Author: Sorting Last Post on Top Message:
BUNNYKICKS Posts: 2,393
3/25/13 7:48 P

as a contra-read, try this one

Goal 1 - break 200 (46 pounds lost)**DONE**
Goal 2 - leave obesity behind (BMI 29.9, at 185#) **DONE**
Goal 3 - BMI = Normal (154# or less)
BUNNYKICKS Posts: 2,393
3/25/13 7:39 P

Oh good lord, and then I see the disclaimer. There's a similar disclaimer for all authors but for the sake of brevity, I'll just give you one:

Dr. Astrup reports receiving payment for board membership from the Global Dairy Platform, Kraft Foods, Knowledge Institute for Beer, McDonald's Global Advisory Council, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Basic Research, Novo Nordisk, Pathway Genomics, Jenny Craig, and Vivus; receiving lecture fees from the Global Dairy Platform, Novo Nordisk, Danish Brewers Association, GlaxoSmithKline, Danish Dairy Association, International Dairy Foundation, European Dairy Foundation, and AstraZeneca; owning stock in Mobile Fitness; holding patents regarding the use of flaxseed mucilage or its active component for suppression of hunger and reduction of prospective consumption (patents EP1744772, WO2009033483-A1, EP2190303-A1, US2010261661-A1, and priority applications DK001319, DK001320, S971798P, and US971827P); holding patents regarding the use of an alginate for the preparation of an aqueous dietary product for the treatment or prevention of overweight and obesity (patent WO2011063809-A1 and priority application DK070227); and holding a patent regarding a method for regulating energy balance for body-weight management (patent WO2007062663-A1 and priority application DK001710).

Goal 1 - break 200 (46 pounds lost)**DONE**
Goal 2 - leave obesity behind (BMI 29.9, at 185#) **DONE**
Goal 3 - BMI = Normal (154# or less)
BUNNYKICKS Posts: 2,393
3/25/13 7:22 P

Well I just don't even understand how some of the "myths" are even being considered to be myths.

For example "_Snacking leads to weight gain. Fact: No high quality studies support that, the authors say."


I have NEVER heard of the myth that "snacking leads to weight gain" EXCEPT with reference to "those that snack mindlessly on junk." The simple act of snacking can be a HEALTHY weight-loss-supporting habit - "try mini meals so you don't get ravenous by dinner!" etc. etc. We've all heard that! We all know (or should know) that it isn't the act of snacking that is "bad for your weight" but WHAT AND HOW MUCH YOU SNACK ON.

I bet there are plenty of high quality studies that will tell you, snacking on family sized bags of chips WILL lead to weight gain.

Edited by: BUNNYKICKS at: 3/25/2013 (19:22)
Goal 1 - break 200 (46 pounds lost)**DONE**
Goal 2 - leave obesity behind (BMI 29.9, at 185#) **DONE**
Goal 3 - BMI = Normal (154# or less)
23KAIYA Posts: 4,928
3/25/13 6:57 P

This is interesting, thank you for posting!

I may not be there yet but I'm closer than I was yesterday.

I got tired of starting over and working back to where I was, so I have stopped giving up!

IRISHFANUH87 Posts: 1,038
3/25/13 4:30 P

I agree as well, the one that sounds the most crazy is the one about people losing weight quickly weighing less than those who lose slowly. And it's written by people with ties to the companies that try to sell quick fixes. I think it's possible that the numbers say they weigh less, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are healthier. And how much less? The article doesn't say.

The rest are not really rocket science - the smaller your body gets, the less calories you need; some people need lofty goals, others need realistic goals, that's an individual thing; the readiness "study" doesn't make sense because it was apparently done on people who "seek weight-loss treatment". I would think if you are seeking treatment you are more ready than those who don't and probably will lose some weight. Those who don't seek weight loss aren't ready and I'm assuming don't lose weight! The study needs to be done on everyone, not just the people who seek treatment; Obviously there is an obesity issue and PE has been around as long as I can remember....never really thought it had much of an impact; I've never heard that breastfeeding protects against obesity; and I never had the illusion that sex burns a ton of calories.

So what I'm saying is, I don't think most of these are new findings. And some of it may just be malarkey.

BARBWMS Posts: 1,263
3/25/13 1:27 P

I'd agree with MissRuth... as well as with the huffington post comment that so many of the diet drugs have proven problematic, even dangerous. And while I have some friends who have had success with bariatric surgery, I know just as many who have had serious problems.

My bottom line is that it's not easy, but lifestyle changes are the best approach.... and there is more to this than just the numbers on the scale.. there are all the other factors attendant to eating more heatlthily and being more active. My resting heart rate has come down by about 15-20 beats per minute over the last year; my blood pressure is much lower; my knees don't hurt as much, my endurance has increased remarkably, I haven't had a cold in over a year, and my skin and hair look better. I sleep better....

So here's to eating a balanced, sensible diet and moving more!

Be a voice, not an echo!
MISSRUTH Posts: 4,088
3/25/13 10:45 A

I find the most telling thing to be... "many of the report's authors also have deep financial ties to food, beverage, and weight-loss product makers". hmm. Couldn't possibly be any bias on their part, now could there.

Ruth in Cookeville, TN Central Time Zone

Promise me you'll always remember: You're braver than you believe, and stronger than you seem, and smarter than you think - Christopher Robin to Pooh
RENATARUNS SparkPoints: (4,367)
Fitness Minutes: (2,155)
Posts: 1,379
3/24/13 12:34 P

Looking at it in more detail --

Myth #1 -- does anyone (who's actually in a position to influence others about diet) actually believe that? Plenty of people do tout making small changes as opposed to large ones, but I don't know many who aren't aware that calories will need to keep going down once significant amounts of weight are lost. And in terms of doing small changes the right way, I personally know of someone who started his weight-loss plan at *3000* calories a day -- and succeeded. He *had* been eating more like 4000. Every so often he cut off a few hundred more calories, that's all.

Myth #2 -- Sounds like psychological pseudo-babble. You can't generalize people on the topic of motivation, even if there is an overall population tendency toward one end of the spectrum or other. When I had "40 pounds to lose", there was no chance of me doing anything about it. It was too intimidating. "Cut out the crap, get some exercise, and see what happens", on the other hand, was just the ticket.

Myth #3 -- Interesting if true, but without seeing some exceptionally persuasive data I wouldn't take it too seriously. Biology allowing, determination and good habits do seem to trump all. It also begs the definition of "quickly".

Myth #4 -- Bah. As if a questionnaire could even accurately assess a person's state of mind. What did they even ask?

Myth #5 -- Does it even matter? PE should be a part of the day for its own sake. Kids need to move.

Myth #6 -- People say so many things about breastfeeding, and the kind of study that measures it is right up my "scream" alley. Wouldn't be surprised if they're right about this, wouldn't be surprised if they're wrong.

Myth #7 -- Hah! Finally an amusing one, and probably the best founded of all of them, at that.

I'm not impressed.

Height 5'8 1/2"
SW: 190+
CW: 141.0 Woohoo!

5K 4/21/11: 31:55
RENATARUNS SparkPoints: (4,367)
Fitness Minutes: (2,155)
Posts: 1,379
3/24/13 12:19 P

It may be the case that quick weight loss and very slow weight loss each fail (when they do) for different reasons. Very quick due to lack of ability or interest in following through; and very slow due to discouragement and giving up. Same idea would apply to biological issues. That could even out the results, hypothetically, without presuming nefarious motives on the part of the researchers or their sponsors.

Haven't read the article yet to figure out if its' the kind of study that tends to make me scream regardless of its conclusions. :)

Edited by: RENATARUNS at: 3/24/2013 (12:20)
Height 5'8 1/2"
SW: 190+
CW: 141.0 Woohoo!

5K 4/21/11: 31:55
SHERYLDS Posts: 13,699
3/24/13 12:05 P

interesting articles

but myth #3 Gradually losing weight is better than quickly losing pounds. Quick weight losses are more likely to be regained.

I think quick weight loss usually doesn't allow the person to learn how to change their lifestyle they tend to regain the weight they lost and more.
I'd be curious as to how they debunked that idea....and who funded the study
(pharma?....surgeons? formulas?)

Sheryl from New Jersey, EST...2015 Summer final wt. 225
EL for 2015 5% Challenge...Spirited Underdogs Team
NYLAURA1 Posts: 1,638
3/24/13 11:57 A

Thanks for posting about this article. It raises some interesting points. I wonder how long it will be before those myths disappear? The best take-away from that article is that only calorie reduction leads to weight loss.
The myth that I keep having to try to overcome is about exercise. I know that exercise is good for us but does not produce weight loss yet I keep believing that if I exercise I can eat whatever I want.

BLUENOSE63 SparkPoints: (107,996)
Fitness Minutes: (82,255)
Posts: 2,954
2/19/13 6:54 A

Thanks so much for posting this link. What a great read!

2/19/13 5:18 A

Interesting study.... It is incredible just how complicated the study of nutrition and obesity is...

ZENANDNOW SparkPoints: (58,494)
Fitness Minutes: (2,138)
Posts: 3,711
2/18/13 10:41 P

This paper raises serious questions about our understanding of obesity. Links:
Msa1208051 (New England Journal of Medicine)

Page: 1 of (1)  

Other SparkPeople Cafe Topics:

Topics: Last Post:
Adrenal Gland - Thyroid 5/29/2014 6:45:34 AM
Friday 7/19/2014 8:25:42 AM
losing weight but not inches? 8/24/2014 12:36:24 PM
kudos to me! How rare is that? :) 7/19/2014 4:00:12 PM
Would a Pixie look good on me?? 5/10/2014 5:58:51 AM