That's the USA Today version for one segment of the population...
This is a NY Times version for probably a different...
Study Zeroes In on Calories, Not Diet, for Loss
And for the crazy "elitist" "uber-intellectual" "scientists" we have the original source article that the "news" sources are writing their copy from...
Comparison of Weight-Loss Diets with Different Compositions of Fat, Protein, and Carbohydrates
The titles are all dramatically different, no?
But heck the abstract there at NEJM isn't exactly encouraging. Of the 80% that finished the trial they only lost an average of 4kg (8.8 pounds) over two years.
Yes the popular news reports state that but they wait until after dropping the eyecatching bombshell of the opening line.
Calories in Calories out.
Pretty simple. cut out fat? sure go for it. cut out carbs? sure what ever. Doesn't matter if you aren't cutting total calories. But it does matter what you are cutting out - ya need fats and you need carbs (ya just don't need as much protein, people eat too much of it).
Will this wake people up to the need to count calories? Maybe. Me? I tend to count calories. But I'm back to having the metabolism of a hummingbird and I'm usually more concerned with getting more and more and more calories. It is hard for a 200# hummingbird to eat enough food.
Well that's not quite true. I could certainly eat enough food to tip the balance away from my eerily stable 200-205# weight fluctuation lately, but it would take quite a bit of work.
back to that article. I much prefer the way the NYTimes concludes their analysis, quoting the lead author in the NEJM paper instead of the USA Today's use of a dietitian. It is quite true:
“The effect of any particular diet group is minuscule, but the effect of individual behavior is humongous,” Dr. Sacks said. “We had some people losing 50 pounds and some people gaining five pounds. That’s what we don’t have a clue about. I think in the future, researchers should focus less on the actual diet but on finding what is really the biggest governor of success in these individuals.”Dropping weight isn't really about what you eat. It is about what you do. And how your brain works. However someone overcomes the bad habits or what ever it was that got them to the point that they feel the need to drop weight, well that's how it will work. calories in and calories out is the surest bottom line... but then again, that's easier said then done.
How do you determine your basal metabolism rate? Well you really almost have to do the whole head in a plastic bad study, humans are so variable that guessing on your basal rate is going to be pretty challenging...
weird tangent...
i guess that's what a headline i supposed to do... distract your focus long enough to read the article...
But going back to the NEJM article... This is the key:
Such diets can also be tailored to individual patients on the basis of their personal and cultural preferences and may therefore have the best chance for long-term success.
Diets tailored to "Personal and Cultural preferences"
it don't work if you can't make it a lifestyle
-G
3 comments:
Yep, that one caught my attention too. The only reason I've been able to keep about 70 lbs off for 10 years now has been a complete lifestyle change. The passion for cycling drives the "calories out" side of the equation. The "calories in" side is a tricky devil. I'm convinced that if I ever reach a point where I can't ride anymore, I would never be able to throttle back the intake. When I was fat, I used to bring lots of sweet junk into the house. Today I find it is far easier to not buy or bring home sweets than to lay off them if they're in the house. That's part of the lifestyle change. Everybody is wired differently. If one is wired for success which requires long sedentary hours on the job leaving no time for activity or healthy eating, they are doomed in my opinion. How do you snap people out of that mold? Most of us have been programed since birth for a doomed lifestyle.
Eat more = Ride more,
eat less in not an option.
I agree with the not having sweet stuff in the house, or junk in general. My sister's house is full of crap (yet she and my brother in law are totally fit. How? I do not know).
After dinner I wolfed down a pile of cake and ice cream and then absent-mindedly ate half a bag of cheese curls. No self control.
Eating less is not that difficult if you focus on it. Being a bit hungry is a lot more comfortable than that stuffed with food feeling. You just have to remember it.
Most cyclists have it backwards. They fatten up in the off season. Think about it in the paleo sense, or look at the animal world. Food is scarce in winter, and so nature's intention is for you to lose weight, not gain it. The summer has higher activity but animals still manage to fatten in order to survive the winter.
Obesity is not just caused by "bad" food. We have unlimited food available for immediate consumption 24/7/365. Just about any animal would get fat in that situation.
Post a Comment