5/2 Diet

I lost the majority of my weight doing alternate day fasting. 500 calories one day and my TDEE the next and so on.

Just dont eat over your maintenance calories on your up days.

feisty_bucket wrote: »

You'll get good info on the specialist groups here.

Anyways, yeah, I'm in a week of ADF right now. I switch from maintenance into fasting mode whenever I need to, and have been using the technique for the past year and a half.

IMO, it's way better than regular day-to-day calorie cutting.

http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/group/100058-5-2-fasting

I found 5:2 far easier to lose weight in a slow, steady way than everyday calorie deficit which just bores and frustrates me.
There's two 5:2 groups on here - well worth joining.

You can either do it the way it was intended (2 days @ 500 and 5 days eating "normally") or if you want to calorie count 7 days a week then 2 days @ 500 and 5 days eating at maintenance calories.

Fasting day kind of misnomer - as in the study it was 25% of the maintenance days.

So for average woman with 2000 maintenance - 500, man was about 600.

But if you have decent level of activity - your average maintenance could be much higher, therefore 25% would be higher too.

So "healthy" in this context means enough calories compared to something?
Nothing to do with type of food.
Because frankly, if only eating 500-600, most people tend not to kill that with a couple candy bars.

In the study the 5:2 actually had better results than a daily deficit - because it allowed the body and hormones to usually be at best levels not being stressed constantly.
And most studies on fasting have shown increase in metabolism within the first 48-72 hrs before it nosedives - so actually a benefit there too, even though not a true fast since still eating.

Then again - when done correctly, it's an average 22% deficit - which frankly is probably a lot smaller deficit than many take (woman burning on average 2200-2500 and eating only 1200) - so that helps them too.

I'm doing 5/2. I don't average 500 CALs on my fast days, more like 700. I workout alot and find that 500 is just too low for me. On non-fast days I have around 1300 cals. YMMV.

Play with the numbers. Everyone is different.

Orangesoda0201 wrote: »

I personally wouldnt do it because I workout at least 6 days a week for 2-3hrs and I NEED my calories LOL i dont see how this can be good for your body?? Wouldnt it make more sense to increase exercise and lower your calories?

And wreck your metabolism while losing muscle? No thank you. Fasting is not a new concept. I would encourage you to read up on the subject, as I have found intermittent fasting to be extremely healhy, gives me more energy and lets me enjoy my foods without obsessing over meal prep and calories. Fasting allows for increased levels of HGH, and higher insulin sensitivity. Fat (not weight) loss comes as a biproduct.

I usually eat less on days I don't work out, but not only 500 cal. more like 900-1000, and around 1200 on days that I workout.

TeaBea wrote: »

megemrj wrote: »

I'm doing 5/2. I don't average 500 CALs on my fast days, more like 700. I workout alot and find that 500 is just too low for me. On non-fast days I have around 1300 cals. YMMV.

Play with the numbers. Everyone is different.

Um no.......

What 5:2 is - 5 days at MAINTENANCE and 2 days at 500. So you aren't technically doing 5:2 at all unless you are about 4'6" tall. Your daily average for the week (assuming 700) is only 1,128 calories.

Here's how you find maintenance: http://scoobysworkshop.com/calorie-calculator/

There's some debate about what to do with the 5 non-fasting days. Many people do eat slightly under their maintenance calories on those days, to make up part of the deficit. Dr. Mosley is pretty vague for this part, which has led to some frustration in the 5:2 community.

For me, I'm doing a modified 5:2 plan. I figured out my TDEE/light exercise x7 days-3,500 calories (1lb a week), -700 calories x2 (my 2 fasting days), and then with the leftover calories I divide by 5 days to get my non-fasting number. This gives me 1,618 calories on those days, compared to my TDEE of 1,856. All this works out to an average of 1,355 calories a day

I did it and it worked really well for me also. Currently I'm at maintenance, so no longer fasting, but at the time I was eating 2000/500 cals. Essentially skipped breakfast and had light lunch and dinner.

I know someone who does it, however, let's be frank.... You are starving yourself 2 days a week.

heybales wrote: »

Nothing like taking the benefits of a certain plan from a research study, and tweaking it because dang it - I just know better and want to lose faster.

And to that I'll add YMMV - but I'd sure suggest someone try the plan as the study showed great success with and see how that goes first before deciding you just need to lose weight even faster and tweaking some or all the benefits right out of it.

Could you elaborate please? I'm not aware of any study that's been done on 5:2 specifically. It was a diet plan created by Dr. Mosley.

I've been doing IF in one form or another since 2012. I've done 5:2IF as laid out by Dr. Mosley in his BBC documentary/book. It's the plan I used for the transition period between my active weight loss phase/maintenance phase. If you read the book though, Dr. Mosley's pretty vague on the 5 'up' days. He actually recommends women eating around 2,000 calories on those days. Since my TDEE is below that now, it wouldn't make sense to follow that advice as it would negate some of the deficit I'm trying to obtain.

And I'm not the only one who's run into this issue. If you hang out at the big 5:2 site (not connected to MFP), this is a common complaint because the higher 5 days are causing some people to stall/not lose. There's nothing wrong with using the idea of 5:2 as a framework, but using your TDEE to figure out your actual numbers. All said and done 5:2 is just a trademarked way of zig zagging calories

ReaderGirl3 wrote: »

heybales wrote: »

Nothing like taking the benefits of a certain plan from a research study, and tweaking it because dang it - I just know better and want to lose faster.

And to that I'll add YMMV - but I'd sure suggest someone try the plan as the study showed great success with and see how that goes first before deciding you just need to lose weight even faster and tweaking some or all the benefits right out of it.

Could you elaborate please? I'm not aware of any study that's been done on 5:2 specifically. It was a diet plan created by Dr. Mosley.

I've been doing IF in one form or another since 2012. I've done 5:2IF as laid out by Dr. Mosley in his BBC documentary/book. It's the plan I used for the transition period between my active weight loss phase/maintenance phase. If you read the book though, Dr. Mosley's pretty vague on the 5 'up' days. He actually recommends women eating around 2,000 calories on those days. Since my TDEE is below that now, it wouldn't make sense to follow that advice as it would negate some of the deficit I'm trying to obtain.

And I'm not the only one who's run into this issue. If you hang out at the big 5:2 site (not connected to MFP), this is a common complaint because the higher 5 days are causing some people to stall/not lose. There's nothing wrong with using the idea of 5:2 as a framework, but using your TDEE to figure out your actual numbers. All said and done 5:2 is just a trademarked way of zig zagging calories

The thing about some fasting protocols is that calorie restriction on your "up" days shouldn't be the focus. Personally, I have to eat well above my TDEE or else the weight flies off way too fast, and there is some strength loss. Again, I believe fasting should be a lifestyle change,with weight loss being a biproduct of your choices. If you feel like you can stick to fasting while using calorie restriction and you see no adverse affects, then by all means go ahead. But with the hormonal changes that come with fasting, calorie restriction does not have to be a necessity to lose fat, and may slow your metabolism (as shown with calorie restrictive diets over 6 weeks in length)