| Search Weight Loss Topics: |
Posted: April 24, 2017 at 5:42 pm
Monday, April 24, 2017 3:46 p.m. CDT
By Will Boggs MD
(Reuters Health) - Consuming too much choline, a nutrient sold in over-the-counter dietary supplements, can boost the risk for blood clots, researchers warn.
Thats because bacteria in the intestines interact with choline to produce a compound that encourages platelets to clump together and form clots.
Choline is found in a variety of foods including meat, eggs and milk. Its whats known as an essential nutrient, which means the body cant make enough choline on its own and so it must be provided in food.
But unless prescribed by your doctor, avoid supplements with choline, said senior study researcher Dr. Stanley L. Hazen of the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio, in a statement.
Hazen and colleagues had previously shown that bacteria in the intestines interact with choline and other dietary nutrients to produce a substance called TMAO, and they linked high levels of TMAO in the blood to an increased risk of cardiovascular diseases.
Also, in studies in animals, they linked higher levels of TMAO to a higher risk for blood clots.
Their latest research, reported in the American Heart Associations journal Circulation, shows that choline in food can affect blood clotting risk in humans, and in some cases, that risk can be minimized by taking low-dose aspirin.
In the current study, they gave oral choline supplements to 18 volunteers and then measured TMAO levels, along with the responses of platelets, tiny particles involved in clotting.
After taking the supplements for up to two months, participants had more than 10-fold increases in blood levels of TMAO. The tendency of their platelets to clump together and form clots was also significantly increased, in direct proportion to the increases in TMAO levels.
Aspirin, which reduces the stickiness of platelets, reduced both the increases in TMAO and the increases in platelet clotting associated with choline, but it didn't completely eliminate them, the researchers found.
The findings are of particular concern in people at high cardiovascular risk, whose increased risk of blood clots may not be overcome by low-dose aspirin. The researchers recommend further study.
They also say it's worth exploring whether low-dose aspirin is beneficial in otherwise healthy people with high TMAO in the blood although at this point, they cant explain why the aspirin seemed to bring down TMAO levels.
Dr. Herbert Tilg from Medical University Innsbruck, Austria, who has studied the link between gut microbes and blood clots, told Reuters Health by email, This and earlier studies show that we now definitely have to consider dietary aspects in this context, i.e., diet drives thrombosis risk.
These associations are totally new and unexpected: a link between diet - gut microbiota - and thromboembolic events, he said.
They are extremely relevant for the public and in medicine, given that clots are very, very common and can be fatal, he said.
Tilg added that preventive strategies are needed, and probably aspirin is not sufficient. This needs further studies.
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/1q3uqj1 Circulation, online April 24, 2017.
See original here:
Diet and gut bacteria linked with blood clots - KFGO
Posted: April 24, 2017 at 5:42 pm
Cutting out certain amino acids the building blocks of proteins from the diet of mice slows tumour growth and prolongs survival, according to new research published in Nature.
Researchers at the Cancer Research UK Beatson Institute and the University of Glasgow found that removing two non-essential amino acids serine and glycine from the diet of mice slowed the development of lymphoma and intestinal cancer.
The researchers also found that the special diet made some cancer cells more susceptible to chemicals in cells called reactive oxygen species.
Chemotherapy and radiotherapy boost levels of these chemicals in the cells, so this research suggests a specially formulated diet could make conventional cancer treatments more effective.
The next stage would be to set up clinical trials with cancer patients to assess the feasibility and safety of such a treatment.
Dr Oliver Maddocks, a Cancer Research UK scientist at the University of Glasgow, said: Our findings suggest that restricting specific amino acids through a controlled diet plan could be an additional part of treatment for some cancer patients in future, helping to make other treatments more effective.
Professor Karen Vousden, Cancer Research UKs chief scientist and study co-author, said: This kind of restricted diet would be a short term measure and must be carefully controlled and monitored by doctors for safety. Our diet is complex and protein - the main source of all amino acids - is vital for our health and well-being. This means that patients cannot safely cut out these specific amino acids simply by following some form of home-made diet.
Amino acids are the building blocks that cells need to make proteins. While healthy cells are able to make sufficient serine and glycine, cancer cells are much more dependent on getting these vital amino acids from the diet.
However, the study also found that the diet was less effective in tumours with an activated Kras gene, such as most pancreatic cancer, because the faulty gene boosted the ability of the cancer cells to make their own serine and glycine. This could help to select which tumours could be best targeted by diet therapy.
Dr Emma Smith, science communication manager at Cancer Research UK, said: This is a really interesting look at how cutting off the supply of nutrients essential to cancer cell growth and division could help restrain tumours.
The next steps are clinical trials in people to see if giving a specialised diet that lacks these amino acids is safe and helps slow tumour growth as seen in mice. Wed also need to work out which patients are most likely to benefit, depending on the characteristics of their cancer.
Reference
Maddocks, O. D., Athineos, D., Cheung, E. C., Lee, P., Zhang, T., Niels J. F. Van Den Broek, . . . Vousden, K. H. (2017). Modulating the therapeutic response of tumours to dietary serine and glycine starvation. Nature, 544(7650), 372-376. doi:10.1038/nature22056
View post:
Diet Therapy Could Be Effective at Starving Cancer - Technology Networks
Posted: April 24, 2017 at 5:42 pm
Q13 FOX | Diet sodas may be tied to stroke, dementia risk Q13 FOX Gulping down an artificially sweetened beverage not only may be associated with health risks for your body but also possibly your brain, a new study suggests. Artificially sweetened drinks, such as diet sodas, were tied to a higher risk of stroke and ... Study links diet soda to stroke and dementia risks Study: Diet soft drinks linked to strokes, dementia Study claims a link between diet sodas and stroke and dementia |
See the article here:
Diet sodas may be tied to stroke, dementia risk - Q13 FOX
Posted: April 24, 2017 at 5:42 pm
By focusing more on men, Nutrisystem is able to get a leg up on rivals. (NutriSystem)
Bikini-bod season is nigh upon us.
It's a goodthing for Nutrisystem (NTRI) that the weight-loss plan provider is expected to reporta pretty killer "diet season."
When the company reports first-quarter results Wednesday after the close, analysts are expecting profit to almost double, with revenue jumping 25%.
Craig-Hallum analyst Alex Fuhrman said in a note to clientslast week that "all signs point to another beat and raise" for Nutrisystem, citing "strong" Google searches, ramped-up advertising and developments with the South Beach Diet brand.
"We believe the core Nutrisystem brand has resonated well with consumers in 2017, and a focus on men (is) likelyyielding stronger performance than other diet space peers," he wrote in his Thursday report. "Combined with the continued advertising of the South Beach Diet brand, which is indicative of strong consumer interest, we believe Nutrisystem will continue to gain marketshare in 2017."
When it comes to losing weight, the tsunami of options can be overwhelming.Googling "diet plan" yields 33 million search hits. Searching for "best way to lose weight" brings up more than twice as many results.
Diet delivery plans now also contend, to a degree, with home-delivery meal-kit options like Blue Apron, Hello Fresh and others though many of those cater to amateur gourmands, not necessarily health-conscious diners. Some, like Pete's Paleo, Sakara and Purple Carrot, appear to cater to both.
The company's five-day weight-loss kits and packaged products such as its NutriCrush bars and shakes and Thick Crust Pizza are available at Wal-Mart (WMT).
Now it has another well-known brand in its portfolio. After acquiring the South Beach Diet brand in December 2015, Nutrisystem reintroducedit at the start of this year as a diet-plan system that includes meal deliveries. The company expects South Beach to add $20 million to $25 million to revenue in fiscal 2017, with "meaningful growth" expected the following year.
Investors felt goodabout the last batch of earnings and sales figures in February. Shares of Nutrisystem took off like a rocket after handily beating the Street's fourth-quarterforecasts. Breaking clear of a period of consolidation in heavy volume, the stock popped 18.6% to 46.50 on Feb. 28 and hasn't looked back.
That action led analyst Matthew Gall of Barrington Research to downgrade the stock to market perform from outperform "solely based on valuation."
"Guidance for the Q1 diet season and (fiscal 2017) was particularly strong and ahead ofconsensus expectations, which we believe is now reflected in NTRI's current share price," he wrote on March 24, adding that trading at a premium to its diet peers "reflects consistently strongexecution by management and higher growth rates."
IBD'S TAKE: Nutrisystem's jump after its last earnings report sent shares soaring, but also extended the stock. Still, shares keep climbing and are up nearly 20% from the Feb. 28 rally. The stock is ranked No. 1 in IBD's Cosmetics and Personal Care Group.
Shares now are in the mid-50s, finishing Monday's session down 0.8% to 55.05.
For the first quarter, Nutrisystem is expected to post revenue of $202.9 million for the quarter that includes the key January-February "diet season" months that come courtesy of New Year's resolutions and follow the winter holidays. Earnings are seen catapulting 89% to 17 cents a share from 9 cents in the prior-year period.
Unlike, say, Oprah Winfrey-endorsed Weight Watchers International (WTW), Nutrisystem has a greater focus on building its men's business, with commercials targeted specifically to that demographic. That is seen as helping the company get a greater slice of the presumably low-calorie diet-plan pie.
And compared withpeers such as Hydroxycut, Jenny Craig, Medifast and Weight Watchers, which have toned down their ad spending in April from the prior year, Nutrisystem has accelerated its spending on national TV commercials, which Craig-Hallum's Fuhrman sees as an indicator that the spring ads are performing well with customers.
Fuhrman told Investor's Business Daily that men account for 25%-30% of Nutrisystem's customer base, about double that of Weight Watchers' clientele.
Diets are tricky things, though.A 2015 John Hopkins analysis of 32 commercial weight-loss programs found that "few" are backed by rigorous scientific data; it found thatonly Weight Watchers and Jenny Craig were backed by clinical trials of a year or longer.
Nutrisystem offered "promising weight-loss results," said researchers, but more data were needed to evaluate long-term effectiveness of the plan.
It fared well enough with health experts at U.S. News & World Report. The publication ranks Nutrisystem in fifth place in its Best Commercial Diet Plans category and No. 16 in Best Diets Overall.
9:43 AM ET Track the latest news and stocks to watch across the tech, retail, finance and other industries.
9:43 AM ET Track the latest news and stocks to watch across the...
Here is the original post:
The New America - Investor's Business Daily
Posted: April 24, 2017 at 5:42 pm
Fish has long been Paul Greenbergs bread and butter. But last year, the fisherman, journalist, and author of Four Fish and American Catch took his relationship to seafood to a new level. While researching his next book, The Omega Principle, Greenberg spent a year eating fish multiple times a day, every day with the goal of raising his bodys level of omega-3 fatty acids. Meanwhile, he also traveled to Peru to visit the worlds largest wild fishery, to Norway to see the birthplace of modern aquaculture, and to Alaska, the last thriving wild salmon habitat in the world.
Greenbergs journey is also at the center of an episode of FRONTLINE called The Fish on My Plate, which airs Tuesday, April 25 on PBS. We talked to him about the film, his experimental diet, and the future of the fish on our plates.
You ate seafood every day for a year while filming this segment. Lets start with that. Why did you do it?
I have marginally high blood pressure, marginally bad cholesterol, and my triglycerides are on the high side, so I was hoping that those things would get addressed. Theres this thing that happens where you see around the corner of 45 and catch a glimpse of 50 in the middle distance and you just dont feel as sharp. And all the things that fish and omega-3s are supposed to do seem to relate to all the problems that you have when you realize that you truly are middle-aged. So, I was hoping to have a better, a less burdened, middle age than I might have had.
We wont spoil it for the audience, but it didnt quite work out how you planned. It has been six months since you stopped; what is your relationship to eating seafood now?
Well, Ive also been evaluating it for next my book and Ive come to the conclusion that a diet where pescatarianism is a large element is probably a good thing for the planet and a good thing for a persons health. That doesnt mean fish every day, but something more like the pescatarian Mediterraneanso it has all the qualities of the Mediterranean diet, but your primary protein more often than not would be fish.
But the other thing that you have to take into consideration is mercury and other pollutants. If you think about not wanting to push the gas pedal on mercury above a certain level, and attuned your fish consumption accordingly, you could strike that balance between pollutants and nutrition and probably get to a point where youd have a pretty healthy diet.
Id always been led to believe that if youre eating fish that is low on the food chain, and focusing on wild salmonwhich also eat relatively low on the food chainyoud avoid mercury. But it just turns out that there is trace mercury in almost every piece of seafood. As [the biologist] said in the film, its like death by a thousand cuts. And so you really do need to be conscious of it.
This filmand the forthcoming bookis much more health-focused than your other work. Do you want to talk about your decision to go that route?
My audience keeps expanding, which is great, but every time the audience expands I have to take a step back and find the right altitude at which to fly to explain these things. And you know to some degree the omega-3 in the film is the MacGuffin. Its important, but its also a way to talk about all these other things.
Omega-3 is also the Forrest Gump molecule. In the film, Forrest Gump shows up at these key moments throughout history and youre not quite sure what he does, but you know its important. And if you look at it from a health perspective, omega-3 exactly reflects our obsessions of the moment. In the 70s and 80s everyone was afraid of dropping dead of a heart attack, so Omega-3s were immediately plugged into cardiology.
They used to think it was connected with lowering cholesterol, but it seems like the evidence is it doesnt lower cholesterol. But that was our obsession and now that we have angioplasty and statins people arent as worried about heart attacks anymore. Now theyre worried about losing their minds and becoming demented. So, where has the Forrest Gump molecule wandered now? Its into the brain. So, thats the altitude that Ive chosen to take in my next book. And at the same time, it frees me up to talk about food systems which is to me the really important stuffmuch more important than my own heart and brain.
Lets talk about changing perceptions about fish farming. Do you find it ironic that while a small percentage of the population has questioned many of the methods behind aquaculture in the last decade, the actual numbers of pounds of farmed fish that were consuming has grown enormously?
Yes, its like [the moment in] Casablanca where Louie comes in and raids the casino and says, Im shocked, shocked to see gambling going on in this establishment! Then the croupier goes up to Louie and says, Your winnings, sir? and he says, Thank you very much. Thats kind of the way we feel about farmed fish.
But the fact is that fish farming is getting better. Theres one very basic metric that has really changed, and thats the amount of fish eaten by farmed fish. The fish-in-fish-out ratio has really come down. The possibilities of alternative feed really have risen. And I actually think in about five years things like algae and soldier flies will be a really major part of the aquaculture portfolio. And well start to see that argument [against farmed fish] getting dropped.
In 2007 and 2008, when I was doing the bulk of the research for Four Fish, the aquaculture industry was in a certain place. But it has changed. You had Ted Danson screaming at the top of his lungs and the celebrity on the Oceana board, saying, Nobody should be farmed fish. Now you have people like Leo DiCaprio who came out and strongly urge that everybody eat more farmed fish.
Any piece of seafoodbe it farmed or wildis going to have a smaller carbon footprint than any piece of land food meat, so its hard to argue against it in a much bigger sense.
A lot of folks are pointing to open-ocean or offshore aquaculture as a promising solution. What are your thoughts about that?
I certainly have thoughts about it; I dont know if Ive made a decision about it. On a basic level, putting aquaculture pens in the open ocean with more current and more water [for circulating the waste] certainly seems to make more sense. A few years ago I wrote an article for Conservation Magazine about open-ocean aquaculture and I kind of stressed a somewhat positive vision of it. I ran it by an ocean conservationist and he was just livid that I would even suggest this idea because he argued that if you had tons and tons of sea pens out there, youd essentially change the chemistry of the ocean and it could have large consequences. And I suppose thats true but its also a hypothesis.
If you could irrefutably prove that any addition of aquaculture will result in an offset of wild fish capture then aquaculture wins. But so far we havent been able to prove that. And I dont know that we ever will. So, that to me is the larger question. If we were to add a bunch of open-ocean pens and introduce these additional nitrates and so forth into the offshore environment but it meant taking away thousands of miles of long lines that [inadvertently] catch turtles and other aquatic life, maybe it would be okay to have a few ocean pens. But that hasnt happened yet.
Do you want to talk about the good actorslikeKvary Fiskeoppdrett,the fish farm you visited in the Arctic Circle?
As far as I could see, if youre going to do net pen aquaculture, that is about as good as it could get. For one thing, they have much lower stocking densities than the industrial guys further to the south [of Norway]. They were using lump suckers to eat the sea lice off of the salmon. They create this artificial kelp bed that the lump suckers cling to and the salmon swim in and they get kind of cleaned off like in a car wash. The feed they use has a low fish ratio and its all coming from waste from other fisheries.
So, you know, theyve pushed the model as far as it could go [sustainability-wise]. On the other hand, there are people who say theres a limit to how far that model can go. And thats what drove us to go see Bren Smithsmussel and oyster operation in Connecticut because that is truly different and truly less impactful than salmon farms. But do you want to eat mussels as often as you eat salmon?
Yeah, Ill be really curious to see if Bren can grow his operation in the current market.
Were flesh eaters. As Americans, weve really gotten used to wanting a big chunk of meat-like flesh on our plate and its going to be very hard to change that.
One of my favorite parts of the film was the scene in the fish market, where you talked about what you buy and why. Youre the person I think a lot of us should be going to the fish market with.
Thanks. Maybe Ill start a little side business after my next book is done.
Yeah, you could probably give thousand-dollar tours to women from the Upper East Side. Anything else you want to add about the film?
If folks want to learn more they should read my books, Four Fish and American Catch. Films take you places that you couldnt normally go and show you images that you wouldnt see, but to really ponder things, I still believe in the power of the written word.
This interview has been edited for clarity and length.
Posted: April 24, 2017 at 5:42 pm
People may choose a vegan diet for a variety of reasons, be it for the environment, animal ethics or health.
However, some people give the vegan diet a try purely to lose excess weight and perhaps for good reason.
Vegans tend to have lower body mass indexes (BMIs) than the general population, and several studies acknowledge that a vegan diet can promote weight loss (1,2).
Not to mention, a well-planned vegan diet is nutritious, can lower blood sugar and cholesterol levels and may even decrease your risk of certain diseases (3,4).
This article explains how a vegan diet can help you lose weight and shares some tips on how to follow this diet in a healthy way.
Observational studies often report vegans to be thinner or to have lower BMIs than the general population (2,5).
In addition, randomized controlled trials, the gold standard in scientific research, show that when all other factors are controlled for,vegan dietscan help participants lose significant amounts of weight (6,7).
In one study, people following a vegan diet for 18 weeks lost 9.3 pounds (4.2 kg) more than those who made no dietary changes (6).
Another study compared vegan diets to vegetarian,pescatarian, semi-vegetarian and omnivorous diets.
Participants assigned to the vegan group lost an average of 7.5% of their body weight over the 4-month study period. This was more than twice as much weight as the average lost in each of the other four groups (8).
A vegan diet even appears to help people lose weight more effectively than diets commonly recommended by several different health authorities.
In fact, a low-fat vegan diet helped participants in one study lose 2 to almost 3 times more weight than diets recommended by the American Dietetics Association (ADA), the American Heart Association (AHA) and the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) (1,3,4,9,10).
In a study that followed up with participants one year after the initial study period, researchers reported that all participants regained some weight.
However, those initially on the vegan diet remained 5 pounds (2.3 kg) lighter than those initially assigned to the control weight loss diet (1).
Summary:Vegan diets can help individuals lose significant amounts of weight and keep it off. They could be even more effective than diets currently recommended by certain health authorities.
In order to lose weight, you need to create a calorie deficit.
A vegan diet can help you create this calorie deficit in several ways.
For starters, a plant-based vegan diet generally contains a good amount of fruit, vegetables, whole grains, beans, peas, nuts and seeds.
Such foodstend to be rich in fiber, a nutrient that can help reduce hunger and increase feelings of fullness (11,12,13).
Higher fiber intake may help you achieve the calorie deficit needed forweight losswithout restricting your calorie intake or portion sizes.
Studies show that consuming an extra 14 grams of fiber each day may naturally decrease your calorie intake by as much as 10%. This could lead to a loss of 4.2 pounds (1.9 kg) over a period of approximately 4 months (14).
The high fiber content of the vegan diet may also explain why study participants assigned to a vegan diet often lose weight despite being allowed to eat until they feel full (1,4,9,15).
Due to its higher content of fruits and vegetables, a vegan diet provides fewercaloriesfor the same volume of food. In other words, its less calorie-dense.
Practically speaking, you would have to eat approximately 10.5 ounces (300 grams) of cooked broccoli or about 10 ounces (283 grams) of melon to consume 100 calories.
Meanwhile, it would only take around 2 ounces (56 grams) of chicken breast or about 1 ounce (28 grams) of cheese to reach the same number of calories.
The lower calorie density of plant foods causes you to feel full with fewer calories, thus potentially contributing to the calorie deficit needed for weight loss.
However, its important to note that when matched for calories, a vegan diet is no more effective than a control diet for weight loss (16).
Many of the foods you come across each day contain animal products.
These include high-calorie, low-nutrient options such as processed foods and baked goods, which are deceptively easy to overeat (17).
Studies show that being exposed to such foods makes you more likely to consume them (18).
Following a vegan diet can make it easier to limit or avoid these options.
For instance, its easier to avoid eating more calories than you need when the cafe doesnt offer vegan brownies or when a bowl of candy only contains milk chocolate.
Research shows that having access to a wider variety of foods may cause you to mindlessly consume up to 23% more calories. By limiting your food choices to a select few, a vegan diet can help reduce your risk of overeating (19).
A vegan diet may also restrict the variety of choices you have when eating out. As a result, many vegans choose to cook at home rather than go to restaurants.
Home-cooked meals often contain less fat, sugar and overall calories than restaurant meals. This can help you limit calories and lose weight.
Summary:Vegan diets are generally richer in fiber, lower in calories and tend to limit your food options. All of these factors can help you lose weight by reducing the number of calories you eat.
In addition to helping you lose weight, a well-planned vegan diet is nutritious and can offer a variety ofhealth benefits.
However, a poorly planned vegan diet can raise certain risks.
A plant-based vegan diet tends to contain a good amount of fruit, vegetables, whole grains, nuts and seeds all of which are high in vitamins, minerals,fiberand healthy plant compounds (20).
When compared to diets recommended by health authorities such as the ADA, AHA and NCEP, vegan diets appear to be up to 2.4 times more effective atlowering blood sugar levelsin diabetics (3,4,21,22).
Moreover, several studies report that vegan diets reduce total and LDL the bad cholesterol levels (23,24,25).
A diet with the ability to lower both cholesterol and blood sugar levels can be particularly beneficial, as it may lower the risk of heart disease by up to 46% (26).
Studies show that a vegan diet may reduce symptoms of arthritis as well, such as joint pain, swelling and morning stiffness (27,28).
Well-planned vegan diets are considered nutritious and safe for all stages of life (29,30,31).
But poorly planned vegan diets can increase the risk of nutrient deficiencies and poor health.
For example,vegansare more likely to suffer from a vitamin B12 deficiency. This risk seems especially apparent for vegans who dont consume vitamin B12 supplements or eat vitamin B12-fortified foods (32).
Poorly planned vegan diets may also be lacking in calcium,omega-3 fatty acids, iodine, iron and zinc (33,34,35,36,37).
Consuming insufficient amounts of these nutrients can lead to an array of health issues, including nervous system damage,hypothyroidism, anemia, bone fractures and depression (38,39,40,41).
Vegans who fail to consume fermented foods such as sauerkraut and natto may also lack sufficient vitamin K2, a nutrient important for heart and bone health (42,43,44).
Finally, genetics may affect your ability tothrive on a vegan diet.
Up to 45% of people are unable to convert the beta-carotene found in carrots and other orange-colored vegetables to retinol, the active form of vitamin A (45,46).
Similarly, some peoples genetics may make it harder to maintain adequate levels of choline, a nutrient important for heart, liver and nervous system health (47).
If interested in a vegan diet, you should strongly consider tracking your nutrient intake in anonline food journaland getting your blood nutrient levels measured.
You can then enrich your diet with fortified foods orsupplementsas needed.
Summary:Vegan diets generally contain many nutrient-rich foods that can help reduce the risk of various diseases. However, its important to make sure your diet is well-planned to avoid nutrient deficiencies.
Eliminating animal products from your diet doesnt automatically lead to weight loss for everybody.
Consuming a plant-based vegan diet also doesnt automatically mean that your diet is healthy.
Here are some tips to keep in mind to maximize weight loss while ensuring that you continue to meet all your nutrient needs:
Summary:Following these guidelines will help you lose weight on a vegan diet without compromising your nutritional status.
Not all vegan diets are equally beneficial.
Some vegan diets favor vegan junk foods such as Oreos, mock cheeses or processed grains.
These diets are unlikely to meet your daily nutrient needs or help you lose weight.
Heavily processed vegan foods tend to contain more calories, sugar and fat. They also often contain limited amounts ofproteinand fiber, making them less filling (48).
This is why a 200-calorie snack of roasted chickpeas is generally more effective at reducing hunger than the same number of calories from vegan ice cream.
The filling effect of roasted chickpeas may also prevent you from overeating later on in the day, making it easier for you to create and maintain the calorie deficit needed to lose weight.
Summary:Junk food remains junk food, whether vegan or not. For best health and weight loss results, ensure that your diet consists mainly of nutrient-rich, minimally processed plant foods.
A plant-based vegan diet can be very effective at helping you lose weight.
This especially rings true if it contains a good amount of nutrient-rich plant foods and limited amounts of highly processed or high-fat plant foods.
In addition to helping you lose weight, a vegan diet can also help improve your health in a variety of ways, as long as it remains well-planned.
If you want to try this diet, you can see whether youre meeting your nutritional needs by tracking your daily intake and checking blood nutrient levels periodically.
Written byAlina Petre, MS, RD.Post originally appeared on Authority Nutrition.
The rest is here:
How a Vegan Diet Can Help You Lose Weight - Care2.com
Posted: April 23, 2017 at 12:41 pm
Excessive intake of sugar has been linked to a huge variety of health problems, many of them a consequence of the obesity that's also linked to excessive sugar. That's led many people to switch to drinks with artificial sweeteners that aren't metabolized by the body. A new study is now suggesting that these sweeteners are associated with their own health risks, namely stroke and dementia. But the study doesn't get into causality, and there's enough oddities in the data to suggest that it's not time to purge your fridge just yet.
The study, run by a collaboration of Boston-based researchers, relied on a cohort of individuals that had been recruited starting in 1971. On average, every four years since, the participants have completed follow-up surveys and had their health checked out. Over 5,000 people are in this cohort, and they provide a rich source of epidemiological data.
The authors started out intending to look at whether sugar-rich drinks increased the risk of strokes and dementia. So they eliminated a lot of people from this cohort because they'd previously experienced these or related issues. That reduced the study population considerably: under 3,000 for stroke, and under 1,500 for dementia.
The authors divided these populations based on how many sugar-filled and diet drinks the participants reported having in a week. The boundaries between these groups were set arbitrarily in order to keep the number of people in each group similar. Thus, members of the group that consumed the most sugar averaged more than two sugar-filled beverages per day, which includes soft drinks and juice. The next group consumed upwards of three soft drinks a week, while the group that drank diet drinks were somewhere in between, at more than one a day.
While this won't matter in terms of estimating risk for each of these factors, readers should note that the study measured very different doses.
The consumption of sugary and diet drinks was also measured two different ways. One was based on recent intake according to the most recent follow-up survey. The second was cumulative and based on the responses across the three most recent surveys. In addition, the researchers split up the outcomes: all stroke and ischemic stroke, all dementia and Alzheimer's.
To complicate matters further, the authors analyzed their participants in three different ways. One way took into account only basic demographic information, like age and education. A second added lifestyle factors, like diet quality and physical activity. The third added basic medical statistics like blood pressure, heart problems, cholesterol levels, and more. A number of the things in this last model are known risk factors for stroke and dementia, so this would seem to be the most relevant analysis.
With all that, the researchers had something on the order of 108 individual statistical tests. At this point, a number of false positive results become inevitable. To have confidence in the results, you'd want to see some consistency across groups and things like dose effects.
And here, the results were mixed. There was remarkable consistency when it came to sugary drinks: absolutely none of the tests showed a statistically significant association with either dementia or stroke. So, the authors' original hypothesis turned out to be a bust.
But things were different with diet drinks. Recent intake of diet sodas was associated with strokes, although there was no dose effect, and cumulative intake dropped below statistical significance. For ischemic strokes, the association was consistent across all groups, but again, there was no strong dose or duration effect. Interpreting these results is difficult, though they're certainly worth looking into more carefully.
On the dementia side, things were a bit simpler. While some associations were statistically significant among the heavier drinkers, they vanished entirely when all the health indicators were taken into account. This was also true when cumulative consumption was analyzed. This suggests that both diet drink intake and dementia are probably both associated with one of the health issues controlled for in this statistical model.
The authors's conclusion is stark: "Artificially sweetened soft drink consumption was associated with a higher risk of stroke and dementia." But that seems to be overselling the results for dementia. For stroke, there do seem to be more consistent associations that are worth following up on.
But, as the authors spend extensive time in the paper discussing, there's no way of telling why this association exists at this point. "Sicker individuals [may] consume diet beverages as a means of negating a further deterioration in health," they posit. "Indeed, in our study, diabetes mellitusa known risk factor for dementiawas more prevalent in those who regularly consumed artificially sweetened soft drinks."
In other words, don't clear out your fridge just yet.
Stroke, 2017. DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.116.016027 (About DOIs).
Excerpt from:
Study claims a link between diet sodas and stroke and dementia - Ars Technica
Posted: April 23, 2017 at 12:41 pm
The foods we choose to put on our plates or toss away could have more of an ecological impact than many of us realize.
On Earth Day, here are some ways to consider how our diet impacts the planet.
Waste not, want not
You've heard the numbers on food waste. More than 30 percent of available food is tossed each year in America. It's enough to fill Chicago's 1,450-foot-tall Willis Tower (formerly known as the Sears Tower) 44 times over.
The U.S. has set an official goal to reduce food waste by 50 percent by the year 2030. Universities have begun to chip away at the food waste issue by promoting ugly fruit and vegetables and shifting away from pre-cooked, buffet style food, instead serving more cook-to-order options that can cut down on waste. Food service companies are working with farmers and chefs to get more blemished but edible produce into cafeterias across the country. Even religious groups are getting into the act, raising attention to the problem of food waste among the faithful and connecting with restaurants, retailers and food banks to help redirect food to hungry mouths that might otherwise end up in landfills.
And there are a host of proposed solutions. Check out this report that highlights which solutions are likely to provide most bang for the buck. Among the most cost-effective strategies: educating consumers on food waste including changes you can make in your own kitchen. (Here are some tips to get you started like how to tell if eggs are still good past their expiration date.)
Rethink your beef and lamb habit
Everything we eat has an environmental footprint it takes land, water and energy to grow crops and raise livestock. The folks at the World Resources Institute have calculated the greenhouse gas emissions associated with producing a gram of edible protein of various foods.
Not surprisingly, they found that foods such as beans, fish, nuts and egg have the lowest impact. Poultry, pork, milk and cheese have medium-sized impacts. By far, the biggest impacts, in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, were linked to beef, lamb and goat. (As we've reported, that's partly because the need for pastureland drives deforestation in places like the Brazilian Amazon.)
Why? According to WRI, beef uses 28 times more land per calorie consumed and two to four times more freshwater than the average of other livestock categories. What's more, cows are less efficient than other animals, like pigs and poultry, at converting feed into food.
Still, telling people to go cold turkey with their red meat isn't likely to inspire real change. But this message might resonate: Even if you don't give up on red meat consumption entirely, just cutting back can significantly impact your diet's carbon footprint.
And these days, there are lots of vegan substitutes like plant burgers that sizzle, smell and even bleed like the real thing that can deliver the meaty taste you crave as you try to scale back.
Keep an eye out for more 'plant-based' dishes on restaurant menus
As interest in plant-centric diets booms, new food businesses have taken root from the veggie-centric fast-casual chains Beefsteak (from celebrity chef Jose Andres) and Chloe (an all-vegan restaurant) to the vegan meal-kit company Purple Carrot.
Now, a new initiative from the World Resources Institute called the Better Buying Lab is bringing together big companies (including Panera Bread, Sodexo, Google, Unilever and Hilton) to develop and test strategies to nudge consumers towards choosing more sustainable foods. One initiative is to get more plant-based dishes onto menus.
"If you look at menus across the U.S., there tends to be [the same] 25 dishes that are on the majority of menus," says Daniel Vennard, director of the Better Buying Lab at WRI. Think burgers, chicken dishes, etc. "Not many [plant-based] dishes have scaled to become national favorites," Vennard says.
His group is working to change that. It's teaming up with chefs from its member companies to create new recipes likely to have broad appeal. Promising ideas include the concept of "superfood salads" containing combinations of nuts, seeds, greens, veggies and avocado.
He points to ideas already out there as well, such as burgers that blend meat and mushrooms. As we reported several years ago, some taste-testing has found that diners warmed up to the idea of blended burgers, and in fact many tasters preferred them to all-beef patties. And an ongoing competition from the James Beard Foundation has encouraged chefs around the country to give blended burgers a try on their menus. (Not everyone is a fan, though.)
"What we're trying to do is shift consumers towards eating more sustainable food, but we're not advocating for a no-meat diet," explains Vennard. "We're saying, 'Let's moderate.' "
Read this article:
Chew On This For Earth Day: How Our Diets Impact The Planet - NPR - NPR
Posted: April 23, 2017 at 12:41 pm
JACKSONVILLE Lets get to it
Tim from Jacksonville:
7-9?
John: I received this admittedly long-winded, meandering email shortly after the Jaguars 2017 schedule was released, so I can only assume its a request to predict wait for it: the Jaguars 2017 record! And yeah, I actually think 7-9 is about right. I could see 8-8, but its tough to predict a five-game turnaround for a team that finished 3-13 the previous season and hasnt finished .500 or better since 2010. I wrote and said Thursday I believed this schedule very manageable if the Jaguars are really improved. Much will hinge on the ability of the quarterback position to be more efficient and to dramatically reduce mistakes. Once we get a better feel for that area, well have a far better feel for the teams outlook for 2017.
Alan from Ellington, CT:
How does a trade work? What would happen if on draft day when the clock is ticking two general managers make a trade for picks and a veteran player? Later that day, one general manager says he didnt trade the player, just the pick. Who else would know?
John: All trades must be documented with and cleared through the league office.
Travis from High Springs, FL:
Hi John, Poz has been my favorite player since we acquired him, and I think possibly our best. Do you think that there should have at least been a competition in training camp for the position? I'm just a fan, so I don't even pretend to know or understand everything about the NFL. But I find it strange to just move a player that's been statistically close to the top every year at his position without even having a competition.
Mike from Section 238:
John: Yes.
Logan from Wichita, KS:
John: The quarterbacks in the 2017 NFL Draft are rated at numerous levels, but Ive come to believe more and more the word risk for the most part is pretty near meaningless when it comes to drafting quarterbacks. The risk is enormous when selecting any quarterback, and there have been few players at the position with consensus high ratings in recent drafts: Andrew Luck and to a far lesser degree Jameis Winston, and well, the list of cant-miss guys runs out pretty fast. If the Jaguars love a quarterback and passionately believe hes a big-time player, then they should take him at No. 4. If they do, then theyll learn when he begins playing if he was worth the risk. Until then, you just dont know.
Scot from Aurora, IL:
I don't care about the schedule. This is the NFL and you have to beat good teams. Just win baby. Also, gimme one for Poz. He's a consummate professional and flat-out balls on the gridiron.
John: Hey, one fer just winning and one fer Poz!
Travis from St. Louis, MO:
Brett Favre had only one season in which he didn't throw over 10 interceptions. Peyton Manning had two 20-interception seasons in his first four seasons. I'm not trying to compare Bortles to them, but his performance in my opinion has had more to do with a bad offensive line and no help from the running game. When you have to throw 40 times in a game, you are more than likely going to throw more picks. Im not trying to give him excuses he needs to improve decision making and pre-snap reads but I feel his ability to extend plays and his toughness is something that can't be overlooked. This is a make-or-break season for sure, and I can't wait to watch him torch the league. I'll be back at the end of the season to gloat.
John: Bortles without question has been under too much pressure in his career, and he without question is a tough, resilient player. What are and will continue to be in question are his decision-making, pocket awareness, accuracy and pre-snap reads; some of those issues have had to do with protection and some havent. I think Bortles will get the opportunity to perform in what essentially in many ways will be a fresh start this season. That could benefit him and lead to the strides he needs to make. Well see.
Brad from Section 115:
Hi, John, I am one of the people disappointed at no prime-time games. Dont they have flex scheduling in the second half of the season? Could the Jags get a prime-time game if they are relevant or play someone else that becomes relevant?
John: Yes.
Michael from Section 122:
Why can't you refer to the London game as the moneymaker or something else? It is a home game in name only. As fans, we get only seven in-season home games. The owner can call it a home game, but we don't. Every time I see you write, it lowers my respect for your journalistic reputation.
John: I refer to the Jaguars game in London as what it is under NFL rules: one of eight home games. It is also very much a home game in the sense that the Jaguars receive significant local revenue from the game that they do not receive from a road game. In that sense, the London home game is a critical piece of what makes the Jaguars sustainable for the long-term in Jacksonville. Fans can call the London game what they like, and I have written often that I understand that there is a large group of fans who never will like the idea of the home game in London. Thats fine, because intrinsically it is a tough thing to accept. Still, accepted or not, it is by definition a home game and one that is important to the franchise.
Frankie from London, UK:
Mr O! As we move closer to the NFL draft, the leading candidates for the Jaguars' No. 4 overall pick appear to be Leonard Fournette, Jonathan Allen and Solomon Thomas. I'd be satisfied with any of them. That's a good thing ... right?
John: Sure, but as it moves closer this feels more and like a draft in which the unpredictable happens. Ive been leaning Fournette/Allen all along. Now, Im not remotely sure.
John from Starke, FL:
Good day, John: I haven't written since last year; I've been in hibernation. I had big hopes for 2016, but we won more games in 1995 our first year. I don't care about free agency, I don't care about the draft, and I don't care about the schedule. The only concern for 2017 is BB5. He is on the hot seat and he and he alone will dictate the season. So, all of the offseason stuff doesn't count unless the team produces more W's. Now, wake me up when the season starts, John. Can you do that for me? It's back to hibernation.
John: Its all about the quarterback. Sleep tight.
Nate from York, PA:
Al talks about MJD and Josh Scobee playing for other teams in their career, but if I remember correctly, Fred Taylor also played with the Patriots towards the end of his career.
John: Yes, he did. Thats why when Al asked about the greatest player in franchise history to only play for the Jaguars the answer was not Fred Taylor.
Johnathan from New York:
John, I don't always diet and exercise, but when I do, I expect the results to be instant, dramatic and spectacular.
John: I dont always diet and I exercise in my own sad, desperate, lunging way. I gave up hoping for spectacular results a while back. Then again, I gave up hope on pretty much all fronts a while back, too.
Go here to see the original:
O-Zone: Diet and exercise - Jacksonville Jaguars (satire)
Posted: April 23, 2017 at 12:41 pm
Eating a diet with a higher amount of plant protein may reduce the risk of developing type 2 diabetes, according to researchers from the University of Eastern Finland. While plant protein may provide a protective role, meat protein was shown to increase the risk of type 2 diabetes.
More than 29 million people in the Unites States are affected by diabetes, with type 2 diabetes accounting for between 90 and 95 percent of all cases. An essential part of managing diabetes is partaking in regular physical activity, taking medications to lower blood glucose levels, and following a healthful eating plan.
According to the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, healthy eating consists of consuming a variety of products from all food groups, with nonstarchy vegetables taking up half of the plate, grains or another starch on one fourth of the plate, and meat or other protein comprising the final fourth.
It is recommended that fatty or processed meat should be avoided and that lean meat, such as skinless chicken, should be opted for as an alternative.
Meat consumption has frequently been explored as a variable associated with diabetes, and previous research has found a link between a high overall intake of protein and animal protein, and a greater risk of type 2 diabetes. Eating plenty of processed red meat, in particular, has been connected with the condition.
The new research - published in the British Journal of Nutrition - adds to the growing body of evidence suggesting that the source of dietary protein may be important in altering the risk of developing type 2 diabetes.
The researchers set out to investigate the links between different dietary protein sources and type 2 diabetes risk. They used data from the Kuopio Ischaemic Heart Disease Risk Factor Study (KIHD), which was carried out at the University of Eastern Finland.
When the KIHD study began in the years between 1984 and 1989, the diets of 2,332 men aged 42 to 60 years old were assessed. None of the individuals had type 2 diabetes at the onset of the study. Over the course of the 19-year follow-up, 432 men were diagnosed with type 2 diabetes.
Jyrki Virtanen, a certified clinical nutritionist and an adjunct professor of nutritional epidemiology at the University of Eastern Finland, and colleagues discovered that a diet high in meat was associated with an increased risk of type 2 diabetes. The association was seen across all types of meat in general, including processed and unprocessed red meat, white meat, and variety meats.
The researchers say that the association may be a result of other compounds found in meat other than protein, since meat protein alone was not connected with the risk of type 2 diabetes.
Men who included a higher intake of plant protein in their diets also had healthier lifestyle habits. However, their lifestyle habits were not shown to fully explain their reduced risk of diabetes.
Male study participants who had the highest intake of plant protein were 35 percent less likely to develop type 2 diabetes than men with the lowest plant protein intake. Furthermore, using a computer model, Virtanen and team estimate that replacing around 5 grams of animal protein with plant protein per day would diminish diabetes risk by 18 percent.
The link between plant protein and reduced diabetes risk may be explained by the effect of plant protein in the diet on blood glucose levels. Those people who consumed more plant protein had lower blood glucose levels at the start of the study.
The primary sources of plant protein in this study were grain products, with additional sources including potatoes and other such vegetables.
A diet preferring plant protein to meat protein may help protect against type 2 diabetes. The authors conclude that:
"Replacing 1 percent of energy from animal protein with energy from plant protein was associated with [an] 18 percent decreased risk of type 2 diabetes. This association remained after adjusting for BMI. In conclusion, favoring plant and egg proteins appeared to be beneficial in preventing type 2 diabetes."
Overall protein, dairy protein, and fish protein were not connected with a risk of type 2 diabetes, the researchers note. The team also revealed that, confirming the group's earlier studies, a higher intake of egg protein was identified as able to lower the risk of type 2 diabetes.
Learn how legumes may reduce the risk of type 2 diabetes.
Go here to read the rest:
Diet rich in plant protein may prevent type 2 diabetes - Medical News Today
