Weight Loss TV Shows - Good or Bad?

Hungry_Shopgirl

One of the problems with "biggest loser" is that it perpetuates the myth that weight loss is all about endless hours of intense, vomit-inducing, painful exercise. And it's really not.

Secret eaters though. Dang good show. I wish it had more seasons. I love watching people come to the realization of how much they're eating and how every bite counts.

quiksylver296

RaeBeeBaby wrote: »

<<<<< Guilty pleasure watcher here. I do enjoy the weight loss programs. I want to see the people be successful and I cheer them on (in most cases). Are they realistic for the common man/woman? No, of course not. It's a TV show and it's always going to be the extreme or it doesn't make for good TV.

Because I feel a certain affinity with the players, I usually only watch these while exercising - walking on the treadmill or doing a dumbbell workout. If I was sitting down eating pizza or a pint of ice cream, then there's something definitely wrong there. I guess if I'm exercising it makes it OK. I'm sure a psychologist would have a field day with that philosophy, too.

All of this is me, too. I DVR them and only allow myself to watch them while I'm on my elliptical.

TheRoadDog

If the concept of the show is a contest, it's not good. Most of the competitors on shows like the Biggest Loser gain all their weight back.

If the concept of the show is to document someone's journey to lose weight, that is a better concept. It can be motivational.

RaeBeeBaby

Mr_Healthy_Habits wrote: »

Biggest loser - Terrible!

Some of the contestants have even come out and said that they were given all kinds of drugs to keep them going in the gym and dehydrate them down...

Ever noticed how the beginning of the season, everyone takes their shirts off for weighing, for no other reason than to show how obese they are to the camera, but at the end of the season, they all weigh with shirts.... To hide the loose skin!

Also, it's just terrible how they starve these people with insane caloric deficits and then bait them with cash and food to break their diets... They are not trying to help these people, they are just trying to exploit them

The show has never actually shown or told the viewers what the daily calorie intake actually was, so it's just an assumption that it's an insane caloric deficit. I remember one episode where the trainers were encouraging the contestants to eat all their calories in order to fuel their workouts, but still no mention of what that was. I felt like it was way more focused on the workouts than on their diet anyway.

As far as exploitation, remember this is a game show and those people pretty much knew what they were getting into. Casting calls nationwide with thousands upon thousands of people wanting on the show. I'm pretty sure all of them had watched it before they applied. How is it exploitation if they entered into it voluntarily pretty much knowing what to expect?

Bekah7482

TheRoadDog wrote: »

If the concept of the show is a contest, it's not good. Most of the competitors on shows like the Biggest Loser gain all their weight back.

If the concept of the show is to document someone's journey to lose weight, that is a better concept. It can be motivational.

I tend to lean towards this. I admit, in my younger years, I loved the biggest loser. However, they do not focus on diet or on mental health. I believe that mental health is a key factor for the morbidly obese that is often overlooked.
Shows that are "contests" promote unhealthy behavior. Perfect example is BL winner Rachel Frederickson who lost way too much weight in order to hit the weight loss number she needed to win the show.

Shows that are more about transformation and more complete aspects of weight loss (mental health, diet and exercise) are much better. My 600lb life is my favorite. It inspired me to turn my life around. I am now down 167lbs partially because of watching that show and realizing that was exactly where I was headed.

HappyKat5

I admit, I’m a sucker for before and after shows, although I also admit, because of good editing it’s not realistic. However, I sometimes learn a trick or two that I didn’t think about regarding my own life. I think if you can see them for what they really are...a 1/2 or 1 hour show, then they can be good motivation to do better.

RaeBeeBaby

Although these are television shows and made to entertain, it's good to remember that these are real people and not actors. That was really driven home when I watched a recent episode of 600 lb life. Robert Buchel was the first cast member to die during the filming of his story. (I'm actually surprised there haven't been more.)

He had a heart attack and did not survive it. In the beginning of his story he had one of the most positive outlooks that I've seen on this show and I was really cheering him on. Although he battled addiction to painkillers, and his attitude began to deteriorate somewhat, I was very sad that he was not successful in the end. I admit that I cried along with his girlfriend and mother as they wrapped up the episode showing his memorial service. Robert Buchel was only 41 years old.

HDBKLM

I got curious about 'My 600-lb. Life' after reading this thread and I'm not sure I've ever sat through a whole hour and a half of television with my mouth hanging open the whole time before. A lot of moving stories and interesting insights there. I have a lingering question from watching that I hope will not come off sounding snarky because it's not meant that way. I was hoping one of you might be able to point to what I'm missing:

Everybody on the program (or at least the 5 eps I've seen so far) has to lose a significant amount of weight on their own before they're approved for surgery. This seems to be a combination of getting them to a safer weight for surgery AND of seeing whether they're serious about the program. What I keep wondering—and I know I must be thinking too simplistically here—is if the participants are able to lose effectively via a calorie-restricted diet, why do they not keep going that way and instead follow through with surgery? Is it just the power of short-term motivation to be approved for surgery but couldn't be sustained long-term?

On the one hand, I can understand that without the fear of re-stretching their post-surgery stomachs or making themselves sick because they can't digest certain foods anymore maybe in the long term it'd be too hard to stay away from trigger foods (or simply too much food) forever. On the other hand, the show announces there's only a 5% long-term success rate anyway, and I'm sure we've all heard those stories about people who 'ate themselves out of their gastric sleeve' within a few years. Regarding the supplemental psychological treatment offered pre-surgery to help patients with their food issues, why could that not happen outside of a surgery-related context?

The issue is clearly complex, and I totally get the logic from the government angle that bariatric surgery has been shown to be a more cost-effective healthcare solution than paying for the aftermath of morbid obesity in the form of treating the diseases that come along with it. I'll leave aside the question of prevention vs. surgery, and I also get that clinically overseen calorie restriction programs in the form of so-called 'fat farms' fail in the long term because that isn't a 'real world' solution and participants eventually have to go home and fend for themselves. But that pre-surgery diet that all the show's protagonists endure is basically a physician-overseen calorie restriction diet done on an outpatient basis. Unlike a fat farm, they shop for and prepare their own food, so in concert with supplemental psychological care, I don't get why that couldn't be the solution in and of itself. Can someone enlighten me with an answer other than 'Because then bariatric surgeons would stop making money'?