Latest news with #DietaryGuidelinesforAmericans
Yahoo
a day ago
- Health
- Yahoo
Doctors And Nutrition Pros Say That 'Fibermaxxing' Can Help With Weight Loss And Gut Health
A new viral social media trend has everyone "fibermaxxing." This basically means you're aiming to 'meet or exceed' the recommended daily fiber intake. Only 5 percent of people get enough fiber in their diets, according to experts, so eating more is a smart move. There's no doubt about it: Fiber has become the supplement queen these past few years. It makes sense, considering it can do everything from support your digestive health to help with weight management. And, as with any buzzy health trend, fiber has slowly made its way onto the TikTok algorithm, with users pointing out its health benefits and telling followers they're prioritizing high fiber foods. They've even come up with a new term, "fibermaxxing," to describe this intense fiber focus. But what is fibermaxxing, exactly, and is this a social media health trend something you should actually try? Women's Health asked some experts to weigh in, and they had a few thoughts on things to consider before diving in. Meet the experts: Sara K. Riehm, RD, is a dietitian at Orlando Health Center for Health Improvement; Mir Ali, MD, is a board certified general surgeon, bariatric surgeon and medical director of MemorialCare Surgical Weight Loss Center at Orange Coast Medical Center in Fountain Valley, CA. Technically, "fibermaxxing" isn't a medical term, but it's based on nutritional recommendations on how much fiber to eat in a day. The practice 'encourages maximizing fiber intake in meals and snacks to promote digestive health and overall well-being,' explains Sara K. Riehm, RD, a dietitian at Orlando Health Center for Health Improvement. With fibermaxxing, you aim to 'meet or exceed' the recommended daily fiber intake, which is usually between 25 to 38 grams for adults. People do this by eating a range of fiber-rich foods and sometimes by using supplements, Riehm explains. FWIW, some of the biggest sources of dietary fiber include unsweetened, high-fiber cereal, bulgar wheat, lima beans, Brussels sprouts, and sweet potato, according to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. 'We're going to see fiber showing up in the highest amounts in plant foods,' Riehm says. There are two main types of fiber: Soluble and insoluble. 'Soluble fiber slows digestion, while insoluble fiber speeds up digestion,' Riehm says. 'We can use these to our advantage when we're dealing with diarrhea or constipation respectively.' Well, getting enough fiber really is great for your overall health. Fiber is a macronutrient with plenty of health perks, but research suggests that just 5 percent of people get enough fiber in their diet. 'Fiber will help keep your colonic movements regular,' says Mir Ali, MD, board certified general surgeon, bariatric surgeon and medical director of MemorialCare Surgical Weight Loss Center at Orange Coast Medical Center in Fountain Valley, CA. 'It helps maintain a healthy gut flora, which could be important for maintaining normal metabolism and hormone levels.' Fiber can help lower cholesterol, too. 'Soluble fiber will bind to cholesterol molecules and help us excrete them rather than them getting absorbed into the bloodstream,' Riehm says. Because soluble fiber is digested slower, it helps with blood sugar control, too, she says. Fiber even adds bulk to your food, making you feel fuller, longer, and potentially helping to support weight loss, Dr. Ali says. 'It's a very powerful super nutrient, so including more of it in our diet can really make a positive impact on our health,' Riehm adds. For the most part, experts say you're just fine to try fibermaxxing. 'This is one of the safer nutrition trends I've seen,' Riehm says. 'It's focused on consuming nutrient-dense foods and including more of one of the most beneficial components of our diet.' But, of course, everyone is different. 'There's always a chance someone could have too much of a good thing,' Riehm says. 'There are certain GI conditions where it isn't appropriate to have high levels of fiber, and you may want to talk to your doctor before implementing a meal plan like this.' Dr. Ali and Riehm stress the importance of ramping up your fiber intake slowly. Meaning, don't just suddenly go all in with fiber if you haven't had much in the past. Otherwise, you could end up dealing with gas and bloating. 'You also want to make sure you're drinking a lot of fluids,' Ali says. 'If you don't drink enough, fiber can bind you up, leading to constipation.' Sounds like you might be interested? Experts generally say 'go for it.' Just remember to start slow. Get the Plan Get the Plan Get the Plan Get the Plan Get the Plan Get the Plan You Might Also Like Jennifer Garner Swears By This Retinol Eye Cream These New Kicks Will Help You Smash Your Cross-Training Goals
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Health
- Yahoo
Eating These Foods Could Improve Sleep Quality By 16%, Reveals New Study
"Hearst Magazines and Yahoo may earn commission or revenue on some items through these links." Struggling to sleep? A new study found a simple diet change that could help a lot. New research suggests that eating five cups or more of fruits and veggies a day could give you up to a 16 percent increase in sleep quality. Here's what to know about how foods can impact your Zzzs. Calling all insomniacs! If you've already exhausted the standard sleep hygiene hacks like sleeping in a cool bedroom and staying off screens for at least an hour before bed, new research has another idea for you to try: Change up your diet. A study, which was published in the journal Sleep Health makes the case for adding more fruits, vegetables, and whole grains to your daily meals, suggesting that you could see results as early as that same day (or rather, night). It seems almost too good to be true. And bear in mind that switching up your eating habits won't magically transform your sleep, but experts say it could definitely help. Here's why, based on the results in this new study. Meet the experts: Phyllis Zee, MD, PhD, chief of Sleep Medicine at Northwestern Medicine; Ellen Wermter, FNP, a nurse practitioner and behavioral sleep medicine specialist; Jessica Cording, M.S., R.D., is author of The Little Book of Game-Changers: 50 Healthy Habits For Managing Stress & Anxiety For the study, 34 healthy young adults with no known sleep issues were asked to log what they ate each day in an app. They also wore a wrist monitor that tracked how they slept. The researchers found a link between what the participants ate during the day and how well they slept that night. Specifically, people who ate more fruits, veggies, and complex carbs had fewer sleep disruptions (waking up during the night) than those who didn't eat as healthy. People who ate more fiber and magnesium each day also had fewer sleep disruptions. Ultimately, the researchers found that eating the recommended five cups or more of fruits and veggies a day could give you up to a 16 percent increase in sleep quality compared to someone who doesn't meet those recommendations. Measuring out a serving depends on which type of produce you're eating, but for a 2,000-calorie diet, that usually means have about two cups of fruit and 2.5 cups of vegetables, according to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. There are a few potential reasons the researchers noted this result in their study. On a basic level, balanced nutrition supports good overall health. 'It helps the body work more efficiently and be more resilient,' says Jessica Cording, RD, author of The Little Book of Game-Changers: 50 Healthy Habits For Managing Stress & Anxiety. 'That in and of itself can support a healthy circadian rhythm.' (Your circadian rhythm is the natural process in your body that regulates your sleep-wake cycle.) But there's likely more to it than that. 'Fruits and vegetables have more antioxidants, and that can decrease inflammation,' says Phyllis Zee, MD, PhD, chief of Sleep Medicine at Northwestern Medicine. 'High inflammation can disrupt your sleep.' High-fiber diets (which usually include plenty of produce and complex carbs) also impact your gut microbiome, Dr. Zee points out. 'These bacteria in your gut are very important for overall health and sleep health,' she says. Whole grains also contain the amino acid tryptophan. 'Tryptophan is a building block for serotonin and melatonin, which are essential for regulating sleep and mood and for maintaining a strong circadian rhythm,' says Ellen Wermter, NP, a family nurse practitioner and behavioral sleep medicine specialist. Also notable: Eating complex carbs can help to keep glucose (aka blood sugar) levels stable, Dr. Zee says. 'That translates into the night, with better glucose regulation,' she says. 'If you have better glucose regulation, you also sleep better.' Finally, choosing lots of fruits, veggies, and complex carbs means you're eating fewer unhealthy foods that may disrupt your sleep, like high-fat and processed foods, Wermter says. 'They also may contribute to an inflammatory state and cause more fluctuation in blood sugar which can lead to frequent awakenings,' she says. Yep, these experts have a few tips and tricks on the dietary front to help you sleep better at night. First? 'Avoid eating heavy meals close to bedtime,' Wermter says. This can cause indigestion and disrupt your sleep. It's also a good idea to avoid simple carbs like white bread and pasta before bed. 'Eating those will increase glucose levels and cause [glucose] spikes,' Dr. Zee says. And these spikes can interrupt sleep by making you have to pee more frequently, increasing dehydration, and increasing body temperature. If you can, Dr. Zee recommends that you stop eating two to three hours before bed to allow your body to digest your food and for your melatonin levels to increase. 'All of those things together can help people fall asleep better and sleep better,' she says. You Might Also Like Jennifer Garner Swears By This Retinol Eye Cream These New Kicks Will Help You Smash Your Cross-Training Goals
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Health
- Yahoo
Most Men Think They Need 2,000 Calories—The Real Number May Surprise You
"Hearst Magazines and Yahoo may earn commission or revenue on some items through these links." EVEN AS NEW, trendy diets emerge, calorie counting remains a reliable practice in the world of weight loss. According to the International Food Information Council's 2024 Food and Health Survey, 54 percent of Americans said they followed some kind of diet or new eating pattern in the past year. Of those people, 13 percent choose calorie counting. 'It can be helpful to gain a little insight into your diet and help people reach weight-loss or performance goals,' especially if it's done on a short-term basis, says Tara Tomaino, R.D., director of nutrition at The Park. While you don't necessarily need to count every calorie to stay healthy, it helps to have a basic understanding of how your body uses energy gained from food. Here's an overview of what calories are, what influences your energy needs, and how to estimate how many calories you need. Kilocalories (kcal)—which we simply refer to as calories—are the amount of heat needed to boost the temperature of 1 kilogram of water by one degree Celsius, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). So, calories are a measure of energy, which we need to function. We need calories to move around and carry out the basic body functions that happen when we're at rest, from DNA synthesis to hormone production to sending chemical messengers throughout the body in order to keep things running smoothly. The three macronutrients—fat, carbs, and protein—contain a set number of calories per gram, according to the USDA. Carbs and protein have 4 calories per gram, and fat has 9. Men typically need between 2,000 and 3,000 calories a day, according to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. But, your minimum (and maximum) calorie intake depends on several factors, including your height, weight, activity level, and age, Tomaino says. 'For a small man, I wouldn't want them to eat less than 1,500 calories,' she says. 'And, that would be for an individual looking for weight loss.' If you're not trying to lose weight, Wesley McWhorter, R.D.N., L.D., C.S.C.S., spokesperson for the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics suggests sticking to around 2,500 calories a day. "The primary factors that determine how many calories someone needs include birth sex, age, genetics, body size, and daily activity level,' says Anya Rosen, M.S., R.D., a New York-based dietitian. 'Other variables can play a significant role, such as body composition, dieting behaviors, injury, or illness.' In general, men burn more calories than women because they're typically larger overall. Men are also predisposed to having more muscle and less fat mass, which impacts calorie burn, explains Kyle Gonzalez, M.S., C.E.S., C.S.C.S., an exercise scientist. Per the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the average American man under 40 is 5 foot 9 and weighs 197 pounds. At a moderate activity level (moderate exercise 3 to 5 times per week), he would need about 2,822 calories per day to maintain his weight. Cutting 500 to 1,000 calories out of your day can help you safely lose one to two pounds a week. For the average guy, that's between 1,822 and 2,322 calories per day. When you drastically cut calories, it can backfire, as you may end up getting so hungry that you overeat. It's also important to factor in exercise: If you're burning 500 calories a day through physical activity, cutting 1,000 calories would actually lead to a deficit of 1,500 calories, which is too much. If you want to gain weight, the Cleveland Clinic recommends increasing your calorie intake by 300 to 500 calories a day—3,122 to 3,322 calories per day for the average guy, assuming his activity level stays the same. Injury and illness can also temporarily increase the amount of calories you need. Certain injuries or illnesses can mean you need extra calories. Healing from burns or large open wounds requires extra energy and protein. If you have a fever, you need more calories to make up for your higher body temperature. Even fighting off the common cold takes energy. Evenly spacing your calories during the day is the best approach. Tomaino suggests eating three meals and two snacks a day, and divvying up your total calories for the day across your meals. 'If you're having those three meals, they could be between 500 and 700 calories, depending on what the total calorie goal is at the end of the day, and then make up the remainder with those snacks in between,' she says. But, it's really a personal preference. Some people prefer eating a larger breakfast and smaller dinner, so being mindful about what works for you is the best approach, McWhorter says. Yes. Once you turn 60, you need 2,000 calories a day if you're sedentary and between 2,200 and 2,600 if you're moderately active or active. That's slightly less than what you need earlier in life. Between ages 21 and 40, men need 2,400 calories a day if they're sedentary, 2,800 to 2,600 if they're moderately active, and 2,800 to 3,000 if they're active. In your 40s and 50s, you need 2,200 if you're sedentary, 2,400 to 2,600 if you're moderately active, and 2,600 to 2,800 if you're active. 'Your metabolism is pretty much steady throughout most of adulthood,' Tomaino says. 'Once you reach about age 60, your muscle mass is decreasing and the general aging of your cells slows down your metabolism in such a way that you don't need as many calories.' Although it's possible to estimate how many calories you need in a day, there's one huge caveat: 'There are many different formulas available to determine calorie needs, but they all have large margins of error due to there being too many influential variables to control,' Rosen says. Scientists use a method called indirect calorimetry to measure exactly how many calories a person burns in a day, but it's expensive, time-consuming, and pretty inaccessible for most people. If you're curious about your exact calorie needs, here's how to determine it. 'I find that the best way for you to determine your calorie needs (assuming you're outside of a research setting) starts with ensuring that you are currently maintaining your weight,' Rosen says. 'Once weight is stable, track your food intake for one to two weeks without changing how you would normally eat,' she says. 'The average calories across that time frame is a good estimate for your maintenance caloric needs, and you can adjust from there according to your goals.' In other words: If your weight isn't changing, you're eating the right number of calories. Using an app, like My Macros+, helps you count calories while focusing on your protein, carbs, and fat intake, Tomaino says. 'If someone's goal is to build muscle or to maintain muscle while losing body fat, it's really important to know where those calories come from because plenty of foods can be equal in calories, but not nutrition.' MyFitnessPal also lets you easily track calories, because you can scan barcodes on food packages or use its food database, she adds. You can also try using a formula to estimate your calorie needs, which is easy to do with an online calorie calculator from a trusted source. This one, from the American Council on Exercise, takes into account your age, weight, gender, height, and activity level, from sedentary to very active to determine your calorie needs. Muscle burns more calories by weight than body fat, although the difference isn't as big as it's sometimes made out to be. 'The claim 'muscle burns more calories than fat' is true, but misleading,' Rosen says. The best estimate is that a pound of muscle burns six to seven calories a day. Fat burns about two calories in the same time period. So, increasing muscle will increase the number of calories you burn — as will gaining fat, though to a lesser degree — but not drastically. An extra 10 pounds of muscle may only add 60 calories per day to your overall calorie expenditure. The size of other body parts probably plays a more significant role in your daily calorie needs. A 2011 study found that more than 40 percent of differences in total calorie burn between people could be explained by the variations in the size of their internal organs. Your activity level plays a big role in your energy needs. It's not just your workouts that burn calories, it's also how much you move around during the day. A physically demanding job burns far more calories than one where you're sitting at a desk most of the day. Biking or walking instead of driving can make a big difference, as well. When determining your physical activity level, it's important to take all of this into account. You also need to factor in your workouts. 'With cardio training, you tend to not only burn calories quicker, but you also burn more total calories per session,' Gonzalez says. 'Strength training, on the other hand, is usually anaerobic (without oxygen) in nature and helps you build muscle and boost your metabolism.' You'll burn fewer calories per strength-training session, he explains, but your metabolic rate (the number of calories burned) will remain elevated for longer afterward. Plus, you'll build muscle mass, which slightly increases your calorie burn and can support better health overall. 'A healthy mixture of both strength and cardio training with varying intensity, frequency, duration, and type is always best when building out your exercise program,' Gonzalez says. Ultimately, there's no need to count calories in order to be healthy. 'Calorie counting focuses people on numbers that don't always have a correlation with the quality of food on the plate,' says McWhorter. 'When we think of calories, it's simply a measure of energy. That's not equal to nutrition. Nutrition is much more than just energy.' Essentially, eating a 200-calorie bag of potato chips for snack will not have the same benefits as eating a 200-calorie piece of grilled chicken breast. The chicken has protein and will help you remain fuller for longer while the chips just are fried and a source of processed food and fat.. 'Calories are not created equal,' McWhorter says. If you feel good and have consistent energy levels throughout the day, you probably don't need to worry about calculating your calorie needs, because chances are you're hitting your target. But if you're worried that you're eating too few or too many calories, understanding what contributes to calorie burn can help you understand your body's needs. Just don't get too caught up in the numbers, McWhorter says. 'There's nothing wrong with counting calories, as long as you focus on the quality of the food. What makes up the plate? It's not just calories; it's food.' Making sure half your plate is fruits and vegetables, and the other half is whole grains and protein should be your goal, he adds. Calorie counting isn't a good idea for anyone with a history of eating disorders, Tomaino says. And, if you're dealing with a medical condition, check with your doctor before calorie counting, and they can refer you to a dietitian to help you get it right. Get the Program Get the Plan Get the Plan Get the Program Get the Program Get the Program Get the Plan Get the Plan Get the Program Get the Plan Get the Plan Get the Program Get the Plan Get the Program Get the Program Get the Program Get the Program Get the Plan You Might Also Like The Best Hair Growth Shampoos for Men to Buy Now 25 Vegetables That Are Surprising Sources of Protein
Atlantic
5 days ago
- Health
- Atlantic
RFK Jr.'s Big Chance to MAHA the American Diet
Every five years, America's top nutrition experts jockey to be part of a rite of passage in the field. The federal government chooses a small group of researchers to serve on a committee that spends months poring over scientific literature to answer questions such as: What is the relationship between sweetened beverages and risk of type 2 diabetes? And how does eating saturated fat influence a person's chance of heart disease? The end result is something called the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. In other words, the government's official nutrition recommendations. The whole process might seem a bit excessive, if not pointless. Presumably, few Americans even know about this document, and even fewer intentionally use it to guide what they eat. But the recommendations touch the diets of tens of millions of Americans, affecting what food is served in schools and in the military. They also influence the food industry. After the dietary guidelines began more explicitly warning about the risks of added sugar, several major food companies committed to reducing added sugar in their products. Those guidelines are now on the brink of getting MAHA-ed. It just so happens that 2025 marks five years since the last version, so they're now due for an update. Much of the work has already been completed. In December, the Biden administration released the scientific report that is supposed to undergird the guidelines. But Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has since promised to start from scratch and remake the recommendations to match his convictions about how Americans should be eating. Last month, he told Congress that the new dietary guidelines could be released 'before August,' teasing big changes. The current version of the document is 149 pages. The forthcoming update, he said, will stand at just four pages that tell people to 'eat whole food; eat the food that's good for you.' Beyond that, RFK Jr. hasn't given any more specifics on what his dietary guidelines will include. (An HHS spokesperson didn't respond to a request for comment.) It's a reasonable bet that RFK Jr. will come after his least-favorite foods, such as seed oils, ultra-processed snacks, and synthetic food dyes. If so, he will pave the way for the MAHA diet to become part of many more people's lives. Kennedy's dietary guidelines could have a much larger impact on what Americans eat than anything else he has done to date. For all of his big talk about how Americans are eating unhealthy food that's making us sick, RFK Jr. has had only middling success so far at enacting change in his short tenure as health secretary. Take food dyes: Kennedy has tried to rid the food supply of most dyes through a handshake agreement with the food industry. The agreement allows food-company executives to decide for themselves whether and when to phase out these products. But by formally discouraging food dyes in the dietary guidelines, Kennedy could effectively block their use in millions of school lunches. Although the lunch program does not need to follow the guidelines word for word, it must be 'consistent with the goals' of the government's official recommendations. Even if Kennedy doesn't outright use the dietary guidelines to come for synthetic dyes, or any other MAHA villain, his promise to keep the guidelines to just four pages—essentially a leaflet—would mean trashing much of the existing nutritional advice. Nonetheless, RFK Jr. might be onto something, at least directionally. Consider the 2020 version of the dietary guidelines. I read all 149 pages, and at times, they left me utterly perplexed about what a healthy meal actually looks like. The word guidelines implies simple instructions that a person can actually follow. 'Don't eat Oreos' would be a useful nutrition guideline—one that I, myself, should observe more often. 'Customize and Enjoy Food and Beverage Choices to Reflect Personal Preferences, Cultural Traditions, and Budgetary Considerations' is not. The report advocates, for example, that people meet their 'food group needs with nutrient-dense foods and beverages,' but it struggles to explain exactly what makes a food nutrient-dense. If the concept seems self-explanatory, consider that the guidelines claim that both vegetable oil and sparkling water are nutrient-dense. (They also state that a nutrient-dense burrito bowl would have sliced avocado, but a 'typical burrito bowl' would have guacamole.) Look, nutrition can be complicated. And this is not to say that the guidelines are entirely useless. They do, for example, outline the amount of vegetables that the average person should eat in a day: Two and a half cups. But clear directives like these are the exception. Part of the issue is that the dietary guidelines are not written for regular people with questions about their diet. In the early 2000s, the guidelines changed from a document explicitly focused on providing everyday people actionable advice to a report whose stated goal, according to the heads of the Departments of Agriculture and Health and Human Services at the time, was 'to be a primary source of dietary health information for policymakers, nutrition educators, and health providers.' But the fact that the document is meant for experts doesn't obviate the need for its overarching message to at least be decipherable to the public. In Kennedy's telling, the guidelines' increasing complexity over time is the nefarious work of the food industry. Before even being nominated to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, Kennedy posted a video decrying that 'corporate interests have hijacked' the guidelines. When he promised lawmakers last month to cut the document down to four pages, he also alleged that the guidelines were 'clearly written by industry.' It's true that a sizeable portion of the experts who have served on the advisory panel developing the guidelines have had ties to the food industry. One study found that 19 of the 20 experts on the advisory committee for the 2020 guidelines had conflicts of interest. (It's common for nutrition experts to receive funding from food companies for their research.) But there's another potential explanation for the bloat plaguing the guidelines. 'I don't think a conspiracy theory is needed here,' Marion Nestle, an emeritus professor of nutrition at NYU who served on the dietary-guidelines advisory committee in 1995, told me via email. She added that every committee 'thought it had to improve on what was done previously.' Consider the 1980 guidelines, a mere 18 pages in total. By 2000, the size of the document had more than doubled, to 39 pages. By 2010, 95 pages. The growing complexity of the guidelines is all the more perplexing because the government's overarching advice on how to eat healthier hasn't changed that much over the past 35 years. 'They all say the same thing no matter how many pages they use: eat more plant foods; restrict salt, sugar, saturated fat; balance calories,' Nestle said. One of Kennedy's particular skills is finding messages that get through to people. So many of his views on nutrition seem to have resonated precisely because they are not full of mealy-mouthed verbiage and caveats. It's easier to grasp that seed oils are poisonous than it is to understand the nuances of how the fatty acids in these oils are digested in the body. For Kennedy to actually benefit Americans' health, however, his guidelines still have to reflect reality. (You shouldn't freak out about seed oils.) Going too far in simplifying dietary messages could further degrade the credibility of the guidelines all the same, warned Michael Pollan, the writer who's perhaps the most famous concise food messenger. 'The challenge always is how do you simplify science without distorting it,' he told me. Kennedy's views of individual ingredients oscillate between commonsense dietary maxims and conspiratorial musings. His views about the risks of added sugar, for example, are far more scientifically founded than his love of beef tallow. That is one of the most troubling elements of Kennedy's tenure as HHS secretary: Especially when it comes to food, he mixes mainstream views with conspiracy theories. No one can predict exactly which of these views he will glom on to from one day to the next—or which will appear in four pages of dietary guidelines.
The Print
6 days ago
- Health
- The Print
2 drinks a day never hurt? Review of over 100 research papers challenges myth of moderate drinking
The evidence, according to the review paper published on 9 June, remains unclear and inconsistent, especially when it comes to conditions like atrial fibrillation—a type of irregular and often rapid heartbeat that can increase the risk of stroke, heart failure and other heart-related complications. 'Uncertainty remains about the true cardiovascular risk of drinking lightly such as one to two drinks per day,' said the review paper. While past studies have suggested that low to moderate alcohol intake—no more than one or two drinks a day—could protect against certain heart conditions like coronary artery disease or stroke, newer research using advanced methods is calling that idea into question. New Delhi: Two glasses of alcohol a day might not hurt your heart—but they don't help either, with new research suggesting that the 'benefits' of moderate drinking may have been overstated for years. A sweeping scientific review by the American Heart Association, a voluntary organisation dedicated to fighting heart disease and stroke, drawing on more than 100 research papers from across the world, has found that the relationship between alcohol and cardiac health is far more complex than popular wisdom would have you believe. What's more certain is that heavy drinking, including binge drinking or consuming three or more drinks a day, is harmful to cardiovascular health. With limited high-quality data and growing doubts about alcohol's benefits, researchers urge doctors to focus instead on well-established ways to protect the heart: regular exercise, not smoking, and maintaining a healthy weight. 'Considering the level of evidence, it remains unknown whether drinking is part of a healthy lifestyle and therefore clinicians should reinforce healthy lifestyle behaviours,' said the review paper. It looked at liquor consumption in the US, where almost 85 percent of adults have had alcohol at some point in their lives. On average, each American consumes around 2.5 gallons (9.4 litres) of pure alcohol each year. The Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2020-2025 (jointly issued by the US Departments of Agriculture and Health and Human Services) highlight the need to avoid making definitive health claims about low-level alcohol use amid the continuing uncertainty in evidence. The World Health Organization (WHO) too states in The Lancet Public Health that there is no amount of alcohol consumption that is completely safe for health. Further, guidelines on alcohol and health in Canada state that 'less is better' while outlining the health risks linked to varying levels of weekly alcohol consumption. Also Read: Smoking, alcohol & high BMI among biggest risk factors linked to cancer death, says Lancet study Alcohol and stroke risk The review paper pointed to growing evidence that heavy drinking clearly raises the risk for all types of stroke. This includes ischemic stroke (caused by blocked blood flow), intracerebral haemorrhage (bleeding inside the brain), and subarachnoid haemorrhage (bleeding around the brain). Some earlier studies suggested that light to moderate drinking (up to two drinks a day) might slightly reduce the risk of ischemic stroke. But more recent and robust research, including large-scale studies and mendelian randomisation (MR) analyses, challenges that idea, the review paper underlined. One combined study involving around 6,00,000 consumers of alcohol found that even increasing intake by just one drink a day raised the risk of ischemic stroke by 13 percent, with similar increases seen for other types of strokes. As the authors noted in the review: 'Evidence is currently insufficient to draw definitive conclusions about the relationship between moderate alcohol consumption and ischemic stroke.' But what's clear is that heavy drinking raises stroke risk across the board, regardless of gender or stroke type. New tools, same challenges The review paper highlighted that most studies on alcohol and heart disease rely on people self-reporting how much they drink—which is often unreliable, especially among heavy drinkers. Measuring alcohol use is tricky, the authors stated, because it varies based on what people drink, how often, how much, whether they have eaten, and personal factors like metabolism. This makes it difficult to draw clear lines between safe and harmful levels of drinking. To improve accuracy, newer studies are using tools like wearable alcohol sensors, urine kits, biomarkers (such as phosphatidylethanol), and smartphone tracking. These methods aim to provide more objective, real-time data on alcohol use. The paper also pointed out that differences in study design—such as how drinking is defined and who is included as a 'non-drinker'—can affect results. For instance, using former drinkers or occasional drinkers as the reference group instead of lifelong abstainers can distort findings. Speaking to ThePrint, Dr Varun Bansal, consultant, cardiothoracic and vascular surgery at Indraprastha Apollo Hospitals, agreed that designing a robust study is far from simple. He explained that it would mean giving alcohol to participants who might not even want to drink, while those who do agree may not stick to the same amount consistently. 'So, while research has its role,' he said, 'how to conduct it remains a big challenge. Ideally, it should be a double-blind study comparing people who are more susceptible to alcohol-related heart risks with those who aren't—but that's much easier said than done.' He also said that any reliable study must be multifactorial and based on large data to reduce bias. Besides alcohol and diet, factors like exercise and genetic makeup need to be considered. He pointed out that how active someone is matters too. 'It makes a difference whether a person spends the evening sitting and drinking or staying active. To avoid misleading results, the dataset must be big enough to account for these confounding factors.' (Edited by Nida Fatima Siddiqui) Also Read: Cancer warning on liquor bottles 'long overdue'. Even 'light', 'moderate' drinking poses threat
