Apologies for the delay in writing a Blogg.
The Blogg will recommence properly later this month but in the meantime - Watch the video on this link.
http://www.youtube.com/user/CJH3ProductionsLLC
Well worth it,

Whilst I have been unable to blogg over recent weeks I have certainly kept up with my reading of scientific journals and it was interesting to read last night a piece from the journal Cancer Prevention Research which was looking at the prevention of prostate cancer. It would appear that a diet light in carbohydrate could slow down a tumor growth. Up till recently there was a presumption that this outcome was due to the subjects losing weight and therefore energy restriction was restricting the growth of the tumor. However new research has shown that in fact the reduction in energy was not all the story and that insulin had a role to play. Insulin not only regulates blood glucose levels but may also be affecting the growth and prolication of cells …including cancer cells.

As said by one of the researchers …” We found that carbohydrate restiction without energy restriction - or weight loss- does indeed result in tumor growth delay”.

This is really exciting news and again points the finger at insulin …..

So another week goes by in the world of science and nutrition and yet again another piece of clinical research is published showing that reducing carbohydrate intake will improve insulin resistance. In this particular trial the replacement was dietary fats.

Satoru Kodama, MD, PHD¹, Kazumi Saito, MD, PHD¹, Shiro Tanaka, PHD², Miho Maki, MS¹, Yoko Yachi, RD¹, Mutsumi Sato, RD¹, Ayumi Sugawara, RD¹, Kumiko Totsuka, RD¹, Hitoshi Shimano, MD, PHD³, Yasuo Ohashi, PHD², Nobuhiro Yamada, MD, PHD³ and Hirohito Sone, MD, PHD, FACP¹

It is actually beyond belief that our experts seem unable to draw any connection between the increase of carbohydrate in our diet and the increase in diabetes and insulin resistance even though my 13 year old son knows that the key food group that stimulates the requirement for insulin is carbohydrate and that within that food group the key stimulators are sugar and starch.

In fact if you look at the studies which indicate that protein stimulates insulin the results are different when the protein is eaten with or without starch and sugar

So at what point will someone with authority dare to point out the enormous similarities between sugar and starch and when will they then dare to point out to the Government and Diabetes UK that the basis of their recommended diet is actually causing the problem that they are trying to solve. Emperor – no clothes and so on

So May has arrived as has swine flu. Being married to a GP I am more than aware of the intensive government action being put into place to ensure that should a mass outbreak occur we will be ready to contain the disease as much as possible.

I am comforted to know this because we actually don’t live a million miles away from Falkirk where the first cases in the UK appeared. Not a great way to end a paradise honeymoon. So I know that the medics in this country are ready willing and able to deal with and control a major health risk, should it arise.

If only someone somewhere would have the energy and commitment to do the same about the less exciting but none the less important epidemic of obesity. Just last week I went to speak to a small group of nurses, medics and support staff.  A great deal of finger wagging has been done by our Nanny State telling us that the only way to slim is to eat less and do more, so it is not surprising to find that most of the people in the room had no idea about the connection between insulin and weight gain nor did some of the key personnel know that insulin will actively encourage cancer and weight gain.

This was disappointing but not surprising.  What we need for our own home grown problem is an open and enquiring mind and the honesty to accept that the last 30 years of preaching low calorie low fat has simply not worked.

Have a great bank holiday and enjoy the good weather if you are having it.

Easter is finally over and the world now turns its attention away from chocolate and back to diet.  We have seen the number of articles in women’s magazines on the bikini diet increase and Mr Motivator is back on GMTV giving it large.

What is a shame is that someone has not picked up on the fact that the slimmest country in Europe has the highest levels of saturated fat in their diet and drink wine for water.  Yes France.  Perhaps even Mr Motivator needs to think different.

So ask your self what you did last year and why it didn’t last.

Was it because it was not sustainable?

Make 2009 the year that you get slim for summer and keep it that way!

With only a few days to go before I can switch off and relax I was interested to read a short article in the Daily Mail by Lowri Turner about the connection between cortisol and weight gain.

This is something that Dr John Briffa has spoken about on a number of occasions.  It is really interesting to see how my ability to metabolise food changes when I begin to chill.

In the summer, when I go away for three weeks, I really notice the difference in my shape even though I am often eating more and doing less than my normal routine at home and work.

It would seem that Dr John Briffa is not alone in his view that stress can cause a rise in the natural levels of cortisol.  When we are under stress our bodies want to prepare for fight or flight and cortisol kicks in to create more energy and does this by  raising  our blood sugars through the production of new glucose from the liver. This in term causes a rise in insulin and that leads to yet other problems.

It is times like this that I wish I could blog the way Dr Michael Eades does it.

If you really want to understand why the latest piece of research on meat and cancer is absolute nonsense then do go and read his blog at http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/fast-food/meat-and-mortality/#more-2770

As usual Michael explains in some detail why the latest attack on meat is nonsense and I would recommend it to anyone who really wants to understand nutrition.

While putting the science to one side I am absolutely amazed how anyone could think that the food we have evolved to eat could be bad for us. Is it not a mad world when we actually believe that something completely natural and non poisonous in its uncooked state could damage us.  And the same people that rant about the dangers of meat will no doubt rant about butter and encourage us to eat some highly processed nonsense called margarine made from foods which in their natural state are poisonous to us. 

I would also like to direct you to the blog by  Dr John Briffa both a nutritionist and a doctor .  Do follow this link

 http://www.drbriffa.com/blog/2009/03/18/does-eating-meat-really-increase-our-risk-of-colon-cancer/

Enough said

Well I couldn’t believe my eyes this morning when I opened my regular email from the US and read a piece published in US News about the “Diabetes Diet”.

For years diabetics have been told by the experts, being dieticians, that the correct diet for a diabetic is rich in carbohydrate and in particular starch. Go to Diabetes UK website and check it out for yourself.  So imagine my surprise when a spokesperson for the American Diabetes Association is quoted as follows:-

“Carbohydrate counting appears to be the best [dietary] tool for managing glucose levels,” says Sue McLaughlin, president of health care and education at the American Diabetes Association. Food has three energy-producing components: protein, fat, and carbohydrate. Carbohydrate is the nutrient that the body most easily turns into blood sugar. Not paying attention to carb content in meals is likely to result in blood glucose that is “extremely variable and unpredictable,” McLaughlin says. That means a person with diabetes should limit consumption of carb-heavy foods like bread, rice, starchy vegetables, grains, and fruit—but not avoid them altogether because some of these foods contain vitamins , says Ann Albright, director of the Division of Diabetes Translation at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Interestingly it is a shame that Ann Albright is not aware of the fact that the vitamins and minerals contained in Starch are far more abundant in the non starchy foods such as Protein and Fat.

Still you can’t have it all I guess.

Hopefully someone at Diabetes UK or the dieticians may pick up on the connection between starch and insulin.  No doubt they have picked this up but have allowed their unfounded fear of fat and protein to seduce them into the notion that a diabetic is better getting fatter on carbs.

On Wednesday in the Daily Mail there was an article written by a Doctor which reported on a recent study published in the US comparing various diets from low fat to low carb. The apparent conclusion was that it didn’t matter which diet was followed as they all had the same results.

Now I would have believed this had I not actually read the Study itself – sad lawyer that I am. Whilst it is true that the conclusion of the Study was correctly summarised by the Doctor it was quite clear that the Doctor had  either not bothered to read the Study or did not understand the subject sufficiently well to understand the conclusion.

Had he read the Study or understood the subject well he would had known that there was a fundamental fault in the definition of low carb.  The definition of low carb has not yet been set in law but ,and this is a big but, it is quite clear from numerous randomized clinical studies throughout the world that  low carb needs to be no more than 60grams of carbs a day. The reason for this is that if you have more than 40-60 grams of carbs a day you can not go into ketosis and it is ketosis that offers such fast and efficient fat loss. Indeed in all other comparative studies which are actually comparing proper low carb to low fat or Mediterranean there is only one outcome – low carb wins

So if you have a low carb diet of 80g a day it would be low compared to the average diet of the average person but it would not be sufficiently low to actually reap the fantastic benefits of low carb diets which put you into ketosis. The study in question had a carbohydrate count closer to 100grams a day rather than the 60 or less required for ketosis.

So don’t believe everything you read in the press because unfortunately some of the journalists don’t always go into the level of detail required to give a fair summary of what they are reporting on.  Now that just makes me want to rant all over again about responsibility……..

My rant last week about sustainable seemed to upset a number of people who wanted to explain to me why the only sustainable way to diet is to eat less and do more…ie calorie count and join a gym.

The interesting thing about this is not so much the gym part but more the eating less part.  Calorie counting is not and never can be sustainable unless you decide to buy all your food in ready meal format or perhaps in the future go to restaurants.

I can’t help but think it strange that we have got so far removed from food as a society that any one can tell me that measuring food by numbers is sustainable.   How mad is that. Just think about it for a moment.

The only way to make anything sustainable is to ensure that you do not require any third party to tell you what to eat at any point. If you are a vegetarian it is sustainable whether you buy ready meals or cook for yourself. You look at the food and you know whether it is animal or vegetable. You don’t need a food scientist or technician to calculate what is in the carrot or the piece of pasta.

However if you calorie count you definitely do need someone to tell you what you are eating.  I stopped looking at the back of food packets long ago because I simply started eating what I am supposed to eat…Just think like a hunter gatherer and frankly the choice of what to eat is simple. No need for labels unless you want to buy a ready meals but then you do need to know what the manufacturers have hidden in your meal and by that I don’t mean calories