Finding The Balance Between Structure And Flexibility (Meal Plans vs Flexible Dieting)
A common practice in nutrition coaching is to focus on creating the “optimal nutritional intervention” in order to fulfill a clients desired goal. It’s typical for coaches in the current space to take two main approaches 1) Flexible dieting approach (if it fits your macros) or 2) creating meal plans so that the “guess-work” is taken out for the client. This poses an important question, which approach is better (short-term vs long term?). In this blog I will be discussing both pros and cons of flexible dieting and meal plans. Additionally I will be integrating how we can use a blend of both approaches may be utilized.
A case for flexible dieting?
What is flexible dieting?
Flexible dieting is setting a client with a specific number of calories and macronutrients in order to manipulate energy balance to either gain weight, lose weight or maintain bodyweight. The rationale behind this approach is to show individuals that a calories in calories out (CICO) will allow you to achieve your goals and avoid a restrictive approach to dieting via manipulation of energy balance. It’s important to note, if you ever plan on losing bodyfat or gaining weight we must follow the rules of thermogenesis (i.e energy balance).
Here’s a photo describing how we can manipulate energy balance in a simplistic manner.
Calories burned (Influenced by)
Hormones
Gut Health
Occupation
Neat (non exercise activity thermogenesis) (i.e walking)
Calories In (influenced by)
Socioeconomic status
Food environment
Social Circle
etc.
Pros:
Allows flexibility to consume the foods you want
Gives your client a sense of autonomy and independence to make choices for themselves
Generally allows the client to develop a better relationship with food (eliminates the idea of avoiding good and bad foods)
Beneficial approach for individuals who frequent social settings
Shows the client that at the end of the day weight loss is a result of a caloric deficit (whereas some nutritionist claim sugar or processed food is the sole reason for their weight gain)
Increased consumption of sugar tends to be easy to overeat and cause a positive energy balance but when calories are equated body composition will inevitably change.
Cons:
Lacks structure if you strictly provide macro/calorie recommendations only
Potentially gives too much autonomy and independence depending on the client you work with
May take longer for an athlete to achieve their weight loss goals
A case for meal plans?
What is a meal plan approach?
The idea that a coach will create an entire meal by meal plan in which you follow exactly to the plan in order to reach the targeted macronutrient and calorie breakdown.
Example of a meal plan: Where every meal is structured and no form of flexibility.
Pros:
Take the guess-work out of what and when to eat foods
Likely works in the short term for your weight loss goals
You will understand most of the foods that you should likely be consuming to create a caloric deficit
Cons:
Too much structure will not allow for a balanced approach to nutrition
Very restrictive and may worsen your relationship with food
Doesn’t teach the client how to be independent with decision making
Foster’s dependency on the coach
Once the client leaves the coach after a transformation, the likelihood that the client regains the weight they started at is high
Now that I have stated pros/cons to both approaches, which one do we choose?
The answer lies in the middle, when it comes to nutrition we need to emphasize an educational approach. In my mind, it is our job as coaches to teach and create successful systems and habits for our clients to ensure long term success and foster autonomy/independence. Now that I have talked about this, how do we accomplish it?
Taken from “The Muscle and Strength Pyramid (Nutrition)
By:
Eric Helms PHD, CSCS
Andy Morgan BS
Andrea Valdez MS
Teaching utilizing the pyramid:
Energy Balance, this is the number one rule when it comes to weight loss, it doesn't matter what diet you perform we need to find an approach that you can adhere to and sustain a caloric deficit (meaning you burn more calories than you consume).
Macronutrients, (Proteins, Carbohydrates, Fat) the priority here is to make sure you take in adequate levels of protein based on your goals and body compositions (ideally 1g per lb of bodyweight). When it comes to carbohydrates/fat these can be utilized interchangeably. Adherence comes first, some clients prefer higher fat lower carbs to create their energy deficit and some are the latter. Typical nutrition coaches will make a one size fits all approach and teach the client what's “optimal” but we need to understand it isn't optimal if the client won't adhere.
Micronutrients, once the athlete can adhere to energy balance and macro targets. We can go a step further and assess deficiencies in certain vitamins/minerals. Generally the further you get up the pyramid the less important it is. I am not saying that micronutrients doesn’t matter but what I would like to convey is that if we can’t create an energy deficit than focusing on micronutrients ahead of those, the plan likely will not lead to the results your client desires.
Meal timing/supplements, in nutrition, I generally will only teach these principles to high level athletes who have checked all the boxes that I discussed above.
To wrap this up, the goal should be to teach clients in these exact phases and educate them on how to structure their day (meal prep, food lists, situationally correct food choices) and understand that clients don’t need to restrict or demonize foods in order to achieve their goals.
Understand that educating someone to make better choices with food while maintaining a balanced lifestyle will likely not be linear in terms of progress but fostering long term independence will be key for success down the road.
If you want to learn how I create sustainable habits and systems to ensure your success with nutrition feel free to fill out the contact information on the website!
