Diets?

[hotblonde]

I found this today and thought I'd share it with you all

http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/conte...urcetype=HWCIT

[bikuki]

I don't have the time to read the whole thing so just scanned the abstract. Are they just looking at fat loss or are the comparing the health benefits/drawbacks of each diet?
If they're not then I don't think it's much basis for choosing a diet, in my opinion.

I'm sure it'll be a interesting read when I do get round to it, though

[Rowsbette]

I'm a bit wary of stuff like this... not only because it doesn't take into account how easy or difficult it is for the individual patients to lose weight, but also because it doesn't reflect how hard it is to stick to each diet. Obviously (most of) the volunteers did, because they were involved in this, but what about folk who don't have that incentive?

I reckon if you're obese (with no underlying medical condition to explain it) any sort of major change in diet "for the better" is gonna allow you to lose weight. I'd be a bit worried that research like this would encourage folk to try fad diets like Atkins and Slim Fast, instead of looking at better long-term strategies of losing weight and keeping it off.

(This is just based on the wee bit I read of this btw, my brain got too sore to read the rest. )

[hotblonde]

Originally Posted by bikuki

I don't have the time to read the whole thing so just scanned the abstract. Are they just looking at fat loss or are the comparing the health benefits/drawbacks of each diet?
If they're not then I don't think it's much basis for choosing a diet, in my opinion.

I'm sure it'll be a interesting read when I do get round to it, though

The overall basis for the study was to compare commercially avail diets for weight loss. They assessed health benefits as far as renal function and blood pressure. Overall, the low carb diet came out top for fat loss and drop in systolic BP in the first 2 months, but by 6 months there was no significant difference between all diet regimes. This backs up most of the previous studies I've read on these diets. The drop out in the first 6 months was 28%, which I don't think is that high over that time range and compliance was measured by attendening slimming clubs coupled with weight loss (Rosemary Conley 79%, Weight Watchers 66%) and six months (47%, 47%). The Atkins diet was measured by reported portions of carbohydrate foods (from 40 each day at baseline to five at two months and seven at six months - which is poor!). Females found the Atkins and Slimfast the most difficult to tolerate, that is due to limited choices I'd imagine. The highest non-compliance or lost to follow up lost tho' (interestingly, was weight watchers - 2 male, 4 female).

Compliance is something that's a problem with medicating a patient and one of the mainstay issues of medical care. With diets, it's the bloody whole issue.

From this study alone, I think it does prompt longterm weight loss (in an obese individual) as being easier to complete with a full package like Rosemary Conley - diet, support, classes, exercise. Short term weight loss is the Atkins - again this does depend on the individual and how they can cope with the meal choices available e.g. vegetarians are limited in food choices. As far as Slimfast go, it's not the best on any level and weight watchers may just be a preference over Rosemary Conley down to choice, what's available, etc.

This is just my take on the paper I stress!