zig-zagging cals?

lorna1002

I'm one of those people who has very hungry days every so often. I am currently 146lb and on a calorie allowance of 1220. Would there be anything wrong with me eating 900 cals a day (which i could stick to most days), but a couple of times a week eating 2000? Does anyone see any problems with this? I am wondering how it might affect my weight loss, if at all.

Thanks

lorna1002

bump

sister_bear

My understanding of zig zagging calories is to basically keep your metabolism from settling into your routine and slowing down. This can be achieved with as little of a change of 100 calories or a change to your exercise routine.

900-2000 calories sounds like binging and purging. This is my opinion and I'm not intending to be mean or anything. I find it a little troubling and am responding because I'm worried. I've been zig zagging between about 1200-1800 with exercise. I really can't eat 2000 calories a day without feeling like I'm going to explode or be sick.

Right now I'm averaging 1400-1500 while burning about 100-200 calories a day, keeping me above 1200 calories a day. Once or twice a month, I'll spike my calories to about 1800, but even on those days I usually exercise.

Calories are your fuel. Like putting gas in a car. Your body needs 1200 to operate normally. Once you start exercising, you're going to need more fuel, just like if you took your car on a road trip you'll use more gas than you do on a normal day driving around town. There's plenty of information on the forums about going under 1200 and I'm sure you'll get some responses, so I'm going to move on.

My other concern about such a big difference between eating 900 to 2000 calories is your stomach. Mine has shrunk since I started controlling my portions, changing my habits. As I said, I can't eat 2000 calories without feeling sick. If you're eating that much from one day to another, I'm thinking your stomach won't make any adjustments and the result may be that you're feeling hungry more often as a result since you'll be not eating enough (900) and then eating too much (2000).

btdublin

Really excellent post just above yours at the moment.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/447397-my-plateau-nutrition-story-learn-from-my-mistakes

Someone halfway through mentions this and a link to this page.
http://www.freedieting.com/tools/calorie_calculator.htm

At the bottom it recommends how to zigzag. Seems like you are doing a good plan. I am the same myself, currently coming in well below my 1200-1400 cals target most days. Don't want to push myself to eat every day so I am gonna try to have one or two higher days in the week, then back to low again.

Some will say we are eating too little!

lorna1002

sister bear thanks for your response, wow, i never considered it like this.

maybe i am being a little drastic, perhaps a better idea would be to eat my 1220 per day and save up some of my exercise calories for a treat meal a couple of times a week.

leomom72

900 sounds like too little, and i suppose 2000 could be good IF you worked out on those days..then again, im not an expert, but i would not reccomend eating 900 cals every day except a couple..i have always heard too little food can make you gain..good luck

lorna1002

Really excellent post just above yours at the moment.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/447397-my-plateau-nutrition-story-learn-from-my-mistakes

Someone halfway through mentions this and a link to this page.
http://www.freedieting.com/tools/calorie_calculator.htm

At the bottom it recommends how to zigzag. Seems like you are doing a good plan. I am the same myself, currently coming in well below my 1200-1400 cals target most days. Don't want to push myself to eat every day so I am gonna try to have one or two higher days in the week, then back to low again.


Some will say we are eating too little!

thankyou i will have a look

LMHinson15

My two cents, no scientific evidence here... just my gut reaction.

It would seem that doing that would even out over a weeks time for calorie deficits and still properly fueling you're body.

If someone is relatively healthy and mentally stable, I almost always defer to "listening to your body."

asyouseefit

Nothing with zigzagging calories but keep ~1200 as your lower "zig".

LMHinson15

900-2000 calories sounds like binging and purging. ...

I don't think eating fewer calories (even maybe too few) is ANYTHING like purging. I very much disagree with this statement.

My other concern about such a big difference between eating 900 to 2000 calories is your stomach. Mine has shrunk since I started controlling my portions, changing my habits. As I said, I can't eat 2000 calories without feeling sick. If you're eating that much from one day to another, I'm thinking your stomach won't make any adjustments and the result may be that you're feeling hungry more often as a result since you'll be not eating enough (900) and then eating too much (2000).

This is perhaps a good concern... but calorie number does not always indicate true volume. An extreme example: if you eat 900 calories of vegetables, you would be eating a MUCH greater volume than if you ate 2000 calories of peanut butter. So the volume doesn't always correlate directly to the number of calories.

mkwongh

i like to zig zag often. But when i am zig zagging, i will still eat my 1200 cals for the low days, for the zag i usually eat more like 1600+. Seems to work well for me. Good Luck

MelissaW1978

I used to do Weight Watchers and you could save points up for a big day of eating...but you had to use them by the end of the week. I lost weight really good on that plan so there must be a way to do it correctly.

paigemarie93

That's a huge difference, you probably wont shift any weight as 900 can be starvation mode, then when you go to 2000 everything will be stored as fat.

slbeutler

I would never go below 1200 calories a day. I almost think the 1220 might be too low. I find that mFP sets the calories a bit low. ARe you trying to lose more or maintain. I am not an expert, but I do know I messed up my metabolism by eating too few calories and have been working for a year to get it working at its best.

juliesummers

i like to zig zag often. But when i am zig zagging, i will still eat my 1200 cals for the low days, for the zag i usually eat more like 1600+. Seems to work well for me. Good Luck

Agreed^
900 to 2000 will just help you gain weight more easily from the 2000 days (like paigemarie said). Try zigzagging between 1200 and 1600-1700 and varying your exercise and food choices.

tigerblue

The MFP iphone app has a weekly calorie allowance page that helps with this sort of thing. I always check how many cals I have left for the week, and if I have more than a day's worth left at the end of a week, I allow myself to go over a bit. Basically, this is practical zig-zagging.

The freedieting.com calorie calculator mentioned above is good, too.

As for eating too few calories, I do agree that this can be a danger. For those of you who go ballistic about this, though, realize that if you a very short, very small-framed, female, and past forty, 1200 calories a day may not create much, if any, deficit to lose weight. Because many posters do not mention their height or size, be careful not to come on too strong about this! Success builds success, and some small people may have to go a bit below 1200 to see results.

That is one improvement that this site could have--a little more flexibility for those of us on the extremes of size. I think the freedieting calculator mentioned above is more realistic for this. As a small, forty-something woman who is maintaining, (and I expect this will get even worse as I continue to age!), the calories I get for maintenance are less than what many of you who are larger and just beginning your fitness/weight-loss journey get to eat in order to lose. This can be very discouraging and depressing when you feel like you will have to be on what is considered a "diet" for most people for the rest of your life in order to stay slim and not gain. And don't tell me that my calories are in proportion to my size. Just because my body is small doesn't mean my appetite is small!!! We short people have to choose carefully to balance calories, plus work our butts off (did I mention that short, small framed, over-forty females don't burn nearly as many calories when exercising??? I'm shocked at the calorie burns many people report. I'd have to exercise for hours. . . .)

Sorry to rant! Just think about walking a mile in someone else's shoes before criticizing!

lorna1002

I would never go below 1200 calories a day. I almost think the 1220 might be too low. I find that mFP sets the calories a bit low. ARe you trying to lose more or maintain. I am not an expert, but I do know I messed up my metabolism by eating too few calories and have been working for a year to get it working at its best.

I have another 11lb to my target and have my settings set at 1lb loss per week

lorna1002

Because many posters do not mention their height or size

I am 5' 3"

sister_bear

I am 5' 3" as well, for reference.

lorna1002

the difference in calories is maybe too large then, like many have suggested maybe i will zigzag between 1200-1400 or something a little more sensible.

thanks for the input guys, i haven't been zigzagging yet, i was just curious to see your opinions

tigerblue

Because many posters do not mention their height or size

I am 5' 3"

I'm also 5'3" with a very small frame. I have bird bones (which I am currently trying to improve with strength training!) and was nicknamed bird legs as a teen because my legs were so skinny. BTW, they stay skinny even when I get fat! Not a pretty picture. Yet another reason to stay slim this time!!!