What's the concept

This topic contains 7 replies, has 6 voices, and was last updated by vicki 11 years, 3 months ago.

Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)

Phil24b

10:00 am
30 Aug 13
Permalink

Hi all, like most of you I’ve read the book, watched the Horizon show and re-searched the Web.

But I am still alittle confused about the fast “goal” is it to go as long as poss without eating?, or so long as you stick to your controlled calorie intake is all good. for example:

If you eat dinner on a non fast day at 6pm, then the next day is your fast day and you have a 200 calorie breakfast at 8am (14hr gap), no lunch, then 400 calorie dinner at 6pm. then nothing until breakfast the next day (non fast) at 8am.
I assume your fast has affectivley lasted 38 hrs?
6pm non fast to 8am fast – 14hrs
then 8am fast to 8am non fast – 24hrs

Or are you better of eating your last fast meal at 6pm, then going all the way until 6pm the next day on a fast and taking in your cals in one go – a 24 hrs pure fast ?

fast for life

10:09 am
30 Aug 13
Permalink

hi phil your right your fast day is 38hours including your cals for a fast, do what you can manage, some go all day some take their cals thoughout the day, the beauty is you choose what works best for you, there is no right or wrong time to eat your fast day meals.
best of luck xx

TracyJ

10:27 am
30 Aug 13
Permalink

You’re not necessarily ‘better off’ with any of the examples, you need to initially think about what you think you’d be able to cope with. For many people, the idea of going for really long periods without anything at all is scary, so they like to have a breakfast and a dinner, or some other combination of meals throughout the day. If you think you could easily cope with a long ‘fasting’ period then just leave breakfast and see how long you can go before you need to have something.

This is a long-term lifestyle so you need to experiment and see what will work for you. There is no ‘best way’ only the best way for you.

vicki

11:59 am
30 Aug 13
Permalink

Dear Phil24b
Stop agonising
This fast is what you make it.
Michael has promoted the 500/600 calories as doable/acceptable for most of us – which is great – AND WORKS
Some like to do a total fast of only water, also good
If you fast from waking to the next morning you are doing a 36ish hour fast (whether 500 hundred or total)
Brad Pilons suggests from lunch to lunch (which also works for many people, including me occasionally)
I do water only after dinner on day 1 to lunch on day 3 – and go to the gym every morning (crosstrain 60 minutes), that works for me
I find eating just stimulates the taste buds and I get hungrier (greedier?)
But others need the 500 calories, which is fine – ITS JUST WHAT WORKS FOR YOU
DONT agonise about calories, just be sensible
Eating whatever you want on non-fast days means “anything” not “everything”

DrLL

12:27 pm
30 Aug 13
Permalink

Well said vicki: Don’t agonise about calories

The concept of 5:2 is to only count calories two days.

The beauty of 5:2 is when you realize you don’t need to count any day, because the fast somehow reverse our spiral towards obesity (the more often we eat the more hungry we get and the more we eat).

I would say focus on the fast, do them as long as you can during the day, and a bit longer tomorrow. Once you can do a 18 hour fast you can start playing around with calories two or three days a week – but maybe you will not need to!

Phil24b

12:39 pm
30 Aug 13
Permalink

@vicki I am really not “agonising” just asking a question – I’ve not lost any sleep over this matter.

The book often uses phrases such as “give your belly a break”. Obviously we all want to maximise results for our efforts so if Iam going to fast I’d like to do it the most efficient way – hence the post.

If this means not eating for as long as I can go then I’d rather do that, I am a very strong willed person and do not “need” to eat a 100 cal breakfast for the sake it. The science behind this is that your body goes into “repair” mode I am trying to be clear on just when this starts and the most it can be prolonged for and if any form of eating switches it off.

Michael states that he has 200 cal breakfast at 7am and 400 cal dinner at 7pm making his fast 12hrs, What can become confusing is if someone was to have a 100 cal breakfast @7am, and 200 cal lunch @2pm and a 300 cal dinner 7pm – is that still a 12 hour fast? or does the lunch make it a 7hr fast?, in other words is a “fast” the total time you go without any food or just the time period you are reducing to 600cals?

Humphrey

5:11 pm
30 Aug 13
Permalink

M’s fast was 12 hours between breakfast and supper, but in total it was actually a 36 hour “fast of 600 cals”, from supper on the previous non-fast day to breakfast the day after the 600 cal fast day. Hope that helps Phil24b

vicki

11:35 pm
30 Aug 13
Permalink

Hi Phil – my reading is that if you are having the 500/600 calories on a fast day they don’t count as breaking the fast, because they are factored in to the fast. Michael says on page 61 “So I decided to try eating 600 calories for 2 days a week. It seemed a reasonable compromise and, more importantly, DOABLE.”