Starvation mode and the Biggest Loser participants

psychod787

CSARdiver wrote: »

psychod787 wrote: »

PAV8888 wrote: »

CSARdiver wrote: »

Points I find particularly interesting - note the drop of weight and BMR during the second evaluation period. This suggests that the participants were dieting during this period, although there is no discussion and no stated control around this, where in any paper a follow up study would be immediately launched to determine significance. We know that anyone in a caloric deficit will experience a reduction to BMR - is this less than/greater than or equal to a control group not in a deficit?

You won't find me defending the 'biggest loser' study. There is just too much of a likelihood that the participants dieted in the period before the follow up measurements. Knowing what we know about how they would be likely to diet, a huge drop in NEAT would be expected!

I disagree that the issue that the study highlights is irrelevant.

I think it is relevant enough that people who are dieting should be taking it into consideration while they diet and attempt to minimize the effects of AT. Smaller deficits, re-feeds, diet-breaks, attention to preserving lean mass. NOT trying to eat as little as possible while working out as much as possible especially once energy stores are no longer at obese levels.

AND ABSOLUTELY YES behaviour modification. Especially for people, such as myself, who start at the obese+ range. We didn't fist get there just because our metabolism was damaged.

This is often called "a lifestyle change". People apparently frown at the term!

I totally agree with the lifestyle change. I do find it awesome that the people who managed to keep off most of their weight were doing almost everything the NWCR members do. I have made one observational note. There tends to be something that happens to people around the 3 year mark when trying to maintain. They tend to regain weight. I wonder if it has to do with body adaptation or just loosening up of their activity and diet? That's the kind of study we need. Any volunteers to go into a metabolic wars for 3 years? Lol

I don't understand the pushback against lifestyle change. This is exactly what is required for a successful change - your entire life! ...or maybe that's it. If you are obsessed with the simplistic notion that all is required is to move more and eat less, then you don't understand the difference between theory and implementation.

Successful people eat less and have multiple mechanism built up to ensure they eat less. They move more and have multiple mechanisms built up to ensure they move more. They tend to regain weight as time passes by and priorities in life shift...then they catch themselves and re-implement the same processes and get back on path.

My N of 1 is pretty consistent over the past three years, observing a 5% fluctuation from high to low, largely influenced by the amount of food I ate recently.

I am agreeing with you about lifestyle changes. Move more, eat smarter. There is no push back against that. I also believe in having moving goals. Might not be a mechanism in place for regain, but keeps me moving toward something. I just tend to believe in a bf set point... zone maybe is the word.

psychod787

I was going to edit this, but I did not want it to look like I was trying to be sneaky. Maybe I am still new to this, about a year into weight management, but it's hard for me to believe that people would nearly destroy themselves to just say, " kitten this, I will let myself regain almost all I lost." I personally would rather kill myself literally than go back to the way I was.

PAV8888

psychod787 wrote: »

I was going to edit this, but I did not want it to look like I was trying to be sneaky. Maybe I am still new to this, about a year into weight management, but it's hard for me to believe that people would nearly destroy themselves to just say, " kitten this, I will let myself regain almost all I lost." I personally would rather kill myself literally than go back to the way I was.

But if all you know is to exercise till you puke and eat nothing, which is my understanding of what the show teaches people to do, what tools exactly do you have the each and multiple times you're going to be confronted with "I'm still, hungry I'd like to eat an extra slice of toast". Or, perhaps more likely, "I would like to enjoy more of the sensation of consuming food/drink at this given time and I am looking for ways to rationalize that it's not going to cause extreme damage"

The less tools and tricks and understanding of yourself that you have at your disposal, the more likely you are to cave/revert/not catch it/fail to recover/ignore the issue, etc.

And all this is also assuming that other issues such as depression extreme stress uncontrolled pain, or whatever else, also do not mess with your brain.

there exists at least one study that showed that fast weight loss was just as effective as slower weight loss. the fast weight loss participants were engaged in regular counseling and received diet advice and follow-ups concerning maintenance during the time that the slow weight loss participants were still losing.

CarvedTones

There are so many sensible studies out there done on more average situations that show there is some metabolic loss that isn't so extreme, but people are always trotting out the Biggest Loser or Minnesota study like they are indicative of what will happen to everyone.

PAV8888

I find that the Minnesota study, and the mental effects of extreme deficits it demonstrated, are disturbingly relevant when applied to the many high normal weight / low overweight MFPeops who dial in 2lb a week = 50%+ TDEE deficits and apply a "never eat your exercise calories back to lose faster" regiment on top.

Their average calories eaten were in the mid 1500's. Their deficit was 50%. Exercise was walking.

How often do people in the forums suggest that walking doesn't really burn up lean mass and therefore you don't "need" to eat back the exercise calories? *I* have certainly seen this more than a few times.

So the same? No, because the options to modify the regiment are certainly more plentiful when Ansel Keys and the war effort aren't making you do it. And the calories eaten may vary a bit more when the food is not getting dished out to you pre measured.

But similarities? I think there do exist a few.