General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Study, best long term weight control strategy

Started by Email address hidden · · Last activity · 8 posts · 375 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
16 November 2004
Last activity
18 November 2004
Original author
Email address hidden
Posts
8
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
375
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–8 of 8
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Study: Low-fat diets better long-term

    By MARILYNN MARCHIONE, AP Medical Writer

    LAS VEGAS (AP) - Regardless of how they shed pounds in the first
    place, big losers stayed that way by limiting fat rather than
    carbohydrates, according to new research that could add fuel to the
    backlash against low-carb diets.

    Dieters already have been turning away from Atkins-style plans as a
    long-term weight-control strategy, and the new study gives them more
    reason: Low-fat plans seem to work better at keeping weight off.

    "People who started eating more fat ... regained the most weight over
    time," said Suzanne Phelan, a Brown Medical School psychologist who
    presented results of the study Monday at a meeting of the North
    American Association for the Study of Obesity.

    The study used the National Weight Control Registry, a decade-old
    effort to learn the secrets of success from people who had lost at
    least 30 pounds and kept them off for at least a year. The registry
    run by doctors from the University of Colorado in Denver, the
    University of Pittsburgh and Brown University in Providence, R.I.

    They studied 2,700 people who entered the registry from 1995 through
    2003. Their average age was 47, most were women, and they had lost an
    average of 72 pounds initially. Doctors compared their diets to see
    whether one type or another made a difference in how much weight they
    had lost and how much they had regained a year later.

    All reported eating only about 1,400 calories a day, but the portion
    that came from fat rose - from 24 percent in 1995 to more than 29
    percent in 2003 - while the part from carbohydrates fell, from 56
    percent to 49 percent.

    The number who were on low-carb diets (less than 90 grams a day) rose
    from 6 percent to 17 percent during the same period.

    The type of diet - low-fat, low-carb or in between - made no
    difference in how people lost weight initially.

    But those who increased their fat intake over a year regained the most
    weight. That meant they ate less carbohydrates, because the amount of
    protein in their diets stayed the same, Phelan said.

    "Only a minority of successful weight losers consume low-carbohydrate
    diets," she and the other researchers concluded.

    Colette Heimowitz, a nutrition expert and spokeswoman for the Atkins
    diet organization, noted that the study considered 90 grams to be
    low-carb, while Atkins recommends 60 grams for weight loss and 60 to
    120 for weight maintenance.

    She said that for many of the dieters studied, "the carbs aren't low
    enough for them to be successful." They also should have replaced
    carbs with more protein rather than fat, she said.

    Dr. Thomas Wadden, a University of Pennsylvania weight loss expert who
    had no role in the study, said it is too soon to say which approach is
    better. Several longer-term studies of low-carb and low-fat dieters
    are in the works, he said.

    But he said: "I do think that people who are keeping the weight off
    are eating a low-fat, high-carb diet."

    The dietary establishment has long been skeptical of the long-term
    safety and effectiveness of low-carb diets, and consumers increasingly
    are losing their enthusiasm for the glut of low-carb products that
    overloaded grocery store shelves as the diet became a fad in the past
    few years.

    More than half of Americans who have tried a low-carb diet have given
    up, according to a recent survey by the market research firm
    InsightExpress. Other published survey information suggests that the
    number of Americans following such a diet peaked at 9 percent last
    February and fell to 6 percent by June.

    The American Institute for Cancer Research used those trends to issue
    a statement in September urging dieters to "come back to common
    sense."

    "Eat a balanced diet weighted toward vegetables and fruits, reduce
    portion sizes and increase physical activity," the institute said.

    Dr. William Dietz, director of chronic-disease prevention at the
    federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said it is
    difficult to tell whether these low-carb diets really work because
    people find it hard to stick to a strict regimen for long periods.

    "My anecdotal experience is that people go on and off these diets," he
    said. "When their weight goes up, they go back on the diet to lose
    weight."

    Other research at the conference underscored the many health and
    personal problems obese people face.

    Duke University doctors said two-thirds of obese people seeking
    treatment at the Duke Diet & Fitness Center reported not enjoying or
    wanting to have sex, and having problems with sexual performance. Only
    5 percent of normal-weight people from the surrounding community who
    completed the same quality-of-life survey reported such problems.

  2. National Weight Control Registry

    http://www.uchsc.edu/nutrition/WyattJortberg/nwcr.htm

    James O. Hill, PhD
    Rena Wing, PhD

    James O. Hill, Ph.D., Professor of Pediatrics and Director, Center for
    Human Nutrition at the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center,
    Denver, CO. Research support from Amgen, Hoffman-LaRoche, Procter &
    Gamble, and Knoll Pharmaceuticals; has received consultant fees from
    Knoll, Roche Laboratories, International Life Sciences Institute, and
    Procter & Gamble and is a consultant to the Duke Diet and Fitness
    Center. (Newark Star-Ledger, 2/17/97). President, North American
    Association for the Study of Obesity. (USA Today, 9/1/98) Lead author
    of a study on olestra supported by a grant from Procter & Gamble. (Am.
    J. Clin. Nutr. 1998;67:1178-85) Co-wrote (with Barbara Rolls) a 1998
    report for ILSI on "Carbohydrates and Weight Management." Participated
    in a 3/25/99 panel assembled by the Sugar Association to inform New
    York magazine editors about obesity, calories, and activity. (Sugar
    Association's 1999 annual report,
    http://www.foodingredientsonline.com; accessed 03/30/99) Research on
    the effects of covert substitution of olestra for conventional fat on
    spontaneous food intake supported by Procter & Gamble. (Am. J. Clin.
    Nutr. 1998;67:1178-85) Research on the role of carbohydrates in weight
    management was supported by the Sugar Association. (Letter from Sugar
    Association to USDA; on file with CSPI; 4/16/99) Research on using
    Orlistat for weight maintenance funded by Hoffmann-La Roche. (Am. J.
    Clin. Nutr. 1999;69:1108-16) Member of the Foodfit.com advisory board.
    (http://www.foodfit.com/about/advisoryBoard.asp; accessed 11/11/00)
    Research on weight management supported in part by Abbott
    Laboratories. (J. Amer. Coll. Nutr. 2001;20:26-31) Member of the
    McDonald's Corporation Global Advisory Council on Healthy Lifestyles;
    formed to "help guide the company on activities that address the need
    for balanced, healthy lifestyles."
    (http://www.mcdonalds.com/corporate/press/corporate/2003/05212003/;
    accessed 6/23/03) Receives consulting fees from HealtheTech, Johnson &
    Johnson, Procter & Gamble, and Coca-Cola. Receives speakers fees from
    Abbott Laboratories, Roche Laboratories, and Kraft Foods. Receives
    research funding from M&M Mars. (N. Engl. J. Med. 2003:348;2082-2090)
    Member of the expert advisory board for the American Council for
    Fitness and Nutrition. (http://www.acfn.org/about/advisory.html;
    accessed 10/31/03)

    Rena R. Wing, Ph.D., U. of Pittsburgh School of Medicine. Consultant
    to and received research support from Lilly Pharmaceuticals, is on
    Weight Watchers Advisory Board; has received research support from
    Ross Laboratories and ILSI. (Newark Star-Ledger, 2/17/97 notes Eli
    Lilly, WW)

    *****

    Do you see how these two people and the entire purpose of the weight
    registry is called into question when they fail to declare their
    obvious conflicts of interests. Why do they hide it? Because they
    understand that their affiliations render them scientifically
    questionable.

    That is what brings disrepute to science in general. Had they declared
    their financial interests up front we could then go on to the report
    and consider its scientific value.

    Where the hell is the press in all of this? Why are they not reporting
    these blatant conflicts of interest?

    TC

    [email hidden] wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    Study: Low-fat diets better long-term

    By MARILYNN MARCHIONE, AP Medical Writer

    LAS VEGAS (AP) - Regardless of how they shed pounds in the first
    place, big losers stayed that way by limiting fat rather than
    carbohydrates, according to new research that could add fuel to the
    backlash against low-carb diets.

    Dieters already have been turning away from Atkins-style plans as a
    long-term weight-control strategy, and the new study gives them more
    reason: Low-fat plans seem to work better at keeping weight off.

    "People who started eating more fat ... regained the most weight over
    time," said Suzanne Phelan, a Brown Medical School psychologist who
    presented results of the study Monday at a meeting of the North
    American Association for the Study of Obesity.

    The study used the National Weight Control Registry, a decade-old
    effort to learn the secrets of success from people who had lost at
    least 30 pounds and kept them off for at least a year. The registry
    run by doctors from the University of Colorado in Denver, the
    University of Pittsburgh and Brown University in Providence, R.I.

    They studied 2,700 people who entered the registry from 1995 through
    2003. Their average age was 47, most were women, and they had lost an
    average of 72 pounds initially. Doctors compared their diets to see
    whether one type or another made a difference in how much weight they
    had lost and how much they had regained a year later.

    All reported eating only about 1,400 calories a day, but the portion
    that came from fat rose - from 24 percent in 1995 to more than 29
    percent in 2003 - while the part from carbohydrates fell, from 56
    percent to 49 percent.

    The number who were on low-carb diets (less than 90 grams a day) rose
    from 6 percent to 17 percent during the same period.

    The type of diet - low-fat, low-carb or in between - made no
    difference in how people lost weight initially.

    But those who increased their fat intake over a year regained the most
    weight. That meant they ate less carbohydrates, because the amount of
    protein in their diets stayed the same, Phelan said.

    "Only a minority of successful weight losers consume low-carbohydrate
    diets," she and the other researchers concluded.

    Colette Heimowitz, a nutrition expert and spokeswoman for the Atkins
    diet organization, noted that the study considered 90 grams to be
    low-carb, while Atkins recommends 60 grams for weight loss and 60 to
    120 for weight maintenance.

    She said that for many of the dieters studied, "the carbs aren't low
    enough for them to be successful." They also should have replaced
    carbs with more protein rather than fat, she said.

    Dr. Thomas Wadden, a University of Pennsylvania weight loss expert who
    had no role in the study, said it is too soon to say which approach is
    better. Several longer-term studies of low-carb and low-fat dieters
    are in the works, he said.

    But he said: "I do think that people who are keeping the weight off
    are eating a low-fat, high-carb diet."

    The dietary establishment has long been skeptical of the long-term
    safety and effectiveness of low-carb diets, and consumers increasingly
    are losing their enthusiasm for the glut of low-carb products that
    overloaded grocery store shelves as the diet became a fad in the past
    few years.

    More than half of Americans who have tried a low-carb diet have given
    up, according to a recent survey by the market research firm
    InsightExpress. Other published survey information suggests that the
    number of Americans following such a diet peaked at 9 percent last
    February and fell to 6 percent by June.

    The American Institute for Cancer Research used those trends to issue
    a statement in September urging dieters to "come back to common
    sense."

    "Eat a balanced diet weighted toward vegetables and fruits, reduce
    portion sizes and increase physical activity," the institute said.

    Dr. William Dietz, director of chronic-disease prevention at the
    federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said it is
    difficult to tell whether these low-carb diets really work because
    people find it hard to stick to a strict regimen for long periods.

    "My anecdotal experience is that people go on and off these diets," he
    said. "When their weight goes up, they go back on the diet to lose
    weight."

    Other research at the conference underscored the many health and
    personal problems obese people face.

    Duke University doctors said two-thirds of obese people seeking
    treatment at the Duke Diet & Fitness Center reported not enjoying or
    wanting to have sex, and having problems with sexual performance. Only
    5 percent of normal-weight people from the surrounding community who
    completed the same quality-of-life survey reported such problems.

  3. [email hidden] wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    Study: Low-fat diets better long-term

    By MARILYNN MARCHIONE, AP Medical Writer

    LAS VEGAS (AP) - Regardless of how they shed pounds in the first
    place, big losers stayed that way by limiting fat rather than
    carbohydrates, according to new research that could add fuel to the
    backlash against low-carb diets.

    Dieters already have been turning away from Atkins-style plans as a
    long-term weight-control strategy, and the new study gives them more
    reason: Low-fat plans seem to work better at keeping weight off.

    "People who started eating more fat ... regained the most weight over
    time," said Suzanne Phelan, a Brown Medical School psychologist who
    presented results of the study Monday at a meeting of the North
    American Association for the Study of Obesity.

    The study used the National Weight Control Registry, a decade-old
    effort to learn the secrets of success from people who had lost at
    least 30 pounds and kept them off for at least a year. The registry
    run by doctors from the University of Colorado in Denver, the
    University of Pittsburgh and Brown University in Providence, R.I.

    more about the weight registry:

    http://www.uchsc.edu/nutrition/Administration/admin.htm

    Robert H. Eckel, M.D., Division of Endocrinology, Health Sciences
    Center, University of Colorado. Research on the "effect of medium
    chain triglycerides on glucose and lipid metabolism in type II
    diabetes melitus" was supported by Procter and Gamble. Research on
    "the effect of leptin on postprandial lipid metabolism" was supported
    by Amgen. (Undated resume on file at CSPI; accessed 6/18/02)

    Uwe Christians, Department of Biopharmaceutical Sciences, University
    of California, San Francisco. Research on mitochondrial metabolism
    supported in part by Novartis Pharma AG. (Br. J. Pharmacol.
    2001;133:875-85)

    William C. Heird, Ph.D., Baylor College of Medicine, Baylor, TX.
    Research on fatty acid in breast milk partially funded by Mead-Johnson
    Nutritional Group. (Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2000;71(supp):292S-9S)

    Stephen C. Woods, Ph.D., Department of Psychiatry, University of
    Cincinnati College of Medicine. Received $1,000,000 in 2000-2001 and
    $1,037,500 in 2001-2002 from Procter & Gamble for a study on obesity
    and energy homeostasis. (University of Cincinnati, Office of Research,
    Active Grants and Contracts - FY 2001,
    http://www.med.research.uc.edu/grants/granttemplateshell.cfm?department_id=186;
    accessed 6/24/02)

    Holly R. Wyatt, M.D., Assistant Professor of Medicine, University of
    Colorado Health Sciences Center, Denver. Receives consulting fees from
    Ortho-McNeil, USANA, and GlaxoSmithKline. Receives speaker fees from
    Roche Laboratories, Abbott Laboratories, Slim-Fast, and Ortho-McNeil.
    (N. Engl. J. Med. 2003;348:2082-90)

    TC

  4. <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Study: Low-fat diets better long-term

    The study used the National Weight Control Registry, a decade-old
    effort to learn the secrets of success from people who had lost at
    least 30 pounds and kept them off for at least a year. The registry
    run by doctors from the University of Colorado in Denver, the
    University of Pittsburgh and Brown University in Providence, R.I.

    They studied 2,700 people who entered the registry from 1995 through
    2003. Their average age was 47, most were women, and they had lost an
    average of 72 pounds initially. Doctors compared their diets to see
    whether one type or another made a difference in how much weight they
    had lost and how much they had regained a year later.

    I question the validity of anything determined via this methodology. We do not know
    how the subjects were recruited (were they truly random representatives of the
    greater population, or were they already clients of conventional weight-loss
    programs?), how reliable their self-reports are (as far as I know, all client
    reports are electronically submitted), whether any uncontrolled but unreported
    variables are at play, or whether the initial requirement that one must have lost 30
    pounds and kept it off for a year presupposes certain characteristics in the
    participants themselves. Those are just ideas off the top of my head. I wonder what
    I'd find if I read a detailed article.

    Lar

  5. "Larry Hoover" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Study: Low-fat diets better long-term

    The study used the National Weight Control Registry, a decade-old
    effort to learn the secrets of success from people who had lost at
    least 30 pounds and kept them off for at least a year. The registry
    run by doctors from the University of Colorado in Denver, the
    University of Pittsburgh and Brown University in Providence, R.I.

    They studied 2,700 people who entered the registry from 1995 through
    2003. Their average age was 47, most were women, and they had lost an
    average of 72 pounds initially. Doctors compared their diets to see
    whether one type or another made a difference in how much weight they
    had lost and how much they had regained a year later.

    I question the validity of anything determined via this methodology. We do not know
    how the subjects were recruited (were they truly random representatives of the
    greater population, or were they already clients of conventional weight-loss
    programs?), how reliable their self-reports are (as far as I know, all client
    reports are electronically submitted), whether any uncontrolled but unreported
    variables are at play, or whether the initial requirement that one must have lost 30
    pounds and kept it off for a year presupposes certain characteristics in the
    participants themselves. Those are just ideas off the top of my head. I wonder what
    I'd find if I read a detailed article.

    Lar

    The topic comes up on the low carb forums often. The main complaint is
    how the questionaires are worded and the narrow choices of responses
    to the questions. The questionaires seem to be specifically designed
    to make it difficult for low carbers to indicate the methods they used
    to lose weight. The questions are skewed to solicit a low-fat message
    even from low-carbers. How can you answer a multiple choice question
    that doesn't give you the option that best represents your desired
    answer?

    The questionaires out forward by the weight registry people were never
    and will never be designed to reflect the truth.

    TC

  6. "Larry Hoover" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Study: Low-fat diets better long-term

    The study used the National Weight Control Registry, a decade-old
    effort to learn the secrets of success from people who had lost at
    least 30 pounds and kept them off for at least a year. The registry
    run by doctors from the University of Colorado in Denver, the
    University of Pittsburgh and Brown University in Providence, R.I.

    They studied 2,700 people who entered the registry from 1995 through
    2003. Their average age was 47, most were women, and they had lost an
    average of 72 pounds initially. Doctors compared their diets to see
    whether one type or another made a difference in how much weight they
    had lost and how much they had regained a year later.

    I question the validity of anything determined via this methodology. We do not know
    how the subjects were recruited (were they truly random representatives of the
    greater population, or were they already clients of conventional weight-loss
    programs?), how reliable their self-reports are (as far as I know, all client
    reports are electronically submitted), whether any uncontrolled but unreported
    variables are at play, or whether the initial requirement that one must have lost 30
    pounds and kept it off for a year presupposes certain characteristics in the
    participants themselves. Those are just ideas off the top of my head. I wonder what
    I'd find if I read a detailed article.

    Lar

    The topic comes up on the low carb forums often. The main complaint is
    how the questionaires are worded and the narrow choices of responses
    to the questions. The questionaires seem to be specifically designed
    to make it difficult for low carbers to indicate the methods they used
    to lose weight. The questions are skewed to solicit a low-fat message
    even from low-carbers. How can you answer a multiple choice question
    that doesn't give you the option that best represents your desired
    answer?

    The questionaires out forward by the weight registry people were never
    and will never be designed to reflect the truth.

    TC

  7. "tcomeau" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    The questionaires out forward by the weight registry people were never
    and will never be designed to reflect the truth.

    I'm not on any registry, but my "truth" -- which may not be your "truth" or
    even THE TRUTH -- was that eating less & moving more worked quite well, and
    continues to work for me in maintaining my weight. I've never been a low
    carber. I don't think I'm "low fat" either. I'm just plain moderate
    (although I do sometimes go a bit too far in the exercise department).
    bj

  8. "Larry Hoover" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Study: Low-fat diets better long-term

    The study used the National Weight Control Registry, a decade-old
    effort to learn the secrets of success from people who had lost at
    least 30 pounds and kept them off for at least a year. The registry
    run by doctors from the University of Colorado in Denver, the
    University of Pittsburgh and Brown University in Providence, R.I.

    They studied 2,700 people who entered the registry from 1995 through
    2003. Their average age was 47, most were women, and they had lost an
    average of 72 pounds initially. Doctors compared their diets to see
    whether one type or another made a difference in how much weight they
    had lost and how much they had regained a year later.

    I question the validity of anything determined via this methodology. We do not know
    how the subjects were recruited (were they truly random representatives of the
    greater population, or were they already clients of conventional weight-loss
    programs?), how reliable their self-reports are (as far as I know, all client
    reports are electronically submitted), whether any uncontrolled but unreported
    variables are at play, or whether the initial requirement that one must have lost 30
    pounds and kept it off for a year presupposes certain characteristics in the
    participants themselves. Those are just ideas off the top of my head. I wonder what
    I'd find if I read a detailed article.

    Lar

    Anyone can register thru their website. I signed up my wife a couple
    of years back because she fit the requirements. The questionaire was
    simplistic and very incomplete in terms of allowing the subject to
    fill in details that gives a clear picture of the methodolgy used to
    lose the weight.

    We haven't heard from them since.

    If you know someone who qualifies, go on their site and register them
    and see for yourself. It really smacks of cherry picking data and
    trying to maniplulate the results and findings.

    Personally, I can't believe that such a farce exists and is allowed to
    exist without someone challenging tham, either someone from the media
    or someone from the scientific community. I guess that leaves us to do
    that.

    TC

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.