Dr. Lois Frankel literally wrote the book on coaching people to succeed in businesses large and small around the globe. Nice Girls Don’t Get The Corner Office and Nice Girls Don’t Get Rich are international bestsellers translated into over twenty-five languages and featured on the TODAY Show, CNN and CNBC, in the New York Times, USA Today, and in People and TimeBusinessWeek named Corner Office one of the top ten business books of the year and ABC Television purchased the rights to it for a comedy series. Her most recent book, See Jane Lead, furthers the premise that women make natural leaders for our time and explains how to harness your own leadership talent. Learn more about Dr. Frankel at  Magazines. www.drloisfrankel.com.

Lois Frankel--

As a Think Pink Line blogger you know I’m a fan of Mrs. O.  So, I was anxious to hear her speech last night.  Well, what can I say?  Once a coach, always a coach.  I thought she did well, but she didn’t hit a home run.  Why?  Because she was over-coached.  Because she read what was on the teleprompter.  Because they coached the fire right out of her (I don’t think TPL blogger Marilyn Z. could call her angry based on that presentation).

Mrs. O's speech was well choreographed, she hit on all the points her handlers wanted her to make, but in the process her essence was lost.  The headline of an article in The International Herald Tribune says it all, "The careful rollout of a warmer Michelle Obama." What  a perfect example of women being expected to walk The Thin Pink Line.  Her focus on family and values was great, but she has so much more to say than that--and she usually says it with more gusto.  She faces the same problem Hillary encountered when she became First Lady and that Theresa Heinz Kerry was met with when she spoke at the same convention four years ago.  We want the spouses of our Presidents to be smart, but not too smart.  Passionate, but not too passionate.  And to have opinions but not come across as opinionated.  Come to think of it, that's what we expect of so many women in the workplace.  And that's The Thin Pink Line.

So, what are the lessons we can all learn from Michelle O?

1. When coached, keep the best of who you are and add to it, don't subtract.  This is the Golden Rule of coaching.  Always lead with your strengtrhs and add new behaviors that will help you to walk TPL.

2. Play the game on the field and in bounds, but avoid the middle--that's not where games are won.  If you receive feedback that you're too quiet in meetings, don't go to the extreme of dominating them.  Find two to three opportunities to give your opinion, affirm what someone else has said, or seek clarification that others need as well.  Going to extremes doesn't work--for women or men.  Michelle played it too safe las night--she had plenty more field to use without being called out.

3. Be strategic in your communications.  Choose the times when you can let the best of you emerge and when you should exhibit a broader range of communication skills.  The pundits may want a gentler, calmer Michelle Obama but this doesn't mean that's all she can be.  Just once las night I wanted to see her diverge from the script and utter something totally passionate in true Michelle O. fashion.  I don't think it would have detracted one bit from her message--in fact I think it would have enhanced it.  Think back to what happened when Hillary got tearful just before the New Hampshire primary.  We liked her even better.

Nice Girls Don't Lead, Leadership Is A Woman's Art

M

by Kelly Jad'on

Cancer is the second leading cause of death worldwide. Approximately 8 million people died as a result of cancer globally in 2007--one of them was my father.  That's approximately one in every eight deaths.  By the year 2030, that number is expected to rise to 12 million deaths, with new cases diagnosed rising from 11 million to 16 million.   Even though Dad passed away in his own home in Florida, 80% of cancer deaths happen in low and middle income countries.  There is a noticeable lack of early detection, treatment, and care for patients in poorer countries.  

During this week in Geneva, Switzerland, the International Union Against Cancer (UICC) is meeting to discuss what has been done in cancer prevention and treatment, and what issues continue to need addressing. One such need is cancer prevention campaigns to correct misbeliefs.  A survey conducted by Roy Morgan Research and Gallup International for UICC in 29 countries in high, middle, and low income countries found several misperceptions.

• People in high-income countries were the least likely to believe that drinking alcohol increases the risk of cancer. In fact, cancer risk rises as alcohol intake increases. (ie. Australia, Austria, Canada, Czech Republic, Greece, Israel, New Zealand, Spain, UK, USA)
  
• In high-income countries, the hazards of not eating enough fruits and vegetables scored more highly as a perceived risk (59%) than alcohol intake did (51%), even though the scientific evidence for the protective effect of fruit and vegetables is weaker than the evidence that alcohol intake is harmful.
• In rich countries, stress (57%) and air pollution (78%) scored higher as perceived risk factors for cancer than did alcohol intake.  However, stress is not recognized as a cause of cancer and air pollution is a minor contributor compared with alcohol consumption.
• People in low and middle income countries have more pessimistic beliefs about cancer treatment than those in high income countries....48% said that "not much can be done" to cure cancer or that they didn't know whether anything could be done.  That compares with 39% in middle income countries and 17% in high income countries.  Such a misbelief is worrying because it might deter people from participating in cancer screening programs. (Low Income: Kenya, Nigeria; Middle Income: Bolivia, China, Dominican Republic, Georgia, Guatemala, Indonesia, Lebanon, Mexico, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Romania, Serbia, Turkey, Ukraine, Venezuela, Uruguay)
  
• People in all countries are more ready to accept that things outside of their control might cause cancer (such as air pollution), than things that are within their own control (such as being overweight, which is a well-established cancer risk factor).
• 75% of those in low income countries said their preference was for their doctor to make all the treatment decisions.  Only 8% said the doctor and patient should decide together and 9% said the patient should decide.  That compares with a preference in rich countries for a more equitable decision-making style that emphasizes self-determination, with 72% saying either that the decision should be made together or rest with the patient alone.

According the the National Cancer Institute in the United States, almost 64% of adults and 75% of children will survive a cancer diagnosis beyond five years.  This is more than 10.5 million people.  But not without struggle--cancer may become a chronic disease needing regular monitoring and treatment, and need access for physical, financial, psychological, and spiritual impacts. 

Lower income countries such as Kenya and Nigeria are not so fortunate.  Viewed as an essential human right, access to analgesics (pain relief) is unattainable. (80% of world's cancer sufferers) Lack of key equipment is another difficulty.  In Kenya, only three radiation machines exist for 30 million people compared with Canada which has 140 machines  for the same number of people. In some places, the choices are between family bankruptcy or treatment, and surgery or death.  Is it no wonder that the poor feel that there is little choice in the matter of life and death?

Dr. David Hill, President-Elect of the UICC and director of the Cancer Council Victoria in Melbourne, Australia states, "The survey reveals there are some big unheard messages....We know that people need to be given a reason why they should change.  They need to be shown how to change; they need to be given resources or support to change; they need to remember to change and they need positive reinforcement for changing."

The End of Cancer Begins With Everyone Standing Up

World's Largest One-Day Running Event

Read Food, Nutrition, Physical Activity, and the Prevention of Cancer: A Globabl Perspective

Dr. Mark Goulston is a former UCLA professor who helps high performing leaders, senior management and sales people reach their full potential using skills he learned training FBI and police hostage negotiators. He is a member of the National Association of Corporate Directors and the Worldwide Association of Business Coaches and writes the weekly Tribune syndicated career advice column, "Solve Anything with Dr. Mark" and columns on leadership for FAST COMPANY and Directors Monthly and is an expert at People Jam. He is frequently called upon to share his expertise with regard to contemporary business, national and world news by television, radio and print media including: Wall Street Journal, Harvard Business Review, Fortune, Newsweek, Time, Los Angeles Times, ABC/NBC/CBS/Fox/CNN/BBC News, Oprah, and Today. Mark Goulston is the author of The 6 Secrets of a Lasting Relationship, Get Out of Your Own Way: Overcoming Self-Defeating Behavior, Get Out of Your Own Way at Work and PTSD for Dummies. For more information visit: www.markgoulston.com.

Mark Goulston--

Jonny Bowden, PhD, C.N.S. is a nationally known expert on weight loss and nutrition and natural healing. A popular and dynamic speaker who combines wit and humor with science, he’s appeared as a health and nutrition expert on MSNBC, CNN, FOX News, ABC, CBS and NBC and he has contributed material to over 50 national magazines and newspapers. Dr. Bowden is on the Editorial Advisory Board of Men’s Health, is an associate editor of Total Health Magazine and is a columnist for both Better Nutrition and Remedy Magazines. His advice on nutrition, weight loss, diet and supplements has been read by millions on iVillage.com and on America Online..

He is the author of The Most Effective Natural Cures on Earth: What Treatments Work and Why, the Amazon best-seller The 150 Healthiest Foods on Earth, and his latest, The Healthiest Meals on Earth, books that have been endorsed and acclaimed by such luminaries as Mehmet Oz, MD, Christiane Northrup, MD and Mark Victor Hansen and a virtual who’s who in the field of integrative medicine and nutrition. For more information about products, services and coaching as well as a free newsletter and audiocourses, please visit him at www.jonnybowden.com

Jonny Bowden--

This week, a new study on diet and weight loss grabbed more headlines than a Britney signing.  You might have seen it reported on the Today Show, or read one of the many (misleading) headlines: "Low Carb Diet Beats Low-Fat in Diet Duel" (MSNBC), "Low Carb Diet Best for Weight, Cholesterol" (Associated Press), or--the most reasonable--"Study Fuels Low-Fat vs. Low-Carb Debate" (Wall Street Journal).

Because of the importance of this study- which after all was published in the ultra-conservative New England Journal of Medicine- I’m going to spend our whole time today discussing what we can- and can’t- learn from this study, which- like many diet studies- was poorly reported and somewhat misunderstood.

For starters, here’s what actually happened:

Israeli researchers recruited 322 moderately obese subjects and randomly assigned them to one of three dietary groups.

Group one followed a low-carb diet without any restriction on calories. For the first two months they limited their carbohydrate intake to 20 grams a day (the exact amount on the Induction Phase of Atkins) and were then encouraged to increase their intake of carbs up to a maximum of 120 grams a day of carbs. (Sharp eyed readers might note that 120 grams of carbs hardly constitutes an Atkins diet, even during the most generous “maintenance” phase. For someone eating 1500-1800 calories a day diet, that would be between 25-40% of calories from carbs, closer to “The Zone” than to Atkins. But I digress.)

In contrast, both the Mediterranean and the low-fat groups were calorie limited: 1500 calories a day for women and 1800 for men. The low-fat group followed the standard American Heart Association guidelines (30% of calories from fat). The Mediterranean group were allowed up to 35% fat, mostly from olive oil and nuts, and were counseled to substitute beef and lamb with poultry and fish.

Interestingly, all three groups lowered their calories significantly compared to where they started, even though the low-carb group wasn’t specifically told to do so, meaning the low-carb group “naturally” ate less calories without even trying. (This is an important point, since I’ve long maintained that a low-carb diet is easier to follow for many people-- especially those with sugar addictions-- because it doesn’t stimulate the appetite like high-carb diets frequently do.)

Fast forward two years: the low-carb group lost the most amount of weight, the low-fat diet brought up the rear and the Mediterranean group was in the middle.

The weight loss results, however, were only part of the picture. The low-carb group had the highest increase in HDL (‘good, protective cholesterol”), most improvement in cholesterol ratio, and the greatest reduction in triglycerides- an important risk factor for heart disease that I firmly believe is more important than cholesterol- (triglycerides didn’t budge in the low fat group).

It gets better. Low-carb dieters saw their C-Reactive Protein go down the most. C-Reactive protein is a very good measure of inflammation, something I think we need to be way more concerned with than cholesterol. Inflammation is a silent killer and a component of every degenerative disease from heart disease to obesity. Incidentally, C-Reactive Protein levels barely budged in the low-fat group.

Now for the “bad” news. The actual amount of weight lost on all three diets was pretty pathetic-- average of about 12 pounds for the low-carb group, 10 for the Mediterranean group and 7 for the low-fat group- statistically significant results, but pretty depressing considering this was over a two year period! Remember, though, those numbers were averages- some people lost a lot more (the highest number of pounds lost was lost on the low-carb approach, by the way).

So the first question that comes to mind is this: Did the subjects actually stick with their diets?

This is an impossible question to answer perfectly, and it’s not the researchers fault. Short of locking folks in a metabolic ward for two years and counting every calorie served to them and left on their plate, there’s no way to completely track compliance with any diet- people cheat, misunderstand the instructions, underreport what they ate, forget, and occasionally outright fib.

But the researchers were smart, and worked with what they had. In Israel, the biggest meal of the day is eaten at lunch, and in this study, everyone participating ate at the company cafeteria where everything was labeled and color coded, insuring the best compliance you could hope for. But we all know what an evening (or a morning) or a weekend can do to sabotage any plan.

So, a lot of weight lost? Not really. But what’s really remarkable about the results is that they didn’t gain any weight over 2 years (and managed to lose some to boot!) Most people in that demographic (slightly obese, middle aged), left to their own devices, would continue to pack on the pounds. The fact that these people not only didn’t gain but actually lost - albeit not that much- shows that there’s hope.

This program shows that employers can actually make a big difference. What worked here- besides the diet programs themselves- was the group support, the counseling, the accountability and the change in choices that was made available at their workplace.

That’s a pretty optimistic finding, if you ask me. (Employers and schools- take notice!)

Most important of all, the study shows that there are health benefits to a low-carb approach that go way beyond weight loss. Lowered C-Reactive Protein, lowered triglycerides and increased HDL is nothing to sneeze at and a nice slap in the face of the establishment that keeps telling us how “unhealthy’ low carb diets are!

And call me crazy- I can’t help wondering if the low-carb group would had lost even more weight if they had eaten less than the 120 grams of carbs these folks ate, all the while keeping calories at a moderate, reduced amount and incorporating other lifestyle changes like exercise and stress reduction. Can you imagine? A more reasonable level of under 100 grams a day (or even less) might have made a lot of difference- that’s a level that seems to work the best for people who have problems with sugar, insulin and carbohydrates in general.

Also worth mentioning: I think a lot of the “distinctions” between the three diets- especially between the Low-Carb and Mediterranean approach- were somewhat artificial. You could easily follow low-carb and eat more olive oil and nuts, and you could easily follow Mediterranean and eat low carb. Both programs emphasize a ton of vegetables (yes, even low-carb diets!) healthy protein and good fat. In this study, even the “low-fat” approach sounded dangerously close to the Mediterranean diet (30% of fat vs. 35%).

The best we can say about this important study is that it got a lot of attention (after all this was the New England Journal) and gave credibility to the researchers stated conclusion that there are other ways to go besides low-fat. And to the conclusion that no one program works for everyone, and that some people may be more metabolically suited to low-carb (just as some may thrive on vegetarian or raw food diets).

And as far as the dismal weight loss results, let’s just remember that weight loss remains a tough nut to crack, but with the right match between program and person, the right social support system, a level of determination and commitment, it can be done. And frequently is- often with much more dramatic results than were seen in this study.

Oxidized Cholesterol Leads To Damage

Mediterranean Diet Is Rich In Antioxidants And Low In Harmful Fats

David Coleman is known nationwide as The Dating Doctor™ and “America’s Real-Life Hitch!” He has been honored eleven times as the National Speaker of the Year - 8 times by Campus Activities Magazine and 3 times by The National Association for Campus Activities. He has just won Speaker Of The Year again in 2008! He is a highly sought after speaker, entertainer, emcee, author, leadership trainer, retreat facilitator, and radio and television personality.
His most recent book, Making Relationships Matter, has entered its second printing run, and his previous works, Date Smart! and 101 Great Dates are well respected and continue to impact lives nationwide. He has been a featured speaker for the Sprint Corporation, Merrill Lynch, The Kroger Co., Federated and Flo-Tork, Inc. as well as civic organizations such as MOPS (Mothers of Pre-Schoolers), Junior Achievement, Circle K International, and Mortar Board. David received a National Service Citation from President George Bush, served as a spokesperson for Microsoft's Streets and Trips 2004 worldwide rollout campaign, was honored as a Distinguished Alumnus by BGSU, and is currently serving as a spokesperson for MSN Online Shopping.

David Coleman--

The longer the process of electing the 43rd President of the United Sates drags on, the more I realize the decision before us is not about whose policies we identify with most. Nor is it about who has more or less experience, is too young or too old to lead or who holds the greatest promise of delivering us from the economic malaise in which we find ourselves mired. Those are catchy smoke screens and media sound bites, but when we step into that voting booth on November 4, 2008, and our hand hovers over the ballot, we are actually deciding who we prefer to "marry" for the next four years. That's right, marry...who will be our new partner for the next 1,465 days?

Election Day is a commitment ceremony of sorts, for if the object of our affection wins, we have willfully entered into a "relationship" with this person. Due to our vote, we will now see him on television every day, hear him on the radio, and read about him in newspapers, magazines and on the internet. He will represent us all over the world to people we will never meet and to places we will never go. There will be no hiding from him, and barring some unforeseen circumstance whereby he is impeached or cannot finish his term, we will be committed to him with no chance of separation, divorce or annulment. We have been "courted" by these gentlemen for several years now and even for the most ardent of supporters, certain feelings are beginning to wain as enough is enough already. Are we committing to one of these candidates out of undying support and respect or out of loyalty and obligation, as we have supported them this far, we might as well carry it through...right?

In this country, we rarely remember who finished second and nowhere is that more true than in a presidential election. John Kerry was an eyelash away from being President of the United States, but following his controversial loss, he all but disappeared from our public consciousness. Al Gore, who won the Presidency, oops then lost it, then appealed and lost it again, would have fallen victim to the same fate had it not been for his whirlwind Global Warming Green Tour and Nobel Peace Prize that kept him in our thoughts. Even with all that, he is an afterthought as the Democratic Convention begins. What have you done for me lately and what can you do for me soon? I guess you don't have to do a thing, because we aren't "a couple."

If we are going to commit to a new partner for the next fours years, let's make sure we are doing it for the right reasons. There are five characteristics found in healthy, mutually beneficial relationships. They are trust, respect, intimacy, passion and commitment. Trust is the confidence to believe that a person's words and actions will be what they say they will be. Respect is mutual, equal and earned, over time, from consistent sincerity, honesty and production. Intimacy involves effective communication, heartfelt regular contact, shared faith and vision, hope and a sense of connection to the person and their mission. Passion stirs our emotions. We are attracted to the person, what they stand for and how they deliver their message. Do they walk their talk and do they do it with class? Commitment is unwavering and unconditional. None of us wants to proudly display the bumper sticker of our new partner on our car only to find ourselves trying to skim it off the bumper with a utility knife only months later.

In a healthy relationship, the "stronger" person takes care of the "weaker" person until they no longer need that type of assistance and are healthy on their own. In an unhealthy relationship, the stronger person takes advantage of the weaker person to keep them down, under control, and as needy and desperate as possible. So ask yourself these questions, "With which candidate will you have a more healthy, long-term relationship? With which candidate can you be confident about an equal exchange of the five characteristics found in healthy relationships? And with which candidate can you permanently affix their bumper sticker to your car without fear of having to remove it under the cover of darkness if they fail to meet or exceed your expectations?"

Over the next four years, the issues will come and go, as will individual successes and failures. But one thing is for certain, one of them will be with you, every day...in your home, in your car, in your head, on your screen, in your ear and even in your wallet. So, before you push that pin or touch that screen, make sure you aren't just marrying out of obligation.

Poll Speculating On Presidential Politics

The Big Night--Does Obama Need A Tune Up?

Oil Speculators And Presidential Politics

Stuart A. Seale, M.D., board-certified family physician and co-author of The 30-Day Diabetes Miracle, has helped thousands of patients over the past quarter century. He serves as the medical director for Ardmore Institute of Health, and is the medical director, physician, and educator for Lifestyle Center of America’s Stopping Diabetes Program ™ in Sedona, Arizona. He conducts an advanced wellness and healthy lifestyle workshop called The Well Experience ™, and also maintains a private, mobile medical practice, Room Calls Sedona. Dr. Seale has also received the 3-year AMA Physician Recognition Award eight times, most recently in 2007.

Stuart Seale--

All of us who drive an automobile know about the “blind spot,” the area just next to us where another vehicle may be present without us knowing it is there. What many of us may not know, however, is that we can develop blind spots in our thinking. It is human nature to look beyond ourselves as we try to explain why certain negative events, such as developing obesity or type 2 diabetes, happen in our lives. We can overlook the obvious, something that is within us, as we seek to find solutions to our problems. I am afraid many researchers, seeking to find answers to the growing epidemics of obesity and type 2 diabetes sweeping across America and the rest of the world, have developed a blind spot of massive proportions. The cause and effect relationship between obesity and the subsequent risk for developing type 2 diabetes is overlooked, as well as the fact that obesity is due to eating too much of the wrong kinds of foods and not exercising enough. The only way to control obesity (and subsequently type 2 diabetes) is by making simple changes in nutrition and physical activity – but we need to check our blind spot if we are to plainly see this truth and then take action.

In the past few weeks, there has been interesting research results reported regarding obesity and type 2 diabetes. One study, coming from John Hopkins School of Public Health, discovered that urinary arsenic levels were 26 percent higher in those with type 2 diabetes than those without. Exposure to arsenic was thought to be through low levels found in drinking water and the conclusion of the researchers was that exposure to arsenic in drinking water may be playing a role in the increasing prevalence of type 2 diabetes. Another recent study focused on dietary saturated fat during pregnancy or breastfeeding, and its role in causing type 2 diabetes in offspring. The study was done in rats, with an increased incidence of diabetes in the offspring of rats fed the high fat diet. The conclusion was that there could be metabolic programming during pregnancy or breastfeeding that could make offspring more susceptible to diabetes. These are just a few of the more notable study results that have recently been published. Here are a few others: exposure to MSG (monosodium glutamate) is related to obesity; frequent middle ear infections in childhood increases risk for obesity in adulthood; tonsillectomy increases risk for weight gain; exposure to PCB (polychlorinated biphenyl) increases risk of developing type 2 diabetes; and clumsiness at age 7, or poor motor skills at age 11, are associated with obesity in adulthood.

It is very easy to read such findings and determine that it is beyond your control to do anything about obesity or the type 2 diabetes that often accompanies it. After all, isn’t it easier to think you have a weight problem or type 2 diabetes because you were a clumsy kid that had frequent ear infections and drank a lot of water, rather than because you eat too many Big Macs with cheese, and never exercise? In effect, such studies interfere with the success of individuals who are battling these disorders, and ultimately makes them victims by discouraging them from claiming power over conditions that can be reversed through relatively simple lifestyle behavior changes. A blind spot has been created, one that hides the fact that no matter what the genetic or other risk factors are for developing obesity and type 2 diabetes, it is the individual who has control over, and can determine whether or not those conditions ever occur. Or, once they are present, whether or not they can be reversed.

If you want to prevent obesity and type 2 diabetes, or if you have them and want to start reversing them, start today by making some simple changes – eat more fiber by substituting fruits, vegetables, 100% whole grains, and beans for the meat, poultry, fish, and dairy that you are currently consuming. Eat a large breakfast, a smaller lunch, and eat a very light supper – or skip it completely. Weigh yourself every day, so you can stop weight gain trends when they first begin. Become more active physically – even small changes will be beneficial. Take a 10-minute stroll after every meal, and a 20-minute brisk walk 2 hours after each meal. And don’t be a victim of poor thinking! When it comes to obesity and type 2 diabetes, check your blind spot and don’t be mislead or confused by research results that tell you anything other than this – these are disorders that are caused by poor choices in the areas of nutrition and physical activity, and as such you can take control and make them go away.

The Cost of Diabetes In The United States

The Real Cure For Type 2 Diabetes

Are You Insulin Resistant?