Confused about reverse dieting

gremmie1963
gremmie1963 Posts: 1 Member
edited December 2024 in Food and Nutrition
I think I need to reverse diet but I am so confused about how where to start. Super grateful for any first-hand experience or expertise (please and thank you!)

Im 19% body fat, my TDEE estimation is 1950cal a day for maintenance. Ive been cycling keto for 7 months and have been focussed on body recomposition. I feel great, but a person as lean and active as me should not be maintaining composition/weight on 1100 (keto) calories a day. I've hit the plateau and I want to get myself back up to maintenance calories, eating a healthy, balanced diet that includes carbohydrates!

I would like to be at about 17% body fat but building muscle. If I reverse diet now, is it only my food I should change? Do I continue lifting weights 5 times a week or should I be doing more cardio because Im adding calories?

I hope I dont have to add body fat just to get back to maintenance calories!

Replies

  • psychod787
    psychod787 Posts: 4,099 Member
    The science is ify at best about reverse dieting. Never done it on purpose, but add a 100 cals a week until you stop losing weight. Scale might be funky, just remember that. Or, you could go back to predicted tdee and see what happens. If you are adding in carbs again, your weight will go up, aka glycogen store and stomach contents. Layne Norton is a big pusher of the idea. Look him up on YouTube.
  • LyndaBSS
    LyndaBSS Posts: 6,964 Member
    I've never heard of reverse dieting. Why isn't it just called gaining weight?
  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,932 Member
    LyndaBSS wrote: »
    I've never heard of reverse dieting. Why isn't it just called gaining weight?

    It's not really for gaining weight. If you have been in a deficit for a long time, it's a way of gradually increasing calories back to maintenance. I guess it could be for gaining weight if one didn't stop at maintenance. It help to adjust to eating more and learning the habits you need at maintenance.

    I am a fan of it. Many people can lose fairly effectively but struggle at maintenance. I think maintenance is harder than losing.
  • psychod787
    psychod787 Posts: 4,099 Member
    LyndaBSS wrote: »
    I've never heard of reverse dieting. Why isn't it just called gaining weight?

    The science is, well, strange, some people think that adding calories in slowly raises your "metabolism" after a diet and minimizes fat gain. I think its ify at best. People may get more active after being in a deficit so NEAT increaseas. They feel better so they workout harder. I think slamming it into reverse and going to predicted tdee might be a better option, so, maybe you put on a pound or two, but that will most likely happen anyways. It allows the body to recover faster. Jmho...
  • BarbaraHelen2013
    BarbaraHelen2013 Posts: 1,941 Member
    LyndaBSS wrote: »
    I've never heard of reverse dieting. Why isn't it just called gaining weight?

    Because it makes people feel big and clever to make up a new ‘sciency’ sounding term to describe something that people have been doing for centuries without even thinking it needed special terminology! 🙄
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,458 MFP Moderator
    psychod787 wrote: »
    LyndaBSS wrote: »
    I've never heard of reverse dieting. Why isn't it just called gaining weight?

    The science is, well, strange, some people think that adding calories in slowly raises your "metabolism" after a diet and minimizes fat gain. I think its ify at best. People may get more active after being in a deficit so NEAT increaseas. They feel better so they workout harder. I think slamming it into reverse and going to predicted tdee might be a better option, so, maybe you put on a pound or two, but that will most likely happen anyways. It allows the body to recover faster. Jmho...

    Its fairly situational, but from the discussions, many think jumping to your predicted TDEE is a better options as it doesn't prolong the process and there is no negative consequence from doing it.

    Personally, i would jump straight to your TDEE, especially considering 1100 calories is fairly restricted.
  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,932 Member
    psychod787 wrote: »
    LyndaBSS wrote: »
    I've never heard of reverse dieting. Why isn't it just called gaining weight?

    The science is, well, strange, some people think that adding calories in slowly raises your "metabolism" after a diet and minimizes fat gain. I think its ify at best. People may get more active after being in a deficit so NEAT increaseas. They feel better so they workout harder. I think slamming it into reverse and going to predicted tdee might be a better option, so, maybe you put on a pound or two, but that will most likely happen anyways. It allows the body to recover faster. Jmho...

    I agree that the science part of it is questionable at best and possible nonsense. It is really majoring in the minors though. If it helps someone to ease into and adjust better to maintenance and helps them with compliance, great. The rest isn't worth the time to worry about.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 38,143 Community Helper
    psuLemon wrote: »
    psychod787 wrote: »
    LyndaBSS wrote: »
    I've never heard of reverse dieting. Why isn't it just called gaining weight?

    The science is, well, strange, some people think that adding calories in slowly raises your "metabolism" after a diet and minimizes fat gain. I think its ify at best. People may get more active after being in a deficit so NEAT increaseas. They feel better so they workout harder. I think slamming it into reverse and going to predicted tdee might be a better option, so, maybe you put on a pound or two, but that will most likely happen anyways. It allows the body to recover faster. Jmho...

    Its fairly situational, but from the discussions, many think jumping to your predicted TDEE is a better options as it doesn't prolong the process and there is no negative consequence from doing it.

    Personally, i would jump straight to your TDEE, especially considering 1100 calories is fairly restricted.

    It helped me to increase gradually: When I did so, my inclination was to add small, pleasant, nutritious tweaks to my eating, like hemp/flax seeds in my oatmeal. If I added a few hundred calories all at once, I'd be more likely to add a less nutrient-dense treat food daily Treats are fine, but that's suboptimal for me..

    This isn't some science-y thing, tough, it's just me gaming my personal psychology to my advantage. ;)

    And 1100 is too low for most people, agreed, so an initial slightly bigger jump could be a good plan.
  • callsitlikeiseeit
    callsitlikeiseeit Posts: 8,626 Member
    mmapags wrote: »
    LyndaBSS wrote: »
    I think maintenance is harder than losing.

    i find it much easier LOL i maintained for 3 years (a 130 pound weight loss). having to work out and count calories and weigh food again sucks LMAO (i have a bit more to lose that i didnt the first time - was in dire need of a break!)
  • psychod787
    psychod787 Posts: 4,099 Member
    mmapags wrote: »
    psychod787 wrote: »
    LyndaBSS wrote: »
    I've never heard of reverse dieting. Why isn't it just called gaining weight?

    The science is, well, strange, some people think that adding calories in slowly raises your "metabolism" after a diet and minimizes fat gain. I think its ify at best. People may get more active after being in a deficit so NEAT increaseas. They feel better so they workout harder. I think slamming it into reverse and going to predicted tdee might be a better option, so, maybe you put on a pound or two, but that will most likely happen anyways. It allows the body to recover faster. Jmho...

    I agree that the science part of it is questionable at best and possible nonsense. It is really majoring in the minors though. If it helps someone to ease into and adjust better to maintenance and helps them with compliance, great. The rest isn't worth the time to worry about.

    True, I accidentally reversed dieted. In retro I should have just jumped into tdee. Would not have been in maintenance hell for 2 years. Lol
This discussion has been closed.