I can't believe I just defended Kim Kardashian ...

I don't much care for the reality show "Keeping up with the Kardashian's" nor any of the spin-offs. I think the media grants Kim more spotlight than she deserves. But one thing I admire her for, is speaking on women's body image issues and being a healthy role model for women in that regard. So when I came across an article that was slamming Kim as someone needing to lose weight, and hoisting her up as a "case in point" for the obesity epidemic ... I had to leave a comment saying otherwise. Yes. I defended Kim Kardashian.

Do you agree or disagree? Do you think Kim is a healthy role model? Do you think she needs to lose weight?

Here's a link to the article. My response should be after it.

In the event that it's taken down or the link stops working, I'll copy/paste the article and my response.

Glittarazi.com's article:
Slowing America's rising obesity rates -- by as little as 1% -- would save our country $85 billion in health care costs over the next 20 years, according to an analysis revealed at the "Weight of the Nation" conference in Washington, D.C., this week.

In fact, people who suffer from obesity incur some of the highest health costs in the nation, and researchers believe that the number of obese people will rise from 5% now to about 11% by 2030.

So, how do we combat obesity healthily? Quit smoking, eat less fast food, and get more exercise. And, most importantly, get your children hooked on healthy habits! It's way easier to stay healthy when you've been taught how to by your role models.
We're talking to you, Kim K.

My response:
I'm not sure your targeting of Kim Kardashian as the ideal recipient for this "lose weight" message is a good call. Kim is Armenian American and naturally curvy. At 5'2", 117 pounds, her bmi is 21 which is well within the healthy range. In a world where 24 million Americans suffer from eating disorders and crippling body image issues (http://tinyurl.com/3cnwz77), she is a celebrity who is not afraid to go against the unrealistic rail-thin model images we see promoted in magazines. She's a healthy role model for girls and women alike. She even speaks out on body image issues and gives a voice to girls who might otherwise feel isolated and alone in their body insecurities (http://tinyurl.com/6nvurgh) Furthermore, she's often photographed leaving the gym (google image search "kim kardashian working out"), so not only does she champion a healthy figure, she leads by example in making exercise a priority. 

I applaud that the core message of this post acknowledges the need to focus on changing our behavior to promote well-being. Our nation does need to prioritize healthy habits. But I'd find a different person than Kim at whom to direct your healthy initiative message. She's already on board.

Read More

Podcast Episode on Sarcopenia

I taught myself how to podcast! Throws confetti! Prances around in celebratory exuberance!

This episode is about sarcopenia - the age-related loss in muscle mass. It affects 1 in 5 of us under the age of 70, and 1 in 2 of us over the age of 80. Fortunately, we're not fated for a series of final years spent stooped and shuffling, there are steps you can take to slow, prevent, and even reverse the effects of Sarcopenia. This podcast episode delves into the contributing factors to the disease and what can be done to stay strong in old age.

Podcast Powered By Podbean

Reference mentioned in podcast: West, D.W. "Resistance Exercise-induced Increases in Putative Anabolic Hormones Do Not Enhance Muscle Protein Synthesis or Intracellular Signalling in Young Men." Journal of Physiology 587.21 (2009): 5239-247.

Read More

How involved is the FDA in the regulation of dietary supplements?

Once upon a time (early 1990's to be exact), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) tightly regulated dietary supplements. In addition, Congress was pondering passing two bills that would help the FDA fight cases of health fraud on the market. The first bill would have strengthened the FDA's enforcement hand while simultaneously spiking the penalties for violating the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. The second bill would have closed a loophole advertisers had found. See, the therapeutic promises and nutritional claims on a supplement label were subject to regulations, but advertisements for the product were not. This second bill, an amendment to the Federal Trade Commission Act, would have made the health claims in advertisements abide by the same regulations for the health claims on product labels.

Sounds like good ideas, right? Not if you're the U.S. dietary supplement industry, whose total sales as of 2006 were an estimated $22.1 billion. More regulations would dent profits. So the health-food industry and their associated lobby groups implored Congress to "preserve the consumer's freedom to choose dietary supplements." They argued that regulations meant the FDA could "put anybody out of business." They told consumers that if the bills were passed, consumers wouldn't be able to buy vitamins. This set off an avalanche of angry communications from consumers to Congress. The end result of this pressure from lobbyists, industry, and consumers was the passage of Dietary Supplement and Health Education Act (DSHEA). A bill that accomplished the exact opposite of what Congress had set out to do; instead of helping the FDA fight health fraud, it took away much of the FDA's power over dietary supplements, making the industry virtually unregulated. A 2010 U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) report concluded that consumers of dietary supplements are not adequately protected under current U.S. law and regulations.

So where does that leave us? What does DSHEA do? It defines a "dietary supplement" as any product containing dietary ingredients (including vitmains, minerals, herbs, botanical, amino acids) that is taken by mouth in addition to usual food and drink, and labeled as a dietary supplement. The FDA takes a back seat regulatory role under DSHEA. Instead of being in charge of pre-market approval of supplements, the burden of ensuring evidence of safety or efficacy in humans is left unto the manufacturer (no, they're not biased at all *note sarcasm*). Manufacturers have a green light for including ingredients with a safe history of use prior to 1994, and newer ingredients go through a notification process with the FDA. If after a supplement is released, it is found to be unsafe, then and only then can the FDA move in for damage control and take action to remove the product from shelves (see govt crackdown on HCG weight loss supplement).  The FDA uses adverse events reports as evidence of safety concerns, but this reporting system captures only an estimated 1 to 10 percent of all cases where supplements are linked to causing harm.

Now that I've got you all worried and paranoid about the state of supplement regulation (sorry about that, don't shoot the messenger), check out this link with information on what to know before you buy herbal supplements. For information on the labeling that is currently allowed on supplements, check out this link.

Read More

The Daily Show's Lewis Black defines Artisan Foods

Dunkin' Donuts totes their bagels as "artisan," gets sued by New York Bakery. Lewis Black is on the case. So is Forbes if you want to read more. Otherwise, enjoy Black's video rant!

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Back in Black - Artisanal Foods
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

Read More