Six Week Workout Program

Why do I need to change my reps?

Everyone must change how many repetitions they do in their weight-training workouts!

When weight-training (aka resistance-training) lower the reps as you progress through sets and increase weight in a single workout (pyramid training). You may do the reverse of that (reverse pyramid training).  You may keep keep the reps the same throughout the workout and either increase the weight or keep it the same.  Unless you have very, very specific goals it is really not that important what you do.  The goal should be to have the last few reps be very difficult no matter what you do! Your workout program must, however, change what you do every 4-6 weeks.  Our bodies rely on energy systems to provide the energy we need to exercise.  The number of repetitions we do basically determines how long our muscles are working before they rest.  If we are working at a high intensity then we will only be able to do a few reps. If we are working at a lower intensity then we will be able to do many reps.  The length of time that we are able to and actually do work determines where our bodies derive the energy from.  We must change how many repetitions we do at least every 4-6 weeks so that different energy systems are trained which improves our health and our ability to do work when training other energy systems.

Here is an example:  Susan desires to increase her strength endurance so she follows the following workout program.

She performs sets with repetitions of between 15 and 20 for 6 weeks.  The next two weeks she performs sets of between 10 and 12 repetitions because she knows this is 0ptimal for hypertrophy and she knows that if she increases the diameter of her muscle fibers then she will increase the ability of her muscles to work for longer.  The following 2 weeks she performs sets of between 4 and 6 repetitions to focus on strength.
This is because she wants to elicit a response from more muscle fibers, thus increasing the maximal weight that these muscles can push.  The following 6 weeks she will again perform sets with repetitions of between 15 and 20.  By the second week of this phase of working on strength endurance she is significantly improved.

For more information on how to target certain goals and results please read Rest: the most overlooked part of your workout.

An Egg White Post

Egg White Nutrition Facts You Must Know

This is a great post about the benefits of consuming egg whites! I would like to point out that while all of the cholesterol is in the egg yolk that is also where essential fatty acids can be found such as the much need Omega 3′s. Many say that organic eggs are better for this. Others say it doesn’t matter. Either way eggs can provide quality nutrition for any diet and fantastic for post-workout consumption to build up muscle!  It should be noted they are a staple food of Mediterranean diets.

Read this great article by Fitness Health Zone here!

Abs That Burn: A More Effective Crunch

This crunch not only helps you on your way to a six pack, but improves posture and helps prevent injuries! Your core is made up of mover muscles and stabilizer muscles.  Mover muscles are muscles that rotate bones around their joints.  These are often your “sexy” muscles.  Stabilizer muscles keep your body safe by stabilizing your bones around your joints.  Mover muscles create the bulk of the power, but are not near as effective if your stabilizer muscles are not conditioned.  Stabilizer muscles in your core mostly consist of slow twitch muscle fibers.

The crunch that targets stabilizer and mover muscles:

The 4 steps:

1: Lie on your back in a normal crunch position.

2: Have someone put their hand under lumbar disks in your spine (the small of your back) and press your back on their hand.  They can now take their hand out.

3: Keep this same position (your core should already be slightly contracted) and crunch up to about 70 degrees off the ground.

4: Lower yourself back to the ground and repeat.  The core should be contracted throughout this whole all of your repetitions.

These are killer for your abs! After you perform these crunches please comment so others can hear your experiences!

Vaccinations: The Positive and Negative

If after reading this article you would like to know more about your rights if you or a loved one is not vaccinated then I suggest you read The Revised Authoritative Guide to Vaccine Legal Exemptions.

Abstract

Vaccinations are common for residents of the United States.  They start at infancy and given into adulthood.  There is controversy about their safety because vaccinations are linked to neurological disorders and epilepsy in some children. Government organizations claim they are safe, but sometimes concede that they may cause problems.  They have, however, led to eradication and near eradication of many diseases in the United States and many countries.  These ideas are not really opposites, but two ideas that can exist together.  Immunizations are best for nations, but may not be best for certain individuals.

Vaccination:  The Positive and Negative

Introduction

Human beings are always looking for ways to improve the quality of life.  This has been the case since the beginning of time.  Since 1820 some nations started to become “Westernized” and prosper many times faster than ever before and nations around the world followed suit; other nations are still trying to follow suit (Bernstein, 2004).  Medicine is a major vehicle to improve quality of life that has been tinkered with, researched, and hopefully improved for millenniums and even more drastically in recent years.

The term vaccine was first used near the end of the 1700s by Edward Jenner.  This term was derived from a virus that affected cows (BBC, 2006).  The terms “vaccination” and “immunization” are now used interchangeably and will be so henceforth.  From the time Jenner first coined the term vaccination there has been controversy every step of the way associated with this term and idea.  It is easy to get confused by learning convincingly positive views and learning convincingly negative views from journals, magazines, websites, radio, news and other types of media.  Officials from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are emphatic that vaccines are safe and that no sound scientific evidence has proved otherwise (Babcock, 2008).  They point to the fact that many deadly diseases have been drastically lowered or completely eradicated as proof to their benefit to humanity and their usefulness in improving quality of life.  Then there is the story by a mother who’s precious infant was growing and behaving normally for months and within a week after her child being immunized starts acting very funny and has lifelong neurological disorders (Wallis, 2008).  This creates a paradox:  Immunizations are beneficial for nations, but may not be best for certain individual.

Effects of Vaccinations on Individuals

Seizures

One point that causes controversy is the fact that within 2 weeks of being vaccinated infants sometimes have a febrile seizure (Barlow et al, 2001).  The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) (2010) defines febrile seizures as a general seizure, resulting from a fever,  occurring in an infant that causes both sides of the body to shake and is not localized to a specific area.  The results in Barlow’s study is that infants receiving the diphtheria and tetanus toxoid and whole-cell pertussis vaccine (DTP) containing thimerosal (a derivative of mercury) have an ,alarmingly, greater than 9 times incidence of febrile seizures within 2 weeks.  Further, infants receiving the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine containing thimerosal are 2.83 times as likely to have a febrile seizure within 2 weeks (Barlow et al, 2001).  While  these statistics may seem and may very well be frightening the absolute risk is still very low because of the low number of overall seizures in relation to the population that actually occur.  Normally these febrile seizures are deemed to be harmless, but it should be noted that a child who has one febrile seizure has a 1% chance of developing epilepsy.  A child who has more than one febrile seizure in a 24-hour period or a prolonged febrile seizure has a 3 to 5 percent chance of developing a seizure (NINDS, 2010).  Again, the absolute risk is low, but the relative risk is significantly higher.  It is often easy to look at numbers and statistics, but any parent would obviously be very frightened to see their infant having a seizure regardless of how low they say the risk may be.

Court Case

Hannah Poling is part of the first case that has been awarded money by the court for damages done by vaccines.  She was developing normally until 19 months when she received nine vaccinations.  She received more than the norm at that age because of ear-infections earlier in her life that backed up her vaccination schedule.  Soon following the receipt of those vaccines she became ill and her normal development stopped.  The panel ruled that, “Hannah had an underlying cellular disorder that was aggravated by the vaccines, causing brain damage with features of autism spectrum disorder (ASD).” (Wallis, 2008).  This ruling is very significant because many parents have claimed that vaccinations have caused disorders in their children, but no court rulings ever agreed. Her parents, nevertheless, maintain that vaccinations are beneficial for many people notwithstanding the effect of them on their daughter.

Government’s Point of View

Many government officials are perplexed that the court ruled in favor of Poling because of a lack of evidence through- what they deem as- quality research that vaccinations could harm her (Wallis, 2008).  Studies of physiological processes in the human body are very difficult to study because of so many confounding variables.    Vaccines may register a problem for one reason in one child and another reason in another child. The CDC admits that those that are possibly susceptible to having immunizations stimulate symptoms of a disorder will not register on their standards of significance in a study (IRC, HPDP, IOM, 2004).  Further, many studies including the one mentioned previously about seizures are funded and administered by organizations that already deem vaccinations as safe and effective (Barlow et al, 2001).  This creates a conflict of interest.  Data can be interpreted many different ways and it is human nature to interpret it in a way that coincides with one’s established viewpoint or even benefits that person.  Government organizations (IRC et al., 2004) state that, “an association between MMR  [measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine] and autism were not established but nevertheless not disproved.” (p. 4).  Nevertheless, in a subsequent report a few years later they allege that the MMR vaccine does not cause autism.  There are two points though to note about their second statement:  First, this only refers to autism and no other neurological disorders.  Second, they do not seem to have found a solution for the problem that their data analysis techniques cannot find subsets of the population that may be genetically predisposed to having a vaccine cause symptoms of disorders to be present.  They also go on to discuss that possible biological mechanisms have been found.  This means that there are known possible pathways in the body that the vaccines with or without thimerosal could cause problems. Nothing, however, has been proven and for these vaccines to travel via these pathways is only theoretical (IRC et al., 2004).

One Possible Mechanism

Research indicates that it may be because of a lack of glutathione.  Glutathione is an amino acid chain that is an antioxidant, which detoxifies or is able to consume and rid the body of metals (Cave, 2008).  Thimerosal is thought by some to be a reason that neurological disorders such as autism or autism spectrum disorder (ASD) occur. Previously, some infants may have been exposed to thimerosal levels that exceeded the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) safe limit.  The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) urged vaccine manufacturers to lower or remove thimerosal (FDA, 2010).  Thimerosal has been removed from all vaccines save for the flu vaccination.  Pregnant mothers are often immunized to stave off the flu.  If thimerosal is the reason this might explain why the rate of autism has not retreated nearer the previous ratio of only 1 in 10,000 before the 1970s from today’s disturbing 1 in 150 (Cave, 2008).  This is one area where government organizations also concur that there is a possible biological mechanism of thimerosal negatively affecting the body because of abnormal mercury metabolism  (IRC et al., 2004).

Cognitive Tests

If there is a causal link between vaccines and neurological disorders it seems that if a disorder does not develop then there are no future consequences.  Tozzi et al. (2009) tested children that had been immunized as infants 10 years earlier.  They tested their cognitive function using 24 different tests.  Only 2 of those 24 tests showed a significant difference from normal and they were very small.  This may show that if there a causal link between vaccinations and neurological disorders it appears that if the child is not affected to the degree of being declared to have a neurological disorder then there is no effect on their cognitive function.

Effects of Vaccinations on Nations

Small pox was the first disease that was attempted to be eradicated via immunizations.  The influential World Health Organization (WHO) embarked upon a successful project resulting in the last naturally occurring case of smallpox in Somalia back in 1977 (WHO, 2009).  The National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Disease and Division of Viral Diseases (2009) illustrates that though measles are a ways from eradication throughout the world, cases are down to 50 a year in the United States and most of these cases originate in other countries.  This is astronomically lower than the 48,000 that were hospitalized, 450 that died, 7000 that had seizures, and 1000 that had permanent brain damage or deafness because of contraction of measles before the vaccine was introduced.    Diphtheria is a potentially deadly disease that was at its worst in the United States in the 1920s with 206,000 cases in 1921 causing 15,520 deaths.  By the late 1940s as a diphtheria vaccine was being used the cases dropped below 19,000 a year.  Since 1980 there have been a mere 2 or 3 cases reported on average a year.  To this day diphtheria still occurs more frequently in parts of the world where there is a low vaccination rate.  One example is the newly formed Soviet Union in the early 1990s: more than 157,000 cases and greater than 5,000 deaths were reported (Atkinson, Hamborsky, McIntyre, Wolfe, 2007).  Pertussis, also known as whooping cough, occurred in 157 people in the United States per 100,000 people.  In the 1940s pertussis started to be vaccinated and it dropped to less than 1 in 100,000 persons.  Since 1980 the number has started to rise since adolescents and those older are not being immunized (Gregory, D, 2006).   In many countries where Hepatitis B afflicted 8% to 15% of children, the rate of affliction is now below 1% among those that are vaccinated (WHO, 2008).  Polio is no longer a problem in the United States so the vaccine is no longer recommended here (CDC, 2010).  The largest effort to eradicate a disease ever worldwide is aimed at Polio.  This was started by the World Health Assembly in 1988.  When they started, Polio was paralyzing more than 1000 children every day.  This was spread over five continents and 125 countries.   In 2006, however, mainly because of immunizations, 2000 cases of Polio (not children paralyzed) were reported in the entire year and these were spread over only four countries and two continents (Global Eradication of Polio).  It is clear that many diseases that caused fear, lifetime impairments, and death have been greatly reduced.  Many lives have been saved and much grief spared because of so many people being immunized and diseases not contracted.

Legitimacy of Claims

Virtually everything the government or associated organizations claim is challenged.  Girard (2006) reveals that the manufacturer of Hepatitis B created and sponsored the Viral Hepatitis Prevention Board (VHPB).  They also convinced WHO that this was an important vaccine and it needed to be administered on a large scale (Girard, 2006).  It is hard to be confident that studies and claims done by anyone that has a significant financial interest are solid.  It is difficult to have an optimistic- and very possibly realistic- view that the intentions of the manufacturers who promoted the vaccine were unbiased.  They believed that what they had found would really help humankind, but it is impossible to say that long term financial incentive and financial stability for them and their families did not sway their beliefs at all.  Girard also points that the VHPB called an “international consensus conference” in 2003 to resolve growing concern about the safety of the hepatitis vaccination (p. 22).  Only people that they already knew believed in the safety of the vaccine were invited to attend.  Researchers that were known to have concern over the safety were not invited.   The decision of the conference for all intensive purposes was decided before convening.  Now WHO and CDC both use this consensus when illustrating the vaccine’s safety (Girard, 2006).

Commentary

Controversy over vaccinations can cause a lot of confusion with conflicting viewpoints heard from many sources.  There are many cases in which a seizure or autistic behavior have developed soon after vaccinations given.  There are biological mechanisms that are possible pathways for these issues to occur.  It is admitted that studies are not precise enough to find subsets of the population that may be predisposed to be negatively affected by immunizations.  A court ruled that a girl should be awarded damages because

of an adverse reaction to a vaccine.  There is debate about the correctness of the reason that immunizations are introduced and mandated.  Additionally, there is debate about how the experts are chosen to rule certain decisions.  Conversely, smallpox has been completely eradicated.  Further measles,  diphtheria, pertussis, hepatitis B, and polio have all afflicted far less people than in the past and this in spite of  a growing world population.

Table 1

Eradication and near eradication leads to many of these diseases being invisible to younger generations because they have never seen how these diseases affect infants and families.  With so many having never seen the severity of polio, smallpox, hepatitis B, and others, people may not see or comprehend that not vaccinating a child exposes them to deadly diseases.  It’s easy to think: vaccinate my child and risk a neurological disorder, epilepsy, or even just having to see the pain of so many shots go into my child, or not vaccinate the child and have nothing happen.  However, not vaccinating a child is relying on vaccinations of other children so that the disease does not become rampant again and affect your non-vaccinated child.

Vaccination beliefs do not have to have a dichotomous relationship: good or bad – at opposite ends of the spectrum. It is very difficult to contend against either side, but they can coincide.  There definitely seems to be a link between vaccinations and subsequent neurological disorders or epilepsy and also a link between vaccinations and disease rates lowering.  It is very difficult to prove either of these otherwise through any type of study.  There are so many confounding variables that cannot be accounted for and that may offset the results.  Further, there is an incredible amount of information to still be learned about the human body.  There are also so many ways that some disorders can manifest themselves that they are difficult to classify and thus won’t be in an analysis of causation to a certain disorder.  In light of this evidence that vaccinations are linked to adverse effects we must integrate this with the overwhelming benefit to so many nations that have seen deadly diseases drastically reduced, thus saving countless lives.

Conclusion

Since the beginning of time myopic thinking has slowed progress.  For centuries man thought that the universe revolved around the earth.  Religious government deemed this heretical because Psalms read, “…the earth feared, and was still.” (Bernstein, p. 108, 2004)  Now when man poses a cause of cancer, autism, SIDS, or other diseases and disorders they may not be called a heretic or put to death, but the views are considered absurd.  Something is causing these problems.  Nothing can be ruled out as the cause until science has actually discovered the cause.  The paradox remains: Immunizations are best for nations, but may not be for certain individuals.

Vaccination is Not Immunization is an interesting read that takes the stance that vaccines are not proven to be safe nor do the manufacturers have our best interest at heart. I suggest you read this in depth book and then re-read my article and make the decision for yourself. Please email me with any questions.

References

Atkinson W, Hamborsky J, McIntyre L, Wolfe S, eds. (2007). Diphtheria.   Epidemiology and Prevention of Vaccine-Preventable Diseases (The Pink Book) (10 ed.). Washington DC: Public Health Foundation.

Babcock, D. (2008). FTS-Center for Disease Control-National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention. Presented on a Netconference.

Barlow, W. E., Davis, R. L., Glasser, J. W., Rhodes, P. H., Thompson, R. S., Mullooly, J. P., et al. (2001). The risk of seizures after receipt of whole-cell pertussis or measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine. The New England Journal of Medicine, 345(9), 656-661.

BBC. (2006). Historic Figures: Edward Jenner (1749 – 1823). Retrieved June 1, 2010 from http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/jenner_edward.shtml

Bernstein, W. (2004). The birth of plenty.  McGraw-Hill.

Cave,S., MD,MS, FAAFP. (2008). The history of vaccinations in the light of the autism epidemic. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, 14(6), 54.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2010). Vaccines and preventable diseases: Polio vaccination. Retrieved May 26, 2010 from http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/polio/default.htm 2010

Girard, M. (2006). World Health Organization vaccine recommendations: Scientific flaws or scientific misconduct? Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, 11(1), pp-pp 22-23.

Gregory, D. (2006).Pertussis: A disease affecting all ages. American Family Physician, 74(3), 420-426.

Immunizaiton Review Committee, Board on Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, Institute of Medicine of the National Academies (2004). Immunization and Safety Review: Vaccines and autism. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Disease, Division of Viral Diseases. (2009). Retrieved June May 26, 2010 from  http://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/overview.html

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. (2010). Febrile Seizures Fact Sheet.

The Global Eradication of Polio. Retrieved May 26, 2010 from http://www.polioeradication.org/history.asp

Tozzi, A. E., Bisiacchi, P., Tarantino, V., De Mei, B., D’Elia, L., Chiarotti, F., et al. (2009). Neuropsychological performance 10 years after immunization in infancy with thimerosal-containing vaccines. Pediatrics, 123(2), 475-482.

United States Food and Drug Administration. (2010). Vaccines, blood, and biologics: Thimerosal in vaccines.  Retrieved June 1, 2010 from http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/SafetyAvailability/VaccineSafety/ucm096228.htm

Wallis, C. (2008). Case study: Autism and vaccines. Time. Retrieved May 19, 2010 from http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1721109,00.html

World Health Organization. (2008). Fact sheet. Retrieved May 26, 2010 from http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs204/en/index.html

World Health Organization. (2010). Fact sheet: Smallpox. Retrieved May 26, 2010 from  http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/smallpox/en/

Decline, Incline, and Flat Bench Press

At almost every gym we have the option to perform the bench press below on a decline bench, and incline bench and a flat bench.  Is there a benefit to doing all three types of bench presses and what are the benefits?

- I must debunk a common myth first!  Using an incline bench versus a flat does not work the “upper pec” more.  The same goes for using a decline bench; you do not work more of your “lower pec” on a decline bench.  Skeletal muscles are striated.  A muscle fiber either contracts or it doesn’t from the insertion to the origin of the muscle fiber.  The weight determines the number of the muscle fibers we use in each of the working muscles. The lighter the weight – fewer muscle fibers are used.  The heavier the weight – more muscle fibers are used.

- There is, however, a benefit of not just doing flat bench.  Incline bench will work muscles in your shoulder more than just a flat bench.  Decline bench will work your lat (latissimus dorsi) muscles more than a flat bench, but I don’t recommend doing decline bench because it is not very good for the shoulder socket.

I hope this helps you make your workouts more effective and safe.

2 laws of eating

Never be too hungry, never be too full.
This is for everyone. If you are trying to bulk up you should err on the side of being too full and if you’re trying to lose weight you should err on the side of being a little hungry. You should aim for never being too hungry or too full! This will keep your metabolism up which is necessary for weight loss. It will also provide constant nutrients which is necessary for increasing lean muscle mass.

Eat foods of the earth
Vegetables, fruits, legumes, nuts, and grains are excellent sources of macro- and micronutrients. I’m not saying you have to be a vegan, but have you ever seen a fat vegan or vegetarian? Flexitarian is what I recommend. Eat meat sparingly; try only once or twice a week. This type of diet will help you feel and look great!

These 2 laws of eating make nutrition simple.  If you focus on only these two laws then you will have made a huge improvement!

This Vegetarian Cookbook has many great recipes that will help you eat foods of the earth!
“Are You Sure That’s Vegan?” is a book that I feel is great way to help you eat foods of the earth!

Rest: the most overlooked part of your workout

Rest is the most overlooked component of workout routines! Below are the basic guidelines for the amount of rest you should give yourself between your sets depending on your goals:

~20-35 seconds for 12+ reps because you’re working on strength endurance and cutting fat.
~45-60 seconds for reps between 6 and 12 because you’re working on increasing muscle mass.
~1.5 mins to 3 mins for reps under 6 because you’re trying to increase your strength.

If you follow this you’ll see better results because you will be targeting the correct energy systems and using science on your side!

For information regarding the reason you change the repetitions performed in your workouts read “Why do I need to change my reps?

High- fructose corn syrup

High-Fructose Corn Syrup is not Significantly Different than Sucrose

Nicholas R Rainey

Brigham Young University

25 March 2009

Abstract

High-fructose corn syrup is a subject of controversy in the media and the general public.  Many attribute the introduction of high-fructose corn syrup into the common diet to the obesity problem and health concerns of today.  High-fructose corn syrup is compositionally different than sucrose.  It generally does not register significant physiological differences than does sucrose.  The body metabolizes fructose differently than it metabolizes glucose.  The higher ratio of fructose in high-fructose corn syrup is what causes many to believe that it leads to increased health problems.  Often, but not always, however, the ratio of fructose to glucose in high-fructose corn syrup and sucrose is minor.  This indicates that there is no need for a substantial dietary change away from high-fructose corn syrup.

High-Fructose Corn Syrup is not Significantly Different than Sucrose

There is a widespread belief that the substitution of high-fructose corn syrup for sucrose (table sugar) in food production is the cause of the dramatic rise in obesity in America and some other countries.  Is high-fructose corn syrup really the culprit?  What is compositionally different between high-fructose corn syrup and sucrose?  It is universally known that high amounts of sugar leads to weight gain and decreased health, but the public does not know if high-fructose corn syrup is worse than sucrose.  High-fructose corn syrup does differ from sucrose chemically and in the manner it is produced, but there is no substantial evidence to dramatically change a diet to eliminate it.

As taught by Hanover and White, sucrose and high-fructose corn syrup are different in composition. They are both made of the two monosacchardides glucose and fructose.  Sucrose is 50% glucose and 50% sucrose and those are bonded covalently. This is easily broken down in the small intestine by the enzyme sucrase (Forshee et al., 2007, p. 561).  The Corn Refiners Association reveals that there is no universal standard for the ratio of glucose to fructose in high-fructose corn syrup, but 55% fructose to 45% glucose is most commonly used in soft-drinks.  42% fructose and 53% glucose is the most common ratio for canned goods, baked goods, and condiments (Forshee et al., p. 561).

Fructose consumption has postprandial results of less ghrelin suppression and less insulin, leptin, and glucose blood levels.  Fructose alone produces more low-density lipoprotein in the body (Stanhope and Havel, 2008).  This is consistent with the findings in the study of Akhavan and Anderson (2007).  In this study the effects of different ratios of fructose to glucose were measured.  Higher fructose ratios had reduced lower glucose and insulin concentrations in the blood and had higher food intakes in a test meal 80 minutes post-solution consumption.  There was no significant difference on these tests in solutions that had a ratio near 1:1 of fructose and glucose.  In a study of high-fructose corn syrup and sucrose consumption there was no significant difference in ghrelin secretion and insulin, leptin and glucose levels in the blood.  The next day there was an increased desire to eat from the sucrose consuming subjects (Melanson et al., 2007, p. 103).  The findings of within day levels of high-fructose corn syrup and sucrose are comparable between the study of Akhavan and Anderson and the study of Melanson et al. The food intake and desire to eat is also comparable.  In Akhavan and Anderson’s study there was increased food intake from the high fructose ratio consuming subjects 80 minutes after.  Whereas in Melanson’s et al. study there was an increased desire to eat the day after the testing was done from the sucrose consuming subjects as opposed to the high-fructose corn syrup consuming subjects.  The stimulation of leptin release is delayed for several hours.  Leptin plays a role in the body’s desire to eat.  In a 24 hour test of circulating blood leptin, levels were lower from pure fructose concentration (Stanhope and Havel, 2008).  The higher ratio of fructose to glucose in high-fructose corn syrup and the non-covalent bond of fructose and glucose in high-fructose corn syrup could cause an increased desire to eat.  Another possibility is that fructose does not trigger the same response in the body as does glucose (Stanhope and Havel, 2008). Because the acute response to fructose is less significant, the body would chronically lower its metabolism to compensate.  The metabolism would not have decreased in the sucrose consuming subjects causing them to have an increased desire to eat the next day, a chronic response.

There is strong evidence to believe that high-fructose corn syrup contains mercury because of the process that produces mercury.  The Environmental Health Organization worked in conjunction with the FDA to collect and test twenty samples from three manufacturers.  Nine of the twenty samples contained significant amounts of mercury.  Eight of those came from two manufacturers who contributed five samples each (Dufault et al., 2009).  This demonstrates that it is manufacturer dependent on the level of mercury in their high-fructose corn syrup.  The average American consumes almost 50 grams of high-fructose corn syrup each day.  This means that the average American consumes an average of 28.4 μg of mercury per day.  Canadian children from ages 3-19 have a daily average intake of 0.79-1.91 μg from dental amalgam and the country recommends that children and pregnant women not use dental amalgam because of its high mercury content (Dufault et al., 2009).

High-fructose corn syrup is composed of more fructose than sucrose and fructose is metabolized differently than glucose.  The process that produces high-fructose corn syrup is more complicated than producing sucrose and that often leads to mercury levels in the finished product that some consider dangerous.  There hasn’t been any recorded health benefit to consuming high-fructose corn syrup as compared to sucrose.  It is still not clear the extent of health risk, if any, of consuming high-fructose corn syrup over sucrose, so major dietary changes are likely not necessary.

Reference List

Akhavan T., Anderson, G.H. (2007). Effects of glucose-to-fructose ratios in solutions on subjective satiety, food intake, and satiety hormones in young men. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition , 86 (5), 1354-1363.

Dufault, R., Leblanc, B., Schnoll, R., Cornett, C., Schweitzer, L., Wallinga, D., Hightower, J., Patrick, L., Lukiw, W.J.(2009). Mercury from chlor-alkali plants: measured concentrations in food product sugar. Environmental Health, 8(2).

Forshee, R.A., Storey, M.L., Allison, D.B., Glinsmann, W.H., Hein, G.L., Lineback, D.R., Miller, S.A., Nicklas, T.A., Weaver, G.A., White, J.S. (2007). Evidence relating high-fructose corn syrup and weight gain. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 47: 561-582.

Melanson, K.J., Zukley, L., Lowndes, J., Nguyen, V., Angelopoulos, T.J., Rippe, J.M. (2007). Effects of high-fructose corn syrup and sucrose consumption on circulating glucose, insulin, leptin, and ghrelin and on appetite in normal-weight women. Nutrition, 23(2), 103-112.

Stanhope, K.L.,  Havel, P.J. (2008). Endocrine and metabolic effects of consuming beverages sweetened with fructose, glucose, sucrose, or high-fructose corn syrup. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 1733-1737.

The 6 Week Workout Program now available for purchase

It’s like having me as your personal trainer but for way cheaper! Pick up my new workout program online from the BYU Bookstore here.

Be sure hit me up here if you have any questions or need some help.