It really is all my mom's fault!

DirrtyH

Or, in other words, it's Friday and I'm bored. Please read and discuss.

http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/04/letter_smart_nutrition_and_fitness_begin_before_bi.html

Note: It's short and easy to read.

DirrtyH

Bump

chivalryder

It's blocked at my workplace.

_incogNEATo_

For @chivalryder
Health initiatives and programs such as SNACK (Smart Nutrition Activity and Conditioning in Kids) to encourage good nutrition and exercise ("Snacking to fitness," April 19) have a Sisyphean task ahead.

Recent evidence is highly discouraging for such programs, because the major challenge is overcoming poor compliance. But it is not the fault of the mothers or the children; it is our fault as a society. Salutary food choices and acquiring the tools for an active lifestyle start not in childhood but in the womb.

A mother's poor nutrition alters the womb environment. The fetus not only "swims" in the amniotic fluid but also drinks and breathes it. Thus, the "cocktail" of poor nutritional byproducts in the amniotic fluid emphasizes the development of salt and sweet taste and links it with a powerful reward system in the developing brain. So, during infancy and childhood, nutritious foods are less palatable compared to foods with sugar, fat and salt. A similar problem exists during breastfeeding, so that by 4 months of age, it may be too late.

Additionally, a mother's poor nutrition influences the development of lean muscle mass in her baby, making life after birth a challenge for maintaining optimal weight gain and thwarting obesity.

The upshot is that we as a society are "penny wise and pound foolish." That's not to say these programs aren't worthwhile, but it is going to be an uphill battle, because it is that much harder for these children to stay the course to healthy adulthood.
We would be better off as a society to stop demonizing the poor and through the ballot box vigorously support federal and state programs that guarantee mothers, newborns and young children access to good nutrition.

-- Rocco Carsia,
Hamilton
The writer is an associate professor and researcher at Rowan University School of Osteopathic Medicine, where he teaches clinically integrated human anatomy.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

enterdanger

Ok. I'm not gonna sugar coat this so if I offend anyone I'm only kinda sorry. I think this is a load of bunk. It's basically saying "Hey fat kid. Your mom ate junk food when she was pregnant so you will be flawed for LIFE."

Personal accountability people. When I was in utero you could still get a smoking room at the hospital. Was I born predisposed towards tobacco addiction? Is it my mom's fault I smoked a pack a day for years before I quit? NO.

This has absolutely no science quoted to back this up. It just says "recent evidence" What recent evidence?

I think this is a cop out and that the writer has an issue with social programs using tax dollars for nutrition education. In my opinion, the bigger issue is eating and the family environment. Parents need to model healthy eating habits and behavior for their kids. Also, kids don't grocery shop. If you don't want your kids to choose salty or overly sweet snacks... don't buy them.

I'm 100% certain that all these healthy eating initiatives will fail without parental role modeling, but I'm not buying that it starts when baby is in the womb.

Carpedieznutz

I'm not saying she is right but...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/07/pearl-cantrell-bacon-105-year-old_n_3230095.html


On a side note, scientists and others alike are constantly proving and disproving theories of what nutritionally is good or not good for us. One day real sugar is the enemy and you should only consume stevia, the next day synthetic sucrose is toxic and causes cancer. I think it is important to remember that we have plentiful occupations in the healthcare field because health and the maintenance of it, isn't simple and needs to be groomed from a variety of angles.

GreenValli

enterdanger wrote: »

Ok. I'm not gonna sugar coat this so if I offend anyone I'm only kinda sorry. I think this is a load of bunk. It's basically saying "Hey fat kid. Your mom ate junk food when she was pregnant so you will be flawed for LIFE."

Personal accountability people. When I was in utero you could still get a smoking room at the hospital. Was I born predisposed towards tobacco addiction? Is it my mom's fault I smoked a pack a day for years before I quit? NO.

This has absolutely no science quoted to back this up. It just says "recent evidence" What recent evidence?

I think this is a cop out and that the writer has an issue with social programs using tax dollars for nutrition education. In my opinion, the bigger issue is eating and the family environment. Parents need to model healthy eating habits and behavior for their kids. Also, kids don't grocery shop. If you don't want your kids to choose salty or overly sweet snacks... don't buy them.

I'm 100% certain that all these healthy eating initiatives will fail without parental role modeling, but I'm not buying that it starts when baby is in the womb.

I agree with you. I would not believe that a mother's nutrition would change the environment in utero to the point of affecting the child's eating habits after birth. By the time the nutrients get assimilated into the body and into the blood stream, it would seem to me that they would be broken down totally into proteins, fats, and carbohydrates without much differentiation. The liver and kidneys would take care of eliminating most of the other "bad byproducts" but not much, if any, would be passed through the umbilical cord to the developing baby.

DirrtyH

Carpedieznutz wrote: »

I'm not saying she is right but...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/07/pearl-cantrell-bacon-105-year-old_n_3230095.html

I think this evidence is irrefutable.

DirrtyH

asflatasapancake wrote: »

I read the article. Not sure what I think about it. So should we as tax payers should fund another state or federal program so mothers who made poor eating choices while they were pregnant now have more availability to healthy eating choices? Or should we continue trying to educate everyone on healthy lifestyle decision making?

I think it just means because my mom ate crap when she was pregnant with me that I may as well just give up now.

Obviously I don't really believe that, but the concept is intriguing to me. I don't know what kind of actual scientific evidence exists to support the theory but it seems plausible to me that babies born to mothers who didn't eat well during pregnancy might have a small disadvantage.

oneunfitdad

sorry but thats just bollocks people these days are to fast to look for excuses

jenncornelsen

well even if there is a tinsy bit of fact, this certainly isn't going to help the people that are already obese. and the ones who are just looking for someone to blame for they're being fat, well they can wave this study around now.

oneunfitdad

jann my favorite excuse is its genetic lol i read the research papers makes them 3% more likely to put on weight >.<