Many dieters ask the question "How long does it take to lose 30 lbs if I go to the gym often and stick to a really healthy diet?"
With those critical diet and exercise habits set up, dieters often think their weight will drop like a stone thanks to all that hard work and get dejected at their lack of progress when their weight loss inevitably plateaus out.
When you reach this crossroads (as almost all slimmers do) where you are asking yourself this exact question, it is time for you to review whether or not you actually like the choices you have made or you have done these things simply because you felt you had to rather than you wanted to, as you are much more likely to carry on with those habits long after you have successfully shed the unwanted pounds. This is what will help you to keep the weight off in the future and be confident in the strength of your achievements.
Assuming you do enjoy what you are doing, then you might want to look at one or two surveys of those who have gone before you for an idea as to how long it actually takes to lose a significant amount of weight and not rely on extreme claims made on behalf of some products touted on the internet, which may not be representative of typical results:
A survey was carried out on willing Jenny Craig weight loss program subscribers (this is a very costly program so you would think that followers would be keen to drop the pounds) which showed that most fall by the wayside.
Within 4 weeks 27% dropped out, losing on average just 1.1% of their body weight.
After 13 weeks, 58% had dropped out, losing on average 8.3% of their body weight.
After 26 weeks, 78% had dropped out, losing on average 12.6% of their body weight.
After 52 weeks, 93.4% had dropped out losing on average 15.6% of their body weight.
Those who kept on going until weeks 40 to 52, typically lost an average of around 12% of their initial body weight.
These are genuine results not what is suggested on the web as hypothetically what you should be achieving.
So say for example you weigh 210lbs and want to lose 30lbs ... this is 14.3% of your starting weight (30/210 x 100), which indicates that you might need to persevere for anywhere between 26 to 52 weeks if you can copy the successful weight loss of those Jenny Craig slimmers.
A study of 157 Slimming World members indicated that a weight loss of 33lbs could be achieved over 11.1 months. That would be equivalent to just 0.69lbs per week when taken as an average result. Your 30lbs might take you around 10 months, or 43-44 weeks if Slimming World results are anything to go by.
The internet is littered with weight loss rubbish and marketing hype. That stuff about calories in and calories out is correct but flawed, it assumes that food label data is absolutely precise .. which it is not ... they are mathematical averages from repeated tests, can vary by a significant margin and will change due to season, growing locality, cooking time etc etc. A helpful guide yes, but that is really all they are ... a guide.
My own weight loss program resulted in slower progress than both of the examples quoted above. In about 13 months I went from 180lbs to around 150-155 pounds during 2002/03. I still watch my weight today long after my successful slimming campaign. Yes that may be slow, but after failing with those usual overmarketed products we have all tried and failed with, I decided to make up my own strategy and that inevitably took time to come to fruition. Now I know enough about weight management to make my weight a breeze to take care of.
In this crazy 24/7 world we live in today where we appear to be able to get anything we want and get it now, most of us are impatient and crave that perfect body right now, but those surveys of some of the most popular weight loss programs suggests that those who achieve weight loss over an extended timeframe, develop the habits of success rather better than crash dieters, who may lose weight much quicker to begin with, but often fail to sustain their early successes and ultimately end up heavier than they were at the start.
This brings us to the underlying triumph of any program of weight management, which only really surfaces after the excess weight has been lost, when we find out if we have discovered the secrets to successfully staying lighter for life. The secret lies in the pleasure we get out of those choices we made in our diet and exercise routines at the beginning of all of this, as any successful changes will most likely become lifestyle changes for the better for good rather than temporary patches to get over the finish line.
Whether you are just ready to begin a weight loss program or have already started, I hope you can use the information given here to work out how long it may take you to achieve your goals and I wish you good luck with your efforts.
Of course if you want to learn the successful slimming secrets I use every day, without having to study for yourself then pop along to my website now.
To Your Success and Thanks for Reading,
Ian B
Sources
Jenny Craig Study
Slimming World Study
My Own Weight Loss
Monday, 8 March 2010
Friday, 10 July 2009
Walking to Lose Weight
In this article we will consider the recent upsurge in the average weight of the individual and the advantages of using walking for weight loss in our daily efforts to combat the problem.
The obesity epidemic has taken less than 30 years to spread out of the Developed World across the planet. Even middle and low-income countries are now suffering the ill effects of the spread.
For many decades leading up to the mushrooming problem we now face, the obesity problem appeared to affect very few.
Indeed, if we go back to the early Victorian era, 90% or more of the world’s population lived and worked in agriculture, and, like our even more distant ancestors, walked to work, were physically active at work, and then walked home at the end of the day.
They were constantly on the go, if at a more modest walking pace than today ... and for other different reasons.
Collecting and carrying water, food preparation, and clothes washing were all physically intensive, and walking was required for socialization.
We may have lost those specific needs to walk, but our bodies evolved to walk, so doesn’t it make sense to do exactly that?
We can use walking to lose weight as well as for improved health benefits. However, one problem facing many wannabe slimmers, is that we are still suffering the hangover of the constant bombardment of messages insisting that short bursts of high intensity, sweaty activity down the gym are the only way.
The argument still rages about whether sweaty aerobic exercise is more beneficial than intense effort anaerobic strength training.
During this time, the message conveyed by the exercise lobby was “more is better.” And even the US surgeon general’s report summarized the view that more exercise of greater intensity promises more health of greater duration.
But a growing body of evidence shows that this is clearly not the case.
A recent article by Nemoto and co-workers reported that walking in middle-aged and older people results in the same health benefits that are similar to those provided by a workout down the gym.
Whether the outcome measurement is blood pressure, as in the Nemoto article, joint problems, mental health, diabetes and other metabolic disorders, or cardiovascular disease, collectively, the data suggests that walking improves health.
So what are we to make of the growing body of evidence relating the health benefits of simply walking in light of pressure from the exercise movement showing the benefits of high-intensity, high level exertion?
Well there are five key points that are important.
Firstly, walking is far more accessible to many more people than expensive high-intensity exercise down the gym, in terms of tolerance as well as cost.
Secondly, evidence shows that a great deal of low-intensity activity can have as many health and physiological benefits as high intensity exercise.
Thirdly, individuals who are able to undertake and sustain high-duration, high-intensity exercise are, by definition, fitter than the population who rarely exercises; so for example, a marathon runner is inevitably fitter than those of us who only occasionally stroll in the park.
Fourthly, walking exposes participants to few activity-associated injuries,whereas nearly all high-intensity athletes experience sports-associated injuries.
And finally, any amount of walking, at any pace in any place, burns calories and as such has the potential, long term, for use in weight management.
There are of course many other benefits to walking to lose weight which have not necessarily been scientifically proven, but are blindingly obvious to anybody who has ever stretched their legs.
The pleasurable and therapeutic, psychological and social dimensions of walking, the stress relief; whilst all these effects are self-evident, they have only recently begun to be studied.
To read more about walking for weight loss and many more interesting topics feel free to visit us at slimmersecrets.com
Take care until next time,
Resources for this article:
Levine JA, Exercise: a walk in the park? Mayo Clin Proc. 2007 Jul;82(7):797-8.
Nemoto K, Gen-no H, Masuki S, et al. Effects of high-intensity interval walking training on physical fitness and blood pressure in middle-aged and older people. Mayo Clin Proc. 2007 Jul;82(7):803-11.
The obesity epidemic has taken less than 30 years to spread out of the Developed World across the planet. Even middle and low-income countries are now suffering the ill effects of the spread.
For many decades leading up to the mushrooming problem we now face, the obesity problem appeared to affect very few.
Indeed, if we go back to the early Victorian era, 90% or more of the world’s population lived and worked in agriculture, and, like our even more distant ancestors, walked to work, were physically active at work, and then walked home at the end of the day.
They were constantly on the go, if at a more modest walking pace than today ... and for other different reasons.
Collecting and carrying water, food preparation, and clothes washing were all physically intensive, and walking was required for socialization.
We may have lost those specific needs to walk, but our bodies evolved to walk, so doesn’t it make sense to do exactly that?
We can use walking to lose weight as well as for improved health benefits. However, one problem facing many wannabe slimmers, is that we are still suffering the hangover of the constant bombardment of messages insisting that short bursts of high intensity, sweaty activity down the gym are the only way.
The argument still rages about whether sweaty aerobic exercise is more beneficial than intense effort anaerobic strength training.
During this time, the message conveyed by the exercise lobby was “more is better.” And even the US surgeon general’s report summarized the view that more exercise of greater intensity promises more health of greater duration.
But a growing body of evidence shows that this is clearly not the case.
A recent article by Nemoto and co-workers reported that walking in middle-aged and older people results in the same health benefits that are similar to those provided by a workout down the gym.
Whether the outcome measurement is blood pressure, as in the Nemoto article, joint problems, mental health, diabetes and other metabolic disorders, or cardiovascular disease, collectively, the data suggests that walking improves health.
So what are we to make of the growing body of evidence relating the health benefits of simply walking in light of pressure from the exercise movement showing the benefits of high-intensity, high level exertion?
Well there are five key points that are important.
Firstly, walking is far more accessible to many more people than expensive high-intensity exercise down the gym, in terms of tolerance as well as cost.
Secondly, evidence shows that a great deal of low-intensity activity can have as many health and physiological benefits as high intensity exercise.
Thirdly, individuals who are able to undertake and sustain high-duration, high-intensity exercise are, by definition, fitter than the population who rarely exercises; so for example, a marathon runner is inevitably fitter than those of us who only occasionally stroll in the park.
Fourthly, walking exposes participants to few activity-associated injuries,whereas nearly all high-intensity athletes experience sports-associated injuries.
And finally, any amount of walking, at any pace in any place, burns calories and as such has the potential, long term, for use in weight management.
There are of course many other benefits to walking to lose weight which have not necessarily been scientifically proven, but are blindingly obvious to anybody who has ever stretched their legs.
The pleasurable and therapeutic, psychological and social dimensions of walking, the stress relief; whilst all these effects are self-evident, they have only recently begun to be studied.
To read more about walking for weight loss and many more interesting topics feel free to visit us at slimmersecrets.com
Take care until next time,
Resources for this article:
Levine JA, Exercise: a walk in the park? Mayo Clin Proc. 2007 Jul;82(7):797-8.
Nemoto K, Gen-no H, Masuki S, et al. Effects of high-intensity interval walking training on physical fitness and blood pressure in middle-aged and older people. Mayo Clin Proc. 2007 Jul;82(7):803-11.
Sunday, 17 May 2009
Additional Note about the Fat Burning Benefits of Breakfast
After my posting regarding the non existent news item about a Which? Report criticizing breakfast cereals (see posting 30 Apr 09), I thought I would delve a little deeper, only to find a recent report out in The Journal of Nutrition which highlighted the fat burning power of a low GI breakfast over a high GI breakfast (see footnote about Glycemic Index or GI).
A team of researchers at the University of Nottingham studied the effects of breakfasts containing low-glycemic index or a high-glycemic index foods on fat burning power whilst at rest and walking exercise in non-dieting, healthy, sedentary women.
The breakfasts provided were muesli with milk and canned fruit with a little apple juice (low GI) or cornflakes and milk, with white bread and jam and a carbonated fizzy drink (high GI). The breakfasts provided either 3.5g fiber (low GI) or 1.5g fiber (high GI).
After walking 3 hours later (for 60 minutes) the women were found to burn twice as much fat per hour after the low GI breakfast compared to the high GI breakfast.
In addition, after eating an identical lunch, on the days where the women ate the low-GI breakfast they also reported feeling fuller than on days where they had previously eaten the high GI breakfast.
These are early findings, from a small study, but they highlight the point that the favored breakfast of cereal and fruit reported by successful weight maintainers who are members of the weight registry, reported in my previous post, has scientific merit as well as ‘statistical’ merit from the members of the registry.
Footnote: The Glycemic Index is a measure of how much a food stuff makes the blood sugar levels rise after consumption.
Foods that are broken down rapidly releasing glucose into the bloodstraem have a high GI, those that are digested more slowly and release glucose into the bloodstream gradually, have a low GI.
The higher the rise the in blood sugar the more problematic the food is for diabetics who have difficulty with glucose metabolism.
The concept has been applied to modern diets in general, which tend to be high in refined carbohydrates and create rapid spikes in blood sugar levels compared to unprocessed foods (this is a general brief summary).
The graph below helps to see the picture in a more visual manner.
Hope this helps in your quest for a slimmer you,
Take care,
A team of researchers at the University of Nottingham studied the effects of breakfasts containing low-glycemic index or a high-glycemic index foods on fat burning power whilst at rest and walking exercise in non-dieting, healthy, sedentary women.
The breakfasts provided were muesli with milk and canned fruit with a little apple juice (low GI) or cornflakes and milk, with white bread and jam and a carbonated fizzy drink (high GI). The breakfasts provided either 3.5g fiber (low GI) or 1.5g fiber (high GI).
After walking 3 hours later (for 60 minutes) the women were found to burn twice as much fat per hour after the low GI breakfast compared to the high GI breakfast.
In addition, after eating an identical lunch, on the days where the women ate the low-GI breakfast they also reported feeling fuller than on days where they had previously eaten the high GI breakfast.
These are early findings, from a small study, but they highlight the point that the favored breakfast of cereal and fruit reported by successful weight maintainers who are members of the weight registry, reported in my previous post, has scientific merit as well as ‘statistical’ merit from the members of the registry.
Footnote: The Glycemic Index is a measure of how much a food stuff makes the blood sugar levels rise after consumption.
Foods that are broken down rapidly releasing glucose into the bloodstraem have a high GI, those that are digested more slowly and release glucose into the bloodstream gradually, have a low GI.
The higher the rise the in blood sugar the more problematic the food is for diabetics who have difficulty with glucose metabolism.
The concept has been applied to modern diets in general, which tend to be high in refined carbohydrates and create rapid spikes in blood sugar levels compared to unprocessed foods (this is a general brief summary).
The graph below helps to see the picture in a more visual manner.
Hope this helps in your quest for a slimmer you,
Take care,
Thursday, 30 April 2009
Breakfast Cereals in the News Again
I watched with dismay a report on BBC Breakfast about the 'worrying' sugar levels in many of our breakfast cereals.
The news item was reporting on a new study by Which? magazine, which investigated the 'alarming' levels of sugar and salt in 100 cereals found on the shelves of British supermarkets (You can read more about the report here).
In a nutshell only 8% of the cereals qualified for a Food Standards Agency "green light" for low levels of sugar, but 31 out the 100 cereals examined containing more than four teaspoons of sugar per recommended serving.
So that means 69% were probably okay, if not spectacularly low in sugar. Not really newsworthy that is it?
The proportion of cereals high in salt was just 8%, down from 20% in a similar survey in 2006. So 92% weren't high in salt.
It depends how you present this stuff, doesn't it?
The presenters on BBC News grilled the particularly ineffective 'expert' from some cereal manufacturers association, or some body like that.
Comments like 'there's as much sugar in a helping of this cereal that you would find in a bowl of ice cream'.
So what?!
How much fat is there in a bowl of cereal compared to a bowl of ice cream? How much protein is there in a bowl of cereal compared to a bowl of ice cream?
Only when you compare all of the macronutrients in a product can you make a real judgement on something.
The problem I have with the way this news item was reported is:
firstly, that they did not specify what cereals are based upon. They are a grain product. Grains are little storage pods of starch ... which is a carbohydrate (or a sugar) and so a product based on carbohydrate is bound to be high in ... carbohydrate! and
secondly, our society is in danger of demonizing food of almost any kind. The calorie really is getting hammered these days.
So go to work on a bowl of cereal if you dare was the overall impression the breakfast team managed to create. Well done folks! You have just succeeded in sending half the UK population out to work on a bowl of guilt in the morning.
In reality for those with a weight issue (and lets face it that is around two thirds of us in the Western hemisphere these days), starting the day with no breakfast is not a smart move.
Many wannabe slimmers deliberately starve themselves by skipping meals in a mistaken attempt to lose weight or to try to keep it off.
However, if they really want to be slim, then perhaps they would be better following the example of successful slimmers.
Research into a register of successful maintainers, who have lost a minimum of 30lbs (or 13.6Kg if you prefer) and kept it off for at least a year, has shown that 78% eat breakfast everyday, typically of cereal and fruit. Hmmm?!
So if we are worried about the obesity epidemic and want to improve what and how people eat (including our kids), then perhaps we should look at what the successful few who manage to keep winning the war with their weight actually do and not just label cereals as high in this or that to grab the promo headlines for our new report.
Incidentally, if you want to read more about how successful maintainers keep the weight off, then you can find more info at Slimmer Secrets here.
That's all for now,
Take care and enjoy your food,
Dr Ian Bracken ridge
Thursday, 23 April 2009
What Type of Cook are You?
There has been a lot of online chatter about an article penned by Tara Parker-Pope which appeared recently in the NY Times. The article focussed upon what type of cook we all are and the health implications of the outcome of the answer to that question.
According to the article, apparently in this time of economic hardship staying in is the new going out. So more and more people are putting that time at home to good advantage by preparing more meals from scratch in an effort to make ends meet.
But is your cooking better for you than what you would have chosen previously?
Well research conducted by Cornell University might help to give us a clue.
A team of investigators questioned the cooking habits of 770 family cooks and found that five distinct types of cook emerged.
“Giving” cooks (22 percent) are eager cooks and excel at preparing homemade treats and comfort food.
“Methodical” cooks (18 percent) follow the recipes for better or worse and so their cooking is clearly shaped by the cookery book they employ.
“Competitive” cooks (13 percent) want to create the best dish ever and don’t care about the consequences on health.
“Healthy” cooks (20 percent) focus less on taste and regularly use fresh ingredients and serve fish.
“Innovative” cooks (19 percent) tend to produce healthier meals by trying out innovative ingredients, cookery techniques and cuisines.
So what does the type of cook you are have to do with your weight?
Well, according to the survey, “giving cooks” tend to be the least healthy cooks, whilst “innovative” cooks tend to be the best in terms of the balance between taste and freshness.
Does this help us out in our slimming ventures?
Well there is a survey at the NY Times which can help you to determine which type of cook you are.
But much as I enjoyed reading the article and the underlying research I can’t help thinking that they miss a couple of points which are essential for successful slimming.
Point 1: This research is largely based upon the impact the “nutritional gatekeeper” has on the household in terms of their food choices, both in the home and out and about in the world.
These gatekeepers apparently influence about 72% of our food choices. I do not believe we need 28% of freedom of choice to get fat. I think a fraction of that freedom is all that is needed for many to put on weight.
Point 2: This is a static review of how people are at this moment in time. It’s a snapshot and not a video, if you like.
When I got fat, for want of a better way to put it, I was largely a “giving” eater, and not a “giving” cook. In fact I rarely cooked – I just made lousy choices: something to slam in the oven while I got ready to go out and drink too much. My food choices were largely poor. The repeated excessive drinking choice was clearly poor. My lifestyle was lousy. It didn’t matter what I did or did not cook.
Point 3: There is no indication in this research about whether they believe leopards can change their spots.
For my own part I had to – at least in my own mind.
As I have already stated I was a comfort eater and drinker which loosely translated into this research, as a single householder, makes me a “giving” cook.
But this is definately not how I cook now. And not how I lost weight. I became ... slowly admittedly ... a “healthy” cook ... much of the time. Which leads me onto the fourth point ...
Point 4: I believe most people are not just one category of cook all of the time.
I am a mix of these.
Nowadays, much of the time I am a “healthy” cook. I eat loads and loads of fruit and veggies ... between 5 and 10 portions per day. But when I started losing weight I was no where near this range – it took me years to get to this point and there were lots of other strategies I had to put in place along the way to allow me to make that long term transition.
However, I am only a “healthy” cook most of the time – the rest of the time I am largely a “giving” type, but not a giving type of cook, rather I am a “giving” eater. Finding the balance between the two allows me to still enjoy some of my old habits occasionally. It allows me to enjoy eating out with friends. I eat and drink to my heart’s content and I believe that is vitally important to the success of any long term venture ... to still be able to eat and drink in a way I enjoy.
Point 5: Following on from point 4 above, why can’t a “giving” cook create a “healthy” starter or dessert to go with a comfort main course, or for that matter, why can’t a “giving” main even be cooked with “healthy” options as accompaniments.
Point 6: I do not like categorizing people in this way. I think to stick people in boxes because of how they live their lives at this moment in time doesn’t define a persons capabilities – it does the opposite – it limits them to the category they have been dumped into ... just like being overweight or obese, or tall or short.
To be fair to the original article and the NY Times piece, the focus of the article is on healthy cooking, not necessarily on weight, but with ever expanding waistlines due to our Western lifestyle eating habits, the link is an obvious one.
Hope you find this interesting. If so please feel free to comment either here or drop me a line at my healthy weight loss site.
Until next time ... take care,
According to the article, apparently in this time of economic hardship staying in is the new going out. So more and more people are putting that time at home to good advantage by preparing more meals from scratch in an effort to make ends meet.
But is your cooking better for you than what you would have chosen previously?
Well research conducted by Cornell University might help to give us a clue.
A team of investigators questioned the cooking habits of 770 family cooks and found that five distinct types of cook emerged.
“Giving” cooks (22 percent) are eager cooks and excel at preparing homemade treats and comfort food.
“Methodical” cooks (18 percent) follow the recipes for better or worse and so their cooking is clearly shaped by the cookery book they employ.
“Competitive” cooks (13 percent) want to create the best dish ever and don’t care about the consequences on health.
“Healthy” cooks (20 percent) focus less on taste and regularly use fresh ingredients and serve fish.
“Innovative” cooks (19 percent) tend to produce healthier meals by trying out innovative ingredients, cookery techniques and cuisines.
So what does the type of cook you are have to do with your weight?
Well, according to the survey, “giving cooks” tend to be the least healthy cooks, whilst “innovative” cooks tend to be the best in terms of the balance between taste and freshness.
Does this help us out in our slimming ventures?
Well there is a survey at the NY Times which can help you to determine which type of cook you are.
But much as I enjoyed reading the article and the underlying research I can’t help thinking that they miss a couple of points which are essential for successful slimming.
Point 1: This research is largely based upon the impact the “nutritional gatekeeper” has on the household in terms of their food choices, both in the home and out and about in the world.
These gatekeepers apparently influence about 72% of our food choices. I do not believe we need 28% of freedom of choice to get fat. I think a fraction of that freedom is all that is needed for many to put on weight.
Point 2: This is a static review of how people are at this moment in time. It’s a snapshot and not a video, if you like.
When I got fat, for want of a better way to put it, I was largely a “giving” eater, and not a “giving” cook. In fact I rarely cooked – I just made lousy choices: something to slam in the oven while I got ready to go out and drink too much. My food choices were largely poor. The repeated excessive drinking choice was clearly poor. My lifestyle was lousy. It didn’t matter what I did or did not cook.
Point 3: There is no indication in this research about whether they believe leopards can change their spots.
For my own part I had to – at least in my own mind.
As I have already stated I was a comfort eater and drinker which loosely translated into this research, as a single householder, makes me a “giving” cook.
But this is definately not how I cook now. And not how I lost weight. I became ... slowly admittedly ... a “healthy” cook ... much of the time. Which leads me onto the fourth point ...
Point 4: I believe most people are not just one category of cook all of the time.
I am a mix of these.
Nowadays, much of the time I am a “healthy” cook. I eat loads and loads of fruit and veggies ... between 5 and 10 portions per day. But when I started losing weight I was no where near this range – it took me years to get to this point and there were lots of other strategies I had to put in place along the way to allow me to make that long term transition.
However, I am only a “healthy” cook most of the time – the rest of the time I am largely a “giving” type, but not a giving type of cook, rather I am a “giving” eater. Finding the balance between the two allows me to still enjoy some of my old habits occasionally. It allows me to enjoy eating out with friends. I eat and drink to my heart’s content and I believe that is vitally important to the success of any long term venture ... to still be able to eat and drink in a way I enjoy.
Point 5: Following on from point 4 above, why can’t a “giving” cook create a “healthy” starter or dessert to go with a comfort main course, or for that matter, why can’t a “giving” main even be cooked with “healthy” options as accompaniments.
Point 6: I do not like categorizing people in this way. I think to stick people in boxes because of how they live their lives at this moment in time doesn’t define a persons capabilities – it does the opposite – it limits them to the category they have been dumped into ... just like being overweight or obese, or tall or short.
To be fair to the original article and the NY Times piece, the focus of the article is on healthy cooking, not necessarily on weight, but with ever expanding waistlines due to our Western lifestyle eating habits, the link is an obvious one.
Hope you find this interesting. If so please feel free to comment either here or drop me a line at my healthy weight loss site.
Until next time ... take care,
Dr Ian Bracken ridge
Thursday, 26 March 2009
Calories, Protein, Fat, Carbs and Weight Loss ... or the Lack of It!
A recent study was reported in the New England Journal of Medicine, which apparently ended the argument about the differences in levels of success between popular diet plans. In actual fact this is one of many studies reporting on the limited success of 'dieting for weight loss' plans.This study followed 811 overweight subjects who were randomly split into four groups assigned to follow a reduced calorie diet. Each of the four diet plans cut around 750 calories from the normal diet. The targeted percentages of energy derived from protein, carbs and fats in the four diets were:
The diets were made up to allow the research team to compare low fat versus high fat and average protein versus high protein and the comparison of highest and lowest carb content. All participants were offered individual and group counselling instructions for the two years of the study.
This is what they found:
· After 6 months, participants assigned to each diet had lost an average of 13 pounds (6 kg), which represented 7% of their initial weight.
· After 12 months, all groups, on average, slowly regained body weight.
· After the two years was complete, each group had lost – and regained – roughly the same amount of weight, regardless of the group.
· 645 participants (80%), completed the two year trial (that is very high), with an average weight loss of 8.8 pounds (4Kg).
· Despite the modest overall losses, 14 to 15% of the participants had a reduction of at least 10% of their initial body weight.
· 31 to 37% of the participants had lost at least 5% of their initial body weight.
· Just 2 to 4% had lost 44 pounds (20Kg) or more.
· Only 185 of the participants (23%) continued to lose weight from 6 months to 2 years.
· By 2 years, in those assigned to a diet with 20% fat and those assigned to a diet with 40% fat the average weight loss was the same (7.3 pounds, 3.3 kg for both groups).
· At the end of the two years, weight loss remained similar in those who were assigned to a low protein diet (15%) vs those assigned to a high protein diet (25%) (6.6 pounds and 8 pounds or 3.0 and 3.6 kg, respectively).
· After two years, those assigned to a diet with 65% carbohydrates and those assigned to a diet with 35% carbohydrates had losses of 6.4 pounds and 7.5 pounds or 2.9 and 3.4 kg, respectively.
· Diminished adherence occurred between 6 months and 2 years in the trial, with some of the participants reverting partly to their old eating habits.
· Satiety, hunger, satisfaction with the diet, and attendance at group sessions were similar for all diets.
· The diets generally improved lipid-related risk factors and fasting insulin levels.
So the worthy points of discussion are:
The diets were much the same in pure weight loss terms. The weight loss profile over time was much the same for each group.
Dr Frank Sacks, lead researcher said:
This is what they found:
· After 6 months, participants assigned to each diet had lost an average of 13 pounds (6 kg), which represented 7% of their initial weight.
· After 12 months, all groups, on average, slowly regained body weight.
· After the two years was complete, each group had lost – and regained – roughly the same amount of weight, regardless of the group.
· 645 participants (80%), completed the two year trial (that is very high), with an average weight loss of 8.8 pounds (4Kg).
· Despite the modest overall losses, 14 to 15% of the participants had a reduction of at least 10% of their initial body weight.
· 31 to 37% of the participants had lost at least 5% of their initial body weight.
· Just 2 to 4% had lost 44 pounds (20Kg) or more.
· Only 185 of the participants (23%) continued to lose weight from 6 months to 2 years.
· By 2 years, in those assigned to a diet with 20% fat and those assigned to a diet with 40% fat the average weight loss was the same (7.3 pounds, 3.3 kg for both groups).
· At the end of the two years, weight loss remained similar in those who were assigned to a low protein diet (15%) vs those assigned to a high protein diet (25%) (6.6 pounds and 8 pounds or 3.0 and 3.6 kg, respectively).
· After two years, those assigned to a diet with 65% carbohydrates and those assigned to a diet with 35% carbohydrates had losses of 6.4 pounds and 7.5 pounds or 2.9 and 3.4 kg, respectively.
· Diminished adherence occurred between 6 months and 2 years in the trial, with some of the participants reverting partly to their old eating habits.
· Satiety, hunger, satisfaction with the diet, and attendance at group sessions were similar for all diets.
· The diets generally improved lipid-related risk factors and fasting insulin levels.
So the worthy points of discussion are:
The diets were much the same in pure weight loss terms. The weight loss profile over time was much the same for each group.
Dr Frank Sacks, lead researcher said:
“The effect of any particular diet group is minuscule, but the effect of individual behavior is humongous. 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.”
The key factor in Sacks’ opinion was that researchers need to find what it is that governs success in individual cases. He confessed that as an expert in the field of obesity research he did not 'have a clue’ about the factors governing success.
That is where Slimmer Secrets have an unquestionable edge.
Having studied success strategies in individuals and NOT diets and all the surrounding hullabaloo associated with them, Slimmer Secrets can teach you the principles of success, not how to be really strict with yourself and attempt to stick to a rigid eating plan. Simplicity rules.
Thanks for reading,
Take Care
Tuesday, 24 March 2009
My successful weight loss and weight maintenance
Thank you for visiting my blog - I do appreciate your time.
I thought I should give you an overview of my situation with regard to my experiences with weight loss and a little background about who I am.
My name is Ian Bracken ridge and I started writing about my experiences back in late 2008 in an effort to help those looking for ways to improve their own weight loss success. In short, I was a failed dieter, but eventually became a successful slimmer and moved on to become a successful maintainer for the last five years.
Having gained weight from around 1999, by living a typical British male life style of too many takeaways and TV dinners, too much boozing with the boys, little activity and a stressful occupation, I decided that it was time to address the increasing weight trouble in 2001.
A pitiful effort at dieting with the low carb diet approach combined with the shopping channel gym equipment (too embarrassed to go to the gym!) and the now apparently compulsory diet pills and left me disillusioned and frustrated at my failings.
I hadn't been accustomed to failure up to this point.
My background as a researcher in academia, followed by a career in the pharma industry had given me the requisite experience in interpreting scientific literature and so I decided to begin exploring for myself how to go about winning in this now problematic game.
I studied the primary literature and followed the ongoing battle of the day between the low carb vs low calorie diets which was raging in the media, although I recognized there was something lacking in all of this debate.
I tried the gym equipment, as I had trained with weights back in my late teens and early twenties, but I just couldn't find the motivation to hang in with this approach.
I finally began to discover successful strategies I could apply around late 2002 and chose to carry on learning while my weight dropped from roughly the 180lb mark down to around the 150lb (~80Kg to 68.5Kg).
I recognized at this time how serious a matter weight maintenance was to those who had slimmed down. I had read about the issue and had witnessed the troubles in other people with my own eyes, but I had never had to face up to this problem before.
Fortunately and I confess rather by chance, I had carried out strategies in a manner that allowed me to beat the yo-yo weight problem that overcomes so many dieters.
At this point, after my success, I stopped reading the primary literature and turned my attention to subjects elsewhere.
After a couple of years of taking on the challenging threat of weight yoyo-ing, I started to realise that the methods that had worked so successfully for me could be useful to other wannabee slimmers, and so I came back to look at the area only to discover the web weight loss arena utterly awash with marketing trash and what I can only describe as a raging community littering the bulletin boards with rather bitter postings!
[If you are trying to slim down nowadays you have my deepest sympathy. Browsing the internet, trying to separate the wheat from the huge amount of chaff, the tripe and the acrimonious ravings from the decent and real help is just about impossible].
I admit freely that at this time I did consider this as an opportunity.
I decided that my accomplishments could serve the community well, so I had to put together a web site to offer my knowledge and more significantly, my experience of weight loss and maintenance.
It's that experience that became the basis for what you are reading today.
I came across some quite amazing facts. The medical community may publically still push slimming down by dieting as a necessary evil if you like, but if you study their ‘trade magazines’, you will discover that there's little belief in weight loss plans (see for example: here ... this is a report penned by medics for medics, not actually for the likes of us, quote: 'When defined as sustained weight loss over a 5-year follow-up period, the success of even the best medical weight-loss programs is next to nil'). Even the medical community have no faith!
Admittedly, I'm a failed dieter too. I agree that dieting does not work typically, but remedying your own diet does work. I can show you how to do this and a lot more too.
The strategies I have developed are all founded on my own success. You'll discover this for yourself as you learn what I have learned. Study what I have studied over the years. Put into practice the techniques I put in place in 2002 and still use now.
The best thing from your position is that you'll be able to short-cut this process, if you choose to learn my techniques.
Nevertheless, that choice is completely your own.
Once more, thank you - for taking the time to read this. Your patience in reading my biog/blog will serve you well in your future success.
I hope you'll stay with me and acquire the strategies of success practised by so many successful slimmers, either following me here or at Slimmer Secrets, although no matter what you do, I wish you Good Luck in your weight loss effort.
I hope this has been of some use to you,
Best Wishes,
I thought I should give you an overview of my situation with regard to my experiences with weight loss and a little background about who I am.
My name is Ian Bracken ridge and I started writing about my experiences back in late 2008 in an effort to help those looking for ways to improve their own weight loss success. In short, I was a failed dieter, but eventually became a successful slimmer and moved on to become a successful maintainer for the last five years.
Having gained weight from around 1999, by living a typical British male life style of too many takeaways and TV dinners, too much boozing with the boys, little activity and a stressful occupation, I decided that it was time to address the increasing weight trouble in 2001.
A pitiful effort at dieting with the low carb diet approach combined with the shopping channel gym equipment (too embarrassed to go to the gym!) and the now apparently compulsory diet pills and left me disillusioned and frustrated at my failings.
I hadn't been accustomed to failure up to this point.
My background as a researcher in academia, followed by a career in the pharma industry had given me the requisite experience in interpreting scientific literature and so I decided to begin exploring for myself how to go about winning in this now problematic game.
I studied the primary literature and followed the ongoing battle of the day between the low carb vs low calorie diets which was raging in the media, although I recognized there was something lacking in all of this debate.
I tried the gym equipment, as I had trained with weights back in my late teens and early twenties, but I just couldn't find the motivation to hang in with this approach.
I finally began to discover successful strategies I could apply around late 2002 and chose to carry on learning while my weight dropped from roughly the 180lb mark down to around the 150lb (~80Kg to 68.5Kg).
I recognized at this time how serious a matter weight maintenance was to those who had slimmed down. I had read about the issue and had witnessed the troubles in other people with my own eyes, but I had never had to face up to this problem before.
Fortunately and I confess rather by chance, I had carried out strategies in a manner that allowed me to beat the yo-yo weight problem that overcomes so many dieters.
At this point, after my success, I stopped reading the primary literature and turned my attention to subjects elsewhere.
After a couple of years of taking on the challenging threat of weight yoyo-ing, I started to realise that the methods that had worked so successfully for me could be useful to other wannabee slimmers, and so I came back to look at the area only to discover the web weight loss arena utterly awash with marketing trash and what I can only describe as a raging community littering the bulletin boards with rather bitter postings!
[If you are trying to slim down nowadays you have my deepest sympathy. Browsing the internet, trying to separate the wheat from the huge amount of chaff, the tripe and the acrimonious ravings from the decent and real help is just about impossible].
I admit freely that at this time I did consider this as an opportunity.
I decided that my accomplishments could serve the community well, so I had to put together a web site to offer my knowledge and more significantly, my experience of weight loss and maintenance.
It's that experience that became the basis for what you are reading today.
I came across some quite amazing facts. The medical community may publically still push slimming down by dieting as a necessary evil if you like, but if you study their ‘trade magazines’, you will discover that there's little belief in weight loss plans (see for example: here ... this is a report penned by medics for medics, not actually for the likes of us, quote: 'When defined as sustained weight loss over a 5-year follow-up period, the success of even the best medical weight-loss programs is next to nil'). Even the medical community have no faith!
Admittedly, I'm a failed dieter too. I agree that dieting does not work typically, but remedying your own diet does work. I can show you how to do this and a lot more too.
The strategies I have developed are all founded on my own success. You'll discover this for yourself as you learn what I have learned. Study what I have studied over the years. Put into practice the techniques I put in place in 2002 and still use now.
The best thing from your position is that you'll be able to short-cut this process, if you choose to learn my techniques.
Nevertheless, that choice is completely your own.
Once more, thank you - for taking the time to read this. Your patience in reading my biog/blog will serve you well in your future success.
I hope you'll stay with me and acquire the strategies of success practised by so many successful slimmers, either following me here or at Slimmer Secrets, although no matter what you do, I wish you Good Luck in your weight loss effort.
I hope this has been of some use to you,
Best Wishes,
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
