Tag: weight loss
For Fitness Motivation, Losing Money Beats Earning More

For Fitness Motivation, Losing Money Beats Earning More

When employers are trying to encourage workers to get more physical activity, offering a monetary award that can be lost if the goal is not met yields better results than offering a bonus that can be gained if the goal is met, according to a new study.

“Most people assume that people are rational, but we know that this is not true. People are irrational but in predictable ways,” said lead author Dr. Mitesh S. Patel of the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia.

Patel’s group studied 281 overweight or obese adult employees who enrolled online. Participants reported their height and weight, and used a smartphone step-counter app to track their activity levels for 13 weeks.

On average, U.S. adults take about 5,000 steps per day. For this study, participants were given a goal of at least 7,000 steps per day and then randomly divided into four groups. One group received no incentives, another received $1.40 for each day they met the goal, another lost $1.40 from a monthly incentive ($42) each time the daily goal was not met, and the last group drew lottery numbers for a chance to win $50 which they could only collect if they had achieved 7,000 steps on the previous day.

All received daily feedback on their step count.

The loss-incentive group met their step goal on 45 percent of days, compared to 36 percent of days in the lottery group and 35 percent in the gain incentive group. Those in the comparison group with no incentive only met their goal on average 30 percent of days, the researchers reported in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

During the following weeks, when step count was still reported but no incentive was offered, step counts decreased for all groups.

“According to a few seminal behavioral economics experiments, people don’t like losing something twice as much as they like gaining the same thing, as a rule of thumb,” said Marc Mitchell of the University of Toronto, who was not part of the new study.

A more tailored design might have yielded different results – like if the researchers had measured how much each person was walking before the study and asked them to increase their step count by 2,000, rather than setting the same goal for everyone, Mitchell told Reuters Health by email.

“Just tracking activity using a smartphone or wearable device will help, but for those who are overweight or obese or have a chronic condition tracking alone is unlikely to boost activity,” which is where a financial incentive comes in, Patel said.

“About 80 percent of employers in the U.S. use financial incentives of some kind in wellness programs,” he said.

Most simply lower insurance premiums if employees achieve health and wellness goals, he noted.

Many are moving to more penalty based schemes given the short-term financial benefit for the company, but this may not be a good way of promoting quality health behavior change, Mitchell said.

“For most employer wellness programs around the country, you do something, you get paid for it,” Patel told Reuters Health by phone. “Sometimes relatively soon, sometimes off into the future.”

In this case, the gain and loss incentives were the same, only framed differently depending on the group, he said.

This technique of framing the incentive comes from previous work in behavioral economics, Patel said.

He added, “I think the evidence is clear, these financial incentives could be better designed if they were based on insights from behavioral economics.”

SOURCE: http://bit.ly/1QGxTgy Annals of Internal Medicine, online February 15, 2016.

(This version of the story has been refiled to fix typos in paragraphs one and two)

For Better Or Worse, It’s Mostly About Food When It Comes To Weight Loss

By Blair Anthony Robertson, The Sacramento Bee (TNS)

As a cyclist who rides almost every day, I often think about the correlation between exercise, calories and ideal body weight. That’s because it’s simply easier to be a good cyclist if you are as light and strong as possible.

One of the misconceptions about active people, especially long-distance runners and cyclists, is that they don’t have to worry about how much they eat. They’ll stay slim and trim automatically.

Indeed, I will occasionally hear fellow cyclists, usually new ones, say that one of the reasons they enjoy riding is they can eat as much as they want. I tend to have a knee-jerk reaction — my eyes go straight to their waistline.

If you truly want to eat all you want, you need to pick foods that are low in energy density, according to Michael Greger, author of How Not To Die.

If you’ve made a New Year’s resolution to get in better shape and drop some weight, your best bet is to focus on what you are eating and not rely on moderate amounts of exercise. Yes, the good news for foodies is that food is the answer to losing weight. The bad news: food — less food, better food — is the answer to losing weight.

The numbers speak for themselves. At the helpful website healthstatus.com, I took a hypothetical 35-year-old man who is 5-foot-9 and 180 pounds — a little overweight but nothing terrible.

Then I checked the calories burned for certain workouts. It’s not a lot. Jogging (a slow trot, which is reasonable for a new exerciser) burns just 286 calories in 30 minutes. Running briskly (8 mph) for 30 minutes burns 551 calories. Riding a bike for an hour rather vigorously (14-16 mph) uses up 864 calories. To lose a single pound, you have to create a caloric deficit of 3,500 calories.

The easier way is to look at food intake. For many, that’s easier said than done. But the numbers can be jarring, as you already know if you’re ever perused those mandatory nutrition charts at chain restaurants. A small fries at McDonald’s are 230 calories. If you eat them, you just wiped out your 30-minute jog through the neighborhood. Pasta carbonara (1,590 calories) and a Godiva chocolate cheesecake (1,110 calories) at The Cheesecake Factory adds up to a sobering 2,700 calories.

Experts say that the biggest factor is awareness. That’s why nearly every diet works in the beginning and why the Weight Watchers points system is so easy to follow — once you reach your allotted points, you’re done for the day. People are focused and determined. In order to make lasting changes, you usually have to change your thinking, your lifestyle and, sometimes, even your friends. While on the Healthstatus.com website, you can get a very good free booklet, “The Caloric Deficit for Weight Loss,” which lists the 27 most fattening foods and offers alternatives.

This doesn’t mean that your days of being a foodie are over (or that we won’t try to dazzle you with recipes for, say, braised short ribs or German chocolate cake in the weeks to come). It simply means that you have to pick your spots and space out your splurges if you want 2016 to be the year you reach your fitness and weight-loss goals.

©2016 The Sacramento Bee (Sacramento, Calif.). Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Photo: Smaller portions and healthier options are the best option. If you want to be satisfied without gaining weight, even a modest increase in fruits and vegetables makes a difference. (Blair Anthony Robertson/Sacramento Bee/TNS)

 

Soda Shouldn’t Be Called ‘Diet,’ Advocacy Group Says

Soda Shouldn’t Be Called ‘Diet,’ Advocacy Group Says

By Greg Gordon, McClatchy Washington Bureau (TNS)

WASHINGTON — Citing research suggesting that diet soft drinks and other artificially sweetened products actually contribute to weight gain, a new advocacy group is asking federal regulators to investigate whether manufacturers including Coca-Cola and PepsiCo have engaged in false or misleading advertising.

The California-based group, U.S. Right to Know, plans to file citizen petitions Thursday calling on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Federal Trade Commission to stop those companies from branding artificially sweetened products with the word “diet.” McClatchy obtained copies of the petitions.

“Consumers are using products — Diet Coke and Diet Pepsi — that are advertised to make us think they assist in weight loss, when in fact ample scientific evidence suggests that this is not true, and the opposite may well be true,” says the petition to the Food and Drug Administration.

The American Beverage Association, speaking for the Coca-Cola Co., PepsiCo Inc., and other soft-drink makers, strongly disputed the assertions in the petition. It said numerous studies showed “that diet beverages are an effective tool as part of an overall weight management plan.”

Only last fall, the beverage association, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, and the Dr Pepper Snapple Group joined in an alliance with the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation for a program to fight obesity by decreasing beverage calories in the American diet. As part of the effort, the soft drink makers agreed to step up the sales of lower-calorie drinks.

The petitions to be filed Thursday call for sweeping inquiries into the marketing of products that contain any artificial sweeteners, not just those with the most popular sugar substitute, aspartame, which is used in more than 5,000 products.

Diet Coke and Diet Pepsi contain aspartame, which has been mainly sold under the brand name NutraSweet and is consumed worldwide. Last year, Diet Coke and Diet Pepsi ranked third and seventh, respectively, in U.S. carbonated soft-drink sales, according to Beverage Digest.

Safety controversies have clouded the use of a number of artificial sweeteners for decades, especially NutraSweet and its predecessor, saccharin. But Gary Ruskin, Right to Know’s executive director and a longtime associate of consumer advocate Ralph Nader, said he thought his group was the first to call for investigations into possible deceptive marketing.

It’s unclear whether conflicting research on the sweeteners’ effect on weight is sufficiently settled for the regulators to take action.

The petitions point to a number of studies in recent years that have challenged the belief that ingesting noncaloric sweeteners helps with weight loss.

Among them:

  • A 2010 review of scientific literature, published in the Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, that concluded “research studies suggest that artificial sweeteners may contribute to weight gain.”
  • A 2010 review in the International Journal of Pediatric Obesity that found large epidemiological studies “support the existence of an association between artificially sweetened beverage consumption and weight gain in children.”
  • A two-year study of 164 children, published in 2005 in the Journal of the American College of Nutrition, that found overweight kids and others who gained weight drank more diet sodas than normal-weight children.
  • A nationwide study, called Growing Up Today, of more than 10,000 children ages 9 to 14 that found that, for boys, intakes of diet soda “were significantly associated with weight gains.”

Also of particular note is an Israeli study published last fall in the journal Nature. It found that mice given the three most popular sweeteners developed bacterial changes in their guts that caused glucose intolerance, which in humans raises the risk of diabetes.

The researchers at the Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovot, Israel, found similar effects in a number of people who ate artificially sweetened foods for a week.

James O. Hill, executive director of the University of Colorado Anschutz Health and Wellness Center, said he accepted the findings in the mice portion of the study but disputed the methodologies of the one-week human trial.

“When it comes to weight, I am absolutely convinced that there’s no way they (artificial sweeteners) are causing weight gain,” he said in a phone interview. “Drinking diet sodas or using noncaloric sweeteners, in my opinion based on my review of the literature and my research, is not something people should worry about.”

Hill acknowledged receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars from the American Beverage Association to finance a controlled study that found people who drank diet sodas lost more weight on a managed diet than those who drank water, but he said the industry group had no role in the study design.

Berna Magnuson, a spokeswoman for the international industry’s Calorie Control Council, contended that the Israeli study’s conclusion was “inappropriate and unjustified.”

Right to Know’s Ruskin, in its petition, acknowledged the conflicting research results, but cited evidence that “industry-funded studies in biomedical research are less trustworthy than those funded independently.”

Neither the Food and Drug Administration, which regulates food labeling, nor the Trade Commission, which polices advertising claims, would comment on the petitions.

However, trade commission spokesman Peter Kaplan said the agency “is vigilant in combating deceptive advertising, and deceptive health claims in particular are a priority of the agency.”

The agency’s 32-year-old advertising standard requires advertisers to have “a reasonable basis” to substantiate their claims or implied claims.

The petition to the FDA could thrust the agency back into one of the bigger controversies in its decades of food safety regulation: its decisions in the early 1980s to approve the use of aspartame, first as a food additive and then in diet soft drinks.

The FDA’s Public Board of Inquiry had voted 2-1 to keep aspartame off the market on the grounds that it had caused brain cancer in laboratory rats.

However, President Ronald Reagan’s choice to serve as food and drug commissioner, Arthur Hull Hayes, used his authority to overturn the board, handing a bonanza to the company that patented the product, the Chicago-based G.D. Searle & Co. There’s long been speculation that a pivotal player in the decision was Searle’s chairman at the time, Donald H. Rumsfeld, who served as U.S. defense secretary under President Gerald Ford and again under President George W. Bush, overseeing U.S. troops during the recent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Searle sold its NutraSweet subsidiary in 1958 to Monsanto, which later sold it to a Boston private equity company.

Despite a host of research studies and the publication of several books linking aspartame to health problems ranging from cancers to neurological ailments, the FDA has stood by its position that the sweetener is safe, except for people who suffer from a rare disease known as phenylketonuria, a developmental illness.

(c)2015 McClatchy Washington Bureau, Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC

Quick & Healthy: Is There Anything Green Tea Can’t Do?

Quick & Healthy: Is There Anything Green Tea Can’t Do?

“Quick & Healthy” offers some highlights from the world of health and wellness which you may have missed this week:

  • One day your phone may be able to sniff out the onset of Parkinson’s Disease, based solely on the way you type. Researchers are currently developing software that can monitor the rate at which users tap on their keyboards and make assessments as to how well a typist’s central nervous system is functioning. It’s an exciting development, but for now, anyway, the software cannot distinguish between someone with Parkinson’s and someone who’s simply sleep deprived.
  • Green tea is the gift that just keeps on giving. The antioxidant-loaded, bacteria-battling, fat-burning substance just got yet another boon: According to a new study, a regular green tea habit correlates to a lower risk of dementia. The study found no such link with black tea and coffee, although those drinks have plenty of well-known health benefits on their own.
  • And we have a winner! Researchers have amassed results from several studies conducted on commercial diet and weight-loss programs, and have determined that Jenny Craig and Weight Watchers are the most effective.
  • A new startup is setting its sights on revolutionizing in-home health care for seniors. The Silicon Valley-based service is called Honor, and it’s designed to bring seniors the best in in-home care, while also allowing family members to stay in close contact, even and especially while they’re remote.

Photo via Wikimedia Commons