Category Archives: nutrition

Feeding time significance in fat metabolism…

An interesting new dimension in research that would readily emerge from data…

http://www.foodnavigator.com/Science-Nutrition/Meal-times-may-have-significant-impact-on-liver-fats-and-metabolism-Mouse-data/

Meal times may have significant impact on liver fats and metabolism: Mouse data

Post a comment

By Nathan Gray+

10-Feb-2014

Alterations to meal times may have a significant effect on the levels of triglycerides in the liver, according to new research that links such effects to a range of metabolic conditions.

The study, published in Cell Metabolism, investigated the role of circadian clocks and meal timings in lipid homeostasis, by performing lipidomic analysis of liver tissues from wild-type and clock-disrupted mice either fed ad libitum or night fed.

Led by Yaarit Adamovich and colleagues at the Weizmann Institute’s Biological Chemistry Department, the team measured the levels of hundreds of different lipids present in the mouse liver – finding that levels of triglycerides (TAG) in the liver were reduced by 50% in mice that were fed during the night-time only.

“The striking outcome of restricted nighttime feeding — lowering liver TAG levels in the very short time period of 10 days in the mice — is of clinical importance,”explained Asher. “Hyperlipidemia and hypertriglyceridemia are common diseases characterized by abnormally elevated levels of lipids in blood and liver cells, which lead to fatty liver and other metabolic diseases.”

“Yet no currently available drugs have been shown to change lipid accumulation as efficiently and drastically as simply adjusting meal time — not to mention the possible side effects that may be associated with such drugs.”

Of course, mice are nocturnal animals, so in order to construe these results for humans, the timetable would need to be reversed, the team added.

Grubby business, poor form, good riddance…

This should have never happened in the first place… what was Peta thinking appointing Furnival CoS!??

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/assistant-health-minister-fiona-nashs-chief-of-staff-alastair-furnival-resigns-20140214-32qol.html

Assistant Health Minister Fiona Nash’s chief of staff Alastair Furnival resigns

Date
  • 56 reading now

Fiona Nash’s Friday morning press conference

At a media call on Friday morning the Assistant Health Minister noticeably declined to give full backing to her chief of staff. His resignation was announced a few hours later.

The chief of staff of the embattled Assistant Health Minister Fiona Nash has resigned.

Fairfax Media had revealed Alastair Furnival had significant links to the junk food industry when he was involved in the pulling down of a new healthy food star rating website.

Both he and Senator Nash intervened to pull down the website, despite it being in development for two years and being approved by state and territory food ministers.

Fiona Nash: her chief of staff has quit.Fiona Nash: her chief of staff has quit. Photo: Peter Rae

Senator Nash made a late-night statement to the Senate on Tuesday to reveal Mr Furnival had a “shareholding” in lobbying outfit Australian Public Affairs, which is run by his wife, after she had previously stated he had “no connection” to the junk food industry.

Advertisement

Until two days ago Australian Public Affairs was listed on the federal lobbyists register as representing the Australian Beverages Council and Mondelez Australia, which owns the Kraft peanut butter, Cadbury and Oreo brands, among others.

It is still listed on state and territory registers as representing those companies, and others including Red Bull.

A screen grab of the website before it was discontinued.A screen grab of the website before it was discontinued.

On Friday Mr Furnival said he had tendered his resignation.

“I have done so with a clear conscience but with recognition that this political attack is a distraction from the important health issues being effectively addressed by this government,” he said.

“I accepted this role to contribute to the Australian government and appropriately managed potential conflicts.

Alastair FurnivalAlastair Furnival Photo: Supplied

“I resign in the knowledge that neither I, nor my wife, has acted improperly.

“I regret any embarrassment that may have been caused to the minister and especially to my wife, who has been dragged into this political smear campaign.”

Senator Nash has always insisted that Mr Furnival only owned the shares because of his previous employment with the lobbying company, and that he had distanced himself so that no conflict of interest occurred.

She has maintained that both she and the Prime Minister’s office were fully aware of his shareholding.

But at a press conference on Friday morning she began distancing herself, refusing to state he had her unqualified support.

Asked twice if he did, she said: “My chief of staff has done a great job for me” and “My chief of staff has done a terrific job for me for a considerable period of time”.

Labor has accused Senator Nash of misleading Parliament over the affair, with Senator Penny Wong saying on Thursday that she had repeatedly mislead parliament both in her explanation of Mr Furnival’s shareholding and why she and he had intervened to have the healthy food site taken down.

Senator Nash had said that she removed the site in part because the state and territory food ministers had unanimously agreed it required a cost-benefit analysis, however that was contradicted by official documents.

”On the face of the documents, including the communique from the meeting, this statement . . . is not true,” Senator Wong said.

”The communique reveals the forum made no decision unanimously or otherwise.”

However, on Friday, Senator Nash insisted it was the truth, despite the lack of records and the fact no vote was taken.

“No, there was no vote, there was no dissent, it was an unanimous decision,” she said. “Not everything is written in a communiqué.”

Follow us on Twitter

Reporter app – self-discovery through data

At least it won’t harm you, physically…

Reporter app, for self-discovery through data

Reporter app, for self-discovery through data

FEBRUARY 13, 2014  |  SELF-SURVEILLANCE

Reporter app

Nicholas Felton, Drew Breunig, and Friends of the Web released Reporter for iPhone. The app—$3.99 on the app store—prompts you with quizzes, such as who you’re with or what you’re doing, sparsely throughout the day to help you collect data about yourself and surroundings. You can also create your own survey questions to collect data on what interests you and use your phone’s existing capabilities to record location, sound levels, weather, and photo counts automatically.

Those who are familiar with Felton’s annual reports will recognize the design of the app, as it has a familiar look and feel, and it works almost how you’d expect an interactive version of his printed reports would. The charts are straightforward. They provide a quick summary of the data you collect.

Photo_Working

But back to the survey collection process. This is the part that interests me most, because as those who have collected data about themselves know, the collection is the hard part and the most important.

When collection is all automatic, it’s easy to forget about and oftentimes we lose context, whereas when collection is all manual, you have to remember to log things and collection grows to be a chore. Reporter is a hybrid between automatic and manual. The automatic part serves as metadata, and the manual portion tries to be as quick and painless as possible (and it is for the most part).

I’ve been using the app for the past week, and it’s actually kind of fun to collect. It takes about as much time as a check-in on Foursquare or a status update on Twitter or Facebook, and all the data stays on your phone or saves to Dropbox, if you like. Export your data as CSV or JSON.

From there, do what you want, because it’s your data. Most people will probably stay inside the app, but the best part is what can be done outside.

Of course, this is still the honeymoon phase of personal data collection, where I want to log everything in the whole wide world. I’ll let you know what it’s like in a month. For now though, the Reporter app is nice.

Liberal Chief of Staff with extremely close ties to food lobbying company

Just disgraceful…

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/government-official-who-opposed-healthy-food-website-owns-shares-in-food-lobbying-company-20140212-32h83.html

Government official who opposed healthy food website owns shares in food lobbying company

Date 

Senator Nash reveals staffer’s lobby links

Assistant Health Minister Fiona Nash tells the Senate her chief of staff, Alastair Furnival, owns shares in a company that lobbies for the junk food industry.

A senior government staffer who demanded a healthy food website be taken down owns shares in a company that lobbies for the junk food industry.
Assistant Health Minister Fiona Nash revealed in a late-night statement to the senate on Tuesday that her chief of staff, Alastair Furnival, owns shares in the lobbying company Australian Public Affairs – only hours after she had first told Parliament there was “no connection whatsoever” between her chief of staff and the company.

Assistant Health Minister Fiona Nash allegedly intervened to have food ratings site pulled down.Assistant Health Minister Fiona Nash is under fire over the withdrawal of a food rating website. Photo: Katherine Griffiths

Australian Public Affairs is listed on the lobbyist register as representing the Australian Beverages Council and Mondelez Australia, which owns the Kraft peanut butter, Cadbury and Oreo brands, among others.

Advertisement

The latest development comes after Fairfax Media reported Mr Furnival is also married to the head of the company. A spokeswoman told Fairfax Media that Mr Furnival had “no role whatsoever in his wife’s business”.

In Parliament last night, Senator Nash stated that “for the sake of completeness” she was updating her earlier statements to include Mr Furnival’s shareholding.

A screen grab of the website before it was discontinued.A screen grab of the website before it was discontinued.

She said that he had no active involvement with the company, and “arrangements” had been put in place so that his business activities would not conflict with his role. His wife had committed to not lobbying the health minister, assistant health minister or health department.

Health groups have condemned the intervention of Senator Nash and Mr Furnival in the health star rating food site, which set up a system that enabled food manufacturers to label their products with easy-to-understand nutritional information.

The site was developed through a Council of Australian Governments process run by state ministers, and was launched last Wednesday with the wide support of health groups, including the Heart Foundation, CHOICE, and the Public Health Association of Australia.

Fairfax Media understands that Mr Furnival insisted staff take the website down – a directive that was refused, only to have Senator Nash intervene with the same request. The site was taken down by 8pm that same night.

Public Health Association head Michael Moore said the decision to take down the site was inappropriate.

“The disappointing thing to me was that it was a unilateral decision that overrode a decision of the food ministers,” he said.

 

http://www.medicalobserver.com.au/news/withdrawn-food-rating-website-linked-to-lobbyist

Withdrawn food rating website linked to lobbyist

12th Feb 2014

LABOR is claiming a conflict of interest and possible breach of parliamentary conduct on the part of a senior federal government staffer over his links to the junk food industry.

Late on Tuesday, Assistant Health Minister Fiona Nash told the Senate her chief of staff Alastair Furnival remains a shareholder of Australian Public Affairs (APA), a company operated by his wife, Tracey Cain.

The business represents the Australian Beverages Council, Mondel?z and Cadbury which opposed a new website providing nutritional information about food.

The website was removed 20 hours after it began operation last week and Labor have questioned Mr Furnival’s involvement.

“Prior to working for me Mr Furnival was APA’s chairman and because of that previous position he has a shareholding in the company,” Senator Nash told the Senate.

But before his parliamentary appointment “arrangements were put in place” to prevent his work history conflicting with his obligations under the Statement of Standards for Ministerial Staff, she added.

Ms Cain subsequently gave undertakings that neither her nor APA would make representations to Health Minister Peter Dutton, the health department, or any commonwealth minister in relation to the health portfolio, Senator Nash said.

“On the advice available to me these undertakings have been honoured in full.

“Indeed, neither he nor my office has met with Mondel?z, formerly Kraft, and owners of Cadbury with whom he worked as a chief economist,” Senator Nash said.

Opposition Senate leader Penny Wong said Senator Nash’s response required further explanation.

“She’s in fact conceded that her chief of staff had a direct pecuniary interest in a firm which… had a commercial interest in the policy decisions in her portfolio,” Senator Wong said.

“There are some very serious questions to be answered by the minister, and frankly by the government, about how that arrangement can possibly comply with the ministerial standards and the standards applicable to ministerial staff.”

Senator Wong said Mr Furnival’s involvement in the website removal is yet to be explained.

She also asked to be told when Mr Furnival declared his interest to Senator Nash, the health department and the prime minister’s office.

Obesity and cancer

  • OBESITY has become the biggest preventable risk factor for cancer in Australia after smoking, a study from the World Health Organization has shown.
  • The majority of cancer-related deaths in Western countries are due to lifestyle factors such as weight, alcohol intake and physical inactivity, said Terry Slevin, a spokesman for the Cancer Council Australia.
  • Approximately 5% of cancer incidence is caused by alcohol consumption.

http://www.medicalobserver.com.au/news/obesity-is-now-the-leading-preventable-risk-factor-for-cancer

Also: http://www.foodmanufacture.co.uk/Ingredients/Alcohol-and-sugar-laws-needed-to-stem-cancer-tidal-wave

Obesity is now the leading preventable risk factor for cancer

Emily Dunn   all articles by this author

OBESITY has become the biggest preventable risk factor for cancer in Australia after smoking, a study from the World Health Organization has shown.

The 2014 World Cancer Report, last released six years ago, also showed that cancer has overtaken heart disease as the leading cause of death in Australia and almost every other country, killing an estimated eight million people globally each year, including more than 43,000 Australians.

This number is expected to rise to 20 million globally by 2025.

The majority of cancer-related deaths in Western countries are due to lifestyle factors such as weight, alcohol intake and physical inactivity, said Terry Slevin, a spokesman for the Cancer Council Australia.

Approximately 5% of cancer incidence is caused by alcohol consumption.

“For non-smokers, the single biggest preventable cause of cancer is obesity in terms of the number of cancer sites affected,” Mr Slevin told MO.

Australia also has one the highest incidence of cancer, third in the world behind Denmark and France, due to our ageing population and successful screening programs.
“In a perverse way, a high rate of cancer indicates a relatively healthy population because it indicates a longer life expectancy, Australia is in the top four in terms of life expectancy,” Mr Slevin said.

Mirroring worldwide trends, Australia has seen an increase in the incidence of breast cancer and prostate cancer, largely due to systematic screening, an effect that is expected to be seen also with the continued roll-out of bowel cancer screening.

Reassuringly, Mr Slevin said, mortality from cancer has also decreased in developing countries thanks to early detection and developments in treatment, and Australia has also seen a slight decrease in incidence of melanoma.

The report estimated the global cost of cancer to be $1.33 trillion a year in 2010, equating to 2% of the world’s GDP, a figure that could be reduced by up to $200 billion a year if more was done to prevent cancer.

Sugar and CV risk

  • JAMA study focused on added sugars
  • WHO recommend less than 10% of daily energy intake come from added sugars

http://www.medicalobserver.com.au/news/sugar-triples-cv-risk

Sugar triples CV risk

Press Association   all articles by this author

CONSUMING too many sugary sweets, desserts and drinks can triple your chances of dying from heart disease.

Scientists in the US have found a relevant association between the proportion of daily calories supplied by sugar-laden foods and heart disease death rates.

The researchers specifically focused on added sugar in the diet – that is, sugar added in the processing or preparing of food, rather than natural sources.

One sugar-sweetened beverage a day is enough to increase the risk of dying from cardiovascular disease (CVD).

For people obtaining a quarter of their calories from added sugar, the risk tripled compared with those whose sugar contribution was less than 10%.

Sugar consumption in the top fifth of the range studied doubled the likelihood of death from heart disease.

Dietary guidelines from the World Health Organization recommend that added sugar should make up less than 10% of total calorie intake.

A single can of fizzy drink can contain 35g of sugar, providing 140 calories.

The study, led by Dr Quanhe Yang, from the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, used US national health survey data to determine how much added sugar people were consuming.

The authors concluded: “Our findings indicate that most US adults consume more added sugar than is recommended for a healthy diet.

“A higher percentage of calories from added sugar is associated with significantly increased risk of CVD mortality.”

Professor Naveed Satta, from the British Heart Foundation Glasgow Cardiovascular Research Centre at the University of Glasgow, said: “We have known for years about the dangers of excess saturated fat intake, an observation which led the food industry to replace unhealthy fats with presumed ‘healthier’ sugars in many food products.

“However, the present study, perhaps more strongly than previous ones, suggests that those whose diet is high in added sugars may also have an increased risk of heart attack. Of course, sugar per se is not harmful – we need it for the body’s energy needs – but when consumed in excess it will contribute to weight gain and, in turn, may accelerate heart disease.

“Helping individuals cut not only their excessive fat intake, but also refined sugar intake, could have major health benefits including lessening obesity and heart attacks. The first target, now taken up by an increasing number of countries, is to tax sugar-rich drinks.”

JAMA Internal Med 2014; online 3 February 

Stanton on Sugar

Rosemary Stanton commentary on current state of play with regard to labeling and research.

Key point is that added sugar seems to be the key determinant of ill-health.

From: https://www.mja.com.au/insight/2014/4/health-cost-spoonfuls-sugar

Health cost of spoonfuls of sugar

Nicole MacKee
Monday, 10 February, 2014
Health cost of spoonfuls of sugar

RESEARCH showing high consumption of added sugar more than doubles the risk of cardiovascular mortality has prompted Australian experts to renew calls for labelling reform to help curb sugar consumption.

Leading nutritionist Dr Rosemary Stanton said labelling reform was needed to compel food manufacturers to disclose the percentage of added-sugar in their products, rather than just list total sugars.

“The body of research basically shows that it’s only added sugar that’s the problem … but the food industry has resisted putting added sugar on the label”, Dr Stanton said. “We need something to alert people to how much they are actually consuming, because I don’t think they really know.”

Dr Stanton was commenting after US researchers found that adults who consumed 17%–21% of daily calories from added sugars had a 38% higher risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality, compared with those whose diet comprised 8% of calories from added sugars. (1)

The prospective cohort study of more than 31 000 people, published in JAMA Internal Medicine, also found that the risk of CVD mortality was more than double for those whose daily calorie intake was more than 21% from added sugar compared with those with less than 8% from added sugar.

An accompanying editorial said the study underscored “the appropriateness of evidence-based sugar regulations, specifically SSBs [sugar-sweetened beverages] taxation”. (2)

Dr Stanton said while in Australia the goods and services tax was applied to junk foods, this was not sufficient to moderate consumption of these foods.

“So many of the sugary foods are very cheap — you can buy a packet of six doughnuts for much less than you pay to buy six apples, for example. So we do need more taxes on these foods … if we could also have subsidies on things like fruit and vegetables”, Dr Stanton told MJA InSight.

She said fresh food subsidies were important to soften the blow for lower socioeconomic groups, pointing to Australian research published last week that found that the most disadvantaged groups in the Greater Western Sydney region experienced the greatest inequality in affordability of a healthy and sustainable diet. (3)

Professor Peter Clifton, professor of nutrition at the University of SA, agreed that a tax on SSBs might reduce consumption, but a labelling initiative alerting consumers to the health risks of these products may be more effective.

“No one needs to drink SSBs at all, so I don’t have any problem with the concept of taxation”, he said.

“This government is certainly not going to do anything in terms of legislation or control, but I think maybe labelling, like cigarette labelling, might have an effect on people’s behaviour more than the cost. Putting a label on [soft drinks] saying that ‘excessive sugar has been associated with heart disease and type 2 diabetes’ — that will surprise a few people.”

However, Professor Clifton was less concerned about singling out the added sugar content in labelling.

“I don’t think there is a difference in a sense between total sugar and added sugar and most of the sugar that we consume is going to be added sugar, unless we’re big fruit consumers, which we’re generally not.”

Professor Clifton said there had already been a change of behaviour in relation to SSBs. “There has already been … a significant reduction in sugar intake from this source by about 25% over the past 14 years — one in three soft drinks are now sugar-free.”

He said the US finding that a higher percentage intake of added sugar significantly increased the risk of CVD mortality meant some dietary guidelines would need to be revised.

“Most dietary guidelines say not to have more than 20% of your energy from sugar, so there will need to be some revision of some guidelines to lower them”, he said.

Dr Stanton said the 2013 Australian Dietary Guidelines, which she was involved in drafting, strengthened the wording around sugar consumption advising consumers to “limit intake of foods and drinks containing added sugars”. (4)

However, she said this latest data built the case to strengthen the wording even further. “With the majority of adults now overweight, I certainly think the stronger wording of ‘limit’ was justified and I would support something along the lines of ‘avoid sugar-sweetened drinks and limit intake of all foods with added sugar’.”

The federal Health Minister Peter Dutton was approached for comment, but was unavailable.

 

1. JAMA Int Med 2014; Online 3 February
2. JAMA Int Med 2014; Online 3 February
3. ANZ J Pub Health 2014; 38: 7-12 
4. NHMRC 2013; Australian Dietary Guidelines

Comments

Submitted by Rosemary Stanton on Mon, 10/2/2014 – 10:45

After two years of deliberations and eventual agreement, food industry, government and public health and consumer representatives developed a Health Star Rating system to appear prominently on the front of food labels. The Star Rating was based on a value derived from the content of sugars, salt and saturated fat in the product with some positive points being taken into account in the rating. Sugars, saturated fat, sodium and the food’s kilojoule content were also to be displayed on the fornt of the pack for easy reference.

Health ministers approved the final package in December 2013. On Wednesday Feb 5, a stand-alone website appeared and public health and consumer groups applauded. By next morning, the website had been taken down. Who ordered this and why?

The Australian Food and Grocery Council has been stating its lack of favour for the scheme even though their representatives had been part of the process that had eventually achieved agreement.

It’s increasingly difficult when we can’t make life a bit easier for shoppers to make healthier choices that fit with current research.

 

Submitted by JustMEinT on Mon, 10/2/2014 – 12:40

If people stopped buying (and therefore consuming) processed frankenfoods, the entire problem would be eliminated. Sounds too hard for some I know, but a drastic elimination of premade foods, canned, packaged, frozen etc, and a replcement with fresh foods, home cooked would substantially reduce the amount of unnecessary added chemicals we take into our bodies. Ultmately we are responsible for what we eat…………

A clear head shot on big sugar, soda etc…

Jenny Brand Miller commences her long-overdue capitulation…

http://www.smh.com.au/national/health/australian-paradox-author-admits-sugar-data-might-be-flawed-20140209-329h1.html

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/backgroundbriefing/2014-02-09/5239418#transcript

Is sugar innocent?

Sunday 9 February 2014 8:05AM

Controversial research by two leading nutritionists which claims sugar has had no role to play in Australia’s obesity crisis is now under investigation by Sydney University.   The paper claims that sales of soft drinks have declined by 10 per cent, but now it looks like the nutritionists themselves are walking away from that statistic, as Wendy Carlisle writes.

What role does sugar play in Australia’s obesity crisis?

According to research from two leading nutritionists, the answer is not much at all.

If that’s the case, it means Australia is unique and sugar is not implicated in our ever expanding girths.  If the research is true, then sugar and in particular soft drinks are off the hook.

The research comes from one of Australia’s best known nutritionists, Professor Jennie Brand Miller, and her colleague Dr Alan Barclay.

Professor Brand Miller devised the Low GI diet and has sold millions of Low GI cookbooks. ‘GI Jennie’, as she is also known, is associated with Sydney University’s  $500 million Charles Perkins Centre for Obesity Research.

Australia’s obesity problem is unique, says Professor Brand Miller: ‘Australia is actually bucking the trend with respect to added sugars; there is good evidence that we are not increasing our intake, with various lines of evidence suggesting our consumption has been in the process of a long decline for quite a long period of time.’

This article represents part of a larger Background Briefing investigation. Listen to Wendy Carlisle’s full report on Sunday at 8.05 am or use the podcast links above after broadcast

The pair examined  FAO datasets on  Australian sugar and  concluded there has been a ‘substantial and consistent decline’ in the consumption of sugar by Australians since 1980.

After examining industry data on soft drink sales, they found Australians have cut their consumption of soft drinks by 10 per cent since 1994.

Not surprisingly, the soft drink industry is thrilled and the findings have been cited widely by the industry in their case against government regulation. We might be getting heavier as a nation, but we can’t blame sugar, says the industry.

‘Soft drinks in particular seem to be in the firing line as some sort of unique contributor to obesity,’ says Geoff Parker CEO of the Australian Beverage Council.

‘The findings do confirm  the Australian Paradox in that there has been a substantial decline in refined sugars over the timeframe that obesity has increased, so the implication is that efforts to reduce sugar intake  may not reduce the prevalence of obesity.’

Are we drinking more or less?

Image: Source: Australian Beverages Council

 

The Australian paradox would seem to let the soft drink industry and sugar off the hook, except that research is now under intense scrutiny from both Sydney University and the dogged form of former Reserve Bank economist Rory Robertson, who calls the research a ‘menace to public health’.

Mr Robertson has been complaining long and loud to the journal Nutrition and to Sydney University and for two years he says they told him to ‘get lost’.

Late last year the university announced a initial inquiry into the research under its research code of conduct.  An external investigator has been appointed.  If the investigator finds there is case to answer, the inquiry will proceed.

Until then, the university will not comment.

One of the most glaring errors in the paper, Mr Robertson says, is the claim that we are drinking 10 per cent less soft drink since 1994.

‘They show a chart of sugary soft drinks sales in Australia between 1994 and 2006, and that chart shows a rise in sugary soft drink sales from 35 L per person per year in 1994 to 45 L per person per year in 2006,’ he says.

‘And in the paper they describe  as a 10 per cent decline, which is nonsense—obviously it’s a 30 per cent increase.’

Are we drinking more or less? Image: The Australian Paradox: ‘Food industry data indicate per capita sales of low calorie (non-nutritively sweetened) beverages doubled from 1994 to 2006 while nutritively sweetened beverages decreased by 10 per cent.’ (Source: Australian Beverages Council)

 

It seemed to be an easy point to fact check.  Graph 5A in the Australian Paradox does indeed trend up by around 30 per cent between 1994 and 2006.

How could the Australian Paradox maintain this was an decrease when the graph clearly showed sales had gone up?

The responses from Professor Jennie Brand Miller and Dr Alan Barclay to Background Briefings inquiries have been equivocal.

Last Wednesday Dr Alan Barclay emailed to say: ‘Your claim is most certainly wrong’.  After another series of email exchanges another answer came through on Thursday.

‘The 10 per cent decline could not possibly refer to per capita sales of nutritively sweetened soft drinks,’ wrote Dr Barclay.

‘I’m sorry I cannot make it more clear than this.’

The paper remains on the Sydney University website of the Glycemic Index Foundation.

 

Transcript

Hide

A transcript of this program will be made available by the Tuesday following the broadcast.

Credits

Reporter
Wendy Carlisle
Researcher
Anna Whitfeld
Supervising Producer
Linda McGinness
Sound Engineer
Executive Producer
Chris Bullock

Energy Drinks linked to illicit drug abuse in school children

  • teens who consume energy drinks are more likely to smoke, drink alcohol and abuse drugs
  • N=22,000 US high school students
  • self-reported
  • non-causal
  • “high-sensation seeking youths”

http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Regulation/Study-links-US-teen-energy-drink-intake-to-illicit-drug-abuse/

Study links US teen energy drink intake to illicit drug abuse

Post a comment

By Ben Bouckley+

06-Feb-2014

Terry-McElrath et al. warn that 'high-sensation seeking youths' may be particularly likely to drink energy drinks and abuse drugs (Photo: Epsos.de/Flickr)

Terry-McElrath et al. warn that ‘high-sensation seeking youths’ may be particularly likely to drink energy drinks and abuse drugs (Photo: Epsos.de/Flickr)

US teens who consume energy drinks are more likely to smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol and use abuse drugs according to a new cross-sectional survey of 20,000+ high school students.

Yvonne Terry-McElrath and colleagues at the Institute of Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor analyzed data taken from nearly 22,000 US secondary school students aged 13-16 (8th-10th grade) in 2010-11.

Taking part in the university’s ‘Monitoring the Future’ study funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the students answered questionnaires on their use of energy drinks/shots, alcohol and drugs.

‘Strong association’ with substance use

Approximately 30% of teens reported using caffeine-containing energy drinks or shots; 40%+ said they drank regular soft drinks every day, while 20% drank diet soft drinks daily.

Summing up their findings, the authors write: “Beverage consumption was strongly and positively associated with past 30-day alcohol, cigarette and illicit drug use. The observed associations between energy drinks and substance use were significantly stronger than those between regular or diet soft drinks and substance use.”

Irrespective of age, Terry-McElrath and colleagues said teens who drank energy drinks/shots were 2-3 times more likely to report other types of substance use compared to those who didn’t.

The researchers’ results also showed that boys were more likely to use energy drinks than girls, while teens without two parents at home and those with less educated parents also drank more.

 “The current study indicates that adolescent consumption of energy drinks/shots is widespread and that energy drink users also report heightened risk for substance abuse,” the researchers write.

The masking effects of caffeine…

Caveating that their study does not demonstrate a causal link between substance abuse and energy drinks, Terry-McElrath and her colleagues nonetheless warn parents and the authorities.

“Education for parents and prevention efforts among adolescents should include education on the masking effects of caffeine in energy drinks on alcohol, and other substance related impairments,” they write.

“High sensation seeking youths” may be particularly likely to consume energy drinks and be substance users, Terry-McElrath et al. add, observing that energy drinks and shots should not be drunk by teenagers due to high caffeine and sugar content, as per American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations.

Title: ‘Energy drinks, soft drinks and substance use among US secondary school students’

Authors: Terry-McElrath, Y.M., O’Malley, P., Johnston, L.

Source: Journal of Addiction Medicine, January/February 2014, Volume 8, Issue 1. doi: 10.1097/01.ADM.0000435322.07020.53

Adolescent Salt – Inflammation – Obesity

  • association established
  • n=800 US teens

http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/R-D/Is-salt-linked-to-obesity-Study-links-adolescent-salt-intake-to-obesity-and-inflammation/

Is salt linked to obesity? Study links adolescent salt intake to obesity and inflammation

07-Feb-2014

High intakes of salt throughout adolescence may be associated with levels of obesity and inflammation, regardless of calories consumed, say researchers.

New research published in the journal Pediatrics suggests that intakes of salt during our teen years may be linked to levels of obesity and inflammation – finding that a high intake of salt in adolecents is correlated to levels of fatness and inflammatory markers regardless of how many calories are consumed.

Led by Dr Haidong Zhu from the Medical College of Georgia and Georgia Regents University, the team analysed data from nearly 800 US teens – finding that 97% self-reported exceeding national guidelines and that this intake of dietary sodium is independently associated with a range of obesity measures and markers of inflammation including total body weight, BMI, percentage body fat, levels of leptin and levels of tumour necrosis factor-alpha.

“The majority of studies in humans show the more food you eat, the more salt you consume, the fatter you are,” said Zhu. “Our study adjusted for what these young people ate and drank and there was still a correlation between salt intake and obesity.”

“Obesity has a lot of contributing factors, including physical inactivity,” she explained. “We think that high sodium intake could be one of those factors.”

Study details

Zhu and her colleagues assessed the relationship between sodium intake, adiposity and inflammation in 766 healthy adolescents aged between 14 and 18 years old.

Dietary sodium intake was estimated by 7-day 24-hour dietary recall, while percentage body fat was measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. Subcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue and visceral adipose tissue were also assessed using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and fasting blood samples were measured for leptin, adiponectin, C-reactive protein, tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), and intercellular adhesion molecule-1.

Average sodium intake was found to be 3280 mg per day, with 97% of teens exceededing the American Heart Association recommendation for sodium intake.

Zhu revealed that analysis of their data showed dietary sodium intake to be independently associated with body weight, BMI, waist circumference, percent body fat, fat mass, subcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue, leptin, and TNF-alpha.

No relationship was found between dietary sodium intake and visceral adipose tissue, skinfold thickness, adiponectin, C-reactive protein, or intercellular adhesion molecule-1, they added.

“We hope these findings will reinforce for parents and pediatricians alike that daily decisions about how much salt children consume can set the stage for fatness, chronic inflammation and a host of associated diseases like hypertension and diabetes,” said study co-author Dr. Gregory Harshfield.

The team noted that while their new study does not prove a causal effect, it contributes to mounting evidence that high sodium could be a direct cause of obesity and inflammation.

Longitudinal or randomised clinical trials are needed to clarify the relationships, added the team.

Source: Pediatrics
Published online ahead of print, doi: 10.1542/peds.2013-1794 
“Dietary Sodium, Adiposity, and Inflammation in Healthy Adolescents”
Authors: Haidong Zhu, Norman K. Pollock, et al