Reverse Dieting-more recent

nattyj725

I wanted to create a new discussion because I can't find anything more recent then 4 years ago and want to be sure I get responses.

I have been in a deficit for a large part of the last almost 2 years. There were very short periods of time where I wasn't as strict (never went off the wagon completely...just the occasional day or 2 where I would eat poorly). But for the most part, have kept my intake 1500/day or less. This was while weight training 5 days a week, as well. I had lost around 40 pounds after I first started working out. Took like 6 months and just stopped. I've been in a plateau since with no getting past it.

In April I had back surgery. I had been out since Feb because of my back issues, and just got back in the gym in July after 3 months recovering from surgery. I didn't really gain weight while out because I was still mindful of my diet. Not quite as strict as I am now, but still tracked 90% of the time.

Because of my time out, when I started working out again, I dropped to 1300/day. I've been doing that since. Have not lost a pound. I incorporated cardio. I was doing kickboxing/HIIT 4 days a week and lifting 3. Just this week I decided to take a rest day per week so cardio 3 and lift 3.

So there is my background.

I am reading up on reverse dieting. My trainer had actually had me commit to 3 weeks of eating MORE right before I ended up out for awhile. Literally was on week 3. It took him months to convince me to do this. Increased from 1500 to 1650-1700/day. I actually lost 2 lbs during that time frame. I actually watched my BMR drop (InBody scan) during my time training by 200. So I know my metabolism was affected before so it made sense.

So now I don't work with a trainer anymore. And I don't know if I should try reverse dieting yet because I was out for so long and wasn't super strict on my diet (again, was mindful, but not obsessed). Would I even be in a place where I'd need to do this yet? I mean, at 1300 cals a day and regular workouts at least 6 days a week, I should be losing weight.

Oh, add in that I've started perimenopause relatively recently. That does NOT help matters. But when I say I workout, I WORK OUT. I don't go half *kitten* it. And when I track my food, I almost always weigh and measure.

So anyone that says it's as simple as calories in vs out is nuts. Sure, it's that simple at the beginning of your weight loss journey. When you first start, you'll see the pounds coming off. But these plateaus are no joke. And very frustrating for people like me who bust their buttons working toward more weight loss. The goal is 25 more lbs.

nattyj725

I love how b-u-t-t is changed to other words in here automatically

Lietchi

Your InBody scan cannot measure your BMR, I'm guessing it just calculates an estimate based on muscle mass and total mass. And body composition estimates based on bio-impedance scans, like InBody, have a large margin of error, so even those muscle mass results should be taken with a grain of salt. Also, it's perfectly normal to have a lower BMR when you lose weight (a smaller body needs fewer calories).

How much do you weigh? What's your height? 1300 calories sounds low: low for someone who's sedentary, extremely low for someone as active as you. I lost all of my weight eating 1700 calories (+exercise calories) and I'm 5ft5, currently weighing 60kg/132lbs.
Eating too little can cause water retention from the stress you're putting on your body, and can also cause a slower metabolism (slower growth of nails and hair, less fidgeting,...). Perimenopause is also a notorious cause of water weight fluctuations which can mask fat loss on the scale.

I would definitely experiment with a gradual increase in calorie intake. What do you have to lose? Making yourself miserable on your current intake level doesn't sound very sustainable.

AnnPT77

What lietchi said. Always keep in mind that:

* Scale weight isn't just fat; it can be 60%+ water, as well as lean tissue of various types. Fat loss is the part we care about, right? A stall in scale weight can be more about water than fat, since stress increases cortisol, cortisol can add water weight (a surprising amount, potentially gradually). A calorie deficit is a stress (and a big deficit is a big stress), challenging exercise is a stress (even if one with positive long-term outcomes), and - cruelly - stressing about bodyweight or performance can be a stress, too. Stresses are cumulative across all sources. Seeing a scale drop from eating more can be a hint that stress-related water retention is part of the picture.

* Human bodies are a dynamic system, not a static one. The idea behind reverse dieting is that long-term or extreme calorie deficits can cause reduced calorie expenditure, possibly in very subtle ways. Eating more calories for a while - like estimated maintenance - or gradually increasing calories (reverse dieting) can persuade the body to reverse that negative course, perk up calorie burn a bit. This can be slowdown from very subtle things like fidgeting, other spontaneous movement, slowed hair growth, slightly reduced core body temperature, and more. It's rare for this effect to totally stop weight loss, but it can slow it below the expected rate, and conspire with the water retention effects to show up as a full stall on the scale.

I'm going to link some posts that I think could be relevant to your circumstances, if in some cases a bit tangent rather than direct, in case you haven't already seen them. These aren't all short/simple, but you're not asking a simple question, IMO.

This is a good thread about the hormonal issues around stalls during dieting (talking hunger or stress hormones, not sex hormones):

http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10604863/of-refeeds-and-diet-breaks/p1

This is about adaptation to low calories (i.e., adaptation in a negative way), sorting out the science from the myths, with footnotes and sources and everything:

https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1077746/starvation-mode-adaptive-thermogenesis-and-weight-loss/p1

That one is not new, but I think it's got some good stuff in it still.

This last is an outlink, and I want to say that I don't think you're anything like as extreme as the cases this article uses as examples, but it has a good explanation of cortisol effects, and how they can sort of double down on us in a negative way:

https://bodyrecomposition.com/research/dietary-restraint-cortisol-levels

There are other links from that page that might be helpful, too.

Yes, this is a lot of reading, and fairly complicated. I'm sorry. I think it may be helpful, if you're up for it. I hope, anyway.

HelenWater

There was a study a while ago that looked at a pattern of two weeks calorie restriction alternating with eating to maintain. It was published in 2018 and called the MATADOR Study. Although the study looked at men, there might be some useful information for you here —> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5803575/

Jthanmyfitnesspal

There is certainly an effect of adaptation to lower calorie levels. My understanding is that you'd feel very lethargic and basically reduce your activity overall. If you're getting in some good workouts and then going through your normal day, then I can't imagine you've adapted to some lower metabolic rate.

But, the point is that something has to give. If you are burning more calories than you eat, you will lose weight, even if your body has to break down your muscles to do it. Let's avoid that!

But, if your body adapts to a lower calorie intake, then you (by definition) burn fewer calories. I have a couple of papers on it, and it seems like the mechanics of it is that you become lethargic and less active. If you feel this way, I would say that this means you are eating too little.

But, in most people, the adaptation effect is relatively small, meaning you could lower your BMR by 10-20% or something like that. And, if you consciously stay active throughout your day, it won't be as pronounced.