Weight loss pseudoscience

[louisem]

Hi all

I just finished a Critical Thinking in Psychology course aka Pseudoscience and one of the requirements was a small paper on any common pseudoscience topic. I chose weight loss with an emphasis on nutritional programs (eg WW, Atkins, etc.). The information I found totally validated my decision for lapband surgery (as I knew it would). Here is a brief synopsis of what I found.

-most nutritional info available is not based on science including the food pyramid which is actually less healthy than the WW meal plan (shocking)

-WW is the only "diet" with any marginal long term success - but even then it only has a 5% success rate for weight loss maintenance.

-weight loss meds currently available (in Canada) are limited, have only marginal success (about 3% increase in total loss), and can have nasty and sometimes dangerous side effects

-low fat, low carb, high protein.....It doesn't matter as far as weight loss, it is ALL about calories in vs calories expended. There is NO scientific evidence that ANY composition is better for losing weight. What all the programs have in common is the restricted diet also tends to restrict total calories.

-Recommended amounts of physical activity have little scientific basis, partly because individual requirements are based on so many variables (health and fitness levels, weight, age, diet, etc. etc.). Again it comes down to calories in vs calories expended.

-Extremely low calorie diets (around 500 calories eg Dr Bernstein's)do mean that you lose weight faster initially, but weight maintenance is even poorer than normal and if you look at different plans after 12 months they are all about equal (ie everybody gains it back)

-The only weight loss intervention that has any proven success rate is surgery.

If anyone is interested I can send you a copy if you want more details just send me your email address cause I don't know how to attach docs here. I also have all my original sources in PDF format for the really geeky.

Cheers

Louise

[magkai1]

I just sent you a private message with my email address. Sounds really interesting!

[bogiesmom]

Hi all

I just finished a Critical Thinking in Psychology course aka Pseudoscience and one of the requirements was a small paper on any common pseudoscience topic. I chose weight loss with an emphasis on nutritional programs (eg WW, Atkins, etc.). The information I found totally validated my decision for lapband surgery (as I knew it would). Here is a brief synopsis of what I found.

-most nutritional info available is not based on science including the food pyramid which is actually less healthy than the WW meal plan (shocking)

-WW is the only "diet" with any marginal long term success - but even then it only has a 5% success rate for weight loss maintenance.

-weight loss meds currently available (in Canada) are limited, have only marginal success (about 3% increase in total loss), and can have nasty and sometimes dangerous side effects

-low fat, low carb, high protein.....It doesn't matter as far as weight loss, it is ALL about calories in vs calories expended. There is NO scientific evidence that ANY composition is better for losing weight. What all the programs have in common is the restricted diet also tends to restrict total calories.

-Recommended amounts of physical activity have little scientific basis, partly because individual requirements are based on so many variables (health and fitness levels, weight, age, diet, etc. etc.). Again it comes down to calories in vs calories expended.

-Extremely low calorie diets (around 500 calories eg Dr Bernstein's)do mean that you lose weight faster initially, but weight maintenance is even poorer than normal and if you look at different plans after 12 months they are all about equal (ie everybody gains it back)

-The only weight loss intervention that has any proven success rate is surgery.

If anyone is interested I can send you a copy if you want more details just send me your email address cause I don't know how to attach docs here. I also have all my original sources in PDF format for the really geeky.

Cheers

Louise

Louise, Were we seperated at birth? If not we should have been You gotta be a Capricorn, Capricorn rising or at least be Capricorn dominante somewhere in your chart! Brilliantly put and what an amazing topic. I am PMing you right away!

Okay, I see you are a Sagatarius and I am Sagatarius rising that partly explains you brilliant mind I also love, love, love your personal photo.

[louisem]

Louise, Were we seperated at birth? If not we should have been You gotta be a Capricorn, Capricorn rising or at least be Capricorn dominante somewhere in your chart! Brilliantly put and what an amazing topic. I am PMing you right away!

Okay, I see you are a Sagatarius and I am Sagatarius rising that partly explains you brilliant mind I also love, love, love your personal photo.

LOL love the irony of talking about horoscopes in a topic concerning pseudoscience :)i don't know about the capricorn dominant or anything, I always thought I was more scorpio than anything else (PS I hope my prof doesn't read this and retroactively fail me lol)

Thanks so much, for all your kind words. The picture is ancient but since I hate getting my picture taken it will have to do for now

[Lindsay]

These are things I've known for a long time, through my own research.

Kudo's for posting it in this forum!