Winston Weight Loss offers a program designed to help individuals transform their bodies and lives by resetting their metabolism. The program emphasizes healthy, sustainable weight loss, as opposed to quick fixes. This review delves into the details of the Winston Weight Loss program, examining its approach, effectiveness, and overall value.
Program Overview
The Winston Weight Loss program distinguishes itself by focusing on resetting your metabolism, which ensures that you not only lose weight but also keep it off in a healthy and sustainable way. Many clients have reported shedding 20-40 lbs in just 8 weeks without the use of medications. The program aims to work efficiently to help you lose and maintain your weight. Throughout the program, they work closely with you to help you understand the key factors that enable your body to burn fat efficiently.
Key Features
- Metabolism Reset: A core component of the program is its emphasis on resetting the metabolism.
- Personalized Approach: Recognizing that each individual's body and goals are unique, the program likely tailors its approach to fit specific needs.
- Sustainable Weight Loss: The program is designed to promote long-term weight management rather than temporary results.
- No Medications: An attractive feature for those seeking a natural approach to weight loss.
- At-Home Program: The platform allows you to successfully complete the program from the comfort of your home.
Success Stories and Testimonials
Many individuals have shared their positive experiences with the Winston Weight Loss program. Here are a few examples:
- One woman's weight loss journey started because of her husband. After hearing a radio commercial, he came home and said, "I’m making an appointment."
- Another individual was motivated by her grandchild, wanting to be able to run around, play, and make memories without constantly needing to sit down after five minutes.
- One client experienced great success with this program and reached their goal of losing 41 pounds.
- Another person gave it a try and lost 33lbs and now has more energy to keep up with their 3 amazing busy kids.
- Someone who was skeptical that losing weight could be easy lost over 20 pounds in a few weeks, their blood pressure was better, and they avoided the need for any new drugs and dropped over 60 pounds and is ready to get off all other prescriptions.
- One person was starting to feel like they were beyond help in their 50’s but now feels like they have a whole new lease on life.
These testimonials highlight the potential for significant weight loss, increased energy levels, and improved overall well-being through the Winston Weight Loss program.
Understanding the Science Behind Weight Loss Programs
Weight loss fundamentally requires an energy deficit. This is usually achieved by reducing the volume of food consumed through modifying portions, reducing certain macronutrients (e.g., lower fat or lower carbohydrate intake), or eliminating various food groups.
Read also: Weight Loss Guide Andalusia, AL
Meal Replacements
Meal replacements (MR), typically formulated as prepackaged shakes or bars, are another option for reducing energy intake. They help promote weight loss by eliminating choices, controlling portions, and providing satiation at lower calorie intakes. Total meal replacement (TMR), or the use of MR as the sole source of daily nutrition, has been studied as one option to enhance behavioral weight loss.
Very-Low-Calorie Diets
Several retrospective and prospective clinical trials through the 1990s showed significant initial weight loss with the use of very‐low‐calorie diets (VLCD), typically providing 400 to 600 kcal/d using TMR. However, the 1998 expert obesity panel convened by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute did not recommend the use of VLCDs because of concerns that long‐term weight losses, especially after cessation of the VLCD, were not significantly different from those achieved with standard low‐calorie diets.
OPTIFAST Program
The OPTIFAST program (OP) is one example of a TMR weight‐loss intervention. Originally developed in the 1970s as a VLCD providing 420 kcal/d, the program has evolved to include comprehensive behavioral intervention and a higher calorie intake.
OPTIWIN Clinical Trial: A Detailed Analysis
The OPTIWIN trial was an open‐label, multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial conducted across nine participating US centers, including private clinics and academic medical centers.
Participants
Participants had to be 18 to 70 years old and nonsmokers with a BMI of 30 to 55 kg/m2. Key exclusions included recent weight loss or use of weight‐loss medications, previous bariatric surgery, organ failure, type 1 diabetes or hemoglobin A1c > 10%, cardiovascular disease event or mental health hospitalization in the past 6 months, alcohol or drug dependence, positive screening for potential eating disorder, or poorly controlled depression.
Read also: Beef jerky: A high-protein option for shedding pounds?
Study Design
Eligible individuals completed a 7‐day run‐in diet that included use of one serving of MR (OPTIFAST; Nestlé Health Science, Bridgewater, New Jersey) daily to assess tolerance to the product. The final screening visit was completed after the run‐in to assess adherence to the run‐in diet, self‐monitoring tasks, and final eligibility. Participants randomized to OP were provided all MR at no cost.
Participants with BMI < 45 were instructed to use five MRs per day (800 kcal total) with 40% of calories as protein, 40% as carbohydrate, and 20% as fat. Participants with BMI of 45 to 49.9 received six MRs per day (960 kcal); those with BMI ≥ 50 received six MRs plus one meal daily of lean protein (3‐4 ounces) and one nonstarchy vegetable serving (1,100‐1,200 kcal). Participants followed their prescription for 12 to 16 weeks based on provider discretion and patient preference, after which there was gradual reintroduction of food through week 26. After week 26, participants’ calories were gradually increased to achieve weight stability.
Medical Monitoring and Behavioral Intervention
The OPTIFAST protocol requires medical monitoring during the initiation of TMR. OP participants saw a clinician regularly to address health concerns and adjust medications for a total of 11 medical monitoring visits during the first 26 weeks and 4 medical monitoring visits in weeks 27 to 52. Labs for medical monitoring, including either a basic or comprehensive metabolic panel, were obtained at weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 16. Both treatment groups had weekly 45‐ to 60‐minute group behavioral sessions for the duration of the intervention. Group sessions were facilitated by trained professional interventionists using a standardized intervention manual. OP program sessions used the OPTIFAST Lifestyle Education Series content as the basis for the behavioral group sessions. Both groups received prescriptions for physical activity that included a graduated target of 150 to 180 min/wk of moderate to vigorous exercise.
Measurements
Body weight was measured in light clothing on digital scales to the nearest 0.1 lb. Height was measured without shoes using a wall‐mounted stadiometer to the nearest 0.5 cm. BMI was calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared. Waist circumference was measured using a spring‐loaded tape measure (Gulick) 1 cm above the umbilicus. Two measures were averaged at each study visit. Body composition was measured using dual‐energy x‐ray absorptiometry.
Outcomes
Adverse events (AEs) were ascertained at each clinic encounter or study visit using a standardized symptom checklist and questionnaire. Any new symptoms or medical problems were logged as AEs. The site medical provider reviewed each event and adjudicated the severity, relatedness, and classification. Because the FB group had fewer contacts with study personnel, the number of opportunities for reporting AEs was higher for the OP group.
Read also: Inspiring Health Transformation
Results of the OPTIWIN Trial
A total of 273 participants (83% of randomized; 135 OP, 138 FB) made up the mITT population. Mean age was 47.1 ± 11.2 years; 82% were female and 71% non‐Hispanic white. Baseline BMI was 38.8 ± 5.9 kg/m2.
Weight Loss
At 26 weeks, OP %WL was 12.4% ± 0.6% versus 6.0% ± 0.6% in FB (P < 0.001). At 52 weeks, OP %WL was 10.5% ± 0.6% versus 5.5% ± 0.6% in FB (P < 0.001).
Body Composition
Fat mass loss was greater for OP; lean mass loss was proportional to total weight loss. By week 52, mean total fat mass was decreased by 9.7 ± 10.4 kg for OP participants. The mean reduction in total fat mass for FB participants was 3.5 ± 6.6 kg at 52 weeks. Both treatment groups also had decreases in lean mass. The absolute difference was statistically significant; however, the proportion of weight loss from lean mass at 52 weeks was similar (23% for OP; 25.5% for FB).
Responder Analysis
At week 52, higher proportions of OP participants achieved 5% (63.7%) and 10% weight loss (43.7%) compared with FB (42% and 21.7%, respectively; P < 0.001). The percentage of people who lost 15% or more of their initial weight was more than double in OP than FB (30% vs. 12%; P < 0.001). At week 26, 15.6% of OP and 39.1% of FB participants were nonresponders (defined by a failure to lose ≥ 3% of their initial body weight).
Adverse Events
Mild or moderate AEs were reported by 76.8% of OP and 62.7% of FB participants. Serious AEs were reported by 4.5% (7/155) of OP and 3.3% (5/150) of FB participants. Discontinuation rates were not statistically different between groups (29.3% OP; 31.9% FB; P = 0.60).
Comparing Winston Weight Loss to Other Programs
The OPTIWIN trial compared two behavioral weight‐loss strategies: OP versus a modified version of DPP. Participants in the OP treatment arm lost 10.5% of their initial weight by 52 weeks, representing a near doubling of the effect on body weight seen with FB. A larger proportion of participants lost 5%, 10%, or 15% of their body weight with OP, and a greater percentage of people responded with at least 3% weight loss to OP. The OP participants had greater losses of fat mass, and OP was well tolerated and safe.
Previous trials of interventions using TMR, typically in the form of VLCD, suggested that short‐term weight loss was much greater than no treatment controls or low‐calorie diets. However, once the TMR was discontinued, weight regain led to only modest differences between the treatment arms with longer follow‐up. In a meta-analysis of six randomized trials comparing VLCD with low-calorie diets with at least 1 year of follow-up, weight loss was 6.4% ± 2.7% greater for VLCD used on average for 12.7 weeks. However, longer‐term weight loss (mean follow‐up 1.9 ± 1.6 years) was not significantly different between the groups (VLCD 1.3% greater weight loss; P > 0.2).
Potential Benefits
- Significant Weight Loss: The program has demonstrated the potential for clients to lose a substantial amount of weight within a relatively short period.
- Improved Health Markers: Testimonials suggest improvements in blood pressure and a reduction in the need for medications.
- Increased Energy Levels: Many users report feeling more energetic and capable of engaging in physical activities.
- Enhanced Quality of Life: The ability to participate more fully in activities and enjoy time with loved ones is a significant benefit.
Considerations
- Cost: The costs are not provided without knowing more about you, your health, and your weight loss goals.
- Individual Results May Vary: As with any weight loss program, results can vary depending on individual factors such as adherence to the program, metabolism, and overall health.
- Maintenance: It is crucial to follow the program's guidance on transitioning back to regular food and maintaining a healthy lifestyle to prevent weight regain.