I'm an agnostic skeptic...

McKayMachina

...when it comes to dieting.

I find that anytime someone posts a thread about some new weight loss aid (shakes, pills/capsules, powders, creams, drops, medications, etc...), my immediate response is "That's probably BS."

Isagenix, Shakeology, TrimSpa, Dukan Diet, Weight Watchers...whatever it is, it's UNNECESSARY. Might it help you? YES! But do you NEED it to lose weight? NOPE.

I'm not one of the people who has "tried every diet under the sun" but I tried a handful of things for short bursts of time and it always became painfully clear that it's ALL just a big marketing gimmick. The whole idea is to MAKE MONEY OFF OF PEOPLE. That's why these companies exist.

So, for the record, if it works for you, KEEP IT UP! But I stand by my skepticism and maintain my position of YOU DON'T NEED IT.

Thoughts? Disagreements welcome.

:drinker:

baisleac

I like you! :flowerforyou:

brandihutchinson

I totally agree. There are so many flaws in these FAD diets! The one going around that I ALMOST did was the Visalus diet, but so close to Christmas, I couldn't stomach spending $750 on myself. Not to mention, what do you do when your three months are over??? How do you not gain the weight back when you start eating normal food???

sophjakesmom

I'm with you. This is an extremely personal choice, though and each person has to find what works for them. I have found for me, that paying money is not a motivator, it is a stresser. I know what I need to do (eat less and move more.) And fortunately MFP helps remind me to do just that. I'll be curious to see what discussion occurs.

myak623

I'm in complete agreement with you!

shaj316

Feel the same. MFP, as its generally practiced, is working for me so I always wonder when I see someone on here trying to find something else.

Jo2926

You are right. I don't need those things....

...but I DO need motivation and determination to stick at it...

...and those things give me that!!

Jodye

fuhrmeister

I agree as well. How long can peoplre really keep these thing up. I believe in counting my calories. and if it makes you unhappy to cut things out don't So i count instead of cutting. Coount calories, count/weight serving sizes so i don't go overboard on my bread or chips or candy corn.

kennethmgreen

I think one of the big reasons so many fad diets SEEM to work is because anytime you are on a diet you are focusing more on your food/caloric intake (and often exercising as well).

For most people, used to never thinking much about food (beyond "more, please" or "why yes, I'll make that a meal deal") start these diets and ACTUALLY PAY ATTENTION to what is going into their mouth hole. That is a huge step that cannot be understated. Just paying attention to what I ate made a difference.

I suspect that most diets, if analyzed for the specific things that make them unique (pregnant lady pee anyone?) would show pretty futile for weight loss. The reason people lose weight isn't a secret, no matter how fancy the packaging or how many infomercials you run.

That being said, I see nothing wrong with fad diets that aren't dangerous. If someone needs to wear foil on their head to eat less and become healthier, so what? They are eating better and becoming healthier. So I agree with your closing sentiment.

KyleB65

Diets of any type never worked for me.
I view what I am doing withe help of MFP as a lifestyle change that will last the rest of my life. Not a "diet" that usually has a beginning and an end.
So far, so good!

aliciagetshealthy

Absolutely agree! The entire industry is a huge money maker.

McKayMachina

Thanks everyone for the replies so far!

And, Kenneth...as usual...I agree with you. Well said.

You are right. I don't need those things....

...but I DO need motivation and determination to stick at it...

...and those things give me that!!

Jodye

Jodye, thanks for the reply! This is the type of reaction I'm most interested in. If you get a chance to expand on your thinking, I would very much like to hear it.

This, to me, sounds like you need an external system for motivation. Which is at odds with what I know about sustaining weight loss. I've always heard that the motivation has to be internal.

I equate internal drive with authenticity.

Is this different for you?

Also, if you're comfortable sharing your specific product or system of choice, it might help frame your response.

I know a friend who uses Isagenix and has spent THOUSANDS of dollars on it over the last two years and she is stuck at 60 lbs. left to go because it has left her with NO greater understanding of nutrition. She literally believes that the products are formulated with compounds that make her lose weight so I fear she will always be stuck and will always spend the money hoping for something that isn't going to happen.

Additionally, I joined Jenny Craig and, after one week of eating the pre-ordered food, it became clear to me that it was a simple case of tiny portions. I was hungry ALL the time and left that program with no clarity in the way of nutrition or exercise.

So it's hard for me to understand why those approaches would work for someone.

Jodye, or anyone, feel free to respond. Thanks!

:drinker:

ABetterBalance

I agree. I am a skeptic, and I have tried different things.

I have always been a believer in the very simple principle of "eat less, move more" I track my food intake and I exercise. Some times I track more strictly than others, (which leads to weight that fluctuates a lot) but nothing else I have tried works as well as this.

Motivating my husband to eat right has always been a challenge, so I have always tried to be supportive when he wants to give one of these programs a try. Last year we did a brief stint with Atkins (anout 2 weeks) This year it's apparently Weight Watchers.

There's nothing wrong with either, I suppose, but they are just too much work for me!

bonjour24

agree

the end

sunkisses

So, for the record, if it works for you, KEEP IT UP! But I stand by my skepticism and maintain my position of YOU DON'T NEED IT.

Thoughts? Disagreements welcome.

:drinker:

This is why I respect your post so much more than the "everyone who does this is going to gain the weight back" posts.

Hmmmm accepting that something might work for others without it diminishing your own beliefs.... I wonder if it'll ever catch on.

Jo2926

This, to me, sounds like you need an external system for motivation. Which is at odds with what I know about sustaining weight loss. I've always heard that the motivation has to be internal.

Perhaps motivation is the wrong word for me to use - as my motivation for losing weight isn't in the diet I follow (low carb - tried a couple, currently trying Dukan, but the diet I have found most sustainable is Montignac). I guess the right word is discipline, and you are right that this is external. It probably isn't the best way to approach weight loss, but on the other hand it is currently working where trying to calorie count/generally cut down hasn't worked for me. It may be inauthentic but at the moment I would rather be inauthenticly a bit slimmer, than authenticly fat!!

I know a friend who uses Isagenix and has spent THOUSANDS of dollars on it over the last two years and she is stuck at 60 lbs. left to go because it has left her with NO greater understanding of nutrition. She literally believes that the products are formulated with compounds that make her lose weight so I fear she will always be stuck and will always spend the money hoping for something that isn't going to happen.

I know that all diets work by restricting what you eat, either by concentrating on the calories, or by restricting you to certain types of food. There is no magic wand, or magic weight loss pill, but I have highly stressful job and I know my limitations. If I try to do this alone I end up putting everything/one else first, myself last, and just grab the first food I see.

So it's hard for me to understand why those approaches would work for someone.

It works because if I follow it correctly, the Montignac diet takes me step by step to a healthy balanced diet. The first stage is based on lean meats, low saturated fat, and occasional 'good carb' meals like lentils or pasta. It makes it easier, which means I stop putting it off, and it lets me know I'm doing the right thing in an area I don't know a lot about. A bit like people asking advice on these forums.

At the moment I am trying the dukan diet because I desperately want to lose the weight faster for my upcoming wedding. The montignac system is very gentle for me (half a pound a week) and I need a quick kick start. I anticipate going back to montignac because in my heart it seems healthier.

I can't speak for why others try these things, but if they stick to it that has to be better than continuing to increase your weight by eating (for example) 3 McDonalds a day!

Jodye

MikeSEA

In this context (and others) being an agnostic just means you don't know whether or not whatever product will work. If it's a product you haven't used, that would make sense, and it's a good, rational position to take.

Being skeptical would make you more of a dieting atheist as you're choosing to not believe the hype

Johannes1

Totally agree with you on that

Jo2926

Hmmmm accepting that something might work for others without it diminishing your own beliefs.... I wonder if it'll ever catch on.

Wouldn't that be nice!

kennethmgreen

Hmmmm accepting that something might work for others without it diminishing your own beliefs.... I wonder if it'll ever catch on.

Sadly, I don't think it will ever catch on. At least not on a large scale. But posts like this help.

Why do you think people don't like to discuss religion or politics? Why do you think those topics aren't allowed here? We can't fit differences into our small minds.

We so desperately hold onto our beliefs and get so much self-worth from those beliefs, that if someone doesn't share the same beliefs we get scared and tell them they are wrong. It's just too difficult a concept to think that maybe you can be happy believing the sky is blue when I know - and have known since the day I was smart enough to learn it from my parents - that the sky is green.

McKayMachina

Thanks again, everyone for the input. And thanks, Jodye, for responding! It really helps that you so articulately laid out your thoughts. I feel like I have a slightly better understanding of your approach. Cheers! And congrats on your upcoming wedding!

In this context (and others) being an agnostic just means you don't know whether or not whatever product will work. If it's a product you haven't used, that would make sense, and it's a good, rational position to take.

Being skeptical would make you more of a dieting atheist as you're choosing to not believe the hype

I disagree with you completely. I hope you don't mind a little alternative wordsmithing. Agnostic literally means "without knowledge of". Prefix a- meaning "without" and gnostic coming from the greek "gnosis" meaning "knowledge". It's the purest form of ignorance and describes my open-minded stance. I only know about SOME of these products/systems firsthand. And even with those I'm limited to within my own experience and perspective. So I think agnosticism, in any sense, always means "without knowledge of".

Skepticism does not mean "choosing not to believe the hype". It means questioning while withholding judgment til such time as a reasonable, logical, rational, satisfying explanation can be obtained.

So, I'm without knowledge until such time as I'm no longer without knowledge.

Atheism simply means "without god" (from the greek "theos" for "god") so I'm not sure where that even came into play.

Just wanted to straighten that out.

choconuts

I completely agree. The ONLY way I've been able to KEEP weight off, is through sensible diet and exercise.

I'm working on finally losing that last 20 now.

MikeSEA

Thanks again, everyone for the input. And thanks, Jodye, for responding! It really helps that you so articulately laid out your thoughts. I feel like I have a slightly better understanding of your approach. Cheers! And congrats on your upcoming wedding!

In this context (and others) being an agnostic just means you don't know whether or not whatever product will work. If it's a product you haven't used, that would make sense, and it's a good, rational position to take.

Being skeptical would make you more of a dieting atheist as you're choosing to not believe the hype

I disagree with you completely. I hope you don't mind a little alternative wordsmithing. Agnostic literally means "without knowledge of". Prefix a- meaning "without" and gnostic coming from the greek "gnosis" meaning "knowledge". It's the purest form of ignorance and describes my open-minded stance. I only know about SOME of these products/systems firsthand. And even with those I'm limited to within my own experience and perspective. So I think agnosticism, in any sense, always means "without knowledge of".

Skepticism does not mean "choosing not to believe the hype". It means questioning while withholding judgment til such time as a reasonable, logical, rational, satisfying explanation can be obtained.

So, I'm without knowledge until such time as I'm no longer without knowledge.

Atheism simply means "without god" (from the greek "theos" for "god") so I'm not sure where that even came into play.

Just wanted to straighten that out.

I use atheism with a modifier "dieting" simply because it was easier than making up a new word. I'm aware of what atheism and agnosticism mean, as you can tell from my post (at least the agnostic part was evident). You'll note that said being agnostic means that you don't know. Your use definitions seems to be of questionable motivation. If I were cynical I might assume you were being pedantic.

I would argue that your rational skepticism is similar to an atheist perspective. I don't see the substantive difference between "choosing to not believe the hype" and being rational. As a rational form of inquiry, skepticism ultimately challenges (perhaps even opposes) belief and faith--faith being the belief in something in the absence of evidence. Faith can be put in God, or in ridiculous ads for fitness products.

It seems nothing was ever not straight

McKayMachina

Thanks again, everyone for the input. And thanks, Jodye, for responding! It really helps that you so articulately laid out your thoughts. I feel like I have a slightly better understanding of your approach. Cheers! And congrats on your upcoming wedding!

In this context (and others) being an agnostic just means you don't know whether or not whatever product will work. If it's a product you haven't used, that would make sense, and it's a good, rational position to take.

Being skeptical would make you more of a dieting atheist as you're choosing to not believe the hype

I disagree with you completely. I hope you don't mind a little alternative wordsmithing. Agnostic literally means "without knowledge of". Prefix a- meaning "without" and gnostic coming from the greek "gnosis" meaning "knowledge". It's the purest form of ignorance and describes my open-minded stance. I only know about SOME of these products/systems firsthand. And even with those I'm limited to within my own experience and perspective. So I think agnosticism, in any sense, always means "without knowledge of".

Skepticism does not mean "choosing not to believe the hype". It means questioning while withholding judgment til such time as a reasonable, logical, rational, satisfying explanation can be obtained.

So, I'm without knowledge until such time as I'm no longer without knowledge.

Atheism simply means "without god" (from the greek "theos" for "god") so I'm not sure where that even came into play.

Just wanted to straighten that out.

I use atheism with a modifier "dieting" simply because it was easier than making up a new word. I'm aware of what atheism and agnosticism mean, as you can tell from my post (at least the agnostic part was evident). You'll note that said being agnostic means that you don't know. Your use definitions seems to be of questionable motivation. If I were cynical I might assume you were being pedantic.

I would argue that your rational skepticism is similar to an atheist perspective. I don't see the substantive difference between "choosing to not believe the hype" and being rational. As a rational form of inquiry, skepticism ultimately challenges (perhaps even opposes) belief and faith--faith being the belief in something in the absence of evidence. Faith can be put in God, or in ridiculous ads for fitness products.

It seems nothing was ever not straight

You're absolutely right. I am being pedantic because these words are hugely important to me.

I wasn't so much clarifying to you as I was to the general "anyone" who might have unclear definitions of these words.

I stand by my clarifications and I don't want to get into why I continue to disagree with you, as that would be a theological discussion and I really have no idea where that came from. I understand why you used the word atheist but it's still wrong. That word means something REALLY specific and, for me, doesn't suit this discussion.

/pedantry

:laugh:

MikeSEA

Thanks again, everyone for the input. And thanks, Jodye, for responding! It really helps that you so articulately laid out your thoughts. I feel like I have a slightly better understanding of your approach. Cheers! And congrats on your upcoming wedding!

In this context (and others) being an agnostic just means you don't know whether or not whatever product will work. If it's a product you haven't used, that would make sense, and it's a good, rational position to take.

Being skeptical would make you more of a dieting atheist as you're choosing to not believe the hype

I disagree with you completely. I hope you don't mind a little alternative wordsmithing. Agnostic literally means "without knowledge of". Prefix a- meaning "without" and gnostic coming from the greek "gnosis" meaning "knowledge". It's the purest form of ignorance and describes my open-minded stance. I only know about SOME of these products/systems firsthand. And even with those I'm limited to within my own experience and perspective. So I think agnosticism, in any sense, always means "without knowledge of".

Skepticism does not mean "choosing not to believe the hype". It means questioning while withholding judgment til such time as a reasonable, logical, rational, satisfying explanation can be obtained.

So, I'm without knowledge until such time as I'm no longer without knowledge.

Atheism simply means "without god" (from the greek "theos" for "god") so I'm not sure where that even came into play.

Just wanted to straighten that out.

I use atheism with a modifier "dieting" simply because it was easier than making up a new word. I'm aware of what atheism and agnosticism mean, as you can tell from my post (at least the agnostic part was evident). You'll note that said being agnostic means that you don't know. Your use definitions seems to be of questionable motivation. If I were cynical I might assume you were being pedantic.

I would argue that your rational skepticism is similar to an atheist perspective. I don't see the substantive difference between "choosing to not believe the hype" and being rational. As a rational form of inquiry, skepticism ultimately challenges (perhaps even opposes) belief and faith--faith being the belief in something in the absence of evidence. Faith can be put in God, or in ridiculous ads for fitness products.

It seems nothing was ever not straight

You're absolutely right. I am being pedantic because these words are hugely important to me.

I wasn't so much clarifying to you as I was to the general "anyone" who might have unclear definitions of these words.

I stand by my clarifications and I don't want to get into why I continue to disagree with you, as that would be a theological discussion and I really have no idea where that came from. I understand why you used the word atheist but it's still wrong. That word means something REALLY specific and, for me, doesn't suit this discussion.

/pedantry

:laugh:

We can agree to disagree on seeing the similarities between the two concepts. :flowerforyou:

tiedye

Oh well I heard all about losing weight eating only twinkles...

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html

JK of course, he was making a point: calories in vs calories out.

solpwr

You forgot the Neanderthal Diet.

And one thing that could be debated but I'm throwing it out there anyway...

I think you need to keep a food diary. I just don't think a person with a history of being over (or under) weight can be successful without one. That may be the only non-negotiable item.

McKayMachina

You forgot the Neanderthal Diet.

And one thing that could be debated but I'm throwing it out there anyway...

I think you need to keep a food diary. I just don't think a person with a history of being over (or under) weight can be successful without one. That may be the only non-negotiable item.

It certainly helps. But I could see being successful without one, too. Or with a very bare-bones version of one, anyway.

I, personally, wouldn't want to do it without recording what I eat and having a unit to track (in this case calories on the principle of thermogenics).

Raf702

Everyone responds differently to products, such as protein powders, pills, etc. Some work, some don't , some are just plain silly. Supplements are exactly what they are. Shouldn't be relied on, but shouldn't be completely avoided.

Hissweetheart

100% agree! The one that really gets me is the HCG diet. It's all kinds of wrong!

McKayMachina

Everyone responds differently to products, such as protein powders, pills, etc. Some work, some don't , some are just plain silly. Supplements are exactly what they are. Shouldn't be relied on, but shouldn't be completely avoided.

I avoid them but only because I don't feel a need to supplement anything. ;p

That aside, I really like your cardigan. It makes me want to go watch Mr. Rogers.

Man. Mr. Rogers was so rad.