Yo-Yo Dieting: The Trap of Extreme Calorie Restriction

Losing weight is easy; keeping it off is the impossible business

A 30-year-old man was out of breath climbing his home stairs. He weighed 87 kg. He started an extreme diet and lost 20 kg in two months, reaching 59 kg. He maintained that weight for ten years. Now he hovers around 70 kg and prepares for another cycle. His case is not an exception; it is the pattern. The discussion generated by his testimony—over a hundred responses accumulated over years—maps what works, what doesn't, and what few want to hear: crash dieting is a loan with interest.

The low-calorie diet loop

The dominant narrative among those who have slimmed down and regained weight is always the same. First, the hypocaloric diet: 1,400 calories, zero carbs, unlimited protein. It works. The kilos drop. The problem is what happens next. "I already lost nearly 14 kg in 3 months once," admits one participant, now nearly 25 years old, trying again "forever." This phrase contains the full diagnosis: the diet is not a habit change, it is a shock operation with an expiration date.

Some state it bluntly: making someone lose weight on 1,300, 1,400, or 1,500 calorie diets is a crime. The argument is that such a deficit cannot be sustained long-term, muscle mass is lost along the way, and metabolism adapts downward. When returning to "normal" eating, the body gains weight more easily than before. A poisoned gift.

What those who haven't regained weight say

The counterargument exists and has names, figures, and methods. A participant who is 1.90 meters tall went from 95 kg to nearly 120 kg after turning 40. He tried the paleo diet, began losing two kilograms a month, and two and a half years later stayed at 85 kg. "I see this as my lifelong diet," he assures. His practical problem, he says, was that he could not tolerate hunger.

Another case: 1.78 meters, 81 kg, three years of gym training. His thesis is that muscle allows you to eat more and that exercise has worked best against his anxiety, which caused his overweight status. A third person went from 111.4 kg at age 27 to 88.25 kg, aiming for 70 kg. His conclusion is that being obese is "like being drunk or addicted": until you accept it yourself, there is no cure.

Insulin, sugar, and the growing narrative

The trend gaining most traction in the conversation blames refined carbohydrates and insulin resistance. The repeated explanation: when young, the body processes sugar efficiently; with age and abuse, it becomes resistant, requires more insulin, and this hormone prevents fat burning and slows metabolism. Hence, each year it costs more effort and motivation to move.

They insist satiety comes from fat, not protein. Those who eat mostly protein feel hungry; those who eat fat go hours without cravings. And exercise, they add, barely helps with weight loss: little energy is expended. It serves to feel good, not to compensate for the diet.

Alcohol, scales, and calculation traps

In the chapter of myths, one exchange is worth noting. A participant argues wine does not cause weight gain but beer does, not due to ethanol but due to carbohydrates. Another responds that alcohol is metabolized as fat in the liver and stays there until burned, which is not a problem if not consumed daily. The practical conclusion: if going out, choose wine over beer. Debatable, but that's the consensus.

Regardless, the scale is a poor measure. Body fat percentage provides much better information. The US Navy method, using a simple tape measure, is the most cited. One participant calculates 19%.

---

No one disputes that weight is regained. What remains unresolved is why, knowing this, people still start with crash diets instead of habit changes. Perhaps because the breathlessness on the stairs scares more than the ten-year graph.