Consider this . . .

Point to ponder. Take a moment to consider it. Then create your own point to think about, and share back.

Tuesday, August 26, 2008

Green Columnist

Talking Directly, and Kindly, to Believers in the Eco Life

Article Tools Sponsored By
Published: August 26, 2008

QUECHEE, Vt. — Living green is not for the faint of heart. Think of the imponderables. What roach killer should one use? How should one deal with environmentally oblivious in-laws? Can one generate electricity while exercising on a StairMaster or a stationary bicycle? Why is bisphenol-A — a chemical found in children’s sippy cups and other plastic containers — considered a toxic villain by some but not by the Food and Drug Administration?

Skip to next paragraph
Jerry Swope for The New York Times

Becka Warren, who writes for grist.org from Vermont, drafts most of Umbra's columns.

G. Paul Burnett/The New York Times

Jennifer Prediger and Stefanie Syman form the essence of Umbra Fisk, a sensible and fictional big sister to the tribe of the environmentally aware.

Confused? Ask Umbra, the arch online sage of the new green age. A trailblazer in the field of eco-advice columnists, Umbra Fisk serves as a sensible big sister to the growing tribe of the environmentally aware. She teases, informs, puns and prods, but never scolds.

Six years after its inception, “Ask Umbra,” a twice-weekly column that reads like the love child of “Miss Manners” and “Car Talk,” is the most popular feature of the environmental Web site grist.org.

Want to rid the house of roaches? “Catnip is a natural repellent, as is an inedible fruit called a hedgeapple,” Umbra wrote. “You can place these in known roach hot spots, sit back and watch the diaspora.”

“Umbra’s Studio,” an online video program based on the columns, should make its debut this fall. Oh, yes, one other thing — she does not really exist.

Becka Warren, who writes for grist.org from Vermont, drafts most of Umbra’s columns. Was the name a play on her own mysteriousness? Ms. Warren says it “just came into my head” back in early 2002 when the founder of grist.org, Chip Giller, was brainstorming about an advice column. The first installment appeared that year.

Umbra now has a supposed dwelling place (the basement library at the magazine’s offices in Seattle) and a virtual social life (Arianna Huffington, the doyenne of Los Angeles’s political left, says she is a great dinner guest — “during the cocktail hour she disappeared and made all my toilets low-flush.”)

Whether real or virtual, Umbra Fisk has been a trend-setter. Similar columns, blending authority and insouciance, have popped up elsewhere, including “Ask Pablo” on Salon.com, “Green Lantern” on Slate.com, “Earthtalk” on E Magazine’s site and “Mr. Green” on the Sierra Club’s Web site.

The writers “have all come out of environmental science programs, and this is a common language of their culture,” said Kevin Berger, the editor for environmental coverage at Salon.

“Not only are they environmentally committed and passionate about conservation and global warming,” Mr. Berger added, “but they know the math and the science behind it. That gives them this easygoing authority, which the proselytizers of yore don’t have at all.”

“Ask Umbra” was one of the first such columns. Grist.org has about 750,000 unique users monthly, said Mr. Giller, who said that more than half a million site visits this year hit on “Ask Umbra” — not counting traffic on the online network MSN and The Huffington Post Web site, both of which carry Umbra.

Umbra Fisk’s no-nonsense, no-embarrassment voice resonates with the left-leaning people in their 30s who were the first generation to take environmental studies for granted as a part of a college curriculum. Judging from the questions, the readers, like Umbra’s creators, are forming families (or choosing not to), buying cars (or choosing not to) and having babies (or choosing not to). Her view on the old argument about cloth versus disposable diapers? A tossup, environmentally speaking.

The readers also appreciate frankness about everything from phosphates to condoms, and a knowledgeable voice on questions about atmospheric science and shower urination (is it more environmentally correct than using a toilet?) .

Here, for example, is Umbra’s take on yoga mats: “They seem so soft and friendly, but they are another product for our list of Things That Contain Vinyl. Vinyl and phthalates. How I wish to never need spell phthalates again.” She suggested a jute and rubber alternative.

She also assures the party set that yes, you can recycle a beer bottle with a lime in it.

In two judgmental businesses — advice-giving and environmentalism — Umbra strains to be nonjudgmental. “I don’t want to be mean to people,” Ms. Warren said in between bites of a pulled-pork sandwich, after a morning of picking potatoes as part of her commitment to sustainable farming.

Umbra, however, makes an exception to that rule when dealing with judgmental environmentalists. Answering a reader who complained about having to take her baby to the home of in-laws who were oblivious to the perils of polyvinylchloride and peeling paint, Umbra wrote, “Your expectations for your in-laws are clearly unrealistic,” adding, “If you explode, you will prove yourself to be a freak dog of a first-time parent.”

Ms. Warren comes as close to an alter ego as Umbra has, though some of the credit for her public persona also goes to Mr. Giller; to a grist.org editor, Katharine Wroth; Jennifer Prediger, an actress living in Brooklyn; and a Web video producer, Stefanie Syman.

Ms. Warren, 37 and a graduate of Brown University, is married to a graphic novelist and is the mother of a 2-year-old daughter. They live on a farm.

She buys things like furniture second hand but worries that her lack of enthusiasm about consumer goods — she is not part of the mall-and-Starbucks set — may distance Umbra from mainstream American life. Ms. Warren said she grew up with “Yankee thrift” and knows little about the kind of life “where you have a ton of stuff and a new house and you go and buy new furniture.”

Nonetheless, she is determined to upend the environmentalist stereotype: “A scolding person with no fashion sense — that’s not who we are.”



Check Out My Other Blogs (click on blog name to go there) = / 1.3rd Eye Blog / 2. Favorites Blog/ 3. Vita Excolatur (Living Well ...) Blog/ 4. Humor Me Blog/ 5. News and Current Events Blog/ 6. Consider This ... Blog/ 7. Consumer Warnings Blog/ 8. New Orleans Pentimento Blog/ 9. We Constant Gardeners Blog/ 10. Chaillot Family Blog/

Tuesday, August 05, 2008

Coffee coffee coffeeeeeeee

Personal Health

Sorting Out Coffee’s Contradictions

Published: August 5, 2008

When Howard D. Schultz in 1985 founded the company that would become the wildly successful Starbucks chain, no financial adviser had to tell him that coffee was America’s leading beverage and caffeine its most widely used drug. The millions of customers who flock to Starbucks to order a double espresso, latte or coffee grande attest daily to his assessment of American passions.

Skip to next paragraph
Jez Burrows

Coffee and TeaCaffeine
Decaffeinated coffee or tea, 8 oz. 2 mgs
Black tea, brewed, 8 oz. 47
Green tea, brewed, 8 oz. 30 to 50
Plain coffee, brewed, 8 oz. 95
Starbucks Coffee Grande, 16 oz. 330
Soft drinks and energy drinks
Coca-Cola Classic, 12 oz. 35
Diet Coke, 12 oz. 47
Mountain Dew, 12 oz. 54
Red Bull, 8.3 oz. 76
Monster Energy, 16 oz. 160
SoBe No Fear, 16 oz. 174
Foods and other products
Hershey’s chocolate milk, 8 oz. 5
Hershey’s milk chocolate, 1.5 oz. 10
Dannon coffee yogurt, 6 oz. 30
NoDoz Maximum Strength, 1 tablet 200

Related

Times Topics: Caffeine

Times Topics: Coffee

Web Link

Caffeine: The Good, the Bad and the Maybe (Center for Science in the Public Interest)

RSS Feed

Although the company might have overestimated consumer willingness to spend up to $4 for a cup of coffee — it recently announced that it would close hundreds of underperforming stores — scores of imitators that now sell coffee, tea and other products laced with caffeine reflect a society determined to run hard on as little sleep as possible.

But as with any product used to excess, consumers often wonder about the health consequences. And researchers readily oblige. Hardly a month goes by without a report that hails coffee, tea or caffeine as healthful or damns them as potential killers.

Can all these often contradictory reports be right? Yes. Coffee and tea, after all, are complex mixtures of chemicals, several of which may independently affect health.

Caffeine Myths

Through the years, the public has been buffeted by much misguided information about caffeine and its most common source, coffee. In March the Center for Science in the Public Interest published a comprehensive appraisal of scientific reports in its Nutrition Action Healthletter. Its findings and those of other research reports follow.

Hydration. It was long thought that caffeinated beverages were diuretics, but studies reviewed last year found that people who consumed drinks with up to 550 milligrams of caffeine produced no more urine than when drinking fluids free of caffeine. Above 575 milligrams, the drug was a diuretic.

So even a Starbucks grande, with 330 milligrams of caffeine, will not send you to a bathroom any sooner than if you drank 16 ounces of pure water. Drinks containing usual doses of caffeine are hydrating and, like water, contribute to the body’s daily water needs.

Heart disease. Heart patients, especially those with high blood pressure, are often told to avoid caffeine, a known stimulant. But an analysis of 10 studies of more than 400,000 people found no increase in heart disease among daily coffee drinkers, whether their coffee came with caffeine or not.

“Contrary to common belief,” concluded cardiologists at the University of California, San Francisco, there is “little evidence that coffee and/or caffeine in typical dosages increases the risk” of heart attack, sudden death or abnormal heart rhythms.

In fact, among 27,000 women followed for 15 years in the Iowa Women’s Health Study, those who drank one to three cups a day reduced their risk of cardiovascular disease by 24 percent, although this benefit diminished as the quantity of coffee rose.

Hypertension. Caffeine induces a small, temporary rise in blood pressure. But in a study of 155,000 nurses, women who drank coffee with or without caffeine for a decade were no more likely to develop hypertension than noncoffee drinkers. However, a higher risk of hypertension was found from drinking colas. A Johns Hopkins study that followed more than 1,000 men for 33 years found that coffee drinking played little overall role in the development of hypertension.

Cancer. Panic swept this coffee-dependent nation in 1981 when a Harvard study tied the drink to a higher risk of pancreatic cancer. Coffee consumption temporarily plummeted, and the researchers later concluded that perhaps smoking, not coffee, was the culprit.

In an international review of 66 studies last year, scientists found coffee drinking had little if any effect on the risk of developing pancreatic or kidney cancer. In fact, another review suggested that compared with people who do not drink coffee, those who do have half the risk of developing liver cancer.

And a study of 59,000 women in Sweden found no connection between coffee, tea or caffeine consumption and breast cancer.

Bone loss. Though some observational studies have linked caffeinated beverages to bone loss and fractures, human physiological studies have found only a slight reduction in calcium absorption and no effect on calcium excretion, suggesting the observations may reflect a diminished intake of milk-based beverages among coffee and tea drinkers.

Dr. Robert Heaney of Creighton University says that caffeine’s negative effect on calcium can be offset by as little as one or two tablespoons of milk. He advised that coffee and tea drinkers who consume the currently recommended amount of calcium need not worry about caffeine’s effect on their bones.

Weight loss. Here’s a bummer. Although caffeine speeds up metabolism, with 100 milligrams burning an extra 75 to 100 calories a day, no long-term benefit to weight control has been demonstrated. In fact, in a study of more than 58,000 health professionals followed for 12 years, both men and women who increased their caffeine consumption gained more weight than those who didn’t.

Health Benefits

Probably the most important effects of caffeine are its ability to enhance mood and mental and physical performance. At consumption levels up to 200 milligrams (the amount in about 16 ounces of ordinary brewed coffee), consumers report an improved sense of well-being, happiness, energy, alertness and sociability, Roland Griffiths of the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine reported, although higher amounts sometimes cause anxiety and stomach upset.

Millions of sleep-deprived Americans depend on caffeine to help them make it through their day and drive safely. The drug improves alertness and reaction time. In the sleep-deprived, it improves memory and the ability to perform complex tasks.

For the active, caffeine enhances endurance in aerobic activities and performance in anaerobic ones, perhaps because it blunts the perception of pain and aids the ability to burn fat for fuel instead of its carbohydrates.

Recent disease-related findings can only add to coffee’s popularity. A review of 13 studies found that people who drank caffeinated coffee, but not decaf, had a 30 percent lower risk of Parkinson’s disease.

Another review found that compared with noncoffee drinkers, people who drank four to six cups of coffee a day, with or without caffeine, had a 28 percent lower risk of Type 2 diabetes. This benefit probably comes from coffee’s antioxidants and chlorogenic acid.



Check Out My Other Blogs (click on blog name to go there) = / 1.3rd Eye Blog / 2. Favorites Blog/ 3. Vita Excolatur (Living Well ...) Blog/ 4. Humor Me Blog/ 5. News and Current Events Blog/ 6. Consider This ... Blog/ 7. Consumer Warnings Blog/ 8. New Orleans Pentimento Blog/ 9. We Constant Gardeners Blog/ 10. Chaillot Family Blog/

Friday, August 01, 2008

Fitness through Pills ?

Couch Mouse to Mr. Mighty by Pills Alone

Cheryl Senter/Associated Press

Mike Batista, center, with other members of the Old School P.E. class at the recreation center in Newport, N.H.

Article Tools Sponsored By
Published: August 1, 2008

For all who have wondered if they could enjoy the benefits of exercise without the pain of exertion, the answer may one day be yes — just take a pill that tricks the muscles into thinking they have been working out furiously.

Readers' Comments

Readers shared their thoughts on this article.

Researchers at the Salk Institute in San Diego reported that they had found two drugs that did wonders for the athletic endurance of couch potato mice. One drug, known as Aicar, increased the mice’s endurance on a treadmill by 44 percent after just four weeks of treatment.

A second drug, GW1516, supercharged the mice to a 75 percent increase in endurance but had to be combined with exercise to have any effect.

“It’s a little bit like a free lunch without the calories,” said Dr. Ronald M. Evans, leader of the Salk group.

The results, Dr. Evans said, seem reasonably likely to apply to people, who control muscle tone with the same underlying genes as do mice. If the drugs work and prove to be safe, they could be useful in a wide range of settings.

They should help people who are too frail to exercise and those with health problems like diabetes that are improved with exercise, Dr. Evans said.

The chemicals involved are already available, and such muscle-enhancing drugs would also have obvious appeal to athletes seeking to gain an edge in performance. Dr. Evans said athletes often showed up at public lectures he had given and asked him about the drugs.

With money from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Dr. Evans has devised a test to detect whether an athlete has taken the drugs and has made it available to the World Anti-Doping Agency, which prepares a list of forbidden substances for the International Olympic Committee. Officials at the anti-doping agency confirmed that they were collaborating with Dr. Evans on a test but could not say when they would start using it.

Experts not involved in the study agreed that the drugs held promise for treating disease. Dr. Johan Auwerx, a specialist in metabolic diseases at the University Louis Pasteur in Strasbourg, France, said the result with Aicar looked “pretty good” and could be helpful in the treatment of diabetes and obesity. “The fact you can mimic exercise is a big advantage,” he said, “because diet and exercise are the pillars of diabetes treatment.”

Dr. Richard N. Bergman, an expert on obesity and diabetes at the University of Southern California, said the drugs might prove to have serious side effects but, if safe, could become widely used. “It is possible that the couch potato segment of the population might find this to be a good regimen, and of course that is a large number of people.”

The idea of a workout in a pill seems almost too good to be true, but Dr. Evans has impressive research credentials, including winning the Lasker Award, which often presages a Nobel Prize. He is an expert on how hormones work in cells and on a powerful gene-controlling protein called PPAR-delta, which instructs fat cells to burn off fat.

Four years ago he found that PPAR-delta played a different role in muscle. Muscle fibers exist in two main forms. Type 1 fibers have copious numbers of mitochondria, which generate the cell’s energy and are therefore resistant to fatigue. Type 2 fibers have fewer mitochondria and tire easily. Athletes have lots of Type 1 fibers. People with obesity and diabetes have far fewer Type 1 and more Type 2 fibers.

Dr. Evans and his team found that the PPAR-delta protein remodeled the muscle, producing more of the high-endurance Type 1 fiber. They genetically engineered a strain of mice whose muscles produced extra amounts of PPAR-delta. These mice grew more Type 1 fibers and could run twice as far as on a treadmill as ordinary mice before collapsing.

Given that people cannot be engineered in this way, Dr. Evans wondered whether levels of the PPAR-delta protein could be raised by drugs. Pharmaceutical companies have long tried to manipulate PPAR-delta because of its role in fat metabolism, and Dr. Evans found several drugs were available, although they had been tested for different purposes.

In a report in the Friday issue of Cell, he described the two drugs that successfully activate the muscle-remodeling system in mice, generating more high-endurance Type 1 fiber. The drug GW1516 activates the PPAR-delta protein but the mice must also exercise to show increased endurance. It seems that PPAR-delta switches on one set of genes, and exercise another, and both are needed for endurance.

Aicar improves endurance without training. Dr. Evans believes that it both activates the PPAR-delta protein and mimics the effects of exercise, thus switching on both sets of genes needed for the endurance signal.

Aicar signals to the cell that it has burned off energy and needs to generate more. The drug is “pretty much pharmacological exercise,” Dr. Evans said.

He said the drugs worked off a person’s genetics, pushing the body to an improved set-point otherwise gained only by strenuous training. “This is not just a free lunch,” he said. “It’s pushing your genome toward a more enhanced genetic tone that impacts metabolism and muscle function. So instead of inheriting a great set-point you are using a drug to move your own genetics to a more activated metabolic state.”

Aicar has been tested for various diseases since 1994 and is in advanced trials for treating a heart condition known as ischemic reperfusion injury. But neither Aicar nor GW1516 has been tested in people for muscle endurance, so the side effects of the drugs, particularly over the long term, are not precisely known.

That may change if pharmaceutical companies pursue Dr. Evans’s findings. “The drugs’ effect on muscle opens a window to a world of medical problems,” he said. “This paper will alert the medical community that muscle can be a therapeutic target.”

The drugs activate at least one of the chemical pathways triggered by resveratrol, a substance that also showed increased endurance in mice. Resveratrol is found in red wine though in amounts probably too low to significantly affect muscle.

In 2006 Dr. Auwerx and colleagues at University Louis Pasteur showed that large doses of resveratrol would make mice run twice as far as usual on a treadmill before collapsing. It is unclear just how resveratrol works, but one of its effects may be to bind with a protein that helps activate PPAR-delta. Dr. Auwerx’s resveratrol-treated mice remodeled their muscle fibers into the Type 1, with greater endurance.

That is the same result Dr. Evans has found can be obtained with Aicar. The relationship between the two drugs is not yet clear. Dr. Evans believes that resveratrol acts on so many pathways in the cell, particularly at high doses, that it is hard to know how it is achieving any given effect, whereas the role of Aicar and GW1516 is well defined. But Dr. Auwerx said he did not think Aicar was necessarily working in the way Dr. Evans described.



Check Out My Other Blogs (click on blog name to go there) = / 1.3rd Eye Blog / 2. Favorites Blog/ 3. Vita Excolatur (Living Well ...) Blog/ 4. Humor Me Blog/ 5. News and Current Events Blog/ 6. Consider This ... Blog/ 7. Consumer Warnings Blog/ 8. New Orleans Pentimento Blog/ 9. We Constant Gardeners Blog/ 10. Chaillot Family Blog/