Another look at forum stats

Alright, many of us here wonder if we're slow losers, fast losers or right at the average. Yesterday I took 11 people who had, at the time, responded to the "Slow Losers Club Stats" check-in, and ran the numbers on them coming up with some average statistics. Some of you seemed to like those statistics, and when I saw several additional stats today, and some not in the Slow Losers Club averages, I added them to my spreadsheet and collected a little more data more analysis. Here are my results so far: Total number of WLS people in data population: 20 Average weeks since surgery: 11.6 Average weight loss since surgery: 44.8 Average weekly weight loss: 4.2 Average percent loss: 16.9 Now, are you a slow loser or a fast loser? There are several ways to look at this to make up your mind. Lets first look at weekly weight loss. The average weekly weight loss is 4.2lbs. It might be easy to look at 4.2 and think "I lost 2.5 last week, I must be slow." But you can't do that. Instead, you have to take your total lost and divided it by the weeks out from surgery. If your average weekly weight loss since surgery is 4.2, then you're average for the data I got for this week. The standard deviation is 1.1lbs, so if you're within 1.1lbs, high or low, you're within the average. You are losing at a normal rate for this group. With this being the lowest standard deviation, this may be the best stat, right now, to judge your "slow loser" status against. The total pounds. The average was 48.8, and the standard deviation is 10.5. So if you've lost anywhere from 38.3 to 59.2 pounds since surgery then you're running in the average. The final data set would be your percentage lost. The group's average is 16.9%. The standard deviation is 2.8%. So if you fall anywhere between 14.1% and 19.7% you're running with the average loss. A few things you should be aware of. This is based only on the 20 people I got data for. As more people give us data, these figures will become more reliable, but pretty much everyone fell into an average range at some point. If you're average in 2 out of 3 of these figures, then you're probably average for the group. No one should take this information and make judgements on the success or failure of your surgery. 20 people is a very small group of people... all of which are in very early stages of post-surgery. As we approach a year, this information may be better suited towards our needs as an evaluation tool. Also, by using standard deviation, we're forcing 68.25% of the people in the group, roughly, into "normal" and everyone else either high or low. So if at a year, you're still low but have lost 100+ pounds... is that still not a success? Anyway, I hope this information is helpful and encouraging for most of you. I'll keep plugging away at the data and see what else I can wring from it. Before I go, however, I wanted to point out that the 20 people I have data for have, all together, lost 975.1lbs. That's nearly a half ton of weight gone forever! I think that's amazing!

Michael, Thank you so much for these stats and volunteering to continue them. They put things into useful perspective and make me feel better .

Hi Michael, I wanted to pop in and thank you for these stats too! When you group us together like that, it is much more reassuring that I am not so alone and that I am in the slow-loser's "average" range. Bless your heart for trying to keep us going! Take care, Kelly

Hi Kelly! Here's one thing I learned about us extra-fluffy starters. We get a strong ding from the start. Of the three people who were 300lbs plus at the start, you at 309, Carol Woodring at 301, and me at 427 (YIKES!) we all suffer a penalty in the percent weight loss catagory. It just takes more weight to move a single percentage point, and that "hurts" us in that catagory more than the others. But what I'm seeing... and I did find some stats for people who tried WW, and we're so smoking that average. Look at your 34.5lbs and know that it is GONE. Forever! This isn't an instant fix, and I hope that the stats are at least showing that we're on track.

Well, I hope that you guys do find it useful. I know it is put together with a lot of caveats and what-ifs, but since I can't find any national statistics, this is the best we can do. It's not terribly scientific, it is just too small a population. And far to many people fall into weird catageories through it. For example... I have lost significantly more weight than anyone else in the group. My weekly loss far outstrips everyone else in the group. But my percentage loss is dead on center. Probably because I have soooo much to loose. I'm trying to wrap my head around what additional information might be useful... and it is somewhat infuriating that I can't find a good way of posting the information here on Obesity Help. I've got this really lovely and useful spreadsheet... and no way of moving the spreadsheet data over to the forum without hand coding it. Oh well. Maybe I'll post it all as an off-site website, or put the file up someplace for download.

I think my post got lost in the shuffle because I'm also an over 300 starter... I started at 342.4 on surgery day and as of the day before Thanksgiving (my last weigh in until tomorrow) I was 288.2. I consider myself to be doing very well, but at the same time I know I have farther to go than many people who aren't even at the 300 mark yet... but then again, my goal weight is 180, not 130... I'm down from a 54.1 bmi to a 45.1 bmi... maybe you should use those in your calculations somehow? can't figure out where they'd help though... HUGS You're doing great with encouraging us, I appreciate it! Rachel

Thanks for the additional stats. Please let me know your weigh in tomorrow so I can update. Since that's a nearly two week old weigh in, you're suffering from not being updated in two weeks. But with that in mind, you're doing pretty awesome. Assuming you don't loose a pound tomorrow at weigh in, you're on the high side of average, but well within the standard deviation... making you average. You might blow the curve with your stats updated! The only stat that you are below average (but within the standard deviation) is percentage lost, which as we were talking about hits us 300+ people more than the rest. Basically at 100lbs, a one pound shift is a 1% change. At 200 it is .5% at 300 it is .33% For me at 400+ it is less than a .25% change. So that's why it pokes us in the eye more than those lightweights who started of so far ahead of us. And I'm still, with your addition, heavier today than everyone else weighed at their surgery! You skinny people stealing my 77lbs of glory! Surely someone can post stats that will put me below their starting weight! I need to feel good about "only" weighing 350lbs!

Skinny... what a lovely thought! I'll get the stats to you tomorrow after I weigh in, which will probably be on my lunch break. My former boyfriend had this surgery 2 years ago, he started at 400+ and is currently at 280 and holding... since about 18 months... it's a healthy weight for him and he still carries a lot of extra skin, but he's much healthier now. Grand total he's down 200 lbs... amazing to lose that much weight. I'm still having trouble believing that the 288 lb woman in the mirror is me! HUGS Rachel

michael, you seem to be mathmatically brilliant...myself, not so much. (duh) will you figure out for me the % I've lost??? (when you have time, & only if you want to or feel like it) I tried last nite, but seriously my eyes just kind of glazed over & I went into information overload start weight 224.5 current 188.8 surgery date 9/22 5'3" am I in the happy medium as far as loss???

I'm not a math wiz, I'm an excel wiz. I don't do this by hand! But I've added you to the mix, and got all that infomation for you now! Okay, you've lost 35.7lbs. That's in the second standard deviation below the average range, but you're also one of the "ligher" weights so that's to be expected. Your weekly lost is 3.3lbs, which is on the low side of average. And your 15.9% lost puts you well within the average range. I did a little research and found out that the "variance" of a population is an indication of how "accurate" the average and standard deviation is, and the varience of the population so far is nearly zero. So the most "accurate" indaction of "average" is the percentage... which leads me to believe you're fine!