blue zones

I know, you keep hearing conflicting reports about saturated fat and health outcomes. So do I. Most recently, just a few
We are a species. Perhaps that’s a bit of a blow to our modern, so-over-biology, Homo sapien arrogance; but it’s true just
Given the almost dizzying frequency of diet-related headlines, the one true revelation about nutrition is superficially the
But our faithfulness to any principle is always imperfect because we are imperfect. That does not invalidate the principle
The current (June 7, 2016) issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association devotes much of its rarefied real estate
Risks of too little sodium are a valid concern only at levels massively below mean intake in the U.S., while the harms of excess are with us right now. The priority, obviously, is fixing what's broken. Kudos to the FDA. Their action on salt does not yet have traction in the real world -- but it does pertain to it.
We have been preoccupied with anti-aging perhaps since the very dawn of self-awareness, and the implications of mortality it unveiled. We have, ever since, tethered our fears to faith and fantasy, tangled our aspirations up in fable -- about fountains of youth in particular.
Where the likes of this pizza and sandwich, and soda and donuts and French fries are introduced, health is devastated, and in short order. Where just this sort of fare is removed to make way for more vegetables, fruits, beans, lentils, whole grains, nuts, seeds, and water when thirsty, the improvements in health are stunning.
The cottage industry in revisionist dietary history -- and make no mistake, it is an industry -- would have us believe that absurd misapplications of advice can be blamed on the advice itself. The dots, and decades, connecting Keys to Karelia, however, paint a very different picture.
Conclusions about diet study outcomes that are this precarious, that can be worked just a bit, and flipped -- are utterly useless. They are propaganda.
What the New York Times tells us today, no surprise to those of us who have worked directly with severely obese patients over the years, is that failure overtakes the show participants, too. Those of us in these trenches have known all along that though challenging, weight loss is rarely the rate-limiting problem.
Similarly, I don't think we can say that historical advice about diet, health and weight control -- whatever the historical era, or advice -- is wrong because people subject to a diet of willfully addictive junk foods failed to follow it.
As for the status quo, United is a business, and has the option of renouncing its high costs. The people paying for business as usual with their lives -- do not.
Medicine and the media are in some ways like a celebrity marriage: of widespread, seemingly irresistible interest; and routinely on the brink of disaster. Neither union, nor the prevailing fascination with it, is apt to go away soon.
We are no strangers to a dizzying array of distorted headlines about diet. But the last couple of weeks took it to a whole new level.
Conventional wisdom is made to be challenged -- that, in fact, is what science is for. Science never rests, and those of us who profess devotion to it are obligated to move with it. But spitting convention in the eye is probably another matter.
A commentary just out in JAMA says many reasonable things about diet and health. The author notes that the overall low quality of the prevailing American diet is an anchor on life expectancy itself. Amen to that.