5:2 diet anyone tried this

Posts: 2,245
5/21/13 11:01 A

If it has the word "diet," in it, I won't try it. I will not go "on a diet" to lose weight, then go back to my normal eating!

Instead, I prefer to choose a lifestyle of healthy eating that allows for some treats with which I can life the rest of my life. I eat a healthy balance of protein, carbohydrates, fats, minerals, and vitamins every day. I also can have a few sugary treats now and then. I don't diet. I live a healthy lifestyle with healthy food choices combined with daily exercise and activity. Then, I don't concern myself with "dieting." Since my diet is nutritious every day.

current weight: 112.4

121 118.85 116.7 114.55

112.4

SparkPoints: (2,037)
Fitness Minutes: (1,132)
Posts: 6
5/20/13 6:42 P

I could never do this, I missed dinner one day and the next morning I was dizzy, nauseous, and my heart felt weird, I attribute that to not eating for almost 20 hours and will never do that again.

Edited by: CRIDLE1 at: 5/20/2013 (18:43)

current weight: 141.8

190 175.75 161.5 147.25

133

SparkPoints: (108)
Fitness Minutes: (120)
Posts: 3
5/20/13 4:50 P

I’ve lost 21 pounds in 14 weeks on the 5:2 diet. My goal is to lose 40 pounds and keep it off.

The 5:2 diet is a type of “intermittent fasting.” It’s not fasting in the strictest meaning of the word, but it does involve caloric restriction two days a week. On any two non-consecutive days of the week I eat only 600 calories (“fast days”). The other five days a week I eat what I want (“feed days”). On my feed days I try to make reasonable choices about what I eat, but I don’t count calories, I never go hungry and I don’t deprive myself. As long as I have two non-consecutive fast days each week (usually Mondays and Thursdays), my weight loss is consistent. [Note: On my fast days I’m consuming only 600 calories in a 36-hour period. For example, if I’m fasting on Monday I eat dinner at 7:00pm on Sunday, I then consume only 600 calories on Monday. I don’t eat again until breakfast on Tuesday. The time period from 7:00pm Sunday until 7:00am Tuesday is 36 hours.]

The 5:2 diet works for me because it’s much easier to be disciplined two days a week than it is to be disciplined seven days a week. The first couple of weeks are challenging , but the fasting days get easier over time. Through trial and error I’ve developed my own way of eating on low-calorie days to keep hunger to a barely noticeable minimum. And from a psychological standpoint, since fast days are always followed by a feed day, I know I can eat what I want tomorrow. And there’s another benefit that may be psychological or perhaps physiological. After about a month, my overall appetite went down. I’m not as hungry as I used to be. And my cravings for sweets has diminished significantly.

By only eating 600 calories on Mondays and Thursdays, I’m cutting well over 3,000 calories out of my diet each week. The result is steady weight loss from week to week.

Restricted-calorie diets typically have a very high failure rate. I’ve been on many calorie-restricted diets (e.g., 1600 calories a day) over the last 20 years and I’ve failed 100% of the time. Here’s what happens to me on a typical reduced-calorie diet: (a) I lose weight for 2-3 months. (b) I get tired of feeling hungry and deprived day after day. (c) I give up. (d) I give in. (e) I gain back all the weight I lost, plus more.

The 5:2 diet is a restricted calorie diet, but I only have to count calories 2 days a week to significantly reduce my average daily calorie intake. Five days a week there’s no feeling of deprivation because I can eat my favorite foods without counting calories. Intermittent fasting works for me because there’s no “diet fatigue.” Five days a week I eat what I want. No deprivation. On my two fasting days I can live with a small amount of hunger. It’s easy because I know how to best use my 600 calories to keep hunger to a minimum and I know that tomorrow I can eat what I want.

So far, I’ve lost over 20 pounds. My blood pressure has dropped from 130/85 to 120/75. Last year at this time my blood glucose was 98 and my triglycerides were 288. I recently went to the doctor for my annual physical. My blood glucose is now 85 and my triglycerides are 109. Both my LDL and HDL cholesterol improved also.

When I reach my goal weight, I’ll reduce my fasting to one day a week for maintenance. If I gain a couple pounds, no problem. I’ll go back to fasting two days a week until I return to my goal weight.


Edited by: AJKHAWK at: 5/21/2013 (08:31)

SparkPoints: (42,076)
Fitness Minutes: (12,476)
Posts: 7,880
5/18/13 1:13 P

TRIING2GETFIT, you aren't "being good" for 2 days, you're starving yourself for 2 days.

I'm beginning to see why the experts are concerned that this can trigger disordered eating patterns.

current weight: 186.0

211 197 183 169

155

SparkPoints: (27,914)
Fitness Minutes: (21,191)
Posts: 2,739
5/18/13 12:17 P

There is a 5:2 team here on SP. It's called the "Fast Diet' team.

current weight: 151.8

203 186 169 152

135

Posts: 218
5/18/13 10:08 A

I decided to give this a go today.

I've tried sticking to 1600 or even 1800 calories everyday but i find i get bored. I think 'being good' for two days a week will be far more achievable.

One of the things that has convinced me the most though is that I start going to boot camp classes 3 times a week - these class a really quite tough and i find if i had a heavy meal the night before i can feel quite sick when im running around so i think a light day of eating 500 calories might help.

I will go and see if there is 5:2 group its good to read about others experiences

current weight: 220.0

477 412.75 348.5 284.25

220

SparkPoints: (749)
Fitness Minutes: (2,019)
Posts: 4
5/10/13 5:52 P

I am pleased to report I have kept the weight off for a few weeks, despite holiday and a wedding on the Isle of Lewis (not mine). ADGIRL, I found that a day of fasting lost 2 pounds, one water, one fat, so the real loss is about half the immediate loss. You do need to eat sensibly for the 'normal' days - not too much.
Mark

current weight: 159.0

175 171 167 163

159

SparkPoints: (11,393)
Fitness Minutes: (2,507)
Posts: 444
5/10/13 10:48 A

I started this yesterday - and while losing weight is great, I'm also trying it for some of the other health benefits I've heard about. (Not the cancer that was mentioned below). I have never been one to get into fad diets or things like that and I eat healthy a majority of the time. I have fibromyalgia, arthritis and pcos - so losing weight has been a struggle but more of a catch 22. I need to lose the weight to get stress off my joints and muscles but it's harder to exercise many days because of the pain. In any case, yesterday was my first day trying the 5:2 fasting (and no, I won't call it a diet). I was absolutely surprised that I wasn't famished the entire day. I didn't feel deprived for the most part and it did force me to become more aware of my hunger. I realized that a good portion of the time, I probably eat more because it's meal times or because the food is there and not because I'm actually hungry or my body needs it. My day yesterday went like this:
Breakfast/morning: a couple of cups of coffee (half caff) with 1/2 tsp fat free creamer per cup, 1.5 cups of watermelon with my morning medicine, a cup of green tea with fresh ginger and a couple of bottles of water (I drink a lot of fluids).
Lunch - around 1:30pm: 1.5 cups of homemade soup that was full of vegetables and barley for the grains. It came in at around 100 calories but completely filled me up. I also had 4 oz of milk.
Dinner - around 6:30: Cod, pan sauteed with cooking spray instead of oil topped with salsa and a good healthy squeeze of lemon juice, a sliced tomato sprinkled lightly with salt and 10 asparagus spears roasted with 1/4 ounce of fresh grated parmesan cheese. I didn't feel deprived at all and in fact, I felt very satisfied.
I did drink a lot of water (with some fresh lemon juice added that I counted in my calorie totals).
In fact, I even got in a good workout before dinner. I weighed myself yesterday morning and again this morning mostly as an experiment to see if it's water weight people are losing or what so I'll keep track of my weight to see if the fast days have anything to do with it or not. But from yesterday to today, I did lose exactly 2 pounds - I do suspect that was due mostly to water weight.
Hope this helps!

current weight: 170.2

178 172.25 166.5 160.75

155

SparkPoints: (27,914)
Fitness Minutes: (21,191)
Posts: 2,739
4/14/13 11:00 A

I tried this for this past week to help me get off a plateau and am happy with the results. (Lost about 2.5 pounds.) I'm not sure how long I will stick with it, but I am going to do it for a 2nd week as it wasn't that hard for me.

In the past, I have ocassionally semi-fasted for a single day or over a weekend to help me get back on track when necessary. I find that it dramatically helps me decrease the carb cravings that can derail me. It also has a mental/spiritual component as I am super-conscious of what I eat those days. It makes me super-mindful of what and how I eat and that helps me put food in its proper place ... which helps me maintain a healthier normal eating pattern in the long run when I am not fasting.

As a health professional and scholar, I am used to analyzing research for its applicability to practice. I work in a specialty where we often use treatments for which there have been no long term studies. If we didn't use such treatments, most of our patients would die. So I am comfortable giving intermittent fasting a try for myself -- knowing that I will be monitoring my health (and labwork) regularly and knowing that I will not be taking an extreme approach to this.

However, I can't endorse it for other people who may not be as well-monitored as I am and who might go to unhealthy extremes. There are some animal studies that indicate benefits for significant calorie restrictions ... but more research is needed on humans before it can be recommended as an eating pattern for large numbers of people. Each person needs to decide for themselves whether or not they are comfortable with the level of risk whenever they try a new, minimally researched intervention. As those types of choices are a regular part of my professional life, it is a choice I feel well-prepared to make. I am not so sure about some other people who aren't as well-prepared to make such choices for themselves.

On the other hand, intermittent fasting (IF) has been an eating pattern that has been around for hundreds/thousands of years as a part of certain religious practices and has not been shown to be harmful as long as it is not taken to extreme. It was almost certainly part of the reality of early man -- as they would not have been successful hunting/gathering food every day. It has been around since the caveman days. It is NOT just "another fad diet" as some people seem to believe. So I feel fine phyically and fine intellectually doing it ocassionally as long as it helps me. I'm trying the 5/2 schedule for a while ... I'll see how it goes.

Edited by: ONLINEASLLOU at: 4/14/2013 (11:08)

current weight: 151.8

203 186 169 152

135

SparkPoints: (7,293)
Fitness Minutes: (4,363)
Posts: 244
4/14/13 9:22 A

Still trying - usually on days off from work, but then some things come up

Posts: 40
4/14/13 8:31 A

Although there isn't very much evidence to support this in humans, there is a lot of strong evidence in rats than calorie restriction results in longer life.

I'd like to see what happens in human trials though.

current weight: 310.0

334 322 310 298

286

SparkPoints: (23,984)
Fitness Minutes: (19,366)
Posts: 895
4/14/13 6:45 A

I tried this recently for 10 weeks. I started initially doing alternate day fasts (allowing myself 500 cals per day). The 500 cal fasts were fine on days when I was busy as work, but were too difficult at weekends. So after a while of doing alternate day dieting (cheating a bit - often having upto 800 calories on Fast days. Then I starting doing only 2 x 500 fast days and was strict about it.

I don't know if it effects your health e.g. prevents disease etc, but it has lowered my weight.

I think in future I will do some weeks when I do the 2 day fast and eat what I like the rest of the time. Then have some week when I aim for 1500 cals per day. I think both approaches work and have their benefits.

Starting weight 66kg
After 1 week 62.4kg
After 2 weeks 62.9kg
After 3 weeks 62.7kg
After 4 weeks 63.0kg
After 5 weeks 62.3kg
After 6 weeks 62.3kg
After 7 weeks 62.5kg
Then changed to The Fast Diet (2x 500 cal fast days per week)
After 8 weeks 61.9kg
After 9 weeks 62.0kg

Then I had a week off. I didn't fast and ate what I wanted. I didn't go crazy, but did eat a fair bit of bread.
After 10 weeks 64.0kg

current weight: 140.0

141 138.25 135.5 132.75

130

SparkPoints: (749)
Fitness Minutes: (2,019)
Posts: 4
4/14/13 3:38 A

I have been on the 5:2 fast diet since 14th January 2013 and lost about 14 pounds (14 April 2013). This may not seem surprising but I found that my usual 'healthy eating, low calorie' diet was not working.
My version of 5:2 is to skip breakfast (small glass orange juice to go with my pills), lunch approx 200 cals, supper 6pm approx 300 cals, and low cal choc Options drink before bed. I do this usually Monday and Thursday but flexible. I also exercise on diet days (eg 25-30 mins) as well as other days.
I was terrified of the first day - I could not imagine eating virtually nothing for a day - but it was not as bad as I thought. I have learned what hunger feels like and also learned to ignore it - a great lesson.
Good luck to anyone else trying 5:2. Since I have reached my goal I will probably switch to 1:6.
Mark

current weight: 159.0

175 171 167 163

159

Posts: 1,436
4/11/13 2:21 P

Gotta say I wouldn't bother checking much with mainstream doctors other than to ensure you're healthy - this isn't something that most of them would take seriously simply because of their training.

There's a very interesting BBC documentary on it (Michael Mosley). It may not be proven per se but there is enough anecdotal evidence from many sources over a long period of time that show how beneficial fasting can be. The attempt that they made was to do something that would get the same type of results with less difficulty staying committed.

The point about this is that your body acts differently when it fasts, therefore, simply dividing your calorie count by 7 days won't have the same affect as fasting for 2 days. If you haven't seen the original documentary, I strongly suggest you check it out.

This seems to fit in well with my natural rhythms so I have decided I will be giving it a try for 5-6 weeks in the very near future.

current weight: 117.0

128 122.25 116.5 110.75

105

Posts: 14,159
2/6/13 9:06 A

The idea is that I could eat 2000 calories a day for 5 days, and then 600 for the 2 fasting days. Or 11,200 calories over the week. So, I could just eat 1600 a day, without fasting, and lose the same amount of weight?

Of course, I burn 600-800 calories a day exercising 90 minutes, but I have to wonder how long you would last while fasting. So I might have to cut down to working out 5 days a week, so I would burn 1200-1600 less calories through exercise.

the best thing about diets like these is they make low carb ( which I eat ), sound almost normal..lol. At least I can enjoy 2000 calories of food, exercise daily, and lose weight. As much as starving yourself sounds exciting, I think I will enjoy my chicken and vegetables.

Edited by: RUSSELL_39 at: 2/6/2013 (09:08)

current weight: 239.2

361 311.75 262.5 213.25

164

Posts: 428
2/5/13 10:26 P

"scientifically unproven" is your big clue right here that it's not based on anything sound. And then the crazy claim of reducing and treating cancer, arthritis, etc. Sounds like a snake oil salesman.

What is more significant is reducing your protein intake. This is said to force your body from "growth mode" into "repair mode" where, instead of creating new cells, the body attempts repair damaged ones. -- This statement is just plain wrong. Protein is essential for repair. Your body does not manufacture it nor can it convert it from other tissues in your body -- like breaking down protein to supply carbs for energy. You must ingest it to have it available.

I'll be blunt, this sounds like a bunch of woowoo crap to me and I wouldn't recommend it.

Posts: 918
2/5/13 9:44 P

"there are a lot of religions that fast with no food . Are these religions wrong for doing this?"

Religious fasts are for spiritual reasons, not "to lose weight."

There's nothing wrong with fasting per se... but incorporating it into your regular weekly routine *for the sole purpose of hoping it'll miraculously cause you to lose weight* is... an overly optimistic perception of what fasting can do.

Pounds lost: 38.0

0 11.5 23 34.5

46

Posts: 918
2/5/13 9:40 P

Ok, I looked at the NHS piece, it doesn't have much flattering to say about the 5:2 diet.

The public comments sound like this:

"My GP told me that 5:2 was a gimmick and I shouldn't waste any time with it...She went as far to say this type of fasting is dangerous. Really?? Frankly I think I shouldn't of wasted my own time making an appointment... Shame the NHS seem also to be taking the same defensive approach. I agree the NHS has a duty to exercise a certain degree of scepticism particularly given the lack of peer-reviewed evidence..."

Uhm. Ok. No. I am not going to take my health advice from "Boggy79" and "Penny501."

Pounds lost: 38.0

0 11.5 23 34.5

46

SparkPoints: (1,438)
Fitness Minutes: (525)
Posts: 281
2/5/13 9:20 P

you need long term studies... everyone has success short-term on every one of the 1000's of diets out there, right?

current weight: 183.8

192 181.5 171 160.5

150

SparkPoints: (1,225)
Fitness Minutes: (340)
Posts: 16
2/5/13 9:07 P

Interesting piece by the nhs, what i found more interesting was the testimonies of the public that had comment on the article.
There seems to be many people that find this an easy way of losing weight

Pounds lost: 9.0

0 12.5 25 37.5

50

SparkPoints: (1,225)
Fitness Minutes: (340)
Posts: 16
2/5/13 8:05 P

nearly 200 reviews on amazon

www.amazon.co.uk/The-Fast-Diet-Intermitten
t-Fasting/dp/1780721676/ref=pd_rhf_se_
s_ts_4_97JN

to be fair they are only fasting twice a week 600 calories

there are a lot of religions that fast with no food . Are these religions wrong for doing this?
Just finding it an interesting topic

Edited by: JIM2104 at: 2/5/2013 (20:06)

Pounds lost: 9.0

0 12.5 25 37.5

50

Posts: 11,048
2/5/13 7:58 P

Also, the 5:2 diet has really only been around for a month! Virtually EVERYONE has success on their January diet for 18 days.

Here's what the National Health have to say about this diet:
www.nhs.uk/news/2013/01January/Pages/Does-
the-5-2-intermittent-fasting-diet-work
.aspx

current weight: 132.0

184 169 154 139

124

Posts: 11,048
2/5/13 7:50 P

If you found exactly the same statement, only instead of diet and weight loss the person was talking about "The 5:2 Investment Plan," and s/he said, "I experimented with the investment after the programme was shown, then had a very dissolute December [...] and now, 19 days later I've paid off my credit cards with no problems, no tightening of the budget (I shop for shoes vigorously, and a Lamborghini when I can find a dealer), and no trouble sticking with the plan", etc.... Would you believe it? What is it that makes you think you can trust an anonymous testimonial about diet when you wouldn't trust someone who was using the same techniques to try to get you to do something with your money?

current weight: 132.0

184 169 154 139

124

Posts: 24,608
2/5/13 6:24 P

I am not aware of any reputable organizations or nutrition interventions based on research using this "eating approach" to prevent cancer or treat diabetes, arthritis, etc.

SP Dietitian Becky

Edited by: DIETITIANBECKY at: 2/5/2013 (18:25)

SparkPoints: (1,438)
Fitness Minutes: (525)
Posts: 281
2/5/13 5:29 P

in an effort to be supportive (underline), I will say that the testimonial is not at all based on the factual pathology of cancer, nor can fasting repair damaged cells (we have mechanisms in all of us that take care of damaged cells, regardless of diet). Don't fall for this one :)

current weight: 183.8

192 181.5 171 160.5

150

SparkPoints: (4,300)
Fitness Minutes: (2,260)
Posts: 225
2/5/13 5:16 P

i think you need to read up a bit more on cancer...

current weight: 149.5

180 162.5 145 127.5

110

SparkPoints: (42,076)
Fitness Minutes: (12,476)
Posts: 7,880
2/5/13 5:12 P

I do not find the idea of starving yourself to the point of dizziness to be pleasant, and there's no way to "trick" your body into losing weight. The only thing this does is put you at risk for blood sugar spikes and injuries! Under no circumstances should any male be eating less than 1500 calories a day without a doctor's guidance, and likewise females less than 1200. Under no circumstances should you even consider trying this diet without talking to your doctor FIRST.

There are anecdotes in support of every crazy fad diet out there, from hCG on up. That doesn't mean they work.

Some nutritionists have criticized this diet, and have concerns that it could be associated with disordered eating habits and potentially trigger eating disorders.

There is no peer-reviewed evidence that this diet works, and very little evidence that IF itself works.

The verdict: It's a diet, and DIETS DON'T WORK! Stop dieting, and start living:

www.sparkpeople.com/resource/motivation_ar
ticles.asp?id=620

Edited by: DRAGONCHILDE at: 2/5/2013 (17:13)

current weight: 186.0

211 197 183 169

155

SparkPoints: (1,225)
Fitness Minutes: (340)
Posts: 16
2/5/13 4:45 P

below is a statement i found regarding the 5:2 diet. I found it quite interestind and wondered if anyone had tried it this person states:-

I experimented with the diet after the programme was shown, then had a very dissolute December, knowing full well that I was going to go at it full tilt in the New Year. I started on the 2nd, 19 days later, I've dropped 10 lbs with no problems, no loss of energy (I play squash vigorously, and 5-a-side when I can get a game), and no trouble sticking with the plan. So, yes it works. Absolutely.
However, the most important point to emphasise is that this not a weight loss diet. Weight loss is entirely a side effect of the real purpose of the diet, which is to prolong life. It's a milder version of Alternate Day Fasting. This is scientifically unproven as yet, but is said to reduce the chance of developing various cancers, and to help manage a variety of conditions / illnesses wide enough to include diabetes & arthritis. What tends to get the headlines is the fact that on your Fast days, you cut your calories to a quarter of the recommended. What is more significant is reducing your protein intake. This is said to force your body from "growth mode" into "repair mode" where, instead of creating new cells, the body attempts to repair damaged ones. Since cancers are essentially uncontrolled cell growth, it's obvious how this diet could help; equally, repairing damaged cells will presumably help with any number of ailments, aches & pains.

Pounds lost: 9.0

0 12.5 25 37.5

50