A surgeon’s column makes the case for assessing weight alongside strength, clinical markers and daily function. Here is what the evidence supports.
On October 22, 2026, India Today updated a first-person column by Dr Mahendra Narwaria about why weight loss is not the same as improved health. Narwaria is a bariatric, gastrointestinal and robotic surgeon at AB Plus Hospital in Ahmedabad. His argument centers on a distinction that can get lost when progress is judged by a single number.
Scale weight combines fat, muscle and water. As Narwaria explains, it does not identify which component changed or show whether blood sugar and physical function improved. His column asks readers to consider those outcomes alongside weight rather than treating weight as a complete health assessment.
For adults trying to manage weight sustainably, that changes the question worth asking. Instead of looking only at how far the number has fallen, the broader question is whether the approach supports strength and meaningful improvements in health.
The mechanism here is not a newly identified metabolic pathway. It is the difference between measuring total body weight and understanding what that total represents. Narwaria’s explanation is that changes in fat, muscle or water can all affect the number on the scale.
That makes weight useful but incomplete. A lower reading does not label the tissue that was lost. It also does not report cholesterol or blood pressure, which Narwaria identifies as relevant parts of a broader assessment.
This distinction matters when evaluating exercise during dietary weight loss. If the only outcome being judged is total weight change, a benefit involving strength or body composition may receive little attention. Those are separate outcomes and deserve separate questions.
A secondary summary of a 2025 systematic review and meta-analysis reports that adding resistance exercise during dietary weight loss helped preserve fat-free mass and improve strength in adults with overweight or obesity. It also reports greater fat loss without a significant increase in total weight loss compared with diet alone.
The useful distinction is between losing more total weight and changing the composition of the weight lost. In that summary, resistance exercise supported some outcomes that the scale alone would not capture. Its value was not dependent on producing a larger drop in total weight.
For someone focused on staying strong during weight loss, that is a more relevant question than whether exercise makes the scale fall faster. It shifts attention toward the quality of the outcome rather than the size of a single change.
The India Today headline sets up a contrast between weight loss and health. Read too broadly, that could sound like a claim that weight never matters. Narwaria’s actual argument is narrower: weight alone cannot identify body-composition changes or replace clinical and functional assessment.
It is also important to identify what kind of media article this is. The column presents a surgeon’s clinical perspective and patient accounts. It is not an independently reported investigation or a controlled clinical trial, so the stories illustrate his argument rather than establish how commonly those outcomes occur.
The resistance-exercise evidence has a different boundary. The available material is a summary of the review rather than enough study-level detail to judge the size of the effects or applicability to an individual. Fat-free mass is also not interchangeable with muscle mass, so the finding does not establish that resistance exercise prevents all muscle loss.
The column’s exercise quantity needs similar care. Narwaria recommends at least 200 minutes of activity weekly, but that is his recommendation within the column. The article does not establish it as a universal target for everyone trying to lose weight.
His discussion of GLP-1 and GIP treatments provides context for patient questions. It does not report a new approval or medication trial result, and it does not quantify medication effects. Those details should not be supplied by inference.
Taken together, the sources support a measured conclusion: assess weight alongside health and function while considering resistance exercise as part of weight-management support. They do not establish a single plan that fits every person. This distinction between a finding and its interpretation is central to reading weight-management research critically.
Narwaria illustrates his argument through a patient he calls Ankita, whose details he says were changed. In his account, her blood sugar and blood-pressure medication needs improved. He also describes less acid reflux and an ability to climb temple stairs without stopping.
Yet she remained disappointed by a relatively small change on the scale. The contrast is the point of the story: the result she was watching did not capture every outcome the surgeon considered important. Her everyday function and clinical measures told a broader story.
Narwaria also describes Rohit, who appeared slim but had blood sugar in the diabetic range when tested. His inclusion makes a related point about appearance. Looking slim was not a substitute for the clinical information reported in that account.
The practical response is not to replace weight with another single measure. It is to be clear about which outcome is being assessed. Narwaria points to several categories that can inform that discussion:
These categories do not have to compete. A clinical conversation can acknowledge disappointment about weight while also recognizing an improvement in function. It can also identify health concerns that appearance alone has not revealed.
WeightRestart’s resource on organizing the markers that matter offers a broader framework for thinking about this kind of assessment. The purpose is a clearer view of progress, not a longer list of numbers to judge yourself against.
Narwaria recommends gradual calorie reduction and meals that are high in protein and fibre. He pairs those nutrition changes with resistance training and aerobic activity. He also emphasizes realistic goals and regular clinical follow-up.
Read together with the review summary, those recommendations support discussing strength preservation as an explicit goal rather than assuming it will follow automatically from weight loss. They also place resistance exercise alongside aerobic activity rather than presenting either as the entire plan.
For personal decisions, the useful next conversation is with a qualified clinician or exercise professional about how those elements fit individual needs. The sources support that discussion but do not supply an individualized exercise or nutrition prescription. There is no need to turn the column into a rigid routine to take its central point seriously.
The same approach applies to people using or considering weight-management medication. Narwaria recommends pairing treatment with lifestyle support and muscle-building activity, with plans adjusted through medical follow-up. Questions about nutrition and strength belong in that ongoing care rather than being treated as separate concerns.
The practical shift is modest but meaningful: define progress broadly enough to include the outcomes the plan is intended to support. Weight can remain visible without becoming the only result that counts. That is a more informative way to discuss progress than treating every weigh-in as a complete verdict.
What to watch next: Future controlled research should assess fat loss and fat-free mass alongside strength, clinical markers and everyday function. Longer follow-up would help establish whether these outcomes remain improved and which combinations of nutrition support and activity are sustainable. Studies should also clarify how support needs differ for people receiving different weight-management treatments. Before any particular package becomes standard practice, the evidence should show not just a change on the scale but a durable improvement in the outcomes that matter to patients.
WeightRestart shares research-led guidance on weight loss, metabolism, nutrition, strength, appetite, sleep and recovery. Our goal is to make complex health information clear, practical and useful for people building progress they can maintain.
Learn how to build a weight-management approach around better information, realistic expectations and habits you can keep using.
read the blog
