From the category archives:

Nutrition Research

So Many Good Reasons to Go Nuts

by Janet on May 10, 2013

Are you a fan of nuts? Almonds, walnuts, pecans, pistachios, pine nuts, hazelnuts…so many wondrous options, so many good reasons to eat them.

hazelnuts by cairistine on flickr

That’s the topic of my latest post for WebMD. Hope you’ll go over there to check it out.

Nuts are one of those foods that have enjoyed a complete turnaround. Once shunned during the low-fat era, nuts have gained new-found respect for the “good” fats they contain. Now there’s growing evidence that adding nuts to your daily routine can be beneficial in so many ways.

For starters, nuts are a core component of the Mediterranean Diet, which made headlines recently after one of the largest studies of its kind examined the heart health benefits of this style of eating. The participants in Spain eating the Mediterranean Diet – supplemented with an ounce a day of nuts (walnuts, almonds and hazelnuts) — experienced a 30 percent reduction in stroke, heart attacks and deaths from heart disease.

The latest evidence, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, is a meta-analysis of 31 different studies that were conducted around the world. These findings should help reassure you that nuts can be safely added to your diet without gaining weight. The researchers found that a nut-enriched diet did not increase body weight, body mass index or waist circumference compared with the control diets (without nuts).

Three new studies were just presented in April at the Experimental Biology meeting in Boston. This research found that eating nuts was associated with a better quality diet (richer in nutrients), lower body weight, lower prevalence of metabolic syndrome and reduced cardiovascular disease risk. The nuts examined in the study included almonds, Brazil nuts, cashews, hazelnuts, macadamias, pecans, pine nuts, pistachios and walnuts.

So there are so many reasons you can feel good about going nuts. Besides the healthy fats in these prized packages, nuts are rich in fiber, plant protein and a bundle of different phytonutrients. They’re a highly satiating food, which means they can tame your appetite and keep you feeling fuller longer. Each nut has a slightly different claim to fame – such as walnuts can boast about omega-3 and almonds are rich in vitamin E – but all nuts are worthy of your attention.

Seven nuts qualify for a FDA health claim related to heart disease prevention: almonds, hazelnuts, peanuts, pecans, pine nuts, pistachios, and walnuts. Even though Brazil nuts, cashews, and macadamias do not meet the criteria because of their higher saturated fat levels, they’re still a healthy choice.

The best approach is to swap nuts for something else you typically eat, rather than just adding nuts to your usual routine. You still need to keep sight of portions, but nuts should be celebrated, not feared.

Dietary guidelines recommend 4 ounces of nuts per week. Here are some ways you can easily add them to your day:

Add chopped walnuts, pecans or sliced almonds to your bowl of oatmeal or yogurt parfait in the morning.
Top your whole-grain toast, English muffin, bagel, pancakes or waffles with peanut or almond butter.
Snack on nuts instead of pretzels, crackers or chips. You can find an array of 100-calorie packs of nuts so you’ll have built-in portion control.
Sprinkle your salad with nuts instead of croutons or bacon bits.
Throw some nuts into the batter when you’re making muffins or quick breads.
Add pine nuts or slivered almonds into your whole-grain dishes, such as quinoa, bulgur or farro.
Try nut-based sauces like pesto to use as a dip for vegetables or to top grilled meats. I’m especially fond of Muhammara, which is made with ground walnuts, and Spanish Romesco, which is made with ground almonds.

You can find more ideas on how to enjoy more nuts, along with recipes for nutty sauces and nut mixes, in my chapter on healthy fats in the Food Lover’s Healthy Habits Cookbook. What are your favorite ways to enjoy nuts?

Tweet This Post

Tagged as: heart health, Mediterranean Diet, nuts

{ 1 comment }

Overcoming Your Fear of Fat

by Janet on July 5, 2012

Long demonized, dietary fats have made a break from the past, and I couldn’t be happier about it. Even so, the concept of good fats is an oxymoron for some folks. It’s just stuck in their heads that all fat is bad. But we’re a long way away from the old food pyramid that dumped all fat and oils into the tip with a warning to “use sparingly.” Now liquid oils and other good fats like nuts have earned a coveted spot on USDA’s MyPlate. For most adults, we should aim for 5-7 teaspoons of oils each day (which includes nuts, olives and avocados).

The topic of good fats was the focus of my latest blog for WebMD’s Real Life Nutrition. In the post, I talked about a new Purdue study that should make you think twice about buying a fat-free salad dressing. Researchers at Purdue found that a fat-free or low-fat salad dressing reduced the absorption of fat-soluble carotenoids – beneficial compounds in the salad such as lutein, lycopene, beta-carotene and zeaxanthin. So by buying some type of bottled fat-free dressing instead of mixing up your own vinaigrette with a luscious-tasting extra-virgin olive oil, you’re not only missing out on the benefits of the oil, you’re getting less out of the salad you just tossed. Plus, just think how much better it’s all going to taste with your own dressing.

The study’s lead author Mario Ferruzzi advised:

If you want to utilize more from your fruits and vegetables, you have to pair them correctly with fat-based dressings. If you have a salad with a fat-free dressing, there is a reduction in calories, but you lose some of the benefits of the vegetables.

This is just another reason why it’s best not to assume that fat-free or low-fat is always better. Sometimes you’re not even saving calories, as this comparison chart illustrates, and the “low-fat” health halo could coax you into eating twice as much, as three recent studies from Cornell University have shown. You also need to look at the ingredients that were used in a product to replace the fat (maybe extra sugar or refined carbs, perhaps more additives). Even messages about eating a low-fat diet can backfire, as this overview from Harvard asserts:

One problem with a generic lower fat diet is that it prompts people to stop eating fats that are good for the heart along with those that are bad for it.

So that’s the big issue. We need to get over our fear of fat so we won’t miss out on the multiple benefits of “good fats.” And we need to get past the idea that low-fat is always better. Here are some suggestions from Cornell University’s Food and Brand Lab on how to avoid the low-fat trap:

Pay attention to the calorie count of foods, particularly low–fat foods. When researchers went to a grocery store and looked at the fat and calorie content of various packaged foods, they found that although the low–fat versions of these foods have 59% less fat than the regular versions, the drop in calorie content is only 15%, which is not large enough to justify our increased consumption.
Understand what claims like “low–fat” and ”reduced fat” really mean, and be sure you’re looking at serving sizes on the label.
Consider buying regular or full–fat versions of snack foods instead of the low–fat ones if you think you’ll still be tempted to overeat. This is especially important for overweight people who showed a strong tendency to overeat low–fat foods, regardless of serving size labels. Also, some research shows that the ingredients companies use to replace the fat can actually make you hungrier, causing you to overeat.

Image courtesy of Selfish Vegan on flickr

Tweet This Post

Tagged as: fat-free salad dressing, good fats, low-fat health halo

{ 6 comments }

Is The War On Obesity a Battle Worth Fighting?

by Janet on October 1, 2011

4207677152_9634680793_o That’s the question posed in a debate during a provocative session at the American Dietetic Association’s Food & Nutrition Conference & Expo last week in San Diego. In one corner was John Foreyt, PhD, a prominent obesity researcher at Baylor College of Medicine. In the other corner was Linda Bacon, PhD, a nutrition researcher at the University of California-Davis and author of Health at Every Size: The Surprising Truth About Your Weight. She also heads up a Health At Every Size Community and speaks throughout the country about her HAES approach — which she calls the new peace movement.

We’ve lost the war on obesity. Fighting fat hasn’t made the fat go away. And being thinner, even if we knew how to successfully accomplish it, will not necessarily make us healthier or happier. The war on obesity has taken its toll. Extensive “collateral damage” has resulted: Food and body preoccupation, self-hatred, eating disorders, discrimination, poor health… Few of us are at peace with our bodies, whether because we’re fat or because we fear becoming fat. It’s time to withdraw the troops.

This was certainly one of the more lively sessions at this year’s conference, and I’m so glad I attended (sitting next to my friend and colleague Marsha Hudnall, author of the blog A Weight Lifted.). However, I’m afraid at the end of the 1-1/2 hours, the sides were more divided than ever and we (the audience) were left a bit wounded on the battlefield. I think we have more to gain by working together than fighting with each other.

Here’s a blog post that gives the backstory of the session and a clip of Linda Bacon talking about her approach so you can get a better idea of what I’m talking about:

Each debater scored some points. Each one lost a few rounds. They both did a good job of discounting the other’s point of view, but the debate format made it challenging to adequately address the topic. I’m not even sure this should have been a debate. But it was….and here’s how I thought it played out.

Round 1 Winner: John Foreyt
I don’t think it serves Linda Bacon’s position well to deny the health consequences of obesity. She spent so much of her time sharing data that the obese live just as long as normal weight individuals and downplaying the health risks of being obese. Why go there? I think that’s why some people just shut down and never hear what this movement is all about. You’re right, Linda, perhaps this shouldn’t be “war,” but I don’t see how you can dismiss the health risks associated with obesity. And there are certainly quality of life issues (not being able to play with your kids, ride a bike, etc.). I just don’t think this is the question we should be asking. Our priority should be discussing what we do about obesity — not debating if there’s even a problem.

Round 2 Winner: Linda Bacon
I think John Foreyt shocked the audience when he dismissed mindful or intuitive eating — and even said it was the reason why we have an obesity problem in America. He lost me on that. I actually think that’s the missing equation in so many weight loss programs. The emphasis should be on health — and how to achieve it. Teaching people the principles of mindful eating — honoring our body’s signals of hunger and fulness, not making judgments of our choices, and choosing pleasureable foods that help you feel good — are all positive things. I agree that it’s all about adopting healthy habits, not dieting. But sometimes this movement takes a militant approach and people think it’s all about “fat acceptance.” Yes, we need to embrace size diversity, but the real value of this approach is sometimes lost because people assume that it means throwing in the towel and giving up.

Round 3 Winner: Tie
At the end of the session, they both made good points. I believe in small changes and long-term weight loss can be sustainable (as Foreyt said), but I do think that most traditional attempts at dieting can do more harm than good (as Bacon reinforced). I liked so many things that Linda Bacon had to say, but I think her statements about “the best way to win the war against fat is to give up the fight” are being misinterpreted. I think it’s more about being happy at every size, and letting go of past approaches to dieting. This movement is quickly gaining ground, and an increasing number of dietitians are embracing the HAES approach. But I think it’s important for people to get past the immediate reaction that these are “obesity doubters” (as Foreyt described) or simply fat acceptors. It’s really all about a healthy lifestyle. Restrictive diets don’t work…but people need guidance on what they should do instead. It’s not enough to say diets don’t work. I think we need to bring these opposing points of view together. I fully agree with the woman in the audience who asked the last question during the session. She ended with “why can’t you both kiss and make up?”

Good question.

If you’re interested in learning more about HAES, here are the handouts that Linda Bacon provided to support her presentation at FNCE.

[Scale image courtesy of flickr user brightcd]

Tweet This Post

Tagged as: American Dietetic Association, FNCE, HAES, Health At Every Size, Intuitive eating, John Foreyt, Linda Bacon, Mindful eating

{ 31 comments }

A New View Of Calories

by Janet on April 5, 2011

5569368944_a943bbeb34 A calorie is a calorie, right? Not so fast.

That age-old adage may no longer be true. Increasingly scientists are realizing that not all calories are created equal. For instance, calories from an apple may not be equivalent to calories from a Twinkie (and yes, even the new chocolate Twinkies).

Read more in my column in the April issue of Cooking Light magazine: How Calories Really Count.

How Calories Really Count

Last summer, Mark Haub, Ph.D, an associate professor of nutrition at Kansas State University, made headlines when he lost 27 pounds after two months of living on Twinkies, Ho-Hos, Little Debbies, and other convenience-store snack cakes.

Haub’s experiment reinforced the calories-in/calories-out equation: If you drastically cut back—as Haub did, from 2,600 to 1,800 calories per day—you will lose weight, no matter how nutrient-deprived your diet may otherwise be. Anyone who knows what calories are—units of energy—knows this to be so.

But lost in the brouhaha surrounding the so-called Twinkie Diet was a more interesting trend: a revision of the idea that all calories are equal. New studies hint that the body may burn calories from whole foods better than it does calories from processed foods like Twinkies. Essentially, it appears the body can “burn” a bit hotter on whole foods and use healthier fuel at the same time. That’s great news for people who want to follow the new Dietary Guidelines, because it addresses two big problems with the American diet: calorie overload and nutrient inadequacy.

While Dr. Haub was carefully counting his Twinkie calories, scientists from Pomona College in California were preparing to publish a small study with interesting implications for anyone who wants to maintain a healthy weight and eat good food.

The researchers fed people two meals with the exact same number of calories; the only difference was how much the food was processed. Group A was treated to sandwiches made with real cheese on whole-grain bread; Group B made do with processed cheese on fiber-stripped white bread. The results, published in Food & Nutrition Research, found that the processed meal decreased the rate of diet-induced thermogenesis—the number of calories you burn when eating and digesting—by nearly 50% compared to the meal made with whole foods.

The calories burned from a single sandwich may be small, but this rise in metabolism caused by whole foods (known as the thermic effect) might account for about 10% of a typical person’s daily calorie expenditure. Although more research is needed, early indicators show that whole foods may offer a real metabolic advantage for calorie counters. Whole foods aren’t just better for you because they’re more nutritious, but they also may be, essentially, lower-calorie.

Weight Watchers, recognizing the differences in how our bodies react to calories—and nudging dieters to eat more whole foods—revamped its points system late last year to make fresh fruits and most vegetables “free.” Eat all you want, the WW plan says. In general, foods higher in fiber and protein were assigned fewer points, and processed foods were given more.

All this comes at a time when calories are back in the nutrition spotlight. The fat-phobia and obsessive carb-counting eras are waning. Governments are talking about “soda taxes” to combat the health costs of consuming too many “empty” calories. Calorie labeling is showing up—voluntarily and by law—on more restaurant menus, and calorie counts are more prominent on some food labels.

This calorie consciousness is a good and a bad thing. Most Americans do need to cut back on calories. Balancing energy in and energy out (which brings in the whole question of exercise) is critical to solving the obesity crisis. But calorie counting per se is tedious and not the real answer, unless you want to go on a Twinkie diet. The better approach is the whole foods approach, because Americans also need to increase intake of a long list of nutrients, including fiber, potassium, calcium, and vitamin D, which are associated with whole foods. Eating more fruits, vegetables, and whole grains delivers those nutrients in a form that may also hold a calorie-burning advantage. [photo credit: gregg_koenig on flickr]

From the April 2011 Issue

Tweet This Post

Tagged as: calories from whole foods, Cooking Light, how calories really count, Mark Haub, not all calories are created equal, twinkie diet

{ 14 comments }

Helping America Eat Right

by Janet on March 9, 2011

NNM times square What will it take to change the way America eats?

It will take an army of registered dietitians. And we’re up to the task, thank you very much.

Well, it’s National Registered Dietitian Day, so we’re feeling pretty good about all that we do. Still, we have our work cut out for us.

We just wrapped up an #RDChat on Twitter and several themes were revealed. To truly help people adopt healthier habits, it’s important to…

Focus on positive nutrition — adding delicious, nutritious foods instead of taking an “avoidance” approach
Get people comfortable in the kitchen — a lack of culinary skills is a primary barrier to healthier eating
Take small steps — people can get overwhelmed by drastic measures
Keep pleasure part of the picture — if you don’t enjoy what you eat, habits won’t stick

Stephen R. Covey, author of the iconic book The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, defines a habit as the intersection between knowledge, skills and desire. I think people know what they need to do to eat healthier – so the knowledge is there. Now we need to focus on the “how” and to inspire them to make those changes. People need new skills and motivation to make it happen.

In honor of National Nutrition Month, several RDs participated in a blog carnival. Hope you’ll check out the great advice from these nutrition professionals.

Tweet This Post

Tagged as: Eat Right, National Nutrition Month

{ 18 comments }

Could Our Love of All Things “Low Fat” Backfire?

by Janet on November 17, 2010

DSCN1041 One of the most anticipated sessions at the American Dietetic Association’s Food & Nutrition Conference & Expo last week was “The Great Fat Debate.”

Even though it didn’t quite live up to the billing — and no feisty arguments erupted — the session was thought-provoking. Yet at the end, the debaters seemed to agree on things more than they disagreed. Bottom line conclusion: low fat diets are not all they’re cracked up to be. The type of fat we eat is more important than the total amount. There’s also no debate that trans fats are bad, omega-3s are good.

The first of the four experts to take to the stage was Walter Willett, MD, DrPH (shown above), chair of the Harvard School of Public Health’s nutrition department. He was probably the boldest in his statements. He thinks all the focus on fat reduction in dietary guidelines has been a “massive distraction” and he wants to see total fat and % of calories from fat abolished from food labels so people won’t zero in on the amount of fat in foods.

He believes today’s low fat advice can even be harmful because it results in the reduction of healthy fats, along with a corresponding increase in carbohydrates — most often refined, sugary grains.

Harvard’s Dariush Mozaffarian, MD, DrPH, believes this trade-off can be harmful to our health. The average carb we eat in the U.S. is worse than saturated fat, he said.

So it all comes down to replacements. Saturated fat has been singled out due to its link to heart disease — although even that connection was called into question during the session because of conflicting evidence. However, unless we replace saturated fat with other fats (mono- and polyunsaurated fats) we could be doing more harm than good.

All four experts agreed that replacing saturated fat with carbohydrates is likely to raise the risk of heart disease, not reduce it (especially with the type of carbohydrates most people typically eat).

How did we get it all wrong? Alice Lichtenstein, DSc, director of the cardiovascular health laboratory at Tufts University, said it’s a problem of message translation. Oh, how often that’s the case. (See my related guest post on the International Food Information Council’s blog Food Insight.)

DSCN1045

There’s been an over simplification of dietary guidlines, which had lead to misinterpretations, she said. Cutting down on saturated fat has been translated to cutting down on all fats. “Low fat” was equated with “healthy,” and then ”low fat” became “low calorie” in the minds of consumers.

People may feel good about buying a low fat muffin, for example, but the calories may be just as high or even higher than a regular fat version.

Lichtenstein warned against focusing on single nutrients for disease risk reduction. This is where the advice can lead people astray.

She said we should stop emphasizing individual dietary components because when one goes down, another goes up.

Instead, Lichtenstein recommends a food-based approach.

I agree. After all, we do eat food — not nutrients.

What do you think?

Tweet This Post

Tagged as: Alice Lichtenstein, American Dietetic Association, fat debate, low fat diets, low-fat, saturated fats, Walter Willett

Is Black The New Blue? Black Rice Touted As An Antioxidant Match For Blueberries

by Janet on September 2, 2010

Black rice photo courtesy of Flickr user Ann@74

Black rice is in the spotlight, based on a new study that found it’s even higher in antioxidants compared to blueberries. Now everyone seems to be talking about black rice, which is also known as “Forbidden Rice.” The dark-hued grain got that moniker because according to Chinese legend, black rice was so coveted that only the emperors were allowed to eat it.

I’ve been on the black rice bandwagon for awhile — writing about the benefits and growing popularity of several black foods in my article three years ago for the Chicago Tribune Is Black the New Black? I previously posted about the trend of black garlic.

Black-colored foods are a signal of health in some parts of the world, and it may be the next big nutrition trend in this country. The black food craze is red-hot in Asia, particularly Japan, and it may be poised to jump West, according to Simone Baroke, health and wellness analyst for Euromonitor International, a global market research firm.

Paul Yamaguchi, a New York-based analyst of the functional-foods market in Japan, said that black foods have always played a prominent role in Japanese cuisine, but now they’ve reached new heights due to the health claims made by these products.

“Black foods have been eaten for hundreds of years in Japan for their rich taste, but now people are buying them for their nutritional value,” he said.

My article featured black beans, black carrots, black raspberries, black soybeans, black vinegar, black mushrooms, black sesame seeds and yes, black rice — which just got a major boost with this new research. The recent press release – and much of the news coverage – positioned black rice as an economical substitute for berries.

Health conscious consumers who hesitate at the price of fresh blueberries and blackberries, fruits renowned for high levels of healthful antioxidants, now have an economical alternative, scientists reported at the 240th National Meeting of the American Chemical Society (ACS). “Just a spoonful of black rice bran contains more health promoting anthocyanin antioxidants than are found in a spoonful of blueberries, but with less sugar and more fiber and vitamin E antioxidants,” said Zhimin Xu, Associate Professor at the Department of Food Science at Louisiana State University Agricultural Center in Baton Rouge, La., who reported on the research. “If berries are used to boost health, why not black rice and black rice bran? Especially, black rice bran would be a unique and economical material to increase consumption of health promoting antioxidants.”

I don’t really care for the “move over blueberries, now you can eat black rice” approach. We shouldn’t be looking at this as a substitute. Fruits contain additionally nutrients not found in grains. And the sugar in berries is natural, so don’t criticize them for that. But I do like the idea of elevating black rice and giving people more reasons to try it — especially instead of white rice.

Blueberries, cherries and other blue/red fruits contain anthocyanins — and that’s the same natural compound found in black rice. This phytonutrient has been linked to a reduced risk of heart disease and cancer, benefits to the brain and anti-inflammation.

According to the press release, brown rice is the most widely produced rice variety worldwide. Rice millers remove only the outer husks, or “chaff,” from each rice grain to produce brown rice. If they process the rice further, removing the underlying nutrient rich “bran,” it becomes white rice. Xu noted that many consumers have heard that brown rice is more nutritious than white rice. The reason is that the bran of brown rice contains higher levels of gamma-tocotrienol, one of the vitamin E compounds, and gamma-oryzanol antioxidants, which are lipid-soluble antioxidants. Numerous studies showed that these antioxidants can reduce blood levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) — so called “bad” cholesterol — and may help fight heart disease. Xu and colleagues analyzed samples of black rice bran from rice grown in the southern United States. In addition, the lipid soluble antioxidants they found in black rice bran possess higher level of anthocyanins, which are water-soluble antioxidants. Thus, black rice bran may be even healthier than brown rice bran, suggested Dr. Xu.

Food manufacturers could potentially use black rice bran or the bran extracts to boost the health value of breakfast cereals, beverages, cakes, cookies, and other foods, Xu and colleagues suggested. The pigments in black rice bran extracts can produce a variety of different colors, ranging from pink to black, which the scientists said could provide a healthier alternative to artificial food colors that manufacturers add to some foods and beverages.

It’s not easy to find black rice. Whole Foods is probably your best bet, in addition to Asian markets. Xu is hopeful that this new research will encourage farmers in Louisiana to grow black rice and will get more people in the country to embrace its use. I’m hopeful too, but so many people won’t even make the switch to brown rice. I love the nuttier, chewier taste of brown and black rice.

Have you made black rice? Here are a few recipes to tempt you. I sure like the idea of the first one from Martha Rose Shulman, why not marry black rice with blueberries!

Forbidden Rice Pudding With Blueberries from New York Times
Black Rice Pudding from Epicurious
Thai Forbidden Rice Salad from Barefoot Kitchen Witch
Forbidden Rice and Beans from Whole Foods

Tweet This Post

Tagged as: anthocyanins, antioxidants, black rice, blueberries, forbidden rice

{ 8 comments }

The Power of 100 Calories to Close the Country’s Energy Gap, Battle Obesity

by Janet on November 15, 2009

It doesn’t sound like much, but there appears to be a lot of power in 100 calories. In fact, some of the country’s leading obesity experts believe 100 calories may hold tremendous potential to stem the obesity epidemic.

In an excellent commentary in the Journal of the American Dietetic Association titled Using the Energy Gap to Address Obesity, James O. Hill and colleagues make a case for the “energy gap.” This term was coined to estimate the degree of change in the energy balance point that’s required to prevent weight gain or maintain weight loss. It’s a calculation based on ”calories in” vs. ”calories out.”

The researchers begin the article with evidence showing how our country got into the mess we’re in. Our collective poundage happened gradually over time — with the average American adult gaining 1 to 2 pounds per year. To prevent this weight gain, the researchers estimate that 100 calories a day change in the population energy balance could theoretically prevent weight gain in 90% of the U.S. adult population. That’s powerful stuff for such a small number.

To lose weight, the energy gap goes up — but not that significantly. The energy gap for weight loss is estimated to be 200-300 calories per day. The researchers suggest having a specific and achievable goal for changing diet and physical activity may be more beneficial than generic advice to eat less and exercise more.

PIIS0002822309014242.gr4.lrg

This chart from the article shows the energy gap at work. For a 100-kg (220 lb.) person to lose 10% of body weight the energy gap is 190 to 200 calories per day. For the same person to lose 15%of body weight, the energy gap is 280 to 300 calories per day.

The continued rise in obesity rates makes you think that something isn’t working. I like the argument that Hill makes in the article. Do people feel overwhelmed by the thought of drastic lifestyle changes to lose weight? He’s been a major champion of the small-changes approach, aimed at helping people make small changes in lifestyle behaviors, which was the focus of a recent report of a joint task force of the American Society for Nutrition, Institute of Food Technologists and International Food Information Council.

There has been little long-term success in treating established obesity through lifestyle change, perhaps because of the large permanent changes in diet and physical activity required to keep weight off. An alternative strategy to address the obesity epidemic involves not focusing on weight loss but promoting small changes in diet and physical activity to initially prevent further weight gain. With the use of this strategy, obesity rates could first be stabilized in most populations and then, over time, decrease gradually. Supporting data show that small reductions in conscious energy intake and increases in physical activity can reduce excessive weight gain. The opportunity exists to use the small-changes approach to bring different stakeholders together to create a national initiative to address the global epidemic of obesity.

310DAFE8K4L._SL500_AA280_ In the “energy gap” article, Hill and colleagues outline multiple ways to implement the energy gap and small changes concept. Research indicates that a small change focused on 100 calories is something that people can achieve and sustain. It’s a specific goal and people feel like they can do it. That may translate to eating 100 calories less (as easy as skipping that giant smear of butter on your bread, drinking water instead of a soda, or foregoing a second glass of wine). Or it could be increasing physical activity — such as taking 2,500 steps a day counted by a pedometer. Starting small is at least starting, and even little lifestyle changes can jump-start other healthy behaviors. But beyond preventing weight gain, taking an energy gap approach can make the task seem more achievable. Setting your sights on a 300-calorie deficit (to lose 15% of body weight) is a specific daily target that can be broken down between diet and physical activity changes.

The article ends with a call-to-action:

A small-changes approach must be included in public health strategies and in public policies to address obesity.

I agree. Let’s don’t overlook the power of small changes. Once again, less is more.

To get you started, here’s an excellent article on 10 easy ways to cut 100 calories every day.

Tweet This Post

Tagged as: 100 calories, energy gap, Obesity, small changes

{ 6 comments }

The Recession Diet

by Janet on March 12, 2009

Is our bad economy making us fat? There’s a growing concern that the deepening recession could inflate America’s waistlines. Are we in store for “recession pounds” as cash-strapped shoppers seek cheaper food?

Sure, the dollar drive-thru menu may look appealing. But as Adam Drewnowski says, the answer lies in affordable but nutrient-rich foods that give you the biggest nutritional bang for your buck — real foods that people relied on during the Great Depression, such as beans, rice, potatoes, milk, cheese, carrots, canned tomatoes and soups. He’s calling it ”a diet for a new Depression.”

photo credit: Nutrient Rich Foods Coalition

And Depression-era foods are back in a big way. Perhaps the best evidence is the latest sensation on You Tube called Great Depression Cooking with Clara, a series of 10 videos featuring 93-year old Clara Cannucciari. Her filmmaker grandson created the videos of Clara demonstrating the meals her family ate during the Great Depression.

Here’s Cannucciari making a “Poorman’s Feast,” a Depression-era version of a celebration meal featuring salad and lentils, rice and a little bit of meat cooked in lemon and oil.

So how are people changing how they eat based on these tough economic times?

The recession has brought back home cooking — or at least eating at home. It’s hard to say home much cooking is actually happening, but 71% of consumers say they’re eating out less. The most popular entree at dinner : sandwiches! That’s according to research by the NPD Group. When people eat at home, they’re apt to eat better.
Some evidence suggests people look to health and wellness in a recession — they are increasingly focused on ways to avoid becoming ill during these uncertain times. But instead of high-priced functional foods, wholesome real foods cooked at home are the likely approach. It’s the back to-basics bailout diet.
The casserole is making a comeback. An article in Advertising Age says this one-dish wonder has become a lot more popular lately among cash-strapped and often culinarily challenged consumers anxious to save bucks while getting dinner on the table. But the modern-day casserole is being re-invented with more fresh vegetables and spice.
Less expensive cuts of meat are quickly growing in popularity, including the cube steak, which is the hottest cut of beef in the country now. An article about the resurgence of cube steak was recently featured in the New York Times by Kim Severson, who lovingly profiled this “wallflower among meat cuts” that brings her back to her childhood dinner table…when “life was safe, steady and predictable.”
NPR food commentator Bonny Wolf says the recession will have a big impact on food trends in 2009 — it will be all about comfort, value and simplicity.

Tweet This Post

Tagged as: depression cooking, depression diet, economy, recession, recession pounds, value

{ 2 comments }

Cooking at Home is Back on the Front Burner

by Janet on February 18, 2009

During these tough economic times, people are returning to the kitchen. That’s good news. And most people (96%) believe that eating at home is healthier than eating out, according to the Food Marketing Institute’s Shopping for Health report.

But some recent headlines would have you believe that cooking at home could be hazardous to your waistline. A Cornell University study published as a letter this week in the Annals of Internal Medicine suggests the popular cookbooks we rely on at home might be making us fat. The researchers examined how classic recipes have changed during the past 70 years, primarily focusing on the iconic Joy of Cooking. They found a nearly 40 percent increase in calories per serving for nearly every recipe reviewed, about an extra 77 calories. This was primarily due to changes in serving sizes and ingredients (extra meat instead of vegetables, more sauces, butter or sugar). Plus, families have gotten smaller, so a dish that once was eaten by 8 people is now consumed by 4.

joy_of_cooking1 joyofcookingx2

But registered dietitian and chef Maggie Green, who served as a lead editor on the updated 2006 Joy of Cooking, is crying foul. She challenges how this study was done — only analyzing 18 recipes out of thousands. She doesn’t believe this small sampling represents the full scope of the book. Additionally, the newer edition provides more nutrition information for the reader and features more fresh ingredients over processed foods.

“I still defy anyone to cook and eat sensibly at home and become obese,” Green told me in an email. “I firmly believe home-cooking and sharing a meal with those you love would go a long way in making this world a healthier place.”

So bottom line, the problem of portion distortion is not limited to restaurant meals. Keeping an eye on portion size is important at home too. But does the YIELD identified in a recipe really determine how much you eat? Not sure folks are really looking at how many servings a recipe makes and then eat accordingly. What may help is switching to a smaller plate. The growing size of our dinner plates makes reasonable portions look puny. Studies show that we tend to eat more as our plates get larger.

With more meals eaten at home, maybe we need to help arm today’s value-conscious home cook with contemporary recipes that help maximize nutrition on a budget. But it all comes down to how much you eat, no matter what recipe you’re using.

Tweet This Post

Tagged as: calories, cookbooks, Joy of Cooking, nutrition research, portion control, Recipes

{ 0 comments }

← Previous Entries

Nutrition Research

So Many Good Reasons to Go Nuts

Overcoming Your Fear of Fat

Is The War On Obesity a Battle Worth Fighting?

A New View Of Calories

How Calories Really Count

Helping America Eat Right

Could Our Love of All Things “Low Fat” Backfire?

Is Black The New Blue? Black Rice Touted As An Antioxidant Match For Blueberries

The Power of 100 Calories to Close the Country’s Energy Gap, Battle Obesity

The Recession Diet

Cooking at Home is Back on the Front Burner

Welcome to Nutrition Unplugged

About Janet Helm

Categories

Recent Comments

Food & Nutrition News

Food Blogs I Like

Global Food Blogs

Nutrition Links

Other Blogs I Read

Resources - Blogging, Food Writing

Restaurant Sites

Tools To Analyze Recipes and Foods

Tracking What You Eat and Drink

Trends

Ways You Can Check Out Diet Fads and Frauds

Search Nutrition Unplugged

Recent Posts

Archives