James ducal diet aka grapefruit

So why not just eat at a deficit?

saramartinez966 wrote: »

Jennifer why did u say noon is it a bad plan

It's a terrible plan.
1200 is probably under eating unless you're very petite and sedentary,
Chemicals you consume is such a non-thing, everything is chemicals, you are chemicals.

Just work out what you burn everyday (your TDEE) and eat less than that (weigh and measure your food to make sure, or do some exercise to create a deficit.

And don't expect to lose 12lbs in a week! That's crazy talk

saramartinez966 wrote: »

Has anyone ever tried the grapefruit diet my sister lost 12 lbs on it in 7 days and I've read lost of reviews with many people losing a stone in a week and keeping it off its totally healthy cuz you can still eat your 1200 calories a day so your no way undereatibg it's apartantly based on the chemicals you consume that make u lose the weight not the quantity so u get to eat lost of fruit veg salads and protein .....OK so I'm starting today lest see the results 7 days later whoever wants to follow support or join me on this pls add me as a friend I'm sticking to the diet word for word so who's in .....u don't have to join me u can just hang around and see the results well wish me luck

OK take a step back and think logically. The diet is based on the idea that grapefruit contains a fat burning enzyme which is just nonsense. Also why do you think basing a diet around one food would be a good idea? We all know the statistics it's publicised enough that short term fad diets fail. They work in the short term but statistically the majority of people regain the weight plus some more. There are no quick fixes

You're on MFP you have a great calorie counting tool why not use it. Why not do something that you can keep up for the rest of your life.

Maybe have a look at this thread. good luck

http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1080242/a-guide-to-get-you-started-on-your-path-to-sexypants/p1

I'm a believer that you can get all kinds of diets to work, short term. They are typically restrictive and not enjoyable. Some may even be harmful to your health.

If you want long term success, why not just use MFP the way it was intended? Eating healthful and moving more is really the only good weight loss solution.

I do wish you luck in whichever path you decide is right for you. I wouldn't recommend the grapefruit thing, but I've tried plenty of fad stuff in my life to know that sometimes, you gotta figure this stuff out on your own.

saramartinez966 wrote: »

Lol grapefruit dose not burn fat so what's the point and all the fuss about grapefruit. ....well anyway that's good cuz I hate grapefruit

It's just a fad diet. People started eating grapefruit, which put them in a calorie deficit, so they assumed that eating grapefruit must burn fat. In truth, it was the calorie deficit. Correlation =/= causation.

saramartinez966 wrote: »

Lol grapefruit dose not burn fat so what's the point and all the fuss about grapefruit. ....well anyway that's good cuz I hate grapefruit

You hate grapefruit but want to go on the grapefruit diet. Makes sense.

maidentl wrote: »

saramartinez966 wrote: »

Lol grapefruit dose not burn fat so what's the point and all the fuss about grapefruit. ....well anyway that's good cuz I hate grapefruit

You hate grapefruit but want to go on the grapefruit diet. Makes sense.

Quoting for truth. o_O

A LOT of diet books; too many frankly. Most follow a fairly standard organization, with very very few exceptions, most will tell you that ‘calorie restricted diets don’t work for weight loss’ and that whatever magic they are selling is the key to quick, easy (and of course permanent) weight loss.

Whether it’s insulin, dietary fat, the protein:carbohydrate or insulin:glucagon ratio, partitioning or whatever other BS, they will make it sound like caloric intake is not the key aspect in whether or not someone gains weight.

In almost all cases, the idea that food intake must be restricted in any fashion is dismissed; if it is mentioned it is generally as a short aside late in the book that nobody pays any attention to.

This is purely a psychological ploy; it sucks to have to consciously restrict food intake and this causes mental stress. Simply knowing that you can’t eat what you want when you want it blows; I hate it as much as the next person. Many people will feel hungrier simply because they know that they can’t eat what they want when they want it.

Yet the fundamental fact is that the body will NOT have any need to tap into stored body fat unless the individual is burning more calories than they are taking in(CICO) Of course this means that either energy expenditure has to go up, caloric intake has to go down, or both have to occur.

So how can these books make this claim? It’s simple: they all hide basic caloric restriction in whatever they happen to be proposing. Basically, this is Lyle’s Rule #1 of Diet books:

All diet books tell you that you won’t have to restrict calories, and then trick you into doing it anyway.

ETA: Same with diet fads such as shakeology, James ducal diet, Atkins, Rapid pulse etc

You will find the most successful members on this site follow a very simple method: CICO (calories in vs calories out). Of course they also pay attention to their macro and micro nutrient needs but nutrition is a whole other story. A calorie deficit is key for weight loss alone.

Source:http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/all-diets-work-the-importance-of-calories.html