Reaction to the biggest loser??

kaylorraine44

I read an article from a previous contestant saying that they tape back the excess skin. Bleh!

SingingSingleTracker

wow those professional athletes are thin

Yup. In road cycling and in running - there is really no need for any extra upper body muscles and weight. So a cyclist, for instance, who is a general classification Tour de Frane (or any of the grand tours) hopeful winner must weigh as little as possible so they have the advantages going up the mountains (power to weigh ratio). There are sprinters, time trialists, team members that lead and protect the general classification contenders, etc... - so you will see several weigh/body/muscle types in cycling. But the guys going for the big prize have very little upper body muscle because it is a detrement to their success. They are burning up to 8000 calories per day in a stage of the race which is usually 4-5 hours. Training, they are on the bike for up to 6- 8 hours per day. Bradley Wiggins who won 2 years ago started the Tour de France at 6'3" and 150 pounds. Guess how much he weighed 21 days later at the end of the race? There is another pro cyclist at 6'4" who weighs only 137 pounds (that's a BMI of 16.7 by the way). And quite a few more that are a bit shorter, but around 130. All much taller than the Biggest Loser gal and many with similar or lower BMI's, and nobody bats an eyebrow.

But she.....

Why should we freak that the Biggest Loser in order to win the big prize did multiple workouts each day? She wanted to win.

Same for professional marathoners. Sickingly skinny with very little upper body muscle mass. Again - it is the power to weight ratio. If you want to win a marathon, you cannot being carrying any excess weight as other contenders will leave you in the dust.

I would either credit the trainer that worked with the Biggest Loser winner - or the winner herself that worked on trimming her upper body as much as possible (running a caloric deficit and doing endurnace training allowed her body to feed on the muscle and drop weight). It's an age old training trick in cyclists and runners for their upper bodies. And it's a tough balance because they don't want to lose their leg muscles. In viewing the pictures of her, her calf muscles look pretty amazing and are not undernourished like her upper body appears. She was doing endurance training where the legs were worked very well and the toning is still there. If that indeed was her targeted training to drop and win - well done. And it got her the grand prize of $250K. She is now free to settle into her weight and enjoy the spoils of winning which may indeed include seeing an increase in nutrition and work to balance the upper body out to be a bit fuller.

We've seen professional movie stars drop weight for a feature film. So much weight that they looked sick. Does anybody freak out about it?

Oh well. I'm sure we'll here more of the story as it unfolds.

AsellusReborn

wow those professional athletes are thin

Yup. In road cycling and in running - there is really no need for any extra upper body muscles and weight. So a cyclist, for instance, who is a general classification Tour de Frane (or any of the grand tours) hopeful winner must weigh as little as possible so they have the advantages going up the mountains (power to weigh ratio). There are sprinters, time trialists, team members that lead and protect the general classification contenders, etc... - so you will see several weigh/body/muscle types in cycling. But the guys going for the big prize have very little upper body muscle because it is a detrement to their success. They are burning up to 8000 calories per day in a stage of the race which is usually 4-5 hours. Training, they are on the bike for up to 6- 8 hours per day. Bradley Wiggins who won 2 years ago started the Tour de France at 6'3" and 150 pounds. Guess how much he weighed 21 days later at the end of the race? There is another pro cyclist at 6'4" who weighs only 137 pounds (that's a BMI of 16.7 by the way). And quite a few more that are a bit shorter, but around 130. All much taller than the Biggest Loser gal and many with similar or lower BMI's, and nobody bats an eyebrow.

But she.....

Why should we freak that the Biggest Loser in order to win the big prize did multiple workouts each day? She wanted to win.

Same for professional marathoners. Sickingly skinny with very little upper body muscle mass. Again - it is the power to weight ratio. If you want to win a marathon, you cannot being carrying any excess weight as other contenders will leave you in the dust.

I would either credit the trainer that worked with the Biggest Loser winner - or the winner herself that worked on trimming her upper body as much as possible (running a caloric deficit and doing endurnace training allowed her body to feed on the muscle and drop weight). It's an age old training trick in cyclists and runners for their upper bodies. And it's a tough balance because they don't want to lose their leg muscles. In viewing the pictures of her, her calf muscles look pretty amazing and are not undernourished like her upper body appears. She was doing endurance training where the legs were worked very well and the toning is still there. If that indeed was her targeted training to drop and win - well done. And it got her the grand prize of $250K. She is now free to settle into her weight and enjoy the spoils of winning which may indeed include seeing an increase in nutrition and work to balance the upper body out to be a bit fuller.

We've seen professional movie stars drop weight for a feature film. So much weight that they looked sick. Does anybody freak out about it?

Oh well. I'm sure we'll here more of the story as it unfolds.

This. It's not a look I'd want, but for 250K? We give up years of our life being unhealthily obese for no reason other than life got in the way or that extra donut was delicious, she gives up half a year and is too thin for a quarter of a million. Would I do that to lose weight without that incentive? No...would I do that to lose weight with that incentive?

I don't know, but I might.

Now, if it turns out she actually has become anorexic, that's a different story. But with everything TBL encourages, we don't care unless the contests carry that extreme to a slightly further extreme? Nuh uh.

lynn1982

While there is a lot of talk on how she looks, I think what we all seem to be missing here is the sheer amount of weight that she lost in such a short period. She may have very well developed an eating disorder. She looks like she lost a significant amount of muscle - and don't forget that the heart is composed of muscle - if her heart muscle's wasting, then it could be fatal. But I think it's also interesting that no one seems to find the tactics on that show disturbing when people are overweight, but as soon as someone thinner employs such tactics, everyone freaks out.

SingingSingleTracker

While there is a lot of talk on how she looks, I think what we all seem to be missing here is the sheer amount of weight that she lost in such a short period. She may have very well developed an eating disorder. She looks like she lost a significant amount of muscle - and don't forget that the heart is composed of muscle - if her heart muscle's wasting, then it could be fatal. But I think it's also interesting that no one seems to find the tactics on that show disturbing when people are overweight, but as soon as someone thinner employs such tactics, everyone freaks out.

She lost 59.62% of her body weight in 10 months. There is a post on the success story thread here at MFP of a guy who lost 57.6% of his body weight in about the same amount of time. Is anybody lambasting him? Nope. Hmmm...

We all know Lance Armstrong the most from his off season look during his athletic career where he bulked up...




What did he weigh and look like while riding in major Tour events? A lot skinnier...




Forget the issue of EPO doping as all the GC contenders were also doing it, yet they still had to trim down to have a chance at climbing the mountains faster than everyone else by being very light.

You want to win? You've got to trim. Should we not be congratulating the gal who won The Biggest Loser for managing to trim using an age old way of doing it by endurance training and running a caloric deficit?

Common place in cycling to drop weight fast...

http://www.bicycling.com/training-nutrition/nutrition-weight-loss/fat-fab?page=0,0

ldrosophila

lame!

SkinnyRach22

I think she totally deserved the win. The show is what should be criticized. They do not promote healthy weight loss at all so why would they expect Rachel to do that when she went home. If I were up to win 250k I would do the same thing. In no way does she look healthy though.

I do not understand the professional athlete example because how the heck is she supposed to maintain a professional athletes body when that is not her profession. These people train all day everyday. Also a lot of the athletes get this way using other methods.

I do not understand the loose skin issue either. There is no way in heck her arms should look like that after losing that much weight. All the other contestants had loose skin. When I lost 115 pounds I had tons of loose skin! Something is not right about the entire picture.

sunshinenjjr

This is the second time I've commented about this subject. I'll say what I said before. I think Rachel lost to much weight. Not because of how her body looks but because of how her face looks. Some people are naturally thin like that, but they look healthy. Rachel does not look healthy. She went from looking like a fresh faced 24 year old to looking like a 40 year old. When your healthy at the age of 24 your face shouldn't look that gaunt.

That being said, if I was in her place and there was 250k on the line, I also would have lost that much weight to win. She can always gain some weight back, but she won't have another chance to win 250k.

stepbystep24

I thought she looked way too thin. She looked great on the makeover episode so I was shocked when I was her at the finale. I hope the Biggest Loser will make some changes and not encourage someone to lose so much weight that they are unhealthy.

sarahslim100

but most tour de france competitors are on drugs


quote]

I am curious to know what people think about Rachel Fredrickson, the current winner of the biggest loser. There has been a lot of controversy around her losing 155 pounds in 5 months, taking her down to just 105 LBS. Speculation of her being unhealthy, even throwing the word "anorexic" around, has been all around the media. I would like to know what your thoughts/comments/feelings are??

Happy Friday!

Hey - the point was whoever won received $250K. Guess what? She won!!!!

Typical Tour de France professional racer looks like this with their clothes off...




And most look like this with clothes...




Typical Professional Marathon Runner looks like this...


mar-leaders

Nobody freaks out when they see these professional athletes that look like that. This gal wins the contest dropping, cuttting weight and grabs the $250K check - and everyone freaks out? She won! 1/4 of a Million.

wow those professional athletes are thin
[/quote]

ebayaddict0127

I haven't watched the show for years. I remember when Caroline Rhea was the host. Anyway.. I've seen the hype about this year's winner. I agree - she's too thin. But my guess is she did it for the money. (I hope)

What sucks is that show isn't real. It just isn't.

SingingSingleTracker

I do not understand the professional athlete example because how the heck is she supposed to maintain a professional athletes body when that is not her profession. These people train all day everyday. Also a lot of the athletes get this way using other methods.

That's fair. Most endurance athletes that trim the weight get there very easily by doing the hours required (pretty much riding 2-6 hours a day year round for an average of 20 - 40 hours per week). If you were burning 5000 calories a day while racing and during heavy training, but only eating 3000 - it doesn't take long to shed all the fat before the body turns to feeding on the muscle.

I was using the analogy because it sounds like Rachel used very similar tactics of working out for multiple hours per day and eating a caloric deficit to cut the final pounds to win the contest. That's not saying she is going to maintain that exact training schedule and eating now that she has won, but she did use a traditional method used by many pro endurance athletes when they need to trim weight for specific events.

Most of them trim down like that to peak for only special events. They don't maintain their absolute lowest weight all year long - just for their peak events (one or two per year). The Tour de France is one event that General Classification racers peak for these days due to the sheer amount of money they and their team can win (millions). But there are hundreds of events all year long, so other racers choose to peak for other events that fit their speciality. And yes, an easy week would be 20 - 30 hours on the bike for a professional. Heck, many of us amateurs are doing 10 - 20 hours a week this time of year on our bikes training for amateur racing this summer. Or a professional marathon runner trains an incredible amount of hours and miles per week as well that none of us can even being to comprehend. Or a professional ballet dancer is rehearsing 6-8 hours a day. The majority of professional ballerinas look as skinny if not more than Rachel. In fact, a ballerina at 105 pounds would be one of the heavier gals to lift. The ones that get lifted are usually in the 85 - 95 pound range and are short (up to 5'5"). Rachel is 5'4". The heavier ballerinas (depending on their height) usually don't get lifted unless they have a massive male dancer - and even then, it is dangerous and could shorten his career lifting a ballerina that is too heavy.

But there are plenty of negative public opinions expressed regarding professional ballerinas and their eating habits as Rachel on the Biggest Loser. It's a tough profession for sure. And they are amazing athletes who also spend a lot of time trying to cut weight for a peak event.




And of course, everyone realizes that if Rachel gained a mere 3 pounds to get herself up to 108, her weight at 5'4" would be considered normal. So, a couple bottles of water and a sandwich after the weigh in would have taken care of it. I think we can all assume she purposely did not drink and eat before the weigh-in, so she was probably a bit dehyrdated to help capture the prize.

SingingSingleTracker

but most tour de france competitors are on drugs

The latest round was centered around EPO which increases the blood's ability to carry more oxygen to the heart. Nothing to do with weight loss. But, yes - there is a long history of drugs in professional cycling, professional baseball, professional football, Olympic sprinters, etc... . None of it really to do with weight loss though.

SkinnyRach22

I do not understand the professional athlete example because how the heck is she supposed to maintain a professional athletes body when that is not her profession. These people train all day everyday. Also a lot of the athletes get this way using other methods.

That's fair. Most endurance athletes that trim the weight get there very easily by doing the hours required (pretty much riding 2-6 hours a day year round for an average of 20 - 40 hours per week). If you were burning 5000 calories a day while racing and during heavy training, but only eating 3000 - it doesn't take long to shed all the fat before the body turns to feeding on the muscle.

I was using the analogy because it sounds like Rachel used very similar tactics of working out for multiple hours per day and eating a caloric deficit to cut the final pounds to win the contest. That's not saying she is going to maintain that exact training schedule and eating now that she has won, but she did use a traditional method used by many pro endurance athletes when they need to trim weight for specific events.

Most of them trim down like that to peak for only special events. They don't maintain their absolute lowest weight all year long - just for their peak events (one or two per year). The Tour de France is one event that General Classification racers peak for these days due to the sheer amount of money they and their team can win (millions). But there are hundreds of events all year long, so other racers choose to peak for other events that fit their speciality. And yes, an easy week would be 20 - 30 hours on the bike for a professional. Heck, many of us amateurs are doing 10 - 20 hours a week this time of year on our bikes training for amateur racing this summer. Or a professional marathon runner trains an incredible amount of hours and miles per week as well that none of us can even being to comprehend. Or a professional ballet dancer is rehearsing 6-8 hours a day. The majority of professional ballerinas look as skinny if not more than Rachel. In fact, a ballerina at 105 pounds would be one of the heavier gals to lift. The ones that get lifted are usually in the 85 - 95 pound range and are short (up to 5'5"). Rachel is 5'4". The heavier ballerinas (depending on their height) usually don't get lifted unless they have a massive male dancer - and even then, it is dangerous and could shorten his career lifting a ballerina that is too heavy.

But there are plenty of negative public opinions expressed regarding professional ballerinas and their eating habits as Rachel on the Biggest Loser. It's a tough profession for sure. And they are amazing athletes who also spend a lot of time trying to cut weight for a peak event.




And of course, everyone realizes that if Rachel gained a mere 3 pounds to get herself up to 108, her weight at 5'4" would be considered normal. So, a couple bottles of water and a sandwich after the weigh in would have taken care of it. I think we can all assume she purposely did not drink and eat before the weigh-in, so she was probably a bit dehyrdated to help capture the prize.

I understand your point. I really support Rachel in all the hard work she did and what she accomplished. I also know that as a overweight person Rachel had issues with food. She talked about these issues on the show. I can imagine that these ballerinas and professional athletes never started out as morbidly obese people. Athletes and someone battling a food problem are not in the same category. I can not say if she traded one extreme for another because I do not know her. I place all the blame on the show for making it ok to work out that amount and eat so little. I think most of us have been there. All of the sudden we are restricting ourselves so much but not really addressing the problem of why we were overweight. I just think the show really needs to monitor the contestants more.

Skarlet13

I actually don't think her body looks too bad, but what happened to her face? It looks like she aged 20 years.

Domineer

I do not understand the professional athlete example because how the heck is she supposed to maintain a professional athletes body when that is not her profession. These people train all day everyday. Also a lot of the athletes get this way using other methods.

That's fair. Most endurance athletes that trim the weight get there very easily by doing the hours required (pretty much riding 2-6 hours a day year round for an average of 20 - 40 hours per week). If you were burning 5000 calories a day while racing and during heavy training, but only eating 3000 - it doesn't take long to shed all the fat before the body turns to feeding on the muscle.

I was using the analogy because it sounds like Rachel used very similar tactics of working out for multiple hours per day and eating a caloric deficit to cut the final pounds to win the contest. That's not saying she is going to maintain that exact training schedule and eating now that she has won, but she did use a traditional method used by many pro endurance athletes when they need to trim weight for specific events.

Most of them trim down like that to peak for only special events. They don't maintain their absolute lowest weight all year long - just for their peak events (one or two per year). The Tour de France is one event that General Classification racers peak for these days due to the sheer amount of money they and their team can win (millions). But there are hundreds of events all year long, so other racers choose to peak for other events that fit their speciality. And yes, an easy week would be 20 - 30 hours on the bike for a professional. Heck, many of us amateurs are doing 10 - 20 hours a week this time of year on our bikes training for amateur racing this summer. Or a professional marathon runner trains an incredible amount of hours and miles per week as well that none of us can even being to comprehend. Or a professional ballet dancer is rehearsing 6-8 hours a day. The majority of professional ballerinas look as skinny if not more than Rachel. In fact, a ballerina at 105 pounds would be one of the heavier gals to lift. The ones that get lifted are usually in the 85 - 95 pound range and are short (up to 5'5"). Rachel is 5'4". The heavier ballerinas (depending on their height) usually don't get lifted unless they have a massive male dancer - and even then, it is dangerous and could shorten his career lifting a ballerina that is too heavy.

But there are plenty of negative public opinions expressed regarding professional ballerinas and their eating habits as Rachel on the Biggest Loser. It's a tough profession for sure. And they are amazing athletes who also spend a lot of time trying to cut weight for a peak event.




And of course, everyone realizes that if Rachel gained a mere 3 pounds to get herself up to 108, her weight at 5'4" would be considered normal. So, a couple bottles of water and a sandwich after the weigh in would have taken care of it. I think we can all assume she purposely did not drink and eat before the weigh-in, so she was probably a bit dehyrdated to help capture the prize.

Great insight on this post. Athletes are true spectacles of the limits we can push our bodies to. I sure as hell couldn't do it. I'm comfortable working out 30-45 mins three or four days a week. Slow and steady wins the race.

SingingSingleTracker

I understand your point. I really support Rachel in all the hard work she did and what she accomplished. I also know that as a overweight person Rachel had issues with food. She talked about these issues on the show. I can imagine that these ballerinas and professional athletes never started out as morbidly obese people. Athletes and someone battling a food problem are not in the same category. I can not say if she traded one extreme for another because I do not know her. I place all the blame on the show for making it ok to work out that amount and eat so little. I think most of us have been there. All of the sudden we are restricting ourselves so much but not really addressing the problem of why we were overweight. I just think the show really needs to monitor the contestants more.

Well there is the crux of the show's issue(s). Many of us could easily sit back and look with utter dismay at the contestants at the start of the show and say something like "How in the world did you ever allow yourself to get so overweight?" and "Why haven't you done something about this to take care of it?" Is it okay to shake our heads in disgust and shame them on the heavy end of the spectrum as it is to shake our heads in disgust and shame people on the opposite end of the scale who are skinny?

And there would be a myriad of answers that could include the gamut from psychological issues to other issues that simply need help developing a more healthy routine with professional guidance - and everything between. And as you mention, then the show goes into hyperdrive to run a huge caloric deficit for the contestants and turn them into full time work out addicts in what seems a short duration to melt the fat off, increase the lean muscle tissue all the time while shaming those who fail to "perform" this grueling task the best week in and week out by kicking them off of the show. That's a heck of a "contest". But it is what it is. A contest and in some odd way has become "entertainment" for millions who watch the show.

Getting back to Rachel....I think it is pretty safe to say that Rachel did trade one extreme for the other. She came from an athetic background of swimming and for the reasons she shared - got herself way overweight. She is not that far removed (in years) from her competitive athletic days as a swimmer. Runners, cyclists, and swimmers are all some of the most disciplined endurance athletes who know what it takes to win the prize. She did have that going for her in the first place by entering the competition. In essence, it was a "comfort zone" for her from just a few years ago and it is clear she didn't have that much difficulty slipping back into that competitive comfort zone. And the weight gain was also so new to her that it had not become a way of life to be that overweight to the point she was "stuck" in it.

She is still very young and in the learning process, so it is quite common for many of us to go from one extreme to another when learning. However, the reason I made my posts in this thread is to ask the question if we, of the public, or the media should shame her for actually doing what the point of the show seems to be - win the contest? Everyone on the show had the capability to win the contest and the big $250K prize. Only one could do it. Talk about sending a mixed message to the winner. From: "You're too fat." to "You won it all, congrats!" to "You won, but you are way too skinny, look sick, look old with wrinkles, and something is obviously wrong." In other words she went from 'Wrong' to 'OK, that's better now' to 'Wrong'. Not that I am a fan of the show, but I think there should not be a cash prize involved. Instead, the prize of winning better health and discipline should really be more than enough to make it worthwhile.

The term anorexia gets thrown around way too much. Keep in mind that for her height of 5'4", she whittled herself down to just 3 pounds shy of being at a "normal" BMI (not that BMI is the best measure to judge anyone). Three pounds is suddenly the difference of being normal to anorexic? For most of us, it's the difference between a cup of coffee and a bowel movement in the morning. Yet, the term is thrown around as if it was fact just by looking at her. Are we to deny her claims that she spent hours and hours each day working out after she left the show (just as they did while they were on the show) to capture the flag? To win the prize? Just like a high school or college wrestler starves himself to "make the weigh in" so they can wrestle in the lighter weight class - Rachel knew how to taper down for the weigh in and the dehydration probably contributed a lot to her facial skin appearing as it did. She could have been down a few pounds water weight with that alone. It would be interesting to see her a week from now, a month from now, and on and on to see now that she has captured the flag, beaten all the other contestants, done what the show is encouraging the partipants to do (be the Biggest Loser), won the 1/4 of a million bucks for her hard work (hey, that's like 4 - 5 years annual salary for some) in terms of her skin, body weight, balance of food and exercise to see what range she settles into going forward.

As we watch figure skaters, ballerinas, gymnasts that weigh 85-100 pounds at heights of 5' - 5'-5" without calling them all sick and anorexic - let's be fair with Rachel. Just because she had recently ballooned up in weight, and then went back to a weight that captured the prize doesn't make her more "sick" than all of those 85 pound ballerinas who live on cigarettes, jelly beans, and dry toast in hopes of winning the opening night Prima Ballerina role at the Bolshoi, or New York City Ballet, Paris Opera Ballet, Royal Ballet, Stuttgart Ballet, etc... . Or a young gymnist or figure skater who is coached and guided to keep the weight off so they can compete and win the prize. Or moving to the endurnace athletes that run marathons, do big bike races to win thousands to millions of dollars. I'm sure if we searched the data base of all professional athletes that compete at what appears to be "anorexic weights", we could find some - that for whatever reason - experienced tremendous weight gains due to "issues" and then turned it around to get competitive again weight wise in their respective discipline. I doubt Rachel is alone...

chaparra71

I really could care less what people do,especially on so called "reality" tv shows. It was, and always is, a game.

I do,however, have one BIG problem with the show, and that is the fact that it is being geared towards children and teens, especially in recent seasons. This is wrong,period. Chldren are just that, children. They do not think/rationalize like an adult. When they see the contestants doing what it takes to win, healthy or not, they will imitate. They need to stop promoting this to this age group.

As far as how she looked, when I saw Rachel's arms, they looked like the arms of a holocaust victim, not a strong athlete. But, if that is what she is shooting for, whatever.

SkinnyRach22

Those are all really good points. This is a very good and respectful debate. Either way I wish Rachel the best in her journey.

Suezyq47

I was shocked when I saw her. She is such a beautiful girl, but way to thin now. Her face looked kind of old and she is only 22 or 23 years old. Hopefully she just did that to ensure her win of the $250K. I hope she puts back on at least 15 lbs and continues in her health and fitness quest. There were many contestants who look absolutely amazing now and didn't go to the extreme that Rachel did. I would like to see the biggest loser change it's format to encourage health and realistic weight loss and give prizes to all that meet their goals rather than 2 big prizes. I will continue to watch the show because I love transformation shows????