Live data from Hacker News

After ‘The Biggest Loser,’ Their Bodies Fought to Regain Weight

nytimes.com

261–270 of 376 posts

Re: After ‘The Biggest Loser,’ Their Bodies Fought to Regain Weight

#261
post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) could be extremely effective for weight loss. Dexcom has a CGM system that hooks up to your phone/watch, but is only available with prescription (and is extremely expensive without coverage), so this is effectively only available if you already have severe health problems. Some former Dexcom employees founded a startup some time ago to do CGM for preventative healthcare, but I have…

"Dexcom has a CGM system that hooks up to your phone/watch, but is only available with prescription (and is extremely expensive without coverage)" Can you elaborate ? What do you mean by extremely expensive ?

Prescription is required: http://www.dexcom.com/faq/do-i-need-prescription-obtain-dexc...

My "extremely expensive" was unfair. Some quick searching suggests ~$650 for the transmitter ~$100/week for sensors. "Not cheap" would be more accurate.

Re: After ‘The Biggest Loser,’ Their Bodies Fought to Regain Weight

#262
What raises metabolic rate? High intensity interval exercise? Long slow distance?

I'm wondering if 2-3 hours of exercise training would be necessary to readjust the metabolism. It's my gut as an athlete... Especially the very high intensity interval training.

This comes from sprinters having almost magically low fat in many cases, despite not doing nearly as much aerobic execise as, say, even a recreational marathoner.

Re: After ‘The Biggest Loser,’ Their Bodies Fought to Regain Weight

#263

The results of this study, while interesting, seem flawed to me because losing 200+lbs in only 8 months' time is ridiculously fast. I would be more interested in a study following people who lost weight very slowly and steadily over time, and curious about their metabolisms and recidivism rates. I've lost 100lbs over the last three years and have had zero issue (so far, not saying I won't ever) with keeping at this w…

I contend you should then force it to adapt to a completely different athletic / exercise reality.

Of course the problem is that people drop back into their same lifestyles, and American lifestyles are pathetically nonactive.

Hint: 20 minutes 3 times a week is not "active". It's just better than pathetic.

Re: After ‘The Biggest Loser,’ Their Bodies Fought to Regain Weight

#264

This jibes pretty well with my experience. Used to weigh about 220 at my peak, and I was eating a lot those days. Cut back, drank less, exercised more (running). Lost about 45 pounds. However, at that point, I was running about 1000 calories a day, sometimes less (a big reason I think The Martian is bullshit). I was not starving. My body wasn't starving. You can (and many people should) subsist on far less than the r…

You are either a very small person, or you are not accurately counting your calories. The reason some people can subsist on less than the recommended caloric intake is that the recommendation is an average. If you are below average in size and/or activity level, then you need a below average amount of calories.

5'11" and 185. It's possible I'm miscounting calories (given how much of a crapshoot the task is), but not by so much that it would matter greatly.

Re: After ‘The Biggest Loser,’ Their Bodies Fought to Regain Weight

#265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who (over the last 6 years has) lost 65 lbs (245>180), regained 45 (225), lost 40 (185), and am now up 25 and back at 210 I can tell you that this will creep up on you if you don't remain diligent about sticking to your new eating habits. Sugar addiction has continually crept back in my life despite sticking to low carb diets for almost a year on more than one occasion.

I second this. Sadly I am up about 35 pounds from when I hit bottom. Sugar-addiction, at least for me, is harder to beat then smoking. I am able to go without sugar for one to two weeks and then it hits me and I binge on chocolate again. Hope to find the strength to restart my efforts. Does any of you have helpful suggestions?

I've cut a tremendous amount of sugar by cutting way way back on Pepsi. I could not stand diet soda, so when I started aiming for under 40% calories from carbs I was trying fairly hard to make sure that I was way under 40% for most of the day, so that my evening snack could include a Pepsi.

I tried adding some low sugar gelatin cup desserts to my diet to have a nice cool dessert on occasion, not expecting much since I usually cannot stand the artificial sweeteners such things use...but to my surprise I was OK with these. That led my to give diet Pepsi and diet Dr. Pepper another try. Nope, still did not like them...but I disliked them a lot less than I used to. The diet Dr. Pepper was close enough to acceptable that I was able to start drinking it a bit, and after a couple of weeks I was OK with it, and after a couple more I liked it.

Pepsi dropped from daily to once or twice a week, and then to none. Everywhere I'd normally want a Pepsi I'm now fine with diet Dr. Pepper. That's cut calories from whatever falls under the "sugar" line on the nutritional information label from 15% of my calories to about 8%.

Of course, as soon as I got to where diet Dr. Pepper was acceptable, I saw an article claiming that new research showed that people drinking diet sodas lost less weight than people drinking regular soda, and sometimes even gained. WTF?

That research, thought, was based on surveys of people who had tried to lose weight for a year asking about their eating habits, so I don't think it is applicable to me. I doubt that most of those people seriously tracked their eating, whereas I have a spreadsheet with almost everything I've eaten for the last 8 years entered.

I suspect that what happened with the people who lost less or gained on diet sodas is that they offset the calorie savings from the diet sodas with more calories elsewhere. If you are trying to cut calories, and you have a regular soda for lunch, you might pass on dessert at dinner because you know that you did something bad at lunch. If you had the diet soda at lunch, you might feel virtuous, and reward yourself by allowing a sugary dessert at dinner which might be more calories than a regular soda.

One suggestion I have for the next time you try to cut sugar is that if you set a daily sugar goal of below X% of calories from sugar then adopt a strict rule of no borrowing against future meals.

What I mean by borrowing is this. Let's say you set a goal of no more than 10% of calories from sugar per day. One way to achieve this would be to have no more than 10% of calories from each meal or snack be from sugar. Another way is to have some meals and snacks be over and some be under, as long as at the end of the day you are overall under.

Borrowing is letting the earlier meals and snacks be over, and then counting on later meals and snacks being under to meet the daily goal.

The problem with borrowing is that you can easy get yourself in a position where it is hard or impossible to get yourself back down to 10% for the day. Now you feel bad and are discouraged.

Instead, try to make the early meals and snacks under, so that the latter meals and snacks can go over and still meet the daily goal. If you do good enough on avoiding sugar during the day, you might be able to have a nice treat in the evening. But note that this presupposes you are keeping track of your sugar, so that when you give yourself a treat at the end of the day as a reward, you won't go over. Without numbers, it is too easy to end up like those diet soda research subjects.

Re: After ‘The Biggest Loser,’ Their Bodies Fought to Regain Weight

#266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sort of. The glycemic index is not really useful because it is based on arbitrary quantities of food. Glycemic load was created to be useful to people, as it is based on reasonable quantities people would eat. Like GI says watermelon is bad because its calories come from sugar. But it is based on eating 100g of carbs from watermelon. That's a huge amount of watermelon, which is mostly water. GL shows watermelon is fi…

So glycemic load is more or less glycemic index times carbohydrate density times the quantity of food you'd need to eat before feeling full?

[deleted]

Re: After ‘The Biggest Loser,’ Their Bodies Fought to Regain Weight

#267
post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. I never eat when I'm not hungry. I can't imagine doing that. I'd suspect a real eating disorder if I were forcing myself to eat.

I think the idea is to not eat because it feels good or because you've got to finish your meal, but only because you're hungry. Says I, who just completed my meal even though it was slightly painful....

I guess that's the only exception I can think of - I may continue eating at a restaurant when I'm full because I don't like to waste, and I also don't like to take things home.

That alone doesn't explain the 40 pounds I need to lose, though.

Re: After ‘The Biggest Loser,’ Their Bodies Fought to Regain Weight

#268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For another perspective on this, see: http://anthonycolpo.com/stephan-guyenet-debunks-gary-taubes/

Interesting how Stephan Guyenet says that: I'd like to begin by emphasizing that carbohydrate restriction has helped many people lose body fat and improve their metabolic health. Although it doesn't work for everyone, there is no doubt that carbohydrate restriction causes fat loss in many, perhaps even most obese people. For a subset of people, the results can be very impressive. From Stephan Guyenet >This is where h…

Guyenet seems to specifically claim that Taubes focused on the hormone insulin instead of the hormone leptin. But, since leptin is still a hormone, I don't see how Taubes' quote that you included is relevant. He also provides plenty of citations for why insulin is the wrong hormone to be looking at.

Re: After ‘The Biggest Loser,’ Their Bodies Fought to Regain Weight

#269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the problem with most sugars is that most people don't understand that the bulk of it is stored as glycogen in the muscular system. Sugars really only have several places to go once they are ingested: Held in the fiber of undigested food, blood stream, liver and muscles. We do really well with vegetables even though they are carbs since veggies are mostly fiber and very low carb. The high glycemic foods are o…

CHO storage in muscles and mostly kidney only amounts to about 2000kcal worth of energy. So there is a very high turnover and already over a week it's averaged out to the point where it doesn't really matter if what you eat is carbs or fat. So for healthy, non-diabetic people it really doesn't matter. (With the obligatory addendum that going all "low-carbs" or "keto" is a very, very bad idea if you expect to do any e…

Why would keto be a bad idea? Genuine question. A friend of mine just run a 54k mountain track (2600m elevation) after 7 months keto. I have barely eaten carbs for 2 weeks now, and just cycled 120 km two days ago.

Re: After ‘The Biggest Loser,’ Their Bodies Fought to Regain Weight

#270
post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I second this. Sadly I am up about 35 pounds from when I hit bottom. Sugar-addiction, at least for me, is harder to beat then smoking. I am able to go without sugar for one to two weeks and then it hits me and I binge on chocolate again. Hope to find the strength to restart my efforts. Does any of you have helpful suggestions?

I've cut a tremendous amount of sugar by cutting way way back on Pepsi. I could not stand diet soda, so when I started aiming for under 40% calories from carbs I was trying fairly hard to make sure that I was way under 40% for most of the day, so that my evening snack could include a Pepsi. I tried adding some low sugar gelatin cup desserts to my diet to have a nice cool dessert on occasion, not expecting much since…

Re: diet soda and weight gain. There's some very early research that suggests artificial sweeteners may change you gut flora in very bad ways.
Post reply on HN