More reasons to skip skim (in case grey coffee isn't reason enough)

We’ve said it before…if you do dairy (and we do), you have to skip the skim. It’s better for your weight, your skin, your bones and your fertility. Recent research adds further evidence to our skim-stance. A study published in Circulation analyzed the blood of 3,333 adults for 15 years. It’s difficult to “skim” over (had to) their findings.  People who consumed more full-fat dairy had a 46% decreased risk of getting diabetes. Another study published in the American Journal of Nutrition looked at obesity risk with full fat versus low fat dairy among 18,438 female participants. Those who consumed the most full-fat dairy products lowered their risk of being overweight or obese by 8%.

At Foodtrainers, we believe fat makes you thin. Fat keeps you full. It’s crucial for your skin, hair, nails and Vitamin D absorption. Cutting back on calories by cutting out fat typically results in eating more sugar/carb calories. And when your sugar and carbs increase your body stores more fat (remember the “fat free” 90s?).

Aside from skipping skim, fermented dairy is your best bet.  Fermented dairy contains probiotics that help your weight, cravings and mood.  These good bacteria break down some of the lactose. If you find dairy difficult to digest, fermented dairy may be easier. We adore four percent Siggi’s yogurt, Maple Hill Creamery plain kefir and Nancy’s (probiotic) cottage cheese. And it’s not fermented but Ronnybrook’s half and half and their glass bottles make life better.

Hate to say we told you so (well before fat was where it's at), but PLEASE skip the skim and grey coffee… you’re welcome. 

Speaking of dairy, Lauren and I are checking out a new cheese headquarters this week… details to follow!

Overweight Folks in Ads: Helping or Selling?

Nathan Sorrel, 12 years old

Yesterday I did a segment for Today. During the taping I was asked the inevitable “so what numbers are we talking about when it comes to weight in this country”.  I mentioned that two thirds of adults were overweight or obese however I don’t focus on these figures. The statistics and obesity anxiety or weight terror- alert doesn’t help. So what does?

A study from the Rudd Center at Yale University concluded two things were helpful when it came to messaging about weight or eating. We tend to respond to messaging that’s supportive and information that encourages a specific behavior. The Let’s Move campaign is a great example of keeping it positive (and not preachy) and providing relevant resources.

How about advertisers? Yesterday’s segment focused on a front page USA Today article about the trend in casting overweight people in ads. While inclusivity is always good, I think we have to look at the motivation. Are the ads designed to sell products? To stir up controversy? Or to help foster change?  Some of these ads have caused quite a ruckus.

Take this add from Blue Cross Blue Shield of Minnesota. An overweight mother and daughter are in the grocery store. The mother places unhealthy items in her cart and the daughter, with a mini cart, does the same. Let’s just say this didn’t sit well with many people including Lindy West on Jezebel (wish I had her with me for the napkin girls incident). I think Blue Cross could’ve made the same point saying “we’ve all been there and we don’t always set the best example for our kids.” Today you can change that and show a mother and child reading a label or making better market selections.

The Nike ad, that ran during the Olympics, was another example cited by USA today.

Nike shows an overweight boy jogging. The narration tells us greatness isn’t reserved for a select few, we are all capable of it. When I see it I smell a conference rooms of ad execs saying “we can’t sell shoes to a select few” it feels calculated. My kids had a different reaction. One of my boys said “it says never give up.” When the video finished the collage of other videos/ads displayed on the screen. My younger son said “the boy running in the commercial was big, none of those people are big.” He then said, “but in the world lots of people are big.” In his eight-year-old terms he could see this was unusual. However, regardless of its intensions it was supportive in its messaging and specific in its explicit message (to exercise). It also appeals to both overweight and non overweight...good for sales and health at the same time.

From years of counseling clients, a couple of things are clear. First, people know what to eat. They know what they “should” eat. Second, shame and guilt isn’t the answer. We all have an abundance of negativity swirling about in our heads when it comes to weight and food. To enact change, we have to go about things differently. We have to give people something they don’t already have.

What’s your reaction to more overweight people in ads? Do you think it’s inclusive or patronizing? And what about the parent’s? Should the parents let their children me the face of childhood obesity?

Relax, it's not really even a soda ban.

Source: Grist

In case you haven't heard, Mayor Bloomberg has proposed what some are referring to as a soda ban in NYC.  Bloomberg has suggested that movie theaters, restaurants, stadiums and food carts limit soda size to 16 ounces. Bodegas and markets will continue to sell sodas of all sizes. While it's hard to believe that 16 ounces (over a can’s worth) of soda is limiting even more alarming to me is the degree of pushback this is receiving. Our government has decided BPAs are safe, it permits food dyes banned in other countries and has yet to notify the public when our food is genetically modified. So when someone takes food seriously and tries to enact positive change, I'm going to support it.

A little background, half the US population over two years old consumes sugary drinks daily and these beverages account for approximately 8% of our calorie intake. The average male teen gets close to 20 teaspoons a day from soda. We would find it strange if you ordered wine in a restaurant and the waiter poured the whole bottle into your glass but this

 is totally acceptable. We’ve learned from Brian Wasink’s research that intake is highly dependent on the size of the food presented. Of course the Beverage Association sees no problem with soda and had this to say, “It's time for serious health professionals to move on and seek solutions that are going to actually curb obesity. These zealous proposals just distract from the hard work that needs to be done on this front."

Nice attempt at passing the buck, this sounds like my children arguing,  “I didn’t do it, he did it”.  I’m a serious expert, or at least an expert, who would love to get more involved as would many of my collegagues. I’ve written about soda and sugar extensively. How about they make smallersize their nasty (told you I wasn’t “serious”) sodas and experts can educate and discuss why this and other ways to limit sugar is important. Obesity and simply better health needs everyone’s cooperation. Speaking of which, the first National Soda Summit, organized by the Center for Science in the Public Interest is being held in DC next week, if you’re looking to learn more that sounds like a good start.

Aside from the beverage industry, there’s also the nanny state objection-that government shouldn’t tell us what to eat.  I’m sorry to say but they already are (see image above for a little refresher) and that’s why sodas are the size of a bottle of Clorox bleach and for many people fresh vegetables are unaffordable. The Atlantic, in an especially whiny piece, suggested that the focus should be on access to healthy food versus banning. How about both? Measures should be taken to increase access to wholesome food and decrease the size of sodas, nobody is taking soda away. The truth is, the power of the soda people may thwart Bloomberg’s plans to have the Department of Health pass this. Talk about politics, if I’m choosing a “nanny” I would take Bloomberg over the Beverage Association any day. And if you think we, as a country, don't need a nanny- what do you propose?
Are you in favor of or against Bloomberg's proposal? Do you think it will pass? 

love me a good infographic

There Are Bad Foods and Bad Kids Too

This "wonderful child" isn't anyone I know

I know there are some people who think all children are wonderful. After nine-plus years of parenting and plenty of play dates I know this is not true. There was one child who expressed his disappointment at having to leave our house by biting my babysitter when she tried to comfort him. There were others who not only played “army” but concocted battle scenarios with such detail I know I will be reading about them one day and not in a good way. All children “have their moments” but some are just not good.

There’s a food equivalent of all “all children are wonderful” and this is a belief system that holds there are no bad foods. I’ve questioned this one for a while but felt validated to read a recent Jane Brody article. The article focuses on the habits of 120,877 health professionals followed for 12 to 20 years. Periodically the subjects answered in depth questions about their eating, exercise, sleep, alcohol and television habits. Participants weren’t obese at the study’s start but steadily gained an average of 16.8 pounds in 20 years. One of the lead researchers, Dr Mozaffarian a cardiologist and epidemiologist had this to say about the results:

“There are good foods and bad foods, and the advice should be to eat the good foods more and the bad foods less. The notion that it’s O.K. to eat everything in moderation is just an excuse to eat whatever you want.”             

In this study foods that contributed to greatest weight gain were French Fries, potato chips, sugar-sweetened drinks, red meat, processed meat, other forms of potatoes, sweets and desserts and refined grains.  My bad food list, not solely concerned with weight, would include artificial sweeteners and anything artificially sweetened (diet soda topping this list), bagels, bottled salad dressings, foods using dyes, TVP and products using processed soy and factory farmed meat.

Many people have items on my list and the items from the study’s findings they eat. Lest people accuse me of advocating dietary perfection, I will confess that I adore a crispy French fry and really enjoy chocolate (and not only the dark kind). Having said this, when I consume these foods I am aware they are a deviation from my healthy diet and know they are bad (if the criteria has to do with health) foods. We need to move away from the Pollyannaish food thinking.

The retort to any acknowledgement that all foods don’t fit is that deprivation leads to disordered eating and eating disorders. With all due respect to eating disorders and the struggle ED individuals endure, we are not a deprived nation.  Telling people they can have fries and chips and hot dogs and soda “in moderation” is akin to telling the “wonderful” boy above he can bite every so often.

As important as it is to acknowledge that certain foods lead to weight gain thereby affecting our health, that isn’t the only message. When I meet with a new client I first focus on what needs to be added to their diets. “Eat more fruits and vegetables” suffers from vagueness.  Dietary advice needs to encourage people to snack on sliced watermelon in the summer, roast Brussels sprouts in the winter and bake some French fries. It’s not dietary doom and deprivation but honesty and inspiration that’s needed.  We cannot wait for people to be ill or obese to embrace significant behavioral changes, the writing is on the wall we just have to read it.

Do you agree or disagree there are bad foods? If you agree, what foods would you add to the unhealthy list? What’s your biggest pet peeve when it comes to children’s behavior? Or do you think all children are wonderful?
The winner of our Travel Snack Bundle is Erin from The Healthy Apron, thank you to everyone for entering and for spreading the word about our new store.

Mrs Obama: Let's Move to Shake Shack

The Washington Post reported earlier this week that Michelle Obama aka FLOTUS (First Lady of the United States though perhaps I am the only person who didn’t know this acronym) paid a visit to the new Washington D.C. Shake Shack. I learned of this through twitter and the sentiment among my colleagues, many of whom are nutritionists, was generally supportive. “She’s human.” “She doesn’t eat that way all the time” and my personal fingernails-on-a chalkboard expression “everything in moderation” were just a few of the reactions I recall.  The Independent even ran a story “Michelle Obama eats burger nutritionists approve.” Wait a minute, I'm a nutritionist and I don't approve.

Let’s Move!

Michelle Obama’s major initiative is childhood obesity. Her campaign Let’s Move!  Is about helping children and families live healthier lives. In their own words they’re:

Giving parents helpful information and fostering environments that support healthy choices. Providing healthier foods in our schools. Ensuring that every family has access to healthy, affordable food. And, helping kids become more physically active.

What about Shake Shack is in line with this mission? If her platform was smoking, would we be ok with her having a cigarette once in a while?  As President Obama focuses on the economy many articles have pointed fingers at his spending.

I asked a couple of my favorite nutritionists a few questions about this (mostly to see if I was overreacting). Keri Glassman said “this was overindulging in a very public manner when she is spending the majority of her time in public promoting good health!" Andy Bellatti admitted “frankly, I’m much more concerned with the policies Michelle Obama supports than what she puts in her mouth. That said, I don’t see why her Shake Shack visit needs to be applauded. It reeks of “oh don’t worry folks, she’s not one of those ‘tofu’ crazies. See, she loves burgers and fries just like you.”

You don’t see burgers and fries on the Let’s Move food and nutrition page, you see this

Moderation

One of the tweeters told me repeatedly that healthy eating was all about BVM. BVM, BVM- what was he talking about? BMW? No, BVM. This, it seems, stands for Balance, Variety and Moderation.  I’m sorry; Mrs. Obama had a ShackBurger, fries, a chocolate shake and Diet Coke to wash it all down. Over 1500 calories or a day’s worth. My verdict? Immoderate. Keri Glassman said it well “A home made, perhaps grass-fed burger – fine. Even a "bite" of someone’s fast food is fine. But a total no holds barred indulgence in fast food - not fine! Andy added, “just like “natural” there is no tangible definition of “moderation.”

Trust Me, I’m not Perfect (but I am a snob)

In the course of the twitter “debate” one in the “BVM” camp said to me “we can’t eat perfectly all the time, #FLOTUS showed us all foods fit.” I don’t think Americans or obese children need a FLOTUS path paved to fast food, they are “fitting” it in just fine.  How about this- all foods don’t need to fit. I know it’s a nutty suggestion but what about suggesting a month without fast food and soda? Or if that’s unrealistic, have Michelle Obama go to a fast food restaurant and order small fries (her favorite) and a salad? Or post a recipe on the White House website for baked French fries.

I don’t eat fast food because I think about where my food comes from and how it’s made. I documented my last experience with fast food, in a blizzard on the Interstate with 2 screaming children. It wasn’t pretty and I’m still shocked we weren’t pursued by Alka- Seltzer for a commercial-yuck.

For the record Keri said “I do not eat fast food and do not bring my kids.” Andy, when asked if he eats fast food, replied “every day! It takes me 45 seconds to make a smoothie, 60 seconds to make a green juice, 15 seconds to grab a handful of almonds and about 2 minutes to toast bread and top it with avocado, arugula, balsamic and lemon juice.”

I can only imagine the number of hits the Shake Shack website received and the number of Shackburgers sold after Ms. Obama’s visit. I wish she had “moved” in a healthier direction.

Are you supportive of, disappointed by or indifferent to Ms. Obama’s burger? Do you feel experts should practice what they preach? Do you eat fast food? Do you believe in Moderation?

Who has the time?

Last week, I did a segment for a local TV show called Moms and the City. A study was released revealing that 40 percent of NYC kindergarteners are overweight or obese. Even more disturbing were the numbers for certain neighborhoods where over half the children were overweight. Neighborhoods with high mean income levels had some of the lower percentages. Moms and the City asked me for some simple tips all moms could follow in light of the study. I didn’t want to sound extreme and yet, clearly, NYC parents need some help. I said:


The one skill that can transform a families eating, many mothers possess already and that’s organization. When it comes to food organizing:
1. Make a weekly menu plan to avoid waste and up the nutritional ante in meals.

2. Cook- this doesn’t have to be a 100% cooking commitment but 2 times a week if you aren’t already.

3. Shop- seek out farmers markets as the selection of produce in some urban supermarkets is lousy. Farmers markets excite children about healthy food.

If you’ll notice none of these tips involve removing things from your diet. There isn’t “no” preceding any tips and yet following these guidelines would make a huge difference for many families obese or not. I felt good about my segment and was excited to watch it. Thursday night at 10:00 I turned on the show and the obesity statistics were the first item discussed. They ran the clip, taped in my office, and despite only 1 take I thought my message came across as clear and reasonable. A nanosecond later, one of the 3 moms said “I’m sorry but who has the time?” One of the other moms Melissa Gerstein, who had interviewed me, said “we go to Fairway on Sunday and we figure it out.” She proceeded to give some examples of meals her family ate and made a good case for planning. I was a little disappointed. The format of the show is 3 different moms giving their opinion on various issues. While this mom, Raina, was probably expressing an opinion many moms relate to, I felt it could quell any newfound inspiration moms watching may have been feeling.

Last night something made me rethink my reaction. I was out with 2 friends, 2 other moms in the city (no connection to the show) and we were discussing housekeeping. My friend mentioned this glow system  that teaches you how to be more efficient in cleaning your house or apartment. My friend said “they have these tips that allow you to leave for work with a spotless kitchen.” I smiled, thinking about the dishes in the sink and breakfast remnants that greet me when I return from my run and dropping the kids at school. “It isn’t going to happen for me, as it is I am up at 5:30 to return emails and get breakfast ready.” In my own way, I was pretty much saying “who has the time?”

Most people I know are time-starved but use their time for things they deem important. I will change my day around to get to the market but have a huge stack of papers sitting on my desk. I have clients who wake up at 4:30am to exercise and others who work until 4:30am. They key is to make the time for the areas previously marginalized and for many of us that includes food. The key is to get the ball rolling, even if it rolls slowly. I put the milk away and washed out the coffee pot this morning. I wonder if Raina would be willing to cook a bit.
What are your weak or strong areas? What do you always make time for? What could you carve out more time for?

Sweet Little Lies

Have you seen the commercials for high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) on TV lately? In case you haven't, I’ve provided the link. In the commercial, one mom questions another about a beverage with HFCS. The mother pouring the bright magenta beverage replies adamantly with a case for HFCS stating, among other things, that it’s “made from corn” and “fine in moderation.” Viewers are then encouraged to “get the facts.” There is debate over whether HFCS is the sole culprit in the obesity epidemic or whether it’s just one of many guilty parties. To me this is like debating murder versus manslaughter or brain cancer versus lung cancer, none of which are good. What’s next…commercials making a case for vodka, lard or perhaps infidelity (another hot topic)?


In the HFCS commercial you see one mom state that having HFCS was a sign of not caring what your kids eat (I concur though would never say that bluntly). This same mother doesn’t really know why HFCS is bad. I think we all suffer from the “I heard it is bad so it must be bad” syndrome at times. It is important to dig a little and research or ask an expert if you are questioning a certain food.
For HFCS I will tell you why it’s bad:

1. HFCS and I are roughly the same age. I say this to point out that HFCS hasn’t been around that long (it’s young!). In my lifetime, and as HFCS has made its way into more food products obesity rates have skyrocketed. HFCS is cheap and has a long shelf life. In that respect it is not that different from trans fats (also cheap and extend shelf life). I would argue that the cheaper the ingredients and longer their shelf life the more they will shorten your life.

2. HFCS may also affect your metabolism. This past Tuesday, Jane Brody wrote “high fructose intake over a period of months resulted in resistance to the leptin signal.” Leptin tells you’re satiated and can stop eating.

3. HFCS often contains mercury. In various studies as many as half the samples of HFCS were shown to contain mercury. Mercury can make its way in during processing. So much for HFCS being natural because it starts out as corn. Vodka can start out as potatoes. While many of us shun seafood, a stronger case can be made for shunning soda and certain snack foods and breads and cereals and all the other foods you may be eating with HFCS.

4. Michael Pollan has also pointed out that HFCS can be an environmental threat. The increase of corn for HFCS has drastically increased fertilizer use. The run-off from these crops is a serious threat to our rivers and oceans.

In all fairness, this isn’t just about HFCS. Increased rates of obesity are affected by the increase in screen time/decrease in activity, the increase in portion size and the increase of all “sweet” in our diets. There is just a logic breakdown if we say that because other factors may be culpable, HFCS is innocent. When it comes to HFCS, as Stevie Nicks says in little lies, “we’re probably better off apart.”

What do you make of the HFCS debate? Do you look for it on labels? Avoid it? Do you like Fleetwood Mac I would love to know.