Research regarding the definition and consequences of dieting has generated controversy for years. This controversy has spilled over into the public domain, especially as eating disorders and obesity have become more prevalent. One of the earliest and longest-lasting controversies involves the restrained eating framework, which was originally developed by Herman and Polivy and also strongly influenced the development of the cognitive-behavioral model of bulimia nervosa. An alternative framework for understanding the role of dieting in nonclinical and clinical groups, called the Three-Factor Model of Dieting, took a sharply different approach to defining, and understanding the impact of, dieting. This paper provides a brief historical review of the development of these divergent perspectives and updates the Three Factor Model's critical distinction between restraining eating to prevent over-consumption and dieting to lose weight. We suggest that three historical trends impacted the development of Restraint Theory in ways that unfairly impugned dieting for weight control: the emergence of the new eating disorders of bulimia nervosa and binge eating disorder, a population-based increase in loss of control eating and a population-based increase in obesity. This update is aimed in part at encouraging new research to reconcile ongoing, unresolved issues between Herman and Polivy's restrained eating model and the Three-Factor model of Dieting model. Such research might also contribute to the public's understanding of the pros and cons of dieting and to new approaches to treating eating disorders and obesity.