Disappointed by your diet results? You're not alone. Even when disciplined, dedicated people stick with a diet plan for a year or more, they are likely to only lose about 5 percent of their body weight—far less than most dieters anticipate losing. That means, someone who weighs 200 pounds at the start of a diet can realistically expect to lose 10 pounds in an entire year.

The Washington Post and Reuters report that researchers from the Tufts-New England Medical Center conducted the first scientific trial that pitted four popular diet plans against each other to assess their individual effectiveness: Atkins, Dean Ornish, Weight Watchers, and The Zone. The study was federally funded.

One hundred sixty overweight and obese men and women ages 22 to 72, who had all tried to lose weight previously and had at least one major risk factor for heart disease, were randomly assigned to follow one of the four diets for a full year. The surprising results:

Atkins: Although almost no carbohydrates are permitted, dieters can enjoy lots of high-fat foods, such as bacon and steak, on the Atkins diet. In this study, 52 percent of the dieters stuck with it for the full year, losing on average 4 percent of their body weight and decreasing their risk of heart disease by 12 percent. Even though the diet encourages consumption of high-fat foods, dieters' total cholesterol dropped by about 3 percent. The "bad" LDL cholesterol dropped 8 percent and the "good" HDL cholesterol rose 15 percent.

Dean Ornish: Half of the dieters stayed with this super-strict low-fat, vegetarian diet for the year and lost on average 6 percent of their body weight, the most of any plan. But their risk of heart disease decreased by only 7 percent, the least of any of the four plans, as measured by cholesterol levels. Ornish challenges this as arbitrary and inaccurate when assessing actual heart disease risks. (See "Heart Healthy Diets" elsewhere in this column.)

Weight Watchers: Similar to the U.S. dietary guidelines, Weight Watchers emphasizes eating low-fat foods. Dieters attend group meetings for expert advice, weekly weigh-ins, and moral support. Fully 65 percent stayed with the diet for the entire year, losing on average 5 percent of their body weight and decreasing their risk of heart disease by 15 percent—the most of all the diet plans.

The Zone: Following The Zone diet requires that all food items be measured by their glycemic index, which is a calculation of how much they raise blood sugar levels. Small amounts of healthy fatty foods are allowed. Sixty-five percent of the dieters continued on the diet for the full year, losing on average 5 percent of their body weight and decreasing their risk of heart disease by 11 percent.

So which diet is best? "The results are modest. The study shows that no single approach has a monopoly on weight loss," Thomas Wadden, director of the Weight and Eating Disorders Program at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, told The Post.

The bottom line: The amount of weight you can lose on a diet is not impacted by whether you gorge on carbohydrates or virtually shun them. "Diets work if you use them. They all work probably by the same mechanism, which is that they get people to eat fewer calories," Gary Foster, clinical director of the Weight and Eating Disorders Program at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, explained to The Post.
"Eat less. Lose weight." If it were only that simple....

Express Yourself and Live Longer!

When facing adversity, is it healthier to just "think lovely thoughts" or to vent your rage? According to new research from Rush University Medical Center in Chicago, reports HealthDay News, go ahead and scream, haler, rant, and rave!
Here is the startling conclusion: People who didn't vent their anger were twice as likely to die as people who let it out.

As part of the ongoing Religious Order Study with elderly priests, brothers, and nuns, neuropsychologist Robert S. Wilson examined the medical records of 851 participants, mostly seniors, from 1994-2002. Priests and nuns are an excellent study group because they live in almost identical socioeconomic and social worlds.

The goal was to examine how life span is affected by the expression or suppression of anger. Just over 160 of the participants died during the study. Following their deaths, the researchers examined the results of tests the subjects had taken earlier that measured their level of negative feelings and their ability to express it.

Although much research has been done on how depression is related to a shorter lifespan and contributes to heart disease, little investigation has been done on how people cope with negative emotions, including anger.

The results: The 10 percent of the priests, brothers, and nuns who were most likely to keep their anger and other negative emotions bottled up were twice as likely to die as the 10 percent on the other end of the scale. If the losers in this life-or-death contest were the "sit and stew" people, the winners were those who said, "I get angry, and I slam a door. I curse a lot." (Yes, even clergy curse.)

What is still unknown is how anger—and the management of it—affects our health, including immune system function and the risk for cardiovascular disease. Considering that one's display of anger may have adverse health consequences for its intended targets, Wilson acknowledged that "it is much better to be able to talk things through."
The research findings were published in the American Journal of Epidemiology.

Growth Hormones Versus Exercise

As reported in USA Today, November 4, 2003, as many as 50,000 Americans are taking daily injections of human growth hormone to delay the effects of aging or to improve athletic performance. Researchers say this practice, for which users pay up to $10,000 a year, can have serious and potentially deadly side effects, including increased risk of cancer.

Artificial human growth hormones were originally designed to help youths who were at risk for short stature because of a specific hormone deficiency. Their widespread use for performance and anti-aging is still experimental and some maintain unethical, if not illegal.

San Diego resident Billie Russell, 79, takes an intravenous cocktail of growth hormone shots, estrogen, testosterone, thyroid, vitamins, and minerals. "I was not able to walk a block four years ago. Now I can walk a mile on my treadmill. I just feel great. I have sex drive again. I give large dinner parties. It's been a miracle."

Despite anecdotal reports such as this, researchers aren't so sure. While growth hormones may help melt abdominal fat and add some muscle, they do not markedly improve attitude or performance. George Merriam, professor of medicine at the University of Washington-Seattle, says that although growth hormone "can resculpt your body composition, it won't get you up out of bed." Significantly, it did not help subjects on the precise Continuous Scale-Physical Function Performance test, which measures life skills using a simulated bus stop, grocery store, kitchen, and bedroom.

Only exercise clearly improved functional status, endurance, and strength. "People are looking for a magic bullet," says Christine Cassel, an expert on geriatric medicine. "The message that the key to vigorous old age is activity—physical, mental, and social—just isn't one our society wants to hear." OPEN EXCHANGE readers, are you listening?

Dr. Andrew Weil's Prescription for Health

"Walk your way to wellness" prescribes Andrew Weil, MD, whose commonsense approach mixed with new age wisdom has made him a national favorite. "Brisk walking—which burns about 100 calories a mile—has been shown to be as effective as running in reducing the risk of heart attack and stroke, and it's a lot kinder to your legs and back."

15 Million Americans Practice Yoga, An Increase of 28.5% In One Year!

Berkeley's own Yoga Journal, the country's premier yoga magazine, has just released "Yoga in America," the first comprehensive study of the yoga market. According to the study, over 7% of U.S. adults, or 15 million people, now practice yoga, an increase of 28.5% from the year prior. The poll surveyed over 4,000 respondents—a statistically representative sample of the total U.S. population.

The survey revealed that interest in yoga has gone mainstream. Specifically:

• More than 12% of the U.S. population, or 25.5 million people, is very or extremely interested in yoga.
• One in six respondents, or 35.3 million people, express the intention to try yoga within the next 12 months.
• More than half of the general population, or 109.7 million people, has at least a casual interest in yoga.

Says John Abbott, president and CEO of Yoga Journal, "Yoga has become a cultural phenomenon and an integral part of the wellness trend in this country. All the data indicates a substantial growth in the number of practitioners over the next few years—a growth that I suspect will be sheltered from both a downturn economy and other world events, as people turn to yoga to help them cope with a changing world."
The study also collected data on age, gender, income, and other demographic factors. Of special note: Over 3/4th of the people who practice yoga are women, and 90% have attended college. If you're interested in meeting smart, limber, health-conscious women, you're likely to find them in yoga classes!
Yoga Journal's first annual San Francisco Conference is featured this issue in OPEN EXCHANGE's Yoga category.

Heart Healthy Diets

Are all diets heart healthy? The experts weigh in, and opinions are mixed.

"Weight Watchers, the high-fat Atkins diet, the extremely low-fat Ornish diet and the high-protein, moderate carbohydrate Zone diet all help people lose weight and all reduce cholesterol, but in different ways, the researchers told a meeting of the American Heart Association" in Orlando, Florida, according to Reuters, 11/10/03.

"On average, participants in the study reduced their heart disease risk by 5 percent to 15 percent," said Dr. Michael Dansinger of Tufts University in Boston. "Instead of saying there is one clear winner here, we are saying they are all winners." Those who stuck it out for a full year lost, on average, 5 percent of their body weight—or about 10 to 12 pounds. The researchers used statistics that show lowering cholesterol by a certain amount, for instance, reduces the risk of heart disease overall.

Dr. Robert Eckel of the University of Colorado, who heads the Heart Association's nutrition committee, said the message is clear—lose weight however you can to reduce your risk of heart disease. "I think weight reduction trumps a lot of other stuff," Eckel said.

For the study Dansinger and colleagues chose 160 overweight people and randomly assigned 40 to each of four different diets. They weighed an average 220 pounds and needed to lose between 30 and 80 pounds.

All agreed to follow the diets to the best of their ability for two months, although none were enrolled in the full programs that Weight Watchers and Dr. Dean Ornish advocate. This includes exercise, group meetings and food diaries for Weight Watchers and stress reduction for the Ornish diet.

After two months, 22 percent of the dieters had given up. After a year, 35 percent dropped out of Weight Watchers and the Zone diets and 50 percent had quit the Atkins and Ornish plans.

Dansinger and other researchers said the study suggested there is no one-size-fits-all diet best for everyone. "The type of person who is going to go for a low-fat, vegetarian diet is not, in my experience, the kind of person who is going to go for a high-meat diet," Dansinger said.

But for people with high cholesterol levels, the Ornish diet might be the most beneficial, Dansinger said. "The Ornish diet, low-fat vegetarian, was best for lowering the bad LDL cholesterol, while other diets were better at raising the good HDL cholesterol," Dansinger said. Low density lipoprotein cholesterol is the stuff that clogs arteries, while high density lipoprotein carries fat out of the blood. Ornish underscored that doctors often place too high a value on high HDL levels. "If you reduce fat, there is less garbage, less saturated fat and cholesterol, so your body needs less garbage trucks."

Although the Tufts study did not find that the high-fat Atkins diet posed special problems in the short term, other researchers cite cases where it may raise the risk of heart disease, even to the extent of requiring bypass surgery.

As reported by WebMD Medical News, 11/20/03, the activist group Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine is calling on the Center for Disease Control to more closely track people on high fat diets like Atkins. The goal, says PCRM president Neal Barnard, MD, is to more easily identify long-term health problems that may be linked to following diets that are high in saturated fats and protein and low in carbohydrates.

Try The Low Petroleum Oil Diet

Even if you know which diet is best for you, which one is best for the planet? As reported in the online environmental magazine Grist (www.gristmagazine.com), small-scale farmers are going "beyond organic" to push locally grown foods.

Once the perceived purview of hippies and wackos, organic food has become so mainstream that you can purchase Safeway-brand organic frozen peas. But is buying organic enough? That oh-so-healthy pesticide-free mango you bought in Minneapolis sure as heck didn't grow in your neighbor's back 40; in fact, the average food product in the United States travels 1,500 to 2,500 miles from farm to table.

That makes for a lot of burned fossil fuels — and food that's not fresh. To counteract this trend, a loose network of farmers, consumers, and advocacy groups is trying to push agriculture one step closer to sustainability by urging consumers to go "beyond organic." You support this movement whenever shop at your local farmers' markets and fruit stands. Beyond organic: Go Local!

Energy Enlightenment

What's the perfect gift for the loved one who has everything? According to the online environmental publication, grist magazine (www.gristmagazine.com), try five compact fluorescent light bulbs.

With energy prices expected to balloon this winter, experts are predicting increased sales of energy-efficient consumer products in the U.S. over the coming months.

Home Depot recently published a catalog showcasing efficient goods: "We've planned for a rush to these types of products this winter," said Craig Menear, the retail giant's senior vice president for merchandising. Sales of compact fluorescent light bulbs, for example, are growing fast — though not fast enough. If every American homeowner installed the efficient bulbs in their five most used lighting fixtures, the U.S. would conserve 800 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity—equivalent to shutting down 21 power plants—a big step toward energy independence and a sustainable future.

Source: The New York Times, December 1, 2003.

Upscale Hotels Rub Pets Right

As reported in the magazine Smart Meetings, October 2003, Sheraton, Westin, and W hotels will welcome dogs throughout their chains in the United States and Canada. Pooches will also be treated to luxurious dog beds and amenities such as plush robes, doggie toys, and even canine massages. The five W hotels in New York City will take pet pampering to a whole new level by offering in-room doggie massages by licensed dog massage therapists. Bow WOW!

God & Health: Churchgoers Live 8 Years Longer

Because patients are now demanding more spiritual care, more than half of the country's medical schools now teach students how to talk to their patients about faith and illness. As reported by Newsweek, November 10, 2003, 84% of Americans think that praying for the sick improves their chances of recovery. How good is the evidence? A recent survey scrutinized about 150 investigations into religion's effect on health and rated the strength of the most popular hypotheses. Here's how they fared:

Church/service attendance promotes longer life. (persuasive)
Religion or spirituality protects against cardiovascular disease. (moderate)
Being prayed for improves physical recovery from acute illness. (moderate)
Religion or spirituality protects against cancer mortality. (inadequate)
Religion or spirituality improves recovery from acute illness. (very weak)
Religion or spirituality protects against disability. (very weak)
Religion or spirituality slows the progression of cancer. (very weak)

The most persuasive argument, based on currently available scientific evidence, is that life expectancy is greatest among regular churchgoers, 83 years, eight years more than for people who never attend church. Chruchgoing is also associated with healthy habits, including less smoking, less drinking, more exercise, and a happier outlook on life. Of special note: it doesn't seem to matter which denomination you belong to, so long as you are in an organized group. Is it belief itself—or membership—that promotes good health?

Some critics argue that faith and medicine are best kept separate. Irrefutable evidence demonstrating a mind-body-spirit connection has yet to be found. Still, whether or not prayers are actually answered, faith seems to foster longevity. Perhaps we should also study whether true believers or skeptics, Democrats or Republicans, new agers or satanists, enjoy better health.

Unhealthy For Democracy: Bush, Mass Media Complicit In Iraq Attack

Was the U.S.-led overthrow and capture of Iraq's Saddam Hussein worth thousands of lives, the wrath of many Muslims, the alienation of many allies, and mortgaging the U.S. economy? Can the U.S. legitimately claim to be exporting democratic values when the justifications for war were founded on falsehoods? As reported by Frank Davies (Knight Ridder Newspapers, October 2, 2003), a majority of Americans have held at least one of three mistaken impressions that contributed to much of the popular support for the war:

• U.S. forces found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
• There's clear evidence that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein worked closely with the September 11 terrorists.
• People in foreign countries generally either backed the U.S.-led war or were evenly split between supporting and opposing it.

Overall, 60 percent of Americans held at least one of those views in polls reported between January and September, 2003, by the Program on International Policy Attitudes, based at the University of Maryland in College Park, and the polling firm, Knowledge Networks based in Menlo Park. "While we cannot assert that these misperceptions created the support for going to war with Iraq, it does appear likely that support for the war would be substantially lower if fewer members of the public had these misperceptions," said Steven Kull, who directs Maryland's program.

In fact, no weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq. U.S. intelligence has found no clear evidence that Saddam was working closely with al-Qaida or was involved in the September 11, 2001, attacks. Gallop polls found large majorities opposed to the war in most countries. PIPA's seven polls, which included 9,611 respondents, had a margin of error from 2 to 3.5 percent.

The analysis also revealed that different news sources convey information with varying degrees of accuracy. For example, 80 percent of those who said they relied on Fox News and 71 percent of those who said they relied on CBS believed at least one of the three misperceptions. The comparable figures were 47 percent for those who said they relied most on newspapers and magazines and 23 percent for those who said they relied on PBS or National Public Radio. In effect, PBS and NPR viewers and listeners were least misinformed and best served by their news sources.

Analysts suggested that there were several reasons for misperceptions. The Bush administration had misstated or exaggerated some of the intelligence findings, with Bush himself saying: "We found the weapons of mass destruction... and we'll find more as time goes by."

The Bush administration has also been a factor in persistent confusion. Last September, for example, Bush said there was no evidence that Saddam was involved in the September 11 attack after Vice President Dick Cheney suggested a link. Cheney, in a Meet the Press interview, had described Iraq as "the geographic base of the terrorists who had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11."

Why some news audiences had more accurate impressions than others was less clear. Kull cited instances in which TV and newspapers gave prominent coverage to reports that banned weapons might have been found in Iraq, but only modest coverage when those reports turned out to be wrong. Susan Moeller, a University of Maryland professor, said that much reporting had consisted of "stenographic coverage of government statements," with less attention to whether the government's statements were accurate.

Is there a hidden agenda behind the dissemination of such misinformation? During the Watergate conspiracy, Deep Throat admonished investigators to "follow the money." Dripping with sarcasm, comedian David Letterman asks, "Do I make the check out to [defense contractor and recent Cheney employer] Halliburton with one 'l' or two?"