Healthy Eating and Diet Trends

Many consumers adopt a keto diet in an effort to burn more fat and help them lose weight. However, researchers from Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory found that this low-carb-centered diet may also be effective at slowing the progression of cancer. 

On the keto diet, you not only cut out carbohydrates but increase fat consumption to help your body produce more energy.

Though early trials have found that keto diets are likely to be associated with cachexia, a disease common in cancer patients that gradually breaks down all of the body’s processes, more recent research has found a way around this deadly side effect. 

In a trial conducted on mice, experts found that a keto diet coupled with a corticosteroid had two-fold benefits: it prevented cachexia and it slowed the progression of the mice’s cancer and ultimately helped them live longer. 

“Cancer is a whole-body disease,” said researcher Miriam Ferrer. “It reprograms normal biological processes to help it grow. Because of this reprogramming, mice can’t use the nutrients from a keto diet, and waste away. But with the steroid, they did much better. They lived longer than with any other treatment we tried.” 

Slowing tumor growth

Earlier research has found that following a keto diet can be beneficial for cancer, as the high-fat and low-carb-centric meals ultimately deprive cancer cells of the compounds they need to survive and multiply. However, with this trial, and moving forward, the researchers’ primary goal was figuring out how to prevent the onset of cachexia and also slow the progression of cancer, while also maintaining a keto diet.

They explained that the hormone corticosterone is what allows the body to process the benefits of a keto diet; however, for those with cancer, it’s difficult for the body to naturally produce corticosterone. 

This led to their latest treatment trial: the keto diet and a corticosteroid. The combination did exactly what the researchers hoped – it boosted the mice’s corticosterone levels, slowed the cancer progression, and prevented cachexia. 

The plan now for the researchers is to further finetune this approach to have even greater success with the combined corticosteroid and keto diet treatment. 

“We want to push back against cancer even harder, so it grows slower still,” said researcher and Assistant Professor Tobias Janowitz. “If we can broaden this effect, make the treatment more efficient, we can ultimately benefit patients and improve cancer therapeutics.” 

We all know that what we eat and drink can have significant impacts on our heart health. While alcohol has been proven to come with heart health risks, things like potassium or eggs have been found to come with heart health benefits. 

Now, researchers from the University of Barcelona have found that peanuts may be the next thing consumers – especially young adults – may want to consume to improve their heart health. A new study found that eating peanuts and peanut butter was linked with better heart health outcomes, including overall vascular health, inflammation, and atherosclerosis. 

“The bottom line finding is that peanuts can play an important role in promoting heart health by preventing atherosclerosis, reducing inflammation, and improving vascular health,” said Dr. Samara Sterling, research director for The Peanut Institute. “It’s encouraging because this is the first study of its kind to show this kind of protection in young people simply by eating peanuts.” 

One serving of peanuts can make a difference

The study included 65 healthy adults between the ages of 18 and 33. The participants were divided into three groups. Over the course of six months, the groups either added 32 grams of peanut butter to their diets every day, 25 grams of skin-roasted peanuts, or 32 grams of butter. 

All three options equated to adding one serving of peanuts/peanut butter to their regular diets. For peanut butter, this is about two tablespoons, and for regular peanuts, this is equivalent to about a handful. 

At the end of the six months, the researchers looked to see whether specific biomarkers that are linked with different types of heart disease were affected by the increase in peanuts and peanut butter. Ultimately, the food was found to be effective at boosting heart health outcomes, and it serves as a frugal way for young adults to improve their heart health now and into the future. 

“There’s an urgent need to focus cardiovascular disease education and prevention efforts on young adults,” Sterling said. “The increases in high blood pressure and obesity are impacting the hearts of young people and leading to serious conditions that are usually seen in those who are decades older.” 

Salt lovers might not like this news, but the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) wants to give food producers the permission to use salt substitutes instead of the real thing. The agency is heralding this move as a way for us all to improve nutrition and reduce the possibility of disease.

The proposed rule – "Use of Salt Substitutes to Reduce the Sodium Content in Standardized Foods” – is part of the Biden administration's strategy on hunger, nutrition, and health designed to end hunger and reduce diet-related diseases by 2030. The FDA is standing firmly behind its decision, too.

"Most people in the U.S. consume too much sodium. The majority of sodium consumed comes from processed, packaged and prepared foods, not from salt people add to their food when cooking or eating," said Susan Mayne, Ph.D., director of the FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. 

How much is too much? If you consider yourself an “average” consumer, FDA statistics say that you consume an average of 3,400 mg of sodium per day — 47% more than the 2,300 mg currently recommended.

"This effort, combined with the FDA's voluntary sodium reduction targets, is part of the agency's overall nutrition strategy to create a healthier food supply, provide consumers with information to choose healthier foods and improve the health and wellness of our nation," Mayne said.

What changes consumers will see

To make things perfectly clear, this rule would not force manufacturers to reformulate items but merely gives them the flexibility to change the formula on products that have salt or brine listed in their standards of identity (SOI). 

If the FDA’s wish gets granted, the short-term target will apply to 160-plus categories of packaged and restaurant-prepared food. These short-term targets are based on a reduction of average sodium intake from current levels of 3,400 mg/day to 3,000 mg/day, and they serve as initial benchmarks for a broad and gradual reduction of sodium in the food supply.

Here’s a partial list of those products the FDA shared in its proposed rule:

• Acidified milk and cultured milk

• Acidified and regular sour cream 

• Bread, rolls, and buns

• Cane, table, maple, and sorghum syrup

• Canned products like applesauce, corn, figs, green beans, mushrooms, oysters, peas, Pacific salmon, tomatoes, tuna

• Eggnog 

• Frozen peas 

• Fruit butter like apple butter

• Ketchup

• Macaroni and noodle products 

• Margarine 

• Mayonnaise 

• Milk chocolate, sweet chocolate, white chocolate, and breakfast cocoa

• Salad dressing 

• Self-rising flour and white cornmeal

• Tomato concentrates and tomato juice

Late last year, the Biden administration vowed to increase benefits from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) by 30% to help Americans who were struggling to afford healthy meals. Now, it looks like that move might have an even bigger impact than previously thought. 

Findings from a 14-year national study show that states with more generous SNAP policies and more participation have lower rates of children being involved in Child Protective Services (CPS) and being sent to foster care. 

"We knew that SNAP had an important role in alleviating food insecurity and hunger among children. Our findings suggest that investments in SNAP may be of even greater value to the health of children than we knew," said lead author Michelle Johnson-Motoyama. 

Win-win for families and states

The study results show that a 5% increase in the number of families receiving SNAP benefits was linked with between 7.6% and 14.3% fewer state CPS and foster care caseloads. Additional SNAP benefit generosity was also correlated with 352 fewer child maltreatment reports accepted for CPS investigation per 100,000 children.

“That’s a large reduction in potential child maltreatment. We were particularly surprised by how robust the findings were to other potential factors that could have explained these effects,” said Johnson-Motoyama. 

While the positive impact on families and children is paramount, the researchers say states that are more generous with SNAP benefits also stand to gain financially. 

“The costs of having children involved with CPS and placing them in foster care are tremendous,” Johnson-Motoyama stated. “Providing people with nutrition benefits is far less expensive and can save states quite a bit of money.”

These findings couldn't come at a more important time for the SNAP program because the federal COVID-19 emergency declaration that boosts its benefits is set to expire this month. That could lead to a lot of hardship for consumers who rely on the program.

“That could add a lot of stress to families with limited resources who rely on the program to help provide meals. Our study suggests that could harm children and increase the workload of CPS workers,” Johnson-Motoyama said.

A new study conducted by researchers from the University at Buffalo explored how consumers’ diet choices may affect their oral health. 

According to their findings, eating larger quantities of carbs and sugary foods was linked with a higher risk of periodontal disease among postmenoapusal women. 

“Limited research exists on carbohydrate intake and oral microbiome diversity and composition assessed with next-generation sequencing,” the researchers wrote. “We aimed to better understand the association between habitual carbohydrate intake and the oral microbiome, as the oral microbiome has been associated with caries, periodontal disease, and systemic diseases.” 

How diet affects oral health

For the study, the researchers analyzed data from over 1,200 postmenopausal women enrolled in the Women’s Health Initiative. Participants completed food questionnaires, which tracked the frequency with which they were eating carbs, starch, monosaccharides, disaccharides, and fiber. The team then tested plaque from underneath the gums to understand if the women’s diet choices affected their risk for gum infections. 

“We examined these bacteria in relation to usual carbohydrate consumption in postmenopausal women across a wide variety of carbohydrate types: total carbohydrate intake, fiber intake, disaccharide intake, to simple sugar intake,” said researcher Amy Millen, Ph.D.

Ultimately, the researchers observed a clear link between diet and oral health. They found that sugar intake was specifically linked with an increase in the Leptotrichia spp. bacteria, which may increase the risk for gingivitis. 

The team also learned that greater consumption of carbs and sucrose was associated with a higher risk of Streptococcus mutans. This bacteria may increase the risk of tooth decay and cardiovascular disease. 

Moving forward, the team plans to do more work in this area to better understand how these oral health risks may affect full body health. 

“As more studies are conducted looking at the oral microbiome using similar sequencing techniques and progression or development of periodontal disease over time, we might begin to make better inferences about how diet relates to the oral microbiome and periodontal disease,” Dr. Millen said. 

Getting kids to consistently make healthy choices can be difficult for many parents, and now a new study is showing that a child’s diet can have lasting impacts into adulthood. 

According to researchers from the University of California at Riverside, what kids eat during childhood can affect their health as they grow and develop. They learned consuming a lot of sugar or fat during childhood can affect gut health for years down the road. 

“We studied mice, but the effect we observed is equivalent to kids having a Western diet, high in fat and sugar and their gut microbiome still being affected up to six years after puberty,” said researcher Theodore Garland. 

Long-term effects on gut health

For the study, the researchers divided mice into four groups based on different diet and exercise routines. The mice were either fed a traditionally healthy or unhealthy diet, and some were given access to exercise while others had no option of physical activity. The mice kept these routines for three weeks before returning to their regular diet and exercise habits, and the researchers monitored the mice’s gut health for more than three months post-experiment. 

The researchers learned that both diet and exercise played a role in the mice’s gut health beyond the length of the experiment. When the gut is functioning properly, there is a mix of bacteria that all contribute to the body’s overall health and wellness; however, for the mice that were given the unhealthy diet in early life, there was very little diversity in the gut later on. 

While diet had the biggest impact on the mice’s gut health long-term, the researchers learned that exercise also played a role. The variety of bacteria found in the gut was greater when the mice exercised, but it was the greatest when mice both exercised and followed a healthy diet. 

These findings are important when thinking about healthy development. The researchers explained that the risk of disease increases when there is an imbalance of bacteria in the gut.

While many consumers try to increase their intake of fruits and vegetables to help improve health outcomes, a new study is focusing on the health benefits associated with eating dried fruits. 

According to researchers from Penn State, consuming more dried fruits is linked with better overall health and diet quality. However, many dried fruits contain high amounts of sugar, which means it’s important for consumers to carefully read labels and choose the healthiest options. 

“Dried fruit can be a great choice for a nutritious snack, but consumers might want to be sure they’re choosing unsweetened versions without adding sugar,” said researcher Valerie Sullivan. “Portion sizes can also be tricky, because a serving of dried fruit is smaller than a serving of fresh since the water has been taken out. But the positive is that dried fruit can help people potentially consume more fruit because it’s portable, it’s shelf-stable, and can even be cheaper.” 

Dried fruit can boost healthy habits

To understand the benefits associated with eating more dried fruit, the researchers analyzed over 25,000 responses to the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. The participants’ health vitals were taken at the start of the study, and they also reported on their diets within a 24-hour period. 

The biggest takeaway from the study was that higher dried fruit consumption was associated with healthier diets overall and better health outcomes. Participants who ate the most dried fruit had lower blood pressure and lower body mass indices (BMIs). However, the researchers also learned that eating more dried fruit was linked with eating more total calories throughout the day. To reap the most benefits from dried fruit, the researchers recommend that consumers pay more attention to the other foods they’re eating. 

“In our study, people who consumed dried fruits had a higher calorie intake but a lower BMI and waist circumference, which suggests they were more physically active,” said researcher Penny Kris-Etherton. “So, when incorporating dried fruits, pay attention to calories and be sure to substitute out calories from low-nutrient foods for dried fruits to get the greatest benefit of eating dried fruits.” 

The researchers also learned that dried fruit consumption affected the participants’ other food choices, both positively and negatively. 

“What I also found interesting was that people tended to eat more total fruit on the days they ate dried fruit than on the days they didn’t,” said Sullivan. “On days when dried fruit was not eaten, however, fresh fruit intake was not higher. So dried fruit could be a way to boost overall fruit intake in people that aren’t eating the recommended amounts.” 

More availability

While fresh fruits come in and out of season, dried fruits are always available to consumers. These findings confirm some of the health benefits associated with eating them, and the researchers encourage consumers to incorporate dried fruit into their diets. 

“Minimally processed forms of fruit, including frozen, canned, and dried, have some advantages over fresh fruits,” said researcher Kristina Petersen. “They are available year round, are relatively consistent in quality, and can be stored for far longer than fresh. Many are also less expensive per serving than their fresh counterparts.” 

While sugar tends to be the first thing consumers cut out when making healthier choices, recent studies have found that too much sugar can have a negative effect on consumers’ lifespans. 

Now, researchers from UT Southwestern Medical Center have found that diets high in sugar can be particularly detrimental to consumers with colitis. According to their findings, consuming large quantities of sugary foods can not only worsen colitis symptoms, but it can also lead to lasting gut damage. 

“Colitis is a major public health problem in the U.S. and in other countries,” said researcher Hasan Zaki, PhD. “This is very important from a public health point of view.” 

Choosing the right foods 

The researchers conducted their study on mice to better understand how sugary foods can affect colitis symptoms and overall gut health. The mice were either already diagnosed with colitis when the study began, or were induced with colitis via a drug, and were fed a diet with three different types of sugars -- glucose, sucrose, and fructose -- for one week. Additionally, the researchers analyzed their intestinal bacteria both before the sugar-heavy diet and after, to determine what long-term effects it could have on their gut health. 

At the end of the week, the researchers observed that the mice’s colitis symptoms had worsened since the start of the high-sugar diets. In terms of gut health, the study revealed that high sugar consumption changed the bacterial make-up of the mice’s guts, which can ultimately lead to inflammation in the intestines. 

The researchers also discovered that the mucus layer of the gut, which serves as a protective barrier, had thinned following the high-sugar diet, which can also leave the mice susceptible to gut damage. 

“The mucus layer protects intestinal mucosal tissue from infiltration of gut microbiota,” the researchers wrote. “Higher abundance of mucus-degrading bacteria, including Akkermansia muciniphila and Bacteroides fragilis, in glucose-treated mice is, therefore, a potential risk for the intestinal mucus barrier. 

“Due to the erosion of the mucus layer, gut bacteria were in close proximity with the epithelial layer of the large intestine in glucose-treated mice. Breaching of the epithelial layer is the key initiating event of intestinal inflammation,” the researchers noted. 

As more and more consumers are struggling with colitis -- including young people, the researchers hope that these findings highlight the critical role that diet plays in colitis symptoms and gut health. 

“Our study clearly shows that you really have to mind your food,” Dr. Zaki said. 

Recent studies have highlighted how eating more plant-based foods can have a significant impact on consumers’ health, improving both overall heart health and lowering the risk for heart disease. 

Now, a new study has found that consumers who include more plant proteins in their diets could lower their risk of death from all causes. 

“These findings have important public health implications as intake of plant protein can be increased relatively easily by replacing animal protein and could have a large effect on longevity,” the researchers wrote. 

Improving overall health

To understand how plant proteins can benefit consumers’ health, the researchers evaluated results from over 30 different studies. The analysis provided data on over 700,000 participants’ diet choices and followed up with health check-ins to assess for possible disease or death. 

The researchers learned that diet played a role in participants’ health and longevity. The study revealed that the risk of death was eight percent lower for those who consumed the highest levels of plant proteins. 

In looking at specific causes of death in relation to the participants’ diet choices, the researchers learned that higher consumption of plant proteins lowered the risk of cardiovascular-related deaths by 12 percent. This is important because several recent studies have shown how consumers’ diet choices can lower their risk of heart disease. 

Although this was an observational study and it’s impossible to say that plant protein intake has a direct link on disease and longevity, the researchers explained that the nutrients found in plant proteins have been linked with countless health benefits. Their results revealed that important health indicators, like cholesterol and blood pressure, were better when participants consumed more plant-based proteins. 

“Our findings therefore strongly support the existing dietary recommendations to increase consumption of plant proteins in the general population,” the researchers wrote. 

Though researchers have found that consumers are most likely to pass on foods high in sugar when trying to make healthy choices, a new study has explored the risks associated with high sugar intake. 

In a study conducted on fruit flies, the researchers learned that diets high in sugar can shorten life expectancy, but not because of obesity. Though metabolic issues are a concern, the researchers learned that too much sugar causes an increase in uric acid, which can lead to several other health issues. 

“Just like humans, flies fed a high-sugar diet show many hallmarks of metabolic disease -- for instance, they become fat and insulin resistant,” said researcher Dr. Helena Cochemé. “Obesity and diabetes are known to increase mortality in humans, and so people always assumed that this was how excess sugar is damaging for survival in flies.” 

Limiting sugar intake

The researchers conducted their study on fruit flies, keeping them on a high-sugar diet for the duration of the study. As Dr. Cochemé explained, the flies responded as expected to the excess sugar, though there were some interesting discoveries. 

They found that even though the flies had gained weight and were showing early signs of diabetes, they also started developing higher levels of uric acid. The researchers explained that a build-up of uric acid can increase the risk for kidney stones and gout, as the molecule is typically responsible for flushing out toxins in the body. 

Though that is certainly cause for concern, the study also revealed that having an adequate water supply helped the flies combat the uric acid build-up and boost their health overall. 

“Water is vital for our health, yet its importance is often overlooked in metabolic studies,” said Dr. Cochemé. “Therefore, we were surprised that flies fed a high-sugar diet did not show a reduced lifespan, simply by providing them with an extra source of water to drink. Unexpectedly, we found that these flies still exhibited the typical metabolic defects associated with high dietary sugar.” 

Even though water helped the flies, the researchers explained that they were still unhealthy because of the high sugar consumption; the results showcase how important it is for consumers to limit their sugar intake.

“There is substantial evidence that what we eat influences our life expectancy and our risk for age-related diseases. By focusing on the purine pathway, our group hopes to find new therapeutic targets and strategies that promote healthy ageing.” said Dr. Cochemé.

In recent years, avocados have become a more popular food choice for many consumers. But the results of a recent study may increase that enthusiasm even further.

Researchers from the University of Guelph found that the nutritional make-up of avocados can help consumers fight obesity and prevent diabetes. The team says their work could help consumers make changes to their diets to improve health outcomes.

How avocados do the work

The researchers conducted two complementary studies to see how good avocados were for consumers’ health. One was performed on mice and the other was conducted on humans. 

For the mice-led study, the researchers’ goal was to have the animals develop obesity and insulin resistance, as these conditions would test the effectiveness of the avocados with the most accuracy. Half of the mice were given avocatin B (AvoB) to supplement their diets, which is a fat compound found only in avocados, while the other half of the mice carried on solely with high-fat diets. AvoB was the prime component of the human-focused study as well, as the researchers had the human participants take an AvoB supplement in addition to their regular diets. 

According to the researchers, during obesity and diabetes, the body is unable to properly burn fatty acids when a person is obese or is combating diabetes. In previous studies, AvoB was found to improve these body functions that had been compromised. 

In both the mice and human studies, the researchers found that adding AvoB to their diets was beneficial in both reducing overall weight gain and increasing insulin sensitivity, which is crucial to preventing diabetes. 

The researchers do note that more research is needed in this area before they can start recommending that consumers wildly increase their avocado intake, but these findings do hold a lot of promise for future projects in this area. 

“We advocate healthy eating and exercise as solutions to the problem, but that’s difficult for some people” said researcher Nawaz Ahmed. “We’ve known this for decades, and obesity and diabetes are still a significant health problem.” 

As many consumers strive to make healthier choices, researchers from Tufts University Health Science Campus did a round-up of American adults’ diet habits between 1999 and 2016. 

In that time, the researchers learned that though there were many positive advances, there is still work to be done for many adults across the country. 

“Although there are some encouraging signs that the American diet improved slightly over time, we are still a long way from getting an ‘A’ on this report card,” said researcher Fang Fang Zhang. “Our study tells us where we need to improve for the future. These findings also highlight the need for interventions to reduce socioeconomic differences in diet quality so that all Americans can experience the health benefits of an improved diet.”

Understanding the highs and lows 

Using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), the researchers were able to collect and analyze responses from over 43,000 adults between 1999 and 2016. 

The researchers determined overarching themes in adults’ diet habits over this time and noted some disparities between consumers of different ages and from different socioeconomic backgrounds. 

While adults cut down their consumption of carbs overall -- including low-quality carbs -- those with higher incomes did so more successfully than those from lower-income households. The researchers say the former group reduced their low-quality carb intake by four percent, while the latter group saw a reduction of just two percent.

“Because low-quality carbs are associated with disease risk, taking in higher-quality carbs could mean better health for Americans in the future,” said researcher Zhilei Shan. 

Additionally, fat intake was a problem area for all consumers. Diets went up in total fat intake over the course of the study, with saturated fat, which is associated with any number of health concerns, accounting for more than the daily recommended percentage of calories. 

The researchers found that those below the poverty line, adults aged 50 and older, and those who didn’t have a high school degree saw no improvement in their diets in any way throughout the study, emphasizing the need, as Zhang recommended, for more widespread healthy-eating initiatives. 

Though it may be difficult for many consumers to avoid carbs -- especially around the holidays -- a new study conducted by researchers from Boston Children’s Hospital might help in the quest for healthier eating.

The researchers found that people who stuck to low carb diets not only burned more calories, but were more successful in maintaining weight loss. In the study, the researchers explain that following weight loss, the metabolism slows as the body begins to adjust, and oftentimes, the weight is put back on.

However, by examining the effect that diet had on the way the participants burned calories, the researchers discovered that maintaining a low-carb diet was key. The team is confident that the study’s results can help people struggling to lose weight.

Less carbs, more energy

The researchers, led by Cara Ebbeling and David Ludwig, were most interested in the way that diet affects the way the body burns calories. The study began with over 230 overweight participants, aged between 18 and 65. The goal of the first 10 weeks was for each participant to lose 10 percent of their body weight.

Over 160 participants were able to reach that goal and move on to the next stage of the study, in which all of the participants were randomly assigned to follow either a low, moderate, or high carb diet for almost two months.

At the end of the 20 weeks, the participants on the low-carb diet burned anywhere from 209-278 more kilocalories per day than the participants on the high-carb diet.

“If this difference persists -- and we saw no drop-off during the 20 weeks of our study -- the effect would translate into about a 20-pound weight loss after three years, with no change in calorie intake,” said Ebbeling.

The low-carb diet proved to have participants expending more energy throughout the day, and the totals were even higher for the participants with high insulin secretion, who burned 478 kilocalories more per day than those on the high-carb diet.

“Our observations challenge the belief that all calories are the same to the body,” Ebbeling said. “Our study did not measure hunger and satiety, but other studies suggest that low-carb diets also decrease hunger, which could help with weight loss in the long term.”

Mental health benefits

As important as a healthy diet is for consumers’ physical health, what we’re eating on a daily basis can also tremendously impact our mental health. A recent study found that weight and diet have a significant effect on bipolar disorder sufferers.

In this global study, researchers looked for the relationship between diet and bipolar disorder symptoms and found that those who have a healthier diet -- and avoid carbs, fats, and alcohol -- were on the right track to a more effective treatment for the condition.

“We found that people who had a better-quality diet, a diet with anti-inflammatory properties, or a lower BMI, showed better response to add-on nutraceutical treatment than did those with a low-quality diet, or a diet including foods that promote inflammation, or who were overweight,” said lead researcher Melanie Ashton.

What babies eat during their first 1,000 days of life can have an significant impact on how important structures and connections in the brain develop, according to the nation’s leading group of pediatricians.

To avoid “lifelong deficits in brain function,” the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) says it’s crucial for parents and caregivers to ensure children get key nutrients during this critical window of development.

In a new set of guidelines, the group calls for increased attention to nutrition during the period of time spanning from conception to the child’s second birthday.

Ensuring healthy brain development

Certain nutrients -- including protein, zinc, iron, choline, folate, polyunsaturated fatty acids, and vitamins A, D, B6, and B12 -- aid in healthy brain development, says the AAP’s Committee on Nutrition. Children whose diets are lacking these key nutrients may experience lifelong issues in brain function.

"The brain's structural foundation, along with billions of brain cells and trillions of connections between them, are built during this sensitive window of time," said Dr. Sarah Jane Schwarzenberg, lead author of the policy statement and an executive committee member of AAP's Committee on Nutrition.  

"Key nutrients provide the building blocks needed so that a child's brain can grow and develop normally," she said.

Prenatal nutrition

To set the stage for healthy brain development, experts recommend following a healthy diet before conception and while pregnant.

Eating well before a child is born can have an impact on their brain development, experts say. It can also increase the chance that they’ll be open to eating a range of healthy foods later.

"The first ways that babies learn about foods is by experiencing the flavors from the mother's diet that get transmitted to amniotic fluid and then breast milk,” Dr. Julie Mennella, an expert on infant sensory development, told ConsumerAffairs.

“Babies are more accepting of foods that contain these flavors when they transition to solid foods. So to get your baby off to a healthy start, eat the healthy foods that you enjoy when you are pregnant and lactating, knowing that you are teaching your baby to learn to like these foods as well."

Brain-building nutrients

Once a baby is born, parents and caregivers can help promote healthy brain development by continuing to ensure they get sufficient levels of key nutrients. Here are a few tips from the AAP:

• Start with breast milk. Breast milk is recommended for newborns until they are about six months old. The AAP recommends exclusive breastfeeding until six months of age if possible and continuing after solids are introduced for at least the first year.

• Introduce iron-rich foods. After six months, an infant’s diet begins to require more iron and zinc than breast milk can provide. Parents and caregivers should aim to introduce babies to foods rich in iron and zinc, such as infant cereals or pureed meats.

• Transition to healthy foods. When babies are older, parents should make sure their diet includes a variety of healthy foods, including meats rich in proteins and fruits and vegetables that contain different vitamins and minerals. The AAP suggests asking your child’s pediatrician to recommend foods that supply critical nutrients for brain development during this critical window of development.

The AAP’s new guidelines have been published online in the journal Pediatrics.

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as Food Stamps, is a federal program that is meant to help low-income consumers purchase nutritious foods. But a new study suggests that its current allotment may still lead to high costs for consumers.

Researchers from North Carolina State University have found that the program only covers 43-60 percent of what it costs to consume a diet that is consistent with federal dietary guidelines. They say that as a result, low-income households would still need to pay hundreds of dollars to follow a healthy diet.

"Even though SNAP is not designed to cover all of the cost of food -- it's meant to be a supplemental food program -- this study makes it clear that there would be many low-income households that would not be able to cover the gap needed to eat a diet consistent with federal dietary guidelines," said study co-author Lindsey Haynes-Maslow.

Not enough to meet standards

The researchers came to their conclusions after examining the costs of following the federal dietary guidelines. The team used monthly retail price data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to determine the costs of fruits, vegetables, grains, protein, and dairy.

After analyzing their findings, the researchers found that a family of four would still need to spend around $200-$300 on top of their SNAP benefits in order to follow federal dietary guidelines. However, those costs could rise even more depending on other dietary requirements.

"We found significant variability in the costs associated with following federal dietary guidelines. For example, it was most expensive to consume only fresh produce, and it was least expensive to consume a vegetarian diet," said Haynes-Maslow. "Many low-income households simply don't have an additional $500 or $600 to spend on food in their monthly budget.”

Informing policymakers

The researchers conclude that SNAP benefits are currently sufficient to meet the dietary needs of children under the age of 8 and women over the age of 51, but that they are insufficient for older children, younger women, and men of any age. They say that policymakers should examine the most recent data on SNAP before making decisions to further trim its budget.

“Current federal proposed budget cuts to SNAP program decrease the amount of benefits available for food purchases and fewer people would have access to the program. An analysis using the most current data is needed to inform policy makers regarding the true costs of healthy eating so that they have up-to-date research when making policy decisions,” the researchers said.

The full study has been published in the Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior.

Nearly 15 years ago, health officials set the minimum protein requirement for healthy adults at 0.80 grams per kilogram of body weight, but recent research shows that this recommended dietary allowance (RDA) doesn’t go far enough for seniors and the critically ill.

In a recent study, lead author Stuart Phillips of McMaster University says that the current RDA, which can be found on the nutrition labels of all food products, is too low to help these consumers maintain needed muscle mass.

"A big disservice is being done. The prescribed 0.8 g/kg/day just isn't enough protein for the elderly and people with a clinical condition. This shouldn't be communicated as what is 'allowed' or even 'recommended' to eat," he said.

More protein needed

RDA standards are currently established by the Food and Nutrition Board of the National Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Medicine, and are meant to meet the requirements of 97.5% of healthy individuals over the age of 19.

However, Phillips says that these standards are woefully out of date and don’t take into account the current protein needs of the elderly or critically ill. In his review, the Canadian researcher says that not enough attention is paid to milk-based proteins and certain amino acids like leucine, both of which help build muscle proteins.

He argues that the nutrients from these sources would especially help critically ill patients who are prone to losing lean body mass and points to the need for further clinical trials to prove their importance. "I think it's clear we need some longer-term clinical trials with older people on higher protein intakes. These trials need to consist of around 400 -- 500 people," he said.

Planning for protein

While the current standards are too low by Phillips' standards, he says that further research could go a long way towards changing policies that would help consumers in need of more protein. In his own diet, he says that considering protein intake is important, but not at the expense of other macronutrients.

"I enjoy a variety of foods, and the only thing I specifically focus on is limiting my intake of sugar and refined carbohydrates. But of course, given the benefits of proteins, they are a big part of what I think about when planning my meals," he said.

The full study has been published in Frontiers in Nutrition.

To some consumers, gluten has almost become a bad word. Recent dieting trends have taken the lead with promoting gluten-free food products, and even advertisers are prominently displaying items that don’t include the protein.

Part of the reason that gluten-free products have become so popular is because of the increased awareness of Celiac disease -- an autoimmune disorder that causes intestinal inflammation when gluten is consumed; the condition affects approximately 3 million people in the U.S. After observing these symptoms, some medical experts have concluded that gluten can have negative health effects on the general population, including increased risk of obesity and heart disease.

But a new study from Columbia University Medical Center and Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School shows that these conclusions, particularly those surrounding heart disease risk, are false. In fact, the researchers say that avoiding whole grains as part of a gluten-free diet may increase heart disease risk in people who don’t have Celiac disease.

"Gluten is clearly harmful for people with celiac disease. But popular diet books, based on anecdotal and circumstantial evidence, have pushed the notion that a low-gluten diet is healthy for everyone. Our findings show that gluten restriction has no benefit, at least in terms of heart health, for people without celiac disease. In fact, it may cause some harm if they follow a low-gluten diet that is particularly low in whole grains because those grains appear to have a protective effect against heart disease," said lead author Dr. Benjamin Lebwohl.

Vast majority not gluten intolerant

Of course, the researchers admit that those suffering from Celiac disease aren’t the only ones that have to watch their gluten intake. While about 1% of the U.S. population have the disease, many more suffer from a condition called “non-celiac gluten sensitivity,” which triggers some of the same symptoms as Celiac’s disease.

However, the researchers say that the vast majority of Americans suffer from neither condition, and they theorized that cutting out gluten from their diets was likely having a negative effect.

"Despite the relatively low prevalence of celiac disease and non-celiac gluten sensitivity, surveys suggest that about one-third of Americans are trying to cut down on gluten. This certainly benefits companies that sell gluten-free products. But does it benefit the public? That is the question we wanted to answer," said Lebwohl.

More harm than good for most

The study assessed 65,000 women and 45,000 men who took part in the Nurses Health Study and Health Professionals follow-up study. Participants were asked to fill out a questionnaire every four years from 1986 to 2000 in which they detailed their estimated level of gluten consumption; none of the participants were diagnosed with Celiac disease.

The findings showed that there was no association between gluten consumption and increased risk of coronary heart disease, with those who ate the least amount of gluten having the same rate of heart disease as those who ate the most gluten. These results indicate that people may have been contributing to their own heart issues by not eating whole grains, which have been shown to be beneficial to heart health.

"Based on our data, recommending a low-gluten diet solely for the promotion of hearth health does not appear warranted," concluded Dr. Andrew Chan, a gastroenterologist and Chief of the Clinical and Translational Epidemiology Unit at Massachusetts General Hospital.

The full study has been published in the British Medical Journal.

So, you’ve decided to go on a diet. That’s great news, and it really should help you get healthier and shed some pounds. But what are you going to eat? If you plan on making the switch to certain so-called “diet” foods, then you might be in trouble.

A new study from the University of Georgia shows that many of these products tend to be high in sugar content. When they mimicked the make-up of these foods and fed them to rat specimens, they found that it led to higher body fat mass, as well as liver damage and brain inflammation.

"Most so-called diet products containing low or no fat have an increased amount of sugar and are camouflaged under fancy names, giving the impression that they are healthy, but the reality is that those foods may damage the liver and lead to obesity as well," explains lead investigator and associate professor of veterinary biosciences Krzysztof Czaja.

Generating body fat

Over a four-week period, the researchers monitored three groups of rats – a group fed on a high-fat, high-sugar diet, a group fed on a low-fat, high-sugar diet, and a group fed on a “normal” or balanced diet. Caloric intake and body composition for all groups was tracked for the duration on the study.

After the test period concluded, the researchers found that the high-fat, high-sugar and low-fat, high-sugar groups showed increases in liver fat and significant increases in body weight and body fat when compared to the balanced diet group. Czaja pointed out that the increase in liver fat is especially concerning since it could lead to non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.

"What's really troubling in our findings is that the rats consuming high-sugar, low-fat diets didn't consume significantly more calories than the rats fed a balanced diet. Our research shows that in rats fed a low-fat, high-sugar diet, the efficiency of generating body fat is more than twice as high -- in other words, rats consuming low-fat high-sugar diets need less than half the number of calories to generate the same amount of body fat," Czaja said.

Permanent damage

Additional findings showed that the non-balanced diets induced chronic inflammation in the intestinal tract and brain, changes that could cause lasting and permanent harm. "The brain changes resulting from these unbalanced diets seem to be long term, and it is still not known if they are reversible by balanced diets," Czaja said.

Consumers looking to start a healthy diet should always consult with their doctor or nutritionist first to get the best advice. Some healthy staples that have passed the test of time include vegetables, fruits, whole grains, and certain fat-free or low-fat dairy products.

The full study has been published in Physiology & Behavior. 

As we previously reported, moms-to-be don’t necessarily have to include flesh foods in their diet in order for it to be considered “healthful and nutritionally adequate” by experts at the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.

When meals are balanced and appropriately planned, plant-based eating habits can even impart health benefits. However, some important nutrients -- such as vitamin B-12 -- can be harder to come by for individuals who avoid meat, eggs, and dairy.

Now, a new study finds that not eating enough food from animal sources may contribute to a vitamin B12 deficiency, which could raise a woman’s risk of having a premature baby by 21%.

Researchers from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology looked at levels of vitamin B12 in more than 11,000 expectant mothers from 11 countries and found that low levels of vitamin B12 are associated with an increased risk of preterm birth.

Vegans at risk

While low levels of vitamin B12 did not appear to affect the baby’s birth weight, the authors found that having a B12 deficiency did appear to raise a woman’s risk of giving birth prior to 37 weeks.

Income levels were also accounted for in the study, but the results were the same regardless of whether the country had a high, middle, or low income.

“Vitamin B-12 is an essential nutrient found only in products of animal origin, such as meat, milk and eggs,” said study author Dr. Tormod Rogne in a statement. “Pregnant women who consume too few animal-derived foods increase their risk of developing a vitamin B-12 deficiency.”

Other explanations

Rogne and his colleagues noted that there may be other explanations for the link, including the fact those with a B12 deficiency may be malnourished in general while pregnant. The team also said that there has been little research on the effect of taking vitamin B12 supplements during pregnancy. 

Vegetarians aren’t as likely to have a B12 deficiency because they consume dairy products or eggs, explained information officer Paul W. Thorbjörnsen from the Norwegian Vegetarian Association.

However, because the body cannot produce this important vitamin itself, he advises vegans to “consume B12 by drinking products such as soy milk or rice milk with added B12" or to take vitamin supplements."

The study was published in the American Journal of Epidemiology.

We’re often told that you are what you eat, but one new startup believes that who you are should determine what you eat. A nutrition tech company called Habit is aiming to change the way we eat by highlighting the importance of personalized nutrition.

Every body is different, and Habit’s home test kit (which looks at your DNA, blood, and 58 other biomarkers) can help you determine what nutrients your unique body craves. After taking the test, the company will send you recommendations and personalized meal-kits that can help you achieve your health goals.

Science-based approach

Seafood is chock-full of vitamins, minerals, and important Omega-3 fatty acids. However, the nutritional value of the seafood on your plate could be slashed if you accidentally bring home seafood that wasn’t stored or handled properly.

In place of a full stomach, you could be left with a case of food poisoning. But foodborne illness can be avoided by selecting fish that has all the markers of being fresh.

For the sake of taste as well as safety, fresh fish should be kept at proper temperatures throughout its journey from ocean to table. Here’s what the FDA says to look for when buying fresh fish or shellfish.

Signs of fish freshness

First, make sure fish is refrigerated or displayed on a bed of ice that is not melting. Next, seafood shoppers should look at the fish itself to ensure it has the following qualities:

• The right smell. Fish shouldn’t give off a fishy, sour, or ammonia-like odor. It should smell fresh and mild.
• Clear eyes. The fish’s eyes should be clear and slightly bulging.
• Firm and shiny. If you’re buying whole fish or fillets, look for firm, shiny flesh with bright red gills. According to the FDA, the flesh should spring back when pressed.
• No discoloration. Look at the color and edges of fish fillets. Avoid buying fish with discoloration or darkening around the edges.

What to look for in shellfish

When buying shellfish, there are a number of qualities that indicate freshness. Begin by looking for tags and labels on live shellfish and on containers of shucked shellfish.

Make sure tags include a certification number for the processor. This will indicate that your shellfish were harvested and processed safely by FDA approved standards.

Next, inspect the shells themselves. Shells shouldn’t be cracked or broken. If you’re buying live clams, oysters, or mussels, make sure the shells close up when tapped. Live crabs and lobsters should also be checked for signs of movement to verify that they are fresh. 

Bread is a big part of many consumer diets, but it is pretty much off-limits to those who are carb cautious and gluten-free. But avoiding carbs doesn’t have to mean missing out on bread altogether. Thanks to a fluffy little creation called “Cloud Bread,” even members of the gluten-free community can enjoy the taste and texture of bread.

Cloud bread -- ranked by Pinterest as one of the top ten trends of 2016 -- is a grain-free, low-carb, flourless bread alternative popularized by food bloggers. It’s made with eggs, softened cream cheese, cream of tartar, and a little bit of honey for sweetness.

Fresh out of the oven, it has a crispy texture; when stored in a container, it becomes soft and chewy like real bread. But while it may be a tasty bread alternative to the gluten-free set, how healthy is it really?

An occasional treat

Compared to other breads -- which are often laden with processed ingredients and high fructose corn syrup -- it’s certainly a step up in the health department. However, health experts say it’s not a substitute for whole grain bread and you should be careful not to overindulge in the spongy treat.

“It’s definitely not a good idea to eat it instead of whole grain bread, in an effort to clean up your diet or lose weight,” says Cynthia Sass, MPH, RD, contributing nutrition editor for Health.com. “Just because a recipe is grain-free or low-carb doesn’t automatically make it healthy, or mean that portions don’t matter.”

The grain flour is replaced with eggs and cream cheese, explains Sass -- and cream cheese isn’t necessarily a food you should be consuming large quantities of daily.

Lacks certain nutrients

While cloud bread may have fewer calories than regular bread, it lacks other nutritional components -- fiber, for one. Since fiber is a key player in helping you feel full and has been shown to help with cholesterol control, you’ll need to be sure to get fiber from other sources.

Cloud bread's lack of carbohydrates is also not ideal. Carbs weren’t meant to be consumed in excess, but they’re also not meant to be avoided 100%, as they're crucial fuel for the brain and muscles. To avoid being hit with a wave of fatigue, be sure to get carbohydrates from other sources (such as quinoa, high-fiber cereal, and fruit).

So, while real bread can rest assured it won’t be totally replaced by cloud bread, it’s a great alternative for those looking to cut back on carbs a little or go the grain-free route.

A recipe for cloud bread can be found here.

Popular food and nutrition writer Michael Pollan says it all in a few words: “Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.”

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), on the other hand, goes on at great length to say pretty much the same thing in its latest set of dietary recommendations, the first it has issued since 2011.

Basically, the USDA would like to nudge everyone towards the so-called Mediterranean diet, which emphasizes consumption of fruits and vegetables, nuts, and legumes and such vegetable fat sources as olive, nut, canola, and soybean oils.

The new guidelines are a little more permissive than some would like, basically giving the go-ahead to eat eggs and other cholesterol-rich foods in moderation. On the other hand, they recommend limiting sugar and saturated fat each to 10% of daily caloric intake.

Strong evidence

The guidelines note that there is strong evidence that diets with less meat are associated with reduced risk of heart disease and stroke. Moderate evidence indicates that those eating patterns are associated with a reduced risk of obesity, type 2 diabetes, and some types of cancer. Teen boys and adult men also “need to reduce overall intake of protein foods by decreasing intakes of meats, poultry, and eggs and increasing amounts of vegetables or other underconsumed food groups,” according to the guidelines.

“The advice presented in the 2015 Dietary Guidelines for Americans is sound, sensible, and science-based,” said Michael F. Jacobson, president of the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. “If Americans ate according to that advice, it would be a huge win for the public’s health."

Not everyone is pleased, however. The Environmental Working Group issued a statement claiming the guidelines don't go far enough in urging Americans to reduce their meat intake.

"The new 2015 Dietary Guidelines should have clearly called on consumers to eat less meat – both to protect their health and to reduce the harm that meat production does to the environment. Producing meat is a major source of greenhouse gas emissions, and growing the feed for livestock is a leading cause of farm runoff that pollutes our drinking water.

The Dietary Guidelines also fail to detail the risk of mercury exposure from canned tuna, a major health risk especially for children and pregnant women."

Egg men at work?

A physicians' group took even greater umbrage, filing suit against the USDA and the Department of Health and Human Services.

The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine charged that the egg industry influenced the USDA's advice that eating eggs is all right as long as it's done moderately.

It said as many as four of 14 experts on an outside panel that made recommendations to the USDA came from institutions that receive generous bequests from the egg industry.

The American College of Cardiology didn't go that far, but nevertheless made it clear that eating more meat, eggs and other cholesterol-laden foods is not a great idea.

"People do not need to obtain cholesterol through diet and should eat as little as possible," said Dr. Kim Allan Williams, president of the cardiologists' professional association.

So far there's little controversy about one of the USDA's revised recommendations, giving the go-ahead for healthy individuals to drink up to five cups of coffee a day. 

Fall is that time of year when chefs can't seem to help themselves. They tend to find more and more ways to use pumpkin flavor in food and beverages.

There's pumpkin donuts, pumpkin ice cream, pumpkin spice cookies, pumpkin beer, pumpkin latte, and of course, pumpkin pie.

“If you believe the sales pitch, the pumpkin is the happiest, healthiest food ever,” said Suzy Weems, registered dietitian and professor of nutrition sciences in Baylor University’s College of Health and Human Sciences.

But not everything with pumpkin in it is good for you. And some things might be fine, if consumed in moderation.

The good

Here are some of the good things pumpkin has going for it:

• Fiber: it has plenty and that helps those watching their waistlines, since it promotes a feeling of being full.
• Zeaxanthin: This common carotenoid alcohol is a powerful weapon against age-related macular degeneration and impaired eyesight.
• Low in cholesterol and high in Vitamin A: this combination leads to healthy skin and eyes and also may help in fighting cancer.
• Heart-healthy phytosterols: You get this benefit if you eat the seeds.
• Magnesium, manganese, copper, phosphorus, protein, zinc, and iron: “On the USDA/FDA rating schedule, pumpkins are a good source of all those,” Weems said. The combination makes for a veritable "cocktail" for energy, growth, and a top-notch immune system.

The bad

Okay, that's the good -- now for the bad. The things you have to look out for are:

• Pumpkin snacks: “Pumpkin-laced candy is still candy,” Weems said. “Pumpkin seeds are good for making you feel full, but the fat doesn’t disappear when you roast and eat them.”
• Pumpkin desserts: “Be sure to notice how much pumpkin is really in it, that it’s not just the flavoring,” Weems said.
• Pumpkin in coffee or for breakfast: “A pumpkin latte is not going to mean any fewer calories if it’s made with a full-fat milk or syrup,” she said. “And pumpkin doughnuts still have sugar.”

The ugly

In short, Weems says pumpkin can make the season more flavorful, but it can also be a Trojan Horse of calories. If you suffer from diabetes, look closely at the sugar and total carbohydrates.

“If you have cardiovascular disease, look at the fat,” she said. “Always be sure to read the container or the wrapper."

With kids about to head back to school or in some cases already back it's time for the annual reminder about the importance of a healthy breakfast.

Skipping it and means your kids will be playing nutritional catch-up for the rest of the day, according to Carole L. Adler, M.A., R.D., a dietitian at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), because they don't get what they need to be at their best. “Growing bodies and developing brains need regular, healthy meals,” she says.

The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics points out that studies show that school children who eat breakfast perform better in the classroom.

As with other meals, it’s a good idea for your kids (and you) to eat a healthy balance of fruits and vegetables, proteins, grains and dairy -- not just for breakfast but throughout the day.

What to do

Here are Adler’s 7 quick and easy breakfast tips to ensure your children start their day off right:

Breakfast doesn’t have to mean traditional breakfast foods.

• Anything goes, as long as you maintain a healthy balance. So if your kids want a change from cereal and eggs, think about serving left-overs from last night’s dinner. There’s nothing wrong with tuna fish with celery on a whole wheat English muffin or a turkey sandwich to start the day.

Give kids foods they like.

• It’s neither necessary nor effective to feed them foods they dislike. Do your kids turn up their noses at vegetables but love pizza? Left-over pizza with a whole-grain crust and veggies works for breakfast, too. Or make muffins with zucchini and carrots, and spread with peanut butter or almond butter for protein with a glass of milk. Your kids love sugary cereal? Mix a little bit of that cereal with a whole-grain, nutrient-packed healthier brand of cereal.

Make healthy trade-offs.

• Keep in mind that nutritional balance is key -- not just for one meal but for foods eaten throughout the day. Not enough vegetables in the morning meal? Prepare extra carrot, celery, and broccoli sticks with a hummus dip as an afternoon snack.

Take growth and activity levels into account.

• Growing bodies need nourishment. And if your kids are physically active, they need plenty of calories to keep them fueled. Adler says having a breakfast that contains protein, fat and carbohydrates helps children feel full and stay focused until lunch. Protein choices might include an egg, some nuts, a slice of deli meat or cheese, or a container of yogurt.

“Mom, I don’t have time for breakfast” is NOT an excuse

• Remember, eating on the go doesn’t have to mean forgoing breakfast. Make sure your kids grab a piece of fruit on the way out the door, and hand them a bag of nut-and-fruit trail mix or a whole-wheat tortilla spread with peanut butter or almond butter and a carton of milk.

Prep the night before

• Morning is a busy time for everyone. So take 10 minutes to think ahead and prep for breakfast the night before. Chop up fruit to layer in a yogurt parfait or add to cereal. Cut up vegetables for an omelet. Mix up muffin or whole-grain waffle batter, cover, and put in the fridge. Get out a pan for pancakes or a blender for smoothies. Put a bowl of nut-and-fruit trail mix on the table for kids to grab a handful as they walk out the door.

Use the Nutrition Facts label when you shop.

• “The label makes it easy to determine the amounts of nutrients your kids are getting and to compare one product to another,” Adler says. Make sure your kids get nutrient-dense foods that are low in salt and added sugars.

There are lots of fad diets, and one of the most popular at the moment is the "blood type diet," promoted by Peter J. D'Adamo, a naturopath who claims that an individual's nutritional needs vary by blood type.

But researchers from the University of Toronto have found that the theory behind the diet is not valid. The findings are published this week in PLoS One.

"Based on the data of 1,455 study participants, we found no evidence to support the 'blood-type' diet theory," said the senior author of the study, Dr. Ahmed El-Sohemy, Associate Professor and Canada Research Chair in Nutrigenomics at the U of T.

"The way an individual responds to any one of these diets has absolutely nothing to do with their blood type and has everything to do with their ability to stick to a sensible vegetarian or low-carbohydrate diet," said El-Sohemy.

Researchers found that the associations they observed between each of the four blood-type (A, B, AB, O) diets and the markers of health are independent of the person's blood type.

A best seller

The 'blood-type' diet was popularized by D'Adamo's Eat Right for Your Type. D'Adamo's claim is that the ABO blood type should match the dietary habits of our ancestors and that people with different blood types process food differently.

According to the theory, individuals adhering to a diet specific to one's blood type can improve health and decrease risk of chronic illness such as cardiovascular disease. The book was a New York Times best-seller that has been translated into 52 languages and has sold over 7 million copies, which proves the hypothesis that lots of people are looking for dietary advice.

The U of T researchers took an existing population of mostly young and healthy adults who provided detailed information about their usual diets and provided fasting blood that was used to isolate DNA to determine their ABO blood type and the level of cardiometabolic risk factors, such as insulin, cholesterol and triglycerides.

Diet scores were calculated based on the food items listed in Eat Right for Your Type to determine relative adherence to each of the four 'blood-type' diets.

"The ... hypothesis is false"

El-Sohemy says that a previous lack of scientific evidence doesn't mean the diets didn't work.

"There was just no evidence, one way or the other. It was an intriguing hypothesis so we felt we should put it to the test. We can now be confident in saying that the blood type diet hypothesis is false."

Last year, a comprehensive review published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition found no evidence to support the 'blood-type' diet and called for properly designed scientific studies to address it.

We recently reported on a study that found encouraging results for patients taking a nutritional supplement called strontium ranelate for knee problems. The supplement is also used by women with osteoporosis, in the hope that it can strengthen bones and build bone density.

The European study causing all the recent buzz was the Strontium Ranelate Knee Osteoarthritis Trial, where researchers gathered 1,683 people with severe knee problems and gave some of the participants strontium ranelate for treatment while the others were given a placebo.

The researchers looked at x-rays and also used computer software to gauge the level of improvement of each participant’s knee.

The study found that those who took strontium ranelate  (brand name Protelos) had improved  physical function and less physical pain, and had less joint damage compared to those who took the placebo.  

The study authors said the safety profile of strontium ranelate is well established, with more than 10 years of experience in the treatment of osteoporosis. The only major contraindication to therapy is deep-vein thrombosis, said Jean-Yves Reginster, MD, of the University of Liège in Belgium, lead author of the study.

Kathryn Dao, MD, director of Clinical Rheumatology at Baylor Research Institute in Dallas, Texas, said that these results are important "since we are so limited in therapeutic options for osteoarthritis (OA)," according to a recent Medscape article. But she said further study is needed before strontium ranelate can be established as a treatment option for knee OA.

"Strontium ranelate seems to have a good side effect profile that is different from narcotics and NSAIDs [nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs], which are used to treat the pain of knee OA," she said.

Not approved

It's important to note that the study looked at Protelos, the drug manufactured by the French company  Servier, which has not been submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to be approved for use in the United States, even though it is registered as a prescription drug in more than 70 countries for the treatment of post-menopausalosteoporosis to reduce the risk of vertebral and hip fractures. 

The lack of FDA approval doesn't mean Protelos -- or, to be more precise, an unregulated nutritional supplement version -- isn't available in the U.S. Like so many other  substances not approved as drugs, it is being widely sold as a nutritional supplement, often accompanied by claims that may be dubious.

Nutritional supplements are only lightly regulated and may not be as potent or as pure as comercial medications with similar ingredients. They also are not required to be proven efficacious -- meaning there is no guarantee they will actually help cure or prevent disease.

In Europe, the equivalent of the FDA -- the European Medicines Agency (EMA) -- has completed a review of Protelos and has confirmed a positive benefit-risk balance but it has also warned of newly-found side effects that call for caution by physicians and their patients. 

Lots of side effects

The EMA cited the results of a study conducted last year in France, which found  844 side effects associated with strontium ranelate--nearly 200 of them considered severe by the researchers.

Among the patients that were studied by the research team, 52 percent suffered cardiovascular issues, 26 percent had side effects related to the skin, 6 percent had hepatodigestive problems, 5 percent had neurological side effects, 3 percent had osteomuscular and blood problems and 3 percent suffered from other side effects that weren’t listed in the study.

Most of the cardiovascular side effects were related to blood clots, and this occurred in one out of every 31,052 patients, the study found. Among those who suffered from skin-related side effects--which was one out of 13,725--many experienced skin rashes that ranged from moderate to severe.

Some who had hepatodigestive side effects suffered from hepatitis and pancreatitis, both potentially serious problems, while those patients with neurological side effects experienced confusion and amnesia.

The researchers also reported seven deaths that were linked to strontium ranelate and three of those deaths were caused by pulmonary embolisms and related problems that fall under the DRESS (Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms) syndrome umbrella.

Similar side effects have been reported to the FDA according to Drugcite.com. 

No consensus

Strontium has its fair share of critics, but there remain many in the medical community who say the drug is useful for treating osteoporosis.

There is certainly a need for a more effective osteoporosis and osteoarthritis treatment. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), eight out of 100 (7.94 percent) adult women have been diagnosed with osteoporosis, and 19.8 percent of them said the disease was linked to their family history. 

Also, women who reported having bone disease in their families were  2.4 times more times likely to get it themselves, compared to those who don't have the disease in their families.

The CDC also says that women 35 years or older who have at least two relatives with osteoporosis are 8.5 times more likely to develop the disease themselves.

Arthritis, meanwhile, is the most common cause of disability, and osteoarthritis is the most common form of arthritis, the CDC says, affecting more than 27 million Americans.

"This serious, painful and potentially life-altering joint disease places severe limits on daily activity and quality of life for over 27 million Americans," according to the CDC. "In view of the fact that the U.S. population is aging and obesity is on the rise, the prevalence, health impact and economic consequences of OA are expected to increase dramatically."

What to do?

So where does this leave someone who has osteoporosis or knee problems?

While strontium ranelate hasn't been approved by the FDA for the treatment of osteoporosis or knee damage, it is readily available as a nutritional supplement. This is because, like so many nutritional supplements, it is a naturally-occurring substance and thus can be sold so long as it is not marketed as a medicine and does not make unsupported health claims.

Any decision about taking strontium ranelate -- or any other nutritional supplement -- is one that should only be made in consultation with your physician. There are very definite contraindications -- situations in which strontium ranelate may cause harm. You should review these with your doctor -- and ignore all advertising claims -- before making a decision. 

To put it even more plainly: Talk to your doctor before you start taking strontium ranelate or any other drug or supplement. Never base such a decision on a news story or advertisement. The results of early studies are often contradicted over time.  Side effects may be more severe than expected and the results may not be as positive as early findings suggest.

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)hasreleaseda report that it says demonstratesthat the dietary supplement industry spent millions of dollars on well-connected lobbyists and made numerous campaign contributions to successfully thwart increased regulatory oversight of supplements.

"This is yet again another disturbing example of pay-to-play in Washington, D.C.," said CREW Executive Director Melanie Sloan.  "The old Schoolhouse Rock cartoon about how a bill becomes a law is sadly outdated - in today's world, legislative results are bought and paid for." 

Far and away the largest recipient of campaign contributions from the supplement industry in the 2010 election cycle was Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) who took in $45,780, 59% more than the lawmaker in second place, freshman Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI).   Sen. Hatch wasn't up for reelection, making campaign funds unnecessary. 

Further, the supplement industry paid the lobbying firm of Walker, Martin and Hatch - in which Sen. Hatch's son, Scott Hatch, is a partner -- $125,600 in 2010 alone.  Scott Hatch cannot lobby his father directly, but records indicate Jack Martin, a former aide to Sen. Hatch, lobbied for supplement industry clients.

"Washington is an incestuous place. It can hardly be a coincidence that of all the lobbying firms in town, the supplement industry picked that of Sen. Hatch's son and former aide to lobby on its behalf," said Ms. Sloan. 

86% increase

Lobbying spending by the industry has increased 86% since the 109^th Congress.  Further, the political action committees (PACs) linked to the supplement industry have increased donations to federal candidates.  

In addition to Sen. Hatch and Rep. Amash, CREW found major recipients of supplement industry cash during the 2010 election cycle included Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA), Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ) and Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), all of whom either sit on committees considering legislation affecting the industry or have an industry presence in their home states.  The supplement industry is the third-largest industry in Utah, with revenues estimated at up to $4 billion a year.

"Americans' health and safety is endangered by unregulated dietary supplements, but the money the industry is spending serves to dampen congressional concern over the issue," said Ms. Sloan.  "Sadly, this sort of spending is not unusual because it is effective. 

“Industries facing potential congressional action routinely spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep regulation at bay.  More often than not, it is corporate interests, not the people's interests that carry the day," she said.

A new Duke University study finds that the artificial sweetener Splenda contributes to obesity, destroys beneficial inteestinal bacteria and may interfere with absorption of prescription drugs.

It's the latest in a continuing round of studies, claims and counter-claims pitting artificial sweeteners against the powerful Sugar Association, the lobbying group for the sugar industry, which financed the Duke study.

McNeil Nutritionals, which manufactures Splenda, said the study's findings were "unsupported by the data presented" and said Splenda may be safely used "as part of a healthy diet." The study is scheduled to be published in a forthcoming issue of The Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health. An advance copy appears on its Web site.

A Minneapolis-based group called Citizens for Health said the Duke study demonstrates that Splenda is a health threat. The group, headed by attorney Jim Turner, has been collecting consumer reports of side effects supposedly caused by Splenda.

"The report makes it clear that the artificial sweetener Splenda and its key component sucralose pose a threat to the people who consume the product. Hundreds of consumers have complained to us about side effects from using Splenda and this study ... confirms that the chemicals in the little yellow package should carry a big red warning label," said Turner.

Turner's group has filed a petition with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) calling on it to review its approval of sucralose and to require a warning label on Splenda packaging cautioning that people who take medications or have gastrointestinal problems avoid using Splenda.

"The new study makes it clear that Splenda can cause you to gain weight and lose the benefits of medications designed to improve and protect your health. The FDA should not continue to turn a blind eye to this health threat," Turner said.

In February, a study published in Behavioral Neuroscience cites laboratory evidence that the widespread use of no-calorie sweeteners may actually make it harder for people to control their intake and body weight.

McNeil and the Sugar Association have been waging war in the courts and the public arena for years. In 2004, the association sued McNeil, claiming it had misled consumers by claiming that Splenda was "made like sugar, so it tastes like sugar."

Splenda's main ingredient -- sucralose -- is manufactured. The process involves the use of a sugar molecule but there is no sugar in the finished product.

The Duke study was conducted on rats over a 12-week period. A lead researcher, Dr. Mohamed B. Abou-Donia, said the Sugar Association had no input into the study's findings.

Earlier study

In the February study, psychologists at Purdue Universitys Ingestive Behavior Research Center reported that compared with rats that ate yogurt sweetened with sugar, those given yogurt sweetened with zero-calorie saccharin later consumed more calories, gained more weight, put on more body fat, and didnt make up for it by cutting back later.

Authors Susan Swithers, PhD, and Terry Davidson, PhD, theorize that by breaking the connection between a sweet sensation and high-calorie food, the use of saccharin changes the bodys ability to regulate intake. That change depends on experience.

Problems with self-regulation might explain in part why obesity has risen in parallel with the use of artificial sweeteners. It also might explain why, says Swithers, scientific consensus on human use of artificial sweeteners is inconclusive, with various studies finding evidence of weight loss, weight gain or little effect.

Because people may have different experiences with artificial and natural sweeteners, human studies that dont take into account prior consumption may produce a variety of outcomes.

Three different experiments explored whether saccharin changed lab animals ability to regulate their intake, using different assessments -- the most obvious being caloric intake, weight gain, and compensating by cutting back.

Body temperature

The experimenters also measured changes in core body temperature, a physiological assessment.

Normally when we prepare to eat, the metabolic engine revs up. However, rats that had been trained to respond using saccharin (which broke the link between sweetness and calories), relative to rats trained on glucose, showed a smaller rise in core body temperate after eating a novel, sweet-tasting, high-calorie meal. The authors think this blunted response both led to overeating and made it harder to burn off sweet-tasting calories.

The data clearly indicate that consuming a food sweetened with no-calorie saccharin can lead to greater body-weight gain and adiposity (fat) than would consuming the same food sweetened with a higher-calorie sugar, the authors wrote.

The authors acknowledge that this outcome may seem counterintuitive and might not come as welcome news to human clinical researchers and health-care practitioners, who have long recommended low- or no-calorie sweeteners. Whats more, the data come from rats, not humans.

However, they noted that their findings match emerging evidence that people who drink more diet drinks are at higher risk for obesity and metabolic syndrome, a collection of medical problems such as abdominal fat, high blood pressure and insulin resistance that put people at risk for heart disease and diabetes.

But why?

Why would a sugar substitute backfire?

Swithers and Davidson wrote that sweet foods provide a salient orosensory stimulus that strongly predicts someone is about to take in a lot of calories. Ingestive and digestive reflexes gear up for that intake but when false sweetness isnt followed by lots of calories, the system gets confused. Thus, people may eat more or expend less energy than they otherwise would.

The good news, Swithers says, is that people can still count calories to regulate intake and body weight. However, she sympathizes with the dieters lament that counting calories requires more conscious effort than consuming low-calorie foods.

Swithers adds that based on the labs hypothesis, other artificial sweeteners such as aspartame, sucralose and acesulfame K, which also taste sweet but do not predict the delivery of calories, could have similar effects.

Finally, although the results are consistent with the idea that humans would show similar effects, human study is required for further demonstration.

Looking for a new gimmick to jump-start your New Year's diet? How about a real staple that pierces cartilage in your upper ear to suppress appetite? Or a detoxification plan said to clean toxins and pollution out of your body?

"Save your money -- and save your health," says Francie M. Berg, chair of the Weight Loss Abuse Task Force of the National Council against Health Fraud. These are just two of year's worst weight loss schemes highlighted by Berg in the group's 18th annual Slim Chance Awards.

"There are countless products out there that promise quick weight loss. Most of them are total scams that make your wallet thinner, but not your body. Some cause injury and death. And in a dangerous new trend they now target children," Berg noted.

An unusual glut of unsafe products has flooded the market this year, according to Berg. Both the Federal Trade Commission and the Food and Drug Administration actively pursued weight loss fraud, but are hampered by having to do it on a case-by-case basis and usually getting only consent agreements.

Berg's organization, Healthy Weight Network, started the Slim Chance Awards 18 years ago. They are part of the lead-up to Healthy Weight Week, January 21 to 27, which offers a release from restrictive New Year dieting.

Americans typically begin a diet the first week in January, blow it the second week, and by the third week many are ready for lasting lifestyle changes that can make a real difference in their lives.

"We want to shift our national focus to health and wellness, to acceptance, respect, and an appreciation of diversity," Berg said. "It's time to move on from the war so many Americans are waging against their own bodies. The obsession with thinness is causing tragic problems for both children and adults."

The 2006 Slim Chance Awards:

• Worst Claim: ChitoGenics Billing himself as a "consumer advocate and trouble-shooter," Texas radio personality Tom Martino tells listeners ChitoGenics has transformed his once chubby body to rock hard.

ChitoGenic ads laud his credibility: "Tired of false claims and advertising? So are we! You can believe what this man says ... Tom has made a distinguished career of exposing liars, cheats, rip-offs and scams... when he likes something ... you can bet it works!"

The ChitoGenic stable of cures for the person who wants to lose, say, "20 pounds in one week ... without dieting" includes ChitoGold, ChitoGenics Mahuang, PowerUp Weight Loss Formula and Plus Chito Patches. Claims to be the "leader when it comes to blending herbs that effectively block sugars, carbohydrates, and fats in your diet ... combined with a natural appetite suppressant fat and filtering for cholesterol health." (Undisclosed: kickbacks to radio hosts.)

• Worst Product: PediaLean Advertised in tabloids and magazines including the Enquirer and Redbook, PediaLean is a fiber capsule claimed to cause substantial weight loss in overweight children.

Allegedly it is "clinically proven safe and effective for use by overweight children and adolescents," but experts say the Italian study offered provides no valid scientific proof, is poorly designed, had a high dropout rate, and revealed abdominal discomfort in many of the children tested.

Its active ingredient glucomannan is known to swell in the body and can clump and form an obstructive mass, sometimes causing esophageal and gastrointestinal obstruction. PediaLean is one of six weight loss products for which the FTC, as of May 2006, is requiring payment of $3 million to settle deceptive claim violations.

• Most Outrageous Claim: Isacleanse The detox idea is seemingly the perfect scam -- it sets up a problem that doesn't exist, then provides a solution.

Ads for Isacleanse warn of toxins building up, clogging organs and deteriorating the body -- unless regularly detoxified. (This doesn't happen, as the human body is naturally self-cleaning.)

A "healthier, leaner body" is promised in 30 days through ingesting a medicine chest full of Isagenix cures including IsaFlush for "regularity," diuretics, aloe pills, vitamins, ionic trace minerals, electrolyte drinks, Isalean Shakes and herbal teas.

For those who are frankly more interested in wealth-building, Isagenix turns a neat trick; on the same web page it alternately pushes a get-rich-quick scheme for deceiving others about the need to detoxify.

• Worst Gimmick: Magic Ear Staple What's new is that this is a real staple, piercing the band of cartilage in the upper ear where, supposedly, it presses on an acupressure point that curbs appetite. It's newly illegal in Florida.

Recent damaging publicity in Mississippi was related to infections from "underground operations in parking garages, bathrooms, coin laundries and the back seats of cars," complains Marie Fallow, a Mississippi-based ear stapler. Fallow says she has stapled ears of some 3,000 clients, is doing 2,400 new ears a month, and charges $75 for both ears.

Training offered by chiropractor Carissa Hamilton-Toups of southern Louisiana costs $850 for one afternoon class (in which students staple each other) or $1200 for a private session. Trainees leave armed with two staple guns, a set of rubber ears, staple remover, paperwork to immediately get started in the stapling business, and a warning: remove staples in four weeks or risk severe infection and the staples becoming embedded.

Last year's "winners" were Shape up with Dr Phil, Jana Skinny Water, Nutrathin with Hoodia, and Body Shape by Hydroderm.

Slim Chance award sponsors are Healthy Weight Network, the Society for Nutrition Education and the National Council against Health Fraud.