[niknaksbarbeque (OP)]

Hi,

About one or two years ago in the UK, a Journalist published a radical diet that he did once every 12 years. He existed on 200 calories a day, ran 30 minutes a day (he claimed to keep his "Metabolic Rate up") and stated that he had lost 2 pounds a day, every day, and had lost a total of 60 pounds in a month. There were pictures with the headline "The Incredible Shirking journalist". The paper went to lengths to say that this was just an account of their employee's diet an on no account were they advocating the diet.

The one phrase that the journalist used which got to me was "normal diets feel too much like doing your homework", which is exactly how I feel. I know that losing 2 pounds per week, with no more calorie reduction than 500 calories per day, is sensible, but it takes so long and it is sooo dull.

He said that the diet was "extreme" but it worked and worked quickly.

Unfortunately, I can't remember the name of the Journalist or the paper (I've tried googling unsucessfully this afternoon). If anyone remembers the paper (or Author) could they please post the name.

So then what do you all think? Is this bunkum (I was thinking of trying it and measuring my body fat with calipers to see what effect it had on body fat composition)?

Any scientific basis for a 2 pounds per day weight loss? What if he was right?

Interestingly if he went at all over the 200 calorie limit he didn't lose any weight.

[gecko]

this sounds ridiculous and dangerous to me. youre effectively putting yourself into extreme starvation, esspecially if your running a half hour a day too. what good is the diet anyway if he had to repeat it every year? all hes doing is putting his metabolism and body through unneccesary stress for a month every year, hed probably be healthier to just keep the weight!

my father advocates the "dont eat lunch" diet. its exactly as it sounds and it worked for him.

i was reading about raw veganism, and alot of people advocated it to manage diabetes or general weight management in periods. as in, be a raw vegan for a month, then not for a month. this apparently has some detox properties- also, youre not reducing caloric intake, just eating less weight effecting foods.

[Melisande]

Well, it has been proven, over and over again, that if you go on a low calory diet you will lose weight. BUT, if you let your body get used to a, say 200 calory diet, for some time, and then start eating 400 calories a day, you WILL gain weight again. So what's the use? I feel that it is way better to reduce your calory intake a little bit at a time, or you WILL start gaining weight again...

[another_someone]

I suspect that at 200 calories a day, the amount of weight you will lose will be the loss of your life.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calorie

quote:
As a rough guideline, recommended daily energy intake values for young adults are: 2500 kcal/d (10 MJ/d, 120 W) for men and 2000 kcal/d (8 MJ/d, 100 W) for women. Children, sedentary and older people require less energy, physically active people more.

kcal is the normal scientific way of describing what nutritionist refer to as Calories.

While it may be argued there is some latitude for a smaller intake of energy if you have a relatively sedentary lifestyle; but consuming one 10% of the recommended typical energy intake seems like a certain recipe for an early grave.

George

[gecko]

this sounds ridiculous and dangerous to me. youre effectively putting yourself into extreme starvation, esspecially if your running a half hour a day too. what good is the diet anyway if he had to repeat it every year? all hes doing is putting his metabolism and body through unneccesary stress for a month every year, hed probably be healthier to just keep the weight!

my father advocates the "dont eat lunch" diet. its exactly as it sounds and it worked for him.

i was reading about raw veganism, and alot of people advocated it to manage diabetes or general weight management in periods. as in, be a raw vegan for a month, then not for a month. this apparently has some detox properties- also, youre not reducing caloric intake, just eating less weight effecting foods.

[Melisande]

Well, it has been proven, over and over again, that if you go on a low calory diet you will lose weight. BUT, if you let your body get used to a, say 200 calory diet, for some time, and then start eating 400 calories a day, you WILL gain weight again. So what's the use? I feel that it is way better to reduce your calory intake a little bit at a time, or you WILL start gaining weight again...

[another_someone]

I suspect that at 200 calories a day, the amount of weight you will lose will be the loss of your life.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calorie

quote:
As a rough guideline, recommended daily energy intake values for young adults are: 2500 kcal/d (10 MJ/d, 120 W) for men and 2000 kcal/d (8 MJ/d, 100 W) for women. Children, sedentary and older people require less energy, physically active people more.

kcal is the normal scientific way of describing what nutritionist refer to as Calories.

While it may be argued there is some latitude for a smaller intake of energy if you have a relatively sedentary lifestyle; but consuming one 10% of the recommended typical energy intake seems like a certain recipe for an early grave.

George

[Mjhavok]

I agree that the diet you are talking about is insane. Doing this for 1 or 2 days a month maybe ok to detox your system but for the whole month. The guy sounds like an insane jackass.

[jollyblondebabe]

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/the-incredible-shrinking-man-546259.html

There's the link to the article of 'The Shrinking Man'


Hope it helps, considering giving it ago  []

Goodluck

[Bored chemist]

I agree that the diet you are talking about is insane. Doing this for 1 or 2 days a month maybe ok to detox your system but for the whole month. The guy sounds like an insane jackass.

While we are discussing daft diets, let's not forget that the body is quite capable of detoxing itself on a continuous basis. The liver and kidneys do this. To do so they need energy and raw materials provided by food.

"Detox" diets don't make sense.

[DrN]

Life's too short for diets. Haul your ass round the block a few times instead! Do it during daylight, and you top up your vitamin D levels too. Multi-tasking!

It's worth adding that regular cardiovascular exercise will strenghen your heart, whereas starvation will put considerable strain on it. No point in being thin and dead.

[Don_1]

Most weight loss 'diets' are a waste of time and often a waste of money.

Stick to a good balanced diet, park the car half a mile from your home and have a brisk walk to/from it morning/evening and you'll be fine.

There's nothing wrong with a burger & chips (French fries) or a Mississippi Mud Pie once in a while. Just don't live on these things. Get your balance between meat, fish, dairy, vegetables and fruit right and you can indulge yourself on the odd occasion.

[chris]

Thanks, jollyblondebabe, for locating the original article and reviving this thread!

I think the best approach, where weight is concerned, is not to put it on in the first place. Saves a whole heap of trouble later...

Chris

[ruzzel01]

Hi,

About one or two years ago in the UK, a Journalist published a radical diet that he did once every 12 years. He existed on 200 calories a day, ran 30 minutes a day (he claimed to keep his "Metabolic Rate up") and stated that he had lost 2 pounds a day, every day, and had lost a total of 60 pounds in a month. There were pictures with the headline "The Incredible Shirking journalist". The paper went to lengths to say that this was just an account of their employee's diet an on no account were they advocating the diet.

The one phrase that the journalist used which got to me was "normal diets feel too much like doing your homework", which is exactly how I feel. I know that losing 2 pounds per week, with no more calorie reduction than 500 calories per day, is sensible, but it takes so long and it is sooo dull.

He said that the diet was "extreme" but it worked and worked quickly.

Unfortunately, I can't remember the name of the Journalist or the paper (I've tried googling unsucessfully this afternoon). If anyone remembers the paper (or Author) could they please post the name.

So then what do you all think? Is this bunkum (I was thinking of trying it and measuring my body fat with calipers to see what effect it had on body fat composition)?

Any scientific basis for a 2 pounds per day weight loss? What if he was right?

Interestingly if he went at all over the 200 calorie limit he didn't lose any weight.

Well, this sounds ridiculous to me. It's like you're putting yourself into extreme starvation, esp if your running a half hour a day too. I am in a diet but I never starve to death. I just religiously follow my doctor's advise to diet.