The Biggest Loser show seems to contradict what were taught
Replies
-
This content has been removed.
-
No, the reality is much simpler. Nutrition is bullsh*t.
My 3 month old daughter needs only milk to thrive and have the energy to get through the day, and the contestants, and anyone else with that level of bodyfat...
Will use the stores of fatty acids on their body as food. So long as essential vitamins and minerals are ingested, along with essential amino acids, you don't need to eat.
There was a 400 pound man in the 70's who fasted for 380 days under doctor's supervision. Couple missteps in refeeding him, but he got to 180 or something like that, and to this day he's slightly overweight, not obese like he used to be.
What we NEED for nutrition is only what this magnificent machine requires.
Most of the starvation mode, eating to fuel, it's all hype.
Coma patients exist on protien powder with added carbs and fats, in a shake, fed through a feeding tube.
I mean, honestly, the fact that we all haven't woken up to this realization before now is astounding. At least, I can't speak for everyone, but I'm ashamed of myself for not following common sense.
ETA: eat for your body. Eat what you like. And if you start to gain fat, change your diet slightly, and find what works for you. If you want to lose weight for a boxing match or to look thinner, the principles are the same. You are what you eat.
Was about to click the X on this thread...
...but then I saw this post...
...and now I'm in.0 -
It being a tv show doesn't mean it didn't happen. Well, a 'week' might be 10-14 days on BL. But they lost the weight at the overall rate we see-- less than a year for it all.
If someone posts their story on MFP about how they lost 350lbs. in 18 months and runs marathons now they're roundly applauded (as they should be). But if someone posts at the beginning of that kind of weight loss, or the middle, they're ridiculed for doing it wrong. :laugh:0 -
No, the reality is much simpler. Nutrition is bullsh*t.
My 3 month old daughter needs only milk to thrive and have the energy to get through the day, and the contestants, and anyone else with that level of bodyfat...
Will use the stores of fatty acids on their body as food. So long as essential vitamins and minerals are ingested, along with essential amino acids, you don't need to eat.
There was a 400 pound man in the 70's who fasted for 380 days under doctor's supervision. Couple missteps in refeeding him, but he got to 180 or something like that, and to this day he's slightly overweight, not obese like he used to be.
What we NEED for nutrition is only what this magnificent machine requires.
Most of the starvation mode, eating to fuel, it's all hype.
Coma patients exist on protien powder with added carbs and fats, in a shake, fed through a feeding tube.
I mean, honestly, the fact that we all haven't woken up to this realization before now is astounding. At least, I can't speak for everyone, but I'm ashamed of myself for not following common sense.
ETA: eat for your body. Eat what you like. And if you start to gain fat, change your diet slightly, and find what works for you. If you want to lose weight for a boxing match or to look thinner, the principles are the same. You are what you eat.
Was about to click the X on this thread...
...but then I saw this post...
...and now I'm in.
YOu understood this? Please, explain to me. Does this mean I can live on milk and protein shakes? So confused.0 -
I live every aspect of my life as if it were reality television.
I live mine like a japanese game show.0 -
No, the reality is much simpler. Nutrition is bullsh*t.
you don't need to eat.
You are what you eat.
This is all I got from that.
But if I don't eat. I am nothing
0 -
Huh?
to put it simply, everything that comes out of a nutritionists mouth is opinion, not science.
simply put, NO one knows if eating less processed sources, more raw sources of different foods which contain different levels of nutrients all in different bio-available forms are any better or worse for us than a multivitamin, which have been argued to be almost worthless.
"You need to eat nutritious food, clean calories, and cut out the empty calories."
But, why can't I enjoy a coke with some Jack at the end of my day, and plan out my 2000 calorie diet around that? If I eat a multivitamin and greens throughout my week..
There was a guy in kansas, wanted to prove his students wrong, so he ate chips and little debbies and junk, but in a calorie deficit, and he lost weight. In fact, all his markers for health at his physical afterwards had improved.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
It doesn't matter what you eat, your body will break down the complex carbs into simple glucose, and send that into your bloodstream. It doesn't matter if you eat an apple or a snack cake (albeit the sources and ratios of the types of sugar will be different, the effect on calories is the same... hmm....)
protein powder vs meat
bread vs no carbs.
it doesn't matter what you eat, it matters how much you eat, in terms of energy. You can count calories if you want, but I just watch the scale over time.
Did that make more sense?
ETA: Bombshell, I meant we should eat what we want, and we should all choose to refrain from overeating. As to HOW each of us comes to Jesus, I don't really think I'm an authority to tell someone else how to eat, I dunno what they like. Less processed food has less calories in it though, and that will make it easier for someone to stick to a calorie goal..0 -
No, the reality is much simpler. Nutrition is bullsh*t.
you don't need to eat.
You are what you eat.
This is all I got from that.
But if I don't eat. I am nothing
0 -
No, the reality is much simpler. Nutrition is bullsh*t.
My 3 month old daughter needs only milk to thrive and have the energy to get through the day, and the contestants, and anyone else with that level of bodyfat...
Will use the stores of fatty acids on their body as food. So long as essential vitamins and minerals are ingested, along with essential amino acids, you don't need to eat.
There was a 400 pound man in the 70's who fasted for 380 days under doctor's supervision. Couple missteps in refeeding him, but he got to 180 or something like that, and to this day he's slightly overweight, not obese like he used to be.
What we NEED for nutrition is only what this magnificent machine requires.
Most of the starvation mode, eating to fuel, it's all hype.
Coma patients exist on protien powder with added carbs and fats, in a shake, fed through a feeding tube.
I mean, honestly, the fact that we all haven't woken up to this realization before now is astounding. At least, I can't speak for everyone, but I'm ashamed of myself for not following common sense.
ETA: eat for your body. Eat what you like. And if you start to gain fat, change your diet slightly, and find what works for you. If you want to lose weight for a boxing match or to look thinner, the principles are the same. You are what you eat.
Was about to click the X on this thread...
...but then I saw this post...
...and now I'm in.
YOu understood this? Please, explain to me. Does this mean I can live on milk and protein shakes? So confused.
Whew, glad I wasn't the only one!!! I was reading it and everything glazed over!!!0 -
1) We are taught that eating too few of calories will result in "starvation" mode and our body will hold onto weight. On the show, contestants afterwards spoke about eating 800 to 1100 calories per day and yet they consistently would lose 5 to 20 pounds per week. Obviously they exercised endlessly. But no "starvation" mode...
2) We are taught that if you lose weight too fast, skin will just hang around. Last years winner (and many winners before that) lost 150+ pounds in 6 months -- yet her skin wasn't hanging. What gives?
3) We are taught that you must eat lots of protein to retain muscle mass. I can't imagine them getting much protein on 800 calories per day, yet they look ripped and shredded by the end of the 6 months. I wonder how?
4) On the same tone as #3, we are taught that we must have proper nutrition to lose weight. Once again, I'm not sure how they're getting proper nutrition on 800 to 1100 calories a day? Especially the big guys. Yet they consistently drop pounds.
5) We are told that it is dangerous to lose more than an average of 2 pounds per week. Yet these people lose on average around 6 pounds per week and at the end their bodyfat testing, blood, etc are all much better than at the beginning. Or perhaps they paid off the doctors to give a misleading result. I dont know.
I want to be clear that I am NOT claiming the Biggest Loser way to be healthy, or the "right/ideal" way to lose weight. It just seems like they have sorta disproved some of the theories that get repeated on this forum.
Or maybe i'm just missing something - which is entirely possible.
What you are missing is probably the biggest (no pun intended) most important aspect: these are people are who BIG! Like they need to lose 100 lbs, not 10.
People who haven't been in this situation may or may not know this but when you have a big, big, big amount of weight to lose you drop weight really quickly. For example, I am 5'9 and I started at 320lbs.I am not proud of this fact, but it happened. Within the first month I dropped 15lbs but then it took another 6 weeks to lose 10 and keep it off. When you have that much weight to lose, the first 10% or maybe even 25% will come off really quick.
There are also personal trainers and people making their meals for them on that show. I am not saying it's ok, I am just saying that when you have someone telling you what to do it makes it a lot easier than going to research it on your own and figuring that out.
Plus - starvation mode in the sense you described is a myth. If you're in a caloric deficit you will lose weight - now that weight will be fat and lean body mass, but you will still lose.0 -
Whew, glad I wasn't the only one!!! I was reading it and everything glazed over!!!
Seriously guys? It's plain engrish!
But my mind is really fragmented lately.. blame it on the baby air horn that disrupts my train of thought. I'm sorry it came out of my mouth sideways, But I'm pretty sure it's all there...
ETA: Nope, I forgot to tie it all back in to the TV show. They're overweight and obese, and so long as they take vitamins and the 9 essential amino acids that the human body needs to function (which it can't produce itself out of fat and protien stores), then honestly, the contestants could eat as little as they could stand.
The less you eat the more you lose, because the body costs X number of calories each day. I don't think those results can be duplicated outside of that ranch, but it's not super human, it's just strict adherence to a Very Low Calorie Diet.0 -
Huh?
to put it simply, everything that comes out of a nutritionists mouth is opinion, not science.
simply put, NO one knows if eating less processed sources, more raw sources of different foods which contain different levels of nutrients all in different bio-available forms are any better or worse for us than a multivitamin, which have been argued to be almost worthless.
"You need to eat nutritious food, clean calories, and cut out the empty calories."
But, why can't I enjoy a coke with some Jack at the end of my day, and plan out my 2000 calorie diet around that? If I eat a multivitamin and greens throughout my week..
There was a guy in kansas, wanted to prove his students wrong, so he ate chips and little debbies and junk, but in a calorie deficit, and he lost weight. In fact, all his markers for health at his physical afterwards had improved.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
It doesn't matter what you eat, your body will break down the complex carbs into simple glucose, and send that into your bloodstream. It doesn't matter if you eat an apple or a snack cake (albeit the sources and ratios of the types of sugar will be different, the effect on calories is the same... hmm....)
protein powder vs meat
bread vs no carbs.
it doesn't matter what you eat, it matters how much you eat, in terms of energy. You can count calories if you want, but I just watch the scale over time.
Did that make more sense?
ETA: Bombshell, I meant we should eat what we want, and we should all choose to refrain from overeating. As to HOW each of us comes to Jesus, I don't really think I'm an authority to tell someone else how to eat, I dunno what they like. Less processed food has less calories in it though, and that will make it easier for someone to stick to a calorie goal..
More sense? Yes. But it didn't really seem related to your first post.
Not even sure where it came from as it doesn't really relate to this thread (unless I'm missing something).0 -
The contestants are definitely wearing compression garments towards the end of the show. You can pretty much see this through the tank tops/t-shirts. Whatever they are wearing on the lower half is also compression garments. That really holds in the extra skin... ask me how I know. ;-)
I mostly have extra skin on my upper arms and thighs. My "muffin top" is also just extra skin. Add compression garments and it all seems to magically disappear! I'll take the extra skin over fat. If I had the $$$, I'd probably get a whole body lift and that would drop my weight by another 15-20 lbs.
Anyhow, I think the failure rate is pretty high among the contestants because of how they've lost their weight. Realistically, how many people can exercise 6 hours a day, eat around 800-1000 calories, and sit in a sauna for an hour before weighing in? (I had read the sauna part in a magazine that supposedly one of the former contestants had said, so I am really not sure about that.)0 -
seriously.This guy again.
My thoughts exactly.
Agree!!0 -
No, the reality is much simpler. Nutrition is bullsh*t.
My 3 month old daughter needs only milk to thrive and have the energy to get through the day, and the contestants, and anyone else with that level of bodyfat...
.
Okay - a 3 month old is either on breast milk or formula - neither of which is "just" milk. Both, provide complete nutrition for babies . This is why cow's milk is not given until a toddler is eating a more complete diet.0 -
bump0
-
Bumping to read later, interested in the answers.....0
-
I agree completely, I think we should adhere to the rules of the show instead, don't you?
On an unrelated note, I was watching this show called Game Of Thrones, and I saw dragons flying around. Doesn't this go against everything we've been led to believe? I am going to pray to the old gods and the new to send me some damn dragon eggs, that seems like the right thing to do in this case. I'll lose weight super fast, be ripped and I'll have some awesome dragons to boot.0 -
seriously.This guy again.
My thoughts exactly.
Agree!!
QFT0 -
No, the reality is much simpler. Nutrition is bullsh*t.
My 3 month old daughter needs only milk to thrive and have the energy to get through the day, and the contestants, and anyone else with that level of bodyfat...
Will use the stores of fatty acids on their body as food. So long as essential vitamins and minerals are ingested, along with essential amino acids, you don't need to eat.
There was a 400 pound man in the 70's who fasted for 380 days under doctor's supervision. Couple missteps in refeeding him, but he got to 180 or something like that, and to this day he's slightly overweight, not obese like he used to be.
What we NEED for nutrition is only what this magnificent machine requires.
Most of the starvation mode, eating to fuel, it's all hype.
Coma patients exist on protien powder with added carbs and fats, in a shake, fed through a feeding tube.
I mean, honestly, the fact that we all haven't woken up to this realization before now is astounding. At least, I can't speak for everyone, but I'm ashamed of myself for not following common sense.
ETA: eat for your body. Eat what you like. And if you start to gain fat, change your diet slightly, and find what works for you. If you want to lose weight for a boxing match or to look thinner, the principles are the same. You are what you eat.
I just can't take this seriously! just can't! dumbfounded by the sheer lack of "common sense"
ETA: Any 3 month old babies, 400lb 70 year old men under medical supervision or coma patients that want to provide some insight?0 -
The Biggest Loser is a horrible show. They basically torture the contestants. I mean come on, super low calorie intakes for people that big with excessive amounts of exercise? They have got to be starving.
And that's not even it.
They force their contestants to exercise even when they have injuries that should prevent them from exercising.
And on weigh-in days, they don't allow the contestants to eat OR drink anything whatsoever the night before until after they've weighed in the next day.
And because I know people on here will want a source, I will work on finding where I read all this.0 -
No, the reality is much simpler. Nutrition is bullsh*t.
My 3 month old daughter needs only milk to thrive and have the energy to get through the day, and the contestants, and anyone else with that level of bodyfat...
.
Okay - a 3 month old is either on breast milk or formula - neither of which is "just" milk. Both, provide complete nutrition for babies . This is why cow's milk is not given until a toddler is eating a more complete diet.
Exactly. If you believe the hype about "how to eat" and how much to eat to avoid starvation mode, I think it's a terrible lie to keep spreading that you MUST do this way or that program, or eat this, and cut out that.
Just be honest guys! You don't know, all you know is what you've read, and what's worked for you and the people you know.
Babies need only breastmilk, which was shocking to me because I sat there thinking, but all these studies, where's the fiber, where's the whole grains? I felt stupid when I realized how much babies and coma patients had in common, and the correlations between everything.
The answer is no. There is no set way to lose.
You can do it like the biggest loser, and VLCD, but the mods in here won't let you post about it. You can low carb, you can simply watch your calorie intake, you can count your macros, but in the end, it's about what you can stick to.0 -
Huh?
to put it simply, everything that comes out of a nutritionists mouth is opinion, not science.
simply put, NO one knows if eating less processed sources, more raw sources of different foods which contain different levels of nutrients all in different bio-available forms are any better or worse for us than a multivitamin, which have been argued to be almost worthless.
"You need to eat nutritious food, clean calories, and cut out the empty calories."
But, why can't I enjoy a coke with some Jack at the end of my day, and plan out my 2000 calorie diet around that? If I eat a multivitamin and greens throughout my week..
There was a guy in kansas, wanted to prove his students wrong, so he ate chips and little debbies and junk, but in a calorie deficit, and he lost weight. In fact, all his markers for health at his physical afterwards had improved.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
It doesn't matter what you eat, your body will break down the complex carbs into simple glucose, and send that into your bloodstream. It doesn't matter if you eat an apple or a snack cake (albeit the sources and ratios of the types of sugar will be different, the effect on calories is the same... hmm....)
protein powder vs meat
bread vs no carbs.
it doesn't matter what you eat, it matters how much you eat, in terms of energy. You can count calories if you want, but I just watch the scale over time.
Did that make more sense?
ETA: Bombshell, I meant we should eat what we want, and we should all choose to refrain from overeating. As to HOW each of us comes to Jesus, I don't really think I'm an authority to tell someone else how to eat, I dunno what they like. Less processed food has less calories in it though, and that will make it easier for someone to stick to a calorie goal..
That doesn't mean nutrition is bullsh*t. The Twinkie professor also had protein powder and a vitamin every day. Because nutrition.0 -
It being a tv show doesn't mean it didn't happen. Well, a 'week' might be 10-14 days on BL. But they lost the weight at the overall rate we see-- less than a year for it all.
If someone posts their story on MFP about how they lost 350lbs. in 18 months and runs marathons now they're roundly applauded (as they should be). But if someone posts at the beginning of that kind of weight loss, or the middle, they're ridiculed for doing it wrong. :laugh:
I was just coming in to say this. What they say is a week really isn't a week. All of those "bad" weeks that they have are only a few days.0 -
No, the reality is much simpler. Nutrition is bullsh*t.
My 3 month old daughter needs only milk to thrive and have the energy to get through the day, and the contestants, and anyone else with that level of bodyfat...
.
Okay - a 3 month old is either on breast milk or formula - neither of which is "just" milk. Both, provide complete nutrition for babies . This is why cow's milk is not given until a toddler is eating a more complete diet.
Exactly. If you believe the hype about "how to eat" and how much to eat to avoid starvation mode, I think it's a terrible lie to keep spreading that you MUST do this way or that program, or eat this, and cut out that.
Just be honest guys! You don't know, all you know is what you've read, and what's worked for you and the people you know.
Babies need only breastmilk, which was shocking to me because I sat there thinking, but all these studies, where's the fiber, where's the whole grains? I felt stupid when I realized how much babies and coma patients had in common, and the correlations between everything.
The answer is no. There is no set way to lose.
You can do it like the biggest loser, and VLCD, but the mods in here won't let you post about it. You can low carb, you can simply watch your calorie intake, you can count your macros, but in the end, it's about what you can stick to.
But there is a set way....and you mentioned it. It's eating at a sustainable calorie deficit. All diet plans have that in common and that is what this site promotes.0 -
idk anything about the biggest loser, but i disagree with some of the things you've been 'taught'
there is a show called 'my 600 lbs life'. the Doctor always insists on a 1000 calorie diet, regardless of the individual.
always wondered why he insisted on such a sever defecit when they would lose wait on a far more modest one. i suppose maybe they are really that close to death and it an emergency0 -
I agree completely, I think we should adhere to the rules of the show instead, don't you?
On an unrelated note, I was watching this show called Game Of Thrones, and I saw dragons flying around. Doesn't this go against everything we've been led to believe? I am going to pray to the old gods and the new to send me some damn dragon eggs, that seems like the right thing to do in this case. I'll lose weight super fast, be ripped and I'll have some awesome dragons to boot.
Marry me. I'll give you a pretty horse that you can later kill.0 -
All I know is if my life were Game of Thrones....everyone I loved would be dead.0
-
1) We are taught that eating too few of calories will result in "starvation" mode and our body will hold onto weight. On the show, contestants afterwards spoke about eating 800 to 1100 calories per day and yet they consistently would lose 5 to 20 pounds per week. Obviously they exercised endlessly. But no "starvation" mode...
That's not how starvation mode works. These are obese people, not people who are digging into their last essential fat stores
2) We are taught that if you lose weight too fast, skin will just hang around. Last years winner (and many winners before that) lost 150+ pounds in 6 months -- yet her skin wasn't hanging. What gives?
It's a myth that fast weight loss causes loose skin. Loose skin can happen with fast and with slow weight loss. It depends on many factors. As for the show, have you noticed that after a certain point people stop taking off their shirts? That's because they are wearing body shapers. Those can do wonders!
3) We are taught that you must eat lots of protein to retain muscle mass. I can't imagine them getting much protein on 800 calories per day, yet they look ripped and shredded by the end of the 6 months. I wonder how?
Their food is mostly protein. It's a myth that you need as much protein as usually advocated to retain muscle mass. 500-600 calories of protein would be enough. Don't forget that these are people who work out for hours every day, people who didn't work out before, so you can expect some newbie gains too
4) On the same tone as #3, we are taught that we must have proper nutrition to lose weight. Once again, I'm not sure how they're getting proper nutrition on 800 to 1100 calories a day? Especially the big guys. Yet they consistently drop pounds.
It's a game show. They aren't focusing on health, they are focusing on their ratings. You can lose weight without being healthy. Look at anorexia for example
5) We are told that it is dangerous to lose more than an average of 2 pounds per week. Yet these people lose on average around 6 pounds per week and at the end their bodyfat testing, blood, etc are all much better than at the beginning. Or perhaps they paid off the doctors to give a misleading result. I dont know.
The mere fact of weight loss causes certain aspects of your blood work to improve, regardless if you lose it eating healthy or eating nothing but cleanses for months. Now why do we only hear about glucose/lipid but nothing about other tests like hormones and nutrients? It's because these are the tests that improve with weight loss.
I want to be clear that I am NOT claiming the Biggest Loser way to be healthy, or the "right/ideal" way to lose weight. It just seems like they have sorta disproved some of the theories that get repeated on this forum.
Or maybe i'm just missing something - which is entirely possible.0 -
No, the reality is much simpler. Nutrition is bullsh*t.
My 3 month old daughter needs only milk to thrive and have the energy to get through the day, and the contestants, and anyone else with that level of bodyfat...
.
Okay - a 3 month old is either on breast milk or formula - neither of which is "just" milk. Both, provide complete nutrition for babies . This is why cow's milk is not given until a toddler is eating a more complete diet.
Exactly. If you believe the hype about "how to eat" and how much to eat to avoid starvation mode, I think it's a terrible lie to keep spreading that you MUST do this way or that program, or eat this, and cut out that.
Just be honest guys! You don't know, all you know is what you've read, and what's worked for you and the people you know.
Babies need only breastmilk, which was shocking to me because I sat there thinking, but all these studies, where's the fiber, where's the whole grains? I felt stupid when I realized how much babies and coma patients had in common, and the correlations between everything.
The answer is no. There is no set way to lose.
You can do it like the biggest loser, and VLCD, but the mods in here won't let you post about it. You can low carb, you can simply watch your calorie intake, you can count your macros, but in the end, it's about what you can stick to.
Oh dear. Good luck.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions