Community centers  NC HH or individual food security, NC food expenditures, NC food consumption, ↑ social status, ↑ self-confidence  ↑ health and knowledge, ↓ anemia, ↑/NC HH food security, NC individual food security, NC food expenditures, ↑/NC food consumption, ↑/NC dietary diversity, ↑ MN-rich foods (Fe, vitamin A, vitamin C, calcium), ↑/NC intake of protein, ↑ ASF intake, ↑/NC BMI, ↑ weight gain, ↑ social status, ↑ self-confidence, ↑/NC decision-making  ↑ health and nutrition knowledge, ↓/NC anemia, ↑/NC HH food security, ↑/NC food expenditures, ↑/NC HH food consumption, ↑/NC dietary diversity, ↑ nutrient-rich foods (Fe, vitamin A), NC intake of protein, ↑/NC intake of vegetables and ASF, ↑/NC BMI, ↓ underweight, ↑ weight gain, NC diarrheal morbidity, ↑ self-confidence, ↑/NC decision-making, ↑ control HH resources  ↑ health knowledge, ↑/NC HH food security, ↑/NC HH food consumption, ↑ dietary diversity, ↑ self-confidence, ↑/NC decision-making 
The impact of income-generation interventions on women's nutrition has not been sufficiently evaluated. Income-generating interventions were associated with increases in women's income, empowerment, and household decision-making (161, 164–166). However, these gains were often at the expense of more work for women (5). Income-generation interventions have been associated with increased food-related expenditures, improved household food security, and greater household dietary diversity (160, 161, 165–168). Income-generating interventions targeting adolescents improved their social status; however, these showed no impact on their access to food, nor on individual and household food security (169). There was also limited evidence of impacts of income-generating interventions on women's anthropometric and biochemical nutrition outcomes (5, 169, 170). Increased income was associated with reductions in maternal underweight and anemia, but the reductions were modest (171). Studies suggested that the limited impact was related to continued poor access to health services (167), poor measurement, and the need for longer evaluation periods (164, 165, 167, 169).
Popular belief says if you really want to make a big change, focus on one new healthy habit at a time. But Stanford University School of Medicine researchers say working on your diet and fitness simultaneously may put the odds of reaching both goals more in your favor. They followed four groups of people: The first zoned in on their diets before adding exercise months later, the second did the opposite, the third focused on both at once, and the last made no changes. Those who doubled up were most likely to work out 150 minutes a week and get up to nine servings of fruits and veggies daily while keeping their calories from saturated fat at 10 percent or less of their total intake. 
Complementing income-generating interventions with interventions that more directly target women's nutrition has potential to have greater impacts on women's nutritional status (171). Integrated interventions were associated with improvements in health knowledge and behaviors, as well as increased intake of nutrient-rich foods (5, 164, 169, 170, 172). In Bangladesh and Cambodia, the aforementioned EHFP program was associated with increased income, decision-making power in the household, food expenditure (including on oils, salts, spices, fish, rice, and meat), and consumption of fruits and vegetables from home gardens (160, 173). There was also limited, but mixed, evidence of income-generating interventions and behavior change communication causing improvements in maternal anemia and BMI (164, 168, 170).

Frankly, looking around, it seems your choice is either a magazine that barely addresses fitness, or going straight to the hardcore muscle-building mags. I was hoping for something reasonably in-between with Women's Health, but failed to find it. If someone knows of such a magazine, I'd be interested to hear it (I tried Women's Fitness, which suffers from the same problems as Women's Health). The good news is that my subscription to Women's Health seemed to get me a good price on Men's Health, which I am switching over to because some reviewers recommended it for those disappointed with the content of WH. I'll see how that works out.
Many WASH interventions targeted mothers and their caregiving behaviors for children. However, these interventions were applied to entire households and not individual household members. Larger community-based hygiene and sanitation initiatives broadly reached more people in the community (131). However, certain populations such as the elderly and young children might have limited access to public infrastructure, such as public latrines, particularly if there are physical and economic barriers to accessing them (136).
  Community centers  ↑/NC knowledge about hygiene and sanitation, ↑ water quality, ↓ diarrheal morbidity  ↑/NC knowledge about hygiene and sanitation, ↑ water quality, ↓ diarrheal morbidity  ↑/NC knowledge about hygiene and sanitation, ↑/NC hand-washing, ↑ water quality, NC waste disposal, ↓ diarrheal morbidity  ↑/NC knowledge about hygiene and sanitation, ↑ water quality, ↓ diarrheal morbidity 
In our review, we found that fortification interventions that provided fortified foods reached women of all life stages through home visits, community distribution centers, local markets, and retail stores. Delivery of fortified foods in school-based programs, at work, and in maternal–child health centers were also used to target school-age children, women of reproductive age, and pregnant and lactating women that were engaged with those facilities (37, 72–74, 84). There was mixed evidence that consumption of fortified foods reached all socioeconomic groups. Some studies showed differences in consumption between nonpoor and extremely poor, and between urban and rural stakeholders (33, 64, 85). Women who have restricted access to markets, depend largely on locally grown foods, are in areas with underdeveloped distribution channels, or have limited purchasing power, might have limited access to fortified foods (64). Additional research is needed to address implementation gaps and to determine the best platforms for reaching high-risk populations.

Second, the scope of nutrition-specific and nutrition-sensitive approaches was largely focused on undernutrition. There were major research and programming gaps in studies targeting overweight, obesity, and noncommunicable disease. In our review, the interventions addressing overweight, obesity, and noncommunicable disease were limited to nutrition education and integrated healthcare. However, overweight and obesity were identified as potential concerns for interventions targeting undernutrition, including food supplementation, and in-kind and cash transfers. This might be a result of the types of interventions that were evaluated, but also speaks to the need to broaden the scope of nutrition interventions that are commonly assessed (5, 13, 14) to explicitly address overweight, obesity, and noncommunicable disease as nutrition outcomes, and not just as unintended consequences. Globally, there is limited evidence of large-scale interventions that effectively prevent, treat, or correctly classify adiposity-related noncommunicable diseases, and this is a growing area of concern around the world (208). Future evaluations of nutrition interventions might also include interventions that influence women's time and physical environment, and that encourage physical activity or change in access to and affordability of certain foods, as these might also influence overweight, obesity, and noncommunicable disease outcomes for women.
Also limit the amount of cholesterol you consume. Cholesterol is a fat-like substance found in every cell of the body. It helps digest some fats, strengthen cell membranes and make hormones. But too much cholesterol can be dangerous: When blood cholesterol reaches high levels, it can build up on artery walls, increasing the risk of blood clots, heart attack and stroke. Although dietary cholesterol can contribute to heart disease, the greater risk comes from a diet high in saturated and trans fats.
It’s been a while since I’ve picked up any of these, but when I did, the messages weren’t nearly as body-positive. In fact, a quick perusal of other Shape magazine covers from the 1980s (I was probably still reading Seventeen then, but still) shows a bunch of celebrity cover models who would like you to get off the couch immediately, with demands like “Get Strong!” and “Push For Fitness!” Also suspect: “How To Think And Eat Like A Thin Person” and “Is Food Your Lover? How To End The Affair.”
Protein should provide about 15% of a healthy person's daily calories. As a rule of thumb, people of both sexes and any size will do fine with about 60 grams of protein a day. Athletes who have large muscles and work out hard may need 20% more. But even that's not very much; 8 ounces of chicken or 6 ounces of canned tuna, for example, will fit the bill.