If I read this thread correctly, it IS the case that calorie cycling works, it's just the mechanism that's in question.

Samantha seems to be saying is that claims about calorie cycling affecting metabolism aren't valid -- that particular mechanism isn't the cause. I have heard her exact argument from other science-oriented types!

It seems that calorie cycling could work simply because we are, on average, keeping ourselves in calorie deficit.

Is that right?

yes. more coming out then going in = deficit. That is the major science behind 3500 less = 1lb.

However, some have noticed even though they are following their low calorie plan they stop losing. They have found shifting--jolts the body out of homeostasis--and lets them start losing again.

Unlike cars, our bodies are amazing at adapting to our circumstances. If you put 1 gallon of fuel in a car, and that car has 24 mpg. I guarantee at 24 miles--you will have to put more gas in that car.

Not so with the body. The body can adapt. You can start using 1 gallon fuel to go 24 miles and that will be the consumption rate, but eventually the body will learn how to go 30 miles per gallon if need be by lowering "fuel consumption" or metabolism. So you will stop losing weight or lose less slowly.

Yes

I believe in moderate calorie cycling where I never go above the number of calories that my body needs each day, thus never storing excess fuel.

I also believe that eating smaller meals, more often helps as well. Providing regular fuel so that my body does not store what it doesn't need "right now".

And, yes Jen. I agree with your post as well. The human body DOES respond much differently than a machine does. And to make things more complicated, no two bodies respond the same. We are indeed ALL laboratories of one, as Meg is fond of saying!

Okay, I got my BMR which is 1931. How do I get how many calories to eat to lose 2-3 lbs a week?

I'm not trying to pick a fight here, and I (sadly) have no training in biology. But if all the arguments for the metabolism shakeup are what people seem to be noticing, then I have to say I don't think that's very good evidence. In the absence of controlled, blind experiments, it is difficult, if not impossible, to determine that calorie cycling is doing anything to metabolism. There could be a lot of other reasons why people lose weight at that point. Perhaps they would have broken that plateau anyway, perhaps they are eating less, perhaps they pay more attention...

I'm not saying I know this to be the case -- I am not familiar with all the research. But Samantha's point earlier seemed to indicate that all evidence indicates that the metabolism argument doesn't hold water. And I've heard others with biological training say the same thing. Is there good research that supports the metabolism explanation for calorie cycling?

Again, I'm not trying to pick a fight, just understand the evidence for the argument.

I've often thought this to be a big factor. If a person is gonna plateau for 3 weeks (or whatever time period) and then just spontaneously start losing again (and this happens a lot) - then a lot of people are going get frustrated and try something new right about the time they would have started losing again anyway. But they will come away thinking they did something to end the plateau.

She said there's no good research to prove it works that way. That's quite different than saying all evidence indicates it *doesn't* work that way.

I see there's a lot of debate about metabolism and such. But, I actually like calorie cycling because I can have what feels like a big eating day without ruining my diet plan. I choose to have my higher day on Saturday or Sunday, so I can go out to eat with family or splurge a little.

I really don't care that there are no controlled double blind experiments about it. I mean, there are lots of studies that show that the majority of people who lose weight gain it all back, are we all just giving up because of that?

Whatever I've been doing (eating the same cals every day) hasn't worked in the last 3 weeks. My weight loss has stalled. So you bet I'm going to try calorie cycling for a bit even if some of you think it doesn't work. This is my body. My choice.

And does it matter whether the weight would have come off anyway? No. Because calorie cycling isn't harmful to me.

I'm just adjusting what I eat over the course of a week to have high and low days.

I mean, if you think it won't work for you, dont' do it. That's the awesome thing, we all get to choose what we think might work for us and we really don't need to criticize what other people are doing just because there are no studies about it.

I thought Jendiets plan was the weirdest thing I'd ever heard of, but you know what, it works for her and she's losing weight so why would I ever try to tell her not to do it or caution her about the lack of studies (and if I did this at some point, I'm sorry) or tell her take a biology class or whatever. I'm just going to cheer her along on her journey, while I'm on mine.

Whatever. I'm giving it a whirl. Went to the website someone posted and got a plan that seems to only go up or down by 200 calories. Maybe it'll help me pay attention more as I count the calories....

spanks

I'm someone who did calorie cycling over their maintenance calories and still lost.
Actually I can't figure out how I was losing 1.5 lbs a week. What I need to maintain my weight is like 2200 calories, and I was aiming for an average of 2000 a day.
This is what I did:
M 2000
T 1600
W 2200
T 1455
F 2400
S 1800
S 2600
Both Friday and Saturday I would eat MORE than I need to maintain my current weight, but I did still lose. I think about it this way... I gain a little bit of weight on those two days, but my metabolism is all reved up so the days I eat far less I'm burning off that fat stored over those two days and FAR FAR more than that. *shrugs* I haven't calorie cycled lately, because I've been lazy, but it worked for me at least.

I believe you are asking a question about the calorie tool.

to to the calculator via this link:

http://www.freedieting.com/tools/calorie_calculator.htm

put in your information again THIS time put in your level of activity whether it be 3 times a week exercise or what. Then there is a bar titled Results Guideline only

says Fat loss, extreme fat loss. That will be your read out of suggested caloric intake. Below that is the 7 day calorie cycle link. Click on that and it will show you what amount to intake during the cycle of a week.

I agree that everyone is different. And we are all individual unique laboratories. I do have a major in biology. Nursing. And I have been studying nutrition for a long time due to suffering from an eating disorder when a teenager. Roughly 15 years of my life. i have been personally studying nutrition and fitness.

It may not work for everyone. Anyone who believes that weight loss will slow down if calories become too low can see the science behind caloric cycling.

I also want to throw in this little tidbit. When I was desperate to lose weight before I would meet up with my long distance bf after 8 years of not seeing him--I found this book "miracle of fasting" by Dr. Bragg who opened the first health food chain in America.

If you haven't noticed. I respect conventional medicine but I am more of a naturopath myself.

This book recommended ADF. basically you do not eat anything except some water with raw organic apple cider vinegar and a little raw honey in it on one day. You eat normally but healthy the next. No restrictions. You do this for about 3 weeks, then you eat regularly for 2 weeks, then go back to it. I didn't own a scale, but my clothes started falling off me so quickly. This OF COURSE is an EXTREME METHOD OF CALORIE CYCLING. I started out at about 169-170 lbs (before I lost my scale and had to move to my parents house). I started in early September. By December 28th, I was down to 135 lbs. That is the fastest outside of Atkins, (which I was absolutely miserable on)I have ever lost weight. I did not calorie count at all. I kept that weight off for 2 years.

BeachBum can testify to caloric cycling. She does a 500, 2000 stint. And she is dropping weight like crazy.

If she were a normal keep your calories low everyday and if she had 4 days 2000, 3 days 500 her daily intake would be 1357. She lost 5 lbs in less than a week. Why? Ask anybody on a 1357 cs/day diet. Did you lose 5 lbs in less than a week? The answer is most likely no! So why did this work this way?

Or could it be like megwin mentioned. eating way below and then shifting higher keeps your metabolism revved and you lose weight quicker.

I suggest everyone conducts their own weight loss experiments on their own bodies. I am with seagirl, I WOULD NEVER tell anybody that was using a plan that was working for them that it was BUNK and they weren't really seeing results. Find what works for YOU. For me, caloric cycling got the scale moving. I was stuck at the same weight +/- 1 lb for 11 days.

I've been stuck in the same +/-1lb for 4 weeks!

So, yeah, I'm going to try calorie cycling, and adding 200 calories per day (which that calculator recommended given my recent increase in exercise) and dancing naked under the light of the full moon, and doing anything else that seems remotely like it might get the weight off.

lol..seagirl..dancing is a good way to exercise...i don't know what nakedness or moonlight would contribute--except for fun--so go for it!

I'm on day 3 of calorie cycling.

Day 1 was 1900. (also rode 13 miles)

Day 2, 1497, no bike riding. 25 mintues of yoga. This was the lowest day of the week, and I felt fine.

Day 3, 2100, 12 mile bike ride. I thought I wasn't going to be able to eat that much, but I'm managing to so far. Biking makes me hungry!