What every weight loss study needs - food for thought

gmallan

Just read this article and I think it makes a really good point about what is missing from a lot of diet and weight loss studies. I think it would be really interesting to compare the degree of misery or conversely enjoyability of particular weight loss diets with the likelihood of weight re-gain or ability to maintain long term.

http://www.weightymatters.ca/2015/03/the-diet-score-what-every-weight-loss.html

Thoughts?

hsmith0930

The problem is how subjective it is. Obviously people can report that they were miserable, but what is miserable to one person (Oh my god, I can't have BREAD?!) is nothing to someone else (Who cares about bread? I get my steak and cheese, I'm good). Not everyone likes the same types of foods, and generally "diets" concentrate on cutting some type of food (or many types of food) out. That's why some people can live on Atkin's for the rest of their lives and others are actually miserable. Some people can be vegan for health and love it (or morals, whatevs) and others would hate to not have some meat in their diet.

The key isn't to just avoid all "diets" which is generally the consensus here, but to find a way of eating that will be sustainable FOR YOU. Whether that is a straight caloric deficit with nothing off-limits, low carb, low fat, etc, doesn't really matter in the long run.

TimothyFish

Well, the misery isn't long-term, so I don't think the degree of misery matters. Once a person reaches their goal, they will switch to something without misery. Sustainable weight loss requires a successful transition to maintenance and a lifestyle change that makes it easier to stay at maintenance. Once in maintenance, the people willing to put up with the most pain are the ones who will be successful.

gmallan

TimothyFish wrote: »

Well, the misery isn't long-term, so I don't think the degree of misery matters. Once a person reaches their goal, they will switch to something without misery. Sustainable weight loss requires a successful transition to maintenance and a lifestyle change that makes it easier to stay at maintenance. Once in maintenance, the people willing to put up with the most pain are the ones who will be successful.

So you think that you can't lose weight without misery and that maintenance will require a certain degree of pain also?

Why can't your maintenance 'diet' just be substanitally the same as your weight loss 'diet' with some additional calories?

gmallan

hsmith0930 wrote: »

The problem is how subjective it is. Obviously people can report that they were miserable, but what is miserable to one person (Oh my god, I can't have BREAD?!) is nothing to someone else (Who cares about bread? I get my steak and cheese, I'm good). Not everyone likes the same types of foods, and generally "diets" concentrate on cutting some type of food (or many types of food) out. That's why some people can live on Atkin's for the rest of their lives and others are actually miserable. Some people can be vegan for health and love it (or morals, whatevs) and others would hate to not have some meat in their diet.

The key isn't to just avoid all "diets" which is generally the consensus here, but to find a way of eating that will be sustainable FOR YOU. Whether that is a straight caloric deficit with nothing off-limits, low carb, low fat, etc, doesn't really matter in the long run.

I still think that the correlation between weight re-gain and degree of misery in the population would be interesting. I suspect there would be some diets that would generate a higher degree of misery overall (e.g. a very low calorie diet). You could also look at the data from an individual perspective (whether the individual's score correlated with weight re-gain for that individual).

jgnatca

Well the memory of the misery might keep someone from trying again.

What I think is missing from the studies is empirical record of intake rather than depending on self reporting.

Mr_Knight

gmallan wrote: »

TimothyFish wrote: »

Well, the misery isn't long-term, so I don't think the degree of misery matters. Once a person reaches their goal, they will switch to something without misery. Sustainable weight loss requires a successful transition to maintenance and a lifestyle change that makes it easier to stay at maintenance. Once in maintenance, the people willing to put up with the most pain are the ones who will be successful.

So you think that you can't lose weight without misery and that maintenance will require a certain degree of pain also?

Why can't your maintenance 'diet' just be substanitally the same as your weight loss 'diet' with some additional calories?

Your maintenance level at maintenance weight *is* a weight loss diet at your original weight.

pollypocket1021

The use of the word "misery" here is disconcerting. I have seen misery. I have seen anguish. This is not it.

With that said, relative degree of inconvenience might be a nice number. With a high enough sample size, that would become significant. However, most people could simply read about the methods and probably figure out at first glance whether it is worth the trouble without any type of indicator.

gmallan

Mr_Knight wrote: »

gmallan wrote: »

TimothyFish wrote: »

Well, the misery isn't long-term, so I don't think the degree of misery matters. Once a person reaches their goal, they will switch to something without misery. Sustainable weight loss requires a successful transition to maintenance and a lifestyle change that makes it easier to stay at maintenance. Once in maintenance, the people willing to put up with the most pain are the ones who will be successful.

So you think that you can't lose weight without misery and that maintenance will require a certain degree of pain also?

Why can't your maintenance 'diet' just be substanitally the same as your weight loss 'diet' with some additional calories?

Your maintenance level at maintenance weight *is* a weight loss diet at your original weight.

Depends on the diet

tomatoey

jgnatca wrote: »

Well the memory of the misery might keep someone from trying again.

What I think is missing from the studies is empirical record of intake rather than depending on self reporting.

sometimes they use a small sample and keep them onsite the whole time

gmallan

pollypocket1021 wrote: »

The use of the word "misery" here is disconcerting. I have seen misery. I have seen anguish. This is not it.

With that said, relative degree of inconvenience might be a nice number. With a high enough sample size, that would become significant. However, most people could simply read about the methods and probably figure out at first glance whether it is worth the trouble without any type of indicator.

Yep, I agree that misery probably isn't the right term although these things are relative

gmallan

jgnatca wrote: »

Well the memory of the misery might keep someone from trying again.

What I think is missing from the studies is empirical record of intake rather than depending on self reporting.

Yep that's a problem with any diet self-reported studies. The studies on how much people under-estimate their food intake are pretty damming

Mr_Knight

.

50452

Misery is subject to gradation. You can be a bit miserable because you are hungry for a few hours.

I think if they use large enough subject groups (1000+), the study results is far more valid.

TimothyFish

gmallan wrote: »

TimothyFish wrote: »

Well, the misery isn't long-term, so I don't think the degree of misery matters. Once a person reaches their goal, they will switch to something without misery. Sustainable weight loss requires a successful transition to maintenance and a lifestyle change that makes it easier to stay at maintenance. Once in maintenance, the people willing to put up with the most pain are the ones who will be successful.

So you think that you can't lose weight without misery and that maintenance will require a certain degree of pain also?

Why can't your maintenance 'diet' just be substanitally the same as your weight loss 'diet' with some additional calories?

Because tracking calories will eventually get tedious for most people. While calorie restriction works best for weight loss, exercise works best for maintenance. People who are putting in 5 hours of moderately intense exercise or two and a half hours of vigorous exercise per week are better able to maintain their weight, even though it may involve some pain.

ahoy_m8

jgnatca wrote: »

Well the memory of the misery might keep someone from trying again.

What I think is missing from the studies is empirical record of intake rather than depending on self reporting.

Excellent points.

SergeantSausage

Our lives are waaaaay too easy when dieting is "misery", right?

hsmith0930

gmallan wrote: »

hsmith0930 wrote: »

The problem is how subjective it is. Obviously people can report that they were miserable, but what is miserable to one person (Oh my god, I can't have BREAD?!) is nothing to someone else (Who cares about bread? I get my steak and cheese, I'm good). Not everyone likes the same types of foods, and generally "diets" concentrate on cutting some type of food (or many types of food) out. That's why some people can live on Atkin's for the rest of their lives and others are actually miserable. Some people can be vegan for health and love it (or morals, whatevs) and others would hate to not have some meat in their diet.

The key isn't to just avoid all "diets" which is generally the consensus here, but to find a way of eating that will be sustainable FOR YOU. Whether that is a straight caloric deficit with nothing off-limits, low carb, low fat, etc, doesn't really matter in the long run.

I still think that the correlation between weight re-gain and degree of misery in the population would be interesting. I suspect there would be some diets that would generate a higher degree of misery overall (e.g. a very low calorie diet). You could also look at the data from an individual perspective (whether the individual's score correlated with weight re-gain for that individual).

I understand. I guess I was thinking comparing one person's miserable feelings to anothers, but it's more about "this person reports they were miserable on a diet and gained everything back, the other person said they weren't miserable and didn't gain it back."

Then again, do we really NEED a study to tell us that if you try to sustain a lifestyle you hate you will eventually fall back to something you do enjoy? If you hate veggies and love burgers and you try to become vegan, you will probably have a bad time and go back to eating burgers before long, and instead of having learned to eat one regular burger you get a double bacon cheeseburger with fries because that's what you used to do and you want to do what made you feel good.