2,634
Views
2
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

Flexible vs. rigid dieting in resistance-trained individuals seeking to optimize their physiques: A randomized controlled trial

, , & ORCID Icon
 

Abstract

Abstract

Background

The purpose of this study was to compare a flexible vs. rigid diet on weight loss and subsequent weight regain in resistance-trained (RT) participants in a randomized, parallel group design.

Methods

Twenty-three males and females (25.6 ± 6.1 yrs; 170 ± 8.1 cm; 75.4 ± 10.3 kg) completed the 20-week intervention (consisting of a 10-week diet phase and a 10-week post-diet phase). Participants were randomized to a flexible diet (FLEX) comprised of non-specific foods or a rigid diet (RIGID) comprised of specific foods. Participants adhered to an ~20%kcal reduction during the first 10-weeks of the intervention and were instructed to eat ad libitum for the final 10-weeks. Body composition and resting metabolic rate were assessed 5 times: (baseline, 5, 10 [end of diet phase], 16, and 20 weeks).

Results

During the 10-week diet phase, both groups significantly reduced bodyweight (FLEX: baseline = 76.1 ± 8.4kg, post-diet = 73.5 ± 8.8 kg, ▲2.6 kg; RIGID: baseline = 74.9 ± 12.2 kg, post-diet = 71.9 ± 11.7 kg, ▲3.0 kg, p < 0.001); fat mass (FLEX: baseline = 14.8 ± 5.7 kg, post-diet = 12.5 ± 5.0 kg, ▲2.3 kg; RIGID: baseline = 18.1 ± 6.2 kg, post-diet = 14.9 ± 6.5 kg, ▲3.2 kg p < 0.001) and body fat% (FLEX: baseline = 19.4 ± 8.5%, post-diet = 17.0 ± 7.1%, ▲2.4%; RIGID: baseline = 24.0 ± 6.2%, post-diet = 20.7 ± 7.1%, ▲3.3%; p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the two groups for any variable during the diet phase. During the post-diet phase, a significant diet x time interaction (p < 0.001) was observed for FFM with the FLEX group gaining a greater amount of FFM (+1.7 kg) in comparison with the RIGID group (−0.7 kg).

Conclusions

A flexible or rigid diet strategy is equally effective for weight loss during a caloric restriction diet in free-living, RT individuals. While post-diet FFM gains were greater in the FLEX group, there were no significant differences in the amount of time spent in resistance and aerobic exercise modes nor were there any significant differences in protein and total caloric intakes between the two diet groups. In the absence of a clear physiological rationale for increases in FFM, in addition to the lack of a standardized diet during the post-diet phase, we refrain from attributing the increases in FFM in the FLEX group to their diet assignment during the diet phase of the investigation. We recommend future research investigate additional physiological and psychological effects of flexible diets and weight regain in lean individuals.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Katie Coles, MS, RD for her contributions to the diet plans for the rigid diet group. We would also like to thank Sohee Lee, MS, for donating her e-book to the participants in the flexible dieting group. We had previously submitted this manuscript for pubilication to the Journal of Human Nutrition and Food Sciences, but withdrew our paper and our consent for publication in that journal on January 11, 2021.

Authors’ contributions

LAC conceived the study, participated in its design and coordination, collected data, and assisted in the drafting of the manuscript, and approved the final version. DTA collected data, participated in its coordination, and approved the final version. GER assisted in the drafting of the manuscript and approved of the final version. BIC conceived the study, interpreted the data, drafted the manuscript, and approved of the final version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported by the Biolayne Foundation Research Grant

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

All subjects provided oral and written informed consent before their enrolment. Procedures were performed in accordance with the latest revised Declaration of Helsinki (2013). The University of South Florida Institutional Review Board approved the study (Pro00021377).

Consent for publication

Not applicable

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.