In your endeavors to
eat healthy and lose weight, you've heard
about the benefits of cutting calories.
Of course, in this age of fast foods,
health claims and hectic lifestyles, that's
easier said than done.
The real challenge in
cutting calories is finding the point
where you can live physically and psychologically
in optimum health, experts at the American
Institute for Cancer Research say.
For adults with healthy
weights who want to do more for their
long-term well-being, sensible calorie
restriction can be accomplished without
rigid diets. Simply see if you can comfortably
eliminate 50 to 200 calories a day of
nutrient-poor foods, like pastries or
sodas, from what you eat.
If you feel you need
more calories, try adding some back diet
as nutritionally rich plant-based foods.
There
are more reasons to avoid excess calories
than controlling your weight, because
permanent, modest cuts in your calorie
consumption may help prevent cancer and
possibly improve your heart's health.
Furthermore, long-term calorie restriction
by people with healthy weights may
also lower their blood cholesterol and
blood pressure and significantly reduce
heart-threatening build-up of plaque in
their blood vessels.
In fact, people
with weights at the lower end of the healthy
range and a body mass index reading of
18 to 22 may fare better than those folks
at the upper end of a healthy range, considered
BMIs of 23 to 25.
Downside
of cutting calories
However, as with most
things in life, you have to walk a fine
line if you're seeking to cut calories
Some health professionals
think that calorie restriction for people
with healthy weights does not improve
their health and can risk malnutrition.
It seems possible to defuse this criticism
by cutting your calorie consumption about
10 percent, while still meeting all of
your nutrient needs.
But studies show that
meeting nutrient needs with less than
1,500 calories is extremely difficult.
Fully meeting your nutritional
needs with a limited number of calories
is not the only reason for caution. Excessive
restriction may make it difficult or impossible
for you to exercise vigorously, which
is recommended for many health benefits.
'Weight-obsessed
culture'
What's more, experts
agree that severe calorie restriction
is inappropriate for people under 21,
who are still developing physically and
mentally.
Studies of the after-effects
of food restriction and famine in The
Netherlands during World War II show that
a sudden or severe restriction of food
for a limited time may actually worsen
a person's health and increase the risk
of cancer by possibly impairing the body's
immune system.
It's
also critical that limiting calories for
better health does not hide an eating
disorder, such as anorexia nervosa. Anorexia
nervosa restricts calories without regard
for nutritional needs, aims for physical
perfection at lower and lower weights,
and is based on low self-esteem.
Yet, a rational desire
to restrict calories will meet all nutritional
needs, avoid perfectionist rules and always
show self-respect.
There is a danger in
our weight-obsessed culture that some
vulnerable people who begin calorie restriction
for valid reasons could develop an eating
disorder as they strive for harmfully
low weights.
For the majority of our
overweight and sedentary population, cutting
back on excess calories and exercising
daily are obvious steps to better health.
Adults with a healthy weight can also
prevent the usual, small yearly weight
gain with a slight reduction in calories
and an increase in activity.
The
'buzz'
At the same time, you're
dealing with three prevailing weight-loss
myths:
• Carrying
a few extra pounds is good for you;
• Trying
to lose weight is pointless, because
you can't change your "set point
weight."
• People
who've been heavy all their lives are
better off staying heavy.
Most of us know people
with firmly held beliefs about why they
can't lose weight. But accumulated
science on weight management and weight
loss over the years solidly reinforces
the often-heard common sense advice to
eat less and exercise more.
Unfortunately, such studies
tend not to generate much public attention.
"That's
not the research that people talk about
around the water cooler, says Karen Collins,
a nationally known registered dietitian
and the institute's nutrition advisor.
"But if a study about weight loss
comes along that seems to contradict the
eat less, exercise more advice, that's
when you get buzz."
Collins carefully notes that
the mere fact that a study doesn't agree
with what has gone before doesn't invalidate
it. Such studies are valuable additions
to the mass of research because their
findings are factored into ongoing scientific
debates, she adds.
Look
for 'consensus'
The problem, according
to Collins, is that the popular buzz these
studies generate has less to do with their
scientific merits and more to do with
the fact that they tell people what they
want to hear.
"Losing weight takes
real effort, and it's just human nature
to look for reasons excuses not to make
that effort," she says. "That's
where these myths come from."
And not every myth stays
a myth.
With a handful of findings
and a little PR know-how, enterprising
individuals can turn a weight-loss myth
into lucrative products. The no-carb
craze that seized the nation at the end
of the 20th century is the most famous
example, but bookstores are still crammed
with quick-fix weight-loss plans: no fat,
no flour, no sugar, all juice, etc.
But when it comes to
the losing weight, it's the basic research,
not the buzz, that should guide any decision.
"Look
for consensus, not one surprising study,"
Collins says. "Take a good look at
what you do or don't do to lose weight.
If you find that you're tracing your beliefs
about weight loss to a single study, you're
probably just buying into the buzz."
Behind the buzz, the
hype and the myths, there's a single unassailable
truth: if you want to lose weight,
you have to place yourself into a state
of energy deficit by burning more calories
than you consume.
"And that means
eating less and exercising more,"
Collins says.