Week 4: Dr. Oz Diet Secret

Or at least that is my paraphrase of a Woman's World headline at the supermarket checkout. We expect miracles, and if it is in a pill ... so much the better. We know these headlines are false, but hope springs eternal in the human breast. By hope, I of course mean self-deception.

Or maybe the headline is "Cancer Cured by Asparagus." The person sharing this on Facebook will include a statement like,"Isn't God great?" Well, God is great, and asparagus is a great food that is an important part of my household's dietary choices as spring approaches and the price drops. But do we really expect a life long pattern of bad choices will be cured by gingko biloba and asparagus for dinner?

Based on the posts I read on forums or Facebook I can only conclude we do.

Or at least this is the lie we tell ourselves.

The truth is that we need to change what we eat, how much we eat, and where we eat it. We need to change our whole perception about food. We need to change where we spend our time, what we do with our time, and what we do with our bodies. We need to change our whole perception about our bodies and what to do with them. I can just see you cringing as you read this. How do I know this? I am cringing too.

The last thing I want to do is discourage you, or myself. But this is hard. 

We could blame our upbringing. "I can't help it, my mommy made me deep-fried banana peanut butter sandwiches." We can blame society. "Babylon the Great controls our food supply." We can blame advertising. "They're magically delicious." We can blame our metabolism. "I am hungry all the time." Or we can blame the person really responsible. Look in a mirror. I am not saying that all these excuses are not valid. They are. But ultimately who controls what you eat, what you watch, and what you do? You do. 

The last thing I want to do is discourage you, or myself. But this is hard.

But as The Sphinx said in Mystery Men, "If you doubt your power, you give power to your doubt."

Why am I giving you a pep talk in the blog post that is designed to discuss your blood lipid profile? The reason is simple. Your doctor might be suggesting you take a statin drug if your lipid profile is not quite right. Why do they do this? A lot of it is the modern philosophy of medicine--take a pill. But far more important is the attitude of the patient. The patient wants what the patient wants, and this is not to change their life. They want a Twinkie while watching football drinking beer with their statin. The doctor knows this. So out comes the prescription pad. You can't really blame him.

It is not in dispute that the most effective way to improve your blood profile is to lose weight. It actually does not matter how. But even more important is what you eat, although the dietary advice is not consistent. My suggestion over the next year is that you try various ideas out on yourself and see what works. Small incremental changes are best. 

Remember that all drugs have side effects, yes even vitamins. Statins have side effects too. For most people who refuse to heed the Santana song and "change your evil ways, baby," taking a statin may be for the best. Are you that person? I hope you are not. (Note that those with a history of heart disease might need a statin even if they change their evil ways.)

Note that I am not a doctor, nor do I play one on television or on the Internet. I am not giving medical advice. Obviously any change in medication must be done in consultation with your doctor. I sure consulted mine. He was quite helpful in gradually reducing my blood pressure medication as I lost weight. The side effects from my medicine, as I got healthier, actually went up and I needed to decrease my dosage to prevent fainting from low blood pressure. 

At my last appointment my doctor said that he had a different mix of patients as they were more willing to change. This is because we live in a mountain community where hipsters greatly outnumber rednecks. Hopefully I can eat properly and still not become a hipster!

My doctor also mentioned that there was a reason for someone to have high cholesterol. The body is producing it in order to fight inflammation. In my words, it is a sign of an underlying problem. There is nothing wrong with treating a symptom, but it is better if at the same time one treats the cause of the inflammation--what you eat, how much you eat, and your activity level. So if you and your doctor decide that statins are best, be sure to change your evil ways as well, but gradually over time.

I am not going to comment on your exact numbers. First I do not feel competent to do so. Secondly, get a print out of your lab results and that print-out will tell you the parameters for the various lipid types. The only one that may not be well understood is triglycerides. A much lower number may be optimal. This will be the subject of a future week. Note also that there is a difference between average and normal. This may skew the recommended numbers away from optimal.

The homework for this week is this presentation by Dr. Barron at UCSF obesity center.

Note that I think that LDL and HDL are good markers for lipid health, AboB and LDL particle number may be even better.

Week 4 Action Plan: This week continue writing down everything you eat. You have to know where you are to devise a plan to get where you want to be. Reduce/eliminate diet sodas and all caloric drinks of any kind. You want to change your taste buds as rapidly as possible.

If you have not done so, go ahead and make an appointment and get your blood lipid work done.

Corporate Profits

In his blog, Mish Shedlock quotes from the Wall Street Journal. If you want to read the whole article you can subscribe or google the title, click on the link, and read it for free. This works for all wsj articles. 

Quarterly profits and revenue at big American companies are poised to decline for the first time since the recession, as some industrial firms warn of a pullback in spending.

From railroads to manufacturers to energy producers, businesses say they are facing a protracted slowdown in production, sales and employment that will spill into next year. Some of them say they are already experiencing a downturn. 

“The industrial environment’s in a recession. I don’t care what anybody says,” Daniel Florness, chief financial officer of Fastenal Co. , told investors and analysts earlier this month. A third of the top 100 customers for Fastenal’s nuts, bolts and other factory and construction supplies have cut their spending by more than 10% and nearly a fifth by more than 25%, Mr. Florness said.

Caterpillar Inc. last week reduced its profit forecast, citing weak demand for its heavy equipment, and 3M Co. , whose products range from kitchen sponges to adhesives used in automobiles, said it would lay off 1,500 employees, or 1.7% of its total, as sales growth sagged for a wide range of wares.

The weakness is overshadowing pockets of growth in sectors such as aerospace and technology.

Profit and revenue are falling in tandem for the first time in six years, with a third of S&P 500 companies reporting so far. Analysts expect the index’s companies to book a 2.8% decline in per-share earnings from last year’s third quarter, according to Thomson Reuters.

Sales are on pace to fall 4%—the third straight quarterly decline. The last time sales and profits fell in the same quarter was in the third period of 2009.

Wal-Mart recently warned its sales this year are likely to be flat, down from projection of as much as 2% growth, and cut its earnings forecast for next year as it raises wages. The retailer blamed the strong dollar for the weakening sales growth.

And truckload carriers have warned that they aren’t witnessing the usual uptick in retailer demand as the holiday season approaches, thanks to stubbornly high inventories, said Alex Vecchio, a transportation analyst at Morgan Stanley. “Transportation companies are typically a leading indicator, and our data is not good,”Mr. Vecchio said.

I read Mish regularly and find his views interesting, and he thinks corporate profits are headed down. I think so too, but that is not the focus of this post. Nor is the focus illegal misstating or manipulation of income. Instead I want to focus on legal manipulation of income. Since corporate officers salaries are usually based on making a set profit number, there is high incentive to use both legal and illegal techniques to increase profits. My view is that the last crisis was exaggerated in depth by these practices. 

One way this is done is to borrow money to buy back shares in the company. Since interest rates are low right now this results in a increase in profits. The total profits might remain the same, but those same profits are spread over fewer shares. For example a hypothetical corporation might have a profit of 100 with ten shareholders. Each shareholder gets 10. The corporation borrows enough money to buy one share. Maybe the new profit is 97 after interest, but this profit will now be spread over 9 shares so instead of a 10 profit for the each share, it will 97/9 or a profit of 10.78. A company that does this consistently is one you want in your portfolio. This is an increase of almost 8%. The corporation's health is less, but the share price would go up. A corporation can either go the traditional route and actually increase profits, or load up the corporation with debt, buy back shares and in some cases get a nice salary bump for its officers.  Do you care to guess what many corporations are doing? Have you ever wondered why all the Radio Shacks are closing? While there are other factors involved as well, Radio Shack has been a "poster boy" for this risky practice. 

Can you trust corporate profit numbers? Mostly you can, but you need to understand that there are ways, legal and illegal, to manipulate profit. 

Do You Trust the Numbers?

According to the unemployment numbers, corporate profits, and the low inflation rate things are going well. But do you believe the numbers? Charles Hugh Smith had this comment on his blog last week: 

Sorry, Corporate Media: the unemployment rate and the official rate of inflation are not real. They are illusions rigged to lull the masses and enrapture the simulacrum experts living high on the hog in academia, NGOs (non-governmental organizations) and think-tanks. 

I tend to doubt conspiracy theories, but if the "powers that be" control the numbers, and the decisions about how to calculate these numbers that are made favor the "powers that be," it is not unreasonable to point this out. One of my most popular posts was several years ago where I point out that markets are manipulated. This post regularly hits my weekly list of most viewed posts, even years later.

How are these numbers manipulated?  

Inflation numbers for a particular product are regularly adjusted if there is an "improvement" in the product. This actually makes sense if the numbers are adjusted properly. Are they? I doubt it. I have been a lifelong Apple computer user, since the early 80's. But lately each update and improvement reduces my user experience. I postpone all updates as long as I can. Each time Apple has a hardware update and the specs improve, as far as the government is concerned, if the price stays the same, an improvement in the specs is a price reduction. There has been little improvement in what I use a computer for in years. Yet they supposedly cost less now than a few years ago. I am just not seeing it. I have an old computer I use for accounting because the new versions of the software I use are useless for my purposes. This is probably the last year I can do this. This will be a huge cost for me in time at the very least. (Gaming is obviously a big exception to this. The best improvements have been huge.)

Am I alone in noticing a rather dramatic reduction in quality in small appliances for the last decade? This is not necessarily bad as there has also been a dramatic reduction in price. Does the reduction in price match the reduction in quality? I have not found it so. But all the reduction in price is factored into the inflation rate. There is an old Russian saying, "I am not so rich that I can buy cheap." 

So both supposed technological improvements and a dramatic reduction in quality has artificially reduced the inflation rates.  I doubt the supposed inflation rate of 5 to 7 percent that many claim. This seems wrong, I would even say stupidly wrong. But it seems clear to me that the rate of inflation is higher than what the government claims. 

The next time I will talk about corporate profits. 

Until then ask yourself a question. Can you trust the government numbers? 

Week 3: Fat People Drink Diet Drinks

Think about the title to this week's health post. While I hope you will read and benefit from this post, if you meditate on the title you already have all the information you need on this topic. 

First let's talk about non-diet drinks. In a study of the obvious the following conclusion was drawn:

Researchers from the University of Virginia in Charlottesville surveyed the parents of 9,600 children born in 2001 from across the nation, asking questions about their TV-watching habits, socioeconomic level, and children’s consumption of sugary drinks. The completed study, published in this month’s issue of the journal Pediatrics, reported that five-year-old children who drank beverages sweetened by sugar every day were 43 percent more likely to be obese than those who drank the beverages less frequently or not at all. 

If you have young children what are they drinking? The answer for my household is mixed. My daughter has never drunk a soda. She does however use sweetened tea on occasion. She takes the sweet tea we buy and cuts it by 50% with water. So progress is being made. She is also gradually reducing the sugar she puts into tea. I am trying to lead by example by not drinking such items myself.

Note that an exercise in the obvious is beneficial. We often miss the obvious, at least I do. Most of what I will discuss over the next year is obvious, yet we as a nation do not do it! 

Why do sugary drinks have this effect? The reason may be that we do not fully register the calories when we drink something sweet. 

“Sugar provides empty calories, and sugary drinks are unnecessary calories which often do not register and help—children or adults—feel full,” Young tells TakePart. “We also usually eat something along with the drink, so it is getting a double dose of calories. This is a huge concern as they are forming habits, and drinking sugary drinks is a bad habit.” 

In addition the body has to process a sudden increase in sugar and a lot of insulin is produced. This will produce hunger later as blood sugar drops. Sorry, but fruit juices are not much better. 

Diet drinks have no calories so they must be all right, right? But remember my title. We all know it is true by observation, but it is also been studied. Here are the results of one study: 

Results. Overall, 11% of healthy-weight, 19% of overweight, and 22% of obese adults drink diet beverages. Total caloric intake was higher among adults consuming sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) compared with diet beverages (2351 kcal/day vs 2203 kcal/day; P = .005). However, the difference was only significant for healthy-weight adults (2302 kcal/day vs 2095 kcal/day; P < .001). Among overweight and obese adults, calories from solid-food consumption were higher among adults consuming diet beverages compared with SSBs (overweight: 1965 kcal/day vs 1874 kcal/day; P = .03; obese: 2058 kcal/day vs 1897 kcal/day; P < .001). The net increase in daily solid-food consumption associated with diet-beverage consumption was 88 kilocalories for overweight and 194 kilocalories for obese adults.

I am not a fan of such studies since the groups being compared are so very different. It may actually be that these people would be even heavier if they did not drink diet drinks. Maybe. But psychologically it may lead to eating more, with the internal self talk of "I had a diet drink so I can eat that dessert." 

The Arteriosclerosis Risk in Communities Study showed that diet soda drinkers were 34% more likely to have Metabolic syndrome.

Metabolic syndrome is a disorder of energy utilization and storage, diagnosed by a co-occurrence of 3 out of five of the following medical conditions: abdominal (central) obesity, elevated blood pressure, elevated fasting plasma glucose, high serum triglycerides, and low high-density cholesterol (HDL) levels. Metabolic syndrome increases the risk of developingcardiovascular disease, particularly heart failure, and diabetes.[1] Some studies have shown the prevalence in the USA to be an estimated 34% of the adult population,[2] and the prevalence increases with age.   

At the start of my journey toward better health I had all five of these. Now I have two, maybe three depending on what the cutoff for high blood pressure currently is. I will be talking about metabolic syndrome later. But note that the study did not really prove that diet drinks caused metabolic syndrome. It may be that those with this problem tend to use diet drinks, not the other way around. 

So should you be using diet drinks? While it may be coincidental, I can only point out that personally limiting diet drinks was to some degree associated with my weight loss. 20 years ago I used 8 8oz servings of diet drinks a day. Now I drink about 1 16oz serving a month. My goal is zero. 

I have noticed that my taste buds have changed with the elimination of diet drinks. I was crunching on a Brussels sprout and noticed how sweet it was. I was shocked. While you may never move Brussels sprouts to the top of your personal vegetable hit parade, without the overload of sweetness your perception of food will change. This is why I am suggesting limiting diet drinks so early in the one year journey we are on. The sooner you change your tastes the better. 

I have always had a nagging feeling about diet drinks, and asked myself, "What does the body do when it thinks you are drinking a large number of calories due to the sweetness in the diet drink?" If it produces insulin in response, then you will be hungry. Research tells us that I was not alone in wondering this. It is known that if you drink diet soda with a meal the artificial sweetener will cause more insulin to be produced. But it was not significant in one study. However, GLP-1 was increased.  Although as is normal for the health field, another study disagrees. 

Click here for a popular level discussion of these issues. This article is the first of your homework for this week. 

The second part of your homework this week is Dr. Hyman's presentation on diet drinks. I will be discussing all the diet gurus like Dr. Hyman later. I did find this presentation convincing and watching it led to my decision to reduce diet drinks. 

But you can't beat something with nothing so I suggest you try other drinks instead. The biggest problem for me is traveling. You may have heard of my first choice--dihydrogen monoxide. Another choice is a carbonated bottled water like Perrier. If you plan ahead, you can buy a 26 oz flavored Perrier for $1.50 at Walmart. 

You might try a soda stream machine. It makes carbonated water cheaper, but to my tastes not quite as good as the purchased product. Note that the link to SodaStream contains samples that I do not recommend. 

What I did at first was drink more coffee. I am backing off this and am trying to limit myself to two cups a day. I try to drink a minimum of four cups of green or black tea a day. There is good evidence that green tea is very good for you. This link is your final homework assignment for this week. 

No, do not take the green tea concentrate pill. The modern desire to think that we just need a pill to solve everything is one reason we are in the health crisis we are in. I will be talking about the pill mania for the next two weeks.  

Action Plan for Week Three: Dramatically reduce all sweet drinks, real or artificial. Replace them with dihydrogen monoxide and green tea. 

Remember the wisdom of Socrates, "The unexamined drink is not worth drinking."

I Got A Gal in Kalamazoo

Be sure to watch the Nicolas Brosthers dance at the end.