5:2
niknok2015
Posts: 1 Member
Hello everyone
I'm new to MFP and doing the 5:2 anyone else doing this would love to see what other people do on their fast days and normal days feel free to add me :-) x
I'm new to MFP and doing the 5:2 anyone else doing this would love to see what other people do on their fast days and normal days feel free to add me :-) x
0
Replies
-
I've been doing it since September 14 an I love it. Lost over 5 stone so far and it hasn't been crazy difficult. I struggled the first few weeks with headaches etc but now I want to eat like this forever.
My 500's are generally tons of fruit infused water all day with boiled chicken and salad for evening meal. My other days are up to 1600. I'm now eating by macros and I've found it so easy.
I've added you x0 -
Hi I'm new to 5:2 just started this week, 2 fast days done, and not too bad so far
0 -
What is 5:2?0
-
So this is my month 2 of 5:2 diet and results are awesome.I fast 2 days a week and eat 500 cal on my fast days,it's upto you if you want to save it for one meal or spread it throughout your day.Rest of the 5 days you eat normal.I'm working out 3/week.I don't feel hungry my job fast days anymore.First week or two will be a little difficult but will get easy with each week.0
-
What is 5:2?
5:2 is a form of intermittent fasting plan. It's another method of creating a deficit. 5 days at one calorie level, 2 days at a very low calorie level.
There are some more elaborate versions of 5:2 but there's no magic to this way of doing things, and it's not necessarily more effective than other plans.
0 -
ProjectSYD wrote: »You shouldn't be doing stupid diet fads. People who do those things are misinformed. Just burn more calories than you consume and don't think there's some miracle.
Man this thread deserves a face palm.
Do you even know what 5:2 is???
All forms of intermittent fasting works for many people.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
ProjectSYD wrote: »You shouldn't be doing stupid diet fads. People who do those things are misinformed. Just burn more calories than you consume and don't think there's some miracle.
Man this thread deserves a face palm.
You are the one who is misinformed uninformed.
5.2 is an accepted way of eating at a deficit, which means in plain English that it can be a way to burn more calories than a person takes in....just like any other way to achieve a deficit . For some people it works, for others not so much.....just like everything else. It's nothing special, it's not magic, it is not a fad; it is just one of the several ways to achieve a caloric deficit
For the last 2 years and 3 month it has worked well for me and so far I have lost 65 pounds....a planned .5 pounds a week, right on schedule.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
ProjectSYD wrote: »ProjectSYD wrote: »You shouldn't be doing stupid diet fads. People who do those things are misinformed.Just butn more calories than you consume and don't think there's some miracle.
Man this thread deserves a face palm.
You are the one who is misinformed uninformed.
5.2 is an accepted way of eating at a deficit, which means in plain English that it can be a way to burn more calories than a person takes in....just like any other way to achieve a deficit . For some people it works, for others not so much.....just like everything else. It's nothing special, it's not magic, it is not a fad; it is just one of the several ways to achieve a caloric deficit
For the last 2 years and 3 month it has worked well for me and so far I have lost 65 pounds....a planned .5 pounds a week, right on schedule.
I'm informed, I understand how it works. I understand your views inthe subject but my stance stays the same. I've tried things like this, you can't maintain eating like that forever. I've lost 16 lbs in a month just keeping track of what I eat and eating regularily. I understand portion sizes and can confidently eat enough to maintain my weight if I wanted (but I don't)
I don't think these fasting diets do that. But like I said, this is my opinion.
Please refrain from making personal attacks towards other users note forum as it's against the ToS. I did not make any assumptions that you were uninformed an I'd appreciate it if you showed me the same courtesy.
My stance is the same though, this thread deserves a face palm.
Lolwut?
-1 -
This content has been removed.
-
ProjectSYD wrote: »ProjectSYD wrote: »You shouldn't be doing stupid diet fads. People who do those things are misinformed. Just burn more calories than you consume and don't think there's some miracle.
Man this thread deserves a face palm.
You are the one who is misinformed uninformed.
5.2 is an accepted way of eating at a deficit, which means in plain English that it can be a way to burn more calories than a person takes in....just like any other way to achieve a deficit . For some people it works, for others not so much.....just like everything else. It's nothing special, it's not magic, it is not a fad; it is just one of the several ways to achieve a caloric deficit
For the last 2 years and 3 month it has worked well for me and so far I have lost 65 pounds....a planned .5 pounds a week, right on schedule.
I'm informed, I understand how it works. I understand your views inthe subject but my stance stays the same. I've tried things like this, you can't maintain eating like that forever. I've lost 16 lbs in a month just keeping track of what I eat and eating regularily. I understand portion sizes and can confidently eat enough to maintain my weight if I wanted (but I don't)
I don't think these fasting diets do that. But like I said, this is my opinion.
Please refrain from making personal attacks towards other users note forum as it's against the ToS. I did not make any assumptions that you were uninformed an I'd appreciate it if you showed me the same courtesy.
My stance is the same though, this thread deserves a face palm.
Then you might want to preface things like this comment "It doesn't teach you how to eat properly. Sure you might lose weight but you can't live the rest of your life like that." ... with "I THINK" or "I FEEL". 5:2 is very much an accepted form of creating a caloric deficit, as are things like 16:8 and 14:10 (the latter of which I tend to gravitate towards naturally myself). Just because it's not your speed doesn't make it face palm worthy.-1 -
This content has been removed.
-
ProjectSYD wrote: »ProjectSYD wrote: »ProjectSYD wrote: »You shouldn't be doing stupid diet fads. People who do those things are misinformed.Just butn more calories than you consume and don't think there's some miracle.
Man this thread deserves a face palm.
You are the one who is misinformed uninformed.
5.2 is an accepted way of eating at a deficit, which means in plain English that it can be a way to burn more calories than a person takes in....just like any other way to achieve a deficit . For some people it works, for others not so much.....just like everything else. It's nothing special, it's not magic, it is not a fad; it is just one of the several ways to achieve a caloric deficit
For the last 2 years and 3 month it has worked well for me and so far I have lost 65 pounds....a planned .5 pounds a week, right on schedule.
I'm informed, I understand how it works. I understand your views inthe subject but my stance stays the same. I've tried things like this, you can't maintain eating like that forever. I've lost 16 lbs in a month just keeping track of what I eat and eating regularily. I understand portion sizes and can confidently eat enough to maintain my weight if I wanted (but I don't)
I don't think these fasting diets do that. But like I said, this is my opinion.
Please refrain from making personal attacks towards other users note forum as it's against the ToS. I did not make any assumptions that you were uninformed an I'd appreciate it if you showed me the same courtesy.
My stance is the same though, this thread deserves a face palm.
Lolwut?
Basically saying I have the same information as they do but came to a different conclusion. I didn't disagree with the diet because of being misinformed I disagreed with it for my own reasons.
I'm not saying that the diet is wrong or bad just that I don't agree with it or any diets like it for that matter. I gave my reasoning before as to why I disagree and that is why. There's more reasons behind it but I don't feel like double checking facts tonight so I left that out of my reasoning.
Umm...wut?
-1 -
This content has been removed.
-
ProjectSYD wrote: »PrizePopple wrote: »ProjectSYD wrote: »ProjectSYD wrote: »You shouldn't be doing stupid diet fads. People who do those things are misinformed. Just burn more calories than you consume and don't think there's some miracle.
Man this thread deserves a face palm.
You are the one who is misinformed uninformed.
5.2 is an accepted way of eating at a deficit, which means in plain English that it can be a way to burn more calories than a person takes in....just like any other way to achieve a deficit . For some people it works, for others not so much.....just like everything else. It's nothing special, it's not magic, it is not a fad; it is just one of the several ways to achieve a caloric deficit
For the last 2 years and 3 month it has worked well for me and so far I have lost 65 pounds....a planned .5 pounds a week, right on schedule.
I'm informed, I understand how it works. I understand your views inthe subject but my stance stays the same. I've tried things like this, you can't maintain eating like that forever. I've lost 16 lbs in a month just keeping track of what I eat and eating regularily. I understand portion sizes and can confidently eat enough to maintain my weight if I wanted (but I don't)
I don't think these fasting diets do that. But like I said, this is my opinion.
Please refrain from making personal attacks towards other users note forum as it's against the ToS. I did not make any assumptions that you were uninformed an I'd appreciate it if you showed me the same courtesy.
My stance is the same though, this thread deserves a face palm.
Then you might want to preface things like this comment "It doesn't teach you how to eat properly. Sure you might lose weight but you can't live the rest of your life like that." ... with "I THINK" or "I FEEL". 5:2 is very much an accepted form of creating a caloric deficit, as are things like 16:8 and 14:10 (the latter of which I tend to gravitate towards naturally myself). Just because it's not your speed doesn't make it face palm worthy.
I understand the concept. And if it makes you more comfortable in the future I will make sure to add "I thinks" to my post.
The work was once believed to be flat, it was widely accepted. We now know it to be round. However, recent science has suggested it may be both flat and round. (Check out Vsauce on youtube for the scientific explanation)
My issue with fasting is when you fast you lower your metabolic rate and so even though you're creating a deficit you don't lose as much as you would normally throughout a day. Also when you start eating again you're body needs time to adjust and you may gain the weight back. When you're in starvation mode your body typically will eat away at muscle before fat which is also not a good thing.
http://www.m.webmd.com/diet/fasting
If you feel that strongly about the diet then by all means continue to do it. You're not in the wrong for doing it I'm just trying to shed some light on some of the potential dangers with these kinds of things
And face palm worthiness is subjected to the person giving the face palm. I strongly think any diets involving some trick to lose weight deserve a face palm.
So you think that in 1 day you will lower your metabolic rate? In 1 day you think that you will go into starvation mode and start eating your muscles?
Okay...
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
ProjectSYD wrote: »My issue with fasting is when you fast you lower your metabolic rate and so even though you're creating a deficit you don't lose as much as you would normally throughout a day. Also when you start eating again you're body needs time to adjust and you may gain the weight back. When you're in starvation mode your body typically will eat away at muscle before fat which is also not a good thing.
http://www.m.webmd.com/diet/fasting
If you feel that strongly about the diet then by all means continue to do it. You're not in the wrong for doing it I'm just trying to shed some light on some of the potential dangers with these kinds of things
And face palm worthiness is subjected to the person giving the face palm. I strongly think any diets involving some trick to lose weight deserve a face palm.
The webmd link you posted warns against long term fasts. A 5:2 IF plan alternates 5 days of normal level eating with 2 days of low calorie (usually around 500) eating. It is not nearly long enough to be dangerous to someone who is metabolically normal.
Also, starvation mode as you are describing just does not happen.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
ProjectSYD wrote: »ProjectSYD wrote: »PrizePopple wrote: »ProjectSYD wrote: »ProjectSYD wrote: »You shouldn't be doing stupid diet fads. People who do those things are misinformed. Just burn more calories than you consume and don't think there's some miracle.
Man this thread deserves a face palm.
You are the one who is misinformed uninformed.
5.2 is an accepted way of eating at a deficit, which means in plain English that it can be a way to burn more calories than a person takes in....just like any other way to achieve a deficit . For some people it works, for others not so much.....just like everything else. It's nothing special, it's not magic, it is not a fad; it is just one of the several ways to achieve a caloric deficit
For the last 2 years and 3 month it has worked well for me and so far I have lost 65 pounds....a planned .5 pounds a week, right on schedule.
I'm informed, I understand how it works. I understand your views inthe subject but my stance stays the same. I've tried things like this, you can't maintain eating like that forever. I've lost 16 lbs in a month just keeping track of what I eat and eating regularily. I understand portion sizes and can confidently eat enough to maintain my weight if I wanted (but I don't)
I don't think these fasting diets do that. But like I said, this is my opinion.
Please refrain from making personal attacks towards other users note forum as it's against the ToS. I did not make any assumptions that you were uninformed an I'd appreciate it if you showed me the same courtesy.
My stance is the same though, this thread deserves a face palm.
Then you might want to preface things like this comment "It doesn't teach you how to eat properly. Sure you might lose weight but you can't live the rest of your life like that." ... with "I THINK" or "I FEEL". 5:2 is very much an accepted form of creating a caloric deficit, as are things like 16:8 and 14:10 (the latter of which I tend to gravitate towards naturally myself). Just because it's not your speed doesn't make it face palm worthy.
I understand the concept. And if it makes you more comfortable in the future I will make sure to add "I thinks" to my post.
The work was once believed to be flat, it was widely accepted. We now know it to be round. However, recent science has suggested it may be both flat and round. (Check out Vsauce on youtube for the scientific explanation)
My issue with fasting is when you fast you lower your metabolic rate and so even though you're creating a deficit you don't lose as much as you would normally throughout a day. Also when you start eating again you're body needs time to adjust and you may gain the weight back. When you're in starvation mode your body typically will eat away at muscle before fat which is also not a good thing.
http://www.m.webmd.com/diet/fasting
If you feel that strongly about the diet then by all means continue to do it. You're not in the wrong for doing it I'm just trying to shed some light on some of the potential dangers with these kinds of things
And face palm worthiness is subjected to the person giving the face palm. I strongly think any diets involving some trick to lose weight deserve a face palm.
So you think that in 1 day you will lower your metabolic rate? In 1 day you think that you will go into starvation mode and start eating your muscles?
Okay...
Actually I know this to be true. That isn't an opinion but a fact that helped me come to my opinion. Opinions are conclusions one comes to upon being presented with facts.
Your bodies metabolism changes when you sleep, and throughout the day. When you sleep you burn less calories than you do when you're awake.
Eating breakfast will speed up your metabolic rate, it's like putting keys in the inition of your car and turnin the car on.
I can send you some links to sources but I need to find them - add me if you want and I'll message you them. I really gotta get to bed though, good luck with the weightloss!
so you don't like IF
neither do I
so what
it doesn't make it any less useful or effective0 -
This content has been removed.
-
ProjectSYD wrote: »ProjectSYD wrote: »My issue with fasting is when you fast you lower your metabolic rate and so even though you're creating a deficit you don't lose as much as you would normally throughout a day. Also when you start eating again you're body needs time to adjust and you may gain the weight back. When you're in starvation mode your body typically will eat away at muscle before fat which is also not a good thing.
http://www.m.webmd.com/diet/fasting
If you feel that strongly about the diet then by all means continue to do it. You're not in the wrong for doing it I'm just trying to shed some light on some of the potential dangers with these kinds of things
And face palm worthiness is subjected to the person giving the face palm. I strongly think any diets involving some trick to lose weight deserve a face palm.
The webmd link you posted warns against long term fasts. A 5:2 IF plan alternates 5 days of normal level eating with 2 days of low calorie (usually around 500) eating. It is not nearly long enough to be dangerous to someone who is metabolically normal.
Also, starvation mode as you are describing just does not happen.
If you can find me a reliable source that supports this then maybe I will rethink my opinions.
Anyways, just weighed in today and I've lost 23 lbs in a month eating every day, 4-5 times a day. My biggest change was cutting out juice and pop 6/7 days a week.
This is a study performed on 5:2 diet plan.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3017674/This is the largest randomised comparison of an isocalorific intermittent vs. continuous energy restriction to date in free living humans. Both approaches achieved comparable weight loss and improvements in a number of risk markers for cancer, diabetes and cardiovascular disease, for example reductions in fasting insulin, insulin resistance, leptin, the leptin: adiponectin ratio, free androgen index, inflammatory markers, lipids, blood pressure, increases in SHBG, IGFBP-1 and 2. IER was no easier to adhere to than CER, however it may be offered as an equivalent alternative to CER for weight loss and reducing disease risk.0 -
ProjectSYD wrote: »PrizePopple wrote: »ProjectSYD wrote: »ProjectSYD wrote: »You shouldn't be doing stupid diet fads. People who do those things are misinformed. Just burn more calories than you consume and don't think there's some miracle.
Man this thread deserves a face palm.
You are the one who is misinformed uninformed.
5.2 is an accepted way of eating at a deficit, which means in plain English that it can be a way to burn more calories than a person takes in....just like any other way to achieve a deficit . For some people it works, for others not so much.....just like everything else. It's nothing special, it's not magic, it is not a fad; it is just one of the several ways to achieve a caloric deficit
For the last 2 years and 3 month it has worked well for me and so far I have lost 65 pounds....a planned .5 pounds a week, right on schedule.
I'm informed, I understand how it works. I understand your views inthe subject but my stance stays the same. I've tried things like this, you can't maintain eating like that forever. I've lost 16 lbs in a month just keeping track of what I eat and eating regularily. I understand portion sizes and can confidently eat enough to maintain my weight if I wanted (but I don't)
I don't think these fasting diets do that. But like I said, this is my opinion.
Please refrain from making personal attacks towards other users note forum as it's against the ToS. I did not make any assumptions that you were uninformed an I'd appreciate it if you showed me the same courtesy.
My stance is the same though, this thread deserves a face palm.
Then you might want to preface things like this comment "It doesn't teach you how to eat properly. Sure you might lose weight but you can't live the rest of your life like that." ... with "I THINK" or "I FEEL". 5:2 is very much an accepted form of creating a caloric deficit, as are things like 16:8 and 14:10 (the latter of which I tend to gravitate towards naturally myself). Just because it's not your speed doesn't make it face palm worthy.
I understand the concept. And if it makes you more comfortable in the future I will make sure to add "I thinks" to my post.
The work was once believed to be flat, it was widely accepted. We now know it to be round. However, recent science has suggested it may be both flat and round. (Check out Vsauce on youtube for the scientific explanation)
My issue with fasting is when you fast you lower your metabolic rate and so even though you're creating a deficit you don't lose as much as you would normally throughout a day. Also when you start eating again you're body needs time to adjust and you may gain the weight back. When you're in starvation mode your body typically will eat away at muscle before fat which is also not a good thing.
http://www.m.webmd.com/diet/fasting
If you feel that strongly about the diet then by all means continue to do it. You're not in the wrong for doing it I'm just trying to shed some light on some of the potential dangers with these kinds of things
And face palm worthiness is subjected to the person giving the face palm. I strongly think any diets involving some trick to lose weight deserve a face palm.
So you think that in 1 day you will lower your metabolic rate? In 1 day you think that you will go into starvation mode and start eating your muscles?
Okay...
Okay so you reported this post...
How is it an attack upon your intelligence?
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I don't like IF either. I'd prefer not to punish myself for whole days at a time. But IF can work, especially if you like the martyr thing.0
-
This content has been removed.
-
This thread lifts my 5:2 soul... I remember the days fighting on here for the 5:2 to be seen as a legit method and not a fad..
It helped that I came prepared to back up my stance...
If I wasn't prepared to do that...I'd keep my thoughts to myself or slink away and do a little educating or rest my metabolism or something.
0 -
I've lost 51.5 pounds so far with IF. I didn't even know it was IF, it was just the way that felt best to me since I'm rarely hungry before 4 PM. Starvation mode has yet to kick in, and while I haven't studied the concept - my personal history supports that it is effective for me.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