Why VLCD "work" and why they are a horrible idea

Colorscheme

ilex70 wrote: »

Sorry, but I don't think so. Not sure where you got your info.

VLCD isn't ideal, and it sure isn't fun. But it is effective for weight loss for the morbidly obese under a doctor's supervision.

Been there, done that.

If you had done the same you would likely know that rule number one on a VLCD is to prioritize protein and hit a minimum protein goal every day to maintain muscle mass.

In my first 3 months on 800 calories a day I lost 30 pounds the first month and then another 30 over the next two months. Proceeded to lose a total of 100 pounds.

I didn't regain because I did VLCD, I regained because I had a lot of stress and grief in my life and I didn't prioritize good eating and exercise habits.

And, per another thread that came up here, VLCD isn't banned. What is banned is promoting VLCD without a doctor's supervision and/or promoting if for people who are not morbidly obese.

Agreed. There are certain cases where it's necessary. Look at Dr. Now, he has his patients on VLCD's in prep for surgery. It's ok if supervised by a doctor because as I understand, it's only necessary under extreme circumstances.

ki4eld

allenpriest wrote: »

And you know how many folks on here want to lose 10 oR 15 pounds and jump to VLCD. They are not under a doc's care. They are just winging it. Example? Those "military diet" threads perhsps?? And what I described is exactly what happens.

You may be working with a doc. Good for you. Hope it works. But there are good reasons why VLCD are discouraged.

I'm not disagreeing with the fact that VLCD aren't a solution for the overwhelming majority of people. I'm disagreeing with your original post, because much of it is inaccurate or at least misleading. Would you like to discuss what can happen with VLCD? The first indicator isn't loss of LBM, which most people don't know and can't measure. The first indicator beyond electrolyte issues is usually hair, skin, and nail issues, which people will see within a couple of weeks. *It's also not a given that people will lose LBM and certainly not pounds and pounds of it.

I'm not advocating VLCD. Seriously, I wouldn't put my ex-husband through this and I'd happily set him on fire any day of the week. But your post wasn't helpful or informative and that's why you're getting push-back. If anything, it was preachy, which isn't going to get through to people and may just encourage them down a very bad path.

eta *

ki4eld

deleted double post.

robertw486

allenpriest wrote: »

ki4eld wrote: »

allenpriest wrote: »

Promotion of very low calorie diets is prohibited on these discussion forums. VLCD will allow one to lose weight rapidly. So why is promotion banned and why do so many regular posters jump on any discussion of such with a vengeance? Here is why.

You will lose lots of weight rapidly on VLCD. When you restrict calories below about 1100 for women and 1500 for men, the body starts to hunt for enough energy to keep the brain running properly. The first reserve is the store of glucose stored in the liver. There is about a pound there. That pound of sugar also ties up about 3 pounds of water. So over the first couple of days the liver gets drained of sugar and you dump the water and you lose 3.5 to 4 pounds.

Now the liver is depleted, so the body looks for another energy source. The amino acids in muscle proteins are very similar to glucose and the liver and easily convert them into glucose. So, taking the path of least resistance, the body tears down muscle to keep the brain running. One pound of muscle yields about 700 calories so the body burns one half to one pound of muscle trying to keep up. So this will yield 3-5 pounds per week - a pretty common claim of VLCD.

Now what? When your body is under this level of stress your metabolic rate starts to drop so that one can get by on fewer calories. This slows down the weight loss. Then the intense feelings of depravation and just bad feelings kick in and the dieter abandons the VLCD.

In returning to regular eating habits the liver fills back up with the pound of glucose and the accompanying water. That four pound bounce happens in a day or two. Building the muscle back won't happen like that though. The body with push the extra calories into fat. And since the maintenance of muscle requires more calories than does the maintenance of fat, the body gets set in the pattern of less muscle and more fat.

So we end up with a messed up metabolism, less muscle, more fat, and a temporary drop in weight that is not a drop in any fat and that cannot be maintained.

That is why VLCD promotion is banned and why regular posters attack such so vociferously.

Bless your heart, but no. Just no. Let me get some coffee and I'll be willing to go point by point what you got wrong. It'll take less time if I say "pretty much every word" but I can go point by point if you like. Since I've been living a VLCD for over a year under a doctor's supervision, I can speak with some authority on the matter.

And you know how many folks on here want to lose 10 oR 15 pounds and jump to VLCD. They are not under a doc's care. They are just winging it. Example? Those "military diet" threads perhsps?? And what I described is exactly what happens.

You may be working with a doc. Good for you. Hope it works. But there are good reasons why VLCD are discouraged.

I'd have to see some science based evidence to believe that even the extreme diets would start eating muscle that quickly. Muscle retention is way up on the list of the priorities even in fasting situations. The body is going to go after the consumed calories and fat first. Once you remove water weight, actual muscle mass is small regardless.

Nobody on this thread is promoting VLCD without medical supervision, and studies show that done with supervision VLCD is not something that has negative metabolic impact. Fasting long term does to some extent, but that is just the body going into self preservation mode. And even then, muscle mass is reduced more in ounces per day rather than pounds per week.



I personally still think that defining VLCD without regard to total body weight and composition is the wrong way to go about it. The example of some of the extreme woo diets such as military diets are a good example. For a very small person, they might be completely safe. For a large lean person, really stupid. And really every diet should consider LBM vs fat mass.

allenpriest

ilex70 wrote: »

....
And, per another thread that came up here, VLCD isn't banned. What is banned is promoting VLCD without a doctor's supervision and/or promoting if for people who are not morbidly obese.

community guidelines 3 b




Of course, as a grown up, you get to do whatever you want.