According to the NYT, hospitalization rates are increased for obese/morbidly obese people with swine flu infections.

Obesity appears to be a risk factor on a par with pregnancy for developing complications from an infection with pandemic H1N1 influenza, according to the most comprehensive look yet at swine flu hospitalizations.

About a quarter of those hospitalizations have been for people who were morbidly obese, even though such people make up less than 5% of the population. That fivefold increase in risk is close to the sixfold increase observed in pregnant women…When the merely obese are included with the morbidly obese, they make up 34% of the American population. Yet they accounted for 58% of the hospitalizations in the study.

…The researchers found that two-thirds of the obese patients had a health problem that was previously recognized as an underlying risk factor for swine flu. The most common were chronic lung disease, heart disease and diabetes.

But that still left one-third of obese patients without other risk factors, said Dr. Janice K. Louie, lead author of the study and chief of the state health department’s influenza and respiratory syndromes section.

There are many possible explanations.

This parallels a University of Michigan report released a few months ago.

This article from Scientific American is from March, but it’s still quite timely… It provides a common sense answer to a recurring question: whether it’s best to eat vegetables cooked or raw.

The whole article is worth a read, although I’ll give you the conclusion up front:

Comparing the healthfulness of raw and cooked food is complicated, and there are still many mysteries surrounding how the different molecules in plants interact with the human body. The bottom line, says Liu, is to eat your veggies and fruits no matter how they’re prepared.

“We cook them so they taste better,” Liu says. “If they taste better, we’re more likely to eat them.” And that’s the whole idea.

Bingo.  The “raw vs. cooked” debate is one I’ve had to deal with on the forums I mod, too.  When people want to get healthy, it seems that “black/white” rules are innately appealing.  If it isn’t the bestest of the best ways to do something, then it’s just no damn good at all.  But in my humble opinion, a few compromises that make healthy living more palatable and enjoyable are infinitely worth it… health isn’t a religion, so there’s no need to be a martyr.  If you eat a wide variety of both raw and cooked veggies, you won’t be missing out on anything “real” as far as your health and vitality are concerned.

Click here to read a pretty inspirational article in the LA Times.  It profiles 5 different people (including actor Larry Hagman) who were able to eliminate their need for insulin… and other medications as well.  Needless to state, there were no magic supps involved… just lifestyle changes.  Very significant lifestyle changes, too.

It’s safe to say that some of these folks workout more than I do (you won’t catch me jogging or hitting the elliptical every day – lol)!   These folks didn’t start from zero, either… more like minus 10.  Here’s a brief rundown:

• Aaron Snyder: 220 lbs. —> 160 lbs. (low carb diet). Lifts weights 4 days/week + rides a stationary bike for 30 min. 3 days/week.
• Howard Yosha: 240 lbs. —> 175 lbs. (low calorie diet). Participates in 2 – 4 yoga classes/week and walks/jogs 2 – 8 miles/day.
• John Burgess: 305 lbs. —> 211 lbs.(low calorie/reduced carb diet).  Puts in 5 1/2 miles on elliptical/day.
• Louise Valenciana: 242 lbs. —> 189 lbs. (low calorie diet). Walks every day for 40 minutes.
• Larry Hagman: 216 lbs. —> 196 lbs. (reduced calorie/carb diet). Exercises for 1 – 2 hours each day (free weights, cardio machines, walking).

Read the whole thing.  It took a lot of dedication to go from where they were, to where they are now.  Color me impressed.

…You get up with fleas.  It’s an old, old saying, but there’s truth to it.

Earlier today, I was exchanging e-mails with a friend, Will Brink.  He drew my attention to a recent study published in JANA – the Journal of the American Nutraceutical Association.  While scanning the list of papers, I came across one that made me do a double-take…

Inhibitory Effects of a Novel Nutrient Mixture on MMP Secretion and Invasion on Human Thyroid Cancer Cell Line SW 579

Ok, it wasn’t the title… it was the list of authors that caught my eye… specifically the senior author.

M Waheed Roomi PhD, Bilwa Bhanap MD, Vadim Ivanov PhD MD, Aleksandra Niedzwiecki PhD and Matthias Rath MD.

Dr. Rath Research Institute, Cancer Division, Santa Clara, California

I looked up the Dr. Rath Research Institute to verify that it was the same Matthias Rath I’d read about… and nearly gagged.  It was: there was NO mistaking that face, and the address on the paper matched the one on the site.

OMFG.

Continue Reading »

This Johns Hopkins study confirms some anecdotes I’ve heard/read.

October 22, 2009-Doctors have less respect for their obese patients than they do for patients of normal weight, a new study by Johns Hopkins researchers suggests. The findings raise questions about whether negative physician attitudes about obesity could be affecting the long-term health of their heavier patients.

Mary Margaret Huizinga, M.D., M.P.H., an assistant professor of general internal medicine at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, says the idea for the research came from her experiences working in a weight loss clinic. Patients would come in and “by the end of the visit would be in tears, saying no other physician talked with me like this before. No one listened to me,” says Huizinga, the study’s leader and director of the Johns Hopkins Digestive Weight Loss Center.

“Many patients felt like because they were overweight, they weren’t receiving the type of care other patients received,” she says.

Not good – no one should be disrespected by their doctors, particularly people who are at risk for future health problems (even if they’re apparently healthy now).

And it’s not a pretty sight. I think his article in the LA Times, on the recent White House “Healthy Kids Fair,” was supposed to be tongue-in-cheek, but it failed… both as humor and reporting.  The problem?  Malcolm evidently couldn’t decide who he has more contempt for… Michelle Obama for using her position to promote healthy living, or overweight/obese Americans, whose “…flabby thighs are hidden by their drooping stomachs.”
Continue Reading »

An Institute of Medicine (IOM) panel has proposed a new set of guidelines for the National School Lunch Program… and they’re long overdue.  According to the LA Times:

Children would get fewer French fries and more dark green vegetables in school cafeterias under recommendations being issued today by an Institute of Medicine panel.

In addition, for the first time in the National School Lunch Program, the committee called for calorie limits on meals in an effort to curb obesity. The lunch recommendations allot 650 calories for students in kindergarten through fifth grade, 700 calories in sixth to eighth grade, and 850 calories in high school. Breakfasts should not be above 500, 550 and 600, respectively, for the same grade levels, the committee said.

…Over the next decade, the sodium content of meals should gradually be reduced, the committee said. A typical high school lunch today contains about 1,600 milligrams of sodium; a maximum of 740 milligrams is recommended.

But the recommended upper limit of total fat would increase from 30% to 35% of calories, bringing it in line with the dietary guidelines. The goal is no trans fats and less than 10% of calories as saturated fats.

The committee recommended more legumes, vegetables and fruits — such as cups of fruit in breakfasts for all grades and in lunches for high school students. It also said no more than half of the fruit should be in the form of juice.

The committee recommended weekly amounts for vegetables, including dark green and orange vegetables, grains, and meats, cheese and yogurt for each age group. And it said fruits and vegetables were not interchangeable.

It also recommended that whole milk be replaced with low-fat or skim milk, and that refined grains be replaced with whole grain foods.

These changes are sorely needed.  Over the years, my kids resolutely refused to eat the food served in their school cafeterias, because it was always too fatty, salty and just plain unappetizing.  But a lot of kids have no choice.  Needless to state, school lunches ought to be better than fast food meals so many kids eat these days… not the equivalent (or worse).

Remember this?  Looks like the so-called “Smart Choices” labelling system is drawing critics with teeth.

Raising the stakes in the battle over nutritional claims for packaged foods, the Connecticut attorney general said on Wednesday that he was investigating a national labeling campaign that promotes products like Froot Loops and mayonnaise as nutritionally smart choices.

In letters to Kellogg’s, General Mills and PepsiCo, the attorney general, Richard Blumenthal, said he was concerned that the program, called Smart Choices, was “overly simplistic, inaccurate and ultimately misleading.” The three companies are among several food giants that participate in the program.

In an interview Wednesday, Mr. Blumenthal said he had discussed his investigation with attorneys general from other states and several had expressed interest in joining his effort. In other prominent consumer protection cases, states have worked together to pursue companies or industries, including cigarette makers and subprime lenders, over charges of deceptive marketing.

“As a matter of common sense, these sugar-laden or fat-saturated products seem very questionable as so-called ‘Smart Choices’ nutritionally,” Mr. Blumenthal said. “We’re ratcheting up pressure for truthful answers to these issues.”

The Connecticut investigation will seek to determine if the labeling campaign violates the state’s consumer protection law, which bars misleading or false product claims, he added.

Personally, I’d be delighted to see Mr. Blumenthal roast the industry over a sloooow fire for this one.  Stay tuned…

About 400, apparently…

Low-income children in Philadelphia with about one dollar in pocket money managed to purchase almost 400 calories worth of snack food at convenience stores on the way to and from school, according to study published on Monday in the journal Pediatrics.

…“One of the most surprising findings was how many calories a dollar and seven cents can buy,” said Kelley E. Borradaile, the paper’s lead author and a professor at the Center for Obesity Research and Education at Temple University. She worked on the study with The Food Trust, a community-based organization in Philadelphia that promotes healthy eating options.

The neighborhood stores offer a wide variety of cheap packaged snacks that contain little nutrition but are high in fat and sugar, the study found. For a total tab of $1.07, a child could purchase an 8-oz. sugary drink and a single serving bag of potato chips, plus a popsicle and several pieces of individually wrapped candy. The sum total of calories: 356 calories on average per day.

Estimated calorie needs for moderately active children 9 – 13 years of age are 1,600 – 2,000 for girls, and 1,800 – 2,200 for boys… so 356 calories is a pretty significant percentage of daily needs (16% – 22%).  That’s a lot of empty calories.  Convenience store snacks probably aren’t the only sources of empty cals in the kids’ daily menus, either.  As the full study makes clear, they’re at risk not only for obesity, but also other health/behavior issues associated with nutrient-poor diets.

The “War on Obesity” has definitely lost its bearings when a healthy, 4 month old, 100% breast fed infant can be labelled “obese” and denied health insurance.

By the numbers, Alex is in the 99th percentile for height and weight for babies his age. Insurers don’t take babies above the 95th percentile, no matter how healthy they are otherwise.

“I could understand if we could control what he’s eating. But he’s 4 months old. He’s breast-feeding. We can’t put him on the Atkins diet or on a treadmill,” joked his frustrated father, Bernie Lange, a part-time news anchor at KKCO-TV in Grand Junction. “There is just something absurd about denying an infant.”

Bernie and Kelli Lange tried to get insurance for their growing family with Rocky Mountain Health Plans when their current insurer raised their rates 40 percent after Alex was born. They filled out the paperwork and awaited approval, figuring their family is young and healthy. But the broker who was helping them find new insurance called Thursday with news that shocked them.

” ‘Your baby is too fat,’ she told me,” Bernie said.

…At birth, Alex weighed a normal 8 1/4 pounds. On a diet of strictly breast milk, his weight has more than doubled. He weighs about 17 pounds and is about 25 inches long.

…The Langes, both slender, don’t know where Alex’s propensity for pounds came from. Their other child is thin. No one in their families has a weight problem.

At this point, there’s no reason to suspect that the kid is anything but an outlier.  He’s large for his age, but it’s reasonable to suspect that his growth will slow down… within a year from now, I’d be willing to bet that his size will be quite average.  My own son, Ryan was like that: he was in the 90th percentile during his first few months of life, but his growth rate tapered off after 6 months.  At 19, he’s 5′ 11″ (tall, but not as tall as his dad) and a real beanpole – so his early growth spurt wasn’t an indication of his adult size/girth.  Same deal with my nephew, Sam, who was an absolute tank as an infant, but at 22, is quite lean and athletic.

Unreal…

This week’s routine continued the trend from last week: once again the number of reps dropped and the tempo of each rep increased. In addition, some rather murderous drop sets were introduced: sets of 12, immediately followed by 10 reps (20% drop in weight), then by another 8 reps (with another 20% drop in weight).

Yes, this was kinda painful. It was only done for two exercises in each workout, but that was more than enough for me.

John is still struggling a bit with finding the right weights to start with. This is less of a problem for me – although I did “miss” on my barbell shrug weight. I chose 135 pounds, which I figured would be just about right for me, given the slowish 3-0-1-0 tempo… but I miscalculated. My shoulders handled it just fine, but the weak spot was my grip… I had to (briefly) set the bar down twice towards the end of my second set, as my fingers were starting to ache (note to self: bring straps next time BB shrugs are in the line up).

Continue Reading »

I’m of two minds about this…

In an effort to limit how much sugar and fat students put in their bellies at school, the Education Department has effectively banned most bake sales, the lucrative if not quite healthy fund-raising tool for generations of teams and clubs.

The change is part of a new wellness policy that also limits what can be sold in vending machines and student-run stores, which use profits to help finance activities like pep rallies and proms.

As a health/fitness professional, obviously I don’t support having a lot of junk food in schools.  But as a former parent-teacher organization member/officer, I also have a lot of sympathy for student groups and clubs that are being deprived of a popular fund-raising tool.

Continue Reading »

According to the New York Times, the law mandating that chain restaurants in NYC post the calorie counts of their food isn’t working… or so a recent study reports.

The study, by several professors at New York University and Yale, tracked customers at four fast-food chains — McDonald’s, Wendy’s, Burger King and Kentucky Fried Chicken — in poor neighborhoods of New York City where there are high rates of obesity.

It found that about half the customers noticed the calorie counts, which were prominently posted on menu boards. About 28 percent of those who noticed them said the information had influenced their ordering, and 9 out of 10 of those said they had made healthier choices as a result.

But when the researchers checked receipts afterward, they found that people had, in fact, ordered slightly more calories than the typical customer had before the labeling law went into effect, in July 2008.

…Tameika Coates, 28, who works in the gift shop at St. Patrick’s Cathedral, ordered a Big Mac, 540 calories, with a large fries, 500 calories, and a large Sprite, 310 calories.

“I don’t really care too much,” Ms. Coates said. “I know I shouldn’t, ’cause I’m too big already,” she added with a laugh.

April Matos, a 24-year-old family specialist, bought her 3-year-old son, Amari, a Happy Meal with chicken McNuggets, along with a Snack Wrap for herself. She said with a shrug that she had no interest in counting calories. “Life is short,” she said, adding that she used to be a light eater. “I started eating everything now I’m pregnant.”

Nutrition and public health experts said the findings showed how hard it was to change behavior, but they said it was not a reason to abandon calorie posting.

NYC is conducting its own, considerably larger study, so this isn’t the final verdict, although the early returns don’t look promising.

Years ago, I happened to read “New Guinea Tapeworms and Jewish Grandmothers” by Dr. Robert Desowitz, an entertaining little book about… parasites.  Or rather, how ecological perturbations affect human relationships with them.  Not surprisingly, many of Dr. Desowitz’s anecdotes concerned well-intentioned but poorly thought-out interventions in the 3rd world.  For example, dams erected to provide cities with hydroelectric power frequently increased the incidence of schistosomiasis (”snail fever”) – a debilitating parasitic disease transmitted to humans by snails flourishing in the man-made reservoirs.  Likewise, irrigation systems often became breeding grounds for the mosquitos that transmit malaria. 

Continue Reading »

This should clear up any lingering questions about Aspartame…

Expert advice is that aspartame – found in more than 4,000 products – is safe to consume.

However, a number of people have reported sensitivity to the product including headaches, dizziness, vomiting, diarrhoea and fatigue.

…Professor Stephen Atkin, who will lead the new research, said: “This study is not to determine whether aspartame can be consumed safely; this has already been established, but rather to see whether certain people are sensitive to it.”

The Hull team hope their work will lead to a larger international study to pin down the issue once and for all.

…Andrew Wadge, Chief Scientist at the Food Standards Agency said: “The study will address consumer concerns, including anecdotal reports that have linked a range of conditions to aspartame.

Personally, I’ve never had any problems with aspartame, nor have I known anyone who has.  It’s certainly not hard to find reports of adverse effects, however.  It will be interesting to see if there are genuine chemical sensitivities behind these reactions.

Ok, we all know that smoking, high blood pressure and high serum cholesterol levels are likely to shave some years off your life, but – according to the BBC - University of  Oxford researchers were able to come up with a pretty good estimate of how many.

And it ain’t just one or two, either.  On average, it’s 10 – 15.

The UK study looked at more than 19,000 civil servants aged 40-69 and traced what happened to them 38 years later.

The Oxford study, in the British Medical Journal, said men with these three risk factors could expect a 10-year shorter life from 50 years of age.

…The researchers from the University of Oxford focused on smoking, high blood pressure and cholesterol because they are the main cardiovascular risk factors.

But when they broadened it out to look at all risk factors including obesity, diabetes and employment grade, they found a 15-year life expectancy difference between the 5% with the highest number of risk factors and the 5% who had the lowest number of risk factors.

I don’t know about you, but I could get a lot of living done in 10 – 15 years.  If that’s not a good reason to quit smoking and get other risk factors in line, I don’t know what is.

Full study here.

There are times I’m alternately fascinated and repelled by the stuff the food industry comes up with.  On the one hand, I can’t really object to entrepreneurs pushing healthier versions of not-so-healthy-but-extremely-popular food products… but on the other hand, it seems somewhat exploitative too.  Marketing better quality  junk/snack/convenience foods as “healthy” implies that consumers don’t really have to change their eating habits… just their product choices.  In other words, they can have their cake and eat it too… or in this case, pizza.

The gut health market is growing, driven predominantly by yogurt shots from household names like Dannon, but if the vision and plans of a New Orleans-based archaeologist-turned-entrepreneur come to fruition, the gut-health market could soon be colonized by pizzas.

Naked Pizza started in 2006 and is the brainchild of Jeff Leach, an archaeologist by trade and head of Paleobiotics Lab, a New Mexico-based independent research group investigating the implications of dietary and nutritional evolution and its bearing on modern health.

…The pizza crust is formulated with 12 types of whole grain, including amaranth and buckwheat, and fortified with Beneo Orafti’s Synergy1 prebiotic, and Ganeden’s heat resistant Bacillus coagulans strain, said Leach.

A two-slice serving delivers a Bacillus coagulans payload of one billion colony forming units (cfu) and five grams of Synergy1, he said.

If you’re going to eat pizza, then one with added whole grains, prebiotic fiber and probiotic bacteria will certainly be superior to what Pizza Hut or Papa John’s has to offer, although I’m politely skeptical that palliatives like “Naked Pizza” will ultimately “change the health of the nation.”

But, we’ll see.  The company recently got a major boost from the Kraft Group, and is planning to expand nationwide.  If a franchise eventually opens nearby, I’ll have to check it out. 

In my local supermarkets, nutrition/energy bars are big business… Fred Meyer, Safeway and Albertson’s all devote a decent amount of shelf space to them.  At Freddy’s – where I shop most often – they’re in the “Health Food” section… after all, they’re so healthy!  Right?

Kinda sorta.

Continue Reading »

I’m not sure why the NYT titled this article “New Concerns Over Dietary Supplements” – the military has always been vehemently opposed to supps.  In fact, the only thing I find “new” here, is that the doc they interviewed, Col Erin Edgar, sounds refreshingly rational, and isn’t foaming at the mouth like some other military docs I’ve come across.

The problem with supplements, Colonel Edgar said, is that they often contain substances that can make users susceptible to heat stroke. Many products include stimulants, like caffeine or ephedrine, that increase metabolism but also raise the heart rate and blood pressure — not necessarily good thing for troops in combat or a hot climate, he said.

Colonel Edgar, who is assuming leadership of the Army’s 18th Medical Command, said “elite troops,” including Special Operating Forces, seem to use the supplements more cautiously and therefore have fewer problems. He is most concerned, he said, about soldiers who over-consume the supplements, which they view as “magic bullets” that will make them muscle-bound overnight.

This strikes me as a pretty legitimate concern, but one that also should also be manageable through education… objective education, that is, not the “creatine is a gateway drug” jeremiads you typically see from the military brass.*

*ok, I’m exaggerating… but not by much.

LOL – I didn’t write that, just so you know.  It’s one of the comments posted in response to this article in the Sacramento Bee.

A sweeping statewide study released today points to soda and other sugar-sweetened beverages as one of the main reasons why we are fat.

“For the first time, we have strong scientific evidence that soda is one of the – if not the largest – contributors to the obesity epidemic,” Dr. Harold Goldstein, executive director of the California Center for Public Health Advocacy, said Wednesday.

…”Bubbling Over: Soda Consumption and Its Link to Obesity in California” – a joint effort by the California Center for Public Health Advocacy and the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research – interviewed 42,000 Californians of all ages.

…The study found that 24 percent of adults drink one or more non-diet sodas a day, and these adults are 27 percent more likely to be overweight.

The results for children were worse, researchers said. Sixty-two percent of adolescents ages 12 to 17 and 41 percent of children ages 2 to 11 imbibe at least one sugar-sweetened drink a day.

The report is here.

Continue Reading »