For those who think it doesn't/can't/won't work

This topic contains 6 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by arla 10 years, 3 months ago.

Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)

Smeeagain

3:07 pm
27 Jan 14
Permalink

I have done some calculations over the weekend. If we all accept that if you consume less calories (and ideally expend more but we will exclude that for now) then you will lose weight. And if you don’t accept that logic then I’d suggest this isn’t the place for you!

My metabolic base rate (from a variety of calculations elsewhere) states that I need 2400 calories a day just to exist (in reality I must be consuming more than that as I’m putting on weight year on year but park that for now)

365 days a year x 2400 calories = 876,000 calories in a year

On the 5:2 diet I will have 2 days per week (total 104 days) at 600 calories or so = 62,400 calories in a year,
which leaves another 261 days per year at 2400 calories per day = 626,400
That’s a total of 688,800 calories per year on 5:2 v 876,000 calories ‘normally’.

That’s an annual calorie reduction of 187,200 calories or around 21% (187,000 calories is like not eating at all on 78 of my normal 2400 calorie days!!)

Now if we accept that I probably do eat more than 2400 calories per day before commencing 5:2 then the 21% is even greater – possibly as much as 25% or more

So it must and will work as long as you persevere.

ChrissieinBrittany

3:09 pm
27 Jan 14
Permalink

What else did you do this weekend? 😉

TracyJ

3:33 pm
27 Jan 14
Permalink

Smeeagain – I don’t wish to put you off because you’re right, it IS a pure numbers game and it works because of that but it’s not quite as simple as your equation. You need to remember that as you lose the weight your TDEE also reduces, which is why your rate of weight loss will reduce as you get closer to your goal weight. Going by your numbers above your reduction of calories would have you losing in the region of 50-60lb during the year but with the TDEE reduction throughout that year, you’d probably be looking at more like 40-50lb max. if you didn’t make any other lifestyle changes and as long as you were on or under your TDEE on non-fastdays.

The key is to keep track of your TDEE as it reduces and ensure that you are always on or slightly under it on non-fastdays and that your fastday intake remains at 500/600 (if your personal numbers indicate that you should be having less than 500 calories then you decide if you want to do that or just make sure that you’re comfortably under your TDEE on non-fastdays to compensate for your ‘extra’ calories on fastdays).

Eating a little under the TDEE is fine if you want to go for quicker losses but you must never eat less than your BMR number on non-fastdays.

Smeeagain

5:32 pm
27 Jan 14
Permalink

Thanks Tracy

I did acknowledge that I am/was probably eating more than the TDEE as I was putting on weight year on year and I did say my calculations were based on eating BMR on non fast days (2400) calories, and I did make reference to TDEE (when i talked about being a bit more active)

I’m just trying to keep it simple for those who are struggling with the motivation. Even if I did only lose 40-50lb instead of 50-60lb I’d be over the moon. I suspect that those who post saying they are struggling, are not 3 or 4 lbs from their target weight but more, possibly even a lot more.

My point is, as and when you get deeper into it, then yes there are more complexities to consider, but if you consume 20 (or more) percent calories than you did last year, and change nothing else, then you will lose weight. The not changing anything is critical to that argument. So last year you could have been very active, and maybe now you’re not, so reducing your calorie intact wouldn’t necessarily make you lose weight in that particular example. Add in activity (a much nicer word than exercise) and you will definitely lose weight!

Let the pounds roll!

arla

12:17 am
28 Jan 14
Permalink

Actually it’s a lot more complex than calories in v calories out, and the fasting does more than simple calorie reduction.

I’m an example of it not being that simple. I once spent 4 weeks on a VLCD and lost zero weight, despite being active.

Stef.

12:44 am
28 Jan 14
Permalink

I agree with you Arla! There is so much more to calorie intake than it looks like.

I have read a really good book called The Calorie Myth and in quintessence he is saying there are “good” and “bad” calories. You can stuff yourself with bad calories and your body is starving! The body needs a certain amount of nutrients and it doesn’t get those from junk food. Unfortunately this includes my beloved pasta…and rice…and ice cream.

What I have learnt over the last three months is paying much more attention to what I am eating and not only to keeping to my 5:2; 4:3; ADF…it really pays off. If you eat the “right” food you feel much less hungry.

This does not mean though I do not deserve an occassional ice cream 😉

Nutrition is a real science!

Best of luck
Stef.

arla

5:04 am
28 Jan 14
Permalink

I’ve been trying to find an article I photocopied from colleagues fitness magazine (to help me find if the research has been published). The article was in December 2011 and had to do with inflammation & weight loss. An aussie academic ran a trial where one group got anti-inflammatary supplements and made no dietary changes and the other group didn’t get the anti-inflammatary supplements. The group that got them lost weight.