How to lose weight without dieting ir exercise, Really!

[Glenda]

The U. of Gothenburg found they can reduce body weight & fat without loss of muscle using weighted vests,  the body seems to try to maintain your weight,  After wearing a 24 pound vest for 3 weeks participants wearing a (11K)   24# vest lost 1.6K or 3.5 pounds with no dieting,  The controls wearing 1K (2,2#) vest lost only 0.3 kg.  24 pounds is a lot!  How about a 12 pound belt..  Maybe you could lose ..15kg or 3,3pounds.  Would it be worth it. .......But what next?  Wear it forever?

[SunsetRunner]

Lose weight without dieting or exercise?? And only lose fat, not muscle?!  What’s that saying? If it sounds too good to be true … 

[Glenda]

Do you think the University of Gothenburg would lie?  It was  scientific study.  But I don't think it would be easy to wear that vest or a belt.  Do you think it would be worth it?

[SebWotan · Accepted solution]

Here is a link to the study : https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(20)30082-1/fulltext

And the PR : https://www.gu.se/en/news/reduced-obesity-for-weighted-vest-wearers

You notice the experiment was done on obese people only, that they do not know where the weight was lost (deep fat or subcutaneous fat) and that there is no clue yet as if the weight loss is temporary or permanent. So far it is just one experiment, nothing to get excited about. 

[BASILCHIVES]

I would guess the weight loss is due to the fact that carrying around the extra weight burns more calories, and probably in a small way increases muscle which burns more calories than fat.    Sort of like wearing leg and arm weights to walking.   Wearing a 24 lb vest might encourage me to think that if I don't manage my weight, I could be carrying that around as body fat.

[Heybales]

Calories was not equated for by any reliable method - though the end results dictate they ate less than they burned:

To estimate daily energy intake, a validated food questionnaire called “Short Dietary Questionnaire” (SDQ) [[25]] was filled out by patients every week including the week between the screening and the baseline visit, during week one of the study, during week two of the study and during week three of the study.

That type of method has been shown to be terrible for food logging.

Perhaps daily movement with only 11% more weight wasn't so much of an increase of daily burn that they felt like eating more.

Perhaps they decided to take this time to purposely try to eat less, despite instructions to keep things normal, and the food logs being what they probably were.

Regarding muscle - they used rather unreliable BIA measurements for BF%, the formula for which is by %, not by mass.

Therefore LBM or FFM (Lean Body Mass or Fat-Free Mass) as rest of the %, was not by weight.

So in losing fat weight, the LBM% would of course go up - not that any LBM was gained necessary though.

And since LBM is everything but fat, that means blood volume with water, water in the body in general (sore knees from carrying around extra weight perhaps), whatever was not fat increased.

Those measurements mean it's impossible to tell if muscle as a part of LBM increased.

Worth it?

Any activity that doesn't make you eat more than you burn is worth it probably. For me walking makes me way more hungry than it's burning in the walk. Biking & running don't.

If walking around 8 hrs a day with slightly more weight doesn't make you blow your diet - great!

This may be saying that.

[happymangle]

I don't believe in those things, also not in unicorns.

In order to lose weight you need to something

[greenivy12]

Me too, it should at least be some kind of diet, and it's not necessarily fasting, you can feel full all day, I learned  some info from this article https://betterme.world/articles/5-meals-a-day/ that if you eat 5 times a day in small portions, you can lose weight twice so fast and now I'm on it for the 3rd day, I feel great, I'll share the results later