Advanced search

16:8 alongside slimming world?

(10 Posts)
helpamummaout Tue 16-Jul-19 16:40:21

Hi everyone!
I've lost 2.5 stone with slimming world but recently really been struggling to even loose half a lb a week even after a great week off plan. I'm only 4lb away from target and hoping to do 16:8 alongside slimming world as the last push. Has anyone ever tried this? Would love some success stories, thank you

OP’s posts: |
Acrasia Thu 18-Jul-19 14:45:47

It might help if you are prone to snacking/grazing throughout the day. I would suggest tracking your calories for a couple of days to see how much you’re actually eating. I found with SW I could be 100% on plan and gain wait after a while just because I was terrible at portion control.

Liskee Sun 08-Sep-19 13:04:27

I've been doing this the last month or so. Has been easy to sustain on an 11am-7pm eating window. The first couple of weeks I didn't lose but I wasn't completely on plan. Last 2 weeks, doing 16:8, (mostly) on SW plan and incorporating a 40 min you tube workout 4-5 times a week and I've lost 6lbs. To date I've lost nearly 5 stone with another 3 to go and been stalled since around Easter. Think this has been the kick start I've needed to get losing again smile

LimeJellyHead Thu 12-Sep-19 12:23:14

I'm guessing Slimming World is calorie counting? If yes, I would ditch that. Bit of a bold statement but there is loads of evidence now that low calorie diets simply cause your metabolic rate to lower meaning that eventually your weight loss will stall and you will start gaining again.

My favourite thing was someone saying there is a reason why 'Biggest Loser' never had a reunion show, lol. Not sure if you remember that show but you know the sort of thing. I looked it up and only 2 of those people are still near their final weight... all the rest are as big or bigger.

So after lots of research in my weight loss journey, I have started intermittent fasting and upped my calories (yes, I increased them) and am loosing weight like never before.

Start with 16:8 and go from there (maybe even try a 3 days water fast) but also try to get your calorie intake back up or your metabolism will be set on 'slow' forever.

Good luck.

Meirion Thu 12-Sep-19 13:48:09

I do SW, calorie counting and 16:8 IF and I am losing weight. When I hit target I will stop SW but I will continue watching calories and doing a more moderate version of IF. There is nothing magic about IF, but it is a great way to control the amount of calories you are consuming and for me it has completely eliminated snacking.

There are a lot of beliefs about metabolism that are not based in science or are only loosely related to science.

Calorie counting in itself will not cause your metabolism to slow down. It will cause you to lose weight and smaller, lighter people need fewer calories to subsist each day. So if you eat a set number of calories each day and don't change it, your weight loss will naturally slow down as you become smaller. This does not mean your metabolism has slowed down, it is running at the same pace as before.

If you don't exercise, or if you were exercising and then you stop, your muscle mass will be smaller than the muscle mass of someone who exercises a lot. If you aren't very muscular, the calories you need to consume each day to sustain or even lose weight will be smaller. If you want to speed up weight loss, add some exercise into your programme.

It is commonly said that people who go on diets later regain all the weight and again this is often attributed to metabolism. In fact, what often happens is that they think 'I can't wait to finish this diet and go back to eating normally' except they were never eating normally, they were over-eating, that's why they were fat. Normal eating is an amount and type of eating that sustains you at a healthy weight.

Biggest Loser is now widely regarded as having been abusive programme in which participants were dehydrated, over-exercised to the point of injury and hospitalisation and provoked into developing eating disorders. It was never going to result in long term success and was not designed to. It was a televised competition which existed to make money for the producers, which it succeeded in doing. Like many reality TV shows, it wasn't as good for the hapless members of the public who participated.

tl;dr Yes, you can do SW and IF.

LimeJellyHead Thu 12-Sep-19 14:32:18

We'll have to agree to disagree smile The low fat, low cal diet has been about for many decades now (I remember in the 70s when we all ditched butter for margarine, changed to skimmed milk and avoided fat like the plague) and look at where the population is at... overweight and with a diabetes epidemic.

From my own personal experience of growing up in an era of low cal, low fat misinformation, I can tell you that is certainly hasn't worked for me. I have now switched to fasting and have INCREASED my calorie intake and am losing weight.

Meirion Thu 12-Sep-19 16:59:28

@LimeJellyHead, ah we are probably more in agreement than we first thought, then.

I was still a child in the 70s but I am aware of the history of dieting. Calorie counting in the 60s, then low fat in the 70s as though it was going to solve all the world's problems. Then low carb, Atkins, etc. Then sugar was poison. Then paleo, warrior diets, fasting and back to calorie counting again by a younger generation that thinks they invented calories. Round and round it goes.

As for my personal opinion, I do think the low fat aspect of SW is a bit dated. I also agree with points of view that the food manufacturing industry absolutely loved (and still loves) low fat ideologies because it allowed them to make 'diet' versions of all their foods where the fat was replaced with sugar and sweeteners. The advantage being that low-fat 'diet' foods are far cheaper to manufacture than the higher fat versions. I would agree with you as well that we are having an unprecedented diabetes problem in the West and this is largely attributable to people's insulin levels spiking because of too much sugar / sweeteners as well as general obesity.

However. Even though I think the low-fat aspect of the SW ideology is a bit out of date, in my view, where it succeeds is that people don't actually realise how many calories are contained in oil and fat. If they did realise, they would cut back a bit. Avocados - all good, natural fat but could be up to 300 calories each. For me, that's a lot because my total daily energy expenditure is only 1,500. In order to lose weight, I have to shave 500 calories off that amount, meaning that a large avocado is nearly a whole meal. Or take olive oil - I have nothing against olive oil at all and would rather use that than some synthetic alternative. But when I have only 1,000 calories per day to 'spend', it's valuable to me to know that 1 tablespoon of olive oil is 120 calories. That really makes a difference to how much oil I will use when cooking or even if I want to use it at all.

For me, the main value of SW is weekly motivation. I'm about to nip down there now and see if I have won Slimmer of the Week again. The main thing that gets the pounds off for me is watching calories, of which I'm a lot more careful than I used to be. And the 16:8 IF has helped terrifically with reducing my calorie intake. I don't snack. I don't graze all around the clock. I have two meals a day, one at about 12:30 and the other one in the early evening which absolutely must be over by 8:30pm no matter what. I'm usually not too hungry for the second meal and I'm amazed how much IF has shrunk my appetite.

Using a mix of all these methods, I've lost 20 lbs in ten weeks. I plan to drop another 15 pounds between now and Xmas and then I'm done and I can spend the rest of my life doing maintenance.

It was fun speaking with you! Always interesting to compare strategies.

LimeJellyHead Thu 12-Sep-19 18:02:54

Yes, for sure. I enjoyed reading your post smile I understand that some knowledge of calories is needed and people can't go crazy with how many calories they eat but I also think the obsession with calories needs to end.

Like you I also can't eat many calories as I have eaten so few for so long I am now in that rut. I am using IF and extended water fasts to get out of that rut and am increasing my calories and so far the weight is coming off.

It was either Jason Fung or Dr Berg who explained it quite well (forgive me but I can't remember who as I watch both their stuff) but it went something like this.... if when you eat you don't eat enough your body clocks that and if it continues it has to take action so it will decrease what your brain and heart and liver etc... need in order to run (resting metabolism). That is how me and you and millions of others end up in this mess of hardly being able to eat any calories.

Give your body more calories again so it reverses that 'decision' and the metabolic rate will hopefully (eventually) be restored. If people do IF but are still obsessing over calories and still eating low calories, that cycle can't be broken... but I agree that people can't go round eating like loonies just because they are doing IF wink

Meirion Thu 12-Sep-19 20:01:34

@LimeJellyHead, I've never watched Fung or Berg on YouTube but I am currently listening to the audio version of The Complete Guide to Fasting by Jason Fung and Jimmy Moore and I'm really enjoying it. I like what they have to say about hunger, eg it is largely psychological. It's also not linear, so you don't get progressively more and more hungry while you are fasting, and I have found this to be true.]]

If you like Fung's approach, you may also like a book I've just read called Conquering Fat Logic by Nadja Hermann. She is about calories but despite this, she and Fung have a surprising amount in common and share a pragmatic, no-nonsense type of approach.]]

Again, nice speaking with you! PS, I did win Slimmer of the Week again. I realise it's all silly nonsense and doesn't mean anything but I will take any type of motivation if it keeps me away from the custard creams.

LimeJellyHead Thu 12-Sep-19 20:13:55

Yay, well done. That is great. it is not silly at all. i would be chuffed smile

Yeah, for sure about the hunger. People think they will get more and more hungry but I found you only get hungry around meal times. After a few days it does get a bit more intense but nothing unbearable, hey. Hunger doesn't bother me.

For me the biggest issue with a fast is drinking plain water. I can't stand the stuff and as a result I worry that I am not drinking enough. I love blackcurrant squash and drink loads of it when not fasting, very diluted. But plain water I just don't drink it like I do squash. If I could find a way to drink more I would be happier. Still, small things.

It makes me laugh how afraid we all are simply not to eat and then one day we try it and think hang on, why was this such a big deal... if I don't eat every day nothing happens... only good things grin

Join the discussion

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet

Already have a Mumsnet account? Log in