Two doctors dispel 4 myths to weight loss
Options
Replies
-
elisa123gal wrote: »I've been reading articles on best permanent weight loss information outside of mfp I learned a few things not mentioned in this read.
One was that counting calories really doesn't work as well as just looking at it as portion control and truly eating better foods.
But myth i read one in agreement.. that losing weight quick doesn't mean you'll gain it back faster as many PROFESS on here. To me it makes sense.. that slow long weightless for some.. could take too much will power and time so they give up. To lose it quick and get it done could really work for some. I think it is a personal choice.
Counting calories worked for me
But when you recognise the calories in each food you make better, more informed choices..you choose to pad out with low cal nutritious vegetables so you can 'spend' on other food that you want and not be hungry
I've never read on here that losing weight quick means you'll put it back on faster, just that losing weight quickly means you will lose more muscle than necessary, carries specific risks of gallstones and kidney issues if over 3.3 lbs per week, and that you have less time to learn better lifestyle habits or find your way to maintenance7 -
-
elisa123gal wrote: »I've been reading articles on best permanent weight loss information outside of mfp I learned a few things not mentioned in this read.
One was that counting calories really doesn't work as well as just looking at it as portion control and truly eating better foods.
But myth i read one in agreement.. that losing weight quick doesn't mean you'll gain it back faster as many PROFESS on here. To me it makes sense.. that slow long weightless for some.. could take too much will power and time so they give up. To lose it quick and get it done could really work for some. I think it is a personal choice.
Not being able to do portion control is why most people are here to begin with. Eyeballing doesn't work and simply recalling amounts eaten is way off even in professional dieticians.
Thinking "I just want to get it done" is 1A material for not being able to maintain your lost weight. You need to be able to eat at maintenance, what teaches you proper amounts of food better, quickly starving yourself or longterm eating just slightly less than you'll be able to when you maintain? I could amputate my arm and lose weight immediately, that would teach me even less though. The people in that study all regained some of the weight they lost, the ones who went slowly regained the least.7 -
elisa123gal wrote: »I've been reading articles on best permanent weight loss information outside of mfp I learned a few things not mentioned in this read.
One was that counting calories really doesn't work as well as just looking at it as portion control and truly eating better foods.
But myth i read one in agreement.. that losing weight quick doesn't mean you'll gain it back faster as many PROFESS on here. To me it makes sense.. that slow long weightless for some.. could take too much will power and time so they give up. To lose it quick and get it done could really work for some. I think it is a personal choice.
Judging by what you've 'learned,' I think you would benefit from reading better sources.
- Calorie counting *is* the most reliable and accurate way of knowing how much you are consuming
- Classifying foods as better or worse is completely unnecessary in terms of weight loss
- I've never seen knowledgeable people here PROFESS that everyone who loses weight rapidly gains it back. What is said on here all the time is that rapid weight loss isn't healthy. There's a heavy price paid for doing it too quickly. Mainly in muscle loss along with the fat, and the real potential for heart and kidney damage, gallstones and hair loss to mention a few.8 -
...That were bored or something."your body wants to stay the same size"? How about small changes take too long to add up to the total of 3500 which is necessary to lose one pound, let alone a hundred pounds?
If they really are doctors they should tell the truth not Moe up fairytales for us poor ignorant commoners.4 -
I've never read on here that losing weight quick means you'll put it back on faster, just that losing weight quickly means you will lose more muscle than necessary, carries specific risks of gallstones and kidney issues if over 3.3 lbs per week, and that you have less time to learn better lifestyle habits or find your way to maintenance
You know, was going to make a long post, as I often do; but, some Sued0nimous person as usual pretty much said it all.
I especially want to highlight "and that you have less time to learn better lifestyle habits or find your way to maintenance", because, you know, most people on MFP are not part of a study that provides them with a "6-month lifestyle intervention followed by a 1-year extended care program"
Also it doesn't look to me like a blind randomised study where they assigned people to groups and gave them food to get results. I think they selected out of the results of the initial 1200 Cal a day intervention the ones who lost faster, medium, and slow.
So the taller, more obese participants who would lose faster at 1200 Cal and 10000 steps lost more and kept more of their loss as an absolute value (but also had an absolute value higher regain) at 18 months.
OK...3 -
Small changes don't make a difference? So walking 30 minutes a day instead of sitting isn't a big enough of a difference? Or sleeping and extra hour because one goes to be and extra hour early? Or how about using a 9" plate to eat off of versus a 13" plate if it's just a single serving?
Sometimes I find that general doctors are subjective on their approaches to nutrition and weight loss due to lack of education on 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
8 -
Myths that worked for me (except that last one).
By the way, my favorite doctor joke: What do you call the person who graduates at the bottom of his class from medical school? "Doctor." To be fair, it's not entirely accurate, but it is also my favorite lawyer joke. And those two are at Michigan so it's not applicable.
The joke is flippant and irreverent, but science isn't a competition between degrees or intelligence. It's based on evidence. I'm not seeing any solid evidence in the article, though I will say I think there is more than one path to success. I agree with Stevencloser above in questioning the 10% loss standard for success. I'd like to see a study on long-term success (defined as those who reach a healthy body fat percentage and keep it there over a 5-10 year period). I'm at year 6.6 -
What's that BS about how 'physiologically, your body tries to stay the same weight'?
There is a lot of research about body set points, and of course as with any research, there are degrees of varying conclusions (of which those who believe in set points and those who don't will use the conclusions that suit their own point of view), but the research is interesting nonetheless.3 -
Seems to me like they're (willfully?)
- misunderstanding or misrepresenting what serious people who advocate those "myths" really say or mean (for the "small changes" one, and the "lose slowly" one), and/or
- treating rarely-emphasized things as major myths to be combatted (the sex one, the realistic goals one).
7 -
Or looking for internships with Dr. Oz.Seems to me like they're (willfully?)- misunderstanding or misrepresenting what serious people who advocate those "myths" really say or mean (for the "small changes" one, and the "lose slowly" one), and/or
- treating rarely-emphasized things as major myths to be combatted (the sex one, the realistic goals one).
7 -
I read the original article when it came out and it was reasonably well done. This article is not particularly well written IMO but it is not fundamentally wrong.
People on MFP are just as likely as anyone to hold on to their pet ideas, even in the face of contrary evidence.
I think the biggest problem with these types of stories is that they are meant to be quick content fillers written for a very average audience. So they tend to be shallow and overly generalized.5 -
tiptoethruthetulips wrote: »What's that BS about how 'physiologically, your body tries to stay the same weight'?
There is a lot of research about body set points, and of course as with any research, there are degrees of varying conclusions (of which those who believe in set points and those who don't will use the conclusions that suit their own point of view), but the research is interesting nonetheless.
People whose set point works correctly usually don't have weight problems. MFP (obviously) attracts those who need a calorie counting site because some individusls don't have a working set point in a normal BMI range. I have a set point, but it needs recalibration.
1 -
I swear my set point is 148lbs, i can stay at this weight effortlessly.
I got down to my goal weight last year of 143lbs, and it was a constant struggle to stay there. It required pin point food logging/calorie counting, just all round hard work!
I lost my weight very slowly, and have never been obese.0 -
They state that sex takes on average 6 minutes? I'm sorry, but anyone who delivers that sorry a performance is not going to stay on my radar for long! That's ridiculously bad!3
-
stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »About 2 and 3:
That's because what they're linking to is based on percentage of weight lost. "Success" was determined by "lost 10% of their bodyweight". So someone who lost 9% and gained nothing back would be a "failure" while someone who lost 20% and regained 10% within the study time would be a success...
It's a bit of a reductive suggestion of the science, in the sense that these were in controlled group's of obese patients, not just a range of people that only need to lose just a few pounds and some people 100 pounds. It also doesn't say that losing 20% and regaining would be a success - the study cites long term weight loss management — i.e. stablising, not putting back on.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3780395/
If you're going by that, the slow group was best.
"No significant group differences were found in weight regain between 6 and 18 months (2.6, 1.8, and 1.3 kg, respectively, ps < 0.9). "
And staying at more than 10% loss sustained was the factor for "success".
"The FAST and MODERATE groups were 5.1 and 2.7 times more likely to achieve 10% weight losses at 18 months than the SLOW group."
No *kitten*. If I go at 300 km/h on the autobahn instead of 100, I'm more likely to be at an arbitrary place after an arbitrary time. Says nothing about whether it's the better way to get to the place.
Not to mention that the "fast" group was basically losing 1.2 or so pounds a week on average, not what most would classify as fast for someone who is obese. That's not the kind of "fast" most people here advocate against.2 -
tiptoethruthetulips wrote: »What's that BS about how 'physiologically, your body tries to stay the same weight'?
There is a lot of research about body set points, and of course as with any research, there are degrees of varying conclusions (of which those who believe in set points and those who don't will use the conclusions that suit their own point of view), but the research is interesting nonetheless.
People whose set point works correctly usually don't have weight problems. MFP (obviously) attracts those who need a calorie counting site because some individusls don't have a working set point in a normal BMI range. I have a set point, but it needs recalibration.
Set points are an excuse to fail or quit when weight loss isn't linear, or you aren't tracking properly
I have yet to see any scientific evidence that they actually exist, it's just media spin / health & fitness woo
If anyone has any evidence at all, you know robust factual evidence rather than tabloid and blogs, please do share it
I fail to see how believing in something that isn't there to explain physical reactions is helpful to an adult
0 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »About 2 and 3:
That's because what they're linking to is based on percentage of weight lost. "Success" was determined by "lost 10% of their bodyweight". So someone who lost 9% and gained nothing back would be a "failure" while someone who lost 20% and regained 10% within the study time would be a success...
It's a bit of a reductive suggestion of the science, in the sense that these were in controlled group's of obese patients, not just a range of people that only need to lose just a few pounds and some people 100 pounds. It also doesn't say that losing 20% and regaining would be a success - the study cites long term weight loss management — i.e. stablising, not putting back on.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3780395/
If you're going by that, the slow group was best.
"No significant group differences were found in weight regain between 6 and 18 months (2.6, 1.8, and 1.3 kg, respectively, ps < 0.9). "
And staying at more than 10% loss sustained was the factor for "success".
"The FAST and MODERATE groups were 5.1 and 2.7 times more likely to achieve 10% weight losses at 18 months than the SLOW group."
No *kitten*. If I go at 300 km/h on the autobahn instead of 100, I'm more likely to be at an arbitrary place after an arbitrary time. Says nothing about whether it's the better way to get to the place.
Not to mention that the "fast" group was basically losing 1.2 or so pounds a week on average, not what most would classify as fast for someone who is obese. That's not the kind of "fast" most people here advocate against.
Oh, I didn't even notice that one. Good catch.1 -
They state that sex takes on average 6 minutes? I'm sorry, but anyone who delivers that sorry a performance is not going to stay on my radar for long! That's ridiculously bad!
Apparently it's the average. http://www.esquire.com/lifestyle/sex/a5943/average-sex-time-0709/0 -
They state that sex takes on average 6 minutes? I'm sorry, but anyone who delivers that sorry a performance is not going to stay on my radar for long! That's ridiculously bad!
I guess it depends how good he is. If he isn't, six minutes can seem like six hours!
On the other hand... 3
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 390 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 921 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions