I'm not sure how the American version goes, but I have met a couple of people who were on the first "Australia's Biggest Loser". One of them was one of the finalists and the other one was the winner. They both looked pretty good when I saw them, but I have heard that they both put on weight after the final airing of the show. I also heard (from a close source) that even when they went home, between the 'house' and the final show, they were still exercising up to 8 hours a day. So, when people thought that they had returned to their 'normal' lives, they hadn't.

We also had one of the entrants end up in hospital with complications that I think were caused by the drastic change in lifestyle.

I always get really worried when they do the 'challenges'. I'm not sure if they do those on the American show. Here they had them doing things that had a couple of them needing oxygen! Now, that CAN'T be healthy. I know they say that they have medical supervision, but I still wonder at putting such a heavy person under such physical stress.

We didn't get much info at all about the diets they had while they were at the 'house', so I have no idea what their calorie intakes were. We mostly saw them exercising, doing challenges and arguing. In-house fighting seemed to be one of the biggest points of the show.

Zelma

If you exercise 7 hours a day on 1200-1500 cals, I would call that crash dieting. That leaves next to nothing for your basic functions. You might as well be eating a 500 cal a day diet.

If anyonme came to 3fc with that kind of regimen, we'd say they're crazy! But anyway, it's a tv show and I'm probably getting to worked up about it. It just bugs me.

So I hope those people do keep the weight off and learn healthy long-term habits. Do they do follow ups? Where they check-up on people a year later?

I have to agree with you Linki- I just dont get it. If you are only eating 1200-1500 and you are working out doing HOURS of cardio...how is that not sending their body into shock? Also, isnt it true that anything over 60 minutes of cardio a day burns protien/muscle and not fat?

I was under the impression that i am doing the best thing for my body by eating 1400 cals., exercising with cardio 30 minutes 6 days a week, weight training 3 days a week, etc. From what i see of them, it is over training. I mean it obviously works for them, but i just dont get how it is beat in our head that a deficit like they are creating would send me into starvation mode....doesnt seem to send them into starvation mode and you would think the trainers wouldnt advise them to work to the point of burning muscle. I am just confused.

I love the show and it really inspires me, but i am just totally confused.

Last year as her senior project, a girl started a contest like the biggest loser, The YMCA donated memberships to all of the participants, there was a nutritionist, a medical doctor, and a fitness trainer to help each member. The person who won got another years membership to the Y, plus like $500. This year our chamber of commerce wanted to do the same. They increased the number of participants by 5 people. I think the biggest loser is a great way to inspire a community like mine. I believe the contest will go on until June so A total of 9 months. I tried, but I didn't qualify, but I do know at least 2 of the participants. The TV show itself isn't realistic in a persons "real life" but I think people see it as a motivator, and a lot of people need motivation.

BTW last years winner of our local contest lost 100 pounds in the 9 month span. She said she ate a 1400 calorie diet and worked out 2-4 hours a day (4 hours each weekend), plus she walked everywhere she went.

I like the show, but do consider it a "guilty pleasure," because I think the jury is still out on whether the show has any value beyond freakshow entertainment. It isn't much different from "Fear Factor," except that it is wrapped up in a greater good "means justifying the ends" sort of logic.

Seeing some of the challenges and how dangerous they are, I'm certain there are ambulances standing by just out of camera range, and these people have signed releases up the yingyang, but that isn't always apparent to the viewer. I do wonder how many people watch the show and are "inspired" to do some of the stupid things shown on the show WITHOUT the precautions the show has taken (but hasn't shown to the audience). I mean last week Wylie (?) should have been taken to the hospital for the neck injury for x-rays, and he certainly shouldn't have been allowed to complete the challenge.

At least Fear Factor warns people not to try this at home, and while there's a written disclaimer for Biggest Loser at the end, I'm not sure people realize
how real are the risks to "crash course" diet and exercise programs. I think there's a mentality in our culture that fat is so dangerous, that anything that reduces the fat quickly, must be less risky than the fat itself.

It's also hard to remember that these people are not "typical" fat people. They have been carefully selected and most likely were already among the healthiest fat people on the planet, because even though the contestants have signed releases to protect the show from lawsuits, deaths and serious injuries would hurt the show's image.

My two cents anyway

Jill, I think that's a good point about using exercise to create a larger calorie deficit instead of just dropping calories. I think it's pretty universally accepted that it's not a good idea to go under 1200 calories without medical supervision, for a variety of reasons. I'm not a big believer in the starvation mode theory but I do think it's very difficult to nourish your body with adequate protein (to maintain muscle mass), fiber, and vitamins etc when your calories drop too low. Plus drastically low calories can lead to binging.

So enter exercise! It's a great way to increase your calorie deficit and get healthy and fit and still be able to eat enough for good nutrition. I attribute a huge part of my weight loss and maintenance to exercise; in fact, I'm absolutely convinced that without it I would still be screwing around with WW and moaning about how it's impossible to lose weight.

I lost 122 pounds in about 50 weeks eating between 1200 and 1600 calories (the last six months were all around 1200-1300), doing an hour of cardio (elliptical) every day, and lifting weights five days a week. Without a doubt, I needed that extra calorie deficit created by the cardio and weightlifting to reach my goal. And I didn't lose any muscle - in fact I added eight pounds! - and have maintained my weight loss for more than four years now It's not as fast and drastic as TBL, but it was and is healthy and sustainable.

Jill,

I remember that too, but all in all, I still would argue, knowing human behavior, that the show producers likely selected contestants, at least in part, on their health status. I would expect them to have avoided people with multiple health risks, including weight related problems, medications, age, family history.. We'll never know for sure, because they're not likely to reveal the detailed medical histories of the contestants. My point is just that the apparent safety of "trying this at home" may be misjudged based on what is (and isn't) shown.

Common sense (and pain) is going to protect most people, so I'm not judging the show too harshly, just recognizing that "reality shows" aren't necessarily "realistic."

Interesting debate. I still don't get how these very large people who have been sedentary can exercise 5-7 hours a day without significant injury. And how it is possible to lose 23 lbs in one WEEK. Albeit some is water, but in week 2??? If I follow their program, I could be at my ideal weight in 3 weeks! I just don't get the numbers. Take, for example, Kai's 12 lb loss. That means a calorie deficiency of 3500 cal per pound, for a total of 42,000 calories a week, or 6000 calories a day. Her Basal Metabolic Rate for a 250lb woman (at the start of the week) is 1931 calories, and her daily intake is 1200 calories (benefit of the doubt, here), for a deficiency of 731 calories each day. She has to burn off 5269 calories through exercise to lose 12 lbs. 5 hours of high impact aeorbics at her weight will burn 3969 calories. 2 hours of vigorous weight training will burn 1,361 calories. She is still short 61 calories (!), so lets throw in 13 minutes of stretching exercises, for a total of 7 1/4 hours of exercise, of which 5 hours is akin to a full out run. The numbers just don't make any sense to me, especially since this is week 2 and the bulk of her weight loss due to water should be gone by now.
Could Meg, our fitness guru and moderator, give us some help here? Are we assuming that the numbers reported on TV are actually accurate? Is their reported weekly loss physically possible???

I'm convinced that the human body doesn't care about mathematical formulas. It doesn't always lose exactly as the math says it should -- there are too many variables that the math doesn't take into account. For example, we burn xxx amount of calories via exercise, but the math doesn't take into account that for a period of time afterward our body is still working at a somewhat higher-than-normal rate -- we don't just turn on and turn off the calorie burn. But how can we measure that? I don't think we can, really -- eah person has their own recovery rate, and level of activity. As Jilly said, the best thing those calculators do is provide a rough estimate.

I think that people who are regularly eating in an unhealthy manner see a bigger change initially too, as they go from their old style of eating to a new, healthier menu. I know I've always lost faster the first couple of weeks of a diet when I've started after just not paying attention than I do when I'm being somewhat conscious of what I'm eating but just eating too much of good food (I don't know if that made any sense to you, but I know what I'm trying to say...)

Ha! That is so true. Everybody's body is different and there are just too many variables seen and unseen that cannot be taken into account for that would affect a loss or gain.

I always feel badly for those on the show who are working their butts off and get kicked off because they aren't losing enough weight. It isn't even their fault!

I understand the variables of weight loss, but if you refer to Meg's (our moderator) advice on weight loss (see the fitness thread), she seems to be clear that weight loss is a matter of calories IN vs calories OUT. My point is that the results that are reported seem to be physically impossible to achieve. And, my example of Kia was purposeful in that she isn't hugely oveweight (i.e. 350 lbs) and is a female to boot. I just wonder how they can get these results, and what I have to do to get similar results.

I like the show for several reasons. One of which is the fact that it proves that diet and exercise works. I get tired of people saying they've tried every diet and nothing works for them and no matter how hard they try they cannot lose the weight. I agree that losing weight is more difficult for some than it is for others, but EVERYBODY can lose weight through proper diet and exercise, barring certain extraordinary medical conditions such as thyroid problems, etc.

This show motivates me to push myself harder during my workouts. In fact, I often watch it while on the treadmill. When they are working out on the show, I increase my speed up to 7 or 8 mph and push myself right along with them.

Bottom line...it's a tv show. The obesity crisis in this country is very sad and totally unacceptable. If this show can get people motivated to eat sensibly & exercise (as it motivates me), then more power to them. I can no longer blame restaurant portion sizes or genetics - it is up to ME to control my health and size. It is up to ME to control what goes into my mouth and how much I exercise. My destiny is in MY hands, and this show helps motivate me to reach my goals.