Eating exercise calories and calorie cycling/zig zagging

caramkoala

I don't want to ask this in the forums. All you get is a lot of people giving a lot of different answers. And if you don't know, "i don't know" (or just no comment) is the best answer you can give. Here goes.

I have young children and no partner or family support. Therefore I have to be choosy about the exercising I can do. I work part time, during school hours.

I go to Zumba on Saturdays to a kid-friendly place, and I go to Hip Hop dancing on Wednesday nights to a kid-friendly place. I have Mondays and Wednesdays off work, when the kids are at school. I usually swim laps for an hour on these days, or go walking with a friend. Because I have to squeeze exercise in around the kids (not making excuses!) some days I get no proper cardio exercise, and some days (Wednesdays) I get a lot.

I don't have a heart rate montior. They are an expense I am yet to be able to justify, also I doubt a HRM's accuracy on my body. I just have nowhere to put a chest strap- my boobs are in the way (advice on this welcome - can I just strap it under my boobs? Is the $40 one from Big W - like Walmart - better than nothing?). Anyway, so on Wednesdays, when I swim and dance, MFP estimates my calorie burn at 1200. I am skeptical. Without a HRM or CO2 test I can't be sure how far off that estimate is though.

Usually, on the days I exercise, I'm not hungry. I have to force myself to make up my calorie goal. And that's before exercise is taken into account. I tried not eating if I wasn't hungry, but my weight loss stalled. I at least force myself to eat my normal cal goal (I think I am on 500 deficit?). Usually the day AFTER I exercise, I am pretty hungry. I have been distracting myself from my hunger with water or something and just eating my normal cals. I'll allow myself to go up to 200 over (because I know I burned at least that the day before) and they are really decent food choices, but my stupid brain still tells me more food = more weight.

My weight loss has slowed down from 1.5kgs a week (3 pounds) to 0.8kg a week (1.5pounds). I realise this is probably because I am almost halfway to goal now (Yay!) and the weight gets harder to lose the closer you get.

I should probably just suck it up (or change the setting on my scale to pounds so the numbers look better), but I wanted to check here first in case anyone had links to wonderful studies done on the subject. The subject being "The benefits of calorie cycling".

If it's likely/possible I can lose more weight by eating more cals the day after exercise when I'm hungry, I might try it. Yes, I realise I could just try it for 4 weeks and see what happens. I think I am still too delicate emotionally to see an accidental increase on the scales yet though. Anyway, if anyone has some good info, I'd love to hear about it. In the meantime, I will be here, sucking it up

caramkoala

Can I eat up to half of my exercise calories the day after the burn, and call it calorie cycling? Will it work?

If you could consult your crystal/magic eight balls and let me know, thanks.

treetop57

Great question. I'll exercise my last bit of self-control and not give you my uninformed opinion.

LabRat529

Caramkoala,

I don't know enough about metabolism and exercise physiology to give you a "right" answer. Captain probably can do it, but it may be a few before he answers.

I know you said you don't want a bunch of conflicting opinions... but for what it's worth, here's my opinion. It's based on a better-than-average understanding of they human body and common sense.

Exercise can suppress your appetite temporarily. When I lift, I'm not hungry for several hours. The next day, I'm starving and I want to eat everything. It could be a physiological response or a phycological response. I have no idea which it is... I just know that's what I personally experience.

I usually eat even if I'm not hungry, BUT I don't think you *have* to eat. I eat because I hope it will help control the ravishing hunger that comes the next day (it doesn't seem to). But I just don't think it's a "must".

See... weight loss is about a long term deficit. The ups and downs throughout the week shouldn't effect the outcome *that* much as long as the "net" effect is that you've burned more than you've eaten.

There are some exceptions to this rule- the water weight gains that you've heard about. You can gain weight temporarily on a calorie deficit. But the general rule holds true.

This phenomenon called calorie cycling... I see people say that it 'shakes up' the body... but I don't believe that. The body isn't something that thinks. It can't get confused. Only our consciousness, our awareness, our thoughts get confused or 'shaken' or whatever. The body just plugs around doing what it is doing.

So... in my opinion, calorie cycling is unnecessarily complex and is not worth the effort for most people. But if it fits with how you naturally would eat (being hungry one day, not hungry the next), then calorie cycling suddenly becomes "natural" and might then be worth the effort.

The choice is really yours... I don't think you can go wrong either way as long as you are eating enough calories to fuel your basic nutritional needs, it just doesn't matter if you eat the same number every day or if you eat low one day and high the next.

And for what it's worth... my younger sister tracks her deficit weekly, not every day. Does that make sense? She doesn't worry about the day-to-day that much.

Pebble321

Re your HRM - they are expensive and I did just fine for a year without one. But, if you want to buy it, do get one with a chest strap.
I was quite convinced that there would be no point as it wouldnt get anywhere near my heart, but it just goes around my middle below (next to, not squashed by) my bra. It doesn't move around and I don't even know its there - which I'm still quite amazed by!

With regard to your other questions - I'm another person who tends to track cals over the week rather than day by day, not intentionally but just becase that's the way my days seem to pan out. This works just fine for me.
That's only my opinion though, if you want a scientific answer, I have to say "I don't know!"

caramkoala

Hey thanks everyone who did and didn't comment I appreciate it :flowerforyou:

When I read back my original topic, it seems like a bit of a rant. I seemed to answer or dismiss my own questions. I think I'm just sad I'm not losing 3 pounds a week now. But it's ok. I will get used to it. Have to remember the big picture, and as long as I'm losing I am on the right track.

Thanks again!

JanieJack

Have to remember the big picture, and as long as I'm losing I am on the right track.

And not only that, but sometimes it's not about even the loss... I had a time of almost a year where my weight did NOT budge though I had stepped up my exercise and tightened my eating. But I was getting in better shape. Then all the sudden it dropped.