[INFOGRAPHIC] Hope for Sustained Weight Loss Without Hardship

5 comments

1. I wasn’t able to see from the published survey results, nor from the A.C. book, nor from the asking Facebook group, so I’ll ask here. Is there a difference in the rate of weight loss between men and women using Fast-5, or is the average of one pound per week regardless of sexual dimorphism?

   Reply

   1. Kaiden,

      There’s more of a range between members of the same group than any difference between groups and every individual’s loss varies over time and circumstance. There are far too many variables to conveniently dissect single attributes of respondents and make sweeping predictions for others who share that attribute.

      We can only say that for all respondents to the survey, the average was a pound per week. The pound per week is offered as a best guess about what most people can expect and is not offered as a promise. It’s a guide and serves to dispel expectations of losing 30 pounds in a month. Our experience for the past ten years has consistently revealed that there’s no substitute for a well navigated study of one.

      We value your engagement with the group and appreciate your question.

      Peace.

      Judi

      Reply

2. Judi,

   Your detailed response is really interesting to me. I am no expert in survey methods, but I feel like I`ve learned a bit about how challenging retrieving data that is `evaluable` ends up being.

   I do like the way that the respondents you have are not required to be of a certain pre-determined fitness, nor are they expected to never carry out natural physical acts (e.g. lactating). While I can see why the 2015 Apr 7 study may have chosen to exclude many of your type of respondents, I think this only confirms that one size does not fit all – and that some of the surveys you refer to are attempting to square peg the human condition rather. There is no ceteris paribus – things are not equal for anyone. That said, I am relatively new to thinking about this.

   I think you are identifying a certain lack of uniformity (in the `longer answer`) within the commercial program study, I mean, for example, where `2 study arms` have economic incentive with free of charge meals. This kind of re-balancing demonstrates adjustments are being made to offset the lack of uniformity that real people manifest.

   A couple of reservations, on my part. Again, this is mostly only my own suspicion about all (what seem to be) entirely successful ideas: `motivation to exaggerate or minimize` must be there, for any of us, especially if we are on an off-the-radar diet as others might see it – not that I have any proof for this, but my own tendencies to exaggerate and minimize. And, secondly: to `not feel hungry` is still the goal, rather than the invincible achievement – meaning I think that `Each has found the recipe that works for them to lose weight sustainably and not feel hungry` sounds over-claimed, even if the sentiment is directionally compelling. Maybe that is because I have never experienced this entirely un-tempted state for longer than a few days at a time – I know 77 days is not long enough to have fully explored what `recipe` should/could work for me permanently…

   Not more questions, but a response at least.

   Reply

3. Christopher,

   Thanks for the comment and the questions. Among the survey respondents, 69 reported living the AC/Fast-5 lifestyle for more than a year and 75 reported living the lifestyle for 1-3 months. I hope that helps. The results were self-reported without an external verification step meaning that the respondents answered questions. They did not present to a place to have a designated “official” weigh or measure them.

   As for comparing to other studies, determining the average results from commercial studies is challenging. You may have seen advertisements for various commercial programs where a success story is featured and along with the “remarkable results” there appears a line of fine print that reads, “Results not typical.”

   In our efforts to determine the very best results that commercial programs offered we started with an April 6, 2015 commentary on Johns Hopkins Medicine website entitled, Few Commercial Weight-Loss Programs Show Reliable Evidence of Effectiveness, Johns Hopkins Reports: A handful of programs may help some dieters, but a new review of thousands of studies finds sparse evidence for long-term benefits. The commentary featured this 2015 study:

   Ann Intern Med. 2015 Apr 7;162(7):501-12. doi: 10.7326/M14-2238.
   Efficacy of commercial weight-loss programs: an updated systematic review. Gudzune KA, Doshi RS, Mehta AK, Chaudhry ZW, Jacobs DK, Vakil RM, Lee CJ, Bleich SN, Clark JM.
   We read the article and identified the commercial program with the best results among the programs the study reviewers considered evaluable. We invite you to review the study to determine the full criteria for inclusion and exclusion. In short, the researchers considered 4212 citations and included 45 clinical trials that evaluated 11 programs. Among those 45 clinical trials, this is the study Jenny Craig sponsored that appeared to reveal the best outcome among commercial programs:

   Caitlin A. Dow, Cynthia A. Thomson, Shirley W. Flatt, Nancy E. Sherwood, Bilge Pakiz, and Cheryl L. Rock. Predictors of Improvement in Cardiometabolic Risk Factors With Weight Loss in Women. Journal of the American Heart Association, December 2013
   This brings us to the question of whether or not the study compares with the survey results. It’s a great question. We’ll offer a short answer and then a longer answer.

   The short answer: No.

   The longer answer:

   The commercial program study recruited individuals who stepped away from their usual routine and embarked on a clinically supervised program for which researchers were seeking to determine cardiometabolic changes as study participants lost weight. Any potential participant who was pregnant, planning a pregnancy, lactating, reported a history of eating disorders, other psychiatric disorders, comorbid conditions, or food allergies, or was unable to perform a 3-minute step test for cardiopulmonary fitness assessment was excluded from study participation.
   Participants were randomized to 1 of 3 possible pathways: for those whose pathways focused on promoting weight loss, they “visited the weight loss center weekly for brief counseling sessions and weigh-ins with designated trained staff; they also had access to Web-based resource materials. Women in the telephone-based arm similarly received weekly counseling by telephone to reinforce weight loss behaviors and goals. They also had access to Web-based resource materials. Prepackaged meals and snacks provided 42% to 68% of total energy needs of the prescribed eating plan and were provided free of charge for participants randomized to these 2 study arms. Generally, after the initial 12-month period, women were transitioned to fewer prepackaged meals and more self- selected food items. In addition to the prepackaged foods, women assigned to the weight loss program received one-on- one counseling to promote adherence to a low-fat (20% to 30% total energy), reduced-energy (1200 to 2000 kcal), high fruit-and-vegetable eating plan with recommendations for increased physical activity to achieve current guidelines of 30 minutes of planned exercise ≥5 days/week. Usual-care counseling sessions took place once at baseline and again at 6 months. Usual-care study participants received written educational materials to support their dietary goals (500 to 1000 kcal/day deficit); regular physical activity was also promoted.”

   The AC.Fast-5 survey respondents learned about the survey either because they subscribe to the Bert Herring, MD page, are members of the Dr. Bert’s AC / Fast-5 private or public Facebook groups or have signed up for email notifications form Dr. Bert. Respondents gave a self-reported a “snapshot in time” as they answered questions about their experience with the lifestyle.
   Survey respondents reported on their individual studies of one living their life without supervision and without intervention by an outside observer. What they have in common is achieving appetite correction with a customized approach beginning with AC/Fast-5 and tailored over time to suit their individual needs. Each has found the recipe that works for them to lose weight sustainably and not feel hungry. They eat according to their appetite, preference, needs and goals: vegan foods, low carb foods, “junk” foods, southern food, Caribbean food and the list goes on. Although we wouldn’t recommend this, one person eats beer and pizza most days. Some people exercise, some people body-build and some do no exercise at all. The survey asked questions of people who share openly in the private group with before and after pictures and interim pictures for encouragement and to inspire others. The survey respondents were independent people living life with no apparent motivation to exaggerate or minimize their results or to distort their experience with the lifestyle.

   I hope this makes sense. Please feel free to email or comment further if you have additional questions. We’ll be publishing a more granular analysis of the data over time.

   Reply

4. Are more details about the survey`s respondents available? How many actually were on the AC/Fast-5 for over a year or even over 2 months? I ask having succeeded fine for 77 days, then got side-tracked… I still think it is the best health inspiring way of eating out there. Do the other studies, with which AC/Fast-5 stats are compared,have the same level of trustworthiness to what they get back in the survey… Basically, what was the survey actually asking? Any evidence required as proof? If same level of trust and doubt as other surveys, then fair enough comparison obviously.
   This aint a dig at your survey`s respondents at all. I stand in awe!

   Reply