Why ‘Operation Transformation’ is a superficial reality show

nice_guy80

good article today in the Irish Times

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/second-opinion-why-operation-transformation-is-a-superficial-reality-show-1.2074034

I've been saying it for years

fits

I don't watch it, but I think its not completely useless. Gets people out for walks and events and such. My main problem with these things is that there is no follow up with the participants after the show ends. A year round show might be better.

Hanley

If operation transformation was run for it's contestants benefits it wouldn't run anyway cos it would be boring as sh*t...

So it's really a catch 22.

DoYouEvenLift

Someone who otherwise wouldn't have the motivation to lose weight will definitely get the motivation when they're aware that there are going to be thousands of people watching them and their progress on television. Who would be okay with allowing themselves to fail under this pressure? For some people this is just what it takes unfortunately.


It's really sad that some people grow up and develop a negative attitude towards exercising and think of it purely as work and a chore when if they just took a few minutes everyday and pushed themselves they'd experience the amazing feeling they can get after even just a simple cardio workout. That feeling is even better when you discover and start doing exercises you actually enjoy followed by a nice shower and eating a tasty meal during an episode of your favourite TV show. It's like a daily reward to yourself and it always feels good.

Mellor

I haven't read the article, and I've never seen the show.

But I'd assume the show is about people weight/appearance. How could it be anything other than superficial?

DoYouEvenLift

Mellor wrote: »

I haven't read the article, and I've never seen the show.

But I'd assume the show is about people weight/appearance. How could it be anything other than superficial?

Losing weight and getting healthy is superficial. Right, okay.

ArnieSilvia

It helps to educate society. It was an eye opener for my kids to stop eating sweets and control what they eat, with great results.

You don't need to eat what is suggested in the program, just stop binge eating that's all. I lost 6 kg last year just by eating less (coming down on weight after stopping smoking)

Giruilla

So the author complains about poor families not being able to afford the foods recommended on the show... then follows that up suggesting we should raise taxes on the food they CAN afford?

How about producing shows on calorie consumption and portion control if she really gives a sh*t.

LuckyLloyd

DoYouEvenLift wrote: »

Losing weight and getting healthy is superficial. Right, okay.

Meh, we had a huge thread on this last year. Losing weight and getting healthy are good things. Everything is better than nothing blah, blah.

At the end of the day OT has a huge captive audience each year. They choose to do the following with it:

- promote low fat nutrition approaches;
- promote running / cardio as the backbone of exercise approach even to very overweight individuals;
- promote short term result based goal setting including weekly weigh in targets;

The issue I have with OT is not that losing weight is a bad thing. It's that the approach they push is not sustainable or long term. Shock and awe has its place alright, but it can't be a foundation for changing one's life around and maintaining it.

A bad fitness goal is an outcome goal. So:

- I will Deadlift 250kgs next year;
- I will lose 20kgs before June 12th;
- I will win a national championship in my sport;

Are bad goals because you can control your behaviour but you can't control the ultimate outcome of that behaviour. They are also bad goals because by just stating the goal you get positive feedback from people. You intend to Deadlift 250kgs? 'Wow, that's cool - you're awesome'.

Better goals would be:

- I'm going to complete 8 cycles of 531 on Deadlift and work assistance as part of training smart five days a week;
- I'm going to cut out bread and make 8 out of every 10 meals home cooked from scratch. I will allow myself a no holds barred eat what I like meal once every 14 days but no more than that;
- I'm going to go to bed an hour earlier each work night;
- I'm going to get coaching and give myself 10 weeks of full effort and do my best at the national championships next year;

etc, etc. In that way, if you stick to your goal you've already won and you're ingraining good behaviour as the objective. Consistent good behaviour will inevitably produce results over the long haul.

Ultimately, we can sit here and talk about how OT is something that gets people moving and makes it simple for people, etc but we are entitled to retain higher standards. My belief is that it is a wasted opportunity sacrificed for entertainment purposes.

norwegianwood

My biggest issue is with the dietitian, her personality grates on me and I think she's very condescending, but even that aside, this high carb/protein, low fat diet she promotes in the meal plans annoys me. But this, for some reason I don't really understand, is what a lot of experts seem to recommend, I'm in my last year of my nutritional science degree and most of my lecturers push this kind of diet. It was that more than anything else that put me off becoming a dietitian myself because I don't want to be stuck giving crappy advice to people.

Mellor

DoYouEvenLift wrote: »

Losing weight and getting healthy is superficial. Right, okay.

Superficial means at or near the surface, the external or exterior, ie appearance.
How somebody looks, by extension their weight, is therefore a superficial marker to judge by. How you feel would be a centralised marker. Both are important to judge "health".

Is problem here is that you assumed I said weight loss was a negative thing. Which is ridiculous, and I obviously didn't mean that.

yosser hughes

Some of the sentiments of the article I'd agree with.I'm not sure what the benefit of getting obese people to ultimately run 5k when really it is what they are eating is the key and also attitude to food. It requires a change of mindset for these people and I'm not sure they really achieve that. It makes people feel good about themselves for a while, but without a follow up, how is the show's success or otherwise measured?
However the whole 'food poverty' thing in the article is nonsense.

Gits_bone

norwegianwood wrote: »

My biggest issue is with the dietitian, her personality grates on me and I think she's very condescending, but even that aside, this high carb/protein, low fat diet she promotes in the meal plans annoys me. But this, for some reason I don't really understand, is what a lot of experts seem to recommend, I'm in my last year of my nutritional science degree and most of my lecturers push this kind of diet. It was that more than anything else that put me off becoming a dietitian myself because I don't want to be stuck giving crappy advice to people.

Would I be correct in saying you'd be able eat more volume of carb/protein than fats?

sh1tstirrer

Operation transformation is about viewers and ratings.

papu

Gits_bone wrote: »

Would I be correct in saying you'd be able eat more volume of carb/protein than fats?

but protein and fats are more satiating...

efb

It's a TV programme it has to entertain

walshb

It's not a perfect show, but it does serve some good purpose. The OTT criticism is odd. If it motivates people to get up and move and manager their health and diet and weight then I say best of luck to it. There is no silver bullet out there for the perfect healthy life. The show tries to give advice on how best to stay healthy.

LuckyLloyd

walshb wrote: »

It's not a perfect show, but it does serve some good purpose. The OTT criticism is odd. If it motivates people to get up and move and manager their health and diet and weight then I say best of luck to it. There is no silver bullet out there for the perfect healthy life. The show tries to give advice on how best to stay healthy.

It gives bad advice and espouses a focus that leaves ever bigger swathes of people fatter and sicker every passing year.

walshb

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

It gives bad advice and espouses a focus that leaves ever bigger swathes of people fatter and sicker every passing year.

What bad advice? It can be quite subjective.

norwegianwood

Gits_bone wrote: »

Would I be correct in saying you'd be able eat more volume of carb/protein than fats?

You would but fats are still a vital part of the diet and need to have their place and cutting them out completely is nonsensical, especially when they'll likely be replaced with something like sugar to keep flavour in most diet foods. Proteins and fats also serve more of a functional purpose within the body than carbs, and from a weight loss perspective they're a lot more satiating, but common advice for weight loss/CHD prevention is to limit them, fat in particular, from what I can see it's based on a lot of outdated research that's been thoroughly disproven. One of my lecturers actually said that all excess protein is instantly turned to fat, if that was true everyone taking protein supplements would be obese!

I'm probably nowhere near enough of an expert to advocate against something that's recommended by people with a lot more knowledge of nutrition than me but I personally don't understand it.

LuckyLloyd

walshb wrote: »

What bad advice? It can be quite subjective.

- eat high carbs / low protein / low fat;
- focus on the scales above all else;
- run fatboy run;
- be at point X in short period of time Y;
- you are bad and should feel bad;

The above doesn't work long term and will generally see people yoyo back to zero.

walshb

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

- eat high carbs / low protein / low fat;
- focus on the scales above all else;
- run fatboy run;
- be at point X in short period of time Y;
- you are bad and should feel bad;

The above doesn't work long term and will generally see people yoyo back to zero.

It's advice. It may be bad for you, but like I said, there is no silver bullet here. For many the advice may help them.

You are bad and should feel bad! What's this about?

sh1tstirrer

walshb wrote: »

It's not a perfect show, but it does serve some good purpose. The OTT criticism is odd. If it motivates people to get up and move and manager their health and diet and weight then I say best of luck to it. There is no silver bullet out there for the perfect healthy life. The show tries to give advice on how best to stay healthy.

How many people will be walking in their droves after the show ends very few I'd say even this C25K many people start it few finish and of the few that finish less of them keep it up long term.

LuckyLloyd

walshb wrote: »

It's advice. It may be bad for you, but like I said, there is no silver bullet here. For many the advice may help them.

You are bad and should feel bad! What's this about?

The condescending tone adopted by some of the panel experts and the way the participants are generally handled. 'You are a fat mess and need to lose 2.3kgs before next weigh in otherwise you are failing'.

And most people will be badly served by this advice - the same tired old advice in the public domain for the last few decades.

norwegianwood

walshb wrote: »

You are bad and should feel bad! What's this about?

Maybe the way they wheel them out in shorts about 3 sizes too small for them with everything on show? I can't imagine they do that for any other reason than making them feel bad!

papu

If the motivation to change is purely derived from a TV show you've got some bigger problems.

sh1tstirrer

norwegianwood wrote: »

Maybe the way they wheel them out in shorts about 3 sizes to small for them with everything on show? I can't imagine they do that for any other reason than making them feel bad!

I can never see the reason for this other than to humiliate the contestants.

Doug Cartel

The cost of the “Week 3” dinner for at least two people in one of the cheaper Galway supermarkets came to €86.38. And that is just the dinners.

Anyone know what this was?

walshb

sh1tstirrer wrote: »

How many people will be walking in their droves after the show ends very few I'd say even this C25K many people start it few finish and of the few that finish less of them keep it up long term.

And as I said it is not a perfect show. Maybe there will be many who won't get anything out of it, but maybe there are plenty who do get inspired and motivated by it. I'd prefer to look for the good rather than the negativity being espoused on this thread.

walshb

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

- eat high carbs / low protein / low fat;
.

What is wrong with this? I don't think OT is saying that you should cut out things, just advising on what they believe to be the healthiest food types.

Magenta

Mellor wrote: »

I haven't read the article, and I've never seen the show.

Why bother commenting then?

papu

walshb wrote: »

What is wrong with this? I don't think OT is saying that you should cut out things, just advising on what they believe to be the healthiest food types.

High Carbs , High processed carbs.
Low fat , High Sugar.
Low protein. No Gains.

arayess

papu wrote: »

If the motivation to change is purely derived from a TV show you've got some bigger problems.

this is bullsh1t - do you really believe that?

movitation can be derived from any source once it comes with the desire to change.

the group/community effort that OT gives is a great source of encouragement for people to start getting fit.
Sometimes not being on your own can be a great help in kickstarting something.

I know some girls who arent into fitness but want to stay healthy who are now training for the 5k run in feb. This is f8cking brilliant they have a goal and now are working to that thanks to OT.

to say they had bigger problems is a nonsense cos you don't have a clue who they are.

papu

arayess wrote: »

this is bullsh1t - do you really believe that?

movitation can be derived from any source once it comes with the desire to change.

the group/community effort that OT gives is a great source of encouragement for people to start getting fit.
Sometimes not being on your own can be a great help in kickstarting something.

I know some girls who arent into fitness but want to stay healthy who are now training for the 5k run in feb. This is f8cking brilliant they have a goal and now are working to that thanks to OT.

to say they had bigger problems is a nonsense cos you don't have a clue who they are.

Yes, completely. I highly doubt the origin stories for people who live healthy , active sustainable lives begin with , I was watching T.V....
The group community effort, encouragement and motivation is tainted with the misinformation the show is spreading and entertainment factor the show needs to continue.

I mightn't have a clue of who they are but any healthy person should be able to run 5K... training for 5K isn't "Staying healthy".. It seems perceptions on health have become very badly skewed.

arayess

papu wrote: »

.. It seems perceptions on health have become very badly skewed.

clearly.

walshb

papu wrote: »

High Carbs , High processed carbs.
Low fat , High Sugar.
Low protein. No Gains.

Oh, so they said to eat high processed carb foods?

They advised to eat low fat/high sugar foods?

Advised to eat low protein? And?

I think saying anyone healthy should be able to run that off the bat is a little unfair
It's a great goal to have and once they've done that they might look at 10k etc

norwegianwood

bluewolf wrote: »

I think saying anyone healthy should be able to run that off the bat is a little unfair
It's a great goal to have and once they've done that they might look at 10k etc

I'm 21 and reasonably healthy, it took me 4 months to get to that point, it probably wouldn't take most people that long but very few would be able to do it straight away without any training I'd say!

brownej

norwegianwood wrote: »

I'm 21 and reasonably healthy, it took me 4 months to get to that point, it probably wouldn't take most people that long but very few would be able to do it straight away without any training I'd say!

I think the trouble here is the definition of healthy.
To some, being healthy is having a basic level of cardio vascular fitness that would allow you to run 5k
To others, being healthy is having a diet coke instead of regular coke and only having half a bar of chocolate.

There is an enormous chasm in between.

Mellor

Magenta wrote: »

Why bother commenting then?

Because it wasn't essential to my point. Nor was my point it specific to OT only.

I went back and read it when I had a chance later. My opinion hasn't changed.

Glinda

People who are overweight or obese have probably lost more weight in their lifetime than you would believe.

They are often experts on calorie counting, food restriction and know the intimate calorific details of every tiny thing they or anyone else eats.

They have probably tried a dozen or more weight loss plans, often with dramatic success (losing multiples of stones and very high percentages of their bodyweight).

Losing weight is most often not the problem (because often the person concerned is a little obsessive about food anyway). The problem is that the weight bounces straight back on again, with a couple of additional stones as soon as they lose control, which they almost always do.

I think OT is awful, body-shaming reality TV nonsense. Just because it has a few 'healthy' aspects (like social exercise) doesn't make the rest of it any good.

People with eating problems need to learn to love their bodies, not hate them. It's not your body that makes you fat - it's your head. Unless you fix whatever led to the eating issue in the first place your weight will never be healthy and (most importantly) stable.

Mellor

norwegianwood wrote: »

I'm 21 and reasonably healthy, it took me 4 months to get to that point, it probably wouldn't take most people that long but very few would be able to do it straight away without any training I'd say!

See the above highlights the fact that health and fitness are separate, albeit related, issues. You may have been healthy, but if it took you 4months to work up to a 5km, you were probably lacking fitness.
Anybody can start "eating healthy" and exercising tomorrow. But that won't suddenly make then a fit and healthy person. That requires consistancy over a period if time. A particular plan or set of advice isn't conducive to maintaining consistency, then it's not good advice.

Jon Stark

fits wrote: »

I don't watch it, but I think its not completely useless. Gets people out for walks and events and such. My main problem with these things is that there is no follow up with the participants after the show ends. A year round show might be better.

There's a usually a follow up show after 6 months but unfortunately it just highlights what you say.

Maybe one of the leaders will have had good progress, but the most part it's just an awkward situation for those participating.

All of these shows have the same problem. The biggest loser being the most extreme example where they take people away from their typical day (and daily temptations) and give them a personal trainer....and personal chef on top.

Then when the cameras stop rolling the weight creeps back on for many as they simply haven't been given the tools to sustain a long term change.

Another thing I find very unsettling about these shows is how they pick and target on people who are quite emotionally fragile. I remember one particular year of OT where they hadn't picked the leaders but we're encouraging people to share fully about their weight problem. There was one particular lady who had a full on meltdown, where she spoke so candidly about how hard she found it to wake up in the morning and go to work with a smile on her face.

They didn't pick her as a leader in the end, just used a woman clearly in need of help for a bit of drama.

So yeah, not a fan. :pac:

LuckyLloyd

You can have very 'healthy' people (good blood markers / good blood pressure / normal weight / sleep well / no allergies or inflammation) who are very unfit and weak.

You can have people who are very fit and / or strong who have bad blood markers, chronic inflammation and high blood pressure.

People will say I'm overcomplicating things, maybe so. But if sustainable health and fitness was as easy as ****ing 'low fat + running + self chastisement' then we'd have a population getting ever healthier. We don't. OT regurgitates the same old failed public health bollocks that is making western society sicker with every passing year.

walshb

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

You can have very 'healthy' people (good blood markers / good blood pressure / normal weight / sleep well / no allergies or inflammation) who are very unfit and weak.

You can have people who are very fit and / or strong who have bad blood markers, chronic inflammation and high blood pressure.

Those points are spot on, and they are why I find the criticism of OT odd. It does not claim to be solving the world's health problems. That is much too complicated a problem. From what I have seen the advice given on the show is fair. It can't really be slated. There's far too much to cover to try and fit into a half hour show. They give advice and tips.

LuckyLloyd

walshb wrote: »

Those points are spot on, and they are why I find the criticism of OT odd. It dos not claim to be solving the world's health problems. That is much too complicated a problem. From what I have seen the advice given on the show is fair. It can't really be slated. There's far too much to cover to try and fit into a half hour show. They give advice and tips.

Yes it can:

- their nutrition advice is not current;
- their exercise advice does not offer a sustainable starting point for people unfit and overweight;
- their goal setting approach is harmful;

You continue to ignore these points.

walshb

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Yes it can:

- their nutrition advice is not current;
- their exercise advice does not offer a sustainable starting point for people unfit and overweight;
- their goal setting approach is harmful;

You continue to ignore these points.

What exactly is current? You seem to think that there is a method and that is it, and that other options cannot be healthy or advisable. What is wrong with their nutritional advice?

I'd like to see/hear the points on OT that are so obviously bad and inadvisable

Goal setting? Explain what is wrong with it? Throwing out one liners without counter claiming or giving a 'better' alternative means little. And, even if you do have abetter alternative that doesn't mean that what it's replacing is wrong or bad.

LuckyLloyd

walshb wrote: »

What exactly is current? You seem to think that there is a method and that is it, and that other options cannot be healthy or advisable. What is wrong with their nutritional advice?

From this thread:

papu wrote: »

but protein and fats are more satiating...

norwegianwood wrote: »

You would but fats are still a vital part of the diet and need to have their place and cutting them out completely is nonsensical, especially when they'll likely be replaced with something like sugar to keep flavour in most diet foods. Proteins and fats also serve more of a functional purpose within the body than carbs, and from a weight loss perspective they're a lot more satiating, but common advice for weight loss/CHD prevention is to limit them, fat in particular, from what I can see it's based on a lot of outdated research that's been thoroughly disproven. One of my lecturers actually said that all excess protein is instantly turned to fat, if that was true everyone taking protein supplements would be obese!

papu wrote: »

High Carbs , High processed carbs.
Low fat , High Sugar.
Low protein. No Gains.

walshb wrote: »

I'd like to see/hear the points on OT that are so obviously bad and inadvisable.

Regarding exercise advice being bad, here's a real expert's take:

Transform wrote: »

my two cents -

Karl is an extremely nice guy but his methods of training are very dated and im not convinced with the arguement that he has to "tone things down" for the masses.

Ive done screen tests for this show twice now so im not sure what they're looking for as havent had my ugly mug on that show once - face for radio maybe.

The problem is in his delivery - he made a mess of it also with a lady that dropped 11lbs the first week then 1.5lbs the following week and told her if she wasnt really killing herself in her sessions then shes wasting her time - baffling, when most of these people could lose a pile of weight each week with some light walking, foam rolling, mobility work and use a nutrition approach thats half way sensible (their nutrition approach is full of holes).

walshb wrote: »

Goal setting? Explain what is wrong with it? Throwing out one liners without counter claiming or giving a 'better' alternative means little. And, even if you do have abetter alternative that doesn't mean that what it's replacing is wrong or bad.

I've already explained what's wrong with it:

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The issue I have with OT is not that losing weight is a bad thing. It's that the approach they push is not sustainable or long term. Shock and awe has its place alright, but it can't be a foundation for changing one's life around and maintaining it.

A bad fitness goal is an outcome goal. So:

- I will Deadlift 250kgs next year;
- I will lose 20kgs before June 12th;
- I will win a national championship in my sport;

Are bad goals because you can control your behaviour but you can't control the ultimate outcome of that behaviour. They are also bad goals because by just stating the goal you get positive feedback from people. You intend to Deadlift 250kgs? 'Wow, that's cool - you're awesome'.

Better goals would be:

- I'm going to complete 8 cycles of 531 on Deadlift and work assistance as part of training smart five days a week;
- I'm going to cut out bread and make 8 out of every 10 meals home cooked from scratch. I will allow myself a no holds barred eat what I like meal once every 14 days but no more than that;
- I'm going to go to bed an hour earlier each work night;
- I'm going to get coaching and give myself 10 weeks of full effort and do my best at the national championships next year;

etc, etc. In that way, if you stick to your goal you've already won and you're ingraining good behaviour as the objective. Consistent good behaviour will inevitably produce results over the long haul.

You keep saying 'what's wrong with it, no one is making any points' when the forum is full of logical explanations of why their approach is lacking.

walshb

Where did the programme advise anyone to ingest unhealthily, or to ingest unhealthy foods. Simple question. I asked it earlier and it was avoided.

Example: I don't believe the show said to cut out all fats.

If they did that was wrong.

"The problem is in his delivery - he made a mess of it also with a lady that dropped 11lbs the first week then 1.5lbs the following week and told her if she wasnt really killing herself in her sessions then shes wasting her time - baffling, when most of these people could lose a pile of weight each week with some light walking, foam rolling, mobility work and use a nutrition approach thats half way sensible (their nutrition approach is full of holes)."

The above point I agree with. I thought he was wrong here too. Ridiculous.

papu

walshb wrote: »

Where did the programme advise anyone to ingest unhealthily, or to ingest unhealthy foods. Simple question. I asked it earlier and it was avoided.

Look at the foods they recommend , bread , pitta , cereal.

Following the food plan might be alright , but you're not going to eat those meals everyday of the year. You're going to start having sandwiches more and more ,
then adding crisps to it , next thing you know you're off the wagon and waiting for the next season of OT to get your life sorted again... It's all about sustainability , even some of the people on the show can't sustain the lifestyle so how are the people watching and following it supposed to? Its much better to educate people so that they
can make their own choices , meal plans , and understand what they should be eating. It isn't difficult , Hanley even made it into a dance

From His Seminars

LuckyLloyd

walshb wrote: »

Where did the programme advise anyone to ingest unhealthily, or to ingest unhealthy foods. Simple question. I asked it earlier and it was avoided.

Example: I don't believe the show said to cut out all fats.

If they did that was wrong.

A low fat carb heavy diet equates to one that is high in sugar and low in protein and fat. Advocating grains and wheat as a dietary stable is bad advice, particularly for overweight people attempting to undergo a dramatic caloric deficit. In one of the episodes a 135kgs male was being asked to exist on a heavily carb based 2000 calories a day diet plan and was falling asleep at his desk in the afternoon. Top notch advice.