Is a fast diet unhealthy? 500 cals a day?
Options
Replies
-
NicoleS107 wrote: »Blondie, I don't think it's unhealthy. I am currently doing the same thing. I can burn a few pounds and then maintain.
you don't think it's unhealthy to consume only 500 calories for 10 days?
really?
wow
0 -
"I want it now" is why you still haven't made any progress.0
-
-
NicoleS107 wrote: »Blondie, I don't think it's unhealthy. I am currently doing the same thing. I can burn a few pounds and then maintain.
Maybe few pounds of water (which will return) and some lean mass (which is likely gone forever ... a bad thing).
0 -
screw benadryl cabbagepatch, don't starve yourself.0
-
-
0
-
It used to be called "crash dieting," drastically dropping calorie intake for a short period to lose a few pounds fast. Is it sensible? No, because it's not eating realistically. Will it help you look good for a reunion or wedding? Yes, but you'll probably destroy your efforts the same night by eating and drinking all the calories back in a single day. So you have to ask yourself, what's the ultimate goal to justify short-term starvation?
Crash dieting has been around forever (probably since the first cave woman asked her cave husband, 'Does this pelt make me look fat?' and got an answer she wasn't expecting.). There is nothing new under the sun.0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »Given your weight, I would guess that you would lose somewhere between 1 and 2 lbs of fat over the 10 days, and possibly some muscle to go with it. A bad diet for ten days probably won't kill you. If it would, more people would die while on vacation. But why mess with it? Just eat at 1200 for ten weeks and you're done.
who are these people that go on vacation and eat 500 calories a day?????????????0 -
asflatasapancake wrote: »I've heard of the 5:2 split. Eat light for 2 days, then the next 5 days make up the calories that were missed. I'm not an expert, but this seems a bit unhealthy to me. Why not eat at a slight to moderate calorie deficit every day? Technically, it shouldn't matter when you eat at a deficit during the week. Just as long as you are eating at a deficit. My guess is you will be miserable. Prepare for being dizzy and nauseous at the very least. What are the supposed benefits of doing this? Answer: there are none. Just my two cents. Take it or leave it.
The 5:2 diet is not unhealthy if done correctly. What the OP is talking about is a crash diet that has nothing to do with 5:2.
to the bolded part, because that would be too easy and is not "fast" enough ...0 -
When I was way younger, I tried alot of those kind of diets. Cabbage soup diet, 3 day diet, blah blah blah. And like others said, I lost a few pounds but it all came back. I personally wouldn't make myself miserable to lose a few pounds to be gained back within the next day or so after stopping it.0
-
NicoleS107 wrote: »Blondie, I don't think it's unhealthy. I am currently doing the same thing. I can burn a few pounds and then maintain.
you don't think it's unhealthy to consume only 500 calories for 10 days?
really?
wow
People do water fasts for as long or longer sometimes for spiritual reasons, and many people say, "oh, well that's okay if it's for spiritual growth." I doubt there will be any real physical damage doing 500 calories for 10 days if the person is medically healthy. However, I would have to question if there are psychological issues that are causing a look for a quick fix like that, when a healthier deficit could accomplish the goal in 2 months. This type of thinking could lead to larger issues down the road. I personally considered fasting as a quick solution years back when I started getting desperate to lose weight, but I realized it came from a negative emotional state and trying to find an easy solution. I'd also wager that any loss, not counting the obvious water weight, would probably be put right back on in a couple of weeks once eating returned to pre-fast levels.
Anyways, as others have said, OP is probably thinking of the 5:2 plan, which is a managed way of eating, not a crash diet. Search for the 5:2 groups here and do some actual digging so you understand what it really means to eat that lifestyle. I followed it last year and sometimes use it when I go over my calorie goal for the day so I can aim for a weekly go instead.0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »Given your weight, I would guess that you would lose somewhere between 1 and 2 lbs of fat over the 10 days, and possibly some muscle to go with it. A bad diet for ten days probably won't kill you. If it would, more people would die while on vacation. But why mess with it? Just eat at 1200 for ten weeks and you're done.
who are these people that go on vacation and eat 500 calories a day?????????????
If anything I eat MORE on vacation, not less-and so do most people from what I can gather having actually talked to people who go on holiday and the threads that are started here about people gaining whilst on holiday.
Seriously Mr Fish, where the hell do you get some of the 'information' you come out with most of the time?! I see nothing to back up the vague claims!0 -
asflatasapancake wrote: »I've heard of the 5:2 split. Eat light for 2 days, then the next 5 days make up the calories that were missed. I'm not an expert, but this seems a bit unhealthy to me. Why not eat at a slight to moderate calorie deficit every day? Technically, it shouldn't matter when you eat at a deficit during the week. Just as long as you are eating at a deficit. My guess is you will be miserable. Prepare for being dizzy and nauseous at the very least. What are the supposed benefits of doing this? Answer: there are none. Just my two cents. Take it or leave it.
It's eat light (500-600 calories) for 2 days out of the week, then eat maintenance for 5 days (not making up the calories you missed). The 2 days don't need to be consecutive, but some people do that. It's not unhealthy at all, because people still meet their weekly deficit, macros, and micros if they follow the plan correctly. The benefit is that people can get their weekly deficit over in just two days, and then get to eat at maintenance for 5 whole days. It's simply a mental thing that allows them to feel fuller for those 5 days while feel like they only have to sacrifice for 2 days instead of 7 while controlling their intake. Some people even do it for a maintenance diet as well so ensure they don't start overeating again.0 -
asflatasapancake wrote: »In essence, they are eating calories missed on the maintenance days.
That's not the case. On maintenance days, they are eating the amount of calories needed to reach their TDEE for that day, not to make up for calories from the previous fasting days. The "missed" calories are just gone towards the deficit. If they were eating back missed calories, they'd have to eat over their TDEE either spaced out throughout the 5 days, or in one big shot.
Most people would create anywhere from a 1500-3000 calorie deficit eating 500-600 calories for the day, depending on age, gender, weight, and activity level. Twice a week then would be 3000-6000 for most people. Those calories are gone, since the other days are maintenance. They stay missing ;-) This would lead to about a 1-2 pounds a week ballpark weight loss, assuming they actually ate maintenance on the 5 days. Most people on this program will set their MFP goal to maintain their weight, so they know specifically how much to eat on those 5 maintenance days.
0 -
It is worth noting that the 5:2 diet isn't aimed at weight loss. It was for health benefits. The weight loss is just a bonus!0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 395 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 960 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions