, for taking the time from your busy schedule to post some studies.
I therefore conclude that while some people find great benefits in intermittent fasting, and it clearly works for some and not others, it is not superior as to health benefits.
0 -
WalkingAlong wrote: »Here is a link to the google scholar results for 'varady and modified fasting'.
Though now you will scan the abstracts only and say, "She didn't study lbm or dementia! She used poor methods because she studied SAMPLES!" Others have studied other aspects. No, I don't have their names memorized and don't need to for them to exist.
The books on it were written by two MDs and a PhD in nutrition who teaches at a major university. They're not just making stuff up but I'm not going to dig out the books and re-type their bibliographies to help you try to debunk an entire field of study because it's not the diet that appeals to you personally.
anna already beat you to it and appears that the IF prevents cancer assertion is bunk...
At least for rats lol. And if it wasn't found in rats, there's not a great likelihood that different results would be found in humans.
But even when something IS found in rats or other animals it doesn't mean it also translates to human physiology.
This is a video that spoke about longevity genes, and that calorie restriction can help with longevity. But it'd be a really big restriction for long-term (I think 40% is what they said?). However, near 11-min mark the research about some compound in wine was showing promise for prolonging life via this specific gene, but in class our prof turned off the video and then said that the studies did not pan out for humans (or possibly for the animals being studied, I can't quite remember).
So again, null findings.
Idk why the video won't show. Here's the link:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=ZZMsIao2Jlo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZMsIao2Jlo 0 -
It's clear nobody is challenging the validity of personal success with IF. It's your claims outside of your personal experience that are being challenged.WalkingAlong wrote: »
Two of us in this thread reported info about our own results, though if you want to see details you might have to click on a profile or two.I wish one of these posts would be past tense, like "I wanted to lose 10 pounds in 30 days, did IF using method X and did it". Instead we get wishful thinking before the OP even starts.
There are plenty of threads where people discuss their successes with IF. Though there are far more threads that are people just asking about because they're considering it.
0 -
I'm sure all readers are glad you settled that with your advanced analysis and credentials.I therefore conclude that while some people find great benefits in intermittent fasting, and it clearly works for some and not others, but it's probably not superior when it comes it providing health benefits.
With all due respect.
0 -
WalkingAlong wrote: »
I refuse to engage with you, I'm sorry. You don't understand the most fundamental basics of information literacy.WalkingAlong wrote: »Here is a link to the google scholar results for 'varady and modified fasting'.
Though now you will scan the abstracts only and say, "She didn't study lbm or dementia! She used poor methods because she studied SAMPLES!" Others have studied other aspects. No, I don't have their names memorized and don't need to for them to exist.
The books on it were written by two MDs and a PhD in nutrition who teaches at a major university. They're not just making stuff up but I'm not going to dig out the books and re-type their bibliographies to help you try to debunk an entire field of study because it's not the diet that appeals to you personally.
Credentials of the authors doesn't really matter, because their studies can still be shotty. E.g. a renowned author could put out a study with some really major new findings, and then universities around the world will try replicating it to no avail but because it is a well respected author, they might assume "oh, we just conducted the study wrong" and no one publishes the null findings. OR if someone DOES publish the null findings, then no one actually reads it. Null findings are pretty rare for journals.
Also your link is a search engine results page. Link to the specific article(s) you are referring to. How are we supposed to know WHICH of these articles you are even referring to?
LOL your argument got shredded and that is what you come back with…??? She actually posted the studies not just a "random google scholar search"…
wow….-2 -
Definitely, just like ANY method used to sustain one's caloric deficit is not any healthier than the other. It's all about what someone will stick to. I stick to IIFYM because I love eating junk. Someone else does IF because they really like eating in large quantities but obviously cannot do this for an entire day.
Nobody wants to debunk any studies, or to prove anyone wrong, but it is reasonable to ask for you to post peer reviewed studies to back up your claims.WalkingAlong wrote: »Here is a link to the google scholar results for 'varady and modified fasting'.
Though now you will scan the abstracts only and say, "She didn't study lbm or dementia! She used poor methods because she studied SAMPLES!" Others have studied other aspects. No, I don't have their names memorized and don't need to for them to exist.
The books on it were written by two MDs and a PhD in nutrition who teaches at a major university. They're not just making stuff up but I'm not going to dig out the books and re-type their bibliographies to help you try to debunk an entire field of study because it's not the diet that appeals to you personally.
As Kat said, we all do a form of IF every day, which is from our last meal at night to our next meal the next day. For most of us, this is about ten to fifteen hours.
Thank you, Ana, for taking the time from your busy schedule to post some studies.
I therefore conclude that while some people find great benefits in intermittent fasting, and it clearly works for some and not others, it is not superior as to health benefits.
0 -
WalkingAlong wrote: »
I'm sure all readers are glad you settled that with your advanced analysis and credentials.I therefore conclude that while some people find great benefits in intermittent fasting, and it clearly works for some and not others, but it's probably not superior when it comes it providing health benefits.
With all due respect.
Nope. Just common sense.
0 -
WalkingAlong wrote: »
I refuse to engage with you, I'm sorry. You don't understand the most fundamental basics of information literacy.WalkingAlong wrote: »Here is a link to the google scholar results for 'varady and modified fasting'.
Though now you will scan the abstracts only and say, "She didn't study lbm or dementia! She used poor methods because she studied SAMPLES!" Others have studied other aspects. No, I don't have their names memorized and don't need to for them to exist.
The books on it were written by two MDs and a PhD in nutrition who teaches at a major university. They're not just making stuff up but I'm not going to dig out the books and re-type their bibliographies to help you try to debunk an entire field of study because it's not the diet that appeals to you personally.
Credentials of the authors doesn't really matter, because their studies can still be shotty. E.g. a renowned author could put out a study with some really major new findings, and then universities around the world will try replicating it to no avail but because it is a well respected author, they might assume "oh, we just conducted the study wrong" and no one publishes the null findings. OR if someone DOES publish the null findings, then no one actually reads it. Null findings are pretty rare for journals.
Also your link is a search engine results page. Link to the specific article(s) you are referring to. How are we supposed to know WHICH of these articles you are even referring to?
Dude, you post a link with plenty of results that popped up, adn you refuse to specify WHICH ARTICLE you are pulling your information from. This leads me to believe that you are not pulling your information from ANY of these articles.
For those interested, the link that WA posted and looking at the abstracts of a handful (because again, no specific information for WHICH article specifically she is referring to), none of them refer to cancer or any other diseases other than obesity and they basically are all saying "hey if you IF then you will be able to change your body composition (although your likelihood of getting these results are greatly increased if you are a rat)"-1 -
I just don't think you'll drop 10 in less than a month. I'd suggest 5:2 over ADF, because I looked up reviews of both. People who did both 5:2 and ADF (tried ADF after doing 5:2) found that they didn't see significant improvement in weight loss by going to ADF and that they freaked out a bit because they stopped pooping. It seemed strange, but it was a consistent opinion on the various sites I checked.0
-
I did 4:3 fasting (so 4 days eating normal, 3 days 500 kcal) and it worked a treat for me, and weirdly I felt less hungry on my "normal" days. I advise you try it, but still track your "normal" days as it's easy to go off the rails thinking you've "earned" it!
It's not a quick fix, expect gentle weight loss, but I find it very manageable and it helped me build the RIGHT habits to east sensibly.
That said, I'm still fat
! -1 -
I just don't think you'll drop 10 in less than a month. I'd suggest 5:2 over ADF, because I looked up reviews of both. People who did both 5:2 and ADF (tried ADF after doing 5:2) found that they didn't see significant improvement in weight loss by going to ADF and that they freaked out a bit because they stopped pooping. It seemed strange, but it was a consistent opinion on the various sites I checked.
5:2 is 5 days at maintenance, 2 at 500, correct? And with this ADF I guess it's 6 days at maintenance and one day at 400 calories?
If my maintenance is 2500, then doing 5:2 I'd be eating around 1930 calories.
Doing ADF I'd be eating about 2200 calories. Considering many people don't weigh their food and may actually be eating above maintenance when "eating normally" I can see how ADF wouldn't provide weight loss results when 5:2 would. I would not do either though personally, I prefer eating a lot of calories every day. But I also don't have a ridiculously low calorie goal, so maybe if I had been eating 1200 calories for months now I'd consider something like this.0 -
I just don't think you'll drop 10 in less than a month. I'd suggest 5:2 over ADF, because I looked up reviews of both. People who did both 5:2 and ADF (tried ADF after doing 5:2) found that they didn't see significant improvement in weight loss by going to ADF and that they freaked out a bit because they stopped pooping. It seemed strange, but it was a consistent opinion on the various sites I checked.
5:2 is 5 days at maintenance, 2 at 500, correct? And with this ADF I guess it's 6 days at maintenance and one day at 400 calories?
If my maintenance is 2500, then doing 5:2 I'd be eating around 1930 calories.
Doing ADF I'd be eating about 2200 calories. Considering many people don't weigh their food and may actually be eating above maintenance when "eating normally" I can see how ADF wouldn't provide weight loss results when 5:2 would. I would not do either though personally, I prefer eating a lot of calories every day. But I also don't have a ridiculously low calorie goal, so maybe if I had been eating 1200 calories for months now I'd consider something like this.
I think ADF and 5:2 are the same thing…
I think 5;2 you eat like 200 calories on two days, and then maintenance on five days…*I think*0 -
I just don't think you'll drop 10 in less than a month. I'd suggest 5:2 over ADF, because I looked up reviews of both. People who did both 5:2 and ADF (tried ADF after doing 5:2) found that they didn't see significant improvement in weight loss by going to ADF and that they freaked out a bit because they stopped pooping. It seemed strange, but it was a consistent opinion on the various sites I checked.
5:2 is 5 days at maintenance, 2 at 500, correct? And with this ADF I guess it's 6 days at maintenance and one day at 400 calories?
If my maintenance is 2500, then doing 5:2 I'd be eating around 1930 calories.
Doing ADF I'd be eating about 2200 calories. Considering many people don't weigh their food and may actually be eating above maintenance when "eating normally" I can see how ADF wouldn't provide weight loss results when 5:2 would. I would not do either though personally, I prefer eating a lot of calories every day. But I also don't have a ridiculously low calorie goal, so maybe if I had been eating 1200 calories for months now I'd consider something like this.
I think ADF and 5:2 are the same thing…
I think 5;2 you eat like 200 calories on two days, and then maintenance on five days…*I think*
maybe the only difference is the number of calories on your fast days or the number of fast days?0 -
obscuremusicreference wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »obscuremusicreference wrote: »If you think that works for you and you won't binge, try it. That said, I don't know how someone that small can lose 10 pounds in that time unless you drink a lot of soda/sodium and are going cold turkey in addition to this diet.
Good luck!
wait, what???
I agree that losing 10LBS in a SHORT amount of time is absurdly hard, but... what about soda/sodium? what?
*if she consumes a lot now and goes cold turkey so she loses that water weight
that is not really weight loss….water weight loss does not equal fat loss …just stop, seriously.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I just don't think you'll drop 10 in less than a month. I'd suggest 5:2 over ADF, because I looked up reviews of both. People who did both 5:2 and ADF (tried ADF after doing 5:2) found that they didn't see significant improvement in weight loss by going to ADF and that they freaked out a bit because they stopped pooping. It seemed strange, but it was a consistent opinion on the various sites I checked.
5:2 is 5 days at maintenance, 2 at 500, correct? And with this ADF I guess it's 6 days at maintenance and one day at 400 calories?
If my maintenance is 2500, then doing 5:2 I'd be eating around 1930 calories.
Doing ADF I'd be eating about 2200 calories. Considering many people don't weigh their food and may actually be eating above maintenance when "eating normally" I can see how ADF wouldn't provide weight loss results when 5:2 would. I would not do either though personally, I prefer eating a lot of calories every day. But I also don't have a ridiculously low calorie goal, so maybe if I had been eating 1200 calories for months now I'd consider something like this.
I think ADF and 5:2 are the same thing…
I think 5;2 you eat like 200 calories on two days, and then maintenance on five days…*I think*
Google is your friend.
Varady's diet is 4:3. 4 days at TDEE and 3 days on 500-600 kcal
http://www.eoddiet.com/
5:2 is 500-600 kcal 2 days and 5 days at TDEE.
http://thefastdiet.co.uk/
0 -
VerySpecialSnowflake wrote: »I just don't think you'll drop 10 in less than a month. I'd suggest 5:2 over ADF, because I looked up reviews of both. People who did both 5:2 and ADF (tried ADF after doing 5:2) found that they didn't see significant improvement in weight loss by going to ADF and that they freaked out a bit because they stopped pooping. It seemed strange, but it was a consistent opinion on the various sites I checked.
5:2 is 5 days at maintenance, 2 at 500, correct? And with this ADF I guess it's 6 days at maintenance and one day at 400 calories?
If my maintenance is 2500, then doing 5:2 I'd be eating around 1930 calories.
Doing ADF I'd be eating about 2200 calories. Considering many people don't weigh their food and may actually be eating above maintenance when "eating normally" I can see how ADF wouldn't provide weight loss results when 5:2 would. I would not do either though personally, I prefer eating a lot of calories every day. But I also don't have a ridiculously low calorie goal, so maybe if I had been eating 1200 calories for months now I'd consider something like this.
I think ADF and 5:2 are the same thing…
I think 5;2 you eat like 200 calories on two days, and then maintenance on five days…*I think*
Google is your friend.
Varady's diet is 4:3. 4 days at TDEE and 3 days on 500-600 kcal
http://www.eoddiet.com/
5:2 is 500-600 kcal 2 days and 5 days at TDEE.
http://thefastdiet.co.uk/
Assuming my TDEE is 2500.
Varady: 1640 or 1685 calories/day on average (way too low, and way too large of a deficit unless I were obese)
5:2 : 1930 or 1960, which would be doable for me. But not great when I am within 10-15lbs from my goal.
Of the two I would recommend 5:2 over Varady simply based on caloric intake.0 -
I have good experience with IF. I'm loosing weight and it's helped versus binge problems. I don't feel deprived, I can eat what I want within TDEE the next day. It's not one size fits all, for me it works well.0
This discussion has been closed.
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