Last week a friend pointed me towards an article in The Age. "More big losers make program the big winner over counsellors" A startling headline. I found the whole article at the L A Times - link below.
http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-sci-weight-watchers-20121010,0,7567805.story
The title implies (infers?) that Weight Watchers ("WW") is miles ahead of counselling as a method for losing weight. There's no mention of it being permanent weight loss - just weight loss.
Those on WW lost on average 6kg over 48 weeks. Those who spent 48 weeks in counselling lost about 5.4 kg - which, the article states, IS NOT A STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE. What does this mean? Well, firstly, don't believe the headlines. And, secondly, should we find out if the author has shares in WW??
In my (not so humble) opinion, Weight Watchers is a reasonably acceptable weight loss program because it allows higher calories than most others. This means it is less likely to induce the famine effect in the body. That is when your system realises its being starved and fights back tooth and nail with reduced metabolism and psychological urges to eat calorie dense food. Nevertheless, WW is still a diet and therefore by nature a temporary measure that focuses on the symptom i.e. the excess weight.
As the late Rodney King said "can't we all just get along?" If a person addresses the CAUSES of overweight or obesity with a counsellor, it may then be appropriate for them to choose a reasonable, balanced tool to handle the slow and steady loss of their excess weight.
No comments:
Post a Comment