Study, best long term weight control strategy

[markd]

Study: Low-fat diets better long-term

By MARILYNN MARCHIONE, AP Medical Writer

LAS VEGAS (AP) - Regardless of how they shed pounds in the
first place, big losers stayed that way by limiting fat
rather than carbohydrates, according to new research that
could add fuel to the backlash against low-carb diets.

Dieters already have been turning away from Atkins-style
plans as a long-term weight-control strategy, and the new
study gives them more reason: Low-fat plans seem to work
better at keeping weight off.

"People who started eating more fat ... regained the most
weight over time," said Suzanne Phelan, a Brown Medical
School psychologist who presented results of the study
Monday at a meeting of the North American Association for
the Study of Obesity.

The study used the National Weight Control Registry, a
decade-old effort to learn the secrets of success from
people who had lost at least 30 pounds and kept them off
for at least a year. The registry run by doctors from the
University of Colorado in Denver, the University of
Pittsburgh and Brown University in Providence, R.I.

They studied 2,700 people who entered the registry from
1995 through 2003. Their average age was 47, most were
women, and they had lost an average of 72 pounds initially.
Doctors compared their diets to see whether one type or
another made a difference in how much weight they had lost
and how much they had regained a year later.

All reported eating only about 1,400 calories a day, but
the portion that came from fat rose - from 24 percent in
1995 to more than 29 percent in 2003 - while the part from
carbohydrates fell, from 56 percent to 49 percent.

The number who were on low-carb diets (less than 90
grams a day) rose from 6 percent to 17 percent during
the same period.

The type of diet - low-fat, low-carb or in between - made
no difference in how people lost weight initially.

But those who increased their fat intake over a year
regained the most weight. That meant they ate less
carbohydrates, because the amount of protein in their diets
stayed the same, Phelan said.

"Only a minority of successful weight losers consume
low-carbohydrate diets," she and the other researchers
concluded.

Colette Heimowitz, a nutrition expert and spokeswoman for
the Atkins diet organization, noted that the study
considered 90 grams to be low-carb, while Atkins recommends
60 grams for weight loss and 60 to 120 for weight
maintenance.

She said that for many of the dieters studied, "the carbs
aren't low enough for them to be successful." They also
should have replaced carbs with more protein rather than
fat, she said.

Dr. Thomas Wadden, a University of Pennsylvania weight loss
expert who had no role in the study, said it is too
soon to say which approach is better. Several
longer-term studies of low-carb and low-fat dieters are
in the works, he said.

But he said: "I do think that people who are keeping the
weight off are eating a low-fat, high-carb diet."

The dietary establishment has long been skeptical of the
long-term safety and effectiveness of low-carb diets, and
consumers increasingly are losing their enthusiasm for the
glut of low-carb products that overloaded grocery store
shelves as the diet became a fad in the past few years.

More than half of Americans who have tried a low-carb diet
have given up, according to a recent survey by the market
research firm InsightExpress. Other published survey
information suggests that the number of Americans following
such a diet peaked at 9 percent last February and fell to 6
percent by June.

The American Institute for Cancer Research used those
trends to issue a statement in September urging dieters to
"come back to common sense."

"Eat a balanced diet weighted toward vegetables and fruits,
reduce portion sizes and increase physical activity," the
institute said.

Ds. William Dietz, director of chronic-disease prevention
at the federal Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, said it is difficult to tell whether these
low-carb diets really work because people find it hard
to stick to a strict regimen for long periods.

"My anecdotal experience is that people go on and off these
diets," he said. "When their weight goes up, they go back
on the diet to lose weight."

Other research at the conference underscored the many
health and personal problems obese people face.

Duke University doctors said two-thirds of obese people
seeking treatment at the Duke Diet & Fitness Center
reported not enjoying or wanting to have sex, and
having problems with sexual performance. Only 5 percent
of normal-weight people from the surrounding community
who completed the same quality-of-life survey reported
such problems.

[Tcomeau]

National Weight Control Registry

http://www.uchsc.edu/nutrition/WyattJortberg/nwcr.htm

James O. Hill, PhD Rena Wing, PhD

James O. Hill, Ph.D., Professor of Pediatrics and Director,
Center for Human Nutrition at the University of Colorado
Health Sciences Center, Denver, CO. Research support from
Amgen, Hoffman-LaRoche, Procter & Gamble, and Knoll
Pharmaceuticals; has received consultant fees from Knoll,
Roche Laboratories, International Life Sciences Institute, and
Procter & Gamble and is a consultant to the Duke Diet and
Fitness Center. (Newark Star-Ledger, 2/17/97). President,
North American Association for the Study of Obesity. (USA
Today, 9/1/98) Lead author of a study on olestra supported by
a grant from Procter & Gamble. (Am.
J. Clin. Nutr. 1998;67:1178-85) Co-wrote (with Barbara Rolls)
a 1998 report for ILSI on "Carbohydrates and Weight
Management." Participated in a 3/25/99 panel assembled by
the Sugar Association to inform New York magazine editors
about obesity, calories, and activity. (Sugar Association's
1999 annual report, http://www.foodingredientsonline.com;
accessed 03/30/99) Research on the effects of covert
substitution of olestra for conventional fat on spontaneous
food intake supported by Procter & Gamble. (Am. J. Clin.
Nutr. 1998;67:1178-85) Research on the role of
carbohydrates in weight management was supported by the
Sugar Association. (Letter from Sugar Association to USDA;
on file with CSPI; 4/16/99) Research on using Orlistat for
weight maintenance funded by Hoffmann-La Roche. (Am. J.
Clin. Nutr. 1999;69:1108-16) Member of the Foodfit.com
advisory board.
(http://www.foodfit.com/about/advisoryBoard.asp;
accessed 11/11/00) Research on weight management
supported in part by Abbott Laboratories. (J. Amer.
Coll. Nutr. 2001;20:26-31) Member of the McDonald's
Corporation Global Advisory Council on Healthy
Lifestyles; formed to "help guide the company on
activities that address the need for balanced, healthy
lifestyles." (http://www.mcdonalds.com/corporate/press/-
corporate/2003/05212003/; accessed 6/23/03) Receives
consulting fees from HealtheTech, Johnson & Johnson,
Procter & Gamble, and Coca-Cola. Receives speakers fees
from Abbott Laboratories, Roche Laboratories, and Kraft
Foods. Receives research funding from M&M Mars. (N.
Engl. J. Med. 2003:348;2082-2090) Member of the expert
advisory board for the American Council for Fitness and
Nutrition. (http://www.acfn.org/about/advisory.html;
accessed 10/31/03)

Rena R. Wing, Ph.D., U. of Pittsburgh School of Medicine.
Consultant to and received research support from Lilly
Pharmaceuticals, is on Weight Watchers Advisory Board; has
received research support from Ross Laboratories and ILSI.
(Newark Star-Ledger, 2/17/97 notes Eli Lilly, WW)

*****

Do you see how these two people and the entire purpose of the
weight registry is called into question when they fail to
declare their obvious conflicts of interests. Why do they hide
it? Because they understand that their affiliations render
them scientifically questionable.

That is what brings disrepute to science in general. Had they
declared their financial interests up front we could then go
on to the report and consider its scientific value.

Where the hell is the press in all of this? Why are they not
reporting these blatant conflicts of interest?

TC

markd@toad-net.com wrote in message
news:<4199f0a3$0$63179$4d5ecec7@reader.city-net.com>...
> Study: Low-fat diets better long-term
>
> By MARILYNN MARCHIONE, AP Medical Writer
>
> LAS VEGAS (AP) - Regardless of how they shed pounds in
> the first place, big losers stayed that way by limiting
> fat rather than carbohydrates, according to new research
> that could add fuel to the backlash against low-carb
> diets.
>
> Dieters already have been turning away from Atkins-style
> plans as a long-term weight-control strategy, and the new
> study gives them more reason: Low-fat plans seem to work
> better at keeping weight off.
>
> "People who started eating more fat ... regained the most
> weight over time," said Suzanne Phelan, a Brown Medical
> School psychologist who presented results of the study
> Monday at a meeting of the North American Association for
> the Study of Obesity.
>
> The study used the National Weight Control Registry, a
> decade-old effort to learn the secrets of success from
> people who had lost at least 30 pounds and kept them off
> for at least a year. The registry run by doctors from the
> University of Colorado in Denver, the University of
> Pittsburgh and Brown University in Providence, R.I.
>
> They studied 2,700 people who entered the registry from
> 1995 through 2003. Their average age was 47, most were
> women, and they had lost an average of 72 pounds
> initially. Doctors compared their diets to see whether
> one type or another made a difference in how much weight
> they had lost and how much they had regained a year
> later.
>
> All reported eating only about 1,400 calories a day, but
> the portion that came from fat rose - from 24 percent in
> 1995 to more than 29 percent in 2003 - while the part
> from carbohydrates fell, from 56 percent to 49 percent.
>
> The number who were on low-carb diets (less than 90 grams
> a day) rose from 6 percent to 17 percent during the same
> period.
>
> The type of diet - low-fat, low-carb or in between - made
> no difference in how people lost weight initially.
>
> But those who increased their fat intake over a year
> regained the most weight. That meant they ate less
> carbohydrates, because the amount of protein in their
> diets stayed the same, Phelan said.
>
> "Only a minority of successful weight losers consume
> low-carbohydrate diets," she and the other researchers
> concluded.
>
> Colette Heimowitz, a nutrition expert and spokeswoman for
> the Atkins diet organization, noted that the study
> considered 90 grams to be low-carb, while Atkins
> recommends 60 grams for weight loss and 60 to 120 for
> weight maintenance.
>
> She said that for many of the dieters studied, "the carbs
> aren't low enough for them to be successful." They also
> should have replaced carbs with more protein rather than
> fat, she said.
>
> Dr. Thomas Wadden, a University of Pennsylvania weight
> loss expert who had no role in the study, said it is
> too soon to say which approach is better. Several
> longer-term studies of low-carb and low-fat dieters
> are in the works, he said.
>
> But he said: "I do think that people who are keeping the
> weight off are eating a low-fat, high-carb diet."
>
> The dietary establishment has long been skeptical of the
> long-term safety and effectiveness of low-carb diets, and
> consumers increasingly are losing their enthusiasm for
> the glut of low-carb products that overloaded grocery
> store shelves as the diet became a fad in the past few
> years.
>
> More than half of Americans who have tried a low-carb
> diet have given up, according to a recent survey by the
> market research firm InsightExpress. Other published
> survey information suggests that the number of Americans
> following such a diet peaked at 9 percent last February
> and fell to 6 percent by June.
>
> The American Institute for Cancer Research used those
> trends to issue a statement in September urging dieters
> to "come back to common sense."
>
> "Eat a balanced diet weighted toward vegetables and
> fruits, reduce portion sizes and increase physical
> activity," the institute said.
>
> Dr. William Dietz, director of chronic-disease prevention
> at the federal Centers for Disease Control and
> Prevention, said it is difficult to tell whether
> these low-carb diets really work because people find
> it hard to stick to a strict regimen for long
> periods.
>
> "My anecdotal experience is that people go on and off
> these diets," he said. "When their weight goes up, they
> go back on the diet to lose weight."
>
> Other research at the conference underscored the many
> health and personal problems obese people face.
>
> Duke University doctors said two-thirds of obese people
> seeking treatment at the Duke Diet & Fitness Center
> reported not enjoying or wanting to have sex, and having
> problems with sexual performance. Only 5 percent of
> normal-weight people from the surrounding community who
> completed the same quality-of-life survey reported such
> problems.

[Tcomeau]

markd@toad-net.com wrote in message
news:<4199f0a3$0$63179$4d5ecec7@reader.city-net.com>...
> Study: Low-fat diets better long-term
>
> By MARILYNN MARCHIONE, AP Medical Writer
>
> LAS VEGAS (AP) - Regardless of how they shed pounds in
> the first place, big losers stayed that way by limiting
> fat rather than carbohydrates, according to new research
> that could add fuel to the backlash against low-carb
> diets.
>
> Dieters already have been turning away from Atkins-style
> plans as a long-term weight-control strategy, and the new
> study gives them more reason: Low-fat plans seem to work
> better at keeping weight off.
>
> "People who started eating more fat ... regained the most
> weight over time," said Suzanne Phelan, a Brown Medical
> School psychologist who presented results of the study
> Monday at a meeting of the North American Association for
> the Study of Obesity.
>
> The study used the National Weight Control Registry, a
> decade-old effort to learn the secrets of success from
> people who had lost at least 30 pounds and kept them off
> for at least a year. The registry run by doctors from the
> University of Colorado in Denver, the University of
> Pittsburgh and Brown University in Providence, R.I.
>

more about the weight registry:

http://www.uchsc.edu/nutrition/Administration/admin.htm

Robert H. Eckel, M.D., Division of Endocrinology, Health
Sciences Center, University of Colorado. Research on the
"effect of medium chain triglycerides on glucose and lipid
metabolism in type II diabetes melitus" was supported by
Procter and Gamble. Research on "the effect of leptin on
postprandial lipid metabolism" was supported by Amgen.
(Undated resume on file at CSPI; accessed 6/18/02)

Uwe Christians, Department of Biopharmaceutical Sciences,
University of California, San Francisco. Research on
mitochondrial metabolism supported in part by Novartis Pharma
AG. (Br. J. Pharmacol. 2001;133:875-85)

William C. Heird, Ph.D., Baylor College of Medicine, Baylor,
TX. Research on fatty acid in breast milk partially funded by
Mead-Johnson Nutritional Group. (Am. J. Clin. Nutr.
2000;71(supp):292S-9S)

Stephen C. Woods, Ph.D., Department of Psychiatry, University
of Cincinnati College of Medicine. Received $1,000,000 in
2000-2001 and $1,037,500 in 2001-2002 from Procter & Gamble
for a study on obesity and energy homeostasis. (University of
Cincinnati, Office of Research, Active Grants and Contracts -
FY 2001, http://www.med.research.uc.edu/grants/granttemplates-
hell.cfm?department_id=186; accessed 6/24/02)

Holly R. Wyatt, M.D., Assistant Professor of Medicine,
University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, Denver.
Receives consulting fees from Ortho-McNeil, USANA, and
GlaxoSmithKline. Receives speaker fees from Roche
Laboratories, Abbott Laboratories, Slim-Fast, and
Ortho-McNeil.
(N. Engl. J. Med. 2003;348:2082-90)

TC

[Larry Hoov]

<markd@toad-net.com> wrote in message
news:4199f0a3$0$63179$4d5ecec7@reader.city-net.com...
> Study: Low-fat diets better long-term
>
> The study used the National Weight Control Registry, a
> decade-old effort to learn the secrets of success from
> people who had lost at least 30 pounds and kept them off
> for at least a year. The registry run by doctors from the
> University of Colorado in Denver, the University of
> Pittsburgh and Brown University in Providence, R.I.
>
> They studied 2,700 people who entered the registry from
> 1995 through 2003. Their average age was 47, most were
> women, and they had lost an average of 72 pounds
> initially. Doctors compared their diets to see whether one
> type or another made a difference in how much weight they
> had lost and how much they had regained a year later.

I question the validity of anything determined via this
methodology. We do not know how the subjects were recruited
(were they truly random representatives of the greater
population, or were they already clients of conventional
weight-loss programs?), how reliable their self-reports are
(as far as I know, all client reports are electronically
submitted), whether any uncontrolled but unreported variables
are at play, or whether the initial requirement that one must
have lost 30 pounds and kept it off for a year presupposes
certain characteristics in the participants themselves. Those
are just ideas off the top of my head. I wonder what I'd find
if I read a detailed article.

Lar

[Tcomeau]

"Larry Hoover" <larryhoover@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:<ERumd.24706$Ho4.891256@news20.bellglobal.com>...
> <markd@toad-net.com> wrote in message
> news:4199f0a3$0$63179$4d5ecec7@reader.city-net.com...
> > Study: Low-fat diets better long-term
> >
> > The study used the National Weight Control Registry, a
> > decade-old effort to learn the secrets of success from
> > people who had lost at least 30 pounds and kept them off
> > for at least a year. The registry run by doctors from
> > the University of Colorado in Denver, the University of
> > Pittsburgh and Brown University in Providence, R.I.
> >
> > They studied 2,700 people who entered the registry from
> > 1995 through 2003. Their average age was 47, most were
> > women, and they had lost an average of 72 pounds
> > initially. Doctors compared their diets to see whether
> > one type or another made a difference in how much weight
> > they had lost and how much they had regained a year
> > later.
>
> I question the validity of anything determined via this
> methodology. We do not know how the subjects were recruited
> (were they truly random representatives of the greater
> population, or were they already clients of conventional
> weight-loss programs?), how reliable their self-reports are
> (as far as I know, all client reports are electronically
> submitted), whether any uncontrolled but unreported
> variables are at play, or whether the initial requirement
> that one must have lost 30 pounds and kept it off for a year
> presupposes certain characteristics in the participants
> themselves. Those are just ideas off the top of my head. I
> wonder what I'd find if I read a detailed article.
>
> Lar

The topic comes up on the low carb forums often. The main
complaint is how the questionaires are worded and the narrow
choices of responses to the questions. The questionaires seem
to be specifically designed to make it difficult for low
carbers to indicate the methods they used to lose weight. The
questions are skewed to solicit a low-fat message even from
low-carbers. How can you answer a multiple choice question
that doesn't give you the option that best represents your
desired answer?

The questionaires out forward by the weight registry people
were never and will never be designed to reflect the truth.

TC

[Tcomeau]

"Larry Hoover" <larryhoover@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:<ERumd.24706$Ho4.891256@news20.bellglobal.com>...
> <markd@toad-net.com> wrote in message
> news:4199f0a3$0$63179$4d5ecec7@reader.city-net.com...
> > Study: Low-fat diets better long-term
> >
> > The study used the National Weight Control Registry, a
> > decade-old effort to learn the secrets of success from
> > people who had lost at least 30 pounds and kept them off
> > for at least a year. The registry run by doctors from
> > the University of Colorado in Denver, the University of
> > Pittsburgh and Brown University in Providence, R.I.
> >
> > They studied 2,700 people who entered the registry from
> > 1995 through 2003. Their average age was 47, most were
> > women, and they had lost an average of 72 pounds
> > initially. Doctors compared their diets to see whether
> > one type or another made a difference in how much weight
> > they had lost and how much they had regained a year
> > later.
>
> I question the validity of anything determined via this
> methodology. We do not know how the subjects were recruited
> (were they truly random representatives of the greater
> population, or were they already clients of conventional
> weight-loss programs?), how reliable their self-reports are
> (as far as I know, all client reports are electronically
> submitted), whether any uncontrolled but unreported
> variables are at play, or whether the initial requirement
> that one must have lost 30 pounds and kept it off for a year
> presupposes certain characteristics in the participants
> themselves. Those are just ideas off the top of my head. I
> wonder what I'd find if I read a detailed article.
>
> Lar

The topic comes up on the low carb forums often. The main
complaint is how the questionaires are worded and the narrow
choices of responses to the questions. The questionaires seem
to be specifically designed to make it difficult for low
carbers to indicate the methods they used to lose weight. The
questions are skewed to solicit a low-fat message even from
low-carbers. How can you answer a multiple choice question
that doesn't give you the option that best represents your
desired answer?

The questionaires out forward by the weight registry people
were never and will never be designed to reflect the truth.

TC

[Bj]

"tcomeau" <tunderbar@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b550f406.0411170647.1710bad8@posting.google.com...
>
> The questionaires out forward by the weight registry people
> were never and will never be designed to reflect the truth.
>

I'm not on any registry, but my "truth" -- which may not be
your "truth" or even THE TRUTH -- was that eating less &
moving more worked quite well, and continues to work for me
in maintaining my weight. I've never been a low carber. I
don't think I'm "low fat" either. I'm just plain moderate
(although I do sometimes go a bit too far in the exercise
department). bj

[Tcomeau]

"Larry Hoover" <larryhoover@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:<ERumd.24706$Ho4.891256@news20.bellglobal.com>...
> <markd@toad-net.com> wrote in message
> news:4199f0a3$0$63179$4d5ecec7@reader.city-net.com...
> > Study: Low-fat diets better long-term
> >
> > The study used the National Weight Control Registry, a
> > decade-old effort to learn the secrets of success from
> > people who had lost at least 30 pounds and kept them off
> > for at least a year. The registry run by doctors from
> > the University of Colorado in Denver, the University of
> > Pittsburgh and Brown University in Providence, R.I.
> >
> > They studied 2,700 people who entered the registry from
> > 1995 through 2003. Their average age was 47, most were
> > women, and they had lost an average of 72 pounds
> > initially. Doctors compared their diets to see whether
> > one type or another made a difference in how much weight
> > they had lost and how much they had regained a year
> > later.
>
> I question the validity of anything determined via this
> methodology. We do not know how the subjects were recruited
> (were they truly random representatives of the greater
> population, or were they already clients of conventional
> weight-loss programs?), how reliable their self-reports are
> (as far as I know, all client reports are electronically
> submitted), whether any uncontrolled but unreported
> variables are at play, or whether the initial requirement
> that one must have lost 30 pounds and kept it off for a year
> presupposes certain characteristics in the participants
> themselves. Those are just ideas off the top of my head. I
> wonder what I'd find if I read a detailed article.
>
> Lar

Anyone can register thru their website. I signed up my wife a
couple of years back because she fit the requirements. The
questionaire was simplistic and very incomplete in terms of
allowing the subject to fill in details that gives a clear
picture of the methodolgy used to lose the weight.

We haven't heard from them since.

If you know someone who qualifies, go on their site and
register them and see for yourself. It really smacks of
cherry picking data and trying to maniplulate the results
and findings.

Personally, I can't believe that such a farce exists and is
allowed to exist without someone challenging tham, either
someone from the media or someone from the scientific
community. I guess that leaves us to do that.

TC