The fashion industry is long aimed at women alone.  Increasingly we see unrealistic, unobtainable male models who are of an unhealthy size.

It is now estimated that at least 10% of anorexics, bulimic s and binge eaters are male.  Many believe that the recent shift in the fashion industry and media using very skinny male models are to blame for this.  For some reason comedian Russell Brand's skinny physique has become somewhat of a sensation which is great for him and his skinny jeans but not so great for the rest of mankind!

Eating Disorders affect anyone and everyone.   However, most people make the mistake that sufferers tend to be white, middle class and teenage.  

Men are known to visit the doctor far less than women, particularly young men, so this could be the tip of the iceberg where Eating Disorders and body image problems where men are concerned.

Men are also coming under increasing pressure to look like the cover of "Men's Health" magazine - a problem women have felt similar pressure for many years.  This presents it's own gender specific problems such as the perfect 6 pac.  Manorexia and Bigorexia are terms most are not familiar with but they relate to when men become dangerously muscle bound in the pursuit of perfection.  Sound familiar ladies?!

Can you imagine what it must be like to be suffering from an Eating Disorder when you are male when the rest of society believes it to be a female only affliction?  Chances are that GP's and health professionals, even mental health professionals, will fail to recognise your symptoms.  However, these professionals will say that early diagnosis and treatment is paramount!  Also, men have the added problem that admitting to having such a problem simply isn't macho.  There's nothing wimpy about an eating disorder!

Thankfully there are some folks over at the South London and Maudsley NHS Foundations Trust and  Canterbury Christchurch University say “In talking to men suffering eating and body image problems, they told me they felt male eating disorders were an invisible issue and that eating disorders were thought to only affect women. They felt very alone with their eating disorders and worried about how people would react if they found out. The men we spoke to had found it difficult to admit to themselves and others that their eating behaviours were problematic and that they needed some support. This meant that many of the men waited a considerable amount of time before seeking help.”  They are keen to do something to make a difference to the lives of these individuals.

As far as where these issues can start, childhood bullying is a very common in the start of an Eating Disorder.  Many men who were overweight as kids were teased at school.  70% of young people start a diet at some stage.  It's therefore not surprising that some of these end up with and Eating Disorder.

A group of men in Brighton with Eating Disorders have started a petition to try and get a better understanding from health professionals.  If you would like to sign up please follow this link 100,000 signatures on an e-petition 

Also, if any of the issues raised has moved you into action, please check out my upcoming workshop/seminar  on body image - details on front page of the website.  You will be most welcome to come along and will be amongst many who suffer the same things!

James.

They says that sugary foods are causing illnesses such as obesity, heart disease, cancer and liver problems.

Given that these scientists say that sugar contributes to 35 million deaths per year worldwide, should it be controlled through legislations and taxation?

Incredibly, the authors of this article report that obesity is now a bigger problem across the world than malnourishment!  Truly remarkable!

Interestingly they state that not only does sugar make you fat but it also changes metabolism, raises blood pressure, mucks about with hormone levels and harms the liver.  Unpleasant stuff!

The scientists say that the harm done by sugar is similar to the damage done by alcohol which is of course distilled sugar so really we shouldn't be that surprised.

When reading the comments made by Robert Lustig, a childhood obesity expert from California University, one could be forgiven for thinking that he is talking about a class A drug!  He talks about sugar as being widely available, toxic, abused and harmful to society. See the link?!

Their enthusiasm for taxation is quite remarkable.  They want to see the price of fizzy drinks double, restricting their sale to over 17's or 18's and tightening regulations on school vending machines (which incidentally was shown this week to have nothing to do with obesity rates in the UK) - No Evidence Of A Link Between Junk Food And Weight Gain In Schools 

Dr Laura Schmidt also of the California University wants to see the cost and availability of good food easier to obtain.  Great!

The report also points out that sugar consumption has tripled in the last 50 years.  What will happen if this trend continues?

Whilst reading the article today, I got the distinct feeling that we are being beaten around the head yet again for the choices we make where our diets are concerned.  However, the issue is not just about that, the problem is multi-faceted.  We need to take into consideration the responsibility that the food companies have, along with supermarkets and then advertising.  Do we really need to be reminded that we can buy Coca Cola (and other makes)  in the local supermarket and that it tastes good?!

Another issue that needs addressing is the labelling of food.  They are confusing and are very good at hiding the truth.  It is simply outrageous that ready meals, fast food and even bread contain so much salt and sugar.  They want us to become addicted to these products and it looks as though they have their wish! 

The article finishes by asking that if we can ban smoking in public places due to health concerns and put air bags in cars for safety, why can we not make changes in the food industry regarding sugar?  Others have described the report as "puritanical" and that we all just have to take responsibility for our own health.  True, but there's no harm in trying to get the food industry to take equal responsibility for the amount of sugar they pile into their everyday foodstuffs such as bread!  Next time you buy a loaf, check out the sugar content!  You might be surprised if a little shocked!  

A new drug for weight loss is being developed by the afore-mentioned professor.

The drug works by switching off the appetite by mimicking the effect of the hormone that is naturally released when the stomach is full.

The hormone, Oxyntomodulin, is also found in those who have had their stomachs made small by operations such as Gastric Bypass.

The professor says that he wanted to develop something that will produce weight loss without the need for surgery.

The drug is still in the early stages of development and initially will be given to diabetics but in time could be available over the counter according the The Daily Mail.

The professor is reported to have said, "If you take away hunger, food is not attractive".  Is the professor saying that people who overeat do so because they do not have enough of the said hormone to tell them they are full or do they overeat regardless of this particular hormone's  level?  I think the answer is clear!  Given the number of overweight/obese in this country, surely they cannot all be suffering from a lack of the ability to feel full.

People overeat for a vast wealth of reasons, even when they are obviously full and obesity is the result.

One has to be cautious when another "wonder" diet pill hits the headlines.  Questions need to be asked such as will it cause more health issues than it sets out to solve?  What are the long term effects?

Indeed more and more people are turning to therapy following disastrous bariatric  surgery.  If you haven't got your emotions and mental health sussed, even bariatric surgery will fail you in the end.

Non surgical solutions to the obesity epidemic are to be welcomed but by far and away the best course of action is to look deep inside yourself to find out the root cause of your weight issues and find a way to resolve it if at all possible.

James.

However, a recent study published in Sociology In Education, authored by Jennifer Van Hook, a professor of Sociology and Demography, has found no evidence that junk food found in schools has contributed to weight gain.

The findings were so unexpected that Proff Hook and her team delayed publishing their findings for two years while they searched for an alternative explanation.

This was a large study of 19,500 children who were studied all the way from fifth to eighth grade.

Junk food was available to 59.2% of fifth graders and 86.3% of eighth graders.

Even though there was a significant rise in the availability and accessibility of junk food in schools, the rates of obesity/overweight remained much the same.  If fact, in the same group of children, as they got older the rates of obesity/overweight actually fell from 39.1% to 35.4%.  Quite remarkable. 

Celebrity chef Jamie Oliver did a whole series based around junk food in schools.  His passion was commendable but he came in for a load of abuse, particularly from parents when he tried to implement better nutrition for the kids.

It has often been said that schools are making an awful lot of money from the sale of junk food but it would appear that this does not reflect the obesity levels in children.  Could it be that we need to focus our attention elsewhere to find the root cause?  After all, kids spend a relatively small amount of time in school, about a third, and even then for only 39 weeks per year.  Then, there are only small amounts of this time where children in this age range can actually access the junk food which is apparently making them fat.  Doesn't add up does it?

Parents do not like the finger being pointed at them as far as their children's diets are concerned.  Jamie Oliver's efforts showed this in spectacular style with parents throwing McDonald's over the school gate to their starving children!  However, there is no link that schools are the cause of the problem.  Obviously other factors need to be looked at too such as the amount of exercise these kids get, affluence and poverty etc. in order to get a clearer picture but this research in itself is very interesting indeed!

James.

Professor Pilar Guallar-Castillon of the Autonomous University in Madrid and her team conducted the study.

They took 40,757 adults, all of whom were free of heart disease at the start of the study.  During the 11 years of the studies durations, there were 606 diagnosis of coronary heart disease and 1,135 deaths overall. 

Those in the highest risk group for fried food consumption had no significant raised risk of heart disease than those not eating fried food.

A report published in the BMJ said there was no difference in the results between the use of olive oil for frying than the use of sunflower oil.

It was found that even though it is common place in a Mediterranean diet to use olive oil and sunflower oil in large quantities, both in the home and away from home, there was no association observed between fried food consumption and the risk of coronary heart disease or death.

However, we must proceed with caution!  Whilst this information will come as a breath of fresh air to those who like to indulge in a good fry up, we should be careful to note that fried food does of course contain more calories than non fried food.  We could certainly rack up an awful lot of calories if we fried everything which could lead to over consumption which in turn could lead to weight gain or obesity which are both risk factors in heart disease.

It would appear however that the widespread belief that the smallest amount of fried food is going to kill us appears to be unfounded.  The evidence just isn't there to support the myth.   The challenge as always is balance!  Enjoy your occasional fry up guilt free!

James.

Around 1000 people were surveyed.  Some 29% said they would like to do more exercise but were prevented from doing so due to long term health problems.  This shows that the over 55's would be much more active than their younger counterparts if they were physically able to do so.

It would appear that the Government's message about exercise being good for us isn't filtering down  to young people quite as well as it could.

Why are the 18-25's not exercising as much as the over 55's?

A few of issues spring to mind.  Children nowadays are far less likely to go outside of their own houses for example to ride a bike than people over the age of 55 would have when they were kids largely due to parent's fears around safety.  Bottom line is kids just aren't allowed out like they used to be!  Also, the upsurge in the use of technology seems to be taking it's toll creating an ever more sedentary lifestyle amongst the young.

Perhaps the over 55's have more time to exercise, possibly having retired and therefore more able to tend to their exercising needs.  Maybe people who are that bit older tend to take heed of healthy lifestyle messages more than the young who simply think that they are immortal!

The study conducted by the Norwegian University of Science and Technology found a link between the occurrence of pain and the frequency, intensity and amount of exercise.

It has also been found that in general if people are active they have better mental health.

The study was conducted over a five year period across the general population.

3 out of 10 people studied, aged 20 years and over, said that they had suffered from constant moderate to severe pain over the last year.

Whilst the results only showed a 10% improvement in those who exercised moderately for at least 30 minutes at least 1-2 times per week than those who did no exercise, the results among older women was quite pronounced.  The pain reduction amongst these individuals  was 20-40% more than inactive individuals.

Generally speaking, if you have a very sedentary lifestyle it really would be worthwhile taking some exercise every week.  It will give you a sense of well being too!  It really doesn't have to be a marathon!  A gentle stroll is better than nothing!  It's never too late either to start to make small changes in our lives that will benefit us greatly.

James.

France has a real problem with rising obesity levels. In the past 4 decades the number of obese has risen from 500,000 to 22 million. This appears to be Dukan's concern. 

Dukan suggest that pupils should be set an ideal weight in the final year of their baccalaureate exams. If they manage to keep their BMI between 18 and 25 they will earn extra points. His suggestions have not gone down well.

Dukan adds that his plans would not discriminate against the already overweight as they would earn even more points if they manage to to lose weight over the 2 year period. 

Mr Dukan has been accused of seeking publicity for his book and in turn putting forward dangerous proposals to the future president. 

One problem is that adolescents have an awful lot to deal with without this added pressure. Could this generate a whole new generation of weight obsessed people, perhaps leading to anorexia and or bulimia? 

Interestingly it is reported that of 5000 people who have followed Dukan's diet, 80% had regained the weight within 4 years. This is disputed by Mr Dukan who puts the figure closer to 40%. We know that 95% of dieters in general cannot sustain their weight loss which begs the question, do diets work? Clearly not! 

Another question to ask would be does bribing people to lose weight work? 

A scheme set up last year as a pilot in the NHS found that giving a financial incentive to people to lose weight worked very well. On average patients lost 4kg in a year and were paid £180. 

However, the study wasn't without it's problems. Only 38% of participants completed their plans which is worse that people who opt to attend a slimming club. There has not been any long term follow up as to whether the participants kept their weight off! 

James  

Should overweight people pay more for their airline seat?

A recent poll revealed that 76% of people think that they should. Only 22 of the 550 surveyed thought that they should not have to pay for an extra seat due to their size. 

This poll raises a number of issues which quite frankly leaves one feeling remarkably uncomfortable. 

We can see that if our baggage weighs more than is allowed then we accept that we have to pay more. Is there a difference if the excess baggage is our own body? 

Of course if this news had read that thin people will get to pay less for their ticket would anyone have batted an eyelid? It seems smokers, overweight people the ill etc are in the firing line and are easy targets. 

Is this the thin end of the wedge? We are aware of so called “fat taxes”. What will be next? Paying more to ride in a taxi or go on a train? Let alone turning up to your favourite eateries to find you are put on the scales in the queue and turned away due to your current BMI? Where will the line be drawn?

Frankly people who are overweight suffer enough. Rarely are the overweight in society overweight due to ignorance. They are suffering in some way. This will only add insult to injury. We are all human after all.

In the end won't all of this even itself out? On any given flight, the airline will usually have a cross section of society on board. For example, thin people, overweight people, tall people, short people, body builders and children!

James