Video from ASAP Science
Tuesday, June 25, 2013
Monday, June 24, 2013
In the News: American Medical Association recognizes obesity as a disease
This article in the NY TIMES talks about the American Medical Association's (AMA) decision to officially recognize obesity as a disease. This decision has created a stir similar to when Alcoholism was classified as a disease.
If you go by what the AMA is saying, 1/3 of our population has a disease. I know how personal people take their weight and I know this is going to offend many people. But I think that's the point.
I think the reason the AMA did this is to underline, bold and italic how serious the obesity problem is in our country. I think they want doctors, health insurance companies, politicians, the general public to stop looking at obesity as an unfortunate cosmetic issue, but as the serious public health concern and burden that it is. Medical professionals see people with obesity as a ticking time bomb for a long list of other diseases.
While the AMA has no legal power, this decision could potentially have big ramifications when we talk about how obesity is treated and who pays for it.
The counsel on Science and Public health praised the move saying that it would help remove some of the stigma of obesity as people sometimes oversimplify it as "that person eats too much." Obese people have such a difficult time losing weight because it's just not that simple--another post we'll discuss the hormonal changes that work against an obese person losing weight.
Ironically, the "Fat Activists" are demanding that the AMA change this back because they claim it adds to the stigma of being overweight. I have very little patience for the "Fat is Beautiful" activists and that mentality. I feel like they do much more harm than good. They keep the focus on appearance and this debate should sit squarely on the shoulders of health. I feel strongly that we need to be caring about what our bodies can do and significantly less about what our bodies look like.
The other question is about if insurance companies and by default, all of us are going to be paying for other people's obesity. As I listened to the talk show host this morning talk about this, she was concerned about having to start paying for other people's obesity. I yelled at my radio "WE ALREADY ARE!"
We already are paying for, what we call comorbidities of obesity. We are paying for people's quadruple bypass surgeries, and for their type 2 diabetes, and for their dialysis when their kidneys fail, for their cancer treatments (obesity significantly increases the risk for cancer) and for all the medical conditions that come hand in hand with obesity.
I promise you, the cost of preventative care, of helping someone lose weight, is way less than the cost of treating renal failure, CVD, type 2 diabetes, and Cancer.
As the rates of obesity is rising in the country, it seems we are getting used to it and it's becoming the new normal. This move by the AMA will hopefully remind people that we should be caring about this and should be taking action. At least it has people talking.
Sunday, June 23, 2013
High Fructose Corn Syrup
High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) has ended up on the naughty
list, right next to trans-fat. HFCS is supposed to be extra scary because it’s
in almost everything.
What is HFCS?
Before I explain what HFCS is, we need to review sugar. A Monosaccharide is the big fancy word for the simplest structure of sugar. There are different kinds of monosaccharides—glucose, fructose, galactose, xylose and ribose. We mostly care about only about glucose, fructose and galactose. These sugars are found in different combinations in the foods we eat. For example, the table sugar is glucose/fructose combination. The sugar found in milk is glucose/galactose.
To get HFCS, we start with corn syrup which is made up of fructose/glucose, the same basic building blocks as table sugar, but a little bit different. The corn syrup is enzymatically changed so that it has a higher ratio of fructose to glucose than normal corn syrup. The end result is something very similar chemically to honey.
Why is HFCS in everything?
HFCS is in everything because it’s cheap. I don’t understand agricultural law, but there are tarrifs on sugar and subsidies for corn in the United States. The end result is that sugar is much more expensive in the United States than any other part of the world. And Corn is cheaper. The process to make HFCS is to make the corn syrup sweeter so they don’t have to use as much of it, again making it cheaper.
What’s the fear?
As the use of HFCS increases, the rate of obesity, type 2 diabetes and CVD has also been increasing. This leads many to believe that HFCS is the cause.
(Another branch of fear of HFCS is related to the use of genetically modified corn (GMO’s). That’s a topic all in itself, so we will just focus on if HFCS is what is making us fat.)
What we need to know is that if the body reacts differently to HFCS than to regular sugar and if that is, in any way, what is contributing to rampant obesity.
Research Says
As I began to dig into the research of HFCS, I found several problems with the research. First, many studies were funded by either parties that would profit from HFCS being tarnished (sugar companies) and parties that would profit from HFCS being exonerated.
Second, most studies are of a correlative nature. Meaning, lets look at the statistics and see if they somehow make sense. And what's the number one rule of statistics? "Correlation does not imply causation." I was not finding any good controlled studies, the kind that show cause and affect. (As a personal preference, I don't count rat studies.) I summed up a few of the articles I found below.
The resounding message I got from the research was that HFCS is just as bad as regular sugar. Both are, simply put, extra calories. Extra calories lead to obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease. I will submit that there needs to be better and more research with controlled studies on HFCS just to make sure there isn't something we're missing.
Take Home Message
As we feed ourselves and our families, we need to think about the added sugar/calories we and they are getting. I suggest that if we are going to avoid HFCS, we need to do it not because were scared of HFCS, but because were scared of added sugars. Here are some other added sugars to be aware of:
Research and some other sources of info
The American Medical Association wanted to know how HFCS measured up against other sweeteners. They looked at the research others had done on HFCS (not quite a meta-study) and concluded that the composition and the way the body absorbs HFCS is so similar to table sugar, it is unlikely that HFCS is contributing more to obesity than table sugar. They do say that more research needs to be done.
This article published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition looks at global statistics of HFCS and other sweetener use and obesity rates. The author concludes that the hypothesis of a HFCS-Obesity link is not supported by these statistics. He says that the increase of calories (and increase of obesity) starting in the 1970s was due to an increase of all nutrients, fats included.
This study found an increased correlation between type 2 diabetes and the use of HFCS within a country. In countries where HFCS was prevelant, there was a 20% increased liklihood of type 2 diabetes.
Mayo Clinic "What is high fructose corn syrup? What are the health concerns?"
Princeton university research showed that rats fed HFCS gained more weight than rats fed other sugars, but had a similar caloric intake.
Harvard University "High Fructose Syrup and Health"
What is HFCS?
Before I explain what HFCS is, we need to review sugar. A Monosaccharide is the big fancy word for the simplest structure of sugar. There are different kinds of monosaccharides—glucose, fructose, galactose, xylose and ribose. We mostly care about only about glucose, fructose and galactose. These sugars are found in different combinations in the foods we eat. For example, the table sugar is glucose/fructose combination. The sugar found in milk is glucose/galactose.
To get HFCS, we start with corn syrup which is made up of fructose/glucose, the same basic building blocks as table sugar, but a little bit different. The corn syrup is enzymatically changed so that it has a higher ratio of fructose to glucose than normal corn syrup. The end result is something very similar chemically to honey.
Why is HFCS in everything?
HFCS is in everything because it’s cheap. I don’t understand agricultural law, but there are tarrifs on sugar and subsidies for corn in the United States. The end result is that sugar is much more expensive in the United States than any other part of the world. And Corn is cheaper. The process to make HFCS is to make the corn syrup sweeter so they don’t have to use as much of it, again making it cheaper.
What’s the fear?
As the use of HFCS increases, the rate of obesity, type 2 diabetes and CVD has also been increasing. This leads many to believe that HFCS is the cause.
(Another branch of fear of HFCS is related to the use of genetically modified corn (GMO’s). That’s a topic all in itself, so we will just focus on if HFCS is what is making us fat.)
What we need to know is that if the body reacts differently to HFCS than to regular sugar and if that is, in any way, what is contributing to rampant obesity.
Research Says
As I began to dig into the research of HFCS, I found several problems with the research. First, many studies were funded by either parties that would profit from HFCS being tarnished (sugar companies) and parties that would profit from HFCS being exonerated.
Second, most studies are of a correlative nature. Meaning, lets look at the statistics and see if they somehow make sense. And what's the number one rule of statistics? "Correlation does not imply causation." I was not finding any good controlled studies, the kind that show cause and affect. (As a personal preference, I don't count rat studies.) I summed up a few of the articles I found below.
The resounding message I got from the research was that HFCS is just as bad as regular sugar. Both are, simply put, extra calories. Extra calories lead to obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease. I will submit that there needs to be better and more research with controlled studies on HFCS just to make sure there isn't something we're missing.
Take Home Message
As we feed ourselves and our families, we need to think about the added sugar/calories we and they are getting. I suggest that if we are going to avoid HFCS, we need to do it not because were scared of HFCS, but because were scared of added sugars. Here are some other added sugars to be aware of:
- Anything that ends in "ose" dextrose, glucose, fructose
- cane syrup, cane juice
- fruit juice concentrates, nectars
- honey (there's no nutritional advantage to honey over other sugars)
- malt syrup
- molasses
- Remember that ingredients in foods are listed by weight. The higher up on the list a food is, the more of it is in that food. If an added sugar is high on the list, then you know that food is high in added sugar. If it's near the end of the list, you don't need to worry about it as much.
- Stop buying soda or juices. If you are frequenting a fast food place, get your kids the milk (even chocolate) or water option. Be mindful of the times you or your child is getting a soda or other sugary drink--you may be unaware of just how often that is.
- Put smaller portions of ketchup on your child's plate. If you have a ketchup-loving kid that wants it on everything, tell them that you can only give them ketchup for specific foods (i.e. ketchup is only for hotdogs and fries).
- Limit meals eaten out at restaurants--they add sugar to make it taste better. Don't add sugar to your own cooking.
- Opt for a less sugary cereal. Here is a list of breakfast cereals and the amount of added sugar by weight. I suggest you find the cereals you usually eat, see how much added sugar is in it and then find a few options that have less added sugar in it.
Research and some other sources of info
The American Medical Association wanted to know how HFCS measured up against other sweeteners. They looked at the research others had done on HFCS (not quite a meta-study) and concluded that the composition and the way the body absorbs HFCS is so similar to table sugar, it is unlikely that HFCS is contributing more to obesity than table sugar. They do say that more research needs to be done.
This article published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition looks at global statistics of HFCS and other sweetener use and obesity rates. The author concludes that the hypothesis of a HFCS-Obesity link is not supported by these statistics. He says that the increase of calories (and increase of obesity) starting in the 1970s was due to an increase of all nutrients, fats included.
This study found an increased correlation between type 2 diabetes and the use of HFCS within a country. In countries where HFCS was prevelant, there was a 20% increased liklihood of type 2 diabetes.
Mayo Clinic "What is high fructose corn syrup? What are the health concerns?"
Princeton university research showed that rats fed HFCS gained more weight than rats fed other sugars, but had a similar caloric intake.
Harvard University "High Fructose Syrup and Health"
Wednesday, June 19, 2013
Pastuerized vs. Raw Milk
I was speaking to a woman at church that only gives her toddler raw milk. She did this because of the nutrients lost during the pasteurization process and she felt her little one needed all the nutrients she could get from the milk she drank.
What is pasteurization? Should I buy raw milk?
Pasteurization is the process of heating the milk up to a specific temperature and length of time. They do this to kill most of the microbes off so the milk doesn't spoil as quick and so the milk is safer to drink. If you were to pasteurize your own milk, you'd heat it to 145 degrees for 30 minutes.
So does the process decrease nutrients? The CDC and the FDA says no, not really.
This study and this meta analyisis (a study analyzing several studies) say yes, but the decrease doesn't not significantly affect milk's nutritive value. For example, it decreases Vitamin B6 but because B6 is found in such low levels naturally in milk, it's not nutritionally significant if there is a decrease of B6.
So the question you have to ask yourself is, does the risk outweigh the benefit?
The risk is that a cow at a dairy is not healthy and carrying a bacteria that causes food-borne illness such as E Coli or Listeria. Their feces would contaminate their own skin or the potentially the equipment used to milk the cow. If you don't think that is likely, imagine a dairy and the cow feces everywhere.
My opinion? After the scary experience of having my own toddler have salmonella, I personally can say it's not worth the risk. I feel like if you are an adult with a robust immune system, you could probably take the risk because you'd most likely recover just fine from a food borne illness. But pregnant women, babies, toddlers, preschool age kids (and even older) and the elderly must be protected against food borne illness.
Take home message? Go ahead and by the $2.79 gallon of milk at the store.
Note: I did not touch the topics of allergens, and added hormones in milk. Another time, but you can guess what my take home message is going to be.
These sites have more information pasteurization:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2282302/?page=1
http://www.cdc.gov/foodsafety/rawmilk/raw-milk-questions-and-answers.html#benefits
http://www.fda.gov/Food/ResourcesForYou/consumers/ucm079516.htm
These links take you to a few news articles about food borne illnesses related to raw milk in Utah.
http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2010/05/campy-outbreak-in-utah-traced-to-raw-milk/#.UcKCEZywXQ4
http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2010/05/salmonella-in-ut-linked-to-raw-milk/#.UcKCkJywXQ4
http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=1016412
What is pasteurization? Should I buy raw milk?
Pasteurization is the process of heating the milk up to a specific temperature and length of time. They do this to kill most of the microbes off so the milk doesn't spoil as quick and so the milk is safer to drink. If you were to pasteurize your own milk, you'd heat it to 145 degrees for 30 minutes.
So does the process decrease nutrients? The CDC and the FDA says no, not really.
This study and this meta analyisis (a study analyzing several studies) say yes, but the decrease doesn't not significantly affect milk's nutritive value. For example, it decreases Vitamin B6 but because B6 is found in such low levels naturally in milk, it's not nutritionally significant if there is a decrease of B6.
So the question you have to ask yourself is, does the risk outweigh the benefit?
The risk is that a cow at a dairy is not healthy and carrying a bacteria that causes food-borne illness such as E Coli or Listeria. Their feces would contaminate their own skin or the potentially the equipment used to milk the cow. If you don't think that is likely, imagine a dairy and the cow feces everywhere.
My opinion? After the scary experience of having my own toddler have salmonella, I personally can say it's not worth the risk. I feel like if you are an adult with a robust immune system, you could probably take the risk because you'd most likely recover just fine from a food borne illness. But pregnant women, babies, toddlers, preschool age kids (and even older) and the elderly must be protected against food borne illness.
Take home message? Go ahead and by the $2.79 gallon of milk at the store.
Note: I did not touch the topics of allergens, and added hormones in milk. Another time, but you can guess what my take home message is going to be.
These sites have more information pasteurization:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2282302/?page=1
http://www.cdc.gov/foodsafety/rawmilk/raw-milk-questions-and-answers.html#benefits
http://www.fda.gov/Food/ResourcesForYou/consumers/ucm079516.htm
These links take you to a few news articles about food borne illnesses related to raw milk in Utah.
http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2010/05/campy-outbreak-in-utah-traced-to-raw-milk/#.UcKCEZywXQ4
http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2010/05/salmonella-in-ut-linked-to-raw-milk/#.UcKCkJywXQ4
http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=1016412
Welcome to the new blog
After our second child turned one, my husband and I looked at
ourselves and with a loud sigh, proclaimed that it was time to lose our
baby weight and embrace a healthier lifestyle.
Despite having earned my bachelor's degree in dietetics from BYU, I had failed to live what I knew to be true.
In my first pregnancy, I gained 70 lbs. My second pregnancy, I gained 60 lbs. I am a 6 ft tall woman, but that doesn't justify such a large weight gain.
The title of this blog, "Third Time's the Charm" is looking forward to my third pregnancy in which I hope to finally get the weight gain right. This isn't a pregnancy announcement, yet, although that will likely come in the next year.
Blog Goal 1: Use this blog to document my pregnancy and use it as accountability to help me gain a healthier 30-35 lbs. (Again, not a pregnancy announcement.)
The other part of this blog is nutrition information.
As Mommies, it's beyond challenging as we try to keep our families healthy while balancing all of our responsibilities. Often our own health takes a back burner. This blog is meant to have information specifically for busy, stressed or emotionally spent mommies.
You won't find any expensive or extreme food suggestions. You will find information from reputable organizations and peer-reviewed research. I plain just don't subscribe to a lot of the trendy diets and food movements out there. I see a lot of fear and misguided effort. This blog is for average mommies that still want to feed their kids a box of Kraft mac and cheese and don't have a problem taking their kids to a McDonald's drive through every once and a while.
Blog Goal 2: Use this blog as a platform to dust off my brain and hopefully be helpful to my many mommy friends.
Thanks for reading and if there is a topic you want covered, send your requests my way.
Despite having earned my bachelor's degree in dietetics from BYU, I had failed to live what I knew to be true.
In my first pregnancy, I gained 70 lbs. My second pregnancy, I gained 60 lbs. I am a 6 ft tall woman, but that doesn't justify such a large weight gain.
The title of this blog, "Third Time's the Charm" is looking forward to my third pregnancy in which I hope to finally get the weight gain right. This isn't a pregnancy announcement, yet, although that will likely come in the next year.
Blog Goal 1: Use this blog to document my pregnancy and use it as accountability to help me gain a healthier 30-35 lbs. (Again, not a pregnancy announcement.)
The other part of this blog is nutrition information.
As Mommies, it's beyond challenging as we try to keep our families healthy while balancing all of our responsibilities. Often our own health takes a back burner. This blog is meant to have information specifically for busy, stressed or emotionally spent mommies.
You won't find any expensive or extreme food suggestions. You will find information from reputable organizations and peer-reviewed research. I plain just don't subscribe to a lot of the trendy diets and food movements out there. I see a lot of fear and misguided effort. This blog is for average mommies that still want to feed their kids a box of Kraft mac and cheese and don't have a problem taking their kids to a McDonald's drive through every once and a while.
Blog Goal 2: Use this blog as a platform to dust off my brain and hopefully be helpful to my many mommy friends.
Thanks for reading and if there is a topic you want covered, send your requests my way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)