Alzheimers disease is a devastating degenerative brain disorder that leads to problems with memory, cognition, and overall mental ability. The disease is the most common form of dementia, accounting for 60 to 80 percent of all cases in America. Alzheimers is an age-related disease thats categorized by the slow deterioration of the mind over many years. One in nine people over the age of 65 currently lives with Alzheimers disease, and as many as one in three seniors die with some form of dementia.
The most troubling aspect, however, is how the disease targets its victims. Its first signs are innocuous a forgotten word, face, or name but it then slowly develops into the loss of personal history and culminates in compete helplessness and the need for full-time care.
Whether an individual develops Alzheimers is largely out of his/her control the most reliable indicators are your age, your family history, and your genetics. That said, Alzheimers is still, above all, a disease of the mind. Therefore, building a diet around foods that have been found to benefit the brain is one way to proactively combat it.
The medical community is fighting feverishly to discover the origins of this mysterious and deadly disease, and new research continues to flow from universities and research hospitals. A 2015 study of 923 subjects between ages 58 to 98 found that the subjects who followed a diet that was rich in green leafy vegetables, berries, fish, whole grains, and olive oil, and that was also low in red meats, cheese, butter, and fast food, had lower rates of developing Alzheimers.
Here is a list of six ways that your diet can help you avoid Alzheimers disease.
(CNN)Wearable technologies can monitor your physical activity or your allergies. Increasingly, they are part of our everyday lives. But a new analysis comparing two sets of dieters discovered that those wearing activity trackers lost less, not more, weight than the tech-free dieters.
“We went in with the hypothesis that adding the technology would be more effective than not having the technology, and we found just the opposite,” said John Jakicic, author of the study, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
“One of the things we didn’t study here was, maybe these things are really effective for people gaining weight, but maybe that’s different from helping people lose weight,” said Jakicic, a professor and director of the Physical Activity and Weight Management Research Center at the University of Pittsburgh. “We need to do a lot more digging in the data to understand that.”
“That means that something is amiss,” said Berkeley, who was not involved in the new study. She explained that if there was “absolutely no difference” between what the two groups ate and how much they exercised, the average weight losses “should be the same whether the study subjects wore a device or not.”
Berkeley observed that studies on dieting are “notoriously hard to do,” so adding exercise into the mix makes accurate research doubly difficult. The main issue is that any long-term study must rely on the participants self-reporting what they ate and how much they exercised, so accuracy is naturally a problem.
Wearable but in the drawer
Jakicic is eager to look more closely at the data, but he and his colleagues have come up with a few hypothetical explanations for the unexpected result.
“Anecdotally, these devices tend to work or people tend to engage with them for about three months or so, and after that, a lot of people start throwing them in the drawer. They get bored with them,” Jakicic said.
Another possibility: Not everyone likes wearables. Instead, many people feel ” ‘I got this device, and I just hate it,’ ” he said.
See the latest news and share your comments with CNN Health on Facebook and Twitter.
Berkeley, the author of “Refuse to Regain: 12 Tough Rules to Maintain the Body You’ve Earned,” noted that “weight loss is much more dependent on scrupulously following a weight-reducing diet than on exercise.” Generally, she said, diet is more important than exercise during the active weight loss phase, but exercise becomes much more important during weight maintenance.
“It’s entirely possible that those who were paying more attention to the exercise part of their regimen [because of the wearable device] were less scrupulous about their intake,” Berkeley said. She added that exercising can often cause dieters to “feel that they’ve ‘earned’ the chance to eat more.”
Losing weight can be one of the hardest things for a person to do.
Eating right and working out is what pretty much every fitness expert will tell you to do if you want to shed some pounds, but that is easier said than done.
We all lead busy lives! How do some people make it to the gym 6 times a week? I am amazed and impressed by people who can make healthy meals for themselves 3 times a day. I’m lucky if I eat a salad once a week.
I give these dedicated folks plenty of credit. Mastering a healthy diet and lifestyle is something I haven’t figured out yet, but maybe one day.
After getting a scale in the mail, Erica decided to turn her life around after she read the number of the screen.
When Erica was a kid, she fit into her mom’s size 12 jeans when she was in the 2nd grade. She used food to comfort herself, as well as to celebrate and enjoy life.
Erica works as a blogger and someone sent her a scale to review, not knowing that Erica struggled with her weight. When she stepped on the scale, it said she weighed 326 pounds.
Instead of kicking herself for her weight, she was inspired to use that scale daily to monitor it. She started a low-carb diet and over time, she shed 180 pounds! But after losing that weight, she didn’t know what to wear. That is where Today nutritionist Joy Bauer came in to help!
If you were inspired by this woman’s weight loss journey, you will also find this mother losing 90 pounds after having her baby as motivation as well!
Don’t forget to SHARE Erica’s story with all of your friends and family!
Research shows a simple diet and exercise plan is more effective weight loss strategy than using Fitbit and Jawbone devices
They have become the must-have for fitness fans but wearable gadgets that track users physical activity may not help people lose weight, a new study has found.
Instead of motivating users to do more exercise over the day, the two-year survey found the devices were actually less effective at encouraging people to lose weight than simply following a diet and exercise plan.
Scientists suspect that people become overly dependent on the gadgets to help them change their health, developing a false sense of security and would do better by relying on simple willpower.
Costing up to 150, the devices by technology firms including Fitbit, Jawbone and Misfit are worn on the wrist or arm, monitor physical activity, steps taken, calories burnt, heart rate and quality of sleep and feed the data directly into a smartphone.
The researchers tracked 470 overweight or obese people, aged 18 to 35, for 24 months. Everyone in the study was put on a low-calorie diet, given an exercise plan and invited to regular group sessions.
After six months, half the group was given a Fit Core armband, which tracks activity and feeds it into a computer programme that also allows people to log their diet. The other half were simply told to monitor their exercise and diet by themselves.
The group using the Fit Core gadgets lost an average of 7.7lb over two years, compared with an average 13lb in the self-monitored group.
A spokesman for Jawbone, which owns BodyMedia, the manufacturer of Fit Core, told the Daily Mail: The results of the study do not suggest that wearable devices should not be used for positive weight loss outcomes.
In fact, the study demonstrated positive weight loss in both groups. Wearable tech helps to bridge the gap between patients who have access to rather intensive weight loss treatments and the very many who dont.
A spokeswoman for Fitbit said: The researchers point out that a limitation of their work includes the fact that they did not use a modern wearable device such as those offered by Fitbit. The upper arm device used in the study was limited to automatic data collection only.
Most wearables today, including those offered by Fitbit, go far beyond data collection, offering individuals real-time access to their information, insights, motivation from associated social networks, and guidance about their health. We would strongly caution against any conclusion that these findings apply to the wearable technology category as a whole.
Anyone over thirty-five might look at you blankly if you mention vintage kilo sales, but they are increasingly popular with teenagers and students looking for cheap, fashionable clothing.
Customers turn up to pop-up venues, often at universities, pick what they want and then pay according to weight rather than per item.
Clothing wholesaler John Hickling and Judy Berger, who runs and markets vintage fairs, claim to be the first to have sold clothes like this in the UK.
They started their Vintage Kilo events in Britain in 2009, when many consumers were still feeling the effects of the financial crash.
They charge 15 a kilo which equals about five T-shirts, three or four dresses, or a heavy winter coat.
It may be a relatively new phenomenon in this country, but shops selling clothes by the weight are popular in Holland and parts of eastern Europe.
Appealing to thrifty necessity has spawned a profitable fashion business.
The two entrepreneurs have held 48 Vintage Kilo events around the country this year and the aim is to double them in 2017, selling clothes from the late 60s to the 90s.
Market researchers IBISWorld Ltd, have valued the second-hand clothing market in the UK at 658.7m for 2016/17, and despite the upturn in the economy since 2008 the market for second-hand goods in the UK continues to grow.
Jenessa Williams, brand manager for the Vintage Kilo events said: “I think young people and those into fashion want changeable, new looks that don’t cost them a fortune.
“They’re becoming more aware of the ethics of the high street and want new clothes without consuming resources.”
According to Ms Williams the events also feed into the trend for upcycling which means people re-model or re-work clothes by adding embroidery, patches and other additions and then put them on Facebook and Instagram.
She says 21-year old painter and print-maker Elizabeth Ilsley, who has created an internet sensation with her subversive, customised leather jackets, has bought from their events, as have traders and stylists for music bands.
Maria Malone, principal lecturer in fashion business at the Manchester Fashion Institute, says her students attend the sales and, as term gets underway, there is one on campus this weekend.
“There is no longer a stigma in buying value for money clothing as seen with the growth of Primark, this has translated into removing the stigma of buying what was once known as second hand – now re-branded into the term ‘vintage’.
“Students are exploring their personal style and want to look different from everything sold on the high street,” adds Ms Malone.
But what is vintage?
John Hickling says the definition is constantly changing.
“The great thing about vintage is it is all about nostalgia. It means different things to different age groups,” he says.
“When I first started 10 years ago people didn’t think clothes from the 1980s could be called vintage.
“Now I hear young people talking about the early 2000s and remembering clothes their mothers wore in that period.”
The vintage kilo sales are just one aspect of John Hickling’s business, and while they cater for those looking for a bargain, there is also a more expensive end of the vintage clothes business. Mr Hickling’s company, Glass Onion Vintage, buys over 20,000 kilograms of clothing a month from recycling companies in the UK, Europe and the US.
He works closely with recycling wholesalers and has given them training to help them spot what he wants.
“Straightforward designer items are not as common now because people are more aware of their worth, so we’ve asked them to look for good, quality fashion items. Denim and college t-shirts have been very popular this year. Even if they are damaged we can re-work them, saving them from ending up in landfill.”
The clothes that have been picked are delivered in bales to Glass Onion’s warehouse and distribution centre in Yorkshire, which supplies more than 200 wholesale customers with recycled, and refashioned clothes.
They include high street companies such as Urban Outfitters, which take high quality vintage pieces, and Lush cosmetics, who use Glass Onion’s scarves to wrap shoppers’ purchases in, rather than a bag.
Mr Hickling is hoping to open a manufacturing facility to keep up with demand for his re-worked pieces.
Through the vintage kilo sales he is also able to do some small runs to test the popularity of various designs very quickly and, he says, increase supply if necessary.
Charity shops too now recognise the value of selling designer classics.
Retail expert, Mary Portas helped set up boutique charity shops for Save the Children, and when Oxfam launched its vintage section online it saw sales through its website shoot up by 400%.
At the top end Kerry Taylor Auctions have been specialising in designer vintage and clothing since 2003, selling collections worn by Princess Diana, Audrey Hepburn, and Elizabeth Taylor to name but a few.
In June the auction house sold clothing designed by Jean Paul Gaultier and Alexander McQueen for Madonna and Bjork.
But in October they are holding an auction where prices are in the hundreds rather than the thousands.
They include 1930-50s bridal gowns with reserve prices starting at 150- 250 and include names such as Chanel, Christian Dior and Moschino.
Kerry Taylor says despite the increasing popularity of vintage, she finds it frustrating that there is still the most amazing ignorance about its value.
“People know about paintings and silver, but when it comes to someone’s wardrobe they can have a complete blind spot,” she says.
“Some years ago I also had a young man working for me, who told me that as a student employed at a clothing recycling company he pulled out a beaded Balenciaga cocktail dress worth a couple of thousand pounds.”
And she adds: “Next week Oxfam want me to value a Gabrielle labelled Chanel coat from the 1920s which someone left in a plastic bag outside one of their shops.”
Very few of us have exquisite designer items lurking in the back of our wardrobe, but next time your mother or your grandmother have a clear out make sure you take a good look at what is being thrown away. It may be worth more than you think.
The conventional dietary wisdom for the past quarter century has been eat less, move more, referring to reducing caloric intake and increasing exercise. But at the same time, weve seen obesity explode into the number one health problem facing Americans.
Only two logical explanations exist. The first possibility is that this dietary advice is good, but we are all too lazy or weak to follow it. Since obesity was relatively uncommon in the 1950s, this would mean that an entire generation of Americans individually, but simultaneously decided to let themselves go. This hardly seems plausible. The only remaining explanation is that this dietary advice was simply incorrect. The reason you couldnt lose weight was because youve been given the wrong information and focused on the wrong issue calories.
To understand how to lose weight, first you must understand how we gain weight. For too long, weve been told that it is simply a matter of excess calories. Therefore, the solution was simply to restrict the intake of calories and you would lose weight.
Sadly, this is not true. The medical evidence has been crystal clear for decades. Restricting calories does not lead to long-term weight loss. The enormous randomized study called The Womens Health Initiative involving almost 50,000 women combined caloric restriction with increased exercise. The expected weight loss was over 30 pounds per year. What was the actual weight loss? Not even a single pound over seven years!
But I dont need an expensive study to convince you. Almost every single one of us has tried a caloric-restriction diet. The failure rate is estimated at 99 percent, and that would be consistent with all our personal experiences. Caloric restriction simply does not work in the long term.