Childhood Obesity

Enlightening Findings: Causes of Rising Obesity Rate in America

January 30, 2013 by James Bogash

Big shocker: There is a growing obesity rate in America. And it’s starting in childhood. Some factors are obvious, some not so. This one came as a surprise to me.

The list of things that have been shown to contribute to obesity is quite long and seems to be growing every day. As mentioned, some are very obvious, like too many calories, too many refined carbs, skipping breakfast, chemical exposures like BPA in plastic water bottles and not enough exercise. Others, like having the right blend of bacteria in your gut, are less obvious, but still play a potentially large role.

This particular article highlights a new factor in the rising tide of obesity. Light at night.

Yep. Something as simple as too much light at night may have a very large impact on both your weight and your cholesterol levels. This goes doubly for night shift workers. Who would have thought?

Researchers measured the amount of light in the bedroom of 528 seniors over the course of 2 nights and broke them into 2 categories: low lux group (<3 lux) and a light-at-night (LAN) group (> 3 lux). For reference, a typical nightlight is under 3 lux and the first hints of twilight are about 3 lux. This means that the LAN group likely had a light or TV on while they were sleeping. This is not the time to get into a discussion about blue light (from computers, TV, room lighting, cell phones) and how it disrupts our sleep patterns, but feel free to research on your own.

Here is what the researchers found:

Those with higher light exposure at night had an 89% greater risk of being obese (Tweet this).
This group also had a 72% higher risk of having cholesterol problems (Tweet this).

While the research on the problems with night shift work as it relates to conditions such as cancer and depression is not new (previous posts on the negative effects of night shift working can be read by clicking here), this is the first time I’ve come across anything on this topic.

The bottom line is that you need to be very careful of the lighting that you have in your room at night, if any. This of course needs to be balanced against the chance of tripping over your dog in the middle of the night (we’ve got four–the odds are pretty high of this happening…). Consider a non-blue night light or looking into blue blocking glasses if you spend time watching TV or are on the computer at night. Especially for your young children who need some light at night.

What kind of light are you exposed to at night? But question–what kind of light are your kids exposed to?

Does Healthy Food for Kids Include Milk for Toddlers & Teens?

December 19, 2012 by James Bogash

Every public health recommendation pushes dairy as a healthy food for kids. Milk for toddlers is almost a requirement. But is this true or extreme misguidance?

Food pyramids. School lunches. The CDC. The commercials pushing dairy as the solution to every woe facing children today. Someone who was strongly against dairy much be absolutely crazy.

Or maybe just well educated.

First, we need to address a few things. First, I’d really like to know the first upright mammal that looked at a cow’s udder and thought to him or herself, “I’ve GOT to try some of that!!” Most of us remain very distanced from the collection of milk and it’s easy to forget where it comes from when you’re drinking it out of a plastic jug or cardboard carton.

Second, many patients, with a look of horror when I tell them that milk is not a healthy food for kids and adults, ask how they are going to get their calcium to protect bones if they don’t drink milk?? I then ask if cows actually drink milk for their calcium. Pretty much ends the conversation there (the answer is NO–cows don’t drink milk).

Lastly, we all need to refresh our minds on what mammalian milk is designed to do. It is designed to take a newborn to a more self sufficient mammal. It doesn’t matter whether we are talking about humans, cows, sheep or dogs, the goal of mother’s milk is the same. And no other mammal uses milk for toddlers, teens or adults.

One of the needs of a rapidly growing newborn is glucose. The brand new cells of the little growing creature need lots and lots of glucose to support all of the metabolic activity going on. And how do these cells get the sugar they need? From insulin, of course. Mammalian milk is well known to stimulate the release of insulin so that the sugar can make it into the cell where it is so desperately needed.

More insulin. Great idea for a newborn. NOT a good idea as we get older. As a matter of fact, the prediabetic state is already having problems with too much insulin because insulin is not working the way it is supposed to. Forcing the body to release even more is probably not a great idea.

Now that you have some background, we can move on to this particular study. A group of overweight adolescents (12-15 years old) were studied for 12 weeks on diet that included 1 liter of either skim milk, a drink containing casein, a drink containing whey or water. Casein and whey are the principle proteins found in milk.

They looked at whether these milk drinks caused the pancreas to work harder to release more insulin (the term is insulinotropic) and whether they contributed to weight gain. The results?

BMI scores adjusted for age increased with skim milk, casein and whey groups. (Tweet this)
C peptide release (a marker of insulin release by the pancreas) went up in the casein and whey groups.

This is not good news, but not truly unexpected if you understand what mammalian milk was designed to do. When we give milk for toddlers up through our adult years, you are trying to stimulate rapid growth. That is what it is SUPPOSED to do. This, of course, is not such a good idea if you’re already overweight.

With this in mind, do you think we should still promote dairy and milk products as healthy food for kids?

Childhood Obesity Statistics: Parental Stress Matters

December 12, 2012 by James Bogash

As parents, we all try to do our best to raise our children with the best of morales and the most ideal of health. No parent looks at their child and thinks, “I love little junior, but I’m going to feed him McDonalds three times per week so he can grow obese and develop heart disease and diabetes.” Rather, the effects on our kids are more subtle.

Read the entire article here.

Childhood Obesity Statistics: Damage to This in Overweight Kids

November 27, 2012 by James Bogash

I’ve covered many dangers associated with the rising childhood obesity statistics in this country, but damage to this vital organ caught me a little by surprise.

Ok. You know that your child is overweight. Or, maybe you don’t because statistically, parents have a tendency to downplay their child’s body weight issues.

Either way, you know it’s not a good thing, but they’ll outgrow it. And then everything will be fine once he or she gets older. Maybe not. Maybe not in a BIG way.

This particular article took an interesting long term look at what happened to 17 year old children who were overweight (85th to 95th percentiles of BMI) or obese (≥95th percentile of BMI) getting his or her physical for the Israeli military. This was an interesting chance to observe these kids because the physical examination to determine fitness level for entry into the military in mandatory. Among other things, urinalysis and body weight was determined.

With the urinalysis being done, it was easy to determine if these children had any pre-existing kidney problems and were ruled out for this study. In other words, the kidney function of these kids was in good shape with no indication of problems.

Fast forward 25 years and that is not at all the case.

Before we get into the results, let’s review what end stage renal disease (ESRD) really means. This has typically been the realm of diabetics and chronic high blood pressure because these two cause so much damage to the kidneys (although not as much damage as it causes to the heart). Long term use of NSAIDs and Tylenol can also destroy the kidneys. End stage renal disease is dialysis and kidney transplant stuff. It is not good and something we want to avoid at ALL costs.

Back to the study…

Researchers looked at two things: how much being overweight or obese at 17 years old led to the development of kidney failure up to 25 years later. Remember–these kids had no evidence of kidney problems at 17. Here’s what they found:

Overweight adolescents had a 300% increased risk for ESRD from all causes.
Obese adolescents increased risk was 689% for all-cause treated ESRD.
Overweight kids had a 596% increased risk of being treated for kidney failure associated with diabetes.
Obese kids had a whopping 1,937% increased risk for diabetic associated kidney failure.

These are shocking statistics and suggest that these kids, at age 17, are on a trajectory to a very, very poor health outcome with devastating consequences.

I do have to point out that the absolute number of these kids who are developing end stage renal disease was small, but the risk is so high that I felt the need to point this out.

If your child is overweight or headed that way, you need to recognize this threat to their long term health and begin to address it TODAY. Later may be too late.

Childhood Obesity Statistics: Do Exercises for Kids Help?

November 3, 2012 by James Bogash

Society has promoted exercise to solve the issue of rising childhood obesity statistics. But will exercises for kids actually solve the problem?

I have made it clear in my blog posts that I place dietary choices above exercise in importance for avoiding chronic disease. This is, of course, based on the research, which is supportive of my position (or rather-I’ve developed my opinion based on the research). I have a good friend who began to use MyFitnesPal.com on his phone to monitor his caloric intake. Now, some 6 months later, he’s down a whopping 45 lbs. And he is only now beginning to add in exercise.

It’s great to see this happening to him, but also good for me because it means I haven’t been giving out the wrong information….

Now for my pure speculation NOT based on medical literature.

We promote exercise as a society because no one has money to lose. Reebok, Nike, La Fitness….the list of businesses that can profit from more exercise is quite long. No one is hurt when we promote exercise.

Michelle Obama’s Let’s Move program, even by it’s title, supports increased activity with not enough focus on the hard recommendations for dietary changes.

Let’s look at who dietary changes like avoiding refined carbs and other processed foods would affect. Kelloggs, Quaker, Nabisco and Kraft just to name a few. These companies would be devastated by national inititives to eat better because few of their products would actually be considered healthy.

So, to summarize my speculation, we make national recommendations to exercise more and get our kids to be less sedentary because there is only money to be made. We avoid solid lifestyle recommendations because the companies that would take a beating financially are the ones in the trenches helping to decide on guidelines.

So why am I bringing all of this up? You guessed it–it relates to this particular article looking at how much effective attempts at increasing kids activity levels were.

Researchers looked at 30 studies over 14,326 participants and evaluated how well they worked. The overall end result?

Four minutes more.

Yup. 4 more lousy minutes of walking or running per day. Hardly enough to overcome the large Starbucks.

I’m not saying that promotion of exercise to our kids is not important. What I’m saying is that we spend millions of dollars on research and promotion and advertisement to get kids to move more and

Childhood Obesity Statistics: Can the Xbox Kinect Help?

November 1, 2012 by James Bogash

I’ve addressed the chemical and dietary aspects of childhood obesity statistics. Clearly, though, exercise plays a role as well. Could technology help obese kids?

It’s a dream that every kid has. The parents condoning the use of video games. In the past, this really hasn’t been an option due to the inherently sedentary nature of video game playing.

But that has been changing. It started with the Nintendo Wi and has moved forward with the Playstation move and the Xbox Kinect. If you’ve never played these games before, they vary from sitting on the couch swishing around the controller to all out physical activity with games like Just Dance, Kinect Sports, Fighters Uncaged or Kinect Adventures.

These games can really help you break a sweat. But just how much?

This particular study was designed to answer just that question.

Researchers looked at the calories burned while a small group of kids aged 11-15 played two different Xbox Kinect games for 15 minutes: Dance Central and Kinect Sports Boxing. Here are the findings:

Heart rate, oxygen uptake, and energy expenditure were considerably higher with these games.
The Dance Central increased calorie burning by 150%.
The Boxing increased calorie burning by 263%.

Not too shaby for something the kids may actually enjoy and can be done year round, regardless of hot or cold temps. AND, to top it all off, this is clearly something you can do as a family. Many of the games, like Kinect Adventures, allows you to compete against one another. We break the family into two teams for some nice competitive fun.

Incidentally, this is not the first study to look at what might happen in a household that uses these types of games. In May of 2011 a study looked at the weight of children who were given a Wii system instead of their normal, sedentary-type video games and found definate improvements in 6 months.

If you have played the Xbox Kinect before, what games did your family really seem to like and helped everyone get more exercise?

Childhood Obesity Statistics: Blame Artificial Sweeteners

October 29, 2012 by James Bogash

I know I’ve written frequently on childhood obesity statistics lately, but are you really paying attention to everything your child is putting in their mouth?

You’ve banned artificial sweeteners. No more diet soda. You read one of my blog posts on just how unhealthy artificial sweeteners are, and you instantly tossed what you had in the house into the garbage. You’ve scrapped the plastic water bottles and cheap soup cans to ban BPA as well.

You’ve even searched out the labels where artificial sweeteners like sucralose (Splenda) lurks; some juices, “energy” drinks, even drink “enhancers” like Mio. You’ve vowed to not use any of the Nuun Active Hydration during your Susan Komen 3-day hike because of the acesulfame potassium. You’ve told your primary care doctor that Medifast is not going to help you lose weight in the long run.

Your family is all set and your children are happily chewing their gum in the back seat, artificial sweetener free.

Wait…chewing gum?

You slam on the brakes as you pull the car to the side of the road and demand to see the pack of Trident that your son is chewing from.

You guessed it. Almost every major brand of gum available now has artificial sweeteners in it. Actually, most seem to have multiple types (Yes-that Trident sugarless gum has acesulfame potassium AND aspartame in addition to the naturally occurring sugar alcohol sorbitol–apparently Trident couldn’t decide just which sweetener it was going to use so it through them all in…).

But it’s just a little amount.

That’s what I hear. It’s just a little. Or it’s just one can of diet soda per day. Or just a few pieces of gum per day. I remember hearing one distributor for a direct marketing “health” company stating that the sucralose in their drink was “just a little.”

Make no mistake–“just a little” is enough for us to taste or it wouldn’t be in there.

Which brings us to this particular article.

Researchers looked at a group of obese children aged 6-18 and compared them to a similar group of normal weight children. They were specifically looking to see if there was a difference in the taste sensations between the two groups. There findings give us some insight into the problems our children are facing:

Obese children were less able to identify salty, bitter and umami (savory) tastes.
Obese kids rated 3 of 4 test strips (with increasing sweet concentrations) as being less sweet.
The greatest difference was in the lowest concentration of “sweet.”
Only at the sweetest concentration did the two groups of children agree on the degree of sweetness.
Overall, girls and older kids were better at picking out the right tastes.

Basically, the obese children seemed less sensitive to “sweet” until the concentration became strong. To me, this would seem to identify a type of tolerance for sweet sensations, much like a drug.

Giving our children sweet this and sweet that, including artificial sweeteners with sensations 1,000 times stronger than table sugar will do nothing but cause problems. I remain very strong of the opinion that giving artificial sweeteners to our children AT ALL, at any age, begins to disassociate taste from our body and brain’s response to sweet. This process can only lead contribute to the worsening childhood obesity statistics as time goes on.

If your child is already stuck in this loop, the first step is to cut out any and ALL artificial sweeteners. Today. If your family chews gum, switch to a xylitol based gum.

From there, begin to cut back on the “sweet” that they are exposed to. That could mean smaller serving sizes. We have frozen yogurt stores here in Arizona that sell by the ounce–you basically fill up as much as you’d like and then top it off with the selections such as bad stuff, fruit and nuts. I can tell you that, for 4 of us, we frequently pay just a little more than most of the cups that get filled and dropped on the scale. Do you really need to fill the whole thing?

You can also begin to substitute unsweetened items for the sugary stuff. If they can’t drink tea without a 50:50 sugar:tea mix, begin to gradually cut back on the amount of sugar being added until it’s gone. And do you really need the largest size Starbucks with whipped cream?

What have you done to cut back on your child’s “sweet” intake?

Childhood Obesity Statistics: 12 Reasons for Concern

October 27, 2012 by James Bogash

You try to do everything for your kids’ health. Yet childhood obesity statistics continue to mount. Could something they do doing every day be affecting them?

In today’s overly toxic world there are many things you are exposed to that harm your health and you may not even be aware of them or how likely your exposure is. Some examples include:

While the list is much longer, these are a few that we are all very commonly exposed to. The one I did not put on this list, though, it likely the most common exposure.

That 12 ounce bottled water sitting next to you right now.

Somewhere along the way, society decided that we were at risk of spontaneously desiccating to a husk if we did not have water immediately accessible at every single moment of our lives. Personally, I haven’t seen it happen, but I suppose it could.

This behavior has had a price to pay. The exposure to bisphenol A (BPA) has increased as a result of this proximity to bottled water. I have certainly written in past blogs about how bad BPA can be for our health, increasing the risk of obesity, diabetes and certain cancers like breast cancer.

This particular article takes a look at the relationship between BPA exposure and childhood obesity statistics. Researchers looked at the urine BPA levels of children aged 9-19 and looked at how many suffered from childhood obesity. Here’s what they found:

Those with the lowest BPA had the lowest risk of childhood obesity.
Those kids with the highest levels of BPA had a 22% greater risk of being classified as having childhood obesity than the kids with the lowest levels.

Granted, 22% is not a huge number, but given that the childhood obesity statistics are continually heading up, anything we can do to impact this process is a good thing. So scrap the plastic water bottle and start giving your dehydrated children tea in a BPA free water container.

Are you still buying bottled water for your family?