The Biggest Loser - Page 2 - JP Fitness Forums

raymond3 · 11-30-2006, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rgv

In addition what about the emotional aspect of it. Most of the people cry because they HAVE to leave! They know if they do they might not continue to get healthy so they want to stay. I realize its a motivational device but honestly its probably doing more harm than good. I know i couldnt deal with that kind of pressure, stress, and emotional distress. Add in the temptations and competitiveness and I'm convinced you're just further pounding it into their heads they aren't and can't ever be good enough.

I dont know, I guess Im in a minority here. While I dont agree with everything the show displays, at least the people want to help themselves and do lose the weight (which is better than weighing 300-400lbs and being obese). Also, just about every one of them continue to lose weight and exercise, as they show them a few months later. So this obviously shows that they 'learned' somewhat how to eat and exercise and now its just up to them to continue that type of lifestyle. Although I do agree, the crying is ridiculous.

rgv · 11-30-2006, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raymond3

I dont know, I guess Im in a minority here. While I dont agree with everything the show displays, at least the people want to help themselves and do lose the weight (which is better than weighing 300-400lbs and being obese). Also, just about every one of them continue to lose weight and exercise, as they show them a few months later. So this obviously shows that they 'learned' somewhat how to eat and exercise and now its just up to them to continue that type of lifestyle. Although I do agree, the crying is ridiculous.

I agree, but you're taking people who clearly want to help themselves (they signed up for the show) and then punishing them for doing it (voting them off) what message are you really sending them?

Thats the aspect of the show that really gets to me.

Alan Aragon · 11-30-2006, 11:14 AM

Put lightly, I think this show is a piece of shit. It doesn't help the general public in terms of realistic goal setting for permanent bodycomp changes. All the public seems to get from watching the show is that they should attempt to speed up their weight loss to at least 5-10 lbs per week (regardless of their current weight). The quicker is better approach backfires for at least 9 out of 10 people. Anyone can lose weight, but keeping it off for more than a temporary stint is a different ballgame altogether.

What would be interesting would be a film documentation of how some of these folks gained the extra couple hundred pounds in the first place. Now that would be more entertaining & educational.

Michael Roussell · 11-30-2006, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan Aragon

Anyone can lose weight, but keeping it off for more than a temporary stint is a different ballgame altogether.

AMEN!

Patricia · 11-30-2006, 11:25 AM

The militeristic treatment of these people is ridiculous. Physical activity should be a joy, it should be fun and they're not experiencing that at all. Their focus on this show is still food (using it as an reward, for example) and that's what got these people in trouble in the first place.

I agree though, this show is awful. Awful. It's another part of bad television. And I'll admit that I've caught one episode of this show and the reason I couldn't watch it again is I was downright pissed off about it. It disgusts me.

Currently, on HBO, there's a documentary called "THIN", and it's about women with eating disorders. Now, that's good television and you actually learn a few things.

raymond3 · 11-30-2006, 12:21 PM

I guess you guys (and girls) are missing my point. Again, I know losing 10-20lbs a week isnt good. Thats obvious. But you are talking about a majority of obese (not just a little fat) people...some weighing over 400lbs. They do teach them to eat better (and enough, not starve themselves) and they do teach them to workout. They also teach them that losing weight is a lifestyle, not a quick fix (although it appears that way when you are that obese at first).

Would I train that way and try to lose that much weight? Of course not. I tell my wife the things they are teaching them that are wrong, and the things that are right. Bottom line to me is that they lost alot of weight and are healthier than before. The question now is, will they be able to maintain that in the real world? Its obvious that some do, because they show them months later and they continue to lose weight on their own. (if you guys are actually watching the whole show).

Again, is it the optimum/proper way? No, but at least they are losing weight and learning somewhat how to eat better, etc. Its better than staying a 300-400 lb fatty.

Alan, youre right...the show probably isnt the greatest example for the general public, no doubt. But I guess Im looking at the individuals themselves (on the show) getting healthier. For example, one of the shows had a doc take their blood pressure, cholesteral, and other stats after the weight loss vs before, and of course it was alot better. Most of these people have kids and I guess I feel that they are adding years to their lives by losing all of the weight. On top of that, if the general public has to watch a show to figure how they should eat/train, that is pretty sad.

BamaDave · 11-30-2006, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan Aragon

Put lightly, I think this show is a piece of shit. It doesn't help the general public in terms of realistic goal setting for permanent bodycomp changes. All the public seems to get from watching the show is that they should attempt to speed up their weight loss to at least 5-10 lbs per week (regardless of their current weight). The quicker is better approach backfires for at least 9 out of 10 people. Anyone can lose weight, but keeping it off for more than a temporary stint is a different ballgame altogether.

Yeah, on last night's show, the girl who was voted off lost "only" two pounds for the week (she weighed in the 160's), and she was completely devastated by this reasonable amount.

Alan Aragon · 11-30-2006, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raymond3

Would I train that way and try to lose that much weight? Of course not. I tell my wife the things they are teaching them that are wrong, and the things that are right.

Being someone who frequents this forum where the uberschtuds of training & nutrition dwell puts you in the microscopic minority of well-informed individuals. If households across the country had guys like yourself coaching their families on the good info versus the bad, that would be fine. But, it's not that way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by raymond3

The question now is, will they be able to maintain that in the real world? Its obvious that some do, because they show them months later and they continue to lose weight on their own. (if you guys are actually watching the whole show).

Long-term weightloss as it's been defined in clinical circles is maintenance of the goal for a MINIMUM of 5 years. The odds are stacked against anyone maintaining their weightloss if a) it was achieved via means similar to the biggest loser show; b) there isn't the built-in compliance factor of national TV coverage.

I understand the potential merit of the show in that it exposes what can be accomplished with determination and consistency. But like JP mentioned earlier, the means to achieving the (temporary) end is an insult to the legit practitioners in the fitness industry.

Alan Aragon · 11-30-2006, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BamaDave

Yeah, on last night's show, the girl who was voted off lost "only" two pounds for the week (she weighed in the 160's), and she was completely devastated by this reasonable amount.

See, this is exactly what I'm talking about. Any weight loss beyond 1% of total bodyweight per week (after the initial month of typically rapid 'bloat drop') shouldn't be a disappointment. In fact, I'd be concerned of whether those 2 lbs were all fat & not some lean weight as well. One of the things that burns me up about the goal of rapid weightloss is that I'm a stickler for maintaining muscle. The less lost the better. Weight loss "races" are setups for way too much muscle loss, and that ultimately sabotages the dieter.

raymond3 · 11-30-2006, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan Aragon

See, this is exactly what I'm talking about. Any weight loss beyond 1% of total bodyweight per week (after the initial month of typically rapid 'bloat drop') shouldn't be a disappointment. In fact, I'd be concerned of whether those 2 lbs were all fat & not some lean weight as well. One of the things that burns me up about the goal of rapid weightloss is that I'm a stickler for maintaining muscle. The less lost the better. Weight loss "races" are setups for way too much muscle loss, and that ultimately sabotages the dieter.

Alan- you do bring up good points and I understand what you are saying. I guess my point was that at least they are attempting to make a change vs not doing anything at all. I for one have never agreed on the way they determine who did the best for the week...ie who had the highest percentage of actual weight loss. One, because as you are saying, most of the time less loss is better. Also, I think it should be determined on who lost the most bodyfat percentage vs actual weight. Because if they are gaining muscle (especially when there bodyfat has dropped significantly), the scale may not move much, if at all. I never did agree with the terms of how they determine who goes home or wins.

Trust me, Im not trying to argue and I understand your points (plus I know you are more experienced than I in this field

). I guess I just hate seeing obese people (nor do I understand how they get that way to begin with) and at least they are trying somewhat to make a change.

Alan Aragon · 11-30-2006, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raymond3

I think it should be determined on who lost the most bodyfat percentage vs actual weight. Because if they are gaining muscle (especially when there bodyfat has dropped significantly), the scale may not move much, if at all.

This would be a big step in the right direction. I once held a contest at my gym to see who amongst the training staff could achieve the best transformation. The judging was based on what you mentioned, plus equal credit was given for percentage of LBM gain as well. This prevented the typically stupid starvation tactics folks pull on these types of contests. I was just speaking to a client last night whose friend entered the Bally's transformation contest. He spent $30 a day on fast food for 2 months straight en route to the initial weigh-in. He gained appx 35 lbs of lard within the 2 month binge. His before-after shots were of course dramatic, but the best part is, the guy didn't win the contest, hahahaha.

LisaS · 11-30-2006, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raymond3

I for one have never agreed on the way they determine who did the best for the week...ie who had the highest percentage of actual weight loss. One, because as you are saying, most of the time less loss is better. Also, I think it should be determined on who lost the most bodyfat percentage vs actual weight.

IIRC, this is what they did for the overall winner on the 1st season

BjsAust · 12-03-2006, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan Aragon

I was just speaking to a client last night whose friend entered the Bally's transformation contest. He spent $30 a day on fast food for 2 months straight en route to the initial weigh-in. He gained appx 35 lbs of lard within the 2 month binge. His before-after shots were of course dramatic, but the best part is, the guy didn't win the contest, hahahaha.

Thats just left me flabbergasted