As usual (heavy sigh :D ) you are right - I have edited my post so all that's left is my opinion of *statistics*

As a researcher, I have a healthy respect for statistics. But they need to be taken in context, and are not inevitable. I could even believe a statistic that 95% of people who lose weight gain it back in 5 years (I don't know that's true or not, but for the sake of argument, I'll assume it is).

But what about the 5% who keep it off? If they engage in X behavior, and that was a key to maintenance, if more people start doing X, then the statistic should improve!

I don't know if I'll be a statistic who keeps off the weight or one who doesn't. But from the examples on this board, I feel like I have a lot more information to make me successful.

So, sure, that statistic may be true, but it doesn't HAVE to be! And I think we're on the front line here at 3fc!

Let's change those depressing weight loss statistics!

Knowledge is power. I truly believe that when it comes to nutrition, health and fitness.

3FC frontline weight loss educators!

Just as current trends are about increasing obesity ... trends can change. If enough folks think they'd rather be part of the 2%, sooner or later it'll be more percents.

Statistics as a learning tool. A tool for change.

Someone came to the door and I lost my chain of thought. Sorry, hope that made sense.

oh and Jay - thank you for using your usual (and enviable) restraint and using the word "gossipy" instead of that other word you probably would've rather used :lol:

I also kind of think that negative statistics can become a "self fulfilling prophecy" of sorts. I mean how many people out there (like that poor other poster) might make one or two stabs at "dieting" then just give up because The Statistics tell them they are doomed to fail anyway? Or people like me who, when we actually poked our head out of the denial hole, would have latched on to a statistic like that and used it to drag ourselves over to the excuses hole?

I'm with Heather - Let's tip those scales (pun intended :D ) in the other direction!

In all honesty, the thought that Billy could be a thin person, mocking fat people did cross my mind. And Billy, I mean no offense to you personally, but in an online community (and in real life sometimes too) there are always people who are not actually who they pretend to be.

Either way, I think the appropriate response is the same. Calm and rational discussion. By taking the post at face value and not getting angry or defensive, we give the "right" response to someone who is sincere and reaching out (whether they realize that's there motive or not) and it also is the best response to someone who is deliberately trying to provoke us (whether they're in the situation they say they are or not).

I am a "freeloader" upon society right now. And while I'm not proud of it, I'm not really ashamed of it either. Not because I don't care that I can't contribute much right now, but because I know what led to that dependence is complicated. I burnt the candle at both ends for many years, trying to prove to myself and society that I might be fat, but I wasn't lazy. That probably led to my having to go on disability more than the weight itself - sacrificing my health for my career - not an unusual response in our society right now (of people of all weights). I didn't eat properly or rest properly and I am paying for that - in more ways than society is. I'm still a "contributing" member of society, in that I still do feel a responsibility to the folks that are taking care of me, so I care back as much as I can. I do volunteer work when and as much as I can and I'm working at getting back enough health and stamina to return to the workforce in at least a limited capacity.

I think many people do give up in my situation. Billy's comments are not ones that I haven't heard from others, or even thought myself in my darkest times. In that respect, whether or not they are true doesn't matter, because they COULD be true and our answers could help more than just Billy, but anyone feeling so helpless and hopeless that they believe nothing else is possible (and maybe even that they prefer it that way).

I can understand being content (and maybe even calling it happy) with a small life, but the moment a person realizes it has become a "too small" life - only they can make it bigger. People can help you, but only with your assistance and consent.

I think the mental preparation it takes to lose weight is very similar to the stages of grief. Maybe we're grieving for the person we could have been, or the person we are and wish we weren't. I don't know, but I know that I have gone through all of the stages of grief: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. I've gone through the stages many, many, many times in my life.

The acceptance once took the form of accepting my weight as inevitable, and deciding to live as full a life as I could (and if I'd done that at 180 lbs rather than over 300, maybe that could have been a workable solution).

Now, I accept that I will always have to make a conscious and concerted effort to lose and maintain those losses. And I do so, knowing that I do so for selfish reasons (and finally giving myself permission to be selfish) I want to have a bigger life. Losing weight is a means to that end. That's all. I don't need to be "cute" anymore. I do need to be stronger and healthier to do some of the things I want to do, so that's why I'm working on the weight loss. Simple and selfish. And not so selfish too. My husband doesn't want to lose me, so I owe him a bit too (just as he owes me). And all of the people and animals I want to help, I can't do that without helping me. For many years I didn't understand that. Taking care of myself last, was a "good thing," I thought, but when you don't take care of yourself, you're often left in no position to help anyone.

This whole "mess" is very complicated, and so are our emotions. Anyone feeling like Billy, is responding well within the range of "normal." Sometimes depression is an UGLY critter and that eats away at the ability and willingness to rise above it. We can't give anyone hope if they won't take it, but telling our stories I think can help. It shows others (even if Billy isn't ready, someone else may be) that whether the odds are 5% or 2% or any other possible number that it CAN be done.

Gossipy? Jay, I hope I don't come off that way. I mentioned in my post to BillyG that I thought he might be pulling the wool over on us. I also told him that regardless of whatever his motive was that I still meant what I said about his ability to relay what he was feeling with words, that he definitely had a knack.

I look at the numbers and for me that is just what they are numbers to be absorbed and I can either buy into it or not. They may be true but they don't have to be numbers that dictate my outcomes

First of all, you are NOT a "freeloader"! A freeloader would be someone who is fully capable of doing more for themselves but simply chooses not to. You, on the other hand, are actively striving to make changes that will ultimately result in your being back on your feet. 'nuff said.

I hope the medical community lurks around 3FC and reads your observation on mental preparation. I think if more of the people we turn to for help and information when we're stumbling around trying to get started were to view weight loss in that light, they would be able to be much more supportive.

Susan,

Interesting thought on the statistics.

Here's my thought. :) As with anything else, I take what is meaningful to me and leave the rest. Assuming there is an overwhelming and abject failure to maintain by most people who attempt weight loss, what does that mean to me?

It means I have been there---twice. I regained. I was that statistic.
It also means that I have learned how to NOT be a regain statistic.
I need to continue to make food and movement choices that enhance my health. I am not perfect. Thankfully I don't have to be! But I can make better choices for health most of the time and that is enough for me.

I hope that all people who come to 3FC meet and maintain their weight loss goals. But the bottom line is that everyone else's chances and statistics don't really effect me. The only statistic that matters to my maintenance is myself---an N of 1. Coincidentally, that is the only statistic I can control.

So I shall continue to defy statistics. In a world where over 50% of girls never get to go to school, I am an educated woman. In a country where midwives catch 10% of babies, I work in a practice where midwives catch >80%. In a society where lots of kids live with just one parent for a myriad of reasons, I have married to my high school sweetheart for 17 years---my kids come home to both parents. In my mid-thirties, I've gone from an overweight couch potato to a runner (9 minute mile, baby!).

Screw the stats. It is my life. I will control what I can and build my future.

Statistics...I worked in a neonatal intensive care unit for a while and I learned a lot about statistics. Everyone wanted them...what was the percentage of babies who lived, who had complications, who had siblings with the same problems etc.

One doctor I know taught me a big lesson. When parents would ask he would say "Statistics are very useful to talk about a large population...but you have one baby. Maybe less than 1% of babies have this problem, but sadly 100% of this baby has the problem."

The same thing goes for me. 98% of everyone who ever seeks to lose weight may regain it. That says that in a large population 2% don't. I am only one person, so I am choosing to be part of the 2%. It is what midwife said, we are an N of 1!

Good luck everyone...let's show that the odds are just a little better for those who join 3FC.

Warning: Statistics May have been misused in this post
 

Warning - Statistics may be intentionally misused in this post.
LONG post ahead

This is a somewhat lighthearted look at the 2%/5% statistic - the success side of 92-95% of dieters regain the weight.

First of all, I'm going to use the 5% because it makes the math easier and because it better supports my end claim (hey, I did warn you. :D)

This makes the claim "5% of dieters keep the weight off" and since I don't know what the original statement really is "5% of dieters keep the weight off for 5 years or more". Keep in mind 5% is 1 out of 20. (This is a true part, not any of the misused part.)

At any given time when 100 dieters are being interviewed (I'll say interviewed so I don't have to keep saying interviewed, filled out a questionnaire form, answered a survey on line, on the phone, etc.) . . . At any given time when 100 dieters are being interviewed, 5% or 5 of them are reporting success. At any given time when 20 dieters are being interviewed, 5% or 1 of them are reporting success. And keep in mind, they are being interviewed at a particular point in time, not 5 minutes after they stop "dieting" for the very last time.

The others are in various stages of: been on a diet now or in the past and didn't lose anything, didn't lose it all, lost some and gained it back, lost it all and gained it back, lost some and kept it off a short time, lost some and kept it off a long time, lost some and weight crept back up, etc. etc. Some have tried to lose it once, some on their second try, some on their 18th try, 19th, 25th, etc. Remember in the headlines, all those different results are lumped in the same category - didn't lose it all and didn't keep it off for 5 years. People who tried half-heartedly, didn't read the book, didn't really follow the plan, cheated every day, will still be reported as dieting - most likely unsuccessfully. :dizzy:

If the same people are surveyed a year later, some will have tried dieting again or continued dieting with the same or different results.

At some point some people will have given up, some will have tried less than 20 times and some 20 or more. But statistically they all will have been counted at some phase in their dieting life. Only 5% will have been counted at the "completion and maintenance" phase. You have to believe some will have learned something about weight loss and nutrition that they will apply to a future "diet" or will cause them some incremental success in their current "diet".

Now let's say enough time passes that everyone who is going to diet times has done so as many times as they ever will. They've either lost their weight and kept it off, lost some of their weight and kept it off, or are back at original weight or more. At this point the same group of 100 is reinterviewed. Assuming that this is the end stage of dieting, I think you'd have a much higher % of success. You're interviewing the folks at the end of dieting, not all the ones who haven't gotten there yet.

I'm relating this to the research concept that if you interview people in a store on one single day and ask how often they frequent that store, and you use those values straight up, your results are skewed.
How often do you shop?
Daily? 10
Weekly? 10
Monthly? 10

If you think from this that of 30 customers, on average 10 shop daily, you would be wrong. The 10 customers who responded daily will be the same 10 who will be there tomorrow. Assuming your customers are evenly distributed through the week, the next day the same 10 daily customers would be there, but a different 10 who shop weekly and a different 10 who shop monthly. In the end there would be 10 who shop daily, 70 who shop weekly and 300 who shop monthly.

So applying or misapplying that concept back to our 5% of successful dieters: In the end out of 20 people interviewed there are 19 who are on the journey to success and 1 who has reached it AT THIS POINT IN TIME.

Wow! That's good! :bravo: Thanks, Webrover!

Here's another statistics story: A friend of mine was considering whether to have a test her doctor recommended. She asked, "So, if I get a positive result, then it means I have the disease?" The doctor said, "Well, not exactly. This test has a certain percentage of false positives, so we wouldn't know for sure."

"Oh," she said, "Well, then if I get a negative result, it means I don't have the disease." The doctor said, "Possibly, but the test also has a percentage of false negatives, so we wouldn't be absolutely sure of that, either."

"In other words," my friend said, "We could just toss a coin and say there's a 50/50 chance!"

The doctor didn't know how to answer that. She didn't have the test. And in her case, she didn't have the disease, either.

Jay

My few cents worth...
Many people lose weight successfully, but don't report it to anyone.
I am reading Thin For Life by Anne Fletcher right now, I'm about half way through. I really like that her approach was to go to those who have been successful and ask them how? why this time? etc.
I also didn't have knowledge of the National weight control registry until reading this book, but I think I saw a link to it here on 3FC??
Maybe those maintainers here at 3FC can help change those stats for the better?
I also read Rethinking Thin by Gina Kolata. It is an overview of dieting programs. It includes historical aspects of dieting as well as following current dieters through a research based weight loss program. The book could be perceived as discouraging, but for me, it makes me think about my own attempts in the past and how I can approach this differently to facilitate my own success.

If weight loss was a well understood science, I would pay a lot more attention to the statistics, but we're still in the dieting dark ages. We don't know which programs work best (probably because we're asking the wrong question - which program works best for which people, might be a better one. We don't know why some people succeed and others fail, or why a person may try 100 times and why the 100th time worked for them when the first 99 didn't.

Our cultural ideal of dieting is for the most part, still pretty stupid. Crash diets are more the norm than the exception. Eating primarily for health, and secondarily for weight loss, is a revolutionary concept. Heck just the first part, is a pretty novel idea. We're also often expecting perfection from the start - when a person can't pick up a saxaphone for the first time and start playing jazz, we don't call them a failure at the saxaphone - they haven't learned the skill set yet. That's not failure, that's learning curve. Geez. Besides that, we don't allow for learning curve, in the cultural experience of dieting, the general idea is that you start another diet just like the one you failed at. If the Wright brothers had kept getting into their faulty model of the airplane, expecting to fly, attempt 99 isn't going to be any more successful than attempt 1. Instead, we're often expecting to get on the same horse that threw us, at some point a sensible person has to consider a new horse.

To lose weight successfully, you have to wade through many of the diet myths that pass for "information." You have to be willing to think outside of the box, and learn what works for YOU. When the common dieting "wisdom" is true wisdom, the stats are going to look very different.

Ya know what? If we are "outside of the norm" because there are so many successful losers here....then yay us.

Maybe more people ought to hang out here with us.

I still think a 98% failure rate is a load of hooie. Am I supposed to count myself in there because I haven't gotten to my stated goal yet? Yeah...I guess I'm a failure because I've only lost 95 pounds and not the 115 I wanted to. WHATEVAH. :devil: