Search Weight Loss Topics:

Page 1,037«..1020..1,0361,0371,0381,039..1,0501,060..»

The Right Chemistry: Intermittent fasting is hard. But does it work? – The Province

Posted: February 2, 2020 at 10:53 am

The New England Journal of Medicine is widely regarded as perhaps the most prestigious medical journal in the world. It has an acceptance rate of five per cent, meaning that only one in 20 articles submitted is judged by experts to be worthy of publication. That doesnt mean the rejected papers are not based on sound research; most eventually get published in lesser journals. But the New England Journal looks for the cream of the crop. Thats why I pay particular attention to papers published in this journal, such as a recent article on the Effects of Intermittent Fasting on Health, Aging, and Disease. Even more so when the article is the work of Johns Hopkins University neuroscientist Dr. Mark Mattson, renowned globally for his research in the area of intermittent fasting.

Intermittent fasting does not mean cutting out a Snickers bar between meals. It refers to a systematic eating pattern that places emphasis not on what food should be eaten, but rather on when it should be consumed. Intermittent fasts fall into three general categories. In alternate day fasting, days of very low-calorie intake are alternated with days of regular eating. The 5:2 variety dictates eating normally on five days of the week but restricting calories to under 700 on two non-sequential days. In daily time-restricted feeding, all food is consumed in a six-to-eight-hour window, essentially resulting in a 16- to 18-hour fast. Most people who engage in this version finish supper by about 7 p.m. and do not eat again until lunch the next day.

Of course, the question is why anyone would want to engage in any of these torturous regimes. Simply put, it is because there is accumulating evidence that calorie restriction provides benefits beyond the obvious weight loss. It has long been known that reduced food intake in animals results in an increased life span. The assumption has been that the benefits of reduced calorie intake are due to a reduction in the generation of free radicals as a consequence of metabolic processes. However, it appears that there is another factor involved. Typically, in experiments in which rodents are put on a low-calorie diet, they are given their daily allotment of food in one dose that they generally consume within a few hours. This means that essentially, they are on a 20-hour fast. This results in metabolic switching, a term with which we have to become familiar to understand the benefits that are attributed to intermittent fasting.

The main source of energy for cells is glucose. During respiration, glucose serves as fuel, providing energy as it reacts with oxygen to yield carbon dioxide and water. It is this process that is also accompanied by the production of those troublesome free radicals. The main source of glucose are carbohydrates in the diet and when these are severely restricted, as in fasting, the body switches to fats as an alternate fuel. But fats are not used directly, they are converted in the liver to ketone bodies that then are metabolized yielding energy. This is commonly referred to as a state of ketosis.

It turns out that these ketones are not just fuel for cells, but are also signalling molecules that regulate the expression and activity of various proteins and other biochemicals that influence health and aging. It seems that metabolic switching, which is a result of periods of fasting, is perceived by the body as a signal to go into survival mode since no food is coming in. Cells respond by improving control of blood pressure and blood sugar, producing more antioxidants and curbing inflammation.

Most of the fasting studies that have produced promising results have involved animals, but some human trials are starting to emerge. Improvements in insulin sensitivity, verbal memory, resting heart rate, and cholesterol levels have been noted in short-term clinical trials. In rodents, experiments have shown reduced occurrence of spontaneous tumours with daily calorie restriction or alternate-day fasting. Suppression of the growth of induced tumours has also been observed. Furthermore, the animals show increased sensitivity to radiation and chemotherapy. Stimulated by these observations, a number of human trials examining the effect of intermittent fasting on breast, ovarian, prostate, endometrial, colorectal and brain tumours are underway. Pilot studies are also examining possible benefits of intermittent fasting in multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, surgical outcomes and athletic performance.

Obviously, we have to temper this discussion with the all-too-often-stated disclaimer that more research is needed. But it is forthcoming. Dr. Valter Longo at the University of Southern California has some interesting results with his Fasting Mimicking Diet. For five days, people consume only special prepackaged foods that provide 1,000 calories the first day and 725 the other days and are said to have a unique combination of nutrients that trick the body into thinking it is fasting. Repeating the cycle monthly for three months has resulted in weight loss as well as a drop in blood sugar and cholesterol. But going hungry for five days is challenging and the meals are expensive.

It is always meaningful to ask experts what change they have made in their life as a result of their research. Mattson says he eats within a six-hour window every day. And thats from the horses mouth.

joe.schwarcz@mcgill.ca

Joe Schwarcz is director of McGill Universitys Office for Science & Society (mcgill.ca/oss). He hosts The Dr. Joe Show on CJAD Radio 800 AM every Sunday from 3 to 4 p.m.

Go here to read the rest:
The Right Chemistry: Intermittent fasting is hard. But does it work? - The Province

The menopause isnt so scary that young women need to sign up for costly surgery – The Guardian

Posted: February 2, 2020 at 10:52 am

Against a background of tasteful pastel which signals from the off that we are in the land of discretionary spending on faulty female anatomy the ProFaM website makes its unique bid for womens money. Ovarian tissue storage! And not only for fertility-related reasons. Whod want a menopause? Will you be ready? the website challenges. You never know what the future holds, so freeze the biological clock and prepare for the future.

For many women, alas, the offer will be empty. The ProFaM clockstopping technique requires young ovarian tissue and costs up to 7,000 for removal (storage and reinstatement extra). Age 25-30 is optimal, the doctors say. Once reinstalled, the tissue is supposed to function as natural HRT.

The average age at menopause is 51. To defer the menopause theoretically at least, via this method women need to pay for an operation before theyve thought about middle age, or experienced its social construction as an affliction, or, probably, considered volunteering as guinea pigs in non-essential experiments. Nobody knows how long, how well or how safely thawed ovarian tissue will function once its replaced in a much older body, because it hasnt been done yet.

We believe we are now in a position to offer the opportunity to postpone the menopause seems to be the closest ProFaM gets to closing the argument for costly speculative surgery. Its a bit like persuading very thin people to pay for an untrialled weight loss technique they might not need for a quarter of a century, if ever. And what if, one day, menopausal ceased being an insult? Meanwhile, ProFaM needs healthy and affluent young women to pay up.

Step forward Savannah Fishel, 22, the daughter of Dr Simon Fishel, a co-founder of ProFaM. In BBC interviews that may prefigure the corpororations new non-inquisitorial style, father and daughter last week together made the case for using Fishel ovary-harvesting services, presumably, in Ms Fishels case, at a discount.

Maybe we've all been a bit unfair to Gwyneth Paltrow and vaginal steaming

Ive seen menopausal problems manifest themselves in family members, Ms Fishel offered, by way of objective scientific reasoning. The technique sounded, the BBC reporter hazarded, a bit experimental? One for the fertility expert. Its experimental with a group of patients we want it to benefit, Mr Fishel said. But in its own element, each element of it is not experimental, no. You couldnt help wondering at this point if we havent all been a bit unfair to Gwyneth Paltrow. Is vaginal steaming so much more disreputable than minced ovary with still indeterminate menopause-postponing powers?

It was left to another doctor, Dr Melanie Davies of Fertility Preservation UK, commenting separately, to confirm that Fishels technique is unproven, to warn against healthy women going through surgery that would not otherwise be needed, and make the case, instead, for conventional hormone replacement therapy.

More usefully for the Fishels, the BBC illustrated its report with one of those stock pictures of a tormented middle-aged woman who has stepped away from normal, happy people into private, menopausal hell. Unless Savannah Fishels dynastic loyalty can substitute for peer-reviewed studies, sustained aversion to the menopause is likely to be as critical to ProFaMs prosperity as are misogyny and gerontophobia to buccaneering aesthetic surgery, and the cultural pressure to reproduce to the sale of unpromising IVF.

Conversely, too much awareness about the significant number of women who are either unafflicted or only temporarily troubled by the menopause or immeasurably more affected by other life events could be disastrous for a business posited on a narrative of female biological doom. There cant be enough doom, or gloom, where no compelling argument exists. Have women realised, for instance, that female longevity is not the unqualified bonus they may have thought? As women, for the first time in human history, are living so much longer in the post-fertile phase, Fishel likes to argue, they may be suffering much longer.

But perhaps women define suffering and indeed their reasons for existing differently? Though one in four women, as a study suggested, report severe menopausal symptoms, that suggests three out of four dont. Some actively exult. US research suggests that their experience will relate to prevailing cultural attitudes. In societies where age is more revered and the older woman is the wiser and better woman, menopausal symptoms are significantly less bothersome, Yales Dr Mary Jane Minkin has said. Should young women, not knowing into which category they will fall, pay, insurance style, for future interventions they may not want?

Mercifully for Fishels embryonic industry, a growing and welcome openness about the menopause seems to favour his version, in alighting predominantly on its potential to cause distress, as opposed to its potential compared with other middle-aged afflictions manageability. To hear Dawn Butler, before the election, advancing Labours case for dedicated menopause rooms and menopause leave, was to wonder why any woman should be expected to work through an enveloping fog of heat, mood changes, cognitive decline and misery. Not to mention why these arrangements should be more urgent than, say, carers leave or bereavement rooms.

If Labours menopause policy did raise awareness, it probably did just as much to consolidate the view that this process is a scary, debilitating illness that regularly defies all treatment. Earlier media rejoicing about Fishels evidence-light scheme had already indicated the degree to which the menopause is pathologised as a relentless biological curse on women, who await their saviour.

Whether it is ethical for UK clinicians, in the absence of long-term trials, to monetise this kind of thinking is for professional bodies to decide. Maybe private ovary-freezing is no less respectable than other offers of inessential but encouraged self-optimising surgery?

As a lay person I would only add that one of the unexpected benefits of a post-fertile existence turns out to be the protection it offers against ambitious male gynaecologists.

Catherine Bennett is an Observer columnist

More here:
The menopause isnt so scary that young women need to sign up for costly surgery - The Guardian

Counting Net Carbs vs Total Carbs: How to Calculate Net Carbs Easily and the Benefits – LIVESTRONG.COM

Posted: February 2, 2020 at 10:51 am

Track your carbs and eat them, too? That's the lofty promise behind counting net carbs over total carbs.

Tracking net carbs can help you feel more in control of your diet.

Credit: Jelena Danilovic/iStock/GettyImages

If you're on a low-carb diet such as keto or you limit carbs to manage a medical condition, you're likely quite familiar with counting carbs. But in recent years, dietitians and other experts have made a case for tallying up net carbs also sometimes called "digestible carbs," "active carbs" or "impact carbs" instead of the total carbs you take in.

When you're counting carbs, it's easy to think of them as an enemy to avoid completely. But carbs serve an important purpose: They're converted into energy that's either used or stored in the body. Along with fat and protein, they're one of the three essential macronutrients required to keep your body running smoothly.

There are three main forms of carbohydrates: fiber, sugar and starch, according to the Mayo Clinic. While sugar and starch are both digested and turn into blood glucose (aka blood sugar), most of the fiber you eat won't be digested at all, according to the American Diabetes Association.

That's where net carbs come in.

Instead of counting total carbs, tracking net carbs allows you to tally up only the ones your body actually digests. While there's no standard medical or scientific definition for net carbs, they're generally calculated by taking total carbs and subtracting fiber and sugar alcohols (a commercially produced form of carbs that act as a sweetener, per the FDA). The new total after subtracting these is your net carb total.

Total carbs fiber sugar alcohols = **net carbs **

Essentially, the sugar and starchers are your net carbs. To understand why net carbs do not take fiber or sugar alcohols into account, it's important to know how each of these types of carbohydrates affect the body and why they're so important.

Easily track your net carb intake on an app like MyPlate.

Credit: mapodile/E+/GettyImages

This method of carb-tracking recognizes that not all carbs are the same. That's because some are indigestible and won't affect your blood sugar. So if you're restricting the number of carbs you eat, counting net carbs allows you to choose more thoughtfully. Simply put: You'll be able to eat a variety of satiating foods (hello, whole grains) while still hitting your target carb or blood sugar levels.

Consider these perks that might convince you to board the net-carb bandwagon.

Let's zero in on that second benefit a bit. You'll find dietary fiber, a type of carbohydrate, listed on food labels under "total carbohydrates," but fiber is digested differently than white grains or sugar-filled candy, which turn into glucose fairly rapidly in the body. Unlike these simple carbs, fiber helps fill us up, then passes through our body, aiding in digestion and regularity.

We hear about the importance of fiber often when it comes to health and nutrition because eating fiber helps lower cholesterol levels, prevent constipation and control blood sugar levels, according to the Mayo Clinic.

It can also help you maintain a healthy weight since fiber-rich foods take longer to eat and are more filling, the Mayo Clinic notes. "Fiber slows down our digestion and keeps us full for longer," says Murphy.

A January 2018 study update in the Journal of Nutrition found a high-fiber diet is tied to lowering the risk of developing type 2 diabetes. High fiber intake during the teen years and into early adulthood is also tied to reducing breast cancer risk, according to a large February 2016 study published in Pediatrics. And, several studies have shown that dietary fiber may be linked to a reduced risk of heart disease, according to the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

Sugar alcohols provide sweetness with fewer calories than regular sugar and have less of an effect on blood sugar than other carbs, per the FDA, which is why we subtract them when counting net carbs.

But because they arent digested or absorbed in the same way as sugar, sugar alcohols can often cause GI issues (such as gassiness and a laxative effect). It's a good idea to slowly introduce foods with sugar alcohols until you're aware of your tolerance to them. The sugar alcohol erythritol is the least likely to cause GI upset.

For many people, ditching carby foods is an effective solution to lose or maintain weight. Often, however, those who restrict their carb intake find that they don't feel full as a result.

Here's the key to feeling full and losing weight: Getting more fiber while nixing sugar, which is where tracking net carbs helps.

The FDA notes that people in the United States don't get enough fiber and fall below the 25-gram-per-day recommendation. Here are some easy ways to increase fiber intake:

And when you're adding more fiber to your diet, make sure to drink plenty of water along with it to prevent consipation.

"As with tracking food in general, tracking carbs or net carbs can quickly turn into disordered eating if not managed mindfully," Murphy points out. It's important to keep in mind that even if the net carbs in a certain food are low, that doesn't mean the calories are low. If your goal is weight loss or weight management, it's important to always read the full nutritional label, too.

As mentioned earlier, the term "net carbs" still doesn't have a medically or scientifically standardized definition. So, if you have diabetes, consider subtracting dietary fiber from carbohydrates in food with more than 5 grams of fiber, the Diabetes Research Institute at the University of Miami suggests.

The Institute also recommends only subtracting half and not all of the sugar alcohols from the total carbohydrates. Remember, sugar alcohols can have some effect on blood sugar (it's just less of than effect than other types of carbs).

It's important for people living with diabetes to closely monitor their blood sugar levels and work with their health care provider to determine an appropriate net carb amount per day and which foods make the most sense for them to eat in conjunction with any medication or insulin regimen.

See the article here:
Counting Net Carbs vs Total Carbs: How to Calculate Net Carbs Easily and the Benefits - LIVESTRONG.COM

Fat and furry – top tips on how to stop your pooches getting pudgy – Gloucestershire Live

Posted: February 2, 2020 at 10:51 am

It's not just people who pile on the pounds, but often our pet pals do too.

But as pet owners we have a responsibility to keep our dogs (and other animals of course) healthy, which includes managing their weight.

Pet charity the PDSA have even launched their annual 'Pet Fit Club' where they search for the UK's fattest pets in a bid to help them scrub the chub.

Up to 15 overweight pets (dogs, cats, rabbits and rats) from across the UK will be chosen to participate in Pet Fit Club.

Selected pets are then placed on a six-month diet and exercise programme, individually tailored to their needs and overseen by vets and vet nurses at their local PDSA Pet Hospital.

But before they get too fat, is there a way that we can stop them putting on excess weight first?

Grain free pet food brand, Canagan have put together their top tips on how you can help keep your best friend maintain a healthy weight.

The right weight for your dog depends on its breed; Whippets, for example, have vastly different parameters to Newfoundlands.

Theres a healthy weight range for each breed, and if your dog falls within this, there should be no cause for concern.

Weight changes often arent that noticeable, especially if the change is gradual and over time. If you are worried about your dogs weight, there are some key visual indicators that can help determine if theyre under or overweight.

Are the ribs, backbone or other bones visible? Can you see them from a distance? If so, this could be a sign that your dog is underweight.

Can you barely see the rib cage or not at all? This could indicate that your dog is overweight. There are also other medical issues that could cause bloating, so if this is the case, its best to book an appointment with your vet to rule these out

Does your dog have a large/bloated looking stomach that hangs too low? This is another sign that they may be carrying a few too many pounds.

How can you control your dogs diet for weight loss?

Here are some tips to start your dogs weight loss journey:

What is the best dog food for maintaining a healthy weight?

Whilst exercise is a good way to help your dog lose weight, sometimes, due to illness or old age, dogs can be less active.

Senior dogs are often a lot less mobile, meaning they burn less calories, so their food should contain a lower percentage of fats and fewer carbs.

Cutting out carbohydrates can also be helpful, but make sure you cut out the right ones. Grains all contain high levels of carbohydrates which release their energy quickly so are best to avoid, but sweet potato releases energy slowly and is a great source of soluble fibre, so this makes a great addition to your dogs diet.

Keep a note of your dogs weight to monitor their progress and remember that slow and steady wins the race a healthy rate of weight loss is one per cent per week. If you begin to see a dramatic change, visit your vet to rule out any other health issues.

If you do switch your dog onto a grain-free dog food, it is quite common for them to appear hungry initially. As grain-free food is often full of higher quality ingredients, this means that the quantity you will be feeding them is less.

Their stomach will need time to adjust to this decreased amount of food, but dont worry, your dog will still be getting all their dietary needs met in the recommended portion size.

How do you stop your dog begging?

Why your dog is begging in the first place? More often than not, its because weve reinforced this behaviour as we want to give them treats every now and again, but this is a slippery slope.

Here are some top tips to break this cycle:

Read more:
Fat and furry - top tips on how to stop your pooches getting pudgy - Gloucestershire Live

Can fasting reverse your ‘biological’ age? It can, according to Goop Lab experts – CNET

Posted: February 2, 2020 at 10:50 am

Gwyneth Paltrow gets a vampire facial in the fourth episode of Goop Lab.

Netflix's The Goop Lab follows Gwyneth Paltrow and the team that runs her wellness brand, Goop, as they experience various alternative wellness practices, from meeting with a psychic to taking aworkshop about how to orgasm. In The Goop Lab's fourth episode, The Health Span Plan, Paltrow, chief content officer Elise Loehnan and Goop's marketing VP Wendy Lauria explore the societal obsession with antiaging and the often expensive lengths many go to avoid it.

In their quest for eternal youth, members of the Goop staff try several different diets reported to reduce the risk of age-related disease, including fasting, veganism and pescatarianism. Paltrow and her team also set out on a quest to find "more natural" alternatives to plastic surgery and fillers, like facials and acupuncture.

Aging is one of many things that medicine can't stop, so that raises the question: Is there any validity to these diets and treatments? Can you really slow down the aging process with food? That's what The Goop Lab sets out to determine and the results are, surprisingly, somewhat valid.

The Health Span Plan episode explores diets and skincare treatments that claim to have antiaging benefits.

The Goop team chats with Valter Longo, the director of the University of Southern California's Longevity Institute, about the practice of fasting and how it can have positive effects on health. He promotes his fasting mimicking diet in the episode (for which he has a book and a $250 diet kit that Paltrow tries). Notably, the group doesn't talk about other forms of fasting -- such as intermittent fasting or alternate-day fasting -- which can have the same health benefits as Longo's diet.

Paltrow also talks with Morgan Levine, who studies aging at the Yale Department of Pathology. Levine developed a method of calculating a person's "biological age," based on several factors that intend to predict how likely you are to get age-related diseases or be at risk for early death.

Paltrow, Loehnan and Lauria are tested for their biological age before starting a new diet for three weeks. Lauria followed a vegan diet and Loehnan did a pescatarian diet, while Paltrow uses Longo's kit (which includes a nut bar, soup packets and kale crackers -- appetizing, huh?) for a five-day fast.

At the end of the three weeks, all three have their "biological ages" retested. The only person whose age did not "lower" was Lauria.

To round out this antiaging episode, all of the women try three different facial treatments -- acupuncture, facial threading and a vampire facial -- that are supposed to be more natural than using typical dermatological treatments such as skin fillers and Botox injections.

Loehnen tries facial acupuncture, which is reported to boost collagen production. Lauria gets a "facial threading" treatment that involves sewing a plastic thread that dissolves after nine months into her face in an effort to boost collagen and lift the face.

A Goop employee tries facial threading, a less invasive way to get the effect of a face lift.

Finally, Paltrow gets a "vampire facial," which is when a facialist extracts platelet rich plasma from your blood, and then microneedles it into the skin on your face. The PRP is supposed to help the skin resurface and look rejuvenated. Paltrow seems a bit weirded out by the process but notes that there's an "overuse of that stuff," (referring to injections, fillers and plastic surgery), and at least "this is your own blood and not a toxin, it's a more natural way."

Right now, there is a lot of hype surrounding fasting, intermittent fasting and ketosis and how those diets might benefit our overall health. It's not all hype -- there's definitely some sound science here and it's likely to keep expanding.

During the episode, Longo presents his fasting mimicking diet, which involves "tricking" the body into a fasting state while allowing specific amounts of food for at least five days. The idea is to give your body just enough nutrients that it thinks it's fasting, but not so few that you encounter the negative effects of prolonged fasting like a weakened immune system and nutritional deficiencies.

Fasting can help improve your overall health, some studies have shown.

Longo says that his clinical trials on the fasting mimicking diet showed to "reduce risk factors for multiple age-related diseases." That's not totally bunk -- science shows that when you restrict calories for certain periods of time, it does promote longevity. A study on this type of fasting did show that it can be effective in improving health markers that put you at risk for age-related diseases such as BMI, body fat percentage and blood pressure. Fasting can also lower inflammation levels in the body, improve cognitive impairment in miceand can decrease insulin-like growth factor, a hormone linked to cancer. The research is promising.

While Longo's diet might be scientifically sound, I found it hard to wrap my mind around the idea that eating processed, packaged foods for five days could actually be better for you than eating whole, unprocessed foods. Surely you can hit the same macronutrient targets (low carb, low protein and a total of 750-1,000 calories per day) he cites is necessary to "trick your body that it's fasting" with real food?

I'd be interested in seeing studies on groups who do the fasting mimicking diet versus groups that follow a pescatarian diet (as Loehnan did in the show). Also, I'd like to see results in a study of participants who follow the fasting mimicking diet with Longo's food packets and bars versus the same exact macronutrients in whole food form. My guess is that the results could be pretty different.

The facial treatments in the episode are pretty extreme. While they are touted as "more natural" alternatives to plastic surgery or fillers, Goop did not provide much information on why these treatments are "better" for you.

When each practitioner did each treatment, it sounded more like an infomercial about why you should do it, rather than a scientifically backed procedure. The episode lacked real information or science on if these treatments are actually safe, and how they compare to fillers or Botox. No one (at least that we could see) challenged the practitioners about the safety or quality of what was going on.

Facial acupuncture is said to help stimulate the production of collagen in the skin.

The science behind facial acupuncture is promising, but there's still a lot of work to be done. As for the facial threading, aka the noninvasive face lift, a study published in JAMAconcluded that the results of the threading face lift are not effective enough to justify the patient's risk of potential complications from the procedure.

I would describe the facial threading procedure more as a cosmetic procedure and less of a facial treatment. Even though the Goop staff say it's more "natural" than a face lift, it seems pretty invasive to me. You see the doctor literally sew a plastic thread into her face and if that isn't invasive plastic surgery, I don't know what is. Nothing about this treatment says "natural alternative" to me. It just says, "here is another way to get a face lift, and it's temporary."

Goop has long been criticized for presenting highly inaccessible treatments, and that's the same in this episode. The vampire facial costs over $1,000, and the facial threading pricing can start at $1,500 and go up to over $4,000. Facial acupuncture is typically less expensive, but it depends on where you go and how many treatments you get.

There's nothing wrong with showing what these extreme treatments are like, it makes for entertaining television. But if Goop wanted to better serve its audience, perhaps it would have been more helpful to show more accessible options for natural beauty products, regimens or other useful skincare advice.

This episode of The Goop Lab presents a few valid and several questionable antiaging practices for your body and face. While fasting to improve your overall health is backed up by science, there are plenty of other more accessible and doable ways to improve your health through nutrition, exercise and lifestyle alone.

Focusing on the basics like sleep, drinking water, moving more and lowering stress seems more realistic, and then you can experiment with fasting if you think it could help you. Fasting is not a very accessible wellness trend in that it's difficult to do, you should do it under the supervision of a specialist, certain health conditions can prevent you from doing it and it can be really triggering for someone who has a history of eating disorders.

Because of this, fasting is not my favorite wellness topic to explore, and I would have loved to see Goop cover more of the actual science on the benefits other diets such as pescatarianism and veganism, or even better the benefits of eating more plant-based diet versus a restrictive plan like veganism or vegetarianism.

As for the facial treatments, I found it interesting to see the different procedures on the market, but unrelatable for someone who can't afford to drop $1,000 and up on a treatment. It would have been much more interesting to me if Goop had talked to skincare experts, dermatologists and other pros in the space who can teach people about good skincare regimens, habits, ingredients and explain what clean or natural beauty products can help.

Now playing: Watch this: Impossible Foods CEO talks pork and the future of plant-based...

7:38

The information contained in this article is for educational and informational purposes only and is not intended as health or medical advice. Always consult a physician or other qualified health provider regarding any questions you may have about a medical condition or health objectives.

Continued here:
Can fasting reverse your 'biological' age? It can, according to Goop Lab experts - CNET

How sugar affects the heart | News, Sports, Jobs – Williamsport Sun-Gazette

Posted: February 2, 2020 at 10:50 am

You probably know that your sweet tooth affects your waistline, but did you know it can also be harmful to your heart?

A 2014 study showed that a diet high in sugar puts you at a greater risk of dying from heart disease, even if you arent overweight. If at least 25% of calories in your daily diet come from added sugar, you are twice as likely to die of heart disease than if your diet included less than 10% of total calories from added sugar.

Sugar can affect your heart by:

Increasing the likelihood of developing type 2 diabetes, which in turn increases the risk of heart disease and stroke.

Spiking blood sugar levels (and so insulin levels), which increases your risk of obesity and heart disease.

Stopping triglycerides (fat in the blood connected with cardiovascular disease) from breaking down.

Lowers the level of HDL cholesterol (the good cholesterol) while raising LDL (bad cholesterol) levels.

Increasing blood pressure through increasing sodium accumulation in the body.

Sugar is added to most processed foods, which most Americans consume daily. Refined sugars are also found in all of the sweet treats lining your pantry shelves. They are even found in yogurts, salad dressings, ketchup, and other common condiments. On average, Americans consume 66 pounds of sugar per person per year. That equals nearly 20 teaspoons per day.

Limiting sugar in your diet can not only decrease your risk of heart disease, but it can also help with your overall health. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommends sugars should not take up more than 10% of your daily calories (based on a 2,000 calorie per day diet). The American Heart Association recommends women should not consume more than 24 grams of sugar per day, and men should have no more than 36 grams. Just four grams of added sugar is equal to one teaspoon.

Tips to limiting sugar, include:

Read all food labels. Sugar can be hidden on labels. Sugar may be named brown rice syrup, barley malt, beet sugar, agave, and sucrose.

Avoid processed foods. By cooking with whole foods and shopping the outside aisles of the grocery store, you can naturally decrease sugar consumption and increase the amount of vegetables and fruits you eat.

Avoid sugary drinks. Replace soda with carbonated water with a squeeze of lemon or splash of fruit juice.

Remember that all calories are not equal. You should work to eat a balanced diet with 30% lean protein, 30% good fat, and 40% low-glycemic carbohydrates.

Sugar can also be very addicting. The more you consume, the more you crave. Moderation is the key to staying healthy and keeping your heart healthy. It is important to ignore the constant barrage of advertising and messages tempting you to eat more sugar your heart and your waistline, will be better for it.

Dr. Michael Desiderio is a cardiologist at UPMCs Heart & Vascular Institute. He earned his medical degree at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey and completed his residency at the Cleveland Clinic, Ohio. Dr. Desiderio sees patients in the Health Innovation Center at UPMC Williamsport, 740 High St. To schedule an appointment with Dr. Desiderio, call 570-321-2800.

AIDS Resource now offers an online option to schedule appointments for HIV, chlamydia and gonorrhea testing. ...

DANVILLE As one of the largest employers in the region, Geisinger is set to expand its career services reach to ...

A multitude of preventive screenings and immunizations created for people of all ages can help folks stay on top of ...

Read the rest here:
How sugar affects the heart | News, Sports, Jobs - Williamsport Sun-Gazette

Book Review: The Politics of Weight: Feminist Dichotomies of Power in Dieting by Amelia Morris – USAPP American Politics and Policy (blog)

Posted: February 2, 2020 at 10:50 am

In The Politics of Weight: Feminist Dichotomies of Power in Dieting, Amelia Morris challenges the degree to which feminist debates about dieting often take the form of a binary whereby (womens) bodies are either sites of oppression or liberation. Instead, drawing on interviews with dieters, analyses of dieting programme materials, fat activism and black feminist scholarship, the book posits a more ambivalent middle ground, arguing for a promising path tonuanced understanding of how our bodies are shaped in relation to power and diet culture, writes Megan Dean.

The Politics of Weight: Feminist Dichotomies of Power in Dieting. Amelia Morris. Palgrave. 2019.

Find this book:

For decades feminists have criticised weight-loss dieting, accusing it of (among other things) reinforcing unrealistic and harmful body ideals, distracting from meaningful social and political engagement and being a tool of the patriarchy. Recently, body-positivity activists, including celebrities like actor Jameela Jamil, have spread their anti-dieting messages through social media, reaching new generations with the encouragement to reject dieting and love ones body as it is.

And yet, many people still diet. In the United States, 49.1 per cent of adults and 56.4 per cent of women tried to lose weight between 2013 and 2016. Ten of the top eleven strategies used toward that end were changes to diet. We have to assume that at least some of these dieters are aware of feminist objections to dieting. Indeed, Susan Bordo, whose book Unbearable Weight offers a canonical critique of dieting and weight-loss culture, has herself acknowledged participation in a commercial weight-loss dieting programme. Bordo is certainly not the only feminist who has considered joining Weight Watchers.

But why would anyone who thinks that dieting is a tool of the patriarchy go on a diet? Why would they engage in a practice that reinforces body norms they themselves reject? In short, why is knowing better not enough when it comes to dieting?

Amelia Morris explores these questions in her book The Politics of Weight: Feminist Dichotomies of Power in Dieting. Morris, a postdoctoral researcher in the Department of Politics, International Relations and Philosophy at Royal Holloway University, situates what Ill call the ambivalent dieter within a broader feminist debate about the status of the body and its relation to power. As Morris characterises it, the main positions within this debate take the form of a dichotomy: bodiesspecifically, womens bodiesare either sites of oppression or opportunities for the exercise of liberty. Morris identifies the former perspective with radical feminists, such as Susan Brownmiller and Germaine Greer, and the latter with liberal and post-feminist scholars and writers, including Naomi Wolf, Catharine Lumby and Katie Roiphe.

Morris herself supports a third, post-structuralist position, which she identifies with Michel Foucault and feminist theorists like Sandra Bartky, Judith Butler and Bordo. According to this perspective, the body has a more ambivalent relationship to power than either side of the dichotomy suggests. Bodies exist, Morris writes, within a middle-ground of power (19). This middle ground is characterised by the claims that power works on and through the body in more subtle, mundane and insidious ways than oppression proponents would have it, and that the experience of freedom in relation to ones body is neither as attainable as the liberation side suggests nor a reliable sign that one is in fact free from pernicious forms of power.

The Politics of Weight argues that we should use this middle-ground approach to understand womens engagement in weight-loss dieting. Morris takes an interdisciplinary approach to this task, using interviews with British women dieters, body-positivity activists and fat-positive activists to highlight womens conflicted understandings and experiences of dieting, and the challenges of ridding oneself of an attachment to thinness as a source of happiness, comfort and confidence, even when one believes one should.

The first two chapters of the book discuss Morriss methodology and introduce the broader feminist debate about the body. In Chapter Three, The Dichotomy of Power in Dieting, Morris explores how this debate applies to weight-loss dieting in particular, and begins to make her case for a Foucauldian feminist approach. She does this in part by using interviews with dieters and analyses of dieting-programme materials to highlight some of the quintessentially disciplinary aspects of dieting, including the use of panoptic surveillance and the confession of dietary transgressions and weight gain to peers and group leaders at weight-loss meetings.

Morris is careful to point out that the feminist Foucauldian literature she favours has often ignored the relevance of race to the effects of power on the body. In Chapter Four, The O Factor: Foucault, Race, and Oprahs Body Journey, Morris attempts to address this gap through engagement with black feminist scholarship on the topic of Oprah Winfreys weight-loss projects. Morris highlights the ways that racist stereotypes like the Mammy and Jezebel structure understandings of black womens bodies. She suggests that the white hostility and ambivalence that met Oprahs dramatic weight loss can be understood as a response to Oprahs visible shift away from what white audiences perceived as a non-threatening, nurturing Mammy image. In this chapter and elsewhere, it is sometimes challenging to distinguish Morriss original contributions from her detailed discussion of the existing literature. Nonetheless, this chapter addresses an important issue and will point readers to some fascinating work on race and diet, such as Cheryl Thompsons 2015 paper, Neoliberalism, Soul Food, and the Weight of Black Women.

Chapter Five, Fat Activism and Body Positivity: Freedom from Dieting? will be of most interest to readers grappling with the complexities of resisting diet culture. Morris draws on fat-activist literature and practice to suggest that the insistence that we unequivocally love our bodies and reject dieting without ever looking back betrays a misunderstanding of how power works.

According to the Foucauldian picture Morris endorses, our subjectivities are shaped by our practices, including dieting. We can reject dieting but be left with emotions and self-understandings that have been shaped by that practice. This chapter draws attention to the ways fat activism can help reshape these aspects of subjectivity, while highlighting how widespread fatphobia limits such self-transformation. Rachel, a fat-activist performance artist, explains the limits of her work:

I dont think any of my work makes me feel liberated, because of re-opening that wound. You can make the space as safe as you want but weve all got to go outside afterwards and I cant make outside safe for me or for any of you.

Morriss discussion underscores the complications of resistance and the importance of a compassionate and nuanced understanding of how deeply many womennot to mention men and non-binary individualsare affected by diet culture.

Those acquainted with this area of research will find the books positions familiar, drawn from feminist and Foucauldian theorists Ive already mentioned as well as Fat Studies scholars like Samantha Murray. Throughout the book, Morriss interviews are mainly used to support rather than complicate or develop theoretical claims made by others. Some may hope for more dynamic engagement between theory and empirical work than is offered here. But the value of gathering relevant empirical evidence for theoretical claims should not be underestimated, and many theorists do not have the professional training to do so themselves.

While the books interdisciplinary approach and subject will be of interest to scholars in many different fields, I hesitate to recommend the book to those unfamiliar with the literature. The book suffers from poor copy-editing, which at times undermines the readability and reliability of the work. Of particular note are some significant citation issues that those new to the subject may not have the resources to recognise, such as a misquotation of Simone de Beauvoir on page 39.

Overall, though, The Politics of Weight tackles a topic of ongoing importance. Having a nuanced and accurate understanding of how our bodies are shaped in relation to power and diet culture is central to treating ourselves and others with compassion and respect. Such an understanding can also help us recognise what is needed to create the conditions so that knowing better can translate into doing better when it comes to dieting. The Politics of Weight argues for a promising path to this very worthy goal.

Please read our comments policy before commenting.

Note: This article gives the views of theauthors, and not the position of USAPP American Politics and Policy, nor of the London School of Economics.

Shortened URL for this post:http://bit.ly/3aVrMr8

Megan Dean Hamilton CollegeMegan Dean is the Chauncey Truax Postdoctoral Fellow and a Visiting Assistant Professor in Philosophy at Hamilton College in New York. Her current research focuses on ethical issues relating to eating, specifically on the ways eating shapes the self and the implications of these self-shaping effects for clinical ethics, diet research, food policy and personal food choice. Dr. Dean received her PhD from the Philosophy Department at Georgetown University, and she has an MA in Philosophy from the University of Alberta.

Go here to read the rest:
Book Review: The Politics of Weight: Feminist Dichotomies of Power in Dieting by Amelia Morris - USAPP American Politics and Policy (blog)

Joe Rogan reveals his new, stacked physique after a month of following the carnivore diet – GIVEMESPORT

Posted: February 2, 2020 at 10:50 am

Joe Rogan at the age of 52 is in absolutely incredible shape after completing the whole of January on a purely carnivorous based diet.

Rogan is known widely by many people around the world for a few different things he is a regular commentator and interviewer employed by Dana Whites UFC, as well as being an avid mixed martial artist himself.

Alongside his work in the world of MMA and the UFC, Rogan is also a successful stand-up comedian and is currently on tour in the United States he has previously noted how unlikely the two professions go together but went on to say that for whatever reason, it just seems to work.

As well as that, he hosts one of the most popular and listened to podcasts on the planet The Joe Rogan Experience in which he has world-famous guests on to discuss anything from stand-up, MMA to conspiracy theories.

The one main thing Rogan keeps a consistent theme throughout his many platforms is his promotion of leading an active and healthy lifestyle. He is often posting stories to his social media of him and his dog going for a run (HIS DOG, IN FACT, HAS HIS OWN INSTAGRAM PAGE!) as well as posting post-workout videos of him at the gym either after weight training or sparring.

Before the start of the new year, Rogan vowed to lean up his physique and become an even healthier version of himself and as a result, he embarked on the carnivore diet.

After a full month of dedicated diet throughout the whole of January, Joe Rogan finally revealed to his followers via his social media the changes he feels both physically and mentally.

Joe has stated many times on his podcast that a good workout often leads to a better state of mind and increased productivity.

Rogan revealed that he has lost a total of 12lbs since the start of January and has lost his love handles and has gained a tone of energy and stated that his energy levels had been more consistent as a result.

He cited that his energy levels used to fluctuate somewhat and also mentioned to his listeners that he, in fact, suffers from an immune disorder known as Vitiligo of which had appeared to improve since the diet though he is unsure of the direct correlation, it does seem a little coincidental.

Rogan closed out his message by stating how it was the best he had felt in a long time, and its only been one month.

In a bid to get healthy for the new year Rogan has followed the carnivore diet; this cuts out all vegetables, fruit, grains, nuts and seeds in favour of meat, fish and other animal foods such as eggs and a few dairy products here and there.

Last year, Rogan stepped on the scales on the set of his podcast and weighed 205lbs (14.5st) he later stated that it was the fattest he had ever been.

Rogan went onto say:

"I had a belly; a lot of people made fun of me, fat-shamed me. I lost all my fat, I lost the belly, I lost my love handles.

"I don't know if I'm gonna keep eating like this, but it was tremendously beneficial.

"I also have an auto-immune disorder, it's called vitiligo, and my vitiligo improved, I had a bunch of white spots fill in, so, I don't know.

"I went into this thing thinking this carnivore diet was wacky and probably thought it was nonsense, but this is as good as I've felt in a long time and it's just one month.

Rogan made fans aware in a jokey social media post that he had suffered a severe bout of diarrhoea but noted that this passed and now feels great.

At the age of 52, Joe Rogan puts all of us to shame and is definitely one to watch, if not for health advice, tips and tricks but because he is so damn entertaining! whether it be from the Octagon, the stand-up stage or behind the microphone OR ALL OF THEM!

Read the original post:
Joe Rogan reveals his new, stacked physique after a month of following the carnivore diet - GIVEMESPORT

‘The Hormone Diet’: What Does Science Have To Say About This New Trend? – Gentside UK

Posted: February 2, 2020 at 10:50 am

More and more people who want to lose weight are turning to the new "hormone diet." But what is it exactly? Does it work? Here's what science has to say about it.

Say goodbye to high protein diets, intermittent fasting, and the keto diet. Meet the latest fad: the "hormone diet." The premise of this diet is that if a person hasnt managed to lose weight after several attempts, its probably because their hormones are working against them.

Several books have been published on the subject, praising the merits of this technique. Apparently, following this specific diet, along with physical exercise, will make you lose weight fast by "tweaking" or "resetting" your hormones.

Despite this new diet's surge in popularity, most scientists are sceptical about it. Overall, the hormone diets nutritional approach actually isnt bad.

But if people do in fact loseweight from it, its not because they've 'reset their hormones,' but rather because they've created a deficit between how many calories they're consuming and the number of calories their body burns. As of now, there is no scientific proof that the hormone diet actually works by tweaking a persons hormones.

Moreover, not managing to lose weight despite a healthy and balanced diet and regular physical activity could be a sign of something more serious, like diabetes or an underactive thyroid. However, people who suffer from these ailments cant just go on a diet. They must first be treated and follow their physician's health plan.

Follow this link:
'The Hormone Diet': What Does Science Have To Say About This New Trend? - Gentside UK

Diet Demand Addresses Emotional Eating as Underlying Cause of Weight Gain – Benzinga

Posted: February 2, 2020 at 10:49 am

Houston, TX, Jan. 30, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Many people who struggle with weight loss believe that the solution can be found by simply changing what they eat. Fad diets are constantly changing or repackaging certain strategies that don't often tackle the common underlying issue, emotional eating. In our daily lives, there are a number of overt and hidden stressors bombarding us; whether they be job related, financial, health related, relationship-based or otherwise. Even when one doesn't feel emotionally stressed out, symptoms of stress can be sneaky, as managing and coping with ongoing stress can feel commonplace. A major symptom of stress emotional eating/food addiction, and this is what derails many dieters without them even realizing it.

The simple truth is, you may eating emotionally and not even know it. Many symptoms of emotional eating can seem quite benign, while others are more harmful. Some of the most common symptoms are:

Not only can emotional eating be a sign of larger issues, it is also very unhealthy, leading most commonly to:

Fortunately, Diet Demand has created a collection of great medical weight loss programs focused on helping individuals overcome the real problem, stress-based emotional eating. By tackling the true underlying cause, Diet Demand is helping lose weight faster and move towards long-term habit changing activities. Our doctor created and supervised medical weight loss plans combat emotional eating in many different ways, ranging from simple doctor supervision and evaluation to powerful prescription weight loss aids specifically designed to address the causes of emotional eating.

These medications can range from our Low Dose Naltrexone, which helps reduce appetite between meals and reduce stress levels in the body, our prescription Appetite Zap, a simple appetite suppressant designed to safely and effectively curb hunger.

Get your FREE Diet Demand consultation to assess your need for safe and quick diet results by visiting https: http://www.dietdemand.com/ to complete an initial comprehensive, yet simple, health questionnaire and schedule an immediate personal, no-cost consultation. DietDemand's physicians all received specialized training in nutritional science and fast weight loss. DietDemand reviews each patient's health history to create a personalized diet plan geared for fast weight loss, or that addresses life-long issues causing weight loss to slow down or stop. Nutritionists work personally with each patient and use their own algorithm to craft meal and snack plans that are compatible with each patient's age, gender, activity level, food preferences, nutritional needs and medical conditions. They combine these state of the art diet plans with pure, prescription diet products that enable their patients to resist the temptation to reach for sugary snacks, eliminate fatigue and curb the appetite. Over 97% of DietDemand patients report incredible weight loss results with the majority losing 20 or more pounds per month.

At DietDemand, all patients gain unlimited access to the best minds in the business. Their staff of doctors, nurses, nutritionists and coaches are available six days per week to answer questions, offer suggestions, address concerns and lend their professional guidance and support. Because of this, more and more people are turning to DietDemand for their weight management needs. Diet plans are tailored to be specific to the needs of those of any age, gender, shape or size and for those who are struggling to lose that final 10-20 pounds to those who must lose 100 pounds or more. Call today to request a private, confidential, no-cost online consultation.

About the Company:

DietDemand is the nation's leader in medical, weight loss offering a full line of prescription medication, doctor, nurse and nutritional coaching support. For over a decade, DietDemand has produced a sophisticated, doctor designed weight loss program that addresses each individual specific health need to promote fast, safe and long-term weight loss.

DietDemand Contact Information:

Providing care across the USA

Headquarters:

Original post:
Diet Demand Addresses Emotional Eating as Underlying Cause of Weight Gain - Benzinga


Page 1,037«..1020..1,0361,0371,0381,039..1,0501,060..»