Posts Tagged ‘Scientists’
Tricks to curb your appetite
Obesity is such a BIG problem these days – no pun intended – that you hear about different tricks to curb your appetite and to lose weight. Many are considered old wives’ tales, but if it is not dangerous, there’s nothing to lose.
For example, many of us were probably admonished by our parents for gulping down food too quickly. I know parents are concerned about kids choking and all, but there may be more to it than just that. It can be painful to swallow big bites of food without chewing properly. But the chewing process is important for other reasons. As you chew, your mouth releases many digestive enzymes. These enzymes work to break down the food, but they also help to keep your teeth and gums clean. When the food enters your stomach, there is less work for it to do. Not only that, the stomach releases its own hormones to stimulate the brain and tell it that the body is hungry. While you are chewing, these hormones are gradually suppressed so that your brain senses it is no longer hungry. It means you eat less. Unless you are one of those who likes to gorge even after your stomach is bulgingly full. (I’ll admit I can be like that with some foods.)
Scientists are continually searching for the hunger triggers to try to find ways to combat the ever-growing problem of obesity. They have now found another interesting trick to curb your appetite. It appears that blending your food into a thick soup serves to keep your stomach satisfied longer, thereby, decreasing the chances that you will reach for those calorie-laden snacks to keep you going until dinner time. In their research, they found that those who ate a solid meal, washing it down with water, remained satisfied for a shorter period than their counterparts who had the same meal (combined with the water) pureed into a soup. The idea behind it is that the thick soup takes longer to be digested in the stomach, so it remains longer. Water does not take any time to be digested, so it goes through the digestive tract quickly, while the solid food remains in the stomach. However, if the water is combined into the soup, it remains in the stomach.
Sounds very interesting because it goes back to the previous tenet that chewing your food longer can help curb your appetite. It may sound counter-intuitive since the soup and the well-chewed food would appear to take less time to be digested; therefore, you would get hungry quicker. According to the research, the soup takes up more volume than the meal, once the water was washed away. As for our old wives’ tale, it is a matter of timing. It takes time for the stomach to send signals to the brain, telling it is satiated. When you gulp your food, you do not allow your stomach time to do this. Whereas, if you chew carefully and take your time, your stomach is able to send a signal to your brain in time.
The stretching of the stomach also plays a role in obesity. Those who eat a lot (such as those who inhale their food) stretch out their stomachs, such that it requires the same amount or more for the stomach to recognise that it is full. This is the basis behind the stomach stapling surgery. It intends to curb your appetite by making your stomach smaller. For those who want to do it naturally, you simply cut back a little at a time until your stomach shrinks. This is not the same as anorexics who abruptly cut back on their food intake. That can be dangerous. Weight loss of any kind should be done with the supervision of a doctor, as changes in your body may be detrimental to your health.
Avian flu does not like the cold
Despite all the warnings about swine flu, it still has not reached pandemic level. One of the biggest concerns is that it may mutate and become more virulent. Another concern is that it may mix with the avian flu and create a maor crisis. However, a recent study suggests that the avian flu virus has not adapted to colder climates. This makes it less likely to be carried in human noses, or at least, noses of humans living in colder climes.
The reason that many other human viruses can cause infections in our colder noses is that these viruses have adapted themselves to the cold. There are still some that prefer warmer climes. That is why sometimes cold air is recommended for cold sufferers. The swine flu virus (H1N1) is able to survive in colder climates, therefore, it has been able to spread. We would have a bigger catastrophe if the avian virus mutates. Fortunately, this takes time and scientists are able to monitor any changes.
Experts still urge us not to be complacent about the swine flu, but some people are suggesting trying to get it now while it’s mild and you can develop an immunity to it. This would only be advisable if you are healthy and can quarantine yourself so as not to inadvertently infect someone who is immunocompromised in any way.
Oestrogen protects against infections
Men might not like to hear it, but according to a new research, they are the “weaker” sex. The research was performed at McGill University and was done on mice. However, the research is applicable to humans because it involved a human gene that was transplanted into the mice.
The gene was for an enzyme called Caspase-12. This enzyme, when present in the body, blocks anti-inflammatory responses, which is the first line of defense against infections. Therefore, when this enzyme is present, the body is more susceptible to infections. However, it has been shown that oestrogen blocks this enzyme, thereby, allowing the anti-inflammatory response.
In conclusion, scientists believe that women are better at fighting off infections than their male counterparts due to the beneficial effects of oestrogen. Of course, it’s all relative because not all women have equal levels of oestrogen in their system. Can we conclude that postmenopausal women will not fight off infections due to loss of oestrogen? Should that be yet another argument for them to be on hormonal therapy? What about obese men who make oestrogen? Will they be more protected? Some interesting questions to answer.
Exercise and antioxidants
An interesting health article today discussed vitamins and exercise. Though experts are always urging us to eat a well-balanced diet in order to receive all our daily nutrients without the use of supplements, it is not an easy task. I know people who eat healthy, but I really don’t know anyone who eats everything that is recommended in order to get all their vitamins and minerals. Most of us are set in our ways as far as diet is concerned, with very little variation in our meals. When the diet consists of the same thing day after day, it is likely that many nutrients are missing and many others are in excess.
I had never heard of people taking vitamins, especially C and E, after exercising in order to reduce what’s called “oxidative stress”. This oxidative stress is created by harmful chemicals, called “free radicals”, which are released when we exercise. Free radicals are believed to cause cancer and heart disease, amongst other things. Vitamins C and E are antioxidants, which block these free radicals and protect the body from its damage. Interesting, logical concepts, though I had never heard about doing this.
But scientists have now found that antioxidants after exercising may not be good. Apparently, these free radicals can reduce the risk of diabetes by increasing insulin sensitivity. Most diabetes caused by obesity is related to insulin insentivity. That is, the body cannot respond to insulin, so the blood sugars remain elevated. Muscles, when they respond to insulin, take glucose up and use that as energy. When they don’t respond, the muscles have to use other sources of energy. Antioxidants block these good effects of free radicals.
As always in health, there is a delicate balance that needs to be preserved. Vitamins are good, but they should not be taken in excess. The study highlights some negative effects of vitamins, but it only talked about vitamins taken after exercising. There was no comment about its effects if taken at other times. Will it help protect against free radicals in cancer and heart disease or harmful in diabetes? Also, it did not discuss threshold levels that can help or harm.
