Resetting Metabolism. Myth or Not?

spaingirl2011

Hi everyone,

I've read on some forums here that some people eat at their maintenance calories every 6 weeks or so to "reset" their metabolism so that they can keep losing.

I'm considering doing this in early July so that my body can acclimate to being back in the U.S. (rather than in Europe where I walk everywhere).

What I'm curious about is whether this "resetting" strategy is bunk or whether it has its merits?

Thanks so much!

spaingirl2011

bump

mcarter99

I think there is a lot of evidence to support 'calorie cycling'. You can google it.

PercivalHackworth

In my humble opinion, it's a myth.

BUT.... the approach is good. Much people (and I can understand) remain in deficit for a long time, they end up with woozy hormones, fatigue and the weight loss is not optimal : TDEE slowly decreases, so the hormone levels, not to mention the increased micro-nutrients deficiencies (vitamines, iron, and so on)

A deficit has not only an impact on the overall loss (understand that being in deficit doesn't magically use fat and sorted) it has an impact on the overall health

That "reset" aims to simply bring back up all these things back, and people usually feel better after that, the weight loss is optimal generally. Reset == big refeed

PercivalHackworth

I think there is a lot of evidence to support 'calorie cycling'. You can google it.

Calorie cycling could be another approach but it is not imho as efficient. You can cycle but remain in deficit.
From a psychological perspective, people who willingly eat at maintenance during a couple of weeks do it frankly - people who cycle keep in mind the weight loss (assuming that is the subject) and are still in deficit in the end of the week or the month.

Elizabeth_C34

In my humble opinion, it's a myth.

BUT.... the approach is good. Much people (and I can understand) remain in deficit for a long time, they end up with woozy hormones, fatigue and the weight loss is not optimal : TDEE slowly decreases, so the hormone levels, not to mention the increased micro-nutrients deficiencies (vitamines, iron, and so on)

A deficit has not only an impact on the overall loss (understand that being in deficit doesn't magically use fat and sorted) it has an impact on the overall health

That "reset" aims to simply bring back up all these things back, and people usually feel better after that, the weight loss is optimal generally. Reset == big refeed

Yup.

I just started my 1-2 weeks of eating at maintenance to help replenish myself a bit. I've been on a deficit for months, and I've completely stalled out. Just two days in, and I feel good. My biggest issue is mental though. I've been so used to eating 1450 calories that eating 1900+ purposefully is difficult on me. I'm terrified of gaining, but I know this is good for me.

Good article here on why taking a break is good:

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/the-full-diet-break.html

Pedal_Pusher

Sounds weird to me.

dotti1121

bump

momma31

I haven't heard of this but i am going to read up on this. thanks for the link

BigDaddyBRC

Myth. Your body adapts to whatever you are doing.

secretlobster

I don't like the name "metabolism reset" because I think it's misleading. But, you CAN increase your metabolism by increasing the amount of fuel you put in your body IF you are currently at a significant deficit. It does take some time, and often people are up against other factors (thyroid issues) that make this nearly impossible.

carld256

Edit: I was going to say there's no research on that Body Recomposition site, but he does cite one study.

Elizabeth_C34

I see lots of opinion at that Body Recomposition link, but I don't see any facts to back it up. I haven't followed all the links yet, but is there actual research out there to support the effectiveness of calorie cycling?

Scroll down to the comments section. Lyle provides a couple references there.

I agree though, that this article needs more references in it.

Elizabeth_C34

Edit: I was going to say there's no research on that Body Recomposition site, but he does cite one study.

He actually cites two. One in the article and another in the comments.

carld256

I see lots of opinion at that Body Recomposition link, but I don't see any facts to back it up. I haven't followed all the links yet, but is there actual research out there to support the effectiveness of calorie cycling?

Scroll down to the comments section. Lyle provides a couple references there.

I agree though, that this article needs more references in it.

Yeah, I edited my post. There might be something there, we'll see.

Okay, having looked at the abstract of the study, I'm not sure why this is pointed to as proof of calorie cycling for weight loss. Group A took a six week break, Group B took three two week breaks, both continued to exercise. All this showed is that there wasn't any big difference between how much these groups lost and how much the control group lost which didn't take breaks.

There were no food or exercise logs, and we have no idea what the people ate during these breaks. I don't see that this one study is any sort of solid foundation for drawing a conclusion. It didn't, as far as I can tell, lead to any greater weight loss, or break any plateaus.

The study wasn't designed to show that it reset anyone's metabolism, and I don't see how anyone can draw the conclusion that it did.

I admit I didn't read the psychological sections. I don't have any real interest in that.

WhitneyT586

I don't know if there is any science behind it or not, but sometimes my mind and body need a reset. I eat at a strict deficit until I stop losing and then I'll up my calories until I start losing again. I keep up with my workout routine and eat back my calories.

almc170

In my humble opinion, it's a myth.

BUT.... the approach is good. Much people (and I can understand) remain in deficit for a long time, they end up with woozy hormones, fatigue and the weight loss is not optimal : TDEE slowly decreases, so the hormone levels, not to mention the increased micro-nutrients deficiencies (vitamines, iron, and so on)

A deficit has not only an impact on the overall loss (understand that being in deficit doesn't magically use fat and sorted) it has an impact on the overall health

That "reset" aims to simply bring back up all these things back, and people usually feel better after that, the weight loss is optimal generally. Reset == big refeed

Yup.

I just started my 1-2 weeks of eating at maintenance to help replenish myself a bit. I've been on a deficit for months, and I've completely stalled out. Just two days in, and I feel good. My biggest issue is mental though. I've been so used to eating 1450 calories that eating 1900+ purposefully is difficult on me. I'm terrified of gaining, but I know this is good for me.

Good article here on why taking a break is good:

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/the-full-diet-break.html

I think the diet break is a great idea. I just came off a 2-month break (a little long, but it was suggested by a dietician). It was a little nerve-racking at first, but I went from eating ~1800 to ~2300 cals/day and didn't gain anything.

carld256

Edit: I was going to say there's no research on that Body Recomposition site, but he does cite one study.

He actually cites two. One in the article and another in the comments.

The second one is more interesting. There might be something there. The terminology is a bit over my head though.

Elizabeth_C34

Edit: I was going to say there's no research on that Body Recomposition site, but he does cite one study.

He actually cites two. One in the article and another in the comments.

The second one is more interesting. There might be something there. The terminology is a bit over my head though.

Actually the psychological section of that article is really important. He uses more argument there than the physiological side. The only argument he's really making is that a full diet break helps replenish hormones that get depleted during an extended calorie deficit. I don't believe he made the argument anywhere that it's a "reset" for your metabolism other than to improve bodily functions based on increasing hormone levels which may improve the body's ability to metabolize fat when you go back on a deficit. PercivalHackworth gave a good explanation of the difference above.

I also have noticed a lot of what he said about performance problems with exercise. My max lifts have gone way down lately, and I think doing this reset will help replenish my body more so I can continue making progress on my fitness goals as well.

carld256

Actually the psychological section of that article is really important. He uses more argument there than the physiological side. The only argument he's really making is that a full diet break helps replenish hormones that get depleted during an extended calorie deficit. I don't believe he made the argument anywhere that it's a "reset" for your metabolism other than to improve bodily functions based on increasing hormone levels which may improve the body's ability to metabolize fat when you go back on a deficit. PercivalHackworth gave a good explanation of the difference above.

I also have noticed a lot of what he said about performance problems with exercise. My max lifts have gone way down lately, and I think doing this reset will help replenish my body more so I can continue making progress on my fitness goals as well.

Well no, he doesn't, but this topic is about resetting your metabolism and if it's a myth or not. I really am not interested in the psychological aspects of it, because that varies so wildly from person to person. I'm really interested in the physiology of it, what's measurable and provable.

As far a benefits from taking a break. I didn't see any in the first study mentioned, just that it didn't hurt, and that it wasn't really a well controlled study. The second one, maybe, but I'd have to research it a lot more to understand exactly what's being said there.

I've never heard of a need to replenish hormones. That's an entirely new theory to me.

Elizabeth_C34

Actually the psychological section of that article is really important. He uses more argument there than the physiological side. The only argument he's really making is that a full diet break helps replenish hormones that get depleted during an extended calorie deficit. I don't believe he made the argument anywhere that it's a "reset" for your metabolism other than to improve bodily functions based on increasing hormone levels which may improve the body's ability to metabolize fat when you go back on a deficit. PercivalHackworth gave a good explanation of the difference above.

I also have noticed a lot of what he said about performance problems with exercise. My max lifts have gone way down lately, and I think doing this reset will help replenish my body more so I can continue making progress on my fitness goals as well.

Well no, he doesn't, but this topic is about resetting your metabolism and if it's a myth or not. I really am not interested in the psychological aspects of it, because that varies so wildly from person to person. I'm really interested in the physiology of it, what's measurable and provable.

As far a benefits from taking a break. I didn't see any in the first study mentioned, just that it didn't hurt, and that it wasn't really a well controlled study. The second one, maybe, but I'd have to research it a lot more to understand exactly what's being said there.

I've never heard of a need to replenish hormones. That's an entirely new theory to me.

I think this article is still relevant to the original topic though there seems to be some confusion between refeeding (a real metabolic reset often done by bodybuilders or show athletes after competition) and a "reset" in the terms you and I are talking about with hormone response with potential benefits to resting metabolism. OP was asking about doing a reset and wondering what the information is about it, and this is the best article I've found on it thusfar. Trying it myself for this week and the next to see how I respond to it.

I also know (not scientific proof but anecdotal) 6 people off the top of my head on my friend's list who do a reset week every 6-8 weeks and have lost over 70 lbs without ever hitting a plateau, so I believe there is some merit to it. I'm doing more homework on the topic as well, though. I'm not as knowledgeable about it as I'd like to be.

weisegirl1119

bump

carld256

I think this article is still relevant to the original topic though there seems to be some confusion between refeeding (a real metabolic reset often done by bodybuilders or show athletes after competition) and a "reset" in the terms you and I are talking about with hormone response with potential benefits to resting metabolism. OP was asking about doing a reset and wondering what the information is about it, and this is the best article I've found on it thusfar. Trying it myself for this week and the next to see how I respond to it.

I also know (not scientific proof but anecdotal) 6 people off the top of my head on my friend's list who do a reset week every 6-8 weeks and have lost over 70 lbs without ever hitting a plateau, so I believe there is some merit to it. I'm doing more homework on the topic as well, though. I'm not as knowledgeable about it as I'd like to be.

I'm up for whatever works, honestly. There might be something to this, like I said. It seems to be a really popular idea, but I don't think I'm up for doing hours of research on it. Good luck. Let us know what happens.

manic4titans

Myth. Your body adapts to whatever you are doing.

So by your words it isn't a myth???

If the body adapts to whatever you are doing , eat more for several weeks for the body to adapt then cut back to a deficit for a while. Then repeat. ???

Although, the more I search online the less I am sold on the idea. I have been searching for a couple weeks and the trainer for Oprah says "it is sounds to good to be true, it isn't."

1holegrouper

I don't claim to understand the science but when I incorporate 2-4 days of "cheat days" every 4-6 weeks I end up losing more weight than if I stuck to plan during that time. My trainer says that it confuses my metabolism. Perhaps it does. Perhaps it does not. But one thing I know- I ALWAYS lose weight when I do it . I have tested this and it really makes a difference. So, the results themselves cause me to do it.

AnvilHead

...Although, the more I search online the less I am sold on the idea. I have been searching for a couple weeks and the trainer for Oprah says "it is sounds to good to be true, it isn't."

All I know is that I trust Lyle McDonald a lot more than "Oprah's trainer". Lyle has done a lot of research, is very knowledgeable and doesn't spout broscience. He's one of about three people in the fitness/nutrition world that I put any real trust in (the other two being Alan Aragon and Tom Venuto).

manic4titans

...Although, the more I search online the less I am sold on the idea. I have been searching for a couple weeks and the trainer for Oprah says "it is sounds to good to be true, it isn't."

All I know is that I trust Lyle McDonald a lot more than "Oprah's trainer". Lyle has done a lot of research, is very knowledgeable and doesn't spout broscience. He's one of about three people in the fitness/nutrition world that I put any real trust in (the other two being Alan Aragon and Tom Venuto).

Who is Lyle McDonald? I would like to read that.

you must have missed my point. I have read several articles and I was only quoting ONE person.

manic4titans

I don't claim to understand the science but when I incorporate 2-4 days of "cheat days" every 4-6 weeks I end up losing more weight than if I stuck to plan during that time. My trainer says that it confuses my metabolism. Perhaps it does. Perhaps it does not. But one thing I know- I ALWAYS lose weight when I do it . I have tested this and it really makes a difference. So, the results themselves cause me to do it.

What works for you :drinker:

I became overweight by eating too much and the wrong kinds of foods. Now I try to eat smaller portions of those "wrong" foods. My body is so out of whack. That's why I am researching. I have lifted weights since first of April. Gained 6 pounds of what I took off by cardio and 1200 calorie diet. Could it just be my body doesn't require a LOT of food? I am small frame....

mstifb

I don't know! I just started my goal of losing weight a few weeks ago. I'm trying to stick to 1200 calories and not sure what to think. Sort of confused about some of the posts too. :ohwell: I hope more answers will be posted, and maybe something I might be able to understand. Thanks for asking - good question!! :flowerforyou:

AnvilHead

Who is Lyle McDonald? I would like to read that.

Lyle McDonald is the author of the article linked by Elizabeth_C34, at bodyrecomposition.com (which is his website). He has many articles there that are definitely worth reading. He has done a lot of research, authored several books and has plenty of personal experience as a trainer to back up what he says. He has a no-nonsense style and may be a little too straight to the point for some people's tastes, but he knows what he's talking about.

lrcross

...it works. I was stuck in a plateau for two weeks and I increased my cals for 6 weeks. Afterthat, I began a cal zig-zag (eating the average cals/week, but increase/decrease of cals every day for 7 days)... My plateau FINALLY broke and I started losing weigh again. Some days it is a struggle to eat lots of cals, but I really try.

My other 2 cents...
I know that our bodies respond/react differently to weight loss "methods", but I did try this so that I could teach myself how to eat correctly (eating enough calories, eating my BMR, and eating enough meals per day). I increased my intake from the MFP recommendation of 1500 to 2460. So, when I zig-zag, the lowest I will go is about 1800 cals and the highest being 2700. My body adjusts, and the scale moves in the right direction.

The reset worked for me.