Mediterranean Wellness

Nutrition Advice on Hydration Performs Simone Biles-worthy Back-Flip, U-turn, Reversal

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 29 Aug 2016 14:01:00 +0000

We've all been told that to keep hydrated, the best drink is always water, and we should consume at least 64 ounces per day. Conversely, to keep from dehydrating, the standard advice is to avoid caffeinated beverages because they're diuretics that cause you to lose water.

Ditto for alcohol.

Unfortunately, most of the things we think we thought we knew about healthful hydration no longer seem to be certain.

For example, the advice to drink at least eight 8-ounce glasses of water per day turned out to have very little evidence supporting it. The idea that coffee and other caffeinated beverages dehydrate you also seems to be incorrect, given the conclusions of this meta-analysis that any concerns "regarding unwanted fluid loss associated with caffeine consumption are unwarranted."

So what should you really be drinking to stay hydrated?

The best drinks to keep you hydrated:

Given this confusion, a recent study by researchers at the School of Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences at Loughborough University in the UK is very important. They did a straightforward study by creating a "hydration index." In other words, they measured many drinks to show how well your body is hydrated by each of them.

Their test drinks included still and sparkling water, soda (Coke and Diet Coke), sports drink (Powerade), Orange Juice, lager beer, black coffee, black tea (hot and cold), milk (skim and normal), and an oral rehydration drink designed for children with prolonged diarrhea.

It's important to note that the study was partly funded by the European Hydration Institute, which is funded by Coca-Cola (hence the study's choice of test sodas and sports drink). But if the soda giant was looking to juice a study to get some kind of marketing boost, the results didn't fall their way. In fact, the researchers found that the best drinks for hydration were actually milk (both versions) and the oral rehydration drink.

Their sports drink, which is manufactured and marketed specifically for rehydration, was actually worse than water for this purpose. In this case, the source of funding was inversely associated with a positive outcome.

Other interesting findings were that the drinks normally thought to be diuretics (in other words, drinks that would make you urinate more, losing more water) did not have that effect. Alcohol and caffeine have typically been viewed as diuretics, but the lager beer, despite its alcohol, was not a net diuretic. Neither was caffeinated coffee or tea.

What explains these findings?

Alcohol and caffeine have been found to be diuretics in prior studies. But in this one, the lack of diuresis may come down to the simple, common-sense rule that is applied to almost everything: A little may be good, but a lot is not.

The authors point out that the acute doses of caffeine are unlikely to have a diuretic effect until they exceed ~300 mg. In their study, the amount of caffeine given to the subjects ranged between 96 and 212 mg.

As for alcohol, this study has subjects drink 2 pints of 4 percent alcohol lager, which did not increase urine output compared to the other drinks. In other words, the water in the beer was offset by any diuretic effect of the alcohol. This was also true for athletes who had a beer after training. But as in the case of caffeinated beverages, as the alcohol concentration increased above 4 percent, the diuretic effect increased as well.

Surprisingly, milk was more likely to sustain hydration than any other drink—and this wasn't the first study to show this. The authors point out that this may be because of the higher energy content in the drink. Any food or drink containing fat, fiber, or protein will slow the rate that the stomach empties into the small intestine, effectively slowing the rate of absorption.

The authors' suggestion that milk proteins may contribute to the reduced diuretic effect is also supported by other research concluding that "milk protein has been shown to be more effective for post-exercise rehydration than an isoenergetic amount of carbohydrate."

The bottom line:

Even though this is a small study of 72 subjects assessing a small number of drinks—and it definitely needs to be replicated—it's a really clarifying start to create an index for hydration. This opens the door to follow-up research that can do at least two things:

Study more kinds of drinks so consumers can get a better picture of those drinks that help hydration and those that don't.
Study different concentrations of alcoholic and caffeinated drinks to show the inflection point where they turn from hydrating to dehydrating.

In the meantime, while we're waiting on new studies, at least we know this: Milk seems to be the most hydrating drink of the current hydration index, and beer and coffee probably aren't dehydrating until you overconsume them.

Follow @willclower
For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

Why Am I NOT Hungry After Exercise?

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 11 Aug 2016 14:26:00 +0000

That's because when you exercise, your body shunts blood to the areas it thinks you need it: toward the muscles, lungs, and brain, and away from the viscera (your gut).
Follow @willclower

When you stop exercising, it takes a little while before your body can make the cardiovascular switch back. This is one reason why you just don't feel hungry after your workout.

And it doesn't matter about your calorie debt. For example, if you haven't eaten and go for a run or something, you won't feel hungry during your run. You may feel light headed if you get low blood sugar and your liver can't squeeze out enough back into your blood stream.

So think of exercise as an appetite suppressant!

Also, don't think that because you just went for a run that you need to immediately "fill the tank" again, because your hunger doesn't work that way.

For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

Finally Some Good News On Health

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 01 Aug 2016 17:36:00 +0000

We live in a wind tunnel of bad news. Day after day it slowly erodes your soul over time and numbs you to the daily onrush of awful.

And I know it's not fashionable to talk about positive things, so with apologies in advance, and despite our daily barrage of political and social crazy, I'd like to show why there actually is good news (for our culture of health anyway) that definitely needs to be shared.

Despite our 50+ year slide into declining health, inclining obesity rates, childhood diabetes, and the confusing array of health advice that changes by the year, there is reason to hope. It seems that our culture’s unhealthy trajectory has paused.

1) Food Choices

Foods appear on the grocery store shelves because consumers purchase them. The tiers of Day-Glo breakfast cereals with the shelf life of steel belted radials wouldn’t be there if we didn’t purchase them. In other words, what is supplied reflects our demand.

But recently, many food companies have removed (or pledged to remove) artificial ingredients from even iconic food brands. Kraft pulled Yellow #6 from its Macaroni and Cheese. Chipotle is taking the preservatives from its tortillas. Pizza Hut and Taco Bell are removing artificial ingredients from its foods along with High Fructose Corn syrup and palm oil. And Campbell’s soups will stop using artificial ingredients and syrups in their products by next year.

It’s no surprise that food companies make these changes because they’re only interested in what increases profits which, in turn, is driven by what we purchase. But that is in fact the good news. We are purchasing healthier items, and therefore seeing those choices reflected in the product offerings of our producers.

This healthy change in our food preferences is not only reflected in the grocery store, but also at the Farmers Market. The number of Farmers Markets as well as the purchasing done there are both increasing as we start to choose healthier items (USDA graphic reference). By contrast, soda consumption has declined for 11 straight years.

This is all very good news.

2) Activity Rates

Over the same time that we’ve been eating better, we’ve also become more active. Overall, participation in sports, fitness, and related physical activities did not decrease last year. In fact, it actually increased slightly. Both casual and active participation have increased, showing that although Americans may not be as active as in the past, they continue to keep moving at some level of fitness.

Conversely, the number of Americans who are inactive dropped in 2015, from 82.7 million to 81.6 million over the prior year. While these rates have fluctuated over the last five years, the 2014 to 2015 decrease (0.6%) is the largest drop since 2010.

This showed that 1.2 million people who were inactive in 2014, participated in a some sort of fitness activity in 2015.

This is very encouraging.

3) Healthy Living

Our workaholic culture is a driver of stress and the stress-related health problems that follow. We are urged to burn the candle at both ends just to make those ends meet. However, this seems to be changing as well. The Labor Department time use survey showed that Americans are starting to work less and sleep more.

Even though the unemployment rate dropped in 2015 from 5.7 to 5.0 (reaching what economists call “full employment”), leisure time on activities like watching television, socializing and exercise is still five minutes more than a decade earlier.

Those with jobs got more shut eye, sleeping 8 hours and 52 minutes on average, which is up seven minutes from the year before. Overall, Americans now sleep an average of 13 more minutes than they did 10 years ago.

Taking care of ourselves in this way is just good news.

4) Cooking

The fact that we don’t make our own food in our own home has been much talked about, and for good reason. This article reports on this trend showing that Americans cooked at home less and less from 1984 until 2008. However, it goes on to show that after this time, the level planes out. In fact, the number of people eating home cooked meals has remained at or above where it was in 2008.

When more people cook from home, they eat food that is on average healthier. And contrary to popular belief, it doesn’t matter whether that food is from a fast food or sit-down restaurant. Either way, this recent study found that you will consume almost 200 calories more, more fat, saturated fat, cholesterol and especially sodium.

When more people make more food more often from their own homes, this is very good news for our health.

In other good health news, smoking has plummeted, falling each year from 42.4 percent in 1965 to 16.8 percent in 2014. Obesity Rates have finally seemed to stabilize for adults and children. And the percentage of Americans with diabetes actually decreased in the most recent CDC report.

The Bottom Line

A number of markers indicate that the culture of health is improving. Is it perfect? No. Do we have more work to do? Of course we do.

But the trend is definitely moving in the right direction. We do need to continue the conversation that encourages eating real food, eating that in control, getting daily activity, and controlling the daily stressors of our lives.

If we can continue doing these things, we can expect this pause in our health freefall to then reverse. And that would be good news indeed.

Follow @willclower
For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

What Is The Low Hanging Fruit of Health? (quick video)

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 28 Jul 2016 21:57:00 +0000

You just have to do it. It's deceptively easy, and works in the long term.

Let me know your thoughts!

Reference:
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/homemade-meals-type-2-diabetes-risk/

For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

Coffee Is Super Healthy, Unless You Mess It Up In One of These Three Ways

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 21 Jun 2016 23:39:00 +0000

From a health perspective, coffee has turned a corner and is increasingly recognized as a healthful drink. In addition to being an antioxidant, it’s also linked to a decreased risk for Parkinson’s disease, protecting against type 2 diabetes, improving heart health, and lowering rates of depression in women.

Despite these exceptional health outcomes, there is nothing in this world so wonderful that we can’t come along and totally screw it up. And coffee makes the point. There are three main ways that the benefits of this most deliciously healthy beverage can be undermined.

1. Just Add Milk

The most potent of coffee’s polyphenols is called chlorogenic acid, which is an antioxidant and is also strongly anti-inflammatory. In other words, these polyphenols in coffee can help douse the inflammation in your body that can contribute to everything from cancer, heart disease, diabetes, arthritis, depression and even Alzheimer’s. Its antioxidant action can also help by reducing disease-causing free radicals in the body.

For these effects to take place, obviously your body must absorb those polyphenols first. However, adding dairy to your morning java decreasesyour body’s ability to absorb chlorogenic acid. This is likely due to the fact that milk proteins like casein really like to bind to polyphenols. Once bound, your body is not able to absorb them, and then they can’t do you any good any more.

So if you want to downgrade your morning cup of health prevention from Really Good to just So So, you can definitely do that. Just add milk.

2. Just Add Sugar

I spoke to a woman who told me, with a totally straight face, that she put 6 packets of sugar in her coffee every morning. The calorie content of normal coffee is about 4 calories, meaning that this sugar just adds a ton calories. And it’s not just her, as adding gratuitous amounts of sugar to coffee is now quite common. A medium sized cup of the popular caramel macchiato (with its vanilla syrup and caramel) weighs in at 280 calories. Like you need roughly 20% of your entire calorie allotment for the entire day in one morning cup!

Worse though, the consumption of sugar can increase cravings for sweets in the short term (through the over-production of insulin which creates hypoglycemia, leaving you tired and hungry in about an hour and a half). In the long term, sweetened foods also habituate sensory receptors to that level of sugar, so you crave more of it more often. By contrast, the consumption of plain coffee may help lower the amountof food consumed at meals.

So if you want to turn your coffee from something that helps you control calories into something that adds calories, and then creates the short and long term cravings for even more calories, you can definitely do that. Just add sugar.

3. Just Add More

An element of coffee that raises your bad cholesterol (and the LDL which can contribute to artery disease and heart attacks) is present in some coffees but not others. Diterpenes such as cafestol and kahweol are both present in the oil contained within the coffee bean, and these can increase your total cholesterol and LDL levels.

The bad news is that the way the brew is brewed turns out to increase the level of diterpenes, and the highest levels are unfortunately found in the better tasting brewing methods. French Press coffee, for example, has 7.9 mg per cup; Turkish coffee contains 7.8 mg per cup; and espresso produces a level of diterpenes at 3.3 mg per cup. By contrast, the lowest levels are found in more pedestrian brewing methods like instant (0.4 mg per cup), filtered coffee (0.2 mg per cup), and percolated (0.2 mg per cup).

The good news is that to coffee-up your cholesterol to any extent, you would need 5 cups of that French Press or Turkish mud coffee every day. And I know that it’s possible, now that there are colossal swimming pool sizes available, but fortunately most people going for quality are not also going for quantity.

So if you want to increase your coffee-induced bad cholesterol levels, just drink it by the bucket and then add more!

Why English is "The Language of Obesity"

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 28 Mar 2016 16:00:00 +0000

Italian may be the language of romance, but English is the language of obesity.

Need proof?

If you line up all the countries around the world based on their obesity rates, you'll see that English is the dominant language of six of the top nine most overweight countries.

These nations are located all over the globe, with different cultures, histories, and relative wealth. But what they all have in common is their language:

How do we explain this odd accumulation of obesity rates clustered around the calorie-free factor of language?

Hypothetically, it could be that the lexicon itself drives the problem. Maybe we just have more words for it, like Eskimos have 50 words for snow. Maybe we have so many terms and phrases for “swing through the drive-thru," “supersize that," and “pig out” that people are encouraged to do those things, like some kind of subliminal suggestion.

But of course, English is almost certainly reflecting the problem rather than driving it. American idioms around food are not the same as those in Ireland or New Zealand. We can definitely rule this explanation out.

A second interpretation is that countries like the United States, that are more business-friendly, are less likely to regulate additive sugars and artificial ingredients in food products. Choking grocery shelves with these unhealthy products might contribute to higher obesity rates, particularly among our children.

However, Ireland and England are both on the list, and these countries are in vastly more socialized political and economic systems. Scratch that explanation off the list.

A third thought is that there's an educational gradient to obesity: more education is associated with less obesity. Although there's some support for this idea within the U.S. anyway, it’s hard to say that this entire list of English-speaking countries is all less committed to education than the other thinner countries.

Socioeconomics also falls short. There is some idea that those with less money have a harder time finding good food. However, the U.S. has one of the highest standards of living in the world.

So much for all that.

So What Makes English the Language of Obesity?

It may all come down to the fact that the most obese country of all English-speaking countries—the United States—also has the biggest voice in the world. It’s like having someone with an oversize influence, who gets seen more and thus emulated more.

The same could be said across those countries that speak English, as the American image, mystique, and visibility can influence the cultural norms. One culture influencing another would be fine if it were only that the people in other countries were just wearing bluejeans, incorporating blues music, utilizing social media technology, and so.

But we have other cultural behaviors that contribute to the highest obesity rates on Earth. When those activities become incorporated right along with T-shirts, Elvis, and Facebook, language becomes the vector of that transmission. So English does not cause the effect you see, but it acts like a facilitator.

It's the window through which the fume of our unhealthy habits escape to the world. It’s the convenient access point for all who speak it. And the outsize influence of American allure is what moves dietary norms in our direction rather than theirs.

In other words: the more other countries look to us, the more they look like us.

If you live in one of these other countries, remember the cultural habits you had when you were thinner and healthier: fewer processed food products, drive-thrus, and habits like eating on the run. Reincorporate more traditional habits before adopting the eating norms of a country in which two-thirds of the people are overweight, obese, and morbidly obese.
Follow @willclower

For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

Fasting. Is it good for you or not?

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 07 Mar 2016 18:18:00 +0000

We're currently in the season of Lent, a practice in the Christian tradition that includes periods of abstinence and the denial of many foods and beverages.

Follow @willclower

Fasting isn't limited to the Christian tradition. Other examples include Ramadan (a month of fasting), and the Greek Orthodox tradition in which the faithful sometimes give up not only meat but also dairy products, fish, wine, and the use of oil in cooking. And the Daniel Fast is another religious-based fast that includes a 10- or 21-day avoidance of foods declared unclean in the Book of Daniel.

Research suggests that fasting is healthy when part of a spiritual, emotional, or physical cleansing — not a hard-core diet plan.

Of course, fasting isn't just associated with religion these days. Many popular diets now include a component of intermittent fasting. Coldplay's Chris Martin, for example, recently revealed that he follows the "6:1 diet," in which he doesn't eat at all one day a week.

But what does the science actually say about the benefits of fasting? Let's take a look at when it can promote health — and when it only hurts.

Is Fasting Good for You? The Pros and Cons

The notion that the absence of eating might be healthy may seem counterintuitive at first, given that food contains nutrients, and you need them to survive. On the other hand, with 69 percent of Americans overweight or obese, it certainly seems that many of us could stand to rein it in a bit.

Still, the question of whether fasting is actually good for you isn't settled yet, and there are supporting studies on both sides.

And, interestingly, the answer to whether fasting is healthy or not depends on more than just the number of calories you consume or when you eat. It turns out that the context in which you fast also has a big impact on the outcome.

Calorie Restriction

It looks like Benjamin Franklin was correct when he stated: “To lengthen thy life, lessen thy meals.” Research suggests that cutting calories overall can mimic the effect of healthy antioxidants to decrease age-related deteriorationin your body and brain.

In other words, one of the strongest indicators of longevity is not just what you eat but how much of it you eat. Those who eat smaller tend to live longer.

However, if you take this to an extreme, go cold turkey, and severely clamp down on calories, your body can interpret the situation as a stressor. In one study, experimental animals put on a two-week fast showed spikes in their stress hormones along with decreases in their cardiac muscle volume and output. That form of caloric restriction was terribly unhealthy.

Likewise in humans, fasting for a full two days led to symptoms of insulin resistance and, as you might predict from this result, induced diabetes in some cases. Along with increased stress hormones and insulin resistance, your systems can go into what is commonly called “starvation mode," in which your metabolism slows down (you’re burning fewer calories). Even worse, your body can hold on to the fat it does have, essentially frustrating the very point of the fast in the first place.

Intermittent Fasting

Intermittent fasting refers to a diet that involves periods of fasting and nonfasting, as opposed to overall calorie restriction.

Research suggests that intermittent fasting can be healthy for your body and weight. In a study of religious fasts, such as Ramadan, Lent and the Daniel Fast, researchers found that those who engaged in voluntary, controlled restriction in this context didn't tend to suffer the metabolic ill effects.

Here's what other research on these practices found:

A 21-day Daniel Fast (no animal products or preservatives) was found to improve health parameters and lower the risk for heart disease.
Greek Orthodox fasting was found to improve the LDL/HDL ratio.
Fasting during Ramadan was found to benefit immune systems and lead to less inflammation and better cholesterol.

Of course, more research needs to be done to determine just what it is about particular fasts that make them healthy or unhealthy.

But one critical element seems to be how your body interprets the context. It’s not about the calorie count alone or the religious element. In the cases above, healthy fasting seemed to occur within the mental context of a spiritual, emotional, or physical cleansing. It’s taken by your mind — and so your body — as a positive means to a healthier end.

By contrast, unhealthy fasting seems to be focused on deprivation alone — whether externally imposed by some arbitrary program or internally imposed as through a deprivation diet.

The Bottom Line

Fasting isn't good or bad for you on its own. It can depend on how you frame it. If you use fasting as a hard-core diet technique to lose weight quickly and punish yourself for your past dietary "sins," your body will work against your efforts.

On the other hand, if you use fasting as a part of a meditative, purposeful cleansing of the body, mind, and spirit, it will be taken that way. That’s because diet is more than just what you put in your mouth — it’s also the context of that consumption.

For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

The Most Basic Coaching We Receive That Creates Our Health Problems

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 24 Feb 2016 17:01:00 +0000

Follow @willclower
For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

Its not just what you eat that matters. How you eat is just as important.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 17 Feb 2016 17:00:00 +0000

The family table turns out to be as good for your nutrition as it does for the connective tissue of our lives.

For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

For Valentines Day, Chocolate and Love on The Brain

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 12 Feb 2016 19:18:00 +0000

Chocoholics rejoice!! There actually is a right way to love your chocolate, and it’s not just about eating less of it. The key to knowing which is which and why lies inside your mind and brain.

Anyone who really loves their chocolate knows that this wonderfully delicious food must contain a raft of psychoactive chemicals because, obviously.

It turns out that chocolate’s feel-good effects are a direct result of its impact on your neurophysiology and psychology.

Knowing what’s going on “under the hood” can help understand cravings, and make them work for you rather than against you.

This Is Your Brain On Chocolate

The cocoa bean contains a wide array of psychoactive properties, each of which nudge your neurons in different ways.

Its anadamide stimulates the same cannabinoid brain receptors as marijuana.
Chocolate’s theobromine may act synergistically with its caffeine within the brain to create a sense of pleasure.
It also contains phenylethylamine, known as the love drug because it is also released naturally when people fall in love or experience intense pleasure.
In addition to all these other feel good chemicals, chocolate also contains tryptophan, which can be converted into serotonin. The levels of tryptophan and serotonin are both associated with your emotional state: if they’re low, so are you.
Brain PET scans reveal that chocolate consumption light up the pleasure areas of the brain. This is also related to the chocolate-stimulated release of endorphins.

This is all very suggestive, but just because chocolate is associated with all these neurochemicals linked to positive mood.

But the real question is intensely practical and personal. When you eat chocolate, does your mood actually improve? Are real world measures of anxiety changed, and in what direction?

The answer turns out to be yes and no. While that non-answer isn’t interesting, what is very interesting is the fact that chocolate “brings the happy” under specific conditions, but not in others. So once you know what those two conditions are, you can make sure all those upbeat brain chemicals work for you, not against you.

The Wrong Way: Chocolate Used As Treatment

Taking chocolate in response to emotions is a bad idea. This is what that looks like. “I had an incredibly awful day, I’m going to console myself with chocolate”, or “I had an incredibly awesome day, I’m going to celebrate with chocolate.”

One research group found that emotional eaters who used chocolate to treat their bad mood were actually more likely to have those negative feelings persist than those who didn’t use chocolate in this way.

In other words, when used as a treatment for existing anxiety or stress, chocolate made the negative feelings persist even longer.

And think about how this condition can very quickly slip out of control. If a person continues this strategy (eating chocolate to fix an emotional state), the mood doesn’t actually improve. This can increase anxiety and/or depression, which increases the chances of self-medicating even more. At that point, you’re sliding down a slippery chocolate slope straight into a bog of emotional awfulness.

The Right Way:Chocolate As Prevention

On the other hand, eating 40 grams of high cocoa chocolate (about 8 thumb-size pieces, or 1 ounce) every day for 2 weeks can help lower stress levels.

How? Consuming this amount of chocolate for this long is actually associated with a decrease in the stress hormone cortisol that floods your blood, can trigger fatty deposits, adrenal exhaustion, and even muscle wasting.

But does the statistical decrease in cortisol actually translate into you feeling less crappy? Less stressed? Less anxious? It’s one thing to measure a hormone in the context of some research study and show that the cortisol level in your blood stream moves up or down. But the real question is whether eating chocolate results in improved feelings in the long term.

As the continual bearer of good news, let me just tell you that the answer is a big, chocolaty yes. A 2010 study looked at the impact of cocoa polyphenols on two groups of people over an 8-week period. They gave one group 85% cocoa chocolate and the second group something that tasted just the same (it even had the same number of calories).

By the way, if you’re wondering how eating the equivalent of 9 thumb-size pieces of 85% cocoa chocolate daily impacted their weight, there was no weight gain at all after 8 weeks of eating this amount. Zero. Just one more reason to be happy!

So what happened?

Those eating the 85% cocoa chocolate reported a 35% reduction in fatigue, a 37% reduction in anxiety, and a 45% reduction in depression.

By comparison, those who ate the very same product without cocoa’s polyphenols reported slight increases in every one of those measures.

So if you’re responding to these stressors by using chocolate to basically self-medicate, your very best case scenario is that you’d just be treating symptoms. At worst, you are making the problem worse. The better solution is to have a little high-cocoa chocolate each and every day.

After all, it is good for your heart and mind when you take it slow, make it last, and think about it more as a One-A-Day than a Band-Aid.

For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

How to know whether you are eating chocolate, or "chocolate"

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 17:00:00 +0000

Follow @willclower

For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

Is It True That You Should Eat A Big Breakfast?

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 09 Feb 2016 18:16:00 +0000

This is a whopper. In fact, its a whopper with cheese.

Here's what we hear:
You need a big breakfast. In fact, as the saying goes, you should "Eat breakfast like a king, lunch like a prince, and dinner like a pauper."

Follow @willclower

But no healthy culture does that. No healthy culture encourages its people ...

to eat their largest meal of the day in the morning, or
to eat a big breakfast at all.

Just saw this study result, and it confirms what you see out in the world:

extended morning fasting does not cause compensatory intake during an ad libitum lunch, nor does it increase appetite during the afternoon. Morning fasting ... reduced concentrations of the appetite-stimulating hormone-acylated ghrelin during the afternoon relative to lunch consumed after breakfast.

Science to English Translation:

If you're not hungry in the morning, and you don't eat, that does not make you more likely to eat more at lunch, or after lunch for that matter.

Caveats:

This was one study, in an obese population. Plus, everyone is different, so your individual mileage may vary. However, this study does ring true with other healthy cultures, such as in the Mediterranean region. This gives it the advantage of having common sense on its side.

For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

For Mardi Gras, a brilliant gumbo recipe

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 09 Feb 2016 17:30:00 +0000

"Will Clower." It’s not a Cajun name. Maybe this gumbo recipe would be more credible coming from someone named Lafayette “crawfish” Prud’homme. But I promise this gumbo really is authentic.

Follow @willclower

Even though, it’s true, I have no bayou water splashing through my veins, I managed to get some good recipes and sneak them back east after my sister married a certified, born and bred, crawdad-snatching, zydeco-stomping Cajun. I’m not sure how legal it is, exporting genuine Cajun recipe magic across state lines, so just keep this to yourself.

My son was always a picky eater. He knows what he likes and, more importantly for him, he knows what he doesn’t like. This gumbo falls into the first category, and has become his definition of great food.

In fact, since he was a kid gumbo has become a reward item for him – a prize for good efforts and noble deeds benefiting humanity at large. However, we’ve had to draw the line at him bathing in gumbo or eating it for more than 2 meals per day.

In the recipe below, you may notice in the “You’ll need” list that some of the items are a bit vague. But no worries, you cajuns-in-training, I’ll explain everything below. There’s a bit of alchemy involved. After all, it is authentic.

You’ll need:

1 ½ gallons water

8 large chicken pieces, bones and skin still on them

1 small handful salt

3 – 4 bay leaves

3 lb spicy sausage

1 cup vegetable oil

11/3 cup flour

2 large onions, finely chopped

2 cloves garlic, minced

¼ cup parsley

1 – 2 stalks celery

Red and black pepper to taste

Tabasco

Gumbo filé

Green onions, chopped

First make the stock.

When you get the chicken, be sure to buy the parts with skin and bones still on them. This dramatically adds to the flavor you get on the other end. One result of the fat free frenzy is that people tend to just eat breast meat, and avoid legs and thighs. For the gumbo, you should include both. The darker meat is richer and, frankly, has a better flavor.

Put them all into the water with the salt and bay leaves, bring it to a chummy sort of boil in a large gumbo pot. During the early part of the boiling you’ll notice some whitish foam gooze bubbling on the top. Get a large spoon and ladle this out. It’s yuck. The stock should boil along until the chicken meat falls off the bones, about an hour or so. In the end, your stock should have boiled down by about ¼, from 1 ½ gallons to a little more than a gallon.

Make the sausage

There are a couple of options here. You’ll have to play with them to see what works best for you (I always love it when I’m instructed to “play with my food”).

You can get the firm Andouille sausage that slices into small medallions and fry them up like that. They’re generally very spicy, but it’s really great when this flavor seeps into the broth of the gumbo.

If you are not such a fan of spicy foods, you can also get the hot Italian sausage, which comes in the casing. Squeeze it out into the pan and chop it up as it cooks. Even though it says “spicy” Italian sausage, you’ll be adding it to a vat of gumbo, so never you fear.

Either way, you simply cook up the sausage and set it aside.

Remove the chicken from the bone

After the stock has cooked down by a quarter and the meat is falling off the bones before your very eyes, pull out the chicken and pull off the meat.

Let it cool a bit first because it’ll be quite hot. But be careful to remove all of the bones. Cover the chicken and set it aside with the sausage.

Do the roux

Roux is the elixir of life. Not many people know this, although I guess this book has let the cat out of the bag now. If you do this part of the recipe correctly, your gumbo will be triumphant! (Triumphant. No kidding, you just wait and see if you don’t agree with that word at the end.)

Get a 2-cup measuring container. Fill the first cup with vegetable oil. Now stir in some flour until it’s smooth. Keep stirring in flour until the level gets up to 2 cups.

You’ll end up adding in much more than 1 cup of flour to the oil, because it all mixes in together.

After the total beige mixture levels out at 2 cups, get a rubber spatula and scrape it into a frying pan over medium-high heat. You’ll need a metal spatula to turn over the roux as it cooks.

Here’s what you’re shooting for: chocolate. Not Hershey’s milk chocolate, a rich dark chocolate. As the roux cooks and you turn it over and over, it will go from an anemic pale, to milk chocolate, to a fine dark chocolate. Also note the texture. This will go from liquidy, to firmish and bubbly, to crumbly. When it gets to “crumbly dark chocolate,” remember the aroma you smell. This means you have arrived at gumbo nirvana.

Now for the alchemy. Watch out that you don’t scorch the chocolate. Keep the roux just this side of burned. I can’t tell you where that line is, young Jedi knight, so you’ll have to use the force. Or maybe just be conservative to start with and take it off when it’s crumbly and dark, but not yet burned.

Add the roux to the stock

Careful here. The chicken stock is water-based. The roux is oil-based. These two like each other as much as two irate alley cats in a shower.

Take just enough roux to fit on your spatula and set it down into the pot, but not all the way down into the stock. Have the lid in the other hand because it’s going to hiss and spit at you when the roux hits the water.

After all the roux is in, boil it hard for 1 hour. Stir occasionally.

Finish the gumbo

After the roux and stock have boiled themselves into blended perfection, put in the chicken, sausage, vegetables, salt, pepper, gumbo filé, and Tabasco. Let these flavors simmer for another 20 minutes.

You may notice that I did not specify any amounts for the salt, pepper, gumbo filé, and Tabasco. I want you to add these in as you taste. You’ll get a feel for how much is enough. Remember, you are cooking in a vat, so you may need more than you think.

Add the gumbo filé last. It gives it that “dirty” flavor that’s the essence of Louisiana cooking. Add, taste, add, taste.

When it’s ready, chop some green onions to sprinkle on top. Gumbo is served in a bowl, on a bed of rice. I dash some Tabasco in on top. But then I like it hot.

For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

Mardi Gras Mentality and the Difference Between a Common Practice, and Common Sense.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 08 Feb 2016 14:57:00 +0000

Tuesday is Mardi Gras, when a parade of partiers famously let loose in New Orleans every year.

“Mardi Gras” means “Fat Tuesday” and represents the day prior to Lent, the 40 days of fasting before Easter. Thus Tuesday is fat because the next six weeks are supposed to be lean.

Follow @willclower

Mardi Gras has become a cultural hood ornament for a splurge-and-purge mentality.

Blow it out on Saturday night and expect to pay for it the next morning.

The bitter medicinal spoon comes tomorrow, so drink from the sweet cup today.

The self-imposed credit/debt tradeoff of excess provides a rationalization for the wicked bender. And we pay back the dietary loan following the excess of overconsumption by punishing ourselves in one form or another. Some of us join gyms, undergo restrictive diets, or just feel bad about ourselves.

For many, this self-flagellation serves as a well-deserved punishment: If the problem was that we lived it up too much, the solution must be the opposite.

If we were too good to ourselves, we now must be punished with the equal and opposite pain.

It’s clear how unhealthy this attitude is. It can lead to overconsumption, and going from one extreme of eating to another not only can lead to physiological problems like diabetes, but can also mirror emotional extremes. In addition, disordered eating patterns can lead to more weight issues. And suddenly, you can find yourself in a positive feedback cycle of abandon, regret, and self-loathing.

The dietary antidote to the splurge-and-purge self-denial trap is to avoid the binging in the first place.

Avoiding the swings between excess and denial requires moderation.

The excess to avoid is not the quality of your food, but the quantity. The wine is fine in control, the party is fine in control, and everything from cheese to chocolate is great for you until you eat it out of control.

That’s the problem, isn’t it? The Mardi-Gras mentality we accept as the norm does nothing to promote moderation. It’s “either-or,” “all or nothing.”

And it’s more prevalent than once a year at Mardi Gras. For example, the CDC reported that an astounding one in six adults binge drinks at least four times a month.

The 18-to-24 age group drinks nine drinks per booze-up (it’s even higher for those 65+).

In other words, what sounds like the activity of the once-a-year Mardi Gras party is actually happening all the time.

Compare our drinking pattern to that of the French and Italians. They drink more than we do—their per capita consumption of wine is about 44 liters per person per year, compared to Americans, who drink closer to 9 liters per person per year. The difference between us and them is that many in these cultures drink a little wine with a meal. It’s consumed every day, but more in control.

Food and drink (and even a little Mardi Gras mayhem now and then) only become bad when they’re overdone. Find the sane middle ground.

For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

The simplest dietary rule on this particular planet

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 04 Feb 2016 16:05:00 +0000

Follow @willclower

For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

A magic molecule of weight loss? This is a well done study, but I still have two issues with it.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 28 Jan 2016 14:13:00 +0000

Magic molecules? Of course not.

Although .... in THIS STUDY the guys at the Harvard School of Public Health assessed the dietary patterns of over 124,000 men and women for up to 24 years.

They wanted to know A) what they were eating, and B) if those who were better able to control their weight tended to eat certain things more than others.

What they found?
People who ate more antioxidant flavonoids were more likely to maintain their weight over the long haul.

After controlling for every lifestyle variable on planet Earth, this class of molecule was most associated with keeping your weight in check. Magic!!

The image on the left is from the paper. Check out the top of the chart, which shows how much of the magic flavonoid molecules they were eating, and where they came from.

Two Points
First of all, there are no magic molecules, and this study is only a correlation. So it doesn't prove anything. That said, it is strongly suggestive, especially given the quality of the study and the huge number of people (greater than 124k).

Moreover, it's not hard to imagine that the foods eaten can contribute to weight control. If you review them, they're basically a list of all the usual suspects: fruits, veg, tea, red wine. Heck, even beer is included.

But secondly, where's my dark chocolate? Or even just cocoa? Did they not count it? Why are they excluding the food with the highest concentration of antioxidant flavonoids of them all??

Check this chart:

Food Catechin flavonoids (mg/100g) ... Epicatechin flavonoids (mg/100g)
Dark Chocolate 12.0 ... 41.5

Red Table Wine 7.0 ... 3.3
Brewed Black Tea 1.5 ... 2.1
Apples 0.9 ... 6.1

Why the exclusion?
I'm not sure why they did not allow dark chocolate and cocoa into their little club of healthy flavonoid foods. It may be that the idea that these two can be associated with weight loss is just too much to accept right now.

In any case, until this all gets cleared up (in the year 2094), I think it's a safe bet that consuming food high in flavonoid antioxidants is going to be great for you, and may even help you control your weight!! Oh, and the wine/chocolate don't hurt either.

Reference:
Dietary flavonoid intake and weight maintenance: three prospective cohorts of 124 086 US men and women followed for up to 24 years

For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

Which Exercise to Choose?

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 27 Jan 2016 17:00:00 +0000

It's about love. Find the thing that pulls you forward, and lights you up.

That's your exercise.

Follow @willclower
For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

Check out my article in TIME

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 15:12:00 +0000

This is a response to the recent release of this year's Dietary Guidelines for all Americans.

The Dietary Guidelines are mostly useless for most Americans most of the time.

There seems to be a nutritional Price Is Right Wheel that gets spun every 5 years, after which we find out what the new dietary coaching is. This is problematic in itself, but adding to this confusion are the groups with agendas, who lobby Congress to get the nutritional advice modified, or those who sue the government to have them remove language that doesn't agree with their philosophy.

Check out this article, and let me know your thoughts.

When It's Okay, To Be Type-A

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 21 Jan 2016 19:08:00 +0000

I admit it: I’m "Type-A." In fact, sometimes I feel like I need to go to meetings:

"Hello, my name is Will."

[in unison] "Hello, Will."

"It's been two weeks since my last workaholic episode, my phone is no longer physically plugged into my umbilical cord, and I don't hyperventilate until I pass out when I take an entire day off."

Yes, I am that person. The Type-A behavior pattern — with which I identify — is defined as a temperament with excessive ambition, aggression, competitiveness, drive, impatience, need for control, and an unrealistic sense of urgency. These are the overachievers who just cannot get themselves to sit down and chill out for a second.

It's also commonly said that this pattern of behavior can lead to high blood pressure, heart disease, and stroke. It's an association that we've known about since the 1950s, and it's often stated just as unequivocally today. Case in point: WebMD's declaration, “Type A Triggers Heart Disease." Nothing questionable about that.

So if you’re a competitive person, or someone driven to succeed, you might read this and freak out a bit. You might think that these tendencies will be the death of you. But you should know that isn't the whole story.

Being a hyper-motivated overachiever is irrelevant to your cardiovascular health.

Why Your Type-A Personality Isn't Necessarily Harmful

Although it's true that the Type-A personality profile in general can be more prone to cardiovascular disease and death (one study found that more than a third of all cardiovascular patients had the Type-A behavior pattern), it's also completely misleading. Type-A behavior has many traits associated with it. And so the über anal-retentive fact-finding obsessives like me will doubtless ask, which one of these traits is most responsible? Is it a combination of those traits, or perhaps a subset?

As it turns out, there is hope for my people. Because Type-A personality is to heart disease as coffee is to cancer.

Let me explain: Several decades ago, researchers discovered that people who drink coffee also have a greater risk of getting cancer. As a result, these two factors were linked and for a while we were burdened with an incorrect assumption: that coffee consumption increases the risk of cancer.

The problem with this conclusion — besides coffee-deprived mornings — was that those who drank coffee also tended to smoke. In other words, many variables were associated with coffee consumption and only one of them was actually responsible for an increased risk of cancer (smoking). That means all the other variables associated with coffee consumption — like actually drinking coffee — are not related to an increased risk of cancer at all.

It’s a totally rookie science error. And the same basic problem seems to be at play with the link between the Type-A personality and cardiovascular disease.

Of the seven different traits assigned to this personality type, it turns out that only a couple of them actually contribute to heart problems. And the question really is, which trait is contributing to heart problems?

The higher the hostility and impatience, the higher your risk of hypertension.

Anger and Hostility: The Personality Traits That Actually Matter

In fact, it's hostility by itself that's a well-established risk factor for heart disease. In studies, this effect held up for healthy people as well as those who had prior cardiovascular problems.

This association was also supported by the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (CARDIA) study. A total of 3,308 adults aged 18 to 30 years from four metropolitan areas were followed for more than 15 years. Researchers wanted to discover which of the personality traits — time urgency/impatience, achievement striving/competitiveness, hostility, depression, and/or anxiety — were most associated with hypertension.

The results? Achievement, striving, and competitiveness — all classic hallmarks of a Type-A personality — were not related to hypertension at all. However, the traits of impatience and hostility were related in a dose-dependent manner — meaning, the higher the hostility and impatience, the higher the risk of hypertension.

The message seems to be that being a hyper-motivated overachiever is irrelevant to your cardiovascular health. It’s neither here nor there (one less thing to micromanage, right?). So, go ahead and achieve away.

What does matter is whether you carry yourself through this life with anger and hostility or live via more positive emotions. This distinction seems to be the case no matter where you are on the personality scale, from busy bee to beach bum.
(article originally published here in Mind Body Green)

For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

Keep Outside Stressors On The Outside

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 20 Jan 2016 17:00:00 +0000

Stress is not the craziness in your life.

Stress is a physiological reaction that happens within your body when the external craziness gets on the inside.

Follow @willclower

For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

"Cocoa improves men's vascular stiffness." Wait, whaaaaaat?

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 15 Jan 2016 14:25:00 +0000

What kind of article is this? Lemmie splain.

First of all, cocoa doesn't come in little blue pills, this DOES have important medical relevance, and if the effect lasts for more than 4 hours it's actually a good thing.
Follow @willclower

Here's the Science-to-English translation of this article.

The flavanol antioxidants in cocoa help keep your arteries from losing their stretchyness. THIS, in turn, makes them better able to absorb blood pressure spikes, much like a balloon expands but does not pop.

However, if you're arteries stiffen up like a pipe, they don't expand when your blood pressure spikes. At that point, the more highly pressurized blood can pop out into your brain.

That's called a stroke.

So eat your cocoa! By the way, when choosing your cocoa (or chocolate for that matter), the UNdutched cocoa has between 60 and 90 percent MORE of the polyphenols that are keeping your blood inside your blood vessels where they belong!

For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

You are enough.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 13 Jan 2016 17:00:00 +0000

January is the diet month where people look outside themselves for answers.

Starting looking inside.

Follow @willclower
For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

Leadership Styles, And The College Football Championship

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 21:58:00 +0000

When I was 6, I had my parents paint my walls crimson to match my team, the Alabama Crimson Tide.

In 3rd grade, their legendary football coach Paul "Bear" Bryant came to our little town in lower Alabama to sign his book. I got to leave school to get it signed. I touched HIM. And I swear he shimmered just a little with the glow of the deity he definitely was.

Follow @willclower

edIn

Needless to say, during the college football national championship (Alabama vs Clemson), I was up until midnight gnawing my nails like every other one of the football faithful until order was restored, and we won the national championship (again). The game was impressive and exciting, but another element of this was the character of Clemson. More specifically, their coach Dabo Swinney.

Because I was sick prior to the game, I had curled up on the couch with my hot lemon tea and infinite supply of tissues to watch the parade of pregame biopics. The one on Dabo Swinney (Clemson's coach) and Nick Saban (Alabama's coach, for those of you who don't live on this planet) were most impressive, particularly when you map that onto the topic of leadership style.

Both of these men emphasized repeatedly how they genuinely care for the players, and they're not shy about saying it. But I also know that these two coaches are exceptionally demanding, pushing the performance envelope to its edge and back. During the biopics of the players, this same duality was echoed: high levels of care coupled with high levels of expectation.

In other words, in addition to strategically mapping out X's and O's, play by play, they have created a culture that goes beyond mere execution and talent. This is a quality that any corporate leader would envy.

Why This Is An Ideal Leadership Style

In The Prince, Machiavelli said it is better to be feared than loved. As a leadership style, I'm not so sure. It's definitely easier to be feared than loved. But how can you get a group of people - such as within your company or from your direct reports - to be motivated to perform well? Is it better for them to feel like they have to perform or they'll lose their jobs? Or is it better for them to be so invested in the leadership and its vision that the motivation comes from inside, not outside.

This is really the crux; creating an internal motivation versus an external motivation.

The external version is a fear-based, survival of the fittest, perform or get fired motivation. This totally works to motivate people, as long as you have that external threat hanging over your head. On average, people will tend to perform right up until they don't. In organizations that deploy this strategy, they just reload with another body to sit at that desk.

But once the fear is gone, so is the motivation.

The other strategy of creating internal motivation (in the case of Swinney and Saban, is by creating vision and loyalty). Psychologically this is the more stable motivator because a person carries it with them where ever they go. Once they absorb the vision of the leadership as their own -- and this is set into the context of a common cause and supportive climate -- they'll give 110% for you, not despite you ... on their own ... even when you're not looking.

Does this leadership style mean that you don't demand excellence and effort? Of course not. Does it mean that you have to balance love-and-support with accountability-and-consequences? Absolutely. That's why I said (above) that it is far easier to create a climate of fear than one of love.

But once in place, it creates its own inertia.

So the bottom line is that the leadership style that creates internal motivation through common purpose and caring will always produce more consistent production more often. These college teams performing at the very top of their game is a case-in-point. If nothing else, the excellence shown in both of these teams makes their strategy definitely worth emulating. Moreover, when you see teams that win, their coaches typically share this kind of approach.

Oh, and Roll Tide.

For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

The Happiness Experiment and Second-hand Stress

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 07 Jan 2016 14:43:00 +0000

This is a fun article on the nature of happiness working the workweek versus the weekend.

The author is something of a nerd (love that) with great perspective for getting more happiness into your weekday. You data-heads like me will appreciate how he approaches and analyzes this question.

I also really enjoyed his concept of "Secondhand Stress". This is the idea that, like secondhand smoke, the unhealthy nature of stress can be passed to you by those around you.

Given the dangerous nature of stress for our health, maybe we should have outdoor areas for people to be stress balls away from the rest of us.

Out by the dumpster.

We can tell them in the winter to go shiver out there with the other stressy stressers. Airports will have "stress friendly" rooms where people can go between flights to wring their hands until the veins pop out on their necks.

Short of stress-shunning, it's important to be aware that your environment can add to, or subtract from your own angst. And this directly addresses the issue of corporate wellness culture.

When there is positivity (of mood, language, and interaction) it becomes a feed-forward benefit for everyone. On the other hand, a climate of angst, stress, and negative speech infects others like an influenza spreading from one person to the next like the virus it is.

In either case, once the wellness culture gathers inertia it becomes somewhat self-sustaining. The key for us is to make it a positive one.

Gratitude. Exercise It Daily.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 06 Jan 2016 17:00:00 +0000

Think of gratitude like a muscle that you have to use to develop.

Make it a practice.

Follow @willclower
For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.