Reverse Dieting is not Necessary. Here's why скачать в хорошем качестве

Reverse Dieting is not Necessary. Here's why

The Path to your Goal Physique: http://www.thinkeatlift.com/path/ Now that I'm at the end of my cut someone asked me if I'm going to do reverse dieting to move back into maintenance. I thought I'll give my full answer in a video. Greg also did a video on reverse dieting recently which you can watch here. So am I going to reverse diet? No, I won't. I'm not going to do the classic reverse diet where you increase you calorie intake by 100 every week. The reason for that is because it's not necessary. I want to move into maintenance as fast as possible not take a month to get there. I'll move straight to maintenance when I'm happy with my level of leanness. From what I've seen people do reverse dieting for 3 reasons: 1. To prevent rapid fat gain when they move into maintenance 2. To build metabolic capacity 3. To prevent binge eating after the diet is over In this article/video we'll address each of these points one by one and explain why Reverse Dieting may actually don't do those things. Alright let's get started. Does Reverse Dieting prevent rapid fat gain when you move into maintenance? If you think about it, the answer is obvious. If you bring your calories back up to maintenance, how are you going to store fat? Maintenance means eating just as many calories as your body burns for energy, not more, not less. So if there's not calorie surplus or deficit, your weight and body composition stays the same. I personally don't see how moving from a deficit into maintenance can lead to fat gain. It defines the very definition of maintenance. Now here's where I think people make the mistake. They think their maintenance calories are still the ones from before the diet. For example if they started cutting at 200 lbs and their maintenance was 3000 kcal, now that they weigh 185 lbs they think their maintenance is still 3000 kcal. Of course it doesn't work like that. Now that you weigh less you'll be burning fewer calories both at rest and during any kind of activity. Also, your leptin levels will likely be lower and your metabolic rate slightly decreased and these adaptations will probably never go back to pre-diet levels unless you regain the lost weight. Also because you're eating less food overall, the energy required for digestion and absorption is also decreased. The thermic effect of food is about 15% of the total calories consumed so if you're eating 3000 that is 450 compared to 2500 calories that have a thermic effect of only 375. And another thing you need to take into account is non-exercise activity thermogenesis (NEAT). Studies show that when we're in a deficit, our body tries to conserve energy by reducing our spontaneous movements such as fidgeting. And considering that some people can burn up to 1000 calories through NEAT you can imagine how much that can affect your maintenance. Oh and something else, everyone agrees that taking a full diet break meaning one or two weeks at maintenance is a good idea. But no one talk about reverse dieting your way to a diet break. Why not? Isn't it the same thing? You're going to eat at maintenance which means fat gain... of course not. So I think the reason people gain less fat when they reverse diet compared to moving straight into maintenance is because it's much easier for them to discover their new maintenance intake. If you increase your calorie intake by 100 every week, you can't miss it. On the other hand the people that jump straight into maintenance usually eat too much. They think their maintenance is the same as before and they actually go into a surplus. That's the reason I think people see rapid fat gain. Remember fat gain is only possible in a calorie surplus, not maintenance. But as I said in the beginning I believe increasing your calorie intake by 100 every week takes toooo long. In my opinion there's a better way.