'Cheat Days' - Myth or Fact?

[KaraCooks]

If you are on a low grain diet with a significant calorie deficit, then your body can easily access stored fat for energy. In other words, you are not on a calorie deficit because your fat that is being burned is making up the difference.

If you are on a high grain diet with a significant calorie deficit, then your body can not easily access stored fat for energy. You will feel like you are starving, because you are.

Um ... what?

I went to the link - it's all about selling a "bar" to get "proper nutrition". Find me a source that isn't about selling a product and I'll consider what they have to say.

 

[socialgym]

i think the worst cheat day i've seen was a MMA fighter in this documentary.

He would eat on a daily basis of like 20 vitamin and supplement pills, this special bok choy, a multigrain bread, and other super lean/ vitamin filled stuff that normal people wouldn't consider food.

Then on his cheat day he would eat a dozen of krispy kreme doughnuts in one sitting.

So i guess its just balance??

 

[KaraCooks]

Then on his cheat day he would eat a dozen of krispy kreme doughnuts in one sitting.

Urk. I like Krispy Kremes when they're fresh and hot, but one is my limit. I would serious puke if I ate a dozen. Bleah.

 

[Charlie Golf]

At this point, with the information given, telling her to eat more calories is quite simply, bad advice.

I disagree. But we will simply have to agree to disagree. What I have done is given her "different" advice.

The body weight x14 methodology is, IMHO, over-simplified because metabolism is not simply a factor of body weight alone. FWIW, I have also seen anything from body-weight x10-12 for women and x14-16 for men to calculate "minimum" calories. I've also seen these numbers referenced as both no-exercise and moderate-exercise factors. There just doesn't seem to be a lot of consistency.

But heck, even if her goal is to lose 10 lbs from her original weight, her minimum, caloric intake using weight x14 would be 1484 calories to maintain her weight. That's at the "new" weight.

Bodies need additional calories to fuel exercise and maintain normal metabolic function. If those exercise calories are replaced 1 for 1, weight loss would be negligible if any, and I'm not recommending that. Assuming though, she's burning 1750-3500 calories per week through exercise, at 1578 calories (from my post below) she'd be adding less than 100 calories and still be at a calorie deficit.

Drastically cutting calories will definitely lead to rapid weight loss. I'm not arguing that. But it will only work for a certain period of time and then the body will begin to physiologically rebel. Like I said, I know this from first-hand experience. A person who has a long way to go to their goal weight may not see this occur as quickly as someone who is in the "red zone."

Of course, we can only go off what she posted originally and seeing that, I am led to believe that her diet was more imbalanced (carb-intensive) and too low in protein than anything else. I have a feeling it was more of eating too much of the wrong stuff vs. simply eating too much.

My real issue is that none of the above "formulas" take into account all variables which have determinant effects on one's metabolism.

A 4'11" person who weighs 120 lbs and a 5'11" person weighing the same require different caloric intakes to maintain their body-weight. Likewise, a 4'11" 25-year old and a 4'11" 30-year old will also require different caloric intake for the same.

Generally speaking, all other variables constant, the taller a person is for a given weight, the higher their metabolism. Likewise, we know males on average have higher metabolisms than females. Conversely, the older or lighter a person is, the slower their metabolism tends to be.

I will maintain again, that at 1200 calories, should she begin to "bonk," is not hunger-satiated, or ceases to lose weight, that she reconsider utilizing a different method to calculate caloric needs.



Oh, one thing we can agree on though is the single Krispy Kreme. One is ok! More =