Study shows less weight loss with wearable technology than without

[Dominique]

New study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA):

Effect of Wearable Technology Combined With a Lifestyle Intervention on Long-term Weight Loss

"Conclusions and Relevance: Among young adults with a BMI between 25 and less than 40, the addition of a wearable technology device to a standard behavioral intervention resulted in less weight loss over 24 months. Devices that monitor and provide feedback on physical activity may not offer an advantage over standard behavioral weight loss approaches."

Bummer 😉

[ActiveMike]

---

@GershonSurge wrote:

A more accurate title might have been "Lifestyle Intervention has no Significant Effect on Weight Loss."

Neither group showed impressive weight loss even after two years.

---

Extract from the research report Abstract/Results states otherwise:

"Both groups had significant improvements in body composition, fitness, physical activity, and diet, with no significant difference between groups."

I would hope so considering the number of interventions they received, quote;

"Participants were placed on a low-calorie diet, prescribed increases in physical activity, and had group counseling sessions. At 6 months, the interventions added telephone counseling sessions, text message prompts, and access to study materials on a website. At 6 months, participants randomized to the standard intervention group initiated self-monitoring of diet and physical activity using a website, and those randomized to the enhanced intervention group were provided with a wearable device and accompanying web interface to monitor diet and physical activity."

[GershonSurge]

@ActiveMike

I think the study was well run and well reported. I added the weight conversions. I don't think the results were great enough to demonstrate any of the interventions would be cost effective in treatment programs. I challenge the assertion everyone was put on a low-calorie diet. The lack of significant weight loss proves otherwise. It at least shows people didn't follow the diet.

" Weight change at 24 months differed significantly by intervention group (estimated mean weight loss, 3.5 kg (7.7 lb) [95% CI, 2.6-4.5} in the enhanced intervention group and 5.9 kg (13 lb) [95% CI, 5.0-6.8] in the standard intervention group; difference, 2.4 kg (5.3 lb) [95% CI, 1.0-3.7]; P = .002). Both groups had significant improvements in body composition, fitness, physical activity, and diet, with no significant difference between groups."

This is not impressive for a group with BMI's of 25 to 40. Calling the difference significant is stretching the conclusion except from a pure statistical viewpoint. 

It appears they used older wearable techology:

"Buried deep down is "On days that the device was worn, the median wear time was 241.1 min/d (25th-75th percentile: 99.3-579.1). User experience with this technology is reported in eTable 2 in Supplement 2."

[ActiveMike]

s

---

@GershonSurge wrote:

@ActiveMike

I think the study was well run and well reported. I added the weight conversions. I don't think the results were great enough to demonstrate any of the interventions would be cost effective in treatment programs. I challenge the assertion everyone was put on a low-calorie diet. The lack of significant weight loss proves otherwise. It at least shows people didn't follow the diet.

" Weight change at 24 months differed significantly by intervention group (estimated mean weight loss, 3.5 kg (7.7 lb) [95% CI, 2.6-4.5} in the enhanced intervention group and 5.9 kg (13 lb) [95% CI, 5.0-6.8] in the standard intervention group; difference, 2.4 kg (5.3 lb) [95% CI, 1.0-3.7]; P = .002). Both groups had significant improvements in body composition, fitness, physical activity, and diet, with no significant difference between groups."

This is not impressive for a group with BMI's of 25 to 40. Calling the difference significant is stretching the conclusion except from a pure statistical viewpoint. 

---

On reflection you make a reasonable comment Gershon.  It also supports a comment I heard the report authors make about the possible low level of committment to the trial of the group with the wearable.  It seems if this was the best weight loss both groups could achieve after 2 years then this would support the researcher's suspicions. After all most people could lose a little weight in 2 years without any intervention at all, even as a result of normal life cycle changes.

[A_Lurker]

It would be more interesting to know the progression of both group's losses.  I suspect in both groups there was earlier, faster loss, followed by going back to their original habits and regaining.  Decades ago when I was chosing a career path I should have headed into something involving research.  I do investigation, data collection, analysis as part of my work.  However, I think I would have preferred to do it as my work.

[Rscunu]

I find I'm way more concious about how much I move now that I have a tracker.  I could see how the information may be miss interpreted or even how the data reflects those that set out January with fitness/gym goals.  You'll see them all January, some of february, and by March never again....

I'm hopeful I will continue to rely on it as a tool to help me achieve my goals

[HeyJules45]

---

@BartLin wrote:

I agee about the carbs and sugar. I too lost a lot of weight, 17 kg, by sharply cutting back on carbs.

I'll quote a doctor about the cholesterol: "the effects of cholesterol-rich foods on blood cholesterol are small and clinically insignificant" and "dietary cholesterol actually reduces the body's production of cholesterol."

Now that second quote is important because the cholesterol in your body is actually produced by your liver and doesn't come from the food you eat. You don't lower your cholesterol by eating less cholesterol. 

---

If that is so, why do doctors always measure cholesterol levels and insist that you cut back on high-cholesterol foods. If the levels are too high then it must be because you are adding to the normal levels found in the body.

[AndyDandyPandy]

I've been losing weight before I got my fitbit. In fact, I don't even need it to lose weight. But it looks nice, tells time, gives me notification, and last but not least, it monitors and tracks my health at an estimation. Worth.

[OCDOC]

---

@HeyJules45 wrote:

---

@BartLin wrote:

I agee about the carbs and sugar. I too lost a lot of weight, 17 kg, by sharply cutting back on carbs.

I'll quote a doctor about the cholesterol: "the effects of cholesterol-rich foods on blood cholesterol are small and clinically insignificant" and "dietary cholesterol actually reduces the body's production of cholesterol."

Now that second quote is important because the cholesterol in your body is actually produced by your liver and doesn't come from the food you eat. You don't lower your cholesterol by eating less cholesterol. 

---

If that is so, why do doctors always measure cholesterol levels and insist that you cut back on high-cholesterol foods. If the levels are too high then it must be because you are adding to the normal levels found in the body.

---

Find me ONE up-to-date MD that advises cutting dietary cholesterol. This myth was debunked ages ago. If I'm not mistaken, they've even removed the ceiling on the nutrition labels.

Truncal obesity and processed artificial fats are the culprits. Eliminating trans-fats is a good step.

Now if only people would shed their gut! 🙂

[4R5NNF]

It's funny, I saw an article in the NY Times that referenced this study and then I spotted on the same page an article about how stress affects diet results. I then noticed that the study group were aged 18 - 35. How much stress do you think this age group is under on average. There are just too many variables to consider when creating a study of this type.

[GershonSurge]

---

@OCDOC wrote:

---

@HeyJules45 wrote:

---

@BartLin wrote:

I agee about the carbs and sugar. I too lost a lot of weight, 17 kg, by sharply cutting back on carbs.

I'll quote a doctor about the cholesterol: "the effects of cholesterol-rich foods on blood cholesterol are small and clinically insignificant" and "dietary cholesterol actually reduces the body's production of cholesterol."

Now that second quote is important because the cholesterol in your body is actually produced by your liver and doesn't come from the food you eat. You don't lower your cholesterol by eating less cholesterol. 

---

If that is so, why do doctors always measure cholesterol levels and insist that you cut back on high-cholesterol foods. If the levels are too high then it must be because you are adding to the normal levels found in the body.

---

Find me ONE up-to-date MD that advises cutting dietary cholesterol. This myth was debunked ages ago. If I'm not mistaken, they've even removed the ceiling on the nutrition labels.

Truncal obesity and processed artificial fats are the culprits. Eliminating trans-fats is a good step.

Now if only people would shed their gut! 🙂

---

Dr. McDougall, Dr. Esselstyn, Dr. Ornish, Dr. Cambell, Dr. Cooper, etc. 

[shipo]

---

@OCDOC wrote:

Find me ONE up-to-date MD that advises cutting dietary cholesterol. This myth was debunked ages ago. If I'm not mistaken, they've even removed the ceiling on the nutrition labels.

---

 Thanks!  Took the words right out of my fingers.  🙂

[Choice]

---

@OCDOC wrote:

---

Find me ONE up-to-date MD that advises cutting dietary cholesterol. This myth was debunked ages ago. If I'm not mistaken, they've even removed the ceiling on the nutrition labels.

---

 Amen.  If your doctor believes that dietary cholesterol is the main driver of high blood cholesterol, it's time to find a new doctor.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/07/government-revises-dietary-guidelines-for-ame...

[GershonSurge]

---

@Choice wrote:

---

@OCDOC wrote:

---

Find me ONE up-to-date MD that advises cutting dietary cholesterol. This myth was debunked ages ago. If I'm not mistaken, they've even removed the ceiling on the nutrition labels.

---

 Amen.  If your doctor believes that dietary cholesterol is the main driver of high blood cholesterol, it's time to find a new doctor.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/07/government-revises-dietary-guidelines-for-ame...

---

Here is a quote from the guidelines. ALWAYS look to the root research when posting a newspaper article.

"Healthy Intake: Intake of saturated fats should be limited to less than 10 percent of calories per day by replacing them with unsaturated fats and while keeping total dietary fats within the ageappropriate AMDR. The human body uses some saturated fats for physiological and structural functions, but it makes more than enough to meet those needs. Individuals 2 years and older therefore have no dietary requirement for saturated fats. Strong and consistent evidence shows that replacing saturated fats with unsaturated fats, especially polyunsaturated fats, is associated with reduced blood levels of total cholesterol and of low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-cholesterol). Additionally, strong and consistent evidence shows that replacing saturated fats with polyunsaturated fats is associated with a reduced risk of CVD events (heart attacks) and CVD-related deaths"

"The Key Recommendation from the 2010 Dietary Guidelines to limit consumption of dietary cholesterol to 300 mg per day is not included in the 2015 edition, but this change does not suggest that dietary cholesterol is no longer important to consider when building healthy eating patterns. As recommended by the IOM,[24] individuals should eat as little dietary cholesterol as possible while consuming a healthy eating pattern."

"Strong evidence from mostly prospective cohort studies but also randomized controlled trials has shown that eating patterns that include lower intake of dietary cholesterol are associated with reduced risk of CVD, and moderate evidence indicates that these eating patterns are associated with reduced risk of obesity" (Chloresterol is ONLY found in animal products.)

[Choice]

---

@GershonSurge wrote:

---

@Choice wrote:

---

@OCDOC wrote:

---

Find me ONE up-to-date MD that advises cutting dietary cholesterol. This myth was debunked ages ago. If I'm not mistaken, they've even removed the ceiling on the nutrition labels.

---

 Amen.  If your doctor believes that dietary cholesterol is the main driver of high blood cholesterol, it's time to find a new doctor.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/07/government-revises-dietary-guidelines-for-ame...

---

Here is a quote from the guidelines. ALWAYS look to the root research when posting a newspaper article.

"Healthy Intake: Intake of saturated fats should be limited to less than 10 percent of calories per day by replacing them with unsaturated fats and while keeping total dietary fats within the ageappropriate AMDR. The human body uses some saturated fats for physiological and structural functions, but it makes more than enough to meet those needs. Individuals 2 years and older therefore have no dietary requirement for saturated fats. Strong and consistent evidence shows that replacing saturated fats with unsaturated fats, especially polyunsaturated fats, is associated with reduced blood levels of total cholesterol and of low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-cholesterol). Additionally, strong and consistent evidence shows that replacing saturated fats with polyunsaturated fats is associated with a reduced risk of CVD events (heart attacks) and CVD-related deaths"

"The Key Recommendation from the 2010 Dietary Guidelines to limit consumption of dietary cholesterol to 300 mg per day is not included in the 2015 edition, but this change does not suggest that dietary cholesterol is no longer important to consider when building healthy eating patterns. As recommended by the IOM,[24] individuals should eat as little dietary cholesterol as possible while consuming a healthy eating pattern."

"Strong evidence from mostly prospective cohort studies but also randomized controlled trials has shown that eating patterns that include lower intake of dietary cholesterol are associated with reduced risk of CVD, and moderate evidence indicates that these eating patterns are associated with reduced risk of obesity" (Chloresterol is ONLY found in animal products.)

---

The Washington Post seems to suggest the sentence you have bolded is originally sourced from a paper published 16 years ago...I think that's important context.

"But elsewhere in the report, the guidelines cite a 16-year-old report from the Institute of Medicine and advises people to “eat as little dietary cholesterol as possible while consuming a healthy eating pattern."

[GershonSurge]

@Choice,

I copied it right from the new dietary guidelines.  I don't know where they got the information, but they consider it still relevant.

[Choice]

@GershonSurge wrote:

Here is a quote from the guidelines. ALWAYS look to the root research when posting a newspaper article.

---

---

@GershonSurge wrote:

@Choice,

I copied it right from the new dietary guidelines.  I don't know where they got the information, but they consider it still relevant.

---

These are strange bedfellows...

Not trying to pick a fight--just pointing out that when you suggest people dig a little deeper--what's good for the goose is good for the gander, no? 

[GershonSurge]

---

@Choice wrote:

@GershonSurge wrote:

Here is a quote from the guidelines. ALWAYS look to the root research when posting a newspaper article.

---

---

@GershonSurge wrote:

@Choice,

I copied it right from the new dietary guidelines.  I don't know where they got the information, but they consider it still relevant.

---

These are strange bedfellows...

Not trying to pick a fight--just pointing out that when you suggest people dig a little deeper--what's good for the goose is good for the gander, no? 

---

According to the Jews, Adam and Eve were vegan. Root enough?

[Choice]

---

@GershonSurge wrote:

According to the Jews, Adam and Eve were vegan. Root enough?

---

You're not going full root if you're omitting Lilith. 

/epic mic drop

[GershonSurge]

---

@Choice wrote:

---

@GershonSurge wrote:

According to the Jews, Adam and Eve were vegan. Root enough?

---

You're not going full root if you're omitting Lilith. 

/epic mic drop

---

Bottom line, if a newspaper article says one thing and the source says something different, which do you quote? I should have said source instead of root.

[shipo]

---

@GershonSurge wrote:

---

@Choice wrote:

---

@OCDOC wrote:

---

Find me ONE up-to-date MD that advises cutting dietary cholesterol. This myth was debunked ages ago. If I'm not mistaken, they've even removed the ceiling on the nutrition labels.

---

 Amen.  If your doctor believes that dietary cholesterol is the main driver of high blood cholesterol, it's time to find a new doctor.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/07/government-revises-dietary-guidelines-for-ame...

---

Here is a quote from the guidelines. ALWAYS look to the root research when posting a newspaper article.

"Healthy Intake: Intake of saturated fats should be limited to less than 10 percent of calories per day by replacing them with unsaturated fats and while keeping total dietary fats within the ageappropriate AMDR. The human body uses some saturated fats for physiological and structural functions, but it makes more than enough to meet those needs. Individuals 2 years and older therefore have no dietary requirement for saturated fats. Strong and consistent evidence shows that replacing saturated fats with unsaturated fats, especially polyunsaturated fats, is associated with reduced blood levels of total cholesterol and of low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-cholesterol). Additionally, strong and consistent evidence shows that replacing saturated fats with polyunsaturated fats is associated with a reduced risk of CVD events (heart attacks) and CVD-related deaths"

"The Key Recommendation from the 2010 Dietary Guidelines to limit consumption of dietary cholesterol to 300 mg per day is not included in the 2015 edition, but this change does not suggest that dietary cholesterol is no longer important to consider when building healthy eating patterns. As recommended by the IOM,[24] individuals should eat as little dietary cholesterol as possible while consuming a healthy eating pattern."

"Strong evidence from mostly prospective cohort studies but also randomized controlled trials has shown that eating patterns that include lower intake of dietary cholesterol are associated with reduced risk of CVD, and moderate evidence indicates that these eating patterns are associated with reduced risk of obesity" (Chloresterol is ONLY found in animal products.)

---

Cutting to the chase here; the above information is extremely dated and much if it is incorrect, some of it horribly so.