Is anybody still doing the 5:2 diet?

It's called Low carb flu gettingon and will pass. If you access the Diet Doctor web site it will tell you all about it. Or join us on the Low Carb thread. You would be most welcome and we swop lots of tips and recipes. See you there?

bbevan that's brilliant.

I've eaten 560 calories so nearly accomplished a "fast". I feel a bit headachey though, which is unlike me.

That normal?

Thanks all. Sounds good. I've been good so far. Walked for 2hours and now waiting to tuck into four fish fingers! I know how to live.

Low carb, high fat, * gettingon*. There is a whole thread devoted to it.
So no potatoes, rice, pasta etc. But proper butter, olive oil, cream etc. I do it as carbs change to sugars when digested and so I limit all sugars as I am ( was) diabetic. Lost 2 stone since March.

Just noticed you asked about exercise too, gettingonabit. I'm a bit lax. I don't drive so walk a lot, at least 5000 steps a day and aiming for 10000. And I do yogalates at home two or three times a week, usually for just half an hour. I know I should do more and am full of good intentions

I don't count calories at all on non-fast days, gettingonabit. I do have a reasonably healthy diet, as I always have had, but indulge myself too. I love my wine and my chocolate, my nibbles and my treats. I had an all-inclusive stay in Italy last week, so you can imagine the calorie tally! I have tried calorie counting in the past and just been miserable, even at 1400 calories per day. As I said earlier, I lost a stone when I first started the 5:2 and am now at a weight that I am happy with (any more weight loss and I find I start to look a bit haggard). If I did find my weight creeping up again, I think I'd do a third fast day for a week or so rather than restrict myself on the non-fast days.

You lot are so committed!

I'm going to try harder today. I've got a decent walk lined up (at least 2 hours). I'm going to have a tiny meal as a very late lunch.

Hoping to get under that 500!

Anyone any ideas for tiny meals of around 250?

bbevan LCHF?? I'm intrigued..

I try for 2 fast days and 2 under 1200 cal days Mon to Thursday and then eat normally Friday to Sunday. Works well if you stick to it.

I do the LCHF diet on non fast days. Therefore never need to count calories.

I do count calories on non-fast days and try to stay as close to 1200 as possible. If I have meals out/ family events I do not bother. I stick to my daily walk and anything else I do but as I am generally fairly active I am relaxed over exercise.

I am off to France with DH and a friend for 3 days. I have done my fast days for this week and I already know of one 1500 calorie meal we will be having, but I will probably skip breakfast and have a light supper that day. Other days we will eat out and I will try and draw a balance between enjoying myself nd not going OTT.

Can I ask if you all count calories/exercise on non-fast days?

Had 700 cals today, and walked nearly 10000 steps. That's quite good going by my current standards.

A mug of Bovril, if you are feeling desperate, works a treat

Started back on 5:2 today. So far had a banana and a mugshot. Chicken and green veg this eveming. Plenty of water all day. Fingers vrossd i can stick it out till bedtime.

bbevan I think I will try fasting. Maybe it'll shock my body into shifting some of that flab.

You obviously predate me but, yes, I remember all that bread, and sugar sandwiches were a kind of guilty treat. But I can't remember much obesity, and certainly not amongst children (this was 60s). I'm from a poor area, and we were weighed to make sure we weren't too skinny.

I disagree with you about tomato soup, and other savoury foods being known to have a high sugar content. I certainly didn't know, and I've always thought of myself as pretty clued up. I've always been more concerned with calorie content, though, not sugar per se.

I'm not sure what the answer is. People have to eat. Carbs are easy, and cheap.

I think the 'some can do moderation' phrase is a cop out. All but a tiny minority can, if they really want to.

I think there has always been a general feeling that too much sugar and sweet things is not good for you, even before there was any science to formally back it up, quite a part from the specific concern about its links with dental decay.

I remember as a child that being overweight (predominantly women) was connected with poverty. It was explained to me that in poor families what good food there was went to the wage earner and children and the women tended to live on bread and marge with sugar to make it palatable and that this poor diet was the cause of their obesity.Nothing much has changed obesity now is associated with a diet high in processed carbohydrates, Fat (high in caloris) and sugar

That there is sugar in tomato soup and ketchup has been known for thirty or forty years.

gettingonabit A couple of fast days on the 5:2 and the weight will move a little quicker.

nikdumpling I'm a bit like that! I can lose weight on 1200 cals a day, but cripes! It's hard going.

That plateauing is so bloody annoying, isn't it? I've got about a stone to go, and it won't budge. It's as if my body has settled for being fat.

What annoys me even more is if a significantly overweight friend follows the same eating plan as me, she can lose about 10lbs in a month. I'd be lucky to lose 10lbs in 10 months.

Why oh why..

Mm..some can do moderation, but many can't /won't.

I disagree with you on sugar. The dangers of sugar on the teeth have been well known , yes. But the research that Lustig and Yudkin did back in the 70s was dismissed until recently (in favour of, I think, research into fats).

Everyone knows about sugar in biscuits, cake and sweets. That's obvious. But sugar in tomato soup? Ketchup? Beans?

Not so obvious..

We have always known that an excess of sugar was bad for us, not just since the 1970s. I was born during the war and our generation grew up being told not to eat too many sweet things because they were bad for us. I think that attitude goes back to the 19th century.

Free choice and ubiquity of food has nothing to do with it. What each individual eats is their own choice and information on what is a sensible diet in broadest terms has always been widely available. Everything in moderation has always been the underlying message what ever expert has popped up and said eggs or sugar or fat or bacon are not good for you and ignorance is not an adequate excuse for eating badly.

People can do moderation if they want to, mMany people do. That they choose not to is a different question.

Monica I agree with you on your point about rationing. Of course people were healthy then-their food was strictly controlled. And there was little choice.

I'm not suggesting that people should not take responsibility for own eating. Of course they should. In an ideal world. But we do not live in that world. We live in a world of free choice and ubiquity of food. Add to that any vested commercial interests a government has in food production, and it becomes vastly more difficult.

And as to the "neurosing"? People make choices based on the information they get. If that information is incorrect, out of date or not made available, you can't really blame people for making daft choices. If the experts can't get it right, why should the consumer be expected to?

We've known about the dangers of sugar since the 70s. But the messages were swept under the carpet. Why? Who knows? And who cares anyway? One minute we're avoiding eggs, the next minute it's saturated fat, the next it's fibre, and now it's sugar. Tomorrow it'll probably be something else, and soon we'll be back to "everything in moderation".

Unfortunately nowadays people can't seem to "do" moderation!

Caramac, the advice for people like you, or anyone with a medical problem is 'Consult your GP'

The phrase 'Eat well, not too much, most of it plants' tells you what a good diet is. It is one with planty of fruit and veg in it and not eating more than is required to keep to a healthy weight.

I would however dispute the idea that people do not know what a good diet is. It has always been made clear that a good diet is one that is high in fruit and veg and low in processed foods. In other words what most people ate before we became neurotic about every mouthful we put in our mouths.

The population of this country was at its healthiest during and after WW2 when we had rationing, and while those devising the rationing system worked to broad nutritional standards they were certainly not neurosing over carbs/not carbs/lactose/gluten and all the other things so many with no diagnosed medical condition get obsessed by.

I should add that we live in a lovely market town with independent butchers, local fruit and veg, lovely deli's, two artisan bakers, farmers markets.... Good food is difficult to avoid. We only buy stuff like toilet rolls in Sainsburys.