On Monday, I'll be completing my fourth month on the Nutrisystem diet. Although the target weight might shift by 2 or 3 pounds, it looks as though I'll have attained a cumulative loss in the range of the mid-40 pounds. That, in my view, is impressive (better than some celebrity endorsers), but I have a lot more to lose and anticipate being on the diet through most of next year.
This post should not be considered an endorsement of the company's products or services. I have no financial stake in the company. What I'm addressing here is my own honest assessment and reasons for trying the system.
In part, this post is in response to the opinions of others. One unnamed relative by marriage unsuccessfully tried the company's products in the past and has a negative opinion; she and her husband subsequently had bariatric surgery, and they have been pleased with the results. I will not recommend their approach, which I regard as risky and a surrender without addressing the unresolved fundamental issues of proper nutrition and exercise. Is it wrong? Or are we simply indifferent to whatever the weight loss method, so long as it is effective?
I don't believe that I'm judgmental regarding other obese people. For example, I have a sister and a nephew whom have gained weight principally as a consequence of medication they are taking for other health reasons. I similarly remember seeing comedian Jerry Lewis whom had appeared on one of his MS telethons with a bloated appearance. I also know it is very difficult for a number of people to lose weight. There are individual differences (e.g., in terms of metabolism) that go beyond diet and exercise. But it's very difficult to get away from the fact that being excessively overweight goes beyond the social stigma and the difficulty in buying clothes; the inability to control your diet can affect your longevity and the quality of the end years of one's life.
In the case of my relatives having the bariatric procedure done, the motive was primarily aimed at improving one's appearance and sexual attractiveness. There is nothing wrong with wanting others to find you physically attractive, but in my opinion, one's general attitude (a positive self-image, good sense of humor and confidence) is more critical. Things like cosmetic surgery only address one's surface appearance; it does not compensate for one's deficient self-image. Perfection is never attainable in real life. What if you achieve your goal and discover the reality doesn't meet your unrealistic expectations? Do you go back to comfort foods and regaining your lost weight, pound by pound?
I have gone up and down in weight my whole adult life. But I've rarely purchased sugary foods or packaged snacks, do not frequent all-you-care-to-eat buffets, and the like. How is it possible that I regained nearly 90 pounds I lost on a low-carb diet from 2003 to 2004? The simple answer is: one pound at a time; I think it's a matter of slowing metabolism, in part due to an undiagnosed thyroid deficiency but also part of the aging process, and lack of consistent exercise (which I blamed on long commute times, work schedules and business travel), and also a lack of portion control.
Nutrisystem has done a good job addressing the latter issue (portion control). I'm on a plan which explicitly plans for three heavier traditional meals and three light snacks, roughly at 3 hour intervals. The basic idea is not to overload one's stomach at once but to more efficiently spread one's calories through the day. A typical Nutrisystem meal consists of one packaged item for each of three regular meals and one snack item or dessert (for one of the 3 light snack/meals). Breakfast items include things like cereals, nutrition bars, or pastry items; lunch items include some microwavable bowls (e.g., small pasta dishes or prepared soups), packaged dry soups and nutrition bars; dinner items include a variety of pasta, meat and/or vegetable entrees; snack items include modestly sized cookies, pastries, or bars or various flavored soy chips, pretzels, and related items.
I personally find that I like the taste of the Nutrisystem items, but I don't go into meals with unrealistic expectations. For example, if you bite into a Nutrisystem cookie with the expectation of a Mrs. Fields' experience or a lasagna expecting the Olive Garden's version, you will be disappointed. You are not going to find a lot of high-glycemic (sugary) or fatty ingredients. What you will find are precisely portioned items with impressive ingredient lists, often in very subtle ways, not unlike mothers finding stealth methods for getting their kids to eat their vegetables. For example, many of the pastry items have a significant number of protein and fiber grams (e.g., soy-based ingredients).
As Nutrisystem explicitly notes, you need to supplement your diet with fresh or frozen foods, i.e., fruits and vegetables, beverages and very limited portions of other foods (e.g., breads, nuts, etc.)
Going back to the question if it's worth roughly $300 a month (including delivery): I think it's a good value, especially when you take into account that the meals are precisely portioned and quickly and easily prepared (many lunch and dinner items are ready in less than 2 minutes in a microwave). As to my relative's adverse opinions regarding the taste of the food: probably the best response can be seen in the context of a Nutrisystem website feature called the Daily Dose, a daily post message of diet/motivational advice. There is an accompanying click rewards item which you can click once a day, earning a minor discount each time you complete a fifty-click cycle. One of things you'll see when you load the Daily Dose page is the most recent aggregate click totals for the last 10 customers. I often see click totals from between 500 to 1500 clicks--meaning there are customers whom have purchased Nutrisystem items for more than a year. You don't keep customers paying $300 or more a month for a year or longer if they don't like the company's products.
I can't speak for other people. It is possible to carefully shop and prepare your own nutritious meals without paying a company hundreds of dollars a month; I did it during my low-carb phase. For me, I think the major motivation was the sobering potential risk of developing type 2 diabetes if I didn't get my weight under control. What I had been doing on my own wasn't working. Under the Nutrisystem method, I rarely, if ever, binge, and I've managed to eat under 2000 calories a day. (I did manage to lose 15 pounds over the past year before Nutrisystem, but the fact is my weight loss has picked up under the discipline of the new system.) The results are beginning to show; for instance, several months ago I had a belt which I could barely fasten, and now I'm going to have to buy a new belt. If most people looked at me, they would see still a seriously overweight man--but a man whom has lost roughly 60 pounds over the past year, easier said than done.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Organ Meat: Part of a Nutritious Diet?
One of the funniest scenes I've ever seen in a movie was in 1988's Funny Farm, starring Chevy Chase. He sets a new restaurant record (3 helpings) for eating euphemistically named "lamb fries", which, unknown to Chevy's character, are stir-fried sheep testicles. His reaction to the waitress' post-record explanation of the secret behind the making of a great lamb fry is hilarious...
Many people have a similar reaction to the consumption of organ meat in general (e.g., hearts, liver, tongue, kidneys, brain, feet, ears, stomach (tripe), intestines (chitterlings), etc.) Brian Wansink in Marketing Nutrition explains how the American government during World War II, sending typically preferred muscle meat overseas for the troops, were trying to coax a reluctant public to eat more nutritionally-dense organ meat.
Occasionally on my political blog, I will discuss feijoada, a Brazilian meal concept I experienced during my 1995 work trips to São Paulo. The Brazilian restaurants where I ate served feijoada on Wednesdays and Saturdays; it attracts a large crowd of yuppies. There were two adjacent buffet lines, emphasizing a variety of organ meats (including ears and tongue) and black beans. [I'm an adventuresome eater and tried a variety of dishes, including pig ears; I think it must be an acquired taste...] I was told that the traditional meal dated back to the days of Brazilian slavery when the slaveowners would harvest the choice cuts from a hog (e.g., ham, bacon, and other muscle meat), leaving the organs. I also noticed some churrascarias (Brazilian steakhouses) serve dozens of chicken hearts on skewers (thumbs up). [Waiters in churrrascarias circulate around tables bearing large chunks of various meats, from which they carve servings onto your dinner plate.]
I have observed when I roasted dozens of chickens and turkeys over the years, the first thing I generally look to eat is the giblets (or miscellaneous organ meats) for the poultry (often packaged separately from the bird). Eberling and Geary argue that organ meats are non-plant superfoods; they claim that in mankind's early dietary history and in many cultures, nutrient-dense organ meats were often preferred to muscle meat. In fact, native groups in the far north often eat organ meats in place of scarce plant-based food sources. There are a number of distinctive nutritional benefits depending on the type of meat, including iron (liver), B vitamins, vitamin D, CoQ10 (heart), Omega-3, CLA and various important minerals. For those not preferring the source meats, the authors suggest certain products containing a seasoned mixture of organ meats, such as Braunsweiger, liverwurst, and head cheese. They also point out that the amount of certain nutrients depends on the source animal's diet, e.g., pasture or flaxseed versus conventional grains.
An interesting related discussion is the anecdotal evidence that many wild animals, after killing their prey, will target the organ meat first. (One can argue that "the world is complex", because what an animal chooses to eat may depend on factors like when the animal last ate, the relative abundance of prey, complementary sources of nutrition, etc.)
I believe in the principle of nutritional diversity--having noted in past posts that cherrypicking of foods (e.g., filtering out egg yolks or refusing to eat fattier dark meat from poultry) arbitrarily excludes some excellent sources of nutrients for one's daily diet. Thus, I'm making an explicit attempt within my own diet to rotate in cold-water fish, beef and other red meat (buffalo and ostrich), poultry, pork and organ meats.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Nutrition Miscellany: 10/7/09
State Fairs and Making Use of Deep Fryers
Corn dogs. The All-American treat. Nearly 500 calories, 60 carbohydrate grams, and 40% of the suggested daily amount of sodium. Texan cooks sometimes add a block of cheddar cheese to the mix. What better for one's health than processed meat, refined cornmeal, and deep-fried in Omega-6 vegetable oil (with bonus trans fats)? Granted, an occasional indulgence isn't a major concern. But the obsession with deep frying goes beyond hot dogs; in Minnesota they have put other "nutritious" fare, such as cheese curds, pasta, and pizza, on a stick. Not to mention batter-coated Oreo cookies, candy bars, Twinkies, ice cream, and even watermelon, optionally served with French fries or ice cream.
Is it any wonder that McDonald's continues to innovate with products like the 400-plus calorie McGriddle sandwiches? According to Dietblog, "For starters - the word healthy is no longer used by McDonald's because "our consumer research shows people don’t understand it and it’s actually a turn off when it comes to food items.” (McDonald's)." This is, plain and simple, resistance to change and a state of denial. I mean, is it really necessary to candy walnuts for salads? When I cracked walnuts at home, I never even thought of asking my mom for some table sugar to mask the taste of shelled walnuts... There are a lot of ways for McDonald's to make things healthier without resorting to tofu burgers, e.g., options like baked or broiled fish or tuna fish (vs. fried breaded fish), low-fat cheese or mayonnaise, reduced sodium and more imaginative seasonings, improved, more generous vegetable fixings (or a condiment bar), ground turkey, whole-grain buns or flatbreads, and more flexible combos (allowing substitutions of yogurt, side salads, veggie cups (e.g., broccoli, celery, and carrots), or vegetable soups, bottled water, etc.)
In the meanwhile, if you want something on a stick, might I suggest bringing along a 1.5 oz stick of Ostrim jerky? 14 protein grams, a good source of potassium, low-fat and 80 calories.
Food Journals
Madeline Vann of Everydayhealth.com wrote a recent post entitled "Write Your Way to Weight Loss", pointing out a recent study where overweight dieters who kept a food journal or diary were found to have lost twice the weight of those whom didn't. There's certainly something to be said about creating goals and fleshing out more specific behavioral objectives.
Obviously writing things down isn't diet and exercise themselves. I see it as a means of self-discipline; many websites, including Nutrisystem, provide interactive tools to log diet and exercise, including a default menu boilerplate based on Nutrisystem and supplemental items. I have to define foods not in the Nutrisystem database, including unit measures and calorie counts. The daily process of recording my weight and my dietary choices in details keeps me honest and less likely to cheat or binge. Maintaining multiple observation points also allows me to plot meal/daily calories and weight trends over time.
I have not reviewed all the weight-loss software and websites, but one could easily conceive obvious feature improvements over the rudimentary tools I've primarily used to date. For example, one way would be improve integration of standard grocery and fast food items; one could also visualize utilities able to separate macronutrients (protein, carbs, fats), fiber, vitamin and mineral intakes and configure alerts to flag nutritional gaps or imbalances and/or to enforce certain dietary rules (e.g., eat cold water, oily fish twice a week) and to generate intelligent grocery shopping lists (identifying more nutritious food items/brands for target menus and suggested buys, e.g., sales on in-season fruits and vegetables, lower-calorie frozen meals, etc.)
Fast Food and Nutrition Disclosure
AP writer Megan Scott wrote a short article entitled "Calorie Counts on Menus Force Hard Choices", noting that consumers have been rethinking their food choices as local regulations force disclosure of nutrition facts. For example, the Chipolte wrap, by itself, is nearly 300 calories; the burrito fillings can add up to 700 (or more) calories. That Dunkin' Donuts low fat blueberry muffin is roughly 400 calories. NOTE: Many fast food chains (e.g., McDonald's) post nutritional information on the Internet. However, it is cumbersome to navigate several websites to do things like compare competitive products. Some websites, such as myfitnesspal.com, have food databases where you can search for items (and their relevant nutrition labels), e.g., "Kraft macaroni and cheese" or "Chipolte burrito".
Ms. Scott discusses a recent self-report study showing that providing additional nutritional information to New Yorkers influenced their decisions on where to eat half the time and what they ordered (up to 80%) of the time. [I am generally supportive of regulations providing basic information consumers need to know to make informed dietary choices.] These kinds of results challenge the orthodox opinions (cited above) that customers don't want healthier food choices. I've noticed this anecdotally on my trips to Sam's Club; I'll notice other overweight people with healthier items in their grocery carts, including vegetables, fruits, and heart-healthy wild salmon.
I do want to take issue with nutritionists cited in the article. One worries that people may make food purchases based on short-term nutritional considerations (like lower calories) and may binge later. (This is more likely if you eat a meal high in simple carbohydrates versus satiating protein/fats/complex carbs.) I am skeptical about these concerns; I think the New York consumers are more concerned about right-sizing their meals or improving their nutritional value.
Another dietitian argues that people are one of three types: one doesn't care about nutritional information; the other extreme makes too much of nutritional data and simplistic dietary principles like "low fat", "low calorie" or "low carb" versus general principles of nutritional diversity; and those in the middle (e.g., preferring a varied, balanced diet) don't really need it. The point is more that people may not realize that comfort foods they've been eating all their lives are often higher than they realized in calories, fat, and sodium; in addition, a lot of people don't realize that low fat foods don't necessarily mean low calorie--so, for example, a food company may substitute sugar calories in place of fat grams. It can also be difficult to realize portions are oversized without that information.
I support this information at the place of purchase on the principles of consumer information usability. In my articles on computer documentation and usability, I mention work done in applied psychology, e.g., Patricia Wright; one relevant point is that readers do not perform well in dealing with fragmentary information, making interpolations, etc. Having salient information at the point of a task, in this case, a food purchase, is important. I would expect informed nutritionists to come into a food purchase decision highly motivated, with memorized facts and heuristics; this is not a realistic assumption for most consumers.
It is true that people may be aware of nutrition labels and not be motivated to read them. There are a variety of reasons that doesn't happen, including not knowing how to read and interpret a list of ingredients, but also coming to the purchase decision with invalid product assumptions. I mentioned in a recent post that I had been purchasing a popular brand guacamole dip. There were pictures of avocados on the container and I saw obvious bits and pieces of avocado in the dip. Then I discovered, through a Rodale website, that the leading ingredient of this product was soybean oil. So while I thought I was getting a large portion of heart-healthy monounsaturated fat in the dip, I was really getting a large portion of n-6 PUFA's, something we have far too much of in the typical American diet.
I think that forcing restaurants to come clean with nutritional information may result in a strategy similar to Denny's, as mentioned in a prior post: smaller portion desserts, healthier sides, lower-sodium preparation, etc. I think when restaurants see that their bigger-portion/higher-calorie/salt/fat foods are losing sales momentum, they may choose to right-size their menu options. To some extent, the chains are already recognizing that; for example, you can order a Subway salad or wrap equivalent of their popular sandwiches, and you can purchase a burrito bowl at Chipolte.
Corn dogs. The All-American treat. Nearly 500 calories, 60 carbohydrate grams, and 40% of the suggested daily amount of sodium. Texan cooks sometimes add a block of cheddar cheese to the mix. What better for one's health than processed meat, refined cornmeal, and deep-fried in Omega-6 vegetable oil (with bonus trans fats)? Granted, an occasional indulgence isn't a major concern. But the obsession with deep frying goes beyond hot dogs; in Minnesota they have put other "nutritious" fare, such as cheese curds, pasta, and pizza, on a stick. Not to mention batter-coated Oreo cookies, candy bars, Twinkies, ice cream, and even watermelon, optionally served with French fries or ice cream.
Is it any wonder that McDonald's continues to innovate with products like the 400-plus calorie McGriddle sandwiches? According to Dietblog, "For starters - the word healthy is no longer used by McDonald's because "our consumer research shows people don’t understand it and it’s actually a turn off when it comes to food items.” (McDonald's)." This is, plain and simple, resistance to change and a state of denial. I mean, is it really necessary to candy walnuts for salads? When I cracked walnuts at home, I never even thought of asking my mom for some table sugar to mask the taste of shelled walnuts... There are a lot of ways for McDonald's to make things healthier without resorting to tofu burgers, e.g., options like baked or broiled fish or tuna fish (vs. fried breaded fish), low-fat cheese or mayonnaise, reduced sodium and more imaginative seasonings, improved, more generous vegetable fixings (or a condiment bar), ground turkey, whole-grain buns or flatbreads, and more flexible combos (allowing substitutions of yogurt, side salads, veggie cups (e.g., broccoli, celery, and carrots), or vegetable soups, bottled water, etc.)
In the meanwhile, if you want something on a stick, might I suggest bringing along a 1.5 oz stick of Ostrim jerky? 14 protein grams, a good source of potassium, low-fat and 80 calories.
Food Journals
Madeline Vann of Everydayhealth.com wrote a recent post entitled "Write Your Way to Weight Loss", pointing out a recent study where overweight dieters who kept a food journal or diary were found to have lost twice the weight of those whom didn't. There's certainly something to be said about creating goals and fleshing out more specific behavioral objectives.
Obviously writing things down isn't diet and exercise themselves. I see it as a means of self-discipline; many websites, including Nutrisystem, provide interactive tools to log diet and exercise, including a default menu boilerplate based on Nutrisystem and supplemental items. I have to define foods not in the Nutrisystem database, including unit measures and calorie counts. The daily process of recording my weight and my dietary choices in details keeps me honest and less likely to cheat or binge. Maintaining multiple observation points also allows me to plot meal/daily calories and weight trends over time.
I have not reviewed all the weight-loss software and websites, but one could easily conceive obvious feature improvements over the rudimentary tools I've primarily used to date. For example, one way would be improve integration of standard grocery and fast food items; one could also visualize utilities able to separate macronutrients (protein, carbs, fats), fiber, vitamin and mineral intakes and configure alerts to flag nutritional gaps or imbalances and/or to enforce certain dietary rules (e.g., eat cold water, oily fish twice a week) and to generate intelligent grocery shopping lists (identifying more nutritious food items/brands for target menus and suggested buys, e.g., sales on in-season fruits and vegetables, lower-calorie frozen meals, etc.)
Fast Food and Nutrition Disclosure
AP writer Megan Scott wrote a short article entitled "Calorie Counts on Menus Force Hard Choices", noting that consumers have been rethinking their food choices as local regulations force disclosure of nutrition facts. For example, the Chipolte wrap, by itself, is nearly 300 calories; the burrito fillings can add up to 700 (or more) calories. That Dunkin' Donuts low fat blueberry muffin is roughly 400 calories. NOTE: Many fast food chains (e.g., McDonald's) post nutritional information on the Internet. However, it is cumbersome to navigate several websites to do things like compare competitive products. Some websites, such as myfitnesspal.com, have food databases where you can search for items (and their relevant nutrition labels), e.g., "Kraft macaroni and cheese" or "Chipolte burrito".
Ms. Scott discusses a recent self-report study showing that providing additional nutritional information to New Yorkers influenced their decisions on where to eat half the time and what they ordered (up to 80%) of the time. [I am generally supportive of regulations providing basic information consumers need to know to make informed dietary choices.] These kinds of results challenge the orthodox opinions (cited above) that customers don't want healthier food choices. I've noticed this anecdotally on my trips to Sam's Club; I'll notice other overweight people with healthier items in their grocery carts, including vegetables, fruits, and heart-healthy wild salmon.
I do want to take issue with nutritionists cited in the article. One worries that people may make food purchases based on short-term nutritional considerations (like lower calories) and may binge later. (This is more likely if you eat a meal high in simple carbohydrates versus satiating protein/fats/complex carbs.) I am skeptical about these concerns; I think the New York consumers are more concerned about right-sizing their meals or improving their nutritional value.
Another dietitian argues that people are one of three types: one doesn't care about nutritional information; the other extreme makes too much of nutritional data and simplistic dietary principles like "low fat", "low calorie" or "low carb" versus general principles of nutritional diversity; and those in the middle (e.g., preferring a varied, balanced diet) don't really need it. The point is more that people may not realize that comfort foods they've been eating all their lives are often higher than they realized in calories, fat, and sodium; in addition, a lot of people don't realize that low fat foods don't necessarily mean low calorie--so, for example, a food company may substitute sugar calories in place of fat grams. It can also be difficult to realize portions are oversized without that information.
I support this information at the place of purchase on the principles of consumer information usability. In my articles on computer documentation and usability, I mention work done in applied psychology, e.g., Patricia Wright; one relevant point is that readers do not perform well in dealing with fragmentary information, making interpolations, etc. Having salient information at the point of a task, in this case, a food purchase, is important. I would expect informed nutritionists to come into a food purchase decision highly motivated, with memorized facts and heuristics; this is not a realistic assumption for most consumers.
It is true that people may be aware of nutrition labels and not be motivated to read them. There are a variety of reasons that doesn't happen, including not knowing how to read and interpret a list of ingredients, but also coming to the purchase decision with invalid product assumptions. I mentioned in a recent post that I had been purchasing a popular brand guacamole dip. There were pictures of avocados on the container and I saw obvious bits and pieces of avocado in the dip. Then I discovered, through a Rodale website, that the leading ingredient of this product was soybean oil. So while I thought I was getting a large portion of heart-healthy monounsaturated fat in the dip, I was really getting a large portion of n-6 PUFA's, something we have far too much of in the typical American diet.
I think that forcing restaurants to come clean with nutritional information may result in a strategy similar to Denny's, as mentioned in a prior post: smaller portion desserts, healthier sides, lower-sodium preparation, etc. I think when restaurants see that their bigger-portion/higher-calorie/salt/fat foods are losing sales momentum, they may choose to right-size their menu options. To some extent, the chains are already recognizing that; for example, you can order a Subway salad or wrap equivalent of their popular sandwiches, and you can purchase a burrito bowl at Chipolte.
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Nutrition Miscellany: 10/4/09
Beef: Consider the Source...
Men's Health has an interesting post over the "world's most powerful eating strategies". In an earlier post I argued that what animals eat makes a significant difference in the nutrition characteristics of their meat or products (e.g., eggs). Phillip Rhodes points out that Argentinians eat on average over 30 lbs. more a year in beef, a favorite whipping boy of establishment nutritionists, without any increased risk of heart disease. What accounts for the difference? A quarter-pound of conventionally finished American beef has over four times the saturated fat and twice the calories of a grass-fed Argentinian beef patty (140 calories, 2.5 grams of saturated fat). I mentioned in earlier posts that grass-fed beef also has a more balanced Omega-6 to Omega-3 PUFA ratio and higher amounts of CLA, a "good" type of natural trans fat. There are some online sources of American grass-fed beef (e.g., U.S. Wellness Meats). [NOTE: I have not ordered shipped items from relevant vendors.]
The China Study?
I have not personally read T. Colin Campbell's 2005 study, which purports to provide an empirical foundation for a preferred vegan diet based on extensive empirical data, based in China. I'm an omnivore and proud of it (some of my favorite foods are plant-based...) and will reserve substantive comments for my own review.
[I once was criticized by one of my mentor professors in undergraduate school for relying too much on secondary sources. I also discovered that in the process of developing a documentation measure that there were issues with a widely respected and used computer user satisfaction measure in my interdisciplinary academic field (management information systems). I decided to read the original dissertation, initially intending to look at its methodology as a potential model for my own approach; on closer investigation, I soon found myself with serious doubts about the reference measure (statistical tests, deviations from scale development in the applied psychology literature, etc.) and abandoned the author's approach. A few years later, I tried to publish my criticisms of this and other MIS measures and their utilization in the literature (in fact, I was unaware of any other academic raising these issues, and I simply wanted to open a serious debate before other researchers continued to crank out research using suspect measures). My article was rejected in personal terms with predictable criticisms, e.g., why didn't I submit my own user satisfaction measure? In hindsight, it was not surprising that the editor would farm out the article to reviewers with a vested interest in the criticized measures.]
You might think this would make me sympathetic to Professor Campbell; after all, the vegan lifestyle (no meat, fish or dairy) is not widely followed and challenges a more conventional American diet. And there are some noteworthy developments, like middle-class Asians eating a more Western diet and developing similar health issues. My intuition, though, tells me that blaming meat and dairy is a red herring, especially given the fact that recent domestic health trends have not been accompanied by commensurate increases in the consumption of meat and dairy; I would also like to see more evidence of a suspect, implied zero-sum relationship with the consumption of vegetables and fruits. I suspect that there are issues with the nature and extent of carbohydrate and fat intakes, in particular, an unbalanced amount of n-6 PUFA's and trans fats, the nature of animal feeds and more prevalence of fast foods, processed foods, and refined carbohydrates. I also wonder, in the process of presenting a case for a vegan lifestyle, whether Dr. Campbell sufficiently addressed known issues related with a vegetarian or vegan lifestyle. (In fact, one of my nieces adopted a more vegetarian lifestyle before abandoning it.) There are other anecdotal observations as well, for example, Asian-Americans (including females) towering over their parents (suggesting nutritional factors).
One of my favorite pastimes during my academic career was to go around the college bookstore, shelf-reading, particularly for research methodology texts being used in other disciplines. In an analogous way, one of the things I might do with a book like Colin Campbell's is to look at the reader reviews on Amazon.com's website. I wasn't so much interested in enthusiastic readers saying how reading the book changed their lives and their views on food, but in the readers whom DISAGREED with him--and not in personal terms, but for very specific reasons. For example, there's a criticism that Campbell makes a case against a specific milk protein (casein) but doesn't examine counterbalancing effects of other milk proteins. Another notes that Campbell is the co-author of a China-based article pointing out beneficial effects of fish/fish oil, but this (among other studies) doesn't fit in with his book's pro-vegan slant. A third criticism is Dr. Campbell's tendency to jump to other broad generalizations that simply aren't true, such as the assertion that folate is exclusively available from plant sources (versus, say, organ meat). Chris Masterjohn provides a good summary of criticisms against Campbell's book and replies to Campbell's response. [I was not favorably impressed with Campbell's use of ad hominem arguments. Furthermore, I am troubled by Campbell's relationship with certain special-interest groups; a scientist must be impartial in fact and appearance.]
Turkey Legs!
I LOVE turkey; it's more than just a holiday food to me. And in that recurring holiday debate: I prefer dark meat (the color is due to higher levels of myoglobin, which facilitates oxygen transport) to white meat; being the oldest of seven growing up, I usually lucked out in getting one of the drumsticks. Later, in fact, the mother-in-law to one of my sisters was going around a few years back with a camcorder, catching me right in the middle of chomping down on a turkey leg and asking how I liked it (now THAT'S a flattering picture I won't post in my blog anytime soon...)
Carolyn Kylstra, in Men's Health post entitled "6 Power Foods You Should Be Eating", points out poultry dark meat stimulates production of the hormone cholecystokinin (CCK), which promotes a feeling of satiety, has only modestly higher calories per ounce (approximately 8) over white meat, and only about 15% of the saturated fat, which accounts for a third of total fat, is the "bad" kind.
Dr. Fernstrom points out ostriches bear only relatively low-calorie dark meat. Not to mention: "compared with white meat, [dark meat] contains more iron, zinc, riboflavin, thiamine and vitamins B6 and B12."
These facts (including, as I mentioned in a past post, the fact that egg yolks contain a lion's share of nutrients) point out the danger in blindly following conventional nutritional heuristics (e.g., low-fat/low-cholesterol) white meat, nonfat milk products or egg whites: Consider more of a "whole foods" approach and limit your portions.
Men's Health has an interesting post over the "world's most powerful eating strategies". In an earlier post I argued that what animals eat makes a significant difference in the nutrition characteristics of their meat or products (e.g., eggs). Phillip Rhodes points out that Argentinians eat on average over 30 lbs. more a year in beef, a favorite whipping boy of establishment nutritionists, without any increased risk of heart disease. What accounts for the difference? A quarter-pound of conventionally finished American beef has over four times the saturated fat and twice the calories of a grass-fed Argentinian beef patty (140 calories, 2.5 grams of saturated fat). I mentioned in earlier posts that grass-fed beef also has a more balanced Omega-6 to Omega-3 PUFA ratio and higher amounts of CLA, a "good" type of natural trans fat. There are some online sources of American grass-fed beef (e.g., U.S. Wellness Meats). [NOTE: I have not ordered shipped items from relevant vendors.]
The China Study?
I have not personally read T. Colin Campbell's 2005 study, which purports to provide an empirical foundation for a preferred vegan diet based on extensive empirical data, based in China. I'm an omnivore and proud of it (some of my favorite foods are plant-based...) and will reserve substantive comments for my own review.
[I once was criticized by one of my mentor professors in undergraduate school for relying too much on secondary sources. I also discovered that in the process of developing a documentation measure that there were issues with a widely respected and used computer user satisfaction measure in my interdisciplinary academic field (management information systems). I decided to read the original dissertation, initially intending to look at its methodology as a potential model for my own approach; on closer investigation, I soon found myself with serious doubts about the reference measure (statistical tests, deviations from scale development in the applied psychology literature, etc.) and abandoned the author's approach. A few years later, I tried to publish my criticisms of this and other MIS measures and their utilization in the literature (in fact, I was unaware of any other academic raising these issues, and I simply wanted to open a serious debate before other researchers continued to crank out research using suspect measures). My article was rejected in personal terms with predictable criticisms, e.g., why didn't I submit my own user satisfaction measure? In hindsight, it was not surprising that the editor would farm out the article to reviewers with a vested interest in the criticized measures.]
You might think this would make me sympathetic to Professor Campbell; after all, the vegan lifestyle (no meat, fish or dairy) is not widely followed and challenges a more conventional American diet. And there are some noteworthy developments, like middle-class Asians eating a more Western diet and developing similar health issues. My intuition, though, tells me that blaming meat and dairy is a red herring, especially given the fact that recent domestic health trends have not been accompanied by commensurate increases in the consumption of meat and dairy; I would also like to see more evidence of a suspect, implied zero-sum relationship with the consumption of vegetables and fruits. I suspect that there are issues with the nature and extent of carbohydrate and fat intakes, in particular, an unbalanced amount of n-6 PUFA's and trans fats, the nature of animal feeds and more prevalence of fast foods, processed foods, and refined carbohydrates. I also wonder, in the process of presenting a case for a vegan lifestyle, whether Dr. Campbell sufficiently addressed known issues related with a vegetarian or vegan lifestyle. (In fact, one of my nieces adopted a more vegetarian lifestyle before abandoning it.) There are other anecdotal observations as well, for example, Asian-Americans (including females) towering over their parents (suggesting nutritional factors).
One of my favorite pastimes during my academic career was to go around the college bookstore, shelf-reading, particularly for research methodology texts being used in other disciplines. In an analogous way, one of the things I might do with a book like Colin Campbell's is to look at the reader reviews on Amazon.com's website. I wasn't so much interested in enthusiastic readers saying how reading the book changed their lives and their views on food, but in the readers whom DISAGREED with him--and not in personal terms, but for very specific reasons. For example, there's a criticism that Campbell makes a case against a specific milk protein (casein) but doesn't examine counterbalancing effects of other milk proteins. Another notes that Campbell is the co-author of a China-based article pointing out beneficial effects of fish/fish oil, but this (among other studies) doesn't fit in with his book's pro-vegan slant. A third criticism is Dr. Campbell's tendency to jump to other broad generalizations that simply aren't true, such as the assertion that folate is exclusively available from plant sources (versus, say, organ meat). Chris Masterjohn provides a good summary of criticisms against Campbell's book and replies to Campbell's response. [I was not favorably impressed with Campbell's use of ad hominem arguments. Furthermore, I am troubled by Campbell's relationship with certain special-interest groups; a scientist must be impartial in fact and appearance.]
Turkey Legs!
I LOVE turkey; it's more than just a holiday food to me. And in that recurring holiday debate: I prefer dark meat (the color is due to higher levels of myoglobin, which facilitates oxygen transport) to white meat; being the oldest of seven growing up, I usually lucked out in getting one of the drumsticks. Later, in fact, the mother-in-law to one of my sisters was going around a few years back with a camcorder, catching me right in the middle of chomping down on a turkey leg and asking how I liked it (now THAT'S a flattering picture I won't post in my blog anytime soon...)
Carolyn Kylstra, in Men's Health post entitled "6 Power Foods You Should Be Eating", points out poultry dark meat stimulates production of the hormone cholecystokinin (CCK), which promotes a feeling of satiety, has only modestly higher calories per ounce (approximately 8) over white meat, and only about 15% of the saturated fat, which accounts for a third of total fat, is the "bad" kind.
Dr. Fernstrom points out ostriches bear only relatively low-calorie dark meat. Not to mention: "compared with white meat, [dark meat] contains more iron, zinc, riboflavin, thiamine and vitamins B6 and B12."
These facts (including, as I mentioned in a past post, the fact that egg yolks contain a lion's share of nutrients) point out the danger in blindly following conventional nutritional heuristics (e.g., low-fat/low-cholesterol) white meat, nonfat milk products or egg whites: Consider more of a "whole foods" approach and limit your portions.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Remembering Why I Love Trader Joe's
I first came to experience Trader Joe's while serving as the Oracle Consulting tech lead on an Oracle ERP implementation project for the City of Oakland, CA back in 1998. Oracle had leased some corporate apartments in Emeryville; Oracle felt there was no need for us to rent cars, because there was a nearby BART station (to get to the client site in downtown Oakland) nearby and a shopping mall with a large food court across the street. Some of my colleagues didn't like to do fast food and had very specific dietary preferences; a couple of people on the project did have cars, and every once in a while, I got invited along for a ride to a grocery. There was this buzz in the car about Trader Joe's, so we went to a local store.
The first thing I noticed when I went into the store was the people, in particular a few silver-haired hippies and, of course, a number of yuppies (in most cases, the kind of people you might find at a Whole Foods). It doesn't quite fit the stereotype of a health food store; you won't find the bulk food canisters. What you will find is what I would consider a healthier version of a supermarket concept (e.g., no junk food but healthier version of snack foods) without the premium prices of a Whole Foods. It also differs by carrying mostly its own private brands (with a small number of competitively-priced healthier brand items, e.g., McCann's Oatmeal and Food for Life breads).
You will find a wider variety of healthier foods with a twist I would term as premium private-label foods. In most cases, we think of store or generic brands as less expensive, comparable quality variations of branded foods. Trader Joe's marries the concept of low prices with healthier, quality ingredient food variations, often with innovative twists. Let me discuss a couple of illustrative examples from the list below. You can purchase a 1 lb. jar of organic unsalted crunchy peanut butter made from Valencia peanuts for $2.99, and a dozen brown large cage-free (i.e., high Omega-3) eggs for $2.69. In contrast, my local supermarket starts Eggland's Best at over $3 a dozen--and organic and/or cage-free eggs are at a significant premium to that price.
Some drawbacks:
- Trader Joe's doesn't have locations in every state. I sometimes write about Trader Joe's to my mom in Texas, and she points out there aren't any local stores.
- Trader Joe's maintains a small number of stores in an area. [I used to have to drive to Bethesda until they opened up a location in Columbia (technically, Elkridge).]
- Whereas Trader Joe's is on the web, it doesn't have an Internet storefront (and it doesn't sound like they have any near-term plans to do so).
Sample Checkout Tape
McCann's Irish Oatmeal tin, $4.99
TJ Soy (Milk) Essential (unsweetened), 1 quart, $1.69 (2)
Butternut Squash Soup, 1 quart, $2.49
Unsalted Macadamia Nuts, 12 oz., $6.29
Brazil Nuts, 1 lb., $4.49
Raw Mixed Nuts, 1 lb., $4.99
Dark Chocolate Jet Black Cocoa Almonds, 1 lb., $4.99
Sunflower Seed Nut Butter, 1 lb., $3.99
Frozen Berry Medley (blackberry, raspberry, blueberry), 1 lb., 3.29
Buffalo Jerky, 3.5 oz., $4.99
Low Carb Whole Wheat Tortilla, 10 small, $2.69 (2)
TJ Oat Bran, 2 lbs., $2.69
Organic Extra Dark Chocolate Bar with Almonds, 3.5 oz., $1.99
Tetra Garden Patch Soup, 1 quart, $2.99
Swiss Dark Chocolate Bar with Hazelnuts, 7 oz., $3.99
Organic Crunchy Peanut Butter, 1 lb., $2.99
Ground Buffalo Patties, 20 oz., $5.69
Wild Alaska Sockeye Salmon Fillets, 7.99/lb, $8.47
Large Brown Cage Free Eggs, 1 dozen, $2.69
Lime Chile Mixed Nuts, 1 lb., $3.99
Canned Wild-Caught Pacific Red Salmon, 7.5 oz, $2.49 (2)
Crunchy Raw Almond Butter, 1 lb., $4.99
Whole-Wheat Pretzel Sticks, 12 oz., 1.99
Mini-Pearl Tomatoes, $2.49
Fresh Strawberries, 2 lbs., $4.99
5" Whole Wheat Pita, 8 pack, $1.49
Multi-Grain Wheat Sprouted Bread, 24 oz., $3.49
Whole Wheat English Muffins, half-dozen, $1.49
Just a few minor complaints: I would like my local store to carry frozen venison, grass-fed beef, and ostrich. (I have purchased venison at other locations in the past.) I'm not impressed with my store's current selection of tortillas/flat breads (I think they carry one lavash item in their fresh bread section. They do carry a few tortilla items in their refrigerated deli section. It would be nice if they carried Tumaro's, Flatout, or La Tortilla or offered a comparable private-label product).
An Abridged List of Free Recipe Links
Free Downloadable Recipe Books
Courtesy of Gizmo's Freeware, there is a webpage (click here) which maintains links for free downloadable cooking, food, and wine books in various e-book or audio formats. ["Free" does not include any related, applicable Internet service/download fee.] NOTE: I have not personally pre-screened these recipes for nutritional value, and relevant e-book formats may require you to locate and install additional software on your PC. (Freeware viewers are available for most or all common e-book formats.)
Recipe Bookmarks
Here is an abridged list of recipe portal links from my personal bookmark collection. [Note: although I am not diabetic, there are relevant risk factors, and I believe in eating in a proactive, preventive manner, e.g., taking into account factors such as glycemic index/load.]:
123Drinks Free Mixed Drinks Recipe Website Cocktails Alcohol
All recipes – complete resource for recipes and cooking tips
American Recipes, on USA.gov
Arielle's Recipe Archives: Cajun
Bed & Breakfast Inns ONLINE - Cooking * Food * Dining
Beef Recipes
CDC Recipes
CookingCache.com
Cooks.com - Recipe Search and More
Cooks Recipes
Free Cooking Recipes
20 Quick Crock-Pot Recipes | Food | Disney Family.com
American Diabetes Association
Diabetic Recipes - Recipes by Category
Diabetic Recipes
Eating Well Recipe
efooddepot Recipe
Epicurious.com: Recipes
Esquire's Recipes for Men - Esquire
Food Network
Gourmet Recipes Delicious Meals
Group Recipes - Food Social Network
iChef
Incredible Egg Recipe
Love to Know Recipes
MayoClinic.com Healthy Recipes
Meal-Master Recipes
MrBreakfast.com
MyRecipes.com
Native American Foods -- Recipes
NetworkedBlogs.com Recipes
NIH Recipes
Recipe.com
Recipe Archive Index
Recipe Center
Recipe Cottage: Home Cooking Recipes
Recipe Goldmine
RecipeLand
Recipelink.com
RecipeLion.com
RecipeSource
Recipe Trove
Recipes Wiki
Recipezaar
Canned Salmon Recipes
Santa's Net Christmas Recipes
Simply Recipes Food and Cooking Blog
SparkRecipes
WebMD Health & Cooking: Recipes
World Famous Recipes
World Hearth Recipe Collection
Yahoo! Directory Recipes
Low-Carbohydrate Recipe Links
Low-carbohydrate plans focus on limiting or eliminating the higher-glycemic (blood sugar-spiking) "white foods" (i.e., flour, potatoes, sugar, and refined rice) and related simple carbs (e.g., fruit juices and many fruits). I personally follow a less-restrictive lower-carb diet; for example, I don't think that emptying muscle glycogen stores is good for a healthy, active lifestyle. However, with breads, "less is more"; for example, if I was to eat pizza, the thinner the crust, the better (e.g., flatbread crust); if available, I would purchase whole-grain varieties. If I go to Subway, I'll order a wrap version of their sandwiches (available on request). [The low-carb purist will insist on making it a salad.]
NOTE: Many of the recipe portals listed above have low-carb recipes which you can access by doing a site search on low-carb. For example, RecipeZaar has a very low carb category with nearly 14,000 recipes and a reduced carbohydrate category with over 60,000 recipes.
Alt.support.diet.low-carb Recipes
Low Carb Cookbook
Low Carb Luxury Recipes
low-carb.com Low Carb Recipes
"My" Lowcarb Recipes
Courtesy of Gizmo's Freeware, there is a webpage (click here) which maintains links for free downloadable cooking, food, and wine books in various e-book or audio formats. ["Free" does not include any related, applicable Internet service/download fee.] NOTE: I have not personally pre-screened these recipes for nutritional value, and relevant e-book formats may require you to locate and install additional software on your PC. (Freeware viewers are available for most or all common e-book formats.)
Recipe Bookmarks
Here is an abridged list of recipe portal links from my personal bookmark collection. [Note: although I am not diabetic, there are relevant risk factors, and I believe in eating in a proactive, preventive manner, e.g., taking into account factors such as glycemic index/load.]:
123Drinks Free Mixed Drinks Recipe Website Cocktails Alcohol
All recipes – complete resource for recipes and cooking tips
American Recipes, on USA.gov
Arielle's Recipe Archives: Cajun
Bed & Breakfast Inns ONLINE - Cooking * Food * Dining
Beef Recipes
CDC Recipes
CookingCache.com
Cooks.com - Recipe Search and More
Cooks Recipes
Free Cooking Recipes
20 Quick Crock-Pot Recipes | Food | Disney Family.com
American Diabetes Association
Diabetic Recipes - Recipes by Category
Diabetic Recipes
Eating Well Recipe
efooddepot Recipe
Epicurious.com: Recipes
Esquire's Recipes for Men - Esquire
Food Network
Gourmet Recipes Delicious Meals
Group Recipes - Food Social Network
iChef
Incredible Egg Recipe
Love to Know Recipes
MayoClinic.com Healthy Recipes
Meal-Master Recipes
MrBreakfast.com
MyRecipes.com
Native American Foods -- Recipes
NetworkedBlogs.com Recipes
NIH Recipes
Recipe.com
Recipe Archive Index
Recipe Center
Recipe Cottage: Home Cooking Recipes
Recipe Goldmine
RecipeLand
Recipelink.com
RecipeLion.com
RecipeSource
Recipe Trove
Recipes Wiki
Recipezaar
Canned Salmon Recipes
Santa's Net Christmas Recipes
Simply Recipes Food and Cooking Blog
SparkRecipes
WebMD Health & Cooking: Recipes
World Famous Recipes
World Hearth Recipe Collection
Yahoo! Directory Recipes
Low-Carbohydrate Recipe Links
Low-carbohydrate plans focus on limiting or eliminating the higher-glycemic (blood sugar-spiking) "white foods" (i.e., flour, potatoes, sugar, and refined rice) and related simple carbs (e.g., fruit juices and many fruits). I personally follow a less-restrictive lower-carb diet; for example, I don't think that emptying muscle glycogen stores is good for a healthy, active lifestyle. However, with breads, "less is more"; for example, if I was to eat pizza, the thinner the crust, the better (e.g., flatbread crust); if available, I would purchase whole-grain varieties. If I go to Subway, I'll order a wrap version of their sandwiches (available on request). [The low-carb purist will insist on making it a salad.]
NOTE: Many of the recipe portals listed above have low-carb recipes which you can access by doing a site search on low-carb. For example, RecipeZaar has a very low carb category with nearly 14,000 recipes and a reduced carbohydrate category with over 60,000 recipes.
Alt.support.diet.low-carb Recipes
Low Carb Cookbook
Low Carb Luxury Recipes
low-carb.com Low Carb Recipes
"My" Lowcarb Recipes
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Nutrition Miscellany: 9/26/09
Sam's Club Update
Nuts and seeds vary in vitamins, minerals, fats, etc. The October 2009 3-page feature article ("Going Nuts") gives short-shrift to the discussion of minerals (nothing beyond a gratuitous reference to magnesium and copper in the second paragraph) I don't have an issue with their criticisms of excessive salt, sugar, etc., and I don't mind their raising the issues of calories and saturated fats. The question, in my view, is more about limiting one's portions--NOT the number of saturated fat grams in a single serving.
CSPI systematically eliminates macadamia nuts (one of my favorites, a superb source of monounsaturated fat, highest in B vitamins), Brazil nuts (best source of selenium), and cashews (highest in zinc) from "best bite" consideration, solely based on the ratio of polyunsaturated to saturated fat (re: Lipid Hypothesis).
A couple of other critical notes: David's Sunflower Seeds receive an honorable mention. I had stopped eating David's Sunflower Seeds a while back after I noticed, with considerable dismay, the third ingredient listed on the ingredient panel: partially hydrogenated soybean oil. Even most laymen know once you see "partially hydrogenated", you think "trans fat"; be aware of nutrition labels that read "0 grams of trans fat" because that's an artifact of label reporting requirements (e.g., less than half a gram of trans fats) and serving size. This article didn't say a single word about process-generated trans fats, even though they are worse than any other type of fat.
Finally, if I was going to pick a favorite nut, it's easy--almonds, hands down (best source of calcium and fiber, high in protein, vitamin E and monounsatured oil). CSPI got on my bad side by refusing to rate Emerald Almonds Cocoa Roast (there are additional health benefits for dark chocolate), a best buy or honorable mention, primarily because the producers use a small amount of acesulfame potassium (an FDA-approved artificial sweetener) in conjunction with sucralose. [This product is one of my favorite things.] CSPI has a known ax to grind against this sweetener, based on cancer-related concerns, which the FDA and other organizations reject.
--Salad Dressings. I noticed on my most recent trip that the club is now carrying twin pack bottles of Hidden Valley Light (40-50% lower fat and calories than the regular brand). Lately though, I've become much critical in reading salad dressing ingredient labels in general (beyond calories); in part, this was stimulated by the fact one of the Rodale websites pointed out a certain guacamole dip I was buying from a supermarket contained more vegetable oils than guacamole. Avocados are an amazingly nutritious fruit (eaten in moderation) and a superb source of monounsaturated fats. Things like soybean oil and high fructose corn syrup automatically set off yellow flags to me. Anyway, I took a pass, although I'm pleased to see lower-calorie versions available.
My personal preference is extra virgin olive oil for salads or cooking (olive oil is almost 75% monounsaturated). A second oil to consider (in a salad dressing, not for cooking) is flaxseed oil, which contains the highest percentage of an Omega-3 fatty acid, ALA. (ALA is a precursor to DHA/EPA, e.g., in fish oil, although we only able to convert a small percentage.) If I have to settle for another oil for salad dressings, the most reasonable alternative is canola oil, which is a runner-up in the monounsaturated and ALA categories. Litehouse (not carried by Sam's Club) has a jalapeño ranch (made with canola oil) that I like. [On a side note, beware of products which give you a multiple choice of vegetable oils like soybean or canola. I'm always going to assume the worst case scenario.]
The other thing I try to look for in salad dressings is how the product is sweetened. I mentioned in my Favorite Things post that I have purchased Walden Farms (which is sweetened with sucralose). Kraft used to offer "Carb Well" products and also used sucralose in its salad dressings (but they also used soybean oil, which is over 50% n-6 PUFA).
--Veggie Dips. I will often purchase the three-lb. bag of fresh broccoli florets; when I eat the broccoli raw and allow myself a dip, there are a couple of relevant items I have purchased from the deli/ prepared foods section of the store. First, my stores sell Yucatan guacamole (the vendor advertises its products as 95% avocado). Most lower-carbers like myself consider avocado as a preferred fruit, with low net carbohydrates and "good" fat (i.e., monounsaturated). Second, it also carries a ready-made branded spinach dip (at about 70 calories for 2 tablespoons).
--Jerky. I never cared much for the taste of jerky when I was a kid. There are a couple of things that made me reconsider: (1) it is portable and doesn't require refrigeration, and (2) you can get jerky for a number of meats or fish which can be hard to obtain in fresh or frozen form in many supermarkets, e.g., venison, ostrich, buffalo or salmon. Sam's Club offers some economical values on varieties of Jack Link's. (I have separately purchased Ostrim, a blend of ostrich and beef.) A 1-to-1.5 ounce high-protein, low-fat stick at under 100 calories is one way I cope with occasional between-meal dieter munchies.
--New Fad: Water Bottles. I recently purchased a reusable Clear2Go water bottle from Clear2O (not stocked by Sam's Club); this comes with a replaceable water filter attached to the lid. A principal concern is not having plastic that leaches into your drinking water and in particular is BPA-free (BPA is thought to be related to insulin resistance). The Clear2Go bottle is made of LDPE #4 (which is one of the non-leaching plastics). Of course, you can always fill a water bottle from a filtered water cooler or dispenser, but with this unit, you can refill your water bottle from any public source away from home. In any event, I was shopping for replacement filters for my Brita UltraMax and noticed most of the water filter container packages (e.g., Brita and Pur) seem to come bundled with free water bottles. Anything which that facilitates dieter exercise and good quality drinking water is a good thing.
The Angus Burger Wars
As a small investor, I have been interested in how McDonald's (and its competitors, such as Burger King) would finally address the premium burger segment, which is a mainstay in casual dining chains like Fuddruckers, Chili's, and others. Well, it seems as if they've decided on a particular cattle breed, a bigger burger (from a quarter to a third of a pound), more upscale fixings (e.g., types of cheese) and a bakery-style bun; it comes with a premium price tag and steep increases of calories (starting at over 640), fat, and sodium. [Heaven forbid instead of increasing portion size (I think a quarter-pound is enough), they should think of something like marinating burgers or seasonings beyond salt and pepper or offering customers a choice of low-fat cheeses, condiments or a whole-grain bun!]
Hats off to Denny's for going beyond the typical fast food executive excuse ("our customers don't want to buy healthier food") for its innovative "Better for You" menu options, including things like smaller portions of calorie/fat-intensive foods (What a concept! Portion control! In a restaurant!), reduced-sodium food preparation, and vegetable sticks and fruit slices for kids.
The Thin Roll Wars
I've mentioned in past posts my fondness for Arnold's Multigrain Sandwich Thins (100 calories). (Speaking of burgers, I like to get my George Foreman grill up and running, fry a low-fat burger and add a fat-free slice of cheese, a layer of baby spinach leaves, picante sauce, mustard, onions and some sliced jalapeño peppers. A quarter-pound burger fits the thin roll quite nicely.) Pepperidge Farm has come out with a competitive product, Deli Flats, which come in 3 flavors (100% whole wheat, 7-grain, and oatmeal). They also market a brand of very thin bread slices (about 45 calories) Let's hope the trend catches on (less is more). Of course, if you want to do away with bread altogether, you could try a trick every lower-carb dieter knows--substitute large lettuce leaves for bread...
Hats off to Denny's for going beyond the typical fast food executive excuse ("our customers don't want to buy healthier food") for its innovative "Better for You" menu options, including things like smaller portions of calorie/fat-intensive foods (What a concept! Portion control! In a restaurant!), reduced-sodium food preparation, and vegetable sticks and fruit slices for kids.
The Thin Roll Wars
I've mentioned in past posts my fondness for Arnold's Multigrain Sandwich Thins (100 calories). (Speaking of burgers, I like to get my George Foreman grill up and running, fry a low-fat burger and add a fat-free slice of cheese, a layer of baby spinach leaves, picante sauce, mustard, onions and some sliced jalapeño peppers. A quarter-pound burger fits the thin roll quite nicely.) Pepperidge Farm has come out with a competitive product, Deli Flats, which come in 3 flavors (100% whole wheat, 7-grain, and oatmeal). They also market a brand of very thin bread slices (about 45 calories) Let's hope the trend catches on (less is more). Of course, if you want to do away with bread altogether, you could try a trick every lower-carb dieter knows--substitute large lettuce leaves for bread...
Nutrition Action Looks at Nuts
If you read my last post, you know that I am a skeptic on the Lipid Hypothesis (the CSPI is in the tank for it). You would think the facts that some ethnic groups (e.g., Eskimos) have existed on diets high in saturated fats without significant coronary heart disease, that some studies show much of clogging arterial plaque consists of polyunsaturated fats, and that saturated fat is necessary for number of purposes (including calcium absorption, a preferred nutrient for vital organs, cell stability, and an improved immune system), and that mother's milk largely consists of fat, most of it saturated, would lead some people to pause before replacing saturated fat in one's diet with polyunsaturated Omega-6 fats (i.e., most vegetable oils and shortening, used in many packaged and deep fried foods), unbalanced without enough Omega-3 fats in one's body (particularly DHA/EPA, found in oily fish).
Generally, I frown with overly simplistic dietary heuristics and prefer nutritional diversity. One of the differences I had with lower-carb contacts was their choice of vegetables based strictly on carbohydrate grams, even though vegetables vary in vitamins and minerals.
Generally, I frown with overly simplistic dietary heuristics and prefer nutritional diversity. One of the differences I had with lower-carb contacts was their choice of vegetables based strictly on carbohydrate grams, even though vegetables vary in vitamins and minerals.
Nuts and seeds vary in vitamins, minerals, fats, etc. The October 2009 3-page feature article ("Going Nuts") gives short-shrift to the discussion of minerals (nothing beyond a gratuitous reference to magnesium and copper in the second paragraph) I don't have an issue with their criticisms of excessive salt, sugar, etc., and I don't mind their raising the issues of calories and saturated fats. The question, in my view, is more about limiting one's portions--NOT the number of saturated fat grams in a single serving.
CSPI systematically eliminates macadamia nuts (one of my favorites, a superb source of monounsaturated fat, highest in B vitamins), Brazil nuts (best source of selenium), and cashews (highest in zinc) from "best bite" consideration, solely based on the ratio of polyunsaturated to saturated fat (re: Lipid Hypothesis).
A couple of other critical notes: David's Sunflower Seeds receive an honorable mention. I had stopped eating David's Sunflower Seeds a while back after I noticed, with considerable dismay, the third ingredient listed on the ingredient panel: partially hydrogenated soybean oil. Even most laymen know once you see "partially hydrogenated", you think "trans fat"; be aware of nutrition labels that read "0 grams of trans fat" because that's an artifact of label reporting requirements (e.g., less than half a gram of trans fats) and serving size. This article didn't say a single word about process-generated trans fats, even though they are worse than any other type of fat.
Finally, if I was going to pick a favorite nut, it's easy--almonds, hands down (best source of calcium and fiber, high in protein, vitamin E and monounsatured oil). CSPI got on my bad side by refusing to rate Emerald Almonds Cocoa Roast (there are additional health benefits for dark chocolate), a best buy or honorable mention, primarily because the producers use a small amount of acesulfame potassium (an FDA-approved artificial sweetener) in conjunction with sucralose. [This product is one of my favorite things.] CSPI has a known ax to grind against this sweetener, based on cancer-related concerns, which the FDA and other organizations reject.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
