Low Vitamin D is common and increasing

A new report from the International Osteoporosis Foundation shows that populations all around the world are suffering from low levels of vitamin D. The problem is increasing and will likely have negative effects on overall health and fracture rates in particular.

Vitamin D is mainly produced in the skin when it is exposured to sunlight and low levels of vitamin D often lead to increased risk of osteoporosis, hip fractures and, in severe cases, to rickets.

The main risk factors for low vitamin D levels highlighted in the report include being older, female, living at lower latitudes, winter season, darker skin, less sunlight exposure and dietary habits.

Reference:
A. Mithal, D.A. Wahl, J-P. Bonjour et al. Global vitamin D status and determinants of hypovitaminosis D. Osteoporosis International 2009.


Weblink:

http://www.springerlink.com/content/rk974qu66jm36p5n/?p=c3b7559689b74a318d596045fa024dc4π=1

CHRISTUS Health on the Right Journey as Health Care Reform Initiatives Accelerate

Clearly, the CHRISTUS Health goal to continue our journey to become one of the highest quality and lowest cost providers both in the U.S. and internationally appears to be the key to success for the for the minds of those driving health care reform, including Sen. Kennedy and President Obama.The proposed plans emanating from the White House and Congress have several key strategies in common,

CHRISTUS Health on the Right Journey as Health Care Reform Initiatives Accelerate

Clearly, the CHRISTUS Health goal to continue our journey to become one of the highest quality and lowest cost providers both in the U.S. and internationally appears to be the key to success for the for the minds of those driving health care reform, including Sen. Kennedy and President Obama.The proposed plans emanating from the White House and Congress have several key strategies in common,

Archives :June 2009

June 29Blueberry Almond Butter-oats Bars

June 27Plum Bakewell Tart...err..Pudding

June 23A year of Healthful blogging.Cherry-blueberry Crumble.Announcing the event,Health Nut Challenge

June 19Radish Greens and Brown rice Soup with Sesame Twists.Fruit2day,a new way to eat fruit

June 17Peruvian Causa,a layered potato and Vegetable Salad

June 15Whole Grain Garden Veggie Pizza

June 12Kale-Barley Soup

June 10Strawberry Rhubarb Ice Pops

June 8Organic, for a healthier you and greener earth.Food ,Inc.-the truth about food Industry

June 4Sarson Ka Saag Aur Makke Ki Roti(Mustard greens and Corn Flatbread)


June 2Mint Harissa Chicken

Junk food makers may be open to national limits in schools

Rising childhood obesity rates and easing resistance from the food industry may result in meaningful national legislation to limit junk food in schools according to today’s Washington Post. CT was a national leader in 2005 passing a ban on soda in schools, which was vetoed by the Governor. In 2006, the legislature passed and the Governor signed a similar ban that included incentives for schools to meet nutritional food standards. Since then a dozen states have passed similar laws. According to the liquid candy calculator from the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a one cent tax per 12 oz. non-diet soda in CT could raise $18 million/year; obesity costs CT over a billion dollars annually, over half of that in Medicaid.
Ellen Andrews

LDL Calculator

Commenter Kiwi Geoff kindly wrote a program that calculates LDL using the Friedewald equation and the equation from this paper, which may be more accurate for people with a total cholesterol over 250 and triglycerides under 100. For people whose triglycerides are over 100, the Friedewald equation should be relatively accurate. You can plug your total cholesterol, HDL and triglycerides into the program (in mg/dL), and it gives you both LDL values side-by side. Here it is:

LDL Cholesterol Calculator

Thanks, Geoff.

LDL Calculator

Commenter Kiwi Geoff kindly wrote a program that calculates LDL using the Friedewald equation and the equation from this paper, which may be more accurate for people with a total cholesterol over 250 and triglycerides under 100. For people whose triglycerides are over 100, the Friedewald equation should be relatively accurate. You can plug your total cholesterol, HDL and triglycerides into the program (in mg/dL), and it gives you both LDL values side-by side. Here it is:

LDL Cholesterol Calculator

Thanks, Geoff.

LDL Calculator

Commenter Kiwi Geoff kindly wrote a program that calculates LDL using the Friedewald equation and the equation from this paper, which may be more accurate for people with a total cholesterol over 250 and triglycerides under 100. For people whose triglycerides are over 100, the Friedewald equation should be relatively accurate. You can plug your total cholesterol, HDL and triglycerides into the program (in mg/dL), and it gives you both LDL values side-by side. Here it is:

LDL Cholesterol Calculator

Thanks, Geoff.

LDL Calculator

Commenter Kiwi Geoff kindly wrote a program that calculates LDL using the Friedewald equation and the equation from this paper, which may be more accurate for people with a total cholesterol over 250 and triglycerides under 100. For people whose triglycerides are over 100, the Friedewald equation should be relatively accurate. You can plug your total cholesterol, HDL and triglycerides into the program (in mg/dL), and it gives you both LDL values side-by side. Here it is:

LDL Cholesterol Calculator

Thanks, Geoff.

Blueberry Almond Butter-Oats Bar.Agave Nectar,the Low GI Sweetener

The best part of the summers are the surplus gorgeous berries,melons and stone fruits brimming in the local markets,all at affordable prices.After picking your favorite kind of berries ,how do you use up these delicate fruit with short shelf life before spoiling?I say,make preserves that can go great on a toast ,biscuits or for baking. Or enjoy them whole in a cooling yogurt smoothie ,blend it in the Nature's best drink,parfait,fruity pancakes or sprinkle over the morning bowl of cereal.


I've made bars before with whole oats,for this recipe I use ground oats and didn't use any wheat flour keeping them gluten-free bars.With crumbly texture, blueberry filling and soft almond butter topping these were totally enjoyable.You could even use mangoes or plums or which ever fruit is in season in your part of the world.

Agave Nectar,the Low GI Sweetener
I use Agave Nectar as a sweetener.Agave is extracted from the heart of the agave plant.It is a low glycemic sweetener,best suited for diabetics,as it is slowly absorbed in to the body preventing spikes in blood sugar.It is 25% sweeter than sugar,so you need less.The sweet mild taste is perfect for sweetening beverages,baking and as a multipurpose sweetener.Read more more other natural sweeteners with low GI in my post here.Agave is available in many natural food stores,I bought mine from Costco.

Recipe
Ingredients
For Blue Berry Filling
3 cups Fresh blueberries
1/4 cup water
1 tablespoon cornstarch mixed with 1 tablespoon water.

For Bottom Oatmeal layer
2 cups Whole rolled oats
1/4 cup Flax seed meal
1/2 teaspoon baking soda
1/4 teaspoon salt
2 tablespoon Olive oil or vegetable oil
1 Organic egg (Vegans could replace with 1/2 cup applesauce or tofu)
1/4 cup Agave or 1/2 cup sugar
1/2 cup reduced fat milk or soy milk

For Top Almond Butter Layer
1/2 cup Almond butter
1/2 cup whole rolled oats
2 teaspoon Agave or 1 tablespoon sugar

*If you can't use almond butter,use 1/2 cup roasted ground almonds,blend with 3-4 tablespoon of water to smooth paste .


Method
Prepare the filling by Cooking the berries and water,until bubbly and soft,then mix in the cornstarch dissolved in water,stir constantly until thickened.Let cool.

Grind the oats used in both the layers to a coarse mixture in a food processor or blender.Grind together then measure and use separately.Approximately 3/4th for the bottom layer and rest for the top layer.

Preheat oven to 350F. Grease a 8X8 inch baking dish with oil or line with parchment paper.

Mix the bottom layer in medium bowl,whip egg or tofu with agave or sugar,then stir in rest of the ingredients.Spread evenly on the bottom of the baking dish,next spread the blueberry filling.
In the same bowl mix the ground oats ,almond butter and sugar.Spread over the blueberry filling using a spatula or with fingers.
Bake in the middle rack of the oven,for about 25-30 minutes until the top is nice and brown.Cool completely and cut in to squares.Enjoy these nutritious bars with morning or evening cuppa tea or coffee .

These bars are my entry for Heart of the Matter : Best of June's produce

CT on health reform.gov

On Friday, President Obama’s website tracking health care reform published state-specific pages making the case for reform. CT’s numbers aren’t surprising, but it’s another source for info. Family premiums in CT approximately equal the entire wages of a full time minimum wage worker. Employers offering coverage is dropping, health care costs are skyrocketing, and the quality of our care is average.

My pet peeve with these collections from national sources (and it’s not just the White House) – we are not “Connecticuters”. I’ve lived in CT thirty four years and never heard that word. Are national reformers talking to anyone outside the beltway, beyond Massachusetts I mean?
Ellen Andrews

Another Fatty Liver Reversal

Just to show it wasn't a fluke, reader "Steve" replicates the experiment:

I had a similar problem as what Sam described, and it just happened to coincide with my discovery of and commitment to a new eating plan (based on low/good carb, high in good fat and omega 3, and good protein--basically a mix of paleo, primal, low carb, whatever they call it). I consider myself lucky to have had great fortune in my timing of finding out about my fatty liver.

My ALT and AST [markers of liver damage] had been at 124 and 43 respectively, and then still at 80 and 30 in a follow up a few months later. I weighed in at about 205 (I'm 6'1.5" on a slimmish frame), which was my heaviest. I had been on a basic American (bad) diet. The whole thing shocked me, especially after a CT with contrast showed the fatty deposits on my liver (and prior to that, when the muddy ultrasound revealed a fatty liver and a possible pancreatic mass, later ruled out by the CT). Like Sam, though I was surely overweight, I was not fat or heavy. (Most people have noticed I look leaner, but are shocked when I disclose how much weight I have lost since they say "I cannot believe you had that much to lose.")

At about the same time I found out about my liver issue, I had been getting into reading about diet and health (something I had done once when I read the Zone stuff from Sears many years ago). I practically dove through Taubes, Eades, Cordain, and a bunch of blogs (including yours), and I made a commitment to fix my problem.

I started a pretty severe regimen at first, which included only protein and good fats with a minimal amount of non-starchy fruits and vegetables. Almost immediately, I started losing weight and body fat (as measured by an electrical impedance scale). I have always supplemented with fish oil, but I added krill oil and I also started eating grass-fed beef and pastured eggs and pastured pork as much as possible. I have added some coconut oil and pastured butter to my diet as well. I have dropped almost 40 pounds, I am down to about 10-11% body fat (from 24%), and my ALT/AST on my last test was 24/14 [normal]. I am getting another test soon, and I expect similar results.

And a later comment:

I can add to the story that I first found out about the fatty liver on a routine new patient blood screening when I moved to a new town. I can also add that it took a bit of initiative on my part to get to the right diagnosis. The first doctor suspected hepatitis, but when blood work ruled that out, he ordered the imagining tests. Once I was referred to a GI specialist, it was a quick diagnosis. Still, I had to undertake myself to figure out the best diet. The GI recommended eliminating white bread, rice, pasta, starches, etc. but also recommended lowering fat intake. Having done some of my reading on diet and health, I knew to follow the former advice and to modify the latter to be "get plenty of fat, but make sure its the right kind."

Steve took the initiative and fixed his damaged liver. He modified his GI doctor's advice based on what he had read about nutrition, with excellent results. I suspect his doctor will be all ears next time Steve comes into his office.

The liver is a remarkable organ. Besides being your "metabolic grand central station", it's the only organ in the human body that can regenerate almost completely. It can be 75% obliterated, and it will grow back over time. Fatty liver and NASH are largely reversible.

Another Fatty Liver Reversal

Just to show it wasn't a fluke, reader "Steve" replicates the experiment:

I had a similar problem as what Sam described, and it just happened to coincide with my discovery of and commitment to a new eating plan (based on low/good carb, high in good fat and omega 3, and good protein--basically a mix of paleo, primal, low carb, whatever they call it). I consider myself lucky to have had great fortune in my timing of finding out about my fatty liver.

My ALT and AST [markers of liver damage] had been at 124 and 43 respectively, and then still at 80 and 30 in a follow up a few months later. I weighed in at about 205 (I'm 6'1.5" on a slimmish frame), which was my heaviest. I had been on a basic American (bad) diet. The whole thing shocked me, especially after a CT with contrast showed the fatty deposits on my liver (and prior to that, when the muddy ultrasound revealed a fatty liver and a possible pancreatic mass, later ruled out by the CT). Like Sam, though I was surely overweight, I was not fat or heavy. (Most people have noticed I look leaner, but are shocked when I disclose how much weight I have lost since they say "I cannot believe you had that much to lose.")

At about the same time I found out about my liver issue, I had been getting into reading about diet and health (something I had done once when I read the Zone stuff from Sears many years ago). I practically dove through Taubes, Eades, Cordain, and a bunch of blogs (including yours), and I made a commitment to fix my problem.

I started a pretty severe regimen at first, which included only protein and good fats with a minimal amount of non-starchy fruits and vegetables. Almost immediately, I started losing weight and body fat (as measured by an electrical impedance scale). I have always supplemented with fish oil, but I added krill oil and I also started eating grass-fed beef and pastured eggs and pastured pork as much as possible. I have added some coconut oil and pastured butter to my diet as well. I have dropped almost 40 pounds, I am down to about 10-11% body fat (from 24%), and my ALT/AST on my last test was 24/14 [normal]. I am getting another test soon, and I expect similar results.

And a later comment:

I can add to the story that I first found out about the fatty liver on a routine new patient blood screening when I moved to a new town. I can also add that it took a bit of initiative on my part to get to the right diagnosis. The first doctor suspected hepatitis, but when blood work ruled that out, he ordered the imagining tests. Once I was referred to a GI specialist, it was a quick diagnosis. Still, I had to undertake myself to figure out the best diet. The GI recommended eliminating white bread, rice, pasta, starches, etc. but also recommended lowering fat intake. Having done some of my reading on diet and health, I knew to follow the former advice and to modify the latter to be "get plenty of fat, but make sure its the right kind."

Steve took the initiative and fixed his damaged liver. He modified his GI doctor's advice based on what he had read about nutrition, with excellent results. I suspect his doctor will be all ears next time Steve comes into his office.

The liver is a remarkable organ. Besides being your "metabolic grand central station", it's the only organ in the human body that can regenerate almost completely. It can be 75% obliterated, and it will grow back over time. Fatty liver and NASH are largely reversible.

Another Fatty Liver Reversal

Just to show it wasn't a fluke, reader "Steve" replicates the experiment:

I had a similar problem as what Sam described, and it just happened to coincide with my discovery of and commitment to a new eating plan (based on low/good carb, high in good fat and omega 3, and good protein--basically a mix of paleo, primal, low carb, whatever they call it). I consider myself lucky to have had great fortune in my timing of finding out about my fatty liver.

My ALT and AST [markers of liver damage] had been at 124 and 43 respectively, and then still at 80 and 30 in a follow up a few months later. I weighed in at about 205 (I'm 6'1.5" on a slimmish frame), which was my heaviest. I had been on a basic American (bad) diet. The whole thing shocked me, especially after a CT with contrast showed the fatty deposits on my liver (and prior to that, when the muddy ultrasound revealed a fatty liver and a possible pancreatic mass, later ruled out by the CT). Like Sam, though I was surely overweight, I was not fat or heavy. (Most people have noticed I look leaner, but are shocked when I disclose how much weight I have lost since they say "I cannot believe you had that much to lose.")

At about the same time I found out about my liver issue, I had been getting into reading about diet and health (something I had done once when I read the Zone stuff from Sears many years ago). I practically dove through Taubes, Eades, Cordain, and a bunch of blogs (including yours), and I made a commitment to fix my problem.

I started a pretty severe regimen at first, which included only protein and good fats with a minimal amount of non-starchy fruits and vegetables. Almost immediately, I started losing weight and body fat (as measured by an electrical impedance scale). I have always supplemented with fish oil, but I added krill oil and I also started eating grass-fed beef and pastured eggs and pastured pork as much as possible. I have added some coconut oil and pastured butter to my diet as well. I have dropped almost 40 pounds, I am down to about 10-11% body fat (from 24%), and my ALT/AST on my last test was 24/14 [normal]. I am getting another test soon, and I expect similar results.

And a later comment:

I can add to the story that I first found out about the fatty liver on a routine new patient blood screening when I moved to a new town. I can also add that it took a bit of initiative on my part to get to the right diagnosis. The first doctor suspected hepatitis, but when blood work ruled that out, he ordered the imagining tests. Once I was referred to a GI specialist, it was a quick diagnosis. Still, I had to undertake myself to figure out the best diet. The GI recommended eliminating white bread, rice, pasta, starches, etc. but also recommended lowering fat intake. Having done some of my reading on diet and health, I knew to follow the former advice and to modify the latter to be "get plenty of fat, but make sure its the right kind."

Steve took the initiative and fixed his damaged liver. He modified his GI doctor's advice based on what he had read about nutrition, with excellent results. I suspect his doctor will be all ears next time Steve comes into his office.

The liver is a remarkable organ. Besides being your "metabolic grand central station", it's the only organ in the human body that can regenerate almost completely. It can be 75% obliterated, and it will grow back over time. Fatty liver and NASH are largely reversible.

Another Fatty Liver Reversal

Just to show it wasn't a fluke, reader "Steve" replicates the experiment:

I had a similar problem as what Sam described, and it just happened to coincide with my discovery of and commitment to a new eating plan (based on low/good carb, high in good fat and omega 3, and good protein--basically a mix of paleo, primal, low carb, whatever they call it). I consider myself lucky to have had great fortune in my timing of finding out about my fatty liver.

My ALT and AST [markers of liver damage] had been at 124 and 43 respectively, and then still at 80 and 30 in a follow up a few months later. I weighed in at about 205 (I'm 6'1.5" on a slimmish frame), which was my heaviest. I had been on a basic American (bad) diet. The whole thing shocked me, especially after a CT with contrast showed the fatty deposits on my liver (and prior to that, when the muddy ultrasound revealed a fatty liver and a possible pancreatic mass, later ruled out by the CT). Like Sam, though I was surely overweight, I was not fat or heavy. (Most people have noticed I look leaner, but are shocked when I disclose how much weight I have lost since they say "I cannot believe you had that much to lose.")

At about the same time I found out about my liver issue, I had been getting into reading about diet and health (something I had done once when I read the Zone stuff from Sears many years ago). I practically dove through Taubes, Eades, Cordain, and a bunch of blogs (including yours), and I made a commitment to fix my problem.

I started a pretty severe regimen at first, which included only protein and good fats with a minimal amount of non-starchy fruits and vegetables. Almost immediately, I started losing weight and body fat (as measured by an electrical impedance scale). I have always supplemented with fish oil, but I added krill oil and I also started eating grass-fed beef and pastured eggs and pastured pork as much as possible. I have added some coconut oil and pastured butter to my diet as well. I have dropped almost 40 pounds, I am down to about 10-11% body fat (from 24%), and my ALT/AST on my last test was 24/14 [normal]. I am getting another test soon, and I expect similar results.

And a later comment:

I can add to the story that I first found out about the fatty liver on a routine new patient blood screening when I moved to a new town. I can also add that it took a bit of initiative on my part to get to the right diagnosis. The first doctor suspected hepatitis, but when blood work ruled that out, he ordered the imagining tests. Once I was referred to a GI specialist, it was a quick diagnosis. Still, I had to undertake myself to figure out the best diet. The GI recommended eliminating white bread, rice, pasta, starches, etc. but also recommended lowering fat intake. Having done some of my reading on diet and health, I knew to follow the former advice and to modify the latter to be "get plenty of fat, but make sure its the right kind."

Steve took the initiative and fixed his damaged liver. He modified his GI doctor's advice based on what he had read about nutrition, with excellent results. I suspect his doctor will be all ears next time Steve comes into his office.

The liver is a remarkable organ. Besides being your "metabolic grand central station", it's the only organ in the human body that can regenerate almost completely. It can be 75% obliterated, and it will grow back over time. Fatty liver and NASH are largely reversible.

More selenium could slash bladder cancer risk

The Facts:

* Selenium is a trace element that is essential for good health.

* Researchers in Belgium studied the link between levels of selenium in the blood and the risk of bladder cancer in over 500 patients.

* The results showed that low levels of selenium were associated with an increased risk of developing bladder cancer.

Shaun’s comment: This was an excellent study, which compared a group of people with bladder cancer (“cases”) with a group of similarly aged people living in the same area without the disease (“controls”). As selenium is thought to prevent cancers, the researchers looked at whether those with more selenium in their blood would have less chance of getting cancer. And that is precisely what they found. This would appear to be yet another potential benefit from having a good intake or selenium, either in food or as a supplement.

Study reference:

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2042.2006.01526.x

2,5 Billion(!) dollars spent on search for alternative therapies...

Often when I debate alternative therapies or remedies with people they claim that there is no evidence in favor of alternative methods and therapies because no one bothers to investigate (and find the amazing effects), or that no money is given to investigators who want to test these remedies i.e. that the grant managers are against alternative therapies. These excuses are now no longer valid since the American government has spent 2,5 Billion dollars testing alternative therapies.

As was known and not unexpected from my point of view is that some alternative therapies do show minor benefits. Acupuncture works for certain things, yoga helps you relax which also results in other spin off effects. However a large majority of the therapies tested proved to be no better than placebo (if you think that placebo is "good enough" read my post here).

Also remarkable is how easy it seems to be to get a grant if you wan't to study alternative therapies (which by definition do not have a solid scientific theory behind them). In one instance 2 million dollars were given to study whether accupressure could help people loose weight. Now this large sum of money was given despite the fact that a pilot study on 60 participants had failed. The grant was given even though no scientist have ever found any evidence of meridians (in accupressure you are supposed to press on these meridians). I could go on, but the essence of the matter is that these 2 million dollars were given to a study that, judging from the evidence, had extremely low plausibility - I would even go as far as to say that if accupressure would prove to have an effect (beyond placebo) we would face a paradigm shift in biology.

There are of course some positive aspects of this endeavour. I suppose that it is normally good to test whether a really popular type of therapy works. However, the question is whether the people using a particular therapy cares about the outcome of a scientific study - my guess is that they will only care if it gives them a positive results, otherwise it is just biased scientists. I also have trouble seeing where to put the line, there are some really crazy ideas out there and if we would start to research everything that is getting popular we would end up spending huge amounts of money on evaluating pure nonsense.

I would personally prefer that grants are given to those who have good reasons for studying whatever it is they want to study, today that is not the case...

See also orsakverkan (swe)

Talking about homeopathy on Newstalk ZB...and listener feedback

On Kerre Woodham's show on Sunday 28th June 2009. First we have the interview and then some feedback from listeners.

Here's some feedback from listeners...the last one is worth listening to for those that say that there is no harm from homeopathy...

Evidence for...Folic Acid for depression

Folate for depressive disorders: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Taylor MJ et al.
J Psychopharmacol. 2004;18:251-6.
Evidence was reviewed from 3 randomised controlled trials (247 participants) on the effectiveness, adverse effects and acceptability of folate in the treatment of patients with a diagnosis of depressive disorder. In the 2 studies that assessed the use of folate in addition to other treatment, adding folate reduced Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores on average by a further 2.65 points, while the remaining study found no statistically significant difference when folate alone was compared with trazodone. Folate was well tolerated.


Enhancement of the antidepressant action of fluoxetine by folic acid: a randomised, placebo controlled trial.
Coppen A and Bailey J.
J Affect Disord. 2000;60:121-30.
127 patients with major depression were randomly assigned to receive either 500 microg folic acid or a placebo in addition to 20 mg fluoxetine daily. At 10 weeks, the overall response rate (>50% decrease from baseline in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale score) was 82% for folate plus fluoxetine group vs 62% for the placebo and fluoxetine group; an analysis of these data according to gender found that the difference was 94% vs 61% in the women, respectively, while there was no difference in the men.


Folate and unipolar depression.
Morris DW et al.
J Altern Complement Med. 2008;14:277-85.
This review of the literature on the clinical utility of folate augmentation for patients with major depressive disorder concluded that depressed patients with both low and normal folate levels may benefit from augmentation of antidepressant medication with a folate supplement either initially, at the onset of treatment, or later in cases of treatment resistance.

Plum Bakewell Tart......er.....Pudding

The June Daring Bakers' challenge was hosted by Jasmine of Confessions of a Cardamom Addict and Annemarie of Ambrosia and Nectar. They chose a Traditional (UK) Bakewell Tart... er... pudding that was inspired by a rich baking history dating back to the 1800's in England.

This sensational pudding like tart is local confection of a charming small town in Derbyshire(England),can easily be put together with a fruity filling over shortcrust pastry shell and topped with sponge-like filling with ground almonds(Frangipane).Baked to perfection this is an absolutely succulent fruit and nut tart...er...pudding.
I used my home made plum Jam for the fruit filling and honestly I prefer mildly sweet desserts,hence had to reduce the sugar from the suggested recipe.This dessert is mildly sweet ,as the home made Jam is was also low sugar, add a little more sugar if desired.Adding cocoa to the pastry crust isn't very traditional,but I decided to slip in some ,for a touch of chocolate to the tart.Also for those on No eggs diet, these can be baked without eggs,check the recipe for the substitutions.


Recipe
Makes one 23cm (9” tart)
Prep time: less than 10 minutes (plus time for the individual elements)
Resting time: 15 minutes
Baking time: 30 minutes
Equipment needed: 23cm (9”) tart pan or pie tin (preferably with ridged edges), rolling pin

You'll Need
One quantity shortcrust pastry (recipe follows)
250ml (1cup (8 US fl. oz)) jam (I used home made Plum Jam)
One quantity frangipane (recipe follows)
One handful blanched, flaked almonds

Assembling the tart
Place the chilled dough disc on a lightly floured surface. If it's overly cold, you will need to let it become acclimatised for about 15 minutes before you roll it out. Flour the rolling pin and roll the pastry to 5mm (1/4”) thickness, by rolling in one direction only (start from the center and roll away from you), and turning the disc a quarter turn after each roll. When the pastry is to the desired size and thickness, transfer it to the tart pan, press in and trim the excess dough. Patch any holes, fissures or tears with trimmed bits. Chill in the freezer for 15 minutes.

Preheat oven to 200C/400F.

Remove shell from freezer, spread as even a layer as you can of jam onto the pastry base. Top with frangipane, spreading to cover the entire surface of the tart. Smooth the top and pop into the oven for 30 minutes. Five minutes before the tart is done, the top will be poofy and brownish. Remove from oven and strew flaked almonds on top and return to the heat for the last five minutes of baking.

The finished tart will have a golden crust and the frangipane will be tanned, poofy and a bit spongy-looking. Remove from the oven and cool on the counter. Serve warm or cold with sliced fresh fruit

When you slice into the tart, the almond paste will be firm, but slightly squidgy and the crust should be crisp but not tough.



Prep time: 15-20 minutes
Resting time: 30 minutes (minimum)
For Cocoa Short Crust Pastry Dough
Ingredients
1 cup all purpose flour
1/2 cup Whole wheat flour
1/4 cup unsweetened cocoa powder
1 tablespoon sugar
2 organic egg yolks(exclude the eggs for eggless crust substitute with a tablespoon extra oil or butter)
2 tablespoon cold butter
3-4 tablespoons cold water
1/2 teaspoon almond extract or use 1 tablespoon of Orange blossom water

Method
Sift together flour, sugar and salt. Grate butter into the flour mixture, using the large hole-side of a box grater. Using your finger tips only, and working very quickly, rub the fat into the flour until the mixture resembles bread crumbs. Set aside.

Lightly beat the egg yolks with the almond extract (if using) and quickly mix into the flour mixture. Keep mixing while dribbling in the water, only adding enough to form a cohesive and slightly sticky dough.

Form the dough into a disc, wrap in cling and refrigerate for at least 30 minutes


For Frangipane

Prep time: 10-15 minutes

Ingredients
3 Organic eggs (or use 2 tablespoon of cornstarch for egg less frangipane + 1 cup of Tofu)
1/2 teaspoon almond extract or 1 tablespoon orange blossom water or rose water
3/4 cup(125g) ground almonds
1 tablespoon Sugar(add a tablespoon more for little more sweetness)
1 tablespoon softened butter
2 tablespoon(30g) all purpose flour

Cream butter and sugar together for about a minute or until the mixture is primrose in color and very fluffy. Scrape down the side of the bowl and add the eggs, one at a time, beating well after each addition. The batter may appear to curdle. In the words of Douglas Adams: Don’t panic. Really. It’ll be fine. After all three are in, pour in the almond extract and mix for about another 30 seconds and scrape down the sides again. With the beaters on, spoon in the ground nuts and the flour. Mix well. The mixture will be soft, keep its slightly curdled look (mostly from the almonds) and retain its pallid yellow color.

Peak in to many more delectable variations of this Tart..er..pudding at the Daring Bakers Blogroll

When Friedewald Attacks

I don't get very excited about nitpicking blood lipids. That's not to say they're not useful. There's definitely an association between blood lipids and certain health outcomes such as cardiovascular disease. The thing that tires me is when people uncritically interpret those associations as evidence that lipids are actually causing the problem.

Low-density lipoprotein, or LDL, is the cholesterol fraction that typically gets the most attention. High LDL associates with heart attack risk in Americans and some other groups. Statins reduce LDL and reduce heart attack risk in a subset of the population, and this has been used to support the idea that elevated LDL causes heart attacks. This is despite the fact that lowering LDL via diet doesn't seem to reduce heart attack risk (typically by reducing total fat and/or saturated fat). Statins may in fact work because they're anti-inflammatory, rather than because they reduce LDL. But both explanations are speculative at this point.

The fact remains that if you want to know if Mr. Jones is going to have a heart attack in the next five years, measuring his LDL will give you more information than not measuring his LDL. This association doesn't seem to apply to all cultures or to Americans eating atypical diets. Then you can get into the fractions that associate more tightly with heart attack risk, such as low HDL, high triglycerides, small dense LDL, etc. Triglycerides vary with HDL (that is, when trigs go up, HDL generally goes down) and the ratio also happens to be a predictor of insulin sensitivity. Total cholesterol is virtually useless for predicting heart attack risk in the general population. This is something I'll discuss in more detail at another time.

When you walk into the doctor's office and ask him to measure your cholesterol, the numbers you get back will generally be total cholesterol, LDL, HDL and triglycerides. All of those except LDL are measured directly. LDL is calculated using the Friedewald equation, which is (in mg/dL):

LDL = TC - HDL - (TG/5)

Low-carb advocates have known for quite some time that this equation fails to accurately predict LDL concentration outside certain triglyceride ranges. Dr. Michael Eades put up a post about this recently, and Richard Nikoley has written about it before as well. The reason low-carb advocates know this is that reducing carbohydrate generally reduces triglycerides, often below 100 mg/dL. This is the range at which the Friedewald equation becomes unreliable, resulting in artificially inflated LDL numbers that make you have a heart attack just by reading them.

I had a lipid panel done a while back, just for kicks. My LDL, calculated by the Friedewald equation, was 131 mg/dL. Over 130 is considered high. Pass the statins! But wait, my triglycerides were 48 mg/dL, which is quite low. I found a paper through Dr. Eades' post that contains an equation for accurately calculating LDL in people whose triglycerides are below 100 mg/dL*. Here it is (mg/dL):

LDL = TC/1.19 + TG/1.9 - HDL/1.1 - 38

I ran my numbers through this equation. My new, accurate calculated LDL? 98 mg/dL. Even the U.S. National Cholesterol Education Panel wouldn't put me on statins with an LDL like that. I managed to shave 33 mg/dL off my LDL in 2 minutes. Isn't math fun?

*This equation was designed for individuals with a total cholesterol over 250 mg/dL.

When Friedewald Attacks

I don't get very excited about nitpicking blood lipids. That's not to say they're not useful. There's definitely an association between blood lipids and certain health outcomes such as cardiovascular disease. The thing that tires me is when people uncritically interpret those associations as evidence that lipids are actually causing the problem.

Low-density lipoprotein, or LDL, is the cholesterol fraction that typically gets the most attention. High LDL associates with heart attack risk in Americans and some other groups. Statins reduce LDL and reduce heart attack risk in a subset of the population, and this has been used to support the idea that elevated LDL causes heart attacks. This is despite the fact that lowering LDL via diet doesn't seem to reduce heart attack risk (typically by reducing total fat and/or saturated fat). Statins may in fact work because they're anti-inflammatory, rather than because they reduce LDL. But both explanations are speculative at this point.

The fact remains that if you want to know if Mr. Jones is going to have a heart attack in the next five years, measuring his LDL will give you more information than not measuring his LDL. This association doesn't seem to apply to all cultures or to Americans eating atypical diets. Then you can get into the fractions that associate more tightly with heart attack risk, such as low HDL, high triglycerides, small dense LDL, etc. Triglycerides vary with HDL (that is, when trigs go up, HDL generally goes down) and the ratio also happens to be a predictor of insulin sensitivity. Total cholesterol is virtually useless for predicting heart attack risk in the general population. This is something I'll discuss in more detail at another time.

When you walk into the doctor's office and ask him to measure your cholesterol, the numbers you get back will generally be total cholesterol, LDL, HDL and triglycerides. All of those except LDL are measured directly. LDL is calculated using the Friedewald equation, which is (in mg/dL):

LDL = TC - HDL - (TG/5)

Low-carb advocates have known for quite some time that this equation fails to accurately predict LDL concentration outside certain triglyceride ranges. Dr. Michael Eades put up a post about this recently, and Richard Nikoley has written about it before as well. The reason low-carb advocates know this is that reducing carbohydrate generally reduces triglycerides, often below 100 mg/dL. This is the range at which the Friedewald equation becomes unreliable, resulting in artificially inflated LDL numbers that make you have a heart attack just by reading them.

I had a lipid panel done a while back, just for kicks. My LDL, calculated by the Friedewald equation, was 131 mg/dL. Over 130 is considered high. Pass the statins! But wait, my triglycerides were 48 mg/dL, which is quite low. I found a paper through Dr. Eades' post that contains an equation for accurately calculating LDL in people whose triglycerides are below 100 mg/dL*. Here it is (mg/dL):

LDL = TC/1.19 + TG/1.9 - HDL/1.1 - 38

I ran my numbers through this equation. My new, accurate calculated LDL? 98 mg/dL. Even the U.S. National Cholesterol Education Panel wouldn't put me on statins with an LDL like that. I managed to shave 33 mg/dL off my LDL in 2 minutes. Isn't math fun?

*This equation was designed for individuals with a total cholesterol over 250 mg/dL.

When Friedewald Attacks

I don't get very excited about nitpicking blood lipids. That's not to say they're not useful. There's definitely an association between blood lipids and certain health outcomes such as cardiovascular disease. The thing that tires me is when people uncritically interpret those associations as evidence that lipids are actually causing the problem.

Low-density lipoprotein, or LDL, is the cholesterol fraction that typically gets the most attention. High LDL associates with heart attack risk in Americans and some other groups. Statins reduce LDL and reduce heart attack risk in a subset of the population, and this has been used to support the idea that elevated LDL causes heart attacks. This is despite the fact that lowering LDL via diet doesn't seem to reduce heart attack risk (typically by reducing total fat and/or saturated fat). Statins may in fact work because they're anti-inflammatory, rather than because they reduce LDL. But both explanations are speculative at this point.

The fact remains that if you want to know if Mr. Jones is going to have a heart attack in the next five years, measuring his LDL will give you more information than not measuring his LDL. This association doesn't seem to apply to all cultures or to Americans eating atypical diets. Then you can get into the fractions that associate more tightly with heart attack risk, such as low HDL, high triglycerides, small dense LDL, etc. Triglycerides vary with HDL (that is, when trigs go up, HDL generally goes down) and the ratio also happens to be a predictor of insulin sensitivity. Total cholesterol is virtually useless for predicting heart attack risk in the general population. This is something I'll discuss in more detail at another time.

When you walk into the doctor's office and ask him to measure your cholesterol, the numbers you get back will generally be total cholesterol, LDL, HDL and triglycerides. All of those except LDL are measured directly. LDL is calculated using the Friedewald equation, which is (in mg/dL):

LDL = TC - HDL - (TG/5)

Low-carb advocates have known for quite some time that this equation fails to accurately predict LDL concentration outside certain triglyceride ranges. Dr. Michael Eades put up a post about this recently, and Richard Nikoley has written about it before as well. The reason low-carb advocates know this is that reducing carbohydrate generally reduces triglycerides, often below 100 mg/dL. This is the range at which the Friedewald equation becomes unreliable, resulting in artificially inflated LDL numbers that make you have a heart attack just by reading them.

I had a lipid panel done a while back, just for kicks. My LDL, calculated by the Friedewald equation, was 131 mg/dL. Over 130 is considered high. Pass the statins! But wait, my triglycerides were 48 mg/dL, which is quite low. I found a paper through Dr. Eades' post that contains an equation for accurately calculating LDL in people whose triglycerides are below 100 mg/dL*. Here it is (mg/dL):

LDL = TC/1.19 + TG/1.9 - HDL/1.1 - 38

I ran my numbers through this equation. My new, accurate calculated LDL? 98 mg/dL. Even the U.S. National Cholesterol Education Panel wouldn't put me on statins with an LDL like that. I managed to shave 33 mg/dL off my LDL in 2 minutes. Isn't math fun?

*This equation was designed for individuals with a total cholesterol over 250 mg/dL.

When Friedewald Attacks

I don't get very excited about nitpicking blood lipids. That's not to say they're not useful. There's definitely an association between blood lipids and certain health outcomes such as cardiovascular disease. The thing that tires me is when people uncritically interpret those associations as evidence that lipids are actually causing the problem.

Low-density lipoprotein, or LDL, is the cholesterol fraction that typically gets the most attention. High LDL associates with heart attack risk in Americans and some other groups. Statins reduce LDL and reduce heart attack risk in a subset of the population, and this has been used to support the idea that elevated LDL causes heart attacks. This is despite the fact that lowering LDL via diet doesn't seem to reduce heart attack risk (typically by reducing total fat and/or saturated fat). Statins may in fact work because they're anti-inflammatory, rather than because they reduce LDL. But both explanations are speculative at this point.

The fact remains that if you want to know if Mr. Jones is going to have a heart attack in the next five years, measuring his LDL will give you more information than not measuring his LDL. This association doesn't seem to apply to all cultures or to Americans eating atypical diets. Then you can get into the fractions that associate more tightly with heart attack risk, such as low HDL, high triglycerides, small dense LDL, etc. Triglycerides vary with HDL (that is, when trigs go up, HDL generally goes down) and the ratio also happens to be a predictor of insulin sensitivity. Total cholesterol is virtually useless for predicting heart attack risk in the general population. This is something I'll discuss in more detail at another time.

When you walk into the doctor's office and ask him to measure your cholesterol, the numbers you get back will generally be total cholesterol, LDL, HDL and triglycerides. All of those except LDL are measured directly. LDL is calculated using the Friedewald equation, which is (in mg/dL):

LDL = TC - HDL - (TG/5)

Low-carb advocates have known for quite some time that this equation fails to accurately predict LDL concentration outside certain triglyceride ranges. Dr. Michael Eades put up a post about this recently, and Richard Nikoley has written about it before as well. The reason low-carb advocates know this is that reducing carbohydrate generally reduces triglycerides, often below 100 mg/dL. This is the range at which the Friedewald equation becomes unreliable, resulting in artificially inflated LDL numbers that make you have a heart attack just by reading them.

I had a lipid panel done a while back, just for kicks. My LDL, calculated by the Friedewald equation, was 131 mg/dL. Over 130 is considered high. Pass the statins! But wait, my triglycerides were 48 mg/dL, which is quite low. I found a paper through Dr. Eades' post that contains an equation for accurately calculating LDL in people whose triglycerides are below 100 mg/dL*. Here it is (mg/dL):

LDL = TC/1.19 + TG/1.9 - HDL/1.1 - 38

I ran my numbers through this equation. My new, accurate calculated LDL? 98 mg/dL. Even the U.S. National Cholesterol Education Panel wouldn't put me on statins with an LDL like that. I managed to shave 33 mg/dL off my LDL in 2 minutes. Isn't math fun?

*This equation was designed for individuals with a total cholesterol over 250 mg/dL.

Vitamin C may stopping diabetes damage

The combination of insulin to control blood sugar together with the use of Vitamin C, stopped blood vessel damage caused by the disease in patients with poor glucose control.

We had tested this theory on research models, but this is the first time anyone has shown the therapy's effectiveness in people," said Michael Ihnat, Ph.D., principal investigator and a pharmacologist at the OU College of Medicine Department of Cell Biology.

The team is now working to determine how antioxidants work at the molecular level to halt the destructive chain reaction set in motion by high blood sugar levels.

Reference:
Ceriello et al. Long-term glycemic control influences the long-lasting effect of hyperglycemia on endothelial function in type 1 diabetes. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, 2009.

Weblink:

http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/jc.2009-0762v1

Senate passes a budget, Governor expected to veto

Yesterday the Senate passed a Democratic budget spending $35.5 billion over the next two years. The fiscal year ends next Tuesday. The Democratic budget saves health coverage for legal immigrants, the current definition of medical necessity for Medicaid, and increases cigarette taxes by 75 cents per pack to $2.75. The budget also takes $50 million from HUSKY HMO rates, based on an audit by the Comptroller’s Office finding that the HMOs are overpaid by 5 to6%; that cut was also included in the Governor’s latest budget proposal. Five Democratic Senators and all the Republicans voted against the bill. The House will vote on the bill today. The Governor has signaled that she will veto it.
Ellen Andrews

SustiNet rally and vigil

Tuesday the SustiNet and Health Care Partnership bills were delivered to the Governor for her to sign (hopefully). The next day, the Interfaith Fellowship for Universal Health Care organized a vigil and rally to encourage the Governor to sign the bill. They started with a vigil outside the Governor’s office and then walked from there, wearing red SustiNet T-shirts and carrying signs, to the Governor’s mansion in Hartford, where about 65 people gathered for the rally. Two state legislators participated in the event, Rep. Betsy Ritter (Waterford and Montville) and Tim Rep. O’Brien (New Britain and Newington). There were a few speakers and a lot of chanting. We hope that showing our support at this rally demonstrates to the Governor how strongly we feel about having this bill signed into law.
Jen Ramirez

B vitamins ease painful pregnancy leg cramps

The Facts:
* In this study, 84 pregnant women were given three different dietary supplements to assess whether they reduced the amount of leg cramps experienced.
* Four weeks of treatment with either calcium carbonate, magnesium aspartate, or B-vitamins (B1+ B6) resulted in an improvement in the number of leg cramps.
* Vitamins B1 and B6 resulted in the greatest improvement, with nearly three-quarters of the women having no leg pain following treatment.


Shaun’s comment: Almost 50% of pregnant women have painful leg cramps during their pregnancy. These tend to be in the latter part of the pregnancy and mostly occur at night. This was not a big study and there were issues with respect to the design of the study. However, if you are having painful leg cramps, B vitamins are a natural product that you can try.

Study Reference:

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2006.05.034

benefits of a vegetarian diet

people are amazed that I'm 61 and often think I'm about 10 years younger. Sometimes they ask me what's my secret - I think exercise and attitude of mind are important but so is a vegetarian diet. Good for me , good for the animals and good for the planet.

Did you know that research has shown that the more intelligent you are the more likely you are to be a vegetarian?

Former insurance executive tells the truth

We haven’t been blogging much on national health reform here at CT Health Notes. No need for it – that space is crowded with great blogs at the national level. Like everyone else, we’ve been following them and “official” developments closely. But yesterday something extraordinary happened. A former insider at two large insurance companies opened his testimony on Capitol Hill with

“My name is Wendell Potter and for 20 years, I worked as a senior executive at
health insurance companies, and I saw how they confuse their customers and dump
the sick – all so they can satisfy their Wall Street investors. I know from
personal experience that members of Congress and the public have good reason to
question the honesty and trustworthiness of the insurance industry. Insurers
make promises they have no intention of keeping, they flout regulations designed
to protect consumers, and they make it nearly impossible to understand—or even
to obtain—information we need.”

He went on to say,

“The average family doesn’t understand how Wall Street’s dictates determine
whether they will be offered coverage, whether they can keep it, and how much
they’ll be charged for it.”

He describes the single minded priority within companies for ever-rising stock values and profit. Investors are only interested in earnings per share and medical loss ratios. Not only is his testimony a refreshing and detailed look at how insurance companies do business, it is good reading. He must have been very good as chief of communications.
The industry’s responses are about what you’d expect.
Ellen Andrews

Sceptic turns believer - Taranaki Daily News

Sceptic turns believer
Taranaki Daily News | Wednesday, 06 August 2008


A hardcore sceptic is now trumpeting the use of natural remedies to help people become healthier and happier.


But pharmacist, doctor and medical researcher Shaun Holt is adamant his message is based on pure science, not hearsay. His just-released book, Natural Remedies That Really Work, A New Zealand Guide, comes with a bottom line: "What medical research actually says about natural health products and therapies."

The British-trained, Tauranga-based medical expert says he's looked at the most compelling "good" research from scientists the world over during the past few years and been wowed by their findings.

Holt wasn't always so convinced about natural remedies.

"Basically, I was a card-holding, paid-up member of the Sceptics Society," he says.

Systematic scientific studies, especially large randomised controlled trials and meta-analysis (overview of many studies of one medicine or natural remedy), changed his way of thinking.

However, he's quick to point out that the difference between natural products and pharmaceuticals is often smaller than people realise.

"A quarter of prescription drugs are taken directly from plants or are chemically modified versions of compounds that are taken directly from plants, and over half of pharmaceuticals are made from natural compounds," he says.

Of the 76 natural remedies outlined in his book, the one that is head and fins above the rest is fish oil, also known as omega-3.

Fatty fish plays a pivotal role in 16 of the 148 studies Holt has chosen for the first edition of the guide. Including 1 gram (1000mg) of fish oil in your daily diet can have positive effects in treating back and neck pain, cardiac arrhythmia, depression, bipolar depression, schizophrenia, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in children, psychiatric patients with a history of self-harm and Alzheimer's.

Omega-3 also helps reduce mental and cognitive decline in the aged, the chance of developing renal cell carcinoma, prostate cancer and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, and the risk of dying from coronary artery disease.

Further studies show that taking fish oil during pregnancy leads to better language, behaviour and hand-eye coordination in toddlers, higher IQ in children and aids concentration in students and improves their performance in exams.

A new study not included in the book shows that taking 1000mg of omega-3 each day has the same therapeutic effects as taking 20mg of fluoxetine (Prozac) daily. However, the researchers found that taking both daily was the most effective treatment of all.

While the fatty fish message is a positive one, it comes with a couple of cautions. People taking antidepressants shouldn't go off them without seeking advice from their doctor, Holt says.

Also, those taking fish oil supplements need to get the dose right. "More is not necessarily better with omega-3," he says. "Some studies suggest its beneficial effects are actually reduced with higher dosages, perhaps because taking high levels of omega-3 produces oxidative stress."

Because of this, some doctors recommend taking antioxidants like vitamins C and E with fish oil supplements, he says.

For those who find the thought of taking fish oil hard to swallow, there is an alternative.

"Good news for vegetarians is that flaxseed oil can also provide your daily dose of omega-3," Holt says.

Other natural stars are probiotics and echinacea.

In a well-controlled trial, mothers with a family history of allergies received an oral probiotic from week 36 of their pregnancy until birth, and then their babies were given the same product for 12 months.

The study showed that infants given the probiotic had significantly less eczema during their second year and less reactivity to the skin prick test than those who were given the placebo.

"Because probiotics appear to alleviate eczema in children, they may reduce the risk of developing respiratory allergic disease later in life," Holt writes in his book.

Probiotics may also help ease colic in babies, according to another study.

And adding probiotics and lactoferrin to the standard triple-drug therapy helped patients with the bacteria Helicobacter pylori, known to cause stomach ulcers. The H. pylori eradication rate increased from 76% in those given the standard therapy to 92% in those who were also given probiotics and lactoferrin.

Extracts from a daisy-like herbaceous flower may be the big battler against the common cold, other research has shown.

A meta-analysis looking at data from 14 studies found that echinacea reduced the common cold by 58% and shortened the duration of the illness by 1.4 days. The recommended daily dose is two 350mg capsules three times per day.

Other natural remedies covered in the book include optimism, transcendental meditation, music therapy, acupuncture, tai chi, yoga, milk, tomato extract and ice.

And for those suffering from the winter blues, light therapy could be the cure. Yes, we could all do with a trip to the tropics right now, but this is about receiving artificial light from a SunBox.

About 100 people with seasonal affective disorder (SAD) received either light treatment or antidepressants. Both treatments helped ease the depressive disorder brought on by lack of sun during winter, but the light therapy shone that bit brighter.

"Light therapy appeared to make a quicker impact with better responses over the first week and produced fewer side effects," Holt writes.

All the research precised in his book has been published in reputable medical journals around the world.

Holt plans to put out a new guide each year to help people wade through the swathes of research on health treatments au naturel.

Letter to the Editor

I just got a letter to the editor published in the journal Obesity. It's a comment on an article published in October titled "Efficiency of Intermittent Exercise on Adiposity and Fatty Liver in Rats Fed With High-fat Diet."

In the study, they placed rats on a diet composed of "commercial rat chow plus peanuts, milk chocolate, and sweet biscuit in a proportion of 3:2:2:1," and then proceeded to simply call it a "high-fat diet" in the title and text body, with no reference to its actual composition outside the methods section. We can't tolerate this kind of fudging if we want real answers from nutrition science. Rats eating the "high-fat diet" developed abdominal obesity, fatty liver and hyperphagia, but this was attenuated by exercise.

As I like to say, the problem isn't usually in the data, it's in the interpretation of the data. The result is interesting and highly relevant. But you can't use terminology that tars and feathers all fat when your diet was in fact high in linoleic acid (omega-6), low in omega-3 and high in sugar and refined grains. Especially when butter and coconut oil don't cause the same pathology. I pointed out in the letter that we need to be more precise about how we define "high-fat diets". I also pointed out that the study is highly relevant to the modern U.S., because it supports the hypothesis that a junk food diet high in linoleic acid and sugar causes metabolic disturbances and fatty liver, and exercise may be protective.

Letter to the Editor

I just got a letter to the editor published in the journal Obesity. It's a comment on an article published in October titled "Efficiency of Intermittent Exercise on Adiposity and Fatty Liver in Rats Fed With High-fat Diet."

In the study, they placed rats on a diet composed of "commercial rat chow plus peanuts, milk chocolate, and sweet biscuit in a proportion of 3:2:2:1," and then proceeded to simply call it a "high-fat diet" in the title and text body, with no reference to its actual composition outside the methods section. We can't tolerate this kind of fudging if we want real answers from nutrition science. Rats eating the "high-fat diet" developed abdominal obesity, fatty liver and hyperphagia, but this was attenuated by exercise.

As I like to say, the problem isn't usually in the data, it's in the interpretation of the data. The result is interesting and highly relevant. But you can't use terminology that tars and feathers all fat when your diet was in fact high in linoleic acid (omega-6), low in omega-3 and high in sugar and refined grains. Especially when butter and coconut oil don't cause the same pathology. I pointed out in the letter that we need to be more precise about how we define "high-fat diets". I also pointed out that the study is highly relevant to the modern U.S., because it supports the hypothesis that a junk food diet high in linoleic acid and sugar causes metabolic disturbances and fatty liver, and exercise may be protective.

Letter to the Editor

I just got a letter to the editor published in the journal Obesity. It's a comment on an article published in October titled "Efficiency of Intermittent Exercise on Adiposity and Fatty Liver in Rats Fed With High-fat Diet."

In the study, they placed rats on a diet composed of "commercial rat chow plus peanuts, milk chocolate, and sweet biscuit in a proportion of 3:2:2:1," and then proceeded to simply call it a "high-fat diet" in the title and text body, with no reference to its actual composition outside the methods section. We can't tolerate this kind of fudging if we want real answers from nutrition science. Rats eating the "high-fat diet" developed abdominal obesity, fatty liver and hyperphagia, but this was attenuated by exercise.

As I like to say, the problem isn't usually in the data, it's in the interpretation of the data. The result is interesting and highly relevant. But you can't use terminology that tars and feathers all fat when your diet was in fact high in linoleic acid (omega-6), low in omega-3 and high in sugar and refined grains. Especially when butter and coconut oil don't cause the same pathology. I pointed out in the letter that we need to be more precise about how we define "high-fat diets". I also pointed out that the study is highly relevant to the modern U.S., because it supports the hypothesis that a junk food diet high in linoleic acid and sugar causes metabolic disturbances and fatty liver, and exercise may be protective.

Letter to the Editor

I just got a letter to the editor published in the journal Obesity. It's a comment on an article published in October titled "Efficiency of Intermittent Exercise on Adiposity and Fatty Liver in Rats Fed With High-fat Diet."

In the study, they placed rats on a diet composed of "commercial rat chow plus peanuts, milk chocolate, and sweet biscuit in a proportion of 3:2:2:1," and then proceeded to simply call it a "high-fat diet" in the title and text body, with no reference to its actual composition outside the methods section. We can't tolerate this kind of fudging if we want real answers from nutrition science. Rats eating the "high-fat diet" developed abdominal obesity, fatty liver and hyperphagia, but this was attenuated by exercise.

As I like to say, the problem isn't usually in the data, it's in the interpretation of the data. The result is interesting and highly relevant. But you can't use terminology that tars and feathers all fat when your diet was in fact high in linoleic acid (omega-6), low in omega-3 and high in sugar and refined grains. Especially when butter and coconut oil don't cause the same pathology. I pointed out in the letter that we need to be more precise about how we define "high-fat diets". I also pointed out that the study is highly relevant to the modern U.S., because it supports the hypothesis that a junk food diet high in linoleic acid and sugar causes metabolic disturbances and fatty liver, and exercise may be protective.

New Financial Reality Accelerates our Journey to Excellence

For CHRISTUS Health, the global economic crisis has prompted the need to proactively accelerate our Journey to Excellence, striving to more rapidly improve our clinical and service quality while reducing costs. Driven by our Futures Task Force II recommendations as they are incorporated into our three-year rolling strategic planning process, we know our future strategic initiatives must be

New Financial Reality Accelerates our Journey to Excellence

For CHRISTUS Health, the global economic crisis has prompted the need to proactively accelerate our Journey to Excellence, striving to more rapidly improve our clinical and service quality while reducing costs. Driven by our Futures Task Force II recommendations as they are incorporated into our three-year rolling strategic planning process, we know our future strategic initiatives must be

Governor vetoes common sense consumer protection

There is a loophole in the current CT law that doesn’t allow insurance companies to cancel your health insurance policy just when you need it. But Monday the Governor vetoed a bill to close that loophole. In 2007, CT passed PA 07-113, An Act Concerning Postclaims Underwriting, which was meant to stop insurers from claiming that consumers hadn’t disclosed something in their application conveniently just when the consumer became ill and the insurer is facing big bills. Lawsuits in other states found that some insurers had entire departments devoted to these investigations and paid bonuses to employees for finding excuses to rescind costly policies. The 2007 CT law requires insurers to do their investigations at the time of the application. If they approve someone and start taking the premiums, they have to cover them – except in cases of intentional fraud obviously. Unfortunately, CT’s insurance department interprets the law to exclude cases where insurers hadn’t done their job and examined consumers’ medical records at the time of application. How convenient is it to just take premiums from everyone and only do the work of investigating when someone files a claim. This year's bill, PA 09-135, An Act Clarifying Postclaims Underwriting, was meant to fix that. CT’s State Healthcare Advocate Kevin Lembo characterized the Governor’s action as “among the most callous veto messages I’ve ever seen from this Governor.” “Nowhere in her veto message is there a recognition of the impact on a patient lying in a hospital bed whose policy has been ripped away. No concern for people losing their homes or foregoing life-saving treatment because an insurance company decided it was too expensive.”
Ellen Andrews

Health Benefits of Watermelon

Watermelon is a popular fruit here in the Philippines, especially when summer, there’s no other summer fruit like the thirst quenching watermelon. Watermelon is said to be the summer fruit because it is on its best quality when harvested during the summer season.
Watermelons can be round, oblong, or even square, as seen in Japan, they have the square watermelons. These square watermelons are not genetically modified. The Japanese figured out how to grow a square watermelon. The technique is very simple; they insert the watermelons into square glass cases or square wood cases while the fruit is still growing on the vine, so when the watermelon is ready to harvest it’s on a square shape. There are also watermelons that have yellow flesh. I think the yellow flesh is much crunchier than the red-flesh watermelon.




Health Benefits of Watermelon

Watermelon is said to help quench the inflammation that contributes to conditions like colon cancer, asthma, diabetes, and arthritis. The health benefits of watermelon are really great. No matter how it is sliced, it is packed with some of the most important antioxidants found in nature.

It is an excellent source of vitamin C and a very good source of vitamin A. A cup of watermelon provides 24.3% of the daily value for vitamin C, and, through its beta-carotene, 11.1% of the DV for vitamin A. Watermelons are packed with some of the most important antioxidants in nature.

Watermelon is also a very concentrated source of the carotenoid, lycopene. Well known for being abundant in tomatoes and particularly well absorbed from cooked tomato products containing a little fat such as olive oil, lycopene is also present in high amounts in watermelon and mangoes. The antioxidant function of lycopene-its ability to help protect cells and other structures in the body from oxygen damage-has been linked in human research to prevention of heart disease. Protection of DNA (our genetic material) inside of white blood cells has also been shown to be an antioxidant role of lycopene.

Watermelon is rich in the B vitamins necessary for energy production. Our food ranking system also qualified watermelon as a very good source of vitamin B6 and a good source of vitamin B1, magnesium, and potassium. Part of this high ranking was due to the higher nutrient richness of watermelon. Because this food has higher water content and lower calorie content than many other fruits (a whole cup of watermelon contains only 48 calories), it delivers more nutrients per calorie-an outstanding health benefit!

One more reason to enjoy watermelon before summer ends: this sweet, crunchy, cooling fruit is exceptionally high in citrulline, an amino acid our bodies use to make another amino acid, arginine, which is used in the urea cycle to remove ammonia from the body, and by the cells lining our blood vessels to make nitric oxide. Nitric oxide not only relaxes blood vessels, lowering high blood pressure, it is the compound whose production is enhanced by Viagra to prevent erectile dysfunction. Arginine has been shown to improve insulin sensitivity in obese type 2 diabetic patients with insulin resistance.