Archive for September, 2005
Researchers find human fat cells produce C-reactive protein
HOUSTON, TX — September 16, 2005 — Researchers at The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center and The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston have found that human fat cells produce a protein that is linked to both inflammation and an increased risk of heart disease and stroke.
They say the discovery, reported in Journal of the American College of Cardiology, goes a long way to explain why people who are overweight generally have higher levels of the molecule, known as C-reactive protein (CRP), which is now used diagnostically to predict future cardiovascular events.
And they also report some good news: the researchers found that aspirin and statin drugs, now commonly used to treat heart diseases, effectively damp down production of CRP from fat cells.
“This study is the first to show how body fat participates in the inflammatory process that leads to cardiovascular disease, but also demonstrates that this process can be blocked by drugs now on the market,” said study leader Edward T. H. Yeh, MD, who is both chairman of the Department of Cardiology at M.D. Anderson and director of the Research Center for Cardiovascular Disease at the Brown Foundation Institute of Molecular Medicine for the Prevention of Human Diseases at the UT Health Science Center at Houston.
UT Health Science Center at Houston President James T. Willerson, MD, is a co-author of the study.
Adipose tissue has been lately regarded as a separate body organ that produce a number of different biologically active molecules — such as cytokine proteins that are associated with inflammation, and the hormone resistin, which is linked to insulin resistance and the development of type two diabetes.
Even if they are healthy, people with more adipose tissue also tend to have higher levels of CRP. Previous research, however, had only found CRP to be produced in liver tissue, although Drs. Yeh, Willerson and Paolo Calabro, MD, discovered in 2003 that the protein also is manufactured in the walls of blood vessels.
“But that didn’t explain obesity’s connection to high levels of CRP and it also was not clear why CRP is higher in patients who have metabolic disorders,” Dr. Yeh said.
So the research team decided to see whether fat cells themselves could be stimulated by inflammatory cytokines or resistin to produce CRP. To help find out, plastic surgery patients at M.D. Anderson donated adipose tissue that would have been discarded, and the research team then isolated fat cells, cultured them and stimulated them under a number of different conditions.
They found the cells produced cytokines that resulted in inflammation and that this process triggered production of high levels of C-reactive proteins.
The researchers also discovered that resistin, the hormone associated with diabetes and insulin resistance, could stimulate production of CRP proteins. “And this is interesting because it is known that resistin is itself produced by fat cells,” Dr. Yeh said.
“We know that patients with metabolic syndromes have higher levels of CRPs, as well as a higher risk of developing heart disease and stroke, but no one understands why that is,” Yeh said. “If fat cells by themselves produce inflammatory signals that trigger cells to produce CRPs, and if CRPs also produce biological effects on vascular walls, that could explain the higher risk of cardiovascular disease.”
The investigators then solved the other part of the puzzle — why it is that aspirin, statin drugs and an agent known as troglitazone, used to treat diabetes, can reduce CRP levels. They exposed the cultured fat cells that were producing high levels of CRPs to these drugs, and found production of the proteins declined. “We knew from studying patients that these drugs can reduce C-reactive proteins, but now we have direct proof of their benefit.”
Even as the CRP picture becomes clearer, there is still much that is not known, the researchers say, including the reason why fat tissue produces an inflammatory response, and just precisely how CRP participates in that process.
“Inflammation is a very complicated phenomenon, but at least we now have a few more clues as to what it does and how the damage it produces can be prevented,” Dr. Yeh noted.
Co-authors include Calabro, an Italian cardiology fellow at the UT Health Science Center at Houston, and David Chang, MD, a plastic surgeon at M. D. Anderson Cancer Center. Co-author Willerson also is president-elect, medical director and director of research for the Texas Heart Institute at St. Luke’s Episcopal Hospital.
SOURCE: The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston
Taken From: www.pslgroup.com
September 21st, 2005
Fri Sep 16,11:00 AM ET
LONDON (Reuters) - Eating a diet rich in beans, nuts and cereals could help to prevent cancer because the foods contain a natural compound that inhibits the growth of tumors.
Scientists at University College London (UCL) said on Thursday that the substance called inositol pentakisphosphate, which is also found in lentils and peas, could also help researchers develop new therapies against the disease.
“Our study suggests the importance of a diet enriched in foods such as beans, nuts and cereals which could help prevent cancer,” said Dr Marco Falasca, of UCL’s Sackler Institute, who reported the finding in the journal Cancer Research.
He and his team discovered that the compound inhibits an enzyme called phosphoinositde 3-kinase which promotes tumor growth.
Scientists have been trying to develop drugs to inhibit the cancer-promoting enzyme but have had difficulty so far.
When the researchers tested inositol pentakisphosphate in mice and cancer cells in the laboratory, it killed the animal tumors and enhanced the effect of drugs used against ovarian and lung cancer cells.
“Our work will now focus on establishing whether the phosphate inhibitor can be developed into an anti-cancer agent for human therapy,” Falasca said in a statement.
The researchers believe the compound, which was non-toxic even at high concentrations, could also be used to increase the effectiveness of chemotherapy drugs.
Taken From http://news.yahoo.com
September 21st, 2005
Published: September 21, 2005
(Page 3 of 3)
In a July 2003 letter, Lester M. Crawford, then a deputy commissioner and now commissioner of the agency, warned that any of California’s attempts to regulate acrylamide could “directly conflict with federal law.” The F.D.A. says it has broad authority to regulate the labels of food products.
Terry C. Troxell, director for the office of plant and dairy foods at the F.D.A., said that the agency had already spent millions financing acrylamide research. “This isn’t a simple situation,” Mr. Troxell said. “Acrylamide is interwoven with the way we prepare and cook our food.”
Mr. Weil charges that the agency is dragging its feet. “More research is good, but we’ve been waiting around on our own state agency and the F.D.A., which has been studying this for three years and hasn’t done anything,” he said. “And they have no schedule for when they’re going to do anything.”
Most food companies say they will continue to follow the agency’s lead. “If the F.D.A. or California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment ever changes the regulations, we will modify our standards to be in full compliance,” said Jonathan Blum, senior vice president of Yum Brands.
In the meantime, companies are taking some preliminary steps to find ways to reduce acrylamide levels. Frito-Lay says it has worked with Michael W. Pariza, a professor in the University of Wisconsin’s food microbiology and toxicology department, on acrylamide-reduction research.
But Professor Pariza, who is working with a consortium of 12 companies, says no one has found any clear solutions. “Anybody who thinks that companies can turn on a dime and fix this is wrong,” he said.
Scientists say that a simple and sure way to reduce acrylamide in food is to lower cooking temperatures. But this approach carries its own set of problems.
“You get French fries that are really just warm potatoes,” said Ken Lee, chairman of Ohio State University’s food science department and a member of the F.D.A.’s advisory committee on acrylamide.
Low cooking temperatures also produce cereal that is not crunchy and crackers that are less flavorful.
“This thing is a real scientific head-scratcher,” Professor Lee said.
September 21st, 2005
Published: September 21, 2005
(Page 2 of 3)
The attorney general’s office cites a dozen acrylamide animal studies showing both cancer and birth defects, as well as the federal Environmental Protection Agency’s regulation of the chemical as a carcinogen for 13 years.
The food industry and the F.D.A., meanwhile, are calling for more studies. The agency says that it has been “very active” in acrylamide research and will do a thorough risk assessment once a large-scale experiment is completed in 2007.
The controversy started when Swedish scientists accidentally discovered acrylamide in food in 2002. The chemical had long been used in the manufacture of things like grout and adhesives and to perform tasks like separating solid sewage from water.
Its discovery in food sent the international scientific community into a tailspin and ignited a debate over how chemicals in food should be regulated.
Under the Delaney Clause, which amended the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act in 1958, no substance that causes cancer in either humans or animals can be added to food. But that law is normally applied to substances introduced to food, like dyes and preservatives, not those, like acrylamide, created by cooking. Frying and baking potatoes at home create acrylamide as well.
Thus, the food industry wants acrylamide treated differently from food chemicals. “Acrylamide has been present in the food supply and safely consumed since human beings discovered that cooked food tastes good,” said Kristen Power, director of state affairs at the Grocery Manufacturers Association, which is leading the food industry’s efforts on acrylamide. “It is in 40 percent of the calories consumed in the average American diet.”
Acrylamide is also found in lesser amounts in breads, cereals, cookies and crackers, as well as roasted nuts and some vegetables that have been grilled or sautéed.
Elizabeth Whelan, executive director of the American Council on Science and Health, a group financed by the food industry, foundations and private individuals, said that in singling out potato chips and French fries, the California attorney general is applying a double standard.
Food like whole wheat toast and black olives, she notes, also have high acrylamide levels. (The chemical processing of black olives, which are not naturally black, forms acrylamide.) “This is really just another attack on what we call junk food,” Ms. Whelan said.
Mr. Weil of the California attorney general’s office said his office looked carefully at food consumption data before deciding which products to pursue. “If people ate as many olives as they do French fries, we’d have to be concerned about it,” Mr. Weil said.
Other foods that test positive for acrylamide, like breads, cereals and peanut butter, contain the chemical at comparatively low levels, Mr. Weil said.
“When the food industry says 40 percent of the calories in the food supply have some acrylamide in it, that’s true only if you count foods with even the tiniest bit,” he said. “The potato chips and French fries really stand by themselves as having high levels.”
Scientists say that is because acrylamide is created, generally speaking, when the naturally occurring amino acid asparagine is heated to temperatures above 250 degrees in the presence of sugars or starches. Potatoes have a lot of both asparagine and starch, and are often fried at temperatures of up to 400 degrees.
Alise Cappel, research director at the Environmental Law Foundation, a nonprofit group that recently sued four potato chip companies over acrylamide (the suit is expected to be joined with the attorney general’s), says people are increasingly eating foods with acrylamide.
“It certainly has been in the food supply for centuries, but the frying of food is a relatively new cooking technique,” Ms. Cappel said. “And we’re eating more cookies, crackers and breads than we ever have before.”
The F.D.A. is not convinced that such consumption is necessarily bad. The agency has said that warning labels on food could “confuse consumers” and create “unnecessary public alarm.”
Read Part III
Taken From www.nytimes.com
September 21st, 2005
By MELANIE WARNER
Published: September 21, 2005
Americans may have plenty of reasons to fear French fries. While they are one of the country’s favorite foods, they are soaked with trans fats, loaded with sodium and full of simple carbs, the bad kind. And, it turns out, they are also full of a chemical called acrylamide, which is known to cause cancer in laboratory rats and mice.
That discovery a few years ago has raised questions about the safety of fries, as well as potato chips, which are also packed with acrylamide.
It ultimately led to a showdown this summer over whether such foods should bear health warning labels and whether companies should be required to reduce acrylamide levels in their food.
The battle pits the activist attorney general of California against the food industry and the Food and Drug Administration.
What happens over the next few months could have a huge bearing on the eating habits of Americans, and may make a dent in the bottom lines of restaurants and food companies. French fries are the No. 1 consumed food in restaurants, according to the NPD Group, a research firm.
California’s attorney general, Bill Lockyer, filed suit in August against McDonald’s; Burger King; Frito-Lay, owned by PepsiCo; and six other food companies, saying that they should be forced to put labels on all fries and potato chips sold in California. The proposed warning might say something to this effect: “This product contains a chemical known to the state of California to cause cancer.”
The food industry, which might prefer seeing every American become vegan to being forced to put the word “cancer” on its products, is worried. Food companies argue, accurately, that scientists do not know for certain that acrylamide is carcinogenic to humans at the levels present in food. Acrylamide is not put into food, but is formed when starchy food is heated at high temperatures.
The F.D.A. is also opposed to labeling, pending its own review of the matter, which began in 2002 when scientists first discovered that acrylamide could be formed in food.
While legal specialists say the attorney general’s lawsuit is something of a long shot, it is likely to spur further action. The California Environmental Protection Agency, which has also been looking at acrylamide for several years, says it will issue regulations by the end of this year. Proposals include displays of warning labels and signs in supermarkets and restaurants, as well as a total exemption for acrylamide in food - an option the food industry has lobbied heavily for but which is considered unlikely to be adopted.
Under Proposition 65, which California voters approved in 1986, the state is required to regulate chemicals that are known to cause cancer or reproductive harm and to force manufacturers to label their products or otherwise warn consumers. Acrylamide, a chemical that has a variety of industrial uses, has been on the Proposition 65 list since 1990.
In California, warning labels are currently found on products like paint solvents and fertilizer. In response to another lawsuit by the attorney general’s office, supermarkets in the state recently started posting signs warning about mercury in certain fish at their seafood counters.
Were they ever to materialize, French fry and potato chip warning labels or signs would be required only in California. But among states, California has the nation’s biggest economy, representing 13.5 percent of the national gross domestic product, and is often a regulatory trendsetter.
And fried potatoes are a big business throughout the country. Americans spend an estimated $4 billion a year on fries and $3 billion a year on potato chips. In addition to McDonald’s, Burger King and Frito-Lay, other companies named in the suit are KFC, a division of Yum Brands; Wendy’s International; Lance, which makes Cape Cod potato chips; H. J. Heinz, which produces Ore-Ida frozen potato products; the potato chip company Kettle Foods; and Procter & Gamble, which sells Pringles.
The regulation of chemicals in food has, for the last four decades, relied upon animal study extrapolation to determine risks to humans. For obvious ethical reasons, the testing of potential carcinogens is not done directly on humans; animals, particularly mice and rats, have served as proxies.
The California attorney general and several activist groups say that consumers should be given information so they can make informed food choices.
“Proposition 65 requires companies to tell us when we’re exposed to potentially dangerous toxins in our food; the law benefits us all,” said Mr. Lockyer, in a statement.
Edward G. Weil, California’s deputy attorney general, said he was “not trying to ban French fries,” but that he needed to take action in the absence of regulatory decisions by either the F.D.A. or the California E.P.A.
Continue reading part II
Taken From www.nytimes.com
September 21st, 2005
September 7, 2005
(The New York Times News Service) — Folic acid fortification of foods, mandated since 1998 in the United States, continues to help reduce the incidence of severe birth defects such as spina bifida, researchers report.
The study, which appears in the September issue of Pediatrics, included a look at the effects of the B vitamin on children born to black and Hispanic women.
“We wanted to see if all racial and ethnic groups are having decreases, or is it only, for example, in one group?” explained study co-author Dr. Sonja Rasmussen, a clinical geneticist with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Her team analyzed data from 21 population-based birth defect surveillance systems. They examined trends in neural tube defects — serious malformations such as spina bifida, a leading cause of childhood paralysis, and anencephaly, a condition in which parts of the brain and skull cap are missing. Both can be prevented through maternal intake during pregnancy of folate, which is thought to be important to embryonic development.
Looking at the years 1995 to 2002, the team divided births into pre-fortification, optional- and mandatory-fortification periods, and then evaluated associations between maternal folate levels and birth defects.
The study included data on 4,468 cases of spina bifida and 2,625 cases of anencephaly.
The CDC team concluded that folic acid fortification accounted for a 36 percent decline in the birth defects among the Hispanic population, and 34 percent in the non-Hispanic white population.
The decline among blacks was not significant.
Before fortification, about 4,000 pregnancies annually were affected by neural tube defects, according to the March of Dimes.
Now about 1,000 fewer babies a year develop one of these conditions.
But some experts believe the fortification level, while helpful, needs to be set higher. In an editorial accompanying the study, Dr. Godfrey Oakley Jr. of the CDC says the U.S. Food and Drug Administration should at least double the amount of folic acid required in enriched grain foods, currently set at 140 micrograms per 100 grams of grains.
The March of Dimes is also calling for higher fortification levels, says Dr. Jennifer Howse, president of the organization. She called the decline found in the Rasmussen study “very significant,” but thinks higher levels of fortification are needed.
In a note of caution, however, Dr. Tsunenobu Tamura, author of a second Pediatrics study on folate status and child development, says more study is needed before that recommendation should be enacted.
“We should be extremely careful in increasing the fortification level, because we do not know the consequences of high-dose fortification,” says Tamura, a professor of nutrition science at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.
In his study, Tamura’s team evaluated the maternal blood folate levels of black women at 19, 26 and 37 weeks of pregnancy. They then evaluated the neurological development of 355 of the women’s children at 5 years of age using memory, motor skills and other tests.
“The mothers’ folate nutritional status during pregnancy does not appear to affect psychomotor development of the children at 5 years of age,” he says.
Still, he says, he believes it’s crucial that women get adequate folate during pregnancy.
Women of childbearing age are advised to take in 400 micrograms a day of folate, which can be obtained through vitamin pills or foods such as leafy green vegetables and citrus fruits.
Copyright 2005 The New York Times News Service. All rights reserved.
Taken From www.intelihealth.com
September 20th, 2005
September 12, 2005
CHICAGO (American Medical Association) — Postmenopausal women who consumed high daily levels of soy protein had reduced risk of bone fracture, according to a study in the September 12 issue of Archives of Internal Medicine, one of the JAMA/Archives journals.
Women experience accelerated bone loss at a rate of three to five percent per year for about five to seven years after menopause, putting them at a high risk for bone fracture, according to background information in the article.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and new clinical guidelines advise against the use of hormone therapy as a first-line treatment for the prevention of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women and emphasize alternatives including exercise and increasing intake of calcium and vitamin D. Growing evidence suggests a potential role for soy in preventing postmenopausal bone loss.
Xianglan Zhang, M.D., M.P.H., from the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, and colleagues examined the relationship between soy food consumption and bone fractures in 24,403 postmenopausal women.
The women were part of the Shanghai Women’s Health Study, a study of approximately 75,000 Chinese women aged 40 to 70 years, conducted between March 1997 and May 2000.
Participants’ usual dietary intake was assessed once at the beginning of the study and then during follow-up, approximately two to three years later. Average age was 60 years.
The researchers found that soy consumption may reduce the risk of fracture in postmenopausal women, especially among those in the early years following menopause.
During an average follow-up of four and a half years, 1,770 fractures were reported. The median (middle value) daily intakes of soy protein and soy isoflavones (estrogen-like plant chemicals) were 8.5 grams and 38 micrograms, respectively.
Participants were divided into five categories, according to their soy intake, with the lowest intake group consuming less than 4.98 grams of soy per day, and the highest group consuming 13.27 grams or more of soy per day.
Those in the highest soy protein intake group had a 37 percent reduced relative risk for fracture compared to the lowest intake group. Women in the highest soy isoflavone group had a 35 percent reduced relative risk for fracture compared to the lowest isoflavone group.
“In this prospective cohort study of postmenopausal women, we found that soy food consumption was associated with a significantly lower risk of fracture, particularly among women in the early years following menopause,” the researchers write.
“The potential impact of timing on the skeletal effects of soy needs to be further addressed in future studies.”
Taken From www.intelihealth.com
September 20th, 2005
September 15, 2005
WASHINGTON (AP) — Store-bought swordfish contained mercury levels above the legal limit in a study released Thursday by environmental groups.
A University of North Carolina Lab found elevated mercury concentrations in 24 swordfish samples from supermarket chains including Safeway, Shaws, Albertsons and Whole Foods.
Groups that paid for the analysis want supermarkets to post signs warning shoppers of health risks from mercury, and they want the government to increase its testing.
“Americans have a right to know what’s in their food, and posting warning signs in grocery stores where these fish are sold is a simple, commonsense solution that fulfills that right,” said Jackie Savitz of the advocacy group Oceana.
The federal government advises pregnant women, nursing mothers and young children to avoid fish with high levels of mercury — shark, swordfish, king mackerel or tilefish. Elevated mercury levels have been linked to learning disabilities and developmental delays in children and to heart, nervous system and kidney damage in adults.
A supermarket industry group said it was not surprised by the survey, because swordfish and tuna are known to have higher levels of mercury. Many stores already offer brochures or have signs, the group said.
“The issue of asking for supermarkets to provide information at the store level is something companies are either engaged in doing or in the process of doing,” said Karen Brown, senior vice president of the Food Marketing Institute. “Certainly, we would support that. We also would not be opposed to increased testing by FDA.”
Average levels were 1.1 parts per million, just over the government’s limit of 1.0 ppm. The Food and Drug Administration can take legal action to remove a product from the market if mercury levels exceed that limit. Two samples, from Maine and Rhode Island, contained double the federal limit for mercury.
Traces of mercury are found in nearly all fish and shellfish. Released through industrial pollution, mercury falls and accumulates in streams and oceans as methylmercury. Methylmercury builds up in fish and shellfish as they feed, in some types more than others.
However, eating fish also has widely acknowledged health benefits. The American Heart Association advises people to eat fish at least twice a week.
FDA and EPA advise even at-risk people to eat up to 12 ounces — about two meals a week — of fish and shellfish that are lower in mercury, such as shrimp, salmon, pollock, catfish and canned light tuna. FDA says to limit albacore, or “white,” tuna to one meal per week because it contains higher levels of mercury.
Of 31 tuna steaks sampled, mercury levels averaged 0.33 ppm, a level comparable to that of canned albacore tuna.
Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Taken from: www.intelihealth.com
September 20th, 2005
We have added a new category to nutritionguides.net: “Nutrition News”. This section will present the latest research and discoveries about the food you eat and its effect on your health to help you maintain a healthy lifestyle. Enjoy the section and be up-to-date.
September 20th, 2005
Fish oil reduces risk of heart disease
Hundreds of studies have been done on fish or fish oils and their role in the prevention or treatment of heart disease. A review in the British Medical Journal recommends fish or fish oil supplements to prevent heart attacks, particularly in people with vascular disease. How omega-3 fats reduce heart disease is not known, but they are known to lower blood triglycerides and blood pressure, prevent clotting, are anti-inflammatory and reduce abnormal heart rhythms.
A word of caution on mercury
While it is recommended to eat one to two fish meals a week, it is wise to avoid fish high in mercury. Excess mercury appears to affect the nervous system, causing: numb or tingling fingers, lips and toes; developmental delays in walking and talking in children; muscle and joint pain; increased risk of heart attack.
Fish high in mercury include shark, swordfish (broadbill) and marlin, ray, gemfish, ling, orange roughy (sea perch) and southern blue fin tuna. Pregnant women, nursing mothers, women planning pregnancy and children up to six years old should avoid these fish.
If catching and eating your own fish, don’t fish in polluted waters. Bottom feeder species, such as catfish, may ingest more pollutants.
Types of fish cuts
The types of fish cuts available include:
* Fillet - the boneless flank of the fish.
* Dressed - with head and fins (entrails, scales and gills are removed).
* Steak - cross-sections taken from a dressed fish.
* Gutted - whole fish with entrails removed.
Healthy ways to cook fish
Healthy ways to cook fish include:
* Baking - make shallow cuts along the top of the fish. Put into a greased dish and cover with foil. Flavour with herbs, lemon juice and olive oil. Bake at around 180°C and baste frequently.
* Shallow frying - dry and flour the fish. Place a small amount of oil or butter in the pan. Fry the fish at a medium heat.
* Grilling - cut slashes into whole fish to help the heat penetrate the flesh. Place fish on a preheated grill. Baste frequently.
* Poaching - not suitable for flaky varieties. Place fish in gently simmering stock. Whole fish should be placed in a pan of cold stock, which is then slowly brought up to a gentle simmer.
* Steaming - put fish in a steamer or on a plate over a saucepan containing gently boiling water. Cover.
Cooking times for fresh fish
To estimate the cooking time of a fresh piece of fish, measure the meat at its thickest part. Suggested cooking times include:
* One cm thick - bake for 3 minutes, shallow fry for 4 minutes, grill for 5 minutes, poach for 8 minutes, steam for 3 minutes.
* Two cm thick - bake for 11 minutes, shallow fry for 7 minutes, grill for 6 minutes, poach for 10 minutes, steam for 7 minutes.
* Three cm thick - bake for 15 minutes, shallow fry for 10 minutes, grill for 9 minutes, poach for 12 minutes, steam for 11 minutes.
* Four cm thick - bake for 20 minutes, shallow fry for 13 minutes, grill for 11 minutes, poach for 13 minutes, steam for 14 minutes.
Cooking times for frozen fish
To estimate the cooking time of a frozen piece of fish, measure the meat at its thickest part. Suggested cooking times include:
* One cm thick - bake for 17 minutes, shallow fry for 7 minutes, grill for 12 minutes, poach for 10 minutes, steam for 5 minutes.
* Two cm thick - bake for 22 minutes, shallow fry for 11 minutes, grill for 15 minutes, poach for 15 minutes, steam for 11 minutes.
* Three cm thick - bake for 35 minutes, shallow fry for 15 minutes, grill for 24 minutes, poach for 22 minutes, steam for 13 minutes.
* Four cm thick - bake for 39 minutes, shallow fry for 18 minutes, grill for 28 minutes, poach for 28 minutes, steam for 16 minutes.
September 2nd, 2005
Australia’s leading health research body, the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), suggests that Australians should eat more fish. This is because fish is low in fat, high in protein and an excellent source of omega 3 fatty acids. Researchers worldwide have discovered that eating fish regularly - one or two serves weekly - may reduce the risk of diseases ranging from childhood asthma to prostate cancer. Healthy ways to enjoy fish include baked, poached, grilled and steamed.
Health benefits of eating fish
Regular consumption of fish can reduce the risk of various diseases and disorders. Selected research findings include:
* Asthma - children who eat fish may be less likely to develop asthma.
* Brain and eyes - fish rich in omega 3 fatty acids can contribute to the health of brain tissue and the retina (the back of the eye).
* Cancer - the omega 3 fatty acids in fish may reduce the risk of many types of cancers by 30 to 50 per cent, especially of the oral cavity, oesophagus, colon, breast, ovary and prostate.
* Cardiovascular disease - eating fish every week reduces the risk of heart disease and stroke by reducing blood clots and inflammation, improving blood vessel elasticity, lowering blood pressure, lowering blood fats and boosting ‘good’ cholesterol.
* Dementia - elderly people who eat fish or seafood at least once a week may have a lower risk of developing dementia, including Alzheimer’s disease.
* Depression - people who regularly eat fish have a lower incidence of depression (depression is linked to low levels of omega 3 fatty acids in the brain).
* Diabetes - fish may help people with diabetes manage their blood sugar levels.
* Eyesight - breastfed babies of mothers who eat fish have better eyesight, perhaps due to the omega 3 fatty acids transmitted in breast milk.
* Inflammatory conditions - regular fish consumption may relieve the symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis and autoimmune disease.
* Prematurity - eating fish during pregnancy may help reduce the risk of delivering a premature baby.
Foods rich in omega 3 fatty acids
The recommended daily amount of omega 3 fatty acids from fish is 200-600mg and from plants it is 1-2g.
The following are approximate amounts of omega 3 fatty acids per 60g serve of varieties of fish:
* Salmon (fresh Atlantic) 1,200mg
* Smoked salmon 1,000mg
* Canned salmon 500mg
* Sardines 1,500mg
* Trout (fresh rainbow) 350mg
* Gemfish 300mg
* Blue-eye, shark (flake), salmon, squid 250mg
* Scallop or calamari 200mg
* Sea mullet, abalone 170mg
* Canned tuna 145mg
* Orange roughy or sea perch 7mg.
The following are approximate amounts of omega 3 fatty acids per 60g serve of other foods:
* Two slices of fish oil enriched white bread 27mg
* Lean beef or lamb 40mg
* One fish oil enriched egg 200mg
* Fish oil enriched margarine (10g) 60mg
* One regular egg 40mg.
The best source of omega 3 fatty acids is fish, rather than fish oil capsules.
Read More about Fish
September 2nd, 2005
The kids are screaming for a Happy Meal, your mouth’s watering but you can’t possibly go there and let yourself be sucked in by this “a moment on the lips, a lifetime on the hips” food. Or maybe you can - because our main fast food venues are catering for us more nutrition conscious consumers by marketing healthier alternatives. Here we suss the healthy options out; for both nutrition content and taste.
Mc Donalds
McDonalds have made many changes to their menu and offer a Penne Pasta Salad with Italian style chicken at a mere 266 calories. It has less than 5% fat and that includes the dressing. This looks gorgeous and has big chunks of chicken so, unlike some chicken salads, you won’t have to play that exciting game of spot the chicken!
If chicken doesn’t flap your wings, why not go for the Feta Cheese and Pasta Salad for 239 calories (dressing not included).
They also offer a fruit bag at 42 calories, that you can swap for chips to make a more nutritious Happy Meal.
For a great snack try their new strawberry yoghurt burst at 35p for just 21 calories (I haven’t made a typing error, it is a silly but fabulous 21 calories!)
Watch out for the additional dressings, they bump those extra hidden calories up. Ranch dressing is a whopping 251 calories, Caesar dressing an extra 143 calories and Balsamic dressing is 105 calories.
Burger King
Burger King is the ultimate king of healthy options. They have launched a range called Lighter Alternative (LA) which offers an LA Chicken Sandwich for 322 calories. Having tried this I can tell you it is a mouth wateringly tasty, succulent and filling and just what the diet ordered - guilt free and better nutrition than a greasy burger!
A warm Flame Grilled Chicken Salad for less than 140 calories can substitute the burger you’ve been longing for all day and a garden salad at less than 35 calories will boost the nutrition value.
Burger King’s French dressing is only 8 calories per serving, the yummy Tomato and Basil dressing only 19, the Honey and Mustard dressing is 32 calories, while the Caesar dressing is 161 calories. All of these, bar the Caesar dressing, are low in calories and can add that extra oomph into your crunchy salad.
Kentucky Fried Chicken
KFC are slowing following in the footsteps of these other fast food venues by offering a warm chicken salad for 256 calories without the dressing, and for an extra 32 calories you can add the low fat vinaigrette. They also offer a side dish of corn on the cob for only 150 calories.
Verdict
For me, there’s no comparison with what Burger King has to offer for both taste and nutrition. They are making a positive statement with their lighter alternatives and seem to be sticking to it. I can’t wait to see what else they come up with.
McDonalds seem to be getting there and have great snacks and the salad is good, although calorie wise it can’t beat Burger King or KFC.
KFC still needs to do some brushing up on good nutrition, and expand its range of healthy options, but like they say - it is finger lickin’ good!
September 2nd, 2005
Question: Why do food manufacturers add so much salt to processed foods? There are so many other excellent food preservation methods available.
Answer
Salt (sodium chloride) helps prevent spoiling by drawing water out of the food and depriving bacteria of the moisture they need to thrive. Salt is also an antibacterial agent, killing some bacteria that cause food spoiling.
At one time, salting was one of the only methods available to help preserve food. But today food manufacturers have many other methods. These include pasteurization, refrigeration and freezing, and dehydration and freeze-drying, irradiation and chemical preservatives. Each of these newer procedures has resulted in the need for less salt in foods — and in some cases, no salt.
So why is salt still added to processed foods? Here are some reasons:
* Salt makes food more flavorful.
* Salted foods such as soups seem thicker and less watery.
* Salt increases sweetness in products such as soft drinks, cookies and cakes.
* Salt helps cover up any metallic or chemical aftertaste in products such as soft drinks.
* Salt decreases dryness in foods such as crackers and pretzels.
Most Americans consume more than double the recommended daily amount of sodium — due in part to a heavy diet of processed foods. To reduce sodium in your diet:
* Eat fewer processed foods such as potato chips, frozen dinners and cured meats.
* Choose low-sodium or reduced-sodium foods.
* Don’t add salt to your food. Instead, use herbs and spices to flavor foods.
* Eat more unprocessed, fresh foods such as fresh fruits, vegetables, lean meats, poultry, fish and unprocessed grains.
September 2nd, 2005
Introduce new foods as soon as your child can handle them. You will have more success before 18 months, but even then it is not easy. Even in the best of circumstances it may take 10 to 15 attempts before a child is willing to eat, or even try, new foods. Offer them and let the child decide what to do with them. If you push too hard, or make a big deal out of a new food, you may inadvertantly create a power struggle. It helps if you yourself model enjoyment of the new foods. If your child sees that beets, for example, are an adult food, s/he may be curious about them and willing to taste. Don’t expect instant acceptance however, especially of stronger flavored items.
And speaking of foods with strong flavors, if you suspect your child may be a supertaster, accept that s/he will avoid certain items, probably for years and maybe forever, and move on. It is possible to be well nourished eating only bland food with little or no seasoning. Provide a selection of mild foods, and notice if your child is more willing to try them. If so, you may be living with a supertaster. It’s another human characteristic like red hair or brown eyes. Don’t fight it. Enjoy your child, idiosyncracies and all.
Worried that your child is not eating enough? Picky eating does not automatically lead to nutritional deficiencies and most picky eaters do consume about 1,000 calories a day, which is the recommended intake for toddlers. However, they often have too little variety in their diets. They won’t starve to death, but the sooner they begin to eat more healthfully, the better. In some cases food restriction can lead to permanently stunted growth.
Many picky eaters choose high-calorie, low-nutrient foods and little else. For example, their favorite vegetable is often french fried potatoes, overcomsumption of which can contribute to overweight and obesity.
Cheese, peanut butter, and ice cream are other favorite foods that can be part of a healthy, balanced meal plan, but they should not be the entire meal plan.
Some parents find incentives useful. For example, “You can have dessert if you eat your green beans.” Others find that bribes do not work. The child is happier avoiding the “icky” food than eating the desired one. Parents can experiment with incentives. If they work, custom tailor them to your child’s preferences. If they don’t work, give up on them.
Above all, refuse to engage in a power struggle. There is no way you can win, and continued attempts will only cement your child’s determination not to eat what you want him/her to eat. If you are concerned about life and health, talk to the child’s pediatrician. Since there are a few relatively rare psychological disorders that can manifest in food refusal, ask for a referral to a child psychologist or child psychiatrist.
* Sources
1. AAP 2004 National Conference & Exhibition: Session F170. Presented Oct. 9, 2004
2. Annals of the New York Academy of Science (Bartoshuk L. Ann NY Acad Sci. 1998;30:793-796)
3. Journal of the American Dietetic Association (Duffy VB, Batoshuk L. J ) Am Dietetic Assoc. 2000;100:547-555)
September 2nd, 2005
* An overview
Although it worries parents, picky eating is usually a stage that children outgrow, a normal part of childhood development seen in toddlers who are learning to be independent and enjoying the power of the word “No!” Needless to say, extended food refusal can drive parents to frustration and feelings of inadequacy, leaving them frantically searching for ways to get their kids to eat.
In less frequent cases, children are picky eaters from birth, consuming only small amounts of a few favorite foods. If parents do get food into them by tempting, punishing, manipulating or bribing them, results may range from tears to tantrums to physical distress; e.g., vomiting. Then well-meaning moms and dads, legitimately concerned about their children’s health, are left feeling even more frustrated, ineffective, anxious and guilty.
In the first situation, parents are faced with a power struggle. In the second, researchers are finding that physiology may play a part. It seems that about 25 percent of us are “supertasters,” people who have many more tastebuds than the general population. Supertasters find certain fruits (grapefruit in particular) and vegetables (especially broccoli, cabbage, brussels sprouts, and cauliflower) intolerably bitter, avoiding them at all costs. Cooking does not diminish the bitterness. Children are more likely than adults to be supertasters, suggesting that the sensitivity to bitterness diminishes over time.
Supertasters make up probably a quarter of picky eaters, which leaves 75% engaged in developmental power struggles on their journey to adulthood and independence. What to do? Read on.
* What can parents do about picky eating?
The first step should be a comprehensive medical exam done by the child’s pediatrician. There are a few, fortunately not common, diseases and abnormalities that can present as picky eating. For your own peace of mind, let the doctor rule them out. If by chance something is found, then follow medical advice about treatment.
Chances are, the doctor will find nothing wrong with your child. Your next job is to realize that picky eating is very common. You are not alone; other parents are going through the same thing. Anywhere from half to two-thirds of children are picky eaters at one time or another. Parents of toddlers report that almost all of them eat selectively or ritualistically from time to time; for example, demanding peanut butter-and-jelly sandwiches on white bread with the crusts cut off for lunch for months on end. Any variation is met with upset and distress.
Child psychologists recommend defining areas of responsibility. Parents are responsible for offering children a variety of healthy, tasty, nutritious foods and beverages. Mom and dad are responsible for creating enjoyable, peaceful, companionable and regularly scheduled mealtimes. Children, even very young ones, are responsible for eating — deciding whether or not to eat and how much to eat. The parents’ job is to present mealtime as an opportunity to enjoy food, pleasant conversation, and one another’s company. The children’s job is to learn how to participate in mealtime and contribute to the total experience. Arguing over food accomplishes nothing and can destroy opportunities to build relationships and personal responsibility for self-nurturing behavior.
Serve the food. If it your child eats it, great. Don’t comment or praise the behavior. Your words may trigger rebellion later if the child feels you have won the battle. If your s/he does not eat what is served, remove the food without comment. If the s/he says s/he is hungry between meals and asks for a snack, gently but firmly refuse to allow him/her to eat empty calories, explaining that snacks cannot take the place of healthy food, more of which will be available at the next mealtime. And then don’t give in. If you do, you have not just lost the battle, you have lost the whole war.
In addition, restrict access to fruit juice and soft drinks to four ounces per day or less because picky eaters are notorious for filling up on sweet liquids that help them avoid solid foods. Juice and pop by themselves cannot provide sufficient nutrition for health and growth.
More Advice in Part II
September 2nd, 2005
Previous Posts