Strollerderby : diet

Eating Your Baby's Placenta

Cole Gamble — Thu, 28 May 2009 17:00:00 GMT

Placentophagia is term for eating of the placenta, and you know if there's a name for it, it's a real deal. Animals, of course, do it al the time. Anyone whose cat had kitten can attest. Humans also engage in the pratice all over the world because it's said to stem postpartum depression and help to contract the uterus after the birth. Chrissy Schilling over at Momlogic details her own placenta feast with twin sister Kathy. From her post:

"The placenta is such an amazing organ in all its done for my baby that it didn't seem right to simply throw it away. My thought was "being the only organ that the human body makes that naturally exits the body, why not take advantage of it?"

Chrissy and Kathy got more than just one meal out of the six pound placenta. They served it over noodles and made sandwiches.

Chrissy even found the experience cathartic:

"By taking it in again, it was symbolic for me as a way to truly say "good-bye" to my 9-month pregnancy and "hello" to an exciting (albeit challenging) new chapter in my life.

See? Delicious, nutricious and life affirming. It's good to eat stuff that comes out of your body. Except poop. So, can I fix you up a nice egg and placenta scramble?

Photo: Kathy Schilling

More Good Stuff:

10 Great Books For (Traumatizing) Children

Dumb Kiddy Product Makeovers

Disturbing Baby-Swinging PSA

How Many of These Pregnancy Blunders Have You Made?

Jen Chaney — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 13:34:00 GMT

We all make mistakes, especially when we're pregnant and our hormones are wreaking havoc on our ability to process information. That may be why, according to an article on the Web site Divine Caroline, intelligent women often commit a few errors when they're with-child.

The site has published a list of Eight Blunders Even Smart Pregnant Women Make, which recently also was featured on the Web site Empowher. I was surprised by a few items, but also must acknowledge that I committed some of these during my nine months of fetus-carrying. Hey, I can 'fess up to my mistakes if you can 'fess up to yours'.

Of the eight errors on the list, here are the ones I made:

Eating For Two -- The Empowher list says most women only need an additional 300 hours calories per day when they're pregnant, but many consume much more than that, and not always of the healthy variety. Uh, yeah, guilty as charged on this one. I ate all kinds of things I shouldn't have when I was pregnant: burgers, hot fudge sundaes, my weight in Cheez-Its and more Christmas cookies than I can count. I was so relieved when I found out I didn't have gestational diabetes that I went on a sugar binge to celebrate. Not smart, Chaney. Not smart.

Decreasing Activity: In addition to gorging, I also was a lazy bum. I exercised a little: occasional gym visits and long walks with the dog. But not nearly as much as I should have. Although, comparatively speaking, I looked like an Olympic athlete compared to how often I hit the gym now. Apparently I am not just a stupid, unhealthy pregnant woman, I'm a stupid, unhealthy woman period. (Wow, this list is making me feel fan-TASTIC about myself.)

Not Addressing Emotional Well-Being: I can't say I got enough sleep or perfectly managed my stress when pregnant. Then again, being aware that I needed to put "address emotional well-being" on my to-do list probably would have only added to my stress.

Now, here are the items on the list that I find understandable, even though I didn't commit these blunders myself:

Not Continuing Medications for Pre-existing Diseases: A lot of women are understandably concerned about taking any sort of medicine while pregnant, so I can see how this might be a common problem.

Skipping Breakfast: Again, when things are busy, can totally see how this happens to some moms-to-be. Me? I was too hungry to even consider it. (Please see previous reference to overeating for two.)

Installing the Car Seat at the Last Minute: It's an unpleasant task and one many of us are inclined to put off. Seems like this might be the most widespread blunder of all.

And finally, the two items on the list that I found most debatable:

Not Buckling Up: Apparently some women get all weirded out by wearing their seat belts because they are afraid it will harm their child. Okay, fine. I still find it hard to imagine taking that fear to the next level and just not bothering to wear a seat belt at all. Are many moms out there really taking this risk? You tell me.

Electing for a C-Section: This is probably the most controversial item on the list. Plenty of women undoubtedly would say that going this route isn't a blunder at all. I had a C-section, though not by choice, and I have to say that I didn't have too much trouble recovering, nor did I have any infections. This one strikes me as a matter of opinion vs. a flat-out mistake that smart pregnant women make.

Okay, I've confessed my pregnancy sins. Now it's your turn: Which of these errors did you commit? Or are you so awesome that you invented a few that Divine Caroline hasn't even heard of yet?

Image: Divine Caroline

10-Year-Old Finally Eats

Madeline Holler — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 18:59:00 GMT

You think you've got trouble with a kid who won't eat? Walk a mile in this mother's shoes. She's been waiting 10 years -- TEN! -- for her daughter to even pick at her dinner, much less heartily dig into anything she has been served.

Tia-Mae had been hooked up to a feeding tube since she was born prematurely and with a gap between her esophagus and her stomach.

While feeding tubes aren't that uncommon, a 10-year dependency on one certainly is. Her mother had tried to get her to eat real food since she was a baby, always offering her bits of this and that to see if she'd make the transition. Tia-Mae always refused.

Then, not long ago, she offered her daughter a yogurt and the most unexpected thing happened: Tia-Mae ate it. The whole thing.

Now, in addition to daily yogurts, she also eats ice-cream, custard, mousse and semolina. She still gets added nutrients via the feeding tube, but the mother hopes that, as Tia-Mae adds new foods to her diet, she'll eventually be weaned.

There was no medical reason for the girl to be eating from the tube for so long and comments about the article in the Daily Mail are harsh. But I wonder what I would do -- it can't be easy to watch your daughter waste away while crossing your fingers that tough love will prevail.

They Say: Our Children Will Grow Up to be Boring

10 Craziest Reasons for Toddler Meltdowns

Little-Boy Dad Inspires Sex Ed for the Very Young

What's a 'Laborist' and Why is She At Your Birth?

Photo: DailyMail.co.uk

They Say: Turns Out Eating Cereal Does Not Affect Your Child's Gender

Jen Chaney — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:02:00 GMT

It sounds like an old wives' tale: If you eat breakfast cereal while trying to get pregnant, you'll have a boy. And yet, that's exactly what a study published last year by British researchers said. Now, a group of Americans has published a new study that says that first study is a load of Crispix.

After re-examining the data, the U.S. group -- based in North Carolina -- contends there is no cause and effect relationship between what a woman eats and what gender her baby is. The British study had found that 59 percent of pregnant women who ate breakfast cereal daily delivered boys, while only 43 percent (still a substantial percentage) of those who rarely ate cereal had boys. It also suggested that moms-to-be who consumed more calories were more likely to have boys, too. Both reports were published in a journal called the Proceedings of the Royal Society B, which sounds like it should be the name of the latest thriller from "Da Vinci Code" author Dan Brown.

To me, all of this should be filed under "duh." The idea that eating cereal is all it takes to determine whether we have sons or daughters sounds ridiculous on its face. And the statistics weren't definitive enough, as the American researchers suggested, to prove anything. I chalk this up to human nature. Naturally, we all want to think we can control that whole boy/girl thing. Any scientist who finally stumbled on the key to that mystery would understandably be excited. Perhaps so excited that they would published a pretty thinly supported study.

Image: Inmagine.com

For the record, the Brits still stand by their results, particularly the more general causal relationship between maternal diet and infant gender. Of course, we all know how important it is to eat well when you're expecting. Whether you want to take that a step further and start chowing down on Special K so you can finally name a child Aidan? Well, that's up to you.

Pete Wentz: "I've Tasted Ashley's Breast Milk."

Cole Gamble — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 20:30:00 GMT

To take heat off his decision to name a child Bronx Mowgli, Pete Wentz recently announced he’s tasted Ashley Simpson’s breast milk.

So what did Pete think?

Unfortunately, Pete thinks Ash’s BM (not bowel movement, people) tastes “weird” and “sour.” Thanks, Pete.

You know what; we’ve probably all done this. Usually accidentally, I need not go into details, but you get it. We all know the taste of breast milk. The difference is most of us aren’t a principal player in a popular emo band and therefore have a forum of millions to share this breast milk tasting news.

At least it was Ashley’s milk he was sampling and not someone else’s. Is this gross? The tasting and/or the proclamation of said tasting. How many mothers have appraised their own juice?

More by this author:

Should You Take A Risk on Orgasmic Birth? (Orgasmic Birth Video included)

4 Ways Birth and Breastfeeding Will Ruin Sex

NY Proposes Taxing Non-Diet Soda

Miriam Axel-Lute — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 19:00:00 GMT

OK Gov. Paterson: I know you've got a wicked budget hole, and we all have to "share the pain." I also know that this country has a severe health crisis with escalating rates of diabetes, heart disease, etc. and that soda and related sugar-water drinks (or, more specifically, high-fructose-corn-syrup drinks) are bad for us and our kids.

But can we work through a few of the logical problems with your proposed "obesity tax" here?

1. It only applies to "nondiet" sodas (and fake juice drinks), thereby giving the implicit healthy stamp of approval to "diet" drinks full of artificial sweeteners, which cause many people a wide range of health problems, from dizziness to migraines, while to others they just taste gross. They also interfere with efforts to adjust to a healthier, lower-sugar diet. Not to mention that carbonated diet sodas still are acidic enough to eat away at kids teeth and still don't hydrate like water or provide nutrients like milk. Remember also that soda—diet and nondiet—is also a major source of people's caffeine fixes (and young kids having caffeine worries me more than their having sugar, frankly).

Basically, this just shows the folly of trying to decide on high what's healthy for people: it varies. I have some extremely health-conscious friends whose son is super allergic to tons of things—so right now he's eating a lot of Fritos (all corn, no cross-contamination). If you tried to tax "junk food," for example, you'd be hitting them hard.

2. Like any sales tax, this going to fall most heavily on the poor, who buy a lot of soda often because it's what's sold at the corner store. Study after study has shown that living in a "food desert" is a primary cause of unhealthy eating choices. Without changing that, adding a tax is like raising the gas tax without investing in public transportaiton. (If the tax is high enough to make bodega owners stock healthier drinks instead, we might see some benefit, but I'm skeptical.)

3. Recent studies have shown that it's possible to be both fat and fit. You say you don't want to make kids feel bad for being overweight. So don't. Instead encourage the good stuff, which is what will really make the difference: access to healthy food and drink, enough sleep, and exercise (recess! later school start times! healthy foods in schools! walking and biking to school!). I know that won't balance the budget. I'm sorry.

Photo by Qfamily.

More by this author:

They Say: Maybe You Should Eat Fish During Pregnancy?

Jen Chaney — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 20:32:00 GMT

In addition to avoiding booze and taking it easy on the caffeine, most pregnant women are told to be careful about eating fish. Just four years ago, the Food and Drug Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency issued a statement advising women of childbearing age, pregnant and nursing women and infants and children to limit their consumption of fish that might contain mercury because of potential health risks.

Well, apparently the FDA has changed its mind. Late last week, The Washington Post reported that the FDA has drafted a report asking the federal government to backpedal on the fish warning because the benefits of eating tuna and its ilk outweigh the potential hazards of consuming mercury. Apparently folks at the EPA are kinda ticked; their memos say the FDA's findings are "scientifically flawed and inadequate."

Other medical professionals and advocates seem to be siding with the EPA on this one. This Market Watch story reports that several have joined the chorus against these new recommendations. The director of the Mercury Policy Project is apparently so incensed that he has developed an insatiable need to inject fish metaphors into everything he says, as quoted in the Market Watch piece:

"'Talk about getting hooked on fish stories,' said Michael Bender, Director of the Mercury Policy Project. 'FDA has really gone overboard this time by casting out the science and reeling in the industry 'line' instead.'"

Would it be wrong if I said that only the most clueless person on Earth wouldn't be able to "catch" his meaning?

Meanwhile, know who's super-happy? The National Fisheries Institute. "This is a science-based approach," a spokesman for the group tells the Washington Post. "And you start to see a picture emerge that shows the clear benefits of eating seafood outweigh the risks of a trace amount of mercury in fish."

In other words, the bickering will continue. In the meantime, what's a childbearing/pregnant woman or nursing mother to do? My OB always told me I could eat fish in moderation. So I personally never had more than a couple servings per week. Whether I needed to limit myself that much, I don't know, but it seemed like the logical thing to do. If you're concerned, it's probably best to consult your doctor about what makes the most sense.

As with most health issues, I suspect the honest answer lies in the middle: That it's okay to consume some fish, as long as you do so responsibly and in careful moderation. But Lord knows how long it will take for our federal agencies to feel in synch enough to issue that sort of statement.

Image: MSNBC.com

Do You Think Your Spouse Is Too Fat?

Amy S.F. Lutz — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 20:04:00 GMT

My husband calls it the old bait-and-switch: a man and a woman in the dating stage of their relationship diet and exercise like crazy to keep themselves in prime physical condition - then, once the honeymoon is over, one or both gain 20 pounds. It's not by any means an intentional misrepresentation - as we all know, once kids come along, and household chores multiply, everyone has less time to go to the gym.

Still, that doesn't mean you should just ignore it if you feel your spouse has put on too much weight, or tell yourself all that matters is how beautiful he or she is on the inside. Not only can those extra pounds affect your beloved's health, but your relationship will suffer if you find him or her less attractive. So, how should you broach what is obviously a loaded topic?

First, according to a great MSNBC article on the subject, don't be critical. Nagging your spouse or snatching the cookie right out of his or her hand is, obviously, not likely to inspire him or her to slim down. Instead, a loving, supportive attitude is much more likely to succeed. Help keep your spouse motivated by watching the kids for an hour so he or she can work out, praising both the effort and the results, and stocking the refrigerator with healthy snacks.

And, needless to say, you lose your cred if you yourself aren't working to keep yourself just as hot as you were the day you met. So, think about finding a sport you can do together, like biking, running or tennis - there are plenty of ways to have fun and burn calories at the same time.

Addicted to Food Because of Genes?

Kelly Mills — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 14:31:00 GMT

I've read about a quadrillion studies on obesity research, and it's rare that one actually makes me reconsider my behavior. This latest one, on a gene variant and the pleasure derived from food, actually did give me pause though. It also might make you think twice about how to feed your kids. Here's what I mean.

It might seem logical that people who are overweight or obese get more pleasure from food than skinny folks, and that's why they overeat. But the study says the opposite might be true. Researchers gave chocolate milkshakes (mmm) to 77 young women. Some were lean, some were obese, and some had a gene variant that makes them respond less to dopamine (a chemical important to the pleasure response.) Here's what they found: Obese women had less of a pleasure response to the milkshakes; this was even more so for women with the gene variant; and women with the gene variant had gained more weight a year later. In the words of one resarcher: "'If you look at the brain response when people are about to get the milkshake, obese individuals show greater activation of the reward circuitry, not less. So, ironically, they expect more reward but seem to experience less.'" Which kinda makes sense---if anticipate something will be better than it is, you might keep eating it in an effort to get satisfaction.

The researcher suggests that eating a small amount regularly of something high in fat and sugar might not be the way to go, because it could make it hard to stop eating. Perhaps cutting the food out entirely would actually do more for reducing cravings and overeating. And this applies to kids because, well, it may be easiest to build in good habits when you are young. Sigh. I'm a cupcake addict, and my kid likes her daily dessert, but this study might make me re-evaluate the frequency of our treats. Um, maybe. No promises.

Does anyone let their kids eat candy on halloween anymore?

Keep kids from getting fat - get a dog.

It's hard out there for a mom who says 'no'

Popular Breakfast Cereals Contain More Than 50% Sugar! Really.

SunnyChanel — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 21:21:00 GMT

Our daughter isn’t much for breakfast. My husband, in a quest to find something, anything that she’d eat in the morning went to one of his childhood favorites, Golden Grahams cereal. Generally, we try to always look at labels, buy organic when we can and attempt to fill our daughters tummy with a healthy and non-sugary diet. Neither of us really gave it a second thought when the box of Golden Grahams entered our pantry. But now? Oh I know more about Golden Grahams than I ever wanted to know. Their dirty little secret? Golden Grahams is 50% sugar. Yes, that was not a typo. 50%! More than, what I would at first glance think were more sugary cereals, Frosted Flakes, Froot Loops and Captain Crunch.

According to new analysis by Consumer Reports, they found that eleven very popular breakfast cereals have about forty percent sugar (by weight). Others high on the list were Post Golden Crisp and Kellogg’s Honey Smacks. The least sugary of the mainstream cereal choices? The ones not to throw out into the garbage? Cheerios, Kix, Life and Honey Nut Cheerios were all low in crack sugar and deemed as “very good”.

An interesting fact is that many of these brands, when produced for Europe, contain less sugar for the overseas market. For example, Honey Smacks here contain 55% sugar but in Germany, Switzerland and Slovenia contain 40%. Next time, I think I’ll be taking over our families cereal shopping, and man will I be reading those ingredient lists.

Via: Today Show

They Say: Don't Eat Your Veggies!

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 17:31:00 GMT

Dr. T. Berry Brazelton is about to become your kids’ new hero. In today’s New York Times Well Blog, he colorfully answers readers' questions about their children’s health, and gets the ball rolling with a firm admonition against vegetables.

Forget about veggies, he says. Battling your child to eat any particular food will only backfire in extended dietary struggles throughout your kid’s childhood. Buy a multivitamin for those picky eating years, and save yourself and your kids some headaches.

If you do feel like getting creative, Dr. Brazelton suggests Jessica Seinfeld's Deceptively Delicious cookbook. But he cautions against getting bent out of shape over any dietary experiments with your kids. Instead, he says, “keep mealtimes relaxing and enjoyable, and focus talk on fun things, but not on food.”

For Dr. Bazelton’s advice on Vitamin D supplements, low cholesterol diets, and calorie counts, visit the Well Blog.

6 Food Mistakes Us Parents Make with Our Kids

SunnyChanel — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 20:25:00 GMT

Who doesn’t love a big old bite of parental guilt? Oh right, no one. One struggle most parents have to deal with, and one which is completely tied into our children’s health, growth and wellbeing, is making sure your offspring is consuming the right kinds of foods not to mention eating at all. Many of us struggle just to have some kind of sustenance pass through their lips. My favorite example is of a preschooler who ate a diet consisting mostly of chocolate: “Chocolate milk, chocolate chip muffins, chocolate chip pancakes — it was unbelievable….His mother just thought, ‘That’s what he wants, so that’s what I’m going to do.’ ” Although most of us (I hope) wouldn't allow that kind of meal plan for our kids, many of us with finicky eaters, according to the New York Times, are plagued with six common food mistakes that we make with our children.

Here is a little taste of the what we are doing wrong:

• Sending children out of the kitchen
• Presurring them to take a bite
• Keeping “good stuff” out of reach
• Dieting in front of your children
• Serving boring vegetables
• Giving up too soon

For the details on all six of these, and for suggestions on how to not succumb to these parental no-nos, check out the full article here.

(photo and info via the New York Times)

Breakfast: It's Not Just For Dinner Anymore

Adrienne Martini — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 18:00:00 GMT

I'm not very good at the breakfasty foods at breakfast time routine. If I'm going to go all out and make fancy eggs or fancy breads or fancy cured meats, I'm going to do it at dinner. As it turns out, my quickie morning breakfasts of high-fiber cereal and juice may be what is keeping all of this jiggly leftover baby fat on my belly.

At least, that's what the experts say. Dieters who ate half of their calories in the morning lost more weight over the long term that those who had fewer calories in the a.m. Which falls into the "good to know" category but not in the "I'll get right on it" category.

In order to make a fabulous breakfast that is both nutritious and meets that calorie requirement, I'd have to get up even earlier than I currently do. My new plan is to wait until one of my kids is old enough to cook a big breakfast for me. I'll let you know how that goes.

Photo credit: Jennifer Causey, whose simply breakfast site makes my mouth water. Wonder if I could get her to come over and cook...

Pregcellent: Eat Well, Period. Prenatal Diet Influences Puberty Onset

Kelly Mills — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 13:34:00 GMT

Just when the pregnant ladies thought they got enough flack about what they ingest during gestation. Now check this out: Researchers say a mother's prenatal diet can influence the early onset of puberty. Sheesh, I was chalking it up to non-organic milk and Bratz dolls. You mean my nutritional choices during the most hormonally insane period of my life are to blame for my daughter's precocious eye-rolling?

Well, in case you were wondering, it's a high-fat diet that the researchers tie to the age of your offsprings' puberty. And of course we are talking about girls going through early puberty, because no one seems to care if boys sprout a little peach fuzz early and start spending hours in their rooms with blacklight posters at an early age. The folks who studied this say prenatal diet may have more influence on menstruation happening young than early childhood nutrition. Of course, the study was on rats, so we can always hold out hope for an species reprieve from regular pregnancy Ben & Jerry's transgressions.

Gasp! Childhood Obesity Not Exploding

Kelly Mills — Tue, 27 May 2008 23:10:00 GMT

Hey, remember how a little while back we were told childhood obesity was a horrific epidemic ravaging the land? And then every thirty seconds or so a study and accompanying news story would appear, saying that juice or distant mothers or text messaging was one of the causes? (Side note: News outlets almost always use one of maybe three pictures of overweight kids for these stories. I do hope those kids are getting royalties or something.) It seemed like you almost couldn't go a week without at least one "such-and-such is contributing to the fattening of our youth" story appearing somewhere.

Well, now there's more news in the kid and weight front. Apparently childhood obesity has leveled off. In fact, the rates of obesity have remained basically unchanged since 1999. The experts say it's too soon to get all hopeful, but maybe public health campaigns are perhaps responsible for the leveling. I don't know--I'd like to hear an alternative theory. Oh, but racial and economic disparities do persist, and poor folks and those in certain ethnic groups are still more likely to be obese. And we can probably in part thank the fast food industry and the dearth of healthy food options in lower income communities for that.

Ending the Food Fight: Stopping Childhood Obesity

Cole Gamble — Wed, 14 May 2008 16:01:00 GMT

You pretty much can't turn on the tv with out hearing how fat American kids are today. Every empire must fall. In Rome, Christian was the downfall. In England it was overextension. Apparently the fall of the American Empire will be juvenile diabetes.

A new book tackles the “epidemic” of childhood obesity in our country: Ending the Food Fight by Dr. David Ludwig, who founded the Optimal Weight for Life program (OWL) at the Children's Hospital Boston. Dr. Ludwig claims success for his method comes from a low-glycemic diet.

Now, I was once a fat kid, and actually would like to have been one now when being fat doesn't seem to put you in the minority. That said, I really watch it with my kids. Not psycho “baby anorexic”, just a concern for establishing good eating habits early on. My parents let me eat whatever I wanted and convinced me the resulting fatness was genetics and nothing I could combat. I don't know about special gylcemic diets, but I do know that modeling good eating habits for your kids does more for putting them on a solid health (physical and mental) foundation than anything.

Babble Talk: The Worst Food to Feed Your Kids

Jen Chaney — Mon, 12 May 2008 14:03:00 GMT

Amy Kalafa and Dr. Susan Rubin recently spoke to Babble about their documentary, Two Angry Moms, in which the pair investigate cafeteria junkfood. Some of the offending school lunch offerings the two mentioned by name: Blue slushies, candy and the balanced meal of chicken nuggets and tater tots. Not exactly the nutritionally sound stuff we would hope our kids get every day. All of which got me to thinking about the food we serve our children at home: Do we do better than some of the schools Kalafa and Rubin describe?

Generally speaking, we probably do but my guess is that many of us also could try harder. Lots of Americans, and I count myself in this group, can be a little lax in the diet department, especially when our schedules are particularly hectic. Sometimes the fastest things to prepare -- which might be some frozen nuggets or, worse yet, nuggets of the McDonald's variety -- are all we can muster.

My son is still young enough (and toothless enough) to avoid the really hardcore stuff, like Rock Candy and licorice. But I will admit to giving him some bites of burgers and fries. So confession time: What's the worst meal you have ever served your kids? Don't worry, none of us will report you to Child Protective Services. Besides, telling the truth makes wonderful therapy ... as do delicious, sugary slushies.

Best of FameCrawler: Week of May 9th

Whit Honea — Fri, 09 May 2008 20:00:00 GMT

Hello, Harlow!

Sheyla Hershey's Got Big (Size FFF) Dreams

Nicole Kidman: DUMPED

Elisabeth Hasselbeck's Post Baby Bikini Bod!

Secrets of How Celebrity Moms Lost Their Baby Weight

Britney Finally Gets Her Boys

Oh My God That Britney's Shameless: Oops, She Did It AGAIN?

Pregnant Posh! Beckham Baby on the Way!

Sarah Jessica Parker's Pregnancy News!

Laura Fay Is N.Y. Rep. Vito Fossella's Baby Mama

Daily Duh: Less junk food leads to weight loss

Brett Singer — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 19:00:00 GMT

This is a new occasional feature where I'll highlight studies that seem to confirm the obvious.

In Philadelphia, land of the cheese steak, five elementary schools participated in a program where candy and soda were eliminated from the vending machines, and kids were rewarded with raffle tickets for "making healthy food choices." And guess what? If kids eat less sugary snacks, they gain less weight. Astonishing stuff, this.

One interesting finding was that kids spend $2 per day on snacks that add up to about 600 calories, presumably of the junk food kind. Those things come from the corner store, where there may not be a lot of options besides Drake's cakes. The group that conducted the study, The Food Trust, says that they are "working with" local shops to get them to stock more fruit, vegetables and water. Because storeowners love it when people who aren't their customers tell them what to sell.

The language used in the story is very interesting when you consider the climate of weight loss. The writer refers to "kids who got fat" and then switches to "obese" and "overweight". This doesn't give you much information. If a kid is 2 or 3 pounds overweight, is that fat? When does overweight become obese? (I personally prefer the term "fatty-boombalatty", but that's just me.)

Getting kids to eat healthy is important, and it certainly would help if the food offered in school were better for you. My school lunch choices were pizza, hamburger, or cheeseburger, all of which came with French fries, or the disturbing looking hot lunch of the day. The fries were -- and this is not a joke -- "vitamin C enriched," which probably was meant to meet some sort of mandate. A study like this at least calls attention to the issue, which is great, but the conclusions aren't exactly earth shaking.

image: Yahoo.com

Your Girls Can Be "Bimbos" Online!

Kelly Mills — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 23:02:00 GMT

Sometimes you see stuff and think, "Is this fer real?" When I read about the Miss Bimbo game, I kept thinking, "Oh, in a minute they'll say the game is for adults." But no, in fact the majority of the 200,000 players are between the ages of 7 and 17. But let me back up: There's a virtual "fashion" game for girls where they get a "Bimbo" and have to navigate her through boob jobs and diets and so on to make her the coolest bimbo of all. Girls can dress their dolls in sexy outfits for clubbing, and are encouraged to keep them waif thin through diet pills and plastic surgery. Niiiice.

Most of the accounts I read focused on the weight and cosmetic horrors of the game, but I personally was more disturbed by the fact that the bimbos are supposed to find a rich boyfriend so they don't have to work. Like, it's one of the goals of the game. Now that is just creepy. For god's sake, we don't even read "Cinderella" without some irritable commentary about how Cinderella ought to stand up for herself instead of waiting to be rescued. So the idea of having girls finding a sugar daddy through the game is icky. It simultaneously asks them to identify with and look down on the bimbos, and frankly, it seems strangely angry to me.

Here's the best quote from the game's creator: "It is not a bad influence for young children. They learn to take care of their bimbos. The missions and goals are morally sound and teach children about the real world." Frigging excuse me? But it goes on: "The breast operations are just one part of the game and we are not encouraging young girls to have them, just reflecting real life." Well, that's a relief. For a minute there I was worried. Yeah, these are totally the lessons I want my kids to learn. Why does it smell so strongly of misogyny in here?

Girl Scout Cookies--Now With Calorie Burning Tips!

Kelly Mills — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 21:06:00 GMT

Hey, guess what? The Girl Scouts are going to start putting out cookies in 100 calorie packs. That's okay, right? I mean, that's like one Samoa per package... Oh, but wait: The 5 Resolutions Blog just alerted us that the packs are also going to have tips for girls to burn calories. Well, thank god, because I so want my daughter to know exactly how to obliterate the potential weight she might put on from those Thin Mints. Never to young to start counting calories, right?

Sigh. Think I'm overreacting? Well, the packages say things like, "Girls can burn calories and have fun with 30 minutes of activities like these: Ice Skating—126 calories. Gymnastics—72 calories…" Hmmm, I like gymnastics, but maybe I should take up ice skating because when you compare the caloric burn potential of each... How much would I hate it if my child thought, "Wow, skipping rope. That's worth an apple and half a pack of cookies, as long as I do it for 22 minutes." Look, I'm not against encouraging healthy eating and moderation, but good lord, we need to start doing this one differently. Do we have to turn our little girls into calorie-conscious weight-obsessed wrecks at every turn? Repeat after me: Being active and playing and participating in sports are great because they are fun and make your body feel good. Oh, and f*ck the calories. Now put that in your 100 calorie pack and eat it.

Stand In Kitchen, Lose Weight

Madeline Holler — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 18:02:00 GMT

Wanna lose the baby weight? (Even if the baby is now a toddler or, Christ, in junior high.)

One "expert" recommends heading straight to the kitchen. But not for a snack or even to throw out the high-calorie, high-carb salt & vinegar kettle chips.

He wants you to throw out your toaster, your George Foreman grill, that chipped platter that just sits there and sits there. Feel the pounds melt from your thighs!

We've already heard this clutter guy's claims of weight loss when you declutter your life and clean your house. Now, he's especially focused on your kitchen.

His analogies, though, read counter to logic.

From the NY Times:

“If you walked into a new restaurant and saw a messy, disorganized kitchen and dining area, you’d turn around and walk out the door,'’ he writes. “You wouldn’t eat dinner in a place like that. So why would you do it at home?'’

In that case, should we be increasing the clutter all over our countertops. Wouldn't that make us turn around and walk out the kitchen door?

Apparently not. He recommends getting rid of appliances that take up counterspace where you could be preparing healthful meals. And tossing anything that isn't used for food storage, prep, serving or cleanup.

So I can keep the stash of kettle chips?

Which Came First -- The Salt or the Corn Syrup?

Adrienne Martini — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 19:32:00 GMT

The human body can't function without a little bit of the old NaCl. But most human bodies also have a huge -- and growing ever huger -- problem with moderation. If a little is good, then a whole lot must be better.

Which is how kids get themselves into so many odd predicaments. They haven't completely learned that more is frequently just more. Too much salt, in addition to playing hell with your blood pressure, also makes you really thirsty. When most kids get thirsty, they reach for a sugar-laden soda the size of a smallish old tanker.

Researchers are suggesting that there might be a connection between the ingestion of sodium-rich processed foods and the resulting gulping down of cola products might just have something to do with why kids are so fat.

I'd get up to yell about how wrong they are, but I can't force myself out of my couch.

Photo credit: whatscookingamerica.net

Pregcellent: Eat This, Not That

Kelly Mills — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 13:32:00 GMT

Sometimes I wonder why I get so pissy about stuff when everybody does it, but I do. Take the diet/nutrition book, "Eat This, Not That" now in a pregnancy edition. It's pimped on the Today site right now. So the original, non-pregnancy version of the book was all over Today and msnbc, three times I believe. Hmmm, it's by the editors of Men's Health--could there be a connection between that mag and Today? Yeah, yeah, nothing new, I know. And the book made dubious claims about nutrition as a way to target belly fat. Again, not unheard of for a diet book to make lame and questionable promises. And I noted that some of the caloric amounts for the "bad" food choices were pretty high, like perhaps they had chosen the worst possible offender and generalized. No, that's not unique.

So, how does the expecting mom version stack up? Well, I do sort of like the format of telling you which of two choices is better in calories and nutrition, and I didn't see much about attacking belly fat here (har de har) so that's a good sign. I suppose once I get over the idea of receiving pregnancy nutritional advice from the dudes at Men's Health (though that mag is at least funnier than many of its brethren) I could be okay with this. But, um, I didn't really see anything so vastly different from what you'd find in many other expecting mom nutrition books. If you like the "this or that" format and feel two choices give you enough info, great. If you prefer to read nutritional labels and do searches for food info free on many websites, or even buy a different book, I think you'll be just fine too.

My Two-Sided Stomach Theory, Vindicated

Amy S.F. Lutz — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:30:00 GMT

It's still a huge joke in my family how, when I was a child, I would tell my mother, "the dinner side of my stomach is full, but the dessert side is empty." That's why it's so exciting to find out that, while there may not be a physical divider involved, I was actually describing a legitimate physiological phenomenon called "sensory-specific satiety." That is, we become full after eating one type of food - i.e., salty - but can still have an appetite for a different taste - i.e., sweet.

Besides explaining why children - and let's face it, adults too - can be hungry for dessert but not hungry for any more of their dinners, sensory-specfic satiety is also involved in portion control and weight loss. Our enjoyment of any particular food peaks with the first bite, then declines the more we eat. But a new dish arouses our appetites again. So the more variety in any given meal, the more we're likely to eat, as we move back and forth among different sensory experiences. If you're trying to eat less, you might try restricting the number of dishes you serve at each meal.