Obesity Medication Lorcaserin Neutral For Cardiovascular Events

Lorcaserin (trade name Belviq) is an obesity medication that is not available in Canada, but is used in USA and other countries as a treatment of obesity.  A recent study evaluated the cardiovascular safety of lorcaserin in people with obesity or overweight, with either established cardiovascular (CV) disease, or multiple cardiovascular risk factors but without established CV disease. (skip to BOTTOM LINE below as to why this study is important)

In the study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, 12,000 people were randomized to receive either lorcaserin or placebo for a median of 3.3 years.  Seventy-five percent of participants had established cardiovascular disease. At one year, people on lorcaserin lost -4.2kg, compared to -1.4kg in the placebo group.   At 3.3 years, there was no difference in the rate of cardiovascular events (a composite of cardiovascular death + nonfatal heart attack + nonfatal stroke) between groups, at 2.0% per year on lorcaserin vs 2.1% per year on placebo.

In people who had diabetes at the start of the study (57% of the total population), diabetes control was improved slightly at 1 year (-0.3% greater reduction in A1C than placebo).  Amongst those with prediabetes at the start, the proportion of people on lorcaserin who went on to develop type 2 diabetes was slightly lower (3.1% per year) than those on placebo (3.8% per year).

The rate of discontinuation of study medication was similar between the two groups, at 12.0% per year in the lorcaserin group vs 12.7% in the placebo group.  In the lorcaserin group, the most common side effects leading to stopping treatment were known potential side effects of dizziness, fatigue, headache, diarrhea, and nausea.

Echocardiogram (heart ultrasound) was performed in a subset of 3270 study participants, because an related obesity medication previously available (fentermine-phenfluramine or Fen-Phen) was found to have an adverse effect on heart valves.  After a year of treatment, they found no statistically significant difference in heart valve problems between the two groups, with 23 cases of new onset, mild aortic valve insufficiency on lorcaserin vs 15 on placebo, and 13 cases of pulmonary hypertension on lorcaserin vs 8 on placebo.

So what's the BOTTOM LINE?    This is the first time that the cardiovascular safety of an obesity medication has been rigorously tested and proven to be safe. Some previously available obesity medications have been pulled from most markets due to safety concerns (eg sibutramine due to increased cardiovascular events in people with CV disease, rimonabant due to psychiatric side effects).

Regarding the three currently available obesity medications in Canada:

• Orlistat (Xenical) has not been tested in this fashion 
• Liraglutide as a diabetes treatment (Victoza 1.8mg) has been shown to reduce cardiovascular events and death in people with type 2 diabetes.  Though liraglutide as an obesity treatment (Saxenda 3.0mg) has not been specifically studied for CV safety, these data are accepted by regulatory agencies as reassurance for CV safety in the lower risk population of people with obesity without diabetes
• Naltrexone/bupropion (Contrave) had a study started but stopped part way through because of a release of interim results that was felt to compromise the integrity of the study. A new trial is now in the planning stages. 

Looking very forward to more safety outcome data in this area.


Disclaimer: I receive honoraria as a continuing medical education speaker and consultant from the makers of liraglutide (Novo Nordisk) and naltrexone/bupropion (Valeant).

Follow me on twitter! @drsuepedersen

www.drsue.ca © 2018

Read more...

Unprecedented Weight Loss With Semaglutide

Semaglutide is a medication that is used to treat type 2 diabetes (trade name Ozempic).  Not only does it improve blood sugars more than any other medication that it has been compared to (so far) in the diabetes world, but it is also very effective to help with weight loss.  Thus, semaglutide is currently under study as a medication to treat obesity in people without diabetes.

We have now completed the first study of semaglutide as an obesity treatment.  The study, published in The Lancet, in which I was an investigator and also an author of this paper, randomized 957 people to receive various doses of once daily semaglutide, with liraglutide 3mg and placebo as controls. (Liraglutide 3mg is also called Saxenda, which is a medication already in use for treatment of obesity.)

At 1 year, 93% of patients were retained in the trial, which is much better than most studies of weight loss medication, which tend to have much less follow up data. Overall, 81% of patients completed the full year of treatment. A higher percent of the placebo group (24%) stopped treatment than did those on semaglutide (18%).

The weight loss after one year on semaglutide was impressive, ranging from -6.0% weight loss on the lowest tested dose of semaglutide (0.05mg per day) to an impressive -13.8% weight loss on the highest dose tested (0.4mg per day), compared to -2.3% weight loss on placebo and -7.8% on liraglutide 3mg per day.

The weight loss had not plateaued by one year on the highest doses of semaglutide, suggesting that if the study had been longer than a year, even more weight loss may have been seen.

In terms of side effects, gastrointestinal were most common (e.g. nausea), in keeping with what we already know about this class of medication; these side effects increased with higher doses of semaglutide, and were a little higher on the highest semaglutide dose than on liraglutide 3mg.  There was also a higher risk of gallbladder side effects (e.g. gallstones), which was a little more common on the highest dose of semaglutide compared to placebo.

The weight loss seen in this study is more than has been seen with any other existing weight loss medication.  The next phase of studies of semaglutide for weight loss is underway.


Disclaimer: I was a principal investigator in this research trial and an author of the paper discussed. I am/have been involved in other trials of semaglutide and liraglutide as an obesity treatment.  I receive honoraria as a continuing medical education speaker and consultant from the makers of semaglutide and liraglutide (Novo Nordisk). 

Follow me on twitter! @drsuepedersen

www.drsue.ca © 2018

Read more...

Could Intermittent Fasting Benefit Our Metabolism?

(this figure is from the study discussed below)

Intermittent fasting (IF) is a popular dietary strategy these days amongst people who are looking to shed pounds.  While IF has not been shown to be any better than daily calorie restriction for weight loss, many have speculated that IF may improve cardiometabolic health, with conflicting data as to whether this is actually the case.

A new study suggests that IF at the right time of day may actually improve metabolic health.

The study was small but elegant - 8 men with pre diabetes, who were assigned to intermittently fast using a new technique called 'time restricted feeding' by eating during only 6 hours per day (with dinner before 3pm), or to eat over a more typical 12 hour period each day.  They followed this eating pattern for 5 weeks, and later crossed over to the opposite eating assignment for another 5 weeks.
All meals were supervised, and were geared towards keeping body weight the same (i.e. this was not a weight loss study).

They found that eating only 6 hours per day resulted in improved insulin sensitivity, blood pressure, appetite, and markers of oxidative stress.

How does this work?  Well, there is a hypothesis that after 12 hours or more without food, our bodies flip a 'metabolic switch' of sorts, turning to fat as a fuel source once liver glycogen (sugar) stores have run out (there is an interesting review from the journal Obesity on this).

Interestingly, the time of day when food is eaten seems to be important - while this study showed a metabolic benefit to restricting food intake to 6 hours earlier in the day, other studies restricting food intake to the late afternoon or evening have shown either no benefit or worsening of metabolic parameters (these studies are referenced in the article).  This may be because eating earlier in the day fits better with our circadian rhythm of hormones, as our insulin sensitivity, and also the calories we burn while digesting food are higher in the morning.

We often recommend: "Eat breakfast like a king, lunch like a prince, and dinner like a pauper."  While this principle was founded on the idea of avoiding overeating in the evening due to not eating enough during the day, it seems that there may be a physiologic basis for eating earlier in the day to promote metabolic health.

Perhaps our new slogan should be: Eat breakfast like a king, lunch like a prince... and have your dinner early.

Stay tuned to www.drsue.ca for discussion of a brand new study on intermittent fasting in people with type 2 diabetes, coming soon!

Follow me on twitter! @drsuepedersen

www.drsue.ca © 2018

Read more...

Should Fertility Clinics Deny Treatment To Women With Obesity?

As blogged previously, due to concerns about poor clinical outcomes and maternal/fetal risks, many fertility clinics in Canada impose an upper body mass index (BMI) cutoff of about 35-40 kg/m2, above which they will not offer fertility treatments.  Is this the right thing to do?

The new Canadian Clinical Practice Guideline for the delivery of fertility care to women with obesity reviews the evidence on this very controversial topic.

Based on survey studies of fertility clinics, whether a BMI cutoff is used, and what BMI cutoff is used if so, is highly variable and not based on any specific or clear evidence.  Most clinics that have an upper BMI cutoff beyond which they will not offer fertility treatments cite anesthesia risk as the main reason for the cutoff.

Not only are BMI cutoffs arbitrary and without consensus, getting below the BMI cutoff goals may be very difficult for many women with obesity to achieve.  Furthermore, one study suggested that over half of the fertility clinics with a BMI cutoff did not offer any weight loss instructions or guidance to their patients - sounds to me like telling a person to row a boat but not showing them how to use the oars.

Denying fertility care to women with obesity is highly stigmatizing and discriminatory, and can worsen feelings of low self esteem, social isolation, anxiety, and depression. Denying older women fertility care until they have lost weight may cost them valuable time and any chance of pregnancy.

There is no doubt that there are risks of obesity to both the mother and the unborn child, and weight loss should be encouraged and supported.  However, as the guidelines point out, the risk of obstetrical obesity-related complications does not clearly exceed the risk of complications with other pre-existing medical conditions like hypertension, diabetes, or epilepsy. In addition, obesity related health status is a better predictor of pregnancy with fertility treatment than BMI, and also a better predictor of overall health outcomes in general, so why is there so much focus on the numbers on the scale in the first place?

As the Guideline states:

In the absence of simple, safe, and effective strategies that reliably help patients with obesity lose weight in a timely fashion, it is difficult to advocate for a universal BMI cut-off in place of careful counselling, screening for metabolic abnormalities and informed consent. 

Programs that impose BMI cut-offs should offer resources for patients to help them lose weight, and should inform patients about both the risks and benefits of delaying fertility treatment.

Follow me on twitter! @drsuepedersen

www.drsue.ca © 2018

Read more...

Fertility Care For Women With Obesity

Obesity has a profound impact on reproductive health from many perspectives. We now have a brand new Canadian Clinical Practice Guideline which provides us evidence based recommendations for fertility care for women with obesity.

The Guideline, published in the Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of Canada, provides 21 key recommendations that answer the following questions (highlights discussed here - please see the full article for details):


What is the impact of obesity on female fertility?

Women with obesity have a risk of infertility due to a lack of ovulation that is more than twice that of women without obesity.   Even if ovulating, the physiologic ability to reproduce is still reduced.


What is the impact of obesity on MALE fertility?

While men with obesity have lower testosterone levels, it is unclear whether obesity has an impact on sperm quality and semen parameters. Men with obesity do have a higher risk of erectile dysfunction, which may be improved with weight loss.


What is the impact of female obesity on fertility treatments?

There is a lower oocyte (egg) yield with IVF. Implantation, pregnancy and live birth rates decline with increasing severity of obesity.  Live birth rates decline by 0.3-0.4% for every 1 increase in BMI over 25 kg/m2.


What is the impact of obesity on mum's health risk in pregnancy?

There is an increased risk of gestational diabetes, high blood pressure, prolonged labor, need for instrument assistance for delivery, shoulder dystocia, and C-section.   These risk increase with higher BMI.


What is the impact of obesity on baby's risk during pregnancy?

The risk of having a large baby or a baby with a congenital abnormality is increased.


What screening tests are appropriate for women with obesity seeking fertility care?

Screening should include testing for diabetes, cholesterol levels, high blood pressure, cardiovascular disease, breast cancer, and endometrial cancer.   These screenings should be done before starting fertility treatment.


What are the most effective treatments to help infertile women with obesity lose weight?

Modest weight reductions (5-10%) improve metabolic risk. Help should be offered for lifestyle modifications.  Medications to treat obesity, or bariatric surgery, should be considered for those who do not have success with lifestyle changes.

Women in their late reproductive years who have had bariatric surgery should be advised that the possible benefits of waiting for 1-2 years after surgery to conceive should be balanced against the decline in fertility related to advancing age. 

Bariatric surgery lowers the risk for large babies, gestational diabetes and hypertension, but increases risk for small babies.


Is there data demonstrating a difference in fertility outcomes for women who lose weight before pregnancy, compared to women who proceed directly to fertility treatment?

Yes - weight loss improves spontaneous fertility rates.


Should there be a national BMI cutoff for access to fertility care?

In Canada and around the world, concerns about poor clinical outcomes and maternal/fetal risks have resulted in many fertility clinic medical directors imposing an upper BMI cutoff to their program, above which they will not offer fertility treatments.  Stay tuned on this one - I am going to dedicate a whole blog post to discuss this very important and hotly debated topic.

Follow me on twitter! @drsuepedersen

www.drsue.ca © 2018

Read more...

How Weight Loss Affects Different Body Tissues, Fat Genes, And Inflammation

(this is fat tissue under a microscope)

We know that a 5-10% weight loss improves many health conditions associated with obesity.  However, it is very interesting to note that some health issues like blood sugar starts to improve with as little as 2-3% weight loss, whereas other health issues like sleep apnea require closer to 10% weight loss before we start to see improvements.  Why is this?


An eloquent study helps us to understand how different tissues in our body respond to weight loss.  This was a randomized controlled clinical trial, assigning 40 patients to a target 0%, 5%, 10%, or 15% weight loss, and then conducted an array of testing to understand the metabolic changes that occur at each of these degrees of weight loss.  Testing was extensive and included assessment of body composition, 24h blood pressure monitors, blood testing for metabolic parameters and inflammatory markers, tests of organ-specific insulin sensitivity, and even biopsies of fat tissue. Participants were weight stable for at least 3 weeks before testing was conducted.

Key findings were truly fascinating.

After a 5% percent weight loss:

• There was a decrease blood sugar, insulin levels, triglycerides, ALT (liver test)
• systolic blood pressure decreased (the top number), but not diastolic (bottom number)
• NO effect on good cholesterol (HDL), bad cholesterol (LDL), glucose tolerance test (OGTT)
• improvement in insulin sensitivity in fat, liver, skeletal muscle 
• improvement in beta cell function (the cells in the pancreas that make insulin)

After 11% weight loss: (the 10% group ended up losing 11%)

• continued reduction in insulin and triglycerides 
• altered gene expression in subcutaneous fat tissue - including genes involved in fat synthesis, cholesterol flux, and inflammation
• no additional benefit to insulin sensitivity in fat tissue or liver
• additional improvement in insulin sensitivity in skeletal muscle
• additional improvement in beta cell function

After 16% weight loss: (the 15% group ended up losing 16%)

• reduction in inflammatory markers (plasma free fatty acids, CRP)
• more marked altered gene expression in subcutaneous fat tissue - including genes involved in fat synthesis, cholesterol flux, and inflammation
• continued reduction in insulin and triglycerides
• no additional benefit to insulin sensitivity in fat tissue or liver
• additional improvement in insulin sensitivity in skeletal muscle
• additional improvement in beta cell function

So what is the BOTTOM LINE from this (rather complicated) study?   

1. A 5% weight loss has important benefits to our health, primarily related to a decrease in our body's resistance to insulin.  

2. Further weight loss continues to improve our body's insulin resistance (particularly in muscle), with additional improvements in our metabolic health.  

3.  At 11% weight loss, we start to see changes in how our fat tissue expresses genes, in favour of better health.

4.  At 16% weight loss, there is a decrease in inflammation in our bodies, and a more marked change in fat tissue gene expression.

While a smaller degree of weight loss (even just 2-3% based on other studies) has a very important impact on our metabolic health, the changes in inflammation and fat gene expression seen at over 10% weight loss may well be what it takes to see benefits in other medical conditions associated with obesity, such as obstructive sleep apnea and arthritis.

Follow me on twitter! @drsuepedersen

www.drsue.ca © 2018

Read more...

How Your Diet Influences Where You Lose Fat

In weight management, our goal is to improve overall health.  In a perfect world, it would be preferable if we could melt away the fat around and inside the internal organs (called 'visceral fat') rather than the fat under the skin, as it is this visceral fat that contributes most to health complications of obesity such as diabetes, high blood pressure, and metabolic syndrome.

A recent study suggests that what we eat actually can help us to target this visceral fat.

The CENTRAL study, published in the journal Circulation, randomized 278 sedentary adults with either abdominal obesity or high cholesterol to follow either the Mediterranean diet versus a low fat diet for 18 months.  Six months into the trial, participants were also randomized to follow an exercise program or not. They used MRI scans to evaluate fat under the skin, fat around the organs, fat in the liver, pancreas, and even around the heart.

At the end of the 18 month study, weight loss was the same between all four groups (Mediterranean vs low fat diets, with or without exercise) at -3.2%.   However, where fat was lost from, and how this influenced health, was different between groups:

• People on the Mediterranean diet lost more fat from the liver, pancreas, and around the heart. 
• Exercise with either diet had a greater effect on reducing visceral fat. 

Whether or not total body weight was lost: 

• Losing visceral fat and/or liver fat improved cholesterol.
• Losing fat deep under the skin improved insulin sensitivity.
• Losing fat just under the skin had no effect on health and reduced levels of leptin (a hormone that tells our brains that we feel full). 

The findings that the Mediterranean diet preferentially reduces the more dangerous visceral fat may explain why it is the only diet that has been convincingly found to prevent cardiovascular events.  

These results also show us that it's not about numbers on the scale, as this does not reflect the important changes going on with fat deposit patterns inside. 

Follow me on twitter! @drsuepedersen

www.drsue.ca © 2018

Read more...

Why Short Term Weight Gain Can Be Easier to Lose Than Long Term Weight

No weight gained is easy to lose, but - have you ever wonder how Hollywood's actors can gain weight for a movie role, and the next thing you know, they are back at their usual weight for their next photo shoot?  While one may think that it’s simply the superstar access to personal chefs and trainers that gets actors back in shape, there is actually a physiologic basis that can make it less difficult to shed a quick/temporary/intentional weight gain than excess weight that has been present for the long term.

As discussed in a recent Scientific Statement on Obesity Pathogenesis by the Endocrine Society, obesity is associated with inflammation in various tissues, including muscle, fat tissue, vascular system, and liver, and this inflammation appears to be a consequence of chronic obesity.    There is also inflammation in the hunger/fullness centre of the brain, called the hypothalamus.

For a person who has been struggling with weight long term,  inflammation in these tissues causes maladaptive changes in those tissues that make them more resistant to weight loss.    It takes time for this inflammation to develop, so for a person who has had a fairly acute weight gain, it may be easier to drop pounds because they don't have this inflammation working against them.

So then you may wonder - why do some people seem to lose quickly gained weight more easily than others? (e.g. after pregnancy)?

Well, the story of the hunger/fullness centre in the brain is a little more complex.  It turns out that this inflammation may not only be a consequence of long term obesity, but may actually be present in some people before obesity develops.   Some animal studies suggest that eating a high fat diet triggers these inflammatory changes, damaging the neurons in the hypothalamus, which may then result in a disruption of sensations of hunger/fullness, lead to weight gain, plus make it harder to lose it again.

In other words, people who struggle to lose weight after a fairly quick/new weight gain may have inflammation in their hunger/fullness centre that was there before the weight gain, thus making them not only more prone to weight gain, but also making it harder to lose weight than the person without the inflammation. 

Follow me on twitter! @drsuepedersen

www.drsue.ca © 2018

Read more...

How Do Our Gut Bacteria Contribute To Obesity... And Can We Treat Them?

As blogged previously, we are learning that the bacteria we carry in our intestines (called the gut microbiota) have a role in obesity.  While we still seem to have more questions than answers on this topic, a fascinating review was just published, discussing some very interesting perspectives on this topic.  Here are some key points:

1.  We know there is an association between certain types of gut bacteria and obesity.  However, which is the 'chicken' and which is the 'egg', so to speak, is not clear, and the answer may be both.  In other words, there is evidence that certain types of gut bacteria contribute to the development of obesity, while others are protective.   There is also evidence that developing obesity can change the gut bacteria in favour of those that further contribute to obesity.


2.  Several ways that gut bacteria can contribute to obesity are identified:

• some gut bugs are better at helping us extract calories from food by fermenting otherwise indigestible fibers
• gut bacteria can influence permeability (leakiness) of the gut lining, allowing bacterial products into the bloodstream that can trigger an obesity-promoting low grade inflammatory response 
• short chain fatty acids produced by gut bugs may have an effect on the gut's barrier function, as well as inflammation and appetite
• (particularly fascinating in my opinion:) gut bacteria can have an impact on the genes we express in the hunger/fullness center in the hypothalamus in our brains through effects on inflammation and nerve signalling. 

3.  Can we treat obesity by changing our gut bacteria?

Knowing that some types of gut bacteria contribute to the development of obesity, the next natural question then is whether we can treat obesity by changing gut bacteria.

There is preliminary evidence that some strains of bacteria, provided as probiotic supplements, may be of benefit in weight management, but there is still much to learn in this area. There is also a lack of regulation in the supplement industry and a huge variation in what different probiotic supplements provide, so it can be hard to know what you're getting.  Some studies suggest that some fibres with prebiotic like effects may be beneficial as well.

Interestingly, metformin, which is an antidiabetic medication, has been shown to alter gut bugs in rodent studies in favour of a gut bacteria that is associated with less adiposity. (While metformin is considered to be weight neutral, some people do lose weight with it.) Also, metformin loses efficacy in animals when pretreated with antibiotics - could this be because of an alteration in gut bacteria? 

We also know that bariatric surgery changes the gut bug composition, and may play a role in the weight loss effect of surgery, by altering gut bugs in favour of those that are not so good at helping us harvest calories from food. 

Fecal transplant (yes, you read that correctly!) is also being considered as a possible treatment strategy for obesity.

Follow me on twitter! @drsuepedersen

www.drsue.ca © 2018

Read more...

Could Your Cholesterol Medication Cause Diabetes?

With any medication, there are benefits and risks that need to be considered.  Medications are generally recommended to a patient when the potential benefit of the medication is felt to be greater than the potential risks.

While it is extremely important for both doctors and patients to be well informed of potential side effects of medications, the media unfortunately loves to hype up side effects, often making it seem like the risks of taking a medication must outweigh any potential benefits.

Statins, a group of cholesterol medications, have taken a particular beating in the media over the years.   A colleague of mine approached me not too long ago saying that he was worried about his patients being afraid of taking their statin cholesterol medications because of fear of developing diabetes as a side effects, and asked me if I would publish a post on this topic.

An excellent review was published in The Lancet, which does a great job of addressing the question of benefit vs risk of statin therapy.

If 10,000 people are treated with statin therapy for 5 years: (with the example given of 40mg of atorvastatin (Lipitor) daily)

Benefits:

• if these 10,000 people had a past history of 'blocked arteries' (occlusive vascular disease) - eg prior heart attack or stroke: 1,000 would be saved from another heart attack or stroke
• if these 10,000 people had no history of vascular disease: 5,000 would be saved from a heart attack or stroke

Risks: 

• 50-100 will develop diabetes because of their statin
• 5-10 will have a bleeding type (hemorrhagic) stroke
• 5 will develop serious muscle complications

The risk of developing diabetes due to statin medications is higher with the more powerful statins (atorvastatin (Lipitor) and rosuvastatin (Crestor)), and with higher doses.  However, it is precisely these particular statins at the higher doses that have the biggest benefit to prevent heart attacks and strokes in people who have a past history of vascular disease.

People with risk factors for developing diabetes (eg, prediabetes, obesity) are at higher risk of statins tipping them up into diabetes range blood sugars. However, even if a person develops diabetes due to their statin, the health benefit in preventing heart attacks and strokes is much greater than the adverse effect of diabetes on their health, provided the diabetes is well managed.

For people who already have diabetes, statins also have a powerful benefit in preventing heart attacks and strokes, which is felt to far outweigh any small increase in blood sugars that may occur (and can be managed with adjustment to diabetes medication).

As to how statins increase the risk of developing diabetes, another study in The Lancet suggests that it may be related to the mechanism of statins to inhibit an enzyme called HMG CoA reductase, and may be genetically mediated.

Follow me on twitter! @drsuepedersen

www.drsue.ca © 2018

Read more...

Is Your Doctor NOT Talking Nutrition?

Everyone out there: I would like you to raise your hand if your doctor has NOT recently talked to you about good nutrition.  If you have your hand up, you are not alone - only about 12% of office visits include counselling about diet, despite there almost always being a good reason to talk about nutrition (eg diabetes, obesity, high blood pressure, and so forth).

Doctors out there - do you feel like you don't do a great job in counselling your patients on good nutrition?   If so, you are definitely not alone.

A recent Viewpoint paper published in the Journal of the American Medical Association uncovers some important issues that limit good nutritional counselling in the doctor's office.

Issues cited that limit doctors in providing nutritional counselling:

• Doctors receive very little nutritional training in medical school. 
• Limitations of time in an appointment. 
• Limitations in reimbursement (pay) for doctors to provide nutrition counselling.
• Frustration in trying to counsel on healthy food choices when our environment is so full of unhealthy choices.

Here are some easy steps that clinicians can take to improve nutritional counselling: 

1. Start the conversation - check out this easy to use tool, which contains eight quick and easy questions you can ask, with suggestions for reasonable changes that you could recommend. 

2.  Use the 5As of Obesity to help start a conversation when you note that your patient carries excess weight. 

3.  Focus on small steps - use the tool for suggestions. 

4.  Don't do it alone (if possible) - nutrition counselling and weight management require multidisciplinary support!  Engage any support you have to help provide your patient the help they need from various avenues: dietitian, nutritionist, psychologist, health/weight management classes - anything you can find to provide your patient with lots of health care provider time to guide them through their journey. 

Follow me on twitter! @drsuepedersen

www.drsue.ca © 2018

Read more...

Are Less People With Overweight Or Obesity Trying To Lose Weight?

As we look forward into a new year, it is also worthwhile to cast a glance backwards in time to understand how perceptions and attitudes towards weight loss may be changing, in the face of a landscape where obesity is on the rise.

One of the most read 2017 studies in the Journal of the American Medical Association used the American National Health And Nutritional Examination Survey (NHANES) data to assess whether there has been any change in the percentage of people with overweight or obesity (defined as BMI of 25 or greater) trying to lose weight during the time frames of 1988-1994, 1999-2004, and 2009-2014.

Upon analysis of the data from 27,350 people aged 20-59, they found that the percentage of people with overweight or obesity increased over time, from 52.7% in 1988-1994, to 65.6% in 2009-2014.

The percentage of people trying to lose weight decreased during the same period, from 55.7% in 1988-1994, to 49.2% in 2009-2014.

So why would the proportion of people trying to lose weight be decreasing, while obesity is actually on the rise? 

Well, we know that there has been a generational shift in perceptions of body weight norms - in other words, people with overweight are less likely to classify themselves as such as they did in years past, because overweight may be perceived more like the 'new normal'.  So if people who carry excess weight perceive themselves to be of a healthy weight, they would be less inclined to try to lose weight.

The authors of this study suggest that the length of time that people struggle with obesity may be a factor - the longer people live with obesity, the more frustrated they may be come with unsuccessful weight loss attempts and thus less likely to try to manage their weight.

I think the issues go even deeper - and likely have much to do with barriers to effective obesity care that we know exist.  The ACTION study in USA highlighted some of these important barriers that needed to be addressed.  Data collection for the ACTION study in Canada (for which I am an author and member of the Steering Committee) is now complete; we are currently working hard to put together and publish our results, to better understand barriers that exist, and how we as a country can overcome these barriers to better help Canadians with weight management.   

Follow me on twitter! @drsuepedersen

www.drsue.ca © 2018

Read more...