Pass The Bubbly Please

Ah. The New Year is upon us - where did the time go? One more reason to celebrate with friends and loved ones, and one more reason to dress up and look fabulous. I'm sure you have all found your dresses already but I just passed by the store window of BCBG the other day. BCBG has always attracted me, there is something simple and ethereal about their dresses, and their cutting (for me at least, is superb).

Their dresses make you feel almost old hollywood glam or simply modern chic. I know they're rather simple, definitely something you've seen before, but talk about excellent draping! I don't know, there's something about them that makes me fall in love.

Love the velvet bodice of this dress!

This dress is actually much more beautiful in person.

Aughhh...I need to get this - look at that sleeve detail!

So simple, so lovely (especially the colour). Hm, I will advise you not to wear a headband that the model demonstrates...

Ok, kind of generic I know, princess cut blah blah blah. But the material! And a colour that would look great on all skin tones.

What are you doing for New Year's? &equally important, what will you be wearing?

Good Golly Boots!

I found (and purchased) two pairs of boots this weekend.

Yes, two.

They are comfortable ... and I love, love, love them.

Steve Madden - Legion


INC Brook Riding Boot - mine are chocolate brown and aren't so shiny.


Oh sales how I love thee.

Butter, Margarine and Heart Disease

Shortly after World War II, margarine replaced butter in the U.S. food supply. Margarine consumption exceeded butter in the 1950s. By 1975, we were eating one-fourth the amount of butter eaten in 1900 and ten times the amount of margarine. Margarine was made primarily of hydrogenated vegetable oils, as many still are today. This makes it one of our primary sources of trans fat. The consumption of trans fats from other sources also likely tracked closely with margarine intake.


Coronary heart disease (CHD) resulting in a loss of blood flow to the heart (heart attack), was first described in detail in 1912 by Dr. James B. Herrick. Sudden cardiac death due to CHD was considered rare in the 19th century, although other forms of heart disease were diagnosed regularly by symptoms and autopsies. They remain rare in many non-industrial cultures today. This could not have resulted from massive underdiagnosis because heart attacks have characteristic symptoms, such as chest pain that extends along the arm or neck. Physicians up to that time were regularly diagnosing heart conditions other than CHD. The following graph is of total heart disease mortality in the U.S. from 1900 to 2005. It represents all types of heart disease mortality, including 'heart failure', which are non-CHD disorders like arrhythmia and myocarditis.

The graph above is not age-adjusted, meaning it doesn't reflect the fact that lifespan has increased since 1900. I couldn't compile the raw data myself without a lot of effort, but the age-adjusted graph is here. It looks similar to the one above, just a bit less pronounced. I think it's interesting to note the close similarity between the graph of margarine intake and the graph of heart disease deaths. The butter intake graph is also essentially the inverse of the heart disease graph.

Here's where it gets really interesting. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control has also been tracking CHD deaths specifically since 1900. Again, it would be a lot of work for me to compile the raw data, but it can be found here and a graph is in Anthony Colpo's book The Great Cholesterol Con. Here's the jist of it: there was essentially no CHD mortality until 1925, at which point it skyrocketed until about 1970, becoming the leading cause of death. After that, it began to fall due to improved medical care. There are some discontinuities in the data due to changes in diagnostic criteria, but even subtracting those, the pattern is crystal clear.

The age-adjusted heart disease death rate (all forms of heart disease) has been falling since the 1950s, largely due to improved medical treatment. Heart disease incidence has not declined substantially, according to the Framingham Heart study. We're better at keeping people alive in the 21st century, but we haven't successfully addressed the root cause of heart disease.

Was the shift from butter to margarine involved in the CHD epidemic? We can't make any firm conclusions from these data, because they're purely correlations. But there are nevertheless mechanisms that support a protective role for butter, and a detrimental one for margarine. Butter from pastured cows is one of the richest known sources of vitamin K2. Vitamin K2 plays a central role in protecting against arterial calcification, which is an integral part of arterial plaque and the best single predictor of cardiovascular death risk. In the early 20th century, butter was typically from pastured cows.

Margarine is a major source of trans fat. Trans fat is typically found in vegetable oil that has been hydrogenated, rendering it solid at room temperature. Hydrogenation is a chemical reaction that is truly disgusting. It involves heat, oil, hydrogen gas and a metal catalyst. I hope you give a wide berth to any food that says "hydrogenated" anywhere in the ingredients. Some modern margarine is supposedly free of trans fats, but in the U.S., less than 0.5 grams per serving can be rounded down so the nutrition label is not a reliable guide. Only by looking at the ingredients can you be sure that the oils haven't been hydrogenated. Even if they aren't, I still don't recommend margarine, which is an industrially processed pseudo-food.

One of the strongest explanations of CHD is the oxidized LDL hypothesis. The idea is that LDL lipoprotein particles ("LDL cholesterol") become oxidized and stick to the vessel walls, creating an inflammatory cascade that results in plaque formation. Chris Masterjohn wrote a nice explanation of the theory here. Several things influence the amount of oxidized LDL in the blood, including the total amount of LDL in the blood, the antioxidant content of the particle, the polyunsaturated fat content of LDL (more PUFA = more oxidation), and the size of the LDL particles. Small LDL is considered more easily oxidized than large LDL. Small LDL is also associated with elevated CHD mortality. Trans fat shrinks your LDL compared to butter.

In my opinion, it's likely that both the decrease in butter consumption and the increase in trans fat consumption contributed to the massive incidence of CHD seen in the U.S. and other industrial nations today. I think it's worth noting that France has the highest per-capita dairy fat consumption of any industrial nation, along with a comparatively low intake of hydrogenated fat, and also has the second-lowest rate of CHD, behind Japan.

Leptin Resistance and Sugar

Leptin is a major hormone regulator of fat mass in vertebrates. It's a frequent topic on this blog because I believe it's central to overweight and modern metabolic disorders. Here's how it works. Leptin is secreted by fat tissue, and its blood levels are proportional to fat mass. The more fat tissue, the more leptin. Leptin reduces appetite, increases fat release from fat tissue and increases the metabolic rate. Normally, this creates a "feedback loop" that keeps fat mass within a fairly narrow range. Any increase in fat tissue causes an increase in leptin, which burns fat tissue at an accelerated rate. This continues until fat mass has decreased enough to return leptin to its original level.

Leptin was first identified through research on the "obese" mutant mouse. The obese strain arose by a spontaneous mutation, and is extremely fat. The mutation turned out to be in a protein investigators dubbed leptin. When researchers first discovered leptin, they speculated that it could be the "obesity gene", and supplemental leptin a potential treatment for obesity. They later discovered (to their great chagrin) that obese people produce much more leptin than thin people, so a defeciency of leptin was clearly not the problem, as it was in the obese mouse. They subsequently found that obese people scarcely respond to injected leptin by reducing their food intake, as thin people do. They are leptin resistant. This makes sense if you think about it. The only way a person can gain significant fat mass is if the leptin feedback loop isn't working correctly.

Another rodent model of leptin resistance arose later, the "Zucker fatty" rat. Zucker rats have a mutation in the leptin receptor gene. They secrete leptin just fine, but they don't respond to it because they have no functional receptor. This makes them an excellent model of complete leptin resistance. What happens to Zucker rats? They become obese, hypometabolic, hyperphagic, hypertensive, insulin resistant, and they develop blood lipid disturbances. It should sound familiar; it's the metabolic syndrome and it affects 24% of Americans (CDC NHANES III). Guess what's the first symptom of impending metabolic syndrome in humans, even before insulin resistance and obesity? Leptin resistance. This makes leptin an excellent contender for the keystone position in overweight and other metabolic disorders.

I've mentioned before that the two most commonly used animal models of the metabolic syndrome are both sugar-fed rats. Fructose, which accounts for 50% of table sugar and 55% of high-fructose corn syrup, is probably the culprit. Glucose, which is the remainder of table sugar and high-fructose corn syrup, and the product of starch digestion, does not have the same effects. I think it's also relevant that refined sugar contains no vitamins or minerals whatsoever. Sweetener consumption in the U.S. has increased from virtually nothing in 1850, to 84 pounds per year in 1909, to 119 pounds in 1970, to 142 pounds in 2005 (source).

In a recent paper, Dr. Philip Scarpace's group (in collaboration with Dr. Richard Johnson), showed that a high-fructose diet causes leptin resistance in rats. The diet was 60% fructose, which is extreme by any standards, but it caused a complete resistance to the effect of leptin on food intake. Normally, leptin binds receptors in a brain region called the hypothalamus, which is responsible for food intake behaviors (including in humans). This accounts for leptin's ability to reduce food consumption. Fructose-fed rats did not reduce their food intake at all when injected with leptin, while rats on a normal diet did. When subsequently put on a high-fat diet (60% lard), rats that started off on the fructose diet gained more weight.

I think it's worth mentionong that rodents don't respond to high-fat diets in the same way as humans, as judged by the efficacy of low-carbohydrate diets for weight loss. Industrial lard also has a very poor ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 fats (especially if it's hydrogenated), which may also contribute to the observed weight gain.

Fructose-fed rats had higher cholesterol and twice the triglycerides of control-fed rats. Fructose increases triglycerides because it goes straight to the liver, which makes it into fat that's subsequently exported into the bloodstream. Elevated triglycerides impair leptin transport from the blood to the hypothalamus across the blood-brain barrier, which separates the central nervous system from the rest of the body. Fructose also impaired the response of the hypothalamus to the leptin that did reach it. Both effects may contribute to the leptin resistance Dr. Scarpace's group observed.

Just four weeks of fructose feeding in humans (1.5g per kg body weight) increased leptin levels by 48%. Body weight did not change during the study, indicating that more leptin was required to maintain the same level of fat mass. This may be the beginning of leptin resistance.

Merry Christmas To All, and To All A Goodnight

Merry Christmas everyone! We hope you had a wonderful evening and a beautiful day! Were in good company with family and friends, wrapped up warm - or dressed downright cool! - with good food, wherever you are!

This spread instantly made me want to layer up with colours and scarves - I actually decided that I had too much black in my closet! Is that even possible? Love the fresh faces and the braided hair. What wonderful winter inspiration - take the look of fall and bring with you into winter, enough of the dull greys and the generic black. I can't believe I just said that.







Image source: Elle Italy by David Burton

The Fundamentals

I heard an interview of Michael Pollan yesterday on Talk of the Nation. He made some important points about nutrition that bear repeating. He's fond of saying "don't eat anything your grandmother wouldn't recognize as food". That doesn't mean your grandmother specifically, but anyone's grandmother, whether she was Japanese, American or African. The point is that commercial food processing has taken us away from the foods, and traditional food preparation methods, on which our bodies evolved to thrive. At this point, we don't know enough about health to design a healthy synthetic diet. Diet and health are too complex for reductionism at our current level of understanding. For that reason, any departure from natural foods and traditional food processing techniques is suspect.

Mainstream nutrition science has repeatedly contradicted itself and led us down the wrong path. This means that traditional cultures still have something to teach us about health. Hunter-gatherers and certain other non-industrial cultures are still the healthiest people on Earth, from the perspective of non-communicable disease. Pollan used the example of butter. First we thought it was healthy, then we were told it contains too much saturated fat and should be replaced with hydrogenated vegetable margarine. Now we learn that trans fats are unhealthy, so we're making new margarines that are low in trans fats, but are still industrially processed pseudo-foods. How long will it take to show these new fats are harmful? What will be the next industrial fat to replace them? This game can be played forever as the latest unproven processed food replaces the previous one, and it will never result in something as healthy as real butter.

The last point of Pollan's I'll mention is that the world contains (or contained) a diversity of different cultures, living in dramatically different ways, many of which do not suffer from degenerative disease. These range from carnivores like the Inuit, to plant-heavy agriculturalists like the Kitavans, to pastoralists like the Masai. The human body is adapted to a wide variety of foodways, but the one it doesn't seem to like is the modern Western diet.

Pollan's new book is In Defense of Food. I haven't read it, but I think it would be a good introduction to the health, ethical and environmental issues that surround food choices. He's a clear and accessible writer.

Merry Christmas, happy Hanukkah, and happy holidays to everyone!

Happy Christmukkah!

Something to drool over on this special day....Yes, I'm in love with red pumps! But just to add some variety, these are not Louboutins (remember the Turkey day pumps?), but from Stuart Weitzman. Dear Santa.....

Happy Christmukkah everyone!

Psst! I heard Bloomies is having a big sale on the 26th!

Image Source: Bloomies

Scented

I indulge in perfume. I tend to put too much on and think nothing of it. I'm a dedicated and committed wearer of four scents, all of which are used in a rotational manner, depending on mood, weather, clothes and/or occasion. They are much more than just the fantastic four.

My first ever - must wear all the time - is this discontinued line of Ines De La Fressange. After all, she was Lagerfeld's muse.


I found this a couple of years ago - extremely fitting for Spring or Fall. Roger & Gallet Bouquet Imperial


Something fresh after a hot shower, or light for a summer day I wear Baby Bench. What's that? Yes, a perfume for babies. Not really a perfume actually, scented water? I have no idea, but it smells damn good AND it's made in the Philippines! Subtle and soft.


And last, but certainly not least, Marc Jacobs' Daisy. Divine. Long lasting, beautiful!


What's your scent?

Ctrl BG: A Shortcut to Financial News 12/21

After MUCH drama, the fall of the auto industry in the US has finally been avoided- at least temporarily anyway. In the end, Bush signed over $17.4 to Chrysler and GM on Friday in return for non voting warrants and more oversight on executive pay etc. In the end, they made a full circle and the money will be coming from the TARP fund, which brings up the really intriguing question of whether the government has opened the pandora box and now other industries will be lining up to get a share of the rest of the TARP fund. Paulson has already asked Congress to release the rest of the $350 billion TARP fund early, when just a few days ago he said that it will not be necessary. Just when we thought we figured out how the TARP is going to work, they change their minds. This does not bode well for the government, because it makes them look like they have no idea what they're doing. Maybe they don't! On the other hand, the wider purpose of TARP is to support the financial market stability, and I daresay, it will probably not be very stable if the auto industry went bankrupt!

On the sidelines, the Madoff scandal continues to unfold, revealing many influential individuals exposed to this fraud. The S&P cut the rating of 11 US and EU banks, including Bank of America, Barclays Bank, Citibank, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase Bank, Morgan Stanley, Royal Bank of Scotland, UBS and Wells Fargo Bank. I guess if ratings must be cut, at least there is safety in numbers. What are you going to do when everyone goes down?

Outside of the States, it looks like the land of chocolate and waffles is not doing very well. Belgium's attempt to bailout Fortis got frozen as Prime Minister Yves Leterme tendered his resignation after having reportedly politically meddling to sway a court ruling. Apparently this is the third time their government collapsed. I had no idea.

The Girl With The Short Hair

Last year I went from that was down below the middle of my back, to a really bad short japanese-boy-rockstar cut. My hair grows fast so while I was mortified & stuck with pinning it back and trying to tie it up in all sorts of ways, with ribbons and clips, it eventually grew back to past my shoulders by September of this year. Being stuck with thick, thick hair I got fed up and went to go get it cut again into a straight across, above the shoulders/longish bob.

Then, I went home and chopped it all off to have it super short in the back, with an A-line cut in the front. Kind of like Victoria Beckham, but less extreme and shorter. How does it feel? Totally awesome. Here are some cuties that might inspire you to cut it short.




The best part is that you figure out fun ways to do your hair, it's just easier to take of! Best part? If you can work the curling iron and get a bunch of curls, it's completely adorable. It definitely becomes a deciding factor on how you style your outfits.

What are your thoughts on girls with short hair?

As for my next hair cut? I'm definitely going to go for a Shannyn Sossamon look.


Image Source: Garance Dore

Little Frivolous Somethings

When I was a kid, Christmas was about finally getting that one toy I've wanted all year long. When I grew older, it was about finally getting that one big fashion item that I've been craving for since all season. Now that I'm a bit older and (hopefully) wiser, I'm beginning to think that maybe that perfect Christmas gift is not about getting that big ticket item, but about getting that little frivolous something that will make you smile. Because really, I'd like to be present when a big ticket item is bought for me- just in case anything goes wrong. Besides, you'd be really broke if you bought something big for everyone you loved!

When I say frivolous, I do not mean something completely useless. It has got to be something that I would actually use, that little something that I've been meaning/wanting to buy but have put it on the backlog because there are more practical things on my list (like toothpaste, vacuum cleaners and Tweezerman tweezers- though if all else fails, these would not be a bad idea. At least they're useful!). Here are a few things on my backlog:
Essie nail varnish set. I am a HUGE fan of professional nail varnish (they go on SO much smoother and chips less!), Essie in particular. One can never have too much nail varnish, because they come in so many different colors and your favourite ones will start to dry out and coagulate after a while. I am especially loving this little gift set from Essie, because it encompasses all the classic colors one MUST have in their repertoire. They are also in delightfully small bottles that are actually more easy to carry and well, just the right size. I have personally never finished a bottle of nail varnish. Plus, did I mention that they are only $15 (they are usually $6-7 a bottle)!

The next thing on my list, are Shu Uemura fake lashes. Frivolous? Yes, for $20, they can only be used for one night. But fun? Definitely! I'd love to know what it feels like to have ridiculously long and perfect lashes for one night. This would also be the perfect time to give them out, because what better time is there to try fake lashes then New Years Eve? Speaking of New Years Eve, I have a vision. A vision of myself in a simple dress (of undecided color as of now) with a low side bun accessorized with this fabulous piece of purple feather (right). And if that plan should go awry, I can be masculine chic, in this adorable hat (left). I can even use this for Halloween next year! Spending $18 on literally a piece of feather is definitely not practical, but it will definitely draw a smile from me :)
Other random cute things on my list is a munny and a lego Ipod speaker. I don't really need ipod speakers, but I definitely wouldn't mind one that is so small and cute! And actually, I have a Munny. But mine didn't come out as I would like it to, so I'd love a second chance to decorate a Munny (including markers and other decorating materials would also be a nice touch).
Not exactly "little" , but I've always been very intrigued with lomography. I love taking pictures and I'd love to try out the different effects of lomography. The camera is not too expensive at $50 (compared to real digital cameras anyway), but if you factor in film and developing etc, it is actually a very expensive random hobby. Like those polaroids back in the days!

The purple frame (left) is not just a random piece of art. It is a mini DNA portrait! HG and I saw it on CNBC's list of weird gift ideas and our inner nerds are awaken. You really cannot get more personalized than a picture of your own DNA composition. And for someone to go to the effort of collecting your DNA sample and then go have it made.... that's a LOT of effort.

Then there are classes. Cooking classes, dancing classes, it would just be FUN to take a random class with friends even though you will never be able to replicate that 5 layer chocolate cake you just made at home. My friends just did a Christmas Cupcake decorating class, and I am SO jealous, because it looked so much fun. I wish I was there! Sur la Table offers cooking classes for $69 and I'm sure there are lots more similar places that I don't know of yet. Whatever you want to learn, there will be a class for it somewhere!

And last on my list is a really cute and big stuff toy. Something cute so it'll look good on my bed and something big and cushiony so I can lean on it while I read. I know, I am a kid at heart :P 8 more days til Christmas!!!

Image Source: Essie, Sephora, DNA 11 and Urban Outfitters

Oh boy, oh boy

How do you like your boy to look? Mine is the usual jeans and t-shirt kinda guy, but I like a little styled grunge to be honest!

A little flannel can go a long way. Too much flannel can be tacky and "OH LOOK I AM A HIPSTER."

Perhaps a little too trendy with the scarf and all - but nonetheless a rather eye-pleasing outfit! I love the checkered shirt.

I love this. I love the coat. He looks so... historical!

Casual, cute, playful! Lego belt!


Umm...yes, hello and hello.

Boys with style are big in my book - a little character like a neck scarf or a sharp looking jacket can make all the difference. Just enough scruff balanced out by the perfect amount of tidiness. And of course, excellent manners. Chivalry is not dead and of course style for men is alive as ever. Just a few things that make me sigh.

So tell me, how you would you like your man to dress?


All photos by The Sartorialist, which I love and adore. Who doesn't?

U.S. Weight, Lifestyle and Diet Trends, 1970- 2007

For this post, I compiled statistics on U.S. weight, health and lifestyle trends, and graphed them as consistently as possible. They span the period from 1970 to 2007, during which the obesity rate doubled. The data come from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Some of the graphs are incomplete, either because the data don't exist, or because I wasn't able to find them. Obesity is defined as a body mass index (BMI) of 30+; overweight is a BMI of 25+. Yes, it's frightening. It has affected adults and children (NHANES).
The percentage of Americans who report exercising in their spare time has actually increased since 1988 (BRFSS).
We're eating about 250 more calories per day, according to NHANES.
The 250 extra calories are coming from carbohydrate (NHANES).

We're eating more vegetables and fruit (USDA).
We're eating more meat by weight, although calories from meat have probably gone down because the meat has gotten leaner (USDA). This graph represents red meat, fish and poultry. The increase comes mostly from poultry. Boneless, skinless chicken breasts anyone?
We're eating more sugar (USDA). The scale of the graph doesn't allow you to fully appreciate that sweetener consumption had increased by a full 100 calories per day by 1999, although it has dropped a bit since then. This is based on food disappearance data. In other words, the amount consumed is estimated using the amount sold domestically, minus a percentage that approximates waste. High-fructose corn syrup has seized nearly 50% of the sweetener market since 1970.
Again, the scale of the graph doesn't allow you to fully appreciate the magnitude of the change here. In 2000, we ate approximately 2.5 ounces, or 280 calories, more processed grains per day than in 1970 (USDA). That has since decreased slightly (34 calories). You might be saying to yourself right now "hey, that plus the 100 calories from sugar adds up to more of an increase than the NHANES data show!" Yes, and I think that points to the fact that the data sets are not directly comparable. NHANES data are self-reported whereas USDA data are collected from vendors. Regardless of the absolute numbers, our processed grain consumption has gone way up since 1970.

Wheat is still king. Although we grow a lot of corn in this country, most of it gets fed to animals. We prefer eating wheat without first feeding it to an intermediary. In absolute quantity, wheat consumption has increased more than any other grain (not including corn syrup).
Bye bye whole milk. Hello skim milk (USDA).

This graph represents "added fats", as opposed to fats that occur naturally in meat or milk (the USDA does not track the latter). Added fats include salad oil, cooking oil, deep fry oil, butter, lard, tallow, etc. We are eating a lot more vegetable oil than we were in 1970. It comes chiefly from the industrial, omega-6 rich oils such as soybean, corn and canola. Added animal fats have increased slightly, but it's pretty insignificant in terms of calories.

There is an artifact in this graph that I have to point out. In 2000, the USDA changed the way it gathered vegetable oil data. This led to an abrupt, apparent increase in its consumption that is obvious on the graph. So it's difficult to make any quantitative conclusions, but I think it's clear nevertheless that vegetable oil intake has increased considerably.

Between 1970 and 1980, something changed in the U.S. that caused a massive increase in obesity and other health problems. Some combination of factors reached a critical mass that our metabolism could no longer tolerate. The three biggest changes in the American diet since 1970:

• An increase in cereal grain consumption, particularly wheat.
• An increase in sweetener consumption
• The replacement of meat and milk fat with industrial vegetable oils, with total fat intake remaining the same.

Mainstream America has done to itself what it did to native American and other indigenous cultures worldwide, with the same result.

Privacy Policy

Privacy Policy for site
The privacy of our visitors to site is important to us.

At site we recognize that privacy of your personal information is important. Here is information on what types of personal information we receive and collect when you use and visit site, and how we safeguard your information. We never sell your personal information to third parties.

Log Files
As with most other websites, we collect and use the data contained in log files. The information in the log files include your IP (internet protocol) address, your ISP (internet service provider, such as AOL or Shaw Cable), the browser you used to visit our site (such as Internet Explorer or Firefox), the time you visited our site and which pages you visited throughout our site.

Cookies and Web Beacons
We do use cookies to store information, such as your personal preferences when you visit our site. This could include only showing you a popup once in your visit, or the ability to login to some of our features, such as forums.

We also use third party advertisements on site to support our site. Some of these advertisers may use technology such as cookies and web beacons when they advertise on our site, which will also send these advertisers (such as Google through the Google AdSense program) information including your IP address, your ISP , the browser you used to visit our site, and in some cases, whether you have Flash installed. This is generally used for geotargeting purposes (showing New York real estate ads to someone in New York, for example) or showing certain ads based on specific sites visited (such as showing cooking ads to someone who frequents cooking sites).

DoubleClick DART cookies
We also may use DART cookies for ad serving through Google’s DoubleClick, which places a cookie on your computer when you are browsing the web and visit a site using DoubleClick advertising (including some Google AdSense advertisements). This cookie is used to serve ads specific to you and your interests (”interest based targeting”). The ads served will be targeted based on your previous browsing history (For example, if you have been viewing sites about visiting Las Vegas, you may see Las Vegas hotel advertisements when viewing a non-related site, such as on a site about hockey). DART uses “non personally identifiable information”. It does NOT track personal information about you, such as your name, email address, physical address, telephone number, social security numbers, bank account numbers or credit card numbers. You can opt-out of this ad serving on all sites using this advertising by visiting http://www.doubleclick.com/privacy/dart_adserving.aspx

You can choose to disable or selectively turn off our cookies or third-party cookies in your browser settings, or by managing preferences in programs such as Norton Internet Security. However, this can affect how you are able to interact with our site as well as other websites. This could include the inability to login to services or programs, such as logging into forums or accounts.

Deleting cookies does not mean you are permanently opted out of any advertising program. Unless you have settings that disallow cookies, the next time you visit a site running the advertisements, a new cookie will be added.

The Myth of the High-Protein Diet

The phrase "low-carbohydrate diet" is a no-no in some circles, because it implies that a diet is high in fat. Often, the euphemism "high-protein diet" is used to avoid the mental image of a stick of butter wrapped in bacon. It's purely a semantic game, because there is no such thing as a diet in which the majority of calories come from protein. The ability of the human body to metabolize protein ends at about 1/3 of calories (1, 2), and the long-term optimum may be lower still. Low-carbohydrate diets (yes, the ones that are highly effective for weight loss and general health) are high-fat diets.

Healthy cultures around the world tend to consume roughly 10 to 20% of calories from protein:

Masai - 19%

Kitava - 10%

Tokelau - 12%

Inuit - 20%, according to Stefansson

Kuna - 12%

Sweden - 12%

United States - 15%

Human milk - 6%

The balance comes from fat and carbohydrate. Ask a traditional Inuit. If there's no fat on your meat, you may as well starve. Literally. "Rabbit starvation" was a term coined by American explorers who quickly realized that living on lean game is somewhere between unhealthy and fatal.

In the early 1900s, anthropologist and explorer Vilhjalmur Stefansson lived for several years among completely isolated Canadian Inuit (Eskimo) who had never seen a white person before. They were literally a stone-age culture, completely uninfluenced by the modern world. They are representative of how some of our paleolithic ancestors would have lived. Here's Stefansson, quoted from My Life With the Eskimo (1913):

In certain places and in certain years, rabbits are an important article of diet, but even when there is an abundance of this animal, the Indians consider themselves starving if they get nothing else, - and fairly enough, as my own party can testify, for any one who is compelled in winter to live for a period of several weeks on lean meat will actually starve, in this sense: that there are lacking from his diet certain necessary elements, notably fat, and it makes no difference how much he eats, he will be hungry at the end of each meal, and eventually he will lose strength or become actually ill. The Eskimo who have provided themselves in summer with bags of seal oil can carry them into a rabbit country and can live on rabbits satisfactorily for months.

Dr. Loren Cordain, in his excellent paper "Plant-Animal Subsistence Ratios and Macronutrient Energy Estimations in Worldwide Hunter-Gatherer Diets", argues based on calculated estimates that historical hunter-gatherers generally consumed between 19 and 35% of calories from protein:

This high reliance on animal-based foods coupled with the relatively low carbohydrate content of wild plant foods produces universally characteristic macronutrient composition ratios in which protein is elevated (19- 35% of energy) at the expense of carbohydrates (22- 40% of energy).

Later, he states that the most plausible range of fat intakes is 28- 58%. I agree with his assertion that hunter-gatherer diets tended to be relatively high in protein compared with contemporary diets, but I think his protein numbers are a bit high. Why? Because he calculates macronutrient composition based on the whole-carcass fat content of "representative" animals such as deer.

It's clear from the anthropological literature that hunter-gatherers did not go after representative animals. They went after the fattest animals they could find. They knew exactly which animals were fattest in which seasons, which individuals were likely to be fattest within a herd, and which bodyparts were fattest on an individual animal. For example, Stefansson describes how the Inuit relied on (extremely fat) seal in the spring, wolf in the summer, and caribou and bear in the fall and early winter. If necessary, they would discard lean meat in favor of tongue, marrow, internal organs, back fat and other fat-rich bodyparts. This was in order to obtain a minimum of 65% of calories from fat.

Hunter-gatherers would sometimes even provision themselves with enough fat in advance to last a lean season or two. This was true for dozens of tribes along the Northwest coast of North America that relied chiefly on animal foods. Here's another excerpt from My Life With the Eskimo:

...[spring] is the season which the Eskimo give up to the accumulation of blubber for the coming year. Fresh oil is not nearly so palatable or digestible as oil that has been allowed to ferment in a sealskin bag through the summer, and besides that it is difficult often to get seals in the fall... Each family will in the spring be able to lay away from three to seven bags of oil. Such a bag consists of the whole skin of the common seal... This makes a bag which will hold about three hundred pounds of blubber, so that a single family's store of oil for the fall will run from nine hundred to two thousand pounds.

That's a lot of oil! Some of it would have been used to light oil lamps, but much of it would have been eaten. I think Cordain's estimate of the protein intake of hunter-gatherers is a bit high due to his underestimating fat intake. His paper shows that if you break historical hunter-gatherer cultures into 10 groups based on their reliance on animal foods, the most numerous group (46 out of 229) obtained 85- 100% of their food from animal sources. In other words, approximately 20% of historical hunter-gatherers were carnivorous or nearly so. If the human protein ceiling is 35% of calories, that means roughly one fifth of hunter-gatherers ate 65% or more of their calories as fat. It also means carnivory and high-fat diets are not just anomalies, they are part of the human ecological niche. Zero out of 229 groups obtained less than 16% of calories from animal foods. Vegetarianism is not part of our niche.

Further, although the human body can theoretically tolerate up to 35% protein by calories, even that amount is probably not optimal in the long term. I think that's suggested by the fact that diverse cultures tend to find a source of fat and/or carbohydrate that keeps their protein intake roughly between 10 and 20%. I think it's fine to eat plenty of protein, and there's no need to deliberately restrict it, because your tastes will tell you if you're eating too much. However, "high-protein diet" as a euphemism for low-carbohydrate diet is a misnomer. Low-carbohydrate diets are, and have always been, high-fat diets.

Ctrl BG: A Shortcut to Financial News 12/14

It's been a stressful few weeks for US auto makers. Last week, they handed in their proposals to be reviewed by Congress. I'm not sure about the details, but it was along the lines of major cut backs, and the Ford CEO vowing to work for $1 a year if Ford had to take money from the government (they are currently only asking for a loan line for emergency). At the beginning of the week, the senate approved a bailout. On Thursday, it was blocked by opposing Republicans, who thinks that it will be better for the big 3 to pursue a prearranged bankruptcy instead and also because the Unions wouldn't back down from a wage cut (beggars really can't be choosers...). Supporters argue that no one wants to buy cars from a bankrupt car company, which is a very valid point (think of the warranty/repair issues!). On Friday, Bush had to step in vowing to save the automakers from collapsing, with the TARP money (which they originally didn't want to do). A lot is at stake. The automakers claim that 1 out of 10 jobs in the US is connected to the auto industry. That would be devastating to the already weak economy.

A very good example of this trickling effect, would be GMAC the auto financier, which just got approved to become a bank holding company last week. Unfortunately, becoming a bank holding company is not as easy as GS and MS makes it out to be and they're struggling to raise the capital needed to do so. They are trying to renegotiate with debt holders to swap the debt for a smaller amount of debt, cash and preferred shares. If this doesn't work then they are highly likely to go into bankruptcy.

The other big news this week was Bernie Madoff $50 billion fraud. This former chairman of the NASDAQ stock market and Wall Street legend, is allegedly the perpetrator of a $50 billion giant ponzi scheme. According to Wiki, a ponzie scheme is a fraudalent investment operation that pays abnormally high returns to investors using the money coming in from subsequent investors. Apparently lots of the super wealthy have been fooled by this scheme. It is amazing how much you can get away with, with a good reputation and an affable character!

It appears though that the markets is already immune to these scandals, because the markets ended (by a tiny bit) up this week!

Great Help for Finding Your Best Hairstyle

With every new year comes a whole new batch of hairstyle trends. If you are looking to find the best hairstyle that works for you, then check out the Ultimate Guide to Your Best Hairstyle. The guide comes from a celebrity hairstylist team that specializes in hair extensions, trensetting cuts and color.

No matter what condition your hair or hairstyle is in, you can get something from this guide. Also, check out the celebrity hairstyles they created this year.

Ultimate Guide to Your Best Hairstyles

FW08: Fancy Tights

Ever since I saw these stockings on the Chanel FW08 runway, I knew I wanted them.
They are refreshing, fun and elegant. I especially love the black stripe at the back- it is super slimming!
Luckily for me, this trend finally made it to high street. Urban Outfitters have almost the same contrasting colored ones (left: and it's not true what they say on the website about it being online only. I just got mine from the store today!). They are also just simple enough that you can wear it with almost anything.

Urban Outfitters also offer a bit of variation with the bold black/gray stripes (right), which are still cool and slimming. But since this one is so much more striking than the other one, I'd be much more careful matching this one because these ARE the statement. If you want something even subtler, I'd go with these stockings with a seam at the back. It is almost like regular stockings but with an interesting twist at the back that is both sexy and slimming (a very important attribute), what more can you want?
I'd always thought that lace was slutty, but HG turned me around and now I"m a convert (or maybe I'd just confused them with fishnets?). It adds just the right subtle touch of girliness to an outfit (and it is very popular amongst the models this season). This mini diamond printed tights (right) gives a similar textured effect in a less girly way. Just remember not to choose any print too densely populated or wide (like wide diamond prints or plaids!), because they'd just make your legs look uneccesarily wide.
And also, not fishnet footless stockings or v print red ones (above), please. They are just tacky tacky tacky. But otherwise, have fun with this trend. I know I will :)

Image Source: Urban Outfitters, Style.com, Accessorize and Express