WHY do liquid diets work? Medifast - Optifast - HMR!

A Sun, 6 Jun 2004 18:25:20 -0700, "GaryG"
escribió:
This would seem to violate the laws of thermodynamics. Your body burns a
certain number of calories every day. If you were consistently consuming
only 600 calories per day, and not losing any weight, that would mean that
your body was only burning 600 calories per day. This seems highly
unlikely...you would probably burn more than this even if you were sleeping
all day long.

That's not clear, and so no violation of physics is
assuredly indicated. The body is a remarkable thing, and it
does often manage to slow itself down quite a bit. All of
the major VLCDs are specifically designed to provide enough
protein, and to include enough exercise, to preclude this
(though there is nothing forcing VLCD patients to ensure a
good amount of exercise is weight-bearing). However, any
low-calorie diet, improperly practiced, metabolism can be
adversely affected.

Most people underestimate the number of calories they consume each day -
this phenomenon has been documented in a number of research studies, and it
is especially true of overweight and obese folks.

Yes, this is likely to account for some, but not necessarily
all, of the disparity, in most cases. VLCDs, especially the
600 calorie ones, though are easier to ensure accuracy.
Count the empty packets. It is a lot harder to deceive
yourself into believing that you're not cheating when what
you're doing is eating something other than the one packet
of powder you're supposed to be eating.

So, in answer to your question - perhaps the liquid diets work because it's
harder to cheat on a liquid diet.

Yes, yes, yes. Precisely.


--
bicker®
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/GMA/D...ry_040602.html

A Sun, 6 Jun 2004 21:44:48 -0500, "Auntie Em" Auntie
escribió:
How on earth can you stand drinking those liquid diet things?

I'm drinking one now, for breakfast, more than two years
completing weight-loss. I'm at a healthy weight, and have
been for over two years, so why would I still be drinking
shakes, when I could legitimately be having a bowl of
oatmeal, cereal, toast or even eggs? Because they're GOOD!
What I'm having for breakfast this morning is the single
best breakfast I could imagine (for 200 calories). Better
than any of the traditional choices. It sure helps that it
is also incredibly nutritious and helps me maintain my
weight-loss.

What's the difference? Have I been reprogrammed? grin
No! I just know which shakes to buy, and how to make them
into my breakfast -- make them better than any alternative.

There are horrible shakes out there.

There are also rotten eggs!

(Hint: Don't eat rotten eggs!) grin


--
bicker®
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/GMA/D...ry_040602.html

My body is so like yours! But I didn't do a liquid diet -- what worked for me was
initially, getting off my main problem food (sugar) permanently because I lost 100
lbs upon doing so -- and then subsequently, when I couldn't get under 200 lbs.
despite trying hard for 22 years -- what worked was a balanced diet prescribed by a
very good nutritionist, and increasing my exercise to 7 hours a week of walking along
with the 4 hours of weight training I was already doing. I *do* have to do more than
other people to keep weight off -- it is scary how fast I gain if I slack off on even
one component of my health regimen -- but if this is the physical challenge I've been
dealt, I'd take it any day over being blind or deaf or unable to walk or having some
other devastating physical problem that I have absolutely no control over. At least I
can do something about this (even if I don't like it one bit some days) -- it's
important for me to stay out of pity party mode because that's the first step down
the slippery slope. But I do relate and feel for you, Vanessa! I can sure relate to
quick gains -- on vacation one year I gained 15 lbs. in 16 days -- and not even going
hog wild either! But I ate more refined carbs and fat than usual (i.e. fried foods,
too) and couldn't exercise because of a foot injury. No one believed that I could
gain that much in such a short time -- but with bodies like ours, it happens and so
we know it's true for at least you and me!

It took me a long long time to find out what works for me -- and it's more than I
ever thought I'd have to do -- but that's OK too -- it takes what it takes.

Mary M
325-158-145

"KittenLove99" wrote in message
...
I am a person who has a tough time losing weight. Most people do anyway but I
am resistant to it. Exercise has to be excessive, food intake has to be perfect
and low calorie or I maintain. Yet medifast, a liquid diet, makes me lose
weight everytime I can stick to it.

I have eaten as little as 600 calories a day and never lost an ounce, yet that
is about what a consume with medifast and off comes the weight. Why do I go
into "starvation mode" on any other low calorie food diet but not on medifast?
Does anyone understand why this works??

It is a sad fact of the world for everyone, but especially us ladies, that we
are willing to torture our bodies to be thin. Here I am, suffering on
medifast, a diet that gives me heart palpitations and headaches, makes me weak
and feel gross but willing to do it because it WORKS. Because other diets cant
seem to get the last of the weight off me and the liquid diet always does.

I am so confused about dieting, I thought I was an expert. I have no idea what
to eat to make me thin and healthy and stay that way. The only time I have
maintained my weight and not gained was on an 800 calorie a day ALL PROTEIN low
fat and I mean ZERO carb diet. How the hell do I stay on that for life???? I am
really frustrated with my body. I dont even lose weight on that, only maintain.
If I eat ONE thing off the plan I gain up to 5 pounds. In 2 weeks I put on 17
pounds just from eating "normally" and not starving. I hate my body.

Well I am venting. Thanks for being here. Would love to hear any thoughts from
people out there who did liquid diets, and from other women with bodies like
mine...are you out there or am I alone?
Thanks
Vanessa

Bicker, what shakes do you use? Did you lose weight on a liquid diet? Which
one? Can you please email me so I can ask you a few questions? I would
appreciate it so much! Thanks
V.

On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 08:36:54 -0400, "Mary M - Ohio"
wrote:

I *do* have to do more than
other people to keep weight off -- it is scary how fast I gain if I slack off on even
one component of my health regimen -- but if this is the physical challenge I've been
dealt,

This is me, too. In order to stay where I am now, I need to exercise
more than most people and eat less as well. But it really isn't all
that big a sacrifice to make. A slower metabolism also means I don't
get hungry on what I'm eating, whereas others might. My problem isn't
hunger but just wanting to indulge -- and I do make room for that
occasionally. (I know this doesn't seem to work for you, Mary -- at
least not with sugar -- but I don't seem to have that particular
sensitivity.) The exercise is fun, but there are times I'd rather
just relax. This week I'm in long meetings each day, and I'm the only
one there who's working out in the gym beforehand or taking a walk
during the lunch break. I'm also the only one not eating the cookies
and pastries and chips and stuff that are provided. But I'm about the
thinnest person in the room, too :-). (There are 12 people in the
group, and I think one of the men is also a normal weight. The other
folks are of varying degrees of tubbiness -- none huge but typical of
middle-aged white collar workers.)

Chris
262/151/ (145-150)

On 9 Jun 2004 03:41:31 GMT, Ignoramus11156
wrote:

In article , Chris Braun wrote:
This is me, too. In order to stay where I am now, I need to exercise
more than most people and eat less as well. But it really isn't all
that big a sacrifice to make. A slower metabolism also means I don't
get hungry on what I'm eating, whereas others might. My problem isn't
hunger but just wanting to indulge -- and I do make room for that
occasionally.

So, you are not hungry, but once in a while you want to eat some
treats, right?

That's correct. And so far it has worked okay.

Supposedly, successful long term weight maintainers spend about 2800
calories per week exercising, which is equivalent to walking about 5
miles per day for 5 days a week.

I never pay attention to calories burned exercising, but I think I get
a pretty good amount of exercise. Currently I'm walking 2 to 4.5
miles most weekdays, running maybe 6-7 miles total per week, and
weightlifting around 4 hours per week, plus other odds and ends.

Chris
262/151/ (145-150)

Bicker,

That seems to jive with reports that dieters using meal replacements
have more success. At least the meal replacements won't have the side
effects of diet pills - so you can continue using the shakes
indefinitly.


*bicker* wrote in message ...
A Sun, 6 Jun 2004 21:44:48 -0500, "Auntie Em" Auntie
escribió:
How on earth can you stand drinking those liquid diet things?

I'm drinking one now, for breakfast, more than two years
completing weight-loss. I'm at a healthy weight, and have
been for over two years, so why would I still be drinking
shakes, when I could legitimately be having a bowl of
oatmeal, cereal, toast or even eggs? Because they're GOOD!
What I'm having for breakfast this morning is the single
best breakfast I could imagine (for 200 calories). Better
than any of the traditional choices. It sure helps that it
is also incredibly nutritious and helps me maintain my
weight-loss.

What's the difference? Have I been reprogrammed? grin
No! I just know which shakes to buy, and how to make them
into my breakfast -- make them better than any alternative.

There are horrible shakes out there.

There are also rotten eggs!

(Hint: Don't eat rotten eggs!) grin

A 9 Jun 2004 13:56:31 GMT, Ignoramus26239
escribió:
Sounds like you exercise on the order of 3 thousand calories per
week...

Research from the National Weight Control Registry shows
that this is typical for folks successfully maintaining
significant weight-loss.


--
bicker®
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/GMA/D...ry_040602.html