Biggest Loser in the Media

[SmithW6079]

An article in the New York Times today details a study about the struggle some Season 8 "Biggest Loser" contestants have had with maintaining weight loss (most of them regain it and then some), and the negative metabolic effect it has had on their bodies. The article does not address the damage caused by the rapidity with which they lost weight and the absolutely unrealistic exercise regimes they follow while on the ranch. It's got to be the same for those people on "Extreme Weight Loss." How can losing 100+ pounds in such a short time frame be good?

[Kromm]

28 minutes ago, SmithW6079 said:

An article in the New York Times today details a study about the struggle some Season 8 "Biggest Loser" contestants have had with maintaining weight loss (most of them regain it and then some), and the negative metabolic effect it has had on their bodies. The article does not address the damage caused by the rapidity with which they lost weight and the absolutely unrealistic exercise regimes they follow while on the ranch. It's got to be the same for those people on "Extreme Weight Loss." How can losing 100+ pounds in such a short time frame be good?

Look 5 posts up (6 from this one). auntjess beat you to it (and we've been discussing what an asshole Dr. Death is for making excuses for the show).

Edited May 3, 2016 by Kromm

[Canada]

It's kind of disturbing to read that.  I don't know that I can watch the show anymore.  It's also depressing news for those of us who have a large amount of weight to lose.

[Kromm]

10 hours ago, Canada said:

It's kind of disturbing to read that.  I don't know that I can watch the show anymore.  It's also depressing news for those of us who have a large amount of weight to lose.

I know it's no consolation to those with really large amounts to lose, but I don't think the implications are as dire for those with more moderate amounts. Clearly the idea of shocking your metabolic system into a change is stupid. You have to more message it, over time. Well, short of surgery. I do hate that some of these conclusions actually support the idea of the surgery, which still seems like a bad idea to me personally. I mean most people seem to think the surgery literally means only that your stomach holds less. But I know people who have had it, and the reality is that it also literally creates a whole list of foods you can no longer eat at ALL, even in moderation. Stuff that post-surgery will literally go right through you, with all that implies.

Hopefully if there are hormonal components to all of this, that's why science will pin down and be able to fix. The "natural" (in other words badly tested, or sometimes totally untested) pills to do stuff like this seem dangerous, but there may be a root of real research that can follow a trail to something real some day. And it would never be "take a pill and you're body will burn the fat off". It would go back to being diet and exercise, but hopefully with a way to fix the stubbornness of whatever the body is trying to do to keep that fat on. I suppose biologically our bodies are still stuck somewhat in Caveman mode, where instead of seeing the direct dangers of circulatory and respiratory problems from carrying all of that weight, it instead has the prehistoric mandate to not let us starve over a lean winter (so it needs to store fat and burn it when there's not as much food around).  We're basically still kind of like slightly more clever bears (albeit with less sleep in the winter). 

[SmithW6079]

On 5/7/2016 at 0:11 AM, Canada said:

It's kind of disturbing to read that.  I don't know that I can watch the show anymore.  It's also depressing news for those of us who have a large amount of weight to lose.

 

On 5/3/2016 at 6:11 PM, SmithW6079 said:

The article does not address the damage caused by the rapidity with which they lost weight and the absolutely unrealistic exercise regimes they follow while on the ranch. It's got to be the same for those people on "Extreme Weight Loss." How can losing 100+ pounds in such a short time frame be good?

Also, there's no mention about the loss of muscle mass. If they followed a muscle-building plan, how would their metabolisms change?Bodybuilders go up and down in weight -- sometimes pretty drastically -- yet they eat a lot. The participants on these shows don't really appear to gain any appreciable amount of muscle.

Even weight loss surgery isn't the answer. We've all seen plenty of people who had gastric bypasses, lose weight, then gain it back (and then some), except now there's not much surgery can do for them, because they've already had it.

[Canada]

On further reflection, as someone who has a large amount of weight to lose, I'm not as concerned as I was when I first read about this.  The people on the Biggest Loser are not really losing weight how the rest of us would attempt to do it.  They really just go into starvation mode.  I'm not planning on doing anything so drastic.  It might take me a lot longer than your average TV show contestant, but I think it will be a lot healthier and will help to avoid some of the issues that they have, including what was touched on in that article.

[SmithW6079]

18 hours ago, Canada said:

On further reflection, as someone who has a large amount of weight to lose, I'm not as concerned as I was when I first read about this.  The people on the Biggest Loser are not really losing weight how the rest of us would attempt to do it.  They really just go into starvation mode.  I'm not planning on doing anything so drastic.  It might take me a lot longer than your average TV show contestant, but I think it will be a lot healthier and will help to avoid some of the issues that they have, including what was touched on in that article.

 

At this point in my life, I've decided that I'm going to focus on eating healthy and working out (resistance training to build muscle) and worry less about the amount of weight I'm "supposed" to lose.

[Kromm]

On 4/29/2016 at 9:32 AM, auntjess said:

Ali Vincent has gained a lot back.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2016/04/29/i-feel-like-failure-biggest-loser-winner-ali-vincent-opens-up-about-regaining-her-weight/?hpid=hp_no-name_hp-in-the-news%3Apage%2Fin-the-news

Fuck this show.  Seriously.

[SmithW6079]

3 hours ago, Kromm said:

Fuck this show.  Seriously.

Why? No one held a gun to these people's heads to try out for this show. And however many seasons in, with how many examples that almost everyone regains the weight they lost, no one should be under any delusion that this show has anything to do with health. From the start, it's been about financially rewarding the most amount of weight lost. 

[Kromm]

23 minutes ago, SmithW6079 said:

Why? No one held a gun to these people's heads to try out for this show. And however many seasons in, with how many examples that almost everyone regains the weight they lost, no one should be under any delusion that this show has anything to do with health. From the start, it's been about financially rewarding the most amount of weight lost. 

Ali Vincent was on Season 5. So you can't exactly use that "after all these years she should have known" logic with her.

[Kromm]

Yet another article in the now seeming unending stream of "they've mostly gained the weight back" pieces.

http://bgr.com/2016/05/13/how-to-lose-weight-nbc-biggest-loser/

 

EDIT - Ah, never mind. They spend 3/4 of the article quoting the New York Times article we already saw.

Edited May 14, 2016 by Kromm

[SmithW6079]

9 minutes ago, Kromm said:

Ali Vincent was on Season 5. So you can't exactly use that "after all these years she should have known" logic with her.

Season 5, not season 1, so, yes, you can.

[Canada]

I'd be interested in seeing a follow-up on all contestants, especially the winners, who have been on the show.  I'd like to see how many are at or near their goal weight.  And how many have gained back a significant amount of weight, like Ali appears to have done.

[rab01]

The part that's disturbing is not that many contestants gain weight back; life happens.  The part that's really really disturbing is that the show seems to have permanently damaged their chances to maintain a healthy weight by changing their metabolisms for the worse. If you go on a show like this, you expect them to create narratives about you and possibly humiliate you but you don't expect the doctors and professional trainers of a show promising stories of weight loss to do things to your body that make weight control harder.

I can't watch it any more. The show was selling itself as caring about its contestants' health. If it's about the reverse, I might as well be watching people eat bugs on a rebooted fear factor.

[SmithW6079]

20 hours ago, rab01 said:

The show was selling itself as caring about its contestants' health. If it's about the reverse, I might as well be watching people eat bugs on a rebooted fear factor.

 

 

 

But did it? From the start, the show has been about losing weight for big money. I remember being appalled when it first aired because it made losing weight a money-making proposition, and I didn't see how that could be healthy at all. I believe after the first season or two, they did try to make more of an emphasis on health, but money was always the motivator.

I do feel bad that these people have screwed up their metabolisms, but I keep coming back to the same thought: these people chose to be contestants on a show that had a payoff for losing the most weight, that if they thought it was just a "fat farm" just to learn about healthy eating and smart exercising then they were under a delusion.  

I'd be curious to see if there's any type of similar study about Chris Powell's Extreme Weight Loss , because the people on that show also lose tremendous amounts of weight is such a short time. 

Quote

I'd be interested in seeing a follow-up on all contestants, especially the winners, who have been on the show.  I'd like to see how many are at or near their goal weight.  And how many have gained back a significant amount of weight, like Ali appears to have done.

 

I believe most of them have regained the weight they lost.

Edited May 17, 2016 by SmithW6079

[Kromm]

56 minutes ago, SmithW6079 said:

But did it? From the start, the show has been about losing weight for big money. I remember being appalled when it first aired because it made losing weight a money-making proposition, and I didn't see how that could be healthy at all. I believe after the first season or two, they did try to make more of an emphasis on health, but money was always the motivator.

I do feel bad that these people have screwed up their metabolisms, but I keep coming back to the same thought: these people chose to be contestants on a show that had a payoff for losing the most weight, that if they thought it was just a "fat farm" just to learn about healthy eating and smart exercising then they were under a delusion.  

I'd be curious to see if there's any type of similar study about Chris Powell's Extreme Weight Loss , because the people on that show also lose tremendous amounts of weight is such a short time. 

I believe most of them have regained the weight they lost.

Pardon any bluntness here, but that makes it sound like you haven't been listening to a good deal of what they actually SAY on the show. They harp on the health benefits, the lifestyle change, almost continuously, and while the cash prize is always there lurking in the background, they even edit a lot of the elimination debates to make it sound like it's not about getting rid of threats to winning the show (often it's not, but my point is that the show often goes to lengths to imply an atmosphere that the money is just the cherry on top).

There's a good argument a lot of these people went on the show not thinking of winning the money (many of them never realistically had a chance and knew that) but that it was basically a deal for a free intense bootcamp, or maybe even for some it was the reality show fame aspect they fixated on. But even those going for money went with the assumption, because they showed Dr. Death onscreen talking all of this up, that the show was taking care of them during the process. It wasn't implicit that it was a devil's deal--your health for some chance at money. The implication was instead that they knew what they were doing.

I don't know about studies with Extreme Weight Loss, but I do know there were at least a few ex participants that have ranted about that show. Although they have a full year, whereas BL is I think less (it does vary between seasons--I'm sure we've seen as long as 8 or 9 months and probably as short as 6 months). 

Is there always a "they should have known better" argument for anything like this? Sure. But among the opportunists there were certainly some genuinely vulnerable people, I think, who's judgment was impaired by desperation, and the shiny appeal of a magic fix. And the show sold that aspect HARD.

And Bob Harper just opened his mouth and made the idea that they know what they're doing even harder to believe--because he just couldn't resist answering the charge that contestants don't keep the weight off with more advice from the peanut gallery about what he thinks everyone else is doing wrong: http://www.womansday.com/health-fitness/advice/a54916/biggest-loser-bob-harper/  The part about no carbs/low sugar being fairly conventional, but them adding his magic fix about skipping periodic meals and fasting periods. And why is he giving this advice now in particular? Because it's recently become trendy...

Edited May 17, 2016 by Kromm

[Kromm]

New articles:

Woman's Day: Bob Harper Finally Responds to the Recent 'Biggest Loser' Controversy

Frankly his response highlights the danger of following any expert, because Baub has his own wacky advice. I mean the part about no carbs is fairly conventional wisdom, but... well.. read it yourself...

Quote

To combat weight gain post-show, Harper has some pretty unusual advice that goes against much of what you've probably heard about eating healthy. He suggests intermittent fasting—an eating strategy where you skip one meal per day and then fast for 14 hours straight (which can include hours when you're asleep). 

Further, he recommends loading up on vegetables, healthy fats, and proteins during your two meals for the day. Starchy carbs and sugar shouldn't be apart of your diet, according to Harper, and you have to be mindful of everything you're doing in terms of eating and exercising post-weight loss, he said. 

But how realistic is his advice? Where's the moderation and the balance? To play devil's advocate, another recent health study claimed the opposite of what Harper is recommending—that "cheat days" are good when trying to achieve weight loss and healthy goals in the long run.  

But intermittent fasting may work for some, including Harper himself who says he follows these diet rules—so it's always best to test out this eating plan and others, under the guidance of your doctor, to see what works best for you. 

Harper's last words of advice? Stay active, and stay away from the sugary drinks. 

[Kromm]

And here's a new opinion piece alleging that the show "fat shames":

The Cut: The Biggest Loser Is Organized Fat-Shaming, So How Is It Still on TV?

Quote

The show may be inspirational to some, but it’s also an opportunity for people to get perverse satisfaction out of watching lazy fatties actually work out.

“I almost think the show is some sick way of just mocking people who have obesity,” Dr. Butsch says. “It has this guise of benefit but you can see the sort of sinister in it as well. I don't think it's there, but it ends up looking that way.”

But then again, would anyone watch a show that consists of people visiting their doctor, grocery shopping and cooking, and doing lots of cardio before picking up a kettlebell? Probably not.

[SmithW6079]

17 minutes ago, Kromm said:

Pardon any bluntness here, but that makes it sound like you haven't been listening to a good deal of what they actually SAY on the show. They harp on the health benefits, the lifestyle change, almost continuously, and while the cash prize is always there lurking in the background, they even edit a lot of the elimination debates to make it sound like it's not about getting rid of threats to winning the show (often it's not, but my point is that the show often goes to lengths to imply an atmosphere that the money is just the cherry on top).

There's a good argument a lot of these people went on the show not thinking of winning the money (many of them never realistically had a chance and knew that) but that it was basically a deal for a free intense bootcamp, or maybe even for some it was the reality show fame aspect they fixated on. But even those going for money went with the assumption, because they showed Dr. Death onscreen talking all of this up, that the show was taking care of them during the process. It wasn't implicit that it was a devil's deal--your health for some chance at money. The implication was instead that they knew what they were doing.

I don't know about studies with Extreme Weight Loss, but I do know there were at least a few ex participants that have ranted about that show. Although they have a full year, whereas BL is I think less (it does vary between seasons--I'm sure we've seen as long as 8 or 9 months and probably as short as 6 months). 

Is there always a "they should have known better" argument for anything like this? Sure. But among the opportunists there were certainly some genuinely vulnerable people, I think, who's [sic] judgment was impaired by desperation, and the shiny appeal of a magic fix. And the show sold that aspect HARD.

4

I don't watch the show regularly. I stopped when Caroline Rhea left and watched this season because of Bob. Are there some vulnerable people who are under the impression this is a good thing to appear on this show? Sure, probably. But they're grown-ups, and it's their personal responsibility to accept the decisions they made. There is certainly enough information out there for them to have made informed decisions.

There is no "magic fix," but then again, PT Barnum was right: "There's a sucker born every minute." 

[Alapaki]

Quote

I know it's no consolation to those with really large amounts to lose, but I don't think the implications are as dire for those with more moderate amounts. Clearly the idea of shocking your metabolic system into a change is stupid.

This is the problem with equating "fitness" with "fatness".  A healthy diet and active lifestyle can create a quite healthy, fit life, even if it doesn't result in the suit/dress size or scale-weight that society pressured folks to achieve.

But as long as society and even medical doctors insist on people getting down to a certain weight, when studies like this come out that demonstrate that getting to that weight may very well be biologically impossible, it's easy for people to fall into a "ah, screw it" attitude and see no point in avoiding bad foods or being sedentary.

[Chip]

merged another thread into this one.

[Kromm]

On 5/19/2016 at 2:33 PM, Alapaki said:

as long as society and even medical doctors insist on people getting down to a certain weight, when studies like this come out that demonstrate that getting to that weight may very well be biologically impossible, it's easy for people to fall into a "ah, screw it" attitude and see no point in avoiding bad foods or being sedentary.

To put some perspective to this, while this show evilly put numbers into people's minds (not specific ones as much but "as big a number as possible"), the one true thing about it was that the people they cast tended to truly be at weights that were unsustainable for any kind of healthy life. One thing I fear about a kickback to this show, as disgusting as the show could be, is the so-called "fat acceptance" alternative. Even the name has always gotten my goat. Accepting a few extra pounds is fine. Accepting being truly obese (vs. just overweight) is not. "Fat" implies obese a lot more than it does merely being overweight, and over the years the people I've seen who are mostly loudly part of that movement have always seemed to me to mostly be on the obese side. 

I don't think there's any easy answer. Certainly it's inevitable with age we're probably MEANT to weight more. But the tragedy of the past few decades has been children starting out overweight then becoming obese. This show had a few stabs at trying to address that and it was somewhat poisoned by the rest of the shit involved on it, but I think the one of the few things most researchers tend to agree on is that the road isn't as hard for people in adulthood if they're not overweight as children. All of this talk of biological course correction is only because we broke our bodies in the first place. So it might be too late for us personally, but I think the key is making sure the disaster isn't repeated after us. 

Edited May 21, 2016 by Kromm

[silverspoons]

http://nypost.com/2016/05/22/biggest-loser-fed-us-illicit-drugs-to-lose-weight-ex-contestants/

It just gets worse. These aren't the same contestants we have heard from before? Some of this is new.

What gets me even more upset is how much the show has made off the people at home with the biggest loser products. The worst of which was the extremely expensive biggest loser resorts. They opened one where I live and it was the biggest scam. It was conditions close to what people describe in this article, cinder block walls, a cot and bare minimum living conditions in the heat of the desert. The staff  wasn't anything special, I don't think many if any had any sort of degree of certificate in any sort of related field, nutrition , sports medicine etc. The prices were crazy, I saw people taking leaves from work which was hardship and paying over 10k to come for a month. It was all for the biggest loser brand because right across the way was a real weight loss spa that many celebrities have visited and it cost less, yet people flocked to the biggest loser brand.

I wonder if this is the beginning of the end of the show and franchise. It is too bad because having a show that is inspirational that people lose weight would always have a draw, but it has do be done realistically.

[SmithW6079]

Issues with quoting other posts. Argh!

Edited May 24, 2016 by SmithW6079

[SmithW6079]

On 5/23/2016 at 8:07 PM, silverspoons said:

I wonder if this is the beginning of the end of the show and franchise. It is too bad because having a show that is inspirational that people lose weight would always have a draw, but it has do be done realistically.

2

But people don't want to see individuals lose about a pound or so a week, exercise realistically and build muscle over a period of years. They want to see dramatic 100+-pound weight losses in a few months' time.

Quote

 

“Bob Harper was my trainer,” says Joelle Gwynn, of 2008’s “Couples” season. “He goes away and his assistant comes in. He’s got this brown paper bag that’s bundled up. He says, ‘Take this drug, it’ll really help you.’ It was yellow and black. I was like, ‘What the f- -k is this?’ ”

Gwynn says she took the pill, once.

“I felt jittery and hyper,” she says. “I went and told the sports medicine guy. The next day, Dr. H gave us some lame explanation of why they got added to our regimen and that it was up to us to take them . . . People chastise Bill Cosby for allegedly offering meds to women, but it’s acceptable to do to fat people to make them lose weight. I feel like we got raped, too.”

 

Good lord, seriously? She's equating taking a weight-loss pill with rape? 

Quote

“Psychologically, you’re like a weight victim,” Gwynn says.

Apparently, Joelle Gwynn is quite the skilled professional victim.

Quote

Like all participants, Donahue was separated from family and friends, contact completely cut off. For her season, producers installed contestants in a former psychiatric hospital and put 12 obese contestants in one bedroom in the LA heat, with no air conditioning.

“It was hot as hell, and the smell was horrible,” Donahue says.

The contestants were forced to shower together with no curtains or barriers of any kind. There were also no working toilets during Donahue’s season, so producers made these severely overweight contestants squeeze into Port-a-Potties — a challenge even for thin people, and yet another humiliation.

 

I'm sorry, but I'm calling bullshit on this. She's describing Third World prison camp conditions. Did the show make them break rocks with sledgehammers?

On 5/17/2016 at 2:43 PM, Kromm said:

New articles:

Woman's Day: Bob Harper Finally Responds to the Recent 'Biggest Loser' Controversy

Frankly his response highlights the danger of following any expert, because Baub has his own wacky advice. I mean the part about no carbs is fairly conventional wisdom, but... well.. read it yourself...

 

 

 

 

 

Are you talking about his comments about intermittent fasting? Because intermittent fasting is a legitimate eating strategy. I think "fasting" throws people off, but if you finish eating at 8 p.m. and don't eat again until 10 the next morning, that's 14 hours of "fasting." There are many athletes and other people who follow intermittent fasting at some of the time.

I'm fat myself, so I'm not "throwing shade" at fat people, but I keep coming back to this: no one made these people sign up for this. Maybe they had a sincere desire to change, but greed was also a factor in their decision to try out for this show. I refuse to think of them as helpless "victims."

[quaintirene]

He's not wrong about the kinds of foods that should be eaten.  The guy who won Season 8--and ended up saying that he had gained back most of the weight--told the interviewer that he would only eat a couple of chips and then everything went black and he'd eaten the whole lot. 20 years ago I lost quite a lot of weight although nothing like these guys--around 80 lb.  I've kept it off.  I would not ever go near chips.  Because you can't eat just a couple.  And they aren't worth all the calories they cost, and they set up cravings that are really hard to ignore.  When I heard that I wasn't surprised that he couldn't keep the weight off.  You eat crap and you gain weight.  

However, that having been said, this show is an abomination and should be erased from tv!

[Kromm]

It doesn't surprise me that Dr. Death is the target of a lot of these accusations. Sure there's a lot of hyperbole by some of these people, and a lot of it is bound to be about positioning themselves better for a lawsuit, but that guy IS a quack, and it's been clear for years. Any last reservations we had about his quality/trustworthiness should have been tossed on the rubbish pile when we all heard about his role as Charlie Sheen's enabler/built in excuse to have condomless sex with women despite having HIV.

Edited May 24, 2016 by Kromm

[JudyObscure]

I've always hated this show, all this new information just makes it worse.  Bob and Jillian making 300lb people do stupid things like run up bleachers and push tires down the beach when they should have been learning a steady aerobic routine with a little weight training added.  The diets that were all over the place, pushing low-carb one minute while selling jello and sugary yogurt the next.  I remember Jillian having one of her temper fits over a man grilling a steak in TBL's kitchen, followed by reward challenges that involved eating cupcakes.  What to eat, was never clear to the people at home so probably not to the people on the show either. 

 

What offended me most, and made me quit watching, was all the faux psychology.  Nothing tickled the trainers more than someone having a sobbing melt down. It could never be simply from hunger and exhaustion it was always the moment for Jillian to scream at someone until she broke down and gave Jillian what she wanted --  a story about past abuse, or an unhappy marriage, or the one I hated most, "I'm so ashamed!  I've always put my children first. I must learn put myself first."  I actually think young parents are supposed to put their children first, and if helping them with their homework means not getting to the gym, so be it.  Besides, those kids didn't force you to eat all those cookies.

But I can only fault the show so much for the false, fat-shaming myth that doctors themselves perpetuate -- that it's possible for most people to lose a lot of weight and keep it off.  The medical establishment has yet to come up with a weight loss plan that doesn't have a 95% re-gain rate over five years.  At this point in medical science only surgery shows any real promise as a "cure," for obesity. So, until they find an answer I don't really want to hear anyone say that obesity is "unacceptable," I don't even want Michelle Obama going to schools and holding seminars where it is subtlely implied that the over-weight children are not okay the way they are.  Entire schools in West Virginia, eliminated junk food, added daily exercise programs, and classes on how to choose "healthy" food at home.  At the end of a year those students weighed just as much as the kids in the schools with candy and soda machines and no exercise program.  Nobody knows the answers.

[LoneHaranguer]

On 5/24/2016 at 1:47 PM, SmithW6079 said:

But people don't want to see individuals lose about a pound or so a week, exercise realistically and build muscle over a period of years. They want to see dramatic 100+-pound weight losses in a few months' time.

Viewers don't care how much time elapsed between episodes, so you could have slower weight loss and each "week" be a month. But, the producers won't do that because it's a lot more expensive to produce 13 episodes over the course of a year than to push for fast weight loss and be done in a few months.

[Kromm]

2 hours ago, LoneHaranguer said:

Viewers don't care how much time elapsed between episodes, so you could have slower weight loss and each "week" be a month. But, the producers won't do that because it's a lot more expensive to produce 13 episodes over the course of a year than to push for fast weight loss and be done in a few months.

Except can you seem them actually even living up on air to the time?  Forget about money--they have to break that illusion they always maintain that these shows are somehow magically in real time.

[SmithW6079]

On 5/25/2016 at 8:50 AM, JudyObscure said:

But I can only fault the show so much for the false, fat-shaming myth that doctors themselves perpetuate -- that it's possible for most people to lose a lot of weight and keep it off.  The medical establishment has yet to come up with a weight loss plan that doesn't have a 95% re-gain rate over five years.  At this point in medical science only surgery shows any real promise as a "cure," for obesity. So, until they find an answer I don't really want to hear anyone say that obesity is "unacceptable," I don't even want Michelle Obama going to schools and holding seminars where it is subtlely implied that the over-weight children are not okay the way they are.  Entire schools in West Virginia, eliminated junk food, added daily exercise programs, and classes on how to choose "healthy" food at home.  At the end of a year those students weighed just as much as the kids in the schools with candy and soda machines and no exercise program.  Nobody knows the answers.

4

 

 

I don't like fat-shaming either, but probably not entirely for the same reason you do. I hate "whatever"-shaming because people use it to absolve themselves of any personal responsibility for their behaviors. "It's not my fault, I'm fat!" Now, everyone's physiognomy is different, and different people react different ways to different things, and while "science" may not have come up with a final solution to how people's bodies hold on to fat, people can (and do) change their physiques. If changing your body were truly impossible, then athletes would never improve or bodybuilders would never grow. Drug addicts and alcoholics would forever be addicted.

I think a big part of regaining weight loss is that most people don't want to hear they have to change their lifestyles forever -- and it can't be done on a cheesy reality show. If I recall, this study did not address the speed at which contestants lost weight and the extremes they went to. Of course it's unhealthy and devasted their bodies.    

Edited June 3, 2016 by SmithW6079

[JudyObscure]

16 minutes ago, SmithW6079 said:

If changing your body were truly impossible, then athletes would never improve or bodybuilders would never grow. Drug addicts and alcoholics would forever be addicted.

Gaining weight and building muscle are very different things from losing weight. Drugs are not something our bodies need the way we need food so our body doesn't fight us as much when we give it up. If we never ate again we would die.  Not so with drugs and alcohol.

 Our bodies are hard wired to respond to fat loss by lowering the metabolism to burn less calories.  People who don't want to believe that, say that the dieter lost weight too quickly  or didn't change their "lifestyle," or that they are looking for excuses.  The truth is that it happens, no matter how slowly the weight is lost.  The body thinks the top weight was the ideal and strives to regain it.

When I diet I lose about one pound a week, after about a year that's fifty pounds, at that point, even though my food and exercise doesn't vary from one week to the next,  my weight loss slows,  stops, and I begin to regain.   It's happened about ten different times.  I know you'll say I've probably slipped in extra calories or worked-out less hard but that simply isn't true, my husband as witness, if anything, I'm even more vigilant with scales and measurements and work-out times and it still happens.

Sure we can change our bodies, we can lose weight, but we can't keep it off over five or more years unless we keep eating less and exercising more until we're on about five hundred calories a day and exercising so much we have to quit our jobs and start working at the gym.  Exceptions are very young people, heavy smokers, people who have had gastric bypass, etc.  I'm talking about everyday dieting.  I don't think it works long term.

[ProfCrash]

I would be interested in knowing what the threshold is when that hits. I topped out somewhere around 215. It took me about 1 1/2 years to get to 170, I aimed for slow and steady, and I have maintained that since then. My lowest is 160 but I seem to hover around 170. I am not counting when i was pregnant. I returned to 210 by the end of my pregnancy. I have maintained my weight for about 4 years now and had maintained it for 3 years before getting pregnant. Right now I am walking a ton and have not been good about working with weights. I recently added tennis to my regime.

So does this metabolism issue mainly effect people who have to lose a ton of weight? I figure I'll gain weight as I age but I am aiming at limiting that as much as possible.

[Rum Punch]

In this day and age my motto has gone from "Don't believe everything you read", to "Don't believe anything you read". That NY Times article left me with a couple of questions. First, how did they know what the contestant's metabolic rate was before they were on the show? Did BL supply them with that information or are they just assuming that it was normal as compared to what it is now? Second, if all these contestant's metabolic rates were rocking so hard before they were on BL, why did they weigh 430 lbs?

I also couldn't help but notice that, although most had gained back some weight, almost all were still significantly lighter than before they were on the show.  I think this NY Times article might be an example of "Morgan Spurlock Syndrome".  Spurlock, in the movie "Supersize Me", ate nothing but McDonalds for a time, and suffered weight gain and other health difficulties.  But, if he ate nothing but Mcdonalds and nothing happened, Spurlock's got no movie, so you can be sure he's going to do everything possible to obtain the results he wanted.  I question the validity of the conclusions in this article on the same grounds, no headline material, no story.

[hnygrl]

Thank you rumpunch! FINALLY somebody makes sense!

If you were 500 pounds pre-show chances are your metabolism was already jacked up. You don't get that size from a proper diet and regular exercise folks.

Yes, a lot of what is said is true. You can't exercise 8 to 19 hours a day, eat less than a thousand calories, and then go home and do the normal weight loss stuff. I have a life. I can't be in the gym for 6 to 8 hours. If I can manage an hour twice a week it's a miracle.

They forget that. So of course they gain back SOME weight. BUT. They see that they have gained back SOME weight and instead of saying "oh well, I kinda knew this would happen when I got back to a regular life. Let's see if we can keep from gaining any MORE."

Instead most say "oh CRAP!!! I'M GAINING WEIGHT! WHAT WILL PEOPLE SAY? I'M SO ASHAMED! May as well gain it all back"

I think this past season may be the last for the show. Notice the strength training shows on now, and the Ninja Warrior show? (I'm sorry, that show is just so dumb to me) I think NBC is already going in another direction.

Somebody really should've told those people that the would gain SOME weight back and how to keep from gaining it all back. They never did maintenance.

[rab01]

On 6/3/2016 at 2:32 PM, JudyObscure said:

Our bodies are hard wired to respond to fat loss by lowering the metabolism to burn less calories.  People who don't want to believe that, say that the dieter lost weight too quickly  or didn't change their "lifestyle," or that they are looking for excuses.  The truth is that it happens, no matter how slowly the weight is lost.  The body thinks the top weight was the ideal and strives to regain it.

When I diet I lose about one pound a week, after about a year that's fifty pounds, at that point, even though my food and exercise doesn't vary from one week to the next,  my weight loss slows,  stops, and I begin to regain.   It's happened about ten different times.  I know you'll say I've probably slipped in extra calories or worked-out less hard but that simply isn't true, my husband as witness, if anything, I'm even more vigilant with scales and measurements and work-out times and it still happens.

I agree that all our bodies are hardwired to do certain things but I don't think that all are hard-wired the same way. My first "successful" diet was when I was 12.  I lost over 20 pounds (i weighed 140 at the start) on a weight watchers diet plan. I was heavy again two years later and fat by the time I was a senior in high school. I starved myself the summer before college; that stayed off for a few years but I did nothing to watch my eating so ... another diet after graduation, which stuck for 4 years, etc. Lather-rinse-repeat

As an adult, the only thing that keeps weight off for me is a low-carb diet. My body simply does not regulate its weight (and I do not portion control properly) when flour, sugar and rice are big components of my diet but my body works fine so long as I largely avoid that stuff.  I don't think that type of eating works for everybody (either as a tolerable lifestyle, or in terms of being healthy, or as a weight loss method) but from personal experience it works for me.   We all generalize somewhat from our own experiences and our own bodies so while I believe in a set-point, I'm not sure that it's immutable for everyone.

[Mu Shu]

It's always going to be the simple formula of calories in, calories out for most people.   People tend to think excercise burns more calories than it actually does, and that the food they eat contains less calories than it actually does.  

We aren't hard wired to be fat.   We are simply eating more, especially sugary high carb foods, and moving less.   All it takes to gain an extra 5 pounds per year is 50 extra , un burned calories per day.    

Vanity sizing hurts, too.   When clothing makers say that size 10 you are in is a 6,. It creates a sense of complacency.   

[Wings]

On 6/17/2016 at 10:05 AM, rab01 said:

As an adult, the only thing that keeps weight off for me is a low-carb diet. My body simply does not regulate its weight (and I do not portion control properly) when flour, sugar and rice are big components of my diet but my body works fine so long as I largely avoid that stuff.  I don't think that type of eating works for everybody (either as a tolerable lifestyle, or in terms of being healthy, or as a weight loss method) but from personal experience it works for me.  

This works for everyone.  It is difficult to follow if you love bread (I do) but it is a magic bullet!   You hear carb comments peppered through casual talk on TV and everywhere, everyday. The vast majority of celebs eat this way.  

Jillian Michaels among many others, recommends low carb.  BL would be wise to change to this.  They do the archaic low fat/calorie counting. 

http://getfit.jillianmichaels.com/low-carb-high-protein-diet-benefits-1506.html

Edited June 19, 2016 by wings707

[CarolMK]

I haven't watched the Biggest Loser in a couple of years, but I do think that the way the contestants lose weight so drastically hurts them in the long run. My background, I was a normal weight my entire adult life (til age 30) until I got pregnant and gained 60 lbs. Lost about half of that and then had my second son a couple of years later and really had a tough time losing any weight for years after that. I blame hormones to an extent and the fact I developed gestational diabetes in both my pregnancies as well. I was able to lose over 80 lbs to get back to my "normal weight" of 145 by following Weight Watchers very strictly for 2 years. But when I stopped weighing myself daily and stopped measuring every bite that I put in my body (I seriously had to do that..tracking to the extreme to keep the weight off) and I stopped working out 2 hours a day due to a new job, I gained back over 50 lbs in 5 years. Now having gone through menopause the last 2-3 years, I think it will be next to impossible to lose the weight again unless I go for weight loss surgery. The Biggest Loser type experience might help me drop some weight, but long term, not possible. And Bob Harper and his intermittent fasting can go take a flying leap at the moon. 

[Mu Shu]

I finally bought a scale.  Once I get 5 lbs over where I want to be, it's on. 

Edited July 5, 2016 by Mu Shu

[Kromm]

Why haven't they announced an official cancellation yet? What are they waiting for?

Normally they'd already be shooting a new season by this point I think and you'd hear rumors. I'm guessing that's not happening. Are they perhaps thinking if they keep quiet the scandal will die down and they can try for 2017?

 

Meanwhile, this asshole is suing someone for libel. I wonder if he'll sue us here as well for referring to him as "Dr. Death"? 

[Canada]

Would they really be shooting now if the new season isn't supposed to start until January?  Not that I'll be sad in the least if this crap is cancelled.  It's been bad for a while now, and last season with The Great Bob as host was the worst, but I still tune in every season!

[Lamb18]

Hi CarolMK, you can still lose the weight without having surgery. I'm 58 and I assume menopausal (hard to tell with a hysterectomy) and I've lost 45 pounds since November and 80 pounds overall since 2013, mainly through changes in diet. Exercise helps, too. I lost 20-30 pounds with just going gluten-free and no other change in diet and exercise. Since November I've been following a low carb plan with exercise (walking). I have to say I've been in a plateau for about 3 months due to cravings, fluxuating within a 5-pound range, but I'm getting back on track again.

[Kromm]

On 7/5/2016 at 6:38 PM, Canada said:

Would they really be shooting now if the new season isn't supposed to start until January?  Not that I'll be sad in the least if this crap is cancelled.  It's been bad for a while now, and last season with The Great Bob as host was the worst, but I still tune in every season!

I'm actually trying to see if the show is airing anywhere in the world currently. The press has been so bad I could see it killing the show maybe even in other markets.

This wikipedia chart is kind of out of date, so it's not clear from it.  Biggest Loser Sweden seems to be one of the few definitely committed to another season already.

As for the US show, as of May, the Facebook casting page still says announcements are pending, and there's been no update since.

[Rum Punch]

I know I'm being judgmental here, but I think that there are many overweight people who, though they may claim to be disheartened, are actually relieved by the New York Times article.  Most folks don't like to diet or exercise, so when they see something that suggests, wrongly I think, that losing weight in the long term is impossible, say, "Whew, now I don't need to try.  Nothing works, anyway."   Since I think the article is largely bogus, I think publishing such an article is reprehensible.

[SmithW6079]

NPR just published an article that touches on what many of us have been saying here -- that building/maintaining muscle mass is vital in any weight loss scheme.

Uncannily Youthful At 67, He Embodies Antidote To Bummer 'Biggest Loser' Study

[auntjess]

Ali Vincent is going to be on Oprah: Where Are They Now, at 10 ET tonight, and 1(I think) in the morning tomorrow.
Posted Saturday, 10/8/16.

[Wings]

This show is going to be cancelled.  These are just two stories. Not sure what they are waiting for. 

http://nypost.com/2016/05/22/biggest-loser-fed-us-illicit-drugs-to-lose-weight-ex-contestants/

http://nypost.com/2015/01/18/contestant-reveals-the-brutal-secrets-of-the-biggest-loser/

[Canada]

I don't know.  There have been rumours for years about the show, with former contestants speaking out, and that hasn't stopped it.  It is strange that they haven't made an announcement yet about next season.  Hopefully they do cancel it, as it seems to have a horrific effect on the people who are on the show.

[auntjess]

Even if it were legit, it's outlived its time.