Study: Vitamins may increase death risk in older women
http://usat.ly/pLTisA
Monday, October 10, 2011
Study: Vitamins may increase death risk in older women - USATODAY.com
Just eat right, don't mess with vitamins....
Sunday, September 11, 2011
Exercising
Funny. The Organization which I work for - the Oregon Conference of Seventh-day Adventists - is trying to get us healthy and is giving us financial incentives to do so. Great news for me, since I already exercise every day. My wife and I go for a walk almost every day of 3.5-5.5 miles. But in order to help us, they gave us a digital pedometer. Curious as to how well it worked, I tested it against my iPhone's GPS. With the settings all accurate, I've worn the pedometer to track every step I take during the day since Thursday morning. Thursday I walked almost 12 miles. Friday almost 11. Saturday almost 8, and today, almost 8. That's a lot of miles! Sure it helped that we were having a convention on the campus of Walla Walla University and walked across campus all day long.... But still.
Add to what I now see I'm walking each day, is that my son and daughter and I have been swimming 5 days a week. That's about 2 aerobic miles a day (we're swimming less than 2 actual miles), and then I'm also doing some weight conditioning training for my shoulders and arms and I feel tired! Whew!
But in actuality it feels very good. My diet while eating at the college cafeteria was less than stellar. Now with that over, I'm ready to deal with the Forks over Knives diet again. We bought the movie a few weeks back and watched it again. Great job!
I feel armed and ready now. Let's go get 'em!
Monday, September 5, 2011
Eating and Exercise
This article was first published here:
http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2011/09/diet-exercise-beat-high-blood-pressure.html
http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2011/09/diet-exercise-beat-high-blood-pressure.html
How diet and exercise beat high blood pressure
Monday, August 22, 2011
Don’t forget to tune in to CNN this weekend!
This is a great article about Bill Clinton's health reversal. You really need to read the link for the whole article.....
Sent to you by rog via Google Reader:
via The Engine 2 Diet by Engine 2 Team on 8/19/11
Tune in as Dr. Sanjay Gupta explores the signs, tests and lifestyle changes that could make cardiac problems a thing of the past on "The Last Heart Attack," Sunday 8 p.m. ET.
Read about Bill Clinton's transformation from McDonalds loving President to a plant-powered and healthy!
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to The Engine 2 Diet using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Well Blog: Swapping Meat for Nuts to Lower Diabetes Risk
Lower the risk? Why not try to totally destroy the risk....?
Sent to you by rog via Google Reader:
via NYT > Home Page by By ANAHAD O'CONNOR on 8/10/11
Eating red meat, and in particular processed red meat like bacon and hot dogs, raises the risk of Type 2 diabetes. But replacing just one serving a day with nuts or low-fat dairy can lower the risk.Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to NYT > Home Page using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Doctors group says hot dogs as dangerous as cigarettes - USATODAY.com
Doctors group says hot dogs as dangerous as cigarettes
Monday, July 18, 2011
The Jell-O Is Made From People! Human-Derived Gelatin Coming Soon
Major YUCK Factor in this "slightly creepy product"....
Sent to you by rog via Google Reader:
via Fast Company by Ariel Schwartz on 7/18/11
We may not have to rely on boiled pig bones for our gelatin forever. The solution may not be any more appetizing, but it is safer and easier.
Gelatin is found in everything from Jell-O and marshmallows to cosmetics and candles. But the current method of taking gelatin from the skin and bones of cows and pigs has a number of drawbacks, including variation in quality from batch to batch, the potential for transmitting infectious diseases like Mad Cow and the possibility of triggering immune system responses in humans. We may not have to rely on pig bones for gelatin forever, though the newest option--human derived gelatin--isn't too appetizing.
Beijing University of Chemical Technology researchers created the slightly creepy product by sticking human gelatin genes into a strain of yeast that can produce gelatin with reliable features--and a virtual guarantee that it won't be contaminated with pathogens or cause immune responses (because the gelatin molecules are based on human DNA sequences). No word on when the gelatin will be available for commercial use, but there are other companies working on similar products.
A San Francisco-based company called FibroGen is also developing "recombinant human gelatin" that has already been safely tested on humans as a stabilizer for vaccines. FibroGen is also talking with capsule manufacturers (think: capsules for medication) to study the feasibility of using recombinant gelatin in their products.
So here's the question: cow and pig-based gelatin is definitely not vegetarian, but what about human-derived gelatin? It doesn't come from actual people, but it is derived from human genes. At what point do genes represent a person that you don't want to eat? On the plus side, it's undoubtedly safer than today's gelatin, so perhaps we should consider it a stepping stone on the way to a less stomach-curdling gelatin source.
[Image: Flickr user stevendepolo]
Reach Ariel Schwartz via Twitter or email.
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to Fast Company using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Friday, July 8, 2011
Organic? Vegan? Vegetarian? What Does It Cost?
Sent to you by rog via Google Reader:
via The Simple Dollar by Trent on 7/8/11
A few weeks ago, I put out a call on Twitter and on Facebook for detailed posts that people would like to see. I got enough great responses that I'm going to fill the entire month of July – one post per day – addressing these ideas.
On Facebook, Vicki asked "what impacts going organic vegan has on your food budget—do you end up spending more or less than you did when you ate a more typical diet?"
I'll start off by giving you a simple answer and then elaborate on it: eating organic foods caused the food budget to go up, while eating vegan foods caused it to drop a bit.
First, let's back up and define what we're talking about here, for those who might not be familiar.
Organic foods refer to "foods that are produced using methods that do not involve modern synthetic inputs such as synthetic pesticides and chemical fertilizers, do not contain genetically modified organisms, and are not processed using irradiation, industrial solvents, or chemical food additives." (source) Our biggest reason for deciding to eat a large proportion of organic foods were articles relating various food additives and hormonal injections in animals to such effects as early onset puberty in children. We decided, on the whole, that we preferred to minimize the additives in the foods we feed our children (as much as we reasonably can) and one simple way to do that is to just watch for the USDA Organic label on foods.
Vegan foods are ones that do not involve the use of non-human animal products. In other words, vegan foods exclude meat, eggs, and dairy products, along with a few other minor ingredients. We chose to go this route because of personal health concerns and a recommendation from a dietitian to try a "vegan plus fish" diet for a while. I am not vegan for political reasons, I am following a "vegan plus fish" diet for now, while my family often eats much the same food, sometimes supplemented with meat and dairy products. For example, if we make a pizza, they'll often have regular cheese as a topping while I'll either have no cheese or soy cheese. At the grocery store, we tend to spend a lot of time in the produce section these days.
So, what impacts have these choices had on our food budget?
Organic foods and our food budget
We started eating a slowly-growing proportion of organic foods at about the time our first child was moving to table foods in late 2006. This choice caused a decided increase in our monthly food budget.
Why? Usually, organic foods are strictly more expensive than non-organic foods of the exact same type. Organic milk costs more than non-organic milk. Organic vegetables cost more than non-organic vegetables.
Of course, while this increase was a real one, the increase was somewhat mitigated by other gradual changes in our diet that came hand-in-hand with having young mouths at home.
First, our gradual move toward preparing more food at home reduced our monthly food costs. We started eating less take-out and making our own meals right at the same time as we were switching to organic foods, and for the same reason. We wanted more control over what our children were eating.
For similar reasons, we gradually moved away from prepackaged meals and toward meals from scratch, which similarly reduced our food costs. Believe it or not, it's cheaper to actually plan out your meals and understand how to use herbs and spices than it is to throw a boxed meal or a frozen meal into your cart. I can make a far better tasting pan of lasagna than a frozen lasagna at about 60% of the price.
These changes happened gradually over roughly the same period of time and resulted in a net slight reduction in our food budget. It's pretty easy to see that there was one cost-increasing factor (organics) and two cost-decreasing factors (preparing more food at home, preparing more food from scratch).
Vegan foods and our food budget
Last October, I made a switch to a vegan "plus fish" diet, for reasons described above. This meant our food purchasing changed a bit. We began to purchase less meat, milk, and cheese, and we began to purchase more fruits, vegetables, and grains.
The net impact on our food budget of this change was a reduction in food costs. On the whole, the increase in fruits, vegetables, beans, grains, and so on had less of an impact than the decrease in meats, milk, cheese, and so on.
The interesting part is that this dietary change pushed us to really start using a lot of new things. For example, we discovered how tasty and versatile quinoa is – that was really our top discovery here. Quinoa itself can be a bit expensive if you don't look very hard for it, so we started really shopping around for it. Even given the relative expense, though, it didn't compare to the ongoing cost of meats and cheeses and milk, which can really add up.
One example of a cost reduction that's clear cut is the fact that our usual dinner beverages shifted, too. I always drink water with dinner now (sometimes with wine, depending on the meal), whereas before I often drank milk. My wife now often drinks water, too, though our kids typically still drink (organic) milk. That's less milk purchased each week, which is a direct savings.
So, what saves money?
If your primary aim is to reduce your food budget, what can you learn from the above items to save money?
First, prepare your own food at home. Simply switching from eating out is a big cost saver. Virtually every meal you can eat at a restaurant is far cheaper to eat at home.
Second, make your own food from scratch as much as possible. The key here is simply learning how to cook things from scratch. Many people fall into the trap of using prepared meals at home because it's easier than learning how to prepare them yourself, even though there's often not much of a time savings from using a packaged meal.
Finally, use more fruits, vegetables, beans, and grains whenever and wherever you can, and drink water as your main beverage. Fruits, vegetables, beans, and grains are all usually bargains in your store, especially compared to the costs of meats and cheeses. Similarly, water from your tap is the biggest bargain there is for beverages, so take advantage of it.
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to The Simple Dollar using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Thursday, July 7, 2011
New obesity rates keep going up, but show some leveling out; Oregon 35th mos...
Sent to you by rog via Google Reader:
via Oregon Local News by Tatiana Sanchez, The Oregonian on 7/7/11
A new report released today, "F as in Fat: How Obesity Threatens America's Future," found adult obesity rates increased in 16 states in the past year-they did not decline in any state. Oregon's adult obesity rate is 25.4 percent.Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to Oregon Local News using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Thursday, June 30, 2011
Diet Soda Is Why You're Fat
Sent to you by rog via Google Reader:
via Fast Company by Ariel Schwartz on 6/30/11
Whoops. Diet soda might have no calories, but that doesn't keep it from growing your waistline. A new study finds that diet drinkers might be even worse off than regular soda drinkers.
Diet soda is not, it turns out, a panacea for overeating. But it's not just because ordering a burger, fries, and a diet soda means you're still consuming too many calories; it's because diet soda itself may increase your waistline.
The news comes from a University of Texas study that examined data from 474 participants in the San Antonio Longitudinal Study of Aging, a continuing study of elderly Mexican and European Americans. The result: Diet soda drinkers saw a 70% increase in waist circumference compared with non-drinkers over the course of a decade. People who drank more than two diet sodas a day saw a staggering 500% greater waist circumference compared to non-drinkers.
Part of the problem may be traced back to aspartame, the artificial sweetener used in many diet sodas. According to a study from other researchers at the university, heavy exposure to aspartame may directly increase blood glucose levels, leading to an increase in diabetes risk. "Artificial sweeteners could have the effect of triggering appetite but unlike regular sugars they don't deliver something that will squelch the appetite," explained Sharon Fowler, an obesity researcher who co-authored both studies, in an interview with the Daily Mail. (If this sounds familiar, here's why.)
So what's the solution? Cut down on your soda intake--both diet and regular. And while you're at it, stop driving so much and exercise more at your job. Or get your employer to join Keas, where you'll get rewards, instead of just being scolded.
[Image by Flickr user "Cowboy" Ben Alman]
Reach Ariel Schwartz via Twitter or email.
Related: Your Mom Is Why You're Fat
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to Fast Company using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
In U.S., black members of Adventist Church defy health disparities, study shows
Cool! The dietary factors are likely universal!
Sent to you by rog via Google Reader:
via Adventist News Network by Ansel Oliver on 6/28/11
Health disparities between black Americans and the rest of the United States have been well documented in medical journals. But one study shows that blacks who identify as members of the Seventh-day Adventist Church actually report a better quality of life than the average American.
 |
Researchers point to certain lifestyle behaviors as a possible explanation for the difference. The research was conducted at Loma Linda University as part of the Adventist Religion and Health Study (ARHS), a study of nearly 11,000 Adventists, including more than 3,400 black Adventists.
The findings were drawn from an ARHS survey that included questions from SF-12v2 Physical and Mental Health composite scores, widely recognized among researchers to be accurate measures of quality of life. Examples of questions included are:
--"During the past four weeks, how much did pain interfere with your normal work?"
--"How much time during the past four weeks have you felt downhearted and depressed?"
ARHS results were then compared to results from a nationwide sample of people who took the SF-12v2 survey. Overall, black Adventist study participants reported better physical and mental quality of life than the U.S. norm, in some cases by as much as 4.5 percentage points.
"It is striking that, although in the general population blacks show poorer quality of life on a variety of measures, our results show that black Adventists have a significantly better quality of life than the average American," said Dr. Jerry Lee, principal investigator for ARHS.
"This difference is particularly pronounced in older age groups, who progressively demonstrate increased mental health -- lower depression, more energy, feeling more calm and peaceful -- relative to the general population," Lee said. "This could be a result of the healthy lifestyle choices that are built into the Adventist faith."
Compared to non-Adventist blacks and whites, rates of smoking, drinking, and meat consumption for Adventists were lower, and rates of vegetarianism and water consumption were higher. In addition, about 95 percent of the males and females in the black study cohort attended church weekly or more often, as compared to 30 percent of black males and 50 percent of black females in the General Social Survey -- a survey routinely conducted on a sample of the entire U.S. by the National Opinion Research Center.
Adventists, who advocate temperance, a plant-based diet, and setting aside Saturday for worship and family time, have received much coverage in recent years for their longevity and quality of life.
Loma Linda, California, a city with a high concentration of Adventists, was the only U.S. locale featured in the book The Blue Zones, by Dan Buettner. The book examined five areas of the world where life spans often noticeably exceed the norms. Loma Linda Adventist subjects of the book have been featured on many national TV spots, including a heart surgeon practicing at 94 years old, interviewed on The Oprah Winfrey Show, and a piano teacher giving lessons at 97, interviewed on CNN's Anderson Cooper 360.
ARHS is a sub-study of the Adventist Health Study-2 (AHS-2), a long-term health study of more than 96,000 Adventists, including 26,000 black Adventists, across the U.S. and Canada.
Research shows that lifestyle diseases disproportionately affect blacks. Part of AHS-2's goal has been to determine why this is the case by exploring the links between diet, lifestyle, and disease. Researchers at the study's outset said the results of ARHS would be in important step toward learning practices that may help eliminate health disparities between blacks and the general population.
As analysis of data continues, researchers say they expect more results that will have far-reaching implications for improving the health of the black community.
AHS-2 is conducted by researchers at Loma Linda University School of Public Health. For more information, visit www.adventisthealthstudy.org.
Click HERE for a PDF of a graph with more specific information from the study
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to Adventist News Network using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Bad choices, not aging, pack on the pounds - USATODAY.com
Bad choices, not aging, pack on the pounds
http://usat.ly/mBlbK8
http://usat.ly/mBlbK8
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
The Case For Test-Tube Steaks: Harvesting Artificial Meat Would Save Tons Of...
This sounds udderly disgusting! It's not going to end up on my vegan table for sure! Wow! Wonder what the long-term implications of this will be....
Sent to you by rog via Google Reader:
via Fast Company by Ariel Schwartz on 6/21/11
And so would trading beef for chicken. According to a new study, cultured meat production generates up to 96% fewer greenhouse gas emissions than conventional meat production, though it's still second to poultry in terms of energy efficiency.
Lab-grown meat is going to be on your table someday. It's cheaper than dealing with whole animals, there are none of the ethical issues associated with factory farms, it can help prevent the spread of animal-borne diseases, and according to a new study, cultured meat production generates up to 96% fewer greenhouse gas emissions than conventional meat production. Except for chicken, which is the most energy efficient of all meats. You may be seeing a test-tube steak well before a test-tube chicken breast.
The Stanford and Amsterdam University-authored study, Environmental Impact of Cultured Meat Production, contends that the overall environmental impact of cultured meat production is significantly lower than conventionally produced meat. This is largely because of the greenhouse gas emissions associated with raising livestock (i.e. methane emissions from cow burps and farts), manure management, nitrous oxide from soil, and the conversion of forests to grassland.
In almost all cases, growing animal muscle tissue in vitro makes more sense for the environment than having actual animals. But it requires more energy than conventionally produced poultry, which has relatively few CO2 emissions when conventionally grown and requires less energy than it would to run an in-vitro meat lab. The study's authors argue that cultured poultry production still may make more sense, because the emissions numbers don't take into account that biofuel crops could be put on the land where chicken coops now stand:
Energy input alone does not necessarily provide a sufficient indicator about the energy performance if the opportunity costs of land use are not taken into account. Cultured meat production requires only a fraction of the land area that is used for producing the same mass of conventionally produced poultry meat. Therefore, more land could be used for bioenergy production, and it can be argued that the overall energy efficiency of cultured meat would be more favorable.And since most of the greenhouse gas emissions from cultured meat production come from fuel and electricity use, using renewable energy sources could cut down on emissions even further. There's another (slightly creepy) energy bonus: Cultured meat might require less refrigeration than conventional meat because of a lack of excess bones, fat, and blood.
Large-scale cultured meat production is still far from reality. The study's authors estimate that it would cost $160 million in research to bring artificial meat to mass production. And there is still the cultural acceptance issue to work out--who will actually eat this stuff?
But the study makes an excellent point: "Cultured meat consists of similar muscle tissue to conventionally produced meat, but only the production technique differs. It can also be argued that many current meat production systems are far from natural systems."
Reach Ariel Schwartz via Twitter or email.
[Image: Flickr user FotoosVanRobin]
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to Fast Company using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Sunday, June 12, 2011
Sugar: The Bitter Truth
Sugar: The Bitter Truth
Great information! A little long. Wow! You need to watch.
Friday, June 3, 2011
OHSU research points to high-fat diet as culprit in some birth defects
Wow, mainstream is beginning to get it too! Amazing.
Sent to you by rog via Google Reader:
via The Portland Tribune - News on 6/3/11
The typical high-fat American diet may be responsible for increased stillborns and serious birth defects regardless of whether pregnant women are themselves obese or slender, according to a new animal study at Oregon Health & Science University's National Primate Research Center. The ...Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to The Portland Tribune - News using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Adventist health studies indicate a long, healthy life is no accident
Sent to you by rog via Google Reader:
via Adventist News Network by Ansel Oliver on 5/18/11
People continuously seek the secrets to a long, fulfilling life. As members of a church that has historically emphasized physical health as an important component of spiritual health, we are in a unique position to find answers.
This is the whole purpose of the Adventist Health Studies at Loma Linda University. The first study, conducted from 1976 to 1988, examined 34,000 Adventists in California, establishing firm connections between lifestyle, disease and longevity.
 |
We learned that California Adventists live years longer than non-Adventist Californians: 7.3 years longer for men, 4.4 years for women. We also discovered that five simple behaviors can increase lifespan by about two years each, for a total of 10 years: eating a plant-based diet, never smoking, consuming nuts several times per week, exercising regularly and maintaining a normal weight.
Our second and much larger study, which focuses on cancer, began in 2002 with almost 100,000 subjects in North America. We have not yet received enough data to begin analysis, but we're following up on the clues we learned from past research.
Adventist males in California appear to have a 40 percent reduction in cancer risk; for women the reduction is about 25 percent. While few Adventists smoke, much of this risk reduction appears to be related to factors other than tobacco.
Here are some of the things that we know. Consuming meat appears in many cases to increase the risk of commonly occurring cancers. On the other hand, eating fruits, tomatoes, and legumes (including soy) appears to be protective. Even in less common cancers that are better known for being related to smoking and alcohol, diet may play a significant role in reducing risk.
It can be difficult to prove a link between particular foods and some cancers. But one case where the connection appears to be very real is meat and colon cancer. We've seen that non-vegetarian Adventists have about an 85 percent higher risk of developing this disease than their vegetarian counterparts.
Our past research suggests that eating legumes may protect against colon cancer, but further study is needed. It's also possible that consuming legumes may somewhat counteract the negative effects of eating meat when it comes to colon cancer, but this too needs further exploration.
Another possible connection we've seen is between soymilk consumption and prostate cancer. Our study showed that men who drank soymilk daily had about a 30 percent lower risk than men who never drank it. Additionally, other studies have suggested that eating tomatoes, legumes and dried fruit may be protective.
We discovered a strong connection between bladder cancer and certain behaviors. Being a current smoker increases the risk almost six-fold over people who have never smoked. Even past smokers are more than twice as likely to develop the condition. We also ascertained that meat-eating Adventists had more than double the bladder cancer risk of vegetarians.
Pancreatic cancer, known for being especially devastating, does not appear to be affected by whether a person is vegetarian or not. However, eating legumes, dried fruit and possibly even vegetarian meat substitutes may offer some protection. This is another question we need to explore further.
In the case of breast cancer, there is pretty clear evidence that physical activity relates to lower risk. Among study participants with breast cancer, those who exercised the least frequently were more likely to be diagnosed at an earlier age.
Beyond cancer, we have discovered interesting connections in the realm of cardiovascular conditions and diabetes. When it comes to heart attacks, blood lipids, diabetes and high blood pressure, vegetarians have the clear advantage and vegans fare even better.
A big reason is that vegetarian Adventists are thinner. The average Adventist woman eating a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet weighs 19 pounds less than a non-vegetarian. A vegan woman weighs 34 pounds less than a meat eater. Vegetarian men weigh 16 pounds less than meat-eaters, and vegan men weigh 32 fewer pounds.
This can make the difference between being healthy or being overweight. In a nation with an obesity epidemic, this difference is striking and should perhaps influence doctors to advocate for plant-based diets.
It isn't exactly news to say that diet can contribute to or prevent heart-related conditions. But it might be surprising just how much of a difference it makes.
Adventist men who eat meat are about twice as likely to die of a heart attack than their vegetarian peers. The difference is even more pronounced in women, but in their case, it tapers off considerably during their elderly years.
Which plant foods are consumed also makes a big difference. We were the first researchers to notice that eating small quantities of nuts at least five times per week cuts heart attack risk in half. We, along with other researchers, have also noted that eating whole grains is protective against heart disease, too. People who eat whole-grain bread are roughly 50 percent less likely to have a heart attack than those who choose white bread.
In the end, death is inevitable. And Seventh-day Adventists die of the same causes as everyone else. But they die later. Some might think the extra years are feeble ones. They ask, "Why would you want to live longer?" But we have also measured quality of life related to physical and mental health. At virtually every age, the bottom line is that Adventists score better.
Adventist Health Studies would never receive grant funding from the United States' National Institutes of Health just to benefit Adventists -- we believe the Adventist experience will benefit all Americans and hopefully the global community. But as our understanding of health continues to grow, we should be the first to take full advantage of the knowledge we gain and live as examples to others.
--Dr. Gary Fraser is director of the Adventist Health Study, professor of medicine, and professor of epidemiology at Loma Linda University
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to Adventist News Network using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)