1. Make H20 your friend
We all know we need to stay hydrated but just how much water do we need? Hard and fast rules don’t work til you factor in issues like temperature and exertion. Sitting in an office cooled to 20c all day is going to require less fluid than bush walking at 25c or 35c.
Despite there being little “evidence based medicine”* for the common guideline to drink 8 glasses of water a day, it does provide a good baseline. While on cool days we might only need 1.5 litres, on hot days our bodies may require more than 3 litres of fluid, more for any alcohol or caffeine that may actually take the precious water out of us.
Reusing drink bottles is problematic. The PET bottles that water is often purchased in is designed for single use. There are concerns about toxic chemicals leaching from these and other types of plastic bottles. While there is no clear evidence on this and as naturopaths we tend to err on the side of caution, what is a real problem from reusing bottles comes down to hygiene. Sipping out of a bottle all day without it having a hot, soapy wash between use is one way to create a bacteria factory! Low level gut upsets are common from this type of practice. Safer alternatives include HDPE Stainless steel or glass containers (though the second is not so safe if you drop it!)
Those of extra risk of dehydrating in the hot weather are babies and children, for example when sitting in a hot car. But also the elderly, whose internal temperature control may not be as reliable. Dehydration has historically been rife in institutions where the environment is often overheated and residents tend to be given caffienated drinks more often than water, though fortunately this practice is changing.
Some clever ways to stay well hydrated this summer include: homemade iceblocks made from fruit juice, jugs of water with fresh mint, strawberries, cucumber or slices of citrus, chilled soups, salads with lots of juicy ingredients like tomatoes and cucumber and eating fresh fruit like melons.
* For a tricky piece of EBM review this piece by Heinz Valtin. He states that a thorough review of the literature can find no research to verify the advice to drink ‘8 x8’ (roughly 2 litres) of water a day. He also goes into the health pros and cons of adequate hydration. It should be noted the author writes from New Hampshire, a North American region with a more moderate climate than the major Australian cities.
2. Safe sun
It’s easy to get sunburnt even on overcast days, or when the temperature is barely over 20c. A breeze can also trick you into feeling cool and mistaking your sun exposure. RRR’s BBQ day yesterday is a good example!
Slapping on the sunblock cream has some controversy. Titanium, oxybenzone and a whole laboratory of chemicals get smeared on our skin each summer. I have to admit that I find the whole issue as to whether sunblock is our saviour or not, rather confusing. What is 100% safe however is using a wide brim hat and layers of clothing to protect us from too much UV. As sunblock creams wear or are sweated off easily, using other methods – shade and clothing when the sun is at its peak, to protect us is a healthy option.
However we do need to get some sun. Vitamin D deficiency is an epidemic in this country according to the Medical Journal of Australia. Anecdotally I would add that at least 90% of all women who I have seen in my clinic that have been tested for their Vitamin D levels are deficient. So getting a little “safe sun” is also important. According to the article a fair skinned person needs only 6-8 minutes of mid-morning or mid-afternoon sun, in summer in Melbourne to get an adequate dose of Vitamin D. For example, this could mean sun exposure at 10 am, with your arms and legs exposed and sunblock lotion-free.
If you do end up getting lightly scalded by the sun aloe vera gel provides good symptomatic relief. Avoid applying ice directly to the skin because this can also cause a ‘burn’.
Heat stroke is a potentially serious condition, especially in the young and the old or those exercising or working out of doors. Symptoms include nausea, dizziness, weakness and fatigue. Vomiting may also occur, causing further fluid loss. While sipping on water or oral rehydration drinks is useful, sometimes a visit to the emergency department is needed.
3. Bites and stings
I’ll never forget my first encounter with a bull ant, or a march fly coming to think of it. What is it about this vast hostile land with so many creatures that bite and sting? From box jellyfish, to spiders, snakes and usually harmless looking insects that pack a punch, Australia is full of nasty surprises.
It’s great to avoid getting bitten in the first place. Natural insect repellents include the essential oils of lavender, tee tree and citronella.
For an Australian health guide to treating toxic bites and stings check out this Better Health Channel article.
If you are bitten and have a non-emergency reaction, lavender oil or aloe vera is worth using.
Homoeopathic apis is useful after a bee sting.
4. Safe food handling
Sadly your greatest health risk this summer could come from your very own backyard. Bacteria also likes to party in warm environments (5-60c) and food inadequately chilled or meat that is not cooked thoroughly are common causes of a gut upset.
It’s not just the esky with melted ice that could cause the problem; think of your refrigerator on Xmas eve stuffed to the gunnels with too much food. An over full fridge may be stop the cool air circulating properly creating warm zones.
But that’s even before we get to the problems with meal preparations. Especially when cooking for large numbers of people remember to get everyone who’s helping to wash their hands, keep meat and animal food preparation separate to vegetables and fruit. Provide separate serving spoons for each bowl of food.
If you are eating meat – make sure it is hot in the centre. Vegan foods tend to be lower risk.
More info on safe food handling at this site.
If you are unlucky enough to get a dose of food poisoning, adults can be safely treated at home if you are still able to hold down fluids. Keep drinking water (but avoid sweet drinks) or even a little green tea. Take ginger tablets for nausea. When you feel able to eat again, start with plain steamed white rice.
The herb golden seal is very useful to help repair your digestive tract after this kind of infection.
Remember children are easily dehydrated and may need medical attention.
5. Alcohol and drugs
Summer, parties and festivals all go together. For some this means drinking more than usual or indulging in something else. Habitual drug and alcohol use is another issue altogether but there is a more vulnerable group of individuals who may binge or take drugs only at these times of the year.
There is little I can legally say on this one. Ecstasy use tends to peak at festival times and New Years Eve, with an increased market for one-off or occasional users. This means what is passing for the drug may be less pure, contaminated or substituted with other drugs such as amphetamines or veterinarian pharmaceuticals. This may be a greater issue than the initial drug itself.
For harm minimalisation ideally in any group there should be at least one person who remains drug and alcohol free, with some basic first aid knowledge. While staying vigilant for alcohol poisoning (a “rite of passage” like drunk driving for many of my male peers when I was in high school) or adverse drug reactions, this person also makes sure that the group remains safe by not driving or getting involved in other risk behaviours.
Multivitamins, the liver repair herb St Mary’s Thistle (Silybum marianum), good food and plenty of water are sensible measures to take before and after partying.
Seeking help with drugs or alcohol? Contact Turning Point or call their 24 hour free help line 1800 888 236.
Showing posts with label alcohol. Show all posts
Showing posts with label alcohol. Show all posts
Monday, December 08, 2008
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
I'll drink to that!
Recently on air I mentioned the surprise I got when I actually measured how many mls of wine I poured to get the fabled “standard drink”. The issue being that our wine is getting stronger and that means that percentage of alcohol-wise there are more drinks per bottle despite the size of the bottle remaining the same.
In today’s Epicure, in The Age, Ben Canaider eloquently covers the same ground in his piece, ”Measuring up to Standards”.
Like me, he recently did the maths – took a bottle of wine off the shelf, grabbed the calculator and did the maths. For a 14% alcohol bottle of pinot grigio there are 8.24 standard. By law all alcoholic beverages display the amount of standard drinks on the label. Very simply take your 750ml bottle of plonk – divide the 750 by the number of drinks and in this case it gives you 91, the number of mls per glass you need to comply with “standards”.
I actually did this a month ago. The innocuous little rosé that previously I’d considered a light summer drop was nothing of the sort. At 86 mls a glass, using a kitchen measurer to quantify the liquid, there was a rather paltry splash of wine in the bottom of the glass.
As Candaider points out, what you get in your local pub or bar is very likely to be uncalibrated for the percentage of alcohol, for wine that is up to 150ml in your wine glass.
So, other than an exercise of rudimentary mathematics, why does this matter?
At this time of year, more than any other, there are some outdated games some drivers play in their heads along the lines of “I can have two drinks every hour and one per hour there after and still be under the limit to drive”. Wrong! Even if you are using properly measured standard drinks for this game, considering gender, size, metabolism and state of your liver you are still very likely to be way over Australia’s .05 blood alcohol limit.
Regardless if it’s a quick drink or a long night, the woman who has just two pub sized glasses of champagne after work in an hour before rushing to pick the kids up is likely to be over the limit to drive safely and legally. The regular bar glass of champagne usually works out to 1.5 in standard drinks, even more if using larger vessels at home. But if this woman is premenstrual, when under the influence of a certain cocktail of hormones she might process alcohol less efficiently, giving an even higher blood alcohol reading.
Then there is a guy having a few stubbies, not a big night as he’s going to work the next day. Two in the first hour, then one per hour from 5-10 pm. At 1.7 standard drinks for a bottle of Coopers, the 6 drinks actually morphs into over 10.
The Victorian standard drink guide will give you an idea of how much your favourite drink equates to. The current official guidelines regarding your health and drinking are:
Back to the wine guide that is – women drinking about 1.3 glasses of wine a day but no more than about 2.5, while men can have about 2.5 glasses of wine but no more 4.
But if you are driving, it’s safer to stick to none at all.
In today’s Epicure, in The Age, Ben Canaider eloquently covers the same ground in his piece, ”Measuring up to Standards”.
Like me, he recently did the maths – took a bottle of wine off the shelf, grabbed the calculator and did the maths. For a 14% alcohol bottle of pinot grigio there are 8.24 standard. By law all alcoholic beverages display the amount of standard drinks on the label. Very simply take your 750ml bottle of plonk – divide the 750 by the number of drinks and in this case it gives you 91, the number of mls per glass you need to comply with “standards”.
I actually did this a month ago. The innocuous little rosé that previously I’d considered a light summer drop was nothing of the sort. At 86 mls a glass, using a kitchen measurer to quantify the liquid, there was a rather paltry splash of wine in the bottom of the glass.
As Candaider points out, what you get in your local pub or bar is very likely to be uncalibrated for the percentage of alcohol, for wine that is up to 150ml in your wine glass.
So, other than an exercise of rudimentary mathematics, why does this matter?
At this time of year, more than any other, there are some outdated games some drivers play in their heads along the lines of “I can have two drinks every hour and one per hour there after and still be under the limit to drive”. Wrong! Even if you are using properly measured standard drinks for this game, considering gender, size, metabolism and state of your liver you are still very likely to be way over Australia’s .05 blood alcohol limit.
Regardless if it’s a quick drink or a long night, the woman who has just two pub sized glasses of champagne after work in an hour before rushing to pick the kids up is likely to be over the limit to drive safely and legally. The regular bar glass of champagne usually works out to 1.5 in standard drinks, even more if using larger vessels at home. But if this woman is premenstrual, when under the influence of a certain cocktail of hormones she might process alcohol less efficiently, giving an even higher blood alcohol reading.
Then there is a guy having a few stubbies, not a big night as he’s going to work the next day. Two in the first hour, then one per hour from 5-10 pm. At 1.7 standard drinks for a bottle of Coopers, the 6 drinks actually morphs into over 10.
The Victorian standard drink guide will give you an idea of how much your favourite drink equates to. The current official guidelines regarding your health and drinking are:
Men should drink no more than 4 standard drinks a day, on averageDepartment of Health and Aging
And never more than 6 standard drinks in one day.
Women should drink no more than 2 standard drinks a day, on average
And never more than 4 standard drinks in one day.
Everyone should have 1 or 2 alcohol-free days every week.
Back to the wine guide that is – women drinking about 1.3 glasses of wine a day but no more than about 2.5, while men can have about 2.5 glasses of wine but no more 4.
But if you are driving, it’s safer to stick to none at all.
Monday, November 12, 2007
diet and cancer risks
An American study has just released, updating the latest findings regarding what we eat and our cancer risks. According to the media representation, this research means great news if you are short but cause for concern if you are overweight. It is the usual swings and roundabouts. The report itself is not a new or definitive study, rather it is a systematic review of recently published health studies.
Perhaps what fascinates me more about the report, released jointly by the World Cancer Research Fund and the American Institute for Cancer Research, is what sound bites the media runs with. The Age ran with Tall people 'at higher cancer risk’ over the weight issue (News Radio, ABC and the BBC). The Age also promoted the American Institute for Cancer Research study into people’s perception of cancer risks, making big news of there being no proven link between pesticides and cancer:
However, is this what the report actually says and does the lack of evidence actually prove that these people’s perceptions are truly wrong? What the Diet and Cancer report actually found, concerning pesticide and herbicide risks, were much more complex than The Age implied.
The panel did find studies that showed links between conventional food production and cancers but no specific epidemiological studies have been produced as yet. However they are concerned enough with the preliminary findings to suggest that “women of a reproductive age” (a significant chunk of the population) should take a “precautionary approach” to eating conventionally grown foods. Perhaps a more accurate headline should have screened “Don’t eat conventional food if you plan to get pregnant!" 71% of the 1000 Americans interviewed may not be so wrong after all.
The actual study document is dense and takes a lot of reading. I wonder if any of the journalists reporting on it poured over it? I always find inclusion criteria in such large scale analysis interesting. For example although we may think this all about humans and the food they eat, the panel included animal studies (genetically modified animals and rodent).
Overall the dietary recommendations made as a result of the report mimic much of what the naturopathic community has always said – pull way back on meat and dairy (yes, dairy a got specific mention) and focus more on plant foods such as whole grains, fruit and vegetables. Alcohol, salt, sweet drinks, processed meat and moulds (specifically afllatoxins, which are common to peanuts) got the thumbs down, while moving your body more received a predictable tick.
But the report is actually a lot more specific than this as there is no single "cancer", it exams the published literature on diet and specific cancers. The findings link eating carrots with cervical cancer protection, soy reducing prostate cancer and so on. However it was perplexing to find suggestions about cancer reduction linked to nutrients such as vitamins E, C and Selenium (the presumed link the panel was making regarding certain groups of foods) yet categorically implied people should not take nutritional supplements, which were not within the scope of the review.
Selenium is an interesting case in point. The cancer protective effects of this nutrient, would depend entirely on the soil it was grown in. New Zealand for example, has little or none, while in Australia anywhere near medicinal doses of selenium are considered a poison. So unless each individual study did an actual lab analysis of the foods these people were eating, they are making some leaps of faith in their conclusions.
The weight issue that was such a popular tag line in the press, is also slightly misrepresented. The Panel acknowledged being over weight (a BMI of 25-29) or obese (BMI >30) as a significant health risk. But will the lifestyle factors they surmised as being likely causes of weight gain, such as being sedentary, watching too much TV and consuming ‘energy dense’ (sugary or fatty) foods and drinks actually cause cancer? The conclusion was increased body fat “should be considered to be additional, indirect causes of (some) cancers”. (Chapter 8)
What about tall people, does height really determine cancer risk as the other popular headline suggests? The conclusion was not so obvious: “The Panel emphasizes that greater adult attained height, meaning how tall people are as adults, is unlikely directly to modify the risk of cancer”. Though there are odd implications that being tall may be a factor in some gynaecological and colorectal cancers, it was not suggesting that being short is necessarily a “get out of cancer free” card.
Keeping in mind that the study looks at the swings and roundabouts of individual cancers and that all cancers are not the same, the general conclusions about diet and cancer risk confirm nutritional and naturopathic commonsense:
Breastfeeding has benefits for both mother and child
Eat lots of vegetables, legumes and fruit
Ensure your diet has sufficient amounts of plant fibre, folate, vitamins B6, C, E, beta carotene (the vegetable form of vitamin A) and nutrients selenium, caratenoids, quercetin and lycopenes.
Eat less meat, this includes all meat of which processed meats get a special increased cancer risk mention
Cut out the cheese, though there are cancer factors for and against milk drinking
Don’t drink alcohol
There is a handy graph showing food risks and benefits at this summary.
Remember this study looked primarily at diet, rather than all lifestyle factors such as smoking and other recreational drugs).
So what’s for dinner tonight?
Perhaps what fascinates me more about the report, released jointly by the World Cancer Research Fund and the American Institute for Cancer Research, is what sound bites the media runs with. The Age ran with Tall people 'at higher cancer risk’ over the weight issue (News Radio, ABC and the BBC). The Age also promoted the American Institute for Cancer Research study into people’s perception of cancer risks, making big news of there being no proven link between pesticides and cancer:
71 per cent thought that pesticide residue on produce was a cause - something that has never been shown; 56 per cent thought stress causes cancer, again not proven; and 49 per cent believed hormones in beef cause cancer.
However, is this what the report actually says and does the lack of evidence actually prove that these people’s perceptions are truly wrong? What the Diet and Cancer report actually found, concerning pesticide and herbicide risks, were much more complex than The Age implied.
There are theoretical grounds for concern, which are constantly reviewed by international and national regulatory bodies. However, there is no epidemiological evidence that current exposures are causes of cancers in humans, and so the Panel has made no judgements. Nevertheless, a precautionary approach is wise for women of reproductive age, since vulnerability during embryonic phases of development is increased, and early exposure may result in increased risk at later stages in life. (Diet and Cancer Report)
The panel did find studies that showed links between conventional food production and cancers but no specific epidemiological studies have been produced as yet. However they are concerned enough with the preliminary findings to suggest that “women of a reproductive age” (a significant chunk of the population) should take a “precautionary approach” to eating conventionally grown foods. Perhaps a more accurate headline should have screened “Don’t eat conventional food if you plan to get pregnant!" 71% of the 1000 Americans interviewed may not be so wrong after all.
The actual study document is dense and takes a lot of reading. I wonder if any of the journalists reporting on it poured over it? I always find inclusion criteria in such large scale analysis interesting. For example although we may think this all about humans and the food they eat, the panel included animal studies (genetically modified animals and rodent).
Overall the dietary recommendations made as a result of the report mimic much of what the naturopathic community has always said – pull way back on meat and dairy (yes, dairy a got specific mention) and focus more on plant foods such as whole grains, fruit and vegetables. Alcohol, salt, sweet drinks, processed meat and moulds (specifically afllatoxins, which are common to peanuts) got the thumbs down, while moving your body more received a predictable tick.
But the report is actually a lot more specific than this as there is no single "cancer", it exams the published literature on diet and specific cancers. The findings link eating carrots with cervical cancer protection, soy reducing prostate cancer and so on. However it was perplexing to find suggestions about cancer reduction linked to nutrients such as vitamins E, C and Selenium (the presumed link the panel was making regarding certain groups of foods) yet categorically implied people should not take nutritional supplements, which were not within the scope of the review.
Selenium is an interesting case in point. The cancer protective effects of this nutrient, would depend entirely on the soil it was grown in. New Zealand for example, has little or none, while in Australia anywhere near medicinal doses of selenium are considered a poison. So unless each individual study did an actual lab analysis of the foods these people were eating, they are making some leaps of faith in their conclusions.
The weight issue that was such a popular tag line in the press, is also slightly misrepresented. The Panel acknowledged being over weight (a BMI of 25-29) or obese (BMI >30) as a significant health risk. But will the lifestyle factors they surmised as being likely causes of weight gain, such as being sedentary, watching too much TV and consuming ‘energy dense’ (sugary or fatty) foods and drinks actually cause cancer? The conclusion was increased body fat “should be considered to be additional, indirect causes of (some) cancers”. (Chapter 8)
What about tall people, does height really determine cancer risk as the other popular headline suggests? The conclusion was not so obvious: “The Panel emphasizes that greater adult attained height, meaning how tall people are as adults, is unlikely directly to modify the risk of cancer”. Though there are odd implications that being tall may be a factor in some gynaecological and colorectal cancers, it was not suggesting that being short is necessarily a “get out of cancer free” card.
Keeping in mind that the study looks at the swings and roundabouts of individual cancers and that all cancers are not the same, the general conclusions about diet and cancer risk confirm nutritional and naturopathic commonsense:
Breastfeeding has benefits for both mother and child
Eat lots of vegetables, legumes and fruit
Ensure your diet has sufficient amounts of plant fibre, folate, vitamins B6, C, E, beta carotene (the vegetable form of vitamin A) and nutrients selenium, caratenoids, quercetin and lycopenes.
Eat less meat, this includes all meat of which processed meats get a special increased cancer risk mention
Cut out the cheese, though there are cancer factors for and against milk drinking
Don’t drink alcohol
There is a handy graph showing food risks and benefits at this summary.
Remember this study looked primarily at diet, rather than all lifestyle factors such as smoking and other recreational drugs).
So what’s for dinner tonight?
Monday, March 19, 2007
Health Trip Top 5 Health Tips
Want to make some healthy changes the easy way? Here are my Top 5 simple tips to make your body a little happier.
1. Downsize your glasses
It seems we have supersized most fluids these days except water, which most of us always need more of. With the exception of H2O, switch your glasses, cups and take away requests to the smallest size.
Alcohol: A standard unit in this country means 100 ml of (12% alcohol) wine, a 30 ml single nip of spirits or 285 ml of full strength beer (often a stubby or can is actually 1.5 standard drinks). Swap the big bucket shape wine glasses for daintier ones or only half fill the large ones (which is how they were designed to be used).
Coffee: Stick to a single shot espresso, or equivalent. Ditch the mugs or large sized coffees dished up at some of the big chains.
Soft drink: Do you really need to have one at all?
2. Replace 1 for 2
If you are trying out a diet without a common food, make sure you bring in at least 2 healthy alternatives for each food you take out.
For example: Wheat-free? Try quinoa and millet.
Dairy-free? Try tempeh and chickpeas.
Meat-free? Try fish and beans.
3. The “once a week” rule
So you have identified a daily habit that is not beneficial for you and you want to change it but feel bereft at the thought of giving it up? The “once a week” rule is to have the best quality, small quantity of the food, drink or substance you are eliminating, just once a week. Enjoy every moment of it when you do it.
4. Nibble on nuts
If you can’t have a small meal every 4 hours, the best way to keep your blood sugar stable and moods in check is to eat a handful of nuts and seeds. Always choose raw nuts, as these have the best oil content. Nuts are low GI and break down slowly – perfect to keep you going til your next meal.
5. Start the day with the juice of half a lemon in warm water
If you do a web search on this one you’ll find a fair amount of mythology. The fact is that the bitter receptors in your tongue are triggered by the bitterness in the lemon and send a signal to your liver to swing into action. What’s more it tastes good and is refreshing. The point of the water being warm, is that it takes less energy to have fluids at blood temperature, rather than cool drinks.
Enjoy.
1. Downsize your glasses
It seems we have supersized most fluids these days except water, which most of us always need more of. With the exception of H2O, switch your glasses, cups and take away requests to the smallest size.
Alcohol: A standard unit in this country means 100 ml of (12% alcohol) wine, a 30 ml single nip of spirits or 285 ml of full strength beer (often a stubby or can is actually 1.5 standard drinks). Swap the big bucket shape wine glasses for daintier ones or only half fill the large ones (which is how they were designed to be used).
Coffee: Stick to a single shot espresso, or equivalent. Ditch the mugs or large sized coffees dished up at some of the big chains.
Soft drink: Do you really need to have one at all?
2. Replace 1 for 2
If you are trying out a diet without a common food, make sure you bring in at least 2 healthy alternatives for each food you take out.
For example: Wheat-free? Try quinoa and millet.
Dairy-free? Try tempeh and chickpeas.
Meat-free? Try fish and beans.
3. The “once a week” rule
So you have identified a daily habit that is not beneficial for you and you want to change it but feel bereft at the thought of giving it up? The “once a week” rule is to have the best quality, small quantity of the food, drink or substance you are eliminating, just once a week. Enjoy every moment of it when you do it.
4. Nibble on nuts
If you can’t have a small meal every 4 hours, the best way to keep your blood sugar stable and moods in check is to eat a handful of nuts and seeds. Always choose raw nuts, as these have the best oil content. Nuts are low GI and break down slowly – perfect to keep you going til your next meal.
5. Start the day with the juice of half a lemon in warm water
If you do a web search on this one you’ll find a fair amount of mythology. The fact is that the bitter receptors in your tongue are triggered by the bitterness in the lemon and send a signal to your liver to swing into action. What’s more it tastes good and is refreshing. The point of the water being warm, is that it takes less energy to have fluids at blood temperature, rather than cool drinks.
Enjoy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
