Uncategorized

What Can Twins Tell Us About Diet?

by

What Are The Pros And Cons Of Twin Studies? 

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney 

Why is the advice on healthy diets so confusing? One blog claims the vegan diet is best. Another says it is the keto diet is best. The Mediterranean diet is popular, but other experts claim the DASH or MIND diet might be better. Blogs champion diets ranging from the familiar to downright weird.

If you try to keep up with the science, it seems like the science is constantly changing. Each week you see headlines saying the latest study shows diet “X” is best – and “X” keeps changing. Why is that? Why do studies on healthy diets keep coming up with conflicting conclusions?

I have discussed the strengths and weaknesses of clinical studies and why they provide conflicting results in detail in previous issues of “Health Tips From the Professor”. However, one factor I have not discussed in detail is the effect of genetics on how we utilize foods, something called nutrigenomics.

Simply put, we are all genetically different. The way we utilize foods is different. The effect that foods have on our bodies is different. I have touched on that briefly in a previous article discussing individual difference in blood sugar response to various foods. But that is just one of many examples.

We do not yet know enough about gene-nutrient interactions to use genomic data to accurately predict which diets are best. Again, I have covered that topic in a previous issue of “Health Tips From the Professor”. However, we do know that genetic differences have a big influence on which diet is best for us. And most clinical studies on diets do not even attempt to take genetic differences into account.

That is where twin studies come in. Identical twins (monozygotic twins) have an identical genetic makeup and usually have an identical environment until they become adults. So, when I saw an identical twin study (MJ Landry et al, JAMA Network Open, 6(11):e2344457, 2023) comparing a vegan diet (only plant foods) with an omnivorous diet (both animal and plant foods), I wanted to review it and share it with you.

How Was The Study Done? 

Clinical StudyIdentical twins were recruited from the Stanford Twin Registry. Twenty-two identical twin pairs were chosen for this study. Their characteristics were average age = 40, BMI = 26% (moderately overweight), sex = 77% female, ethnicity = 73% white, followed by an approximately equal representation of Asian, black, multiracial, and Pacific Islander.

One unanticipated characteristic of this group of twins was that 70% of them still lived together and cooked together, so their environment was also very similar.

One twin of each pair was put on a healthy vegan diet and the other on a healthy omnivorous diet for 8 weeks. Both diets were designed by dietitians. The diets emphasized fruits, vegetables, and whole grains while limiting added sugars and refined grains.

Both diets were healthier than the diets the twins were eating prior to the study. Finally, the participants were not told how much to eat, and were not instructed to lose weight.

For the first four weeks the participants were provided with all their meals by a nationwide food delivery company. The participants were also provided with training on purchasing and preparing healthy foods for their diet. This prepared them for the last 4 weeks of the study in which they purchased and prepared their own meals.

Participants visited the Stanford Clinical and Translational Science Research Unit at the beginning of the study and at the end of weeks 4 and 8 for weight measurement and a fasting blood draw.

Adherence to the diets was measured by a series of unannounced interviews to administer a 24-hour dietary recall questionnaire. These were scheduled for the weeks they visited the clinic.

What Can Twins Tell Us About Diet? 

TwinsEven though the sample size was small, there were three statistically significant results.

  • LDL-cholesterol was reduced by 12% for the twin on the vegan diet, while it remained unchanged for the twin on the omnivorous diet.
  • The fasting insulin level was reduced by 21% for the twin on the vegan diet, while it remained unchanged for the twin on the omnivorous diet. This suggests the twin on the vegan diet was experiencing improved blood sugar control after just 8 weeks.
  • The twin on the vegan diet lost 4 pounds in 8 weeks, while weight remained the same for the twin on the omnivorous diet. This occurred even though neither twin was instructed to eat less nor to lose weight. It is most likely a consequence of the lower caloric density of the vegan diet (See my discussion of caloric density in last week’s issue of “Health Tips From the Professor”.
  • The changes in LDL-cholesterol and fasting insulin were remarkable because none of the twins in this study had elevated LDL-cholesterol or problems with blood sugar control at the beginning of the study.

The authors of this study concluded, “In this randomized clinical trial of the cardiometabolic effects of omnivorous vs vegan diets in identical twins, the healthy vegan diet led to improved cardiometabolic outcomes compared with a healthy omnivorous diet. Clinicians can consider this dietary approach as a healthy alternative for their patients.”

[Let me decipher the term cardiometabolic for you. The decrease in LDL-cholesterol is associated with heart health – the cardio portion of the term. The decrease in fasting insulin is associated with decreased risk of diabetes. Since diabetes is considered a metabolic disease, this is the metabolic portion of the term.]

Were There Any Downsides To The Vegan Diet? 

thumbs down symbolThis study also highlighted two well-known limitations of vegan diets.

  • Although the differences were not statistically significant, the authors expressed concern that vitamin B12 intake was less for twins on the vegan diet than twins on the omnivorous diet even though the vegan diet was designed by dietitians.

The authors noted that B12 deficiency among vegans is well known, and said, “Long-term vegans are typically encouraged to take a cyanocobalamin (vitamin B12) supplement.

  • Although both groups had excellent adherence to their assigned diets, those assigned to the vegan diet expressed a lower satisfaction with the diet, which suggests long-term adherence to the diet after the study ended was unlikely.

The authors said, “Although our findings suggest that vegan diets offer a protective cardiometabolic advantage compared with a healthy omnivorous diet, excluding all meats and/or dairy products may not be necessary because research suggests that cardiometabolic benefits can be achieved with modest reduction in animal foods and increases in healthy plant-based foods compared with typical diets.”

“We believe that lower dietary satisfaction in the vegan group may have been attributable to the strictness of the vegan diet…Some people may find a less restrictive diet preferable for LDL-cholesterol-lowering effects.”

I concur.

What Are The Pros And Cons Of Twin Studies? 

pros and consThe Pros are obvious. Most dietary studies cannot take genetic differences into account and have difficulty accounting for environmental differences. In this study genetics was identical for each twin pair and their environment was very similar. It offers a unique advantage over other studies.

But the strength of this study is also its greatest weakness. Because the general population is genetically and environmentally diverse, it is difficult to extrapolate the results to the general population.

If this were the only study to show cardiometabolic benefits of a plant-based diet, it would simply be an interesting observation.

  • But there are several studies showing that the vegan diet is associated with lower weight and reduced risk of heart disease and diabetes.
  • And there are dozens of studies showing that primarily plant-based omnivorous diets reduce the risk of heart disease and diabetes.

This study is fully consistent with those studies.

The Bottom Line 

A recent study put identical twins on either a healthy vegan diet (only plant foods) or a healthy omnivorous diet (both animal and plant foods) for 8 weeks. At the end of 8 weeks:

  • LDL-cholesterol was reduced by 12% for the twin on the vegan diet, while it remained unchanged for the twin on the omnivorous diet.
  • The fasting insulin level was reduced by 21% for the twin on the vegan diet, while it remained unchanged for the twin on the omnivorous diet. This suggests the twin on the vegan diet was experiencing improved blood sugar control after just 8 weeks.
  • The twin on the vegan diet lost 4 pounds in 8 weeks, while weight remained the same for the twin on the omnivorous diet. This occurred even though neither twin was instructed to eat less or to lose weight. It is most likely a consequence of the lower caloric density of the vegan diet.
  • The changes in LDL-cholesterol and fasting insulin were remarkable because none of the twins in this study had elevated LDL-cholesterol or problems with blood sugar control at the beginning of the study.

The authors of this study concluded, “In this randomized clinical trial of the cardiometabolic effects of omnivorous vs vegan diets in identical twins, the healthy vegan diet led to improved cardiometabolic outcomes compared with a healthy omnivorous diet. Clinicians can consider this dietary approach as a healthy alternative for their patients.”

For more information on the pros and cons of this study and what it means for you, read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

 _____________________________________________________________________________

My posts and “Health Tips From the Professor” articles carefully avoid claims about any brand of supplement or manufacturer of supplements. However, I am often asked by representatives of supplement companies if they can share them with their customers.

My answer is, “Yes, as long as you share only the article without any additions or alterations. In particular, you should avoid adding any mention of your company or your company’s products. If you were to do that, you could be making what the FTC and FDA consider a “misleading health claim” that could result in legal action against you and the company you represent.

For more detail about FTC regulations for health claims, see this link.

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/health-products-compliance-guidance

_______________________________________________________________________

 About The Author

Dr. Steve ChaneyDr. Chaney has a BS in Chemistry from Duke University and a PhD in Biochemistry from UCLA. He is Professor Emeritus from the University of North Carolina where he taught biochemistry and nutrition to medical and dental students for 40 years.  Dr. Chaney won numerous teaching awards at UNC, including the Academy of Educators “Excellence in Teaching Lifetime Achievement Award”. Dr Chaney also ran an active cancer research program at UNC and published over 100 scientific articles and reviews in peer-reviewed scientific journals. In addition, he authored two chapters on nutrition in one of the leading biochemistry text books for medical students.

For the past 35 years Dr. Chaney and his wife Suzanne have been helping people improve their health holistically through a combination of good diet, exercise, weight control and appropriate supplementation.

Why Does Processed Food Make You Fat?

by

How Can You Enjoy Eating Without Getting Fat? 

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney 

You are probably tired of hearing about how bad processed foods are for you. If you have been following the headlines, you probably already know that diets high in processed foods are linked to obesity, type 2 diabetes, heart disease, some forms of cancer, memory loss, liver disease, kidney disease, depression, risk of dying from any cause, and much more.

And this is a serious problem because 60-70% of the American diet comes from processed foods.

In fact, you may have seen these headlines so frequently that your eyes glaze over, and your mind shuts down any time you see the words “processed foods” in the title.

This week I will be sharing the latest studies on why processed foods make us fat. Stick with me on this. This is not just another article on processed foods. While the focus of the article is on processed foods, the studies it covers are valuable because they also identify some unprocessed foods that can make us fat.

Spoiler alert! Today’s “Health Tip” is important because it teaches us that weight control is not as simple as eliminating processed foods from our diet. We also need to know which unprocessed or minimally processed foods to eat less of.

Before I proceed, I should give you a brief review of how processed foods are defined because that definition has changed in recent years.

What Are Processed Foods? 

ScientistEveryone used to have a good understanding of which foods were processed. But several years ago, the scientific community introduced a new food classification system called “The NOVA food classification system” and introduced a new category – ultra-processed foods. I have covered this classification system in previous “Health Tips From the Professor” articles, but I will review it here.

The NOVA system categorizes foods into four groups according to the extent of processing they have undergone:

  1.  Unprocessed foods.
    • This category includes foods like fruit, vegetables, milk, eggs, and meat.

2) Processed culinary ingredients.

    • This category includes foods you might find in restaurants or prepare yourself to which things like salt, sugar, vegetable oils, butter, or cream were added in the preparation.

3) Minimally processed foods.

    • This category includes foods like canned vegetables, freshly made breads, and cheeses.

4) Ultra-processed foods.

    • This category includes foods like soft drinks, chips, packaged snacks, most breakfast cereals, chicken nuggets & fish sticks, fast food burgers, hot dogs, and other processed meats.

The actual list is much longer, but you get the idea. What we call processed foods, scientists now call ultra-processed foods. The article I am discussing used the term “ultra-processed foods” in the title.

But, since the term “ultra-processed foods” has not yet entered the popular vocabulary, I will use the term “processed foods” in this article because it is more understandable to the average reader.

Does Processed Food Make You Fat? 

clinical studyI shared a study in a previous issue of “Health Tips From the Professor” that suggested that the answer was yes, but did not answer the question of why. That’s because of the way the experiment was designed.

The ultra-processed diet and unprocessed diets were matched with respect to:

  • Total calories in the food portions given to the subjects.
  • Caloric density (calories per serving size). That’s because caloric density has been linked to overeating (I’ll discuss that in more detail below.) The authors of the study eliminated that variable.
  • Macronutrients (carbohydrate, fat, & protein). I’m sure you’ve seen blogs suggesting that carbohydrates or fat cause weight gain. And you’ve probably seen blogs suggesting that high protein diets cause weight loss. The authors eliminated these variables.
  • Total sugar, fiber, and sodium. That’s because the sugar, fat, and sodium content of foods increase their tastiness (palatability), which has been linked to overeating (more below). The authors eliminated this variable.

In short, this study compared a tasty, healthy ultra-processed food diet with a tasty, healthy unprocessed food diet. [Note: This does not represent the real world. In the real world the ultra-processed foods eaten by most Americans are higher in caloric density, sugar, fat, and sodium and lower in fiber than unprocessed foods.]

However, in the scientific world, this was an excellent study design. By eliminating variables thought to explain the correlation between ultra-processed food consumption and obesity, the study was able to focus on two questions:

#1: With those variables eliminated, do ultra-processed foods still lead to overeating? Here the answer was a clear, yes.

  • The study participants eating ultra-processed foods ate 500 more calories per day than those eating unprocessed foods. (Both groups were presented with meals and snacks containing the same number of calories and told to eat as much as they wanted.)
  • Participants eating ultra-processed foods gained 2 pounds in just two weeks, while those eating unprocessed foods lost 2 pounds.

#2: If so, what else about ultra-processed foods leads to overeating? One popular theory of why ultra-processed foods lead to overeating is that they cause large blood sugar spikes and crashes, which stimulates appetite. But the authors of the study were disappointed to find no large blood sugar spikes following consumption of ultra-processed food meals.

However, I don’t think their data disproves the blood sugar spike theory. Remember that this was a “healthy ultra-processed food diet”. The amount of sugar and fiber was identical in the ultra-processed and unprocessed food diets. More importantly, when I looked at the sample menus provided by authors as supplementary information, each meal contained a significant percent of whole, low-glycemic foods. This was a “healthy ultra-processed food” diet designed by a dietitian, not what the typical American eats.

So, why did the ultra-processed food group eat more in this study? This study did not provide an answer to that question, but other studies (described below) have provided probable answers to that question.

Why Does Processed Food Make You Fat? 

What do other studies tell us about why processed foods make us overeat and gain weight? Here are the top 7 mechanisms that have been suggested and what they mean for us.

candy bar#1: Caloric Density: Simply put, caloric density is the number of calories in a serving of food. When you consume foods with a high caloric density, you are more likely to consume excess calories without even thinking about it.

When I was still teaching medical students, I used this example to illustrate the effect of caloric density on calories consumed. “There are the same number of calories in a 2-ounce candy bar and a pound of apples. You can eat a 2-ounce candy bar and be ready to eat more. If you eat a pound of apples, you are done for a while”.

Since most processed foods have a higher caloric density than unprocessed foods, the simplest solution to weight control is to limit processed foods in your diet.

However, how you or your favorite restaurant prepares unprocessed foods is important as well. For example, the addition of cheese or cream sauces can significantly increase the caloric density of the food. This is why the NOVA food classification system I described above created a new category of “culinary foods” to describe these kinds of foods.

#2: Hyper-palatability: In prehistoric times foods that were sweet, salty, and fatty were essential for survival, so we are hardwired to desire those foods. Here is why:

  • We need a certain amount of sugar for our brain, red blood cells, and a few other tissues to function. Wild game provides almost no carbohydrate. Fruits were the best source of sugar, but fruits were scarce prior to farming. The craving for sweetness drove us to forage far and wide to find fruits and other plant sources of sugar and carbohydrate.
  • Sodium is essential for survival, but unprocessed plant and animal foods provide very little. That’s why even in Biblical times, salt was worth its weight in gold.
  • In prehistoric times, food was sometimes scarce, especially in winter. It might be a week or more between meals. Fat stores got prehistoric man through these times of scarcity, so it was important to eat fatty meals in times of plenty. [Note: We no longer live in times of scarcity, and those fat stores have gone from being an asset to being a health concern.]

Unfortunately, “Big Food, Inc” has weaponized these hardwired desires for sweet, salty, and fatty foods. Simply put, processed foods taste good because they fulfil our hardwired taste desires. Scientists call it “hyper-palatability”. But whatever you call it, we want to eat more, and that leads to overeating.

And again, the way we prepare the foods we eat also matters. It’s only natural to add extra salt, sugar, and/or fat to the foods we prepare so they taste better. And if we add too much, we make the healthy foods we eat hyper-palatable, and we are tempted to overeat.

On a personal note, I never knew you might want to add sugar and fat to the vegetables you cook before my family moved to the south. On the other hand, I had never eaten collard greens before either.

#3: Food Consistency: When you look at studies on the effect of food consistency on calories consumed, you find that there are several different ways of defining food consistency, but they are all looking at the same thing from a different perspective – like the fable of the 6 blind men trying to describe an elephant.

applesauce
  • Food Structure: The classic study, published in 2009, compared the effect of sliced apples, applesauce, and apple juice eaten shortly before a meal on the number of calories consumed at the meal. In terms of calories consumed during the meal, the results were clear. It was apple juice > applesauce > apple slices.

This drew attention to the effect of food structure on calories consumed. Apples are a whole food with cellular structure intact. Applesauce contains all the nutrients, phytonutrients, and fiber of whole apples, but the cellular structure has been lost. Apple juice contains most of the nutrients and phytonutrients of applesauce, but the fiber has been lost.

Why does the structure of whole foods matter?

    • Cell structure must be destroyed before digestion can occur, the release of sugar and carbohydrates from the food is delayed. This reduces the spikes and valleys of blood sugar that can increase appetite.
    • Transit time of the food through the intestine is also delayed. Thus, the feeling of fulness persists longer, which reduces appetite.

There are two takeaway lessons from this study that may not be so obvious:

    • Neither applesauce nor apple juice meet the NOVA definition of an ultra-processed food. So, simply removing processed foods from your diet may not be enough to reduce your appetite and, therefore, your caloric intake.
    • In addition, adding fiber back to apple juice did not make it equivalent to applesauce in reducing appetite. So, despite what Big Food Inc tells you, adding fiber to processed foods does not turn them into health foods.
  • Soft Versus Hard Foods: Many processed foods are soft, and most unprocessed foods are hard. So, you could think of this as a description that separates processed foods from unprocessed foods.

But, if you consider the apples versus applesauce comparison I described above, it is obvious that soft versus hard description also pertains to minimally processed foods such as applesauce and whole, unprocessed foods such as apples. 

For example, one recent study comparing soft versus hard foods found it didn’t matter whether the soft foods were processed or unprocessed. People in the study ate more calories from all soft foods than from hard, unprocessed foods such as raw fruits and vegetables.

  • Fast Versus Slow Foods: This description separates foods based on the speed at which they are digested and pass through the intestine. Once again, you might think of this as a description that separates processed and unprocessed foods until you think about applesauce versus apples comparison.

And, as you might expect, a recent study comparing “fast” versus “slow” foods found it didn’t matter whether the fast and slow foods were processed or unprocessed. People in the study ate more calories from fast foods than from slow foods.

[Note: This study defined “slow” foods as harder, chunkier, more solid, and more viscous. While the first three adjectives describe what other scientists also refer to as “hard” foods, the final adjective broadens the category to include “soft” foods like oatmeal.]

How Can You Enjoy Eating Without Getting Fat? 

For most Americans, weight is a constant uphill battle. Their weight increases by a few pounds every year, and over time that continuing weight gain adds up. Diets are never enjoyable, which is part of the reason they almost always fail in the long term. You want to control your weight, but you also want to enjoy what you eat. Why is that so hard?

The secret to a healthy weight is to find foods you enjoy that don’t increase your appetite –  foods that fill you up, so you eat less naturally. Here are my 4 tips for eating foods you enjoy without getting fat.

Tip #1: Limit processed foods. Processed foods tend to have a high caloric density; are hyper-palatable, soft, and fast; and lack the intact cellular structure of whole, unprocessed foods. And multiple studies, such as the one I cited above, agree that processed foods cause us to eat more and to gain weight. So, the single most important step you can take to control your weight is to limit your intake of processed foods.

Tip #2: Choose minimally processed foods wisely. The studies I shared above suggest that avoiding processed foods may not be enough. We also need to look at the minimally processed foods we eat (applesauce, for example). These studies suggest we should also favor whole, unprocessed foods over minimally processed foods that are softer and faster (more quickly digested).

By now, you might be saying, “Wait a minute. I thought you said I could enjoy eating without getting fat. How can I enjoy eating if I have to give up my favorite processed and minimally processed foods?”

My short answer would be, “No. But you might want to broaden your horizons”. We all tend to be creatures of habit. We eat a relatively small variety of foods on a regular basis. When my wife and I decided to eat healthier, we kept trying new foods until we found new, healthier foods we loved.

The category of whole unprocessed foods offers many options. There are fruits, vegetables, many varieties of 100% whole grains, beans, nus, seeds, eggs, and meats. And we are blessed to live in a country with abundant choices. When you walk into your local supermarket you will find dozens of foods in each of these categories that you have never tried before. Be daring. Keep trying new foods until you find new favorite foods you love.

Tip #3: Be aware of how foods are prepared. The studies described above also suggest how we prepare the food is important. We can start out with a whole unprocessed food and end up with something no better than processed food if we prepare it incorrectly. If we add lots of cream, cheese, butter, and/or sugar, we increase the caloric density. And this can lead to us consuming more calories without even thinking about it.Throw in some salt and we have also made the food hyper-palatable, which makes us want to eat more.

Now you might be saying, “But I grew up with my food being cooked this way. This is my comfort zone. Do I have to completely change the way I cook my food, and the items I choose at my favorite restaurant?”

Again, my short answer would be, “No, but you might want to try new recipes.” I am not a cooking guru. That would be my wife. But I do know there are lots of books and web sites featuring healthy recipes. Once again, be bold. Try new recipes until you find new favorites. Try new items on your favorite restaurant’s menu or try new restaurants until you find healthier, restaurant foods you love.

Tip #4: Never say never. This is perhaps the most important tip. Whenever we tell ourselves we can never eat a food again, it becomes irresistible. We are setting ourselves up for failure. The goal should be to change unhealthy foods and unhealthy recipes from an everyday occurrence to an occasional pleasure.

The Bottom Line 

Multiple studies show that eating processed foods leads to weight gain. It may be no coincidence that 60-70% of the foods Americans eat is highly processed and 60-70% of us are overweight or obese.

In the article above, I summarize recent studies asking why processed foods make us fat. If you think these studies are only of interest to scientists, you would be wrong. These studies also help us to identify unprocessed and minimally processed foods in our diet that can make us fat.

For more information on these studies, and 4 tips on how you can enjoy eating without getting fat, read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

 _____________________________________________________________________________

My posts and “Health Tips From the Professor” articles carefully avoid claims about any brand of supplement or manufacturer of supplements. However, I am often asked by representatives of supplement companies if they can share them with their customers.

My answer is, “Yes, as long as you share only the article without any additions or alterations. In particular, you should avoid adding any mention of your company or your company’s products. If you were to do that, you could be making what the FTC and FDA consider a “misleading health claim” that could result in legal action against you and the company you represent.

For more detail about FTC regulations for health claims, see this link.

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/health-products-compliance-guidance

 

Your Rectus Femoris Muscle And Knee Pain

by

Treating Your Rectus Femoris Muscle Safely

Author: Julie Donnelly, LMT – The Pain Relief Expert

Editor: Dr. Steve Chaney

Walking FastI hope that 2023 was kind to you and your family.  Covid seemed to come and go, with new strains popping up every time we turned around. And then there is RSV and the flu. What a year!

In December the foods all seemed to be fattening – delicious for sure, but fattening.  Which brings me to the topic of the month.  Maybe you are trying to walk off some of the extra calories you put on last month.

Walking will help burn calories, but it can also come with aches and pains from muscles getting used repetitively.

This month I want to focus on pain that prevents you from bending your knee after several days of walking more than your body is used to. It can reduce your walks to a slow hobble at best. And that isn’t going to burn off any extra calories.

One Quadricep Muscle is the Source of Pain from the Low Back to the Knee. 

You likely already know that there are four quadriceps that form the front of your thigh.  You probably also know that they are responsible for straightening your leg when you want to stand up from sitting. But there is so much more…especially for one of the quads…the rectus femoris.

Your Rectus Femoris Muscle And Knee Pain

The rectus femoris is a long muscle located in the front, and a bit toward the outside of your thigh.

The rectus femoris is the only one of the four quads that originate on the tip of your pelvis (ASIS), the rest: vastus lateralis, vastus intermedius, and vastus medialis, all originate along your thigh bone (femur). These four muscles join together and attach to your kneecap (patella).

This picture shows the muscle but fails to show the tendon that starts at the top of your kneecap, goes over your kneecap (patella), and inserts into the front of your shin bone (tibia).

It is the patella tendon that causes knee pain and can prevent you from bending your knee when you sit down or want to walk up steps. 

Think of the analogy I use so frequently.  When you pull your hair, your head hurts, but you don’t need to rub your head, take pain pills, or have brain surgery.  You just need to let go of your hair!

In the same way, the muscle is pulling down on the front of your hip and may cause anterior hip pain, and it’s pulling up on your patella tendon, causing your kneecap to move up so you can’t bend your knee, and putting stress on your shin bone.

Your knee and front of your hip are NOT the problem, they are the symptom!

The Function Of The Rectus Femoris Muscle:

Since the muscle originates on the tip of your pelvis,

  • The rectus femoris flexes (bends) the hip along with two other muscles I’ve discussed in the past, the sartorius and iliopsoas. The four quads pull up on your lower leg at the knee, straightening your leg so you can stand up.

Injury To The Rectus Femoris Muscle: 

  • In acute rectus femoris muscle injuries, a person may feel a tearing sensation at their knee, with an abrupt onset of pain.
  • Subacute injuries may present with gradual onset of pain at either the front of your hip or your knee. If you enjoy running, you may also have knee pain while you’re running uphill.
  • You may feel that you have arthritis in your knee joint. If that is the case, it is beneficial to see a deep muscle massage therapist to eliminate tight muscles from the diagnosis.  You can also do the Julstro self-treatment that is shown below to release the tension in the muscle.
  • When a muscular strain injury occurs, a person may also have moderate to severe pain in the groin.
  • Pain can be sudden, like kicking the ball in soccer or sprinting from a standing position. Or it may build up gradually as an overuse problem with repeated tearing and repeated stress.
  • Stretching, without first releasing the tension in the muscle, can cause tearing where the muscle inserts into the tendon, or tear the tendon fibers from the bone.
  • Spasms in your rectus femoris can also be caused by contractions in the muscles that impact your lower back and pelvis. If this is the case, you need to treat each of the muscles before your thigh muscles release.  I demonstrate the full treatment in my books in the chapter about the Julstro Protocol.

Treating Your Rectus Femoris Muscle Safely

There are multiple ways to treat your rectus femoris muscle and I show them to you in my books: The Pain-Free Athlete and Treat Yourself to Pain-Free Living.   

Using a 12” length of 1” PVC pipe, place the pipe as shown in this picture. This is the perfect position to treat the rectus femoris.

Hold the pipe loosely in your hand or hold your four fingers straight out so you are not curling them around the pipe. This will prevent tension from forming in your forearm muscles.

Press into your thigh and slide, don’t roll, down your thigh to just above your knee.

Do this to your entire thigh, outside/front/inside so you treat all four quadriceps.

I suggest you treat both thighs, even if you are only having pain in one leg.

Wishing you well,

Julie Donnelly

www.FlexibleAthlete.com

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.

About The Author

Julie Donnelly has been a licensed massage therapist since 1989, specializing in the treatment of chronic pain and sports injuries. The author of several books including Treat Yourself to Pain-Free Living, The Pain-Free Athlete, and The 15 Minute Back Pain Solution.

Julie has also developed a proven self-treatment program for the symptoms of carpal tunnel syndrome.

She has a therapy practice in Sarasota, Florida, and she travels around the USA to teach massage and physical therapists how to do the Julstro Method, and she also teaches self-treatment clinics to anyone interested in taking charge of their own health and flexibility.

She may be reached at her office: 919-886-1861, or through her website: www.FlexibleAthlete.com

Weight Gain During Pregnancy

by

How Much Weight Should You Gain And Why?

Author: Carolyn Curtis, MSN, CNM, RN, FACNM, FAAN

Editor: Dr. Steve Chaney

Pregnant CoupleWeight gain during pregnancy is a challenge for many women.  The Centers for Disease Control has stated that 48% of women gained more than the recommended amount of weight during pregnancy, only one third (32%) of women gained the recommended amount and 21% of women gained too little[i]

Weight is a big thing to be concerned about and to work on prior to and during pregnancy. Why do you need to worry about this?   One’s weight prior to pregnancy can make it more difficult to become pregnant. And weight gain during pregnancy carries lifelong implications for both the mother and infant.

Many women think that during pregnancy, that they must “Eat for Two”, thus giving them the feeling that they should eat more to nourish a developing baby.  However, this saying needs to be re-examined, as I explain below.

Nutrition during pregnancy is really, really important.  It lays down the physical foundation for your baby and has lifelong implications for both mother and baby.  Keep in mind, you are growing a baby!

So how much weight should I gain during pregnancy? Weight gain in pregnancy will be based upon your body mass index or BMI.

What is the body mass index?  The Body mass index (BMI) is a measure of body fat based on height and weight that applies to adult men and women.  A calculator is used to determine your BMI. [ii] Calculators to measure BMI can be downloaded from the Apple store and Google Play.

It is going to be the determining factor for how much weight you should gain during pregnancy.

So, Based On Your BMI, How Much Weight Should You Gain During Pregnancy?

The Institute of Medicine recommends that, based upon your pre-pregnancy BMI, weight gain during pregnancy can range from zero pounds up to 40 pounds during pregnancy.

  • If you are underweight, weight gain between 28 and 40 pounds is recommended.
  • If you are at normal weight, the recommended weight gain is between 25 to 35 pounds.
  • If you are overweight, the recommended weight gain is 15 to 25 pounds.
  • And if you are obese, the weight gain is 11 to 20 pounds during your pregnancy.[i]

Recent recommendations have proposed that obesity should be broken into three different categories. BMI 1, BMI 2 and BMI 3, and that total weight gain should be limited to zero to 15 pounds gain based on these BMI categories.[ii]  Research is ongoing on these recommendations.

Proposed Weight Gain Recommendations for Pregnant Women with Obesity†
BMI Category Current IOM Recommendations (lbs) Proposed Recommendations (lbs)
BMI 1 (30-34.9) 11-20 5-15
BMI 2 (35-39.9) 11-20 <10
BMI 3 (≥ 40) 11-20 Maintain prepregnancy weight

J. Clin. Invest. 2019 129: 4567-4569

Where Does The Weight Go During Pregnancy?

Your baby and changes in your body during pregnancy account for the 25 to 35 pounds weight gain during pregnancy.

  • Baby – 6-8 pounds.
  • Placenta and surrounding water – 4-6 pounds.
  • Uterus – 2-3 pounds.
  • Enlarged breast tissue – 2-3 pounds.
  • Increased blood (blood volume increases 40% to 50% during pregnancy) – 4 pounds.
  • Fluids in the maternal tissue throughout your body – 2-3 pounds.
  • Fat stores – 5-8 pounds.

How Many Calories Should You Eat Each Day?

During the first trimester, it is recommended that women gain no more than four pounds.  In the second and third trimesters of pregnancy, it is recommended that women should gain between one half pound to one pound per week[i].

One pound is equal to 3,500 calories.  This equals to 500 calories per day which is equal to a sandwich and a glass of milk.  This is definitely not “eating for two”. If you are carrying twins or triplets, this amount will increase.

What Happens If You Are Underweight Or Overweight?

Implications for mother and baby are as follows:

Overweight[i]

Mother:

  • May take longer to get pregnant.
  • Increased risk of miscarriage
  • Increased risk of developing pre-eclampsia.
  • Increased risk of diabetes.
  • Having a longer labor which can result in postpartum hemorrhage.
  • Increased possibility of needing to use internal monitors as external monitors cannot pick up fetal heart tone due to fat density.
  • Increased risk of cesarean section.
  • Increased risk of shoulder dystocia because the baby is also big.
  • Weight stays on after pregnancy, which increases the risk of overweight and obesity.
  • Increased risk of developing diabetes later in life.
  • Increased risk of repeat cesarean section.

Baby:

  • Increased risk of neural tube defects.
  • Increased risk of heart defects.
  • Baby is too big for weeks of pregnancy (gestational age baby).
  • Hyperglycemia, meaning that the baby’s blood sugar is too high.
  • Possibility of trauma when the baby is being born.
  • Long-term obesity for that child resulting in childhood obesity.
  • Daughters that are large for gestational age are more likely to be obese and deliver larger babies.

Underweight

Mother:

  • Difficulty with getting pregnant.
  • Increased risk of having a pre-term birth (your baby is born before 37 weeks of pregnancy).

Baby:

  • Increased risk for prematurity.
  • Increased risk that baby is small for gestational age or low birth weight.
  • Problems with oxygen levels at birth.
  • Trouble staying warm because the baby doesn’t have the fat stores that give the calories to help the baby to stay warm.
  • Breathing problems.
  • Increased problems with infection.
  • Nervous system problems with possible long-term effects of cerebral palsy, blindness, developmental delays where your baby is not developing on time.

What Resources Are Available To Help You Gain The Appropriate Amount Of Weight During Pregnancy?

There are many resources available, including weight gain trackers.[i]  It would be wise to seek the help of a registered dietitian.  If you are underweight or obese, their services may be covered under your health insurance.

The Bottom Line

  1. Women who are overweight or underweight prior to pregnancy can have difficulty becoming pregnant.
  1. Many women carry the idea that during pregnancy, that they are “Eating for Two”. This idea can lead to excessive weight gain for the mother that persists after pregnancy and childhood obesity for the infant.
  1. Weight gain during pregnancy is determined by one’s pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI).
  1. Based upon the prepregnant BMI, weight gain during pregnancy can range from 11 pounds to 40 pounds during pregnancy. Ongoing studies are suggesting a weight gain amount of zero to 15 pounds for Obesity Categories I through III.
  1. It is recommended that during pregnancy, mothers gain up to a total of four pounds in the first trimester and between one half to one pound per week in the second and third trimesters. This amount of weight gain equals to an additional 500 calories per day which is equal to a sandwich and one glass of whole milk additionally per day.
  1. Weight gain during pregnancy carries lifelong implications for both mother and infant.
  1. Seek help from a registered dietitian if you are overweight or underweight. Weight gain trackers are also available for mothers to track their weight during pregnancy at the Centers for Disease Control website.[ii]
[1] https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/maternalinfanthealth/pregnancy-weight-gain.htm
[1] https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/educational/lose_wt/BMI/bmicalc.htm
[1] https://nap.nationalacademies.org/resource/12584/Resource-Page—Weight-Gain-During-Pregnancy.pdf
[1] https://www.acog.org/clinical/clinical-guidance/committee-opinion/articles/2013/01/weight-gain-during-pregnancy
[1] https://nap.nationalacademies.org/resource/12584/Resource-Page—Weight-Gain-During-Pregnancy.pdf
[1] https://www.womenshealth.gov/healthy-weight/weight-fertility-and-pregnancy
[1] https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/maternalinfanthealth/pregnancy-weight-gain.htm
[1] Ibid
[i] https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/maternalinfanthealth/pregnancy-weight-gain.htm
[ii] Ibid

Visit My You Tube Channel

For more information on how to have a healthy pregnancy and healthy child, especially if you are black, visit my You Tube Channel.

https://www.youtube.com/@carolyncurtis-thecarabcompany

Carolyn Curtis

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.

About The Author

Carolyn Curtis, MSN, CNM, RN, FACNM, FAAN, has:

  • More than 40 years’ experience in the oversight of domestic and international programs and the provision of nursing and midwifery integrated service delivery in maternal child health, family planning, reproductive and women’s health care.
  • Twenty years’ experience in teaching, mentoring, and providing clinical oversight to undergraduate and graduate public health, medical, nursing and midwifery students.

 

Which Diets Are Heart Healthy?

by

Which Diet Is Best For You?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney 

strong heartThe top 3 claims the advocates of every popular diet make are:

  • It will help you lose weight.
  • It reduces your risk of diabetes.
  • It reduces your risk of heart disease.

The truth is any restrictive diet helps you lose weight. And when you lose weight, you improve blood sugar control. Which, of course, reduces your risk of developing diabetes.

But what about heart disease? Which diets are heart healthy? When it comes to heart disease the claims of diet advocates are often misleading. That’s because the studies these advocates use to support their claims are often poor quality studies. Many of these studies:

  • Look at markers of heart disease risk rather than heart disease outcomes. Markers like LDL cholesterol, triglycerides, c-reactive protein, etc. are only able to predict possible heart disease outcomes. To really know which diets are heart healthy you have to measure actual heart disease outcomes such as heart attacks, stroke, and cardiovascular deaths.
  • Are too short to provide meaningful results. Many of these studies last only a few weeks. You need much longer to measure heart disease outcomes.
  • Are too small to provide statistically significant results. You need thousands of subjects to be sure the results you are seeing are statistically significant.
  • Have not been confirmed by other studies. The Dr. Strangeloves of the world like to “cherry pick” the studies that support the effectiveness of their favorite diet. Objective scientists know that any individual study can be wrong. So, they look for consensus conclusions from multiple studies.

A recent study (G Karam et al, British Medical Journal, 380: e072003, 2023) avoided all those pitfalls. The investigators conducted a meta-analysis of 40 high-quality clinical studies with 35,548 participants to answer the question, “Which diets are heart healthy?”

How Was The Study Done?

Clinical StudyThe authors started by searching all major databases of clinical studies for studies published on the effect of diets on heart disease outcomes through September 2021.

They then performed a meta-analysis of the data from all studies that:

  • Compared the effect of a particular diet to minimal dietary intervention (defined as not receiving any advice or receiving dietary information such as brochures or brief advice from their clinician with little or no follow-up).
  • Looked at heart disease outcomes such as all cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, non-fatal heart attacks, stroke, and others.
  • Lasted for at least 9 months (average duration = 3 years).
  • Were high-quality studies.

Using these criteria:

  • They identified 40 studies with 35,548 participants for inclusion in their meta-analysis.
    • From those 40 studies, they identified 7 diet types that met their inclusion criteria (low fat (18 studies), Mediterranean (12 studies), very low fat (6 studies), modified fat (substituting healthy fats for unhealthy fats rather than decreasing fats, 4 studies), combined low fat and low sodium (3 studies), Ornish (3 studies), Pritikin (1 study).

One weakness of meta-analyses is that the design of the studies included in the meta-analysis is often different. Sometimes they don’t fit together well. So, while the individual studies are high-quality, a combination of all the studies can lead to a conclusion that is low quality or moderate quality.

Finally, the data were corrected for confounding factors such as obesity, exercise, smoking, and medication use.

Which Diets Are Heart Healthy?

Now that you understand the study design, we are ready to answer the question, “Which diets are heart healthy?” Here is what this study found:

Compared to minimal intervention,

  • The Mediterranean diet decreased all cause mortality by 28%, cardiovascular mortality by 45%, stroke by 35%, and non-fatal heart attacks by 52%.
  • Low fat diets decreased all cause mortality by 16% and non-fatal heart attacks by 23%. The effect of low fat diets on cardiovascular mortality and stroke was not statistically significant in this meta-analysis.
    • For both the Mediterranean and low fat diets, the heart health benefits were significantly better for patients who were at high risk of heart disease upon entry into the study.
    • The evidence supporting the heart health benefits for both diets was considered moderate quality evidence for this meta-analysis. [Remember that the quality of any conclusion in a meta-analysis is based on both the quality of evidence of the individual studies plus how well the studies fit together in the meta-analysis.]
  • While the percentage of risk reduction appears to be different for the Mediterranean and low fat diets, the effect of the two diets on heart health was not considered significantly different in this study.
  • The other 5 diets provided little, or no benefit, compared to the minimal intervention control based on low to moderate quality evidence.

The authors concluded, “This network meta-analysis found that Mediterranean and low fat dietary programs probably reduce the risk of mortality and non-fatal myocardial infarction [heart attacks] in people at increased cardiovascular risk. Mediterranean dietary programs are also likely to reduce the risk of stroke. Generally, other dietary programs were not superior to minimal intervention.”

Which Diet Is Best For You?

confusionThe fact that this study found both the Mediterranean diet and low fat diets to be heart healthy is not surprising. Numerous individual studies have found these diets to be heart healthy. So, it is not surprising when the individual studies were combined in a meta-analysis, the meta-analysis also concluded they were heart healthy. However, there are two important points I would like to make.

  • The diets used in these studies were designed by trained dietitians. That means the low fat studies did not use Big Food, Inc’s version of the low fat diet in which fatty foods are replaced with highly processed foods. In these studies, fatty foods were most likely replaced with whole or minimally processed foods from all 5 food groups.
  • The Mediterranean diet is probably the most studied of current popular diets. From these studies we know the Mediterranean diet improves brain health, gut health, and reduces cancer risk.

As for the other 5 diets (very low fat, modified fat, low fat and low sodium, Ornish, and Pritikin), I would say the jury is out. There is some evidence that these diets may be heart healthy. But very few of these studies were good enough to be included in this meta-analysis. Clearly, more high-quality studies are needed.

Finally, you might be wondering why other popular diets such as paleo, low carb, and very low carb (Atkins, keto, and others) were left out of this analysis. All I can say is that it wasn’t by design.

The authors did not select the 7 diets described in this study and then search for studies testing their effectiveness. They searched for all studies describing the effect of diets on heart health. Once they identified 40 high-quality studies, they grouped the diets into 7 diet categories.

I can only conclude there were no high-quality studies of paleo, low carb, or very low carb diets that met the criteria for inclusion in this meta-analysis. The criteria were:

  • The effect of diet on heart health must be compared to a control group that received no or minimal dietary advice.
  • The study must measure heart disease outcomes such as all cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, non-fatal heart attacks, and stroke.
  • The study must last at least 9 months.
  • The study must be high-quality.

Until these kinds of studies are done, we have no idea whether these diets are heart healthy or not.

So, what’s the takeaway for you? Which diet is best for you? Both low fat diets and the Mediterranean diet are heart healthy provided the low fat diet consists of primarily whole or minimally processed foods. Which of these two diets is best for you depends on your food preferences.

The Bottom Line 

Many of you may have been warned by your doctor that your heart health is not what it should be. Others may be concerned because you have a family history of heart disease. You want to know which diets are heart healthy.

Fortunately, a recent study answered that question. The authors performed a meta-analysis of 40 high-quality studies that compared the effect of various diets with the effect of minimal dietary intervention (doctors’ advice or diet brochure) on heart disease outcomes.

From this study they concluded that both low fat diets and the Mediterranean diet probably reduce mortality and the risk of non-fatal heart attacks, and that the Mediterranean diet likely reduces stroke risk.

Other diets studied had no significant effect on heart health in this study. That does not necessarily mean they are ineffective. But it does mean that more high-quality studies are needed before we can evaluate their effect on heart health.

So, what’s the bottom line for you? Both low fat diets and the Mediterranean diet are heart healthy provided the low fat diet consists of primarily whole or minimally processed foods Which of these two diets is best for you depends on your food preferences.

For more information on this study, read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.

___________________________________________________________________________

My posts and “Health Tips From the Professor” articles carefully avoid claims about any brand of supplement or manufacturer of supplements. However, I am often asked by representatives of supplement companies if they can share them with their customers.

My answer is, “Yes, as long as you share only the article without any additions or alterations. In particular, you should avoid adding any mention of your company or your company’s products. If you were to do that, you could be making what the FTC and FDA consider a “misleading health claim” that could result in legal action against you and the company you represent.

For more detail about FTC regulations for health claims, see this link.

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/health-products-compliance-guidance

Your Pectineus Muscle And Groin Pain

by

Treating Groin Pain Naturally

Author: Julie Donnelly, LMT – The Pain Relief Expert

Editor: Dr. Steve Chaney

The holidays are inching up on us, and this month is one of my favorites.  I love Halloween because the children have so much fun dressing up and going to parties.

Back when I was a child we could roam around the neighborhood, knocking on doors and having our candy dropped into the pumpkin basket or pillowcase our moms gave us.  We traveled in a pack, and our parents knew we were safe as long as we stayed in our neighborhood because everyone knew everyone.

Nowadays children go to “Trunk or Treat” parties, often with mom or dad in tow. They’re still having fun, and it’s great to see their excitement when they’re sharing with each other how many goodies they have collected.

Now, even just LOOKING at that candy makes me gain 5 lbs!  Oh well!

Happy October to you and your family!

Your Pectineus Muscle And Groin Pain

Today, we will be discussing how a small muscle that most people aren’t even aware of can cause groin pain. I’ve been working with athletes since 1989 and I’ve seen this small muscle cause such pain that it was preventing the athlete from continuing with his/her sport.  And it’s so simple to treat!

The pectineus muscle is in your adductor muscle group. The adductors are responsible for hip flexion and adduction.

Adduction is when you bring your leg closer to the opposite leg, such as when you cross your legs when you are sitting down.  Athletes who play soccer, or who ride a horse, are heavily using their adductor muscles.

As you look at the graphic on the left, the muscles on the left side (right leg) are the larger adductor muscles.

The pectineus is shown on the right side (left leg) so that it is more visible, helping you see the location of the muscle.  In reality, all the muscles are on both sides.

Since the pectineus muscle is so close to the pubic bone, it is more difficult to self-treat. You need to sit on the floor and twist yourself, so the sore side is pressing into the floor.

The pectineus muscle is often overlooked, but it can cause significant pain when in spasm or injured. Here are some of the symptoms, causes, and a simple self-treatment I have developed for a tight pectineus.

Quick Facts About Groin Pain And Your Pectineus Muscle

Causes of Spasms of the Pectineus and Adductors:

  • Muscular injuries of the adductors, the iliopsoas muscle, and abdominal musculature are the most frequent causes of acute groin pain in sportsmen and sportswomen.
  • Spasms in your pectineus muscle are also a common cause of groin pain and are often overlooked.
  • Pectineus pain often stems from an injured groin muscle. Common causes include running, kicking a soccer ball, riding a horse, and sitting with a crossed leg.

Symptoms Of Groin Pain Caused By Your Pectineus Muscle:

  • Groin pain is any discomfort in the area between your abdomen and thigh, located where your abdomen ends, and your legs begin.
  • Localized pain on the pubic bone, in the groin area, on one side or the other, is a primary indication of injury to the pectineus.
  • Pain on palpation of the involved muscle and pain on adduction (moving your legs closer together against resistance) is also an indication of injury to the pectineus.

Treating Groin Pain Naturally

You are trying to be pressing close to your pubic bone, which is shown in the graphic above.

Sit as shown and use a ball to press deeply into your adductors. Start the treatment at the very top of the muscles, close to your pubic bone, and move down toward your knee.

If you find any tender points, called “trigger points,” hold  the pressure on the spasm until it stops hurting.

You can also “pump” the trigger point, applying pressure for 15 seconds, then stay where you are but release the pressure for 5 seconds, and repeat this sequence several times until the pain point stops hurting.

You may get better leverage if you lift up your opposite hip (lift up the right hip in this demonstration), bending your right leg so you can press your right elbow into your thigh to get better pressure.

If it’s difficult with the ball, use your right hand fingertips to press on the muscle on your left side.

In conclusion, the pectineus muscle can cause groin pain when injured.

If this simple self-treatment doesn’t help, it would be important to seek medical attention to determine the underlying cause, especially if it is severe or accompanied by other symptoms.

Wishing you well,

Julie Donnelly

www.FlexibleAthlete.com

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.

Is Time-Restricted Eating Better Than Other Diets?

by

Is Time-Restricted Eating Right For You?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney 

Time-restricted eating is the latest fad. If you read Dr. Strangeloves’ blogs, he or she will tell you that eating for 8-10 hours and fasting the rest of the day will change your metabolism. They tell you that:

  • You don’t need to change what you eat.
  • You don’t have to restrict calories.
  • You don’t have to restrict fats or carbs.
  • You will feel fuller and naturally eat less.
  • The pounds will just drop away magically.

And you will have benefits like:

  • Better blood sugar control.
  • Lower levels of heart-unhealthy lipids like LDL and triglycerides.
  • Enhanced cellular repair, which might help you live longer.

Are these claims true? Is there something special about time-restricted eating, or is it simply another way to cut calories?

Two recent studies (EA Thomas et al, Obesity; 30: 1027-1038, 2022) and (D Liu et al, New England Journal of Medicine, 386: 1495-1505, 2023) answered these questions by cutting calories to the same extent for people following a time-restricted eating pattern and people who had no restrictions on when they ate.

How Were These Studies Done?

clinical studyStudy 1: The authors enrolled 81 adults aged 18 to 50 years (average = 38 years, 69% female) with BMIs of 27 to 45 (overweight to morbidly obese).

The study lasted 39 weeks with measurements taken at baseline, 12 weeks, and 39 weeks.

The participants were divided into two groups:

  • A time-restricted eating group that was advised to restrict their eating to start eating within 3 hours of waking and restrict their eating to 10 hours.
  • A calorie restricted group that was given no time limitations on when they could eat.

Both groups were:

  • given a personalized calorie goal which represented a 35% caloric restriction based on measurements of their resting energy expenditure.
  • enrolled in a 39-week, group-based, comprehensive weight-loss program. Groups were taught by registered dietitians and met weekly through the first 12 weeks, and monthly between weeks 13 and 39.

Study 2: The authors enrolled 139 adults 18 to 75 years (average age = 32, 64% female) with BMIs of 28 to 45. The study lasted 12 months.

The participants were divided into two groups:

  • A time-restricted eating group that was advised to restrict their eating to between 8 AM and 4 PM (an 8-hour window) each day.
  • A calorie restricted group that was given no time limitations on when they could eat.

Both groups:

  • Were told to reduce calories by 25% which represented a 1500-1800 calorie/day diet for men and a 1200-1500 calorie/day diet for women.
  • Received dietary information booklets that provided portion advice and sample menus.
  • Were required to write in a daily dietary log, photograph the food they ate, and note the time they ate it using a mobile app.
  • Received follow up phone calls or app messages twice per week and met with trained health coaches every two weeks.

Is Time Restricted Eating Better Than Other Diets?

Here are the results of the two studies.

Study 1: There was no difference between the time-restricted group and the group who were just told to cut calories at either 12 or 39 weeks for:

  • Weight loss.
  • Body composition (fat loss and lean muscle mass loss).
  • Appetite and eating behaviors.
  • HDL cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, and HbA1c (a measure of blood sugar control).

The authors concluded two things:

  1. “Time-restricted eating with caloric restriction was found to be an acceptable dietary strategy, resulting in similar levels of adherence and weight loss compared to caloric restriction alone.”

2) “The addition of behavioral support and caloric restriction to a time-restricted eating intervention results in a clinically significant weight loss, a reduction in caloric input, and an improvement in diet quality.”

Study 2: There was no difference between the time-restricted group and the group who were just told to cut calories at 12 months for:

  • Weight loss, BMI, and waist circumference.
  • Body composition (fat loss and lean muscle mass loss).
  • Appetite and eating behaviors.
  • Blood pressure, HDL cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, fasting blood sugar levels, and several measures of blood sugar control.

The authors concluded, “Among patients with obesity, a regimen of time-restricted eating was not more beneficial with regard to reduction in body weight, body fat, or metabolic risk factors than daily caloric restriction.”

Is Time-Restricted Eating Right For You?

Questioning WomanThe take-home lessons are the same for both studies.

  1. You can forget the metabolic mumbo-jumbo of the Dr. Strangeloves of our world. When you restrict calories to the same extent, time-restricted eating is no more successful and no healthier than any other diet.”

2) Like any other diet, time-restricted eating works best when you focus on eating healthy foods and reducing your caloric intake.

So, what does this mean for you? I have two thoughts:

1) If you find it easier to cut calories by restricting the time you eat, then time-restricted eating is right for you. If not, choose a healthy, reduced calorie diet that best fits your food preferences and lifestyle.

2) Time-restricted eating works best when you are in complete control of when and what you eat. They don’t work as well for travel, holidays with friends and family, and other social occasions. If your lifestyle is such that you are often not in control of when and what you eat, you might want to choose a more flexible diet.

The Bottom Line 

Time-restricted eating is the latest fad. If you read Dr. Strangeloves’ blogs, he or she will tell you that eating for 8-10 hours and fasting the rest of the day will change your metabolism, the weight will fall away effortlessly, and your health will be better.

But is this true? Two recent studies tested the hypothesis that time-restricted eating offers a special advantage by cutting calories to the same extent for people following a time-restricted eating pattern and people who had no restrictions on when they ate.

Both studies found there was no difference between the time-restricted group and the group who were just told to cut calories for:

  • Weight loss.
  • Body composition (fat loss and lean muscle mass loss).
  • Appetite and eating behaviors.
  • HDL cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, and HbA1c (a measure of blood sugar control).

The take-home lessons are the same for both studies.

  1. You can forget the metabolic mumbo-jumbo of the Dr. Strangeloves of our world. When you restrict calories to the same extent, time-restricted eating is no more successful and no healthier than any other diet.”

2) Like any other diet, time-restricted eating works best when you focus on eating healthy foods and reducing your caloric intake.

For more information on this study and a discussion of whether time-restricted eating might be right for you, read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.

 ___________________________________________________________________________

My posts and “Health Tips From the Professor” articles carefully avoid claims about any brand of supplement or manufacturer of supplements. However, I am often asked by representatives of supplement companies if they can share them with their customers.

My answer is, “Yes, as long as you share only the article without any additions or alterations. In particular, you should avoid adding any mention of your company or your company’s products. If you were to do that, you could be making what the FTC and FDA consider a “misleading health claim” that could result in legal action against you and the company you represent.

For more detail about FTC regulations for health claims, see this link.

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/health-products-compliance-guidance

Do Produce Prescriptions Improve Health?

by

What Are The Pros And Cons Of Produce Prescriptions?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney 

Can you imagine a world in which doctors asked their patients how many fruits and vegetables they were eating rather than how many drugs they were taking? Can you imagine a world in which doctors advised their patients to try a healthier diet before they put them on drugs?

Unfortunately, that world doesn’t exist currently and is unlikely to exist in the foreseeable future.

But what if there were another approach to encourage healthier eating? And what if it made a meaningful impact on people’s health?

There is such an approach, and it’s called a “produce prescription”.

“What are produce prescriptions?”, you might ask. Simply put, produce prescriptions are government programs that provide lower-income Americans with food insecurity extra income that can only be spent on fresh fruits and vegetables.

And it isn’t a lot of extra income. Previous studies have shown that lower-income Americans only need an extra $63 to $78/month to afford the recommended 3-5 servings of fresh fruits and vegetables a day.

But do produce prescriptions work? Do they significantly improve the diet and health of lower-income Americans who participate in programs offering produce prescriptions?

These are the questions that the authors of the current study (K Hager et al, Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality And Outcomes; 16:e009520, 2023) set out to answer.

How Was The Study Done?

clinical studyThe authors evaluated the results from 9 pilot produce prescription studies that were administered at 22 sites in 12 states between 2014 and 2020. These pilot studies were generally funded as experimental programs through Medicare and SNAP.

The pilot programs enrolled:

  • Adults at risk for poor cardiometabolic health (at risk for both heart disease and diabetes). The enrollment criteria included being overweight or obese and having either diabetes or elevated blood pressure.
  • Children who were overweight or obese.
  • People recruited from health centers serving predominantly low-income neighborhoods who were food insecure.

The authors of the study only included pilot studies that collected data on food intake and measured at least 1 biomarker of improved health (BMI (a measure of obesity), HbA1c (a measure of blood sugar control) and blood pressure).

The income incentive to purchase more fruits and vegetables varied from state to state but averaged $63/month.

With these criteria the study included 1817 children and 2064 adults.

The adults:

  • Averaged 54.4 years old.
  • Were 70.7% female, 29.8% non-Hispanic White, 45.1% non-Hispanic Black, 21.4% Hispanic, 3.6% other.

The children:

  • Averaged 9.2 years old.
  • Were 51.4% female, 9.2% non-Hispanic White, 13.1% non-Hispanic Black, 75.5% Hispanic, 2.3% other.

Overall:

  • 3% of families enrolled in the program experienced food insecurity.
  • 7% of families enrolled in the program were involved in SNAP.

Finally, the programs lasted an average of 6 months.

Do Produce Prescriptions Improve Health?

The results were encouraging:

  • At the beginning of the study fruit and vegetable intake was 2.7 cups/day for adults and 3.4 cups/day for children.
  • By the end of the study fruit and vegetable intake increased by 0.85 cups/day for adults and 0.26 cups/day for children.

Note: It is unfortunate that the authors chose to report fruit and vegetable consumption as cups/day because most of us think in terms of servings per day and the relationship between servings and cups varies with each fruit and vegetable. For example, one cup represents:

  • One serving of raw spinach.
  • Two servings of cooked spinach.
  • Two servings of most fruits.
  • One serving of bananas.

I could go on, but you get the point.

  • So, perhaps a better way to think about these results would be to say both adults and children in these low-income households were eating around 3.6 cups/day of fruit and vegetable intake – a 31% increase for adults and a 7.6% increase for children.
  • Another way of thinking about it would be to say that produce prescription programs got both adults and children in food-insecure households up to a healthier 3.6 cups/day of fruits and vegetables.

As for other outcomes:

  • Food insecurity dropped by one third for families participating in these programs.
  • The families reported that they felt healthier.
  • BMI (a measure of overweight and obesity) decreased for both adults and children.
  • HbA1c (a measure of blood sugar control) and blood pressure decreased in adults with cardiometabolic disease (heart disease and diabetes) at the beginning of the programs.

In the words of the authors, “In this large, multisite evaluation, produce prescriptions were associated with significant improvements in fruit and vegetable intake, food security, and health status for adults and children, and clinically relevant improvements in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), blood pressure, and BMI for adults with poor cardiometabolic health.”

What Are The Pros And Cons Of Produce Prescriptions?

pros and consThe pros are obvious.

Food insecurity in low-income neighborhoods is a major problem. In the words of the authors:

  • “Food insecurity is strongly associated with poor health outcomes and higher health care costs.
  • Food-insecure individuals under use medications and choose cheaper, unhealthful foods due to costs.
  • [There are] stark disparities in household food insecurity…by race/ethnicity, with 7.1% of White, non-Hispanic households experiencing food insecurity compared with 21.7% of Black, non-Hispanic households, and 17.2% of Hispanic households.”

The authors do not claim that food insecurity is the only cause of health disparities in this country, but a simple program that reduces food insecurity and improves health outcomes is an obvious plus.

But there are cons as well.

  • While the results of these programs were statistically and clinically significant, they were relatively modest. In the words of the authors, “Produce prescriptions may need to be of longer duration or combined with additional components…”
  • Most Americans have the income to buy more fruits and vegetables but chose not to. Programs like this can reduce health disparities but are unlikely to improve the health of the American population as a whole.
  • There was no mention of the cost of implementing this program nationwide in the article, but that is likely to be a major stumbling block.

Unfortunately, government agencies never think of replacing old programs that don’t work with new programs that do work. They only think of adding the cost of the new program to their current budget.

Unfortunately, once you start talking about programs that increase government spending, they become political footballs. Because of this many beneficial programs end up in the dustbin of history.

The Bottom Line 

Food insecurity among low-income households is a major cause of health disparities in this country. Several states across the country have piloted an idea called produce prescription programs. Simply put, these programs provide high-risk families who have food insecurity and poor health with a monthly stipend that can only be used to purchase fresh fruits and vegetables from grocery stores and farmers markets.

A recent study evaluated the effectiveness of these pilot programs and found the produce prescription programs:

  • Improved fruit and vegetable intake for the families who participated in the programs.

In addition:

  • Food insecurity dropped by one third for families participating in these programs.
  • The families reported that they felt healthier.
  • BMI (a measure of overweight and obesity) decreased for both adults and children.
  • HbA1c (a measure of blood sugar control) and blood pressure decreased in adults with cardiometabolic disease (heart disease and diabetes) at the beginning of the programs.

In the words of the authors, “In this large, multisite evaluation, produce prescriptions were associated with significant improvements in fruit and vegetable intake, food security, and health status for adults and children, and clinically relevant improvements in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), blood pressure, and BMI for adults with poor cardiometabolic health.”

For more information on this study and a summary of the pros and cons of produce prescription programs, read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.

____________________________________________________________________________

My posts and “Health Tips From the Professor” articles carefully avoid claims about any brand of supplement or manufacturer of supplements. However, I am often asked by representatives of supplement companies if they can share them with their customers.

My answer is, “Yes, as long as you share only the article without any additions or alterations. In particular, you should avoid adding any mention of your company or your company’s products. If you were to do that, you could be making what the FTC and FDA consider a “misleading health claim” that could result in legal action against you and the company you represent.

For more detail about FTC regulations for health claims, see this link.

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/health-products-compliance-guidance

Which Diets Are Heart Healthy?

by

What Does A Heart Healthy Diet Look Like?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney 

heart attacksHeart disease is a big deal. According to the CDC, “Heart disease is the leading cause of death for men, women, and people of most racial and ethnic groups in the United States. One person dies every 33 seconds in the United States from cardiovascular disease. About 695,000 people in the United States died from heart disease in 2021 – that’s 1 in every 5 deaths”.

This doesn’t have to happen. According to the Cleveland Clinic, “90 percent of heart disease is preventable through healthier diet, regular exercise, and not smoking”. For this issue of “Health Tips From the Professor”, I will focus on the role of diet on heart health.

The problem is many Americans are confused. They don’t know what a heart-healthy diet is. There is so much conflicting information on the internet.

Fortunately, the American Heart Association has stepped in to clear up the confusion.

In 2021 they reviewed hundreds of clinical studies and published “Evidence-Based Dietary Guidance to Promote Cardiovascular Health”.

And recently they have published a comprehensive review (CD Gardner et al, Circulation, 147: 1715-1730, 2023) of how well popular diets align with their 2021 dietary guidelines.

I will cover both publications below. But first I want to address why Americans are so confused about which diets reduce heart disease risk.

Why Are Americans Confused About Diet And Heart Disease Risk?

I should start by addressing the “elephant in the room”.

  • As I discussed in last week’s “Health Tips From the Professor” article, Big Food Inc has seduced us. They have developed an unending supply of highly processed foods that are cheap, convenient, easy to prepare, and fulfill all our cravings. These foods are not heart-healthy, but they make up 73% of our food supply.

The Institute of Medicine, the scientific body that sets dietary standards, states that a wide range of macronutrient intakes are consistent with healthy diets. Specifically, they recommend carbohydrate intake at 45% to 65%, fat intake at 20% to 35%, and protein intake at 10% to 35% of total calories. (Of course, they are referring to healthy carbohydrates, fats, and proteins.)

The authors of this article pointed to several reasons why Americans have been misled about heart-healthy diets.

  • Many of the most popular diets fall outside of the “Acceptable Macronutrient Range”.
  • Many popular diets exclude heart-healthy food groups.

And, the words of the authors,

  • “Further contributing to consumer misunderstanding is the proliferation of diet books, [and] blogs [by] clinicians with limited understanding of what the dietary patterns entail and the evidence base for promoting cardiometabolic health.” I call these the Dr. Strangeloves of our world.

What Does A Heart Healthy Diet Look Like?

Let me start by sharing the American Heart Association’s 10 “Evidence-Based Dietary Guidelines to Promote Cardiovascular Health.

#1: Adjust energy intake and expenditure to achieve and maintain a healthy body weight
#2: Eat plenty of vegetables and fruits; choose a wide variety
#3: Choose foods made mostly with whole grains rather than refined grains
#4: Choose healthy sources of protein
Mostly from plants (beans, other legumes, and nuts)
Fish and seafood
Low-fat or fat-free dairy products instead of full-fat dairy products
If meat or poultry are desired, choose lean cuts and avoid processed forms
#5. Use liquid plant oils (olive, safflower, corn) rather than animal fats (butter and lard) and tropical oils (coconut and palm kernel)
#6. Use minimally processed foods instead of highly processed foods
#7: Minimize intake of beverages and foods with added sugars
#8: Choose and prepare foods with little or no salt
#9: If you do not drink alcohol, do not start; if you choose to drink alcohol, limit intake
#10: Adhere to this guidance regardless of where food is prepared or consumed

Here are my comments on these guidelines:

  • If you have been reading my “Health Tips From the Professor” blog for a while, you probably realize that these aren’t just guidelines to promote heart health. These guidelines also reduce the risk of diabetes, cancer, inflammatory diseases, and much more.
  • If you have read my post on coconut oil, you will know that I have a minor disagreement with the AHA recommendation to avoid it. There is no long-term evidence that coconut oil is bad for the heart. But there is also no long-term evidence that it is good for the heart. My recommendation is to use it sparingly.
  • And you probably know there has been considerable discussion recently about whether full fat dairy is actually bad for the heart. In my most recent review of the topic, I concluded that if full fat dairy is heart healthy, it is only in the context of a primarily plant-based diet and may only be true for fermented dairy foods like unpasteurized yogurt and kefir.
  • Finally, guideline 10 may need some translation. Basically, this guideline is just asking how easy it is to follow the diet when you are away from home.

Which Diets Are Heart Healthy?

confusionIn evaluating how well diets adhered to the American Heart Association guidelines the authors ignored item 1 (energy intake) because most of the diets they evaluated did not provide any guidelines on how many calories should be consumed.

Each diet was given a score between 0 (Fail) and 1 (A+) for each of the other 9 guidelines by a panel of experts. The points for all 9 guidelines were added up, giving each diet a rating of 0 (worst) to 9 (best). Finally, a score of 9 was assigned 100%, so each diet could be given a percentage score for adherence to heart-healthy guidelines.

Here are the results:

Tier 1 diets (the most heart healthy diets) received scores of 86% to 100%. Going from highest (100%) to lowest (86%), these diets were:

  • DASH, Nordic, Mediterranean, Pescetarian (vegetarian diets that allow fish), and Ovo-Lacto Vegetarian (vegetarian diets that allow dairy, eggs, or both).
  • You will notice that these are all primarily plant-based diets.

Tier 2 diets were Vegan and other low-fat diets (TLC, Volumetrics). They both received scores of 78%.

  • The Vegan diet received 0 points for category 10 (ease of following the diet when eating out). It was also downgraded in category 7 for not having clear guidance for the use of salt when preparing foods.
  • The other low-fat diets were downgraded in categories 7, 10, and 5 (use of tropical oils).

Tier 3 diets received scores of 64% to 72%. They included very-low fat diets (<10% fat, very strict vegan diets) and low-carb diets (Zone, South Beach, Low-Glycemic Index).

  • They received 0 points for category 10 and were downgraded for eliminating heart-healthy food groups (liquid plant oils for the very low-fat diets, and fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and plant proteins for the low-carb diets).

Tier 4 diets (the least heart healthy diets) were the Paleo diet with a score of 53% and very low-carb diets (Atkins and Ketogenic) with a score of 31%.

  • The Paleo diet received 0 points for categories 10, 3 (choose whole grains), and 5 (using liquid plant oils rather than animal fats or tropical oils). It was also downgraded for lack of healthy plant-based protein sources.
  • The very low-carb diets were the least heart healthy. They received 0 points for categories 2 (eat plenty of fruits and vegetables), 3 (choose whole grains), 3 (healthy protein sources), 5 (use liquid plant oils instead of animal fats), 7 (minimize salt consumption), and 10 (ease of following the diet away from home).

The authors concluded, “Numerous [dietary] patterns [are] strongly aligned with 2021 American Heart Association Dietary Guidance (ie, Mediterranean, DASH, pescetarian, vegetarian) [and] can be adopted to reflect personal and cultural preferences and budgetary constraints.

Thus, optimal cardiovascular health would be best supported by developing a food environment that supports adherence to these patterns wherever food is prepared or consumed.”

Given our current food environment that last statement is wildly optimistic. But at least you have the information needed to make the best food choices for you and your family

The Bottom Line 

In 2021 the American Heart Association published 10 guidelines for evaluating heart-healthy diets. A recent study looked at how well popular diets adhered to those guidelines. The authors separated the diets into four categories (tiers) based on how heart-healthy they were. The results were not surprising:

  • Tier 1 diets (the most heart healthy diets) were DASH, Nordic, Mediterranean, Pescetarian (vegetarian diets that allow fish), and Ovo-Lacto Vegetarian (vegetarian diets that allow dairy, eggs, or both).
  • Tier 2 diets were Vegan and other low-fat diets (TLC, Volumetrics).
  • Tier 3 diets included very-low fat diets (<10% fat, very strict vegan diets) and low-carb diets (Zone, South Beach, Low-Glycemic Index).
  • Tier 4 diets (the least heart healthy diets) were the Paleo diet and very low-carb diets (Atkins and Ketogenic).

The authors concluded, “Numerous [dietary] patterns [are] strongly aligned with 2021 American Heart Association Dietary Guidance (ie, Mediterranean, DASH, pescetarian, vegetarian) [and] can be adopted to reflect personal and cultural preferences and budgetary constraints.

Thus, optimal cardiovascular health would be best supported by developing a food environment that supports adherence to these patterns wherever food is prepared or consumed.”

Given our current food environment that last statement is wildly optimistic. But at least you have the information needed to make the best food choices for you and your family.

For more information on this study, read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.

____________________________________________________________________________

My posts and “Health Tips From the Professor” articles carefully avoid claims about any brand of supplement or manufacturer of supplements. However, I am often asked by representatives of supplement companies if they can share them with their customers.

My answer is, “Yes, as long as you share only the article without any additions or alterations. In particular, you should avoid adding any mention of your company or your company’s products. If you were to do that, you could be making what the FTC and FDA consider a “misleading health claim” that could result in legal action against you and the company you represent.

For more detail about FTC regulations for health claims, see this link.

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/health-products-compliance-guidance

Do Processed Foods Cause Cancer?

by

How Can You Reduce Your Cancer Risk?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney 

We are facing a food crisis in this country. Big Food Inc is taking over our diet. Currently, 73% of our food supply is processed. And because these are manufactured foods, not real foods, they are 52% cheaper than the whole unprocessed foods we should be eating.

And Big Food Inc has seduced us. They know our weaknesses. The foods they make are convenient and easy to prepare. They also know our bodies were created with an ingrained craving for sweet, salty, and fatty foods. These cravings served us well in prehistoric times, but in today’s world Big Food Inc has weaponized them. Their foods are designed to satisfy every craving. They have done their best to make their processed foods irresistible!

The result is no surprise. In 2018 (LG Baraldi et al, BMJ Open, 2018, 8(3) e020574 60% of the calories the Average American consumes came from processed foods, and the percentage has only increased since then.

This is alarming because higher consumption of processed foods has been linked to increased risk of obesity, diabetes, and all-cause mortality.

Some studies have suggested that higher consumption of processed foods may also be linked to increased risk of cancer. The authors of the current study (K Chang, eClinicalMedicine 2023;56: 101840) set out to test this hypothesis.

How Are Processed Foods Defined In This Study?

Before I proceed with describing the findings of this study, I should probably contrast the common definition of processed foods with the current scientific definition of processed foods. The scientific community has recently developed something called “The NOVA food classification system” to describe the various levels of food processing.

The NOVA system categorizes foods into four groups according to the extent of processing they have undergone:

  1. Unprocessed or minimally processed foods.
    • This category includes foods like fruit, vegetables, milk, and meat.

2) Processed culinary ingredients.

    • This category includes foods you might find in restaurants or prepare yourself to which things like sugar, vegetable oils, butter, or cream were added in the preparation.

3) Processed foods.

    • This category includes foods like canned vegetables, freshly made breads, and cheeses.

4) Ultra-processed foods.

    • This category includes foods like soft drinks, chips, packaged snacks, most breakfast cereals, chicken nuggets & fish sticks, fast food burgers, hot dogs, and other processed meats.

The actual list is much longer, but you get the idea. What we call processed foods, scientists call ultra-processed foods. Since the term “ultra-processed foods” has not yet entered the popular vocabulary, I will use the term “processed foods” in describing the results of this study because it is more understandable to the average reader.

How Was This Study Done?

clinical studyThe authors of this study started by using data from the UK Biobank study. The UK Biobank study is a long-term study in the United Kingdom that is investigating the contributions of genetics and environment to the contribution of disease.

The authors focused on 197,426 (54.6% women) participants in the study who completed up to five 24-hour dietary recalls between 2009 and 2012. The participants were age 58 (range 40 to 69) when they entered the study and were followed for an average of 9.8 years. None of the participants had been diagnosed with cancer at the time of their enrollment in the study.

The purpose of this study was to examine the correlation between percent of “processed food” in the participant’s diets and both the frequency of newly diagnosed cancer and the frequency of cancer deaths during the 9.8 years of follow-up.

More importantly, the size of this study allowed the authors to examine associations between processed food consumption and both the risk of cancer and cancer mortality for 34 site-specific cancers – something most previous studies were unable to do.

  • The percentage “processed food” in their diets was calculated from the 24-hour dietary recalls using the NOVA scoring system.
  • The frequency of newly diagnosed cancers and cancer deaths was obtained by linking the data in this study with the national cancer and mortality registries, provided by the National Health Service.

Do Processed Foods Cause Cancer?

CancerThe authors started by dividing participants into four equal quartiles based on their consumption of processed foods:

  • For quartile 1 processed foods made up between 0 and 13.4% of calories (average = 9.2%).
  • For quartile 2 processed foods made up between 13.5 and 20% of calories (average = 16.7%).
  • For quartile 3 processed foods made up between 20.1 and 29.4% of calories (average = 24.3%).
  • For quartile 4 processed foods made up between 29.5 and 100% of calories (average = 41.4%).

They started by looking at the risk of developing cancer during the 9.8-year follow-up period. A total of 15,921 participants developed cancer during that time. When the authors compared the group consuming the most processed foods with the group consuming the least processed foods:

  • The risk of overall cancer of any type increased by 7%.
  • The risk of lung cancer increased by 25%.
  • The risk of ovarian cancer increased by 45%.
  • The risk of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma increased by 63%.
  • The risk of brain cancer increased by 52%.

Furthermore, every 10% increase in processed food consumption was associated with:

  • A 2% increase in overall cancer incidence…and…
  • A 19% increase in ovarian cancer incidence.

A total of 4,009 participants died from cancer during that time. When the authors compared the group consuming the most processed foods with the group consuming the least processed foods:

  • Overall cancer mortality increased by 17%.
  • Lung cancer mortality increased by 38%.
  • Ovarian cancer mortality increased by 91%.

Furthermore, every 10% increase in processed food consumption was associated with:

  • A 6% increase in overall cancer mortality.
  • A 16% increase in breast cancer mortality.
  • A 30% increase in ovarian cancer mortality.

The authors concluded, “Our UK-based study suggests that higher [processed food] consumption may be linked to an increased [frequency] and mortality for overall and certain site-specific cancers especially ovarian cancer in women…These findings suggest that limiting [processed food] consumption may be beneficial to prevent and reduce the modifiable burdens of cancer.”

How Can You Reduce Your Cancer Risk?

American Cancer SocietyLet’s start with the American Cancer Society recommendations to limit cancer risk:

1) Avoid tobacco use. 

2) Get to and stay at a healthy weight.

If you are already at a healthy weight, stay there. If you are carrying extra pounds, try to lose some. Losing even a small amount of weight can reduce your risk of cancer and have other health benefits. It is a good place to start.

3) Be physically active and avoid time spent sitting.

Current recommendations are to get at least 150-300 minutes of moderate intensity or 75-150 minutes of vigorous intensity activity each week. Getting to or exceeding 300 minutes is ideal.

In addition, you should limit sedentary behavior such as sitting, lying down, watching TV, and other forms of screen-based entertainment. This is especially important if you spend most of your working day sitting.

4) Follow a healthy eating plan.

A healthy eating pattern includes a variety of vegetables, fiber-rich legumes (beans and peas), fruits in a variety of colors, and whole grains. It is best to avoid or limit red and processed meats, sugar-sweetened beverages, highly processed foods, and refined grain products. This will provide you with key nutrients in amounts that help you get to and stay at a healthy weight.

5) It is best not to drink alcohol.

It is best not to drink alcohol. People who choose to drink alcohol should limit their intake to no more than 2 drinks per day for men and 1 drink a day for women.

This study adds an exclamation point to the American Cancer Society’s recommendation to avoid or limit “processed meats, sugar-sweetened beverages, highly processed foods, and refined grain products”.

You may be asking, “What is so harmful about processed foods?” The most obvious harm is that they are replacing healthier foods that reduce cancer risk, such as “a variety of vegetables, fiber-rich legumes (beans and peas), fruits in a variety of colors, and whole grains” that the American Cancer Society recommends for reducing cancer risk.

But there are other reasons as well. In the words of the authors:

  • “Evidence has been accumulating on the strong obesity and type-2 diabetes-promoting potential of [processed foods], both of which are risk factors for many cancers including those of the digestive tract and some hormone-related cancers in women.
  • Emerging research has suggested other common properties of [processed foods] that may contribute to adverse cancer outcomes, including the use of controversial food additives, contaminants such as acrylamide that form during [food processing], and toxic contaminants such as phthalates and bisphenol-F that migrate from food packaging [into the food].”

The Bottom Line 

You probably know that processed foods are bad for you. But do processed foods cause cancer? A very large study (197,426 people followed for 9.8 years) suggests the answer to that question appears to be yes.

When the authors of the study compared the group consuming the most processed foods with the group consuming the least processed foods:

  • The risk of overall cancer of any type increased by 7%.
  • The risk of lung cancer increased by 25%.
  • The risk of ovarian cancer increased by 45%.
  • The risk of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma increased by 63%.
  • The risk of brain cancer increased by 52%.

And when they looked at cancer deaths and did the same comparison:

  • Overall cancer mortality increased by 17%.
  • Lung cancer mortality increased by 38%.
  • Ovarian cancer mortality increased by 91%.

The authors concluded, “Our study suggests that higher [processed food] consumption may be linked to an increased [frequency] and mortality for overall and certain site-specific cancers especially ovarian cancer in women…These findings suggest that limiting [processed food] consumption may be beneficial to prevent and reduce the modifiable burdens of cancer.”

These results are alarming because the most recent study shows that 60% of calories in the American diet comes from processed foods, and the percentage is increasing each year. We need to reverse this trend!

For more information on this study, why processed foods increase your risk of cancer, and what the American Cancer Society recommends to reduce your risk of cancer, read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.

____________________________________________________________________________

My posts and “Health Tips From the Professor” articles carefully avoid claims about any brand of supplement or manufacturer of supplements. However, I am often asked by representatives of supplement companies if they can share them with their customers.

My answer is, “Yes, as long as you share only the article without any additions or alterations. In particular, you should avoid adding any mention of your company or your company’s products. If you were to do that, you could be making what the FTC and FDA consider a “misleading health claim” that could result in legal action against you and the company you represent.

For more detail about FTC regulations for health claims, see this link.

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/health-products-compliance-guidance

 

 

Health Tips From The Professor