5:2 diet

kittykat500

Gloomendoom wrote: »

Judge for yourself... http://i51.tinypic.com/2n7pr3a.jpg

Don't know why you call yourself Gloomendoom, married to a fit honey like that!

Gloomendoom

murphydog999 wrote: »

Mrs G isn't trying to loose any more weight is she????

Ha ha! No, if she sticks to her plan, she may even gain some although it will be muscle, not fat.

She can do more push ups than I can.

murphydog999

Does she know you've put that bikini shot on for the world to see?

Gloomendoom

murphydog999 wrote: »

Does she know you've put that bikini shot on for the world to see?

She does... but you will notice that it is a very carefully chosen bikini shot that doesn't show her face.

lizzie_b

Gloomendoom wrote: »

Nothing is good for you in large amounts.

My granddad told me that, in his opinion, the key to healthy life is 'everything in moderation'.

He, like me, would eat practically anything.

My grandma says exactly the same, and she has no ailments except very mild type 2 diabetes caused purely by the fact that she is very nearly 82, and a clicky knee more than likely caused by the fact that she has walked everywhere her entire life and worked standing up from aged 14-59

euronorris

Gloomendoom wrote: »

I only used 1.2 as a multplier as I don't do 'exercise' as such. However, I am pretty active, never use lifts or drive if the distance is only a mile or two.



When I was 16 1/2 stone, I thought I would look emaciated at 14st. Surprise, surprise, I don't.

Mrs G has a small frame and, IMHO, doesn't look particularly poorly or emaciated either.

Judge for yourself... http://i51.tinypic.com/2n7pr3a.jpg

Ahh, she looks ace! I'm almost there - getting there, bit by bit. But I am also aiming for a bit more abs definition as I really like that. I want my abs to look like Jillian Michaels.

I think you posted a pic of your wife once before, in a DT thread (or similar), and that was before I had really kickstarted my health regime. I've dropped 2 sizes since then!

pineapple

lizzie_b wrote: »

My grandma says exactly the same, and she has no ailments except very mild type 2 diabetes caused purely by the fact that she is very nearly 82, and a clicky knee more than likely caused by the fact that she has walked everywhere her entire life and worked standing up from aged 14-59

Plus she probably benefited from the war years and rationing. They say our diet was healthier then than ever. It seems to me that our lifestyle becomes increasingly sedentary as our food intake increases and the quality diminishes. I can see a big difference just in my lifetime. I was brought up with plain simple home cooking and baking (Bero book anyone?). Plus there simply wasn't the range of tinned, packaged and convenience food there is now.
Back to this eating plan, I've done 2 weeks now. Rightly or wrongly I do two consecutive days. I believe it's re-educating my taste buds and my appetite. So though not consciously restricting calories, I am eating less but better on my off days. The 'norty' cravings are going away - no willpower required! :T

~Chameleon~

From: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/women-and-intermittent-fasting/

If you haven’t satisfied the usual IF “pre-reqs,” like being fat-adapted, getting good and sufficient sleep, minimizing or mitigating stress, and exercising well (not too much and not too little), you should not fast. The pre-reqs are absolutely crucial and non-negotiable, in my opinion, especially the fat-adaptation. In fact, I suspect that if an IF study was performed on sugar-burning women versus fat-adapted women, you’d see that the fat-burning beasts would perform better and suffer fewer (if any) maladaptations.

I would also caution against the already lean, already calorie-restricted woman jumping headfirst into IF. I mean, fasting is ultimately sending a message of scarcity to your body. That’s a powerful message that can get a powerful response from our bodies. If you’re already lean (which, depending on the degree of leanness, arguably sends a message of scarcity) and restricting calories (which definitely sends a message of scarcity), the response to fasting can be a little too powerful.

I’d also say that daily fasts, a la 16/8 or even 14/10, run the risk of becoming chronic stressors and should be approached with caution by women. Same goes for ultra-long fasts, like a 36 (or even 24) hour marathon. Most of all, though, I’d simply suggest that women interested in fasting be cautious, be self-aware, and only do so if it comes naturally. It shouldn’t be a struggle (for anyone, really). It shouldn’t stop your cycle or make it harder for you to get pregnant. It should improve your life, not make it worse. If you find that fasting has those negative effects, stop doing it. It should happen WHEN (When Hunger Ensues Naturally), if it happens at all.

As it stands right now, I’d be inclined to agree that pre-menopausal (and perhaps peri-menopausal) women are more likely to have poor – or at least different – experiences with intermittent fasting, at least as a weight loss tool. That said, it appears to be a potentially gender-neutral therapeutic tool for chemotherapy, cancer, and age-related neurodegeneration patients.

lessonlearned

~Chameleon~ wrote: »

From: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/women-and-intermittent-fasting/

If you haven’t satisfied the usual IF “pre-reqs,” like being fat-adapted, getting good and sufficient sleep, minimizing or mitigating stress, and exercising well (not too much and not too little), you should not fast. The pre-reqs are absolutely crucial and non-negotiable, in my opinion, especially the fat-adaptation. In fact, I suspect that if an IF study was performed on sugar-burning women versus fat-adapted women, you’d see that the fat-burning beasts would perform better and suffer fewer (if any) maladaptations.

I would also caution against the already lean, already calorie-restricted woman jumping headfirst into IF. I mean, fasting is ultimately sending a message of scarcity to your body. That’s a powerful message that can get a powerful response from our bodies. If you’re already lean (which, depending on the degree of leanness, arguably sends a message of scarcity) and restricting calories (which definitely sends a message of scarcity), the response to fasting can be a little too powerful.

I’d also say that daily fasts, a la 16/8 or even 14/10, run the risk of becoming chronic stressors and should be approached with caution by women. Same goes for ultra-long fasts, like a 36 (or even 24) hour marathon. Most of all, though, I’d simply suggest that women interested in fasting be cautious, be self-aware, and only do so if it comes naturally. It shouldn’t be a struggle (for anyone, really). It shouldn’t stop your cycle or make it harder for you to get pregnant. It should improve your life, not make it worse. If you find that fasting has those negative effects, stop doing it. It should happen WHEN (When Hunger Ensues Naturally), if it happens at all.

As it stands right now, I’d be inclined to agree that pre-menopausal (and perhaps peri-menopausal) women are more likely to have poor – or at least different – experiences with intermittent fasting, at least as a weight loss tool. That said, it appears to be a potentially gender-neutral therapeutic tool for chemotherapy, cancer, and age-related neurodegeneration patients.

Thanks for that.

Just thought I'd give you a progress update. I am 61 and post-menopausal. I've been doing the 5:2 regime for about 10 days and have lost 3lbs so no not a huge weight loss. I think it will be a case of slow but steady.

For me the main benefit has been in the reduction of IBS pain and symptoms - I've also decided to drop grains so I think the real IBS benefit probably comes from that rather than the fasting.

However, the fasting has proved really easy and manageable, with no negatives side effect - no headaches, dizzy spells.

I've not been hungry, no sugar or carb cravings. I'm eating well and healthily. Meat, fish, dairy, good oils and fats, nuts, seeds, fruit and veg, the odd glass of wine and some good quality chocolate and yes, I still enjoy the odd Gin & Tonic.

One odd thing has come out of all this - my attitude to food seems to have changed - for the better. My relationship with food is improving - perhaps because I no longer have to cope with sugar and carb cravings and hunger.

I have stopped forever thinking about food, planning my next meal, feeling constantly hungry. I am far more relaxed and no longer plan my days around what and when I'm going to eat.

I'm definitely going to continue because I feel so much better. Any weight loss is a welcome bonus.

I've tried them all, calorie counting, weight watchers, slimming world and have been a typical yo-yo dieter.

I've had stomach problems all my life and for the first time, I'm pain and symptom free. It just feel good.

murphydog999

Good for you.

That'll be the grain, esp. the benefits with your IBS. You will find once you have eliminated completely, and you have been off grain for a while, if you succumb at any stage - even one slice of bread - your symptoms will probably come back doubly as bad! (I speak from experience!!)

Do make sure you are exercising, especially resistance exercises, to maintain body mass.