by mediocregopher on 7/11/22, 4:58 PM with 498 comments
by safety1st on 7/11/22, 5:51 PM
Basically they're the most filling food per calorie. So if you subscribe to the idea that losing weight is mainly about how many calories you consume, a potato heavy diet should be effective.
And an all potato diet, while monomaniacal, even more effective.
Eggs and fish are also very high on the satiety index. If you threw in pretty much any vegetables and spices of your choosing and just stuck to those along with potatoes, even with a cheat day or three you'd have a very healthy diet which I bet most people would lose weight on.
by ksenzee on 7/11/22, 6:15 PM
by billjings on 7/11/22, 6:25 PM
In short, while the variety and satiety explanations make a lot of sense subjectively for an individual on this diet, they don't match up with the empirical data on weight gain since 1980. Here are a few phenomena that are not explained by this hypothesis:
* The inflection point at right around 1980. There's no specific change that occurred in 1980 that anyone can point to that indicates a major change in variety of food in the average diet.
* The correllation of weight gain with location in watersheds: high altitude locales where surface water has not moved very far (e.g. Colorado) exhibit the weight gain phenomena much less than locales deeper down in the watershed (e.g. Mississippi and Louisiana)
I'm not interested in fad diets or disordered eating because they have a track record of bad long term outcomes, but I am interested in the potato diet as a blunt tool for taking action on this hypothesis, which looks pretty compelling to me. And if it doesn't work out, that's fine, too!
by siliconc0w on 7/11/22, 8:55 PM
Also it's ridiculously cheap and way easier to cook potatoes in bulk than practically any other food. At least with the Yukon golds I just rinse them, stab them with a knife and drop them into an instant pot with about a cup of water and a trivet. When done I transfer them into a big bowl in the fridge to cool and when I want to reheat them I reheat the whole bowl to accumulate resistant starch.
It's not a silver bullet but it's a really useful tool if you haven't been successful with other diets.
by soared on 7/11/22, 5:49 PM
by csours on 7/11/22, 5:54 PM
Some other thoughts:
Obesity is not a disease of over-eating, it is a disease of managing hunger.
"Losing weight" is a terrible goal. "Changing Body Composition" is a much better goal. Specifically change the proportion of fat to muscle.
----
If your immediate answer is "Those are the same thing but with different words!!!" then here are some questions to get you thinking:
* Can you measure someone else's hunger and compare it to your own?
* What parts of hunger come from perceptions and what parts come from psychological conditioning?
* Can you survive being hungry? Can you survive starvation? How does your body know the difference?
* How does food energy relate to hunger? For CICO a Calorie is always a Calorie; is that also true for hunger?
* How do you measure progress towards a goal and how does it feel when you can't perceive progress?
* Excess body weight can put stress on your joints, but doesn't generally have any other negative effects. Excess body fat has many negative effects. A scale is cheap and consistent. Body fat monitors and measurement isn't always cheap or consistent (or accurate).
by adam_arthur on 7/11/22, 5:34 PM
The body gets very conditioned to eating patterns. Something to ease into.
I'm not sure the average person can succeed on a diet predicated on greatly limiting the variety of foods you eat. It's an interesting idea though!
by CobaltFire on 7/11/22, 10:13 PM
He's also autistic and has food texture issues.
Somehow he's good with potatoes (generally baked "fries") and milk with some infant formula mixed in. He's the only young (<5 YO) patient they've personally had that has gained weight during treatment, and the attribute it to his "milk and potato" diet. To be clear, he's continued growing, if not normally, something approximating normal, during his chemo. That's highly unusual.
Anecdotal, but it's my experience.
by dstroot on 7/11/22, 6:20 PM
by worker_person on 7/11/22, 5:35 PM
Best I have ever felt. Ended six months of whole body agony.
I try and follow AIP these days. (Potatoes aren't allowed, but Sweet Potatoes are.)
by steve_adams_86 on 7/11/22, 6:06 PM
But like the potato diet, it's extremely easy to stay full and lose weight. Unlike the potato diet, there's a ton of variety. It also seems to have completely reversed a decline in health I'd been experiencing for over 5 years and I suspect the potato diet wouldn't have had the same effect, haha.
by jasonlotito on 7/11/22, 6:43 PM
"Every diet restricts food choices."
This is incorrect. Good diets do not restrict food choices. They usually limit overall intake. You can eat whatever you want. You only have a certain number of calories you can eat per day without gaining some weight. I'm defining "good diets" as a diet that helps you maintain a healthy weight.
Basically, a diet is what you eat. If you eat junk food, your diet is junk food. When you go on a "diet" to lose weight, you generally change what you eat and how much. So, the most successful diets are ones that replace your old unhealthy diet. This means learning to eat a good diet as a habit.
It also means realizing a diet doesn't end just because you eat way more than you should one day. The mental strength needed to realize you didn't fail your diet, but simple changed your diet for one day, is quite high. You didn't fail. You didn't fall off the wagon. There is no wagon to fall off of. This is probably the biggest mental shift for me. Accept that I will eat unhealthy some times, and I don't need to feel guilty for it. I just go back to normal next time I eat.
And that all revolves around changing your normal diet, or what you eat normally. All of that also means I know I can eat anything, but only so much.
Note: This is mostly me rambling, so I apologize for any confusion. This is also my overall look and what's worked for me long-term. This isn't something that might apply to you, but it's how I see things, and helped me. Maybe it will help others.
by JamesBarney on 7/11/22, 6:02 PM
It's expensive without insurance, but it helped me go from 25 lbs of weight loss to 55.
by fnordpiglet on 7/11/22, 8:02 PM
I don’t know I expected it to do anything other than drop a few pounds and reset my palate, and it seems to do that. I wasn’t hungry but it was hard to handle the lack of variety as I felt a lot of compulsions despite my lack of hunger.
by moses-palmer on 7/11/22, 5:47 PM
by mikkergp on 7/11/22, 5:28 PM
by papito on 7/11/22, 6:18 PM
The Colbert jokes are spot-on, though. We really did eat a buttload of potatoes. It was the primary survival vegetable.
by fleddr on 7/11/22, 10:09 PM
I'm exaggerating, but not by much. I grew up on tasteless boiled potatoes, at least 6 times per week. Supplemented with veggies boiled to pulp. Very fatty meat. And lots of milk.
It's laughed at in relation to the highly creative and tasty mediterranean cuisine, but I respect our bland food for other reasons. It's creative for being a nutrition/cost hack born out of necessity.
Potatoes are a nutritional super food but also cheap and you can store them for months even without refrigeration. Even the skin isn't wasted, it has several uses.
The veggies are boiled to pulp because unlike potatoes, those do go bad when stored longer. In modern times a needless precaution but the paranoia to eat rotten veggies has stuck around for a while in people's habits.
Milk, not part of an adult's normal diet, but a cheap source for protein regardless, so let's use it.
Altogether, it's a physical worker's ultra cheap yet highly nutritional meal. In that sense it's very creative. It's creative where it counts, not just for optics.
by duffyjp on 7/11/22, 5:46 PM
by novok on 7/11/22, 9:38 PM
Another infamous glycoalkoloid is nicotine from the tobacco nightshade. Nicotine is a stimulant that decreases hunger. Stimulants also increase body temperature, which is something that happens on this diet too. Nicotine is also a depressant, which is why your probably still able to sleep on this diet. It's also one reason why smokers tend to be skinnier than the normal population.
by idontwantthis on 7/12/22, 5:40 AM
English doesn't have a specific names for this, but in Khmer there is a related word: "tralowahn". It means the feeling of being full of whatever you are currently eating. Usually used to describe the feeling after eating creamy/buttery western food. Cambodian people use it all the time, and being aware of that feeling seems to go a long way to prevent overeating.
by _0w8t on 7/11/22, 6:37 PM
I stopped after two weeks mostly because the stomach became rather bloated. There was no weight change.
Then I tried a similar rice diet. Basically one eats rice (both white and brown are OK) with few fruits or fruit juices. To my surprise I lost about 5 kg in 25 days and then the weight loss stopped during the last weak. There were no apparent strength loss judging by weigh lifting results or uphill jogging. There were no other side effects. Now I recommend this, not potato diet.
by dr_dshiv on 7/12/22, 7:49 AM
by moron4hire on 7/12/22, 12:30 AM
Definitely the 5 bacon cheeseburgers. That's one for breakfast, two for lunch, and two for dinner. I could definitely eat like that.
The picture OP shows looks like a typical fast food joint burger. And if we look at McDonald's own self-reporting of calorie content, they list a bacon cheeseburger as 330 calories. So the math of "5 bacon cheeseburgers = ~1750 calories" checks out.
The problem is, I think McDonald's is lying. 1800 calories is about my break-even rate. I don't lose or gain weight at 1800. But--though I'm a little ashamed to admit--I have eaten 5 such cheeseburgers a day (and really just the cheeseburgers, no fries and soda, I actually find them gross), and I gained weight rapidly.
That suggests to me that each of those cheeseburgers is much more than 330 calories. I'd not be surprised if--without bacon--they were actually 500 calories. 2500 calories a day, minus 1800 basal metabolic rate equals 4900 extra calories a week. If we go with the received wisdom of 3600 calories per pound of weight, that's gaining 5 pounds every 3 weeks.
And that tracks with my experience. My slovenly experience of eating nothing but McDonald's cheeseburgers for two months straight.
by dusted on 7/12/22, 6:39 AM
by bejelentkezni on 7/11/22, 5:38 PM
by pmoriarty on 7/11/22, 9:43 PM
1 - If you want your meal to be healthy you'll have to avoid many (most?) tasty toppings.
2 - The diet is incredibly monotonous and boring.
Hats off to people who can stomach it for an extended period of time, but I would be willing to wager that the vast majority of people who try it won't be able to stick with it for long.
by alanthonyc on 7/11/22, 8:16 PM
1. Use a fad diet (e.g. potato) to get down to 80 kg.
2. Weigh yourself every morning
3. If your average weight over a week ever exceeds 81 kg, spend the next week on the potato diet.
4. Repeat forever.
by avodonosov on 7/11/22, 6:09 PM
by layer8 on 7/11/22, 6:27 PM
Now I wonder what is the minimum N such that switching diets every N days ad libitum would work.
by thoughtexprmnt on 7/12/22, 2:27 AM
I also think the best long term strategy is to focus first on eating plenty of nutrient dense, minimally processed foods which will naturally tend to crowd out the junk. Junk being anything consisting mostly of the cheap subsidized ingredients like wheat, corn, and soy.
by Macha on 7/11/22, 6:16 PM
by scotty79 on 7/13/22, 9:30 AM
Weightloss stopped when I decided to start doing shopping again and bought higher variety if food including sweets.
by aantix on 7/11/22, 8:40 PM
Wegovy (semaglutide) and Mounjaro (tirzepatide) have set a new bar in weight loss drugs.
15-20% body weight loss over the course of a year.
by mtlmtlmtlmtl on 7/12/22, 1:31 AM
Diets only work if you can stay on them without being miserable, and I know if all I could eat was potatoes I would be pretty miserable about that.
Also, any diet that requires supplements(Vitamin B12, probably some other vitamins that are fairly low in potatoes, and whatever essential amino acids are missing from potato protein. That's just off the top of my head) to be complete is a bad diet in my book.
by akudha on 7/11/22, 10:43 PM
The thing that sucked, was the amount of work. Buying, cleaning, juicing, cleaning again… crap ton of work. Ah, it is also expensive.
If only fruits and veggies were as cheap as milk, eggs, chicken… life would be much better
by darkhorse222 on 7/11/22, 6:28 PM
by alexitorg on 7/12/22, 12:50 AM
by jiggywiggy on 7/11/22, 10:47 PM
But to eat 2500kcals of potatoes a day is so hard. No wonder they loose weight. That's so much potatoes!
With 70-80 kcals per 100 grams an adult would need between 3-4 kilos. Every day
That's a mountain of potatoes twice the size of your stomach.
Some bake it with fat or oils I've read which makes it somewhat more manageable volume wise.
by avgcorrection on 7/11/22, 6:03 PM
by isitmadeofglass on 7/12/22, 3:59 PM
> How to explain this? Well, what does everything have in common? Every diet restricts food choices.
Or some variant of the Hawthorne effect, and the change has nothing to do with the specific change and everything to do with your conciseness about there being a change and it being for the purpose of weight loss.
by mylons on 7/11/22, 7:02 PM
that being said, this approach didn't work long term for me (hence multiple times doing it). I'd transition back to the way I was eating before and put the weight back on.
currently I'm working with a nutritionist and trying to eat towards specific macros, and counting everything in my fitness pal. the weight loss is more subtle (1-2 lbs per week tops), and I'm lifting weights which distorts the actual loss on the scale. not seeing the scale go down dramatically is hard, but eating the way I am now is totally sustainable and I've been doing it for almost 3 months now.
by thehias on 7/11/22, 7:06 PM
Actually I heard from the local potato lobby organisation in my country, that the potato is the only food in existance which you can eat exclusive forever and you can't get any bad sideeffects, because a potato contains all nutritions needed...
Is this not true? :D Is there any real science on that?
by renewiltord on 7/11/22, 5:53 PM
by scythe on 7/11/22, 7:17 PM
https://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor...
by psb on 7/11/22, 7:21 PM
by screamingpotat on 7/11/22, 10:32 PM
by TehCorwiz on 7/11/22, 5:53 PM
by sebg on 7/11/22, 5:21 PM
by dmix on 7/11/22, 6:27 PM
by 0x53 on 7/11/22, 11:36 PM
by EddieDante on 7/11/22, 10:22 PM
by shipman05 on 7/11/22, 5:36 PM
by karol on 7/11/22, 7:33 PM
by theptip on 7/12/22, 5:41 AM
The finding was that giving people unlimited boring nutrient sludge on tap, they consumed way fewer calories while still reporting satiety (not feeling hungry).
The basic idea being if you restrict yourself to boring food, then your appetite is lower. And the inverse; if you eat at a buffet and can have any number of diverse flavors, then your appetite (and “fullness threshold”) is higher.
Any diet where you just eat one thing is therefore going to equilibrate at a lower caloric intake than a diet where you are allowed to eat multiple flavors.
I’m a bit skeptical about glycemic load (I had potatoes down as by far the worst vegetable of them all) but perhaps that isn’t the current understanding of things. Any diet of one-thing is going to have strong appetite suppressing effects. I suspect there are more nutritious options, like “only eat salad with no dressing” which might be boring enough to suppress appetite, while also being nutritious enough to sustain longer-term. You don’t want to be the first case of scurvy in your town this century.
1: https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/04/25/book-review-the-hungry...
by maerF0x0 on 7/11/22, 6:18 PM
I highly recommend Layne Norton's book Fat loss forever, and his free content on youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3ePbeZJzYA .
Important tldr from his content:
* protein and resistance training are key if you want to lose fat (and not muscle), not just "weight"
* All restriction diets work when adhered to, the key is to find the one you will actually adhere to. This includes low carb, keto, intermittent fasting of various protocols (OMAD, 16:8, others), low fat, eat only soup, etc etc. They all work by causing a restriction on eating time or foods eaten. They all only work if there is a caloric deficit (net of cost of digestion for protein + fiber, or equal if equated for protein+fiber) .
* Calories in - calories out ("CICO") is absolutely backed by science when the researchers are smart enough to actually account for known things like caloric cost of digestion (changes the "CO" part)
Go DYOR on his content if you want the sources.
by dangarbri3 on 7/12/22, 1:27 AM
by germandiago on 7/11/22, 6:13 PM
by polynomial on 7/11/22, 5:29 PM
by myth_drannon on 7/11/22, 6:16 PM
by TedShiller on 7/11/22, 6:26 PM
by sph on 7/11/22, 6:03 PM
by whoomp12342 on 7/11/22, 8:12 PM
what is this. Can we just come out and say, the recent increase in price of food is too damn high instead of hiding it behind a veneer of clever diets that choose lesser costing food?
by pengaru on 7/11/22, 5:46 PM
by ramesh31 on 7/11/22, 5:46 PM
by hirundo on 7/11/22, 6:20 PM
So out of desperation and pain I did something I thought I never would or could resort to. Carnivore. It hasn't fixed all of my problems, but it has done more to stabilize my weight at a much lower level than anything else. It has controlled my cravings, making it uniquely sustainable.
My new theory is that obesity is about appetite control is about ... malnutrition. The secret for me was simply to find the fuel mixture that my body demands. Appetite responds immediately. No fancy behavioral techniques need be applied. I'm pretty sure carnivory isn't the right fuel mixture for everyone. But I think finding what is, is a lot more important than other weight control strategies.
Specifically I think The Hungry Brain gets it backwards. I spent decades trying to "outsmart the instincts that make us overeat" and failed horribly. I succeeded by following those instincts.