Has anyone heard of the VLCD (diet) ?
Replies
-
FYI: It's completely possible to lose eight pounds in five weeks without starving yourself.
I'm sure there is. Except, I'm not starving. 800 calories, eaten right, is quite a bunch.
The question, then, is WHY you want to eat only 800 calories a day when the results are so unimpressive. What's motivating you?0 -
Discusses how fiber can help a VLCD,does not recommend this for anyone that is not obese though.
Discusses maintaining lean body mass, but does not say that it's safe or effective for anyone not obese.
Again, deals with this diet for obese folks.
Did you read this one?
"Very-low-calorie diets. These diets, which require specialized medical management, typically restrict calories to a maximum of 800 per day and are sometimes recommended for people whose health would benefit from initially rapid weight loss." That means obese folk.
"Interestingly, clinical studies show that after one year, the weight loss associated with LCDs and VLCDs is similar. In other words, people who have followed VLCDs regain more weight, on average, than those who have followed LCDs."
Yes, I can... and I could not find reputable articles supporting this for anyone that is not severely obese.But I'm ~sure~ you know how to google, so you can find others.
So not a good idea for most people. What a shocker.0 -
I lost the first 8 pounds in 5 weeks too - eating around 1600 NET calories a day.
You are of course, quite welcome to follow any diet you choose, but in my experience it just isn't necessary to drop to such low calories to lose weight. Personally I could not sustain such low intake for any length of time, whereas eating a moderate amount and exercising has yielded great results and I'm still doing it 10 months later, and plan to continue.0 -
That's how I lost my first 25lbs.. in a little under 3 weeks. Then I plateaued for months, and gained 10lbs back when I started eating "normally" again. I still stay around 1000 calories a day now, but I'm losing more consistently.0
-
I am quoting myself on another thread, link below on what happens when you do VLCD's (HCG including)
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/382578-day-1-of-hcg
I am happy to help,
I started out with a fat % of 43% my weight was 283, now my fat % is 24% and I weigh 172 and keep in mind I have a very large frame. Does that help?
Thank you very much..
LBM = Weight - (weight x body fat)
Starting = 283 - (283 * .43) = 161
Current = 172 - (172 *.24) = 131
BMR = 370+(9.79759519*LBM)
Starting BMR = 370+(9.79759519*161) = 1950
Ending BMR = 370+(9.79759519*131) = 1650
You lost 30 lbs of muscle during your journey. There is zero disputing that. That is a 20% loss of muscle in your journey so far and a 16% reduction in your metabolism. My question is, don't you see that as a problem? I understand maintaining musle mass is difficult when you have a lot to lose and overall, at some point you might lose some but 20% and on top of that, a 16% reduction in metabolism? Something to think about.
Now here is my story, I eat 2600 calories (actually 2800-3000 now) I started at 18% body fat @ 210 lbs, I am at 11% body fat now @ 195.
Starting = 210 - (210 * .18) = 172
Current = 195 - (195 * .11) = 173
BMR = 370+(9.79759519*LBM)
I have lost several inches around my body, I have lost weight but still maintain muscle mass. That is why huge deficits dont' work. That is why HCG is not great for you. Muscle mass is linked to so many items like metabolism, insulin control, organ function, etc...
If this stuff isn't a concern to you, I am amazed, but there is a reason for my madness. Please let the discussion continue.0 -
VLCD == Very Low Calorie Diet
It's not a fad diet, in fact, it's a Dr recommend diet for those who need to lose a lot of weight. You gotta be careful though, here are the guildlines
~ You calorie intake per day is between 500 - 800 calories.
~ Doctor stress that there should be "good" calories so you still get nutrition you need
~ To ensure you don't go into starvation mode, It's NOT a longterm diet. In fact, it should only be for 12 weeks in the 500-800 cal range. After that, you stup up to 800-1200. (I believe you go back down after those 12 weeks are up, if you didn't lose everything you need.
~ It doesn't restrict what "kind" of calories, since a calorie is a calorie, but obviously, if you eat a candy bar, that's 300 calories mostly from fat. You can eat a lot of healthy items to match those 300. So use common sense and choose wisely.
~ drink, throughout the day, 3L of water.
That's pretty much it. After I read a bunch about it from reputable sources (NIH, FDA, ivy league schools, etc), I asked my doctor about it, who completely agreed with me.
In about 5 weeks, I've lost about 8 pounds.
Anyone else doing this diet?
(p.s. ---> If you have any bit of punk rock in you, join our group "Punk Rockers Scare You)
Thanks for posting that. And thanks for posting the links to medical studies.
Some people will simply refuse to change their opinions about eating less than 1200 calories but, for those folks who are interested in reading about "another way to lose weight", you've done a great service!
I used a low calorie diet (800 to 1000 net cals per day) to lose 95 pounds in 7 months (not a VLCD)
My weight loss is here. I weigh daily and update…almost daily.
http://cbeinfo.net/weight.htm
My diary is public so feel free to browse. When I've looked back at what I ate, it leaves me a little wide-eyed 'cause I darn sure wasn't eating much!
If folks are interested in my results, send me a PM. I won't go into my results here but they were nothing short of superb.
Again, to the OP, thank you so much for posting your message and for following it up with links to credible medical sources.
I had a great experience on a low calorie diet. If you're reading this thread and open minded enough to try it, I'd urge you to do so. I mean, what have you got to lose? ;-)0 -
Muscle.I had a great experience on a low calorie diet. If you're reading this thread and open minded enough to try it, I'd urge you to do so. I mean, what have you got to lose? ;-)0 -
Muscle.I had a great experience on a low calorie diet. If you're reading this thread and open minded enough to try it, I'd urge you to do so. I mean, what have you got to lose? ;-)
Life.0 -
While I can appreciate that a VLCD may be an option for some people (very obese people) under the strict guidance of the proper professionals I always refer back to the great think someone said when I joined MFP almost a year ago. "What makes you think you can lose in 3 months what took you an entire lifetime to put on?"
It took me 3 years to gain my almost 60 extra pounds....so, even with eating anywhere from 1500-2800 calories a day (depending on how much exercise I do, because I eat back my exercise calories) I have lost over 40 pounds so far....plus lost more inches than I can keep track of, and have muscles! I don't want to be skinny...I want to be healthy! I want to be in good shape!
Even though the weight comes off more slowly now because I have less to lose...I am not at all tempted to try some fad diet. Because I feel amazing! I have energy, I have hardly been sick this entire year, I am accomplishing things! And I would never want this to end! I'm hooked for life!
0 -
The VLCD is used in combination with the hormone HCG. I used HCG and went from 197lbs to 164lbs in 42 days. I was under my nutritionists care, who is also an MD and I had weekly weigh-ins and measurements. I only ate 500 calories a day...but the foods you are allowed to eat are very limited and very specific (google Dr Simeon's protocol). I feel great when dieting and actually find the the diet easy to follow. What happens is the HCG, when in the absence of food, lyses your "abnormal" fat cells and feeds your body with your own fat. It is an amazing diet and it works if you record and weigh all your food and take your HCG. I am now on round 2 of the VLCD and hope to get down to 148lbs. I have lived an extremely healthy lifestyle for the past 2 years, which has included healthy food choices and tons of exercise, and I just was not losing. I am a smart person and work as a nurse, I know this diet is extreme but it has worked for me and I am a huge fan:)0
-
I believe that some of your underlying assumptions are incorrect.I am quoting myself on another thread, link below on what happens when you do VLCD's (HCG including)
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/382578-day-1-of-hcg
I am happy to help,
I started out with a fat % of 43% my weight was 283, now my fat % is 24% and I weigh 172 and keep in mind I have a very large frame. Does that help?
Thank you very much..
LBM = Weight - (weight x body fat)
Starting = 283 - (283 * .43) = 161
Current = 172 - (172 *.24) = 131
BMR = 370+(9.79759519*LBM)
Starting BMR = 370+(9.79759519*161) = 1950
Ending BMR = 370+(9.79759519*131) = 1650
You lost 30 lbs of muscle during your journey. There is zero disputing that. That is a 20% loss of muscle in your journey so far and a 16% reduction in your metabolism. My question is, don't you see that as a problem? I understand maintaining musle mass is difficult when you have a lot to lose and overall, at some point you might lose some but 20% and on top of that, a 16% reduction in metabolism? Something
The difference in weight (161-131) cannot be construed to represent loss of 30 pounds of muscle. What we know is that the poster lost 30 pounds of body mass other than fat. That includes muscle tissue, connective tissue, skin, etc. as well as, possibly, water weight. Unless you have other information regarding that person's body comp, your assertion is incorrect.
Second, based on your knowledge of weight loss, what is considered a normal loss in lean body mass for that person's body mass? It is completely normal to lose lean body mass when you lose weight.
On what basis do you state that the person's metabolism has dropped by 16%. Again, if you think that their metabolism is "slowing down" because their BMR has dropped, you're incorrect. BRM is a measure of the calories needed per day and varies, among other things, with the size of the animal. You cannot correctly infer that a person's metabolism has slowed down because their BMR has changed — there's simply no connection.0 -
My response to a question like that would be "Why should I think I can't?""What makes you think you can lose in 3 months what took you an entire lifetime to put on?"
I know a lot about a lot of things (I'm old, very smart, have had a good education, and have worked with a huge number of people in many industries in many locations across North America) and one of the most important things that I've learned is that there are a lot of things I don't know.
So, yes, being ignorant about weight loss, I investigated weight loss back in November and December of 2010. I found out that low calorie diets were safe so I made a plan to lose weight.
I executed the plan and it worked very well.
It didn't take me "a lifetime" to put on the 100 pounds that I no longer carry 'round. I went from 220 to 250 between 2002 and 2005 and then from 250 to 295 between 2006 and 2008. So, all told, it took me about 6 years to gain 75 pounds — and I lost that much in 5 months.
Yes, it can be done and lots and lots of people lose weight that fast. My GF runs a weight loss clinic here in SoCal where people who follow their program routinely lose 10% of their body mass in 10 weeks. I figured if a 40+ year old company is using that approach, that's safe enough for me.0 -
Oy…What's so innocent about trying to tell people that this diet is a valid way of losing weight? Esepcailly when you don't even remotely qualify to be on this diet?
Let me pose this question - why shouldn't the poster tell people about this diet?
Your implication is that only certain people should talk about certain ways of losing weight?
OK, since I'm not losing weight any more, I shouldn't talk about how I lost weight? ("Well, Doug, we do wish you'd put a cork in it sometimes!" :-) )
I just can't agree with your position.0 -
You do realize this was just an innocent post, right? I'm all for people disagreeing with me, but why bury me with the stones you threw? You could have just said "You've been duped! the vvlcd is a piece of ****!". That would have done it.
For what it's worth, the issue here is twofold in my opinion:
1) There's far too many people who are ALREADY looking for shortcuts at nearly any cost. You're dealing with plenty of people who already don't have a "good" relationship with food, many of whom have already tried the "_____________ diet" (fill in the blank) and failed. Suggesting yet another shortcut, specifically one that doesn't include exercise, isn't exactly promoting healthy habits.
2) If you ARE going to do a VLCD, you certainly should follow a specifically outlined protocol (Lyle has a well outlined PSMF protocol for example) rather than what you listed.
Lastly, I understand you're just spreading information, but if you WERE to follow a PSMF, you REALLY REALLY should be spot on with your food choices AND macronutrient targets. The less you consume for calories, the less room for error you have when it comes to micronutrients.
This is the type of diet that experienced bodybuilders might use for a very short period of time, and while it doesn't mean that it's limited to this population, I do think it requires a solid amount of research and a tremendous willpower to do successfully.
Word.0 -
I believe that some of your underlying assumptions are incorrect.
The difference in weight (161-131) cannot be construed to represent loss of 30 pounds of muscle. What we know is that the poster lost 30 pounds of body mass other than fat. That includes muscle tissue, connective tissue, skin, etc. as well as, possibly, water weight. Unless you have other information regarding that person's body comp, your assertion is incorrect.
Second, based on your knowledge of weight loss, what is considered a normal loss in lean body mass for that person's body mass? It is completely normal to lose lean body mass when you lose weight.
On what basis do you state that the person's metabolism has dropped by 16%. Again, if you think that their metabolism is "slowing down" because their BMR has dropped, you're incorrect. BRM is a measure of the calories needed per day and varies, among other things, with the size of the animal. You cannot correctly infer that a person's metabolism has slowed down because their BMR has changed — there's simply no connection.
Last I checked, BMR is also known as your metabolism as cited below. I have done what I would consider a fair amount of research into this topic. I am also very well educated. The sudject in the post about lost 100 lbs, 30% or 30 lbs of that being muscle. In my journey, I lost not muscle mass but lost 15 lbs and 7% body fat. I know that isn't common but i would not infer that 30% muscle loss is common or healthy by any means. I would think the number would be closer to 10% from what I have seen. I also understand that there are other factors that determine your metabolic rate including age/sex/genetics, etc.. including medicine.
The person I referenced did HCG over 6 months and lost that weight. Do you think it's truely possible to lose a large amount of connective tissues, skin, etc.. in that short period of time? If we were talking years, I could maybe buy that but not months. Also, water weight will always be an issue but I would doubt you would see huge differences in body fat % (maybe +/ - 1%) At least that is what I have seen in myself and other friends of mine.
Also, again, if your BMR is reducing, the means your metabolism is slowing down. It's not uncommon that a person has to evaluate your caloric needs as they lose weight. It's the reason why MFP will ask you to revaluated your inputs as you go. It's also the reason you continous need to monitor your caloric intake as you progress throughout your workouts. So yes, a 30 lb muscle loss does equate to a slower metabobism. If you say it doesnt, I would love to see the proof because that is the complete opposite of the evidence I have seen.
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/metabolism/WT000060 -
Why not just do the ABC diet? Same shyte different pile.0
-
Most morbidly obese people having lap band surgery go on a VLCD diet for 4-6 weeks to reduce the amount of fat around the liver.
It's a diet that was initially developed to prepare very overweight people for major surgery (joint replacements, heart surgery etc) and the risks of the diet were outweighed by the risks of surgery at their current weight. Typically, these kinds of major surgeries involve a degree of assisted, supervised lifestyle change for the participant, including counselling, exercise programs and dietary support afterwards.
My research suggests exactly the same as the majority opinion, that it's not a great idea for sustained and maintainable weight loss.
I've lost 11lbs in 4 weeks with MFP, and I know which option is more sustainable and adaptable to normal life and fun. I'll stick with MFP.0 -
0
-
:-)Muscle
Is there any difference in folks who use VLCD's vs LCD's in the area of loss of muscle mass, ceteris paribus?
I don't have any knowledge of such and, in my case, I lost something like 70 pounds of mass and only 7 pounds of lean body mass. I do not know to what extent I lost muscle mass.0 -
:-)Muscle
Is there any difference in folks who use VLCD's vs LCD's in the area of loss of muscle mass, ceteris paribus?
I don't have any knowledge of such and, in my case, I lost something like 70 pounds of mass and only 7 pounds of lean body mass. I do not know to what extent I lost muscle mass.
Quit condoning this like it's something that people should do because it worked for you! You had 90+lbs to lose didn't you? The OP doesn't appear to have that much to lose and A LOT of young impressional girls on here who are already healthy weights do not either, they don't need this idea put into their minds anymore than they already have that a crash diet is anywhere close to healthy for them or will give them their desired results. Thank you Suzeysmum.0 -
:-)Muscle
Is there any difference in folks who use VLCD's vs LCD's in the area of loss of muscle mass, ceteris paribus?
I don't have any knowledge of such and, in my case, I lost something like 70 pounds of mass and only 7 pounds of lean body mass. I do not know to what extent I lost muscle mass.
Quit condoning this like it's something that people should do because it worked for you! You had 90+lbs to lose didn't you? The OP doesn't appear to have that much to lose and A LOT of young impressional girls on here who are already healthy weights do not either, they don't need this idea put into their minds anymore than they already have that a crash diet is anywhere close to healthy for them or will give them their desired results. Thank you Suzeysmum.
While you present a valid concern, at the same time, obese people need to know that this is an option for them. Obesity is a world wide epidemic, which means that the majority of the new users that come to this site every day are obese. Condemning people who have chosen this method for themselves is the same as discriminating against obese people. Why can't we just stamp a disclaimer on these posts and let them ride? Why does everyone on this site who is only "overweight" feel the need to take responsibility for every other individual who uses this site? No the OP is not obese and is likely taking a greater risk than ATT949 but that doesn't make the method any less valid. What works for one does not work for all. That is just a universal truth. People who are morbidly obese are called "morbidly" for a reason, meaning that their life is in danger from the obesity. They need to see faster results. Stop discriminating against members who choose this method because not everyone who chooses it is choosing it because they are anorexic!0 -
"condoning" - there's no need for me to "condone" what the OP is doing. First off, my opinion is just…one man's opinion — it's not an endorsement.Quit condoning this like it's something that people should do because it worked for you!
You had 90+lbs to lose didn't you? The OP doesn't appear to have that much to lose and A LOT of young impressional girls on here who are already healthy weights do not either, they don't need this idea put into their minds anymore than they already have that a crash diet is anywhere close to healthy for them or will give them their desired results. Thank you Suzeysmum.
Second, she's not proposing anything that's not done, day in and day out by people across the country.
Finally, I'm happy with the approach that I've taken to losing weight and I think people should consider it as an alternative.
When I started on MFP, I read through all of the admonitions about "don't go below 1200 calories or…" and it did not square with what I've seen over the course of my life. As a result of my time in the Army, I met folks who routinely ate well below 1200 net calories for extended periods while operating in extreme physical environments and they had zero long term negative effects.
Also, I'm familiar with the program offered by a company here in SoCal that's helped hundreds of thousands of people lose weight in their 40+ year history They put their patients on a diet of less than 1000 calories per day and, in the course of the program, you will lose, generally speaking, 10% of your body mass in 10 weeks.
That program was the final "push" that got me to start losing weight. The clinic, that my GF runs, has before and after pictures of dozens of folks who have lost lots and lots of weight. It's amazing to see walls lined with pix of every day folks who have dropped tons of weight!
So, I read the admonitions and warnings of "Never go below 1200 calories or…" and yet I was faced with real life examples of folks who ate well under that level and had excellent outcomes. I decided to take a similar approach to losing weight and I had a superb outcome.
One of the things that I believe about losing weight is that there are lots of ways to lose weight. Some folks want to follow a 1200 calorie diet. Some lose weight at 2000 cals/day. Some folks lose weight at 800 to 1000 cals/day.
What ever approach you take, I hope it works well for you.0 -
Hmmpf. Well I asked questions to learn more and got no answers. I tried to be supportive and got deleted. So I give up. Good luck on your diet!0
-
VLCD were created to help people that were extremely overweight. Unfortunately, fad VLCD are often being used by people that are not even obese to lose "vanity weight" so they can look great in a bikini, and the people that do these fad VLCD diet plans often do it with no awareness of the potential dangers and without medical supervision, as most doctors would not put people that are not severely overweight on an extremely low calorie diet.
http://www.webmd.com/diet/guide/low-calorie-diets
http://women.webmd.com/pharmacist-11/rapid-weight-loss
While we are on the topic, everyone please stay away from the HCG VLCD diet (500 calories a day). It is a horrible starvation diet that can do so much more damage than good. I have seen so many friends think they were doing great on it, and then find out that all those weeks of starvation wrecked their metabolism, and now they are heavier than ever.
http://www.myhealthnewsdaily.com/hcg-diet-dangerous-1428
Your long term health is worth so much more than rapid weight loss on any fad diet!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
- 427 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