article: "5 really simple new rules for weight loss"

PolythenePam910
PolythenePam910 Posts: 14 Member
edited November 18 in Health and Weight Loss
Once again, the news, which is supposed to be our source of up to date facts and truth, publishes something like this. The fifth rule instructs to quit obsessing over counting calories. “Our study adds to growing new research that counting calories is not the most effective strategy for long-term weight management and prevention.”
WAT?
I am posting this article for you to gawk at and ridicule. I in no way endorse it.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/simple-rules-weight-loss/story?id=31243000
«1345

Replies

  • IsaackGMOON
    IsaackGMOON Posts: 3,358 Member
    PolythenePam910 wrote: »
    Quit obsessing about calories
    All of the above tactics matter more. “Most interestingly, the combination of foods seems to make a big difference,” said senior author Dariush Mozaffarian, MD, DrPH, in a statement. “Our study adds to growing new research that counting calories is not the most effective strategy for long-term weight management and prevention.”


    Wat
  • MoiAussi93
    MoiAussi93 Posts: 1,948 Member
    edited May 2015
    Why should it be ridiculed? Because it doesn't say what you want it to say? No one study should be considered the be all and end all, but this is one piece of the puzzle and adds to the body of knowledge.
  • PolythenePam910
    PolythenePam910 Posts: 14 Member
    edited May 2015
    *posted for general entertainment purposes. Last time I posted an article people seemed to think I wrote it or agreed with it.
    MoiAussi93 wrote: »
    Why should it be ridiculed? Because it doesn't say what you want it to say? No one study should be considered the end all be all, but this is one piece of the puzzle and adds to the body of knowledge.

  • Abe178
    Abe178 Posts: 8 Member
    Yeah, that strikes me as an odd finding to highlight. Even if the focus is on "long term weight management" I think it's hard to argue against the bennifits of knowing what you've put into your body (counting calories). Downplaying the importance of that knowledge in weightloss is silly. Thanks for sharing it!
  • crazyjerseygirl
    crazyjerseygirl Posts: 1,252 Member
    (Try to read this in the most pleasant voice possible, I couldn't get it to sound less snarky!)

    Just because something works doesn't mean it's the most effective way to do something in a population. CICO works, but long term how many ppl keep it up? I want to, I know I have to, but will I? Maybe not. I'm great at rationalizing my own stupidity.
    I think scientists try to find something that the majority of ppl can really stick with and after that gets filtered through "science journalism" you get lists like this. The scientists know it's CICO, but they also know that it doesn't work if you don't keep on top of the numbers.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • besaro
    besaro Posts: 1,858 Member
    the article sounds quite rational to me. to dismiss the entire article because you dont agree with one point is well, throwing the baby out...
  • Dnarules
    Dnarules Posts: 2,081 Member
    crazyjerseygirl wrote: »
    (Try to read this in the most pleasant voice possible, I couldn't get it to sound less snarky!)

    Just because something works doesn't mean it's the most effective way to do something in a population. CICO works, but long term how many ppl keep it up? I want to, I know I have to, but will I? Maybe not. I'm great at rationalizing my own stupidity.
    I think scientists try to find something that the majority of ppl can really stick with and after that gets filtered through "science journalism" you get lists like this. The scientists know it's CICO, but they also know that it doesn't work if you don't keep on top of the numbers.

    This doesnt sound snarky to me at all..

  • bambione
    bambione Posts: 30 Member
    Thanks for posting this article. It was interesting. Since I'm only been on this program for 5 weeks I'm definitely counting calories. Later on, maybe not so much. But I'm trying to make my calories count by eating the right combination of foods as well. It's very motivating for me to read weight loss articles, so thanks again.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    The analysis given by the article writers, at least, is not very good.

    The study is a longterm series of correlations between particular self-reported diets and weight (and other health issues often). It is one of many from the data kept on various health professionals (most famously the Nurses Study), and this specific one has been discussed here before, with an actual link to the study itself, if memory serves.

    The article ignores that the analysis also found a link between red meat and processed meat (i.e., bacon) and weight gain, which is funny given how often it seems to be used by pro low carb types lately. Also, the list of foods correlated with weight loss--yogurt, chicken breast, seafood--are foods commonly eaten by people trying to control calories (vs. those who don't care). Also, of course, people motivated to follow health advice.

    The biggest problem is the conclusion that eating these foods vs. counting calories makes more difference or that counting calories is not effective. The analysis doesn't support that at all. For all we know the reason people ate in certain ways vs. others was that they were counting calories or there is a correlation between those likely to eat healthy and those likely to care about weight.

    Is it likely that people who choose to eat lots of veggies and lean meats tend to eat lower calorie diets or diets more in tune with their activity levels than those who tend to eat lots of fast food and what is often termed junk food? Sure, but that doesn't seem especially surprising and it doesn't tell us much about the direction of the causal factors.

    Personally, if you look at my diet when I've been my fattest and when I've been my thinnest, my diet when thin is better. Is that because my diet caused me to be thinner (beyond calories)? Or is it because I tend to eat better (and also am more active) when I care about staying thin or being healthy? And thus I also do other things that are in tune with those goals also.
  • EvgeniZyntx
    EvgeniZyntx Posts: 24,208 Member
    Observational study tires to make recommendations about optimal behavior?
    Sigh. Meh.


    Oh, and the original: http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/early/2015/04/08/ajcn.114.100867.abstract
  • Wiseandcurious
    Wiseandcurious Posts: 730 Member
    edited May 2015
    Tl;dr - link to the actual study (probably) mentioned in the article at the bottom.

    ETA: EvgeniZyntx has beaten me to it, and he found the one in AJCN. Bonus - we know have two studies to discuss...
    /ETA

    This article is entirely useless since it's written in magazine-speak. Useless to defend because it's not clear what it says and useless to "ridicule" even if someone was inclined to (I refuse to take that part of OP's post seriously), because it would be ridiculing/attacking a straw man. If you want to have a real discussion about their findings, link to the study!

    To save you the work, I tried to find it - he has many publications but the one that comes closest in terms of number of participants and timeline was actually published in a different journal, here is the link below, I am assuming that is what the article is referring to:

    Changes in Diet and Lifestyle and Long-Term Weight Gain in Women and Men

    Notice that the article is misleading already in the title - apparently they did not study weight loss but weight gain, or the lack of it, long-term. Huuuuuuuge difference right there.

    I haven't read it yet but it am going to now. Enjoy.
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,267 Member
    edited May 2015
    PolythenePam910 wrote: »
    Once again, the news, which is supposed to be our source of up to date facts and truth, publishes something like this. The fifth rule instructs to quit obsessing over counting calories. “Our study adds to growing new research that counting calories is not the most effective strategy for long-term weight management and prevention.”
    WAT?
    I am posting this article for you to gawk at and ridicule. I in no way endorse it.

    http://abcnews.go.com/Health/simple-rules-weight-loss/story?id=31243000

    This was your first mistake...believing that bolded statement.
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    PolythenePam910 wrote: »
    Once again, the news, which is supposed to be our source of up to date facts and truth, publishes something like this. The fifth rule instructs to quit obsessing over counting calories. “Our study adds to growing new research that counting calories is not the most effective strategy for long-term weight management and prevention.”
    WAT?
    I am posting this article for you to gawk at and ridicule. I in no way endorse it.

    http://abcnews.go.com/Health/simple-rules-weight-loss/story?id=31243000

    This was your first mistake...believing that bolded statement.

    ^^
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Wiseandcurious wrote: »
    This article is entirely useless since it's written in magazine-speak. Useless to defend because it's not clear what it says and useless to "ridicule" even if someone was inclined to (I refuse to take that part of OP's post seriously), because it would be ridiculing/attacking a straw man. If you want to have a real discussion about their findings, link to the study!

    I think it's totally fair to ridicule the reporting of the study and not the study itself.

    I find the correlation analyses of the Nurse's and other related data quite interesting.

    I also find the way it's reported to be typically incorrect or even ridiculous.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    shell1005 wrote: »
    I don't need people dumbing down or pervert in what the data says in such an unfortunately all to common manner.

    Precisely.

    Plus, it tends to give me the impression that the people reporting on it are, on average, not very smart.

    I admit that my impression is heightened by reading general-interest and mainstream media reporting of matters in my own field, which are extremely often reported poorly and by people who seem not to understand basic stuff, and I'm not even in a scientific field. It's made me cynical.

    (I was an editor of our college paper back in the day, so this also makes me sad.)
  • PeachyCarol
    PeachyCarol Posts: 8,029 Member
    MrM27 wrote: »
    All of the above tactics matter more. “Most interestingly, the combination of foods seems to make a big difference,” said senior author Dariush Mozaffarian, MD, DrPH, in a statement. “Our study adds to growing new research that counting calories is not the most effective strategy for long-term weight management and prevention.”


    I wonder how they can say what is or isn't the most effective strategy when at the end of the day thesuccess rate with any approach is very poor.

    ^This. I don't think there's any one most effective strategy. People are different. What clicks for one won't click for someone else. Promoting the idea that there's probably a magic bullet and that they're onto it is the most ridiculous thing in that piece.

    Counting calories is NOT the best approach for a lot of people because it does not suit their personality and they won't adhere to it. Clearly, for them, some sort of dietary approach would be best.

    Nothing will work if you can't stick with it.

  • PeachyCarol
    PeachyCarol Posts: 8,029 Member
    edited May 2015
    EvgeniZyntx wrote: »
    Observational study tires to make recommendations about optimal behavior?
    Sigh. Meh.


    Oh, and the original: http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/early/2015/04/08/ajcn.114.100867.abstract

    I sniffed Ludwig all over that as soon as I saw GI mentioned so often in the article. I'm automatically dismissing it without reading.

    It's SO coincidental how every study he has his paws on ends up confirming his pet theory.

  • ashdawg8790
    ashdawg8790 Posts: 819 Member
    I'm concerned that they advise to load up on nuts for protein... My personal opinion is that too many people believe nuts are a healthy choice (go, healthy fats!), so they eat too many to stay within their daily calorie allotment if they aren't counting calories. I could eat a whole lot of mixed nuts (like, a half a container...) and still be ready for dinner in an hour. Just a minor take-away from the article...
  • PolythenePam910
    PolythenePam910 Posts: 14 Member
    I dream of a day when the experts will finally agree on something and we can all live in harmony.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    PolythenePam910 wrote: »
    Once again, the news, which is supposed to be our source of up to date facts and truth...

    News has NEVER been - nor was it ever meant to be - "our source of up to date facts and truth".

  • crazyjerseygirl
    crazyjerseygirl Posts: 1,252 Member
    It
    PolythenePam910 wrote: »
    I dream of a day when the experts will finally agree on something and we can all live in harmony.

    Its called "Medicine"
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    crazyjerseygirl wrote: »
    It
    PolythenePam910 wrote: »
    I dream of a day when the experts will finally agree on something and we can all live in harmony.

    Its called "Medicine"

    Two doctors, three opinions.

    Nope....
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • TimothyFish
    TimothyFish Posts: 4,925 Member
    The key term here is "long term". While counting calories works well for weight loss, that doesn't mean it works well for long term maintenance. Realistically, I don't see myself logging everything I eat for the rest of my life, so either I'm going to do something else, or I'll gain weight
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • PeachyCarol
    PeachyCarol Posts: 8,029 Member
    TimothyFish wrote: »
    The key term here is "long term". While counting calories works well for weight loss, that doesn't mean it works well for long term maintenance. Realistically, I don't see myself logging everything I eat for the rest of my life, so either I'm going to do something else, or I'll gain weight

    FOR YOU. Again, generalizing doesn't work.

    There's no one solution. For some people, continued counting/logging works very well.

  • LBuehrle8
    LBuehrle8 Posts: 4,044 Member
    mamapeach910 wrote: »
    TimothyFish wrote: »
    The key term here is "long term". While counting calories works well for weight loss, that doesn't mean it works well for long term maintenance. Realistically, I don't see myself logging everything I eat for the rest of my life, so either I'm going to do something else, or I'll gain weight

    FOR YOU. Again, generalizing doesn't work.

    There's no one solution. For some people, continued counting/logging works very well.

    Exactly! I don't mind the logging at all! I'd much rather log the rest of my life and enjoy my kids and grandkids than not log and overeat , become obese, not be able to have kids, and end up miserable!
  • bunsen_honeydew
    bunsen_honeydew Posts: 230 Member
    CICO for weight management is like abstinence for birth control. Obviously it works, but it only works if you actually do it, or in the case of abstinence, it works if you don't "do it". Clearly for the vast majority of people, calorie counting is not something which is long term sustainable For them. I'm happy for scientists to carry on looking at other ways which have a better compliance rate.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories