A leading U.S. dermatologist claims that by ditching sugar from your diet, you can look ten years younger in ten days.

And it isn’t just by losing weight but because : “In a nutshell, sugar hastens the degradation of elastin and collagen, both key skin proteins. In other words, it actively ages you,” he says.

In his new book, 10 Minutes/Ten Years: Your Definitive Guide to a Better and Youthful Appearance, Dr Fredric Brandt says he saw a remarkable change in his own skin when he dropped sugar from his diet. He lost 20lb in weight, but also saw a new glow, radiance and elasticity in his face. Within a year, his body had changed as well.

“I’m really lean and have the body of a teenager, although I’m in my 40s. … Believe me, it’s cheaper than a facelift.”

He continues, “The sugar triggers a process in the body called glycation. This is where the sugar molecules bind to your protein fibres — those wonderfully springy and resilient collagen and elastin fibres — which are the building blocks of skin.”

But it gets worse. Just by overheating starchy foods or grilling them, the sugar content mutates producing Advanced Glycation End products, AGEs, which do immense harm to the skin.

A word to the wise.

2007 may be the year of vindication for fat people.

First a study at UCLA declares that diets don’t work and what is worse, are actually harmful to your health.

Now scientists announce they have discovered a “fat” gene which explains why two people leading similar lifestyles could have disparate amounts of weight. Talk to any overweight person and they will tell you they know of thin people who eat as much or more than they do and yet stay thin. Society has always chalked this up to overweight meaning lazy, but now the evidence says that is not the case.

The scientists discovered the gene, known as FTO and say the influence on the gene in weight depends on whether a person has one or two copies of the FTO gene variant. FTO is known to play a role in the hypothalamus which regulates appetite.

16% of the population have two copies of the high-risk gene, and weigh nearly 7 pounds more than those without it. Those with only one copy were found to weigh about 2.6 pounds more than those who did not have the gene variant at all.

Research into the gene variant and its effects may lead scientists one day to discover better treatments and methods for dealing with obesity.

For overweight people everywhere, it may relieve some of the guilt to know that what is in their jeans, may be in their genes.

A Common Variant in the FTO Gene Is Associated with Body Mass Index and Predisposes to Childhood and Adult Obesity

According to a team of researchers at University of New Hampshire, being a couch potato may contribute to obesity in more ways than just lack of exercise. The couch itself could be making you fat.

I don’t know if this is true, but it’s such a good theory it definitely should be. UNH researchers are investigating environmental chemicals as a possible cause off the rising rate of overweight Americans.

The only hitch is that the chemicals that they think may make you fat are the same ones that protect you and your home from fire. Flame retardants called polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) are found in carpets, furniture and in some small appliances which reduces the risk of combustibility.

The researchers are looking at the ways that PBDEs mimic estrogen and thryroid hormones in the body, their relationship to the insulin sensitivity of cells and how this might contribute to the incidence of Type II diabetes and obesity.

I might be okay with spending less time on my couch, but they lost my support when they said that PBDEs are also found in computers.

Obesity And Environmental Chemicals: Research Probes Potential Link

In a brilliant stroke of fascism, Naveed Sattar, Professor of Metabolic Medicine at the University of Glasgow has suggested that larger size clothing ought to have obesity helpline numbers sewn into them. He even wants these warnings in children’s clothing!

Professor Sattar wants the government to intervene to stop fat people from being fat, on the premise that it costs too much money for healthcare for obese people.

No one would argue that being overweight can contribute to some health issues, but being singled out for punitive treatment because of weight could lead to much more serious mental health issues.

It used to be that in this politically correct society you had to show tolerance for everyone (except smokers, you can excoriate them all you like, it’s PC). Now it seems that fat people have been reduced to second-class citizenship and it’s righteous and good to be rude to them.

In other health news, a study being published in the British Medical Journal states that vegetarians have higher IQs than those who eat meat. The researchers say that the vegetarians were also more likely to have college degrees and high-powered jobs.

But is this cause or effect? Another point to consider is that “vegans” – vegetarians who also avoid dairy products – had lower IQ scores, proving that some animal protein must be good for you. There was no difference in IQ between vegetarians who shunned all meat and those who, although calling themselves vegetarian, still ate poultry and fish.

There were no plans to put labels in size 0 clothing encouraging the underweight wearer to visit a McDonald’s drive-thru soon, nor is anyone going to tell those intelligent people that if they eat fish and chicken they aren’t vegetarians at all.