Jump to content
Mac Dude

So far so good...

Recommended Posts

For the past 10 years or so my weight has hovered between 81 and 85 kgs which is a bit heavier than I should be or want to be.

My flaky memory seems to indicate that my weight has changed in stages. I was quite skinny up to my early 20s, but I was playing soccer, tennis and cricket and had a metabolism that seemed to be permanently on high.

A career in IT isn't necessarily great for keeping the weight off, and as time went by my waistline went out. Every 5 years or so I'd reach a plateau, stay there for a while then creep up to the next plateau. Eventually something had to give (apart from my pants). Most of last year I hovered around 85kg, and eventually I realised enough is enough, but what to do?

Over the past 6 months I've watched a few shows by a dude called Michael Mosley who is a doctor and he has produced a few docos for the BBC on health, weight, cholesterol and exercise. He is also the guy who came up with the 2:5 diet.

It basically where you fast for 2 days a week.

Based on various research he developed the theory that the human body is designed for a feast/famine cycle. We are good at storing energy(fat) when food is in abundance so that we can burn it during the lean times between antelope kills. Unfortunately in the western world because food is always available we never enter the famine part of that cycle where we burn that stored energy.

Anyhow, the bottom line is that for 2 days you consume one quarter of your average daily calories. SO on a fasting day a male can consume 600 calories and a female 500, usually in two meals, breakfast and dinner. In between you can have VERY low calorie drinks like coffee or tea in moderation, but no milk or sugar of course. We had the 2:5 diet book around the house so I started reading it. As he described why he was doing it all the factors he listed for himself, weight, height, cholesterol, blood sugars, etc., were all identical to me.

So on Jan 14 I jumped in.

I fasted for 2 days a week, using recipes out of his book then making a few of my own. I did not change anything about my lifestyle or eating habits on the 5 non-fasting days.

Initially.

Because there was very little or no sugar on fasting days I noticed that my sugar consumption during non-fasting days decreased. Then the meal sizes started to decrease. I found myself 'listening to my body' more. Eating enough to not be hungry, but not enough to be full, allowing time for the food to hit my stomach.

To get me through the fasting days, I drink a LOT of water - I've discovered that sometimes when I think I'm hungry I'm actually thirsty. Aside from water I get stuck into the herbal teas and I usually have a long black coffee for lunch. Strange, but I find coffee quite filling. I also noticed that when I was busy, I didn't miss the food or feel hungry. I had some fasting days where I'd work from 7am to 3pm (moderate manual labour) then I'd go out and play a round of golf in 35C heat but the lack of food didn't bother me.

Yes, the first few fasting days were REALLY hard, but you get used to it. Also, some of the recipes are really yummy so the rest of the family are happy to eat it.

Anyway, I'm posting this today because I reached a milestone, albeit a minor one :)

Since my kids have been alive (over 24 years I think!), I've never been under 80kgs.

Today I hit 79.6kg.

I know there are a lot of people who have lost a lot more, but for me I'm half way to my goal.

And today not being a fasting day I will drink to that :)

Below is the journey so far. You will notice one point where there is a 'pause' in the downward trend. This was due to a weekend away with two other couples where we ate and drank everything that wasn't nailed down.
The idea of the diet is so I can get away with doing that every now and then :)

Anyway, I'm posting this for any folks who have found themselves in the position where they want to chop off a few kilos but aren't sure how to go about it.

As a side note, the current Scientific American has an article on the relationship between exercise and weight loss. In a nutshell, the research indicates that no matter how active or inactive we are, humans generally burn the same number of calories. I won't go into how this can be here, but for men the level is 2,600 calories. If you consume more than that a day your body will store it...

ciao!

Fitbit.png

Edited by Mac Dude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without changing any other factors? Thats not a bad outcome man! good work!

I'm always interested in what other people are doing to control weight.

I lost 35KG when I was younger in 2006 but plateaued since then.

 

Man, if that trick works, I'm interested, keep us informed!

 

Ive started an intense weights regime, and moved as many carbs to protien as possible, without being 'atkins' obsessed or anything like that.

Lost 8kg in 3 weeks so far.

 

Hmm, 600 calories a day?

Man it depends what you eat for that eh, it could be a lot of food!

I mean, I don't know if I could consume 5 full chicken breasts in a day.

or a whole dozen eggs, or 2KG of watermelon.....

 

That said, my 1/4 would be 300cal a day, which is easier to eat.

My daily intake for the last 8 or so years is about 1000cal to 1300cal a day.

When I started weights, I HAD to increase that, but its hard to eat more after so long.

 

I'm intrigued though, I'm going to look into this, please do keep us informed!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not bad... I'm overdue for the test for Type 2 Diabetes following one around late November where I was borderline.

 

I think I peaked somewhere around 97.5, my efforts to lose weight sort of died off and barely lost much at all where I think it was around 95.5 when tested and dropped to maybe 93.5 after a couple of weeks with some restriction to the junk I was eating.

 

Go back to late 2013 and it was going the other way, I was in a shitty headspace and not eating much with the weight barely topping 80.

The hope was a couple of months ago to be on the way to somewhere around 84-87, looking like a far off goal ATM.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice one. I used the same diet a few years back to help my old man sort through some health problems related to weight and diabetes. It works well.

 

One thing I learned over the long term is to augment it with ideas from Keto/Atkins/Slow carb diets. The theory is that early humans needed to make the most of fruit when it became available, in order to survive winter or drought. As a result, our bodies process high sugar foods differently, and they don't trigger a sense of fullness at similar levels of consumption to fat and protein. We have a detailed understanding of this process by studying the Citric Acid Cycle, but for some reason it's still on the fringe of public awareness, and the focus is maintained on invalid ideas about fat consumption. The key point being that a diet high in sugar and carbohydrates makes you hungrier.

 

Tim Ferris describes a 'Slow Carb Diet' in his book The 4 Hour Body which I found convenient to follow, and compatible with the 5:2 diet. In a nutshell, eat more fat (avocado, olive oil, dairy), and less high GI carbs (sugar, fruit juice, white bread, jasmine rice etc.), and following the diet/lifestyle change will eventually take less effort. You'll simply feel full when you've eaten enough.

 

Kicking sugar is bloody hard for the first few weeks though, cravings to the point that my diet was interfering with my ability to work. The problem is that any transgression kicks you back to the start, and the withdrawals/cravings repeat themselves. However, after a few false starts, I got to a point where the cravings disappeared, the fast days were a breeze, and my body weight stabilised at a healthy level (13-16% body fat in my case).

 

I've since fallen off the wagon unfortunately, the move to China disrupted by routines. Now that I'm settled, and Winter is almost over here, I guess it's time to sort my diet and exercise habits out.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way I see it, the best way to eat would be fats and sugars early, protein later on then stop eating 4 hours or more before bed.

 

Problem is, that sort of philosophy nearly totally disagrees with my desires and habits. I eat SFA during the day and the feast time occurs between 6:30pm - midnight with much of the bad stuff concentrated in the last few hours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way I see it, the best way to eat would be fats and sugars early, protein later on then stop eating 4 hours or more before bed.

 

 

Correct!

 

High carbs in the morning.

Low carbs at lunch.

No carbs at dinner.

 

For me that's usually a chicken sandwich for breakfast.

A salad with heaps of meat for lunch.

and a large protein bar or shake for dinner (which I have at 5pm on the dot, on the drive home from work).

Then if I get hungry before bed (bed is 1:30am), I'll have a slice or two of ham and some sugar free cordial.

 

Works for me; well at least, so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm,

 

I had added weight last year for some reason, diet hasn't really changed in years, but then I had a repeat of glandular fever.

 

Not sure I'd recommend it as a diet but it took 15Kgs off me in no time and my cholesterol went down to 4ish.

 

It's not always just about weight though, muscle weighs more and whilst I don't really exercise much I carry much more of that than of fat so I hover in the 85/90KG region which my doc is perfectly happy with, he was not happy with me at 100/105KG, neither was I.

 

Cheers

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I suck on a beer sitting at the PC...I hover at 83kg, should lose a couple. Or at least redistribute the belly to other areas.

 

But what I really wanted to say was, "How DARE you start a New Topic!"

 

:)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct!

 

High carbs in the morning.

Low carbs at lunch.

No carbs at dinner.

 

For me that's usually a chicken sandwich for breakfast.

A salad with heaps of meat for lunch.

and a large protein bar or shake for dinner (which I have at 5pm on the dot, on the drive home from work).

Then if I get hungry before bed (bed is 1:30am), I'll have a slice or two of ham and some sugar free cordial.

 

Works for me; well at least, so far.

 

When you look at the science, there isn't actually a clear correlation between when carbs are eaten, and weight loss/gain. If you stop to think about it, this is a logical outcome, because of the nature of our modern sedentary lifestyles. High carbs at any point in the day raises sugar levels in our blood, and without high intensity exercise that would utilise this energy, our body efficiently starts storing it away as fat for winter. So high carbs in the morning only applies if you exercise in the morning, or if your days involve physical labour. If you're like most modern people, and have a job with low exercise demands, the spike in blood sugar will interrupt mechanisms that burn fat for the 4-6 hours your body spends processing it, and then you'll feel hungry and irritable when your blood sugars eventually crash.

 

A (very) simplified model for how our bodies work is that we have two operating modes: Glycolysis, where energy comes from blood sugars, and Ketosis, where energy comes from stored fat. Eating food with a high Glycemic Index (GI) will raise blood sugar (glucose) levels, and once they pass a certain threshold, they trigger a a body-wide switch to Glycolysis. While in Glycolysis, you stop burning fat, and if your blood sugar levels are high enough, you'll start creating new fat cells.

 

As energy is used, blood sugar levels will go down, and you'll start using Glycogen reserves (short term storage for glucose) in your liver and muscles. At this point, your hunger response will be triggered in order to keep your body in Glycolysis, and avoid energy costs associated with reorganising cells to switch to Ketosis. Continued low blood sugar levels will cause irritability as various processes run short of energy, until eventually a switch to Ketosis is made. Ketosis will then stabilise blood sugar levels, which you'll experience as diminished hunger. Hunger will eventually be triggered as levels of a hormone called leptin (released when you eat) run low, your stomach empties itself, or Cortisol (a hormone associated with stress) is released. A state of ketosis will be preserved for as long as your blood sugar levels are kept below the threshold for Glycolysis.

 

Bloodsugar.jpg

 

It follows that in order to lose weight (excess fat), you need to be in Ketosis, and any spikes in blood sugar will pause the fat loss process. A calorie deficit will still lead to weightless, but the experience will be less comfortable as you switch between Glycolysis and Ketosis.

 

A common misconception when following a keto diet is that we should replace energy from carbs with tons of protein. A diet high in protein is still capable of raising blood sugars to levels that would prevent ketosis, so the better option is to replace carbs with healthy fats, which have a much lower GI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks guys :)

 

MS I think you prove that, to a degree, we all need to find what works for us.

 

As for the carbs/protein, that's something you can overlay on to the 2:5 regime. If I can dig up what the dude said about it I'll post it here...

 

Rybags I think I have a munchy problem like you describe :) So far I've managed, on most occasions, to substitute bad stuff with water or tea.

 

Mostly :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice work :D

 

It's always difficult to lose it and keep it off consistently as you get older, but yeah - well done ;)

 

I'm 44 now & lost 22kg a few years back, got down to 86, went back up to 97 & now I'm at 91 & heading back down to around 88-ish & I'll be happy.

 

Mostly I've just cut bread, white carbs and refined/processed sugar out of the diet.....and upped the cycling again. I'm sticking with a singlespeed steel CX bike for 200km/week of commuting at a minimum & extending it out on the weekends which really helps my frame with the weightloss. The downside is trying to find the happy balance of protein & carb from other sources to maintain the energy levels & muscle recovery.

 

<shrug> I'll get there. Looks like you will too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The weird thing I'm finding, is that cutting down my food intake has lessened the amount of leg and foot cramps I get. The weekend is when

I get stuck into the house work stuff. Up here it means constant sweating so always need to be refilling the water. Following my previous regime

of food intake three times a day, I would find at the end of the weekend slog I would be all crampy. I could fix it, but it was still a nuisance.

 

Over the last few months, we've cut bread totally from our food intake. Even spuds are almost completely gone. Pulse noodle

replaces our usual wheat noodle.

edit : to insert : Basmati brown rice is still very very nice.

 

During the day I'll have some nuts ( brazil ) a few dates and a piece of fruit satisfies the sugar and the meal at night has the protein and veg

needed. The meal is, i would say normal size now and not over compensating for the loss of a lunch.

 

The other sugar I indulge in is "Old Gold " chocolate and a nip or two of scotch << that's a weekend thing only ;)

 

I'm really really surprised that I don't get all weak and inactive by this regimen. Even my chronic urge for lollies and chips etc is gone.

Since giving the ciggies the flick, this has been the first time I've felt capable of getting a handle on my weight .

 

I don't feel the need for vitamin supplement and I'm not as bothered by people coughing and sneezing in my vicinity ;)

Edited by eveln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Correct!

 

High carbs in the morning.

Low carbs at lunch.

No carbs at dinner.

 

For me that's usually a chicken sandwich for breakfast.

A salad with heaps of meat for lunch.

and a large protein bar or shake for dinner (which I have at 5pm on the dot, on the drive home from work).

Then if I get hungry before bed (bed is 1:30am), I'll have a slice or two of ham and some sugar free cordial.

 

Works for me; well at least, so far.

 

When you look at the science, there isn't actually a clear correlation between when carbs are eaten, and weight loss/gain. If you stop to think about it, this is a logical outcome, because of the nature of our modern sedentary lifestyles. High carbs at any point in the day raises sugar levels in our blood, and without high intensity exercise that would utilise this energy, our body efficiently starts storing it away as fat for winter. So high carbs in the morning only applies if you exercise in the morning, or if your days involve physical labour.

 

I've heard the argument and seen the science behind both ideas; and it all has some credit IMO.

 

From my personal research, the whole 'carbs in the morning' thing makes sense. It 'wakes you up' and makes you feel energised, meaning you're more likely to do something.

Even if you're a desk job worker (as I am) I have to get dressed, shower, carry things to the car, drive, carry things out of the car, take the stairs to my office, and arrange the day.

 

That's a LOT more than I do at lunch, where I sit passenger, buy food, then, sit at the desk again to eat.

 

Is it enough to burn off the carbs? Nope.

But it is a LOT more and it stops you feeling shit. Since following those rules I've found I have more energy overall, and I can finish work, and hit the gym.

Where as before I would finish work and hit bed.

 

It's good info Tastywheat,

I've also done some big research into ketosis.

On one side, its the bodys emergency starve mode. If you let protein drop, at any point during ketosis, it can consume your muscle to repair damage and keep organs working.

It's fairly risky if you're trying to overall improve your health, as opposed to straight up lose KGs.

As I got warned when I was being "unhealthy" with my eating, your heart is a muscle, you're rotting muscles, figure it out. (eep!)

 

I guess I'm so trusting of the "old school macros" method, not because I enjoy ignoring modern science, but because when I hit the gym, I'm surrounded by professional bodybuilders who swear by it and have majority placed in competition.

None of them are 'risking' Ketosis. Most are relying on the tried and tested: Empty the muscles Glucogen at night (hard weights), only provide protein for the sleep, burn fat in the morning as Glucogen is low, then high carb to fuel organs for the day.

 

Everyone has their own approach, but the whole "ketosis" scene is a little extreme to my mind.

We may have been designed to not eat high carbs as cavemen, but we've had 10's of generations of relying on purely rice and bread as main food sources, so I think we're foolish to assume we haven't adapted a little.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On one side, its the bodys emergency starve mode. If you let protein drop, at any point during ketosis, it can consume your muscle to repair damage and keep organs working.

It's fairly risky if you're trying to overall improve your health, as opposed to straight up lose KGs.

As I got warned when I was being "unhealthy" with my eating, your heart is a muscle, you're rotting muscles, figure it out. (eep!)

 

...

 

Everyone has their own approach, but the whole "ketosis" scene is a little extreme to my mind.

We may have been designed to not eat high carbs as cavemen, but we've had 10's of generations of relying on purely rice and bread as main food sources, so I think we're foolish to assume we haven't adapted a little.

 

There's a lot of conflicting advice out there, fads, people trying to make money, and people who haven't done the necessary critical analysis claiming to be experts. The thing that make diets like the 5:2 developed by Dr. Mosley, or principles (not the culture) behind the Keto/Atkins/Low carb diet, is that they are based on science and empirical evidence. I don't agree with the idea that there are fundamental differences in how our bodies function, the mechanism for weight loss is universal. However, I do accept that the culture we come from, and the lifestyle we lead can impact what is most comfortable/attainable.

 

"Starvation mode" is another misconception that is perpetuated in direct contradiction to readily available science. All it takes is a Google search, and basic skills in identifying trustworthy sources, and you'll see that the body definitely does have a starvation response, but the idea of activating it from dieting is complete scaremongering. It has very little to do with dietary protein levels, the driving factor is available glucose for the brain. You have glycogen reserves that will last for up to 3 days without food, body fat will be used for another 5-15 days of complete fasting, and only at this point does your body start selectively breaking down muscles as a last resort to produce glucose for the brain. This can't happen by accident, and it won't happen if you've got fat reserves, and a regular intake of glucose (unless you're an ultra marathon runner or extreme athlete). Gym Bros who suggest you need to load up on carbs or protein or else you'll lose muscle haven't done the research necessary to make such claims, and rely far to heavily on emotive anecdotes. This isn't an 'alternative fact', it's established science that I encourage you to confirm for yourself.

 

If what you're doing now works for you, awesome. Empirical evidence trumps theory. But if you find yourself in repeating patterns where you're breaking your diet/lifestyle change, or that you're not making the progress you expect, try changing your mindset, and measure the outcome.

Edited by tastywheat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

"Starvation mode" is another misconception that is perpetuated in direct contradiction to readily available science. All it takes is a Google search, and basic skills in identifying trustworthy sources, and you'll see that the body definitely does have a starvation response, but the idea of activating it from dieting is complete scaremongering.

 

I imagine that'd depend on the type of diet no?

 

According to the doctor, Ive been locked in 'starvation mode' for so long, its become my new norm.

It's the only explaination to my low calorie diet, and my huge body fat percentage (along with the need to sleep twice a day).

In that case, I followed a VLCD (very low calorie diet) but instead of stopping after the "initial week" and introducing more food, I kept on it for 7 years.

 

I'm 6ft, over 100kg, a very broad build, even if I was thin, and I ate 1200Cal per day, for 7 years.

And in multiple long periods, added 2+hrs of intense cardio a day.

 

I genuinely don't think that 'activating starvation mode' from dieting is scaremongering.

You diet hard enough, your body starves.

 

Activating it from 'changing up macros' might be harder to do, but it's pretty well documented that if the body has no spare protein, and needs to heal, it'll consume other sources.

So that "don't cut all carbs and go totally keto" makes sense.....

 

Im actually kind of glad I ended up 'fat' and not 'anorexic'.

I don't even hate eating (i fucking love it :P) I'm not adverse to the idea.

 

It's just training my body to be able to PROCESS something like 2000cal a day is hard. You get stomach cramps and have to poop more often and just... it's odd.

Edited by Master_Scythe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I imagine that'd depend on the type of diet no?

 

According to the doctor, Ive been locked in 'starvation mode' for so long, its become my new norm.

It's the only explaination to my low calorie diet, and my huge body fat percentage (along with the need to sleep twice a day).

In that case, I followed a VLCD (very low calorie diet) but instead of stopping after the "initial week" and introducing more food, I kept on it for 7 years.

 

I'm 6ft, over 100kg, a very broad build, even if I was thin, and I ate 1200Cal per day, for 7 years.

And in multiple long periods, added 2+hrs of intense cardio a day.

 

Nope. I'd suggest seeing a registered dietician (not a nutritionist), because your doctor absolutely has it wrong.

 

What he's calling 'starvation mode' is a misnomer, and has nothing to do with the starvation response described above. What he's actually referring to is adaptive thermogenesis, where a prolonged calorie deficit will result in a reduced metabolic rate. This is a completely normal bodily response, and while it impacts weight loss progress, there's no evidence to suggest that it inhibits weight loss completely.

 

There's a chance that you're an extremely rare mutant able to preserve energy beyond the abilities of regular humans, but I think a more likely explanation is that you're miscounting calories (the most common trap is ignoring calories from drinks and alcohol), being mislead by significantly incorrect nutritional info, or your cheat days are packing in enough calories to counteract the rest of your diet.

 

If this is something that's important to you, why not try a different approach? It'll require more discipline that what you're currently practicing, and you'll necessarily have to give up some comforts (like feeling satiated before bed), but it might be what's necessary for you to make progress. Treat it as a challenge. For two weeks, try giving up high-carb comforts, or foods that stimulate an insulin response (i.e. diet coke/pepsi/energy drinks). Don't be too ambitious with cutting calories, 1,500 - 1,600Cals should be your minimum starting point (1,200Cals will likely be counter productive). Use an app like My Fitness Pal to count calories, and weigh yourself daily to provide an active feedback loop, where you see immediate weight loss or gain based on the previous days eating. If necessary, give yourself 1 cheat day a week, but don't go overboard.

 

If you follow this to the letter, without skipping parts of the process because you don't see them as important, or lying to yourself about how many calories you're actually consuming, the current science is extremely confident in suggesting you will lose weight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I imagine that'd depend on the type of diet no?

 

According to the doctor, Ive been locked in 'starvation mode' for so long, its become my new norm.

It's the only explaination to my low calorie diet, and my huge body fat percentage (along with the need to sleep twice a day).

In that case, I followed a VLCD (very low calorie diet) but instead of stopping after the "initial week" and introducing more food, I kept on it for 7 years.

 

I'm 6ft, over 100kg, a very broad build, even if I was thin, and I ate 1200Cal per day, for 7 years.

And in multiple long periods, added 2+hrs of intense cardio a day.

There's a chance that you're an extremely rare mutant able to preserve energy beyond the abilities of regular humans, but I think a more likely explanation is that you're miscounting calories (the most common trap is ignoring calories from drinks and alcohol), being mislead by significantly incorrect nutritional info, or your cheat days are packing in enough calories to counteract the rest of your diet.

 

I can't help but feel that's just 'simple' talk for the same thing.

When you intake is low, metabolism drops to conserve energy.

I'd call that a starve reaction; even if scientists have tried to invent another name for it, or use the term elsewhere.

 

I'm losing weight now, and well !

I'm very happy!

Just got onto MASSIVE weight lifting 4 times a week and upped my caloric intake to 1700cal. (well...the weights are small, but its a lot for me. I leave nearly unable to walk, lol)

 

I don't drink alcohol, I don't drink sugar based beverages, and I've gone as far as photographing everything I put in my mouth for a couple of weeks, because my doctor accused me of the same thing.

I do know how to add and subtract.....

I actually OVER estimate calories, because to keep it simple I divide KJ's by 4, not 4.2, to reach Cal.

I only eat pre-packaged food where possible so I know I have an accurate energy reading.

incorrect nutritional info,

^ If that's fucking possible, I'm fucking furious. I work so damn hard to record everything!

 

The only thing I don't 'count' is whatever is in tomato sauce on top of something, I know sauce is calorie dense, but I doubt that's the cause.

I've never had a 'cheat day' that I can remember.

 

About the only odd thing with me (but this is according to a GP again, so he might be wrong), is that no matter how hard I work (cardio or resistance) within 1 minute (60 seconds), my body is back at resting heart rate.

APPARENTLY it's meant to stay elevated for quite some time? Especially since I'm on the boarder line of overweight-obese.

But that's just doctors talking again, perhaps I'm better off talking to someone who knows about heart rate and exercise better.

 

 

EDIT: thing about all this, is that people think there's some common ground between people. like; "This is how you lose weight, eat this much, work this hard" and it just doesn't add up.

I know people who eat nothing but 4000+ calories of sugar and simple carbs a day and are thin. and People like me who eat 1200cal a day and work out as often as possible, and are fat.

There's always an accusation that "you're doing it wrong", like you're some kind of invalid unable to read and write down the nutritional panels from your food each day.

It's very tiring.

It's why I take advice on this stuff with a grain of salt.

Growing up I saw a dietitian, nutritionist, and 2 GP's. Followed their advice to a T.

and I went through teenage years fat.

They were all wrong.

 

 

Regardless, this is MacDudes thread to report his success not my proving that dietitians are idiots.

Edited by Master_Scythe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd call that a starve reaction; even if scientists have tried to invent another name for it, or use the term elsewhere.

 

...

 

EDIT: thing about all this, is that people think there's some common ground between people. like; "This is how you lose weight, eat this much, work this hard" and it just doesn't add up.

I know people who eat nothing but 4000+ calories of sugar and simple carbs a day and are thin. and People like me who eat 1200cal a day and work out as often as possible, and are fat.

There's always an accusation that "you're doing it wrong", like you're some kind of invalid unable to read and write down the nutritional panels from your food each day.

It's very tiring.

It's why I take advice on this stuff with a grain of salt.

Growing up I saw a dietitian, nutritionist, and 2 GP's. Followed their advice to a T.

and I went through teenage years fat.

They were all wrong.

 

Hopefully Mac Dude doesn't mind, but I thought it was worth going into detail about a couple of points you raised, because I think they're helpful to people trying to lose weight.

 

So we have a starvation response, where the body starts breaking down muscles to produce glucose, and we have adaptive thermogenesis, where the body is constantly adjusting our metabolic rate to survive the conditions we evolved in. Having an understanding that dieting doesn't cause the body to burn muscles for glucose, and a working model for how our metabolism fluctuates, helps us understand what changes we need to make to stay healthy, but lose weight.

 

The goal of weight loss is always to maximise the total time our body spends in ketosis, while still providing it with the nutrients necessary to function, and to keep our metabolic rate high with regular exercise. The 5:2 diet achieves this with two fast days, the Keto/Atkins/Low carb diet achieves this through careful management of blood sugar levels. Both require compromises to comfort and/or mental performance, at least initially.

 

Going to bed hungry on fast days is uncomfortable. You need to keep the primal part of your brain in check that's constantly nagging you to eat. It was helpful at keeping us alive in our distant past when food wasn't plentiful, but it's mostly a vestigial function in an era with supermarkets and 24 hour fast food. While in ketosis, less glucose is given to your brain to use, and until you adjust to this change, you'll experience irritability, brain fog, and fatigue.

 

Most reputable doctors and dieticians will strongly advise against extreme calorie deficits (1,200Cal would be considered extreme for your build), because they stress your system, and therefore stimulate the release of Cortisol. If you've ever had a really stressful day, and after the adrenalin has worn off, found yourself absolutely craving junk food or a big meal (maybe even telling yourself you deserve it)? This is a typical experience with the effects of Cortisol. The calories in/calories out model for weight loss is incomplete, because it doesn't recognise these mental and hormonal factors that have a strong influence over our eating habits.

 

It's also common to overestimate the importance of exercise in losing weight, and significantly underestimate the impact of diet. Exercise should be used to boost and maintain your metabolic rate, but it can't compensate for poor diet choices if your starting point is a sedentary lifestyle. 2 hours of cardio (realistically burning maybe 800-1,200Cal) is completely undone by a single meal from most fast food restaurants, or matching a healthy chicken breast with a high calorie sauce/dressing and sides. If the goal is to lose weight, then the evidence available suggests that High Intensity Interval Training, where multiple short (6-8 minutes) bursts of cardio results in prolonged periods of high metabolic rates is a good strategy to use. This has been coined the 'After burn' effect, and it looks something like this (Y axis shows metabolic rate):

 

graph2.png

 

Weight training works on exactly the same principle for weight loss (i.e. high intensity, prolonged elevation of metabolic rate). The people who get away with eating what they want are sometimes just lucky with genetics, where particular genes trigger the sense of feeling full more readily, and excess energy is burnt via fidgeting (seriously). For most people though, they get away with it by constantly maintaining a high metabolism through healthy lifestyle choices.

 

As I mentioned in the previous post, there's enough misinformation in regular circulation that people have come to think of weight loss as something vague and individual. They get bad advice, and when it doesn't produce results, they think weight loss science can't be trusted. I'd argue that the science is clear, and the results objective, but losing weight necessarily requires lifestyle changes and sacrifices that are hard to stick to. Everyone is looking for shortcuts, and by doing so that start to distort the reality of the situation. Take a scientific approach, and I'm confident you won't enjoy it, but you'll get results.

Edited by tastywheat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" Going to bed hungry on fast days is uncomfortable... "

 

...and is not beneficial to a good nights sleep or a good start for the next day. I find if I can achieve a decent sleep of at least six hours ( no less ) then

what ever else comes at me I can deal with ... mostly ;)

 

It just doesn't seem logical to me to go to bed hungry / starving ... I live in a place that has food... at night when my body is in repose is when I can do

the most good for myself ... starving at that time for me is illogical. I can manage all day on minimum food intake and am a good drinker of water.

Coffee quota is a bit less but the morning dose is still a MAJOR MUST HAVE :) And that dose is about half a litre. Next lot of coffee I have is at night

when I get home around 6.30pm -7pm-ish.No making or buying of coffees through the day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One chapter of the 5:2 diet book is called 'the science of fasting' for obvious reasons.

 

For most animals, and we are one, the cycle of feast and famine is a natural one and one for which we are suited. Our bodies, our genes are the result of an environment where we would gorge ourselves then go without for extended periods.

 

This is what our bodies are designed to do.

 

So we went from a feast/famine cycle to where our parents told us not to eat between meals. That's in the dim dark past and now we have numerous big meals with snacking in between. In the last few decades the time we spend not eating has dropped dramatically.

 

A recent study found that we now eat nearly 200 more calories per day in snacks than 30 years ago, and we eat more for each of our main meals to boot.

 

Eating throughout the day is now considered normal.

 

Briefly touching on exercise, as outlined in the current Scientific American, exercise does not assist weight loss.

 

It's basically down to what you put in your mouth...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems all to technical for me,I was a very active kid and was skinny,after I had three children or my wife did oops now you know what sex I am.I was a virgin when I married

and we ended up with five kids but back to my story.After our third who was born on the 4 September we had a break.My father in law used to always to go on about his first child

a daughter was was born on his wife birthday.By then I was having it 3 times a day making up for lost time over the years of missing out of all this fun.So I recond I could equal his feat,

we had another son later on and practiced my the theory.Five years later after that with much calculation my last born son arrived on the 4th September 1992 and I was quite proud of my

mathematical prowess.People used say was he like an accident,because my eldest was 20 years older than my new born, as they say practice makes perfect.So I used to put heaps back on him my father in law

as I was his only son in law as the eldest daughter never got married.The moral of the story is every time you have sex it is equivalent to a brisk 1 mile walk,if that is any help.I have offered to help other

families to perfect my feat of having a child born on a specific day but no one has taken me up so now I weigh 86 kgs and have hung my boots up.Weight can be a problem but who gives a fuck

anyone who does I am available because I want stay at 86 kg and I won't charge for the pleasure.Have had no takers I am getting worried and may need your formula. Amen

Edited by mickf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congrats Mac Dude, this resonates very much with me too. I've being doing 5:2 since September last year and have so far last 14kg, down from 115kg. I can't remember the last time I weighted this much in the last 20 or so years. The other benefits of intermittent fasting are appealing as well :)

 

Hopefully I'll hit 85kg by the end of this year. Keep it up!


It seems all to technical for me,I was a very active kid and was skinny,after I had three children or my wife did oops now you know what sex I am.I was a virgin when I married

and we ended up with five kids but back to my story.After our third who was born on the 4 September we had a break.My father in law used to always to go on about his first child

a daughter was was born on his wife birthday.By then I was having it 3 times a day making up for lost time over the years of missing out of all this fun.So I recond I could equal his feat,

we had another son later on and practiced my the theory.Five years later after that with much calculation my last born son arrived on the 4th September 1992 and I was quite proud of my

mathematical prowess.People used say was he like an accident,because my eldest was 20 years older than my new born, as they say practice makes perfect.So I used to put heaps back on him my father in law

as I was his only son in law as the eldest daughter never got married.The moral of the story is every time you have sex it is equivalent to a brisk 1 mile walk,if that is any help.I have offered to help other

families to perfect my feat of having a child born on a specific day but no one has taken me up so now I weigh 86 kgs and have hung my boots up.Weight can be a problem but who gives a fuck

anyone who does I am available because I want stay at 86 kg and I won't charge for the pleasure.Have had no takers I am getting worried and may need your formula. Amen

g13371304382124686.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congrats Mac Dude, this resonates very much with me too. I've being doing 5:2 since September last year and have so far last 14kg, down from 115kg. I can't remember the last time I weighted this much in the last 20 or so years. The other benefits of intermittent fasting are appealing as well :)

 

Hopefully I'll hit 85kg by the end of this year. Keep it up!

115 to 85 is a long way but you've making fantastic progress SM!

 

I know one of the pluses they list for the 5:2 diet is how fast you get results. In fact the research shows that folks on this diet keep off more weight over longer periods than diets which take a 'gently gently' approach. Part of the reason for that they believe might be psychological in that providing early results is a great motivator.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Congrats Mac Dude, this resonates very much with me too. I've being doing 5:2 since September last year and have so far last 14kg, down from 115kg. I can't remember the last time I weighted this much in the last 20 or so years. The other benefits of intermittent fasting are appealing as well :)

 

Hopefully I'll hit 85kg by the end of this year. Keep it up!

115 to 85 is a long way but you've making fantastic progress SM!

 

I know one of the pluses they list for the 5:2 diet is how fast you get results. In fact the research shows that folks on this diet keep off more weight over longer periods than diets which take a 'gently gently' approach. Part of the reason for that they believe might be psychological in that providing early results is a great motivator.

 

 

I've decided I'll probably stay on some form of this diet indefinately and stop referring to it as a 'diet'. Since there are no exclusions to consider, I don't have to change what I eat only how much, even then it's only twice a week. Once I hit my goal weight I'll probably wind it back to 6:1. God knows at the moment I'm still drinking moderate amounts of alcohol on the weekend, enjoy the off takeaway meal and still go to restaurants and have desserts and all the rest so it is not hard to maintain. It's just a way of life, only a couple of times a week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×