nutritionwonderland

Author: nutrition

  • Food Safety Enhancement Act (HR 2749) Advances Out of Committee

    Food Safety Enhancement Act (HR 2749) Advances Out of Committee

    UPDATE at bottom (jump there now)

    Wednesday June 10th marked a historic day in food safety as the Food Safety Enhancement Act (HR 2749) moved out of subcommittee for a vote in the US House in the coming weeks. Here we review the bill and talk about what you can expect in the weeks to come.

    HR 2749 is patching up the archaic Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act from the 1930s, the last time food safety legislation was significantly updated (believe it or not). This legislation set up the fractured structure we have today – that has given us countless recalls of late. The genesis of for a new bill was the peanut butter recall earlier this year but, in reality, this legislation has been coming for a long, long time.

    Poised for a comeback?

    Interestingly, the usual detractors to food safety legislation have had a huge break in their ranks because of the peanut butter scare. While large meat producers like Tyson and Smithfield are dumping their usual lobbying efforts against HR 2749, the processed food industry is now endorsing this legislation – overwhelming the meat industry’s efforts. There is no sea change in ethics going on here; the estimated $1 billion lost by industry (and $200 million alone by the Peanut Corporation of America) is the real reason. It seems poisoning your customers is bad business.

    Are Small Farms Protected?

    The legislation is doing a bunch of things for food safety, most notably giving the FDA mandatory recall authority. This has been a major sticking point for previous iterations of this legislation in the House, because House reps more than senators represent small fiefdoms inside large rural states. These districts worry recalls will disproportionately harm smaller businesses and processors versus their larger partners. In a sense, FDA recalls and fees would represent a regressive tax.

    This is an extremely valid concern given the FDA’s proclivity for influence from industry. However, this bill was able to climb out of committee in the House because it properly addressed small growers and farmers markets. Specifically, Section 107 of the bill which stipulates ‘Traceability Requirements’ on most farms makes an exemption for farmer’s markets (more or less):

    ‘(4) EXEMPTIONS-

    ‘(A) DIRECT SALES BY FARMS- Food is exempt from the requirements of this subsection if such food is–

    ‘(i) produced on a farm; and

    ‘(ii) sold by the owner, operator, or agent in charge of such farm directly to a consumer or restaurant.

    Traceability is a huge issue and this bill seeks to establish a new electronic system for tracking that will be vetted over the course of a couple years.  The exemption for small farmers is good but poorly defined.  We hope this vague language about exemptions gets tightened up as the bill moves forward. It would be a pity to see this single exemption allow major agribusiness farmers off the hook.

    Watch some of the debate in congress over this very issue:

    Quarantine Authority, however, is maintained for all farms, restaurants, convenience stores and grocery stores – and this ability is really what gives this legislation its teeth. The FDA has been tied in knots over what it can do once it finds problems in the system; this legislation overcomes that problem and would be a major boon to the FDA’s policing powers, for better or worse. This part of the legislation will surely evolve when the bill comes up for a full vote in the weeks to come, so stay tuned if you are interested in the finer points.

    What does this cost?

    This new legislation is original in that it imposes it costs on the very people it is inspecting, a controversial move. This allows the legislation to scale up with the growth of industry, which has been a huge problem for the current FDA. In 1972, the FDA conducted 50,000 food safety inspections; in 2006, the FDA conducted 9,164. Obviously, more coverage is required but again, the worry is how this new provision will impact the booming small, sustainable agriculture field.

    The major concession made yesterday that helped get this legislation out of committee was by paying attention to smaller establishments. They reduced the yearly fee paid to the FDA by 50% from $1000 to $500, a fee they argue should be affordable for all and one that does not cover all of the FDA’s costs. Our worry is that if this fee does not cover the FDA’s new actions, it will gradually go up over time. It would seem smarter to price in what it costs to make this legislation happen rather than begging for funds later.

    We will cover this bill more as it progresses but as it stands now, it is a huge improvement over the system we currently have from the 1930s.

    Watch the opening remarks on the legislation here:

     

    UPDATE:

    As of June 17th, the HR2749 has officially been voted out of committee for a vote in the US House in the coming months.

    The Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association (MOFGA) has some interesting things to say about the legislation. They were working directly with the congress to address the concerns of small farmers – and they appear to have done a great job. All 12 of their most immediate concerns were addressed. Some of the major ones were:

    • exemptions for traceback systems for direct market sellers
    • criteria for produce safety standards that include their impact on family farms and organic farms
    • ways to incorporate other standards (e.g. fair trade) into import standards through accreditation

    The full list can be read here:

    The Ethicurean also had some good words on the subject. Here is a list of what they gleaned from the legislation:

    • high-risk food processors HAVE to be inspected 1-2X per year
    • fees are expected to give the FDA about $200 million to conduct new inspections
    • the FDA get rulemaking authority for the ‘safe growing and harvesting of produce’

    In addition, there is a $175,000 cap on total fees for any one operation, which may be revised upwards, considering the size of some individual operations now in existence. The exact slide of the sliding-fee scale is yet to be determined.

    Both Ethicurean and MOFGA note that the legislation does not yet fully comprehend the role farmers have in processing small food stuffs and how that interacts with the larger food system. No line has been drawn as to what size a farm is before it becomes a potential widespread health hazard – so they ask for more guidance there.

    Overall, this legislation seems to be shaping up quite nicely for all parties involved. But much time remains and it still has to go to a vote in both the House and Senate. At least, both Republicans and Democrats were complimenting each other on how they worked together. Did hell just freeze over?

  • Food Inc. Review – Advance DC Screening

    Food Inc. Review – Advance DC Screening

    Food. We all eat it. But only a select few know how it is produced. Food Inc., the first full length movie from the PBS documentarist Robert Kenner, aims to teach everyone how their food got to their plate – and it succeeds in spades. Dark chicken coops with 300,000 birds, illegal workers being recruited for hog slaughterhouses, feed lots bigger than Rhode Island – its all here in depressing detail. But for those of you that have already been sinking your spades into various organic gardens, Food Inc. will leave you wanting more. A lot more.

    Down in It

    The movie takes you through a a loosely constructed narrative, trying to explain how we got such an industrialized agricultural system in the United States. Eric Schlosser, author of Fast Food Nation, sets the tone as he describes how we have gotten to where we are today, in a similar way to his book. The answer, in short: Fast Food.

    Eric Scholosser of Fast Food Nation fame

    Companies like McDonalds, Burger King and Wendy’s require so much food as inputs for their operations that they have effectively shaped the system by being the biggest customer. These companies put low prices first, which has gotten us a highly efficient food machine– an accomplishment, which some in the movie are understandably proud. The basic message is that when you go to the supermarket, you are basically eating the leftovers from the fast food industry. Not light stuff.

    After some disturbing tours of the industrial food system and the e.coli food borne illnesses they breed, we get shown how the various companies use illegal workers in very dangerous working conditions. With the graphic imagery, this part of the movie seemed to really hit the audience; the people we were with who had very little idea what was going on in the slaughter houses of America were particularly moved by this sequence.

    A Little Light

    In a slightly more upbeat sequence, Michael Pollan makes his grand entrance. We get walked through Joel Salatin’s Polyface Farm from Omnivore Dilemma’s fame and, more generally, introduced to many of Pollan and Co.’s ideas on how proper agricultural practices should take place. Open air slaughter, pastured animals, and a very low tech approach appeals to our agrarian roots as a country. Salatin himself is worthy of a movie.

    Michael Pollan

    But you have to wonder, anyone interested in this subject has at least heard of and probably read Michael Pollan’s book Omnivore’s Dilemma. For better or worse, Pollan’s portion of Food Inc. is the theatrical adaptation of the now famous book. This part of the movie will open some eyes but we wonder how many given the almost four years that has lapsed since its publication.

    As much as we enjoyed this journey (which was rounded out by another corporate shellacking – this time Monsanto and its role in the seed market) we found the movie’s sections were only vaguely related to each other but it was not to the point that it made the movie unwatchable. Each section stood on its own in an internet-youtube-sort-of way. It worked but organizational structure was not this movie’s strong point. Devastating content was – and for that reason alone, you should see this movie. You would be hard pressed to get a better look inside the food system without some very important friends – and they probably wouldn’t even let you take pictures. But not all is perfect with this film.

    The Real Question at Hand

    If you peel back the thin (and we mean razor-thin) veil between the hate you can feel the producers have for these agribusiness corporations, you can see this movie more properly as a critique of the relationship between corporations and government. Even though agribusiness is included in this film (Monsanto even claims they wanted to be in the film – dubious claim), the real question raised in this movie has nothing to do with food and everything to do with politics:

    ‘What role should corporations have in determining how government regulates them?’

    It’s the 500 lbs gorilla in the room that Schlosser and Pollan do not address. Food Inc. never formally argued for extensive regulation of the system at every turn but its often implied. The movie does however advocate for an almost complete return to the Jeffersonian ideal of agrarian America – where each American (or a sizable legion of small farmers) tends a little farm in harmony with nature. And that’s where Food Inc. begins to fail.

    Not All Roses

    As a documentary illuminating a subject, Food Inc. has few equals – maybe An Inconvenient Truth or Enron, The Smartest Guys in the Room but little else can match just how artfully Robert Kenner has constructed the message here. As for the real rallying cry the sustainable agriculture movement has been longing for, Food Inc. silently passes. The film never formally makes its case for advocacy or policy and only throws a few casual suggestions to its audience as the film’s credits commence. Traditional farmers are made to look especially foolish in the film – almost vilified as poor and helpless, groveling at Monsanto’s feet for scraps.

    How could this have been left out of the movie?

    These critiques are outdated and the conversation should be moving along with the movement. Frenetic growth in farmer’s markets and organics over the past five years seems almost like an afterthought to this film. Outside of the Stoneyfield Farm aside in the film, this heavy tone of despair was unnecessary when there is some serious success to celebrate. Many farmers across America have taken up the challenge against industrial agriculture Food Inc. calls for, certified themselves organic and are pioneering a new way forward. Food Inc. is again silent on this now gigantic movement, only briefly profiling Polyface Farms.

    During a Q & A after the movie, many of these critiques were brought up and not answered very well by Pollan or anyone else in the panel. Maybe this criticism is too harsh, as this movie never claimed to be anything but a trip into the world of industrial agriculture. But with so many high powered people involved in the film from within the movement, we had hoped for more.

    Worth the Price of Admission?

    It all depends on who you are. If you are just getting into these issues, by all means, run over to the theater. But will you even be able to see this movie? Documentaries almost exclusively play to arthouse cinema crowds – theaters that are typically in larger, liberal cities all with audiences well versed in these issues, as was our DC audience on the whole.

    With that said, the real commercial audience for this movie is a bit unknown to us. The sustainable agriculture crowd will be there, of course, but who else? Middle America needs to be there but we aren’t sure it will even get air time in Wichita, Kansas or Amarillo, Texas, nor are we sure that the corn farmers and ranchers there would even want to see their livelihood disparaged on such a scale.

    Even with these critiques, this movie should be seen if it is playing near you – especially if you have little knowledge of industrial agriculture. The movement Food Inc., is trying to spark already exists in fragments across America. Sustainable agriculture is so young and fragile, trying to achieve so much as a movement, that it moves in many fits and starts. Food Inc. may be the brightest ray of sunshine we have seen yet but we are still staring into an abyss.

  • Brain Food: Berries and Greens! (Part 2)

    Brain Food: Berries and Greens! (Part 2)

    We all know that we should be eating our 5-7 servings a day of fruits and vegetables. But there’s good reason to make quite a few of those servings berries. Berries, like blueberries, strawberries and cranberries, have all kinds of nutritional benefits because of their color – no, really.

    This article is the 2nd part of a 2 part series about Brain Food.  You might also find our first installment on Nuts helpful in understanding the Brain > Food connection.

    The berry

    The main pigments which color berries the bright blues and reds are anthocyanins, which just happen to be more than just colorful. They’re powerful antioxidants which have benefits similar to the Vitamin E in nuts. In the plants, these pigment molecules serve to protect the fruit from sun damage, bacteria, viruses, fungi and the harmful free radicals that are produced during photosynthesis.

    When eaten, they pass these effects on to us. Anthocyanins turn on and off important genes in our brains, allow cells to respond quickly and efficiently to signals, and even promote the growth of new nerve cells. Though present in all kinds of vegetables, fruits, and flowers, anthocyanins are found at their highest levels in:

    • blueberries
    • blackberries
    • black and red raspberries
    • black and red currants
    • red grapes
    • red wines

    Blueberries and Beyond

    Blueberries are often touted as a ‘superfood‘, having so much good stuff packed into each delicious bite – and for good reason. Blueberries have been shown to contain more antioxidants than 50 other fresh fruits and vegetables, which protect our brains from aging-related degeneration and improve cognitive function. They also have been shown to improve short term memory, coordination, and navigation skills due to how the compounds support neurotransmission, improve blood vessel elasticity and ramp up protective kinases like ERK and PKC.

     

    Superfood!

    A 2007 symposium on berry health benefits showed that blueberries (and other berries, like cranberries) may alleviate the cognitive decline occurring in Alzheimer’s disease and other conditions of aging. Studies in rats have found that dietary blueberries improve mental abilities, and those genetically prone to Alzheimer’s-like brain problems can prevent the neurological symptoms by consuming blueberry extract.

    Blueberries even wear capes!

    But that’s not to dis other berries. Strawberries contain fisetin, which has been found to improve long-term memory. They’re also rich in iodine, which is key for the brain and nervous system to properly function, and Vitamin C, which also acts as an antioxidant. One study

    , published in Neurobiology of Aging, found that different berries had different positive effects, and that the best thing for us, then, is a mix.

    Strawberry with fisetin

    Strawberries helped rats memorize and run a maze faster while blueberries boosted their memories and ability to run it backwards, processes which use two different parts of the brain. And other berries are great for us, too. Black raspberries and cranberries are even under investigation as treatments for cancer! So the best thing is a combination of berries to get all of their nutritious brain-boosting goodies.

    The best part is that gorging on berries has few, if any, drawbacks. They’ve been shown to help reduce bad cholesterol and enhance weight loss, so you don’t have to worry about packing on a couple extra pound or two by overdoing it. They’ve been linked to good heart health, particularly when you start young. And, just to make them seem too good to be true: research has indicated that a combination of berries and the fatty, Vitamin E filled nuts is even better, with the two acting synergistically to provide more brain-boosting benefits than the sum of their individual effects.

    Don’t Weed Out Greens

    While berries are fantastic, other veggies, particularly leafy greens, are also super brain foods. Vegetables have all kinds of good nutrients in them, including the Vitamin E found in nuts, and they’ve been shown to help keep brains sharp as we age. In one study, eating 2.8 servings of vegetables a day led to 40% slower rates of cognitive decline than eating less than one serving per day.

    Spinach for Vitamin A

    Spinach and other greenery are rich sources of B vitamins, which are essential for the production of neurotransmitters like serotonin, dopamine and norepinephrine. These chemicals not only boost your thinking and memory, they balance your mood to help keep you balanced and focused on the task at hand. They also help fight the degenerative affects of aging on our brains.

    Low levels of B vitamins have been linked to cognitive decline in aging men. Another study found that people the lowest levels of dietary B vitamins were 80% more likely to have Alzheimer’s. These veggies also contain folate, which can help prevent the strokes which lead to brain degeneration.

    Green, leafy veggies are also high in iron. Iron is a key nutrient for our brains, and its deficiency, called ‘anemia’, can have devastating impacts. Numerous studies have found that a lack of iron, particularly when we’re young, has strong consequences on our minds. Iron deficiency in youth can lead to irreversible changes in brain chemistry, organization and structure. But it’s not just kids who need iron.

    One study found that adult women lacking in iron performed worse and more slowly on mental tasks than those who had enough in their systems – a difference that was erased when the anemic women were given iron supplements for two months. Anemia, which causes a lack of heme, the body’s way of transporting oxygen to cells, can lead to brain cell death.

    Tomtoms!

    Other vegetables, like tomatoes, are full of great nutrients like Vitamin C and Vitamin A. And legumes, leafy greens, and other vegetables are even high in protein, which the brain uses as neurotransmitter building blocks. And you don’t just have to eat all these vegetables raw. As we told you before, some vegetables actually have more antioxidants and other nutrients when steamed, boiled or fried than they do uncooked.

    And, like berries, the best part is it’s pretty tough to overeat greens. My grandpa always tells a story about a conversation he had with his nutritionist. “I don’t lose weight no matter what I do,” he said. “I could get fat on just broccoli!” Her response was simple: she just smiled and said “Go ahead. Try it.”

    Eat more salads and vegetables and you’ll be maintaining a slim figure while keeping your brain sharp!

    In Short: Feed Your Mind

    Keep this in mind: our brains, which are about 2% of our body by weight, use up 20% of our daily calorie intake. So to keep it sharp you have to keep it fed. Particular parts are extremely sensitive to dropping blood sugar levels, especially those related to thinking and clarity. After all, if you’re a little hungry, you don’t want to stop breathing, so the portions that control basic functions are fairly resilient. But you’ll find that if you starve yourself for a little while, you start to lose the ability to do easy math or memorization – tasks not required, specifically, to live.

    It’s important that you keep your blood glucose even for the best brain power, and having a snack (particularly of brain-boosting foods!) in and of itself will help you think sharper in between meals.  That doesn’t mean eat all the time or too much. High glucose levels and the immune system’s response to them are damaging to all types of cells. It’s even been suggested that high glucose levels for extended time periods can lead to Alzheimer’s – so don’t overdo it! But keeping your brain fed, especially with the foods above, will keep you at your sharpest all day long, even above and beyond their other brain-boosting effects.

    References:

    1. Joseph JA, Shukitt-Hale B, Denisova NA, Bielinski D, Martin A, McEwen JJ, & Bickford PC (1999). Reversals of age-related declines in neuronal signal transduction, cognitive, and motor behavioral deficits with blueberry, spinach, or strawberry dietary supplementation. The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 19 (18), 8114-21 PMID: 10479711
    2. Gordon, M., Diamond, D., Shukitt-Hale, B., Morgan, D., Joseph, J., Denisova, N., & Arendash, G. (2003). Blueberry Supplementation Enhances Signaling and Prevents Behavioral Deficits in an Alzheimer Disease Model Nutritional Neuroscience, 6 (3), 153-162 DOI: 10.1080/1028415031000111282
    3. Maher, P., Akaishi, T., & Abe, K. (2006). Flavonoid fisetin promotes ERK-dependent long-term potentiation and enhances memory Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103 (44), 16568-16573 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0607822103
    4. Shukitt-Hale, B., Carey, A., Jenkins, D., Rabin, B., & Joseph, J. (2007). Beneficial effects of fruit extracts on neuronal function and behavior in a rodent model of accelerated aging Neurobiology of Aging, 28 (8), 1187-1194 DOI: 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2006.05.031
    5. Morris MC, Evans DA, Tangney CC, Bienias JL, & Wilson RS (2006). Associations of vegetable and fruit consumption with age-related cognitive change. Neurology, 67 (8), 1370-6 PMID: 17060562
    6. Tucker KL, Qiao N, Scott T, Rosenberg I, & Spiro A 3rd (2005). High homocysteine and low B vitamins predict cognitive decline in aging men: the Veterans Affairs Normative Aging Study. The American journal of clinical nutrition, 82 (3), 627-35 PMID: 16155277
    7. Beard J (2003). Iron deficiency alters brain development and functioning. The Journal of nutrition, 133 (5 Suppl 1) PMID: 12730445
    8. Murray-Kolb LE, & Beard JL (2007). Iron treatment normalizes cognitive functioning in young women. The American journal of clinical nutrition, 85 (3), 778-87 PMID: 17344500
    9. Atamna, H. (2002). Heme deficiency may be a factor in the mitochondrial and neuronal decay of aging Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99 (23), 14807-14812 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.192585799
  • Understanding Our Bodies: Leptin (The Fullness Hormone)

    Understanding Our Bodies: Leptin (The Fullness Hormone)

    Time and time again, I tell you guys that the best way to stay healthy is to stay informed. Read labels, I say. Know what you’re eating. Know what you’re not eating. Know this, know that, etc and make informed decisions. Well, part of making informed decisions is understanding how your body works. And for that reason, I’ve decided to dive into a bit of physiology.

    Even informed consumers tend to know very little about how their appetites actually work. What makes you hungry or full? Why do some foods fill us up more than others? What exactly is going on in our bodies, anyway?

    I figured you just might want to know. So here is part one of a new series I call “Understanding Our Bodies” – nutrition based on how our bodies work. And to kick it off is a little explanation of the fullness hormone: Leptin.

    What is Leptin?

    Leptin is a hormone that is tied closely to regulating energy intake and expenditure, including appetite, metabolism and hunger. It is the single most important hormone when it comes to understanding why we feel hungry or full. When present in high levels, it signals to our brain that we’re full and can stop eating. When low, we feel hungry and crave food. It does this by stimulating receptors in our hypothalamus, the part of our brains which regulates the hormone system in our bodies. When leptin binds to receptors in this part of our brains, it stimulates the release of appetite-suppressing chemicals. People with leptin disorders eat uncontrollably.

     

    Your leptin LEVEL is high when you are full, low when you are hungry

    Now here’s the strange part.  Leptin is produced mostly by our adipose tissue – aka our fat.  The level of circulating leptin is directly proportional to the total amount of fat in the body.  That means the more fat you have, the greater the amount of leptin you have. It may seem counter-intuitive, but it makes sense in the end when we consider how yo-yo dieting tends to be. It takes some time for your body to adjust to large changes in body fat levels when it comes to leptin.

    The total AMOUNT of leptin you have is related to your weight

    So when you lose a lot of weight quick, via liposuction or serious calorie restriction, your leptin levels plummet. Subsequently, you get hungrier, your thyroid decreases output and your metabolic rate drops. Your body then increases catabolic hormone activity and appetite, making you tend to slip off your regime and gain all that weight right back. That’s why crash diets are often ineffective – your leptin won’t let you eat less, and even if you do, you’re lethargic and your metabolic rate slows way down.

    Of course, just because it makes things difficult for dieting, leptin levels are far more sensitive to starvation than overeating. So when you cut caloires and start ot burn fat, the leptin levels in your body plummet, but when you eat too much they don’t skyrocket – although they do increase. Leptin levels increase with increased insulin levels, like right after eat, and when our body is storing energy. Keeping this in mind, in general, can help you eat healthier and loser weight in the long run.

    The Science of Leptin

    Obviously, since leptin is so key to hunger and feeling full, scientists have been looking into it as a possible target for anti-obesity or weight loss. As it turns out, leptin controls a lot more than just our feelings of fullness.

    Turning on leptin in the brains of mice causes them to exercise more, according to research from Harvard Medical School. It’s interwoven into how our bodies control our metabolism, activity levels, and energy budgeting – like immediately increasing appetite when fasting. While levels drop quickly, eating can bring them back up, too. It has been shown to reduce lipids in muscle and other tissues which lead to insulin resistance (the first step towards type 2 diabetes). It even controls what foods we find appealing when we’re just looking at them. Basically, it seems like the perfect way to lose weight – just give people more leptin,  right?  Well, there is another factor at work.

    Leptin Resistance

    But when researchers gave people leptin in human clinical trials, people didn’t lose weight. The trouble is, your body constantly tries to adjust basal leptin levels. If there’s a lot of it all the time, like in obese and overweight people, the brain loses sensitivity. Mice can become leptin resistant after as few as 3 days of overfeeding – so it happens quickly in response to consistent high blood glucose levels.

    When obese, your leptin LEVELS spike radically because you have higher leptin AMOUNTS in your body (causing leptin resistance in the brain)

    When it does this, it takes more and more leptin before our bodies feel full. When we get fatter, our bodies produce more leptin, and we become resistant to it. So obese people actually have unusually high leptin levels, but are not responsive to it. Even when healthy people eat a much lower calorie diet for a little while,  levels decrease, and they feel hungrier and less energetic, even if they haven’t lost weight yet. To lose weight and keep it off, you have to give your body time to adjust to the new, lowered leptin level, so it sets that as “normal” and you feel full when you’re supposed to.

    Yes, he is.

    The bad news is that not just excess weight can lead to leptin resistance. A new study published in the American Journal of Physiology found that high fructose diets can induce leptin resistance. These sugars actually impair the leptin’s ability to cross the blood-brain barrier and reach the hypothalamus. So even when the leptin levels are high, not enough is reaching the brain to tell the body to stop eating.

    How do you use this information to lose weight or keep healthy?

    First things first: quit the crash diets. You aren’t going to do your body any favors by losing weight too quickly. If you are trying to lose weight, though, there’s one thing you can do to help your body out: cheat. Seriously.

    When you cut calories dramatically, your body acts like its starving and your leptin levels plummet. You’ll be hungry and generally have lower energy levels and want to eat more. So, once a week or so, cheat. Really cheat. Have a nice, high-calorie meal.

    Your body then senses the rush of fuel and boosts leptin levels, increasing your metablism and priming your body for fat loss. Cheating helps ease your body down to lower daily leptin levels without making it feel too starved. That way, as you lose the weight, your body adjusts and realizes that the reduced leptin levels are normal not starving. And you get to enjoy something delicious – come on, it’s a win-win!

    A beautiful sockeye salmon

    Secondly, avoid too much sugar intake. High calorie loads aside, the sugars make your brain less sensitive to leptin, which causes you to eat more and pack on the pounds. Conversely, some foods have been shown to increase leptin activity and sensitivity. The biggest connection scientists have found is between Omega-3 Fatty Acids and leptin. That’s right – the ever remarkable fish just keep getting better and better.  Researchers found that a group of people who ate a high proportion of fish every day had lower leptin levels despite eating the same calorie loads and having the same body fat as their fish free cousins – suggesting that a fish-rich diet increased their bodies’ sensitivity to leptin.

    There’s good news, too, for those that are already overweight and leptin resistant: it’s only temporary. Research has shown that reducing fat content in leptin-resistant, obese mice allowed them to regain leptin sensitivity. So even if you’re overweight and likely leptin resistant, you can improve on that state. Unlike type 2 diabetes and insulin resistance, which is very hard to reverse, leptin resistance is fairly correctable with a normal, healthy diet and exercise.

    And lastly, there’s something really simple that everyone can do to keep their leptin levels high and keep cravings under control: sleep well. When you go to sleep, your leptin levels naturally rise – after all, you want to be sleeping, not snacking, so your body knows to cut down on your hunger while you’re resting. But if you cut your sleeping short, your body tries to adjust by making you hungry again. Research has found that shorter sleep periods (6 hours or less instead of 8) lower overall daily leptin levels, cause an increase in appetite, and even make people crave carbs and other fattening foods. So its important for your body to rest well to maintain its natural hormonal balance, allowing you to look and feel your best.

    In summary:

    • Stop crash diets
    • Eat ONE large meal per week to spark leptin-based weight loss
    • Avoid processed sugar
    • Eat Omega-3 (in fish/flaxseed/walnuts)
    • Sleep well

    Like any other system in our bodies, the our hormonal appetite controls are sensitive to our daily habits and routines. The better a routine you have – sleeping well, eating right, and exercising, the more balanced your system will be and the better you will feel.

    Stay tuned for more deep dives into the physiology of nutrition with the next installment of Understanding Our Bodies!

    References:

    1. Williams, K., Scott, M., & Elmquist, J. (2009). From observation to experimentation: leptin action in the mediobasal hypothalamus American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 89 (3), 985-990 DOI: 10.3945/ajcn.2008.26788D
    2. Havel, P. (2007). Role of adipose tissue in body-weight regulation: mechanisms regulating leptin production and energy balance Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 59 (03) DOI: 10.1017/S0029665100000410
    3. Huo, L., Gamber, K., Greeley, S., Silva, J., Huntoon, N., Leng, X., & Bjørbæk, C. (2009). Leptin-Dependent Control of Glucose Balance and Locomotor Activity by POMC Neurons Cell Metabolism, 9 (6), 537-547 DOI: 10.1016/j.cmet.2009.05.003
    4. Pratley RE, Nicolson M, Bogardus C, & Ravussin E (1997). Plasma leptin responses to fasting in Pima Indians. The American journal of physiology, 273 (3 Pt 1) PMID: 9316457
    5. Chin-Chance C, Polonsky KS, & Schoeller DA (2000). Twenty-four-hour leptin levels respond to cumulative short-term energy imbalance and predict subsequent intake. The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism, 85 (8), 2685-91 PMID: 10946866
    6. Enriori, P., Evans, A., Sinnayah, P., Jobst, E., Tonelli-Lemos, L., Billes, S., Glavas, M., Grayson, B., Perello, M., & Nillni, E. (2007). Diet-Induced Obesity Causes Severe but Reversible Leptin Resistance in Arcuate Melanocortin Neurons Cell Metabolism, 5 (3), 181-194 DOI: 10.1016/j.cmet.2007.02.004
    7. Zelissen, P., Stenlof, K., Lean, M., Fogteloo, J., Keulen, E., Wilding, J., Finer, N., Rossner, S., Lawrence, E., Fletcher, C., McCamish, M., & , . (2005). Effect of three treatment schedules of recombinant methionyl human leptin on body weight in obese adults: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism, 7 (6), 755-761 DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-1326.2005.00468.x
    8. Wang, J., Obici, S., Morgan, K., Barzilai, N., Feng, Z., & Rossetti, L. (2001). Overfeeding Rapidly Induces Leptin and Insulin Resistance Diabetes, 50 (12), 2786-2791 DOI: 10.2337/diabetes.50.12.2786
    9. Keim NL, Stern JS, & Havel PJ (1998). Relation between circulating leptin concentrations and appetite during a prolonged, moderate energy deficit in women. The American journal of clinical nutrition, 68 (4), 794-801 PMID: 9771856
    10. Shapiro A, Mu W, Roncal C, Cheng KY, Johnson RJ, & Scarpace PJ (2008). Fructose-induced leptin resistance exacerbates weight gain in response to subsequent high-fat feeding. American journal of physiology. Regulatory, integrative and comparative physiology, 295 (5) PMID: 18703413
    11. Peyron-Caso E, Taverna M, Guerre-Millo M, Véronèse A, Pacher N, Slama G, & Rizkalla SW (2002). Dietary (n-3) polyunsaturated fatty acids up-regulate plasma leptin in insulin-resistant rats. The Journal of nutrition, 132 (8), 2235-40 PMID: 12163668
    12. Winnicki M, Somers VK, Accurso V, Phillips BG, Puato M, Palatini P, & Pauletto P (2002). Fish-rich diet, leptin, and body mass. Circulation, 106 (3), 289-91 PMID: 12119240
    13. Enriori, P., Evans, A., Sinnayah, P., Jobst, E., Tonelli-Lemos, L., Billes, S., Glavas, M., Grayson, B., Perello, M., & Nillni, E. (2007). Diet-Induced Obesity Causes Severe but Reversible Leptin Resistance in Arcuate Melanocortin Neurons Cell Metabolism, 5 (3), 181-194 DOI: 10.1016/j.cmet.2007.02.004
    14. Nedeltcheva AV, Kilkus JM, Imperial J, Kasza K, Schoeller DA, & Penev PD (2009). Sleep curtailment is accompanied by increased intake of calories from snacks. The American journal of clinical nutrition, 89 (1), 126-33 PMID: 19056602
    15. Taheri, S., Lin, L., Austin, D., Young, T., & Mignot, E. (2004). Short Sleep Duration Is Associated with Reduced Leptin, Elevated Ghrelin, and Increased Body Mass Index PLoS Medicine, 1 (3) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0010062

  • Glycemic Index Table v1.0

    With insulin resistance and diabetes reaching epidemic levels in the United States, it is imperative to know the glycemic index of the foods we are commonly eating. Unfortunately, this data is usually locked away in research journals and when it is made available, you get a million listings with a ton of garbage results for foods you’ve never heard of. Well, we got tired of that and fixed up a nice GI table.

    We dug around a bit and have come up with the latest information on GI values for the most common foods, pulled from many sources by esteemed researchers at the Diabetes Care Journal.

    This is by no means the whole list. There must be 3,000-4,000 foods and products profiled for this survey. We cherry picked what we felt would be the most important for you to see. Sometimes less is more and we feel this is one of those times.

    If we missed any major ones, let us know. The full lists are at the bottom if you want to download/view them.

    Enjoy the list.

    Glycemic Index (GI) of Common Foods

    Note: Both charts can be re-categorized by clicking on the column headings

    Grains, Breads, Cereals
    Food GI Value Accuracy
    Whole Wheat Bread 74 ± 2
    White Bread 75 ± 2
    Multi-Grain Bread 53 ± 2
    Whole Wheat Indian Bread (Roti/Chapatti) 62 ± 3
    White Indian Bread (Roti/Chapatti) 52 ± 4
    Tortilla, Corn 46 ± 4
    Brown Rice 68 ± 4
    White Rice 73 ± 4
    Basmati Rice, White 57 ± 4
    Barley 28 ± 2
    Whole Wheat Pasta 48 ± 5
    White Pasta 49 ± 2
    White Rice Noodles 53 ± 7
    Udon Noodles 55 ± 7
    Couscous (Wheat) 65 ± 4
    Cornflakes (Kellogg’s) 81 ± 52
    Instant Oats 79 ± 3
    Rolled Whole Oats 55 ± 2
    Millet 67 ± 5
    Museli 57 ± 2
    Clif Bar 101 ± 6
    Powerbar 83 ± 11
    Mac and Cheese 64 n/a
    Amaranth 97 ± 19
    Rice Krispies (Kellogg’s) 82 n/a
    Rice Chex 89 n/a
    Total (General Mills) 76 n/a
    Life (Pepsico) 66 n/a
    Grapenuts (Altria) 67 n/a
    Cream of Wheat 66 n/a
    Cheerios (General Mills) 74 ± 0
    Sourdough Rye 56 ± 0
    Gluten-Free Bread 74 ± 6
    Bagel 72 ± 0
    Waffles 76 ± 0
    Muffins (average) 67 ± 35
    Doughnut 76 ± 0
    Flan 65 ± 0
    Cake (Average) 52 ± 13
    Croissant 67 ± 0
    Pancakes (Wheat) 64 ± 18
    Pancakes (Buckwheat) 102 ± 11
    Gluten-Free Bread (Average) 64 ± 24
    Spelt Bread, Whole 63 ± 0
    Coco Pops (Kelloggs) 77 ± 8
    Corn Pops (Kelloggs) 80 ± 4
    Froot Loops (Kelloggs) 69 ± 9
    Kashi Seven Whole Grains (Kelloggs) 65 ± 10
    Special K, US Variety (Kelloggs) 69 ± 5
    Buckwheat (Soba) Noodles 59 ± 1
    Brown Rice Noodles 92 ± 8
    Gluten-Free Pasta 76 ± 6

    Fruits, Vegetables, Nuts & Legumes (raw unless noted)
    Food GI Value Accuracy
    Sweet Corn 52 ± 5
    Apples 36 ± 2
    Oranges 43 ± 3
    Banana 51 ± 3
    Pineapple 59 ± 8
    Mango 51 ± 5
    Watermelon 76 ± 4
    Dates 42 ± 4
    Peaches, Canned 43 ± 5
    Strawberry Jam 49 ± 3
    Apple Juice 41 ± 2
    Orange Juice 50 ± 2
    Potato, boiled 78 ± 4
    Potato, instant 87 ± 3
    Carrots, boiled 39 ± 4
    Carrots 16 n/a
    Pumpkin, Boiled 64 ± 7
    Plantain 55 ± 6
    Taro, boiled 53 ± 2
    Chickpeas 28 ± 9
    Kidney Beans 24 ± 4
    Lentils 32 ± 5
    Edimame (Raw Soybeans) 16 ± 1
    Black Beans 30 n/a
    Brown Beans 38 n/a
    Yam 25 ± 4
    Sweet Potato 48 ± 6
    Beets 64 ± 16
    Peas, Cooked 35 ± 4
    Peanuts 18 ± 3
    Pinto Beans 42 n/a
    Lentils – Red 26 ± 4
    Lentils – Green 26 ± 8
    Kidney Beans 23 n/a
    Grapefruit Juice 48 n/a
    Raisins 66 ± 6
    Pear 38 ± 10
    Peach 42 ± 14
    Papaya 60 ± 8
    Grapes 46 ± 6
    Kiwi 47 ± 4
    Grapefruit 25 n/a
    Apricots 34 ± 3
    Ginger 10 ± 4
    Strawberries 40 ± 7
    Cranberry Juice 59 ± 0
    Tomato Juice (V8 – Campbell’s) 33 ± 3
    Cashews 25 ± 1

    Dairy Products
    Food GI Value Accuracy
    Milk, Cow – Full Fat 39 ± 3
    Milk, Cow – Skim 37 ± 4
    Yogurt 41 ± 2
    Soy Milk 34 ± 4
    Rice Milk 86 ± 7
    Ensure 75 ± 10
    Slimfast 35 ± 2

    Junk Food / Sugars
    Food GI Value Accuracy
    French Fries 63 ± 5
    Chocolate 40 ± 3
    Potato Chips 56 ± 3
    Soft Drink 59 ± 3
    Rice Crackers/Chips 87 ± 2
    Popcorn 65 ± 5
    Fructose 15 ± 4
    Sucrose 65 ± 4
    Glucose 103 ± 3
    Honey 61 ± 3
    Corn Chips 74 n/a
    Pizza, Cheese 70 n/a
    Gatorade (Pepsico) 89 ± 12
    Coca-Cola 63 ± 0
    Lean Cuisine (average- Nestle) 46 ± 8
    Hamburger (McDonalds) 66 ± 8
    Chicken McNuggets (McDonalds) 55 ± 6
    Ice Cream 51 ± 3
    Gelato 38 ± 5
    Lifesavers – Nestle, Peppermint 70 ± 6
    Milky Way (Mars) 62 ± 8
    Snickers (Mars) 51 ± 0
    Agave Syrup (high fructose) 13 ± 0
    Hummus 6 ± 4

    The rest of the table, Parts I + II:


    Notes:

    GI Index values do not tell you the whole story! Blood sugar can be effected by factors like which foods you eat together, how long ago your last meal was, etc.

    Additionally, food high in fructose register very low in their glycemic index. This occurs because fructose takes a special metabolic detour in your body, straight to the liver – and only the liver deals with fructose. This general idea is one of the major theories behind the rise in insulin resistance and diabetes across America. Beware of all sugary foods (minus produce – apples arent going to kill you).

    Sources:

    • Atkinson FS, et al. International tables of glycemic index and glycemic load values: 2008. Diabetes Care. 2008 Dec;31(12):2281-3.
    • Chart from the study

    Version 1.0 – (2009.06.07)

  • Mailbag: Is milk good for me? Sheep Milk?

    Mailbag: Is milk good for me? Sheep Milk?

    How good is milk for me?  In particular, how good is sheep milk of the Spanish Manchego variety?

    Jessica, Washington DC

    Dairy Up Close

    Pretty healthy, in moderation – thanks to flickr user: redfishid

    These are excellent questions.  Most dairy products have great nutritional profiles.  They are loaded with good fats, minerals like the antioxidant selenium and vitamins like vitamin D, crucial to good bone health.  The USDA inspects the behind most food stuffs, including sheep’s milk (which you can see here), search for sheep milk), but not the Manchego variety in particular.  More than a particular species like Manchego Sheep, proper animal husbandry translates into better nutrition in the animals’ finished products, as we have seen in previously – especially in the fat profile.  Look for pasture raised milk as these animals generally eat the best food.  You may have to get very creative to find it.  Local food co-ops are your best bet.

    Watch this video to better understand what proper animal care really means for your health:

    Nutritionally though, things get more complex.  Most people eat dairy because they think its high in calcium.  What they dont know is that calcium can only be absorbed into the body when its eaten with vitamin D and phosphorus.  You could eat 100 pounds of cheese and, if you didn’t have any phosphorus or vitamin D, none of the calcium would be absorbed into your bones.

    The Calcium Phosphorus Connection

    Fortunately, these nutrients usually occur together, although in variable amounts.  The calcium in dairy products if any kind can best be tolerated by the body when the balance of calcium and phosphorus are closest to that of human mother’s breast milk, which is 2:1 calcium to phosphorus.  This ratio is far higher than the calcium and phosphorus ratio present in the milk from most other mammals, like cow’s milk (~1.3:1), goat’s milk (~1.2:1) and sheep’s milk (~1.2:1).  [1,2].  (Remember, these numbers are just averages and could range wildly depending on what the cow is eating or what kind of soil your crops are in, something the USDA never considers.)

    A German study postulates that the evolutionary advantage of the lower phosphoric content in humans allowed their excrement to remain exceptionally acidic, thereby killing additional pathogens that could harm humans many thousands of years ago.  This also made humans exceptionally good at extracting phosphorus from food sources, which can be both good and bad.

     

    Yes, he is.

    Westernized diets are extremely tilted towards phosphoric foods like corn (.08:1 ratio) and chicken (.09:1 ratio), which have over 10X more phosphorus than calcium!   You can quickly see why our evolutionary advantage turns into a disadvantage: calcium deficiencies and osteoporosis are such a big issue now largely because we are getting excessive amounts of phosphorus and too little calcium from sources we cannot properly use.  This is one large reason to limit the amount of dairy, including sheep’s milk, that you are eating in general, and replace it with leafy greens like spinach – which tend towards the magic 2:1 calcium phosphorus ratio.  (Leafy greens are probably where most cultures got their dairy, as hard as the ‘Got Milk’ campaign has made that may be for you to believe.)

    Lactose

    Another problem with dairy, including sheep’s milk, is that most humans rarely ate large quantities of dairy until the 20th century.  This leaves much of the world’s population unable to process the milk protein lactose, with some Asian and African ethnic groups over 90% lactose intolerant to some degree.  Below is a chart of the average lactose intolerance across some racial groups put out by UC Davis:

    Lactose Intolerance by ethnicity
    Race, Ethnicity, Country of Origin Percentage
    Southeast Asians 98%
    Asian Americans 90%
    Alaskan Eskimo 80%
    African-American Adults 79%
    Mexicans (rural communities) 74%
    North American Jews 69%
    Greek Cypriots 66%
    Cretans 56%
    Mexican American Males 55%
    Indian Adults 50%
    African American Children 45%
    Indian Children 20%
    Descendents of Northern Europe 5%

    Unless you are from Northern Europe, you are likely to have problem with dairy in general.  You may not think you are lactose intolerant because your body has built an immunity towards it but take a break from dairy for a couple of weeks and then revisit the subject.  You may be surprised by what you find.

    Lactose Intolerance by Country (via Wikipedia) – click on picture for full-size version

    Many people enjoy dairy despite lactose intolerance, you just have to be smart about it.  Although accurate lactose analysis methodology is not uniformly performed by the USDA, it is widely held that milk has the highest lactose content of any dairy product.  Try raw milk cheeses like swiss and cheddar, as cheese has less lactose than milk and raw varieties will have digestive enzymes which may aid digestion.

    Making Sense of Dairy

    Taking all this information together, it makes sense to eat dairy only in small amounts.  You should aim to get most of your calcium from leafy greens as it is far easier to digest and helps restore the delicate balance between calcium and phosphorus in your body.  It also makes sense to consider your ethnic background when eating sheep’s milk or any kind of dairy.  If you are asian, african, latino or jewish you should probably avoid all dairy with high amounts of lactose like pasteurized milk.  Raw milk, with its extra digestive enzymes might help but your mileage may vary.  Limited amounts of cheese, like feta, goat, swiss and cheddar are probably the best bet for most people who still want to enjoy dairy products from time to time.

    Sources:

    USDA Chart with Phosphorus and Calcium Ratios:
    http://www.answers.com/topic/phosphorus-and-calcium

    USDA Nutrient Data Laboratory:
    http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/search/

    Ethnic Lactose Intolerance:
    NCMHC Center for Nutritional Genomics (UC Davis)

  • Are Raw Veggies Better Than Cooked Ones?

    Are Raw Veggies Better Than Cooked Ones?

    You’ve probably heard that it’s better to eat vegetables raw, nutritionally, than it is to cook them. The argument is that cooking vegetables destroys the vitamins and nutrients that are packed into raw foods. But is that really true? Are you destroying all the good stuff whenever you make a stir fry? Research says no. Cooked vegetables can be just as nutritious as raw ones are – and some are even more nutritious than their uncooked rivals.

    How Science Weighs in

    Be careful with me!

    There are definitely some vitamins and nutrients that are vulnerable to heating. Vitamin C is a great example. Heating tomatoes for 2 minutes can reduce the Vitamin C levels by 10%, loss which triples after half an hour 1. Of course, that means at least 70% of the Vitamin C is still in there. And when we’re talking about vegetables, we’re not just talking one nutrient. We have to look at the overall impact cooking has on a variety of nutrients. Evidence has found that cooking vegetables, particularly boiling them, can actually make them better for you.

    Why is cooking good?

    For one, it helps break down the tough compounds in plants that our body has trouble digesting like cellulose. By doing so, it actually makes nutrients more available to our digestive system. The same study which found a decrease in Vitamin C in tomatoes found an increase in the antioxidant lycopene, a much rarer nutrient which is linked to anti-cancerous activity and reduced risk of heart attacks. And in another study, researchers found that people an all-raw diet had low levels of lycopene 2. It’s likely that breaking down the plant cell walls made the lycopene more bioavailable.

    I’m more nutritious when cooked!

    Studies have also suggested that cooking actually boosts the antioxidant content of vegetables. One found that the total antioxidant capacities actually increased when a variety of vegetables were cooked by boiling, frying and steaming3. It’s well established that cooking can increase beta-carotene levels, a nutrient which we use to make Vitamin A4. Studies have also found that we only absorb 1-2% of the beta-carotene in vegetables like carrots, but cooking can raise the level we can absorb to over 75% 5. And while cooking Broccoli might damage the sulforophane, a nutrient linked to anti-cancerous activity, it increases the folate availability 6

    Other studies are less clear. One found that what you cooked and how mattered a lot. Deep frying increased the antioxidants in potatoes, artichokes and aubergine but reduced it for mushrooms and onions 7. In that same study, boiling increased antioxidants across the board but pan-frying reduced them. So different cooking methods can have different effects on different vegetables, some negative and some positive.

    So is it better to cook vegetables?

    Yes and no. It’s better to have a good mix of raw and cooked veggies in your diet. That way you get the best of both worlds. The key thing is not to presume that cooked vegetables are nutritionally poor, because they’re not. They’re also packed with vitamins and minerals, and some of them you can’t get as easily by eating the uncooked versions. Most important, though, is that you’re eating lots of fruits and vegetables to begin with. So if you don’t like to eat certain vegetables raw, cook them – it’s better you eat them cooked than not eat them at all, no matter how many of the nutrients cooking might destroy. And it doesn’t really matter whether you cook them or not if you’re eating your full servings greens, reds, and yellows every day. You’ll get the nutrients you need either way!

    Sources:

    1. Dewanto, V. et al. (2002). “Thermal Processing Enhances the Nutritional Value of Tomatoes by Increasing Total Antioxidant Activity.” Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 50(10), 3010-3014.

    2. Garcia, A.L., et al. (2008). “Long-term strict raw food diet is associated with favourable plasma β-carotene and low plasma lycopene concentrations in Germans.” British Journal of Nutrition 99, 1293-1300.

    3. Miglio, C., et al. (2008). “Effects of Different Cooking Methods on Nutritional and Physicochemical Characteristics of Selected Vegetables” Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 56(1), 139-147.

    4. Talcott, S. T., L. R. Howard, and C. H. Brenes (2000). “Antioxidant Changes and Sensory Properties of Carrot Puree Processed with and without Periderm Tissue.” Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 48(4), 1315-1321.

    5. Erdman, et al. (1993). “Absorption and transport of carotenoids.” Annual NY Academy of Sciences 691, 76-85.

    6. Clifford A.J., et al. (1990). “Bioavailability of folates in selected foods incorporated into amino acid-based diets fed to rats.” Journal of Nutrition 120(12), 1640-1647.

    7. Pellegrini, N. et al. (2009). “Effect of domestic cooking methods on the total antioxidant capacity of vegetables.” International Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition, Retrieved March 31, 2009, from http://www.informaworld.com/10.1080/09637480802175212.

  • Lemon Buckwheat Pancakes with Sugared Berries, Cherries, and Apricot

    Lemon Buckwheat Pancakes with Sugared Berries, Cherries, and Apricot

    Below is the first of Tony the Chef’s targeted recipes for different metabolic typologies. These recipes accompany Patti the Nutritionist’s dieting guidelines, which we will be releasing in pieces of the next couple of months. For now, enjoy the food and soon you will learn how to integrate this recipe into a larger framework for your body.

    Pancakes, thanks to Flickr user: WayTru

    Pancakes, thanks to Flickr user: WayTru

    PANCAKES:

    • 1 32 oz. bag Arrowhead Mills Organic Buckwheat Pancake and Waffle Mix
    • 1 teaspoon lemon zest, finely chopped (per serving made)

    Make pancake batter according to the instructions on the package.  For ‘Type A’ bodies, use the non-dairy version.  Once batter is completed, just incorporate the zest into the batter.   Make pancakes as directed. Garnish with sugared berries (recipe follows).

    FRUIT:

    • 2 cups lemon juice
    • ½ cup sugar
    • ½ cup dried mixed berries
    • ½ cup dried cherries
    • ½ cup dried apricots

    In a small saucepan, simmer together lemon juice and sugar over medium-high heat until sugar has dissolved.  Add all the dried fruit.  Bring the mixture to a boil then reduce to a simmer for 5 minutes. Refrigerate uncovered to cool.  Serve over above pancakes instead of or in addition to syrup.  Enjoy.

  • Book Review: Safe Food by Marion Nestle

    Book Review: Safe Food by Marion Nestle

    What if this latest peanut-salmonella outbreak in 2009 was completely preventable?  What if the procedures to prevent it were already in place?  Even worse, what if we didn’t even have a food safety system at all?

    NOTE: This article is the 2nd part of a series about Food Safety in the United States. You may want to read the first part to better understand this article:

    Part 1: Food Safety – A Recent History

    After reading Marion Nestle’s Safe Food, you will see the world of irony and contradiction finds a comfortable home in food safety.  Or should we say, a lack of food safety.  For it becomes painfully obvious in Nestle’s work that, in fact, we do not have a food safety system in the United States and a wide array of interests are actively working to keep it that way.

    Going Down to Get Up

    But before Nestle’s takes us down that dark road, we are introduced to this dysfunctional world very quickly with the story of how Starlink genetically modified corn made its appearance throughout the food supply in countries with bans on GMO crops.

    Quick Facts about this Title

    Her treatment of the subject acts as an interesting twist on the typical introductions you generally see with non-fiction books.  We meet all the players, agencies and of course trickery in a haphazard fashion, instead of having it all methodically laid out.  The method is good – because if you are thirsty for facts, it prepares you for the coming Thanksgiving-like feast.  An avalanche of professional observations and research accompanies every point in this book.  For better or worse.

    This style immediately establishes credibility and you will not find yourself asking whether or not the author is qualified to speak on the subject.  With a Ph.D. in molecular biology form UC Berkeley, a spot on the FDA’s Food Advisory Committee and Science Board and the USDA/DHHS Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, Marion Nestle does not really need a formal introduction to remind the reader she knows what’s going on – her prose does the job for her.

    And it’s Nestle prose that sets up an interesting dichotomy around which the entire book spins.  She breaks the world of food safety into two what we would call observational positions:

    • Science Based – ‘Benefits and Costs’
    • Value Based – ‘Fear and Dread ‘

    As she explains throughout the later parts of the book, parties involved with actually making food safe tend to view the situation in a purely scientific sense – ie, the benefits of GMO far outweigh the risks – whereas consumers in the general public use value based judgements – ie, the fear of what GMO could be outweigh the benefits.

    One of her central tenets is that the food makers need to satisfy the public’s value based concerns with the same perniciousness they purportedly apply to the science side of the equation – if we want to feel as if we have a safe food supply.  She claims this would go a long way to assuaging many people’s fears – an slightly provocative argument that would be a radical departure from how risks are currently evaluated.

    After the three – yes three – introductions, we get that the book contains two prominent sections and smaller rejoinder about pathogens, GMO crops and food terrorism, respectively.  But before you think she adopts such a staid format to the detriment of the book, keep in mind how explosive and controversial the subject matter she is dealing with really is.  Billions of dollars are the scale agribusiness operates on and Nestle handles each topic with the proper respect.

    After you find Nestle’s rhythm – which admittedly is not the easiest thing to do – the structure of the book fades away and you won’t find yourself burdened by it.  Other heavy lifting, however, is mandatory.

    Novel Concepts, Descriptive Means

    The cover…

    The book’s first section rips right into the meat of the issue, literally.  We get a first-hand account of the history of efforts and interventions that have been tried to implement a known protocol for ‘pathogen reduction’ called HAACP.  You’ll get a real sense of how much resistance there is on the part of industry to implementing these new controls.  Particularly disheartening was the section dealing with the government’s efforts to test ground beef for e.coli immediately before the Jack-in-the-Box outbreak of the early 90s.  From Page 77:

    “On October 14, the day before the rule for ground meat was to take effect, the federal court in Austin, Texas, issued an injunction that blocked the labeling plan, saying that the Jack in the Box outbreak was insufficient to justify ‘any departure from the normal rule-making procedures.’  Industry groups hailed the injunction as ‘a victory of fairness over bureaucracy.’  That very week, however, three children in Texas died from eating ground meat contaminated with E. coli O157:H7…”

    Similar tales of false starts and questionable means plague the history of food safety and Nestle pulls the curtains back in a fashion that is even and balanced.  You get the sense throughout her work that she, as an educator and public health advocate, is indeed enraged – even disgusted with the ways in which the system works but she never belies herself into a sycophant-like rage.  Instead, Nestle beautifully walks the tight-rope, delivering an objective review of the facts – a rare event in the charged world of food.

    GMO as Savior or Satan?

    Nowhere is this sensibility more pronounced than in the second part of her book, where she covers GMO crops.  Nestle gives her audience a good background on the issue and again dives into the core of the issue.  This time she focuses on the disconnect between researchers who better understand the mechanics of biotech foods and the consumers – reintroducing her dichotomy of science and value based arguments.  Particularly good is her chapter covering the ‘Politics of Consumer Concern’ – where she feels more comfortable in giving her opinion on the issues.  From Page 225:

    “What seems more surprising [about the food industry] is how much the industry’s unyielding opposition to labeling damages its own cause.  If public trust is the key to successful marketing, biotechnology companies should freely disclose their methods, economic goals, and products.”

    While she does give opinion, her treatment of the subject is really great because it, again, is able to show an objective view of the facts.  Sure, Nestle peppers her texts with her observations and opinions but she gives a fair shake to an industry she is usually in direct opposition to.

    The conclusion of the text is an applied section about how the politics of food safety play into bio-terrorism.  The section has a real strapped-on type feeling, especially considering how closely this book was published to the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center, mere blocks from her NYU teaching post.  Still, the section comes off as half-baked, possibly a move suggested by publishers to include a terrorism-related topic to move a few more copies in the wake of 9/11.

    Take the Good with the Bad

    Nestle covers all subjects thoroughly, at times too thoroughly.  Often complex analysis of super specific issues creates a significant hurdle to understanding the issues for most people outside of the world of nutrition and health.  You are constantly reminded as a reader that Ms. Nestle is a first and foremost an academic.  Her brilliance is frequently on display but so are her verbose explanations.

    It’s not that any concept she includes is particularly challenging in and of itself but taken together with the enormity of her topics, the political nature of the issue and the alphabet soup of acronyms you’ll find, Safe Food makes for a challenging read.  Observe a paragraph here where Nestle tries to explain the difficulties in determining food allergies (from page 173):

    “The widespread use of soy proteins – transgenic or not – in foods such as infant formulas, meat extenders, baked goods, and dairy replacements might be expected to increase the prevalence of soy allergies, but the increase would be difficult to detect unless it affected large numbers of people.  Worse, because methods to diagnose food allergies are unavailable or imprecise, the allergenic potential of most genetically modified foods is uncertain, unpredictable, and not easily tested.”

    Any reader of Nestle’s previous books would quickly recognize her academic style – and have formed their own opinion no doubt – but new readers should be warned.  Nestle expects her audience to come to this book with a significant background on the topic.  If upon hearing ‘GMO’ you are reminded of failed automakers or little green men from Mars, you might want to look elsewhere for a book.

    (Re)visit This Work

    But also realize this book’s high barrier of entry is also what makes it so good.  The more you read it, the more you know you are dealing with one of, if not THE, authority on the subject.  Yes, the prose bends towards the tone of an academic journal at times but if you want to understand the world of food safety, this is the book.

    The exceptional insight into every dimension of this crisis, the balanced view from both sides of each issue and her ability to educate – even entertain – at times, makes this a great read for anybody with a background in health or food.  Therefore, we highly recommend Safe Food as it provides both acumen into the most pressing issues related to food safety as well as a detailed context for understanding the issues (purchase this work on Amazon to support Nutrition Wonderland).

  • Mailbag: Smart Balance versus Butter

    Mailbag: Smart Balance versus Butter

    Question:

    We are having a discussion about whether buttery spread – such as Smart Balance is better than using butter?!?!

    http://www.smartbalance.com/

    what do you think??

    Thank you!!
    Claire from Los Angeles

    ##################

    Smart Balance is not good for you in the relative scheme of things.  It is a chemical conglomeration of esterified oils – which means they take all these different oils, blast them apart, combine them with caking agents which come together to form this new age margarine.  Its WAAAY better than old fashioned margarine, made from trans fat, but still not a natural food.  That stuff about the flaxseed oil helping is really nonsense – processing destroys the bioavailabilty of omega-3s.

    Ideally, you want to eat your essential fats, that is Omega3 and Omega6, in a 1:1 ratio.  Most Americans get about 15-20X more Omega6 than Omega3, precisely because of this processing problem.  Omega3 is very sensitive – it will degrade at room temperature even – and only in a small number of foods (flax, walnuts, wild salmon).  Omega 6 is everywhere and stands up to heat and processing much better…so you can see where this goes.  Smart Balance will have a high Omega6:3 ratio – making it an inflammatory food.

    We would much rather see you eating butter, but realize the type of butter you are eating here is key.  You really want to find butter from grass fed cows.  This type of butter will tend to be a bright yellow orange – the more orange the better.  This is an outward indication the cows feed on grass, which is rich in beta-carrotene – an orange flavonoid that will tint your butter (it will be more orange in the spring, when grass first starts to grow).  This is an unrefined, real food that contains high amounts of omega3 fats along with a dizzying array of vitamins and minerals – all very bioavailable.  Try and find Raw, Grass Fed butter if you can – this is even better for you.

    People lament that butter is high in saturated fats, which have been linked to heart disease.  While this is true, that information is related to a more outdated view of heart disease.  Heart disease is truly an inflammatory disease, not one of cholesterol.  Its when cholesterol gets oxidized that we have problems and eating natural foods decreases inflammation in the body.  Additionally, there is no research to back up the idea that saturated fats even translate into cholesterol in the body – the mechanisms are very very complex and still not fully understood.

    The degree of processing in foods is always an indication of whether or not you should be eating them.  ALWAYS STAY AWAY FROM PROCESSED FOODS!  Ignore whatever the label says – you have no idea how bought and paid for those labels are.  Smart Balance is highly processed; if it was not, the oils would simply separate and youd have something along the lines of salad dressing.  Butter is clearly the winner here.

    ##################

    Follow-up:

    Ok – one more question
    Salted or unsalted butter??  – or is that an obvious one?

    Claire, LA

    ##################

    The salting is important but pretty irrelevant considering how little the amount of salt in your butter will contribute to your overall salt intake.  The big thing to pay attention to in all your food is the quality of inputs – by that I mean, how good was the stuff that went into making it?

    If you buy butter from factory farm cows – who eat crap corn product, it once again creates that high Omega6:Omega3 inflammatory fat ratio, much like Smart Balance.  If you get butter from pasture cows that eat grass and hay like they are supposed to (they have 2 stomachs for a reason!), the nutrient profile increases dramatically.

    This ideology extends into everything you eat.  If you put an organic carrot next to conventionally grown carrot, you probably wont see a difference – but your body will.  Organics come from soil not artificially enriched and not bathed in hormone disrupting pesticides – which is why they are always preferred.

    Of course finding these foods is always hard, not to mention their cost after you have found them.

    For cooking, the most readily available unrefined oil is extra virgin olive oil.  You want to use it in low heat cooking (steaming) because it can oxidize easily due to its monounsaturated fat chemical alignment.  For higher heat cooking (BBQ, Sauté), use raw coconut oil or the grass fed butter – they are saturated fats, which can take heat very well.  Both the oils are readily available if you have trouble finding grass fed butter.