JUSTEATREALFOOD   6,411
SparkPoints
5,500-6,999 SparkPoints
 
 
JUSTEATREALFOOD's Recent Blog Entries

Gradual weight loss no better than rapid weight loss for long-term weight control - Study

Wednesday, October 29, 2014

According to Katrina Purcell, dietician and the first author on the paper from the University of Melbourne, "Across the world, guidelines recommend gradual weight loss for the treatment of obesity, reflecting the widely held belief that fast weight loss is more quickly regained. However, our results show that achieving a weight loss target of 12.5% is more likely, and drop-out is lower, if losing weight is done quickly."

www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/1
0/141015190832.htm

  
  Member Comments About This Blog Post:

NICOLES0305 10/29/2014 10:22AM

    And BILL60, from what I've seen, learned, and read, you can survive just fine on a very restricted calorie diet. In fact, look at the history of humanity. Just a few hundred years ago, we were used to lasting long periods of time without significant amounts of food. Our bodies were designed to handle intermittent fasting in order to survive. They still operate this way. It will be a few thousand years yet until our bodies evolve enough to handle today's level of abundance.

Report Inappropriate Comment
NICOLES0305 10/29/2014 10:17AM

    YES! I've read this recently too! :)

Report Inappropriate Comment
BILL60 10/29/2014 9:42AM

    Interesting article. However, would like to see a study done for those not obese. Additionally, the study must have focused on "couch potatoes" because anyone doing aerobic exercises would never survive on the calorie limitations imposed. Thank you for sharing.

Report Inappropriate Comment
HMBROWN1 10/29/2014 8:33AM

    Great advice!

Report Inappropriate Comment


It is time to revisit current dietary recommendations for saturated fat.

Wednesday, October 29, 2014

From the Institute of Nutrition and Functional Foods, Laval University, Québec, Canada.

"We therefore urge the Canadian nutrition community to be proactive in this process and to hopefully arrive at a consensus that will reflect both our own food reality and the latest science. Perhaps in the end the conclusions will remain that reducing SFA intake per se is indeed a justified dietary target. But at least we will have a sense of having gone through the process with an open mind, using the totality of the evidence. And perhaps the conclusion will be that reducing SFA intake should no longer be a target to advocate in future dietary guidelines."

nrcresearchpress.com/doi/full/10.113
9/apnm-2014-0141#.VEBas-d4Vqv

  
  Member Comments About This Blog Post:

POCKETFULOFSUN 10/29/2014 9:04PM

    Its about time!

Report Inappropriate Comment
WOUBBIE 10/29/2014 8:16PM

    Woohoo!

Report Inappropriate Comment
BILL60 10/29/2014 9:44AM

    Interesting.

Report Inappropriate Comment


Listen to an Amazing Podcast about Metabolism

Monday, October 06, 2014

Dr. Jade Teta: The Metabolic Effect & Being a Diet Detective – #159

Dr. Jade Teta is an integrative physician, naturopath, and personal trainer with over 25 years of experience helping people achieve their health, weight loss, and fitness goals. He is the founder & CEO of Metabolic Effect Inc., and author of the best-selling book,The Metabolic Effect Diet. He is a regular contributor to many publications, including The Huffington Post, and the Textbook of Natural Medicine, the number one natural medicine textbook used in medical schools across the country. Jade has completed an estimated 10,000 workouts in his lifetime, and has worked with thousands of weight loss and fitness seekers from all over the world through his Metabolic Effect Clinic and online programs.

Why you should listen –

Jade comes on Bulletproof Radio to discuss how diets are destroying metabolisms and making people fat, the potential holy grail of weight loss research, the New Laws of Metabolism, and how to become your own diet detective. Enjoy the show!

www.bulletproofexec.com/dr-ja
de-teta-the-metabolic-effect-being-a-d
iet-detective-159/

  
  Member Comments About This Blog Post:

POCKETFULOFSUN 10/12/2014 9:57PM

    Thanks for the link.

Report Inappropriate Comment
NICOLES0305 10/7/2014 5:05PM

    Thanks for sharing this. It definitely made me think about things! I'm going to start paying attention to how food and exercise affect my body. Maybe I'll learn a few things. :)

Report Inappropriate Comment
NOWYOUDIDIT 10/7/2014 1:29AM

    Thanks! I book marked to listen to later! emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment
JUSTEATREALFOOD 10/6/2014 6:56PM

    Thanks, I fixed the link.

Report Inappropriate Comment
BLAZINGSWORD 10/6/2014 5:10PM

    It says sorry this page can't be displayed. Oy!

Report Inappropriate Comment


Selling Obesity Drugs to Americans Shouldn't Be This Hard

Friday, September 26, 2014

"Eisai, the maker of rival drug Belviq, has been running national television ads since the spring. The two-minute spot follows a familiar drug ad script: Ominous music plays as a cast of characters think out loud about their problems. “It’s late, and I’m still hungry,” one woman peering into a fridge in a darkened kitchen says. A reassuring female narrator says, “Weight loss is not just about willpower.” The music turns jaunty as the narrator suggests, “Maybe it’s time to try Belviq.”

Then comes a predictable-yet-surreal montage in which a trio of Belviq patients put down their plates and go to yoga class, play with a dog, and greet friends—all while the narrator reviews a long list of safety risks that might help explain the restrained interest in the anti-obesity medication. The warnings escalate from ordinary (not for pregnant women or nursing mothers) to disconcerting: “High doses may cause mental problems. Tell your doctor if you become depressed or have thoughts of suicide.” And then there’s mention of prolonged erections or unexpected lactation."

www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-0
9-15/selling-weight-loss-drugs-like-co
ntrave-in-the-u-dot-s-dot-shouldnt-be-so-hard


Shocking that the sales aren't high isn't it!?

  
  Member Comments About This Blog Post:

MRTHING2000 9/27/2014 6:33AM

    Funny stuff. Belviq is a huge crock in my opinion, and in fact. It really has virtually no impact on weight and is only for people who have at least some self-control. I'd bet those who can actually afford it also abuse it. Wait until people discontinue it at their 'goal weight' and see what happens.

A drug only needs to be 'clinically proven' to demonstrate a statistically significant difference between the control group. Statistical significance is WAY open to manipulation based on the sample size and confidence interval. And if it is 'statistically significant' it doesn't mean a whole heck of a lot. It just means that this group had outcomes greater than could reasonably be accounted for by random chance.

It doesn't mean that it necessarily 'works well'. If placebo only works 3% and the treatment group works 10%, IMHO that's a 90% failure rate. But the drug company will say it is 'clinically proven'. But that doesn't tell you quality of outcome. So if Belviq only makes one lose 1 pound, that's an outcome but we know that's pretty small.

No one should buy this. Smoke cigarettes instead--it is cheaper, helps control weight, and won't make you suicidal--and they make you look cool. LOL

Comment edited on: 9/27/2014 6:37:22 AM

Report Inappropriate Comment
SUNSHINE65 9/27/2014 1:04AM

    What? No report to your doctor if you die?


Report Inappropriate Comment
NOWYOUDIDIT 9/26/2014 7:02PM

    Those ads scare me! emoticon
emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment
WOUBBIE 9/26/2014 3:43PM

    LOL! I wonder if they can just prescribe a coconut oil tablet once an hour during waking hours! Probably works better than placebo and won't make you suicidal!

emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment


Campaign to cut calories not leading to lower obesity rates

Friday, September 26, 2014

"One reason a reduction in calories sold has not translated into a reduction in obesity could be that the balance of protein, fats and carbohydrates in a diet may be more important for weight than calories, said obesity expert Dr. Kevin Fontaine of the University of Alabama at Birmingham."

www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-
and-fitness/health/campaign-to-cut-cal
ories-not-leading-to-lower-obesity-rat
es/article20667622/

  
  Member Comments About This Blog Post:

BLAZINGSWORD 9/27/2014 9:04AM

    True Woubbie. Each person is different. And I also agree with you Justeatrealfood. I try to watch the number of calories that I eat, but also try and make sure that I eat real food and to stay active.

I do love popcorn, and eat Arnold's Thinwiches at times. But plain bread, white stuff, and such, no. That went by the way side a long time ago.

Report Inappropriate Comment
WOUBBIE 9/26/2014 2:31PM

    "One reason a reduction in calories sold has not translated into a reduction in obesity could be that the balance of protein, fats and carbohydrates in a diet may be more important for weight than calories, said obesity expert Dr. Kevin Fontaine of the University of Alabama at Birmingham."

Hmm. I think they may be on to something there....

Report Inappropriate Comment
JUSTEATREALFOOD 9/26/2014 11:52AM

    Well corporations legally have to maximize profits for investors, so they have to make products that sell. Our health isn't a priority, but as more and more people are looking to live a healthier lifestyle and eat healthier, the products they offer are slowly changing because of that changing demand.

I cannot eat the 50/30/20 diet that SP recommends because it makes me gain weight. The more carbohydrates I eat the more body fat I get and the more I weigh. I lost 4 lbs in the last week simply by cutting out all grains and added sugars (I was only eating 2 slices of GF bread a day, as it was, so not a lot of change). I still eat tons of vegetables including some potatoes and berries.

I can eat more calories, eating more fat and lose weight. Calories in vs. calories out doesn't matter to my body as much as excess carbohydrates do, I guess.

I do not believe anyone especially diabetics should be consuming 50% of calories from carbohydrates. I would have to eat 250+g of carbs a day to hit 50%. I'm not even diabetic but my blood sugars would be all over the place. Major highs and lows complete with the shakes and hunger.

Comment edited on: 9/26/2014 2:20:34 PM

Report Inappropriate Comment
BLAZINGSWORD 9/26/2014 9:58AM

    I hear what they are saying; but don't quite get it.

According to the pie chart on the food tracker, the 50% carbs, 30% fats, and 20% protein is basically following a sound and good nutritional balance. It's actually what they use for a diabetic program.

Hence, the protein and the fats will help balance out the carbs and should hopefully prevent sugar spikes BUT it's important to know that if you want to prevent sugar spikes you should eat a balanced meal or snack, which means whenever you eat a piece of fruit that you should also eat some protein before eating the fruit. That way the sugar is more slowly absorbed into one's system instead of spiking it.

Sure you can lose some weight just cutting calories alone but the crux of the matter is how one does it and is it not only healthy for the body but is this particular manner of losing weight will it be used for maintenance? I seriously doubt it.

Like a mathematical equation, living an active lifestyle, taking in less calories, and eating whole foods as oppose to processed & refined, if you change any one of those factors which helped with obesity, chances are the weight will come back on. It generally does, and more so.

But it all boils down to a matter of choice, and it's called "the survival of the fittest" and I believe that's Darwin's theory.

I don't quite agree with the article, but that's just my humble opinion.

I, like you, have read many articles & books on nutrition, dieting, and exercising, over the last 10 or so years, (although I am by no means in the medical field), I know that following the spark plan, (counting calories, eating healthy & living an active lifestyle), faithfully for the past 5 months has helped me to: become slimmer, healthier, sleep better, more alert, have more joy, and a brighter outlook.

Now, as I said before, it's a matter of choice. And here at spark people I find that most people want to be encouraging and uplifting to others and that's a good thing.

But when you are talking about corporations that develop, prepare, and make foodstuffs, their bottom line is profit; and not all companies are in it for the good of those who purchase their commodities. And I think that's the case here.

Times have changed since the 1950s when food stuffs were made "frozen", "packaged" or "refined processed".

Today in 2014, it's about health because 60 some odd years later we have an epidemic of ill health issues due to the change in nutritional "values" so to speak, especially those that were set forth by the government for "recommended" percentages of those values.

And our country has been reaping the consequences ever since and it's unfortunate because many have suffered tremendously from debilitating diseases such as diabetes, and other such complications; and it's not all hereditary. Most of it is cultural. Although it seems to "run in families", that's not true. I tend to disagree with that. (Just to note, I am not a diabetic but my mom was, and so was my best friend. Both passed, several years apart from its complications.)

It's basically because the women are the ones that make the meals and the pattern of prepping and making those meals are passed down from one generation to the next with not too much thought given to whether or not the meals are actually healthy. And even then, that hasn't been changed until recently when people are now sitting up taking notice when their loved ones pass away from such diseases, saying, "How did this happen? What bought this on? How can we avoid diabetes or do better?"

It's takes heart and research, and knowledge to get started but the real work begins when one applies it to their lives. Hence, again, it all boils down to: knowledge and choice; and both must go hand in hand. You can't have one without the other, it just doesn't work.

Comment edited on: 9/26/2014 10:06:41 AM

Report Inappropriate Comment
HMBROWN1 9/26/2014 8:22AM

    Great info - thanks!

Report Inappropriate Comment


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Last Page