Are food bloggers unhealthy? I would say no, but the NYT Wednesday Food Section recently had an article on food bloggers and how their love of food and fat connotes an unhealthy life. The article's specific example is Jason Perlow, founder of eGullet, who is making life changes after an emergency hospital visit this fall. He received a diagnosis of diabetes and a prognosis of less than 5 years to live. He weighed over 400 lbs at the time.
I get where the Fat Pack coming from, but my experience is quite the opposite. Most of the food blogs I read seem to be about healthy food and healthy eating habits. I tried to find some "outrage" over this article in the blogosphere, but there was very little. Chowhound had a lively discussion, but that was all I could find. Is it a non-issue, or perhaps there's a great divide between "fat foodies" and healthy ones?
The family angle, plus my interest in local and organic food, probably tip my Internet reading to the healthy side. Even if you don't think of your own health, you want your kids to have healthy foods. The real struggle for most families is the lure of fast food and convenience foods. They might seem healthy from the packaging or the name, but many convenience foods are really over-processed and packed with hidden sugar, fat, and salt. Family dinner puts most of our meals at home, and mostly home-cooked, rather than at the high-end restaurants that many so-called foodies frequent. Still, we don't eschew any food in our family. We use plenty of butter and have bread and pasta regularly, foods that many consider "unhealthy." These are coupled with lots of fresh fruit and vegetables, and a moderate amount of meat, chicken, and fish. The books Real Food by Nina Planck and In Defense of Food by Michael Pollan get at the core message, I think. Healthy eating means real food, not industrial food, in moderation and as part of a family meal or communal table. More reasons for family dinner!
The Fat Pack Wonders if the Party's Over 3.19.08, NYT
Chowhound's discussion, including some very relevant comments about diabetes and moderation.
Showing posts with label diabetes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label diabetes. Show all posts
Monday, March 31, 2008
Friday, February 8, 2008
Diabetes: Curing the Sweet Blood
The dinner table is always a good place to start lifelong habits of good food and nutrition. Occasionally in this blog, I will focus on a specific health problem that is associated with eating right and nutrition. Today, I'll highlight diabetes.
Heart disease is not the only complication to diabetes and other complications may be more lethal. Still controlling blood sugar (by making dietary or exercise changes or by taking prescription drugs) has been the primary method of diabetes treatment for the past 10 years. A close read of the ACCORD study, and the reasons for stopping it, do not dispute that traditional control of blood sugar is still advised, as many in the Diabetes advocacy circles have pointed out. Many blame the media for sensationalizing and misrepresenting the results. The Times actually published a modified response today. To me, moderation may be what's signaled here, rather than pushing for lower and lower blood sugar levels with more and more drugs.**
I am particularly invested and interested in diabetes because I had gestational diabetes in my three pregnancies and am at risk of developing diabetes later in life. Also my stepfather has diabetes, and has just recently taken to testing his blood regularly. Normally, you test your blood several times a day. (You pinprick your finger and analyze a tiny drop of blood on a little machine that reads the sugar level.) It's not bad, but it's not fun either. In addition you track what you eat during the day, when you exercise, and when you take medication.
The blood sugar level tells you what you are doing "right," and it can be maddening to figure out and adjust your life to get the right levels. I found that eating whole wheat toast with jam was fine, but having just a little pasta or any fruit juice were both absolute "no-nos." Also, going from my first pregnancy in 1995 to my last in 2005, the standards for "low blood sugar" became draconian. I easily controlled my blood level with diet and exercise in my first pregnancy. By the time my third came around, not only did my body produce higher levels of sugar naturally, but the medical standards for "low" had changed. Now fasting levels were supposed to be at or below 70mg/dL whereas before it was under 100. Two hours after eating, I was supposed to be in the 110mg/dL range, and it was tough. No wonder I didn't gain any weight in my pregnancies! With my third child, I had to take medication as well as follow a strict diet to be in compliance.
This is an important topic for family dinner since diabetes affects so many Americans and because prevention is the best remedy for the disease. Well-balanced meals, including careful consumption of sweets as well as plain old carbohydrates, and regular exercise are the soundest ways to prevent diabetes for you and your family. More tips are below.
Wed MD: Healthy Diet Basics
American Diabetes Association: Diet and Exercise Tips to Prevent Diabetes
Harvard School of Public Health: Simple Steps to Preventing Diabetes
** If you have diabetes, obviously check with your medical provider and do not make changes in your treatment without medical advice.**
An estimated 21 million Americans have diabetes and 284,000 die from it each year. Sixty-five percent of the deaths are related to cardiovascular causes. Type 2 diabetes increases the risk for heart disease 2 to 4 times. NHLBI, ACCORD Study Press Release, 2.6.08Diabetes is a serious chronic disease caused by an imbalance in the body's ability to produce insulin and regulate blood sugar. One of the major symptoms is high blood sugar, which prompts some to call the disease "sweet blood." It has often been thought that the lower the blood sugar, the better. It was a shock, then, that the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute abruptly ended a massive clinical trial (ACCORD), as covered in the New York Times yesterday. The startling report was that intensive blood sugar control was not effective in reducing the risk of cardiac events. The intensive regimen used in the trial was actually associated with increased risk of heart attack and stroke compared to more traditional control of blood sugar. The study centered on Type 2 Diabetes, which is sometimes called adult-onset diabetes, and is the disease type that is more associated with obesity.
Heart disease is not the only complication to diabetes and other complications may be more lethal. Still controlling blood sugar (by making dietary or exercise changes or by taking prescription drugs) has been the primary method of diabetes treatment for the past 10 years. A close read of the ACCORD study, and the reasons for stopping it, do not dispute that traditional control of blood sugar is still advised, as many in the Diabetes advocacy circles have pointed out. Many blame the media for sensationalizing and misrepresenting the results. The Times actually published a modified response today. To me, moderation may be what's signaled here, rather than pushing for lower and lower blood sugar levels with more and more drugs.**
I am particularly invested and interested in diabetes because I had gestational diabetes in my three pregnancies and am at risk of developing diabetes later in life. Also my stepfather has diabetes, and has just recently taken to testing his blood regularly. Normally, you test your blood several times a day. (You pinprick your finger and analyze a tiny drop of blood on a little machine that reads the sugar level.) It's not bad, but it's not fun either. In addition you track what you eat during the day, when you exercise, and when you take medication.
The blood sugar level tells you what you are doing "right," and it can be maddening to figure out and adjust your life to get the right levels. I found that eating whole wheat toast with jam was fine, but having just a little pasta or any fruit juice were both absolute "no-nos." Also, going from my first pregnancy in 1995 to my last in 2005, the standards for "low blood sugar" became draconian. I easily controlled my blood level with diet and exercise in my first pregnancy. By the time my third came around, not only did my body produce higher levels of sugar naturally, but the medical standards for "low" had changed. Now fasting levels were supposed to be at or below 70mg/dL whereas before it was under 100. Two hours after eating, I was supposed to be in the 110mg/dL range, and it was tough. No wonder I didn't gain any weight in my pregnancies! With my third child, I had to take medication as well as follow a strict diet to be in compliance.
This is an important topic for family dinner since diabetes affects so many Americans and because prevention is the best remedy for the disease. Well-balanced meals, including careful consumption of sweets as well as plain old carbohydrates, and regular exercise are the soundest ways to prevent diabetes for you and your family. More tips are below.
Wed MD: Healthy Diet Basics
American Diabetes Association: Diet and Exercise Tips to Prevent Diabetes
Harvard School of Public Health: Simple Steps to Preventing Diabetes
** If you have diabetes, obviously check with your medical provider and do not make changes in your treatment without medical advice.**
Labels:
blood sugar,
diabetes,
diet,
pregnancy
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)