Deficit through activity or food?

longtimeterp
longtimeterp Posts: 614 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
Okay, thought i would throw this out to the forum, get some thoughts and opinions, as i was wondering about this today...

To create a large deficit in calories for a day, say 2600, and not an everyday thing but like once a week, would it be better to eat less, say 1400 calories, and aim for a 4000 cal daily burn (as per activity tracker or such), or would it be better to exercise a lot more that day, say trying to burn around 5500 cal and then eat 2900 cal?

im am sure there are varying opinions on this, and i am sure many will say why so much in a day, but like i said this isnt an everyday thing, lets call it part of calorie cycling?

Thoughts?

Replies

  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • shadow2soul
    shadow2soul Posts: 7,692 Member
    Okay, thought i would throw this out to the forum, get some thoughts and opinions, as i was wondering about this today...

    To create a large deficit in calories for a day, say 2600, and not an everyday thing but like once a week, would it be better to eat less, say 1400 calories, and aim for a 4000 cal daily burn (as per activity tracker or such), or would it be better to exercise a lot more that day, say trying to burn around 5500 cal and then eat 2900 cal?

    im am sure there are varying opinions on this, and i am sure many will say why so much in a day, but like i said this isnt an everyday thing, lets call it part of calorie cycling?

    Thoughts?

    While both methods seem extreme to me. I think it would be easier to create the deficit with food. There is a method of fasting where you eat extremely low calorie amounts 2 days out of the week and then maintenance for the other 5 days (5:2 fasting).
  • SunofaBeach14
    SunofaBeach14 Posts: 4,899 Member
    2600 calorie deficit per day?

    Seriously?

    I'd recommend reading a number of forum posts from folks who have lost weight and kept it off, and reevaluating your goals. Slow and steady wins the race.
  • BramageOMG
    BramageOMG Posts: 319 Member
    I eat under the calorie allotment given (weigh food and track VERY accurately) and exercise (Gym) everyday.

    -38lbs in 8 weeks (8 weeks and 2 days to be fair).

    So I guess my answer is: Both
  • MelodyandBarbells
    MelodyandBarbells Posts: 7,724 Member
    I'm a bit up side down compared to the MFP recommendations on this, because my "big" exercise days (three hours of fitness classes, twice a week max), tend to coincide with my little eating days. I think it has to do with the amount of time spent getting to and from the gym, physically being at the gym, etc. But I still get enough food overall because I like the stuff. I may eat double my target intake on a lazy Friday, etc

    So I'd say just play with it and see where things shake out for you. I do carry a small snack with me during my long workouts (a sliced up apple) and had to buy a banana as well yesterday because I ate it all up early. So long as you can get through the workouts and still have your energy, I'd say eat as little or as much as you want but don't make not eating enough food a continuous habit.
  • nosebag1212
    nosebag1212 Posts: 621 Member
    psmf
  • SEAFOODMAN
    SEAFOODMAN Posts: 342
    or you could do a 36hr water fast, but you will be cranky as heck...............i prefer ADF
  • keefmac
    keefmac Posts: 313 Member
    2600 calorie deficit per day?

    Seriously?

    I'd recommend reading a number of forum posts from folks who have lost weight and kept it off, and reevaluating your goals. Slow and steady wins the race.

    Yep, plenty of people manage to loose loads of weight, maintain for a few months then pile it all back on.

    If you can lose steadily and create a method that you can happliy live with it's better in the long term.
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,222 Member
    Once a week is fine to do that, why is another thing altogether. If the 2600 calories for 1 day equates to an additional 200 or 300 cals over a 7 day period why not just do that.....your body hasn't a clue you did it anyway.
  • Branstin
    Branstin Posts: 2,320 Member
    I think you should research Intermittent Fasting. There are several methods including fasting a few days a week. It is structured and you will still eat enough to lose weight, fuel your workouts, and provide the proper amount of nutrients to your body.
  • WalkingAlong
    WalkingAlong Posts: 4,926 Member
    To create a large deficit in calories for a day, say 2600, and not an everyday thing but like once a week, would it be better to eat less, say 1400 calories, and aim for a 4000 cal daily burn (as per activity tracker or such), or would it be better to exercise a lot more that day, say trying to burn around 5500 cal and then eat 2900 cal?
    If it was me, I would opt for eat 1400/burn 4000, assuming you can walk after say a normal one hour workout to pad the activity. If weight loss is the reason and you did say a 3-hour gym routine that's new to you, water weight effects might muddy the waters for some time.

    Plus it's a lot easier to not eat dessert than to eat it and then go burn off 600 calories.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    It is far easier and more efficient to adjust your intake and control your weight through diet than it is exercise. It's not a matter of "better" or "worse" necessarily...it's a matter of efficiency. To lose 1 Lb per week and create that deficit through exercise, one would have to burn 3500 calories per week with exercise...that's actually quite substantial for someone new to fitness (which I presume someone needing to lose weight would be)...this would probably result in a lack of proper rest days and over train and burnout. Whereas it's pretty easy to cut out 500 calories per day in snacks and food and whatnot...really, if I cut out my afternoon snack that would put me in about a 1 Lb per week deficit...it's really pretty easy to control your diet.
  • longtimeterp
    longtimeterp Posts: 614 Member
    i guess i should clarify that i have lost weight before, and stopped tracking and exercising due to life happening this year, and put like 50lbs back on. So im trying to get back rather quickly, or at least get closer. i have a decent base level of fitness but obviously im building it back up after 6 months off only 1 month on. ive done 16:8 if, with varying success, find that makes more of a difference at lower weights. considered a psmf before but i like food too much to only eat like 800 cals. and with regards to the 300/day all week, im already at a deficit all week so i dont want to add to it every day, as i am a big fan of calorie cycling anyways, carb cycling as well. im actually torn, i was thinking the diet was easier to control, but i know exactly what i have to do dto burn 500 cals, eating 500 cals can come in many different ways.

    i appreciate all the input so far
  • brower47
    brower47 Posts: 16,356 Member
    What are you doing that burns 4000 calories? It would take a 3000lb person running a little less than a marathon to burn that amount.
  • Kalikel
    Kalikel Posts: 9,603 Member
    I have no idea, but would like to hear how it works out for you. Please update. :) And good luck!
  • albayin
    albayin Posts: 2,524 Member
    eat 1200 AND run a full marathon...so I guess it's possible...but likely or not, it's a different subject...
  • longtimeterp
    longtimeterp Posts: 614 Member
    my bmr is around 2200, so neat plus exercise can easily get to 1800, getting that to 3000 takes a lot more effort however, but not a marathon!
  • Holla4mom
    Holla4mom Posts: 587 Member
    How many pounds per week are you hoping to lose?
  • matthawthorneisamyth
    matthawthorneisamyth Posts: 196 Member
    Food is much easier.

    - 80% food 20% exercise; stop killing yourself with cardio. It's easier just to not overeat.
  • Kevalicious99
    Kevalicious99 Posts: 1,131 Member
    It is far easier and more efficient to adjust your intake and control your weight through diet than it is exercise.

    I truly believe it is far easier to get to where you probably want to be by having a well tuned diet as compared to having a bad diet and trying to exercise your brains out.

    It is very hard to out exercise a bad diet. The 2600 Cal / day deficit is in my little opinion not a good idea .. and just not maintainable.
  • MelodyandBarbells
    MelodyandBarbells Posts: 7,724 Member
    It is far easier and more efficient to adjust your intake and control your weight through diet than it is exercise.

    I truly believe it is far easier to get to where you probably want to be by having a well tuned diet as compared to having a bad diet and trying to exercise your brains out.

    It is very hard to out exercise a bad diet. The 2600 Cal / day deficit is in my little opinion not a good idea .. and just not maintainable.

    Good thing that's not what the OP asked!
  • stephe1987
    stephe1987 Posts: 406 Member
    Food is a better way to create a deficit.

    Exercise is good too, but I wouldn't count on burning so many calories. MFP and gyms usually overestimate how much was actually burned. Studies show that an average person doing a typical form of cardio at a typical intensity will burn around 7-10 calories per minute. How many minutes do you plan on exercising? From Jillian Michaels' website: "when you exercise for more than two hours straight — even at a moderate intensity, your body releases stress hormones such as cortisol, which inhibits weight loss, causing your body to react by storing fat and retaining water out of self protection."

    I would recommend eating at a deficit and then exercising between 30 and 90 minutes each day. The World Health Organization recommends 30-45 minutes per day, but some exercise DVDs will go closer to 90 minutes once you've completed all the activities for the day (e.g. two different DVDs from Beachbody).

Categories