weightloss

I think losing weight the fastest is a bad plan.

Too often, people who try to lose weight fast crash and burn before they reach goal weight, or they don't learn then practice sustainable new habits to stay at a healthy weight long term. Something like 80%+ of people who lose weight regain it, often with extra pounds or kilos on top of their starting weight.

A sensibly moderate weight loss rate can sometimes get a person to goal weight in less calendar time than a supposedly aggressive, fast approach that causes deprivation-triggered over-eating, breaks in the action, or even giving up altogether. As a bonus, it gives an opportunity to find and practice new habits that can keep a person at that healthy weight long term, ideally permanently.

For myself, I decided I wasn't going to do anything to lose weight that I wasn't willing to continue long term to stay at a healthy weight, other than a sensibly moderate calorie deficit until I reached goal weight: No extreme eating rules, no punitively intense and unpleasant exercise: Just calorie-appropriate eating (on average) of foods I enjoy, and fun (or at least tolerable/practical exercise). I was overweight/obese for around 30 years. It took just under a year to lose to a healthy weight, and I've been at a healthy weight for 8 years since.

My best advice - not the advice you asked for at all - is this: Don't look for ways to lose weight fast. Look for ways to lose weight (relatively) easily, and stay there. It's a different mindset. Give it some thought.

Best wishes!

Jacq_qui wrote: »

Lots of studies saying that any weightloss based on calorie counting isn't even sustainable when they consider the picture over a number of year in those studies. You have to change how and what you eat if you want it to stay off for the rest of your life. Which sucks because for most people that takes some time.

https://zoe.com/learn/why-calorie-counting-doesnt-work A link to the meta-analysis paper is in the article if you prefer to read the original study.

I think that article is possibly misleading, or at least incomplete. Yes, most people who use calorie-counting will regain long term . . . which is pretty much true for other ways of losing weight, too.

Things they say that I think are misleading or incorrect:

1. " . . . a diet focused on drastically reducing caloric intake initially produces dramatic weight loss. But people's weight steadily rises back." Calorie counting doesn't necessarily require drastic calorie reductions. If a person learns and practices new habits, it's not assured that weight steadily rises back.

2. ". . . when you see the calories listed on a food label, that’s really only an estimate — amounts can vary. Legally speaking, food manufacturers can be up to 20% out in their estimates, which could be significant." This is true. But most of us have somewhat repetitive overall eating patterns. If we calorie count, and adjust based on results, that tends to compensate for the overs and unders of reasonably-accurate logging. Same is true for other points in that section. (Things we eat rarely don't matter much in the big picture. The day-in, day-out routine is the big deal.)

3. "Even if you knew exactly how many calories were in your meal, you wouldn't know how many you’ve actually absorbed." Same thing as #2, if you track and adjust based on results, this sort of thing isn't a big practical problem. Ditto for many of the immediately following points about calories differing depending on how processed the food is, what the nutritional quality is, etc. Those aren't trivial concerns when it comes to health, but not huge practical factors in a "count and adjust" situation.

4. "When counting calories, you tend to fixate on the calorie figures alone. This can mean choosing foods simply because their calorie counts are low. . . . . you may miss out on essential vitamins and minerals." I don't understand why some critics of calorie counting believe that calorie counting means people will necessarily ignore nutrition. Sure, some people do, but some people ignore nutrition in any context. Ignoring nutrition is dumb in any context, IMO. Also important: Personal satiety, energy level implications, affordability, practicality, and enjoyment of eating.

5. "There’s also growing evidence that for some people, it may increase the risk of disordered eating. . . . For instance, a study from 2017 recruited participants with existing eating disorders. . . . Around three-quarters of the participants reported that the calorie counting app contributed to their eating disorder." Honestly, this is a little eye-roll-y to me. Yes, people with eating disorders, or susceptible to eating disorders, may be triggered by calorie counting. I don't think that - potentially being triggered into disordered eating - is unique to calorie-counting either. I understand - and truly sympathize with, feel horrible for - people who try calorie counting and slide into disordered eating. That doesn't mean that this concern applies to everyone.

The final bit is IMO really good advice: "Rather than focusing on removing things from your diet, focus on adding vegetables, nuts, seeds, whole grains, legumes, and fermented foods. But if you fancy a slice of cheesecake every once in a while, go for it. Food should be enjoyed, not counted." IME, that's completely compatible with calorie counting (except the "not counted" ) - the rest is more compatible with counting than with many other methods people adopt to lose weight.

The one thing I didn't notice in their article is another frequent criticism of calorie counting: That calorie calculator estimates aren't accurate for every one. That's also 100% true, but also countered by using a "track then adjust based on 4-6 weeks' experience" approach. (MFP is off by 25-30% for me, which is rare. Nonetheless, I lost predictably once I figured that out, and adjusted.)

Also, near the start, the article links a "review and meta-analysis examining 80 weight loss clinical trials provides some evidence" for their thesis. Here's the conclusion from that meta-analysis:

Conclusions: Weight-loss interventions utilizing a reduced-energy diet and exercise are associated with moderate weight loss at 6 months. Although there is some regain of weight, weight loss can be maintained. The addition of weight-loss medications somewhat enhances weight-loss maintenance.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17904936/

Yup, evidence against calorie counting. Did they think we wouldn't look at the link?

Final observations: This site, ZOE, is selling something that doesn't benefit from people succeeding with other methods, so they have some self-interest in the game here. Their test kit currently costs $295 (which can be installment purchased over 6 months), and membership tiers exist at monthly costs of $29, $39, or $59, depending on how long in advance one pays. Calorie counting with MFP is free. (No, I don't work for MFP.)

Calorie counting isn't perfect. Especially, it's not the perfect route for everyone.

Yes, most people - calorie counting or otherwise - regain. I think the bigger issue is unrealistic methods, things that can't continue forever while allowing a person happy overall life balance.

Various methods can be used alongside calorie counting, including their recommendation that "Rather than focusing on removing things from your diet, focus on adding vegetables, nuts, seeds, whole grains, legumes, and fermented foods. But if you fancy a slice of cheesecake every once in a while, go for it." Some of those supplementary methods are more sensible and realistic than others, IMO.

I'm far from the only person here who is in the 20% (ZOE article: "And at the 3-year mark, most people — around 80% — are rapidly approaching their starting weight." I'm about 50 pounds below my starting weight, same region where I've been since my initial weight loss via calorie counting over 8 years ago (after around 30 previous years of overweight/obesity). Calorie counting was perfect for me.

Calorie counting isn't the right route for everyone. Some people will stumble over the concerns in the ZOE article, which are indeed potential stumbling points. But a reasonably intelligent, calm pursuit of calorie counting can work well for some people. I'm going to keep hanging around this calorie counting site, trying to help new folks understand how to use calorie counting realistically and productively. It's been hugely powerful for me.

Best wishes, sincerely!