Interesting study

No Snacks, no sweets, no seconds. Except on Days that start with S. Too simple for you? Simple is why it works. Look here for questions, introductions, support, success stories.

Moderators: Soprano, automatedeating

Post Reply
User avatar
ClickBeetle
Posts: 410
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 7:28 pm
Location: North Carolina, USA

Interesting study

Post by ClickBeetle » Fri Jul 08, 2005 3:36 am

http://www.techcentralstation.com/060205D.html

Nondieters participating in selected programs lost more weight than dieters, and had other health improvements that dieters did not have.

Hmm!
Chance favors the prepared. - Louis Pasteur

User avatar
Jammin' Jan
Posts: 2002
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 2:55 pm
Location: The Village

Post by Jammin' Jan » Fri Jul 08, 2005 11:30 am

Finally, a clinical study that makes some sense! This confirms what I have experienced personally and witnessed in others' behavoir.

I think that the "No-S Diet" is mis-named. It should be thought of as "The No-S Guide to a Lifetime of Normal Eating." But it would be hard to fit that on the business card!

User avatar
reinhard
Site Admin
Posts: 5918
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 7:38 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA
Contact:

Post by reinhard » Fri Jul 08, 2005 12:20 pm

It's "diet" in the sense of "the great eastern marmoset has an omnivorious diet" not "some wierd temporary thing you do to shuck pounds." Whereas most diets have you eat in ways that no naturally skinny person every has, the no s diet is really just about restoring deeply normal eating habits. And while we're at it we'll rescue the term "diet" from its recently acquired scammish connotations!

There was another study published recently that showed people who drink diet soft drinks tend to be fatter than those who don't.

http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/12058193.htm

While I'm not sure causality was established, I thinks it points to something important. If you want to be skinny, the obvious thing to do is eat and drink like a naturally skinny person. Skinny people do not cram themselves with diet products. Obviously skinny people do not follow explicit rules either, but they tend to do certain things naturally, they have certain socially conditioned or instinctive behaviors. The no s diet is just a sytematic attempt to restore these unsystematic behaviors.

Beth
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 2:43 pm

Post by Beth » Fri Jul 08, 2005 1:37 pm

What a fascinating article! Of course, all the companies that promote their "cash cow" diet du jour aren't going to like this. But it fits in with No-S and a few books I have read (10 habits of naturally slim people, Diets Don't work, Intuitive Eating).
Beth
Mom to Nathan and Jessica, born 04/20/2004
Image

Ariel King
Posts: 188
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 4:35 pm
Location: Knoxville, TN
Contact:

Post by Ariel King » Fri Jul 08, 2005 3:06 pm

Thanks for the fascinating article ClickBeetle! It's so nice to see common sense upheld by clinical studies (and actually reported to the public) once in awhile. I just have a few comments:

1) Being anal, I have to slightly disagree with your original post -- the nondieters didn't actually lose weight, but they did improve their health and activity levels. The dieters did lose weight but regained it (duh).

2) Just a general pet-peevy complaint: When did "overweight" become a noun meaning "the state of being overweight"? I see this EVERYWHERE... it seems to be the English language mutilation du jour.

3) [juvenile humor] Did anyone else find it funny that the researcher mentioned in that article is named Linda Bacon? :wink:

User avatar
gratefuldeb67
Posts: 6256
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 9:26 pm
Location: Great Neck, NY

Post by gratefuldeb67 » Fri Jul 08, 2005 3:12 pm

I have read numerous "alternative" science forum articles for the past four or five years now, which implicate aspartame and other artificial sweeteners with *increased appetite* and confusing the brain as to how sweet something tastes....
It makes sense to me, in this context, that these diet sodas are stacking the odds against losing weight... As I have noted several times since joining NoS, when I switched from Aspartame, then to Splenda and then to Sugar, it took 4 teaspoons of sugar for my coffee to rival the one or two packs of fake stuff...
It also kills your central nervous system because it builds up toxic levels of formaldehyde in the body, and denatures the DNA.... This, with long term use, can lead to all kinds of illnesses, and especially those that are degenerative CNS related like Altzheimers and Parkinsons...
Am I going to go back to using that stuff?
Not bloody likely!
Okay that's all folks....
Thanks for the article Reinhard.. It was nothing surprising to me, but it did confirm stuff I've been harping on, and I'm glad.... Hope I'm not coming across as someone who says... "Told you soooo!" LOL...
But, hey, the clinical trials are in!
PS... I'm doing pretty well enjoying my coffee with one spoon of sugar and that chocolate soy milk.... Think I'll ditch the powdered hot chocolate soon, or just sprinkle a dusting of it, instead of a teaspoons worth...
Keep that science stuff a comin!
Love,
8) Deb

User avatar
gratefuldeb67
Posts: 6256
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 9:26 pm
Location: Great Neck, NY

Post by gratefuldeb67 » Fri Jul 08, 2005 3:18 pm

Hey guys! One more happy bit of info... I got a newsletter about two or three weeks ago, that stated that simply by *attempting* to lose weight, your mortality rate jumps up like 25 percent or something...
(If I'm misusing mortality rate, forgive me..I always get that confused! LOL.... I'm trying to say we stay alive longer!)
Conversely, people who weren't actively trying to lose weight, but did anyway, and these were elderly folk, had a much shorter life....
It didn't seem to significantly matter whether the people who were trying, actually lost the weight, just that they were trying to....
So... Keep trying, and you'll live longer! :wink:
Love,
8) Deb
PS... If I find the little blurb I'll post it.. The study was on people, not mice!
PPS... I think many of us could claim that "anal" title Ariel! You are amongst a bunch of "thinking buggers!" :P
PPS... Juvenille humor is good sometimes... Hmm... It could have been worse.. She might have been named Linda Hashbrowns!

Ariel King
Posts: 188
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 4:35 pm
Location: Knoxville, TN
Contact:

Post by Ariel King » Fri Jul 08, 2005 3:32 pm

I personally don't drink diet sodas because they taste awful to me (except for Diet Pepsi, which is marginally bearable). But I very rarely drink regular sodas either, b/c they just don't taste good enough to be worth the flood of empty calories. I'm (mostly) doing NoS these days, and am happy to report that avoiding soda required no effort at all. I'm grateful to my parents for never keeping it in the house when I was a kid, as that probably played a big role in my current good habit.

Ariel King
Posts: 188
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 4:35 pm
Location: Knoxville, TN
Contact:

Post by Ariel King » Fri Jul 08, 2005 3:42 pm

Heh... I cross posted with Deb. Hi Deb! That's a very encouraging bit of news. I think you meant the mortality rate drops though, if attempting to lose weight makes you live longer. (See how anal I am?!?) I'm curious as to what means of attempting weight loss were analyzed in the study. I'm sure they didn't mean that taking Ephedra and smoking crack would decrease your mortality :wink:

In my previous post, I should have said that I avoid fake sugar in everything, not just soda. I'm not anti-technology, even when it applies to food, but I just don't see the point of artificial sweeteners. Even if they tasted good to me (which they don't), I'd far rather have a moderate amount of REAL sugar, and just eat less of it if I want to decrease my calorie intake.

User avatar
sibyl
Posts: 141
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 3:34 pm
Location: Guelph, ON

Post by sibyl » Fri Jul 08, 2005 4:18 pm

I prefer real sugar to the fake stuff for almost everything, but I drink a lot of Diet Coke - not Diet anything else, but Diet Coke. I can't stand the real stuff. There's this slightly bitter aftertaste to it (from the artifical sweetner) that I'm hooked on.

As to the weight-loss study, it confirms an inner suspicion of mine, that deliberately starving yourself or depriving yourself of large numbers of different foods can't be good for you.
"I have no idea what you're talking about, so here's a bunny with a pancake on its head".

User avatar
gratefuldeb67
Posts: 6256
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 9:26 pm
Location: Great Neck, NY

Post by gratefuldeb67 » Fri Jul 08, 2005 4:28 pm

Hey Ariel!

http://www/care2.com/channels/solutions/self/2204
Here's where I saw that info about Mortality and attempting to lose weight.
It's not really that specific, so sorry, you'll have to imagine all the anal details! LOL... :P
Love,
8) Deb
ps (after trying the link...)... If this link doesn't work, just google in the words
Mortality, Diet and Attempt...
That will bring you to the page... It's from the Care2 website....
The link seems weird...

Ariel King
Posts: 188
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 4:35 pm
Location: Knoxville, TN
Contact:

Post by Ariel King » Fri Jul 08, 2005 5:14 pm

Thanks Deb! Yeah, you put the right URL in the link, but it still doesn't work. But I found it anyway with that search you suggested. It is a pretty vague article... oh well. The association probably comes from the fact that most people trying to lose weight do things that end up improving their health, even if their efforts don't result in actual weight loss. Still, there are so many unhealthy methods of attempting weight loss (cigarettes and phen-phen, anyone?) that I'm a little surprised the survey came out that way.

User avatar
gratefuldeb67
Posts: 6256
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 9:26 pm
Location: Great Neck, NY

Post by gratefuldeb67 » Fri Jul 08, 2005 5:52 pm

I think the study involved older people... Ephedra and cigarettes is a method of weight control that only a much more foolish and much younger person would use.... Talk to some of the young trainers at my club!
To my knowledge it's not all the rage to pop those upper pills amongst the older generations.
I think they just pop metamucil!
Love,
8) Deb

User avatar
peetie
Posts: 277
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:18 pm

Post by peetie » Fri Jul 08, 2005 11:12 pm

Deb, Metamucil??? I resent that!!! I don't deny it....I just resent it.

Seniorly yours,
Peetie

User avatar
gratefuldeb67
Posts: 6256
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 9:26 pm
Location: Great Neck, NY

Post by gratefuldeb67 » Fri Jul 08, 2005 11:25 pm

Hee hee!
Sorry granny Peetie!
LOL :lol:
Don't resent me Peetie, I forgot you drink Warrior Prune Juice and will come and give me a beating with your cane one day! LOL....
(ps.. I have no clue how old you are... Are we really that seniorly??? Should I be avoiding other topics such as Depends, and Fixodent?...LOL....)
I know I am being berry berry bad!

Love and Kidding around,
8) Deb
(that whippersnapper!)

User avatar
peetie
Posts: 277
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:18 pm

Post by peetie » Sat Jul 09, 2005 2:03 pm

Watch it, Deb, or I'll run you down with my walker!!!

With love and fiber,
Peetie

User avatar
doulachic
Posts: 435
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2005 8:02 pm
Location: Idaho

Post by doulachic » Sat Jul 09, 2005 9:31 pm

Hey Deb and others, :D

I think I read somewhere that people who are *trying* to lose weight are generally healthier because they are eating better foods (with the idea that they are low calorie) such as more veggies and fruits, lean meats, etc. As opposed to some naturally thin people who eat a lot of junkfood (and never gain weight, the stinkers!) Good foods not only help aid weight loss (I'm talking good, whole food here--not low fat/low calorie *fake* products), but they are full of vitamins and such.

Anywhoo, just my 2 cents... :D
***GRINS***
Tricia

"When you are in a jam, a good friend will bring a loaf of bread and peanut butter..."

User avatar
snazzybabe
Posts: 103
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 7:44 am
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Post by snazzybabe » Mon Jul 11, 2005 6:07 am

The non-dieter's were counselled to love their body size, told to eat whatever they wanted. Because of this they lost their obsession with food and their weight stayed the same.
The dieter's lost weight but then put it all back and then some.

1. The non-dieters experienced some health benefits but they are still overweight. If their aim was to remain the same size then they have accomplished that and they have learnt to love their body.

2. The dieters did lose weight but put it all back after the study finished. I think because they did not get the proper support. They were told that what they were eating was a diet instead of a new way of eating for life. Also, I bet the diet was low-fat and low-calorie and their bodies just couldn't hack it. Your body needs fat.

The NoS is a diet in a way. Its a structured way of eating where you avoid snacks during NoS days and save them for the S days. You end up limiting the amount of calories you eat and hence start to lose weight. You lose the weight slowly and probably will keep it off for good because you learn to have a good relationship with food. When you are on too much of a restrictive diet you can end up rebelling after a diet and eat everything you were not allowed to.

Post Reply