Currently viewing the category: "diets"

Biggest Loser’s Biggest Problem

By On · Add Comment · In body mass index (BMI), diets, exercise, obesity, The Biggest Loser, weight loss

I like The Biggest Loser–it’s good T.V. And I certainly see some value in the show. Saying that, however, it is not necessarily the best approach to weight loss.

According to some experts, The Biggest Loser is counterproductive and dangerous. The show takes obese contestants through extreme exercise conditions and carefully monitored diets, as they compete against each other for the greatest weight loss. The winner at the end of the show wins $250,000.

Last year’s season 8 saw two of the contestants collapse during a one-mile (1.6 km) foot race. And this year’s season 9 began with two contestants having complications during a 26.2 mile (42 km) race on stationary bikes. One of the contestants had to be dragged off the bike under her protests due to severe cramps, while a second, who weighed in at a massive 526-pounds, was treated for exhaustion.

Some criticisms of the show include that they take a group of people falling to the extreme side of obesity, or the largest people in society, the severely obese (BMI greater than 40) as contestants. Whereas the majority of obese Americans have a body mass index (BMI) of 30+, people with BMIs above 40 represent only 6% of the population. The show, however, uses mostly severely obese contestants. In fact, 17 of the 22 contestants (~80%) this season have BMIs over 40. The problem, critics say, is that it does not accurately represent the population and is, therefore, removed from real world conditions.

Another criticism is that the program is too strenuous and that weight loss happens too quickly, neither of which is healthy. Not only can this pose a danger to contestants but can also be discouraging for those viewers at home trying to lose weight. When people can’t match the numbers posted on the show, some being record weight losses (fastest 100-pound weight loss in seven weeks, and most weight lost in one week–34 pounds), people are bound to get discouraged.

The final criticism is that the rapid weight loss seen on The Biggest Loser is not likely to be maintained. Several former Biggest Loser contestants have regained some or all of the weight they lost while contestants on the show.

Well I’ve got to say…I couldn’t agree more. I do like The Biggest Loser, mostly because it shows that for any person to lose weight, one simple physiological principle must be satisfied: More calories must be burned than taken in. This principle is true whether one has the “obesity” gene, an underactive thyroid, or whether one just likes to eat. To lose weight you’ve gotta burn more than you bring in, period. I think the show demonstrates this princilple quite nicely.

But as I’ve said in a recent article, losing more than one pound per week is unhealthy. And if you are trying to lose weight for any other reason than your own inspiration, forget it–it will never happen, not with any permanence, that is.

If you really want to lose weight, you’ve got to set realistic goals, and do it over the long haul. Making some lifestyle changes will be a necessity, and getting over the mental barriers that attach you to eating will be of the utmost importance.

So as far as The Biggest Loser is concerned, it’ll keep on its game plan of getting the fattest people to lose the most extreme amount of weight in the shortest period of time, healthy or not. Even if they lose a couple contestants one year to heart attack or dehydration, they’ll keep going for one simple reason: It makes good T.V.

Best Diet for Losing Weight is…

By On · Add Comment · In cutting calories, diets, low carb, low fat, weight loss
Drum roll please: brrrrrrllllrrrlllrllrlllrllrllllrlllrllllrlrlrrrrrlllll…..

Low carb? Low fat? High protein? Atkins? South Beach? Hollywood? Cocaine? Uh…guess again.

How about…cutting calories. Ta-Dah! That’s right, cutting calories (translate: eating less) is the only, and I mean the only, way to lose weight (along with increasing exercise). I’ve said again and again in this blog: It’s simple physiology. Take in more calories than you burn–gain weight. Burn more calories than you take in–lose weight. Simple as that.

But if for any reason you didn’t believe me, here’s the proof: A study conducted by the Harvard School of Public Health and Pennington Biomedical Research in Louisiana found that diets which modify the amounts of fats, carbs and proteins mattered not at all; the only factor that made a difference in whether participants lost weight was cutting calories.

If you are trying to lose weight, cutting calories probably is least attractive notion in that endeavor; but, without a doubt, it’ll get you to where you are going. Substituting activities for eating and drinking is of mega-importance: feel like eating, go to the gym, drink tons of water, and engage in something mentally like reading, problem solving or writing–anything that’ll get your mind off the food. Hate to make it sound so simple, but, well…it is. It’s just getting over the incessant mind trip that plagues everybody who has ever had to practice discipline–I know, I’ve been addicted to just about everything. And I’ve quit it all (with the exception of coffee), so I know how frickin’ tough it is, but it can be done.

So, again, the only way to lose weight is by cutting calories and stepping up the exercise. Sorry to be such a bummer and tell it like it is.

Oprah’s Weight Woes

By On · Add Comment · In Bob Greene, diets, ectomorph, endomorph, healthy, mesomorph, O Magazine, obese, Oprah Winfrey, skinny, thin, weight

Oh Oprah, stop being so hard on yourself! Don’t beat yourself up for not being a waif. Waifdom is highly overrated–and not very healthy either.

According to her own words published in the January issue of O Magazine, Oprah Winfrey has ballooned up to 200 pounds. The 54-year-old television talk show personality says that she is “embarrassed” that she has “fallen off the wagon” of healthy living, and that a thyroid condition has led her to develop a “fear of working out”. She states she has put on 40 lbs. since being 160 in 2006, and that she is “mad” at herself for allowing this to happen. She says, “I look at my thinner self and think, `How did I let this happen again?'”

Chill out, Oprah! Yours is not a problem of the rind, but a problem of the mind. It’s not what you can and cannot do, it’s your self-perception that’s the problem. First, you are not of a thin body type. Body types are usually ectomorphic, mesomorphic, and endomorphic. Oprah, I think you are a endomorph. Endomorphs tend to be stocky with wider hips and a tendency to put on weight. These are the people who no matter what they try never get skinny. Notice I say, “never get skinny”, not “never lose weight,” because endomorphs can lose weight. But if these people succumb to the illusion that “thin is in,” then they are setting themselves up for a massive let down. That’s because endomorhs ain’t ever going to be thin–not for long, anyway.

Second, Oprah, the weight you’ve actually lost has been done by faulty, and dangerous, methods. In 1988 you lost 67 lbs on a liquid protein diet. Special and crash diets don’t work, babe. Sorry. Eating well and working out is the only thing that works. But I feel grateful that the world has you, especially since your weight-battle is on display for everyone to see. You see, this should help many, many people–especially readers of this blog–because you are living proof of what I’m trying to push here, and in my book, The Six Keys To Optimal Health: Accept who you are with regard to your body type, eat well and exercise regularly. You’ll have no alternative but to approach the healthiest and most attractive shape and size for your body type. Swear.

Your weight has also yo-yoed over the years. Not healthy, babe. It’s much better to lose weight slowly and steadily than too quickly. One pound per week (on average) is healthy–nothing more. Then you did the Marine Corp marathon in ’94, and hired super-trainer Bob Greene to help you lose weight (hate to be him right now–even with the Oprah-effect in play). Good thing you didn’t jump on your old pal Dr. Phil’s weight loss program too. You’d probably be suing him as a result.

But never fear, Oprah, my dear–you look great livin’ large. Who the heck are you trying to impress, anyway? You haven’t lost any viewers because of your weight. I think you’re attractive, and I’m sure I’m not alone in that feeling. You are supposed to be above the cultural pressures that our teens, young women, and mature women all seem to be victims of these days; the one that says beauty is in thinness; I mean, you’re Oprah, dammit. Why would you be under that pressure. I’d think you’d be better leading our women out of that self-esteem quagmire than being a part of it.

Finally, you can still be as healthy as you can be, no matter what your weight, Oprah. Eat well, exercise, practice discipline, The Six Keys To Optimal Health, and don’t obsess about obesity. I feel that the obesity crucifixion is a lot more media and medical hype than anything else. It’s the new smoking, you know? True, taking a little off ain’t gonna hurt–it’ll help. But better to be fat and happy than thin and miserable, I always say. And I mean it.

Now This is Getting Sick!

By On · Add Comment · In child abuse, childhood obesity, children, cholesterol, diets, magic bullet, obese, parenting, pediatric, statins
Okay, now I’ve heard it ALL! Check this out: the American Academy of Pediatrics has issued guidelines stating that children as young as two should be screened for high cholesterol. And even better, get this: they are recommending that children as young as eight should be started on statins. Whoa, ho, ho…hold on, Nellie…isn’t that the sickest thing you’ve ever heard? Our nation’s pediatric association–the professionals taking care of our children–is recommending statins, cholesterol lowering drugs, for our youngsters? I don’t know about you, but I’ve effin’ heard it all now.

Let me get this straight: the American Academy of Pediatrics is recommending that American children should be screened for high cholesterol and given statins to combat any risk of future heart disease, instead of getting their asses up and moving and exercising like normal kids? Holy crapoly!

Now to be fair, I understand where this idiocy stems from; I mean, let’s face it, Americans are blowing up to gargantuan proportions. Recent reports disclose that the number of obese Americans has grown significantly, yet again, over the last two years, making the current numbers 25% of the general population. I spend a great deal of ink on this tragic situation in my book, The Six Keys to Optimal Health, and, yes, it’s a many-faceted problem for the obese adult.

But childhood obesity? Excuse my language, but…that’s effin’ child neglect and abuse by lazy, undisciplined, ignorant parents. There, I’ve said it, and you all know it’s true. Letting your kid drink more than one Coke a week is child abuse. Feeding your kid Frosted Flakes is asinine and inexcusably ignorant or neglectful, or both. Letting your kid sit his or her fat ass in front of the T.V. for hours watching the Kardashians’ fat asses is equally ignorant and neglectful, and is also child abuse. According to a recent Canadian study on childhood obesity, kids who watch television while eating lunch take in 228 more calories than those who ate without the television on. Duh! Wake the eff up, parents! Sitting on your ass all day watching the boob tube and stuffing your face makes you fat. It does the same to your kids who–guess what?–learn from you! Duh!

And another study points out that parenting styles are what have the greatest effect on children’s eating habits. Duh! We need a study to know that? Wake the eff up, parents! Being too permissive in what you let your children eat will eventually lead to obesity. Yes, Junior wants PopTarts. Too bad…you’re getting an apple…now put down that WiiFii and go out and play.

And being too strict isn’t any good, either. You know exactly who I’m talking about, Food Nazis. Let the kid have an ice cream every now and again. Being authoritarian when it comes to food practices can also lead to obesity…the closet kind. I don’t know why Junior is blowing up, he only gets radishes at home. Duh!

According to nutritional experts conducting the study, the best thing parents can do to influence healthy eating habits in their children is to “set a good example with their own diets.” Duh! Both strict and permissive parents typically fail to serve as good dietary role models for their children, according to the researchers.

But here is my biggest beef: What the hell is wrong with the parent who sees their kid blowing up and doesn’t make him run his fat ass around the block every damn day till he gets back in kid shape? But he doesn’t want to…Yeah, no kidding. Get up and run, Engelberg! You mean, you’d rather give your kid statins than make him exercise or send him to military school? WTF?!?! And the American American Academy of Pediatrics recommends this???

According to one idiot doctor: “If we are more aggressive about this in childhood, I think we can have an impact on what happens later in life…and avoid some of these heart attacks and strokes in adulthood, says Dr. Stephen Daniels, of the academy’s nutrition committee. You know, this is what’s so pathetic about our current health system and it’s downright brain-dead paradigm: drugs like statins have been developed for lazy, undisciplined individuals who know better but just can’t get themselves to do what’s right because they have zero willpower. Doctors know this, and many will rightly say, “Patients don’t comply.” Yeah, that’s why they recommend statins and other meds, because they know the average lazy American (or busy, or challenged, or depressed, or underprivileged, or whatever convenient BS excuse is needed to not work hard) won’t do what it takes, so give ’em the ol’ magic bullet. Kids, however, are under the guidance, and yes, control of their parents. In no way should non-compliance be allowed–not by doctors, not by P.E. teachers, not by parents, nobody. Period!

So now you know how I feel. If you want to eat whatever you want to, at whichever quantity you want, if you don’t want to exercise, if you would rather be obese than do the work to bring it down, I’ll be the first to say, “That’s your choice, killer…do as you please.” But when it comes to your kids, if you are not teaching them the right dietary habits, if you are not acting as proper role models for their health and future well being, if you are not insisting that they go outdoors and play and exercise like normal kids should be doing, and you are thinking about giving them statins, then you are a child abuser plain and simple. Don’t do that to your kid. Shape up!

Popular Diet Shows Promise for Epilepsy

By On · Add Comment · In anti-convulsant drugs, Atkins Diet, calories, carbohydrates, diets, epileptics, John's Hopkins School of Medicine, low-carb diet, remedy, seizures, sugar, weight loss

Strange thing, diets. What’s touted as a cutting-edge weight loss remedy may actually have benefits extending beyond a slim trim. New reports show that a modified Atkins-like diet may actually decrease the amount of seizures suffered by epileptics. Very interesting, yes…

A study performed at the John’s Hopkins School of Medicine fed 30 epileptic subjects a diet restricted to 15 grams of carbohydrate a day. The rest of their calories came from fats such as eggs, meats, oils and heavy cream. In addition, the subjects were free to eat as much protein and no-carb drinks as they wanted. After one month on the diet, half of the subjects (15) experienced 50% less seizures. Remarkable!

Right now scientist are unsure of exactly what causes the reduction in seizures, but it is good news particularly for epileptics who respond poorly to anti-convulsant drugs. The subjects in the study all had unsuccessfully tried two medications in the past, and were having ten seizures per week on average. The low-carb diet has already been established as a valuable seizure control in children, but researchers wanted to see if the benefits extended to adults as well.

The one negative of the study is that only two-thirds of the participants stuck with the diet for longer than three months, finding it simply “too restrictive”. This is not surprising coming from a culture where carbohydrates make up a large portion of its calorie intake. Putting things into perspective, 15 grams of carbohydrate are:

  • one slice of bread
  • half a round pita bread
  • one small apple, pear, peach, plum, orange, or ½ banana, or ½ grapefruit
  • 2.5 ounces of peanuts (approximately a package)
  • 3 cups of popcorn

And they could only have one of the above…per day! I know, I know–to prevent seizures most everybody would say they’d do anything. But if you’ve never tried to eat that little carbohydrate, you don’t know how hard it can be. Without a doubt, it’s still way worth the effort; but I’m sympathizing anyway–I’ve changed enough habits to understand the challenge. I guess it just comes down to prioritizing one’s values.

I think the most important thing we can all pull out of this is to remind ourselves how carbohydrate-heavy (read: sugar) our western diet is. If you want to get the most from your health, start cutting down the carbs and sugar now, while you’re still healthy. And definitely don’t start the habit with your children. These eating patterns are learned behaviors; they can certainly be unlearned, but much easier to not learn them in the first place. We all need carbs, no doubt; but we definitely don’t need them to the excess that many of us consume. So be smart–chill on the carbs a bit; you’ll do wonders for your health as a result.

Copyright © 2013 Dr. Nick Campos - All Rights Reserved.