to think that Lighter Life is a big gat waste of money!

[macdoodle]

One of my colleagues has just signed up to this and has gone off in a huff because I have said she is wasting her money!

FWIW I too am overweight and I know the only guaranteed way is to eat less and exercise more - I have done it before I got pregnant and yes its bloody hard work but this is one area where I am pretty sure there is no quick fix!

Also FWIW I am a GP and she is one of our nurses

So AIBU anyone prove me wrong??

[londonone]

howtotellmum - That stat is across ALL types of diets including the "feted" eat less exercise more lifestyle change! Which is in fact a diet!

Wannabe - You don't lose half a stone a week on LL, you average a stone a month!

[howtotellmum]

londoneoen- yeah, I know that! What made you think I was applying those stats just to "diets"- I know the figures

[Sycamoretreeisvile]

Yes, but Howtotellmum, you are speaking as though LL is the only diet to have that rate of success and failure.

The tragedy is that all diets have that degree of success and failure.

That's why I'm so passionate about any option being available to those that want it if it can work for them.

I'm about choice. And I'm against scaremongering by people that don't have the facts.

Flipping heck, life, dieting etc is hard enough without other folk getting in your way or casting unfounded aspersions.

I don't know what this bigger picture is? Because I don't agree with anything you have posted in criticism of LL. Nothing that can't be levied at any other diet. So by that accusation, we should just not bother?

The point is, traditional exercise and calorie counting diets have the same failure rates. So i don't see how they are superior unless you have a smaller amount of weight to lose.

Most women and men I know with more than 3 stone to lose have serious emotional issues with food that a traditional diet can't hope to help with. That's why LL has a place in the marketplace. And a very valid one.

[macdoodle]

Sycamore well done to you - you have done amazingly well and I bet it has been bloody hard work - BUT it is down to you !! Your detrmination and hard work not LL, and I suspect when you were ready in the right frame of mind probably anything would have helped!!

London HOW DARE YOU tell me I am failing my duty of care
The VLCD diets on the NHS are supervised,run and monitored BY doctors, nurse and dietcians who are trained in this - they dont shove the responsibility in my direction -
LL expect the GP to sign that it is safe and monitor the medical effects/complications (including a nasty cholecystitis with a very unwell patient from a far too rapid weight loss), why on earth should I be their safety net, monitor there programme for nothing while they rake in £66/week !
Apart from that i take issue with VLCD - 1000 cals a day is the lowest I am happy to support and that is after years of training and experience as a GP and in diabetes!

[Sycamoretreeisvile]

Lewisfan - I suppose it was about 56lbs.

Thanks

[londonone]

Morloth - As I said when you are 20 stone plus It's actually quite difficult to physically do the exercise!

[Morloth]

It is indeed a Catch22 londonone, I started out swimming more, climbing (though that was bloody hard with all that extra weight) and weight training. When I got under 100kgs I started running.

[howtotellmum]

But syc you must admit surely that you are just a tiny bit biased?

I agree with you 100%- if people want to wastespend their money on LL that is their choice. I am delighted it has worked for you and you are so pleased with it.

I also think you are 100% correct when you say that most people who are overweight have emotional issues as the cause of it. IMO LL succeeds more from what you say because of the emotional support it offers, rather than the slopfood that people eat on it.

Ok- leaving this now- off to make myself a nice, healthy prawn salad for lunch!

[MumHadEnough]

Macdoodle, do you prescribe Xenical? I ended up with a very nasty case of cholecystitis after being on this. Ended up with an emergency Lap Chole because of it. Not to mention all the pants I ruined shitting orange oil! roflmao .

I think treatments like Xenical are far more dangerours. But again, thats down to personal experience!

[Sycamoretreeisvile]

Macdoodle - yes, it was 75% me, but it was also 25% LL.

From where I was standing, 4 stone was a mountain I couldn't even get the energy up to start climbing on something like WW. So I just would not have bothered.

The rapid weight loss, and the ease of the packs was appealing with a toddler and a 4 month old baby around.

I wouldn't ever want to have to do it again. I hope I never have to. But I'm always on guard, because the old habits are entrenched. I have to work hard to avoid them. And I have to credit my LL counsellor with helping me see all of that - can you understand? It is definitely the support bit of LL that deserves more respect than it's getting on this thread.

[londonone]

macdoodle - Sorry but I think it is incredibly arrogant of you to tell people how they can and cannot lose weight. You are not monitoring their weightl,oss plan you are supposed to be monitoring the health of YOUR patients. Some people smoke do you not offer them treatment and expect them to get help from the tobacco companies!

[MumHadEnough]

And I'm off to make myself a tasty choc mint shake! (which actually is very tasty btw!)

[Sycamoretreeisvile]

yes, Howtoo, I am biased. But I don't see how that proves any of your points? Do you just object to people drinking shakes? Does that just fundamentally strike you as unhealthy?

If so, I can sort of see that. It's not ideal, of course it's not. But it's not ideal that I couldn't control portion, or be trusted to make a good choice in a restaurant.

The packs give you time and space away from all of those decisions. You see the BIGGER PICTURE in your eating habits. If you're smart and committed, after the diet part is done, you'll act on your discoveries and make good changes.

Anyway, the thread is specifically about LL, so I'm specifically defending it as a successful and legitimate diet to an OP who thought otherwise. So I'm not biased really - no more than you are for having NOT gone through the programme, IYSWIM?

Yes, the counselling is the biggest part, but the rapid weight loss has been proving to be an incredibly motivating factor in people sticking at dieting.

There was a piece in the Indy about it about a year ago.

[macdoodle]

London I dont tell them when did I say that - I am just not prepared to be LL safety net sorry not unreasonable at all - if they need to be monitored that closely then LL need to have thier own drs/nurses to supervise/monitor it themselves - whic as far as I am aware they do if the GP wont "play ball"!!
Who do you think the patient/LL will blame if it all goes tits up, I bet it wont be LL!!

I support my patients in whatever way they choose, I fully inform them of the risks and the benefits (which am not convinced LL do), I am not a huge fan of weight loss medication as the results as mentioned before are all very similar after a year! BUT if I prescribe something I can inform my patient, and monitor them myself not something I can do with LL!

I am not arrogant, I just think the money making business around weight loss is massive/takes advatnge of us poor souls who are desperate to lose weight!
And dont kid yourself LL is a money making business like anything else (WW and SW included), how many take up the 5 yrs free counselling , how many go back again and again??

[MumHadEnough]

Then why not support them in LL if that is the way they have chosen. You could monitor them in full the same way you would a patient that you have prescribed weight loss medication to.

[paisleyleaf]

quote macdoodle: "and it BLOODY ANNOYS me that LL expect the GP to sign saying it is safe for the patient"

I can understand that.
They should perhaps employ there own nurse/doctor to keep the buck with themselves.
(they must be rich enough - they also own Cambridge diet).

[Morloth]

I am not sure macdoodle should support anyone in LL as their GP if as a GP she believes it is unsafe.

As she says she will be the one with the moral responsibility/lawsuit if it goes wrong (and there must be people who it goes wrong for).

GPs definitely shouldn't sign off/support something they believe to be unsafe, doesn't mean that the GP in question is necessarily correct.

[MumHadEnough]

"(they must be rich enough - they also own Cambridge diet). "

I'm pretty sure they're not! Where did you get that from?

[Sycamoretreeisvile]

I was annoyed I had to get my GP's consent.

I would quite willingly have taken on all the responsibility myself.

I read a lot about it before hand. One inspirational colleague did it. He's still slim.

You guys are so right in that very few people take up the counselling for life offer, but that's their choice. Same as all those who fail to stay on course after WW.

OP - I didn't realise the GP's would be liable if anything were to go wrong with LL. Would they really? In that case, yes, I can see why you'd be cautious. But for legal reasons rather than health ones.

But, and not being arrogant here I am a well educated person. I'd have listened to my body if I felt anything was going wrong. Of course there are going to be people who can't take as good care of themselves on a diet like this. There are also likely to be a lot of counsellors not nearly as brilliant, smart, committed and excellent as mine .

[Sycamoretreeisvile]

Have to go and do some real work now

It's been lively! Will pop my nose back in later.

Bye for now ladies.

[londonone]

macdoodle - You fully support your patients in what they choose, but it seems only if it's a choice you approve of. If there is strong valid medical evidence that LL is dangerous then surely no GP would sign off on it. As it stands it seems that you have made a personal choice that you don't approve of it.

[macdoodle]

I have a link to the risks but my computer wont let me do it at work - I will post it later to explain why I am not happy to take responsibility for this diet or advocate a VLCD, having seen some of the complications myself!

[macdoodle]

London I find your comments strange!! It has nothing to do with approval, unlike LL I get nothing from this, I can only do what I think is in my patients best interests and will continue to do so!

[millenniumfalcon]

have read the beginning of the thread and i see that people are putting the arguments i would have put more eloquently, but i do want to add that i for one am not at all surprise the op is a gp. i'm not surprised to see that she is living up to the standards of tact and helpfulness i've learned to expect from the profession. i imagine she also tells depressed patients to pull themselves together and breastfeeders that they've "done their bit" at the 6 week check

[wannaBe]

Thing is, it's possible to disagree with something without objecting to other people doing it, iyswim.

People do lighter life because they have a lot of weight to lose/because they have tried everything else/because they are desparate. But while there are people who can genuinely say that it worked for them, I think it's important not to lose sight of the fact that there can be side effects, and health repercussions, and to make people aware of those before they embark on this diet. Because it's not a straightforward cut-out-the-crap-and-increase-exercise diet, it does come with risk.

Also, while a lot of people do read up on these diets before doing them, the rapid weight loss will almost certainly encourage people to go into them blindly, without any thought about what this could mean for them.

The weight loss industry is huge business. And lighter life is no exception. I sincerely suspect that the reason why they get the gp to sign off is to protect themselves, rather than their customers.