Talk:Weight loss

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for Weight loss:

There are no active tasks for this page

Expand Intentional Weight loss Libertate 13:59, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

  • please!*

I would suggest a proofread of 'Therapeutic Weight Loss'. There is lots of unneeded or confusing punctuation that affect the clarity of the section.

  • Perhaps something on the physical mechanism of weight loss?

Do This, Before You Spend $26,000 on Weight-Loss Surgery→

Source suggestion[edit]

I've created a resource about weight loss guide. Can we add any information from it on this page or any related page, if it has something new. ( (talk) 01:55, 19 May 2013 (UTC))

Unfortunately, that page does not appear to meet Wikipedia's criteria for reliable sources. --bonadea contributions talk 15:22, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
I doubt anyone would find that list of inane platitudes helpful anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:37, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Citation provided[edit]

Intentional weight loss section says - This section needs additional citations for verification. (August 2011) Am providing a citation should someone wish to edit, e.g. can use for sentence

However, individuals whose obesity places them at an increased risk for diabetes, heart disease, or other conditions, may follow a stricter diet, but only under the close monitoring of a physician and/or specialist.

Nuzee (talk) 15:37, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, but no. We need reliable secondary medical sources as discussed at wp:MEDRS. LeadSongDog come howl! 17:17, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Please add a section of Physical Activity Weight Loss Techniques[edit]

I was hoping to find some information on ways to lose weight from doing different kinds of physical activities. I would add this information in myself, but I'm not an expert in this field. Hopefully someone else with more experience and knowledge in this field can add that section in.

Poorly Organized and Idiosyncratically Edited Article[edit]

First, re-title to "Intentional Human Weight Loss" and start another article on unexplained human weight loss. Divide fat loss from lean body loss. Define fat storage as a function of energy homeostasis and fat loss as a result of energy input and output modulation. Define input reduction as calorie restriction. Define macro-nutrient restriction, fasting and modified fasting as forms of calorie restriction. Define surgical gastric volume restriction and surgically induced malabsobtion as "surgically induced caloric restriction". Define orlistat, various sympathomimetic amines and dietary fiber as pharmacologically induced calorie restriction. Discuss output modulation via exercise, cellular metabolism and thermogenesis. Discuss the "thrifty gene" hypothesis. Discuss hunger and reduction of metabolism as a consequence of intentional weight loss. Discuss set point theory. Discuss weight loss economics Weight loss fraud. Success and failure rates. Science of calorie regulation including hormone-like peptides. Risks and benefits of weight loss.

I don't mean to barge in and seem rude, but this article has been left to wither for over a year. If nobody objects within a week, I shall begin slowly editing it. Pupplesan (talk) 00:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Please do! It needs significant improvement as is. Also, what is up with that weight loss pyramid? What diet is it from? It's totally random and unreferenced. Marcipangris (talk) 07:06, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

It sounds like everyone agrees we should split this page into 2 separate pages, see additional discussion below. Tcotco (talk) 03:09, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Weight Loss Strategies[edit]

Came here looking for accepted and referenced weight loss strategies (HIIT, weightlifting, aerobic stuff, % heart rate numbers) and found not a whole lot. Anyone with expertise please contribute. Decent sources: and Not editing due to inebriation. Hic! Pär Larsson (talk) 05:58, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Effects of Rapid Weight loss[edit]

I think this article would benefit from an outline of effects from rapid weight loss and links to the associated conditions. ie loose skin. I'd do it myself but I'm not well versed in the topic and would probably hurt the article rather than help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:03, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Recent spamming[edit]

Much of the recent spamming is sockpuppetry. spam report here. --Ronz (talk) 18:07, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 24 January 2012[edit]

< !-- Dear Sir, I am a Health, Safety and Environmental professional with high qualifications and 32 years of experiences in the field of Health, Safety and Environment and want to contribute my knowledge to the world through Wikipedia. I have reduced weight of may people successfully by using simple natural remedies. I have investigated root causes of obesity and eliminated all causes to reduce weight of many persons. Therefore, I request you to permit me to edit and add new articles links etc to benefit people. My goal is to give solutions which reduces weight, green house gases and save this earth planet too which is a planetary emergency right now and we need to address by proper choice of our diet. If you need more clarification please contact me on <redacted>-->

Dradadiya (talk) 09:30, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

This template is for requesting specific changes to the article, if you need to edit it yourself you need to be autoconfirmed or confirmed, and I recommend you read the following pages: WP:REF, WP:OR and WP:NEUTRAL --Jac16888 Talk 10:11, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 30 January 2012[edit]

I would like to add an external link to the above topic referencing an article I wrote on the best of the various methods of weight loss which have worked for me in the past, The main topic of planning your weight loss, Thank you

The link is : Proper Planning For Weight Loss Tmmahon1 02:53, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Not done - The link fails Wikipedia's guidelines and policies related to external links. See WP:ELNO and WP:NOT#REPOSITORY. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 03:09, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 17 March 2012[edit] "Weight Loss Factors"

Wan123 (talk) 15:28, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Not done: What a URL! Please read the section on link spam. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 17:49, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit Request to remove source linked to decrease in diabetes risk[edit]

I do not think that the source linked as Butler ME (September 2001). "Diabetes study shows value in diet, exercise". U.S. Medicine. Archived from the original on 23 April 2008. shows that therapeutic weight loss in individuals who are overweight or obese can decrease the likelihood of developing diabetes, as stated. A similar statement appears in the conclusion as a statement attributed to Dr. Kahn, but the text of that article links eating a healthy diet and getting exercise to a decrease in the risk of developing diabetes. It does not link therapeutic weight loss to a decrease in the risk of developing diabetes (and certainly not causally).

I think that either the statement needs to be attributed in the text to Dr. Kahn or else this source needs to be removed from that statement. (talk) 21:26, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

New source[edit]

See: Loveman E, Frampton GK, Shepherd J, et al. The Clinical Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Long-Term Weight Management Schemes for Adults: A Systematic Review. Health Technology Assessment, No. 15.2. Southampton (UK): NIHR Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre (UK); 2011 Jan.

This should be an excellent source for the article.LeadSongDog come howl! 18:44, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Link Probably Needs to be Removed[edit]

The link that points to the FDA's "Losing Weight Safely" guide happens to be broken. It leads to a search(dot)com page. Waybackmachine cannot pull it up because the page was protected by Robots.txt and I cannot find any alternative sources for this information except Google Books. I'm not sure if I'm autoconfirmed or not, but I'd still appreciate feedback before taking any liberties on this one. Wieldthespade (talk) 01:58, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 20 November 2012[edit]

Andrew125689 (talk) 23:35, 20 November 2012 (UTC) Healthy Weight Loss Foods

The most important thing about loosing weight is your eating habits. On average a person trying to loose weight should eat around six small meals a day. The meals don’t have to be huge. For example, breakfast, snack, lunch, evening snack, then dinner. The person should talk with their doctor to find a healthy calorie intake they need to be taking in. For, example a young male should eat around 2500 calories a day. Most foods that are healthy can be very delicious. A well balance diet includes all the food groups. A person needs proteins, vegetables, fruits, fats, starches, and dairy. An example of proteins would be chicken, fish, peanut butter, eggs, and almost any type of nuts. Important fact about proteins is to stay away from beef as much as possible. Some beef are all right, but eat mostly chicken, turkey and fish. All together stay away from pork. For example, bacon, sausage, and pork chops. An example of a vegetable could be celery, carrots, and broccoli. To add, if you are not a huge fan of vegetables or fruits “V8 Fusion” is a great substitute. An example of a fruit would be apples, grapes, and kiwis. An example of a starch would be bread, pasta, and potatoes. An example of a fat would be mayo, butter, and vegetable oil. Try to stay away from as much fats as possible especially saturated fats. Get light mayo and “I can’t believe its not butter”. An example of a dairy would be cheese or milk. With a well balanced diet, regular exercise three to four times a week, and drinking 8 glasses of 8 ounces of water a day will help you loose weight and meet a goal.

You haven't indicated what, specifically, you want to have edited. The material you did provide appears to be redundant to the existing text in the article (granted, worded differently), so I'm not seeing an appropriate place to add the requested material. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 23:40, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Unintentional weight loss: expansion & differentiation[edit]

Have added a section on characteristics, and re-named the "causes" section to indicate that it's about disease process-related weight loss. Characteristics is currently about adults, but babies and children will need to be specifically addressed. The characteristics section includes several issues that will need to be expanded into small sections (such as adverse effects of medication).Hildabast (talk) 22:55, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Agree regarding adding a section on "characteristics". With respect to the heading for "causes" we know it will contain info about "causes of unintentional weight loss" as that is the name of the article and the heading above. It already discussed that some medications can cause weight loss which is separate from a diseases in a way. Best to keep it shorter IMO. Switched it before realizing you had just changed it. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 23:42, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
No worries - I added a sub-category - don't want it looking in the interim as thought that's meant to be complete. Hildabast (talk) 01:34, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

From the section marked "Intentional"[edit]

"Weight loss occurs when an individual is in a state of negative thermodynamic flux: when the body is expending more energy (i.e. in work and metabolism) than it is consuming (i.e., from food or other nutritional supplements), it will use stored reserves from fat or muscle, gradually leading to weight loss."…I think this statement could be made more exact, or at least give more exact understanding, by inserting the words "and excreting" between the words "expending" and "more energy". I suppose one could argue that excretion of calories is covered by the "metabolism" in the parentheses. but it should have more emphasis than that. (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:57, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

I agree, and I have changed the word "consuming" to "absorbing" to reflect the fact that a portion of consumed calories are excreted. This explains why feces are flammable (Feces contain a lot of calorific content which is nutritious to insects, microorganisms, etc.)

There is also a kind of fallacy implied by this statement, that weight loss by definition cannot be more complicated than "Eat less, move more!". What you eat and when you eat it affects both how much exercise you end up doing, as well as the total amount of calories you end up eating. Also, the amount of exercise you do affects how much you eat. If exercising makes you hungry and causes you to eat more calories than you burned, then "moving more" will result in weight gain, not weight loss. Gcsnelgar (talk) 13:13, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Unintentional vs Intentional[edit]

Adding to various observations above...

From a readers perspective (broadly per WP:AUDIENCE) these really are two separate topics, which I think would be better covered on separate pages. The present page carries an infobox with an ICD9 code that refers to "Abnormal loss of weight". While I presume that code may also refer to inappropriate forms of intentional weight loss, it can scarcely be applied to well-balanced slimming. Imo, possible page names might be "Unintentional weight loss" vs. "Slimming". (The latter is currently a redirect to the entire weight loss page, including the unintentional part.) (talk) 14:52, 20 May 2014 (UTC) It sounds like everyone agrees we should split this page into 2 separate pages, see "poorly edited" above. Tcotco (talk) 03:09, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Tcotco You can't use comments from nine years ago to say that "everyone agrees" with your brand new proposal. If you have such a proposal, you should also make it at the bottom of the talk page, and invite discussion from other editors, or better still, make a request at WP:SPLIT, before making any large changes such as duplicating articles as you have done. Melcous (talk) 05:00, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Okay, fair enough. I've created a section 'Split' at the bottom of this talk page.

Semi-protected edit request on 14 September 2014[edit]

Please change: "Cancers to suspect in patients with unexplained weight loss include gastrointestinal, prostate, 'hepatobillary'..." to "hepatobiliary" to correct misspelling. Genomicsguy (talk) 19:20, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done and thanks for the eye Cannolis (talk) 20:10, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 September 2014[edit]

Mikewilliam44 (talk) 09:10, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to any article. - Arjayay (talk) 09:35, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

This request might be *Not Done* but this individual just got an affiliate link into Wikipedia, even if it's a no-follow. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:56, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

"Dieting doesn't work"[edit]

Words to that effect do indeed appear in the cited study. However, examination of the study shows that it only concerns itself with short-term interventions, not permanent changes in diet. In fact, it explicitly states that it's examining outcomes "after the diet ends". It's therefore misleading to apply it to the wider meaning of "dieting", which we correctly define as "the practice of eating food in a regulated and supervised fashion to decrease, maintain, or increase body weight", without any limitation on time period. – Smyth\talk 14:13, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

I though it was a fair paraphrasing of "In sum, there is little support for the notion that diets lead to lasting weight loss or health benefits." Are you saying the paraphrasing is poor or that the abstract is incorrect? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:35, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm saying that what they mean by "diets" only covers a small portion of the common meaning of the word, and we should be clear about that. In fact, they address this point themselves in the footnote on page 221: "The term dieting has been used to refer to a wide range of behaviors, but we use it solely to refer to the specific behavior of severely restricting one’s calorie intake in order to lose weight." They make no claims about the effectiveness of diets whose aim is to maintain a weight loss. That was outside the scope of their study. – Smyth\talk 15:23, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Weight loss. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:19, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Fat burners[edit]

Following this WT:MED thread, Fat burner/s redirects here to #Techniques, where dietary supplements are mentioned. Fat burners seem to be an industry-driven bunch of supplements with little evidence of efficacy in humans [1]full text accessible via Google Scholar, and in some cases at least, potential for major harm [2]. Given the presence of the redirect, could someone here perhaps insert some specific (appropriately-weighted) mention of this stuff...? (talk) 09:20, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Edit requested 23 Nov 2016 section marked "Intentional"[edit]

I have published a research paper on the use of supplements to produce weight loss, without any change in behavior or diet. I hope the following sentences can be added to Intentional, techniques, dietary supplements:

"Dietary supplements, though widely used, were not considered a healthy option for weight loss.[32] Many are available, but very few are effective in the long term.[33]

In 2008, "PILOT STUDY FOR AN AGE AND GENDER-BASED NUTRIENT SIGNALLING SYSTEM FOR WEIGHT CONTROL" demonstrated that nutraceuticals could promote weight loss (1). In 2006, three studies indicated how nutrients may signal metabolic controls related to body weight. The first study was done with leucine. Branched chain amino acids (BCAA) stimulate the nutrient signaling pathway known as the mammalian Target of Rapamycin (mTOR) pathway (2). Cota et al. (3) described the complex effects of mTOR signaling and then demonstrated in rats that leucine produces two signals in the brain in specific regions of the hypothalamus and the arcuate nucleus. They also demonstrated that those two signals decreased food intake and increased metabolic rate to decrease body weight. The second study was done with oleic acid. A signaling system proposed by Hsu and Huang (4) could regulate metabolism in adipose tissue in rats. In response to oleic acid, they proposed two signals that would occur in fat cells. Fatty acid catabolic genes would be upregulated while lipid storage genes would be downregulated. The third signaling system was found by Kim et al. (5) using docosahexaenoic acid (DHA). This fatty acid commonly associated with fish oil was shown to produce two important signals, one inhibiting adipocyte differentiation and another causing apoptosis in preadipocytes.

In the pilot study, people took a combination of BCAAs which contains leucine, fish oil which contains DHA, and olive oil which contains oleic acid. Over two weeks, all young men lost weight, many young women and older men lost some weight, but it was concluded that mature women did not lose weight as the signalling was only for 2 weeks and the supplements used were not concentrated enough. Now that better supplements are available, a new nutraceutical weight loss study is being organized. Those interested in participating to help end the obesity epidemic should email, SUBJ: Weight loss, to obtain more information about the study."

References: 1. Ordman AB (2008) "Pilot Study for an age and gender-based nutrient signaling system for weight control", AGE 30(2): 201-8 URL:

2. Sabatini DM, Erdjument-Bromage H, Lui M, Tempst P, Snyder SH (1994) “RAFT1: a mammalian protein that binds to FKBP12 in a rapamycin-dependent fashion and is homologous to yeast TORs”. Cell 78:35

3. Cota D, Proulx K, Blake Smith KA, Kozma SC, Thomas G, Woods SC, Seeley RJ (2006) “Hypothalamic mTOR signaling regulates food intake”. Science 312:927–930

4. Hsu S, Huang C (2006) “Reduced fat mass in rats fed a high oleic acid–rich safflower oil diet is associated with changes in expression of hepatic PPAR and adipose SREBP-1c–regulated genes”. J Nutr 136:1779–1785

5. Kim H, Della-Fera M, Lin J, Baile CA (2006) “Docosahexaenoic acid inhibits adipocyte differentiation and induces apoptosis in 3T3-L1 preadipocytes”. J Nutr 136:2965–2969

Rocordman (talk) 16:45, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

@Rocordman: Please place new sections at the bottom of the talk page. Regarding your request, there are two important pieces of information needed before your request can be considered. First, we need to know specifically where it is published (if it's a journal article, volume and page numbers). See WP:MEDRS for acceptable sources. Secondly, is this a review article? Thanks. Sundayclose (talk) 17:03, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. The suggested edit is my summary of published research. For instance, where the edit suggests Target of Rapamycin (mTOR) pathway (2)., at the bottom in References I cite the published articel 2. Sabatinin DM. Each of the five references are peer-reviewed scientific publications of original research. To answer your second question, my suggested edit is just additional new information to update the subsection to be added to Intentional, techniques, dietary supplements of the weight loss article. I hope someone with your editing ability can format it properly to add it to this page. User: Roc Ordman 23 Nov 2016 Rocordman (talk) 14:52, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

sorry but the initial response you received was incorrect. All that matters are the sources cited here and the content based on them. The content is WP:Biomedical information and so the sources need to comply with WP:MEDRS and these sources do not. So there is nothing we can use here.Jytdog (talk) 22:00, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Wow! Thanks so much for educating me about wiki sources. As a professor, I always think of primary sources as the bible for information. But your link points out, perhaps wisely, that review articles are more secure sources. I shall try to revise my text when that becomes possible. I hope there is a way we can just delete everything so I do not fill up the cloud. Thanks, Roc Rocordman (talk) 22:51, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

User:Rocordman thanks for the understanding. This is a bit of a shift for many within academia. Cheers Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:59, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 November 2017[edit]

Another aspect of weight loss without diet control is liposuction Sud761 (talk) 19:03, 23 November 2017 (UTC) Spam link removed from this comment. Deli nk (talk) 19:18, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Deli nk (talk) 19:18, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Edit Request on April 15th, 2018[edit]

I wish to add a whole new section to the article revolving around the "Myths" of weight loss, such as the inefficiency of diets provided by weight loss magazines and how much metabolism really impacts weight loss (which surprisingly isn't much at all). This can help those who are starting their journey yet are following some false information which may end up hindering their progress in the end. Canless (talk) 16:16, 15 April 2018 (UTC)Canless

Interesting idea, but be wary of writing a "self-help" article. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a medical reference.IAmNitpicking (talk) 14:33, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 May 2018[edit]

The only true way to change body composition is to make lifestyle adjustments in diet and activity level (exercise) as a combined effort.[1] Bluedropinc (talk) 04:13, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —KuyaBriBriTalk 13:51, 16 May 2018 (UTC)


Semi-protected edit request on 27 April 2019[edit]


Arshadali3791 (talk) 23:14, 27 April 2019 (UTC)


  1. ^ 3 Healthy Vegetable Soup Recipes For Weight Loss
 Not done: Wikipedia is not a cookbook. NiciVampireHeart 23:19, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Splitting proposal[edit]

I propose that we split this article into 2 pages: 'Intentional' vs 'Unintentional' i.e. Weight loss (intentional) and Weight loss (unintentional). There is not much commonality between these 2 sections and I think any reader will be interested in only one or the other, not both at the same time. Probably 95% of readers are interested in _intentional_ weight loss. This split has been proposed already twice before with a couple of upvotes, albeit from 9 years ago. This would allow us to lift all the headings up one level.

What do others think? Tcotco (talk) 11:18, 28 July 2019 (UTC) @Nuzee, Kuyabribri, Rocordman, Smyth, and Gcsnelgar:

  • Not convinced. In fact I'm not convinced that "unintentional weight loss" is even a topic. Most of the stuff in this article is about causes of weight loss, and the sources are bent to fit. I think this article need a severe haircut, then it might be easier to see what's what. Alexbrn (talk) 06:42, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
    • I'm sympathetic to the view that "unintentional weight loss" is "not even a topic", but there's been a lot of work put into that section. I think to avoid an outcry, we should split and then subsequently tackle the question of whether to delete the "unintentional ..." article or not. I would also vote that the unqualified "Weight loss" should refer just to intentional weight loss, with a prominent reference to the disambiguation page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tcotco (talkcontribs) 06:48, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Is there enough material to split this page into intentional vs unintentional weight loss? I'd say no, just from my general knowledge. Also, I've never heard that intentional weight loss is called "slimming." I'm from the East Coast in the US. Intentional weight loss is called "losing weight." Can we remove this line, provide a source, or clarify where it's from? YRG (talk) 11:39, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
    • The issue is not the amount of material but whether any reader would be interested in both sides at the same time. Tcotco (talk) 06:49, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I think this is feasible. The resulting "unintentional" article should also mention sarcopenia. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:16, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
  • I agree with Alexbrn that the article could do with work. We have dieting which covers most intentional weight loss. The "slimming" concept is mostly concerned with losing fat for appearance/health and also includes simply making oneself appear thinner. Weight changes can also concern muscle, which may be lost or gained when dieting depending on one's approach and exercise. Not everything in life is fully intentional and unintentional. -- Colin°Talk 13:25, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Support split One of these concepts is for a benefit and the other is a harm. Any reader is unlikely to want the very different information on these topics. The process, end result, and sources to cite are different. Split into two articles. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:11, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Splitting sounds reasonable. It's the first question when a person presents with weight loss (Is it intentional or unintentional?). Whispyhistory (talk) 14:14, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
  • I agree with the splitting suggestion. As an aside, I am unconvinced that eating disorders (anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa) count as "unintentional weight loss". Axl ¤ [Talk] 12:14, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
  • I agree with the spirit of the proposal. These two concepts are very distinct. However, I don't think there has been any discussion on the wisdom of the proposed names Weight loss (intentional) and Weight loss (unintentional). I find it quite awkward to have both. Perhaps only the unintentional one is needed. I think that the weight loss that we think of in terms of diet, exercise, and lifestyle modifications should be kept here with this name. At his point, we do have articles on cachexia and wasting. I would want some educated opinion (I would need to do some research) to determine if there's enough of a difference between unintentional weight loss and cachexia and wasting to determine if we actually need a new article on that topic. Maybe we can merge some content, delete some if it is redundant, etc., depending upon what is determined. Biosthmors (talk) 15:56, 9 February 2020 (UTC)