Is reverse dieting really necessary?

macchiatto

I had assumed reverse dieting was necessary as you transition to maintenance since I've seen it mentioned so often. However, I tried googling last night (I was so hungry and wondering if I could bump my calories up a bit faster. I lost on 1350 and had bumped them up to 1450 so far. I also eat back usually 1/2-2/3 of my exercise calories.). I saw mixed results and it seemed like a lot of the sites that encouraged it were broscience/lifting sites. So ... what says the LCD group on this topic?

I realize there does need to be a bit of experimenting to find true maintenance but not sure how slowly I need to increase.

macchiatto

I should add, I think my maintenance calories might only be around 1600/day (plus exercise calories) so I guess I don't have that much farther to go either way. But regardless, I am curious if my knowledgeable group members know more about the science behind this and whether it's really necessary or helps your metabolism in some way.

baconslave

I'd like to know myself. I did try reverse dieting, but then I developed bad/lazy habits again in the middle of it and had to reverse the damage from that stupidity. Loki, my food demon, is still around after all. The turd...

Gallowmere1984

If you're going for maintenance, either is fine. Reverse dieting is more applicable when transitioning from cut to bulk. When you've been running a harsh deficit, your body is all hot and ready to put the fat back on. Reverse dieting back up slowly (over a few weeks) gives your hormones a chance to stabilize.

tcunbeliever

I don't increase slowly at all, I shift straight from deficit levels to maintenance levels - based on what MFP calculates for both. I do 6 weeks of deficit, 2 weeks maintenance, repeat, so I don't have time for a slow bump to maintenance since I'm only going to be there short-term. But once I get to final weight I will do the same for permanent maintenance.

To be fair, I do usually still lose on the maintenance weeks, but if I stay at maintenance longer than 2 weeks, then I stop losing, so I'm pretty sure the MFP calculation is close to my actual maintenance. And I do eat back about 1/2 of my exercise calories.

I think reverse dieting is probably great for someone who has been at a deficit a long time and might go crazy and eat way over maintenance. Or maybe for someone who doesn't like a big shift in food planning. It is a challenge for me to go between the two, I have to really make a deliberate effort to eat more/less those weeks right after a shift. However, if you are logging at the same level as before, and still keeping to calculated calorie levels, then I don't see the advantage to dragging out the transition.

macchiatto

Gallowmere1984 wrote: »

If you're going for maintenance, either is fine. Reverse dieting is more applicable when transitioning from cut to bulk. When you've been running a harsh deficit, your body is all hot and ready to put the fat back on. Reverse dieting back up slowly (over a few weeks) gives your hormones a chance to stabilize.

Thank you! I am shifting to maintenance/hopefully recomp. (Since I've got skinny-fat tendencies so I'm at the point where if I keep cutting, I start looking overly thin in places but I'd love to lose some more fat and actually gain a little muscle.)

macchiatto

baconslave wrote: »

I'd like to know myself. I did try reverse dieting, but then I developed bad/lazy habits again in the middle of it and had to reverse the damage from that stupidity. Loki, my food demon, is still around after all. The turd...

I actually did the same thing last spring, which is why I ended up spending months bouncing around 1-5 lbs above goal range. Maybe bumping back up a little faster this time will help?? I also started physical therapy around the time I was moving into maintenance last year so I did that for an hour 3days/wk and rested on the off days. Now I'm working out more, so maybe that will help me stay in goal range this time??

XavierNusum

In addition you don't necessarily want to bounce directly back to maintenance, because who really knows what that intake level is? A slow increase allows you to find that sweet spot through trial and error instead of relying on calculators that aren't perfect. This is especially true for those who's anxiety levels increase with the slightest semblance of scale increases.

Side note, broscience has it's place because, aside from pharmaceutical assistance, those folks look great and have to be doing something right. There is merit to tried and tested concepts even when/if they aren't proven in a lab.

kpk54

1st off, you've not been doing reverse dieting long. 2nd, you're posing the question after indicating you had a super high carb weekend and can't trust having Zone Bars in the house. You also indicated in another thread you had a weekend of ~2000 calories/day. (at least I recall that was you??)

I'll answer the question based on my personal experience. There wasn't much to "reverse dieting" in my case. At the end of my weight loss, my calorie intake was ~1200/day. 1200 was as low as MFP would go in calories (at the time? may have changed). When I'm a sedentary, 59 (at the time I reached maintenance) year old old female @ 5'6: my sedentary intake is only ~1500 calories per MFP and the average of a multitude of TDEE calculators. I never spent much time "reverse dieting". I was dealing with only 300 calories.

I was eating somewhat low carb at the time. I really had no issues adding more calories. It was only about 300. I kept eating the same foods I had always eaten just a little more most of the time though not always. Some days I was a bit over.

Here's something that didn't work for me. I started looking at calories as a weekly total versus daily. Cool idea for some. They can plan higher calorie days for special occasions or whatever. My pitfall in doing so was I rationalized that into it being ok to have a "cheat" and those cheats sent me into a high excess carb/calorie intake (dessert) which led me to a restrictive intake to balance out the calories-over the week. Bad idea for me. Works for others. Sorry. I guess this paragraph doesn't pertain to your question. I digressed but it may have some relevance.

My opinion regarding your question with yourself: there is only a 250 calorie difference between your deficit calories of 1350 (not including exercise) versus maintenance calories of 1600 (not including exercise) so there is probably little need to increase calories slowly. What there is a need to do (IMO) is to not auto add 250 calories in carbs (even fruits and vegetables) or if you do, expect some water weight fluctuation or increased cravings if cravings were an issue before that was controlled by eating low carb. I would be paying more attention to the effects of individual carbs than attention to the 250 calories (though not ignoring calories).

I was never into body building, crossfit, running or anything remotely "intense" so never engaged in extreme "cuts and bulks", calorie deficits/calorie surpluses. Most of what I have read regarding reverse dieting pertains to people who had a much wider range of calories in and calories burned than I ever had.

ETA: LOL. Took me a long time to type what I wrote above and I now see several excellent posts above. All with very valid points.

Gallowmere1984

macchiatto wrote: »

Gallowmere1984 wrote: »

If you're going for maintenance, either is fine. Reverse dieting is more applicable when transitioning from cut to bulk. When you've been running a harsh deficit, your body is all hot and ready to put the fat back on. Reverse dieting back up slowly (over a few weeks) gives your hormones a chance to stabilize.

Thank you! I am shifting to maintenance/hopefully recomp. (Since I've got skinny-fat tendencies so I'm at the point where if I keep cutting, I start looking overly thin in places but I'd love to lose some more fat and actually gain a little muscle.)

Honestly, if you've hit the skinnyfat point, consider a reverse diet to maintenance, then a slow increase to a surplus with heavy weight training. I looked like a *kitten* alien in August (big head, skinny *kitten* body with no definition). Just six months, two bulks and one cut, and 20 lbs. later, I have veins popping in my shoulders that I didn't know existed. About to end my second bulk and hit another RFL cut in about two weeks, so I'll have updated pictures then.

It can be hard to get over the "*kitten* I'm getting fat again" feeling, but after peeling that *kitten* back off, totally worth it.

macchiatto

@kpk54 yes! Good memory!
I did realize that TOM is starting (I have PCOS so it's not always easy to predict) so I now understand why I had two ravenously hungry days this weekend. (And "super high carb" is relative since they were both below 100gm carbs/day so technically low carb. Definitely high for me though! So I'm scaling back down to staying under about 60 total per day for now.) Appetite is back to normal today.

Either way, I was curious to know the reasoning behind reverse dieting since I realized I was just kind of blindly following what I've heard others do. Like I said in my last para above, I realize some experimenting is necessary to figure out what my true maintenance level is.

@gallowmere1984 skinny-fat has always been my tendency. I definitely take after my dad! I also have PCOS so I know that can also contribute to stubborn belly fat while my arms and legs are long and skinny. Good food for thought; thanks!

Thanks everyone for all the insightful responses!