BodyRecomposition Support Forums  

Go Back   BodyRecomposition Support Forums > General information > General diet questions
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Unread 09-24-2017, 06:28 AM
manofsteel manofsteel is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 10
Default Study shows diet break every 2 weeks causes more weight loss than regular dieting

In obese men at least. They took 2 groups of obese men and put them either on a continuous diet for 16 weeks (at 66% maintenance) or a diet of alternating 2 weeks on (66% maintenance) and 2 weeks off (maintenance). Dieters in the alternating group lost more weight. Thoughts?

EDIT: it looks like the intermittent group actually took 32 weeks, so same time in energy restriction (16 weeks) but just alternating between 2 weeks on, 2 weeks off.

https://www.nature.com/articles/ijo2...PhnTq1t4xZzv04

"The aim of this investigation was to compare changes in bodyweight, body composition, and REE in men with obesity inresponse to: (1) 16 weeks of continuous ER, or (2) an equivalentduration and magnitude of ER delivered intermittently asalternating 2-week blocks of ER and energy balance. In supportof the hypotheses, intermittent ER resulted in greater weight lossand greater (or a tendency for greater) fat loss, without greaterloss of FFM, than an equivalent‘dose’of continuous ER. Inaddition, despite greater weight loss, there was a significantlysmaller reduction in REE (adjusted for changes in FM and FFM) inthe INT than in the CON group, consistent with attenuation ofadaptive thermogenesis. Furthermore, although both groupsregained weight post-intervention, weight loss (reduction frombaseline) was, on average, 8.1 kg greater in the INT than CONgroup at the 6-month follow-up."

Last edited by manofsteel : 09-24-2017 at 06:38 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Unread 09-24-2017, 07:14 AM
BigPecsPeter BigPecsPeter is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 2,225
Default

Psychological advantage?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Unread 09-24-2017, 08:05 AM
lylemcdonald lylemcdonald is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 911
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigPecsPeter View Post
Psychological advantage?
Physiological as well.

And huh, 2 week diet break between periods of active dieting

Someone should write about that
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Unread 09-24-2017, 09:56 AM
manofsteel manofsteel is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 10
Default

I think the interesting thing was that ree was still much higher after 6 month follow up on the alternating group than on the continuous group. When adjusted for fat and fat free mass the continuous group was -770 and the intermittent group was -255. lol to be honest I don't know if those are calories or what those numbers represent but I think it is interesting that even after gaining weight back for 6 months the people that went on a continuous diet still had negative effects on their REE.

Is this a diet strategy that could or should be implemented? I feel like 2 weeks on, 2 weeks off would help adherence as long as people didn't go crazy in the 2 weeks off. And it seems to be better in the long run.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Unread 09-24-2017, 11:54 AM
alcahuetej's Avatar
alcahuetej alcahuetej is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 649
Default

I bet the intermittment group had better success keeping the weight off long term too.

Spending 32 weeks alternating might teach them better habits and how to actually eat at maintenance, and they get to slowly become accustomed to eating at their new weight.

As opposed to doing it all in one four month shot and then having no clue how to maintain that weight, and possibly binging after dieting for so long.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Unread 09-24-2017, 01:15 PM
manofsteel manofsteel is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 10
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alcahuetej View Post
I bet the intermittment group had better success keeping the weight off long term too.

Spending 32 weeks alternating might teach them better habits and how to actually eat at maintenance, and they get to slowly become accustomed to eating at their new weight.

As opposed to doing it all in one four month shot and then having no clue how to maintain that weight, and possibly binging after dieting for so long.
This is what I was thinking. It trains you to eat at maintenance which is an amazing skill to have post diet. Most obese people have no idea how to do this. Also increased REE (compared to 16 weeks straight dieting) is a huge plus as well.

Honestly this seems like a very good idea for dieting, though many people who need immediate results will probably be against it because it takes a bit longer.

Last edited by manofsteel : 09-24-2017 at 01:17 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Unread 09-24-2017, 05:56 PM
alcahuetej's Avatar
alcahuetej alcahuetej is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 649
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by manofsteel View Post
Honestly this seems like a very good idea for dieting, though many people who need immediate results will probably be against it because it takes a bit longer.
Not really a "bit longer", but double the time. Four months vs. eight months to reach your goal is a huge difference.

Which is obviously the main drawback of alternating dieting and maintenance this frequently.

I could see it being a great tool for people who are lower in body fat and only have a few lbs. of fat left to lose though. Assuming they're not up against it in terms of competing or some other deadline.

Last edited by alcahuetej : 09-24-2017 at 05:59 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Unread 09-24-2017, 07:18 PM
BEATMEOUTTAME's Avatar
BEATMEOUTTAME BEATMEOUTTAME is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 350
Default

One word. Leptin.
__________________
My Wild Ride to A great body in my 30s.

http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showthread.php?t=23215

Thank you Lyle. This website is a game changer once you understand the mechanisms behind fat loss/muscle gain.

Spun my wheels for years prior to finding this site.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Unread 09-24-2017, 08:06 PM
w1cked w1cked is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,497
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BEATMEOUTTAME View Post
One word. Leptin.
Another word: wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Unread 09-25-2017, 09:26 PM
BEATMEOUTTAME's Avatar
BEATMEOUTTAME BEATMEOUTTAME is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 350
Default

Actually it's correct. Thanks for your failed input. Even Lyle alluded to it dude.
__________________
My Wild Ride to A great body in my 30s.

http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showthread.php?t=23215

Thank you Lyle. This website is a game changer once you understand the mechanisms behind fat loss/muscle gain.

Spun my wheels for years prior to finding this site.

Last edited by BEATMEOUTTAME : 09-25-2017 at 09:35 PM. Reason: A
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.