The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Response to “Overstated metabolic adaptation after ‘The Biggest Loser’ intervention”
Open accessAbstract
Kuchnia et al. claim that metabolic adaptation was overstated because stress, anxiety, and weight gain artificially elevated the baseline resting metabolic rate (RMR) measurements. However, baseline RMR was not significantly different from standard prediction equations 1, and subjects were weight stable in the 17 days before the measurements (−31 ± 86 g/d; P = 0.72). Furthermore, anxiety increases RMR by only ∼100 kcal/day (2), which is far too small to explain our observations. While mean RMR was ∼350 kcal/day lower in a retrospectively pair matched group of bariatric surgery patients (3), this may have been due to lack of randomization and greater insulin resistance in the surgery patients who may have followed common advice to decrease food intake and lose weight before the surgery, thereby suppressing RMR. The mean metabolic adaptation calculated using this equation is mathematically identical to the value we reported and therefore invalidates the claim that the high y-intercept could negate our results. Equation 1 above also illustrates that to explain the observed metabolic adaptation, the mean FFM measurements would have to be 13 kg and 24 kg lower than reported at the end of the competition and after 6 years, respectively. Such large systematic DXA errors suggested by Kuchnia et al. are frankly implausible and would indicate a profound loss of FFM. Kuchnia et al. noted in passing that we used a slightly different RMR prediction equation 1 compared with a previous report (5). This was because we employed a common indirect calorimetry equation to minimize the potential bias of using different equations to calculate RMR between the carts. Our extensive testing revealed no significant systematic bias in gas exchange measurements between instruments, which would need to be ≥17% or ≥440 kcal/day to render our observations statistically insignificant (1). Finally, the reported physical activity energy expenditure after 6 years was not significantly different from when participants had returned home from the ranch before the end of “The Biggest Loser” competition (1) but was considerably less than on the ranch while engaging in >3 h/day of vigorous exercise (6). We previously concluded that the “Biggest Loser” exercise regimen in combination with the ∼50% caloric restriction was unsustainable (6)—a conclusion now strengthened by the increased calorie intake and weight gain observed 6 years later (1).
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Body weight and fat mass are regulated by numerous physiological mechanisms beyond voluntary food intake and physical exercise.
“First, body weight and fat mass are known to be regulated by numerous physiological mechanisms, beyond voluntary food intake and physical exercise.”
From Joint international consensus statement for ending stigma of obesity (2020) · cites this paper as [80]
The main text and “Metabolic adaptation” section discuss changes in resting metabolic rate that are not explained by changes in body composition, supporting a physiological influence beyond voluntary eating and exercise. The paper does not make the broader claim that numerous physiological mechanisms regulate both body weight and fat mass; its focus is metabolic adaptation after weight loss. The supplied copy gives no page numbers. (LLM, conf=0.78)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredWhen fat mass decreases, the body responds with reduced resting energy expenditure and changes in signals that increase hunger and reduce satiety (for example, leptin, ghrelin).
“When fat mass decreases, the body responds with reduced resting energy expenditure79,80 and changes in signals that increase hunger and reduce satiety93 (for example, leptin, ghrelin)98.”
From Joint international consensus statement for ending stigma of obesity (2020) · cites this paper as [80]
Citation 98 is attached to the leptin-and-ghrelin example, not the resting-energy-expenditure claim. The paper’s References section names another study concerning changes in circulating leptin, but this paper does not discuss ghrelin or link either hormone to increased hunger or reduced satiety. Searches for those terms and the claimed appetite response found no supporting passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Metabolic Slowing with Massive Weight Loss despite Preservation of Fat-Free Mass
Johannsen, D. L., Knuth, N. D., Huizenga, R., Rood, J. C., Ravussin, E., & Hall, K. D. (2012) · The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism · doi:10.1210/jc.2012-1444 · Cited by 254
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- 10.1002/oby.21538 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1152/jappl.1996.80.2.638 · DOI
- 10.1002/oby.20900 · DOI
- 10.1002/oby.21408 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/oby.20065 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Joint international consensus statement for ending stigma of obesity
Rubino, F., Puhl, R. M., Cummings, D. E., Eckel, R. H., Ryan, D. H., Mechanick, J. I., Nadglowski, J., Ramos Salas, X., Schauer, P. R., Twenefour, D., et al. (2020) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-020-0803-x · Cited by 1,152
“When fat mass decreases, the body responds with reduced resting energy expenditure 79, 80 and changes in signals that increase hunger and reduce satiety 93 (for example, leptin, ghrelin) 98 .”
BackgroundIntermittent energy restriction improves weight loss efficiency in obese men: the MATADOR study
Byrne, N. M., Sainsbury, A., King, N. A., Hills, A. P., & Wood, R. E. (2018) · International Journal of Obesity · doi:10.1038/ijo.2017.206 · Cited by 113
Metadata
- Authors
- Hall, K. D., Kerns, J. C., Brychta, R., & Knuth, N. D.
- Affiliations
- National Institutes of Health (US)
- Washington DC VA Medical Center (US)
- Towson University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Hall, Kevin D.
- Venue
- Obesity
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2016-09
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 2026-2026
- ISSN
- 1930-7381 (ISSN-L)
- 1930-739X
- OpenAlex
- W2517078028
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2020: 2 · 2017: 1
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Obesity (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Bariatric Surgery and Outcomes
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Regulation of Appetite and Obesity
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
- Keywords
- metabolic adaptation, resting metabolic rate, The Biggest Loser, weight loss, fat-free mass, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, indirect calorimetry, physical activity energy expenditure, caloric restriction, bariatric surgery, weight regain, stress and anxiety
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Obesity, Television
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review