Author |
Message |
Dahli
Member
11-27-2000
| Tuesday, July 25, 2006 - 8:33 am
Only 20 years ago, what you weighed was mainly your own concern. That was before statistics showed that 60 percent of adult Americans weigh too much, and 17 percent of American children and teens are overweight or obese, too. “Overweight” is defined as having a body mass index (BMI) of between 25 and 29.9, and “obese” as having a BMI of 30 or higher. With such a large percentage of the population weighing more than is healthy, the public-health implications of being overweight have taken on greater importance. The burgeoning percentage of heavy Americans has economic consequences, too. Researchers at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and RTI International estimated that 2003 health-care costs attributable to obesity reached $75 billion, with taxpayers picking up about half of the bill through programs like Medicare and Medicaid. America’s Red Zone Some of the states with the highest rates of obesity are in the south, including Texas, Alabama, Louisiana and Mississippi. We asked some of our health experts to weigh in on what is causing such an increase in obesity across the nation. “There is mounting evidence that shows lack of access to healthy food is associated with obesity,” says MSN Health & Fitness Nutrition Expert Keecha Harris. Harris is president of Harris and Associates, a food systems and public-health consulting firm based in Birmingham, Ala. Harris lists hunger, food insecurity and inaccessibility to healthy, safe food on a regular basis as more prevalent in states with higher obesity rates, indicated in red in the Interactive Map. http://health.msn.com/reports/obesity/default.aspx
|
Dahli
Member
11-27-2000
| Tuesday, July 25, 2006 - 8:45 am
High-fructose corn syrup, which is now found in everything from soda to crackers to salad dressing, has been noted by many experts as a possible culprit in the obesity epidemic. Obesity rates since 1980, for instance, have risen at a rate similar to that of high-fructose corn syrup, and nutritionists often advise avoiding it. However, now some scientists are saying that there is no evidence linking high-fructose corn syrup to obesity, and theories that have emerged are based on misperceptions or coincidence. The corn syrup, some experts say, is no worse than refined white sugar, and even the two scientists who first opened the debate that the sweetener may be linked to obesity have backed off, saying their paper was just a "suggestion" for further study. The two scientists also neglected to raise the issue of high-fructose corn syrup at a panel developed to provide guidelines to consumers about nutritional risks and benefits of beverages. They felt singling out high-fructose corn syrup would be a distraction, when they wanted to focus on limiting beverages with sweeteners in general. New York Times July 2, 2006 (Registration Required) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr. Mercola's Comment: Great article from the NY Times that shows that our site and many others have been successful at informing the public about the major problems with high-fructose corn syrup. The main expert they cite in this article, Dr. Bray, is one that I have used many times before on this topic and pointed to his classic study in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition as the landmark review in this area. Here is a link to the free full-text article from April of 2004. I consulted with one of my good friends who is a pharmacologist and toxicologist, Russ Bianchi, managing director of Adept Solutions, Inc, a global food & beverage formulation firm in Soquel, CA. He is one of the brightest people I know in the sweetener industry and these are his comments: Willet and Popkin either do not understand that fructose from HFCS is NOT the same molecule that is in sucrose, or for that matter fruit leveulose, or are taking the latest Corn Lobby tactic of confusing the debate, intentionally, because they have sold out, through smoke and mirrors. There are over 35 years of HARD empirical evidence of refined man-made fructose metabolizing to triglycerides and adipose tissue, UNLIKE the fructose molecule linked to a glucose molecule, found in sucrose (cane or beet), which is converted to blood glucose. Sucrose raises blood glucose and then crashes it, below fasting baseline, within 25 minutes of ingestions -- A FACT. HFCS or crystalline fructose or hydrolyzed fructose from inulin, convert to triglycerides and adipose tissue, within 60 minutes of ingestion, not blood glucose -- A FACT. The cheapest ingredient in the American food chain (profit factor) after air, water and salt is HFCS -- A FACT. In 1970, zero pounds of HFCS existed in the U.S. food chain, or the SEMANTICALLY legislated equivalent in the EU, 'iso-glucose,' which is High Fructose Wheat Or Beet Syrup. Today HFCS is about 68 pounds per year per person in the USA -- FACT. In 2005, if one looks at the actuarial curve on cardiovascular disease, obesity, hypoglycemia, and diabetes, they all parallel HFCS increase in the food chain -- A FACT. Corn starch converted to a man-made molecule falsely called 'fructose' is NOT sugar from cane or beet or metabolized the same -- A FACT. MDs have no nutritional or metabolic training in med school -- A FACT. MDs have no methodology in their teaching to prevent, as opposed to only treat -- A FACT. Does HFCS significantly contribute to ill health in the U.S. food chain? Yes, follow the insurance companies scrambling in actuarial panic with a sudden and unexplained spike in heart attack death pay-outs among baby boomers ingesting too much HFCS and telling MDs to warn patients to get off soda and HFCS-laden prducts, for profit -- A FACT. Are Willet & Popkin liars? -- YES. Ask Willet why "sugar diabetes" is no longer a term in the medical lexicon. The answer is western medicine has known since 1924 sugar and refined sweeteners cause or trigger diabetes, yet the AMA cut 'sugar' out of the diabetes description in the early '60s because they knew they could make more money on treatment, not prevention or cure ... They have betrayed The Hippocratic Oath -- "First, Do No Harm ... "
|
Konamouse
Member
07-16-2001
| Tuesday, July 25, 2006 - 5:26 pm
Oh jeesh. Sorry, rant mode has been turned on. Caloric intake has risen and exercise/activity and lifestyle activity have decreased. Period. Eating out and Fast Food for meals has increased, family dining and home cooked meals has decreased. Period. Organized school activity, PE, after school and recess has decreased, while tv watching & video games & computers have increased. Period. Stop blaming and start moving. Stop pointing fingers & calling people liars and eat more fruits & vegetables. Eating sugar does NOT cause diabetes!!!! I hate it when this myth is propegated. Makes parents & grandparents guiltridden or blameful. Ugh! Members of the AMA do not make money on treating diabetes. In fact, most practices lose money because they can only bill for the office visit with the doctor (the big money is doing procedures, not in education). All the time spent with the educators is usually lost $$. Endocrinology practices survive only by being part of a bigger practice, medical group, University hospital, and/or government & private grants. The "name" for diabetes has been modified over the years to help clear up misconceptions. Actually, "Diabetes" loosely means "a siphon" and comes from the increased urination that occurs when blood glucose is too high. "Mellitus" is the description that means "Sweet" - because in Diabets Mellitus the urine is sweet. Originally they used the word "sugar" diabetes to differentiate it from Diabetes Insipidus. Then it was further divided into "Juvenile Onset" and "Adult Onset". Most recently, Insulin Dependent Diabetes Mellitus (IDDM) and Non-Insulin Dependent Diabetes Mellitus (NIDDM). This confused even physicians since many Adult Onsets are also on insulin. But now it is Type 1 and Type 2 (and there is Gestational, Mature Onset Diabetes of Youth aka MODY, and maybe even Type 1 1/2). (sorry, I get a little ranty on the topic - but my primary job is pediatric dietitian & diabetes educator).
|
Ilovekitties
Member
06-29-2006
| Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - 6:34 am
Kona do you think that Alzheimer's is closer to being managed better since they now are saying it is related to insulin and possibly considered as "Diabetes 3"? I was diagonosed with Type 2 2 years ago. I havent' cut out my sugar (yet) I just took the dietician's "diet", which was basically a controlled carb diet - 50 - 80 each meal and 15 - 20 each snak. I started slow because I've always thought that if you try to diet really quick your body gets used to it and doeasn't really help. I first started by trying to cut down serving sizes. After a couple weeks I went to the amount of carbs the RD told me. Still not worring about calories, fat, etc. Lost 20 lbs the first month, the other 20 I needed to lose the next 3 months, and still not worring too much about cutting sugar out totally, just controlling the carbs and keeping my sugar level level. I'm down to taking 1 Metformin a day, and check my blood sugar 3 times a week. I'm having more problems with low blood sugar than high. Dr said she'd probably take me off the Metformin completely if I'm still doing as good. Oh and my job is quite active so I never thought I needed to exercise and all I added is weights for 2o minutes 3 times a week, and 20 - 30 minutes of aroebic exersize the other 3 days a week, and total rest on Sunday [except for walking, which I always do on Sat and Sun and sometimes through out the week.]
|
Konamouse
Member
07-16-2001
| Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - 7:35 am
WoW! ILK you are doing wonderfully! A stunning testimony that Controlled Carb (not "LOW CARB") does work. And it isn't the "sugar". Funny thing about controlling carbs = controlling portions. 3 small meals and a couple of small snacks controls hunger which in turn controls portions and thus all of that together controls calories. Who'd of thunk? With Type 2 diabetes, sometimes just losing 10% of body weight can significantly decrease the insulin resistence and allow a person to maintain control with just diet & exercise. I'm not sure about the insulin & Alzheimer's connection yet. Newspapers harp on the littlest part of a study and neglect to point out the limitations. They go for the sensational headline. The hard part about Alzheimer's is that there is no test to diagnose it for sure until there is an autopsy after death to look at the brain tissue. Because there are other causes of memory loss. But that should be a discussion for an Alzheimer's thread. Lots of folks with diabetes (both types) who don't get Alzheimers. And lots of folks with Alzheimers who don't have diabetes.

|
Twiggyish
Member
08-14-2000
| Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - 2:06 pm
My uncle and grandmother both had diabetes (both were on insulin) and they were NOT overweight. It's also genetic. My grandfather had type 2. He wasn't overweight, either. He was a small little man who never had a weight problem.
|
Konamouse
Member
07-16-2001
| Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - 5:25 pm
Trying to Enlighten Kids on the Perils of Fast-Food By Robin D. Schatz Bloomberg News Wednesday, July 26, 2006; Page F02 Author Eric Schlosser railed against the fast food industry in his 2001 bestseller, "Fast Food Nation." He's still talking and writing about the evils of mass-produced burgers, sugar-laden soft drinks and U.S. agribusiness. Only this time, the author is aiming his message at the Happy Meal set. His latest book, "Chew on This: Everything You Didn't Want to Know About Fast Food" (Houghton Mifflin, $16), co-written by his former fact-checker Charles Wilson, covers everything from obese kids getting gastric bypass surgery to why a four-ounce burger may contain the meat from hundreds, or even thousands, of animals. The book has already provoked attacks against Schlosser on Web sites that the author says are linked to the fast-food industry. Schlosser, 47, is slim and fit, though his favorite meal is still a cheeseburger, chocolate shake and fries. This interview took place a lunch of grilled chicken breast sandwich with avocado, lettuce and mayo. I understand you still like fast food. I like hamburgers; I like french fries; I like fried chicken. I just don't buy those foods at the big fast-food chains anymore. I know too much, and I just don't want to give them any of my money. Does this book cover any new ground? Well, what we tried to do is take the same basic themes but look at them through the eyes of kids. So we spent time with a young man, a young teenager, who was undergoing gastric bypass surgery, in the section on obesity in kids. We spent time looking at what's happening to Native Americans in Alaska to show how the soda companies in particular are targeting vulnerable populations in order to sell more soda. Most of the book is new material. Adolescents are notoriously resistant to adult advice, so how do you get this information across to kids without preaching to them? We really tried hard not to write something that felt like a sermon. The book tries to treat readers as though they're intelligent. The aim of the book is really to encourage critical thinking and not to convert kids into vegetarians or convert them into anti-corporate activists or anything like that. What do you say to these critics who accuse you of spreading misinformation -- and who are they? These critics are the companies that are selling the fast food and selling the meat that is in the fast-food meals. They've tried, particularly since this book has come out, to portray me as some radical figure on the fringe of American opinion. And yet, I strongly support what Governor Mike Huckabee, the conservative Republican in Arkansas, and former president Bill Clinton just did, which was to broker an agreement with soda companies so that they won't sell high-calorie drinks to children in schools. I think that's very good. Disney recently has revealed that they're not going to do any more promotions of their films with unhealthy food. I think that's really good. Some of the attacks against you are coming from groups with names that aren't familiar, such as the Heartland Institute. Who is behind those efforts? The Heartland Institute actually put out a press release recently that compared my children's book to Nazi propaganda and compared me by implication to Hitler. And as someone who lost family in the Holocaust, I found that very offensive. . . . If you go to their Web site they're not only attacking me, but they're also defending the tobacco companies and suggesting that much of the science surrounding the health impact of smoking is junk science. Instead of having McDonald's or one of these companies come out and say outrageous things about me, I think that these companies are using these "AstroTurf" groups. They're fake grass-roots organizations. What kind of response are you getting from the children? The kids who are reading the book, who are 9, 10, 13 years old, they've never lived in a world without these restaurants being everywhere. So you'd think they'd have no interest. On the contrary, I found remarkable curiosity about what is going on behind the counter. They've seen so many fast-food ads all their lives, but they've never seen an ad that shows them where the hamburgers come from, where the french fries come from. What's the grossest thing in the book? One of the grossest things is the origin of the modern fast-food hamburger. I love hamburgers, but if you eat hamburgers, you should keep in mind these hamburgers are a fundamentally different thing than a hamburger you would've had 30 or 40 years ago. The modern fast-food hamburger is more like an industrial commodity than it is like anything you'd get at a butcher shop or you could make at home. And when you think of thousands of animals ground up in one burger, it's just unpleasant.

|
Racsan
Member
04-09-2004
| Thursday, July 27, 2006 - 1:39 pm
I on the other hand am considered "morbidly obese" because I weigh 245lbs at 5'4. My doctor would like me to be lighter, but states that I am one of the healthiest people she treats. She tests me for diabetes every year and each time comes back with I'm on the low side of normal. So while I probably should, and have tried, to lose weight, I'm living proof that weight alone does not cause diabetes.
|
Crzndeb
Member
07-26-2004
| Thursday, July 27, 2006 - 4:58 pm
Rascan, Have you ever journaled what you eat everyday? I use the calculation that to maintain a certain weight, you input 10% of those calories, if you want to be 150, then eat 1500 calories a day . Of course, if you want to lose weight, do it gradually...I do not like to exercise, so I don't ( I know I should) except for walking...But, I really watch what I eat. At 55, I am 5'2" and usually about 125. But I work at it. I love junk food but I just don't buy it. A girlfriend of mine had breast cancer and has completely changed her eating habits. She's an inspiration. It amazes me that people who have life threatening diseases continue to eat crap. I lost my Mom when I was 24 (she was 50) to lung cancer because she refused to quit smoking. Pissed me off!! Same thing with obesity. Think about the people that love you. I try to buy nothing canned, jarred (check the labels) and stick with fresh or frozen. I really agree with Kona...caloric intake, caloric output....diets suck! It's a lifestyle change. <ModND>
|
Shadoe
Member
11-04-2004
| Friday, July 28, 2006 - 2:17 am
Rascan, keeping a journal of the foods you eat during the day can be a real eye opener. I kept an extremely detailed journal for 10 days as part of my training at the gym. I don't think most people realize how many calories, etc that they are putting into their body. Exercise or any movement has to accompany any plan for weight loss. I got a heart rate monitor to keep track of how I was doing at the gym, but then I thought let's see how many calories I am burning during the day so I can make sure I am not putting in more than I am working off. You may hate the input/output concept, but it's true. And that exercise part has to be a part of the equation. You may not think of walking as exercise but it is! I am sure that you would be suprised at how many calories you are burning by going for walks. There are so many forms of exercise that just saying I do not like it makes me think you just have not found the type that is fun for you. When it's fun, you will want to do that form of exercise all the time. It must be a complete and permanent lifestyle change. Many people go through their lives eating poorly and thinking nothing of exercise and their health. Then when something happens to them or someone who is dear to them, it's a wake up call. Their eyes are opened and many take it as the time to make personal changes. You don't have to make any huge and drastic changes to start because they won't be lasting. It's the gradual ones that will stand the test of time. Start reading those labels and putting the crappy products in the trash or back on the store shelf. Take the opportunity of walking up the stairs instead of taking the escalator or walk up the escalator. With slow change, you won't notice the improvement sneak up on you. Before you know it, people will start saying you're looking great - what have you been doing?
|
Racsan
Member
04-09-2004
| Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 7:59 pm
First of all thanks for your kindness and helpfull hints but I'm not complaining about my weight or even trying to lose weight. I'm healthy as a horse. As far as what I eat - anywhere from 1300 - 1700 calories a day, usually closer to 1300. My doctor says I'm healthy, my cholesterol is good, my blood pressure is low, my sugar level is good. I'm very active. Haven't had a sick day at work for over 5 years {well a sick day that I was ACTUALLY sick *grin*}, never get colds, never get the flu. Before you know it, people will start saying you're looking great - what have you been doing? People tell me I look good all the time, but even if they didn't - I could give a rat's ass about how anybody ELSE thinks I look. I am happy being me, and I think this world would be a hell of a lot happier if people didn't worry about what others think. Sorry if that seems harsh, but I had a friend starve herself to death because she was worried about what others thought. And by starved herself to death, I mean she DIED. All because she was obsessed with what everybody else thought of her instead of being happy with herself.
|
Konamouse
Member
07-16-2001
| Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 6:41 am
Rascan - it's more important to do the right thing! Good for you. Eat healthy, get regular exercise, don't smoke, wear sunscreen. What clothing size you wear isn't the only measure of health. Oh, and according to the Yahoo article below - Managed your STRESS! Obesity weighs more heavily on women than men By Anne Harding Thu Jul 27, 4:40 PM ET NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Being overweight puts a greater burden on women's health than men's, a new study shows. Dr. Peter Muennig of Columbia University in New York and colleagues calculated the amount of illness due to overweight and obesity in the USA. They found that overweight cost US women 1.8 million years of perfect health, compared to just 270,000 years lost for men. Obesity cost women 3.40 million years of perfect health, compared to 1.94 million years for men. Muennig suggested in an interview that this gender difference could be due to the social stigma that excess weight carries for women but not for men. While many studies have looked at the effect of overweight and obesity on mortality, Muennig and his team note, there is little information on how excess weight might affect a person's well-being while he or she is still alive. To investigate, the researchers used a measurement called the quality-adjusted life year (QALY), which represents a year of being perfectly healthy, to determine the burden of disease associated with obesity in a nationally representative sample of adults. Most of the years of health that women lost to overweight and obesity were due to poor health-related quality of life and later-life mortality, the researchers note in the September issue of the American Journal of Public Health. Death rates among overweight and obese women were lower than for men up until age 45; after age 45, women's mortality was far higher than men's. Previous studies, which did not look at men and women separately, have suggested that being overweight may actually protect against mortality, Muennig told Reuters Health. "What we were shocked to find is that men were really the primary beneficiaries of any differences in the overweight category, and that women actually had much higher morbidity and mortality," he added. In their report, the researchers suggest several explanations for the gender differences. "To me what makes more sense is that there's just a lot more social stigma associated with being overweight amongst females, and that that causes a lot more stress and distress," Muennig said. "There's evidence showing that high levels of stress can increase your risk of morbidity and mortality." The findings provide evidence, he added, that "the message that women are getting in the mass media about their weight is actually more harmful than we previously thought." SOURCE: American Journal of Public Health, September 2006.

|
Racsan
Member
04-09-2004
| Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 6:09 pm
Thanks Konamouse. Like I said before, I'm extremely healthy, healthier than alot of my "skinny" friends. There is alot of muscle to me - I'm whats normally called "well sturdily built". But I'm not denying that there is fat to me also. But I'm happy with who I am and where I am, and my doc says that as long as all my tests keep coming back so well she's not going to push me to lose weight. On a lighter note, Shel Silverstein said it best: So you're takin' better care of your body Becoming more aware of your body. Responding to your body's needs. Everything you hear and read about diets, Nutrition and sleeping position and detoxifying your system, And buying machines that they advertise to help you exercise. Herbs to revitalize you if you're traumatized. Soaps that will sanitize. Sprays to deordorize. Liquid to neutralize acids and pesticides. Free weights to maximize your strength and muscle size. Shots that will immunize. Pills to re-energize you. But remember that for all your pain and gain Eventually the story ends the same... You can quite smokin', but you're still gonna die. Cut out cokin', but you're still gonna die. Eliminate everything fatty or fried, And you get real healthy, but you're still gonna die. Stop drinkin' booze, you're still gonna die. Stay away from cooze, you're still gonna die. You can cut out coffee and never get high, But you're still gonna, still gonna, still gonna die. You're still gonna, still gonna, still gonna die. Still gonna, still gonna, still gonna die. You can even give aerobics one more try, But when the music stops playin', you're still gonna die. Put seat belts in your car, you're still gonna die. Cut nicotine tar, you're still gonna die. You can exercise that cellulite off your thigh. Get slimmer and trimmer, but you're still gonna die. Stop gettin' a tan, you're still gonna die. You can search for UFO's up in the sky They might fly you to Mars where you're still gonna die. You're still gonna, still gonna, still gonna die. Still gonna, still gonna, still gonna die. And all the Reeboks and Nikes and Adidas you buy You can jog up to heaven and you're still gonna die. Drink ginseng tonics, you're still gonna die. Try high colonics, you're still gonna die. You can have yourself frozen and suspended in time, But when they do thaw you out, you're still gonna die. You can have safe sex, you're still gonna die. You can switch to Crest, you're still gonna die. You can get rid of stress, get a lot of rest, Get an AIDS test, enroll in EST, Move out west where it's sunny and dry And you'll live to be a hundred But you're still gonna die. You're still gonna, still gonna, still gonna die. Still gonna, still gonna, still gonna die. So you'd better have some fun 'Fore you say bye-bye, 'Cause you're still gonna, still gonna, still gonna die.
|
Dahli
Member
11-27-2000
| Saturday, September 09, 2006 - 9:38 am
The sweetness you taste in your soda – and many foods – comes from corn, not sugar. Food makers use high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) in thousands of products. Pick up a can or a bottle of Coke or Snapple iced tea – even Dannon yogurt, Wonder Bread or Chips Ahoy cookies – and you’ll find the ubiquitous sugary liquid. In today’s Health Alert, I’ll show you why HFCS is a threat to your health. You’ll also find out how to identify this popular sweetener – and avoid it. In spite of what the media may tell you, this man-made sweetener can pack on the pounds – leading to obesity and diabetes. * The Corporate Giants want You to Think HFCS is Harmless… * Dr. George Bray found a convincing connection between this artificial sweetener and rates of obesity.(1) But last week, a patient brought me an article from The New York Times, entitled “A Sweetener with a Bad Rap.” In it, the author tried to dispute the link between HFCS and obesity. America’s obesity epidemic has many contributors. So technically, it’s true that high fructose corn syrup is not the sole cause of obesity. But letting it off the hook isn’t a good idea. There’s a mountain of clinical evidence showing that high fructose corn syrup is damaging to your health. Researchers at the USDA led by Dr. Meira Field, fed lab rats a diet which included HFCS. All of the rats died before reaching adulthood. These rats experienced health problems including: anemia, high cholesterol, delayed testicular development and fatal heart problems.(2) The livers of the rats resembled those of alcoholics. They were cirrhotic and plugged with fat. Another study by Dr. Lee Gross at Harvard University found a direct link between a diet of foods containing HFCS and a dramatic rise in diabetes and obesity.(3) * Maintain Your Good Health by Sticking to Natural Foods * High fructose corn syrup is not natural to anyone’s diet. The only good solution is to avoid it. Since HFCS is in so many of the foods we eat, you may have to put some effort into avoiding it. But it is possible. After all, we only began eating this ingredient 25 years ago. The easiest way to eliminate HFCS is to avoid processed foods, especially drinks. If you drink bottled or canned juices, teas or “health drinks” consider them the same as soda. They only have different flavorings and colorings. Avoiding HFCS altogether may be impossible, but here are a few easy-to-follow tips: • Eat food that grows naturally. • Avoid low fat and/or processed foods. • Avoid soda and other drinks with added HFCS. • Stay on the outer isles of the supermarket. That’s where you’ll find whole, unprocessed foods. • Read labels! Hundreds of items contain HFCS. Examine the product label before you buy. To Your Good Health, Al Sears, MD 1. Kim Severson; San Francisco Chronicle. Sugar Coated, We’re Drowning in High Fructose Corn Syrup. Feb 18, 2004. (www.sfgate.com) 2. Siscovick DS, Raghunathan TE, et al. JAMA 1995; 274(17):1363-1367 3. Davidson MH, Hunninghade D, et al. Arch Intern Med. 1999; 159:1331-1338
|
Konamouse
Member
07-16-2001
| Sunday, September 10, 2006 - 12:11 pm
Off-label drugs a risky Rx for slimming down By Elizabeth Bernstein Wall Street Journal Like many people who struggle with their weight, Sally Krawczyk has tried everything from liquid diets to low-carb regimens to Weight Watchers. And like many dieters, each time she stopped, she gained back all the pounds she’d lost. But the 51-year-old teacher says she’s finally discovered a successful way to lose weight. On the advice of her doctor, she has been taking an anti-seizure medication and two antidepressants – and has lost 135 pounds in 18 months. Krawczyk doesn’t suffer from seizures or depression, but she has found the medication beneficial in another way. “The medicine helps control my need to constantly be eating,” says Krawczyk, of Murrieta, Calif., who now weighs 220 pounds and hopes to lose 40 more. “Without it I could eat and eat and never feel full or satisfied.” In the unending quest for a miracle diet pill, Americans are trying an array of prescription drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration to treat a variety of illnesses. None of them have been approved as diet drugs – but for many, weight loss is a side effect. The list includes drugs meant to treat attention-deficit (hyperactivity) disorder (Adderall and Ritalin), depression (Wellbutrin), epilepsy (Topamax and Zonegran), diabetes (Glucophage and Byetta), sleep disorders (Provigil), smoking (Zyban) and even opiate overdoses (Narcan). Often these drugs are used alone, but sometimes they’re taken in combination with each other or with popular weight-loss medications, such as phentermine. Though there are no hard data on the trend, doctors and patients say it has been increasing for several years and that the drugs are being used by Americans – especially women – of all sizes, from obese people to anorexics. Adderall, a stimulant that was originally marketed as a diet drug in the 1970s under a different name, is said to be the weight-loss agent of choice for everyone from soccer moms to Hollywood starlets, debutantes and college kids, many of whom take it without a prescription. “People are looking for a quick fix,” says Christine Gerbstadt, spokeswoman for the American Dietetic Association. “Taking a pill is so much easier than going to the gym or cutting back on portions.” Though the drugs generally work to suppress appetite or food cravings, many have additional, less desirable side effects, which can include abdominal cramps, anxiety, insomnia and cognitive problems. One drug, Wellbutrin, comes with a “black box” warning that it may cause increased risk of suicide in children and adolescents. Doctors are permitted to prescribe drugs for applications other than those for which they are approved – a use that is termed off-label. But not everyone is getting these drugs from a physician. Some are buying the drugs from Internet pharmacies or from Canada. A number admit they are taking drugs prescribed for friends or family members. When Jacqueline Colozzi, a 20-year-old college student in New York, wanted to drop a few pounds, a friend with an Adderall prescription offered her some. “It was easier just to take a pill as opposed to working out or watching what I ate,” says Colozzi, who weighs 110 pounds. After losing 10 pounds over the course of a year, she got tired of never wanting to eat or sleep. “I realized it didn’t make me feel good.” Trading tips on the Internet, too, is giving the use of off-label drugs for dieting a boost. Web sites such as FatNews.com often run articles on the latest research being done on the weight-loss effects of these drugs. Users compare the success rates and side effects of the medications in an increasingly varied range of message boards, from Web sites dedicated to information about drugs, such as Askapatient.com, to eBay. Still, the practice of prescribing drugs off-label for weight loss is controversial. To begin with, the drugs can be expensive, and insurance companies typically don’t pay for off-label uses of drugs. What’s more, doctors have varying opinions on the weight-loss effects of these drugs. In general, they say, they may help people lose about 5 percent to 10 percent of their body weight. More important, these can be risky drugs, especially when taken without a doctor’s supervision. Although drug companies and independent researchers have studied the weight-loss effects of many of these drugs, including Wellbutrin and Topamax, to date the FDA hasn’t approved any of them for weight loss. “There’s no evidence of the safety or the efficacy of going off-label for weight loss,” says George Blackburn, associate director of Harvard Medical School’s Division on Nutrition. When patients request off-label drugs to help them lose weight, Blackburn suggests that they modify their diet and exercise instead. If that doesn’t work, he will prescribe one of the approved weight-loss drugs to help them control their cravings. “We see no need to go off label,” he says. “We have zero tolerance for the side effects.” The focus on other drugs comes amid a growing obsession with weight and obesity. Many people are fed up with over-the-counter dietary supplements, which often don’t work. Some say they perceive prescription drugs – which are more strictly regulated – to be safer, especially in the wake of the FDA’s warning to consumers a few years ago to stop taking the dietary supplement ephedra, which was sold over-the-counter, in part because it could damage the circulatory system. Part of the reason people are so eager to take off-label drugs to lose weight, according to doctors and patients, is that there hasn’t been a truly promising short-term weight-loss medication on the market since the FDA withdrew approval for fenfluramine in 1997 after it was linked to heart-valve problems. (Fenfluramine had been commonly given to patients along with phentermine, another appetite suppressant; the combination, which was never approved by the FDA, was known as fen-phen. Phentermine is still approved for short-term weight loss.) For obese patients seeking long-term weight loss, there are just two approved drugs on the market – Meridia and Xenical. Some doctors say they are reluctant to prescribe Xenical because it can produce distasteful side effects such as abdominal cramping, gas and anal leakage. Meanwhile, Rimonabant, a medication that is showing promising results for weight loss in some people in the United Kingdom, hasn’t been approved by the FDA for use in the U.S. The doctors who prescribe drugs off-label for weight loss think they fill a void. “Obesity is a chronic disease – diet and exercise aren’t enough for long-term weight loss for most patients,” says Robert Skversky, a bariatric physician in Newport Beach, Calif. “Chronic diseases need drugs to keep them under control.” Skversky uses a combination of drugs he adjusts for each patient – a drug cocktail usually consisting of phentermine plus antidepressants such as Prozac, anti-seizure drugs such as Topamax or Zonegran, or diabetes drugs such as Glucophage or Byetta. (Krawczyk, who is one of his patients, takes Adipex, or phentermine; the antidepressants Wellbutrin and Celexa; and Topamax.) A combination of these drugs could cost about $100 to $200 a month or more, Skversky says. Skversky, who tells his patients that they will be on these drugs for life, says the benefits far outweigh the side effects. “We rarely stop anyone because they can’t tolerate a drug because we can adjust the dose or the combination,” he says. A number of his patients, he says, have lost more than 100 pounds. He also encourages his patients to exercise and eat high-protein, low-carb diets. Other doctors say that although they see less-dramatic results, off-label drugs can still be valuable weight-loss tools. Ann Wry, medical director of Women’s Health Services at Hackensack University Medical Center, in Hackensack, N.J., sometimes prescribes Wellbutrin – a drug she feels has minimal side effects – if she thinks it will help a patient lose weight. “It doesn’t produce a ton of weight loss, but it takes the edge off of hunger,” she says. “If someone is trying to do South Beach or Weight Watchers, this diminishes the craving enough so that they can say, ‘No, I’ve had enough.’ ” The pharmaceutical companies that manufacture these drugs warn that they shouldn’t be taken for weight loss. Both types of Adderall – short- and long-release – carry a black-box warning against their misuse because they can cause sudden death or serious cardiovascular events. (The drug can also cause dependency or addiction.) Topamax can cause confusion or difficulty concentrating, and Provigil can cause dizziness or insomnia. For Theresa Saleeby, the ill effects ended up overshadowing the benefits of taking a drug to lose weight. When she decided she wanted to lose about 50 pounds last year, her doctor prescribed Topamax. He told her that most patients lost between 20 to 50 pounds on the drug and that it would help prevent her migraines. But after taking the medication for seven months, she weighed in at 175, just 3 pounds less than when she started. Even more upsetting, Saleeby says, were the side effects: While on Topamax, she had minor memory loss, her legs regularly fell asleep and her hair fell out in patches, one of which was the size of a baseball. “These minor side effects aren’t that minor,” says Saleeby, 31, a real-estate agent in South Orange, N.J. After the hair loss, she stopped taking the drug, then cried for a week. “I’d rather be chubby than bald,” she says.

|
Dahli
Member
11-27-2000
| Sunday, September 10, 2006 - 8:21 pm
Holy crap, that's scary!
|
Sunshyne4u
Member
06-17-2003
| Thursday, October 05, 2006 - 12:21 am
MDs have no nutritional or metabolic training in med school -- A FACT. Incorrect...Here in Canada they get around three months. Interesting post about the medications which have a supposed sideeffect of weight loss. This really bothers me as the MEDS dont cause weightloss, it is how the brain reacts to the calming affects from the meds. Once a person is feeling more relaxed and happier, of course they quit gorking down food. The med does NOT change their metabolism Wellbutrin may be technically labelled an antidepressant but it is more accurately referred to as a "motivator" drug. It also gives people focus and energy due to its action on the brain. The same med is also the 'antismoking' med. Eating sugar does NOT cause diabetes!!!! I hate it when this myth is propegated. We do not know what causes a body to start becoming Diabetic. Very few people are 'born' that way and have diabetes since childhood. people who abuse sugar in their lives seem to have a higher likelyhood of developing it. IS HIGH sugar consumption a "trigger" to the condition? My training says Yes. If you are constantly stressing your pancreas, you are more likely to have a problem. however, there does seem to be a strong genetic link!
|
|