FW: Healthy substitutions

Lately I've been on a baking kick.  It started with wanting to be able to eat muffins.  I really like muffins!  But it's hard to fit them into my diet anywhere without adding extra calories.  I decided that if they were healthy muffins, they could easily count as breakfast... right?  First I made muffins with shredded carrots and applesauce, and they came out really good.  Then I bought a "501 muffins/scones/pastries" book and have made a different kind of muffin every week. 
 
Thing is, only so many of the recipes in the book are for "healthy" muffins; you know, low fat with lots of fiber.  I've gradually been learning how to make healthier substitutions.  The first thing I learned was to swap out oil for applesauce, then to use whole wheat flour in place of some of the all-purpose.  Now I also add bran (the first few recipes had it in the ingredients list already, but now I've learned how to incorporate it whether it's called for or not) and am getting to the point that I'm ready so start experimenting with honey instead of sugar.  I've already been using brown sugar instead of white when I think it will work well with the other flavors in the recipe. Here are some of the tips I've used:
 
Applesauce for vegetable/canola oil
As long as you are okay with the slight change in taste and texture (typically sweeter and softer), you'll have the best success substituting applesauce in oil-based baked goods, like quick breads, muffins and some cakes.

But let's get one thing straight: applesauce is not a great substitute for butter, and will lead to disaster in cookies and any other treat with a crispy snap. Unless you like cake-y, mushy cookies.

Most sources recommend a 1:1 swap:  if the recipe calls for 1 cup of oil, substitute with 1 cup of applesauce.  If recipe is too moist, you may want to reduce the amount of applesauce by as much as 1/3.
 
More tips for substitute success:

    * Use unsweetened applesauce, or reduce the amount of sugar in the recipe if you use sweetened applesauce.

    * Measure applesauce in a liquid measuring cup.

    * Use a hand or stand mixer to thoroughly combine the applesauce with the other liquid ingredients (egg, flavoring), then blend the liquids with the sugar. With a large spatula, carefully fold the dry ingredients into the mixture until just combined.

    * The finished product will be moist. Don't alter the time for cooking because low-fat recipes dry out when they're over-cooked.
 
 
Whole Wheat for White Flour
Whole-wheat flour usually can be substituted for part or all of the all-purpose flour in most recipes. If a recipe calls for two cups flour, try one cup all-purpose and one cup whole-wheat. When completely substituting whole-wheat for white, use 7/8 cup whole-wheat for one cup of white flour.
 
Products made with whole wheat flour will usually be more dense.  This may be helped somewhat by sifting the flour one or two extra times to help incorporate more air. Using a combination of regular and whole wheat flour will produce a lighter result. Aim to replace about 1/2 to 3/4 the white flour with whole wheat.
 
Always remember when using any all purpose flour for items such as muffins and cookies to mix as little as possible to avoid forming glutens, which will toughen the final result. 
 
 
Wheat Bran/Wheat Germ for flour
Replace up to 1/3 of the flour with Wheat Bran/Wheat Germ (Wheat Bran/Wheat Germ can substitute for each other in equal amounts).
 
 
Brown Sugar for White Sugar
In spite of their difference in weight, you can substitute brown sugar for granulated white on a 1 to 1 basis, and the most significant difference will be taste.  Pack the brown sugar firmly into the cup.  Brown sugar includes molasses, which adds moisture, so it will keep baked goods from drying out so quickly. 

 
Honey for White Sugar
To start with, it's a good idea to substitute up to half of the sugar in a given recipe. Once you've experimented more and have a better handle on how it works, you can try a higher percentage.
 
Up to one cup, honey can be substituted for sugar in equal amounts. For example, you can substitute 1/2 cup of honey for 1/2 cup of sugar called for in a recipe. Over one cup, use about 2/3-3/4 cup of honey for every cup of sugar. This is because honey is actually sweeter than sugar.
 
Honey is a liquid, so you'll need to reduce the liquid in the recipe a little. Do this at a rate of 1/4 cup less liquid for every cup of honey used in the recipe.  Honey browns faster than sugar so lower the temperature of the oven by 25 degrees and watch closely in the final few minutes of baking. Honey is also a little acidic. To counter-act this, you may need to add 1/2 teaspoon of baking soda for every cup of honey used. 

 
Whipping or heavy cream
Equal amounts evaporated skim milk OR 1/2 low-fat yogurt + 1/2 low-fat cottage cheese
 

Sour Cream
Substitute plain yogurt in equal amounts.

 
Options for reducing fats in a recipe
Start by just replacing half the amount of fat with an equal amount of any of these options:

• Fruit purees like unsweetened applesauce, canned crushed pineapple, or mashed bananas.  Use an old banana for sweetness and banana-y flavor, a green banana for all the nutrition without competing flavors.
• Vegetable purees like sweet potato, cauliflower, or canned pumpkin.  Also try shredded veggies, like the familiar carrots or zucchini.  Though technically a fruit, don't forget about mashed avocado!  Save the darker veggies like spinach puree to combine with chocolate desserts or with a darker fruit like blueberries.
• Beans, my personal favorite option.  Beans add protein and structure to a recipe and, when pureed, go completely unnoticed!  Try great northern beans or pinto beans for a neutral taste, and chickpeas for a slightly nuttier taste.  Use black beans and adzuki beans in recipes that call for cocoa or chocolate.
• Nut butters, like peanut butter, almond butter, or tahini.  Cashew butter has a particular neutral creamy taste.  These also pack in some extra protein.

 
An egg is 2 ounces of thick liquid, so it is best substituted with 2 oz of another thick liquid.  Try any of the above fruit, veggie, bean, or nut butter substitutions listed for subbing out fats.
 
Nuts - reduce the amount by half and toast them.
 

Not my typical post

... but it was too hilarious to pass up.  Sometimes I feel like this truly is the world we live in.
 
 
MY NAME IS DAVE AND I'M A CARBOHYDRATIC (or, carbohydrolic?)

I probably shouldn't admit this to you younger readers, but when my
generation was your age, we did some pretty stupid things. I'm
talking about taking CRAZY risks. We drank water right from the
tap. We used aspirin bottles that you could actually open with your
bare hands. We bought appliances that were not festooned with
helpful safety warnings such as, "DO NOT BATHE WITH THIS TOASTER."
But for sheer insanity, the wildest thing we did was - prepare to be
shocked......... we deliberately ingested carbohydrates.

I know, I know. It was wrong. But we were young and foolish, and
there was a lot of peer pressure. You'd be at a party, and there
would be a lava lamp blooping away, and a Jimi Hendrix record
playing. And then, when the mood was right, somebody would say: "You
wanna do some 'drates?" And the next thing you know, there'd be a
bowl of pretzels going around, or crackers, or even potato chips, and
we'd put these things into our mouths and just EAT them.

My only excuse was that we were ignorant. It's not like now, when
everybody knows how bad carbohydrates are, and virtually every
product is advertised as being "low-carb," including beer, denture
adhesives, floor wax tires, life insurance and Viagra.

Back then, we had no idea. Nobody did! Our own MOTHERS gave us
bread! Today, of course, nobody eats bread. People are terrified of
all carbohydrates, as evidenced by the recent mass robbery at a
midtown Manhattan restaurant, where 87 patrons turned their wallets
over to a man armed only with a strand of No. 8 spaghetti. ("Do what
he says! He has pasta!")

The city of Beverly Hills has been evacuated twice this month because
of reports - false, thank heavens - that terrorists had put a bagel
in the water supply. But as I say, in the old days we believed that
the reason you got fat was from eating calories," which are tiny
units of measurement that cause food to taste good".

When we wanted to lose weight, we went on low-calorie diets in which
we ate only inedible foods such as celery, which is actually a
building material. The problem with the low-calorie diet was that a
normal human could stick to it for, at most, four hours, at which
point he or she would have no biological choice but to sneak out to
the garage and snork down an entire bag of Snickers, sometimes
without removing the wrappers.

So nobody lost weight, and everybody felt guilty all the time. Many
people, in desperation, turned to disco. But then along came the
bold food pioneer who invented the Atkins Diet: Dr. Something
Atkins. Dr. Atkins discovered an amazing thing: Calories don't
matter! What matter are carbohydrates, which result when a carbo
molecule and a hydrate molecule collide at high speeds and form tiny
invisible doughnuts.

Dr. Atkins' discovery meant that as long as you avoided carbohydrates
you could, without guilt, eat high-fat, high-calorie foods such as
cheese, bacon lard, pork rinds and whale. You could eat an entire
pig, as long as the pig had not recently been exposed to bread. At
first, like other groundbreaking pioneers such as Galileo and Eminem,
Dr. Atkins met with skepticism, even hostility.

The Celery Growers Association hired a detective to - yes – stalk
him. His car tires were repeatedly slashed by what police determined
to be shards of Melba toast. But Dr. Atkins persisted, because he
had a dream - a dream that, some day, he would help the human race by
selling it 427 million diet books. And he did, achieving vindication
for his diet before his tragic demise in an incident that the autopsy
report listed as "totally unrelated to the undigested 28-pound bacon
cheeseburger found in his stomach."

But the Atkins Diet lives on, helping millions of Americans to lose
weight The irony is, you can't tell this by looking at actual
Americans, who have as a group, become so heavy that North America
will soon be underwater as far inland as Denver: Which can only mean
one thing: You people are still sneaking Snickers!! You should be
ashamed of yourselves!
 
 
I unfortunately haven't found the orignal source to be able to site this very funny quip.

FDA issues diet pill warning

The following FDA warning, revised Jan 8, 2009, is not exactly a "food for thought" post... but it is related to healthy weightloss and dieting. Just remember, if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. And in this case, it can be downright dangerous.
 
FDA Expands Warning to Consumers About Tainted Weight Loss Pills
 
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is expanding its nationwide alert to consumers about tainted weight loss pills that contain undeclared, active pharmaceutical ingredients. On December 22, 2008, FDA warned consumers not to purchase or consume 28 different products marketed for weight loss. Since that time, FDA analysis has identified 41 more tainted weight loss products that may put consumers' health at risk.
 
An FDA analysis found that the undeclared active pharmaceutical ingredients in some of these products include sibutramine (a controlled substance), rimonabant (a drug not approved for marketing in the United States), phenytoin (an anti-seizure medication), phenolphthalein (a solution used in chemical experiments and a suspected cancer causing agent) and bumetanide (a diuretic). Some of the amounts of active pharmaceutical ingredients far exceeded the FDA-recommended levels, putting consumers' health at risk.
These weight loss products, some of which are marketed as "dietary supplements," are promoted and sold on various Web sites and in some retail stores. Some of the products claim to be "natural" or to contain only "herbal" ingredients, but actually contain potentially harmful ingredients not listed on the product labels or in promotional advertisements. These products have not been approved by the FDA, are illegal and may be potentially harmful to unsuspecting consumers. 
 
"These tainted weight loss products pose a great risk to public health because they contain undeclared ingredients and, in some cases, contain prescription drugs in amounts that greatly exceed their maximum recommended dosages," said Janet Woodcock, M.D., director, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, FDA. "Consumers have no way of knowing that these products contain powerful drugs that could cause serious health consequences. Therefore FDA is taking this action to protect the health of the American public."
 
Full article and listing of the 41 products:
http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2008/NEW01933.html
 
 

Take some advice from a toddler

We are all born with the intuitive knowledge to eat when hungry and stop when satisfied.  Think back to when you were a child (or, if that is too long ago, think back to when your children were very young!).  Until "rules" are imposed by mom and dad, we govern our intake purely by instinct.  Children often have to be told to eat at mealtimes because instinct says that we do not need to eat yet if we are not feeling hungry. Before we "learned better," we ate the parts we liked best and stuck our tongues out at the rest; we did not feel guilty about eating one food vs. another food because it was fattening or sweet; we stopped when we were no longer hungry, even if the plate was not empty.  As adults, we know it is important to make healthy food choices that nourish our bodies, but beyond that, why did most of us lose touch with our innate ability to eat only when hungry and stop when satisfied?
 
It is learned behavior to eat when not hungry, to feel guilt or shame about our food choices, and to eat beyond satiety.  It can be unlearned as well.  It is true that self-monitoring--telling yourself that it's not ok to eat an entire bag of cookies for dinner--is an important skill.  However, it does no good to vilify certain foods and declare them "off limits".  This only makes us want the food more!  And then, consuming it results in negative feelings.  We feel like a failure because we ate a piece of cake even though we know we "shouldn't" eat sweets.  We feel so badly about ourselves that we resolve to try harder to adhere to a strict diet regimen. Next time we give in, we feel even worse.  It's a vicious cycle. And how many of us eat things we don't even really like because it's on our plates?
 
Wouldn't it be so much better to eat what we wanted, when we wanted, and never feel guilty about it again?? 
 
This is what a "normal" eater does.  You know, the naturally thin person that everyone hates!  The one who never seems concerned with dieting, is happy to indulge occasionally, and maintains a healthy weight.  They might eat the pizza and leave the crust.  They might scrape the icing off a cupcake, lick the fork, and toss the rest.  If this sounds like the way a child eats, you would be right!  Most children are excellent intuitive eaters until deregulated habits become ingrained in their behavior.  Normal eaters know that any food, in moderation, can be part of an overall healthy eating plan.
 
The secret is to eat when hungry, stop when satisfied, and, since we are all adults here, listen to your "inner grandmother" when it comes to nutrition.  You know, things like, "Eat your veggies before you have dessert", and "Two cookies are enough, dear."  It really is that simple.  Now, normal eaters do occasionally eat when they aren't hungry and continue past satiety.  They might enjoy popcorn at a movie, or celebrate a promotion with a fancy 6-course dinner even though they stopped being hungry long before dessert.  These types of behaviors are the exceptions and not the norm.  In general, they wait until they are hungry to eat, eat as soon as possible after noticing they are hungry (rather than starving themselves until some arbitrary point in the future), and stop eating when they are no longer hungry.  This means stopping when satisfied--not full. Adults often eat to the point that they are so full they feel physically uncomfortable.  Have you ever known a toddler to do this??  No! They stop eating at the point that their body no longer signals hunger. Normal eaters also eat what they like and leave the rest. 
 
Don't believe that intuitive eating can lead to weight loss or maintaining a normal weight?  The following article profiles Steven Hawks, a professor of health science, as he gives traditional "diets" the thumbs down and "intuitive eating" a nod of approval.  It helped him shed 50 pounds--painlessly and normally.
 
http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/01/11/profile.hawks/

Danger in diet soda: All things in moderation

No, not it's not the formaldehyde myth, or a lecture about aspartame.
 
The "danger" I speak of has to do with the correlation between diet soda and obesity.  That is, those who consume larger amounts of diet pop have been found more likely to be obese than those who consume lesser amounts--even when compared to people who drink regular, non-diet soda.
 
The reasons are multi-factored, but the basic danger lies in the misconception that it's ok to drink large amounts of diet soft drinks with no ill-effects because they have zero or very few calories.  While they may indeed be calorie-free... and perhaps even caffeine-free and low-sodium... it's still not a "healthy" alternative, folks.  Water is the best way to go.  Fruit or vegetable juice is a nice option, as is milk (all have potential for lots of nutrients and vitamins, but be mindful of calories).  Diet pop has no redeeming qualities.  We just like the way it tastes.  The sweet taste itself can be detrimental to our healthful intentions by increasing the desire to continue consuming more and more sweets (it's classic conditioning--the more sweets you regularly ingest, the more you crave in your daily diet).
 
The notion of moderating the consumption of "diet" versions of things does not just apply to soft drinks.  The argument can be made that any "light" or "low fat" or "low carb" version of any food product lulls the consumer into a false sense of security with this label. We consequently tend to overeat a product that in some cases, when over-consumed, is worse for the body than the original product (such as trans fat found in margarine).  It may also be less satisfying than the original; another reason we eat more.
 
Now, before I make it sound like I'm condemning all things "L-I-T-E": I do drink diet pop, and I do buy skim milk and low fat cream cheese.  I am not suggesting that diet foods are evil.  The key is in moderation; being aware of the tendency to over-consume these products, and evaluating on a case-by-case basis whether you want the "real thing" or a "diet" version. 
 
The following article links consumption of diet pop to metabolic syndrome and obesity.  As always, I highly recommend you do your own research and make your own decisions. I can honestly say that I have noticed, prior to reading any articles on the topic, a connection in my own life between times when I've made an effort to limit my consumption of diet soda and times when I have not, and my cravings for sweets of other kinds throughout the day. 
 
http://www.getfitslowly.com/2008/02/12/the-dangers-of-diet-soda/

Wasting food

Some people overeat because they are trying to numb unpleasant emotions, or prolong the pleasurable ones.  Others eat too much because it just tastes good, and they indulge beyond the point of self-nourishment in an act of rebellion or greed.  And some individuals eat until they finish what's on the plate whether they are still hungry or not, because they can't stand the thought of letting food go to waste.  Often, if these people are parents they will dutifully finish what's on their kids' plates along with their own! ...and lecture the children on being wasteful, to boot.

 

Learn to practice the fine art of eating the best and chucking the rest!

 

We live in an age of plenty. Throwing away a cup of overcooked pasta or one leftover hamburger patty isn't going to hurt anyone, nor would forcing yourself to finish every meal save a starving child in Somalia from the ravages of malnourishment.  It goes without saying that everyone should strive to be conservative, and try not to take more than you need at an all-you-can-eat buffet. Likewise, it is not necessary to prepare a double-recipe knowing your family will only barely finish half of it.  Because throwing away food is wasteful... there is no argument about that. But it is no more noble, or useful, or wise to treat your own body as a garbage can for disposing of unwanted food! Maybe you hold the notion that your body will somehow make good use of the extra food beyond what it needs to sustain itself.  It won't!  It stores the excess food as fat! Which, let's face it--most of us won't need to rely on as an energy source anytime within our lifetimes.  So the food still goes to waste, inside the body, in the form of unused, unhealthy fat.

 

For the longest time I couldn't bring myself to throw away food, even if I knew it wouldn't get eaten. I'd put leftovers in the fridge and then let them rot until I "had" to throw them away. Or I'd eat the same thing meal after meal until I'd finished the whole amount, even if it was no longer appealing to me and even if I truly would've preferred to make something new and eat that instead.  What did this accomplish? It instilled a desire to overeat when the food was fresh, in an effort to "dispose of" the leftovers in a way that wouldn't make me feel guilty or result in my ritualistic self-punishment of forcing myself eat it later.  Now, knowing that I can eat only what I want, when I want, and toss the rest, means that I have no reason to stuff myself on extra bites that don't really serve any purpose beyond adding on extra pounds of fat over time.

 

Don't guilt yourself into eating food you don't want just so it won't be "wasted."  Remember that no matter whether it ends up being tossed in the trash or stored as fat in your body, it is not being utilized for any useful purpose. And if you spy someone else giving you a dirty look when you scrape your plate into the garbage can, ask yourself whether you believe that person to be any smarter or better or healthier than you simply because they finish every last bite, or save leftovers until they go bad, or force themselves to eat the same thing for every meal until every last scrap is gone.  Put waste in a garbage can, not in your body.

Not all yogurts were created equal

I love yogurt. With it's live bacterial cultures, high calcium content, and protein to boot, it is often praised as a healthy, wholesome snack--especially for women, who have a higher RDA for calcium than men but too often fail to eat enough dairy or meat to reach nutritional requirements.

But have you ever looked at your yogurt label? I mean, really looked at it?? I was shocked to discover that my favorite brand contains 14 grams of sugar per serving. That's more than the sugary fruit and grain bars I'd long ago deemed too "candybar-like" to be a regular addition to my diet! Also, to my chagrin, the second ingredient on the label...? High fructose corn syrup. Why, Yoplait? Why???

I learned firsthand that not all yogurts are created equal. A quest to find what to do about it revealed the following article, from Health Action newsletter.

---

Yogurt: Health food... or dessert?

Plop a 1960s shopper down in the yogurt aisle of a 1990s supermarket and she’d probably drop her loaf of Wonder bread. Yogurt’s come a long way, baby.

On the upside, it’s got less fat than it did 30 years ago, when yogurt first showed up in supermarket dairy cases. On the downside, it’s looking a lot more like dessert than health food.

For children, you can now find yogurt with added candy, Jell-O, or Trix "fruity colors"—that is, the same artificial colors and flavors that make some kids think they’re getting fruit instead of sugar when they eat Trix (make that "Tricks") cereal. For adults, you can find flavors like chocolate eclair, coconut cream pie, and caramel praline.

If you’re looking for dessert, almost any yogurt is better than cakes, cookies, pies, and the rest. But if you’re looking for a healthy food, you’ve got to be choosy.


The Best
You can’t beat a cup of plain low-fat or fat-free yogurt. It can have as much as 400 mg of calcium—40 percent of the Daily Value (DV)—more than a glass of 1% or fat-free milk
(30 to 35 percent of the DV). And, like milk, it also has protein, B-12, riboflavin, potassium, magnesium, and zinc. The only exception: Yogurt has no vitamin D because, unlike milk, it’s not fortified.

What’s more, people who have trouble digesting lactose (the naturally occurring sugar in milk) should have no problem with yogurt. The "live and active cultures" digest the lactose for you.

Whether those Lactobacillus bulgaricus and Streptococcus thermophilus—the bacteria in yogurt—have other benefits is unclear. But even if they don’t, yogurt’s still a bargain. All those nutrients for just over 100 calories is a steal.

That is, if you eat it plain. Not that it has to be eaten alone.

Yogurt’s natural tartness makes it a perfect foil for a sweet, ripe banana, juicy fresh (or frozen) berries, or even canned (unsweetened) pineapples or peaches. Throw it in the blender or spoon it into a bowl. Either way, you get one of the five daily servings of fresh fruit that could cut your risk of cancer.

Plain fat-free or low-fat yogurt is a Best Bite if there ever was one. Unfortunately, that’s not the way most people eat it.

The Next Best
People who would never let a sip of chocolate milk cross their lips think nothing of eating a cup of sweetened yogurt. Yet an eight-ounce cup of Dannon Lowfat fruit-on-the-bottom has six teaspoons of added sugar. A glass of Hershey’s Chocolate Fat Free Milk has four.
Now you’re talking 240 calories in a snack that many people gulp down in 240 seconds. You could have spent the 100 calories from the added sugar on a banana or a couple of cups of low-fat microwave popcorn.

Judging by the calories in other brands—whose manufacturers are more secretive than Dannon—six teaspoons of sugar is par for the course for yogurts with fruit. (Flavored yogurts like coffee, vanilla, and lemon may have "only" four teaspoons.)

All that sugar means more calories and less calcium-rich yogurt.

Since the calcium comes from milk, that means you’re also getting less potassium, magnesium, zinc, etc. Plus, the sweeter the yogurt, the less likely you are to add your own fruit.
Still, if it’s a choice between sweetened yogurt and no yogurt, get the sweetened. Just try to pick the best ones. That means the most calcium and fruit and the least added sugar.
But while food labels list calcium and sugar, there’s no way to tell how much of the sugar comes from the milk and fruit and how much is added.

So we gave Honorable Mentions to yogurts that kept the calcium up to at least 300 mg (30 percent of the Daily Value) in eight ounces.

Just because a yogurt didn’t make an Honorable Mention doesn’t mean it’s dishonorable. More than a few just missed the cutoff for calcium. When push comes to shove, most yogurts are more nutritious than most ice creams, frozen yogurts, or prepared puddings.

One more thing: If coffee’s your flavor, you may end up with an unwanted shot of caffeine. And, in most cases, there’s nothing on the label to clue you in. For the record, an eight-ounce container of Dannon Lowfat Coffee Yogurt contains 45 mg of caffeine. That’s about what you’d get in half a cup of brewed coffee. Six ounces of Horizon Organic Nonfat Cappuccino have 25 mg. Dannon Light Cappuccino and Stonyfield Farm Nonfat Cappuccino have none.

The Least Best
Why did some lines strike out?

Too little calcium. A few brands—like Colombo, Jell-O, Light n’ Lively, SnackWell’s, and some lines of Breyers—had less calcium than their competitors. Is that because they have more sugar? Or is it because other brands have more milk solids? The companies won’t say.
Artificial sweeteners. Though the aspartame (NutraSweet) in "light" yogurts cuts calories to 100 or less, its safety isn’t 100 percent certain.

Heat-treatment. SnackWell’s is heat-treated to get rid of the off-flavors that arise when chocolate mixes with the acid made by yogurt’s beneficial bacteria. Unfortunately, the heat also kills the bacteria.

The information for this article was compiled by Wendy Meltzer.

See link for comparison chart

Full article and comparison chart here

The Skinny on Diet Sodas

Everyone knows that when you are on a diet, regular soda just isn't on the menu. But order up a diet soda, have as many as you want, and you are doing a great job, right? Well, maybe not so much.

There is, and always has been, a lot of press surrounding diet sodas and artificial sweeteners (which are what give diet soda its sweet taste). For years, it has been suggested that these enticing and oh-so-delicious beverages not only rot your stomach lining and your teeth, but even can rot your brain....anyone remember the mid-90's urban legend about certain diet sodas killing memory brain cells?

I am not convinced either way on any of the above, but what I can talk to you about is the potential risks and benefits that are associated with diet sodas such that you can make your own decision to drink on up or pass on by.

Let's break it down into some "Myths and Facts":

Diet soda destroys your stomach lining.
MYTH/FACT (depending). Soda is acidic. Acidic foods and beverages can be hard on certain people's digestive systems but in general, our bodies are pretty good at adjusting. An occasional soda here and there is not going to wreak havoc on your stomach if you don't have underlying conditions to begin with. If you are having problems with acid reflux, indigestion or ulcers then, indeed, sodas probably aren't the best and you should avoid as they will exacerbate these conditions.

Diet soda rots your teeth.
FACT. As stated above, soda is acidic. Acid is hard on your teeth. Continuously drinking soda throughout the day is definitely not a good thing to do if you want to preserve a sparkling smile. My advice: if you want to enjoy a soda (diet or otherwise), do so through a straw and brush your teeth immediately after.

Diet soda kills your brain cells.
MYTH(??). I actually consider the jury to be still out on this one. It really has more to do with the artificial sweeteners and other artificial ingredients than anything else. We really don't have all the answers when it comes to long-term effects of artificial anything. While it appears that regular (in other words: in moderation) human consumption of FDA-approved additives is perfectly safe, there is no 100% guarantee.

Diet soda helps you lose weight.
MYTH. This actually falls in a gray zone but is in the neighborhood located much closer to myth-land. It is true that there are no (or very few) calories in diet soda and all things considered, if you reduced your calorie intake and increased your energy expenditure through exercise, a diet soda or two each day will not help or harm. And we do know that regular soda is full of empty calories and sugar so getting away from this stuff is a good idea. The issue here with diet soda is that recent studies suggest that the taste of it may actually trick our bodies into wanting the calories it has been "promised" by the sweet tasting beverage, thus essentially sabotaging our best laid plans.

Diet soda, in moderation, is probably just fine.
FACT. As with anything, moderation is the key. If you enjoy diet soda, go ahead and have one-just not every day/all day. Better choices when the thirst strikes: water and decaf iced tea (particularly green or white). If plain water bores you, try the sparkling kind or throw in some limes, lemons or other fruit for flavor.

Full article here

Artificial additives linked to hyperactivity

Cadbury and Mars to ban artificial food additives
Cadbury and Mars have promised to remove artificial additives from a range of their sweets following a study last week that confirmed a link with hyperactivity in children.

Mars brands which currently use one or more of the suspect additives include Starburst, Skittles and peanut and plain M&Ms. The confectionery giant has committed to removing E104 from M&Ms and all artificial colours from Starburst and Skittles by the end of this year.

Cadbury sweets containing the additives include Maynards wine gums, Bassett Murray Mints, Barratt Flumps and varieties of its Trident chewing gum. A spokesman from Cadbury said that the company had already begun a programme to replace artificial additives in its biggest brands such as Bassett's Liquorice Allsorts and Jelly Babies but has now extended that to all other sweet brands before the end of 2008.

The moves will increase pressure on the Food Standards Agency to support a total ban on the additives.

Prince Charles joined in the debate yesterday at the launch of the Year of Food and Farming, when he warned that a generation of "over-industrialised" children may be poisoning themselves with food additives.

Full article here.

Choosing a healthy breakfast cereal

How healthy is your breakfast cereal?
Choosing a healthy breakfast cereal is not a simple task. The cereal aisle is a long one, full of contradictions. You'll find cereals made with refined grains with nearly no fiber, and cereals made with whole grains and bran boasting 7 grams or more of fiber. There are cereals with so much sugar they seem more like boxes of little cookies. And there are cereals with sugar listed far down on the ingredient list.

But it's well worth the effort, experts say. If you eat cereal almost every day, either for breakfast or as a snack, the cereal you choose can say a lot about your health. It can add a lot of good stuff to your diet -- or it can add a whole lot of nothing.

Choosing a healthy breakfast cereal is mainly about getting some whole grains. There's no excuse not to get at least one serving of whole grains if you eat cereal for breakfast. Recent research suggests those who eat more whole grains are at lower risk of diabetes and heart disease.

Taste or Nutrition?
The trick is finding a breakfast cereal that is full of healthful attributes, low in sugar, and has no saturated fat and trans fat -- but still tastes great! It doesn’t matter how good for you a cereal is; if it doesn’t taste good, you’re probably not going to eat it day after day.

Of course, one person’s perfect whole-grain cereal with less sugar is another person’s bowl of sawdust. If you like breakfast cereals that come in lots of colors and artificial flavors, then yes, you probably do have to choose between taste and nutrition. But if you like a cereal with natural flavors from toasted whole grains, and maybe some nuts and dried fruit, you'll have many healthful cereals to choose from.

And yes, dried fruits do add nutrition to your cereal. A quarter of a cup of raisins, for example, has about 1 1/2 grams of fiber plus 4% of the Recommended Daily Value for vitamin E and about 6% each of the Daily Value for vitamins B-1, B-6, and iron, magnesium, and selenium. But when you look on the nutrition facts label for Raisin Bran, for example, you might be shocked to see there are 19 grams of sugar in a 1-cup serving. What’s going on is that any sugars -- even those from natural sources like dried fruit -- are counted in the sugar grams listed on the label. It may be helpful for the consumer to review the ingredient listing of a Nutrition Fact label to identify added sugars rather than reading the amount of total sugars in the product.

How Much Sugar?
Does the ingredients list for your cereal look a lot like that on, say, a box of cookies? One ounce of Mini Oreo cookies has 11 grams of sugar and 130 calories (34% of its calories come from sugar). And sugar is the second ingredient listed (enriched flour is first). Lots of cereals have ingredient lists that look similar -- like Cookie Crisp Cereal, with 44% calories from sugar.

The U.S. Government's Dietary Reference Intakes recommend that added sugars not exceed 25% of total calories (to ensure sufficient intake of micronutrients). And while there isn’t a specific guideline for cereal, it makes sense to aim for a cereal that gets 25% or less of its calories from sugar. (If the cereal contains dried fruit, this could be a pinch higher.)

While you can find plenty of cereals with 5 grams of fiber per serving or more, some of them go a little bit over the "25% calories from sugar" guideline. But if the percentage of sugar calories is still below 30%, the first ingredient is a whole grain, and the cereal tastes good, it may still be a good choice overall.

8 Good-Tasting Picks
After some taste testing and input from acquaintances, I came up with eight picks for the best-tasting healthful breakfast cereals. The cereals on my list had to have a whole grain as the first ingredient and 5 grams of fiber per serving. Sugar had to be around 25% calories from sugar or less, unless dried fruit was among the top three ingredients. I also tried to choose cereals that are easily found in the supermarket.

Post Grape-Nuts Trail Mix Crunch: 5 grams fiber, and 22% calories from sugar. The first three ingredients are whole grain wheat, malted barley, and sugar, followed by raisins and wheat bran.
Fiber One Bran Cereal: 14 grams fiber, 0% calories from sugar. First three ingredients are whole-grain wheat bran, corn bran, and cornstarch. This cereal only appeals to some people. I would suggest enhancing the flavor with cinnamon, fresh or dried fruit, and/or roasted nuts.
*Fiber One Honey Clusters: 13 grams fiber, 15% calories from sugar. The first three ingredients are whole-grain wheat, corn bran, and wheat bran.
Quaker Oatmeal Squares: 5 grams fiber, 19% calories from sugar. The first three ingredients are whole oat flour, whole-wheat flour, and brown sugar.
Shredded wheat: 6 grams fiber, 0% calories from sugar (for a generic brand). The only ingredient is 100% whole grain cereal. I enjoy this with added fresh or dried fruit and nuts. If you opt for the frosted variety, it has 6 grams fiber and gets 23% of its calories from sugar.
*Frosted Mini Wheats: 6 grams fiber, 24% calories from sugar. The first three ingredients are whole-grain wheat, sugar, and high-fructose corn syrup.
*Raisin Bran: 7 grams fiber, 40% calories from sugar (in Kellogg’s brand). The first three ingredients are whole wheat, raisins, and wheat bran). Sugar is listed fourth in the ingredient list, but many of the calories from sugar come from the raisins.
Kashi Heart to Heart Honey Toasted Oat Cereal: 5 grams fiber, 18% calories from sugar. The first three ingredients are whole oat flour, oat bran, and evaporated cane juice. This is a higher-fiber alternative to Cheerios. I think they taste better, too. But that may be because there is more sweetener added (the evaporated cane juice).

Read the full article here.

* indicates a personal choice (even I wouldn't eat some of these "healthy" options!)

What's the Buzz: Protein

Protein is an essential nutrient that is important to good health. It is used by our bodies to produce and grow muscles, hair, nails, skin and internal organs. Proteins used for synthesis within the body are comprised of amino acids, many of which the body cannot produce on its own. We therefore must ingest protein to supplement the body's amino acid production to enable us to grow, heal, and function normally.

The great thing about protein is that it's not only delicious and nutritious, but easy to get in a variety of forms! Everyone knows that meat contains protein, but so do dairy products, nuts, legumes, and other sources.

Foods that are high in protein:
Meat, fish (including canned tuna)
Eggs or egg substitute
Milk
Yogurt
Cheese (including cottage cheese)
Beans
Soy
Nuts (including peanut butter)
Seeds
Lentils (including peas and chickpeas)
Tofu
Wheat germ or wheat gluten, as contained in--
*Some whole-wheat pastas (check label, look for at least 10g protein per 1 cup serving)
*Some cereals (check label, look for at least 5g protein per serving)

Surprisingly, even though the list above is rather specific, most people consume adequete amounts of protein in their regular diet. The body just doesn't need much to meet it's requirements. In fact, most Americans consume more than enough protein daily. Only a few specific groups of people are at risk for being protein-deficient, including elderly women and people with illnesses or eating disorders. Protein should make up approximately 10-15% of your total daily caloric intake, according to the recommended daily allowances (RDA) set by the Food and Nutrition Board, with the other 85% coming from fat and carbs (15% and 70% respectively). Ideally, one should consume 0.36 grams of protein for every pound of body weight, meaning someone who weighs 120lbs should consume about 43 grams of protein per day and someone weighing 180 lbs needs roughly 64 grams of protein per day unless otherwise advised by a physician. Consuming more than 30% of your daily calories from protein can have adverse effects on the body, as the relative reduction of carbohydrates can cause it to enter a canabalistic state known as "ketosis." Excess protein consumption is especially a concern due to the fact that most sources of animal-protein (meat and dairy) are high in unhealthy saturated fat.

Someone who is having trouble meeting the recommended daily allowance for protein through their regular diet might consider drinking protein shakes, such as the following recipe:

Banana/Peanut Butter Shake (12 grams protein)
8 ounces fat-free milk
1 tablespoon creamy peanut butter
1/4 - 1/2 banana

Blend until smooth in blender.

Protein powders can also be used as an additive to any smoothie/shake-type recipe to boost protein content. A simple alternative is to purchase ready-made meal replacement drinks, such as Ensure, Boost, or SlimFast (check label, look for at least 9-10 grams of protein per 8oz serving). However, remember that these are meant to be meal "replacement" drinks--they are quite high in calories and are NOT intended to supplement your regular meals!

Technically this isn't about food...

But I like coffee, and I like exercise, and so I was intrigued by the following article:

Exercise Plus Coffee May Ward Off Skin Cancer
A coffee habit, coupled with regular exercise, may help prevent skin cancers better than either factor alone, new research suggests.

The study was done only with animals, however, and it's not a reason to abandon standard sun-protection habits. "You should not give up the sunblock," said Dr. Allan H. Conney, senior author of the study, published in this week's Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The findings aren't entirely new. "In earlier studies, we found caffeine and exercise -- either one by themselves -- inhibited ultraviolet light-induced skin cancer in mice," said Conney, the director of the Laboratory for Cancer Research at the School of Pharmacy at Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey. But the new research shows that "the combination [of the two] works better," he said, providing a dramatically better anti-cancer result. Both caffeine and exercise seem to help kill the UVB-damaged cells before malignancy sets in. "We really don't know how that happens," Conney said.

In the study, his team looked at four groups of hairless mice. The rodents' exposed skin is very vulnerable to the sun. One group was given caffeinated water to drink each day, the equivalent of a person drinking a couple of cups of coffee a day, Conney said. Another group ran voluntarily on a running wheel, the equivalent of a person running two or two and a half miles every day, he said. (These mice will happily go on an exercise wheel if one is available, Conney said.) A third group had both the caffeine and the exercise, while a fourth group had neither and served as the control group. The mice in all four groups were exposed to lamps that generated UVB radiation that damaged the skin cells' DNA.

While some degree of healthy, programmed skin cell death ("apoptosis") was seen in all four groups of mice, the caffeine drinkers and exercisers were best at killing off the damaged cells, the researchers found.

To find out how different the four groups were in terms of killing off damaged skin cells, the researchers looked at physical changes in those cells. They also looked at chemical markers, such as enzymes, involved in killing damaged cells. The differences were dramatic. The caffeine drinkers showed a 96 percent increase in damaged cell death compared to the control group and the exercisers showed a 120 percent increase. Even more significant, the mice that drank caffeine and ran on the training wheel had a nearly 400 percent increase in cell death of damaged cells.

A spokesman for the Skin Cancer Foundation urged caution in interpreting the study findings, however. "It will take years of extensive testing to determine whether this will be a worthwhile concept before you can say anything specific about it," said Dr. Michael Gold, founder of the Gold Skin Care Center in Nashville, Tenn.

"Mice and humans are very different. That said, we do know that caffeine applied topically has been popular as a 'cosmeceutical' anti-aging ingredient and might be useful in helping prevent non-melanoma skin cancers," Gold said. "The concept of systemic caffeine needs to be addressed further. We also know that moderate exercise is an immune moderator and can help ward off cancers and other diseases."

He echoed standard advice to wear sunscreen when out in the sun. "If you are exercising outside you must wear sunscreen no matter what," Gold said. "If you don't protect yourself from the sun while exercising outdoors you are increasing your risk of getting non-melanoma skin cancers and melanoma. Protecting yourself from the sun is currently the only proven way to prevent skin cancer."

Read the full article here

Can you tell I really like peanut butter?

Nutty About Peanut Butter
As American as apple pie, peanut butter has made its mark on American cuisine since the early 1900s. Whether it's partnering with jelly on bread or is the featured ingredient in cookie dough, it's an enduring favorite. Most households have a jar of it in the kitchen at all times.

But is peanut butter good for you? Well, like most nut butters, peanut butter is high in fat and calories (with around 190 calories and 16 grams of fat per 2 tablespoons). But the good news is, you get a lot of nutrition for your 190-calorie investment. Nuts and nut butters are a great source of protein, fiber, vitamins, minerals, and phytochemicals.

In 2003 the FDA approved a qualified health claim for peanuts and certain tree nuts. It basically says that scientific evidence suggests that eating 1.5 ounces per day of most nuts (as part of a diet low in saturated fat and cholesterol) may reduce the risk of heart disease.

Most of the research suggesting health benefits to nuts has involved lowering the risk of heart or cardiovascular disease or their risk factors. But there is some evidence nuts may help with other diseases as well. For example, peanuts are a source of the phytochemical resveratrol (also found in grape skins and red wine). A recent German study explored resveratrol's possible cancer-preventing effects in colorectal cells.

Acts Like a Nut
The funny thing is, the peanut is actually a legume, native to South America, that happens to look and taste like a nut.

Nutritionally, peanuts act like nuts, too. About half their weight comes from fat, with the rest split fairly evenly between protein and carbohydrate (with fiber). About half of their total fat comes from monounsaturated fat, the kind that is linked to more healthful blood lipid levels. One-third of the fat comes from polyunsaturated fat (all of which is omega-6 fatty acid, not the superhealthy omega-3). About 14% of the fat is naturally saturated.

What to Look for in Peanut Butter
When shopping for peanut butter, look for a natural style product with little to no added fat or sugar. Some companies add partially hydrogenated oils to the regular type of peanut butter. And depending on the amount added, this could add trans fats into the equation.

When it comes to sodium, even most natural brands of peanut butter add some salt for flavor. A little goes a long way, though. Around 120 milligrams sodium per 2 tablespoons usually does the trick!

'PB' Without the 'J'
Here are 10 tips for eating peanut butter beyond the PB&J:

- Spread peanut butter on whole-grain toast or bagels instead of butter or cream cheese.
- Add peanut butter to fat-free or low-fat salad dressings (with compatible flavors) for added thickness and flavor. Beat them together until smooth -- using an electric mixer, small food processor, or whisk.
- Add peanut butter to muffin or pancake batters instead of butter or margarine (when the taste is compatible).
- Add peanut butter to smoothies, especially chocolate- or banana-flavored smoothies.
- Add peanut butter to stir-fry sauces for added flavor and thickness.
- When making peanut butter cookies, keep the peanut butter, but for the butter/margarine the recipe calls for, substitute a less-fat margarine (one with 8 grams of fat or less per tablespoon).
- Peanut butter adds plant fat and protein to make a well-rounded, satisfying snack out of whole-wheat crackers, sliced apples or bananas, or celery sticks.
- Make a vanilla or chocolate peanut butter treat by mixing a tablespoon of natural peanut butter into 1/2 cup of light vanilla or chocolate ice cream or frozen yogurt.
- Add peanut butter to granola bar recipes for extra flavor and to help bind the oats and other ingredients together.
- Use whole-grain bread and less-sugar jam to whip up a healthier peanut butter sandwich

Peanut Butter Safety
Recently, the FDA warned consumers not to eat certain jars of peanut butter produced by a particular plant in Georgia, which may be contaminated with salmonella. Historically, it has been the potentially carcinogenic aflatoxin -- produced by particular fungi -- that was the thing to watch in peanut butter, not the notorious salmonella (usually linked to poultry and raw eggs). Aflatoxin can contaminate grains and nuts before harvest or during storage. Corn and peanuts are thought to be at highest risk of aflatoxin contamination.

One of the best things you can do to minimize aflatoxins in the future is to store your grains and nuts in a dry, cool environment. That's why I always refrigerate my peanut butter and freeze nuts that I’m not going to use right away.

To prevent rancidity in your peanut butter, keep your jar of natural-style peanut butter in the refrigerator. And if you don’t go through a lot of peanut butter, buy the smaller sized jars.

Read the full article here.

You probably know someone just like this

Today I want to write about two different types of people who both are very misguided in their approach to a sensible diet. Both are attempting to lose weight. One just wants the weight off, no matter how it happens; the other wants to be healthy but is extremely naive and gets caught up in all the latest trends and hype, and caters blindly to a set of ever-changing "rules" about what comprises a good, healthy diet.

The first person is the desperate dieter. This person will go to extreme lengths to lose weight, claims to be determined to lose weight, and yet is only interested in the "quick fix" approach and refuses to make the necessary lifestyle changes to actually accomplish her goals. For example, this person might start drinking a "weight loss tea" on Monday morning, two weeks before planning to attend an event that she wants to look her best for. The tea makes her sick--literally. She has violent boughts of vomiting and diarrhea. Simultaneously and repeatedly, lasting the whole day and into the next morning. She is so sick at one point that it actually starts to scare her. By Tuesday afternoon she feels mostly alright again so she makes some more tea for herself.

What is wrong with this picture?? Does the above approach seem like a reasonable way to lose weight to any rational, sane person? What exactly does the tea claim to do, I'd like to know. Is it marketed as a laxative or is it actually supposed to suppress the appetite or enable you to burn more calories somehow? Do they even bother to make a logical argument as to how it works, or is it just "miracle tea"? Sure, one might lose some weight this way... perhaps even five pounds or so in just a few days. Of water weight. Purely as a result of being radically dehydrated. To the desperate dieter, though, five pounds is five pounds; who cares where it comes from??

The second person is the uninformed dieter. This person takes any new information she receives, regardless of the source, as the gospel truth. One day she might hear that chocolate is good for the heart. She immediately tells all her friends, sends e-mails to all her co-workers, and revels in being able to eat chocolate again (since she had long since written it off as a no-no food). The next day someone tells her that the chocolate is bad for the skin. How disappointing, she says, and gives up chocolate again. For months or even years she has been eating whole grain bread for the health benefits. Then one day she reads something on the Internet that says the gluten in wheat bread is bad for women. She does not question why--something about women's hormones, she asserts--or in what way. Instead she sighs and throws her hands up in the air and resigns to eating potato bread from now on, or rye. Some of the new information she hears might conflict with old information. No matter; she assumes something new has been discovered that discounts the previous claims. Next week she might be convinced to choose real sugar over artificial sweetener only to revert back a day later; it's ok to eat eggs one month but the next month some new evidence says it's not again.

At least the uninformed dieter is attempting to be healthy, but at what point would she begin to question some of these "facts" and seek out the truth on her own? If someone she's never met who has no credentials or authority on the matter claimed that eating three tablespoons of lard every evening prevents cancer, would she go out and buy a tub of lard? I think she would. And she'd eat her lard adamantly, every evening, vehemently spreading the news about the benefits of lard, until the day someone else mentioned to her that saturated fats can raise cholesterol levels. And then she'd throw away the lard and shake her head in disappointment because maybe she was really enjoying the lard (pretend with me for a moment here). And yet she would still not learn that one cannot simply assume that everything she reads or hears or THINKS she hears is factual. For an indeterminate period of time, everything she eats will be dictated by what she thinks she "should" be eating, based not on tried and true scientific research or even, God forbid, her actual preferences, but solely on the latest rumors pertaining to optimal health and weight loss. She may actually be successful in losing weight and achieving good health; if she is, it is purely luck of the draw as she's no better off imposing such wildly fluctuating restrictions on herself than she would be to just use common sense and practice moderation. She's only setting herself up to grow weary of the whole scene and/or become so dependent on outside guidance that she feels she can no longer "trust" any food, let alone her own body. And really, can anyone consider that to be truly healthy??

World's easiest* peanut butter cookies

Re1 cup peanut butter
1 cup brown sugar
1 egg

That is the original recipe in it's entirety, but I've always added 1/2 cup oatmeal to bulk it up a bit and add some texture. This is the only thing I think I've ever cooked that I don't need instructions for!

Bake at 350 for 8-10 minutes (mine have always taken more like 11-13, probably due in part to the extra ingredient and also the fact that I make big, fat cookies!).

Makes about two dozen small or 18 large cookies.

Give them a try!

*and possibly the best, you be the judge

What's the Buzz: HFCS

WHAT IS IT? High-fructose corn syrup is produced by milling corn to produce corn starch then processing the corn starch to yield corn syrup. The corn syrup at that point is almost entirely glucose. Enzymes that change the glucose into fructose, which is sweeter than glucose, are added. The resulting syrup (after enzyme conversion) contains approximately 90% fructose and is known as HFCS 90. To make the other common forms of HFCS, the HFCS 90 is mixed with 100% glucose corn syrup in the appropriate ratios to form the desired HFCS. The typical types of HFCS are: HFCS 90 (most commonly used in baked goods) which is approximately 90% fructose and 10% glucose; HFCS 55 (most commonly used in soft drinks and comparable in sweetness to table sugar) which is approximately 55% fructose and 45% glucose; and HFCS 42 (most commonly used in sports drinks) which is approximately 42% fructose and 58% glucose.

The process by which HFCS is produced was first developed in 1957, then refined in the 1970s. Over the period of about 1975-1985, HFCS was rapidly introduced in many processed foods and soft drinks in the US. Since that time, HFCS has replaced cane sugar in a large variety of foods in the USA. The main reasons for this switch are:

- HFCS blends easily with sweeteners, acids, and flavorings and is easier to transport because it is a liquid.
- HFCS usage leads to products with a much longer shelf life because it retains moisture, resists drying out, controls crystallization, and prevents microbiological growth.
- HFCS is cheaper due to the relative abundance of corn, farm subsidies, and sugar import tariffs in the United States.

From a manufacturer's point of view, HFCS is a revolutionary advance in food science!


WHY IS THIS A CONCERN? Fructose is one component of sucrose (cane or table sugar), which also naturally contains glucose. In laboratory and human tests, it has been found that excess sucrose increases blood levels of cholesterol, triglyceride (another type of fat), uric acid, insulin, and cortisol--all associated with an increased risk of heart disease. Sucrose also raises blood pressure and increases the fragility of blood platelet cells, making them more prone to clotting. As dramatic as those findings were, when substituting pure fructose for sucrose in the same experiments, the effects are magnified with fructose. Fructose was determined to be, in effect, "the dangerous part" of sucrose. In contrast, glucose did little more than cause cavities. Studies have also concluded that pure fructose produces significantly higher fasting plasma triacylglycerol values (a risk factor for cardiovascular disease) than a pure glucose diet. While fructose has been advocated for years as a safe sugar for diabetics because it doesn't trigger a rapid rise in blood sugar, the cardiovascular consequences of consuming large amounts of fructose may outweigh the benefits for diabetics who already face a higher than average risk of developing heart disease.

It is an interesting thing about fructose, that it does not stimulate insulin secretion and does not require insulin to be transported into cells like other carbohydrates, and at first this may seem like a great thing. However, the lack of insulin response can be viewed by some as a double-edged sword because insulin also controls the fate of another hormone--leptin. Essentially, leptin signals the brain to stop sending hunger signals when you've had enough to eat. Since fructose doesn't stimulate insulin, there will be no subsequent increase in leptin levels, thus no feeling of satiety achieved by consuming fructose alone.

Some advocates of HFCS (notably, those who manufacture goods containing HFCS or benefiting from it's production) regard such findings as "media hype", stating that information about the effects of HFCS have been "blown out of proportion" because the aforementioned studies looked at the effects of fructose alone and not actual HFCS in a relastic context. High fructose corn syrup, they proclaim, actually contains varying ratios of fructose and glucose, which are roughly the same products produced by the breakdown of natural sucrose in the body. Still, as evidenced by a myriad of other independant lab experiments, even large quantities of the natural from sucrose are known to stimulate the liver to produce triglycerides, promote glycation of proteins, and induce insulin resistance which can be a contributing factor in developing diabetes. We now know this to be especially true of fructose, regardless of whether it is 100% pure fructose or a mixture of fructose and glucose.

While some forms of HFCS may not inherently be more dangerous than natural sucrose, the problem comes with the sheer quantity of "hidden" fructose being consumed through the HFCS in processed foods: most people are surprised to learn of the abundance of HFCS in foods we don't normally associate with being "sweet", from breads to pasta sauces to bacon and even beer. Its commonly used in so-called "health products" like protein bars and energy drinks, and of course in candy and soda pop. Overall sweetener consumption, and in particular high-fructose mixtures, has increased since the introduction of HFCS. Thus, the proportion of fructose as a component of overall sweetener intake in the United States has increased since the early 1980s.


WHAT ABOUT FRUIT? Fructose is commonly known as "fruit sugar." So does this mean fruit has the same effects on the body as HFCS?

Fortunately, natural sources are much less potent simply because the quantity of pure fructose consumed is significantly less than found in most processed foods. Fructose accounts for only 5 to 7 percent of the weight of cherries, pears, bananas, grapes, and apples. That's about 5 to 8 teaspoons per pound of fresh fruit. There's even less fructose--2 to 3 percent, or roughly 2 to 3 teaspoons per pound--in strawberries, blackberries, blueberries, oranges, and grapefruit. Compare this to conventional soft drinks, which almost universally contain 11 percent HFCS by weight--a whopping 2.2 pounds per case. Honey, refined by bees, contains 40 percent fructose, but its extreme sweetness deters most people from consuming it in large amounts.


THE FINAL VERDICT: Though many hazards are associated with fructose and HFCS, the overall ill effects appear to be largely dose dependent, according to experts. There is very real concern with a diet that is comprised predominantly of processed foods, especially as younger generations become more frequently exposed to convenience diets. Conversely, if you eat primarily whole, natural foods, and avoid large quantities of processed or sweetened foods, you have little to worry about with an occasional sugary treat. "We have not taken a no-sugar stance," one nutritionist says. "We have taken a no-excessive-sugar stance."

Why a blog about food?

Because I like food. I like to eat food, I like to learn about food, and I like to share what I know about food.

I don't like a lot of the negative associations that have arisen concerning food, such as the idea that it is a necessary evil we must strive to defeat if we are to be healthy and happy with ourselves. I also dislike the concept that food is merely fuel for our bodies and should have no emotional or psychological ties. There is a middle ground; it can be so simple as to be instinctive to even the youngest child. In fact, children set a great example for the rest of us.

This is a place for me to post information, thoughts, and feelings. I welcome the same in return.