Tweet
Waarschijnlijk is jullie eerst reactie iets in de richting van "natuurlijk is dat slecht voor je!", maar ik vind het toch een stuk interessanter om iets meer over dit westersfenomeen uit te zoeken.
De eerste vraag is wanneer je eigenlijk aan het crashen bent. Voor ieder persoon zal dit verschillend zijn, maar het komt er op neer dat er voor een korte periode dermate weinig calorieën wordt genuttigd dat het dit het lichaam schade toe brengt. Goed dat is duidelijk, crashen kan in deze context dus nooit ongezond zijn.
De vraag is dus eigenlijk wanneer jij in deze toestand verkeerd en na hoeveel tijd. Je lichaam zal niet na 1 dag vasten de handen in de ring gooien en je temperatuur op 0 graden zetten en je spieren opvreten voor dat beetje extra energie. Dat je lichaam zich gaat aanpassen staan vast.
Er zijn 2 dingen die ikzelf interessant vind. 1 zijn de bodybuilders die op een zeer laag kcaldieet naar een wedstrijd toewerken (50% van hun behoefte). Iets anders wat ik interessant vind is het verschil in lichaamssamenstelling (en gezondheid) bij een gewichtverlies van 5 kg vetmassa waarvan het ene dieet 5 weken duurt en het andere dieet 10 weken. Ik heb 1 onderzoek gevonden die het dichst hierbij de in de buurt komt.
Ik heb al is eerder een artikel gevonden die beweert dat bodybuilders die 2 weken 50% van hun behoefte eten geen spierverlies ondervinden (dit staat wel los van de overige eventuele problemen die crashen met zich mee kan brengen).
Een aantal artikelen die ikzelf heb kunnen vinden:
>>
Overgewicht | Dierstudie: crash-diet tast niet spieren maar spijsverteringsorganen aan
(studie naar crashdieet)
>>
For new research from Tufts University in Massachusetts says that crash diets can actually work better than slow weight loss. Susan Roberts, professor of nutrition and psychiatry at Tufts, says the latest research from her lab shows that “sensible, healthy crash diets actually do as well for long-term success as slow diets and, for some people, can actually work better”.
She distinguishes between good and bad crash diets, however. The one she advocates goes further than the usual 1,500 calories a day typically advised for women to lose 1lb per week, but is not extreme, never dipping below 1,200 calories for women (or 1,800 for men). “We studied two groups, in which we cut either 10% or 30% of calories, and tried to keep them at it for a year,” she explains. “In the end, they were in a similar place — the 30-percenters definitely did not do worse, despite having a more stringent programme.”
What is more, she adds, people who get tempted easily may be better candidates for fast, strict diets than gentle weight loss: “A small calorie cut can work for the sensible crowd, but seems to almost backfire for people who get tempted by food. Disinhibited eaters [a psychological term referring to people who give up on diets easily when presented with food opportunities] actually did really badly on the 10% diet.”
Certainly, if you’re addicted to overeating, it can be easier dramatically to cut out all your favourites, rather than learn moderation, which is perhaps why meal-replacement diets have been found to be one of the most successful ways to lose weight (see Simon Glazin, above). “Despite the hype about slow diets being better, there has actually been very little research into whether losing weight fast or slowly works better in the long run,” argues Roberts. “The trouble with slow diets is people tend to feel they are getting nowhere and give up. Fast keeps you excited and feeling like you’re making progress.” Other experts take a very different view and insist any kind of diet is bunkum. “Diets depend on failure,” says the psychotherapist Susie Orbach, who has explored women’s attitudes to eating in such books as Bodies. “They need to fail, otherwise there would be no repeat customers.”
Others, such as Dr Peter Rowan, an eating-disorder consultant from the Cygnet hospital in London, warn that dieting and eating disorders go hand in hand. “The large majority of patients with anorexia and bulimia have the illnesses triggered by weight loss. Even a sensible weight-loss diet can trigger an eating disorder in someone who is vulnerable, but there is evidence to suggest that the more severe the weight loss, the more likely the diet is to trigger an eating disorder.”
Roberts dismisses extreme crash diets that promise huge losses, as well as fasting, as “snake oil”, but says that to lose as much as 20lb in eight weeks on 1,200 calories a day, plus 30 minutes’ daily exercise, is safe, provided the diet is balanced, with plenty of low-GI, high-protein foods to keep you full. And the weight loss will last, she says, if you “change what you eat permanently” to generally healthy habits.
Dr Shahrad Taheri, director of the weight-management clinic at the Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust, agrees that 1,200 nutritious, low-GI calories per day is the lowest a woman should go, but warns: “Most people’s weight problems occur over a number of years and reflect a lifestyle of selecting calorie-dense foods combined with reduced physical activity — this needs time to change.”
Ik vind het persoonlijk jammer dat er zo kort door de bocht gesproken word over de negatieve aspecten van crashen. het internet staat vol met informatie, maar er is nauwelijks iets wetenschappelijks te vinden.
De eerste vraag is wanneer je eigenlijk aan het crashen bent. Voor ieder persoon zal dit verschillend zijn, maar het komt er op neer dat er voor een korte periode dermate weinig calorieën wordt genuttigd dat het dit het lichaam schade toe brengt. Goed dat is duidelijk, crashen kan in deze context dus nooit ongezond zijn.
De vraag is dus eigenlijk wanneer jij in deze toestand verkeerd en na hoeveel tijd. Je lichaam zal niet na 1 dag vasten de handen in de ring gooien en je temperatuur op 0 graden zetten en je spieren opvreten voor dat beetje extra energie. Dat je lichaam zich gaat aanpassen staan vast.
Er zijn 2 dingen die ikzelf interessant vind. 1 zijn de bodybuilders die op een zeer laag kcaldieet naar een wedstrijd toewerken (50% van hun behoefte). Iets anders wat ik interessant vind is het verschil in lichaamssamenstelling (en gezondheid) bij een gewichtverlies van 5 kg vetmassa waarvan het ene dieet 5 weken duurt en het andere dieet 10 weken. Ik heb 1 onderzoek gevonden die het dichst hierbij de in de buurt komt.
Ik heb al is eerder een artikel gevonden die beweert dat bodybuilders die 2 weken 50% van hun behoefte eten geen spierverlies ondervinden (dit staat wel los van de overige eventuele problemen die crashen met zich mee kan brengen).
Een aantal artikelen die ikzelf heb kunnen vinden:
>>
Overgewicht | Dierstudie: crash-diet tast niet spieren maar spijsverteringsorganen aan
(studie naar crashdieet)
>>
For new research from Tufts University in Massachusetts says that crash diets can actually work better than slow weight loss. Susan Roberts, professor of nutrition and psychiatry at Tufts, says the latest research from her lab shows that “sensible, healthy crash diets actually do as well for long-term success as slow diets and, for some people, can actually work better”.
She distinguishes between good and bad crash diets, however. The one she advocates goes further than the usual 1,500 calories a day typically advised for women to lose 1lb per week, but is not extreme, never dipping below 1,200 calories for women (or 1,800 for men). “We studied two groups, in which we cut either 10% or 30% of calories, and tried to keep them at it for a year,” she explains. “In the end, they were in a similar place — the 30-percenters definitely did not do worse, despite having a more stringent programme.”
What is more, she adds, people who get tempted easily may be better candidates for fast, strict diets than gentle weight loss: “A small calorie cut can work for the sensible crowd, but seems to almost backfire for people who get tempted by food. Disinhibited eaters [a psychological term referring to people who give up on diets easily when presented with food opportunities] actually did really badly on the 10% diet.”
Certainly, if you’re addicted to overeating, it can be easier dramatically to cut out all your favourites, rather than learn moderation, which is perhaps why meal-replacement diets have been found to be one of the most successful ways to lose weight (see Simon Glazin, above). “Despite the hype about slow diets being better, there has actually been very little research into whether losing weight fast or slowly works better in the long run,” argues Roberts. “The trouble with slow diets is people tend to feel they are getting nowhere and give up. Fast keeps you excited and feeling like you’re making progress.” Other experts take a very different view and insist any kind of diet is bunkum. “Diets depend on failure,” says the psychotherapist Susie Orbach, who has explored women’s attitudes to eating in such books as Bodies. “They need to fail, otherwise there would be no repeat customers.”
Others, such as Dr Peter Rowan, an eating-disorder consultant from the Cygnet hospital in London, warn that dieting and eating disorders go hand in hand. “The large majority of patients with anorexia and bulimia have the illnesses triggered by weight loss. Even a sensible weight-loss diet can trigger an eating disorder in someone who is vulnerable, but there is evidence to suggest that the more severe the weight loss, the more likely the diet is to trigger an eating disorder.”
Roberts dismisses extreme crash diets that promise huge losses, as well as fasting, as “snake oil”, but says that to lose as much as 20lb in eight weeks on 1,200 calories a day, plus 30 minutes’ daily exercise, is safe, provided the diet is balanced, with plenty of low-GI, high-protein foods to keep you full. And the weight loss will last, she says, if you “change what you eat permanently” to generally healthy habits.
Dr Shahrad Taheri, director of the weight-management clinic at the Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust, agrees that 1,200 nutritious, low-GI calories per day is the lowest a woman should go, but warns: “Most people’s weight problems occur over a number of years and reflect a lifestyle of selecting calorie-dense foods combined with reduced physical activity — this needs time to change.”
Ik vind het persoonlijk jammer dat er zo kort door de bocht gesproken word over de negatieve aspecten van crashen. het internet staat vol met informatie, maar er is nauwelijks iets wetenschappelijks te vinden.
Comment