Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Teenage girls' junk food diet leading to health problems later in life
The Telegraph ^ | 7/9/2011 | unk.

Posted on 07/09/2011 3:55:31 PM PDT by Signalman

Nutritionists have discovered that a diet of pizza, sweets, and sugary drinks is taking a severe toll on the health of young women which is having implications as they get older.

A study has concluded that teenage girls are shunning fruit, vegetables and oily fish, leading to almost half of teenage girls being dangerously low in key nutrients, such as iron, magnesium and selenium.

Iron, found in products such as red meat and green vegetables is vital for the production of healthy red blood cells and helps to keep the brain healthy. Magnesium from shellfish helps keep bones strong while selenium is beneficial to the immune system.

(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: girls; junkfood; teenage

1 posted on 07/09/2011 3:55:37 PM PDT by Signalman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Signalman

2 posted on 07/09/2011 4:03:06 PM PDT by Morgana (I never said a thing.....................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana
Drinking milk makes me severely congested for three days. But I do eat my veggies. They are particularly good fried. Fried eggplant, fried green tomatoes, fried zucchini, fried summer squash, fried broccoli, fried cauliflower, fried mushrooms, fried radishes, fried onions.......Yum yum. :-)
3 posted on 07/09/2011 4:08:48 PM PDT by DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis (Want to make $$$? It's easy! Use FR as a platform to pimp your blog for hits!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Signalman

Must be those “food deserts” they live in.


4 posted on 07/09/2011 4:10:08 PM PDT by Tax-chick ("This is a revolution, damn it! We're going to have to offend somebody!" ~ John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Signalman
And it is no ones business except for the girls and their parents while they are under age. After they hit 18 it is only the girl's business, certainly not the government.

Judging by the number of anti-eating articles lately I assume there will be a massive push for onerous regulations as to what we can purchase and consume. Hopefully this will be the straw that breaks the Marxists backs.

5 posted on 07/09/2011 4:11:05 PM PDT by calex59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis

6 posted on 07/09/2011 4:21:35 PM PDT by Morgana (I never said a thing.....................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Morgana
From the article:

"While things like heart disease and cancer affect people in their 40s, 50s and 60s, the very early stages happen several decades before."

This delayed effect is true for saturated fat and cholesterol consumption leading to heart disease, sodium consumption leading to hypertension and the consumption of high glycemic index foods leading to diabetes.

Poor nutrition in our teens and twenties has its life threatening effect a generation later.

The shortages cited in the article can be remedied with daily multi-vitamin and calcium carbonate pills.

7 posted on 07/09/2011 4:33:49 PM PDT by Kennard (io)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kennard

8 posted on 07/09/2011 4:40:54 PM PDT by Morgana (I never said a thing.....................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: calex59
I assume there will be a massive push for onerous regulations as to what we can purchase and consume.

This will hit the average Democrat voter, especially Holder's People, harder than it will me.

9 posted on 07/09/2011 4:49:58 PM PDT by Tax-chick ("This is a revolution, damn it! We're going to have to offend somebody!" ~ John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Soy milk and soy products are very bad for young females (and males, too).

Soy has estrogen-like compounds which can affect hormones.


10 posted on 07/09/2011 4:51:21 PM PDT by webstersII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Kennard

“This delayed effect is true for saturated fat and cholesterol consumption leading to heart disease”

You need to read some more recent information about this. Saturated fat and cholesterol are not the cause of heart disease.

“sodium consumption leading to hypertension”

This has been disproven many years ago. There is a very small percentage of people who have a sensitivity to excess sodium leading to hypertension.

“the consumption of high glycemic index foods leading to diabetes”

That, and overeating in general, can lead to type II diabetes.


11 posted on 07/09/2011 5:11:24 PM PDT by webstersII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: webstersII
Soy is not a health food. If an adult is not bothered by its side effects it is okay. But growning children and adolecents should never be served daily servings of soy 'milk', tofu hamburgers and hot dogs, soy 'yogurt', or snacks of green soy beans.

The only kind of soy that is suitable for human consumption is soy sauce and pan spray such as PAM because the bad part of soy (plant estrogen) is removed when the soy beans are fermented for soy sauce and processed for PAM spray.

Soy is although a fine food for multi-stomach livestock such as cattle and sheep. If you or your children cannot digest well dairy products consider such substitutions as rice and almond 'milk' and cheese. I find almond milk delicious, plus it is both low in fat and carb.

12 posted on 07/09/2011 5:46:52 PM PDT by Irish Queen ("Don't fence me in")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Irish Queen

I like your comments. Never much cared for soy - didn’t like the taste at all and appreciate the tip about almond milk. Saw it in the market yesterday and will consider purchasing it soon.


13 posted on 07/09/2011 6:17:37 PM PDT by SatinDoll (NO FOREIGN NATIONALS AS OUR PRESIDENT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: webstersII
I disagree.

Everyone should reduce their consumption of saturated fat, cholesterol and sodium as much as possible.

The leading studies and institutions support this position.

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/dietary-guidelines/MY01594

http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/public/heart/chol/cholesterol_atglance.pdf

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2943062/

14 posted on 07/09/2011 10:26:43 PM PDT by Kennard (io)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

You are so thoughtful. :-)


15 posted on 07/10/2011 9:27:18 AM PDT by DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis (Want to make $$$? It's easy! Use FR as a platform to pimp your blog for hits!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Click the Pups

Calling for Donors!

Give what you can
Or donate monthly
A sponsoring FReeper will give $10 for each new monthly donor

16 posted on 07/10/2011 10:49:42 AM PDT by TheOldLady (FReepmail me to get ON or OFF the ZOT LIGHTNING ping list.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kennard
"Everyone should reduce their consumption of saturated fat, cholesterol and sodium as much as possible. The leading studies and institutions support this position."

Their conclusions are at odds with the data.

In one of the longest-running studies ever, The Framingham Heart Study on High density lipoprotein cholesterol and mortality, found:

"In 12 years of follow-up for 2748 Framingham Heart Study participants ages 50 to 79, low levels of high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL- C) were associated with increased mortality. For men, the relative risk of death in the first HDL-C quintile (less than 35 mg/dl) as compared to the top quintile (greater than 54 mg/dl) was 1.9 for all causes, and 3.6 and 4.1 for death due to cardiovascular and coronary heart disease (CHD), respectively, after adjustment for standard cardiovascular risk factors."

Note that there was an INVERSE releationship between low levels of HDL cholesterol and mortality.

From American Journal of Clinical Nutrition January 13, 2010: PubMed.gov link to study
"CONCLUSIONS: A meta-analysis of prospective epidemiologic studies showed that there is no significant evidence for concluding that dietary saturated fat is associated with an increased risk of CHD or CVD. More data are needed to elucidate whether CVD risks are likely to be influenced by the specific nutrients used to replace saturated fat."

Cholesterol is a nutrient in the body. It is responsible for many vital processes.

This link states what cholesterol does in the body: Link to Trusted MD network
"It is also important to understand cholesterol is an essential component of our cell membranes, it acts as an anti-oxidant, it is a precursor for the synthesis of vitamin D as well as bile for digesting fats, and is the only source out of which our steroid hormones, such as cortisol, as well as estrogen, progesterone and testosterone which are key to reproduction, can be made. Therefore it is safe to say that without cholesterol we would not survive. Cholesterol is also the precursor to calcitrol, the steroid hormone that regulates calcium levels in our bodies by helping us absorb calcium from our food, thus playing a key role in the mineralization of our bones and teeth. Cholesterol is also manufactured in the glial cells of the brain to aid with synapses."

The whole cholesterol myth was theorized in the 19th century and supported by misguided research in the early 20th century. In 1913 a Russian scientist demonstrated that feeding a large amount of cholesterol to rabbits caused atherosclerotic lesions. Further studies showed that dietary cholesterol induced atherosclerosis in rabbits because it depressed thyroid function. When thyroid extracts were given along with the cholesterol, the rabbits did not develop atherosclerosis anymore.

Most studies show that CVD and CHD are a result of the body's response to inflammation, and reducing cholesterol has little to no impact on progress of the disease. Studies show that cholesterol-lowering medications do not reduce heart attack risk because of lowering cholesterol, but only offer a small reduction of heart attack risk because of their blood-thinning properties.

17 posted on 07/10/2011 8:40:23 PM PDT by webstersII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: webstersII
This is the current NIH position on the causative effect of cholesterol on heart disease:

http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/public/heart/chol/wyntk.pdf

The NIH's current practice guidelines reflect this position.

The "cholesterol wars" ended a few years ago with a widespread acknowledgment that high levels of LDL cholesterol (over 1.9) increase the risk of coronary heart disease. There are still some holdouts, however.

I am not a doctor. I have, however, resolved several medical issues naturally, through nutrition, and have never taken cholesterol-lowering or hypertension medication.

My motivation for posting on these issues is that I want conservatives, and Freepers in particular, to lead long, healthy lives. We need every one of you.

I consume no cholesterol, only trace amounts of sodium, no saturated fat and only trace amounts of polyunsaturated fats from nuts, grains and vegetables.

For those of you on a typical diet, following these nutritional principles will knock off an easy twenty-five pounds.

18 posted on 07/11/2011 12:51:57 PM PDT by Kennard (io)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Kennard

“The “cholesterol wars” ended a few years ago with a widespread acknowledgment that high levels of LDL cholesterol (over 1.9) increase the risk of coronary heart disease.”

But reducing total cholesterol just to reduce LDL is a recipe for disaster. That’s what the data show. The ratio of HDL to LDL is what’s important, and most people reduce them both to their detriment.

The whole cholesterol-causes-heart-disease was predicated on junk science in the first place. And the studies have reflected that ever since. The real issue is inflammation, and reducing cholesterol with medications has so many side effects that it is a bad idea for many other reasons.

As far as taking advice from the NIH, that organization is so riddled with conflicts of interest (google it for yourself) that anything they recommend is suspect. The only ‘consensus’ about cholesterol is just like the Global Warming consensus.


19 posted on 07/13/2011 5:43:00 AM PDT by webstersII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: webstersII
The liver produces all the cholesterol that the body needs. The brain produces its own cholesterol. We do not need to consume cholesterol. The consumption of excess cholesterol,mainly through meat consumption, is a significant cause of coronary heart disease. I was well aware of the dangers of cholesterol-reducing drugs such as Lipitor. That is why I tackled my high-LDL issue by becoming a vegan. I naturally reduced my LDL from 320 to 190.

I did substantial research on the issue of the link between cholesterol and CHD about a year ago and am aware of the controversy to which you refer. Not just the NIH, but all the major research hospitals in the cardiology field, support the link. Visit the Cleveland Clinic, Mayo Clinic, John Hopkins and Massachusetts General websites.

Incidentally, I don't think that the government has any business telling people what they should eat. I am concerned about misinformation, however, and how it can harm people's lives. Telling people that they can consume cholesterol with no concern can do their cardiovascular system great long term damage. It is insidious, since it exploits their natural inclination to maintain their current nutrition/lifestyle.

20 posted on 07/13/2011 9:19:05 PM PDT by Kennard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: webstersII
Here is a summary of studies on the inflammation topic, if you can wade through the ads:

http://articles.cnn.com/2008-10-16/health/healthmag.cholesterol.inflammation_1_c-reactive-protein-bad-cholesterol-inflammation?_s=PM:HEALTH

The recommendation is still to keep LDL low and HDL high.

21 posted on 07/13/2011 10:07:41 PM PDT by Kennard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson