Plan ahead to avoid the fast food trap

With all the information available it’s tantamount to negligence to eat fast food.

But given a hectic lifestyle and time spent in our cars is almost unavoidable not to hit the “drive thru” from time to time.

In a better world you would have a cache of nutritious snacks for the road; nuts, fruits, water to get you through the day until the next healthy meal.

David Zinczenko, the author of “Eat This, Not That” offers up strategies to help you avoid the junk food jungle!

  

Thumbs up review, “The Obesity Epidemic: What caused it? How can we stop it?”

Where does the formula “1 pound equals 3500 calories” come from? Zoe Harcombe checked with all the major British organizations including the British Dietetic Association. The best answer, or worst depending on how one perceives this topic, was, “We don’t know.” Some of the other questions one sees in a list towards the beginning of the book are: Does energy in equal energy out? Does the law of thermodynamics apply to humans? Can you prove saturated fat causes heart disease? How does exercise relate to weight loss or gain?

When dealing with weight loss the public is bombarded by misinformation concerning calories which are a measurement of energy. According to Harcombe when you see the statement, “energy in equals energy out” you are getting a misapplication of the laws of thermodynamics. The first law doesn’t state energy in must equal energy out; it states that energy in a closed system is neither created nor destroyed.

The calorie theory, i.e., counting calories for weight control, was tested in the Minnesota Starvation Experiment. Thirty six healthy men participated in the study, with the goal being to reduce their weight by 25% in 24 weeks. A control period was utilized to figure how many calories were needed to maintain weight at a specific activity level. During the starvation period of the experiment, while trying to maintain the specified activity level, the participant’s diets were cut by 1640 calories. At this point the weight loss didn’t meet the researcher’s goal, so the participant’s calories were cut even further. According to the “Gold Standard Formula” promoted by so many so-called experts, “1 pound equals 3500 calories”, each participant should have lost 78 pounds; by week 20 all reached a plateau, and the average weight lost was 37 pounds.

Once the men were allowed to eat, they couldn’t get enough. Even when they were stuffed, the men still complained of hunger. None of the men had eating disorders prior to the experiment; it was clear according to the Minnesota Starvation Experiment, that no one can tolerate calorie deprivation over an extended period of time.

The people who do research as generalist/specialists in the area of obesity (Barry Groves, Gary Taubes, Sally Fallon Morell are the forerunners) have all come to the same conclusion – we must eat real food and not processed food. Man is the only chronically sick species on the planet and the only one eating his own food. (I would add that we have also given our pets obesity, diabetes and other modern illness, by feeding them our processed junk ). “Eat food as nature intends us to eat it” is surely classic common sense – but government, dietitians and doctors tell us instead to “Base our meals on starchy foods” and they have developed the Eatbadly Plate (I refuse to call it Eatwell), which could not be more different to what we have evolved to eat. (Do take a look at this plate and see for yourself sugar, cornflakes, weetabix, white flour, bagels, white pasta, sugared baked beans, fruit in syrup, Battenberg cake, sweets, coca-cola and so on. No wonder Kellogg’s sponsor the British Dietetic Association obesity conference!)

The Obesity Epidemic” has a very simple message; everything you think you know about eating right and weight loss, is way off the mark. With a mound of references to support her well stated arguments, Zoe expounds the truth while dissecting the dietary BS promulgated by industry, health agencies, doctors and dieticians. There is no doubt that the world is experiencing an obesity epidemic and it’s a shame that money not evidence based research is guiding our behavior. Anyone interested in the correct natural way to a healthy body, needs to read this book.

  

6 Natural strategies for protecting your vision

Despite what your eye doctor may say, there are natural, common-sense strategies you can employ to help protect your healthy vision.

1. Quit smoking, if you currently do. Smoking ramps up free radical production throughout your body, and puts you at risk for less-than-optimal health in many ways. If you want healthy vision for your whole life, you cannot afford to risk less-than-optimal eye health with cigarettes.
2. Lose weight. If your over weight you’re going to have all the negative effects associated with being over weight or obese like diabetes and cardiovascular disease, which can harm your eyes.
3. Care for your cardiovascular system. High blood pressure can cause damage to the minuscule blood vessels on your retina, obstructing free blood flow.
4. Normalize your blood sugar. Excessive sugar in your blood can pull fluid from the lens of your eye, affecting your ability to focus. And, it can damage the blood vessels in your retina, also obstructing blood flow.
5. Eat plenty of fresh dark green leafy vegetables. Studies have shown that a diet rich in dark leafy greens helps support eye health. And that those with the highest consumption of carotenoid-rich vegetables, especially ones rich in lutein and zeaxanthin, had increased vision health.
6. Consume omega-3 rich foods. Consume fresh caught salmon, or use a reputable omega – 3 supplement. A study published in the August 2001 issue of Archives of Ophthalmology found that consuming omega-3 fatty acids was protective of your healthy vision.

Mercola.com

  

Dr. Lustig explains why we are fat

So…why are we fat?

The incidence of overweight and obese individuals shown in the NHANES surveys has a linear relationship to fructose consumption in the U.S. According to the USDA?s data, total sugar and fructose consumption started to increase sharply in 1985 and reached a peak in 1999, which is congruent with the incidence of obesity. During 2000 through 2005 we see a slight drop in total sugar and fructose consumption, which is consistent with the leveling off of obesity rates during that same period. This drop in sugar, adds up to 10lbs of total sugar with fructose contributing 6 of those lbs.

Even more compelling, the USDA?s data in reveals total sugar consumption from 1970 to 1999 increased 26%, which at first glance doesn?t seem like much. Also note that from 1970 to 1983 total sugar consumption did not increase while obesity rates did. This would lead one to infer that sugar is not a major contributing factor to our expanding waist-lines. However, take another look. While total sugar consumption did not increase from 1970 to 1983, fructose consumption tripled. More-over, between 1970 and 1999 with only a 26% increase in total sugar consumption, fructose consumption increased 425%.

Evolution of the Unhealthy American

In the below video Dr. Lustig puts the kibosh on the positive reputation fructose has been allowed to hold even in the face of mounds of evidence pointing to the contrary.

  

ALERT: Eliminate these 2 toxins from your diet

Fructose

Sources: This garbage is found in everything from soda to cereal. It?s literally in thousands of products. Read your labels.

The ?fat carb? has been in our food supply for more 35 years. We?ve been led to believe that fructose from high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is akin to naturally occurring sugar, the same that?s found in fruit. Nothing could be further from the truth. The fructose from HFCS is not the same as the molecule from sucrose (table sugar), or fruit leveulose. [1] Is it any wonder they have worked so hard to link HFCS to something natural and healthy like fruit?

The problem is our bodies metabolize HFCS differently than sucrose or fruit leveulose. When we consume sucrose, our bodies convert it into glucose, which raises our blood glucose levels. We then get an insulin spike to shuttle the glucose where it?s needed. When we consume HFCS, unlike natural sugar, it is metabolized in the liver and produces high triglyceride levels which are linked to heart disease. In addition, HFCS does not induce insulin secretion, nor does it boost leptin production, both of which are key signals for decreasing hunger. Hence, the name ?fat carb.? Eat it, get fat. Eat more, get fatter.

Russ Bianchi, a pharmacologist and toxicologist, explains: ?There is no safe form of fructose available from any source, unless already existing in an unprocessed apple or other piece of fruit. The science is known and epidemiologically proven.? [2]

If you follow the obesity epidemic in the U.S., you?ll find that Americans are eating less fat. In 1965, men ate an average of 139 grams and women 83 grams of fat per day. In 1995, men ate 101 grams and women ate 65 grams of fat per day. [3] With the way fat has been demonized over the last four decades, you?d expect an increase in fat consumption to be the main cause of the obesity epidemic, yet it?s not.

What does mirror the increase in fat Americans is the consumption pattern of HFCS. Between the years of 1970 and 1990, HFCS consumption increased 1000% and today represents 40% of the sweeteners added to foods and beverages. In fact, HFCS is the sole caloric sweetener in soft drinks in the United States. Is it any wonder that obesity is an epidemic? One of the main ingredients in our food supply not only converts to fat when we consume it, it facilitates fat storage. And Americans as a whole are eating more and more and more.

Trans Fat

Sources: Any foods containing ?shortening,? ?partially hydrogenated vegetable oil? or ?hydrogenated vegetable oil? in the ingredients list.

These manmade fats, like fructose, are in thousands of products. I cannot stress enough the importance of reading food labels. However, do not be fooled by products that claim ?zero trans fat?. Showing the power the edible oil and processed food industries have, the FDA agreed to allow food labels to list trans fat as zero if it contains a half a gram or less. And yes, small amounts of trans fat will yield negative consequences over time.

Decades of research show the consumption of trans fats to be detrimental to health. As early as the 1940s, researchers found a strong correlation between cancer, heart disease and the consumption of hydrogenated fats. [4]

What are trans fats? They are poison in our food supply. The latest government study confirms that trans fat is directly related with heart disease and increases LDL cholesterol. Because of that, the Institute of Medicine, a branch of the National Academy of Sciences, declared, “There is no safe amount of trans fat in the diet.? [5] ?There should be a warning on food made with this stuff like there is on nicotine products. It?s that bad for you.”, says Dr. Jeffery Aron, a University of California at San Francisco professor of medicine and one of the nation?s leading experts on fatty acids and their effect on the body. [6]

Poison is the most appropriate description of trans fat I can think of. These man-made fats are literally toxins in our bodies. Trans fat is produced through the process of hydrogenation. This process turns polyunsaturated oils into fats that are solid at room temperature, which are used to make products like margarine and shortening.

1. Mercola, J. ?Debate about the dangers of high fructose corn syrup.? Mercola.com
2. “Is lots of fructose water foolhardy? Apology, too.? Sugarshockblog.com, 13 September 2005.
3. Anand, Rajen S., ?Is fat consumption Really Decreasing?? Family Econ and Nut Rev. Summer 1998.
4. USDA Economic Research Service.
5. Severson, Kim. ?Trans fat in food: as bad as it gets. Scientists? warning likely to bring listing on nutrition labels.? San Francisco Chronicle. 11 Jan, 2002. SFGate.com
6. Severson, Kim. ?Hidden Killer, It?s trans fat. It?s dangerous. And it?s in food you eat everyday.? San Francisco Chronicle. 30 January, 2002. SFGate.com

  

Related Posts