GPSGuided wrote:Ultimately it all comes down to calories in vs calories out. The more it’s in negative balance the quicker the weight will go down. Eat vs activity.
Moondog55 wrote:A question for those who have trialed intermittent fasting as a weight control measure. What in your experience has worked better, fasting for 2 days straight or 2 out of seven?
Moondog55 wrote:While I acknowledge that this is true I find it hard to eat small but relatively easy to go without food for short periods of time, also like many people I eat when I'm bored and this is a really bad habit that avoided by not eating at all.
I find it easy enough to lose weight but really hard to keep it off
Moondog55 wrote:... like many people I eat when I'm bored ...
Neo wrote:"I'm not fat, I'm winter-ready".
crollsurf wrote:Yeah and I have a six pack, you just cant see it
I was talking to my boss the other day about this and he has a theory that has no scientific basis but made sense to me. Lets say you weigh 100kg and you lose 5kgs. Problem is, any indiscretion and your back to your original weight. That's because you still have a potential 100kg of fat cells. You need to lose that weight and stay at 95kgs until the natural cycle of cell replacement removes the starved fat cells and leaves with only 95kg of fats cells. Then your weight will bounce around 95kg.
Moondog55 wrote:At least it allows me to eat pizza once a week.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests