There's a lot of research to link accumulated visceral fat tissue to aspects of accelerated degenerative aging. Also, separately, a weight of research linking the body's responses to the overeating and lack of exercise needed for most people to build up that fat to aspects of accelerated degenerative aging.
From the article: "We need great weight loss drugs that adjust the metabolism to keep weight off without side effects."
Or we could encourage healthier lifestyles. A good start would be introducing requirements for pedestrian footpaths and bike lanes in new communities. Trying to walk or ride a bike in many recently built communities is either impossible or scary.
That's just one idea, there's a lot of others out there. The bottom line is that if we sit on our butts all day and eat high-caloric sugary foods, then we're going to get fat. That's simply the way our biology is wired. I have a hard time imagining that any new wonder-drug is going to change those fundamentals.
How about encouraging food producers to stop sticking sugar and/or high-fructose corn syrup into EVERYTHING. I'm almost to the point that I feel I could go to the store and look at the ingredients for a container of salt and see sugar/HFCS in there instead of just 'salt.'
"... food producers to stop sticking sugar and/or high-fructose corn syrup into EVERYTHING. ..."
That is a sign you are eating the wrong things. Just as I like my gasses simple [0] so I like my food simple. In fact a Scot would recognise my breakfast (Oats) and any Italian, Greek or Frenchman would recognise what I'm having for lunch (vegetables celery tomato cabbage spring onion spices olive oil soy sauce spices as the noodles & meat are gone) ~ http://www.flickr.com/photos/bootload/4383706461/ left over from last night.
As Jamie Oliver was quoted in TheAge, Good Weekend, p20: "There's a new type of poverty and it's f...ing knowledge poverty".
[0] Obscure Zodiac reference: "...The simpler the molecule, the better the drug. So the best drug is oxygen. Only two atoms. The second-best, nitrous oxide—a mere three atoms. The third-best, ethanol—nine. Past that, you’re talking lots of atoms ..." ~ http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Neal_Stephenson#Zodiac_.281988....
Noodles are hardly a good example of a healthy meal. They consist of pure refined carbohydrates, which are metabolically equivalent to pure sugar. It's not much different from eating a candy bar.
If your Noodles are mostly / only refined carbohydrates you are buying the wrong Noodles. Look calories are not bad, it's ingredients that only contain calories that get you into real trouble.
Really? Do I really need to have HFCS in my whole-grain bread? Or am I 'eating the wrong things?' I'm not talking about removing sugar from donuts or pastries in some attempt to eat junk food and still not get fat. I mean, I'm sure that I could find HFCS in mustard or all things.
This is also not to mention all of the fruit juices/cocktails that are on supermarket shelves that are so loaded with additional sugar or HFCS that I can't even drink them. It would be nice to not have to pay twice the price to get a bottle with 100% juice in it or at the very least have a larger selection of juices that aren't loaded with sugar. It's not even that I'm a huge juice drinker. It's just depressing to see some juice at the grocery store that sounds like an interesting blend of fruit flavors only to realize that the first ingredient on the list is sugar. I mean how many people are actually reading those labels? They are probably buying those bottles of juice thinking that it's somehow more 'healthy' than drinking soda, only to be deceived by the juice companies.
"... his is also not to mention all of the fruit juices/cocktails .."
Squeeze your own so you know what's in it.
"... Do I really need to have HFCS in my whole-grain bread? ..."
Harder, but find a better baker.
"... It's just depressing to see some juice at the grocery store that sounds like an interesting blend of fruit flavors only to realize that the first ingredient on the list is sugar. I mean how many people are actually reading those labels? They are probably buying those bottles of juice thinking that it's somehow more 'healthy' than drinking soda, only to be deceived by the juice companies. ..."
Look I agree. What's not happening is transparency in food processing. That's why I try to remove the processing out of my food. Am I 100% successful, no. But by buying the raw ingredients and cooking them up myself I can attempt to avoid this problem.
Of course the next bit is knowing sovereignty of fruit and vegetables. But that's another problem. I guess as a consumer we can vote with our dollars to make a difference here.
I really think that we need to bring this issue to the fore-front rather than this 'vote with your dollar' stuff. I'm not in favor of government intervention per-se, but eliminating any government subsidies that promote usage of additives could be on the docket. "Vote with your dollar," doesn't really work as a solution unless you reach a critical mass of people that are willing to vote with their dollar. Raising awareness is also a crucial step.
Yep, it's pretty frustrating when you're on the go and looking for something to eat that isn't going to spike your blood sugar and put you into a coma in the afternoon. Not too many options here in Canada.
A good start would be introducing requirements for pedestrian footpaths and bike lanes in new communities.
Having footpaths and cycle lanes almost everywhere hasn't helped the UK's obesity rate which is almost on a par with the US.
They built cycle crossings and a cycle lane outside my house a couple of years ago. I've seen two people using them in that time and perhaps 10-20 cyclists total.
Owning a car and driving is too easy. Building some cycle lanes isn't encouraging people to get onto bikes - it just makes life easier for those who've already made the decision (and so don't need convincing). You'd need to make cars less desirable to have the effect you want, but even that ain't easy.. I didn't see people flocking to bikes when oil was $150 a barrel.
"We need great weight loss drugs that adjust the metabolism to keep weight off without side effects."
Talk about missing the point. As discussed in Good Calories, Bad Calories (aka The Diet Delusion), there was a study done of mice in which a group of mice was bred with knockout genes in order to be much more obese than normal mice. However, they were given the exact same diet as a group of normal, healthy mice. The obese mice had no higher rates of any of the illnesses commonly associated with obesity (diabetes, heart attacks, etc).
But a group of mice that were fed with an unhealthy diet to become equally obese had all of those problems.
Obesity and other health issues have a common cause. Obesity does not cause (most) health issues it is commonly associated with. Solving obesity without solving the common cause will do little more than make us feel better about ourselves.
Being obese doesn't make you unhealthy--being unhealthy makes you obese.
It's "wishful thinking" to say that a "magical drug" won't solve all our problems? Seriously?
I'm pretty sure the people proclaiming that all we need is a miracle drug to eliminate fat are the ones involved in wishful thinking.
Read the facts: http://higher-thought.net/complete-notes-to-good-calories-ba.... Being fat may have some health costs, but the primary impact is caused by the diet that made you fat. If you believe that simply removing the fat caused by an unhealthy diet will make you healthy again, now that is wishful thinking.
If you don't eat healthy, you won't be healthy, no matter how many pills you swallow and how much you exercise.
Based on my wife, who has lost a whole bunch of weight, some weight loss tips:
* Other than say breakfast cereal and snack soups, eat mainly or only food cooked at home,
* By implication, no fast food,
* Lean toward simple minimally processed ingredients,
* No soda,
* Buy smaller plates, US standard dinner plates are way too big,
* For any restaurant, only ever eat half the portion. Sack the rest and eat as leftovers later in the week,
* Where possible, avoid foods such as bread, ready meals, cereal, jams and jellies that contain HFCS,
This ideas can be eased into over a period of months, and will lead to a much healthier diet, and as a bonus, will teach you to cook.
As a further bonus, a diet like this cut our grocery bill for two down to around $300 / month. And we still get dessert!
I did something similar: near the end of January I dropped all soda, increased the amount of meat, cheese, eggs, and vegetables in my diet, and removed almost all rice, pasta, and bread from my diet. I added a large water bottle to my desk and drank it all day.
I kept some desserts, but replaced all my snacks with cashews and other nuts (high fat/protein content, low carbs).
I've lost almost 20 pounds since then. It's damn effective.
I'm not a big guy, but I was getting kinda burly. I made one change, which was eating only half a Chipotle burrito bowl for lunch, instead of the whole thing. That ONE CHANGE dropped me 10 - 15 pounds.
No doubt about it, soda and processed food are poison. It not even like you have to go full-on zealot, just a trip back 20 years to eating meatloaf, nuts, vegetables, home-made bread.
The above articles are not at all convincing. They are also hosted at sites that have a vested interest in selling you weird shit to put in your body that will supposedly make you live longer.
I'm going to eat my vegetables, go to the gym, and pass on the weird shit.
Clearly you didn't click though, much less go on to read the scientific papers linked from those posts. Fight Aging! is a science blog. It reports on published research and advocates more research into aging and longevity. The only thing it's selling is the idea you should give more money than you are presently giving to research efforts like Aubrey de Grey's SENS.
Really, it just illustrates how ridiculous and poisoned the cultural environment has become surrounding fat, aging, and research that someone would knee-jerk the remark above.
Growth Hormone is stimulated by exercise. The simplified story is that GH puts sugar into cells so that it can be used. Sure you can choose to buy that diet drink if you don't stimulate much GH (don't yell at the food companies for giving people what they buy) but if you ride your bike and take the stairs having that coke will only leave you with a smile.
Excess sugar, on the other hand,is toxic as we just ain't used to it (evolution). If too much sugar floats around the blood the immune system feels the need to respond and the sugar related molecules collect and glom into more antigenic moiety junk...blah,blah we then get chemical and physical reactions and clogging of capillaries and membrane pores and all that other complicated stuff. Bad for most systems in the body, it's only been recent that we figured the brain was just as susceptible as the tiny nerves and the tiny arterioles surrounding the nerves in the toe of a diabetic.
Bodies can make sugar out of other nutritive molecules. In general, eat less sugar and stimulate more Growth Hormone by exercise. GH is a true fountain of youth.
23 comments
[ 5.1 ms ] story [ 75.8 ms ] threadhttp://www.fightaging.org/archives/2008/03/a-gentle-reminder...
http://www.fightaging.org/archives/2009/12/grow-fat-and-lazy...
There's a lot of research to link accumulated visceral fat tissue to aspects of accelerated degenerative aging. Also, separately, a weight of research linking the body's responses to the overeating and lack of exercise needed for most people to build up that fat to aspects of accelerated degenerative aging.
Or we could encourage healthier lifestyles. A good start would be introducing requirements for pedestrian footpaths and bike lanes in new communities. Trying to walk or ride a bike in many recently built communities is either impossible or scary.
That's just one idea, there's a lot of others out there. The bottom line is that if we sit on our butts all day and eat high-caloric sugary foods, then we're going to get fat. That's simply the way our biology is wired. I have a hard time imagining that any new wonder-drug is going to change those fundamentals.
That is a sign you are eating the wrong things. Just as I like my gasses simple [0] so I like my food simple. In fact a Scot would recognise my breakfast (Oats) and any Italian, Greek or Frenchman would recognise what I'm having for lunch (vegetables celery tomato cabbage spring onion spices olive oil soy sauce spices as the noodles & meat are gone) ~ http://www.flickr.com/photos/bootload/4383706461/ left over from last night.
As Jamie Oliver was quoted in TheAge, Good Weekend, p20: "There's a new type of poverty and it's f...ing knowledge poverty".
[0] Obscure Zodiac reference: "...The simpler the molecule, the better the drug. So the best drug is oxygen. Only two atoms. The second-best, nitrous oxide—a mere three atoms. The third-best, ethanol—nine. Past that, you’re talking lots of atoms ..." ~ http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Neal_Stephenson#Zodiac_.281988....
But in moderation. Probably twice/week. I'm eating the left-over vegetables only.
Really? Do I really need to have HFCS in my whole-grain bread? Or am I 'eating the wrong things?' I'm not talking about removing sugar from donuts or pastries in some attempt to eat junk food and still not get fat. I mean, I'm sure that I could find HFCS in mustard or all things.
This is also not to mention all of the fruit juices/cocktails that are on supermarket shelves that are so loaded with additional sugar or HFCS that I can't even drink them. It would be nice to not have to pay twice the price to get a bottle with 100% juice in it or at the very least have a larger selection of juices that aren't loaded with sugar. It's not even that I'm a huge juice drinker. It's just depressing to see some juice at the grocery store that sounds like an interesting blend of fruit flavors only to realize that the first ingredient on the list is sugar. I mean how many people are actually reading those labels? They are probably buying those bottles of juice thinking that it's somehow more 'healthy' than drinking soda, only to be deceived by the juice companies.
Squeeze your own so you know what's in it.
"... Do I really need to have HFCS in my whole-grain bread? ..."
Harder, but find a better baker.
"... It's just depressing to see some juice at the grocery store that sounds like an interesting blend of fruit flavors only to realize that the first ingredient on the list is sugar. I mean how many people are actually reading those labels? They are probably buying those bottles of juice thinking that it's somehow more 'healthy' than drinking soda, only to be deceived by the juice companies. ..."
Look I agree. What's not happening is transparency in food processing. That's why I try to remove the processing out of my food. Am I 100% successful, no. But by buying the raw ingredients and cooking them up myself I can attempt to avoid this problem.
Of course the next bit is knowing sovereignty of fruit and vegetables. But that's another problem. I guess as a consumer we can vote with our dollars to make a difference here.
Having footpaths and cycle lanes almost everywhere hasn't helped the UK's obesity rate which is almost on a par with the US.
They built cycle crossings and a cycle lane outside my house a couple of years ago. I've seen two people using them in that time and perhaps 10-20 cyclists total.
Owning a car and driving is too easy. Building some cycle lanes isn't encouraging people to get onto bikes - it just makes life easier for those who've already made the decision (and so don't need convincing). You'd need to make cars less desirable to have the effect you want, but even that ain't easy.. I didn't see people flocking to bikes when oil was $150 a barrel.
Talk about missing the point. As discussed in Good Calories, Bad Calories (aka The Diet Delusion), there was a study done of mice in which a group of mice was bred with knockout genes in order to be much more obese than normal mice. However, they were given the exact same diet as a group of normal, healthy mice. The obese mice had no higher rates of any of the illnesses commonly associated with obesity (diabetes, heart attacks, etc).
But a group of mice that were fed with an unhealthy diet to become equally obese had all of those problems.
Obesity and other health issues have a common cause. Obesity does not cause (most) health issues it is commonly associated with. Solving obesity without solving the common cause will do little more than make us feel better about ourselves.
Being obese doesn't make you unhealthy--being unhealthy makes you obese.
http://www.fightaging.org/archives/2008/03/lose-the-visceral...
http://www.fightaging.org/archives/2008/01/how-excess-fat-ti...
It's the fat.
I'm pretty sure the people proclaiming that all we need is a miracle drug to eliminate fat are the ones involved in wishful thinking.
Read the facts: http://higher-thought.net/complete-notes-to-good-calories-ba.... Being fat may have some health costs, but the primary impact is caused by the diet that made you fat. If you believe that simply removing the fat caused by an unhealthy diet will make you healthy again, now that is wishful thinking.
If you don't eat healthy, you won't be healthy, no matter how many pills you swallow and how much you exercise.
As a further bonus, a diet like this cut our grocery bill for two down to around $300 / month. And we still get dessert!
I kept some desserts, but replaced all my snacks with cashews and other nuts (high fat/protein content, low carbs).
I've lost almost 20 pounds since then. It's damn effective.
I'm not a big guy, but I was getting kinda burly. I made one change, which was eating only half a Chipotle burrito bowl for lunch, instead of the whole thing. That ONE CHANGE dropped me 10 - 15 pounds.
No doubt about it, soda and processed food are poison. It not even like you have to go full-on zealot, just a trip back 20 years to eating meatloaf, nuts, vegetables, home-made bread.
I'm going to eat my vegetables, go to the gym, and pass on the weird shit.
Really, it just illustrates how ridiculous and poisoned the cultural environment has become surrounding fat, aging, and research that someone would knee-jerk the remark above.
Excess sugar, on the other hand,is toxic as we just ain't used to it (evolution). If too much sugar floats around the blood the immune system feels the need to respond and the sugar related molecules collect and glom into more antigenic moiety junk...blah,blah we then get chemical and physical reactions and clogging of capillaries and membrane pores and all that other complicated stuff. Bad for most systems in the body, it's only been recent that we figured the brain was just as susceptible as the tiny nerves and the tiny arterioles surrounding the nerves in the toe of a diabetic.
Bodies can make sugar out of other nutritive molecules. In general, eat less sugar and stimulate more Growth Hormone by exercise. GH is a true fountain of youth.