Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Data Driven Weight Loss: Losing 66 pounds and gaining a six pack in 8 months

debarghyadas.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–98 of 98 posts

Re: Data Driven Weight Loss: Losing 66 pounds and gaining a six pack in 8 months

#91

Post by JamesBarney »

sidlls wrote: post #61
JamesBarney wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Sustainable weight loss is achievable by everyone, whether you're 40 or 50 years or 400 pounds or 600 pounds." While I applaud those individuals that have kept off weight long term, the science disagrees that is an achievable goal for everyone.(only about 5% of people who successfully lose large amounts of weight will keep it off long term) For example here is what happened to the contestants on the biggest loser. h…

The "Biggest Loser" contestants undergo an extremely rapid weightloss regimen. It's not clear that similar slowdowns would impact more gradual weight loss regimens, or that it would affect people who start dieting at a lower (but still fat) weight.

Why would you think different rates of weight loss would have different effects? I'm not aware of any studies that say that. Also the hypothesized reason weight loss maintenance is so hard is changes to leptin level which related to absolute level of body fat, not rate of body fat loss.

Re: Data Driven Weight Loss: Losing 66 pounds and gaining a six pack in 8 months

#92

Post by sidlls »

JamesBarney wrote: post #91
sidlls wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "Biggest Loser" contestants undergo an extremely rapid weightloss regimen. It's not clear that similar slowdowns would impact more gradual weight loss regimens, or that it would affect people who start dieting at a lower (but still fat) weight.

Why would you think different rates of weight loss would have different effects? I'm not aware of any studies that say that. Also the hypothesized reason weight loss maintenance is so hard is changes to leptin level which related to absolute level of body fat, not rate of body fat loss.

I am not an expert in this area. I speculate the rate is important due to hysteresis in the system.

Re: Data Driven Weight Loss: Losing 66 pounds and gaining a six pack in 8 months

#93

Post by fatso83 »

JamesBarney wrote: post #91
sidlls wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "Biggest Loser" contestants undergo an extremely rapid weightloss regimen. It's not clear that similar slowdowns would impact more gradual weight loss regimens, or that it would affect people who start dieting at a lower (but still fat) weight.

Why would you think different rates of weight loss would have different effects? I'm not aware of any studies that say that. Also the hypothesized reason weight loss maintenance is so hard is changes to leptin level which related to absolute level of body fat, not rate of body fat loss.

This is known for decades. If you drop too fast over too long period of time your metabolism changes base burn rate and you will have a hard time losing fat/staying the same weight once your normalize your diet. There is a reason diets like PSMF at restricted to 1-2 weeks. Not healthy over time.

Re: Data Driven Weight Loss: Losing 66 pounds and gaining a six pack in 8 months

#94

Post by notliketherest »

sridca wrote: post #89
notliketherest wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at the number of photos and angles this guy has of himself on the page. We've all seen before / after photos of people who've lost weight. I've never seen this many photos of one dude. It's super narcissistic.

If he is super narcissistic, what does that make all the actresses and actors strutting the stages of public shows with a buttload of face paint, hair dyes, plastic surgeries and the like? Or is it that you casually use the word 'narcissistic' only when disapproving of something you don't like?

Whether actors and actresses are narcissistic or not has nothing to do with the fact that this guy is super narcissistic. Look up "logical fallacy".

Re: Data Driven Weight Loss: Losing 66 pounds and gaining a six pack in 8 months

#95

Post by JamesBarney »

fatso83 wrote: post #93
JamesBarney wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you think different rates of weight loss would have different effects? I'm not aware of any studies that say that. Also the hypothesized reason weight loss maintenance is so hard is changes to leptin level which related to absolute level of body fat, not rate of body fat loss.

This is known for decades. If you drop too fast over too long period of time your metabolism changes base burn rate and you will have a hard time losing fat/staying the same weight once your normalize your diet. There is a reason diets like PSMF at restricted to 1-2 weeks. Not healthy over time.

I've now read several studies about successful long term weight loss maintenance. And none of them mention speed of weight loss as a factor. The Wikipedia article on it doesn't mention it.

Also here's a study that suggests the exact opposite, that rapid weight loss is correlated with long term success.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3780395/

Re: Data Driven Weight Loss: Losing 66 pounds and gaining a six pack in 8 months

#96

Post by JamesBarney »

sidlls wrote: post #92
JamesBarney wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you think different rates of weight loss would have different effects? I'm not aware of any studies that say that. Also the hypothesized reason weight loss maintenance is so hard is changes to leptin level which related to absolute level of body fat, not rate of body fat loss.

I am not an expert in this area. I speculate the rate is important due to hysteresis in the system.

The system definitely experiences hysteresis.(if you drop and regain weight you're metabolism will be slower) But I haven't seen any evidence that the rate of weight loss has any influence on it. I can see the intuitive appeal, but I haven't seen theoretical, epidemiological, or any other empirical evidence for it.

Re: Data Driven Weight Loss: Losing 66 pounds and gaining a six pack in 8 months

#97

Post by IkmoIkmo »

elorm wrote: post #52
forgotmysn wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a 6-8 month break from work? Who can afford that?

If your health is really important to you, you'll take a 3 year break(Not realistic, I know) if you have to. I know people who quit jobs so they can focus on weight loss. Moved to cheap areas/countries and made their weight a priority. I'll rather go broke a few months than spend the rest of my life with mounting medical bills that pile up as a result of my weight.

Know of any blogs/stories like that to read, particularly of people moving to a cheaper area while quitting?

Re: Data Driven Weight Loss: Losing 66 pounds and gaining a six pack in 8 months

#98

Post by jjawssd »

allover wrote: post #18
jjawssd wrote: post #9

The real key to weight loss is a non-insulin-stimulating diet in conjunction with strength and cardiovascular exercise. Even with minimal exercise I lost 7 kg since March. My weight loss hits a plateau when I am not exercising. It is essential to move your ass or lift things if you want more gains. Weight loss is not practical without some exercise. A lot of Westerners are rediscovering amazing gains from the ketogen…

> The real key to weight loss is a non-insulin-stimulating diet That was debunked recently [1]. > Weight loss is not practical without some exercise. Nonsense. Do you have any evidence for that? [1] https://www.vox.com/2016/7/6/12105660/do-low-carb-diets-work

Quoted from the article:

It lacked a control for comparison, and while the baseline diet was designed to keep participants at about the same levels of energy burn they experienced outside of the study, the participants started to lose weight on that diet too. So they were already slimming down by the time they started their low-carb month.

And while the study was designed to overcome some of the limitations of real-world diet studies, a highly controlled setting that amounts to confining people to a hospital and lab isn’t exactly representative of how people actually live and eat.

"These points, along with the small sample size and short-term follow-up, prevent the ability to draw conclusions about the effects of a very low-carbohydrate versus usual carbohydrate diet," said Deirdre Tobias, an associate epidemiologist at Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Men's Hospital.

What’s more, one of the promises of the low-carb, high-fat diet is that when people start eating this way, they naturally cut back on calories because they’re more satiated (from the protein and fat in their diet). This study didn’t measure that either, since the participants were forced to stick to strictly measured menus.

Post reply on HN