Slow day...post day...

You know work is slow when it's a double-post kinda day... : )

 Mari asked me a wonderful question about PCOS and what type of diet is best for women suffering from PCOS. Great question, Mari...I hope this is helpful!

Women with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) are at increased risk for heart disease and diabetes. Many women with PCOS have insulin resistance, causing the pancreas to secrete more and more insulin in order to transport glucose (sugar) out of the blood and into muscle, fat, and liver cells where it is converted to energy or stored as fat. Elevated insulin levels can cause polycystic ovaries, weight gain or difficult losing weight, increased risk of heart disease (elevated LDL-cholesterol and triglyceride levels and decreased HDL-cholesterol levels), and increased clotting factors. The risk of the developing diabetes in women with PCOS can be up to 40% by the age of 40. Most women (50-60%) with PCOS are obese (BMI greater than 30). Weight loss, even as little as 5% can lead to decreased insulin levels which is critical due to the fact that elevated insulin levels promote fat storage [1].

In researching how much carbohydrate a woman with PCOS should consume, I found varying recommendations. Before prescribing a standard 50-55% carbohydrate diet or a low (40% or less) carbohydrate diet, I would want to know a PCOS patient’s fasting blood sugar and HbA1c – a lab value indicating an average blood glucose reading representing 6-8 weeks. Agreeably, women with a higher BMI are statistically more likely to have insulin resistance, in which case a lower (less than 50-55%) carbohydrate diet is probably advisable.

I am of the opinion that to prevent diabetes, one should eat like a diabetic. For most women of normal to overweight size, this would include 30-45 grams of carbohydrates at meal times and 15-30 grams of carbohydrate + 1-2 ounces of protein before bedtime. Emphasis should be placed on complex, low-glycemic index carbohydrates, as well as a diet low in saturated (13 grams or less per day) and trans fat (none, preferably). For women with a BMI greater than 30, carbohydrate and energy needs go up – consult a Registered Dietitian for recommendations.

For example, a 180-pound (81.8 kilograms) female requires roughly 1230-1640 calories a day to lose weight (15-20 calories per kilogram of body weight. In order to find your weight in kilograms, divide your weight in pounds by 2.2). At minimum (30 grams of carbohydrate per meal with a 15-gram carbohydrate evening snack), carbohydrate comprises 26-34% of the daily intake. At maximum (45 grams of carbohydrate per meal with a 30-gram carbohydrate evening snack), carbohydrate comprises 40-54% of the daily energy intake. 

(Note: one gram of carbohydrate contains 4 calories – this is needed for calculations).

Other diet-related suggestions for women suffering from PCOS [1]:

-         Pair carbohydrate-rich foods and snacks with a lean protein or fat high in mono and/or polyunsaturated fatty acids.

-         Consume foods with a lower glycemic index – these foods are typically high in fiber

-         Space carbohydrates out throughout the day. Consuming consistent, moderate carbohydrate levels is best for blood sugar control

-         Consume plenty of decaffeinated, sugar-free beverages, especially water

-         Exercise on a regular basis -- aerobic and anerobic

-         Take a multi-vitamin mineral supplement daily

[1]. McKittrick, Martha. PCOS and Diet. OBGYN.net Publications.

The above information was provided by the above source. The author, Martha McKittrick is a Registered Dietitian and Certified Diabetes Educator. In other words, she is a wonderful resource!

Cookie Taste-Test Results!

The preferred cookie in yesterday's cookie taste testing was the Oatmeal Cranberry White Chocolate Chip Cookies. Hands down. There were only 2 votes NOT for the Oatmeal Cranberry White Chocolate Chip Cookies and they were for the Chocolate Peanut Butter Cookies and the Peppermint Cheesecake Brownies.

P.S. I had 2 late-comers who wanted in so the total participation was 18 employees!

Last night I made deer meat tacos for dinner!

My father-in-law is a bow hunter and provides us with deer meat. Yum!

I had 1 deer meat taco, a dollop of fat-free refried beans, and a bed of shredded lettuce with deer meat, salsa, corn, and homemade guacamole. Mmmm!

 Nutritional comparison of deer/venison vs. ground beef

(values represent a 1 ounce, raw portion)

- deer meat is 40 calories versus the 72 in ground beef*

- deer meat contains 0.8 grams of fat compared to 5.7 grams in ground beef*

- deer meat contains 7.6 grams of protein compared to 4.9 grams in ground beef

*this is standard 70-80% lean (does not specify)

Question: Have you tried deer meat? Did you like it? Did it taste "game-y" to you?

80 degree Saturday mornings are not meant to be spent in Urgent Care!

My husband got me sick...finally. He's had bacterial bronchitis for the past 2 weeks and it's finally caught up with me. We live about 2 miles from an Urgent Care Clinic, so I headed over to get checked out this morning. Ends up, I'm a mess.

Apparently, I have a polyp in my NOSE which could explain my excessive snoring here lately (does anyone else snore?? Badly...?). I also have the standard cold with chest congestion pretty deep into my chest. For the first time, I got a cortisone shot and some beloved Z-Pack. Hopefully I'll be back to good here soon!

I thought I would take this opportunity to discuss cortisone shots as my initial thought was, "Ahh! Weight gain!" Cortisone is naturally produced by the body, so noted or adverse side effects are rare. The most common systemic side effects included elevated blood sugars (caution with diabetes), facial flushing, injection site soreness, and/or some generalized pain after injection. Doc said maybe some increased appetite, too.

Has anyone else received a cortisone shot for cold-like symptoms? 

It was my first shot I've ever received in my tushie!! 

My friend Andrea sent me this AWESOME article on loving your body and I wanted to share it with you all. Here it is:

How to end 'fat talk' and why you should love your body

So we all like working out to lose weight, maintain weight, look good and keep our tummies tight, but how many of us do it simply because it makes us feel good?

Sure it may be a happy side-effect… ya know, the endorphins and all that science that proves that exercise makes us feel better, but for most of us, it isn’t THE reason that we work out.

The more I started thinking about this, the more I realized…it SHOULD be! Why shouldn’t the main reason we work out be that it makes us feel better about ourselves? Let the fitness level and lowered body fat be the happy side-effect!

Once we start switching our focus to the positive energy that exercise brings, our increased fitness level and tighter body will come with it.

According to Heather Hausenblas, a University of Florida exercise psychologist, “people who don’t achieve workout milestones such as losing fat, gaining strength or boosting cardiovascular fitness feel just as good about their bodies as their more athletic counterparts.” Hausenblas study is published in the September issue of the Journal of Health Psychology.

“You would think that if you become more fit that you would experience greater improvements in terms of body image, but that’s not what we found,” she said. “It may be that the requirements to receive the psychological benefits of exercise, including those relating to body image, differ substantially from the physical benefits.”

The study analyzed all previous (from June 2008) studies on the wide-ranging effects of exercise on body image. From the 57 publications, the researchers found conclusively that exercise improved the way people see their bodies, regardless of the actual benefits.

“While the frequency of exercise mattered for boosting body perceptions, there were no differences for the duration, intensity, length or type of exercise, the study found.”

I find this study so interesting because it really does drive home the fact that exercise, if we allow it, will make us happy! So why is it that so many people make it such a negative thing? It’s their focus.

Too much focus on exercising to lose weight or “having to lose this last 5 pounds,” or “not wanting to be fat anymore,” or “being able to fit into skinny jeans.” Stop making it all about your looks! STOP the fat talk.

I invite you all to think about why you love your body and what makes it beautiful. Why are you thankful for your body? START letting the reason you exercise be that you want to feel good about yourself. Not only will those endorphins start working for you, but before you know it you’ll have the body that better represents your mind-set: healthy, strong and beautiful.

Half-time is over. GO ILLINI! Resting up this afternoon...sad not to be out for a run, enjoying this GORGEOUS day! Have a wonderful Saturday!!

Weight...or height?

Is trying to control our country's height just as plausible as trying to control our country's weight? Maybe so.

Economists estimate that excess weight accounts for 9% of the U.S.'s medical spending. And while there's no similar figure for height, it is clear that both obesity and short stature cause similar economic strain [1].

Whatever the reason as to why, higher weight and lower height are associated with chronic disease, low wages, and poor educational attainment. In the US, the shorter you are the higher risk you're at for developing coronary heart disease, diabetes, and stroke. Women weighing more than 212 pounds at 5'4" tall are paid up to 9% less for their work, for example. According to survey data collected from over 450,000 adults suggests that male college graduates are, on average, more than an inch taller than men who never finished high school [1].

Is the reshaping of America both a war against fatness and shortness? How can one increase stature?

Height is not only genetic, but nurture and nature-related. Exposure to malnutrition, infectious disease, chronic stress, and poverty can abbreviate children's proper growth and height. Promoting foods which are low in calories and high in micronutrients, such as fruits and vegetables, is one feasible option. Increasing and improving education as a means of decreasing poverty and environmental stress is another. And of course, access to quality health care providers to improve prenatal and postnatal care is imperative [1].

This information is simply food for thought...and a topic that peeked my interest. Or maybe we should just throw everyone on growth hormone and run a blow-out sale on bariatric surgery!!

Kidding.

Yesterday checked out like so...

Breakfast:
1 cup steel cut oats, prepared (2 carbs)
1 Tbsp pumpkin butter (1 carb)
1/2 tsp turbinado (0 carbs)
     Total: 3 carbs

Lunch:
1 slice Buffalo Chicken Lasagna (2 1/2 carbs)
1 2% string cheese (0 carbs)
apple (1 carb)

     Total: 3 1/2 carbs

Snack:
6 ounces fat-free yogurt (1 1/2 carbs)

Dinner:
1 serving Chicken Tamale Casserole (2 1/2 carbs)

     Total: 2 1/2 carbs (low)

Snack:
4 peanut butter crackers (1 carb)

10 more days of being a diabetic...I can DO IT!!!!! Though, I am yet to look up the carbohydrate content of the INCREDIBLE pumpkin spice cappuccino I mixed with Dark Roast coffee this morning. It was worth the splurge though, I swear!!

Gina, CandidRD, is having a great give away on her site. Go here for more information!

[1]. Engber, Daniel. The Fat and Short of It. The New York Times. October 15, 2009.

Diabetes, Cheerios, and Late Night Eating...

...you betcha, it's a smorgasbord today!

First up: a break-down of diabetes prevalence across the United States. Sorry the below map doesn't enlarge any bigger, but you can go here to see the enlarged version. Of course I found this interesting as I work with a largely diabetic population.

Among those 30 and older in the US, 13.7% of men and 11.9% of women have diabetes. A third of this estimated number are going undiagnosed. Colorado, Minnesota, and Vermont have the lowest rates of diabetes while the southeastern states have the highest rates -- Mississippi having the highest rates of all. Lead author and epidemiology research fellow, Goodarz Danaei at Harvard stated, "The Southern States have a very dangerous aggregation of risk factors for heard disease: obesity, high blood pressure, and diabetes [1]."

With more than 70,000 diabetes-related deaths each year, diabetes is the sixth leading cause of death [1]. You can clearly see that Oklahoma and Texas have much work to be done in diabetes prevention, especially among the men, compared to neighboring Arkansas, Missouri, Kansas, and New Mexico.

In other news, a federal court panel has ruled that five pending lawsuits against General Mills for claims touting the cholesterol-lowering benefit of Cheerios will be consolidated into one multi-district case. The FDA administered a warning to General Mills regarding their claims of Cheerios "lowering your cholesterol 4% in 6 weeks" and "clinically proven to lower cholesterol." A specific rate of risk reduction is not allowed, according to the FDA. Plantiffs states that General Mills made false claims which led them to eat the cereal as a way to lower cholesterol [2].

The FDA stated in May that eating Cheerios was "not generally recognized as safe and effective for use in preventing or treating hypercholesterolemia or coronary heart disease [2]. Shame, shame, Cheerios and General Mills!

Last up: light night eating produces weight gain. I found WebMD's take on evening eating and weight gain, which was in consensus with a post I made back in September. Similarly, recent research performed at Northwestern University found that eating at night led to twice as much weight gain, even when total calorie consumption was the same among mice. The science, however, is still unknown [3]s.

Kathleen Zelman, MPH, RD, and director of nutrition for WebMD recommends consuming regular meals, as well as consuming 90% of your daily caloric needs before 8 pm. Eating every three to four hours helps regular blood sugar and control hunger and cravings [3]. I concur, for what it's worth. :O ) 

And yesterday's diabetic diet...

Breakfast:

1/2 cup old-fashioned oats (2 carbs)

1 cup skim milk (1 carb)

1 tsp turbinado (1/2 carb)

1 tsp Splenda brown sugar (1/2 carb)

1/2 ounce pecans, chopped (0 carbs)

cappuccino with 2 Tbsp sugar-free International Delight

     Total: 4 carbs

1 cup whole wheat pasta (3 carbs)

4 ounce chicken breast (0 carbs)

3/4 cup marinara (1 carb)

1 ounce Parmesean cheese (0 carbs)

     Total: 4 carbs

Snack:

12 baby carrots (0 carbs)

small apple (1 carb)

     Total: 1 carb

Dinner:

1 cup mashed potatoes (2 carbs)

3 fingerlings of Biggest Loser "Fried Chicken" (2 carbs)

     Total: 4 carbs

Snack:

3 graham crackers (1 carb)

1 1/2 Tbsp peanut butter (0 carbs)

     Total: 1 carb

[1]. Bakalar, Nicholas. Diabetes: A State-by-States Breakdown. The New York Times. October 13, 2009.

[2]. Scott-Thomas, Caroline. Lawsuits Against Cheerios Cholesterol Claims Combined. Food Navigator. October 13, 2009.

[3]. Zelman, Kathleen M.  Is Late Night Eating More Likely to Pack on the Pounds? WebMD.

Blog topic request: sleep and diet

Our friend Lena requested a blog topic: sleep and eating. She asked, "How does sleeping tie into what/how you eat? Is there really much of a connection?" Lena, I'm so glad you asked!

Yes! There most definitely is a connection between sleeping and what and how one eats. There has been a lot of recent research focused on sleep and diet/weight/nutrition with the ever expanding obesity epidemic.

What's the deal? There's lots of theories and ideas, let's discuss.

Scientifically speaking, hormones such as leptin, ghrelin, and cortisol can become out of whack with insufficient sleep. Leptin is the hormone playing a central role in fat metabolism; ghrelin is a hormone counterpart to leptin, which stimulates hunger -- increasing before meals and decreasing after meals; cortisol is a hormone commonly referred to as the "stress hormone", which helps the body use sugar (glucose) and fat for energy (metabolism). A lack of sleep triggers a wave of reactions in the body that begins with the hormones mentioned above. This results in the body waking up exhausted and craving fat and carbohydrates, says Dr. Joseph Koninck, director of the University of Ottawa's Sleep Research Laboratory. There is no doubt that the hormones which control appetite are effected by insufficient sleep [1]. So, sleep more!

Basic math would also lead any logical person to the conclusion of less hours awake leads to less hours of eating, and thus, less calories consumed. Makes sense, doesn't it?

Those staying up late to watch TV, catch up on emails, or surf the Internet are more often than not consuming high-calorie foods. When you eat late at night, Dr. Koninck suggests one's sleep is more fragmented due to the body's digestion process. Lack of deep sleep can also cause a drop in the "satiety hormone", leptin. This can cause excessive hunger the following day, even after eating. All the while, ghrelin, the "hunger hormone", is rising...setting one up to overeat [1].

Stanford University connected a lack of sleep to the rise in obesity back in 2004. Their 15-year study of 1,024 volunteers with sleep disorders found that individuals sleeping less than 4 hours a night were 73% more likely to be obese [1]. If you don't have time to sleep, you certainly don't have time to cook or eat properly, right?

Think YOU'RE getting enough sleep? Maybe not!

In 2006, University of Chicago researchers found that while adults may be in bed for 7.5 hours, the average woman slept for 6.7 hours, while men enjoyed a mere 6.1 hours of rest [1].

How much sleep does one need? Follow these steps to find out...

1. Set a bed time. Calculate back 7 1/2 hours from the time you need to get up to figure out what time that bedtime ought to be.

2. Go to bed 15 minutes earlier every day. Make note of what length of sleep leaves you feeling refreshed and awakening without the use of an alarm clock. This is your optimum length of sleep -- likely between 7 1/2 and 9 hours each night.

3. Keep a journal. Track when you go to bed, when you get up, any restless periods, when you ate and exercised before bed, whether or not you napped, and if so, for how long.

4. Keep on this schedule! Your body and waistline will thank you!

Key points to remember:
- exercise 30 minutes daily, but not within a few hours of your bedtime
- keep your bedroom a place for sleep and sexual activity only
- get into a pre-bed routine (i.e. bath, music, reading)
- DO NOT check email, watch TV, or play video games before bed -- it can leave you sleeping restlessly or unable to get to sleep
- cut out caffeine in the afternoon and evening hours
- DO NOT go to bed on a full stomach OR hungry
- use alcohol in moderation, and not as a sleep aid!

I have to say, I may ace this test. Mark and I climb into bed around 9:40 every night. My alarm goes off at 6:22 am, which is when I get up, so long as Lily has a restful sleep, too. Generally, I feel refreshed and ready for the day. While I still require one dose of caffeine and an alarm clock, I think we happily master the sleep routine.

What time is your bedtime? Are you often tired? What gets in your way of getting more sleep?

[1]. Beun, Chown, Julie. Dozing to diet: Sleep as a diet aid works, research shows. Canwest News Service. September 18, 2009.

Fat Gene

In 2007, UK researchers discovered a gene variant that may help to explain the variation in weight status among humans. It is noted, however, that this gene is unlikely to be the cause of the global obesity epidemic. The gene, called "FTO", helps to regulate the amount of fat in the body and thus, is a strong indicator in predicting BMI. The FTO gene is known to play a role with the hypothalamus, which regulates appetite in the brain. The strength of the relationship between the gene and weight status depends on whether or not an individual has inherited one of two copies of the FTO gene variant. For an individual with two copies of FTO, their weight is an average of 6.6 pounds more than an individual without the variant. For an individual with one copy of the FTO variant, their weight is approximately 2.6 pounds more than an individual without the variant. It was estimated that 16% of Europeans have two copies of the variant with half of the population containing at least one copy of the variant [1].

The FTO gene aforementioned is not to be confused with the estimated genetic predisposition to "severe" obesity, which is estimated at 1 on 10,000. The UK research team confirms a genetic link to obesity, but reminds that while genetics have not changed, environment and eating patterns have changed [1].

Emily Sonestedt, author and member of the research group at Lund University Diabetes Centre, says that in the case of FTO, the critical determinant of obesity of what you eat. The September 14, 2009 article by Science Daily states, "The risk of becoming obese is 2.5 times higher for those who have double copies of the best known risk gene for overweight and obesity [FTO]." The article goes on to explain that a low-fat diet "neutralizes" the harmful effects of the FTO gene [2].

While exercise has been studied in relation to the FTO gene, Sonestedt's research is the first study where the effect of the gene is being studied in relation to food. After extensive questionnaires and interviews, as well as food diaries kept by study participants, a clear pattern between fat consumption and obesity risk emerged -- the risk of obesity was dramatically increased only in the case of high fat consumption [2].

Sonestedt's research shows that the harmful effects of the gene can be canceled by improving diet and mapping the effects of other obesity genes, allowing professionals to better individualize nutrition counseling for those that want to avoid gaining weight. She also states, "This shows that we are not slaves to our genes. Even if we are born with an inherited predisposition to obesity, life style is important" [2].

To all the people of the world wanting to lose weight: YOU CAN DO IT!

[1]. Paddock, Catherine. Obesity Gene Discovered. Medical News Today. April 13, 2007.
[2]. Obesity Risk Gene. ScienceDaily. September 14, 2009.

Food Stamps for Pounds!

A 14-year nationwide study shows the U.S. Food Stamp Program may help contribute to obesity among its users. The average BMI of a Food Stamp participant was found to be 1.15 points higher than nonusers. Specifically, women's BMI rose with food stamp usage, while men's did not [1].

People's BMI's increased faster when they were on food stamps than when they were not, and also increased the longer they participated in the Food Stamp Program. While the Food Stamp Program is intended to increase food security and combat hunger, there may be unintended consequences, such as obesity [1].

Based on these findings alone, the Food Stamp Program may have a significant impact on America's obesity rate with nearly 1 in 11 U.S. residents receiving food stamps in 2008. Because poverty and obesity are linked, the study accounded for income and a variety of other factors, including race and education [1].

Is this trend worsening? Yes. While Food Stamp Program participant BMI's have increased in the past, the rate is increasing. The average food stamp user's BMI rose 0.4 points per year on food stamps, compared with 0.07 points the year before they were receiving food stamps and 0.2 points the year after they no longer received food stamps [1].

While 2002 was the last year included in the study, participants were then receiving a mere $81 in food stamps per month. The study co-author of the study, Jay Zagorsky states, "I think it would be very difficult for a shopper to regularily buy healthy, nutritious food on that budget...Modifying the Food Stamp Program to include economic incentives to eat healthier might be an important tool for fighting obesity." It is true that calorie-dense, high-fat, processed foods tent to be less expensive and the least healthy of the available options out there [1].

So, the Food Stamp Program needs some tweeks. Maybe they should consult with WIC which recently removed juice (yes, even 100% juice) from their program. Just like with soda, juice is now being linked to excess weight gain among American's, and specifically among children.

Any thoughts on ways to better the Food Stamp Program? Should certain foods be excluded from the program due to their nutritional content...or lack thereof? Weigh in! Tax dollars making our nation more unhealthy should be concern for us all!

[1]. Food Stamp Use Linked to Weight Gain. Today's Dietitian. Source: Ohio State University. September 4, 2009.

Late ---> Weight

Eat late, weigh more? Maybe so.

Recent animal research shows dramatic weight gain among mice who are "allowed to eat during the light phase -- their 'wrong' time of the day." The research was recently published online in the journal Obesity. Until I read this article, I never really thought the timing of intake mattered as much as the caloric intake itself. Did you?

In the study design, two nocturnal groups of mice (who thus eat at night) were given the same high-fat diet. One group of mice was given 12-hour daytime access to the food while the other group was given 12-hour nighttime access to the food. After six weeks, the mice eating during the day (their normal sleep time), gained much more weight than the mice eating at night (their typical eating time). How drastic was the weight gain? The nighttime munchers gained a whopping 20% while the daytime eaters gained an jaw-dropping 48%! And astonishingly, there was no difference in the average amount of calories consumed between the two groups of mice.
The only variable to point to was the times the mice were eating [1].

And here's the proposed logic. According to Arble, the study conductor, there is "interplay between body temperature, metabolic hormones such as leptin, and the sleep-wake cycle...Eating at night is contradicting your body's natural circadian rhythm. The leptin levels are starting to rise, and are supposed to be discouraging you from eating [1]."

Arline Salbe, PhD and a senior research fellow at Kronos Longevity Research Institute in Phoenix confirms Arble's results with her own. In her own study, she and her colleagues evaluated the food intake of 94 people over the course of three days. Of the 94 participants, 29 were "night eaters" -- consuming food between the hours of 11pm and 5am. After following the patients for nearly 3 1/2 years, the night eaters gained 13.6 pounds while the non-night eaters gained 3.7 pounds. These results were published in The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition [1].

The bottom-line advice: 3 meals a day with a snack around 8 or 9pm if dinner is early enough.

[1]. Doheny, Kathleen. Study Shows Eating at the 'Wrong' Time of Day Could Lead to Weight Gain. WebMD. September 3, 2009.

Boozercise!

Do you boozercise? I do! Just this weekend I pulled into the parking lot of the ice rink to find a beer trailer -- a trailer housing beer with exterior taps for one to help themselves. Gift from God? Obviously.

While I limited myself to half a Coors Light before hopping on the ice for 3 solid hours of hockey games, others fared much worse than myself. Seeing as the beer was available since 2pm...there was surely some serious consumption of my teammates prior to the 5:45pm game time. This takes me back to hockey in Chicago where locker room time with the girls included a case of beer and lots of giggles. Ah, the old days.

The Chicago Tribune recently looked into BRFSS information and found an interesting connection: those that drink more...exercise more. More surprisingly, the heavier drinkers were the most likely to workout...and to workout for longer. Though this seems oxymoronic (that's not a word, per se...but I like it all the same)...there's several plausible explanations such as exercise to negate drinking damage, thrill-seeking nature, and team sport partaking after events and games [1].

Now don't go picking up a booze habit in order to gain an exercise habit, as the effects of alcohol don't outweigh the benefits of exercise [1]. Sigh, sigh...I know, I know.

But boozercise -- a little "booz-" and lots more "-ercise" -- combined -- can't be all bad...right? Regardless, I'm a fan of boozercising and will likely keep up my regimen. Does dog-walking with wine in-hand count? Half kidding...

[1]. Deardorff, Julie. Study: Drinkers More Likely to Exercise. Chicago Tribune. August 31, 2009.

Exercise won't make you thin.

I can recall sitting in an undergrad nutrition class (who I believe was taught by the yummiest of professors) and having it explained how much more effective controlling diet for weight loss was than increasing exercise alone. Because really, weight loss is just simple math. To lose one pound, you need to create a deficit of 3,500 calories which can be done through the diet, exercise, or ideally, a combination of the two. With exercise alone, an average-sized adult owes the gym 35 hours of moderate-to-intense exercise, or approximately 35 miles of walking/running. Now that's not exact science, but it gets the point across: exercise alone will probably lead to osteoarthritis before it gets you to your weight loss goal (half jokingly). Needless to say, that yummy professor solidified my thoughts on proper nutrition -- it's important stuff, especially in regards to weight loss.

So TIME put out this article on August 9th explaining why exercise won't make you thin. In addition to the information above, the article explains that some believe exercise to increase their appetite, causing them to eat more and negate the work of their exercise. Some exercisers just make poor decisions because they exercise, likely overestimating the calories they expend during exercise [1].

The article states that there are more than 45 million Americans who belong to a gym, up from 23 million in 1993. Of course, that doesn't mean that people actually GO to the gym (unfortunately a membership alone does not qualify you as physically active). A study performed by the Minnesota Heart Survey found that more people say they exercise than the number who actually do. The 20-year survey found that the number of individuals saying they exercise rose from 47% in 1980 to 57% in 2000 [1].

Until recently, exercise was deemed an integral part of weight loss, when in fact, its role is largely over-stated. Exercise does, however, play an essential role in fighting chronic disease and in particular, heart disease...as well as cancer and diabetes [1]. So it's not to say exercise isn't hugely important...just maybe not so for weight-loss endeavors.

A recent study lead by Dr. Timothy Church randomized 464 overweight, sedentary women into 4 groups. The groups were asked to workout with a trainer for 72 minutes, 136 minutes, and 194 minutes per week for six months, with the last group being a control group. The women were asked to change nothing diet-related and to fill out monthly medical-symptom questionnaires. The results? On average, all the women lost weight. The three groups meeting with the trainer for varying lengths of time did not lose significantly more weight than the control group, however. Some women in each of the four groups actually gained weight -- some more than 10 lbs! What happened? Some of the exercising women ate more because the worked out. Some "rewarded" hard work at the gym with an extra treat. Some moved less when they got home because they worked out [1].

Current 2007 recommendations for exercise put out by the American College of Sports Medicine and the American Heart Association include 60 to 90 minutes most days of the week for weight loss. That's quite a lot for the average Joe [1].

A quote from the article:
"According to calculations published in the journal Obesity Research by a Columbia University team in 2001, a pound of muscle burns approximately six calories a day in a resting body, compared with the two calories that a pound of fat burns. Which means that after you work out hard enough to convert, say, 10 lb. of fat to muscle — a major achievement — you would be able to eat only an extra 40 calories per day, about the amount in a teaspoon of butter, before beginning to gain weight. Good luck with that."

So today during my TWO hockey games (makes me tired just thinking about it!), I will opt for water in place of my G2 (Gatorade's low-sugar option). While even I was thinking, "It's just 100 calories...I'm burning WAY more than that"...I am reminded of otherwise. Thanks, TIME.

[1]. Cloud, John. Why Exercise Won't Make You Thin. TIME. August 9, 2009.

One more reason to decrease the grease...

If you’re not interested in your exercise performance, you are probably interested in preserving your short-term memory, right? New research shows that consuming fatty foods appear to hinder both – exercise performance and short-term memory. In addition, we know that high-fat diets over time lead to weight gain, heart disease, and cognitive function decline [1].

When 32 rats became proficient in running a particular maze, their healthy diets were then switched to a high-fat diet containing 55% fat. Within 4 days of consuming the higher-fat diet, the mice began to double-back and falter on the maze maneuvering indicating a short-term memory error. The rats that remained on the healthful diet experienced no change in their maze maneuvering abilities [1].

Additionally, half of the study rats had also been worked out on a treadmill. After just a few days of the 55% fat diet, the rats performed at a level 30% less than they had previously while consuming the healthful diet. And after 5 days on the high-fat diet, the exercise performance of the rats on the treadmill was half of what it had been previous to the switch to a high-fat diet [1].

Though similar human studies are yet to be published, researchers have produced similar results in humans. While the mechanism for this cognitive and muscular decline are unknown, one theory suggests high-fat diets triggering insulin resistance causing the body to less effectively use blood glucose in the body, important for cognitive function. In regards to exercise performance, fatty foods appear to release certain proteins that essentially make the metabolism less efficient. Dr. Murray states, “It’s thought to be a protective mechanism to get rid of excess fat…But it was making muscles less efficient at using oxygen and fuel to make energy needed to run” [1].

The article by Tara Parker-Hope of the New York Times explains that these findings are of particular interest to the individual who consumes whatever they want…because they exercise regularly. Cough, cough. Noted.

[1]. Parker-Poke, Tara. Fatty Foods Affect Memory and Exercise. The New York Times. August 13, 2009.

Soda Tax.

Firstly, a huge thanks to those following my blog -- I appreciate it! I get extremely giddy over new followers, so thank you! And keep the comments coming, I love the questions and commentary. :)

And on to soda tax. VERY interesting idea. I think I may like it.

Kelly Brownell, professor of psychology and director of the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale University, argues that in order to produce a real change, there needs to be a shift in the economic balance between healthful and unhealthful foods and to curtail the all-pervasive marketing of junk food. This would include a tax on soda, he states. Brownell is a go-to guy on topics surrounding the obesity debate and the media [1].

Brownell is also co-author of the book entitled, "Food Fight: The Inside Story of the Food Industry, America's Obesity Crisis, and What We Can Do About It" (Note to self: order this on amazon.com ASAP!). His suggestion of taxing sugar and high-fructose corn syrup beverages surfaced in April when it was published in the New England Journal of Medicine. While this idea isn't a new one to Brownell, he claims it's now feasible due to the economic recession in America [1].

The details? Brownell proposes an 18% tax on soda. He states that with such a tax, fewer Americans will consume soda, and weight loss nationwide can be expected. Starting at the state-level, Brownell forecasts involvement on a federal level, much the same way as tobacco taxes [1].

The tax money can then be used to fund obesity-prevention programs and subsidize the farming of healthful fruits and vegetables, just as the government currently subsidizes corn that's processed into high-fructose corn syrup [1]. Does anyone care about the obesity epidemic enough to DO anything about it? Appears so. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) held a three-day "Weight of the Nation" conference in DC last month. The conference brought together academics, scientists, physicians, and public health officials from all over the world to discuss the current obesity epidemic in America. Specifically, research presented at the conference estimated the 2008 cost of treating obesity-related ailments in the US at $147 billion [1].

Brownell is quoted in saying [1]:
"Until healthful foods routinely cost less than unhealthful ones, getting people -- especially low-income people -- to eat them will remain a challenge." -- I agree.

"...Unless limits are placed on the marketing of unhealthful foods, the whole anti-obesity effort hardly stand a chance." -- Probably so.

"The public-health approach to fighting obesity must shift from treatment of those who are already fat to preventing others -- especially kids -- from getting that way." -- Interesting. Worth a shot, anyways.

The columnist, LaRue Huget, counters with the argument that diet and weight should be a matter of personal responsibility, not government concern [1]. While I wish I could agree, I don't. Just because something ought to be, certainly doesn't mean it's a reality. And certainly this is true for leading a healthful lifestyle and maintaining a healthy weight. If obesity weren't an epidemic, I could possibly wish on a lucky star that Medicare would be in existence in 45 years' time. Ha! Brownell goes on to say, "When people move to the U.S., they gain weight. Have they become less responsible? We have more obesity this year than last. Are we all less responsible? [1]." Hmm. Wise man, that Brownell, don't ya think?

Regina Benjamin, a highly accomplished and well-regarded physician (who happens to be overweight) has been nominated for surgeon general. What does this message send? Brownell explains that Benjamin is an "excellent role model because she does struggle with her weight. Her nomination underscores that there are better ways to judge a person than by how much she weighs." Great. But, how much is too much? At what point does a weight "struggle" turn into a weight "problem"??

[1]. LaRue Huget, Jennifer. Can We Fight Obesity by Slapping a Heavy Tax on Soda? The Washington Post. August 11, 2009.

Go on a date!

Date to lose weight? Yep! But don’t get married, nope. I blogged about marriage and weight gain in the past, and unfortunately for love, the two go hand-in-hand.

A study performed by psychologist Meredith Young, PhD found that women who eat a meal with a man...eat less. Women eating in large groups, however, tend to eat more and also consume foods which are more calorically dense [1]. Anyone see the Sex and the City episode where Carrie calls Miranda to meet at “their spot,” a local grease pit. Here Miranda and Carrie gossip over extra large pizza slices into the wee hours of the night. Always an exception to the study results!

Men, however, are a hold different beast. They, unlike women, do not vary their intake based on their company. Young’s research found that neither companions nor the gender makeup of the group had any impact on what men consumed. The results were all published online in the journal Appetite [1].

During the study, it was found that the average caloric intake for a meal was 716 calories for men and 609 calories for women. When women ate with men, they consumed 552 calories, but when eating with other women, the women consumed 665 calories – more than they would’ve consumed eating on their own. When a woman eats in a mixed group, she also eats less than when eating with only other women. Young explains, “As soon as there is a man in the mix, the amount of calories a woman eats decreases” [1].

How many women is too many? When three women dine together, they intake an average of 650 calories. When a fourth woman is added – the damage goes up to 800 calories a piece. Wowza!

The logic? Sarah-Jeanne Salvy, PhD and assistant professor of pediatrics at the State University of New York at Buffalo explains that people often manipulate the amount of food they eat to “convey a positive impression.” She goes on to say that “eating like someone else would be integrating yourself” while women eating in front of men commonly consume less in order to appear more feminine and in control [1].

Similarly, Salvy found that overweight children who eat in the presence of their overweight friends eat more than those who eat with someone they don’t know. Does it have to be an overweight friend that’s making us eat more? Nope. Salvy found that whether it be a friend or a complete stranger, the fact that their company was overweight was enough drive for the individual to consume more [1]. Subconsciously, of course.

Just something to be aware of…but you may want to eat in a closet just in case!

[1]. Doheny, Kathleen. Ladies’ Night Out A Diet Wrecker. WebMD Health News. August 5, 2009.

One RD's take on your failing diet...

Why does your diet fail? Lots of reasons, probably...

Reason 1: You follow the plan that worked for your friend.

There’s not ONE “right” diet…you have to do what works for YOU. Last year a study completed by the New England Journal of Medicine found that when compared, the Mediterranean diet, low-fat diets, and low-card diets all produced weight loss. Some say, "Pass the bread basket!" while others shout, "Give me the MEAT!" -- to each their own, and same goes with their diet.

Reason 2: You eat a small breakfast.

Check THIS out: one study including 94 women showed that eating a larger (610 calories!) breakfast produced more weight loss in women when compared with those consuming a smaller breakfast (290 calories!). How much of a difference, you ask? The big breakfast eaters lose an average of 40 pounds, while the nibblers lost a pathetic 10 pounds! For the record, I completely agree with this one! Bring on the breakfast - yum!

Reason 3: You’re clueless about calorie counting.

Yep, that’s right…they’re calling you out. Did you know that an additional 100 calories each day leads to a weight gain of 10+ pounds a year? That’s a glass of fat-free milk or slice of 2% cheese too much in a day. Ouch! Add on a can of regular pop for an afternoon caffeine jolt, and you can count on an excess 25 pounds a year. Eek! So, write down what you eat by keeping a food log. A 2008 study found that recording your intake can DOUBLE your weight-loss.

Reason 4: You skip meals.

Extending the time between standard meals by 4-5 hours to “save up” for a special occasion can cause you to consume substantially more. And, you’re more likely to choose less healthy options, too. What to do? Eat every 4 hours as to not set yourself up for disaster at your next meal.

Reason 5: You load up on superfoods.

Nuts, avocados, and dried fruits are healthy, right? Yep! But, those are superfoods that are extremely easy to over-indulge in. While they’re PACKED with nutrients, they’re also extremely calorically-dense – it doesn’t take much to get the benefit before you’ve gone over-board! Your body loves the healthy stuff, but losing weight boils down to consuming LESS calories than we need. The body doesn’t care whether the excess calories are coming from fruit or candy – excess calories will lead to excess pounds.

Reason 6: You’re canceling out the benefit of your workouts.

Workout to pig out? Not wise rationalization… unfortunately. We tend to under-estimate our intake while over-estimating the number burned during exercise (Psssst: DO NOT get duped into thinking the elliptical accurately measures the number of calories you burn!). To burn off that 1 slice of 2% cheese we talked about earlier, you would owe the treadmill another mile of running. And with that additional can a pop, an ANOTHER 1 ½-2 miles of running. Walking, biking, and other aerobics will cost you even more time working away. Reward hard work at the gym with something other than food. Manicures, anyone?

Reason 7: You watch what you eat Monday thru Friday only.

Splurges ought to be reasonable and the weekend need not bring your weight loss efforts to an entire 2-day hault. And if you go really over-board, you've undone the results of scheduled, predictable (and probably good!) eating patterns the work week brings. Plan your weekend and act accordingly. A weekend, every weekend, is not a right to binge! (Duly noted. I do love the weekends...)

Reason 8: You don't plan for stress.

Food is not a licensed therapist or source of entertainment -- it's fuel for our bodies. When you're having an emotional moment or a mental uprooting, think about the situation at hand and devise an appropriate means of dealing with the situation. The right response to stressful situations does not involve fast food, refrigerators, or ice cream. Stress happens...learn to cope without using food as an answer. It won't solve your problems, I assure you!

Ansel, Karen. 8 Reasons Your Diet Isn’t Working. Family Circle. August 2009.

"First Comes Love, Then Comes Obesity?"

I lovingly borrowed the title of this blog entry from today's American Dietetic Association Daily News. I couldn't have come up with anything more clever myself...wise people those ADA'ers.

It is wedding season, and yay for marriage!! I am a May 2009 bride and so now... I'm a married old hag myself. Turns out, my life may be over...or at least ending sooner than anticipated now that I'm in a romantic partnership for life.

Published in April 2009 by the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (ew..) was a study performed on adult obesity in relationships [1]. What the study results revealed is that individuals in relationships with overweight individuals are more likely to become overweight themselves. BMI, thus, is correlated between spouses [2]. Worse yet, one's chances of becoming obese double after just a few short years of matrimony [1]. And if you think you're in the clear for living (in sin - kidding) with your boyfriend/girlfriend, you're wrong. The study showed that those living with their significant others are also at risk for packing on "some excess lbs" [1].

While a woman's risk of weight gain is incremental after year one, men's weight gain spikes only between years one and two of cohabiting [1]. Gee, that sounds fair.

The study looked at dating, cohabiting, and married adult couples. Concordance of outcomes observed included obesity, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, screen time by romantic partnerships, and duration of time living with romantic partner. Negative obesity-related behaviors were most predominant in married couples while dating couples not cohabiting were less likely than cohabiting and married couples to become obese [2].

But...I guess I can see where the mistakes begin: wedding night. Forgive the RD...it was a rough job being the bride. You know what they say, be sure to eat. ....Check!

[1] Rochman, Bonnie. First Comes Love, Then Comes Obesity? Time. 2009.
[2] Gordon-Larson, Penny. Entry into Romantic Partnership Associated with Obesity. Obesity. Department of Nutrition, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. April 9, 2009.