Im on day 5 of my nutrition shake diet

Associate
Joined
4 Jun 2020
Posts
2,410
Day 1 was 2 shakes and chocolate.

Day 2 was 1 shake and 1 bowl of unsweetened porridge.

Day 3 1 shake and normal dinner

Yesterday 2 shakes.

Also got a barbell set and am doing multiple lifting sets each day. I have 2 bags of Bulk 1 in the vanilla and chocolate flavours and they are at least not completely vile.

But why am I still fat? ... Digits on the scale remain the same. (/S I know its not gonna do anything in just 4 days).

Gonna need some pasta today. Each shake is 400 calories and only 2.6g sugar.
 
Depending on how overweight you are it can take months.
I lost 3 stone in 4 months and that is probably on the quicker side.

85 kg, ideal weight range is 65-75, so need to lose 10-20kg.

My heart blockage has been getting very sore / irritated / irregular heartbeats which is what prompted me to lose weight / cholesterol, been feeling very close to having a heart attack soon if I don't improve my diet.
 
If you're looking to be healthy and not just lose weight these shakes are not the way to go. One a day will be okay for sure if it helps, but relying on them for health really isn't.

Don't be scared of sweetening up porridge for example, honey is good stuff. Low sugar fruit also good, allbeit expensive.

What was in your normal dinner?

Thought about getting yourself down to a spinning class etc?

My normal dinners were all junk and lots of takeaways. I already have thought of getting honey to add to porridge, but am delaying my next food order now.

The stuff in the shakes is far healthier than anything I would normally eat, takeaway or not.

I was mainly making my own quiches, cakes, cookies and all butter curries.
 
Have you had this diagnosed as irregular beats rarely ever have anything to do with a blockage. If so, there would be far more obvious warning signs for those on the way to a heart attack.

Yes its been diagnosed twice, mild then moderate blockage. The irritation, irregular beats, heart feeling like its jumping out of theh chest started recently, a few years after the moderate blockage was diagnosed. Medical history says both heart blockage and arythmia, most likely due to too much cholesterol in the arteries which I'm hoping is reversible. The symptoms have already vastly reduced while drinking these shakes.

From the way you talk I thought you were really huge 85kg isn't massively heavy unless you're a dwarf.

Either way as you know you'll need more than 4 days to really notice anything although I'd have expected you to have lost some water weight by now if you've switched from a salt/carb heavy diet.

Which shakes are you using?

Its not, my BMI is only 27, but my heart is already messing up. Could be due to more cholesterol build up than fat, so using the shakes which contain coconut and avacado fats would be the right way to reduce cholesterol too. I'm using Bulk 1, got the vanilla and chocolate flavours currently, £45 per 3 kg, also have a £10 voucher to buy directly on their site but will wait for one bag to finish before trying the banana flavour.

The chocolate one tastes like barely sweetened digestive biscuits, but also tastes a lot better with half of the water replacing with milk. Might want to get extra sweetener to add to it soon
 
Last edited:
After 5 days I thought I would have some greggs again, but no more than at weekends.

Big mistake, my heart is now jumping out of my chest with pain shooting up to the left temple and left arm, though it subsided after a couple of minutes and I'm still alive.

No more greggs / any takeaway again then oopsie. I was feeling a lot better until I had a usual takeaway.

One more takeaway will probably kill me.
 
Ditch the milk at least. If you're happy to shake your way to losing weight, milk isn't doing you any favours. You've probably done in your taste buds a bit, try to refrain from a sweetening up stuff. Just part of the battle sadly.

Its not so much to do with the sweet, the overall taste is much better and tolerable with some milk added in, similarly to coffee / tea.
 
Of course calorie deficit works, it’s the only way to lose weight.

But 800 calories/day is stupid. Ask your doctor what (s)he thinks of it.

Its not 800 calories everyday.

Its 800 calories two days and normal food on Wednesday and weekends.

So mon / tues, then again thurs / fri.

Normal food Weds, Sat, Sun.
 

Exactly this, I already knew it works for type 2 diabetes and as such am hoping it also works for my heart blockage. Its also to prevent becoming diabetic soon.

I either do this now or I'm dead within 5 years.

The thing is you have to do it for at least 3 months. I ate more normal food during my first week then planned, but am now going to try to cut back to just cereal or porridge when too hungry.

The NHS shakes are also only 200 calories so you would have to make 4 a day instead of just 2 x Bulk 1 shakes. I also dont drink the whole shake in one go, spread the two shakes out over 4 times to manage hunger.
 
Last edited:
Also its right here on the NHS site 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.

The diet usually involves replacing normal food with low-calorie shakes, soups, bars, or porridge containing milk.

The shakes I have are also recommended to have 1-2 a day, so even just 400 calories on some days if you can manage.
 
Depends what's in them, which dictates if they are unhealthy or not, optimal vs a optimal balanced diet.

Its basically powdered muesli

23uQPrk.jpg

In which case @BallistixOnZ490 should go to his doctor and get it prescribed. Embarking on something like this shouldn't be done without proper medical advice.

Plenty of people already take these shakes without seeing doctors. What you get in Huel or Bulk powders is much more complete than the NHS shakes. They are tried and tested as full meal replacements already, and surprisingly taste pleasant, just obviously not the best and still require a lot of willpower to stick to.

I'm now on my second week and wont be getting any weekend takeaway again. Having at least two different flavours helps to not get fed up them too, the chocolate one tastes like digestive biscuit soup and is still 2.6g sugar per shake.
 
Last edited:
A few points on this. I never really understood the IM thing. (**EDIT** Okay, I do get it, but it's floored IMO) If you can eat whatever you want during the hours you CAN eat, then you're not guaranteed a deficit? I could easily eat 3k calories in 8 hours. Therefor IF doesn't prove a deficit works because IF doesn't guarantee a deficit. Carefully count your calories to ensure a deficit, but eat whenever you want. Also, yes it's the only realistic way to lose fat, but don't forget the deficit comes from 'out' being greater then 'in' and all OP is changing is 'in'. (See below)

Definitely this. PyschoS didn't get when I said in the weight loss thread that just dieting is rather lazy in my books. Get outside and exercise. Limiting your calories in might make you loose weight, but getting outside and exercising will make you loose weight AND get healthy. Surely here being healthy is the main goal, but OP has omitted the bit that actually gets you healthy?

I am exercising? Exercise is the least efficient way of losing fat, and it does nothing to reduce cholesterol. Maintaining a calorie deficit is the only guaranteed way of improving both. Exercising while eating 3000 calories of chocolate a day isn't going to make anyone healthy. Also getting outside during a pandemic is quite bad advice, and you dot need to 'go outside' to 'exercise'.

Intermittent fasting isnt just eating however much you want, there are different tiers.

The first tier is the 8 / 16 hour split, but you are still supposed to count and lower calorie intake. Then theres 24 and 48 hours between 'normal' meals. On the latter you limit your calories to 600 a day for two days at a time, which is the same thing as using shakes.

All these things are well documented and proven over and over again, there was an entire TV show dedicated to it - Supersize vs Superskinny.
 
Wait... what?

Liquid meal replacements, sandwiches, and biscuits do not constitute "decent food".

Gregg's roast chicken sandwich is surprisingly healthy and tasty.

Chocolates twice a week with nutrition shakes instead of chocolates twice a day with takeaways is still a huge improvement.

Replacing all junk food with shakes is far better than having any junk food. As for 'why not vegetables?' because vegetables alone dont fill anyone up nor reduce appetite. If simply eating healthier worked then we wouldn't have so much obesity in the first place.
 
As others have said, I'm really not sure what this thread is about... clearly you have it all worked out and everything will be great. I'll leave you to it. Don't bother listening to others that have successfully lost loads of weight and become much healthier. I'm sure you'll be fine :cry:

I mean I am listening to people that have lost loads of weight?

The overwhelming majority of whom do so through reducing calories.

Most people who work out also replace meals with shakes. You dont continue chowing down McDonald's and KFC 3 times a day and get healthy from exercising.
 
People who know what they are doing DON'T replace meals with shakes. No one with any knowledge on nutrition is replacing meals with shakes, it's just not healthy or sustainable.

I wouldn't even say most people, some might have a protein shake but it's out of laziness/cost saving than the want to be on a good diet. It's very arguable that a shake is a worse diet than any other real food source. The only good thing about any form of liquid diet, is how easy it is and how little research/cooking is needed which has huge advantages but it isn't the best way to eat.

The NHS literally prescribes 800 calorie shake diets for 3 months as already linked earlier.
 
That doesn't mean it's healthy or sustainable, it means the other option for the people it's prescribed to is death and they need to lose weight rapidly.

From the figures you've posted before you're not that heavy and therefore probably wouldn't qualify.

Its for reversing type 2 diabetes, and in my case I'm doing the same for heart blockage.

BMI and weight figures dont matter when you have a diagnosed heart condition that was getting closer and closer to having a heart attack every day.
 
The simple question then is why haven't you been prescribed it for your diagnosed condition if it works to improve it and it's that serious?

Because I haven't seen any doctors about it?

It was simply diagnosed twice from routine annual ECG tests and put on my medical history.

All it meant initially was having to have some medications I was on at the time stopped and changed to others.

There were virtually no symptoms initially, its simply suddenly hit me like a truck out of nowhere since a few months ago, and I can't be bothered seeing doctors about it.
 
So you have routine annual ECG tests, which have found a potentially serious blockage and yet you've never been referred to someone to investigate it or thought to contact your GP about it.

What's the point of the ECGs if the results aren't followed up on :confused:

I could ask the same question.

All GPs do annual tests but never seem to follow up on the results unless I ask.
 
Back
Top Bottom