…into the water of dieting; if you will permit.

It’s a bit like entering an unfamiliar swimming pool and wondering what vista will present itself; will it be a by comparison cramped but oh-so-stylish four-lane Victorian swimming bath or will it be a pool truly Olympic in proportions.

One has swum in and enjoyed many of the former as a child, struggled a tad in the latter in schools galas and quietly cruised up and down repeating “lengths” when (formerly) training for specific endurance endeavours as a younger adult. It’s a similar story with dieting. If others will permit the continuing analogy in purely dietary terms one can experience both; and still have fun too. The Fast Diet.

One was fond of periodically urging oneself to don the shorts again, to see if they would still fit and if one would be brave enough to expose one’s flesh to the gaze of anonymous onlookers. It became easy to always be too busy to find the time to…

…it becomes just as easy to see where this is going.

But one kept tugging at the shorts; metaphorically and literally speaking that is. Then one heard about The Fast Diet. And summarily dismissed it out of hand as being something which was associated with The Fast Show; which one does not watch. One doesn’t enjoy it. Simple as that. But, observing the time honoured maxim of not judging a book by its cover, one decided it might be wise to read up a little on this Fast Diet thing; research a little to see what and who was behind it all. One began to like what one was reading about this Fast Diet. It made some sort of sense; fasting but still eating. ‘That’s an odd juxtaposition’ one mused, but an interesting one.

So one resolved to purchase the book and start reading in depth. One day.

The days rolled by and one intermittently visited various websites to see what all the fuss was about; it was being spoken of in glowing terms and with surprise too. This became intriguing. ‘One really must…’ the muse continued…

Finally, having piffled around with a self-devised form of fast dieting one took the plunge and bought the book. And the recipe book too; one had taken some notice of what Ms. Spencer and Dr. Moseley had been extolling, to make dieting fasting fun.

There had been a noticeable loosening of the waistband whilst muddling about with one’s own fasting foolery and one was quite pleased with that but, if you’ll forgive the deliciously wicked pun, one was hungry for more.

And so it began. The real ‘the fast diet’. One read the book with increasing impatience. One resolved that one would not start this regime until one had completed the book. And one didn’t.

One is now into one’s third week of 5:2 Fast Dieting and coping quite well. However, one has to admit to a gargantuan struggle to overcome the impulse to snack – on nuts, always on nuts – between the hours of 7pm and 9pm on those fast days. Brazils, Hazelnuts, Almonds, Walnuts, Pecans, and oh, those delicious Peanuts. Irresistible. It is a struggle. But, to do without for one day twice a week is no real hardship. One has stopped buying peanuts. No greater love has one than that for one’s country and those delicious Peanuts. But, something had to give.

One started the fast diet at 112.7K; one is, of course, a chap, with a waistband one did not like. One is now at 110.3K and passaging one’s sixth fast day and becoming gradually stricter with one’s calorie intake. From 800 on a fast day down to 650 per fast day. Well, Mimi and Dr. Moseley do say not to beat oneself up about this diet. Instead one is always encouraged to make it work for oneself; stop punishing the soul they encourage, be pleased about progress they intone. So, one doesn’t, one endeavours and one is in response.

One looks forward to enjoying what could be amazing progress. The real measuring will start soon; as the book encourages. And the diary too. That’ll be fun. Already one’s waistbands are significantly looser. What joy.

Happy New Year dieters.

Trouble? Odd? …talking for such a long time…?

I can be you, also I can be one. Now that’s an odd way of talking, but it is grammatically correct; in response to your comment, in an abstract sort of way. If you will permit?

As for the use of I, one does not like the centricity of it. One prefers to talk in or from a remove, if you will allow. It is an affectation; in much the same way that modern casual profanity is intended to shock and impress (hardly likely in this instance) and to create a strong “edgy” image. One prefers to remember the kinder mores of an almost forgotten age; an age that is not so distant in its passing.

Have you seen where this social networking guttermouthing is leading the madding crowd? One prefers to adopt a kinder, gentler approach to communicating when “speaking” via websites. I have a voice of course I do but one is an impersonal – anonymous if you like – way of “speaking” when “talking” from the fringes. One takes a view that I is the norm but one is not of the norm, as implied one is of a certain remove, one is different. And what is wrong with that?

As you are your own ultimate censor, as indeed are we all our own ultimate censors, what is so wrong, so troubling, so odd about another not being one of the masses, why does one have to be advised/invited to correct one’s form of personal address? This seems to mock your concluding paragraph about not beating oneself up; there is no need for that when another is prepared to save one the trouble, eh, what?

If you would prefer that one does not comment, desists from contributing, then say so, outright; don’t veil an instruction by appending an apologetic,
“…please?” If one is offensive to another then say so. One will apologise, and sincerely so; one intends no offence. Perhaps I should herald that information lest others breach some unwritten, some undisclosed,
(n)etiquette? Perhaps it’ll save you the bother of having to inform others on an individual basis?

As one sees it, one is being chided. And all because one sought to, humorously one hoped, extoll the virtues of an eating regime that offers so much promise.

Yes, one has tried, and succeeded, in losing weight before. However, one’s passage through the years and genetic imprint predisposes one to becoming slightly corpulent as one becomes just a tad more sedentary. That’s all. I’m a bit lazy. I need the occasional spur. Happy now? I, I.. skipper.

Sceptical; you suggest. Not half as much as I am now; about the motives of others.

It’s a non-fast day. Nice!

So, old luv, thanks, I think, for the e-mail. And the good luck wishes.

Ooroo.

Dear readers, both local to the United Kingdom and internationally; it’s all about the diet, ‘the fast diet’.

It shouldn’t be about how one addresses the virtues of ‘the fast diet’. It’s all about the benefits that may be gained by adopting a sustainable eating regime that affords one significant health benefits.

That, in a nutshell, is it. It’s all about the diet, the regime…

It’s not about you, it’s not about me, it’s not about any one in particular; it’s all about ‘the fast diet’.

I hope that clarifies matters for those who seem unusually exercised by a different from the norm form of address. Mama used to caution, “When one cannot find anything good to say it is always best to say…”

Now, where the heck is the Delete Post function?

Stef

Patronising and condescending at the same time. Quite a feat.

And the rest..?

One does not seek the permission or approbation of others. One’s intentions were to relate to one’s experiences of the lauded beneficial effects of adapting to an alternative dietary regime not to promote the self or sate one’s ego; to feast on self importance. However, it becomes apparent that unless one adopts a form of address which is approved by or agreeable to others one will be advised to change whatever stylistic approach one may wish to employ. One will be chided. The ego will be belaboured.

So you see Stef, it really is all about the diet as far as oneself is concerned; one’s self is singularly unimportant. One’s experiences are the point not the self per se. That was and is one’s point entirely. Perhaps contrary to what Ms. Spencer and Dr. Mosley might encourage.

One is intrigued by the comment “…quite a few of us have… read the book…”

The quantifying “quite a few” and the use of “us”. The implications. A stylised form of address? Not that one is, sheepishly, inferring anything.

‘the fast diet’? it’s going well.