The role of cognitive restraint savings and the safety of ketogenic weight loss interventions

Abstract

Achieving a caloric deficit through diets and meal plans requires various actions, including planning, consistency, and effective execution. These actions necessitate cognitive processing of information, decision-making, and choice 1 . Additionally, they require skills like inhibiting impulses, managing cravings and conflicts that arise with the desire to lose weight, challenging emotions associated with the body, and responding to environmental cues about food 2,3 . Many studies have identified factors that improve or impede adherence to dietary guidelines. The general consensus is that high adherence is crucial 4,5 . However, there are noteworthy dietary interventions, such as the ketogenic diet, that possess distinct characteristics.The term "low-carb and ketogenic" encompasses various dietary possibilities, but I want to emphasize three distinctive nuances that are contradictory to the current discussion: (i) professionally prescribed low-carb and ketogenic diets; (ii) professionally prescribed food substitute options marketed as ketogenic diets; and (iii) self-imposed low-carb and ketogenic diets 6,7 . It is crucial to consider that studies that provide meals to participants might not reflect actual eating behavior, and their outcomes are based on highly regulated conditions. Thus, it appears that food substitutes may enhance both clinical studies and regular nutrition practice by offering a more practical solution. In particular, the inquiry surrounding these diets, despite their limitations and high cost, involves an aspect that is not often studied but is applied to all nutritional interventions: how much cognitive restraint individuals require to adhere to dietary recommendations 8-11 ?