It is currently Wed Mar 01, 2017 1:59 am
Blitz wrote:Well they call it a diet...so I wouldn't be scared to call it that.
I personally don't like using the word for myself...but I'm fine if others describe it for themselves as such.
Technically they are right...I just find that it is such a loaded word that can mess with your thinking.
It has an interesting idea behind it. I've said much the same about exercise in that routine can lead the body to running in comfortable mode and that variation can cause the body's metabolism to run faster. I can see how this idea can be transferred to that other lever in weight loss - food.
My concern with this diet is how workable is it for real life. Can it be continued forever or will the demands of it cause you to fold eventually? The fact that the losses that they have featured were not that spectacular (well within normal results) leads me to believe that long term it may be difficult to stay on.
I certainly concede that fasting for minimal periods can be beneficial. If only for the spiritual aspect of it (and getting your head in the right place for weight loss too) - but worry that it isn't a sustainable method for weight loss long term.
I'm pretty sure I've seen that British guy on something else before. Something about how lots of exercise isn't as useful as short intense exercise. Is he the same guy or have I got him mixed up with someone else?
Anyway...worth the watch and food for thought - or should I say lack of food for thought!
Thanks Josie for drawing it to my attention.
DD Diva wrote:I've been on it for coming onto 18 months!!! True, I've had my setbacks, but that is my own doing not the program itself!!! I've just taken things too far, and instead of being sensible on the "non fast" days, I've gone to town for the day (and days thereafter)!!!
DD Diva wrote:The amount one will lose will depend greatly on how rigid they are with the rules; I tend to be a little more lax and as such my losses have (on average) been around 500g-750g per week (give or take). Sure it's not been super lightening speed losses, but then, I don't believe the sign of a good program is one that will shed the kilos overnight; in fact, fast losses tend to cause alarm bells to ring for me; I believe that FAST LOSS = FAST REGAIN and so I am all for the tortoise approach!!!
DD Diva wrote:The regime can work in several ways, you can adopt (as Dr Mosley did in the first experience) a very hard nosed, days straight of fasting (very hard to do!!!) or as the 5:2 is designed to work, eat normally 5 days out of 7 and then fast for 2 (NON CONSECUTIVE) that part was omitted from the TV report!!! The 2 days should not be consecutive, that is just too difficult to maintain, and is discouraged!! The other form is (as I've been doing it for 18 months now) ALTERNATE DAY FASTING, that is, one day low, one day high and so on!! Works great!! And although the lower caloric intake (fast) days are difficult, reminding yourself it's just till tomorrow morning really helps you get through it better.
DD Diva wrote:And yes Kim, it is the same good Doctor!! Michael Mosley who is the 5:2 diet pioneer, is also the same man who is advocating that 3 minutes of intense (cardiovascular) activity outstrips the benefits of prolonged gym workouts or sessions of pounding the pavement. He is not alone in this though, many of the exercise physiologists/scientist that I work with everyday, have found this too!
DD Diva wrote:However, much of this information is poo-pooed by the fitness industry simply because it would bankrupt most (if not all) of them!!! There are many studies that will show intense (and by that I mean INTENSE; not just a few little sweat beads, but almost at cardiac arrest level intensity) that will elevate your heart rate sufficiently to keep the body's metabolism firing for days!!!
DD Diva wrote:Michael Mosley is a well respected doctor, and revered by many of the scientist I work with and I believe that the 5:2 regime which has debunked many of the weight loss myths we've been brainwashed into for decades will eventually prove that our bodies were not designed to eat X number of meals, and/or at certain times, and that we don't have to workout like maniacs to sustain a healthy and happy life. I walk now not because I HAVE TO but because I enjoy it, and that's the difference!!! If I HAD TO I probably would resent it, and consequently, not bother!!! But that's just me....
Blitz wrote:It sounds like there is enough flexibility in the system to allow for individuals to tailor to their lifestyle requirements. I see that you have tailored it to suit your lifestyle thus making it your own.
One good aspect of the fast days is that it does focus the mind to meaningfully discipline itself to the task at hand.
How do you decide which days are fast days...and how do you stop the fast days from drifting away from the 5:2 ratio or worse - the fast days drifting to never never land?
I take it that fast days aren't true fast days - they are low calorie intake days. What is your calorie intake for a regular day and a fast day?
Blitz wrote:He got the idea that a fast day was quarter of normal calorie intake.
The only thing he didn't realise was that the fast days were non-consecutive.
DD Diva wrote:50kg later (I'm proof that it works)!!!
Blitz wrote: ...and counting! - You're not finished yet!
Should be the poster girl for the cause!
DD Diva wrote:The real key is to not treat the "non fast" days as a licence to gorge yourself!!!
If your friend needs any information; I've got HEAPS!!!
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest