Getting closer to the Zone all the time

Last week the USDA announced its newest version of how Americans should eat. For the first time in more than 20 years, the USDA apparently stopped acting as the marketing arm of agribusiness by using a food pyramid (presented in 1992) and worse yet some abstract concept of an “eat-more, exercise-more” idea (presented in 2005). Now the USDA has turned to a plate format, which I have used for years. For comparison, you can see that the Zone diet recommendations are still a lot easier to understand than even the new and improved USDA recommendations as shown below:

The USDA proposes that half your plate (I’ll assume at every meal that you want to control the glycemic load of the meal) should be composed of vegetables and fruits. This is much closer to my Zone recommendation of filling 2/3 of the plate at each meal with vegetables and fruits. Both plates give a volume size to protein (and I’ll assume it is a low-fat protein source). The Zone plate appears to have a higher amount of low-fat protein consisting of 1/3 the plate instead of a quarter as found in the USDA plate. Of course if you add in the strange circle outside the plate that represents milk or cheese (both protein sources) back onto the plate, then you would probably get to about 1/3 the plate volume as low-fat protein.

Finally, what about whole grains on the USDA plate? From a glycemic-load viewpoint, whole grains have nearly the same impact on insulin response as refined grains, so you really don’t gain anything hormonally from having them in your diet. However, if you are at your ideal percentage of body fat, have no chronic disease, perform at peak levels, and are always happy and even-keeled emotionally, only then should you think about adding some whole grains to your diet. (Keep in mind that real whole grains are usually only found in storage bins or in the frozen product section of the supermarket, not in the processed food aisles.) But if you begin to gain weight, develop indications of a chronic disease, or don’t perform physically, mentally, and emotionally on a consistent basis, then take the whole grains out of your diet and go back to my classic Zone plate.

The one thing not mentioned in the USDA guidelines is the role of fat. On the Zone plate, I always say add a dash (that’s a small amount), but that dash of fat should be very low in omega-6 and saturated fats as both can accelerate cellular inflammation. I guess the USDA hasn’t had time to grapple with that more complex dietary concept. Perhaps they will another five years from now. But you don’t have to wait for their next guideline revision. Just follow the dietary guidelines on the Zone plate the best you can at every meal and snack. If you do, then you have done everything possible to maintain your wellness (as measured by your ability to manage cellular inflammation) for as long as possible. I guarantee you that will be the only real health-care reform program that you can count on in the future.

Nothing contained in this blog is intended to be instructional for medial diagnosis or treatment. If you have a medical concern or issue, please consult your personal physician immediately.

No excuses, eat your breakfast

Everyone knows that breakfast should be the most important meal of the day. Unfortunately, no one seems to have time to consume a real breakfast. If they do, then it’s usually a high-carbohydrate quasi-dessert that is so portable that they can eat it in the car. Although our world is becoming time-compressed, our biological rhythms are not. While you sleep, your body is literally digesting itself to provide energy for the brain. Much of this energy comes from digesting muscle mass to make glucose as the supplies of stored carbohydrate in the liver are rapidly depleted during the night forcing the body to start digesting muscle to supply enough glucose to the brain. Rebuilding lost muscle mass demands protein replenishment upon waking, and you aren’t going to get achieve that goal by eating a typical breakfast cereal and definitely not by drinking a cup of coffee as a stimulant.

It has been known for some time there is a strong relationship between skipping breakfast and obesity and subsequent establishment of poor dietary habits (1,2). Furthermore, the higher the protein content of the breakfast, the greater the satiety. That increase in satiety is correlated with increased PYY (the satiety hormone) levels in the blood (3). It was also demonstrated more than 10 years ago that giving a higher-protein breakfast meal to overweight adolescents resulted in significant appetite suppression. This lack of hunger is correlated with dramatic changes in the levels of insulin and glucagon in the blood (4).

Now a new study pre-published electronically indicates that a high-protein breakfast also dramatically alters brain function (5). Overweight adolescents who normally skipped breakfast were either given nothing for breakfast, a carbohydrate-rich breakfast, or a protein-rich breakfast for six days. On the seventh day of each breakfast cycle, they had a fMRI scan of their brains while being shown pictures of various palatable foods on a screen. After consuming the higher-protein breakfast for six days, there was far less activation in the regions of brain associated with food motivation and reward when shown the pictures of highly desirable foods.

One surprising observation from this study is the primary reason given by the overweight adolescent subjects for skipping breakfast was not that they were trying to lose weight, but they just lacked the time or were not feeling hungry upon waking. The lack of time in the morning is understandable because adolescents don’t get enough sleep anyway. However, the lack of hunger is probably due to the rise of hormonal levels early in the morning to rouse someone out of sleep. This acts like a powerful stimulant (and if you need more, then drink coffee). But the lack of breakfast means eating more snacks with higher calories throughout the day. Bottom line, even if you aren’t hungry at breakfast, just eat it anyway. But make sure it has adequate levels of protein if you want to lose weight.

References

  1. Deshmukh-Taskar PR, Nicklas TA, O’Neil CE, Keast DR, Radcliffe JD, and Cho S.
    “The relationship of breakfast skipping and type of breakfast consumption with nutrient intake and weight status in children and adolescents: the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999-2006.” J Am Diet Assoc 110: 869-878 (2010)
  2. Sjoberg A, Hallberg L, Hoglund D, and Hulthen L. “Meal pattern, food choice, nutrient intake and lifestyle factors in The Goteborg Adolescence Study.” Eur J Clin Nutr 57: 1569-1578 (2003)
  3. Leidy HJ and Racki EM. “The addition of a protein-rich breakfast and its effects on acute appetite control and food intake in ‘breakfast-skipping’ adolescents.” Int J Obes 34: 1125-1133 (2010)
  4. Ludwig DS, Majzoub JA, Al-Zahrani A, Dallal GE, Blanco I, and Roberts SB.
    “High glycemic-index foods, overeating, and obesity.” Pediatrics 103: E26 (1999)
  5. Leidy HJ, Lepping RJ, Savage CR, and Harris CT. “Neural responses to visual food stimuli after a normal vs. higher-protein breakfast in breakfast-skipping teens.” Obesity doi 10.1038./oby.2011.108 (2011)

Nothing contained in this blog is intended to be instructional for medial diagnosis or treatment. If you have a medical concern or issue, please consult your personal physician immediately.

The demise of the Mediterranean diet?

This week is Mediterranean diet week. Unfortunately after 2,000 years, no one really knows what the Mediterranean diet actually consists of. Is it the Italian, Spanish, Moroccan, Egyptian, Greek or Lebanese Mediterranean diet? Each diet is very different from each other. What is clear is that people in the Mediterranean region are becoming fatter and less healthy (1).

Part of the reason for the demise of the benefits of a “Mediterranean diet” is the time it takes to prepare a quality meal. It takes time to purchase fresh vegetables. It takes even more time to prepare them. In a world without globalization, you have a lot more time. Now you are competing with every human on the face of the globe for a job, and the result is time-compression. The first casualty of this time-compression effect of globalization is the inability to cook and consume good food containing high-quality food ingredients. Another sinister aspect of globalization is the reduction in the number of food ingredients being used by the general population. In particular, those food ingredients are the least expensive, have an extended shelf life and can be made into very inexpensive, convenient, and portable (not requiring a knife or fork to eat) processed foods. The only food ingredients that meet those requirements are cheap refined grains and cheap refined vegetable oils. And the low-cost producer of these food ingredients is not China, but the United States.

Fruits and vegetables are really expensive unless you grow them yourself. With urbanization of the Mediterranean region, most people now rely on processed foods and restaurants for their meals. Not surprisingly, is the consumption of cheap, refined grains and vegetable oils, which in the past were alien components to the Mediterranean diet (regardless of the location). Now they have replaced vegetables, fruits and olive oil (the primary food ingredients of a Mediterranean diet) because they are cheaper. For example, vegetables and fruits are now 400 times more expensive for the same number of calories as cheap, refined grains imported from America. Corn oil from America is now five times cheaper than olive oil produced in the Mediterranean region.

The people in the Mediterranean regions are eating the same foods that have produced the Perfect Nutritional Storm in America. This explains why 75 percent of Greeks are now overweight or obese and more than half the populations of Italy, Spain and Portugal are now overweight or obese. They are making the right economic choices (cheap food), but the wrong health choices (an increasingly inflammatory diet).

Even if you were to go back to the original Mediterranean diet (circa Roman times), it is apparently still not the best diet for health. This was demonstrated in a recent publication that compared the Mediterranean diet (50 percent calories as carbohydrates, 20 percent calories as protein, and 30 percent of calories as fat) to a diet that contained 40 percent carbohydrates, 30 percent protein, and 30 percent fat in a cross-over study. The higher protein, lower carbohydrate diet was more satiating and had better clinical results, especially in hormonal responses, than a real Mediterranean diet (2). Besides having a different macronutrient ratio, the other diet was extremely limited in grains and dairy products compared to the Mediterranean diet.

So if you want to follow a diet that is the evolution of the Mediterranean diet, then make it a diet that is higher in low-fat protein, lower in carbohydrates (but rich in vegetables and fruits) and low in omega-6 fats. Sure sounds like the Zone diet, but call me crazy (3).

References

  1. Ciezaldlo A. “Does the Mediterranean diet even exist?” New York Times April 1, 2011
  2. Jonsson T, Granfeldt Y, Erlanson-Albertsson C, Ahren B, and Lindeberg S. “A paleolithic diet is more satiating per calorie than a Mediterranean-like diet in individuals with ischemic heart disease.” Nutr Metab 7:85 (2010)
  3. Sears B. “The Zone.” Regan Books. New York, NY (1995)

Nothing contained in this blog is intended to be instructional for medial diagnosis or treatment. If you have a medical concern or issue, please consult your personal physician immediately.

The dangers of over-analyzing too much data in prostate study

In the last week there has been a constant buzz about an online pre-publication of a new research article that suggests that high concentrations of omega-3 fatty acids promote aggressive prostate cancer (1). Well, that really isn’t the case, in spite of the press reports. That’s why you have to carefully read the article before jumping to conclusions.

Prostate cancer, like all cancers, is driven by cellular inflammation. The level of cellular inflammation is defined by the AA/EPA ratio of isolated serum phospholipids. When you analyze the data correctly in that article, you find that there was no difference in the AA/EPA ratio between the low-aggressive, high- aggressive, or control group. In fact, all the groups had the same elevated AA/EPA ratio of 18.8. Since I like to have individuals try to maintain an AA/EPA ratio of less than 3, all of these groups could be considered to be inflamed.

Not surprisingly, when you look at either EPA or AA levels separately in each group, they are identical. It’s only when you look at the DHA levels, do you see a small difference statistically, but it’s meaningless clinically. There was a 2.5 percent increase in the DHA levels in the high-aggressive group compared to the control group. In the paper, authors state their error in measuring DHA is ± 2.4 percent. Call me crazy, but I don’t see the big difference between the reported results and their error measurements. To further cloud the results, the authors also find that the levels of trans-fatty acids are lower in the aggressive prostate cancer patients than the controls. So I guess if you wanted to take their data at face value, DHA makes prostate cancer more aggressive and trans-fatty acids found in junk foods make prostate cancer less aggressive.

I believe this is simply a case of over-interpretation of massive amounts of collected data. If you get enough data points, you can always make some type of correlation, but that’s all it is. At some point you also have to allow common sense to enter the final analysis.

Nonetheless, let’s say their data might be correct. How could excess DHA increase the aggressiveness of any cancer? Well, it might decrease the levels of dihomo gamma linolenic acid (DGLA) as I have explained in many of my books (2-5). DGLA is the building block for a powerful group of anti-inflammatory eicosanoids, and its formation is inhibited by DHA. Depressing DGLA levels would reduce the body’s ability to hold back the inflammation that drives the tumor. Unfortunately, with all the data they accumulated, they forgot to publish the changes in the DGLA levels in the various groups. Oops.

So even if there were not any changes in the AA/EPA ratio between groups, a depression of DGLA levels in the aggressive prostate cancer group would easily explain the clinical observation. Unfortunately, that interpretation requires an extensive background in understanding eicosanoid biochemistry, which is not easily found in academic clinical-research centers.

This is not the first time that the potential benefits of DHA are in question. In the largest cardiovascular intervention study ever done, it was demonstrated that adding high levels of EPA to the diet of Japanese patients with high cholesterol levels (who already with a very low AA/EPA ratio of 1.6), dramatically decreased their likelihood of future cardiovascular events (6). This reduction was only correlated with increases in EPA levels as well as with a decrease in the AA/EPA ratio from an already low 1.6 to an even lower 0.8 (7). The levels of DHA in these patients had no significance for predicting future cardiovascular events.

Likewise other studies using DHA alone to treatment post-partum depression, improve neurological functioning of children or treating Alzheimer’s have also been found to be negative (8,9).

It’s not that DHA is bad, it just doesn’t do much to reduce cellular inflammation. DHA does a lot of other useful things, but reducing cellular inflammation in not one of them.

References

  1. Brasky TM, Till C, White E, Neuhouser ML, Song X, Goodman P, Thompson IM, King EB, Albanes D, and Kristal AR. “Serum phospholipid fatty acids and prostate cancer risk.” Amer J Epidem 173: doi 10:1093/aje/kwr9027 (2011)
  2. Sears, B. “The Zone.” Regan Books. New York, NY (1995)
  3. Sears, B. “The OmegaRx Zone.” Regan Books. New York, NY (2002)
  4. Sears, B. “The Anti-inflammation Zone.” Regan Books. New York, NY (2005)
  5. Sears, B. “Toxic Fat.” Thomas Nelson. Nashville, TN (2008)
  6. Matsuzaki M, Yokoyama M, Saito Y, Origasa H, Ishikawa Y, Oikawa S, Sasaki J, Hishida H, Itakura H, Kita T, Kitabatake A, Nakaya N, Sakata T, Shimada K, Shirato K, and Matsuzawa Y. “Incremental effects of eicosapentaenoic acid on cardiovascular events in statin-treated patients with coronary artery disease.” Circ J 73:1283-1290 (2009)
  7. Itakura H, Yokoyama M, Matsuzaki M, Saito Y, Origasa H, Ishikawa Y, Oikawa S, Sasaki J, Hishida H, Kita T, Kitabatake A, Nakaya N, Sakata T, Shimada K, Shirato K, and Matsuzawa Y. “Relationships between Plasma Fatty Acid Composition and Coronary Artery Disease.” J Atheroscler Thromb 18:99-107 (2011)
  8. Makrides M, Gibson RA, McPhee AJ, Yelland L, Quinlivan J, and Ryan P. “Effect of DHA supplementation during pregnancy on maternal depression and neurodevelopment of young children: a randomized controlled trial.” JAMA 304; 1675-1683 (2010)
  9. Quinn JF, Raman R, Thomas RG, Yurko-Mauro K, Nelson EB, Van Dyck C, Galvin JE, Emond J, Jack CR, Weiner M, Shinto L, and Aisen PS. “Docosahexaenoic acid supplementation and cognitive decline in Alzheimer disease: a randomized trial.” JAMA 304: 1903-1911 (2010)

Nothing contained in this blog is intended to be instructional for medial diagnosis or treatment. If you have a medical concern or issue, please consult your personal physician immediately.

Obesity starts in the womb

A new study from Harvard Medical School strongly suggests that childhood obesity begins in the mother’s womb (1). Specifically, the lower the EPA and DHA concentrations in either the mother’s diet or her umbilical cord attached to the fetus, the more likely the child will develop obesity by age 3.

It is well known from animal experiments that omega-6 fatty acids make the offspring fat, and omega-3 fatty acids make the offspring thin (2-4). This new study now confirms the same thing is happening in humans (1).

It has been demonstrated in animal models that it only takes three to four generations of a high omega-6 fatty acid intake to increase obesity in the offspring (5,6). I believe one of the driving forces for the increase in childhood obesity has been the dramatic increase in omega-6 fatty acids over the past 100 years (7). However, much of that omega-6 fatty acid increase has come from the massive increase in soybean oil consumption that started in the early 1970s. That 40-year period only represents about two generations of humans, which means it is quite likely there will be higher childhood obesity rates coming with the next generations as long as omega-6 fatty acid consumption stays elevated.

At the molecular level, the problem really starts when these excess omega-6 fatty acids are activated by ever-increasing insulin levels caused by refined carbohydrate consumption to create increased cellular inflammation. In my book “Toxic Fat“ I describe some of the political decisions and their metabolic consequences that have led to the epidemic increase of cellular inflammation that has resulted in the rapid deterioration of American health (8).

The bottom line is that this dramatic increase in omega-6 fatty acids in the diet of American mothers is causing trans-generation changes in our children due to fetal programming. This occurs in the womb and results in the final tuning of the genetic code of the fetus by changing the gene expression of the unborn child. This is called epigenetic programming and begins to explain why each succeeding generation of Americans is getting fatter and fatter (9).

Even more ominous warnings are animal studies that indicate the “reward” response (increased dopamine levels) induced by consuming junk food experienced by the mother can also be transferred to the next generation by fetal programming (10).

So what can you do about this growing genetic disaster? If you are contemplating having a child, then beginning to cut back on omega-6 fatty acids and eating more omega-3 fatty acids is a good starting point. The benefits include having a thinner and smarter child. If you already have children whose gene expression has already been altered by fetal programming, then you have to control their diet for a lifetime to prevent reverting to that altered gene expression. It’s not a pretty picture. Although you can’t escape the dietary consequences of fetal programming, you can minimize the damage by treating food as drug to manage increased cellular inflammation that is making us fatter, sicker and dumber.

References

  1. Donahue, SMA, Rifas-Shiman SL, Gold DR, Jouni ZE, Gillman MW, and Oken E. “Prenatal fatty acid status and child adiposity at age 3y.” Amer J Clin Nutr 93: 780-788 (2011)
  2. Gaillard D, Negrel R, Lagarde M and Ailhaud G. “Requirement and role of arachidonic acid in the differentiation of pre-adipose cells.” Biochem J 257: 389-397 (1989)
  3. Kim HK, Della-Fera M, Lin J, and Baile CA. “Docosahexaenoic acid inhibits adipocyte differentiation and induces apoptosis in 3T3-L1 pre-adipocytes.” J Nutr 136: 2965-2969 (2006)
  4. Massiera F, Saint-Marc P, Seydoux J, Murata T, Kobayashi T, Narumiya S, Guesnet P, Amri EZ, Negrel R, and Ailhaud G. “Arachidonic acid and prostacyclin signaling promote adipose tissue development: a human health concern?” J Lipid Res 44: 271-279 (2003)
  5. Blasbalg TL, Hibbeln JR, Ramsden CE, Majchrzak SF, and Rawlings RR. “Changes in consumption of omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids in the United States during the 20th century.” Am J Clin Nutr 93: 950-962 (2011)
  6. Hanbauer I, Rivero-Covelo I, Maloku E, Baca A, Hu Q, Hibbeln JR, and Davis JM. “The Decrease of n-3 Fatty Acid Energy Percentage in an Equicaloric Diet Fed to B6C3Fe Mice for Three Generations Elicits Obesity.” Cardiovasc Psychiatry Neurol: 2009, Article ID.867041 (2009)
  7. Massiera F, Barbry P, Guesnet P, Joly A, Luquet S, Moreilhon-Brest C, Mohsen-Kanson T, Amri EZ, and Ailhaud G. “A Western-like fat diet is sufficient to induce a gradual enhancement in fat mass over generations.” J Lipid Res 51: 2352-2361 (2010)
  8. Sears B. “Toxic Fat.” Thomas Nelson. Nashville, TN (2008)
  9. Godfrey KM, Sheppard A, Gluckman PD, Lillycrop KA, Burdge GC, McLean C, Rodford J, Slater-Jefferies J, Garratt E, Crozier SR, Emerald BS, Gale CR, Inskip HM, Cooper C, and Hanson MA. “Epigenetic gene promoter methylation at birth is associated with child’s later adiposity.” Diabetes 60: 1528-1534 (2011)
  10. Ong ZY and Muhlhausler BS. “Maternal “junk-food” feeding of rat dams alters food choices and development of the mesolimbic reward pathway in the offspring.” FASEB J 25: S1530-6860 (2011)

Nothing contained in this blog is intended to be instructional for medial diagnosis or treatment. If you have a medical concern or issue, please consult your personal physician immediately.

Fetal programming: Gene transformation gone wild (Part II)

In part 1 of this blog, I discussed how dietary changes can alter gene expression and how those epigenetic changes can be mediated from one generation to the next by fetal programming. This is very clear from animal studies. One of the most frightening studies was published a few years ago (1). In this study, genetically identical mice were split into two colonies. For the next three generations they were fed exactly the same number of calories with exactly the same balance of protein, carbohydrate, and fat. The only difference was that one group had a diet rich in omega-6 fatty acids and low in omega-3 fatty acids, and the other had a better balance of omega-3 to omega-6 fatty acids. After three generations the mice fed the high omega-6 fatty acid diet were grossly obese.

In addition, the mice with high omega-6 fatty acids had fatty livers and enlarged hearts and kidneys, all indicative of major metabolic disturbances.

This also happens with the brain. It has been demonstrated that removing omega-3 fatty acids and replacing them with omega-6 fatty acids over three generations makes animals a lot dumber, probably due to significant reductions in neurotransmitters, like serotonin and dopamine (2-5). Not only are they dumber, but their offspring also show a strong preference for junk food. (6)

How could this happen in such a short period of time? The answer is fetal programming induced by increased cellular inflammation. If this cellular inflammation is maintained by an inflammatory diet, there will be a constant driving force to maintain these epigenetic effects from one generation to other.

The next question is how long does this epigenetic programming have to be continued until it becomes a permanent part of the gene structure. One indication might be found in the development of lactose intolerance in those populations who have been exposed to dairy products for thousands of years. Seventy percent of the world’s population can’t digest these dietary products because they have lost the ability to maintain the necessary enzyme production after weaning from mother’s breast milk. Those who have been constantly exposed to dairy products after weaning have developed an epigenetic programming that seems to be permanent.

These epigenetic changes in humans may take place in only one generation. This is the suggestion of a new article to be published in Diabetes that indicates more than 25 percent of the explanation for childhood obesity could be predicted by prenatal epigenetic changes at birth (7).

As long as our epidemic of cellular inflammation continues to be fueled by the Perfect Nutrition Storm, we can expect our children to continue to become fatter, sicker, and dumber (8).

References

  1. Hanbauer I, Rivero-Covelo I, Maloku E, Baca A, Hu Q, Hibbeln JR, and Davis JM. “The Decrease of n-3 Fatty Acid Energy Percentage in an Equicaloric Diet Fed to B6C3Fe Mice for Three Generations Elicits Obesity.” Cardiovasc Psychiatry Neurol: 2009, Article ID.867041 (2009)
  2. Chalon S, Delion-Vancassel S, Belzung C,,Guilloteau D, Leguisquet AM, Besnard JC, and Durand G. “Dietary fish oil affects monoaminergic neurotransmission and behavior in rats.” J Nutr 128: 2512-2519 (1998)
  3. Zimmer L, Delpal S, Guilloteau D, Aioun J, Durand G, and Chalon S. “Chronic n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid deficiency alters dopamine vesicle density in the rat frontal cortex.” Neurosci Lett 284: 25-28 (2000)
  4. Moriguchi T, Greiner RS, and Salem N. “Behavioral deficits associated with dietary induction of decreased brain docosahexaenoic acid concentration.” J Neurochem 75: 2563-2573 (2000)
  5. Chalon S. “Omega-3 fatty acids and monoamine neurotransmission.” Prostaglandins Leukot Essent Fatty Acids 75: 259-269 (2006)
  6. Ong ZY and Muhlhausler BS. “Maternal “junk-food” feeding of rat dams alters food choices and development of the mesolimbic reward pathway in the offspring.” FASEB J 25: S1530-6860 (2011)
  7. Godfrey KM, Sheppard A, Gluckman PD, Lillycrop KA, Burdge GC, McLean C, Rodford J, Slater-Jefferies J, Garratt E, Crozier SR, Emerald BS, Gale CR, Inskip HM, Cooper C, and Hanson MA. “Epigenetic gene promoter methylation at birth is associated with child’s later adiposity.” Diabetes 60: doi: 10.2337/db10-0979 (2011)
  8. Godfrey KM, Lillycrop KA, Burdge GC, Gluckman PD, and Hanson MA. “Epigenetic mechanisms and the mismatch concept of the developmental origins of health and disease.” Pediatr Res 61: 5R-10R (2007)

Nothing contained in this blog is intended to be instructional for medial diagnosis or treatment. If you have a medical concern or issue, please consult your personal physician immediately.

Fetal programming: Gene transformation gone wild (Part I)

Normally genes change very slowly through mutation. Most mutations are harmful and hence provide no survival advantage to the organism. This is why there is a less than a 2 percent difference between our genes and those of a chimpanzee, even though we became a separate species more than six million years ago. What distinguishes mankind is not the number of genes (corn has twice as many genes as humans), but the speed at which our genes can be turned on and off. This is because of the presence of gene transcription factors that can be activated or inhibited by nutrients. The effect of nutrients on gene expression is known as nutrigenomics.

Because of mankind’s rapid gene switching abilities, gene expression can be influenced significantly by the diet. Due to the speed at which new food ingredients are being introduced into the human diet, these types of nutrigenomic interactions can create radical changes in gene expression in a very short period of time. Normally what a person eats should only affect their gene expression during their lifetime. But is it possible that these changes in genetic expression can be transferred to the next generation?

We can see how genetic engineering (i.e. cross-breeding) can rapidly change the size and shape of dogs, flowers, vegetables and fruits. The genes in each of these species don’t change, but changes in gene expression induced by crossbreeding can persist from one generation to the next, especially if they are constantly reinforced. This is known as epigenetics.

Somehow we don’t think this type of epigenetic change can happen to us, but it does as a result of fetal programming. The prenatal period in the womb is the time that a child’s genes are most susceptible to epigenetic programming. Epigenetic programming can be amplified by the ongoing dietary effects on gene transcription factors (i.e. nutrigenomics) taking place in the mother. The result is the imprinting of epigenetic changes on the genes of the developing fetus that can alter the metabolic future of the child (1).

Examples of how this type of epigenetic programming influences future metabolic effects has been demonstrated under the conditions of famine, which generate increased obesity and cardiovascular disease in the next generation (2). This is also true of children who were exposed to excess calories or elevated levels of glucose while they were developing in the womb (3,4). Likewise hypertension (i.e. pre-eclampsia) during pregnancy increases the risk of stroke as adults if the fetus is exposed to the high blood pressure in the womb (5) as well as the increased risk of adult obesity if the fetus is exposed to gestational diabetes in the mother (6).

Bottom line: The dietary and metabolic environment the fetus is exposed to in the womb can echo through the rest of his or her life. In part II of this blog, I will explore how the Perfect Nutritional Storm, described in my book “Toxic Fat” (7) has been making Americans fatter, sicker and dumber for the last three generations.

References

  1. Kussman M, Krause L, and Siffert W. “Nutrigenomics: where are we with genetic and epigenic markers for disposition and susceptibility?” Nutrition Rev 68: S38-S47 (2010)
  2. Painter RC, Roseboom TJ, and Bleker OP. “Prenatal exposure to the Dutch famine and disease in later life.” Reprod Toxicol 20: 345-352 (2005)
  3. Singhal A. “Early nutrition and long-term cardiovascular health.” Nutrition Rev 64: S44-S49 (2006)
  4. Boney CM, Verma A, Tucker R, and Bovh BR. “Metabolic syndrome in childhood: associated with birth weight, maternal obesity, and gestational diabetes mellitus.” Pediatrics 115: e290-e296 (2005)
  5. Kajantie E, Eriksson JG, Osmond C, Thornburg K, and Barker DJP. “Pre-eclampsia is associated with increased risk of stroke in the adult offspring.” Stroke 40: 1176-1180 (2009)
  6. Lawlor DA, Pichtenstein P, and Langstrom N. “Association of maternal diabetes mellitus in pregnancy with offspring adiposity into early adulthood.” Circulation 123: 258-265 (2011)
  7. Sears B. “Toxic Fat.” Thomas Nelson. Nashville, TN (2008)

Nothing contained in this blog is intended to be instructional for medial diagnosis or treatment. If you have a medical concern or issue, please consult your personal physician immediately.

A new obesity suspect

The number of overweight and obese has been remarkably stable for the past several years at about two-thirds of the adult population. This strongly suggests that these Americans are genetically prone to gain weight under the right dietary circumstances. Yet a greater number of adults are moving from a classification of being simply overweight to being labeled as obese. This is a strong indication that those who are genetically predisposed to weight gain are becoming fatter. According to the Centers for Disease Control, only three states in 2007 had more than 30 percent of the adult population classified as obese. In only two years, the number of states that have more than 30 percent obesity in adult populations had increased to nine. That’s a 300 percent increase in two years!

One new suspect in our growing obesity crisis may be caffeinated coffee. It has been known for a long time that a high-fat meal increases blood sugar as well as maintains high levels of triglycerides (1). A new study from the University of Guelph found that consuming a high-fat meal increased blood sugar by more than 30 percent when giving a standard glucose tolerance test five hours later (2). Adding the equivalent of two cups of coffee more than doubled this increase in blood-sugar levels five hours after a high-fat meal.

The implication is that a constant diet of high-fat foods and a lot of coffee will accelerate the development of insulin resistance. When this occurs, the pancreas is forced to release more insulin to help reduce blood sugar levels. Unfortunately, it is excess insulin that makes you fat and keeps you fat.

The controversy over caffeine has continued for more than 100 years. The first instance occurred in a trial in the early part of the 20th century at which the U.S. government sued Coca-Cola for adulterating a food by adding caffeine to a soft drink. (Fortunately for Coca-Cola, the company had removed the coca extracts containing cocaine several years earlier). In a trial similar to the Scopes trial on evolution that would be held 15 years later in the same court system, the testimony was highly charged on both sides. The local judge dismissed the case, but the government continued it for many years in various appeals courts until the case was settled with a no-contest plea (3).

Now a new call for limits on caffeine was presented in a recent article in the Journal of the American Medical Association (4). Maybe with more research we will find that caffeine may be another factor for those who are genetically predisposed to gain weight to become fatter than ever.

References:

  1. Tushuizen ME, Nieuwland R, Scheffer PG, Sturk A, Heine RJ, and Diamant M. “Two consecutive high-fat meals affect endothelial-dependent vasodilation, oxidative stress and cellular microparticles in healthy men.” J Thromb Haemost 4: 1003-1010 (2006)
  2. Beaudoin MS, Robinson LE, and Graham TE. “An oral lipid challenge and acute intake of caffeinated coffee additively decrease glucose tolerance in healthy men.” J Nutrition 141: 574-581 (2011)
  3. Carpenter M. “A century later, jury’s still out on caffeine limits.” New York Times. March 28, 2011
  4. Arria A and O’Brien MC. “The ‘high’ risk of energy drinks.” JAMA 305: 600-601 (2011)

Nothing contained in this blog is intended to be instructional for medial diagnosis or treatment. If you have a medical concern or issue, please consult your personal physician immediately.

New food trends may be dysfunctional

dysfunctional food trendsAs our obesity epidemic gets worse and the general health of Americans continues to decline, people are always searching for new food trends to make us thinner, happier and smarter.

The leading contenders for the next new thing are functional foods. Frankly, these are simply processed foods with added dietary supplements to make you more likely to purchase them compared to the competition on the same shelf. Of course, this means the functional food can’t be too much more expensive than its competitor (and ideally the same price) without affecting the taste of the product. As an afterthought, it might even have some health benefit for you.

Frankly, there are only two functional foods that have been truly successful over the years. The first is Gatorade. Originally developed to reduce minerals lost during exercise, the original Gatorade tasted terrible. So they simply added some sugar to make it taste better and called it a sports drink. Gatorade is basically a Coke or a Pepsi with minerals, but you feel better about yourself when you guzzle down those carbohydrates. The other commercial success was Tropicana Orange Juice with Calcium. The makers of Tropicana didn’t ask you to pay a premium for this functional food since it was exactly the same price as Tropicana Orange Juice without calcium. That’s why the sales of this functional food dramatically increased. Who doesn’t want something extra (and it might even be healthy) for free?

It’s been a long time since any new functional foods tried to break into the market. The two most recent have been POM and Activia yogurt. POM contains polyphenols from the pomegranate seed. That’s good because polyphenols are excellent anti-oxidants and potentially good anti-inflammatory chemicals. But like the minerals in Gatorade, they taste terrible. So when you purchase a bottle of POM, what you are getting is a mass of added sugar. I guarantee you that the intake of these polyphenols in POM is not worth the extra sugar.

Another “new” source of polyphenols we hear about comes from chocolate, which is now being promoted as the new super-fruit (1). Like all polyphenols, the polyphenols found in chocolate are intensely bitter. That’s why no one likes to eat unsweetened Baker’s Chocolate even though it is polyphenol-rich. But if you add a lot of sugar to it, then it tastes great. In fact, it’s a candy bar. Again like most functional foods, these polyphenol functional foods represent one step forward in that you are consuming more polyphenols, but two steps backwards for consuming too much sugar.

Tasting bad is something that has really prevented yogurt sales from taking off in America. The solution was simple. Add more sweetness, usually in the form of fruit plus extra sugar. Finally, natural yogurt became acceptable. But to turn it into a functional food, Dannon decided to add more probiotics to its already sugar-sweetened yogurt and call it Activia, promoting it to help soothe an angry digestive system. In December 2010 the Federal Trade Commission stepped in and hit Dannon with a $21-million fine for false advertising (2). Not only were the levels of probiotics in Activia too low to be of any health benefit, but Dannon was also making drug-claims on a food to boot. Not surprisingly, the FTC is also after POM for similar misleading claims (3). Darned those regulators. They take all the fun out of marketing functional foods.

The list goes on and on. Whether it is vitamin waters, or micro-encapsulated fish oil, vitamin D, etc., trying to put bad-tasting nutritional supplements that have some proven benefits into foods and charge the consumer a higher price is never going to work. To prevent the poor taste, you have to microencapsulate the supplement to make it sound high-tech, (they call it nanotechnology) and this costs a lot of money. Adding the bad-tasting nutritional supplement without the microencapsulation to a food makes it taste worse (unless you are adding a lot of sugar at the same time, of course eroding all the potential health benefits of the supplement). Finally, the consumer will only buy this new functional food if it is the same price as what they usually purchase.

So what’s the next new thing in functional foods? In my opinion, it is returning to the concept of cooking for yourself in your own kitchen using food ingredients you buy on the periphery of the supermarket, and then taking the nutritional supplements that have proven efficacy (like fish oil and polyphenols) at the therapeutic level to produce real health benefits. Now you have real functional foods that finally work at a lower cost than you would pay for in the supermarket.

Now, that’s a radical new food trend that just might work.

References

1. Crozier SJ, Preston AG, Hurst JW, Payne MJ, Mann J, Hainly L, and Miller DL. “Cacao seeds are a ‘super fruit’: A comparative analysis of various fruit powders and products.” Chem Central J 5:5 (2011)

2. Horovitz B. “Dannon’s Activia, DanActive health claims draw $21M fine.” USA Today. December 15, 2010

3. Wyatt E. “Regulators Call Health Claims in Pom Juice Ads Deceptive.” New York Times. September 27, 2010

Nothing contained in this blog is intended to be instructional for medial diagnosis or treatment. If you have a medical concern or issue, please consult your personal physician immediately.