Headlines: FDA: 125-plus products recalled in peanut outbreak

By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press Writer Ricardo Alonso-zaldivar, Associated Press Writer – Wed Jan 21, 5:57 pm ET

WASHINGTON – More than 125 products have been recalled in a salmonella-and-peanuts investigation that keeps getting bigger, federal health officials said Wednesday.

The list ranges from goodies like cookies and ice cream to energy bars. Even food for pooches may not be entirely safe, with a national company recalling some of its dog treats.

On Tuesday, PetSmart recalled seven kinds of its Grreat Choice dog biscuits. On Wednesday, the weight loss company NutriSystem issued a recall for peanut butter granola bars. And some Asian foods made with peanut sauces are starting to turn up on the recalls list.

To help consumers, the Food and Drug Administration has set up on its Web site a searchable database of recalled peanut products. "We expect (the) number to continue to increase," said Stephen Sundlof, head of the FDA's food safety program. No major brands of peanut butter sold in jars are implicated.

Peanut butter is not normally thought of as a high-risk product for salmonella. The bacteria, a frequent source of food poisoning, is supposed to be killed off in the roasting process.

In this investigation, the common denominator is that all the products contain peanut paste or peanut butter made at a Peanut Corp. of America plant in Blakely, Ga.

Originally the problem appeared limited to peanut butter shipped in big tubs to institutional customers like nursing homes. But then peanut paste was implicated. Made from ground roasted peanuts, it is used as an ingredient in dozens of other products sold directly to consumers.

Last week, Kellogg recalled some of its Austin and Keebler brand peanut butter crackers. Salmonella was later confirmed in a package of Austin crackers.

At least 486 people in more than 40 states have gotten sick since the outbreak began in the fall. Six have died.

Investigators found salmonella contamination at the PCA plant, which has suspended production. In one of the curious twists in the investigation, the salmonella strain at the plant is not an exact match to the one that has gotten people sick, the FDA said. However, the outbreak strain has been positively identified in a sample from an unopened jar of peanut produced at the Georgia plant.

Sundlof suggested it doesn't much matter whether health authorities get a perfect match at the plant. "Having salmonella in the plant is not supposed to happen," he said. "Regardless of whether it's the outbreak strain or not, that represents a violation."

Salmonella has been found in a floor crack and on the floor near a wall where pallets are stored, he said.

The manufacturer said it is cooperating with the investigation, but has received nothing in writing from health investigators to document their findings. "We trust that at some point they will share this with us and PCA will respond accordingly," said a company statement.

Although PCA is a small company, it lists more than 70 food companies as its customers. "Peanut paste is used in a huge variety of other foods," said Dr. Robert Tauxe, who is directing the investigation for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

A noted food safety scientist said manufacturers have to be careful that peanuts don't get contaminated after roasting. That's partly because peanut butter itself can't be heated to kill the bacteria without making it unpalatable to eat.

"Once the salmonella gets into the peanut butter, you are not going to kill it," said Michael Doyle, head of the University of Georgia's food safety center. "What the processor has to rely on is the roasting process. That's a critical control point."

After roasting, peanuts can be contaminated if they somehow come into contact with tainted water, or if birds or rodents get into the plant. They can also be cross-contaminated by equipment that is used to handle raw ingredients. Raw peanuts can harbor salmonella, just like other agricultural products.

"If there are fork lifts in the raw ingredient area, they can't go into the other part of the plant, because they could be bringing in untreated material," Doyle said. Federal and state officials would not discuss details of the investigation at the Georgia plant.

The FDA's Sundlof said it's rare for dogs to get salmonella illness, but that their owners can pick up the bacteria by handling tainted biscuits. If people don't wash their hands after feeding the dog, they can transfer the bacteria to human foods.

FDA peanut products database

"WORST" DIET PROMOTIONS OF 2008

20th ANNUAL SLIM CHANCE AWARDS

HETTINGER, ND - Healthy Weight Network released its 20th annual Slim Chance
Awards today, highlighting both the hidden dangers of diets and the merely
ridiculous. Here are the "worst" weight loss promotions of 2008.

MOST OUTRAGEOUS CLAIM: Kevin Trudeau infomercials. Fined over $7 million for
deceptive infomercials on his weight loss book, Kevin Trudeau is banned for
three years from making infomercials.

WORST GIMMICK: Skineez jeans ($139). In the fight against cellulite,
Skineez jeans are impregnated with a so-called "medication" of retinol and
chitosan. Supposedly the substance is released through friction and absorbed
in the skin to reduce fat layers.

WORST CLAIM: AbGONE. Full-page ads in daily newspapers tout AbGONE as
"proven to promote pot belly loss." Drug-like claims are that it increases
"fat metabolism" and calorie burn, promotes appetite suppression and
inhibits future abdominal fat deposits.

WORST PRODUCT - Kimkins diet. Heidi "Kimmer" Diaz charged users access to
her Internet diet, claiming they could lose up to 5 percent of weight in 10
days safely and permanently. Essentially it is a starvation diet, and
members complained of chest pains, hair loss, heart palpitations and
menstrual irregularities. Eleven are now suing Diaz.

"Today's economic downturn can remind us how foolish it is to waste money on
unsafe, ineffective and energy-draining weight loss efforts," said Francie
M. Berg, a licensed nutritionist and adjunct professor at the University of
North Dakota School of Medicine, whose organization Healthy Weight Network
started the Slim Chance Awards 20 years ago.

With the New Year upon us, resolutions freshly on our minds, Berg is
advising people of all sizes to skip dieting and move ahead with healthy
habits. "Resolve to follow a healthy diet-free lifestyle through 2009. You
can get your life back on track, improve your health and move on with what's
really important to you." (Guidelines available at
www.healthyweight. net/handouts. htm.)

The National Council Against Health Fraud and Healthy Weight Network
co-sponsor the awards, which are part of the lead-up to Healthy Weight Week,
which falls from January 18 to 24 in 2009.

###

For more information see www.healthyweight.net/hww.htm

Xmas Carol for Dieters (HUMOR)

*Twas the night before Christmas and all round my hips*
*were Fannie May candies that sneaked past my lips.*
*Fudge brownies were stored in the freezer with care*
*In hopes that my thighs would forget they were there.*

*While Mama in her my girdle and I in chin straps*
*Had just settled down to sugar-borne naps.*
*When out in the pantry there arose such a clatter*
*I sprang from my bed to see what was the matter.*

*Away to the kitchen I flew like a flash*
*Tore open the icebox then threw up the sash.*
*The marshmallow look of the new-fallen snow*
*Sent thoughts of a binge to my body below.*

*When what to my wandering eyes should appear:*
*A marzipan Santa with eight chocolate reindeer!*
*That huge chunk of candy so luscious and slick*
*I knew in a second that I'd wind up sick.*

*The sweet-coated santa, those sugared reindeer*
*I closed my eyes tightly but still I could hear;*
*On Pritzker, on Stillman, on weak one, on TOPS*
*A Weight Watcher dropout from sugar detox.*

*>From the top of the scales to the top of the hall*
*Now dash away pounds now dash away all.*
*Dressed up in Lane Bryant from my head to nightdress*
*My clothes were all bulging from too much excess.*

*My droll little mouth and my round little belly*
*They shook when I laughed like a bowl full of jelly.*
*I spoke not a word but went straight to my work*
*Ate all of the candy then turned with a jerk.*

*And laying a finger beside my heartburn*
*I gave a quick nod toward the bedroom I turned.*
*I eased into bed, to the heavens I cry*
*If temptation's removed I'll get thin by and by.*

*And I mumbled again as I turned for the night*
*In the morning I'll starve... 'til I take that first bite!*

Americans Eating More Processed Sugar, Study Finds

The other day I was "interviewed" for a magazine article. The author emailed me questions. Most of them were asking about my opinion of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) and childhood obesity. One can usually tell the slant of the author by the wording of the questions. This author seemed bent on getting a nutrition expert to blame HFCS for the rising weight of American children/teens.

In my opinion, the problem isn't HFCS. If you look at the big picture, American kids are eating more CALORIES overall (and a lot of them from fried foods as well as sugar-sweetened beverages & processed baked sweets) and using less CALORIES with increasingly sedentary lifestyles (more tv/video/computer and less physical activity). Intake of sugar-sweetened beverages is ridiculously high (soda, sport drinks, energy drinks and juice). Yes, even juice! I've always considered juice to be "soda without the bubbles" since it is just sugar & water - only very little micronutrients (vitamins/minerals/phytonutrients) compared to EATING the fruit. But the popularity of sport & energy drinks is growing. Add to this the newest sugared beverage, the "nutrient waters" and what lessons are children getting from parents & the media? Apparently there is something wrong with drinking regular, plain, natural water.

This press release from Emory University shows another affect of increased soda/processed food consumption - high fructose consumption in 'empty' calories from these beverages is contributing to more than American waistlines:
-------------------------------------

Americans are getting more than 10 percent of their daily calories from fructose, used mainly in sugar-sweetened beverages and processed foods, a new study finds.
The study, analyzing the amount and sources of dietary fructose consumption among U.S. children and adults from 1988 to 1994, was published in the July 9, 2008 issue of The Medscape Journal of Medicine.

Fructose occurs naturally in fruits and vegetables, however, it is added to many processed foods as table sugar (sucrose) and high-fructose corn syrup.

"Measurement of fructose consumption is important because growing evidence suggests that it may play a role in health outcomes," says lead study author Miriam Vos, MD, MSPH, assistant professor of pediatrics, Emory University School of Medicine.

Vos and colleagues examined fructose consumption patterns by sex, age group, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status and body mass index for 21,483 U.S. children and adults. They used a single 24-hour dietary recall administered in the third National Health and Examination Survey (NHANES), the only nationally representative survey in the past 20 years to include fructose content as a reported variable.

The study found that U.S. children and adults consumed 54.7 grams of fructose per day, an almost 50 percent increase from a national study sample conducted in 1977-1978, which estimated mean consumption of fructose at 37 grams per day.

Fructose consumption was highest among adolescents ages 12 to18 at 72.8 grams per day. Among racial and ethnic groups, non-Hispanic blacks consumed the most fructose at 57.7 grams per day, or 11 percent of total calories. Normal-weight participants (56.2 grams) consumed more fructose than obese persons (51.1 grams). And those in the highest-income category consumed less of their total calories from fructose than those in the lowest-income category.

The largest source of fructose was sugar-sweetened beverages (30.1 percent), followed by grains, which include processed foods such as cakes, pies and snacks, breads and cereals (21.5 percent), and fruit or fruit juices (19.4 percent).

"Short-term studies have shown that fructose can elevate plasma triglycerides," says Vos. "Further surveillance and research are needed to assess trends in fructose consumption and to develop a better understanding of the health impact of this common additive in the food supply."

In addition to Vos, study authors were Jean Welsh, MPH, RN, of the Graduate Division of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, Nutrition and Health Science Program, Emory University; and Joel Kimmons, PhD, Cathleen Gillespie, MS, and Heidi Blanck, PhD, all of the Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Obesity, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Dr. Vos was supported by the Joseph W. Crooks Faculty Development Award.

Reference: The Medscape Journal of Medicine, eJournal, Clinical Nutrition & Obesity, July 9, 2008

######################################

A follow up Systemic Reviews issue of the Medscape Journal of Medicine on 8/12/2008 asked the question "Soft Drinks and Weight Gain: How Strong Is the Link?" It's free to register at Medscape to read the article, here is the abstract:
---------------------------------------

Emily Wolff, MPH; Michael L. Dansinger, MD, MS

Context: Soft drink consumption in the United States has tripled in recent decades, paralleling the dramatic increases in obesity prevalence. The purpose of this clinical review is to evaluate the extent to which current scientific evidence supports a causal link between sugar-sweetened soft drink consumption and weight gain.
Evidence acquisition: MEDLINE search of articles published in all languages between 1966 and December 2006 containing key words or medical subheadings, such as "soft drinks" and "weight." Additional articles were obtained by reviewing references of retrieved articles, including a recent systematic review. All reports with cross-sectional, prospective cohort, or clinical trial data in humans were considered.
Evidence synthesis: Six of 15 cross-sectional and 6 of 10 prospective cohort studies identified statistically significant associations between soft drink consumption and increased body weight. There were 5 clinical trials; the two that involved adolescents indicated that efforts to reduce sugar-sweetened soft drinks slowed weight gain. In adults, 3 small experimental studies suggested that consumption of sugar-sweetened soft drinks caused weight gain; however, no trial in adults was longer than 10 weeks or included more than 41 participants. No trial reported the effects on lipids.
Conclusions: Although observational studies support the hypothesis that sugar-sweetened soft drinks cause weight gain, a paucity of hypothesis-confirming clinical trial data has left the issue open to debate. Given the magnitude of the public health concern, larger and longer intervention trials should be considered to clarify the specific effects of sugar-sweetened soft drinks on body weight and other cardiovascular risk factors.

Exerpt from the article:

Mechanisms by Which Soft Drinks May Promote Obesity and Related Diseases

There are 4 main mechanisms by which soft drinks may promote obesity and cardiovascular risk factors: direct caloric increases, appetite stimulation, adverse metabolic effects of high-fructose corn syrup consumption, and replacement of milk and other beneficial dietary intake.

Sugar-sweetened soft drinks typically contain 140-150 calories per 12-oz serving. If normal dietary intake decreased by an equivalent amount of calories per serving, then weight change would not be expected. However, as noted above, DiMeglio and Mattes[6] found that there was no decrease in usual dietary intake in response to 450 calories per day from sucrose-sweetened soda. (The daily caloric intake was equal to baseline intake plus the caloric intake attributed to the soda.) In the same study subjects, a solid sucrose supplement in the form of jelly beans was associated with a caloric reduction from baseline dietary intake that perfectly compensated for the caloric load provided by the jelly beans, such that the daily caloric intake remained unchanged. Others have reported similar findings.[38,39] Hypothetically, sugar solutions may fail to trigger satiety in the same way that solid preparations do; however, the physiologic mechanisms have not been fully determined.

Appetite stimulation associated with rapidly changing glucose and/or insulin levels may be caused by rapidly absorbed, high glycemic carbohydrates, including those found in sugar-sweetened soft drinks. A rapidly falling serum glucose level is a well-known appetite stimulant, and carefully conducted human studies have attributed increased hunger and caloric intake to differences in glycemic index or glycemic load intake, and associated differences in glucose and insulin levels.[40,41] The DiMeglio data described above may not support this hypothesis because the glycemic load of the jelly beans vs the soda was probably similar.[6]

Fructose, found in similar amounts in both sucrose and high-fructose corn syrup, may hypothetically promote obesity more than an equivalent amount of glucose. A study by Elliott and coworkers[42] examined the relationship between fructose, weight gain, and the insulin resistance syndrome and found that fructose, compared with glucose, is preferentially metabolized to lipid in the liver. In animal studies, fructose consumption induces insulin resistance, impaired glucose tolerance, hyperinsulinemia, hypertriacylglycerolemia, and hypertension, although data in humans are less clear.[42] Because fructose has limited insulin-stimulating effects, the consumption of foods and beverages that contain fructose produce smaller amounts of insulin than glucose-containing carbohydrates. In addition, because leptin production is regulated by insulin responses to meals, circulating leptin concentrations are reduced by the consumption of fructose. Bray and coworkers[13] have also found that the digestion, absorption, and metabolism of fructose differ from those of glucose, noting that when large amounts of fructose are ingested, the fructose provides a relatively unregulated source of carbon precursors for hepatic lipogenesis. Furthermore, a recent study conducted in mice suggested that the consumption of fructose-sweetened beverages increases adiposity more than the consumption of either sucrose-sweetened or artificially sweetened beverages.[43]

The consumption of milk has greatly decreased over the past few decades, whereas sugar-sweetened soft drink consumption has greatly increased. Energy intake from milk decreased by 38% between 1977 and 2001.[12] It has been shown that this trade-off between sweetened drinks and milk has led to a lower daily intake of protein, calcium, phosphorous, magnesium, zinc, and vitamin A at the highest level of sweetened drink consumption (> 2 glasses or 12 oz/day).[44] Harnack and colleagues[45] found similar results in children and adolescents, particularly at high levels of soft drink consumption. French and coworkers[4] also noted that soft drinks may affect the dietary quality of youth by displacing milk consumption, which can reduce calcium intake among children and increase their risk for osteoporosis and bone fracture. Nielsen and Popkin[12] have hypothesized that because dairy products may have a favorable effect on weight, reducing milk intake may be associated with increased weight gain, especially if the milk is being replaced with drinks of a higher caloric value. Popkin and colleagues,[46] however, citing the 2005 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, noted that there was no sufficient evidence that milk consumption reduced, or prevented, weight gain.

#############################################

Healthy Fast Food?

If you sell it, will people buy it?

Many "fast food" chains tried those options a few years ago (when you are a Registered Dietitian, you get samples at the annual Food Expo every year) but the public wasn't ready. Do you remember McDonald Salad Shakers? Not a big seller. Even I didn't like the McLean (honestly, I haven't eaten a McD's burger in 10 years, but that's another story).

A few years later, Wendy's closed their in-restaurant salad bar (yes, they used to have a real salad bar) and just premade them and WOW! They were a hit! The timing was right for salad-to-go. And the rest jump aboard.

Warning: Many of these salads pack just as much fat & calories as the burgers. However, if you choose the grilled chicken and the fat-free dressing, take off half the cheese & bacon, you've got a decent meal.

Men's Health published a great article about the newest trend in fast food: Healthy options. If you are a patron of fast food, I hope this helps you make better choices. And lets hope that the public increases their purchase of these items so the chains will keep them on the menu. Remember, the companies aren't trying to help us be healthier, they are trying to make $$$. If it doesn't sell, they will stop serving it.

Eat This Not That: America's Best - and Worst - Restaurants

Posted Thu, Jul 31, 2008, 3:29 pm PDT

Eating out invariably raises a number of tricky questions: sit-down or drive-thru? Burgers or pizza? Thin or stuffed crust? And if you're dining with your family, add the biggest question of all: Will the food we eat today bring a fatter tomorrow for our kids? And fewer tomorrows for the rest of us?

So the choice between McDonald’s and Burger King shouldn’t be based solely on whether you're more terrified by the scary clown Ronald McDonald or that creepy masked Burger King. Choosing one over the other could be the difference of hundreds of calories in a meal, more than 10 unnecessary pounds over the course of a year, and countless health woes over the course of a lifetime.

During more than a year of research, my coauthor and I discovered vast dietary discrepancies between many of the places Americans love to eat most. So to help you separate the commendable from the deplorable, we put 43 major chain restaurants under the nutritional microscope — both for your benefit, and that of your family.

How did we judge the restaurants? We started by calculating the average number of calories per kid entrée, then rewarded restaurants for having healthy adult options that would appeal to the young palette, and for providing healthy vegetable sides and non-soda drink options. Finally, we docked points for those restaurants still harboring nasty trans fats.

The result is a Restaurant Report Card that holds each eating establishment fully accountable for the fare they’re serving up to all of us — moms, dads, kids, teens, and twentysomethings — along with a survival strategy for making it through any meal unscathed.

Did your favorite restaurant make the grade?

A Chick-fil-A
Chick-fil-A excels in every category we tested for. With a slew of low-calorie sandwiches, the country’s “healthiest” chicken nugget, a variety of solid sides like fresh fruit and soup that can be substituted into any meal, and nutritional brochures readily available for perusing at each location, Chick-fil-A earns the award for America’s Healthiest Chain Restaurant (for kids, for the adults who drive them there, plus anybody else wise enough to make it their fast food choice).

Your Survival Strategy: Even the smartest kid in the class can still fail a test, so be on your toes at all times, even at Chik-fil-A. Skip salads with ranch or Caesar dressings, any sandwich with bacon, and avoid milkshakes at all costs.

A- Subway
A menu based on lean protein and vegetables is always going to score well in our book. With more than half a dozen sandwiches under 300 calories, plus a slew of soups and healthy sides to boot, Subway can satisfy even the pickiest eater without breaking the caloric bank.

But, despite what Jared may want you to believe, Subway is not nutritionally infallible: Those rosy calorie counts posted on the menu boards include neither cheese nor mayo (add 160 calories per 6-inch sub) and some of the toasted subs, like the Meatball Marinara, contain hefty doses of calories, saturated fat, and sodium.

Your Survival Strategy: Cornell researchers have discovered a “health halo” at Subway, which refers to the tendency to reward yourself or your kid with chips, cookies, and large soft drinks because the entrée is healthy. Avoid the halo, and all will be well.

B+ Boston Market
With more than a dozen healthy vegetable sides and lean meats like turkey and roast sirloin on the menu, the low-cal, high-nutrient possibilities at Boston Market are endless. But with nearly a dozen calorie-packed sides and fatty meats like dark meat chicken and meat loaf, it’s almost as easy to construct a lousy meal.

Your Survival Strategy: There are three simple steps to nutritional salvation: 1) Start with turkey, sirloin, or rotisserie chicken. 2) Add two noncreamy, nonstarchy vegetable sides. 3) Ignore all special items, such as pot pie and nearly all of the sandwiches.

B McDonald’s
Though not blessed with an abundance of healthy options, Mickey D’s isn’t burdened with any major calorie bombs, either. Kid standards like McNuggets and cheeseburgers are both in the acceptable 300-calorie range.

Your Survival Strategy: Apple Dippers and 2% milk with a small entrée makes for a pretty decent meal-on-the-go. McDonald’s quintessential Happy Meal® makes this possible — just beware the usual French fries and soda pitfalls. Adults should go for a Quarter Pounder without cheese.

C+ Domino’s
Domino’s suffers the same pitfalls of any other pizza purveyor: too much cheese, bread, and greasy toppings. If you don’t order carefully, you might bag your child a pizza with more than 350 calories per slice. To its credit, Domino’s does keep the trans fat off the pizza, and it also offers the lowest-calorie thin crust option out there.

Your Survival Strategy: Stick with the Crunchy Thin Crust pizzas sans sausage and pepperoni. If your must order meat, make sure it's ham. And whenever possible, try to sneak on a vegetable or two per pie.

C Burger King
BK has only four legitimate kids’ entrées on the menu, and none of them — French Toast Sticks, hamburger, mac and cheese, chicken tenders — are particularly healthy. And while the recent addition of Apple Fries provides a much-needed healthy side alternative for kids, the menu is still sullied with trans fats.

BK pledged to follow in the wake of nearly every other chain restaurant and remove trans fats from the menu by the end of 2008, but so far, we’ve seen little action.

Your Survival Strategy: Adults can sign on for the Whopper Junior and a Garden Salad, and escape with only 365 calories. The best kids’ meal? A 4-piece Chicken Tenders®, applesauce or Apple Fries, and water or milk. Beyond that, there is little hope of escaping unscathed.

D Chipotle
We applaud Chipotle’s commitment to high-quality produce and fresh meats, but even the most pristine ingredients can’t dampen the damage wrought by the massive portion sizes served up here. The lack of options for kids means young eaters are forced to tussle with one of Chipotle’s massive burritos or taco platters, which can easily top 1,000 calories.

Your Survival Strategy: Stick to the crispy tacos or burrito bowls, or saw a burrito in half.

F Applebee’s, IHOP, Olive Garden, Outback, Red Lobster, T.G.I. Friday’s
These titans of the restaurant industry are among the last national chains to not provide nutritional information on their dishes. Even after years of communication with their representatives, we still here the same old excuses: it’s too pricey, it’s too time-consuming, it’s impossible to do accurately because their food is so fresh. Our response is simple: If every other chain restaurant in the country can do it, then why can’t they?

Your Survival Strategy: Write letters, make phone calls, beg, scream, and plead for these restaurants to provide nutritional information on all of their products. Here are the phone numbers for each of the restaurants that refuse to tell us the truth!

Applebees: email, 888-59APPLE; IHOP: email, 888-240-6055 (press 1 for Guest Visit issues); Olive Garden: email, 800-331-2729; Outback: email, 757-493-7662; Red Lobster: email, 800-LOBSTER.

For a comprehensive A-to-F breakdown from Men's Health on 30 other chain restaurants, see the complete Eat This, Not That! For Kids Restaurant Report Card. Or check out the adult versions of the Restaurant Report Cards here.

Will Calories on the Menu Change Your Eating Habits?

First New York City passed a law requiring fast food places to post calories of their foods on the menu....then it was amended to include ANY chain restaurants with 15 or more locations.
Most of these places have had nutrition information available in pamphlets for years, and subsequently posted online. For example:
Blimpie
McDonald's
Panda Express
Starbucks Beveragesand Food
Now other cities are thinking about following the example of NYC. Why? Because obesity is fast becoming the nation's number ONE health problem (now that smoking has been banned in most all public places).

Today MSNBC posted an interesting article about the effect of calorie information on the menu? Will it open up some eyes and show the public WHY we're getting heavier? It's not the "carbs", it's not the "fat", it's not the "high fructose corn syrup"; IT'S THE CALORIES!!!!

New Yorkers try to swallow calorie sticker shock
600 calorie muffins? The first city to adopt law faces unappetizing surprises
By Roni Caryn Rabin, MSNBC contributor, Wed July 16, 2008

Nora Cara was flabbergasted.

She was about to order her usual morning coffee and muffin at Dunkin’ Donuts when she saw the new calorie labels. The chocolate chip muffin she had her eye on was 630 calories.

“I was blown away,” said Cara, a 27-year-old homemaker from Forest Hills in New York City. “I’m not a no-carb type of person, and I usually don’t even think about it. But you pick up a little muffin with your coffee, and it has 630 calories in it? That’s a bit extreme!”

New Yorkers have been in the throes of sticker shock since this spring when the Big Apple became the first city in the country to implement a law forcing chain restaurants to post the calorie count of each food in the same size and font as the price.

Restaurants have not exhausted their legal challenges, but the city will start fining violators up to $2,000 beginning Friday, say officials with the city’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene.

While some sit-down chains and fast-food eateries are waiting until the last minute, coffee shops like Starbucks — home of the 470 calorie raspberry scone and 610 calorie cookie — have been replacing their menu boards and adding calorie tags to pastries in recent weeks. The result: Do a little eavesdropping in a New York City restaurant, and you may think you’ve stumbled into an Overeaters Anonymous meeting.

At T.G.I. Friday’s, one of the few sit-down chain restaurants to have already added calorie counts to menus, a group of young women gasped as they studied the menu, barely able to find a meal under 1,000 calories, never mind an appetizer or dessert. Both Stephanie Fowler and Lindsay Green asked about the suddenly popular Classic Sirloin — at 290 calories, it was one of the lowest calorie items on the menu — but learned the restaurant ran out by the time the dinner rush started.

Outside the Forest Hills’ Dunkin’ Donuts, Juan Restrepo, the 45-year-old owner of a construction company, said he was quitting corn muffins — 510 calories! — this time for good.

“My daughter warned me about them,” he lamented. “I just didn’t listen.”

Preventing diabetes
Putting the brakes on thoughtlessly inhaling calories is exactly the effect New York City health officials hoped the law would have. They say calorie labels could reduce the number of obese New Yorkers by 150,000 over the next five years, and prevent 30,000 cases of diabetes.

New York is not the only city pushing calorie labels. New laws in Seattle and California’s Santa Clara and San Francisco are scheduled to go into effect later this year, including some more stringent than New York’s, requiring restaurants to post information about sodium, carbs, fats and cholesterol in addition to calories.

Such laws have faced stiff opposition and legal challenges from the restaurant industry. A judge struck down New York City’s first calorie labeling law, which would only have applied to fast food restaurants that were already making calorie information available on Web sites or posters. The law was then revised to apply to all chain restaurants with 15 or more outlets nationwide.

“We’re still in court, but the ruling is in effect,” said New York City health department spokeswoman Jessica Scaperotti. Fines for the restaurants who haven't posted calorie counts by Friday will range from $200 to $2,000 depending on the violation, she said.

Scaperotti said she didn't know what impact the calorie labels have made on consumer choices or sales. But, she said, “We know nutritional information is effective. If you go to the Starbucks near our office in lower Manhattan, the little cookies that are 80 calories each — they’re the first ones to go.”

1,360 calorie salad
Many New Yorkers are finding that even the foods they thought were lower calorie really aren’t. Vicki Freedman, who lives in Manhattan, watches her weight and always tries to choose a light option when eating out. But the 26 year old just discovered that the Friday’s pecan-crusted chicken salad, served with mandarin oranges, dried cranberries and celery, has 1,360 calories.

“That surprised me the most because they market it as a healthy option,” she said. “It’s like false advertising. You think it’s better than the burger and the fries. It’s misleading.” (The cheeseburger served with fries is, indeed, 1,290 calories.)

Meals ordered at sit-down chain restaurants may have more calories than typical takeout fast-food, nutritionists say, because the portions are often larger and an entrée can be served on a plate smothered with French fries. In a takeout restaurant, the fries have to fit into a container, which limits the portion size.

Managers at some restaurants, including an Upper East Side Johnny Rocket’s and Outback Steakhouse, said new menus including calorie counts would be on tables by Friday, or shortly thereafter.

“We’re concerned,” acknowledged Eric Hagy, proprietor of Outback Steakhouse on Third Avenue in Manhattan. “I don’t know what effect it will have, but it will bring people’s attention to certain items that are high in calories, like the Bloomin’ Onion appetizer. It has over 2,000 calories, but it’s meant to be shared between two or three people.”

At a Starbucks on the Upper East Side of Manhattan, barista Bishoy Ayoub, 18, said he’s noticed many customers switching to smaller drinks or reduced-fat drinks since calorie labels were posted several months ago.

‘Take off the labels’
“Some people actually tell us we should take off the labels, because it discourages them from ordering what they want,” he said. “But I think honesty is the best policy.”

At a Wendy’s nearby, where calorie counts were just posted next to prices on the menu-boards behind the counter, customers didn’t flinch. “I figure I’ve got 1,350 calories here on my tray,” said Tristan Rowe, 26, who lives in Brooklyn, pointing to his lunch of a chicken club sandwich, junior bacon-cheeseburger, large fries and a large Coke (which actually added up to 1,680 calories). “It’s not going to change what I order — I’m not watching my waistline. I have a very active lifestyle.”

Despite the eye-opening revelations, whether New Yorkers will switch to lower calorie meals remains to be seen. They may just switch menus.

That’s what Fowler, the woman who was dining recently with her friends at T.G.I. Friday's, decided to do.

“I’m so upset,” she said, noting some entrees — like the Jack Daniels ribs and shrimp dinner — contain almost 2,000 calories, and the desserts were more of the same (the brownie obsession is 1,500 calories). “I wish they wouldn’t have done this.”

But then Fowler noticed that the waiter had handed her friend an old menu, which didn’t have calorie counts on it.

“You got a menu without anything on it?” she asked her friend. “Can I have yours?”

Roni Caryn Rabin is a health writer who lives in New York City.

© 2008 MSNBC Interactive
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25464987/

Food Records = Weight Loss Success

Myself and many other nutrition experts have been saying this for years - keeping a food journal helps people lose weight. Anne Fletcher, MS RD LD wrote about this tool in "Thin for Life" back in 1994. I've often recommended her books for people working on weight management.

Here's the Reuters article published on Yahoo News this morning. When the actual research article is available, I'll link it.

Study shows value of food diary in losing weight

By Will Dunham
Tue Jul 8, 3:25 AM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Keeping a food diary -- a detailed account of what you eat and drink and the calories it packs -- is a powerful tool in helping people lose weight, U.S. researchers said on Tuesday.

The study involving 1,685 middle-aged men and women over six months found those who kept such a diary just about every day lost about twice as much weight as those who did not.

The findings buttressed earlier research that endorsed the value of food diaries in helping people lose weight. Companies including Weight Watchers International Inc use food diaries in their weight-loss programs.

"For those who are working on weight loss, just writing down everything you eat is a pretty powerful technique," Victor Stevens of Kaiser Permanente's Center for Health Research in Portland said in a telephone interview.

"It helps the participants see where the extra calories are coming from, and then develop more specific plans to deal with those situations," said Stevens, who helped lead the study published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.

The technique also helps hold dieters accountable for what they are eating, Stevens said.

The study involved people from four U.S. cities: Portland, Oregon; Baltimore, Maryland; Durham, North Carolina; and Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Their average weight loss was about 13 pounds (6 kg). But those keeping food diaries six or seven days a week lost about 18 pounds (8 kg) compared to 9 pounds (4 kg) for those not regularly keeping a food diary.

The average age of people in the study was 55.

They were asked to eat less fat, more vegetables, fruit and whole grains, exercise 180 minutes a week mostly by walking, attend group meetings, and keep a detailed food diary.

Blacks made up 44 percent of the people in the study. The researchers noted that blacks Americans have a higher risk than whites for conditions linked to obesity including type 2 diabetes and heart disease.

"Keeping a food diary doesn't have to be a formal thing. Just the act of scribbling down what you eat on a Post-It note, sending yourself e-mails tallying each meal or sending yourself a text message will suffice," Dr. Keith Bachman, another Kaiser Permanente expert, said in a statement.