What are the Proven Benefits of a "Lifestyle Change"?

EvgeniZyntx

The question isn't how do people gain weight back, we know how. We lose the weight, then eat like pigs again. The question is: Why do so many of us do that, given how horrible being overweight is and how hard we worked to not be anymore?

When that gets solved, then this issue can be laid to rest. For certain the simple, ill-defined phrase 'lifestyle change' isn't offering up any solutions.

It means you keep working out and eating right even after you hit your goal. You set new fitness related goals (doesn't have to just be losing weight). Mabye your goal is lose 30 lbs. Then once you get there, you maintain it and you set some other goal your interested in - maybe run a 5k, 10k, whatever. You keep working out and doing fitness related activities. You don't start eating junk because you lost your 30 lbs. You eat a maintainance amount of calories. If weight starts to creep up, you lower cals again. Rinse and repeat for life. Best thing to do is keep setting goals and enter into fitness related events so you have something to train for. Example: I'm training for a powerlifting meet and three mud obstacle races this summer. In the fall I'll be training for some other events. That's why it's a lifestyle, always have a goal to train (and eat) for.

If it was that simple everyone with even a moderate amount of nutrition information would never get fat in the first place, much less have trouble keeping weight off.

How do you see that? People who have emotional ties to food for stress and comfort, people that have binging disorders.....these issues can easily overtake the best intentions unless dealt with. Until the why is addressed, the how to fix it will never work. Not addressing the core issues is why people yo-yo and develope an even more harmful perpetuating cycle of self sabotage.

But what if losing weight causes those disorders? Quoting this again because I read it today in someone's post, and to me it sums up the issue of how difficult it is to maintain a loss and I don't think the words 'lifestyle change' address it at all:

"The Rockefeller subjects also had a psychiatric syndrome, called semi-starvation neurosis, which had been noticed before in people of normal weight who had been starved. They dreamed of food, they fantasized about food or about breaking their diet. They were anxious and depressed; some had thoughts of suicide. They secreted food in their rooms. And they binged."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/08/health/08fat.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&

The whole article is really worth a read.

It's called pulling excuses out of a hat.

You can probably lose weight without "semi-starvation" and extremism. Maybe. Thousands of people are doing it on this place called myfitnesspal.com.

But the loss isn't the issue. No one disputes people can lose weight. How many of us, using this place called MFP will keep off a large portion (say greater than 50%) of the weight we lose long term? That is the rub.

I'm at over 665 days - look at my ticker that's over 50% lost and maintained. Lots of people here are at 50% or greater loss and over several years.
Other than that - talking about how it won't work, how it is semi-starvation, etc. IS excuses if you use it as a way of giving up or creating a negative mind set. You may be setting yourself up for failure by saying it can't be done.

Lifestyle changes work - be more active, eat better, exercise ...
The proof is all around you. I could point out dozens of people here that have lost 50lbs or more and kept them off for years!

BTW - a proven benefit of increased exercise is reduced heart attacks. Oooodles of studies on that.

lemurcat12

By definition, if you give up the 'lifestyle change' at some point after you hit goal, then it wasn't a 'lifestyle change' and you'll gain the weight back.

So then, by definition, maintaining the lifestyle change that got you to goal, will allow you to maintain indefinitely.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but this sounds like no true Scotsman or the "once saved always saved" corollary one gets from some sorts of evangelicals, that if someone backslides after being "born again" one was not truly "born again" in the first place. Or perhaps the assertion that one gets from some fanatical AA members, that if one can stop drinking without the AA method one was not a true alcoholic. (Not trying to start a debate about any of these--they are just parallels that come to mind.)

If someone who in all respects appears to have done a lifestyle change and believes that one has changed his or her lifestyle, what help is it to anyone to claim that those who backslide must not have done a real lifestyle change after all.

Besides, people do change their lifestyles multiple times in their life. Successfully creating a lifestyle change doesn't mean you will maintain it. One theory is that you need to look at what encourages that lifestyle vs. not. The people I know who have maintained such changes (anecdotal--I'd definitely be interested in better information, but don't have them) have external forces that help establish that lifestyle--as with any particular lifestyle. For the most part that relates to social structure. And there are studies that indicate that it's easier to avoid gaining weight if you are surrounded by in shape people with lifestyles that lead to being in shape. This is one reason why I suspect (and see on MFP as well as offline) that people who get into hobbies associated with being in shape seem to do well, comparatively. It helps create a social network, among other things.

EvgeniZyntx

By definition, if you give up the 'lifestyle change' at some point after you hit goal, then it wasn't a 'lifestyle change' and you'll gain the weight back.

So then, by definition, maintaining the lifestyle change that got you to goal, will allow you to maintain indefinitely.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but this sounds like no true Scotsman or the "once saved always saved" corollary one gets from some sorts of evangelicals, that if someone backslides after being "born again" one was not truly "born again" in the first place. Or perhaps the assertion that one gets from some fanatical AA members, that if one can stop drinking without the AA method one was not a true alcoholic. (Not trying to start a debate about any of these--they are just parallels that come to mind.)

If someone who in all respects appears to have done a lifestyle change and believes that one has changed his or her lifestyle, what help is it to anyone to claim that those who backslide must not have done a real lifestyle change after all.

Besides, people do change their lifestyles multiple times in their life. Successfully creating a lifestyle change doesn't mean you will maintain it. One theory is that you need to look at what encourages that lifestyle vs. not. The people I know who have maintained such changes (anecdotal--I'd definitely be interested in better information, but don't have them) have external forces that help establish that lifestyle--as with any particular lifestyle. For the most part that relates to social structure. And there are studies that indicate that it's easier to avoid gaining weight if you are surrounded by in shape people with lifestyles that lead to being in shape. This is one reason why I suspect (and see on MFP as well as offline) that people who get into hobbies associated with being in shape seem to do well, comparatively. It helps create a social network, among other things.

In other words.

SymphonynSonata

This redundancy may in part explain the high degree of failure and weight regain observed following weight loss through lifestyle intervention [20]."

I haven't read through the whole thread because I'm pressed for time - but I do want to later on and contribute a little more. Anyway, this particular quote stood out to me. I don't agree with calorie counting for long term results (NO doubt that it works, just not for me, and I'm not a special snowflake; if anyone is particularly curious I'll delve into this later when I pop back into this thread). However, redundancy doesn't really apply to calorie counting IMO, since you can eat whatever you want within a set parameter of calories. While the calories for some may be incredibly limiting (if they want to eat, say, 1,600 calories for the rest of their life) if they don't engage in exercise they always have that option to gain more of an allowance which they could tap into just on days when they want to eat meals that need more like 2,000 calories to fully enjoy. Be back later! Thanks for this thread.

agrafina

The question isn't how do people gain weight back, we know how. We lose the weight, then eat like pigs again. The question is: Why do so many of us do that, given how horrible being overweight is and how hard we worked to not be anymore?

When that gets solved, then this issue can be laid to rest. For certain the simple, ill-defined phrase 'lifestyle change' isn't offering up any solutions.

It means you keep working out and eating right even after you hit your goal. You set new fitness related goals (doesn't have to just be losing weight). Mabye your goal is lose 30 lbs. Then once you get there, you maintain it and you set some other goal your interested in - maybe run a 5k, 10k, whatever. You keep working out and doing fitness related activities. You don't start eating junk because you lost your 30 lbs. You eat a maintainance amount of calories. If weight starts to creep up, you lower cals again. Rinse and repeat for life. Best thing to do is keep setting goals and enter into fitness related events so you have something to train for. Example: I'm training for a powerlifting meet and three mud obstacle races this summer. In the fall I'll be training for some other events. That's why it's a lifestyle, always have a goal to train (and eat) for.

If it was that simple everyone with even a moderate amount of nutrition information would never get fat in the first place, much less have trouble keeping weight off.

How do you see that? People who have emotional ties to food for stress and comfort, people that have binging disorders.....these issues can easily overtake the best intentions unless dealt with. Until the why is addressed, the how to fix it will never work. Not addressing the core issues is why people yo-yo and develope an even more harmful perpetuating cycle of self sabotage.

But what if losing weight causes those disorders? Quoting this again because I read it today in someone's post, and to me it sums up the issue of how difficult it is to maintain a loss and I don't think the words 'lifestyle change' address it at all:

"The Rockefeller subjects also had a psychiatric syndrome, called semi-starvation neurosis, which had been noticed before in people of normal weight who had been starved. They dreamed of food, they fantasized about food or about breaking their diet. They were anxious and depressed; some had thoughts of suicide. They secreted food in their rooms. And they binged."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/08/health/08fat.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&

The whole article is really worth a read.

It's called pulling excuses out of a hat.

You can probably lose weight without "semi-starvation" and extremism. Maybe. Thousands of people are doing it on this place called myfitnesspal.com.

But the loss isn't the issue. No one disputes people can lose weight. How many of us, using this place called MFP will keep off a large portion (say greater than 50%) of the weight we lose long term? That is the rub.

Maybe you can answer the question. If lifestyle changes aren't made, how do you suggest people keep the weight off?

Nope. I can't. If I could I'd be rich.All I know is what the evidence tells me, and that is that by far the majority of people who lose end up regaining all or a portion, no matter how they lose. Don't shoot the messenger just because you don't like the message.

agrafina

The question isn't how do people gain weight back, we know how. We lose the weight, then eat like pigs again. The question is: Why do so many of us do that, given how horrible being overweight is and how hard we worked to not be anymore?

When that gets solved, then this issue can be laid to rest. For certain the simple, ill-defined phrase 'lifestyle change' isn't offering up any solutions.

It means you keep working out and eating right even after you hit your goal. You set new fitness related goals (doesn't have to just be losing weight). Mabye your goal is lose 30 lbs. Then once you get there, you maintain it and you set some other goal your interested in - maybe run a 5k, 10k, whatever. You keep working out and doing fitness related activities. You don't start eating junk because you lost your 30 lbs. You eat a maintainance amount of calories. If weight starts to creep up, you lower cals again. Rinse and repeat for life. Best thing to do is keep setting goals and enter into fitness related events so you have something to train for. Example: I'm training for a powerlifting meet and three mud obstacle races this summer. In the fall I'll be training for some other events. That's why it's a lifestyle, always have a goal to train (and eat) for.

If it was that simple everyone with even a moderate amount of nutrition information would never get fat in the first place, much less have trouble keeping weight off.

How do you see that? People who have emotional ties to food for stress and comfort, people that have binging disorders.....these issues can easily overtake the best intentions unless dealt with. Until the why is addressed, the how to fix it will never work. Not addressing the core issues is why people yo-yo and develope an even more harmful perpetuating cycle of self sabotage.

But what if losing weight causes those disorders? Quoting this again because I read it today in someone's post, and to me it sums up the issue of how difficult it is to maintain a loss and I don't think the words 'lifestyle change' address it at all:

"The Rockefeller subjects also had a psychiatric syndrome, called semi-starvation neurosis, which had been noticed before in people of normal weight who had been starved. They dreamed of food, they fantasized about food or about breaking their diet. They were anxious and depressed; some had thoughts of suicide. They secreted food in their rooms. And they binged."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/08/health/08fat.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&

The whole article is really worth a read.

It's called pulling excuses out of a hat.

You can probably lose weight without "semi-starvation" and extremism. Maybe. Thousands of people are doing it on this place called myfitnesspal.com.

But the loss isn't the issue. No one disputes people can lose weight. How many of us, using this place called MFP will keep off a large portion (say greater than 50%) of the weight we lose long term? That is the rub.

I'm at over 665 days - look at my ticker that's over 50% lost and maintained. Lots of people here are at 50% or greater loss and over several years.
Other than that - talking about how it won't work, how it is semi-starvation, etc. IS excuses if you use it as a way of giving up or creating a negative mind set. You may be setting yourself up for failure by saying it can't be done.

Lifestyle changes work - be more active, eat better, exercise ...
The proof is all around you. I could point out dozens of people here that have lost 50lbs or more and kept them off for years!

BTW - a proven benefit of increased exercise is reduced heart attacks. Oooodles of studies on that.

I think we tend to think of the benefits of lifestyle changes on only weight, when there are significant benefits to lifestyle alteration on many other things. Diabetes prevention, coronary heart disease risk, just about every chronic health condition, you name it, dietary change and increased activity benefit them. Absolutely. Plenty of studies show that. I don't dispute that. I think those benefits get lost in the quest for weight loss as the sole goal.

kethry70

QFT

By definition, if you give up the 'lifestyle change' at some point after you hit goal, then it wasn't a 'lifestyle change' and you'll gain the weight back.

So then, by definition, maintaining the lifestyle change that got you to goal, will allow you to maintain indefinitely.

It's not rocket surgery.

I bet surgeons for rockets make heaps of money.

I think OP was not challenging the idea that a "lifestyle change" won't maintain weight. Any way of eating that helps someone get to goal will work for maintenance. I think she is more asking, "Where is the evidence that eating in moderation, including treats on a semi-regular basis, and calorie counting results in more long-term success than following other diet methods?"

I don't believe she is questioning whether or not people who can stick to that plan do well. I believe she is asking if there's any proof that more people can stick to that plan. Of course calorie counting works. But many people don't comply with it. What makes it a lifestyle change any more than choosing to follow a true Paleo diet? Both groups have people who stick with it and those who don't.

Fwiw, the OP appears to be male based on the pronoun associated with his profile

tycho_mx

By definition, if you give up the 'lifestyle change' at some point after you hit goal, then it wasn't a 'lifestyle change' and you'll gain the weight back.

So then, by definition, maintaining the lifestyle change that got you to goal, will allow you to maintain indefinitely.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but this sounds like no true Scotsman or the "once saved always saved" corollary one gets from some sorts of evangelicals, that if someone backslides after being "born again" one was not truly "born again" in the first place. Or perhaps the assertion that one gets from some fanatical AA members, that if one can stop drinking without the AA method one was not a true alcoholic. (Not trying to start a debate about any of these--they are just parallels that come to mind.)

If someone who in all respects appears to have done a lifestyle change and believes that one has changed his or her lifestyle, what help is it to anyone to claim that those who backslide must not have done a real lifestyle change after all.

Besides, people do change their lifestyles multiple times in their life. Successfully creating a lifestyle change doesn't mean you will maintain it. One theory is that you need to look at what encourages that lifestyle vs. not. The people I know who have maintained such changes (anecdotal--I'd definitely be interested in better information, but don't have them) have external forces that help establish that lifestyle--as with any particular lifestyle. For the most part that relates to social structure. And there are studies that indicate that it's easier to avoid gaining weight if you are surrounded by in shape people with lifestyles that lead to being in shape. This is one reason why I suspect (and see on MFP as well as offline) that people who get into hobbies associated with being in shape seem to do well, comparatively. It helps create a social network, among other things.

Agree on the "True Scotman" analogy.

I still think that a large part of this discussion is how the OP and others interpret "lifestyle change". The large study mentions a set of common factors in successful cases: increase in physical activity, constant monitoring of weight, and dietary tracking.

I am engineer (with some studies in physiology), and for me the issues are simple (not easy): you can't manage what you don't measure. So simply measuring your energy intake and expenditure (independent variables) and weight (i.e. response, dependent variable) seem to be common in long-term weight management success. I would call that a lifestyle change: incorporating these monitoring activities as part of your plan for the rest of your life. But it seems some opinions don't think this is a lifestyle change. As with many opinion-based discussions, we're reduced to arguing over definitions and semantics.

BigGuy47

Do you want to know why I keep reiterating the entire point of this thread?

Yes, you want a specific study that determines if a "lifestyle change" is beneficial for long term maintenance.

Four pages in and no study has been posted to meet your criteria. Perhaps you should set up a crowdsource page to gather funding for this study that you are so passionate about.

SingRunTing

The amount of hypocrisy in this thread astounds me. When someone makes claims about detoxes or paleo diets (which I also think are ridiculous), everyone is asking for scientific studies. But someone asks for a study about a common claim on this board and everyone is saying "oh, its common sense, you don't need a study" or "how else would you do it". OP is not saying that maintenance can be done without a lifestyle change, he's just asking for the scientific backing for the claim that is so often spouted here.

By the way, see the articles below (all from PubMed). These are from a link posted earlier in the thread by the way: http://www.nwcr.ws/Research/published research.htm


Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 1998 Jun;22(6):572-7.
Long-term maintenance of weight loss: do people who lose weight through various weight loss methods use different behaviors to maintain their weight?
McGuire MT1, Wing RR, Klem ML, Seagle HM, Hill JO.

Abstract
OBJECTIVE:
To evaluate whether individuals who lost weight on their own (n = 447), through organized programs (n = 313) or with liquid formula (n = 133) would differ in the strategies they used to maintain their weight losses.
DESIGN:
All subjects were members of the National Weight Control Registry, had lost > or = 13.6 kg (30 pounds), and kept it off at least one year (mean weight loss = 30.1+/-14.9 kg and mean duration of maintenance = 5.7+/-6.9 y).
RESULTS:
Liquid Formula users differed from the other two groups on many characteristics; they were more likely to be women, older, heavier, and to have had a medical disorder prior to weight loss. To maintain their weight loss, the Liquid Formula group reported greater use of dietary strategies (for example, counting calories, limiting the amount of calories from fat) and higher dietary restraint. Liquid Formula users reported that weight maintenance was more difficult than losing weight, whereas individuals who lost weight on their own reported the reverse. The On Own group reported expending a higher percentage of calories through strenuous activities such as running and weight lifting, and reported weighing themselves more frequently to maintain weight loss. Despite these behavioral differences, all three groups are maintaining their weight losses similarly by eating a low calorie diet (5792.3 kJ/d and 25% of daily calories from fat) and engaging in high levels of physical activity (11847.3 kJ/week).
CONCLUSIONS:
Despite using different methods to lose weight, individuals who lost weight on their own, through an organized program, or with a liquid formula, use similar behavioral strategies to maintain their weight loss.




Obes Res. 1999 Jul;7(4):334-41.
Behavioral strategies of individuals who have maintained long-term weight losses.
McGuire MT1, Wing RR, Klem ML, Hill JO.

Abstract
OBJECTIVE:
The purpose of the present study was to compare the behaviors of individuals who have achieved long-term weight loss maintenance with those of regainers and weight-stable controls.
RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES:
Subjects for the present study were participants in a random-digit dial telephone survey that used a representative sample of the U.S. adult population. Eating, exercise, self-weighing, and dietary restraint characteristics were compared among weight-loss maintainers: individuals who had intentionally lost > or =10% of their weight and maintained it for > or = 1 year (n = 69), weight-loss regainers: individuals who intentionally lost > or = 10% of their weight but had not maintained it (n = 56), and weight-stable controls: individuals who had never lost > or = 10% of their maximum weight and had maintained their current weight (+/-10 pounds) within the past 5 years (n = 113).
RESULTS:
Weight-loss maintainers had lost an average of 37 pounds and maintained it for over 7 years. These individuals reported that they currently used more behavioral strategies to control dietary fat intake, have higher levels of physical activity (especially strenuous activity), and greater frequency of self-weighing than either the weight-loss regainers or weight-stable controls. Maintainers and regainers did not differ in reported levels of dietary restraint, but both had higher levels of restraint than the weight-stable controls.
DISCUSSION:
These results suggest that weight-loss maintainers use more behavioral strategies to control their weight than either regainers or weight-stable controls. It would thus appear that long-term weight maintenance requires ongoing adherence to a low-fat diet and an exercise regimen in addition to continued attention to body weight.





Annu Rev Nutr. 2001;21:323-41.
Successful weight loss maintenance.
Wing RR1, Hill JO.

Abstract
Obesity is now recognized as a serious chronic disease, but there is pessimism about how successful treatment can be. A general perception is that almost no one succeeds in long-term maintenance of weight loss. To define long-term weight loss success, we need an accepted definition. We propose defining successful long-term weight loss maintenance as intentionally losing at least 10% of initial body weight and keeping it off for at least 1 year. According to this definition, the picture is much more optimistic, with perhaps greater than 20% of overweight/obese persons able to achieve success. We found that in the National Weight Control Registry, successful long-term weight loss maintainers (average weight loss of 30 kg for an average of 5.5 years) share common behavioral strategies, including eating a diet low in fat, frequent self-monitoring of body weight and food intake, and high levels of regular physical activity. Weight loss maintenance may get easier over time. Once these successful maintainers have maintained a weight loss for 2-5 years, the chances of longer-term success greatly increase.

agrafina

The question isn't how do people gain weight back, we know how. We lose the weight, then eat like pigs again. The question is: Why do so many of us do that, given how horrible being overweight is and how hard we worked to not be anymore?

When that gets solved, then this issue can be laid to rest. For certain the simple, ill-defined phrase 'lifestyle change' isn't offering up any solutions.

It means you keep working out and eating right even after you hit your goal. You set new fitness related goals (doesn't have to just be losing weight). Mabye your goal is lose 30 lbs. Then once you get there, you maintain it and you set some other goal your interested in - maybe run a 5k, 10k, whatever. You keep working out and doing fitness related activities. You don't start eating junk because you lost your 30 lbs. You eat a maintainance amount of calories. If weight starts to creep up, you lower cals again. Rinse and repeat for life. Best thing to do is keep setting goals and enter into fitness related events so you have something to train for. Example: I'm training for a powerlifting meet and three mud obstacle races this summer. In the fall I'll be training for some other events. That's why it's a lifestyle, always have a goal to train (and eat) for.

If it was that simple everyone with even a moderate amount of nutrition information would never get fat in the first place, much less have trouble keeping weight off.

How do you see that? People who have emotional ties to food for stress and comfort, people that have binging disorders.....these issues can easily overtake the best intentions unless dealt with. Until the why is addressed, the how to fix it will never work. Not addressing the core issues is why people yo-yo and develope an even more harmful perpetuating cycle of self sabotage.

But what if losing weight causes those disorders? Quoting this again because I read it today in someone's post, and to me it sums up the issue of how difficult it is to maintain a loss and I don't think the words 'lifestyle change' address it at all:

"The Rockefeller subjects also had a psychiatric syndrome, called semi-starvation neurosis, which had been noticed before in people of normal weight who had been starved. They dreamed of food, they fantasized about food or about breaking their diet. They were anxious and depressed; some had thoughts of suicide. They secreted food in their rooms. And they binged."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/08/health/08fat.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&

The whole article is really worth a read.

It's called pulling excuses out of a hat.

You can probably lose weight without "semi-starvation" and extremism. Maybe. Thousands of people are doing it on this place called myfitnesspal.com.

But the loss isn't the issue. No one disputes people can lose weight. How many of us, using this place called MFP will keep off a large portion (say greater than 50%) of the weight we lose long term? That is the rub.

Maybe you can answer the question. If lifestyle changes aren't made, how do you suggest people keep the weight off?

Nope. I can't. If I could I'd be rich.All I know is what the evidence tells me, and that is that by far the majority of people who lose end up regaining all or a portion, no matter how they lose. Don't shoot the messenger just because you don't like the message.

Seems like you have already accepted that you "will" fail. Having a defeatist towards something that is supposed to have a high rate of failure is pretty much guaranteeing that will not succeed. So then t he question is, why even bother trying? Why not just cut your losses now, same the time and not deal with not deal with the stress of doing something that you will inevitably fail at?

Or you could come up with a plan on how to achieve your and a possible game plan on how to remain in that illusive 5%. Having a plan that might fail is better than having no plan and accepting failure from the start.

Thank you for telling me about my defeatist attitude about how I know will fail. If I'm so convinced I'll fail, why am I doing this in the first place? Or am I stupid too? Understanding and accepting the magnitude of a task in front of you doesn't make you a defeatist. It makes you a realist. Perhaps it makes you appreciate something about the difficulty of the task you have set out to do and makes you aware of what to watch out for. Perhaps understanding the fact that so many people fail makes you more determined to succeed because you know you can't be complacent. But thanks for telling me I'm defeatist. I had no clue until you informed me.

SingRunTing

I'm pretty sure that 1980's low fat fad isn't such a great idea or even necessary.

You missed the point. All three of these (and the rest in the link I posted) say that the people who are maintaining were successful because they kept the behavior changes they made while losing. Which is the evidence the OP asked for.

I'm in no way promoting a low fat diet. I'm just posting the scientific studies that I found on maintaining.

agrafina

The question isn't how do people gain weight back, we know how. We lose the weight, then eat like pigs again. The question is: Why do so many of us do that, given how horrible being overweight is and how hard we worked to not be anymore?

When that gets solved, then this issue can be laid to rest. For certain the simple, ill-defined phrase 'lifestyle change' isn't offering up any solutions.

It means you keep working out and eating right even after you hit your goal. You set new fitness related goals (doesn't have to just be losing weight). Mabye your goal is lose 30 lbs. Then once you get there, you maintain it and you set some other goal your interested in - maybe run a 5k, 10k, whatever. You keep working out and doing fitness related activities. You don't start eating junk because you lost your 30 lbs. You eat a maintainance amount of calories. If weight starts to creep up, you lower cals again. Rinse and repeat for life. Best thing to do is keep setting goals and enter into fitness related events so you have something to train for. Example: I'm training for a powerlifting meet and three mud obstacle races this summer. In the fall I'll be training for some other events. That's why it's a lifestyle, always have a goal to train (and eat) for.

If it was that simple everyone with even a moderate amount of nutrition information would never get fat in the first place, much less have trouble keeping weight off.

How do you see that? People who have emotional ties to food for stress and comfort, people that have binging disorders.....these issues can easily overtake the best intentions unless dealt with. Until the why is addressed, the how to fix it will never work. Not addressing the core issues is why people yo-yo and develope an even more harmful perpetuating cycle of self sabotage.

But what if losing weight causes those disorders? Quoting this again because I read it today in someone's post, and to me it sums up the issue of how difficult it is to maintain a loss and I don't think the words 'lifestyle change' address it at all:

"The Rockefeller subjects also had a psychiatric syndrome, called semi-starvation neurosis, which had been noticed before in people of normal weight who had been starved. They dreamed of food, they fantasized about food or about breaking their diet. They were anxious and depressed; some had thoughts of suicide. They secreted food in their rooms. And they binged."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/08/health/08fat.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&

The whole article is really worth a read.

It's called pulling excuses out of a hat.

You can probably lose weight without "semi-starvation" and extremism. Maybe. Thousands of people are doing it on this place called myfitnesspal.com.

But the loss isn't the issue. No one disputes people can lose weight. How many of us, using this place called MFP will keep off a large portion (say greater than 50%) of the weight we lose long term? That is the rub.

Maybe you can answer the question. If lifestyle changes aren't made, how do you suggest people keep the weight off?

Nope. I can't. If I could I'd be rich.All I know is what the evidence tells me, and that is that by far the majority of people who lose end up regaining all or a portion, no matter how they lose. Don't shoot the messenger just because you don't like the message.

Seems like you have already accepted that you "will" fail. Having a defeatist towards something that is supposed to have a high rate of failure is pretty much guaranteeing that will not succeed. So then t he question is, why even bother trying? Why not just cut your losses now, same the time and not deal with not deal with the stress of doing something that you will inevitably fail at?

Or you could come up with a plan on how to achieve your and a possible game plan on how to remain in that illusive 5%. Having a plan that might fail is better than having no plan and accepting failure from the start.

Thank you for telling me about my defeatist attitude about how I know will fail. If I'm so convinced I'll fail, why am I doing this in the first place? Or am I stupid too? Understanding and accepting the magnitude of a task in front of you doesn't make you a defeatist. It makes you a realist. Perhaps it makes you appreciate something about the difficulty of the task you have set out to do and makes you aware of what to watch out for. Perhaps understanding the fact that so many people fail makes you more determined to succeed because you know you can't be complacent. But thanks for telling me I'm defeatist. I had no clue until you informed me.

First off, not once did I call you stupid. I said you have a defeatist attitude because that's what you are displaying. Sorry if that bothers you. No need to take the whoa is me victim role. Soon everyone will be mean and a bully?

Understanding why people fail and trying to do things different, that are different from thing that we did in the first place to end up overweight/obese involve lifestyle changes no?

I think I object to the blanket use of "lifestyle change FTW!" more than anything. Of course, any behaviors that change constitute a lifestyle change. But just saying "lifestyle changes!" does no good in telling us anything. How do we help people maintain these "lifestyle changes" so that they can successfully maintain a significant weight loss? You can lose weight on any diet as long as fundamentally, you are taking in less than you are using. The physics don't change. Nor do the physics of keeping it off. You have to maintain an energy balance. To me, how we maintain that energy balance is interesting. What that looks like. And there hasn't been evidence that I have encountered yet that indicates what is typically meant as the OP stated as "lifestyle change" leading to better maintenance results in previous threads exists. It well may be true. I don't argue that. I just want to see evidence that in the real world, with real people, "lifestyle changes" are any more successful than other forms of weight loss. That is why above I posted links to the NWCR research page on the first page of this discussion. Because I do think there is valuable information to learn. .

Also, I'm not taking a victim/woe is me/everyone is a bully attitude. I explained why I didn't feel I was defeatist (except for the "stupid" bit. That was just annoyance. Sorry). Sarcasm isn't always obvious through text.I simply don't feel that acknowledging the difficulty of something is defeatist. Acknowledging the difficulty of climbing Mt. Everest doesn't mean that a person won't be successful at doing it. Everyone comes at weight loss with the certainty that they will be able to do it. Recognizing the difficulty doesn't make for setting yourself up for failure. It just means recognizing that when the odds are against you, you're going to have to do a lot more to maintain your heard earned loss. That is all it means.

DayByDayGetStronger

There's a wonderful book written by a Registered Dietitian, Anne Fletcher, called THIN FOR LIFE. It's been my bible and she quotes in the book that the percentages of successful weight loss are off. The book offers sound, real-life, advice and tips from people who have maintained weight loss for more than 5 years.

I would imagine that your search for actual numbers will be just as difficult if you were looking for accurate studies on drug/alcohol addiction successes.

My bariatric surgeon has an ongoing study for over 10 years now in his practice and he has found that about 40% of his patients achieve and maintain weight loss of 80% excess body weight for 5 years or more. It's sad that these numbers aren't higher considering the magnitude of having your guts reconfigured.

EvgeniZyntx

Everyone comes at weight loss with the certainty that they will be able to do it. Recognizing the difficulty doesn't make for setting yourself up for failure. It just means recognizing that when the odds are against you, you're going to have to do a lot more to maintain your heard earned loss. That is all it means.

Clearly not - a lot of people are certain it is hard, nay, impossible!
Read this thread and the other one you posted in.

Meerataila

The question isn't how do people gain weight back, we know how. We lose the weight, then eat like pigs again. The question is: Why do so many of us do that, given how horrible being overweight is and how hard we worked to not be anymore?

When that gets solved, then this issue can be laid to rest. For certain the simple, ill-defined phrase 'lifestyle change' isn't offering up any solutions.

It means you keep working out and eating right even after you hit your goal. You set new fitness related goals (doesn't have to just be losing weight). Mabye your goal is lose 30 lbs. Then once you get there, you maintain it and you set some other goal your interested in - maybe run a 5k, 10k, whatever. You keep working out and doing fitness related activities. You don't start eating junk because you lost your 30 lbs. You eat a maintainance amount of calories. If weight starts to creep up, you lower cals again. Rinse and repeat for life. Best thing to do is keep setting goals and enter into fitness related events so you have something to train for. Example: I'm training for a powerlifting meet and three mud obstacle races this summer. In the fall I'll be training for some other events. That's why it's a lifestyle, always have a goal to train (and eat) for.

If it was that simple everyone with even a moderate amount of nutrition information would never get fat in the first place, much less have trouble keeping weight off.

How do you see that? People who have emotional ties to food for stress and comfort, people that have binging disorders.....these issues can easily overtake the best intentions unless dealt with. Until the why is addressed, the how to fix it will never work. Not addressing the core issues is why people yo-yo and develope an even more harmful perpetuating cycle of self sabotage.

But what if losing weight causes those disorders? Quoting this again because I read it today in someone's post, and to me it sums up the issue of how difficult it is to maintain a loss and I don't think the words 'lifestyle change' address it at all:

"The Rockefeller subjects also had a psychiatric syndrome, called semi-starvation neurosis, which had been noticed before in people of normal weight who had been starved. They dreamed of food, they fantasized about food or about breaking their diet. They were anxious and depressed; some had thoughts of suicide. They secreted food in their rooms. And they binged."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/08/health/08fat.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&

The whole article is really worth a read.

It's called pulling excuses out of a hat.

You can probably lose weight without "semi-starvation" and extremism. Maybe. Thousands of people are doing it on this place called myfitnesspal.com.

Go read my post in the other thread you're posting in about how things changed for me after I'd dropped about %15 of my body weight. Before that, as I recall, it was pretty darn easy. I counted calories, exercised lightly, ate what I wanted in moderation, and didn't feel especially deprived. Then something happened. And I don't know what it was, but it had nothing to do with my motivation, mindset, or 'lifestyle'.