MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
Seems to be fronted by a credible TV doctor and be based on at least some real research.
Any users? Just another fad diet? Eat less move more?
Whaddya think?
Does this not set the alarm bells ringing?
we developed The Fast 800 online programme and The Fast 800 shakes, which are designed to help people lose weight, stay healthy and live longer.
screams money making scam to me.
It's a useful kick start if you feel you've lost your way. Any significant amount if CV excercise on 800 calories is tough.
It does help you realise what portion sizes should be, how satisfying healthier cleaner food can be and how feeling a bit hungry occasionally isn't the end if the world.
I find I'm more likely to stick to something if it's a tough challenge. Too easy and I just can't be arsed. I did well on 5-2 before, but knowing I could actually made it less challenging and therefore harder to stuck to next time around.
The real trick isn't getting down to where you want to be, but staying there
it's obviously money-making but not a scam. Have a search on here for 5/2 diet... loads of people used it successfully! That said you don't need to sign up to that website or buy the shakes to do the diet - the principle is extremely simple.screams money making scam to me.
5:2 is only one of the stages. The Fast 800 start looks interesting. 800 kcals a day for 12 weeks. 🤔
The Fast 800 start looks interesting. 800 kcals a day for 12 weeks.
How is that even sustainable?
I would suggest that anyone with the willpower to stick to that probably doesn't need to go to such extremes in the first place.
The real trick isn’t getting down to where you want to be, but staying there
This, in spades. I'm just about where I want to be, weight-wise, but as this weekend showed me, dropping off my current regimen will just result in weight gain. I ate "normal" food for 2 days and I haven't felt this hungry on a Monday morning for months!
ah fair enough. Yeah agree that sounds a bit extreme. Think this might tie-in with his new telly prog I've seen advertised?5:2 is only one of the stages. The Fast 800 start looks interesting. 800 kcals a day for 12 weeks.
How is that even sustainable?
It isn't, but should be doable for 12 weeks if you are fat enough.
screams money making scam to me.
I'm sort of with TJ here, anything that wants to sell you stuff is a bit compromised. I've watched enough of his programmes to think that he really does want to help folk loose weight, but I'm a bit sceptical of this being the way forward.
"We are a group of doctors, nutritionists and lifestyle specialists"
No dietitians then?
Actually, with some smart choices, 800 calories can provide you with enough satisfying food to stave off hunger for that day.
It's not sustainable, and not meant to be, but if you pay attention to what's going on while you do it, you can learn some valuable lessons about the difference between what you think you want and what you actually need.
Sounds very similar to The Newcastle University Diet, supposed to reverse Type 2 diabetes.
Did it last year lost a lot of weight in the first month or so. Wasn't doing much cardio at the time due to injury. Found that my metabolism started to slow down was shivering all the time, I switched to a keto / intermittent fasting approach and continued to lose weight but was able to run marathons / fell races with little extra nutrition.
To be fair i did the 800 a day low carb and really set me up to be fat adapted .
but was able to run marathons / fell races with little extra nutrition
There's no danger of me being in that situation even after 12 weeks of 800 a day I suspect.
OK. I'll chip in. Michael Moseley's diets, the original 5:2, the Blood Sugar Diet and the Fast 800 are based on some real science and medicine.
His latest programme on C4 coinciding with the Fast 800 does whiff a bit of money making, especially the shakes and the website to register.
Back in Nov my GP advised me my BP was borderline and I should have to medicate. I asked for one more chance he recommended me Moseley's 8 week Blood Sugar Diet. So in Jan I went for it. Basically Moseley says do 800 cals a day until you lose 10% of bodyweight or for 8 weeks before going 5:2 if more weight loss required.
Within 1 week my BP was back down below borderline Hypertensive. I lost my 10% (2 stone) within 6 weeks. I've followed the principles of the diet (Low Carb, High Fat) ever since and have lost another stone and am now maintaining (FYI 6'3" male 17.5 stone now around 14.25-14.5 stone) successfully.
The diet isn't religious Keto. But cuts out most processed carbs and starches, Potato, Pasta, White FLour etc etc. Based on a lot of good research, if you want to understand how / what why we've been brainwashed to believe is a good diet (high carb low fat) have a read of Leo Fung's The Obesity Code.
It works for me but it's a lifestyle change in eating habits not a 3-4 month diet then back to old habits.
Personally I'd recommend buy his book (either the Blood Sugar Diet or Fast 800) along with the accompanying recipe book. Empty your cupboards of crap. Plan a week's meals and go for it!
if you want to understand how / what why we’ve been brainwashed to believe is a good diet (high carb low fat) have a read of Leo Fung’s The Obesity Code.
Also have a read of Wheat Belly by William Davies.
Freester - you can expect a load of responses that all you have done is reduced your calorie intake and that's why you've lost weight.
I am not sure why people cannot see that there is very little different insulin responses to eating pasta or sugar? It's clear and proven.
Thanks Freester I was hoping for someone whod'd done it.
1. Don't eat like a 5 year old.
2. Move as much as you can.
3. Lift some heavy things.
4. If you want to lose weight eat less calories than you burn.
Send your £50 notes to:
Quick diets don't work
No easy ways
Fadtown
https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/healthy-weight/very-low-calorie-diets/
A very low calorie diet is a clinically supervised diet plan that involves eating about 800 calories a day or fewer. They are sometimes considered for obese and severely obese people who are managing diabetes, going to have surgery or preparing for fertility treatment.
...
Very low calorie diets should only be followed under medical supervision for a maximum of 12 weeks. Do not follow a very low calorie diet unless a GP has suggested it to you.
The NHS should be doing this, recipes published for free and shakes available at cost, surely it would pay for itself in the long run if a lot of people adopted it.
That said surely most people that have the willpower for this sort of diet should already have the willpower just to eat generally more healthily and so wouldn't be fat in the first place? There can't be people out there eating takeaways 4+ days a week and snacking on biscuits, cake and crisps that just don't know if instead they only ate small portions of vegetables & pulses they'd lose weight?
what why we’ve been brainwashed to believe is a good diet (high carb low fat)
the normal recommended diet is not high carb. its a balanced diet that is recommended.
But we have been told for a long time that low fat is important and now the research is not only suggesting that's not the case, but that it could well be part of the problem.
Not quite from my reading. Low fat is not perhaps as important a factor as thought but remains important. Sugar consumption is more important than previously thought. High fat is not good. Never seen anything reputable stating low fat is a part of the problem.
Again - a balanced diet is not high fat.
Unless someone puts some actual numbers to low and high fat, they become relative terms.
As for "low fat", a lot if the problem, particularly for those not paying attention, is what food processors do to foods that's aren't actually a problem, to make them "low fat". So while the lowers of fat might not be the issue, what people are getting as a result of that fat being reduced, is unhelpful.
Fat has been demonized and it doesn't need to be.
Fat has been demonized and it doesn’t need to be.
This is a big part of the problem, and I think that the marketing departments of food companies are largely to blame for this.
I think it all comes down to oversimplistic thinking - consumer doesn't want to be fat, therefore buys "low fat" food. However consumer has failed to recognise that their body will readily convert any calories they eat into fat if they consume more than the body is using.
Never seen anything reputable stating low fat is a part of the problem.
As Onza says, it’s whats added is the problem- salt to get some flavour back and then sugar to counter act the saltiness.
Even for non low fat food, food makers (*) (esp those that make ready meals) pump as much water as poss as it’s cheap (coz they want to make a profit). Again, salt is used to bring the flavour back then add sugar as it’s too salty.
I think there have been studies showing the rise in obesity matches the predominance of low-fat food.
Portion control is a biggie too. On Chub Club this year I actually weighed the “treat” cereal I had at weekends. The sugar was amber based on their portion- as I was having no it just at the weekend, it was my treat for a week of eating sparingly. Trouble is, my portion was over twice the recommended one and not even a half full bowl. I measured their portion and it was tiny.
* i’ve worked for the baby- killing food co so have some background info, but am not a food scientist/nutritionist.
Hearty breakfast, light lunch, light tea nothing in between lifestyle forever type thingy works for me.
Other greedy **** type lifestyle thingy's are also available but not so effective.
Sugar consumption is more important than previously thought.
Can you tell me the major difference from the blood sugar spike caused from eating sugar, to eating say rice or pasta?
The chemical reaction in your body is basically the same.
Mmm - I think I'm going to give it a go. £100 for a 12 week programme is less than I used to spend on takeaway coffee.
Wish we luck 🙂
I did the fast 800 this time last year and lost the 3 stone that had crept on over the years in 4 months. It had immeasurable benefits for me.
I bought the book. And a premiere subscription to myfittnesspal to track my consumption (esp protein - getting enough and vitamins/mineral intake). And a set of posh withings wifi scales. That was the total of my spend.
I now use time restricted eating 5 out of 7 days a week (so only consume calories between 1130-1930 on those 5 days) and otherwise eat relatively normally.
The fast 800 taught me how to be hungry again (I'd forgotten it was ok) and reset my expectation on portion size. I also fell back in love with exercise.
Thanks @Convert it was your post on the Chub Club thread that piqued my interest.
Posh scales on order 🙂
My 2p worth (COI: I work medically in this field but have nothing to do with this program):
It is (overall) the most evidenced based widely available (rapid) weight loss program that I have seen.
1-1 intensive behavioural support would be an improvement (at the cost of it being much less widely available)
The claims made about the benefits of Intermittent Fasting and Time-Restricted Eating are less robust (in humans anyway...). However an absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence when it comes to the benefits. And there is a growing body of research now backing these.
Mediterranean Diet is still the gold standard although maybe not quite as clear cut as we had once assumed.
We should assume everyone will have at least one relapse (weight gain episode) within 5 years, and so should plan for that. Reverting to a short run of VeryFast800 for 2-4 weeks to arrest this would be a reasonable (probably the recommended) approach whilst that person also looks to make the necessary behavioural changes to maintain their weight again.
I'd definitely recommend it @oldtennisshoes !
IMO probably the most important things to remember are:
1) Weight (fat actually) gain is a symptom of an underlying lifestyle that is too unhealthy for your genetic make up. Therefore using weight as the only metric for improvement is to miss the point. Better long term to aim to be healthier, with weight loss as a consequence, than to be lighter, with weight loss as the primary goal. That way you maximise the benefits (cardiovascular risk, long term outcomes etc). Fast800 can be a stepping stone to that.
2) If weight (fat) is your number 1 concern, then stopping alcohol completely for the rapid weight loss phase is an easy win.
3) Relapse will happen. Deal with it by having a plan to nip it in the bud.
4) I almost always recommend a slightly modified Mediterranean Diet as the gold standard long term. This is somewhat complex and ideally individualised, but by understanding what is happening through the first and second stages you may come to your own sensible conclusions (as did @convert)
5) The cornerstones of healthy lifestyle (and therefore weight maintenance) are : refreshing sleep, diet, activity, and exercise. Target all 4.
Having re-read that I think I come across as a bit of a know-it-all, which I'm not. I've learnt a lot in the last 5 years in particular from working in this field (1-1 based work primarily). I'll change my views if good evidence supports it.
Thanks @Ioneonic it’s good to hear some (qualified) support from a professional.
Mosely is the doctor who never practiced, he passed the exams but has never worked on his own cognisance since graduating. He is a very good salesman and TV presenter though.
How is that even sustainable?
It's not, it's 3 months of anorexia probably followed by 3 months of gaining any lost weight back while you hunt for your next fad diet...
I have to admit I'm tempted to try some flavour of 5:2 during winter just to see if I can still exercise, lose weight and not become horrifically grumpy.
It’s not, it’s 3 months of anorexia probably followed by 3 months of gaining any lost weight back while you hunt for your next fad diet…
I have to admit I’m tempted to try some flavour of 5:2 during winter just to see if I can still exercise, lose weight and not become horrifically grumpy.
You are welcome to poke me in the stomach to confirm the lost weight has not returned in the last 9 months 🙂
I tried 5:2 - I found it much harder than the 800. 800 just becomes a way of life - after 8 or 9 days you stop being hungry in the way you are on the 2 days of the 5:2. It's oddly more sustainable. 800cals rather than 500/600 makes a hell of a difference too.
I have to admit I’m tempted to try some flavour of 5:2 during winter just to see if I can still exercise, lose weight and not become horrifically grumpy.
My experiences of general calorie cutting so far: can still exercise, don't lose any weight, always at risk of becoming horrifically grumpy!
I'm slowly adapting, I have to learn that when I'm exercising I NEED to eat, long rides in particular are still difficult to adequately fuel (I mean, I can get home, feel like I'm riding well, but the hangry is always lurking...). I can get non-exercise days down to 1000kCal relatively easily, so 800kCal should be achievable with a bit of care.
I think the weekend relapse is my biggest problem, Friday night can rapidly become 2 beers and a family size bag of salt and vinegar crisps, so that's ~ 1400 calories right there. Can't really cut that out of the rest of the day but think I'm going to try the GCN trick of 2 short intense workouts on days I think I might binge, will hopefully spark metabolism on those days but also potentially suppress appetite for beer and crisps in the evening!
Good luck. First few days will feel tough as you adapt to a new way of eating and try to break the sugar addiction.
Just remember, if it was easy, everyone would do it. It takes some effort to turn the ship around, but once you have, it's plain sailing.
I've bought the book. Had it about 3 months. Still not started...
To the OP.
Good luck. It worked for me. My advice:
- empty your cupboards of all the crap
- plan a week's meals and shop for just those ingredients
- you will get hungry, black or green tea got me through the pangs
- if the hunger becomes unbearable snack on plan - nuts work well
I was surprised how well I got on. I was less hungry than expected and really only ravenous after some exercise.
There's some good support on the BSD website and also groups on Facebook.
You can't eat many nuts if you're on 800 calories a day!
I would echo a large number of the positive comments made here (and ignore the naysayers). I wasn't overweight, but had put weight on in a lot of hard to shift places (midrift, manboobs) when I started. For reference, 5ft 11 and was 12st 4lbs. Started with some scepticism about 5 weeks ago and thought I'd be starving all the time and riding would be a challenge. I've had to adapt to accommodate and 8hr plus week bike training plan. I've lost 8lbs in that period, and would echo a comment about about the joy of feeling hungry again. Plenty of standard white carb substitutes such as quinoa wholegrain rice, chick peas and other pulses / beans. I've spent time considering my recovery from longer / harder rides with whole milk and full fat yoghurt recovery shake.
I'm convinced there is still a few more lbs to come off, and will continue for a few more weeks to see if the progress remains.
What I've learnt: -
Good fat = less hungry
Greater protein intake = less hungry
No white carbs / sugar or seriously restricting this = less hungry
Time restricted eating (down to approx. 8-10 hour window) = less hungry
So, my take is that it works and I was certainly very cynical to begin with.
Just following up on this to see how people are going. My shock came when I realised I was 50lbs heavier than when I did the TCR in 2015 and my 8 year old weights 58lbs! 10lbs added during the first 6 months of lock down. So though I'd give this a go. 8 months ago id given up full fat coke and switched to pepsi max and obviously this wasn't helping. So the first week of fast800 was hard, getting rid of the sugar and caffeine out of your body. Since the middle of week 2 it's not been too bad and it is surprising what you can eat for 800 calories. I'm having 200 cal breakfast at 10am, 300 cals at lunch and 300 cals at dinner before 6pm. And loads of water.... So far in 21 days I've lost 20lbs. So happy with that. Working from home has made this easier, as it is easy to hide the hangry and temptations.
So 4.6kg lost in the first 3 weeks of the programme.
I'd lost a couple of kgs before I formally started it, so I'm hoping this is fat lossy rather than water/glycogen.
I've not stuck to 800 cals every day, but usually sub 1000. I'm not using strictly following the meals because I'm also cooking for the rest of the family, but doing what I can.
If I can stay clear of the bread, it's much easier. At this rate I might hit my intermediate target by Christmas 🤞
I'm rather late to the conversation but doing the fast 800 I've lost a stone and a half/10kg in ten weeks. Gone from 16st 10lbs to 15st 3lbs or 106kg to 96 kg. My BMI was 32 now I'm a shade under 30 (so now overweght not obese). It is very doable and I've rarely felt hungry. As above a lot of the days have been more like 1000 calories. having a week off now as on holiday in Northern Scotland, but I'm confident I can lose whatever I put on this week within a week or so and then push on and lose another stone without feeling hungry all the time.
I'd recommend it to anyone wanting to shift weight.
And another kilo this week. Maybe a bit of a plateaux, but still feeling good on it.
If I had my way in a Bond villain-y sort of way I'd measure numbers monthly rather than daily/weekly. Sadly for my world domination plans, the evidence suggests that each person should decide to what degree they follow their numbers (some find it a positive motivating thing, others find it negative), so I don't get to tell people.... To be clear body fat loss is the metric we are interested in (not the same as weight loss), and muscle loss is to be avoided. Fluid shifts will mess up the scales hourly/daily/weekly and to a lesser extent monthly (hence daily/weekly weights are often not telling us as much useful information about the type of weight loss as we would like)
My advice is to trust the process. It is such a significant calorie deficit that it cannot not work (in the short term anyway**) so worrying about whether it is working or not is wasted energy. Following protocol driven diets is easy/hard for a few weeks depending on your personality I guess. If following it is fairly straightforwards then I'd worry less about actually following it/daily and weekly targets, and more about the plan when you come off it. I don't mean don't follow it, just focus on the medium to long term changes, rather than whether or not it is working (which it will be if you are properly following it, no matter what the scales say)
** In my experience there is a definite slowing down in fat loss after around 8-12 weeks in a reasonable percentage of people. If pushed I'd guess that it is another example of the body's amazing ability to adapt, and hence is staving off the fasting mode you have entered (which makes sense from the viewpoint of evolution) and that maybe the body up-regulates the pathway to recycle ketones to use for energy rather than them being waste products. But I've not looked into that in any detail so I don't know. If that happens an option is to move back to a calorie-neutral diet again until the body adapts to that (?3 months... a useful trial run on your new healthy lifestyle in any case) and then decide if you want to go again at the sort of calorie deficit you were doing before.
TLDR: Don't worry about 1-2 weeks of apparent plateau or even weight gain. Fat is what we are interested in, and the scales aren't terribly accurate for that in the short term. If 3-4 weeks then consider ** above.
You guys are doing well. As expected. (This is the easy bit though....)