Showing posts with label obesity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label obesity. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 1, 2012

Liquid Candy


Soda pop creates more than just cavities

A commentary from Nutrition Action Healthletter
Soda pop was once an occasional treat for millions of people. I remember drinking Coke on picnics or at Sunday dinners when I was a kid in the 1950s. I pretty much gave up sugary drinks in the 1970s as I learned about the sugar, dyes, and other things they contained. But at the same time, America was gulping them down with ever greater alacrity.
Consumption of regular soda tripled between 1957 and 1998, when the industry produced about 450 12-ounce soda servings for every American. And that doesn't include the gallons of sugar-laden non-carbonated fruit drinks, bottled teas, energy drinks, and sports drinks that we swallow each year. Some people, especially teens, drink a six-pack a day of sugary drinks and get a quarter of their calories from the added sugars.


Vending machines were being installed everywhere. Fast-food restaurants helped make soft drinks the default beverage for new generations of kids. Container sizes ballooned from 6½ ounces to 12 ounces to 20 ounces. Restaurants and convenience stores started offering half-gallon cups and free refills.
The Center for Science in the Public Interest (publisher of Nutrition Action) began a serious campaign against soft drinks in 1998 when we published Liquid Candy: How Soft Drinks are Harming Americans' Health.
Cavities resulting from chronic soda pop consumption
Dentists had long argued that soda causes cavities. New research was linking soft drinks to weight gain and obesity—a cause of heart attacks, strokes, diabetes, and cancer. Soft drinks also displace nutrient-rich milk.
Non-diet soda peaked in 1998. Since then, we've cut our consumption every year, so that by 2010 we drank almost 25 percent less than in 1998. Bottled water (much of it marketed by Coke and Pepsi) has taken up the slack.
The battle against sugary beverages is in full swing. Boston and New York City are ridding public office buildings and parks of them. And health departments are creating anti-soda videos (for New York City's, see youtube.com/user/drinkingsugar).
The Food and Drug Administration also needs to act. It should require warning notices on soft drinks, set a Daily Value for "added sugars," and require added sugars (instead of total sugars) on Nutrition Facts labels. And the government should get sugary drinks out of cafeterias and vending machines in office buildings, national parks, and other facilities.
But the single most important thing that federal, state, and local governments could do would be to slap a tax on all sugary drinks. Depending on the rate (some have proposed one cent per ounce or 12 cents per can), a national excise tax would reduce consumption by up to 23 percent, generate $15 billion annually, and help fund programs that promote health.
Now that would be sweet.
Michael F. Jacobson, Ph.D.
Executive Director
Center for Science in the Public Interest

Monday, April 30, 2012


Financial costs of the U.S. obesity epidemic reach new heights
Sharon Begley, Reuters  Apr 30, 2012

NEW YORK – U.S. hospitals are ripping out wall-mounted toilets and replacing them with floor models to better support obese patients. The Federal Transit Administration wants buses to be tested for the impact of heavier riders on steering and braking. Cars are burning nearly a billion gallons of gasoline more a year than if passengers weighed what they did in 1960.
The nation’s rising rate of obesity has been well-chronicled. But businesses, governments and individuals are only now coming to grips with the costs of those extra pounds, many of which are even greater than believed only a few years ago: The additional medical spending due to obesity is double previous estimates and exceeds even those of smoking, a new study shows.
Many of those costs have dollar signs in front of them, such as the higher health insurance premiums everyone pays to cover those extra medical costs. Other changes, often cost-neutral, are coming to the built environment in the form of wider seats in public places from sports stadiums to bus stops.
The startling economic costs of obesity, often borne by the non-obese, could become the epidemic’s second-hand smoke. Only when scientists discovered that nonsmokers were developing lung cancer and other diseases from breathing smoke-filled air did policymakers get serious about fighting the habit, in particular by establishing nonsmoking zones. The costs that smoking added to Medicaid also spurred action. Now, as economists put a price tag on sky-high body mass indexes (BMIs), policymakers as well as the private sector are mobilizing to find solutions to the obesity epidemic.
“As committee chairmen, Cabinet secretaries, the head of Medicare and health officials see these really high costs, they are more interested in knowing, ‘what policy knob can I turn to stop this hemorrhage?’” said Michael O’Grady of the National Opinion Research Center, co-author of a new report for the Campaign to End Obesity, which brings together representatives from business, academia and the public health community to work with policymakers on the issue.
The U.S. health care reform law of 2010 allows employers to charge obese workers 30% to 50% more for health insurance if they decline to participate in a qualified wellness program. The law also includes carrots and celery sticks, so to speak, to persuade Medicare and Medicaid enrollees to see a primary care physician about losing weight, and funds community demonstration programs for weight loss.
Such measures do not sit well with all obese Americans. Advocacy groups formed to “end size discrimination” argue that it is possible to be healthy “at every size,” taking issue with the findings that obesity necessarily comes with added medical costs.
The reason for denominating the costs of obesity in dollars is not to stigmatize plus-size Americans even further. Rather, the goal is to allow public health officials as well as employers to break out their calculators and see whether programs to prevent or reverse obesity are worth it.
LOST PRODUCTIVITY
The percentage of Americans who are obese (with a BMI of 30 or higher) has tripled since 1960, to 34%, while the incidence of extreme or “morbid” obesity (BMI above 40) has risen sixfold, to 6%. The percentage of overweight Americans (BMI of 25 to 29.9) has held steady: It was 34% in 2008 and 32% in 1961. What seems to have happened is that for every healthy-weight person who “graduated” into overweight, an overweight person graduated into obesity.
Because obesity raises the risk of a host of medical conditions, from heart disease to chronic pain, the obese are absent from work more often than people of healthy weight. The most obese men take 5.9 more sick days a year; the most obese women, 9.4 days more. Obesity-related absenteeism costs employers as much as US$6.4-billion a year, health economists led by Eric Finkelstein of Duke University calculated.
Total annual cost of presenteeism due to obesity:
US$30-billion
Even when poor health doesn’t keep obese workers home, it can cut into productivity, as they grapple with pain or shortness of breath or other obstacles to working all-out. Such obesity-related “presenteeism,” said Finkelstein, is also expensive. The very obese lose one month of productive work per year, costing employers an average of US$3,792 per very obese male worker and US$3,037 per female. Total annual cost of presenteeism due to obesity: US$30-billion.
Decreased productivity can reduce wages, as employers penalize less productive workers. Obesity hits workers’ pocketbooks indirectly, too: Numerous studies have shown that the obese are less likely to be hired and promoted than their svelte peers are. Women in particular bear the brunt of that, earning about 11% less than women of healthy weight, health economist John Cawley of Cornell University found. At the average weekly U.S. wage of $669 in 2010, that’s a $76 weekly obesity tax.
MORE DOCTORS, MORE PILLS
The medical costs of obesity have long been the focus of health economists. A just-published analysis finds that it raises those costs more than thought.
Obese men rack up an additional US$1,152 a year in medical spending, especially for hospitalizations and prescription drugs, Cawley and Chad Meyerhoefer of Lehigh University reported in January in the Journal of Health Economics. Obese women account for an extra US$3,613 a year. Using data from 9,852 men (average BMI: 28) and 13,837 women (average BMI: 27) ages 20 to 64, among whom 28% were obese, the researchers found even higher costs among the uninsured: annual medical spending for an obese person was US$3,271 compared with US$512-for the non-obese.
Nationally, that comes to US$190-billion a year in additional medical spending as a result of obesity, calculated Cawley, or 20.6% of U.S. health care expenditures.
That is double recent estimates, reflecting more precise methodology. The new analysis corrected for people’s tendency to low-ball their weight, for instance, and compared obesity with non-obesity (healthy weight and overweight) rather than just to healthy weight. Because the merely overweight do not incur many additional medical costs, grouping the overweight with the obese underestimates the costs of obesity.
A hospital room in Birmingham, AL that has oversized chairs and strengthened mobile medical beds to accommodate the increasing size of overweight Americans.
     Marvin Gentry/Reuters
An oversized chair and an oversized hospital bed are pictured in the children's and women's maternity ward at the University of Alabama Hospital in Birmingham, Alabama.
Contrary to the media’s idealization of slimness, medical spending for men is about the same for BMIs of 26 to 35. For women, the uptick starts at a BMI of 25. In men more than women, high BMIs can reflect extra muscle as well as fat, so it is possible to be healthy even with an overweight BMI. “A man with a BMI of 28 might be very fit,” said Cawley. “Where healthcare costs really take off is in the morbidly obese.”
Those extra medical costs are partly born by the non-obese, in the form of higher taxes to support Medicaid and higher health insurance premiums. Obese women raise such “third party” expenditures US$3,220 a year each; obese men, US$967 a year, Cawley and Meyerhoefer found.
One recent surprise is the discovery that the costs of obesity exceed those of smoking. In a paper published in March, scientists at the Mayo Clinic toted up the exact medical costs of 30,529 Mayo employees, adult dependents, and retirees over several years.
“Smoking added about 20% a year to medical costs,” said Mayo’s James Naessens. “Obesity was similar, but morbid obesity increased those costs by 50% a year. There really is an economic justification for employers to offer programs to help the very obese lose weight.”
LIVING LARGE, BUT NOT DYING YOUNG
For years researchers suspected that the higher medical costs of obesity might be offset by the possibility that the obese would die young, and thus never rack up spending for nursing homes, Alzheimer’s care, and other pricey items.
“Growing obesity rates increase fuel consumption.”
That’s what happens to smokers. While they do incur higher medical costs than nonsmokers in any given year, their lifetime drain on public and private dollars is less because they die sooner. “Smokers die early enough that they save Social Security, private pensions, and Medicare” trillions of dollars, said Duke’s Finkelstein. “But mortality isn’t that much higher among the obese.”
Beta blockers for heart disease, diabetes drugs, and other treatments are keeping the obese alive longer, with the result that they incur astronomically high medical expenses in old age just like their slimmer peers.
Some costs of obesity reflect basic physics. It requires twice as much energy to move 250 pounds than 125 pounds. As a result, a vehicle burns more gasoline carrying heavier passengers than lighter ones.
“Growing obesity rates increase fuel consumption,” said engineer Sheldon Jacobson of the University of Illinois. How much? An additional 938 million gallons of gasoline each year due to overweight and obesity in the United States, or 0.8%, he calculated. That’s US$4-billion extra.
Not all the changes spurred by the prevalence of obesity come with a price tag. Train cars New Jersey Transit ordered from Bombardier have seats 2.2 inches wider than current cars, at 19.75 inches, said spokesman John Durso, giving everyone a more comfortable commute. (There will also be more seats per car because the new ones are double-deckers.)
The built environment generally is changing to accommodate larger Americans. New York’s commuter trains are considering new cars with seats able to hold 400 pounds. Blue Bird is widening the front doors on its school buses so wider kids can fit. And at both the new Yankee Stadium and Citi Field, home of the New York Mets, seats are wider than their predecessors by 1 to 2 inches.
The new performance testing proposed by transit officials for buses, assuming an average passenger weight of 175 instead of 150 pounds, arise from concerns that heavier passengers might pose a safety threat. If too much weight is behind the rear axle, a bus can lose steering. And every additional pound increases a moving vehicle’s momentum, requiring more force to stop and thereby putting greater demands on brakes. Manufacturers have told the FTA the proposal will require them to upgrade several components.
Hospitals, too, are adapting to larger patients. The University of Alabama at Birmingham’s hospital, the nation’s fourth largest, has widened doors, replaced wall-mounted toilets with floor models able to hold 250 pounds or more, and bought plus-size wheelchairs (twice the price of regulars) as well as mini-cranes to hoist obese patients out of bed.
The additional spending due to obesity doesn’t fall into a black hole, of course. It contributes to overall economic activity and thus to gross domestic product. But not all spending is created equal.
“Yes, a heart attack will generate economic activity, since the surgeon and hospital get paid, but not in a good way,” said Murray Ross, vice president of Kaiser Permanente’s Institute for Health Policy. “If we avoided that heart attack we could have put the money to better use, such as in education or investments in clean energy.”
The books on obesity remain open. The latest entry: An obese man is 64% less likely to be arrested for a crime than a healthy man. Researchers have yet to run the numbers on what that might save.
© Thomson Reuters 2012

Saturday, December 31, 2011

The Curse of Processed Foods: White Sugar = White Death

The massive problem with processed foods is that almost all of them contain refined white sugar. This can be in several forms such as sugar, sucrose, corn syrup etc but the bottom line is that all are highly detrimental to your health and achieving the body you deserve. This section is quite detailed but it's important that you know the TRUTH about how white sugar just totally destroys your ability to get lean and muscular and with this knowledge 'eating clean' becomes a powerfully sane choice. 


The following information comes from 'Sugar Blues' by William Duffy. 

Why is sugar toxic to the body? 

In 1957 Dr William Coda Martin tried to answer the question: When is a food a food and when is it a poison? His working definition of "poison" was: "Medically: Any substance applied to the body, ingested or developed within the body, which causes or may cause disease. Dr Martin classified refined sugar as a POISON because it has been depleted of its life forces, vitamins and minerals.


"Sugar consumption forms 'toxic metabolites' such as pyruvic acid and abnormal sugars containing five carbon atoms. Pyruvic acid accumulates in the brain and nervous system and the abnormal sugars in the red blood cells. These toxic metabolites interfere with the respiration of the cells. They cannot get sufficient oxygen to survive and function normally. In time, some of the cells die. This interferes with the function of a part of the body and is the beginning of degenerative disease."


Refined sugar is lethal when ingested by humans because it provides only that which nutritionists describe as "empty" calories. In addition, sugar is worse than nothing because it drains and leaches the body of precious vitamins and minerals through the demand its digestion, detoxification and elimination make upon one's entire system. 
Sugar taken every day produces a continuously over acid condition, and more and more minerals are required from deep in the body in the attempt to rectify the imbalance. Finally, in order to protect the blood, so much calcium is taken from the bones and teeth that decay and general weakening begin.


Excess sugar eventually affects every organ in the body. Initially, it is stored in the liver but the liver's capacity is limited, a daily intake of refined sugar soon makes the liver expand like a balloon. When the liver is filled to its maximum capacity, the excess glycogen is returned to the blood in the form of fatty acids. These are taken to every part of the body and stored in the most inactive areas: the belly, the buttocks, the breasts (man boobs anyone?) and thighs.


When these small & comparatively harmless places are completely filled, fatty acids are then distributed among active organs, such as the heart and kidneys. These begin to slow down; finally their tissues degenerate and turn to fat. The whole body is affected and abnormal blood pressure is created. The parasympathetic nervous system is affected; and organs governed by it, such as the small brain, become inactive or paralyzed. The circulatory and lymphatic systems are invaded, and the quality of the red corpuscles starts to change. An overabundance of white cells occurs, and the creation of tissue becomes slower. Our body's tolerance and immunizing power becomes increasingly limited, so we cannot respond properly to extreme attacks, whether they be cold, heat, mosquitoes or microbes.


Excessive sugar has a strong mal-effect on the functioning of the brain. The key to orderly brain function is glutamic acid, a vital compound found in many vegetables. The B vitamins play a major role in dividing glutamic acid into antagonistic-complementary compounds, which produce a "proceed" or "control" response in the brain. B vitamins are also manufactured by symbiotic bacteria that live in our intestines. When refined sugar is taken daily, these bacteria wither and die, and our stock of B vitamins gets very low. Too much sugar makes one sleepy; our ability to calculate and remember is lost.


Thus it should be clear that in order to get your body as lean and muscular as possible, you have to stop kneecapping yourself and your progress every time you have something to eat. 

Sunday, November 13, 2011

Obesity Link to Periodontal Disease

In a study titled "MicroRNA Modulation in Obesity and Periodontitis," lead author Romina Perri, University of North Carolina School of Dentistry, Oral Health Institute, conducted a pilot investigation to determine whether obesity or periodontal disease modified microRNA expression and whether there was any potential interaction between obesity and periodontitis that could involve microRNA modulation. This study is published in the Journal of Dental Research, the official publication of the International and American Associations for Dental Research (IADR/AADR). 

In this investigation, total RNA was extracted from gingival biopsy samples collected from 20 patients in 4 groups:

  • 5 non-obese [BMI < 30kg/m2] participants with a healthy periodontium
  • 5 non-obese participants with periodontitis
  • 5 obese [BMI > 30kg/m2] participants with a healthy periodontium
  • 5 obese participants with periodontitis).


Two microRNA species (miR-18a,miR-30e) were up-regulated among obese individuals with a healthy periodontium. Two microRNA species (miR-30e,miR-106b) were up-regulated in non-obese subjects with periodontal disease and in the presence of periodontal disease and obesity, nine microRNAs were significantly up-regulated (miR-15a,miR-18a,miR-22,miR-30d,miR-30e,miR-103,miR-106b, miR-130a,miR-142-3p,miR-185 and miR-210).

The authors conclude that the data are consistent with the concept that miRNA that are induced by chronic nutritional stress leading to obesity may also non-parsimoniously modulate inflammatory pathways within periodontal tissues and affect disease expression. "The expression of specific microRNA species in obesity provides new insight into possible mechanisms of how risk factors might modify periodontal inflammation and may represent novel therapeutic targets," said JDR Editor-in-Chief William Giannobile. A perspective article titled "Obesity, Inflammation and Oral Infections: are microRNAs the Missing Link?" was co-authored by Francesco D'Aiuto and Jean Suvan, University College London Eastman Dental Institute. In it, the authors suggest that these data could represent a mechanistic breakthrough in our understanding of the modulatory effects of obesity on periodontal tissue destruction, but caution reproducibility of these findings is needed in larger and well-characterized cohorts.