All About Weight Loss

In recent years, we have all become aware of the bad fats called trans fats. Trans fats do not occur in nature in any appreciable quantity, although small amounts are generated by bacterial / enzymatic action in ruminants, such as cows and sheep. Man is the culprit who makes the vast majority of them. They are unavoidable by-products in a process called hydrogenation.

What is hydrogenation? Many years ago, we discovered how to convert liquid fats into solid fats by means of this process called hydrogenation. Here, the liquid fat is put into a strong vessel, heated, and put under high pressure with hydrogen in the presence of a catalyst. The catalyst, usually platinum, palladium or nickel, is necessary because the process would be so slow otherwise that it would, for all practical purposes, never happen. Under these catalytic conditions, however, the liquid fat becomes a solid fat. In this process, unsaturated fats are partially converted into saturated fats. The word partially is what makes all the difference, because if the hydrogenation were complete (very impractical!), there would be no trans fat.

Hydrogenation was employed by the food industry in an effort to convert liquid fats (unsaturated ones) to solids (saturated fats). There were two main topics that could be addressed by this approach: separation of oils (for example, in peanut butter), and shelf life problems.

As a matter of fact, converting the liquid fats to solid fats did indeed solve both problems. Separation could be halted, and the off-tastes and odors produced over time by oxidation of the unsaturated fats (which is called rancidity) could be avoided, because the saturated fats do not oxidize (turn rancid).

But the price the consumer pays for the benefit of the food industry is a cardiovascular risk, produced by the trans fats, which is why the government required the amount of trans fats to be listed on labels starting in January 2006.

Unfortunately, the FDA left a gaping loophole in the law: as long as the trans fat content per serving was less than 0.5 g, the manufacturers could state on the label that the product contained 0 g of trans fat. So, if the serving size on the label could be said, rightly or wrongly, to be one cookie, and that cookie contained 0.499999999999 g of trans fats, the label could legally say that the product contained 0 g of trans fat.

If you had two cookies, you would have consumed essentially 1 g of trans fat, but everything was completely legal. There would be no practical way for you to know that you had just eaten 1 gram of trans fat. And even if you ate the whole box, you might not know that you had consumed a lot of trans fat.

In the final analysis, you are the only one that can look out for you! Read labels, and read between the lines also. Remember, if the ingredient section lists partially hydrogenated anything, the product most assuredly contains trans fats, regardless what the nutritional information label states! Moreover, some manufacturers are beginning to use the term "vegetable shortening", which is code for partially hydrogenated fats. Do not be fooled by this maneuver. It is trans fat, by whatever method they use to game the system.

Try to limit your trans fats intake to the lowest practical level. In our American society, it would be almost impossible to eliminate them completely, at least for some time to come. But progress is being made on this front!

Trans fats are also contributors to obesity and excess weight in general. Recent studies have suggested that, even with the same caloric intake (including fat calories) in two groups, the group with the higher trans fats intake gained more weight. In addition, this weight tended to gather around the middle, giving the "apple" shape, which has been implicated in an increased cardiovascular risk.

Please take care of yourself. Avoid trans fats as much as possible!

The above is a condensed version of one of my webpages. For more information, please see

http://www.theweightlossresource.com/Discussion%20of%20Trans%20Fats.htm

Linus Pauling was the only person to win two unshared Nobel Prizes. One was in Chemistry, and the other was the Nobel Peace Prize. When Pauling says something about Chemistry, it only makes sense to listen to him. In his book How to Live Longer and Feel Better (W.H. Freeman and Company, © 1986), he discusses the role of fructose in our health. He points out that, until a couple of centuries ago, people consumed about 8 grams of fructose per day, mainly from fruits and honey. After our common sugar (sucrose), derived from sugar cane and sugar beets, became readily available, our intake of fructose rose to about 74 grams per day. (When we ingest sucrose, it splits into 50 % glucose and 50 % fructose.) The glucose simply becomes a part of our general pool of glucose, which is derived from many of the foods we eat. Some, but not all, of the fructose, on the other hand, is converted to acetate, which, in turn, is partially converted to cholesterol.

Pauling quoted some experimental work by Winitz et al., in which the subjects were given two very controlled diets. The only difference between the two diets was that one included glucose as the only carbohydrate, while the other used 75 % glucose and 25 % sugar (sucrose) as the sources of carbohydrate. That 25 % sucrose would lead to fructose, which would be lacking in the glucose-only portion of the study. In the glucose-only portion of the study, the cholesterol levels of the subjects dropped dramatically. When the subjects were then given the glucose-plus-sucrose diet, their cholesterol levels rose just as dramatically. The subjects were once again put on the glucose-only diet, and, once again, their cholesterol levels again plummeted.

Pauling's point was that sucrose ingestion in our times leads to elevated cholesterol levels, because of the resulting fructose. The point that I am trying to make here is that our dietary sources of fructose today are almost infinite, over and above sucrose, fruits and honey. Look at the list of ingredients on any of the foods you buy, or look at the list below. You'll find high fructose corn syrup on a staggering range of them. Our processed food producers have elected to give us a superhighway to high cholesterol as a nation. It's bad enough that we consume too much sugar (sucrose). These folks are turning us into mainliners, giving us a shot of the bad stuff directly. Why? Profits! And, in part, your tax dollars at work - to the detriment of your health! For details, please see

http://www.theweightlossresource.com/Sugar,%20Corporate%20Welfare%20and%20High%20Fructose%20Corn%20Syrup.htm

Since it seems well established that a high cholesterol level is one (of several) risk factors for cardiovascular problems, such as heart attacks and strokes, it would only make sense to try to keep our cholesterol level down in a normal range. This is not a condemnation of cholesterol. We absolutely need cholesterol to function. In addition to what we ingest, some of our cholesterol is manufactured by our own livers. But we certainly don't need these massive amounts of fructose, which push our cholesterol levels way up.

There is more bad news about HFCS. When we consume sucrose, the glucose produced then, in turn, produces a hormone called leptin. Leptin, which is produced in the fat cells, is the hormone that tells us when we've had enough to eat. Fructose does not produce leptin. So, when your're hungry, and you eat or drink something containing HFCS, you will tend to remain hungry, and consequently, you may easily overeat.

There is another hormone called ghrelin. This is the hormone produced by your stomach to tell you that you are hungry. Sucrose, by way of its product glucose, suppresses the production of ghrelin, telling you that you are no longer hungry. Fructose does not suppress the production of ghrelin, so you remain hungry. Once again, the tendency is to overeat.

For more information on the hormones that affect your weight, hunger and satiety, please see

http://www.theweightlossresource.com/Hormones%20and%20Excess%20Weight.htm

What can we do to help ourselves in this sea of cholesterol-breeding high fructose corn syrup (HFCS)? Although it would be very difficult in our society to completely eliminate HFCS from our diets (unless we could use a time machine to take us back to the 1960s), we should do our best to avoid those products. For example, I love cookies. I have noticed that most cookies contain HFCS. I simply look for those brands (there are a few) that don't contain the high fructose corn syrup.

Cookies are just one example. It sometimes seems that high fructose corn syrup is everywhere. For example, you will find it in most cold cereals, most crackers, most pancake syrups, most fruit punches, many canned fruits, many jams and jellies, some barbeque sauces, most commercial breads, and the list goes on and on. There are a few things we can do to minimize our consumption of HFCS, however. You can choose pure maple syrup over the cheap pancake syrup. You can read the labels on canned fruit and select only those without HFCS. You can read the ingredients on the cereal boxes, and select one of the brands that show more interest in your health than in their bottom line. You can carefully select jams, jellies or preserves that preserve the integrity of their product rather than stoop to the use of HCFS. You can seek out those bakeries or house brands that refuse to adulterate their bread with this cheap sweetener.

Granted, it's a lot of work at first. Eventually, however, you can build a list of items that will help you to minimize the damage that our food processing industries are doing to our health. As a general rule, the higher the degree of processing, or the more lengthy the list of ingredients, the lower the quality of the food product. And if you'd like to get an idea just how pervasive high fructose corn syrup is in the American diet, take a look at this list:

http://www.accidentalhedonist.com/index.php/2005/06/09/foods_and_products_containing_high_fruct

I think you'll be shocked at how many foods contain HFCS.

The liver can convert glucose somewhat, and fructose much more so, to triglycerides. These in turn lead to increased levels of low density lipoproteins (LDL, the bad cholesterol) and reduced levels of high density lipoproteins (HDL, the good cholesterol).

In other words, high fructose corn syrup can lead to overeating, obesity, elevated triglycerides and high cholesterol with all its increased cardiovascular risks. Does it have any good points? Yes, it's cheap!!!

All soft drinks made in the US since the 1980's are made with HFCS. The same manufacturers use sucrose in other parts of the world. The reasons for this, plus an explanation of just how HCFS became such a dominant factor in the American diet, can be found at:

http://www.theweightlossresource.com/Sugar,%20Corporate%20Welfare%20and%20High%20Fructose%20Corn%20Syrup.htm

Incidentally, if you think you can beat the system by drinking diet soda, think again. In a recent study (reference 1 below) in Circulation (a journal of the American Heart Association) researchers found that in the Framingham Heart Study, those who drank 1 or more soft drinks per day were at higher risk of developing the metabolic syndrome. This is true whether they drank HFCS sweetened soda or diet soda - that made no difference! To see a definition of metabolic syndrome, see our page:

http://www.theweightlossresource.com/Metabolic%20Syndrome.htm

I believe that the case could be made for a good correlation between sugar consumption and cardiovascular disease. I also believe an even stronger correlation could be made between the consumption of high fructose corn syrup and cardiovascular disease. Time will tell whether or not I am correct.

And then there's the matter of the epidemic of excess weight in our country. In 1966, there was no high fructose corn syrup in the US. Most people were not overweight, either. Back then, the average American didn't eat even 1 oz of HFCS annually.

Today, HFCS is the dominant sweetener (55 %) in the US, with sales of over $4.5 billion per year. Nowadays, the average American eats more than 60 pounds of HFCS per year. Look around. Most Americans are now overweight. Yes, it's true that we don't get enough exercise. It's also true that we eat too much - and part of that overeating is due to HFCS. To understand why this is true, please see

http://www.theweightlossresource.com/Hormones%20and%20Excess%20Weight.htm

In the final analysis, the only person who will look out for you on this subject is you!

Reference 1. Circulation. 2007; 116: 480-488

There are very many different hormones produced in our bodies. Each of them has its own job to do. The primary function of a hormone is to act as a messenger. It is released somewhere in the body, and sent to another place, where it instructs the receptor involved what has to be done. Since its role is essentially that of a messenger, the quantity of a hormone is usually quite small.

Here we will focus primarily on just a few hormones that can have a profound effect on hunger, weight and sleep, all of which are of interest to any weight management program. These would be:

· leptin (and its friends obestatin and nesfatin-1) which signal satiety

· ghrelin (along with orexin and PYY 3-36) which signal hunger

· melatonin which is involved in sleepiness and weight loss

· insulin which is involved with the metabolism of glucose and calling out leptin from the fat cells and with suppressing the ghrelin from the digestive apparatus

· glucagon which is sort of the counterpart of insulin

· thyroxine which is involved with the metabolic rate

There are many other hormones that you have probably heard of, such as epinephrine (adrenaline), cortisol, testosterone, estrogen, progesterone, prostaglandins in general, plus many others. This is a potentially very large field of discussion, far beyond the level of this page, so we will stick to those hormones mentioned above, that are involved primarily with weight/hunger/satiety.

The next four species of hormones are currently under intensive investigation, so information may change as more is learned about them. I only mention them here because it shows just how much research is going on in the field of weight management by serious scientists.

The orexin/hypocretins group is currently a very hot topic of research, so it is still in the early stages of development. As of now (2007), however, it is believed to be involved in evoking hunger and in addition, is related to sleep and narcolepsy. This work is so cutting-edge that even the names for the species are tenuous at the moment.

Obestatin is genetically related to ghrelin, but it evokes the opposite response, that is, it reduces the appetite, whereas ghrelin raises it. It is also a recent addition to the group (2005).

Nesfatin - 1 is another hormone (discovered in 2006) that contributes to the sense of fullness, or satiety. The work on this material is also very recent, hence incomplete.

Now, as far as hunger and satiety are concerned, the two main hormones we will focus on will be leptin and ghrelin.

Leptin (discovered in 1994) is produced primarily by our fatty tissue. Its production is called for by our insulin. Our insulin, in turn, was called for by the glucose produced by the food or drink that we consumed. The process is a little reminiscent of an old song from my youth: From the vine came the grape, from the grape came the wine, from the wine came a dream to a lover ... In this case, we have: from the food came the glucose, from the glucose came the insulin, from the insulin came the leptin, from the leptin came satiety. That's the way it's supposed to work, and it usually does. In addition, leptin can increase our metabolic rate.

Unfortunately, there are things that can mess up that beautiful song. One is a lack of sleep (please see http://www.theweightlossresource.com/Sleep%20and%20Weight.htm). Another is high fructose corn syrup (please see above High Fructose Corn Syrup - Recipe for Disaster ).

Ghrelin (discovered in 1999) is produced in the stomach. It is the hormone that makes us feel hungry. When we take in food, the glucose produced is supposed to suppress the production of ghrelin, thereby reducing our hunger.

The levels of both leptin and ghrelin both operate on a circadian rhythm. During the night, the level of ghrelin increases, getting us ready for breakfast. In addition, the level of leptin decreases, due in part at least, to melatonin. This also prepares us for breakfast. Do not disappoint your body. Eat breakfast!

Once again, this system can be thwarted by a lack of sleep (please see http://www.theweightlossresource.com/Sleep%20and%20Weight.htm) or by high fructose corn syrup (please see above High Fructose Corn Syrup - Recipe for Disaster ).

Your natural production of melatonin is very important for many reasons, including sleep and weight control. The production of melatonin is favored by darkness. It is produced while we are sleeping, and peaks during the middle of the night. Light inhibits its production, so sleep in the dark, with no TV. Use nightlights when necessary.

The story of the discovery and development of insulin is a fascinating one, but too long to go into here. It is manufactured in the pancreas. As is widely known, insulin is the hormone that directs the cells to take up the glucose from the bloodstream. The insulin receptors are normally on the surface of the cell. They assist the cells to take up the glucose. When the cells have taken up all the glucose they can handle, the insulin receptors bury themselves inside the cell, away from the glucose in the bloodstream. The excess glucose is then converted to fat. The insulin also assists in the conversion of glucose to glycogen, for intermediate-term energy storage. (Fat is the long-term energy storage.)

Glucagon, like insulin, is produced in the pancreas. When the glucose level falls too low, glucagon is released into the bloodsteam. This then goes to the liver, where it causes the liver to convert its glycogen stores to glucose.

Strictly speaking, thyroxine is not itself a hormone, but rather it is a prohormone. Nevertheless, it is involved in controlling the metabolic rate.

In my opinion, these messenger molecules called hormones are very powerful materials, and should only be taken under the direction of your health care provider.

The above description has been greatly simplified in order to preserve the sanity of both the reader and the writer. But I think it is basically correct.