Compliments to Your
Health
Weight Management in the 21st
Century:
Part 2 - Food, Glorious Food
by Joann Flora,
Acupressure, Nutrition Counseling, Qigong
November 24, 2004
Wednesday
Ketchikan, Alaska - In
Part 1 of this series on Weight Management, we looked at
some of the reasons Alaska, and America, seems to be on an ever
increasing weight gain status. We identified such things as sedentary
life style, transportation, psycho-social factors,
|

Joann Flora
|
modern food choices, and
predisposition. Part 2 will discuss food factors, specifically meal
planning and portion control, diets, nutrients, energy,
and meal replacements. Much has been written about weight in
recent years. We know that clothing manufacturers have been resizing
clothes so that we don't think we need to buy larger sizes. The
airline industry has identified passenger weight as a cause of
increased fuel consumption; small craft airlines may actually
charge large passengers additional fare. Diet products have
become a mega-industry equal to the financial status of a small
country. All the while, fashion advertisements continue
to emphasize waif-ness as the desirable body type. If all that
doesn't get your attention, how about this: weight gain, and
its related health risks, is currently running neck and
neck with tobacco use as the number one cause of preventable
death. It is expected to be #1 in the near future.
We should not be surprised by this information, though most of
us are.
In 1932, Clive McKay of Cornell University studied the health
and longevity of rats. He fed a test group of weaned rats 60%
fewer calories than a control group. The test group was provided
supplements to insure they were not deficient in necessary nutrition.
The test group tended to grow slower, be smaller than the control
group, and had longevity up to twice that of the controls.
Less food and lean bodies equated to longer life. Since that
time, America has focused on expanding and enhancing the pre-manufactured
food industry, has supersized restaurant portions and created
and entire industry devoted to serving meals quickly. At
the same time, America has been gaining an average of one pound
per year, reaching nearly epidemic levels of heart disease, diabetes,
elevated cholesterol, and high blood pressure. Now, 70 years
later, we are finally getting serious about recognizing the risks
of excess weight. How can we reverse the trend of 70 years?
First, we need to consider what and how we eat: MEAL PLANNING.
As a society, we consume many more calories than we need for
health. We tend to do this because it is convenient to do so.
Convenience comes in some of the follow forms:
1. Drive-through meals
2. Frozen and pre-packaged meals
3. Restaurants
4. Social events (potlucks, fundraiser dinners, banquets) and
recreational eating
When we cook meals at
home using basic ingredients, we tend toward SMALLER PORTIONS and consume
fewer calories than when we use the methods above which
offer large portions, foods fried in reused cooking oils,
sauces, and breading. It is accurate to say that meals of convenience
are generally high calorie, high fat, high sodium, high cholesterol.
They frequently contain hydrogenated fats (liquid fats treated
to stay solid at room temperature) which are known to be artery
clogging. Unfortunately, we believe that our society of two-parent
working families, single-parent homes, multiple jobs, and over-scheduled
time is not conducive to the kind of home cooking on which many
of us were raised. Another factor is that advertising has conditioned
us to falsely believe that we simply don't have the time,
or energy, to cook, and that our solution is eating out
or pre-fab meals. This is not true as frequently as marketers
would have us believe. Test it yourself. In the time it takes
to gather the family, go to a restaurant, order, be served, eat,
and return home, most of us could chop some seasonal vegetable,
make a fresh salad, and steam or grill a nice piece of Alaskan
seafood. The advent of gas BBQ's makes it possible for us
to make beautifully grilled meals most of the year. Though
drive-thru or pre-made meals may be faster than home cooked,
no one can dispute that the nutritional value of freshly cooked
food is significantly higher, and the calorie/fat content tends
to be consistently lower. The key to cooking at home is KEEP
IT SIMPLE. When we keep our meal routine simple, at-home
meal planning itself becomes simpler and dining out more
of a treat than a routine. Some ideas for quick and simple meals
follow. Experiment and make your own.
One-Dish Fish
Layer colorful, seasonal vegetables (EX: Red chard, orange
squash, parsnips, red onions), in a steam basket. Place fresh
fish (Ex: winter king salmon, rock fish) on veggies. Sprinkle
with favorite seasonings (herbs such as rosemary or basil for
an earthy taste or spices like Cajun for a warmer flavor). Steam
together till fish is tender. If using spinach, wilt it atop
the fish when everything else is cooked. Serve with green, veggie,
or carrot salad and warm multi-grain rolls. Note: Save and freeze
the broth from all steamed foods. When you're ready to make soup
(any kind), this broth is the perfect starter.
All-Grilled Meal
Use seafood, chicken strips (unbreaded), steak strips,
or ground turkey burgers. Season or dip in a light sauce (EX:
Teriyaki) or marinate during the work day. Quarter onions,
halve zucchini, wedge sweet potatoes. Depending on your grill,
you can cook the veggies on the perimeter while the meat is over
the fire, you can skewer the pieces or place them in a
grill basket. Some grills allow burner control separately front
to back or left to right. Cooking over moderate heat with
lid down speeds cooking and keeps food moister.
A note about grilling non-fatty proteins (fish or skinless chicken):
a light coat of mayonnaise on the first side facing the fire
helps prevent sticking and conditions the grill for turning.
The fat drips down and does not add significant fat to the food.
Roast-Together Dinner
Using a roasting pan with a lid, place chicken pieces topped
with veggies (pearl onions, fresh crushed garlic, new or baby
red potato slices, baby carrots). Sprinkle with seasonings, spices, or
splash with Teriyaki, cover and roast till done. If you roast
with the skin on, place the food on a rack, allowing the fat
to drip below the food. Using petite vegetables reduces the preparation
time. Covered roasting speeds cooking time and keeps foot moist.
You can remove the cover near the end for browning. Serve with
salad.
Combine the methods above so that you serve steamed, mixed veggies
with grilled or roast protein. Cook extra food for a nice, easy
to reheat lunch the next day. Or, freeze left-over meats
and veggies and add them to the broth you saved for soup. If
you keep your meals small and supplement with nutritious snacks
(fruit, nuts, whole grains, veggies) you can, and should, eat
five to six times per day, consume less calories than during
a super-sized-double-burger- bagged dinner, and keep your metabolism
raised for higher efficiency burning calories.
We've considered how we might improve our meal planning and portion
control, but what about those of us who stand to benefit from
losing weight? How do we do it? The dirty 'D' word, DIET, is
D-pressing, D-moralizing, and D-iscouraging to many people. I
try never to use it with my nutrition clients. I prefer
to work with nutrition programs or meal plans rather than diets
as these terms are perceived as positive and beneficial.
Many Americans spend a great deal of their lives on 'diets',
which we all know don't work. Why not? The answer is simpler
than we think: we have not made a significant, long term change
in our eating behavior. Again, I go back to advertising and marketing
which repeatedly tells us that we need a certain pill,
powder, potion, club, or exercise machine to reach our
ideal weight. So we buy products and programs that promise to
solve our weight problems quickly without much effort on our
part. They promise we will lose weight while we sleep, eat anything
we want, in only 20 minutes a day, three times per week.
We are conditioned to believe it can be done, fast without effort.
It's a billion dollar fantasy land. The truth is that if we do
not somehow reach a 500 negative calorie burn through dietary
changes and increased activity, we don't lose weight. Beware
of any plan that doesn't call for an increase in your activity
level!
If diets don't work, why do the diet books continue to sell and
the testimonials continue to roll in? In any diet - Atkins, South
Beach, grapefruit, Mayo Clinic Soup, watermelon, etc. - the participant
tends to eat less food due to limited choices. Less choice often
results in less volume of food and fewer calories consumed. Weight
is lost for the duration of the diet, but success turns to failure
when we resume regular meals due to a lack of maintenance strategies.
Our weight can yo-yo up and down year after year as we go on
and off diets due to the evolutionary factors that allowed
the primitive body to maintain a desirable weight year round,
regardless of food supply availability. The energy flow chart
of dieting looks like this:
DIET PLAN = REDUCED CALORIC
INTAKE
= WEIGHT LOSS
= BRAIN RECOGNIZES FAMINE CONDITIONS (caloric deficiency)
= METABOLISM SLOWS TO CONSERVE CALORIES FOR NEXT FAMINE
(weight loss stops)
NORMAL EATING RESUMES = INCREASED
CALORIC INTAKE
= BRAIN RECOGNIZES END OF FAMINE AND ASSESSES CALORIC ADEQUACY
= BRAIN DIRECTS METABOLISM TO STORE CALORIES FOR NEXT FAMINE
= WEIGHT GAIN
= FASTER/GREATER GAIN THAN BEFORE DIET
Each time we diet, we are working
against the body's mechanism to protect us from food shortages
by storing calories during times of plenty in preparation
for leaner times. Each successive weight loss period becomes
harder and longer, while each period of weight gain brings us
more poundage in less time. The process of dieting is a contest
of our will over our evolved metabolism as we teach our brain
that there are frequent periods of famine followed by times of
plenty. The reality of successful weight management is that we
need to make consistent changes in eating behavior over a four
to five year period of time in order to effect long term loss.
The reconditioning of our brain (and thus our evolutionary metabolism)
and eating behavior takes that much time; this can't be accomplished
quicker. Therefore, whether a person uses an in-vogue diet or
simply cuts calories (even to the point of starvation) doesn't
seem to matter. The point is that the change must become a permanent
reduction in caloric intake and expansion of activity level.
The best caloric restrictions are the ones that
afford an adequate, regulated intake of MACRO-NUTRIENTS:
protein, carbohydrate, and fats. The body requires all three
to function adequately and long term deprivation of any one can
create an imbalance in the body. If our intake of fat, carbohydrate,
and protein equals what we burn (oxidize), we have ENERGY
balance and weight maintenance. When we take in less macro
nutrients than we burn, we create a negative energy balance (weight
loss). What is important about this factor is that it all really
boils down to what we've known for many decades: a calorie is
a calorie and we need to burn more than we consume to lose
weight. It's therefore irrelevant if we restrict carbohydrate
or fat calories, though it is healthier over the long term to
restrict fat. Restricting carbohydrates may produce quicker weight
loss, but it is not a healthy option for long term weight
management. Though many nutrition professionals scoff at
Atkins, South Beach, and other vogue diets, I feel that whatever
plan gets you motivated and started is great. Lose some weight,
feel good about yourself, and move onto a loss-maintenance program
that will keep you healthy and lean for the long haul. Losing
only five to ten percent of your body weight is enough to begin
lowering your risk of metabolic syndrome (heart disease, hypertension,
diabetes, etc). The 200 pound man who would ideally weight 150
can begin to reduce his metabolic risk by losing 10 to 20
pounds.
ENERGY in vs out is still the best approach to weight loss; exactly
what is the "best program" is different for different
people. Regardless of your plan specifics, the ideal program
shares several characteristics:
- 1. It provides the largest
negative energy status = weight loss
2. It is safe as well as effective = no mal-nourishment
3. It will tend to result in a negative fat balance = supports
cardio-vascular adequacy
Last, I wish to address the
subject of MEAL REPLACEMENTS (MR's). I have long had an aversion
to MR's as they are seldom used appropriately. Meal Replacements
are not snacks, they replace meals and contain sufficient calories
and macro-nutrients (protein, carbohydrate, and fat) to suffice
for a complete meal. Dieters are sometimes known to consume
an MR (shake or bar) then have a meal. They wonder why
they cannot lose weight on the 'Slim Fast' (or other MR) plan. MR's
that are not satisfying, (do not produce sensations of fullness
and adequate food intake), only stimulate us to want to continue
eating. Using the 'MR as snack' scenario, it is colossally difficult
to reach a 500 negative calorie status. In fact, this practice
will often produce weight gain. Susan Bowerman, RD of the
UCLA Center for Human Nutrition recently shed some light on this
issue. One reason MR's can fail to produce the desired results
is that they can be a) slow to enter the system, or b) they
only provide short term appetite satisfaction. She recommends
combining whey and soy proteins for adequate satiety (appetite
satisfaction). Bowerman states that using whey protein mixed
in soy milk provides the benefit of quick entry into the
system (whey) and long term satiety (soy). Shakes can be
mixed or blended with yogurt or fruit for variety. I have personally
tried this combination and have found it to be very satisfying.
People looking to lose considerable weight can use a whey/soy
MR for two meals, eat a balanced, sensible dinner with their
family and achieve good results. To lose a few pounds, use one
whey/soy MR and eat two reasonably light meals. This type of
effective MR use can be effective for achieving long term weight
loss goals and maintenance. In addition to utilizing MR's, the
person wishing to lose weight can adjust meals in the following
ways:
- 1. Substitute small plates
for large and eat a plateful of food.
2. Eliminate foods that are breaded, fried, or in rich sauces.
3. Replace pastry-like desserts with fresh fruits or non-fat
yogurt.
4. Drink a full glass of water 20 minutes prior to eating to
curb appetite.
5. Take salad dressing on the side, dip the fork into the dressing
and then the salad.
6. Be sure each meal contains protein (3-4 oz), carbohydrates
(whole grain or starchy vegetable), and fat (olive oil, fat from
fish) for macro-nutrient balance.
7. Track your calories! Women should aim at 1200 per day and
men 1500. Go to www.caloriesperhour.com for an on-line calorie
counter plus lots of additional information about nutrition and
weight management.
Reduced calories and balanced
nutrition is but a part of the equation. Part 3 of this
series will focus on movement as a necessity for effective weight
loss. Please feel free to submit your comments and questions
about Parts 1 and 2 as well as your suggestions for information
to be included in Part 3.

flora@sitnews.org
©Compliments
To Your Health
Joann Flora 2004
Post a Comment -------View Comments
Submit an Opinion - Letter
Sitnews
Stories In The News
|