Archive for July 2nd, 2005
Mistake #5: Going on very low calorie diets (VLCD)
Research has shown little to no difference in the weight loss rate of 1200 calorie diets and 800 calorie diets. The 1200 calorie threshold is the point where further calorie restriction does not yield faster results. Diets in the range of 800 to 1200 calories a day suppress the resting metabolic rate from the very first day and after some weeks on these diets, the metabolic rate has dropped by up to 20%. This metabolic drop is just a consequence of the calorie restriction factor; other factors such as the level of leanness may further depress the calorie expenditure
.
A big percentage of the quick initial weight loss on a VLCD is water. VLCDs create an illusion of fast fat loss, while in reality most of the weight loss is water. It is hard to continue a very low calorie diet for a prolonged time because the harsh calorie restriction makes you hungrier than ever. People on VLCDs often lack energy and move very little. When you stop the diet, you are prone to instant overeating. Eating a very low calorie diet is the ticket to yo-yo dieting.
Instead of using very low calorie diets, I recommend diets with a mild calorie restriction and an emphasis on exercise. Overweight people who know what they are doing can employ VLCDs for a limited time. It is important to get enough vitamins and minerals from supplements, because such low calorie diets are woefully inadequate in nutrients. Water intake should be high.
Bodybuilders, powerlifters and athletes must stay away from very low calorie diets because the large calorie restriction causes a greater proportion of the weight loss to be muscle loss.
July 2nd, 2005
Mistake #3: Training with light weights and lots of reps
I have seen countless number of ladies come to the gym, get the lightest possible dumbbells, crank out some hundreds of reps and go home. Most often, these women do not get the results they want. The problem with this type of training is that it does not burn many “extra” calories unless you spend a considerable amount of time in the gym. Hefting Ken and Barbie weights in the gym has a MET value of 3, which means that it burns 3 times more calories than resting in bed. Almost anything you do during the day has a MET value of 1.2 to 2. Browsing the internet on your computer has a MET value of 1.5. Realize that almost anything you do during the day (average MET = 1.5) has about 50% overlap in calorie expenditure with training with very light weights (MET = 3). If you pump super light dumbbells in the gym, only about half of the calories burned are “additional”.
Of course, you can burn a considerable amount of extra calories training with light weights but you have to really extend the duration of this type of training. Curling 5 pound dumbbells for 4 sets of 20 reps and chit-chatting for 20 minutes in the gym is not going to burn many extra calories.
Remember the rule: the less intensive the activity (smaller MET), the greater the calorie expenditure overlap with casual activities; the less intensive the activity, the more time you have to spend doing it to expend a good deal of extra calories. Always subtract a MET of 1 to 1.5 to arrive at the additional expended calories.
Mistake #4: Using “average person” calorie estimations
You can find all kinds of tables showing the calorie cost of different physical activities on the internet. These tables don’t show your calorie expenditure. They actually tell you the calorie expenditure of an “average person”. These tables assume you are an average person that burns one calorie per minute at rest. Yes, we covered this in the first part of the article and it needs repeating. Most men burn more than one calorie per minute and most smaller women burn less than one calorie per minute at rest. In reality, these standard tables overestimate the calorie expenditure of smaller people and underestimate the calorie expenditure of bigger than average people. Combine this with the common mistake of counting all burned calories as “additional calories” and you have a wide range of possible miscalculations.
View Mistake #5
July 2nd, 2005
Mistake #2: Overreporting the “extra” calorie expenditure of exercise
Most people count the calories they spend exercising as “extra” calories. There is a difference between calories burned while exercising and “extra” calories burned exercising. Here is an example: you burn 300 calories on the treadmill instead of your usual activity such as watching TV at home; in reality, you have to subtract the calories you would have spent watching TV from these 300 calories to calculate how many additional calories you burned. Let’s say that watching TV, you would have burned 80 calories. In this specific case, you have expended 300 calories while exercising, and 220 “extra” calories.
Calorie counters mindlessly add the calories burned exercising as “extra” and in some cases, this practice can significantly influence the calorie calculations. Hence, calorie software counts the part of your usual activities that overlaps with the extra activities twice.
How to estimate the “extra” calories burned exercising?
In order to make the calculations more accurate, I shall first introduce the concept of MET values. MET values are a convenient way to calculate the calorie cost of activities. MET values are multiples of the resting energy expenditure per time. In plain English, a MET = 3 means burning 3 times more calories than resting. A MET = 1 signifies how many calories you burn at rest (your Resting Metabolic Rate or Basal Metabolic Rate). Whatever you do, you burn calories at a rate of at least MET = 1 with the only exception being sleeping which has MET = 0.9.
During the day, most activities include sitting and walking which have MET values between 1.2 and 3. Your total daily energy expenditure is calculated by multiplying your Resting Metabolic Rate by the average MET of all your activities. Is your head spinning?
Let’s use a real world example. Consider a female person with a Resting Metabolic Rate of 1200 calories a day. One day has 1440 minutes. Our example lady is burning 1200/1440 = 0.84 calories per minute at rest, which signifies a MET = 1. Let’s say our example woman just returned from an aerobics class, where she exercised for 30 minutes. General aerobic class training has a MET = 6. Our example lady has just burned 30 (minutes) x 6 (MET) * 0.84 (calories per minute) = 151 calories while exercising. Suppose our lady would have chatted on the internet instead of exercising (MET = 1.5). In this example, the woman substituted chatting on the internet with aerobic exercising. Remember, that every time you do something you substitute one activity for another. In order to get the extra calories, we have to subtract 1.5 (chatting) from 6 (exercising). Now let’s calculate the extra calories: 30 (minutes) X (6 - 1.5) (MET value) X 0.84 = 113 calories.
Let’s consider what a standard calorie counter would have done. First, it will assume an average calorie burn rate of 1 calorie per minute. Then the counter will find that exercising for 30 minutes will yield 30 (minutes) X 6 (MET) X 1 (calories per minute) = 180 calories. The calorie counter will add these 180 calories to your daily expenditure without considering that a part of these 180 calories is already accounted by your usual activities.
Do you now see the difference between 113 calories and 180 calories? If that woman spends 5 hours a week in that aerobics class, the standard calorie counters will overreport her calorie output by: (180-113) X 10 = 670 calories a week. The woman will be fooled that her metabolic rate has dropped while she just overestimated her calorie expenditure. Enter weight loss plateau, wasted time and efforts. Do you have the time for trial and error calorie estimations?
Remember these two rules:
*Report only extra activities to your calorie counter. If your walk to your office every day, do not log “walking to office for 30 minutes” as an extra activity. Consider only unusual activities that contribute to extra expended calories!
*Always subtract the calories you would have burned instead of exercising. A general rule is to subtract from 1.2 to 1.5 from the MET values. In some cases, you need to subtract a greater MET. If you substitute 30 minutes of bodybuilding (MET = 6) for 30 minutes of slow jump rope (MET = 
then the additional MET would be 8 - 6 = 2.
How to find the MET values of activities based on standard tables?
In order to make the above calculations, you need to know the MET values of activities. Standard tables give: name of activity, duration and calories. Standard tables assume an average calorie expenditure of one calorie per minute. To find the MET you just need to divide the calories by the duration.
Example: “Bicycling, stationary, general”, “20 minutes”, “140 calories”
MET of “Bicycling, stationary, general” = 140 / 20 = 7
I know these calculations are somewhat tedious and in many cases the standard calorie calculations are close to correct. However, in some cases they can significantly over or under-calculate the calorie expenditure of activities and compromise your weight loss plan with daily miscalculations.
View Mistakes 3 & 4
July 2nd, 2005
Mistake #1: Not changing your calorie plan as you lose weight. The fallacy of the “1200 calorie diet” plans and the like.
Most people fix their calorie intake to a given number and expect to lose weight at the same constant rate over a period of weeks. Hence, dieters look for 1000 calorie or 1800 calorie diet plans on the internet. The fixed calorie diet plans don’t work. If you burn 3000 calories a day at the start of a diet, after a week or two of losing some weight, you are no longer burning 3000 calories. Now you might be burning 2800 calories. If you fix your calorie intake in the face of a decreasing calorie expenditure, your weight loss will slow down more and more as you lose weight.
If you want to lose weight at a constant rate, you must repeatedly:
*decrease your calorie intake to accommodate the calorie expenditure drop
*increase your calorie output by exercising more
* do both
I would like to note that you must set realistic slow weight loss goals. If you go for fast weight loss you would not be able to sustain it for a long period unless you go extreme in the calorie reduction and exercise a lot. For people who have to lose more than 20 pounds (10kgs), the goal should be a loss of no more than 2 pounds or 1 kg per week. People who need to lose just a bit of weight should go for weight loss of 1 pound or half a kilogram per week.
Why does my calorie expenditure drop as I lose weight?
The most important factors are:
*You weight less. A smaller body burns less calories both at rest and while active
*You may involuntarily burn fewer calories. Dieters often lack energy and move less
*Calorie restriction suppresses the metabolic rate
*You have less body fat, which may further suppress your metabolic rate
These major factors contribute to an ever-decreasing energy expenditure as one loses weight. The more a dieter cuts calories, the bigger the calorie expenditure drop. The leaner the dieter, the greater the calorie expenditure drop.
Now you must understand that if you want to succeed in losing weight, you have to make changes in your nutrition plan. I recommend burning more calories, because being more active facilitates smaller calorie restriction and milder calorie expenditure drop.
It is very difficult to estimate the rate of the metabolic drop. Here is the general rule: the bigger you are, the smaller the rate of the metabolic drop. The more weight you lose, the more you have to cut calories or increase exercise. If you are overweight you might need to cut just 10 more calories for every lost pound, while if you are lean you might have to cut 60 calories for every pound lost. I picked these numbers just as an example.
View Mistake #2
July 2nd, 2005
Treated Waters
Reverse Osmosis
Reverse osmosis is a method of treating water that utilizes a semi-permeable membrane to separate beneficial drinking water from less beneficial contaminants. Water is forced through the membrane, and the membrane blocks the passage of any contaminants that are physically larger than the water molecules. While this process is useful for treating water in which bacteria and heavy metals are the largest concerns, it is not ideal for purifying municipally treated water. In municipal water, most bacteria have already been killed or removed while chlorine has been added as a disinfectant. In the reverse osmosis process, contaminants like chlorine and volatile organic chemicals-whose physical size is smaller than that of water-pass through the membrane with the water. Economically speaking, reverse osmosis wastes about three gallons of water for every one gallon it purifies. While reverse osmosis is valuable for treating well water, it is certainly not the most economic or even safest drinking water choice.
Distillation
Water distillers boil water and capture the steam to remove any impurities from that water. The basic premise of the distillation system is that any contaminants with a lower boiling point than water will not become a part of the purified steam (which is later condensed into “pure” drinking water). While this process is useful for removing fluoride, bacteria, and heavy metals, it does not remove chlorine or volatile organic chemicals. These chemicals have a higher boiling point than water and travel safely with the purified steam into the condensation container. Distillation, also, is a wasteful process; approximately 75% of the starting water is discarded with the contaminants. Similarly to reverse osmosis, distillation is a useful process for treating well water, but it does not meet the economic or safety demands of a wise water consumer.
Filtration
Filtration has recently emerged as the most efficient and effective water treatment process. Using both physical and chemical filtration processes, a home water filter is capable of removing several of the most dangerous water contaminants, including chlorine. In physical filtration, water passes over the granular bed of a filter media that physically blocks the passage of contaminants. In chemical filtration, water passes over a specifically designed, ionic media that chemically attracts contaminants, encouraging them to break their bond with water molecules. Filtration wastes no water in its process. In addition, a point-of-use water filter can also remove lead that may have corroded into drinking water. For both economy and safety-if one is receiving municipally treated water-water filters provide the best drinking water product.
July 2nd, 2005
It hardly needs to be stated that drinking an adequate amount of water is an essential component of any nutrition plan. Doctors and nutritionists have expounded for years upon the proven health benefits of drinking water. Listening to this advice, people around the world have made concerted efforts to include water in their diet and/or general nutrition plans. However, there are currently so many different water products to choose from that the actual integration of the “right” water can become quite a daunting task. Should one choose the convenience and economy of tap water or the commercially lauded “pureness” of bottled water? Should one attempt to treat his or her own water with a distiller, reverse osmosis system, or home water filter? What about mineral water? Or sparkling water? Each of these water choices surely offers some nutritional benefits, but which choice offers the most benefits with the least cost and risk? To help you in your decision, we ! have provided a quick and simple guide to many of the most popular drinking water options.
Tap Water
Thirty years ago, most water consumers would have received their water directly from the tap, accompanied by an occasional indulgence in bottled water Today, the popularity and safety of tap water has withered somewhat. While municipal treatment plants will remove some of the more dangerous contaminants (bacteria, pesticide runoff, etc.), the municipally added contaminants (chlorine, fluoride, etc.) can be quite as dangerous as the original contaminants. In addition, once tap water enters into a home’s plumbing system, corrosion of lead pipes further contaminates that water. The health dangers of these contaminants include cancer, dementia, and birth defects. While tap water may be the most economical and convenient choice, it is certainly not the safest.
Bottled Water
Two decades ago, bottled water emerged as the magic panacea to the impurities of tap water. Since its emergence, the bottled water industry expanded rapidly, seeking to fulfill rising demands for clean, pure water. Today, there are hundreds of bottled water companies, and each company promises the purest, healthiest, drinking water product. Bottled water, however, is not always the “pure, spring water” it is touted to be. More often than not, due to lax regulations and even laxer standards, bottled water is nothing more than bottled tap water. While this water may undergo further treatment, it and its stepchildren (mineral water and sparkling water) are not the superior water products they are supposed-and priced-to be. In general, one can have no assurance that bottled water is of a higher quality than common tap water, and the price of this lackluster product can be enough to strap many a family budget.
View Part II
July 2nd, 2005
Mediterranean diet
The Mediterranean diet is associated with longer life expectancy among elderly Europeans.
The Mediterranean diet is characterised by a high intake of vegetables, legumes, fruits, and cereals; a moderate to high intake of fish; a low intake of saturated fats, but high intake of unsaturated fats, particularly olive oil; a low intake of dairy products and meat; and a modest intake of alcohol, mostly as wine.
Current evidence suggests that such a diet may be beneficial to health.
The study involved over 74,000 healthy men and women, aged 60 or more, living in nine European countries. Information on diet, lifestyle, medical history, smoking, physical activity levels, and other relevant factors was recorded. Adherence to a modified Mediterranean diet was measured using a recognised scoring scale.
A higher dietary score was associated with a lower overall death rate.
A two point increase corresponded to an 8% reduction in mortality, while a three or four point increase was associated with a reduction of total mortality by 11% or 14% respectively.
So, for example, a healthy man aged 60 who adheres well to the diet (dietary score of 6-9) can expect to live about one year longer than a man of the same age who does not adhere to the diet.
The association was strongest in Greece and Spain, probably because people in these countries follow a genuinely Mediterranean diet, say the authors.
Adherence to a Mediterranean type diet, which relies on plant foods and unsaturated fats, is associated with a significantly longer life expectancy, and may be particularly appropriate for elderly people, who represent a rapidly increasing group in Europe, they conclude.
Source: Mediterranean diet and survival: EPIC-elderly prospective cohort study
July 2nd, 2005
Question:
1. Does Microwave cooking reduce the nutritional value of food any more than other forms of cooking (considering that it is usually faster and at a lower temperature, my guess is that any loss is less)?
2. Any other warning or food specific advice?
Answer:
Microwaves in your microwave oven cause water molecules in your food to vibrate, which in turn causes the surrounding molecules to heat up. Nutrient loss depends on length of cooking time and amount of water used. Microwaving is better than boiling, but frying will maintain more vitamins.
While there are groups of people who believe that microwaving food is dangerous, current research shows that microwaving your food is safe. There are, however, two warnings I have for you. People with pacemakers should not be near microwave ovens while they are in use, and you should not use plastic or styrofoam containers in the microwave, unless they are specifically made for use in a microwave. Some plastics may melt and give off harmful chemicals as a side effect. The best containers for microwaving are made of glass.
July 2nd, 2005
Besides the nutrients and occular nutrition foods, the following nutrients are associated with vision and eye health.
· Alpha Lipoic Acid – ALA improves the performance of other antioxidants in the body
· L-Taurine – helps protect the eyes from UV light and helps strengthen the retinal cells
· Lycopene – a strong antioxidant found in tomatoes
· N-Acetyl Cysteine – helps protect the eyes from damage by UV light and strengthens the immune system
· Quercetin – a strong antioxidant that helps maintain lens transparency; exists in small amounts in red wine
· Vitamin C – helps the body resist damage by oxidation (damage from long-term exposure to oxygen and light)
· Zinc – helps support macula and retina health; levels of zinc and eye health are definitely related
How can you obtain these occular nutrition nutrients every day?
Great question! There’re several options:
1 – Try to include the occular nutrition foods in the daily meal planning. Consuming more whole foods and healing and eye health should be a goal of everyone. While using nutrition to improve eye health is a good idea, very large quantities of the eye-healthy foods are needed to provide meaningful nutrient levels.
2 – Take the various nutrients individually in supplement form. Not a very practical idea since this would cost in excess of $100 a month with lots of individual supplements to take each day, which is somewhat cumbersome.
3 – Take a vision and eye health specific nutritional supplement. There ARE ocular health vitamins and ocular health nonprescription supplements that help maintain or even improve eyesight. This can be a practical and cost-effective solution. One such vision health product is called Extension Vision.
4 – Take a daily multiple vitamin/mineral supplement that INCLUDES the vitamins for ocular health providing the eye-healthy nutrients in meaningful quantities. This option can be the BEST way, assuming one can locate such a product. Most daily supplements either do not include all of the eye-healthy nutrients, or the quantities are so low as to be of little benefit.
July 2nd, 2005
Based on information provided by the U.S. National Eye Institute, results of occular nutrition studies have shown that consuming certain foods provides occular nutrition. In other words, using food to improve eyesight and nutrition to improve eye health has been proven by studies. Here is a list of food to improve eyesight:
Occular nutrition with collard greens, kale and spinach.
Studies show that eating foods rich in carotenoids is associated with reduced risk of developing age-related macular degeneration. Foods rich in carotenoids are leafy green vegetables such as spinach, collard greens and kale. Macular eye nutrition becomes increasingly important as we age.
Occular nutrition with green vegetables and corn.
Another study on occular nutrition has shown a reduced likehood of developing cataracts for persons with diets higher in lutein and zeaxanthin. Foods high in these two carotenoids are broccoli, collard greens, corn, green peas, kale, romaine lettuce, spinach, turnip greens and zucchini. Lutein is also found in egg yolks.
Persons with diets high in lutein and zeaxanthin were also less likely to need cataract surgery. In another study, persons ages 40-59 with macular eye nutrition diets high in lutein and zeaxanthin may experience reduced risk of developing adult macular degeneration.
Occular nutrition with blueberries, apricots and bilberries.
Besides the studies reported by the National Eye Institute above, other studies exist on occular nutrition and foods that improve eye sight.
Eating blueberries has been associated with the reduction of eye fatigue. Blueberries are related to cranberries, and both also help the body resist urinary tract infections.
Apricots are rich in nutrients such as beta carotene and lycopene that help promote good vision. Beta carotene is converted as needed by the body to vitamin A, an important antioxidant that resists oxidative stress damage to cells and tissues, including the eye lenses. Continued oxidative stress may result in the development of cataracts or damage the blood supply to the eyes and lead to macular degeneration.
Bilberries grow on small bushes and were used by British pilots to improve their night vision and eye health night vision. Fresh bilberries and bilberry jams would be sources of this ocular nutrition food. Bilberry seems to improve eye health by increasing the blood supply to the eyes (smoking, for example, decreases the blood supply to the eyes). The substance in bilberry that nourishes eye tissue is called anthocyanosides.
Occular nutrition with cold water fish and Omega 3 fish oil.
Cold-water fish such as salmon, tuna, cod, haddock as well as sardines are rich in the healthy Omega 3 oils. For example, Eskimos have almost no incidence of open-angle glaucoma with their diet rich in Omega 3 cold-water fish. Omega 3 is also associated with numerous other health benefits relating to improving heart health, arthritis symptoms relief and lowering chosterol. It is certainly one of the best foods for clear eyesight and eye health.
July 2nd, 2005
Having good vision is related to occular nutrition. Eye sight nutrition is an important part of helping maintain our vision and eye health as we age.
One can safely say that every part of the human eye needs nutritional support and nutrition to improve eye health (occular is actually spelled as “ocular”, but occular will be used on this page).
Healthy vision and the human eye is related to the health of the individual parts of the eye – the cornea, iris, macula, lens, optic nerve, pupil, retina and the vitreous humor. And occular nutrition is one of the ways good vision can be supported.
As we age, many things can go wrong with our vision. Ultraviolet light from the sun can damage the lens and the cornea. Wind, dust, chlorine fumes, automobile fumes, freezing temperatures and physical injury are examples of threats to good vision.
Vibration from driving and hitting potholes has a cumulative negative impact on eye health as well as long hours spent in front of a computer screen.
July 2nd, 2005
Could what you eat affect your risk for breast cancer?
We know that diet can have a big impact on health. Now there have been two recent studies suggesting that a high-fat diet - especially a diet high in animal fat - may increase a woman’s risk for breast cancer.
Researchers in Britain and the United States found in separate studies that women who ate more fat had a higher cancer risk than women who ate a lower-fat diet. The British study found that women who ate less than 40 grams of fat a day had half the risk for breast cancer than women who ate 90 grams of fat. The American study found that women who ate the most fat had a 33 percent higher cancer risk than the women who ate the least fat. Saturated fat, which is found in animal products like milk, cheese and meat, seemed to have the most effect on breast cancer risk.
Researchers at UT Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas say most previous research has shown that it’s a high-fat diet during childhood and early adolescence that has the greatest impact on adult breast cancer risks. Other research hasn’t found a strong link between adult fat intake and breast cancer risk.
At any rate, there are still numerous health benefits to eating a diet low in saturated fat. That’s a good way to lower your risk for heart disease and some other kinds of cancer.
July 2nd, 2005
Adding whole grains to your diet may help protect you from diabetes.
Type 2 diabetes has been on the rise in the United States in recent years. This condition occurs when insulin no longer effectively regulates blood sugar. Before people develop diabetes, however, they usually first develop symptoms that may lead to diabetes. These symptoms are grouped as the metabolic syndrome, and they include excess weight in the abdomen, high blood sugar, high blood pressure and low levels of good cholesterol. Preventing the metabolic syndrome from developing is a good way to prevent diabetes.
Researchers have found that people who eat about three servings of whole grains a day are less likely to develop insulin resistance or the metabolic syndrome. Unfortunately, most Americans barely get one serving of whole grains a day. Many patients at risk for insulin resistance and diabetes are encouraged to eat low-carbohydrate diets, but this study demonstrates that not all carbohydrates are alike. Carbohydrates that come in the form of whole grains may be beneficial.
Researchers at UT Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas have found that a high-fiber diet helps diabetics better manage their blood sugar levels. The American Diabetes Association recommends a diet incorporating fiber-rich foods, including fruits, vegetables and whole grains .
To add grains to your diet, switch from white bread to whole grain bread and from white rice to brown rice.
July 2nd, 2005
Make sure your guests carry home fond memories instead of stomach aches after your picnic.
Picnics and backyard cookouts are favorite ways to celebrate summer, but make sure the ants are the only uninvited guests. Doctors at UT Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas say hot weather can create the ideal climate for bacteria to grow in food, and food poisoning can be the result.
Dr. Greene Shepherd, a UT Southwestern toxicologist, has some tips for keeping illnesses like salmonella away from your picnics and cookouts.
First, refrigerate or freeze perishable foods as soon as you get them home from the store. If you’re not going to use meats within a couple of days, freeze them. Once you’ve thawed meat, cook it. Don’t re-freeze thawed meat.
Cook foods at recommended temperatures to kill bacteria. That’s especially important for ground beef, such as hamburgers. When grilling, cook hamburgers until they’re no longer pink inside.
Wash your hands thoroughly in warm, soapy water before you handle food, and wash any hands, surfaces or utensils that come in contact with raw meats. Don’t put cooked meats on the same plate you used to carry raw meats to the grill.
Don’t leave food standing for long periods of time. Eat hot foods as soon as they’re cooked or while they’re still hot. Remove cold foods from the refrigerator just before serving and put them away quickly.
July 2nd, 2005
