hCg Diet Makes a Comeback

Among the hundreds of drastic and unproven weight loss plans, the controversial hCG diet may take the cake.

Discredited by researchers in the 1970s, the near-starvation diet restricts followers to 500 calories a day for six weeks. At the same time, dieters regularly inject themselves with human chorionic gonadotropin, or hCG, a hormone taken from pregnant women's urine. Proponents say the hCG curbs hunger pangs, makes it easier to stay on a very low-calorie diet — and even releases stored body fat from trouble spots like the belly, hips and thighs.

Followers of the hCG diet acknowledge that the severe calorie restriction feels like a "forced death march." Both supporters and critics agree that evidence is scant to show the hCG works any better than a placebo. Meanwhile, safety data are lacking on long-term use of hCG for weight loss.

"Starving yourself is never a good idea," said Pieter Cohen, an associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, who criticized the hCG diet this year on "The Dr. Oz Show." "Injecting yourself with ineffective hormones is an even worse idea."

Yet, the long-discredited diet is making a comeback, and the renewed interest has spawned a cottage industry for products that haven't been tested for quality, safety or efficacy, including drops and sprays.

What's also different this time around is that though the hCG diet still exists largely in the realm of alternative medicine practitioners and Internet hucksters, it's also making inroads in integrative clinics headed by medical doctors, where it's offered as part of a "medically supervised" weight loss plan. At least one physicians group is offering hCG training to doctors. And wellness centers and medical spas also tout the hCG diet as the long-awaited magic bullet.

Dr. Mehmet Oz fueled interest in the diet — and appalled some medical colleagues — by featuring anecdotal success stories on his TV show. Whenever scientific studies show something doesn't work, "yet you have real human beings saying they tried it and it works, I get curious," explained Oz, who called the diet "portion-control shock therapy."

There's no question that men and women do lose weight on the diet — as would anyone who eats 500 calories a day. The pounds melt off quickly, and the instant gratification can be intensely motivating to the patients, who have often exhausted most other options. And because so few obesity treatments are successful, some proponents say the anecdotal evidence shouldn't be dismissed.

"If it was as simple as reducing calories and increasing exercise, we'd all be thin," said Nikol Margiotta, who directs the Longevity HCG Diet at the Raby Institute for Integrative Medicine at Northwestern, which is not part of Northwestern Memorial Hospital. Margiotta is a naprapath, a health care practitioner who treats connective tissue disorders using nutrition and hands-on therapy.

On the hCG diet, "there's a focus, a single-minded drive that comes over you," said Margiotta, who went on the diet herself and said she lost 22 pounds in five weeks. "The problem is that you get addicted to the weight loss."

Still, the bulk of research has found no evidence that taking hCG brings about weight loss or fat redistribution, reduces hunger or improves mood. Since the 1970s, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has required labels to state that the hormone "is not an effective adjunctive therapy" for weight loss.

If dieters lose weight on the regimen, the effect is from the ultralow-calorie diet, most studies have concluded, and the hCG is a placebo.

"Unfortunately that placebo comes with other potential harms," said Dr. Melinda Ring, director of the Northwestern Center for Integrative Medicine and Wellness. "In human and animal studies, hCG injections have been associated with many problems, including excessive stimulation of the ovaries, elevated leptin, insulin and cortisol."

One common side effect of the hCG diet is hair loss; calorie restriction starves the body of essential nutrients, though the diet's proponents believe the body gets the calories it needs from existing fat. HCG can also increase the risk of blood clots, headaches, irritability and fatigue.

In men, hCG stimulates testosterone production, which is why hCG is considered a performance-enhancing substance for athletes. But for a woman of childbearing age, hCG taken by injection, nasal spray or orally could generate antibodies that put future pregnancies in danger, said Dr. Rasa Kazlauskaite, an endocrinologist and preventive medicine expert at Rush University Medical Center who specializes in weight gain.

Taking hCG, she said, "may immunize yourself to your own pregnancy," said Kazlauskaite. "You could still get pregnant, but you could potentially have an antibody to the hormone that is needed to maintain the pregnancy," she said. "The longer you use hCG, the higher the chance you could get the antibody."

Source:August 14, 2011|By Julie Deardorff, Tribune reporter

Calories, Not Carbs or Protein Key to Weight Management

Curbing calories is the key ingredient for diabetics seeking to lose weight, and low-fat diets that are either high in protein or high in carbs are equally effective, researchers say.

"I think there are two key messages from this study," said study lead author Jeremy D. Krebs, a senior lecturer with the school of medicine and health sciences at the University of Otago in Wellington, New Zealand. "The first is that no matter what diet we prescribe, people find it extremely difficult to sustain the changes from their habitual diet over a long time. But if they are able to follow either a high-protein diet or a high-carbohydrate diet, they can achieve modest weight loss."

Krebs said this first message conveys flexibility and allows people to choose the approach that best suits them and "even to swap between dietary approaches when they get bored."

The second point "is that for people with diabetes, if they can adhere to either diet and achieve weight loss, then they do get benefits in terms of their diabetes control and cardiovascular risk," he added.

Krebs and his colleagues are scheduled to report their findings Sunday in San Diego at the American Diabetes Association meeting.

To compare the potential benefits of two popular dietetic approaches, the authors tracked nearly 300 overweight men and women between the ages of 35 and 75 who were on a new, two-year nutritional program.

To start, all the participants had a body mass index greater than 27, meaning they were moderately overweight, and all had type 2 diabetes.

The researchers randomly assigned the participants to one of two groups: a low-fat/high-protein group or a low-fat/high-carb group.

For the first half year, all attended twice-weekly group sessions led by a dietitian; for the following six months, sessions took place monthly.

Weight and waist circumference were measured at six months, one year, and two years. Kidney function and lipid (blood fats) profiles were also assessed throughout.

Food diaries indicated that total calorie intake went down in both groups. Ultimately, both groups lost a similar amount of weight and reduced their waist size in similar measure, the investigators found. And by the end of the two-year period, both groups had similar blood fat profiles.

Krebs and his colleagues concluded that their "real-world" experiment demonstrated that both approaches afford similar benefits, with the principal driving factor behind sustained weight loss being calorie reduction rather than either high-carb or high-protein consumption.

Lona Sandon, a registered dietitian and assistant professor of clinical nutrition at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, said the observations were "not at all surprising."

"This is pretty consistent with other research out there that has conducted other long-term comparisons in the general population," she said. "In the first six months you might see a little better benefit from a high-protein approach. But long-term, the initial benefits from a high-protein diet seem to diminish over time, and the two diets end up being essentially equivalent," Sandon explained.

"The bottom-line is that the issue for weight loss is calories," Sandon added. "Not where those calories come from. You need to create an energy deficit to lead to weight loss, and that happens by decreasing those calories. That's just been shown again and again."

Experts note that research presented at medical meetings is considered preliminary because it has not been subjected to the rigorous scrutiny required for publication in a peer-reviewed medical journal.

Source: 6/26/11 Health Day News

Athletic Trainers Safe Weight Loss Statement

The National Athletic Trainers' Association (NATA) issued a statement Monday of recommendations for coaches, players, and athletic trainers regarding safe weight
loss and maintenance practices for athletes. The group hopes its recommendations will help reduce a disturbing prevalence of eating disorders and unsafe weight-maintenance habits that affect up to 62% of athletes.

NATA's statement emphasizes the importance of a well-rounded diet to an
athlete's performance and weight maintenance, the dangers of unsafe practices to long-term health, and the need for including medical professionals when
deciding on a safe weight.

Former LSU gymnast Ashleigh Clare-Kearney addressed NATA members at their
annual convention Monday in New Orleans.Clare-Kearney, one of the most decorated
gymnasts in LSU women's gymnastics history, was the physical and emotional
exception in the gymnastics world during her career. At 5-foot-5 and 150 pounds, the
two-time NCAA champion outsized most of her fellow gymnasts who she says are
traditionally around five feet, 100 pounds.

Emotionally, Clare-Kearney's self-esteem and comfort with her weight were also
rarities in a culture she describes as "very high up there with sports like wrestling with the number of eating disorders and issuesof that nature relative to other sports."

"I definitely saw a lot of people who either didn't eat at all or ate and threw it up
because they were trying to fulfill this image …" says Clare-Kearney, who went on to
become an assistant coach at LSU after graduating in 2008. "They needed to
understand that food is fuel for your body and they were actually hurting themselves
…You can't perform if you don't eat."

According to Paula Turocy, chair at the John G. Rangos Sr. School of Health Sciences at Duquesne University and chair of the group that wrote the NATA statement, the goal is to dispel common misconceptions that lead to unsafe weight maintenance practices like the ones Clare-Kearney described. Particularly dangerous is the idea that adjustments to an athlete's weight can be achieved quickly,says LSU senior associate athletic trainer Shelley Mullenix.
Source: USA Today 6/21/11

Food Choices Matter

If there was ever any suggestion that French fries are good for you, it’s now dispelled in stark detail. An analysis of data from three lengthy surveys that assigns actual pounds of weight gain to foods finds that fries, sodas and several other guilty pleasures are among the most potent waist expanders.

On the bright side, researchers attribute weight loss to eating yogurt, fruit, nuts and vegetables. The report appears in the June 23 New England Journal of Medicine.

“Conventional wisdom often recommends ‘everything in moderation’ with a focus only on total calories consumed, rather than the quality of what is consumed,” says study coauthor Dariush Mozaffarian, a cardiologist at Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston. “Our results demonstrate that the quality of the diet — the types of foods and beverages that one consumes — are strongly linked to weight gain.”

Mozaffarian and his colleagues combined data from three long-term surveys conducted between 1986 and 2006 that included more than 22,000 men and nearly 100,000 women. The weight, diet and lifestyle information collected in those surveys enabled the researchers to calculate an effect for specific foods.

None of the participants was obese or had any serious medical problems at the study’s outset, and no one was asked to go on a diet. Starting with each volunteer’s weight at the outset, the researchers monitored any gain or loss at four-year intervals. On average, participants had gained 3.35 pounds at each four-year point.

Potatoes stood out as a culprit. A single-serving bag of potato chips added to one’s daily intake tacked on 1.69 pounds over four years by this calculation. Potatoes prepared as boiled, mashed or baked, added about half a pound, while French fries larded on 3.35 pounds. A single sugar-containing soft drink per day tacked on 1 pound every four years. Butter, refined grains, desserts, processed or red meats, fruit juice, fried food or foods containing trans fats added somewhat less weight.

Other foods seemed to lower weight. Adding a daily serving of yogurt knocked off nearly a pound over four years, while adding a serving of nuts or fruit was associated with a loss of about half a pound each. An extra serving of whole grains, vegetables or diet soft drinks reduced weight slightly.

Changes in intake of dairy products other than butter and yogurt, whether low-fat or not, appeared to have little effect on weight.

A pound here and a pound there might not seem worth worrying about, but weight gain in middle age is often so gradual that people don’t notice it until they have already gained a substantial amount, Mozaffarian says. “These ‘small amounts’ are exactly what is causing the obesity epidemic,” he says.

Specifying which foods may lessen or prevent weight gain is highly practical, says nutrition scientist Christopher Gardner of Stanford University, who wasn’t involved in this study. “When you choose one of these foods, you choose not to consume something else,” he says. The strength of the study, he says, is that it demonstrates that “these are achievable differences because real, live people did them.”

Source: Science News 6/22/11

Pressure to be Thin Can Result in Sleep Loss

Some people may lose sleep over the pressure to be thin -- especially young white girls who are being pushed by female friends to lose weight or stay skinny, according to a new study.


"There is a significant amount of research in other areas regarding pressure on adolescent females to minimize body weight, but this pressure as it relates to sleep health is a less-explored topic and its consequences are mostly unknown," said the study's principal investigator, Katherine Marczyk, a doctoral student in clinical health psychology and behavioral medicine at the University of North Texas in Denton, Texas. "These results are important as this discovery could be one of the first steps in this research," she explained in a news release from the American Academy of Sleep Medicine.

In conducting the study, which was to be presented Tuesday at the annual meeting of the Associated Professional Sleep Societies in Minneapolis, researchers asked 789 Texas middle-school students, all females and averaging 12 years of age, to describe how much pressure they felt to lose weight and be thin.

The girls also pinpointed the sources of this pressure, which included peers, family, friends and the media. Researchers then assessed the girls' quality of sleep to measure how this external pressure to be skinny affected how much sleep they got.

The pressure the girls felt to be thin from girlfriends as well as from the media significantly predicted sleep duration, accounting for 4.5 percent of the difference in how much sleep the girls got.

That discrepancy in sleep duration jumped to 6 percent among white girls (about 60 percent of the study's participants) who faced pressure to be skinny from their friends, the investigators found.

The study authors added that losing sleep could put young girls at risk for other health problems, including increased anxiety and depression.

Because this study was presented at a medical meeting, the data and conclusions should be viewed as preliminary until published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Source: Health Day, 6/14/11

Best Weight Loss Diets

Best Weight-Loss Diets
The best diet to lose weight on is Weight Watchers, according to weight-loss experts who rated the diets below for U.S. News. The Jenny Craig diet program and the Raw Food Diet come in close behind. Some other diets outperform these for fast weight loss, but long-term weight loss is more important for your health.

RANKINGS
DATA
#1

Weight Watchers Diet
(3.8 out of 5.0)
This popular points-counting diet helps dieters drop pounds—and keep them off. In experts' ratings, Weight Watchers bested all other ranked diets for both short-term and long-term weight loss. But that doesn't guarantee it will work for everyone. Its average rating of "moderately effective" for long-term weight loss reflects the difficulty dieters have staying on the wagon, even when using the best weight-loss diet available.

#2

Jenny Craig Diet
(3.5 out of 5.0)
As a weight-loss diet, Jenny Craig outranked nearly all of its competitors. Experts appreciated, among other aspects of the program, the value of the emotional support provided by its weekly one-on-one counseling sessions. A few experts, however, questioned whether dieters can expect to keep the weight off once they're weaned from the diet's prepackaged, portion-controlled foods. Though not factored into its ranking, Jenny Craig's cost is relatively high.

#2

Raw Food Diet
(3.5 out of 5.0)
The raw food diet can deliver both short- and long-term weight loss, experts concluded, since raw foodists typically eat fewer calories than other people. But the restrictive and labor-intensive diet certainly isn't for everyone.

#4

Volumetrics Diet
(3.4 out of 5.0)
Volumetrics helps dieters drop pounds—and keep them off. It scored well in both the short- and long-term weight loss categories, comparable to or better than many other diets. Because it focuses on satiety, or the satisfied feeling that you’ve had enough, it’s “more likely to be successful” than other diets.

#5

Slim-Fast Diet
(3.3 out of 5.0)
Slim-Fast claims dieters will drop one to two pounds a week. Experts awarded the program relatively high scores for short-term and long-term weight loss, indicating their optimism the pounds will stay off, too.

#5

Vegan Diet
(3.3 out of 5.0)
Going vegan gives you good odds of losing weight and keeping it off, according to experts. Veganism is also an effective weight-control method. But vegans must be “very committed,” as one expert put it, because forgoing all animal products can be challenging.

#7
Atkins Diet
(3.2 out of 5.0)
In keeping with its emphasis on helping dieters shed pounds fast, the Atkins program rated well for short-term weight loss but was judged by experts as less impressive over the long haul. On balance, it came out slightly ahead of the middle of the pack.

#8
DASH Diet
(3.1 out of 5.0)
With an emphasis on healthful, filling foods that don’t pack lots of calories, the government-developed Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) drew reasonably good ratings from experts, despite not having been designed as a weight-loss diet. They judged it to be about as good for short-term weight loss as for long-term weight loss.

#8
Eco-Atkins Diet
(3.1 out of 5.0)
Experts regarded Eco-Atkins as much more effective for short-term weight loss than for long-term weight loss. It “may be difficult to consistently adhere to,” one expert said, because it is largely a “do-it-yourself diet.”

#8
Mayo Clinic Diet
(3.1 out of 5.0)
Among weight-loss plans, the Mayo Clinic Diet tied with DASH and Eco-Atkins. While needed evidence is lacking, experts' ratings reflect their believe that Mayo, if followed, could deliver modest weight loss, both short- and long-term.

#11
Mediterranean Diet
(3.0 out of 5.0)
As a weight-loss plan, the Mediterranean diet didn't overwhelm the experts, but it’s not built to be one. It is up to the individual to keep watch over the scale.

#11
Ornish Diet
(3.0 out of 5.0)
Experts deemed the Ornish Spectrum plan to be OK, but not great, for people searching specifically for a weight-loss diet. Its greatest strengths lie elsewhere.

#11
South Beach Diet
(3.0 out of 5.0)
South Beach helps dieters drop pounds—fast. But our experts felt it’s less likely that they’ll actually keep the weight off long-term. We found little research indicating that the diet is sustainable or that it helps dieters maintain weight loss over the long haul.

#11
TLC Diet
(3.0 out of 5.0)
Therapeutic Lifestyle Changes (TLC) isn't designed to be a weight-loss diet. But if sensibly followed, it can produce weight loss, experts said, because it's a fundamentally sound approach to eating. One plus: It requires no extreme measures such as shunning carbs or meat.

#15
Vegetarian Diet
(2.9 out of 5.0)
For weight loss, the vegetarian diet is slower off the starting line than most alternatives. But it gains back some ground over the long haul, beating out about half the field on long-term weight loss. Although vegetarianism isn’t designed to be a weight-loss plan, building in a calorie restriction and filling the menu with healthful foods could help dieters shed some pounds.

#16
Medifast Diet
(2.7 out of 5.0)
Medifast landed near the bottom of the pack for overall weight loss. While dieters will likely drop pounds quickly on Medifast, most experts felt they’d regain the weight. The diet's relatively low ratings for long-term weight loss pulled it down in the ranking.

#16
Nutrisystem Diet
(2.7 out of 5.0)
Nutrisystem also earned better ratings for short-term weight loss than for long-term weight loss. Experts were doubtful dieters could keep off the weight once they graduate from prepackaged meals and transition to cooking on their own again.

#18
Zone Diet
(2.6 out of 5.0)
Experts weren’t convinced that the Zone diet helps keep weight off over the short or long term. While it “provides a dose of dietary discipline,” one said, portions are small, and the diet requires a lot of work, which can make adhering to it difficult.

#19
Glycemic-Index Diet
(2.5 out of 5.0)
The glycemic-index diet doesn’t have much potential as a weight-loss diet, according to experts. It premise of favoring "good" carbs over "bad" hasn’t been scientifically validated, and dieters won’t have enough guidance to drop the pounds and keep them off, they concluded.

#20
Paleo Diet
(1.9 out of 5.0)
If weight loss is the goal, the Paleo diet will likely disappoint, in the judgment of our panel of experts. While they gave it slightly higher scores for short-term weight loss than for long-term, on the whole it was the least effective for weight loss of all 20 diets they reviewed.

Disclaimer and a note about your health.

Does Late Night Eating Cause Weight Gain?

A link between late-night eating and weight gain has been debated for years. But though many dieters suspect a connection, it has not been borne out in studies.

Most of the research on the matter has been carried out in animals, and with mixed results. A 2005 study of primates at Oregon Health & Science University found that late-night meals did not lead to extra weight gain; whether consumed at 10 a.m. or 10 p.m., a calorie was just a calorie.

But a study on adult men and women, published in April in the journal Obesity, has added support to the claim that eating late does have a greater effect on the waistline.

In the study, researchers followed the sleeping and eating patterns of 52 people over seven days. About half the subjects were “late sleepers,” meaning the midpoint of their sleep cycles was 5:30 a.m. or later. The others were “normal sleepers,” whose midpoints were before 5:30 a.m.

At the end of the study, the scientists found that the late sleepers had higher body mass indexes, typically downed more calories at dinner, and ate fewer fruits and vegetables. The late sleepers also slept fewer hours, a habit that is generally linked to weight gain. But even after adjusting for these and other variables, the scientists discovered that eating after 8 p.m. was associated with a higher body mass index, suggesting that late-evening calories are, for some reason, more hazardous to your weight.

THE BOTTOM LINE

Recent studies suggest that eating at night may in fact lead to more weight gain, though it’s not clear why.

Source: Anahad O'Conner NY Times Health 5/16/11

Can You Be Fit and Fat?

Many of us would describe the ideal runner's body as lean, lanky, lithe. But then someone who is none of those things blows past us in a 5-K, leaving us questioning what "fit" really looks like. Some doctors say people who are overweight (body-mass index, or BMI, of 25 to 29.9) or obese (BMI above 30) will face health issues, regardless of how often--or fast--they run. But some studies show that heavy people who exercise can be cardiovascularly healthy and may live longer than their sedentary but skinny peers.

We asked two experts to, ahem, weigh in. Glenn Gaesser, Ph.D., director of the Healthy Lifestyles Research Center at Arizona State University, says you can be fit and fat. Amy Weinstein, M.D., M.P.H., an assistant professor at Harvard Medical School who studies the impact of obesity and exercise on disease, disagrees. Here's why.

Is it possible to be overweight and healthy?YES

Virtually every weight-related health problem can be greatly improved or cured with a moderate level of exercise, even if you're overweight. The amount of exercise necessary to achieve a fitness level that greatly reduces disease and mortality risk is the equivalent of brisk walking for 30 minutes a day, five days a week, or running 20 to 30 minutes a day, three days a week.

NO
Based on research I've seen and studies I've performed, it appears that physical activity cannot completely reverse the ill effects of carrying excess weight on diabetes and cardiovascular disease. The reason for this is unclear. There may be hormones and proteins that regulate weight and affect chronic diseases, which physical activity cannot reverse.

But can a butterball really outrun a lean machine?YES

It's possible for a heavier runner to be faster than a thinner runner if the heavier runner has the necessary ingredients for better endurance: higher VO2 max, higher lactate threshold, and better running economy. Genes play a huge role as well, as does experience.

NO

Well, sure, it's not impossible. But a person who is overweight would be faster if he lost weight. A loss of about two pounds will theoretically increase speed by about a meter per minute of running. So if a runner runs a 5-K in 20 minutes, a two-pound weight loss would make him five seconds faster overall.

Do heavy runners get injured at the same rate as thin runners?NO

Being overweight increases your risk of arthritis. Research shows that obese people have almost three times the risk of arthritis in the knees. So it would make sense that heavy runners are at a higher risk of injuring their joints.

Should runners disregard age-related weight gain?YES

To control your weight as your metabolism slows down, you probably have to double your exercise. After age 40, you'd need to run about two more miles per week, each year, in order to maintain your weight. So if you are running 25 miles a week at age 40, you'd have to do 27 miles at 41, 29 miles a week at 42, and so on. That might be more than most people are willing to do. That's why I promote physical activity for health and not for losing weight, because it takes a lot. If your weight is creeping up but your cholesterol and blood pressure stay in the healthy range, I wouldn't worry about it.


Source:Runners World 4/30/11

Fitness Games Burn Calories

"Exergames," interactive digital or video-based games such as Wii Fit and Dance Dance Revolution, are part of today's fitness landscape for children and young adults. But do they really offer a substantial calorie burn? Two studies find that some of the games do, but whether they're fun enough for people to stick with them is another thing.

The first study, published online in the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, set out to quantify how many calories children burned while engaging in a number of exergames, and compared those activities with walking on a treadmill at 3 mph.

Researchers analyzed energy expenditure among 39 boys and girls, average age about 11, as they spent time on the games and the treadmill. The participants were also asked to rate how well they enjoyed the games, a mix of commercial and consumer products: Sportwall, the Jackie Chan Alley Run by Xavix, Lightspace Bug Invasion, Cybex Trazer Goalie Wars, Dance Dance Revolution and Nintendo Wii Boxing.

Walking at 3 mph on a treadmill produced a metabolic equivalent, or MET, of 4.9 among the children. MET values approximate how much oxygen the body uses during an activity. Light gardening has a MET of 2, a challenging hike has a MET of 6 to 7, and running at 8 mph has a MET of 13.5.

The Wii game came in at 4.2, Dance Dance Revolution was 5.4, the Lightspace game was 6.4, the Xavix game was 7, the Cybex Trazer was 5.9, and the Sportwall was 7.1. All games were played at a moderate to vigorous intensity, and four of the games surpassed treadmill walking in calorie burn.

The children liked the Sportwall game the most, and the Xavix game the least. Children who were overweight or at risk for becoming overweight enjoyed the games more than kids with lower body mass indexes.

In the study, the authors said that although exergaming may not be the answer to getting sedentary children moving, it does have potential: "It appears to be a potentially innovative strategy that can be used to reduce sedentary time, increase adherence to exercise programs, and promote enjoyment of physical activity," they wrote. "This may be especially important for at-risk populations, specifically children who carry excess body weight.

Source:Jeannine Stein, Los Angeles Times. March 7,2011

"Stealth veggies" may help cut calorie intake

Don't look now, but invisible cauliflower may be lurking in your chicken casserole -- and helping you lose weight.

Adding hidden pureed vegetables to entrees can reduce the number of calories the meals pack without sacrificing texture or taste, helping to cut the overall calorie intake, a study at Pennsylvania State University found.

Using "stealth vegetables" to pad dishes in the study of unsuspecting adults had an additional benefit, researchers found -- the participants more than doubled their intake of fiber and vitamin-packed veggies without even knowing it.

"The overconsumption of energy-dense foods leads to excessive energy intakes," wrote Alexandria Blatt in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

"The substitution of low-energy-dense vegetables for foods higher in energy density can help decrease energy intakes but may be difficult to implement if individuals dislike the taste of vegetables."

The study included 20 men and 21 women who agreed to eat at a laboratory once a week for three weeks.

Volunteers were served as much as they wanted to eat, along with side dishes such as bread rolls, strawberry yogurt, broccoli and green beans, depending on the meal, and given snacks such as carrot sticks or fig cookies to take home.

The meals were always the same: carrot bread for breakfast, macaroni and cheese for lunch and chicken-and-rice casserole for dinner. Portion sizes were controlled by weight and the researchers kept a close account of the amount of food eaten.

Unknown to the diners, back in the kitchen cooks were slipping in vegetables that had been steamed and then pureed -- cauliflower, squash or carrots, depending on the entree -- to some of the main dishes. The result was a helping of food that was either 15 percent or 25 percent vegetable by weight, although it looked, tasted and otherwise resembled the original.

Some participants got the traditional version of the entree.

The study subjects all ate about the same amount of a given entree regardless of how much puree, if any, it contained. But those who were eating the altered foods saw their calorie intake drop substantially -- as much as 360 calories a day -- at the same time their vegetable intake rose.

Cutting 360 calories a day means a person could lose about half a kilogram (one pound) in about 10 days.

Nearly half the subjects said at the end of the study that they could tell something was different about the altered meals, but only two said they could taste the extra vegetables.

Blatt said that this strategy could led to substantial reductions in energy intake and an increase in vegetable consumption, but others were skeptical, noting that eating more veggies and fruits is "not a panacea" for weight loss.

Richard Mattes, a professor of foods and nutrition at Purdue University in Indiana who wasn't involved in the study, added that other studies had shown the big problem was getting people to stick to a new meal plan even if it was effective.

"Many people said they were not going to spend the extra money on fresh fruits and vegetables, or shop more often, or spend more time preparing them," he said.

Noting that U.S. citizens don't seem eager to embrace healthy diets, he added: "It's interesting that we have to go to such extents to get people to consume more vegetables."
Soruce: Reuters 3/3/11

Do Slimming Patches Work?

Slimming patches stick on the skin like a Band-Aid. Marketers say the patches reduce cravings and speed metabolism, helping you to lose weight. Some doctors say there's no proof the patches work, and in recent years the Federal Trade Commission has charged certain companies with false advertising.

Slimming patches are being widely advertised on the Web and in some stores. The ingredients are typically a mixture of plants and natural ingredients, such as hoodia gordonii, a seaweed called fucus vesiculosus and guarana, a stimulant. The Slim Weight Patch, sold by Roduve Healthcare Solutions BV of Rotterdam, the Netherlands, contains a blend of ground seaweed, guarana and nine other ingredients the company's website says will "control your hunger cravings and speed up your metabolism."

Some obesity experts are skeptical of the patches. "There is no evidence that it works. I think you are wasting your money," says Xavier Pi-Sunyer, director of the New York Obesity Nutrition Research Center at St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center in New York.

Typically the patches are applied once a day, anywhere on the body that is clean, dry and hairless. Companies who sell the patches say the active ingredients are absorbed through the skin. Costs vary, but typically range from $15 to $40 for a month's supply.

The patches being marketed haven't generally been tested in rigorous clinical trials. "There is weak evidence that it affects the thyroid [which helps regulate metabolism] but evidence is lacking for its use in weight loss," says Catherine Ulbricht, co-founder of Natural Standard and senior attending pharmacist at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston.

Another issue is that even if the ingredients themselves do affect appetite and weight, there is no proof they are getting into the body via the patches, without well-designed clinical trials. "Just because a drug is effective when swallowed doesn't mean the drug is going to be effective when put on the skin," says Mark R. Prausnitz, director of the Center for Drug Design, Development and Delivery at Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta. To pass effectively through the skin, he adds, a substance must have a low molecular weight (which means it is very small) and must be oily. And once an ingredient is in the body, it may have a different effect when eaten compared with skin absorption, scientists say.

Source: Wall Street Journal 11/16

Looks like you might be able to save your money by passing this patch up and instead spend it on a gym membership.

The value of sleep -- again!

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Getting too little sleep might prevent dieters from losing as much body fat as they otherwise would have, a small study suggests.

The findings, published Monday in the Annals of Internal Medicine, add to evidence that sleep habits play a role in weight regulation. They also suggest that people embarking on a weight-loss plan may want to make sure they are catching enough shut-eye each night, researchers say.

The study included 10 overweight men and women who lived in a sleep lab for two separate two-week periods. During both, they were kept on the same calorie-restricted diet; but for one period, the participants slept for 8.5 hours per night, while during the other, they got 5.5 hours.

Researchers found that the dieters lost the same amount of weight under both conditions -- just under 7 pounds, on average. But during the sleep-restricted period, they mainly lost muscle rather than fat.

When participants got 8.5 hours of sleep, more than half of their weight loss came from shedding fat; when they got 5.5 of sleep, only one-quarter of their weight loss came from fat -- translating to a 55 percent reduction in fat loss.

Instead, the majority of people's weight loss during the sleep-restricted period came from lean body tissue, which refers to muscle and any other body tissue that is not fat.

"So they lost the same amount of weight, but the composition was different," said senior researcher Dr. Plamen Penev, an assistant professor of medicine at the University of Chicago.

Successful dieters always shed a certain amount of muscle, Penev noted in an interview, but ideally one wants to limit that loss in favor of shedding excess body fat. Insufficient sleep, the current findings suggest, might interfere with that.

The study has a number of limitations. Besides its small size, it also looked only at short-term weight loss. More research is needed to see how sleep duration might affect dieters' body composition over time, Penev said.

It's also unclear how well these findings from a tightly controlled sleep-lab setting might translate to the "real world," according to Penev.

Still, the findings do add to a body of research linking sleep habits to body weight. A number of studies have found that self-described "short sleepers" -- typically defined as those who get less than 6 hours of sleep each night -- tend to weigh more or gain more weight over time than people who get seven to eight hours of sleep per night.

Those studies do not, however, prove that sleep differences are the reason for the weight differences. Small sleep-lab studies such as the current one help researchers zero in on the effects of sleep itself.

Lab studies have suggested, for example, that sleep loss may alter people's levels of the "hunger hormones" leptin and ghrelin. Leptin is secreted by fat cells; low blood levels of the hormone promote hunger, while increases tell the brain that body is full and encourage calorie burning. Ghrelin is secreted by the stomach to boost appetite.

In their study, Penev and his colleagues found that under the sleep-restricted condition, participants reported greater hunger during the day compared with the 8-hour sleep condition -- even though they consumed the same number of calories during both periods. They also had higher blood levels of acylated ghrelin, one form of the appetite-boosting hormone.

This, Penev said, raises the question of whether, outside the tight control of the lab, the sleep-deprived dieters would have eaten more.

"The study suggests that if you are trying to lose weight by restricting your calories, it may be more difficult if you are sleep deprived," Dr. Shahrad Taheri, of the University of Birmingham in the UK, told Reuters Health in an email.

As for how much sleep is enough, "I don't think at this stage we can recommend a specific number of hours of sleep, as sleep is very individualized," said Taheri, who co-authored an editorial published with the study.

"But what we can do," Taheri added, "is pay more attention to our daily routines of eating, physical activity, and also sleep."

Penev agreed that there is no one-size-fits-all prescription for sleep. He suggested that people try to notice how much sleep they generally need to feel refreshed the next morning; for some people that may be 6 hours, for others it may be 8.

Both Penev and Taheri said that more studies are needed in real-world settings. According to Penev, a study might, for instance, follow patients at a weight-loss clinic to see how their typical sleep habits correlate with their weight-loss success.

As for why fewer hours in bed may cause the body to preferentially lose muscle over fat, Penev said he and his colleagues can only theorize. Their guess is that the extra waking hours increase the need for glucose (sugar) in the brain and other parts of the nervous system -- and they get that extra fuel from breaking down muscle.
Source:Mon, Oct 4 2010
By Amy Norton

3 1/2 lb weight gain forms 2.6 billion new fat cells!

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Researchers who persuaded slender volunteers to gorge themselves on sweets to gain weight said on Monday they have overturned the common wisdom that adults cannot grow new fat cells.

As they gained weight, the volunteers added new fat cells on their thighs, while fat cells on their bellies expanded, Michael Jensen of the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota and colleagues found.

"It sort of inverts the old dogma that we don't make new fat cells when we are adults," Jensen said in a telephone interview.

Doctors have long believed that, in adults, fat cells just get bigger and bigger when people gain weight.

Understanding why this happens on one part of the body and not another may explain why gaining weight in the lower part of the body does not appear to carry as many health risks as gaining belly fat, Jensen said.

"Those people who make new leg fat cells, it may be protecting them," he said.

Writing in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Jensen and colleagues said they recruited 28 healthy men and women and fed them controlled meals, asking them to eat until they were more full than usual for two months.

The volunteers also agreed to have their body fat sampled.

To boost weight gain, the volunteers were encouraged to slurp milkshakes, chocolate bars and energy drinks.

In the two months the volunteers gained about 2 kg (4.4 pounds) of upper body fat and about 1.5 kg (3 pounds) of fat on the hips and thighs.

"We found that a gain of only 1.6 kg of lower-body fat resulted in the creation of 2.6 billion new adipocytes (fat cells) within eight weeks," Jensen's team wrote.

There were some unexpected findings.

"We thought the women would be the ones who gained on the thighs but it turned out it was pretty even on the two sides, to our surprise," Jensen said.

The volunteers shed their extra pounds easily, Jensen said.

"When you take normal, healthy weight people and you overfeed them and make them gain weight, almost as soon as they stop overeating the weight just falls off," he said.

"These were all people who never had a history of weight problems. Most of us have trouble when we gain it. We don't lose it so easily," Jensen said.

Jensen is unsure what the findings may mean for most Americans. More than two-thirds of the U.S. public are overweight or obese and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development says residents of most developed countries are catching up fast.

"Our next step is to try to understand better what are the genetic and environmental factors that cause the leg fat cells to be able to proliferate," Jensen said.

Scientists have learned that fat cells are not just passive storage facilities for extra calories, but produce hormones and other compounds with important biological effects. This may help explain why extra pounds raise the risk of diabetes, heart disease and some cancers.

Source: Mon, Oct 4 2010
By Maggie Fox, Health and Science Editor

Belly weight-loss wraps - Looks like hype to me

Wrap your flabby abs with the Belly Burner and sweat away the fat? Not so fast, say experts, who add that neoprene bands rid the body of water and make it harder to burn fat and tone muscles.

Searching for a shortcut to weight loss? If so, you're part of a long tradition. For at least 100 years, people have been wearing full-body rubber suits in hopes of melting away pounds. The idea is simple: Heat up your body, and you'll supposedly burn fat.

In these ab-conscious times, perhaps it's only natural that you can now buy weight-loss wraps specifically for your midsection. The best-known option is the Belly Burner, a snug neoprene band invented by celebrity trainer Bobby Waldron. The Belly Burner TV ad shows people wearing the band while pushing a stroller, walking in the park and lifting weights in the gym. You can buy it at many drug and department stores for about $20. (It's often sold in the As-Seen-on-TV shelves, along with the ShamWow! and PediPaws.)

Danskin, the dance wear company, makes a similar product called the Waist Trimmer Belt. It's made out of fuchsia neoprene and is sold online for about $13.

Claims

The TV ad for the Belly Burner says that the band "increases your thermal core temperature … accelerating the fat-burning energy needed to trim down those love handles." This claim is backed up with thermal images showing that the midsection does, in fact, get warm underneath the Belly Burner. The ad goes on to say that using the Belly Burner is the "absolute fastest way to get those fit and trim abs you've been dreaming about."

The ad also features a couple of celebrity endorsements, including this testimonial from comedian Carlos Mencia: "I started working out with the Belly Burner, and I literally went from a size 38 to a size 32. That's real." A caption explains that the drop in weight happened over just eight weeks.

In an e-mail, Waldron, the inventor of the product, said that "results will vary depending on level of activity. The Belly Burner should be used in conjunction with a fitness routine and a healthy eating regimen."

Claims made for the Danskin Waist Trimmer Belt are relatively tame. According to the package label, the belt will help you "shed excess water while you exercise." The Danskin website simply says that the belt "is designed to preserve body heat, promote water loss and provide extra back support during exercise." Danskin didn't respond to a request for comments.

Just like a rubber suit, a neoprene wrap around the belly will definitely make people sweat, says Pete McCall, a spokesman for the American Council on Exercise and a San Diego-based exercise physiologist and personal trainer. Depending on the intensity of the workout, he says, they could sweat a lot.

But McCall warns that there's a big difference between sweating and losing fat. In his opinion, the Belly Burner or any other neoprene wrap would actually make it harder to burn body fat and tone abdominal muscles. When a person wears a snug wrap around the belly, the muscles that normally support the midsection can relax, he explains, so they don't burn as many calories or get as toned as they would without the wrap. "That's why trainers are moving away from weightlifting belts. The only time I would have a client wear any type of belt is when they're coming off back surgery, and that would be under the guidance of a physical therapist or doctor."


Source: LA Times 8/30/10

Could Drinking Water Before Meals Help You Lose Weight?

Close the diet books and skip the pills. The latest weight-loss trick may be as simple as gulping a couple of glasses of water before you eat.

A new study found that middle-aged and older adults who drank two cups of water before each meal consumed fewer calories and lost more weight than those who skipped drinking water.

Researchers divided overweight and obese men and women aged 55 to 75 into two groups: one group was told to follow a low-fat, low-calorie diet; the other group was told to follow the same diet and to drink two cups of water before breakfast, lunch and dinner.

After 12 weeks, those who drank water before meals had lost 15.5 pounds, compared to 11 pounds for the non-water drinkers, a nearly 30 percent difference.

The researchers got the idea for the weight-loss program from their prior research, which found that when middle-aged and older adults drank water before meals, they ate between 75 and 90 fewer calories at the meal.

What they weren't sure about, however, was if water drinkers would compensate by eating more throughout the rest of the day, said senior study author Brenda Davy, an associate professor in the department of human nutrition, foods and exercise at Virginia Tech. But after 12 weeks of dieting, that didn't happen.

"Drinking more water is a pretty simple strategy that may be helpful to people trying to lose weight," Davy said. "We're not saying, 'Drink more water and the body fat will melt away'. But for people who are trying to lose weight and trying to follow a low-cal diet, it's something they can do as part of that."

The research was to be presented Monday at the annual meeting of the American Chemical Society in Boston.

One of the most vexing issues with dieting is how difficult it is to keep the weight off long-term, Davy said. After the 12 weeks were up, Davy and her colleagues have continued to follow the participants.

After one year, preliminary data shows that those who continued to drink water before meals not only kept those pounds off, but have even continued to lose a bit more -- about 1.5 pounds on average.

Yet pre-meal water chugging comes with one caveat: it may only work if you're middle-aged or older, Davy said.

Prior research has shown that in those aged 18 to 35, drinking water before the meal did not cause them to eat fewer calories at the meal, Davy said.

In older people, it takes longer for the stomach to empty, which may be why the water helps them feel fuller and less hungry, while in younger people, water begins leaving the stomach almost immediately, Davy said.

Barry Popkin, director of the University of North Carolina Nutrition Obesity Research Center, called the findings "promising." His research has shown people who drinks lots of water drink fewer sugary beverages, eat more fruits and vegetables and overall consume fewer calories throughout the day.

One culprit in the obesity epidemic is that Americans consume some 300 calories more a day in sugary beverages than they did 30 years ago, Popkin added. That includes soda, punch and fruit juices with added sugar, sports drinks and sweetened tea.

"If you drink some more water right before a meal and fill up a little bit right before, there is the potential you may reduce your food intake," Popkin said. "But what we're concerned with is encouraging people to drink water to replace all the caloric beverages we're drinking."

Another challenge to the water-before-meals weight-loss strategy is getting people to do it, said Carla Wolper, an assistant professor in the Eating Disorders Center at Columbia University and a research faculty member at the New York Obesity Research Center at St. Luke's Hospital in New York City.

"The question is, do people continue to drink the water in a non-study situation?" Wolper said. "We know there are a lot of simple things people could do to lose weight. Clinical trials have shown if people write down what they eat, they lost twice as much weight. Yet it's very hard to get people to write down what they eat. Or, if people would reduce portions just a little bit, they would lose weight. But people don't do it."

The same goes for drinking more water. Even seemingly small changes require commitment. "Changing a pattern of behavior is complicated, and requires time and energy," Wolper said.

Still, it could be worth a try, she added. "Unless people overload on water, it's harmless, inexpensive. And if over the course of the entire day, it reduces the amount of food people take in, then of course it's a good idea," Wolper said.

Dieticians often will suggest a non-caloric drink such as club soda with lemon, diet soda or tea to help resist the urge to snack after dinner, Wolper said.

Source: HealthyDay News 8/23/10