Long Term Weight Loss (Biggest Loser Study)

[Hmac]

I didn't say that a negative nitrogen balance is healthy, I said that its degree of unhealthiness is not nearly as great as you imply. The human body tolerates a 3500 calorie deficit per week, more than that in fact, quite readily and without long term, and very few short term, deleterious effects. It is important to note that some degree of pre-weight loss coaching is important relative to how to eat, what to eat, and physical activity, as well as some degree of preparatory psychological intervention in some cases. People in that category are indeed also followed during that high calorie-deficit weight loss, typically at 3 month intervals.

[Kyohte]

I didn't say that a negative nitrogen balance is healthy, I said that its degree of unhealthiness is not nearly as great as you imply. The human body tolerates a 3500 calorie deficit per week, more than that in fact, quite readily and without long term, and very few short term, deleterious effects. It is important to note that some degree of pre-weight loss coaching is important relative to how to eat, what to eat, and physical activity, as well as some degree of preparatory psychological intervention in some cases. People in that category are indeed also followed during that high calorie-deficit weight loss, typically at 3 month intervals.

It isn't the 3,500/week (I've done over that before) that shocked me from the initial article. It was the 3,500 per day. I cannot even fathom that.

[Shorts]

No answer Kyohte, just thinking out loud on just the math of it - take 100lbs overweight, that's is 350,000 spare calories that have been stored. 3500 seems like it be easily available to spare. I'm like you though, can't even fathom. My caloric world is so different that I could live for 2 days on what they're suppose to burn in one day. As for actually working to burn off 3500/day, that seems physically exhausting. I guess for what their normal intake may be, deleting 3500 in food calories may be entirely easy.

[Dave Williams]

Maybe a turkey sandwich or two, an apple, diet ice tea, Kind bar, and a salad as examples of choices. What goes in the cooler depends on the nutrition plan you want to follow, length of shift, size of cooler, etc, but that's what my cooler looks like when I know I'll be out for an extended time and don't wanna eat crappy. I spent all day looking at houses today and that's what was in my cooler.

Thanks! I always look for your posts.

[WillBrink]

No answer Kyohte, just thinking out loud on just the math of it - take 100lbs overweight, that's is 350,000 spare calories that have been stored. 3500 seems like it be easily available to spare. I'm like you though, can't even fathom. My caloric world is so different that I could live for 2 days on what they're suppose to burn in one day. As for actually working to burn off 3500/day, that seems physically exhausting. I guess for what their normal intake may be, deleting 3500 in food calories may be entirely easy.

That too has been brought into question:

Is the dieting rule – 3,500 calories per pound weight loss – correct?

A pervasive dieting mantra is that a cumulative reduction of caloric intake of 3,500 will result in a weight loss of 1 pound. This dieting rule popularly states “because 3,500 calories equals about 1 pound (0.45 kilogram) of fat, if you cut 500 calories from your diet each day, or burn 500 calories extra per day from exercising (or a combination thereof) you’d lose about 1 pound a week (500 calories x 7 days = 3,500 calories) and 52 pounds in a year.

Cont:

http://www.brinkzone.com/weight-loss...-loss-correct/

[Hmac]

It isn't the 3,500/week (I've done over that before) that shocked me from the initial article. It was the 3,500 per day. I cannot even fathom that.

That kind of calorie deficit has nothing to do with normal people in a normal life and isn't relevant to anyone posting here. In fact totally irrelevant to anyone I've ever met. Even so, if electrolyte losses are replaced and attention paid to vitamin and mineral intake, I see no problem with 3500 calorie per day deficit.

Metabolism? That concept as an excuse gives me a pain, and it's an extraordinarily common one. This excerpt from the article struck me.

His slow metabolism is part of the problem, and so are his food cravings. He opens a bag of chips, thinking he will have just a few. “I’d eat five bites. Then I’d black out and eat the whole bag of chips and say, ‘What did I do?’”

I think it's illustrative of a common thread in obesity discussions "I just have a slow metabolism". Yes, metabolic rates can vary, but the degree to which that contributes to obesity is minuscule compared to the tendency to gnosh an entire bag of potato chips. Very common that people that will eat an entire bag of potato chip in one setting then blame their obesity on their "slow metabolism". If we agree that lifestyle change is necessary for any kind of sustained weight loss then the very fact that this guy even opened a bag of potato chip in the first place indicates that he was doomed to fail from the very beginning.

Metabolism.


....

[6933]

Metabolism.


....

Yep. The "metabolism issue" is simply another excuse to be fat.

Face it. There are really no conditions that cause a person to be overweight from a medical standpoint. Can't exercise? Adjust diet accordingly.

With the rise in obesity there has been a rise in reasons which take the responsibility and blame away from the person.

If you are overweight, the reason you are overweight is staring at you in the mirror everyday. PERIOD.

[WickedWillis]

Yep. The "metabolism issue" is simply another excuse to be fat.

Face it. There are really no conditions that cause a person to be overweight from a medical standpoint. Can't exercise? Adjust diet accordingly.

With the rise in obesity there has been a rise in reasons which take the responsibility and blame away from the person.

If you are overweight, the reason you are overweight is staring at you in the mirror everyday. PERIOD.

So I have a friend who eats about 5k calories a day, doesn't work out, and doesn't gain weight. What would you call that?

[Hmac]

So I have a friend who eats about 5k calories a day, doesn't work out, and doesn't gain weight. What would you call that?

I would call that an unlikely miracle of thermodynamics.

[WillBrink]

So I have a friend who eats about 5k calories a day, doesn't work out, and doesn't gain weight. What would you call that?

I would call that an unlikely miracle of thermodynamics.

I'm going with voodoo.