Ω
A program which combines interval training and healthy eating practices seems to be perfectly indicated for those suffering from obesity, according to the results of a new study from the Montreal Hearth Institute's centre for preventive medicine and physical activity (ÉPIC Centre). Results of the study were announced at the National Obesity Summit, currently taking place in Montreal.
Within the framework of this study, researchers analyzed the track record of 62 participants in Kilo-Actif, a 9-month program intended for obesity sufferers that focuses on weight loss and maintenance. The study showed significant improvements in participants' body mass, waist circumference, body mass index and effort capacity. The results are especially encouraging because on average participants lost 5.5% of their body mass, reduced their waist circumference by 5.15% and increased their effort capacity by 15%. Beyond weight loss, participants also saw a 7% decrease in bad cholesterol (LDL) as well as an 8% increase in good cholesterol (HDL).
Offered at ÉPIC Centre and overseen by physicians, kinesiologists and nutritionists, Kilo-Actif is a program which aims at modifying eating habits and promoting an active lifestyle through education on healthy practices. During the course of the program, participants commit to taking part each week in two or three supervised training sessions of 60 minutes each. Participants are also invited to five face-to-face meetings and two group meetings with a dietitian where the basis of the Mediterranean diet and nutritional rules are explained.
"It has been clearly demonstrated that obesity increases the risk of health problems, particularly of cardiovascular disease, Type 2 diabetes, stroke, hypertension and certain types of cancer," explains Dr. Martin Juneau, Director of Prevention at the Montreal Heart Institute and Director of ÉPIC Centre. "A program like Kilo-Actif, which combines interval training with healthy eating, is therefore perfectly indicated because we know that a decrease in body mass can lower the risk factors associated with cardiovascular disease."
"Kilo-Actif's success is largely based on the adoption of an interval training program," adds Valérie Guilbault, an ÉPIC Centre kinesiologist who oversaw the training of the participants. "It is proven that, compared to moderate-intensity continuous training, interval training is more appreciated by participants. This type of training is also more effective, because alternating between short periods of intense effort and rest periods allows for a longer training time."
Training as a fun activity
Inactive for several years because of health troubles, Marie-Josée Desjardins had difficulty just carrying out regular everyday activities, like going up stairs or doing her shopping. Determined to take charge of her life, she decided to join the Kilo-Actif program. Two years later and weighing 40 pounds less, she does not want to go back to the way things were because she can't imagine living without that great sense of well-being she feels today. "Kilo-Actif not only gave me the discipline, but also the taste for training. Now, I can't last the week without putting in at least three high intensity sessions during that time," she explains.
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Monday, April 25, 2011
Reasonable quantities of red pepper may help curb appetite
Ω
Spicing up your daily diet with some red pepper can curb appetite, especially for those who don't normally eat the popular spice, according to research from Purdue University.
"We found that consuming red pepper can help manage appetite and burn more calories after a meal, especially for individuals who do not consume the spice regularly," said Richard Mattes, distinguished professor of foods and nutrition who collaborated with doctoral student Mary-Jon Ludy. "This finding should be considered a piece of the puzzle because the idea that one small change will reverse the obesity epidemic is simply not true. However, if a number of small changes are added together, they may be meaningful in terms of weight management. Dietary changes that don't require great effort to implement, like sprinkling red pepper on your meal, may be sustainable and beneficial in the long run, especially when paired with exercise and healthy eating."
Other studies have found that capsaicin, the component that gives chili peppers their heat, can reduce hunger and increase energy expenditure - burning calories. The amounts tested, however, were not realistic for most people in the U. S. population, Mattes said.
The current study measured the spice's effects using quantities of red pepper - 1 gram or half a teaspoon - that are acceptable for many consumers. Other studies also have looked at consumption via a capsule, but Ludy and Mattes' study demonstrated that tasting the red pepper may optimize its effects. The findings are published in Physiology & Behavior.
This study used ordinary dried, ground cayenne red pepper. Cayenne is a chili pepper, which is among the most commonly consumed spices in the world. Most, but not all, chili peppers contain capsaicin.
Twenty-five non-overweight people - 13 who liked spicy food and 12 who did not - participated in the six-week study. The preferred level of pepper for each group was determined in advance, and those who did not like red pepper preferred 0.3 grams compared to regular spice users who preferred 1.8 grams. In general, red pepper consumption did increase core body temperature and burn more calories through natural energy expenditure.
This study found that those who did not consume red pepper regularly experienced a decrease of hunger, especially for fatty, salty and sweet foods.
"The appetite responses were different between those who liked red pepper and those who did not, suggesting that when the stimulus is unfamiliar it has a greater effect. Once it becomes familiar to people, it loses its efficacy. The finding that there is a difference between users and non-users is novel and requires further study to determine how long it will be effective and how to adjust the diet to improve continuous effectiveness."
The failure to account for individual differences in liking the burn of chili peppers may explain why some previous studies varied on capsaicin's impact on appetite suppression and thermogenic response, which is an increase in body heat produced when digesting food.
Mattes said the findings also show that red pepper should be consumed in non-capsule form because the taste - the sensory experience - maximizes the digestive process.
"That burn in your mouth is responsible for that effect," he said. "It turns out you get a more robust effect if you include the sensory part because the burn contributes to a rise in body temperature, energy expenditure and appetite control."
Mattes, who specializes in taste and directs Purdue's Ingestive Behavior Research Center, studies the role taste plays in feeding and digestion.
"Taste works on two very different levels," he said. "First, it determines the palatability of foods, and that influences food choice. Second, it influences physiology, so it alters how you digest foods and the efficiency with which you absorb the nutrients from them and use them throughout the body."
Spicing up your daily diet with some red pepper can curb appetite, especially for those who don't normally eat the popular spice, according to research from Purdue University.
"We found that consuming red pepper can help manage appetite and burn more calories after a meal, especially for individuals who do not consume the spice regularly," said Richard Mattes, distinguished professor of foods and nutrition who collaborated with doctoral student Mary-Jon Ludy. "This finding should be considered a piece of the puzzle because the idea that one small change will reverse the obesity epidemic is simply not true. However, if a number of small changes are added together, they may be meaningful in terms of weight management. Dietary changes that don't require great effort to implement, like sprinkling red pepper on your meal, may be sustainable and beneficial in the long run, especially when paired with exercise and healthy eating."
Other studies have found that capsaicin, the component that gives chili peppers their heat, can reduce hunger and increase energy expenditure - burning calories. The amounts tested, however, were not realistic for most people in the U. S. population, Mattes said.
The current study measured the spice's effects using quantities of red pepper - 1 gram or half a teaspoon - that are acceptable for many consumers. Other studies also have looked at consumption via a capsule, but Ludy and Mattes' study demonstrated that tasting the red pepper may optimize its effects. The findings are published in Physiology & Behavior.
This study used ordinary dried, ground cayenne red pepper. Cayenne is a chili pepper, which is among the most commonly consumed spices in the world. Most, but not all, chili peppers contain capsaicin.
Twenty-five non-overweight people - 13 who liked spicy food and 12 who did not - participated in the six-week study. The preferred level of pepper for each group was determined in advance, and those who did not like red pepper preferred 0.3 grams compared to regular spice users who preferred 1.8 grams. In general, red pepper consumption did increase core body temperature and burn more calories through natural energy expenditure.
This study found that those who did not consume red pepper regularly experienced a decrease of hunger, especially for fatty, salty and sweet foods.
"The appetite responses were different between those who liked red pepper and those who did not, suggesting that when the stimulus is unfamiliar it has a greater effect. Once it becomes familiar to people, it loses its efficacy. The finding that there is a difference between users and non-users is novel and requires further study to determine how long it will be effective and how to adjust the diet to improve continuous effectiveness."
The failure to account for individual differences in liking the burn of chili peppers may explain why some previous studies varied on capsaicin's impact on appetite suppression and thermogenic response, which is an increase in body heat produced when digesting food.
Mattes said the findings also show that red pepper should be consumed in non-capsule form because the taste - the sensory experience - maximizes the digestive process.
"That burn in your mouth is responsible for that effect," he said. "It turns out you get a more robust effect if you include the sensory part because the burn contributes to a rise in body temperature, energy expenditure and appetite control."
Mattes, who specializes in taste and directs Purdue's Ingestive Behavior Research Center, studies the role taste plays in feeding and digestion.
"Taste works on two very different levels," he said. "First, it determines the palatability of foods, and that influences food choice. Second, it influences physiology, so it alters how you digest foods and the efficiency with which you absorb the nutrients from them and use them throughout the body."
Saturday, April 23, 2011
Whole Grains, Fiber, Protein and Almonds Help Manage Hunger Pains
Ω
In the April 2011 issue of Food Technology magazine, published by the Institute of Food Technologists (IFT), author Linda Milo Ohr examines some of the options available for increasing satiety. These ingredients are reported to increase the feeling of fullness, leading to reduced food intake and curbing overeating.
“Although it may affect people at different times throughout the day, reducing or satisfying those hunger pains is a common concern for those either trying to lose weight or maintain a certain weight,” Ohr writes. “Satiety, or the feeling of being full, is a hot topic addressed by the food industry in recent years.”
Satiety-increasing foods include:
Whole grains, such as oats, barley, rye and corn. According to research cited in the article, the high-volume, low-energy density and the relatively lower palatability of whole-grain foods may promote satiation. For example, researchers found that eating rye at breakfast, whether through pure rye bran or sifted rye flour, suppressed appetite for the next few hours better than wheat.
Fiber, such as resistant starch and oligosaccharides. Resistant starch escapes digestion in the small intestine of healthy individuals and delivers the benefits of both soluble and insoluble fiber. The article cites research that found the quantity of resistant starch in foods correlates with blood glucose response and reduced food intake after two hours. Oligosaccharides are complex carbohydrates that are found in beans and legumes, and they help maintain stable blood glucose levels when eaten as part of a meal. Like resistant starch, they are not digested by the small intestine and end up being metabolized and expelled from the large intestine.
Protein. The author cites a study by Solae of St. Louis that found consumers understand the important role protein plays in helping to manage hunger, and they are interested in protein-enhanced versions of everyday foods such as soup, yogurt and breakfast cereal. Protein choices for satiety include soy, which animal studies have shown stimulates the release of cholecystokinin (CCK), a hormone that plays a role in appetite suppression; whey, which stimulates several gastrointestinal hormones that are thought to regulate appetite control in the brain; egg, which provides protein in the form of readily available, essential amino acids; and potato protein extract, which has shown promise for optimal satiety by enabling the release of CCK.
Almonds. An ounce of almonds contains 6 grams of protein and are often suggested as snacks by popular weight loss programs because of their role in satiety. A 2009 study found that chewing almonds slowly can affect satiety, as well as affect nutrient absorption.
In the April 2011 issue of Food Technology magazine, published by the Institute of Food Technologists (IFT), author Linda Milo Ohr examines some of the options available for increasing satiety. These ingredients are reported to increase the feeling of fullness, leading to reduced food intake and curbing overeating.
“Although it may affect people at different times throughout the day, reducing or satisfying those hunger pains is a common concern for those either trying to lose weight or maintain a certain weight,” Ohr writes. “Satiety, or the feeling of being full, is a hot topic addressed by the food industry in recent years.”
Satiety-increasing foods include:
Whole grains, such as oats, barley, rye and corn. According to research cited in the article, the high-volume, low-energy density and the relatively lower palatability of whole-grain foods may promote satiation. For example, researchers found that eating rye at breakfast, whether through pure rye bran or sifted rye flour, suppressed appetite for the next few hours better than wheat.
Fiber, such as resistant starch and oligosaccharides. Resistant starch escapes digestion in the small intestine of healthy individuals and delivers the benefits of both soluble and insoluble fiber. The article cites research that found the quantity of resistant starch in foods correlates with blood glucose response and reduced food intake after two hours. Oligosaccharides are complex carbohydrates that are found in beans and legumes, and they help maintain stable blood glucose levels when eaten as part of a meal. Like resistant starch, they are not digested by the small intestine and end up being metabolized and expelled from the large intestine.
Protein. The author cites a study by Solae of St. Louis that found consumers understand the important role protein plays in helping to manage hunger, and they are interested in protein-enhanced versions of everyday foods such as soup, yogurt and breakfast cereal. Protein choices for satiety include soy, which animal studies have shown stimulates the release of cholecystokinin (CCK), a hormone that plays a role in appetite suppression; whey, which stimulates several gastrointestinal hormones that are thought to regulate appetite control in the brain; egg, which provides protein in the form of readily available, essential amino acids; and potato protein extract, which has shown promise for optimal satiety by enabling the release of CCK.
Almonds. An ounce of almonds contains 6 grams of protein and are often suggested as snacks by popular weight loss programs because of their role in satiety. A 2009 study found that chewing almonds slowly can affect satiety, as well as affect nutrient absorption.
Thursday, April 21, 2011
Carriers with higher omega-3 fatty acid intakes tended to weigh less than carriers who consumed little or no omega-3 fatty acids
Eating more n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids, commonly known as omega-3 fatty acids, may help carriers of a genetic variant on the perilipin 4 (PLIN4) gene locus lose weight more efficiently. Based on this observation, researchers at the Jean Mayer Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging (USDA HNRCA) at Tufts University identified a microRNA (miRNA) which may elucidate the underlying biological mechanism.
Led by Jose M. Ordovas, PhD, director of the Nutrition and Genomics Laboratory at the USDA HNRCA, researchers genotyped seven single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), also known as gene variants, from men and women of mostly white European ancestry enrolled in the Genetics of Lipid Lowering Drugs and Diet Network (GOLDN) study and the Framingham Offspring Study. Carriers of the gene variant tended to weigh more and exhibit higher body mass index (BMI), which would increase their risk of becoming obese. Yet carriers with higher omega-3 fatty acid intakes tended to weigh less than carriers who consumed little or no omega-3 fatty acids.
Ordovas believes this to be the first example of a genetic variant that creates a miRNA binding site that influences obesity-related traits through a gene-diet interaction. Although further research is necessary, the findings suggest that miRNA activity is a possible target for dietary-based weight-loss therapies for obesity. The results were published online April 20 by the journal PLoS ONE.
“We tested for miRNA activity after seeing significant interactions between the gene variant, characteristics of obesity, and omega-3 fatty acid intake in our meta-analysis in two large populations,” says Ordovas, who is also a professor at the Friedman School of Nutrition and Science Policy at Tufts. “When a gene variant is that informative, you get a strong sense that it may be functional.”
The family of perilipin genes controls the release of perilipin proteins which dictate how fat is stored and broken down in the body. The current study adds to a body of research of the perilipin gene family and its role in obesity risk, yet most of the work focuses on perilipin 1 (PLIN1). “In the past, studies have shown gene variants in the PLIN1 gene locus are associated with obesity risk and appear to be regulated by polyunsaturated fat. It is encouraging that we saw both loci expressed in similar ways,” Ordovas adds.
Omega-3 fatty acids are polyunsaturated fats mostly found in fatty fish such as tuna, salmon and sardines. The recently-issued 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans say that “(f)at intake should emphasize monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats.”
Led by Jose M. Ordovas, PhD, director of the Nutrition and Genomics Laboratory at the USDA HNRCA, researchers genotyped seven single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), also known as gene variants, from men and women of mostly white European ancestry enrolled in the Genetics of Lipid Lowering Drugs and Diet Network (GOLDN) study and the Framingham Offspring Study. Carriers of the gene variant tended to weigh more and exhibit higher body mass index (BMI), which would increase their risk of becoming obese. Yet carriers with higher omega-3 fatty acid intakes tended to weigh less than carriers who consumed little or no omega-3 fatty acids.
Ordovas believes this to be the first example of a genetic variant that creates a miRNA binding site that influences obesity-related traits through a gene-diet interaction. Although further research is necessary, the findings suggest that miRNA activity is a possible target for dietary-based weight-loss therapies for obesity. The results were published online April 20 by the journal PLoS ONE.
“We tested for miRNA activity after seeing significant interactions between the gene variant, characteristics of obesity, and omega-3 fatty acid intake in our meta-analysis in two large populations,” says Ordovas, who is also a professor at the Friedman School of Nutrition and Science Policy at Tufts. “When a gene variant is that informative, you get a strong sense that it may be functional.”
The family of perilipin genes controls the release of perilipin proteins which dictate how fat is stored and broken down in the body. The current study adds to a body of research of the perilipin gene family and its role in obesity risk, yet most of the work focuses on perilipin 1 (PLIN1). “In the past, studies have shown gene variants in the PLIN1 gene locus are associated with obesity risk and appear to be regulated by polyunsaturated fat. It is encouraging that we saw both loci expressed in similar ways,” Ordovas adds.
Omega-3 fatty acids are polyunsaturated fats mostly found in fatty fish such as tuna, salmon and sardines. The recently-issued 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans say that “(f)at intake should emphasize monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats.”
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Diet Plus Exercise Is Better for Weight Loss than Either One Alone
Ω
Everyone knows that eating a low-fat, low-calorie diet and getting regular exercise helps shed pounds, but a new study led by researchers at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center has found that when it comes to losing weight and body fat, diet and exercise are most effective when done together as compared to either strategy alone.
The results of this randomized trial, led by Anne McTiernan, M.D., Ph.D., director of the Prevention Center and a member of the Hutchinson Center’s Public Health Sciences Division, were published online April 14 in Obesity.
The majority of women in the study who both improved their diet and exercised regularly shed an average of nearly 11 percent of their starting weight, which exceeded the study’s goal of a 10 percent or more reduction in body weight._“We were surprised at how successful the women were,” McTiernan said. “Even though this degree of weight loss may not bring an obese individual to a normal weight, losing even this modest amount of weight can bring health benefits such as a reduced risk of diabetes, heart disease and cancer.”
The year-long intervention involved 439 overweight-to-obese, sedentary, postmenopausal Seattle-area women, ages 50 to 75, who were randomly assigned to one of four groups:_• exercise only (goal: 45 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous aerobic exercise per day, five days a week, including three days at the Hutchison Center’s exercise facility);_• diet only (goal: 1,200 to 2,000 calories a day, depending on starting weight, and fewer than 30 percent of daily calories from fat);_• exercise and diet (with the same goals as above); and_• no intervention.
“Although numerous studies have examined the effect of lifestyle interventions on weight, few have focused on postmenopausal women, a group that experiences particularly high rates of overweight and obesity,” McTiernan said.
At the end of the intervention, the researchers found that the women in the exercise-only group lost, on average, 2.4 percent of their starting weight (with a mean weight loss of 4.4 pounds) as compared to an average weight loss of 8.5 percent among women in the diet-only group (with a mean weight loss of 15.8 pounds). The greatest weight loss was achieved by women who both changed their diet and exercised regularly; these women shed an average of 10.8 percent of their starting weight (with a mean weight loss of 19.8 pounds). Two-thirds of the women in this group achieved the study goal of losing at least 10 percent of their starting weight.
Body-mass index (height-to-weight ratio), waist circumference and percentage of body fat were also significantly reduced among the three intervention groups. The women who were assigned to the nonintervention control group, who did not change their diet or activity level, on average lost less than a pound – a statistically insignificant decrease.
“This study shows that you get the biggest bang for your buck by combining a healthy weight-loss diet – which in this case meant reducing calories by cutting fat intake and boosting the consumption of low-calorie foods – with regular, moderate-intensity aerobic exercise,” McTiernan said. “You don’t need to be an athlete; walking, biking or gym cardio machines all work well. Start slowly and gradually increase to 45 minutes of activity a day, more if you are able.”
In addition to promoting weight loss and preventing weight gain over time, regular exercise helps with balance, strength and fitness. “This helps older people keep active overall, which has been shown to prolong a healthy life,” McTiernan said.
The study also found that the women who lost the most weight and body fat kept a food journal, writing down everything they ate and drank with the exception of water and no-calorie drinks. Other strategies associated with the most successful weight loss included preparing meals at home and eating out less often at restaurants. “Doing your own cooking gives you the most control over calories,” McTiernan said.
The combined diet-plus-exercise arm of the study followed the current nutrition and physical activity recommendations by the National Institutes of Health Obesity Education Initiative Expert Panel. “Our clinical trial supports these recommendations,” McTiernan said.
Despite the overwhelming evidence for the benefits of lifestyle-induced weight loss, there are still major barriers to implementing these programs, the authors wrote. To this end, McTiernan and colleagues are conducting ongoing follow up of these study participants to try to determine factors – both psychological and behavioral – that are associated with long-term weight-loss maintenance.
“Identifying factors that help women not only lose weight but keep it off long term will help steer the development and implementation of obesity-treatment programs that have the greatest promise to impact public health,” she said.
Everyone knows that eating a low-fat, low-calorie diet and getting regular exercise helps shed pounds, but a new study led by researchers at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center has found that when it comes to losing weight and body fat, diet and exercise are most effective when done together as compared to either strategy alone.
The results of this randomized trial, led by Anne McTiernan, M.D., Ph.D., director of the Prevention Center and a member of the Hutchinson Center’s Public Health Sciences Division, were published online April 14 in Obesity.
The majority of women in the study who both improved their diet and exercised regularly shed an average of nearly 11 percent of their starting weight, which exceeded the study’s goal of a 10 percent or more reduction in body weight._“We were surprised at how successful the women were,” McTiernan said. “Even though this degree of weight loss may not bring an obese individual to a normal weight, losing even this modest amount of weight can bring health benefits such as a reduced risk of diabetes, heart disease and cancer.”
The year-long intervention involved 439 overweight-to-obese, sedentary, postmenopausal Seattle-area women, ages 50 to 75, who were randomly assigned to one of four groups:_• exercise only (goal: 45 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous aerobic exercise per day, five days a week, including three days at the Hutchison Center’s exercise facility);_• diet only (goal: 1,200 to 2,000 calories a day, depending on starting weight, and fewer than 30 percent of daily calories from fat);_• exercise and diet (with the same goals as above); and_• no intervention.
“Although numerous studies have examined the effect of lifestyle interventions on weight, few have focused on postmenopausal women, a group that experiences particularly high rates of overweight and obesity,” McTiernan said.
At the end of the intervention, the researchers found that the women in the exercise-only group lost, on average, 2.4 percent of their starting weight (with a mean weight loss of 4.4 pounds) as compared to an average weight loss of 8.5 percent among women in the diet-only group (with a mean weight loss of 15.8 pounds). The greatest weight loss was achieved by women who both changed their diet and exercised regularly; these women shed an average of 10.8 percent of their starting weight (with a mean weight loss of 19.8 pounds). Two-thirds of the women in this group achieved the study goal of losing at least 10 percent of their starting weight.
Body-mass index (height-to-weight ratio), waist circumference and percentage of body fat were also significantly reduced among the three intervention groups. The women who were assigned to the nonintervention control group, who did not change their diet or activity level, on average lost less than a pound – a statistically insignificant decrease.
“This study shows that you get the biggest bang for your buck by combining a healthy weight-loss diet – which in this case meant reducing calories by cutting fat intake and boosting the consumption of low-calorie foods – with regular, moderate-intensity aerobic exercise,” McTiernan said. “You don’t need to be an athlete; walking, biking or gym cardio machines all work well. Start slowly and gradually increase to 45 minutes of activity a day, more if you are able.”
In addition to promoting weight loss and preventing weight gain over time, regular exercise helps with balance, strength and fitness. “This helps older people keep active overall, which has been shown to prolong a healthy life,” McTiernan said.
The study also found that the women who lost the most weight and body fat kept a food journal, writing down everything they ate and drank with the exception of water and no-calorie drinks. Other strategies associated with the most successful weight loss included preparing meals at home and eating out less often at restaurants. “Doing your own cooking gives you the most control over calories,” McTiernan said.
The combined diet-plus-exercise arm of the study followed the current nutrition and physical activity recommendations by the National Institutes of Health Obesity Education Initiative Expert Panel. “Our clinical trial supports these recommendations,” McTiernan said.
Despite the overwhelming evidence for the benefits of lifestyle-induced weight loss, there are still major barriers to implementing these programs, the authors wrote. To this end, McTiernan and colleagues are conducting ongoing follow up of these study participants to try to determine factors – both psychological and behavioral – that are associated with long-term weight-loss maintenance.
“Identifying factors that help women not only lose weight but keep it off long term will help steer the development and implementation of obesity-treatment programs that have the greatest promise to impact public health,” she said.
A proven tool for losing weight: Reading food labels
Diet and exercise have long been the top two elements of effective weight loss. Now add a third: reading the labels on packaged foods.
Washington State University Economist Bidisha Mandal has found that middle-aged Americans who want to lose weight and who take up the label-reading habit are more likely to lose weight than those who don't. In some cases, label reading is even more effective than exercise.
"I'm finding that reading labels is useful," said Mandal, an assistant professor in the WSU School of Economic Sciences. "People who are trying to lose weight want to know what they're buying and preparing and many do better if they use labels to find what they need to know."
Writing in the latest Journal of Consumer Affairs, Mandal analyzes the responses of more than 3,700 people who regularly took a national survey asking about their label-reading habits while attempting to lose or control their weight. Among her findings:
• If you want to lose weight, you have a better chance of success if you read a food label when you first buy a product.
• People are more successful at losing weight when they add label reading to their exercise program.
• Label readers who do not exercise have a slightly greater chance of losing weight than those who exercise but do not read labels.
• Women are more likely to read food labels when they buy a product for the first time, possibly because they are responsible for buying food and cooking. They are also more successful than men in losing weight.
• In a case of good news and bad news, Mandal found that overweight and obese label readers are more likely to lose weight. But only a little more than one-third lost weight, while nearly half gained weight. This confirms what many middle-aged people know—losing weight is hard and often unsuccessful. But Mandal found overweight and obese people at least have a better chance if they read the label.
The analysis underscores the value of the U.S. Nutrition Labeling and Education Act, which has required standardized nutrition facts on packaged foods since 1994, Mandal said. She adds that the findings build the case for posting nutritional information on vending machines and in many restaurants, as planned under the new federal health care reform bill.
Washington State University Economist Bidisha Mandal has found that middle-aged Americans who want to lose weight and who take up the label-reading habit are more likely to lose weight than those who don't. In some cases, label reading is even more effective than exercise.
"I'm finding that reading labels is useful," said Mandal, an assistant professor in the WSU School of Economic Sciences. "People who are trying to lose weight want to know what they're buying and preparing and many do better if they use labels to find what they need to know."
Writing in the latest Journal of Consumer Affairs, Mandal analyzes the responses of more than 3,700 people who regularly took a national survey asking about their label-reading habits while attempting to lose or control their weight. Among her findings:
• If you want to lose weight, you have a better chance of success if you read a food label when you first buy a product.
• People are more successful at losing weight when they add label reading to their exercise program.
• Label readers who do not exercise have a slightly greater chance of losing weight than those who exercise but do not read labels.
• Women are more likely to read food labels when they buy a product for the first time, possibly because they are responsible for buying food and cooking. They are also more successful than men in losing weight.
• In a case of good news and bad news, Mandal found that overweight and obese label readers are more likely to lose weight. But only a little more than one-third lost weight, while nearly half gained weight. This confirms what many middle-aged people know—losing weight is hard and often unsuccessful. But Mandal found overweight and obese people at least have a better chance if they read the label.
The analysis underscores the value of the U.S. Nutrition Labeling and Education Act, which has required standardized nutrition facts on packaged foods since 1994, Mandal said. She adds that the findings build the case for posting nutritional information on vending machines and in many restaurants, as planned under the new federal health care reform bill.
Limiting carbs, not calories, reduces liver fat faster
Curbing carbohydrates is more effective than cutting calories for individuals who want to quickly reduce the amount of fat in their liver, report UT Southwestern Medical Center researchers.
Although the study was not designed to determine which diet was more effective for losing weight, both the low-calorie dieters and the low-carbohydrate dieters lost an average of 10 pounds.
"What this study tells us is that if your doctor says that you need to reduce the amount of fat in your liver, you can do something within a month," said Dr. Jeffrey Browning, assistant professor of internal medicine at UT Southwestern and the study's lead author.
The results, available online and in an upcoming issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, could have implications for treating numerous diseases including diabetes, insulin resistance and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, or NAFLD. The disease, characterized by high levels of triglycerides in the liver, affects as many as one-third of American adults. It can lead to liver inflammation, cirrhosis and liver cancer.
For the study, researchers assigned 18 participants with NAFLD to eat either a low-carbohydrate or a low-calorie diet for 14 days.
The participants assigned to the low-carb diet limited their carbohydrate intake to less than 20 grams a day – the equivalent of a small banana or a half-cup of egg noodles – for the first seven days. For the final seven days, they switched to frozen meals prepared by UT Southwestern's Clinical and Translational Research Center (CTRC) kitchen that matched their individual food preferences, carbohydrate intake and energy needs.
Those assigned to the low-calorie diet continued their regular diet and kept a food diary for the four days preceding the study. The CTRC kitchen then used these individual records to prepare all meals during the 14-day study. Researchers limited the total number of calories to roughly 1,200 a day for the female participants and 1,500 a day for the males.
After two weeks, researchers used advanced imaging techniques to analyze the amount of liver fat in each individual. They found that the study participants on the low-carb diet lost more liver fat.
Dr. Browning cautioned that the findings do not explain why participants on the low-carb diet saw a greater reduction in liver fat, and that they should not be extrapolated beyond the two-week period of study.
"This is not a long-term study, and I don't think that low-carb diets are fundamentally better than low-fat ones," he said. "Our approach is likely to be only of short-term benefit because at some point the benefits of weight loss alone trounce any benefits derived from manipulating dietary macronutrients such as calories and carbohydrates.
"Weight loss, regardless of the mechanism, is currently the most effective way to reduce liver fat."
Although the study was not designed to determine which diet was more effective for losing weight, both the low-calorie dieters and the low-carbohydrate dieters lost an average of 10 pounds.
"What this study tells us is that if your doctor says that you need to reduce the amount of fat in your liver, you can do something within a month," said Dr. Jeffrey Browning, assistant professor of internal medicine at UT Southwestern and the study's lead author.
The results, available online and in an upcoming issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, could have implications for treating numerous diseases including diabetes, insulin resistance and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, or NAFLD. The disease, characterized by high levels of triglycerides in the liver, affects as many as one-third of American adults. It can lead to liver inflammation, cirrhosis and liver cancer.
For the study, researchers assigned 18 participants with NAFLD to eat either a low-carbohydrate or a low-calorie diet for 14 days.
The participants assigned to the low-carb diet limited their carbohydrate intake to less than 20 grams a day – the equivalent of a small banana or a half-cup of egg noodles – for the first seven days. For the final seven days, they switched to frozen meals prepared by UT Southwestern's Clinical and Translational Research Center (CTRC) kitchen that matched their individual food preferences, carbohydrate intake and energy needs.
Those assigned to the low-calorie diet continued their regular diet and kept a food diary for the four days preceding the study. The CTRC kitchen then used these individual records to prepare all meals during the 14-day study. Researchers limited the total number of calories to roughly 1,200 a day for the female participants and 1,500 a day for the males.
After two weeks, researchers used advanced imaging techniques to analyze the amount of liver fat in each individual. They found that the study participants on the low-carb diet lost more liver fat.
Dr. Browning cautioned that the findings do not explain why participants on the low-carb diet saw a greater reduction in liver fat, and that they should not be extrapolated beyond the two-week period of study.
"This is not a long-term study, and I don't think that low-carb diets are fundamentally better than low-fat ones," he said. "Our approach is likely to be only of short-term benefit because at some point the benefits of weight loss alone trounce any benefits derived from manipulating dietary macronutrients such as calories and carbohydrates.
"Weight loss, regardless of the mechanism, is currently the most effective way to reduce liver fat."
Does seeing overweight people make us eat more?
Consumers will choose and eat more indulgent food after they see someone who is overweight—unless they consciously think about their health goals, according to a new study in the Journal of Consumer Research.
"Why do people often think back on a pleasant evening with friends and realize that they ate more and worse food than they wish they had?" ask authors Margaret C. Campbell (Leeds School of Business) and Gina S. Mohr (University of Colorado, Boulder). If any of those friends carry a few extra pounds, just being in their presence could trigger what the authors call a "negative stereotype."
The research suggests that merely seeing someone who is strongly associated with an undesirable behavior leads to surprising increases in the behavior. "Seeing someone overweight leads to a temporary decrease in a person's own felt commitment to his or her health goal," the authors explain.
In one study, researchers asked people who were walking through a lobby if they would take a quick survey. The surveys had photos of an overweight person, a person of normal weight, or a lamp. After completing the survey, the researchers asked respondents to help themselves from a bowl of candy as a thank you. "People who completed the survey that included a picture of someone who was overweight took more candies on average than people who saw either of the other two pictures," the authors write.
In subsequent studies, people who were invited to do a cookie taste test ate twice as many cookies or candy after seeing someone who was overweight. This was true even if the participants had a goal to maintain a healthy weight and believed that cookies and candy can lead to weight problems.
Two main strategies served to counteract people's tendency to overeat when in the presence of overweight individuals: thinking about health goals and being reminded of the link between eating and becoming overweight.
Because weight problems can spread through social networks, the authors have advice for people who are concerned about overindulging. "Thinking about personal health goals and reminding oneself of the undesirable effects of eating indulgent food at the time of possible consumption can help people avoid eating too much," the authors conclude.
"Why do people often think back on a pleasant evening with friends and realize that they ate more and worse food than they wish they had?" ask authors Margaret C. Campbell (Leeds School of Business) and Gina S. Mohr (University of Colorado, Boulder). If any of those friends carry a few extra pounds, just being in their presence could trigger what the authors call a "negative stereotype."
The research suggests that merely seeing someone who is strongly associated with an undesirable behavior leads to surprising increases in the behavior. "Seeing someone overweight leads to a temporary decrease in a person's own felt commitment to his or her health goal," the authors explain.
In one study, researchers asked people who were walking through a lobby if they would take a quick survey. The surveys had photos of an overweight person, a person of normal weight, or a lamp. After completing the survey, the researchers asked respondents to help themselves from a bowl of candy as a thank you. "People who completed the survey that included a picture of someone who was overweight took more candies on average than people who saw either of the other two pictures," the authors write.
In subsequent studies, people who were invited to do a cookie taste test ate twice as many cookies or candy after seeing someone who was overweight. This was true even if the participants had a goal to maintain a healthy weight and believed that cookies and candy can lead to weight problems.
Two main strategies served to counteract people's tendency to overeat when in the presence of overweight individuals: thinking about health goals and being reminded of the link between eating and becoming overweight.
Because weight problems can spread through social networks, the authors have advice for people who are concerned about overindulging. "Thinking about personal health goals and reminding oneself of the undesirable effects of eating indulgent food at the time of possible consumption can help people avoid eating too much," the authors conclude.
Why do hopeful consumers make healthier choices than happy ones?
Happy people are more likely to eat candy bars, whereas hopeful people choose fruit, according to a new study in the Journal of Consumer Research. That's because when people feel hope, they're thinking about the future.
"Most of us are aware that we often fall victim to emotional eating, but how is it that we might choose unhealthy or healthy snacks when we're feeling good?" write authors Karen Page Winterich (Pennsylvania State University) and Kelly L. Haws (Texas A&M University).
Because previous research has explored how feeling sad leads to eating bad, the authors focused on the complicated relationship between positive emotions and food consumption. "We demonstrate the importance of the time frame on which the positive emotion focuses and find that positive emotions focusing on the future decrease unhealthy food consumption in the present," the authors write.
To understand why someone who is feeling positive would be more likely to choose a candy bar versus a piece of fruit, the authors teased out the difference between positive feelings that arise from thinking about the past or the present (pride and happiness) and hope, which is a more future-oriented emotion.
In the authors' first study, hopeful participants consumed fewer M&Ms than people who experienced happiness. In a second study, the authors found that consumers who were more focused on the past chose unhealthy snacks, even if they felt hope. In the third study, the researchers shifted the time frame of the positive emotion (having participants feel hopeful about the past or having them experience pride in the future). "That is, if someone is anticipating feeling proud, she prefers fewer unhealthy snacks than someone experiencing pride."
Finally, the authors compared future-focused positive emotions (hopefulness, anticipated pride) to future focused negative emotions (fear, anticipated shame). They found that the combination of positivity and future focus enhanced self-control.
"So, the next time you're feeling well, don't focus too much on all the good things in the past. Instead, keep that positive glow and focus on your future, especially all the good things you imagine to come. Your waistline will thank you!" the authors conclude.
"Most of us are aware that we often fall victim to emotional eating, but how is it that we might choose unhealthy or healthy snacks when we're feeling good?" write authors Karen Page Winterich (Pennsylvania State University) and Kelly L. Haws (Texas A&M University).
Because previous research has explored how feeling sad leads to eating bad, the authors focused on the complicated relationship between positive emotions and food consumption. "We demonstrate the importance of the time frame on which the positive emotion focuses and find that positive emotions focusing on the future decrease unhealthy food consumption in the present," the authors write.
To understand why someone who is feeling positive would be more likely to choose a candy bar versus a piece of fruit, the authors teased out the difference between positive feelings that arise from thinking about the past or the present (pride and happiness) and hope, which is a more future-oriented emotion.
In the authors' first study, hopeful participants consumed fewer M&Ms than people who experienced happiness. In a second study, the authors found that consumers who were more focused on the past chose unhealthy snacks, even if they felt hope. In the third study, the researchers shifted the time frame of the positive emotion (having participants feel hopeful about the past or having them experience pride in the future). "That is, if someone is anticipating feeling proud, she prefers fewer unhealthy snacks than someone experiencing pride."
Finally, the authors compared future-focused positive emotions (hopefulness, anticipated pride) to future focused negative emotions (fear, anticipated shame). They found that the combination of positivity and future focus enhanced self-control.
"So, the next time you're feeling well, don't focus too much on all the good things in the past. Instead, keep that positive glow and focus on your future, especially all the good things you imagine to come. Your waistline will thank you!" the authors conclude.
When a salad is not a salad: Why are dieters easily misled by food names?
Ω
Dieters are so involved with trying to eat virtuously that they are more likely than non-dieters to choose unhealthy foods that are labeled as healthy, according to a new study in the Journal of Consumer Research. It seems dieter focus on food names can work to their disadvantage.
"Keeping your weight-loss goal in mind as you scan the lunch menu at a café, you are careful to avoid pasta selections and instead order from the list of salad options," write authors Caglar Irmak (University of South Carolina), Beth Vallen (Loyola University), and Stefanie Rosen Robinson (University of South Carolina). "But before you congratulate yourself for making a virtuous selection, you might want to consider whether your choice is a salad in name only."
These days, restaurant salads can include ingredients that dieters would be likely to avoid (meats, cheeses, breads, and pasta). Potato chips are labeled "veggie chips," milkshakes are called "smoothies," and sugary drinks are named "flavored water." Why are dieters, who are supposedly more attuned to healthy foods, likely to be confused by these labels?
"Over time, dieters learn to focus on simply avoiding foods that they recognize as forbidden based on product name," the authors explain. "Thus, dieters likely assume that an item assigned an unhealthy name (for example, pasta) is less healthy than an item assigned a healthy name (for example, salad), and they do not spend time considering other product information that might impact their product evaluations." Non-dieters do not learn to avoid foods based on names and, given that they are not focused on healthful eating, are more likely to dismiss cues that imply healthfulness, including name.
Participants in one study were presented with a mixture of vegetables, pasta, salami, and cheese, served on a bed of fresh romaine lettuce. The item was either identified as "salad" or "pasta." When it was called pasta, dieters perceived it as less healthy. In another study, participants were given samples of a product, which was labeled either "fruit chews" or "candy chews." "Dieters perceived the item with an unhealthy name (candy chews) to be less healthful and less tasty than non-dieters," the authors write. As a result, dieters consumed more of the confections when they were called "fruit chews."
Dieters are so involved with trying to eat virtuously that they are more likely than non-dieters to choose unhealthy foods that are labeled as healthy, according to a new study in the Journal of Consumer Research. It seems dieter focus on food names can work to their disadvantage.
"Keeping your weight-loss goal in mind as you scan the lunch menu at a café, you are careful to avoid pasta selections and instead order from the list of salad options," write authors Caglar Irmak (University of South Carolina), Beth Vallen (Loyola University), and Stefanie Rosen Robinson (University of South Carolina). "But before you congratulate yourself for making a virtuous selection, you might want to consider whether your choice is a salad in name only."
These days, restaurant salads can include ingredients that dieters would be likely to avoid (meats, cheeses, breads, and pasta). Potato chips are labeled "veggie chips," milkshakes are called "smoothies," and sugary drinks are named "flavored water." Why are dieters, who are supposedly more attuned to healthy foods, likely to be confused by these labels?
"Over time, dieters learn to focus on simply avoiding foods that they recognize as forbidden based on product name," the authors explain. "Thus, dieters likely assume that an item assigned an unhealthy name (for example, pasta) is less healthy than an item assigned a healthy name (for example, salad), and they do not spend time considering other product information that might impact their product evaluations." Non-dieters do not learn to avoid foods based on names and, given that they are not focused on healthful eating, are more likely to dismiss cues that imply healthfulness, including name.
Participants in one study were presented with a mixture of vegetables, pasta, salami, and cheese, served on a bed of fresh romaine lettuce. The item was either identified as "salad" or "pasta." When it was called pasta, dieters perceived it as less healthy. In another study, participants were given samples of a product, which was labeled either "fruit chews" or "candy chews." "Dieters perceived the item with an unhealthy name (candy chews) to be less healthful and less tasty than non-dieters," the authors write. As a result, dieters consumed more of the confections when they were called "fruit chews."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)