Reason I ask why 800? for say a 4’11 female vs a 6’5 male 800 is very different depending on which you are.

If you look at the recommended daily allowances for people, they only change between men and women, children and adults. Which one are you? The 4’11 female or the 6’5 male?

I am the female

Ha ha! In that case, let the 6’5 male worry for himself! I checked with the book and the reason 800 was chosen was to give people with diabetes and prediabetes a big push with rapid weight loss. I don’t have either but I am only 5’2 and in the overweight category on the bmi chart. I have always found being vertically challenged makes any weight gain more apparent. But my BMI is gradually coming down and I am nearly back within the healthy range.

Best wishes on your journey, whatever your current make-up, you can improve it with this programme.

I suspect the figure doesn’t really matter that much as long as it’s a fair bit less than we’re using, but in a book it’s not very helpful to say ‘keep the calorie count low’ and most people prefer a definite figure to aim for.

The reason is given in the book, this is a rapid weight loss diet for Type 2 diabetics and pre-diabetics.

It is worth looking at the 5:2 diet if you are not in those categories. There is a calculator associated with the diet that will give you a recommended calorie intake for the non fasting days and that should give you something to aim for that is not 800 calories.

800 calories was the figure used by Professor Taylor in his initial Newcastle Diet program.
It was based on the calorie intake of post weight loss surgery patients, many of whom were seeing their blood sugar readings go into normal tolerances.
The whole idea behind the research was to see if the same results could be obtained by people using a rapid weight loss eating regime.
The rest is history and I’m sure we all agree that the results speak for themselves.

The book is aimed at anyone who wants to lose weight and stay healthy. That’s what it says in the homepage of the website. After all, its possible to have a lot of weight to lose and not be t2 or pre- diabetic.

Agreed totally Janet
I was just explaining the history behind the 800 figure.
Personally I’m just waiting for the weight loss companies to announce their new low carb wonder diets, it’s got too happen one day.

It was actually Fred Forest’s post I was responding to, no disrespect intended to either of you. I only mention it as I wouldn’t want people to be put off using the programme if they haven’t got a medical reason.

I used this site https://www.supertracker.usda.gov/bwp/index.html to calculate the amount of calories it will take to lose 16 pounds taking me from 176 to 160, (I’m 5’2) in 60 days, and it recommends to eat 1,255 calories (other factors weigh in, like adding walking, etc.)… I guess the question is, why, in ketosis where burning fat is optimal, can’t I eat 1255 calories of fat/protein rather than 800?

I know MM isn’t forcing me to do anything ;O), just curious why 800. I’m finding it very difficult on 800, eating properly etc. but still hungry, but I don’t want to swap to 5-2, as I really want to stick to this program and be in ketosis. I also really want to maintain weight afterwards, so I’m trying to come up with something feasible in the long run.

Anybody have any input on why 800 and if increasing to 1200 but in same diet (low carb/high fat) will be an issue?

xrissy – it is in the posts above. 800 was low enough to ‘reverse diabetes’ for some participants in one of the trials referred to in the book. As you say you can eat what you want, and there are options in the book to fast some days and not others. How long have you been going? Many find the first week harder than the rest.

krissy,
As they say on training courses – if it was easy everyone would do it!
800 is a researched # designed to kick start you on a new life with significant weight loss in 8 weeks.
Higher cals = longer to reduce. The BSD/Fast/800 diet is a programme that many people can stick to it seems. On the back cover of the BSD book it suggests that the ‘average’ weight loss after 8 weeks of 800 cals is 14kg.

I’ve made up my mind that I want to lose the fat around my middle and get healthier and reverse a high HbA1c reading, so am sticking to it. I say this on a day when I have woken up *starving* and the yogurt doesn’t seem to be doing it… so I’m drinking lots of water now, and then a coffee with a splash of milk, and then a big bowl of soup for lunch. From the past 11 days [& approx -9lb] hydration seems to be a factor; if not hydrated I get hungrier and grumpier, but it passes. Other days I’m absolutely buzzing and do intense exercise without eating much more than 800. This is my first ever time at looking at what I eat – I have been exercising a lot for *years* [and enjoying it] but wondering why not much weight loss whilst consuming approx. 3000 cals per day. When I complete the 8 weeks I intend to eat more sensibly and do a variation of 5:2, but I have to lose the 14kg first.

Everyone’s different, but I would encourage you to accept the science and find coping strategies to get you through. The brunch/dinner combos on the weekend seem to help – a steak never tasted so good or was ever so filling last weekend.

heya… FoFi, I’ve been doing this 3 weeks, been having yogurt with flax mix for 230 cal, lunches are usually meat and cheese slices and veg like carrots and lettuce, or mini crustless quiche with almonds and carrots, and dinners are stuff on mushrooms or chicken. I don’t eat red meat. Found the weight came off 5 pounds in first few days, but now completely stopped. I think sometimes the cals creep up on certain days, MM said it wouldn’t matter much, but I’ve been so hungry, despite all the water. I thought maybe if I upped the cals whilst eating the right things, that might help in the long run. Unfortunately, very hard to stay motivated when scales aren’t shifting.

I’ll try to stick to it for now, just wondering how much diff 800 cal vs 1200 makes if it’s the same food groups and you’re in ketosis.

Cheers :O)

Hi xrissy, I think MM’s comment about the 800 ‘not mattering’ were more that some days you are above it, but the next day you are below – it will even out. That approach stops people trying to manage to the exact calorie, and is a user friendly approach. If you are always above the 800, then the advantages of a ‘shock’ to the system is less and this shock is what reverses the diabetes.
You may what to look at is what your carb count is. If you are having high carbs each eg 70g per day or above, then bring that down to 60 or under. For many people ketosis starts under 50g carbs per day.
Some on the forum have managed to loose a lot of weight by only measuring their carbs, but making sure portion sizes are small as well. They may each 900 cals, but the carbs are under 50g so the body burns fat.
Many people have had a good first week and sometimes second one then struggled for a couple of weeks, and then the weight came off.
keep going – it does work!

xrissy,

If your goal is to put diabetes into remission, I believe the 800 calories v. 1200 calories is a critical difference. If your goal is weight loss, not so much.

I’ve been eating 1200 calories a day since October 2 and have almost certainly been in ketosis most of that time (although it is not a specific goal of mine, so I don’t check). I’ve eaten fewer than 50 carbs most days (although my specific limit has been fewer than 20 in a 3 hour period. During that time I lost around 50 pounds, and never moved beyond management of BG. Even with 50 lbs down, if I ate something with more than 20 net carbs, my blood glucose shot up just as much as it did on October 2.

Nearly three weeks ago, after reading Dr. Taylor’s research, as well as doing research on fasting and insulin, I started the BSD fast 800 + 16:8 intermittent fasting. The goal of both is to restore my 1st phase insulin response, and put my diabetes into remission. In the second week I had a meal that contained 33 carbs and nervously tracked my blood glucose for 3 hours – the peak was 6.16 (111). Little more than a week earlier, 33 carbs would have put my BG over 7.8, and likely closer to 10.0. So, I achieved – in a little over a week at 800 calories – something I was unable to even approach while consistently eating low carb/keto at 1200 calories for 6 months. (Even with the stress of multiple doctor’s visits this wee testing for what is almost certainly breast cancer, my average BG is still under 5.6 (I believe 5.4, but I left my meter at work). My average for the preceding 3 months (on a ketogenic, 1200 calorie diet) was 6.

The difference to me is remission (meaning I won’t have to actively manage my BG by dietary control) v management of BG by careful monitoring of every bite I eat. 1200 gives me the latter; 800 gives me (I hope) the former.

But – if you’re not going for remission of diabetes – it probably doesn’t matter.

I chose this diet mainly because I need fast results to keep me motivated, and here was someone telling me I was allowed to go as low as 800 calories and still be healthy! In the past all I got was ridicule or worry if wanted to go as low as 1000. Reversing my prediabetes will hopefully be a lovely extra benefit.

Hi Xrissy, it does get easier, believe me. You will find this easier than 5:2 as your stomach will adjust quite quickly to the smaller meals every day rather than jumping between a ‘normal’ day and a fast day. 5:2 will also be easier to do once you have reached your target weight on this programme.

Listen to what Neohdiver says about the 800 being critical for reversing T2 – she’s right! 🙂