The Low Down On Diet Comparison

Low carbs and high protein is the way to lose weight, or so you’ll hear from one diet guru, and he has the testimonials to back it up. Low fat, lots of carbs and fresh fruits and veggies, says another – and he’s got the back up from satisfied users, too. A third swears that you need to count the amount of sugar; another tells you the enemy is white flour – if you want to lose real weight and keep it off, who do you listen to?

Take a look at the brief summaries below for a quick overview of the pros and cons of each of the popular types of diet plans.

Low Carb-Hi Protein Diets

Diets like the Atkins, the South Beach and the Zone Diet all recommend restricted carbohydrates and allow liberal amounts of protein, including protein derived from animal sources. Generally, they limit the overall amount of carbohydrates, or teach you to differentiate between “good” and “bad” carbohydrates. Bad carbohydrates, which are forbidden, include white flour, white bread, and white sugar.

Pros: The diets all encourage learning healthy eating as part of losing weight. Deriving most of your daily calories from high fibre sources of carbs like leafy green vegetables and grains is generally considered the best diet for nutrition by the established medical community. The popularity of the diets makes it easy to find low-carb foods.

Cons: The allowance of eating all the protein and fats you like flies in the face of conventional medical wisdom. A diet high in saturated fats could lead to heart disease, diabetes, gout and other chronic health conditions. Following the diets’ cautions and advice to keep portions reasonable should mitigate that concern, though.

Weight Loss “Programs”

Jenny Craig, NutriSystem, Weight Watchers, SlimFast and a number of other weight loss programs rely heavily on pre-packaged ‘diet’ foods. They incorporate professional coaching, social structure and reinforcement.

Pros: The professional coaching and nutritional benefits are a big plus, as are the reinforcement and support aspect of the diets. Meals and supplements are pre-packaged in the right proportions, and if you stick to the diets and exercise as directed you will lose weight.

Cons: The weekly fees and cost of meals can be expensive. In addition, if you rely completely on the packaged foods, you miss out on the re-education of your eating habits, which is important to maintaining any weight lost.

The Real Mayo Clinic Diet

This is not the diet that has circulated for the past thirty or more years and purported to have originated at the Mayo Clinic! The true Mayo Clinic’s nutrition and diet centre recommends a healthy eating weight loss plan based on limiting fats, proteins and carbohydrates, counting calories and deriving most of the daily nutrition from vegetables, grains and fruit.

Pros: There’s no ‘diet’. Instead, you’re encouraged to take control of your eating. Portion control and sensible balance of nutrients are the cornerstones of a weight loss plan that takes weight off gradually, and helps you keep it off permanently.

Cons: It may be difficult to stay on the diet. Counting calories and portions can be difficult if you’re eating out or on the run.

There are many diets that promise to take weight off quickly and painlessly, without exercise or changing your eating habits. The three major variations of diets above all will result in 1-2 pounds of loss per week, which most doctors believe is the optimum way to lose weight for long lasting results.

Hot Chile Peppers

http://blog.foodnetwork.com/healthyeats/2015/02/13/nutrition-news-hot-chile-peppers-great-organics-and-fake-supplements/

Food for thought: What future doctors are learning about nutrition

Katie Ball, Georgia Health News | Posted: Friday, February 6, 2015 1:00 pm    

If you type the phrase “What do doctors know about nutrition?” into an Internet search engine, the most common result will be “not much.”
Some links will open on articles claiming that busy doctors have no time for diet advice during brief office visits. Other will lead to authors who chastise medical educators for drilling students on neurology at the expense of nutrition.
The National Academy of Sciences recommends that medical students get at least 25 hours of instruction about nutrition. Even though this advice comes from a highly respected group, the fact is that only 30 U.S. medical schools — roughly 25 percent of the national total — actually follow it.
At the new medical campus in Athens, Dean Barbara Schuster’s faculty has chosen a different route from what is supposed to be the norm on nutritional instruction. It’s not focused on devoting hours to formal nutrition courses.
She says the “case-based” approach used at Georgia Regents University-University of Georgia Medical Partnership (GRU-UGA) teaches students how to build nutritional considerations into treatment plans for their patients.
Dr. Schuster freely acknowledges that the school offers no freestanding courses on nutrition, but this does not trouble her. She resists the idea that nutrition is something to be taught in isolation.
Information about what constitutes healthy or unhealthy eating, and how nutrients can promote health and healing, is abundant in the school’s curriculum, she says. It’s incorporated into lectures, discussions and problem-solving exercises.
“We integrate all the information within our case-based structure,” Schuster said. “Elements of nutrition really are added across the curriculum into the cases.”
During a biochemistry learning module, for example, students might be required to examine a runner’s metabolism. They would analyze the athlete’s energy needs and consider how different types and quantities of foods could meets those needs. They’d work out how foods are transformed into energy, calculating how many calories the runner needs based on his or her body weight.
A practical approach to obesity
Knowledge about nutrition becomes even more important in the third year of medical schools, when students begin clinical rotations that take them into hospitals and doctors’ offices.
A student on a surgical track may need to look at the food intake of a patient recovering from an operation, with the goal of restoring normal metabolism as soon as possible. Those focusing on family medicine may see patients who have been obese for years, and the medical student may wrestle with the challenge of providing effective counseling in an office setting.
More than 78 million Americans face the life-threatening problem of obesity, and the rates are highest in the South.
Schuster’s philosophy, of course, is not to look at the problem in isolation.
What families choose to eat often depends on what they can afford. The Athens medical students are taught to consider diet in the context of a patient’s income and access to medical advice, two key factors in obesity. The students learn to take all these factors into consideration when calculating treatment plans for temporary illness, injury or chronic disease.
“We really try to intermingle aspects of poverty and a lack of medical care into the curriculum as well,” said Shuster. This is important because students learn to understand how complex a person’s overall well-being really is.
When researchers at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill examined trends in nutrition education at U.S. medical schools, they found that the number of hours usually falls short of the National Academy of Sciences recommendation. And the number of hours is actually dropping.
But hour totals are not necessarily an indication of how well the subject is being taught. In Athens, for instance, the case-based learning methods of the Medical Partnership are an “excellent way to integrate nutrition into medical education,” according to Dr. Mary Ann Johnson, a foods and nutrition professor at UGA and a national spokeswoman for the American Society for Nutrition.
Johnson believes national guidelines can encourage medical schools to integrate nutrition education into their teaching, and she says technology is also changing the landscape as doctors use mobile devices to supplement their own memories.
“Health professionals should know where to access nutrition education and advocacy resources and should use innovative approaches, including online resources and case-based approaches to enhance learning,” she says.
Johnson believes that integrating learning about food, diet and nutrition into standard medical instruction is more important than setting aside a certain number of hours for nutrition classes.
This is what Schuster hopes that graduates of the GRU-UGA Medical Partnership will remember a decade from now, when they have their own patients to care for.
“Students may not have taken courses on food, but we’ve put all those areas of nutrition in throughout the curriculum just like everything else, so it not separate,” she says.
Katie Ball is a medical journalist based in Athens. Recently earning her graduate degree in health and medical journalism from the University of Georgia, her writing interests include food and nutrition, health policy, and medical technology.

http://m.northwestgeorgianews.com/mobile/rome/news/local/food-for-thought-what-future-doctors-are-learning-about-nutrition/article_fe270ba6-ae11-11e4-ad07-efbf42319831.html

Discover How To Easily Read Nutrition Labels

 

There are so many nutrients in food, so many ingredients, so many facts to know about what’s supposedly good for you and what’s supposedly not? Fortunately for all of us, the US Food and Drug Administration (US FDA) created a standardized format for the nutrition label that all processed and/or packaged consumer foods must affix to the outside of their product. So, no matter what the food, you can easily compare its value to you with that of any other food.

There are 3 fundamental areas to look for first on a nutrition label, and they’re all conveniently grouped together near the top, just under the title “Nutrition Facts”.

What is the Serving Size: standardized amount (like cups or tablespoons or pieces) followed by the equivalent amount in the metric system (such as grams). In general

How Many Servings Per Container: Most packaged foods contain multiple servings in a single package, making it easy to double, triple, quadruple, etc. the caloric intake from that of a single serving.

What are the Amount of Calories Per Serving: Typically, a single serving of around 40 calories is considered low-calorie, around 100 is considered moderate, and 400 is considered high-calorie.

Keeping tabs on the amount of servings you take in, based on the caloric intake per serving, is one great way to manage your weight. Another is to balance out eating high-calorie foods with some low-calorie foods earlier or later in the day.

The next step to using nutrition labels to help control your weight is to get the most nutrition out of the calories you take in.

Use the Percentage Daily Value to tell you how rich in each of the required nutrients the food really is. Daily values are based on a 2000-calorie diet. 5% or less of a nutrient’s %DV is low, 20% or more of a nutrient’s %DV is high. Limit your amount of Total Fat, Cholesterol, and Sodium. No daily requirement exists for Trans-Fats (the most dangerous kind), though their quantity per serving does appear on the label; so just be sure to keep them to an absolute minimum. Make sure to get plenty of Dietary Fiber, Vitamin A, Vitamin C, Calcium, and Iron.

Once you have gathered all the information you need, you simply ask yourself if a food choice is a wise choice for you in terms of both calories and nutrients, and whether it makes more sense for you as part of a meal or as a standalone snack. If the answers to these questions don’t satisfy you for a particular food, then the next question to ask yourself is whether you can find a suitable alternative. The answer that question is almost invariably, ‘Yes’.

Natural News Blogs 12 Untold Benefits of Honey For Health, Nutrition Facts & Calories

Natural News Blogs 12 Untold Benefits of Honey For Health, Nutrition Facts & Calories

Four supplements that will benefit almost everyone

Four supplements that will benefit almost everyone - NaturalNews.com

The Top Reasons Why Some Diets Don't Work

Many of us have had the experience of dieting rigorously and conscientiously but nevertheless, seeing few or no results.

Why's that?
Here are some of the top reasons why certain diets simply don't work.

1. Lying to oneself
Studies have shown that, very sadly, many of us are prone to subconsciously delude ourselves into how rigorously we have followed the diet.
Calorie-counting is particularly prone to this. Those occasional snacks or treats that we might be inclined to forget about as 'incidental' can often ruin any weight reduction regime.

2. Exercise
It is something of a myth that you need to exercise in order to lose weight.
In fact, exercise without an appropriate dietary reprogram can often add weight by building muscle, which is typically heavier than fat. However muscle and fat are not the same thing, so while you can in theory gain weight as you develop those muscles you should also be burning off fat to fuel all that exercise.

So that's why many weight reduction programs stress the need for at least some exercise and many of us simply fail to comply with that requirement - even though we often maintain that we do.

3. Using the wrong type of diet
This really is the biggie and something that, surprisingly, has only relatively recently been grasped by experts in the area.

The simple fact of the matter is that different types of regime are likely to be more suitable for some people than others. For decades people have reported that one type of diet seemed to work far better for them than others but that fact was largely ignored by many people in the field as they continued to push their particular 'pet diet' as being suitable for everybody.

Today, weight reduction programmes are being defined based upon the individual's own biology rather than any view that one diet will fit all.

4. Failing to monitor and react to changing body status
A common complaint is that after an initial period of weight loss, suddenly everything stops and starts going into reverse, even though the regime is still being followed correctly.
In a sense, this is perfectly predictable. Your body will react to the changing nutrition it is receiving and will adjust its conversion of that into various substances including fat.

So, as your body changes over time in response to dietary success, you need to recognise that and make corresponding adjustments in your intake to continue the process.

Modern approaches cover this by taking periodic blood tests, checking your hormonal and other levels, then customising your meal plan for weight loss.

In other words, gone up are the days when you stuck to one approach rigidly for months and months on end, even if it wasn't working. Today a more reactive approach is defined by some weight loss specialists.

It is often said that no diet can really change your body weight - only you can do that. Although it may sound like something of a platitude, the reality of life is that it is very true.

By taking account of some of the above common inhibitors to dieting success, you may improve your chances of losing weight.

Ratna Rashid is an author and business manager in Adventures in Weightloss team. Adventures in Weightloss is a medically designed, personalised weight loss program resulting in rapid and permanent weight loss.

http://ezinearticles.com/?The-Top-Reasons-Why-Some-Diets-Dont-Work&id=8833232

The Big Picture of Permanent Weight Loss

By Will Brink  |   Submitted On August 01, 2008  

Most people who read my articles and e-books know me as a science guy who likes to quote studies and apply research to everyday problems such as weight loss, bodybuilding, and other health/fitness related topics. However, sometimes you have to step back from the science and look at the big picture to help bring people back into focus, so they can see the forest for the trees, so to speak.

For most people reading this article, finding an effective diet that works most of the time must seem as complicated as nuclear physics. It's not, but there are a bewildering number of choices for diets out there. High fat or no fat? High carbohydrate or no carbohydrate? Low protein or high protein? To make matters worse, there are a million variations and combinations to the above diet scenarios to add to the confusion. It seems endless and causes many people to throw up their hands in frustration and give up. In this article I will attempt to change all that.

There are some general guidelines, rules of thumb, and ways of viewing a diet program that will allow you to decide, once and for all, if it's the right diet for you. You may not always like what I have to say, and you should be under no illusions this is another quick fix, "lose 100 lbs. in 20 days," guide of some sort. However, if you are sick and tired of being confused, tired of taking the weight off only to put it back on, and tired of wondering how to take the first steps to deciding the right diet for you that will result in permanent weight loss, then this is the article that could change your life...
Does your diet pass "The Test"?

What is the number one reason diets fail long term; above all else? The number one reason is...drum roll...a lack of long term compliance. The numbers don't lie; the vast majority of people who lose weight will regain it - and often exceed what they lost. You knew that already didn't you?

Yet, what are you doing to avoid it? Here's another reality check: virtually any diet you pick which follows the basic concept of "burning" more calories then you consume - the well accepted "calories in calories out" mantra - will cause you to lose weight. To some degree, they all work: Atkins-style, no carb diets, low fat high carb diets, all manner of fad diets - it simply does not matter in the short term.

If your goal is to lose some weight quickly, then pick one and follow it. I guarantee you will lose some weight. Studies generally find any of the commercial weight loss diets will get approximately the same amount of weight off after 6 months to a year. For example, a recent study found the Atkins' Diet, Slim-Fast plan, Weight Watchers Pure Points program, and Rosemary Conley's Eat Yourself Slim diet, were all equally effective. (1)

Other studies comparing other popular diets have come to essentially the same conclusions. For example, a study that compared the Atkins diet, the Ornish diet, Weight Watchers, and The Zone Diet, found them to be essentially the same in their ability to take weight off after one year. (2)

Recall what I said about the number one reason diets fail, which is a lack of compliance. The lead researcher of this recent study stated:
"Our trial found that adherence level rather than diet type was the primary predictor of weight loss"(3)

Translated, it's not which diet they chose per se, but their ability to actually stick to a diet that predicted their weight loss success. I can just see the hands going up now, "but Will, some diets must be better than others, right?" Are some diets better then others? Absolutely. Some diets are healthier then others, some diets are better at preserving lean body mass, some diets are better at suppressing appetite - there are many differences between diets. However, while most of the popular diets will work for taking weight off, what is abundantly clear is that adhering to the diet is the most important aspect for keeping the weight off long term.

What is a diet?
A diet is a short term strategy to lose weight. Long term weight loss is the result of an alteration in lifestyle. We are concerned with life long weight management, not quick fix weight loss here. I don't like the term diet, as it represents a short term attempt to lose weight vs. a change in lifestyle. Want to lose a bunch of weight quickly? Heck, I will give you the information on how to do that here and now for no charge.
For the next 90 to 120 days eat 12 scrambled egg whites, one whole grapefruit, and a gallon of water twice a a day. You will lose plenty of weight. Will it be healthy? Nope. Will the weight stay off once you are done with this diet and are then forced to go back to your "normal" way of eating? Not a chance. Will the weight you lose come from fat or will it be muscle, water, bone, and (hopefully!) some fat? The point being, there are many diets out there that are perfectly capable of getting weight off you, but when considering any eating plan designed to lose weight, you must ask yourself:
"Is this a way of eating I can follow long term?"
Which brings me to my test: I call it the "Can I eat that way for the rest of my life?" Test. I know, it does not exactly roll off your tongue, but it gets the point across.

The lesson here is: any nutritional plan you pick to lose weight must be part of a lifestyle change you will be able to follow - in one form or another - forever. That is, if it's not a way of eating you can comply with indefinitely, even after you get to your target weight, then it's worthless.

Thus, many fad diets you see out there are immediately eliminated, and you don't have to worry about them. The question is not whether the diet is effective in the short term, but if the diet can be followed indefinitely as a lifelong way of eating. Going from "their" way of eating back to "your" way of eating after you reach your target weight is a recipe for disaster and the cause of the well established yo-yo dieting syndrome. Bottom line: there are no short cuts, there is no free lunch, and only a commitment to a lifestyle change is going to keep the fat off long term. I realize that's not what most people want to hear, but it's the truth, like it or not.

The statistics don't lie: getting the weight off is not the hardest part, keeping the weight off is! If you take a close look at the many well known fad/commercial diets out there, and you are honest with yourself, and apply my test above, you will find most of them no longer appeal to you as they once did. It also brings me to an example that adds additional clarity: If you have diet A that will cause the most weight loss in the shortest amount of time but is unbalanced and essentially impossible to follow long term vs. diet B, which will take the weight off at a slower pace, but is easier to follow, balanced, healthy, and something you can comply with year after year, which is superior? If diet A gets 30 lbs off you in 30 days, but by next year you have gained back all 30 lbs, but diet B gets 20 lbs off you in the next 3 months with another 20 lbs 3 months after that and the weight stays off by the end of that year, which is the better diet?

If you don't know the answer to those questions, you have totally missed the point of this article and the lesson it's trying to teach you, and are set up for failure. Go back and read this section again...By default, diet B is superior.
Teach a man to Fish... A well known Chinese Proverb is - Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.

This expression fits perfectly with the next essential step in how to decide what eating plan you should follow to lose weight permanently. Will the diet plan you are considering teach you how to eat long term, or does it spoon-feed you information? Will the diet rely on special bars, shakes, supplements or pre-made foods they supply?

Let's do another diet A vs. diet B comparison. Diet A is going to supply you with their foods, as well as their special drink or bars to eat, and tell you exactly when to eat them. You will lose - say - 30 lbs in two months. Diet B is going to attempt to help you learn which foods you should eat, how many calories you need to eat, why you need to eat them, and generally attempt to help teach you how to eat as part of a total lifestyle change that will allow you to make informed decisions about your nutrition. Diet B causes a slow steady weight loss of 8 -10 lbs per month for the next 6 months and the weight stays off because you now know how to eat properly.

Recall the Chinese proverb. Both diets will assist you to lose weight. Only one diet, however, will teach you how to be self-reliant after your experience is over. Diet A is easier, to be sure, and causes faster weight loss than diet B, and diet B takes longer and requires some thinking and learning on your part. However, when diet A is over, you are right back where you started and have been given no skills to fish. Diet companies don't make their profits by teaching you to fish, they make their money by handing you a fish so you must rely on them indefinitely or come back to them after you gain all the weight back.

Thus, diet B is superior for allowing you to succeed where other diets failed, with knowledge gained that you can apply long term. Diet programs that attempt to spoon feed you a diet without any attempt to teach you how to eat without their help and/or rely on their shakes, bars, cookies, or pre-made foods, is another diet you can eliminate from your list of choices.
Diet plans that offer weight loss by drinking their product for several meals followed by a "sensible dinner;" diets that allow you to eat their special cookies for most meals along with their pre-planned menu; or diets that attempt to have you eating their bars, drink, or pre-made meals, are of the diet A variety covered above. They're easy to follow but destined for failure, long term. They all fail the "Can I eat that way for the rest of my life?" test, unless you really think you can eat cookies and shakes for the rest of your life...Bottom line here is, if the nutritional approach you use to lose weight, be it from a book, a class, a clinic, or an e-book, does not teach you how to eat, it's a loser for long term weight loss and it should be avoided.

The missing link for long term weight loss
We now make our way to another test to help you choose a nutrition program for long term weight loss, and it does not actually involve nutrition. The missing link for long term weight loss is exercise. Exercise is the essential component of long term weight loss. Many diet programs do not contain an exercise component, which means they are losers for long term weight loss from the very start. Any program that has its focus on weight loss but does not include a comprehensive exercise plan is like buying a car without tires, or a plane without wings. People who have successfully kept the weight off overwhelmingly have incorporated exercise into their lives, and the studies that look at people who have successfully lost weight and kept it off invariably find these people were consistent with their diet and exercise plans. (4)

I am not going to list all the benefits of regular exercise here, but regular exercise has positive effects on your metabolism, allows you to eat more calories yet still be in a calorie deficit, and can help preserve lean body mass (LBM) which is essential to your health and metabolism. The many health benefits of regular exercise are well known, so I won't bother adding them here. The bottom line here is, (a) if you have any intentions of getting the most from your goal of losing weight and (b) plan to keep it off long term, regular exercise must be an integral part of the weight loss strategy. So, you can eliminate any program, be it book, e-book, clinic, etc. that does not offer you direction and help with this essential part of long term weight loss.

Side Bar: A quick note on exercise:
Any exercise is better than no exercise. However, like diet plans, not all exercise is created equal, and many people often choose the wrong form of exercise to maximize their efforts to lose weight. For example, they will do aerobics exclusively and ignore resistance training. Resistance training is an essential component of fat loss, as it builds muscle essential to your metabolism, increases 24 hour energy expenditure, and has health benefits beyond aerobics.

The reader will also note I said fat loss above not weight loss. Though I use the term 'weight loss' throughout this article, I do so only because it is a familiar term most people understand. However, the true focus and goal of a properly set up nutrition and exercise plan should be on fat loss, not weight loss. A focus on losing weight, which may include a loss essential muscle, water, and even bone, as well as fat, is the wrong approach. Losing the fat and keeping the all important lean body mass (LBM), is the goal, and the method for achieving that can be found in my ebook(s) on the topic, and is beyond the scope of this article. Bottom line: the type of exercise, intensity of that exercise, length of time doing that exercise, etc., are essential variables here when attempting to lose FAT while retaining (LBM).

Psychology 101 of long term weight loss
Many diet programs out there don't address the psychological aspect of why people fail to be successful with long term weight loss. However, quite a few studies exist that have looked at just that. In many respects, the psychological aspect is the most important for long term weight loss, and probably the most underappreciated component.

Studies that compare the psychological characteristics of people who have successfully kept the weight off to people who have regained the weight, see clear differences between these two groups. For example, one study that looked at 28 obese women who had lost weight but regained the weight that they had lost, compared to 28 formerly obese women who had lost weight and maintained their weight for at least one year and 20 women with a stable weight in the healthy range, found the women who regained the weight:

o Had a tendency to evaluate self-worth in terms of weight and shape
o Had a lack of vigilance with regard to weight control
o had a dichotomous (black-and-white) thinking style
o Had the tendency to use eating to regulate mood.

The researchers concluded:
"The results suggest that psychological factors may provide some explanation as to why many people with obesity regain weight following successful weight loss."
This particular study was done on women, so it reflects some of the specific psychological issues women have - but make no mistake here - men also have their own psychological issues that can sabotage their long term weight loss efforts. (6)

Additional studies on men and women find psychological characteristics such as "having unrealistic weight goals, poor coping or problem-solving skills and low self-efficacy" often predict failure with long term weight loss. (7) On the other hand, psychological traits common to people who experienced successful long term weight loss include "...an internal motivation to lose weight, social support, better coping strategies and ability to handle life stress, self-efficacy, autonomy, assuming responsibility in life, and overall more psychological strength and stability." (8)

The main point of this section is to illustrate that psychology plays a major role in determining if people are successful with long term weight loss. If it's not addressed as part of the overall plan, it can be the factor that makes or breaks your success. This, however, is not an area most nutrition programs can adequately tackle and should not be expected to. However, the better programs do generally attempt to help with motivation, goal setting, and support. If you see yourself in the above lists from the groups that failed to maintain their weight long term, then know you will need to address those issues via counseling, support groups, etc. Don't expect any weight loss program to cover this topic adequately but do look for programs that attempt to offer support, goal setting, and resources that will keep you on track.
"There's a sucker born every minute"
So why don't you see this type of honest information about the realities of long term weight loss more often? Let's be honest here, telling the truth is not the best way to sell bars, shakes, books, supplements, and programs. Hell, if by some miracle everyone who read this article actually followed it, and sent it on to millions of other people who actually followed it, makers of said products could be in financial trouble quickly. However, they also know - as the man said - "there's a sucker born every minute," so I doubt they will be kept up at night worrying about the effects that I, or this article, will have on their business.

So let's recap what has been learned here: the big picture realities of permanent weight loss and how you can look at a weight loss program and decide for yourself if it's for you based on what has been covered above:

o Permanent weight loss is not about finding a quick fix diet, but making a commitment to life style changes that include nutrition and exercise
o Any weight loss program you choose must pass the "Can I eat that way for the rest of my life?" test,
o The weight loss program you choose should ultimately teach you how to eat and be self reliant so you can make informed long term choices about your nutrition.
o The weight loss program you choose should not leave you reliant on commercial bars, shakes, supplements, or pre-made foods, for your long term success.
o The weight loss program you choose must have an effective exercise component.
o The weight loss program you choose should attempt to help with motivation, goal setting, and support, but can't be a replacement for psychological counseling if needed.

Conclusion
I want to take this final section to add some additional points and clarity. For starters, the above advice is not for everyone. It's not intended for those who really have their nutrition dialed in, such as competitive bodybuilders and other athletes who benefit from fairly dramatic changes in their nutrition, such as 'off season' and 'pre-contest' and so on.
The article is also not intended for those with medical issues who may be on a specific diet to treat or manage a specific medical condition. The article is intended for the average person who wants to get off the Yo-Yo diet merry-go-round once and for all. As that's probably 99% of the population, it will cover millions of people.

People should also not be scared off by my "you have to eat this way forever" advice. This does not mean you will be dieting for the rest of your life and have nothing but starvation to look forward to. What it does mean, however, is you will have to learn to eat properly even after you reach your target weight and that way of eating should not be a huge departure from how you ate to lose the weight in the first place. Once you get to your target weight - and or your target bodyfat levels - you will go onto a maintenance phase which generally has more calories and choices of food, even the occasional treat, like a slice of pizza or whatever.

Maintenance diets are a logical extension of the diet you used to lose the weight, but they are not based on the diet you followed that put the weight on in the first place!
Regardless of which program you choose, use the above 'big picture' approach which will keep you on track for long term weight loss. See you in the gym!

References
(1) Truby H, et al. Randomised controlled trial of four commercial weight loss programmes in the UK: initial findings from the BBC "diet trials" BMJ 2006;332:1309-1314 (3 June),
(2) Michael D., et al, Comparison of the Atkins, Ornish, Weight Watchers, and Zone Diets for Weight Loss and Heart Disease Risk Reduction. A Randomized Trial. JAMA. 2005;293:43-53.
(3) Comparison of Diets for Weight Loss and Heart Disease Risk Reduction-Reply. Michael Dansinger. JAMA. 2005;293:1590-1591.
(4) Kruger J. et al. Dietary and physical activity behaviors among adults successful at weight loss maintenance. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 2006, 3:17 doi:10.1186/1479-5868-3-17
(5) Byrne S, et al. Weight maintenance and relapse in obesity: a qualitative study. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2003 Aug;27(8):955-62.
(6) Borg P, et al. Food selection and eating behaviour during weight maintenance intervention and 2-y follow-up in obese men.Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2004 Dec;28(12):1548-54.
(7) Byrne SM. Psychological aspects of weight maintenance and relapse in obesity. J Psychosom Res. 2002 Nov;53(5):1029-36.
(8) Elfhag K, et al. Who succeeds in maintaining weight loss? A conceptual review of factors associated with weight loss maintenance and weight regain. Obes Rev. 2005 Feb;6(1):67-85

http://ezinearticles.com/?The-Big-Picture-of-Permanent-Weight-Loss&id=1375468

Nutrition Smackdown: School Lunch vs. Packed Lunch

Laura TedescoNovember 13, 2014

Food fight: School lunches are giving brown-bag meals a run for their nutritional money. (DebbiSmirnoff/E+/Getty Images, DNY59/E+/Getty Images)

Remember when school lunches consisted of frozen pizza and French fries? When it was proposed that ketchup be counted as a vegetable? Fortunately, those days are becoming a distant memory, thanks, in large part, to the National School Lunch Program (NSLP), which sets strict nutritional guidelines for meals in school cafeterias. For the 2012-2013 school year, the NSLP updated its standards, and now requires schools to offer fruits and vegetables every day, shift from refined to whole-grain carbs, serve fat-free or low-fat milk, reduce sodium content, eliminate trans fat, and limit calories to meet specific energy requirements by age group.

“[These changes] are required if schools want to get reimbursement for meals — and they all want to get reimbursement for meals,” said Alisha Farris, a registered dietitian in the Virginia Tech department of human nutrition, foods, and exercise. “About 95 percent of schools are meeting the new standards.”

This may explain why, despite the less-than-stellar reputation of school food, Farris and other Virginia Tech researchers found that cafeteria lunches are actually healthier than the meals parents are packing. To determine this, the scientists analyzed the contents of 1,314 student lunches at three elementary schools in rural Virginia. “There have been studies [like this before], but they were prior to the new guidelines,” she said.

So how did the nutritional showdown pan out? After crunching the numbers, the researchers found that the packed lunches contained more calories, carbs, fat, and sugar and less protein and fiber than the school lunches.

The foods that parents tossed into their little learners’ brown bags explain these nutritional differences: Packed lunches were less likely to contain fruits and vegetables and more likely to include chips and sugary drinks, compared to cafeteria meals. Which foods cropped up again and again? Grab-and-go items, such as mini bags of chips, Capri Sun drink pouches, and Lunchables. And while none of the school cafeterias offered dessert, 61 percent of the brown-bag meals included a sweet treat.

Although packed lunches may vary by region and socioeconomic status, Farris thinks her study’s findings are on par with national trends. “The results speak to a wider problem of our children [consuming] more sugar-sweetened beverages and desserts,” she told Yahoo Health. These dietary shifts are likely fueled by one thing: convenience. “You really have to go the extra mile to chop fruits and vegetables — it just takes more time,” she said. “Convenience foods are very handy, but for the most part, they aren’t healthy options.”

And as any parent can attest, it’s often a struggle to get your child to eat an apple instead of a cookie. “Parents might cave in to what their kids want,” said Janice Newell Bissex, a registered dietitian and co-founder of Meal Makeover Moms. “If kids see that their friends have a Lunchable and it looks good, they’ll beg their parents. And the parents think, ‘Well, it’s convenient, and they like it. So I’ll go for it.’”

Although Farris originally assumed parents opted to pack lunches due to nutritional concerns, “our results really suggest that’s not the case,” she said. “We really want to figure out what’s motivating them: Is it food preferences of their child? Do they just want to get some calories in — and that’s more important than the quality of the food? We don’t know.”

What is clear: There’s definitely room for improvement. The good news is that upping the nutritional quality of kids’ lunches doesn’t have to be difficult or time-consuming. You can start with simple swaps — say, sending a piece of whole fruit instead of a prepackaged dessert or replacing sugary drinks with water, said Farris. “That would make a huge difference to the nutritional quality of the lunch,” she said. Or follow this roadmap to a well-balanced lunch to give your kids’ afternoon meal a total overhaul:

Essential #1: A source of protein

If you opt for the traditional lunchtime source of protein — sliced turkey breast — try serving it Lunchables style with whole-grain crackers and other bite-size nibbles. “Some children like that style of eating — just finger foods,” said Bissex. “They might be intimidated by a big sandwich, especially the younger kids.” Other creative ways to pack in protein: hummus, tuna (canned with a little mayo), or even leftover grilled chicken from last night’s dinner. “Thread fruit and little blocks of chicken and cheese on a kabob,” suggested Bissex.

The payoff: Protein is what keeps your kid full throughout the day, and it also helps prevent blood-sugar spikes and crashes, said Bissex. That equals better concentration.

Essential #2: A fruit

The easiest route is, of course, to toss a whole piece of fruit into your little one’s lunchbox. However, if your child won’t eat it, there’s no use packing it, said Bissex. Instead, try sliced-up strawberries, or use a melon baller to create small scoops of fruit. (Hint: Pack a toothpick — your kid will think it’s fun to eat fruit that way!) Dried fruit is also an option, as long as you pick the no-sugar-added kind, said Elisa Zied, a registered dietitian and co-author of Feed Your Family Right! Even pre-packaged fruit cups are acceptable if you pick the ones soaked in juice or water, not syrup, said Bissex.

The payoff: Not only does fruit help quiet your child’s sweet tooth, but the fresh stuff is also full of nutrients like vitamin C, vitamin A, and filling fiber, as well as water to help keep him or her hydrated, said Zied.

Essential #3: A vegetable

This may be the least convenient food group to fulfill, but with the a little prep work, you can avoid feeling rushed in the A.M. The night before, or even on Sunday evenings every week, cut up a bunch of carrots or celery, and create single portions in zip-top bags, said Bissex.

If your kiddie won’t eat plain veggies, it’s OK to include a little ranch dressing (try making your own with low-fat yogurt!) or even hummus for dipping — and don’t hesitate to experiment: “Hold taste tests at home to figure out what foods they want and like,” suggested Farris. “Get them involved in the process as much as possible.” If all else fails, you can sneak a layer of fresh spinach onto your child’s sandwich.

The payoff: Vegetables are loaded with essential nutrients — without adding a crazy number of calories to your child’s meal.

Essential #4: Whole grains

It’s not just what you put between the bread that matters — the foundation of your child’s sandwich is also critical. Whenever possible, opt for whole-grain — not white — bread or tortillas, said Bissex. The same goes for crackers if you’re sending a smorgasbord-style lunch. Triscuits are an easy option.

The payoff: Whole grains contain complex carbs and fiber to fill your little one’s belly, plus iron, magnesium, and B vitamins, which help turn food into energy, said Zied.

Essential #5: Low-fat or nonfat dairy

In the Virginia Tech study, parents did consistently pack yogurt. The question is: Did they pack the good stuff — or the sugar-laden junk? At the supermarket, check the labels and make sure you choose one of the lower-sugar options, advised Farris. “Yogurt has lactose in it, so it’s going to have some sugar,” she said. “But if sugar is one of the first ingredients on the list, then you know it has a lot of added sugar.” As an alternative, give your child the cash to buy a little carton of milk from the cafeteria.

The payoff: Dairy is packed with calcium and often has vitamin D added. Plus, “it provides protein that fills kids up and keeps them satisfied,” Zied said.

Essential #6: A source of healthy fats

This shouldn’t be the star of your child’s meal — just a small handful of nuts (if they’re allowed at his or her school) or even a few slices of avocado on a sandwich will do the trick, said Bissex. You can even turn nuts into a treat: Mix them with dried fruit and chocolate chips for a tasty trail mix, she suggested.

The payoff: Even a small amount of fat will help your child absorb certain nutrients in fruits and veggies, Bissex said.

Essential #7: Water

Even if your child buys milk from the cafeteria, you should always pack a bottle of water, too. You can even add a splash of 100 percent fruit juice or fresh berries or cucumber slices to flavor it, said Zied.

The payoff: One word: hydration! 

Optional Item: Dessert

If you want to send a little something special, skip the prepackaged sweets, and make your own at home instead. “Then you have a lot more control over how healthy they are,” Bissex pointed out. “I always try to weave in a little bit of good nutrition to cookies — a little flaxseed, a little wheat germ.” You could also go the trail-mix route (see above), or even just break off a square of chocolate to sate your child’s sweet tooth.

https://www.yahoo.com/health/nutrition-smackdown-school-lunch-vs-packed-lunch-102450598117.html
 

Taste and smell can be powerful tools in the classroom

   

As classrooms “go digital,” educators should consider smell and taste as underutilized

There’s strong evidence for smell and taste being central to nutrition education dating back a century to the pioneering work of physician Maria Montessori, whose schools worldwide continue to prioritize what Dr. Montessori referred to as the “education of the senses.” There is also recent evidence that multisensory nutrition education reduces classroom absenteeism and improves standardized test scores, according to a report by the Institute of Medicine’s task force on childhood obesity. Changes in health behaviors, such as hand washing, hydration and reducing sugar intake, lead to fewer sick days. And activities such as cooking with recipes, reading nutrition labels and counting calories appear to greatly improve math test scores, possibly because they utilize more senses than does most math classwork.

There’s a biochemical basis for incorporating taste and smell into nutrition education. Taste and smell, which are referred to as the chemosenses because they “talk” to the brain via molecules, guide our behavior and level of motivation. Studies using functional MRI map chemosensory brain activity in the brainstem, a control center for instinctual behaviors like sleeping, eating and the fight-and-flight response. (In contrast, sight and sound are largely registered in the neocortex, the part of the brain used for cognition.) Food scents and taste are powerful influencers because of food’s central role in species survival. The gaming and cosmetic industries use food fragrances to incentivize behavior and purchases. In other words, the nose knows–less in the test-taking way we usually assess knowledge and more through pathways linked closely to behavior change and lifelong learning.

Chemosensory learning does not stop in elementary school. In fact, taste acquisition and adult food preferences are honed during early adolescence.
The case for incorporating chemosensory learning into middle and high school curricula has never been stronger. The sophistication of fast food marketing requires today’s youth to be especially discerning. Children and teens also have more discretionary spending and a wider array of food choices. Given the epidemic of nutrition-related chronic diseases, we need an all-hands-on-deck approach to equipping our nation’s youth.

A rise in chronic diseases in youth has led to a rise in the use of prescription medications to treat them. One in 4 insured American youth takes a prescription medication on a regular basis, according to the Medco 2010 Drug Trend Report. Many of these medications have not been studied in youth, and those that have been studied exhibit nuanced, individualized and sometimes adverse effects on food selection and appetite. Appetite-related side effects are not limited to the medication’s duration and can be long-lasting. However, teaching kids to fine-tune their senses of smell and taste can minimize these side effects by helping people realize when they’re full, and is also key to mindful eating.

The digital age makes new and innovative ways of incorporating the chemosenses possible. One example is “flipped classrooms,” where technology-driven learning can be used at home or in during extracurricular activities, which then frees up class time for student discussion and presentations. The flipped classroom approach makes it possible to use smell and taste in virtual classrooms as well, and in settings where food allergies may limit such experiences in the classroom. Encouraging students to engage in nutrition activities in the home has long been used in public health interventions known as a “child-as-change-agent approach.”

Community partnerships have long been a way for public health nutritionists and educators to work together to achieve sustainable behavior change among youth. The web has also become a catalyst for more diverse stakeholders in nutrition education: STEM programs using nutrition as a gateway science, athletic groups seeking to improve the sports performance of youth, agriculture programs such as 4-H and Future Farmers of America, and the National Park Service linking healthy parks with healthy people for their upcoming centennial.

Peer leadership is another well-established method for engaging adolescents in positive health behaviors. The web and social media have allowed youth peer leaders to expand beyond traditional roles such as camp leaders, afterschool tutors and buddy program participants. In NutriBee, an early adolescent nutrition intervention I researched and developed at Johns Hopkins, high school students come up with projects relating their personal interests to nutrition, which then comprise the online component of NutriBee’s curriculum. The curriculum, aimed at slightly younger kids, incorporates the chemosenses, touch and social interaction.

The chemosenses can help translate nutrition education into healthful behavior changes and positive actions. Getting taste and smell back into the teaching toolbox can therefore impact public health. And the digital age is fertile soil for sprouting the innovation necessary to do that.

Ingrid Kohlstadt, MD, MPH, is a physician graduate of Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. Dr. Kohlstadt is a Faculty Associate at Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health and double-board certified in preventive medicine and nutrition. She edited textbooks Food and Nutrients in Disease Management and Advancing Medicine with Food and Nutrients, Second Edition. Dr. Kohlstadt has worked for the CDC, the FDA, the USDA, the Indian Health Service and the Johns Hopkins Weight Management Center, and serves on the review board of Nutrition Journal.

http://time.com/3582298/coming-to-our-senses-on-education-and-nutrition/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+time%2Ftopstories+(TIME%3A+Top+Stories)

The Big Picture of Permanent Weight Loss

Most people who read my articles and e-books know me as a science guy who likes to quote studies and apply research to everyday problems such as weight loss, bodybuilding, and other health/fitness related topics. However, sometimes you have to step back from the science and look at the big picture to help bring people back into focus, so they can see the forest for the trees, so to speak.
For most people reading this article, finding an effective diet that works most of the time must seem as complicated as nuclear physics. It's not, but there are a bewildering number of choices for diets out there. High fat or no fat? High carbohydrate or no carbohydrate? Low protein or high protein? To make matters worse, there are a million variations and combinations to the above diet scenarios to add to the confusion. It seems endless and causes many people to throw up their hands in frustration and give up. In this article I will attempt to change all that.
There are some general guidelines, rules of thumb, and ways of viewing a diet program that will allow you to decide, once and for all, if it's the right diet for you. You may not always like what I have to say, and you should be under no illusions this is another quick fix, "lose 100 lbs. in 20 days," guide of some sort. However, if you are sick and tired of being confused, tired of taking the weight off only to put it back on, and tired of wondering how to take the first steps to deciding the right diet for you that will result in permanent weight loss, then this is the article that could change your life...
Does your diet pass "The Test"?
What is the number one reason diets fail long term; above all else? The number one reason is...drum roll...a lack of long term compliance. The numbers don't lie; the vast majority of people who lose weight will regain it - and often exceed what they lost. You knew that already didn't you?
Yet, what are you doing to avoid it? Here's another reality check: virtually any diet you pick which follows the basic concept of "burning" more calories then you consume - the well accepted "calories in calories out" mantra - will cause you to lose weight. To some degree, they all work: Atkins-style, no carb diets, low fat high carb diets, all manner of fad diets - it simply does not matter in the short term.
If your goal is to lose some weight quickly, then pick one and follow it. I guarantee you will lose some weight. Studies generally find any of the commercial weight loss diets will get approximately the same amount of weight off after 6 months to a year. For example, a recent study found the Atkins' Diet, Slim-Fast plan, Weight Watchers Pure Points program, and Rosemary Conley's Eat Yourself Slim diet, were all equally effective. (1)
Other studies comparing other popular diets have come to essentially the same conclusions. For example, a study that compared the Atkins diet, the Ornish diet, Weight Watchers, and The Zone Diet, found them to be essentially the same in their ability to take weight off after one year. (2)
Recall what I said about the number one reason diets fail, which is a lack of compliance. The lead researcher of this recent study stated:
"Our trial found that adherence level rather than diet type was the primary predictor of weight loss"(3)
Translated, it's not which diet they chose per se, but their ability to actually stick to a diet that predicted their weight loss success. I can just see the hands going up now, "but Will, some diets must be better than others, right?" Are some diets better then others? Absolutely. Some diets are healthier then others, some diets are better at preserving lean body mass, some diets are better at suppressing appetite - there are many differences between diets. However, while most of the popular diets will work for taking weight off, what is abundantly clear is that adhering to the diet is the most important aspect for keeping the weight off long term.
What is a diet?
A diet is a short term strategy to lose weight. Long term weight loss is the result of an alteration in lifestyle. We are concerned with life long weight management, not quick fix weight loss here. I don't like the term diet, as it represents a short term attempt to lose weight vs. a change in lifestyle. Want to lose a bunch of weight quickly? Heck, I will give you the information on how to do that here and now for no charge.
For the next 90 to 120 days eat 12 scrambled egg whites, one whole grapefruit, and a gallon of water twice a a day. You will lose plenty of weight. Will it be healthy? Nope. Will the weight stay off once you are done with this diet and are then forced to go back to your "normal" way of eating? Not a chance. Will the weight you lose come from fat or will it be muscle, water, bone, and (hopefully!) some fat? The point being, there are many diets out there that are perfectly capable of getting weight off you, but when considering any eating plan designed to lose weight, you must ask yourself:
"Is this a way of eating I can follow long term?"
Which brings me to my test: I call it the "Can I eat that way for the rest of my life?" Test. I know, it does not exactly roll off your tongue, but it gets the point across.
The lesson here is: any nutritional plan you pick to lose weight must be part of a lifestyle change you will be able to follow - in one form or another - forever. That is, if it's not a way of eating you can comply with indefinitely, even after you get to your target weight, then it's worthless.
Thus, many fad diets you see out there are immediately eliminated, and you don't have to worry about them. The question is not whether the diet is effective in the short term, but if the diet can be followed indefinitely as a lifelong way of eating. Going from "their" way of eating back to "your" way of eating after you reach your target weight is a recipe for disaster and the cause of the well established yo-yo dieting syndrome. Bottom line: there are no short cuts, there is no free lunch, and only a commitment to a lifestyle change is going to keep the fat off long term. I realize that's not what most people want to hear, but it's the truth, like it or not.
The statistics don't lie: getting the weight off is not the hardest part, keeping the weight off is! If you take a close look at the many well known fad/commercial diets out there, and you are honest with yourself, and apply my test above, you will find most of them no longer appeal to you as they once did. It also brings me to an example that adds additional clarity: If you have diet A that will cause the most weight loss in the shortest amount of time but is unbalanced and essentially impossible to follow long term vs. diet B, which will take the weight off at a slower pace, but is easier to follow, balanced, healthy, and something you can comply with year after year, which is superior? If diet A gets 30 lbs off you in 30 days, but by next year you have gained back all 30 lbs, but diet B gets 20 lbs off you in the next 3 months with another 20 lbs 3 months after that and the weight stays off by the end of that year, which is the better diet?
If you don't know the answer to those questions, you have totally missed the point of this article and the lesson it's trying to teach you, and are set up for failure. Go back and read this section again...By default, diet B is superior.
Teach a man to Fish...
A well known Chinese Proverb is - Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.
This expression fits perfectly with the next essential step in how to decide what eating plan you should follow to lose weight permanently. Will the diet plan you are considering teach you how to eat long term, or does it spoon-feed you information? Will the diet rely on special bars, shakes, supplements or pre-made foods they supply?
Let's do another diet A vs. diet B comparison. Diet A is going to supply you with their foods, as well as their special drink or bars to eat, and tell you exactly when to eat them. You will lose - say - 30 lbs in two months. Diet B is going to attempt to help you learn which foods you should eat, how many calories you need to eat, why you need to eat them, and generally attempt to help teach you how to eat as part of a total lifestyle change that will allow you to make informed decisions about your nutrition. Diet B causes a slow steady weight loss of 8 -10 lbs per month for the next 6 months and the weight stays off because you now know how to eat properly.
Recall the Chinese proverb. Both diets will assist you to lose weight. Only one diet, however, will teach you how to be self-reliant after your experience is over. Diet A is easier, to be sure, and causes faster weight loss than diet B, and diet B takes longer and requires some thinking and learning on your part. However, when diet A is over, you are right back where you started and have been given no skills to fish. Diet companies don't make their profits by teaching you to fish, they make their money by handing you a fish so you must rely on them indefinitely or come back to them after you gain all the weight back.
Thus, diet B is superior for allowing you to succeed where other diets failed, with knowledge gained that you can apply long term. Diet programs that attempt to spoon feed you a diet without any attempt to teach you how to eat without their help and/or rely on their shakes, bars, cookies, or pre-made foods, is another diet you can eliminate from your list of choices.
Diet plans that offer weight loss by drinking their product for several meals followed by a "sensible dinner;" diets that allow you to eat their special cookies for most meals along with their pre-planned menu; or diets that attempt to have you eating their bars, drink, or pre-made meals, are of the diet A variety covered above. They're easy to follow but destined for failure, long term. They all fail the "Can I eat that way for the rest of my life?" test, unless you really think you can eat cookies and shakes for the rest of your life...Bottom line here is, if the nutritional approach you use to lose weight, be it from a book, a class, a clinic, or an e-book, does not teach you how to eat, it's a loser for long term weight loss and it should be avoided.
The missing link for long term weight loss
We now make our way to another test to help you choose a nutrition program for long term weight loss, and it does not actually involve nutrition. The missing link for long term weight loss is exercise. Exercise is the essential component of long term weight loss. Many diet programs do not contain an exercise component, which means they are losers for long term weight loss from the very start. Any program that has its focus on weight loss but does not include a comprehensive exercise plan is like buying a car without tires, or a plane without wings. People who have successfully kept the weight off overwhelmingly have incorporated exercise into their lives, and the studies that look at people who have successfully lost weight and kept it off invariably find these people were consistent with their diet and exercise plans. (4)

I am not going to list all the benefits of regular exercise here, but regular exercise has positive effects on your metabolism, allows you to eat more calories yet still be in a calorie deficit, and can help preserve lean body mass (LBM) which is essential to your health and metabolism. The many health benefits of regular exercise are well known, so I won't bother adding them here. The bottom line here is, (a) if you have any intentions of getting the most from your goal of losing weight and (b) plan to keep it off long term, regular exercise must be an integral part of the weight loss strategy. So, you can eliminate any program, be it book, e-book, clinic, etc. that does not offer you direction and help with this essential part of long term weight loss.
Side Bar: A quick note on exercise:
Any exercise is better than no exercise. However, like diet plans, not all exercise is created equal, and many people often choose the wrong form of exercise to maximize their efforts to lose weight. For example, they will do aerobics exclusively and ignore resistance training. Resistance training is an essential component of fat loss, as it builds muscle essential to your metabolism, increases 24 hour energy expenditure, and has health benefits beyond aerobics.
The reader will also note I said fat loss above not weight loss. Though I use the term 'weight loss' throughout this article, I do so only because it is a familiar term most people understand. However, the true focus and goal of a properly set up nutrition and exercise plan should be on fat loss, not weight loss. A focus on losing weight, which may include a loss essential muscle, water, and even bone, as well as fat, is the wrong approach. Losing the fat and keeping the all important lean body mass (LBM), is the goal, and the method for achieving that can be found in my ebook(s) on the topic, and is beyond the scope of this article. Bottom line: the type of exercise, intensity of that exercise, length of time doing that exercise, etc., are essential variables here when attempting to lose FAT while retaining (LBM).
Psychology 101 of long term weight loss
Many diet programs out there don't address the psychological aspect of why people fail to be successful with long term weight loss. However, quite a few studies exist that have looked at just that. In many respects, the psychological aspect is the most important for long term weight loss, and probably the most underappreciated component.
Studies that compare the psychological characteristics of people who have successfully kept the weight off to people who have regained the weight, see clear differences between these two groups. For example, one study that looked at 28 obese women who had lost weight but regained the weight that they had lost, compared to 28 formerly obese women who had lost weight and maintained their weight for at least one year and 20 women with a stable weight in the healthy range, found the women who regained the weight:
o Had a tendency to evaluate self-worth in terms of weight and shape
o Had a lack of vigilance with regard to weight control
o had a dichotomous (black-and-white) thinking style
o Had the tendency to use eating to regulate mood.
The researchers concluded:
"The results suggest that psychological factors may provide some explanation as to why many people with obesity regain weight following successful weight loss."
This particular study was done on women, so it reflects some of the specific psychological issues women have - but make no mistake here - men also have their own psychological issues that can sabotage their long term weight loss efforts. (6)
Additional studies on men and women find psychological characteristics such as "having unrealistic weight goals, poor coping or problem-solving skills and low self-efficacy" often predict failure with long term weight loss. (7) On the other hand, psychological traits common to people who experienced successful long term weight loss include "...an internal motivation to lose weight, social support, better coping strategies and ability to handle life stress, self-efficacy, autonomy, assuming responsibility in life, and overall more psychological strength and stability." (8)
The main point of this section is to illustrate that psychology plays a major role in determining if people are successful with long term weight loss. If it's not addressed as part of the overall plan, it can be the factor that makes or breaks your success. This, however, is not an area most nutrition programs can adequately tackle and should not be expected to. However, the better programs do generally attempt to help with motivation, goal setting, and support. If you see yourself in the above lists from the groups that failed to maintain their weight long term, then know you will need to address those issues via counseling, support groups, etc. Don't expect any weight loss program to cover this topic adequately but do look for programs that attempt to offer support, goal setting, and resources that will keep you on track.
"There's a sucker born every minute"
So why don't you see this type of honest information about the realities of long term weight loss more often? Let's be honest here, telling the truth is not the best way to sell bars, shakes, books, supplements, and programs. Hell, if by some miracle everyone who read this article actually followed it, and sent it on to millions of other people who actually followed it, makers of said products could be in financial trouble quickly. However, they also know - as the man said - "there's a sucker born every minute," so I doubt they will be kept up at night worrying about the effects that I, or this article, will have on their business.
So let's recap what has been learned here: the big picture realities of permanent weight loss and how you can look at a weight loss program and decide for yourself if it's for you based on what has been covered above:
o Permanent weight loss is not about finding a quick fix diet, but making a commitment to life style changes that include nutrition and exercise
o Any weight loss program you choose must pass the "Can I eat that way for the rest of my life?" test,
o The weight loss program you choose should ultimately teach you how to eat and be self reliant so you can make informed long term choices about your nutrition.
o The weight loss program you choose should not leave you reliant on commercial bars, shakes, supplements, or pre-made foods, for your long term success.
o The weight loss program you choose must have an effective exercise component.
o The weight loss program you choose should attempt to help with motivation, goal setting, and support, but can't be a replacement for psychological counseling if needed.
Conclusion
I want to take this final section to add some additional points and clarity. For starters, the above advice is not for everyone. It's not intended for those who really have their nutrition dialed in, such as competitive bodybuilders and other athletes who benefit from fairly dramatic changes in their nutrition, such as 'off season' and 'pre-contest' and so on.
The article is also not intended for those with medical issues who may be on a specific diet to treat or manage a specific medical condition. The article is intended for the average person who wants to get off the Yo-Yo diet merry-go-round once and for all. As that's probably 99% of the population, it will cover millions of people.
People should also not be scared off by my "you have to eat this way forever" advice. This does not mean you will be dieting for the rest of your life and have nothing but starvation to look forward to. What it does mean, however, is you will have to learn to eat properly even after you reach your target weight and that way of eating should not be a huge departure from how you ate to lose the weight in the first place. Once you get to your target weight - and or your target bodyfat levels - you will go onto a maintenance phase which generally has more calories and choices of food, even the occasional treat, like a slice of pizza or whatever.
Maintenance diets are a logical extension of the diet you used to lose the weight, but they are not based on the diet you followed that put the weight on in the first place!
Regardless of which program you choose, use the above 'big picture' approach which will keep you on track for long term weight loss. See you in the gym!
References
(1) Truby H, et al. Randomised controlled trial of four commercial weight loss programmes in the UK: initial findings from the BBC "diet trials" BMJ 2006;332:1309-1314 (3 June),
(2) Michael D., et al, Comparison of the Atkins, Ornish, Weight Watchers, and Zone Diets for Weight Loss and Heart Disease Risk Reduction. A Randomized Trial. JAMA. 2005;293:43-53.
(3) Comparison of Diets for Weight Loss and Heart Disease Risk Reduction-Reply. Michael Dansinger. JAMA. 2005;293:1590-1591.
(4) Kruger J. et al. Dietary and physical activity behaviors among adults successful at weight loss maintenance. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 2006, 3:17 doi:10.1186/1479-5868-3-17
(5) Byrne S, et al. Weight maintenance and relapse in obesity: a qualitative study. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2003 Aug;27(8):955-62.
(6) Borg P, et al. Food selection and eating behaviour during weight maintenance intervention and 2-y follow-up in obese men.Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2004 Dec;28(12):1548-54.
(7) Byrne SM. Psychological aspects of weight maintenance and relapse in obesity. J Psychosom Res. 2002 Nov;53(5):1029-36.
(8) Elfhag K, et al. Who succeeds in maintaining weight loss? A conceptual review of factors associated with weight loss maintenance and weight regain. Obes Rev. 2005 Feb;6(1):67-85

http://ezinearticles.com/?The-Big-Picture-of-Permanent-Weight-Loss&id=1375468