Ads 468x60px

Wednesday, February 29, 2012

How care homes are blinding their residents.

Now that I have your full attention (!), care & nursing homes are not blinding them in the conventional sense. What's in the picture below?

I haven't the foggiest idea! I found the image using Google Image search and it's called blurry-1.jpg.

This is what the world looks like to residents who have either not been given their glasses, or who have been given their glasses but the lenses are filthy.

Mum's lenses were filthy this morning. I've written it in the book and informed the manager. Another lady has been at the home for ages and still doesn't have glasses, despite asking for them repeatedly. Her relatives didn't supply the home with any. This sort of thing makes me so mad!

Mum pays ~£1,000 a week to stay at this care home. It's well-run, but on mum's floor (severely disabled) during the day, there are 4 carers + 1 nurse for 18 residents. It takes 2 carers to bath or toilet a resident (my sister damaged her back and had to take early retirement, as there were no health & safety guidelines for lifting in her day) and there is a lot of paperwork.

EDIT: The care home is arranging for the lady whose relatives didn't supply the home with any glasses to get some, so it's not all bad news.

Diets high in meat and eggs are an effective treatment for type II diabetes


This study was published in Diabetologia 2007 Sep;50(9):1795-807

Study title and authors:
A Palaeolithic diet improves glucose tolerance more than a Mediterranean-like diet in individuals with ischaemic heart disease.
Lindeberg S, Jönsson T, Granfeldt Y, Borgstrand E, Soffman J, Sjöström K, Ahrén B.
Source
Department of Medicine, Hs 32, University of Lund, SE-221 85, Lund, Sweden. staffan.lindeberg@med.lu.se

This study can be accessed at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17583796

This 12 week study compared the effects of a  Paleolithic "old Stone Age diet" and a consensus "Mediterranean-like diet" in 29 patients with ischaemic heart disease with either high blood glucose levels or type II diabetes. 

The diets comprised of:
(i) The "old stone age diet" tended to be lower in carbohydrate and higher in fat. Meat consumption was 47% higher, egg consumption 52% higher and cholesterol consumption 34% higher on the "old stone age diet" compared to the "Mediterranean-like diet".
(ii) The "Mediterranean-like diet" tended to be higher in carbohydrate and lower in fat. Cereal consumption was 1388% higher, pastry consumption 1200% higher, margarine consumption 1500% higher, potato consumption 51% higher and sweetened drinks consumption 194% higher on the "Mediterranean-like diet" compared to the "old stone age diet".

After 12 weeks the study found:
(a) Those on the old stone age diet lost 31% more weight compared to those on the Mediterranean-like diet.
(b) Those on the old stone age diet lowered their unhealthy high fasting glucose levels 88% more than those on the Mediterranean-like diet.
(c) Those on the old stone age diet lowered their unhealthy high HbA1c levels 4.3% more than those on the Mediterranean-like diet.

This study shows how a diet high in meat and eggs is more effective than a diet high in cereals and margarine in the treatment of type II diabetes.

Palatability, Satiety and Calorie Intake

WHS reader Paul Hagerty recently sent me a very interesting paper titled "A Satiety Index of Common Foods", by Dr. SHA Holt and colleagues (1).  This paper quantified how full we feel after eating specific foods.  I've been aware of it for a while, but hadn't read it until recently.  They fed volunteers a variety of commonly eaten foods, each in a 240 calorie portion, and measured how full each food made them feel, and how much they ate at a subsequent meal.  Using the results, they calculated a "satiety index", which represents the fullness per calorie of each food, normalized to white bread (white bread arbitrarily set to SI = 100).  So for example, popcorn has a satiety index of 154, meaning it's more filling than white bread per calorie. 

One of the most interesting aspects of the paper is that the investigators measured a variety of food properties (energy density, fat, starch, sugar, fiber, water content, palatability), and then determined which of them explained the SI values most completely.

Read more »

Tuesday, February 28, 2012

Protein Poppers (C1)

Looking for Becky's Protein Poppers?

Click on the following link to get there (this post is just a cross-reference to get you there):

http://17ddgal.blogspot.com/2012/02/strawberry-cheesecake-bites-c1.html

Rocky Road Cake Bites (C3)


Rocky Road Cake Bites (C3)
Recipe Author: Becky Yokeley Love


1 cup Whole Wheat flour
2 scoops Chocolate Protein Powder
1 oz sugar free chocolate pudding mix
1/4 tsp Baking powder
Stevia equivalent to 1/2 cup sugar
4 egg whites
1/2 cup Unsweetened almond milk
3 tbsp unsweetened applesauce
3/4 cup Walden Farms marshmallow fluff
1/2 cup crushed pecans

Preheat oven to 350

Combine all ingredients and blend well.

Bake for 9 min in mini bite pan

Servings: 48

Note: This is intended as an occasional snack, not a meal!

Type I diabetics have better blood sugar control on a high fat diet

This study was published in Diabetologia 1985 Apr;28(4):208-12

Study title and authors:
A prospective comparison of 'conventional' and high carbohydrate/high fibre/low fat diets in adults with established type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetes.
McCulloch DK, Mitchell RD, Ambler J, Tattersall RB.

This study can be accessed at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2991051

This study tested the effects on blood sugar control in 40 type I diabetic adults in either a high carbohydrate/high fibre/low fat diet or a low carbohydrate/low fibre/high fat diet.

The diets comprised of:
(i) 45% carbohydrate, 34% fat, 32 grams fibre per day (higher carbohydrate diet).
(ii) 38% carbohydrate, 43% fat, 20 grams fibre per day (higher fat diet).

After 4 months, HbA1c levels were 1.8% higher in those on the higher carbohydrate diet compared to those on the higher fat diet.

This study reveals that a higher fat diet enables better blood sugar control than a higher carbohydrate diet in type I diabetics.

Soda-Free Sunday

Last Thursday, I received a message from a gentleman named Dorsol Plants about a public health campaign here in King County called Soda Free Sunday.  They're asking people to visit www.sodafreesundays.com and make a pledge to go soda-free for one day per week. 

Drinking sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs), including soda, is one of the worst things you can do for your health.  SSB consumption is probably one of the major contributors to the modern epidemics of obesity and metabolic dysfunction.

I imagine that most WHS readers don't drink SSBs very often if at all, but I'm sure some do.  Whether you want to try drinking fewer SSBs, or just re-affirm an ongoing commitment to avoid them, I encourage you to visit www.sodafreesundays.com and make the pledge.  You can do so even if you're not a resident of King county.

Advice for Your Doctor for NEDAW


Call me crazy, but I’m tempted to respond to a doctor’s closed-ended questions in ways that would knock his socks off. When he asks me about alcohol, for instance, he frames it something like this “you don’t drink much, right?” Or perhaps to assess risk of STDs he suggests “just one partner—you’re married, right?” Well, yes, he’s right, but would I ever say anything other than what he’s led me to believe is the only acceptable answer possible?

Isn't it time to get the support you need?
This brings me to the important topic of educating your healthcare team, your doctor, in particular, about how to truly support you. In honor of National Eating Disorder Awareness Week (NEDAW) (here in the States) I thought that health care providers could use a bit of awareness, to hopefully make your visits, and your life, a bit less stressful. Please consider adding your own two cents to the comments—then pass it on to others—and your providers! While this is prompted by NEDAW, I’ve included recommendations that are worth sharing regardless of whether you struggle with an eating disorder, disordered eating, or simply are outside of what the BMI chart says you should be.

Unsolicited Advice From One Healthcare Provider To Another

On weighing your patient

Please weigh patients with their back to the scale. Have them remove all layers possible—most individuals, regardless of their weight, want the weight to reflect what’s real. Weighing with shoes, heavy belts, and jackets doesn’t contribute much valid information. Oh, and have them empty their pockets!

That said, some do want to misrepresent their weight—so less is always better—with regards to clothing. And have them empty their bladder first!

A poker face and restraint from commenting is wise. That is until you’ve gotten to assess their weight in context. Imagine if you said to an overweight patient—“great, you’ve dropped a ton of weight” only to realize that they had a rapidly growing cancer? 

Weight change must be evaluated relative to behavior. Someone who lost weight (regardless of how appropriate you thought it was for them to drop some pounds) may very well have gone about it the wrong way. 

Consider this—they may have been starving themselves, resulting in messing up their periods, their metabolic rate, their mood, their sleep, their thoughts, their relationships.  This is nothing to offer positive reinforcement for. There is nothing healthy about losing weight this way. Perhaps they are compulsively exercising, or dehydrated from purging or laxative abuse. No, weight would not be a good measure of health then.

Similarly, your patient with a high BMI might have simply maintained her weight. But she feels well, is active and fit, and is healthy by all measures. Maybe she has even turned things around, if her weight had previously been climbing. Sure, you can explore other risk factors, such as quality of her diet—as I hope you would do with your slim patients, too. But if all looks good, perhaps you can accept that her stable weight is just fine for her.

Perhaps if she’s been climbing in weight that might warrant some probing about recent lifestyle changes—stressors, activity, diet—to help with better self care and disease prevention.

And if your underweight anorexic patient has increased his weight, please similarly temper your response! While you may be delighted, he (or she) may not be. It’s a mixed bag, gaining weight, even for those who are trying to gain weight. There’s the healthy side of them that really wants to recover. And then there’s the eating disorder voice that sees weight gain as a failure, as a “you can’t do anything right”, pulling them back to restricting again. It’s more valuable to elicit a sense of what they are thinking and feeling about the change. How does it fit with what they expected? What are the benefits of the changes they’re making? Focusing on the behaviors that contributed to the weight shift is more valuable than discussing the weight itself.

If your patient isn’t doing well, rest assured that they are as frustrated—even more so, really—than you are. The impact is far greater on them than on you, that’s for certain.

Hooray! You got your period back!

It’s not healthy to lose one’s period due to such factors as anorexia, restrictive eating, or compulsive exercising. We all know that. But while getting a period back is a good sign, it is not always well-received by patients. For some, getting a period equals “I must be fat now”. For others, it means they are done with their efforts to change their eating and behaviors. And that may be the worse thing for them to conclude.

Periods may return before weight is restored and before behaviors are normalized. Or they may come back after 4-6 months after stabilizing in a healthy range. Or they may never have disappeared, as was the case of a patient of mine who conceived 5 children through her years living with anorexia. The point? Consider where your patient is at before you rejoice in their body’s normalizing their periods!

Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell? I Don’t Think So.

If you don’t ask the right questions, you won’t get the real answers. So do ask open- ended questions—different than what my MD thought to ask—to obtain valuable information. If you’re discussing weight or body dissatisfaction, do ask if they’ve used laxatives, or diet pills, or vomiting or restricting—in the past, or currently. Suggest a frequency, in a non-judgmental way. If a patient says she purges daily, follow with a question like “how many times per day?” And when he says twice, follow with “And what’s the maximum?”  Just like if they say they have a couple of drinks, follow with what’s a couple—4? 5? 2? Per day? Per week? Suggest a range of possibilities, without raising an eyebrow.
 
We can only help our patients if we can accurately assess their situation. And, we can’t begin to do so if they feel they can’t trust us. So do your part. Ask your questions in open-ended ways, and be careful how you react. Ask how you can help, what they need from you. Are they connected with appropriate resources, or do they need guidance?

Encourage a follow-up sometime soon! 

Suggesting a 3 or 6-month follow-up visit certainly sends the message that their situation simply isn’t worth your taking too seriously. And as a result, they will undoubtedly convince themselves that really everything is fine, that nothing really needs to change.
And if you don’t believe me, read the comments from those in the know, below.

Thanks for taking the time to read this.

Monday, February 27, 2012

Monday MOETivation: The Spiritual Bitch

I started reading Deepak Chopra's "The Seven Spiritual Laws of Success" this morning. Now, before you go rolling your eyes and handing me a yoga mat, please understand this: I am not one of those hoity toity crazy meditating bitches. I do not set aside two hours a day to silence, and I sure as hell am not calm. But I'm working on it.

What inspired me to read this book was the fact that I could relate to it. I've been struggling lately with the word "success," and anything you read about success has to do with money and business 99% of the time. So when I saw that there was a spiritual take on it, I was in.


The word "success" can have many definitions. According to the dictionary, success is "the accomplishment of an aim or purpose." But what does that really mean? Are you successful when you are doing what you love? Do you have to be making money at what you love to really be successful? Are you successful because you have a big title at your job? Are you successful because you raised your child to be a law abiding citizen as opposed to a serial killer? Or is success just being able to pay your rent and bills?

Chopra has a really interesting point of view on spiritual success and it's something we should all pay attention to. In short, he wants us to look beyond the material wealth of success. He wants us to view success as the "experience of the miraculous." That means putting aside all the big houses, fancy cars, and shallow aspects of success, and finding the creativity and divinity within us. Success is about creating and cultivating fulfilling relationships, maintaining good health, and having energy and enthusiasm for life. DING DING DING! 

I literally felt as if a giant weight was lifted off my shoulders as I read that. I think we get so caught up in defining ourselves, our careers, and our passions by tangible items that we often lose sight of what really matters. I have definitely gotten caught in that vicious cycle more times than I can count. I do not make a living off The Champagne Diet, yet I continue to work hard by using this blog as an expression of myself and my creativity in order to connect with everyone who reads it. That is what matters to me. Would it be lovely to give up my day job and have a stream of income to do this all the time? Absolutely. But that is not the driving force behind it. And it never will be.

So I encourage you to really think about what success means to you today. If you can let go of all the BS and really get in tune with the creativity and passion deep inside of you, I guarantee you will uncover something amazing.

Cheers!



Discrimination is bad, mmmkay?

What do the following three images have in common? Images found with Google Image search.










They are all unable to fend for themselves or express how they feel. They all need a lot of care and attention and can be very demanding. The last two also have to be fed & toileted.

So why is it that the first two images make people go "Squeeeeeeee!" but the third one doesn't?

Is it because the first two images give you something to look forward to but the third one doesn't?

We're all going to end up old one day if we're "lucky". Just hope and/or pray that when you get there, you either have caring partners and/or relatives to look after you, or independent care for the elderly has improved a lot. I've seen things.

Strawberry Cheesecake Cake Bites (C3)


Strawberry Cheesecake Cake Bites (C3)
Recipe Author: Becky Yokeley Love


8 mini bites = 1 starch

1 cup Whole Wheat flour
2 scoops Vanilla Protein Powder
1 oz sugar free cheesecake pudding mix
1/4 tsp Baking powder
Stevia equivalent to 1/2 cup sugar
4 egg whites
1/2 cup Unsweetened almond milk
3 tbsp unsweetened applesauce
3-4 Tbsp Walden Farms strawberry syrup (could probably use sf strawberry jam)

Preheat oven to 350

Combine all ingredients and blend well.

Bake for 9 min in mini pan if bigger (15-20 watch them they cook fast)

These are intended as an occasional snack!

Strawberry Cheesecake Bites (C3)


Strawberry Cheesecake Bites (C3)
 Recipe Author: Becky Yokeley Love


Better known as PROTEIN POPPERS!

1 bite = 25 calories so serving size 4 = 100cal snack

4 scoops vanilla whey powder
1oz sugar free cheesecake pudding mix
3 tbsp walden farms strawberry syrup
Stevia equivalent to 1/2 cup sugar
4 egg whites
1/4c almond milk
1/2 tsp baking powder
Preheat oven to 350
Spray with non stick spray
Bake 10 minutes

Makes 24 mini bites

Preheat oven to 350; bake for about 10 minutes.

These are not meant for a meal only as a sweet treat!

Cinnamon Bun Protein Poppers (C3)


Cinnamon Bun Protein Poppers (C3)
Recipe Author: Becky Yokeley Love


4 poppers = 100 calories

4 scoops vanilla whey powder
1 oz sugar free vanilla pudding mix
Stevia equivalent to 1/2 cup sugar
4 egg whites or (3/4 cup liquid egg whites)
1/4 cup unsweetened almond milk
1/2 tsp baking powder
1 tsp cinnamon
1/2 tsp vanilla extract

Preheat oven to 350

Spray with non stick spray.

Bake 10 minutes.

Made 36 poppers....mini bite size; if you are making them larger, you will have to adjust the baking time.


Vanilla Cake Bites (C3)


Vanilla Cake Bites (C3)
Recipe Author: Becky Yokeley Love


8 mini bites = 1 starch

1 cup Whole Wheat flour
2 scoops Vanilla Protein Powder
1 oz sugar free vanilla pudding powder
1/4 tsp Baking powder
Stevia equivalent to 1/2 cup sugar
4 egg whites
1/2 cup Unsweetened almond milk
3 tbsp unsweetened applesauce
1 tsp vanilla extract

Preheat oven to 350

Combine all ingredients and blend well.

Bake for 9 min in mini bite pan ( if you do larger portions, bake for 15-20 min --you will have to watch them as they cook fast).

Note: These are intended to be used as a treat.  For maximum weight loss, it's recommended not to eat these every day, but to eat in moderation.

Butterscotch Bites (C3)


Butterscotch Bites (C3)
Recipe Author: Becky Yokeley Love



8 mini bites = 1 starch

1 cup Whole Wheat flour
2 scoops Vanilla Protein Powder
1 oz sugar free butterscotch pudding powder
1/4 tsp Baking powder
Stevia equivalent to 1/2 cup sugar
4 egg whites
1/2 cup Unsweetened almond milk
3 tbsp unsweetened applesauce

Preheat oven to 350
Combine all ingredients and blend well.
Bake for 9 min unless bigger size then adjust from 15-20 min


Note: These are intended to be used as a treat.  For maximum weight loss, it's recommended not to eat these every day, but to eat in moderation.

Brownie Mini Bites (C3)


Brownie Mini Bites (C3)
Recipe Author: Becky Yokeley Love


8 Mini bites = 1 starch

1 cup Whole Wheat flour
2 scoops Chocolate Protein Powder
3 tbsp Unsweetened baking cocoa
1/4 tsp Baking powder
Stevia equivalent to 1/2 cup sugar
4 egg whites
1/2 cup Unsweetened almond milk
***added 3 tbsp applesauce to original recipe for moistness*****

Preheat oven to 350

Combine all ingredients and blend well.
Bake for 15-20 minutes for brownie pan.....about 9 min if you use bite size pan.

Note: These are intended to be used as a treat.  For maximum weight loss, it's recommended not to eat these every day, but to eat in moderation.

Notes from Simmie:
I did not have chocolate protein powder in the house and don't generally use almond milk, so I substituted vanilla whey protein powder for the chocolate protein powder mentioned above and 1 cup of Kefir instead of the almond milk and they turned out wonderful as well.  Take a look-see:


Bea's Taco Salad (C1)


Bea's Taco Salad (C1)
Recipe AuthorDeanne Bergeron

1 lb lean Ground turkey or chicken
1 pkg taco seasoning (reduced salt or you could try it with homemade)
1 sm-med onion
1 bag mixed lettuce
1/2 cup chopped cucumber
1/2 cup chopped peppers (red & green)
1/2 cup c Chopped celery
2 or 3 small roma tomatoes, diced
1 large bottle catalina dressing (kraft makes a fat free one)

Cook onions until clear. Cook ground turkey or chicken according to taco seasoning packet, using only half the required water.

Set aside

Mix all other ingredients together, except the salad dressing & ground beef.

Then put the ground beef on top (making sure it's still warm - if not, heat it back up a bit - not hot) & start mixing in the dressing, half bottle at a time.

Now - this recipe is from pre 17DD so also calls for a bag of corn chips, which are mixed in last minute - so for 17DD - not sure if you might not need as much salad dressing without the chips .. probably not.

Note: There is a recipe on this blog for homemade taco seasoning.


High-fat, carbohydrate-restricted diets are a superior treatment option for type 2 diabetes compared to a low-calorie, low fat diet

This study was published in the New England Journal of Medicine 2003 May 22;348(21):2074-81

Study title and authors:
A low-carbohydrate as compared with a low-fat diet in severe obesity.
Samaha FF, Iqbal N, Seshadri P, Chicano KL, Daily DA, McGrory J, Williams T, Williams M, Gracely EJ, Stern L.
Philadelphia Veterans Affairs Medical Center, University of Pennsylvania Medical Center, Philadelphia, USA. rick.samaha@med.va.gov

This study can be accessed at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12761364

This study investigated the effects of a carbohydrate-restricted diet or a calorie- and fat-restricted diet on severely obese people. The trial lasted for six months and included 132 severely obese subjects with an average body-mass index of 43 and a high prevalence of diabetes (39 percent) or the metabolic syndrome (43 percent).

The subjects were assigned to either of two diets:
(i) The subjects assigned to the low-fat diet received instruction in accordance with the obesity-management guidelines of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, including caloric restriction sufficient to create a deficit of 500 calories per day, with 30 percent or less of total calories derived from fat. (Low fat diet).
(ii) The subjects assigned to the low-carbohydrate diet were instructed to restrict carbohydrate intake to 30 g per day or less. No instruction on restricting total fat intake was provided. (High fat diet).


The study found:
(a) Those on the high fat diet lost an extra 3.9 kg (8.6 lb) compared to those on the low fat diet.
(b) The high unhealthy triglyceride levels of those on the high fat diet decreased by an extra 31 mg/dL (.35 mmol/l) compared to those on the low fat diet.
(c) The high unhealthy Hb1AC levels decreased by .6% in those on the high fat diet, whereas Hb1AC levels remained the same in those on the low fat diet.
(d) The unhealthy high glucose levels of those on the high fat diet decreased by an extra 9 mg/dL (.5 mmol/l) compared to those on the low fat diet.
(e) There was a greater increase in insulin sensitivity in those on the high fat diet compared to those on the low fat diet.


The results of this study show how a high-fat, carbohydrate-restricted diet is a superior treatment option for type 2 diabetes compared to a low-calorie, low fat diet.

It's all in a day's work (as measured in Joules) Part 2.

Are you as aerobically-fit as this bloke?

Emmanuel Mutai made it a Kenyan double after winning the Virgin London Marathon in a new course record. Mutai's time of 2:04.38, beats the previous best of 2:05.10 set by Samuel Wanjiru in 2009 and also the fifth-fastest time ever.

I'll take it that's a "no", then.

Elite marathon runners have optimised their metabolisms to use the minimum possible amount of muscle glycogen as fuel. Muscle glycogen storage is limited to ~1,680kcals-worth (~420g of carb)*.
Supercompensation (depletion followed by 3 days of carb-loading) can increase this figure to ~720g*.
Fat storage can amount to ~35,000kcals-worth (~10lb of fat), even in a skinny Kenyan like Mutai.

A blogger called Thor Falk took the data from It's all in a day's work (as measured in Joules) and plotted it as a graph in Fat vs carb burning – a N=1 chart. Here's the graph:-

Even a super-fit Kenyan like Mutai burns some carbs when running at ~12.5 miles per hour. The less fit that somebody is, the more the first corner in the blue plot moves down and to the left. This results in more carbs being burned at energy consumption levels more than the first corner. This depletes muscle glycogen stores faster, resulting in "hitting the wall" (running out of muscle glycogen) sooner.

Muscles that are depleted of glycogen are more insulin-sensitive than muscles that have more glycogen, therefore the less aerobically-fit somebody is, the sooner their muscles become insulin-sensitive when they exercise.

*Assuming 20kg of muscle (Lore of Running P104)

Sunday, February 26, 2012

Red meat reduces colon cancer by 34%

This study was published in the American Journal of Epidemiology 2004 Nov 15;160(10):1011-22

Study title and authors:
Dietary fat and fatty acids and risk of colorectal cancer in women.
Lin J, Zhang SM, Cook NR, Lee IM, Buring JE.
Division of Preventive Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA. jhlin@rics.bwh.harvard.edu

This study can be accessed at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15522858

Dr. Jennifer Lin, an Assistant Professor of Medicine at the Harvard Medical School, examined the association of intakes of different types of fat with the risk of colon cancer. She and her colleagues analyzed the diets of 37,547 women over 8.7 years.

Dr. Lin found:

  • Women who consumed the most saturated fat had an 8% reduced incidence of colon cancer compared to the women who ate the least.
  • Women who consumed the most cholesterol had a 21% reduced incidence of colon cancer compared to the women who ate the least.
  • Women who consumed the most red meat had a 34% reduced incidence of colon cancer compared to the women who ate the least.
  • Women who consumed the most vegetable fat had a 21% increased incidence of colon cancer compared to the women who ate the least.

This study shows that dietary cholesterol, animal fats and red meat give protection from colon cancer, whereas vegetable fats (margarine, sunflower oil etc.) increase the risk of colon cancer.

Zero medications.

As mentioned in Both Sides Now: Medications, some medications are essential, as they are hormones that the body can no longer produce for itself due to glandular dysfunction. Other medications act as dietary supplements. It's the medications that change how the body works which can cause problems.

Due to prostatitis, I had been prescribed the alpha-adrenoreceptor blocker Tamsulosin Hydrochloride at a dose of 400ug/day. This reduces constriction of sphincter muscles in the urethra, which alleviates urinary retention. However, it also affects arterioles, the iris in the eye, veins, the stomach, the intestines, male sex organs, the skin, the liver, pancreatic Acini & Islet (beta) cells, fat cells and salivary cells.

I stopped taking Tamsulosin and have had no problems weeing, so the prostatitis has gone. I'm now taking zero medications that change how my body works.

So eating less and moving more does have benefits.

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Small LDL cholesterol size (caused by a high carbohydrate diet) is the highest risk factor for heart disease in type II diabetics

This study was published in Metabolism 2005 Feb;54(2):227-34

Study title and authors:
Low-density lipoprotein size and subclasses are markers of clinically apparent and non-apparent atherosclerosis in type 2 diabetes.
Berneis K, Jeanneret C, Muser J, Felix B, Miserez AR.
Department of Internal Medicine and Central Laboratories, Basel University Hospital Bruderholz, Switzerland 4101. kaspar@berneis.ch

This study can be accessed at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15690318

This study investigated the significance of various risk factors in the development of heart disease in type II diabetics. The investigators measured ten different risk factors in 38 overweight type II diabetics, such as  body mass index, blood pressure, smoking, high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, and low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol particle size.

Berneis found that small low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol particle size was most strongly associated with the highest risk of heart disease in type II diabetics.

Small particle sizes of low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol are caused by diets high in carbohydrate and low in fat see here and here.

Cheapest Vitamin D3 yet.

A big thank you to Ted Hutchinson (the chap who got me interested in Vitamin D in 2007) for bringing Vitacost to my attention. Their own-brand 5,000iu Vitamin D3 mini gelcaps product is somewhat cheaper than the Healthy Origins product that I've been using ($12.99 vs $14.99). Click http://www.vitacost.com/Referee?wlsrc=rsReferral&ReferralCode=3320491 when creating a Vitacost account, to get $10 discount on orders over $30.

As imports are liable to VAT + handling charges (usually £8) if the value exceeds £15, the lower price means that I can order two pots of 365 Mini Gels for less than £15.

P&P is slightly more expensive at $7.99 vs $4. Delivery takes about two weeks.

Friday, February 24, 2012

Professor says that low-carbohydrate, high-fat diets are the preferred method for treating type 2 diabetes

This paper was published in the Scandinavian Cardiovascular Journal 2008 Aug;42(4):256-63

Study title and authors:
Carbohydrate restriction as the default treatment for type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome.
Feinman RD, Volek JS.
Department of Biochemistry, SUNY Downstate Medical Center, 450 Clarkson Avenue, Brooklyn, New York 11203, USA. rfeinman@downstate.edu

This paper can be accessed at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18609058

Professor Richard Feinman reviews the role of low carbohydrate diets in relation to treatment of diabetes and metabolic syndrome.

He found:

  • Dietary carbohydrate restriction in the treatment of diabetes and metabolic syndrome is based on an underlying principle of control of insulin secretion and the theory that insulin resistance is a response to chronic high blood glucose levels and high insulin levels.
  • This theory has substantial experimental support.
  • This theory has generally been opposed by health agencies because of concern that carbohydrate will be replaced by fat, particularly saturated fat, thereby increasing the risk of heart disease as dictated by the so-called diet-heart hypothesis. However recent data shows that, in fact, substitution of fat for carbohydrate generally improves heart disease risk factors.
  • Removing the barrier of concern about dietary fat makes carbohydrate restriction the preferred method for treating type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome.
  • Low carbohydrate, high fat diets are shown to improve blood glucose control, lower HbA1C levels and reduce the need for diabetes medication.

This review find that a low carbohydrate, high fat diet is the preferred method for treating type 2 diabetes.

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Hello, pretties.


Turkey Meatballs with Asian Style Noodles

Gluten free turkey meatballs with Asian noodles
Light and tempting turkey meatballs with fresh herbs, ginger and lime.

Let it Roll, Baby, Roll


Okay, I confess. I admit it. When it comes to this recipe? I was totally inspired by Jamie Oliver and his Jamie's Food Revolution. I loved the flash mob stir-fry dance at Marshall University in episode four (view here at WabiSabi, one of the participants). The energy, spirit and creativity of the students, the killer combo of cooking and dance, with a generous dash of self expression and celebration got this creaky gluten-free goddess off the couch and movin', Baby.

Not to mention, craving a pan-tossed noodle stir-fry.

No doubt about it, I've been more attuned to Asian inspired flavors since moving to Santa Monica. Understandable. It's hard not to respond to the fresh, Pacific-infused tastes and heady scents of Asian fusion out here. So when we decided to play around with meatball recipes this weekend, yours truly started conjuring fusion-style tweaks for the humble Mediterranean meatball recipe I know and love.

First- I wanted to use organic free-range turkey (come Spring, I favor lighter meatballs and meatloaf, don't you?). And I knew I wanted to use fresh chopped herbs- mint, cilantro and parsley. Perfect with a splash of lime. Some spring onion. A little ginger and chile. Boom.

This Asian fusion meatball was born.

A quick note on my noodle choice- I've discovered Ancient Harvest Gluten-Free Quinoa Pasta-- and I love the texture and flavor. This is the least starchy gluten-free noodle I've found. And the best part is (perhaps due to the higher protein content of quinoa flour?) it stands up to pan tossing for brilliant stir-fries.



Read more + get the recipe >>

Gluten-containing foods increase the risk of type 1 diabetes in children

This study was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association 2003 Oct 1;290(13):1721-8

Study title and authors:
Early infant feeding and risk of developing type 1 diabetes-associated autoantibodies.
Ziegler AG, Schmid S, Huber D, Hummel M, Bonifacio E.
Diabetes Research Institute and Hospital München-Schwabing, Munich, Germany. anziegler@lrz.uni-muenchen.de

This study can be accessed at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14519706

Antibodies are proteins produced by the body. They are used by the immune system to detect and block the harmful effects of foreign substances such as viruses and bacteria.

Autoantibodies attack and damage the body's own healthy cells, tissues and organs. Islet cells in the pancreas produce the hormone insulin. If autoantibodies attack the islet cells then the production of insulin may be severely curtailed or stopped, so the presence of islet cell autoantibodies increases the risk of an individual developing type 1 diabetes.

The objective of the study was to determine whether breastfeeding duration, or age at introduction of gluten-containing foods influences the risk of developing islet autoantibodies. The study followed 1,610 newborn children of parents with type 1 diabetes for 5 years.

The study found there was a 300% rise in islet autoantibodies in children who received gluten-containing foods before the age of 3 months compared with children who received only breast milk until aged 3 months.

The study shows that introducing gluten-containing foods before the age of 3 months to children who have parents with type 1 diabetes significantly increases their risk of developing type 1 diabetes.

Turkey Sloppy Joe's (C3)


Turkey Sloppy Joe's (C3)
Recipe Author: Sandra Lobel 


1 tsp olive oil
1 lb lean ground turkey
1 onion diced
1 carrot diced
1 bell pepper diced
2 garlic cloves minced
1/2 cup sugar free ketchup
1 tbsp chili powder
2 tsp Worcestershire sauce
pepper to taste
Whole Wheat Hamburger Buns

Saute turkey, onion, bell pepper, carrot and garlic in oil until the turkey is cooked and the onions are soft. Add ketchup, chili powder and Worcestershire. Stir and simmer 15 min. Serve on whole wheat buns. Makes 4. My kids like a little cheddar sprinked on top.

Hope you like!

Is Sugar Fattening?

Buckle your seat belts, ladies and gentlemen-- we're going on a long ride through the scientific literature on sugar and body fatness.  Some of the evidence will be surprising and challenging for many of you, as it was for me, but ultimately it paints a coherent and actionable picture.

Read more »

REMINDER: Join Me at Bubble Lounge TONIGHT!

What are you doing tonight?

How does Champagne, live music, food, and a sabering lesson sound?

If you're in the New York City area, I would love to see you TONIGHT at Bubble Lounge! I will be guiding guests through a Champagne tasting, complete with four different high-end Champagnes and appetizers to match. Anders Holst will be tearing down the house with live music, and at the end of the night, one lucky guest will be presented with a complimentary bottle of Champagne and a sabering lesson!



Tickets are $35 in advance, and $40 at the door. Please RSVP to amy@twoshepsthatpass.com

Hope to see you all there!

Wednesday, February 22, 2012

High-carbohydrate, low-fat diets increase the risk of heart disease in diabetic patients

This study was published in Diabetes Care 1989 Feb;12(2):94-101

Study title and authors:
Persistence of hypertriglyceridemic effect of low-fat high-carbohydrate diets in NIDDM patients.
Coulston AM, Hollenbeck CB, Swislocki AL, Reaven GM.
Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, California.

This study can be accessed at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2539286

Coulston notes that although low-fat high-carbohydrate diets are recommended for patients with diabetes in an effort to reduce the risk of coronary artery disease, the results of short-term studies have shown that these diets can actually lead to an increased risk of heart disease.

In this study Coulston observed the effects of such diets compared to higher-fat diets over a longer period of 6 weeks in diabetic patients.

 
The diets were either:
  • 60% carbohydrate, 20% protein, 20% fat (high-carbohydrate diet).
  • 40% carbohydrate, 20% protein, 40% fat (high-fat diet).

The study found:
  • The (bad) blood glucose and insulin concentrations were significantly elevated throughout the day when patients consumed the high-carbohydrate diet.
  • The (bad) triglyceride concentrations increased by 30% when patients consumed the high-carbohydrate diet.
  • The (bad) Very low density lipoprotein (VLDL) cholesterol was significantly increased when patients consumed the high-carbohydrate diet.
  • The (good) High density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol levels were significantly decreased when patients consumed the high-carbohydrate diet.

This study shows that a high-carbohydrate, low-fat diet increases the risk of heart disease in diabetic patients. 

Tuesday, February 21, 2012

Meat, poultry and fish may help in the treatment of diabetes

This study was published in the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2002 Nov;56(11):1137-42

Study title and authors:
Coenzyme Q10 improves blood pressure and glycaemic control: a controlled trial in subjects with type 2 diabetes.
Hodgson JM, Watts GF, Playford DA, Burke V, Croft KD.
University of Western Australia Department of Medicine and HeartSearch, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.

This study can be accessed at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12428181

The objective of the study was to assess the effects of dietary coenzyme Q10 on blood pressure and blood sugar levels in subjects with type 2 diabetes. The study included 74 patients with type two diabetes who received extra coenzyme Q10 for 12 weeks.

After 12 weeks of the extra coenzyme Q10 the study found:
  • There was a 3-fold increase in blood levels of coenzyme Q10.
  • Blood pressure was significantly lowered.
  • Blood sugar levels were lowered. HbA1C levels decreased by .37%.
The results of the study show that extra coenzyme Q10 may improve blood pressure and long-term blood sugar control in subjects with type 2 diabetes.

The richest dietary sources of coenzyme Q10 are meat, poultry, fish and organ meats such as liver, kidney and heart. 

How care homes are starving their residents to death.

Now that I have your full attention (!), care & nursing homes give their residents plenty to eat & drink, so they are not starving them to death in the conventional sense.

So, what am I talking about? Clue:- UVB cannot penetrate window glass. Watch this video.


I'm talking about Vitamin D starvation.

At this time of year, care home residents are dying like flies. My sister (who worked in a care home years ago) told me that this is normal. Three died at mum's care home in the same week recently. All of the residents have one thing in common. They're all pale.

Old people feel the cold, so if they do go outside between March and September, they're covered from head to toe in clothes. They synthesise minimal Vitamin D in their skins for their bodies to store. Then, between September and March, their bodies use up those stores. Vitamin D levels decay exponentially , with a half-life of about 60 days. As Vitamin D levels fall, the risk of getting viral infections greatly increases, mood worsens, aches and pains worsen, blood glucose control worsens, the risk of getting cancer greatly increases. Need I go on?

As Dr. Richard M. Cooper (Private GP, Harley Street) pointed out, ALL of his patients were low in Vitamin D and they were active people who could go outdoors. Many care home residents can't go outdoors. They can get a paltry 400iu Vitamin D from an Adcal-D3 chewable tablet, but they're huge things that taste like sweetened chalk and cause constipation (mum hated them).

Death by Vitamin D starvation is a long, drawn-out process that reduces the quality & length of life for care home residents. Something needs to be done about it. All care home residents should have their serum Vitamin D levels tested and be given Vitamin D3 accordingly. I have broached this subject with the manager of mum's care home.

Mum's on 5,000iu/day of Vitamin D3. Although she is now fairly non compos mentis, she still smiles a lot and laughs at my dreadful jokes. She is also infection-free.

EDIT: Here's a transcript of the important bits from the above video:-

"At this care home, they're proud of their varied menu. Even so, the Government recommends supplements for the over 65's as well as children under 3 and women who are pregnant or breast-feeding. But health charities are demanding clearer guidelines and better advice. Because research into Vitamin D deficiency has revealed associations with all sorts of conditions, including Multiple Sclerosis, Diabetes, Arthritis, Osteoporosis, Heart Disease and even some cancers."

Dr Carrie Ruxton (Nutritionist) said:-
"What I think the Government should do is promote its own policies. It had a policy for years to recommend Vitamin D supplementation for vulnerable groups, like elderly, housebound and pregnant & lactating women and children but at the moment, that's not being done. In my own example, I was pregnant twice and nobody told me to take Vitamin D supplements."

This is unacceptable. As the manager at mum's care home is not responsible for the residents' supplementation, I will be taking this up with the MP for the area.

Update: I spoke to the nurse on Friday 2nd March about mum's medical history. Before Vitamin D3, mum had a Urinary Tract Infection in the previous 9 months. Since Vitamin D3, mum has had no medical problems and she has been happy & contented. Her serum Vitamin D level is in the normal range.

Monday, February 20, 2012

My High Calorie Intake Could Make Me Forgetful?


A Response to the Mayo Clinic's Press Release on Overeating and MCI


UPDATE! Read the response in "comments" from the primary investigator!

Yes I'm distressed!
I'm pretty worked up right now. Could be because the media is suggesting I should eat less, and I don't like it when I'm told to eat less—particularly for no good reason. And maybe it's because I take my mental function seriously, particularly living with Multiple Sclerosis, which can impact cognitive function. So best not to make unsubstantiated claims about what's gonna impact things like my memory unless it comes from good, solid science.

I'm perplexed. Could I really be the only one who sees the great irony in the opening statement of this Mayo Clinic press release stating that higher calorie intake, as self-reported by those with memory loss, ages 70-89, is associated with greater mild cognitive impairment (MCI)? Under the title Overeating May Double The Risk Of Memory Loss  the authors conclude "Cutting calories…may …prevent memory loss as we age." The study suggests that eating "too much" (more than 2,143 calories) may double the risk of memory loss.

Yes, the very people assessed to have the worse cognitive function reported the highest, sometimes extremely and unbelievably high calorie intakes. And as the press release video reveals, we're talking significant impairment (as in “Oh my, I've forgotten I was supposed to fly to New York yesterday" — oops!)

"Vell, I believe I had a couple of chickens, a pinch of shmaltz,
a few spoons of potatoes and a pint of borsht."
It's well established that self reporting dietary intake is full of errors—generally, the underweight err on the side of over-representing food intake, while the overweight do just the opposite. But self-reporting by the cognitively impaired? Is this some sort of joke, an April Fool's prank come early?

Even self-reported food intake using a validated assessment tool has its faults. (As in the Harvard study.) Being validated does not mean that the findings are real, that they reflect what was truly eaten. It merely addresses reproducibility. In this Mayo Clinic study, the only thing that was truly confirmed (as reported in the press release) is the degree of impairment, as assessed by more than one source. So we know participants are truly cognitively impaired, but we don't know with certainty how much they really ate calorically in the preceding year they were reporting on. Quite the population for accurately reporting, retrospectively, the amount they ate!

Maybe, given their MCI, they've forgotten how many portions they really consumed? Or perhaps they forgot that we typically don't report these things honestly.

The Joke is on Us

So here's my beef. The Mayo Clinic's press release, and subsequently the media outlets which picked it up, misled us. Even if my reasoning is off and all of the potential places where the science seems shabby were fully explained in the full study (which is yet to be released) there remains this problem—the media's conclusions suggest causation when at best we have an unexplained association.

The research summary states that higher calorie intake is associated with more cognitive loss (but does not necessarily cause it). So to then conclude, as most every article has, that we should be reducing our food intake, “cut out the chips” even, limiting our calories to prevent memory loss couldn't be more absurd! How unreasonable to manipulate us with these faulty one-liners, these irresponsible conclusions.

The Real Answer May Lie With BMI

The study controls for variables that might otherwise have confounded or confused the results. The researchers appropriately ensured that the finding, the increase in MCI with higher calorie intake, was not the result of such variables as diabetes, stroke, and, important to this argument, BMI. In other words, if I understand the press release and study abstract correctly, the increase in MCI associated with increased calorie intake at the highest intake levels, was not due to BMI. So BMI would not have been similarly increasing along with the cognitive impairment. Or, for that matter, with caloric intake.

So here's where I run into some difficulty. The study is stating that some, manyindividuals ages 70-89 years, are consuming > 2,000 to 6,000 calories daily, if we believe what they self-reported. And this is not linked with increasing BMI? If it isn't, that means people eating a rather extraordinary amount of food have no higher BMI than those at lower intakes. Soooo, if they are eating so much, but don't have higher BMIs, than how do we explain this?

There are several possible explanations. They could be expending more calories from exercise. Yet from the abstract, there was no mention of activity level—a major omission if we are assessing intake and making claims regarding the effects of intake without exploring output. Maybe it's exercisethat's linked with MCI, for goodness sake, as exercisers would need to be eating at higher calorie levels. “Exercise Causes Cognitive Impairment.”  Wouldn't that make for a headline!

Or, maybe there is some other medical explanation for such high intakes without resultant higher BMI. Are they malabsorbing—as in such conditions as celiac disease? This would result in nutrient deficiencies, which certainly may be responsible for cognitive losses.

Or maybe they have some thyroid condition, or cancer, not yet diagnosed, which may account for greater expenditure of calories, and may also impact cognitive function. I am no expert on memory loss—that I can say with certainty. But it appears the researchers have not done due diligence regarding their study and its conclusions.

In fairness, all the answers may be in the full research paper, yet to be published. Yes, I requested it, but was only presented with the abstract and the press release; even my questions regarding exercise were ignored.

Even referring to the higher calorie intake as “excessive” or "overeating", leaves me scratching my head—on what grounds? If you are more active than your peers at 75 years old—still playing tennis, walking regularly, golfing in your retirement years, even hiking as I've seen many a 70 and 80 year old do—wouldn't you need to be consuming more calories? Why should they be labeling this higher intake excessive, unless it is resulting in an undesirable weight increase outside of their normal range? But I didn't see this addressed in either the abstract or the press release.

And why should you care?

You, my readers, do not match the profile of the study participants in terms of age. But you are being irresponsibly told that lower calorie intake may prevent cognitive failure. And when it comes from a reputable establishment such as the Mayo Clinic, and sealed as a reality in the written word of such media outlets as the Wall Street Journal, Time Online, and others, you'll believe it.

You'll believe that higher calorie intake is detrimental—regardless of your caloric need. And then another study may arise (like the Harvard study) drawing similarly inappropriate conclusions, and you'll buy into those senseless conclusions, too. And soon you'll be so inundated with all this "science" that you'll be overwhelmed about what you can eat and what you should avoid and how much. See the problem?

What can you do? Don't be too quick to accept the written word as fact. Await a follow up study that might confirm findings. And be careful about where you get your information. Sure, reputable resources are better than sites promoting and selling something, with a financial interest in convincing you of the value of their words. But even seemingly solid institutions and individuals can draw the wrong conclusions. When in doubt, discuss such articles with those capable of shedding some light on the findings.

The unfortunate end result of early publication of scientific studies is a loss of trust. Studies that haven't yet made it for publication in peer-reviewed journals have no place in the hands of the public. Misinformation runs rampant, and as consumers of this information, we are left overwhelmed and confused. And it's a bad state of things when we can't trust science.





High-fat diets are better than high-carbohydrate diets in the treatment of type 2 diabetes

This study was published in the New England Journal of Medicine 1988 Sep 29;319(13):829-34

Study title and authors:
Comparison of a high-carbohydrate diet with a high-monounsaturated-fat diet in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus.
Garg A, Bonanome A, Grundy SM, Zhang ZJ, Unger RH.
Center for Human Nutrition, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas 75235-9052.

This study can be accessed at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3045553

The study compared the effects of a high-carbohydrate diet with a high-fat diet in 10 patients with type 2 diabetes receiving insulin therapy. The patients were assigned to receive first one diet and then the other, each for 28 days.

The diets were:
(i) 60% carbohydrate, 15% protein, 25% fat (high carbohydrate diet).
(ii) 35% carbohydrate, 15% protein 50% fat (high fat diet).

The study found:
(a) As compared with the high-carbohydrate diet, the high-fat diet resulted in lower average glucose levels and reduced insulin requirements.
(b) As compared with the high-carbohydrate diet, the high-fat diet reduced unhealthy triglyceride levels by 25%.
(c) As compared with the high-carbohydrate diet, the high-fat diet reduced unhealthy lower very-low density lipoprotein (VLDL) levels by 35%.
(d) As compared with the high-carbohydrate diet, the high-fat diet increased healthy high density lipoprotein (HDL) levels by 13%.

The results of this study indicate that a high-fat diet is better than a high-carbohydrate diet in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. 

Sunday, February 19, 2012

You can’t please all of the people...

...all of the time. I see that I've lost a few followers recently. I guess some of my recent posts have been too controversial. The triple-whammy of bad things that happened last year (and which sent me into several months of depression) have all been resolved and my mood is now very positive.

I don't write posts to gain followers. I'm not trying to start a new religion. I write in order to dump my thoughts to hard copy so that I can go over them and also so that you can critique them.

I've just added Food Politics to my blog list. Marion Nestle writes about it, so I don't have to.

Oh no, not again!

Today's title is a quote from Douglas Adams' "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy".



There seems to be a lot of hysteria & worry around the Internet.

Oh, noes! They took away her lunch-box (they didn't)! Her lunch-box! That's crap!

Oh, noes! They made her eat chicken nuggets (they didn't)! Chicken nuggets! That's crap!

Oh, noes! They made her eat a portion of grain! A portion of grain! That's crap!

Oh, noes! They wanted to give her a carton of skimmed milk! Skimmed milk! That's crap!

Oh, noes! They wanted to give her a carton of chocolate milk! Chocolate milk! That's crap!

Is there too much fat in this Guacamole?

Is there too much omega-6 in this pork?

Is there too much BPA in this bottled water?

And so on...

Firstly, chicken nuggets, grains, skimmed milk and chocolate milk are not crap. They're not perfect, but they're far better than chocolate/candy bars and fizzy drinks.

Schools act in loco parentis, so they are not going to feed the children crap. USDA guidelines are nowhere near perfect, but children who aren't humongously fat are metabolically-flexible. Therefore, whether they eat carbohydrates or fats, their bodies will burn them. If a child has been diagnosed with Coeliac disease, they won't be given gluten grains (unless the school wants to get sued).

Eat some carbs, dammit. See Why I Ditched Low Carb.

To quote from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy again, DON'T PANIC! The dose makes the poison. Dietary fructose is used by the liver to make blood glucose to run red blood cells & the brain. A non-keto-adapted brain uses ~140g/day of glucose. Therefore, in the absence of any other dietary carbohydrates, a child could eat 100g/day of fructose, or 200g/day of sucrose without harm. Obviously, other carbohydrates are being eaten, so the amount of fructose that can be eaten without harm is probably ~50g/day, or ~100g/day of sucrose, or ~90g/day of HFCS55.

Warning, irony alert. So, light up a large spliff and chill a bit! Here's a song to help.



EDIT: Worrying about "X" may be worse for you than "X" itself, due to the adverse effect of chronically-elevated cortisol.