Calorie Counter

Message Boards Debate: Health and Fitness
You are currently viewing the message boards in:

If a calorie is a calorie, why do we see this?

saintor1saintor1 Member Posts: 305 Member Member Posts: 305 Member
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/oby.20460
Design and Methods: Overweight and obese women (BMI 32.4 6 1.8 kg=m2) with metabolic syndrome were randomized into two isocaloric (1400 kcal) weight loss groups, a breakfast (BF) (700 kcal breakfast, 500 kcal lunch, 200 kcal dinner) or a dinner (D) group (200 kcal breakfast, 500 kcal lunch, 700 kcal dinner) for 12 weeks.

So 1400cal in both groups, first BF ate 700 / 500 /200 for breakfast / lunch / dinner and the D group ate the opposite.

And the kicker:
However, compared with the D group, the BF group showed a 2.5-fold greater weight loss

That's massive.

"Eat breakfast like a king, lunch like a prince and dinner like a pauper."
edited January 28
«1345678

Replies

  • ReenieHJReenieHJ Member Posts: 1,565 Member Member Posts: 1,565 Member
    I don't believe studies are highly accurate but I do feel if you eat less towards the end of the day as opposed to more, there is some benefit to that. Now, does it have anything to do with eating less overall?? I know if I ate less at night my caloric intake would diminish because that's when my munchies hit. So as far as studies go, I take some of them with a grain of salt. UNLESS you're able to back them up with even more studies that seem more closely monitored. Just my take on it.
  • erickirberickirb Member Posts: 12,272 Member Member Posts: 12,272 Member
    Did both groups have the same maintenance cals. if one was higher (BF group) and ate the same cals as the other group they would be expected to lose more. the other possible reason, as noted before, is that bigger breakfast could lead to a higher NEAT.
  • lemurcat2lemurcat2 Member Posts: 5,424 Member Member Posts: 5,424 Member
    erickirb wrote: »
    Did both groups have the same maintenance cals. if one was higher (BF group) and ate the same cals as the other group they would be expected to lose more. the other possible reason, as noted before, is that bigger breakfast could lead to a higher NEAT.

    The calories weren't controlled. Both groups seem to have lost less than they should have at the calories provided than if they'd truly been compliant, but the big breakfast group was either more compliant or moved more, most likely.

    It would be very interesting to see this study with truly controlled cals, but it's hard to do 12 weeks with such a study. It would then lead to questions about NEAT (we discussed a study recently that supposedly did find that eating breakfast increased NEAT, which offset the fact that people who skipped breakfast tended to eat less over the course of the day -- I don't know if anyone saw the actual study, so we were discussing assuming the account of it were true, which is always risky).
    edited January 28
  • DaffyGirl88DaffyGirl88 Member Posts: 398 Member Member Posts: 398 Member

    "It is likely that the low bf participants were not accustomed to such a low calorie breakfast and it impacted their NEAT. "

    Pardon the ignorance here...what is NEAT? Thanks!
  • cmriversidecmriverside Member Posts: 30,013 Member Member Posts: 30,013 Member
    erickirb wrote: »
    Did both groups have the same maintenance cals. if one was higher (BF group) and ate the same cals as the other group they would be expected to lose more. the other possible reason, as noted before, is that bigger breakfast could lead to a higher NEAT.

    ^^This.

    Plus time of day of weigh-ins...plus the set number of calories allegedly eaten, plus - if it were this simple I'm pretty sure we all would have done this.

    It's still about calories, not bogus 30 sample "studies."
  • SezxyStefSezxyStef Member Posts: 15,248 Member Member Posts: 15,248 Member
    Only 30 people? Then it sounds like statistical anomalies and math threw off the data. Not a big enough study to be accurate. The data is just fluff. Especially if their calorie intake wasn’t controlled every day!
    erickirb wrote: »
    Did both groups have the same maintenance cals. if one was higher (BF group) and ate the same cals as the other group they would be expected to lose more. the other possible reason, as noted before, is that bigger breakfast could lead to a higher NEAT.

    ^^This.

    Plus time of day of weigh-ins...plus the set number of calories allegedly eaten, plus - if it were this simple I'm pretty sure we all would have done this.

    It's still about calories, not bogus 30 sample "studies."

    Just for clarity it was over 90 and they were split into groups...not just 30 people in total.
  • LietchiLietchi Member Posts: 903 Member Member Posts: 903 Member
    Aside from the question of the accuracy of the calories and differences in NEAT, I also wonder about body composition before and after weight-loss.
    Losing mostly fat versus losing fat and muscle mass would also change the weight loss rate, I presume. Muscle loss certainly seems a relevant factor considering the (theoretically) large deficit.
  • DaffyGirl88DaffyGirl88 Member Posts: 398 Member Member Posts: 398 Member
    Suezq72760 wrote: »
    "It is likely that the low bf participants were not accustomed to such a low calorie breakfast and it impacted their NEAT. "

    Pardon the ignorance here...what is NEAT? Thanks!

    Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis

    All the calories you burn throughout the day, when not exercising.

    Thank you!! :-)
  • deannalfisherdeannalfisher Member, Premium Posts: 5,604 Member Member, Premium Posts: 5,604 Member
    i'd like to know how they determined that 1400 cal was the right amount of calories per day for each person - technically by BMI i'm obese but i can tell you that i lose weight eating 2000cal a day (as a female 5'3", 165lbs) so 1400 would be really low for me; but others who aren't as active 1400 could be the right goal
  • saintor1saintor1 Member Posts: 305 Member Member Posts: 305 Member
    Another study going the *same way*.
    https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07315724.2013.863169
    Results: Thirty-six subjects completed the study (G1 = 18, G2 = 18). Both groups had significant improvements in body composition and metabolic parameters but G1 had enhanced results for weight loss (G1: −8.2 ± 3.0 kg; G2: −6.5 ± 3.4 kg; p = 0.028),

Sign In or Register to comment.