Mar 28

People with a bulging waistline in mid-life could face a higher risk of dementia and Alzheimer’s in the senior years, a new study shows.

Previous research has shown that having an apple-shaped body increases the risk of diabetes, stroke and heart disease, but this is the first time it has been linked to dementia and Alzheimer’s.

In the study, which was published Wednesday by the journal Neurology, people who were both obese and had a large belly were three times more likely to be diagnosed with dementia in later years than those of normal weight and belly size. The risk of dementia nearly doubled in those who were a healthy weight but still had a bulging waist, suggesting that fat accumulated around the midline is particularly unhealthy for the brain.

“The take-home message from this study is that one should not only be concerned about their weight but where they carry their fat,” said Rachel Whitmer, the lead author of the study and a research scientist with Kaiser Permanente’s division of research in Oakland, Calif.

The findings are particularly concerning in light of the rise in obesity rates in the United States, Whitmer said. More than one-third of U.S. adults are obese and about half have abdominal obesity.

On the upside
“But the good news,” Whitmer added, “is that you can do something about it.” The type of fat that collects around the abdominal region is easy to accumulate but also easy to get rid of, she said.

Lenore Launer, chief of the neuroepidemiology division at the National Institute of Aging, said it’s too early to conclude that abdominal fat is a direct cause of dementia.

“These findings are an indicator that something is happening in the brain and more research needs to be done looking at the role obesity is playing in brain health when people get older,” Launer said.

In the study, Whitmer’s team followed up on 6,583 men and women who had their waists measured between 1964 and 1973, when they were between 40 and 45 years old. The measurement used, known as sagittal abdominal diameter (SAD), is the height of the belly taken while a person is lying down and is considered a good indicator of abdominal fat.

A SAD of 9.8 inches or more is considered a large belly. Using medical records, the researchers found that between 1994 to 2006, when the study participants were between 73 and 87 years old, 1,049 had been diagnosed with dementia or Alzheimer’s disease.

Those who were both obese and had a large belly back in their 40s were 3.6 times more likely to be diagnosed later with dementia than those who’d had a healthy weight and belly size. Those who were a healthy weight but still had a large belly were 1.9 times more likely to develop dementia.

Source: MSN 

 

written by admin \\ tags: , , , ,

Mar 26

pumpkin sculpture

carved strawberry

More….

written by admin

Mar 25

THE FUTURE OF FOOD offers an in-depth investigation into the disturbing truth behind the unlabeled, patented, genetically engineered foods that have quietly filled U.S. grocery store shelves for the past decade.

written by admin \\ tags: , , ,

Mar 16

When it comes to dieting, most of us are willing to resort to a trick or two to help us curbtoxic artificial sweetener our appetite and eat less — drinking water to fill up when we’re hungry, for example, or opting for artificial sweeteners instead of sugar to get the same satisfying sweetness without the offending calories. But new research suggests that the body is not so easily fooled, and that sugar substitutes are no key to weight loss — perhaps helping to explain why, despite a plethora of low-calorie food and drink, Americans are heavier than ever.

In a series of experiments, scientists at Purdue University compared weight gain and eating habits in rats whose diets were supplemented with sweetened food containing either zero-calorie saccharin or sugar. The report, published in Behavioral Neuroscience, presents some counterintuitive findings: Animals fed with artificially sweetened yogurt over a two-week period consumed more calories and gained more weight — mostly in the form of fat — than animals eating yogurt flavored with glucose, a natural, high-calorie sweetener. It’s a continuation of work the Purdue group began in 2004, when they reported that animals consuming saccharin-sweetened liquids and snacks tended to eat more than animals fed high-calorie, sweetened foods. The new study, say the scientists, offers stronger evidence that how we eat may depend on automatic, conditioned responses to food that are beyond our control.

What they mean is that like Pavlov’s dog, trained to salivate at the sound of a bell, animals are similarly trained to anticipate lots of calories when they taste something sweet — in nature, sweet foods are usually loaded with calories. When an animal eats a saccharin-flavored food with no calories, however — disrupting the sweetness and calorie link — the animal tends to eat more and gain more weight, the new study shows. The study was even able to document at the physiological level that animals given artificial sweeteners responded differently to their food than those eating high-calorie sweetened foods. The sugar-fed rats, for example, showed the expected uptick in core body temperature at mealtime, corresponding to their anticipation of a bolus of calories that they would need to start burning off — a sort of metabolic revving of the energy engines. The saccharin-fed animals, on the other hand, showed no such rise in temperature. “The animals that had the artificial sweetener appear to have a different anticipatory response,” says Susan Swithers, a professor of psychological sciences at Purdue University and a co-author of the study. “They don’t anticipate as many calories arriving.” The net result is a more sluggish metabolism that stores, rather than burns, incoming excess calories.

Swithers stops short of saying that the animals in her study were compelled to overeat to compensate for phantom calories. But she says that the study does suggest artificial sweeteners somehow disrupt the body’s ability to regulate incoming calories. “It’s still a bit of a mystery why they are overeating, but we definitely have evidence that the animals getting artificially sweetened yogurt end up eating more calories than the ones getting calorically sweetened yogurt.”

Though it’s premature to generalize based on animal results that the same phenomena would hold true in people, Swithers says, she notes that other human studies have already shown a similar effect. A University of Texas Health Science Center survey in 2005 found that people who drink diet soft drinks may actually gain weight; in that study, for every can of diet soda people consumed each day, there was a 41% increased risk of being overweight. So even though her findings were in animals, says Swithers, they could lead to a better understanding of how the human body responds to food, and explain why eating low-calorie foods doesn’t always lead to weight loss. “There is lots of evidence that we learn about the consequences about eating food,” she says. “And we have physiological responses to food that are conditioned.”

So does that mean you should ditch the artificial sweeteners and welcome sugar back into your life? Not exactly. Excess sugar in the diet can lead to diabetes and heart disease, even independent of its effect on weight. But it’s worth remembering that when it comes to counting calories, it’s not just the ones you eat that you have to worry about. The calories you give up matter too, and they may very well reappear in that extra helping of pasta or dessert that your body demands. Your body may actually be keeping better count than you are.

Source: www.time.com

written by admin \\ tags: , ,

Mar 10

yoga position

Combine modern western science with the ancient art of Hatha Yoga. A beautifully illustrated and well presented Yoga book.
Bandha Yoga

written by admin

Mar 08

A Star Wars spoof with an important message on the state of our food supply.

written by admin \\ tags: , , , ,

Mar 07

Since 1901, Monsanto has brought us Agent Orange, PCBs, Terminator seeds and recombined milk, among other infamous products. But it’s currently obsessed with the milk, or, more importantly, the milk labels, particularly those that read “rBST-free” or “rBGH-free.” It’s not the “BST” or “BGH” that bothers them so much; after all, bovine somatrophin, also known as bovine growth hormone, isn’t exactly what the company is known for. Which is to say, it’s naturally occurring. No, the problem is the “r” denoting “recombined.” There’s nothing natural about it. In fact, the science is increasingly pointing to the possibility that recombined milk is — surprise! — not as good for you as the real thing.

“Consumption of dairy products from cows treated with rbGH raise a number of health issues,” explained Michael Hansen, a senior scientist for Consumers Union. “That includes increased antibiotic resistance, due to use of antibiotics to treat mastitis and other health problems, as well as increased levels of IGF-1, which has been linked to a range of cancers.”

Read more>>

written by admin \\ tags: ,

Mar 06

A short documentary on the fluoride debate that everyone should watch.

written by admin \\ tags: , , , ,

Mar 05

written by admin \\ tags: , ,

Mar 05

written by admin \\ tags: , , ,