University Studies on Rapid Weight Loss Diets

24

Replies

  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    zmusic wrote: »
    MrM27 wrote: »
    What percentage of those people that crash diet make sure they are at least getting in proper nutrition is the question.

    They were all a part of medically supervised studies at major Universities, so there is no doubt they got proper nutrition.

    So how does that apply to people doing these on their own, without medical supervision?

  • jellybaby84
    jellybaby84 Posts: 583 Member
    I would love it if this were true!

    Not scientific enough to know if it is or isn't. But liking the idea!
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,388 MFP Moderator
    Mr_Knight wrote: »
    Done right (which most don't) rapid fat loss protocols (the non-idiotic ones) are the bomb. Lean mass retention and accelerated fat oxidation FTW.

    Not for everybody, though. They can be tough mentally. But for those who prefer stair step approach (cycling periods of rapid fat loss with periods of maintenance) over a gradual incline...yeah....

    Too bad we can't really talk about them on MFP.

    :drinker:

    Love this quote:

    "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.

    Actually, under the right protocols, we do allow for members to discuss VLCD (medically supervised, gastric bypass, etc...) but what you find is that 99% of the people advocating LCD do not follow any type of protocol and do it without real knowledge. So it's more circumstantial. If someone was prepping for a competition, that would probably be something I would let go too.


    Regarding the link, there are circumstances (especially morbidly obese) where they benefits significantly outweigh the disadvantages of rapid weight loss but that generally applies to those obese/morbidly obese and under supervision.

  • tintinsaab
    tintinsaab Posts: 18 Member
    I agree that crash dieting can work, but most people don't do it with regards to adequate nutrition. They just exist on a bowl of Frosties a day so they can get into a swimsuit in 4 weeks time. Unless it is adequately supervised, it's not going to provide you with a healthy diet, or be any good for your mental health. Or be a long-term solution to weight issues. I can understand why people use it to kick start a diet, but it's not sustainable.

    I am glad MFP don't allow discussion on crash diets, just as they don't encourage discussion on all the herbal/diet drug scam solutions either.

    I would also add that those that do undertake vlc diets, such as Lighter Life, seem to end up putting the weight back on. Making a lifestyle change and a permanent adjustment to your eating habits is the only way to lose weight and keep it off in my opinion.
  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    zmusic wrote: »
    MrM27 wrote: »
    What percentage of those people that crash diet make sure they are at least getting in proper nutrition is the question.

    They were all a part of medically supervised studies at major Universities, so there is no doubt they got proper nutrition.

    Medical supervision and monitored intake vs crash dieting on one's one ... quite a difference.
  • EvgeniZyntx
    EvgeniZyntx Posts: 24,208 Member
    zmusic wrote: »
    http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2014/10/16/crash-diets-rapid-weight-loss-better-gradual-weight-loss-study


    Contrary to most research that recommends long term weight loss diets, the University of Melbourne paper, published in The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology, has suggested that ‘crash diets’ may be more effective

    "Around 71 per cent of subjects in both groups ended up regaining similar amounts of weight within three years, regardless of the diet program they were assigned."

    Doesn't seem more effective.
  • hupsii
    hupsii Posts: 258 Member
    zmusic wrote: »
    http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2014/10/16/crash-diets-rapid-weight-loss-better-gradual-weight-loss-study


    Contrary to most research that recommends long term weight loss diets, the University of Melbourne paper, published in The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology, has suggested that ‘crash diets’ may be more effective

    "Around 71 per cent of subjects in both groups ended up regaining similar amounts of weight within three years, regardless of the diet program they were assigned."

    Doesn't seem more effective.

    yes, but this study opens up new perspectives, no ?
  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    hupsii wrote: »
    zmusic wrote: »
    http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2014/10/16/crash-diets-rapid-weight-loss-better-gradual-weight-loss-study


    Contrary to most research that recommends long term weight loss diets, the University of Melbourne paper, published in The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology, has suggested that ‘crash diets’ may be more effective

    "Around 71 per cent of subjects in both groups ended up regaining similar amounts of weight within three years, regardless of the diet program they were assigned."

    Doesn't seem more effective.

    yes, but this study opens up new perspectives, no ?

    Only if you're looking for medically supervised crash diets.
  • EvgeniZyntx
    EvgeniZyntx Posts: 24,208 Member
    edited April 2015
    hupsii wrote: »
    zmusic wrote: »
    http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2014/10/16/crash-diets-rapid-weight-loss-better-gradual-weight-loss-study


    Contrary to most research that recommends long term weight loss diets, the University of Melbourne paper, published in The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology, has suggested that ‘crash diets’ may be more effective

    "Around 71 per cent of subjects in both groups ended up regaining similar amounts of weight within three years, regardless of the diet program they were assigned."

    Doesn't seem more effective.

    yes, but this study opens up new perspectives, no ?

    Not really, there's a place for rapid weight loss. I and others have posted about that. It isn't new.

    And various studies have shown that rapid loss has higher short-term adherence and larger total weight loss results (but ... read on). Other studies have shown low carb diets result in larger body weight results.

    The caveat exists. These studies fail in comparing body weight versus fat loss or comparing versus long term calorie counting and overall adherence. They fail to demonstrate fat loss vs LBM maintenance or small gains while exercising. If what you are trying to achieve is improved body composition, better eating habits and long term fitness performance then we are not, by definition, focusing on 8-12 week programs.

    There is a place for low cal, protein sparing diets but the Daily Fail and other sensationalist press don't provide sufficient information and in their sensationalism the result is that crash dieting is generally "not a good thing"; remember that practiced as it was in the 70and 80 it led to various physiological issues including deaths.

    A variety of risks from gallstones, to eating disorder, to metabolic hormonal issues, to depression, to critical tissue loss, etc exist with crash dieting. Getting health information from journalists (and book writers selling diet books) that ignore that is unfortunate.


    Some of the discussions relevant to this:

    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1116315/science-only-please-the-case-against-1200-kcals/
    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10074833/dangers-of-losing-weight-too-quickly-how-fast-is-too-fast
    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1331580/new-here-360lbs-and-doing-the-1200-calorie-diet-am-i-nuts/p3
    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1092657/starvation-mode-real-fake-or-a-matter-of-opinion/p2
    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1077746/starvation-mode-adaptive-thermogenesis-and-weight-loss
    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1153883/too-few-calories
  • 3bambi3
    3bambi3 Posts: 1,650 Member
    Just curious, are all of the threads you start going to be about Dr. Katahn's Magical Rotation Diet?

    Stop.
  • noclady1995
    noclady1995 Posts: 452 Member
    hupsii wrote: »
    zmusic wrote: »
    http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2014/10/16/crash-diets-rapid-weight-loss-better-gradual-weight-loss-study


    Contrary to most research that recommends long term weight loss diets, the University of Melbourne paper, published in The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology, has suggested that ‘crash diets’ may be more effective

    "Around 71 per cent of subjects in both groups ended up regaining similar amounts of weight within three years, regardless of the diet program they were assigned."

    Doesn't seem more effective.

    yes, but this study opens up new perspectives, no ?

    Not really, there's a place for rapid weight loss. I and others have posted about that. It isn't new.

    And various studies have shown that rapid loss has higher short-term adherence and larger total weight loss results (but ... read on). Other studies have shown low carb diets result in larger body weight results.

    The caveat exists. These studies fail in comparing body weight versus fat loss or comparing versus long term calorie counting and overall adherence. They fail to demonstrate fat loss vs LBM maintenance or small gains while exercising. If what you are trying to achieve is improved body composition, better eating habits and long term fitness performance then we are not, by definition, focusing on 8-12 week programs.

    There is a place for low cal, protein sparing diets but the Daily Fail and other sensationalist press don't provide sufficient information and in their sensationalism the result is that crash dieting is generally "not a good thing"; remember that practiced as it was in the 70and 80 it led to various physiological issues including deaths.

    A variety of risks from gallstones, to eating disorder, to metabolic hormonal issues, to depression, to critical tissue loss, etc exist with crash dieting. Getting health information from journalists (and book writers selling diet books) that ignore that is unfortunate.


    Some of the discussions relevant to this:

    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1116315/science-only-please-the-case-against-1200-kcals/
    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10074833/dangers-of-losing-weight-too-quickly-how-fast-is-too-fast
    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1331580/new-here-360lbs-and-doing-the-1200-calorie-diet-am-i-nuts/p3
    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1092657/starvation-mode-real-fake-or-a-matter-of-opinion/p2
    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1077746/starvation-mode-adaptive-thermogenesis-and-weight-loss
    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1153883/too-few-calories

    This is excellent. Based on personal experience with a close family member who underwent all of this, I would support this.
  • EvgeniZyntx
    EvgeniZyntx Posts: 24,208 Member
    3bambi3 wrote: »
    Just curious, are all of the threads you start going to be about Dr. Katahn's Magical Rotation Diet?

    Stop.
    There's nothing particularly wrong with it. It's a calorie restriction diet and while it has a few bad days (nutrition wise) it's pretty close a short term 1200 diet - with diet breaks every few weeks. One week is particularly very low.

    Would I do it? Eff no. It sounds of sadness and punched puppies, but if you want to follow yesterday's fad? Why not?
  • 3bambi3
    3bambi3 Posts: 1,650 Member
    edited April 2015
    zmusic wrote: »
    Dr. Katahn's research at Vanderbilt University is tried and true and has withstood the test of time. His book is still in publication after 30 years. It saved my life and it saved his life. He wrote to book after he had health problems related to obesity. He personally lost 75 pounds on his diet and kept it off for 30 years.

    Dr. Katahn is a Psychology professor. Who seems to believe that dietary fat = increase in body fat. And his diet has women eating 600 calories for 3 days, 900 for 4 days and a week of 1200. Yeah, I'd lose weight on that as well since it is basically starving myself.
  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    3bambi3 wrote: »
    zmusic wrote: »
    Dr. Katahn's research at Vanderbilt University is tried and true and has withstood the test of time. His book is still in publication after 30 years. It saved my life and it saved his life. He wrote to book after he had health problems related to obesity. He personally lost 75 pounds on his diet and kept it off for 30 years.

    Dr. Katahn is a Psychology professor. Who seems to believe that dietary fat = increase in body fat. And his diet has women eating 600 calories for 3 days, 900 for 4 days and a week of 1200. Yeah, I'd lose weight on that as well since it is basically starving myself.

    Are we going to let a pesky little thing like updated medical understanding get in the way of becoming true believers in a diet plan?