Be cautious when you approach this watering hole
Many folks find it difficult to drink the usual recommended eight 8-oz glasses of water daily. That makes me wonder if there’s an underlying evolutionary mechanism at play, and maybe we don’t need that much water. Drinking untreated water exposes us to disease-causing organisms. The more water, the more pathogens.
I quote MNT:
“But how much water do we need to drink on a daily basis?
While you may have heard that eight 8-ounce glasses of water each day – known as the “8×8 rule” – is the aim, there is no scientific evidence that pinpoints precisely how much fluid is the optimal amount.
Based on studies to date, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommend that women should aim to drink around 2.2 liters of total beverages daily (around 9 cups), while men should aim to consume around 3 liters of total beverages daily (around 13 cups).
However, contrary to these recommendations and the so-called 8×8 rule, the new study suggests we should only drink when we are thirsty, after discovering a mechanism that makes drinking excess water challenging.”
Source: ‘Only drink water when thirsty,’ study suggests – Medical News Today
Dead whole fish aren’t very appealing to many folks
Probably so. Mercury is the key pollutant people think about when considering polluted fish. Mercury toxicity isn’t on the list of top 10 killers in the U.S., but heart disease is.
Heart disease is #1 on the list of top causes of death, followed by cancer and chronic lower respiratory tract disease. “Heart disease” is a broad category; the primary killer is heart attacks.
Eating fish regularly seems to reduce your risk of heart attack. I favor the cold-water fatty fish like salmon, trout, herring, and sardines.
I quote the NYT:
“Numerous studies have found that people who eat fish on a regular basis are less likely to die of a heart attack than those who don’t eat it or eat it less than once a month, and a 2006 Harvard review concluded that eating one to two servings of fish rich in omega-3s every week cut the risk of dying of a heart attack by one-third.”
Source: Why Is Fish Good for You? Because It Replaces Meat? – The New York Times
Steve Parker, M.D.
PS: Accidents are the #4 cause of death, and suicide is #10.
PPS: Click for ideas on reducing your risk of cancer.
It may not matter whether you eat this particular low-carb meal at lunch or dinner
They say that to lose excess weight, you should eat breakfast like a king, lunch like a prince, and dinner like a pauper.
A recent study tested whether weight loss in dieting women was more effective by making lunch rather than dinner (evening meal) the main meal of the day. Over the course of 12 weeks, dieters making lunch their main meal lost 4 lb (2 kg) more than the other group. Furthermore, the lunch eaters had better improvement in their insulin resistance (as measured by HOMA-IR)
From the abstract:
“Background: The association between the time of nutrient intake and health has been described in a few studies. To our knowledge, no study has evaluated the relation between high energy intakes at lunch compared with at dinner on weight loss in overweight and obese subjects.
Objective: We compared the effect of high energy intake at lunch with that at dinner on weight loss and cardiometabolic risk factors in women during a weight-loss program.Design: Overweight and obese women [n = 80; body mass index (BMI; in kg/m2): 27–35; age: 18–45 y] were asked to eat either a main meal at lunch (LM) or a main meal at dinner (DM) for 12 wk while in a weight-loss program.
Conclusions: The consumption of higher energy intake at lunch compared with at dinner may result in favorable changes in weight loss in overweight and obese women after a weight-loss program of 12 wk. The consumption may also offer clinical benefits to improve insulin resistance.”
Source: Beneficial effect of high energy intake at lunch rather than dinner on weight loss in healthy obese women in a weight-loss program: a randomized clinical trial
I don’t have the full text of the research report, so I don’t know what kind of diet the women were on. The researchers seem to be based in both Iran and Great Britain. I don’t know the nationality of the women participating. The metabolism of Iranians may be different from Brits.
Steve Parker, M.D.
PS: My books don’t taste good at either lunch or dinner.
I doubt she’s juicing (i.e., taking anabolic steroids)
This study was based in Europe, so may not apply to the U.S.
“Many bodybuilders illegally sell steroids to help fund their own use of performance and image enhancing drugs and maintain their social status in the weightlifting community, a new academic study has found. Researchers at Birmingham City University analysed more than 60 criminal cases and interviewed dozens of people involved in the purchase and sale of performance enhancers in the Netherlands and Belgium, to identify the different types of people drawn to selling the drugs.
The report found that sellers often broke the law to help fund their own use of steroids and that most viewed the substances no differently to high street supplements such as protein powders, energy bars or sports drinks.”
Source: Bodybuilders illegally sell steroids to fund own use and maintain social status, finds report
That’s a dumbbell in her right hand. I work-out with those myself.
I don’t have access to the full scientific report, but I’ve posted part of the abstract below.
The biggest problem with the study at hand is that physical activity apparently was surveyed only at the start of this 14-year study. Results would be much more robust if activity was surveyed every year or two. My overall activity level seems to change every two or three years. How about you?
“Compared to women who reported no strength training, women engaging in any strength training experienced a reduced rate of type 2 diabetes of 30% when controlling for time spent in other activities and other confounders. A risk reduction of 17% was observed for cardiovascular disease among women engaging in strength training. Participation in both strength training and aerobic activity was associated with additional risk reductions for both type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease compared to participation in aerobic activity only.
CONCLUSIONS: These data support the inclusion of muscle-strengthening exercises in physical activity regimens for reduced risk of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, independent of aerobic exercise. Further research is needed to determine the optimum dose and intensity of muscle-strengthening exercises.”
Source: Strength Training and the Risk of Type 2 Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease. – PubMed – NCBI
Steve Parker, M.D.
PS: Cardiovascular disease includes heart attack, cardiac death, stroke, coronary angioplasty, and coronary artery bypass grafting.
You need to worry about cancer because you have a roughly four in 10 chance of coming down with invasive cancer. (Skin cancers like squamous cell and basal cell are quite common, but rarely invasive.)
Dr. David Gorski is a breast cancer surgeon. He’s looked at the scientific literature on the linkage between diet and exercises, and the risk of developing cancer.
Here’s his conclusion from his review at Science-Based Medicine:
“You can reduce your risk of cancer by staying active and exercising, eating a healthy diet with a lot of plant-based foods and minimizing intake of processed meats, limiting alcohol consumption (although I think the WCRF/AICR guidelines go a bit too far in saying that you shouldn’t drink at all if possible), and maintaining a healthy weight. (Of course, if you stay active and eat a healthy diet, maintaining a healthy weight will probably not be a problem.) Conceptually, it’s easy to do. In practice, as I’m discovering, it’s anything but easy.”
Source: Diet and exercise versus cancer: A science-based view « Science-Based Medicine
The Mediterranean diet seems to protect against cancer.
Steve Parker, M.D.
PS: One of the reasons I write diet books is that I want to keep you from getting cancer.
MNT has the details:
“Around the world, weight gained from holiday feasting takes months to lose, a study found.
Christmas Day in particular is a holiday that appears to pack on the pounds: in a study of some 3,000 individuals in three countries, Americans showed an average 0.4% weight gain from 10 days before Christmas to 10 days after; Germans gained 0.6% more weight; and the Japanese 0.5%.
U.S. participants packed on 0.7% more weight in total during the full Christmas-New Year holiday season, but the Germans had us beat with a 1.0% weight gain, according to Brian Wansink, PhD, of Cornell University in Ithaca, N.Y. and colleagues.”
Source: Holiday Feasts Take Months-Long Weight Toll | Medpage Today
Those percentages aren’t very helpful, are they? In real life, if you weigh 180 lb (81.8 kg) and gain an extra 0.7%, you’re all the way up to a whopping 181.26 lb (82.4 kg). But if you do that—1.26 lb—every year for 20 years and fail to lose the weight, you’re up to 205 lb (93.2 kg) and now you’ve got diabetes and high blood pressure.
Here are a few tips to avoid the weight gain:
- On the day of the major feast, just eat two meals, and make one of them small
- Don’t snack or graze; just eat at mealtimes
- Work in some extra exercise
- Minimize the alcohol that weakens your discipline
Steve Parker, M.D.
Pro Tip: Read one of my books before you make your annual New Year’s weight-loss resolutions.
PPS: Click for the research report in NEJM.
“Before I knew anything about the effect of diet on my health and hunger, I did notice that an hour or 2 after eating refined starch foods I suffered low blood sugar and was ravenously hungry.
Back in the day (1995) as I’ve written about previously, I discovered The Zone Diet, it was literally life changing for me.
Through following this eating plan I discovered that refined carbohydrates, particularly those from grains and sugars played havoc with my blood sugar regulation. The Zone diet reduces carbohydrates, for me it was down to around 70 – 100 grams a day, divided to around 20 – 30 grams per meal. Vegetable and low glycemic index (GI) carbohydrates are encouraged over refined grains and high GI carbs.
I’ve followed this principal for 20 years now, and found limiting carbohydrates, and adding animal protein to each meal is critical for both my well-being and appetite regulation. I’ve since found that 50 to 100 grams of carbs per day works well for me, and carbohydrate quality is important. This works out to 1 to 2 grams per kg body weight per day.I’ve often wondered why I seem to be so sensitive to carbohydrates, while others don’t suffer the dysregulated blood sugars and reactive hypoglycemia and consequent carbohydrate cravings that I do.The answer may be in my genes. I recently had a gene test to find out how many copies of the AMY1 gene I have, this a gene that codes for salivary amylase.”
Source: Your carbohydrate tolerance – is it written in your genes? AMY1 copy numbers | Julianne’s Paleo & Zone Nutrition