Steps to reduce leading causes of death

WHO outlines steps to reduce leading

causes of death

By Madison Park, CNN

updated 5:33 PM EST, Sun September 18, 2011

Deaths from noninfectious diseases are increasing, especially for low- and middle-income countries.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• WHO: Countries should tax tobacco and alcohol, discourage smoking, salt and trans fats
• They should also emphasize good diet, physical activity, health organization report says
• Recommendations were released to cut heart disease, cancer, lung disease, diabetes
• Not implementing interventions could cost countries $7 trillion in 15 years, study says

(CNN) -- To decrease deaths from noninfectious diseases, countries should pass excise taxes on tobacco and alcohol, encourage smoke-free public places, reduce salt and trans fat in foods, and increase awareness of diet and physical activity, according to a World Health Organization report.

The report, released Sunday, warned that people in rich and poor countries continue getting noninfectious diseases related to lifestyle and the use of tobacco and alcohol.

These diseases -- heart disease, cancer, lung disease and diabetes -- are not only the leading killers in the world, with 36 million deaths a year, their economic toll can be devastating.

If these noncommunicable diseases flourish at their current rate, low- and middle-income nations could lose about $7 trillion from 2011 to 2025. These estimates are results from a World Economic Forum and Harvard School of Public Health study also released Sunday.

A 2009 survey of business leaders by the World Economic Forum called chronic disease one of the leading threats to global economic growth.

For only the second time in its history, the United Nations General Assembly, which is meeting this week, has put a health issue on its agenda. Nations will meet Monday and Tuesday to develop an international plan for preventing and controlling noncommunicable diseases.

The need for action is urgent, said Dr. Ala Alwan, assistant director-general for noncommunicable diseases and mental health at the WHO.

"The world is now recognizing the enormous health impact of noncommunicable diseases, particularly the four major groups: cardiovascular disease, cancer, chronic lung disease, diabetes. This is now emerging as a major social-economic problem as well," he said.

Deaths from noninfectious diseases are increasing, especially for low- and middle-income countries, some of which are grappling with other health issues such as malnourishment and infectious diseases.

"We know there are 100 million people who are pushed into poverty every year, because they have to pay directly for health care," Alwan said. "Most of the health care requirements are for noncommunicable diseases: cardiovascular disease, stroke, lung disease, diabetes or cancer."

These illnesses hurt household income for the affected individuals and their families, but also translate to loss of productivity and physical disability.

"When much of the work force is sick and dies in their productive years, national economies lose billions of dollars in output. And millions of families are pushed into poverty," Jean Pierre Rosso, managing director at the World Economic Forum, said in a news release.

The diseases also affect the United States, which spends $2 trillion a year on health expenses, according to the WHO report.

CNNMoney: Health care's big money wasters

WHO grouped heart disease, cancer, lung disease and diabetes because these account for 80% of the deaths from noncommunicable diseases, and they share common risk factors. These include tobacco use, harmful use of alcohol, physical inactivity and an unhealthy diet.

It recommended several public health steps to help countries take action such as discouraging smoking, reducing salt in foods and encouraging healthier habits.

The WHO studied 48 low- and middle-income countries all over the world over 10 years. The countries, such as Sri Lanka, Ukraine and Kenya, implemented measures such as salt reduction campaigns and tobacco control.

The measures resulted in a "considerable reduction" in the incidence of noncommunicable disease and death, Alwan said. He called these steps "best buys," because they cost little money and have the potential to "save literally millions of lives over the next 15 years."

These recommendations also include screening people who are at risk for heart disease, cervical cancer screenings and hepatitis B immunization to prevent liver cancer.

The cost of adopting these interventions in all low- and middle-income countries would be $12 billion per year. Inaction would result in about $7 trillion in losses over the next 15 years for these nations.

Unlike infectious diseases, these chronic diseases have been slow to get attention. The U.N'.s focus on the topic is much needed, said Yanzhong Huang, a senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations think tank.

"It's a difficult thing to do, to frame it as something sexy that mobilized policy makers or society groups," he said. The pervasive thought is that, "this is a lifestyle disease. It's because of the lack of exercise, too much high-fat food, you deserve it. It's your problem."

Details on how much weight individual foods make people put on or keep off

Potatoes bad, nuts good for staying slim, Harvard study finds

The Washington Post

June 22, 2011

"...[R]evelations produced by a big Harvard project ... details how much weight individual foods make people put on or keep off.

The federally funded analysis of data collected over 20 years from more than 120,000 U.S. men and women in their 30s, 40s and 50s found striking differences in how various foods and drinks — as well as exercise, sleep patterns and other lifestyle choices — affect whether people gradually get fatter.

The findings add to the growing body of evidence that getting heavier is not just a matter of “calories in, calories out,” and that the mantra: “Eat less and exercise more” is far too simplistic. Although calories remain crucial, some foods clearly cause people to put on more weight than others, perhaps because of their chemical makeup and how our bodies process them. This understanding may help explain the dizzying, often seemingly contradictory nutritional advice from one dietary study to the next....

The findings help explain why many people put on weight little by little over the years without even realizing it. Just by picking the wrong combinations and portions of foods, and making unhealthy lifestyle choices, people imperceptibly enlarge their girth as time goes by, eventually becoming overweight or even obese, the study indicates.

Among all the foods studied, potatoes stood out. Every additional serving of potatoes people added to their regular diet each day made them gain about a pound over four years. It was no surprise that french fries and potato chips are especially fattening. But the study found that even mashed, baked or boiled potatoes were unexpectedly plumping, perhaps because of their effect on the hormone insulin.

Similarly, while it was no shock that every added serving of fruits and vegetables prevented between a quarter- and a half-pound gain, other foods were strikingly good at helping people stay slim. Every extra serving of nuts, for example, prevented more than a half-pound of weight gain. And perhaps the biggest surprise was yogurt, every serving of which kept off nearly a pound over four years.

“The big picture of what’s new and unique here is we looked at multiple things simultaneously. Most studies just focused on one thing or a few things at a time. I wanted to see if you took the whole picture together. That hasn’t been done before,” said Dariush Mozaffarian of the Harvard School of Public Health, who led the study published in Thursday’s edition of the New England Journal of Medicine....

Many people might also be surprised that every extra serving of refined grains, such as white bread, added 0.39 pounds — almost as much as indulging in some sweets.or desserts...."

How to Save a Trillion Dollars

APRIL 12, 2011, 8:30 PM
How to Save a Trillion Dollars

By MARK BITTMAN
The New York Times

In the scheme of things, saving the 38 billion bucks that Congress seems poised to agree upon is not a big deal. A big deal is saving a trillion bucks. And we could do that by preventing disease instead of treating it.

For the first time in history, lifestyle diseases like diabetes, heart disease, some cancers and others kill more people than communicable ones. Treating these diseases — and futile attempts to “cure” them — costs a fortune, more than one-seventh of our GDP.

But they’re preventable, and you prevent them the same way you cause them: lifestyle. A sane diet, along with exercise, meditation and intangibles like love prevent and even reverse disease. A sane diet alone would save us hundreds of billions of dollars and maybe more.

This isn’t just me talking. In a recent issue of the magazine Circulation, the American Heart Association editorial board stated flatly that costs in the U.S. from cardiovascular disease — the leading cause of death here and in much of the rest of the world — will triple by 2030, to more than $800 billion annually. Throw in about $276 billion of what they call “real indirect costs,” like productivity, and you have over a trillion. Enough over, in fact, to make $38 billion in budget cuts seem like a rounding error.

Similarly, Type 2 diabetes is projected to cost us $500 billion a year come 2020, when half of all Americans will have diabetes or pre-diabetes. Need I remind you that Type 2 diabetes is virtually entirely preventable? Ten billion dollars invested now might save a couple of hundred billion annually 10 years from now. And: hypertension, many cancers, diverticulitis and more are treated by a health care (better termed “disease care”) system that costs us about $2.3 trillion annually now — before costs double and triple.

It’s worth noting that the Federal budget will absorb its usual 60 percent of that cost. We can save some of that money, though, if an alliance of insurers, government, individuals — maybe even Big Food, if it’s pushed hard enough — moves us towards better eating.

The many numbers all point in the same direction. Look at heart disease: The INTERHEART study of 30,000 men and women in 52 countries showed that at least 90 percent of heart disease is lifestyle related; a European study of more than 23,000 Germans showed that people with healthier lifestyles had an 81 percent lower risk.

And those estimates might be on the low side. Dean Ornish, the San Francisco-based doctor who probably knows more about diet and heart disease than anyone, says, “My colleagues and I have found that more intensive diets than those studies used can reverse the progression of even severe coronary heart disease.”

In his latest book, “The Spectrum,” Ornish recommends that people at risk eat stricter diets (more plants, higher fiber, lower saturated fats and so on) than those who are generally healthy, but it’s not all or nothing — the more you change your diet and lifestyle, the healthier you are. “What matters most,” he says, “is your overall way of eating and living. If you indulge yourself one day, eat healthier the next.” I’ve been preaching similarly for years. But the trillion-dollar question is, “How do we get people to eat that way?”

I don’t have an easy answer; no one does. But it for sure will take an investment: it’s a situation in which you must spend money to make or save money. (Yes, taxes will go up, but whose taxes?) Some number of billions of dollars — something in the rounding error area — should be spent on research to figure out exactly how to turn this ship around. (The NIH, which pegs obesity-related costs at about $150 billion, just announced a new billion-dollar investment. Good, but not enough.)

Corny as it is to say so, if we can put a man on the moon we can create an environment in which an apple is a better and more accessible choice than a Pop-Tart. Some other billions of dollars must go to public health. Again: we built sewage systems; we built water supplies; we showed that we could get people to eat anything we marketed. Now all we have to do is build a food distribution system that favors real food, and market that.

Experts without vested interests in the status quo come to much the same conclusion: Only a massive public health effort can save both our health and our budget.

Can we afford it? Sure. Dr. David Ludwig, a Harvard-affiliated pediatrician and the author of “Ending the Food Fight,” says, “The magnitude of the deficit is small when you consider costs of nutrition-related disease; the $4 trillion that the Republicans want cut over a decade is about the same as the projected costs of diabetes over that same period.”

In last week’s issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association, Ludwig made a number of concrete suggestions, like restructuring subsidies, regulating the marketing of food to children and adequately funding school lunch programs.

His most novel ideas use existing and future technologies to help the food industry retain profits while producing less junky products: devising a method of preserving polyunsaturated fats, for example (dangerous trans-fats are widely used simply because they are stable) or making bread with real whole grains instead of refined ones. (His research demonstrates that people who eat ultra-processed grains rather than whole grains for breakfast go on to consume 600 to 700 calories more than other people each day.) “I’m not arguing that the food industry should be philanthropic,” he says. “Its purpose is to make money. But the goal of the government should be to encourage industry to make money by producing more rather than less healthful foods.”

The best way to combat diet-related diseases is to change what we eat. And if our thinking is along the lines of diet improved = deficit reduced, so much the better. If a better diet were to result only in a 10 percent decrease in heart disease (way lower than Ludwig believes possible), that’s $100 billion project savings per year by 2030.

This isn’t just fiscal responsibility, but social responsibility as well. And the alternative is not only fiscal catastrophe but millions of premature deaths.

Visit my blog, where you can find out more about my columns, or what I just cooked. You can also join me on Facebook or Twitter.

Beating Obesity - By 2015, four out of 10 Americans may be obese

Beating Obesity - by Marc Ambinder - The Atlantic

"By 2015, four out of 10 Americans may be obese....

In 1960, when President-elect John F. Kennedy fretted about fitness in an essay for Sports Illustrated titled “The Soft American,” roughly 45 percent of adults were considered overweight, including 13 percent who were counted as obese; for younger Americans, ages 6 to 17, the rate was 4 percent. Obesity rates remained relatively stable for the next 20 years, but then, from 1980 to 2000, they doubled. In 2001, the U.S. surgeon general announced that obesity had reached “epidemic” proportions. Seven years later, as the obesity rate continued to rise, 68 percent of American adults were overweight, and 34 percent were obese; roughly one in three children and adolescents was overweight, and nearly one in five was obese. Americans now consume 2,700 calories a day, about 500 calories more than 40 years ago. In 2010, we still rank as the world’s fattest developed nation, with an obesity rate more than double that of many European nations.

For that dubious distinction, we pay a high price. The obese are more likely to be depressed, to miss school or work, to feel suicidal, to earn less, and to find it difficult to marry. And their health care costs a lot. Obese Americans spend about 42 percent more than healthy-weight people on medical care each year. Improper weight and diet strongly correlate with chronic diseases, which account for three-fourths of all health-care spending. Type 2 diabetes is one of the leading drivers of rising costs for Medicare patients, and 60 percent of cases result directly from weight gain. In short, even as the nation is convulsed by a political struggle to “reform” health care, no effort to contain its costs is likely to succeed if we can’t beat obesity....

The bad news is that no one knows exactly why. And the debate on how to deal with obesity remains frozen. On one side are the proponents of individual responsibility, who believe that fat people suffer from a surplus of self-indulgence and a shortage of willpower. On the other are people who believe that Americans are getting fatter because of powerful environmental factors like cheap corn, fast food, and unscrupulous advertising....

The people most vulnerable to obesity, however, do not have access to healthy food, to role models, to solid health-care and community infrastructures, to accurate information, to effective treatments, and even to the time necessary to change their relationship with food. And if that is true for fat adults, it is even more true for fat children, many of whose choices are made for them. Their vulnerability to obesity is much more the result of societal inequalities than of any character flaw....

“But if you go with the flow in America today, you will end up overweight or obese,” Thomas Frieden, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, told me when I met him at an obesity conference in Washington last summer. “This does not absolve individuals of the responsibility of trying to get more exercise and eat healthier. But it suggests a synergy between policy intervention and personal efforts to lose weight.” Frieden’s tenure as New York City’s health commissioner from 2002 to 2009 was intensely productive and attention-getting: under his direction, the city banned trans fats from restaurants....

The rise in obesity is associated with a rogue’s gallery of individual, social, and technological factors. The “Big Two,” as scientists call the leading factors, are reduced exercise and increased food consumption: Americans are ingesting more and more calories than they’re burning. But underlying that simple energy-in, energy-out equation is a complex, and so far inexorable, interplay between powerful physiological and societal forces....

But why did the obesity rate accelerate in the United States beginning in the 1980s, setting us apart from our peers in other developed countries?....

The average American spends half of his or her food budget outside the home....

This jumble of circumstances and effects is what Thomas Frieden means when he says that just being an American can naturally lead you to be obese: obesity is an almost inevitable consequence of living with our cultural norms, our history of agricultural production and subsidies, our long-standing socioeconomic inequalities, and the impact of technology on our behavior and bodies....

[T]he Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the largest philanthropy dedicated to improving health care in America...its nationwide campaign against childhood obesity and become the “connective tissue of the movement,” as the director of the childhood-obesity project, Dwayne Proctor, told me....

States and cities have come up with some of the best structural initiatives. In Pennsylvania, for example, the state has partnered with nonprofits and supermarkets to open high-quality food stores in underserved areas. In Louisville, Kentucky, housing projects, including the one where Cassius Clay grew up, have been redesigned with a focus on health. In one, wide sidewalks ring the perimeter so families and kids can walk in groups with less fear of crime. Near the boxer’s childhood home, the local sanitation department has cleaned the soil of toxins for the creation of a community garden. And there is a farmers’ market at a school across the street every Saturday. With the strong leadership of the mayor, the blue-collar city of Somerville, Massachusetts, lowered the rate of obesity in its elementary schools by promoting exercise in schools, smaller portions in restaurants, health counseling, and biking and walking to school. (The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation supported all three of these initiatives.)...

Michelle Obama went public on February 9 with her campaign against childhood obesity. Almost a year earlier, she had decided to make fighting obesity her principal cause: working largely in secret, over a period of about six months in 2009, the first lady’s staff and the White House Domestic Policy Council began to draft a truly comprehensive anti-obesity strategy.... The proposals that Raben and his group pondered have a place in the framework: state and local cooperation, nutrition-labeling standards, money to promote programs to bring healthy food to poor communities, and reforms to the school-lunch program. The goal is to end the epidemic of childhood obesity within a generation...."

The total number of antibiotics used in agriculture is continuing to grow

Op-Ed Contributor - Cows on Drugs - NYTimes.com

"More than 30 years ago, when I was commissioner of the United States Food and Drug Administration, we proposed eliminating the use of penicillin and two other antibiotics to promote growth in animals raised for food. When agribusiness interests persuaded Congress not to approve that regulation, we saw firsthand how strong politics can trump wise policy and good science.

Even back then, this nontherapeutic use of antibiotics was being linked to the evolution of antibiotic resistance in bacteria that infect humans. To the leading microbiologists on the F.D.A.’s advisory committee, it was clearly a very bad idea to fatten animals with the same antibiotics used to treat people. But the American Meat Institute and its lobbyists in Washington blocked the F.D.A. proposal....

But the total number of antibiotics used in agriculture is continuing to grow. According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, 70 percent of this use is in animals that are healthy but are vulnerable to transmissible diseases because they live in crowded and unsanitary conditions.

In testimony to Congress last summer, Joshua Sharfstein, the principal deputy commissioner of the F.D.A., estimated that 90,000 Americans die each year from bacterial infections they acquire in hospitals. About 70 percent of those infections are caused by bacteria that are resistant to at least one powerful antibiotic.

That’s why the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Pharmacists Association, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the American Public Health Association and the National Association of County and City Health Officials are urging Congress to phase out the nontherapeutic use in livestock of antibiotics that are important to humans.

Antibiotic resistance is an expensive problem. A person who cannot be treated with ordinary antibiotics is at risk of having a large number of bacterial infections, and of needing to be treated in the hospital for weeks or even months. The extra costs to the American health care system are as much as $26 billion a year, according to estimates by Cook County Hospital in Chicago and the Alliance for the Prudent Use of Antibiotics, a health policy advocacy group.

Agribusiness argues — as it has for 30 years — that livestock need to be given antibiotics to help them grow properly and keep them free of disease. But consider what has happened in Denmark since the late 1990s, when that country banned the use of antibiotics in farm animals except for therapeutic purposes. The reservoir of resistant bacteria in Danish livestock shrank considerably, a World Health Organization report found. And although some animals lost weight, and some developed infections that needed to be treated with antimicrobial drugs, the benefits of the rule exceeded those costs...."

Donald Kennedy, a former commissioner of the United States Food and Drug Administration, is a professor emeritus of environmental science at Stanford.

Food Rules From Michael Pollan Worth Following

Personal Health - Food Rules From Michael Pollan Worth Following - NYTimes.com:

"In the more than four decades that I have been reading and writing about the findings of nutritional science, I have come across nothing more intelligent, sensible and simple to follow than the 64 principles outlined in a slender, easy-to-digest new book called “Food Rules: An Eater’s Manual,” by Michael Pollan.

Mr. Pollan is not a biochemist or a nutritionist but rather a professor of science journalism at the University of California, Berkeley. You may recognize his name as the author of two highly praised books on food and nutrition, “In Defense of Food: An Eater’s Manifesto” and “The Omnivore’s Dilemma.” (All three books are from Penguin.)

If you don’t have the time and inclination to read the first two, you can do yourself and your family no better service than to invest $11 and one hour to whip through the 139 pages of “Food Rules” and adapt its guidance to your shopping and eating habits.

Chances are you’ve heard any number of the rules before. I, for one, have been writing and speaking about them for decades. And chances are you’ve yet to put most of them into practice. But I suspect that this little book, which is based on research but not annotated, can do more than the most authoritative text to get you motivated to make some important, lasting, health-promoting and planet-saving changes in what and how you eat.

Reasons to Change

Two fundamental facts provide the impetus Americans and other Westerners need to make dietary changes. One, as Mr. Pollan points out, is that populations who rely on the so-called Western diet — lots of processed foods, meat, added fat, sugar and refined grains — “invariably suffer from high rates of the so-called Western diseases: obesity, Type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease and cancer.” Indeed, 4 of the top 10 killers of Americans are linked to this diet.

As people in Asian and Mediterranean countries have become more Westernized (affluent, citified and exposed to the fast foods exported from the United States), they have become increasingly prone to the same afflictions.

The second fact is that people who consume traditional diets, free of the ersatz foods that line our supermarket shelves, experience these diseases at much lower rates. And those who, for reasons of ill health or dietary philosophy, have abandoned Western eating habits often experience a rapid and significant improvement in their health indicators.

I will add a third reason: our economy cannot afford to continue to patch up the millions of people who each year develop a diet-related ailment, and our planetary resources simply cannot sustain our eating style and continue to support its ever-growing population.

In his last book, Mr. Pollan summarized his approach in just seven words: “Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.” The new book provides the practical steps, starting with advice to avoid “processed concoctions,” no matter what the label may claim (“no trans fats,” “low cholesterol,” “less sugar,” “reduced sodium,” “high in antioxidants” and so forth).

As Mr. Pollan puts it, “If it came from a plant, eat it; if it was made in a plant, don’t.”

Do you already avoid products made with high-fructose corn syrup? Good, but keep in mind, sugar is sugar, and if it is being added to a food that is not normally sweetened, avoid it as well. Note, too, that refined flour is hardly different from sugar once it gets into the body.

Also avoid foods advertised on television, imitation foods and food products that make health claims. No natural food is simply a collection of nutrients, and a processed food stripped of its natural goodness to which nutrients are then added is no bargain for your body.

Those who sell the most healthful foods — vegetables, fruits and whole grains — rarely have a budget to support national advertising. If you shop in a supermarket (and Mr. Pollan suggests that wherever possible, you buy fresh food at farmers’ markets), shop the periphery of the store and avoid the center aisles laden with processed foods. Note, however, that now even the dairy case has been invaded by products like gunked-up yogurts.

Follow this advice, and you will have to follow another of Mr. Pollan’s rules: “Cook.”

“Cooking for yourself,” he writes, “is the only sure way to take back control of your diet from the food scientists and food processors.” Home cooking need not be arduous or very time-consuming, and you can make up time spent at the stove with time saved not visiting doctors or shopping for new clothes to accommodate an expanding girth.

Although the most wholesome eating pattern consists of three leisurely meals a day, and preferably a light meal at night, if you must have snacks, stick to fresh and dried fruits, vegetables and nuts, which are naturally loaded with healthful nutrients. I keep a dish of raisins and walnuts handy to satisfy the urge to nibble between meals. I also take them along for long car trips. Feel free to use the gas-station restroom, but never “get your fuel from the same place your car does,” Mr. Pollan writes.

Treating Treats as Treats

Perhaps the most important rules to put into effect as soon as possible are those aimed at the ever-expanding American waistline. If you eat less, you can afford to pay more for better foods, like plants grown in organically enriched soil and animals that are range-fed.

He recommends that you do all your eating at a table, not at a desk, while working, watching television or driving. If you’re not paying attention to what you’re eating, you’re likely to eat more than you realize.

But my favorite tip, one that helped me keep my weight down for decades, is a mealtime adage, “Stop eating before you’re full” — advice that has long been practiced by societies as diverse as Japan and France. (There is no French paradox, by the way: the French who stay slim eat smaller portions, leisurely meals and no snacks.)

Practice portion control and eat slowly to the point of satiation, not fullness. The food scientists Barbara J. Rolls of Penn State and Brian Wansink of Cornell, among others, have demonstrated that people eat less when served smaller portions on smaller plates. “There is nothing wrong with special occasion foods, as long as every day is not a special occasion,” Mr. Pollan writes. “Special occasion foods offer some of the great pleasures of life, so we shouldn’t deprive ourselves of them, but the sense of occasion needs to be restored.”

Here is where I can make an improvement. Ice cream has been a lifelong passion, and even though I stick to a brand lower in fat and calories than most, and limit my portion to the half-cup serving size described on the container, I indulge in this treat almost nightly. Perhaps I’ll try the so-called S policy Mr. Pollan says some people follow: “No snacks, no seconds, no sweets — except on days that begin with the letter S.”"

Mama wasn't always right: 9 updated health rules - CNN.com

Mama wasn't always right: 9 updated health rules - CNN.com:

"Now that you have kids, you've probably realized that there was actually some sense behind all that advice your mother gave you.

There is a lot of sense behind some of mama's advice, but other adages are not quite right.

Maybe you can thank her for your perfect posture (even though it took 4,567 reminders to stand up straight) or for insisting on all those family dinners. Then again, some things need not be passed down to yet another generation. Take a look.

Mama always said: Eat more! Kids are starving!

That's true, but probably not in your house. The clean-plate club isn't where it's at anymore. It's important to give kids the chance to stop eating based on appetite, instead of external cues like an empty bowl, says Marilyn Tanner-Blasiar, a pediatric dietitian at Washington University School of Medicine. It helps them stay attuned to their feelings of satiety.

When they lose that connection, the risk of becoming overweight goes up. But moms wouldn't be moms if they didn't worry about their kids' food. It's never going to be easy to let go, but if you give them healthy options and allow them to eat when they're hungry and stop when they're full, the rest will take care of itself.

Mama always said: Don't sit so close to the TV -- you'll ruin your eyes

Actually, you won't, and neither will your kids. According to the American Optometric Association, children can't harm their eyes by sitting with their noses practically pressed against the flat-screen. Watching close-up, however, may cause eyestrain, which can lead to headaches, says Dr. Vincent Iannelli, a Dallas, Texas, pediatrician.

Eyestrain doesn't worsen vision, but it's not comfortable, either. For healthier viewing, remind your children not to watch in total darkness -- the sharp contrast between the room and the TV can worsen strain -- and have them plop down about ten feet away. But if you have a child who's always sitting really close, she may be having a hard time seeing. Ask her to scooch to a more normal distance, and if she can't see the screen clearly, get her eyes checked.

Mama always said: Don't read in the dark

Smart thinking. Just as watching TV in a black void can cause eyestrain, so it goes with reading in low light, says Cathy Doty, a pediatric optometrist in New Bern, North Carolina. And if kids keep it up for long periods (like your voracious reader, who sneaks in extra chapters with a flashlight under the covers), it can lead to intermittent blurred vision and headaches.

All of these symptoms resolve with rest, but this behavior can speed the onset of nearsightedness in kids who are genetically predisposed, says Doty. To protect their peepers, make sure kids have at least 60 watts of light to read under and encourage them to keep books (and computer screens) at arm's length and to take frequent breaks. Parenting.com: Moms' dirty little secrets

Mama always said: Don't frown, you'll get wrinkles

Yep, you might. Furrowing your brow millions of times over your life can leave a line or two eventually. So can laughing. There's no way to avoid it, nor any reason to try.

Our facial muscles move to express emotion. And without those muscles, we couldn't eat, drink, smile, or kiss. The best way to help protect your kids' future faces and skin from head to toe? Load them up with SPF and keep on encouraging all the healthy stuff you already do: Try a vegetable. Run outside and play. And most of all, have fun! Parenting.com: 12 parenting rules you can break

Mama always said: Sit up straight

Good one, Nana. Slumping over puts major pressure on the neck, shoulders, and back, not to mention that it keeps the lungs from completely filling. But constantly scolding kids to correct their posture is frustrating. Instead, try to keep your kids active, says Patrice Winter, a physical therapist and assistant professor at George Mason University. It will give their muscles the strength needed to maintain alignment -- without nagging!

Mama always said: That music is too loud

It probably is. If you have a kid who goes nowhere without her iPod, there's a good chance she's rocking her way to some hearing loss later, says Dr. Craig Derkay, professor of otolaryngology and pediatrics at Eastern Virginia Medical School. If she likes her tunes loud, ask her to take a break every 20 minutes or so. You can also consider springing for noise-canceling headphones: They drown out background sounds, so she'll be less tempted to turn it up.

Mama always said: We're having dinner together because that's what families do

She was onto something. Kids are more likely to eat a balanced meal when the family dines together, says Kathleen Burklow, a clinical psychologist in Cincinnati, Ohio. And it's an all-around great way to connect. Don't stress if you can't do it every night (who can?); instead, make the most of the time you have. Parenting.com: 7 snacks that won't spoil dinner

If you always get the same one-word responses, have the kids ask you questions about your day. Or come up with a few very specific questions for everyone to answer, like what made you laugh today? What was the nicest thing someone did for you today? What was the nicest thing you did? You might be surprised at how much you actually hear.

Mama always said: Eat your breakfast

Pass it down. There is no doubt that breakfast is the most important meal of the day. Studies have proven that children who eat an a.m. meal perform better in school. Plus, many breakfast foods are excellent sources of calcium, iron, and fiber, all of which tend to be lacking in many children's diets. If your kids are picky breakfast eaters, have them grab a handful of raisins, some dry cereal, or even some leftover pizza to nibble on when they're ready. Parenting.com: 13 rise & shine breakfast ideas

Mama always said: Put on a coat, you'll catch a cold

The only thing your kid is likely to get from being outside in the cold is... cold. "When I was growing up, my grandmother insisted I bundle up in even slightly cold weather because 'getting cold could make you sick,'" says Sue Stevens of Arlington, Texas. "I knew from my school health class that she was wrong and that germs make you sick. I let my own son play in the rain, sleep under a ceiling fan, and play soccer in short pants in freezing weather. He never had colds afterward!" That's because only cold and flu viruses cause those illnesses.

There is some research that suggests that prolonged exposure to chilly temps may dampen the immune system because it puts a strain on the body. But that's not the same as making you sick. So if your kid wants to tough out the chilly season in his skimpy but oh-so-hip hoodie, save yourself the fight. Let him!"

Health Library

• MayoClinic.com: Childhood obesity -- make weight loss a family affair
• MayoClinic.com: Children's illness -- top 5 causes of missed school
• MayoClinic.com: Children and TV -- Limiting your child's screen time

Two-thirds of our calories now come from just four crops: rice, soy, wheat and corn

Nicholas Kristof - Food for the Soul - NYTimes.com:

"Michael Pollan, the food writer, notes that monocultures in the field result in monocultures in our diets. Two-thirds of our calories, he says, now come from just four crops: rice, soy, wheat and corn. Fast-food culture and obesity are linked, he argues, to the transformation from family farms to industrial farming."

List of the most nutritious nuts

David H. Murdock: The "Nut" In Nutritious:

"In my first blog post, I wrote about the benefits of thirty-three of the healthiest fruit and vegetables on earth, describing the nutrition benefits of each. The post garnered over 100,000 readers, and generated nearly 400 reader comments, many of which asked for more information. People asked: "What about nuts? What about beans? What about fish? Aren't they healthy, too?" My answer is: "Yes, of course!"

Therefore, my next ten posts will be devoted to covering ALL the areas crucial to longevity.... Though I'm not a scientist, everything my Dole Nutrition Institute publishes is based on scientific research. So this second post will provide information readers requested on nuts - and why you should include them in your diet.

ALMONDS: My favorite - especially when covered in dark chocolate! Top nut source of vitamin E, to protect the heart, slow aging, and bolster immunity.

WALNUTS: Top nut in heart-healthy, brain-boosting omega-3 oils. The omega-3 oils in walnuts could help calm and moisten dry, irritated skin. Walnuts also contain a unique form of vitamin E thought to suppress prostate and lung cancer cell division.

PECANS: Top nut in antioxidants. This means they can help neutralize the free radicals that can accelerate aging and cause DNA damage. Pecans may also lower cholesterol.

PEANUTS: Though not strictly a nut (they are in fact a legume), peanuts contain more protein than tree nuts. They also contain the potent antioxidant resveratrol -- famously found in red wine.

PISTACHIOS: Top nut in potassium, needed to maintain healthy blood pressure. Also top nut in phytosterols (plant compounds that inhibit cholesterol absorption).

CASHEWS: Top nut in zinc, a mineral needed to support vision and immunity.

PINE NUTS: Top nut in manganese, essential for bone health and wound healing.

BRAZIL NUTS: Top nut in selenium, a mineral needed for proper thyroid and immune health. Selenium may also protect against cancers of the prostate, liver and lungs. Don't eat more than four a day.

MACADAMIA NUTS: Often shunned because they have more saturated fat than other nuts. However, researchers have found that a handful of macadamia nuts a day reduced total cholesterol by about 9%.

These are the kinds of things we are studying at our North Carolina Research Campus. It is the only campus in the world encompassing eight universities all working together for the benefit of health and longevity. These include Duke University, UNC Chapel Hill, NC State University, UNC Charlotte, North Carolina Central University, NC A&T State University, UNC Greensboro and Appalachian State University. Our Dole Nutrition Institute publishes articles, brochures, videos and our Dole Nutrition News, which you can receive by signing up at www.dolenutrition.com.

Stay tuned for my next post on Brain Fitness: What mental exercises and daily activities help keep your mind sharp and focuses, at any age."

A Recipe For Longevity: 33 Of The Healthiest Foods On Earth

David H. Murdock: A Recipe For Longevity: 33 Of The Healthiest Foods On Earth:

"David H. Murdock
May 20, 2009

A Recipe For Longevity: 33 Of The Healthiest Foods On Earth"

"Is it possible to live to 125 or maybe 150? It's certainly a possibility, as discussed on Oprah Winfrey's recent show on longevity. She visited me at my farm to learn how, at 86, I am enjoying the robust health, energy, and mental creativity of someone many decades younger. My secret: large quantities of fruit and vegetables, plus an hour of daily exercise.

No pills, not even aspirin, and certainly no supplements ever enter my mouth -- everything I need comes from my fish-vegetarian diet, which incorporates 30-40 different kinds of fruit and vegetables every week. Even though I am Chairman and Owner of Dole Food Company, I do most of my own grocery shopping, and even took Oprah on an impromptu trip to Costco, in a day that included bike riding, exercise in the gym, and juicing vegetables in the kitchen. Oprah marveled at how much I eat, and yet never gain a pound. In fact, I expend a lot of energy in my 50-60 minutes of cardio and strength training every day. Plus there's the fact that fruit and vegetables tend to be lower in calories, but higher in filling fiber and other nutrients that help you feel satisfied.

By eating many fruits and vegetables in place of fast food and junk food, people could avoid obesity. Obesity accelerates aging even faster than smoking, according to scientific research.

We created the North Carolina Research Campus to study the health benefits of fruits and vegetables. It is the only campus in the world encompassing eight universities all working together for the benefit of health and longevity. These include Duke University, UNC Chapel Hill, NC State University, UNC Charlotte, North Carolina Central University, NC A&T State University, UNC Greensboro and Appalachian State University. We've gathered a comprehensive array of famous scientists and scientific equipment under one roof, including a two-story, 950 megahertz, 8-ton superconducting magnet. It is the largest and most powerful magnet in the world and will help us look at both plant and human cells at the most minute level. We are constantly doing research on all fruit and vegetables, including the ones listed below, which are the mainstay of my diet.

The Healthiest Foods on Earth

Pineapple	Speeds post-surgery	Promotes joint health	Reduces asthma inflammation
Blueberries	Restore antioxidant levels	Reverse age-related brain decline	Prevent urinary tract infection
Spinach	Helps maintain mental sharpness	Reduces the risk of cancers of the liver, ovaries, colon and prostate	Top nutrient density
Red Bell Pepper	Reduces risk of lung, prostate, ovarian and cervical cancer	Protects against sunburn	Promotes heart health
Broccoli	Reduces diabetic damage	Lowers risk of prostate, bladder, colon, pancreatic, gastric and breast cancer	Protects the brain in event of injury
Tomato	Reduces inflammation	Lowers risk of developing esophageal, stomach, colorectal, lung and pancreatic cancer	Reduces cardiovascular disease risk
Apple	Supports immunity	Fights lung and prostate cancer	Lowers Alzheimer’s risk
Artichoke	Helps blood clotting	Antioxidant Superfood	Lowers “bad” cholesterol
Arugula	Lowers birth defect risk	Reduces fracture risk	Protects eye health
Asparagus	Nourishes good gut bacteria	Protects against birth defects	Promotes heart health
Avocado	Limits liver damage	Reduces oral cancer risk	Lowers cholesterol levels
Blackberries	Build bone density	Suppress appetite	Enhance fat burning
Butternut Squash	Supports night vision	Combats wrinkles	Promotes heart health
Cantaloupe	Bolsters immunity	Protects skin against sunburn	Reduces inflammation
Carrot	Antioxidants defend DNA	Fights cataracts	Protects against some cancers
Cauliflower	Stimulates detoxification	Suppresses breast cancer cell growth	Defends against prostate cancer
Cherries	Alleviate arthritic pain and gout	Lower “bad” cholesterol	Reduce inflammation
Cranberries	Alleviate prostate pain	Fight lung, colon and leukemia cancer cells	Prevent urinary tract infection
Green Cabbage	Promotes healthy blood clotting	Reduces risk of prostate, colon, breast and ovarian cancers	Activates the body’s natural detoxification systems
Kale	Counters harmful estrogens that can feed cancer	Protects eyes against sun damage and cataracts	Increases bone density
Kiwi	Combats wrinkles	Lowers blood clot risk and reduces blood lipids	Counters constipation
Mango	Supports immunity	Lowers “bad” cholesterol	Regulates homocysteine to protect arteries
Mushrooms	Promote natural detoxification	Reduce the risk of colon and prostate cancer	Lower blood pressure
Orange	Reduces levels of “bad” cholesterol	Lowers risk of cancers of the mouth, throat, breast and stomach, and childhood leukemia	Pectin suppresses appetite
Papaya	Enzymes aid digestion	Reduces risk of lung cancer	Enhances fat burning
Plums & Prunes	Counter constipation	Antioxidants defend against DNA damage	Protects against post-menopausal bone loss
Pomegranate	Enhances sunscreen protection	Lowers “bad” cholesterol	Fights prostate cancer
Pumpkin	Protects joints against polyarthritis	Lowers lung and prostate cancer risk	Reduces inflammation
Raspberries	Inhibit growth of oral, breast, colon and prostate cancers	Antioxidant DNA defense	Lower “bad” cholesterol levels
Strawberries	Protect against Alzheimer’s	Reduce “bad” cholesterol	Suppress growth of colon, prostate and oral cancer
Sweet Potato	Reduces stroke risk	Lowers cancer risk	Protect against blindness
Watermelon	Supports male fertility	Reduces risk of several cancers: prostate, ovarian, cervical, oral and pharyngeal	Protects skin against sunburn
Banana	Increases Fat Burning	Lowers risk of colorectal and kidney cancer, leukemia	Reduces asthmas symptoms in children

One of my missions in life is to share this kind of knowledge with others, so they can live more vital, active, satisfying lives. Since acquiring major interests in Dole 26 years ago, educating the public on proper diet has constituted the agenda of my Dole Nutrition Institute. We publish the Dole Nutrition News -- enjoyed by 2.5 million subscribers (sign up at www.dolenutrition.com). We create cooking and nutrition videos, cookbooks, brochures, and other educational collateral, like the chart above. We also provide educational support to teachers, parents and kids through www.dolesuperkids.com."

* David H. Murdock is Chairman and owner of Dole Food Company, Inc., the world's largest producer and marketer of fresh fruit, fresh vegetables, packaged and frozen foods. He is also Chairman, CEO and owner of Castle & Cooke, Inc., a leader in real estate development. Mr. Murdock advocates healthy eating to promote longevity. His Dole Nutrition Institute is dedicated to nutrition education through an award-winning monthly newsletter, health brochures, cookbooks, videos and the Dole Nutrition website. He recently dedicated the David H. Murdock Core Laboratory Building, the UNC Nutrition Research Building and the NC State Fruit and Vegetable Science Institute Building at the newly opened North Carolina Research Campus, representing a historic partnership with leading universities to advance knowledge about nutrition and disease prevention.

Why a Big Meal Makes You Hungry

Why a Big Meal Makes You Hungry - WSJ.com:

"Every few months, a new study purports to prove that a calorie is a calorie is a calorie, and that the only way to lose weight is to burn more than you take in.

But veteran dieters know something that some researchers apparently don't: Certain foods seem to fuel the appetite like pouring gasoline on a fire. Some people find that once they start eating bread, cookies, chocolate, potato chips -- or leftover Easter candy -- they lose all sense of fullness and find it difficult to stop.

That's the concept behind "The Skinny," a new book by Louis J. Aronne, longtime director of the Comprehensive Weight Loss Program at NewYork Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center. He makes the best case yet why what you eat and when you eat it can make a big difference in appetite, satiety and how much willpower it takes to cut down. "It's true that a calorie is a calorie," Dr. Aronne says. "But what that doesn't take into account is how some calories affect what people eat later on."

Appetite Stokers

Some foods make it harder to stop eating:

• Bread
• Sweets
• Juice
• Pasta
• Wine or beer before dinner
• Artificial sweeteners

*Source: "The Skinny" by Louis J. Aronne

After 23 years of treating patients -- some of it espousing liquid diets -- Dr. Aronne has concluded that refined carbohydrates and foods with high sugar and fat content promote what he calls "fullness resistance." They interfere with the complex hormonal messages the body usually sends to the brain to signal that it's time to stop eating. People feel hungrier instead.

This happens in part because refined carbohydrates raise blood-sugar levels, setting up an insulin surge that drives blood sugar down again, causing rebound hunger. That insulin spike also interferes with leptin, the hormone secreted by fat cells that should tell the body to stop eating. Obese people have loads of leptin, but it either doesn't get to the brain, or the brain becomes resistant to it. "This is not a failure of willpower, it's a physical mechanism," Dr. Aronne writes. The body also becomes resistant to insulin, setting the stage for diabetes.

Other researchers have described similar phenomena. An article in this month's Medical Hypothesis argues that for some people, refined foods with high sugar and carbohydrate content can be just as addictive as tobacco and alcohol.

Eating foods high in protein, vegetables, fiber and water have the opposite effect, Dr. Aronne says. His plan recommends revising what you eat, one meal at a time, to restore your sense of fullness:

Breakfast: Loading up on lean protein -- ideally from egg whites or a protein shake -- in the morning reduces hunger all day long. Eating muffins, bread, sweetened cereal and juice does the opposite. A study of 30 overweight women at Saint Louis University School of Medicine found that those who ate eggs for breakfast consumed 140 fewer calories at lunch, and ate less for the next 36 hours, compared with women who ate bagels in the morning.

Some people argue that they aren't hungry in the morning, but Dr. Aronne notes that ghrelin, the hormone that typically signals hunger, adjusts to habitual meal patterns. After a few days of eating breakfast, you should find that you are hungry in the morning, and are eating less the night before, he writes.

Lunch: Some dieters try to cut calories by skipping this meal. But going more than five hours without food causes hunger hormones to rise and fullness hormones to drop, and sends more of the calories consumed at dinner straight to fat cells. Dr. Aronne recommends starting lunch with a salad -- at least two cups of lettuce -- then more vegetables, and then lean protein. Skip the cheese, croutons, bacon and creamy dressings, he advises. Using vinegar alone will cut your appetite and slow the rise in blood sugar.

Dinner: The end of the day is fraught with temptation. Obese people consume significantly more calories at dinner than slimmer people. Here, too, load up first on salads, clear soups, or high-protein appetizers like shrimp cocktail, then have a lean protein main course. Unlike some other diet plans, Dr. Aronne's program allows a half-cup of grains or a small dessert at the end of the meal, but only if you're still hungry.

Eating bread before dinner makes people lose their sense of fullness and eat more, Dr. Aronne warns. Alcohol makes it worse by lowering your resistance and promoting fat storage.

Snacks: Like many other weight-loss experts, Dr. Aronne believes that midmorning and midafternoon snacks can act as mini appetite suppressants, preventing blood sugar from dropping too low. But the same principals apply: high-sugar, high-starch, high-fat snacks -- including those little 100-calorie cookie packs -- start a vicious cycle of more cravings, whereas fruit, nuts, vegetables and clear soups can halt them.

Beverages: It should go without saying that juice and sweet soda can add hundreds of extra calories a day. A few studies have shown that even artificially sweetened beverages can prompt people to crave real sweets during the day. Cut back on all sources of liquid calories, Dr. Aronne advises; stick with water.

To be sure, if you eat as Dr. Aronne suggests, you'll consume fewer calories overall. The point is, eating protein early in the day may make it much easier to cut down. "It definitely does make a difference," says Ned Sadaka, a New York investment manager who consulted Dr. Aronne to drop 30 pounds that had crept up on him in recent years. He's lost 21 pounds and 5 inches off his waist since January.

Not everyone agrees that consuming more protein cuts appetite. Harvard School of Public Health's Frank Sacks led a study recently published in the New England Journal of Medicine that compared 811 overweight adults on four diets with varying levels of protein, fat and carbohydrate. "We found absolutely no difference in their satiety and hunger levels," Dr. Sacks says. All the groups lost similar amounts of weight.

Other weight-loss experts say that's not surprising, since there were only modest differences in their fat, protein and carbohydrate intakes, and many participants didn't stick to their plans."

Trying to lose weight? Watch what you drink

Trying to lose weight? Watch what you drink - CNN.com:

"75 percent of U.S. adults are projected to be overweight or obese by 2015, according to researchers. Americans consume anywhere from 150 to 300 more calories than they did three decades ago and half of those calories come from liquid. A new study out of John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health finds that reducing liquid calories, especially from sugar-sweetened drinks such as punches, fruit juices and sodas, helps people lose weight and keep it off.

Question: Why the emphasis on liquid calories?

Americans consume more liquid calories now than they ever have before. But unlike calories from solid food, it's much harder for people to track how many calories they consume from drinking. The human body's systems for regulating hunger and food intake are complex. But scientists do know that the lack of physiological and environmental cues associated with drinking, like not having to chew or prepare a drink like you prepare a meal, play a role. For these reasons, liquid calories don't keep a person full and they are not as satisfying as solid food. They are usually "empty calories" as well because they generally lack any nutritional value."

Video Watch more on the dangers of sweetened drinks »

Want to live longer? Cut back on red meat

Want to live longer? Cut back on red meat - CNN.com:

"Burger lovers beware: People who eat red meat every day have a higher risk of dying over a 10-year period -- mostly because of cardiovascular disease or cancer --than their peers who eat less red or processed meat, according to a new study of about half a million people.

"This is the biggest and highest quality study like this," says Barry M. Popkin, Ph.D., from the University of North Carolina, who wrote an editorial accompanying the study, which was published Monday in Archives of Internal Medicine. "They collected the diet data very carefully, and it's saying to people, 'You don't have to eat red meat every day.'"

In the study, a research team led by Rashmi Sinha, Ph.D., from the National Cancer Institute in Rockville, Maryland, looked at more than 500,000 people who were aged 50 to 71 when they enrolled in the National Institutes of Health-AARP Diet and Health study.

Over a 10-year period, people who ate the most red meat every day (about 62.5 grams per 1,000 calories per day, equivalent to a quarter-pound burger or small steak per day) had about a 30 percent greater risk of dying compared with those who consumed the least amount of red meat (a median of 9.8 grams per 1,000 calories per day). The excess mortality was mostly the result of cardiovascular disease and cancer."