Friday, August 15, 2008

MORE BITE SIZED TIPS FOR YOUR WEEKEND

As I do every four years, I've been watching the Olympics fairly religiously. This one in Beijing is the best summer Olympics I can recall. I have to commend China, whatever you might feel about them: they have done a hell of a job building facilities and running a fantastic sports extravaganza. I personally could care less how old their gymnasts are. In watching these sports, it's interesting to see the athletes and what sort of shape they are in. I've come to some conclusions about the relative health of athletes, and these conclusions are not just opinions. They are well substantiated by studies of athletes as they age.


THE HEALTHIEST OLYMPIC SPORT: SWIMMING
Why? Simple. Swimming provides good cardiovascular training, the involvement of most if not all muscle groups, and is very low-impact. Swimming injuries are few, far between, and generally minor. Drawbacks: requires a pool and silly clothing. Michael Phelps may be dull as a post, but you can't deny that dude is in good shape.



THE LEAST HEALTHY OLYMPIC SPORT: GYMNASTICS
Why? Gymnastics is not exercise, it's torture. The constant impact on the joints, especially in young girls, combined with anatomically harsh angles and hard falls, is a recipe for poor health. In the best of cases, gymnastics can lead to Olympic medals. In most cases, it leads to recurrent severe injuries and chronic pain. Don't believe me? Consider this: the age range of our Olympic women's gymnastics team is 16-20 years. All of them, with the exception of 1, have already had orthopedic surgery. Ask Mary Lou Retton (my childhood hero) about her hip replacement. Nobody as young as Mary Lou should need a hip replacement. If you have a young daughter who wants to do gymnastics, I suggest you gently but firmly tell them to take up something safer, such as motorcycle racing or BASE jumping.

READER QUESTION: FLOURIDE?
A friend of mine recently blew me away by getting a letter published in The Economist, then stumped me with a question about flouride in kids' toothpaste. I'm a big fan of flouride, and I get pissed when I see toothpaste in health food stores marketed as "flouride free." Turns out that it's DIFFERENT FOR KIDS. While flouride is in most toothpaste for school-aged kids, younger kids are supposed to brush their teeth with FLOURIDE FREE toothpaste. This is because flouride hardens the teeth and makes the tooth enamel more permanent. But when kids are still growing their permanent teeth, they don't have hard, permanent enamel established. When you use flouride toothpaste in young kids, especially before age 2, the enamel hardens prematurely on the new teeth as they grow in. The results are not awful, but they can get abnormally bright white spots on otherwise "cream colored" new teeth, and these spots are both noticeable and permanent.
Close to age 2, kids are supposed to have their first dental checkup. That makes it easy to decide when to use flouride. The bottom line is: DON'T use toothpaste with flouride on your kids UNTIL they have had an exam with a dentist and the dentist has told you to start using flouride.
Adults: you need flouride, even if you've never had cavities. That's because it prevents bacteria from infecting the gums, which leads to gum disease and root canals. If you've never had a root canal, you're lucky. The only thing I liked about mine is that I ended up with a sweet gold tooth that only cost $4500!

ORGANIC? PESTICIDE FREE?
If you can afford it, organic produce is probably worth buying. Today, I found a website I just have to tell you about, because it helps you spend your money wisely. This site actually quantifies the amount of pesticide residue on common commercial fruits and vegetables, so that you can choose WHICH to buy organic, if your grocery store or your pocketbook limit your choices. Kudos to: www.foodnews.org for good research and a great website- you can even download a wallet-size list of commercial produce to buy (and to avoid), so that you can take it to the market with you. And the list is surprising.