That is the question.
Dietitians are...um…opinionated. Armed with a stack of controversial and repudiated facts, we will debate any nutrition idea. You can think of it in terms of liberal vs. conservative. (I hate to use the terms democrat vs. republican as these terms hold little meaning anymore as to which stands for what.) There are the "idealist” dietitians, or those who push for organic eating, farm-to-market principles, and who would like to see everyone with their own compost bin. And then there are the dietitians who sit back and say, “That’s great but probably not happening in this lifetime.” We can call these dietitians “realists.”
I park myself in the realist camp. I would love to live in a
world where produce is local and
affordable. I would love for everyone to eat a low fat lifestyle while
increasing servings of lean fish. I would love for everyone to cook at home and
rarely eat out. But I live in this world where even I have to drag myself to
the kitchen to cook during the week. I like to teach people how to eat in today’s
world while meeting their health goals. For the record, the idealists are a
necessary part of the dietetics field and I would secretly like to be a little
bit more like them.
Now, the argument of artificial sweeteners continues to
cause such emotional reactions in people. We have yet to find a link between artificial sweeteners
and cancer. (I mean a scientific link
with trials, studies and paid researchers. Not the latest yahoo article.) Yet
we do know there is a strong link between obesity and cancer. According to
Cancer.gov, obesity can be linked to esophagus, pancreas, colon, breast,
endometrium, kidney, thyroid, and gallbladder cancers. It is estimated obesity
can account for as much as 40% of these cancers. So if I am trying to help
decrease someone’s waistline and they need the aid of artificial sweeteners to
get them through the day, then so be it!
The FDA banned Ephedra, in 2004 due to reported deaths and heart complications |
Is it appropriate to
use medication for weight loss? My quick response is no. What can medication do
to change behaviors and set that individual up for long term weight loss
maintenance? But upon further reflection I would say, “it depends.” It depends
on that individual’s view of the drug and its role in their weight loss
success. A study based on participants in the National Weight Control Registry
found that only 4.3% of people used medications for weight loss.* However 20%
used liquid formulas and 55% used a program or professional assistance. Meaning
that approximately 80% of individuals used some sort of aid to lose and
maintain their weight. But what these participants realized is that these were
just aids, not solutions. They still had to reduce caloric intake and increase
exercise to meet and keep the weight off.
Now I’m a realist. While I prefer that people lose weight
without the use of medications, I’m a realist. We may need aids to lose weight
and the benefits of being at a long term healthy weight may be well worth the
side effects of drugs.** In fact, I have
been known to use a liquid formula to maintain weight. It’s an aid, not the
solution. But again, Im a realist. You absolutely can lose weight without aids,
but should you decide to add them make sure and keep perspective. It’s an aid,
not the solution.
*Also, this
study occurred in 1997, when there fewer drugs available for weight loss.
**Side
effects of these drugs are tingling of hands and feet (paresthesia), dizziness,
altered taste sensation, insomnia, constipation, and dry mouth. Enjoy! J
Today’s Verse: “Because
he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being
tempted” Romans 2:18.
No comments:
Post a Comment