Tony Ferguson, PhC.M.P.S, is an Australian pharmacist who, working with nutritionist Jan Tait, developed his Tony Ferguson Weightloss Program to offer dieters a nutritious and safe alternative to fad diets. His goal was to provide something that was 1) based on scientific fact, 2) easy to use, 3) affordable, and 4) wasn’t too restrictive. Today, he is considered to be one of Australia’s favorite weight loss experts.
In essence, the Tony Ferguson diet is an extreme low-carbohydrate diet that consists of two meals being replaced by protein shakes, with the third meal consisting of low-carb, low-GI foods. Caffeine is limited and higher-carb foods like breads, pastas, potatoes and wholegrain cereals are prohibited. Tony is based in Australia, so in addition to website and forum support, dieters there can find help through a national network of weight loss and wellness centers, as well as at participating local pharmacies.
Based upon testimonials, most people find Tony’s program affordable and easy to use. There is a considerable amount of praise for the shakes, jellies, and other extras provided by the program and recipes are provided. However, there is also a high-level of falling off the diet, which brings the sustainability of the diet to question. Most people seem to grow bored with substituting shakes for food or they miss their carbs too much.
From a nutritional viewpoint, there are two primary concerns:
- The diet cuts out cereals, which are an essential part of nutritionally sound eating.
- The shakes – which are to be consumed in replacement for two meals – contain sugars in the form of fructose and glucose. In fact, the chocolate shake (according to its label) derives 91% of its carbohydrate content from sugar – one of them being glucose, which is actually a high-GI food, not a low one.
In addition, we have read that the shakes leave a funny aftertaste, which could be a huge deterrent to some dieters.
All in all, while Tony Ferguson’s Weightloss Program may provide a path to successful short-term weight loss, its usefulness as a long-term, sustainable solution is questionable. There are simply too many restrictions.