The core principle is simple: Eating big for 14 days, then small for 14 days, is better than eating medium for 28 days--you end up with more muscle and less fat. Although Akerfeldt says the regimen works for him, ABCDE remains scientifically untested. Even so, the principle is powerful and warrants exploration. Not only does it agree with the idea that two weeks of dieting followed by 2-4 weeks of less-restricted eating can defend against a drop in metabolism, but it also raises the possibility of a muscle-preserving effect.

One line of evidence comes from a study in which all subjects exercised three times a day for 40 minutes at a time and were put on either high- or low-calorie diet plans. Although lean young men were used in both groups, the results are expected to apply to women. With both diets, body composition changes were approximately 2:1 in favor of muscle over fat. In other words, test subjects lost more fat by dieting than they gained by overeating, and gained more muscle by overeating than they lost during dieting (3).

Questionging the Days
What if the subjects had alternated 12 days of overeating with 12 days of dieting, instead of doing just one or the other? From the evidence, one predicts they would've gained 2 pounds of muscle and lost 2.6 pounds of fat--a huge improvement for just 24 days of food manipulation but no weight training (just aerobics). Such an effect would be consistent with the idea that percentage bodyfat can best be improved by cycling calories about once every 14 days.

No one knows for sure if 14 days is the optimal period of low-calorie eating, but it seems about right for less-restrained eating. In women, eating more food makes insulin, testosterone and IGF-1 levels rise progressively to peak in about 15 days, after which they mysteriously decline (4). This suggests that it takes about 14 days to increase (or perhaps restore) levels of muscle-preserving hormones in response to a change in eating habits. As a result, it might follow that women should take 2-4 weeks off from dieting now and then to regain levels of muscle-preserving hormones that have otherwise fallen due to dieting.

Following the healthy two-week low-cal plan outlined on page 100 appears to be an effective alternative to continuous dieting. After being "good" for two weeks, a period of more permissive eating (see above) is a welcome respite and gives you a sense of accomplishment, besides restoring muscle-preserving hormones and rate of metabolism. Even so, dietitians caution that long-term changes in diet and exercise habits are needed for sustainable fat loss. Always consult your doctor before beginning a diet or other fat-loss program.

REFERENCES
1. Rossner, S. Intermittent vs. continuous VLCD therapy in obesity treatment. International Journal of Obesity and Related Metabolic Disorders 22(2):190-192, 1998.
2. Sports supplement review, 3rd issue, 261-286. Golden, CO: Mile High Publishing, 1997.
3. Jebb, S.A., et al. Changes in macronutrient balance during over- and underfeeding assessed by 12-day continuous whole-body calorimetry. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 64:259-266, 1996.
4. Forbes, G.B., et al. Hormonal response to overfeeding. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 49:608-611, 1989.

Continued Reading:
Metabolism 101
Arms in Balance
Quick Chicken Tacos
1  |  2    

| Print Page | Email to Friend