Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg) - Meaningless Statistic on Weight Regain

Another poster wrote:

"Well, since about 90 % of people who lose weight then regain it, there is obviously something going on."

What's going on is citation of a meaningless statistic. My first question when I see such a figure cited is, "Is it valid?" I've seen all sorts of data about weight regain thrown around. My second is, "What is the methodology used to come up with that figure?" Fumento in his book The Fat of the Land points out often the figure comes from groups of people who traditionally have failed with weight loss previously.

But more importantly, the 90% - or whatever - figure is meaningless. Does it mean they regain ALL the weight they lost? Or does it assume someone who lost 100 pounds and regained 10 or 20 is part of the 90%? And even in a worst case scenario, if they regain the 100 pounds, hasn't this person enjoyed the benefits of the loss? And hasn't he learned that if he lost it once, he can lose it again, and he knows how to do it?

Please keep these thoughts in mind next time someone cites this meaningless statistic.

Aren't almost all statistics meaningless?

Aren't almost all statistics meaningless?
Only 76% are meaningless. The other 24% are insignificant. :D

Aren't almost all statistics meaningless?


No, they are very useful if properly applied. You need to understand where they come from and what they mean though and not just swallow figures thrown around as gospel. That often takes a fair bit of effort to develop an understanding and to get to the source of the stat in question, but statistics are invaluable for understanding large numbers of observations. Statistics are indeed frequently tortured and twisted to argue a point. Figures don't lie, but liars figure is one way I've heard it put.

A certain proportion of statistics are pure fabrications.

On the internet, that percentage approaches 100.

You know, I will say, it's almost depressing the weight gains I see in my social circle. There were five others that did some variation of the liquid diet that I did, and all lost a substantial amount of weight. And all but one have gained it all back, and then some. The other one is well on their way to gaining it back. I have another two friends who lost a ton of weight, now are quite chubby again thanks in no small part to a healthy Budweiser habit.

Do you know what they ALL said? "Well, I guess I'm just one of the 90% who gain all their weight back".

Self-fulfilling prophecy, anyone?

That being said, the ones who fail make up maybe 50% of my social circle's dieting group, the other 50% have managed to successfully lose and keep it off. My oft riding partner went from over 200 last year (I don't know exactly, but I think around 220) to a VERY svelte 170 this year. By VERY svelte I mean that I don't think he could healthily lose more. My brother did the same liquid diet I did, and has managed to keep most of the weight he lost off, but he's not trying to lose more. He walks his dog nightly and does other things so that he can eat and drink whatever he wants... to each their own, right? :)

I honestly hate hearing that 90% number as much as you, Neil. I think it gives those who fail an excuse to live up to, and those who want to try an excuse not to. And that is just very, very, VERY sad.

What are your own experiences? I believe that statistic to be fairly accurate. I know my weight goes up and down, I lose I gain it's a vicous cycle and all my friends that struggle with weight also deal with it.

Here's a old photo - at this point I lost over 100 lbs and was running marathons.
http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o288/bcipam/BFphotoII.jpg


I was never stronger, healthier, happier in my life so why did it change? Dunno. Makes me sad to think I threw it all away and now am an old, unhappy fat woman on blood pressure medication!

People who use the statistic BTW as an excuse would use anything else as an excuse (you know the "I have an overactive thyroid" people). I know why I gained weight; I started eating all the wrong foods in the wrong quantities. I have been weak and lazy and can give you no excuses. The statistic is fact. It's something to acknowledge and attempt to understand if trying to lose weight. The odds are stacked against you and you must try doubly hard.

Thanks! I am seriously trying. It's a hard struggle. I can use the encouragement!

Pam, look at my last post in the "advise to help a friend" thread.

I've lost and gained back a couple of times. It's always because I quit watching what I eat and quit being active. It also always involved a relationship with someone who had a sedentary lifestyle - they did not like me being gone to work out when I could be cuddling on the couch watching a movie.
I'm going to do my best to avoid that trap in the future.

(sorry for a long reply) Neil sadly I think that statistic is true. I know it is true for myself and several of my friends over the past few years. I've lost the same 30-40 lbs almost every year for the past 5 years yet I always slip up and drop back into bad habits (mostly portion size). <rant mode> Ultimately the individual is to blame but I think current society doesn't help people either. Absolutely not making excuses but in our current culture it's always someone else's fault, we are never to blame ourselves, there are so many calorie dense frankenfoods and fastfood choices, etc. Everyone is looking for a miracle pill to make themselves thin overnight. As a society we do a horrible job of promoting/teaching exercise and how to eat correctly. Also I think as a society we have some really screwed up ideas about body proportion and size. From Hollywood stars, to models, to steroid hopped sports stars, to BMI, to height/weight charts etc. None of them promote being healthy they all promote an "ideal" image.

Shog

This reminds me of one of my better blog posts:

Last year a monument to human gullibility was published. Rhonda Byrne's silly nonsense tome The Secret made the best seller lists and proved once again that no one ever lost money underestimating the intelligence of the American public. The book, which I have not read, discusses a allegedly universal "law of attraction" and how the power of thinking positive thoughts makes them happen for you. (It sounds like US policy in Iraq.) An excerpt of the book is available online, and in it Ms. Byrne gives advice on weight loss:

"Make it your intention to look for, admire, and inwardly praise people with your idea of perfect-weight bodies. Seek them out and as you admire them and feel the feelings of that-you are summoning it to you. If you see people who are overweight, do not observe them, but immediately switch your mind to the picture of you in your perfect body and feel it."

If this is so, perhaps you shouldn't read this blog. But while Ms. Byrne's book is bound snake oil, there is a point buried under the bunkum. Weight loss is about changing the associations you have with food, but also with people. Some of my friends with weight problems I don't see as often because I no longer do what fat people do - watch TV and eat to excess. I don't have the time, and I don't have the interest. I turned down an invitation to a Christmas party last year simply because I didn't want to be in an environment that encouraged gluttony. I could have resisted the excess food and drink, but I didn't want to look at it, and the gluttons who consumed it.

I'm not the only one reevaluating a friendship during my metamorphosis. I've lost at least one friendship as a result of the weight loss. As far as I can tell, my former friend, very fit for his age, was used to me being 385 pounds and not very active or able. Once I began to lose weight our friendship became strained. He no longer returns my emails or phone calls. It's been suggested that the friendship was based on my weakness; in other words, I made my former friend look better, stronger, healthier in comparison to me, and that as I improved, nothing was left to sustain the friendship.

There's another factor at play here, one common to the 'super obese.' You have to get used to people liking you for you, and stop assuming that friendship is being motivated by pity or charity. My friend "Miranda" has observed that my disposition is greatly improved from my 385 pound days. Aside from the fact I feel much better physically, I no longer question if friendships are motivated by any factor other than common interests and the strange undefinable magic that governs friendship. Weight loss is more than losing weight, it's gaining self-worth.

Wheels keep turning. Exercise, and bicycling, are bringing me new friendships to replace old ones, bringing me in contact with fit, and fitter, people than myself. And these people seem to be accepting me. Since people, despite the claims of some, are social creatures and mirror others, I am changing myself by looking at fit people and not looking at fat people. Not for Ms. Byrne's stated reason, of course.


My two ex wives were very slim - and ate as much or more than I did. I don't know why they could lay around all day and stay slim - but they sure could not understand why I could not do that too. My system seems to be very efficient at extracting all the calories from food - I have to stay a lot more active than they do on the same calorie intake.

I'm not complaining about it though - I like being more active. Not just in working out and riding the bike - but in how much I do in a day. The level of accomplishment required for me to be happy with my day is pretty high. I just need to be sure future partners are more active too.;):D

There are certain breeds of dogs-- siberian huskies in particular-- you are "easy keepers". They eat much less than other dogs their size to maintain the same weight with even more activity. Their bodies can store every calorie it encounters effeciently! I like it when these kinds of things show up in dogs, because it takes away all the psychological stuff. Huskies eat very little and can run for hours. Other dogs would bonk on the same amount of food.

I can understand if Neil is angry. I'm angry as well.

But, its not aimed at the people who are fat. Its the people who are making the excuses for them, and giving them a false sense of hopelessness. If you tell somebody enough that things are not happening to them as a direct result, and ONLY as a direct result of their actions alone, you are perpetuating the problem by providing them with excuses.

Brakes please......

Let's keep it safe here.

I can understand if Neil is angry. I'm angry as well.

But, its not aimed at the people who are fat. Its the people who are making the excuses for them, and giving them a false sense of hopelessness. If you tell somebody enough that things are not happening to them as a direct result, and ONLY as a direct result of their actions alone, you are perpetuating the problem by providing them with excuses.

There seems to be a fine line between making people feel good about themselves and encouraging unhealthy habits. I think the scale has tipped in this country to the point where many think it's more important to make people feel good about themselves (the excuses) than to point out things that can be improved. If you know something is bad for a friend or family member, do you enable their behavior, by supporting their excuses, or do you help them improve? Tough choice.

It's become easy to be lazy (speaking for myself here), I can blame it on genetics. My father is heavy, my sister and brother are both heavy, and my mother is not thin, so it's nature's fault. There's no reason to bother trying, for me, being overweight is my destiny. :cry: Unfortunately, I have proven to myself that it's not genetics, it's behavior. At 38 years old I had myself to the point where I ran a 5K in a little more than 21 minutes, ran my first, and only 10K in around 43 minutes, and could comfortably hang with the race team at 22 mph for 40+ miles. And speaking of bad support, when I had reached this level of conditioning, my mother complained that I looked too thin, even though I still had a "healthy" layer of "insulation". :mad:

Fast forward 10 years and I can't even run a 5K, I'm up to about 2 miles, haven't yet ridden 20 miles, but will this weekend if all goes well, and am only averaging 13-15 mph on rides. To top it off, my wife tells me I'm too old to be running and cycling. :mad: Fortunately, I've learned to ignore her on things like this, she's clueless...

I can't blame my parents, siblings, or wife for my current situation, I can only blame myself. And rather than wallow in self-pity, I need to get off my butt and fix the problem.

I can't blame my parents, siblings, or wife for my current situation, I can only blame myself. And rather than wallow in self-pity, I need to get off my butt and fix the problem.


TRUE THAT!!!! ;)

There seems to be a fine line between making people feel good about themselves and encouraging unhealthy habits. I think the scale has tipped in this country to the point where many think it's more important to make people feel good about themselves (the excuses) than to point out things that can be improved. If you know something is bad for a friend or family member, do you enable their behavior, by supporting their excuses, or do you help them improve? Tough choice.


You know this flows over into other things than just weight loss, a hard fact of life is that there are winners and there are losers, get over it (BTW, this isn't directed at piper_chuck, just in general) I think that most people don't want to face their problems and deal with them. Enter the groups like the NAAFA, it's easy to buy into there spin on the diet and exercise, there is no effort involved at all, all you have to do is more of what you have been doing and generally that requires no work.

I think the tragedy in all of this is that in the current day and age people are so afraid of offending someone that they will go to great lengths to avoid it thus fostering the notion that there are no losers in life and that everyone should be equal, I think this problem extends far beyond the bounds of obesity and weight loss. It really is odd on one side I have groups telling me that I'm overweight, fat, unhealthy and should be working to lose the weight and become a more healthy person. On the other side I have groups telling me that I should accept who I am, it's not my fault and there is nothing that I can do about it. but yet as was pointed out by another poster, no one seems to be concerned about how I fell or what I do, so in truth it all boils down to our own personal point of view and our own personal choices. But if I make a choice I have to be willing to live with that choice, and if I'm not willing to live with it, I have to be willing to work to do something about it.

This all reminds me of a high school student at a science fair, he did a project on a very dangerous substance that is so abundant on the planet that it has to potential to wipe out huge numbers of population, he even had people sign a petition that this substance (Di-Hydrogen Oxide) should be have government regulations on it and banned if possible, the response was overwhelming, no for those of you that have caught on Di-Hydrogen Oxide is H2O simple water, the whole point of his science project wasn't that water was bad for us, but rather that you could create a study to get what ever outcome that you wanted, and for what ever end you wanted. It is all in presentation of the facts and spinning it in the view that you want to get across. I think that Niel is actually trying to point this out, we don't have to believe the spin that is put on some of the statistics and numbers, they have a reason for spinning it that way, and both sides have reason for wanting you to believe them, and I can tell you that neither of the sides of the global argument (not the BFer's that post) really don't care about me personally, they are not really interested in my success's and failures unless it proves the point that their side is trying to make, they are much more interested in the agenda of their own group.

So if you have read this far you are probably long over due for that ride you've been planing I know that I'm long overdue after writing this :). Actually we should probably all go out and ride, we will feel better than sitting here at the computer.

Go Ride --- .

I would love to ride...but im @ work. :(

I would love to ride...but im @ work. :(
So instead, you're posting about riding? :p

That's how I roll!!!

Actually, I have little to do, and nobody wants to play ping-pong.

When I focus on my own statistics (in a way completely unrelated to the Iraq war) I find I am sometimes satisfied and at other times not. When statistics involving others are brought to my attention, I find that they are generally of no concern to me or "none of my business." Like most, I appreciate compliments and care little for criticism but generally seek neither nor place much importance on either.

My weight and fitness fluctuates. When I focus on what I consume and record how much I burn, it doesn't take much analysis to understand what is happening.

When I was in college, there was this book called "Blaming the victim". I think (I barely remember it now) that it was a cry for people to understand that some people's struggles were under much more difficult circumstances than others. I remember it was fairly radical thinking at the time (82)

Unfortunately, our society is one which carries everything to extremes, and people embraced the idea that everyone was a victim of something. What was never really looked at was that the biggest factor in someone's success was the belief that these hard circumstances were not sentences for failure.

So, let's say someone does* have a low thyroid, for example. If you were inclined to say they were a victim of poor health, you could say that. So the person with Hypothyroidism has 4 choices:

They can say,

1- "I'm a victim and it's too hard for me to lose weight" or

2- "I'm going to learn what impact this has on me and if I should be taking medication so I can counteract it to the best of my abilities" or

3- "what thyroid problem? I just need to exercise more and eat less" or

4- I am totally unconcerned about whether I lose weight or not.

I'm not saying any of these are better or worse than the other, but the dance between how much you can realistically do is a complicated one. If one person opts for medication and the other doesn't, is one person wrong?

There are other examples right here on the board. Some of you go out and work your butts off, even if you're injured! That's a sign that weight loss is really, really important to you.

I don't* work that hard. I don't like pain, and I don't like to get wiped out for work. So maybe I'll lose weight slower than someone else. That's fine with me. I'll get there. Like the example above, we all fit our goals into our every day survival.

As far as all these studies and stats go... I find it hard to be offended. Some seem dumb and I ignore them, some seem to have merit and if it gives me knowledge I'm all for it. Society is struggling to understand why so many of us are fat. I'm of the belief that it's multifactoral. It may just be laziness and overeating (I know it is for me), but it may be a number of things that all subtley combine. I'm glad society is at least exploring these things.


If some study has been done that says that most people regain weight--that's something to be aware of. Yes, see how the research was conducted. See if there's flaws. But why disregard things which may help?

I'm a middle aged woman. I've never understood the whole slower metabolism in middle age thing until now. I don't feel like a victim because I'm old... but I sure want to be aware that it's happening so I can adjust my eating to it.

There's no right or wrong way to do this stuff. We all have our priorities, and we'll work as hard as it's important to us.

Unfortunately, our society is one which carries everything to extremes, and people embraced the idea that everyone was a victim of something. What was never really looked at was that the biggest factor in someone's success was the belief that these hard circumstances were not sentences for failure.

There is more truth to the saying that "What doesn't kill me, makes me stronger" than society today would like to admit :).

When I was 20 years old I weighed #340+... by the time I was 26 I weighed 220 or there abouts(had a thirty six inch waste) and was body building, looking buff... Now at nearly 47 I weigh #270ish. I know what I did to get here, I know what I need to go back, but I do find as I get older it gets harder to lose weight.

My point is for true change it takes time, many of us don't ever notice the changes in our own lives that lead us back to weight gain. 3 pounds a year over 20 years is 60 pounds... We can lose it fast, we can gain it fast, or you can lose it over a long period of time and keep losing, or gain it over a long period of time and keep gaining.
We really do have a choice, it just seems many of us don't think we can make it...

I wish each and everyone of us success, but our plans have to be as individaul as each of our lives are...

When I was 20 years old I weighed #340+... by the time I was 26 I weighed 220 or there abouts(had a thirty six inch waste) and was body building, looking buff... Now at nearly 47 I weigh #270ish. I know what I did to get here, I know what I need to go back, but I do find as I get older it gets harder to lose weight.

My point is for true change it takes time, many of us don't ever notice the changes in our own lives that lead us back to weight gain. 3 pounds a year over 20 years is 60 pounds... We can lose it fast, we can gain it fast, or you can lose it over a long period of time and keep losing, or gain it over a long period of time and keep gaining.
We really do have a choice, it just seems many of us don't think we can make it...

I wish each and everyone of us success, but our plans have to be as individaul as each of our lives are...

Personally I think the slower metabolism, is related to our hunter-gatherer past, when a 20 year old, could hunt or gather more food, then a 40 year old. Now that hunting and gathering takes place at the mega mart, this isn't as required for modern living. However we hunted and gathered for 300 generations at least, we have been shopping at the supermarket (and driving to get there) only for 2-3 generations, so it will take a while longer for things to change.

However, no matter what your metabolism, if you take in 2500 calories, and burn 3500 a day, you will lose 2lbs a week. Metabolism is simply the number of calories you burn doing nothing (like sitting in front of the computer :eek:). So you need to get more active as you age, rather then the less we normally would, or cut back on the amount of food you eat.

However I think the next generation, will see things very differently, oil isn't possibly going to run out, it will run out, and then all those people in cars will be either walking or biking to get places. I think transit will be limited to longer distance rail travel, to get to the nearest port where wind powered ships will again rule the seas. Expect the only affordable way to get from New York to LA will be via the Panama canal, and will take 6 weeks rather then 6 hours, but I digress.

However I think the next generation, will see things very differently, oil isn't possibly going to run out, it will run out, and then all those people in cars will be either walking or biking to get places. I think transit will be limited to longer distance rail travel, to get to the nearest port where wind powered ships will again rule the seas. Expect the only affordable way to get from New York to LA will be via the Panama canal, and will take 6 weeks rather then 6 hours, but I digress.


That and steam powered rail travel will make a comeback :), I'd rather ride my bike I think.

That and steam powered rail travel will make a comeback :), I'd rather ride my bike I think.

I don't know about steam, if it does come back, it will likely operate differently, most likely a small recirculating boiler, powered by ethanol, running a small turbine-generator, and that powering electric wheel motors, most of it built of aluminum alloy, to keep the weight down.

This will be limited to intercity travel, inner city will often be by bike or walking.

However, no matter what your metabolism, if you take in 2500 calories, and burn 3500 a day, you will lose 2lbs a week. Metabolism is simply the number of calories you burn doing nothing (like sitting in front of the computer :eek:). So you need to get more active as you age, rather then the less we normally would, or cut back on the amount of food you eat.

.

I couldn't agree more with what you said in this paragraph, but I will say this... I have found as I get older that my body fights me more about burning the 3500 calories a day. After two back surgeries and a hip replacement, I have found that my activity level is not what it used to be. I am however trying to make head way on this by riding my bike and getting exercise when I can, plus lowering my Caloric intake... My point was everyone has different needs. One formula does not work for every one. And, some of us will take longer to get there than others...

I couldn't agree more with what you said in this paragraph, but I will say this... I have found as I get older that my body fights me more about burning the 3500 calories a day. After two back surgeries and a hip replacement, I have found that my activity level is not what it used to be. I am however trying to make head way on this by riding my bike and getting exercise when I can, plus lowering my Caloric intake... My point was everyone has different needs. One formula does not work for every one. And, some of us will take longer to get there than others...

+1, everyone is different, I think that was what I got over winded in saying :). Do what's right for you.

I believe the full text of the meaningless statistic should have been "over 90% of the people who lose weight regain it within 5 years"(-- within five years of what, I don't know. The 'end' of the diet? The landing at the goal weight?). Which, if one chooses to believe that statistic, says to me that it's not the losing of the weight that's the "hard part" -- it's the keeping it off. And I can see how that would defeat someone before they even set out on the path to thin -- I can see someone saying to themselves "I'm willing to work hard to get thin" but having a harder time facing the idea of "If I do this, I'm going to have to work hard at this every day for the rest of my life". Throw in the statistics about yo-yo dieting, and you've got someone who's saying "I'll have to work hard at this for the rest of my life, and if I screw it up, my metabolism will be in worse shape then if I didn't do anything . . ."

I think the real issue is not to announce that "people who quote those statistics are making excuses!" but rather: how does one stay motivated in the face of those thoughts/stats? And once you get to that question, it doesn't even matter if one has meaningless statistics to support them or thwart them, at the end of the day, one still has to find a way to stay motivated. So I would be curious to know, from the people who've hit their goal and stayed there for 9 mos or year or two or three (or 6!): What keeps you motivated every day?

Well, what keeps me motivated is this picture, as well as the senond one.

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o260/TomStormcrowe/Project1.jpg

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o260/TomStormcrowe/FatPants004.jpg

and this one:
http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o260/TomStormcrowe/MichiganTrip067.jpg


I believe the full text of the meaningless statistic should have been "over 90% of the people who lose weight regain it within 5 years"(-- within five years of what, I don't know. The 'end' of the diet? The landing at the goal weight?). Which, if one chooses to believe that statistic, says to me that it's not the losing of the weight that's the "hard part" -- it's the keeping it off. And I can see how that would defeat someone before they even set out on the path to thin -- I can see someone saying to themselves "I'm willing to work hard to get thin" but having a harder time facing the idea of "If I do this, I'm going to have to work hard at this every day for the rest of my life". Throw in the statistics about yo-yo dieting, and you've got someone who's saying "I'll have to work hard at this for the rest of my life, and if I screw it up, my metabolism will be in worse shape then if I didn't do anything . . ."

I think the real issue is not to announce that "people who quote those statistics are making excuses!" but rather: how does one stay motivated in the face of those thoughts/stats? And once you get to that question, it doesn't even matter if one has meaningless statistics to support them or thwart them, at the end of the day, one still has to find a way to stay motivated. So I would be curious to know, from the people who've hit their goal and stayed there for 9 mos or year or two or three (or 6!): What keeps you motivated every day?

For what it's worth--even though my weight has fluctuated (love those doctors who kept prescribing anti-depressants for my migraines :( ), losing weight isn't my goal.

It's knowing that my mother has diabetes. One sister is pre-diabetic. Another sister has high cholesterol and high blood pressure. A brother has high cholesterol and high blood pressure. The remaining sister is like me--she remains active because she also doesn't want to take five, ten, fifteen different medications every day. That's what keeps me motivated. And seeing Tom's before and after photos is always a good thing!

East Hill

I posted my motivation in another thread, so I'll just be lazy and copy it here.

The amount of weight is not my motivator, it's my health. Weight is kind of a side issue. I went to the doc last summer because I was not feeling right and found out I was anemic and had high blood pressure. I had to get 2 units of blood immediatly. It's been a long process to get through that - still continueing. It's under control but requires a lot of drugs to keep it there. I want to get healthier and get off of as many drugs as possible.

My dad had a triple bypass at my age, and my mom died from an anurism at 63. I want to break that trend.

I partly agree with the statistic.. I never once thought I would gain so much weight back, but again something just switched in my attitude which helped make it possible.

I started off at atleast 425lb, just 1.5 years later I was down to 211lb at age 21. Then I started going out more, met a girl, and just started not caring/being strict. another 1.5 years later and I have regained 100lbs! At least the past 2 months I've rededicated myself and want to lose weight.

I guess this was just a harsh lesson learned...

Tom, an idle thought here. Your remaining potential for significant additional weight loss involves a razor.:D

MAN, that is one HEAVY beard you wear Sir!

Well, as the poster who got the Historian so riled up, I'm going to stick by the assertion that almost everybody who loses weight regains it. That's just a fact, and saying it's wrong does not make it wrong. There have been a ton (:))of well designed observational studies that demonstrate this fact, and a lot of new experiments are uncovering reasons for it. These studies are focusing on the observation that a number of hormones in the body regulate appetite, while other hormones control the tendency to deposit and utilize body fat. A good, impartial source of information about this topic is a new book by NY Times science writer Gina Kolata, called Rethinking Thin. (http://www.amazon.com/Rethinking-Thin-Science-Loss-Realities/dp/0374103984)

However, if you're still reading this, notice that the statistic is not that 100 % of people who lose significant weight regain it. Only that most people regain it. (In fact, many regain more than they originally lost.) For almost everybody, weight control is a frustrating and unhealthy roller coaster of losing and regaining weight. Surely most of you have seen this to be true, either in yourselves or in your friends and relatives.

This sobering fact makes it all the more important that those of us who have lost weight should use the available knowledge to help us maintain our weight loss. Pretending that weight regain is not a problem will not magically make it into less of a problem. One source of good information about maintining weight loss is the National Weight Control Registry (http://www.nwcr.ws/). They have polled people who have maintained significant weight loss, and gathered some of the strategies that were successful for maintenance. Here are the key findings, in a nutshell:




There is variety in how NWCR members keep the weight off. Most report continuing to maintain a low calorie, low fat diet and doing high levels of activity

78% eat breakfast every day.
75% weigh them self at least once a week.
62% watch less than 10 hours of TV per week.
90% exercise, on average, about 1 hour per day.
Personally, I went from more than 320 pounds to 180 pounds about 6 years ago. I was unable to maintain 180 pounds. However, I have successfully maintained at 210 pounds most of the time, although I did slip back to 246 about 3 years ago. With a lot of vigorous exercise and a modicum of care with my diet, I am happy with 210, even though my BMI suggests a "normal" weight of 180.

So, you can ignore the statistic if you like. For me, it's more sensible to be aware of this "inconvenient truth" so that I can make sensible and realistic plans when it comes to my own weight control.

Good post Roody.

Ooooh -- that's really useful information, Roody -- thanks for posting that link!

One source of good information about maintining weight loss is the National Weight Control Registry (http://www.nwcr.ws/). They have polled people who have maintained significant weight loss, and gathered some of the strategies that were successful for maintenance. Here are the key findings, in a nutshell:



I am registered with the National Weight Control Registry something to keep in mind they consider "Regain" a gain of 5 pounds re-gain. I dropped 230 pounds I weight between 160-165 pounds they have me registered at 160 if when the annual questioner comes out I weigh in at 166 I am counted as "re-gaining" weight.

The vast majority of folks who get swept up in this 90% figure are the folks who are constantly fighting with say 10 or 15 "Vanity" pounds. They do some sort of strict diet, drop the weight, then go back to business as usual. Of course they are going to re-gain their weight they really haven't changed their lifestyle.

There is no magic that causes folks to regain weight. It really just is consuming more calories then we need to get though the day. We may not like that we can't eat all the things we like when we like but controlling that urge is the only way to truly keep weight off.

5 lbs?? That DOES make the whole statistic incredibly meaningless. It would be so much better if they used a % of weight lost as the guideline for what constitutes a "gain."

That said, the resource is still good - not regaining lost weight IS hard, but I think most of us here have one of the most important tools in preventing it: we love to ride bikes.

Statistics are not meaningless, but they are only meaningFUL in the proper context. Outside that, they lose meaning. Aplied to individuals, their meaning is very limited indeed.

Statistics prove, for example, that cigarettes cause cancer. But they DON'T tell you WHICH smokers will get lung cancer.

Let's take "90% of people who lose weight gain it back".

If you take 1000 "overweight" or "obese", people who have lost significant weight, then yes, probably 900 will gain it back. Anyone who's ever done a fad diet, or dropped 10 lbs for some event (wedding, class reunion, etc) understands this. There are many reasons for this, but probably the biggest is that losing and keeping off weight, and gaining and maintaining fitness require life changes. 900 out of 1000 either dont make the changes, or backslide.

But what does this statistic mean to any individual? Not much, except as a cautionary tale - "There but for the Grace of God go I". Change your life - what you eat, how much you eat, how much you exercise, and how much you sit on the couch - and you will be among the 10% who DON'T regain the weight.

OTOH, if you say, "I've only got a 10% chance of keeping this weight off, so why bother?", you have about a 100% chance of gaining it back.

But all that statistic says is that 90% of people who lose some amount of weight gain at least 5 lbs back. I'd be interested in seeing the percent of, say, people who lost more than 100 pounds and kept 90% of it off after 5 years.

I went to the website and couldn't find the 5 lb reference... I'm sure the definitions are somewhere in the studies, but I couldn't see it readily.

But all that statistic says is that 90% of people who lose some amount of weight gain at least 5 lbs back. I'd be interested in seeing the percent of, say, people who lost more than 100 pounds and kept 90% of it off after 5 years.

I can't say what that % is, I'd have to actually look that up. I'd like to see this bunch ere on CLyde's/Athenas have a 100% success rate though! ;) :)

Actually, most people who lose weight--by any means, in any amount, on any program or diet or lifestyle modification--regain most or all of the weight they lost, and a significant number gain more than they lost. This has been shown in countless observational studies, including those by major university weight loss centers like Duke and Penn.

I'm having difficulty understanding why folks are having trouble believing what is only a simple observable fact. Of course, one reason that it's hard to believe is that for-profit weight loss centers and programs don't want us to believe it, and spend lots of money deceiving us into believing that their diet or program is the permanent solution. People wouldn't spend much money for a diet book or weight loss center if they promised only, "You'll lose 30 pounds in six months but you'll gain it all back within three years." So naturally they don't emphasize this fact, and they design their own studies with no follow-up or only a short followup. Any time you evaluate a weight loss program, check to see what kind of followup they did. If they didn't re-weigh subjects after a year or two (at least), it's probably a self-serving and inaccurate study.

Accepting that the studies on regain are true shouldn't make it more likely that you'll regain weight. It's not a self-fulfilling prophecy, but a helpful and timely warning to all who are losing weight. Use this unwelcome information to your own advantage. Research the regain problem and find information that will help you to beat the odds. To me, that's the only approach that makes sense in this situation.

Actually, most people who lose weight--by any means, in any amount, on any program or diet or lifestyle modification--regain most or all of the weight they lost, and a significant number gain more than they lost. This has been shown in countless observational studies, including those by major university weight loss centers like Duke and Penn.

I'm having difficulty understanding why folks are having trouble believing what is only a simple observable fact. Of course, one reason that it's hard to believe is that for-profit weight loss centers and programs don't want us to believe it, and spend lots of money deceiving us into believing that their diet or program is the permanent solution. People wouldn't spend much money for a diet book or weight loss center if they promised only, "You'll lose 30 pounds in six months but you'll gain it all back within three years." So naturally they don't emphasize this fact, and they design their own studies with no follow-up or only a short followup. Any time you evaluate a weight loss program, check to see what kind of followup they did. If they didn't re-weigh subjects after a year or two (at least), it's probably a self-serving and inaccurate study.

Accepting that the studies on regain are true shouldn't make it more likely that you'll regain weight. It's not a self-fulfilling prophecy, but a helpful and timely warning to all who are losing weight. Use this unwelcome information to your own advantage. Research the regain problem and find information that will help you to beat the odds. To me, that's the only approach that makes sense in this situation.

I think the reason that people who diet, gain it all back, is rather simple. If your old eating habits have you gain 1lb per month, and you go on a diet and lose 30lbs, then return to your old eating habits, it 3 years you have put back the 30lbs and added 6 more. However if, at the end of your diet, there is a maintenance program, and you use that, watching what you eat, and balancing that with your activity level, then you can keep that weight off.

Me, I'm not really one to talk though, I am a terrible eater, I eat lots, and I eat crap, although, I walk 10km a shift at work, most of it carrying boxes and stuff, and then I do a lot of walking and biking besides (no car), so my burn rate is twice or thrice even of most guys my age, who drive to work, sit at a desk all day, then drive home and flop in front of the idiot box.