The shape of things

We all know that a little exercise can help you lose weight, lower cholesterol, blood pressure and reduce the risk of diabetes etc. But it also has other benefits that might just encourage you to pick up your gym shoes after work and go for a little workout.

If you have trouble sleeping at night, exercise has proven to help people fall asleep better and have a more restful sleep. Exercising can also help you stop smoking (sedentary female smokers assigned to an exercise regime were twice as likely to quit smoking and stay smoke free).

Not enough? Well a better sex life can also come about from exercise - men who exercise regularly are less likely to have erectile dysfunction, and women who exercise spurred "greater sexual response." Not only that, but when you exercise you tend to feel better about yourself and feel more sexually desirable.

Like I said - Just do it! 

Update on Stretching: I've made a point to add in the stretches from Shape Magazine after my workouts (ok, not everytime, but I tried). Anyway, I still felt like they were a waste of time and not really relaxing my muscles.

So today I was shocked when I was reading an article on Women's Health Website about old workouts vs. new workouts. Basically they claimed that the old way of stretching (i.e. holding a stretch for 30 seconds or more) is outdated and has been replaced by a new type of stretching - Active Isolated Stretching - that advocates holding a stretch for only two seconds doing 10 reps.

Confused, I read that example hamstring stretch and then followed the link to a Website with more information. I found this article on the Website that explains this new type of stretching. Wharton claims that holding a stretch for too long causes the muscle to contract (not relax!) because it is protecting itself from the bouncing and pulling that goes on during a long stretch.

This is their plan: 

1. Work one muscle at a time.
2. Actively contract the muscle that is opposite the targeted muscle, which will relax in preparation of its stretch.
3. Stretch it gently and quickly.
4. Release it before it realizes that it has been stretched and goes into its protective contraction.
5. Do it again.
6. Go out and win.

The article then goes on to provide information on how to stretch your calf muscles, hamstrings and quads. You need a rope (or towel or resistance band), and preferably an area where you won't feel silly contorting your body in some odd positions. Now this, I will try. Read it at http://www.whartonperformance.com/exercises.htm

If you try it out, comment here on how it worked out. If I (or you) like this active-isolated stretching, there is a book that teaches stretching exercises for all muscles.

I loved the title of this article "Relax or Die". I also liked the research it presented... for a quarter of a century 800 workers were studied to see if the amount of relaxation that people get on the weekend is related to death by heart disease. The results? Those that said they failed to recover from the workweek during the weekend were more likely to die of heart disease.

Obviously, relaxing and recovering are not the only way you can protect yourself from future heart problems, but it can be added to the list.

If you find yourself stressed out even on the weekends, it might be time to consider why. Excessive stress at work? depression? heavy drinking?

My favorite weekend relaxing activities: tennis, curling up with a good book, renting movies and ordering take out, going home and visiting my parents.

Add your favorite activities to the list!

When I read this article I almost felt as if my fiance had written it himself. For as long as I've known him, he's been complaining about the poor design of our city (Baton Rouge) because you can only use a car to get around. He claims (and I believe he's right) that the reason so many people in our city are fat is because they never have to walk anywhere!

A San Diego psychology professor says that everything America has done in the past 100 years has made us fatter. The solution? Walkable developments, more money for parks and bike paths, etc.

Communities designed under the idea of "new urbanism" will allow residents to adapt a more active lifestyle because residents will be able to walk to parks and shopping through wide sidewalks and meandering bike paths.

One reason I'm glad I'll be moving to Denver soon: A new neighborhood called Stapleton in Denver is designed with this concept. A spokesman for the developer of the neighborhood said "People will walk if you give them the opportunity."

I'm tired of getting in my car to go anywhere in my city. Right next to my neighborhood is a grocery store and strip mall with Subway and other stores. It's a perfect location. BUT, the only way to access it from the neighborhood... Is to walk on the road, through a huge drainage ditch full of water, and into the parking lot of the stores. Multiple times I've wished that a simple sidewalk and a little bridge would connect my neighborhood to the shopping center so I don't have to waste gas and time on the traffic-filled roads just to get to the store next door.

Hopefully more developers will plan communities like Denver's neighborhood. Not only will it help our obesity problem, it will result in a decrease in our addiction to oil.

Experts are now saying that good ole sunscreen (no matter the SPF) may not do what it was designed to do, protect you from skin cancer. Apparently you don't need a sunburn to get skin cancer, and although sunscreens efficiently screen out UVB rays, not all screens are created equal. Many sunscreens do not protect you against the most harmful UVA rays (the rays that penetrate deep into your skin and cause cancer and wrinkles).

How does your sunscreen add up? Check the label and see if it includes the following ingredients:  zinc oxide, titanium dioxide or avobenzone. Another tip - check to see if the sunscreen has expired. I went to get some sunscreen out of my cabinet before a trip and realized it expired in 2003.

I was browsing on Shape's Website a few weeks ago and saw an online poll that asked, "Would you ever take a diet pill" Interested, I submitted my answer (no!) and wondered what the results would be (I guessed 70% no, 30% yes). I got the new Shape magazine this week and sure enough, the reader poll and results were featured in the shape.com section. Surprisingly, the results were 52% yes and 48% no.

Let me be clear, I realize that this poll is in no way scientific and/or generalizable to shape readers, young women, or any group for that matter. But despite all that, I'm way alarmed by the results. More than half of the women in the poll would take a diet pill?

I realize that losing weight takes a lot of work (I've been through it) but I also am skeptical of anything that claims it's product makes losing weight easy. It's not easy. It takes willpower, it takes commitment, it takes doing things differently, changing a lifestyle, spending money and time cooking healthy meals, etc. etc. But it's so worth it.

If you (or someone you know) is a diet pill person, or someone who would consider taking these pills, maybe this will change your opinion: They aren't very effective!

Weight loss is modest for prescription diet drugs: an average of less than 5.5 Ib more than placebo at the end of one year with fenfluramine, 7 to 11 Ib for the recently approved sibutramine (Meddia, by Knoll Pharmaceutical), and 8 Ib for orlistat (Xenical, by Hoffman-La Roche). Most studies show maximum weight loss at about 20 weeks, with little or no further weight loss during long-term treatment, and weight regain when the drug is discontinued (Levitsky, 1997).

If you consume 500 calories less than what you are consuming regularly, you can lose 1-2 pounds a week. Multiply that by 52 weeks and you could lose 100 pounds in a year!  

Not only do they not work well, they also are associated with major health risks (like leaky heart valves, increased blood pressure, and possible brain damage.

Americans need to learn that there isn't always an easy way out of things... especially out of obesity.

I've been out of town for a week, hence the lack of posting, but I'm back now, with lots to report.

I read an article today about Wendy's switching to a new oil to fry their food in, one that will cut the grams of trans fat in their food tremendously (making a child's size fry have zero grams of trans fat). Personally, I think this is great news, considering only 5 grams of trans fat a day can up your risk for heart disease by 25%!

The switch will occur in August, with a promise that the taste will not be sacrificed.

I think our nation will always be a fast food nation, but luckily there seems to at least be an attempt to make it healthier. I believe that by offering low-cal options (like salads, fruit cups, etc.) is a step toward this, but does little to help the problem.

When I think about the healthy-eaters I know, the majority of them limit their fast-food intake to a minimum. Naturally, they would be the one's to order the healthier options, but if they don't frequent fast food joints, they won't be consuming them, and I think very few will.

Therefore, the solution to the problem would be to make the fast food staples (burgers, fries, chicken nuggets) healthier, a la Wendy's. Hopefully other restaurants will join this trend, and developments will be made to make the staples even healthier.