|
Sept. 5, 2003
FROM THE AIRWAVES
A Lesson in the American Food-Lust
From the Airwaves is a transcript of “The GW Washington Forum,”
the weekly public affairs radio program produced by GW, hosted by Richard
Sheehe, and broadcast Sunday’s at 9 am on WWRC-AM 1260 in Washington.
This conversation with Dr. Neil Barnard, adjunct associate professor of
medicine, comes from a recent program.
Richard Sheehe: Nutrition, obesity in America
and the potentially addictive nature of food. These are topics upon which
Dr. Neil Barnard regularly ruminates. Barnard is the founder of the Physicians
Committee for Responsible Medicine, an adjunct associate professor of
medicine and he’s the author of the new book “Breaking the Food
Seduction.” Let’s talk about this in context. Obesity tends
to be making more headlines these days as a systemic problem in the United
States. Why don’t you recap some of the statistics of obesity in
the United States?
Dr. Neil Barnard: Well, the main statistic
that is particularly frightening for us now is that about two-thirds of
adults are significantly overweight. As many as about one-in-three come
in the category of obesity and these are figures we have never seen.
RS: So to be of a normal, healthy weight
is actually to be in the minority in this country?
NB: Sadly, that’s correct. And while
the most concern is with kids, most kids are not in the obese category
at all or even overweight. But of the numbers who are, it’s more
than we’ve ever had. Your average kid is heftier and at much higher
risk of becoming overweight in adulthood than ever before, so we are concerned.
RS: One-out-of-three Americans is obese?
How many and what percentage of children are either overweight or obese?
NB: It depends on the age range. The older
they get, the further they get into the teen years, the closer they approximate
the adulthood years, although they’re not there yet. But it shouldn’t
be that way. They’re at a time of life when they should be at their
absolute leanest. Of course, they run many risks by being overweight.
It isn’t just a cosmetic problem, it increases a risk of heart problems,
certain cancers like post-menopausal breast cancer, diabetes and high
blood pressure. So the current generation of kids growing into adulthood
is going to have a lot of personal tragedy and cost.
RS: How do the statistics compare to 10 or
20 years ago?
NB: They’re dramatically higher. To
tell you the truth, we weren’t svelte as a country back in the 1970s
and ’80s; we were still heftier than people in, say, Japan. Over
time what has happened is we have an increase in individuals, particularly
in the obese category. And this has been reflected also overseas, where
in Japan obesity was unknown, in say 1980. And it’s still rare, but
a percentage of the population there is now in that obese category and
a sizable number are in a mild overweight category and it’s for one
reason — the diet changed. The Japanese diet has changed and the
American diet has changed. The diet used to be, in Asian countries, based
on rice, huge amounts of rice and vegetables and not a lot of meat and
dairy products. Fast food was utterly unknown. That’s all changed,
the diet is westernizing rapidly and they’re paying the price.
RS: What is changing about the diet? What
was the average, daily round of meals for an American 20 years ago versus
today?
NB: What has really happened is that we’ve
taken a day that wasn’t especially healthy to start with. To give
you a picture, I guess of our own diet, using myself as an example, I
grew up in North Dakota and my grandpa was a cattle rancher and all my
uncles and cousins are in that business, so the normal way of eating was
roast beef, baked potatoes and corn.
RS: That’s about the way it was. Roast
beef was always there, whether it was a special occasion or not.
NB: Exactly. Pretty much that sort of pattern
of making meat the center of the diet, and everything after that is what
makes us different from Asian countries where the dietary staples are
rice. But since 1980, what has happened is people are simply adding more
and more and more calories to the diet. More of everything; you’re
not cutting fat intake at all. Our portion sizes have grown quite substantially.
The Journal of the American Medical Association quantified this
several weeks ago and it’s true. The six ounce soda became 12, became
16 and now it’s 20 ounces and everyone saves half for the next day.
Hamburgers are bigger, virtually everything is bigger and that is the
reason why we are overweight.
RS: Are market forces making larger portions
available?
NB: Yes, they simply found you can make more
money that way. But they’ve also found willing customers for it and
this is where I am suggesting something that may perhaps sound a bit novel,
but we have a lot of evidence in support of it. Certain foods behave as
if they are habituary and are even addicting. I don’t mean every
food. I don’t mean that you’re going to run down to the 7-11
and binge on bananas. That doesn’t happen, but when we look at the
effects that certain foods have on the brain and on our feeding patterns,
it’s quite striking. A person has some chocolate while they’re
not even hungry, but they want a little sweet taste after a meal. So that
one chocolate cookie leads to a second, and a third, and a fourth and
five minutes later your hand hits the bottom of the bag and you’ve
polished it all off. We tend to blame our weak will power, our personality
or lack of discipline, none of which is the issue. It turns out that chocolate
triggers the release of opiate chemicals in the brain.
RS: Opiate as in opium that you can find
in heroin?
NB: You got it.
RS: The same
kind of effect?
NB: The same chemical class, not as strong,
but yes. Opiates are a class that includes the endorphines and antephelines
that are there to help give you the runner’s high when you’re
exercising or to help you in times of stress. But when a person consumes
chocolate, it triggers a nerve impulse from the taste buds to the base
of the brain. Opiates are released and ultimately they give you a little
bit of a feel-good effect. Not a lot, just a little bit so people tend
to come back to it again and again. Particularly when you’re stressed,
you’re depressed, you’re alone, you’re lonely, chocolate
acts very much like a feel-good drug.
Send feedback to: bygeorge@gwu.edu
|
|
Related Link
"The
GW Washington Forum"
|
