Today's Halloween Funny Friday video features the world's cutest porcupine.
Have a great weekend!
Friday, October 31, 2014
Thursday, October 30, 2014
To explore their theory the researchers used two Swedish cohorts. The first included 61,433 women, and the second 45,339 men (both after all exclusions), and with them the authors explored the cohorts' relationships between milk intake (ascertained by way of just two food frequency questionnaires with the women and only one with the men) and mortality and hip fractures over a 20.1 year mean follow-up period. As far as possible confounders go, they considered hormone replacement therapy, menopausal status, and whether or not the women had children, smoking status, body mass index, vitamin D supplementation, alcohol consumption, a healthy dietary pattern, cortisone use, leisure time physical activity, education, and marital status.
Results wise the researchers found that the mean intake of milk was roughly a glass a day for both men and women but that some folks were drinking more than 3 glasses daily, and some less than 1. During the 1,231,818 person years of follow up 15,541 women died as did 10,112 men. Fracture wise there were 4,259 hip fractures among women and 1,166 among men. As far as milk goes, the researchers found those women consuming >3 glasses a day vs. women consuming <1 had a hazard ratio of total mortality of 1.93 (and 1.60 for hip fractures). Comparing male heavy vs. light milk drinkers, the risk found was less pronounced (though still significant according to the researchers) at 1.10 for mortality, but nothing for hip fractures. But bear in mind, those hazard ratio span an average of 20 years of follow-up.
So should you stop drinking milk because it's going to kill you after it leads you to have a hip fracture? These sorts of studies are brutal. No doubt the researchers do their utmost to try to ensure they control for confounders, but given the food data utilized are often single contact food frequency questionnaires (as was here) which are then extrapolated to represent decades worth of consumption, and that lives in general are complicated, it really is difficult to get too worked up about the results. For instance it's difficult to put a great deal of stock in this particular study's FFQ validities as they report the frequent milk drinkers as consuming nearly 40% more calories than the infrequent, and yet the weights of those two groups are within about 3lbs of one another.
So I remain unconvinced that milk is in and of itself markedly toxic, but that said, drinking 3 or more glasses of the stuff a day isn't something I'd be advising anyone to do simply on the basis of liquid calories not being particularly filling. Given that there are many studies that dance around milk providing ever so slight health benefits as well as many studies that dance around milk providing ever so slight health risk, I'm still comfortable with my belief that milk is neither a magic fairy brew nor a devil's broth and consequently should be consumed in the name of loving it (in the smallest quantities you need to like your life), but not in the name of health, and that eating your dairy, from a health perspective, is likely preferable to drinking it.
Wednesday, October 29, 2014
- All parents are followed by a physician.
- All parents receive 6 months of unlimited one-on-one counselling from a registered dietitian, behaviourist and exercise specialist who will work on family health, parenting, nutrition, healthy active living and the cultivation of healthy attitudes surrounding weight and body image. Parents will continue to meet with all team members following those 6 months at prescribed intervals, but if the need arises, emergently as well.
- All parents who themselves have overweight or obesity will be provided with BMI’s existing 6 month behavioural weight management program which also includes unlimited access to all team members, as well as on-site group fitness classes three times weekly for 6 months.
- Five group classes for children, led by a specialized social worker/behaviourist with sessions focusing on self-esteem, anti-bullying, body image and stereotypes, depression, anxiety, and anger management. There will be no emphasis or discussion on weight at these meetings aside from how weight might play into the emotions and issues being discussed.
- One group class for adults with overweight or obesity led by a clinical psychologist on common psychological roadblocks to self-efficacy.
- Ten hours of one-on-one therapy with a clinical psychologist for parents struggling with mental health issues such as depression and anxiety as improving the treatment of mood disturbances will likely improve those parents' interactions with their children
- Seasonal group fitness outings designed for families led by exercise specialists to introduce families to different active living options.
- Two group cooking classes for all parents at a rented outside facility designed to teach basic cooking and meal preparation skills. Thanks too to the generosity of best selling cookbook authors Greta and Janet Podleski, each family will receive a free copy of their latest compilation The Looneyspoons Collection which was Canada's best-selling cookbook of 2012.
While we haven't yet done any statistical crunching, the outcomes are pretty much what one might expect. Many kids lost weight. Some kids stopped gaining weight. Some kids continued to gain but gained more slowly. Some kids weights and gains didn't see change. That range makes sense too because parenting is fairly described as role model, guide, support and then hope for the best. Put another way, as every parent knows, no matter how badly we want something from or for our children, there simply isn't any way to guarantee we can make it happen.
The adults too had outcomes across the board. From small losses, to one couple who together over the course of their year with us, lost 191 lbs.
But one thing I'm confident of, every single family coming through our Family Reset program, learned how to approach health and weight free from nonsense, free from weight-bias, and learned how to improve upon their family's lifestyles in a manner that was body-image and self-esteem friendly, and one which regardless of weight, benefits health.
Ottawa parents, if you have a child 12 and under whose weight places them in the 85th percentile (for a calculator click here) or higher and would like to be considered for our Family Reset program please give our office a call at 613-730-0264, or send Tori an email and we will quickly contact you to set up an appointment to discuss our program further.
[And Ottawa folks, please feel free to share this post with your various social networks - we still have spots available for this year's programming and would love to help.]
Tuesday, October 28, 2014
I don't get how really smart folks, folks trained to critically appraise actual journal articles, folks for who evidence is reported to be extremely important, regularly tweet out press releases without first having read the study.
Press releases are designed for hype and publicity, not for measured and scientifically supportable conclusions.
If you care about your audience, and you also care about evidence, you owe it to both to stop, read the article in question, and link to it in your tweet along with your own 140 character sound-bite.
Read it before you tweet it!
Monday, October 27, 2014
And, shocker, the singular intervention of stocking healthy foods alongside chips, candy, and soda in corner stores didn't all by itself lead the surrounding 9-11 year olds to lose weight.
Yet that didn't stop The Obesity Society from tweeting out,
I found this tweet incredibly frustrating as by definition complex problems won't be solved by way of singular interventions, and of all folks The Obesity Society ought to know that.
Jumping on pop pub health initiatives w/o science costs time & resources- Study-no benefit for healthy corner stores http://t.co/DAlqXwGMrK— The Obesity Society (@ObesitySociety) October 23, 2014
I'm not suggesting there's an easy solution, but we need to figure out a better way to consider single sandbags than to design (or publicize) studies that invariably will show them to be incapable on their own of stemming a flood.
Saturday, October 25, 2014
Nicola Davis with a great interview of Edzard Ernst, Professor of Complementary Medicine
Judith Newman in the New York Times with an incredible read on the friendship between the iPhone's Siri virtual assistant and a boy with autism.
[And if you don't follow me on Twitter or Facebook, here's a piece I wrote for The Globe & Mail asking why aren't RDs covered by Canada's public servant health care plan, here's a piece I wrote for US News and World Report on obesity and morbid self-righteousness, here's an op-ed I wrote for Examine.com on predatory journals and medical "evidence", and here's a podcast I recorded with Evidence Magazine's Armi Legge on weight management and more.]
Friday, October 24, 2014
If you need proof that Zach Galifianakis' Between Two Ferns is the best talk show around look no further than today's Funny Friday video featuring him interviewing Brad Pitt.
Have a great weekend!
Thursday, October 23, 2014
And I'm not really all that worried. At least not about Halloween night.
The fact is food's not simply fuel, and like it or not, Halloween and candy are part of the very fabric of North American culture and to suggest that kids shouldn't enjoy candy on Halloween isn't an approach I would support.
That said, Halloween sure isn't pretty. On average every Halloween sized candy contains in the order of 2 teaspoons of sugar and the calories of 2 Oreo cookies and I'd bet most Halloween eves there are more kids consuming 10 or more Halloween treats than less - 20 teaspoons of sugar and the calories of more than half an entire package of Oreos (there are 36 cookies in a package of Oreos).
So what's a health conscious parent to do?
Use Halloween as a teachable moment. After all, it's not Halloween day that's the real problem, the real problem are the other 364 days of Halloween where we as a society have very unwisely decided to reward, pacify and entertain kids with junk food or candy (see my piece on the 365 days of Halloween here). So what can be taught on Halloween?
Well firstly I think it's worth chatting about sugar and calories, and those rule of thumb figures up above provide easy visualizable metrics for kids and parents alike.
Secondly it allows for a discussion around "thoughtful reduction". Remember, the goal is the healthiest life that can be enjoyed, and that goes for kids too, and consequently the smallest amount of candy that a kid is going to need to enjoy Halloween is likely a larger amount than a plain old boring Thursday. Ask your children how much candy they think they need to feel Halloween was awesome. In my house it's 3 pieces - so our kids come home, they dump their sacks, and rather than just eat randomly from a massive pile they hunt out the 3 treats they think would be the most awesome and then take their time enjoying them.
Well it goes into the cupboard and gets metered out at a rate of around a candy a day....but strangely....and I'm not entirely sure how this happens....after the kids go to sleep the piles seem to shrink more quickly than math would predict.
You might also check to see if the Switch Witch works in your neighbourhood, where like the Tooth Fairy, the Switch Witch, on Halloween, flies around looking for piles of candy to "switch" for toys.
And if you do happen upon our home, we haven't given out candy since 2006 and we haven't been egged either. You can buy Halloween coloured play-doh packs of 50 for $15 at Costco, Halloween stickers or temporary tattoos at the dollar store, and last year had a tremendous response to our dollar store glow wands and swords. If your community is truly enlightened, you might even be able to buy free swim or skate passes for your local arena (they run about 50 cents per so if you're in a very busy neighbourhood this can get pricey).
Do you have other strategies you'd like to share?
[Here's me chatting about the subject with CBC Toronto's Matt Galloway]
Wednesday, October 22, 2014
First, thank you for your reasonable approach to weight loss and for pointing the finger at the dismal food environment we’ve created. I’ve been following your blog for a few years now and I thought I would give you a brief account of my recent weight loss of which a lot of credit goes to your simple approach, though I haven’t read your book (sorry). I have been dieting or exercising for weight loss for probably 25 years all to no avail until this year. I’ve gone from about 155-160 (at 5’9”) when I graduated high school in 1985 to a high of 215 lbs. at the end of 2013. As of today I’m at 178 lbs and still working at it (37 lbs total loss).
I think part of the problem was that I wanted society to change my eating environment for me or perhaps for there to be a way to eat as much of some kind of esoteric diet (Ornish, vegan, paleo, etc.) as I wanted and still lose weight. I came to the realization that two things had to happen:
- I needed to take charge of my weight loss because the food environment was unlikely to change.
- I needed something that was guaranteed to work and would be simple.
- Set a fixed calorie amount per day – in my case 1,800 and try to get about 100-150g of protein per day. Fat and carbs could vary (I didn’t track them). I had tried 1,600 before and it was way too low and 2,000 didn’t give me fast enough results to keep me motivated.
- Write down and weigh all the food I was eating – the good, the bad and the ugly. This is really not that hard – takes a few minutes a day at most now. Early on, I realized I had eaten 3000-3500 calories some days and the scary thing was how easy that is to do if you don’t pay attention. If I wasn’t sure about a food’s calorie count, like at restaurants, I would just estimate and try to be close – don’t get trapped into being perfect. The food log ended up being the most critical part of the weight loss – I can’t emphasize this enough.
- DO NOT have a weight loss goal or a date to have lost the weight – too easy to fail. Better approach is to remember than not quitting is the only way not to fail.
- Focus on systematically meeting my calorie/protein goal DAILY – the rest will take care of itself.
- Eat any kind of food – nothing is off limits. However, I quickly figured out that whole foods are just more filling than processed ones. Really, I’m not pious about this at all, but the reality is that an 8 oz chicken breast, 6 oz. of boiled golden potatoes with salt & pepper and a couple of cups of broccoli with a pat of butter is so much more filling than a large milkshake for the same calories.
- Eat cake at parties, pie at Thanksgiving, ribs on the 4th of July, etc. without guilt.
- Don’t use setbacks to quit – get back on track and keep working at it even if your weight goes the wrong direction for a few days.
- Don’t get trapped into being perfect.
- Exercise daily for fitness and not for calories – I focused on getting faster in my running and lifting more weight.
- Always look at the menu and decide what to eat BEFORE having a drink - drinking lowers my inhibitions and I go off the rails with my eating
- Write down the meal and calories before eating it – then go to town and enjoy!
- Eat whole foods because they are bulky and fill me up more than refined ones
- Alcohol takes up calories I would rather be eating
- Eat lots of vegetables – they are stupidly low calorie and fill you up
- Meatless days are very hard on a low calorie diet for me.
- Starches like potatoes, rice & pasta seem to have too many calories for how little I enjoy them – replace with veggies I like or more protein.
- Prepare my lunch the night before – I never regret this small chore
- Rolled oats are cheap, low calorie, high protein, fast to cook and I don’t seem to tire of them for breakfast – cinnamon, applesauce, walnuts, brown sugar – lots of ways to mix them up.
- Controlling your food intake by cooking at home is HUGE – very hard to manage calories while eating out regularly
- You can eat healthy and low calorie at practically any restaurant – it’s just not always easy to do
- Don’t let yourself get too hungry or you go off the rails – an apple is usually enough to take the edge off.
- Man up! - you have to be a leader and stay in your own frame – don’t let other people influence you to eat the way they eat even though it doesn’t fit your lifestyle
- Your family will start to follow your lead – my wife weighs the food now before she cooks it!
Tuesday, October 21, 2014
Yet here's betting the health halo of the words, "Granola", the claims, "Made with Whole Grains", "Low-Fat", and "Source of Fibre and Vitamin D", along with the weight-focused branding of "Special K", leads many to think this high calorie sugar bomb is a great, weight-safe, healthful meal or snack.
If you're going to have a dessert cereal, best you know it's a treat and not think it's a health food.
Monday, October 20, 2014
There's been a lot of discussion about obesity. Whether or not it's a disease (as it is in the USA now). How this label would positively or negatively influence action taken by society and governments in addressing this large and growing burden.
This conversation is important, but I have noticed very often it ends with confusion. Questions around why we begin talking about obesity - and end discussing mental health, cancer, heart disease or diabetes. To make hings even more confusing, the term 'Non-Communicable Diseases' might even be mentioned.
Well the reality is that all these diseases are actually highly interrelated. Obesity, diabetes, heart disease, cancers, lung diseases and mental illness (all combined are called Non-Communicable Diseases, or NCDs) largely share the same drivers or "risk factors". Things like an unhealthy diet, using tobacco, drinking alcohol and not getting enough exercise are all related to, or direct drivers of obesity and diseases like diabetes and some cancers. What's more confusing though, is that obesity itself puts us at higher risk for diabetes and some cancers, as does diabetes for heart diseases - for example.
Taking a step back though, the overlap becomes even more apparent. Because at a time when as much as two-thirds of many countries are overweight or obese (and obesity is rapidly rising in even the poorest nations), this is not an issue that comes down to 'stupid individuals making poor choices'. The reason we have a poor diet, or smoke, or don't get enough exercise - is largely due to the built environment around us, the ubiquitous nature of junk-food and alcohol advertising, the way our cities are designed, the structuring of our food system, the subsidies that make unhealthy foods cheap, the over-focus of treatment at the expense of prevention in our health systems, the lack of integrated health education in schools and so on...
These are the structural and social determinants of health, and disease.
My point is that in a nation where 2 in 3 of us are overweight or obese, something much bigger is going on that simply 'stupid people making poor choices'.
My other point is that whilst we might think of these diseases as separated outcomes, they actually have common root causes, risk factors and social determminants. Many of them far beyond the health sector.
Some biting food for thought.
In the month of October, NCDFREE is running a campaign called The Face of NCDs. Here are some crowd-sourced reflections on the overlaps between these diseases, from people like you around the world.
For more stories, head to www.thefaceofncds.org today.
In 2013 Dr Demaio co-founded NCDFREE, a global social movement against NCDs – reaching more than 1.5 million people in its first year. His team convened two international launches and has made 4 short advocacy films; two in collaboration with the World Health Organization.
Currently, he holds a Postdoctoral Fellowship at Harvard Medical School and continues a part-time role as Assistant Professor at the Copenhagen School of Global Health. He also serves on the Advisory Board of the EAT: Stockholm Food Forum.
Saturday, October 18, 2014
Brad Stulberg in The Harvard Public Health Review makes the case for levee building over swimming lessons in behaviour change.
Josephus Weeks, the nephew of Ebola victim Thomas Eric Duncan, with a must read story in The Dallas News on why his uncle's death might have been preventable.
Frank Bruni in The New York Times on how Ebola has highlighted our messed up health priorities and asks, among other things, if you've had your flu shot?
Alex Hutchinson in Runner's World with an amazing example of why the Internet's a great place to write, with his incredibly presented piece on what it's going to take to run a sub 2 hour marathon.
[And if you don't follow me on Facebook or Twitter, here's my piece this week from US News and World Report where I make the case for "Guerrilla Nutrition."]
Friday, October 17, 2014
Thursday, October 16, 2014
Read the actual paper and the story becomes far less exciting.
In brief, study participants were randomized to either lose weight quickly with an all-liquid meal replacement shake program (Optifast), or to lose weight slowly using that same Optifast shake to replace one to two meals daily. Once a target weight loss of 15% was reached all patients who got there were then instructed to follow Australia's national dietary guidelines and to see a dietitian once every 3 months for the next 3 years.
Over that same 3 year period, everyone, regardless of whether they lost weight with Optifast quickly, or lost weight with Optifast slowly, regained the same amount of weight when following Australia’s national dietary guidelines – guidelines not even remotely designed for weight management or satiety (15% protein, 30% fat, 55-60% carbs) - while being provided with very little in the way of ongoing support.
Put another way, being prescribed a weight loss program that involves zero changes to lifestyle (aside from drinking shakes in place of meals), and then once weight is lost quickly or slowly, being told to follow a diet not designed in any way shape or form for weight management while receiving infrequent ongoing support, is clearly equally ineffective.
The fact that weight lost comes back when the intervention you undertook to lose the weight is stopped is anything but surprising, and yet that is precisely what was done with both the rapid losers and the slow losers. That there was no difference in their rate of regain speaks more to the authors' failure of recognizing obesity as a chronic condition, which like any chronic condition, returns once treatment is stopped, than it does to the speed participants lost weight using weight loss interventions that they were explicitly instructed to stop once their weight was lost.
The more weight you'd like to permanently lose, the more of your life you'll need to permanently change. All this study proves is that temporary changes lead to only temporary results and that what matters to your longterm success isn't the speed with which you lose your weight, but whether you lose your weight with a lifestyle that you enjoy enough to sustain.
Wednesday, October 15, 2014
And while I fully expect the likes of both tabloid television and tabloid journalism to ascribe super powers to supplements without the requirement of super proof of those same powers, for some reason (naiveté I'm guessing) I wouldn't have expected the same from the New York Times. And yet...
Yesterday I clicked on a link to a story in the Times that detailed a reporter's experiences travelling from Liberia to New York in this new context of Ebola. When I got to this sentence, had I been drinking coffee I might have spit it out,
"I carried a blue canvas handbag crammed with wallet, laptop, two cellphones, passport, change of clothing, bleach wipes, and two Ziploc bags full of the malaria pills and immune boosters I had been taking for the two weeks I had been covering the Ebola outbreak".Immune boosters?
To date, there are no products that I'm aware of that have been found to have a direct connection between their ingestion and heightened immunity. Sure, there are some theoretical connections (probiotics for instance), but nothing that would make me not scratch my head about the New York Times' journalist (and her editor) who felt that including a casual mention of "immune boosters" as if they were, akin to malaria pills, real and obvious things to pack (and take), in an article about Ebola, during a time of knee jerk medical paranoia, was in the public's best interest.
Why? Well beyond the responsibility a credible newspaper has in providing the public with fact and not fiction, there may be risk to those pharmacy shelf/health food store products that purport to boost immunity, because if they actually did, they would likely cause harm. Mark Crislip of Science Based Medicine explains this succinctly,
"If you really, truly, could boost your immune system, you would almost certainly increase your risk for thrombotic events."The reason there would be risk is that a genuinely boosted immune system is pro-inflammatory which in turn would increase your risk of thrombotic events (like strokes, heart attacks, blood clots, and embolisms).
That a New York Times reporter is not only comfortable purchasing and taking products purported to "boost" her immune system, let alone casually including a mention of them in her article (and having that casual inclusion get past her editor), is a true testament to us needing far more regulation when it comes to our aisles of nonsense.
Tuesday, October 14, 2014
Before I get to the results it goes without saying that these results can't distinguish between cause and effect - meaning that it's unclear if the relationships described by the study, if adopted, would in fact prevent weight gain (or lead to loss). That said, given how easy and straightforward many are, I thought it would be worthwhile to publish a simple recipe for healthful family meals based on the study's findings.
The Perfect Family Meal
- Takes place in the kitchen
- Lasts for 18 minutes or longer
- Has at least one (or ideally both) parents present
- Is consumed alongside attentive, warm and supportive conversation
- Includes a positive discussion of the foods involved (not a discussion in terms of weight or good/bad, but rather such things as where the food came from, what it might be like to grow it, other meals that might be enjoyable from similar/same ingredients, etc.)
6. No screens (TV, phones, or other).
Saturday, October 11, 2014
A harrowing story in the New Yorker by Jennifer Gonnerman on a boy, a stolen backpack, and 3 years of his life.
A great piece of investigative journalism by a team from the Washington Post on the failures that have allowed for Ebola's rapid spread.
Dr. Jen Gunter delivers the Food Babe's most recent idiocy surrounding Glucola and OGTT testing.
Emily Landau in Flare (with some quotes from me) on the baby steps she's taken towards home cooking and the difference they've made in her life.
And here's the segment I did with CTV's The Social this week on sleep, sleep trackers, sleep aids, and sleep issues.
Also, if you're in Ottawa, here are the details on the free public lecture I'm delivering this coming Thursday October 16th at 7:00pm at Centrepointe Theatre for Ottawa Public Health (book signing following the lecture) - tickets are limited so register (freely) today!
Friday, October 10, 2014
Thursday, October 09, 2014
Here's hoping that next year they don't sell cigarettes to help fund a new respirator.
(For newer readers, here's a piece I wrote on why we need to put an end to this sort of fundraising, and if anyone is interested in non-junk food fundraising, here are some recommendations from CSPI, which while specific to schools, are in many ways applicable to hospitals and health foundations (and certainly are so when we're talking about raising a grand total of $4,925)
Wednesday, October 08, 2014
But it also teaches them that doing a teeny tiny bit of exercise warrants being fed, as the food tent is just steps from the finish line and loudspeakers (and food) beckon their visitations.
The fact of the matter is that neither a 1km nor a 5km run require any refuelling whatsoever as our bodies have more than sufficient supplies of fuel to get us through such short durations and distances. The myth that exercise warrants or deserves a food reward is part of our broken societal approach to food as a whole and may well be a contributor to the fact that despite the laws of thermodynamics suggesting they should do otherwise, exercise only interventions meant to address weight tend to fail miserably in part because we've been taught (and do) to eat "because we exercised".
And what of the food in the food tent? Well no doubt in large part due to our ridiculous national Food Guide that still lists juice as a fruit serving, there were post-breakfast (the race began at 9:30am) large cans of juice containing nearly 200 calories and 10 teaspoons of free sugar. There were also 260 calorie bagels with an additional 1.5 teaspoons of free sugar, bananas, and if you were lucky enough to get there first and were so inclined, they also had a few bottles of water (compare and contrast the bottled water availability to the boxes of juice cans in the photo up above that I took from the end of the table).
Tuesday, October 07, 2014
Preparing for the show I was provided with two trackers to test drive. One from Beddit, and one from Fitbit.
The Beddit tracker, a thin strip of high-tech sensors that you adhere to your mattress, chats via Bluetooth with your phone and records heart rate, respiration and sleep time. Below is a typical night of mine's Beddit readout:
As you can see from the Fitbit readout, I'm quite a restless sleeper, but frankly some nights I feel much more rested than others irrespective how much I tossed and turned.
And that's where a notepad shines. Instead of concerning yourself with respiration, heart rate, or movement, concern yourself with how your sleep felt, and using a notepad beside your bed (or a notepad app on your smartphone), when you wake up each morning, rate your sleep on a scale of 1 to 10, where 10's are mornings you feel terrifically well rested, and 1's are mornings you feel tired and a mess. Combine those numbers with information such as how much caffeine or alcohol you consumed (and when you consumed it - both interfere with sleep), your room's temperature, darkness and noise levels, whether or not you used a screen (phone, laptop, TV) before bedtime, what time you went to bed, whether or not you exercised, whether you used a sleep aid, etc. and suddenly you'll have a low-cost, low-tech tool that will allow you to somewhat objectively figure out what matters to your sleep. For instance happily I learned that cutting out both coffee and alcohol from my life doesn't in fact improve my perceived quality of sleep (meaning I don't have to cut them out), but that my room's temperature is best on the colder side if I want to feel rested.
Gadgets are great, but sometimes old-school is the best way to go.
Monday, October 06, 2014
If Health Canada moves ahead with added (or free) sugar nutrition fact panel labelling, could that information also be used to dictate which products are, and which products aren't, allowed to make nutrition and health claims on the fronts of their packages?
Preferentially, I'm for the removal of all front-of-package health claims, but given I can't see that ever happening, wonder if there might be a compromise where products with non-natural trans-fats, or some predetermined amount of free sugars, would be forbidden from using their front of package real estate to try to coax busy shoppers into thinking they're making a good (or less bad) choice.
Froot Loops should not be allowed to infer they're healthful no matter how much vitamin D might be added to them.
Saturday, October 04, 2014
Lois Beckett with a somewhat terrifying piece in ProPublica on how much personal information people were willing to give up in return for a yummy cookie.
Sally Jenkins in the Washington Post with an incredibly hard hitting editorial (pun intended) on how the NFL needs to be treated like the coal industry.
Robert Pearl in Forbes with HIV as a backdrop explains why assumptions are unwise in medicine (and life in general).
[And if you don't follow me on Twitter or Facebook, here's my weekly piece in US News and World Report - this week, more on the science of why The Biggest Loser folks are likely to struggle to keep their lost weight off.]
Friday, October 03, 2014
Thursday, October 02, 2014
"Carbonated candy typically consists of tiny sugar crystals containing highly pressurized carbon dioxide"And when those crystals mix with saliva, they reportedly fizz (think pop-rocks).
Here's betting that when they inevitably do carbonate granola bars, the words "carbonated candy" won't appear on the no doubt health-washed front-of-package nonsense usually festooned on the fronts of Quaker's (a PepsiCo company) granola bar packaging.
Posted by Yoni Freedhoff at 5:30 am
Wednesday, October 01, 2014
I love that it has MDs prescribing exercise to patients.
I love that it helps to provide affordable transportation to low income Bostonians (with an MD's Rx the normally $85 bike share membership cost is dropped to $5 and a free helmet is provided).
I love that it will improve the health of its riders.
I don't love the fact that Boston Medical Center President and CEO Kate Walsh promoted the program by suggesting the bike share will help to combat obesity as you'll no sooner out-ride your fork than out-run it, and perpetuating the myth that you can forestalls both individual and societal efforts at targeting our godawful diets.