Rodents get hooked up…again

Those rodents…they’re always reaping the benefits of new weight-loss drugs. Luckily for them, the drugs many times work effectively and they are left sans a few ounces and moving up the hierarchy of rodent hood, strutting their improved sleek, trim bodies.

Research at Indiana University, lead by Richard DiMarchi, looked into drug therapies to increase metabolism while suppressing the appetite. Outcome: it’s working in rodents. The critters lost 25% of their body weight and 42% of their fat mass….after just one week [1]. WHAT is this miracle drug…and when and where can I get some, right?

Most interestingly, the drug is comprised of two FDA-approved drugs: Byetta and Glucagon. Byetta is a drug therapy used in the treatment of diabetes [1]. A recent (separate) study on Byetta showed that when combined with diet and exercise, the drug produces weight loss. One-hundred and fifty-two obese men (BMI > 30 and an average weight of 241 lbs) were split into 2 groups. Roughly 25% of the study participants has pre-existing glucose tolerance, a risk factor for the development of type 2 diabetes. One of the groups received 10 micrograms of exenatide (Byetta) twice a day while the other group received a placebo. For a 24-week period, both groups were put on a diet and exercise program. After six months, those taking the exenatide (Byetta) lost 3x more weight (11 lbs) than those taking the placebo (3.5 lbs) [2].

Experts comment saying:

“This has potential…It’s long been known that combination therapies can work well – that is, multiple drugs at the same time to treat chronic illness, viruses, et cetera…With this paper, we see that a single drug is developed that acts in two different ways, which is a littler different. It’s like getting one drug to work in two distinct ways.” –Keith-Thomas Ayoob, associate professor in the department of pediatrics at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in Bronx, New York.

“Remember, even though these are mice, the treatment is affecting two receptor systems that exist in humans.” – Dr. Lou Aronne, weight-loss author and obesity expert.

I had a patient just last week asking about Hydroxycut made with Ephedra. He said, "Man, I used to eat whatever I wanted with that stuff and I looked gooooood!". My reply, "There's likely a reason it's no longer legal in the US my friend,."

While the evidence is in support of this new miracle drug (on mice, anyways), does the bottom line not yet remain: eat less, move more? As I tell all my patients, being thin and being healthy are NOT synonymous!! Make it a health(ier) one today and everyday.

[1]. Canning, A. and Childs, D. A New Weight Loss Quick Fix? ABC News Health. July 14, 2009.

[2]. Thomas, Jennifer. Diabetes Drug Byetta May Aid Weight Loss in Obese Patients. ABC News Health. June 12, 2009.

6 legs are better than 2

If you want to boost your activity level, lose weight, and have a great time doing it…a dog may be your answer.

Robert Kushner, professor of medicine at Northwestern University in Chicago, co-authored a study looking into the effects of dog ownership on activity level...and subsequently, weight loss. Two groups were observed: one group of obese adults with obese dogs and one group of obese adults without dogs. After a year, those with dogs had lost weight -- 4.7% of their body weight, or roughly 11 pounds. Similarly, the dogs shed (pun intended) 12 pounds, accounting for an average loss of 15% of their body weight [1].

Those dogs participating in the study were fed a calorie-controlled diet while their owners received dietary counseling and were encouraged to walk at least three times a week for 30 minutes [1]. An easy goal to reach with a 4-legger around, I’d say.

Most importantly, however, is the sustainability of activity that goes along with dog ownership. Dogs can be used for not only great companionship, but also motivation to stick with a diet and exercise plan long-term. Plus, it’s more enjoyable than going alone – all huge keys to permanent lifestyle behavior changes such as the incorporation of exercise.

On a side note: Bulldogs may not be your best bet when looking for a weight-loss companion. Our Lily (AKA “Wrinkle Butt”) made it to the end of the block last night with just enough energy reserves left to watch Molly, the black lab mix, run guns-a-blazin’ after her ball…incessantly….for the better part of a half-hour. And somehow the walk home was still taxing on our little bundle of laziness. Must be that Oklahoma heat, right? Guess I’ll need to utilize that YMCA membership as my companion needs as much help as I do to maintain an exercise regimen!

[1]. Need a Walking Partner? Try a Dog. Medline Plus. June 11, 2009.

Move to Colorado

Well, we've gone and out-done ourselves...again. The Center for Disease Control (CDC) has published results of the 2008 obesity rates in America. Please consult the picture and legend of the U.S. for a depressing sight. Congratulations (not!) to Oklahoma for being one of THE top 5 fattest states. Alabama, Mississippi, and West Virginia are the only states with worse-off citizens. Sigh. Colorado has the lowest incidences of obesity at 18.4%...we should all move there, apparently [1].

I had a gentlemen in my office yesterday afternoon after the doc requested a DASH diet instruction. After going over his 24-hour recall the gentlemen shyed away saying, "I know what I eat aint good, but I just can't help it." I joked saying, "I know I won't be able to take the country out of you, but I have to suggest taking some country out of the cooking." He laughed; rapport was strong. We decided that his goal regarding his country cooking would be to "eat like his lady friend," as he explained how she removes the layer of fried batter off her fried dinners. I left him with, "You know, gentlemen could always stand to learn something from us lady friends." With a wink. I think he'll be back, and I think doc'll like his labs. We'll see!

Ship-shape up, America. Country bumpkins can, so you can, too!

[1]. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Overweight and Obesity. US Obesity Trends 1985-2008. June 26, 2009.

Monkey see...monkey do?

While results are deemed premature, dieting monkeys may offer hope for living longer. In similarly conducted studies involving mice, favorable results were produced. When consuming 30% less calories than their uncontrolled counterparts, mice have been seen to have significant increases in longevity -- up to 40% longer, in fact [1]. Impressive.

Would the same be true in humans? Primates? One study researched into the latter. Using rhesus monkeys, 30% reduced-calorie diets were observed starting over 20 years ago. With an average life span of 27 years and a maximum life span noted at 40 years, the study has surely required patience from the team leaders, Ricki J. Colman and Richard Weindruch of the University of Wisconsin [1].

Despite the known life span of the primates, the results were reported this past Thursday in Science. The researchers describe the study results as "showing many beneficial signs of of caloric resistance, including significantly less diabetes, cancer, and heart and brain disease". Colman and Weindruch conclude the study's data proves caloric restriction slows the aging process in the primate species [1]. Is such the same true in humans?

Most know that humans are most similar in genetic make-up to that of the primate, so the study results appear quite promising as far as human longevity is concerned. Based on similar mice studies, an additional 10-20% in longevity was hypothesized. Critics declare the death rate in the experimental reduced-calorie primates was not significant compared to the death rate of the control group. Though there is a difference in the number of deaths, the statistic is not significant [1]. As can be guessed, the researchers explain the experimental monkeys deaths to be attributable to undergoing anesthesia during blood sampling, and others from gastric bloat related to endometriosis. With those deaths accounted for, the results would be deemed statistically significant [1].

All-in-all, the study raises interest of reduced-calorie diets and their benefits, as there are no obeserved harms. As always, eat less and move more for better health.

[1]. Wade, Nicholas. Dieting Monkeys Offer Hope for Living Longer. The New York Times. July 9, 2009.

Buttttttttttter up!

The name of this post sounds similar to "batter up" which reminds me...Cubs pummeled the Cards yesterday. Hoping for a similar outcome after today's game.

Anyways...butter. Butter is the topic of discussion this morning while I enjoy my morning ritual: cappuccino and blogging. And as husband sweats away playing Punch Out on Wii while Lily the bulldog sun bathes in 103 degree Oklahoma heat. Freaks..

As I opened my Journal of the American Dietetic Association this month, I found an eye-catching page devoted to the "Big FAT Truth": butter. Butter is certainly one of those confusing aisles we enter at our local grocery stores. The health claims, the rumored dangers of margarine vs. butter...and the list goes on. So, what is the deal with butter?

Simply put, soft spreads have 70% less saturated fat than butter, no cholesterol, and "no" trans fats per serving*. These spreads are made with healthy plant oils including soybean and canola which are loaded with our near-and-dear mono and polyunsaturated fatty acids providing desired heart-healthy protection [1].

And by now you should be thinking, "That's great and all...but which soft spread do I grab?". Those listed in the ADA Journal included: I Can't Believe It's Not Butter, Country Crock, Promise, and Brummel & Brown made with Natural Yogurt [1]. These would all be better choices the next time you're butter browsing...but possibly not the best.

Let's delve a little deeper. If you visit Smart Balance's website, the first thing you read is, "Partially hydrogenated means trans fat"...and, right they are. That phrase on the ingredient list tells us consumers that there was a hydrogenation process in production. And that process is what puts trans fats into foods such as butter spreads, as trans fats do not naturally occur in the foods. Trans fat is way worse than saturated fat, even. It raises our bad cholesterol, lowers our good cholesterol, contributes to diabetes, and is linked to heart disease [2].

If you're really interested in trans fats (which you should be), more information can be found here: The Truth About Trans Fats. A seemingly innocent 2% increase in trans fat consumption can increase risk of cardiovascular disease by 23%. That's only 40 calories or 4 extra grams of trans fat a day. Can't say I didn't warn you!

In summary: no butter is "good butter". It's a high-calorie condiment with fat and should be used sparingly. Taste your food before buttering it up, and purchase products wisely. Read labels and stay informed: 0.48 + 0.48 + 0.47 + 0.45 + 0.46 (or 5 servings of "trans fat free" products) exceeds the recommended daily amount of trans fat.

* Products containing up to 0.49 grams of trans fat are not required to be put on food labels. Ahhhh!

[1]. Journal of the American Dietetic Association. Big FAT Truth. Eat Right. July 2009 edition.
[2]. The Truth About Trans Fat. The Facts.

Smart fans are Cubs fans.

I'm a Chicagoan through-and-through: I'm a Cubs fan. If you've never witnessed Wrigley Field, what a shame. A few years ago, I spent a perfect early-April Saturday afternoon on a rooftop bordering the famous brick walls of Wrigley Field's outfield. Specifically, it was the "Ivy League" rooftop -- definitely worth checking out for those of you blessed enough to be living in the beloved Windy City. Or if you're me, you make special trips to the Chi for a game (and a weekend with your family). Anyways, on our rooftop we had unlimited food, beverage...and beer. T-r-o-u-b-l-e.

Picture (left-to-right): Kristen, myself, Michael, and Dave. Having a blast on the rooftop. "Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, whaddya say? The Cubs are gunna win today..."

So in this economic recession, MLB home stands such as those of the Minnesota Twins, Pittsburgh Pirates, Baltimore Orioles, and Texas Rangers have opted to boast "stuff-your-face-tickets" in specific sections of the ballpark. With the recent state of the economy, baseball sales are down and this all-you-can-eat incentive is being used to lure in baseball fans [1]. Or should I say food fans?

With the Twins suffering a 6% drop-off in ticket sales this season, they've allotted 600 seats in a few section distant from the diamond. This clientele has priorities other than baseball and their seating reflects that. While alcoholic beverages are not included in the ticket price, all-you-can-eat nachos, hot dogs, popcorn, pretzels, soda, and water are available to stuff-your-face ticket holders [1].

This story covered by USA Today quotes several note-worthy patrons [1]:

"We're just here to pig out."
"As long as there's food involved, that's all that matters" coming from the gentleman with the goal of eating 20 hot dogs.

"I've got some veggies here!" in reference to his jalapenos topping the nachos

Baseball: America's laziest sport supported by America's gluttonous patrons. Obviously.

Attendees feel they are "sticking it to the system" by purchasing this stuff-your-face-ticket for a mere $12 more than the general admission price, which are regularly priced at $22 a seat [1]. Of course my Cubbies would never stoop so low with such offers. Packing that sanctuary has never been an issue. And though ticket sales may be down a smidgen, the sales of Old Style are sure to stay up. For the record, I recommend the Old Style Light.

Today, we're opting to stay out of the 103 degree heat and instead watch the Cubs v. Cardinals - a classic rivalry between husband and I. Some 94% fat-free Orville Redenbacher popcorn will mostly likely be involved, but I'll leave the nachos, hot dogs, and jumbo pretzels to those "sticking it to the system". Or more like sticking it to themselves. Gross.

[1]. Campbell, Dave. All-you-can-eat Seats: Baseball Fans Pig Out. USA Today.

Are you lovin' it?

On July 14th, McDonalds will be opening a new "green" location in Cary, North Carolina [1]. No, they're not rolling out a new line of garden fresh salads, but rather a location offering electric car recharging. Yep, that's right...charge your car at America's most beloved fast food joint.

We go "green" with everything BUT our diets, doesn't it seem? While McDonalds does offer salads (and shamrock shakes...), you have to access both the salad and salad dressing nutrition facts online in order to calculate the true caloric value of your meal. Don't forget the croutons, those will cost you 90 calories on top of the salad and dressing calories. Con-fus-ing.

The Center for Disease Control conducts the largest consumer telephone survey in the US called the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), designed to track health risk behaviors nationwide. Not surprisingly, more than 75% of American's fail to meet the recommended 5+ servings of fruits and vegetables a day. Those over the age of 65 are noted as the highest consumers of fruits and vegetables at a whopping 31.6% consuming 5 or more a day. Overall, males consuming 5 or more F&V's a day was a mere 18.2% with the females coming in at 27.6%. Fruit and vegetable consumption was also highest in those with college degrees and those with the highest incomes (> $50,000) at 28.6% and 22.7% respectively [2].

Seriously, though...we want to sustain everything but ourselves. I'm all for electric cars, I think it's great! It's just a shame more American's don't sustain themselves by making small lifestyle changes to sustain their health.

At least we can thank McDonalds for (hopefully) making it safely to the nearest ER when our Big Macs and french fries finally take their toll, right?

[1]. Stone, Jerry James. McDonald's Debuts Plug-In Charging Station. Reuters. July 6, 2009.

[2]. BRFSS Data. Produce for Better Health Foundation. July 9, 2009.