There's no seven-day version of this, and anyone offering one is working from a model of the reward system that doesn't hold up.
What follows is what the literature suggests when enjoyment has flattened — ordered by leverage, honest about timescale, and clear about where the boundary is.
Start with the shape of the problem
If enjoyment has faded, the useful framing isn't an empty tank. It's a setpoint that moved.
Reward function is normally held inside a range by opposing processes. Under sustained load those processes stop restoring it, and the system re-stabilizes lower — a chronic deviation of the reward setpoint. Everything then gets measured against the new reference, which is why good things stop registering as good.
That framing sets the expectations. Movement is possible. It's slow, roughly proportional to how long the load ran, and it shows up as drift rather than a switch flipping.
Sleep, first and unglamorously
It's the highest-leverage item and the least interesting, which is why it gets skipped.
Sleep deprivation is associated with downregulation of striatal dopamine receptors. If sleep has been poor for weeks, it caps everything else — behavioural changes layered on top of a sleep deficit tend to underperform for reasons that have nothing to do with the behaviour.
If only one thing changes, make it this one.
Change structure, not volume
The instinct is to cut totals. The literature points at shape instead.
Make one unpredictable reward predictable. Variable-ratio schedules train hardest. Converting a single frequent one into something scheduled does more than deleting several predictable ones — the schedule is the variable, not the hours.
Put effort in front of something. Effort-gated rewards behave differently from frictionless ones. Small friction buys most of the benefit; the point isn't difficulty, it's that something preceded the payoff.
Reduce frequency before duration. Repetition trains the opposing process. Forty small hits cost more than one large one.
Keep the things detox tells you to cut
This is where most attempts go wrong.
Exercise, cooking, music, people, being outside, work that is hard and yours — these are effortful rewards, and in a load model they're protective, not indulgent. A protocol that removes them alongside the feeds is stripping the half that was helping.
If your baseline is already low, austerity adds load. Restriction is not neutral.
Expect drift, and measure direction
The failure mode isn't giving up on day 2. It's reaching week 3, feeling 20% better rather than restored, and reading that as failure.
Twenty percent in three weeks, sustained, is the shape of a setpoint moving. It doesn't feel like a result because you can't perceive a reference point shifting from inside it — you only notice the level. Which is precisely the argument for tracking something rather than relying on how the week felt.
That's what Myo does: whether load is accumulating or clearing, how much of your day arrives unearned, which rewards are unpredictable. Direction, over weeks. The model is published, mechanism by mechanism, with its sources.
The boundary, stated plainly
Some flatness isn't a loaded reward system.
Persistent loss of enjoyment is a recognised clinical symptom — anhedonia — and a core feature of depression. It also appears in other conditions and as a side effect of some medications. It cannot be distinguished from the inside, and no tracker or article can distinguish it either.
If the flatness has lasted more than a couple of weeks, covers everything rather than specific things, or comes with hopelessness, changes in sleep or appetite, or thoughts of hurting yourself — talk to a doctor or a mental health professional. That is the highest-value action available, well above anything on this page. If you're in immediate distress, contact your local emergency services or a crisis line where you are.
Getting the mechanism right matters mostly because it tells you where to put your effort. Sometimes it tells you the answer isn't a habit change at all, and that's a useful answer too.