Bugs Bunny and Cecil Turtle are registered trademarks of Warner Brothers
Dieting is a touchy subject. We all have our own ideas as to what is the “best” way to lose weight, and with very little research we can often find studies that back up our claim. What’s more, we’re all pretty defensive of our choices. Getting together in a room full of low-carb and low-fat dieters and asking them which is the better way to diet is as fraught with danger as standing in the middle of the lobby of the Marriott at Dragon*Con with a bullhorn and asking what the best Science Fiction series is.
In the spirit of full disclosure I have to admit that I am a low-fat, calorie counting dieter. That’s what Weight Watchers® really is, when you get right down to it. They just wrap it up in a convenient system and assign food point values. I’ve been on Weight Watchers for over 9 years now and while the amount of weight I have lost has varied consistently I have managed to maintain the large majority of my loss following that program. As a result, I am obviously biased toward low-fat diets and a big proponent of them. I truly believe that portion control, exercise, and healthy food choices are the key factors in losing weight and keeping it off.
A study released in the Annals of Internal Medicine seems to back me up on that.
Researchers at the University of Pennsylvania studied two groups of dieters over three years to try and determine which type of diet was most likely to help individuals maintain long-term weight loss. While the participants in the low-carb group had greater short term success in their efforts, by the end of the first year there was no significant difference in the amount of weight lost between the two groups. By the end of the third year, the low-fat calorie restricted group weighed an average of 9.5 pounds less than when they started, while the low-carb group averaged only 4.9 pounds less.
The scientists in this study concluded that while the low-carb dieters lost more weight, they also tended to gain more back. They didn’t go into any kind of details as to why that might be the case, but I suspect it has a lot to do with the fact that low-carb dieting tends to make people unhappy. A study released last year showed that low-fat dieters tended, on the whole, to be happier than their low-carb counterparts, and mood can have a direct impact on food consumption. There’s also the deprivation factor to consider. One of the things that I truly appreciate about a program like Weight Watchers is that there are no “forbidden” foods. There is nothing that I simply can’t have as long as I count the calories and make it fit in with my daily totals. This tends not to be the case with low-carb diets, and nothing makes food taste better than slapping a taboo label on it.
As much as I am a cheerleader for low-fat diets I do concede that every individual needs to find what works for them. The important thing to consider, though, is that whatever you choose to do in order to lose weight should be something you can live with for the long term if you want to keep that weight off. If you hit your goal weight and go right back to eating the way you were before you started dieting you’re just going to gain the weight back (along with a few extra pounds in most cases). Low-fat dieting may not be the fastest way to lose weight, but if you’re really looking to make a permanent healthy change in your life it is likely to be the best one.
A blog and/or book has been mulling in the back of my head for a few months now. The title is going to be something like, “Why all diets fail — and — why all diets work”
I think there are just too many metabolic variables to call anything the “right” way. (Though, there are several that are simply “wrong”.)
And, I agree with pretty much everyone — WeightWatchers is the best “lifestyle”. Personally, though, I prefer to lose weight a bit faster than WW allows 🙂
That book has already been written, and, as I pointed out elsewhere, “every workout regimen works, too… for a while.”
EAT LESS AND EXERCISE MORE. Nobody’s going to buy a book that’s five words long, though.
Oh — and one comment on low carb:
I think the quick weight gain is that it teaches BAD habits. The “Eat all you want” of a specific group encourages over eating. And, there’s a solid 10lbs of water weight that you lose instantly on low carb. So, those 10 lbs come back, then plus the overeating of carbs . . leads to . . muffin tops again.
Wow, your post reads as very pro-Weight Watcher, almost an advertisement, definitely a ringing endorsement, and very anti-low carb. Will we get a post showcasing the studies that back up other diets (vegetarian, low-carb, and so on) later on?
I am very pro-Weight Watcher, and unashamed to admit it. I went on the program back in 2001 and at the current time am down about 170 pounds from when I was back then, and most of the time I’ve spent on the program has been maintaining the bulk of that loss. I’ve been on many diets in my life (including Sugar Busters), and WW is the only one I’ve ever been able to stay on for this long AND pick up again during times when I’ve slacked off and paid less attention (after several years on Slim-Fast the smell alone of those drinks makes me ill).
That said, we have featured several Vegan/vegetarian posts in the past (from someone who is also a WW proponent, admittedly). Not so much on the low-carb specific because, as far as I know, none of us on staff have ever had much in the way of long term success with it.
As a counterpoint, I’ve never even looked at Weight Watchers’ web site, so I don’t know the first thing about their program, beyond “You’re allowed to eat X amount of stuff based on your size and gender, and can earn more food through exercise.”
I dropped 30# by busting my ass in the gym and giving up beer and doritos for a year. That’s not exactly the sexy way to do it, but it works.
Mike came right out and stated that he’s been on WW for the best part of a decade, and has had personal success with it; it’s hardly surprising to note that he’d be an advocate for that program in the same way that I encourage people to pick up heavy things. As I pointed out last week, extremely restrictive diets that don’t give your body the opportunity to restore normal hormone balances won’t be as successful as those that do, because they’re fighting against hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of years worth of endocrine adaptation.