I thought I'd give calorie shifting/cycling/zigzagging a go, cos I'm enjoying calorie counting but I get bored easily. Plus I easily get frightened of food and need to resist the temptation to eat too little.
Anyway, based on the most sensible suggestions I found on line, the plan is to eat low - high - low - medium - medium - high - medium, which being translated into calories is 1100 - 1800 - 1100 - 1300 - 1300 - 1800 - 1300
It should work quite well, because the second high falls on a Sunday, which is my release from Lent eating day.
Just coming to the end of the 2nd low, and I'm hungry but that's kind of my fault for not preparing in advance properly, I could have had big veggie stews or soups ready, which would have been filling, I just ran out of shopping time.
Interesting, though - the 1100 has really bitten today. I'm certainly going to be grateful for 1300 tomorrow.
Thankyou for that, Kelly. Can I ask, why? I haven't been able to find a whole lot of *sensible* research on calorie shifting but I thought the point was to go high and low, to keep your metabolism on its toes. Is varying between 1700 and 1300 enough of a shift for that effect?
Some people would argue that your calories shouldn't drop below 1200 a day.
I jump from the 900 to 1200 range and occasionally get up to 1300+. I don't plan which days are going to be high and which ones are going to be low, it just works out that way.
At your current weight, you probably need more calories a day just to handle your basal metabolic needs and that may be why the 1100 days are tougher. Keep tweaking it, but I wouldn't be afraid to stay in a higher range. As you lose weight and your BMR drops, then you can lower your calories a bit more.
I was thinking of doing this myself. I kindof tried unplanned but it hasn't worked out too well so far lol. I think it would help me alot to get out of the system of eating the exact same thing every week lol.
I was thinking of doing:
M-1700
T-1200-1250
W-1450
T-1350
F-1600
S-1450
S-1300
Though I am unsure if it is even possible for me to get up to 1700 lol. Do you think that sounds like a good plan?
Well my comatose calorie figure is 1600 and activity (only just ex-couch potato) 1900. I decided to base my highs and lows around the lower one, because the plan I am following is
medium: figure -300 (= 1300)
high: medium +500 (= 1800)
low: medium -200 (= 1100)
working on the higher figure of 1900 would have given me 1400 - 1600 - 2100 and that just sounded way too high for weightloss.
I guess I'm not being ultra smart, in that I've given up weighing for Lent, so it'll be a few weeks yet before I can say whether it's working. hm.
I agree with Diva. I try to vary my calories, but instead of planning the numbers in advance, I sort of listen to my body. If I'm having a hungry day, trying to stay with very low calories is just self-defeating. A hungry day will be the day I allow myself to go a little over. When I'm having a not-so-hungry day, I embrace that too and eat low.
Of course, I'm new to this as a 40-something CC, but it always worked when I was younger....
I hope to get to the point when I can shift naturally, listen to my body but I'm not there yet.
Today was a medium day, and tomorrow is a high day, and my off-Lent day. To maintain a decent weekly average, I could go to 2000 tomorrow - if I dare. Not so much if I dare eat as if I dare weigh but I'm determined to beat my scalesophobia.
If you stay within your calorie budget, IMO, there really is no reason to calorie shift to the extreme that you are. I mean 1100 calories on one day and 1800 on another? Why not 1450 on both of those days, instead of going for soooo little on one? Aren't you hungry on those 1100 days? I think the very best way to lose weight is to stay on plan and eating only 1100 calories is a sure way to set yourself up for OVEReating, by getting too hungry, making poor decisions and then going OFF plan. Just makes more sense to me to keep at a steady pace to avoid being hungry and then bingeing and the such.
Metabolisims don't need to be "kept on their toes" in the sense that you are speaking of, IMO. Of course we're all different, but I myself lost steadily without that much of a shift. I gave myself a calorie limit and gave myself the option of adding in another 200-300 calories per day if I needed/wanted it. Some days I did, some I didn't. I never, ever not once hit a stall the entire time I was losing weight. Not once.
Eat steadily and frequently through out the day and get in some activity. That's what a metabolisim needs. That's what a BODY needs.
As we often find here, everyone IS different and what works for some people doesn't work for others. Personally, I don't have success sticking to the exact same number of calories every day. I like being able to have some days where I can eat more and then others when I'll eat less. My body seems to lose weight more quickly this way as well. Also, there's nothing wrong with being hungry sometimes. Having a day or two a week when you eat slightly less than what makes you full isn't necessarily a bad thing.
In my opinion though, I think 1100 calories a day is probably too low for a 200 pound person. You may want to up that to closer to 1200 as a minimum for your low calorie days. I know for me personally, my low days are usually around 1200 calories (I'm about 180 pounds, 5'5") and I am definitely still hungry throughout the day eating that little. I only usually get that low one day a week, maybe two if I'm really good. My high day is always Saturday and on that day I don't count my calories at all, pretty much eat what I want within reason. I still try to make healthy choices but will usually have a bigger breakfast with my family and then we go out to eat for dinner.
I appreciate everyone's input.
I'm deliberately having a little experiment with this, as a way of overcoming fear of little bounces on the scales. I have dieted on and off for 36 years, and I know how obsessive I get if the scale doesn't drop - and then I'm tempted to waaay undereat. I'm in a good place mentally at the moment, and to maintain this good place, I need to learn to be unaffected by little fluctuations.
So yesterday I deliberately ate 1938 calories - was aiming for 2000, because my last couple of days had gone quite low. That's 38 (i.e. nothing) above my daily maintenance weight of 1900, 38 calories more than I burn.
That should have led to a weigh gain of 0.00022 of a pound. Yes, I'm a bit sad round calculators.
However, according to the scales I've gained 1.2 pounds overnight. This is clearly impossible, I'd have had to have eaten an extra 4200 calories for that to be a real pound of fat.
So I'm working, real hard, to wait over the next couple of days and observe what the scale does next.
On lower calorie days, I really don't mind being hungry - unless, of course, I'm in a quiet public meeting lol! - because my overeating has never been about hunger, it's almost always been head hunger.
We'll see.
Yesterday I ate under 1,000 calories - but before you all jump on me - I took a friend out for birthday lunch, which took me up to that nearly 1,000 but then I spent the evening with a dreadful food poisoning event. Don't know if it was the food, tho I suspect so, or some virus; it definitely wasn't a change of food or anything, because I had chills and fever, as well as er everything else.....
Having today off work, because I can't risk being contagious and because I still feel dire. Spending the day trying to rehydrate, very slowly!
Just for the heck of it, I got weighed this morning, and I've dropped 2lbs! That was just a bit of a teehee though, I know that'll rise as I rehydrate.
I only managed about 800 calories yesterday, there is only so much dry toast you can eat. Dropped another 1+lb! I so understand why people are tempted to go so low.
I promise to try and eat more today, although still not feeling great. ack.
Hm. This calorie shifting is 'entertaining'
- I took a friend out for birthday lunch, which took me up to that nearly 1,000 but then I spent the evening with a dreadful food poisoning event. Don't know if it was the food, tho I suspect so, or some virus; it definitely wasn't a change of food or anything, because I had chills and fever, as well as er everything else.....