|
|
|
|
|
|
by glenra
4742 days ago
|
|
|
A diet people consistently can't keep to doesn't constitute a solution to the problem. It's also worth noting that people who have gained a bunch of weight and lost it have a slower metabolism than people who stayed at the same weight. The Hacker's Diet - being based on calories in/calories out - did not account for this factor. The claim it made was that you could lose weight by keeping a calorie deficit for a while, then once you've lost enough weight you could stop the deficit, go back to basically eating at the level you did before and still stay at the new weight. Which doesn't work. Dieting seems to work because your body takes a long while to adapt to new conditions. Eventually you get hungrier and less active; progress tends to stop and reverse whether or not you keep "trying". Temporarily losing weight is "a solved problem". But losing weight without reducing metabolism and thereby making yourself more likely to gain weight in the future, is not. |
|
|
No, it is. Getting people to do it and stick to it is unsolved.
Lifestyle change, to reduce calories and restructure meals to include correct balance of proteins, carbohydrates and fats, and to raise awareness of when food is eaten and how many calories are being eaten, is tricky. But if people do it it works.