Posted by Tim at Sep 30th, 2006 in Main
Further to our recent post that discussed that fact that even a heart attack doesn’t ensure that people change their health habits. In that post, we wondered, “If a heart attack isn’t sufficient motivation for following heart healthy guidelines, just what would it take for people to do it.”
Following that same logic, we see a brief but insightful piece in the WAPO by Shankar Vedantam which discusses recent studies that indicate that fear is a poor motivator to encourage improvement in health regimens.
Constantly inundating people with the serious health impacts of obesity, diabetes, lack of exercise has not proved effective. Simply put, scaring people is not the most effective means of changing unhealthful lifestyle choices—fear, guilt, and regret apparently don’t work.
According to the article, “Giving people the confidence that they can make such changes is far more effective, according to an analysis of hundreds of research studies involving 47 different kinds of behaviors. One key to success seems to lie in giving people tools — breaking desirable lifestyle changes down to a series of methodical steps, setting goals and establishing ways to monitor results.”
While I continue to believe that education regarding the tangible risks of obesity, lack of exercise, etc. are crucially important, it’s apparent that that isn’t enough. People have to understand how they can address the problem on their own terms. An interactive process with a health care professional would be ideal.
Read Full Post
Posted by Tim at Sep 29th, 2006 in Main
Here's a graphic representation of an excellent exercise routine for which you only need a simple medicine ball as demonstrated by Jeff Biehl. Note the total body engagement during the routine. Engagement of the core is in evidence as is the upper body, trunk, and legs muscles. The exercise routine also emphasizes hand eye coordination and motor skills. Here are some medicine ball tips from the getfitsource.com site.
|
When using Medicine Balls to improve your fitness level, the emphasis is not necessarily on super-heavy weight lifting. We encourage you to begin your functional training using a lighter-weight ball and then over time work towards increasing the ball weight as challenges to your progression.
|
|
Also, give special consideration to exercises where you will be lifting the ball over your head versus those with rotational or lateral type movements; you should choose lighter weight balls for the overhead presses and heavier balls for the torso-intensive exercises.
|
|
If you are a beginner, you may want to start with the very light Medicine Balls and advance as necessary.
|
|
People at any stage of fitness can make great use of the Medicine Ball to work towards improving their fitness level.
|
Read Full Post
Posted by Tim at Sep 28th, 2006 in Main
Many newspapers are reporting the results of the recent survey that showed that health care costs are rising at twice the rate of inflation. This article in today’s NYT is an example that gives a good summary of the results of the survey. Medical costs rose at 7.7% last year, far in excess of wage increases and much higher than most other cost components of our economy. The trend is actually moderating somewhat, with the 2005 increase the lowest since 1999 but it still moving up at an unsustainable rate. Clearly this has significant impacts on all Americans. In particular, business is squeezed as they try to control costs in the rapidly escalating health care area, with employees unwilling to cede any benefits. Employers also argue that higher health care costs leave less of the pie available for actual wage increases.
However, another NYT article, from yesterday’s edition, a column by economist David Leonhardt takes a somewhat different view and his insights are worth noting. Yes, healthcare costs are spiraling upward, but so is the relative benefit of health care. In a sense, as the economy has matured, with health care becoming much more sophisticated and capable of increasing life span, it’s only natural that the country will spend a higher percent of its GNP on health care. In his words, or perhaps in those of the headline writer summarizing his article, it’s a choice between “more stuff or a better life.” Naturally we are choosing a longer life. Mr. Leonhardt makes the point that, yes, the cost of medical care is dramatically higher than it was in the 1950s when no one worried about the cost of health care. But you are also getting much more for your money. Health care has grown dramatically more expensive but dramatically more effective. Higher health care costs are keeping people alive and therefore represent a good value.
It’s a very valid point. People talk about controlling health care costs but if that means not taking advantage of proven techniques to extend both the quality and length of life, is it really a realistic choice.
Health care costs are rising dramatically but consumers are getting much better care for those increased dollars being spent.
From my perspective, workers and employers both have to recognize this basic fact in their wage discussions.
Read Full Post
Posted by Tim at Sep 27th, 2006 in Main
Annys Shin discusses the preliminary steps being taken in New York City which will ultimately lead to legal restrictions on trans fats served in city restaurants. Annys indicates that trans fats are also called partially hydrogenated vegetable oils and are known to cause heart disease.
No doubt that trans fats are bad for you and should be avoided to the maximum extent possible, but clearly there is a legitimate debate between where personal responsibility and choice enter the picture compared to government control. While some may liken this move as similar to cigarette smoking bans, there is a crucial difference. Smoking bans are necessary to protect innocent people sitting in the same room as the smoker, while eating too much trans fat only hurts the person eating it.
Still there is undoubtedly some role for government to play. It might be preferable to see government stick to requiring strict labeling of the trans fat menace as well as caloric content. For example, it’s far from clear that a diet that allows some trans fats but keeps overall weight in check is worse than a trans fat free diet that allows weight gain. Overall calories, not the amount of trans fat, determines weight gain.
In view of getfitsource.com, while trans fats are bad, overall weight gain, obesity and the resultant increase in diabetes are a greater threat than trans fats per se.
And, Government’s role should focus on education and be information intensive with all out bans being a last result, as long as the only person being harmed is the actual person doing what the government considers to be bad, particularly in the area of food consumption.
Bottom line: New York City is right to be concerned about the healthfulness of its restaurants but it’s difficult to legislate eating habits.
Read Full Post
Posted by Tim at Sep 26th, 2006 in Main
This WAPO article discusses studies that detail the compliance of patients after having had a heart attack with respect to diet, exercise and pharma. The results are not encouraging. For example, “study of 40 women published in Nursing Research in 1998 found that only 27 percent exercised at least three times a week in the three months after finishing cardiac rehab.”
Similarly bad results are detailed for taking mediation and following a diet.
One has to wonder, “If a heart attack isn’t sufficient motivation for following heart healthy guidelines, just what would it take for people to do it.” It does give insight into just how incredibly difficult it is to convince Americans to follow a healthful lifestyle that emphasizes maintenance of a good BMI through exercise and diet.
The article suggests that personal intervention may be a key to improving the dismal record of post heart attack patients in following a more healthful regimen as there may be an “education gap.” That is the patients may not fully understand how important exercise, diet and mediation is.
It’s somewhat incomprehensible that people don’t care enough about their own health to take reasonable steps to prevent another heart attack. Part of the problem may be that the heart attack victims are so set in their ways that they just can’t change their behavior patterns.
It would seem that medical system has to have a much more invasive follow up system to ensure that patients follow recommendations with appropriate incentives for the correct behavior. Employing knowledgeable functionaries to communicate with patients frequently to inquire into their behavior and encourage and explain the right steps would be helpful. American healthcare is highly proficient at performing extremely complicated cardiac surgery but cannot find a solution for the relatively simple issues of human motivation and compliance with medical recommendations. It’s a conundrum that will continue to haunt us and negatively affect the quality of life for many Americans.
Read the whole WAPO article here.
Read Full Post
Posted by Tim at Sep 25th, 2006 in Main
This WebMD article through Fox News.com relates the results of the current studies on obesity, diabetes and risk of death. Cutting through the voluminous material, this study apparently indicates that while obesity increases the risk of premature death, the primary reason that obesity causes premature death is because it causes diabetes. The study indicates that obese people who do not contract diabetes do not have a significantly higher risk of premature death compared to the non-obese.
There is strong dissention to this point of view. The article quotes JoAnn Manson, MD, of the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, who doesn’t buy the idea that diabetes alone is responsible for the increased risk of early death in people who are obese. Manson led the team which reanalyzed CDC data from a prior study.
She told WebMD that there is plenty of good evidence implicating obesity in death from cardiovascular disease and several types of cancer, as well as diabetes.
“There are clearly pathways through which obesity increases the risk of death that do not involve type 2 diabetes,” she says.
I count myself in the company of Dr. Manson. Other studies do show a links between obesity and other diseases besides diabetes which foster premature death. I’m extremely skeptical about the results of this study, i.e., that the only way obesity causes premature death is through diabetes. However, even if correct, obesity still causes premature death, as it dramatically increases your risk of diabetes.
Stay tuned for more studies and more controversy on this subject.
Read Full Post
Posted by Tim at Sep 24th, 2006 in Main
This LAT article is an interesting read, detailing the history of Alzheimer’s disease including the physician, Dr. Alois Alzheimer, who identified and studied the disease and the first Alzheimer’s patient, “Auguste D.,” who died of the disease in Germany in 1906.
Dr. Alzheimer’s studies documented the hardened blood vessels and clusters of cells and proteins, known as plaques and tangles of neurons that permeate the Alzheimer’s patient’s brain tissue.
One hundred years later, with Alzheimer’s a household name, too little is still known about it. Scientists have identified 4 genes that are linked to the disease but still do not know what causes it and there is no cure. Alzheimer’s rarely affects those under 60.
Read Full Post
Posted by Tim at Sep 23rd, 2006 in Main
Imbibing too much sodium is known to cause elevated blood pressure and elevated blood pressure is a leading cause of death in the United States. Other health impacts of excess sodium are less clear, but the link to higher blood pressure is pretty solid.
This WSJ article discusses the impact of sodium on our health and its sources in our diet. The bottom line: anything you eat in restaurants or any processed foods you buy for consumption at home is likely to have excess sodium. As the article makes clear, the threat from excess sodium in your diet really isn’t the household salt shaker but all the sodium already “baked in” to your processed foods.
The article gives some telling examples. The daily recommended intake of sodium is 2,400 mg. Here are some sodium contents for popular processed foods cited by the article:
WaWa Hot Turkey Bowl: 2,288 mg
Panera’s French Onion Soup: 1,790 mg
Wendy’s Frescata Club Sandwich: 1,530 mg
Panera’s Grilled Chicken Caesar Salad: 1,270 mg.
The only answer is to carefully read labels and try to avoid high sodium foods. The article also wisely points out that exercise offers a partial antidote to excess salt as we secrete salt when we exercise.
We also agree with the article that one should cut out processed foods to the maximum extent possible (a very tall order in our fast food society.) Chances are: “if it’s processed, it’s high sodium.”
Read the whole article for the normal great insights of the WSJ's prolific health and fitness writer, Tara Parker-Pope.
Read Full Post
Posted by Tim at Sep 22nd, 2006 in Main
This New York Times article recaps the current state of play about professional relationships between physicians and personal trainers. It’s a difficult one at best. While it makes imminent sense for doctors and trainers to team up to better the health of their respective patients there are many roadblocks that keep that from happening. One of the biggest roadblocks is the lack of trust that many physicians have for personal trainers. On some level this is very understandable because the training and qualifications of personal trainers varies widely. Some have master’s degrees and an excellent understanding of key medical issues, and others do not.
Still, it makes sense for doctors and personal trainers to form alliances based on mutual respect for each person’s qualifications and talents. Exercise and therapy can be a crucial component in the overall health of people and doctors cannot manage this process. Similarly, if trainers are knowledgeable they can refer clients to their doctors when problems exist that are not responsive to exercise. While the idea of an alliance is fantastic, in the real world, it’s unlikely to work out. There just seem to be too many structural impediments for doctors and trainers to work effectively together. Too bad. Both have their areas of expertise and the client/patient can benefit from both.
On the trainer side, many minor aches and pains are more amenable to resolution through exercise than through invasive medical treatment. And, you will spend hours with your trainer, but perhaps only minutes with your doctor. Accordingly, the trainer, if qualified, is sometimes in a better position to assist with certain of your exercise treatable medical conditions than the doctor.
If you can find a doctor/trainer team, great. If not, and frankly, you probably can’t, it’s best to use both and take each professional’s advice within their respective field of expertise. I’ve found that some doctors aren’t focused on the benefits and techniques of exercise and certainly shouldn’t be your only source of exercise advice.
Read Full Post
Posted by Tim at Sep 21st, 2006 in Main
This Daily Mail article recaps a recent report from UK’s Food Standards Agency indicating that organic milk is not more healthful than conventional milk.
Previous reports had indicated that organic milk did contain more healthful omega 3 fatty acids than conventional milk. “Omega-3s are considered to cut consumers' risk of heart disease, and have been linked with better concentration in children.”
The FSA reported that: “… organic milk consumed in volumes consistent with a healthy diet, would not provide sufficient amounts of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids to provide significant health benefits, over and above those associated with conventional milk.”
Of course, organic milk is significantly more expensive than conventional milk.
Our take at Getfitsource on this debate is as follows. First and foremost drink skim milk or ½ %. Second, control your overall caloric intake to achieve a BMI within healthful guidelines. Third, if you can afford it, consider organic milk.
Read Full Post
