New research about different diets
Options
Siege_Tank
Posts: 781 Member
I know this will probably be removed, but I just don't care. I keep hearing on MFP more and more information that flies in the face of what experience has taught me, and what sounds logical to me, and what I am reading from studies.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2819400/Why-crash-diets-GOOD-New-research-turns-accepted-dieting-wisdom-head.html
From the article:
Being overweight is what is making us unhealthy, and I would wager that losing weight in any way has GOT to be more healthy than remaining at or above the "overweight" or "obese" category. People diet, lose their motivation, and go right back to how they were eating before. I know, I've done it a bunch too.
You know what has worked, for me? Not eating as much. Putting the fork down and skipping meals is how I finally got my own body under 170 lbs consistently for more than a week. I drink my water and I eat my vitamins and I work out.
I don't know why this topic brings out so much venom in people, but it's time we stopped with the supposition and correlations and instead, honestly look for the truth, admitting we could be wrong about our ideas, and testing them to check for accuracy.
TL;DR: Eat less. As much as you can stand for as long as you can stand it. The data shows most people put weight back on, and then try again.
SMH
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2819400/Why-crash-diets-GOOD-New-research-turns-accepted-dieting-wisdom-head.html
From the article:
For decades, we've been told that when it comes to losing weight, slow and steady is the way to go. 'Rapid weight loss is unlikely to help you maintain a healthy weight long-term,' says the NHS website. 'And it comes with health risks.'
Losing weight any faster than 2lb a week has been linked to problems such as gallstones (because it upsets the balance of cholesterol in the body), malnutrition and fatigue due to the sudden drop in calories.
There is also the widely held view that crash dieters will put the weight back on more quickly because drastic food plans can't be sustained long term.
But research is turning this advice on its head. Last month, an Australian study in the Lancet showed rapid weight loss was more effective in the short term than a gradual, sustained approach.
One group of obese adults were put on a 12-week rapid weight loss programme with meal replacements of 450 to 800 calories a day (an average man needs 2,500 calories a day to maintain his weight. For a woman, it's 2,000 calories).
Another group was put on a gradual weight loss programme, cutting 500 calories per day.
More of those in the rapid weight loss group achieved the goal of losing 15 per cent of their weight.
When the researchers followed up the participants two years later, both groups had regained most of the weight they had lost. But there was no difference in how quickly they put it back on, which flies in the face of conventional thinking that losing weight too quickly means you'll put it back on just as fast.
'The idea that losing weight slowly is better for you is an old wives' tale,' says Professor Nick Finer, consultant endocrinologist and an expert in obesity at University College London Hospitals.
Being overweight is what is making us unhealthy, and I would wager that losing weight in any way has GOT to be more healthy than remaining at or above the "overweight" or "obese" category. People diet, lose their motivation, and go right back to how they were eating before. I know, I've done it a bunch too.
You know what has worked, for me? Not eating as much. Putting the fork down and skipping meals is how I finally got my own body under 170 lbs consistently for more than a week. I drink my water and I eat my vitamins and I work out.
I don't know why this topic brings out so much venom in people, but it's time we stopped with the supposition and correlations and instead, honestly look for the truth, admitting we could be wrong about our ideas, and testing them to check for accuracy.
TL;DR: Eat less. As much as you can stand for as long as you can stand it. The data shows most people put weight back on, and then try again.
SMH
-2
Replies
-
^ venom. Sticks and stones, love.
And keep arguing with data, that'll change it.-3 -
I was just reading this article on another website. My mind is open to this.0
-
Slow and steady finishes my goals.0
-
WyrdSyster wrote: »I was just reading this article on another website. My mind is open to this.
The weirdest part of reading it was when I got to the data about people who regained weight, but lost enough to go down a category, like from obese to overweight. People who had lost weight had less spurring of their arteries than people who had never lost that amount of weight.0 -
LiveLaughLoveEat1 wrote: »Siege_Tank wrote: »^ venom. Sticks and stones, love.
And keep arguing with data, that'll change it.
lol. That stuff you posted...bunch of rubbish
It's not rubbish. The newspaper article is based on a peer reviewed article and it actually is reiterating what most of the studies done before it had also found.
I don't know why people have so much trouble believing that their way is not The Only Healthy Way to lose weight. It's like someone is telling them that they HAVE TO eat less. No one is doing that.
OP- There were some other threads on this study and they didn't get deleted.
0 -
Siege,
I don't perceive you as telling other what to do, so we're good there. However, this information is not new (though I see this particular article was just published.
), and I believe it's been discussed on the forums before.
As for me, I tried the very low calorie diets, and all they did was taught me about depriving myself, helped me to validate a bad relationship with food, and just confirmed to me over and over again that I didn't have it in me to lose weight. I was also very hungry and very cranky. Of course, I lost weight, but by the time I was done dieting, I'd been so deprived and so hungry, didn't really make any behavioral changes, and therefore I went back to eating as much or more as I did when I was fat.
It took me almost a year to lose 44 pounds. I learned all I could about nutrition, my BMR and TDEE, weighed all food, learned how to property log food and exercise, and didn't deprive myself of a thing. I have been maintaining for almost a year now, the longest I ever have in my life. This, in my personal experience, is due to changing my relationship with food, learning how to eat foods in moderation, and coming to the solid realization that I am 100% in charge of my weight.
In other words, it really doesn't matter how fast either group put their weight back on, what matters is that people who put their weight back on did not make a lifestyle change in order to keep it off.
This comes from a person who would have at one time disagreed with everything I just wrote.0 -
That seemed hostile? Not "Please, get a clue"?emily_stew wrote: »Siege_Tank wrote: »^ venom. Sticks and stones, love.
And keep arguing with data, that'll change it.
You seem unreasonably hostile.
0 -
emily_stew wrote: »Siege_Tank wrote: »^ venom. Sticks and stones, love.
And keep arguing with data, that'll change it.
You seem unreasonably hostile.
I agree. He'd written something asking for no rudeness, and he changed it to that. Wow.0 -
Which peer reviewed article?WalkingAlong wrote: »LiveLaughLoveEat1 wrote: »Siege_Tank wrote: »^ venom. Sticks and stones, love.
And keep arguing with data, that'll change it.
lol. That stuff you posted...bunch of rubbish
It's not rubbish. The newspaper article is based on a peer reviewed article and it actually is reiterating what most of the studies done before it had also found.
I don't know why people have so much trouble believing that their way is not The Only Healthy Way to lose weight. It's like someone is telling them that they HAVE TO eat less. No one is doing that.
OP- There were some other threads on this study and they didn't get deleted.
0 -
Winner!!
In other words, it really doesn't matter how fast either group put their weight back on, what matters is that people who put their weight back on did not make a lifestyle change in order to keep it off.
That seems to be the conclusion that objective minds keep coming to. Over time, new evidence will certainly find some of these assumptions in error, and that’s a good thing because science is about refining our understanding of the truth.
My fiancee doesn't lose weight like I do, she eats totally different than I and there are some ways that we are biologically similar, and others in which we are not. Because we have different genetics. If how we think and act are different, then there can be no one size fits all advice for how a person can keep weight off and successfully make the lifestyle change.
It's each person's job to discover how their own body works, and how to make that work with their life. I'm short, I have a desk job, and I loathe cardio, so I have to eat less. I could eat a lot more, but I'd have to move a lot more to justify that, and I don't have the time right now.
Dang lifestyle. Now it's my job to fix it, and change it into what I want it to look like. The only easy day was yesterday..
Loved your post, I wish I could give kudo points to ya
0 -
-
I'm a winner? Well, shoot, please tell the next lottery ticket I buy that I'm the winner.Siege_Tank wrote: »
Winner!!
In other words, it really doesn't matter how fast either group put their weight back on, what matters is that people who put their weight back on did not make a lifestyle change in order to keep it off.
That seems to be the conclusion that objective minds keep coming to. Over time, new evidence will certainly find some of these assumptions in error, and that’s a good thing because science is about refining our understanding of the truth.
My fiancee doesn't lose weight like I do, she eats totally different than I and there are some ways that we are biologically similar, and others in which we are not. Because we have different genetics. If how we think and act are different, then there can be no one size fits all advice for how a person can keep weight off and successfully make the lifestyle change.
It's each person's job to discover how their own body works, and how to make that work with their life. I'm short, I have a desk job, and I loathe cardio, so I have to eat less. I could eat a lot more, but I'd have to move a lot more to justify that, and I don't have the time right now.
Dang lifestyle. Now it's my job to fix it, and change it into what I want it to look like. The only easy day was yesterday..
Loved your post, I wish I could give kudo points to ya
0 -
emily_stew wrote: »Siege_Tank wrote: »^ venom. Sticks and stones, love.
And keep arguing with data, that'll change it.
You seem unreasonably hostile.emily_stew wrote: »WalkingAlong wrote: »
That seemed hostile? Not "Please, get a clue"?emily_stew wrote: »Siege_Tank wrote: »^ venom. Sticks and stones, love.
And keep arguing with data, that'll change it.
You seem unreasonably hostile.
Yes, OP kind of came out swinging. Edit: Or on the defensive, would be a better way to describe it.
Because I have tried asking for *CONSTRUCTIVE* feedback on some stuff I just read, and to be perfectly honest, I don't trust myself when it comes to making descisions on what I believe.. because I've been so, so SO wrong in the past.
And the people on these boards, some of them anyway, proved my point, the first response was "Get a clue". Cause that's constructive. And then the rest of the thread is a discussion on whether or not that was rude.
Humans suck.
-1 -
As am I. Granted. My approach, after all these years flies in the face of MFP mantra. (13 years at maintenance so far...)LiveLaughLoveEat1 wrote: »I'm going to keep eating the food that I like, tracking my calories, eating at a deficit, drinking my water and going on daily walks. talk to the people here on MFP that have lost wait and kept it off for more than 2 years. Please, get a clue.
Perhaps, just perhaps, there's more than one way to do this... Perhaps it's not about how we eat to lose, but what we learn along the journey. Heck, that's probably true with most things in life.
0 -
Which peer reviewed article?WalkingAlong wrote: »LiveLaughLoveEat1 wrote: »Siege_Tank wrote: »^ venom. Sticks and stones, love.
And keep arguing with data, that'll change it.
lol. That stuff you posted...bunch of rubbish
It's not rubbish. The newspaper article is based on a peer reviewed article and it actually is reiterating what most of the studies done before it had also found.
I don't know why people have so much trouble believing that their way is not The Only Healthy Way to lose weight. It's like someone is telling them that they HAVE TO eat less. No one is doing that.
OP- There were some other threads on this study and they didn't get deleted.
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/landia/article/PIIS2213-8587(14)70200-1/abstract0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 913 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions