What are healthy approaches to dieting?

Take our Healthy Lifestyle Test

Find a health professional

Numerous systematic reviews and meta-analyses synthesize findings from hundreds of studies over 20-plus years.

The most meaningful changes from tracking diet and/or exercise are found in daily step-count increases.

Presentations of the evidence sometimes overstate the real-world significance of their findings.

So far in this series, we’ve looked at the new ubiquity of numerical measures in body-related matters, and we’ve considered a cultural-evolution argument for why they may have spread so successfully regardless of benefits.

Now we turn to the question of evidence. What systematic evidence is there to suggest that keeping numerical track of things like energy input (eating) and energy output (exercise) has beneficial effects? The benefits might involve positive changes to those variables themselves, and/or changes in bodyweight or body composition, blood pressure, cholesterol, pain, or other quality-of-life factors. Once we’ve surveyed the benefits, we can ask how they stack up against the harms.

A note on the link with eating disorders and disordered eating: For now, I’ll be taking claims of benefits at face value. If a study is trying to help increase physical activity or reduce body weight, I’ll be assessing whether it succeeds in helping people do that. But later parts of the series will go deeper, for it is not necessarily the case that everyone who thinks (or has been told) that they should eat less or be more physically active will benefit from taking more steps or ingesting fewer calories. The difference between what humans actually need and what numerical tools allow them to achieve is at the heart of what’s interesting in all this. So for now, please remember that when I say that something “helped” or “worked,” I mean merely that it did what it was intended to.

Overview of Research on Tracking Diet and Exercise

There’s no shortage of experimental evidence trying to answer the question “does tracking diet and exercise improve health?” In an informal search, I found 14 systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and umbrella analyses, collectively analysing hundreds of individual studies conducted over decades. Doubtless I could have found a 15th if I’d kept looking, but the patterns that emerge from these 14 are clear enough that I feel confident predicting that more examples wouldn’t radically change the picture.

And what is that picture? Well, in a nutshell: tracking helps a bit. It does not work wonders. It often encourages change in the intended direction, but usually only weakly.

Let’s get more specific. Here are eight simple takeaways from my reading of the state of the evidence about food and movement tracking and health.

The clearest “beneficial” changes are to daily step count, which was found to increase by between 475 and 2,592 steps a day. (e.g., Kirk et al., 2019; Laranjo et al., 2021; Brickwood et al., 2019; Larsen et al., 2022)

Weight loss is minimal, with effects varying from no change to a maximum of 2.87 kg for trials lasting up to 12 months. (e.g., Flores Mateo et al., 2015; Tang et al., 2020; Berry et al., 2021; Chew et al., 2022)

Tracking works better when combined with other support and individually tailored, i.e., it is not a magic bullet. Tailoring might mean that a device provides different messages based on individual characteristics; additional support might involve text messaging, biofeedback, professional input or “human counselling” via phone or video call, or even an........

© Psychology Today