Worked example: 1,800 kcal now, 2,600 at maintenance
| Week | Daily calories | Added so far |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1,900 | +100 |
| 2 | 2,000 | +200 |
| 3 | 2,100 | +300 |
| 4 | 2,200 | +400 |
| 5 | 2,300 | +500 |
| 6 | 2,400 | +600 |
| 7 | 2,500 | +700 |
| 8 | 2,600 | +800 |
Eight weeks at 100 kcal a week. Doubling the step to 200 halves it to four. The schedule is not the interesting part — the interesting part is that most people finishing a cut have no plan at all for this phase and simply stop tracking, which is how a hard-won deficit becomes a fast regain.
What a reverse diet is, and what the evidence supports
A reverse diet is adding calories back gradually after a period of restriction, rather than in one step. The strong version of the claim — that a slow climb repairs a damaged metabolism and lets you eat far more than before at the same weight — is not well supported.
What is real: total daily energy expenditure does fall during a cut by more than the weight loss alone predicts. Part of that is a smaller body needing fewer calories; part is adaptive, including a genuine drop in spontaneous movement. That component recovers when energy is plentiful again, but it recovers to roughly where it should be, not to somewhere higher.
What is oversold: the idea that reverse dieting produces a permanently higher maintenance. It does not. What it produces is a controlled transition in which you find out where your maintenance actually is, week by week, instead of guessing.
That is worth doing for two ordinary reasons. First, glycogen and water return with the carbohydrate, and several kilograms can appear on the scale in a fortnight. If you have not been warned, that reads as fat regain and often triggers another cut. Second, appetite after a long deficit is not a reliable guide, and a structured number is easier to follow than an instruction to eat normally.
How big should the step be?
Between 50 and 200 kcal a week for most people. Smaller steps take longer and give a clearer signal about where maintenance actually is; larger steps get you out of a deficit faster, which matters if the cut has been long. If you have been dieting for months and are underweight, tired or losing performance, the correct answer may be to go straight back to maintenance rather than to schedule a climb at all.
Methodology
Weeks = ceiling of (maintenance − current) ÷ step. Each week's target is the current intake plus the step multiplied by the week number, capped at maintenance so the last week lands exactly on it rather than overshooting. If maintenance is at or below current intake, there is nothing to reverse and the page says so. Schedules longer than 52 weeks are truncated: a plan longer than a year is not a plan.
Limitations
The maintenance figure you enter is the weak link, and it is probably out of date. If you have just finished a cut, you are lighter than you were, so your maintenance is lower than it was; and the adaptive component means it is temporarily lower still. Work it out fresh at your current weight with the maintenance calculator, and expect the real figure to drift upward over the weeks as the adaptive component recovers.
This page does not predict your weight during the climb. It cannot: glycogen and water return with the carbohydrate and can add two to three kilograms in the first fortnight with no fat gain at all. Weigh daily, take a weekly average, and judge the trend after three weeks rather than reacting to the first jump.
None of this is a diet plan for a clinical situation. Returning to normal eating after prolonged severe restriction is a medical process with real risks, and a schedule generated by a web page is not the tool for it.
This is a fitness estimate, not medical advice, and not a substitute for a professional who can actually see you. If you have any history of disordered eating, this whole category of tool is best used with a dietitian rather than alone.