5:2
Options
Replies
-
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 -
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 -
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 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
-
o nvm he just trolling I get it
gj0 -
0
-
ProjectSYD wrote: »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 effective
? Not sure I understand your post friend. Sorry.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.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.
Maybe fad was a poor choice in words. I do disagree with it. I've tried IF and it really worked short term but the yoyo affect it had on my body when I stopped was horrible as well as it was painful to go through.
See, now here's a better answer! Personal discomfort with the method is a fair enough repellant. As most fasters would say...if you can't then don't. Just don't assume how it affected you applies to all.
0 -
ProjectSYD wrote: »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 effective
? Not sure I understand your post friend. Sorry.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.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.
Maybe fad was a poor choice in words. I do disagree with it. I've tried IF and it really worked short term but the yoyo affect it had on my body when I stopped was horrible as well as it was painful to go through.
See, now here's a better answer! Personal discomfort with the method is a fair enough repellant. As most fasters would say...if you can't then don't. Just don't assume how it affected you applies to all.
But again personal dislike for the method does not equate into the entire method being "face palm worthy" or the people who utilize the method "misinformed". To stomp into a thread making sensational claims because a specific method of caloric restriction didn't work for you is asinine at best. I'm no fan of 5:2 myself because those two low days would make me a total B, but like I said I gravitate towards 14:10 myself so I totally get how it would work for some and not others.0 -
I laugh at how much people scoff at 5:2. Just because they don't like the idea etc. It's not a fad it's CICO - pure and simple.
I weigh and measure everything. Having my cals on a weekly basis rather than 24 hours isn't a big deal. It fits in with my busy lifestyle and I love that can have a treat when I want on 5 days a week. Some days I'm too busy to eat until about 7pm. Yeah I got obese from eating the wrong foods and way too much of them. Now I eat mainly unprocessed foods and tons of fruit and veg.
So a healthier diet and 5:2 together completely works for me. Maybe I would have the same results with diet alone but I'm not about to change something that works.
It's always an emotive subject but it is surprising just how emotional people do get about it.0 -
ProjectSYD wrote: »ProjectSYD wrote: »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 effective
? Not sure I understand your post friend. Sorry.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.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.
Maybe fad was a poor choice in words. I do disagree with it. I've tried IF and it really worked short term but the yoyo affect it had on my body when I stopped was horrible as well as it was painful to go through.
See, now here's a better answer! Personal discomfort with the method is a fair enough repellant. As most fasters would say...if you can't then don't. Just don't assume how it affected you applies to all.
I gained 70 lbs in 4 months after I was done it. That's the yoyo effect - my main reason for not agreeing with it. My discomfort is a small reason.
So basically you believe in flexible dieting, but only if people flex the way you do?
Also, what if someone follows your prescribed way of dieting and they gain back weight? I'm just wondering if I need to lose and regain a few pounds to prove an inane point.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 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
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 911 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions