Posts Tagged: diet


9
Nov 10

Eat Twinkies…Lose Weight?

Daily Life Wellness | Twinkie Diet

OK. Some background: This dude, Mark Haub, a “nutrition professor” at Kansas State University decides to eat mostly junk food for two months, including potato chips, brownies, and, yes, Twinkies.

His quest: “…to see if these products which are thought by most to promote or lead to the development of obesity, if they can actually be used to do just the opposite.”

Uh-huh.

Haub tracked his calories, logging in 1800 per day…and lost 27 pounds in the process.

So, with his goal attained, what has he shown the world? Not much. Through calorie restriction, he shed some pounds over the short term. That’s the same game that Jenny Craig has been playing for years.

However, I would like to see Haub continue on this path to see just how quickly he can induce full-blown Type 2 diabetes, among a host of other concerns. That would be pretty cool — strictly from a science perspective, of course.

The really scary thing…is that the composition of Haub’s sensationalized “junk food diet” doesn’t look all that different from the actual diets consumed by many Americans.

Here is a typical day’s menu for Haub, as published by U.S. News and World Report.

Breakfast

1 double espresso, black

2 cups Kellogg’s Corn Pops

1 cup whole milk

1 Centrum Advanced Formula multivitamin

Total calories: 376

Lunch

1 Hostess Twinkie

1 Little Debbie Star Crunch

1 Muscle Milk Protein Shake

Total calories: 540

Snack

1 Hostess Twinkie

Total calories: 150

Dinner

1 Little Debbie Zebra Cake

1 brownie (Duncan Hines mix)

3-4 baby carrots

1 Muscle Milk Protein Shake

Total calories: 688

Snack

6 chips, Cool Ranch Doritos

Total calories: 75

Total Calories: 1,829

One real problem (among many) here is when people look to things like this as salvation for weight loss. We could have another Cookie Diet on our hands, folks.

Let’s hear from Mark on his glorious achievement…

Photo

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • Live
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,


15
Oct 10

What Jenny Craig Doesn’t Want You to Know

Daily Life Wellness

Maybe you’ve seen the late-night infomercials for the following: creams that “erase” wrinkles…diet pills that magically burn fat…and acne creams that will get you laid.

Aside from the bold claims, what’s the common thread among these items?

They’re all made for quick consumption — and can be used up over time. This means, if you like the product, you’ll have to buy more…and more…and more. It’s a very profitable model for product sellers.

Guthy Renker, one of the heavyweight infomercial producers, switched to this model almost exclusively some years back to take advantage of the automatic repeat business.

Diet programs, not coincidentally, also find success by selling annual memberships and meal programs that need to be purchased again and again. It’s genius, really. For a few hundred dollars annually, plus hundreds more per month in meals, you get a prepackaged roadmap to health — without the “hassle” of trying to figure it out on your own.

Take Jenny Craig, for example. It’s a very polished system that includes meals that you’re encouraged to buy, a popular community forum, and consultations with real-life Jenny Craig “partners” — and it’s all sold using high profile celebrity success stories. (Valerie Bertinelli, is a recent example — as is Jason Alexander of Seinfeld fame.)

I have no doubt that the weight loss success stories promoted by Jenny Craig, Nutrisystem and similar plans are legitimate. However, once you pull back the gilded curtain, it’s really just simple calorie restriction that produces weight loss.

I don’t have an axe to grind specifically with Jenny; “she” just happens to be a good example of where I’m headed with this…

Here are the two chief issues I have with diet plans where you’re goaded to buy meals, pills, shakes and cookies.

1. Nutrition — real nutrition — takes a back seat to portion size and calorie restriction.

2. The implication is that success can only be achieved by using their products; they never tell you that it’s something you can do entirely on your own — without the expensive products and the continuity program.

Let’s look at the first one: Nutrition. In fairness to Jenny Craig nowhere could I find an actual ingredients list for any of their “Jenny’s Cuisine” menu items (WTF?) — so it would be difficult for me to pass judgement on the whole deal, on that basis.

However, they do publish sample menus showcasing things like the following: blueberry mini loaf; frosted oats cereal; and cookies ‘n’ cream cheesecake. Now, again, no ingredients published, but I have a hard time believing any of this “diet food” is made with stuff that’s genuinely good for me.

So, then, is eating frosted oats cereal really the way to optimal health as Jenny Craig would suggest? Of course not. But, if the portions are small enough, and you can handle the starvation thing well, then you might lose weight.

Score! Mission accomplished…at least temporarily.

How long can someone really go…eating only 1,200 calories (or less!) a day — before falling off the wagon and gorging themselves silly? I ate 1200 calories before 9 AM this morning, for goodness sake! Starvation is not the answer.

Let’s head over to item 2: Success on their terms only.

I get it. The promise of health and/or weight loss in a shiny new box is very attractive. It’s positioned as a blueprint for weight loss success — provided you continue to buy the meals, vitamins, consulting, etc., of course.

I’ve touched on this before in a previous post about perfect diets. My stance is that any program that requires or “encourages” you to spend money to buy their weight loss/muscle building products should be seen as suspect.

Nobody has the one right answer to health/wellness — and they certainly don’t have it in a pill…or powder…or a fancy little blueberry mini loaf.

Unfortunately, many folks too easily buy into the promises of “effortless” weight loss and radiant health, or the promise of the one, last way that’s going to be the permanent solution for them.

I know I’ve been guilty of it in the past.

Some people so blindly believe this shit that they’ll shout it from the rooftops even though their own results have been less than stellar. I had an obese woman tell me a few months ago at a business lunch — with a straight face — that I shouldn’t be eating anything after 8:00 PM or I would suffer terrible weight gain. As if 8:00 is the fucking witching hour for food consumption or something. Some of my biggest meals are after 10 PM, and I’ve never had a problem.

The secret is that there is no secret. When you’re done with all the hype and noise you realize that all you really have to do is make better choices at the grocery store and move around a little more — then make these your new habits.

Unfortunately, I doubt there will be any high profile ad campaigns for broccoli and coconut milk anytime soon. Cookies ‘n’ cream cheesecake is just an easier sell — especially if George Costanza is doing the selling.

###

Photo

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • Live
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,


7
Oct 10

Why the USDA Food Pyramid is Dangerous

Daily Life Wellness | Food Pyramid Update
The food pyramid is due for an update.

I’ll assume you’re at least loosely familiar with the USDA’s guidelines as to how America should be eating. (if not, refresh your memory and head over to the Dept. of Agriculture and take a peek.)

The current guidelines, unveiled in 2005 and dubbed “MyPyramid,” have largely been viewed as a failure. There’s little in the way of actual nutritional guidance, and it’s confusing. For example, the current pyramid recommends “at least” 3 oz. of bread and cereals each day, but, oddly, doesn’t provide quantity recommendations for anything else. “Eat more vegetables” is the hard-hitting, tell-it-like-it-is advice we’re given instead.

Every five years the USDA, CDC, and various “health experts” gather to discuss the makeup of the new pyramid and issue new guidelines. And this December those experts will be gathering once more — and America waits anxiously for the outcome.

I’m not a fan of the pyramid. There are many problems with the guidelines, but let’s focus on one in particular…

Where there is government, there are lobbysts. And it is the sole job of a lobby to gain favor for, in this case, the food producing industries represented on the pyramid. And each producer wants their say, lest their product get “demoted” or somehow disparaged on the new pyramid.

For example, the meat lobby (not to mention the yes-it-really-does-exist Salt Institute) is already opposing strict guidelines on sodium intake — which would affect the perception of lunch meat, among other foods.

The milk lobby is up in arms about warnings to cut back on sugar. Chocolate and strawberry flavored milk might just fall out of favor. (Blasphemy!)

And the egg lobby wants nothing to do with proposed verbiage advocating a “plant-based” diet for fear that it would be misunderstood as meaning vegetarian.

So…how, then, can a government appointed committee possibly be objective in the face of so much political pressure? It can’t. As proof, the current pyramid doesn’t expressly warn against eating anything at all — not even the stuff we know is bad for us.

Is it really in our best interest to have politicians and the big food conglomerates dictate how we should eat?

Imagine how many politicians would be out of a job if the pyramid guidelines came out and said: “don’t fucking eat anything with corn syrup in it; it’s terrible for you.” Corn producers would mount a campaign to send them packing. Witness the re-election loss of Senator George McGovern in 1980, who in 1977 (misguidedly) recommended that folks cut back on red meat and dairy in a report titled Dietary Goals for the United States.

Among McGovern’s constituents: pissed off cattle ranchers and dairy farmers in his home state of South Dakota.

The reality is that corn syrup is awful, dirty stuff. Everyone knows it, and now, finally, even science is catching up. (But that’s not stopping the corn syrup producers from changing their tactics.) Since the McGovern debacle, no one wants to risk his or her neck by actually promoting some specific guidelines.

The fact is, watered down nutritional guidelines from Uncle Sam are at best ineffective, and at worst, downright dangerous, if it avoids genuine real-world guidance in order to appease politicians and their food-producing constituents.

But, let’s face it, does anyone actually pay attention to the USDA’s food guidelines? Well, for most of us, the answer is no when deciding what to eat day-to-day. But, the guidelines do impact what is served in school lunches and the makeup of nutrition labels, for example. Plus they’re included in educational materials provided by hospitals, and in connection with food stamp programs, among other things.

The effect is broader than what you may realize.

Where do I stand? That’s easy, and I don’t need a pyramid: Cut out most (or all) of the grains/cereals, then eat lots of veggies, some fruit, lean meats, eggs, some nuts and seeds, some dairy, plus good fats (olive oil and coconut milk, for example.) Easy.

The Obama administration has a huge opportunity here, but my guess is that we’ll get more of the same come December.

-Mike

Photo

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • Live
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , ,


22
Sep 10

Something’s Fishy About “Genetically Modified” Salmon.

Daily Life Wellness | Something's Fishy About Genetically Modified Salmon

I’m not a big fish eater, but something just gives me the willies with this whole genetically modified salmon thing.

For those who haven’t heard…mad scientists (the kind with gray spiky hair and evil laughs, I imagine) have “engineered” a salmon to grow twice as fast as a standard salmon — meaning twice as fast to your dinner plate, I suppose.

There’s a lot of press about this lately — most likely because of how freaking scary it sounds to modify the genes of another species…just to make its consumption more cost effective. Frankenstein comes to mind.

Also of note: Should the FDA approve this, the salmon will be the first genetically altered animal available for human consumption. (Some fruits and veggies have already been approved, as is my understanding.)

But where does this end? Genetically modifying everything will become the norm . It’s a slippery slope for sure.

Years from now, when all we’re eating is modified food of one kind or another, science will discover that…Ooops!…they made a whopper of a mistake. And that all this modified food is actually horrible for us in some capacity.

I think I’ll be sticking with the real stuff — at least for now.

What do you think about mutant food? And what’s so wrong with regular salmon that we have to grow them twice as fast anyway?

- Mike

Photo

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • Live
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace

Technorati Tags: , , , ,


19
Sep 10

Is There A Perfect Diet?

Daily Life Wellness | Is There a Perfect Diet?

I’m the first to admit that I don’t know the answer to that question definitively.

It seems that every day some new “diet” comes along that promises to be the last greatest diet you’ll ever need. Or that you can lose 60 pounds in a month eating nothing but…acorns and tomato juice. (Just made that up, but with the right marketing, I think I could make it a bestseller.)

Keep in mind…when I say “diet” I don’t necessarily mean weight loss — more like a long term eating plan for health and life wellness. “Long term eating plan” isn’t as sexy as “Lose Weight Today!” but it’s more practical, realistic and sustainable.

There are no shortages of ways to eat, even among the paleo method that I largely subscribe to. And there are no shortages of crazy diets either.

First, there are the outright ridiculous “diets”:

Ever heard of the Cookie Diet? No? Well it actually exists. The deal, apparently, is that you eat a bunch of cookies and supplements, knock them back with shakes and special teas — and you lose weight. Well, you might lose weight by way of calorie restriction (calories taken in vs. calories expended) but is that really a long term solution for health and life wellness? Cookies?

Then there’s the so-called Twinkie Diet. (Yes, really.) Professor Mark Haub at KSU, in an effort to “disprove common beliefs about nutrition,” subsisted on a diet of Twinkies, donuts, and similar snacks for a month. In addition to losing weight, Haub hopes to challenge the notion “that foods regarded as nutritious may, in fact, be unhealthy, while foods regarded as junk may have some benefits.”

What benefits, exactly, are derived from Twinkies, Mark? Let’s see, included among the many ingredients in your average Twinkie are…corn syrup, high fructose corn syrup, and corn syrup solids. (Apparently there wasn’t quite enough corn syrup in there already, so they needed to bulk it up with some additional “solids.”) Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you know that corn syrup is not healthy stuff.

Thanks to Doug at Health Habits for the head’s up on the Twinkie Diet.

And let’s not forget Morgan Spurlock’s (mis)adventures eating only McDonald’s for 30 days. (Not really a diet, of course, but a fascinating reminder of how a body can be ravaged by fast food.)

The shiny crazy diets with the big claims are (or should be) the easiest to stay away from.

But what about the rest of the diets out there?

Face it: Out there is an endlessly churning sea of books, blogs, supplements and workouts at the core of the multi billion dollar health and fitness industry. Tough to choose.

Your first stop should be common sense. If you’re looking for a lifelong nutrition plan then draw the line at anything promising quick weight loss. You may lose weight, but is it sustainable over the long term — and will it be something you enjoy?

I would then make sure that lots of fruits and vegetables are included. The food we grow, generally speaking, is far better for us than the stuff we process. Any diet that puts silly and arbitrary restrictions on vegetables and fruit should be suspect.

Also, does the diet you’re considering require you to buy special supplements or foods only sold by the author and/or marketer? Suspect.

Rational amounts of exercise should also be on the menu here, as well as plenty of rest. While exercise isn’t a diet plan, per se, nutrition and exercise go hand in hand.

From there it comes down to what you can sustain healthfully, while looking and feeling your best.

I mentioned the paleo diet above, which is how I eat 90 percent or more of the time. It does meet the criteria above and I am definitely a fan, but I would never suggest that paleo is the absolute best method for everyone. I do think, in general, some version of paleo is probably optimal for most — but I leave that up to you to experiment with.

A good place to start would be Robb Wolf’s new book The Paleo Solution (disclosure: affiliate link.) I’ve been a listener of Robb’s weekly podcasts for a while now, and when it comes to the science behind this paleo deal, this guy knows his stuff. Plus he blends humor with an easy to understand delivery, so it’s also enjoyable.

So, back to the beginning: Is there a perfect diet? Probably not for everyone in absolute terms. There’s only the perfect one for you: The one that you can sustain for the long term, and keeps you not only looking good, but feeling and performing at your best.

- Mike

Photo: Leonardini

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • Live
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace

Technorati Tags: , , , ,