Atkins Diet

Go Back   Atkins Diet > Main Forum > Miscellaneous Forums > News and Research
Forgot Password? Register

Reply
 
Bookmark and Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 29th, 2007, 12:21 PM
sillygirl's Avatar

Moderator Emeritus

Atkins Phase: Maintenance
 
Join Date: May 18, 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 16,457
Rep Power: 162
sillygirl has a reputation beyond reputesillygirl has a reputation beyond reputesillygirl has a reputation beyond reputesillygirl has a reputation beyond reputesillygirl has a reputation beyond reputesillygirl has a reputation beyond reputesillygirl has a reputation beyond reputesillygirl has a reputation beyond reputesillygirl has a reputation beyond reputesillygirl has a reputation beyond reputesillygirl has a reputation beyond repute
Default Another great article in the LA Times

This really pertains to children getting a sugar high or not. However, the explanations are exactly why we follow this WOE.

http://www.latimes.com/features/heal...ck=2&cset=true

In general, the whole health section today is about various weight issues.
__________________




49 Female 5'6" ish
158 (5/18/05)~Goal of 145 met 9/16/06
"What if the Hokey Pokey IS what it's all about?"
Apparently the Hokey Pokey IS what it's all about.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old October 29th, 2007, 06:16 PM
dreamof145's Avatar
ADBB Admiral

Atkins Phase: Pre-maintenance
 
Join Date: Apr 14, 2004
Posts: 5,955
Rep Power: 89
dreamof145 has a reputation beyond reputedreamof145 has a reputation beyond reputedreamof145 has a reputation beyond reputedreamof145 has a reputation beyond reputedreamof145 has a reputation beyond reputedreamof145 has a reputation beyond reputedreamof145 has a reputation beyond reputedreamof145 has a reputation beyond reputedreamof145 has a reputation beyond reputedreamof145 has a reputation beyond reputedreamof145 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Another great article in the LA Times

Gosh, I wanted to read this, but you have to have login in order to access it. Can you copy/paste it??
__________________
Starting Date 3/12/04 285/165/145 - F



Dedication gives wings to our dreams and keeps them in flight! In One Word...COMMITTMENT.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old October 29th, 2007, 08:11 PM
sillygirl's Avatar

Moderator Emeritus

Atkins Phase: Maintenance
 
Join Date: May 18, 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 16,457
Rep Power: 162
sillygirl has a reputation beyond reputesillygirl has a reputation beyond reputesillygirl has a reputation beyond reputesillygirl has a reputation beyond reputesillygirl has a reputation beyond reputesillygirl has a reputation beyond reputesillygirl has a reputation beyond reputesillygirl has a reputation beyond reputesillygirl has a reputation beyond reputesillygirl has a reputation beyond reputesillygirl has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Another great article in the LA Times

Here you go - It's very long!

From the Los Angeles Times
Tricky side of treats

Does all that Halloween candy turn kids into little monsters? Many parents say yes -- but in fact the sugar high may be a myth.
By Karen Ravn
Special to The Times

October 29, 2007

DRESS up your kids like Dracula or Frankenstein, and most likely they'll look more cute than scary.

Let them eat too much candy, and they'll turn into real little monsters.

That's the word, at least, from many parents who fear their trick-or-treaters' sweets success this Halloween will end in wild "sugar highs" -- with energy going through the roof -- followed by moody "sugar crashes" -- with that energy suddenly dropping through the floor.

"I have mothers tell me their child can ingest something sweet, and they know to the minute when the reaction is going to occur," says Jo Ann Hattner, a registered dietitian who teaches nutrition at the Stanford University School of Medicine.

Yet the truth is that experts disagree about whether the sugar high and sugar crash truly exist.

Many say the evidence contradicts such stories. "There is no scientific basis to the idea that sugar and/or candy has any major effect on children's behavior, particularly if they eat OK," says Dian Dooley, professor of human nutrition, food and animal sciences at the University of Hawaii at Manoa.

Others think sugar has plenty of skeletons in its closet. "The bottom line is that the ingestion of too much high-glycemic carbohydrate causes a rapid rise and then fall of blood sugar," says Dr. David Ludwig, professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School and director of the Optimal Weight for Life program at Children's Hospital Boston. "This triggers a series of metabolic and hormonal changes that can affect appetite and behavior for hours to come."

Still more experts think that the experience of a sugar high is real -- but only because parents are convinced it exists.

"I would never try to convince parents otherwise," says Dr. Thomas Robinson, professor of pediatrics at Stanford and director of the Center for Healthy Weight at Lucile Packard Children's Hospital. "You can't tell them it doesn't happen because, for them, it does happen."



A little basic physiology implies that sugar highs could happen. Glucose, a digestive byproduct of the sugar we eat, is one of the body's two main sources of energy (along with fat). So it seems feasible that eating a lot of sugar could give a person a quick energy boost.

That's the reasoning behind, say, marathoners eating candy bars en route. It's also the theory behind an old test doctors once got a kick out of: They'd give a pregnant woman a glass of orange juice, Hattner says, and in no time, if the woman's baby was healthy, it would be treating its mom like a soccer ball.

But the body is designed to keep glucose levels in the blood stable. When the levels increase, the pancreas releases insulin, which moves glucose out of the blood and into tissues throughout the body.

If levels have spiked steeply, the pancreas might overreact and release too much insulin, so the glucose level could end up dipping below where it should be. But then the pancreas releases another hormone, glucagon, which moves glucose stored as glycogen out of the liver to bring the levels back up again.

Things can go wrong with this regulatory system. Diabetics don't produce enough insulin, for example. And even in a healthy person, it can take a little time to restore the system to balance once it's gotten off kilter. If glucose levels get dramatically low, that's the physiological basis for a sugar crash. But here the neatness of the theory seems to end. If levels stay high for a while, instead of energizing a person as you'd expect, it actually makes a person sleepy, studies show.

Investigations into the topic date back decades. In the early 1970s, pediatric allergist Dr. Benjamin Feingold found that food additives were related to hyperactivity. His work is widely seen as jump-starting the study of how diet affects behavior, and that field of research soon became very active.

Early studies of sugar searched in vain for proof of the sugar highs that parents and teachers so often complained about. One such finding, published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1994, compared sugar and the artificial sweetener aspartame -- both of which had been reported to cause hyperactivity and other behavioral problems.

Researchers tested two groups of children: 25 normal preschoolers, 3 to 5 years old, and 23 school-age children, 6 to 10 years old, who were described by their parents as sugar-sensitive.

Each of the children followed three different diets for three weeks each. One was high in sugar but had no artificial sweeteners. A second was low in sugar and used aspartame as a sweetener. And the third was low in sugar and used saccharin as a sweetener. (Because no hyperactivity problems with saccharin had been reported, saccharin was considered a placebo.)

The result: On 39 behavioral and cognitive measures, no significant differences in the three diets were found among the "sugar-sensitive" children. Some differences were found on four of 31 measures among preschoolers, but in no consistent pattern.

The researchers concluded that even at atypically high levels, neither sugar nor aspartame affects children's behavior or cognitive function.

Other studies came up short as well. In 1996, an article published in Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition reviewed 12 studies and found no evidence that sugar had negative effects on the behavior of normal children or children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. The authors also found no evidence of such effects in a number of studies of chocolate and other types of candy.



The opposite effect?

More recently, researchers testing sugar effects on adults found that, if anything, sugar makes people hypoactive -- that is, more lazy and sluggish. In a 2006 study (published in the journal Human Psychopharmacology: Clinical and Experimental), five healthy adults had an "energy drink" containing 42 grams of sugar and 30 milligrams of caffeine an hour after a light lunch. Five others had a sugar-free drink that tasted exactly the same. Then all 10 took a 90-minute performance test.

At first, both groups did equally well, but 50 minutes after having the drinks, the supposedly energized ones began going downhill, becoming slower to react and getting sleepier.

Some evidence does support the reality of sugar highs, however. In a survey of more than 5,000 Norwegian teenagers, researchers found higher rates of hyperactivity among those who habitually drank the most sugary sodas.

Of course, this study (which was published in 2006 in the American Journal of Public Health) did not show that the sugar in the sodas caused the hyperactivity. Any number of relationships could exist between the sodas and the teenagers' behavior. Another ingredient in the sodas might be to blame. It's also possible that hyperactivity makes teens more likely to drink sugary sodas, instead of vice versa.



Missing the link

Even though a great deal of evidence implies that sugar does not affect children's behavior -- and many experts seem to consider the issue settled -- some researchers think mistakes were made in the research and wrong conclusions reached as a result.

Harvard's Ludwig says that much of the research in this field has been looking for effects in the wrong way and in all the wrong places. ("If you lose your keys, and you don't happen to look where they actually are, you're not going to find them," he says.)

Ludwig says that many studies testing for a sugar-behavior link didn't find one because they compared sugar with other refined starches whose effects on the body are the same because they are broken down into sugar very quickly. "Your glucose level can rise as much after a bowl of plain Rice Krispies as after a bowl of sugar," he says.

With co-workers, he corrected for this problem in a 1999 study of 12 obese, but otherwise healthy, teenage boys that was published in the journal Pediatrics. The boys were evaluated on three occasions: when their breakfast and lunch had a low, medium or high glycemic index -- a ranking of carbohydrates according to how quickly they cause blood glucose levels to rise. All the meals for each subject had the same number of calories.

Ludwig's team measured how much the boys ate during the five hours after their lunches. After the high-index lunch, the boys ate 53% more calories than after the medium-index meal and 81% more than after the low-index meal -- indicating that the higher the glycemic index of a meal, the hungrier the boys were likely to get soon afterward.

More significant for the sugar-high question, the high-index meal led to lower levels of glucagon and higher levels of insulin and epinephrine -- a stress hormone that, among other things, increases heart rate and blood pressure.

"The results show that sugar and other refined starches can trigger counter-regulatory stress hormones that can affect hunger, mental functioning and behavior," Ludwig says.

Parents' reports on the effects of sugar vary widely -- even among children in the same family.

"Cameron gets nasty," says 42-year-old Diane O'Hagan of Pacific Grove, about her eldest son. "And Eric, he gets kind of moody. And Reece just gets wild, but then he's wild all the time, so it's hard to tell when he's having a sugar high."

Faith Shearin, a 38-year-old poet in Kittyhawk, N.C., says her 7-year-old daughter, Mavis, doesn't experience sugar highs. But, she says, "Some of my friends complain that their children consume candy or soda and begin to hop up and down like popcorn. I have witnessed this behavior but have never been sure if sugar was the cause."

If sugar is not responsible for the behavior so often labeled a sugar high, what might be?

Caffeine is one possibility, at least at Halloween, suggests Dr. Zhaoping Li, a professor of medicine at UCLA's Center for Human Nutrition. The stimulant is found in many soft drinks and candies, but usually not at a level to affect mood. Still, sugar reactions may occur when those foods are consumed in mega amounts: "Ordinarily, kids will eat one piece of candy, but at Halloween, maybe 30 or 40," Li says.

It's also possible, she says, that kids simply experience genuine excitement on the night. They look forward to Halloween for a long time -- plan their costumes, anticipate their goodies -- and they expect to have big fun.

If effects of sugar vary from child to child, it might be explained by differences in their insulin secretion, Ludwig suggests. For example, if the three O'Hagan boys each ate half a bag of Reese's Pieces, their three different pancreases might produce three different amounts of insulin, influencing how rapidly sugar rises in their blood and is removed from it.

No one knows yet how much insulin production should be considered normal, but a routine glucose tolerance test can measure its levels. (In a study reported in the May edition of the Journal of the American Medical Assn., "high" was anything above 57.5 micro-units per milliliter. Not that there's a ghost of a chance parents will have such tests at their disposal Wednesday night.)



All an illusion?

Here's one more spooky thing to think about. If the sugar-high-sugar-crash cycle exists, parents, not the kids, may lie at the root of it.

"It's due to parents' expectations of what behavior is likely to be after kids eat a lot of sugar," says Robinson of Stanford.

This can work in several ways. For one thing, if parents expect a child to be hyper after eating something full of sugar, then that's what they'll see. "Expectancies are very powerful in altering perceptions," Robinson says.

Parents may even conceivably act in subtly different ways toward their kids -- in ways that could make them get wilder.

Alternatively, if parents see their child behaving hyperactively they may try to figure out why that's happening and decide it's because of a sugary treat the child ate awhile before.

Audrey Vernick, 43, of Ocean, N.J., says she's found herself doing just that with her kids. "When they don't sleep at night . . . it's easy to think of the sugar they've eaten and try to blame that."

There's even science to back up the notion that the sugar effects that parents report might be based on the sugar effects they expect to see. A 1994 study published in the Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology tested the theory on 35 boys, ages 5 to 7, described by their mothers as sugar-sensitive. During the study, researchers told half the mothers that their sons had been given a lot of sugar. They told the other set of mothers that their sons had been given a placebo. In fact, though, all the boys received the placebo, which was the artificial sweetener aspartame.

Mothers and sons then spent awhile playing together, and then the mothers were interviewed about how their sons behaved. Those who believed their sons had eaten sugar rated them as more hyperactive than did those who believed their sons had eaten a placebo -- in direct support of the expectancy hypothesis. (To show how tricky these studies can be, recall that aspartame, too, has been blamed by parents on altering the mood of their kids, making it a less-than-ideal placebo.)

Sugar highs and lows may not do all that we think they do, but for some people they can definitely make themselves felt. "For some people it's an uncomfortable feeling to go up and then down within a couple of hours," says Carol Koprowski, a registered dietitian and a professor at USC.

But whether or not sugar makes your child go wild, it would be hard to find anyone who thinks a child should go wild eating sugar. It is implicated, after all, in other undesirables such as obesity and tooth decay.

Still, most experts do consider Halloween a special case.

And it is just one night.
__________________




49 Female 5'6" ish
158 (5/18/05)~Goal of 145 met 9/16/06
"What if the Hokey Pokey IS what it's all about?"
Apparently the Hokey Pokey IS what it's all about.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old October 29th, 2007, 08:24 PM
dreamof145's Avatar
ADBB Admiral

Atkins Phase: Pre-maintenance
 
Join Date: Apr 14, 2004
Posts: 5,955
Rep Power: 89
dreamof145 has a reputation beyond reputedreamof145 has a reputation beyond reputedreamof145 has a reputation beyond reputedreamof145 has a reputation beyond reputedreamof145 has a reputation beyond reputedreamof145 has a reputation beyond reputedreamof145 has a reputation beyond reputedreamof145 has a reputation beyond reputedreamof145 has a reputation beyond reputedreamof145 has a reputation beyond reputedreamof145 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Another great article in the LA Times

Hmmmm, this was interesting. So next time kids eat sweets, I guess I'll put in a Kenny G tape and get their mood relaxed. lolol
__________________
Starting Date 3/12/04 285/165/145 - F



Dedication gives wings to our dreams and keeps them in flight! In One Word...COMMITTMENT.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0
Copyright © 2003-2005, Atkins Diet Bulletin Board. All rights reserved.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348