Search
Thursday
Aug162012

Study on school snack nutrition rules something to chew on

In this May 3, 2006 file photo, a student purchases a brown sugar Pop-Tart from a vending machine in the hallway outside the school cafeteria, in Wichita, Kan. A new study published in the journal Pediatrics looks at the impact of school snack nutrition rules.Recently published research on the effectiveness of laws that regulate the nutritional value of snack foods sold in public schools offers some hearty food for thought for Utah parents, educators and lawmakers.

The study, published in the journal Pediatrics, compared rates of weight gain among school kids in states with strict laws on what kinds of food schools can offer for sale outside of school meal programs, compared to kids in states like Utah, with no such laws. And the study shows rather uniformly that kids with access to sugar-rich vending machine snacks and soft drinks tend to gain more weight over time and face a greater risk of obesity.

The data might seem to merely confirm the obvious, but a proposed law in Utah to regulate vending machine food in schools was defeated in 2010 partly because there was a lack of evidence at the time on whether such a law might be effective. Now the verdict is in, and it puts the onus back on the Legislature to reconsider its reticence to set nutritional standards for the kinds of foods kids can buy in school vending machines.

The issue is not trivial. Rates of childhood and adolescent obesity have tripled since 1980. One in five children ages 6 to 11 is considered obese under standards set by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and another large group is considered near obese. They are, as a result, at a much higher risk for serious health complications as they age.

The federal government currently regulates the nutritional content of food offered during school meal programs, and the food and drink for sale separately – but only during meal hours. It's up to the states to regulate, or not, the kinds of food and drink available outside the lunch hour.

Utah might have joined a number of states with such restrictions two years ago when the Legislature considered a "Vending Machines in Public Schools" bill sponsored by then Sen. Patricia Jones, D-Salt Lake. The bill died after it struggled against two strong crosscurrents. The food industry lobbied against it on grounds there was no evidence tying vending machine food to health problems. And several lawmakers saw it as a case of government over-reach.

One opponent in the Senate said, "I feel like we're taking away the responsibilities from Mom and Dad."

Another way to look at it is that the moms and dads who set rules for their kids on what's appropriate to eat might appreciate having backup from the schools, lest their kids bypass the family kitchen rules by plunking down change for a quick candy bar and soda pop during afternoon recess.

The authors of the study in Pediatrics acknowledge such laws are fought on grounds they further the growth of a "nanny state." And while it is appropriate to be wary of any instances of government creep into the daily habits of its citizens, it's hard to argue that denying kids the right to buy a certain kind of snack in school is a disruption of anyone's civil liberties.

The research was commissioned because there is growing concern among public health officials that the trend toward obesity among children is not abating. In that context, the new research, if nothing else, is certainly something to chew on.

Via:  Deseret News

Thursday
Aug162012

From brain to mouth: The psychology of obesity

By Sharon Jayson, USA TODAY

Everyone knows that people put on weight because they consume more calories than they burn. But as the medical community struggles to get a handle on obesity in the USA, a growing body of research is delving deeper to find out more about the psychology behind the numbers.

  • Reasons for obesity go beyond willpower to genes, culture and cognitive overload.

    By Alejandro Gonzalez, USA TODAY

Although people might be inclined to think of nutritionists or dietitians, obesity is "one of the big common public health issues that falls right in the heart of psychology," says psychologist Paul Rozin of the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia.

Among a host of questions aimed directly at the psychology of eating are why Americans are eating more than they used to; whether some foods can really be addictive; and whether more people than in the past are genetically predisposed to pack on pounds.

Rozin, who has studied humans and food for 30 years, is one of dozens of psychologists who will share their latest findings and theories this weekend at the American Psychological Association's annual meeting, starting Thursday in Orlando. Obesity is one of the themes.

"Obesity has been much more resistant to treatment than any reasonable person would have thought 50 years ago," he says.

There's no question that Americans are heavier than ever before. More than one-third of adults are considered obese and almost 17% of teens and kids fit the category, according to the most recent federal data, released earlier this year.

In fact, food is everywhere at any time, and advertising is an additional lure, says psychologist Kelly Brownell, director of the Rudd Center for Food Policy & Obesity at Yale University in New Haven, Conn. "We've been completely retrained to think that large portions are acceptable, that eating throughout the day is acceptable, that eating late at night is acceptable, that eating in the car is acceptable," he says. "All the boundaries that would put limits around eating have been exploded."

Among the most-blamed culprits are intense food marketing toward consumers and less physical activity.

But research scientist David Allison has some other ideas. A psychologist who directs the Nutrition Obesity Research Center at the University of Alabama-Birmingham, Allison points to other contributors, such as too little sleep and advanced maternal age, which some research has shown can increase the chances of overweight kids.

Allison's new research, online in Frontiers in Genetics, finds that people with higher body mass index tend to partner with those of similar BMI and may predispose their offspring to obesity. Using Danish height and weight data collected for hundreds of thousands of children at age 13, researchers were able to find 37,792 spousal pairs who married between 1945 and 2010. They then calculated couples' BMIs. The study he co-wrote confirms that those with higher BMIs tended to pair up and suggests the implications for heavier offspring.

"It starts concentrating the genes for BMI within families," he says.

He and others also are looking at cognitive demand. Early findings suggest we may be draining our brains because "we have more cognitively demanding lifestyles."

Significant increases in the prevalence of obesity occurred over the past 30 years, when computers and technology use exploded, Allison says. Being constantly available to others means we are so often occupied with mentally involved tasks that we're on cognitive overload. And that, he says, may be wearing out our self-control to resist food temptations.

Food could be the fuel we need, the reward we want or maybe both, he says. But "if those mental activities lead to increased food intake, that could be a major driver of why we're taking in more food," he says.

"That's not to say any of us want to give up our computers or stop engaging in mentally demanding activities. But we may want to say, 'Are there ways to alter our lifestyle that might protect us?' "

'The buffet effect'

Another area of research focuses on food itself. Studies by Barbara Rolls, director of the Laboratory for the Study of Human Ingestive Behavior at Penn State University in University Park, Pa., have found that something as seemingly innocuous as more variety actually encourages overeating. She says pleasure from eating a food declines while eating. But if other foods at the meal have different tastes, aromas, shapes and textures, instead of stopping eating, people shift to another food that remains appealing.

"It's the buffet effect," she says. "If you go to a place with 50 different kinds of foods, you're going to eat more than if there was just a few."

She co-wrote a study in the August Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics in which researchers found that participants ate more vegetables when served three types (broccoli florets, baby carrots or snap peas) at a meal than when served the same amount of just one, even if it was a preferred vegetable. The 66 adults got pasta and cooked vegetables once a week for four weeks; amounts were carefully measured.

Among the more controversial topics to be discussed is food addiction. Some research suggests certain foods "hijack" the brain in ways that resemble addiction to drugs or alcohol.

"Nobody would say food addiction is like morphine, but it does get similar effects," Brownell says. "So the question is, 'Should some of these constituents of food be limited because they're hijacking the brain?' "

Brownell's center is at the forefront of food addiction research. One of its studies, published last year in the Archives of General Psychiatry, gained attention for finding that food cues activated the same brain areas in those who score high on food addiction measures as drugs or alcohol do in those addicted to them. Lead author Ashley Gearhardt, a psychologist, will present research on food addiction in children this weekend.

She also has compiled data on the foods people report stimulate the most addictive response. Generally, she says, they are higher in sugar, fat and salt.

"Ice cream, chocolate and pizza were our three big culprits," says Gearhardt, who this fall moves to the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor as an assistant professor.

"In recent years, science has begun to provide support for food's addictive properties, and food addiction has gained attention as a contributor to obesity," says Rebecca Puhl of the Yale center. "But there has been no research examining how the public perceives food addiction, and whether it is believed to be a legitimate addiction or disease," an area of her latest work.

Still, many are successful at losing weight and keeping it off. Rena Wing, a professor of psychiatry and human behavior at Brown University in Providence, says psychologists have had an influence on the field of obesity.

She has been studying people who have been successful at maintaining long-term weight loss in a national study tracking more than 10,000 people who have lost at least 30 pounds and kept it off at least a year.

Stigma doesn't help

"We have a lot of measures of their behavior," she says, even MRIs showing how people respond to pictures of food. "The pattern of brain responses in successful weight losers suggests they are restraining their responses to the food cues. They exhibit a lot of cognitive control when looking at the pictures — more than normal-weight or overweight people."

But for those who struggle with the pounds, there is continued stigma, says Puhl, director of Research and Weight Stigma Initiatives at the Rudd Center. She says the public may think "maybe a little bit of stigma is not such a bad thing — that maybe it will motivate people to lose weight and provide an incentive for weight loss."

But she says the opposite is true. "When people are stigmatized because of their weight, they are more likely to engage in unhealthy behaviors, like binge eating and unhealthy weight-control practices. They actually increase their food consumption and have lower motivation for physical activity," she says. "They are at increased risk for numerous psychological consequences that includes depression, anxiety, poor body image, low self-esteem and, unfortunately, suicide."

Weight stigma surfaced just last week over Australian Olympic swimmer Leisel Jones when a newspaper in her home country published photos suggesting she had put on weight and polled readers online about whether she was fit enough to swim. Readers were outraged, and the poll was removed within hours.

"We live in a culture that has placed a premium value on thinness," Puhl says.

Rozin's work as a cultural psychologist focuses on how culture frames eating behavior. For a paper comparing French and American eating cultures, published last year in the journal Frontiers in Psychology, he found that Americans emphasize quantity over quality, have a higher preference for variety and prefer convenience in food. He says the French enjoy food more than Americans do — yet are thinner.

"They eat more fat than we do. They don't snack. They have a very strong food culture — which we don't have — as to what a proper meal is. The meal is a real occasion to sit down and relax and spend time together — and not eat too much." 

 

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/story/2012-08-02/apa-food-obesity-psychology/56660516/1?utm_source=SNEB+Members+2012&utm_campaign=93cd0fdba6-Weekly_Policy_Update07_30_12&utm_medium=email

Thursday
Aug162012

Food fight in Congress focuses on fresh vs. frozen produce in schools

Are canned pears the nutritional equivalent of a juicy fruit off the tree? House Republicans seem to think so. And their proposal to tinker with a program that serves fresh fruit and vegetables to children in select schools has touched off the ultimate food fight.

As Congress debates whether to renew farm legislation, the Senate is pressing to keep the program limited to fresh produce. The House, however, has proposed making room for frozen, canned and dried produce — agitating program supporters and pitting factions of the food industry against one another in a bout of frenetic lobbying.

Shift work may strain the heart, but study finds no additional risk of mortality.

Since its creation a decade ago, the tiny program has been distributing free fresh fruit and vegetables as snacks to elementary schools that have a high percentage of low-income children, a group that typically has less exposure to fresh produce and does not consume anywhere near the amount recommended by national dietary guidelines.

The effort raised consumption in participating schools by a quarter-cup per day, or 15 percent, according to an analysis released by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which oversees the program. The increase did not contribute to weight gain, suggesting that the fruit and vegetables replaced other foods, the study said.

In 2008, Congress set aside $1.2 billion to cover the program through 2017. Last year, USDA spent $150 million to cover snacks for up to 3 million kids.

Advocates of the House legislation say schools should have access to produce in all forms. The frozen, canned and dried varieties are often more affordable than fresh produce, they argue, and their inclusion would enable schools to provide a wider range of options year-round.

“If the goal is to expand and improve upon childhood nutrition, it doesn’t make sense to limit the kinds of fruits and vegetables that schools serve,” said Corey Henry, a spokesman for the American Frozen Food Institute, who argues that processed produce can be just as nutritious as fresh. “Let the schools decide.”

Coalitions representing firms that make processed, canned and frozen food said in a recent letter to the House Agriculture Committee that expanding the program “will teach kids how to get the most nutrition bang for their buck.” School nutrition associations in three states — California, New York and Texas — have signed on.

But while the California School Nutrition Association wants the program expanded, the California Department of Education does not. The department said kids have plenty of exposure to frozen, canned and dried produce in federally subsidized school meals. United Fresh Produce Association, a trade group that primarily represents fresh-produce firms, has made the same argument.

“We would prefer that the word ‘fresh’ remain the priority,” said Sandip Kaur, acting director of the nutrition services division at the Education Department. “It’s the ‘fresh’ that makes this program unique.”

Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), the program’s lead sponsor, and others who want the program to remain intact say they have nothing against frozen, canned or dried produce. But opening up the program threatens to undermine its integrity, they said.

“We may see the floodgates open for perhaps less nutritious foods,” said Matthew Marsom, a vice president at the Public Health Institute, a nonprofit group dedicated to improving public health. “There’s nothing [in the House bill] that would stop fruit cups with syrup or frozen Tater Tots with sodium. You just don’t get those problems with fresh.”

In fact, when the program was introduced in select states, it allowed for a limited amount of dried fruit. But then the schools started offering trail mix, said a Harkin aide who helped craft the program. So dried fruit got the boot in 2008.

Since then, those who back the current program say, the dried fruit supporters have been furious about getting shut out while the canned and frozen food supporters are furiously knocking to get in.

“I’m regularly lobbied to add nuts to the program, to add dried fruits to the program, to add canned and frozen fruits and vegetables to the program,” Harkin said at a food industry gathering last year. “I once had someone suggest that Congress add beef jerky to the program.”

Harkin said the case for expanding the program is not compelling.

“Even the schools that support changing the program to serve dried fruit or frozen vegetables are not dropping out,” he said in a statement this month. “So there is no reason to risk undermining an effective program when no one can reasonably point to a problem with the way it is working right now.” 

 http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/food-fight-in-congress-focuses-on-fresh-vs-frozen-produce-in-schools/2012/08/06/9590933c-dd80-11e1-af1d-753c613ff6d8_story.html?utm_source=SNEB+Members+2012&utm_campaign=93cd0fdba6-Weekly_Policy_Update07_30_12&utm_medium=email

Wednesday
Aug152012

International students visit MSU for food security program

Master’s degree and doctorate students from Asia and Africa will travel to MSU and other universities in the U.S. to learn methods for enhancing food security in their home country as part of the Borlaug Higher Education Agricultural Research and Development, or BHEARD, program.

The United States Department of Agriculture defines food security as “access by all people at all times to enough food for an active, healthy life.”

Eric Crawford, MSU professor in the Department of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics and BHEARD project director, said food security implies that individuals have a sufficient supply of food as well as access to those supplies.

“Even if enough food exists at the regional, national or global level, various physical, economic or policy constraints may affect food distribution so that food needs are not met at the household, or intrahousehold, level,” Crawford said in an email.

Crawford said in general, upgrading food security means improving access to, availability and utilization of food.

According to a press release in the MSU News, the project is funded by a $7.3 million grant from the U.S. Agency for International Development’s Bureau for Food Security.

Crawford said he estimates the grant will be able to provide for about 30 to 35 master’s degrees and 10 to 12 doctorate students.

“The ultimate goal of the BHEARD program is to strengthen the capacity of agricultural research organizations in Asia and Africa,” Crawford said. “(Master’s degree and doctorate) training will strengthen the capacity of the individuals involved, but it is also important that their skills match the needs of their home countries and organizations and that their skills are applied in ways that contribute to people’s incomes and food security.”

The people chosen to do the research are not picked based on gender because in the U.S., women in the areas of technology and science are underrepresented, Crawford said.

“This means we are not taking full advantage of the skills and potential contributions of women in these fields,” Crawford said. “The same situation prevails in many countries in Africa and Asia, yet it is important that those countries make full use of their human resources.”

Via:  State News

Monday
Aug132012

Study Shows Child Obesity Can Be Fought Successfully With School Snack Laws

A recent study shows childhood obesity can successfully be curbed with laws that limit the sale of junk food and sweet drinks.

According to the Associated Press, a study released Monday in the journal Pediatrics found that children actually gained less weight from fifth through eighth grades while living in states with stringent, consistent laws, as opposed to no laws, governing the snacks available to children in schools.

The study looked at date of 6,300 students across 40 states, and showed that children who were overweight in the fifth grade were far more likely to reach a healthier weight by the eighth grade in states with the strongest snack laws.

The lead author of the report, Daniel Taber from the University of Illinois at Chicago, says the results show that “for these laws to be effective, they need to be consistently strong in all grades.”

About one in three children (ages 2-19) in the United States are already overweight or obese, according to the Alliance for a Healthier Generation.

Via:  CBS Local - DC

Page 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... 207 Next 5 Entries »