More than 70 y ago, Dr Albert Stunkard identified that weight loss treatments often fail due, in part, to the difficulty in maintaining weight loss. He famously stated, “Most people will not stay in treatment for obesity. Of those who stay in treatment, most will not lose weight and of those who do lose weight most will regain it” (1). Since then, weight loss strategies have improved, and many lifestyle interventions are now achieving levels of weight loss that are sufficient to confer significant improvements in cardiometabolic health (2). Nonetheless, after weight loss, most individuals return to their baseline weight within 5 y.
It is now well accepted that lower energy expenditure and higher physiological and psychological drivers of food intake undermine the ability to maintain weight loss. In a recent provocative study in 71 participants, Martins and colleagues (3) show that metabolic adaptation at the level of resting metabolic rate (RMR) is indeed present and quite variable (−92 ± 110 kcal/d) after 8 wk of energy restriction leading to significant weight loss (14 kg on average). After 4 wk of weight stabilization, this adaptation decreased to −38 ± 124 kcal/d on average. Furthermore, the authors report that the observed metabolic adaptation was not related to weight regain 1 y later. This prompted their conclusion that metabolic adaptation is a transient phenomenon—related to acute negative energy balance—which has nothing to do with weight regain. Despite this small study, there are ample data pointing to the impact of energy expenditure (including metabolic adaptation) on the regulation of body weight, even if energy intake seems to remain the major driver of weight loss relapse.
From early studies in the Pima Indians, a population prone to obesity, we identified that RMR was a familial trait likely genetically determined (4) and that a low metabolic rate for a given body weight and body composition was a risk factor for body weight gain (5). Our data suggested for the first time that the physiological variability in energy expenditure was an important biological factor underlying the propensity for weight gain and the resistance to weight loss in response to energy restriction. Importantly, we suggested that weight gain—and often obesity—was the price to pay to achieve a “normal” metabolic rate at a new higher energy flux (6).
As observed by Martins et al., RMR is often reduced by weight loss to a greater extent than would be expected by the loss of fat-free mass and fat mass. This physiological mechanism, called “metabolic adaptation,” represents one of the reasons why the body resists further weight loss and individuals regain weight so easily. In the classical Minnesota semistarvation studies, Keys et al. (7) reported first that RMR was drastically reduced in response to 24 wk of severe energy restriction, and well below the metabolic rate needed to support the reduced body mass. Years later, Leibel et al. (8) documented significant reductions in energy expenditure after weight loss in lean and obese adults beyond the predicted reductions due to the loss of fat-free mass and fat mass. Importantly, and unlike the data from Martins et al., this metabolic adaptation triggered by weight loss persisted years later (9). In another example, individuals participating in The Biggest Loser competition experienced an even larger metabolic adaptation (∼300 kcal/d) after a 40% body weight loss (10), which was sustained 6 y later despite an almost 70% regain of the initial weight loss (11). Interestingly, the magnitude of the observed metabolic adaptation was strongly related to the degree of negative energy balance during weight loss and the reduction in plasma leptin concentration (12).
In an impressive series of prospective studies in which metabolic adaptation was measured in response to acute episodes of overfeeding or fasting, Piaggi (13) identified “thrifty” and “spendthrift” phenotypes associated with resistance or ease of losing weight during caloric restriction. These prospective observations once again emphasize the role of energy expenditure in the control of body weight and in the maintenance of weight loss. As such, we are somewhat surprised that Martins et al. dismiss the role of RMR and metabolic adaptation in body weight regulation. We agree that the impact of metabolic adaptation on energy balance can be rather small (∼6% of 24-h energy expenditure); however, the variance among individuals is considerably larger—for example, ±110 kcal/d after weight loss in the Martins study. However, as we initially proposed, because an impaired energy expenditure can explain only a small fraction of the weight gain, a low RMR can also be a marker for either enhanced hunger or impaired satiation and therefore hyperphagia (14). Confirming such a hypothesis in 50 study participants, energy restriction was shown to impact circulating mediators of appetite immediately after weight loss, with an elevation of orexigenic signals and a reduction of anorexic signals, even 1 y after the initial weight loss (15).
In contrast to Martin and colleagues’ observations and claims, the literature indeed suggests that persistence of metabolic adaptation is likely to play a role in the lack of success in maintaining the weight loss. However, there remains a critical need to identify and understand the mechanisms that drive weight regain as well as those that promote long-term weight loss maintenance. To date, very few trials have studied the effect of changes in potential mediators of energy expenditure and energy intake on weight loss and subsequent weight regain and none in a single study. For these reasons, a workshop was organized last year by the National Institutes of Health which resulted in a Request For Applications to create a research consortium to tackle these questions using state-of-the-art energy balance methods and improve our understanding of the mechanisms of weight loss maintenance (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/rfa-dk-19-017.html). Until the results of these experiments are known, a more balanced view of the literature surrounding metabolic adaptation and body weight regulation is required. Casting a dismissive view of metabolic adaptation “as an illusion” with this 1 study—after so many others have shown its importance—is problematic to say the least.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Both authors were responsible for all aspects of this manuscript.
Notes
The authors report no conflicts of interest.
Contributor Information
Eric Ravussin, From the Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Baton Rouge, LA, USA.
Leanne M Redman, From the Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Baton Rouge, LA, USA.
References
- 1. Stunkard AJ. The management of obesity. New York State Journal of Medicine. 1958;58:79–87. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Magkos F, Fraterrigo G, Yoshino J, Luecking C, Kirbach K, Kelly SC, de Las Fuentes L, He S, Okunade AL, Patterson BW et al. Effects of moderate and subsequent progressive weight loss on metabolic function and adipose tissue biology in humans with obesity. Cell Metab. 2016;23(4):591–601. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Martins C, Roekenes J, Salamati S, Gower BA, Hunter GR. Metabolic adaptation is an illusion, only present when participants are in negative energy balance. Am J Clin Nutr. [Internet] 2020. Available from: doi:10.1093/ajcn/nqaa220. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Bogardus C, Lillioja S, Ravussin E, Abbott W, Zawadzki JK, Young A, Knowler WC, Jacobowitz R, Moll PP. Familial dependence of the resting metabolic rate. N Engl J Med. 1986;315(2):96–100. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Ravussin E, Lillioja S, Knowler WC, Christin L, Freymond D, Abbott WG, Boyce V, Howard BV, Bogardus C. Reduced rate of energy expenditure as a risk factor for body-weight gain. N Engl J Med. 1988;318(8):467–72. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Ravussin E, Swinburn BA. Metabolic predictors of obesity – cross-sectional versus longitudinal data. Int J Obesity. 1993;17:S28–31. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Keys A, Brozek J, Henschel A, Mickelsen O, Taylor HL. The biology of human starvation. St Paul: North Central Publishing Company; 1950. [Google Scholar]
- 8. Leibel RL, Rosenbaum M, Hirsch J. Changes in energy expenditure resulting from altered body weight. N Engl J Med. 1995;332(10):621–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Rosenbaum M, Hirsch J, Gallagher DA, Leibel RL. Long-term persistence of adaptive thermogenesis in subjects who have maintained a reduced body weight. Am J Clin Nutr. 2008;88(4):906–12. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Johannsen DL, Knuth ND, Huizenga R, Rood JC, Ravussin E, Hall KD. Metabolic slowing with massive weight loss despite preservation of fat-free mass. J Clin Endocr Metab. 2012;97:2489–96. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Fothergill E, Guo J, Howard L, Kerns JC, Knuth ND, Brychta R, Chen KY, Skarulis MC, Walter M, Walter PJ et al. Persistent metabolic adaptation 6 years after “The Biggest Loser” competition. Obesity. 2016;24(8):1612–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Knuth ND, Johannsen DL, Tamboli RA, Marks-Shulman PA, Huizenga R, Chen KY, Abumrad NN, Ravussin E, Hall KD. Metabolic adaptation following massive weight loss is related to the degree of energy imbalance and changes in circulating leptin. Obesity. 2014;22(12):2563–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Piaggi P. Metabolic determinants of weight gain in humans. Obesity. 2019;27(5):691–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Ravussin E, Bogardus C. Energy balance and weight regulation: genetics versus environment. Br J Nutr. 2000;83(Suppl 1):S17–20. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Sumithran P, Prendergast LA, Delbridge E, Purcell K, Shulkes A, Kriketos A, Proietto J. Long-term persistence of hormonal adaptations to weight loss. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(17):1597–604. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]