ZME Science
No Result
View All Result
ZME Science
No Result
View All Result
ZME Science

Home → Science → News

Diets aren’t as good as they claim to be – even the fancy ones

"Lose weight NOW", "You'll never believe how [this person] got slim", "An easy way to lose extra pounds" - big claims, with little to back them up. Diets and weight loss programs are popping everywhere nowadays, and they've done so for years and years, but does the science actually back them up? Kimberly Gudzune, an assistant professor of medicine at Johns Hopkins found that many diet plans have zero or very little rigorous scientific evidence backing them up.

Mihai AndreibyMihai Andrei
April 6, 2015
in Health, News, Nutrition
A A
Share on FacebookShare on TwitterSubmit to Reddit

“Lose weight NOW”, “You’ll never believe how [this person] got slim”, “An easy way to lose extra pounds” – big claims, with little to back them up. Diets and weight loss programs are popping everywhere nowadays, and they’ve done so for years and years, but does the science actually back them up? Kimberly Gudzune, an assistant professor of medicine at Johns Hopkins found that many diet plans have zero or very little rigorous scientific evidence backing them up.

Image via the Weight Lose.

Exercising/running regularly, and having a healthy and balanced diet are the best ways to lose weight, but when it comes to figuring out which diet and weight loss plan work best, things get very fuzzy. Even physicians are at a loss – because there’s basically no solid scientific info on which option works best.

Gudzune wanted to remove the fuzziness and uncertainty, and analyzed most popular diets and weight loss options.

“Weight Watchers and Jenny Craig are the two programs that have the evidence to support that they help people lose weight and keep it off,” she explained. “For the other diet programs [there’s an] absence of evidence. We don’t know whether they help people to lose weight and keep it off.”

The first thing they foun was that there were actually quite few studies that rigorously tracked how people lost weight – and if they maintained the new weight. Sure, there was a trove of studies on the issue (they found no less than 4,212), but only a small fraction of those (45) actually followed the golden standard of modern medicine – randomly assigning people to a weight loss program or not, and then tracking their evolution over time.

“The majority [of programs] still have no rigorous trials done,” says Gudzune.

According to her analysis, only Weight Watchers and Jenny Craig helped dieters to lose weight and keep it off for at least a year. Other programs, such as Atkins, the Biggest Loser Club and eDiets also helped people drop pounds, but they only followed the progress of the users for 3-6 months – so there’s no way to know if the weight was maintained or not.

People lost on average between 3% and 5% of their weight using these two programs – which may not seem like much, but it’s certainly a step in the right direction, and a solid step at that one.

 

RelatedPosts

Music Acts as a Painkiller — But You Have to Listen at Your Internal Tempo
If we don’t hurry, the life we find on Mars might be from Earth
Scientists find 3.8-million-year-old skull that could reshape human evolution
Mighty migrations: how technology is changing what we know

“Even that small amount of weight loss can help to lower blood sugar, improve cholesterol profiles, help to lower blood pressure and ultimately prevent things like diabetes,” she says.

More would be better, but a 5% loss is not two times worse than a 10% loss, actually

“Would 6% or 8% or 10% of body weight lost be better? Yes, but it’s not like the interaction is totally linear,” says Gary Foster, chief scientific officer of Weight Watchers International.

But people spend money (and lots of it), in the hope of dropping many pounds and reaching an ideal weight – are these results actually enough?

“Entering any weight-loss program, people come in with idea of losing large amounts of weight,” Gudzune said. “It’s not impossible to do, but it’s the more unusual occurrence.” She noted that in 2014, Weight Watchers cost about $43 a month, while Jenny Craig was $570 a month — the latter being more expensive because it involves food for the month.

Is spending tens or hundreds of dollars a month actually worth it? The answer is likely no. Basically, it’s not about the diet you keep, it’s not about a specific nutrition plan; it’s about dedicating yourself to a decent calorie intake, a balanced nutrition, and working out or walking/running as often as possible. Dr. Yoni Freedhoff, an Ottawa-based obesity doctor — who has worked with thousands of overweight and obese patients — says he tells people:

“Ultimately you need to like the life you’re living food-wise if you’re going to keep living that way. It’s crazy to think, with billions of people on the planet, that there’s one approach that suits everybody.” He added: “The best diet for one individual is the worst diet for another individual.”

Which brings us to the next question – how does a multi-billion industry thrive, without actually having the science to  back it up? How do people get away with promoting one lifestyle as the best one, when there clearly is no one best lifestyle? Hey, and if it actually works like they claim it does, then why are there no solid studies to back it up? That probably has a lot to do with the fact that people often believe what they want to believe – even when there’s not enough evidence. People want a quick fix to a complicated problem. By all accounts, weight loss is not something you can sustainably do fast. It’s a lengthy process. The best diet, the best weigh-loss program is the one you stick to.

Journal Reference: Kimberly A. Gudzune et al. Efficacy of Commercial Weight-Loss Programs: An Updated Systematic Review. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(7):501-512. doi:10.7326/M14-2238

ShareTweetShare
Mihai Andrei

Mihai Andrei

Dr. Andrei Mihai is a geophysicist and founder of ZME Science. He has a Ph.D. in geophysics and archaeology and has completed courses from prestigious universities (with programs ranging from climate and astronomy to chemistry and geology). He is passionate about making research more accessible to everyone and communicating news and features to a broad audience.

Related Posts

Environment

The UK Government Says You Should Delete Emails to Save Water. That’s Dumb — and Hypocritical

byMihai Andrei
18 hours ago
Health

In Denmark, a Vaccine Is Eliminating a Type of Cervical Cancer

byMihai Andrei
18 hours ago
This Picture of the Week shows a stunning spiral galaxy known as NGC 4945. This little corner of space, near the constellation of Centaurus and over 12 million light-years away, may seem peaceful at first — but NGC 4945 is locked in a violent struggle. At the very centre of nearly every galaxy is a supermassive black hole. Some, like the one at the centre of our own Milky Way, aren’t particularly hungry. But NGC 4945’s supermassive black hole is ravenous, consuming huge amounts of matter — and the MUSE instrument at ESO’s Very Large Telescope (VLT) has caught it playing with its food. This messy eater, contrary to a black hole’s typical all-consuming reputation, is blowing out powerful winds of material. This cone-shaped wind is shown in red in the inset, overlaid on a wider image captured with the MPG/ESO telescope at La Silla. In fact, this wind is moving so fast that it will end up escaping the galaxy altogether, lost to the void of intergalactic space. This is part of a new study that measured how winds move in several nearby galaxies. The MUSE observations show that these incredibly fast winds demonstrate a strange behaviour: they actually speed up far away from the central black hole, accelerating even more on their journey to the galactic outskirts. This process ejects potential star-forming material from a galaxy, suggesting that black holes control the fates of their host galaxies by dampening the stellar birth rate. It also shows that the more powerful black holes impede their own growth by removing the gas and dust they feed on, driving the whole system closer towards a sort of galactic equilibrium. Now, with these new results, we are one step closer to understanding the acceleration mechanism of the winds responsible for shaping the evolution of galaxies, and the history of the universe. Links  Research paper in Nature Astronomy by Marconcini et al. Close-up view of NGC 4945’s nucleus
News

Astronomers Find ‘Punctum,’ a Bizarre Space Object That Might be Unlike Anything in the Universe

byTibi Puiu
24 hours ago
News

Drone fishing is already a thing. It’s also already a problem

byMihai Andrei
1 day ago

Recent news

The UK Government Says You Should Delete Emails to Save Water. That’s Dumb — and Hypocritical

August 16, 2025

In Denmark, a Vaccine Is Eliminating a Type of Cervical Cancer

August 16, 2025
This Picture of the Week shows a stunning spiral galaxy known as NGC 4945. This little corner of space, near the constellation of Centaurus and over 12 million light-years away, may seem peaceful at first — but NGC 4945 is locked in a violent struggle. At the very centre of nearly every galaxy is a supermassive black hole. Some, like the one at the centre of our own Milky Way, aren’t particularly hungry. But NGC 4945’s supermassive black hole is ravenous, consuming huge amounts of matter — and the MUSE instrument at ESO’s Very Large Telescope (VLT) has caught it playing with its food. This messy eater, contrary to a black hole’s typical all-consuming reputation, is blowing out powerful winds of material. This cone-shaped wind is shown in red in the inset, overlaid on a wider image captured with the MPG/ESO telescope at La Silla. In fact, this wind is moving so fast that it will end up escaping the galaxy altogether, lost to the void of intergalactic space. This is part of a new study that measured how winds move in several nearby galaxies. The MUSE observations show that these incredibly fast winds demonstrate a strange behaviour: they actually speed up far away from the central black hole, accelerating even more on their journey to the galactic outskirts. This process ejects potential star-forming material from a galaxy, suggesting that black holes control the fates of their host galaxies by dampening the stellar birth rate. It also shows that the more powerful black holes impede their own growth by removing the gas and dust they feed on, driving the whole system closer towards a sort of galactic equilibrium. Now, with these new results, we are one step closer to understanding the acceleration mechanism of the winds responsible for shaping the evolution of galaxies, and the history of the universe. Links  Research paper in Nature Astronomy by Marconcini et al. Close-up view of NGC 4945’s nucleus

Astronomers Find ‘Punctum,’ a Bizarre Space Object That Might be Unlike Anything in the Universe

August 15, 2025
  • About
  • Advertise
  • Editorial Policy
  • Privacy Policy and Terms of Use
  • How we review products
  • Contact

© 2007-2025 ZME Science - Not exactly rocket science. All Rights Reserved.

No Result
View All Result
  • Science News
  • Environment
  • Health
  • Space
  • Future
  • Features
    • Natural Sciences
    • Physics
      • Matter and Energy
      • Quantum Mechanics
      • Thermodynamics
    • Chemistry
      • Periodic Table
      • Applied Chemistry
      • Materials
      • Physical Chemistry
    • Biology
      • Anatomy
      • Biochemistry
      • Ecology
      • Genetics
      • Microbiology
      • Plants and Fungi
    • Geology and Paleontology
      • Planet Earth
      • Earth Dynamics
      • Rocks and Minerals
      • Volcanoes
      • Dinosaurs
      • Fossils
    • Animals
      • Mammals
      • Birds
      • Fish
      • Amphibians
      • Reptiles
      • Invertebrates
      • Pets
      • Conservation
      • Animal facts
    • Climate and Weather
      • Climate change
      • Weather and atmosphere
    • Health
      • Drugs
      • Diseases and Conditions
      • Human Body
      • Mind and Brain
      • Food and Nutrition
      • Wellness
    • History and Humanities
      • Anthropology
      • Archaeology
      • History
      • Economics
      • People
      • Sociology
    • Space & Astronomy
      • The Solar System
      • Sun
      • The Moon
      • Planets
      • Asteroids, meteors & comets
      • Astronomy
      • Astrophysics
      • Cosmology
      • Exoplanets & Alien Life
      • Spaceflight and Exploration
    • Technology
      • Computer Science & IT
      • Engineering
      • Inventions
      • Sustainability
      • Renewable Energy
      • Green Living
    • Culture
    • Resources
  • Videos
  • Reviews
  • About Us
    • About
    • The Team
    • Advertise
    • Contribute
    • Editorial policy
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact

© 2007-2025 ZME Science - Not exactly rocket science. All Rights Reserved.