Study Details Four-Day, 11-Pound Weight Loss in Overweight Men

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Study Details Four-Day, 11-Pound Weight Loss in Overweight Men

By severely cutting calories and working out for four days, 15 overweight men were able to see lasting results.

Anyone who's ever spent time tracking calories likely knows the basic method to weight loss: take in less calories, burn more calories. Because that's so obvious, it probably doesn't come as a surprise that 15 overweight men who were restricted to 360 daily calories were able to see drastic weight loss results, considering healthy adults typically eat 1,200 to 2,000 calories in a day. What's surprising is how dramatic the loss was--11 pounds in just four days--and that they were able to keep the weight off for months, well after they went back to their regular eating habits.

The study was published in March, appearing in The Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, and tracked 15 healthy but overweight men from Spain and Sweden. By cutting about 1,800 calories out of their daily diets and getting a full day of exercise--45 minutes of upper body, eight hours of strolling the countryside--each lost about 11 pounds, with nearly half of that coming from body fat.

While those four days sound grueling and impossible to those of us who like to, you know, eat and generally not be active, the participants reported that it wasn't as hard as it sounds. According to Josť Calbet, a professor at the University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria in Spain, they "were surprised that it was easier than they thought it would be," with common issues being joint pain and blisters (as opposed to an inescapable craving for mac & cheese).

A month later, long after the subjects returned to their normal lives, their bodies didn't; most had lost two more pounds of fat. Even a year later, the subjects were generally five pounds lighter than when they started. Since most dieters end up regaining whatever weight they've lost, this is the part of the study that's perhaps the most interesting. It's not entirely clear what caused the sustained fat loss; Dr. Calbet theorized that the men may have been motivated to eat less and move more by their four days in the study. He hopes to perform a similar study with women next.

Source: The Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports via The New York Times

Permalink

I have a better one. It worked for me anyway. Try to lead a healthy life style without all the junk food and exercise regularly because it feels good and makes your brain work better.

yeah, 360 calories, 45-minutes of upper body and 8 hours of walking a day? isn't that called anorexia? or in this case manorexia!

I sincerely hope that no one looks at this and thinks "This is a good idea, I'm going to do it." You don't run before you can walk, you don't go lift heavy before you can lift light. You don't starve your body in an attempt to lose weight. 11 lbs in 4 days isn't impressive our bodies fluctuate between weight a large amount throughout the day, saying they were on average 5lbs lighter isn't impressive either.

But weight loss is impossible! The Fat Acceptance movement told me so!

Speaking as someone who took off 80lbs by cutting out junk and exercising, this comes as no surprise.

Dear. Fucking. God.

No. Don't do this. This isn't weight loss, this is starvation.

each lost about 11 pounds, with nearly half of that coming from body fat.

This bit is rather telling. That means over half of that was only water weight and muscle mass, not body fat.

Do this instead. Consume 1500 calories a day. Burn 500 calories a day doing cardio. That's a caloric deficit of 1000 calories a day.
One pound of fat=3500 calories. 1000x7=7000 calories. Which is equivalent to 2 pounds. That means you should lose 2 pounds of fat a week.
Do that for a year, and you'll lose over 100 pounds.

Don't be dumb and eat 360 calories a day, AND lift weights. Don't. There's no way you can consume enough protein on 360 calories a day in order for you body to fix the damage done to your muscles.

I'm sorry, 360 calories a day? What were they eating, nothing but lettuce and rice cakes?

This is a bit of an odd one though, given how much weight they were able keep off afterwards. Maybe because the diet was SO intense?

Brian Tams:
Dear. Fucking. God.

No. Don't do this. This isn't weight loss, this is starvation.

each lost about 11 pounds, with nearly half of that coming from body fat.

This bit is rather telling. That means over half of that was only water weight and muscle mass, not body fat.

Do this instead. Consume 1500 calories a day. Burn 500 calories a day doing cardio. That's a caloric deficit of 1000 calories a day.
One pound of fat=3500 calories. 1000x7=7000 calories. Which is equivalent to 2 pounds. That means you should lose 2 pounds of fat a week.
Do that for a year, and you'll lose of 100 pounds.

Don't be dumb and eat 360 calories a day, AND lift weights. Don't. There's no way you can consume enough protein on 360 calories a day in order for you body to fix the damage done to your muscles.

Well said

Listen to the B-man, he's nailed this. Aint no one looking out for your nutrition but your damned self, it's your responsibility. I wish there were like buttons so, I wouldn't have to show my support for an idea with banal lip-service.

Brian Tams:
Dear. Fucking. God.

No. Don't do this. This isn't weight loss, this is starvation.

each lost about 11 pounds, with nearly half of that coming from body fat.

This bit is rather telling. That means over half of that was only water weight and muscle mass, not body fat.

Do this instead. Consume 1500 calories a day. Burn 500 calories a day doing cardio. That's a caloric deficit of 1000 calories a day.
One pound of fat=3500 calories. 1000x7=7000 calories. Which is equivalent to 2 pounds. That means you should lose 2 pounds of fat a week.
Do that for a year, and you'll lose over 100 pounds.

Don't be dumb and eat 360 calories a day, AND lift weights. Don't. There's no way you can consume enough protein on 360 calories a day in order for you body to fix the damage done to your muscles.

For four days I don't see anything wrong with it.

The body is perfectly adjusted to deal with short periods of starvation and heavy exercise. You can't keep doing it of course, but considering this was an actual study on long-term effects as opposed to "one little trick found by reading the bible backwards to lose weight" I trust the men have been well enough advised.

What's odd though is that the weight stayed off, usually with this sort of thing it comes right back.

If i do not eat candy and unhealthy food i can easily lose 3 or more pounds of fat in a week the problem is that it rarely happens that i can go two days without satisfying my craving for chocolate and steak.

Eh....you don't have to stop eating unhealthy food, just start eating healthy food too...

also get outside every so often

I wonder what the results would be for women. I've heard my whole life that women have it much harder when it comes to weight loss (and I believe it's true), but I would like to see tested under controlled conditions like these.

Three days ago, I constructed spreadsheets and diaries in a definitive attempt to lose weight.

If I tried what they were trying, I'd be running a freaking 5860 calorie (apprx) daily deficit.

There is no universe in which that's healthy.

The fact that only half the lost weight is fat is even more damning.

This holds a lot of weight (bad pun is bad), and I can offer further evidence. I started a new job in October that required me to move a lot more then I used to, and due to a lack of money, I was eating a lot less then I used to (6 hours of walking opposed to 10 hours of me sitting on my ass). The end result is that I have lost over 20 pounds since that time, a noticeable chunk. Hell I didn't even really notice until my friends were pointing it out to me. So yeah, nice to know that this is a lasting effect. Gives me some hope for the future.

Oddly enough, fat people tend to be pretty healthy because they carry around all that extra weight. And people who were skinny when they were younger who get fat still tend to be healthy.

Even so, the damage done to these mens' muscles and nerves are completely irreversible, unless they were having protien literally supplied into their bloodstream.

Adam Jensen:
I have a better one. It worked for me anyway. Try to lead a healthy life style without all the junk food and exercise regularly because it feels good and makes your brain work better.

my brain cant work properly unless my blood is caramelized

Hagi:

Brian Tams:
Dear. Fucking. God.

No. Don't do this. This isn't weight loss, this is starvation.

each lost about 11 pounds, with nearly half of that coming from body fat.

This bit is rather telling. That means over half of that was only water weight and muscle mass, not body fat.

Do this instead. Consume 1500 calories a day. Burn 500 calories a day doing cardio. That's a caloric deficit of 1000 calories a day.
One pound of fat=3500 calories. 1000x7=7000 calories. Which is equivalent to 2 pounds. That means you should lose 2 pounds of fat a week.
Do that for a year, and you'll lose over 100 pounds.

Don't be dumb and eat 360 calories a day, AND lift weights. Don't. There's no way you can consume enough protein on 360 calories a day in order for you body to fix the damage done to your muscles.

For four days I don't see anything wrong with it.

The body is perfectly adjusted to deal with short periods of starvation and heavy exercise. You can't keep doing it of course, but considering this was an actual study on long-term effects as opposed to "one little trick found by reading the bible backwards to lose weight" I trust the men have been well enough advised.

What's odd though is that the weight stayed off, usually with this sort of thing it comes right back.

I'm inclined to agree that for actually obese people this 4 day super blitz might be a viable kickstart to a healthy lifestyle. If you're 20 - 50 pounds overweight this sounds like a horrible idea. If you're 200 pounds overweight that's another story.

As someone who is fat but loosing weight i can saftly say this is dumb and over doing it.

Iv lost major weight just eating better not killing my entire food intake and I exercise 2-3 hours a day 5-6 days a week and I feel amazing.

I hope none look at this study and thing gosh je willikers this is amazing way to loose weight...

After my gallbladder had to be removed late last year, I was put on a post-surgery diet. For the first week or so, I couldn't eat anything but beans, rice, applesauce, and toast. When I was finally cleared to eat "normal" food again, I took out many of the obvious suspects (daily TV dinners, weekly pizza, and sodas) and swapped then for other foods (cooking at least 5 meals a week, sticking with 40 grams of fat or less per day, and remembering how to prepare foods without a microwave). I was 235-240lbs in late September, and now I'm nearly 160. I used to have a size 42 waist, and now it's size 34-36. I'd like to know more about how thesubjects managed to maintain that weight loss after a crash diet, but the more detailed information is behind a paywall.

Still, there are times I wish I could go back and take out the plaque that I imagine are still lingering in the arteries. Anyone got a really tiny roto-rooter? =P

That just sounds nuts. I've lost about 120 lbs over the past year and a half using the calorie limits set for my by myfitnesspal, supplemented by a new found love of jogging (Zombies Run! ftw!)

They never let the total go below 1200 a day and if I don't exercise to get my daily calorie intake above 1500 I start to crash. Hard.

This is not a good thing. 11 pounds is good if you lose it over a couple of months, but losing that much weight in that short a time will generally be terrible for your body. I would know; I once tried cutting back to one meal per day and while I lost a lot of weight (not even as much as these men did!), I was also constantly exhausted and my hair started to fall out.

That reminds me, I need to get my 45 minutes of upper body tonight. I did my 8 hours chasing kids around a 100-acre amusement park, got some upper body ropeclimbing and on the teacups (also some callouses).... anyway, yea, weight training.

11 pounds sounds nice. Almost half being body fat, though, I don't know how they managed to make that seem acceptable. What was the other fucking half? I'm pretty sure the goal is ONLY to lose body fat, if you're losing anything else you're not in as good a shape as you think.

Sarah LeBoeuf:
Study Details Four-Day, 11-Pound Weight Loss in Overweight Men

By severely cutting calories and working out for four days, 15 overweight men were able to see lasting results.

Anyone who's ever spent time tracking calories likely knows the basic method to weight loss: take in less calories, burn more calories. Because that's so obvious, it probably doesn't come as a surprise that 15 overweight men who were restricted to 360 daily calories were able to see drastic weight loss results, considering healthy adults typically eat 1,200 to 2,000 calories in a day. What's surprising is how dramatic the loss was--11 pounds in just four days--and that they were able to keep the weight off for months, well after they went back to their regular eating habits.

The study was published in March, appearing in The Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, and tracked 15 healthy but overweight men from Spain and Sweden. By cutting about 1,800 calories out of their daily diets and getting a full day of exercise--45 minutes of upper body, eight hours of strolling the countryside--each lost about 11 pounds, with nearly half of that coming from body fat.

While those four days sound grueling and impossible to those of us who like to, you know, eat and generally not be active, the participants reported that it wasn't as hard as it sounds. According to Josť Calbet, a professor at the University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria in Spain, they "were surprised that it was easier than they thought it would be," with common issues being joint pain and blisters (as opposed to an inescapable craving for mac & cheese).

A month later, long after the subjects returned to their normal lives, their bodies didn't; most had lost two more pounds of fat. Even a year later, the subjects were generally five pounds lighter than when they started. Since most dieters end up regaining whatever weight they've lost, this is the part of the study that's perhaps the most interesting. It's not entirely clear what caused the sustained fat loss; Dr. Calbet theorized that the men may have been motivated to eat less and move more by their four days in the study. He hopes to perform a similar study with women next.

Source: The Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports via The New York Times

Permalink

This is a total thing. However, to replicate you do not need to go to such extremes. A 600-900 calorie day is fine for activating these results. That's all your body generally needs anyway, it's just way under for what is considered comfortable in society. But society is BS, the human body can do just fine on a low calorie diet, it thrives in every way.

A proper 600 calorie diet would be like oatmeal, 4-6 shakes with fiber, protean and assorted vitamin/mineral crap it helps to eat (You can get these anywhere now, they used to be through doctors in the 80'.) and a modest salad. If you ate like that every day you would have a lot more energy and live a lot longer. If you want to be buff, you will find it isn't even kinda enough and you will be starving. Most people are not body building though and that is more than enough calories for the average person.

Look up caloric restriction diets and longevity in chimps/animals through caloric restriction for some fun articles.

MeChaNiZ3D:
11 pounds sounds nice. Almost half being body fat, though, I don't know how they managed to make that seem acceptable. What was the other fucking half? I'm pretty sure the goal is ONLY to lose body fat, if you're losing anything else you're not in as good a shape as you think.

Correct.

The other half was water and lean muscle.

ie. if they continued this diet, they would get weaker, their metabolism would slow drastically, and they would begin to starve.

I REALLY hope some poor sod doesn't see this, and think "Wow! In twenty days of hell, I can lose over fifty pounds! This could be worth it!"

cnaltman62:
This is not a good thing. 11 pounds is good if you lose it over a couple of months, but losing that much weight in that short a time will generally be terrible for your body. I would know; I once tried cutting back to one meal per day and while I lost a lot of weight (not even as much as these men did!), I was also constantly exhausted and my hair started to fall out.

There is starvation and then there is caloric restriction. These guys were getting a very specific 400 calories, exactly enough to cover their actions. They were also severely overweight in some cases. A body and diet like this can produce these results consistently. I did it for years at 600 calories and I swear to god, everything was great for those years, I was more energetic, my skin was awesome, I was healthy all the time. I stopped because I stopped being fat and could eat more reasonably and decided to do that. I even lapsed for a couple of years in my first try on this diet and the results from the diet (only like 8 months) lasted those 4 years of no-diet down time (I ate like a pig). This is a completely possible diet.

MeChaNiZ3D:
11 pounds sounds nice. Almost half being body fat, though, I don't know how they managed to make that seem acceptable. What was the other fucking half? I'm pretty sure the goal is ONLY to lose body fat, if you're losing anything else you're not in as good a shape as you think.

This was a supervised diet so they were only losing body fat. I don't think anyone is recommending this extreme of caloric restriction for casual use, this diet requires a doctor. A diet like medifast though which is 600-900 calories is over the counter. Also, this was basically the subway diet Jared did, a very light sandwich and protein shakes for every other meal followed by 45-min a day of exercise. Any fatty would lose all their fat that way, it's the most effective diet behind weight watchers (technically the most sustainable diet around).

lacktheknack:

MeChaNiZ3D:
11 pounds sounds nice. Almost half being body fat, though, I don't know how they managed to make that seem acceptable. What was the other fucking half? I'm pretty sure the goal is ONLY to lose body fat, if you're losing anything else you're not in as good a shape as you think.

Correct.

The other half was water and lean muscle.

ie. if they continued this diet, they would get weaker, their metabolism would slow drastically, and they would begin to starve.

I REALLY hope some poor sod doesn't see this, and think "Wow! In twenty days of hell, I can lose over fifty pounds! This could be worth it!"

Look up caloric restriction diets, they exist and work. It's not some scam or fad or trick. It's a massive change to your eating habits that most people would not touch casually. It's not starvation, but on a diet like this (specifically this crazy low calorie one) nothing is left to chance or whim, this is a doctor supervised diet.

Fenrox Jackson:

cnaltman62:
This is not a good thing. 11 pounds is good if you lose it over a couple of months, but losing that much weight in that short a time will generally be terrible for your body. I would know; I once tried cutting back to one meal per day and while I lost a lot of weight (not even as much as these men did!), I was also constantly exhausted and my hair started to fall out.

There is starvation and then there is caloric restriction. These guys were getting a very specific 400 calories, exactly enough to cover their actions. They were also severely overweight in some cases. A body and diet like this can produce these results consistently. I did it for years at 600 calories and I swear to god, everything was great for those years, I was more energetic, my skin was awesome, I was healthy all the time. I stopped because I stopped being fat and could eat more reasonably and decided to do that. I even lapsed for a couple of years in my first try on this diet and the results from the diet (only like 8 months) lasted those 4 years of no-diet down time (I ate like a pig). This is a completely possible diet.

MeChaNiZ3D:
11 pounds sounds nice. Almost half being body fat, though, I don't know how they managed to make that seem acceptable. What was the other fucking half? I'm pretty sure the goal is ONLY to lose body fat, if you're losing anything else you're not in as good a shape as you think.

This was a supervised diet so they were only losing body fat. I don't think anyone is recommending this extreme of caloric restriction for casual use, this diet requires a doctor. A diet like medifast though which is 600-900 calories is over the counter. Also, this was basically the subway diet Jared did, a very light sandwich and protein shakes for every other meal followed by 45-min a day of exercise. Any fatty would lose all their fat that way, it's the most effective diet behind weight watchers (technically the most sustainable diet around).

Nope nope nope nope nope.

They were NOT only losing body fat:

OP:
each lost about 11 pounds, with nearly half of that coming from body fat.

They were not eating "exactly enough to cover their actions", they were getting 360 calories a day. A particularly fat person can burn through that in one hour of walking. These guys did eight.

As for your story of your perfect diet, well, I straight up don't believe you unless you're as thin as a crafting dowel. You mean to tell me that you thrived for YEARS on the caloric equivalent of three potatoes a day? Not buying it for an instant.

Fenrox Jackson:

lacktheknack:

MeChaNiZ3D:
11 pounds sounds nice. Almost half being body fat, though, I don't know how they managed to make that seem acceptable. What was the other fucking half? I'm pretty sure the goal is ONLY to lose body fat, if you're losing anything else you're not in as good a shape as you think.

Correct.

The other half was water and lean muscle.

ie. if they continued this diet, they would get weaker, their metabolism would slow drastically, and they would begin to starve.

I REALLY hope some poor sod doesn't see this, and think "Wow! In twenty days of hell, I can lose over fifty pounds! This could be worth it!"

Look up caloric restriction diets, they exist and work. It's not some scam or fad or trick. It's a massive change to your eating habits that most people would not touch casually. It's not starvation, but on a diet like this (specifically this crazy low calorie one) nothing is left to chance or whim, this is a doctor supervised diet.

I'm on one. A self-designed and safe one, specifically. Assuming I don't give up, I'm going to lose 30 pounds this summer.

The only way I could lose weight the same way as the people in this study (assuming 3500 calories per pound of fat and 1000 calories per pound of other tissue) (5.5 lb at 1000 cal/lb + 5.5 lb at 3500 cal/lb) / 4 days = 24750 cal / 4 days = a daily deficit of

6188 calories.

This means that I'd have to burn my normal 2500 standard calories a day AND THEN 3688 MORE THROUGH OTHER ACTIVITIES BEFORE I'M ALLOWED TO EAT. And THEN anything I eat has to be burned off further.

To even attempt this, I'd have to swim the butterfly (which is utterly exhausting) for over two hours before anything I eat is even accounted for. More realistically, I could just walk at 3.5 miles an hour (a quick pace) for about 7 hours before my diet is considered. Then, I'd have to burn off everything that I eat.

This is simply unsafe.

Tell me how ripping two to three times the normal number of calories from your system each day without adequate vitamin, mineral or carbohydrate replenishment isn't stressful on the body and doesn't cause damage.

Tell me.

lacktheknack:

Fenrox Jackson:

cnaltman62:
This is not a good thing. 11 pounds is good if you lose it over a couple of months, but losing that much weight in that short a time will generally be terrible for your body. I would know; I once tried cutting back to one meal per day and while I lost a lot of weight (not even as much as these men did!), I was also constantly exhausted and my hair started to fall out.

There is starvation and then there is caloric restriction. These guys were getting a very specific 400 calories, exactly enough to cover their actions. They were also severely overweight in some cases. A body and diet like this can produce these results consistently. I did it for years at 600 calories and I swear to god, everything was great for those years, I was more energetic, my skin was awesome, I was healthy all the time. I stopped because I stopped being fat and could eat more reasonably and decided to do that. I even lapsed for a couple of years in my first try on this diet and the results from the diet (only like 8 months) lasted those 4 years of no-diet down time (I ate like a pig). This is a completely possible diet.

MeChaNiZ3D:
11 pounds sounds nice. Almost half being body fat, though, I don't know how they managed to make that seem acceptable. What was the other fucking half? I'm pretty sure the goal is ONLY to lose body fat, if you're losing anything else you're not in as good a shape as you think.

This was a supervised diet so they were only losing body fat. I don't think anyone is recommending this extreme of caloric restriction for casual use, this diet requires a doctor. A diet like medifast though which is 600-900 calories is over the counter. Also, this was basically the subway diet Jared did, a very light sandwich and protein shakes for every other meal followed by 45-min a day of exercise. Any fatty would lose all their fat that way, it's the most effective diet behind weight watchers (technically the most sustainable diet around).

Nope nope nope nope nope.

They were NOT only losing body fat:

OP:
each lost about 11 pounds, with nearly half of that coming from body fat.

They were not eating "exactly enough to cover their actions", they were getting 360 calories a day. A particularly fat person can burn through that in one hour of walking. These guys did eight.

As for your story of your perfect diet, well, I straight up don't believe you unless you're as thin as a crafting dowel. You mean to tell me that you thrived for YEARS on the caloric equivalent of three potatoes a day? Not buying it for an instant.

Fenrox Jackson:

lacktheknack:

Correct.

The other half was water and lean muscle.

ie. if they continued this diet, they would get weaker, their metabolism would slow drastically, and they would begin to starve.

I REALLY hope some poor sod doesn't see this, and think "Wow! In twenty days of hell, I can lose over fifty pounds! This could be worth it!"

Look up caloric restriction diets, they exist and work. It's not some scam or fad or trick. It's a massive change to your eating habits that most people would not touch casually. It's not starvation, but on a diet like this (specifically this crazy low calorie one) nothing is left to chance or whim, this is a doctor supervised diet.

I'm on one. A self-designed and safe one, specifically. Assuming I don't give up, I'm going to lose 30 pounds this summer.

The only way I could lose weight the same way as the people in this study (assuming 3500 calories per pound of fat and 1000 calories per pound of other tissue) (5.5 lb at 1000 cal/lb + 5.5 lb at 3500 cal/lb) / 4 days = 24750 cal / 4 days = a daily deficit of

6188 calories.

This means that I'd have to burn my normal 2500 standard calories a day AND THEN 3688 MORE THROUGH OTHER ACTIVITIES BEFORE I'M ALLOWED TO EAT. And THEN anything I eat has to be burned off further.

To even attempt this, I'd have to swim the butterfly (which is utterly exhausting) for over two hours before anything I eat is even accounted for. More realistically, I could just walk at 3.5 miles an hour (a quick pace) for about 7 hours before my diet is considered. Then, I'd have to burn off everything that I eat.

This is simply unsafe.

Tell me how ripping two to three times the normal number of calories from your system each day without adequate vitamin, mineral or carbohydrate replenishment isn't stressful on the body and doesn't cause damage.

Tell me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calorie_restriction
look up medifast.

The diet I was on is a 600 calorie diet with daily exorcize, usually 45 min of elliptical and some weight lifting, like 15 min every other day. I started about 290lbs and ended at 170, that took about 2-3 years total. Near the end I started adding more food but I don't think i averaged above 1000. I now eat like 1500 a day. Yes you can do this wrong and everyone should see a doctor before doing it but it's totally possible and for many people it works. You can focus on negatives that affect some people, I can't help stubbornness. But hey, DON'T TAKE MY WORD FOR IT, go ask your Doctor, Doctors know about caloric restriction diets, many prescribe them to grossly overweight people that don't want a lapband. The internet has however allowed places like medifast to go over doctor approval and sell it as a normal diet. The article says 360 calories which I agree is way too low, but still way under your estimates of "healthy" is 600 and it was perfectly healthy, so is 900. You just have to be smart, those shakes you drink supplement what you need, there isn't a danger for most people.

Ok there are a million diets, but I have alot of experience with diets, I know which work, and I know how to get people who are even extremely over weight (700+ pounds) fit again.

But for your average person that isn't needed. If you have extra weight, some minor changes in your lifestyle can have you getting more fit, losing weight and feeling healthier...without having to drastically change what you eat, or spend long hours working out etc.

First step, I personally think everyone should take, is cut out all soda. If you must, drink it every so often when eating out (once or twice a week), but that is it. Alot of people struggling with weight drink soda often, even if it's diet you still usually get alot of salt, and it's just plain not healthy. There are tons of drinks that taste just as good as soda, without any sugar (I use Mio's for me and my wife for instance).

The next big deal is to control just how much you eat...especially the carbs. I'm not saying no carbs, but if you have other types of food there as well, you won't need to eat as many carbs to feel full. Salad.....is pretty much amazing for diets, since it's very healthy (as long as your not putting unhealthy dressing on it...itallian dressing (not creamy) or oil and vin are what I use. I have a salad with dinner every night. I use live lettuce because at least where I live it's not much more expensive (2.99 vs 2.50 for a head), and it's fresher and tastier. I have it first before my meal and it keeps me from starvation eating (IE I'm super hungry and eat more then I need).

Another good idea, always try and have some veggie with your meal. If I'm making chicken, steak or fish etc...I make a yummy veggie side dish. There are some great stir fry options (packages with broccili crowns, snap peas, carrot slices etc) in most grocery sections. Two bags of them tossed in my frying pan with a bit of water first (covered) to steam a bit, then a bit of olive oil to fry it...touched off with a few spritzes of terriky sauce to ad a bit of flavor...and you have a great side dish. Just switch out different veggies to keep it fresh (they sell bags of brussle sprouts for instance, or caluflower etc). If you have as much veggies on your dish as everything else your eating...along with a starter salad, you'll find yourself quite full without sacrificing the type of foods you want to eat.

Another idea is to experiment with different dishes. For instance, I used to make a sinful insanely good Lasagna. It was made with noodles, my meat sauce (hamburger meat + itallian sausage), and 3 types of cheese. It was so good everyone would eat till they where stuffed every time. I stopped making it a few years ago because of that (Seriously nobody had the ability to resist the evil lasagna including me).

So awhile ago, I tried switching it up a bit. I got low carb noodles...but that by itself really wouldn't make a big difference. I go with the same sauce I used before (just only a tiny bit of sausage now), but I use half as many noodles and cheese...instead I slice up yellow zuiccini squash and use that as 2 layers in my lasanga...along with slivered carrots as well (which I stir fry in a pan first before adding it in). I have even made vegetarian versions (Without my meat sauce) and while it's not as good, it's still very yummy (probably great if you are actually a vegetarian...but I just did it because I had a friend over who is...usually we go with the meat variety).

Finally, fill your house with healthy snacks. Keep yourself from ever getting to the point where you are starving, and prevent yourself from going for bad foods by having good healthy snacks around instead. No candy, ice cream etc, instead fruit is great to have as snacks. Bannana's and apples (we like fuji the best), have peanuts around if you need some quick protien etc.

That of course is just the food portion...but it's very important. The other portion is actually moving around. It's good to have some form of exersize you do regularly, even if it's just water aroebics. Try and walk if you can (not everyone can at first) instead of driving everywhere. Going to eat then shop nearby? Park where you will shop, then walk to where you are going to eat and back (so you don't have to move your car...and you got some walking in as well!).

Another nice way of moving more, is to not do large shops. Get all your food fresh each day if you can fit it into your schedule. If it's on the way home etc, just run in, get the food for the day, and use the express lane or self serve lane to save time. If your store is like mine, you'll probably end up saving time over all by not having to wait in the long lines (Seriously sometimes it's 45+ minutes to check out with a cart!!).

If you have set your life up in a way that you are happy, that is the best way to lose weight. Focus on food, making yummy food you really enjoy, spend energy and time making it, and you will end up with more energy and you'll end up being happy with the weight loss process.

Diet's too good to be true for good reason. Unhealthy, impractical, etc.
Who has 8+ free hours if they have a full time job anyhow? Not me. *Mutters about huge commute.*... aaanyhow, hanging out with friends would take a hit.

Also, I want a doubledown, now. Man, those things are great! Not healthy but frikkin' chickin' delicious! I wish they'd bring back the grilled version. Grilled just tastes different in a good way. Best chicken sandwich in terms of meat volume since it took seeming decades for a fast food chain to figure out that chicken sandwiches can come with more than one slab of chicken. I really like chicken sandwiches. <.<
Frikking expensive, though...

I may have done a similar thing to this unintentionally-- when I moved from Seattle to Houston I stopped drinking milk and have eaten mostly bread and peanut butter (and/or regular butter) with water and orange juice along with some pizza and various junk food generously given by my roommates. But mostly bread and peanut butter and more recently some strawberry preserves because delicious. And also breakfast cereal, though not nearly as much as the bread. Exercise hasn't really been a factor, I hardly move.

The result is that I went from about 180-200 pounds to 140 and I've stayed there for more than a year. I wasn't even trying to lose weight, it just happened. I don't know if I am healthier but I feel like I am. And this diet is cheap, like wow it is so cheap.

What, is escapist running diet advertisement now or something?

15 overweight men who were restricted to 360 daily calories

yeah, thats not healthy at all. they weren getting enough calories to even run their brains. can leave permanent damage very quickly.

starving yourself is the worst kind of diet you can have.

each lost about 11 pounds, with nearly half of that coming from body fat.

And the other half? you do know that this kind of body self-eating results in what we saw in nazi concentration camps right?

Adam Jensen:
exercise regularly because it feels good

i always have a problem with this.
IT DOES NOT FEEL GOOD. its a torture i have to endure to stay healthy. nothing more.

LavaLampBamboo:

This is a bit of an odd one though, given how much weight they were able keep off afterwards. Maybe because the diet was SO intense?

more likely due to permanent body damage from the "Experiment". the body was not able to repair itself from the exercise and left dead tissue that did not allow further growth.

WarHamster40K:
(cooking at least 5 meals a week

wait, so people dont cook thier meals? im cooking 14 meals a week and the other 7 are self-prepared too but requires no cooking (such as a salad for example, or a sandwitch). every 2 weeks or so i go to a restaurant with a friend but thats kinda it. you mention pizzas..... i actually cook my own pizzas.....

Fenrox Jackson:

This is a total thing. However, to replicate you do not need to go to such extremes. A 600-900 calorie day is fine for activating these results. That's all your body generally needs anyway, it's just way under for what is considered comfortable in society. But society is BS, the human body can do just fine on a low calorie diet, it thrives in every way.

Ech no. if you work a mental job (a job in which you have to think and make decisions) your brain alone will consume 800-900 calories. Brain consumes over half the calories needed in your body, and starving brain, well, i dont suggest you try it.

The human body can "thrive" as much as nazi camp prisoners "Thrived" on 800 calories a day.

Fenrox Jackson:

There is starvation and then there is caloric restriction. These guys were getting a very specific 400 calories, exactly enough to cover their actions.

400 calories is not enough to run your brain, let alone a trianing exercise. they were being starved through and through.

This was a supervised diet so they were only losing body fat.

except that the study itself says that less than half of the weight loss was body fat.
LESS than half.

Fenrox Jackson:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calorie_restriction
look up medifast.

whaat. High mortality rate is considered a positive effect. i dont even....

wulfy42:

If you have set your life up in a way that you are happy, that is the best way to lose weight. Focus on food, making yummy food you really enjoy, spend energy and time making it, and you will end up with more energy and you'll end up being happy with the weight loss process.

but making yummy food is what got me into beign fat in the first place! now i have to eat bad tasting vegetables and stuff. really, my tastes for food is really something thats never gonig to be healthy, but i prefer health>taste

Seanchaidh:
And this diet is cheap, like wow it is so cheap.

Starvation is cheap until health disorders kick in.

Strazdas:

Seanchaidh:
And this diet is cheap, like wow it is so cheap.

Starvation is cheap until health disorders kick in.

I'm not starving, though. It's really efficient on the calories per dollar.

What's the rush?

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here