Calorie stability vs Calorie Instability for losing weight. Which works better?

leobrah

What I mean in my question is this, which works better or does it have no difference.
Let's say I need 1800cal per day to healthily lose weight, is there a difference in:
1) If I eat 2000 cal one day and then 1600 the other.
2) If I eat 1800 cal every day and no more.

Is strict stability crucial to weight loss?

notarunnermfp

Some people may have better adherence doing one or the other, but if calories are equal it will make no difference.

TavistockToad

notarunnermfp wrote: »

Some people may have better adherence doing one or the other, but if calories are equal it will make no difference.

This.

snickerscharlie

leobrah wrote: »

What I mean in my question is this, which works better or does it have no difference.
Let's say I need 1800cal per day to healthily lose weight, is there a difference in:
1) If I eat 2000 cal one day and then 1600 the other.
2) If I eat 1800 cal every day and no more.

Is strict stability crucial to weight loss?

No, not at all. What's crucial to weight loss is maintaining a caloric deficit over time. Going over or under your target for any particular day doesn't matter.

I look at my weekly intake rather than my daily, since (unless you're eating the exact same thing every day) my numbers will fluctuate. As long as my weekly totals are within range, I'm good to go.

leobrah

snickerscharlie wrote: »

No, not at all. What's crucial to weight loss is maintaining a caloric deficit over time. Going over or under your target for any particular day doesn't matter.

I look at my weekly intake rather than my daily, since (unless you're eating the exact same thing every day) my numbers will fluctuate. As long as my weekly totals are within range, I'm good to go.

Alright, thank y'all! That makes a lot of sense.

jjpptt2

The greater the instability, the greater chance of scale fluctuations due to changes in water weight (assuming bigger fluctuations = bigger variation in carbs and/or sodium). Those scale fluctuations can make it harder to see/track progress, but should NOT reflect changes in body fat.

Stockholm_Andy

No choose what works for you.

I prefer to eat more calories at the weekend as it fits with my family life right now. Others times it hasn't

Weight loss is a long term project....as is weight gain for that matter.

jennifer_417

The math equation works the same either way. It's really just a matter of what you'll stick with.

diannethegeek

I've done both. The results were equal as long as I kept my calorie deficit from week to week. It's just a matter of which you find more appealing for satiation and adherence. Try them out and see what you like.

stacimarie1015

leobrah wrote: »

What I mean in my question is this, which works better or does it have no difference.
Let's say I need 1800cal per day to healthily lose weight, is there a difference in:
1) If I eat 2000 cal one day and then 1600 the other.
2) If I eat 1800 cal every day and no more.

Is strict stability crucial to weight loss?

Depends on what works for you. You may have some days where you are more active and thus more hungry.

Seffell

It has no difference so choose the one that is easier for you to keep with.