Did any of you see the experiment on there where they had the participants try on skimpy 2 pieces and gave them 2 months to lose 15 pounds or else have their pictures shown on national TV.

It was very fascinating to watch if you missed it.

I saw the commercial and taped it to watch tonight. We were ZZZZs at 10pm, heh heh.

I watched it!!! Very interesting indeed. I've never worn a bikini, and I will never wear a bikini unless the fate of the mankind depended on it. But it's great incentive to get off the pounds. I think I'd take part in the experiement if it was like, "lose 15 lbs or we're shaving you bald." I'd bet there wouldn't be anyone who loses that challenge.

What happened?

Did they lose the weight?

A few of us were discussing it last night on this thread ---> Tonight's ABC Primetime (diet challenge).

In essence, almost everyone lost the weight, so they didn't have to have their photos broadcast. What bothered me most was 1) they were given no guidance at all regarding diet or exercise, 2) it was sort of celebrated that under the circumstances, they'd do "anything" to lose the weight and 3) I'd imagine now that the threat of humiliation is over, they'll probably regain because they learned nothing about lifestyle changes.

I thought it was rather irresponsible reporting. But that's just my opinion . What do you think?

The report wasnt really about weight loss. It was more about the effect of the threat. How if you have something like that pushing you, youll do it. How we need to be pushed in someway. And it was linked to the other story. Something about cause and effect. But It wasnt about dieting, that is just what he used for his experiment. I cant remember the details of what it was about but I know it was not really about the dieting. All But one lost the weight I think she was just calling there bluff. I dont think she needed to lose very much to began with. It was very interesting.

I agree, the point of the piece was how people respond to imminent threat, and that was really interesting. I just wish they'd used some other goal besides "X pounds by Y date". I wish they'd used something that was quantifiable and yet controllable.

As we all know, you can do everything "right" and not have the pounds drop off on a schedule. There can be any number of reasons why. Water retention, TOM, muscle building... We cannot control at what rate the pounds will be released from the body. We can only control the things we do to make it happen.

If they wanted to do something weight-loss related (since losing weight is an issue so many people can relate to), why not make it controllable and quantifiable? Examples:

Threat: "We're going to show your picture if you don't work out for one solid hour at the gym 6 days a week for the next 8 weeks". ABC could access the gym records to verify.

Threat: "We're going to show your picture if you don't walk a minimum of 60,000 steps per week for the next 8 weeks". ABC could check the pedometer to verify.

Same threat (humiliation) but now the result is solely up to the participant and his/her willingness to do the activity. The participant can control whether or not s/he walks or works out. S/he cannot control whether the body responds by dropping pounds.

And the benefit would probably have been close to the same: weight loss. And the participants may have learned or incorporated some new, healthier habits into their life.

I agree that would have been more Ideal, BUT that was not the point of test. They were not trying to get people to eat healthy or exercise or anything good they just wanted to see If and how people would respond to the threat. And Of course they did. Now if they were doing it to get the people to lose the weight and keep it off than ya they should have gone it about it alot differant. But it was just to see how people react to the threat. It wasnt for anything long term. It was just a simple expierment. To prove he is right about his theory of how people react. I think the only way to lose it and keep it off is to do it slow and healthy. But that is just not what it was about. It was not at all about how the people lost it, just that they did when pushed. I did not mean to offend you. I just think that we should look @ the show for what it was. an experiament and nothing more. Sorry for the spelling.

Oh. LadyBug! You didn't offend me, dear! We just have differing opinions! And that's ok!

Actually, we agree that the premise of the report was interesting, as was the participants' reactions to it. Where we differ is in our assessment of whether ABC could have gotten the same point across using a slightly different methodology.

No offense taken whatsoever!

I'm so glad. No matter what my opinion is I would never want to offend or insult anyone!

THREATEN ME.. PLEASE THREATEN ME.. lol