Reverse Dieting

Options
Hey_Its_Catriona
Hey_Its_Catriona Posts: 15 Member
in Food and Nutrition
Posting in here as I realised it may be more appropriate than the main forum...Just wondering what the best way to go about increasing calories after a period of under-eating is? I know roughly what I should be eating, but it's way over 500 cals per day more than I am now: am I better just to jump in and do it, or build up slowly like increasing 100 cals per week? I'm not really wanting to gain weight (a little muscle wouldn't go amiss), just have more energy/life and be healthy again. Is a 'reverse diet' the way to go? How would I go about it? Advice please!
«1

Replies

  • SherryTeach
    SherryTeach Posts: 2,836 Member
    Options
    How about just up your calories by 100 or so per week until you find that your weight remains stable and you feel better?
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Options
    I usually recommend adding incrementally over time. How quickly you go is very individual, but 100 cals a week seems fine. You may want to add 100, sit there for 2 weeks to let the additional weight from water/food stabilize then add another 100. It really depends on how quickly you are trying to get your calories up and how much the scale fluctuations bother you.
  • livingleanlivingclean
    livingleanlivingclean Posts: 11,751 Member
    Options
    When I reverse dieted I had a bmr test, roughly worked out my "new" maintenance (lower than pre dieting maintenance) and jumped straight to that. I measured myself weekly (weight and calipers) to check progression and increased cals accordingly.....

    I think slow reverses aren't necessary... I'd probably get more frustrated!
  • galgenstrick
    galgenstrick Posts: 2,086 Member
    Options
    Sarauk2sf wrote: »
    I usually recommend adding incrementally over time. How quickly you go is very individual, but 100 cals a week seems fine. You may want to add 100, sit there for 2 weeks to let the additional weight from water/food stabilize then add another 100. It really depends on how quickly you are trying to get your calories up and how much the scale fluctuations bother you.

    ^^^ this is how to do it.
  • jddnw
    jddnw Posts: 319 Member
    Options
    Hey_Its_Catriona wrote: »
    Posting in here as I realised it may be more appropriate than the main forum...Just wondering what the best way to go about increasing calories after a period of under-eating is? I know roughly what I should be eating, but it's way over 500 cals per day more than I am now: am I better just to jump in and do it, or build up slowly like increasing 100 cals per week? I'm not really wanting to gain weight (a little muscle wouldn't go amiss), just have more energy/life and be healthy again. Is a 'reverse diet' the way to go? How would I go about it? Advice please!

    You are way overthinking this. Go have a milkshake. You can start eating your desired calories immediately. You don't have to make a big deal out of it.
  • galgenstrick
    galgenstrick Posts: 2,086 Member
    Options
    jddnw wrote: »
    Hey_Its_Catriona wrote: »
    Posting in here as I realised it may be more appropriate than the main forum...Just wondering what the best way to go about increasing calories after a period of under-eating is? I know roughly what I should be eating, but it's way over 500 cals per day more than I am now: am I better just to jump in and do it, or build up slowly like increasing 100 cals per week? I'm not really wanting to gain weight (a little muscle wouldn't go amiss), just have more energy/life and be healthy again. Is a 'reverse diet' the way to go? How would I go about it? Advice please!

    You are way overthinking this. Go have a milkshake. You can start eating your desired calories immediately. You don't have to make a big deal out of it.

    There are plenty of reasons to reverse diet, so I wouldn't recommend this advice.
  • Bizurke51
    Bizurke51 Posts: 190 Member
    Options
    Hey_Its_Catriona wrote: »
    Posting in here as I realised it may be more appropriate than the main forum...Just wondering what the best way to go about increasing calories after a period of under-eating is? I know roughly what I should be eating, but it's way over 500 cals per day more than I am now: am I better just to jump in and do it, or build up slowly like increasing 100 cals per week? I'm not really wanting to gain weight (a little muscle wouldn't go amiss), just have more energy/life and be healthy again. Is a 'reverse diet' the way to go? How would I go about it? Advice please!

    I'm transitioning back as well using the reverse diet method. I added 125 calories to my daily budget for 10 days and today I went up another 125. I might add 50 per week now or stay at this rate for a little bit. Depends how I feel next week.

    I asked for advice when I began and there's seems to be no clear cut consensus on what is "the best" way. I'd recommend going with what you're most conformable with. I chose to go slow so I could learn to eat more healthy calories and not just get a milkshake everyday. Also I was worried that such a sudden increase would result in a lot of weight being gained.

    Good luck

  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Options
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    When I reverse dieted I had a bmr test, roughly worked out my "new" maintenance (lower than pre dieting maintenance) and jumped straight to that. I measured myself weekly (weight and calipers) to check progression and increased cals accordingly.....

    I think slow reverses aren't necessary... I'd probably get more frustrated!

    Adding 100 cals a week is not that slow. There are quite a few reasons to not jump straight up to what you estimate maintenance to be - they may or may not be relevant to the OP.
  • livingleanlivingclean
    livingleanlivingclean Posts: 11,751 Member
    Options
    Sarauk2sf wrote: »
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    When I reverse dieted I had a bmr test, roughly worked out my "new" maintenance (lower than pre dieting maintenance) and jumped straight to that. I measured myself weekly (weight and calipers) to check progression and increased cals accordingly.....

    I think slow reverses aren't necessary... I'd probably get more frustrated!

    Adding 100 cals a week is not that slow. There are quite a few reasons to not jump straight up to what you estimate maintenance to be - they may or may not be relevant to the OP.

    What are they? I know quite a few people who recommend doing it that way, and don't experience weight gain....

    I doubled the calories I was on at the end of my prep in about 4/5 weeks, without excessive weight gain.
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Options
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    Sarauk2sf wrote: »
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    When I reverse dieted I had a bmr test, roughly worked out my "new" maintenance (lower than pre dieting maintenance) and jumped straight to that. I measured myself weekly (weight and calipers) to check progression and increased cals accordingly.....

    I think slow reverses aren't necessary... I'd probably get more frustrated!

    Adding 100 cals a week is not that slow. There are quite a few reasons to not jump straight up to what you estimate maintenance to be - they may or may not be relevant to the OP.

    What are they? I know quite a few people who recommend doing it that way, and don't experience weight gain....

    I doubled the calories I was on at the end of my prep in about 4/5 weeks, without excessive weight gain.

    Coming out of contest prep is a different situation to someone getting down to 'average leaness', for want of a better word. You find conflicting opinions on how slow/quick you should reverse in the bb'ing 'world' - from what I have seen however, I err on the side of not needing to go super slow. However, most people are not competitive bb'ers coming out of prep.

    A couple of reasons - which may or may not relevant to individuals
    - someone may want to keep losing some weight (ie. stay at a deficit) but wants to start eating more for adherence or energy levels (it does not take much food to give increased energy)
    - the weight fluctuations caused by additional water and food weight can mess with some people
    - some people may just not be comfortable estimating their maintenance.


    From a purely physiological perspective, is it necessary? Unlikely. Preferred? Maybe. Adaptive Thermogenesis can be very different individual by individual however.

    I have a question for you - how low did you go in prep to have your maintenance twice as high as your prep calories?
  • honkytonks85
    honkytonks85 Posts: 669 Member
    Options
    This seems like a lot of woo to me to be honest. If your metabolism has changed due to dieting it'll only be a small fraction of a change. I wouldn't overthink this. Just eat at a modest deficit, or your maintenance cals if you're looking to maintain.
  • galgenstrick
    galgenstrick Posts: 2,086 Member
    Options
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3gTGLulLnI
  • livingleanlivingclean
    livingleanlivingclean Posts: 11,751 Member
    Options
    honkytonks85 wrote: »
    This seems like a lot of woo to me to be honest. If your metabolism has changed due to dieting it'll only be a small fraction of a change. I wouldn't overthink this. Just eat at a modest deficit, or your maintenance cals if you're looking to maintain.

    Mine dropped 500 cals in 10 weeks. I'd already been dieting for about 15 weeks prior to this 10 week period....

    @Sarauk2sf.... By the end of prep I was on about 1000cals. I think I jumped up to 1500 straight away then added cals weekly.
  • BWBTrish
    BWBTrish Posts: 2,817 Member
    edited May 2015
    Options
    the program i am on or in, does this. Slowly my calorie intake goes up to maintenance level. At one point my deficit is so small i will stop losing weight. This will be around my healthy weight range somewhere between 144 and 150 pound.

    This is monitored and very important to keep my BP and Blood sugar levels and heart rate normal and steady.
    So it isn't a lot of woo at all.
    For some people it can be important. Like me :)

    What happens is that you introduce your body to more food at a slow past to avoid as much as possible fluctuations for example.
    For me on a salt less diet very important. More food means also more ( natural ) salt. More salt means higher blood pressure more water in my left ( damaged leg) more stress on my vain because of that. And my heart wont be a happy chappie :)

    So there is a bit more to it ;)
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Options
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    honkytonks85 wrote: »
    This seems like a lot of woo to me to be honest. If your metabolism has changed due to dieting it'll only be a small fraction of a change. I wouldn't overthink this. Just eat at a modest deficit, or your maintenance cals if you're looking to maintain.

    Mine dropped 500 cals in 10 weeks. I'd already been dieting for about 15 weeks prior to this 10 week period....

    @Sarauk2sf.... By the end of prep I was on about 1000cals. I think I jumped up to 1500 straight away then added cals weekly.

    No wonder you wanted to up to 1,500 straight away - I would have also.

    My low point cut calories are over 1,500 and I only sit there for a few weeks, if I go that low at all. When I reverse up, I am usually reversing up from about 1,800 calories. Then again, I am a fluffy'ish competitive PL'er and not a BB'er - so the strategies re weight loss/gain/maintenance (and respective leanness) are different.

  • j6o4
    j6o4 Posts: 871 Member
    Options
    I always reversed diet by adding 100 calories a week and never gained weight during the process; I actually lose a bit of weight because I'm still in a deficit while reversing. You can probably get away with bumping your calories more in the beginning then taper it down when you get closer to maintenance. For example, bump it up by 200 calories the first week then go 100 every week after that.
  • livingleanlivingclean
    livingleanlivingclean Posts: 11,751 Member
    Options
    Sarauk2sf wrote: »
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    honkytonks85 wrote: »
    This seems like a lot of woo to me to be honest. If your metabolism has changed due to dieting it'll only be a small fraction of a change. I wouldn't overthink this. Just eat at a modest deficit, or your maintenance cals if you're looking to maintain.

    Mine dropped 500 cals in 10 weeks. I'd already been dieting for about 15 weeks prior to this 10 week period....

    @Sarauk2sf.... By the end of prep I was on about 1000cals. I think I jumped up to 1500 straight away then added cals weekly.

    No wonder you wanted to up to 1,500 straight away - I would have also.

    My low point cut calories are over 1,500 and I only sit there for a few weeks, if I go that low at all. When I reverse up, I am usually reversing up from about 1,800 calories. Then again, I am a fluffy'ish competitive PL'er and not a BB'er - so the strategies re weight loss/gain/maintenance (and respective leanness) are different.

    Where's the "thumbs up" symbol when you need it? We went to America about 6/7 weeks post comp and I was eating about 2400 cals by then....hadn't gained much by that stage, but after a month of eating my way around the US I was fluffy. Just started comp prep again and planning a longer reverse next time!
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Options
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    Sarauk2sf wrote: »
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    honkytonks85 wrote: »
    This seems like a lot of woo to me to be honest. If your metabolism has changed due to dieting it'll only be a small fraction of a change. I wouldn't overthink this. Just eat at a modest deficit, or your maintenance cals if you're looking to maintain.

    Mine dropped 500 cals in 10 weeks. I'd already been dieting for about 15 weeks prior to this 10 week period....

    @Sarauk2sf.... By the end of prep I was on about 1000cals. I think I jumped up to 1500 straight away then added cals weekly.

    No wonder you wanted to up to 1,500 straight away - I would have also.

    My low point cut calories are over 1,500 and I only sit there for a few weeks, if I go that low at all. When I reverse up, I am usually reversing up from about 1,800 calories. Then again, I am a fluffy'ish competitive PL'er and not a BB'er - so the strategies re weight loss/gain/maintenance (and respective leanness) are different.

    Where's the "thumbs up" symbol when you need it? We went to America about 6/7 weeks post comp and I was eating about 2400 cals by then....hadn't gained much by that stage, but after a month of eating my way around the US I was fluffy. Just started comp prep again and planning a longer reverse next time!

    I hear you - I was 'average lean' all my life until I moved to the States when I was about 30. Ended up gaining quite a bit after found foods I liked. Main issue was driving everywhere and sitting on my butt all day. Luckily I found that I loved lifting, so that counteracts the driving everywhere thing, and have learned some better food habits to keep the fluffy in check.

    Good luck with your prep and your competition!!
  • Hey_Its_Catriona
    Hey_Its_Catriona Posts: 15 Member
    Options
    Pu_239 wrote: »
    Hey_Its_Catriona wrote: »
    Posting in here as I realised it may be more appropriate than the main forum...Just wondering what the best way to go about increasing calories after a period of under-eating is? I know roughly what I should be eating, but it's way over 500 cals per day more than I am now: am I better just to jump in and do it, or build up slowly like increasing 100 cals per week? I'm not really wanting to gain weight (a little muscle wouldn't go amiss), just have more energy/life and be healthy again. Is a 'reverse diet' the way to go? How would I go about it? Advice please!
    Depending on your size, 500 calories is a breath of air. It's nothing. Reverse dieting is usually in reference to drastically cutting calories and losing weight, as you lose you start to bring them back up. Your case isn't that necessarily. If i was you, assuming you're pretty small, maybe 125 calories a week. Or do 125 calories for 2 weeks, as you build up ot the 500 calories. If you're normal size, then i don't see a problem going to 500 calories immediately. There might be a minor weight gain but it's mostly water, so no need to worry.

    The main reason it's recommended to increase slowly is to avoid the "OMG I GAINED 5lbs IN 1 DAY HELP!!!" mentality. If you can deal with that initial weight gain, knowing it will come off, i see no problem increasing your calories immediately. It might be best to take some physical measurements to ensure yourself.

    I don't weigh myself so that "ohmgee five pounds in a day" isn't really a problem. A little more info, I'm 5'6'', probably around 120lbs right now. Eating 1400-1900 calories per day. Walk 10,000 steps each day, and then either go for a run (between 5k and half marathon) or go to the gym, for 6 days a week. One rest day where I only do the walking. Was never trying to lose weight, but been accidentally under eating, no period and UK size 6 is too big so finding clothes is hard right now. Hence wanting to eat more for health :)

Categories