Are Reality Cooking Shows Really Fantasy Cooking Shows?

A group of us were chatting about a local restaurant whose chef was eliminated from the Food Network show, “Chopped.” The restaurant was popular; the show was not.

“The problem,” said someone, “is that the contestants are supposed to combine weird ingredients like Marshmallow Fluff and mushrooms into something edible and do it in 30 minutes or less.  How can of you make an entrée with side dishes in thirty minutes?  And using ingredients that are familiar, not Halloween candy and duck breast?”  We laughed but the question resonated and the group’s response was, “No way.”

As one person commented, it would be possible if we employed a full time assistant who would do all the basic prep work like chopping onions, peeling garlic, dicing carrots, and washing greens. And also making sure that water for pasta was always boiling, sauté pans were at the correct temperature and, we all chimed in, “Cleans up as the cooking goes along.”

“Watching the cooking shows, and then expecting to make the same dishes in 30 minutes or less, is like watching an international tennis match and then expecting to serve the same way,” said one of the women. “Even assuming I have all the ingredients on the counter before I start to cook—and that is a big assumption—it takes me twice as long, if not longer, to prepare the same meal.  And the shows are so deceptive. The cook will say something like, “…wilt the onions or beat the egg whites… and 3 seconds later it is done. Tell that to my onions! “

The women were of a certain age; that is, they had raised children, prepared thousands of meals, entertained, and had done this while working most, if not all, of these years. They may or may not have been good cooks, but they were experienced. And the consensus among us  was that cooking shows, whether competitive ones or in demonstrations by individual chefs, were deceptive. It looked too easy, too fast. Indeed, one woman said that she wondered if a younger generation, inexperienced in meal preparation, would end up serving undercooked food if they tried to imitate what they saw on television.

Wouldn’t it be useful to have one cooking program that was closer to reality? Onions would be burnt because the cook forgot to turn down the heat while answering the phone call from a telemarketer. The chicken would still be half frozen and dripping reddish chicken juice, the cat would leap onto the counter and poke around at the fish, the brownies would be overcooked around the edges and too moist in the center, and the food processor, used to puree the squash soup, would thrust its contents all over the floor like an erupting volcano.  But of course who needs to watch this on television when one can see it in one’s own kitchen?

Unrealistic menus or meal preparations are nothing new. During the 19th century and early 20th centuries, women studied and practiced a discipline called Home Economics, whose goals were to teach housewives basic nutritional requirements for their families and healthy cooking techniques on how to prepare food for the household. The goals were worthy, but some of the so-called nutritional meals were anything but. Cream sauces were poured over just about everything.  Salads consisting of Jell-O cubes, canned pineapple chunks and maraschino cherries were considered elegant enough for a luncheon. And, often disdain was shown toward ethnic dishes prepared by new immigrants, despite the fact that they were nourishing and familiar.  Women’s magazines often promoted recipes, not for their nutritional content, but because they used ingredients of their advertisers. The famous string bean dish in which the vegetable is drenched in canned cream of mushroom soup and sprinkled with canned fried onions rings certainly promoted the sales of these products.

But of course, in those far-off times in the last century, people were still cooking. Today one cannot assume that younger generations will or even want to cook at all.  Thus, if a non-cooking younger generation is to be weaned from supermarket or fast food take-out, prepackaged meals, or a diet of smoothies and shakes, they have to be shown, realistically, how to prepare a meal with more than two ingredients (salt and pepper).  Fortunately, the Internet is replacing the food channels in meeting this need. A little bit of searching will produce videos on how to prepare anything from baked potatoes to a soufflé.  And since they can be viewed as often as necessary, a refresher view is possible if it has been several months since the dish, say meatloaf or roast chicken, has been made.

Ingredients in a box that cook into a meal for two or more, delivered to your door, are becoming popular. Certainly the advertisements looks compelling, especially to cooks like this one who always seem to be lacking one or more ingredients essential to the recipe.  These could be considered starter meals. As they are more expensive than meals assembled from one’s own kitchen, they are unlikely to be a permanent substitute for reading a recipe, finding the ingredients, and cooking. Or maybe not.

Programs on the food channels are entertaining, which is their intent. If a recipe looks worth trying, it is always available on the website of the television personality who prepared it. But just don’t try making it in 30 minutes or less.

How To Stay Full In 2017 When You Are On A Diet

January can be depressing. The predictable cold, snow, ice, wind, and bills are accompanied by, for many, the need to go on a diet. It is hard to ignore the pounds you’ve accumulated since Thanksgiving, and even if you do try to disregard them, advertisements for weight-loss programs won’t allow you to.

Diets tend to be dismal, adding to January gloom, and they are often boring. If someone suggests that we have been all wrong in eating X and avoiding Y, then there is at least the possibility of talking about a novel approach to dieting. But, alas, a quick survey of the diet books appearing now indicates that most of them are still promoting low-or carbohydrate-free diets (ho-hum).

Promoting a low-carbohydrate weight-loss regimen while one is enduring the long hours of winter darkness seems somewhat counterproductive. Such diets exacerbate the toll the lack of sunlight takes on serotonin levels and the grumpy moods, excessive sleepiness, uncontrollable food cravings, and lack of motivation to exercise that may consequently follow. And most relevant for the dieter is the absence of a sense of satiety, or fullness, also conveyed by serotonin.

Eating carbohydrate is the only way the brain makes more serotonin, and a diet that denies or limits starchy carbs like potatoes, pasta, bread, cereals, rice, beans, lentils and corn meal will leave the brain serotonin deprived.  It is a better plan to wait until May or June to stop eating carbohydrates in order to lose weight. The days at this time of year are so long that serotonin levels are not affected by carbohydrate depletion.

But, New Year resolutions being what they are (here today, gone tomorrow), many people feel that they’d better grab onto their will power and start dieting immediately.

So if you can’t eat carbohydrates because the diet books tell you not to, then you might consider an extract from a magical fruit called Garcinia Cambogia. (The name sounds a new dance step.) If you missed hearing about this fruit whose extract not only melts away extra pounds but, based on pictures on the Internet, leaves dieters looking as if they have had head-to- foot plastic surgery, then here is the information.

The fruit is tropical, apparently shaped like a pumpkin but grows on a tree, not on the ground, and is also known as the Malabar tamarind. Its popularity as a promoter of weight loss has shifted on and off for the last 20 or more years and had a resurgence this past year. Its virtues were extolled by the television medical personality Dr. Oz a few months ago, and like dandelions after the rain, companies sprang up to sell a particular ingredient in the fruit. Carcinia Cambogia contains hydroxycitric acid, aka HCA. Rodent studies done many years ago suggested that HCA might cause weight loss by blocking chemical reactions in the body that transform glucose into fat.

Fat or triglycerides are composed of two parts: glycerol, which makes up the backbone of the molecule and three fatty acids. So if your body produces fewer fatty acids, then fewer fat molecules are produced. This is what HCA seems to accomplish. It decreases the conversion of glucose  (all carbohydrates are digested to glucose) to acetyl-CoA. Acetyl-CoA is the building block of fatty acids.Rat studies found that when a high carbohydrate diet was eaten, HCA prevented some of the glucose from being changed into fatty acids. Moreover, as a value added sort of feature, people claim that HCA gives them a feeling of fullness or satiety, so they eat less. Serotonin, the neurotransmitter responsible for satiety, is thought to be increased by HCA, but there is as of yet no evidence for this.

A couple of pesky problems are associated with using Garcinia to lose weight: cost and sketchy purity. It is not cheap. One company is selling the extract HCA at a cost of $50.00 for 60 caplets and since it is recommended that a dose be taken before each meal, the cost can add up. The quality of the preparation is inconsistent among brands. ConsumerLab.com analyzed the content of hydroxycitric acid in several supplements and found the actual amount far less than claimed on the package label. Moreover, the HCA seems effective only when a very high carbohydrate diet is eaten.

There is a much cheaper way to prevent the transformation of carbohydrates into fat, while increasing satiety. It’s simple….eat only moderate amounts of carbs so what is eaten is used for energy, not to build up the fat cells. And consume some of those carbs, such as a half a cup of oatmeal or a toasted English muffin, about a half an hour before meals. Serotonin will be made naturally, the appetite will be decreased naturally, and you will lose weight naturally. Stay on this plan and the weight will even stay off long after the snow has melted, and the rest of the New Year’s resolutions have been forgotten.

Should Santa Claus (and his wife) Stop Eating So Many Cookies?

Poor Santa, he certainly has not kept up with modern times. No internet, no computer, no 3-D printer assisted toy maker, and certainly no electric sleigh (or self driving one for that matter). And somehow Santa and his wife have not heard health professionals lament our excessive intake of sugar.

Consider this:

He used to be thin. Orginally, a long time ago, he started out life as a monk (and monks did not eat cookies) and eventually became a Bishop in a town in what is now Turkey. This was around 270, a time way before people thought much about the North Pole and its toy making factory. In his spare time, he gave away money he had inherited by throwing coins and gifts through the windows of homes in which children lived. But no one reciprocated by feeding him sweets.

Eventually, as St. Nicholas (this was long after his death) he became the patron saint of children. Still thin.

Then something happened several centuries later. St. Nicholas was transformed into a chubby (well more than chubby) jovial, cookie eating distributor of gifts because of a poem, meter and rhyme.

In l822, Clemet Clarke Moore, an Episcopal minister wrote the poem, The Night before Christmas, * and Santa lost his buff figure forever.  Others helped enlarge his figure; a cartoonist Thomas Nast drew Santa with a large belly in l890, and Washington Irving described him as a fat Dutch elf. And finally, Coca-Cola gave us the image we associate with him today by picturing St. Nick in a red suit with a white beard, of course.

Given the ubiquity of sugary snacks available to this now robust figure, it is really amazing that he does not grower fatter with every passing century or require a supply of insulin in his sleigh because surely he must have developed diabetes by now! Will he still eat cookies containing gluten, or might this affect his intestinal tract and mood?  Does he know about Grain Brain? We don’t want the presence of gluten to change his “HO HO HO!” into, “Oh, oh, oh….”

Why is he eating carbohydrates at all? That surely must be the reason he is still fat. If he followed the Paleo diet he might be thinner, and also be able to use wooly mammoths to drive his sleigh, rather than reindeer.

And really, what kind of example is he to our children? All year we try to get them to eat healthily, limit their snacks to baby carrots and plain yogurt, and make sure they eat nothing, or almost nothing, with sugar. We try to make sure they get enough exercise, and that they not depend on us to drive them everywhere. And then on Dec 24 along comes this guy who won’t even walk from house to house, no matter how close they are, but insists on riding to each one on a sleigh. He goes down a chimney (how much exercise is there in that? It is all downhill!) and his sleigh is waiting for him at the door. And there are those cookies. Does he even bring them home to his wife? Probably, because she is not exactly svelte herself.

Perhaps his focus on sweet carbohydrates means that like so many who live in northern part of the world, he is suffering from Winter Depression or Seasonal Affective Disorder (“SAD”). SAD suffers have an urgent need to consume sweets, especially in the late afternoon and evening. Maybe if he lived at the South Pole he would be not be so chunky and addicted to chunky chocolate chip cookies; seeing there it is summer in December, and the sun barely sets.

Of course none of us knows whether he and his spouse go on diets on January 2 like most of the world.  They may go the Weight Watchers equivalent at the North Pole, or endure a weeks-long cleanse or eat only meat (reindeer?).  But like most of the world, by next fall they will probably have gained back all the weight they lost, and Santa will be pudgy again. Should someone put out a diet book next to the cookies? Or at least some baby carrots?

But then again, if he loses masses of weight, his clothes will be too loose and worse yet, he will not be the Santa of Moore’s poem whose “little round belly laughed like a bowl full of jelly.”  So keep those cookies by the chimney. With care.

Is Mindless Eating Like a Dog Worrying a Bone?

One of our dinner guests, a thin older man who prided himself on his eating and exercise discipline, sat down next to a bowl of nuts and almost inhaled them. We were having cocktails before dinner, and as hostess I was paying more attention to whether there was a coaster under every glass and napkins next to the finger foods, more than to what our guest was eating. But his rapid almond-to-mouth movements caught my attention.

“Did you see how much Jake (not his real name) was eating?” my husband asked after everyone departed. “He is usually so deliberate and slow in his eating, but this evening he cleaned his plate almost before everyone had picked up his or her fork. “

We mused over his uncharacteristic behavior, and then one of us remembered a story he told later on in the evening about a possibly nasty legal situation he was facing with a neighbor.

“I don’t think he even knew what and how much he was eating,” I commented. “I suspect that if he had been asked what he had eaten for dinner, he would have no idea.“

Not paying attention to what, especially how much, we are eating is one of the unsolved causes of weight gain. Who has not munched on a sandwich or crunched baby carrots while staring at a cell phone? Peering at the screen while eating is so common that eventually restaurants will probably provide cell phone stands so the phone can be propped up while eating, thus relieving the necessity of eating with only one hand. However, the perils of attending to the cell phone screen rather than to your food on the plate is that everything on the plate is consumed (possibly even the toothpick holding the sandwich together) without the eater being aware of doing so. Have you ever eaten a large bag of popcorn in a movie theatre and found that your munching was faster or slower depending on what was on the screen in front of you? Your fingers were able to direct the popcorn to your mouth without much awareness of your part.

Psychologists and nutritionists tell us TO PAY ATTENTION to what we are eating. We are to look first at the food before biting into it and notice its texture, smell, and color, perhaps the same way we might look at a glass of wine. Then we are to chew slowly, savoring the release of flavors and how they change in the mouth. Finally we are allowed to swallow. I was at a workshop watching the facilitator demonstrate this with a strawberry. We all had several on our plates so we could practice along with her. One of the participants was so mesmerized by the slow motion consumption of the strawberry by the leader that she mindlessly munched on all the strawberries on her plate.

Of course, paying attention to what we are eating, and especially noticing when we are full so we don’t continue eating beyond fullness, is helpful in controlling our universal tendency to overeat.  But perhaps more important is noticing why we put our mouths on automatic pilot and eat and eat the way a dog gnaws and gnaws at a bone. The dog is probably not thinking much of anything except where the next bone might be coming from, but the automatic eater is, for sure, thinking of something other than the food.

Mindless eating should really be called “mind elsewhere” eating. Like the dog worrying a bone, or our dinner guest, the “mind elsewhere” eater is gnawing away at an unresolved, troublesome situation.  It is unlikely that the eating and the somewhat obsessive thinking will produce a solution at that moment, but is more likely to result in the consumption of excessive calories. (And, to my mild annoyance, probably no recollection of what the food tasted like.)

A dog owner will take away the bone when it is apparent that the dog should move on to something else.  As owners of our “elsewhere minds” we must take away our own bones. We must put away or move away from the food, set our forks down, determine how much we have already eaten, and halt the repetitive movement of either a utensil or a hand carrying food to the mouth.

Dogs usually sigh and then go to sleep when the bone is gone. We should learn from them. A few minutes of calmness, of allowing ourselves not to be consumed by the problem at hand, will bring our mind and our eating into harmony.  It will also bring the benefit of enjoying the food we are eating.

Are Kids Born, or Made Into, Emotional Overeaters?

Anyone who has eaten when frustrated, angry, bored, worried, exhausted, lonely, or depressed—but not hungry—has engaged in emotional eating
(So that makes most of us.)  And for most, the food eaten is less likely to be steamed broccoli, poached chicken breast, or fat-free yogurt and far more likely to be a member of the so-called carbohydrate junk food family.

We know this from studies carried out at the MIT clinical research center about 25 years ago. Emotional overeaters were offered a choice between protein snacks like miniature meatballs or luncheon meat and carbohydrate snacks like cookies and crackers. The choice was always the carbohydrate foods. The predictable choice of carbohydrates led to research confirming that the carbohydrates were chosen not from taste (the meatballs were delicious but ignored) but because eating crackers or cookies led to an increase in the mood-soothing activity of serotonin. Our conclusion, reinforced by many subsequent psychological studies, was that people used carbohydrates as a form of self-medication.

But how did we learn to do this? And indeed, did we learn to do this, or is medicating with food something we are born with?

Infants don’t eat to make their bad moods go away. They eat to make their hunger go away.   And infants don’t eat when they are not hungry.  Theoretically infants, especially those who are breastfed, do not overeat since it is almost impossible to get infants to swallow more milk when they are done feeding. The mouth closes, the head is turned away, and often sleep takes over.

So how does an infant who self-regulates her food intake turn into an emotional overeater? Some pediatric obesity researchers such as Savage, Birch, Marini, et. al.1 suggest that it is the mother’s fault. Mothers who interpret every sign of their infant’s distress as hunger will feed their infants too often. The baby may not eat but eventually, so the researchers surmise, the baby associates feeling bored, lonely, wet, annoyed or whatever emotions babies feel with being offered food.

This association seems to be strengthened when parents offer treats to the now older child to soothe her. Blisssett, Haycraft and Farrow measured cookie and chocolate consumption among preschool children when they were stressed in a research setting. Children whose mothers often gave them snacks to comfort them ate more sweet snacks than children whose mothers did not offer them snacks when they were upset.

Is this how it begins? The child grows up and, when experiencing the predictable stresses of childhood, adolescence and adulthood, turns to food as a means of coping?

But there is much unanswered about this assumption, i.e. that children will turn into emotional overeating adults because they were given treats as children to help them overcome distress, boredom, or anger.

Do children growing up in cultures where food is scarce become emotional eaters? They may worry as adults about not having enough food and hoard food or overeat because they learned as children that food is not always available. But is this emotional overeating?

Do all children in a family become emotional overeaters in response to being given comfort food while growing up? Often some children in a family overeat sweet or starchy junk food and others reject these items. What makes Sally, but not Sam, reach for cookies when experiencing a negative mood state? Why doesn’t Sam also use food to feel better?

Do children, and indeed adults feel comforted if given any food when upset or only specific foods? The answer is obvious, at least in our culture.  Foods offered and eaten in times of stress tend to be tasty, sweet or starchy and often high in fat (cookies, chocolate, ice cream).  If, theoretically, a toddler was always offered a piece of broccoli or spoonful of cottage cheese after bumping his head or feeling confined in a stroller, would he grow up and reach for the same foods when upset? Probably not, but this is testable. If a child grows up in a community where it is common to eat hot chili peppers or munch on dried seaweed or snack on avocado, then would these be comfort foods?

Are children nurtured from early infancy in a daycare center where meal and snack times are regulated and not dependent on a child’s mood less likely to become emotional overeaters?

Might children who are denied so-called tasty junk food because of their adverse effect on weight and health, feel compelled to eat such foods when they are old enough to get the food themselves? And might they overeat such foods to compensate for the years they were denied such treats?

Clearly much research has to be done before we understand whether an emotional overeater is born or made that way.  Answers may come from studies in which self-defined emotional overeaters are given covertly a food that they tend to eat when stressed, and a food that is never eaten  (crackers versus cottage cheese). Measurements of their emotional state before and following eating are measured. If the emotional overeater shows an improvement in mood to one or the other test food, then the change must have come about because of some change in the brain regulation of mood, and not because of taste or the anticipation that the food will help the mood.

And perhaps, eventually, we can find what in the food gives the child or adult an emotional hug, so we can strip away the calories and leave just the good feeling behind.

Strolling: Good for the Mind as Well as the Body

Walking has become the default mode of exercise. If going outside to walk is not convenient, then a walking treadmill is available for year-round use. You will get nowhere, but you will use up calories. We are exhorted to walk to lose weight, to avoid gaining weight, to refresh our minds, to unstiffen our muscles.  As someone whose steps per day are counted by an app on my cell phone, I am pleased when my daily walking miles increase. “Look at all the calories I am using up!“ I think when a congratulatory computer-generated message appears on the phone.

But before walking was reserved for burning calories, it used to be the predominant way of reaching a destination. Those who still depend on walking, rather than a car or public transportation, often find it a more efficient and cost-effective way of getting somewhere.  When the roads are clogged with traffic, it is a delight to realize that walking to a destination is faster than driving.  And in some situations like a mall, museum or zoo, walking is the only option other than a wheelchair. Tour buses get drive a sightseeing group to the ancient castle or botanical garden, but seeing it requires legs not wheels.

However, there is an aspect to walking that seems to have been forgotten or disregarded in an attempt to make more people move more. Walking is good for the mind, for thinking, daydreaming, and becoming aware of the details of our environment.  Indeed, those who meditate sometimes do a walking meditation in which the body, breathing, and mind become one. Usually too impatient to contemplate anything but a robust pace while walking, recently I have been forced to slow down because of my dog. He is almost blind due to a genetic problem associated with his breed. Fortunately, his hound genes allow him to sniff his way through the world as if there are eyes at the end of his nose; but his pace is about 90% slower than when he could see.  As I am at the other end of the leash, I too have slowed down my pace. 

Our walks have now become a stroll, a leisurely perambulation around the neighborhood. But as the number of miles we used to cover diminishes to a few blocks, moving slowly has the positive effect of increasing my awareness of the surroundings: There are fewer ducks in the pond today; the yellow leaves of the birch tree highlighted by the sun look painted; that trash can needs to be emptied; the moon is almost full tonight; the leaves on the sidewalk crunch delightfully when I scuff through them. Casual conversations with other walkers occur frequently, as I stop to allow the dog to smell his way to the next tree. But the best aspect of these leisurely strolls is giving me the time and privacy to think, to indulge in memories, even to daydream.     

A constant complaint of our over-committed lives is the absence of time to restore and renew ourselves.  We must always get to the next thing on our list. One of my friends jokingly told me that as she is lowered into her grave, she will toss out her ‘to -do’ list. Strolling gives us permission to forget the list, to stop temporarily multi-tasking and strategizing about how much we can accomplish over the next 24 hours. Ambling gives us the respite from the constant demands upon us. It gives us time to indulge in our private selves without having to worry about how we present ourselves to the world.  Strolling, if we think about it, should even make us aware and grateful that we can walk and see and hear.

Exercise is important; indeed, it is essential to good mental and physical health. But as my dog has taught me, sometimes a gentle walk can truly enhance our well-being.    

Lactose Intolerance: Can It Cause Weight Gain and Weak Bones?

I hadn’t seen my neighbor for several weeks, but we’d just met again while walking our dogs.  When I commented on how well she looked, she patted her mid-section and said, ”I finally got rid of my big stomach.” (that she had a large stomach was not apparent in our previous encounters.)  When I murmured something to that effect, she went into a long discourse on how she managed to vanquish her perceived girth by radically changing her diet.  She told me, “I cut out all dairy and carbohydrates, and I eat only protein and vegetables. But it’s strange. I haven’t lost any weight. I just lost the bloating.”

My nutritional antennae went up when she mentioned her dietary changes.  Further questioning revealed that she really hadn’t stopped eating carbohydrates, and had enjoyed an excellent pasta dish the previous night at a local restaurant.  But no dairy products had been eaten for weeks. “And as soon as I stopped putting milk on my cereal, and cut out yogurt and cottage cheese, my bloating stopped,” she proclaimed, patting her flatter stomach. “So obviously the dairy products were making me fat.”

As our dogs settled down on the grass, we continued talking. “ So maybe you have lactose intolerance,” I suggested. “That would account for the bloating after you eat dairy. “

She was unaware that as people age, the enzyme lactase that breaks down lactose, the sugar naturally found in milk, disappears or becomes much less active. Consuming milk and sometimes other dairy products such as ice cream, yogurt, cottage cheese, cheese and even butter (it contains milk solids) causes gas, bloating and diarrhea. This is due to bacteria in the intestine interacting with the undigested milk sugar. The intestinal discomfort is accompanied by cosmetic discomfort; skirts or pants strain to fit over a bloated stomach, and the abdomen may not retract to a flatter shape until all the lactose has been expelled.

“You can get lactose-free dairy products,” I told her. “Also, often the bacteria in yogurt have already broken down some of the sugar, so regular yogurt may not cause bloating. And you can take pills that contain the enzyme lactase. You chew them right before eating any dairy products. “

“Well, maybe I do have lactose intolerance… but it doesn’t matter,” she responded. “Why go back to eating dairy? I drink almond milk and eat broccoli. “ She bent down to pick up her dog who was eating grass. “I get all the calcium I need. “

I felt as if I was making a nutritional nuisance out of myself, but asked anyway, “ Didn’t your doctor tell you a few months ago that you may be developing osteoporosis? You were worried that calcium in supplements was not being absorbed as well as calcium in food. Are you sure you are getting enough calcium now?”  Her dog started barking, and she looked as if she was going to bark at me so, letting our dogs pull us in opposite directions, we parted company. But as I walked home, I wondered whether she could get enough calcium from almond milk and broccoli. She needed to get about 1200 mg of calcium daily.

She was right about the almond milk. Eight ounces of calcium-fortified milk contains as much of this mineral as cow’s milk: 300 mg.  But would she drink 4 glasses a day?  Yogurt has 400 mg of calcium, but because eating it supposedly made her fat, it was not on her allowable food list.  What else could or would she eat? Canned salmon or sardines with bones? Probably not, or only rarely. Vegetables? She said she ate broccoli.  Could vegetables provide the calcium she needed?

Broccoli is not a good option, unless she eats a bucket full.  A cup contains at most about 65 mg of calcium. Steamed kale, bok choy, turnip greens, and spinach are good sources (a relative term as they contain only about 100 g per cup of calcium) but there is a problem. These dark leafy vegetables have a pesky substance called oxalic acid that attaches to the calcium, and prevents the mineral from being absorbed from the intestine into the circulation. In fact, oxalic acid can even prevent the calcium in milk or yogurt from getting into the blood stream if these dairy products are eaten along with dark leafy vegetables.

What about orange juice? Calcium-fortified OJ is as good a source of calcium as milk, and has about the same number of calories as whole milk. But will my friend, worried about the size of her tummy, fret about the calories?

Maybe she could swallow 2 tablespoons of blackstrap molasses every day (400 mg). And she could eat chickpeas, black-eyed peas, soybeans, tofu processed with calcium sulfate, figs, and instant oatmeal fortified with calcium.

Bones are an excellent calcium source, but I suspect only her dog chewed on those. (These cook down in the canning process of sardines and salmon to boost calcium.)

So it seems that dairy products are the best natural sources of this essential mineral. But will my friend be willing to try lactose-free dairy products and/or the lactase containing pills so she can consume them? Maybe so, if her stomach remains flat.  Perhaps it will require another   walk with our dogs to convince her.

If We Celebrated Thanksgiving in July, Would We Gain Less Weight?

Weight gain season has started: first Halloween, then Thanksgiving, and finally the Christmas/New Year holidays. The trick-or-treat candy has been barely put away (in our stomachs) when the recipes for Thanksgiving dinner are pulled from the drawers, or torn out of the November magazines. Even those among us who rarely cook begin to fantasize about a perfectly cooked turkey, moist dressing, gooey sweet potato casserole (will last year’s marshmallows still be edible?) and pies…How many pies should we bake? Surely not just one. What will our guests think? And as the days grow colder, wetter, windier, and darker, we fantasize about spending an entire day focused on eating. No need to exercise. The gyms are closed on Thanksgiving anyway (at least most of them), and who wants to go outside for a walk when it is so cold and/or so dark?

So begins the season of real weight gain.

What makes Thanksgiving so fraught with weight-gaining potential is its position on the calendar. Presumably when President Lincoln picked the fourth Thursday in November as a day of national Thanksgiving, he could not have known that the holiday would be altered into a day of national overeating due, to some extent, it being plopped in one of the darkest months of the year. It wasn’t until more than a hundred years later that scientists linked the short days of late fall with a winter depression causing significant overeating. Nor was President Lincoln concerned, skinny as he was, that the feasting on Thanksgiving was a prelude to weeks of overeating associated with December holidays. Indeed, for a country in the middle of a civil war, obesity was not something anyone worried about, nor was anyone in the position to spend much time in festive parties.

But just consider the impact on our food intake and weight if Thanksgiving were moved to the warmer, sunnier months like June, July or August. The benefits are obvious:

1. Menus would not be filled with butter and cream-infused carbohydrate dishes like mashed potatoes and creamed onions;
2. Stuffing soaked in the melted fat of the turkey would be incompatible with the warm temperatures of a late June afternoon;
3. Vegetables might come from the farmer’s market and reflect what was harvested that day, rather than limited to what was harvested weeks earlier, or shipped from a country a continent away;
4. Desserts could include really fresh fruit whose tastes do not have to be enhanced by large amounts of sugar, or baked in piecrust made with copious amounts of butter or lard;
5. Long hours of daylight would allow outdoor activities before and after the meal, such as a lengthy walk after dinner instead of lying on a couch; and
6. Wearing bulky clothes to disguise large figures would not be possible, thus adding a bit of restraint to indulging in more than two servings.

Were Thanksgiving moved to another date not bookended by holidays characterized by overeating, there would be time to diet or exercise off the pounds that might be added by the meal. But coming as it does at the time of the year when we think wistfully of the joys of overeating and then hibernating until spring, it seems easier to ‘go with the flow’ and continue to overeat until January ads for diet programs make us get on a scale.

When the Pilgrims celebrated the first Thanksgiving in October (by the way), they did feast for three days on foods provided mainly by their Native Americans neighbors. They did not have to worry about overindulging a couple of months later at Christmas, as they did not celebrate this holiday. Moreover, they were worried that their food supply would not last through the winter, and so were very careful about how much they were eating. Death from hunger, not obesity, was their constant worry.

It is unlikely that Thanksgiving will be moved to another time of the year, regardless of the benefits that would confer on those of us struggling to maintain our weight. But if we, like Governor Bradford and President Lincoln, focus on the reasons for the holiday rather than the recipes, we might emerge with our weight intact.

 

Are You Losing More Than Weight on a High Protein Diet?

Adherents of high-protein/low-or no-carbohydrate diets have, to some extent, hijacked the discussion of whether we should still be eating carbohydrates. Indeed, for some militant followers, carbs are seen as leading only to brain and body decay, and are to be avoided at all costs. Well, maybe it is time to reconsider this attitude.

Avoiding carbohydrates seemed like the logical response to poor insulin activity. Obesity often causes a decreased responsiveness to insulin and may result in Type 2 diabetes. But before the diabetes is confirmed, there are signs that the body requires more than normal amounts of insulin to push glucose in the cells. This is called insulin resistance or decreased insulin activity. “Well,” say the high-protein folk, “stop eating carbohydrates! No carbs, no glucose? No problem getting the glucose into your cells.”

What these high-protein adherents fail to mention is that the body can make its own glucose and only by following an exceedingly stringent no-carbohydrate diet does the body switch from its natural use of glucose to using fat for energy.  There are many side effects that come with a fat- burning (ketotic) diet:  dreadful breath, foggy brains and bad moods. But so what if one’s breath will kill mosquitoes? It is worth it so one does not have to worry about insulin and carbohydrates?  Eliminating fruits, vegetables, fiber, and dairy products, in short the foods that our bodies require for their nutrient contents, on such diet shouldn’t be a problem according to the non-carbohydrate folk.  Just take lots and lots of vitamin/mineral/fiber supplements.

There was only one problem with this approach. It apparently did not work.

A few weeks ago, researchers from Washington University in St. Louis published a study that is challenging the relationship between high protein and better insulin responsiveness. Bettina Mittendorfer and her colleagues divided 34 obese post-menopausal women into three groups: a non-dieting group, a dieting group that ate only the recommended daily amount of protein, and a third dieting group who followed a high-protein diet.

If the ‘high protein diet to improve insulin sensitivity’ proponents were correct, the women on the high protein diet should have shown the most benefit. They didn’t. In fact, there was no improvement among this group. Only the group whose diet contained carbohydrate showed improvement in insulin sensitivity; it increased by about 25-30%. And a side benefit assumed to be conferred by eating lots of protein while on a diet, i.e., no muscle loss? This did not happen either.

This study generated headlines, albeit brief about these unexpected results. However, Sargrad, Mozzoli and Boden reported similar results in the April 2005 journal American Dietetic Association. They found no improvement in fasting glucose levels or insulin sensitivity among dieters on a high-protein diet. Those on a high-carbohydrate diet did improve.

The absence of improvement of insulin sensitivity among the obese women on a high-protein diet is worrisome because they are already at risk for developing Type 2 diabetes. To bring glucose levels in the blood to normal levels, their beta cells in the pancreas have to produce abnormally high levels of insulin. Eventually diabetes can result.

What is also worrisome is that blunted insulin response affects the ability of a critical amino acid, tryptophan, to get into the brain. Tryptophan is the essential component of serotonin; too little or too inactive serotonin may result in depression, anxiety, inability to focus, or even fatigue. Insulin removes other amino acids from the blood that interfere with the ability of tryptophan to get into the brain. High-protein diets fill the blood with these interfering amino acids so that with such a diet, tryptophan levels in the brain may be lower than normal. Consequently, serotonin levels are lower. This may be one reason why there is a strong relationship between diabetes and depression.

The results of the Washington University study seem unfair. High-protein diets are no fun. The dieter can’t eat starchy carbs like popcorn, rice, or bread and must limit fruits and starchy vegetables like winter squash or potatoes. But this deprivation seems worthwhile if the result was an improvement in insulin sensitivity. But of course this did not happen.

The better option it seems is the natural one: Eat the amount of protein that corresponds to what the body needs but no more. Eat a variety of healthy fruits, vegetables, grains, and low-fat dairy products. And finally do physical activity, which in itself helps insulin shunt glucose into the cells so the body can use it for energy.

Not terribly exciting, nor the focus of television health talk shows or dinner table conversation….But it works.

If Teens Eat According to Their Own Internal Clock, Maybe They Will Eat Better

Do any teens eat breakfast? Do they eat it at breakfast time? Possibly there are a few who manage to wake up on school days early enough to get breakfast, but given the choice of sleeping longer or facing a bowl of cereal and milk and toast, it would be the rare adolescent who opts for feeding over sleeping. Conversely, late in the evening, when their homework and/or social networking is complete and everyone else in the house is asleep, the teen may prowl the kitchen for something to eat, even the cereal or toast that was ignored that morning.

That the food intake of the contemporary American teen may be lacking in many nutrients considered essential for life is well known. And that their diet may leave them too thin or too fat, this is also well known. Studies have been done to see how parents cope with the resistance of their adolescent offspring to consuming a nutritionally balanced diet, one which when they were a few years younger, they willingly ate. They, the parents, are not very successful.

Nagging, bribery, coercion, feigning lack of concern or interest, and controlling the foods coming into the household have some effect; but the pushback from the teens can be strong. And once the adolescent can buy food from vending machines, convenience stores, or fast-food franchises? Parental control over food intake is weakened considerably. Parents may not even know what their teens are eating.  A 16-year-old relative told me that she ate only white bread, peanut butter, and honey for a month before her parents noticed. A friend’s daughter used to eat dinner in her room during school nights so she wasn’t wasting time eating dinner with her family, but could start on her homework. She prepared her own dinner, usually microwaved chicken nuggets, and never ate what her mother prepared.

Teens are like the proverbial horse: they can be led to water but can’t be forced to drink or…in the case of the teens, eat. However, when they are hungry, they will eat what is available.   Perhaps one solution to improving their nutrient intake is to only make available at home foods with some nutritional value. This means eliminating junk foods, e.g. chips, cookies, sugary drinks, candy, batter-coated fried foods, cheese dips, and fatty cold cuts.  At night when the teen is looking for something to eat, he or she will just have to settle for what is in the kitchen. If no sugary beverages are in the refrigerator, then the thirsty teen will have to settle for something that is healthful, e.g. milk, juice or water.

Their hunger will have to be satisfied with sandwiches made from lean proteins such as turkey breast, cold chicken, or tuna. It is possible that the desire to crunch on something will lead the teen to baby carrots rather than nacho chips. Even breakfast foods, so soundly rejected at breakfast, will seem tempting before bedtime. Cereal & milk, yogurt, fruit, or whole grain toast or waffles topped with peanut butter will seem satisfying to the hungry teen at 10 or 11pm, and they can claim that they did indeed eat breakfast that day.

Another solution, which does not yet exist, is to invent a food or beverage containing the nutrients teens should be consuming. Surveys among adolescent populations indicate that vitamin and mineral intake is below required levels due, no doubt, to an avoidance of the vegetables and fruits that contain these nutrients. To be sure, if all teens suddenly started to eat kale salads, grapefruit segments, and low-fat cottage cheese as consistently as they eat nachos, pizza and subs, they would not need any vitamin/mineral pills or nutrient-laden beverages. And, as the saying goes, “If pigs had wings, they would fly.“

But when I asked my 16-year-old relative whether teens would consume a food or beverage that contained most of the daily nutrient requirements, she was skeptical. “Most kids would not consider it cool. And besides, it would have to be really tasty.”

However, we have seen the power of marketing on changing almost every aspect of our lifestyle, and indeed the negative power it has on generating nutritionally poor food choices. Images of older teens enjoying life in some magical environment while drinking popular carbonated beverages are so enticing that one is tempted to believe that such beverages even erase credit card debt.

What will convince teens, and indeed adults, to consume formulated beverages or foods is the belief that doing so enhances athletic power, improves complexion and hair texture, increases cognition, or even removes stress. The effects must be more or less immediate, not something that will be of benefit 40 years in the future like improved bone strength or decreased cardiovascular disease. And if the beverage or food is available when the teen decides that now is the time to eat, then there is a chance that it will be consumed.