Power Up Your Brain
Power Up Your Brain
by David Perlmutter, MD, FACN, ABIHM &
Albert Villoldo, Ph.D
Raise a Smarter Child by Kindergarten
Raise a Smarter Child by Kindergarten
by David Perlmutter, MD, FACN, ABIHM
The Better Brain Book


by David Perlmutter, MD, FACN, ABIHM
Read Dr. Perlmutter's
articles at

Study of diets shows what truly counts: calories

February 26th, 2009

From www.latimes.com

Two decades after the debate began on which diet is best for weight loss, a conclusion is starting to come into focus. And the winner is . . . not low-carb, not low-fat, not high protein but . . . any diet.

That is, any diet that is low in calories and saturated fats and high in whole grains, fruits and vegetables — and that an individual can stick with for a lifetime — is a reasonable choice for people who need to lose weight. That’s the conclusion of a study published online Wednesday by the New England Journal of Medicine, research that represents the longest, largest and most rigorous test of several popular diet strategies.

In light of another highly regarded study published last year that reached a similar conclusion, medical experts are embracing the back-to-basics idea that the simple act of cutting calories is most important when it comes to losing weight. The conclusions could finally end the often-contentious debate over the comparative effectiveness of diets that are predominantly low in fat, high in protein, low in carbohydrates or marked by other specific configurations of nutrients.

“This study is saying it doesn’t make any difference what diet you choose. Calories have always been the bottom line,” said Dr. Robert Eckel, a physiology professor at the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center and past president of the American Heart Assn.

The findings should free people from the notion that it’s necessary to eat a specific ratio of fat, protein and carbohydrates. They should choose, instead, what works for them.

“There isn’t any one way. That is the nice thing about none of these diets in particular winning,” said Christopher Gardner, a nutrition researcher at Stanford University’s Prevention Research Center. “We don’t have any right to push low-fat or low-carb or high-protein. If one of these approaches is more satiating, where you will not be hungry and have cravings, that is the one that will work for you.”

The study did not prove, however, that every dieter succeeds. Instead, it reinforces numerous other studies showing most people lose a modest amount of weight in the first few months of dieting and regain some or all of it over time. In Wednesday’s study, the average weight loss was 13 pounds at six months and 9 pounds at two years.

The research followed 811 overweight or obese people, 62% of whom were women, enrolled at one of two study sites: Harvard School of Public Health in Boston or the Pennington Biomedical Research Center of Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge. The participants were assigned to one of four diets: low-fat, average-protein; low-fat, high-protein; high-fat, average-protein; and high-fat, high-protein.

The diets ranged from 1,200 to 2,400 calories a day based on each individual’s body mass index and gender, but everyone was asked to cut about 750 calories a day from what they normally ate. All the diets were low in saturated fat, the kind linked to heart disease and found in many fried or processed foods. Participants were asked to do 90 minutes a week of moderate exercise. They kept a food diary, and a Web-based program provided feedback on how close they had come to their goals. Individual and group counseling sessions were held over the two-year study.

“We were trying to focus on just those three nutrients — fat, protein and carbohydrates — and keep everything else, such as saturated fat and fiber, as consistent as possible,” said Catherine M. Loria, project scientist at the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, which funded the research. “This shows people can just focus on counting calories. They have a lot of flexibility. It’s a great finding.”

The study refutes the notion that any one nutrient has a special power to accelerate weight loss, said Dr. Frank M. Sacks, lead author of the study and a professor of cardiovascular disease prevention at Harvard. “We used to think there could be a biological effect of certain diets. That is probably not true.”

There may be a strong behavioral effect in the success of a diet, however. The people who attended two-thirds or more of the counseling sessions over the two years lost an average of 22 pounds, compared with the average loss of 9 pounds.

The study was highly anticipated because previous research on diets over the last two decades has come to dramatically different conclusions.

“Some studies showed a very low-fat, strict vegetarian diet was best,” Sacks said. “Others had Atkins diets doing better. So the question we had was, how do we reconcile all that?”

Many of the previous studies lasted six months or less, enrolled small numbers of people (usually women) and sometimes involved feeding participants prepared meals instead of allowing them to follow the diet on their own in real-life conditions, Gardner said.

Some studies also attracted media attention and marketing hype that may have contributed to the success of specific regimens, Sacks said.

“In this study, we wanted to neutralize these diets,” he said. “No marketing. No expectations. All the diets were healthy. We told the participants that experts are completely at odds about which would be better. I think that is a lot of the reason why our study showed they were equal.”

Another study, published in July in the New England Journal of Medicine, found that both the Atkins and Mediterranean diets were somewhat more effective than a low-fat diet.

But that study’s authors also recommended choosing a diet “according to individual preferences.”

Few of the people in the current study strictly adhered to the calorie limits and the composition of their diets, suggesting it is just too difficult to do so, Gardner said. For example, those assigned to consume 35% of their calories as carbohydrates actually consumed an average of 43%, and groups that were supposed to eat a 20%-fat diet averaged 26%. In the end, many of the participants were eating diets that were more similar than dissimilar.

“If the diets are blurring together, then one might expect that the results would be similar,” Gardner said. “In reality, trying to follow a low-fat or high-protein diet really has a negative impact on adherence.”

KONDRACKE: Targeting obesity

January 2nd, 2009

From washingtontimes.com
President-elect Barack Obama has plenty of serious problems on his agenda, but here’s another worthy one:a war on obesity.

The reason is: Fatness is killing Americans by the millions. It’s driving up health costs and damaging the national economy. It’s also aesthetically displeasing.

And Mr. Obama is singularly positioned to lead the charge against excess flab: He’s lean, he exercises and he can set a great example for getting the nation fit again.

He’s also smart enough to figure out how to do it — which is probably to mention the obesity problem in his health-care reform speeches and assign his yet-to-be-named surgeon general to mount a campaign of exhortation and scolding.

If it were up to me, being fat would be made as socially unacceptable as smoking. (And, before you send me an irate e-mail, as a formerly overweight person, I admit to some prejudice here.)

We can’t put fat people outside in the cold, I suppose, but the fact is that incidence of smoking has dropped from 42 percent in 1965 to below 20 percent, reducing cases of lung cancer along the way.

I like what Southwest Airlines does — charge double for people who can’t fit into one seat. I would also favor higher health insurance premiums for fat people and for taxes on fast foods with high fat and sugar content.

New York Gov. David Paterson has talked about fostering social pressure on people to lose weight, but Mr. Obama probably would prefer a kinder and gentler approach.

After showing interest in the problem — and repeating it often enough to show he’s serious — Mr. Obama can advance the cause by continuing to let photographers show him working out, playing basketball and hunking it up on the beach.

The Washington Post reported last week that, whatever else he has to do, Mr. Obama works out 90 minutes a day. Pictures of him on the beach while vacationing in Hawaii show the results.

Why bother to take on this cause? Because no less than 66.3 percent of U.S. adults are overweight, according to the federal Centers for Disease Control, and nearly 20 percent of children.

More than a third of adults — more than 72 million — are obese, fatter than fat. That percentage has doubled since 1980. The figure for children has tripled. According to the Almanac of Chronic Disease, unless something is done, by 2015, three-quarters of U.S. adults will be overweight and 41 percent, obese.

What’s fat? What’s obese? Officially, such questions are measured by body mass index (BMI). For an adult 5 feet, 9 inches tall, weighing more than 169 pounds (BMI 25) is overweight and 203 pounds (BMI 30) is obese.

Mr. Obama, at 6-1 and 180 pounds, has a BMI of 23.7 — perfect. And First Lady-elect Michelle Obama, at 6 feet and 175, has an identical BMI.

(You can easily find out your own at the National Institutes of Health Web site, nhlbisupport.com.bmi/bmicalc.htm For what it’s worth, mine was 27.4. Now it’s 24.3. It is possible to lose 20 pounds.)

The reason a president should tackle the issue of obesity is this: it kills and it costs.

Incidence of Type 2 diabetes — which can lead to blindness, loss of limbs and even mental impairment — has doubled over the past three decades, on track with obesity.

There has also been an upsurge in incidence of high blood pressure, coronary heart disease, strokes and gall bladder ailments.

According to the nonprofit Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease, the doubling of obesity accounts for nearly 30 percent of the rise in health care spending since 1987.

If the prevalence of obesity was the same as it was in 1987, the group said, health-care spending per capita would be 10 percent less than it is, saving $200 billion.

The burden of obesity on society is felt in Medicaid and Medicare spending and in everyone’s insurance premiums.

It would be impolite, I know, to walk up to a fat person and say: “You know, you are costing me money,” as you might complain without compunction to someone smoking.

But it’s a fact. Insurance companies are afraid of lawsuits alleging discrimination, so many of them offer premium discounts for people who enter fitness programs, but they don’t charge extra based on weight.

That means everyone else pays higher premiums to insure the overweight and pay for treatment of their diseases.

At a recent gathering of corporate CEOs sponsored by the Wall Street Journal, the top health-care issue the group thought Mr. Obama should address was obesity and its costly burden.

News reports indicate that some employers refuse to hire fat people, fearing their insurance costs will balloon.

Some of these workers are being unfairly discriminated against, based on genetics or hormonal imbalance, but certainly not most.

Trimming down America probably is going to be harder during a deep recession than at other times. There’s a socioeconomic correlation to obesity – it’s more prevalent among poor people than wealthier folk.

Making things even tougher, depressing circumstances undoubtedly cause people to seek comfort in food and being fat probably increases depression, creating a vicious cycle.

So it will be difficult right now for Mr. Obama to get people to eat less and exercise more. But it can be done and it’s definitely worth the try.

Morton Kondracke is a nationally syndicated columnist.

Calculate Your Body Mass Index

November 17th, 2008

http://www.healthnews.com/

Use the above link to determine your BMI

The Body Mass Index (BMI) is a stastical measure of weight ranges. BMI is calculated by dividing your weight by your height. You shouldn’t use BMI as a diagnosis – it’s intended to give you an idea of how heavy you are relative to other people of your height. Try our BMI calculator to see if your weight falls within a healthy range.

Vitamin D Insufficiency Linked to Increased Body Fat

November 16th, 2008

From medscape.com
Vitamin D insufficiency is associated with increased body fat and decreased height but not with changes in peak bone mass, according to the results of a cross-sectional study in young women reported in the November 4 Online First issue of the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism.

“Vitamin D insufficiency has now reached epidemic proportions and has been linked to low bone mineral density (BMD), increased risk of fracture and obesity in adults,” write Richard Kremer, MD, PhD, from McGill University Health Center in Montreal, Canada, and colleagues. “However, this relationship has not been well characterized in young adults.”

The goal of this study was to assess the association between serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] determined by radioimmunoassay, anthropometric measures, and computed tomography (CT) and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) values of body fat and bone structure at the approximate time of peak bone mass. The study sample consisted of 90 postpubertal women aged 16 to 22 years and living in California.

Insufficiency of 25(OH)D, defined as a serum level of 29 ng/mL or less, was present in approximately 59% of participants, and the remaining 41% had sufficient 25(OH)D levels, defined as a serum level of 30 ng/mL or more. Serum 25(OH)D levels were strongly negatively related to CT measures of visceral and subcutaneous fat and to DXA values of body fat.

Compared with women with insufficient levels of serum 25(OH)D, those with normal serum 25(OH)D levels had significantly lower weight, body mass, and imaging measures of adiposity at all sites. However, circulating 25(OH)D concentrations were not related to measures of bone mineral density at any site. There was an unanticipated positive correlation between 25(OH)D levels and height.

“Our study indicates that vitamin D insufficiency is extremely common in young women living in a sun-rich area of the United States,” the study authors write. “It also supports the hypotheses that either vitamin D insufficiency is a risk factor for increased body fat or increased body fat is a risk factor for vitamin D insufficiency.”

Limitations of this study include insufficient power to analyze Caucasian and Hispanic participants separately and lack of generalizability to young men.

“The positive association between height and vitamin D status is unexplained and intriguing, and warrants further investigation,” the study authors conclude. “Our data, however, do not support a role for vitamin D in regulating bone mass acquisition around the time it reaches its peak.”

Child Obesity Seen as Warning of Heart Disease

November 15th, 2008

From nytimes.com
A new study finds striking evidence that children who are obese or have high cholesterol show early warning signs of heart disease.

The study, presented Tuesday at the American Heart Association conference in New Orleans, found that the thickness of artery walls of children and teenagers who are obese or have high cholesterol resembled the thickness of artery walls of an average 45-year-old.

The study, which has not yet been published, was small, involving 70 children ages 6 to 19, and several experts said the results would need to be replicated to be considered conclusive. But they said the method used to measure artery wall thickness was considered a reliable indicator of heart disease risk, usually more reliable than cholesterol levels or other measures. The method, which uses ultrasound, has been applied to children in other studies in the last few years, but experts said this appeared to be the first time that results had been correlated to adults.

“I think this is a red flag,” said the lead author of the study, Dr. Geetha Raghuveer, a cardiologist and associate professor of pediatrics at the University of Missouri Kansas City School of Medicine. “These kids are more similar to middle-aged adults.”

Scientists not involved in the study said the findings supported a growing body of research suggesting that childhood obesity in the United States was likely to result in heart disease as the children age.

“These findings are potentially consistent with predictions that obesity and its complications would result in cardiovascular disease becoming a pediatric illness,” said Dr. David Ludwig, an associate professor of pediatrics at Harvard, who was a co-author of a 2005 study predicting that obesity could shorten the average child’s lifespan by two to five years. “There are other indications that this might be the case, but much of that has been speculative, so this may well be significant hard data, which has been largely lacking. This is actually looking at the development of atherosclerosis, the process that we know will, if it is not dealt with, lead to heart attack or stroke.”

Childhood obesity is considered an epidemic in the United States, with about 16 percent of children ages 2 to 19 considered obese, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Although the number of new cases of childhood obesity appears to be leveling off, some experts say they are now seeing an increase in Type 2 diabetes in children, which they believe is a consequence of increased obesity.

The Kansas City study was one of several presented at the conference that looked at the link between childhood obesity and heart disease.

A study of 991 Australian children ages 5 to 15 found that children who were obese had greater enlargement of their hearts, as measured by the size of their left atrium, said the study’s leader, Dr. Julian G. Ayer, a heart researcher at the University of Sydney.

Another Australian study, of 150 10-year-olds, found that in the heart pumping process, the left ventricles were slower to untwist in children with a higher body-mass index, a relationship of weight to height, said a co-author of that study, Walter Abhayaratna, a researcher at Australian National University.

“These studies are interesting, imperfect corollary evidence of something we all believe is true,” said Dr. Lee Goldman, a cardiologist who is dean of the faculties of health, sciences and medicine at Columbia University. “The obesity epidemic in adolescents is the biggest adverse time bomb we’ve got going on in coronary diseases. These are high tech ways of adding more evidence.”

Dr. Goldman was a co-author of a study published in December 2007 in The New England Journal of Medicine in which a computer model was used to predict whether heart disease deaths in the United States would rise. The authors predicted that by 2035, there would be 100,000 additional cases of heart disease attributed to current instances of obesity in children, an estimate especially noteworthy given that advances in treatment have reduced cardiac deaths in recent years.

Another study published in the same journal at that time further bolstered the link between childhood obesity and heart disease. Analyzing the records of 276,835 Danes who were examined as children in 1930, researchers from Denmark found that the higher the children’s body-mass index in 1930, the greater the chances they would develop heart disease.

While it is too early to know if the current generation of American children will suffer more heart attacks, strokes or other heart problems, or experience them sooner, many heart researchers consider the growing corroboration of links between childhood obesity and heart disease alarming. Still, Dr. Raghuveer said that for the children she studied, hope was not lost.

“A lot of these kids’ arteries, even though they are in the early stages of atherosclerosis, are not hardened or calcified, not really advanced,” she said. “There may be an opportunity to implement lifestyle alterations, be it exercise, be it diet, or perhaps even medication. Perhaps it may be reversed.”

Dr. Raghuveer’s study used an ultrasound method called carotid artery intima-media thickness or CIMT to measure the thickness of the inner walls of the carotid arteries, located in the neck. Scientists, who measure the carotid artery because it is easier to capture images of neck arteries than the coronary arteries directly connected to the heart, say increased thickness in the carotid artery wall indicates greater amounts of fatty plaque in the arteries leading to the heart and brain. When such plaque ruptures, it can result in clots that lead to heart attack or stroke.

Of the 34 boys and 36 girls in the Kansas City study, patients at Dr. Raghuveer’s cardiology clinic at Children’s Mercy Hospital, 40 were obese and 30 were not considered obese but had high levels of LDL or bad cholesterol. Many also had high levels of triglycerides. Their average age was 13; average weight was 140 pounds. Nearly 90 percent were white.

The researchers found that 52 of the 70 participants had a maximum CIMT of at least 0.5 millimeters, a thickness that corresponded with the CIMT of an average 45-year-old or what Dr. Raghuveer called a “vascular age” of 45. She did not measure CIMT in normal-weight children and said there was no standard CIMT chart for children.

Vascular age is “an interesting idea, and I hope it gets out there,” said Dr. Gerald S. Berenson, head of the long-running Bogalusa Heart Study in Louisiana, who has taken CIMT measurements of children in the last few years.

Dr. Ludwig, director of the Optimal Weight for Life program at Children’s Hospital Boston, said that seeing risk factors like CIMT in children was especially worrying because “there’s not only a much longer period of time for it to be damaging the body, but it is also occurring at a stage of life where the body is still forming and the physiological systems are still being fine-tuned.”