CrossFit Discussion Board  

Go Back   CrossFit Discussion Board > CrossFit Forum > Nutrition
CrossFit Home Forum Site Rules CrossFit FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Nutrition Diet, supplements, weightloss, health & longevity

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-26-2009, 10:50 AM   #11
Christian Gotcher
Member Christian Gotcher is offline
 
Christian Gotcher's Avatar
 
Profile:
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Annapolis  Maryland
Posts: 751
Re: Yet another study....

A friend of mine was trying to lose weight (he was 40-50 pounds overweight, high school age), and his strategy was simple. Cut down to 3 Mountain Dews a day (instead of 5) and walk for one mile down to the park (take a bench break) then walk back. It worked to his satisfaction- he lost 15 pounds in 2 months (a much more dramatic loss, I notice, than what the study resulted in...).

A Crossfitter wouldn't see that as a huge difference (he's still in the overweight range and not really near 'fit'), but to him, it was everything in the world. At the very least, it was a step in the right direction- one step towards control over his own body. Calories in vs. Calories out worked, and who can blame him for liking the deal?
__________________
M/22/155|Murph-28:19|Helen-9:39|Annie- 5:12|CFT-700|1.5 Mile-8:35|Strict PU-24|Fran-5:24 log
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 10:57 AM   #12
Jamie J. Skibicki
Member Jamie J. Skibicki is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Pittsburgh  PA
Posts: 8,841
Re: Yet another study....

Becuase they don't mention anything about calories in calories out has it limits. If they put Laura post in the article, I would be satisfied. But when the weight won't come off anymore and they are stuck now where near what they want, they get frustrated and give up. THats my problem.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 10:59 AM   #13
Laura Kurth
Member Laura Kurth is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Boston  MA
Posts: 2,476
Re: Yet another study....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Christian Gotcher View Post
A friend of mine was trying to lose weight (he was 40-50 pounds overweight, high school age), and his strategy was simple. Cut down to 3 Mountain Dews a day (instead of 5) and walk for one mile down to the park (take a bench break) then walk back. It worked to his satisfaction- he lost 15 pounds in 2 months (a much more dramatic loss, I notice, than what the study resulted in...).

A CrossFitter wouldn't see that as a huge difference (he's still in the overweight range and not really near 'fit'), but to him, it was everything in the world. At the very least, it was a step in the right direction- one step towards control over his own body. Calories in vs. Calories out worked, and who can blame him for liking the deal?
But of course this worked, would you have expected another outcome

The closer he gets to 'lean' the more difficult this will become for him.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 11:17 AM   #14
Ed Haywood
Member Ed Haywood is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Valrico  FL
Posts: 492
Re: Yet another study....

Quote:
when overweight or obese people hear this, they think "i need to eat less and workout more"
That is exactly what they should be thinking.

The important things are simple, and the simple things are hard.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 11:27 AM   #15
Danni Coffman
Member Danni Coffman is offline
 
Danni Coffman's Avatar
 
Profile:
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Kalispell  MT
Posts: 110
Re: Yet another study....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamie J. Skibicki View Post
Becuase they don't mention anything about calories in calories out has it limits. If they put Laura post in the article, I would be satisfied. But when the weight won't come off anymore and they are stuck now where near what they want, they get frustrated and give up. THats my problem.
Why would they put Laura in this study? Someone who is already very thin, lean and fit does not make for a good study because, frankly, any desire to get thinner/leaner/fitter has nothing to do with "health" and instead has to do with a self-absorbed obsession with being the best possible speciman of human. (I'm not saying this is Laura's goal btw!) In the grand scheme of things, whether Laura can shave a few seconds off her Fran time by eliminating night shades from her world is totally insignificant -- whereas the global health crisis resulting from obesity is of major widescale concern. Just sayin. (And using her name since you did, not because I think she is self-obsessed or refuses to eat nightshades).
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 11:35 AM   #16
Tom Seryak
Member Tom Seryak is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Dublin  Ohio
Posts: 389
Re: Yet another study....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamie J. Skibicki View Post
Becuase they don't mention anything about calories in calories out has it limits. If they put Laura post in the article, I would be satisfied. But when the weight won't come off anymore and they are stuck now where near what they want, they get frustrated and give up. THats my problem.
right on, that's what i was trying to say but it didn't come off as well as you put it. imo, the "health and wellness" industry has not communicated well that caloric needs change as one gets closer to a healthier bodyweight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 11:40 AM   #17
Tom Seryak
Member Tom Seryak is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Dublin  Ohio
Posts: 389
Re: Yet another study....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Haywood View Post
That is exactly what they should be thinking.

The important things are simple, and the simple things are hard.
okay how about the "busy" working professional who skips breakfast, eats a modest lunch and a high calorie dinner? does this person need to eat less? we all know "this guy" and if this guy tries to cut calories and start exercising, his calorie deficit will get too large and the already damaged metabolism will get worse. now, if you have someone that eats junk all day long, then eating less is appropriate. so, it depends on what the person's current habits are!
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 12:15 PM   #18
Tom Seryak
Member Tom Seryak is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Dublin  Ohio
Posts: 389
Re: Yet another study....

last one, then i'm done.

perhaps "they/we" should say "caloric deficit" instead.

caloric expenditure (RESTING METABOLIC RATE + daily activity level + thermic effect of food + intentional exercise) needs to be greater than caloric intake (food-cho, p, fat).

educate those who are overweight/obese that a calorie deficit needs to be established to lose weight/fat. educate them that if caloric deficit becomes too large (i.e, too little calories, too much exercise), RESTING METABOLIC RATE gets damaged (goes down). educate them that diet/exercise strategies that lower rmr are not good strategies for long-term weight management. encourage them to always eat at least as many calories as rmr. educate them that rmr may actually increase (hopefully they are weight training) as they lose weight/fat and that they may need to INCREASE daily caloric intake over time, so as to not damage rmr.

bottom line: we have been telling overweight people for decades now to cut calories and increase activity. while this may "work" in the short-term, clearly it doesn't work well in the long-term. just look around, people aren't getting skinnier over time. the nation is fatter now than it ever has been and it isn't slowing down, it's still getting worse.

how about instead of cutting calories, let's work to increase resting metabolic rate?
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 12:28 PM   #19
Jamie J. Skibicki
Member Jamie J. Skibicki is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Pittsburgh  PA
Posts: 8,841
Re: Yet another study....

Danni,

I said "Laura post in the article" (i forgot the 's)

not

"Laura in the study", which would be silly.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 12:46 PM   #20
Steven Low
Member Steven Low is offline
 
Steven Low's Avatar
 
Profile:
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: silver spring  maryland
Posts: 12,221
Re: Yet another study....

Dr. G's post on PMenu on this study....

Looks like the came to a bad conclusion and/or the press came to a bad conclusion. Epic fail.

-------------------------------------

This study was far from simply calories in, calories out. Here's why:
Quote:
Weight-Loss Intervention

The nutrient goals for the four diet groups were: 20% fat, 15% protein, and 65% carbohydrates (low-fat, average-protein); 20% fat, 25% protein, and 55% carbohydrates (low-fat, high-protein); 40% fat, 15% protein, and 45% carbohydrates (high-fat, average-protein); and 40% fat, 25% protein, and 35% carbohydrates (high-fat, high-protein). Thus, two diets were low-fat and two were high-fat, and two were average-protein and two were high-protein, constituting a two-by-two factorial design. The four diets also allowed for a dose–response test of carbohydrate intake that ranged from 35 to 65% of energy. Other goals for all groups were that the diets should include 8% or less of saturated fat, at least 20 g of dietary fiber per day, and 150 mg or less of cholesterol per 1000 kcal. Carbohydrate-rich foods with a low glycemic index were recommended in each diet. Each participant's caloric prescription represented a deficit of 750 kcal per day from baseline, as calculated from the person's resting energy expenditure and activity level.

Blinding was maintained by the use of similar foods for each diet. Staff and participants were taught that each diet adhered to principles of a healthful diet29 and that each had been recommended for long-term weight loss, thereby establishing equipoise.1,2,26 Investigators and staff who measured outcomes were unaware of the diet assignment of the participants.

Group sessions were held once a week, 3 of every 4 weeks during the first 6 months and 2 of every 4 weeks from 6 months to 2 years; individual sessions were held every 8 weeks for the entire 2 years. Daily meal plans in 2-week blocks were provided (see the Supplementary Appendix). Participants were instructed to record their food and beverage intake in a daily food diary and in a Web-based self-monitoring tool that provided information on how closely their daily food intake met the goals for macronutrients and energy. Behavioral counseling was integrated into the group and individual sessions to promote adherence to the assigned diets. Contact among the groups was avoided.

The goal for physical activity was 90 minutes of moderate exercise per week. Participation in exercise was monitored by questionnaire30 and by the online self-monitoring tool.
Changing fiber intake, lowering glycemic index, keeping a food diary, and getting dietary counseling. Most of us here would agree that doing any/all of those things would improve general body composition, as they generally improve quality of the diet.

If it was all about calories, the glycemic index should have been avoided, because that in itself is saying that some "calories" have a different impact than others.

As I've said before, the same person could eat chocolate cake for a month straight versus a meat/veggies/good fat diet for a month straight--they would likely feel different and have different body comp at the end of a month due to the effects of different foods on things like hormones. It will never be as simple as only calories.

I didn't go back and check, but I'm assuming that measures of actual body composition were not taken. This was simply measuring weight loss, be it muscle or fat. Not a wise approach, if that's what they did.
__________________
Posts are NOT medical, training, nutrition info
Bodyweight Article, Overcoming Gravity Book

Last edited by Steven Low : 02-26-2009 at 12:48 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
POWER study - need volunteers Louis Hayes Community 7 01-15-2009 02:32 PM
New Diet Study Robert Pierce Health and Medical Issues 6 07-21-2008 03:16 AM
New Glucosamine Study Kevin Hughes Nutrition 2 02-20-2008 09:53 PM
I'm going to do a study on CrossFit Neal Winkler Fitness 26 04-16-2006 08:23 AM
Yet another study Stanley Kunnathu Fitness 3 02-16-2006 10:36 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
CrossFit is a registered trademark of CrossFit Inc.