Just consider this
Options
Replies
-
myfelinepal wrote: »Let me try a different approach then.
If anyone who says they "can't" moderate, were told today that if they could moderate, they were "gauranteed" their weekly target loss and wouldn't regain weight (hypothetical) again, do you think the people who stated they couldn't, would?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Except people's weekly target loss is often unrealistic and unsustainable.
People come in with their own expectations, but I really wish MFP pushed clear, specific, strongly worded guidance around choosing a calorie goal. Of course most people are going to say they want to lose 2 lbs a week, and if it's a default option (can't remember), they're going to think it's fine for them, since MFP says it is*.
I'd like to see a *strong* pop-up come up for people based on their stats, informing them which goal (-0.5lb, -1 lb, whatever) makes the most sense for them in terms of adherence.
*And I know the issue is really that MFP's basing this on the official medical consensus, which is that most women can handle 1200 net, but come on, it's only really true for very short people, older people, and very sedentary people. Maybe for some people who have quite a lot to lose. But for average height people who want to drop like 20-30 lbs, so unnecessary.0 -
myfelinepal wrote: »Let me try a different approach then.
If anyone who says they "can't" moderate, were told today that if they could moderate, they were "gauranteed" their weekly target loss and wouldn't regain weight (hypothetical) again, do you think the people who stated they couldn't, would?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Except people's weekly target loss is often unrealistic and unsustainable.
People come in with their own expectations, but I really wish MFP pushed clear, specific, strongly worded guidance around choosing a calorie goal. Of course most people are going to say they want to lose 2 lbs a week, and if it's a default option (can't remember), they're going to think it's fine for them, since MFP says it is*.
I'd like to see a *strong* pop-up come up for people based on their stats, informing them which goal (-0.5lb, -1 lb, whatever) makes the most sense for them in terms of adherence.
*And I know the issue is really that MFP's basing this on the official medical consensus, which is that most women can handle 1200 net, but come on, it's only really true for very short people, older people, and very sedentary people. Maybe for some people who have quite a lot to lose. But for average height people who want to drop like 20-30 lbs, so unnecessary.
I think as a welcome to mfp that would be a good idea. I too chose 2 pounds loss and it was quite obvious to me 1200 wasn't going to work so I upped it. Many people try and persevere with it even though not all have to. Apparent by the 1200 posts we get all the time0 -
With regards to the Ops question. The right time is the right time for each individual. Not everyone came be shamed or scared into losing weight.
Each time I complained to the nurse about little things she told me to lose weight. I didn't listen I just blamed stress. She was the one that told me i was obese. How rude.
She even helped by giving me ideas of what to eat and portions. She said I should walk 30 mins a day. Did I listen nope.
It was as simple as the thought of going on holiday with 2 other mums and I didn't want to be the biggest out of the three. That's what did it. Now all complaints have gone the nurse was right. Deep down I always knew it0 -
There are people that are told EVERY SINGLE DAY, all over the world, that if they don't stop a certain activity it will, without question, kill them.
This is a false analogy. The premise is false. I would not try to motivate anyone using something as faulty as this. I would also not try to motivate someone using fear.Let me try a different approach then.
If anyone who says they "can't" moderate, were told today that if they could moderate, they were "gauranteed" their weekly target loss and wouldn't regain weight (hypothetical) again, do you think the people who stated they couldn't, would?
Sure. Lots of defeatists out there. There are entire subcultures devoted to defeatism. Do you have another approach that attempts to place all of humanity into one easy, cookie cutter mind frame?
Does this fear approach work well with clients? Do you think it's ethical to use this approach even if it is effective (short term at best in the vast majority of cases)? Becuase a doctor telling a patient that their behaviour is going to kill them is one thing; they have the expertise, medical histories and the statistics that back that advice up. They can say it with relative certainty.
Is it wise to tell this to people that have a hard time sticking to a diet plan, nearly all of which are not in the crisis of dying if they take one more bite? Is it good to try to instill that sort of fear in a person? Is it wise to place that sort of pressure on them to the point where they fear for their lives if they fall off the wagon? Considering that the vast majority of people that lose weight will gain it back, I think that inserting a false sense of fear into that situation would be in extremely poor taste.
It is rarely the emotionally unstable that achieve healthy goals. I don't see how this approach would strengthen a person's emotional well being.
0 -
I totally get the point of the op. If you KNEW x behavior would cause y result that would be enough to motivate Some people to change. Its an analogy. It will not be true for everyone.
In the same way a person who is upset and fighting with someone can hear a knock on the door and instantly go from growls to smiles. Motivation is amazing!0 -
There are people that are told EVERY SINGLE DAY, all over the world, that if they don't stop a certain activity it will, without question, kill them.
This is a false analogy. The premise is false. I would not try to motivate anyone using something as faulty as this. I would also not try to motivate someone using fear.Let me try a different approach then.
If anyone who says they "can't" moderate, were told today that if they could moderate, they were "gauranteed" their weekly target loss and wouldn't regain weight (hypothetical) again, do you think the people who stated they couldn't, would?
Sure. Lots of defeatists out there. There are entire subcultures devoted to defeatism. Do you have another approach that attempts to place all of humanity into one easy, cookie cutter mind frame?
Does this fear approach work well with clients? Do you think it's ethical to use this approach even if it is effective (short term at best in the vast majority of cases)? Becuase a doctor telling a patient that their behaviour is going to kill them is one thing; they have the expertise, medical histories and the statistics that back that advice up. They can say it with relative certainty.
Is it wise to tell this to people that have a hard time sticking to a diet plan, nearly all of which are not in the crisis of dying if they take one more bite? Is it good to try to instill that sort of fear in a person? Is it wise to place that sort of pressure on them to the point where they fear for their lives if they fall off the wagon? Considering that the vast majority of people that lose weight will gain it back, I think that inserting a false sense of fear into that situation would be in extremely poor taste.
It is rarely the emotionally unstable that achieve healthy goals. I don't see how this approach would strengthen a person's emotional well being.
I think this is well said. When you work in healthcare, you encounter people all the time who are being told by a doctor they WILL die if they don't change their behavior. While this works for some people, I often find myself shaking my head and saying, "You're right, it's YOUR life," because people don't want to be scared into what to do, or for that matter told that what they have been doing for years, or decades, is wrong. By using this tactic, you're telling a client, "What you have been doing all this time is wrong, and hurting you," which may be true, but by human nature is INCREDIBLY difficult to hear because no one wants to be wrong. You start getting into psychology at this point, and it's a messy game to be playing. I, for one, never changed a single thing because someone scared me into it.0 -
My oldest sister (smoker) got breast cancer at age 38. No history in the family on either side. Double mastectomy. Quit smoking for about 2 months. Fast forward @ age 54 she was diagnosed with lung cancer & brain cancer. Died 6 weeks after diagnosis. Smoking was a contributing factor.
Some people just can not change their behavior.
Nothing is as easy as some people seem to think it should be for everyone, because it is seemingly easy for them. Everyone is different and for whatever reason (valid for each of us) things that others may think should be easy simply are not easy. Just the way it is.0 -
This is slightly off topic but still related...I have found it interesting that in our world, an individual with anorexia can, and is often, involuntarily committed to a hospital because their weight is so unhealthy that they are at risk for death and yet on the other extreme, people who are so morbidly obese that the doctor is telling them hey are going to die if they don't lose weight are allowed to keep eating themselves into the grave... in both scenarios the person's weight is so unhealthy they are risking death. I've thought of this recently because I have an uncle who is close to losing his legs because he won't stop eating and won't regulate his diabetes. He gains weight every time he goes to the doctor...if he were anorexic and losing weight every time he'd be hospitalized. Sorry, like I said, a bit off topic but still related.0
-
bcalvanese wrote: »Life style changes are probably one of the hardest things to do. That is why I think success greatly depends on them being done over time. So, if my doctor told me that my next cigarette would be my last, I probably wouldn't be responding to this thread right now. My doctors did tell me that I had to lose weight and quit smoking or I would start having serious issues though. Over the past year I have lost 55 lbs. and went from smoking 3 packs of cigarettes a day to smoking 3 to 5 cigarettes a day.
This is awesome. Congrats on the progress.0 -
I disagree. Fads appeal because people actually BELIEVE that that's what they need to do for success, regardless if it's extreme or not. Hence why the supplement industry profits by promoting "fat burning" pills even if they don't work. Many people buy them (many without changing their diets at all) because they believe that the pills will burn off their excess fat.
Fads appeal to people because they're extreme. I almost think the weirder the diet the more attractive, for people in certain states of mind. But you couldn't promise a permanent result with any diet. That would be just as suss as the banana thing! Or somewhat suss, anyway.
And really what I'm suggesting is a much more "permanent" solution than what other fads offer.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Also IMO, fads, pills, etc appeal to people because they often advertise an easy way.0 -
Let me try a different approach then.
If anyone who says they "can't" moderate, were told today that if they could moderate, they were "gauranteed" their weekly target loss and wouldn't regain weight (hypothetical) again, do you think the people who stated they couldn't, would?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
To me this, again, sounds like the notion that moderation is the BEST WAY FOR ALL to approach weight loss and the much more important weight maintenance.
I don't know that I believe that moderating some foods is the best way for all. To me, again, best includes: most manageable, comfortable etc.
I also don't believe there's a black and white of moderation or so-called fad diets (which often aren't fads).
And, of course, that always brings us back to the definition of moderation.0 -
Absolutely. People are relying more on "what they've heard" rather than actually researching on any product objectively even if the information is just a button press away.
I disagree. Fads appeal because people actually BELIEVE that that's what they need to do for success, regardless if it's extreme or not. Hence why the supplement industry profits by promoting "fat burning" pills even if they don't work. Many people buy them (many without changing their diets at all) because they believe that the pills will burn off their excess fat.
Fads appeal to people because they're extreme. I almost think the weirder the diet the more attractive, for people in certain states of mind. But you couldn't promise a permanent result with any diet. That would be just as suss as the banana thing! Or somewhat suss, anyway.
And really what I'm suggesting is a much more "permanent" solution than what other fads offer.
I think fad diets and scam supplements appeal most to the lazy and those wanting instant gratification. They've been told that calorie deficit and exercise will lead to gradual, sustainable weight loss, but they don't want that - they don't want to change the way they eat and they don't want to have to actually work at something and/or utilize some self-discipline. They desperately want to believe that there's something out there - some magic pill or potion - that will melt the fat off their bodies at the rate of 30 pounds a month without all that icky hard work, even if they know deep inside that it sounds too good to be true. It's not what they believe they NEED to do, it's what they WANT to do because if it works, it's the easy way out.
You've been around MFP long enough and seen the threads. People ask about some scamwoo diet or supplement, are told by 30 people that it won't work and is a waste of their money, and their response is to get defensive and say they're going to do it anyway and they'll prove everybody wrong. Strangely enough, I have yet to see a thread in "Success Stories" where somebody has told the tale of how they lost 50 pounds and 20% bodyfat by taking Garcinia Cambogia or Green Coffee Bean Extract, or doing the 30-day juice fast or military diet or whatever.
The multi-billion dollar diet industry is a giant scam, but it's an easy way to get rich. No matter what useless garbage you put on the market, there will always be millions of desperate people willing to give it a try because maybe this one will be the elusive magic pill - and their thinking is "Why not try it? If it doesn't work, all I wasted was 20 bucks". Get Dr. Oz or one of the many snake oil peddlers to endorse your product, 5 million people try it at 20 bucks apiece, and you've just grossed $100 million dollars!
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to try the "prime rib burrito diet" I just heard about.
And even I at one time scoffed at a professor of nutritional sciences when he stated that supplements weren't necessary in one's diet. Of course at that time I was popping about 45-50 pills a day (pre workout, during workout, post workout, pre sleep, etc.) and didn't want to "hear" it.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
Let me try a different approach then.
If anyone who says they "can't" moderate, were told today that if they could moderate, they were "gauranteed" their weekly target loss and wouldn't regain weight (hypothetical) again, do you think the people who stated they couldn't, would?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
and if you replaced the word "moderate" with eliminate?
There are people on this site that believe they would fail to adhere to their diet if they had to eliminate certain foods.0 -
Looking at this objectively, you're probably right. Maybe it will ring true for some though and get them to look at it with an open mind. Won't hold my breath though.myfelinepal wrote: »Let me try a different approach then.
If anyone who says they "can't" moderate, were told today that if they could moderate, they were "gauranteed" their weekly target loss and wouldn't regain weight (hypothetical) again, do you think the people who stated they couldn't, would?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Except people's weekly target loss is often unrealistic and unsustainable. Many people mentioned instant gratification. But also people leave things til the 11th hour. Then they want to lose 30lbs in 5 weeks for the big event. How many times do we see that sort of thread?
So moderation and 1/2 lb a week weightloss will hold no appeal to them. You've essentially done a sales pitch to the wrong audience. Whereas Dr X is queueing behind you with the latest miracle cure that won't work but by the time the person realises they've bought the product and the event has already happened.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
Depends. I've had morbidly obese patients (3 whom I've actually helped reduce more than 200lbs) referred to me by a doctor letting them know that if they didn't change, they shouldn't expect a long life. I'd throw it in there here and there, but relied more on their successes (whether it be weight loss or new personal best on an exercise) because it was something more they strived for since success usually brings more effort.Does this fear approach work well with clients? Do you think it's ethical to use this approach even if it is effective (short term at best in the vast majority of cases)? Becuase a doctor telling a patient that their behaviour is going to kill them is one thing; they have the expertise, medical histories and the statistics that back that advice up. They can say it with relative certainty.
Lol, given that people react to fear on a daily basis (look at how shootings and bombings are now causing political rhetoric amongst Americans), I think fear can be used to an extend. But again, being more optimistic than pessimistic, I'd use the fear of something to help them achieve success by means of overcoming them.Is it wise to tell this to people that have a hard time sticking to a diet plan, nearly all of which are not in the crisis of dying if they take one more bite? Is it good to try to instill that sort of fear in a person? Is it wise to place that sort of pressure on them to the point where they fear for their lives if they fall off the wagon? Considering that the vast majority of people that lose weight will gain it back, I think that inserting a false sense of fear into that situation would be in extremely poor taste.
It is rarely the emotionally unstable that achieve healthy goals. I don't see how this approach would strengthen a person's emotional well being.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
I wouldn't. I don't believe in elimination unless it's something like an allergy to a food or drink. I believe people "can" do what they need to do when it comes to weight loss IF they put it in the context that it's important to them.Let me try a different approach then.
If anyone who says they "can't" moderate, were told today that if they could moderate, they were "gauranteed" their weekly target loss and wouldn't regain weight (hypothetical) again, do you think the people who stated they couldn't, would?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
and if you replaced the word "moderate" with eliminate?
There are people on this site that believe they would fail to adhere to their diet if they had to eliminate certain foods.
Looking now at opinions of others, I'm more consigned to the fact that there are going to be people regardless of if something is going to be their demise, they may not avoid it at all. I hadn't really taken that into consideration basically because I believe if someone who struggled with weight was put on the spot about life or death, they'd choose life. And now I'll admit that may not be the case.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
Depends. I've had morbidly obese patients (3 whom I've actually helped reduce more than 200lbs) referred to me by a doctor letting them know that if they didn't change, they shouldn't expect a long life. I'd throw it in there here and there, but relied more on their successes (whether it be weight loss or new personal best on an exercise) because it was something more they strived for since success usually brings more effort.Does this fear approach work well with clients? Do you think it's ethical to use this approach even if it is effective (short term at best in the vast majority of cases)? Becuase a doctor telling a patient that their behaviour is going to kill them is one thing; they have the expertise, medical histories and the statistics that back that advice up. They can say it with relative certainty.
Lol, given that people react to fear on a daily basis (look at how shootings and bombings are now causing political rhetoric amongst Americans), I think fear can be used to an extend. But again, being more optimistic than pessimistic, I'd use the fear of something to help them achieve success by means of overcoming them.Is it wise to tell this to people that have a hard time sticking to a diet plan, nearly all of which are not in the crisis of dying if they take one more bite? Is it good to try to instill that sort of fear in a person? Is it wise to place that sort of pressure on them to the point where they fear for their lives if they fall off the wagon? Considering that the vast majority of people that lose weight will gain it back, I think that inserting a false sense of fear into that situation would be in extremely poor taste.
It is rarely the emotionally unstable that achieve healthy goals. I don't see how this approach would strengthen a person's emotional well being.
Lol.0 -
Let me try a different approach then.
If anyone who says they "can't" moderate, were told today that if they could moderate, they were "gauranteed" their weekly target loss and wouldn't regain weight (hypothetical) again, do you think the people who stated they couldn't, would?
I "can't" moderate certain foods and I've been at goal weight and peak fitness for a while now. So this whole premise of fear of not hitting my goals may as well be the bogeyman. It is irrelevant to me
I've learned many, many things from this site, and the fear or shaming approaches just never did it. A step by step solution set detailing how they overcame any shared concerns have tended to be the most useful to me.
Even if certain OP's were not ready to hear the solutions offered, imagine if they could come back to the same thread three months after the fact and realize, wow, this that and that could work, let me try it. That's unlikely to happen if they're shamed or berated, but the reasoning we usually see behind such an approach is that it is direct, and even if the OP may be hurt or offended, lurkers who are not being directly addressed (and therefore would not feel the sting as badly as the OP does) can be helped. It's hard to counter this because who knows how many lurkers are being helped? Dozens? Hundreds? Millions? Don't know.0 -
So people who fall for crazy diet fads, won't go for this one then?Let me try a different approach then.
If anyone who says they "can't" moderate, were told today that if they could moderate, they were "gauranteed" their weekly target loss and wouldn't regain weight (hypothetical) again, do you think the people who stated they couldn't, would?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
No, I don't think so. They still have to moderate, and it might be more or less challenging for them for any number of reasons. (By the way, there are lots of ways of moderating!)
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Fads appeal to people because they're extreme. I almost think the weirder the diet the more attractive, for people in certain states of mind. But you couldn't promise a permanent result with any diet. That would be just as suss as the banana thing! Or somewhat suss, anyway.
Yes. Have you seen those Weird Trick to Weight Loss Ads? They are successful.
Eat Less/Move More is just not sexy, and without the sizzle, it's harder to sell.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 404 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 987 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions