Friday, May 31, 2013

Nutritional powerhouses: raw kale and chard chips

Hankering after a crunchy, savory snack? When this craving hits me I usually try to satisfy it with some organic air-popped popcorn, tossed with a little truffle oil and topped with truffle salt. However, this spring my friend Ann’s amazing organic garden has produced a serious crop of rainbow Swiss chard and kale, and she generously shares her bounty with me. Just look at the size of those rainbow chard leaves!
Plus, I received a food dehydrator for Mother’s Day which I’m excited to break in. So, today I thought I’d try my hand at making some raw kale and chard chips.

I knew that kale and Swiss chard were healthy food choices, but I didn't realize the magnitude of their nutrient value. Kale and Swiss chard are leafy greens that are truly nutritional powerhouses. To say that their health benefits far surpass popcorn is putting it mildly! If you’re trying to eat more nutrient dense foods, these are two greens you must not pass up. Here are a few reasons why: Swiss chard, for example, has been found to help regulate blood sugar in studies done on animals (1).  It’s also been shown to help pancreatic cells regenerate (1). Swiss chard is an antioxidant, an anti-inflammatory and supports bone health as well because of its high supply of calcium, magnesium and Vitamin K (1).

Kale is a cruciferous vegetable. Research suggests that we should include cruciferous vegetables in our diet "2-3 times per week, and make the serving size at least 1-1/2 cups. Even better from a health standpoint, enjoy kale and other vegetables from the cruciferous vegetable group 4-5 times per week, and increase your serving size to 2 cups" (1). Included among the many nutritional benefits of kale are its: antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, cardiovascular support and anti-cancer properties which are due to nutrients in the form of glucosinolates (1).

So, adding raw kale and chard chips to your list of healthy raw snacks is definitely a smart choice. Each is low in fat and cholesterol, but an excellent source of fiber. Besides calcium, iron and vitamins A and C, these greens also supply vitamins E, K and B6, thiamine, folate, riboflavin, magnesium, manganese and potassium (3). If you want to learn more about the nutritional value of the foods you're eating, check out these excellent sites - USDA Nutrient Data Lab (NDL) and the World's Healthiest Foods.org.  For more detailed information about the nutrients found in raw kale and chard, click here for kale and here for chard. Compare with air-popped popcorn here.

So here's the recipe:

  1. I started with about 12 leaves of kale and a big bunch of chard. 
  2. I cut the large center ribs out of the kale and chard and saved the kale ribs to grind in my Vita-mix smoothie and the chard ribs for another recipe.  I enjoy these sautéed in olive oil with some chopped fresh garlic.  
  3. Next, I washed the kale and chard leaves and laid them out on paper towels to dry. 
  4. Then I put the kale leaves in a large bowl, along with 1 T (15 ml) grapeseed oil, 1 t (5 ml) garlic powder and ground in some pink Himalayan sea salt to taste.
  5. Sort of hand kneaded the leaves in this mixture and then spread them on the lower tray in the dehydrator trying not to overlap too much.  I’m using a Nesco dehydrator.

  6. Now, for the chard leaves – I cut these into approximately 3 inch square pieces and put them in a large bowl with 2 T (30 ml) truffle oil, (since I had more chard leaves I used more oil, but I will use less next time), 1 t (5 ml) garlic powder and ½ t (2.5 ml) truffle salt.
  7. Tossed the leaves with my hands to mix and then spread them on the remaining trays.
  8. Set the temp to 115 degrees F or (46 C) and set the timer for 6 hours. 
  9. Check for crispness.
Note: A few food bloggers had mentioned that dehydrating certain foods can really stink up the house. So, as a prevention I put the dehydrator in the utility room, closed the door, and turned on the exhaust fan.  I didn’t find the odor to be overly offensive, but there was definitely a smell.

Next time I make these chips I'd like to try nutritional yeast for a cheesy chip and maybe include some turmeric for extra health benefits and nutritional value. Studies show that turmeric may help fight infections and some cancers, reduce inflammation, and treat digestive problems.

Food really is our best medicine! Enjoy.

6/18/13 Update:  These didn't store well for me.  I put them in a sealed glass container, but they didn't stay crispy, so I ended up chopping the chips up and putting the into a frittata.  I also think they were a little to oily and salty so I will reduce both of these ingredients next time.


Sources
World's Healthiest Foods - Swiss chard http://www.whfoods.com/genpage.php?tname=foodspice&dbid=16
World's Healthiest Foods - Kale http://www.whfoods.com/genpage.php?tname=foodspice&dbid=38
USDA Nutrient Data Lab http://fnic.nal.usda.gov/food-composition/usda-nutrient-data-laboratory
University of Maryland Medical Center - turmeric http://www.umm.edu/altmed/articles/turmeric-000277.htm

Friday, October 5, 2012

Breast Cancer Awareness Month: Seeing red over pink!

image of pink lit White House from CBC News
It's that time of year when I see red, even though October is all about the color pink. That's because it's Breast Cancer Awareness Month. Here in the states it's referred to as National Breast Cancer Awareness Month (NBCAM), and even the White House is wearing pink! This whole pink thing is really getting old and frankly, since going through my own breast cancer experience, I find I'm actually angered by it all. Now that I've gotten that off of my, er, dare I say, chest - I'll get straight to the issue. How could a positive thing like raising awareness about cancer rouse me to anger?

Well, before I tackle that question, I want to be clear that this isn't going to be a post bashing America, or medical experts, researchers, charities or any others that have made a positive difference in the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer or any cancer. My family and I have personally benefited from these things, and I am especially grateful for early detection. My hope is that this post will provide some food for thought.

Experts agree that an increased awareness about a disease may encourage a person to receive medical screening that can lead to early detection (6). Obviously, this is a good thing. But after more than 25 years of raising awareness, is NBCAM actually impacting the early diagnosis of breast cancer? A recent study published in the Journal of Health Economics researched this question and they found the answer is no, not any more (1). So, if NBCAM is no longer effectively raising public awareness about breast cancer or encouraging early detection via screening, than why is it we are seeing more pink than ever? I believe it's because breast cancer has turned into a profit generating industry, and I'm not alone in this thinking.

Profiteering of breast cancer? -
What ever happened to the thinking that:


"An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure." Benjamin Franklin 

Benjamin Franklin's quote holds true for those of us health seekers doing our best to prevent disease. But how does this resonate with, for example, a pharmaceutical company, whose bottom line is to make a profit? Let's face it, there's just not much money to be made in preventing breast cancer, or any cancer for that matter. Consider the primary breast cancer treatments to date: slash, burn and poison, otherwise known as surgery, radiation and chemotherapy. In a previous post I discussed an instance where a pharmaceutical company that produced a chemotherapy drug also made a bovine growth hormone being used in dairy cows. This hormone has been linked to an increased risk of breast cancer (5). But, hey, we've got a drug for that.

Whose interests are being served here? This is just one sad example of how some corporations have turned breast cancer into a profitable industry. Breast Cancer Action explains it this way:
 "The cancer industry consists of corporations, organizations, and agencies that diminish or mask the extent of the cancer problem, fail to protect our health, or divert attention away from the importance of finding and working to prevent the disease. This includes drug companies that, in addition to profiting from cancer treatment drugs, sometimes produce toxic chemicals that may be contributing to the high rates of cancer in this country and increasing rates throughout the world. It also includes the polluting industries that continue to release substances that are known or suspected to be dangerous to our health, and the public relations firms and public agencies that protect these polluters. The cancer industry includes organizations like the American Cancer Society that downplay the risk of cancer from pesticides and other environmental factors, and that historically have refused to take a stand on environmental regulation. " (3). 
More to NBCAM than meets the eye?-
So what does National Breast Cancer Awareness Month (NBCAM) have to do with this? Well, let's see. According to Wiki, NBCAM "is an annual international health campaign organized by major breast cancer charities every October to increase awareness of the disease and to raise funds for research into its cause, prevention, diagnosis, treatment and cure. The campaign also offers information and support to those affected by breast cancer. As well as providing a platform for breast cancer charities to raise awareness of their work and of the disease, BCAM is also a prime opportunity to remind women to be breast aware for earlier detection." This sounds great doesn't it?

Well, if we look a little deeper, we find that NBCAM was formed by Imperial Chemical Industries, the creator of Tamoxifen, a breast cancer treatment drug. In the 90's, Imperial Chemical Industries spun off Zeneca Group. Then Zeneca merged with Astra and became Astra Zeneca, which formed a non profit arm that is known today as AstraZeneca Healthcare Foundation, one of the largest financial contributors to NBCAM.  Astra Zeneca also created and markets Arimidex, another breast cancer treatment drug. CancerCares was also involved in the formation of NBCAM. A look at their donors reveals several pharmaceutical companies as well. So, what message would you want to spread if you were a drug manufacturer financially invested in breast cancer treatment medications? Probably not prevention.

I do want to acknowledge again that cancer treatment drugs are not bad. I'm just saying that it's a fact that pharmaceutical companies spend a lot of money on the research and development of new drugs. Forbes  published an article earlier this year that puts the dollar amount between a high of $12 billion and a low of $55 million (4). Considering the magnitude of expense to produce a drug, pharmaceutical companies must be under an enormous amount of pressure to deliver a drug that will generate revenue and for that they need a disease to treat. As I said earlier, there's no profit in prevention.  

Pink washing -
This brings me to what has come to be known as the "pink washing" of breast cancer. You can read more about this here. The term "pink washer" has been used to describe a company "that purports to care about breast cancer by promoting a pink-ribboned product, but manufactures products that are linked to the disease" (Breast Cancer Action) (2). The point is non-profit organizations accepting donations from companies that stand to gain from their philanthropy seems to represent a conflict of interest to me. It's no wonder that little focus is being placed on breast cancer prevention! It's much more profitable for these powerful industries to keep the emphasis on looking for the so-called "cure", which is really just another word for drug treatment.

Awareness, screening and a cure are NOT prevention -
Let's face it,  awareness, screening and early detection is a means to find disease, not prevent it. A cure is defined as the "restoration of health; recovery from disease" (7). Primary prevention of disease is about avoiding or reducing the risk factors for disease. After over 25 years of seeing pink, I think it's safe to say we are aware of breast cancer. I can't help but wonder where we would be now if that focus had been directed toward the prevention of breast cancer.

Well, we can't go back, but we can take action going forward! Let's think before we let our emotions be swayed by all things pink. Let's do some due diligence when donating to a charity.  Where does our money go?  How much of what is spent on that pink colored item will go toward breast cancer prevention research? What chemicals are in my pink marketed cosmetics or foods that my be adversely affecting my body? What's my elected official's stance on this topic? Let's tell those in government how we feel about these issues. Going forward we can shift the focus from awareness to prevention, because the only way we can be cancer free is by preventing cancer from occurring in the first place! 


GO TO: http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/6098/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=11729

Resources
(1) Health awareness campaigns and diagnosis rates: Evidence from National Breast Cancer Awareness Month
Grant D. Jacobsena, Kathryn H. Jacobsen, Journal of Health Economics http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016762961000144X
(2) Breast Cancer Action, http://bcaction.org/
(3) Breast Cancer Action, 
(6) Planning Implementing and Evaluating Health Promotion Programs, James McKenzie, et al, 4th ed., Pearson, 2005.
(7) The Free Dictionary http://www.thefreedictionary.com/cure

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Increase weight loss by working out less?

Really? -
Judging from the ever rising overweight/obesity rates in the United States, I think it's safe to assume that a majority of Americans subscribe to the work out less plan. I find it a bit alarming when scientific data is released and the news takes a portion of a study's findings out of context and reports on it. Typically we can end up misguided and confused. That's why it's so important to understand the bigger picture surrounding "sound bites" like this post's title. This reminds me of a radio ad that would, ironically, air while I was training at the gym.  The advertisement was pushing a diet pill which promised weight loss without the "unhealthy stress and strain of exercise"! I'll spare you a rant, but I will say that the ad was eventually changed so that it did not include the word unhealthy.  Calling exercise unhealthy is blatantly inaccurate. Yet, unfortunately this isn't obvious to everyone. But I digress...

What's going on? -
Saying that we can increase weight loss by working out less is ambiguous because this statement tells only part of the story. So, before you scratch that workout off your to-do list, please read on. According to a study published in the American College of Sports Medicine's (ACSM) Journal of Medical Science and Sports Exercise, it's possible to burn more calories and spend less time working out. However, the key to this result lies in how intensely you workout. Before I go on, it might be helpful to recall the caloric balance equation and its role in weight maintenance, and you can read more about this in a past post found here.
Image from CDC website
Consider a typical day of food consumption and energy expenditure. Simply put, if calories eaten exceed calories burned, we end up with a calorie surplus for that day and over time this leads to weight gain. On the other hand, if we burned more calories than we ate, than over time this leads to weight loss. If  calories in are equal to calories out, the scale is in balance and weight is maintained. Another thing to keep in mind is that we are always expending energy, even while we're resting.


Back to the study - The researchers wanted to see what the energy expenditure at rest of males, aged 22 to 33, would be on a day when they performed a vigorous indoor cycling exercise bout vs. on "a controlled resting day" when they performed no exercise at all.  I underlined and bold faced the word vigorous because this is very important to note. In this case vigorous exercise is defined as performing a physical activity at a level that causes you to be too out of breath to talk. Working out at this intensity level "resulted in a significant [emphasis added] elevation in post exercise energy expenditure, that persisted for 14 hours" after the exercise bout ended (ACSM).


Wow! This sheds some much needed light on that rather ambiguous statement that implies we can increase weight loss by working out less. Now we understand that it's possible to decrease the amount of time we spend working out, but this must be accompanied by an increase in the intensity of our workout to a vigorous level. This is because the research suggests that we can burn additional calories above and beyond what we burned during the workout, even while we're at rest! This is sometimes referred to as caloric after burn.

Here's the data: During the vigorous cycling bout these guys expended 520 calories (kcal).  This isn't surprising because we all know exercise expends calories. We also know that vigorous exercise burns more calories than low and moderate intensity exercise. However, what is really exciting is that after the men finished exercising, and with their post exercise activity level restricted and monitored, they continued to  burn an additional 190 calories (kcal)  during the 14 hours after their workout, as compared with control days when the men were inactive. "The 190 calories burned after exercise above resting levels represented an additional 37% to the net energy expended during the 45-min cycling bout." 

Bottom Line - 
The study's test subjects were young men, so the results may not be the same for women, or for an older population.  Also, we might not be able to workout at a vigorous level for 45 minutes. Given this and other studies on vigorous intensity exercise which show the added benefit of caloric after burn, it seems beneficial to try to incorporate little bouts of vigorous intensity exercise in our workouts. But if you've never exercised, or haven't worked out in years - BEGIN SLOWLY and always consult your physician before beginning any exercise program. Obviously any exercise is better than none, but I like the idea of putting in a little more effort, giving it a little less time and reaping bigger rewards from my workout.  It seems like a win/win to me and that's no sound bite.

In the next post there will be some suggestions for vigorous intensity bout exercise programs and also a discussion relating to another study that shows bouts of vigorous intensity exercise have been shown to be beneficial in reducing inflammation in overweight and obese men. Chronic inflammation is linked to all kinds of health problems.

In the meantime, keep moving! 

Sources
CDC - http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.html
ACSM - American College of Sports Medicine - http://journals.lww.com/acsm-msse/Abstract/2011/09000/A_45_Minute_Vigorous_Exercise_Bout_Increases.6.aspx
CDC - http://www.cdc.gov/healthyweight/calories/index.html
chronic inflammation -  http://www.drweil.com/drw/u/ART02012/anti-inflammatory-diet

Saturday, January 21, 2012

Try a new f-word while exercising - FUN!

How's that New Year's resolution you made to exercise coming along? Maybe you've doubled down on your efforts, but are wondering if it's really worth it. Why does something that we know is good for us and that seemed so exciting just a few weeks ago, turn into a lackluster chore we begin to avoid? Rather than dreading it, slugging it out half-heartedly or abandoning your goal altogether, how about considering a different strategy? Try putting a little fun in your exercise program!

Yes, you read that right. FUN! Okay, so, maybe for you another F-word comes to mind when thinking about exercising, but, before you discount the idea as absurd, think about it for a minute... Can exercise really be fun and if so, what could make it fun? I think our response to this question might be influenced by our past experiences with physical activities.  Reflect back to when you were a kid. Did you ride a bike, a skateboard, or a scooter? Did you play tag, hide and seek, jump rope, and run races? What about shooting hoops, roller-blading or hula-hooping? You get the idea. These are all physical activities that for most of us are associated with fun. Now, what comes to mind when you think about your next workout on the treadmill, elliptical trainer or recumbent bike? If you said fun, good for you, but you're definitely in the minority.

The bottom line is for many of us is that physical activity has lost this element of fun. So, if your wondering why you're struggling with waning motivation, or you've moved past that stage to just giving up altogether, take a look at your workout and ask yourself - is this fitness routine boring and uninspiring? Case in point, faced with taking the stairs or the escalator, which would you choose? Well, not surprisingly, an experiment conducted by Volkswagen found that the majority of people would use the escalator - that is until they made the stairs fun.  Check it out:



 

 If you're wondering, how do I make my workouts fun?  Here are a few suggestions:
  1. Revisit some of the childhood activities you once liked to do, although you may have to scale them back to accommodate your current fitness level
  2. Know what you like and reward yourself for doing it. If you find being outside exhilarating, than choosing a form of indoor exercise isn't going to work for you.  Consider hiking through a local park, planting a garden or walking the dog.  Commit to it and reward yourself when you reach a predetermined goal. See SMART goals post here on how to set specific, measured, attainable, realistic and time-targeted goals, another key to being successful.
  3. Progress g r a d u a l l y. This prevents pain and injuries. Remember, we had to learn to crawl before we walked. This applies to everyone. Even if you were a super athlete in college. If you've not exercised in a few years - you need to take it slowly. A few words about exercise and pain. Now, don't get me wrong, there will be a measure of discomfort, but this isn't pain and it will decrease over time. Exercise shouldn't be torture.  The old "No pain no gain" thinking has been replaced with the much wiser - "Train, don't strain."
  4. Mix up your activities.  Variety is the spice of life, so they say and in this case it helps to prevent overuse injuries, as well as boredom and monotony.
  5. Enlist the help of a buddy. Exercise is more fun if you have the support of a like minded friend. Mutual encouragement is a wonderful motivator.
  6. Make exercise less like a "routine" and more like a game - a mental game that is.  Set a little "contest" for yourself for each physical activity you undertake.  For example, today when I perform the plank I'm going to hold this position for 10 extra seconds.  Make this  mini-challenge attainable, but not too easy, and then make sure you congratulate yourself when you win. 
Of course, always check with your physician before beginning any exercise program.

So, are you ready to stop cursing those dreaded workouts and put some fun back into fitness? Just give these ideas a try and perhaps you'll find a new attitude about your exercise resolution. You've got nothing to lose, right? Well, except maybe the few pounds you've resolved to lose already.   I look forward to hearing all your success stories. Happy new year!

References
Association for Applied Sports Psychology - Exercise Adherence - http://www.appliedsportpsych.org/Resource-Center/health-and-fitness/articles/exercise-adherence
The Fun Theory - http://thefuntheory.com/



Friday, October 7, 2011

The pinkwashing and profitizing of breast cancer

It's that wonderful time of year again, and I'm not talking about the upcoming joyous holiday season. Please forgive my sarcasm, but the reason for my less than mirthful attitude about October is because it's officially National Breast Cancer Awareness Month.  I have come to prefer Breast Cancer Action's more accurate designation of National Breast Cancer Industry Month.  

I've shared my feelings about this month-long marketing extravaganza in a previous post, along with a little background on the origin and history of pink ribbons and breast cancer.  You can read more about that here.  Unfortunately, not much has changed in the world of pinkwashing since I wrote that post a year ago. In fact, it appears things are getting worse.

First, however, the good news is that our awareness of this practice is increasing. This is evidenced by the creation of a new word to describe the phenomenon, i.e. pinkwashing. The term comes from a mash up of the words pink - the color of the ribbon used to commemorate breast cancer, and whitewashing - which means to gloss over or cover up vices or scandals (1).  The Urban Dictionary defines pinkwashing as "the use of breast cancer by corporate marketers in which companies promote their products with claims to donate a percentage of proceeds to the cause" (2). In the spirit of creating new words, let's throw in "profitizing" while we're at it because that's exactly the action that is occurring in what has become the industry known as breast cancer.

Now the bad news. Sadly, it's no longer uncommon for corporations to put profits before the welfare of people. However, things have gone from strange to bizarre considering the fact that joining the long line of companies marketing their products under the pink ribbon is the queen of breast cancer charities - the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation.  Evidently, the Komen Foundation has enlisted a company to manufacture a fragrance for them called Promise Me (4).  The slogan listed on the ShopKomen webpage reads, "purchase with purpose to end breast cancer forever" (4).  Have you ever wondered how much of the purchase price of a product that is marketed as "pink" actually goes toward the noble mission to "end breast cancer forever"? At ShopKomen it's 25% (5) (see the small print at bottom of the Komen webpage).

Now, if you're reading this blog you are probably clued in to the fact that the beauty industry is unregulated and as a result most beauty care products, including fragrances, contain chemicals that are proven to be unhealthy. Can you believe that the safety testing of personal care products is left up to the manufacturers? You read that correctly! According to the Environmental Working Group, they police themselves. So, considering this revelation, it will probably come as no surprise to learn that the original Komen Promise fragrance contained at least 2 chemical toxins (8):
• Galaxolide – a synthetic musk that works as a hormone or endocrine disruptor and has been detected in blood, breast milk, and even newborns.
• Toluene – a potent neurotoxicant linked to a variety of demonstrated negative health effects and is widely known as one of the toxic trio. Toluene is banned by the International Fragrance Association.

HELLO!! Endocrine disrupting chemicals are linked to cancer (6). This is outrageous and appalling to me. The Susan G. Komen Foundation is an organization whose mission is to "eradicate breast cancer as a life-threatening disease by advancing research, education, screening, and treatment" (3), yet they are marketing and selling a product containing chemicals that are suspected cancer causing agents.

That's why at this wonderful time of year, when everything is awash in pink, it is especially important to "think before you pink." This phrase, coined by Breast Cancer Action, suggests we ask the following questions before we generously support a charity or buy a pink ribbon product (9):
  1. Where does the money raised by pink ribbon products go?
  2. How much money goes towards breast cancer programs and services?
  3. How are the funds being raised? For example, is it through the sale of cosmetics that contain potential cancer causing chemicals?
  4. What types of programs are being supported? Is the money being used to conduct research to understand the causes of breast cancer, or in support of the prevention of the disease?
Check out the video below and please spread the word. Let's join together to let those who are choosing to profit from this disease that we won't be pinkwashed anymore!






Sources
(1) Wikipedia - definition of whitewashing - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitewash_%28censorship%29
(2) Urban Dictionary - pinkwashing - http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pinkwashing
(3) Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1508105/ 
(4) Shop Komen - http://www.shopkomen.com/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=1687
(5) Shop Komen homepage - http://www.shopkomen.com/
(6) http://www.ewg.org/skindeep/2011/04/13/why-this-matters/
(7) Endocrine Society - http://www.endo-society.org/journals/scientificstatements/upload/edc_scientific_statement.pdf
(8) Breast Cancer Action - Think before you pink - https://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/6098/p/salsa/web/thank_you_page/public/thankYou.sjs?thank_you_page_KEY=1654
(9) http://bcaction.org/our-take-on-breast-cancer/politics-of-breast-cancer/the-cancer-industry/#anchor2 
 

Friday, August 5, 2011

Healthy nutrition: say no to GMO's

Image: www.foodfightthedoc.com
Are you ready for a food fight?! Sorry to disappoint if scenes from Animal House are running through your mind, because it's not that kind of fight to which I'm referring. The GMO conflict is waging on and at the risk of sounding overly dramatic, the very essence of our food and our health is at stake. One ongoing battle front for concerned American consumers is the call for GM food labeling. Unlike most other industrialized countries, the US doesn't label GM foods (1).

Just what is a GMO? -
I've posted about GM foods in the past, but in case you missed those posts (found here and here), I'll just briefly explain that GMO or GM are acronyms for Genetically Modified Organism. You may also see GE used, and this stands for Genetically Engineered. GM foods are the result of  taking specific selected gene(s) from one kind of organism and placing them into a related or unrelated organism (2). According to the World Health Organization (WHO), GMO's contain genetic material that "has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally" (2). In other words, not "present in, or produced by nature" (8).

"It's not nice to fool mother nature" -
What's wrong with the good, old, conventional, natural methods of breeding our crops? Well, it's seems they're just too time consuming and not very accurate. Never mind that this is how nature works. Biotechnology now allows scientists to modify plants in a lab in order to enhance certain desirable traits for crops such as drought tolerance and pest and disease resistance. For example, scientists can take a gene from a bacterium that is resistant to an herbicide like Roundup and insert it into a soybean plant cell to create a Roundup resistant soybean (1). This is viewed as a major benefit to farming because now farmers are able to plant these Roundup resistant GM seeds, known as "Roundup ready" seeds, and then use Roundup to kill the weeds without harming the crops. Are you sensing a theme here? The company that patented the Roundup ready seeds also patented the Roundup.

Well, I'm sure it will come as no surprise to you to learn that there's more to the story, but that's for another post. For now, it might be helpful to know how The World Health Organization answers the question of why foods are being genetically modified. After all, they are looking out for the world's health.  Here's what they have to say: 
"GM foods are developed – and marketed – because there is some perceived advantage either to the producer or consumer of these foods. This is meant to translate into a product with a lower price, greater benefit (in terms of durability or nutritional value) or both." [emphasis added]
Hmmm... Let's briefly examine two of the reasons stated in the WHO statement for why GM foods are developed and marketed:
  1. product with a lower price
  2. product with a greater benefit (durability or nutritional value or both)
Is less expensive food of greater benefit nutritionally? -
A product with a lower price that has a greater benefit than a product with a higher price would be outstanding. I love a bargain, but I'm no economist. However, it's probably safe to say most of us would agree that getting something valuable for a lesser cost seems like a good thing. So, in an effort to make food cheaper and more abundant, cost effective and time efficient farming practices have evolved over the decades. GM crops are one result. Some advantages of GM foods are pest and disease resistance, herbicide as well as cold, heat and drought tolerance, and even greater nutritional benefit (3).  On the other hand, as a very wise biology professor once said, "for every yin, there's a yang", or put another way, for every benefit, there's a consequence.  


Admittedly, the modernization and industrialization of farming practices have brought prices down significantly on some foods. But ultimately at what cost? Consider that the top GM crops are corn and soy which go into many processed foods (9). In fact, "thousands of products on supermarket shelves are made with ingredients from genetically modified crops" (9).  For example, high fructose corn syrup or soy protein is used frequently in the manufacture of prepackaged convenience foods. Yes, the benefits of these foods are that they're cheap and convenient, but there are consequences as well.

A 2006 report from the USDA Economic Research Service revealed some interesting statistical trends on the percent of income American's spent on food over the last 70 years. In 1930, Americans spent 24.2% of their income on food, compared with 9.5% in 2004 (4). Slate has broken it down further by food eaten at home and compared the percentages by country 
Image from: Slate.com
(shown in the bar graph at right). The point being, Americans are paying a lower price for their food than at any other time in history and are also spending less than most countries. If, as WHO states, GMO's are being developed and marketed as products with a nutritional benefit, is the benefit being reflected in the public health? Are Americans healthier?


The fact is obesity rates in America are at the highest rates ever recorded and the diseases that correspond with being overweight/obese are increasing dramatically (5). You can check out the Center for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) interesting animated map here, that shows by state how obesity rates have increased since 1985. The map illustrates that during the past 20 years, "there has been a dramatic increase in obesity in the United States and rates remain high. In 2010, no state had a prevalence of obesity less than 20%. Thirty-six states had a prevalence of 25% or more and 12 of these states had a prevalence of 30% or more" (5).


Is the American penchant for inexpensive, fast, processed and prepackaged, GM foods coming with the unexpected cost of diminishing health and rising health care costs? According to the US Surgeon General, "Obesity is the fastest growing cause of disease and death in America" (6). "One out of every eight deaths in America is caused by an illness directly related to overweight and obesity" and this statement was made back in 2003 (6). Sadly, things haven't improved since then. Does the cheaper cost of GM foods balance out the health care costs of poor nutrition? According to the National Institutes on Health, "on average, people who are considered obese pay 42% more in health care costs than normal-weight individuals" (7). Is there really a lower price/increased nutritional benefit to GM foods?


GM food labeling-
Considering the above information, the critical factor in maximizing our potential for good health is good nutrition. This is only possible by having access to healthy foods and having the ability to make informed decisions about what foods we choose to eat. The fact that GM foods are not labeled in the US makes this impossible. Bearing in mind a 2008 survey, found here, which showed 87% of Americans polled felt labeling of GM food was necessary, it would seem that the US government would enact a GMO labeling policy.  This has been proposed, but unfortunately still not enacted and surely standing to benefit most from GM foods will continue to insist the labeling of GM foods is unnecessary. Considering the mounting research that shows evidence of harm from GMO's (10), it seems prudent to let our government officials know that we feel the labeling of our foods is highly important.

The following statement sums up succinctly the importance of making healthy food choices:
"Every day, several times a day, you make food choices that influence your body's health for better or worse.  Each day's choices are repeated over years and decades, the rewards or consequences become major. That being the case, paying close attention to good eating now can bring you health benefits later"  (5).


Tips to Avoid GMO's:
So, until GM food labeling becomes a reality, and this is a big question mark right now, you will have to do a little due diligence to avoid GMO's. You can limit your consumption of GMO's by making careful food choices. Here are a few suggestions for ways to avoid GM foods:
  1. Steer clear of the top 4 at risk ingredients found in prepackaged, processed convenience foods - corn, soy, cottonseed and canola.
  2. Try to buy organic foods when possible. 
  3. Try to buy only grass fed meat or wild caught fish.  Feed fed cattle and farm raised fish are likely to be fed GM food.
  4. Watch out for GM sugar beet sugar which is on the market now.
For more suggestions visit the True Food Shopper's Guide, which includes specific name brand non GMO foods to buy or GM foods to avoid. They even have an app available for your smart phone.  Lastly, please consider signing the petition found at the Institute for Responsible Technology. We need to let President Obama know that Americans want meaningful GM food labeling now, because the stance the US government seems to be taking to human consumption of GMO's is that they are innocent until proven guilty.  This principle may work for the justice system, but seems reckless when applied to our food supply, especially considering how absolutely crucial food is to our health and very survival.
 
Sources
(1) Wikipedia, Genetically modified organisms, Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_organism August 2011

(2) World Health Organization, Food Safety retrieved from http://www.who.int/foodsafety/publications/biotech/20questions/en/ August 2011
(3) Whitman, D. B., Genetically Modified Foods: Harmful or Helpful? April 2000, Retrieved from http://www.csa.com/discoveryguides/gmfood/overview.php August 2011
(4) US Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service Retrieved from http://www.ilfb2.org/fff06/51.pdf August 2011
(5) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/animated_map_slides/map26.jpg August 2011
(6) US Surgeon General Statement
(7) US Department of Health & Human Services National Institutes of Health, WIN, Retrieved from http://www.win.niddk.nih.gov/statistics/index.htm#overweight August 2011
(8) Free Dictionary, natural, Retrieved from www.thefreedictionary.com/natural, August 2011
(9) True Food Now, Retrieved from  http://truefoodnow.org/shoppers-guide/ on August 2011
(10) Responsible Technology, The Campaign for healthier eating in America, Retrieved from http://www.responsibletechnology.org/docs/140.pdf August 2011

Tuesday, May 31, 2011

Eating for healing: Functional foods that support health

If you're considering eating for healing you might be wondering exactly what to eat. Obviously, there is an overwhelming variety of foods from which one can choose.  Taking into account the fact that we should consume a certain amount of calories daily, it makes sense to select foods that provide the biggest nutritional benefit per calorie.  Functional foods are an excellent choice because they provide health benefits that extend beyond basic nutrition (1).

Functional foods -
Be aware, however, that all functional foods aren't equally beneficial. This category of foods can also include processed foods which have been fortified or enriched with vitamins and minerals that are lost during manufacturing or storing (2).  Processed wheat flour is an example of a fortified food because some B vitamins and iron are added back in to it after the refining process. Another instance of fortification is when micronutrients which aren't normally present in a food are added. Calcium enriched orange juice would be an example of this type of mineral enrichment (3). At first glance fortification and enrichment of foods seems like a good thing.  However, I think it just makes sense to consume unprocessed foods that retain their naturally occurring, unaltered nutrients whenever possible.

So, let's take a look at one functional food that deserves more publicity - black rice. This unprocessed rice has been a staple for a large part of the world's population, but it's only recently gaining popularity here in the US.  I'm not sure why it's taken so long to catch on because I love the delicious nutty taste, firm texture and exotic touch that black rice adds to any dish. Not only does this rice look and taste good, but it's health benefits are outstanding.

Health benefits -
Research has shown that consuming black rice reduces the build up of plaque in the arteries and it also helps to reduce inflammation (4). These health benefits are thought to be the result of the intact outer bran layer that black rice retains.  White rice, on the other hand, loses this outer bran layer during processing.  In addition, research published in the Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry reported on the effects of black rice bran on skin inflammation in lab mice.  This study found that the black rice reduced inflammation by 32%, compared to controls and these benefits weren't seen in tests performed with brown rice extracts (5). These results show the potential anti-inflammatory and anti-allergenic benefits that black rice bran possesses. For those looking to reduce chronic inflammation, I think this food is definitely worth adding to your diet.

Here's a quick, easy and tasty recipe suggestion:
Asian Black Rice Stir Fry
Black Rice - cook per package directions (I found the Forbidden Rice brand at Market Street)
julienne carrots
Fresh pea pods
sliced red and yellow peppers
sliced green onion
sliced bok choy
julienne squash
ginger
handful of sesame seeds
cashews

After you've prepped the vegetables, heat grapeseed oil in a wok and add the vegetables in the order listed and cook until tender but crisp. Add organic sesame oil and tamari to taste, stir and top with cashews and enjoy.

Emerging science is giving us a better understanding of how the nutrients in the foods we eat can effect our health, and black rice is just one example of an excellent functional food. So, when faced with the decision of what to eat for our next meal it's important to consider our bodies' unique and specific needs, and then choose foods that will support these needs.  The next post will discuss functional foods in more detail. Until then, when planning your menus over the next few weeks, I encourage you to keep in mind this quote from Hippocrates:  "Let food be thy medicine..." 

Sources
(1) University of Michigan - http://www.med.umich.edu/mfit/nutrition/knowhow/pdfs/FuncFoodsExamples.pdf
(2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_food 
(3) http://www.eufic.org/page/en/page/FAQ/faqid/fortified-enriched-food-products/ 
(3) http://www.foodinsight.org/Resources/Detail.aspx?topic=Background_on_Functional_Foods
(4) http://jn.nutrition.org/content/131/5/1421.short
(5) http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jf102224b