5:2 Diet works

charliew87

Bonjour,
Started a thread a few months ago entitled "Is This Good Training?" viewtopic.php?t=12887566

Basically was doing bits and pieces, eating normally, not getting much better at cycling and not losing much weight.

Anyway, committed to the 5:2 diet at Xmas, upped my training by no more than 10% and have lost 13kg (97kg > 84kg) since the 1st of January. I kid you not. First couple of days are a bit tough but once you work out decent 200/300cal options it's a piece of piss and I don't change my daily routines gym/exercise at all any longer depending on if it is or isn't a 'fast' day.

Went up Box Hill 4 times last Saturday, each time over a minute quicker than my previous PB and looking forward to the Evans 90 miler in Woking in a few weeks time.

In short - if you want an easy way to lose weight and get quicker on the bike, 5:2 is dead easy to do and does the job nicely.

Anonymous

+1
It's a 600 cal day for me tomorrow though :shock:

ShutUpLegs

Well done on the weight loss, do you know what the long term damage is to to your body by starving and depriving it?

Anonymous

Stuttering?

Anonymous

I cannot see that dropping to 600 calories twice a week for a shortish period is starvation.
There must be loads of things that are a lot more harmful.

KateF

Do you eat training calories on top? Or, if you do, say 1.5 hours of riding on a 'fasting' day, do you still only eat 600 calories?
I've got a few friends who do this diet, and they say they don't eat training calories as well as the 600 'allowance' - I really don't think I'd recover well enough to train properly if I only ate that many calories, so I'd probably have to cut out some training, which I wouldn't want to do

ShutUpLegs

KateF wrote:

I really don't think I'd recover well enough to train properly if I only ate that many calories, so I'd probably have to cut out some training, which I wouldn't want to do

I concur, but then I don't train to lose weight.

KateF

ShutUpLegs wrote:

KateF wrote:

I really don't think I'd recover well enough to train properly if I only ate that many calories, so I'd probably have to cut out some training, which I wouldn't want to do

I concur, but then I don't train to lose weight.

Neither do I, but I could do with losing a few more pounds before doing any hilly races this season! I wouldn't do this diet anyway as I think its crazy, but just wondering what people do about this

Anonymous

I personally am not training on 'lean' days. My plan was to use 5:2 to lose some weight in the short term and stop doing it when more serious training starts for an event in Aug.
I had been ill and have a knee injury which led me to try the diet instead of just exercising.
All I was really saying on this thread was that it seems to work very well as a weight loss method.

GiantMike

Thanks for the feedback on this weight loss plan. It's good to see somebody sticking with it and spreading the news to the rest of us.

zx6man

Just cut the daily calories to a couple under what you need ,weight comes off, easy at that :-)

gavbarron

That weight loss sounds a bit aggressive to be pure fat, you may find starving too much will be at the detriment of some muscle wastage. I've lost weight by using a big calorie deficit in the past yet when I did it a bit more slowly and ate clean the lean me was completely different to the lighter me.
What works for you and me may be different though, just my pennies worth. Good work though fella, losing 13kg via any method takes discipline and work

charliew87

KateF wrote:

Do you eat training calories on top? Or, if you do, say 1.5 hours of riding on a 'fasting' day, do you still only eat 600 calories?
I've got a few friends who do this diet, and they say they don't eat training calories as well as the 600 'allowance' - I really don't think I'd recover well enough to train properly if I only ate that many calories, so I'd probably have to cut out some training, which I wouldn't want to do

I stick to the 600 no matter how many burned exercising. I'll keep gym sessions to 40 mins or so on a fast day but could still do a sufferfest or some fairly intense exercise without issue. I'll eat as near to the gym as possible to get relatively fuelled up for it, and I'll have some nuts or something little to nibble on.

I struggled the morning after the fast day at first, but now I make sure I get a decent bit of breakfast in the next day and I'm sorted.

slunker

I suppose all diets are different but my thinking is that it is much more easier to lose weight if you already have an excess of weight in the first place. Looking at some of the programs where people are amazed by some one who has lost a stone but already weighed 30 stone to start with the slightest calorie deficit would prove to lose weight.

The op says he weighed 93kg to start but what is the height and build ogf the op?? Just to put a little perspective on it. FWIW I'm 72kg and can't lose anymore weight at 5'10" trying all things but I guess this is down to my body's make up even though I look 65!!!

GiantMike

zx6man wrote:

Just cut the daily calories to a couple under what you need ,weight comes off, easy at that :-)

I don't think the OP is looking for weight loss recommendations. I think he has found one, and was just letting us know.

zx6man

GiantMike wrote:

I don't think the OP is looking for weight loss recommendations. I think he has found one, and was just letting us know.

And I let him know which worked for me, I didn't recomend anything

Anonymous

zx6man wrote:

Just cut the daily calories to a couple under what you need ,weight comes off, easy at that :-)

Why do that if this works better (or even the same!)?

Personally I like the idea that I do not have to stick to/calorie count 2300 calories (or whatever you are suggesting) every day for the next two months, as opposed to just 2 days a week.

What you are saying is ultimately true, its the most basic diet and will 100% work if you stick to it, but in the real world people do not stick to it, and it does not work!

Willpower is a big problem for most people trying to lose weight.
5:2 requires (at most) 2/7ths of the willpower and has faster results. IME, seeing results is big motivation for people to not lose willpower, and remember, they only need a fraction of the willpower in the first place

Its like working a two day week for twice the pay basically :P
Your option is like working a 7 day week for minimum wage

zx6man

Won't argue with any of your points made. For me it was cutting out the crap, nothing more than just eating healthy. That way I didn't even call it a diet. No calorie counting or any of that.

As you say sticking to it is the key regardless of the methods.
Seeing results is the biggest motivator for sure. I went from being 17st (was like that for about 5 yrs) to 11st 10.

markp80

Carbonator wrote:

zx6man wrote:

Just cut the daily calories to a couple under what you need ,weight comes off, easy at that :-)

Why do that if this works better (or even the same!)?

From what I've read (and I don't have it to hand now, but I might do a search), the latest research is suggesting that in fact the old method of simply cutting calories every day doesn't work that well, and that the "fasting" technique works beyond just the calorie defecit.

I think reading all the different threads on here about nutrition that it's clear that a calorie isn't just a calorie (as used to be the mantra) - an issue which is again a hot topic, particularly with the latest research into the effects of sugar (fructose specifically) and Coca-Cola's latest advert that would have you believe that all calories are the same. (Which is slightly off-topic, my point just being that research is giving a better understanding of many aspects of nutrition.)

KateF wrote:

I wouldn't do this diet anyway as I think its crazy

Just wondered why you think this? There's some good evidence to suggest it's not, I understand.

Cheers,
MarkP

KateF

MarkP80 wrote:

Carbonator wrote:

KateF wrote:

I wouldn't do this diet anyway as I think its crazy

Just wondered why you think this? There's some good evidence to suggest it's not, I understand.

Cheers,
MarkP

'crazy' was probably the wrong terminology. I just don't think it would work at all for me - I can see the point of it for people who aren't training (and I do mean training and not just exercise), but if you're doing lots of intervals and racing, I'd have thought that the ability to recover and train the next day / day after that after would be severely damaged?

Anonymous

My gut (no pun intended) feeling is that there is something in this. I also like the idea that small amounts of super intense exercise is better than hours in the gym.
Not because its easier (I want to cycle for hours anyway) but just because it might have some scientific truth.

I think we (science) know little about ourselves etc. and if there are lots of things to find out, this type of thing might be one of them.
Cavemen never had Ocado, refrigerators and gym memberships. Maybe they had intense levels of exercise catching meat, gorged on it, then had very little calories until the next catch?
Maybe our bodies are meant to function (or just originally functioned) that way and these things work because of that 8)

charliew87

slunker wrote:

I suppose all diets are different but my thinking is that it is much more easier to lose weight if you already have an excess of weight in the first place. Looking at some of the programs where people are amazed by some one who has lost a stone but already weighed 30 stone to start with the slightest calorie deficit would prove to lose weight.

The op says he weighed 93kg to start but what is the height and build ogf the op?? Just to put a little perspective on it. FWIW I'm 72kg and can't lose anymore weight at 5'10" trying all things but I guess this is down to my body's make up even though I look 65!!!

First bit is definitely true. I've had 2 stone to lose for the last 5 years just haven't been that proactive about doing it. Whenever I had to reduce calories on the whole, like undereating by 500cal 5 days a week or something, I'd have a massive lunch or go out on the piss and negate any of the minor positives I had achieved previously.

A perk of my job currently is plenty of nice lunches in a selection of top places, I don't particularly want to have to forgo these unnecessarily. 5:2 means I can fast on Mon + Weds, have nice lunches Thu and/or Fri and still lose weight.

phreak

Surely it's still a matter of maths? I mean if your fasting provides a deficit of 2000 calories, yet the other five days you have an excess of 2500 you're not going to lose weight are you?

charliew87

phreak wrote:

Surely it's still a matter of maths? I mean if your fasting provides a deficit of 2000 calories, yet the other five days you have an excess of 2500 you're not going to lose weight are you?

Yes and no. Common sense would suggest that's the case but they've done a fair amount of controlled experiments on this and what was eaten on non-fast days didn't affect overall weight loss, supposedly.

I do eat more healthily in general than I used to pre diet but would have no reservations about putting away a 3 course meal and a couple of bottles of red and still losing weight that week.

Anonymous

Same here. Had the works (I am not drinking to be fair) at TGI Fridays the other night (kids party).
Ate a fair bit yesterday and stuck strictly to 600 cal today (coffee and water only for me now )
Pretty confident I will weigh less tomorrow than I did on Tuesday.
Its the work of the devil :evil: I tell you

When I break 14 stone I am going to give it the acid test...................Three coarse Indian :P

Have only got to 14 (from 17 1/2) before. I found it v difficult to get under 14 and am hoping this will be the magic I need.
I want to get to 13 stone and never go above 14 again. I have done this when 14,15,16 so feel the tricky bit is getting to 13 in the first place.

Herbsman

'Scientific truth'? Is there such a thing?

einriba

This is interesting!! A few in work or on about doing it - I've recently cut carbs (potatoes, rice, bread etc), but I'm feeling pretty weak as a result....

Suffering for 2 days a week instead of 7 might be the way to go....

ShutUpLegs

Try eating sensible for 7 days?

markp80

Carbonator wrote:

Cavemen never had Ocado, refrigerators and gym memberships. Maybe they had intense levels of exercise catching meat, gorged on it, then had very little calories until the next catch?
Maybe our bodies are meant to function (or just originally functioned) that way and these things work because of that 8)

I think I did read that this was one of the theories put forward to explain why it works - that we all started as hunter-gatherers and this was how our bodies developed/evolved/adapted.

KateF wrote:

MarkP80 wrote:

KateF wrote:

I wouldn't do this diet anyway as I think its crazy

Just wondered why you think this? There's some good evidence to suggest it's not, I understand.

'crazy' was probably the wrong terminology. I just don't think it would work at all for me - I can see the point of it for people who aren't training (and I do mean training and not just exercise), but if you're doing lots of intervals and racing, I'd have thought that the ability to recover and train the next day / day after that after would be severely damaged?

- thanks, understand where you're coming from. I don't know how it would affect someone who is seriously training, but if someone is seriously training then I'd guess they'd be looking at their daily nutrition pretty closely in any case - for every day. I'd also be surprised if they needed to go on a diet!

Cheers,
MarkP

Courage Monsieur

Very interesting to hear about your experiences.

I agree the real wow factor with these stories is only when people have a good amount of excess weight in the first place.

I've got 2kg or so I'd like to move. I don't think I can realistically lose any more, and wouldn't want to (5'11", 74kg at present). I wonder if this diet would nuke that 2kg or if I should just keep chipping away at it with diet and exercise.

So I'm wondering - will 5:2 get you down to athletic rates of body fat % without having to do the work, or is it only going to shift the stuff that's easier to shift?

zx6man

Check on some body building sites, I would suggest they are the best folks to ask about body fat loss :-) . Whether its healthy or not is another matter