Elemental

Elemental is a former publication from Medium for science-backed health and wellness coverage. Currently inactive and not taking submissions.

Follow publication

Member-only story

The Nuance

Is It Really Better to Lose Weight Gradually?

Here’s what the science says

Markham Heid
Elemental
Published in
4 min readApr 11, 2019

Photo by i yunmai on Unsplash

Every week, the Nuance will go beyond the basics, offering a deep and researched look at the latest science and expert insights on a buzzed-about health topic.

YYou’ve probably heard that a slow and steady approach to weight loss improves the odds that you’ll stay slim in the long run. Easy go, easy come back—or so the conventional wisdom holds.

Historically, some public health authorities even championed the superiority of gradual weight loss plans. The thinking was that a slow reduction in body weight is more likely to be the result of healthy and sticky lifestyle changes, while rapid weight loss tends to stem from get-slim-fast tactics that are ultimately unsustainable.

While this line of thinking makes sense, the research says otherwise.

In a 2013 New England Journal of Medicine report titled “Myths, Presumptions, and Facts about Obesity,” the belief that quick weight loss is inferior to gradual weight loss is highlighted as false. “To date, the totality of evidence does not support the myth that gradual weight loss improves long-term outcomes,” says Krista Casazza, first author of the report and an associate professor at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.

That’s not to say one approach is obviously superior to the other. But the old adage that “the faster you lose weight, the faster you’ll regain it” is clearly wrong, says Joseph Proietto, chair of obesity clinical care at the nonprofit World Obesity Federation.

For a 2014 study, Proietto and his colleagues divided volunteers into two groups. One group adhered to a “rapid weight loss” program that involved severe calorie restriction for 12 weeks. A second group aimed to lose the same amount of weight by taking a less extreme approach to calorie reduction during a 36-week period.

While just 50% of people in the gradual weight loss group achieved the targeted level of weight loss, 81% of people in the rapid weight loss group hit the mark. After roughly two years of follow-up, Proietto and colleagues found that the people who had lost weight rapidly hadn’t gained back more than those who’d lost weight slowly. “The rate of…

Create an account to read the full story.

The author made this story available to Medium members only.
If you’re new to Medium, create a new account to read this story on us.

Or, continue in mobile web

Already have an account? Sign in

Elemental
Elemental

Published in Elemental

Elemental is a former publication from Medium for science-backed health and wellness coverage. Currently inactive and not taking submissions.

Markham Heid
Markham Heid

Written by Markham Heid

I’m a frequent contributor at TIME, the New York Times, and other media orgs. I write mostly about health and science. I like long walks and the Grateful Dead.

Responses (13)

Write a response

The logical fallacy is in thinking that losing weight over 36 weeks is the slow version, which might relate to the length of time research funding is available. A consciously restrictive diet is still a diet. I shed 10kg (about 22lb) over 5 years by…

--

One super-cool aspect of all of this is having a constant stream of supposed facts that’s regularly countermanded by opposing facts in a never-ending cycle, leaves people who need to lose weight completely disheartened and confused. Way to go, assholes.

--

I think I’ll stick to the “slow and steady wins the race" philosophy of weight loss. I need to shed 100 lbs. With that kind of massive weight reduction, conventional wisdom suggests that losing it slowly minimizes loose skin. Or has that changed as well?

--