Can weight loss/gain be a "depression switch"?

M

Metzfan044

New member
Over the past 3-4 years I've been stuck gaining and losing the same 20 lbs. Just the other day I was thinking about my weight at various instances throughout that time, and I noticed a few things worth mentioning....

- At the mid to low end of that 20 lb range, I could describe myself as genuinely happy.

- I noticed a surge of "happiness" while in the process of actually LOSING the weight.

- Although I'm technically not unhappy, I'm pretty "meh" at the top end, which I'm currently at now.

After doing a bit of research I noticed that some of my symptoms coincide fairly well with those of depression including but not limited to lack of interest in usually satisfying activities, looking back to the past "good old days" a bit too much, and an overall feeling that the good times are over.

So my question specifically is if anyone thinks somewhere in that 20 lb. range there lies a "switch" for depression that's being turned on/off every time I pass it. It sure feels like it, and considering I've lost that same 20 lb. about 4 or 5 times in the past, it just seems like far too much to be a coincidence.

Thanks.
 
If I might be as provocative as to suggest that you have got it backwards, there is a lot of research linking depression with weight gain due to a general drop in activity, depression (in the clinical sense) has a high chance of recurrence and well.. perhaps it is more that you get hit by a depression, you gain weight, the depression passes, you start to loose weight and feel happier?

Anyways, I'd be inclined to say that there is nu 20 pound depression switch, and that causality is a very hard thing to determine and... well... I'm a skeptic so :)
 
Depression and weight gain are both caused by the same type of diet, so it's no surprise that you are having this issue. Saturated fat is necessary for your neurotransmitters to properly function; try increasing your fat intake and decreasing your carb intake.
 
LoseWeightNYC said:
Depression and weight gain are both caused by the same type of diet, so it's no surprise that you are having this issue. Saturated fat is necessary for your neurotransmitters to properly function; try increasing your fat intake and decreasing your carb intake.
Click to expand...

Actually that has been studied quite a bit, mind you not any huge placebo controlled double blinded tests yet but still... and there is little if any evidence of any efficacy beyond placebo so... this is pretty horrible advice for someone who might actually be suffering from a depression... just saying.

edit: I remember reading about it in this context but you can follow through from there and go through all the individual studies if you'd like, I even believe there was a meta study done that is referenced in the linked article so... there ya go :)
 
Last edited:
That's not a very good study at all. I couldn't get to the full text, but how is supplementing your diet with omega 3s in any way the same as restricting carbohydrates and eating grass fed red meats?

If your diet is high in carbohydrates, you will have elevated insulin levels, and as a result fat will be mobilized out of the blood stream and into the adipose tissue, depriving the rest of your body of the fatty acids it so desperately needs.
 
I don't want to quote myself but I was just pointing in the direction where i read about fatty acids and depression, the studies referenced in the study I linked to proves the point, which had nothing to do with carbs. I was just saying that the research, as far as I'm aware, show no link between fatty acids and depression.

You are the one claiming that more fat less carbs will cure both obesity and depression, you show me where you get that idea from :)
 
clever_plant said:
I don't want to quote myself but I was just pointing in the direction where i read about fatty acids and depression, the studies referenced in the study I linked to proves the point, which had nothing to do with carbs. I was just saying that the research, as far as I'm aware, show no link between fatty acids and depression.

You are the one claiming that more fat less carbs will cure both obesity and depression, you show me where you get that idea from :)
Click to expand...

Ignoring the fact that all diseases of civilization are caused by carbohydrates, including obesity, anorexia, hair loss, vision problems, cancer, heart disease, diabetes, etc, let's take a look at some research.

According to this study, depression is caused by inflammation: (BTW, if your keeping score at home, elevated insulin causes inflamation). Risk factors include low omega-3 levels, leaky gut, and post partum rise in cytokines (study here: ). All antidepressants have anti-inflammatory effects.

People who are depressed are also carb addicted, and depression is highly correlated with insulin resistance. That's what carbohydrates are, an addiction. They light up the same pleasure centers of the brain on an fMRI as cocaine or any other psychologically addictive substance.
 
The fact that all diseases of civilization are caused by carbohydrates? so... carbohydrates causes cells to mutate? carbohydrates causes beta cells to display the wrong antigens to T-Cells? interesting...

I believe you are overstating the research done on chronic inflammation, the causality chain of insulin, inflammation and carbohydrates, and on inflammation and depression causality on a gross scale.

Inflammation, or.. chronic low level inflammation (I think that is what you are referring to, and not just inflammation which is a very broad term.. I mean.. could we just feed people hydrocortisole to cure depression then?) is believed, not proven, to have a relation to depression and cardiovascular disease.

So... your first study is a proposal for a paradigm shift published in a relatively unknown journal with the title "metabolic brain disease" with an impact factor of 1.825.. I mean.. c'mon. besides the study doesn't prove anything, it simply suggests that we need to do more research. Also, in general I have a hard time taking researchers that also run alternative clinics and sells "life coaching" very seriously.

The other study does indeed say something to the effect of "new research in such and such suggests that inflammation is a big risk factor for depression" well it uses sentences like "is THE risk factor" but that doesn't really mean anything scientifically.

So as I understand your chain of logic it goes something like this: carbohydrates cause insulin levels to rise, high insulin levels = inflammation, inflammation = depression therefore no carbohydrates = no depression (the part where you basically claim that carbohydrates cause diabetes and cancer is just too weird for me to sort of.. even really debate.. i don't understand how you can claim that as a fact)

The problems with your statement is the following

1: not all carbohydrates are equal, and actually eating good carbohydrates (slow carbohydrates) does not cause chronic high levels of insulin at all. Rather, it is related with a steady low and healthy level of insulin.

2: High insulin levels are A (my emphasis) factor related to chronic low level inflammation, not THE cause, there are other causes.

3: Inflammation is A (again my emphasis) factor in causing depression, I'll even give you that it is THE risk factor (whatever that means medically).

Now, your conclusion is.. such a gross overstatement of the research and of facts, and even if it was true that carbohydrates caused depression... there is no guarantee at all that removing them would lover the inflammation that allegedly causes the depression since there is no research proving that restricting carbs cures depression..

I will however concede that yes, there is very good reason to do more research into nutrition, depression and chronic low level inflammation, espeially the latter is the forefront of current medical research so claiming anything about it being "facts" and "causes" of this and that is just way overstating current research.

I think depression is a fascinating subject, as is nutrition, but if we are to have a debate on this you have to stop both moving the goalpost and overstating research, if not then there is no point in this debate and we will just have to agree to disagree.
 
Might I suggest talking to an actual doctor in this? As far as I know, none of us are doctors so we are all just pointing to this study or that study. Doctors have the tools to help find out if your depression is based off medical reason (I had that cause of extremely low T levels).
 
Oh, I completely agree, in fact I'd go as far as to say that it doesn't matter at all if anyone of us is doctors since internet advice, no matter from who, will always be questionable, and at best an argument from authority fallacy, and it can never replace actually being examined and talking to a doctor :)

Apologies to metzfan for turning your question thread into a debate, I just got engaged and now I'm all caught up in it, thank you for pointing that out jericho.
 
I didn't say that study proved beyond a reasonable doubt that carbohydrates caused inflammation. You said, "show me where you get that idea from."

It's funny to me that you attacked all of those diseases I listed as being caused by carbohydrates but let it slide that they were "diseases of civilization." This makes the burden of proof much easier. If we believe that none of these diseases existed prior to civilization (and therefore agriculture), which of course is true, then it is an easy jump to determine that carbohydrates, which were essentially all but non-existent in our diet prior to agriculture (10,000 years/300 generations ago), are the cause of diseases of civilization. All one needs to do is look at societies that ate traditional diets over the last century (the Masai, the tokelau, the inuit, many others) and see if they had any of the diseases listed (they didn't). We can then look at the research as to how this changed when they got introduced to grain (tooth decay very quickly followed closely by diabetes and cancer within 12 years), and extrapolate.

If you want proof, Gary Taubes' book "Good Calories, Bad Calories" is the definitive work on nutrition as far as I'm concerned.
 
While that book is researched, do note that he is not a doctor. Too many people turn to these books instead of speaking to a doctor. While the book has some interesting ideas, to call it the definitive work on nutrition is a bit of a stretch.

Once again, Depression isn't something to be figured out on a blog or website. You need to seek a professional for the answer.
 
Just wondering, how come that there are non-obese people who are on a healthy diet who are still suffering from some form of depression??

And how come that I am experiencing the opposite - since I started paying attention to what I eat, making healthier and supposedly better choices and losing quite a bit of weight, I'm suffering from mood swings that even have my doctor baffled, and that I never had before?

Oh, and cancer, vision problems and heart diseases (amongst other things) are 'civilization diseases' and it is, of course, true that those didn't exist before? How do you know? Have you been there? Just wondering....

As for the OP: I agree with Jericho. Chat to your doctor to make sure that there are no clinical reasons for you to feel the way you do. That's the most important thing.
It would make sense to assume that somebody who is overweight, and probably doesn't feel that great, would feel less happy (not necessarily depressed) and less interested in activities. Losing the weight is probably a good feeling, which makes things a lot better, and might give you a boost in energy and confidence. So yeah, it makes sense that weight and the way you feel are closely connected. But as said, check back with your doc as well, just to be on the save side.
 
San said:
Just wondering, how come that there are non-obese people who are on a healthy diet who are still suffering from some form of depression??

And how come that I am experiencing the opposite - since I started paying attention to what I eat, making healthier and supposedly better choices and losing quite a bit of weight, I'm suffering from mood swings that even have my doctor baffled, and that I never had before?

Oh, and cancer, vision problems and heart diseases (amongst other things) are 'civilization diseases' and it is, of course, true that those didn't exist before? How do you know? Have you been there? Just wondering....

As for the OP: I agree with Jericho. Chat to your doctor to make sure that there are no clinical reasons for you to feel the way you do. That's the most important thing.
It would make sense to assume that somebody who is overweight, and probably doesn't feel that great, would feel less happy (not necessarily depressed) and less interested in activities. Losing the weight is probably a good feeling, which makes things a lot better, and might give you a boost in energy and confidence. So yeah, it makes sense that weight and the way you feel are closely connected. But as said, check back with your doc as well, just to be on the save side.
Click to expand...

I guess that depends on how you define "healthy diet." I define a healthy diet as severely carbohydrate restricted, high in protein and fat, mainly from grass fed beef, milk, and butter.
 
There is no one cause for such problems..the "cause" changes with the time..10 years ago the "cause" was dietary fat, now the cause is carbs, maybe in 10 more years the enemy will be protein.
But I digress, as some people have already pointed out weight loss/gain acting as a depression switch probably hints at more deep-rooted problems.
 
Last edited:
Tamago said:
There is no one cause for such problems..the "cause" changes with the time..10 years ago the "cause" was dietary fat, now the cause is carbs, maybe in 10 more years the enemy will be protein.
But I digress, as some people have already pointed out weight loss/gain acting as a depression switch probably hints at more deep-rooted problems.
Click to expand...

No, 10 years ago the cause was carbs, 30 years ago when Atkins published his first book, the cause was carbs. 80 years ago when Pennington was treating obesity, the cause was carbs. 130 years ago, when William Banting published his "Letter on Corpulence," the cause was carbs.
 
..did you miss the whole part about them living longer and healthier?

"Thanks to the relatively healthier Japanese diet and lifestyle, Japanese women and men live longer and healthier than everyone else on Earth," Moriyama tells WebMD. Not only can they expect to live 86 and 79 years respectively (compared to 80 and 75 years for Americans), but they can also anticipate an average of 75 years lived healthy and disability-free, the World Health Organization reports. On top of that, Japanese people enjoy the No. 1 lowest obesity rate in the developed world -- 3% -- versus 11% for the French and 32% for Americans, according to the International Obesity TaskForce. "You might think it's all in our genes," Moriyama says. "But when Japanese people adopt a Western-style diet, they put on weight quickly."

Or did you not even look.


This Thread is getting way too derailed.


In addition, I will say that I've looked at your other posts and I wonder what your motive is to be here. you don't look like you are losing weight and every time you post your info, people have countered it with facts and science. Steve has done it and for you to just dismiss everything as bad carbs is foolhardy and reckless.
 
Last edited:
LoseWeightNYC said:
I didn't say that study proved beyond a reasonable doubt that carbohydrates caused inflammation. You said, "show me where you get that idea from."

It's funny to me that you attacked all of those diseases I listed as being caused by carbohydrates but let it slide that they were "diseases of civilization." This makes the burden of proof much easier. If we believe that none of these diseases existed prior to civilization (and therefore agriculture), which of course is true, then it is an easy jump to determine that carbohydrates, which were essentially all but non-existent in our diet prior to agriculture (10,000 years/300 generations ago), are the cause of diseases of civilization. All one needs to do is look at societies that ate traditional diets over the last century (the Masai, the tokelau, the inuit, many others) and see if they had any of the diseases listed (they didn't). We can then look at the research as to how this changed when they got introduced to grain (tooth decay very quickly followed closely by diabetes and cancer within 12 years), and extrapolate.

If you want proof, Gary Taubes' book "Good Calories, Bad Calories" is the definitive work on nutrition as far as I'm concerned.
Click to expand...


You are basically just going from one logical fallacy to the next and while I concede that you have somewhat efficient rhetorical skills your level of evidence and proof is something like "I know a red haired guy, he colored his hair black and then he got diabetes, therefore black hair is the cause of diabetes".

First of all, I didn't bother commenting the diseases of civilizations part since it is basically nonsense in a medical sense.

If your line of evidence is taken to be true, then ANY change that happened after the introduction of agriculture, is caused by carbohydrates... this is just nonsensical.

Also, your idea of the definitive text on nutrition is, in my eyes, a perfect example of someone who doesn't want to do the research and prove his ideas, but wants to make a quick buck by writing a book going "ooh.. its all wrong.. tis a conspiracy.. i have the truth right here.. I don't need proof.."

And while you are ofcourse free to spread your opinion we will never see eye to eye on this since you rely on fallacies and basically rhetorics to back your opinion up, and not actual research and evidence.

Apologies for sounding harsh but I get annoyed at quackary.

I do however wish you the best :)

Once more apologies for derailing the thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top