Dr David Katz - total added sugar.

I appreciate the work of Dr David Katz. He has a recent article that has much to say about sugar. The second point he makes is about 'total added sugar'. We've been posting recently about food labels a couple different times. This section from Katz highlights the efforts by the food companies to make the product look healthier than it is. Sugar can come in many forms with many names and by separating them into the various names, it is possible to make the product look like it has less sweetener in it than it really does. Katz argues for simplifying things and forcing the label to have a line: "total added sugar". Makes good sense.

The other stuff he says in the article is helpful also, as is his NuVal food scoring system and the work he does with Lifestyle Medicine. I commend his work to you for keeping up on what is healthy - or not. (Other helpful approaches to medical care are called Integrative Medicine andFunctional Medicine.)

Addictive food

Here is a very interesting article about addictive foods.  It tells about a number of things. First, it recounts the story from back in 1999 when an executive from Pillsbury, James Behnke, gathered the top execs from the eleven companies who ruled the processed food market and were battling each other for what they called "stomach share". The agenda was the growing childhood obesity problem. James was a scientist by training and "...In the months leading up to the C.E.O. meeting, he was engaged in conversation with a group of food-science experts who were painting an increasingly grim picture of the public’s ability to cope with the industry’s formulations — from the body’s fragile controls on overeating to the hidden power of some processed foods to make people feel hungrier still. It was time, he and a handful of others felt, to warn the C.E.O.’s that their companies may have gone too far in creating and marketing products that posed the greatest health concerns..."  He led the executives through 114 slides that detailed the growing crisis. His hope was to get some movement as a group in a healthier direction.

Reports are that Steve Sanger, head of General Mills (who was taking over large sections of the grocery store shelves and "stomach share" spoke up and responded along these lines: "...he reminded the group that consumers were “fickle.” (Sanger declined to be interviewed.) Sometimes they worried about sugar, other times fat. General Mills, he said, acted responsibly to both the public and shareholders by offering products to satisfy dieters and other concerned shoppers, from low sugar to added whole grains. But most often, he said, people bought what they liked, and they liked what tasted good. “Don’t talk to me about nutrition,” he reportedly said, taking on the voice of the typical consumer. “Talk to me about taste, and if this stuff tastes better, don’t run around trying to sell stuff that doesn’t taste good...General Mills would not pull back. He would push his people onward, and he urged his peers to do the same.” That essentially ended the meeting.

The author goes on to say: "...So why are the diabetes and obesity and hypertension numbers still spiraling out of control? It’s not just a matter of poor willpower on the part of the consumer and a give-the-people-what-they-want attitude on the part of the food manufacturers. What I found, over four years of research and reporting, was a conscious effort — taking place in labs and marketing meetings and grocery-store aisles — to get people hooked on foods that are convenient and inexpensive..."

The article continues with a description of the rise of Dr Pepper, what is called the "bliss point", Oscar Mayers bologna crisis, and Frito-Lay's search for a designer sodium. It also shares results from a 2011 study in the New England Journal of Medicine that describes the problem with potato chips, and of course, what discussion about junk food/addictive food would be complete without a story about Coca-Cola.

The individual consumer is hardly able to compete with the cash and resolve to make money displayed by the few companies that rule the processed food aisles... which is most of the store!

Did you fall for these?

Speaking of food labels, as a general rule it is best to pay very little attention to what the front of the box says. It is mostly hype and designed to change our minds/get us to buy the product.  They can easily say things that are 'not-a-lie' but, when you look at all the information, not really accurate or helpful in making an informed decision. Here is a good article about just that trick used to sell cereal.

Calorie Density by Food Group

I recently posted on Calorie Density by Food Label. It introduced the concept of Calorie Density and gave some examples of how to use it.  The challenge is that this method is quite tedious and unmanageable when used in real life - who is really going to check each item every time? 

Some clever people have taken the info and adjusted it for food groups.  They have applied it to broad categories to give you helpful directions. When food is not very calorie dense you can be far less careful about consumption level. When it is very calorie dense you have to be extremely careful about how much you consume.

When you look at the picture for this post you see the categories and some other info. Far left is calorie light, and portion control is not much of an issue - just get a balance of lots of different fruits and veggies to get the best balance of nutrients (which are mostly on the right side, by the way!). Left side is calorie dense - much easier to overeat.  Nuts/Seeds and Oils do have some nutritional value so the point is not to totally avoid the far left side, but just eat in appropriate portions. And if you mix veggies (a salad) with oils (a dressing) and pour the dressing on liberally, you've moved the salad way over to the left side of the picture.

Here are three pictures that give some different looks at calorie density:

Calorie Density Basic Groups. (described above).

Calorie Density Breakouts. This looks at some experiments they did.  When people ate food that was less than one calorie per gram, they lost weight no matter how much they ate (ate till they were full). When they ate till they were full from food that was between one and two calories per gram they lost weight if they were generally active (30-60 minute per day), with less likely to lose if not active and more likely to lose if more active.  If they ate till they were full from food that was between two and three calories per gram, everyone gained weight except for elite athletes.  If they are till they were full from food that was over three calories per gram, everyone gained weight, even elite athletes.

Calorie Density Target Average. Aim for about 1.2 Calories per gram on average and you'll be in good shape. In simple terms that means eat mostly from the green categories on the left and sprinkle in nutrient rich food from the far right. You would do best to go light on meatand avoid refined/junk food altogether or atmost very occasionally.

Calorie Density by label

This is the first in a series of posts on food and the choices we make about what we do or don't eat. At the end of the posts (likely about ten of them) I'll post one that will summarize them all, and link back to them by simple design?

Calorie Density - I first came across this in a video from Fox2News in Detroit when they did a two part series on the subject under the heading "The Doctor Is In.". (This link has been acting up a bit recently - hope it works for you!). Dr Tom Rifai explained how to use the concept of calorie density to make better decisions in the store. The concept goes back to Volumetrics, a concept started by Dr Barbara Rolls.

A little longer look can be found on YouTube done by Jeff Novick. The concept is pretty simple. Look at the food label (the part that has lots of facts that few people know how to really use) and find two numbers: Serving weight (often in grams) and Calories per serving (and note the serving size - an important piece of info by itself!). 

When you look at the picture for this post - a bag of carrots, you see those numbers on the label: 85 grams per serving and 35 Calories per serving. Roughly 1/3 as many calories as grams so about .33 calories per gram.

If you would look at a pint of Ben and Jerry's icecream the numbers come out at 114 grams per serving and about 370 Calories per serving. In this case there are roughly three times as many calories compared to grams, or said another way: about three calories per gram.  So LOTS more calories packed into each gram of Ben and Jerry's; that means it is more calorie dense.  The more calorie dense a food is the easier it is to over-eat it. (there will be a post coming on 'feeling full' - an important factor in staying healthy).

This is a simple way, using the food labels that are already there, to determine if something is healthy or not so much. In my next post we'll take this info and apply it to larger food groups to see if that can make using the info a bit easier, especially as it relates to where the important nutrients are - you guessed it: NOT on the calorie dense side. It is important for us to 'feel full' (research shows that we all tend to eat a certain amount/weight of food, regardless of what kind of food is in there) so if we are eating calorie dense foods, we have to eat more of them to get that full feeling, and end up with lots more calories than we want/need.

Fat Shaming

I focus on three things in my workshops: exercise, diet and play.  When I talk about the 'diet' piece I almost always have shown a series of slides from the CDC on the obesity crisis.  I'm always try to make the point that, in this Western world so full of sugar and food additives, some people just have extreme difficulty keeping their weight where they want it.  I've met lots of people who are working hard at exercise (some of them very hard) and are careful with what they eat (some of them very careful), and they still are classified as obese.

This article tackles the issue of 'fat shaming' - that, sad to say, even shows up in our Presidential politics.  It starts early, it affects women more than men, and people who are obese even 'fat shame' themselves. Hopefully the church community is a place to find forgiveness, and friendship and support.

Primary Food.

This post comes from a blog I watch regularly on my Twitter feed: Integrated Nutrition. The blog post is about "Primary Food".  It is a helpful look at keeping a whole person view of health.  As the post says, you can be eating all healthy foods and still not feel truly healthy if other key areas are out of whack.  Their key point is here (they are pretty weak on the source of Spiritual power but we know where that comes from):

The bottom line is: when you are nourished and happy in the ways that truly matter, food becomes secondary. 

Here are some of the things we consider to be Primary Foods:

• Regular physical movement
• Meaningful positive relationships
• Fulfilling work
• Some form of spiritual connection (whatever that means for you)
• Following your personal passions
• Non-dietary forms of self-care
• Playfulness, creativity, and fun

Some simple things to work on. May be good to start where you have strengths and are doing well and affirm your positives and then build off the strengths into the areas that are weaker.

Prevention vs Treatment

I'll post a fair bit of information from this guy - Dr David Katz.  He is a medical professional focused on prevention. He is behind the NuVal food scoring system, the True Health Initiative which lifts up six simple core principles of healthy living, and Lifestyle Medicine which acknowledges the power of healthy living over disease.

He even has resources to get kids and even adults moving for better health and brain function.

Food Choices When Shopping.

So many choices - so many of them unhealthy.  The playing field is not quite fair: the small number of companies (five or six) responsible for all the processed food in our grocery stores (many thousands of different individual labels) are making lots of money and we have to remember that is their bottom line - profit. Nothing wrong with profit. We just have to remember that our health is not their main goal - despite what the advertisements say!

So how do you choose when you are in the store? Here are some tips:

1. Michael Pollan has some specific 'rules' you can follow and they are reduced to three main ones: Eat food (the less processed the better; look for the least number of ingredients, and terms you can understand and know what they are), not too much (portions are out of whack in restaurants - and perhaps you your plates at home) and mostly plants (he is not against meat but fruits and vegetables are the healthier choice overall).

2. Stay on the outside edge of the grocery store. That is where you can find the healthier options for the most part.

3. Use something like NuVal as a neutral help for which item (among the 20 feet of bread in the bread aisle for example) is healthier. (Neutral is important: These guys are unattached from the food industry so they can give ratings based on science and not on who pays them the most.) I'm a bit frustrated at the expense ($20 per month) but that is the challenge. The Big Food companies are spending plenty to get us to eat the unhealthy stuff; we'll have to pay something to get the best info on what are the healthiest options.

4. Use resources like Cancer Fighting Kitchen - when you eat healthy for cancer you are eating healthy for life. Rebecca Katz has books and workshops and more.

Understanding Habits...

Charles Duhigg has written a very helpful book called The Power of Habit. It looks at how habits are formed and how to change them.

Some key things to remember: He describes the 'habit loop': Cue, Routine, Reward.  The 'Cue' might be something like the stress of a difficult meeting; the 'Routine' we end up repeating might be eating comfort foods and the 'Reward' is that we feel some relief.  If that pattern has been used for a long time it will be difficult to change, but not impossible.

Duhigg suggests keeping the 'Cue' and the 'Reward' and inserting a new routine - in the example above, a routine that is healthier for the long haul, so you substitute exercise for food.  He is careful to say that the old routine will still be there and, in the transition phase, it will be easy to slip back into the old routine. 

Another key learning is what he calls 'Belief' and 'Community'. If we believe that the new routine will actually work (perhaps you've learned that research has shown exercise to be a great stress reducer). Keeping with the new routine will be easier if you actually have tested and found it to be true yourself. And finding others who share the belief, or the need to change a similar routine adds dramatically to the chance of success.

He also wrote about some very interesting research that shows willpower to be something like a muscle - the more you use it the stronger it gets.  And focusing on one area of your life - exercising for stress reduction for example - can help in other areas as well.  Spending time thinking about how to be successful in that area and setting yourself up for success dramatically increases the chances of improving in other areas of life you'd like to work on.