Hilton Head Diet

anny3818

I was wondering if anyone is on the Hilton Head diet. It is an old diet written by Peter Muller ...... would like to hear form people that have tried it

callsitlikeiseeit

no clue what it is, and to be perfectly honest... dont really care LOL Theres too many of them for me to try to keep up with.

if it puts you in a deficit, youll lose weight. thats how diets work. but can you eat that way the rest of your life to MAINTAIN that loss? or even to lose the amount you need or want to? Unless medically necessary, no particular 'diet' is ever needed.

I have lost (and kept off) a HUGE amount of weight. I eat what i want. I eat within my calorie goals (which can vary, depending on if I am maintaining, or losing, or training for something). I eat out, I eat carbs (lots of em), I eat chocolate and sweets, sodas (not full calorie though, I do draw the line at drinking my calories except for my coffee creamer), and I dont stress it when I have a day over my calorie goals, or even obscenely high. They arent many. If you want to try the diet you can. its a diet. itll probably work. but for how long?

Cliffs Notes of Weight Loss:

• Weight loss happens in THE KITCHEN, fitness happens in the gym
• small, sustainable changes
• Understand weight fluctuations are normal. Thinks of a roller coaster, not a steep mountain slope down. Some weeks up, some weeks down. Its the OVERALL TREND that matters
• Learn to weigh your food ON A FOOD SCALE
• Learn how to find ACCURATE DATABASE ENTRIES
• BE ACTIVE - get off your butt and MOVE. Find SOMETHING you enjoy. If your activity is limited, find ways to move that you are ABLE to do
• Deprivation is the key to Binging and falling off the wagon. Learn how to fit your favorite things in regularly. There are no 'bad foods' Just 'bad quantities'.
• One 'bad' day will not undo your deficit.
• You did not gain the weight quickly. You will not lose it quickly. Better to lose it slowly, and KEEP IT OFF, then lose it quick, and gain it all back and more!

Useful Links

https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1234699/logging-accurately-step-by-step-guide/p1

https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1296011/calorie-counting-101/p1

and basically ... all of these

https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10300319/most-helpful-posts-general-health-fitness-and-diet-must-reads#latest

AnnPT77

I read up on it a little, but have never done it.

There appears to be an induction phase where one is to eat 1000 calories or less. MFP will give a woman warning messages if she tries to close her diary on a day that low. (There's no penalty for failing to close the day; it just won't push a message to one's timeline feed to tell MFP friends that one has closed the day.)

Reportedly, the plan is a low fat/higher carb approach, involving 3 meals and 2 snacks daily, with the rationale that eating frequently will rev up metabolism, and that that will be helpful because metabolism (BMR/RMR) is a high percentage of most people's calorie expenditure - 70% or so, maybe. There is a more specific eating plan, it seems, suggesting what foods to eat.

For most people who aren't heavy exercisers, and who don't have an active job, it does tend to be true that the largest percentage of their daily calorie expenditure comes from just being alive, breathing, heart beating, etc. - "metabolism".

IMU, research is mixed on whether multiple daily mails, or some particular combination of macronutrients (like high carb/low fat), or specific food choices, do actually increase BMR/RMR. If they do, IMU the effect is fairly small.

If I'm describing this method as you understand it, I'd observe - and this is very much not a criticism of it - that its conceptual underpinnings are almost the opposite of diets that are popular or trendy recently. The more recent concept seems to be that high fat/low carb diets are superior (because of belief that insulin prompts fat storage, etc., and a belief that fat is sating), and that restricted eating windows (intermittent fasting, avoiding eating for the majority of a 24-hour period) are more likely to cause weight loss.

I don't really know or care which of those theories is more correct (low carb/insulin/fasting vs. high carb/low fat/many meals), personally.

My own opinion is that the "metabolic" effects of any of those strategies - if any at all - are relatively small, as a percent of a typical person's daily calorie needs; and that compliance (ease of sticking with a given eating routine) looms much larger as a success factor, when it comes to losing weight. Ease of compliance tends to vary quite a bit between individual people.

The implication of that opinion would be that if this diet is practical for you, lets you get good nutrition, keeps your energy level up, keeps you full, is tasty to you, leads to sensibly moderate (sustainable) weight loss, then it's a good approach for you. If it doesn't do those things, some other approach may be better.

Myself, when losing from class 1 obese to a healthy weight in 2015 (and while maintaining a healthy weight since), I got a calorie goal from MFP, tested it for 4-6 weeks then adjusted based on weight loss results, and took this approach to eating:

http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10636388/free-customized-personal-weight-loss-eating-plan-not-spam-or-mlm/p1

Alongside that, I didn't particularly change my exercise routine, because I was already very active, even while obese. If someone is not active, gradually increasing exercise activity is a good way to increase calorie expenditure (earning more food, in effect) but more importantly, it's very useful to improve health.

I'm not saying my approach is the best approach for others, will work for others, or anything like that. I'm just being open and honest about the methods I personally chose, since that can give some perspective on what I wrote above.

One thing I would say: If the diet as I've described it above is accurate - particularly the 1000 calorie or less part - then I'd advise against posting much about it here on MFP. IMU, that would meet the MFP definition of a VLCD (very low calorie diet), and promoting those is against the Community Guidelines, presumably because the site's owners believe they're unsafe (at least in circumstances that are not closely medically supervised, and - who knows - maybe not ever).

I started out here eating 1200 calorie plus exercise calories, which in theory was reasonable for my characteristics at the time, but lost too fast, got weak and fatigued, and took multiple weeks to recover normal energy and strength. I have no doubt that that influences my opinions about health risks of VLCDs.

Repeating myself: If this diet is practical for you, lets you get good nutrition, keeps your energy level up, keeps you full, is tasty to you, leads to sensibly moderate (sustainable) weight loss, then it's a good approach for you. I'd encourage you to be alert for the slightest sign of low energy, weakness, hair loss, or worse health consequences, because 1000 is a very low calorie level, even if temporary, unless someone is female, older, quite petite, and quite inactive. Bad consequences are not a sure result of VLCDs, but the risk is increased, so it's good to be attentive. From my own experience, things can seem fine for a while, until there's a sudden problem.

Best wishes, sincerely! Reaching and maintaining a healthy weight is a pretty major quality of life improvement, or at least it has been so for me. I would wish that everyone can find her personal best path to that result!

JBanx256

Been to Hilton Head, never heard of the diet.

Quick Google search showed its creator also refers to it as "The Metabolism Diet," which means you can go ahead and bin it.