Booty Woes

I feel a little naughty posting a paparazzi pic of Jennifer Lopez. But when I think of asses, I think of this one. What a fine ass it is. Perhaps the bearer of this fine behind will forgive me for capitalizing on this topic by sharing a pic of her's with my 3.5 readers, since I hold it in such high regard, and since, of course, it does a great job of illustrating the problem.

Why am I thinking of asses? Apart from the power they have to lure me away from more pertinent issues, like whether to take probiotic supplements on an empty stomach or with food? Especially when a particularly bouncy one swings by clad in snug low-riders?

Well, it's been brought to my attention that medical supply manufacturers have been lax at keeping abreast of people's behinds. I wouldn't think butt size should be cause for concern. But results of a study fresh out of Ireland¹ have documented the inability of standard-sized hypodermic needles to penetrate the layers of adipose that Americans (well, actually, Irish) have surreptitiously packed on over the years. And ineffective penetration means insufficient drug delivery.

In the words of lead author Dr. Victoria O. Chan:

"The amount of fat tissue overlying the muscles exceeds the length of the needles commonly used for these injections."

Disturbingly, in 23 of the 25 women in Dr. Chan's study, the needle failed to reach the buttock muscle underneath the fat. Men fared better with a 56% success rate. Although neither of these statistics supports the continuation of this practice.

Needles tested were 3 cm long, a little more than an inch. I opt for longer needles.² Some rally around butt reduction. But I feel my choice is more pragmatic. It's easier to lengthen the shaft of a needle than, as Americans can attest, to reduce the size of the caboose.

~~~~~~¹ Presented Monday, November 28, at the annual meeting of the Radiological Society of North America. Here's their press release: Obesity Prevents Injections from Reaching Muscle
² In all fairness, the size of Jennifer Lopez's buttocks would probably not necessitate a longer needle. I'll leave it to your imagination to envision a butt that would.

Americans Eat 221 Pounds of Meat a Year

I can account for at least 2 of those 221 pounds during the last few turkey-drenched days alone.

Here's a read that could whittle that down to 0 pounds/yr. It's almost enough to make me wish I was an herbivore:

10 Things Your Butcher* Won't Tell You

* Are there any of these left in America?

Later that day...

Oh, for crying out loud. Herbivore aspirations be damned. Given the following, my body probably contains enough pesticide residue to repel a swarm of locusts. I may as well give up food entirely:

Organic Doesn't Mean Free of Pesticides

Take a Walk, 12

Last horrah. Leaves up. Twelve hours and 6 minutes.
~~~~~~Photo: Homegrown

Google Book Search

This is a dream come true. Not only searchable, but in the original format. Research has just been dealt another step forward. Thank you, Google, from all the chambers of my heart:



(I recognize the controversy. But at least in my case, this will probably increase my consumption of books, not the other way around.)

Snake Oil, Twice Daily or As Needed

What good is research if it doesn't get distilled into something that can ease the burdens of humankind?

All around me people are falling ill. Why? Don't we know more about health and the human body than any generation before us? Isn't our medical gadgetry the most advanced in the world? Haven't we spent more on prescription drugs in one year (2004: $235 billion) than we do on imported oil (2004: $170 billion)?

I've known some smart, sound, scientific minds in my time. Minds that've spent hours sifting through studies that purport possible associations (omega 3 for arthritis) and downright cures (folic acid for spina bifida). Minds that teach and advise and spread the word of virtuous vigor. Oh yes. Yet when no one's looking, (some of) the bodies attached to those minds hightail it to the backroom to scarf down pizza and Pepsi, then cut out to the vestibule for a smoke.

It's enough to make this grown woman trade in her Brussels sprouts for Krispy Kremes.

Who here finds it difficult to swallow health advice from a health practitioner who has obviously swallowed one too many portions of backroom fare? Whose ruddy complexion leaves you with the image of a barroom, not a barbell room?

"Well, Mrs. Gelibelli, looks like you're going to have to lose a few pounds if you want to live to make fattigmands with the grandkids."

"I beg your pardon?"

"That is to say, it's time to catapult the crème brulée."

"I see. Has that worked for you?"

"We're not talking about me right now, Mrs. Gelibelli."

"Well, I'm just wondering what I should do to lose weight, and what tips you could offer, being as you also seem challenged by that prospect."

"Ha Ha. Well, here's an 1200 calorie diet. Why don't you try this and come see me in a few months and we'll check your labs again."

"1200 calories? There's no way!"

"Tut-tut, Mrs. Gelibelli. There's a lot of great food in this diet. Look .... See? Rice cakes! You can't go wrong with cakes. And I'm told the turnip-quinoa sunloaf is spectacular."

"Right. Thanks, Dr. Duzintwash. I'll see you in March."

"... And don't forget ... Eat your veggies!"

Tell me, at what point does knowledge change behavior?

We may as well just rub on some of The Great Yaquis' Rattlesnake Oil.

Take a Walk, 11

Feeling small. Six minutes.
~~~~~~Photo: Homegrown

Resistant Starch

You can't work at a diabetes center and not be privy to all the significant or not-so-significant, probable or possible, inherited or what-I-had-for-breakfast causes for a person's blood glucose (BG) to rise and fall.

Here's a minor player: resistant starch (RS). Rather, it used to be a minor player, but it's slowly muscling its way into the line-up of sound dietary therapies - not just for people with diabetes.

What is RS?
RS is similar to fiber, in that it's a carbohydrate that doesn't get digested. But its many forms aren't technically (structurally) like fiber, so its inclusion in the "Dietary Fiber" call-out on a Nutrition Facts label isn't a sure thing. (e.g. A raw potato has a lot of RS. Cook it and that RS becomes digestible. Let it cool and gelatinize and the starch becomes resistant again.)

RS can hamper spikes in BG that occur right after eating, an advantage for those with diabetes or at risk for it. This happens because much of the starch fails to get disassembled into its elementary glucose units, so it doesn't get absorbed, so it doesn't add to the gob of glucose entering the bloodstream after a meal. It may also slow the emptying of food from the stomach. The overall effect is minimal though, and difficult to measure since there are various types of RS, and individuals respond differently to them. Atkins products take advantage of this mechanism by formulating some of their prepackaged foods with RS, giving them a low "net-carb" rating (a rating soon to be discontinued).

That was the easily understood advantage. The advantages coming to light have less straightforward mechanisms.

New Advantage 1.
RS can improve insulin sensitivity.¹

This is distinct from the process described above. When cells are sensitive to insulin, they easily take up glucose from the bloodstream. Conversely, when cells are less sensitive to insulin (insulin resistant), they take up less glucose from the bloodstream. Insulin resistance is a precursor to diabetes.

In this study, researchers gave participants 30g RS/day. Insulin sensitivity improved by 33%.

The mechanism is thought to be via the action of products (short-chain fatty acids: SCFAs) of bacteria in the colon - bacteria that get to eat all the starch that you didn't.

New Advantage 2.
RS can stimulate the breakdown of fat (fat oxidation), decreasing fat buildup over time.²

In this study, researchers replaced varying amounts of the carbohydrate in a meal with RS. At the 5.4% replacement level*, fat oxidation increased by up to 23% when compared with no RS. And the fat burn continued for at least 24 hours. Curiously, more or less than 5.4% RS was not necessarily better. A 10.7 % replacement saw fat oxidation plummet to levels indistinguishable from that seen with 0% RS.

The mechanism, as above, is thought to be via the action of SCFAs produced by bacteria in the colon. One explanation for why higher doses of RS don't provide as much benefit is that fewer of these bacterial byproducts are made, since RS speeds transit time (of waste in colon) and literally dumps the RS before colonic bacteria can do their business.

* A 5.4% replacement works out to roughly 15g RS/day for a 2000 calorie meal plan.

These advantages put yet another damper on losing weight the high-protein way. There are a few other benefits to RS that I won't belabor this post with, benefits I suspect researchers are working furiously to document so they can patent their RS supplements and food formulations.

Food Sources
RS is found naturally in foods. A typical American diet provides from 5 to 10g/day. You can purchase an RS supplement, usually made form corn, if you want to boost that amount. Or you can go the natural route. Legumes³ are the best source. Cooled, cooked potatoes are a close second. Green bananas for the hardcore.

By the way, when study authors say that RS treatment is "well tolerated", I imagine their tongues stuck to their cheeks. There's no way a human can dump oodles of bacteria-food into his colon and not manufacture copious amounts of carbon dioxide, hydrogen, and methane gas. Just no way. (Ok, some people make more than others.) So if you want to try an RS supplement, and you don't know how much to take, let your flatus be your guide.

~~~~~~¹ Insulin-sensitizing Effects of Dietary Resistant Starch and Effects on Skeletal Muscle and Adipose Tissue Metabolism
² Resistant Starch Consumption Promotes Lipid Oxidation
³ Beans, Peas & Lentils poster (shown) available via art.com

Take a Walk, 10

Out to the hammock and back. Six minutes.
~~~~~~Photo: Homegrown

Chicken Farming in Asia

Last week I posted a photo of chicken farming in Russia.

Here's one I found from China:

"At a market in Shanghai, workers sleep with their chickens. Scientists believe Asia is Ground Zero."
- Photo and caption: October 31, 2005 Newsweek

That Organic Label

Speaking of that organic label, below is a brief description¹ of what it represents. Note that it never meant the food was 100% organic:

USDA ORGANIC - This new government seal, unveiled in October 2002 by the United States Department of Agriculture, identifies food that is either organically grown or made from organic ingredients. Foods labeled as "organic" contain at least 95% organically produced ingredients. A "made with organic" label means that the product contains at least 70% organic ingredients. Products that contain fewer than 70% organic ingredients cannot bear the USDA Organic seal or display the word "organic" on the front of the package.

~~~~~~¹ From the Union of Concerned Scientists

"People Trust That Organic Label"

I didn't support his presidential bid, but this speech he gave to the US House of Representatives on Monday gets me pumped up.

Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) is a Representative from the Cleveland area. Here are some excerpts from his speech:

"Section 79 [of the 2006 Agriculture Appropriations Bill] undermines the organic food industry by changing the definition of organic food without a congressional hearing, without agreement by the National Organic Standards Board, and without consumer consent.

All across America when people go shopping, there are millions of Americans who are looking for the organic label. Why? Because it is considered to be a label that is indicative of greater integrity in food, food which is not likely to be poisoned with pesticides, food which is carefully grown by organic farmers, food which is healthier. People trust that organic label.

But Americans should know that this bill has changed the organic food law and that big food companies have prodded Congress to change the organic food law and that this would allow the use of several synthetic ingredients in organic products and potentially weaken the organic dairy standards."

~~~~~~You can read his entire speech here:
Congressman Dennis Kucinich Speaks out Against Sneak Attack on Organic Standards

Take a Walk, 9

Stop?
Not yet. Six minutes.
~~~~~~Photo: Homegrown

Fleshy Part of the Human Body That Is Sat Upon

Dear members of Congress, particularly those of you who voted yea to HR2744 (the bill that will weaken organic standards), I hope you had a Happy Halloween.

~~~~~~Photo by KIPlog.

Take a Walk, 8

Six minutes?
~~~~~~Photo: Penn State's The Daily Collegian