HCG Diet Plans Springfield, MO

Related Weight Loss Articles

Washington Post - May 9, 2012

We're an obese nation with a lot (as in weight) to lose by Kathleen Parker

WASHINGTON – Close your eyes and picture 110 million obese people waddling around America’s sidewalks. You’ll probably want to keep your eyes closed.

Such is the scenario suggested by a new study projecting that 42 percent of American adults will be obese by 2030. That’s 32 million more than today’s 78 million. Of course, they probably won’t be waddling. They’ll be in their cars in the fast-food lane, as they are now. Recall that independent filmmaker Morgan Spurlock (“Super Size Me”) gained 24.5 pounds after one month of eating exclusively at McDonald’s.

Something no less than a “major public health intervention” is needed, according to Eric Finkelstein, a health economist with the Duke University Global Health Institute and lead author of the study.

What this means is anyone’s guess, but it isn’t far-fetched to infer that a government-mandated health care system eventually would necessitate a government-mandated diet to control costs. In another study, Finkelstein and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that obesity costs about $147 billion per year, accounting for about 9 percent of all medical expenses. An obese person, defined as carrying an extra 30 pounds, costs about $1,400 more in medical expenses per year than a person of healthy weight.

No one wants to make overweight people feel worse than they do. Fat is indeed a plague and most of us struggle to varying degrees. There are about 12 renegade pounds out there that love me so much they never want to be far away. If I drop my guard for so much as a month (that is, eat like a normal person), they jump on me like a June tick.

At this point, we make the necessary disclaimer that some people are blessed with hummingbird metabolisms (and we hate them), and others are genetically inclined toward fatness. Genetic inclination isn’t a life sentence, however, and personal responsibility can’t be excluded as contributing to most fatty outcomes. These days, responsibility isn’t only about pushing away from the table, but it means educating oneself, reading food labels, and going to a little extra trouble.

Getting fat has never been easier, of course. Food is plentiful and convenient, and the bad stuff is tasty and cheap. At the end of long day, it’s easier to buy a Happy Meal than to shop and prepare a balanced dinner. And who wants to hear the little darlings protest when presented with cauliflower over calzone?

Out of sheer exhaustion, we fool ourselves into thinking children should have a say in what they eat. And, never-minding all the studies, diets, consultants and excuses, we know that the mystery of nonmedical obesity isn’t really so mysterious. In a word, it’s about sugar, including hidden sugars such as high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS), a liquid sweetener that seems to be in nearly everything. Because it is six times sweeter than cane sugar, HFCS is cheaper to use and also has preservative, as well as fattening, attributes.

A 2010 Princeton University study found that rats that drank HFCS gained considerably more weight than rats eating sugar, though their caloric intake was the same. On average, Americans consume about 60 pounds of HFCS per person per year, according to the study.

Here’s the simple explanation: Refined or simple sugars and their cousins – high-glycemic carbohydrates (think white bread and potatoes) – cause the pancreas to produce high levels of insulin, which cause the body to store excess sugar not used for energy as fat. The liver in turn is induced to produce cholesterol.

We love high-glycemic carbs because they make us feel good by spiking our blood sugar. But what goes up must come down – with a thud. When our blood sugar inevitably plunges, we feel tired, ornery and hungry – and we repeat the cycle.

Low-glycemic foods (think apples and collard greens), on the other hand, release energy at a steady, less-dramatic rate, and our blood sugar stays reasonably level. Less sugar means less insulin means less fat means leaner bodies means better health.

Oh sure, eating with such attention to the glycemic index ruins your life. You won’t have any friends. You’ll spend all your time alone weighing four-ounce cuts of fat-free meat, sauteing spinach and picking flaxseed out of your teeth – and your children will hate you – but you’ll be thin. Best of all, you won’t need to go to the doctor as often, or rely on federal food marshals to tell you what to eat.

CNN 05-09-12

Where is the U.S. headed if 42% of us are obese by 2030? by Jack Cafferty:

A dramatic warning about just how fat Americans are getting: By 2030, 42% of people in the United States will be obese. Yes, 42%.

According to a new study, 11% of them will be severely obese, meaning that they are 100 or more pounds over a healthy weight.

Already in 2010, 36% of adults are obese, or roughly 30 pounds over a healthy weight, and 6% are severely obese.

If the obesity rate increases as predicted, it could mean we'd have more than 100 million obese people in the U.S. in just 18 years.

The numbers are staggering, and they come with a huge price tag.

This report in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine suggests the increase in obesity would cost an additional $550 billion from now until 2030 in medical expenditures.

It's estimated an obese person costs at least $1,400 more in medical expenses per year than someone who has a healthy weight.

Carrying around all that fat increases your risk for many other diseases, including diabetes, heart disease, several types of cancer and sleep apnea, not to mention a shorter life expectancy.

Obesity is one of the biggest reasons why health care spending has been skyrocketing in the last 20 years.

The report’s authors say we have an environment in the U.S. that promotes obesity, with fast-food chains, cheap junk food and technologies, like the Internet, that keep people sitting at home and at their offices all day long.

Meanwhile, this study doesn't even address children. Currently, one out of every three children in the United States is obese or overweight.

Here’s my question to you: Where is the U.S. headed if 42% of us are obese by 2030?

Tune in to the Situation Room at 4pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.

And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.

Health Insider - April 22, 2012

Losing weight may be key to being pain-free - By Drs. Kay Judge and Maxine Barish-Wreden

You are what you eat. And what you eat can hurt you -- literally.

Recent surveys have found a direct association between obesity and pain levels. A February survey of more than 1 million Americans by the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index asked questions about height and weight as well as pain conditions.

It showed a large correlation between weight and the amount of pain that people were in. The group of participants who were overweight reported 20% higher rates of pain than the low- to normal-weight group.

Weight was graded per BMI into one of three obesity levels as defined by the World Health Organization. A normal weight was defined as a BMI under 25; overweight, a BMI of 25-30; obese I, 30-35; obese II, 35-40; and Obese III, 40 and above.

For the obese group, the pain perception was 68% higher.

As the weight increased, so did pain. For the Obese II and Obese III groups, pain was proportionately 136% higher and 254% higher than the normal groups.•

The increased pain with increased weight correlation held true for both men and women, and as people aged, the pain/obesity correlation worsened,

KSPR Channel 33 Springfield, MO - December 09, 2011

Some Forms of Popular HCG Deemed Illegal by the FDA - by Joanna Small and Joel Girdner Reporter and Photographer For KSPR video click here.

People who make and sell the homeopathic version of the popular HCG diet will have to stop, according to the Federal Drug Administration. A popular diet is under scrutiny by the Food and Drug Administration.In some forms it's now been labled illegal.

HCG is a hormone produced in the urine of pregnant women. While it is approved for certain infertility treatments, the FDA says there's no evidence it aids in weight loss. And now the homeopathic version of the hormone is illegal. Still, Ozarkers are touting its success Friday night.

In the restaurant industry comes with its own set of deep-fried, foil-wrapped challenges. Angela Forrest, who works at Steak-Out in Springfield, says she managed to resist temptation, yet: "I still wasn't losing weight." It wasn't until Forrest tried HCG that she got results. "I have lost a total of 78 pounds," she tells us. Forrest used homeopathic HCG which comes in liquid drops. "I actually think the homeopathic version is even safer than the regular HCG."

Renea Barrett used the injections. "About 40 pounds in 3 months," Barrett says of her weight loss.

Barrett sells both the injectable HCG, which is doctor prescribed, and homeopathic HCG, now illegal. "I think I have about 40 bottles left right now," she says, pointing a shelf inside her Springfield acupuncture clinic. After they're gone, it's for good.

"I have had people calling up who have had weight loss on the HCG drops; they'll buy a bunch of bottles and keep them for awhile."

The reason why the FDA has pulled the homeopathic version of HCG is because since it's not regulated you can't prove what product is in the bottle. Essentially, it could just be water. "Some of them have electro-magnetically encoded HCG into the bottle but there isn't any physical HCG hormone," explains Barrett. Barrett admits the drops didn't work for her.

Many doctors say HCG in any form doesn't work at all. "Outside of pregnancy it can alter thyroid function, it can alter a woman's ovulatory cycle; in a man it can alter testosterone," says endocrinologist Dr. James Bonucchi. Those same doctors credit the strict calorie cutting for the weight loss, if there is any. There was plenty for Forrest. "I started out as a size 22 and I'm down to a size 8 or 10." she was counting on homeopathic HCG to drop to a 6. "It's a life-saving device and definitely a lifestyle enhancing product, so it's tragic," concludes Forrest.

HCG in a prescription form, both as an injection and a nasal spray, is still legal. Barrett works with one local independent doctor and two out of Arizona to prescribe it to her clients. Although the original HCG diet recommends you eat just 500 calories a day Barrett says the doctors she works with suggest eating between 800 and 1,200 calories.

In fact, Dr. Oz touted the injections on his show when coupled with a 1,200 calorie a day diet.
Download the new KSPR News app for Android, iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad

Study funded by a grant from the National Cancer Institute (K22CA126992) 03-31-11

When it comes to losing weight, perception is not always reality - in fact, it's often a major hurdle.

In a new study, nearly one in four adults who were either overweight or obese did not believe they had a weight problem, and as a result did not see a need to improve their health.

With nearly 70 percent of Americans classified as either overweight or obese, the findings have serious implications for how to target efforts that will help Americans lose weight, researchers said.

"It's often said that the first step in improving a problem is believing that you have one. That's particularly true for obesity," said Gary Bennett, associate professor of psychology and neuroscience at Duke University and senior author of the study.

"A sizeable proportion of obese Americans don't accept that they have a weight problem. This group is less likely to practice healthful behaviors that will help them lose weight and improve their health."

The researchers used data from the 2003-2006 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

They examined associations between weight misperception and several weight-related attitudes and behaviors, including wanting to weigh less, having tried to lose weight, dietary intake, and physical activity among overweight and obese adults in the U.S.

The overweight and obese men who misperceived their weight were 71 percent less likely to want to lose weight and women were 65 percent less likely, according to the study, which appears online in the International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity. (View the report at http://www.ijbnpa.org/content/8/1/20/abstract.)

In addition, researchers found that 60 percent of men and 56 percent of women with misperceptions about their weight were less likely to have tried to lose weight within the past year, compared to those who accurately perceived themselves as overweight.

The findings also showed that people with misperceptions about their weight were more likely to continue with habits that will only increase their weight, such as not exercising. Extremely obese individuals face elevated risks for type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular diseases and some types of cancer.

Researchers said most studies on weight misperception only focus on socio-demographic factors, such as gender and race/ethnicity, and not on attitudes and behaviors.

"Our study is among the first to show that weight misperceptions hinder weight loss and control, which is important on its own but also because these data are nationally representative," said Dustin Duncan, lead author of the study who recently completed his doctorate in social epidemiology at the Harvard School of Public Health.

Results varied by race and gender, and blacks who misperceived their weight were particularly less likely to have tried to lose weight, researchers said.

"This was particularly concerning because U.S. blacks have the highest rates of obesity and obesity-associated health problems," Bennett said. "Compared to those in other groups, blacks are more likely to misperceive their weight and less likely to attempt weight loss."

The study said only about 40 percent of respondents in the sample reported being told by a physician or health professional that they were overweight. Several studies have shown that attempts to lose weight tend to increase after a medical professional advises obese patients to do so, researchers said.

"These findings show that it's important for health care providers to consistently diagnose obesity and counsel their obese patients about effective weight-loss strategies," said Bennett, who also holds positions in the Duke Global Health Institute and the Duke Center on Biobehavioral and Social Aspects of Health Disparities.

Researchers said the clothing industry can also help by eliminating "vanity sizing" or size inflation, in which size numbers scale down over time, so a size 14 becomes a size 10. They also believe social norms related to weight could be a reason for the misperceptions.

"It is also necessary for us to understand why these misperceptions exist in the first place, to determine the best strategies for preventing and reducing these misperceptions," Duncan said. "We plan to investigate some of these hypotheses in follow-up studies."

Other researchers in this study were Eric Ding and Erica Warner, from Harvard School of Public Health; Kathleen Wolin, from Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis; and Melissa Scharoun-Lee, formerly of Duke.

Greenbay Pressgazette.com - February 14, 2011

Obesity increases risk for life-threatening illnesses - By Steve Contorno

Wisconsin is getting fatter, and it's causing wallets to get leaner.

Throughout the 1980s, the prevalence of obesity among residents was less than 15 percent. In 2009, nearly 29 percent of Wisconsinites were obese and another 36 percent were overweight.

Such a staggering incline has come with a price tag. U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that medical costs associated with obesity in Wisconsin are $1.5 billion every year.

That comes out to an average of $924 a year per obese individual in doctor visits, prescription drugs and treatment.

"If recent trends continue, Wisconsin costs could as much as quadruple within the decade," said Beth Kaplan, spokesperson for the Wisconsin Department of Health Services.
Why obesity is so expensive

The toll obesity takes on a person's body not only makes physical activity and even everyday tasks more difficult, it puts individuals at significant risk for potentially life-threatening illnesses.

Studies have shown that obesity is a leading factor in heart disease, diabetes and even cancer, said Dr. James Kemmerling, medical director of Aurora BayCare Medical Center's bariatric surgery center.

The federal government calculates obesity using the Body Mass Index, which balances an individual's height and weight to determine an individual's ideal range. A BMI between 25 and 29 is considered overweight and more than 30 is obese.

"As our BMI goes up, our life expectancy declines," Kemmerling said. "If you statistically calculate you're at a BMI of 45, you're losing 8 to 14 years of your life."

Every year, 1.9 million people older than 20 are diagnosed with Type II diabetes, according to the American Diabetes Association. And with complications ranging from heart and kidney problems to blindness and amputation, the estimated medical costs of Type II diabetes are $116 billion annually.

While diabetes used to be associated primarily with the elderly, the increasing number of young people diagnosed with the disease is extremely troublesome, said Roxanne Denneau, a certified dietitian at Bellin Health and head of many diabetes programs for the health care provider.

Denneau said there is a direct link between the rise in obesity and the increase in diabetes cases.

"Every pound of fat is estimated to be the size of a softball. So if you have extra softballs on you, you have to make that much more insulin from your pancreas," Denneau said. "Even if you're just 40 pounds overweight, that's a lot of softballs. You're pushing your pancreas for a long time to make that much more insulin, and it's going to start getting tired. That's what ends up causing more diabetes."

Recent studies also have drawn strong connections between cancer and the overweight population, including breast, colon, kidney and esophagus cancers, said Laurie Pagel, spokeswoman for the American Cancer Society Midwest division. Costs associated with cancer treatment are nearly $100 billion annually.

A poor diet low in fiber, fruits and vegetables with cancer-fighting nutrients but high in fried foods, red meat and fat leads to greater weight gains. Coupled with less exercise, it's a deadly combination, Pagel said.

"We know that approximately one-third of the cancer deaths that occur in the U.S. each year are due to poor nutrition," she said. "We know that we can reduce the risk of cancer and add years to our lives if we do what we know works, including maintain a healthy weight."
Even greater costs

The cost of obesity in the United States was $75 billion in medical expenses from 1998-2000, according to a study released in 2004. Today, the American Heart Association estimates it's closer to $150 billion and roughly 17 percent of all medical bills are obesity-related.

"Medical costs for obesity are going to continue to be high, because as obese individuals get older, their health care costs are going to increase, because the chronic diseases associated with it cause complications," said Bettylou Sherry, lead epidemiologist for the CDC obesity prevention and control branch.

"We have two issues: the obese population is aging, so their medical costs are going to increase over time because it becomes more serious, and then we have young people becoming obese and those costs are going to increase in time as they age."

And it's not just those who carry the extra weight that pay the price. Taxpayer-funded Medicaid and Medicare programs are burdened with an additional $38 billion in obesity-related medical expenses, according to the CDC. In Wisconsin, it's close to $630 million.

There's an increased cost on the workplace as well, Kaplan said. Outside of higher insurance costs for a less healthy population, businesses also are saddled with the increasing amount of sick leave employees need to address illnesses associated with their weight.

Dealing with increased sick days and less productivity from obese employees can cost $2,500 to $5,000 annually per person.

Treatment ranging from joining a gym to surgical intervention can be expensive, especially if insurance companies don't cover the more expensive fixes. Despite research that shows surgery ends up saving patients money in health care costs three and a half years later, insurance plans often don't include preventative care, Kemmerling said.

Because people often change insurance providers, companies are wary of picking up the tab for a costly procedure that they won't see the benefit of long term, Kemmerling suspects.

"If we're thinking about society, it's in our best interest to help these people get healthier right now, because it's going to help our medical treatment in decreasing costs," he said. "And it influences how their children see them and has a positive impact on their lives, and that goes back to the idea of quality of life."

Obesity Campaign UK - 17 December 2010

Archer died after gastric band weight loss surgery - Barbara Tomasik

Susan Archer, 50, from Wales, paid $15,500 for the weight loss surgery, but collapsed just seven weeks later. She was fitted with a gastric band to lose weight.

Susan was inspired by celebrities such as Fern Britton and Sharon Osbourne and booked the procedure at private healthcare firm The Hospital Group.

Susan, who weighed 224 lb, fell ill after a follow-up appointment during which the gastric band was filled with fluid to keep it tight. Susan condition deteriorated shortly after she ate her first meal following the second procedure.

Mrs Archer was advised that she could leave the clinic following the 20-minute procedure, however the pain continued once she had returned home.

On reaching home Susan went straight to bed for the next 36 hours later lost her unconscious. She never regained consciousness and a post-mortem examination showed she died from gastric peritonitis.

Susan choose gastric band to assist her in losing weight. She died from gastric peritonitis. Gastric Band surgery has turned Mr Archer daily life into a complete nightmare as he lost his life partner.

List of problems and complications after the weight loss surgery operation are endless as one may get additional problems such as Hernia, Internal Bleeding, Swelling of the skin around the wounds, etc.Instead of weight loss surgery one can consider natural,healthy and safe option.

All you need is a active lifestyle and healthy eating habits and you can atleast lived your life fully. New Obesity Campaign UK offers absolutely free weight loss program and guidance to lose weight and all you need.

TwinCities.com - 12/02/2010

Obese shrug off risk to health - By Christopher Snowbeck

Americans are fat and not that unhappy about what all the extra weight means for their health.

A new report from University of Minnesota researchers suggests that the vast majority of obese Americans don't think their weight problems translate into poor health.

What's more, the weak association between obesity and self-perceived poor health has remained virtually unchanged over the past 30 years, suggesting that public health campaigns on the subject have missed their mark, researchers say.

A final finding: Men in surveys are especially unlikely to link poor health with being obese.

"There's very little difference between people who are overweight and people who aren't overweight with respect to their perceptions of their own health," said Ross Macmillan, a sociologist and director of the U's Life Course Center. "Both groups think they're healthy."

Published online Thursday in a medical journal called Obesity, the study didn't directly ask men and women whether they thought being obese was bad for their health. Instead, researchers looked back at results from an annual survey that from 1976 to 2006 asked more than 85,000 people each year questions about their health, health behaviors and health care utilization.

Because the survey asked participants about their height and weight, researchers could calculate the body-mass index of respondents and divide them into obese and non-obese groups. Then, they looked at whether people in one of the two groups
Advertisement were more likely to say their health was "poor" as opposed to being excellent, very good, good or fair.

"The overall association between obesity and self-perceived poor health is not large," the researchers wrote. "Remarkably, there is no evidence of change over time in associations between obesity and self-reported health."

The national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says that being overweight or obese — terms that are defined by body-mass index scores — brings a greater risk of myriad health problems ranging from heart disease and diabetes to cancer and high blood pressure. As the number of obese Americans has grown over the past three decades, the National Institutes of Health has supported hundreds of studies documenting these links.

But there are good reasons the health messages aren't sinking in, Macmillan said, adding that the contrast with public health campaigns against smoking is illustrative.

First, everybody eats and lots of foods are healthy. Eating becomes a problem when people consume a lot more calories than they burn off — a ratio that's more difficult to communicate than a simple message of "Don't smoke."

"They won't tell you 'Stop eating,' " Macmillan said. "Everyone will tell you to eat a balanced diet."

Second, most of the health consequences of smoking are far in the future, so people can discount the impact of eating poorly without exercising in the short term.

Some will tell themselves they can work off the excess pounds before they feel the health consequences — even though a great many won't be able to, Macmillan said. Or, they might reasonably think that medical science will offer remedies down the road.

Finally, there's a sort of peer-pressure effect.

"When you look around, if there are more and more heavy people, you suddenly don't think you look any different — you might even think you look better than a lot of people," Macmillan said. "You don't see yourself as being in a problematic state."

In publishing the paper, researchers weren't setting out to say that people are wrong to discount the link between poor health and obesity. On the contrary, people have good reasons in the short term for not associating excess weight with poor health, Macmillan said.

That's part of the reason public health campaigns designed to combat obesity in the U.S. shouldn't necessarily be patterned after anti-smoking campaigns, Macmillan said, where the disease consequences are more striking.

"People who disavow the health consequences of smoking are wrong," he said. "People who disavow the health consequences of excess weight are sort of right — they can push those consequences off, and there are treatments that work."

But that isn't to say that obesity is a good thing.

"These are things that jeopardize people's health, and it's expensive," Macmillan said. "An increasingly obese population is going to increase medical care costs dramatically."

Seer Press News - November 29, 2010

Obesity Curbed by Pregnancy Hormone - by Menchie Tiongan

It may surprise a lot of men and women but the HCG diet which is fast gaining recognition all over the world, has a been an effective tool for both genders to lose weight and to ultimately, to put a stop on obesity according to diet consultant, Jacque Martinez . The Human Chorionic Gonadotropin, a pregnancy hormone is said to be responsible in contributing greatly to weight loss.

Martinez, who patronizes the said program has used the diet amongst sixty individuals starting last May and has affirmed that such diet had clients losing as much as 30 pounds to a whopping 50 pounds in a period of 70 days or approximately three months and a week.

Martinez relates, “You gorge for two days, and you start the injections and then that’s building up your metabolism so that way when you go down to a low-calorie diet, it’s going off all that fat you have stored."

The HCG or pregnancy hormone, as a tool to fight off obesity can be accessed in a clinic or online.

Richmon Register - November 9, 2010

Don’t get tricked by the top five weight-loss myths - by Jack Rutherford Register Columnist The Richmond Register

myth: Eat fat-free foods to Lose Weight.

TRUTH: Yes, you should eat a low-fat diet, but it’s become clear that the recommendation to eat fat-free foods may have helped spur the national rise in obesity and diabetes. Here’s why. Fats are necessary for health. They are important for optimal functioning of the brain, heart and other major organs as well as the absorption of many vitamins. Fat can also be good for dieting. It suppresses the body’s hormone that makes us feel hungry, while simultaneously spurring the release of peptides that make us feel full. A modest amount of fat also lowers the glycemic index of a meal, helping you feel satisfied for longer.

myth: Diet sodas, smoothies and juice detoxes are good for weight loss.

TRUTH: Scientists believe that beverages, especially those with sugar, such as sodas, juices and smoothies contribute to weight gain by tricking the body into thinking it has consumed fewer calories than it really has. Even diet drinks may be more likely to gain weight, according to a 2008 study in the journal Obesity. Researchers explain that artificial sweeteners increase cravings for calorie-dense foods, although they admit that the science behind this theory is unclear. Still, it is probably a good idea to stick with water over diet soda if you’re trying to lose a few pounds.

myth: Energy bars help you lose weight.

TRUTH: Power Bars, Zone Bars and other energy bars are processed foods and like all processed foods, they are easy for the body to absorb. In contrast, whole foods require energy to digest. This expenditure helps explain why people who eat more raw foods tend to lose weight faster. Scientists don’t recommend a diet completely comprised of raw foods, but energy bars aren’t a good substitute for whole foods if you’re trying to reach a healthy weight.

myth: Grazing will boost metabolism and help lose weight.

TRUTH: Certainly, going too long without eating is a recipe for diet disaster, but grazing can also be harmful if you’re not careful. Some experts believe that regular handfuls of even healthy snacks will eventually appear on your waistline. Grazing can confuse the body’s internal eating clock so that it’s nearly impossible to tap into hunger and satiety cues. And there’s always the risk of eating more total calories by grazing than with a more traditional three meals a day approach. Then, there’s the issue of food as reward rather than fuel, which we won’t even go into here.

myth: Eat whatever you want as long as you exercise.

TRUTH: Running three miles several days a week will burn plenty of calories, but if you’re consuming a lot of high-calorie foods, then the net effect may be very little weight loss. Exercise alone may not be as effective as combining it with a calorie-restricted diet. That doesn’t mean you have to starve yourself, just control portion sizes and cut down on some high-calorie options. But, don’t give up the exercise routine. Exercise helps regulate appetite and control weight and should therefore be the cornerstone of any weight loss plan.

OzarksFirst.com October, 06, 2010

More Teens Seeking Gastric Surgery to Lose Weight

(Springfield, MO) -- Everyone knows losing weight can be really tough. And a recent study found more teens are undergoing surgery to shed the pounds.

A recent study found that the number of people under 18 years old getting gastric band surgery has increased seven fold since 2005.

And opinions are mixed about whether that's a good thing. Ask anyone who's gone through high school, and they still remember being a teen isn't easy. "To have the right clothes, wear the right brands, be a certain size," said Jennifer Florence.

Dr. Chris Edwards said that's why across the nation, more teenagers are turning to lap band surgery for help. "We've not seen many that are 12, 13 and 14 years old but I think with new studies coming out we'll see more of those," said Dr. Edwards.

Lap band surgery works like a belt around your stomach that makes you feel full sooner. Doctors say on average people can lose one to two pounds a week. "Over time as we do this over and over they develop different eating habits," said Dr. Edwards.

But is it a good thing to be encouraging teens, as young as 11 or 12, to get this kind of surgery? "I think it's very sad that they're being educated that its an alternative to being healthy," said 20-year-old Alison Johnson.

While the public's opinion may be mixed, doctors say in some cases, yes. Especially when the teen's weight is causing them to develop health problems like hypertension or diabetes. "If they're starting to develop those things we want to interact sooner then wait until they develop serious complications," said Dr. Edwards.

Dr. Edwards said hitting the gym and dieting are always the first options he recommends, but when that's not enough, gastric band surgery can get teens running on the right path. Dr. Edwards said all of his patients have to go through a psychological evaluation and meet with a nutritionist. He said gastric band surgery isn't successful unless people also change their exercise and eating habits.

Dr. Edwards said he only recommends this procedure for teens you have a severe weight problem. Because they're under 18, teenagers must also have their parents sign off on the procedure.

Gastric Band surgery for teenagers is typically not covered by most insurance plans. That means most people have to pay out of pocket for the procedure, which is around $16,000.

CNN Health 9-21-10

Study: Obesity may slim down your wallet - by: Matt Sloane - CNN Medical Producer

More than a third of American men and women are obese. According to a new study, the excess weight doesn't just weigh heavily on their health, but on their wallets as well.

The economic costs of being obese can be as much as $4,879 for a woman, and $2,646 for a man per year, according to the report.

"We looked at both medical and non-medical costs," said Avi Dor, professor of economics and health policy at George Washington University, and a study co-author.

"The non-medical costs were mostly on-the-job costs - things like lost wages, lost productivity at work, sick leave and excess gasoline charges," said Dor. Medical costs included things like inpatient and outpatient hospital visits, emergency room fees, doctors visits and prescription drug costs.

But why does obesity cost women so much more? Study co-author Professor Christine Ferguson says the gender disparity is largely the result of lost wages.

"For men who are overweight or obese, it does not affect their wages," Ferguson said. "If you are an obese woman, you're much more likely to be earning significantly less."

According to both Ferguson and Dor, the study has one major limitation: It did not include factors such as excess clothing needs, food, larger automobile size or furniture, because reliable data for these factors do not exist.

"Anecdotal evidence suggests that these costs could be significant," Dor said.

But there is some good news: weight loss, even in small amounts can benefit your waistline and your bank account.

"The cost of being obese to you at the individual level is a pretty significant cost," Ferguson said, "but weight loss, even in small increments could significantly impact your health, and help reduce the other costs you might be feeling."

Food Consumer Septemer 15, 2010

Corn sugar new name proposed for high fructose corn syrup

Editor's note: The industry has seen the sales of high fructose corn syrup on the decline. Could a new name help the sweetener that has been linked to increased risk of health conditions like obesity and diabetes?

On September 14, the Corn Refiner’s Association said in a press release posted on its website that it has asked the Food and Drug Administration to allow manufacturers of high fructose corn syrup, or HFCS, to use the name "corn sugar" instead of high fructose corn syrup.

The FDA considers HFCS as natural, even though critics point out that this sweetener consisting of both glucose and fructose is in reality, not found in corn. This product is made by enzymatically converting some portion of glucose, which is derived from corn starch, into fructose.

The resulting high fructose corn syrup, which is commonly used in a variety of processed foods and beverages, consists of 55 percent fructose and 42 percent glucose, or 42 percent fructose and 53 percent glucose.

Use of high fructose corn syrup has been linked to an increased risk of overweight and obesity, among other things.

Princeton University researchers reported on March 18, 2010 in the online version of the journal Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior that consumption of high fructose corn syrup caused more weight gain in lab animals than table sugar when both sweeteners were consumed in equal quantity.

Bart Hoebel and colleagues also reported that long term use of high fructose corn syrup caused abnormal increases in body fat, particularly in the abdomen and an increase in circulating blood fats called triglycerides, both of which are signs of metabolic syndrome.

There is a growing body of evidence that fructose, which can also be found in table sugar or sucrose, honey and other foods, can be harmful when consumed in large quantities, over a lengthy duration. Stephan B.C. and colleagues at the University of Cambridge reported in the August 2010 issue of The Journals of Gerontology: Series A, Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences that increased fructose intake may boost risk of cardiovascular disease and dementia.

Gaby AR, whose affiliation is not clear, wrote in the Dec 2005 issue of Alternative Medicine Review : a journal of Clinical Therapeutic:
In particular, fructose is a potent reducing sugar that promotes the formation of toxic advanced glycation end-products, which appear to play a role in the aging process; in the pathogenesis of the vascular, renal, and ocular complications of diabetes; and in the development of atherosclerosis. Fructose has also been implicated as the main cause of symptoms in some patients with chronic diarrhea or other functional bowel disturbances. In addition, excessive fructose consumption may be responsible in part for the increasing prevalence of obesity, diabetes mellitus, and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Although the long-term effects of fructose consumption have not been adequately studied in humans, the available evidence suggests it may be more harmful than is generally recognized.

Fructose in high fructose corn syrup may not be the only issue surrounding the sweetener that concerns some consumers.

Researchers at Rutgers University in New Brunswick, New Jersey reported that reactive carbonyls, which are found high in the blood of diabetes patients, are also found in soft drinks sweetened with HFCS.

Dr. Chi-Tang Ho and colleagues found one single can of a HFCS sweetened soft drink contained a five times higher concentration of reactive carbonyls than the concentration found in the blood of an adult with diabetes.

Reactive carbonyls have been found by other scientists to have the potential to trigger cell and tissue damage that could lead to diabetes, according to a news release by the American Chemical Society, which was reporting Dr. Ho's finding.

Time News Feed 9-10-10

Study: Overweight Americans Think They're Thinner Than They Are By: Megan Friedman

It turns out a major factor in the obesity epidemic is denial.

A survey conducted by Harris Healthcare and HealthDay asked respondents to provide their body-mass index, or BMI, which is a ratio of height to weight. They then asked them to evaluate which weight stage they were in.

The results showed a lack of self-awareness about one's weight. Thirty percent of those measuring in the overweight class said they were in a normal weight, and 70 percent of obese respondents said they were only overweight. Sixty percent of morbidly obese respondents said they were merely obese.

Experts say attitudes like this contribute to growing numbers of obesity, since people can't seem to recognize their actual weight problems. For a BMI calculator and more study results, go to USA Today.

The Huffington Post - July 27, 2010

Obesity is Contagious - by Dr. Dennis Gottfried - Assoc prof, Univ of Conn Medical School

America is the fattest nation on earth. About 68 percent of American adults are now classified as overweight, including the 30 percent designated as obese. Along with an increase in the American waistline has come an increase in obesity-related diseases, especially diabetes. The plumping of America has become our second greatest public health problem after tobacco, claiming 300,000 lives a year. The carnage this epidemic is producing and the drain on health care dollars from the diseases that accompany it are shifting public sentiment from a passive resignation to a desire for active policy. The Surgeon General has initiated a "call to action to prevent and decrease overweight and obesity."

As society initiates its battle to end the obesity epidemic, much can be learned from the similar battle waged against cigarette smoking over the past several decades -- a battle that has enjoyed some success. The act of levying heavy taxes on tobacco products, for example, constituted a politically safe way for the government to raise money. Public opposition to these taxes was minimal, and even smokers themselves paid the inflated prices with little protest. The lobbyists from tobacco companies tried to influence policy but their success was limited by the contempt the public has developed for these industries. Raising taxes on cigarettes had both a predictable and desirable effect. Each time the cigarette tax was increased, the government raised more money and, at the same time, fewer people continued smoking.

Restricting smokers to designated areas and outlawing smoking in public places also became national policy. The effect of separating smokers was to make the unhealthy behavior more difficult. Social isolation of smokers had a similar result to raising cigarette taxes -- fewer cigarettes were smoked. The rationale for having designated smoking areas was based on the premise that second-hand smoke is medically dangerous to nearby people who might inhale the fumes, but just exactly how physically dangerous is second-hand smoke?

Although some early studies showed that spouses of smokers might see a very slight increase in the risk of lung cancer and heart disease, more recent studies failed to confirm that. A large study of 35,561 spouses of smokers who were followed for 38 years was published in the British Medical Journal in May 2003. This study showed no increase in cancer or heart disease in the nonsmoking spouse. Although spouses did have more episodes of self-limited bronchitis as a result of irritation from the smoke, they were spared the more serious complications. The authors of the BMJ article concluded that the major danger for spouses of smokers was early widowhood! If the risk of medical complications from second-hand smoke is so minimal, even in people who have the intense exposure that comes with living with a smoker, the risk for a coworker -- or for someone who is sitting near a smoker in a restaurant -- is almost nonexistent. The real reason cigarette smokers have been banished is because of the social prejudice that has developed in the U.S. against the habit.

How does this apply to our present obesity epidemic? Why should we care what our friends or associates eat? Isn't eating just a personal choice?

While it is true that Americans suffer financially from the rising health care costs produced by irresponsible eating and physical inactivity, there are more than just economic concerns in the obesity crisis. Living in an obese society produces very real physical dangers for all Americans, even those of a healthy weight. We are all weight-interdependent and each one of us is at an added personal health risk of gaining weight if our friends or associates become obese. A study published in the New England Journal of Medicine in July 2007 clearly outlines that interdependence. The article followed the weight changes over time among the inhabitants of Framingham, MA, and as the population at large gained weight, the authors determined each individual's likelihood of becoming obese. The study discovered the presence of "networks of obesity" -- that is to say, members of a population are all interconnected in regard to weight. When people with whom we are closely associated gain weight, such as neighbors, family, friends, or a spouse, we are also at an increased risk of gaining weight. For example, if your mutual friend becomes obese, you have a 171 percent increased risk of becoming obese. If your friend's sister becomes obese, you also have an increased likelihood of becoming obese. Even when your friend's sister's neighbor becomes obese, you still have an increased risk. The increased risk for becoming obese goes out to four degrees of separation.

Perhaps this parallel weight gain is due to a parallel change in eating habits, possibly due to the sharing of unhealthy foods, or a similar decrease in activity levels. Most likely the shared behavior that produces the shared weight gain involves a combination of all these factors. Whatever the cause, it is in our personal and economic interests to make sure that our friends, neighbors, and relatives remain at a healthy weight because obesity is a contagious disease, and presents a greater risk to our health than having them smoke around us!

It is long past the time that we as a society should recognize eating behavior and physical inactivity as not just a personal health problem, but a national one. We need to place similar social pressure on obesity as we have on smoking. The principle of encouraging healthy life habits accompanied by the taxation and social isolation of unhealthy behavior -- as has been done with tobacco -- needs to be applied to the obesity epidemic. However, the public is still reluctant to accept serious government intervention, so we should start with simple measures. Business offices and hospitals, for example, in an attempt to improve their workers' health, could declare their workspaces as "healthy snacks only" areas. Instead of coffee breaks, workers should be given "exercise breaks". Hopefully, using the measures we have learned from the ongoing battle against smoking, we can overcome the obesity epidemic and improve the health of all Americans.

Helium June 30, 2010

Why the McDonalds Mini Meal is contributing to obesity - by Rachel Howells

The McDonald's Mini Meal is contributing to obesity because fast food packs on fast weight, no matter how well it is marketed.

A Mini Meal is more or less a Happy Meal without the toy. It includes a small fries or apple slices, a choice of Snack Wrap, McDonald's Double Cheese Burger or Hamburger, and a small fountain soda.

If Happy Meals are meant to make children happy then the implication is that Mini Meals are meant to keep adult waistlines mini. Enticing overweight people with mini meals in this way is like titillating sober alcoholics with light beer. It is a slippery slope once that first bite is taken.

It starts with a Mini Meal, but before long, any well meaning consumer is thrown from the diet wagon by the sheer weight of a Super-Sized Double Big Mac Meal - hold the lettuce. Not that McDonald's lettuce carries much nutritional value anyway.

McDonald's food seems to be somewhat of a mystery to Mother Nature. Anyone who has discovered an old, petrified cheese burger crammed in between the seats of a mini-van would agree.

The lettuce does not readily wilt. The meat does not appear to rot, and the cheese does not grow mold. If nature is puzzled by how best to deal with McDonald's seemingly non-biodegradable food, then is it really something human beings should be consuming, even under the auspices of "mini"?

Indeed, the human body does appear to be nearly as confused as nature over what to do with McDonald's food, mini or otherwise. One 15-year-long study, "The Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (CARDIA)," researched by Mark Pereira, Ph.D. and David Ludwig, M.D., Ph.D., looked at the link between fast food, weight gain and other obesity-related illnesses, such as type 2 diabetes.

The study found a strong connection between weight gain and regular consumption of fast food, independent of other obesity risk factors such as a sedentary lifestyle. As for McDonald's Mini Meals, they are still fast food and still have way too much saturated fat, sugar, additives and empty calories to be considered a part of a healthy diet.

In addition, the high glycemic index and fat content of most fast food forces the pancreas to produce excessive insulin, which then signals the body to create and store fat. Overall energy is reduced as the body works overtime storing fat in an effort to deal with all that extra insulin. Meanwhile, the brain gets the message that it is still hungry, which compels the person to eat, in this case, more McDonald's Mini Meals.

The body will react the same way to the chemical properties of a fast food meal regardless of how small or mini it is. In other words, "mini meal" may just be the first stop on the way to obesity and a "mini stroke".

DailyFinance 06/30/10

New Obesity Report: Americans Keep Getting Fatter - By MELLY ALAZRAKI

Americans seem to pay endless attention to weight, spending billions of dollars on weight-loss products and services each year, reading a constant flow of stories about weight loss in the news and supporting many public policies aimed at slimming U.S. waistlines. But despite all this attention, Americans continue to grow ever fatter in most states. Adult obesity rates gained in 28 states in the past year, declining only in the District of Columbia, according to F as in Fat, a new report from the Trust for America's Health and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

The report highlights alarming trends in obesity. Adult obesity rates rose above 25% in 28 states, a huge increase considering that no state had an obesity rate above 20% in 1991. Eight states have rates above 30% -- double the number from last year. Mississippi, for the sixth year in a row, had the highest rate of obese adults at 33.8%. Meanwhile, Colorado had the lowest rate at 19.1% and is the only state with a rate below 20%. A growing number of adults in 12 states say they don't engage in physical activity.

Children Also Get Heavier

Just as alarming are the childhood obesity rates and trends, with more than one-third of children ages 10 to 17 being obese (16.4%) or overweight (18.2%). Nationwide, less than one-third of all children ages 6 to 17 engage in vigorous activity, defined as at least 20 minutes of physical activity that makes the child sweat and breathe hard.

Why does all this obesity cause concern? Obesity is related to more than 20 major chronic diseases, according to the report. Currently, one in three adults has some form of heart disease, more than 80 million Americans have type 2 diabetes or are prediabetic and obese children are more than twice as likely to die prematurely, or before the age of 55, compared with those of healthy weight.

Obesity costs the U.S. as much as $147 billion annually in health care, with obesity-related medical costs making up 9.1% of all annual medical spending in 2006, according to a 2009 study from nonprofit RTI International and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Overall, obese people spent 42% more for medical care than normal-weight people in 2006.

Public Policy Could Help

The F as in Fat report isn't all gloomy. It acknowledges that more public policies are attempting to address the high obesity rates. For example, President Obama's White House Task Force on Childhood Obesity has set a goal to reduce child obesity rates from 17% to 5% by 2030, a goal the report calls "bold." On top of the federal activity, 20 states have set stricter requirements for nutritional standards for school lunches, breakfasts and snacks, compared to only four states five years ago. And these are only a few of many such initiatives.

But it's far from enough considering the scale of the problem, the report says. The authors recommend increased support for obesity- and disease-prevention programs through the new health reform law's Prevention and Public Health Fund, as well as refocused and realigned federal policies and legislation, among other recommendations.

More Obesity Among Black and Low-Income Populations

The report also highlights troubling disparities among racial, ethnic, regional and income groups:

    * Southern states have highest obesity rates, while Northeastern and Western states have the lowest rates. The same regional trends are true for diabetes and hypertension.
    * Adult obesity rates topped 30% in 43 states for blacks, in 19 states for Latinos and in one state for whites.
    * Among individuals earning less than $15,000 per year, 35.3% were obese compared to 24.5% of adults earning $50,000 or more per year. Similarly, obesity rates were higher among those who never graduated from high school compared to adults with college degrees.

"Reversing the obesity epidemic will require individuals, families, schools, communities, businesses, government and every other sector of American society to reduce the barriers to healthy eating and active living," the report says. "Every American must have the chance to lead a healthy lifestyle."

The Kansas City Star - Jun 29, 2010

Obesity rates increase in Missouri, Kansas and nation - By JOEL WALSH

Through frequent media attention and new government initiatives like First Lady Michelle Obama’s “Let’s Move” campaign, there has been a mounting focus on obesity in the U.S. this year.

But according to a nationwide report released Tuesday, American waistlines continue to expand.

Like in 28 other states, obesity went up in Kansas and Missouri at a statistically significant rate, Trust for America’s Health and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation reported.

The nonprofits ranked Missouri and Kansas as the 12th and 16th fattest states in the country, respectively. That’s up from last year’s spots of 13th for Missouri and 18th for Kansas.

In Missouri, 29.3 percent of adults are obese. In Kansas, 28.2 percent.

The data averages the last three years (2007-2009) and compares it to the prior three years (2006-2008).

The Missouri and Kansas figures are an increase of at least 1 percentage point between reporting periods. Both have more than doubled since 1992.

“This is the single biggest health problem that confronts the state … in terms of what it’s costing us in shortened lives, unnecessary disease and preventable medical costs,” said Jason Eberhart-Phillips, state health officer and director of health at the Kansas Department of Health and Environment.

Nationally, more than two-thirds of adults are overweight or obese. With a 33.8 percent obesity rate, Mississippi topped the list for a sixth year in a row. Colorado had the lowest obesity rate at 19.1 percent.

The most frequently cited standard for obesity is a person’s body mass index (BMI), a ratio of weight to height.

A BMI of 30 is the baseline for being considered obese. For a 6-foot tall person that means weighing 221 pounds.

A BMI between 25 and 29.9 — someone the same height who weighs between 184 and 221 pounds — indicates someone is overweight.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services considers a healthy weight for a 6-foot tall person to be between 140 and 184 pounds: a BMI between 18.5 and 24.9.

Pat Simmons, a nutrition specialist with the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services, said people’s weight issues are mostly due to their lifestyles and personal decision-making.

But, she added, a number of environmental factors come into play as well.

“Many people don’t have places to be active or don’t have access to healthy food,” Simmons said. “Either it’s too expensive or not close by.”

Jeff Levi, Trust for America’s Health executive director, said there are a number of policy and environmental changes that can be made to make it easier to exercise and to increase access to healthy foods, but he said personal responsibility is also a major factor.

“We have to take ownership of this,” he said, “that each of us has a responsibility to think about how we live, how active we are, as adults, what kind of role model we serve to children and, as employers, what opportunities we provide our staff to make these healthy choices.”

Npr - 06-17-10

Americans Exercise More, But Still Get Fatter - by Scott Hensley

America, how's that exercise thing going for you?

Wait, you don't have to say. It's embarrassing, we know, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention already told us anyway.

That fitness routine is soooo not working. More Americans are spending some of their leisure time exercising, yet folks just keeps piling on the pounds.

Here are the cold, hard facts. About 35 percent of adults engage regularly in physical activity when they're not working, according to estimates based on a 2009 nationwide survey. That's up from 32 percent in 2008.

Now, what's the scale tell us? Not good. More people in the U.S. are obese than ever. In 2009, about 28 percent of people in the U.S. were obese, up a fraction of a percent from 2008.

But hop in the Wayback Machine and check the weights in 1997. Nineteen percent of people in the U.S. were considered obese then.

There's not a moment to lose in doing something to reverse the weight trend. A recent study found that a substantial decline in the rate of heart attacks could be fleeting as obesity and diabetes become more prevalent.

Exercise can only burn so many calories. Eating better is crucial. Recommendations for new nutritional guidelines would cut saturated fats even more than in the past and promote healthier foods, like fruits and vegetables.

But maybe you want to try some more reps of that time-honored weight-loss exercise move — pushing back from the dinner table.

Officer.com - May 12, 2010

Put Down the Donuts - by PAMELA KULBARSH, RN

It is fairly obvious that law enforcement officers need to be physically fit in order to carry out their duties to the best of their ability. An overweight officer can endanger society, suspects, as well as themselves. Obese officers also pose as liability risks for any law enforcement department. Plus, let's face it, they present a bad public image.

The Obesity Epidemic

Obesity is the #2 cause of preventable death in the United States; smoking is #1. But the race is getting closer. About 66% of U.S. adults age 20 or older are overweight: 62% of women and around 71% of men. Nearly one-third of American adults (60 million people) are so overweight that they are considered obese, meaning they have a BMI greater than 30: 33% of women and 30% of men. Nine million children and teens ages 6-19 are overweight. Americans spend more than $33 billion a year on weight-loss products and services. However, the economic cost of obesity in the United States was about $117 billion in 2000.

Being overweight or obese dramatically increases the risk of health conditions and diseases including: coronary artery disease, cardiac arrest, stroke, diabetes, hypertension, sleep apnea, gallbladder disease, osteoarthritis, colon and breast cancer.

Calculating Obesity

The generally accepted standard to measure whether a person is obese or overweight is by using the Body Mass Index, more commonly known as the BMI. Note: Using BMI for athletes can overestimate their level of body fat because muscle is denser than fat and weighs more. There are a number of different ways to measure body fatness. There is a formula for this: divide your weight in pounds by height in inches squared and multiply by a conversion factor of 703. There is an easier way: the BMI calculator. (linked below)

Normal weight consists of BMI in the range of 18.5 to 24.9. If your BMI is under 18.5, you are considered underweight. If your BMI is between 25.0 and 29.9 you are considered overweight. A BMI between 30.0 and 34.9 indicates obesity. Severe obesity is determined if the BMI is between 35 and 39.9. If your BMI is over 40, you are morbidly obese.

These calculations would translate to a six foot tall male police officer having just reached the slightly overweight category at 185 pounds. Upon reaching 225 pounds he would be considered obese.

Why Officers are at Risk for Overeating

Patrol officers frequently have to wolf down their food to complete a meal without being interrupted by a call for service. This does not allow them time to feel full before the plate is clean. If an officer works the second or third watch he or she may have very limited choices on where to purchase food when they feel hungry. Let's face it Circle K, gas stations or the 7-11 primarily offer a feast of sugar and fat. Food can be as comforting for an overeater as a beer is for a drinker. Most overeaters eat to fill a void or deal with stress: from a dispatch call, a demanding supervisor, or personal problems.

Obesity and Compulsive Overeating

While not every obese individual is a compulsive overeater, many are. Compulsive overeating inevitably leads to weight gain and obesity.

Does the cheese cake in the freezer keep calling your name? Can't resist a chip or candy run to a convenience store during your shift? Do you supersize or buy jumbo packages? If so, you may be a compulsive overeater.

Compulsive overeaters are usually aware that their eating habits are abnormal. However, they have an obsession with food and a compulsion to eat. This obsession is demonstrated by spending excessive amounts of time and thought devoted to food, and secretly planning or fantasizing about eating alone. Telling them to go on a diet is about as effective as telling an anorexic to just eat, or heroin addict to just go cold turkey.

Compulsive overeaters will typically eat when they are not hungry and engage in frequent episodes of uncontrolled eating, or binge eating. During a binge a compulsive overeater may consume 5,000 to 15,000 calories per day. They often feel frenzied or out of control, consuming food well past the point of being comfortably full. This is followed by feelings of depression, shame, low self esteem, remorse and guilt. Not all compulsive overeaters binge, others engage in grazing behavior; eating smaller amounts of food (high calorie) throughout the day.

The good payoff is that when compulsive overeaters consume sugary and fatty food they truly enjoy it. In fact they get an addictive high from it. The brain releases endorphins and dopamine that stimulate the individual to eat more of these foods to feel good and to calm him/her down. Unfortunately, left untreated, compulsive overeating can lead to serious medical conditions including death.

Treatment for Obesity and Compulsive Overeating

Approximately 80% of compulsive overeaters who seek professional help recover completely or experience significant reduction in their symptoms. There are several options for people who want help with controlling this disorder. Behavioral therapy is used to help teach individuals how to keep track of their eating and change unhealthy eating habits. Psychotherapy helps compulsive overeaters to look at their interpersonal relationships and make changes in problem areas. Additionally, certain medications can be effective including antidepressant and Topiramate (an anti-seizure medication). In severe cases gastrointestinal surgery may be indicated. Nutritionists can help determine an effective diet plan that an individual can comply with, as well as an exercise regime. There are many self-help groups as well, including Overeaters Anonymous.

Knowing what drives overeating behavior is the first step in changing it. Compulsive overeaters need to change the way they approach food. No one said it was easy

.If you want help, start with your physician. It may be uncomfortable to discuss obesity with anyone, especially your doctor. Know that you are not the first person to enter your doctor's office with this problem. It is usually pretty obvious, and society and your mirror remind you daily. Get a complete physical, lab tests and find out if you are physically healthy enough for certain treatments. If so start an exercise regime, use your departmentís gym if they have one. Better yet, invest in a personal trainer, get referrals.

The Huffington Post – May 6, 2010

The Full Picture of America's Health Includes BMI as a Vital Sign – by Penny Lee - Executive Director, Campaign to End Obesity

The need is clear. Today's generation is the first one expected to have a shorter lifespan than their parents. Our military needs may be unmet by a population that is not physically fit to serve. And Americans continue to spend $147 billion a year in medical costs stemming from obesity. This tide is unsustainable.

To fight back, we need to begin with a simple but powerful tool. Body Mass Index (BMI) is the core measurement used to determine if a patient is overweight or obese, and consequently at risk for triggering more than 60 other chronic, often life-threatening diseases. By measuring and tracking BMI, doctors and patients together can monitor, address or help prevent the onset of illnesses such as heart disease and stroke, diabetes, arthritis, dementia and many forms of cancer.

Establishing BMI as a "vital sign" is a core first step towards getting America healthy again. Today, Congressman Ron Kind and a bipartisan group of others are introducing a bill to that will do just that. The Healthy CHOICES Act will give the medical community the tools it needs to measure, diagnose, treat and begin to reverse this epidemic. It will ensure that children's BMI is tracked through vaccination records, and make BMI a standard part of electronic health records for all adults and children. Additionally, it would establish grant program to help states disseminate information about BMI results to parents.

There are few things we do in life without knowing the full picture first. We wouldn't change the family budget without knowing what's in our bank account; we wouldn't hit the road on I-95 without a traffic report; you certainly wouldn't undergo a medical procedure without knowing the diagnosis. Likewise, to get healthy and to stay healthy, we need a complete picture of our health. That includes all the standard vitals we know --blood pressure, pulse, breathing rate and temperature-- as well as whether our body is at a healthy weight.

Congress has an opportunity to help put America on the road to better health. In addition to standardizing BMI as a vital sign, the Healthy CHOICES Act --a bipartisan bill that offers the first comprehensive federal legislative framework to combat the obesity epidemic-- would equip doctors to diagnose and treat obesity and expand treatment and preventive services . And it would make good health a part of our every-day lives outside of the doctor's office through a variety of measures to make physical activity and healthy eating more accessible and more achievable, especially for at-risk communities. I commend Congressman Kind for introducing this important piece of legislation - now is the time to act!

Wall Street Journal's blog on health and the business of health - April 28, 2010

PepsiCo CEO Blames Obesity on Lack of Exercise. Really? - By Katherine Hobson

PepsiCo CEO and vegetarian Indra Nooyi says obesity “wouldn’t exist” if we all just exercised, Fortune reports.

The context of that comment: a discussion of how Nooyi wants to boost sales of the company’s “good-for-you” foods to $30 billion in 2020 from $10 billion now.

But here’s the rub: it’s not particularly clear that exercise alone is the key to maintaining or losing weight. A recent JAMA study found that women already at a healthy body weight had to get the equivalent of an hour a day of moderately intense exercise to avoid putting on weight over the years. Exercise had little effect on weight gain among women who were already overweight or obese. As one scientist and weight loss expert recently told the New York Times magazine, “In general, exercise by itself is pretty useless for weight loss.”

Of course, food and beverage companies aren’t about to harp on the other – and necessary – part of losing weight or avoiding obesity: watching what you eat. A study published in December in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition concludes that “increased energy intake appears to be more than sufficient to explain weight gain in the U.S. population.” It calculated that to get back to the body weights of the 1970s, adults would need to chop an average of 500 calories from their daily intake, while kids would need to cut back by 350 calories. To get the same reduction via exercise alone, it would take between 110 and 150 minutes a day of walking, the study says.

Here’s a real-world example of why it’s tough to compensate for what we eat via exercise: if a 50-pound kid plays soccer for 45 minutes, she burns up about 120 calories. But a typical post-game snack chosen from Pepsi’s “good for you” brand list – a 15.2-ounce bottle of Dole Strawberry-Kiwi juice and a reduced calorie Quaker granola bar – adds up to 320 calories. Even a 150-pound adult would barely burn off more than she took in under the same circumstances.

The Huffinton Post - April 23, 2010

Why the Biggest Loser Won't Help Solve the Obesity Problem - by Christine C. Ferguson, J.D.

More than a dozen weeks into Season nine of the mega-reality show The Biggest Loser and it is still drawing upwards of 7 million viewers per episode. Some say the program has produced the most drama of any other season, with new twists, turns and, lest we forget, a set of contestants who weighed in heavier than any other season in the past. Add up the weight on-air participants have shed across the show's first 12 weeks and it amounts to more than 1,600 pounds. A simple calculation later, and you will find it's equivalent to more than 6,400 McDonald's Quarter Pounders ...that's a lot of burgers.

As the show continues on its journey to find the biggest loser of all, many will continue to flock to their televisions in hopes of being inspired to jump-start their own weight-loss miracle and, once and for all, conquer their extra weight.

But, seriously, "weight-loss miracle" and "reality show?" This program offers neither. The truth is that obese Americans face a very different reality ... and it doesn't include a personal trainer, nutritionist, psychologist and doctor on call at all times. It doesn't include a brush with fame or weekly national television exposure. And it doesn't include the possibility of winning a quarter of a million dollars at the end. Instead, the possibilities are very high that their realities will lead to a life spent struggling to overcome their weight challenges complicated by serious chronic health conditions like type 2 diabetes, heart disease or any number of the dozens of co-morbid conditions complicated, or onset, by obesity. Moreover, the show features the morbidly obese, yet fails to address the unique needs of this population. Instead, it falls into the trap of generically categorizing a "one-size-fits-all" approach of extreme exercising and low caloric intake.

A danger of the show is that its hype reinforces two myths that continue to undermine the chances we have at successfully overcoming and preventing obesity in America. The first is that success should be measured by the amount and speed of weight lost and the second is that willpower is all that is necessary to succeed.

So let's start with success. On what should success be based? We certainly don't know all the answers, but we do know this. When defining success, many set their goals based on cosmetic appeal rather than health improvement. It's no wonder that many Americans define 100 percent loss of excess weight as the singular measurement for success. Consider the magazines covered with pictures of people who have experienced "miracle weight loss" alongside the always shocking before and after images. It is hard for many of us not to aspire to similar results, despite our nagging doubt that the reason it is presented as a weight loss miracle is because it is. Such a drastic weight loss is extremely difficult to sustain or achieve.

If instead of appearance we shift the focus to health improvement, science provides us with a healthy - and proven - successful weight loss approach. Studies have shown losing five to 10 percent of total body weight can have a tremendous impact on the risk for serious chronic diseases such as type 2 diabetes. For a 200-pound person, that translates into a weight loss of 10 to 20 pounds. This might seem small, but it is achievable and sustainable in the long-term. Additionally, studies have found that people who enter weight loss programs expecting to see a huge weight loss tend to drop out sooner, lose less weight overall, and have a harder time maintaining weight loss . Those who were more focused on health benefits tended to have better success and longer maintenance.

Now, onto the other major myth this show continues to reinforce: the long-held belief that obesity is simply a matter of willpower. The show's Web site promotes a club for viewers that asks people to "join now to get the motivation to lose weight." Certainly, personal choice and motivation are part of the equation, but even "The Biggest Loser" proves that weight loss requires enormously supportive environments. The hosts, trainers and experts involved in the program are almost as numerous as the contestants themselves. Even The Wall Street Journal gets it. In 2009, they wrote an article on a report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that showed "it takes a village" to successfully overcome obesity. The CDC's recommended strategies for combating obesity reflect the often-overlooked influence that our communities play in encouraging and reinforcing the healthy lifestyles that are paramount to overcoming this epidemic.

Equally important is recognizing that the village also includes our health care system and the workplace for adults. Medical professionals must look for evidence-based guidance on the best practices for reducing risk for the illnesses associated with obesity. And employers are increasingly recognizing their own interests in promoting healthy lifestyles and supporting weight loss efforts in the workplace. Health costs associated with weight are literally tipping the scales of affordability for employers - and that doesn't even take into account the impact overweight, obesity and poor health have on productivity.

Obesity is a complex problem. To oversimplify it as a matter of aesthetics and bad personal decisions is to avoid the reality we know exists. So, as we continue to watch the show unfold and lead to its ultimate conclusion, let's promise to remember that there are no easy fixes and that all of us need to focus on this issue not to improve our looks, but to improve our health.

PRWEB - April 21, 2010 (partial article)

HCG Diet Direct discusses the connection between age, obesity and HCG weight loss.

Recent statistics released regarding the obesity and its prevalence amongst varying age groups can lead to definite conclusions regarding the possible HCG weight loss solutions. More overweight and obese individuals are asking themselves, “Does homeopathic HCG weight loss make a difference?”

Recent statistics regarding obesity amongst non-institutionalized individuals in specified age groups (as provided by Health, United States, 2009, table 67):

1.   20 years old and up = 67% overweight/obese
2.   20 years old and up = 34% obese
3.   Aged 12-19 years = 18% overweight
4.   Aged 6-11 years = 15% overweight
5.   Aged 2-5 years = 11% overweight

The connection between age and obesity indicates slow weight gain that escalates consistently until the problem is out of control. Once weight reaches obesity levels it is affecting the general health, energy levels, mood, self esteem, confidence and it can drastically increase the risk for common illnesses and diseases.

Jenny Boynton of HCG Diet Direct said, “Age is a definite factor weighing in on the obesity epidemic. The longer the problem is ignored the more out of control it gets. And the more out of control it gets the more negative effects are felt from the unhealthy weight.”

WTVQ, 21 April 2010

New Diabesity Epidemic - by Kristi Runyon

Roughly 95 percent of type 2 diabetics are overweight. Researchers are calling the link between diabetes and obesity, diabesity.

Diabetes is a condition which affects the body’s ability to use glucose for fuel. Glucose is a form of sugar that we get from our foods. When we eat, the pancreas releases insulin, a hormone that unlocks cell walls and enables the glucose to enter the cells. In patients with type 2 diabetes, the pancreas either doesn’t make enough insulin or the body isn’t able to effectively use the hormone. High levels of glucose circulate in the blood, yet the cells are starved for energy,

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), about 24 million Americans have diabetes. Type 2 is the most common form of the disease, accounting for about 90 to 95 percent of all cases. The condition is typically first diagnosed in middle-aged adults. However, doctors are seeing more cases in children and teens.

Over time, high levels of glucose can damage the walls of the blood vessels and organs. People with long-term diabetes are at higher risk for high blood pressure, heart disease, stroke, kidney disease, nerve damage and amputations. The CDC estimates, in 2007, diabetes cost this country about $174 billion in direct and indirect medical costs.

Diabesity: The Diabetes-Obesity Link

Diabesity is a term that reflects the connection between diabetes and obesity. Roughly 95 percent of type 2 diabetics are overweight. As people gain weight, the need for insulin increases because more cells require fuel. The body has a harder time controlling blood sugar levels, leading to the development of insulin resistance (the inability to use insulin properly) and type 2 diabetes. Researchers have coined this connection between diabetes and obesity as “diabesity.”

For those who are overweight and have not yet been diagnosed with diabetes, one of the best ways to reduce the risk for the disease is to lose weight. Christopher Still, D.O., Obesity Expert with the Geisinger Center for Nutrition and Weight Management in Danville, PA, says patients should aim to lose ten percent of their body weight. The best way to achieve this is by following a healthy diet and getting regular physical activity. They key is to do it slowly, at a rate of about one to one-and-a-half pounds a week. Even this minimal amount of weight loss will reduce the risk for many of the chronic medical conditions associated with being overweight or obese. Taking the weight off slowly increases the likelihood that weight loss will be permanent. If patients are initially very overweight or obese, they can aim to lose another ten percent once they reach the first weight loss goal.

Overweight people who already have diabetes can also benefit from small amounts of weight loss. However, these patients should speak with their health care provider about the safest way to lose weight while maintaining adequate control over blood sugar levels.

New York Times - April 22, 2010

Brain Damage - By OLIVIA JUDSON

Being fat is bad for your brain.

The brains of obese people often show signs of damage. One study of 60 healthy young adults (in their 20s and 30s) found that the fatter members of the group had significantly lower gray-matter densities in several brain regions, including those involved in the perception of taste and the regulation of eating behavior. A study of 114 middle-aged people (aged between 40 and 66) found that the obese tended to have smaller, more atrophied brains than thinner people; other studies have found similar results.

Brains usually atrophy with age, but being obese appears to accelerate the process. This is bad news: pronounced brain atrophy is a feature of dementia.

Why fatness should affect the brain in this way is not clear, although a host of culprits have been suggested. A paper published this week in the early edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences has identified a gene that seems to be involved. FTO, as the gene is known, appears to play a role in both body weight and brain function. This gene comes in different versions; one version — let’s call it “troublesome”— appears to predispose people to obesity. Individuals with two copies of the troublesome version tend to be fatter than those with only one copy of it, who in turn tend to be fatter than those with two copies of the “regular” version. Now, the troublesome form has been linked to atrophy in several regions of the brain, including the frontal lobes, though how and why it has this effect remains unknown.

But genes are not the only guilty parties. Obesity exacerbates problems like sleep apnea, which can result in the brain being starved of oxygen; this can lead to brain damage. Obesity often goes along with high blood pressure, heart disease and diabetes, all of which are bad for the brain in their own right. Indeed, one study has shown that if, in middle age, you are obese and have high blood pressure, the two problems gang up on you, increasing the chances of your getting dementia in old age more than either one would do on its own.

Fat tissue itself may be a problem. Fat cells secrete hormones like leptin; leptin acts on the brain in a variety of ways, and is thought to play a role in the development of Alzheimer’s. Obesity may thus disrupt the normal production of leptin, with dangerous results. Fat cells also secrete substances that cause inflammation; chronic inflammation of the brain, which is often found in the obese, impairs learning and memory and is also a feature of Alzheimer’s.

Diet may play a role, too. Studies in mice have shown that eating a very-high-fat diet increases brain inflammation and disrupts brain function. And the onset of brain decay may itself play a part. Since the regions of the brain most affected by obesity appear to be those involved in self-control and the regulation of appetite, erosion of these abilities may lead to greater obesity, which may lead to more rapid brain erosion, in a downward spiral.

Whatever the causes, the implications are grave. In the United States today, around one-third of adults are obese. At the same time, dementia is already one of the most costly and devastating health problems of old age. The possibility that obesity today will lead to higher rates of dementia in the future is, therefore, deeply alarming.

The obvious question is: can obesity-associated brain damage be reversed? No one knows the answer, but I am hopeful that it can. Those two old friends, a healthful diet and plenty of exercise, have repeatedly been shown to protect the brain. Foods like oily fishes and blueberries have been shown to stimulate the growth of new neurons, for example. Moreover, one study found that dieting reversed some of the changes to brain structure found among the obese. Which suggests an interesting study. The most effective — and radical — treatment for obesity is bariatric surgery, whereby the stomach is made much smaller or bypassed altogether. Do people who have taken this option show a reversal, or at least a slowing, of brain atrophy?

But whether you are fat or thin, young or old, the best hope you have of guarding your brain is to eat well and exercise. Anyone seen my running shoes?

rense.com - posted 04-08-2010

MSG - The Slow Poisoning Of America

MSG Hides Behind 25+ Names, Such As 'Natural Flavouring'
MSG Is Also In Your Favorite Coffee Shops And Drive-Ups

I wondered if there could be an actual chemical causing the massive obesity epidemic, so did a friend of mine, John Erb.

He was a research assistant at the University of Waterloo in Ontario, Canada, and spent years working for the government.

He made an amazing discovery while going through scientific journals for a book he was writing called "The Slow Poisoning of America".

In hundreds of studies around the world, scientists were creating obese mice and rats to use in diet or diabetes test studies. No strain of rat or mice is naturally obese, so the scientists have to create them. They make these morbidly obese creatures by injecting them with MSG when they are first born. The MSG triples the amount of insulin the pancreas creates; causing rats (and humans?) to become obese. They even have a title for the fat rodents they create: "MSG-Treated Rats".

I was shocked too. I went to my kitchen, checking the cupboards and the fridge. MSG was in everything: The Campbell's soups, the Hostess Doritos, the Lays flavoured potato chips, Top Ramen, Betty Crocker Hamburger Helper, Heinz canned gravy, Swanson frozen prepared meals, Kraft salad dressings, especially the 'healthy low fat' ones.

The items that didn't have MSG marked on the product label had something called ''Hydrolyzed Vegetable Protein'', which is just another name for Monosodium Glutamate.

It was shocking to see just how many of the foods we feed our children everyday are filled with this stuff. They hide MSG under many different names in order to fool those who carefully read the ingredient list, so they don't catch on. (Other names for MSG: 'Accent' - 'Aginomoto' - 'Natural Meet Tenderizer', etc) But it didn't stop there. When our family went out to eat, we started asking at the restaurants what menu items had MSG.

Many employees, even the managers, swore they didn't use MSG. But when we ask for the ingredient list, which they grudgingly provided, sure enough MSG and Hydrolyzed Vegetable Protein were everywhere:

Burger King
McDonalds
Wendy's
Taco Bell

And every restaurant like: TGIF, Chilis', Applebees and Denny's use MSG in abundance.

Kentucky Fried Chicken seemed to be the WORST offender: MSG was in EVERY chicken dish, salad dressing and gravy. No wonder I loved to eat that coating on the skin, their secret spice was MSG.

So, why is MSG in so may of the foods we eat?

Is it a preservative or a vitamin?? Not according to my friend John. In the book he wrote, an expose of the food additive industry called "The Slow Poisoning of America" he said that MSG is added to food for the addictive effect it has on the human body. http://www.spofamerica.com

Even the propaganda website sponsored by the food manufacturers lobby group supporting MSG at: http://www.msgfactscom/facts/msgfact12.html explains that the reason they add it to food is to make people EAT MORE OF THEIR PRODUCTS.

A study of the elderly showed that people eat more of the foods it is added to.The Glutamate Association lobby group says eating more benefits the elderly, but what does it do to the rest of us? 'Betcha can't eat just one', takes on a whole new meaning where MSG is concerned! And we wonder why the nation is overweight?

The MSG manufacturers themselves admit that it addicts people to their products. It makes people choose their product over others, and makes people eat more of it than they would if MSG wasn't added.

Not only is MSG scientifically proven to cause obesity, it is an addictive substance! Since its introduction into the American food supply fifty years ago, MSG has been added in larger and larger doses to the pre-packaged meals, soups, snacks and fast foods we are tempted to eat everyday.The FDA has set no limits on how much of it can be added to food. They claim it's safe to eat in any amount. How can they claim it safe when there are hundreds of scientific studies with titles like these? :-

'The monosodium glutamate (MSG) obese rat as a model for the study of exercise in obesity'. GobattoCA, Mello MA, Souza CT, Ribeiro IA.Res Commun Mol Pathol Pharmacol. 2002.

'Adrenalectomy abolishes the food-induced hypothalamic serotonin release in both normal and monosodium glutamate-obese rats'. Guimaraes RB, Telles MM, Coelho VB, Mori C, Nascimento CM, Ribeiro Brain Res Bull. 2002 Aug.

'Obesity induced by neonatal monosodium glutamate treatment in spontaneously hypertensive rats: an animal model of multiple risk factors'. Iwase M, Yamamoto M, Iino K, IchikawaK, Shinohara N, Yoshinari Fujishima Hypertens Res. 1998 Mar.

'Hypothalamic lesion induced by injection of monosodium glutamate in suckling period and subsequent development of obesity'. Tanaka K, Shimada M, Nakao K, Kusunoki Exp Neurol. 1978 Oct.

Yes, that last study was not a typo, it WAS written in 1978. Both the "medical research community" and "food manufacturers" have known about MSG's side effects for decades! Many more studies mentioned in John Erb's book link MSG to Diabetes, Migraines and headaches, Autism, ADHD and even Alzheimer's. But what can we do to stop the food manufactures from dumping fattening and addictive MSG into our food supply and causing the obesity epidemic we now see?

Even as you read this, G. W. Bush and his corporate supporters are pushing a Bill through Congress called the "Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act" also known as the "Cheeseburger Bill", this sweeping law bans anyone from suing food manufacturers, sellers and distributors. Even if it comes out that they purposely added an addictive chemical to their foods. Read about it for yourself at: http://www.yahoo.com. The Bill has already been rushed through the House of Representatives, and is due for the same rubber stamp at Senate level. It is important that Bush and his corporate supporters get it through before the media lets everyone know about 'MSG, the intentional Nicotine for food'.

Several months ago, John Erb took his book and his concerns to one of the highest government health officials in Canada. While sitting in the Government office, the official told him "Sure, I know how bad MSG is, I wouldn't touch the stuff." But this top level government official refused to tell the public what he knew.

The big media doesn't want to tell the public either, fearing legal issues with their advertisers. It seems that the fallout on fast food industry may hurt their profit margin. The food producers and restaurants have been addicting us to their products for years, and now we are paying the price for it. Our children should not be cursed with obesity caused by an addictive food additive. But what can I do about it?... I'm just one voice.

What can I do to stop the poisoning of our children, while our governments are insuring financial protection for the industry that is poisoning us.

This e-mail is going out to everyone I know in an attempt to tell you the truth that the corporate owned politicians and media won't tell you. The best way you can help to save yourself and your children from this drug-induced epidemic, is to forward this email to everyone. With any luck, it will circle the globe before politicians can pass the legislation protecting those who are poisoning us. The food industry learned a lot from the tobacco industry. Imagine if big tobacco had a bill like this in place before someone blew the whistle on Nicotine?

If you are one of the few who can still believe that MSG is good for us, and you don't believe what John Erb has to say, see for yourself. Go to the National Library of Medicine, at http://www.pubmed.com. Type in the words "MSG Obese" and read a few of the 115 medical studies that appear.

We the public, do not want to be rats in one giant experiment and we do not approve of food that makes us into a nation of obese, lethargic, addicted sheep, feeding the food industry's bottom line, while waiting for the heart transplant, diabetic induced amputation, blindness or other obesity induced, life threatening disorders. With your help we can put an end to this poison. Do your part in sending this message out by word of mouth, e-mail or by distribution of this print-out to all your friends all over the world and stop this 'Slow Poisoning of Mankind' by the packaged food industry.

Blowing the whistle on MSG is our responsibility, get the word out.

Fox News – Live Science8 - March 23, 2010

8 Reasons Our Waistlines Are Expanding

If obesity is a disease, like cancer or heart disease, as researchers stress, it is time to stop blaming lack of willpower for the extra poundage and ask — non-judgmentally — why are we so fat? From better hygiene to foods that mimic drugs, the answers may shake up your diet.

8. The Government

In 1998, 29 million people suddenly became overweight without gaining an ounce. That summer, the U.S. government announced new guidelines lowering the threshold of what classifies a person as overweight. Previously, if your body mass index (BMI) was less than 28 for men, or 27 for women, you were considered "normal." Now only BMIs of 25 or below are considered healthy. (BMI is a ratio of weight to height, and is considered an indicator of how much body fat a person has.)

7. Better Hygiene

While our food-stuffed, exercise-starved, modern lifestyles are still the most popular scapegoats, in the future, we might also blame frequent hand-washing and cleaner water.

In experiments done on mice, researchers have found that certain intestinal bacteria can help a body suck more calories out of the same amount of food and even increase a person's appetite. It is possible these bacteria gained prominence as we wiped out competing bacteria with antibiotics and better hygiene practices, said senior researcher Andrew Gewirtz at the Emory University School of Medicine in Georgia.

The finding does not suggest that obesity is an infectious disease — it is nearly impossible to change your intestinal helpers after the first few years, or even days, of life — so don't expect an obesity antibiotic anytime soon.

6. Your Parents

Not everyone has succumbed to environmental changes: Skinny people do still exist. These people have won "the throw of the genetic dice," said Susan Carnell, an obesity researcher at the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons in New York.

Genes likely control how easily one feels satiated, researchers are finding. People who lack the genes for a voracious appetite often don't understand how hard it is for someone who isn't so genetically lucky, Carnell said.

5. Especially Mom

New research has shown that an unborn child may receive "epigenetic" messages in the womb about how to regulate his or her weight. Epigenetics is the idea that even if genes themselves aren't altered, how they function can change.

Researchers at the Arkansas Children’s Nutrition Center in Little Rock transferred the newborns of normal-weight and obese rat mothers, or "dams," to the care of svelte females. Even with nearly identical genes and upbringing, only the babies from the wombs of the rotund became plump themselves.

"This occurred despite the fact that the offspring of overweight dams ate the same amount of high-fat food as the offspring of lean dams," said study researcher Kartik Shankar in a press statement.

4. Friends

People judge their own weight based on that of others and, well, in the land of the obese, the overweight feel superior. Research has shown that if your friends are fat, you are more likely to join the big booty camp yourself — even if your obese pals live far away. An underlying reason might be a resetting of what you consider normal, so a scale reading above a certain point could have sent you into tears one day and barely gotten notice the next. Such findings suggest that obesity has cultural and psychological causes as well as physiological ones.

3. Cars, Chairs and Sofas

We don't move our bodies nearly as much as our hunter-gatherer ancestors, a fact that has likely contributed to our collective weight gain. Exercise is great for maintaining weight and regulating appetite, Carnell said.

But if you want to lose a bulge, or ten, and "you are not reducing calories, just exercising, it will take a very long time to lose a single pound," said Caroline Apovian, an obesity researcher at the Boston University School of Medicine.

2. The Food Fun House

"If McDonald's didn't exist, we'd all be a lot thinner," Carnell said, referring to fast foods in general.

Highly palatable foods, such as those available from fast food chains, are "layered and loaded with fat, sugar and salt," all of which, instead of satiating us, actually prompt us to continue eating, said Dr. David Kessler, former FDA commissioner and author of "The End of Overeating" (Rodale Books, 2009). Such foods cause particular excitement in areas of the brain associated with emotion and reward — much like alcohol, sex and drugs.

With sugar, salt and fat on every street corner, Kessler said, "we are living in a food carnival." And like an over-stimulated preschooler glazing over with fatigue and irritability, our bodies are responding to the food fun house by developing insulin resistance, diabetes and systemic inflammation, which is a body-wide immune response that has been linked with health issues, including heart disease and cancer.

1. The National Eating Disorder

While genes and environment are responsible for two-thirds of the differences in people's BMIs, the remaining third is psychological. Not only can our jam-packed lifestyles drive us to self-medicate with food, stress and lack of sleep may take an unfriendly toll on metabolism.

The U.S. food culture, or lack thereof, is also to blame, Kessler said. Unlike other developed countries, which have been slow to match our obesity rates, we put limited value on the pleasures and rituals of dining — lunch is eaten at our desks, breakfast on the commute.

Such disrespect for food likely exacerbates weight problems by leaving us perpetually unsatisfied, Apovian said. Tellingly, eating fast has been linked to being overweight while regular family meals are associated with a decreased risk of obesity.

Mayo Clinic - Princeton University, news release Mar. 22, 2010

High-Fructose Corn Syrup Worse Than Sugar for Weight Gain - by Deborah Mitchell

Thousands of common foods and beverages contain high-fructose corn syrup, an ingredient that has been found to be worse than table sugar when it comes to weight gain. Ivy league researchers report that rats given high-fructose corn syrup gained significantly more weight than animals given table sugar.

High-fructose corn syrup is a boon to food manufacturers: it extends the shelf life of processed foods and is less expensive than sugar. Yet this common sweetener and preservative, which is made by changing the sugar in cornstarch to fructose, has been the subject of many studies and debates, especially regarding its association with obesity and the promotion of health problems such as high blood pressure, heart disease, and type 2 diabetes.

Two experiments were conducted by researchers at Princeton University and the Princeton Neuroscience Institute. In one, rats were given either water laced with high-fructose corn syrup or water sweetened with table sugar. The concentration of syrup used was half that found in most sodas, while the concentration of sugar was the same as found in some soft drinks. Both groups of rats also ate the same standard diet.

All of the rats that consumed the high-fructose corn syrup gained significantly more weight than the rats in the sugar group. This finding indicated to the study’s authors that high-fructose corn syrup is not the same as sugar, as many people claim, and that it may lead to more weight gain and obesity than sugar.

In the second experiment, the investigators documented the impact that high-fructose corn syrup had on rats that consumed it over six months compared with those that ate standard rat chow only. Rats that consumed the syrup showed signs of metabolic syndrome, including elevated triglyceride levels, abnormal weight gain, and increased deposits of fat, especially in the abdominal area. Rats in the high-fructose corn syrup group gained 48 percent more weight than those who ate a normal diet.

Thus far, experts do not know why the rats that consumed the high-fructose corn syrup had high triglycerides and more body fat than the animals that ate sugar. One idea is that extra fructose is metabolized to produce fat while glucose (sugar) is mostly processed for energy or stored in the muscles and liver as glycogen.

Results of the Princeton experiments provide additional support to the theory that excessive consumption of high-fructose corn syrup may be an important component in weight gain and obesity. To help avoid this sweetener, consumers can limit their intake of processed foods, limit or avoid sodas, choose fresh fruits rather than fruit juice or fruit-flavored drinks, and check food labels before making a purchase.

Source: Johns Hopkins Medicine - 2/17/2010

Obesity—Mild Or Severe—Raises Kidney Stone Risk

Newswise — Obesity in general nearly doubles the risk of developing kidney stones, but the degree of obesity doesn’t appear to increase or decrease the risk one way or the other, a new study from Johns Hopkins shows.

“The common thinking was that as weight rises, kidney stone risk rises as well, but our study refutes that,” says study leader Brian R. Matlaga, assistant professor of urology at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and director of stone diseases and ambulatory care at Hopkins’ James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute. “Whether someone is mildly obese or morbidly obese, the risk for getting kidney stones is the same.”

The findings are published in the February Journal of Urology.

Over the last decade, several epidemiological studies have shown a strong connection between obesity and kidney stone disease. However, as obesity continues to rise worldwide, Matlaga and his colleagues wondered whether different subcategories of obesity, ranging from mildly to morbidly obese, presented different risks.

To answer the question, the researchers used a national insurance claims database to identify 95,598 people who had completed a “health risk assessment” form with information about their body mass index (BMI), a measure of body fat calculated by dividing weight by height, and a general indicator of underweight, healthy weight, or overweight. The database, which spanned over a five-year period from 2002 to 2006, also had encoded information indicating whether these individuals had been diagnosed with kidney stone disease.

Using a definition of obesity as having a BMI greater than 30 kg/m2 (which, in English measurements, corresponds to a 5 foot tall person who weighs 153 pounds, or a 6 foot tall person who weighs 221 pounds), the researchers calculated the incidence of kidney stones in people who were non-obese and in those who were obese. Among the non-obese individuals, 2.6 percent were diagnosed during the study period with kidney stones, compared to 4.9 percent of the obese individuals. When the investigators arranged those in the obese group by their BMIs, ranging from above 30 kg/m2 to more than 50 kg/m2, they found that the increased risk remained constant, regardless of how heavy the individuals were.

Matlaga says that he and his colleagues aren’t sure why obese people are more at risk for kidney stones, though metabolic or endocrine factors unique to obesity are likely reasons, along with dietary factors such as a high-salt diet. The researchers plan to study these potential risk factors in subsequent studies.

Excerpt From Eric Schlosser's book 'Fast Food Nation' (Houghton-Mifflin, 2001)

Why McDonald's Fries Taste So Good by Eric Schlosser

The french fry was "almost sacrosanct for me," Ray Kroc, one of the founders of McDonald's, wrote in his autobiography, "its preparation a ritual to be followed religiously." During the chain's early years french fries were made from scratch every day. Russet Burbank potatoes were peeled, cut into shoestrings, and fried in McDonald's kitchens. As the chain expanded nationwide, in the mid-1960s, it sought to cut labor costs, reduce the number of suppliers, and ensure that its fries tasted the same at every restaurant. McDonald's began switching to frozen french fries in 1966 -- and few customers noticed the difference. Nevertheless, the change had a profound effect on the nation's agriculture and diet. A familiar food had been transformed into a highly processed industrial commodity. McDonald's fries now come from huge manufacturing plants that can peel, slice, cook, and freeze two million pounds of potatoes a day. The rapid expansion of McDonald's and the popularity of its low-cost, mass-produced fries changed the way Americans eat. In 1960 Americans consumed an average of about eighty-one pounds of fresh potatoes and four pounds of frozen french fries. In 2000 they consumed an average of about fifty pounds of fresh potatoes and thirty pounds of frozen fries. Today McDonald's is the largest buyer of potatoes in the United States.

The taste of McDonald's french fries played a crucial role in the chain's success -- fries are much more profitable than hamburgers -- and was long praised by customers, competitors, and even food critics. James Beard loved McDonald's fries. Their distinctive taste does not stem from the kind of potatoes that McDonald's buys, the technology that processes them, or the restaurant equipment that fries them: other chains use Russet Burbanks, buy their french fries from the same large processing companies, and have similar fryers in their restaurant kitchens. The taste of a french fry is largely determined by the cooking oil. For decades McDonald's cooked its french fries in a mixture of about seven percent cottonseed oil and 93 percent beef tallow. The mixture gave the fries their unique flavor -- and more saturated beef fat per ounce than a McDonald's hamburger.

In 1990, amid a barrage of criticism over the amount of cholesterol in its fries, McDonald's switched to pure vegetable oil. This presented the company with a challenge: how to make fries that subtly taste like beef without cooking them in beef tallow. A look at the ingredients in McDonald's french fries suggests how the problem was solved. Toward the end of the list is a seemingly innocuous yet oddly mysterious phrase: "natural flavor." That ingredient helps to explain not only why the fries taste so good but also why most fast food -- indeed, most of the food Americans eat today -- tastes the way it does.

Open your refrigerator, your freezer, your kitchen cupboards, and look at the labels on your food. You'll find "natural flavor" or "artificial flavor" in just about every list of ingredients. The similarities between these two broad categories are far more significant than the differences. Both are man-made additives that give most processed food most of its taste. People usually buy a food item the first time because of its packaging or appearance. Taste usually determines whether they buy it again. About 90 percent of the money that Americans now spend on food goes to buy processed food. The canning, freezing, and dehydrating techniques used in processing destroy most of food's flavor -- and so a vast industry has arisen in the United States to make processed food palatable. Without this flavor industry today's fast food would not exist. The names of the leading American fast-food chains and their best-selling menu items have become embedded in our popular culture and famous worldwide. But few people can name the companies that manufacture fast food's taste.

The flavor industry is highly secretive. Its leading companies will not divulge the precise formulas of flavor compounds or the identities of clients. The secrecy is deemed essential for protecting the reputations of beloved brands. The fast-food chains, understandably, would like the public to believe that the flavors of the food they sell somehow originate in their restaurant kitchens, not in distant factories run by other firms. A McDonald's french fry is one of countless foods whose flavor is just a component in a complex manufacturing process. The look and the taste of what we eat now are frequently deceiving -- by design.

The Flavor Corridor

The New Jersey Turnpike runs through the heart of the flavor industry, an industrial corridor dotted with refineries and chemical plants. International Flavors & Fragrances (IFF), the world's largest flavor company, has a manufacturing facility off Exit 8A in Dayton, New Jersey; Givaudan, the world's second-largest flavor company, has a plant in East Hanover. Haarmann & Reimer, the largest German flavor company, has a plant in Teterboro, as does Takasago, the largest Japanese flavor company. Flavor Dynamics has a plant in South Plainfield; Frutarom is in North Bergen; Elan Chemical is in Newark. Dozens of companies manufacture flavors in the corridor between Teaneck and South Brunswick. Altogether the area produces about two thirds of the flavor additives sold in the United States.

The IFF plant in Dayton is a huge pale-blue building with a modern office complex attached to the front. It sits in an industrial park, not far from a BASF plastics factory, a Jolly French Toast factory, and a plant that manufactures Liz Claiborne cosmetics. Dozens of tractor-trailers were parked at the IFF loading dock the afternoon I visited, and a thin cloud of steam floated from a roof vent. Before entering the plant, I signed a nondisclosure form, promising not to reveal the brand names of foods that contain IFF flavors. The place reminded me of Willy Wonka's chocolate factory. Wonderful smells drifted through the hallways, men and women in neat white lab coats cheerfully went about their work, and hundreds of little glass bottles sat on laboratory tables and shelves. The bottles contained powerful but fragile flavor chemicals, shielded from light by brown glass and round white caps shut tight. The long chemical names on the little white labels were as mystifying to me as medieval Latin. These odd-sounding things would be mixed and poured and turned into new substances, like magic potions.

I was not invited into the manufacturing areas of the IFF plant, where, it was thought, I might discover trade secrets. Instead I toured various laboratories and pilot kitchens, where the flavors of well-established brands are tested or adjusted, and where whole new flavors are created. IFF's snack-and-savory lab is responsible for the flavors of potato chips, corn chips, breads, crackers, breakfast cereals, and pet food. The confectionery lab devises flavors for ice cream, cookies, candies, toothpastes, mouthwashes, and antacids. Everywhere I looked, I saw famous, widely advertised products sitting on laboratory desks and tables. The beverage lab was full of brightly colored liquids in clear bottles. It comes up with flavors for popular soft drinks, sports drinks, bottled teas, and wine coolers, for all-natural juice drinks, organic soy drinks, beers, and malt liquors. In one pilot kitchen I saw a dapper food technologist, a middle-aged man with an elegant tie beneath his crisp lab coat, carefully preparing a batch of cookies with white frosting and pink-and-white sprinkles. In another pilot kitchen I saw a pizza oven, a grill, a milk-shake machine, and a french fryer identical to those I'd seen at innumerable fast-food restaurants.

In addition to being the world's largest flavor company, IFF manufactures the smells of six of the ten best-selling fine perfumes in the United States, including Estée Lauder's Beautiful, Clinique's Happy, Lancôme's Trésor, and Calvin Klein's Eternity. It also makes the smells of household products such as deodorant, dishwashing detergent, bath soap, shampoo, furniture polish, and floor wax. All these aromas are made through essentially the same process: the manipulation of volatile chemicals. The basic science behind the scent of your shaving cream is the same as that governing the flavor of your TV dinner.

"Natural" and "Artificial"

CIENTISTS now believe that human beings acquired the sense of taste as a way to avoid being poisoned. Edible plants generally taste sweet, harmful ones bitter. The taste buds on our tongues can detect the presence of half a dozen or so basic tastes, including sweet, sour, bitter, salty, astringent, and umami, a taste discovered by Japanese researchers -- a rich and full sense of deliciousness triggered by amino acids in foods such as meat, shellfish, mushrooms, potatoes, and seaweed. Taste buds offer a limited means of detection, however, compared with the human olfactory system, which can perceive thousands of different chemical aromas. Indeed, "flavor" is primarily the smell of gases being released by the chemicals you've just put in your mouth. The aroma of a food can be responsible for as much as 90 percent of its taste.

The act of drinking, sucking, or chewing a substance releases its volatile gases. They flow out of your mouth and up your nostrils, or up the passageway in the back of your mouth, to a thin layer of nerve cells called the olfactory epithelium, located at the base of your nose, right between your eyes. Your brain combines the complex smell signals from your olfactory epithelium with the simple taste signals from your tongue, assigns a flavor to what's in your mouth, and decides if it's something you want to eat.

A person's food preferences, like his or her personality, are formed during the first few years of life, through a process of socialization. Babies innately prefer sweet tastes and reject bitter ones; toddlers can learn to enjoy hot and spicy food, bland health food, or fast food, depending on what the people around them eat. The human sense of smell is still not fully understood. It is greatly affected by psychological factors and expectations. The mind focuses intently on some of the aromas that surround us and filters out the overwhelming majority. People can grow accustomed to bad smells or good smells; they stop noticing what once seemed overpowering. Aroma and memory are somehow inextricably linked. A smell can suddenly evoke a long-forgotten moment. The flavors of childhood foods seem to leave an indelible mark, and adults often return to them, without always knowing why. These "comfort foods" become a source of pleasure and reassurance -- a fact that fast-food chains use to their advantage. Childhood memories of Happy Meals, which come with french fries, can translate into frequent adult visits to McDonald's. On average, Americans now eat about four servings of french fries every week.

The human craving for flavor has been a largely unacknowledged and unexamined force in history. For millennia royal empires have been built, unexplored lands traversed, and great religions and philosophies forever changed by the spice trade. In 1492 Christopher Columbus set sail to find seasoning. Today the influence of flavor in the world marketplace is no less decisive. The rise and fall of corporate empires -- of soft-drink companies, snack-food companies, and fast-food chains -- is often determined by how their products taste.

The flavor industry emerged in the mid-nineteenth century, as processed foods began to be manufactured on a large scale. Recognizing the need for flavor additives, early food processors turned to perfume companies that had long experience working with essential oils and volatile aromas. The great perfume houses of England, France, and the Netherlands produced many of the first flavor compounds. In the early part of the twentieth century Germany took the technological lead in flavor production, owing to its powerful chemical industry. Legend has it that a German scientist discovered methyl anthranilate, one of the first artificial flavors, by accident while mixing chemicals in his laboratory. Suddenly the lab was filled with the sweet smell of grapes. Methyl anthranilate later became the chief flavor compound in grape Kool-Aid. After World War II much of the perfume industry shifted from Europe to the United States, settling in New York City near the garment district and the fashion houses. The flavor industry came with it, later moving to New Jersey for greater plant capacity. Man-made flavor additives were used mostly in baked goods, candies, and sodas until the 1950s, when sales of processed food began to soar. The invention of gas chromatographs and mass spectrometers -- machines capable of detecting volatile gases at low levels -- vastly increased the number of flavors that could be synthesized. By the mid-1960s flavor companies were churning out compounds to supply the taste of Pop Tarts, Bac-Os, Tab, Tang, Filet-O-Fish sandwiches, and literally thousands of other new foods.

The American flavor industry now has annual revenues of about $1.4 billion. Approximately 10,000 new processed-food products are introduced every year in the United States. Almost all of them require flavor additives. And about nine out of ten of these products fail. The latest flavor innovations and corporate realignments are heralded in publications such as Chemical Market Reporter, Food Chemical News, Food Engineering, and Food Product Design. The progress of IFF has mirrored that of the flavor industry as a whole. IFF was formed in 1958, through the merger of two small companies. Its annual revenues have grown almost fifteenfold since the early 1970s, and it currently has manufacturing facilities in twenty countries.

Today's sophisticated spectrometers, gas chromatographs, and headspace-vapor analyzers provide a detailed map of a food's flavor components, detecting chemical aromas present in amounts as low as one part per billion. The human nose, however, is even more sensitive. A nose can detect aromas present in quantities of a few parts per trillion -- an amount equivalent to about 0.000000000003 percent. Complex aromas, such as those of coffee and roasted meat, are composed of volatile gases from nearly a thousand different chemicals. The smell of a strawberry arises from the interaction of about 350 chemicals that are present in minute amounts. The quality that people seek most of all in a food -- flavor -- is usually present in a quantity too infinitesimal to be measured in traditional culinary terms such as ounces or teaspoons. The chemical that provides the dominant flavor of bell pepper can be tasted in amounts as low as 0.02 parts per billion; one drop is sufficient to add flavor to five average-size swimming pools. The flavor additive usually comes next to last in a processed food's list of ingredients and often costs less than its packaging. Soft drinks contain a larger proportion of flavor additives than most products. The flavor in a twelve-ounce can of Coke costs about half a cent.

The color additives in processed foods are usually present in even smaller amounts than the flavor compounds. Many of New Jersey's flavor companies also manufacture these color additives, which are used to make processed foods look fresh and appealing. Food coloring serves many of the same decorative purposes as lipstick, eye shadow, mascara -- and is often made from the same pigments. Titanium dioxide, for example, has proved to be an especially versatile mineral. It gives many processed candies, frostings, and icings their bright white color; it is a common ingredient in women's cosmetics; and it is the pigment used in many white oil paints and house paints. At Burger King, Wendy's, and McDonald's coloring agents have been added to many of the soft drinks, salad dressings, cookies, condiments, chicken dishes, and sandwich buns.

Studies have found that the color of a food can greatly affect how its taste is perceived. Brightly colored foods frequently seem to taste better than bland-looking foods, even when the flavor compounds are identical. Foods that somehow look off-color often seem to have off tastes. For thousands of years human beings have relied on visual cues to help determine what is edible. The color of fruit suggests whether it is ripe, the color of meat whether it is rancid. Flavor researchers sometimes use colored lights to modify the influence of visual cues during taste tests. During one experiment in the early 1970s people were served an oddly tinted meal of steak and french fries that appeared normal beneath colored lights. Everyone thought the meal tasted fine until the lighting was changed. Once it became apparent that the steak was actually blue and the fries were green, some people became ill.

The federal Food and Drug Administration does not require companies to disclose the ingredients of their color or flavor additives so long as all the chemicals in them are considered by the agency to be GRAS ("generally recognized as safe"). This enables companies to maintain the secrecy of their formulas. It also hides the fact that flavor compounds often contain more ingredients than the foods to which they give taste. The phrase "artificial strawberry flavor" gives little hint of the chemical wizardry and manufacturing skill that can make a highly processed food taste like strawberries.

A typical artificial strawberry flavor, like the kind found in a Burger King strawberry milk shake, contains the following ingredients: amyl acetate, amyl butyrate, amyl valerate, anethol, anisyl formate, benzyl acetate, benzyl isobutyrate, butyric acid, cinnamyl isobutyrate, cinnamyl valerate, cognac essential oil, diacetyl, dipropyl ketone, ethyl acetate, ethyl amyl ketone, ethyl butyrate, ethyl cinnamate, ethyl heptanoate, ethyl heptylate, ethyl lactate, ethyl methylphenylglycidate, ethyl nitrate, ethyl propionate, ethyl valerate, heliotropin, hydroxyphenyl-2-butanone (10 percent solution in alcohol), a-ionone, isobutyl anthranilate, isobutyl butyrate, lemon essential oil, maltol, 4-methylacetophenone, methyl anthranilate, methyl benzoate, methyl cinnamate, methyl heptine carbonate, methyl naphthyl ketone, methyl salicylate, mint essential oil, neroli essential oil, nerolin, neryl isobutyrate, orris butter, phenethyl alcohol, rose, rum ether, g-undecalactone, vanillin, and solvent.

Although flavors usually arise from a mixture of many different volatile chemicals, often a single compound supplies the dominant aroma. Smelled alone, that chemical provides an unmistakable sense of the food. Ethyl-2-methyl butyrate, for example, smells just like an apple. Many of today's highly processed foods offer a blank palette: whatever chemicals are added to them will give them specific tastes. Adding methyl-2-pyridyl ketone makes something taste like popcorn. Adding ethyl-3-hydroxy butanoate makes it taste like marshmallow. The possibilities are now almost limitless. Without affecting appearance or nutritional value, processed foods could be made with aroma chemicals such as hexanal (the smell of freshly cut grass) or 3-methyl butanoic acid (the smell of body odor).

The 1960s were the heyday of artificial flavors in the United States. The synthetic versions of flavor compounds were not subtle, but they did not have to be, given the nature of most processed food. For the past twenty years food processors have tried hard to use only "natural flavors" in their products. According to the FDA, these must be derived entirely from natural sources -- from herbs, spices, fruits, vegetables, beef, chicken, yeast, bark, roots, and so forth. Consumers prefer to see natural flavors on a label, out of a belief that they are more healthful. Distinctions between artificial and natural flavors can be arbitrary and somewhat absurd, based more on how the flavor has been made than on what it actually contains.

"A natural flavor," says Terry Acree, a professor of food science at Cornell University, "is a flavor that's been derived with an out-of-date technology." Natural flavors and artificial flavors sometimes contain exactly the same chemicals, produced through different methods. Amyl acetate, for example, provides the dominant note of banana flavor. When it is distilled from bananas with a solvent, amyl acetate is a natural flavor. When it is produced by mixing vinegar with amyl alcohol and adding sulfuric acid as a catalyst, amyl acetate is an artificial flavor. Either way it smells and tastes the same. "Natural flavor" is now listed among the ingredients of everything from Health Valley Blueberry Granola Bars to Taco Bell Hot Taco Sauce.

A natural flavor is not necessarily more healthful or purer than an artificial one. When almond flavor -- benzaldehyde -- is derived from natural sources, such as peach and apricot pits, it contains traces of hydrogen cyanide, a deadly poison. Benzaldehyde derived by mixing oil of clove and amyl acetate does not contain any cyanide. Nevertheless, it is legally considered an artificial flavor and sells at a much lower price. Natural and artificial flavors are now manufactured at the same chemical plants, places that few people would associate with Mother Nature.

A Trained Nose and a Poetic Sensibility

THE small and elite group of scientists who create most of the flavor in most of the food now consumed in the United States are called "flavorists." They draw on a number of disciplines in their work: biology, psychology, physiology, and organic chemistry. A flavorist is a chemist with a trained nose and a poetic sensibility. Flavors are created by blending scores of different chemicals in tiny amounts -- a process governed by scientific principles but demanding a fair amount of art. In an age when delicate aromas and microwave ovens do not easily co-exist, the job of the flavorist is to conjure illusions about processed food and, in the words of one flavor company's literature, to ensure "consumer likeability." The flavorists with whom I spoke were discreet, in keeping with the dictates of their trade. They were also charming, cosmopolitan, and ironic. They not only enjoyed fine wine but could identify the chemicals that give each grape its unique aroma. One flavorist compared his work to composing music. A well-made flavor compound will have a "top note" that is often followed by a "dry-down" and a "leveling-off," with different chemicals responsible for each stage. The taste of a food can be radically altered by minute changes in the flavoring combination. "A little odor goes a long way," one flavorist told me. From the archives:

"The Million-Dollar Nose," by William Langewiesche (December 2000) Robert Parker Jr. is a plainspoken American with an astonishing gift for judging wine. He is indefatigable and incorruptible, and his numerical rating system is relied on by millions. His taste is changing the way wine is made and sold. Naturally, the French hate him. Naturally, they honor him. In order to give a processed food a taste that consumers will find appealing, a flavorist must always consider the food's "mouthfeel" -- the unique combination of textures and chemical interactions that affect how the flavor is perceived. Mouthfeel can be adjusted through the use of various fats, gums, starches, emulsifiers, and stabilizers. The aroma chemicals in a food can be precisely analyzed, but the elements that make up mouthfeel are much harder to measure. How does one quantify a pretzel's hardness, a french fry's crispness? Food technologists are now conducting basic research in rheology, the branch of physics that examines the flow and deformation of materials. A number of companies sell sophisticated devices that attempt to measure mouthfeel. The TA.XT2i Texture Analyzer, produced by the Texture Technologies Corporation, of Scarsdale, New York, performs calculations based on data derived from as many as 250 separate probes. It is essentially a mechanical mouth. It gauges the most-important rheological properties of a food -- bounce, creep, breaking point, density, crunchiness, chewiness, gumminess, lumpiness, rubberiness, springiness, slipperiness, smoothness, softness, wetness, juiciness, spreadability, springback, and tackiness.

Some of the most important advances in flavor manufacturing are now occurring in the field of biotechnology. Complex flavors are being made using enzyme reactions, fermentation, and fungal and tissue cultures. All the flavors created by these methods -- including the ones being synthesized by fungi -- are considered natural flavors by the FDA. The new enzyme-based processes are responsible for extremely true-to-life dairy flavors. One company now offers not just butter flavor but also fresh creamy butter, cheesy butter, milky butter, savory melted butter, and super-concentrated butter flavor, in liquid or powder form. The development of new fermentation techniques, along with new techniques for heating mixtures of sugar and amino acids, have led to the creation of much more realistic meat flavors.

The McDonald's Corporation most likely drew on these advances when it eliminated beef tallow from its french fries. The company will not reveal the exact origin of the natural flavor added to its fries. In response to inquiries from Vegetarian Journal, however, McDonald's did acknowledge that its fries derive some of their characteristic flavor from "an animal source." Beef is the probable source, although other meats cannot be ruled out. In France, for example, fries are sometimes cooked in duck fat or horse tallow.

Other popular fast foods derive their flavor from unexpected ingredients. McDonald's Chicken McNuggets contain beef extracts, as does Wendy's Grilled Chicken Sandwich. Burger King's BK Broiler Chicken Breast Patty contains "natural smoke flavor." A firm called Red Arrow Products specializes in smoke flavor, which is added to barbecue sauces, snack foods, and processed meats. Red Arrow manufactures natural smoke flavor by charring sawdust and capturing the aroma chemicals released into the air. The smoke is captured in water and then bottled, so that other companies can sell food that seems to have been cooked over a fire.

The Vegetarian Legal Action Network recently petitioned the FDA to issue new labeling requirements for foods that contain natural flavors. The group wants food processors to list the basic origins of their flavors on their labels. At the moment vegetarians often have no way of knowing whether a flavor additive contains beef, pork, poultry, or shellfish. One of the most widely used color additives -- whose presence is often hidden by the phrase "color added" -- violates a number of religious dietary restrictions, may cause allergic reactions in susceptible people, and comes from an unusual source. Cochineal extract (also known as carmine or carminic acid) is made from the desiccated bodies of female Dactylopius coccus Costa, a small insect harvested mainly in Peru and the Canary Islands. The bug feeds on red cactus berries, and color from the berries accumulates in the females and their unhatched larvae. The insects are collected, dried, and ground into a pigment. It takes about 70,000 of them to produce a pound of carmine, which is used to make processed foods look pink, red, or purple. Dannon strawberry yogurt gets its color from carmine, and so do many frozen fruit bars, candies, and fruit fillings, and Ocean Spray pink-grapefruit juice drink.

IN a meeting room at IFF, Brian Grainger let me sample some of the company's flavors. It was an unusual taste test -- there was no food to taste. Grainger is a senior flavorist at IFF, a soft-spoken chemist with graying hair, an English accent, and a fondness for understatement. He could easily be mistaken for a British diplomat or the owner of a West End brasserie with two Michelin stars. Like many in the flavor industry, he has an Old World, old-fashioned sensibility. When I suggested that IFF's policy of secrecy and discretion was out of step with our mass-marketing, brand-conscious, self-promoting age, and that the company should put its own logo on the countless products that bear its flavors, instead of allowing other companies to enjoy the consumer loyalty and affection inspired by those flavors, Grainger politely disagreed, assuring me that such a thing would never be done. In the absence of public credit or acclaim, the small and secretive fraternity of flavor chemists praise one another's work. By analyzing the flavor formula of a product, Grainger can often tell which of his counterparts at a rival firm devised it. Whenever he walks down a supermarket aisle, he takes a quiet pleasure in seeing the well-known foods that contain his flavors.

Grainger had brought a dozen small glass bottles from the lab. After he opened each bottle, I dipped a fragrance-testing filter into it -- a long white strip of paper designed to absorb aroma chemicals without producing off notes. Before placing each strip of paper in front of my nose, I closed my eyes. Then I inhaled deeply, and one food after another was conjured from the glass bottles. I smelled fresh cherries, black olives, sautéed onions, and shrimp. Grainger's most remarkable creation took me by surprise. After closing my eyes, I suddenly smelled a grilled hamburger. The aroma was uncanny, almost miraculous -- as if someone in the room were flipping burgers on a hot grill. But when I opened my eyes, I saw just a narrow strip of white paper and a flavorist with a grin.