Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > LC Research/Media
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Tue, Aug-29-17, 05:32
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 11,378
 
Plan: ketosis/IF
Stats: 190/158/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 89%
Location: Ontario
Default Shedding consistent pounds each week linked to long-term weight loss

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releas...70828093759.htm

Quote:
Shedding consistent pounds each week linked to long-term weight loss

When it comes to losing weight, it's not necessarily slow, but steady, that wins the race, according to new research from Drexel University.

In a study of 183 participants, those whose weights fluctuated the most during the first few weeks of a behavioral weight loss program ultimately had poorer weight loss outcomes one and two years later, compared to the men and women who lost a consistent number of pounds each week. The results were published today in the journal Obesity.

"It seems that developing stable, repeatable behaviors related to food intake and weight loss early on in a weight control program is really important for maintaining changes over the long term," said lead author Emily Feig, PhD, a former graduate student in the College of Arts and Sciences at Drexel University.

The psychologists were interested in studying what makes some people less successful in weight loss programs and identifying predictors that could improve treatment outcomes in the future.

To find out, they enrolled individuals who were overweight or obese into a year-long weight loss program that used meal replacements along with behavioral goals such as self-monitoring, calorie monitoring and increasing physical activity. The participants attended weekly treatment groups during which they were weighed, and returned for a final weigh-in two years from the start of the program. The participants also reported on food-related behaviors and attitudes like cravings, emotional eating, binge eating and confidence in regulating intake.

The researchers found that higher weight variability over the initial six and 12 weeks of weight loss treatment predicted poorer subsequent, long-term weight control at 12 and 24 months. For example, someone who lost four pounds one week, regained two and then lost one the next tended to fare worse than someone who lost one pound consistently each week for three weeks.

Interestingly, individuals who reported lower emotional eating, binge eating and preoccupation with food at the start of the study showed higher weight variability and less weight loss overall. This suggests that initial weight change, rather than relationships with or behaviors toward food, is much more important in predicting who will succeed in weight loss and maintenance.

Exactly why some people have more weight variability than others is a question the researchers are interested in exploring in future studies.

Though he is hesitant to equate correlation and causation in this case, principal investigator Michael Lowe, PhD, a psychology professor at Drexel, says the study does illuminate a potential method for sticking to weight loss goals.

"Settle on a weight loss plan that you can maintain week in and week out, even if that means consistently losing ĺ of a pound each week," he said.

If future studies can replicate these results, then measuring weight variability may be a way to identify individuals who are less likely to achieve meaningful and sustainable weight loss, and who may benefit from a stronger, more tailored focus on consistency.


This bit;

Quote:
Interestingly, individuals who reported lower emotional eating, binge eating and preoccupation with food at the start of the study showed higher weight variability and less weight loss overall. This suggests that initial weight change, rather than relationships with or behaviors toward food, is much more important in predicting who will succeed in weight loss and maintenance.


I don't really understand why this would be the take-home. You can see how these folk go in with a bias towards behaviour as a cause for obesity. So they have a behaviour modification based intervention. Lower emotional eating, binge eating and preoccupation with food associated with higher weight variability and less weight loss overall. Wouldn't you predict that a behaviour modification intervention, intended to decrease binges, emotional eating and food preoccupation would be least successful, in the long term, for people who didn't have a problem with these in the first place? How exactly is behaviour modification supposed to do you any good if the behaviours addressed had nothing to do with your obesity in the first place? Especially if the behaviour they're trying to modify you towards is healthywholegrains and such slop.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Tue, Aug-29-17, 08:00
Sniggle Sniggle is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 92
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 220/186.2/190 Male 73.5
BF:
Progress: 113%
Location: West Virginia
Default

I consider most of these studies bunk because they all are looking for something other than personal discipline (or self control) to blame for failed weight loss. No one today wants to blame the individual for the situation they are in these days.

Bottom line - If you control what goes in your mouth you control your weight, or weight loss. If you also exercise regularly, you will lose weight and gain muscle.

I am not saying it isn't hard, but there is no secret to weight loss (which ever route you choose to take).

( I remember many years back there was a documentary on weight loss, and it combined interviews with obese people telling the interviewer that they ate like birds and still gained weight, and then they filmed them at home and showed how much they truly ate during the average day.)
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Tue, Aug-29-17, 12:20
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 11,378
 
Plan: ketosis/IF
Stats: 190/158/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 89%
Location: Ontario
Default

So which is it? Discipline, or self control?
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Tue, Aug-29-17, 12:39
GRB5111's Avatar
GRB5111 GRB5111 is offline
Posts: 1,900
 
Plan: Ketogenic (LCHFKD)
Stats: 227/186/185 Male 6' 0"
BF:
Progress: 98%
Location: Herndon, VA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sniggle

Bottom line - If you control what goes in your mouth you control your weight, or weight loss. If you also exercise regularly, you will lose weight and gain muscle.


Here's one to get you started. All the best!

http://nymag.com/news/sports/38001/
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Tue, Aug-29-17, 12:47
M Levac M Levac is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,238
 
Plan: VLC, mostly meat
Stats: 202/200/165 Male 5' 7"
BF:
Progress: 5%
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Default

Ima be a little pragmatic here.

For an endeavor to succeed, there must be two things. First, the action must be easy and simple (all those words that describe a thing that becomes second nature at some point, i.e. does not require special training a priori) to do. For example, going hungry is not easy. Then, the result (the reaction) must be effective (all those words that describe a thing that is, for example, reliable, predictable, controllable, satisfactory, etc). For example, buying a lottery ticket is not effective.

I'll use my golf lessons to illustrate. I wrote golf lessons based on my personal experience with extensive study and practice. I designed the lessons to be simple to understand, easy to perform, logical in their progression, with a bit of higher level knowledge to complement though not strictly needed. They're written in segments, each with a simple specific goal in mind, all easy to achieve by players of all level. However, like the Atkins diet, it's a bit unconventional so that's pretty much the only obstacle to overcome, but once past it, it's smooth sailing because it's all easy to perform and all outcomes from all segments are predictable, i.e. do this to do that and so forth.

The point is that a "diet" doesn't need to be explained why it works, it merely needs to be explained how to do, so long as the instructions produce the intended result. For example, eat less move more is a set of instructions that does not produce the intended result in a predictable manner, so it's not effective. But, telling people to eat less carbs is effective because it actually produces the intended result reliably. Granted, it's possible an underlying condition prevents it from working as it should, but then again this same condition will also prevent any other dietary intervention from working as they should. Accordingly, any dietary intervention should come with this "advisory" that says "if it don't work, it's not the diet (because it should work as intended, right?), it's something else, find it, fix it, move on".

In that last paragraph you quoted, Teaser, it suggests the researchers are blaming the subjects for the failure of their own intervention, as if they could not do anything wrong. Instead, they should acknowledge that their intervention must be tailored to produce the intended results, regardless of the subjects' apparent starting conditions. They seem to believe that the intervention, if followed, will produce intended results, without regard to how these instructions are conveyed to the subjects. If you've ever read any assembly instructions for furniture for example, you'll know exactly what I mean by that.
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Tue, Aug-29-17, 13:11
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 11,378
 
Plan: ketosis/IF
Stats: 190/158/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 89%
Location: Ontario
Default

Those assembly instructions probably work better for some people than for others, though.

Quote:
This suggests that initial weight change, rather than relationships with or behaviors toward food, is much more important in predicting who will succeed in weight loss and maintenance.


It sounds to me like they accepted that the study didn't support their hypothesis, and suggested an alternate hypothesis. I don't understand why, if the intervention worked, then initial tendency to binge, emotional eating etc. not corresponding to failure is possibly a good thing, maybe those best suited to the intervention had the best response. Expecting an intervention that addresses binging and emotional eating to be effective in a person who doesn't binge or eat emotionally is silly.
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Tue, Aug-29-17, 13:27
thud123's Avatar
thud123 thud123 is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 4,173
 
Plan: ~25NC/IF
Stats: 342.2/185.9/000 Male 72 inches
BF:
Progress: 46%
Default

Bazzinga! "...Itís hard to imagine that the French, for instance, would improve their self-esteem by spending more time at the gym."

quote snip from http://nymag.com/news/sports/38001/
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Tue, Aug-29-17, 13:48
Zei Zei is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,220
 
Plan: Carb reduction in general
Stats: 230/213/180 Female 5 ft 9 in
BF:
Progress: 34%
Location: Texas
Default

Quote:
If you control what goes in your mouth you control your weight, or weight loss.

True. But being told the wrong things to put in my mouth for weight loss sure made things a lot harder. Years back before low carb I did succeed in losing a substantial amount on the then recommended low fat semi-starvation type of diet through sheer force of will against constant hunger but quickly regained all plus interest the moment I ate a normal reasonable amount of food again. I still struggle to lose and avoid regaining even on low carb but it is a lot easier with more success and far less hunger. Exercise for me did nothing I could detect either way. I have always worked out quite a bit even while obese with no slimming effect. Also once had to take many weeks off due to injury during a time I was making no effort to lose or control my weight. I made no conscious effort whatsoever to deliberately change my energy/calorie intake and just ate based on appetite/hunger same as before and then later after recovering from the injury with return to fitness activities again. Weight remained absolutely stable throughout the entire experience. I did notice my body automatically adjust for the missing work outs by making me feel less hungry and genuinely not want as much food until I started burning more calories again and automatically went back to eating more. I was surprised by how my body handled things so precisely without any conscious effort on my part to maintain its desired homeostasis because before this experience I would have predicted I'd gain a bunch of weight while recovering, unable to move much. Body is pretty smart.
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Tue, Aug-29-17, 14:16
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 11,378
 
Plan: ketosis/IF
Stats: 190/158/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 89%
Location: Ontario
Default

For me what goes in my mouth seems to control what I want to put in my mouth, and how hard it is to resist. If I eat sufficiently ketogenically, I find much smaller portions of cheese or nuts rewarding, if I don't, I'll tend to binge on these foods. This is just my own experience, I don't know how many people this would also be true for.
Reply With Quote
  #10   ^
Old Mon, Sep-11-17, 22:55
CMCM's Avatar
CMCM CMCM is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 3,853
 
Plan: LCHF / Atkins '72
Stats: 173/139.2/130 Female 5'7"
BF:28.3%
Progress: 79%
Location: Northern Calif. mountains
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by teaser
For me what goes in my mouth seems to control what I want to put in my mouth, and how hard it is to resist. If I eat sufficiently ketogenically, I find much smaller portions of cheese or nuts rewarding, if I don't, I'll tend to binge on these foods. This is just my own experience, I don't know how many people this would also be true for.



I agree with this 100%.
Reply With Quote
  #11   ^
Old Tue, Sep-12-17, 03:45
Kristine's Avatar
Kristine Kristine is online now
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18,014
 
Plan: Primal
Stats: 165/149/145 Female 5'7"
BF:
Progress: 80%
Location: Southern Ontario, Canada
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sniggle
I consider most of these studies bunk because they all are looking for something other than personal discipline (or self control) to blame for failed weight loss. No one today wants to blame the individual for the situation they are in these days.

That statement is addressing the wrong issue. Yes, the personal discipline isn't there - but WHY? I consider myself to be pretty disciplined when it comes to getting showered in the morning and going to work. But someone with severe depression or other illnesses can't even get out of bed. There's no point in looking at that person and saying, "s/he doesn't have personal discipline." The question is why not? Where did it go? That person may have had no problem much of their life, so what happened exactly?

To paraphrase Gary Taubes (I think?), that's like investigating an airline crash and concluding, "well, obviously the plane crashed because there was insufficient lift on the wings. Case closed." Well, duh, but there are many different factors and you have to figure them out if you want to avoid the same thing in the future. It could have been caused by human error, insufficient training or staffing, a multitude of mechanical failures, weather, etc.

In the case of dieting, it's like Zei said: we're told we're supposed to just ignore hunger, as if it doesn't wake you in the middle of the night, as if it isn't distracting you from your job, as if it doesn't make you dizzy, as if food doesn't start becoming an obsession. It's supposed to work this way. Our species wouldn't have survived if it didn't.

...until you eliminate (or at least minimize) grain and sugar intake. Eat a species-appropriate diet minus the addictive substances, and all of the sudden your "personal discipline" reappears. But LC is still seen as "dangerous", and you must eat your HeartHealthyWholeGrains and eat less meat, so let's blame a lack of discipline instead.
Reply With Quote
  #12   ^
Old Tue, Sep-12-17, 04:05
cotonpal's Avatar
cotonpal cotonpal is online now
Posts: 3,239
 
Plan: very low carb real food
Stats: 245/128/135 Female 62
BF:
Progress: 106%
Location: Vermont
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kristine
That statement is addressing the wrong issue. Yes, the personal discipline isn't there - but WHY? I consider myself to be pretty disciplined when it comes to getting showered in the morning and going to work. But someone with severe depression or other illnesses can't even get out of bed. There's no point in looking at that person and saying, "s/he doesn't have personal discipline." The question is why not? Where did it go? That person may have had no problem much of their life, so what happened exactly?

To paraphrase Gary Taubes (I think?), that's like investigating an airline crash and concluding, "well, obviously the plane crashed because there was insufficient lift on the wings. Case closed." Well, duh, but there are many different factors and you have to figure them out if you want to avoid the same thing in the future. It could have been caused by human error, insufficient training or staffing, a multitude of mechanical failures, weather, etc.

In the case of dieting, it's like Zei said: we're told we're supposed to just ignore hunger, as if it doesn't wake you in the middle of the night, as if it isn't distracting you from your job, as if it doesn't make you dizzy, as if food doesn't start becoming an obsession. It's supposed to work this way. Our species wouldn't have survived if it didn't.

...until you eliminate (or at least minimize) grain and sugar intake. Eat a species-appropriate diet minus the addictive substances, and all of the sudden your "personal discipline" reappears. But LC is still seen as "dangerous", and you must eat your HeartHealthyWholeGrains and eat less meat, so let's blame a lack of discipline instead.


Great reply Kristine. Not being hungry all the time allows me to have the discipline to eat a low carb diet and it is the low carb diet that took away the incessant hunger that I could not control.

Jean
Reply With Quote
  #13   ^
Old Tue, Sep-12-17, 06:43
M Levac M Levac is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,238
 
Plan: VLC, mostly meat
Stats: 202/200/165 Male 5' 7"
BF:
Progress: 5%
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Default

I agree with Kristine on that point. I'd like to point out though that in and of itself, cutting out sugar and bread (for example, and especially) takes a whole lot of discipline just for the very first meal, let alone for a lifetime. Cuz, you know, they're addictive. On the other hand once we know from first hand experience, we're in control and that makes all the difference.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 13:24.


Copyright © 2000-2017 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.