If you listen to the "propaganda," and that's a very big if. Like John, I researched Ideal Protein, Medifast, HMR and other plans, because I was considering them.

I carefully compared the supposedly "superior" ingredients, and found that Ideal Protein was no more superior than the other heavily markeded PSMFs and they were actually inferior to many off-the-shelf and whole-food alternatives.

What Ideal Protein is selling at a high premium isn't superior quality, it's brand-loyalty, simplicity, service, and in some cases more variety than other plans (but not as much variety as if you were to put together your own PSMF). You may consider the cost a good value, but I think it's important to know what exactly you're buying.

If you do a PSMF on your own (with or without low-carb, high-protein packaged convenience foods), you can do it with far superior ingredients and for far less money - but you do need to educate yourself a little on these ingredients and in nutrition in general (and by little, I mean only a few hours of reading. You don't need a degree in bariatric nutrition).

None of the prepackaged PSMF plans want you to know how easy it is to create your own as-good-or-better plan, so they all sell "magic." They imply that there's something in (or not in) their products that make them superior to the competition - and yet sometimes they're exactly the same products, made in the same facilities, and often even sold by the same company (It's my understanding that the company that makes Ideal Protein also makes one of the lower-cost competitors and the products are even in identical packaging except for the outer box).

Believe it or not, I'm not bashing Ideal Protein or people following the name-brand plan. Some people (including me) do much better when the have a more structured plan, and especially someone supervising a weekly weigh-in.

I'm struggling now with that, as I've given up my TOPS (weight loss group) membership because the group's practices were so counterproductive I couldn't in good conscience stay. So now I'm trying to build that structure myself.

Still, I find in unconscionable that advertising and marketing is allowed to be so misleading. Every product manufacturer claims that their product contains superior ingredients, down to ketchup made in a factory where a dozen brands are bottled (the only difference being the label) - each of those brands claiming to be made with superior ingredients than all the rest.

If you're comparing the ingredients and the nutrition labels, and sticking closely you should be able to duplicate the quality, success, and flavor-appeal of the name brand. It is more work, and you don't get built-in supevision, support, and accountability - but the results will be the same (assuming you've done a fair job of duplicating the calorie and carb content - obviously if you choose to deviate from the calorie and macro content of the plan you're attempting to mimic, your results will also be different).

And if you're willing to do just a little more work - reading and food preparation you can get superior flavor, results, and nutrition. You don't even have to use processed and prepackaged foods (though for myself too much whole-food cooking means too much food around the house and too many opportunities for eating off plan).

Chloe, I don't really know if the pancreas will be functioning better.

John,
I'm not looking to get into a debate. All I know is that for this diet, it's important that your carbs be low. Raising them during the diet could slow weight loss and throw you out of ketosis.

There are two points:

1) The IP diet rests your pancreas.

Any reduction in calories will reduce insulin output. Carbohydrates get the big rap for insulin release. In a vast over simplification - carbs cause insulin release, protein causes insulin release (whey protein causes the greatest insulin release ironically since IP products rely heavily on whey), and fat has a fairly negligible effect. Carbs + Protein causes the most insulin to be released into the system. I suggest anyone interested in insulin read this article.


2) By the time you've reached phase four your pancreas will be functioning better.

This is true but misleading because when you reduce your fat stores you'll increase insulin sensativity regardless of how you lost the fat.

Bottom line - I am not bashing the IP diet. It works. It just doesn't work for the reasons they claim. Education is a wonderful thing - but if you're getting bad information you're not truly being educated you're just being misinformed.

People ask me why I post here. I post here because I believe the best way to keep the fat off once you've lost it is to educate yourself. For all people there is a WOE (Way of Eating) that is going to be the most sustainable. In my opinion your primary goal should not be to lose weight it should be to lose weight and while you're doing it experiment a little to find out what is going to work long term for you.

Phase four for some people is going to be a complete disaster. It doesn't matter how thin some people get they will always be insulin resistant and they should eat low carb for the rest of their lives. For others - even if they're not genetically insulin resistant whole wheat should simply be avoided because of intollerance or how it triggers cravings. Ultimately you have to restrict calories in one way or another to keep the fat off once you've lost it and it doesn't have to mean a day or two of phase 1 dieting on IP products for the rest of your life.

You can click the link on my sig to find out my personal WOE but that isn't going to work for everyone.

Hopefully this was informative.

I'm not looking for a debate either. I agree 100% that if you're on phase 1 of the IP diet you should stick to the protocol.

I just believe it's worth being educated about the real reasons why this is true.

Thank you, everyone, for that informative exchange!

John, I went to one of the links you posted above and found this fascinating section: (Note: all written below comes from http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat...-equation.html if want to read more.)

If you create a 3,500 cal/week deficit and you should lose one pound of fat, right? Again, wrong.

There is a built in assumption in the above that turns out to not be necessarily correct but also throws a wrench into expectations about the energy balance equation. That assumption is that 100% fat is being lost when a deficit is created. Now, if you diet correctly (e.g. the way I describe in my books), this is a pretty good assumption but it’s not universally true. Often people also lose muscle and connective tissue on a diet.
And the issue is that muscle and connective tissue doesn’t provide as much energy to the body as a pound of fat. Rather than 3,500 calories to break down a pound of fat, a pound of muscle provides about 600 calories to the body when it’s broken down for energy.
Let me put this in mathematical terms, to show you how the identical 3,500 calorie/week deficit can yield drastically different changes in body mass depending on what percentage of tissue you’re losing. I’m going to use the extremes of 100% fat, 50/50 fat and muscle, and 100% muscle.

The assumption of one pound per week (3,500 cal/week deficit) is only valid for the condition where you lose 100% fat. If you lose 50% fat and 50% muscle, you will lose 1.7 pounds in a week for the same 3,500 calorie deficit. Lose 100% muscle (this never happens, mind you, it’s just for illustration) and you lose 5.8 pounds per week.

I’d note that I suspect this is why many rapid weight loss centers advise against exercise: exercise limits muscle loss on a diet and the simple fact is that you will lose MORE TOTAL WEIGHT faster if you lose muscle.
Finally, I’d note that most obesity researchers assume a loss for obese individuals of roughly 25% lean body mass and 75% fat which would put the true expected weight loss somewhere between the 1 lb/week and 1.7 pounds per week. But I don’t feel like doing the math.
I should note that the above numbers aren’t the same as for weight gain but there are differences in the amount of energy required to store one pound of muscle vs. one pound of fat. So there are still differences and this means that the predicted weight gain and actual weigh gain won’t be identical; the math just isn’t quite the same as what I presented above.
But the critics say, it still never works out that way. Even if you account for water and the above, the math still never works out. The calorie hypothesis is still incorrect.

Hello, when I went to alternatives it was VERY confusing there was so much information. My advice would be to: 1. Read the phase 1 sheet (over and over) it is posted in the stickies and 2. Find a few alternative products that would work and start out by just using those as your "packets". As you learn and have more time, you can start to incorporate other products. If you want to know some alternatives you can easily start with just let us know. (My suggestion would be the EAS Ready to drinks and the EAS bar as your restricted item. These can be found in Safeway, Costco and Sam's club). If you look at the alternative threads, there is a LOT of information and it can be so confusing to a newbie. So don't get discouraged. Just keep it simple in the beginning.

HGANTT I do some alternatives and some IP products. Why? I like the IP products and haven't found anything that I like better to replace them. As John said, whatever diet plan you decide to follow do your research first. Also, make sure it is a plan and lifestyle change that you can live with for the rest of your life. The thing we all have to learn about dieting is that we don't do it to take the weight off then go back to our old way of eating. All that will happen is that the weight will come back on.
IP presentation - I went to one. Each center is different. Mine didn't tell me that IP products were superior but I know that some do.C actually tried to get confirmation about the superior nature of IP products from the corp itself and IP would not confirm

Chloe - I've read just about everything Lyle has written. However it's important not to lose sight of the forest for the trees - meaning - don't get too caught up in the details and lose sight of the big picture.

In my opinion one of the most important articles he has written is this one.

Wow, thanks for the information! (Thanks to John, too!) I am planning on doing a mix of IP products and alternative products, but was a little hesitant because of the propoganda I mentioned. But you are right, every company will tell you that their product is best. I don't begrudge them that; after all, they are looking for a profit and if they tell you that cheaper ingredients are also effective, they are not going to turn a profit. I have done a little research and my friend and I are both considering doing alternatives due to the cost of the IP products. She is much more wary of it than I am, because she believes the hype more than I do.

Do you know what the products are made by the same company as IP are called??

There are a few out there. The ProtiThin chocolate soy puffs are identical to the IP ones. And ProtiDiet's White Cheddar crisps are also identical to IP's version (down to the silver space packaging), just a slightly smaller portion. Several bars with a few different companies are also identical to IP.

Hey John -- I was wondering where you were. Hadn't heard from you in awhile. Glad to see you're still sharing your wealth of knowledge.
(p.s. to newbies - don't argue with him...you won't win But if you have a question, as you can see he usually has some good advice or places to go to further your own research)

Actually you can win an argument with John, you just have to be able to back up your argument with evidence supporting your viewpoint and it has to be persuasive enough to win him over after he does his own reading to make sure that you're right.

I know it can be done, because I've done it at least two or three times (Well, to be fair it was probably more like one actual "win" and the rest "draws").

Earning that "win" was an awesome ego boost, but I've learned far more from the losses.

I don't often meet anyone who knows more about weight loss than I do (there's a lot of people who DO better at weight loss than I do, but after years of study, I do understand the subject - heck I put more hours and effort into studying weight loss than I put into my master's degree in psychology - by about a thousand fold).

I've been reading here but not posting much due to time constraints.

Haha yea that is how I feel. The amazing thing is how simple the subject actually is but the signal to noise ratio is so low it's extremely difficult to grasp the fundamentals for anyone new.

Some day I hope to make my living in the field of fat loss because helping people change their lives is so rewarding but as of now I haven't been able to determine a business model that I could grow into the kind of income I need. The entire industry is built around shoveling B.S. and I just couldn't do that.

If I win the super lotto though ...

Just be very careful with the alternative products you choose. Check all the ingredients for hidden sugars and carbs not listed in the breakdown and compare them to IP.

Good luck with whatever you choose