Exercise can't compensate for sitting
COLUMBIA, Mo. (UPI) -- Even exercising for an hour a day isn't sufficient to reverse the effects of sitting the rest of the day, U.S. researchers found.
University of Missouri-Columbia researchers Marc Hamilton and Theodore Zderic found evidence that sitting had negative effects on fat and cholesterol metabolism and that physical inactivity throughout the day stimulated disease-promoting processes.
Hamilton said that there is a misconception that actively exercising is the only way to make a healthy difference in an otherwise sedentary lifestyle but his studies found that standing and other non-exercise activities burn many calories in most adults even if they don't otherwise exercise.
"The enzymes in blood vessels of muscles responsible for 'fat burning' are shut off within hours of not standing," Hamilton said in a statement. "Standing and moving lightly will re-engage the enzymes, and it stands to reason that when people sit much of that time they are losing the opportunity for optimal metabolism throughout the day."
Common non-exercise physical activities include: household chores, shopping, fidgeting and standing while watching a ball game, watching TV or talking on the telephone.
The findings are published in Diabetes and are to be presented at the Second International Congress on Physical Activity and Public Health in the Netherlands.
Copyright 2007 by United Press International
Slim pickings for the women who are starving to look good
More magazine's latest offering serves up a depressing hotch-potch of information about dieting, resulting from interviews with 2,000 women across the UK. The headlines go like this: over a lifetime women spend, on average, more than £150,000 on diet products including books and dvds, gym membership, specialist foods and supplements. In spite of this, average weight loss is three pounds in any one year – most of which is put back on – so every pound lost costs £807.
The average length of time a woman tries to diet before a big event is four weeks, and young women now have a much more "short, sharp burst" attitude to weight loss than their mothers and grandmothers ever did.
Research says that women (the average age of the sample was 23) tend not to believe female celebrities whose bleating explanation for sudden dramatic weight loss is often either, "I just can't to keep weight on, no matter how much I eat..." or "It just dropped off after I had the baby...it must be down to breastfeeding."
Apparently 67 per cent of those surveyed thought the likes of Lily Allen, Paris Hilton, Victoria Beckham and her Spice Girls colleague Geri Halliwell actually achieve their wafer-thinness by opting for the "No Food Diet".
And thinking seems to go that if these suspected drastically slim pickings are okay for the celebs, that's where ordinary young women follow. Maybe this accounts in part for the fact that, although women in general have got bigger since the Second World War, the shops are selling clothes in ever-tinier sizes. We have a generation of younger women now who either gorge themselves or starve to be fashionable and emulate their icons.
Ninety per cent of women have gone at least one day without eating to lose weight, 30 per cent have starved themselves for two or more days, and seven per cent have fasted for four days.
Nearly half of those questioned said they eat only one meal a day, and that they started on this regime at the age of 15. A fifth follow a day of eating by a day of not eating, in order to lose weight or maintain weight loss.
Some of these will be seriously threatening their health, and some will be those who consume hardly any food on a Thursday to mitigate the calories they'll take on board on Friday night from a pizza and eight or 10 glasses of wine.
More's target audience isn't the older woman who knows better than to follow fad diets. The younger women who are probably the core of its readership will read the figures on diet provided by this survey and devour them – they are, after all, calorie-free.
The magazine's editor, Lisa Smosarski, says : "A whole generation of women have a dysfunctional eating pattern of endless mini starvation diets... It's very a very unhealthy, short-term approach to food, and means one day nothing will pass a girl's lips so that she can look 'hot' for a party..." Read More.
The Skinny on Carbohydrates (And don't leave me snotty or know it all comments because you're anti-all-carbs or only eat crescent rolls during a blue moon or pass on the apples and bananas because Jupiter is in the wrong alignment with your treadmill's model number. I don't give a snot).
Melina Jampolis, M.D.
Carbohydrates have been making a comeback lately. In the late '90s, the bun-less double bacon cheeseburger was considered health food, but in the past year or two, with even more research emerging on the importance of whole grains in disease prevention, we have been forced to rethink our boycott of the bread basket. Nevertheless, the average person is still confused about the role of carbohydrates for optimal health and weight loss. When it comes to carbohydrates, it is important to understand that quality and quantity matter.
Carbohydrate Quality: When we think of carbohydrates, we think of bread, pasta, rice, cereal, baked goods and potatoes, but they are also present in fruits, vegetables and dairy. All carbohydrates (except fiber) are eventually broken down into simple sugars, your body's favorite source of fuel. How quickly foods are absorbed and broken down into simple sugars (and therefore raise blood sugar), a value known as the glycemic index (GI), is an important criterion for evaluating carbohydrate quality. Whole, non-processed carbohydrates (vegetables, low-fat dairy) and carbohydrates that are high in fiber (whole grains) tend to be low glycemic while refined, processed and sugary carbohydrates like baked goods, juice, soda, white bread, white rice and white potatoes are generally high glycemic.
Why does the glycemic index of food matter? High-GI foods increase blood sugar very quickly, causing an exaggerated release of insulin. This leads to a subsequent crash in blood sugar, which can leave you feeling tired and hungry - neither of which is good for your waistline or your general well-being. In addition, having too much insulin in your bloodstream regularly can cause dangerous fat to accumulate around your midsection, significantly increasing your risk of heart disease. While studies on GI and weight loss have shown mixed results, in my practice, I find that a low-GI diet helps control hunger and keep energy levels stable throughout the day. And studies suggest it may decrease your risk of heart disease, age-related macular degeneration, breast cancer and diabetes, so even if you don't lose weight, a low-GI diet wins.
Carbohydrate Quantity: When it comes to weight loss, low=carbohydrate diets outperform the rest, in the short term. But most, if not all of the weight loss, is generally regained within a year because it is difficult, if not impossible, to stay on these diets long term. If you tend to carry your weight around your midsection, the so-called apple-shaped body type, studies suggest that you will lose more weight, particularly around your waist, by reducing carbohydrates. But rather than cut them completely, focus on cutting back and eating mainly fruits, vegetables (except potatoes) and whole-grain carbohydrates such as whole grain bread, brown rice, barley and high-fiber cereal. In my book, "The No Time to Lose Diet," I developed a carbohydrate calculator (click here) to help customize the number of starchy carbohydrates you should consume for weight loss. Studies show that eating at least 3 servings of whole grains per day is associated with a reduced risk of heart disease, stroke and Type 2 diabetes. And for athletes (even weekend warriors), you need carbohydrates to fuel your muscles, otherwise you will run out of steam quickly or worse, burn muscle for fuel.
So as you can see, there is no need to fear the carbohydrate. The right carbs can help you become (or stay) healthier and slimmer.
Dr. Melina B. Jampolis is a board-certified physician nutrition specialist. She is the host of Fit TV's "Diet Doctor" and author of "The No Time to Lose Diet" (Nelson Books, 2007). She is in private practice in San Francisco focusing on nutrition for weight loss and disease prevention.
This article appeared on page P - 7 of the San Francisco Chronicle
