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 😉

[GershonSurge]

@shipo

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

---

It's the government's latest eating guidelines. Cutting to the chase, we'd probably be better off using guidelines from early 1900's since people weren't as sick those days from the things that are killing people today.

[OCDOC]

@GershonSurge

"It's the government's latest eating guidelines. Cutting to the chase, we'd probably be better off using guidelines from early 1900's since people weren't as sick those days from the things that are killing people today."

As you must know given your intense interest in the subject, the government stayed out of the dietary guidelines business until 1977. You will also know that it was a politician (George McGovern) who set the guidelines, which complied largely with the recommendations of (the discredited) Ancel Keys and agricultural lobby groups.

Agree that eating like 1908 would probably save the country from our health crisis: Meats, fish, chicken, eggs, fresh dairy, homemade whole-grain bread, and whatever produce your garden was providing at the time was what we ate. The one vice back then was sweets....candies and sweet baked goods were very popular.

[GershonSurge]

---

@OCDOC wrote:

@GershonSurge

"It's the government's latest eating guidelines. Cutting to the chase, we'd probably be better off using guidelines from early 1900's since people weren't as sick those days from the things that are killing people today."

As you must know given your intense interest in the subject, the government stayed out of the dietary guidelines business until 1977. You will also know that it was a politician (George McGovern) who set the guidelines, which complied largely with the recommendations of (the discredited) Ancel Keys and agricultural lobby groups.

Agree that eating like 1908 would probably save the country from our health crisis: Meats, fish, chicken, eggs, fresh dairy, homemade whole-grain bread, and whatever produce your garden was providing at the time was what we ate. The one vice back then was sweets....candies and sweet baked goods were very popular.

---

I know that McGovern's recommendations were changed based on influence from the Meat and Diary Association. 

The USDA released the first nutrition guidelines in 1894. 

[shipo]

---

@GershonSurge wrote:

@shipo

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

---

It's the government's latest eating guidelines. Cutting to the chase, we'd probably be better off using guidelines from early 1900's since people weren't as sick those days from the things that are killing people today.

---

I suppose that's a debatable point; true, folks may well not have been afflicted with the things which kill us now, then again, folks didn't live as long then as they do now.

[GershonSurge]

---

@shipo wrote:

---

@GershonSurge wrote:

@shipo

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

---

It's the government's latest eating guidelines. Cutting to the chase, we'd probably be better off using guidelines from early 1900's since people weren't as sick those days from the things that are killing people today.

---

I suppose that's a debatable point; true, folks may well not have been afflicted with the things which kill us now, then again, folks didn't live as long then as they do now.

---

When you factor out infant mortality, the expected lifespan has barely changed. 

[shipo]

---

@GershonSurge wrote:

When you factor out infant mortality, the expected lifespan has barely changed. 

---

Hmmm, never seen any data to support that.

[shipo]

---

@shipo wrote:

---

@GershonSurge wrote:

When you factor out infant mortality, the expected lifespan has barely changed. 

---

Hmmm, never seen any data to support that.

---

Per U.S. Statistics/Moratlity, Life Expectancy by Age 1850-2011 (the most recent statistics I could find):

• In 1900, individuals reaching the age of 10 years old had a Life Expectancy of 60.59
• In 2011, individuals reaching the age of 10 years old had a Life Expectancy of 76.90

[GershonSurge]

---

@shipo wrote:

---

@shipo wrote:

---

@GershonSurge wrote:

When you factor out infant mortality, the expected lifespan has barely changed. 

---

Hmmm, never seen any data to support that.

---

Per U.S. Statistics/Moratlity, Life Expectancy by Age 1850-2011 (the most recent statistics I could find):

• In 1900, individuals reaching the age of 10 years old had a Life Expectancy of 60.59
• In 2011, individuals reaching the age of 10 years old had a Life Expectancy of 76.90

---

@shipo,

I found lots of conflicting information on everything, and finally gave up. What I did find is I should have done more research before making the claim. 

This site is interesting. 

[A_Lurker]

---

@OCDOC wrote:

Agree that eating like 1908 would probably save the country from our health crisis: Meats, fish, chicken, eggs, fresh dairy, homemade whole-grain bread, and whatever produce your garden was providing at the time was what we ate. The one vice back then was sweets....candies and sweet baked goods were very popular.

---

My grandparents on my mother's side were also a big fan of the deep fryer.  Mainly for chips (french fries), but not unusual for my grandmother to make them the majority of evening meals.  Her family all lived into their 90s, same with my grandfather's side.  If not 90s for all, late 80s at worst.  Also, generally healthy, died quickly... ie. no lingering illness.  However, one died of a stroke, the other a heart attack.  Once you hit 90 though something needs to give.