WeKnowDieting.com’s Blog

According to this year’s numbers, the ranks of the uninsured depleted rather than swelled for the first time since 1999. The NY Times reports that the number of uninsured Americans dropped by more than a million, which most experts are attributing to more government funding for insurance programs. In fact, a close look at the numbers suggest that a majority of the million newly insured came from increased government spending on child welfare programs.

So, here comes confession time: I joined the ranks of the uninsured this year… or at least the under-insured. With the economic slow-down (or whatever you want to call it), the cost of our family’s private health insurance had to go. My husband and I purchased a more affordable emergency health care plan, complete with 3 doctor’s visits per year and prescription coverage. We’re now paying less than half the monthly cost of our private health insurance, but it’s still nearly $100 a month. We’re relatively healthy people, anyway, so it works for us. But our kids? They can be included in the ranks of those now covered by government-funded health care.

I have to admit, it pains me to share this. Some misguided sense of pride makes it difficult for me to admit that I’ve accepted help in any manner, least of all where government supplements are concerned. But in a slow economy, there’s just no room for what we were paying for our private health insurance: $2,000 every 6 months in premiums, with a $30 copay, $10 prescription copay, and $1000 deductible for each family member. Did I mention that both boys were on 4-6 rounds of antibiotics before getting tubes last year? After our third $100 day (2 copays = $60, 2 antibiotics = $20, ear drops = $20, sleeping children = priceless) with 2 sets of tubes on the horizon, I swallowed my pride and picked up the Medicaid application.

In May, we set ourselves up on a payment plan with the local hospital, put the kids on Medicaid, and signed ourselves up for emergency-only coverage. So, I guess I’m sharing all of this to say - I support the findings reported in the NY Times. I find it hard to believe that more people are able to afford health insurance in our current economic state (at one point I considered taking a job that would pay just $150 per week after childcare because it came with insurance benefits). Instead, it’s much more likely that desperate families like ours are turning to government assistance when they are at their wit’s end.

While I can’t say that I’m happy with my kids on government-supported Medicaid, I can say that I am appreciative for this kind of covereage. I know for sure that I am not a person that abuses the system, and as soon as we can “afford” coverage, we’ll be right back to our private health insurance. There’s a good chance I’ll be heading back to work next school year, as much as it pains me, so that our family can live more comfortably… you know, with adequate health insurance coverage. What a luxury!

Well, I have finished with my time on the Medifast diet and I can say that I have been extremely pleased with the results. I lost a total of 15 pounds and I am very happy with that. It has been a tough diet at times, with my energy level struggles, but it seems like making the switch to the 4 & 2 plan made all the difference for me.

Medifast made good on their promises about the amount of weight that I would lose. I think that Medifast is a great product, but I think it is more geared towards people looking for a longer term solution. If you have LOTS of weight to lose and feel like you are at the end of your rope. This might be just what you need. I was amazed at how little my body could take in and still function. The fact that I am fairly active made the first phase of the diet particularly challenging. If you are sedentary, this diet will be a piece of cake (and make sure you don’t eat any). If you live an active lifestyle, stay away from this diet at all costs. Your body will need more fuel than this diet permits.

The next phase for me will be to work at keeping the weight off and continuing to lose weight at a more gradual pace. I learned valuable lessons about self control–things I needed to reteach myself and I am glad to have had this experience.

There is no denying that our lifestyles greatly affect our health, but a new study also reveals that the layout of certain neighborhoods may contribute to a healthier lifestyle as well. A new study set to come out in the September edition of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine (as reported in the NY Times), found that neighborhoods built pre-1950 encourage foot travel to a much greater degree. In return for living in a walking-oriented neighborhood, researchers found that men weighed an average of 10 pounds less, while women weighed an average of 6 pounds less.

The large-scale study used drivers’ license data for nearly 1/2 a million Salt Lake City residents, comparing accessible height and weight data to the location of the person’s home. Of course, assuming that everyone across the board lies about their height and weight on their drivers’ license, statistical analysis clearly showed benefits to living in older neighborhoods, namely because these neighborhood had been designed with pedestrians in mind.

Although suburbs continue to grow - it seems many people have adopted the American dream of the picket fence and the 2.5 kids - there’s no reason that developing areas can’t also be pedestrian-friendly. If you’re looking to purchase a new home, the following neighborhood characteristics encourage walking:

* Spacious paths or sidewalks for biking, walking, or anything in between
* Minimal through traffic for other developments or areas
* Accessible local shops for groceries, coffee, or convenience items

Certainly, living in a walkable neighborhood doesn’t guarantee that you are going to exercise, but there’s no question that your ability to access shops, schools, and even work on foot or bike will encourage you to put away the car keys - if only for one day a week. No matter where you live, try to make the best of the exercise you can accomplish, even if it means getting up half an hour early to make it to work on time! And when you’re thinking of buying a new house, while what’s on the inside definitely matters, what’s on the outside counts in this case as well.

Switching to 4 Medifast meals instead of 5, and adding the second lean and green meal has really made life easier for me. My energy levels have been so much better lately and I have to assume that it is a direct result of the switch.

I have been trying to consistently eat my lean and green meals mid morning and at dinner.  I have settled into a routine that consists of a drink in the morning bar/lean and green at lunch, morning snack time, soup at my afternoon snack, a lean and green meal at dinner, and a drink before dinner. It really is pretty easy now that I have some energy. The redundancy does wear on you a bit, but the weight loss results have been undeniable. I have lost 13 pounds and the weight is still creeping off at a rate of about a pound every other day.

It is nice to be able to wear some clothes that had been banished to the bottom of my drawer, destined to end up in Goodwill store somewhere. When I go off the diet I am going to work extremely hard to keep the weight off, because I am really enjoying the progress I have been experiencing.

It seems that since the battle of the bulge is making its way down to the younger generations, the battle over marketing “unhealthy” foods is raging as well. The NY TImes reports that the Federal Trade Commission is keeping its eye on the striking amounts of money companies are throwing towards marketing to children and teens. However, a self-regulating conglomerate of 14 big-name food corporations claims that they are making strides in the right direction.

The goal of the major food companies is to fend off government regulation of marketing to children, which is obviously in their best interests. Most of the marketing efforts are focused on television commercials. In order to accomplish the goal of alleviating regulation F.T. C. pressures, companies have vowed to promote only what they refer to as “better-for-you” products to children and teens. Notice that they don’t pretend to claim that these products are “good” for you, but they are at least making an attempt to either shape up current products that are wholly unhealthy (like Apple Jacks, Froot Loops, and Corn Pops, which have all undergone a transformation recently) or market them to other audiences.

So, what are the main problems with the current state of this arrangement?

* As we already mentioned, companies are looking to market “better-for-you” products, but in a self-regulating group, guess who determines what’s best? That’s right, it’s up to the company to determine which products meet their “healthier” standards and which products must be marketed to older audiences.

* There is also disension over what constitutes “children’s” marketing, with companies defining children’s marketing as commercials with anywhere from 25-50% of the actors under 12.

* Marketing toward children only applies during children’s programming, despite the fact that droves are children are now watching prime time shows like American Idol or Dancing with the Stars.

* Current marketing numbers suggest that $870 million is geared toward children under 12, while $1 billion is directed at teenagers. Even if advertising “better-for-you” foods, this is a lot of information being directed toward a population largely unable to make healthy decisions for themselves.

* Finally, companies have to market their products to someone. So, if they do end up pulling marketing from children’s programming, there’s a good chance they’ll be aiming the same products at moms instead.

Despite all of the problems, the F.T.C. did applaud the efforts of the major companies - including names like Kellogs, Coca-Cola, Hershey, Kraft Foods, Unilever, Burger King, McDonald’s, Cadbury Adams, PepsiCo and General Mills. They have made a number of strides in the right direction, but few critics believe it will be enough. When you’re talking about the health - and life - of a child, big business shouldn’t win.