The Life Ledger

Fitness is a way of life.

photo credit: M J M

According to a recent article on Food Navigator, a USDA study found the increased rate of obesity in US adults is matched by an increased rate of fat and oil consumption. This follows the generic advice you find almost anywhere - cut fats and sugars, lose weight. The study identifies processed foods as the culprit for the fat consumption trend.

American consumption of added fats and oils has increased dramatically over the past 35 years, exceeding government recommendations and affording a need for healthier processed foods.
The findings form part of Dietary Assessment of Major Trends in the US Food Consumption, 1970-2005 - a report by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) that shows Americans are failing to meet the Federal dietary recommendations.

According to the National Center for Health Statistics, two-thirds of US adults were either overweight or obese between 2003-2004, compared with 47 percent between 1976 and 1980.

The report shows this correlates with a swell in added fats consumption of 63 percent between 1970 and 2005 and a 19 percent increase in added sugar and sweeteners.

I wonder if anyone has conducted a study on the obesity trend of communities before and after fast-food restaurants move in? If not, they’ll have to act fast - I bet it’s getting hard to find one-horse towns without a McDonalds.

Thank you for visiting The Life Ledger. If you enjoyed this article, check out the related posts below and subscribe to our feed.

photo credit: thelifeledger

Childhood obesity is becoming such an epidemic that many schools are taking steps to increase the nutrition and exercise awareness of both their students and their students’ parents. Take, for example, this article covering changes recently instituted by five Philadelphia schools:

Five Philadelphia elementary schools replaced sodas with fruit juice. They scaled back snacks and banished candy. They handed out raffle tickets for wise food choices. They spent hours teaching kids, their parents and teachers about good nutrition.

As a result, “the number of kids who got fat during the two-year experiment was half the number of kids who got fat in schools that didn’t make those efforts.” Which is great, but of course not nearly enough. What we need is more education and awareness about what we feed our children. For instance, the cereal we feed them.

A recent article on Medical News Today about children’s cereal caught my eye. The article cites a recent study conducted by Yale’s Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity, which concluded that children’s cereals are higher in calories, sugar and salt than adult cereals, despite marketing claims to the contrary. The article goes on to summarize the study:

[Marlene] Schwartz and her colleagues examined 161 breakfast cereals from four leading manufacturers and compared nutritional values of children’s and nonchildren’s cereals to national guidelines. They found that when comparing nutrients per gram, children’s cereals were higher in calories, sodium, carbohydrate, and sugar, but significantly lower in fiber and protein. They also found that the majority of children’s cereals, 66 percent, failed to meet national recommended nutritional standards for foods sold in schools.

I couldn’t find a copy of the study itself, so I thought I’d conduct a spot-check myself. When selecting children’s cereal and adult cereal, I concentrated on marketing and shelf placement in the grocery store, as one Yale Rudd Center study points out that

Children are exposed to an estimated 10 000 advertisements for food per year, 95% of which are for fast foods, candy, sugared cereal and soft drinks (13). By pre-school, the child begins to have preferences for certain products and, according to McNeal, is a ‘consumer by influence’ (14). Advertisers place cereal boxes at child eye level because they know that toddlers can recognize brands of cereal and request them from their seat in the grocery cart.

Based on ads and shelf placement, I selected three cereals marketed as “healthy” children’s cereals and two “healthy” adult cereals, because let’s face it - comparing Trix to Allbran is just a tad unfair, and you shouldn’t be feeding your child that un-food anyway. Let’s see how they stack up.

Children’s Cereals

Cheerios

photo credit: Z(-_-)F

Nutrition Facts
Serving Size: 1 cup (28 grams)
Calories, without milk: 100
Sodium: 190mg
Sugar: 1g

Ingredients
Whole grain oats, modified corn starch, sugar, oat bran, salt, calcium carbonate, oat fiber, potassium phosphate, corn starch, wheat starch, vitamin E

Kix

photo credit: sajrow

Nutrition Facts
Serving Size: 1 1/4 cup (30 grams)
Calories, without milk: 110
Sodium: 210mg
Sugar: 3g

Ingredients
corn (whole grain corn, meal), whole grain oats, ugar, corn bran, modified corn starch, corn syrup, salt, calcium carbonate, trisodium phosphate, vitamin E, misc vitamins

Wheaties

photo credit: tape

Nutrition Facts
Serving Size: 3/4 cup (27 grams)
Calories, without milk: 100
Sodium: 190mg
Sugar: 4g

Ingredients
whole grain wheat, sugar, salt, corn syrup, trisodium phosphate, BHT, misc vitamins

Adult Cereals

All-bran

photo credit: davekellam

Nutrition Facts
Serving Size: 1/2 cup (31 grams)
Calories, without milk: 80
Sodium: 80mg
Sugar: 6g

Ingredients
wheat bran, sugar, high fructose corn syrup, malt flavoring, calcium phosphate, calcium carbonate, salt, sodium ascorbate and ascorbic acid (vitamin c), misc vitamins

Special K

photo credit: Paul Cheek

Nutrition Facts
Serving Size: 1 cup (31 grams)
Calories, without milk: 120
Sodium: 220mg
Sugar: 4g

Ingredients
rice, wheat gluten, sugar, defatted wheat germ, salt, high fructose corn syrup, dried whey, malt flavoring, calcium caseinate, misc vitamins

The Comparison

I think visually, so I’ve created a table with what I think are the most important comparisons to draw between the five cereals. *I’ve changed the serving size to make the numbers directly comparable.

The takeaway I get? Eat fruit, not cereal. If you need to serve cereal, Cheerios looks like the least evil. The other takeaway? I need to find a new recipe for my bran muffins.

photo credit: JasonTromm

Medical News Today reported on a study on possible health benefits from natural trans fats. According to the study, rats fed a diet enriched with trans vaccenic acid experienced a drop in total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol and triglycerides.

University of Alberta researcher Flora Wang found that a diet with enriched levels of trans vaccenic acid (VA) - a natural animal fat found in dairy and beef products - can reduce risk factors associated with heart disease, diabetes and obesity.

Results indicated this benefit was due in part to the ability of VA to reduce the production of chylomicrons - particles of fat and cholesterol that form in the small intestine following a meal and are rapidly processed throughout the body. The role of chylomicrons is increasingly viewed as a critical missing link in the understanding of conditions arising from metabolic disorders.

Because VA is the major natural trans fat in dairy and beef products, comprising more than 70 per cent of the proportion of natural trans fat content in those products, the findings support a growing body of evidence that indicates natural animal-based trans fat is different than harmful hydrogenated trans fat created through industrial processing, Wang noted.

Read the entire article for more details.

Chylomicrons. Isn’t that the special gene thingy that creates Jedi?

photo credit: Zervas

Is your coffee creamer the silent killer in your diet? CPSI thinks so, writing a news release stating that

The nutrition label on the powdered Coffee-mate in your office kitchen might list 10 calories and just a half a gram of saturated fat. Those sound like reassuringly low levels of both. But use a more realistic tablespoon-size serving instead of the miserly teaspoon the Food and Drug Administration allows—and unround the rounded down numbers on the label—and you’re looking at 45 calories and three grams of heart-harmful saturated fat. Have three of four servings of your office coffee thusly “creamed” and you’ve stealthily consumed half a day’s saturated fat.

But the liquid version of Coffee-mate—flavored or Original—is worse. Instead of using the coconut and palm kernel oils Nestlé employs in the powdered version, the liquid versions use partially hydrogenated soybean or cottonseed oil. Three mugs of coffee with that (and without Nestlé’s innovative arithmetic) delivers 1.86 grams of saturated fat , not to mention the 2.76 grams of trans fat—which is more than an entire day’s worth of the kind of fat that raises your bad cholesterol and lowers your good cholesterol.

CPSI also released a brochure worth looking at, comparing coffee creamers and listing related nutrition facts.

Interestingly enough, Nestle’s nutrition facts label lists 0g of trans fat per tablespoon, despite the fact “partially hydrogenated soybean and/or cottonseed oil” is listed as the third ingredient. Nestle appears to be following the growing trend for nutrition labels, which they describe on their FAQ pages:

COFFEE-MATE Liquid flavors contain less than 0.5g of trans fat per serving. Although the ingredient statement lists partially hydrogenated oil, the amount is trivial. Therefore, it can be listed as 0 (per FDA guidelines) on the nutritional statement.

Even more alarming is Nestle’s “Concentrate” products, like the French Vanilla Concentrate, which lists .5g saturated fat and 1g trans fat per serving. Assuming the 2tsp serving size is correct, that’s 3g of trans fat per day, just from your coffee!

Personally, I made the switch to using agave and silk when I’m of a mind to drink my coffee with cream and sugar. How about you - after reading about the hidden health cost in using cream in your coffee, will you change your habits?