Analyzing the data: what is most important for weight loss?
onelentilatatime
Posts: 208 Member
I just analyzed 6 months of data to understand what leads to the largest weight loss in a given week. I found that four factors were important. Here they are in order of importance:
1) Last week's weight loss (if you lost a lot of weight last week it's harder to lose this week)
2) Consistency - more important than total calories (or net calories) was - How many days net calories come below maintenance calorie target
3) Binging is bad, even if I compensated the next day (the measure was the maximum calorie intake on any given day)
4) Sugar intake
The following things were related to weight loss but not independently of total net calories:
Protein
Carbs
Fat
Sodium
The following things were NOT related at all to weight loss
Exercise Calories!! (except through reducing net calories)
Cholesterol
Fiber
Would love to hear from anyone who has done (or seen) similar analyses
1) Last week's weight loss (if you lost a lot of weight last week it's harder to lose this week)
2) Consistency - more important than total calories (or net calories) was - How many days net calories come below maintenance calorie target
3) Binging is bad, even if I compensated the next day (the measure was the maximum calorie intake on any given day)
4) Sugar intake
The following things were related to weight loss but not independently of total net calories:
Protein
Carbs
Fat
Sodium
The following things were NOT related at all to weight loss
Exercise Calories!! (except through reducing net calories)
Cholesterol
Fiber
Would love to hear from anyone who has done (or seen) similar analyses
0
Replies
-
Your analysis doesn't make sense to me
Calorie defecits work over time and weight loss is not linear so analysing by single days seems redundant0 -
Fiber IS important for weight loss. I had a week where I didn't consume enough fiber and I was constipated to hell. Upped my fibre, constipation went and I lost 3lb. In a matter of days. So I don't agree with that part of your analysis.0
-
onelentilatatime wrote: »
How many days net calories come below maintenance calorie target
This is the only thing important for weight loss0 -
Dont become an analyst. Why not just be happy at what the toad said?0
-
-
onelentilatatime wrote: »I just analyzed 6 months of data to understand what leads to the largest weight loss in a given week. I found that four factors were important. Here they are in order of importance: yadda yadda yadda
The flaws of your observations or "Analytic process" are painfully obvious and no doubt someone will break it down for you for I can not be bothered.
0 -
Cryptonomnomicon wrote: »onelentilatatime wrote: »I just analyzed 6 months of data to understand what leads to the largest weight loss in a given week. I found that four factors were important. Here they are in order of importance: yadda yadda yadda
The flaws of your observations or "Analytic process" are painfully obvious and no doubt someone will break it down for you for I can not be bothered.
:laugh:0 -
CICO, that is all.0
-
-
Correlation does not imply causation./thread
0 -
So, basically, if you lose a lot of water last week, you don't have as much you can lose this week. If you eat too much, you can't cut calories enough the next day to make up for it. It took six months for you to figure this out?
As for the most important thing. For weight loss it is calorie deficit. For health it is exercise. So, eat less, move more.0 -
I've taken time to analyze my results too and it can be quite revealing. Consistency is key and that is a great lesson to take away from this.
0 -
stevencloser wrote: »
At least I didn't say Poop. Oh wait...0 -
onelentilatatime wrote: »I just analyzed 6 months of data to understand what leads to the largest weight loss in a given week. I found that four factors were important. Here they are in order of importance:
1) Last week's weight loss (if you lost a lot of weight last week it's harder to lose this week)
2) Consistency - more important than total calories (or net calories) was - How many days net calories come below maintenance calorie target
3) Binging is bad, even if I compensated the next day (the measure was the maximum calorie intake on any given day)
4) Sugar intake
The following things were related to weight loss but not independently of total net calories:
Protein
Carbs
Fat
Sodium
The following things were NOT related at all to weight loss
Exercise Calories!! (except through reducing net calories)
Cholesterol
Fiber
Would love to hear from anyone who has done (or seen) similar analyses
lolwut?
Just maintain a Caloric Deficit over time.
That's all.
Really.
You are grossly over complicating things, right?
0 -
-
Exercise calories are not related to weight loss except through reducing net calories? But net calories are the most important thing. So, if you choose to exercise as part of your weight loss, those exercise calories can have a direct relationship to your weight loss.
No, you don't have to exercise to lose weight but saying that exercise calories are 'not related to weight loss' is 100% false.0 -
Larissa_NY wrote: »
But the analysis is faulty0 -
This content has been removed.
-
here is what ten years has taught me…
eat less then you burn
hit your macro/micro/calorie targets
end thread/0 -
-
I guess that's the big question I was interested in answering. My data suggest that calories from sugar could lead to weight gain more than other calories. But, as others pointed out, this is correlational and only data for one person over 6 months. So I'd be interested in any other data people have to bring to bear on this.CICO, that is all.
0 -
0
-
That was kind of where I was coming from. Too many opinions little evidence in this world I think.Larissa_NY wrote: »[
Because data analysis is fun and informative and being an anti-empiricist often predisposes you to believing some really stupid *kitten*?
0 -
Your analysis doesn't make sense to me
Calorie defecits work over time and weight loss is not linear so analysing by single days seems redundant
Well, my analysis was for calories, nutrients over the course of a week. I could do it for 2 weeks at I time I guess, but harder to make the case for how calories you ate 2 weeks ago affect how much weight you lose this week.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I'm no analyst, but my logic skills (not knowledge) are fairly good.
Seems to me you're assigning correlation to causation and calling it analysis. That's not how analysis works.0 -
onelentilatatime wrote: »Your analysis doesn't make sense to me
Calorie defecits work over time and weight loss is not linear so analysing by single days seems redundant
Well, my analysis was for calories, nutrients over the course of a week. I could do it for 2 weeks at I time I guess, but harder to make the case for how calories you ate 2 weeks ago affect how much weight you lose this week.
Because there is no case ...you are concluding causation from correlation because your understanding of the timespan required is faulty ...the body does not work like you think it does and nor does weight loss
0 -
onelentilatatime wrote: »
I guess that's the big question I was interested in answering. My data suggest that calories from sugar could lead to weight gain more than other calories. But, as others pointed out, this is correlational and only data for one person over 6 months. So I'd be interested in any other data people have to bring to bear on this.CICO, that is all.
Again, correlation rather causation. The understanding of glycogen replenishment is lacking in your .... well, whatever this is. Calling it scientific would be wrong.0 -
onelentilatatime wrote: »
I guess that's the big question I was interested in answering. My data suggest that calories from sugar could lead to weight gain more than other calories. But, as others pointed out, this is correlational and only data for one person over 6 months. So I'd be interested in any other data people have to bring to bear on this.CICO, that is all.
if you eat sugar and it puts you in a calorie surplus then you will gain weight.
if you eat sugar and it puts you at maintenance level then you will maintain
if you eat sugar and you are in a deficit then you will lose weight
that is the answer0 -
onelentilatatime wrote: »
I guess that's the big question I was interested in answering. My data suggest that calories from sugar could lead to weight gain more than other calories. But, as others pointed out, this is correlational and only data for one person over 6 months. So I'd be interested in any other data people have to bring to bear on this.CICO, that is all.
Funny, I started tracking my sugar intake lately and kind of noticed the same thing. In my case too, sugar intake seems to really affect weight loss from day to day. It kind of sucks, becasuse I'm finding sugar to be present in everything... but I'd rather know than ignore! However, the sugar I consume is from fruits and dairy, so I'm not worrying about it too much. I'm hoping it won't affect the overall trend
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.9K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions