Main Blog Updated: Paul Jaminet, Matt Stone, Dr. Thomas Bryan at Paleo Summit--and worth listening to for varying views. Note: If you even mildly suspect or wonder about GLUTEN sensitivity, listen to Dr. Bryan's segment.

Paul Jaminet, Matt Stone, Dr. Thomas Bryan at Paleo Summit--and worth listening to for varying views. Note: If you even mildly suspect or wonder about GLUTEN sensitivity, listen to Dr. Bryan's segment.

New Blog Updated: I paid $149 to find out if I do better on low carb, low fat, or "balanced" type diet for weight loss!

Read the new entry at the new blog:

I paid $149 to find out if I do better on low carb, low fat, or "balanced" type diet for weight loss!

Bad sleep, salt bender, and more depressing research on how women's bodies hold onto fat....

Well, I've been struggling to stay on a normal schedule, and my nite owl body is resisting like mad. I was so happy when I was up early and to bed early, but that only lasted like 2.5 weeks and then I started having sleep issues as my body wants to be a vampire again.

When I don't sleep well, I am hungrier and more prone to want those fast food baddies. Don't know why, but it's true. If I sleep well and deeply and at least 8 to 9 hours, I do better with my eating and exercising. When I sleep poorly, I crave salt and I crave sugar and I can barely get through a training session. Yesterday's Pilates class was a struggle punctuated by cramps and having to stop and start several times, whereas the ones when I was getting up earlier were hard, but doable. And I've been practically sucking on the salt shaker.

Disgusting.

So, today, I'm gonna go get some veggie and fruit smoothies and try to mitigate some of the damage from all the sodium. I feel bloated and I have dark circles under my eyes. Not nice.

Of course, to add insult to bloaty injury, I read this: Weighing the Evidence on Exercise.  This is a really interesting article, and I recommend any of you who are struggling with diet AND exercise to read it. It's not the happiest news for us ladies, though, because, as we already knew, when it comes to weight loss, biology favors the gents and royally screws us. The article highlights how, especially in women, exercise increases ghrelin which increases appetite. (I can attest to this. I'm always FAMISHED after a hard workout and hit Starbucks for a sugarfree latte posthaste.)

But it's not all grim news in the article, though it is still grim for those of use with BMIs higher than 25 (and if you're obese, yeah, your BMI is way over 25). (see page 2 of article).

If you plan to lose the weight and keep it off, you (and I) better learn to either love to exercise A LOT or just buck up and do the exercise, love it or hate it. Why? Cause exercise isn't just about calories out. It seems to do something to your very physiology:

Scientists are “not really sure yet” just how and why exercise is so important in maintaining weight loss in people, Braun says. But in animal experiments, exercise seems to remodel the metabolic pathways that determine how the body stores and utilizes food. For a study published last summer, scientists at the University of Colorado at Denver fattened a group of male rats. The animals already had an inbred propensity to gain weight and, thanks to a high-fat diet laid out for them, they fulfilled that genetic destiny. After 16 weeks of eating as much as they wanted and lolling around in their cages, all were rotund. The scientists then switched them to a calorie-controlled, low-fat diet. The animals shed weight, dropping an average of about 14 percent of their corpulence.

Afterward the animals were put on a weight-maintenance diet. At the same time, half of them were required to run on a treadmill for about 30 minutes most days. The other half remained sedentary. For eight weeks, the rats were kept at their lower weights in order to establish a new base-line weight.
Then the fun began. For the final eight weeks of the experiment, the rats were allowed to relapse, to eat as much food as they wanted. The rats that had not been running on the treadmill fell upon the food eagerly. Most regained the weight they lost and then some.

But the exercising rats metabolized calories differently. They tended to burn fat immediately after their meals, while the sedentary rats’ bodies preferentially burned carbohydrates and sent the fat off to be stored in fat cells. The running rats’ bodies, meanwhile, also produced signals suggesting that they were satiated and didn’t need more kibble. Although the treadmill exercisers regained some weight, their relapses were not as extreme. Exercise “re-established the homeostatic steady state between intake and expenditure to defend a lower body weight,” the study authors concluded. Running had remade the rats’ bodies so that they ate less.

As someone whose fat is primarily that dangerous abdominal adiposity, this is actually something that offers a bit of comfort. I may really hate aerobic exercising (though I enjoy Pilates), but the fact that it might have an effect on my worst fat issue--that deadly abdominal fat--is something of a spur.

I'm gonna go check Netflix and On Demand for doable aerobic exercise for big me. I hate to sweat, but I hate this huge, deadly belly more.

It's not good news. Good news would be, "NewsFlash: We've found the magic bullet and you can all be trim with one daily pill with no bad side effects that also happens to make you look younger." :D

Until then--we know, we know--eat wholesome food and move, move, move.

So, let me finish watching THE DOCTORS (they have the Eat This, Not That dude on today, and he's kinda cool), finish my second cup of java, and then do a shopping list for debloating and defatting this week.

Later...from the bloated Princess...


ETA: Well, I found this on sleep and weight loss in a Washington Post article:

What do we know? Scientists have an idea for how lack of sleep might contribute to obesity. In two studies, lack of sleep was found to influence two hormones that help control hunger. Leptin, made by fat tissue, tells your brain when it's time to stop eating, while grhelin, which is made in the stomach, signals that you ought to eat more. Both studies -- one involving 11 subjects, the other more than a thousand -- found that restricted sleep led to suppression of leptin and increased grhelin activity, two states that could make you want to eat more.

At least one doctor is willing to take the leap and recommend that people who want to lose weight should get a handle on their sleep. Michael Aziz, author of "The Perfect 10 Diet" (Sourcebooks, 2010), writes, "Getting enough sleep is the cheapest and simplest advice I can give for losing weight."

Losing and Keeping Away Visceral Fat is Facilitated By Exercise

Let's not kid ourselves. Portion/calorie-contol is key and necessary, but for those of us with deadly visceral fat--especially if you're like me with an apple-ish physique, big belly and all and with Metabolic Syndrome--exercise is ESSENTIAL:

In the study, UAB exercise physiologist Gary Hunter, Ph.D., and his team randomly assigned 45 European-American and 52 African-American women to three groups: aerobic training, resistance training or no exercise. All of the participants were placed on an 800 calorie-a-day diet and lost an average 24 pounds. Researchers then measured total fat, abdominal subcutaneous fat and visceral fat for each participant.

Afterward, participants in the two exercise groups were asked to continue exercising 40 minutes twice a week for one year. After a year, the study's participants were divided into five groups: those who maintained aerobic exercise training, those who stopped aerobic training, those who maintained their resistance training, those who stopped resistance training and those who were never placed on an exercise regimen.

"What we found was that those who continued exercising, despite modest weight regains, regained zero percent visceral fat a year after they lost the weight," Hunter said. "But those who stopped exercising, and those who weren't put on any exercise regimen at all, averaged about a 33 percent increase in visceral fat.

"Because other studies have reported that much longer training durations of 60 minutes a day are necessary to prevent weight regain, it's not too surprising that weight regain was not totally prevented in this study," Hunter said. "It's encouraging, however, that this relatively small amount of exercise was sufficient to prevent visceral fat gain."

The study also found that exercise was equally effective for both races.

--from "Exercise Keeps Dangerous Visceral Fat Away A Year After Weight Loss, Finds UAB Study"

Why Using An Online Food Journal May Help You Find Out The Truth About How Much You Eat

I've known more than a handful of ladies who swear they hardly eat and yet can't seem to lose/keep gaining weight. From my own observation of these gals, it's obvious they are in denial about how much they eat in terms of calories. They assume that having a regular salad for lunch is healthful and "lite", but don't consider that that quarter cup of dressing is loaded with calories and fat. Or they split the fatty entree with a friend/hubby, but don't consider that the entree was 1800 calories to start with, so if it's halved, it's now 900 calories (and this doesn't count sides, rolls, beverages, etc.)

Well, my observations are borne out by a study (flawed or not, it rings true to me), and the emphasis is mine:

In a 12-month weight maintenance study (other details of which are being discussed in this recent post), the subjects kept diet diaries, which were examined by the researchers at regular intervals. However, the researchers report that "it was apparent that, on average, women in both study groups had underestimated their food intake."

And not by a little bit. On average, the women reported having consumed 1370 calories per day. The researchers calculated that their actual calorie intake was 2044 calories per day. That discrepancy of 674 calories a day adds up to over 5 pounds a month!

The men, on the other hand, were spot on: They reported average intake of 1765 calories, the researchers estimated actual intake at 1771.

If you're having trouble losing weight, even though you think you're not eating that much, I suggest you visit on online food tracker--whether the one at Weight Watchers online, or eDiets online, or Fitday, or SparkPeople, and put in EVERY SINGLE THING THAT PASSES YOUR LIPS, solid or liquid or mint or gum, no matter how small. Look at how the calories come out at the end of each day. Do this for a week or more. (If you've ever been to a dietitian/nutritionist, you probably have done this, as this is part of making an appointment. They ask you to keep a food diary. An honest one.)

Be scrupulously honest. Weight and measure stuff if you are not experienced at eyeballing portions. One thing I learned decades ago is that 1/4 cup is a tiny amount, much less than you think. Measure 1/4 cup of shredded cheese and see how small it is. A cup of cereal is puny, but some cereals have a serving size of 3/4 or 1/2 cup (especially dense granolas).

Some Metabolic Mysteries are not mysterious. They're simply a matter of ignorance.

DragonFire Factoid: Oops, We Got Fatter As A Nation...AGAIN!

Two-thirds of Americans are overweight or obese, and there’s no end in sight to this dangerous trend. According to the Centers for Disease Control, in 2007 25.6 percent of Americans were obese. But in 2008, it crept up to 26.1 percent.

There are six states that can dubiously boast the fact that over 30 percent of their citizens are obese: Alabama, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee and West Virginia.

Colorado is the only state in which less than 20 percent of its citizens are not obese.

Another Reason To Get Trim and Fit: Obesity Link To Cancer Stronger

Man, this is scary stuff. If risk of stroke and heart disease and diabetes were all not enough, add the increased risk of cancer to the worries of the obese--like moi.

Yeah, read it and weep:

A new report released yesterday by the World Cancer Research Fund and the American Institute for Cancer Research states that most cancers are preventable.

Poor diet, lack of exercise, obesity and smoking account for the vast majority of cancers; the role of genetic factors is by far overrated.

Indeed, the dramatic impact of obesity on cancer is now increasingly appreciated – one in three cancers may be caused by obesity (or as a result of lifestyle factors that promote obesity). It is therefore perhaps not surprising, that large prospective studies have shown an almost 60% reduction in deaths from cancer with bariatric surgery.

Full post on the study is at Dr. Sharma's blog.

I go in for an endometrial biopsy in three weeks. I think this finding will be weighing on my mind until I get those results.

And for a while after.

It may be what I needed to make a good choice for supper tonight, too.


Have a healthful weekend, folks!

Not Impressed by Five Pound Loss of Recent Diet/Exercise vs Relaxation Study

While I totally believe that stress screws your body and mind up, and destressing and learning to do things that involve quietness and meditation are healthful (they prove so to me), I can't get too excited about that study recently reported all over the diet world online. You may have heard about it, the one that says that destressing with meditation and Yoga and such is better for weight loss than diet and exercise.

The destressors kept off the five pound weight loss for two years, while the nutrition info and the diet/exercise groups didn't lose or keep off.

When you're big like me and five pounds barely registers, this is not big news. If the women in the study had lost and kept off 25+ pounds (just with destressing), I might perk up.

But I've struggled to keep off 25 lbs. I had lost 29, then regained, then lost, then regained a bit, then lost. After my last bout with asthma (3.5 weeks of ickiness), I'm up again. For me, 25 pounds is an ongoing battleground. Makes me nuts. So, excuse me if a five pound loss after two years doesn't make me go yippee for Yoga.

Five pounds. This is gonna solve the obesity epidemic? I think not.

I still think that it's a holistic thing that's gonna get us there--ie, dealing with sedentary habits and moving into movement; dealing with excess calories and outsized portions and learning to eat less; cutting down or out the junk and non-nutritive foods and snacks and focusing on whole and clean foods; working with internal/emotional issues and learning how to tap into the self-control we all have to some extent; tapping into our spiritual power (if we believe in such); creating support systems in and even beyond our family/friendship circles; committing to a lifestyle change that is lifelong; changing the societal landscape so that it is fashioned and structured to support healthful living; encouraging employers to make room for exercise at work and offer healthful snacks instead of junk on the jobsites; incorporating stress management techniques; eliminating all junk from schools; adding penalty taxes to junk foods and using that money to offset health care costs for obesity; tax deductions for gym memberships and buying at-home health gear (bikes, ellipticals, treadmills, etc); making health a top family and personal priority for life.

Destressing, as you see, imo is part of that holistic approach. But without diet and exercise and support, etc, I'm sorry, the very overweight and obese and superobese can't be satisfied with losing five pounds doing yoga. That's not gonna cut it.

So, I'll take the study for what it's worth. Yes, I'll continue to incorporate mind-body/destressing times and activities into my life. But that will not solve my obesity problem--or the nation's. Or the world's. Life is stressful, no matter what we do. Destressing helps, but when you'r mom is dying or your husband leaves you or your kid gets a major illness, or your car is totalled or your country is at war or your house is foreclosed on or someone robs you at gunpoint or a hurricane is coming--stress is hard to eradicate. I think the researchers who de-emphasize or pooh-pooh (or seem to) the role of diet and exercise ain't helping us as much as they might think.

They probably just make us worry about destressing enough. :)

Will This Become The Magic Anti-Fat Pill?

A drug designed to specifically hit a protein linked to the life-extending benefits of a meager diet can essentially trick the body into believing food is scarce even when it isn't, suggests a new report in the November Cell Metabolism.

The drug called SRT1720, which acts through the protein SIRT1, enhances running endurance in exercised mice and protects the animals against weight gain and insulin resistance even when they eat a high-fat diet, the researchers report. The drug works by shifting the metabolism to a fat-burning mode that normally takes over only when energy levels are low.

...The researchers found that a low dose of SRT1720 partially protected mice from gaining weight on a high-fat diet after 10 weeks of treatment. At higher doses, the drug completely prevented weight gain in the animals. SRT1720 also improved blood sugar tolerance and insulin sensitivity and endowed the animals with greater athletic ability.

--from "Drug Mimics Low-cal Diet To Ward Off Weight Gain, Boost Running Endurance" at Science Daily

I gotta say, I sure hope so. I hope it really doesn't have wacky side effects. I have a certain natural skepticism about "magic pills," but that doesn't mean I can't hope for one.

Still, while I wait to see what happens with this, I plan to be drinking more grape juice and wine this season--and to more faithfully take my resveratrol supplement. Heh. Why not?

~

Dragonfire Factoid: Fat? Your Heart Will Attack Earlier and Your Pancreas Give Out Sooner!

A study of more than 111,000 people has shown that overweight people have heart attacks on average 12 years earlier than "normal weight" individuals. This makes obesity worse for the heart than smoking, according to this study...

Dr. Peter McCullough, lead author of the study published in The Journal of the American College of Cardiology, analyzed data from a nationwide U.S. registry of people hospitalized for heart attack and unstable angina, or chest pain, from 2001 to 2007. They were grouped according to their BMI (Body Mass Index). Here's how the numbers break down:

* The heaviest people were an average of 59 years old when they had their heart attacks (average weight 280 pounds).
* That compares to an average age of 75 for the lightest group (average weight 103 pounds). Those in the "normal weight" category averaged 71 years (average weight 142 pounds)
* The rate of diabetes was 17 per cent in the leanest group, and 49 per cent in the most obese.

--from Diet Blog's "Obese Have Heart Attacks 12 Years Earlier?"

Sparkly Factoid: Fiber's Great for Your Lungs

Specifically, folks who took in at least 27 grams daily had a larger lung capacity than did those who consumed fewer than 10 grams. Additionally, the group that consumed more fiber were found to be 15 percent less likely to develop chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

The author of the study, Stephanie London, M.D., Ph.D., said, "The fiber found in cereal and produce may reduce tissue inflammation that can damage lungs."

--from "Fiber...For Your Lungs" at That's Fit

One LESS Reason to Buy Organic

The claims that organically grown produce is higher in nutrients has taken a hit by a study that is nicely exlained and then summarized over at Keith Connects the Dots:

The crops were grown on the same or similar soil on adjacent fields at the same time and so experienced the same weather conditions. All were harvested and treated at the same time. In the case of the organically grown vegetables, all were grown on established organic soil.

After harvest, results showed that there were no differences in the levels of major and trace contents in the fruit and vegetables grown using the three different methods.

Produce from the organically and conventionally grown crops were then fed to animals over a two year period and intake and excretion of various minerals and trace elements were measured. Once again, the results showed there was no difference in retention of the elements regardless of how the crops were grown.

Dr Bügel says: ‘No systematic differences between cultivation systems representing organic and conventional production methods were found across the five crops so the study does not support the belief that organically grown foodstuffs generally contain more major and trace elements than conventionally grown foodstuffs.’

Dr Alan Baylis, honorary secretary of SCI’s Bioresources Group, adds: ‘Modern crop protection chemicals to control weeds, pests and diseases are extensively tested and stringently regulated, and once in the soil, mineral nutrients from natural or artificial fertilisers are chemically identical. Organic crops are often lower yielding and eating them is a lifestyle choice for those who can afford it.’

With food prices on the up-and-up-and-up, I've made a budgetary decision to buy organic what I eat with skin on, and buy conventional what has a rind/peel that I remove (oranges, bananas, onions, pineapples, etc), but I continue to buy eat-with-the-skin and dairy products and meat organic, cause I'm concerned with pesticides in the former and hormones/antibiotics in the latter.

Organic is pricey, and a budget is not infinitely stretchable cause, well, I ain't Oprah or Bill Gates.

~~

Wanna Volunteer for a "Virtual" Obesity Study?

The Texas Obesity Research center at the University of Houston is launching an international effort to find 500 participants for a study promoting healthy dietary habits and physical activity that will be conducted entirely in the virtual world of Second Life. For more information, participants can instant message Sirina Felisimo or Samu Sirnah in Second Life or call the center at (713) 743-9310.

--from
"Fat people get online chance to lose weight"

Diet Blog: Why Diets Fail

Good blog entry over at Diet Blog called "Why Do Most Diets Fail?". If you're on a weight-loss quest, I suggest STRONGLY that you drop by and read it. And maybe weep a bit before getting on with the tough work.

Sniff.

DragonFire Factoid: Weekends lousy for Dieters

Most people do eat more on the weekend, even when they're trying to lose weight.

"Weekend indulgences can wreak havoc on weight control, either causing our weight to increase or if we are following a diet to lose weight, can hinder our weight loss efforts," said study author Susan Racette, an assistant professor at Washington University in St. Louis. The research was published online recently in the journal Obesity.

--from "Weekends Tough on the Diet" at Forbes.com

Sparkly Factoid: Hang On and Your Chances of Weight Loss Success Go Up

{W}eight loss maintenance may get easier over time; after individuals have successfully maintained their weight loss for 2–5 y, the chance of longer-term success greatly increases. Continued adherence to diet and exercise strategies, low levels of depression and disinhibition, and medical triggers for weight loss are also associated with long-term success.

-- "Long-term weight loss maintenance" by Rena R Wing and Suzanne Phelan

(Although I want to say a really big "well, duh" to their success factors.)

Intensive Behavioral Modification Can Lead To Huge Weight Loss In A Year

The latest study result making the bloggy rounds amongst fatfighting types:

Dr. James Anderson, a weight loss researcher, led a nine-year study of patients who have lost 100 or more pounds. Such weight loss can be achieved by following an intensive behavioral program. This method is significantly safer than undergoing bariatric surgery to achieve similar weight loss results.

...63 men and 55 women were part of a nine-year study led by Dr. James Anderson, head of the UK College of Medicine Metabolic Research Group. The average beginning weight of study participants was 353 pounds. The average weight loss was 134 pounds in 44 weeks.

"Many severely obese persons, needing to lose more than 100 pounds, become frustrated and turn to surgery," Anderson said. "This study shows that one in four persons who participate in an intensive weight loss program for 12 weeks can go on to lose over 100 pounds. This program has much lower risks than surgery and can lead to similar long-term weight loss."

--from 100 Pound Weight Loss Possible With Behavioral Changes

I would note this, however, about the above snippets from the article: While only 1 in 4 in this study went on to lose that huge number, it's easier for gastric-bypass and even lap banders to lose 100 pounds in a year. The surgery gives you the satiety that dieting and exercise cannot. And it, obviously also carries the health benefits--even life extension--that losing a lot of weight of offers.

The difference: There is a risk of complications (infections, emboli, etc) and mortality (1 in 200 patients) with bariatric surgery. The risk would be eliminated by using simply diet and exercise and behavioral modification.

So, while the study gives hope to some willing and able to afford 12 weeks of intensive behavioral modification--which I'm guessing doesn't come cheaply--and with strict calorie restriction--which is tough any way you cut it-- that's hardly the most hurrah of results. Hey, if only 25% succeeded at the top weight loss, that means 75% didn't achieve these morbidly obese folks didn't get great results within a year. (And we don't know specifically what results they did get and what percentages got what results. How many went most of the way? Part of the way? Total bust?)

But for now, let's focus on the POSITIVE: Some succeeded at this stunning achievement.

And some hope is better than NO hope for those not willing to or unable to undergo surgery. Right?

Since I don't have all the stats, I'm assuming all the participants lost some weight. Maybe they all lost significant amounts. Certainly, the 12-week treatment benefitted most of the participants, as this excerpt from the above article shows:

The positive results went beyond lower digits on the scale. The weight loss was accompanied by improvements in blood pressure, cholesterol levels, diabetes, sleep apnea and other ails. Sixty-six percent of the participants on medications for high blood lipids, high blood pressure, diabetes or degenerative joint disease were able to discontinue those medications, saving an average of $100 a month and netting a priceless return in health.

Hard to argue with 66% getting off their meds. That's a great outcome.


The study should continue to follow these folks, just to see if the behavioral modification holds up. That is, will these people gain back some, most, all, or more than the weight they lost in the years to come. It's not just losing that's success. In fact, that's only part of the journey. Real success is KEEPING IT OFF, which people tend to do quite well when they've had bariatric surgery.

Main point: It's not just about the calories, it's about the calories and CHANGING HABITS and WAYS OF THINKING about food and eating, and it's about gaining the habit of exercise. Which, clearly, means I have much work to do. And it's also on the focusing on that study fact: One-quarter of 118 people--ie. almost 30 people--lost a huge, huge, huge amount of weight in LESS than a year. In 44 weeks. Roughly 10 months.

In ten months, it will be June 25th. It's possible you could be at your goal weight or 130+ pounds lighter by JUNE 25th.

That's the possibility that this study opens up for all the morbidly obese out there. And even more hope for the plain, old, ordinary overweight.

By this time next year, you could be where you want to be. Or near to it. And you could be off medications for many of the obesity-related ailments. And you could look really hot in that new outfit. And you could go up and down stairs without huffing and puffing.

It's possible. There's hope. (My word for the year.)


Note: Another study released showed the benefits of bariatric surgery, which, like this study, would correlate to losing lots and lots of weight. The main thing--losing weight extends life and improves health and quality of life.

Dragonfire Factoid: Fat Friendships

Much like a virus, obesity can spread from person to person, according to a new study published this week in the New England Journal of Medicine. When one person gained weight, their close friends tended to gain weight also. Having a friend who was obese would increase your likelihood of becoming obese by 57 %. Having a neighbor who gained weight had no effect and having a family member who gained weight had less of an effect than a friend who gained weight.

--from Study: Obese Friends Could Make You Fat