For this comprehensive narrative review, we evaluated both nutrition-specific and nutrition-sensitive interventions. Nutrition-specific approaches are those that address the immediate determinants of nutrition (e.g., food and nutrient intake, diet-related practices and behaviors, disease, etc.), whereas nutrition-sensitive approaches are those that address the underlying determinants of nutrition (e.g., food security, access to resources, safe and hygienic environments, adequate health services, etc.) (5, 12). We evaluated the following nutrition-specific interventions described by Bhutta et al. (13, 14): nutrition counseling and education, micronutrient supplementation and fortification, protein and energy supplementation, and lipid-based supplementation. We also included the following nutrition-sensitive approaches described by Ruel and Alderman (5) and Bhutta et al. (14): health care; family planning; water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH); empowerment; income-generation; education; and social protection. For each intervention, we 1) described the scale and coverage of the intervention, when available; 2) summarized the evidence of effectiveness for women's health and nutrition outcomes; and 3) described and evaluated the target population and delivery platforms, as described in the published articles and as summarized in Table 1. The delivery of interventions included the physical platforms, as well as the adherence and the implementation challenges of the different interventions.
For some simple suggestions about eating a healthy, balanced diet, check out the "New American Plate Concept" from the American Institute for Cancer Research. This concept suggests you fill your plate with two-thirds or more of vegetables, fruits, whole grains or beans and only one-third or less of animal protein. This simple principle can guide you toward healthier eating. For more details, visit http://www.aicr.org/site/PageServer?pagename=reduce_diet_new_american_plate.
Although creating financial incentives to lose weight isn't a new idea, now we know cashing in to stay motivated works long-term. In the longest study yet on this topic, Mayo Clinic researchers weighed 100 people monthly for one year, offering half the group $20 per pound lost plus a $20 penalty for every pound gained. Those in the monetary group dropped an average of nine pounds by the end of the year, while non-paid participants shed about two pounds. If you’re ready to gamble away weight, consider sites such as Healthywage, FatBet, or stickK.
Markets and retail ↓/NC anemia, ↑ MN status (Hgb, Fe stores, ferritin, folate, iodine), ↓/NC goiter prevalence, ↓ folate deficiency, NC retinol-binding protein, ↑ dietary adequacy, ↑ intake of nutrient-rich foods (vitamin A, vitamin B-6, thiamin, iodine, riboflavin, niacin, folate, and Fe) ↓/NC anemia, ↑ Hgb, ↑/NC Fe stores, ↑/NC serum ferritin, ↑ serum folate, ↑ urinary iodine, ↓ goiter prevalence, ↓ folate deficiency, NC retinol-binding protein, ↑ dietary adequacy, ↑ intake of nutrient-rich foods (vitamin A, vitamin B-6, thiamin, iodine, riboflavin, niacin, folate, and Fe) ↓/NC anemia, ↑ serum folate, ↓ folate deficiency, ↑ urinary iodine concentration, ↓ goiter prevalence, ↑ mean adequacy ratio of diet, ↑ dietary adequacy, ↑ intake of nutrient-rich foods (vitamin A, vitamin B-6, thiamin, iodine, riboflavin, niacin, folate, and Fe) ↑/NC Fe stores, ↑/NC serum ferritin, ↑ serum folate, NC B-12 deficiency, ↑ dietary adequacy, ↑ intake of nutrient-rich foods (vitamin A, B-6, thiamin, iodine, riboflavin, niacin, folate, and Fe)
Women and men have approximately equal risk of dying from cancer, which accounts for about a quarter of all deaths, and is the second leading cause of death. However the relative incidence of different cancers varies between women and men. In the United States the three commonest types of cancer of women in 2012 were lung, breast and colorectal cancers. In addition other important cancers in women, in order of importance, are ovarian, uterine (including endometrial and cervical cancers (Gronowski and Schindler, Table III). Similar figures were reported in 2016. While cancer death rates rose rapidly during the twentieth century, the increase was less and later in women due to differences in smoking rates. More recently cancer death rates have started to decline as the use of tobacco becomes less common. Between 1991 and 2012, the death rate in women declined by 19% (less than in men). In the early twentieth century death from uterine (uterine body and cervix) cancers was the leading cause of cancer death in women, who had a higher cancer mortality than men. From the 1930s onwards, uterine cancer deaths declined, primarily due to lower death rates from cervical cancer following the availability of the Papanicolaou (Pap) screening test. This resulted in an overall reduction of cancer deaths in women between the 1940s and 1970s, when rising rates of lung cancer led to an overall increase. By the 1950s the decline in uterine cancer left breast cancer as the leading cause of cancer death till it was overtaken by lung cancer in the 1980s. All three cancers (lung, breast, uterus) are now declining in cancer death rates (Siegel et al. Figure 8), but more women die from lung cancer every year than from breast, ovarian, and uterine cancers combined. Overall about 20% of people found to have lung cancer are never smokers, yet amongst nonsmoking women the risk of developing lung cancer is three times greater than amongst men who never smoked.
WASH interventions were typically community-based. WASH interventions were delivered to households and communities through community mobilization, mass media, home visits, and infrastructural development (126, 130, 136–138). There were some examples of facility-based delivery of WASH interventions, such as in health clinics and schools (139, 140); however, this was not representative of the majority of delivery platform coverage. Health clinic delivery platforms had limited reach, often targeting pregnant women and women with young children. In an evaluation of WASH interventions delivered in India (141), more demanding behavioral practices, such as handwashing and consistent use of latrines, required more intense contact (e.g., multiple home visits) than less intense interventions, such as sweeping of courtyards, that could be effectively delivered in small group meetings such as those in health clinics and community centers. More research is needed to evaluate the benefits and barriers of different delivery platforms for women across the life course.
Even just that single-page layout in Women’s Health is a huge step in the right direction. Seeing more normal-size women on the pages of fashion magazines and catalogues may actually be more inspirational than urging readers to take “more ‘me time.’” It’s also another area where women’s health magazines are surpassing the men’s version: The only non-cut men in Men’s Health are seen in “before” pictures in fitness makeovers. This is despite the fact that 90 percent of men are “overfat,” as the magazine itself reported. Non-six-pack men aren’t missing from the magazine because they’re difficult to find, same as non-size- 2s on the women’s side.
The gym is in the basement with seemed like slow ceiling and dim lighting. I tried to attend a zumba class -- the class was in the middle floor, cramped and crowded. I couldn't see the instructor (in fact I didn't even know who the instructor and what was going on) people looked lost in the class. I kept bumped into one of the cycles. After 10mins of frustration, I gave up on zumba and just hopped on a treadmill, only to find the treadmill was placed on unleveled with a hole on the floor! My treadmill was flip-flopping with each step. I then went to the stretching area hoping to may just suck it up for the next 30 minutes and call it a day. I found the mat to be dirty and the corner for stretching was dark and tight. There's not enough lockers to use. The shower stalls look small and dirty. I just didn't get an good feeling after this first class.
If you thought texting changed your love life, imagine what it could do for your waistline. When people received motivational text messages promoting exercise and healthy behaviors twice a week (i.e., “Keep in the fridge a Ziploc with washed and precut vegetables 4 quick snack. Add 1 string cheese 4 proteins”), they lost an average of about 3 percent of their body weight in 12 weeks. Participants in the Virginia Commonwealth University study also showed an improvement in eating behaviors, exercise, and nutrition self-efficacy, and reported that the texts helped them adopt these new habits. Find health-minded friends and message each other reminders, or program your phone to send yourself healthy eating tips.