Sports Nutrition Guru

Got to meet & talk with an idol of mine, Ellen Coleman, RD, MA, MPH.



Lovely woman. We had a short but interesting conversation about Paleo. We're both on the same page.

I'll explain Paleo next time I'm blogging here.

Chocolate Good for the Heart

Summary: In a cross-sectional study involving 4,970 participants aged
25-93 years who participated in the National Heart, Lung, and Blood
Institute (NHLBI) Family Heart Study, results indicate an inverse
association between chocolate consumption and risk of coronary heart
disease (CHD). After adjusting for potential confounders, chocolate
intake 5+ times/week was associated with a 57% reduced risk of CHD,
compared with no chocolate intake.

Chocolate consumption is inversely associated with calcified atherosclerotic plaque in the coronary arteries: The NHLBI Family Heart Study. Djoussé L, Hopkins PN, Arnett DK, Pankow JS, Borecki I, North KE, Curtis Ellison R.

Division of Aging, Brigham & Women Hospital and Harvard Medical School, 1620 Tremont Street, 3rd Floor, Boston, MA 02120, USA; Massachusetts Veterans Epidemiology and Research Information Center and Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center, Boston Veterans Affairs Healthcare System, Boston, MA, USA.

Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: While a diet rich in anti-oxidant has been favorably associated with coronary disease and hypertension, limited data have evaluated the influence of such diet on subclinical disease. Thus, we sought to examine whether chocolate consumption is associated with calcified atherosclerotic plaque in the coronary arteries (CAC).

METHODS: In a cross-sectional design, we studied 2217 participants of the NHLBI Family Heart Study. Chocolate consumption was assessed by a semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire and CAC was measured by cardiac CT. We defined prevalent CAC using an Agatston score of at least 100 and fitted generalized estimating equations to calculate prevalence odds ratios of CAC.

RESULTS: There was an inverse association between frequency of chocolate consumption and prevalent CAC. Odds ratios (95% CI) for CAC were 1.0 (reference), 0.94 (0.66-1.35), 0.78 (0.53-1.13), and 0.68 (0.48-0.97) for chocolate consumption of 0, 1-3 times per month, once per week, and 2+ times per week, respectively (p for trend 0.022), adjusting for age, sex, energy intake, waist-hip ratio, education, smoking, alcohol consumption, ratio of total-to-HDL-cholesterol, non-chocolate candy, and diabetes mellitus. Controlling for additional confounders did not alter the findings. Exclusion of subjects with coronary heart disease or diabetes mellitus did not materially change the odds ratio estimates but did modestly decrease the overall significance (p = 0.07).

CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that chocolate consumption might be inversely associated with prevalent CAC.

Its a Matter of National Security

US Obesity rates is now a matter of National Defense. Smaller pool of potential recruits. Not to mention the growing number of current members who are not "fit to fight" any more (e.g. weight creep, poor nutritional habits, inactivity, injuries).




More Military-Aged Americans Are Too Fat to Fight
Released: 10/15/2010 7:05 AM EDT
Source: Cornell University


Newswise — At a time when American military forces are stretched thin overseas, a growing number of potential recruits are too fat to enlist, according to an analysis by Cornell University researchers.

In the past half-century, the number of women of military age who exceed the U.S. Army’s enlistment standards for weight-to-height ratio and body fat percentage has more than tripled. For military-age men, the figure has more than doubled.

As of 2007-08, 5.7 million American men and 16.5 million women of military age were ineligible for duty because they were overweight or obese, according to John Cawley, Cornell associate professor of policy analysis and management, and a Cornell economics doctoral student Catherine Maclean.

The findings, published in September by the National Bureau of Economic Research in a working paper titled, “Unfit for Service: The Implications of Rising Obesity for U.S. Military Recruitment,” are cause for alarm for the four U.S. military branches, which together must attract more than 180,000 new service members each year.

“Almost one in four applicants to the military are rejected for being overweight or obese – it’s the most common reason for medical disqualification,” Cawley said. “It is well-known that the military is struggling to recruit and retain soldiers. Having a smaller pool of men and women who are fit enough to serve adds to the strain and creates even more problems for national defense.”

The study follows a similar report last spring by retired generals and admirals. But Cawley and Maclean chart the climbing obesity rates over a much longer period, using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys spanning 1959-2008. Moreover, the Cornell study estimates the number of civilians who meet the body fat requirements of each military branch, which had not been tracked previously.

“It’s another example of the underappreciated public consequences of obesity,” Cawley said. “We tend to think of obesity as a personal, individual health problem. But the fact that U.S. military leaders view it as a threat to national security and military readiness shows its far-reaching impact.”

The paper is available online: http://www.nber.org/papers/w16408

Best Tasting Health Cereals from Bon Appetit

This blog on Bon Appetit Magazine is doing a taste test tour of supermarket foods. I love the Quaker Oat Squares for dry snacking. Kashi GoLean is a great high protein (soy) cereal that works for breakfast & snacking. Barbara's Bakery also have gluten-free Puffins.

Supermarket Standoff: Healthy Cereals
4:00 PM / August 10, 2010 / Posted by Julia Bainbridge

Call them healthy, call them grown-up; whatever you want to call them, this group of cereals doesn't include Fruit Loops and Cap'n Crunch. We wanted to find out which were the best tasting out of the so-called "healthy" cereals sold in national supermarkets. So we compiled a list of thirteen boxes, picked them up along with some milk, and settled in our conference room early this Monday morning to crunch, much, and scribble on score sheets. Flakes, squares, clusters--all shapes and sizes were included. We also got nutritionist Sandra Frank to weigh in, breaking down which three cereals are the best for you out of the already good-for-you pack. Find both our winners for taste and Frank's picks for health after the jump.

The Results:

Our Favorites for Flavor

TIED FOR #1

Quaker Oatmeal Squares
Nutrition: Serving size 1 cup = 210 calories, 2.5g fat, 250mg sodium, 210mg potassium, 44g carbs, 10g sugars, 6g protein, 10% vitamin A, 50% vitamin C, 0% calcium, 10% iron, 100% vitamin E, etc.
Cost: $4.29 at Stop & Shop in Glen Cove, NY
Blind Tasting Notes: "Hearty and substantial"; "Not too sweet"; "Nice crunch/density"; "A good snacking cereal"


Barbara's Bakery Shredded Spoonfuls
Nutrition: Serving size 3/4 cup = 120 calories, 1.5g total fat, 200mg sodium, 125mg potassium, 24g carbs, 5g sugars, 4g protein, 0% vitamin A, 8% vitamin C, 2% calcium, 4% iron, 4% vitamin E
Cost: $3.69 at Whole Foods in New York, NY
Blind Tasting Notes: "Has some sweetness but not a ton"; "Crispy"; "Crunchy and slightly sweet"


Barbara's Bakery Puffins
Nutrition: Serving size 3/4 cup = 90 calories, 1g total fat, 190mg sodium, 85mg potassium, 23g carbs, 5g sugars, 2g protein, 0% vitamin A, 25% vitamin C, 0% calcium, 2% iron
Cost: $3.49 at Whole Foods in New York, NY
Blind Tasting Notes: "Delish!"; Cinnamon-y"; "Surprisingly good if it's healthy"; "Wonderfully crisp texture and light sweetness"; "Light but crunchy"

#2

Whole Foods Market 365 Everyday Value Raisin Bran
Nutrition: Serving size 1 cup = 200 calories, 0.5g fat, 210mg sodium, 210mg potassium, 44g carbs, 15g sugars, 6g protein, 0% vitamin A, 0% vitamin C, 2% calcium, 15% iron
Cost: $2.69 at Whole Foods in New York, NY
Blind Tasting Notes: "Like Raisin Bran with more heft"; "A very crunchy flake"; "Nice sweetness"; "Like the raisins, but flakes are tough to chew"


TIED FOR #3

Cheerios
Nutrition: Serving size 1 cup = 100 calories, 2g fat, 190mg sodium, 170mg potassium, 20g carbs, 1g sugars, 3g protein, 10% vitamin A, 10% vitamin C, 10% calcium, 45% iron, 10% vitamin D
Cost: $4.49 at Whole Foods in New York, NY
Blind Tasting Notes: "Yummy"; Classic"; "Almost burnt grainy flavor--tastes healthy"; "Light"; "This is what I ate as a kid"; "The old standby; a workhorse"

Fiber One Honey Clusters
Nutrition: Serving size 1 cup = 160 calories, 1.5g fat, 230mg sodium, 180mg potassium, 44g carbs, 6g sugars, 3g protein, 20% vitamin A, 0% vitamin C, 10% calcium, 25% iron, 15% vitamin D, 70% vitamin E
Cost: $4.99 at Stop & Shop in Glen Cove, NY
Blind Tasting Notes: "Caramel/butterscotch flavor"; Nice maple syrup note"; "Good crunch, good cluster, nice plain flake"

Nutritionist Sandra Frank's Picks
Note: "Adding variety helps you obtain the different nutrients you need, as well as keeping your meals interesting," says Frank. In other words, these cereals are healthy, but eating them every morning is not.

#1 Cheerios
Nutrition: Serving size 1 cup = 100 calories, 2g fat, 190mg sodium, 170mg potassium, 20g carbs, 1g sugars, 3g protein, 10% vitamin A, 10% vitamin C, 10% calcium, 45% iron, 10% vitamin D
Cost: $4.49 at Whole Foods in New York, NY
Frank's Comments: "Cheerios is lowest in calories per one cup serving. It is considered low in fat and a good source of fiber. For those watching your waistline, this is the best choice. In addition, Cheerios provides 45% of the daily value of iron."
Our Assessment: We ranked this in third place, so it's good news that it's also healthy. We should note, though, that some of us weren't fans of this cereal, commenting that it tastes like cardboard or sawdust.

#2 Kashi GoLean
Nutrition: Serving size 1 cup = 140 calories, 1g fat, 85mg sodium, 480mg potassium, 30g carbs, 6g sugars, 13g protein, 0% vitamin A, 0% vitamin C, 6% calcium, 10% iron
Cost: $3.49 at Whole Foods in New York, NY

Frank's Comments: "Need fiber? Go with Kashi GoLean. It scored highest in fiber, protein, and potassium and the lowest in sodium per serving. It is defined as a low fat, low sodium, and high fiber food."
Our Assessment: Uh oh. "Tastes about as dull as rice cakes. Does nothing for me"; "Too mealy and dry"; Yuck. No flavor and weird texture." Those were some of the comments we received about Kashi GoLean. Some of us were more into it, though: "Great assortment of textures and flavors"; "Nice sweetness." And some were confessional: "I eat this at home because I know it's healthy, but it really tastes like cardboard."

#3 Barbara's Bakery Puffins
Nutrition: Serving size 3/4 cup = 90 calories, 1g total fat, 190mg sodium, 85mg potassium, 23g carbs, 5g sugars, 2g protein, 0% vitamin A, 25% vitamin C, 0% calcium, 2% iron
Cost: $3.49 at Whole Foods in New York, NY

Frank's Comments: "Barbara's Bakery Puffins came in as the second lowest in calories. It is a low fat and a high fiber food. The ratio of fiber to calories placed it third. The good outweighs the lower iron content, but make sure you include iron-rich foods throughout the day. Some foods rich in iron include: lean meats, liver, seafood, shrimp, salmon, poultry, eggs (yolks contain iron), kidney beans, lima beans, black beans, pinto beans, soy beans and lentils; dark green vegetables (spinach, collard greens, mustard greens, broccoli, asparagus, swiss chard); nuts and; dried fruits."

Our Assessment: Hooray! We ranked this number one! We urge you to go for Barbara's Puffins if you want a healthy cereal that tastes scrumptious.

"There were a lot of factors to consider, so I turned to the labeling laws and the diet manual for assistance," says Frank. Nutrition ratings considered the following:

1.A food is considered low fat if it has 3 grams or less fat per serving.
2.A good source of fiber contains 10 to 19 percent of the daily value for fiber (2.5 to 4.75 grams) per serving.
3.Low sodium is defined as a food containing 140 milligrams or less sodium per serving.
4.Lowest calories per one cup (not per serving).
5.Iron fortification.

NY Times Editorial - Beware Claims About Foods

Snake Oil for Breakfast
Published: June 11, 2010
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/12/opinion/12sat4.html?th&emc=th

More than a century after President Theodore Roosevelt signed the Pure
Food and Drug Act, deception is still a far too popular marketing tool
for food makers.

The Federal Trade Commission barred Kellogg’s last year from running ads
saying Mini-Wheats are “clinically shown to improve kids’ attentiveness
by 20 percent.” To claim “benefits to cognitive health, process or
function provided by any cereal or any morning food or snack food,” was
a no-no, unless the claims were true. But the F.T.C.’s order covered
only cognitive abilities. So just as it was signing its consent,
Kellogg’s was starting a new campaign in which “Snap, Crackle and Pop”
called out to parents from the Rice Krispies box promising to help
“support your child’s IMMUNITY.”

Last week, the F.T.C. said that it had closed that loophole, reaching an
agreement with Kellogg’s that would bar the company from making any
claims about the health benefits of their food unless they were backed
by scientific evidence and not misleading.

Businesses have been making dubious claims about their products at least
since the 17th century, when the British clergyman Anthony Daffy sold
Daffy’s Elixir as a cure for scurvy as well as agues, gout, rheumatism,
rickets, worms and other ailments. Hucksterism — no matter how
implausible the claim — lives on.

In 2004, the F.T.C. barred KFC from saying its fried chicken was
compatible with low-carbohydrate weight-loss programs — because such
diets specifically advise against breaded, fried foods. The Food and
Drug Administration sent letters to 17 food companies in March warning
them about misleading product labels. Dreyer’s claimed there is no
trans-fat in its ice cream but forgot to mention it has lots of
saturated fat. POM Wonderful claimed its pomegranate juice helps treat,
prevent or cure hypertension, diabetes and cancer.

This might be par for the course for an era of swift-boating political
ads and a torrent of television commercials plumping for myriad wonder
drugs (sudden death may result). It leaves the consumer in a quandary:
what part of the label can be believed?

Protein Drinks May Be Harmful

A study by Consumer Reports found that most people do not need to add a protein supplement to their diet and that some protein drinks contain contaminants and metals that can cause serious health problems.

Manufacturers of protein drinks once marketed only to body builders, athletes and health fanatics, however in recent years they have aimed promotion of these supplement products to busy professionals, working mothers, pregnant women, young adults and even children. Some protein drinks entice consumers with advertising claims including weight loss, muscle building, energy boosting or anti-aging. They encourage consumers not only to supplement their daily diet with these products, but also to use them to replace meals.

The Consumer Reports investigation sent fifteen protein drinks to an independent laboratory for analysis, reviewed government documents and interviewed health experts, fitness experts and consumers. They found that most people get enough protein in their regular diet and do not need these supplements. Consumer Reports recommends that people who need more protein, can find it in healthier, cheaper sources such as milk, eggs and chicken breast.

The results of the laboratory analysis found that all fifteen of the protein drinks tested contained one or more of the contaminants arsenic, cadmium, lead and mercury. Three of the products tested raised particular concern because consuming more than three servings per day could expose the consumer to levels of these contaminants that are above recommended limits:

- Eas Myoplex (Arsenic and Cadmium)
- Muscle Milk Chocolate (Cadmium and Lead)and;
- Muscle Milk Vanilla Crème (Lead)

“It is our company mission to do everything possible to ensure that our products are superior in quality, reliability, authenticity and safety,” said Greg Pickett, Founder of CytoSport, Inc. who manufactures Muscle Milk. “Additionally, our products are rigorously tested by both us and independent third party agencies including NSF International to ensure their safety and efficacy.”

The article detailing the study appears in the July 2010 issue of Consumer Reports Magazine. The non-profit consumer organization Consumers Union publishes the monthly periodical.

Watch the Early Show on CBS as they take a hidden camera into nutrition stores in New York City where salespeople failed to warn of dangers and even said taking more than the recommended doses would cause no harm.

“What we're concerned about here is the chronic low level exposure of a heavy metal. And what people should know, is that heavy metals, once they come into our bodies, once they're metabolized, they tend to stay there for a long period of time,” Urvashi Rangan of Consumer Reports told
CBS. According to the American Heart Association, people who have an excess of protein in their diet may be at higher risk of kidney and liver disorders, and osteoporosis. While everyone can suffer adverse health effects from exposure to heavy metals, children, growing teens, pregnant women and their unborn children are especially at risk.

Lead exposure can cause developmental problems such as damage to the brain and nervous system or slowed growth in growing children and teens. In adults, it can cause reproductive problems, high blood pressure and hypertension, nerve disorders, effect memory or concentration or cause muscle and joint pain. Ingesting very high levels of arsenic can result in death. Exposure to lower levels can cause nausea and vomiting, decreased production of red and white blood cells, abnormal heart rhythm, damage to blood vessels and a sensation of “pins and needles” in hands and feet. Cadmium is a known carcinogen, meaning cancer causing. Ingesting cadmium can damage kidneys and bones. Exposure to mercury can permanently damage the brain and kidneys. Effects on brain functioning may result in irritability, shyness, tremors, changes in vision or hearing and memory problems.

“The results of this analysis aren't alarming,” Andrew Shao of the Council for Responsible Nutrition told CBS. “The heavy metals that were found are well below the limits FDA Food and Drug Administration) would be concerned about, so they don't pose a health risk to consumers at all.”

Chocolate Milk is a 'Natural' for Post-Exercise Recovery

New research suggests drinking chocolate milk after a workout offers advantages for post-exercise performance and muscle repair

BALTIMORE (June 2, 2010) – One of the best post-exercise recovery drinks could already be in your refrigerator, according to new research presented at the American College of Sports Medicine conference this week. In a series of four studies, researchers found that chocolate milk offered a recovery advantage to help repair and rebuild muscles, compared to specially designed carbohydrate sports drinks.

Experts agree that the two-hour window after exercise is an important, yet often neglected, part of a fitness routine. After strenuous exercise, this post-workout recovery period is critical for active people at all fitness levels – to help make the most of a workout and stay in top shape for the next workout.

The new research suggests that drinking fat free chocolate milk after exercise can help the body retain, replenish and rebuild muscle to help your body recover. Drinking lowfat chocolate milk after a strenuous workout could even help prep muscles to perform better in a subsequent bout of exercise. Specifically, the researchers found a chocolate milk advantage for:

Building Muscle – Post-exercise muscle biopsies in eight moderately trained male runners showed that after drinking 16 ounces of fat free chocolate milk, the runners had enhanced skeletal muscle protein synthesis – a sign that muscles were better able to repair and rebuild – compared to when they drank a carbohydrate only sports beverage with the same amount of calories. The researchers suggest that "athletes can consider fat-free chocolate milk as an economic nutritional alternative to other sports nutrition beverages to support post-endurance exercise skeletal muscle repair."1

Replenishing Muscle "Fuel" – Replacing muscle fuel (glycogen) after exercise is essential to an athlete's future performance and muscle recovery. Researchers found that drinking 16 ounces of fat free chocolate milk with its mix of carbohydrates and protein (compared to a carbohydrate-only sports drink with the same amount of calories) led to greater concentration of glycogen in muscles at 30 and 60 minutes post exercise.2

Maintaining Lean Muscle – Athletes risk muscle breakdown following exercise when the body's demands are at their peak. Researchers found that drinking fat free chocolate milk after exercise helped decrease markers of muscle breakdown compared to drinking a carbohydrate sports drink.3

Subsequent Exercise Performance – Ten trained men and women cyclists rode for an hour and a half, followed by 10 minutes of intervals. They rested for four hours and were provided with one of three drinks immediately and two hours into recovery: lowfat chocolate milk, a carbohydrate drink with the same amount of calories or a control drink. When the cyclists then performed a subsequent 40 kilometer ride, their trial time was significantly shorter after drinking the chocolate milk compared to the carbohydrate drink and the control drink.4

Why Chocolate Milk?

Chocolate milk's combination of carbohydrates and high-quality protein first made researchers take notice of a potential exercise benefit. The combination of carbs and protein already in chocolate milk matched the ratio found to be most beneficial for recovery. In fact, studies suggest that chocolate milk has the right mix of carbs and protein to help refuel exhausted muscles, and the protein in milk helps build lean muscle. This new research adds to a growing body of evidence suggesting milk can be just as effective as some commercial sports drinks in helping athletes refuel and recover.

Milk also provides fluids for rehydration and electrolytes, including potassium, calcium and magnesium lost in sweat, that both recreational exercisers and elite athletes need to replace after strenuous activity. Plus, chocolate milk is naturally nutrient-rich with the advantage of additional nutrients not found in most traditional sports drinks. Penny-for-penny, no other post-exercise drink contains the full range of vitamins and minerals found in chocolate milk.

Sources:

1. Lunn WR, Colletto MR, Karfonta KE, Anderson JM, Pasiakos SM, Ferrando AA, Wolfe RR, Rodriguez NR. Chocolate milk consumption following endurance exercise affects skeletal muscle protein fractional synthetic rate and intracellular signaling. Medicine & Science in Sports and Exercise. 2010;42:S48.

2. Karfonta KE, Lunn WR, Colletto MR, Anderson JM, Rodriguez NR. Chocolate milk enhances glycogen replenishment after endurance exercise in moderately trained males. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 2010;42:S64.

3. Colletto MR, Lunn W, Karfonta K, Anderson J, Rogriguez N. Effects of chocolate milk consumption on leucine kinetics during recovery from endurance exercise. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 2010;42:S126.

4. Ferguson-Stegall L, McCleave E, Doerner PG, Ding Z, Dessard B, Kammer L, Wang B, Liu Y, Ivy J. Effects of chocolate milk supplementation on recovery from cycling exercise and subsequent time trial performance. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 2010;42:S536.

About the National Milk Mustache "got milk?"® Campaign

The Milk Processor Education Program (MilkPEP), Washington, D.C., is funded by the nation's milk processors, who are committed to increasing fluid milk consumption. The National Fluid Milk Processor Promotion Board, through MilkPEP, runs the National Milk Mustache "got milk?"® Campaign, a multi-faceted campaign designed to educate consumers about the health benefits of milk. For more information, go to www.whymilk.com. Deutsch, A Lowe and Partners Company, is the creative agency for the National Milk Mustache "got milk?"® Campaign.

Milk Does More for Muscle Building and Fat Losing!

Milk: 2 glasses a day tones muscles, keeps the fat away in women, study shows

HAMILTON, CANADA – Women who drink two large glasses of milk a day after their weight-lifting routine gained more muscle and lost more fat compared to women who drank sugar-based energy drinks, a McMaster study has found.

The study appears in the June issue of Medicine and Science in Sport and Exercise.

"Resistance training is not a typical choice of exercise for women," says Stu Phillips, professor in the Department of Kinesiology at McMaster University. "But the health benefits of resistance training are enormous: It boosts strength, bone, muscular and metabolic health in a way that other types of exercise cannot."

A previous study conducted by Phillips' lab showed that milk increased muscle mass and fat loss in men. This new study, says Phillips was more challenging because women not only steer clear of resistance training they also tend to steer away from dairy products based on the incorrect belief that dairy foods are fattening.

"We expected the gains in muscle mass to be greater, but the size of the fat loss surprised us," says Phillips. "We're still not sure what causes this but we're investigating that now. It could be the combination of calcium, high-quality protein, and vitamin D may be the key, and. conveniently, all of these nutrients are in milk.

Over a 12-week period, the study monitored young women who did not use resistance-training exercise. Every day, two hours before exercising, the women were required not to eat or drink anything except water. Immediately after their exercise routine, one group consumed 500ml of fat free white milk; the other group consumed a similar-looking but sugar-based energy drink. The same drinks were consumed by each group one hour after exercising.

The training consisted of three types of exercise: pushing (e.g. bench press, chest fly), pulling (e.g. seated lateral pull down, abdominal exercises without weights), and leg exercises (e.g. leg press, seated two-leg hamstring curl). Training was monitored daily one on one by personal trainers to ensure proper technique.

"The women who drank milk gained barely any weight because what they gained in lean muscle they balanced out with a loss in fat" said Phillips. "Our data show that simple things like regular weightlifting exercise and milk consumption work to substantially improve women's body composition and health." Phillips' lab is now following this study up with a large clinical weight loss trial in women.
-------------------------------------

If you are not allergic to milk protein, nonfat milk is a good source of protein, calcium and Vitamin D. 500 ml nonfat milk is about 2 cups (180 kcal, 16 g protein, 24 g CHO). Lots of studies about building lean muscle mass after weight lifting exercise support a mixture of carbohydrate & protein. Some have suggested a ratio of 4 g CHO per 1 g PROT as an optimal ratio (found in chocolate milk). Maybe there is something in the Vitamin D (serum levels were measureable higher in the test group, consistent with fortification of milk). Unfortunately, so many women skip dairy products because they are worried about calories or concerned that milk is not "food for humans". Even people with lactose intolerance can usually tolerate small amounts liquid milk and 6-8oz servings of yogurt.

Chocolate & Heart Risk

Study: Chocolate could reduce heart risk
By MARIA CHENG - AP Medical Writer

LONDON (AP) -- The Easter Bunny might lower your chances of having a heart problem. According to a new study, small doses of chocolate every day could decrease your risk of having a heart attack or stroke by nearly 40 percent.

German researchers followed nearly 20,000 people over eight years, sending them several questionnaires about their diet and exercise habits.

They found people who had an average of six grams of chocolate per day - or about one square of a chocolate bar - had a 39 percent lower risk of either a heart attack or stroke. The study is scheduled to be published Wednesday in the European Heart Journal.

Previous studies have suggested dark chocolate in small amounts could be good for you, but this is the first study to track its effects over such a long period of time. Experts think the flavonols contained in chocolate are responsible. Flavonols, also found in vegetables and red wine, help the muscles in blood vessels widen, which leads to a drop in blood pressure.

"It's a bit too early to come up with recommendations that people should eat more chocolate, but if people replace sugar or high-fat snacks with a little piece of dark chocolate, that might help," said Brian Buijsse, a nutritional epidemiologist at the German Institute of Human Nutrition in Nuthetal, Germany, the study's lead author.

The people tracked by Buijsse and colleagues had no history of heart problems, had similar habits for risk factors like smoking and exercise, and did not vary widely in their Body Mass Index.

Since the study only observed people and did not give them chocolate directly to test what its effects were, experts said more research was needed to determine the candy's exact impact on the body. The study was paid for by the German government and the European Union.

Doctors also warned that eating large amounts of chocolate could lead to weight gain, a major risk factor for heart problems and strokes.

"This is not a prescription to eat more chocolate," said Dr. Robert Eckel, a professor of medicine at the University of Colorado and a past president of the American Heart Association. He was not linked to the study. "If we all had (a small amount) of chocolate every day for the rest of our lives, we would all gain a few pounds."

Eckel said it was amazing to find such a small amount of chocolate could have such a protective effect, but that more studies needed to be done to confirm its conclusions.

Alice Lichtenstein, a nutritionist at Tufts University School of Medicine, said it was difficult to link the reduction in heart disease and stroke risk to the chocolate alone, since there may have been other differences between the study participants.

"The relationship between chocolate and good health outcomes is still uncertain," she said. "If somebody really enjoys eating chocolate, then they should have a small amount of that and just really enjoy it," she said.

© 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.

------------------------------

I have a presentation "For The Love of Chocolate" that I enjoy giving. It's wonderful to get reinforcement that enjoying a small amount of good quality chocolate is potentially healthy. 1 oz dark chocolate will cost you about 150 calories (or about a good brisk 1 1/2 mile walk).

Juiced Fasts: Do You Need Them?

I was recently interviewed for a piece about Juice Fasting (not necessarily for weight loss but that is definately a side effect). Do our bodies need this for "detoxing"?
------------------------

This Is Not Your Grandmother’s Diet

A new batch of juice cleanses aims to improve your overall health
By Geraldine Campbell February 18th, 2010 - 12:00am

Liquid fasts, from the squeezed-to-order Blueprint Cleanse to L.O.V.E. (Live, Organic, Vegan Experience), are the next big thing (again). But the latest crop of detox diets isn’t necessarily about losing weight—though that’s still part of it—it’s about kick-starting a healthier lifestyle. Think of it as dieting 2.0.

While you’re eliminating junk food, caffeine and alcohol from the mix, the premise behind juicing is that it frees up the body’s energy to engage in deep cleaning.

“The energy normally spent on breaking down a sandwich, a Twinkie or even a big healthy salad can now be redirected to helping the body ‘clean house,’” Blueprint Cleanse founder Zoe Sakoutis says. “We like to think of it as a way to press the re-set button and start with a clean slate.” More specifically, Sakoutis says juicing can boost your immune system, improve thyroid function, alleviate allergies and increase energy, not to mention giving your sex drive a jump.

But nutritionists aren’t sold on the benefits of a juice-only diet. For one, there’s no real physiological evidence to support the idea that your body goes into a warp-like cleaning overdrive, or that guzzling liquid seaweed will draw out stored toxins. “Your liver, kidneys, skin and digestive tract do a pretty darn good job at ridding excess toxins daily,” says Christy Maskeroni, the director of nutrition at CLAY, a cutting-edge holistic health club in New York City.

Holly Brewer, a Canyon Ranch nutritionist for the past eight years and the pediatric dietitian on staff at Sunrise Hospital, isn’t drinking the Kool-Aid, either. “While these drinks are adding more calories, they’re still not complete. Anytime you squeeze a fruit, you’re basically just getting water and carbohydrates. The vast majority of the nutrients in fruits and vegetables come from the solid mass.” Bottom line, Brewer says: “Eat your fruit; don’t drink it.” Still, Maskeroni and Brewer admit that some people need to go cold turkey before they can build back to a balanced diet. “A juice cleanse may help jumpstart the desire for a healthier lifestyle,” Maskeroni says.

“It’s not a miracle cure,” Brewer says, “but one to two days won’t hurt you.”
-------------------

Bottom line: If this is what you need to help "jump start" a change in your eating habits, it won't hurt. But it isn't necessary. And these programs are missing many essential nutrients - most importantly, PROTEIN! Best way to make a significant change in your life is to THROW OUT all the junk in the house and then refill on a daily basis with FRESH produce (get only what you need for the next 24-48 hours). Pick your proteins lean (and also fresh, but you can safely stock up and freeze). Choose only whole grains. If it's in a box with a flavoring packet, don't buy it (full of sodium, preservatives and too many multisyllable additives).

Enjoy a Little Chocolate

Another reason to include real chocolate (aka "dark" chocolate or >40% cacao) in your life. According to a research analysis that will be presented at a neurology meeting in April, two out of three studies showed a decrease risk of stroke in people who consumed about an ounce and a half of chocolate per week. Nice news to read on Valentine's Day.

-------------------------------

Can chocolate lower your risk of stroke?
ST. PAUL, Minn. – Eating chocolate may lower your risk of having a stroke, according to an analysis of available research that will be released today and presented at the American Academy of Neurology's 62nd Annual Meeting in Toronto April 10 to April 17, 2010. Another study found that eating chocolate may lower the risk of death after suffering a stroke.

The analysis involved reviewing three studies on chocolate and stroke.

"More research is needed to determine whether chocolate truly lowers stroke risk, or whether healthier people are simply more likely to eat chocolate than others," said study author Sarah Sahib, BScCA, with McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Sahib worked alongside Gustavo Saposnik, MD, MSc, where the study was completed at St. Michael's Hospital and the University of Toronto.

Chocolate is rich in antioxidants called flavonoids, which may have a protective effect against stroke, but more research is needed.

The first study found that 44,489 people who ate one serving of chocolate per week were 22 percent less likely to have a stroke than people who ate no chocolate. The second study found that 1,169 people who ate 50 grams of chocolate once a week were 46 percent less likely to die following a stroke than people who did not eat chocolate.

The researchers found only one additional relevant study in their search of all the available research. That study found no link between eating chocolate and risk of stroke or death.

###

The American Academy of Neurology, an association of more than 22,000 neurologists and neuroscience professionals, is dedicated to promoting the highest quality patient-centered neurologic care. A neurologist is a doctor with specialized training in diagnosing, treating and managing disorders of the brain and nervous system such as Parkinson's disease, ALS (Lou Gehrig's disease), dementia, West Nile virus, and ataxia. For more information about the American Academy of Neurology and the AAN Annual Meeting, visit http://www.aan.com.

Non-late-breaking abstracts to be presented at the AAN Annual Meeting will be posted online in advance of the AAN Annual Meeting at 4 pm, ET, Wednesday, February 17, 2010, at http://www.aan.com/go/science/abstracts.

All RDs Are Nutritionists - But Not All Nutritionists Are RDs

Nutritionist. Food Coach. How Good Is Their Diet Advice?

Anyone can claim to be a "nutritionist" or "food coach."
So here's what you should look for

By Katherine Hobson
Posted on US News & World Report: February 5, 2010

If you feel the need for professional help with your eating habits or diet, you may assume a nutritionist is the person to talk to. As it turns out, that's not a particularly specific or useful term—a point driven home by recent advice published in a magazine from a "nutritionist" who claimed weight loss is aided by eating carbs and protein at separate meals, a notion not supported by science.

By no means is everyone calling herself a nutritionist (or a nutritional consultant, food coach, or weight-loss specialist) dispensing hogwash. But for consumers attempting to make an informed choice, the titles are meaningless; they don't capture the possessor's education, experience, or credentials. And those are all important when it comes to seeking eating advice, given the proliferation of fad diets and quick weight-loss schemes. “I can’t think of a field that has more quackery than nutrition,” says Lisa Sasson, a clinical associate professor of nutrition and food studies at New York University.

One specific title to look for: registered dietitian. In order to call himself an R.D., a person must have an undergraduate degree in nutrition or dietetics—or the equivalent in coursework—from an accredited institution, says Dee Sandquist, an R.D. and spokesperson for the American Dietetic Association, the professional organization that credentials R.D.'s (through the Commission on Dietetic Registration). On top of that, R.D.'s have to complete a yearlong, supervised internship and pass a national exam. And they must get credits in continuing education on an ongoing basis. Anyone calling herself simply a dietitian is also legally supposed to be an R.D.

The American College of Nutrition also issues C.N.S. (certified nutrition specialist) credentials for people with advanced degrees—master's, doctorate, M.D.—in nutrition or related areas. They, too, have to sit for an exam and also earn continuing education credits, says Madelyn Fernstrom, director of the nutrition and weight management program at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center and author of The Real You Diet. Either an R.D. or C.N.S. designation means the holder has relevant education and experience, has passed an exam, and will make evidence-based recommendations, says Fernstrom.

I saw Fernstrom identified as a "board-certified nutritionist," referring to her C.N.S. certification. (She has a Ph.D. from MIT.) But the term "nutritionist" alone is meaningless. "It's not a bad thing," says Fernstrom. "But it's like saying you're a cook—you could be working in Denny's or at a five-star restaurant." So ask: What's the nutritionist's educational background? Does she have an R.D. or a C.N.S.? What experience does she have? Has she treated patients like you before? Is her practice grounded in scientific evidence? "You don't have to discount someone who has some other certification, but do your homework," Fernstrom says. "It's just like reading labels."

Making matters even more confusing is that most states have some kind of licensing, registration, or certification system in place but the systems vary in rigor. Some won't allow anyone to practice without meeting certain requirements, others allow qualified persons to use the titles "dietitian" or "nutritionist" but let others practice under different job titles, and others simply require people, regardless of credentials, to register with the state. (Here are the laws, state by state.) To be certain you're getting someone who has met national industry standards, look for an R.D. or C.N.S. credential.

If you have specific needs—say, you're an athlete who wants to know how to recover from races, are a newly diagnosed diabetic seeking help in planning meals, or are seeking help for your overweight child—be even more pointed in your questioning. Ask what specialized education or experience the person has. The ADA, for example, has additional credentials for R.D.'s who want to focus on kidney disease or cancer patients, children, the elderly, or athletes. The "Ask the Dietitian" website, run by Joanne Larsen, a registered dietitian, has some additional tips for vetting anyone offering nutrition advice. Among them: Question eating plans that require the purchase of certain supplements, avoid diets that eliminate entire food groups or prescribe "magic" foods that must be eaten daily, and ask for research—not testimonials—to substantiate claims.

One title that's grown in popularity is "coach." People seeking guidance or help in their career, for example, may hire a business, life, or personal coach. There also are people who call themselves wellness, weight-loss, food, or health coaches. Rather than calculating how many grams of protein or carbohydrate someone should eat or tracking a client's weight, they're more likely to help a customer define his or her goals and needs and figure out how to meet them. Denise Holz, a weight-loss coach in Seattle, says she helps her clients—both in person and over the phone—to eat mindfully, teaching them to be present, slow down, and focus on taste while they eat. And she helps them figure out what's really causing the bad eating habits they want to change. Doing that, she says, helps them address the underlying issues and learn to eat in accordance with their true hunger and taste. "They approach food in a whole new way," Holz says. "They don't have to sneak, don't have to feel bad about themselves."

If coaching rather than (or in combination with) nutritional advice sounds like what you're after, be aware that, like "nutritionist," anyone can call himself a "coach," says Sasson. There are some certification bodies, including the International Coach Federation. And a company called Wellcoaches Corp., in partnership with the American College of Sports Medicine, now trains and certifies healthcare professionals in wellness coaching. Its training, says Margaret Moore, the company's founder, chairman, and CEO, is "based on theories that have evidence behind them" about things like how to motivate people. Until there's some kind of national credential (similar to an R.D.), ask prospective coaches about their education, training, and experience, says Moore. "They should have a background in what they're coaching and should be able to talk the language of what makes people change," she says. "Ask about their track record and talk to current or former clients. And find someone who fits with you—if your personalities don't jibe, it's not going to work." Sort of like finding the perfect diet.

--------------------------

When I am asked "what is the difference between a Registered Dietitian and a Nutritionist", I always ask "Who makes the decisions about food & meals in your home?". That would be your personal nutritionist. As an RD I'm uniquely trained in medical nutrition therapy for a wide variety of health conditions. And have further specialized to deal with diabetes, pediatrics and many GI disorders. Another important skill is the ability to interpret and explain the research results and real meaning behind all the headlines announcing some nutrition or weight loss breakthrough.

I'm sorry there are NO magic bullets. There are NO "one diet fits all". There are NO shortcuts if you want good health. If it sounds too good to be true. If it makes amazing promises. If it claims to be a secret that the medical professionals don't want you to know. It's going to be a waste of your time & money (and possibly even dangerous). Please consult a licensed/certified health care professional. Ask to see his/her credentials & where they went to school/did their internship. Shop around to find someone who can help you succeed.

Are You a Couch Potato?

"Couch Potatoes Endanger Their Lives, Australian Study"

If you think vegging out in front of the tube after a stressful day is the best way to unwind, you may want to think again.

A study by the Australian Science Media Centre followed 8,800 adults over a six-year period and found that people who watched four hours or more television per day — as compared to less than two hours — had an 80 percent higher risk of death from cardiovascular disease. The findings were independent of traditional risk factors such as smoking or obesity.

The study says watching the television itself is not the problem, but rather sitting while you watch.

To combat these effects, researchers suggest not only regular exercise, but also to stand up and "get moving" during any prolonged period — be it in front of your television, computer, at work or during transport.
------------------------

The Q&A session with the researchers can be found HERE. The journal Circulation will have the published article up shortly.

What do you think of the study?

Again, There is NO Magic Bullet

Headline news in the diet field.

Setting the record straight on weight loss
It's time to set the record straight. The only reliable way to lose weight is to eat less or exercise more. Preferably both.

So why bother to state the obvious? Because a body of scientific literature has arisen over recent years, suggesting that fat oxidation – burning the fats we eat as opposed to the carbohydrates – is enough to promote fat loss. It isn't.

Sydney scientists have demonstrated that mice genetically altered to burn fats in preference to carbohydrates, will convert the unburned carbohydrates into stored fat anyway, and their ultimate weight and body composition will be the same as normal mice.

It all comes down to an enzyme known as ACC2 (acetyl-CoA carboxylase), which controls whether cells burn fats or carbohydrates. When it was shown that 'blocking' ACC2 will force cells to burn fats in preference to carbohydrates, many assumed that such 'fat burning' could make fat stores evaporate, and make people thin without changing food intake or energy expenditure.

Associate Professor Greg Cooney, from Sydney's Garvan Institute of Medical Research, discusses misconceptions surrounding ACC2 in findings that appear in the prestigious international journal, Cell Metabolism, article available online today.

"Our data urges a correction in people's concept of a magic bullet - something that will miraculously make them thin while they sit on the couch watching television," said Professor Cooney.

"While none of the large pharmaceutical companies have marketed ACC2 inhibitors, there are many kinds of so-called 'fat-burning pills' available in the health food, body building and alternative medicine markets, where limited clinical effectiveness data are required."

"Many such products can also contain potentially harmful stimulants or come with a recommendation to follow a calorie-controlled diet and do more exercise while taking them. If you follow those recommendations, then of course you'll lose weight - but you'd lose it anyway."

"The energy you use in your home can come from a coal-fired power station, hydroelectric power, or a wind turbine. You won't know which because the end result is electricity."

"The energy that fuels your body can come from fats, proteins or carbohydrates. You won't know which because the end result is ATP, or cellular energy."

"Your body will use the energy it needs and store the leftover fats, proteins or carbohydrates as fat. When you do the sums, it's ultimately a matter of calories in and calories out."

"It's important to stress that the focus of our study was limited to an analysis of the impact of fat oxidation on overall fatness. We didn't investigate all impacts of fat oxidation – and so we don't rule out benefits of burning off fats in specific tissues."

"For example, manipulating fat metabolism may - or may not - lead to better insulin action in muscles or in the liver. Should insulin action be improved, that would obviously benefit obese people with Type 2 diabetes. But we can't comment either way until we do the experiments."

And the take-home message? Follow a healthy, balanced diet and get plenty of exercise.


###

ABOUT GARVAN

The Garvan Institute of Medical Research was founded in 1963. Initially a research department of St Vincent's Hospital in Sydney, it is now one of Australia's largest medical research institutions with nearly 500 scientists, students and support staff. Garvan's main research programs are: Cancer, Diabetes & Obesity, Immunology and Inflammation, Osteoporosis and Bone Biology, and Neuroscience. The Garvan's mission is to make significant contributions to medical science that will change the directions of science and medicine and have major impacts on human health. The outcome of Garvan's discoveries is the development of better methods of diagnosis, treatment, and ultimately, prevention of disease.

-------------------

Translation: Calories count! There is no magic bullet that will allow you to lose weight without controlling your energy balance. Eat less and exercise more.
There are some benefits to what foods/nutrients you eat and when you eat that can make you more successful in this endeavor, just as there are some more effective exercise/activity patterns that can influence how much weight is lost (but not *where* the fat comes off).