Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
Presumably no one from here as you're all rake-thin, Indie types, right?
I like the idea of eating whatever I want most of the time
some of us...may have bellies
Two non-consecutive days out of every 7 you eat only 500 calories (600 for blokes). The other five days you eat whatever the fuck you want.
I know 5 people doing this right now - they're all 40+ apart from 1 who's 38
surely it's much better to just get a brown leather jacket or something?
Might be true in forza's grim, northern corner of the world. Not so sure about our middle-class poncey sections.
the average age of folk I know is roughly 43 so actually fits pretty snugly with life expectancy in the Nordic regions
If they are, I'll eat my laptop.
I considered it, but couldn't decide on any days were eating that little made sense.
Also, with the given allowance of 'eat anything you want on the remaining five days' I am willing to bet that I would GAIN weight while I was doing it.
I mean the Horizon programme that went on about fasting actually had it down as a 1 day on, 1 day off diet but that was also about living a longer, healthier life.
Anyway, it seems like it's as much about health as weight loss.
As if I couldn't make that back up in 5 days of free-for all eating.
Not recommend for people who have a tendency to binge for that reason. Ahm oot.
People have lost weight on it, though. I think the point is probably that for most people they will eat the same the next day and be full. You're not STARVING, you're just not eating loads. It's not like you've been eating scraps for a week.
If I felt I was allowed to eat whatever I wanted with no repercussions, my junk to good stuff ratio would implode. I'd be a mess. I wouldn't gorge on crisps and chocolate because I'd be hungry, but because I'd been allowed to. And also I clearly have issues around food.
If not, I'll need to add 'em to the people who are cunts but never get called out on being cunts thread.
and do a bit of walking? Why does everything you do have to be a 'thing'? Why does everyone have to feel part of something? Why cant people just get a fucking grip? Its eating. Every organism does it. I dont see a crab having a 5/2 diet ffs
has me next to : "Talks the most sense and is just generally great"
and often need to be told that they're beautiful
why does everyone have to feel part of something?"
this has simultaneously reflected my opinion, made my day and made DiS worthwhile this shoddy wednesday afternoon. ta.
Christ I've done nothing today
are you doing it, PM? Is it working? I'm doing the maths and I can't see how it'd work
I don't eat anything on the two days (as soon as I start thinking about food I'll have the urge to eat, much better to do nothing). I can't stick to a traditional calorie-limit diet because there's no way for me to escape comfort eating when I feel like shit. My mindset is a -lot- better on fast days as well. Feel happier / more energetic.
It's definitely not the kind of thing that would work for everyone. But it does for me. I'm losing weight and feeling a lot better (which hopefully should limit my comfort eating in the future).
It's so fucking infuriating to come on here and read these kind of comments. DiS apparently not only hates overweight people, but also people who are trying to get healthier. It's absolutely pathetic.
You should probably see if you can trust yourself not to eat loads. Drinking lots of water will help to combat the hunger but I think eating nothing at all sounds a bit extreme and I'd worry you'll do yourself harm. :-/
I've checked. Trusted medical opinion: it's fine.
says that in her opinion, and that of many of her peers, this 5/2 lark is actually quite biologically substantive and not a mere `fad`.
She says your body can benefit from the odd day of fasting and that, well managed, it can be very healthy.
Not sure what evidence she's basing that on but she's telling me that it's viewed generally positively in the medical community from what she can deduce.
"My mother - who's a nurse - ..."
I tried my hardest to phrase this post to avoid coming across like a mug. Believe me I tried.
if it's working, keep going. I think my problem with it would be - like you say, eating on the "2" days. I'd be better off fasting on those days (which is perfectly fine assuming overall good health etc). And also I'd easily overeat on the "5" days to the extent that I undid the good work.
I never want junk food or heavy meals, just soup / fish / veg / fruit.
I guess it might be different if I was more active. I go on a walk and (fairly leisurely) cycle pretty much every day, but no more.
If you eat 600 calories on fast days and 2000 on normal days you consume 11,200 calories in a week i.e. an average of 1600 a day, which is a reasonable calorie deficit.
but is there meant to be something about how a more varied intake each day (ie fasting sometimes, more other times) helps metabolism as compared with eating say the identical number of calories each day?
(really confused about the fact that this doesn't seem to have been written off as a worthwhile nutritional pattern, at least yet)
I would love to be able to eat healthily. But I've failed at doing that consistently for the past 6 - 7 years. I honestly don't know whether you're all just stupid enough to believe that it's as easy for everyone else as it is for you, or if you're just trying overly hard to be all, hey look at me, I'm healthy and I don't even have to try.
Grow the hell up and let people who want to try out different diets try out different diets. If they talk about it all the time, then sure, tell them it's annoying. But insulting people just for trying to get healthier? Fuck off.
she's doing one similar, where she eats between 12:30 and 8pm every day and 'fasts' the rest of the time. Basically it means she skips breakfast, and that's the 'diet'
Personally speaking, at least, if I genuinely ate what I wanted for five days, even fasting and doing an ironman triathlon on each of the two days (were that physically feasible) wouldn't be enough to undo the damage of my five day gluttony.
You're not supposed to exceed your calorie allowance. For me that's about 1,800. I go over somedays, and under some days. It inevitably balances out.
The programme / book quite explicitly stresses that you shouldn't eat 'whatever you want'.
It must be on the one day eating, one day fasting routine he tried in the programme that you could eat anything you liked on the non-fast days.
He was just explaining what research / trials there were in the area of alternate fasting. That one is just called 'alternate day fasting', I think. Not at all the same as 5/2.
you eat two two different calorie limits, depending on the day?
Even though you've said you can't exercise control your food intake?
If you're eating a calorie controlled diet, surely that is enough to lose weight/get healthier? I'm like you described before, I can't stick to a calories controlled diet because I will inevitably binge on a bag of cookies or something and two days of carefully portioned stirfry will be undone. But if you are sticking to a sensible calorie limit, why bother with the fast days?
I don't know why that is, but they massively reduce my appetite for the day after (and probably to an extent for the rest of the week). It might seem counter-intuitive, and I'm sure it doesn't work that way for everybody, but it's just how my body reacts.
(And yes, I've calmed down a bit now.)
I like the idea of it because 'don't eat for two days' seems, somewhat illogically, a more manageable proposition than 'never eat biscuits again' (these are extremes, but you get my point), but I'm not sure I even trust myself to attempt the fast days without cheating, and the rest of the time I'd probably have convinced myself that two dozen Krispy Kremes is perfectly allowed.
No diet based on binge and fast will make you healthy.
This diet stinks of eating disorder to me. I hate the idea of it because I don't think it's much of a jump from here to worse dietary issues.
who will have had days without food and days of feasting, depending on how many dinosaurs there were to eat that day
Which doesn't mean it will make you healthier.
That said, surely as a species (in fact all hunting species on the planet) we are designed to feed in fits and starts, to live with lack of food and then eat more when we need it.
I think the assumption behind the diet is down to the fact we eat a lot because it's something we do but not necessarily because it's something we need to do and our food is highly processed now which imbalances things.
On the other hand, it sounded utterly crazy on Horizon and it doesn't sound any the less crazy now, that's for sure.
There is no 'binge'.
You eat your calorie allowance. Let's say one day a week I succumb to junk food and go 500 calories over, I can easily cut out the other days.
that is a binge and fast. You don't have to be eating cake from noon till night for it to be a binge.
listen to PocketMouse.
there's a fair bit of research that suggests fast days do improve health, metabolism and mental functioning in several ways.
the 5 days are supposed to be relatively normal eating, not a free-for-all-to-bursting at a buffet spread. It's not bingeing, that would be eating to excess. the 5 days aren't that - even in comparison to the fast days.
and developing a better relationship with food.
I've tried conventional diets a million times over. Never worked for me.
Even if you don't believe it's ideal, it's a hell of a lot better than the alternative for a lot of people.
if for 29% of your life you're going to be hungry and miserable
I'ts boring and it's bollocks.
Do more, eat a bit less.
Or just don't bother and don't complain.
Don't not order anything from the take-away because you're on a diet and then eat half of mine. Fuck off!
you should shut yourself indoors for the rest of your life.
It's not fucking starving. It's fasting for two days (not necessarily even a complete fast, most eat two meals). There's nothing unhealthy about it - THAT'S THE WHOLE BLOODY POINT. But I'm guessing you know absolutely nothing and are making high-horse judgements because that's what DiS loves to do.
What about these five days?
You must be exercising some degree of restraint throughout.
Otherwise your calorie deficit gained over the two days is gonna be severely diminished. Those calories saved by semi-fasting, spread over five days will easily be undone by truly uncontrolled eaating.
Anyone who claims that they can't possibly control their food intake, but find that the whole "eat what they want for five days" thing works is delusional.
Like I said somewhere up there, the day after a fast my appetite is quite low, and I only want light / fresh food. So that's two days a week fasting, two days where my appetite is good. Which gives three other days.
My overeating isn't such that three days could do much damage. I'm not going to get to more than about 2,500 calories. And that won't be on all three days (helped significantly by the fact that I don't need to go to the shop that much).
But that aside, you seem like a generally reasonable person, so I have no idea why you're being so patronising.
I've tried eating more healthily on a daily basis before a number of times. It has never worked. I'm probably a psychologically weak person, I have to deal with pretty extreme anxiety and depression. For whatever reason, this is really working for me. I can stick to it, I'm feeling healthier and happier, I'm saving money.
You can't eat what you want. You should at least be averaging out the 5 days at your RDA calories.
Don't tell me I'm delusional. Weak? Probably, and I would absolutely love not to be. More than anything in the world, I promise you. But I'm not delusional. I'm just just trying my best to improve my life in ways that work for me. I don't need to be insulted for that.
Probably have been a bit over the ott in this itt. Hope it continues to work out for you.
This thread has successfully made me feel like a worthless delusional idiot. Luckily for me I don't have any food in the house. So I guess I'll just go and cry in my room or whatever it is us weak subhumans do.
I don't expect DiS to be a haven of politeness and sympathy. But given how sensitive people can be in relation to other health / psychological problems, the vitirol you get in these kind of threads is ridiculous.
Fuck. Yeah. I feel fucking great, don't I?
I've got to stop coming here.
If it works for you - it works for you. That's all that matters.
Don't listen to what other people think.
I once saw no-class make a comment about drownedinsound being powered by boredom and self-loathing. Whenever i bear that in mind, about myself as well as all of the other users, it puts things into perspective and helps me to take a lot more stuff with a pinch of salt.
Good luck with the diet thing, hope it carries on going well.
That's pretty much what this diet is telling people to do. It's just presenting it in a different way.
A bit like those jokers that give up eating bread for a month: why?
I'm doing the 7/0 diet but I'll continue taking regular exercise and eating and drinking in moderation.
at least those ones which apparently eat crap, but stay thin. I used to live with a guy like that, he did eat pizza and cake and kebabs, but then some days he would eat nothing but a yoghurt for lunch and maybe some toast later on. So it all balances out. If only I did some proper research and wrote a book about it.
so probably not everyone is doing it. Sounds a bit mental to me
How'd you feel about that, dog-botherer?
in a kik & s_a_d sandwich http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=lucky%20pierre
Saturday is treat day.
2 months of eathing shite, put on 10kg, then stop it for two weeks, lose the 10kg, and then 2 months of eating shite. repeat.
It might be all over the press and stuff at the moment, and it'll be all over the women's glossies in a few months, but give it six months and everyone will have moved onto the next thing to promise wait loss without the effort or without addressing the fundamental reasons for people being/feeling overweight.
Eat less food, lose weight. Just sounds like a basic diet with a gimmick that keeps you more focused on actually doing it.
By placing no restrictions on the other five days it encourages binging and is highly likely to lead to yo-yo-ing energy levels that will likely push up the consumption of things like sugars at the expense of healthier foods.
Any diet that doesn't look at lifestyle, body perception mental well-being etc, and which has to depend on a catchy name or simplified approach is going to be pretty shallow evidence-wise and prone to only being effective in the short-term - to the detriment of the health of the dieter.
but also lays out the rules of how to follow the diet so that the exact phenomena you describe don't occur.
If you do it `properly` then there's no reason why it'd be detrimental to the health of the dieter. You could make the same case for vegetarianism - if you don't do it `properly` then of course it won't be healthy.
Yeah, scientifically it's very, very flimsy and makes lots of claims that don't stand up any scrutiny. Her 'rules' are largely based on anecdote, rather than any sound scientific basis.
The additional problem is that the diet is being advocated by magazines and websites, without explaining how to avoid the pitfalls.
I haven't read an article about this that says "be sensible on the 5 days", they always say EAT WHAT YOU WANT, Ahmay-ZING!.
but, obviously not.
I find actually counting calories works really well. Just that in itself without calling it a Diet.
Get a calorie tracker app, start logging everything you eat and you'll soon learn the calorie values of food, what is wasteful eating, things that just aren't worth the calories. It's an interesting enough exercise even without it trimming the fat off you.
I'm just saying that hopping from diet to diet without looking at lifestyle, exercise, or the underlying reasons for them feeling that they need to go on a diet (some people will be genuinely overweight, others will just feel like they are), will be unsustainable in the long-term and will likely see cycles of weight-gain and loss (which can often happen naturally anyway) which lead to depression or low feelings of self-worth.
Too many people see it, and other diets, as a quick-fix, often following them to a manic degree that suggests there are deeper problems at root there.
not much to add really. Motivation, discipline and realistic goals/expectations are the keys.
Any examples of such claims? I'm genuinely interested, because I've heard claims from doctors that it's actually quite robust. Although, again, that is partially anecdotal.
I'd argue that your second point is the central problem - not the diet itself. The diet itself seems to me like a logical and helpful presentation of a method of losing weight, with a notable attempt (at least) at an evidence based approach and due diligence for all who may choose to partake. The problem is it gets seized upon and diluted for mass consumption by the media. Notice how the crux of this thread seems to sum up the diet as `you fast for two days and on the other days you can eat whatever the fuck you like!`. At no point do Harrison et. al. make these claims themselves – it’s a simplification which is getting endlessly regurgitated.
No 'only eat organic / superfoods / diet products / supplements' etc. It's not trying to sell anything. It's actually selling LESS.
It means you (a) buy less food, and (b) can eat inexpensive food.
I just eat 1000 calories per day. Works a treat.
soak in water for 24 hours
leave to dry out for 24 hours
You're back at square one dude.
(I know they're not in the same state, but whtvrs.)
Two directors at work are doing this. They are competitive at the best of times but now they brag about how little they can eat. It's all rather embarrassing.
The body is easily adjustable and able to survive without food for at least two days plus and still be pretty healthy. I just don't wanna.
I'm just the kind of person that wants something 100% more if I can't have it. So those two days might get easier in time, but it wouldn't personally be something I'd want to do.
I try and keep to the 'I've done an hour of cardio/swimming so I'm going to have some chocolate' kind of thing & keep it to myself instead of announcing it to everything/everyone. It's boring.
it's quite sane and considered. You can eat quite a lot of food for 600 calories. 10 bananas. two bowls of museli and yoghurt. steak and salad. 40 cups of tea. for example. (or Example, he's probably quite low in calories)
so it's really not that horrific.
The pros and cons are debatable - the pros are kind of obvious. the cons - there's no reportedly obvious dangers so long as you're sensible about it.
I sort of do this, or a less extreme equivalent by eating about 1000-1500 calories a day when I exercise, so minus the calories burned off that to get a net of 600-1100.
It is about calorie controlling in a simply structured way, I can see why people are going for it - plus I am sure a lot of them like the drama of being able to say I only ate 600 calories today. Only having two days a week to get through on less eating provides a more sustainable challenge to people than saying every day has to be low calories.
I know a few people who have sustained this for several months, and continue to do it.
What have you created?
I'm not sure you can blame Theo for me.
I have go on too many businessmans lunches with my amazing job, and sod doing it at the weekend.
that I've never known the answer to - how do you all know how to count calories? I know they're printed on ready meals and biscuits, but how would you work it out on food you make yourself? I cook a lot and hardly eat anything out of packets - is there some kind of chart, or does it involve weighing things?
myfitnesspal has an extensive user-created database with calorie guidance on it.
It will involve weighing things as well, if you want to take it seriously.
dieting's not for me though. I'm slightly overweight but I enjoy having nice food more than being thinner, and I'm pretty happy with that.
I can see why people end up talking about diets so much though, you must need to think about it a lot if you're trying to count the calories of what you eat all the time. I've just made a soup with lettuce, peas, shallots, chilli, stock, mint and a bit of feta on top, and that was pretty elaborate to try and work out on a chart!
two minutes with that app.
should be simply to do whatever you want to do regarding what you eat and what you put in your body. If you want to be slightly overweight – fine. If you want to do the 5:2 diet – fine. It’s all fine. I think this has been lost, rather depressingly.
add in all the ingredients for the whole meal, say how many servings it makes and it divvies everything up.
It will also probably already have any and every food you can throw at it, it's quite a big database.
I'm quite habitual and compelled by stats, so adding every ingredient, every food and meal for every day is no chore for me.
My wife thinks I'm on the spectrum. I just find it interesting.
I'm a big database fan too.
and only eat out of habit/boredom. Should probably fast tbh.
I know once I do one it'll be easy - gonna try again tomorrow
And I haven't eaten a thing - I think I'm actually gonna get through my first fast day today!!! Starving though - can someone remind me how amazing my life is going to be when I'm thin