5:2 fasting diet - any experiences/views?

Any one had any experience of this? Good or bad?

«13

Comments

  • it's OK

    it's basically a week long calorie reduction exercise where you eat normally for 5 days but have very few cals on the other 2 days. it probably works better than a general calorie reduction programme as it has that 5:2 structure - with a general one it's not so easy to follow a week long regime.   the danger is however is that you overeat on non-fast days as you come off a fast day feeeling pretty hungry!

    like all calorie reduction methods, it needs discipline to stick to it.

    as for the other supposed benefits - longevity, immunity boost, cancer reduction etc - the science and jury are very much out on that as there's not enough evidence to support any of the theories.

  • Is it 1 day 'off', twice a week, or 2 days 'off' in a row?

  • 1 day twice a week - we did Monday and Thursday

  • 1 day twice a week on non consecutive days

  • there were a whole bunch of people trying this at work.......

    They did it for about 6 weeks, and really enjoyed it and said it felt beneficial.

     

    However, they are not still doing it so........

  • I thought it went like this:

    • 5/2 with two fasting days is the diet.
    • But that is tough so why not split the 2 days off into  two one days off as that is nearly the same. Although not quite.
    • Now a whole day without food is quite tough so you can have a few hundred calories first thing and last thing.
    • Plus if you feel a bit hungry you can nibble a raw carrot or something.

    So I think in the final version you have to skip lunch which isn't where it started. They did a piece on IM Talk recently.

    Not tried it, I don't need to diet as I can't get fat.

    M..eface

  • Hee hee, that amused me, meface!

    It's really not a difficult concept though, is it - it all boils down to "eat less, run more". I dont personally think skipping lunch twice a week is a great strategy, and I bet a lot of people end up eating the same amount in fewer overall meals, so as a long term (ie 2 months!) strategy, it seems destined to fail. But I expect someone got rich from writing a book about it.

  • I am planning on giving this a go with a slightly modified version and replacing the calories used when training on fasting days (so not to impact too heavily on training sessions)and eating healthily on the normal days.  As FB puts it, the structure 'may' help me better than a normal reduced calorie diet through the week.  Going to give it 5 weeks and see how I do.  Not planning on doing it long term as heavy IM training will not allow me to do this.

  • tut Tut TUT

  • flyaway wrote (see)

    Hee hee, that amused me, meface!

    It's really not a difficult concept though, is it - it all boils down to "eat less, run more". I dont personally think skipping lunch twice a week is a great strategy, and I bet a lot of people end up eating the same amount in fewer overall meals, so as a long term (ie 2 months!) strategy, it seems destined to fail. But I expect someone got rich from writing a book about it.

    If the people at my work are anything to go by, on the non-fast days you can eat even more - make sure you load up on pizza, burgers and milkshakes image

    Would be interesting to know what Sarahthebookworm makes of this ...

  • I'm trying this. But sticking  to 500cal and then doing a training session doesn't work (obviously!) so I tend to plan a light swim on my fasting days. I got it wrong yesterday with a bike ride and long swim and felt quite unwell/nauseous later.  I eat normally on the other 5 days and don't wake up hungry either. It has the advantage of keeping me off the booze for at least 2 days in a week. I don't really need to lose a lot of weight, just a couple of extra pounds from January but I'm hoping it will benefit my cholesterol levels and overall health. Its not as hard as it sounds. A dinner of small piece of chicken and lots and lots of fresh steamed veg (no spuds) still come within the calorie limit. And an apple for lunch, porridge for breakfast, its okay. 

  • Although this is not a new 'fad' it is being reintroduced and promoted by that tv doctor who also does the inventions thing on BBC2 ..... obviously I cant remember hie name but he explained the concept well

  • Michael Mosley?

  • Thats the one ... I could see his face and everything!

  • TRTR ✭✭✭

    One of the fat blokes at work does this sometimes, he says it works better if he does the two low calorie days in a row, but he's still a fat bloke.
    Cant see how you can train properly and stick to a regime like this. Besides which you know what CRAB would say Dooz - NFRS, simple formula of calories in vs calories out. Also be aware that you have to actually eat enough to lose a bit of weight and train properly, keep your diet clean 80 to 90% of the time and your body should find its optimum wieght for the demands you put upon it. A bit of lean muscle will stoke your metabolism too.

  • Oh my god, I agree with TR! What is the world coming to?! image

    To be honest, the whole concept just sounds daft to me. Each to their own though...

  • TR

    I am a big fan of the eat less and move more diet. And ultimately if you are in positive calories you gain weight and negative calories you loose weight.

    However there is some tinkering around the edges to do with the calories you burn. Metabolic rate can be altered. Eating chillis and currys increases metabolic rate. Exercising increases burn rate during the exercise and also afterwards to repair, replenish and grow muscles. And yep muscle maintenance burns more all the time.

    Extremely low calorie intake can induce a starvation mode in some, reducing long term metabolic rate. Although how the 5:2 diet affects that versus long term negative calorie intake it would be difficult to comment.

    Many overweight people get so over a long period. 100kcal extra per day puts on a potential 1lb of fat every 35 days. Over a year that is 10lbs. Over 2-3 years that is 2 stone of weight. For 100kcal/.day which is

  • I think, but I'm not sure, that he means natural foods and not processed rubbish.

  • KK I'm carrying about a stone and a half more than normal race weight, and I eat pretty healthy anyway at the moment! I just thought it was something worth trying forvacfew weeks!



    TR. ask crab about his fruit juice only diet when he was competing with cartman!
  • TRTR ✭✭✭

    Flyaway - it'll never last !

    I'm not sure if Meface was agreeing with me or not as he didnt get to finish.

    Mouse - indeed, although it doesnt have to be that strict, if you eat cleaner then your body will work better too. I still eat Pizza with the kids, in fact its a pre race meal (with jacket spuds and salad). I just save it for the weekends. Sports nutrition is saved for race day too. Real foods are the way to go, look back at the 50's and 60's folks were skinneir then, my kids find it funny when that i say we only had one fat kid in our year at school.

  • TRTR ✭✭✭

    Doozer - ok I will. Last time I raced you, you were a long way ahead of me, do what you were doing back then.

  • I agree with TR .. eat foods closest to their natural source and you wont go far wrong
    If the ingredients have more numbers than letters then that is never a good sign either   image

  • It's taken me a long while to get there and a re-education from someone too but I agree totally with Meldy and TR.  It's a lot easier to do than I thought it would be too.  I've lost 2st 5lbs so far and I don't fast.

  • for those who may not have read it - here's the link to the BBC programme which helped promote this diet into the national conscious - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-19112549

    the programme didn't solely look at the weight loss side of things but also at the "potential" side benefits of intermittent fasting - and they are very much unproven, so the diet side of IF is the one that's caught everyone's imagination but (and to quote the Bournemouth crustacean) it's NFRS.   it's a calorie reduction programme but having 2 fast days give it an easier structure to follow as trying to reduce calories on a daily basis is not easy to stick to as many dieters have found.  by eating normally (and that needs discipline not to binge out after a fast day) on 5 days, but really cutting down to 0-500 cals on 2 fast days makes it easier to stick to a weekly calorie reduction.   it's as simple as that.

    the food you eat is to an extent immaterial - it's the overall calorie balance that counts (let's not argue the %'s of fat, protein, carbs for simplicity) - although I wouldn't disagree with those advocating eating wholeseome, fresh food rather than convenience.  

    and if it gives the results that people are after - or by whatever alternative method such as Mouse has used - then it's done it's job for that person.   

    be interested to see how you get on Doozer..

  • fat buddha wrote (see)

     (and to quote the Bournemouth crustacean) it's NFRS.  

    He is from Poole - Bournemouth is where the cool people live

    fat buddha wrote (see)

    the food you eat is to an extent immaterial - it's the overall calorie balance that counts (let's not argue the %'s of fat, protein, carbs for simplicity) - although I wouldn't disagree with those advocating eating wholeseome, fresh food rather than convenience.  

    and if it gives the results that people are after - or by whatever alternative method such as Mouse has used - then it's done it's job for that person.   

    be interested to see how you get on Doozer..

    'Most' of the food I eat is good quality and very low percentage of processed food. 

    Will let you know how it goes, if I can lose 4-7kgs then it will be worth it!



     

  • Bournemouth/Poole - it's one big metropolis these days...image

  • fat buddha wrote (see)
     it's a calorie reduction programme but having 2 fast days give it an easier structure to follow as trying to reduce calories on a daily basis is not easy to stick to as many dieters have found.  by eating normally (and that needs discipline not to binge out after a fast day) on 5 days, but really cutting down to 0-500 cals on 2 fast days makes it easier to stick to a weekly calorie reduction.   it's as simple as that.

    The trouble is, that a lot of people dont know what "normal eating" is. If reducing daily calories is hard, is eating virtually nothing for a whole day any easier? The key is the word you've used - "discipline". You're far better being disciplined on a daily basis. I dont believe that the majority of people who try it dont end up re-compensating for their "fast" on the days that they can eat, and I see this as simply a short-term, minor weight loss, which doesnt last.

    Good luck though, Doozer, I hope you get the results you want.
    TR - yeah, give it a day and it'll be situation normal again!

«13
Sign In or Register to comment.