The Problem with Juice Fasts

Fad diets, detoxes, and weight loss pills. What do these have in common?

They're all quick fixes without lasting results. Fad diets can range from low calorie (< 800 kcal/d), to high fat/low carb (Atkins), very low calorie liquid diets (The Last Chance Diet)...and many more. Just as you can't become an athlete overnight, you shouldn't expect to become slim over a week-long detox. Juice fast, you say? Reading about the acclaimed "benefits" gave me a headache. Let's have a closer look at some of its claims (paraphrased from numerous promotional websites that popped up from a quick Google search):

"RAPID WEIGHT LOSS." Yes, weight loss might occur. However, most of it is probably water weight, considering a typical juice fast only lasts for a week or so. Water is lost because the body obtains energy by using its glycogen stores in muscles or the liver, and glycogen is stored with water. The minute you revert to a normal diet, all the water weight is regained.

"DETOXES THE BODY." Your kidneys and liver are perfectly capable of looking after itself and detoxing. Humans have evolved over time to handle any byproducts that may arise from metabolizing whatever we ingest, and it's all thanks to our kidneys and liver. Did you order that vodka cranberry because you thought juice would help detox the alcohol?

"IMPROVES DIGESTION." If anything, a juice fast (any fast) should slow down digestion. When your body goes into starvation mode - which it's doing during the juice fast - it'll redirect it's activity away from digestion, and slow down overall metabolism. Like I said in previous posts, our bodies are very efficient and redirects its efforts according to different circumstances.

"IMPROVES IMMUNE FUNCTION." To this day, there has not been a single clinical trial (rigorously controlled study using humans) confirming the ability of juice fasts to boost your immune system. The opposite may even happen: a compromised immune system due to vitamin/mineral insufficiency.

Before you hop onto the detoxing/cleansing bandwagon, consider other healthy alternatives. I personally eat more whole fruits & vegetables, and limit processed foods. As a side note, the infamous Nutri Bullet (aka. "nutrition extractor" that "pulverizes cell walls to unlock hidden nutrition") is definitely not on my shopping list. My body seems to be extracting nutrients just fine.

The showdown: Subway vs. McDonald's

You've steered clear of the Big Mac and opted for the 6-inch cold cut sandwich at Subway. What may be surprising is that Subway may not be much healthier than McDonald's, according to a recent study done by a team of researchers at UCLA.

A group of adolescents (12 - 21 yr, 42% were college graduates) were asked to go to both Subway and McDonald's on different days of the week and purchase whatever they liked, using their own money. It turns out that they bought meals of similar number of calories from both fast food outlets! Purchases from Subway averaged 955 calories; McDonald's averaged 1038 calories. Technically speaking, the calorie intake was not significantly different.

Let's have a look at the breakdown of averages:

	Subway (kcal)	McDonald's (kcal)
SANDWICH	784	572*
DRINK	61	151
SIDES (chips, fries, veggie cups)	35	201

*FYI, a Big Mac is 540 calories.
I've excluded non-significant differences such as condiments and desserts, which is why it doesn't add up to the average number of calories.

In terms of nutrient analysis (averages):

	Subway	McDonald's
CARBOHYDRATES	102 g	128 g
PROTEIN	41 g	32 g
SUGAR	36 g	54 g
SODIUM	2,149 mg	1,829 mg

Some of you may be surprised at the high sodium content for Subway. This is because a lot of the sandwiches have processed meat/cold cuts, which are notoriously high in sodium for preservation purposes. Bearing in mind that the upper level for sodium is 2300 mg/day, excessive intakes have been linked to an increased risk of high blood pressure, and in turn, stroke, heart and kidney disease. Interestingly, the amount of fat was similar (Subway 42 g, McD's 45 g).

Even though Subway is marketed as a "healthy" alternative for fast-food, the shredded lettuce and 2 slices of tomato don't add much nutritional value over the single lettuce and tomato at McD's. However, this is not to say McD's is superior to Subway. The study failed to show a more detailed analysis for cholesterol and other vitamins/minerals - an important aspect to consider when judging which one is the winner.

So, which would you opt for?

Sources:

• Lesser, L. I., Kayekjian, K., Velasquez, P., Tseng, C., Brook, R. H., & Cohen, D. A. (2013). Adolescent purchasing behavior at McDonald's and Subway. Journal of Adolescent Health. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.02.014
• Health Canada. (2009). Sodium (Catalogue #H13-7/71-2012E-PDF). Retrieved from http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hl-vs/alt_formats/pdf/iyh-vsv/food-aliment/sodium-eng.pdf

Rethink that "healthy" snack of yours...

It's almost beach season, and one of the most trending topics has got to be how to lose weight (fast). Many will undoubtedly be opting for light, fat-free, or high fibre options whenever we can. But just how healthy are those "healthy" choices? Are they as good as they seem? Let's see if any of your favourite foods show up in the following non-exhaustive list:

• LIGHT SALAD DRESSING. Everything is relative. Relative to the full fat, original version, of course your light caesar salad dressing will be lower in fat and/or calories. But since you're making an effort anyway, why not just drizzle some extra virgin olive oil and balsamic vinegar onto that crispy bed of salad? That way, you'll be cutting out a lot of the sodium and preservatives, not to mention all the good fats you'll be getting from the olive oil!
• GRANOLA. Yes, I can't deny that rolled oats are good for a plethora of reasons (eg. lowers cholesterol, lower risk of heart disease, antioxidant properties). However, a lot of commercially sold granola is packed with sugar and extra calories, mostly from dried fruits and added sugar. Personally, I go for the unsweetened, sans dried fruits.
• DRIED FRUIT. While these shriveled up fruits do contain fibre, vitamins and minerals, they are usually bathed in sugar to prolong shelf life. Kudos for trying to eat fruit, but why not just go for the real deal and eat fresh varieties?
• JUICE. Fruits were designed to be eaten whole, so you get all the fibre and nutrients of the skin and flesh. Even if it's 100% fruit juice, the sugar content can be just as high as a can of pop. But if you must opt for a drink, might as well go for 100% fruit juice. Be wary of "cocktails" or "blends" as these are legally not required to be pure fruit juice - they often have high fructose corn syrup, glucose, or glucose-fructose as added sugars. To top it all off, the ease of absorbing juice (and all it's sugar) leads to spikes in blood glucose...often leading to what people call the "sugar crash." 
• GLUTEN-FREE ______________. Just because it's free from something doesn't make it healthier. Gluten-free ≠ healthy. Gluten is a protein that is developed during the processing step of products containing gluten-forming flours such as wheat, rye, and barley. Gluten-free products usually try to mimic the taste and texture of gluten-containing counterparts by adding more sugar, fat, and salt. Unless you are sensitive to gluten or have celiac disease, gluten-free products aren't really beneficial.

Eating healthy is a commitment to a different lifestyle, not just a quick fix. It'll take time, effort, and dedication to consciously make healthy decisions. Just remember: baby steps.

Midnight Munchies

It's 11:30 pm and you're just about ready to hop into bed. But wait, what's that gentle rumbling coming from your stomach? Many of you know the overwhelming craving for a midnight snack, and I'm not ashamed of admitting to this either. Our ancestors might be the ones to blame for this behaviour, mainly because evening snacking might have increased our chances of survival in times of food scarcity. Hoarding seemed to be socially acceptable back then.

A recent study identified a potential trigger for our midnight cravings: our body's internal clock. The internal clock is otherwise known as our circadian rhythm, and it controls our physical, mental, and behavioural changes over a 24-hr period. Night owls are particularly prone to midnight cravings simply because they're awake to experience it! The consequences are also a cause for concern:

1. Poorer glucose tolerance at night. 
   Your body's ability to handle glucose varies throughout the day, and sadly it's the worst in the evening and into the night. Logically it makes sense: at a time that we should be asleep, we wouldn't want to waste any effort to deal with extra glucose that shouldn't even be there in the first place.
2. More energy storage, less energy expenditure.
   We eat, we sleep, we store (what we ate). Don't kid yourself, sleeping doesn't burn much calories.
3. Sleep deprivation & weight gain.
   You're up late, and now you've got a pack of doritos as company. This doesn't change the fact that you have to wake up at 6 am for work the next day. Sleep deprivation may actually contribute to weight gain!

So before you go reaching out for your late-night snack, re-think what that bite of poutine will actually cost you!

Sources:

• Scheer, F. A. J. L., Morris, C. J., & Shea, S. A. (2013). The internal circadian clock increases hunger and appetite in the evening independent of food intake and other behaviors. Obesity, 21(3), 421-423.

• Van Cauter, E., Polonsky, K. S., & Scheen, A. J. (1997). Roles of circadian rhythmicity and sleep in human glucose regulation. Endocrine Reviews, 18(5), 716-738.

"How do I get rid of tummy flab?"

...is the question I receive most whenever people find out I studied nutrition. Don't expect me to sugar coat my answer, because I'm not your pat-on-the-back grandmother. There is no such thing as targeted fat loss.

Targeted fat loss, a.k.a. spot reduction, does not exist. It might seem logical that the more you exercise a particular spot, the more fat loss should occur there. The fact of the matter is, even professional tennis players don't have less fat in one arm than the other! 

Here are the scientific reasons why spot reduction doesn't exist:

ONE. Fat is stored as triglycerides in your body. Muscle cannot use triglycerides for energy, and must use fat that is broken down into glycerol and fatty acids - both of which travel in the bloodstream to reach various muscles. As such, fat breakdown can occur anywhere in the body to supply the muscle's demands for energy.

TWO. Many spot reduction exercises don't burn many calories. Fat loss ultimately boils down to the balance of calories in, calories out. Running, or any other cardio, burns more calories than sit-ups or crunches. Sustained, low-intensity jogging can promote fat loss. So, lace up and start running!

THREE. Fat has a mind of its own. We don't decide where to draw fat for energy. Even though we don't have control over this, we can most definitely choose a healthier lifestyle by eating healthy and exercising consistently. Those Big Macs aren't doing you any good and you know it.