By R.Davies, PhD・Nutrition
Updated May 15, 2026 | 7 min read
Unhealthy diets increase the risk of nutrient deficiencies and long-term diseases. This article looks at three common diets that consistently fail to support health and may cause you harm.
Every year, millions of people waste their time, money, and energy on diets that fail to deliver promised results and can sometimes damage their health. Poor diet choices can trigger nutrient deficiencies, disrupt your metabolism, increase disease risk, and cause mental health problems, long after you’ve stopped the diet.
Think about it like this: if you're navigating through a minefield, knowing where the dangers are is just as (maybe more) important as knowing a safe path through. The same principle applies to nutrition. By knowing what a harmful diet looks like (i.e., what not to do), you can protect yourself from setbacks.
Get 10 evidence-based lessons delivered to your inbox every 3 days, for 28 days. Completely Free. Evidence-based. No spam.
You’re Enrolled!
We're preparing your course now!
Your first email should arrive in your inbox in a few minutes.
You're all ready to get:
You may also be interested in our articles and guides. Scroll down to read more.
If you don’t see the email shortly, check your spam or promotions folder.
Crash diets, also known as rapid weight loss diets, quick-fix diets, or very low-calorie diets, represent an extreme approach to weight loss that severely restricts your calorie intake. Typically, crash dieters consume fewer than 800 calories a day.
These diets have cycled through popular culture for decades, constantly reappearing with new names, new branding, but only minor variations. You might have seen them before: juice cleanses, the cabbage soup diet, grapefruit diets, extreme meal replacement diets, or various “detox” diets promising rapid results.
Crash diets share a few telltale signs. They promise dramatic weight loss in short timeframes; think “lose 10 pounds in 7 days". They severely restrict your overall food intake or eliminate entire food groups. Many rely exclusively on single foods, liquids, or overpriced meal replacements.
The marketing language is another giveaway. Crash diets typically use marketing rhetoric claiming to “reset your metabolism”, “flush toxins from your body”, or trigger special fat-burning “metabolic states”. These claims sound like science (that’s the point!), but they lack any legitimate scientific evidence. It's just empty words.
The draw of crash diets is understandable. When you're frustrated with your body or have an upcoming event, a wedding, holiday, or reunion, the promise of immediate, visible results is, of course, tempting. The simplicity is also appealing to many people. Following rigid rules about exactly what to eat eliminates decision-making and can feel easier than managing full, flexible diets like the Mediterranean diet.
Crash diets also tend to deliver initial, rapid weight loss. This creates a sense of accomplishment, rewarding feelings and new motivation. For some people preparing for medical procedures or managing serious health conditions, rapid weight loss may be medically necessary, but it is usually done under medical supervision. This is where the benefits end, and the problems begin for most people.
Consuming so few calories while drastically limiting food variety creates the risk of nutrient deficiencies. Your body requires nutrients like protein, fat, fibre, vitamins and minerals for basic bodily functions. Without adequate nutrition, these systems will begin to wobble.
Most crash dieters tend to regain the weight they lost as quickly as they lost it, often exceeding their starting weight [1]. This is a known thing that's called “weight cycling” or “yo-yo dieting”, and it may actually worsen your health compared to maintaining a stable weight.
There are other side effects as well: fatigue, muscle wasting, weakness, dizziness, headaches, irritability, poor sleep, constipation, hair loss, menstrual cycle problems, gallstones, dehydration, and heart arrhythmia in severe cases.
Beyond the physical effects, crash dieting takes a toll on your mental health. Repeated failed attempts at dieting are associated with eating disorders, negative body image, and unhealthy psychological relationships with food.
Their restrictive nature, constant hunger, social isolation, and mental burden make these diets virtually impossible to sustain beyond a few weeks or months. Outside of professionally supervised medical emergencies, crash diets offer no long-term benefits and likely cause harm.
Extreme fad diets represent a broad category of the severely restrictive ‘crash diets’, which are largely unproven. Unlike evidence-based diets developed through scientific research, fad diets typically emerge from commercial interests, celebrity endorsements, or pseudoscientific theories.
They gain popularity through sensational marketing rather than actually working. Social media has dramatically amplified its reach, particularly among young adults and teens, who are especially vulnerable to persuasive before-and-after photos and ‘influencer’ testimonials.
Like crash diets, they often severely restrict caloric intake to under 800 calories a day. They eliminate entire food groups unnecessarily. Many fad diets are “mono-diets”, which means eating only one type of food, like grapefruit, cabbage, ice, or baby food.
Extreme fad diets typically impose rigid rules without flexibility and promise rapid, dramatic results. They frequently make claims about “detoxification” or miracle cures for various health conditions.
The appeal comes largely out of desperation. People who get frustrated with gradual, sustainable approaches seek quick solutions. The marketing exploits body image concerns, cultural obsession with rapid "glow-ups", and the human desire to find simple answers to difficult problems.
The initial rapid weight loss can provide gratification. Seeing dramatic changes on the scale within days creates motivation and a sense of accomplishment. However, much of this initial loss is water weight, not fat. Some people also like the rigid structure. Clear rules about “allowed” and “forbidden” foods remove uncertainty and eliminate the need for decisions.
Like crash diets, severe restrictions create nutritional deficiencies. The type of deficiency depends on which foods are eliminated. For example, ultra-low-carbohydrate diets reduce fibre and the micronutrients found in plants, legumes and whole-grains.
Ultra-low-fat diets will reduce the intake of fat-soluble vitamins and essential fatty acids that are crucial for your brain, hormones, and the health of your cells. Ultra-low-calorie diets risk widespread nutrient deficiencies and probably don't provide enough protein for maintaining muscle mass.
Like crash diets, most fad diets tend to be unsustainable. They are commonly abandoned within weeks. Then the weight returns. Often with additional pounds, leading to recurring “weight cycling” and “yo-yo dieting”.
The ultra-processed food (UPF) diet isn't a deliberate dietary choice; it's a modern eating pattern dominated by industrially manufactured food products. The UPF diet represents an unintentional shift resulting from food industrialisation, aggressive marketing (again), and the appeal of convenience at low cost. The scale of this problem is staggering. In some Western countries, UPFs now account for over 50% of total daily calories, and this percentage continues to rise.
UPFs are formally defined by the NOVA classification system, developed by nutrition researchers to categorise foods by the degree of processing they go through [2]. UPFs fall into the highest category: industrial products typically containing five or more ingredients, many of which you'd never use in home cooking.
These ingredients include hydrogenated oils, high-fructose corn syrup, modified starches, protein isolates, emulsifiers, artificial colourings, flavours, and preservatives. The extensive processing fundamentally alters food structure, concentrating calories, removing fibre, and creating products designed for overconsumption.
Common examples surround you in every supermarket shelf: sugar-sweetened beverages, packaged snack foods, instant noodles, mass-produced breads, breakfast cereals, reconstituted meat products, frozen ready meals, candy, cookies, ice cream, and most fast food menu items.
These products share distinguishing features. They're designed for convenience; ready to eat or heat. They're engineered to be irresistibly tasty by combining fat, sugar, and salt so that they trigger reward pathways in your brain.
They're heavily marketed, profitable, and are commonly positioned as “healthy” through misleading health claims like “low-fat”, “whole grain” or “natural”. We have written a full article on what UPFs are and how to spot them.
The shift toward UPF-dominated diets has occurred gradually over decades, coinciding with rising rates of obesity and cardiometabolic disease (among many others). The modern food environment in developed nations now defaults to UPFs. They dominate in schools, workplaces, hospitals, vending machines, convenience stores, and restaurants. This makes avoiding them challenging without deliberate efforts.
For many people, especially those with limited time, cooking skills, or access to fresh foods, UPFs represent the most accessible and affordable option. To be fair, UPFs do offer some practical advantages, though none are related to health. They provide unmatched convenience, require minimal preparation time, cooking skills, or equipment. This makes them attractive for busy families, people working multiple jobs, or those lacking cooking knowledge or facilities.
UPFs have extended shelf lives, reducing food waste and shopping frequency. Their widespread availability and relatively low cost per calorie make them appealing to people with limited incomes and those living in “food deserts” with restricted access to fresh, whole foods. These practical benefits explain why UPFs have become so popular. However, the health costs dramatically outweigh the benefits.
Research has revealed the harm associated with UPF diets. The nutritional quality of these diets is severely compromised. UPFs deliver high levels of added sugars, unhealthy fats, and sodium while providing low amounts of protein, dietary fibre, and essential micronutrients per calorie.
Increasing UPF intake correlates with declining overall diet quality, increased risk of multiple nutrient deficiencies, and cardiovascular disease. People consuming a UPF diet eat around 500 calories a day more (and go on to gain weight) compared to those who eat minimally processed foods [3].
UPFs drive the overconsumption of food. They are designed to make you eat more often and keep you eating for longer. The bad news doesn’t stop here. There are also concerns about other health impacts outside of obesity and cardiovascular health.
Studies have shown associations between UPF intake and increased risk of certain cancers (particularly cancers of the digestive system), depression and mental health disorders, metabolic diseases, type 2 diabetes, and cognitive impairment [4].
The UPF diet represents a cautionary tale of how modern dietary preferences can actively undermine health. Unlike the other diets in this article, the UPF diet isn't typically intentional; it's a default pattern caused by our food environment. No health benefits exist for the diet beyond practical convenience. So, for anyone wanting to lose weight and improve their diet, immediately reducing UPF intake should be one of the first things they look at.
Crash diets and very low-calorie diets (under 800 calories a day) consistently rank among the most harmful, muscle-wasting, nutrient-deficient, and health issues, with almost inevitable weight regain. Diets based heavily on ultra-processed foods also carry strong links to obesity, heart disease, and early death.
For most people, yes. Crash diets cause muscle loss, nutrient deficiencies, fatigue, and hormone problems. Most people regain the lost weight quickly — often exceeding their starting weight (yo-yo dieting). Long-term psychological issues include disordered eating patterns and a damaged relationship with food.
Severe calorie restriction triggers your body's starvation responses: metabolism slows, hunger hormones increase, and fat storage becomes more efficient. When normal eating resumes, these adaptations persist — making weight regain almost inevitable. Most crash dieters return to or exceed their original weight within one to five years.
Fad diets share common warning signs: promises of rapid weight loss, elimination of entire food groups without scientific justification, reliance on a single "magic" food or mechanism, pseudoscientific language like "detox" or "reset your metabolism", and a lack of long-term safety evidence. They are typically unsustainable and ineffective in the long run.
Evidence consistently favours sustainable, whole-food dietary patterns. The Mediterranean diet has the strongest evidence base, rich in vegetables, legumes, whole grains, and olive oil, with adequate protein and minimal ultra-processed foods. Focus on food quality and a modest, sustainable calorie reduction rather than severe restriction.
Understanding these three diets: crash diets, extreme fad diets, and UPF consumption can help you make better health decisions. Each type of diet causes harm in different ways: severe restriction, nutritional inadequacy, and poor physical and mental health.
The good news? Recognising these red flags should help you avoid wasting time and harming your health on things that simply don't work. Sustainable fat loss and improved health come from balanced, evidence-based diets that nourish your body rather than deprive it.
1. Marinilli Pinto A et al. Successful weight-loss maintenance in relation to method of weight loss. Obesity. 2008 Nov;16(11):2456-61. PMID: 18719680
2. Monteiro CA et al. The UN Decade of Nutrition, the NOVA food classification and the trouble with ultra-processing. Public Health Nutr. 2018 Jan;21(1):5-17. PMID: 28322183
3. Hall KD et al. Ultra-Processed Diets Cause Excess Calorie Intake and Weight Gain: An Inpatient Randomized Controlled Trial of Ad Libitum Food Intake. Cell Metab. 2019 Jul 2;30(1):67-77.e3. PMID: 31105044
4. Lane MM et al. Ultra-processed food exposure and adverse health outcomes: umbrella review of epidemiological meta-analyses. BMJ. 2024 Feb 28;384:e077310. PMID: 38418082
Published: November 14, 2025
Updated: May 15, 2026
Lead Author: R.Davies, PhD | Author Bio
Alphabet Guides provides independent, evidence-based information you can trust. Learn more about our Editorial Standards.
Disclaimer: The information on this website is for educational purposes only. It should not be used as a substitute for medical advice from a qualified healthcare professional.