I don't lose weight- scientific miracle?

SnuggleSmacks

1. Weigh, measure, log. Do this consistently. It is the only way to know what you are actually putting in your mouth. Take the guesswork out of "calories in."

2. Get a Bodymedia Fit band. Or a Fitbit, Vivofit, Polar Loop, or any other fitness band, although Bodymedia is the most accurate. Wear it consistently to track how many calories you're burning through your regular activity daily. Take the guesswork out of "calories out."

3. Make sure #1 is less than #2. Bodymedia makes this easy, as it syncs with MFP and shows you a number called "deficit" or on a bad/fun/cheat day, "surplus." So, it even takes the guesswork out of the math.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

SnuggleSmacks

Not to mention, promoting such diets is against MFP's TOS and can get you deleted.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

EvgeniZyntx

Also, the research is rather all over the place - there is also some research that suggest that there results are not consistent over the long term. Enough evidence to suggest that while LCD (and not VLCDs) might be the best long-term solution, for some, other options should be considered.

There are a lot of reasons not to recommend VLCDs with regards to personal fitness objectives around performance, muscle development, osteo health, child rearing plans, etc... without knowing a person's medical history.

Do you have any sources for these claims?

Sure. i'll focus on current guidelines unlress you have a specific question you'd like me to address. Guidelines each have references to research.

With regards to duration, audience and medical supervision of Very low Calorie Diets - I would suggest that NICE has recommendations of:
- 12 weeks (@1000 cals not 800)
- for BMI of 30 or greater and with a plateau
- lower cal diets should be medically supervised.

NIH/WIN/Diabetes - NIDDK factsheet states

Doctors must monitor all VLCD patients regularly—ideally every 2 weeks in the initial period of rapid weight loss—to be sure patients are not experiencing serious side effects.

Many patients on a VLCD for 4 to 16 weeks report minor side effects such as fatigue, constipation, nausea, or diarrhea. These conditions usually improve within a few weeks and rarely prevent patients from completing the program.

The most common serious side effect is gallstones. Gallstones, which often develop in people who are obese, especially women, may be even more commonly developed during rapid weight loss. Some medicines can prevent gallstones from forming during rapid weight loss. Your health care provider can determine if these medicines are appropriate for you. For more information, see the WIN fact sheet on dieting and gallstones, listed under Resources.

(My bold)

NHLBI guidelines

VLCDs (less than 800 kcal/day) are not recommended for weight loss therapy because the deficits are too great, and nutritional inadequacies will occur unless VLCDs are supplemented with vitamins and minerals. Moreover, clinical trials show that LCDs are just as effective as VLCDs in producing weight loss after 1 year.

BTW - the generally accepted term is that VLCDs are somewhere in the <800-1000 range (depending on the person)...

I also understand that some recommendations might be dated. However, I would like to see one recommendation that states that VLCDs are "generally safe and recommended" as the first-line treatment.

So based on the evidence of current recommendations I stand by the statement a) other options should be considered b) VLCDs should be medically supervised.

in_the_stars

btente, can you give me an example of this 500 calorie diet that gives you all the micros needed? Curious.

still waiting...

Unknown

This content has been removed.

nltg13

If you're consuming dairy or its by-products, hate to burst your bubble here, but you are not vegan.

This. This all over!

Also, you said your bloods have been checked and are normal, so you know this isn't anything medical, which would have been unlikely anyway. I'd guess you're either underestimating how much you eat or overestimating how active you are, there isn't really another logical explanation

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

swilkinson0705

I haven't ready every post in this particular string but I want you to know you are not alone. I have been the same damn weight forever and have been making major lifestyle changes in the last 3 years to no avail. I've often wondered if I am a miracle of science. Everyone on here will have an opinion, whatever. You are not the only one struggling. Wish I had some advice, good luck.

stealthq

btente, can you give me an example of this 500 calorie diet that gives you all the micros needed? Curious.

still waiting...

Then you haven't read all my posts. I discuss the RDI and the scientific and historical evidence that contradicts it. I also provided several diets that provide more nutrients in 500 calories than the average American gets in 3,000 that still continues to live for many years.

Translation: "I can't do it unless I lower the bar ..."

BTW, btente. 3000 cals of fast food and soda can easily meet all nutritional requirements AND provide more nutrients than 500 cals of spinach. Or it might meet very few. Depends on the choices the individual makes. But, I will guarantee you that it is a heck of a lot easier to get your nutritional requirements with 3000 cals to play with than < 1200 cals.

Also, this argument that some people managed to live with malnutrition for years and still survived ... not a great one, mmkay? Better to avoid the malnutrition in the first place, since we have the means to do so.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

timrpm

Nope, not really, lots of people think they're logging carefully but aren't.

What do you reckon, stop eating - will you get thin and starve, or live forever by a MIRACLE? Your body powers itself? Or G-D powers you from on high, removing your need for food?

If none of the above apply, try eating healthier, measured portions and exercise more intensively with cardio intervals and weight training.

EvgeniZyntx

Sure. i'll focus on current guidelines unlress you have a specific question you'd like me to address. Guidelines each have references to research.

I do seriously appreciate the time to put those together, but I need actual study references. Please provide links to the actual study references or the pages that contain them.

The problem is many recommendations are without scientific merit. Take sodium... The CDC recently commissioned the IOM to investigate it's sodium recommendations of 2,300mg to see if it should be lowered to 1,500mg to match other recommendations from places like the AHA. In the study conducted by the IOM they found no negative associations for consumption at the current average American intake of 4,300mg and even a little higher; however, the CDC did not change it's recommendations.

The issues around the sodium guidelines and studies are well-known and critized - like I stated, some guidelines are old.
However, they remain useful, especially when no overview committee has opposing info (as is not the case with salt):

-http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/guidelines/obesity/e_txtbk/txgd/4321.htm
-http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/loseweight/Pages/very-low-calorie-diets.aspx
http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/CG43quickrefguide2.pdf

BTW - thanks for the study on diabetes "reversal" in two weeks - it was an interesting read. Despite the results seen, I am concerned about long-term results once that restriction (600 cals a day, oy vey!) was removed.

THe authors note

In addition, further studies are required to determine the long-term outcome in respect of glucose regulation as the observations made after 12 weeks of return to a normal diet were necessarily limited.

So we don't even know if the reversal was transient. And the study was performed on T2D patients without treatment for their diabetes. Based on

This study demonstrates for the first time the time course of a return of normal beta cell function and hepatic glucose output by acute restriction of dietary energy intake in individuals with type 2 diabetes.

of 11 patients (and 4 drop outs) without long-term evaluation it is cavalier to recommend this as a general method of management.
It should also be noted that the average lean body mass loss was 2.5 kg in the 8 weeks.

So what happens when you look at the data and see if this is really a cure?
Well, someone has done the work for us. You can read their review of 22 studies here:

http://www.diabetes.org.uk/upload/DPC_Speakers2013/Wed/11.20_Wed_Dyson_Aud.pdf

I'll note three points from their summary:

1 Despite recent short-term studies demonstrating reversal over the short-term, there is no evidence of a cure over the long term
2 They are effective in a small sub-­‐group of health-­‐motivated individuals who are recently diagnosed and who are able to achieve significant weight loss
3 According to NICE guidance, very low calorie diets require medical supervision

cebreisch

I agree with the nutritionist. You aren't eating enough, or enough of the right foods.

I am proof positive that you eat at a deficit, and you WILL lose weight. Even with hormone imbalances and other things that typically hinder weight loss.

I have been on the weight lose extravaganza since my teens. I'll be 48 next month. I thought I had tried ever weight loss gig imaginable. The one place I had the most success was 30 years ago when Weight Watchers actually had you track the number of protein, vegetable, fruit, dairy, and carb servings a day, and spelled out what constituted each category. I lost 40 pounds, and then went into the "lying to myself" mode over how well I was actually eating, and gained it all back.

That went on-again and off-again until April/May 2011. I actually started seeing a nutritionist, got "real" about what I was really eating, documented everything down to the condiments, and I lost 115 pounds thru March 2013. I had skin removal surgery, had a rough recovery, went on vacation, and lost my dad in the last year. Meaning: I fell off the wagon and had a lot of excuses why I couldn't follow or stay on track - back on came the weight.

This last week, I logged everything, was "real" about it, and lost 5 pounds.

My nutritionist told me to focus on lean, healthy protein and the fats/carbs would take care of themselves, and I've found that to be pretty accurate. The more protein and fiber I have, the less hungry I am. I have a fitbit that I wear that tells me how many calories I burn, and my MFP that tells me how much I eat. The fitbit site has a chart that shows calories in vs. calories out, and as long as my "in" line stays UNDER the "out" line, then I lose. Always. Really - ALWAYS.

The only occasion that hasn't happened is if I had a lot of salt. I'd gain 3 pounds 1 week, and lose 4 or so the next.

I do still belong to WW. I convert my MFP data to WW points. I was still hungry using MFP numbers because they are a bit on the low side. However, I got more food on WW points, so that's now my range - Low (MFP) to high (WW). and since I know where my in vs. out numbers are, I can look and see what sort of snack I can afford - if I need it to be a protein, or if I can afford a carb.

Be real about what you're eating, about making sure your nutritional needs are being met, about making sure you're getting enough to eat, and you will lose.

It really isn't rocket science.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

in_the_stars

btente, can you give me an example of this 500 calorie diet that gives you all the micros needed? Curious.

still waiting...

Then you haven't read all my posts. I discuss the RDI and the scientific and historical evidence that contradicts it. I also provided several diets that provide more nutrients in 500 calories than the average American gets in 3,000 that still continues to live for many years.

I guess I missed it. Post again, please?

in_the_stars

albertabeefy

VLCD/VLCKDs may make sense when considering risk/benefit situations with other conditions that may be life-threatening, but those are individual and medically-informed decisions to be made - not umbrella recommendations of which is better or safer on this website.

A very low-carb ketogenic diet is NOT a low-calorie diet. They use, like any other reasonable diet, a very modest caloric deficit for weight-loss.

albertabeefy

The issue is a VLED should ONLY be done under strict supervision / doctors care.

Not true.

Actually according to all medical guidelines I've seen (and I look at them), they ARE.

Compared to a high-carb/low-fat diet, this may be true, but if you compare it to a VLCKD (very low carb ketogenic diet) the truth is that with a moderate deficit, VLCKD's reverse symptoms of Type II diabetes at the same rate as a VLED.

Not true either. First off in many diet studies "ketogenic" is severely misapplied and simply synonymous for low carb. Secondly studies with ketogenic diets show that it can take up to 6 months to reverse diabetic conditions.

No offense, but do you even science?

The term 'ketogenic' cannot be misapplied to a diet in the sciences. To be ketogenic requires a macronutrient ratio that involves ketosis, and you can't get into ketosis without severe carbohydrate restriction. Therefore, a modest-deficit "reduced carbohydrate" diet could never be a ketogenic diet from a research standpoint, and no research I've ever seen confuses the two.

Ketogenic diets are never confused as anything BUT what they are. To suggest it might be shows your lack of understanding.

Also of note, studies lasting 6 months of just 30% carbohydrate diets (as opposed to ketogenic) show incredible improvement in SEVERE diabetics. http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/6/1/21

Studies of shorter duration of true ketogenic dieters show incredible improvement in only a FEW DAYS. I've personally read HUNDREDS of studies on diabetes, and dozens on intervention with ketogenic diets, and you are either severely misinformed or you're willfully spreading some rather dubious propaganda.

The reason VLED's work is they are, by nature, also VLCKD - though they're a starvation type instead of moderate deficit.

Not true. You could do a 800 calorie banana diet for example (which I've done in my health experiments).

Your personal health experiments would not be recommended by anyone in the medical profession. Especially an 800 calorie a day banana diet. And certainly not for someone with metabolic syndrome or diabetes.

[quote

]And even though it can take over a year to develop a nutrient deficiency, this doesn't mean we should recommend it to people. VLED's take serious monitoring and nutritional counselling.

It is a reason why they shouldn't be viewed as unsafe though.
[/quote]
The fact remains you WILL be developing a nutrient deficiency. It's better to prevent one that have to recover from a self-imposed one.

You are actually suggesting people self-impose a nutrient deficiency. I'm stunned this thread isn't locked yet.

paulawatkins1974

bump for later

Ang108

I stopped losing weight because I was not eating enough. How many calories a day do you eat? Maybe you have been on like a life-long plateau?

With all due respect, but that is i.m.p.o.s.s.i.b.l.e....

Unknown

This content has been removed.

AllyBlue77

I am pretty much in your same situation.

Nobody here is an MD so you won't get any consistent and accurate advice. Some will tell you that you're not tracking well and eating a million more calories than you claim to be eating (which only you know) :-) others will say losing weight is a simple mathematical issue (calories in calories out..blah blah) some will say eat more, some will say eat less...

I would advise you to go to your general practitioner and have him/her recommend an endocrinologist. Have your TSH levels checked, T3 and T4 levels as well.

My thyroid levels seem to be within the "normal" range, but my doctor ordered further testing (T3 and T4) apparently there could be a "subclinical" thyroid issue? Most general practitioners will only go by your TSH levels and will be reluctant to explore further but it's up to you to make your doctor figure it out for you. There's issues like: Leptin resistance... (google it if you have a free minute)...

anyway, please feel free to add me!

Unknown

This content has been removed.

AllyBlue77

Nobody here is an MD so you won't get any consistent and accurate advice.

Um... You do understand that even MDs have inconsistent and inaccurate advice right? You know like Dr. Adkins, Dr. Agatston, and Dr. Joel Fuhrman just to name a few... Very inconsistent and if they're very inconsistent it means at least 2 of 3 are inaccurate.

An MD is always better than those of us without the proper training.....right?
You know? like, they go to school for like a lot of years...?


And yes there are bad MD's and there are good ones..... I didn't mean to upset you by my comment. I just think that an MD will have perhaps more insight into what's going on physically...
I still stand by what i said before OP needs to go to a medical doctor rather than diet "gurus" who are opinionated and judgmental....(which MD's can also be.... not arguing there)

EvgeniZyntx

Nobody here is an MD so you won't get any consistent and accurate advice.

Um... You do understand that even MDs have inconsistent and inaccurate advice right? You know like Dr. Adkins, Dr. Agatston, and Dr. Joel Fuhrman just to name a few... Very inconsistent and if they're very inconsistent it means at least 2 of 3 are inaccurate.

An MD is always better than those of us without the proper training.....right?
You know? like, they go to school for like a lot of years...?


And yes there are bad MD's and there are good ones..... I didn't mean to upset you by my comment. I just think that an MD will have perhaps more insight into what's going on physically...
I still stand by what i said before OP needs to go to a medical doctor rather than diet "gurus" who are opinionated and judgmental....(which MD's can also be.... not arguing there)

There are a variety of reasons why seeing a doctor or a nutritionist makes sense - however, it doesn't negate the value of also seeking complimentary information and education from other. One can do both and use that differential engine we evolved with.

And even better than any MD is self-awareness. Which the OP is trying to get. While I agree that it is useful for people to seek professional advice, let's not silence the ongoing conversations - proactive caveat emptor.

imaginaryplant

Get your blood checked out. Could be thyroid!