NY Times Defends Trans Fats

In what may be one of the dumbest articles on health I have ever read, a New York Times reporter defends trans fats, labeling a call by Dr. Thomas Frieden, the New York City health commissioner, to remove trans fats from restaurant foods the "panic du jour."

Author Gina Kolata suggests that the hype around the health risks of trans fats has been blown way out of proportion. She cites the valid fact that Americans consume much more saturated fat than trans fats as evidence that our concerns are misplaced. While it is true that saturated fats are the primary culprit in heart disease, it is also true that we need some saturated fat in our diets to maintain healthy hormone levels; around ten percent of fat calories consumed should be from saturated sources unless one is battling high cholesterol. Yet it is also true that we don't need ANY trans fats in our diets and that they serve no good purpose other than making processed foods more palatable. Trans fats could be completely removed from the American diet without any detriment to health and only a small financial loss for processed foods manufacturers.

What follows is an excerpt from an article I wrote on unhealthy fats for an issue of Equilibrium in the summer of 2003 that explains some of the science and dangers of trans fats.

First, the bad news: excess dietary fat has been linked to heart disease, obesity, autoimmune disorders, colon cancer, prostate cancer, breast cancer, and inflammatory diseases, such as arthritis. In terms of caloric intake, one gram of fat yields nine calories, while protein and carbohydrates each yield four calories. It has long been assumed that eating fat can make us fat -- in fact, eating the wrong fats can kill us.

Now, the good news: not all fats are equal. A handful of researchers, most notably the late Dr. Atkins, were able to prove that dietary fat is not the only factor that makes a person overweight. Their research and dietary strategies showed that carbohydrates -- and the associated rise in insulin levels -- are the most significant cause of body fat accumulation. These researchers also discovered that certain fats, such as the omega-3s, are good for us.

Saturated Fat
For years we have known that saturated fat increases serum cholesterol and is a leading cause of atherosclerosis (fat deposits in arteries). We know, therefore, that high-fat animal foods seriously increase the risk of heart disease and stroke. Unfortunately, this knowledge hasn't led to healthier dietary habits for the majority of Americans.

We also know that saturated fat is preferentially stored in adipose tissue (the body's fat cells), which explains why eating fat makes us fat. Because saturated fats have no double-bonded carbons in their structure, they can yield more energy per carbon than if they had double bonds (like the omega fatty acids), which is why the body stores them in adipose tissue.

The human body uses fats according to their structure. Polyunsaturated fats are used as the building materials for cell membranes due to their flexibility. Saturated fats are much more rigid, so the body will use them only as stored energy. Consuming saturated fats with a high carbohydrate meal (which significantly raises insulin) will result in the saturated fat quickly being shuttled into adipose tissue. A Big Mac, fries, and a chocolate shake is the perfect recipe for fat storage.

However, while the fat is still circulating in the blood, it has a tendency to clump due to its long-chain structure. These clumps of fat can be deposited within arteries, organs, and even muscle. When these clumps of fat are deposited in organs or around glands, they greatly increase the risk of cancer.

One possible explanation for the increase in cancer risk due to fat accumulation is the estrogenic properties of fat tissue. While estrogen is necessary for normal health, excess estrogen has been linked to breast and prostate cancers, and is suspected in several other forms of cancer, including colon and skin cancers. It turns out that adipose tissue not only has more estrogen receptors than normal cells, but it also can create estrogen. Therefore, the more adipose tissue a person carries, the higher the risk of developing certain types of cancer.

For many years, we thought saturated fat was the worst fat in the diet. But there has been a lot of research in recent years showing trans-fatty acids to be equally, if not more harmful.

Trans-Fatty Acids
Trans-fatty acids (TFAs) are created by the hydrogenation of mono- or polyunsaturated lipids. The process involves adding hydrogen to a vegetable oil in a complex chemical reaction involving high heat and pressure. The resultant oil is solid at room temperature and becomes rancid much more slowly. TFAs are used in most processed foods and are the foundation of margarine and vegetable shortenings.

Natural unsaturated oils are in a "cis" format, meaning that the hydrogen atoms are all on the same side. This allows the lipid to be more flexible, and most polyunsaturated fats are, in fact, curved, allowing them fit within cells without abnormally altering the cell's shape.

During the hydrogenation process, the hydrogen atoms move to the opposite side of the carbons, thus the designation "trans." This creates a fat molecule that is even more rigid than saturated fat -- a molecule produced naturally only in the stomachs of ruminate animals (and therefore found in small amounts in milk an animal fat). When TFA molecules, which resemble saturated fat more than unsaturated fat, are used in the formation of new cells and cellular membranes, they create more rigid -- and unhealthy -- cell structures.

Research has also shown that TFAs increase cholesterol at least as much as do saturated fats, possibly more. Although both types of fat seem to increase LDL cholesterol (the bad kind) equally, TFAs also reduce HDL cholesterol (the good kind). This factor alone makes them more harmful than saturated fats.

But trans fats are also implicated in increasing lipoprotein levels, which results in the formation of arterial plaque. The combined action of lowered HDL, increased LDL, increased cholesterol, and increased lipoproteins makes TFAs the single greatest dietary risk for coronary heart disease. In addition, TFAs contribute to the risk of type II diabetes and have been linked to the onset of several forms of cancer.

TFAs have absolutely no health benefits. All foods containing these products should carry a clear warning label, just like a pack of cigarettes. Personally, I believe that TFAs are as deadly as cigarettes. In fact, Holland has banned TFAs from food production, a step we unfortunately are not likely to see here.

Praise the Bean!

I love coffee. Strong, black, rich-tasting coffee. But my enjoyment has been tempered in recent years by speculation that coffee (and its caffeine content) may reduce insulin sensitivity and lead to metabolic disorders such as diabetes.

However, a new meta-study looked at all the available information to assess the risk of type-II diabetes in habitual coffee drinkers.

The review consisted of a search in MEDLINE through January 2005 and examined the reference lists of studies that focused on habitual coffee consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes. Nine studies involving 192,473 participants met the criteria and were included in the review. Studies of Type 1 diabetes, animal studies, and studies of short-term exposure to coffee or caffeine were not included in the review.

The relative risk of type 2 diabetes was lowest in those who had the highest coffee consumption (6 to 7 cups per day) compared to those in the lowest consumption group (0 to 2 cups per day. The association did not differ substantially by gender, obesity, or region (United States and Europe). The results are consistent with cross-sectional studies conducted in northern Europe, southern Europe, and Japan. Higher coffee consumption was consistently associated with a lower prevalence of newly detected hyperglycemia, particularly post-prandial (following a meal) hyperglycemia.

The results of this review suggest that habitual coffee consumption is associated with a substantially lower risk of type 2 diabetes.

Van Dam, Rob. M & HU, Frank, B. Coffee Consumption and Risk of Type 2 Diabetes. JAMA. 2005; 294:97-104.

Information on this study is cited courtesy of FitBits, compiled by Jeannie Patton, MS, CSCS.

Weight Training: Men Get Bigger, Women Get Stronger

From Exercise ETC's FitBits:

Men Get Bigger, Women Get Stronger In Response to Strength Training

Adults who begin resistance training often experience vastly different gains in strength and size than counterparts who are on similar programs. The purpose of this study was to document the range of responses in men and women to a progressive resistance program.

Five hundred eighty-five subjects (342 women, 243 men) ranging in age from 18-40 served as subjects. Subjects participated in 12 weeks of progressive resistance training of the non-dominant elbow flexors. Testing consisted of evaluating the isometric and dynamic strength of the elbow flexors, as well as measuring the cross sectional area of the biceps brachii, as determined by MRI.

The results showed that increases in the muscle cross sectional area ranged from 2% to 59%. Isometric strength increases ranged from 32% to 149% and dynamic strength increases ranged from 0% to 250%. Men experienced greater gains in the muscle's cross sectional area than women did, but women had greater gains in relative strength than men.

Results of this study show a wide range of strength and size gains in response to resistance training for men and women, with some participants showing no change and others showing dramatic changes. Men increased slightly more in size than women, but women showed considerably more increase in relative strength than men.

Hubal, Monica. et al. Variability in Muscle Size and Strength Gain after Unilateral Resistance Training. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 2005, 37(6), 964-972.

The most obvious difference here is in hormone levels. Higher levels of testosterone will result in greater protein synthesis, which results in larger muscles. However, it is interesting that the women showed greater increases in relative strength in the absence of higher T levels.

I'll post updated info whenever it becomes available. There has long been an assumption that women should train exactly as men train, but that may change as we find physiological training differences between the genders.

Fructose Increases Obesity

A new study found that consumption of fructose increased body weight despite a reduction in calories.

In the study, researchers at the University of Cincinnati allowed mice to freely consume either plain water or fructose-sweetened water and soft drinks. The mice that drank the fructose-sweetened water and soft drinks gained weight, even though they took in fewer calories from solid food. By the end of the study, the mice that consumed fructose-sweetened beverages had 90 percent more body fat than the mice that consumed water only.

I have been opposed to fructose for a while. In fact, I often advise against high-sugar fruits in an effort to avoid fructose. The liver isn't able to metabolize fructose for energy in the same that it does other sugars, so the fructose is converted to triglycerides and immediately stored as fat. Until now, it was assumed that the fructose would be burned for energy fairly quickly (after being converted to triglycerides), but this study suggests that even with a caloric deficit the body will store fructose as fat.

Bottom line: Avoid ALL sweetened soft drinks and fruit juices. Also make an effort to limit high-sugar fruits like oranges and bananas, and if you must eat them, do so earlier in the day when metabolism is running at its highest.

UPDATE:
An article on Science Daily has a little more info on this topic.

Results from an earlier study in humans led by Peter Havel, DVM, PhD, an endocrinology researcher at the University of California, Davis, and coauthored by Dr. Tschöp, found that several hormones involved in the regulation of body weight, including leptin, insulin and ghrelin, do not respond to fructose as they do to other types of carbohydrates, such as glucose.

Based on that study and their new data, the researchers now also believe that another factor contributing to the increased fat storage is that the liver metabolizes fructose differently than it does other carbohydrates.

“Similar to dietary fat, fructose doesn’t appear to fully trigger the hormonal systems involved in the long-term control of food intake and energy metabolism,” said coauthor Dr. Havel.

Low Testosterone in Men Has Health Risks

Andropause, the age-related decrease in testosterone in men, has been linked to the following symptoms:

Loss of bone
Increased fracture risk
Loss of skeletal muscle and strength
Increased fat mass
Reduced libido
Reduced erectile function
Infertility
Increased insulin resistance and risk of diabetes
Reduced sense of well-being
Fatigue
Reduced stamina
Depression
Reduced cognition

Researchers at U Mass Medical School found that six percent of forty-year-old men and twelve percent of sixty-year-old men had testosterone deficiency. These researchers estimated that we should expect 500,000 new cases of testosterone deficiency each year.

(Source: J Clin Endrinol Metab, 89: 5920-5926, 2004)

The study results I read did not indicate what constitutes testosterone deficiency, but it was most likely a figure that is far below what is optimal for health; the standard definition of low is usually 200 ng/dL [6.9 nmol/L]. This definition of low is not a fair assessment.

When testosterone levels fall below 400 ng/dL in most men, the health effects listed above begin to appear. Optimal levels are above 500 ng/dL and as high as 1000 ng/dL, which is considered the high end of normal. No one knows how extensive low testosterone levels are, especially with the increases in environmental estrogens that drive test levels even lower.

Birth Weight and Its Implications

We've known for some time that babies with low birth weight are more likely to have learning difficulties, vision problems, chronic respiratory problems such as asthma, and cerebral palsy. We also know that smoking, alcohol consumption, poor diet, and genetics can result in low birth weight in newborns. New research suggests that high birth weight can be linked to later health problems, as well.

British scientists -- as part of the Swedish Uppsala Birth Control Cohort Study -- found that infants with a higher birth weight had increased risk of digestive system cancers (13 percent increase) and blood cancers (17 percent increase). In women, high birth weight was correlated with an increased risk of breast cancer but a decreased risk of endometrial cancer.

(Source: Int J Cancer online, Feb., 2005)

No cause and effect was established or can be assumed from this study -- at this point the findings are merely a correlation. However, research is showing that increased bodyfat (and fat babies tend to be fat adults) increases estrogen levels throughout the body (fat cells produce estrogen, and often the harshest form of estrogen, estrodiol), which is linked to a variety of cancers.

The message here is that mothers should avoid the temptation to use pregnancy as an excuse to eat everything in sight. A series of news stories have come out over the last year about enormous infants. From what I've read, a healthy birth weight is in the range of 6.5 to 9 pounds.

If you want to keep your baby healthy -- and reduce the fat you gained during pregnancy -- exercise regularly during pregnancy for as long as your health allows. Obviously, not every mother can exercise during pregnancy, but those who can should. Weight training, yoga, and light cardio are all permissible under the guidance of your doctor or a qualified personal trainer.

Men Suffer More in Obesity Than Do Women

A new study reported on Healthcentral News suggests that obese men suffer more detriment to their health than do women. Study co-author Dr. Emile F. L. Dubois, from the Department of Pulmonary Diseases at the Hospital Reinier de Graaf Groep in Delft-Voorburg, the Netherlands, focused on 56 severely obese Dutch patients -- 22 men and 34 women, all white. None was known to have a history of heart disease or diabetes.

Blood samples were taken, and all patients were assessed for evidence of carbohydrate intolerance and diabetes. Hormone levels and body fat composition were also calculated, and all the men and women completed a bicycle exercise test to observe respiratory health, muscle strength and fatigue.

According to the researchers, men generally failed to meet expectations on the cycle test while women exceeded the anticipated results.

The women demonstrated better lung capacity -- and significantly better endurance -- when exercising than the men, the study team found.

In addition, 59 percent of the men were found to be either carbohydrate-intolerant or diabetic, compared with just 35 percent of the women.

***
"We were surprised by our findings," Dubois said. "We had the idea that severely obese men and women would both have muscle and endurance capacities above normal, because they're carrying a lot of weight around all day long. But this was only true among women. The men really under-performed."

Dubois suggested a range of potential explanations, including the possibility that women are naturally more efficient at energy storage due to the role they play as a food source for newborns. Another theory is that hormones produced by fat tissue -- including estrogen -- might partially explain gender differences. Men could be more negatively affected than women by the release of these hormones, Dubois speculated.

But the most promising explanation might be linked to the distribution of fat around the body. Men, he noted, tend to store it in the upper parts of their bodies and directly inside muscle tissue, whereas women store fat in the lower body area. This may lead to a relatively greater diminishment in lung capacity among men, because abdominal muscles are compressed under the weight of stored fat.

Further proof than men are genetically inferior to women. Okay, not really. But this is part of the overall pattern of males being more likely to live shorter and less healthy lives. Those of us with a Y chromosome need to be more diligent in our efforts to remain healthy or we will die younger than our female peers.

But this doesn't get women off the hook, either. Just because being overweight won't kill women as fast as it will men, it will still kill you. LOSE THE WEIGHT NOW!

This site has tons of useful information to help you lose weight and keep it off. Join a gym, buy a jump rope, or start walking. Do whatever you can to burn more calories than you take in. Depriving yourself of a few snacks and desserts is much better than depriving yourself of life.

Green Tea and Cancer

A recent statement by the FDA claimed that green tea does not offer preventive effects against breast and prostate cancer -- and by extension, any other form of cancer. The studies they cited are weak at best and did not use green tea extract. Simply drinking green tea does not appear to offer any significant protection against cancer.

However -- and there is always a however -- another study has identified the specific mechanism by which green tea DOES fight cancer. A study reported in U.S. News and World Report details the findings of Thomas Gasiewicz, researcher in the Department of Environmental Medicine at the University of Rochester Medical Center.

Gasiewicz found that "the prime antioxidant component of green tea, which is in the family of plant chemicals called catechins—or epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG) to be precise—zooms in on a key target in the cancer cell. And the target is a big one: a normal stress protein, known as heat shock protein 90 (HSP90). Heat shock or stress proteins are critical to survival of all cells, cancerous or otherwise.

"Stress proteins abound in both plants and animals. Think of them as protectors that chaperone the thousands of worker-bee proteins that interact in and on the surface of our cells in the course of any one cell's life. Growth, performance, communication, you name it, and some form of HSP is a key player. When cells are threatened by a treacherous environment such as heat (from which we get the name HSP), proteins curl up and then clump up. We now know it also happens with damaging cold, low oxygen, or poisons. Heat shock protein protectors quickly rev up and come to the rescue to both repair injured proteins and to carry the irreversibly damaged ones to a disposal dump for an out-of-the-way burial so new ones can take their place.

"Cancer hijacks the stress protein network in its efforts to overtake the body. Cancer cells are fast growing and on the march wherever they set up shop—breast, prostate, colon, bone marrow. And in that superstressed state of attack, cancer cells produce abnormally high levels of HSP90 to protect their cancer-producing proteins. Even in the face of toxic radiation and chemotherapy, some cancer cells survive because of these natural potent protectors. What Gasiewicz and his colleagues have shown is that the age-old EGCG does battle with HSP90. A few months ago, his laboratory reported for the first time that EGCG binds to this protective stress protein important to cancer growth and survival and essentially takes it out of commission."

It appears that one would have to drink as many as 10 cups of tea a day to get this effect. But with green tea extract, you can get the protective benefits of EGCG without the insomnia and frequent trips to the bathroom that drinking 10 cups of tea might entail. Studies are now underway to determine if there is a health benefit from taking capsules instead of whole tea.

Once again, your government is out to discredit any possible natural cures for disease. Take anything the FDA says about natural supplements (that isn't supported with a lot of peer-reviewed studies) as a further attempt to make the pharmaceutical companies richer.

EU Supplement Ban Upheld -- Is U.S. Next?

The London Times is carrying the story:

The European Court of Justice approved the Food Supplements Directive even though the court's own Advocate-General advised that the Directive was invalid under EU law.

***
The Directive was first approved by EU governments in 2002, and health food manufacturers were given until today - July 12, 2005 - to submit detailed scientific dossiers proving their ingredients were safe. Those supplements that failed to qualify would be banned.

Over the last three years, health food suppliers have either reformulated their goods, replacing natural substances with synthetic chemicals that already have EU approval, or waited as their legal challenge made its way through the courts.

***

Today's deadline means that health food retailers and manufacturers have sent in hundreds of dossiers for their ingredients over the last week, leaving the current list of which products are banned and which are approved in flux.

The same rules now being imposed on vitamins and supplements by the EU are based on rulings by the World Health Organization (WHO) and have been approved as international law. The U.S. will also have to conform to these barbaric standards or be in violation of the WTO.

I've posted on this issue before. Click here to read more.

Dairy Calcium Helps in Fat Loss

You've heard it in the commercials and read it in the advertisements, and still more studies are confirming that people who consume larger amounts of dairy calcium are thinner than those who don't. A recent study (Int. J Obes, 29: 115-121, 2004) found that men and women who consumed the most dairy products were 80 percent less likely to be obese and had a lower bodymass index (BMI, an unreliable but often used measure of obesity).

It appears that dietary calcium increases levels of hormones that can prevent fat storage and increases fat breakdown for energy. Dairy calcium works better than supplements or plant-based calcium. Diets low in calcium seem to promote fat storage.

Be smart: consume lowfat or nonfat dairy products, especially cottage cheese, yogurt, and cheese. If you like milk, choose the newer low-carb milk products that are also nonfat. The protein from all these foods will also provide a better, longer-lasting sensation of fullness that will allow you to maintain a steady blood sugar level and avoid binges. The higher fat products taste better but eliminate the health benefits. Also, please keep in mind that most yogurt and milk (unless it is low-carb) are carbohydrate foods, not protein foods, so use them accordingly.

Adults need 1.2 grams of calcium a day (1.5 grams if you are over 60) to maintain proper health. Not only will you lose some fat, but your bones and teeth will be healthier, too. Try to consume at least three servings of nonfat dairy foods per day.