Skip to content

Category: nutrition

Published on

One study points out the difficulty of weight loss in overweight adults, because so few actually are able to get down to a normal weight or even lose a mere 5% of body weight (for example. 10 pounds for a 200 pound person or 15 pounds for a 300 pound person). The annual chance of an obese person attaining normal body weight is only 1 in 210 for men and 1 in 124 for women,and the annual chance of obese patients achieving five per cent weight loss was 1 in 12 for men and 1 in 10 for women.  The second study highlights how well weight loss treats "fatty liver" (which is a problem in middle-aged overweight people). Fatty liver or nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), which affects 2 to 5 percent of Americans, can be severe and can lead to cirrhosis, in which the liver is permanently damaged and scarred and no longer able to work properly.

After reading scientific studies nonstop for the last few years, it seems that the best, easiest way to lose weight is to have lifestyle changes rather than focusing just on a "weight-loss diet": increase activity levels (yes, walking counts) and switch to a more plant based diet or Mediterranean diet (lots of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, legumes, seeds, nuts, olive oil, some fish each week) and decrease the amount of typical Western style diet (highly processed foods. lots of meat and coldcuts, lots of fat, fast foods, soda). Try to only eat within 12 hours each day (for example, 8am to 8pm) and don't eat the other 12 hours. And of course eat fewer calories (it should be easier  to do if you substitute fruits and vegetables for high calorie processed foods such as ice cream, french fries, and sweets). And yes, of course it's really hard to lose weight, but the health benefits of weight loss are enormous. From Medical Xpress:

Low chance of recovering normal body weight highlights need for obesity prevention

The chance of an obese person attaining normal body weight is 1 in 210 for men and 1 in 124 for women, increasing to 1 in 1,290 for men and 1 in 677 for women with severe obesity, according to a study of UK health records led by King's College London. The findings, published in the American Journal of Public Health, suggest that current weight management programmes focused on dieting and exercise are not effective in tackling obesity at population level.The research, funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), tracked the weight of 278,982 participants (129,194 men and 149,788) women using electronic health records from 2004 to 2014.

The annual chance of obese patients achieving five per cent weight loss was 1 in 12 for men and 1 in 10 for women. For those people who achieved five per cent weight loss, 53 per cent regained this weight within two years and 78 percent had regained the weight within five years.

Overall, only 1,283 men and 2,245 women with a BMI of 30-35 reached their normal body weight, equivalent to an annual probability of 1 in 210 for men and 1 in 124 for women; for those with a BMI above 40, the odds increased to 1 in 1,290 for men and 1 in 677 for women with severe obesity. Weight cycling, with both increases and decreases in body weight, was also observed in more than a third of patients. The study concludes that current obesity treatments are failing to achieve sustained weight loss for the majority of obese patients.

Dr Alison Fildes, first author from the Division of Health and Social Care Research at King's College London (and now based at UCL), said: 'Losing 5 to 10 per cent of your body weight has been shown to have meaningful health benefits and is often recommended as a weight loss target..... More importantly, priority needs to be placed on preventing weight gain in the first place.'

From Medical Xpress:  Weight loss for a healthy liver

Weight loss through both lifestyle modification and bariatric surgery can significantly reduce features of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), a disease characterized by fat in the liver, according to two new studies published in Gastroenterology..."we most commonly see this condition in patients who are middle-aged and overweight or obese," said Giulio Marchesini, MD, from University of Bologna, Italy, and lead author of an editorial summarizing these two studies. "These two large prospective cohort studies strengthen the evidence that, no matter how you lose weight, weight loss improves liver health. Both bariatric surgery for morbidly obese patients or lifestyle modifications are viable options."

Lifestyle modifications: Eduardo Vilar-Gomez and colleagues from Cuba report in Gastroenterology that a weight reduction of 10 percent or more, induced by a comprehensive lifestyle program, is necessary to bring about NASH resolution and reverse scarring of the liver in overweight and obese patients. To a lesser degree, modest weight loss (7 to 10 percent) reduced disease severity in certain subsets of patients, including male patients and those without diabetes. Conversely, 93 percent of the patients with little or no weight reduction (less than 5 percent) experienced worsening of liver scarring....While promising, less than 50 percent of patients achieved the necessary weight loss goal of 7 to 10 percent, providing a stark reminder of the sustainability of weight loss interventions.

Bariatric surgery: For appropriate morbidly obese patients with NASH who have previously failed to lose weight through lifestyle modifications, bariatric surgery may be considered. In the second Gastroenterology study, Guillaume Lassailly and colleagues from France report that, one year after bariatric surgery, NASH had disappeared from 85 percent of patients and reduced the pathologic features of the disease after 1 year of follow-up. NASH disappeared from a higher proportion of patients with mild NASH before surgery (94 percent) than severe NASH (70 percent). More studies are needed to determine the long-term effects of bariatric surgeryin morbidly or severely obese patients with NASH.

Published on Leave a comment on What’s In the “Natural” Flavors In Our Foods?

I've been reading and thinking about "natural flavors" ever since my earlier posts about food additives (April 20, 2015, August 19, 2014). What exactly are natural flavors and how are they different from artificial flavors?  And why are they even found in organic foods? The more I read, the more I want to avoid them , but it seems to be really, really hard to do so because they seem to be everywhere, even in what we think of as basic foods (e.g., butter). Bottom line: both are chemicals concocted in labs and manufactured in factories. Read labels and try to eat as many unprocessed foods as possible to avoid them.We know very little about many of them, and if they have health effects. Note that the term "natural flavors" may include many chemicals in the "flavor mixtures" (incidental additives) that don't have to be listed on the labels. Currently there are more than 2700 natural flavors being used in the USA. The following are excerpts from articles and a book published in 2015.

From CNN:   What are natural flavors, really?

Look at the food label of almost any packaged good you consume and odds are you'll spot the term "natural flavors." But have you ever wondered what this mysterious additive actually contains? The answer isn't as clear as you might think.Though natural flavors may sound better than their presumably chemical-laden alternative — artificial flavors — it turns out they are not actually all that different.

In the Environmental Working Group's Food Scores database of over 80,000 foods, "natural flavor" is the fourth most common ingredient listed on labels. The only ingredients that outrank it: salt, water and sugar. Yet, natural flavoring isn't nearly as simple as these three pantry staples."Natural and artificial flavors play an interesting role in food. They're essentially providing the taste and often they're added to make the food more appealing, or to potentially replace something that's lost through processing, storage or in some cases even from pasteurizing," says David Andrews, senior scientist at the Environmental Working Group. One place you'll often spot natural or artificial flavor is in orange juice; manufacturers will add faux flavor to juice after it's packaged in the plant, to ensure uniformity.

"The differentiation is really down to the origin of those molecules, whether synthetically processed in a lab or purified in a lab but from a natural source," Andrews says. Here's where it gets even muddier: Added flavoring, both natural and artificial, could contain anywhere from 50 to 100 ingredients. And all of the extra ingredients in flavors often aren't as innocent as you'd hope they would be."The mixture will often have some solvent and preservatives — and that makes up 80 to 90 percent of the volume [of the flavoring]. In the end product, it's a small amount, but it still has artificial ingredients," Andrews says.  ...continue reading "What’s In the “Natural” Flavors In Our Foods?"

Published on Leave a comment on Why Breastfeeding Is So Important

There has been much discussion recently about breastfeeding - why is it so important? Is it really better than formula? The answer is: YES, breastfeeding is the BEST food for the baby, and for a number of reasons. Not only is it nature's perfect food for the baby, but it also helps the development of the baby's microbiome or microbiota (the community of microbes that live within and on humans).

Specifically, breast milk transmits about 700 species of bacteria to the baby - bacteria that are important in developing the baby's microbiota, bacteria that are important for the baby's development and health in many ways (including the immune system). No formula does that. Not even close.

There is obviously much we don't know or understand yet, but finding 700 species in breast milk is a big deal. The most variety was in colostrum (the first milk), but even after 6 months (mature milk) they found hundreds of species of bacteria. What was also interesting was that the bacteria species in the breast milk varied whether the baby was born by vaginal birth, unplanned cesarean, or planned cesarean (this last had a somewhat different bacterial community which persisted through the 6 months of the study).

By the way, in the original study, the authors made a point of saying that the 700 bacteria species are NOT bacterial contaminants, but meant to be there! (for those who want to sterilize and pasteurize everything because they think that all bacteria are bad).

This study is from 2013, but well worth reading. From Science Daily: Breast milk contains more than 700 species of bacteria, Spanish researchers find

Researchers have traced the bacterial microbiota map in breast milk and identified the species of microbes taken from breast milk by infants. The study has revealed a larger microbial diversity than originally thought: more than 700 species. The breast milk received from the mother is one of the factors determining how the bacterial flora will develop in the newborn baby.

A group of Spanish scientists have now used a technique based on massive DNA sequencing to identify the set of bacteria contained within breast milk called microbiome.  Colostrum is the first secretion of the mammary glands after giving birth. In some of the samples taken of this liquid, more than 700 species of these microorganisms were found, which is more than originally expected by experts.

"This is one of the first studies to document such diversity using the pyrosequencing technique (a large scale DNA sequencing determination technique) on colostrum samples on the one hand, and breast milk on the other, the latter being collected after one and six months of breastfeeding," explain the coauthors, María Carmen Collado, researcher at the Institute of Agrochemistry and Food Technology (IATA-CSIC) and Alex Mira, researcher at the Higher Public Health Research Centre (CSISP-GVA).

The most common bacterial genera in the colostrum samples were Weissella, Leuconostoc, Staphylococcus, Streptococcus and Lactococcus. In the fluid developed between the first and sixth month of breastfeeding, bacteria typical of the oral cavity were observed, such as Veillonella, Leptotrichia and Prevotella....The study also reveals that the milk of overweight mothers or those who put on more weight than recommended during pregnancy contains a lesser diversity of species.

The type of labour also affects the microbiome within the breast milk: that of mothers who underwent a planned caesarean is different and not as rich in microorganisms as that of mothers who had a vaginal birth. However, when the caesarean is unplanned (intrapartum), milk composition is very similar to that of mothers who have a vaginal birth.

These results suggest that the hormonal state of the mother at the time of labour also plays a role: "The lack of signals of physiological stress, as well as hormonal signals specific to labour, could influence the microbial composition and diversity of breast milk," state the authors.

And yes, what you eat while breastfeeding has an effect on the breast milk. From Science Daily:  Carotenoid levels in breast milk vary by country, diet

A Purdue University-led analysis of breast milk concludes that levels of health-promoting compounds known as carotenoids differ by country, with the U.S. lagging behind China and Mexico, a reflection of regional dietary habits. Carotenoids are plant pigments that potentially play functional roles in human development and are key sources of vitamin A, an essential component of eye health and the immune system.

The carotenoid content of a woman's breast milk is determined by her consumption of fruits and vegetables such as squash, citrus, sweet potatoes and dark, leafy greens.

Published on

Eating green leafy vegetables and other brightly colored fruits and vegetables containing vitamin K, lutein, folate and beta-carotene were linked to keeping the brain healthy in older adults and slowing cognitive decline. Researchers found that older people who ate one to two servings per day had the cognitive ability of a person 11 years younger than those who consumed none. From Science Daily:

Eating green leafy vegetables keeps mental abilities sharp

Something as easy as adding more spinach, kale, collards and mustard greens to your diet could help slow cognitive decline, according to new research. The study also examined the nutrients responsible for the effect, linking vitamin K consumption to slower cognitive decline for the first time...."Since declining cognitive ability is central to Alzheimer's disease and dementias, increasing consumption of green leafy vegetables could offer a very simple, affordable and non-invasive way of potentially protecting your brain from Alzheimer's disease and dementia."

The researchers tracked the diets and cognitive abilities of more than 950 older adults for an average of five years and saw a significant decrease in the rate of cognitive decline for study participants who consumed greater amounts of green leafy vegetables. People who ate one to two servings per day had the cognitive ability of a person 11 years younger than those who consumed none. When the researchers examined individual nutrients linked with slowing cognitive decline, they found that vitamin K, lutein, folate and beta-carotene were most likely helping to keep the brain healthy.

To conduct the study, Morris' research team gathered data from 954 participants from the Memory and Aging Project, which aims to identify factors associated with the maintenance of cognitive health. The participants, whose age averaged 81, reported their daily food and beverage intake by answering a detailed 144-item questionnaire at the beginning of the study.... They followed participants for 2 to 10 years, assessing cognition annually with a comprehensive battery of 19 tests and adjusted for age, sex, education, smoking, genetic risk for Alzheimer's disease and participation in physical activities when estimating the effects of diet on cognitive decline.

"With baby boomers approaching old age, there is huge public demand for lifestyle behaviors that can ward off loss of memory and other cognitive abilities with age," said Morris. "Our study provides evidence that eating green leafy vegetables and other foods rich in vitamin K, lutein and beta-carotene can help to keep the brain healthy to preserve functioning." In addition to green leafy vegetables, other good sources of vitamin K, lutein, folate and beta-carotene include brightly colored fruits and vegetables.

Published on

The following article excerpts are from the talk "Food and Brain" about the best foods for the brain, at the annual 2015 meeting of the American Psychiatric Association (APA). This is in the new emerging field of food psychiatry, or how certain foods and diet influence the brain. The data is emerging that we can positively influence mental health through dietary interventions. For ex.: recent work reported that adults who followed the Mediterranean dietary pattern the closest over 4.4 years had a significantly reduced risk of developing depression (by 40% to 60%).

One key comment was: "Perhaps diet is the closest we've come to prevention in psychiatry." Some foods that are especially beneficial for the brain: seafood, greens, nuts, legumes (beans) and occasional dark chocolate. Use smaller amounts of meat (more as flavorings rather than just eating huge chunks of it) on top of a plant based diet. Also mentioned were the benefits of turmeric (because of the curcumin in it) and rosemary. And focus on improving the whole dietary pattern rather than just eating or not eating certain foods.

Note that BDNF is Brain-derived neurotrophic factor. This is a protein that acts on the brain, the nervous system, and it is very important for learning, memory, and higher thinking. So increasing BDNF levels is good. And remember, what's good for the brain is also good for the body and microbes - it's all intertwined. From Medscape:

Beans, Greens, and the Best Foods For the Brain

Dr Ramsey, in collaboration with the new International Society for Nutritional Psychiatry, is in the process of developing a standardized "brain food diet." "Food is a very effective and underutilized intervention in mental health," he started off. "We want to help our patients have more resilient brains by using whole foods...by helping get patients off of processed foods, off of white carbohydrates, and off of certain vegetable oils."

Though the field is in its infancy, food psychiatry is increasingly being embraced by clinicians and researchers, as a paper published earlier this year in the Lancet Psychiatry attests. "Although the determinants of mental health are complex," the authors wrote, "the emerging and compelling evidence for nutrition as a crucial factor in the high prevalence and incidence of mental disorders suggests that diet is as important to psychiatry as it is to cardiology, endocrinology, and gastroenterology." ..."The data are very promising that we can positively influence mental health through dietary interventions," commented Dr Ramsey.

"Hominid diets have changed drastically through millions of years of evolution.,,,But only in the past 100 years has our diet drastically switched from a whole foods diet to one that is more processed and high in refined carbohydrates; that includes more vegetable fats rather than meat fats; and preservatives, emulsifiers, and other additives, which appear to have contributed to a decline in our collective health.

Early humans evolved in the African Rift Valley, which is near a seacoast. It's possible that whatever evolutionary spark occurred that made us human occurred here, in part due to reliable access to seafood—oysters in particular—which glutted our brains with omega-3 fatty acids and cholesterol (our brains are composed of 60% fat). Oysters and other mollusks are also very high in nutrients, including B12, which is commonly deficient in people consuming vegan or vegetarian diets and is necessary for myelin and neurotransmitter function. 

A number of studies have linked the Mediterranean diet (high in fish oils, nuts, and grains and including maybe a little red wine) with advantageous effects on neurologic and mental health. Dr Deans cited recent work reporting that adults who followed the Mediterranean dietary pattern the closest over 4.4 years had a significantly reduced risk of developing depression (40%-60%)....When taken together, most of these dietary pattern studies, which have been conducted all over the world, consistently show that traditional, pre-processed diets are the healthiest, including for the brain. ..."Eat the rainbow," he says, given that bold, bright colors in nature tend to signify valuable vitamins and phytonutrients (the reds, purples, and greens in particular).

Seafood: Seafood is packed with brain-healthy omega-3 fatty acids. These healthy fats are also abundant in plants like chia and flax, but plant-based sources aren't as efficiently converted to docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), an important structural component of neuronal membranes. DHA also influences the expression of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), which can benefit people who have mood and anxiety disorders. Bivalves like mussels, oysters, and clams are the top source of vitamin B12 as well as zinc: Six oysters (only about 10 calories each) provide 240% of our recommended daily B12 intake and 500% of our recommended zinc intake! Seafood is also a leading dietary source of vitamin D (we don't get it all from the sun) as well as iodine and chromium. Although many people worry about mercury in fish, Dr Ramsey provided an easy way around the concern: Eat small fish like sardines, anchovies, and herring, which typically don't accumulate toxic levels.

Leafy greens: A great base for a brain-food diet, leafy greens are a good source of fiber, folate (derived from the wordfoliage), magnesium, and vitamin K. Perhaps surprising, kale, mustard greens, and bok choy provide the most absorbable form of calcium on the planet, more so than milk. Greens also provide flavanols and carotenoids that have beneficial epigenetic influences (eg, including upping hepatic toxin processing). 

Nuts:... Nuts are packed with healthy monounsaturated fats. They help keep us full and also aid in absorbing fat-soluble nutrients. Nuts also provide fiber as well as minerals like manganese and selenium. A serving of 22 almonds (just 162 calories) contains 33% of our recommended vitamin E, plenty of protein, and minerals, including iron. One study from 2013 found that the Mediterranean diet augmented with nuts is associated with significantly higher BDNF levels in patients with depression.

Legumes: Dr Ramsey is pro-meat, but he acknowledges that many people are eating far too much and the wrong types of meat, and that nuts and legumes are a great alternative source of protein and nutrients...Some data suggest that vegan and vegetarian diets are associated with improved mood. But as previously mentioned, these dietary patterns can result in B12 deficiency, which has been associated with brain atrophy and developmental delay. Hence, supplementation is important in this population. Vegetarianism has also been linked with depression, anxiety, and eating disorders, as well as increased healthcare utilization and worse quality of life. These negative associations also could be due to the fact that it's harder to absorb nutrients like zinc, iron, and certain omega-3s from plants.

"The notion that the vegan diet is the healthiest diet on the planet is probably incorrect," said Dr Ramsey, before explaining that he just feels that we should approach meat in our diets differently....We want to help patients use beef and seafood more as flavorings on top of a plant-based diet." A modest amount of meat in the diet has its benefits, including nutrient availability: Hemoglobin-derived iron is up to 40% more absorbable than plant-based iron. Unlike most plants, meat provides all of the amino acids necessary for protein synthesis. Dr Ramsey emphasized the importance of seeking out leaner, grass-fed meats if one has the means.

The understanding of how microbiota contribute to our mental and medical well-being is rapidly advancing....One of the most powerful interventions to alter our microbiome is diet. Research shows that stressed mice experienced changes in the gastrointestinal microbiota, reflecting the gut-brain relationship. There are 260 million neurons connecting the gut and the brain; furthermore, many commensal gut bacteria make neurotransmitters and communicate with the brain via the vagus nerve....Although the science of probiotic therapies is relatively young, it's clear that these commensal organisms co-evolved with us and are adapted to our diet.

Finally, to close out the session, Dr Ramsey returned to the stage and asked, "So, can you eat to build a better brain? We think that you can if you focus on dietary patterns and not a single food here or there." He also reminded the audience to help their patients identify and increase their consumption of nutrient-dense foods and to "eat the rainbow,"..."I don't know of anything else that can potentially decrease the risk of depression in a population by 40%," he concluded. "Perhaps diet is the closest we've come to prevention in psychiatry."

...Evidence suggests that curcumin, an ingredient in turmeric, increases BDNF. Other research has found that populations that eat more curry have a decreased risk for dementia, while rosemary extract may help prevent cognitive impairment. "Many spices seem to have healing properties," Dr Ramsey commented.

Although the "Food and the Brain" session at the American Psychiatric Association annual meeting focused on what to eat in the interest of brain health, intermittent fasting might also be beneficial for the brain. In addition to helping maintain a healthy weight, fasting induces ketosis. Ketone metabolism has been shown to be beneficial for the brain and improve cognition in patients with mild cognitive impairment or Alzheimer disease. Keep in mind that fasting can come with risks for some people, particularly diabetics, and should be discussed with a healthcare provider.

Published on

Once again, research shows that eating lots of fruits and vegetables is beneficial to health - this time because high vitamin C concentrations in the blood is linked to lower risks of developing cardiovascular disease and early death. And it's food that they looked at, not supplements. From Science Daily:

Vitamin C related to reduced risk of cardiovascular disease, early death

New research from the University of Copenhagen and Herlev and Gentofte Hospital showshealth benefitsthat high vitamin C concentrations in the blood from the intake of fruit and vegetables are associated with a reduced risk of cardiovascular disease and early death.

As part of the study, the researchers had access to data about 100,000 Danes and their intake of fruit and vegetables as well as their DNA. "We can see that those with the highest intake of fruit and vegetables have a 15% lower risk of developing cardiovascular disease and a 20% lower risk of early death compared with those who very rarely eat fruit and vegetables. At the same time, we can see that the reduced risk is related to high vitamin C concentrations in the blood from the fruit and vegetables," says Camilla Kobylecki, a medical doctor and PhD student at the Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital.

Among other things, vitamin C helps build connective tissue which supports and connects different types of tissues and organs in the body. Vitamin C is also a potent antioxidant which protects cells and biological molecules from the damage which causes many diseases, including cardiovascular disease. The human body is not able to produce vitamin C, which means that we must get the vitamin from our diet.

Published on

This shouldn't be surprising. Of course staying home and making your own meals is the healthiest! Restaurant meals tend to have very large portions, frequently with rich sauces, and the meal choices tend to be heavy on fat and salt. Think of all the fried foods, rich sauces, meats,breads and butter, and desserts available. At home you can limit excess, control the food ingredients, and eat only healthy foods. From Medical Xpress:

Restaurant meals can be as bad for your waistline as fast food is

Restaurant and fast-food meals increase people's daily intake of calories, fats, cholesterol and sodium. Credit: Diana Yates 

When Americans go out to eat, either at a fast-food outlet or a full-service restaurant, they consume, on average, about 200 more calories a day than when they stay home for meals, a new study reports. They also take in more fat, saturated fat, cholesterol and sodium than those who prepare and eat their meals at home.

These are the findings of University of Illinois kinesiology and community health professor Ruopeng An, who analyzed eight years of nationally representative data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, which is conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics. An looked at 2003-10 data collected from 18,098 adults living in the U.S.

His analysis, reported in the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, revealed that eating at a restaurant is comparable to - or in some cases less healthy than - eating at a fast-food outlet. While people who eat at restaurants tend to take in more healthy nutrients - including certain vitamins, potassium and omega-3 fatty acids - than those who eat at home or at a fast-food outlet, the restaurant diners also consume substantially more sodium and cholesterol - two nutrients that Americans generally eat in excess, even at home. 

Fast-food and restaurant diners consumed about 10 grams more total fat, and 3.49 grams and 2.46 grams, respectively, more saturated fat than those who dined at home. Eating at a fast-food outlet adds about 300 milligrams of sodium to one's daily intake, and restaurant dining boosts sodium intake by 412 milligrams per day, on average, An said. 

An also found striking differences in the effects of dining out on different groups."African-Americans who ate at fast-food and full-service restaurants took in more total fat, saturated fat, sodium and sugar than their Caucasian and Hispanic counterparts who dined out," An said. "The effect of fast-food restaurant consumption on daily total energy intake appeared larger among people with lower educational attainment," An said. "And people in the middle-income range had the highest daily intake of total energy, total fat, saturated fat and sodium when they dined at full-service restaurants." 

Published on

Citrus paradisi (Grapefruit, pink) white bg.jpgWill these research results hold up over time? It is known that certain fruits (citrus fruits and juices) and vegetables contain photosensitizing chemicals called psoralens, and the researchers suspected that a high intake of citrus products over time could make individuals more susceptible to melanoma than people who rarely ate citrus fruits. During more than 2 decades of following more than 100,000 persons they found 1840 melanomas , And yes, even though there were relatively few melanomas, they did find a dose-dependent relationship between citrus product consumption and melanoma risk, specifically that ingesting citrus fruit 1.6 or more times per day had a 36% higher risk for melanoma than people who ate it less than twice per week. But this association was only with whole grapefruit and orange juice, and weirdly, not with consumption of grapefruit juice or whole oranges. Before people panic, remember that citrus fruits have all sorts of great health benefits and should be eaten. From Science Daily:

Can orange juice, grapefruit raise your melanoma risk?

People who enjoy a glass of orange juice or some fresh grapefruit in the morning may face a slightly increased risk of melanoma—the least common but most deadly form of skin cancer. That's the finding from a study of more than 100,000 U.S. adults followed for about 25 years. Researchers discovered that those who regularly consumed orange juice or whole grapefruit had a higher risk of developing melanoma, compared to people who avoided those foods.

Experts were quick to stress that the findings, reported online June 29 in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, do not prove that citrus foods help cause skin cancer. It is plausible, however, that certain compounds in citrus explain the association, said senior researcher Dr. Abrar Qureshi, chair of dermatology at Brown University and a dermatologist at Rhode Island Hospital, in Providence.

Citrus foods contain particular "photoactive" chemicals—namely, psoralens and furocoumarins—that are known to make the skin more sensitive to the sun when they're applied topically, Qureshi said."You'll see children get a sunburn in spots where a citrus popsicle dripped down the chin, for example," Qureshi explained.

But even if citrus foods potentially make some people susceptible to sunburn, it's not orange juice that should be avoided, Qureshi said. "The citrus can't hurt you without the excessive sun exposure," he pointed out. So the message remains the same, Qureshi said: Protect your skin from soaking up too many rays by staying in the shade, using sunblock and wearing a hat. "I don't think the general public should make any changes based on this study," said Berwick, a professor of dermatology at the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque. 

For the study, the researchers analyzed data from two long-running studies of U.S. health professionals. Every couple of years, the participants answered detailed surveys on their health and lifestyle. Over about 25 years, more than 1,800 people developed melanoma and the risk was higher among those who regularly drank orange juice or ate whole grapefruit. That was true, the researchers found, even when several other factors were taken into account—including people's reports of their overall sun exposure and history of bad sunburns.

People who had orange juice at least once a day were about 25 percent more likely to develop melanoma than those who drank the juice less than weekly. Similarly, people who ate whole grapefruit at least three times a week had a 41 percent higher melanoma risk, versus those who never ate it. On the other hand, there was no connection between melanoma risk and either whole oranges or grapefruit juice, the researchers found.

Qureshi did offer a potential explanation for why only orange juice and whole grapefruit may be tied to melanoma risk."There are different types of these photoactive compounds in different parts of the fruit," he said. So, it's possible that not all citrus fruits are alike when it comes to melanoma risk. Plus, Qureshi said, heat—like that used in pasteurizing juice—neutralizes the photoactive compounds. That might help explain why grapefruit juice was not connected to melanoma risk.

Published on

The study results of 218 overweight, postmenopausal women who had insufficient levels of vitamin D (like most people) at the beginning of the study found that weight loss (including exercise), in combination with vitamin D supplementation, had a greater effect on reducing chronic inflammation than weight loss alone.

Current thinking is that chronic inflammation is linked to various chronic diseases as well as cancers. So reducing chronic inflammation is good. From Medical Xpress:

Weight loss plus vitamin D reduces inflammation linked to cancer, chronic disease

For the first time, researchers at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center have found that weight loss, in combination with vitamin D supplementation, has a greater effect on reducing chronic inflammation than weight loss alone. Chronic inflammation is known to contribute to the development and progression of several diseases, including some cancers.

"We know from our previous studies that by losing weight, people can reduce their overall levels of inflammation, and there is some evidence suggesting that taking vitamin D supplements can have a similar effect if one has insufficient levels of the nutrient," said lead and corresponding author Catherine Duggan, Ph.D., a principal staff scientist in the Public Health Sciences Division at Fred Hutch. 

To explore this question, Duggan and colleagues recruited 218 healthy, overweight older women who had lower-than-recommended levels of vitamin D (less than 32 ng/mL). The women then took part in a 12-month diet and exercise program (including 45 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous exercise five days a week). Half of the study participants were randomly selected to receive 2,000 IU of vitamin D daily for the duration of the year-long trial, and the other half received an identical-appearing placebo, or dummy vitamin. 

At the end of the study, all of the participants had reduced levels of inflammation, regardless of whether they took vitamin D, "which highlights the importance of weight loss in reducing inflammation," Duggan said. However, those who saw the most significant decline in markers of inflammation were those who took vitamin D and lost 5 to 10 percent of their baseline weight. These study participants had a 37 percent reduction in a pro-inflammatory cytokine called interleukin-6, or IL-6, as compared to those in the placebo group, who saw a 17.2 percent reduction in IL-6. The researchers found similar results among women in the vitamin D group who lost more than 10 percent of their starting weight. While IL-6 has normal functions in the body, elevated levels are associated with an increased risk of developing certain cancers and diabetes and may be implicated as a cause of depression, Duggan said.

Inflammation occurs when the body is exposed to pathogens, such as bacteria or viruses, which puts the immune system in overdrive until the "attack" ceases and the inflammatory response abates. Overweight or obese people, however, exist in a state of chronic inflammation. This sustained upregulation of the inflammatory response occurs because fat tissue continually produces cytokines, molecules that are usually only present for a short time, while the body is fighting infection, for example.

"It is thought that this state of chronic inflammation is pro-tumorigenic, that is, it encourages the growth of cancer cells," she said. There is also some evidence that increased body mass "dilutes" vitamin D, possibly by sequestering it in fat tissue."Weight loss reduces inflammation, and thus represents another mechanism for reducing cancer risk," Duggan said. "If ensuring that vitamin D levels are replete, or at an optimum level, can decrease inflammation over and above that of weight loss alone, that can be an important addition to the tools people can use to reduce their cancer risk."

Published on
Foods with trans fats. Credit: Wikipedia.

Finally the FDA is phasing out the use of artificial trans fats in foods (found in partially hydrogenated vegetable oils) within 3 years. It turns out that even though for many years scientists and the medical community pushed foods such as margarine (which have trans fats) as healthier than saturated fats such as butter, they were wrong. Instead the trans fats are linked to cardiovascular problems.

We can thank 100 year old Frank Kummerow for the ban, and for warning about trans fats for six decades! He is still drinking whole milk, eating eggs and butter, but he does avoid "fried foods, margarine, and anything associated with partially-hydrogenated oils". Other foods that are currently viewed as healthy by the medical community are extra virgin olive oil and coconut oil. However, please note that canola oil, currently viewed as a healthy and safe alternative to partially hydrogenated oils, also contains trans fats (due to the manufacturing process) and should be avoided. Also keep in mind that companies are allowed to say they have zero trans fat of they contain less than 0.5 grams per serving (which means the trans fats can add up over the course of a day). From The Washington Post:

The 100-year-old scientist who pushed the FDA to ban artificial trans fat

No one was more pleased by the Food and Drug Administration's decision Tuesday to eliminate artificial trans fats from the U.S. food supply than Fred Kummerow, a 100-year-old University of Illinois professor who has warned about the dangers of the artery-clogging substance for nearly six decades."Science won out," Kummerow, who sued the FDA in 2013 for not acting sooner, said in an interview from his home in Illinois. "It's very important that we don't have this in our diet."

In the 1950s, as a young university researcher, Kummerow convinced a local hospital to let him examine the arteries of people who had died from heart disease. He made a jarring discovery. The tissue contained high levels of artificial trans fat, a substance that had been discovered decades earlier but had become ubiquitous in processed foods throughout the country.

Later, he conducted a study showing that rats developed atherosclerosis after being fed artificial trans fats. When he removed the substance from their diets, the atherosclerosis disappeared from their arteries.

Kummerow first published his research warning about the dangers of artery-clogging trans fats in 1957. More than a decade later, while serving on a subcommittee of the American Heart Association, he detailed the massive amounts of trans fat in the shortening and margarines lining grocery shelves, and helped convince the food industry to lower the content in certain products.

Despite Kummerow's research and warnings over the years, artificial trans fats remained a staple of processed food for decades. Well into the 1980s, many scientists and public health advocates believed that partially hydrogenated oils were preferable to more natural saturated fats. And the food industry was reluctant to do away with artificial trans fats, which were cheaper than their natural counterparts, extended shelf life and gave foods desirable taste and texture.

Frustrated by the lack of action, Kummerow filed a 3,000-word citizen petition with the FDA in 2009, citing the mounting body of evidence against trans fat. The first line read: "I request to ban partially hydrogenated fat from the American diet."

In the 1990s, more and more studies had shown that trans fats were a key culprit in the rising rates of heart disease. The advocacy group Center for Science in the Public Interest also petitioned the FDA in 1994 to require that the substance be listed on nutrition labels -- a move that the agency put into place in 2006. In 2002, the Institute of Medicine found that there was “no safe level of trans fatty acids and people should eat as little of them as possible.” As the dangers of trans fat became clearer, public opinion also shifted, and food companies increasingly removed the substance from products, though it remained in a broad range of foods, from cake frostings to baked goods.

Four years after filing his petition and hearing nothing, Kummerow sued the FDA and the Department of Health and Human Services in 2013, with the help of a California law firm. The suit asked a judge to compel the agency to respond to Kummerow's petition and "to ban partially hydrogenated oils unless a complete administrative review finds new evidence for their safety."

Three months later, the FDA announced its plans to effectively eliminate trans fats by saying that the substance no longer would be assumed safe for use in human foods. Tuesday's action finalizes that initial proposal, and manufacturers will have three years to reformulate products or to petition the agency for an exception.