Scan barcode
Reviews
The Fast Metabolism Diet Cookbook: Eat Even More Food and Lose Even More Weight by Haylie Pomroy
wanderinglynn's review against another edition
informative
3.0
I'm so-so on this book. The first part I skimmed a lot because it felt like filler, or an ad for her nutrition services, because it was all about how she's helped so many people, how her business has grown, and who she's worked with, etc. To me, it was a waste of pages. Some of the science stuff was interesting, but for me, a non-science person, there was a bit too much. I felt that some of that could have been included in a back section because I just wanted to get to down to the diet.
When it does finally get to the actual diet, there's nothing really revolutionary or surprising. Like many other diets, Pomroy basically suggests a nutrition plan based on eliminating added added sugars, eating every 3-4 hours, hydrating sufficiently, and eating whole foods (e.g., fruits, vegetables, legumes, nuts, seeds, whole grains, meats, eggs). She does mix it up because she has a 2-2-3 day program (this is the metabolism boosting part) where phase 1 is mostly balanced but no healthy fats, phase 2 is primarily protein; and phase 3 is balanced. She also has recommendations on exercising: only running (cardio) on Phase 1, only weight lifting on Phase 2, and only yoga on Phase 3.
The info was sufficient for me to chart out a 7-day meal plan (with 3 main meals and 2 snacks per day to be repeated every 7 days). I did feel her charts felt incomplete and too spread out. I was constantly having to flip between the middle parts and the back of the book. I wish she had included less on the first (her work, her successes. etc.) and fleshed out some of the phase food information.
The diet plan makes sense in the fact that we should all eat moderately and eat primarily whole foods because the typical American diet is unfortunately high in processed foods and added sugar. I did the Whole 30 diet several years ago, which is a strict no sugar diet (among other things), and because of that, I was surprised to find how many products have sugar added, and a lot of sugar at that. But my problem remains, for those of us who work full time, these diets take a lot of time to grocery shop, a lot of time for food prep, and more time to prepare. And then if you're like me and only cooking for 1, you either end up with food waste or have to take multiple trips each week to the grocery store because fresh produce only lasts so long. I also don't like cooking, and so I end up eating the same things over and over again, which gets boring. Did I see results? Yes . . . but so would anyone who has a desk job and primarily lived on frozen (processed) foods and takeout. Although I will say I probably would have had better results had I followed her instructions 100%. (I was probably in the 90-95% range of following her instructions.)
I also didn't follow her strict exercise recommendation. I found it too restrictive. Only strength train once a week? I work out 3 times a week and try to do yoga at least 2 days a week. Mostly because I have a desk job and sitting 8-10 hours a day isn't conducive to good health. So working out and yoga helps combat that. As for running, not my sport. If she was going to include anything about exercise, I wish she would have done a chapter on it to better explain the science on why you can't weight train in phases 1 or 3.
Overall, some good info in the middle. The diet does allow for quite a bit of food (vegetables are really unlimited except in phase 2). I found myself full most days before I finished my plate. It did get me thinking about what I'm eating and I have done better at tracking my food, but then again, I didn't need this book to tell me these things either. So 3 stars.
When it does finally get to the actual diet, there's nothing really revolutionary or surprising. Like many other diets, Pomroy basically suggests a nutrition plan based on eliminating added added sugars, eating every 3-4 hours, hydrating sufficiently, and eating whole foods (e.g., fruits, vegetables, legumes, nuts, seeds, whole grains, meats, eggs). She does mix it up because she has a 2-2-3 day program (this is the metabolism boosting part) where phase 1 is mostly balanced but no healthy fats, phase 2 is primarily protein; and phase 3 is balanced. She also has recommendations on exercising: only running (cardio) on Phase 1, only weight lifting on Phase 2, and only yoga on Phase 3.
The info was sufficient for me to chart out a 7-day meal plan (with 3 main meals and 2 snacks per day to be repeated every 7 days). I did feel her charts felt incomplete and too spread out. I was constantly having to flip between the middle parts and the back of the book. I wish she had included less on the first (her work, her successes. etc.) and fleshed out some of the phase food information.
The diet plan makes sense in the fact that we should all eat moderately and eat primarily whole foods because the typical American diet is unfortunately high in processed foods and added sugar. I did the Whole 30 diet several years ago, which is a strict no sugar diet (among other things), and because of that, I was surprised to find how many products have sugar added, and a lot of sugar at that. But my problem remains, for those of us who work full time, these diets take a lot of time to grocery shop, a lot of time for food prep, and more time to prepare. And then if you're like me and only cooking for 1, you either end up with food waste or have to take multiple trips each week to the grocery store because fresh produce only lasts so long. I also don't like cooking, and so I end up eating the same things over and over again, which gets boring. Did I see results? Yes . . . but so would anyone who has a desk job and primarily lived on frozen (processed) foods and takeout. Although I will say I probably would have had better results had I followed her instructions 100%. (I was probably in the 90-95% range of following her instructions.)
I also didn't follow her strict exercise recommendation. I found it too restrictive. Only strength train once a week? I work out 3 times a week and try to do yoga at least 2 days a week. Mostly because I have a desk job and sitting 8-10 hours a day isn't conducive to good health. So working out and yoga helps combat that. As for running, not my sport. If she was going to include anything about exercise, I wish she would have done a chapter on it to better explain the science on why you can't weight train in phases 1 or 3.
Overall, some good info in the middle. The diet does allow for quite a bit of food (vegetables are really unlimited except in phase 2). I found myself full most days before I finished my plate. It did get me thinking about what I'm eating and I have done better at tracking my food, but then again, I didn't need this book to tell me these things either. So 3 stars.
mariacattwood's review against another edition
4.0
I may not have read this book all the through, however, I did do the diet for the whole 28 days. I'll tell you what, it worked. I didn't lose 20 pounds like the book said I might, but I did lose about 10. The best thing about the "diet" is that it teaches you how to eat better. It's not about losing the weight, but changing how to view what you put in your body. I have a better outlook on what to eat when I go out to eat. You don't think about how unhealthy foods are until you do this diet.
You eat a lot on this diet, so I can say that you never starve. But, there are foods that you have to give up: dairy, caffeine, corn, sugar, bad fats, alcohol, etc. The hardest part for me was giving up coffee. But, I didn't miss dairy foods, or corn. I did crave alcohol a couple of times just because when you go out and all your friends are drinking and having fun, it's hard to stand by and drink water (which is all you can drink the entire 28 days).
Overall, it's worth a shot if you want to really change the way you eat. One of the cons is that it costs a lot because of the organic foods you have to buy, but it may be worth it. Give it a shot.
You eat a lot on this diet, so I can say that you never starve. But, there are foods that you have to give up: dairy, caffeine, corn, sugar, bad fats, alcohol, etc. The hardest part for me was giving up coffee. But, I didn't miss dairy foods, or corn. I did crave alcohol a couple of times just because when you go out and all your friends are drinking and having fun, it's hard to stand by and drink water (which is all you can drink the entire 28 days).
Overall, it's worth a shot if you want to really change the way you eat. One of the cons is that it costs a lot because of the organic foods you have to buy, but it may be worth it. Give it a shot.
stepnic's review against another edition
4.0
I read this book back in 2014. On the surface, this diet is definitely do-able. I actually managed to keep up with it for three of the four weeks before I fell off (it was my fault, not the program's). It gave me decent results, but it's quite restrictive in terms of certain food items and what you can have each day. The diet is broken up into 3 phases, which each having its own rules and food list. If you can handle that, I think you'll enjoy this.
stepnic's review against another edition
4.0
This cookbook is a nice companion to the diet book and is pretty much essential for most. If you're like me, it may all seem confusing when you look at the diet layout and go "what kind of meal would allow me to eat a grain, protein, veggie, and fruit? But I can't just eat whatever?"
Some of the recipes are simple enough that most people could figure out, but it is still extremely useful. I use this one just as religiously as the diet guideline book.
Some of the recipes are simple enough that most people could figure out, but it is still extremely useful. I use this one just as religiously as the diet guideline book.
radioactve_piano's review against another edition
3.0
I am probably one of the worst people to have read this. I have a science background; I am a fitness instructor; I hate gimmicky writing.
From a purely scientific viewpoint, this book is full of "no shit" facts and a whole lot of blanket statements that are not backed up. She is obviously writing for a desperate person, and that's fine, but does that mean that she should remove credibility by making scare-tactic statements like the following without backing it up?:
Page 92 - "Rule #5: No Refined Sugar" is like Requiem for a Dream -- yes, we all know refined sugar isn't good for us, but I'm sorry, please cite your damn sources when you make claims like, "Just 2 teaspoons of refined sugar can inhibit your weight loss for three to four days." and "Just 2 teaspoons... will cut your T-cell count by 50 percent for two full hours after eating". Is that true? Are you sure? Because as far as I can tell, there are absolutely zero studies that actually came to this conclusion. (And I looked - J-Stor, scholar.google, all of the journal repositories I have access to. None of them supported either claim like she intended.)
My coworker lent this to me after our boss suggested she try it. (That in itself is problematic, but let's leave that aside.) Neither of them are as science-minded, poised to question statements presented as fact. Pomroy points out all the things that we in a Western society are consuming that are NOT nutritionally sound, and goes to great lengths to be chatty and caring, presumably in an attempt to nudge people into unquestioning obedience -- let's flatter them into thinking we know they're smart, then present them with scary facts. Typical best-seller diet, really. (We all know that alcohol and sugar and empty calories are NOT going to make us svelte and full of energy. Science can back up any other metabolic claim, though -- whether it's eating every 3-4 hours OR intermittent fasting. It's all about what you choose to believe and follow.)
The science issues aside, this book is pretty much mapping out a meal plan for a month, and that's cool. I like meal plans. I am a busy person and having someone tell me, "here's your grocery list to eat healthy and have a variety of meals!" is wonderful. So, if I think about the book in this way, from a "Well, she had to make it marketable, but surely there are worthwhile aspects!" perspective, I'm not so hostile. Her suggestions are rather realistic for people looking to change their relationship with food in a long-term way. It's the framework that she's using to present them that really irks me. How much of that is her and how much was her editors, I can't say, but I can't ignore the presentation of the information.
From a purely scientific viewpoint, this book is full of "no shit" facts and a whole lot of blanket statements that are not backed up. She is obviously writing for a desperate person, and that's fine, but does that mean that she should remove credibility by making scare-tactic statements like the following without backing it up?:
Page 92 - "Rule #5: No Refined Sugar" is like Requiem for a Dream -- yes, we all know refined sugar isn't good for us, but I'm sorry, please cite your damn sources when you make claims like, "Just 2 teaspoons of refined sugar can inhibit your weight loss for three to four days." and "Just 2 teaspoons... will cut your T-cell count by 50 percent for two full hours after eating". Is that true? Are you sure? Because as far as I can tell, there are absolutely zero studies that actually came to this conclusion. (And I looked - J-Stor, scholar.google, all of the journal repositories I have access to. None of them supported either claim like she intended.)
My coworker lent this to me after our boss suggested she try it. (That in itself is problematic, but let's leave that aside.) Neither of them are as science-minded, poised to question statements presented as fact. Pomroy points out all the things that we in a Western society are consuming that are NOT nutritionally sound, and goes to great lengths to be chatty and caring, presumably in an attempt to nudge people into unquestioning obedience -- let's flatter them into thinking we know they're smart, then present them with scary facts. Typical best-seller diet, really. (We all know that alcohol and sugar and empty calories are NOT going to make us svelte and full of energy. Science can back up any other metabolic claim, though -- whether it's eating every 3-4 hours OR intermittent fasting. It's all about what you choose to believe and follow.)
The science issues aside, this book is pretty much mapping out a meal plan for a month, and that's cool. I like meal plans. I am a busy person and having someone tell me, "here's your grocery list to eat healthy and have a variety of meals!" is wonderful. So, if I think about the book in this way, from a "Well, she had to make it marketable, but surely there are worthwhile aspects!" perspective, I'm not so hostile. Her suggestions are rather realistic for people looking to change their relationship with food in a long-term way. It's the framework that she's using to present them that really irks me. How much of that is her and how much was her editors, I can't say, but I can't ignore the presentation of the information.
zhzhang's review against another edition
3.0
Not sure if it is applicable even though the theory sounds fine.
etkahler's review against another edition
3.0
*Rating pending on my actually trying the plan out.
Update: I never really tried this, lol.
Update: I never really tried this, lol.
jen567's review against another edition
4.0
Just started the 28 day diet to reset metabolism- let you know how much weight loss . So full from first day of grains and fruit. It is taking a lot of planning and prep but it's only for 28 days. Have thee book and confusing to look at everything - apparently a lot of good recipes on pin interest - will look for next week as week one sorted