I Fooled Millions Into Thinking Chocolate Helps Weight Loss. Here's How
Replies
-
crazyjerseygirl wrote: »Does anyone have a link to the published paper? I can't find it!
It's been pulled but you can see it the Google cache:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Yg1ecZvTNgMJ:imed.pub/ojs/index.php/iam/article/view/1087+&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=deChocolate with high Cocoa content as a weight-loss accelerator
Johannes Bohannon, Diana Koch, Peter Homm, Alexander Driehaus
Abstract
Background: Although the focus of scientific studies on the beneficial properties of chocolate with a high cocoa content has increased in recent years, studies determining its importance for weight regulation, in particular within the context of a controlled dietary measure, have rarely been conducted.
Methodology: In a study consisting of several weeks, we divided men and women between the ages of 19-67 into three groups. One group was instructed to keep a low-carb diet and to consume an additional daily serving of 42 grams of chocolate with 81% cocoa content (chocolate group). Another group was instructed to follow the same low-carb diet as the chocolate group, but without the chocolate intervention (low-carb group). In addition, we asked a third group to eat at their own discretion, with unrestricted choice of food. At the beginning of the study, all participants received extensive medical advice and were thoroughly briefed on their respective diet. At the beginning and the end of the study, each participant gave a blood sample. Their weight, BMI, and waist-to-hip ratio were determined and noted. In addition to that, we evaluated the Giessen Subjective Complaints List. During the study, participants were encouraged to weigh themselves on a daily basis, assess the quality of their sleep as well as their mental state, and to use urine test strips.
Result: Subjects of the chocolate intervention group experienced the easiest and most successful weight loss. Even though the measurable effect of this diet occurred with a delay, the weight reduction of this group exceeded the results of the low-carb group by 10% after only three weeks (p = 0.04). While the weight cycling effect already occurred after a few weeks in the low-carb group, with resulting weight gain in the last fifth of the observation period, the chocolate group experienced a steady increase in weight loss. This is confirmed by the evaluation of the ketone reduction. Initially, ketone reduction was much lower in the chocolate group than in the low-carb peer group, but after a few weeks, the situation changed. The low-carb group had a lower ketone reduction than in the previous period, they reduced 145 mg/dl less ketones, whereas the chocolate group had an average reduction of an additional 145mg/dl. Effects were similarly favorable concerning cholesterol levels, triglyceride levels, and LDL cholesterol levels of the chocolate group. Moreover, the subjects of the chocolate group found a significant improvement in their well-being (physically and mentally). The controlled improvement compared to the results of the low-carb group was highly significant (p <0.001).
Conclusion: Consumption of chocolate with a high cocoa content can significantly increase the success of weight-loss diets. The weightloss effect of this diet occurs with a certain delay. Long-term weight loss, however, seems to occur easier and more successfully by adding chocolate. The effect of the chocolate, the so-called "weight loss turbo," seems to go hand in hand with personal well-being, which was significantly higher than in the control groups.0 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »crazyjerseygirl wrote: »Does anyone have a link to the published paper? I can't find it!
It's been pulled but you can see it the Google cache:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Yg1ecZvTNgMJ:imed.pub/ojs/index.php/iam/article/view/1087+&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=deChocolate with high Cocoa content as a weight-loss accelerator
Johannes Bohannon, Diana Koch, Peter Homm, Alexander Driehaus
Abstract
Background: Although the focus of scientific studies on the beneficial properties of chocolate with a high cocoa content has increased in recent years, studies determining its importance for weight regulation, in particular within the context of a controlled dietary measure, have rarely been conducted.
Methodology: In a study consisting of several weeks, we divided men and women between the ages of 19-67 into three groups. One group was instructed to keep a low-carb diet and to consume an additional daily serving of 42 grams of chocolate with 81% cocoa content (chocolate group). Another group was instructed to follow the same low-carb diet as the chocolate group, but without the chocolate intervention (low-carb group). In addition, we asked a third group to eat at their own discretion, with unrestricted choice of food. At the beginning of the study, all participants received extensive medical advice and were thoroughly briefed on their respective diet. At the beginning and the end of the study, each participant gave a blood sample. Their weight, BMI, and waist-to-hip ratio were determined and noted. In addition to that, we evaluated the Giessen Subjective Complaints List. During the study, participants were encouraged to weigh themselves on a daily basis, assess the quality of their sleep as well as their mental state, and to use urine test strips.
Result: Subjects of the chocolate intervention group experienced the easiest and most successful weight loss. Even though the measurable effect of this diet occurred with a delay, the weight reduction of this group exceeded the results of the low-carb group by 10% after only three weeks (p = 0.04). While the weight cycling effect already occurred after a few weeks in the low-carb group, with resulting weight gain in the last fifth of the observation period, the chocolate group experienced a steady increase in weight loss. This is confirmed by the evaluation of the ketone reduction. Initially, ketone reduction was much lower in the chocolate group than in the low-carb peer group, but after a few weeks, the situation changed. The low-carb group had a lower ketone reduction than in the previous period, they reduced 145 mg/dl less ketones, whereas the chocolate group had an average reduction of an additional 145mg/dl. Effects were similarly favorable concerning cholesterol levels, triglyceride levels, and LDL cholesterol levels of the chocolate group. Moreover, the subjects of the chocolate group found a significant improvement in their well-being (physically and mentally). The controlled improvement compared to the results of the low-carb group was highly significant (p <0.001).
Conclusion: Consumption of chocolate with a high cocoa content can significantly increase the success of weight-loss diets. The weightloss effect of this diet occurs with a certain delay. Long-term weight loss, however, seems to occur easier and more successfully by adding chocolate. The effect of the chocolate, the so-called "weight loss turbo," seems to go hand in hand with personal well-being, which was significantly higher than in the control groups.
Hahahahahaha. It's glorious.
0 -
[/quote]Iron_Feline wrote: »
Cute. Still stand by my point. All the 'research' in the world isn't gonna fool me into thinking a high calorie sugar snack is supposed to somehow help me lose weight. If people are that easily fooled they deserve to be separated from their money.0 -
Snickers is helping me lose weight... for a few more pounds, anyway.Iron_Feline wrote: »
Cute. Still stand by my point. All the 'research' in the world isn't gonna fool me into thinking a high calorie sugar snack is supposed to somehow help me lose weight. If people are that easily fooled they deserve to be separated from their money.
0 -
Iron_Feline wrote: »
Cute. Still stand by my point. All the 'research' in the world isn't gonna fool me into thinking a high calorie sugar snack is supposed to somehow help me lose weight. If people are that easily fooled they deserve to be separated from their money.
That... was never the point of the fake study.
And the dark chocolate used in it? Low in sugar and good for you.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »crazyjerseygirl wrote: »Does anyone have a link to the published paper? I can't find it!
It's been pulled but you can see it the Google cache:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Yg1ecZvTNgMJ:imed.pub/ojs/index.php/iam/article/view/1087+&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=deChocolate with high Cocoa content as a weight-loss accelerator
Johannes Bohannon, Diana Koch, Peter Homm, Alexander Driehaus
Abstract
Background: Although the focus of scientific studies on the beneficial properties of chocolate with a high cocoa content has increased in recent years, studies determining its importance for weight regulation, in particular within the context of a controlled dietary measure, have rarely been conducted.
Methodology: In a study consisting of several weeks, we divided men and women between the ages of 19-67 into three groups. One group was instructed to keep a low-carb diet and to consume an additional daily serving of 42 grams of chocolate with 81% cocoa content (chocolate group). Another group was instructed to follow the same low-carb diet as the chocolate group, but without the chocolate intervention (low-carb group). In addition, we asked a third group to eat at their own discretion, with unrestricted choice of food. At the beginning of the study, all participants received extensive medical advice and were thoroughly briefed on their respective diet. At the beginning and the end of the study, each participant gave a blood sample. Their weight, BMI, and waist-to-hip ratio were determined and noted. In addition to that, we evaluated the Giessen Subjective Complaints List. During the study, participants were encouraged to weigh themselves on a daily basis, assess the quality of their sleep as well as their mental state, and to use urine test strips.
Result: Subjects of the chocolate intervention group experienced the easiest and most successful weight loss. Even though the measurable effect of this diet occurred with a delay, the weight reduction of this group exceeded the results of the low-carb group by 10% after only three weeks (p = 0.04). While the weight cycling effect already occurred after a few weeks in the low-carb group, with resulting weight gain in the last fifth of the observation period, the chocolate group experienced a steady increase in weight loss. This is confirmed by the evaluation of the ketone reduction. Initially, ketone reduction was much lower in the chocolate group than in the low-carb peer group, but after a few weeks, the situation changed. The low-carb group had a lower ketone reduction than in the previous period, they reduced 145 mg/dl less ketones, whereas the chocolate group had an average reduction of an additional 145mg/dl. Effects were similarly favorable concerning cholesterol levels, triglyceride levels, and LDL cholesterol levels of the chocolate group. Moreover, the subjects of the chocolate group found a significant improvement in their well-being (physically and mentally). The controlled improvement compared to the results of the low-carb group was highly significant (p <0.001).
Conclusion: Consumption of chocolate with a high cocoa content can significantly increase the success of weight-loss diets. The weightloss effect of this diet occurs with a certain delay. Long-term weight loss, however, seems to occur easier and more successfully by adding chocolate. The effect of the chocolate, the so-called "weight loss turbo," seems to go hand in hand with personal well-being, which was significantly higher than in the control groups.
Hahahahahaha. It's glorious.
It's also pretty clear that the fact checking done was minimal. It's pretty grossly written.0 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »crazyjerseygirl wrote: »Does anyone have a link to the published paper? I can't find it!
It's been pulled but you can see it the Google cache:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Yg1ecZvTNgMJ:imed.pub/ojs/index.php/iam/article/view/1087+&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=deChocolate with high Cocoa content as a weight-loss accelerator
Johannes Bohannon, Diana Koch, Peter Homm, Alexander Driehaus
Abstract
Background: Although the focus of scientific studies on the beneficial properties of chocolate with a high cocoa content has increased in recent years, studies determining its importance for weight regulation, in particular within the context of a controlled dietary measure, have rarely been conducted.
Methodology: In a study consisting of several weeks, we divided men and women between the ages of 19-67 into three groups. One group was instructed to keep a low-carb diet and to consume an additional daily serving of 42 grams of chocolate with 81% cocoa content (chocolate group). Another group was instructed to follow the same low-carb diet as the chocolate group, but without the chocolate intervention (low-carb group). In addition, we asked a third group to eat at their own discretion, with unrestricted choice of food. At the beginning of the study, all participants received extensive medical advice and were thoroughly briefed on their respective diet. At the beginning and the end of the study, each participant gave a blood sample. Their weight, BMI, and waist-to-hip ratio were determined and noted. In addition to that, we evaluated the Giessen Subjective Complaints List. During the study, participants were encouraged to weigh themselves on a daily basis, assess the quality of their sleep as well as their mental state, and to use urine test strips.
Result: Subjects of the chocolate intervention group experienced the easiest and most successful weight loss. Even though the measurable effect of this diet occurred with a delay, the weight reduction of this group exceeded the results of the low-carb group by 10% after only three weeks (p = 0.04). While the weight cycling effect already occurred after a few weeks in the low-carb group, with resulting weight gain in the last fifth of the observation period, the chocolate group experienced a steady increase in weight loss. This is confirmed by the evaluation of the ketone reduction. Initially, ketone reduction was much lower in the chocolate group than in the low-carb peer group, but after a few weeks, the situation changed. The low-carb group had a lower ketone reduction than in the previous period, they reduced 145 mg/dl less ketones, whereas the chocolate group had an average reduction of an additional 145mg/dl. Effects were similarly favorable concerning cholesterol levels, triglyceride levels, and LDL cholesterol levels of the chocolate group. Moreover, the subjects of the chocolate group found a significant improvement in their well-being (physically and mentally). The controlled improvement compared to the results of the low-carb group was highly significant (p <0.001).
Conclusion: Consumption of chocolate with a high cocoa content can significantly increase the success of weight-loss diets. The weightloss effect of this diet occurs with a certain delay. Long-term weight loss, however, seems to occur easier and more successfully by adding chocolate. The effect of the chocolate, the so-called "weight loss turbo," seems to go hand in hand with personal well-being, which was significantly higher than in the control groups.
Hahahahahaha. It's glorious.
It's also pretty clear that the fact checking done was minimal. It's pretty grossly written.
I was thinking that as I read it. It reads like a parody. It's VERY telling that it was published and that he had a few acceptances, and knew where to send them.
I've bookmarked the list of bad publishers. I'll be checking posted studies from now on against it.
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »I admittedly just skimmed the article (SO long), but who were the millions that beleived this? Or are they just assuming all readers believed it?
Maybe they're just lying to us again.0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »crazyjerseygirl wrote: »It's things like this that make me an *kitten* on the Internet. THIS is why I demand links to papers. This is why I don't take you seriously if you can't provide them. And when you say "do your own homework" I know that you never read or understood the paper and you don't like to admit you might be mistaken.
(This is a reply to the article, the "you" is general and not pointed at anyone in particular)
I can use Google as well as anyone, so I'm never too concerned about whether someone provides a link or not. I'm more interested in people and what they have to say about a topic. They could be as wrong as can be and be basing their opinion on something that makes no sense at all, but I find their point of view interesting.
Well of course
0 -
All I can say is I now have TWO new favourite songs. If you didn't get all the way to the videos, you've done yourself a great disservice.
And I really want chocolate now.0 -
I fooled my hubby in to a home "cure" for cold sores that went like this. He could not find any holes in my argument and he remains cured to this day. I shared my "cure" with my (MD) sister and she cried, "unethical!" If I were a doctor maybe, but I made no special claims. Here's my "cure".
Cold sores can be caused by stress. B vitamins are good for stress. I found a B vitamin formulation that had a large label "STRESS" on it. I told hubby how it worked and I stressed it was to reduce his stress. His chronic cold sores cleared up and he continues to take his "STRESS" pill daily.
Can you guess how this worked? What are the flaws in my strategy?
Nice! The cold sores got better of their own accord.
As the saying goes, "Correlation does not equal causation".0 -
I'm glad the OP article got posted.
I came here just now to do the same thing. Ninja'd.
My favourite bit:
"Here’s a dirty little science secret: If you measure a large number of things about a small number of people, you are almost guaranteed to get a “statistically significant” result. Our study included 18 different measurements—weight, cholesterol, sodium, blood protein levels, sleep quality, well-being, etc.—from 15 people. (One subject was dropped.) That study design is a recipe for false positives.
"Think of the measurements as lottery tickets. Each one has a small chance of paying off in the form of a “significant” result that we can spin a story around and sell to the media. The more tickets you buy, the more likely you are to win. We didn’t know exactly what would pan out—the headline could have been that chocolate improves sleep or lowers blood pressure—but we knew our chances of getting at least one “statistically significant” result were pretty good."0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »Caveat to my own post: it was also about how sad science reporting is.
I'll take that comment as an opportunity to share this article I've shared elsewhere a number of times:
"WARNING: wild extrapolation (a classification system for science news)":
http://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2014/sep/10/wild-extrapolation-classification-system-science-media-scepticism
0 -
pretty wild read. thanks for posting!0
-
Iron_Feline wrote: »
Cute. Still stand by my point. All the 'research' in the world isn't gonna fool me into thinking a high calorie sugar snack is supposed to somehow help me lose weight. If people are that easily fooled they deserve to be separated from their money.
lol the point was to fool "the system" and see if they would run with it (publish, promote, etc.)
hence you missing the point. besides that, they didn't eat a "high calorie sugar snack", they ate a 1.5g bar of dark chocolate per day. as long as you feel smart though, right?
0 -
tl;dr maybe it's time to wake up, get back to the basics and realize a couple of simple truths
1) counting calories will always remain king for gaining/losing weight. ALWAYS
2) counting macros of those counted calories influences how healthy you are are while gaining/losing weight
3) there are no miracles. stop fussing about the small details like sodium, antioxidants, some mystical "detoxification" or the always funny "negative-calorie foods" aka "consume these unneeded calories to lose weight!"0 -
tl;dr maybe it's time to wake up, get back to the basics and realize a couple of simple truths
1) counting calories will always remain king for gaining/losing weight. ALWAYS
2) counting macros of those counted calories influences how healthy you are are while gaining/losing weight
3) there are no miracles. stop fussing about the small details like sodium, antioxidants, some mystical "detoxification" or the always funny "negative-calorie foods" aka "consume these unneeded calories to lose weight!"
Gaaaaaaaa!0 -
crazyjerseygirl wrote: »tl;dr maybe it's time to wake up, get back to the basics and realize a couple of simple truths
1) counting calories will always remain king for gaining/losing weight. ALWAYS
2) counting macros of those counted calories influences how healthy you are are while gaining/losing weight
3) there are no miracles. stop fussing about the small details like sodium, antioxidants, some mystical "detoxification" or the always funny "negative-calorie foods" aka "consume these unneeded calories to lose weight!"
Gaaaaaaaa!
I'm making a note to myself to spend extra time on reading comprehension in our school curriculum for next year.
This thread has made it obvious that there's a need for it.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »crazyjerseygirl wrote: »tl;dr maybe it's time to wake up, get back to the basics and realize a couple of simple truths
1) counting calories will always remain king for gaining/losing weight. ALWAYS
2) counting macros of those counted calories influences how healthy you are are while gaining/losing weight
3) there are no miracles. stop fussing about the small details like sodium, antioxidants, some mystical "detoxification" or the always funny "negative-calorie foods" aka "consume these unneeded calories to lose weight!"
Gaaaaaaaa!
I'm making a note to myself to spend extra time on reading comprehension in our school curriculum for next year.
This thread has made it obvious that there's a need for it.
You know I love you right?0 -
aerochic42 wrote: »just act like you know what you are talking about and people will follow. Even if you tell them you making it up. then they think you are either lying or excessively modest. It's scary how many people believe some of the stuff that comes out of my mouth and follow me even when I freely admit that I'm full of poop. Of course my husband will call me on it, but it doesn't matter because people follow him even faster.
ummmmm cough, cough,, jenny macarthy and vacines causing autism cough, cough0 -
aerochic42 wrote: »just act like you know what you are talking about and people will follow. Even if you tell them you making it up. then they think you are either lying or excessively modest. It's scary how many people believe some of the stuff that comes out of my mouth and follow me even when I freely admit that I'm full of poop. Of course my husband will call me on it, but it doesn't matter because people follow him even faster.
ummmmm cough, cough,, jenny macarthy and vacines causing autism cough, cough
I loves you too!0 -
I fooled my hubby in to a home "cure" for cold sores that went like this. He could not find any holes in my argument and he remains cured to this day. I shared my "cure" with my (MD) sister and she cried, "unethical!" If I were a doctor maybe, but I made no special claims. Here's my "cure".
Cold sores can be caused by stress. B vitamins are good for stress. I found a B vitamin formulation that had a large label "STRESS" on it. I told hubby how it worked and I stressed it was to reduce his stress. His chronic cold sores cleared up and he continues to take his "STRESS" pill daily.
Can you guess how this worked? What are the flaws in my strategy?
I approve.
Aren't there studies that placebo can have a significant effect if people believe in it? The difference for me is my husband would never believe anything scientifically related I suggest to him. Also, I keep trying to figure out how I can use the placebo effect to my own advantage but I think since I know it is a placebo and am generally skeptical of things it won't work if I'm the one to initiate it.
At any rate, I think this is way better than doctors who tell their patients to restrict carbs. Some maybe believe in it. Others know if they give their patients restrictive diets they will tend to see some calorie restriction without having to ask their patients to keep food journals or things people don't like to do (MFPers being the exception).0 -
Revisiting because this seems to have spun up again.
Readers need to be aware that peer review is not an imprimatur of guarantee of quality. It's just one step in the process. One peer-reviewed study does not science make. Peer review can stop bad science. It can also enable bad science, and believe me, it can stop good science.0 -
That is a very elaborate story and probably an eye opener for most. Thanks for sharing. You got my interest. I've always been of the opinion that you can find whatever you are looking for on the internet. On a side note: my wife and I have grown to like dark chocolate with almonds. We sometimes have it in the house. We only eat a little bit not even everyday. It's one of those little joys in life. Now, if we sat down and ate the whole bar or bag in one sitting, or if we believed it was the key to staying fit or to us loose weight,... those would be problems... Everyone has to find what make their own body work. It's a real trick. Good luck everyone.0
-
TimothyFish wrote: »I'm not saying that the people who published this information shouldn't have been more careful, but given the number of benefits to eating chocolate that people have been discussing for the past decade, saying that it is beneficial to weight loss isn't that farfetched. It would be interesting to see the results of a properly done study that looks at this.
really???? I am gonna start calling you Sheldon cause you apparently don't get sarcasm...
You rang?0 -
This is so great.
Ill be forwarding to a few people i know IRL.0 -
peter56765 wrote: »
The moral of my overly long story is, I get why people ask to see the actual study instead of an article or a blog post about the study and I get why they're so skeptical. And yes, doctors are just as guilty of falling for this nonsense. So even if your doctor tells you something, do your own research!
I wouldn't trust a doctor as far as I could throw them. BTDT and will NEVER do again. They are infallible human idiots that think they're gods.0 -
In some ways it's amazing to see how easy it was to dupe large publications that just want a sensational story. It's also just sad because it's likely that this story will float around for years and we'll be seeing people bring it up randomly and telling us to look at this awesome study.0
-
Dammit ....before I even had an account on MFP ..I also used to believe in everything anyone would say. Now I try to research the things for myself. I use the internet and internet also has things like above.
So grateful that I learned about Calories being king otherwise I still wouldn't have lost a single pound and would've been wondering why these miracle foods don't work.
BTW a general claim is Protein powders with Coco or chocolate flavor is better than vanilla or any other flavor because Coco is natural and other flavors are made using artificial sugars. Is that true or false as well? because damn I've missed some very good tasting protein shake.0 -
I do several lectures a year on research for Nursing, PA and Pharmacy students, and am always on the lookout for things like this to share with them. This is totally going into my next rotation...0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions