To those eating fake junk food and sweeteners

"Ignoramus11738" wrote in message
...

http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB1...journal_middle

Diet of Low-Fat, Low-Calorie Foods
May Trick the Body Into Eating More
June 29, 2004; Page D1

Supermarket aisles are filled with foods that have been stripped of
calories, sugar, fat and carbs. But new research questions whether
altering foods may actually interfere with the body's instincts and
trick people into eating too much.

It has long been known that consumers consciously overeat many diet
foods -- remember the nation's binge on low-fat Snackwell's cookies?
But what's unusual about the latest research is that it looks at the
impact that regular eating of certain foods may be having on the
body's unconscious, biological mechanisms for regulating food intake.
HEALTH MAILBOX



1
Read Tara Parker-Pope's Health Mailbox2 where she answers readers'
questions about medical studies, ailments and treatments.

The question is whether by consistently eating sweet foods with no
calories, a person can eventually lose an instinctive ability to
distinguish between high- and low-calorie sweet foods. Early studies
have shown that babies and young children have an innate ability to
judge the caloric content of foods. And while adults can obviously
read labels to figure out the calories they're eating, the issue is
whether sugar-free or fat-reduced foods also throw off the body's
subtle, internal signals about food intake -- causing us to overeat a
few calories more here and there.

In the latest study, researchers from Purdue University looked at
whether artificial sweeteners disrupt the body's ability to "predict"
the caloric consequences of a food. The study, published in the July
issue of the International Journal of Obesity, involved young rats who
were fed a steady diet of sweetened drinks for 10 days. One group of
rats consumed only sugar-sweetened beverages. A second group received
an inconsistent diet -- sometimes real-sugar drinks and sometimes
drinks with no-calorie saccharin.

After 10 days, all the rats were given a real-sugar chocolate drink
and rat chow. The rats with a history of eating both real sugar and
artificial sweeteners ate three times the calories as the rats who
always drank the real-sugar drink.

What does it mean? The researchers speculate that the overeating rats
had received inconsistent signals about the meaning of sweet. For
them, sweet sometimes had calories and other times it didn't, possibly
confusing the rats' natural food-intake instincts. But the rats who
always associated sweet with calories were able to compensate for
sweet calories by eating less.

New study suggests some processed foods may mix up internal cues and
lead to overeating.



While rat studies can't explain the human obesity epidemic, animal
studies have long given us insight into certain basic behaviors. Just
as Pavlov's dogs drooled at the sound of a ringing bell, even when
food wasn't present, the Purdue researchers suggest we should consider
a Pavlovian approach to the obesity problem, looking at how sensory
properties of foods can condition our biological instincts about
eating.

"When you substitute artificial sweetener for real sugar, the body
learns it can no longer use its sense of taste to gauge calories,"
says Susan E. Swithers, associate professor of psychological sciences
and the study co-author.

The study doesn't necessarily implicate diet soft drinks; studies have
clearly shown that people lose weight when they switch from sugared
soft drinks to diet soft drinks. But the research does fuel a growing
concern that processed foods may interfere with our ability to
regulate how much we eat. For instance, if one day you eat a regular
potato chip and another time you eat a reduced-fat version, the
question is whether your body may eventually stop making a distinction
between the two, causing you to slightly overeat the next time you
encounter a regular chip or any full-fat food.

And at a time when bread is now low-carb, cookies and candy bars are
being fused into decadent combinations and ice cream can be fat-free,
it's no wonder people are getting mixed signals about foods. "As foods
get more and more dissociated from our traditional history with foods,
it's going to be harder and harder for us to regulate how much to
eat,'' says Barbara Rolls, a longtime food and behavior researcher at
Pennsylvania State University.

But the notion that we are being duped -- either consciously or
subconsciously -- into eating more is controversial.

Human studies haven't consistently shown that artificial sweeteners
affect eating behavior. One French study, for instance, showed that
eating patterns didn't vary among adults who ate a yogurt-like food,
whether it was sweetened with sugar or aspartame, says Adam
Drewnowski, director of nutritional sciences at University of
Washington.

Part of the problem may be that adults, who have years of experience
with food, are tough to study. It has been shown that infants have an
innate sense of the calories they are eating. In studies, babies eat
roughly the same number of calories in a sitting -- eating more of
watered-down formula and less of a concentrated one. Other studies
have shown preschool children given standard portions instinctively
eat less after a high-calorie meal, showing that, at least early in
life, we use internal cues about caloric intake to control our eating.

Until we know more, nutrition and behavior experts say the rat study
reaffirms how important it is to read food labels, control portion
size and pay attention to obvious body signals about hunger and
fullness. And the best way to avoid confusion is to eat whole foods
like fruits, vegetables and fish and cut back on processed foods.

"We appear to have these automatic signals that can help us modulate
our food intake, but when we start to consume foods that violate those
signals, it makes it harder," says Dr. Swithers. "We're people, and we
can use other mechanisms to regulate body weight, but the evidence
suggests that we don't do it particularly well."

I think something else is going on and it's not just calories. Clinical
studies show that the anti-oxidants in vitamin pills don't work as well as
eating foods containing the anti-oxidants. The same is true for fiber.
When you give your body processed foods, typically they are enriched with
chemicals not by combining nutritious foods. I think your body knows it's
getting chemicals, not real food. So it decides it wants some real food and
what does it get instead? More processed food in most cases, right?

Patricia Heil wrote:

I think something else is going on and it's not just calories. Clinical
studies show that the anti-oxidants in vitamin pills don't work as well as
eating foods containing the anti-oxidants. The same is true for fiber.
When you give your body processed foods, typically they are enriched with
chemicals not by combining nutritious foods. I think your body knows it's
getting chemicals, not real food. So it decides it wants some real food
and
what does it get instead? More processed food in most cases, right?

That's exactly what led to my overeating. My body was craving some real
nutrients. I was giving it empty calories, and getting fatter and fatter,
but not proper nutrition.
--
The post you just read, unless otherwise noted, is strictly my opinion
and experience. Please interpret accordingly.