Analysis Questions Benefits of Gluten-Free Diet for Many
By Salynn Boyles
WebMD Health News
Reviewed by Laura J. Martin, MD
Feb. 20, 2012 -- Move over fat, salt, and sugar. There's a new dietary villain in town and its name is gluten.
Scan the grocery aisles and it's impossible to miss the proliferation of products proclaiming that they are "gluten-free."
Pick up a magazine or go online and you are likely to read about yet another celebrity or athlete who has banished gluten from their diet.
By one estimate, as many as 18 million Americans have some degree of gluten sensitivity, but a new analysis raises questions about the claim and the benefits of a gluten-free diet for most people.
Gluten is a protein in wheat, rye, and barley that is commonly found in bread, beer, pasta, and a wide range of other processed foods containing these grains.
For about 1% of the population, eating gluten causes celiac disease, an intestinal condition characterized by the inability to absorb nutrients from food.
Celiac disease is diagnosed through blood and bowel tests, but there are no good tests to determine non-celiac gluten sensitivity, and there has been considerable debate about whether the condition even exists.
In their essay published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, Celiac researchers Antonio Di Sabatino, MD, and Gino Roberto Corazza, MD, of Italy's University of Pavia, explored what is and is not known about gluten sensitivity and addressed the growing hype about the benefits of gluten-free eating.
"Claims [about gluten-free diets] seem to increase daily, with no adequate scientific support to back them up," they write. "This clamor has increased and moved from the Internet to the popular press, where gluten has become the new diet villain."
The researchers noted that many symptoms attributed to gluten may actually be caused by sensitivity to other components of wheat flour or other ingredients found in wheat-based foods like bread, pasta, and breakfast cereals.
Symptoms that have been attributed to gluten sensitivity include diarrhea, abdominal cramping, bloating, headaches, fatigue, and even those associated with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).
Di Sabatino and Corazza write that some people may experience these symptoms when they eat foods containing gluten simply because they believe these foods will make them sick.
They conclude that common sense must prevail to "prevent a gluten preoccupation from evolving into the conviction that gluten is toxic for most of the population."
Pediatric gastroenterologist Alessio Fasano, MD, runs the Center for Celiac Research at the University of Maryland.
Fasano tells WebMD that his own research suggests that 5% to 6% of the population -- about 18 million Americans -- has some degree of gluten sensitivity.
While he concedes that many people who may not benefit have jumped on the gluten-free bandwagon, he says many others who do not have celiac disease or wheat allergies still benefit from following a gluten-free diet.
That is what many food manufacturers are likely counting on, with Anheuser-Busch, Kellogg's, General Mills, and many others now promoting "gluten-free" versions of some of their best-selling products.
"I believe the fad of the gluten-free diet will not last," he says. "But because there are many, many people who are truly gluten-sensitive and sick, the diet will not go away, either."
Stefano Guandalini, MD, who is president of the North American Society for the Study of Celiac Disease, says the true prevalence of gluten sensitivity probably will not be known until biologic indicators exist to diagnose the disorder.
He adds that one very real danger of following a gluten-free diet is eating too much fat and too little fiber.
Guandalini is medical director of the University of Chicago Celiac Disease Center.
"Someone who needs to be on a gluten-free diet and is closely monitored can benefit tremendously from it," he says. "But for everyone else, embracing this diet makes no sense."
SOURCES: Di Sabatino, A. Annals of Internal Medicine, Feb. 21, 2012.Stephano Guandalini, MD, medical director, University of Chicago Celiac Disease Center; president, North American Society for the Study of Celiac Disease.Alessio Fasano, MD, director, Celiac Research Center, University of Maryland.News release, Annals of Internal Medicine.
Study Shows Brown Rice Syrup Adds Arsenic to Many Natural, Organic Products
By Brenda Goodman, MA
WebMD Health News
Reviewed by Laura J. Martin, MD
Feb. 16, 2012 -- Organic brown rice syrup, a popular sweetener in organic and gluten-free foods -- including some formulas made for toddlers -- is a source of the toxin arsenic, a new study shows.
Experts say regularly eating foods that use organic brown rice syrup as a main ingredient could expose a person to more arsenic than the government allows in drinking water, raising the risks for cancer and heart disease. In young children, chronic arsenic exposure has been linked to lower IQs and poorer intellectual function.
"This seems to be quite strong evidence," says Ana Navas-Acien, MD, PhD, an assistant professor of environmental health sciences and epidemiology at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore, Md.
"I would personally not buy formula made of brown rice," says Navas-Acien, who studies the health effects of arsenic exposure. She was not involved in the current research.
Manufacturers insist that their products are safe.
It's not the first time arsenic has turned up in rice-based foods for infants and toddlers. Last year, researchers in Sweden reported finding elevated levels of arsenic and other heavy metals in rice cereals, which parents often use to transition children to solid foods.
Because babies and toddlers are smaller than adults, they get a bigger exposure (based on body weight) of arsenic from a given serving of food than an adult would. And their developing organs may be especially sensitive to environmental exposures.
Regulatory agencies in Europe and the U.K. are in the midst of setting new limits for arsenic in foods, particularly foods made for young children.
In the U.S., there are no set standards for arsenic in food. The FDA is weighing a limit for arsenic in fruit juice after recent tests turned up high levels in some brands of apple juice.
The FDA says rice products are also on its radar. The agency confirms that it has recently tested rice products for arsenic. The results of those tests are pending.
Researchers say they are glad the FDA is stepping up its scrutiny of arsenic in foods.
"We need to elevate the discussion about whether we do need regulations and guidelines for arsenic in food," says researcher Brian P. Jackson, PhD, director of trace metal analysis at Dartmouth College in Hanover, N.H. "And rice-based foods would be the first foods we should look at, I think."
Rice growers disagree that their products should be singled out.
"U.S. rice and rice products are safe to consume," says Stacy Fitzgerald-Redd, a spokesperson for the USA Rice Federation. "When discussing the content of arsenic in foods it is essential to distinguish between organic and inorganic arsenic," she tells WebMD.
"Most of the arsenic found in rice is organic arsenic, the benign kind, and the U.S. rice industry is working with U.S. regulatory officials as they look into this issue," she says.
"There has been no documented incident where ingestion of rice or rice products has led to human health problems, and the U.S. rice industry is committed to maintaining the safety of U.S. rice and rice products," the statement says.
For the study, which is published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, researchers analyzed arsenic levels in 17 different brands of formula made for infants and toddlers.
They also tested 29 energy bars, and three energy gels, portable sources of easily digested carbohydrates often used by endurance athletes.
And they checked three organic brown rice syrups, which are sold in the natural or organic sections of some supermarkets. Some people use rice syrup as an alternative to sugar or corn syrup in baked goods and beverages.
Products that didn't list rice or rice syrups as top ingredients were all low in arsenic.
But the rice syrups themselves, and products that listed rice syrups or rice as one of the first five ingredients, all had high arsenic levels.
Most of the arsenic detected in the bars and energy gels was inorganic arsenic, the kind that's believed to be the most toxic.
Still, that may not be so concerning, experts say, for foods that are eaten only occasionally. The body can typically clear a single small dose of arsenic in just a few days.
But for food staples, the danger increases.
Two kinds of organic formula that listed brown rice syrup as their first ingredient, for example, had arsenic levels that were two to five times higher than the limits allowed in drinking water.
"The infant formula is really troubling, concerning," says Michael Bloom, PhD, an assistant professor in the department of environmental health sciences at the University of Albany, State University of New York, in Rensselaer.
"These children who are fed with formula almost exclusively are getting a very high relative dose of arsenic from these sources," says Bloom, who studies the health effects of arsenic exposure, but was not involved in the research.
In three of the samples, most of the arsenic that was detected was organic, which has been thought to be less harmful than inorganic arsenic.
But experts say new evidence suggests that the kind of organic arsenic picked up in the study, DMA, is not risk-free.
"The available evidence suggests that it is toxic, too," says Navas-Acien.
The arsenic levels detected in the formula were still too low to cause immediate illness.
But over the longer term, studies have shown that young children exposed to moderate arsenic levels, over 50 micrograms per liter, are more likely to have lower IQs and reduced brain function compared to kids drinking water with arsenic levels below 5.5 micrograms per liter.
For comparison, three samples of the formula made with brown rice syrup in the study had about 30 micrograms of arsenic per liter. The fourth sample had nearly 60 micrograms of arsenic per liter.
The U.S. EPA says drinking water shouldn't contain more than 10 micrograms per liter.
Arsenic is a colorless, tasteless substance that's naturally present in the environment. It's also used as a fertilizer and wood preservative. Once in the soil, it can persist for years. It easily dissolves in water.
According to a previous WebMD interview with John M. Duxbury, PhD, a professor of soil science and international agriculture at Cornell University in Ithaca, N.Y., rice is particularly vulnerable to arsenic contamination because it grows in water.
Because arsenic is stored in the darker outer layers of the rice grain, called the germ, brown rice contains higher levels of arsenic than white rice.
Long-term exposure to arsenic, typically from drinking well water, has been linked to cancers of the bladder, liver, kidney, skin, prostate, and lungs. Recent research has also tied chronic arsenic exposure to an increased risk for heart disease. Jackson says more research is needed to understand how arsenic in foods may contribute to those health risks.
For babies, arsenic is another reason why breast milk may be the healthiest option.
"Breast milk has very little arsenic in it, even if the mother is exposed to a lot of arsenic. It doesn't travel through the mammary glands," Bloom says.
SOURCES: Jackson, B. Environmental Health Perspectives, published Feb. 16, 2012.Brian P. Jackson, PhD, research associate professor, director of trace metal analysis, Dartmouth College, Hanover, N.H.Stacy Fitzgerald-Redd, senior director of communications, USA Rice Federation, Arlington, Va.Ana Navas-Acien, MD, PhD, assistant professor, environmental health sciences and epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Md.Michael Bloom, PhD, assistant professor, department of environmental health sciences, University of Albany, State University of New York, Rensselaer, N.Y.
-- If your kids are easily bored with the lunches you pack for school, try adding a little pizzazz (and nutrition) to the boring brown bag.
The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics suggests how to make packed lunches more exciting for your kids:
WEDNESDAY, Feb. 8 -- Trans fat levels in the blood of white adults in the United States fell by 58 percent between 2000 and 2009, which should help lower the risk of cardiovascular disease in the nation, a U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study says.
The findings suggest that public health initiatives to increase consumer awareness about the danger that trans fats pose to heart health and to help people reduce their consumption of trans fats have been effective, according to the researchers.
They analyzed data from white adults who took part in the U.S. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from 2000 to 2009. Their goal was to examine trans fat blood levels before and after the 2006 implementation of a U.S. Food and Drug Administration law requiring food and some dietary supplement makers to list the amount of trans fats on the Nutrition Facts panels of the product label.
During the study period, some local and state health departments worked to force restaurants to limit their use of trans fats in food and to boost campaigns about the health risks of trans fats.
"The 58 percent decline shows substantial progress that should help lower the risk of cardiovascular disease in adults," Christopher Portier, director of the CDC's National Center for Environmental Health, said in an agency news release.
"Findings from the CDC study demonstrate the effectiveness of these efforts in reducing blood [trans fats] and highlight that further reductions in the levels of trans fats must remain an important public health goal," he added.
Dr. Howard Weintraub, clinical director of the Center for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease at NYU Langone Medical Center, is encouraged by the new findings.
"Trans-fats have been shown to be highly linked to atherosclerosis, the hardening and narrowing of arteries," Weintraub said. "Cities have banned trans-fats from restaurant cooking and this report shows there can be a true measurable difference from these proactive actions."
The study, published Feb. 8 in the Journal of the American Medical Association, provides information for white adults only. However, additional CDC studies are underway to examine blood trans fat levels among adults in other racial/ethnic groups, children and teens.
Foods high in trans fats include store-bought baked goods such as crackers, cookies and cakes, many fried foods and some shortenings and margarines.
Unlike other dietary fats, trans fats are not necessary for people and do not promote good health, according to the CDC. High consumption of trans fats increases levels of LDL "bad" cholesterol, which boosts the risk of cardiovascular disease.
Another expert also weighed in on the findings.
"With the direct effect of trans-fatty acids on the increase in LDL, which is the cholesterol leading to heart disease, this FDA initiative clearly had significant benefits on public health outcomes," said Dr. Suzanne Steinbaum, a preventive cardiologist at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City.
But problems with the American diet are still far from solved, Weintraub warned.
"The new CDC report shows that people are concerned about trans-fats, since a nearly 60 percent decrease is really impressive," Weintraub said. "But Americans are still getting fatter and diabetes is getting higher. We shouldn't feel we have these epidemics beat because trans-fats are down."
-- Robert Preidt
SOURCES: Howard S. Weintraub, M.D., clinical director, Center for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease at NYU Langone Medical Center, New York City; Suzanne Steinbaum, M.D., preventive cardiologist, Lenox Hill Hospital, New York City; U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, news release, Feb. 8, 2012
-- Potatoes are a great source potassium, fiber and vitamin C, but many popular recipes also load on the calories.
The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics suggests how to enjoy the nutritional benefits of potatoes without piling on the calories:
Customers Would Opt for Smaller Portions if Restaurants Gave Them the Option, Study Suggests
By Rita Rubin
WebMD Health News
Reviewed by Laura J. Martin, MD
Feb. 8, 2012 -- Forget "supersize that." Tulane University marketing professor Janet Schwartz, PhD, would like fast-food restaurants to instead ask their customers if they'd like to "downsize that."
Instead of asking, "Would you like fries with that?" Schwartz says, fast-food restaurants could make a dent in Americans' waistlines if they asked, "How many fries would you like with that?"
Given the choice, many Americans would opt for smaller portions of starchy side dishes, Schwartz and her co-authors conclude in their new study.
Posting calories in fast-food and chain restaurants has had little or no impact on calorie consumption to date, the authors write. And, Schwartz says, although healthier meals test well, relatively few customers order them.
So, at a Chinese fast-food restaurant on the Duke University campus in Durham, N.C., they field-tested a different approach: Have servers ask customers if they want to downsize that side of steamed rice, fried rice, or chow mein.
A standard portion of the starchy side dishes was 400 calories; the reduced portion was half that.
"Servers at this particular restaurant had to be retrained in order to do the serving this way," Schwartz says. "They looked at us like we were crazy." The restaurant shall remain nameless, she says, but she adds that you can find it at any airport food court.
Customers rarely took the initiative to ask for smaller portions of the side dishes, the researchers found. But when servers offered the option, 14% to 33% of the customers took them up on it, whether or not they were given a $.25 discount. Ironically, the scientists found that customers were less likely to accept the offer of a smaller portion when calorie counts were posted than when they weren't.
Diners who stuck with the regular-sized side dish were just as likely to clean their plate as those who opted for the smaller side. "A lot of people say, 'Well, it's here. I might as well just go ahead and finish it,'" Schwartz says.
But if restaurants gave customers the choice of a smaller portion of side dishes such as rice or fries, she says, they could end up cutting costs as well as calories. "It's a win-win for everybody," she says.
Eric Finkelstein, PhD, deputy director of the Health Services and Systems Research Program at Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School in Singapore, questioned whether customers would continue to choose smaller portions.
"The big problem with the study is customers were only asked to do it once," Finkelstein tells WebMD in an email. He co-authored a study published last year that found posting calories at certain chain restaurants in the Seattle area had no impact on customers' food purchases.
"Asking about smaller portions is fine but unlikely to be of more than academic interest," Finkelstein says. "After all, there is a reason that chains offer the size portions that they do. It is profit-maximizing, or they would not be doing it. Over time, many customers may realize that they are hungry after the meal and would go back to their larger portions."
Schwartz emphasized that only the side dish was downsized, or, as she prefers to call it, rightsized. Customers, who were not aware they were being observed, still received a heaping portion of their entr