US News and World Reports releases it's list

torregro
torregro Posts: 307
edited September 28 in Health and Weight Loss
http://health.usnews.com/best-diet/best-weight-loss-diets

Interesting read for those looking for diet recommendations.

Replies

  • EllieHall
    EllieHall Posts: 21 Member
    *bump
  • JMJohnson1005
    JMJohnson1005 Posts: 209 Member
    Very interesting.
  • SoCalSwimmerDude
    SoCalSwimmerDude Posts: 507 Member
    This is interesting to read, but I didn't see the "Eat Healthy & Workout Diet".
  • MacguyverMommy
    MacguyverMommy Posts: 104 Member
    thanks!:flowerforyou:
  • TK421NotAtPost
    TK421NotAtPost Posts: 512 Member
    Make sense to me that WW would win. A caloric deficit is the key to weight loss and that is exactly what the WW plan provides with no frills or fancy eating plans.

    With that said, I don't think there is anything wrong with going vegan or paleo or any of those other eating plans since they have their own benefits in addition to weight loss.
  • freerange
    freerange Posts: 1,722 Member
    Any study like this is so subjective it’s kind of worthless. What was their criteria, what did they study, who did the study?
  • TK421NotAtPost
    TK421NotAtPost Posts: 512 Member
    Any study like this is so subjective it’s kind of worthless. What was their criteria, what did they study, who did the study?

    It's all there within the link, my friend. :)

    http://health.usnews.com/best-diet/articles/2011/06/06/best-diets-methodology-how-we-rated-them

    I was pretty impressed with the study. DASH diet scored best for overall diet as well as for diabetes, WW for weight loss, Ornish for heart healthy, etc.
  • shesnotthere
    shesnotthere Posts: 117
    It's not a study, they just polled 20 "experts" as to what they think works best. I stopped reading when I saw they recommend the Ornish diet for diabetes.

    The few actual, scientific studies that have been done don't support what they are saying here. Not about WW, but about the other diets. WW doesn't really tell you what you have to eat, it's just calorie reduction - so it's hard to lump it in with diets that tell you exactly what to eat.
  • freerange
    freerange Posts: 1,722 Member
    Any study like this is so subjective it’s kind of worthless. What was their criteria, what did they study, who did the study?

    It's all there within the link, my friend. :)

    http://health.usnews.com/best-diet/articles/2011/06/06/best-diets-methodology-how-we-rated-them

    I was pretty impressed with the study. DASH diet scored best for overall diet as well as for diabetes, WW for weight loss, Ornish for heart healthy, etc.

    Well “friend” did you read their methodology? This was not a study it was an opinion poll. Like I said, worthless.
  • TK421NotAtPost
    TK421NotAtPost Posts: 512 Member
    Perhaps that is the beauty of WW....it focuses on the singular thing that matters with weight loss, ie. calorie restriction. If people would just understand that, they'd understand that a lot of these 'time-travel' diets, or diets based on insulinogenic manipulation are just tricks to make you consume less calories.
  • TK421NotAtPost
    TK421NotAtPost Posts: 512 Member
    Any study like this is so subjective it’s kind of worthless. What was their criteria, what did they study, who did the study?

    It's all there within the link, my friend. :)

    http://health.usnews.com/best-diet/articles/2011/06/06/best-diets-methodology-how-we-rated-them

    I was pretty impressed with the study. DASH diet scored best for overall diet as well as for diabetes, WW for weight loss, Ornish for heart healthy, etc.

    Well “friend” did you read their methodology? This was not a study it was an opinion poll. Like I said, worthless.

    You asked the question, "What was their criteria, what did they study, who did the study?" and I provided you with the link to the answers.

    What's with the hostility? Take it easy....and I apologize if you mis-took my friendliness for sarcasm.
  • torregro
    torregro Posts: 307
    I don't expect any one article to change anyone's mind, particularly in this forum, but I think when a team from a nationally recognized and respected magazine spends 6 months looking into the issues of dieting and weight loss programs, it's at least worth a read with an open mind.

    I see a lot of opinions espoused on this site and many of them are based on personal experience, anecdotal evidence and opinion. It is difficult to find legitimate long term studies for any of the popular diets because too many people drop out of these studies after several months, especially when the diet is restrictive. I think we could all agree that just by looking around the average American shopping mall, it's pretty obvious that the "quick fix" is not working very well.
    While one could quarrel with the methodology of just about any study or survey, the fact remains that there is a lot of misinformation out there, and this article, at least, provides a thoughtful look at some of what is available on the market currently.

    "A U.S. News team spent six months researching the diets, mining medical journals, government reports, and other sources. An in-depth profile was then drawn up for every diet that explains how it works, whether its claims add up or fall short, and what risks it might pose, along with insights into living on the diet, not just reading about it.

    A carefully selected panel of 22 recognized experts in diet and nutrition and specialists in diabetes and heart disease reviewed our profiles. Then the experts rated each diet from 1 to 5 in seven categories: short-term weight loss, long-term weight loss, how easy it is to follow, its nutritional completeness, its safety, its ability to prevent or manage diabetes, and its ability to prevent or manage heart disease. We also asked the panelists to tell us about aspects of each diet that they particularly liked or disliked and to weigh in on what they think those considering the diet should know."
  • freerange
    freerange Posts: 1,722 Member
    I don't expect any one article to change anyone's mind, particularly in this forum, but I think when a team from a nationally recognized and respected magazine spends 6 months looking into the issues of dieting and weight loss programs, it's at least worth a read with an open mind.

    I see a lot of opinions espoused on this site and many of them are based on personal experience, anecdotal evidence and opinion. It is difficult to find legitimate long term studies for any of the popular diets because too many people drop out of these studies after several months, especially when the diet is restrictive. I think we could all agree that just by looking around the average American shopping mall, it's pretty obvious that the "quick fix" is not working very well.
    While one could quarrel with the methodology of just about any study or survey, the fact remains that there is a lot of misinformation out there, and this article, at least, provides a thoughtful look at some of what is available on the market currently.

    "A U.S. News team spent six months researching the diets, mining medical journals, government reports, and other sources. An in-depth profile was then drawn up for every diet that explains how it works, whether its claims add up or fall short, and what risks it might pose, along with insights into living on the diet, not just reading about it.

    A carefully selected panel of 22 recognized experts in diet and nutrition and specialists in diabetes and heart disease reviewed our profiles. Then the experts rated each diet from 1 to 5 in seven categories: short-term weight loss, long-term weight loss, how easy it is to follow, its nutritional completeness, its safety, its ability to prevent or manage diabetes, and its ability to prevent or manage heart disease. We also asked the panelists to tell us about aspects of each diet that they particularly liked or disliked and to weigh in on what they think those considering the diet should know."

    Really? A news team? Spent six months looking at reports and documents, it doesn’t even say they looked at the people doing the diets, just looked at reports. Then they put together their own report (from news people, not doctors or scientist) and had a panel of 22 “carefully” selected “experts” in diet and nutrition,,,,,,, really, do these experts have names, maybe one of them was Richard Simmons?
    What gets me is people will read this and think it was some kind of scientific study and think that WW is the “best” = healthiest diet and go on their merry way. I’m not knocking WW they have helped a bunch of people lose weight, BUT THERE IS MORE TO HEALTH THAN WEIGHT LOSS!
  • Barneystinson
    Barneystinson Posts: 1,357 Member
    I don't expect any one article to change anyone's mind, particularly in this forum, but I think when a team from a nationally recognized and respected magazine spends 6 months looking into the issues of dieting and weight loss programs, it's at least worth a read with an open mind.

    I see a lot of opinions espoused on this site and many of them are based on personal experience, anecdotal evidence and opinion. It is difficult to find legitimate long term studies for any of the popular diets because too many people drop out of these studies after several months, especially when the diet is restrictive. I think we could all agree that just by looking around the average American shopping mall, it's pretty obvious that the "quick fix" is not working very well.
    While one could quarrel with the methodology of just about any study or survey, the fact remains that there is a lot of misinformation out there, and this article, at least, provides a thoughtful look at some of what is available on the market currently.

    "A U.S. News team spent six months researching the diets, mining medical journals, government reports, and other sources. An in-depth profile was then drawn up for every diet that explains how it works, whether its claims add up or fall short, and what risks it might pose, along with insights into living on the diet, not just reading about it.

    A carefully selected panel of 22 recognized experts in diet and nutrition and specialists in diabetes and heart disease reviewed our profiles. Then the experts rated each diet from 1 to 5 in seven categories: short-term weight loss, long-term weight loss, how easy it is to follow, its nutritional completeness, its safety, its ability to prevent or manage diabetes, and its ability to prevent or manage heart disease. We also asked the panelists to tell us about aspects of each diet that they particularly liked or disliked and to weigh in on what they think those considering the diet should know."

    Really? A news team? Spent six months looking at reports and documents, it doesn’t even say they looked at the people doing the diets, just looked at reports. Then they put together their own report (from news people, not doctors or scientist) and had a panel of 22 “carefully” selected “experts” in diet and nutrition,,,,,,, really, do these experts have names, maybe one of them was Richard Simmons?
    What gets me is people will read this and think it was some kind of scientific study and think that WW is the “best” = healthiest diet and go on their merry way. I’m not knocking WW they have helped a bunch of people lose weight, BUT THERE IS MORE TO HEALTH THAN WEIGHT LOSS!

    The diets they recommend for diabetics raise a red flag for me.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories