why dieters need to adjust their expectations
girlinahat
Posts: 2,956 Member
from the BBC news website:
Diets fail 'because advice is wrong', say researchers
By Michelle Roberts Health reporter, BBC News
Eat less and you will lose weight.
This simple piece of advice is true, but it's one that many of us struggle to follow. It is easy to blame a lack of will power or a penchant for sugary, fat-ladened snacks. And often weight does pile back on because people revert back to their old way of eating too much of the wrong foods. But researchers say the reason so many of us relapse and fail on diets is because we have unrealistic expectations. And this is not our fault but that of experts, because the advice they give us is flawed.
Most people start dieting with the notion that they will start to see results fast.
Experts tell us that if we cut around 500 calories from out daily diet, or burn them off exercising, then we can expect to lose 1lb (0.5kg) in weight every week. The British Dietetics Association, the NHS and the American Dietetic Association all say losing weight at this rate is "about right" and that if you stick at it for 12 months, for example, you will shed about 52 lb (26kg).
But US researchers from the National Institutes for Health say this is a gross overestimation because the calculation used is flawed. They say it takes much longer to lose the weight - around three years to be precise, according to their work published in The Lancet.
For example, a year of dieting will result in only half of the amount of weight loss that experts currently predict.
Dr Kevin Hall and colleagues say this explains why many of us give up within months, because we expect unrealistic results that cannot be achieved. Studies of outpatient weight loss programmes show most dieters peak at six months with the pounds starting to creep back on after this.
Some, incorrectly, attribute this to the body getting used to having less food and metabolism slowing down. The dieter then feels that the regime is no longer working and often gives up altogether. Alternatively, as the slimmer begins to see the weight falling off in the early months they are so pleased with their achievement that they begin to relax and the diet slips. But because weight loss is slow there is a lag phase where weight continues to drop even though the person is now eating more. The dieter then mistakenly concludes that they don't need to be so rigid with their diet in order to lose weight.
But eventually, the weight will catch up with them and they may well find they are now heavier than they were when they first started the diet. Dr Hall explains: "The slow time scale for weight change is responsible for the gradual weight regain over many years despite the fact that the original lifestyle was resumed within the first year.
"Studies show that somewhere between 50% and 80% of dieters will put weight back on."
He says professionals need to change the advice that they give to dieters so they don't fall into this trap. "If you can give a realistic picture that can inform people and help them make choices."
Dr Hall says the error occurs because the "500 calorie-cut a day" sum fails to take account of how metabolism changes as we diet, says Dr Hall. The mathematic equation relies on the assumption that one pound of fat contains 3,500 calories, so to lose one pound a week a person should consume approximately 3,500 fewer calories a week, or 500 fewer calories a day.
But in fact, weight loss is not this steady.
Using knowledge about how the human body responds to changes of diet and physical activity Dr Hall's team have created a computer programme that they say gives a more realistic and reliable prediction of weight loss. Their calculations reflect the fact that one person may lose weight faster or slower than another, even when they eat the same diet and do the same exercise.
For example, heavier people can expect greater weight change with the same change in diet, but it will take them longer to reach a stable body weight than people carrying less fat. Plus the body adapts rapidly to a reduced calorie diet, regardless of the type of food eliminated to get this reduction.
This means that all diets with similarly reduced energy content will have the same effect in the short-term, whether the food cut out is fat or sugary carbohydrates.
Dr Hall said: "We tested it on about 100 people and it gave a good fit. It was pretty accurate. Whereas the old rule does not fall anywhere near. "This means we can use it to make realistic predictions. "The rough rule of thumb to go by is 10 calories per day per pound. And it takes a year to lose half of the excess weight and three years to get to 95%."
It's not clear why the advice was adopted in the first place.
Helen Bond, from the British Dietetic Association, admitted: "We all recommend it - it's what we are taught. But I don't know what the scientific evidence for it is.
"It stems from how much energy it takes to burn fat. A lot of diets are not proven by science."
She said some dieters might find it depressing to be told that it takes far longer to get weight down than previously thought.
"It's not very motivating to tell someone that if they cut their intake by 10 calories a day every day for the next three years they will lose a pound of weight.
"But saying 'cut out your daily habit of a 250 calorie chocolate bar and you will lose about 25 pounds and, if you stick at it, the weight will stay off' - that is."
However, Dr Hall says the computer model also shows how people can achieve more rapid weight loss if that is what they desire.
For example, someone could follow a very strict diet for the first year to get rid of a large bulk of their excess weight and then switch to a less restrictive diet to continue and maintain the weight loss. Adding in extra exercise will also have an impact.
At the end of the day, it still boils down to will power. There is no quick fix to dieting and if you want it to work you need to stick at it, says Dr Hall.
A healthy diet is for life, not just post-Christmas.
Diets fail 'because advice is wrong', say researchers
By Michelle Roberts Health reporter, BBC News
Eat less and you will lose weight.
This simple piece of advice is true, but it's one that many of us struggle to follow. It is easy to blame a lack of will power or a penchant for sugary, fat-ladened snacks. And often weight does pile back on because people revert back to their old way of eating too much of the wrong foods. But researchers say the reason so many of us relapse and fail on diets is because we have unrealistic expectations. And this is not our fault but that of experts, because the advice they give us is flawed.
Most people start dieting with the notion that they will start to see results fast.
Experts tell us that if we cut around 500 calories from out daily diet, or burn them off exercising, then we can expect to lose 1lb (0.5kg) in weight every week. The British Dietetics Association, the NHS and the American Dietetic Association all say losing weight at this rate is "about right" and that if you stick at it for 12 months, for example, you will shed about 52 lb (26kg).
But US researchers from the National Institutes for Health say this is a gross overestimation because the calculation used is flawed. They say it takes much longer to lose the weight - around three years to be precise, according to their work published in The Lancet.
For example, a year of dieting will result in only half of the amount of weight loss that experts currently predict.
Dr Kevin Hall and colleagues say this explains why many of us give up within months, because we expect unrealistic results that cannot be achieved. Studies of outpatient weight loss programmes show most dieters peak at six months with the pounds starting to creep back on after this.
Some, incorrectly, attribute this to the body getting used to having less food and metabolism slowing down. The dieter then feels that the regime is no longer working and often gives up altogether. Alternatively, as the slimmer begins to see the weight falling off in the early months they are so pleased with their achievement that they begin to relax and the diet slips. But because weight loss is slow there is a lag phase where weight continues to drop even though the person is now eating more. The dieter then mistakenly concludes that they don't need to be so rigid with their diet in order to lose weight.
But eventually, the weight will catch up with them and they may well find they are now heavier than they were when they first started the diet. Dr Hall explains: "The slow time scale for weight change is responsible for the gradual weight regain over many years despite the fact that the original lifestyle was resumed within the first year.
"Studies show that somewhere between 50% and 80% of dieters will put weight back on."
He says professionals need to change the advice that they give to dieters so they don't fall into this trap. "If you can give a realistic picture that can inform people and help them make choices."
Dr Hall says the error occurs because the "500 calorie-cut a day" sum fails to take account of how metabolism changes as we diet, says Dr Hall. The mathematic equation relies on the assumption that one pound of fat contains 3,500 calories, so to lose one pound a week a person should consume approximately 3,500 fewer calories a week, or 500 fewer calories a day.
But in fact, weight loss is not this steady.
Using knowledge about how the human body responds to changes of diet and physical activity Dr Hall's team have created a computer programme that they say gives a more realistic and reliable prediction of weight loss. Their calculations reflect the fact that one person may lose weight faster or slower than another, even when they eat the same diet and do the same exercise.
For example, heavier people can expect greater weight change with the same change in diet, but it will take them longer to reach a stable body weight than people carrying less fat. Plus the body adapts rapidly to a reduced calorie diet, regardless of the type of food eliminated to get this reduction.
This means that all diets with similarly reduced energy content will have the same effect in the short-term, whether the food cut out is fat or sugary carbohydrates.
Dr Hall said: "We tested it on about 100 people and it gave a good fit. It was pretty accurate. Whereas the old rule does not fall anywhere near. "This means we can use it to make realistic predictions. "The rough rule of thumb to go by is 10 calories per day per pound. And it takes a year to lose half of the excess weight and three years to get to 95%."
It's not clear why the advice was adopted in the first place.
Helen Bond, from the British Dietetic Association, admitted: "We all recommend it - it's what we are taught. But I don't know what the scientific evidence for it is.
"It stems from how much energy it takes to burn fat. A lot of diets are not proven by science."
She said some dieters might find it depressing to be told that it takes far longer to get weight down than previously thought.
"It's not very motivating to tell someone that if they cut their intake by 10 calories a day every day for the next three years they will lose a pound of weight.
"But saying 'cut out your daily habit of a 250 calorie chocolate bar and you will lose about 25 pounds and, if you stick at it, the weight will stay off' - that is."
However, Dr Hall says the computer model also shows how people can achieve more rapid weight loss if that is what they desire.
For example, someone could follow a very strict diet for the first year to get rid of a large bulk of their excess weight and then switch to a less restrictive diet to continue and maintain the weight loss. Adding in extra exercise will also have an impact.
At the end of the day, it still boils down to will power. There is no quick fix to dieting and if you want it to work you need to stick at it, says Dr Hall.
A healthy diet is for life, not just post-Christmas.
0
Replies
-
This is an interesting read, thanks for posting.0
-
Thank you for posting this, a very interesting read. Shame the weight doesn't go on as slowly though, eh?
In some respects it does make me feel better as I seem to be in the 'slow and steady' group now. But, on the other hand? Three years?
:noway:0 -
I just came on here to post exactly the same!0
-
Interesting...0
-
I'm not too surprised by this, as it seems to be what my body is doing. And the last sentence sums it all up, " Healthy eating is for life, not just post-Christmas" .
Personally I'm not put off by this journey taking me 3 years, or even 5 years, as the benefits will last me so much longer and will actually prolong my life.
As they say, "It's all good!"0 -
While there is some truth in the article, I don't like it. Seems to me it says, its OK to take three years to lose the weight, even though 99% of the people want to lose it quickly. Educate yourself on the science behind how the human body works and any healthy person can lose the weight relatively quickly. Adjusting your expectations.............what a loser mentality......... I don't except that.0
-
Thanks I needed this reminder0
-
Good article, thanks for posting.
Should it really surprise people that steady sustainable weight loss can take up to three years when it took as least that long to put it on? It's obviously possible to do it quicker, as many MFP success stories have proven, but that should perhaps be considered a bonus rather than the norm. It would also help people realise there's no need to give up when weight loss slows to a crawl after the first few months.0 -
Good article, thanks for posting.
Should it really surprise people that steady sustainable weight loss can take up to three years when it took as least that long to put it on? It's obviously possible to do it quicker, as many MFP success stories have proven, but that should perhaps be considered a bonus rather than the norm. It would also help people realise there's no need to give up when weight loss slows to a crawl after the first few months.
I agree. I am quite amazed by the speed some people here have lost weight. I have been nowhere near as fast, averaging 0.5 lbs a week, but that has seemed quite fast enough. Aiming for 2lbs a week weight lost can really only lead to disappointment.0 -
I just went to the BBC site to re-read the article, and there's a side bar which says: "The recommended daily calorie intake for men is 2,500 and for women is 2,000," which by not taking into account age, weight and activity level is the kind of gross simplification the article is railing against.0
-
This was a really interesting read. Thank you for posting!0
-
Good article. Amazing how the science behind weight loss and metabolism is constantly evolving - the more we understand and accept the better.0
-
This means that all diets with similarly reduced energy content will have the same effect in the short-term, whether the food cut out is fat or sugary carbohydrates.
Dr Hall said: "We tested it on about 100 people and it gave a good fit. It was pretty accurate. Whereas the old rule does not fall anywhere near. "This means we can use it to make realistic predictions. "The rough rule of thumb to go by is 10 calories per day per pound. And it takes a year to lose half of the excess weight and three years to get to 95%."
I'm confused...what's the 10 cals per lb? BMR? If I weigh 100lbs (I don't!) should I be on 1000cals? Or is that to lose..?0 -
that is interesting. i am finding it to be very true that slowly coming off is TRUE!!! i thought i would drop pounds like mad, but it's coming off about 1 lb./week. (i really expected to lose about 10 lbs instantly w/in the 1st month!) my husband kept telling me, "slower is better" and sure enough, i am feeling SO MUCH BETTER and really into a lifestyle, no matter if i lose another pound or not.0
-
While there is some truth in the article, I don't like it. Seems to me it says, its OK to take three years to lose the weight, even though 99% of the people want to lose it quickly. Educate yourself on the science behind how the human body works and any healthy person can lose the weight relatively quickly. Adjusting your expectations.............what a loser mentality......... I don't except that.
:drinker: 
0 -
While there is some truth in the article, I don't like it. Seems to me it says, its OK to take three years to lose the weight, even though 99% of the people want to lose it quickly. Educate yourself on the science behind how the human body works and any healthy person can lose the weight relatively quickly. Adjusting your expectations.............what a loser mentality......... I don't except that.
I disagree. I think its super important. It means you have to keep going! Not that you shouldn't try and push for results. I think you'll get them. But you won't get them at the same pace over time and that's key.0 -
thanks for the post0
-
I think there is a very huge part of the pie that is missing in this article and fad diets or "dieting" in general and that is EXERCISE is not mentioned once! People in general want to do the least amount of work to lose the weight and when they aren't seeing 10 lbs a week come off, they become disappointed and get into this mentality that "anything that I don't won't be good enough. I have to live with this fat." Or "Fatness runs in the family so I have to be fat." A crock!
We are bombarded "with lose 40 lbs in 40 days!," "Eat anything you want and lose weight!," "Diet pills that remove unwanted fat!" B*ll *kitten*!
A sad (but true) generalization is that people are LAZY. That's why advertisements and companies selling this stuff make money. People want to see results without putting in the effort.
Losing weight in a healthy manner is a culmination of eating whole, unprocessed foods AND sustained activity for 30 mins to an hour, 3-5 days a week. A calorie deficit is a part of the picture but certainly NOT the whole picture.
Sorry for the rant. Peace!0 -
I'm confused...what's the 10 cals per lb? BMR? If I weigh 100lbs (I don't!) should I be on 1000cals? Or is that to lose..?
What they are saying is that the calculation is if you reduce your calories by 10 a day then in a year you will lose 1lb, therefore reducing by 250 calories a day should show a loss of 25lb in a year.0 -
I think there is a very huge part of the pie that is missing in this article and fad diets or "dieting" in general and that is EXERCISE is not mentioned once! People in general want to do the least amount of work to lose the weight and when they aren't seeing 10 lbs a week come off, they become disappointed and get into this mentality that "anything that I don't won't be good enough. I have to live with this fat." Or "Fatness runs in the family so I have to be fat." A crock!
We are bombarded "with lose 40 lbs in 40 days!," "Eat anything you want and lose weight!," "Diet pills that remove unwanted fat!" B*ll *kitten*!
A sad (but true) generalization is that people are LAZY. That's why advertisements and companies selling this stuff make money. People want to see results without putting in the effort.
Losing weight in a healthy manner is a culmination of eating whole, unprocessed foods AND sustained activity for 30 mins to an hour, 3-5 days a week. A calorie deficit is a part of the picture but certainly NOT the whole picture.
Sorry for the rant. Peace!
So True!!0 -
Well to be fair there's this, but it's a bit dismissive:Adding in extra exercise will also have an impact.0
-
Well, I will never adjust my expectations regardless of what people write..Or what "STUDIES" may show. We must do what works for our bodies. No one can tell you what that is. I don't care how many folks they tried this and that on. And, I must say that everyone is not going to lose at the same rate and it may be harder for some than it is for others. I lost 20 lbs in 5 weeks. That's because I worked my *kitten* off and changed a lot of what I was eating (most of which I shouldn't have been eating in the first place). To say that it's not normal or grossly abnormal to lose more than 1lb a week is crazy. I don't expect to see 100lb fall of in 2 months but I sure in hell expect to be close to it in a year. And my expectations are what they are! Oh well to those who choose to lower them because of an article or because "whoever" only lost 30 in a year. You will be a product of hard work and perserverance. Just my thought..Good day0
-
I'm confused...what's the 10 cals per lb? BMR? If I weigh 100lbs (I don't!) should I be on 1000cals? Or is that to lose..?
What they are saying is that the calculation is if you reduce your calories by 10 a day then in a year you will lose 1lb, therefore reducing by 250 calories a day should show a loss of 25lb in a year.
Doh! Thanks
0
This discussion has been closed.
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