Video feature: How to avoid holiday weight gain

It’s that time of year full of merriment, parties, and lots of special food treats.  It’s also the time of year that the majority of Americans gain weight. And some studies have shown the holiday weight gain actually accumulates year after year.

Sure, there are all sorts of theories about how to avoid those few extra pounds over the holidays. But which strategies actually work?

Brian Wansink – a Cornell professor and director of the Cornell Food and Brand Lab – has conducted dozens of studies on environmental cues and diet. He explained there are three main pitfalls to avoid at holiday meals:

  •  First, studies have shown that those who cook food eat more of it because preparing the food makes them feel as if they deserve it. Take home message:  If you’re hosting a holiday gathering, serve yourself a normal portion and then move on to socializing with your guests.
  • Research from Wansink’s lab has also shown that 9 percent of all calories consumed on Thanksgiving are eaten before the big meal. You can make a major dent in your holiday calorie consumption just by avoiding high-calorie appetizers.  If you must munch, stick with plain vegetables.
  • Wansink’s lab has also documented the “happy host” syndrome – essentially when people take more food as a compliment to the host. Research has found that the host won’t actually remember who much food you took in your first plate, only how many times you went back for more. So start with a tiny portion and then go back for a tiny bit more to send the message you’re a fan of the meal.

You can see Wansink discussing his holiday-eating tips in the following video.

Here’s wishing you a happy, healthy holiday!
Note: EBL will be taking a break for the holiday season, but will return with new evidence-based info in the New Year.

A rise in food allergies: Fact or fiction?

I recently attended a children’s holiday party that ended with a group of parents discussing the treats they brought to share. One parent lamented that she could not bring her family’s favorite cookies (which contain peanut butter) for fear a child at the party was allergic to peanuts. The discussion eventually arrived at the question, are more children really suffering from allergies to food items like peanuts, dairy products and wheat?

Everyone at the party had an opinion, but no one quite knew the answer for sure.  Of course, I hurried home to do some research.

I wasn’t able to find a clear conclusion because the evidence on food allergies is limited. Two separate, large systematic reviews published in The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and the Journal of the American Medical Association found inconclusive evidence about the prevalence of food allergies, mainly because there is not uniform criteria available for diagnosing and tracking food allergies.

The review in The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology included 36 studies and a total of more than 250,000 children and adults. Only 6 studies included food challenge tests – the gold standard for allergy testing that involves serving a patient a suspected allergen unknowingly.  More importantly, the analysis found very little uniformity in study methods, making difficult to compile data.

The review in the Journal of the American Medical Association came to the same conclusion – without a uniform method for studying food allergies, it’s difficult to draw conclusions about what’s going on. This review concluded that food allergy affects more than 1 percent of the population but less than 10 percent and found it unclear if the prevalence of food allergies is increasing. The analysis also found that a common diagnostic process for food allergies called the elimination diet – where patients eliminate suspected allergens from their meals – have rarely been studied.

So, the jury is still out. But the good news is that the federal government has recognized the critical need for more research in this area and provided a steady stream of funding to the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease to address these questions. Their first step was to commission a review of the scientific and clinical literature that would eventually lead to the development of guidelines for diagnosing and managing food allergies.  (You can read it here.)

In the meantime, my son’s school will remain peanut-free. And I agree, it’s probably better that way.  If there are students who is seriously allergic to peanuts, it’s important to keep them safe. We’ll just have to make our own peanut butter cookies to enjoy at home.

More evidence supporting the systematic review

Frequent EBL readers are well aware of the importance we put on systematic reviews, studies that synthesize many articles on a given topic and draw a conclusion about what the body of evidence shows.

So we were excited this week to stumble across a paper funded by the Milbank Memorial Fund and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control extolling the virtues of the systematic review for improving health across populations – especially for our policymakers.

The paper includes case studies on a wide range of topics — underage drinking, tobacco use and traffic safety interventions, to name a few.

And it draws the following conclusions about systematic reviews, in general:

  • Policymakers should feel confident about the findings of systematic reviews because, by definition, they help reduce the bias often present in single studies.
  • Systematic reviews help policymakers work efficiently and reduce the influence of outside interests.
  • Researchers in all fields must make strategic efforts to publicize and implement review findings. (Here at EBL, we’re doing our best in this area!)
  • Enhancing the “literacy” of decision makers and the public about the strengths and weaknesses of different types of evidence can help improve population health policy.

So there you have it: More evidence in support of the systematic review.  The next time you’re thinking about making a health decision, considering checking the body of evidence. Just Google “systematic review” along with the topic you’re interested in and see what you can find.

Can you boost your IQ? The evidence says yes

It’s an age-old question studied by researchers for more than a century:  Is there anyone to make your-self smarter?

In the early days of this inquiry, researchers were certain the answer was no.  But studies over the past two decade have proven otherwise.  Yes, you can raise your intelligence quotient, or IQ.   In fact, the very question was covered in a recent Wall Street Journal article.

While I didn’t manage to track down a systematic review of the topic, I did find a body of literature pointing to methods for improving your IQ.  One study that followed 250 adults over the course of six years found that people in jobs involving complex relationships, elaborate systems or difficult problems tend to perform better over time on cognitive tests.

Likewise, the work of Cornell Professor Steve Ceci has found that schooling raises IQ by several points a year, mainly because students are exposed to information and problem-solving often included in cognitive tests.

In another recent study, British students were given IQ tests and brain scans at ages 12 to 16 and again four years later. The students with significant improvements in IQ – 15 points or more – showed changes in gray matter in areas corresponding with their improvements.

Alas, the issue is complicated.  Another recent study tested adults using at Wii video game, reading and reference ability. While the participants showed improvements in what they practiced, their new-found skills didn’t transfer well to other areas, suggesting that learning for adults may be more narrow than for young adults and children.

Clearly, more research is needed. But it seems that we can say definitely that if you practice something – whether physical or mental – you will see improvements in that specific area.

Video feature: Q&A on decision-making

Most of us have seen it before.  Maybe it was a neighborhood boy riding his bike down the middle of the road, or a group of girls performing stunts on the diving board at the local pool. Whatever the circumstance, it’s fairly common knowledge that young people don’t always make the best decisions. In fact, it’s a topic we’ve written about here on EBL.  But given the stakes, it’s one worth revisiting.

Earlier this month, Cornell professor Valerie Reyna — an expert in decision-making  — was featured in a new video on the topic.  In it, Reyna explains the science behind decision-making in adolescents, as well as how the neuroscience of decision-making plays a role in other areas of our lives including health care and memory.

It’s certainly worth a watch!

Sniff, sniff: What the evidence says about colds

Have you got your first cold of the season yet?  Our family has cycled through an entire round already – each of us taking turns coping with runny noses, hacking coughs and sore throats.

While typically not a life-threatening illness, the common cold is one of the most widespread diseases in the world and a leading cause of doctor visits and absenteeism from school and work.  Beyond that, having a cold is just plain uncomfortable.  So of course, I was on the hunt a treatment that actually works.

I immediately turned to the Cochrane Collaboration, which has published dozens of reports on preventing and treating the common cold.  Here are a few that interested me most;

  • The data on heated, humidified air is completely split.  The Cochrane Collabortion review, which included six trials with a total of 387 participants,  found that in some studies inhaling steam helped symptom and in others it did not.
  • I’ve long increased my orange juice intake when I have a cold with hopes that the extra Vitamin C would help. But a systematic review found no consistent effect on the duration or severity of cold symptoms.
  • A review of seven trials found that over-the-counter nasal decongestants like Sudafed do help, but only slightly. Users reported a 6 percent improvement in symptoms after one dose, and a 4 percent improvement over several days. For me, personally, I wonder if such a small improvement is worthwhile.
  • The most promising treatment for the common cold, according to the evidence, is zinc. The systematic review of 15 randomized controlled trials found that zinc lozenges and syrup are both effective in reducing the duration and severity of the common cold in healthy people, when taken within 24 hours of onset of symptoms.

Needless to say, my medicine cabinet is now stocked with zinc lozenges so that our family is ready for any other colds that come our way this season.

The simple facts on layway – and a grateful reminder

During undoubtedly the biggest shopping week of the year, several major retailers  – including Walmart, Sears and Toys R Us – are bringing back a purchasing tool of by-gone days: layaway.

The concept is simple.  If you can’t afford a purchase, the store will set it aside for you (for a fee, or course) and allow you to make payments on it.  Once you’ve paid off the item, you’re free to take it home. The system was set up before credit cards were common-place in American homes.

But there’s a problem with layaway. Compared to credit card interest rates, layaway fees are exorbitant. Louis Hyman, an assistant professor at Cornell’s School of Industrial and Labor Relations, explains in a New York Times column:

“Imagine a mother going to Walmart on Oct. 17 and buying $100 worth of Christmas toys. She makes a down payment of $10 and pays a $5 service fee. Over the next two months she pays off the rest. In effect, she is paying $5 in interest for a $90 loan for two months: the equivalent of a credit card with a 44 percent annual percentage rate, a level most of us would consider predatory.

“In comparison, even a card with an 18 percent A.P.R. would charge only half as much interest — and she could take those presents home the same day.

“Then consider what would happen if she couldn’t finish all the payments. Walmart would give her the money back, less $10. If she borrowed that $90 and paid $15 in interest for two months, she would have the equivalent of a jaw-dropping interest rate of 131 percent.”

The bottom line is that most layway program don’t pay.  Instead, it’s better to save up for your holiday presents.

***

During this week of Thanksgiving, we’d also like to remind you that the feeling of thankfulness or gratitude is actually good for you.  Before you head out the door for those Black Friday sales, take a few minutes to remember what you’re grateful for.

I’m eating what? The evidence about nutrition labels

We’ve all had the experience, right?  You’re at the grocery store on a Saturday morning. The aisles are crowded, and you’ve stopped to read the back of package of crackers to ascertain if they are really good for you.  Only you can’t find the information you’re looking for, and you notice some strange items in the ingredient list. But you’re creating a traffic jam in the grocery aisle, so you give up and toss the box into your shopping cart.

In fact, systematic reviews do find nutrition labels do provide useful information, and those who use them consume healthier diets.

But a new report by the federal Institute of Medicine has found that nutritional labels are far too confusing for the average consumer.

After a systematic review of the literature about how consumers make food choices, the IOM concludes “it is time for a fundamental shift in strategy, a move away from systems that mostly provide nutrition information without clear guidance about its healthfulness, and toward one that encourages healthier food choices through simplicity, visual clarity, and the ability to convey meaning without written information.”

The idea is to create a point system where foods were assigned a number depending on how healthy they are. The higher the number, the healthier the food. This number would be displayed on the front of food packages, making it easier for consumers to make healthy choices. 

And possibly reducing the frequency of grocery aisle traffic jams as well.

The facts on honey

It’s sticky, it’s sweet and it tastes wonderful on a warm biscuit. Honey is a natural sweeter that’s been that provides a natural form of instant energy. And it’s been used for centuries as an antibacterial agent.

Now new evidence from the Food Safety News shows that the majority of honey available in U.S. grocery stores is missing the pollen, which would lead it to fail quality standards set by many of the world’s food safety agencies.

The pollen in honey serves several purposes. It provides some nutritional benefits, it is thought to help minimize seasonal allergies, and it helps food safety officials track where the honey is from.

The pollen is removed from honey using a technique called ultra filtering, where honey is heated, sometimes watered down and then forced at high pressure through extremely small filters to remove pollen.

There’s no way to tell whether ultra-filtered honey is coming from an unsafe source.  In the past, some imported honey was found to contain high levels of antibiotics and heavy metals.

The take-home message: Do your best to buy honey from a known local source, such as a farmer’s market or cooperative grocery store.

As a sidenote, Cornell happens to be one of the nation’s leading resources for information about honey bees. It houses the largest and most comprehensive apiculture library in the world as well as the Dyce Laboratory for Honey Bee Studies.

New data on the flu vaccine

It’s abundantly clear that winter is coming when you start seeing signs for flu vaccines clinics around town.  So far, I’ve seen them advertised at the mall, the pharmacy and our local pediatrician’s office. 

The flu vaccine is a topic we’ve written about before. But I think it’s always helpful to revisit any new information on medical decisions.

Wouldn’t you know, a new meta-analysis coming out of England reviewed the effectiveness of the flu vaccine in preventing seasonal flu infections. 

The analysis included 31 studies conducted from 1967 to 2011.  Research on both the trivalent inactivated vaccine, or TIV – the flu injection – and live attenuated influenza vaccine, or LAIV – the nasal spray flu vaccine – was included.

Pooling the results of these studies showed that the flu injection was effective at preventing seasonal flu in 59 percent of adults.

Data on the nasal spray flu vaccine was only available for children ages six months to seven years, but the studies showed that it was effective in 83 percent of the children studied.  Clearly, more research is needed in this area to determine whether the nasal spray is also more effective in adults.

The analysis underscores the current thinking on the flu vaccine: while it’s not 100 percent effective, it does help prevent the flu in the majority of people who receive it. So it’s worth lining up for one of the flu vaccine clinics in your town.

Updated info: Babies and toddlers should skip the screen

New findings about screen-time for babies and kids is something I keep a close eye on.  As parent of an infant and a three-year-old, I want to do what’s best for them. And yet there’s always the temptation to use the television – “just one show” – when I need to get something done.

So I paid careful attention last month when the American Academy of Pediatrics recommended the first two years of life remain “as screen-free as possible.”

The full report, published in the journal Pediatrics, cited studies that educational programming for children is only beneficial if the children understand the context – a milestone typically not reached until after age 2. The report found that babies and toddlers learn best through unstructured play and interactions with older children and adults.

The report also found that children under age 2 who engage in heavy media use – more than an hour or two a day – may have delays in speech and language.

What does all of this mean?

Rachel Dunifon, a Human Ecology faculty member and expert in child and family policy, says that while research supports that idea that too much media use is likely not ideal for children, parents should know that the studies showing linkages between media use and child well-being are not causal, and that the specific time limits and age cut-offs are somewhat arbitrary. 

While limiting media use is a great goal for parents, she says it is also important that parents not take these recommendations as another source of stress or guilt in their lives.

At our house, not a lot will change despite the new guidelines.  We’ll continue to let our three-year-old watch up to an hour a day of an educational program – most often while the baby is napping. My husband and I will continue to reserve our own TV-viewing until after the kids go to bed – with some special exceptions like the Superbowl and the Royal wedding. 

And yes, every once in a while, I’ll turn on Sesame Street and plunk both kids down in the living room so that I can get something done.  But we’ll try our best to make that a rare exception.

Everything you need to know about vitamin supplements

Now and again, a study is published that leads to a sea change in public opinion. If you’re a regular EBL reader, you already know how we feel about this. (While a single study provides some evidence about an issue, we should really consider all of the available evidence on a given topic before drawing any conclusions.)

Earlier this month, it wasn’t one study, but two.  Separate reports on the use of multivitamins and supplements among older women and the use of Vitamin E and selenium to prevent prostate cancer have led to a flurry of media reports about whether or not we, the general public, should take supplemental vitamins.

What does that mean for you?  We’ve done our best to dissect all of the evidence we can find.  Let’s start with the most recent studies.

First, researchers followed more than 38,000 older women for 25 years to track, among other things, their use of multivitamins and supplements. The study found that the risk of death among these women increased with long term use of multivitamins, vitamin B6, folic acid, iron, magnesium, zinc, and copper. They concluded there is “little justification for the general and widespread use of dietary supplements.”

In the second study, researchers followed more than 35,000 men over 10 years to determine whether taking vitamin E or selenium would decrease the risk of prostate cancer. In this study, the risk of cancer increased for men taking vitamin E, selenium, or both. This study also concluded there is little evidence for taking a supplement.

While these are both large, longitudinal studies, we thought it’d be prudent to check the other evidence available on supplements and talk to some Cornell nutrition professors about their interpretation of the data.

We started off at the Cochrane Collaboration, which has dozens of review on specific supplements for specific conditions. The most general report reviewed studies of supplements to prevent mortality. It reviewed 67 randomized trials with more than 200,000 participants, and found no evidence that supplements prolong life. It also concluded that Vitamin A, beta-carotene, and vitamin E may be harmful.

J. Thomas Brenna, Cornell professor of nutritional sciences, draws the same conclusions. “Human trials of so-called antioxidants have generally been neutral or shown harm, and these recent reports are consistent with their findings,” he said.

Brenna’s take on vitamins and supplements boils down to what he calls one of the oldest and most reliable mantras in biological science, “The dose make the poison.”  In other words, you can get too much of a good thing, and excess vitamin supplementation is no exception.

Patsy Brannon, also a professor of nutritional sciences, emphasized the need to consider your total intake of vitamins and minerals. 

“We know that those who take vitamin and mineral supplements tend to be consuming a healthier diet,” she said. “Further, many foods are fortified with minerals and vitamins such as ready-to-eat cereals and fruit justices.”

So who might benefit from a supplement and how to decide on what supplement to take and how much? 

“For those who routinely consume less than 1500 calories per day, it may be hard to consume all the vitamins and minerals in the amounts needed.  Then, a multivitamin-mineral supplement that provides only 100 percent of the recommended daily values for each of the nutrients in the supplement would be helpful,” she said.

Brannon pointed out a recent study published in the Journal of Nutrition that many adults are not meeting their nutritional needs.  Other evidence found only about 25 percent of American adults are following the recommended dietary guidelines.

The bottom line: Yes, supplements are important for specific deficiencies or when diets do not include a healthy variety of foods.  But the public as a whole may be overconsuming them to ensure health. When that happens, they may do some harm.

Skip to toolbar