Thursday, February 22, 2018
Saturday, June 13, 2015
Does Chocolate Help You Stay Slim?
Here's a sweet surprise for chocoholics: A new study finds that people who eat chocolate regularly are somewhat skinnier than folks who don't indulge their sweet tooth.
The findings don't prove that chowing down on chocolate will melt off your excess pounds. It's possible that another factor is responsible for the modest difference in body mass, or it might be a statistical fluke.
But for now, study lead author Dr. Beatrice Golomb said the findings "reduce any possible guilt that might come with chocolate consumption." Golomb, an associate professor at the University of California, San Diego, said she hopes to better understand what's going on through future research.
As foods go, chocolate is a hard one to figure out. It includes antioxidants, substances that counteract damaging agents in the body. And consumption of chocolate has been linked in other studies to a variety of positive health effects from lower blood pressure to better cholesterol levels. On the other hand, chocolate can come with plenty of calories and fat.
In the new study, Golomb and colleagues reviewed food questionnaires filled out by nearly 1,000 people who were asked how often they ate chocolate. Their average age was 57, and 68 percent were men.
The researchers then tried to find any connections between chocolate consumption and the body mass index (BMI) of the participants. BMI is a calculation based on height and weight that is used to determine underweight, overweight and obesity in adults.
Participants' average BMI was 28 — overweight but not obese. On average, they ate chocolate twice a week and exercised between three and four times a week.
The study found that those who ate chocolate the most often had lower BMIs than the others, even when the researchers adjusted their statistics so they wouldn't be thrown off by factors such as age, gender, education and fruit and vegetable consumption.
For the typical person, the difference between frequently eating or infrequently eating chocolate could account for a 5- to 7-pound difference, Golomb said.
The findings "certainly weren't explained by the chocolate eaters eating fewer calories. They ate more calories and didn't exercise any more," she said.
It's not clear, however, what kinds of chocolate the participants ate, although most would probably have interpreted the question as asking about candy, Golomb said. Milk chocolate is fattier than dark chocolate.
Golomb cautioned that the study does not say that chocolate consumption will help people lose weight.
"It is not a siren call to go out and eat 20 pounds of chocolate a day," she said.
However, the study suggests that diet composition may influence the body's metabolic processes, and therefore BMI, she said.
So why would chocolate fanciers be thinner than others? Dr. Daniela Jakubowicz, a professor at Tel Aviv University in Israel who has studied chocolate, said previous research has shown that diets that force people to avoid sweets actually make them more drawn to them. In her own research, she found that people were actually better able to tolerate a diet when they ate chocolate.
Golomb said that, ideally, future research will randomly assign some people to eat chocolate and others to avoid it. But that may be a challenge, especially if some participants refuse to go without it.
"We have a few pesky details to iron out," she said.
The findings don't prove that chowing down on chocolate will melt off your excess pounds. It's possible that another factor is responsible for the modest difference in body mass, or it might be a statistical fluke.
But for now, study lead author Dr. Beatrice Golomb said the findings "reduce any possible guilt that might come with chocolate consumption." Golomb, an associate professor at the University of California, San Diego, said she hopes to better understand what's going on through future research.
As foods go, chocolate is a hard one to figure out. It includes antioxidants, substances that counteract damaging agents in the body. And consumption of chocolate has been linked in other studies to a variety of positive health effects from lower blood pressure to better cholesterol levels. On the other hand, chocolate can come with plenty of calories and fat.
In the new study, Golomb and colleagues reviewed food questionnaires filled out by nearly 1,000 people who were asked how often they ate chocolate. Their average age was 57, and 68 percent were men.
The researchers then tried to find any connections between chocolate consumption and the body mass index (BMI) of the participants. BMI is a calculation based on height and weight that is used to determine underweight, overweight and obesity in adults.
Participants' average BMI was 28 — overweight but not obese. On average, they ate chocolate twice a week and exercised between three and four times a week.
The study found that those who ate chocolate the most often had lower BMIs than the others, even when the researchers adjusted their statistics so they wouldn't be thrown off by factors such as age, gender, education and fruit and vegetable consumption.
For the typical person, the difference between frequently eating or infrequently eating chocolate could account for a 5- to 7-pound difference, Golomb said.
The findings "certainly weren't explained by the chocolate eaters eating fewer calories. They ate more calories and didn't exercise any more," she said.
It's not clear, however, what kinds of chocolate the participants ate, although most would probably have interpreted the question as asking about candy, Golomb said. Milk chocolate is fattier than dark chocolate.
Golomb cautioned that the study does not say that chocolate consumption will help people lose weight.
"It is not a siren call to go out and eat 20 pounds of chocolate a day," she said.
However, the study suggests that diet composition may influence the body's metabolic processes, and therefore BMI, she said.
So why would chocolate fanciers be thinner than others? Dr. Daniela Jakubowicz, a professor at Tel Aviv University in Israel who has studied chocolate, said previous research has shown that diets that force people to avoid sweets actually make them more drawn to them. In her own research, she found that people were actually better able to tolerate a diet when they ate chocolate.
Golomb said that, ideally, future research will randomly assign some people to eat chocolate and others to avoid it. But that may be a challenge, especially if some participants refuse to go without it.
"We have a few pesky details to iron out," she said.
Drink Red Wine, Stop Fat Cells?
Red wine has long been prized for its heart-boosting benefits and potential protection against diseases such as skin cancer, thanks to the active ingredient resveratrol. But for all its positives, red wine has never exactly been considered a diet food. After all, just one 5-ounce serving of vino packs around 125 calories.
But for anyone who has dreamed of booze suddenly becoming the latest weight-loss superfood, there may be hope. Researchers at Purdue University have discovered a compound in red wine, grapes, peanuts, and some other foods called piceatannol, which may help block the growth of new fat cells in the body. In the long-term, researchers said in a university release, this new information may potentially help treat obesity.
Their discovery, published in the Journal of Biological Chemistry, is that piceatannol alters the gene function of fat cells during the process in which early fat cells grow into mature cells. It takes immature fat cells, called preadipocytes, about 10 days to go through the several steps required to become mature fat cells, in a process called adipogenesis. Once cells have completed adipogenesis, they are more difficult to shrink through a healthy diet and fat-burning exercise. Researchers said in the same release that when piceatannol is present in the blood, adipogenesis is almost entirely stopped. If piceatannol really can keep fat cells from growing and maturing in adult humans, this could help prevent weight gain and perhaps promote weight loss in overweight adults.
This doesn't exactly mean you can run out and grab the nearest bottle of red wine, though. Right now, the effects of the compound are just too small to promote real weight-loss results, and researchers warn that the use of piceatannol — whether through food or supplements — is still a ways off. The next step is to conduct research to see if piceatannol can be protected from digestion long enough to stop body fat gain in a measurable way.
But for anyone who has dreamed of booze suddenly becoming the latest weight-loss superfood, there may be hope. Researchers at Purdue University have discovered a compound in red wine, grapes, peanuts, and some other foods called piceatannol, which may help block the growth of new fat cells in the body. In the long-term, researchers said in a university release, this new information may potentially help treat obesity.
Their discovery, published in the Journal of Biological Chemistry, is that piceatannol alters the gene function of fat cells during the process in which early fat cells grow into mature cells. It takes immature fat cells, called preadipocytes, about 10 days to go through the several steps required to become mature fat cells, in a process called adipogenesis. Once cells have completed adipogenesis, they are more difficult to shrink through a healthy diet and fat-burning exercise. Researchers said in the same release that when piceatannol is present in the blood, adipogenesis is almost entirely stopped. If piceatannol really can keep fat cells from growing and maturing in adult humans, this could help prevent weight gain and perhaps promote weight loss in overweight adults.
This doesn't exactly mean you can run out and grab the nearest bottle of red wine, though. Right now, the effects of the compound are just too small to promote real weight-loss results, and researchers warn that the use of piceatannol — whether through food or supplements — is still a ways off. The next step is to conduct research to see if piceatannol can be protected from digestion long enough to stop body fat gain in a measurable way.
Does Chocolate Help You Stay Slim?
Here's a sweet surprise for chocoholics: A new study finds that people who eat chocolate regularly are somewhat skinnier than folks who don't indulge their sweet tooth.
The findings don't prove that chowing down on chocolate will melt off your excess pounds. It's possible that another factor is responsible for the modest difference in body mass, or it might be a statistical fluke.
But for now, study lead author Dr. Beatrice Golomb said the findings "reduce any possible guilt that might come with chocolate consumption." Golomb, an associate professor at the University of California, San Diego, said she hopes to better understand what's going on through future research.
As foods go, chocolate is a hard one to figure out. It includes antioxidants, substances that counteract damaging agents in the body. And consumption of chocolate has been linked in other studies to a variety of positive health effects from lower blood pressure to better cholesterol levels. On the other hand, chocolate can come with plenty of calories and fat.
In the new study, Golomb and colleagues reviewed food questionnaires filled out by nearly 1,000 people who were asked how often they ate chocolate. Their average age was 57, and 68 percent were men.
The researchers then tried to find any connections between chocolate consumption and the body mass index (BMI) of the participants. BMI is a calculation based on height and weight that is used to determine underweight, overweight and obesity in adults.
Participants' average BMI was 28 — overweight but not obese. On average, they ate chocolate twice a week and exercised between three and four times a week.
The study found that those who ate chocolate the most often had lower BMIs than the others, even when the researchers adjusted their statistics so they wouldn't be thrown off by factors such as age, gender, education and fruit and vegetable consumption.
For the typical person, the difference between frequently eating or infrequently eating chocolate could account for a 5- to 7-pound difference, Golomb said.
The findings "certainly weren't explained by the chocolate eaters eating fewer calories. They ate more calories and didn't exercise any more," she said.
It's not clear, however, what kinds of chocolate the participants ate, although most would probably have interpreted the question as asking about candy, Golomb said. Milk chocolate is fattier than dark chocolate.
Golomb cautioned that the study does not say that chocolate consumption will help people lose weight.
"It is not a siren call to go out and eat 20 pounds of chocolate a day," she said.
However, the study suggests that diet composition may influence the body's metabolic processes, and therefore BMI, she said.
So why would chocolate fanciers be thinner than others? Dr. Daniela Jakubowicz, a professor at Tel Aviv University in Israel who has studied chocolate, said previous research has shown that diets that force people to avoid sweets actually make them more drawn to them. In her own research, she found that people were actually better able to tolerate a diet when they ate chocolate.
Golomb said that, ideally, future research will randomly assign some people to eat chocolate and others to avoid it. But that may be a challenge, especially if some participants refuse to go without it.
"We have a few pesky details to iron out," she said.
The findings don't prove that chowing down on chocolate will melt off your excess pounds. It's possible that another factor is responsible for the modest difference in body mass, or it might be a statistical fluke.
But for now, study lead author Dr. Beatrice Golomb said the findings "reduce any possible guilt that might come with chocolate consumption." Golomb, an associate professor at the University of California, San Diego, said she hopes to better understand what's going on through future research.
As foods go, chocolate is a hard one to figure out. It includes antioxidants, substances that counteract damaging agents in the body. And consumption of chocolate has been linked in other studies to a variety of positive health effects from lower blood pressure to better cholesterol levels. On the other hand, chocolate can come with plenty of calories and fat.
In the new study, Golomb and colleagues reviewed food questionnaires filled out by nearly 1,000 people who were asked how often they ate chocolate. Their average age was 57, and 68 percent were men.
The researchers then tried to find any connections between chocolate consumption and the body mass index (BMI) of the participants. BMI is a calculation based on height and weight that is used to determine underweight, overweight and obesity in adults.
Participants' average BMI was 28 — overweight but not obese. On average, they ate chocolate twice a week and exercised between three and four times a week.
The study found that those who ate chocolate the most often had lower BMIs than the others, even when the researchers adjusted their statistics so they wouldn't be thrown off by factors such as age, gender, education and fruit and vegetable consumption.
For the typical person, the difference between frequently eating or infrequently eating chocolate could account for a 5- to 7-pound difference, Golomb said.
The findings "certainly weren't explained by the chocolate eaters eating fewer calories. They ate more calories and didn't exercise any more," she said.
It's not clear, however, what kinds of chocolate the participants ate, although most would probably have interpreted the question as asking about candy, Golomb said. Milk chocolate is fattier than dark chocolate.
Golomb cautioned that the study does not say that chocolate consumption will help people lose weight.
"It is not a siren call to go out and eat 20 pounds of chocolate a day," she said.
However, the study suggests that diet composition may influence the body's metabolic processes, and therefore BMI, she said.
So why would chocolate fanciers be thinner than others? Dr. Daniela Jakubowicz, a professor at Tel Aviv University in Israel who has studied chocolate, said previous research has shown that diets that force people to avoid sweets actually make them more drawn to them. In her own research, she found that people were actually better able to tolerate a diet when they ate chocolate.
Golomb said that, ideally, future research will randomly assign some people to eat chocolate and others to avoid it. But that may be a challenge, especially if some participants refuse to go without it.
"We have a few pesky details to iron out," she said.
Some Worst Foods for Your Diet
Buyer beware:
Just because a food’s labeled “healthy,” “smart,” or “all-natural” does not mean it’s the best choice for someone who’s trying to lose weight. For example, honey, vegetable chips, and granola are just a few of the supermarket staples that have tricked dieters into believing they’re healthy choices, when in fact, they are as equally loaded with calories, fat, sodium, and glucose as their more vilified counterparts of table sugar, potato chips, and sweet cereals.In an effort to help dieters keep it straight, obesity researchers at Otago University in New Zealand have identified a list of 49 foods that they say are extremely calorie-dense, but are almost totally lacking in nutritional benefit. Published in the current issue of the New Zealand Medical Journal, researchers say the list was primarily developed to help overweight and obese people easily identify which foods they should avoid. Lead researcher Jane Elmsile says it’s important to note that the list represents not only high-calorie foods, but also foods that are almost totally lacking in essential nutrients, vitamins, and minerals.
Here’s the list, in alphabetical order:
1. Alcoholic drinks
2. Biscuits
3. Butter, lard, dripping or similar fat (used as a spread or in baking/cooking etc.)
4. Cakes
5. Candy, including lollipops
6. Chocolate
7. Coconut cream
8. Condensed milk
9. Cordial
10. Corn chips
11. Cream (including crème fraiche)
12. Chips (including vegetable chips)
13. Deli meats
14. Doughnuts
15. Energy drinks
16. Flavored milk/milkshakes
17. Fruit canned in syrup
18. Fruit rollups
19. Fried food
20. Fried potatoes/French fries
21. Frozen yogurt
22. Fruit juice (except tomato juice and unsweetened black currant juice)
23. Glucose
24. High-fat crackers
25. Honey
26. Hot chocolate, chocolate milk
27. Ice cream
28. Jam
29. Marmalade
30. Mayonnaise
31. Muesli/granola bars
32. Muffins
33. Nuts roasted in fat or oil
34. Pastries
35. Pies
36. Popcorn with butter or oil
37. Puddings
38. Quiches
39. Reduced cream
40. Regular powdered drinks
41. Salami
42. Sausages
43. Soft drinks
44. Sour cream
45. Sugar (added to anything including drinks, baking, cooking etc.)
46. Syrups such as golden syrup, treacle, maple syrup
47. Toasted muesli, granola, and any other breakfast cereal with more than 15 grams of sugar per 100 grams of cereal
48. Whole milk
49. Yogurt with more than 10 grams of sugar per 100 grams of yogurt
Extra Pounds Could Harm Your Back
Overweight and obese adults are at significantly increased risk for lumbar spine disc degeneration, a potential cause of low back pain, researchers say.
Previous research has linked having a higher body-mass index (BMI), which is a measurement that takes into account a person's height and weight, to reports of low back pain. This type of pain can affect physical and mental well-being, limit mobility, reduce quality of life and is associated with substantial financial costs for both the patient and the health care system.
The new study included more than 1,000 men and nearly 1,600 women aged 21 and older from southern China. Overall, 73 percent of the participants had lumbar disc degeneration, but the condition was more common in men than women (76 percent vs. 71 percent) and more prevalent among older people, according to the study in the new issue of the journal Arthritis & Rheumatism.
Seven percent of the study participants were underweight, 48 percent were in the normal weight range, 36 percent were overweight and 9 percent were obese, the investigators noted.
"Our research confirms that with elevated BMI there is a significant increase in the extent and global severity of disc degeneration. In fact, end-stage disc degeneration with narrowing of the disc space was more pronounced in obese individuals," Dr. Dino Samartzis, of the University of Hong Kong, said in a journal news release.
As people gain weight, disc degeneration may begin to occur due to physical loading on the disc, the study authors suggested. In addition, fat cells may play a role by causing chronic low-grade inflammation, they noted.
"Since overweight and obesity are worldwide concerns whose prevalence continues to rise, our study's findings have considerable public health implications. If these issues continue to plague society, they can further affect spine health leading to low back pain and its consequences," Samartzis said.
Disc degeneration is a complex process and future studies that investigate risk factors for the condition should take into account the effects of being overweight or obese, the researchers recommended.
American Diet Gets Failing Grade
Americans are still falling short of national dietary recommendations, eating too many sweets and not enough vegetables and whole grains, according to the CDC.
On a national healthy-eating index that measured compliance with U.S. dietary guidelines from 2005, the average overall diet score was only about 60 points out of 100 — "indicating Americans' diets need improvement," Bethene Ervin, PhD, RD, wrote in a National Health Statistics Report.
The Healthy Eating Index, or HEI-2005, assesses specific intake of various nutritional categories, including whole fruits, dark green and orange vegetables, whole grains, milk, meat and beans, oils, fats, sodium, alcohol, and added sugar.
To come up with the estimates, Ervin looked at data on 4,448 adults ages 20 and up from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2003-2004.
She found that American adults were well below the maximum standard for all the HEI-2005 component scores except for total grains and meat and beans.
Scores for dark green and orange vegetables and whole grains were particularly poor, reflecting insufficient intake, she reported, while those for sodium and calories from sugars and alcohol reflected excessive intakes.
Women's diets appeared healthier than men's, Ervin noted, as they had better scores on fruit, vegetable, and discretionary calorie intakes as well as slightly better overall diets.
The same held true for older patients, she reported, with adults age 60 and up having better scores regarding fruit, vegetable, and bad calorie intakes.
Better-educated Americans — those with at least a high school education — more closely complied with the recommendations than those who had less education, Ervin reported.
She added that no racial or ethnic group stood out as having better dietary scores than any other.
Ervin concluded that adults need to up their intake of most of the recommended dietary components — especially dark green and orange vegetables and legumes and whole grains — while lowering the amount of sodium and calories from sugar and alcohol consumed.
On a national healthy-eating index that measured compliance with U.S. dietary guidelines from 2005, the average overall diet score was only about 60 points out of 100 — "indicating Americans' diets need improvement," Bethene Ervin, PhD, RD, wrote in a National Health Statistics Report.
The Healthy Eating Index, or HEI-2005, assesses specific intake of various nutritional categories, including whole fruits, dark green and orange vegetables, whole grains, milk, meat and beans, oils, fats, sodium, alcohol, and added sugar.
To come up with the estimates, Ervin looked at data on 4,448 adults ages 20 and up from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2003-2004.
She found that American adults were well below the maximum standard for all the HEI-2005 component scores except for total grains and meat and beans.
Scores for dark green and orange vegetables and whole grains were particularly poor, reflecting insufficient intake, she reported, while those for sodium and calories from sugars and alcohol reflected excessive intakes.
Women's diets appeared healthier than men's, Ervin noted, as they had better scores on fruit, vegetable, and discretionary calorie intakes as well as slightly better overall diets.
The same held true for older patients, she reported, with adults age 60 and up having better scores regarding fruit, vegetable, and bad calorie intakes.
Better-educated Americans — those with at least a high school education — more closely complied with the recommendations than those who had less education, Ervin reported.
She added that no racial or ethnic group stood out as having better dietary scores than any other.
Ervin concluded that adults need to up their intake of most of the recommended dietary components — especially dark green and orange vegetables and legumes and whole grains — while lowering the amount of sodium and calories from sugar and alcohol consumed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)