If you are like many Americans, beef is “what’s for dinner.” We have a major affinity for red meat. Hamburgers, steaks and hot dogs are everyday meals for many people. Like most things nutrition, they should not be eaten in excess, but can certainly be part of a well balanced nutrition plan. However, not all beef is the same. We’ll take a look at five reasons why the beef you choose should come only from grass-fed cows instead of conventional, grain-fed cows. As you’ll see, it’s more than a decision about nutrition.

1. Grass-fed beef is more nutritious(1)

A new review of 30 years of research on the difference between conventionally-fed and grass fed beef was published in the Nutrition Journal. The review showed several health benefits of consuming grass-fed beef over grain-fed beef, including:

• Grass-fed beef has significantly higher amounts of conjugated linoleic acid (CLA). CLA has been shown in studies to protect against cancer and heart disease, help build muscle and promote fat loss(2). It has also been associated with healthy cholesterol, glucose and insulin metabolism(3,4).
• Grass-fed beef has contains a higher percentage of its saturated fat as stearic acid, which seems to not affect cholesterol levels compared to the higher amounts of myristic and palmitic acid in grain-fed beef which have been shown to elevate cholesterol
• Grass-fed beef has higher levels of Vitamins A and E and the body’s most powerful antioxidant glutathione, as well as superoxide dismutase
• Grass-fed beef contains less overall fat per serving
• Grass-fed beef contains less omega-6 fatty acids, associated with inflammation, and more omega-3 fatty acids, which combat inflammation along with providing a host of additional health benefits

2. Grass-fed beef is easier on the environment(5)

Since cattle are not born to eat grain, they have difficulty digesting it. Much like when humans’ digestive systems are not functioning correctly, cattle produce large amounts of gas. There is concern that the methane they produce could have a significant impact on global warming. Beyond that, though, is the amount of wasted fuel needed to produce feed for grain-fed cattle. The following paragraph, from EatWild.com explains it well:

It’s a different story in a confinement operation. Here, the animals are crowded into sheds or kept outdoors on barren land and all their feed is shipped to them from distant fields. On those fields, the crops are treated with fossil-fuel based fertilizers, sprayed with pesticides, and planted, tilled, and harvested with heavy equipment. Each of these operations requires non-renewable fuel. Then the feed is shipped to feed manufacturers where it is dried, flaked or pelleted, and mixed with other ingredients and then, finally, shipped to the waiting animals, using yet more fossil fuel.

There is also a day-for-night difference in “manure management” on the two systems. On well-managed pasture-based farms, the animals spread their manure evenly over the soil where it becomes a natural source of organic fertilizer. The manure improves the quality of the grass, which increases the rate of gain of the animals. It’s a closed, sustainable system.

On factory farms, the excrement builds up in the feedlots and sheds where it fouls the air and releases ammonia and other gasses to the eco-system. The fumes stress and sicken the animals and farm workers, and they lower the quality of life of people in nearby homes. To get rid of the waste, it is shipped to nearby fields where it overloads the land with nutrients. The excess nitrogen and phosphorous pollute the soil and ground water and drain off into streams, rivers, and estuaries where it can create “dead zones” that threaten the fish population.

3. Grass-fed beef doesn’t contain hormones or antibiotics, and isn’t fed food that has other chemicals sprayed on it

Although use of steroids in beef has been banned in Europe, it is still allowed in the United States. There is concern that the hormones found in conventional beef can be transferred to humans by consuming the beef. Although this is area of much controversy, it’s not worth it to take the chance at consuming excess hormones if you don’t have to. With our high rates of cancer, metabolic imbalances, and younger ages of the onset of puberty, there is always the question of what our meat or dairy could do to us(6).

Because cattle raised on a feedlot are more prone to sickness, they’re also more likely to receive regular shots of antibiotics. There’s also the chance of them being passed on to those that eat the meat (or consume the dairy).

4. Grass-fed beef is treated humanely(7)

The life of a grass-fed cow, allowed to move around and eat its natural diet is a stark contrast to the life of a cow raised on a feedlot, where space is minimized and the cows may spend most of their day standing in piles of manure. The ability to move around helps reduce the levels of fat in the meat, which make it healthier for us as well.

5. Grass-fed beef is less likely to contribute to food poisoning(7,8)

Grass-fed beef have a healthier digestive system because they eat the food they’re supposed to (a good lesson to keep in mind for us humans, as well). With a healthier immune system, they’re less susceptible to disease like e. coli. Being allowed to roam the farm, they’re not left standing in piles of manure, or stuck next to another cow that may become ill.

Summary

The two common reasons people use for not making the switch to grass-fed beef is the taste and the cost. Some people fall in love with the tastes of grass-fed beef immediately, and others have to acquire the taste for it. As for the cost, the more people that make the switch, the lower prices are likely to drop based on supply and demand. We also have to understand that when we’re getting ground beef for $2 per pound, or are able to buy a ¼ pound burger for less than $2, some kind of nutritional / environmental shortcut is being made.

Finally, as you think about what happens to a cow when it’s provided a diet it is not intended to eat, consider what can happen to yourself if you’re not following a diet you are intended to eat. Although it’s a bit of a different topic, you can’t help but wonder: If feeding a cow a diet of grains when it’s intended to eat grass causes this many issues, imagine the issues we do to ourselves when we choose to follow a diet we’re not intended to.

In health,
Tom Nikkola

1. Daley C, Abbott A, Doyle P, Nader G, Larson S. A review of fatty acid profiles and antioxidant content in grass-fed and grain-fed beef. Nut Jour. 2010;9:10

2. Gnadig S, Rickert R, Sebedio JL, Steinhart H. Conjugated linoleic acid (CLA): physiological effects and production. Eur J Lipid Sci Technol. 2001;103:56-61

3. Eyjolfson V, Spriet LL, Dyck DJ. Conjugated linoleic acid improves insulin sensitivity in young, sedentary humans. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2004;36:814-20

4. Moloney F, Yeow TP, Mullen A, et al. Conjugated linoleic acid supplementation, insulin sensitivity, and lipoprotein metabolism in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Am J Clin Nutr. 2004;80:887-95

5. eatwild. Grassfarming Benefits the Environment. EatWild online article, http://www.eatwild.com/environment.html

6. Jim LaValle. Cracking the Metabolic Code. 2004. Basic Health Publications. Laguna Beach, CA

7. Food, Inc. the Movie

8. eatwild. Grass-Fed Products are Clean and Safe. EatWild online article, http://www.eatwild.com/foodsafety.html

This article is  not intended for the  treatment or prevention of  disease, nor as a  substitute for medical  treatment, nor as an  alternative to medical  advice. Use of recommendations in this and other  articles is at the  choice and risk of  the reader.

As far back as 2000 years ago, warmth, pain, swelling and redness were seen as signs of inflammation. These signs can still be used today to help describe the prevalence of inflammation in the body(1).

Inflammation can be as beneficial as it is detrimental to our health. Following acute injuries, inflammation supports the healing process. However, chronic inflammation can be detrimental to health. It is associated with many degenerative diseases including Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, the Parkinson-dementia complex of Guam and age-related macular degeneration. Osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, atherosclerosis, allergies, asthma, diabetes and myocardial infarction are also associated with inflammation(2).

Inflammation is certainly a concern with regard to degenerative diseases, but an even more common issue with inflammation, is the part it may play in obesity and insulin resistance. The mechanisms are not totally clear, however, it appears fat tissue, which is metabolically active, can increase localized inflammation. The increased inflammation can decrease insulin sensitivity, which can lead to the release of more fatty acids and the secretion of more inflammatory compounds. This can create a downward spiral leading to dysfunction of proper lipid metabolism and insulin sensitivity issues(3). Long-term decreased insulin sensitivity can lead to type 2 diabetes.

Measuring Inflammation

High-sensitive C-Reactive Protein (hs-CRP) is the most common marker used for determining levels of inflammation. Levels should be checked with annual blood work. Doctors can use this, along with other cardiovascular risk markers such as cholesterol levels and blood pressure, to determine cardiovascular risk. Of course, the body can experience chronic inflammation without presenting other risk factors for heart disease. Additional labs that a physician may request include lactate dehydogenase (LDH),  erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), basophil and ferritin levels, which can signal non-specific inflammation.

Other signs of inflammation include redness, swollen joints, joint pain, joint stiffness and loss of joint function. According to the Cleveland Clinic website, other signs include flu-like symptoms including fever, chills, fatigue, headaches, loss of appetite and muscle stiffness(4).

Reducing Inflammation

As mentioned, inflammation is a concern for more than just heart health. If there is any risk of any of the above mentioned diseases, managing inflammation may be an important part of a health and fitness program. Some steps that can be taken to decrease chronic inflammation include:

Supplement with omega-3 fatty acids, specifically fish oilfrom deep ocean water anchovies, mackerel, and sardines. Omega-3 fatty acids (DHA & EPA) have been shown to reduce inflammation. The typical American diet has 14-25 times as much omega-6 as omega-3, where the ideal ratio is 1:1 to 4:144.  Although they do not contain as much EPA and DHA, other sources of omega-3 fatty acids include flaxseed, walnuts, hemp seeds, pumpkin seeds(5). Also, eggs from organic, pastured, cage-free chickens and grass-fed beef are great sources of omega-3 fatty acids. Keep in mind that conventional eggs and beef are very high in omega-6 because they are fed differently. This is part of what leads to our imbalance of essential fatty acids.

Limit intake of omega-6 fatty acids. Omega-6 fatty acids are also essential for health, but taken in excess have been shown to increase levels of inflammation. Commercial red meat, pork, dairy products, soybean oil, canola oil, corn oil, safflower oil and conventional egg yolks are common sources of omega-6.

Follow a proper exercise program. Overtraining or improper training can lead to chronic inflammation. Exercise is certainly beneficial, but training at too high an intensity level or with too much volume can lead to excess tissue breakdown and excess inflammation as the body tries to recover.

Avoid inflammatory foods. This could include grains if someone is sensitive to gluten or other chemicals in grains or legumes. Dairy intolerances or allergies can also lead to chronic inflammation.

Avoid excessive carbohydrate consumption, especially from processed carbohydrates. Following carbohydrate consumption, pro-inflammatory pathways are activated and research has shown that high glycemic diets are associated with markers of inflammation(6).

Summary

Inflammation is a very real issue for many people, especially when you consider the number of diseases affected by excess inflammation. In many cases, people just accept that aches and pain are a normal part of aging, which often is not true. Other people, who have been living with inflammation for years, don't know any different. They just accept the way they feel is how they're supposed to feel. Gaining control over inflammation may allow you to feel, move and perform better than you have in years.

In health,

Tom Nikkola

References:

1. Cefalu W. Inflammation, Insulin Resistance, and Type 2 Diabetes: Back to the Future? Diabetes.2009 Feb;58:307-308
   
2. McGeer PL, McGeer EG. Inflammation and the degenerative diseases of aging. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2004 Dec;1035:104-16
   
3. Gutierrez D, Puglisi M, Hasty A. Impact of increased adipose tissue mass on inflammation, insulin resistance, and dyslipidemia. Curr Diab Rep. 2009 9;1:26-32
   
4. The Cleveland Clinic Foundation. Inflammation: What You Need To Know. Cleveland Clinic online article. 3 Sept 2006.
   
5. Ratte P. Omega-3 and Omega-6 Fatty Acids: Getting the Balance You Need. Northwestern Health Sciences University online article. http://www.nwhealth.edu/healthyu/eatWell/omegas.html
   
6. Forsythe C, Phinney S, Fernandez M, Quann E, Wood R, Bibus D, Kraemer W, Feinman R, Volek J. Comparison of Low Fat and Low Carbohydrate diets on Circulating Fatty Acid Composition and Markers of Inflammation. Lipids. 2008;34:65-77
   

This article is not intended for the treatment or prevention of disease, nor as a substitute for medical treatment, nor as an alternative to medical advice. Use of recommendations in this and other articles is at the choice and risk of the reader.

Can the use of a multivitamin cause weight loss? A study published this month in the International Journal of Obesity has provided some evidence that it’s possible. Eighty-seven obese Chinese women took part in a 26-week study which compared the use of a multivitamin/mineral supplement, a calcium-only supplement or placebo. At the end of the study, those taking the multivitamin/mineral supplement had:

“significantly lower body weight, body mass index, fat mass, total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol, significantly higher resting energy expenditure and HDL cholesterol, as well as a borderline significant trend of lower respiratory quotient (which would signify an increase in fat utilization over carbohydrate) and waist circumference. The calcium group also had a significantly higher HDL cholesterol and lower LDL cholesterol levels compared with the placebo group(1).”

This is an interesting study in that the only nutritional change for the participants was the use of the multivitamin or calcium supplement. According to the study, the simple act of taking a multivitamin/mineral helped create these changes.

Past studies have looked at population use of multivitamins and compared weight with multivitamin use. Looking at a large population, individuals’ body weights tend to increase with a decreased use of a multivitamin(2). It would make sense that those who eat a more nutritious diet would also use a multivitamin, and also be at a more healthy weight. That is why it is difficult to look at a large population and say “people at healthier weights use a multivitamin, so the use of a multivitamin helps control weight.” This new study provides some evidence that a multivitamin can help control weight outside of a change in diet.

This leads to additional questions, such as “If multivitamin use helps reduce body weight, how does it work?” The challenge is determining if individual vitamins or minerals contribute to the weight loss, or if it’s the synergistic effect of some or all of them that contributes. Today, there is only speculation. It makes sense, though, that the combination of all of the vitamins and minerals would provide the weight loss benefit as opposed to any one of them by themselves. Our body’s chemistry is extremely complicated, and it is possible that a diet deficient in vitamins and minerals can disrupt our metabolism enough to cause weight gain.

As the study’s authors concluded, “…multivitamin and mineral supplementation could reduce body weight and fatness and improve serum lipid profiles, possibly through increased energy expenditure and fat oxidation.” Eat plenty of vegetables and fruit, but don't overlook the importance of a high-quality multivitamin.

See also: Vitamins, Minerals and Weight Management

In health,

Tom Nikkola

References:

Li Y, Wang C, Shu K, Feng RN, Sun CH. Effects of multivitamin and mineral supplementation on adiposity, energy expenditure and lipid profiles in obese Chinese women. Inter Jour Ob. 2010. 34(2)

Kimmons J, Blanck HM, Tohill BC, Zhang J, Kettel L. Multivitamin Use in Relation to Self-Reported Body Mass Index and Weight Loss Attempts. MedGenMed. 2006 8(3)

This article is not intended for the treatment or prevention of disease, nor as a substitute for medical treatment, nor as an alternative to medical advice. Use of recommendations in this and other articles is at the choice and risk of the reader.

Do you have your clock set to remind you to eat every few hours? Are you afraid that if you miss a meal you'll slow down your metabolism? Food manufacturers would love to have you eating every few hours, especially on high-carb, low-protein snacks that keep you craving more. Is it really necessary to eat every few hours in order to lose or manage weight?

According to a study published in Nutrition and Metabolism, people had more success with weight loss when they waited to eat until they felt hungry than when they stuck to a reduced-calorie, regular feeding schedule. Weight loss programs often recommend eating every few hours, but for some people, it may work against them.

See also: Meal Frequency, Metabolism and Weight Management

The purpose of the study was to understand if waiting for feelings of hunger before eating had a positive effect on weight loss, which it did. Overweight individuals in the study, who only ate when they felt hungry, ended up eating an average of 1082 calories (+/- 290), which is lower than is often recommended on many nutrition plans. It makes sense, though, that if an individual has excess body fat, that extra fat can be used to make up any additional energy needs. The overweight group in the study also ate fewer meals than the normal weight group, with an average of 3.4 meals per day. In the study, normal weight individuals tended to eat more calories than the overweight group without any weight gain. Without excess body fat to provide energy, normal weight individuals would need to eat more calories to meet their daily nutrient needs(1).

Intuitive Eating

Intuitive eating has been recommended as a way managing calorie intake by listening to one's body. When foods eaten come from high-quality, whole-food sources, it can be a practical approach to controlling food intake. However, eating nutrient-less, highly processed foods do not allow the body to provide the same kinds of hunger signals that whole foods do(2).

Many of the prepackaged snacks and meals are high in processed carbohydrates and low in quality protein. The high amount of carbohydrates in most peoples' diets sends their blood sugar up quickly, which also causes a large amount of insulin to be produced. Insulin sends blood-sugar crashing, which increases hunger. This can lead to a day of regular snacking on unnecessary calories. Over time, the unnecessary snacking can lead to weight gain.

Higher-protein diets tend to better maintain satiety. Higher-fiber intake from fruits and vegetables can also help support satiety. Eating plenty of protein and vegetables at each meal will likely lead to a longer duration of time before feeling the need to eat again. Protein shakes can also be useful for ensuring protein is consumed at each feeding. For those looking to lose weight, this can be a major key to success.

See also: Protein & Body Composition

Should anyone eat every few hours?

For weight management, it appears that eating the right types of foods, when you feel the need to eat, is more appropriate than simply forcing yourself to eat every few hours. To gain even more insight into what your body needs, testing your resting metabolic rate every few months and comparing your measurements with a journal of your food intake can be extremely helpful. You may be surprised to see how easy it is to keep your nutrient intake on target when your diet comes from real foods instead of processed foods.

There are individuals who would be best not waiting for feelings of hunger before eating. Those who are training heavily may find they have a reduced appetite. If they do not consciously make themselves eat, they may not recover from their workouts, or even worse, become overtrained. Those looking to add lean body mass may also need to eat more often than their body is telling them in order to stay in a positive caloric balance(3).

Summary

The more we have veered from a diet of natural, unprocessed foods, the more rules we end up needing to follow in order to not gain weight. How often we should eat is a great example. Eating small meals of high-quality food is a great way to give your body what it needs. Unfortunately, as a population, the "high-quality food" part of that principle can be forgotten. The lower the quality of food, the less satisfied our bodies may feel. The less satisfied we feel, the more food we may eat. That's not a good cycle to get on. If you can break the cycle and focus on quality nutrients, your body may clearly tell you how much it needs to maintain an optimal weight.

In health,

Tom Nikkola

References:

1. Ciampolini M, Lovell-Smith D, Sifone M. Sustained self-regulation of energy intake. Loss of weight in overweight subjects. Maintenance of weight in normal-weight subjects. Nutr & Metab. 2010, 7:4

2. Gary Taubes. Good Calories, Bad Calories. 2007. Anchor Books. New York, NY

3. Maughan R. The athlete's diet: nutritional goals and dietary strategies. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society (2002), 61, 87-96

This article is not intended for the treatment or prevention of disease, nor as a substitute for medical treatment, nor as an alternative to medical advice. Use of recommendations in this and other articles is at the choice and risk of the reader.

If you haven't heard much about Bisphenol A (BPA), it's likely you'll be seeing more about it in the near future. Evidence is mounting that shows the potential for many side-effects from this chemical. BPA is a chemical commonly used to make plastic products such as reusable water bottles and baby bottles. It's also used inside many food cans as a barrier to keep canned foods from tasting like the can(1). Although BPA has been considered safe since it was first used in the 1960s, the research done to obtain approval did not assess the issues BPA is associated with today. Recently, BPA has been found in many research studies to be associated with a growing list of health concerns. The National Toxicology Program released a detailed report on BPA in June of 2008 that detailed a small amount of concern with use of BPA. Since that time many more studies have been published. This January, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (USDA) published an updated report on BPA and noted that additional report was going to take place.

What and Where is BPA?

BPA is used to produce a barrier between food and whatever container the food is found in. The most common diet-related sources of BPA are hard plastic drinking bottles, baby bottles and canned foods and drinks(2). In a press release by the Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH) and Harvard Medical School, Karin Michels said "We found that drinking cold liquids from polycarbonate bottles for just one week increased urinary BPA levels by more than two-thirds. If you heat those bottles, as is the case with baby bottles, we would expect the levels to be considerably higher." Besides heating baby bottles, heating other plastic containers for food is not recommended, with or without BPA. When they are heated, it's more likely the chemicals that make up the plastic will be transferred into the food. Most single-use plastic bottles do not contain BPA(3), although their environmental impact is becoming more of a concern.

Dangers of BPA

The FDA has been slow to show concern over the use of BPA. It has been approved for use for about fifty years. Once chemicals are given approval for use, additional research must often prove there is proof of harm from them in humans rather than build the case for safety. The research can be costly, and the companies who have the money to fund the studies, the companies that produce the chemical, may be less inclined to fund research that could negatively affect the chemical's use. Therefore, much of the research on BPA has not been dismissed because of the study designs. Also, most research has been done on animals instead of humans. Obviously, few people would want to take part in a study of a chemical that could cause long-term harm(4).Some of the health concerns associated with the use of BPA include:

< Potential ability to mimic the body's hormones and disrupt the endocrine system(6)

< Increased obesity and has been shown to affect insulin, triglyceride and glucose levels(5,7)

< Possible negative effects on nervous system development(8)

< Adverse effect on dopamine production which could lead to dependence on certain drugs or increase attention deficits(9)

< Negative effect on thyroid hormone action(10)

< Increased breast cancer risk(11)

< Increased risk of prostate cancer(12)

< Colonic inflammation(13)

< Increased heart disease risk(14)

Based on the most recent evidence (as of 2008), the National Toxicology Program presented their concern about BPA as the following:

NEGLIGIBLE Concern: Reproductive toxicity in adult men and women and malformations in newborns

MINIMAL Concern: Developmental toxicity for fetuses, infants, and children (effects on the mammary gland and early puberty in females), and reproductive toxicity in workers

SOME Concern: Developmental toxicity for fetuses, infants and children (effects on the brain, behavior and prostate gland)(5)

Although the NTP concerns seem very conservative, it is a major step away from the claim that BPA is safe, which has been the case for the past 50 years. Many people have begun to understand that it's best to avoid BPA now rather than wait for the evidence to stay it poses a serious risk.

Summary

The FDA statements made in January  of 2010 make it clear that BPA could certainly be a potential health concern, especially in young children and infants. The FDA's current actions include "supporting the industry's actions to stop producing BPA-containing bottles and infant feeding cups for the U.S. market" and "facilitating the development of alternatives to BPA for the lining of infant formula cans." For the rest of the population (adolescents and adults), FDA "will support changes in food can linings and manufacturing to replace BAP or minimize BPA levels where the changes can be accomplished while still protecting food safety and quality." As the issue becomes more well-known, expect that food containers that use alternatives to BPA will make it explicit on their packaging. You may see some of that already, such as in reusable water bottles. Some food companies, such as Eden Foods and Trader Joe's, have already begun changing the materials in their canned foods to eliminate the use of BPA. The best way to reduce BPA in your diet is to cook whole foods instead of packaged foods. Then pack your leftovers in ceramic or glass containers. If you use a reusable water bottle, be sure it is BPA-free. As much as possible, cook real, fresh food.

In health,

Tom Nikkola

References:

1. FDA. Update on Bisphenol A for Use in Food Contact Applications. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. January, 2010.

2. Harvard School of Public Health. BPA, Chemical Used to Make Plastics, Found to Leach from Polycarbonate Drinking Bottles Into Humans. Harvard School of Public Helath Press Release. May 21, 2009

3. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Q&A: Bisphenol A and Plastics. JHBSPH Public Health News Center. June 23, 2008

4. Case D. The Real Story Behind Bisphenol A. Fast Company June 14, 2009.

5. National Toxicity Program. Draft NTP Brief on Bisphenol A. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health. June 11, 2008

6. Endocrine Today. Endocrince Society released scientific statement on endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Endocrine Today. June 11, 2009

7. Rubin B, Soto A. Bisphenol A: Perinatal exposure and body weight. Mole and Cell Endocrin. 304(1-2):55-62

8. Richter C, Birnbaum L, Farabollini F, Newbold R, Rubin B, Talsness C, Vandenbergh J, Walser-Kuntz D, et al. In vivo effects of Bisphenol A in laboratory rodent studies. Reprod Tox. 24(2):199-224

9. Jones D, Miller G. The effects of environmental nerotoxicants on the dopaminergic system: A possible role in drug addiction. Biochem Pharm. 76(5):569-581

10. Kashiwagi K, Furuno Kitamura, Ohta, Sugihara, Utsumi, Hanada, Taniguchi et al. Disruption of Thyroid Hormone Function by Environmental Pollutants. Jour Heal Sci 55:147

11. Jenkins S, Raghuraman N, Eltoum I, Carpenter M, Russo J, Lamatiniere C.A. Oral Exposure to Bisphenol A Increases Dimethylbenzanthracene-Induced Mammary Cancer in Rats. Environ Heal Persp. Vol. 117(6);2009

12. Prins G. Developmental exposure to Bisphenol A increases prostate susceptibility in adult rats: epigenetic mode of action is implicated. Fert and Ster 89:e41-e41

13. Braniste V, Jouault A, Gaultier E, Polizzi A, Buisson-Brenac, Leveque M, Martin P, Theodorou V. et al. Impact of oral Bisphenol A at reference doses on intestinal barrier function and sex differences after perinatal exposure in rats. Proceedings of the Nati Aca of Sci of the U.S.A. 2009

14. Melzer D, Rice N.E., Lewis C, Henley W.E. Galloway, T.S. Zhang B. Association of Urinary Bisphenol A Concentration with Heart Disease: Evidence from NHANES 2003/2006

This article is not intended for the treatment or prevention of disease, nor as a substitute for medical treatment, nor as an alternative to medical advice. Use of recommendations in this and other articles is at the choice and risk of the reader.

Soft drinks have received a growing amount of criticism related to our current obesity epidemic. Studies have shown that a large percentage of the extra sugar calories we're consuming come from sugar, as regular sugar, high fructose corn syrup, and other forms of refined carbohydrates. About half of those extra sugar calories come from soft drinks(1). High fructose corn syrup has taken the most criticism as it is found in a significant amount of food we eat. The New York City Health Department has taken an especially strong stance against soda, producing possibly the most disgusting commercial of all time. It was created to draw attention, and it certainly has. It can be seen below.

Is the Nostalgic Version Healthier?

In response to the criticism of high-fructose corn syrup and to align with the "natural foods" movement, Pepsi has released a few new products which are likely to mislead many consumers. Pepsi Throwback and Mountain Dew Throwback are targeted at consumers who associate "natural" with "healthy."

What is the difference between regular Pepsi and Pepsi Throwback? About 1 gram of sugar. Regular Pepsi contains 28 grams of sugar in an 8-ounce serving and Pepsi Throwback contains 27 grams. The reality is that "natural sugar" has almost the same glucose and fructose concentrations as high-fructose corn syrup. They are basically the same drink, although they may taste slightly different. Pepsi and Mountain Dew Throwback do not provide any better nutrition than the regular sodas do.

What About the Natural Version?

In some markets, Pepsi Natural is now available. With an "organic" look to it, and seemingly healthier ingredients, this is also sure to mislead some people. The ingredient list includes:

Sparkling water, sugar, natural apple extract (color), caramel color, citric acid, caffeine, acacia gum, tartaric acid, lactic acid, natural flavor, kola nut extract

This version has 25 grams of sugar. The tagline on the website says "Made with sparkling water, sugar, kola nut...WOW." Water, sugar, and an herbal form of caffeine. With three less grams of sugar, one could say it's healthier than regular Pepsi with its 28 grams. However, 25 grams of sugar is what the American Heart Association recommends for a day's worth of sugar intake. Consuming that in a single 8-ounce soft drink is not a health choice.

Summary

For the most part, sugar is sugar, and the average person in the United States consumes way too much every day. Calling it "all natural" may be a great way to increase sales, but it will not do anything to decrease the rates of obesity.

References

1. ConsumerAffairs.com. Study Links Soft Drinks With Obesity. www.consumeraffairs.com. August 9, 2006

One of the most common "tips" people read and hear about nutrition is "Everything in moderation." "No food is bad as long as you don't eat too much of it." Is that really the case for everyone? Or, can food have enough power over us, that even a small taste of certain foods can send us in a downward spiral of uncontrolled eating?

The foods we eat today are not the same things we've traditionally considered "food." With a blend of science and psychology, many of today's foods are designed to appear healthier than they are, subconsciously call your name and keep you from feeling full until you've eaten far more than you had planned. The combinations of salt, fat and sugar are intended to trigger your brain into craving foods in the same way your brain can become addicted to drugs or alcohol. When people say they can't stop eating something, it may be true that they really can't stop eating.

Feeding Your Brain Instead of Your Body

David Kessler recently wrote a fascinating book called The End of Overeating. This text provides an interesting look behind the curtain of food design. After understanding the incredible amount of thought and research that goes into your favorite flavor of potato chip, cookie or snack food at the grocery store, or meal at your favorite restaurant, you may understand how futile the idea of eating those foods in moderation may be.

It is rare for someone to have strong cravings for whole foods, such as plain vegetables, fruit, meats or dairy products. To make you crave those foods, it takes adding salt, fat, sugar, more fat and more sugar. Oftentimes, additional sauces are added which contain more salt, fat and sugar. Foods are designed to go down easy, with just a few chews, so you'll be less likely to have your hunger signals triggered. John Haywood,  who designs  restaurant concepts, was quoted in Kessler's book, "Processing creates a sort of 'adult baby food.'" The food goes down easier so it feels like we haven't eaten as much. The ingredients are designed to provide pleasure and make you want to come back for more. Going back to the idea of eating "real food," it would be tough to eat 2000 calories of lean meat, vegetables and fruit. It's pretty easy to take in those kinds of calories without realizing it when the food is processed for you.

Problems With Moderation

Why is moderation so difficult for people? For many people, having a small amount of an addictive food causes something called priming. Priming with food is much like the response when an alcoholic has just one taste of alcohol. The mechanisms in the brain are not totally understood, but it's very clear that a small amount of some foods for some people will create a strong drive to eat more. Chips, crackers, cake, coffee drinks - everyone is different. The addiction to these foods can be caused by how it makes people feel, and the more those foods are relied on for those feelings, the stronger the addiction becomes. As Kessler explains:

When we're hungry, almost any food can have a priming effect - in fact, that's one of the risks of dieting. But in the absence of hunger, only highly palatable foods are likely to spark further eating. "Having a little bit makes you want more. And then you have it, and it makes you want still more," observed (Harriet) de Wit.

How Can I Gain Control?

As explained above, hunger can be a major spark to fuel uncontrolled eating. Eating small, frequent meals helps to control hunger. The key with small, frequent meals is to avoid the high-carb snacks so often marketed for snacking. Snacks such as 100 calorie snack packs, granola bars, pudding snacks and other foods you see advertised on television, do little to control hunger and often result in people eating more than they otherwise would. If you are going to eat every few hours, it's important to eat plenty of protein with those meals, healthy fats and include fruit and vegetables whenever possible.

Eating frequently can help avoid excess hunger, but what about those foods that seem to call our name day after day?:Kessler provides offers four steps in the process or reversing the habity of overheating:

1. Awareness - Simply understanding that there are foods that have some control over some of us is an important first-step.
   
2. Engaging in competing behaviors - Keeping yourself away from the possibility of being pulled into those foods is the next step. If it means driving a different route to avoid a certain restaurant, eating on a full stomach or shopping with a friend or family member so you don't buy thing you don't need may be necessary. It may also be necessary to get out of the habit of buying foods for other family members that you have trouble with. If those foods are not good for you, they're not good for your other family members.
3. Formulate thoughts that compete with, and serve to quite, the old ones - Understand that you may not be able to have "just have one bite." Understand that you won't reach your fitness goals by eating those foods. You may increase your health risks by eating those foods, because it can result in one after another.
4. Support - Finding the right support is critical to controlling cravings and managing weight. Find other people with similar goals and challenges. Look for the right kind of friends to share your goals with. You will have a much better chance of success discussing your goals and challenges with people on the same page as you are. It's also important to beware of other friends or family members who don't care about what they eat or the shape they're in. They can quickly cause you to sabotage your plan. Programs like TEAM Weight Loss and eat are also great places to find support.

Summary

When discussing whole-foods such as vegetables, fruits, meat, dairy, nuts and seeds and high-quality nutritional supplements, eating in moderation makes total sense. It's also quite easy to eat in moderation when those are the foods your diet consists of. If it doesn't consist of those foods and includes more processed foods, moderation may not be the key to success, especially in those foods that seem to speak to you.

You may also like to read:

Meal Frequency, Metabolism and Weight Loss

Fitness Goals and Social Networks

In health,

Tom Nikkola

References:

David A Kessler, MD. The End of Overeating. 2009. Rodale. New York, New York.

This article is not intended for the treatment or prevention of disease, nor as a substitute for medical treatment, nor as an alternative to medical advice. Use of recommendations in this and other articles is at the choice and risk of the reader.

As the new year begins, finding a way to get more sleep, should be at the top of the list of resolutions for many people. More evidence is showing the negative effects of insufficient sleep. Unfortunately, people are getting less and less sleep. Many people are stuck in a cycle that looks like this: poor sleep, wake up tired, stay awake with caffeine and sugar, have trouble falling asleep from the caffeine and sugar, get poor sleep, etc. There can be many causes for poor sleep, but one of the most common causes is simply not "shutting down." It can be staying up too late on the computer, watching too much television, working too late or even just being active too late in a well-lit room.

Sleep Debt and Weight Gain

When it comes to weight management, it seems staying up more and sleeping less should make weight management easier. The more hours you're awake, the more calories you'll burn. However, that only makes sense if weight management were only about calories in and calories out. In reality, a lack of sleep can wreak havoc on the body's hormones, which can lead to weight gain even with a well-controlled diet.

In a study conducted at the University of Pennsylvania, Dr. Siohan Banks found, people restricted to four hours of sleep gained an average of 2.9 pounds over a 5-day period. The weight gain took place even though the study participants reported a reduction in food consumption. In a University of Chicago study, participants ate a diet equal to 90% of their resting metabolic rate. The study group completed two different trials on different dates. During one trial, the group ate the reduced-calorie diet and got sufficient sleep. In a second trial, their sleep was limited while on the reduced-calorie diet. Weight loss was the same during both trials. However, the weight loss during the sleep deprivation came from much more lean body mass loss than when sleep was sufficient. In the past, the association between sleep deprivation and weight gain was thought to come from increased calorie intake. The thought was, when people are awake more, their cravings for food increase. This can be the case in certain circumstances, especially the craving for sugar and other processed carbohydrates. However, more recent evidence shows weight gain can take place even when calories are controlled.

A lack of sleep has been shown to negatively impact glucose metabolism, which partially explains why a lack of sleep increases the risk of diabetes. The worse the body becomes at handling glucose, the higher the body's insulin levels can be. Insulin reduces the body's ability to burn fat, which explains why a lack of sleep can prevent the body from burning excess fat.

Two of the body's appetite control hormones, leptin and ghrelin, are also influenced by sleep deprivation. For some people, a lack of sleep could indeed affect their calorie consumption. The combination of increased appetite for some people, coupled with poor glucose metabolism can lead to an increased consumption of carbohydrates, which can further increase glucose metabolism issues.

What is the Solution?

Is it possible to make up for a work-week of sleep debt by sleeping more on the weekends? According to Dr. Michael Breus in Psychology Today, attempting to make up for regular lack of sleep during the week with a couple of days of more sleep doesn't work. On occasion, if you know you'll be short on sleep for a couple of days, you can sleep some extra hours in advance of the shortened nights, but making up for them later on doesn't work. The best way to overcome sleep debt is to overcome it. If that means missing the evening news or your favorite show, your health is more important.

The effect of sleep debt go beyond weight gain and diabetes. Sleep debt can increase irritability, stress and depression. It can also alter growth hormone production, lead to increased inflammation and suppress immune function. Those who do gain weight as a result of sleep debt, may be among the lucky ones, as they may see the effects on the outside and take action. Those who do not get enough sleep and do not gain weight from it, may not change their habits until something more severe takes place. Turn off the TV. Shut down your computer. Start getting more sleep. Do that day after day and you'll start waking up to a healthier, more fit body.

In health,

Tom

References:

Van Cauter E, Spiegel K, Tasali E, Leproult R. Metabolic consequences of sleep and sleep loss. Sleep Medicine. 9 Suppl. 1 (2008) S23-S28

T.S. Wiley. Lights Out: Sleep, Sugar, and Survival. 2000. Pocket Books, New York, New York.

Jim LaValle. Cracking the Metabolic Code. 2004. Basic Health Publications, Inc. Laguna Beach, CA

Wagner K. Link Between Extended Or Shortened Sleep Duration And Weight Gain. Medical News Today. June 11, 2009

Breus, M. Sleep Newzzz. Psychology Today Online Blog

This article is not intended for the treatment or prevention of disease, nor as a substitute for medical treatment, nor as an alternative to medical advice. Use of recommendations in this and other articles is at the choice and risk of the reader.