| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
experiencelifemag.com
Print › | Back ›
Some Kinds of Help
OK, I realize I’m dating myself here, but I’m hoping that at least some of
you will join me in remembering that cult classic kids’ album Free
to Be...You
and Me. Masterminded by Marlo Thomas and Friends, and
accompanied by a singalong
book, it was played endlessly (to some
parents’ chagrin) by a whole generation
of kids in the ’70s, and as a
result, it permeated our collective memory.
By Pilar Gerasimo |
September 2008 |
I,
for one, still quote lyrics from that album. One favorite line: “Some kind of
help is the kind of help that helping’s all about. And some kind of help is the
kind of help we all can do without.” The latter part of that phrase has been
popping into my mind with some frequency of late. Recently, for
example, its recollection was triggered by the introduction of yet another sugar
substitute — this time, a supposedly “natural” sweetener derived from select
components of the stevia herb and marketed under the rather Orwellian name
“Truvia.” The new sweetener, marketed as “nature’s perfect sweetness”
— and presumably developed in response to the public’s increasing apprehension
about artificial sweeteners like saccharin, aspartame and sucralose — has been
formulated into a whole array of new food and beverage products, including
sodas. Perhaps these products will prove helpful to someone somewhere, but I
am more inclined to think that calorie- and sugar-free sweeteners only lull
people into a continued, complacent pursuit of the sweet-addicted habits that
got us into our epidemic of chronic disease and obesity in the first place.
They also contribute to a “trick the body” mentality that inevitably backfires.
To date, there has been no convincing proof that calorie-reduced,
sugar-free sweeteners help facilitate weight loss. In fact, there is a good deal
of evidence that they actually contribute to weight gain — by perpetuating poor
eating habits and confusing the body’s own food-intake-regulating sensors (for
more on that, read “Poor Substitutes,” available in the December 2007 archives). Clearly, what we most need to do is correct our
out-of-whack sweet and carb cravings. And the best way to do that? Eating more
plant-based whole foods and avoiding processed foods of all sorts — especially
the white flours, processed grains and sweets that contribute to cravings and
trigger both weight gain and bodywide inflammation. (For more on that, read up
on our six-part functional wellness series with Mark Hyman, MD.) Anyway, I was still
processing all the Truvia news when my “some kind of help” alarm was triggered
once again, this time occasioned by the July announcement of new guidelines from
the American Academy of Pediatrics. They’re now calling for routine cholesterol
screenings for children under the age of 10 and suggesting more aggressive use
of cholesterol-lowering drugs in kids as young as 8. Talk about help that we
can do without! There is no evidence that suppressing kids’ cholesterol levels
with drugs does anything to reduce kids’ health risks. And the Academy’s chief
nutritional suggestion — reducing children’s intake of dietary fat and
cholesterol — is troubling, too, both because the whole “lipid hypothesis” on
which such recommendations are based has never been proven (for more on that,
read “Cholesterol Myths,” available in the October 2004 archives), and because simply reducing dietary fats often has the
unintended consequence of encouraging kids to eat more processed grains and
sugars — the very foods that most forward-thinking health experts now agree are
the real triggers for inflammation and weight gain and, thus, for elevated
cholesterol levels. Rest assured, we’ll be covering both these topics in
more depth in upcoming issues of Experience Life, and offering expert guidance
on negotiating the maze of information (and misinformation) surrounding them.
In the meantime, if you’re interested in some practical advice you can put
to good use now, I hope you’ll consider some of the suggestions we’ve gathered
in this issue. If you want to swap ideas and helpful perspectives with other
Experience Life readers, visit our new and improved forums at
experiencelifemag.com. And if you’re looking for insight with a particular
health or quality-of-life concern, write us at the email below. We’ll do our
best to offer the kind of help “that helping’s all about.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some Kinds of Help
OK, I realize I’m dating myself here, but I’m hoping that at least some of
you will join me in remembering that cult classic kids’ album Free
to Be...You
and Me. Masterminded by Marlo Thomas and Friends, and
accompanied by a singalong
book, it was played endlessly (to some
parents’ chagrin) by a whole generation
of kids in the ’70s, and as a
result, it permeated our collective memory.
By Pilar Gerasimo | Thoughts From the Editor, September 2008 |
I,
for one, still quote lyrics from that album. One favorite line: “Some kind of
help is the kind of help that helping’s all about. And some kind of help is the
kind of help we all can do without.” The latter part of that phrase has been
popping into my mind with some frequency of late. Recently, for
example, its recollection was triggered by the introduction of yet another sugar
substitute — this time, a supposedly “natural” sweetener derived from select
components of the stevia herb and marketed under the rather Orwellian name
“Truvia.” The new sweetener, marketed as “nature’s perfect sweetness”
— and presumably developed in response to the public’s increasing apprehension
about artificial sweeteners like saccharin, aspartame and sucralose — has been
formulated into a whole array of new food and beverage products, including
sodas. Perhaps these products will prove helpful to someone somewhere, but I
am more inclined to think that calorie- and sugar-free sweeteners only lull
people into a continued, complacent pursuit of the sweet-addicted habits that
got us into our epidemic of chronic disease and obesity in the first place.
They also contribute to a “trick the body” mentality that inevitably backfires.
To date, there has been no convincing proof that calorie-reduced,
sugar-free sweeteners help facilitate weight loss. In fact, there is a good deal
of evidence that they actually contribute to weight gain — by perpetuating poor
eating habits and confusing the body’s own food-intake-regulating sensors (for
more on that, read “Poor Substitutes,” available in the December 2007 archives). Clearly, what we most need to do is correct our
out-of-whack sweet and carb cravings. And the best way to do that? Eating more
plant-based whole foods and avoiding processed foods of all sorts — especially
the white flours, processed grains and sweets that contribute to cravings and
trigger both weight gain and bodywide inflammation. (For more on that, read up
on our six-part functional wellness series with Mark Hyman, MD.) Anyway, I was still
processing all the Truvia news when my “some kind of help” alarm was triggered
once again, this time occasioned by the July announcement of new guidelines from
the American Academy of Pediatrics. They’re now calling for routine cholesterol
screenings for children under the age of 10 and suggesting more aggressive use
of cholesterol-lowering drugs in kids as young as 8. Talk about help that we
can do without! There is no evidence that suppressing kids’ cholesterol levels
with drugs does anything to reduce kids’ health risks. And the Academy’s chief
nutritional suggestion — reducing children’s intake of dietary fat and
cholesterol — is troubling, too, both because the whole “lipid hypothesis” on
which such recommendations are based has never been proven (for more on that,
read “Cholesterol Myths,” available in the October 2004 archives), and because simply reducing dietary fats often has the
unintended consequence of encouraging kids to eat more processed grains and
sugars — the very foods that most forward-thinking health experts now agree are
the real triggers for inflammation and weight gain and, thus, for elevated
cholesterol levels. Rest assured, we’ll be covering both these topics in
more depth in upcoming issues of Experience Life, and offering expert guidance
on negotiating the maze of information (and misinformation) surrounding them.
In the meantime, if you’re interested in some practical advice you can put
to good use now, I hope you’ll consider some of the suggestions we’ve gathered
in this issue. If you want to swap ideas and helpful perspectives with other
Experience Life readers, visit our new and improved forums at
experiencelifemag.com. And if you’re looking for insight with a particular
health or quality-of-life concern, write us at the email below. We’ll do our
best to offer the kind of help “that helping’s all about.”
Print
| Email
| Comment
| Subscribe
| Give a Gift
|
|