Search Weight Loss Topics:

Page 151«..1020..150151152153..160170..»

Home » Diets that Work » Page 151

DEAR DOCS: My wife and I are trying to get pregnant, but things arent working out. Before we try in vitro, what can I do to increase my contribution to our chances?

DEAR STAN: In vitro fertilization isnt always effective. For women younger than 35, the success rate is just over 21%; for those 38-40, the rate is around 11%. So before you start down that road, heres our advice:

Dont smoke (anything); cut down on or avoid all alcohol; exercise regularly; maintain a healthy weight; and eat a healthy diet.

Theres a reason why a good diet is so important. New research from Sweden shows that too much sugar in the diet has a chilling effect on sperm motility. Just two weeks of a sugary diet (or what most Americans, unfortunately, eat regularly)can sink your swimmers. The good news? The researchers found a strong link between good nutrition and reproductive health.

So, here are some nutritional plans you might try after giving up all added sugars and syrups. According to an annual U.S. News and World Report paper created by 25 nutritionists, dietary consultants and physicians specializing in diabetes, heart health and weight loss, the top three diets, based on palatability, sustainability, family-friendliness and healthiness are:

1. The Mediterranean Diet, which we advocate. Its based on vegetables, fruits, nuts, seeds, legumes, potatoes, whole grains, herbs, spices, seafood, lean skinless meats (as a side dish) and extra-virgin olive oil.

2. The DASH (Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension) Diet. It was developed to lower blood pressure without medication. It encourages lowering sodium while emphasizing vegetables, fruits and low-fat dairy, moderate amounts of whole grains, fish, poultry and nuts.

3. The Flexitarian Diet. You dont have to cut out all animal proteins, just eat lots of vegetables, fruits, nuts, seeds, legumes, potatoes and whole grains, eliminate red and processed meats, and eat fish and poultry occasionally.

Mehmet Oz, M.D., is host of The Dr. Oz Show, and Mike Roizen, M.D., is chief wellness officer and chairman of Wellness Institute at Cleveland Clinic. Email your health and wellness questions to them at youdocsdaily@sharecare.com.

Read more:
Drs. Oz & Roizen: Diet can slow sperm motility; are the elderly on too many meds? - The Union Leader

Joe Rogan, at the age of 52, is in absolutely incredible shape after completing the whole of January on a purely carnivorous based diet.

Rogan is known around the world for a few different things he is a regular commentator and interviewer employed by Dana Whites UFC, as well as being an avid mixed martial artist himself.

Alongside his work in the world of MMA and the UFC, Rogan is also a successful stand-up comedian and is currently on tour in the United States he has previously noted how unlikely the two professions go together but went on to say that for whatever reason, it just seems to work.

As well as that, he hosts one of the most popular podcasts on the planet - The Joe Rogan Experience in which he has world-famous guests on to discuss anything from stand-up, MMA to conspiracy theories.

The one main thing Rogan keeps as a consistent theme across his many platforms is his promotion of leading an active and healthy lifestyle. He is often posting stories to his social media of him and his dog going for a run (HIS DOG, IN FACT, HAS HIS OWN INSTAGRAM PAGE!) as well as posting post-workout videos of him at the gym either after weight training or sparring.

Before the start of the new year, Rogan vowed to lean up his physique and become an even healthier version of himself and, as a result, he embarked on the carnivore diet.

After a full month of dedication, Rogan finally revealed to his followers via his social media the changes he feels both physically and mentally.

Joe has stated many times on his podcast that a good workout often leads to a better state of mind and increased productivity.

Rogan revealed that he has lost a total of 12lbs since the start of January, losing his love handles and has gained a tone of energy.

He cited that his energy levels used to fluctuate somewhat and also mentioned to his listeners that he, in fact, suffers from an immune disorder known as Vitiligo of which had appeared to improve since the diet though he is unsure of the direct correlation.

Rogan closed out his message by stating how it was the best he had felt in a long time, and its only been one month.

The carnivore diet includes cuts out all vegetables, fruit, grains, nuts and seeds in favour of meat, fish and other animal foods such as eggs and a few dairy products here and there.

Last year, Rogan stepped on the scales on the set of his podcast and weighed 205lbs (14.5st) he later stated that it was the fattest he had ever been.

Rogan went onto say:

"I had a belly; a lot of people made fun of me, fat-shamed me. I lost all my fat, I lost the belly, I lost my love handles.

"I don't know if I'm gonna keep eating like this, but it was tremendously beneficial.

"I also have an auto-immune disorder, it's called vitiligo, and my vitiligo improved, I had a bunch of white spots fill in, so, I don't know.

"I went into this thing thinking this carnivore diet was wacky and probably thought it was nonsense, but this is as good as I've felt in a long time and it's just one month.

Rogan made fans aware in a jokey social media post that he had suffered a severe bout of diarrhoea but noted that this passed and now feels great.

At the age of 52, Joe Rogan puts all of us to shame and is definitely one to watch, if not for health advice, tips and tricks, but because he is so damn entertaining!

Read more:
Joe Rogan reveals his new, stacked physique after a month of following the carnivore diet - GIVEMESPORT

You probably know that your sweet tooth affects your waistline, but did you know it can also be harmful to your heart?

A 2014 study showed that a diet high in sugar puts you at a greater risk of dying from heart disease, even if you arent overweight. If at least 25% of calories in your daily diet come from added sugar, you are twice as likely to die of heart disease than if your diet included less than 10% of total calories from added sugar.

Sugar can affect your heart by:

Increasing the likelihood of developing type 2 diabetes, which in turn increases the risk of heart disease and stroke.

Spiking blood sugar levels (and so insulin levels), which increases your risk of obesity and heart disease.

Stopping triglycerides (fat in the blood connected with cardiovascular disease) from breaking down.

Lowers the level of HDL cholesterol (the good cholesterol) while raising LDL (bad cholesterol) levels.

Increasing blood pressure through increasing sodium accumulation in the body.

Sugar is added to most processed foods, which most Americans consume daily. Refined sugars are also found in all of the sweet treats lining your pantry shelves. They are even found in yogurts, salad dressings, ketchup, and other common condiments. On average, Americans consume 66 pounds of sugar per person per year. That equals nearly 20 teaspoons per day.

Limiting sugar in your diet can not only decrease your risk of heart disease, but it can also help with your overall health. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommends sugars should not take up more than 10% of your daily calories (based on a 2,000 calorie per day diet). The American Heart Association recommends women should not consume more than 24 grams of sugar per day, and men should have no more than 36 grams. Just four grams of added sugar is equal to one teaspoon.

Tips to limiting sugar, include:

Read all food labels. Sugar can be hidden on labels. Sugar may be named brown rice syrup, barley malt, beet sugar, agave, and sucrose.

Avoid processed foods. By cooking with whole foods and shopping the outside aisles of the grocery store, you can naturally decrease sugar consumption and increase the amount of vegetables and fruits you eat.

Avoid sugary drinks. Replace soda with carbonated water with a squeeze of lemon or splash of fruit juice.

Remember that all calories are not equal. You should work to eat a balanced diet with 30% lean protein, 30% good fat, and 40% low-glycemic carbohydrates.

Sugar can also be very addicting. The more you consume, the more you crave. Moderation is the key to staying healthy and keeping your heart healthy. It is important to ignore the constant barrage of advertising and messages tempting you to eat more sugar your heart and your waistline, will be better for it.

Dr. Michael Desiderio is a cardiologist at UPMCs Heart & Vascular Institute. He earned his medical degree at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey and completed his residency at the Cleveland Clinic, Ohio. Dr. Desiderio sees patients in the Health Innovation Center at UPMC Williamsport, 740 High St. To schedule an appointment with Dr. Desiderio, call 570-321-2800.

AIDS Resource now offers an online option to schedule appointments for HIV, chlamydia and gonorrhea testing. ...

DANVILLE As one of the largest employers in the region, Geisinger is set to expand its career services reach to ...

A multitude of preventive screenings and immunizations created for people of all ages can help folks stay on top of ...

Link:
How sugar affects the heart | News, Sports, Jobs - Williamsport Sun-Gazette

Most UAE residents are concerned about their diet. Image Credit: Getty

Dubai: Almost half (45 per cent) of the people employedin the United Arab Emirates (UAE) revealed they are worried about their long-term health, according to a new study.

They admitted they have not had a health check in the last year and a significant number said they have no idea about the simple metrics of health such as cholesterol levels, according to new research from Aetna International, a global health benefits provider. Inflexible and long working hours are compounding the problemas employees feel unable to take time off to manage their health, says the report.

The findings are revealed in the Business of health 2020 report, how organisations can overcome employee health inertia, which explores the attitudes to health of 4,000 office workers in the UAE, USA, UK and Singapore, focusing on the health fears of todays workers and probing the gaps in their own health knowledge.

Despite the fact that 94 per centof UAE respondents say that they think about their health at least some of the time, 40 per cent admitted that they would not go to the doctor for a general health check-up unless they felt ill, and just over a quarter (27 per cent) say they are too scared to get a health check-up.

In addition, few know of basic indicators of their own health only 35 per cent of UAE respondents know their cholesterol level and just 31 per cent their body fat percentage. However, when compared to respondents from the other countries surveyed, overall employees in the UAE and Singapore have a better knowledge of health measurements like blood pressure, cholesterol and body mass index (BMI) than those in the US or UK.

Most UAE workers acknowledge they could do more to improve their health, with over half (56 per cent) admitting their diet needs improvement and three quarters (75 per cent) saying they need to exercise more. When people do feel ill, however, 39 per cent say they tend to look up symptoms online and self-medicate rather than seeking out a doctor.

Catherine Darroue, Senior Director of Customer Proposition, EMEA, Aetna International, said: While the majority of workers are aware they need to do more to improve their health, fear and worry are causing a huge number to avoid the situation. More should be done to empower people to manage their own health, with a focus on changing company cultures to promote prevention and early intervention. It is not only the responsibility of the employee but also that of the employer to ensure people are equipped to lead healthy lives.

Increasing pressure in the workplace is having a significant impact on how people prioritise their health. Half (50 per cent) of UAE employees surveyed admit that they often feel stressed because of work but dont see a healthcare professional about the issue. Long and inflexible working hours may be to blame, as nearly a third (32 per cent) say they dont have time to be ill at work and a quarter (25 per cent) cite lack of time off from work as the reason behind their health inertia.

Results also indicate that employers could play a bigger role in encouraging people to look after their health, with over a quarter (28 per cent) of office workers admitting they would go to the doctor if their boss told them to. Nearly half (48 per cent) also said the ability to take time off work to go to the doctor would encourage them to make an appointment.

Additionally, better access to online health consultations would encourage just over a third (34 per cent) to get regular check-ups, and an almost equal number (35 per cent) would like the use of an app or online service.

Expanding access to healthcare is imperative to ensure todays time poor workers prioritise their health. Technology can undoubtedly play a role here, but businesses also need to ensure they create a culture where people can talk about and take time for their health needs, concluded Catherine.

Over a third (39 per cent) say they tend to look up symptoms online and self-medicate rather than seeking out a doctor

Half (50 per cent) of those surveyed admit that they often feel stressed because of work but dont see a health care professional about the issue

Nearly a third (32 per cent) say they dont have time to be ill at work

A quarter (25 per cent) cite lack of time off from work as the reason behind their health inertia

Better access to online health consultations would encourage nearly a third (34 per cent) to get regular check-ups, while over a third (35 per cent) would like the use of an app or online service

Continue reading here:
56% of UAE residents feel they need to improve their diet - Gulf News

Ever wonder just how nutritious grapefruit is? It's National Grapefruit Month. Here's what you need to know about this citrus fruit.

Is there anything more refreshing than biting into a big slice of ripe, juicy ruby red grapefruit? Not just a great accompaniment to breakfast, grapefruit are awesome additions to salads or just a fabulously hydrating snack. And the citrus fruit brings a bevy of health benefits, too.

Angela Goscilo, a registered dietitian with Pollock Communications in New York City, says grapefruit is a healthy component of a diet rich in fruits and vegetables.

Specific health benefits of a medium-sized grapefruit (250 grams) include:

Vitamin C (more than 76 milligrams).

Vitamin A (180 micrograms).

Potassium (over 300 milligrams).

Fiber (4 grams).

Low in calories (82).

Lots of antioxidants and phytochemicals.

Increased iron absorption.

[SEE: Fruits to Eat on a Low-Carb Diet.]

Vitamin C

Gabrielle Mancella, a registered dietitian and corporate wellness dietitian at Orlando Health in Florida, says grapefruits key health benefit is its very high concentration of vitamin C. Vitamin C is an antioxidant that has anti-inflammatory properties to it, she says. This supports your immune system and may even be able to lower your risk of cancer and other chronic disease, such as diabetes and heart disease that have been linked to long-term, systemic inflammation.

One large grapefruit provides 190% of the daily value of vitamin C, which supports your immune system and wound healing, Goscilo says. The National Institutes of Health Office of Dietary Supplements recommends that women aged 19 years and older should consume 75 milligrams and men aged 19 years and older consume 90 milligrams of vitamin C each day. Half a medium-sized grapefruit (about 125 grams) contains more than 38 milligrams of vitamin C.

I recommend eating food rich in vitamin C like grapefruit over taking synthetic vitamin C pills, as fruit will have other nutrients to work synergistically with the vitamin C to make the effects more powerful, says Kate Weiler, a sports nutritionist and co-founder of Drink Simple, a company that makes a line of plant-based beverages.

Vitamin A

Grapefruit is also a good source of vitamin A. This fat-soluble vitamin is important for maintaining normal vision. It also supports the immune system and reproduction. The NIH reports that it also helps keep the heart, lungs, kidneys and other organs working properly. Half of a medium-sized grapefruit contains 90 micrograms of vitamin A. People aged 14 years and older should consume between 700 and 900 micrograms of vitamin A daily.

[SEE: Plant-Based Diet Ideas.]

Potassium

Your body needs potassium for just about everything it does. This electrolyte helps ensure proper kidney and heart function, muscle contraction and nerve transmission. Though we usually think about eating more bananas when trying to increase the level of potassium in our diet, many foods offer this vital nutrient. The USDA reports that a small grapefruit (about 200 grams) contains 278 milligrams of potassium. (A medium-sized banana has a little over 400 milligrams.) Men over the age of 19 are advised to consume 3,400 milligrams of potassium daily. Women over the age of 19 are advised to consume 2,600 milligrams of potassium.

Low-Calorie Fiber

In addition to being high in vitamins and minerals, grapefruit is also high in fiber and low in calories, Weiler says. The U.S. Department of Agriculture reports that half a medium grapefruit has just 41 calories.

Most Americans eat less fiber than they should. The American Heart Association recommends that adults consume 25 grams of fiber per day. Half a medium-sized grapefruit contains 2 grams of dietary fiber.

Antioxidants and Phytochemicals

Antioxidants are compounds found in plants that have been found to inhibit oxidation, which means they can reduce inflammation in the body. Phytochemicals and polyphenols are natural compounds that can also offer health benefits, such as improving blood pressure and lowering inflammation. All this could add up to big health benefits over the long term.

Grapefruit ranks very high in antioxidant compounds and has a wide range of polyphenols, Weiler says. Because of these compounds, there have been several studies that suggest that adding grapefruit to a healthful diet may lower your risk of cancer. The American Institute for Cancer Research lists a variety of studies related to grapefruit and grapefruit components and their potential ability to fight cancer. Another small study published in August 2019 suggested that adding grapefruit juice could help boost the effectiveness of certain medications used to manage certain types of incurable cancer.

[See: How 16 Fruits Boost Your Health.]

Iron Absorption

Weiler adds that grapefruit also boosts your bodys ability to use the iron found in foods you eat. Grapefruit can help boost iron absorption, so if youre low in iron, its great to eat grapefruit with iron-rich foods to improve absorption.

How Often Should I Eat Grapefruit?

There isnt an exact number of times per week I would recommend people to consume citrus, Weiler says, but it is a delicious and healthful fruit to incorporate as part of your diet. In the wintertime, I recommend people eat more citrus as it is in season, and it is the time of year when our immune system could especially use that extra boost.

Many people like to start the day with a sweet-tart grapefruit. Goscilo recommends consuming citrus fruits regularly. They are versatile, from juice to whole fruit, and can fit into a wide variety of dishes and beverages.

Watch the Sugar

Grapefruit is a fruit, and as such contains natural sugars. Some people are concerned about this sugar content, but Mancella says its still a food that can have a place in a healthy diet. I know a lot of people do get concerned over the sugar content, but we want to make sure were not overlooking the benefits. If you can use it appropriately and balance it into the diet, it can be a great inclusion.

Half of a medium-sized grapefruit contains 8 grams of sugar. The AHA recommends limiting added sugar to 38 grams per day for men and 25 grams per day for women.

One way to temper sugar intake is to choose whole grapefruit over juice. While grapefruit juice can offer you a deliciously tart start to the day, it does not retain the healthy fiber of the membrane that can slow the absorption of sugar and make you feel fuller longer.

If youre diabetic or watching your sugar intake, you can still include grapefruit, just be mindful about how you do it, Mancella says. Just make sure youre eating it in proportion. Have a protein and a fat, along with the grapefruit to get the maximum benefit of the fruit in your diet with less chances of an insulin spike.

And if youre drinking commercially pressed grapefruit juice, Mancella also urges you to look closely at the label. I see a lot of people coming in saying theyre drinking grapefruit juice. If its from concentrate or not 100% juice if its one of those juice cocktails, it likely has added sugar, making it a less healthy option than eating a whole grapefruit or drinking pure juice that has nothing added to it. Stay away from artificial versions that have been processed, she says.

Despite the sugar content, Weiler notes that there have been studies that have shown that grapefruit can improve insulin resistance and may help prevent weight gain.

A Word of Caution

Although grapefruit is considered a very healthy fruit, particularly when consumed whole rather than juiced, some people may want to avoid this citrus fruit altogether. Grapefruit and grapefruit juice can interact with several medications, including those that treat conditions like high cholesterol and high blood pressure, Goscilo says.

If youre taking statins and benzodiazepines, you may need to skip the grapefruit. Before you start a new medication, consult a registered dietitian or physician about the risk for food interactions, she adds.

Weiler agrees. Check with your doctor if youre on prescription medications because over the past few years, the number of medications that are associated with negative effects from grapefruit consumption has grown.

More from U.S. News

Foods High in Calcium

Mediterranean Diet Snacks

Healthy Citrus Fruits

Grapefruit Nutrition Facts originally appeared on usnews.com

Original post:
Ever wonder how nutritious a grapefruit is? - WTOP

In The Politics of Weight: Feminist Dichotomies of Power in Dieting, Amelia Morris challenges the degree to which feminist debates about dieting often take the form of a binary whereby (womens) bodies are either sites of oppression or liberation. Instead, drawing on interviews with dieters, analyses of dieting programme materials, fat activism and black feminist scholarship, the book posits a more ambivalent middle ground, arguing for a promising path tonuanced understanding of how our bodies are shaped in relation to power and diet culture, writes Megan Dean.

The Politics of Weight: Feminist Dichotomies of Power in Dieting. Amelia Morris. Palgrave. 2019.

Find this book:

For decades feminists have criticised weight-loss dieting, accusing it of (among other things) reinforcing unrealistic and harmful body ideals, distracting from meaningful social and political engagement and being a tool of the patriarchy. Recently, body-positivity activists, including celebrities like actor Jameela Jamil, have spread their anti-dieting messages through social media, reaching new generations with the encouragement to reject dieting and love ones body as it is.

And yet, many people still diet. In the United States, 49.1 per cent of adults and 56.4 per cent of women tried to lose weight between 2013 and 2016. Ten of the top eleven strategies used toward that end were changes to diet. We have to assume that at least some of these dieters are aware of feminist objections to dieting. Indeed, Susan Bordo, whose book Unbearable Weight offers a canonical critique of dieting and weight-loss culture, has herself acknowledged participation in a commercial weight-loss dieting programme. Bordo is certainly not the only feminist who has considered joining Weight Watchers.

But why would anyone who thinks that dieting is a tool of the patriarchy go on a diet? Why would they engage in a practice that reinforces body norms they themselves reject? In short, why is knowing better not enough when it comes to dieting?

Amelia Morris explores these questions in her book The Politics of Weight: Feminist Dichotomies of Power in Dieting. Morris, a postdoctoral researcher in the Department of Politics, International Relations and Philosophy at Royal Holloway University, situates what Ill call the ambivalent dieter within a broader feminist debate about the status of the body and its relation to power. As Morris characterises it, the main positions within this debate take the form of a dichotomy: bodiesspecifically, womens bodiesare either sites of oppression or opportunities for the exercise of liberty. Morris identifies the former perspective with radical feminists, such as Susan Brownmiller and Germaine Greer, and the latter with liberal and post-feminist scholars and writers, including Naomi Wolf, Catharine Lumby and Katie Roiphe.

Morris herself supports a third, post-structuralist position, which she identifies with Michel Foucault and feminist theorists like Sandra Bartky, Judith Butler and Bordo. According to this perspective, the body has a more ambivalent relationship to power than either side of the dichotomy suggests. Bodies exist, Morris writes, within a middle-ground of power (19). This middle ground is characterised by the claims that power works on and through the body in more subtle, mundane and insidious ways than oppression proponents would have it, and that the experience of freedom in relation to ones body is neither as attainable as the liberation side suggests nor a reliable sign that one is in fact free from pernicious forms of power.

The Politics of Weight argues that we should use this middle-ground approach to understand womens engagement in weight-loss dieting. Morris takes an interdisciplinary approach to this task, using interviews with British women dieters, body-positivity activists and fat-positive activists to highlight womens conflicted understandings and experiences of dieting, and the challenges of ridding oneself of an attachment to thinness as a source of happiness, comfort and confidence, even when one believes one should.

The first two chapters of the book discuss Morriss methodology and introduce the broader feminist debate about the body. In Chapter Three, The Dichotomy of Power in Dieting, Morris explores how this debate applies to weight-loss dieting in particular, and begins to make her case for a Foucauldian feminist approach. She does this in part by using interviews with dieters and analyses of dieting-programme materials to highlight some of the quintessentially disciplinary aspects of dieting, including the use of panoptic surveillance and the confession of dietary transgressions and weight gain to peers and group leaders at weight-loss meetings.

Morris is careful to point out that the feminist Foucauldian literature she favours has often ignored the relevance of race to the effects of power on the body. In Chapter Four, The O Factor: Foucault, Race, and Oprahs Body Journey, Morris attempts to address this gap through engagement with black feminist scholarship on the topic of Oprah Winfreys weight-loss projects. Morris highlights the ways that racist stereotypes like the Mammy and Jezebel structure understandings of black womens bodies. She suggests that the white hostility and ambivalence that met Oprahs dramatic weight loss can be understood as a response to Oprahs visible shift away from what white audiences perceived as a non-threatening, nurturing Mammy image. In this chapter and elsewhere, it is sometimes challenging to distinguish Morriss original contributions from her detailed discussion of the existing literature. Nonetheless, this chapter addresses an important issue and will point readers to some fascinating work on race and diet, such as Cheryl Thompsons 2015 paper, Neoliberalism, Soul Food, and the Weight of Black Women.

Chapter Five, Fat Activism and Body Positivity: Freedom from Dieting? will be of most interest to readers grappling with the complexities of resisting diet culture. Morris draws on fat-activist literature and practice to suggest that the insistence that we unequivocally love our bodies and reject dieting without ever looking back betrays a misunderstanding of how power works.

According to the Foucauldian picture Morris endorses, our subjectivities are shaped by our practices, including dieting. We can reject dieting but be left with emotions and self-understandings that have been shaped by that practice. This chapter draws attention to the ways fat activism can help reshape these aspects of subjectivity, while highlighting how widespread fatphobia limits such self-transformation. Rachel, a fat-activist performance artist, explains the limits of her work:

I dont think any of my work makes me feel liberated, because of re-opening that wound. You can make the space as safe as you want but weve all got to go outside afterwards and I cant make outside safe for me or for any of you.

Morriss discussion underscores the complications of resistance and the importance of a compassionate and nuanced understanding of how deeply many womennot to mention men and non-binary individualsare affected by diet culture.

Those acquainted with this area of research will find the books positions familiar, drawn from feminist and Foucauldian theorists Ive already mentioned as well as Fat Studies scholars like Samantha Murray. Throughout the book, Morriss interviews are mainly used to support rather than complicate or develop theoretical claims made by others. Some may hope for more dynamic engagement between theory and empirical work than is offered here. But the value of gathering relevant empirical evidence for theoretical claims should not be underestimated, and many theorists do not have the professional training to do so themselves.

While the books interdisciplinary approach and subject will be of interest to scholars in many different fields, I hesitate to recommend the book to those unfamiliar with the literature. The book suffers from poor copy-editing, which at times undermines the readability and reliability of the work. Of particular note are some significant citation issues that those new to the subject may not have the resources to recognise, such as a misquotation of Simone de Beauvoir on page 39.

Overall, though, The Politics of Weight tackles a topic of ongoing importance. Having a nuanced and accurate understanding of how our bodies are shaped in relation to power and diet culture is central to treating ourselves and others with compassion and respect. Such an understanding can also help us recognise what is needed to create the conditions so that knowing better can translate into doing better when it comes to dieting. The Politics of Weight argues for a promising path to this very worthy goal.

Please read our comments policy before commenting.

Note: This article gives the views of theauthors, and not the position of USAPP American Politics and Policy, nor of the London School of Economics.

Shortened URL for this post:http://bit.ly/3aVrMr8

Megan Dean Hamilton CollegeMegan Dean is the Chauncey Truax Postdoctoral Fellow and a Visiting Assistant Professor in Philosophy at Hamilton College in New York. Her current research focuses on ethical issues relating to eating, specifically on the ways eating shapes the self and the implications of these self-shaping effects for clinical ethics, diet research, food policy and personal food choice. Dr. Dean received her PhD from the Philosophy Department at Georgetown University, and she has an MA in Philosophy from the University of Alberta.

Read the original here:
Book Review: The Politics of Weight: Feminist Dichotomies of Power in Dieting by Amelia Morris - USAPP American Politics and Policy (blog)

Kenya, South Africa and Zimbabwe are leading in new cancer cases in Africa. In 2018 Kenya was reported to have 47 887 new cancer cases (130 cases daily) and 32 987 deaths (90 daily). This marked a 30% rise since 2012.

Cancer is now the third leading cause of death after infectious and heart diseases in the East African nation.

So whats going wrong?

The rapid rise in cancer cases can be attributed to majorsocietal and environmental changes that have occurred in the past few decades. These include excessive drinking, cigarette smoking, lack of exercise, poor diet, obesity and exposure to environmental carcinogens, like air pollution. Another big risk factor is infectious agents that contribute to cancer such as the human papillomavirus responsible for more than 90% of the cervical cancer burden.

One of the causes of the high death rate is that patients with cancer often present themselves at a late stage when its difficult to cure them. This is a problem in many low and middle-income countries where diagnostic and treatment services are inadequate or non-existent.

Large investments in treatment programmes for cancer arent the best use of resources as treatment often comes too late to save lives and cannot meet the ever-increasing demand for the treatment of new cancer cases.

According to the World Health Organisation nearly half of all cancers can be prevented by reducing known risk factors. It therefore makes more sense to invest in prevention, rather than focusing on treating late-stage cancer.

Currently, prevention efforts encourage behaviour change through health education. But the success of these interventions dissipates over time. A public health approach to prevention must incorporate strong policy measures and address wider contextual factors, not just individual behaviour. For example food marketing influences eating behaviour, so there should be more measures that control the marketing of unhealthy food products.

My colleagues and I from the African Population and Health Research Center (APHRC) have, over the past three years, conducted research in five African countries including Kenya, to assess policies for primary prevention of cancers and other non communicable diseases.

We found that, as in other low and middle-income countries, cancer prevention efforts are failing because governments either lack cancer prevention and control policies or the available policies lack the regulatory teeth to achieve the intended goal.

Our findings showed that policies such as tax increases, bans on tobacco advertising, and warnings on the dangers of tobacco and alcohol are available but they arent being fully implemented. This is because theyre not being prioritised and theres not been an organised, cohesive effort towards this. There are also conflicting interests because of the potential economic gains the government can have from the alcohol or tobacco industry.

In addition to this, Kenyas physical activity and nutrition policies for the prevention of cancer have not been well developed. These policies should advocate for less salt in food, the promotion of food thats low in harmful saturated fats and more fruits and vegetables. Farmers that produce these foods should be offered subsidies and healthy foods given tax waivers.

Recent evidence shows that an unhealthy diet generates more disease than physical inactivity, alcohol and smoking combined. Diet is an important modifiable risk factor for cancer that should be addressed to substantially reduce the burden.

In the last few decades, theres been a great shift in diet in Kenya from traditional foods (rich in fibre, fruits, and vegetables) to the adoption of a more western diet which is typically characterised by high amounts of meat, sugar, fat and salt. Nearly all Kenyans (94%) consume less fruits and vegetables than the recommended amount and a quarter of Kenyans add excess salt to their food, while 28% always add sugar to their beverage.

Unhealthy diet is specifically linked to some cancers that are common in Kenya. For example a high fat diet can lead to cancer of the colon.

An increasing problem is the contamination of meals with food additives and contaminants during food handling, processing, and cooking. A good example is dietary aflatoxin contamination, a perennial problem in Kenya. Policies that emphasise food safety along the food production and transport chain and in trade agreements are needed.

Read more: What must be done to get toxin out of Kenya's food supply

One major weakness our research identified was the challenge in bringing sectors together to develop stronger policies. For example, raising taxes and enforcing advertising bans or restrictions on tobacco and alcohol will require the involvement of the ministries of finance, health, commerce and information. It also involves the legislature and media.

But we observed that sectors arent working together because of a lack of awareness, weak political will, a lack of resources and because they couldnt effectively coordinate.

There is a need for collective action to develop stronger, more comprehensive policies for cancer prevention.

Against this backdrop, in November 2019, the APHRC convened a high-level policy dialogue with key actors in Kenya to share ideas on how this collective action could take place.

Policy and legislative frameworks are needed to guide action in sectors outside the health sector that contribute heavily to cancer. In addition, financial resources are needed for local, culturally relevant ideas to be tested, iterated and amplified.

South Africa is a good example of a country with comprehensive policies covering all the major non communicable disease. More than 40 policies were developed between 1994 and 2015.

This type of action will be key to reducing cancer in Kenya.

The rest is here:
What needs to happen for better cancer prevention and control in Kenya - The Conversation Africa

Vegetarianism is having a moment in the sun. Record numbers of people are giving it a try, the number of places offering vegetarian food is ever-increasing, and the variety and quality of vegetarian alternatives to meat products are rising with it.

But, is this all just misplaced environmental concern, sentimentality, and hippie mumbo jumbo? After all, the stereotype of a vegetarian remains less than flattering. Or is there a method to the bacon-denying madness? Today, we'll look at three philosophies that endorse vegetarianism, look at their arguments, and consider if you should put that piece of steak down.

Peter Singer is an Australian philosopher well known for his work in Utilitarian ethics. His 1975 book Animal Liberation is a groundbreaking work in the field of animal rights and presents a bold program for treating animals much better than we currently do.

He begins with a simple idea; that animals have interests that should be considered equal to the similar interests of human beings. If it is wrong to inflict unnecessary pain on human beings, then it is also wrong to do it to animals.

While it is true that many arguments have been made to separate humans and animals because of differences between them, Singer points out that we never apply them to other members of the human race. If we can't hurt and eat people with very low intelligence or who cannot use language, then why do we justify eating animals because they don't use syntax? Since animals clearly can feel, why should we not consider them as equal when calculating the net pleasure and pain caused by an action?

He argues that any attempt to morally separate humans from other animals when it comes to whose pain matters is based primarily on speciesism, prejudice against other animals, rather than a consistent logic and should be rejected. He then concludes, given the nature of industrial farming and the suffering many animals endure because of it, that we should switch to vegetarian and vegan diets to maximize the total happiness.

There are two subtleties to his arguments that must be remembered. The first is that he is not talking about "animal rights" in the pure sense. He certainly isn't arguing that an elephant be given the right to vote. He is arguing only that the difference between pain in humans and elephants is morally irrelevant and that the elephant's interests should be considered as equal to a humans' when deciding what to do.

Secondly, he is a utilitarian, and some apparent contradictions come with that. Most notably, he argues that some medical experimentation on animals is morally justifiable, as the benefits of the research will significantly outweigh the pain caused to the animal in the laboratory. Similarly, while he likes free-range farming as an idea, he doesn't encourage it in all cases as it can be worse for the environment than factory farming. The cost to benefit ratio doesn't quite work out for him.

His work has been widely influential, and most of the modern animal liberation movement cites him as a major influence. However, some philosophers, such as Richard Sorabji, have argued that his moral theory is simplistic and gives rise to strange moral instructions in some situations.

Many religions have lines of scripture that are commonly interpreted as encouraging or even mandating vegetarianism.

The Dharmic Religions of India are well known for their tendency towards vegetarianism. In Jainism, vegetarianism is mandatory, as harming animals is considered bad karma. Hinduism and Buddhism also have scripture forbidding violence against animals, but how much that applies to the killing of animals for food is still debated. For those who do eat meat, ritualized methods of minimizing the suffering of the animal before death exist.

A third of Hindus are vegetarians. The number of vegetarian Buddhists is not known with certainty. The Dali Lama tried the diet for a while himself but was forced back to omnivorism again for health reasons. He continues to encourage vegetarianism in the name of reducing the suffering of animals.

Pythagoras, of the theorem, encouraged an entire way of life named for him which included vegetarianism. This was perhaps motivated by his belief in reincarnation and aversion to violence.

Lastly, many more recent thinkers have put forward arguments based on the environmental costs of industrial animal farming as a reason to cut back on our animal consumption. Thinkers like Steve Best and Peter Singer have made this argument. They point to studies like one in Nature, which reminds us of how much of the carbon footprint of meat production we'll have to cut back on if we want to reach our goals in the fight against climate change.

You might have noticed that most of these schools and thinkers share a common theme; they tend to object to the production of meat, the killing and suffering of the animal, rather than the actual act of eating it. Some people make arguments along these lines, but they are in the minority.

Most, if not all, of the thinkers mentioned above would undoubtedly be fine with lab-grown meat if the energy costs of producing it could be lowered. Similarly, many debates over if it is alright to eat oysters, which probably can't feel pain and are rather plant-like, have taken place as part of the broader discussion of moral vegetarianism.

There you have it; serious thinkers are often behind vegetarianism, and they make very good arguments as to why you should eat less meat -if any at all. While they won't convince everybody to switch to tofu, they do provide an excellent starting point for any discussion of what an ethical diet is.

From Your Site Articles

Related Articles Around the Web

Go here to read the rest:
Why some philosophers think you should be a vegetarian - Big Think

Its known that drinking more water can help lower the likelihood of urinary tract infections (UTIs) by flushing out bacteria present in the urinary tract. But what about the food we consume? Can what we eat (or avoid) help reduce the risk of a UTI?

The answer is yes, according to new research, published January 30 in Scientific Reports, which found that the overall risk of developing a UTI was lower in vegetarians compared with meat eaters.

RELATED: Is There a UTI-Causing Superbug Lurking in Your Gut?

The study took place in Taiwan, where investigators recruited participants from among volunteers of Tzu Chi, an organization of Buddhists who participate in a variety of charity and disaster-relief efforts. About one-third of the members are vegetarians, and all volunteers must agree to swear off alcohol and smoking to join the group.

Participants completed a food frequency questionnaire, which included whether they identified as a vegetarian. Individuals who said they were vegetarian but reported eating meat or fish as part of their diet were classified as non-vegetarians. After researchers excluded people under 20, those with incomplete questionnaires, and those with a history of UTI, 9,724 subjects remained: 3,257 vegetarians and 6,467 non-vegetarians.

Investigators followed participants from 2005 to 2014 through the National Health Insurance Program, which covers nearly 100 percent of the population, to identify any diagnosis of a UTI. At the end of the study period, 217 people in the vegetarian group had been diagnosed with a UTI compared with 444 people in the non-vegetarian group.

RELATED: What Is a Flexitarian Diet? What to Eat and How to Follow the Plan

That difference translated into a 16 percent lower overall risk of UTI for vegetarians compared with non-vegetarians. In a further subgroup analysis, a vegetarian diet was significantly associated with a reduced risk of UTI mainly in females, according to the authors.

After adjusting for various chronic conditions like hypertension, diabetes, and high cholesterol, the vegetarian diet seemed to have a protective effect against UTIs for women, but no distinct difference was found in males, the authors write. The risk reduction was also present in nonsmokers for uncomplicated UTIs which are those that crop up in otherwise healthy people.

Women are more likely than men to get a UTI; 60 percent of women will have at least one UTI in their lifetime compared with only 12 percent of men. This is because women have shorter urethras than men, meaning that bacteria has a shorter distance to travel to get to the bladder, according to the Urology Care Foundation.

Because vegetarian diets are associated with different bacteria flora in the gastrointestinal system, it isnt surprising that the risk of UTI was lower in this group, says Chin-Lon Lin, MD, the lead author and a professor at Tzu Chi University in Taiwan.

Dr. Lin suspects that the risk reduction is due to the combination of more vegetables and the elimination of meat. But we do think meat plays a more important role because it changes the intestinal flora, says Lin.

The strains of E. coli that cause the majority of UTIs are known as extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli (ExPEC), and they can colonize and infect normally sterile body sites. Researchers theorize that by eliminating meat, particularly pork and poultry, which are known to contain these strains of E. coli bacteria, people are less likely to introduce the bacteria into their bowel and therefore lower the risk that the bacteria will travel to the urethra.

Another potential contributor could be the high fiber content in vegetarian diets. Because of the way fiber is metabolized, it decreases the pH in the gut, which in turn may inhibit the growth of E. coli, the authors write.

RELATED: 9 Things You Should Know Before You Go Vegetarian

Although these findings are intriguing, there are a number of other factors in the Buddhist lifestyle beyond dietary ones, says Yufang Lin, MD, an integrative internal medicine doctor at Cleveland Clinic in Ohio, who was not involved in this research. This makes it difficult to attribute the reductions in urinary tract infections to the effects of diet alone, she says. While I dont think this study provides conclusive evidence that a vegetarian diet reduces UTI risk, there are a number of things about the vegetarian diet that can support the reduction of UTI, says Dr. Lin.

The study authors acknowledge their findings have a few key limitations. They based the presence (or absence) of a UTI on the coding of the healthcare provider (ICD-9) rather than the gold standard, which would have been clinical symptoms and lab tests, including a urine culture. Factors that are known to influence UTIs, such as water intake and sexual activity, were not measured or accounted for in the findings.

According to Dr. Chin-Lon Lin, further research should include more analysis of the strains of bacteria that are responsible for UTI, which will shed light on the mechanism of the apparent protective effect of vegetarian diets.

In addition to reducing exposure to E. coli by eliminating meat, there are ways that eating more vegetables can reduce the risk of UTI, according to Dr. Yufang Lin. Many plant-based foods, particularly herbs or bitter foods, have antimicrobial properties and are also antioxidants, she says.

A vegetarian diet is often rich in components that are antimicrobial, says Lin. Antimicrobial means it has the ability to fight the presence of microbes, including bacteria. These work to suppress bacterial growth in the food that we eat as well as suppress bacterial growth in the gut, she says.

This is combination reduces the amount of bacteria in our intestinal environment, which in turn reduces the possibility of bacteria going to our bladder, she explains. This is how a vegetarian diet that has a lot of antimicrobials can be very beneficial, says Lin.

As part of the vegetarian diet youre also going to get a lot of foods that are antioxidants, says Lin. They are also supportive of our own immune system and as a result can also promote our ability to fight off infection, she says.

Finally, fruits and vegetables are rich in nutrients, which help support the bodys functions in general, says Lin. There are a lot of factors that support having a plant-based diet. You dont necessarily have to be a vegan for better health, she adds.

I absolutely think when you eat lots of whole foods, vegetables, fresh fruits, things of that nature, youre going to get multiple benefits and the potential to reduce UTIs, Lin says. For someone whose immune system is a little bit weaker, she recommends cooking with lots of spices such as garlic, onion, rosemary, thyme, oregano, ginger, all of which are antimicrobials and antioxidants, she says.

View original post here:
Urinary Track Infection (UTI) Risk Reduced With Vegetarian Diet - Everyday Health

Its not common knowledge that meat is a resource reaper, so wed like to show people the scale, explains Hanna Pamula, a PhD student at AGH University of Science and Technology who has created a tool which calculates the carbon footprint of your food.

The Omni Calculator Project is run by a small team of scientists in Poland who are developing ways to help people work out everything from body fat to the cost of Brexit and this meat footprint calculator is just the latest addition. Using data from over 1,500 studies across 120 countries on animal agriculture, the tool looks at carbon dioxide emissions, land use, water and air pollution.

Even frequently neglected factors like eutrophication, caused by too many nutrients in the soil, were taken into account in their calculations. Although results vary depending on where the meat was produced, the tool averages these out to give you the most accurate numbers.

One serving, according to the project, is 85g or a portion roughly the size of a deck of cards. There are five different common animal protein sources you can choose from: lamb, fish, pork, beef and chicken. One of the most revealing results from the data the team used was that even the lowest-impact animal product exceeds the impact of the average vegetable substitute by quite a significant amount.

Pamula and the Omni calculator team think that providing information about our individual carbon footprint easy will encourage people to make eco-friendly decisions. We try really hard to create attractive tools that have educational value, she adds, such ecological calculators should be as user-friendly and easy to understand as possible. Thanks to that, people actually start using the tools and are more and more aware of environmental issues.

It isnt just the health of the planet that the tool wants to improve but yours as well. We wanted to show that reducing meat consumption can be profitable not only for the environment but also for your health, says Pamula, Apart from sodium and saturated fatty acids intake itself, the diet change may be profitable to your health.

She suggests that the less meat you eat, the more you will reach for protein-rich legumes, pulses and nuts which can significantly reduce the risks of heart disease, high blood pressure, stroke and type 2 diabetes. Environmental benefits aside, increasing numbers of people are adopting these small dietary changes for the sake of their own individual health.

The amount of meat eaten around the world has quadrupled in the last half a century to roughly 320 million tonnes each year. Thats the equivalent of over 950 million cows. If we all adopted the average American diet then we would need more than one planet to provide the amount of land needed to create that much meat. Changing to a vegan diet, Pamula suggests, could reduce this land use by up to 75%.

A plant-based diet isnt for everyone, however, and simple changes like a few meat-free days a week could have a big impact with all kinds of meals meeting that could be called planet-friendly. Any increase in your intake of vegetables is beneficial and adopting a flexitarian diet, for example, could provide the answer to avoiding the damaging mountain of meat we currently consume in the West.

Staying away from animal products could be the best way to reduce your carbon footprint, according to recent scientific studies. The UNs Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) suggests that high consumption of meat and dairy in the West is fuelling global warming and urges those looking to lessen their environmental impact to cut down on meat, milk, cheese and butter.

Its more about having a moment of reflection than it is pushing people to completely transform the way they live. We would like to encourage everybody to cut down on meat, not become vegan today, Pamula says. She hopes that having the exact figures for personal choices could better inform people thinking about making this kind of change. The huge numbers showing the meat impact give the opportunity to reflect on our meat-rich diet, the PhD student explains, maybe we can cut that burger or chicken nuggets from our daily menu.

Have a go below and find out the impact of the meat you eat.

Here is the original post:
This tool can tell you the true environmental impact of the meat you eat - Euronews

Page 151«..1020..150151152153..160170..»

Home » Diets that Work » Page 151