Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
How Strongly Does Appetite Counter Weight Loss?
Gianfranco_R
Posts: 1,297 Member
Last K.Hall's work has been released:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/oby.21653/full
(warning: contains maths)
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/oby.21653/full
(warning: contains maths)
1
Replies
-
Interesting study! I need to read it when I am less sleep deprived.
"We found that appetite increased by ∼100 kcal/day above baseline per kilogram of lost weight—an effect several-fold larger than the corresponding energy expenditure adaptations. The few individuals who successfully maintain weight loss over the long term do so by heroic and vigilant efforts to maintain behavior changes in the face of increased appetite along with persistent suppression of energy expenditure" (emphasis mine). That's kind. I am always very impressed by people who manage to lose a lot of weight and then keep it off.2 -
Hall cited this (but specifically said not the title) as a good explanation of the study: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/8714040
-
Wait wait wait. Since when is not eating like a damned hippopotamus a "heroic and valiant effort"? Are we really so far down the rabbit hole that balancing our bodies' energy requirements qualify for that kind of statement?17
-
I found that my appetite decreased as I lost no matter how close to my ideal weight I got. It's entirely individual.3
-
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Wait wait wait. Since when is not eating like a damned hippopotamus a "heroic and valiant effort"? Are we really so far down the rabbit hole that balancing our bodies' energy requirements qualify for that kind of statement?
RFL must make you superhuman.5 -
trigden1991 wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Wait wait wait. Since when is not eating like a damned hippopotamus a "heroic and valiant effort"? Are we really so far down the rabbit hole that balancing our bodies' energy requirements qualify for that kind of statement?
RFL must make you superhuman.
Clearly, we are The X-Force of dietary intake.
Why X-Force? Because Cable and Bishop, and that's all the reason needed.3 -
My appetite decreased as I lost weight.0
-
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Wait wait wait. Since when is not eating like a damned hippopotamus a "heroic and valiant effort"? Are we really so far down the rabbit hole that balancing our bodies' energy requirements qualify for that kind of statement?
Dude, that's basically a meaningless statement. The meat is in the math. You're objecting to some fluffy words they sprinkle around the numbers to keep their readers awake.3 -
NorthCascades wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Wait wait wait. Since when is not eating like a damned hippopotamus a "heroic and valiant effort"? Are we really so far down the rabbit hole that balancing our bodies' energy requirements qualify for that kind of statement?
Dude, that's basically a meaningless statement. The meat is in the math. You're objecting to some fluffy words they sprinkle around the numbers to keep their readers awake.
It's still unnecessary propaganda. That's my point. The more we make this *kitten* seem "heroic and valiant" the fewer people are going to be willing to even bother trying, because effort.5 -
This is a difficult thing to study for scientists, he behavior of humans on their own in the natural environment. The study is intriguing in its emphasis on hunger cues.
Individuals should not be using this study as an attempt to negate their personal experience. It is a statistical analysis of a group of people using a statistical model to describe energy intake and expenditure in an attempt to not influence people's behavior. It is not the point of such studies to say "all people get hungry " or "people should eat like hippopotomi" ( @gallowmere seriously? ) . Nor do I think their analysis is either irresponsible, or defeatest. This is my professional opinion as a PhD physical chemist.
Our bodies are amazing, complex living machines with uncountable numbers if chemical reactions occurring daily. Is it so hard to accept that we may have biological feedback loops that encourage weight maintenance given the strong evolutionary advantage this would confer?
The study suggests hunger often plays a far larger role in diet success than has been given credit recently. From a common sense standpoint it makes sense and is in that hardly revolutionary. The methods developed for non-intrusive study of human energy intake and expenditure are intriguing.10 -
This is a difficult thing to study for scientists, he behavior of humans on their own in the natural environment. The study is intriguing in its emphasis on hunger cues.
Individuals should not be using this study as an attempt to negate their personal experience. It is a statistical analysis of a group of people using a statistical model to describe energy intake and expenditure in an attempt to not influence people's behavior. It is not the point of such studies to say "all people get hungry " or "people should eat like hippopotomi" ( @gallowmere seriously? ) . Nor do I think their analysis is either irresponsible, or defeatest. This is my professional opinion as a PhD physical chemist.
Our bodies are amazing, complex living machines with uncountable numbers if chemical reactions occurring daily. Is it so hard to accept that we may have biological feedback loops that encourage weight maintenance given the strong evolutionary advantage this would confer?
The study suggests hunger often plays a far larger role in diet success than has been given credit recently. From a common sense standpoint it makes sense and is in that hardly revolutionary. The methods developed for non-intrusive study of human energy intake and expenditure are intriguing.
Yes, really. You've seen enough of my posts by now to realize that I have little respect for the feelings of those who eat themselves into a living fat suit, and even less for those who look for any excuse to never take it off.5 -
Couple of issues:
Extrapolating from T2D patient reactions to the general populace - this is not an automatically valid thing to do. It bothers me that this issue is not raised in the paper.
There was no mention that I saw of how well the placebo and treatment groups were controlling their diabetes and whether they are comparable (admittedly, I read quickly). I would expect that could potentially have an effect on appetite.3 -
NorthCascades wrote: »My appetite decreased as I lost weight.
This has been my experience as well.0 -
This is a difficult thing to study for scientists, he behavior of humans on their own in the natural environment. The study is intriguing in its emphasis on hunger cues.... The study suggests hunger often plays a far larger role in diet success than has been given credit recently. From a common sense standpoint it makes sense and is in that hardly revolutionary. The methods developed for non-intrusive study of human energy intake and expenditure are intriguing.
I agree with this and appreciate the comment. It's really hard to gauge what plays a role, since of course psychological things, motivation, whatever make such a difference in what we perceive. I know that it's easy for me to think that hunger is JUST psychological (whatever that would mean, just mental, illusionary, I guess is the idea), driven by seeing and wanting food or being tired of dieting or that kind of thing. That was my experience when I cut calories and found I wasn't hungry at all, or my experience of being hungry between meals at first and having that go away when I didn't give in and got out of the habit of eating then.
At maintenance, I find it harder than when dieting -- I want to eat much more often -- but I wouldn't have called it hunger (I don't trust my own hunger cues and don't really think of myself as feeling hungry when I want to eat). I tend to chalk this up to being tired of eating at a deficit/burned out or not having the motivation because I'm no longer all that unhappy with my weight or being out of the zone, stuff like that. But the main thing is that I cannot tell and if someone had said "people struggle more with hunger after losing weight" my response would have been (totally apart from my own experience): "how on earth is this even possible to know, maybe just just get tired of watching what they eat or are imagining that they are hungry when they are not (again whatever that means)."
This study seems to have done a really good job of comparing the same situation before and after weight loss to indicate that whatever "hunger" that is referred to is, it's stronger or has more influence after the loss. After the loss the participants made up an imperceptible 100 calorie deficit which they had not made up prior to losing weight.
That's interesting, and that it is IMO interesting has nothing to do with claiming that it's impossible to maintain weight loss. It's about what kinds of things might therefore be necessary to maintain weight loss (and that there are bodily forces that tend to push us to regain that must be countered in some way).
And, of course, it's not really about us individually, but weight loss in general and what the body does. Other forces might totally counteract it in individual cases.3 -
crzycatlady1 wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »My appetite decreased as I lost weight.
This has been my experience as well.
Mine too and it's a little annoying when I say I'm satisfied on 1250 calories folks think I'm lying or bragging. Why is that?0 -
crzycatlady1 wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »My appetite decreased as I lost weight.
This has been my experience as well.
Mine too and it's a little annoying when I say I'm satisfied on 1250 calories folks think I'm lying or bragging. Why is that?
I feel less hungry now that lm less weight too.1 -
My appetite is about the same. I'm always down to eat.2
-
That doesn't sound right.. so I have lost 46 kg so far, I don't think my appetite has increased by 4500 calories.1
-
amusedmonkey wrote: »That doesn't sound right.. so I have lost 46 kg so far, I don't think my appetite has increased by 4500 calories.
It's unlikely indeed. they write "We do not yet know whether the simple proportional controller represented by Equation (4) is valid for a range of weight losses. For example, it may be possible that small weight changes are uncompensated by changes in energy intake such that the control system engages only after sufficient weight loss to cross some threshold [35]. Furthermore, larger weight losses may result in energy intake adaptations corresponding to a nonlinear function of body weight change."
But anyway, if i remember well, you are among those MFPers who gained back weight while not counting, so you can roughly quantify your stronger appetite, calculating your excess of calorie intake for that period.1 -
Gianfranco_R wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »That doesn't sound right.. so I have lost 46 kg so far, I don't think my appetite has increased by 4500 calories.
It's unlikely indeed. they write "We do not yet know whether the simple proportional controller represented by Equation (4) is valid for a range of weight losses. For example, it may be possible that small weight changes are uncompensated by changes in energy intake such that the control system engages only after sufficient weight loss to cross some threshold [35]. Furthermore, larger weight losses may result in energy intake adaptations corresponding to a nonlinear function of body weight change."
But anyway, if i remember well, you are among those MFPers who gained back weight while not counting, so you can roughly quantify your stronger appetite, calculating your excess of calorie intake for that period.
I have gained back some weight, but it would not be an accurate quantifier because I did so when I quit smoking, so several factors contributed to that gain like lack of nicotine appetite suppression, decreased energy expenditure, oral fixation, stress eating...etc.1 -
For my anecdotal evidence, I experience hunger regularly when my weight is under 200 lbs. This has been a consistent feature of my adult life. I am happily satiated around 2200.
Unfortunately, even with 70 minutes of dedicated exercise seven days a week and getting in around 8000 non exercise steps a day, my maintenance at 165 is about 1850 . When I swam instead of walked, it hit 2000 but I was even hungrier. I'm fighting as hard now as I did in the first few weeks of my dietry change when I was under the shock of dropping from 2500 to 1750 cal/day.
As an individual, I cannot really place my experience in the context of this study. I have consciously lost weight. The caloric adaptations clearly cannot be linear, as any attempt to lose weight would be counterproductive if it was so. I suspect the algorithm may need work, but the way this group thinks about quantifying metabolism is unique.1 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Wait wait wait. Since when is not eating like a damned hippopotamus a "heroic and valiant effort"? Are we really so far down the rabbit hole that balancing our bodies' energy requirements qualify for that kind of statement?
Yep jumping on the grenade to save the people around you is heroic. Skipping a Twinklie not so much.2 -
For my anecdotal evidence, I experience hunger regularly when my weight is under 200 lbs. This has been a consistent feature of my adult life. I am happily satiated around 2200.
I couldn't tie my hunger to my weight (as in I find it impossible to tell, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if all things equal my physical hunger was higher at a lower weight).
Things I do know:
When dieting and into it I am less bothered by the desire to eat, because I am focused on other things or getting pleasure from the process. I don't think this means I am less physically hungry.
A bigger difference (at least consciously) in whether I eat or not is whether I take steps to control calories (i.e., eating mindfully, watching portions, not just counting calories) vs. just eating freely. Would I eat more eating freely at a lower weight vs. a higher. Not sure, but I do seem to gain fast when I fall into this pattern and then stop at a certain point, so probably?
I was able to easily eat at 1200 gross (a significant deficit) when obese and can't seem to consistently do that now (not saying I should). I have chalked this up to motivation, but could it be underlying hunger? Of course.1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »For my anecdotal evidence, I experience hunger regularly when my weight is under 200 lbs. This has been a consistent feature of my adult life. I am happily satiated around 2200.
I couldn't tie my hunger to my weight (as in I find it impossible to tell, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if all things equal my physical hunger was higher at a lower weight).
Things I do know:
When dieting and into it I am less bothered by the desire to eat, because I am focused on other things or getting pleasure from the process. I don't think this means I am less physically hungry.
A bigger difference (at least consciously) in whether I eat or not is whether I take steps to control calories (i.e., eating mindfully, watching portions, not just counting calories) vs. just eating freely. Would I eat more eating freely at a lower weight vs. a higher. Not sure, but I do seem to gain fast when I fall into this pattern and then stop at a certain point, so probably?
I was able to easily eat at 1200 gross (a significant deficit) when obese and can't seem to consistently do that now (not saying I should). I have chalked this up to motivation, but could it be underlying hunger? Of course.
Was this before or after you started running regularly again?
I know my appetite jumped significantly when my weekly mileage got up to a certain point. I don't feel I can really relate my own experience to the study because of it. I lost weight and had no trouble staying at or below 1400. But I wasn't very active, either. Then when I got to goal weight, I started lifting, and then running and of course my appetite increased.
I'm losing some weight now that I gained after a couple of vacations and a couple of months where I just let everything go, and am not having trouble with 1400 or less, but I just started running again. I expect my appetite to start picking up again shortly. Just in time for Thanksgiving feasting, I'm sure.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »For my anecdotal evidence, I experience hunger regularly when my weight is under 200 lbs. This has been a consistent feature of my adult life. I am happily satiated around 2200.
I couldn't tie my hunger to my weight (as in I find it impossible to tell, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if all things equal my physical hunger was higher at a lower weight).
Things I do know:
When dieting and into it I am less bothered by the desire to eat, because I am focused on other things or getting pleasure from the process. I don't think this means I am less physically hungry.
A bigger difference (at least consciously) in whether I eat or not is whether I take steps to control calories (i.e., eating mindfully, watching portions, not just counting calories) vs. just eating freely. Would I eat more eating freely at a lower weight vs. a higher. Not sure, but I do seem to gain fast when I fall into this pattern and then stop at a certain point, so probably?
I was able to easily eat at 1200 gross (a significant deficit) when obese and can't seem to consistently do that now (not saying I should). I have chalked this up to motivation, but could it be underlying hunger? Of course.
Was this before or after you started running regularly again?
After but even as compared to when I was significantly overweight and running for about the same overall calorie burn. Also, I struggle to do it even on an off day which I never did when overweight. (I'm NOT saying it would be sensible for me to run 5 miles and eat 1200, just to be clear.)I know my appetite jumped significantly when my weekly mileage got up to a certain point. I don't feel I can really relate my own experience to the study because of it. I lost weight and had no trouble staying at or below 1400. But I wasn't very active, either. Then when I got to goal weight, I started lifting, and then running and of course my appetite increased.
This happens to me too -- I find exercise helps me maintain up to a certain point, but after that (I found this when training for a half ironman and a marathon) it becomes impossible for me to maintain a deficit and I easily put on weight if I am not careful and am just wanting to eat all the time. I think this is because I do well with a really regular eating schedule and when I workout beyond a certain point and add in more eating times to supply needed calories I go overboard since my schedule is messed up. I noticed this also when I did a bike trip riding 60-100+ miles a day and was grazing all day. Fine during the trip but afterwards I wanted to keep eating all the time.
Anyway, agree about it being hard to compare my own experience to the study because of all the other factors. That's why I found the controlled study so interesting.0 -
I am always hungry. Whether I'm 20% bodyfat or 12%, I am always hungry.2
-
trigden1991 wrote: »I am always hungry. Whether I'm 20% bodyfat or 12%, I am always hungry.
I've never thought it that way- you're right! It's a personal struggle - each person can only help themselves at the end of the day, and deserve all of the credit then too.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