Tag: obesity

Does losing weight really lower your disease risk?

by Monica Reinagel, MS, LDN

James writes:

“Everyone refers to weight as being a risk factor for various diseases. But is it true that losing weight actually lowers one’s risk?  Or could some other factor be responsible for both disease risk and a higher weight?”

If you’re overweight or obese, losing weight absolutely does reduce your risk of various complications and diseases. Because when you lose weight, it’s not just the the number on the scale that changes.  Losing weight can reduce your blood pressure as well as your fasting blood sugar, for example, and that in turn lowers your risk for stroke and diabetes.

[bctt tweet=” When you lose weight, it’s not just the the number on the scale that changes. ” username=”nutritiondiva”]

And, by the way, losing even a small amount–as little as 5% of your current weight–can significantly reduce your risk of various conditions, even if you are still overweight. For this reason, you’d be better off losing a modest amount of weight and keeping it off than losing a large amount of weight and gaining it back!

(And if you’ve had enough of yo-yo dieting, you may be interested in a new project I’m working on.) But keep in mind that having a risk factor for a disease does not mean that you are certain to develop the disease.  If you are a smoker, you are much more likely to develop lung cancer than  a non-smoker. But some smokers don’t get lung cancer–and some non-smokers do.

Which Risk Factors Should We Focus On?

Some disease risk factors are things we can’t change–such as our age, race, gender, or genetic heritage. I’m at higher risk of developing osteoporosis than James is, simply because I’m female.

Other risk factors, such as our body weight, eating habits, exercise, and other lifestyle habits, are within our control. I can lower my risk of developing osteoporosis, for example, by not smoking and getting regular exercise.

No Guarantees So Enjoy the Ride!

Despite what some people will tell you,  there is no way to completely disease-proof your body. All we can do is focus on our modifiable risk factors and hope for the best. And because there are no guarantees, I think it’s important to strike a balance between lowering risk and maintaining quality of life. Or, as my friend Yoni Freedhoff likes to say, “Live the healthiest life you can enjoy living.”

Is There an Optimal Ratio of PUFAs, MUFAs, and Saturated Fats?

by Monica Reinagel, MS, LDN

Q. Is there an optimal ratio of polyunsaturated, monounsaturated, and saturated fats that you’d recommend for optimal health?

A.  Interesting question, and any answer I give will be controversial, but I certainly don’t mind getting the conversation started!

Here’s how the typical American diet (which, one could argue, is clearly not optimal) breaks down, with fat taking up 34% of total calories. Continue reading “Is There an Optimal Ratio of PUFAs, MUFAs, and Saturated Fats?” >

This week: Fructose fears, apricot cures, and grilling tips

by Monica Reinagel, MS, LDN

A public service campaign on one of the networks has as its tagline, The More You Know.  And information is, in general, a good thing. But sometimes it seems to me as if the constant stream of nutrition information and advice coming at you from all directions serves only to ratchet up needless anxiety.  Take, for example, the alarmist rhetoric about fructose that circulates around the internet these days.  I regularly hear from people who are now afraid to eat fruit. In this week’s Nutrition Diva podcast, I explain the two crucial details that the fructose fear-mongers forget to tell you.

In this week’s Nutrition Diva newsletter, I address internet rumors that eating apricot pits can help prevent cancer.  And on the Quick and Dirty Blog, I calm one reader’s fear that eating too many vegetables could  lead to vitamin toxicity and perhaps even cause her hair to fall out.

On a lighter note, as we Northern Hemispher-ites get ready to kick off the summer barbecue season, I have some reminders on how to keep those cook-outs healthy as well as delicious over on the What’s Cooking Blog.  (Don’t you love it when the thing that tastes better is also better for you?)

 

Are Industrial Chemicals Causing Obesity?

by Monica Reinagel, MS, LDN

Quick and Dirty Nutrition Tips from Monica ReinagelSome  researchers believe that environmental pollutants and industrial chemicals are to blame for the obesity epidemic. This, of course, bucks the conventional wisdom that our increasing girth is simply the result of eating too much and exercising too little. What’s the evidence to support the idea that chemicals are the true cause of our ever-expanding waistlines? Find out in this week’s Nutrition Diva podcast.

3 Ways to Fight Childhood Obesity

by Monica Reinagel, MS, LDN

Quick and Dirty Tips for Eating Well and Feeling FabulousToday, one in every 5 kids is obese and a great many more are overweight. Not only is this a cruddy way to spend your childhood, but overweight kids are highly likely to become overweight adults, battling both their weight and the associated health problems for a lifetime. In this week’s podcast, I outline three simple things you can do to  help your kids maintain a healthy weight. Read or listen to it here.

The Antidote to Fructose Fears

by Monica Reinagel, MS, LDN

For as long as Gary Taubes and Robert Lustig have been sounding the alarm about sugar (in general) and fructose (in particular) being the fall of Western civilization, I have been attempting to inject some much-needed perspective into the discussion.  (See the bottom of the post for  links to my articles dating back to 2007).

In  my opinion, the black-and-white view promoted by Taubes and Lustig is counter-productive. Instead of helping people set reasonable limits on their sugar intake, they’ve got people afraid to have an apple for fear of the fructose it contains.

If you eat large quantities of sugar–say, 25% or more of your daily calories for an extended period of time–you may well experience the doomsday scenario that Taubes and Lustig depict–fatty liver, altered metabolism, increased appetite, diabetes, obesity, and reduced life expectancy.  On the other hand, these effects have not been seen in people (or rats) who consume sugar in moderate quantities.

Continue reading “The Antidote to Fructose Fears” >

Fructose: Poison, Nutrient, or Both?

by Monica Reinagel, MS, LDN

Given the escalating rhetoric on fructose, I think it’s time to revisit a couple of basic facts and try to regain some perspective.

Fructose is not a toxin. It is not a man-made “chemical.” The fact that is it metabolized in the liver does not mean that it is a poison.

Fructose is a naturally occurring mono-saccharide (sugar) found in fruits, vegetables, nuts, grains, eggs, dairy products and other whole foods. It has been part of the human diet since the beginning. Presumably, our bodies are well-adapted to it.  In fact, there might be an evolutionary advantage to the ability to metabolize sugars through multiple pathways–including one that does not lead to an immediate rise in blood sugar.

All nutrients are potentially toxic

As the National Academy of Sciences states: “All nutrients can have adverse effects when intakes are excessive.”  That’s why tolerable upper limits (ULs) have been established for many nutrients. The NAS recommends that you don’t exceed 45mg per day of iron, for example. But no-one is suggesting that iron is a poison or that it should be avoided at all costs. Maybe if we had a tolerable upper limit for fructose, we could all relax a little bit.

How much fructose is too much?

According to a recent analysis, Americans are now consuming somewhere between 38 and 73g of fructose a day. A third of that comes from sweetened beverages. The rest comes from other processed foods as well as grains, fruits, vegetables, eggs, cheese, and other whole foods.

It seems clear that current sugar intake is excessive and making us sick. Many argue that it’s fructose, specifically, that’s doing most of the damage. Fine: For the sake of argument, let’s just say that the current average intake of 55g of fructose (or around 10% of total calories) is enough to overload the liver and contribute to obesity and other ills. That suggests that somewhere between 0 and 55g per day is a threshold at which fructose ceases to be a useful (or at least harmless) nutrient and starts to be a problem.

Seeing as it doesn’t seem possible, necessary, or even desirable to reduce fructose consumption to zero, I think it would be useful to start looking for that threshold.

What is the tolerable upper limit for fructose?