I don't have them handy anymore, I think the last time it was discussed was in one of Thor's threads about the show he was on. If I recall the one I'm thinking of followed 1000+ people long term that went through highly supported weight loss programs and long term (5 years I think it was) it was less than 5% that kept the weight off.
As far as sabotage, it's not that your body needs less calories when you lose weight, it's that your body can keep needing less calories after you regain the weight. Not as few as when the weigh was off, but not as many as before the diet. Carry that over a few major ups and downs, people can get to a point where maintaining a "normal" weight requires an absurdly low calorie count just to maintain.
The body wants to get back to the weight it was is how it is described to me by the program I'm in right now, so will set desires, hunger, etc to get there.
That's why many medical weight loss clinics don't focus on BMI or being skinny or what a typical weight is for age/height/body type, because they're not attainable for the vast majority of people. Instead they focus on cardiovascular health and goals oriented towards reducing risk or improving quality of life i.e. being able to walk a long distance and having a strong heart, losing and keeping 50lbs off instead of expecting 100lbs so that they can participate in some sports or play with their kids, getting high blood pressure / cholesterol / blood sugar under control, etc. Also trying to help with the mental side of not just why food is such a problem, but accepting achievable goals and being happy with yourself despite everyone around you looking down on you and telling you how awful you are.
Requiring less calories to maintain a lower weight is pretty straight forward. If you start of needing 3,000 calories a day to maintain and then lose a bunch of weight, you're clearly going to need less. You just have to adjust your intake of food and realize that the days of burning through a large pizza and a six pack are over.
It is also possible to feel full on the lower calorie amounts, just as it is possible to feel like your starving on a high calorie intake. It boils down to what you are eating.
Curious as to which program you chose, is the end goal of it to achieve an BMI in the healthy range or simply to lower weight until the participants feel good about themselves
Last edited by llwhiteoutll; 01-06-2017 at 03:51 PM.
Requiring less calories to maintain a lower weight is pretty straight forward. If you start of needing 3,000 calories a day to maintain and then lose a bunch of weight, you're clearly going to need less. You just have to adjust your intake of food and realize that the days of burning through a large pizza and a six pack are over.
Though it's not as simple as calories in = your weight.
Say you do that lifestyle change and are down to 1800 a day to maintain the new lower weight. Then for whatever reason you gain back to the weight you were at before, except now instead of needing 3000 calories a day to maintain that high weight you'll only need 2800 (and often will feel hungry so you still eat 3000 and end up at a higher weight, people who lose weight and gain it back very often end up higher). You lose the weight again and to maintain the lower weight now you need 1500 to stay there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll
It is also possible to feel full on the lower calorie amounts, just as it is possible to feel like your starving on a high calorie intake. It boils down to what you are eating.
What you are eating is a factor, but it's not the only factor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll
Curious as to which program you chose, as some of the stuff you typed sounds very similar to what the HAES people preach.
I had to Google HAES so it's not that, I've previously done more fad type or strict diet programs (which are a huge problem not a solution I now know). More recently it's been lifestyle change type and government programs that discuss research and such.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
Each individual may have a genetically determined set point for adult weight. If weight is gained it has been shown that some people experience an increase in metabolism (the rate at which calories are used) so that excess energy is wasted. Following this period of weight gain, it is relatively easy to revert to the previous set point weight. However,
trying to go below the set point weight has the opposite affect. Metabolism can slow down as less food is eaten or exercise is increased. This leads to a slow down in weight loss, a plateau, or even weight regain on few calories. This is your body’s attempt to keep your weight stable.
I always enjoy reading these topics. I am morbidly obese and would love to not be. But I also don't want my entire life to revolve around food and weight. So for now I try to do the best I can and maintain where I am at. I still am able to be active with my small children and aside from not being able to get some clothes in my size, my weight doesn't affect my life.
And while it may sound like making excuses, I think there are several other factors worth mentioning here in addition to the research above that shows weight is not as simple as we might want to believe...
Many people work jobs that are not conducive to good health. I get paid to sit at a computer. And while I would love to get up and walk around, most of the time my schedule doesn't allow it. Additionally, in many office settings, it may not go to well with peers or supervisors if I randomly leave my desk every half hour. (even though smoke breaks were always socially acceptable)
We are still often not equipped with great information for making smart eating choices. Sure we can go to the extremes and compare eating big macs with greens. But what about just going out for a nice dinner and not having the info to make the best choices possible? If we are going to be serious and all about 'fat shaming' then where is the outrage that information on healthy eating is not more easy to come by?
In the academic journal “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,” researchers from Nanyang Technological University in Singapore detailed four experiments that all show a correlation between how people rate their socioeconomic status and what they decided to eat.
Like I say, I am not making excuses for anyone, let alone myself, but the amount of posts here saying we should shame people into losing weight is pretty ridiculous. Even with smoking, we still understand its an addiction and its hard to quit and there are myriad programs and products out there to help people. But with obesity, its all about how stupid and lazy people are.
Curious as to which program you chose, is the end goal of it to achieve an BMI in the healthy range or simply to lower weight until the participants feel good about themselves
The end goals are to reduce measurable risk factors due to excess weight (by reducing weight by whatever is possible, improving health) and improve quality of life.
BMI isn't viewed as a goal.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
Requiring less calories to maintain a lower weight is pretty straight forward. If you start of needing 3,000 calories a day to maintain and then lose a bunch of weight, you're clearly going to need less. You just have to adjust your intake of food and realize that the days of burning through a large pizza and a six pack are over.
It is also possible to feel full on the lower calorie amounts, just as it is possible to feel like your starving on a high calorie intake. It boils down to what you are eating.
You're assuming that eating at maintenance feels the same for everyone, but it doesn't. A person who has been at a healthy weight their entire life usually has no problem feeling full while eating at maintenance as long as they eat reasonably well. But for a person who has been obese their whole life, it's going to feel like they're starving even when they're getting enough energy for their body.
I'm lucky enough to be able to adjust my food intake to match my needs with little hardship or will power needed. If I'm dropping a few pounds I just eat a little less. If I'm gaining weight I eat a bit more and stop when I get to my goal. But I also realize that if it was that simple for everyone, then no one would be obese. If someone told me I had to live off 1000 calories a day for the rest of my life to maintain my weight, I doubt I could do it. But that's likely what it feels like for some people who've been obese their whole lives to eat a 2000 calorie a day diet (or whatever their maintenance level is).
It's been mentioned before in this thread, but children are really where the energy should be focused. If you grow up at a healthy weight and eating good food, then it's far, far easier to maintain your weight as an adult. On the other hand, if you go through childhood and early adulthood being overweight or obese, you're likely going to be in a lifelong struggle to keep your weight down at a healthy level.
Some people have posted that less than 10% of people kept their weight off?
Are all those people keeping up the activities that got them to their lower weight? (Exercising, eating healthy, etc..)
Or did they just go back to eating junk and what not and gain the weight back?
Isn't the stat most people are talking about related to people who were on reality shows? Makes sense if that's the case, you can't go from having a personal chef and a personal trainer 24 hours a day while not working, to back to your normal routine and not expect to gain weight.
You're assuming that eating at maintenance feels the same for everyone, but it doesn't. A person who has been at a healthy weight their entire life usually has no problem feeling full while eating at maintenance as long as they eat reasonably well. But for a person who has been obese their whole life, it's going to feel like they're starving even when they're getting enough energy for their body.
I'm lucky enough to be able to adjust my food intake to match my needs with little hardship or will power needed. If I'm dropping a few pounds I just eat a little less. If I'm gaining weight I eat a bit more and stop when I get to my goal. But I also realize that if it was that simple for everyone, then no one would be obese. If someone told me I had to live off 1000 calories a day for the rest of my life to maintain my weight, I doubt I could do it. But that's likely what it feels like for some people who've been obese their whole lives to eat a 2000 calorie a day diet (or whatever their maintenance level is).
It's been mentioned before in this thread, but children are really where the energy should be focused. If you grow up at a healthy weight and eating good food, then it's far, far easier to maintain your weight as an adult. On the other hand, if you go through childhood and early adulthood being overweight or obese, you're likely going to be in a lifelong struggle to keep your weight down at a healthy level.
We are not talking about a huge swing in caloric intake at two different weights. But it does require an entirely new way of thinking, which is hard when you have gone through life with a specific mindset.
At my starting weight, 6'1" and 261 lbs, I had a TDEE of about 2,637 calories based on a sedentary lifestyle. At my current weight of 235 lbs, my new TDEE is 2,496 calories or about the same a can of coke. At my goal weight of 190 lbs my TDEE will be about 2,241 calories per day (15% less). All these numbers are based on a sedentary lifestyle, it goes up when physical activity is factored in.
I still go to Tim Hortons, McDonalds occasionally and eat burgers and pizza. I eat smaller portions and make choices at these places that are healthier that I used to. It's not a diet, but a change in attitudes towards food and lifestyle. I was genuinely shocked at some of the stuff that I had been eating when I started finding out exactly what a serving size was according to the food labeling and even the caloric content of foods.
I fully agree that we need easier access to the nutritional information in food and it needs to be accurate, having this information right on menus would be a huge start and probably surprise a lot of people. A lot of information is based on either serving size or weight, but outside of weighting things, many people can't accurately gauge what those sizes are. McDonalds and 7/11 have both started showing this right on their menu boards.
I also agree that education NEEDS to start in childhood and will probably need to be forced. Obesity is becoming normalized and accepted and when parents are not making healthy choices in the home, there is little chance they are making them for their kids. Education on serving sizes would be a big part of this.
