For those of you who haven't seen it, Tara Parker-Pope write a nice article on obesity in the latest issue of NY Times Magazine (1). She discusses research showing that the body "resists" fat loss attempts, making it difficult to lose fat and maintain fat loss once obesity is established.
Read more »
New York Times Magazine Article on Obesity
For those of you who haven't seen it, Tara Parker-Pope write a nice article on obesity in the latest issue of NY Times Magazine (1). She discusses research showing that the body "resists" fat loss attempts, making it difficult to lose fat and maintain fat loss once obesity is established.
Read more »
Read more »
The Corporate Psychopaths Theory of Health Care Dysfunction
A new article in the Journal of Business Ethics suggested that the global financial crisis, or great recession, was primarily due to a fundamental flaw in the leadership of financial organizations, one that has important implications for health care organizations.
The article, Boddy CR. The corporate psychopaths theory of the global financial crisis. J Bus Ethics 2011; 102: 255-259 is here. Its premise was:
Note that in 2004 we first posted about the possibility that a proportion of corporate managers, including those in health care, could be psychopaths, raised then by two experts on psychopathy, Paul Babiak and Robert Hare. In 2006, they published Snakes in Suits, about the dangers of psychopaths as executives and managers (see post here). However, the issue got scant attention in those days of letting the good times roll.
Defining Corporate Psychopaths
Boddy described psychopaths as:
Such people do not make good leaders:
Despite the dangers posed by such leadership, corporate psychopaths may rise quickly in management:
The nature of current corporate culture may facilitate the rise of corporate psychopaths:
The destabilization of modern corporations likely lead to the ascendancy of the corporate psychopath:
Thus, Boddy hypothesized the rise of management by corporate psychopaths lead directly to the global financial crisis or great recession:
Worse, if this hypothesis is true, as long as it is not addressed, things will get worse:
The plausible theory that corporate psychopaths ascending to top management positions in finance caused the global financial crisis has been noticed by a few prominent financial pundits. Writing in Bloomberg, William D Cohan agreed with Boddy's suggestion that "anyone who makes decisions that affect significant numbers of other people, concerning issues of corporate social responsibility or toxic waste, for example, or concerning mass financial markets or mass employment, should be screened to make sure that they are, at the very least, not psychopaths and at most are actually people who care about others."
Brian Besham, writing in the Independent, suggested that Richard Fuld, former CEO of Lehman Brothers, whose bankruptcy kicked off public awareness of the global financial collapse, saying he wanted to eat the hearts of those selling his company's stock short (see this post), was a "terrifying" example of corporate executive psychopathy. Worse, Besham noted that he had discovered an case of an investment bank which "psychometric testing to recruit social psychopaths because their characteristics exactly suited them to senior corporate finance roles." It may be that corporate psychopaths are actively recruiting their fellows.
Implications for Health Care
This is chilling. It also unfortunately is highly relevant to health care. As we noted, most recently here, leaders of big finance firms, including those whose failures were most spectacular, now often sit on boards of trustees of hospitals, academic medical centers, medical schools, and their parent universities. Thus, the likelihood that a good proportion of the stewardship of our most prominent not-for-profit health care organizations may be in the hands of psychopaths is not negligible.
Furthermore, health care organizations have become as unstable and chaotic, in the way these terms were used by Boddy, as finance firms. This would suggest that their current nature would make it as easy for psychopaths to rise to positions of power in them as they may have in financial firms. In health care we certainly have seen the consequences he suggested were due to psychopathic managers, including
- intimidation (per Boddy, corporate psychopaths are "prepared to lie, bully and cheat and to disregard or cause harm to the welfare of others");
- self-interest ("pursuit of self-enrichment and self-aggrandizement") leading to outrageous executive compensation ("senior level remuneration and reward started to increase more and more rapidly and beyond all proportion to shop floor incomes")
- fraud and other crime ("corporate fraud, financial misrepresentation, greed and misbehaviour went through the roof,... ")
So as we noted in 2006, "a high prevalence of psychopathic managers could explain the prevalence of mismanagement, conflicts of interest, and corruption in the leadership of health care organizations that we have often discussed on Health Care Renewal."
Boddy's first suggestion to deal with the problem in finance was:
However, it is as hard to imagine top health care leaders willingly and honestly submitting to the use of instruments designed to identify psychopaths as it is to imagine finance leaders doing so. Furthermore, it is easy to imagine how corporate psychopaths in positions of leadership would ruthlessly deploy their legions of public relations personnel and lawyers to quash any challenge should the notion that they are so dominant gain any credibility.
However, if there is any significant prevalence of corporate psychopaths among the leaders of health care, woe will be unto us until we identify and remove them.
The article, Boddy CR. The corporate psychopaths theory of the global financial crisis. J Bus Ethics 2011; 102: 255-259 is here. Its premise was:
The Corporate Psychopaths Theory of the Global Financial Crisis is that Corporate Psychopaths, rising to key senior positions within modern financial corporations, where they are able to influence the moral climate of the whole organisation and yield considerable power, have largely caused the crisis.
Note that in 2004 we first posted about the possibility that a proportion of corporate managers, including those in health care, could be psychopaths, raised then by two experts on psychopathy, Paul Babiak and Robert Hare. In 2006, they published Snakes in Suits, about the dangers of psychopaths as executives and managers (see post here). However, the issue got scant attention in those days of letting the good times roll.
Defining Corporate Psychopaths
Boddy described psychopaths as:
the 1% of people who have no conscience or empathy and who do not care for anyone other than themselves. Some psychopaths are violent and end up in jail, others forge careers in corporations. The latter group who forge successful corporate careers is called Corporate Psychopaths.Corporate Psychopaths as Leaders
Such people do not make good leaders:
Although they may look smooth, charming, sophisticated, and successful, Corporate Psychopaths should theoretically be almost wholly destructive to the organizations that they work for. The probable mal-effects of the presence of psychopaths in the workplace have been hypothesized about in recent times by a number of leading experts and commentators on psychopathy.How Corporate Psychopaths Could Have Become Prevalent
Researchers report that such malevolent leaders are callously disregarding of the needs and wishes of others, prepared to lie, bully and cheat and to disregard or cause harm to the welfare of others. Corporate Psychopaths are also poorly organized managers who adversely affect productivity and have a negative impact on many different areas of organizational effectiveness.
Despite the dangers posed by such leadership, corporate psychopaths may rise quickly in management:
Psychologists have argued that Corporate Psychopaths within organizations may be singled out for rapid promotion because of their polish, charm, and cool decisiveness. Expert ccommentators on the rise of Corporate Psychopaths within modern corporations have also hypothesized that they are more likely to be found at the top of current organisations than at the bottom.
The nature of current corporate culture may facilitate the rise of corporate psychopaths:
These Corporate Psychopaths are charming individuals who have been able to enter modern corporations and other organisations and rise quickly and relatively unnoticed within them because of the relatively chaotic nature of the modern corporation. This corporate nature is characterized by rapid change, constant renewal and quite a rapid turnover of key personnel. These changing conditions make Corporate Psychopaths hard to spot because constant movement makes their behaviour invisible and combined with their extroverted personal charisma and charm, this makes them appear normal and even to be ideal leaders.
The destabilization of modern corporations likely lead to the ascendancy of the corporate psychopath:
However, once corporate takeovers and mergers started to become commonplace and the resultant corporate changes started to accelerate, exacerbated by both globalisation and a rapidly changing technological environment, then corporate stability began to disintegrate. Jobs for life disappeared and not surprisingly employees’ commitment to their employers also lessened accordingly. Job switching first became acceptable and then even became common and employees increasingly found themselves working for unfamiliar organisations and with other people that they did not really know very well.The Harms Caused by Corporate Psychopaths as Executives
Rapid movements in key personnel between corporations compared to the relatively slower movements in organisational productivity and success made it increasingly difficult to identify corporate success with any particular manager. Failures were not noticed until too late and the offending managers had already moved on to better positions elsewhere. Successes could equally be claimed by those who had nothing to do with them. Success could thus be claimed by those with the loudest voice, the most influence and the best political skills. Corporate Psychopaths have these skills in abundance and use them with ruthless and calculated efficiency. In this way, the whole corporate and employment environment changed from one that would hold the Corporate Psychopath in check to one where they could flourish and advance relatively unopposed.
Thus, Boddy hypothesized the rise of management by corporate psychopaths lead directly to the global financial crisis or great recession:
As evidence of this, senior level remuneration and reward started to increase more and more rapidly and beyond all proportion to shop floor incomes and a culture of greed unfettered by conscience developed.
Corporate Psychopaths are ideally situated to prey on such an environment and corporate fraud, financial misrepresentation, greed and misbehaviour went through the roof, bringing down huge companies and culminating in the Global Financial Crisis that we are now in.What Could be Next
Writing in 2005, this author commentating on Corporate Psychopaths predicted that the rise of Corporate Psychopaths was a recipe for corporate and societal disaster. This disaster has now happened and is still happening.
Worse, if this hypothesis is true, as long as it is not addressed, things will get worse:
The very same Corporate Psychopaths, who probably caused the crisis by their self-seeking greed and avarice, are now advising governments on how to get out of the crisis. That this involves paying themselves vast bonuses in the midst of financial hardship for many millions of others, is symptomatic of the problem. Further, if the Corporate Psychopaths Theory of the Global Financial Crisis is correct then we are now far from the end of the crisis. Indeed, it is only the end of the beginning.Some Agreement
The plausible theory that corporate psychopaths ascending to top management positions in finance caused the global financial crisis has been noticed by a few prominent financial pundits. Writing in Bloomberg, William D Cohan agreed with Boddy's suggestion that "anyone who makes decisions that affect significant numbers of other people, concerning issues of corporate social responsibility or toxic waste, for example, or concerning mass financial markets or mass employment, should be screened to make sure that they are, at the very least, not psychopaths and at most are actually people who care about others."
Brian Besham, writing in the Independent, suggested that Richard Fuld, former CEO of Lehman Brothers, whose bankruptcy kicked off public awareness of the global financial collapse, saying he wanted to eat the hearts of those selling his company's stock short (see this post), was a "terrifying" example of corporate executive psychopathy. Worse, Besham noted that he had discovered an case of an investment bank which "psychometric testing to recruit social psychopaths because their characteristics exactly suited them to senior corporate finance roles." It may be that corporate psychopaths are actively recruiting their fellows.
Implications for Health Care
This is chilling. It also unfortunately is highly relevant to health care. As we noted, most recently here, leaders of big finance firms, including those whose failures were most spectacular, now often sit on boards of trustees of hospitals, academic medical centers, medical schools, and their parent universities. Thus, the likelihood that a good proportion of the stewardship of our most prominent not-for-profit health care organizations may be in the hands of psychopaths is not negligible.
Furthermore, health care organizations have become as unstable and chaotic, in the way these terms were used by Boddy, as finance firms. This would suggest that their current nature would make it as easy for psychopaths to rise to positions of power in them as they may have in financial firms. In health care we certainly have seen the consequences he suggested were due to psychopathic managers, including
- intimidation (per Boddy, corporate psychopaths are "prepared to lie, bully and cheat and to disregard or cause harm to the welfare of others");
- self-interest ("pursuit of self-enrichment and self-aggrandizement") leading to outrageous executive compensation ("senior level remuneration and reward started to increase more and more rapidly and beyond all proportion to shop floor incomes")
- fraud and other crime ("corporate fraud, financial misrepresentation, greed and misbehaviour went through the roof,... ")
So as we noted in 2006, "a high prevalence of psychopathic managers could explain the prevalence of mismanagement, conflicts of interest, and corruption in the leadership of health care organizations that we have often discussed on Health Care Renewal."
Boddy's first suggestion to deal with the problem in finance was:
Measures exist to identify Corporate Psychopaths. Perhaps it is time to use them.
However, it is as hard to imagine top health care leaders willingly and honestly submitting to the use of instruments designed to identify psychopaths as it is to imagine finance leaders doing so. Furthermore, it is easy to imagine how corporate psychopaths in positions of leadership would ruthlessly deploy their legions of public relations personnel and lawyers to quash any challenge should the notion that they are so dominant gain any credibility.
However, if there is any significant prevalence of corporate psychopaths among the leaders of health care, woe will be unto us until we identify and remove them.
Just Say "No" to the Term "Anecdotes"; and HIT as a Medical Metadevice
A New Year's thought: there needs to be a push in healthcare for dropping of the word "anecdote" to describe case reports of health IT-related errors.
This word even appears in the late 2011 IOM report on HIT safety (PDF), e.g., the preface:
... We found that specific types of health IT can improve patient safety under the right conditions, but those conditions cannot be replicated easily and require continual effort to achieve. We tried to balance the findings in the literature with anecdotes from the field but came to the realization that the information needed for an objective analysis and assessment of the safety of health IT and its use was not available.
The "A" word needs to be dropped from the healthcare IT lexicon, since such reports from reliable sources are in fact incident reports purposed for risk management activities.
Incident reports do not need peer review for consideration for that purpose.
Of note, I do not believe the incident reports filed in hospitals when something awry occurs are labelled "anecdotes", either.
See the Aug. 2011 post "From a Senior Clinician Down Under: Anecdotes and Medicine, We are Actually Talking About Two Different Things" for more on this topic.
And on another vein, the issue of HIT being a medical device:
As the good State Rep. Marino of my home state of Pennsylvania and others oddly proffer - that 'certification' of health IT, having nothing to do with safety or usability, relieves HIT from being a device [1] - and as the IOM itself debates exactly what to call HIT and under what guidelines to regulate it, another term/category for HIT devices is needed.
In the spirit of the naming of the UMLS Metathesaurus, and in consideration of HIT's informational governance/orchestration of other medical devices and personnel (including the 'carbon units' known as clinicians and patients) -- I suggest the term "metadevice" for HIT.
Healthcare metadevices need their own specific regulation, apart from traditional medical devices.
-- SS
Note:
[1] As in line 21- 24 on page 6 of the "Safeguarding Access For Every Medicare Patient Act" Bill (PDF) that I wrote about here. The Bill states: "CLARIFICATION OF AUTHORITY. Certified EHR’s shall not be considered a device for purposes of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act."
(This proposal, of course, raises the question of whether Rep. Marino believes non-certified HIT shall be considered a medical device, a topic for another time.)
SELF INFLICTED DAMAGE
SELF INFLICTED DAMAGE
The American Psychiatric Association (APA) is in the news again for bad public relations: worse than bad, actually – appalling. Locked in a bunker mentality, they have moved to stifle advance criticism of their flagship initiative, DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition), which is a work in progress. Lawyers for the APA have threatened the owner of a UK blog that served as a discussion forum for issues affected by DSM-5 and other, international psychiatric classifications. The blog, named dsm5watch was considered authoritative and accurate. If you go to this site now you will find that it has been deleted.
As recounted this week by Allen Frances, MD, the editor of the last published DSM edition, the blog’s owner, Suzy Chapman, told him, ”On December 22, I was stunned to receive two emails from the Licensing and Permissions department of American Psychiatric Publishing, claiming that the domain name my site operates under was infringing upon the DSM 5 trademark in violation of United States Trademark Law and that my unauthorized actions may subject me to contributory infringement liability including increased damages for willful infringement. I was told to cease and desist immediately all use of the DSM 5 mark and to provide documentation within ten days confirming I had done so."
"Given my limited resources compared with APA's deep pockets, I had no choice but to comply and was forced to change my site's domain name to dxrevisionwatch. Hits to the new site have plummeted dramatically and it will take months for traffic to recover - just at the time when crucial DSM 5 decisions are being made."
In effect, the APA, acting not through its medical or scientific officers but through its wholly owned publishing house, has attempted a SLAPP maneuver. SLAPP is the acronym for strategic lawsuit against public participation. What kind of leadership does this signal in a major professional organization?
The normal remit of professional medical societies is stewardship of professional values and ethics. That is why these societies are accorded deference and respect on matters of clinical guidelines, health policy and public education. Even when, like the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences, they tolerate compromised members, they can generally hope to retain the public trust.
One reason for this assurance is that they are expected as a matter of professional duty to avoid conflicts of interest – personal and financial. The APA, however, has an enormous conflict in this case: it counts on millions of dollars in revenue from sales of the DSM volumes and it is under siege currently for perceived scientific and clinical weaknesses of the DSM-5 that is due to be released next year. Professional criticism is running so high that over 10,000 interested parties have signed a petition for the APA to reconsider planned changes. There is even talk of abandoning DSM-5 in favor of the ICD system (International Classification of Diseases), which is a WHO initiative.
The APA doesn’t own psychiatric classification and diagnostic criteria. When the field allows the APA to take the initiative for revisions of the DSM, it is with the understanding that the work will be conducted in the public interest rather than in the commercial interest of the APA itself, which is said to derive over $5 million annually in profits from DSM sales. The public interest and the public trust are served by transparency and open discussion, not by contrived SLAPP threats.
It is bad enough that the APA resorts to this legal artifice to stifle public discussion. When they do it through their lawyers and business entities rather than through their medical and scientific officers, they sink to a lower level yet. The parallels with corporate sleaze that we have discussed so often on this blog are obvious. For shame.
The American Psychiatric Association (APA) is in the news again for bad public relations: worse than bad, actually – appalling. Locked in a bunker mentality, they have moved to stifle advance criticism of their flagship initiative, DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition), which is a work in progress. Lawyers for the APA have threatened the owner of a UK blog that served as a discussion forum for issues affected by DSM-5 and other, international psychiatric classifications. The blog, named dsm5watch was considered authoritative and accurate. If you go to this site now you will find that it has been deleted.
As recounted this week by Allen Frances, MD, the editor of the last published DSM edition, the blog’s owner, Suzy Chapman, told him, ”On December 22, I was stunned to receive two emails from the Licensing and Permissions department of American Psychiatric Publishing, claiming that the domain name my site operates under was infringing upon the DSM 5 trademark in violation of United States Trademark Law and that my unauthorized actions may subject me to contributory infringement liability including increased damages for willful infringement. I was told to cease and desist immediately all use of the DSM 5 mark and to provide documentation within ten days confirming I had done so."
"Given my limited resources compared with APA's deep pockets, I had no choice but to comply and was forced to change my site's domain name to dxrevisionwatch. Hits to the new site have plummeted dramatically and it will take months for traffic to recover - just at the time when crucial DSM 5 decisions are being made."
In effect, the APA, acting not through its medical or scientific officers but through its wholly owned publishing house, has attempted a SLAPP maneuver. SLAPP is the acronym for strategic lawsuit against public participation. What kind of leadership does this signal in a major professional organization?
The normal remit of professional medical societies is stewardship of professional values and ethics. That is why these societies are accorded deference and respect on matters of clinical guidelines, health policy and public education. Even when, like the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences, they tolerate compromised members, they can generally hope to retain the public trust.
One reason for this assurance is that they are expected as a matter of professional duty to avoid conflicts of interest – personal and financial. The APA, however, has an enormous conflict in this case: it counts on millions of dollars in revenue from sales of the DSM volumes and it is under siege currently for perceived scientific and clinical weaknesses of the DSM-5 that is due to be released next year. Professional criticism is running so high that over 10,000 interested parties have signed a petition for the APA to reconsider planned changes. There is even talk of abandoning DSM-5 in favor of the ICD system (International Classification of Diseases), which is a WHO initiative.
The APA doesn’t own psychiatric classification and diagnostic criteria. When the field allows the APA to take the initiative for revisions of the DSM, it is with the understanding that the work will be conducted in the public interest rather than in the commercial interest of the APA itself, which is said to derive over $5 million annually in profits from DSM sales. The public interest and the public trust are served by transparency and open discussion, not by contrived SLAPP threats.
It is bad enough that the APA resorts to this legal artifice to stifle public discussion. When they do it through their lawyers and business entities rather than through their medical and scientific officers, they sink to a lower level yet. The parallels with corporate sleaze that we have discussed so often on this blog are obvious. For shame.
New York - Presbyterian Hospital Trustee Advocated Novel Cardiac Procedure - "Reach In, Rip Out Their Heart, and Eat It Before They Die"
The dominant theme of Health Care Renewal has been how problems with the leadership of health care organizations have lead to our current state of health care dysfunction. We have discussed examples of ill-informed, mission-hostile leadership rewarded with excess compensation, exhibiting impunity in the face of alleged misbehavior, and at times descending into corruption. The cause of these problems is doubtless multi factorial. However, one possible cause is that rather than exercise stewardship and hold leadership accountable, those in charge of governance of health care organizations, that is, boards of directors or trustees, have instead infected the organizations with the amoral culture now dominant in much of the business world, especially finance. We have discussed, most recently here and here, how the boards of health care corporations often include heavy representation of leaders of finance, including many of those who seemed responsible for the global financial collapse, great recession, or whatever we will end up calling it.
I recently stumbled upon a particularly graphic example of the sort of predatory culture that now exists on the boards of health care organizations. (More on how I did so later.) Below is an embedded YouTube video of a speech made by a current Trustee of New York - Presbyterian Hospital (who has been on the board since 2007). He is Richard Fuld, the former CEO of Lehman Brothers, whose continuing role on the hospital board, despite his failed leadership of one of the financial firms whose bankruptcy ushered in the global financial collapse, we discussed first here.
Just to underline it once more, Mr Fuld, referring to short sellers of his company's stock, said he "what I really want to do is I want to reach in, rip out their heart, and eat it before they die."
Can there be a more stark reminder of what has gone wrong with the governance of health care? Can anyone watch this video and argue that Mr Fuld ought to be on the board of a hospital system? Why is he still on the board in January, 2012, when this video was released in October, 2011?
While I suspect not many other hospital system board members have been videographed displaying equally brutal sentiments, there are likely others with similarly barbaric tendencies.
So, on a more positive note.... The boards of hospitals, hospital systems, medical schools, and their parent universities ought to be populated with people who take their stewardship roles seriously. They ought to be people who understand, agree with, and support the organizations' mission, and their dedication to patient care and teaching. They ought to understand what good leadership of health care organizations entail. Needless to say, they ought to be of good character and above any ethical reproach. In short, they ought to be the opposite of the sort of person displayed in the video above.
It should now be obvious that grievous problems with the leadership and governance of health care organizations are principle causes of the dysfunction in our health care system. True health care reform will require wholesale changes in health care leadership and governance.
PS - In case the video above seems too short on context, see the one below:
I recently stumbled upon a particularly graphic example of the sort of predatory culture that now exists on the boards of health care organizations. (More on how I did so later.) Below is an embedded YouTube video of a speech made by a current Trustee of New York - Presbyterian Hospital (who has been on the board since 2007). He is Richard Fuld, the former CEO of Lehman Brothers, whose continuing role on the hospital board, despite his failed leadership of one of the financial firms whose bankruptcy ushered in the global financial collapse, we discussed first here.
Just to underline it once more, Mr Fuld, referring to short sellers of his company's stock, said he "what I really want to do is I want to reach in, rip out their heart, and eat it before they die."
Can there be a more stark reminder of what has gone wrong with the governance of health care? Can anyone watch this video and argue that Mr Fuld ought to be on the board of a hospital system? Why is he still on the board in January, 2012, when this video was released in October, 2011?
While I suspect not many other hospital system board members have been videographed displaying equally brutal sentiments, there are likely others with similarly barbaric tendencies.
So, on a more positive note.... The boards of hospitals, hospital systems, medical schools, and their parent universities ought to be populated with people who take their stewardship roles seriously. They ought to be people who understand, agree with, and support the organizations' mission, and their dedication to patient care and teaching. They ought to understand what good leadership of health care organizations entail. Needless to say, they ought to be of good character and above any ethical reproach. In short, they ought to be the opposite of the sort of person displayed in the video above.
It should now be obvious that grievous problems with the leadership and governance of health care organizations are principle causes of the dysfunction in our health care system. True health care reform will require wholesale changes in health care leadership and governance.
PS - In case the video above seems too short on context, see the one below:
High-Fat Diets, Obesity and Brain Damage
Many of you have probably heard the news this week:
High-fat diet may damage the brain
Eating a high-fat diet may rapidly injure brain cells
High fat diet injures the brain
Brain injury from high-fat foods
Your brain cells are exploding with every bite of butter! Just kidding. The study in question is titled "Obesity is Associated with Hypothalamic Injury in Rodents and Humans", by Dr. Josh Thaler and colleagues, with my mentor Dr. Mike Schwartz as senior author (1). We collaborated with the labs of Drs. Tamas Horvath and Matthias Tschop. I'm fourth author on the paper, so let me explain what we found and why it's important.
The Questions
Among the many questions that interest obesity researchers, two stand out:
The Findings
Read more »
High-fat diet may damage the brain
Eating a high-fat diet may rapidly injure brain cells
High fat diet injures the brain
Brain injury from high-fat foods
Your brain cells are exploding with every bite of butter! Just kidding. The study in question is titled "Obesity is Associated with Hypothalamic Injury in Rodents and Humans", by Dr. Josh Thaler and colleagues, with my mentor Dr. Mike Schwartz as senior author (1). We collaborated with the labs of Drs. Tamas Horvath and Matthias Tschop. I'm fourth author on the paper, so let me explain what we found and why it's important.
The Questions
Among the many questions that interest obesity researchers, two stand out:
- What causes obesity?
- Once obesity is established, why is it so difficult to treat?
The Findings
Read more »
High-Fat Diets, Obesity and Brain Damage
Many of you have probably heard the news this week:
High-fat diet may damage the brain
Eating a high-fat diet may rapidly injure brain cells
High fat diet injures the brain
Brain injury from high-fat foods
Your brain cells are exploding with every bite of butter! Just kidding. The study in question is titled "Obesity is Associated with Hypothalamic Injury in Rodents and Humans", by Dr. Josh Thaler and colleagues, with my mentor Dr. Mike Schwartz as senior author (1). We collaborated with the labs of Drs. Tamas Horvath and Matthias Tschop. I'm fourth author on the paper, so let me explain what we found and why it's important.
The Questions
Among the many questions that interest obesity researchers, two stand out:
The Findings
Read more »
High-fat diet may damage the brain
Eating a high-fat diet may rapidly injure brain cells
High fat diet injures the brain
Brain injury from high-fat foods
Your brain cells are exploding with every bite of butter! Just kidding. The study in question is titled "Obesity is Associated with Hypothalamic Injury in Rodents and Humans", by Dr. Josh Thaler and colleagues, with my mentor Dr. Mike Schwartz as senior author (1). We collaborated with the labs of Drs. Tamas Horvath and Matthias Tschop. I'm fourth author on the paper, so let me explain what we found and why it's important.
The Questions
Among the many questions that interest obesity researchers, two stand out:
- What causes obesity?
- Once obesity is established, why is it so difficult to treat?
The Findings
Read more »
Junk Free January
Last year, Matt Lentzner organized a project called Gluten Free January, in which 546 people from around the world gave up gluten for one month. The results were striking: a surprisingly large proportion of participants lost weight, experienced improved energy, better digestion and other benefits (1, 2). This January, Lentzner organized a similar project called Junk Free January. Participants can choose between four different diet styles:
If you've been waiting for an excuse to improve your diet, why not join Junk Free January?
- Gluten free
- Seed oil free (soybean, sunflower, corn oil, etc.)
- Sugar free
- Gluten, seed oil and sugar free
If you've been waiting for an excuse to improve your diet, why not join Junk Free January?
Junk Free January
Last year, Matt Lentzner organized a project called Gluten Free January, in which 546 people from around the world gave up gluten for one month. The results were striking: a surprisingly large proportion of participants lost weight, experienced improved energy, better digestion and other benefits (1, 2). This January, Lentzner organized a similar project called Junk Free January. Participants can choose between four different diet styles:
If you've been waiting for an excuse to improve your diet, why not join Junk Free January?
- Gluten free
- Seed oil free (soybean, sunflower, corn oil, etc.)
- Sugar free
- Gluten, seed oil and sugar free
If you've been waiting for an excuse to improve your diet, why not join Junk Free January?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)