Posted by Robin Bellinger, April 29, 2008 at 2:45 PM
Eat more breakfast and you could have a boy!
Last week news outlets from here to Islamabad announced the release of a study purporting to show that women with higher caloric intake and better nutrition at the time of conception are more likely to have boys than girls. Although it’s the father’s sperm that determines the sex of an embryo, the mother’s body can be more or less well suited to that embryo’s thriving.
Goodness knows I’m no scientist, but I’m fairly skeptical about these conclusions. The amount of extra calories that encouraged male embryos seemed rather small, maybe just a few hundred. Perhaps because my own daily caloric intake can swing a few hundred up or down based on one or two small choices, I find it hard to believe that most people eat with reliable consistency. What’s more, the study was based on the women’s own accounts of their diets, and people are famously bad at this kind of self-reporting. I wonder, though, if women desperate for boys will start loading up on cereal and bananas now, and potential mothers yearning for girls will start skipping breakfast.
Continue reading »
America's fat problem: "I say unto you: Fat is good! Fat is necessary. Ask any chef. Fat does not make you fat, eating too much makes you fat! We aren’t filling our bodies with sodium because of the box of kosher salt we use to season our food, we’re doing it with all the processed food that’s loaded with hidden salt. And American cooks and American diners need to understand the differences."
Posted by Robin Bellinger, February 26, 2008 at 1:15 PM
Last year I got a late Christmas present—on December 26, I found out I was a few weeks pregnant. The very first thing I did was eat a celebratory piece of cheesecake (it’s silly, but I felt as if I was giving the embryo a treat—thank you for implanting!). My second priority was to start reading about what I was actually supposed to be eating, which I suspected was not the cheese enchiladas, endless milkshakes, and french fries I dreamed of as the ideal indulgent pregnancy diet. To prepare for pregnancy, I had already cut out alcohol and started taking folic acid supplements, but how else would I have to change my ways in the months ahead?
Continue reading »
The Guardian investigates the myths of fruit. While it's a good thing that people are eating more fruits these days due to convenient packaging and greater availability, the article says, fruits in general aren't packed with nutrients, nor do they deserve the title of "superfood." Tom Sanders, director of the Nutritional Sciences Division at King's College London, says, "It's a myth that fruit is packed full of vitamins and minerals. The foods packed full of micronutrients are grains, seeds and nuts, the peas and things."
Posted by Adam Kuban, January 4, 2008 at 9:15 AM
Ed's previous post on Michael Pollan's "food commandments" reminded me of the latest issue of Wired magazine, which I paged through recently. In Ed's entry, he quotes Pollan as saying "Shop the peripheries of the supermarket; stay out of the middle." Wired ran a handy little graphic that neatly illustrated this concept, pointing out that the center aisles of the market are loaded with the cheapest, most calorie-laden foods. Click the graphic above for a better view.
Posted by Ed Levine, January 4, 2008 at 7:00 AM
Here they are, Michael Pollan's Twelve Commandments for Serious Eaters, from his new book, In Defense of Food: An Eater's Manifesto. As Jamie Forrest noted yesterday, a few food pundits are taking him to task for a number of them. I'm down with most of what brother Pollan is preaching. What about you? These commandments are made to order for serious fat-chewing.
1. "Don't eat anything your grandmother wouldn't recognize as food." Hard to argue with that. I don't think my grandmother would have recognized porcini mushroom foam as food, though.
2. "Avoid foods containing ingredients you can't pronounce." Hey, what about bouquet garni?
3. "Don't eat anything that won't eventually rot."
4. "Avoid food products that carry health claims."
5. "Shop the peripheries of the supermarket; stay out of the middle."
6. "Better yet, buy food somewhere else: the farmers' market or CSA."
Continue reading »
Don't know if you should eat that tuna sandwich that has been sitting out all day? What about those potatoes that are growing sprouts? Or the 9-year-old Spam found in the trunk of your car? Macbebekin rounds up the best, "Is this safe to eat?" questions from Ask Metafilter in these two entries.
A Calorie Counter pores over the nutritional info of 21 chains, looking for trans-fat transgressions. The top 3: White Castle Onion Rings (30g trans fat), White Castle Fish Nibblers (16g), and KFC's Chicken Pot Pie (14g). Jack in the Box tops the list in frequency; 24 of its items appear on it.
Posted by Ed Levine, September 6, 2007 at 8:00 PM
In results that surprised most diet experts, the grocery store chain Hannaford Brothers yesterday released the results of a study that supports a surprising notion, namely that nutrition sells. The chain had conducted a yearlong experiment steering consumers to healthier foods using a store-created rating system called Guiding Stars, which rated the nutritional value of foods on a one- to three-star scale, three representing the healthiest foods.
I have a feeling that even the leaner, center-cut bacon got a measly one-star. If a labeling system like this went nationwide, I wonder if it would have a profound effect on people's food-buying and eating habits.
Pass the broccoli, please.
Posted by Ed Levine, July 24, 2007 at 8:16 AM
First Steven Shaw weighed in on pregnancy diet myths (yes, he's a guy, but he's a sensitive fellow), then our own Meg Hourihan responded, and coming up fast on the inside is Jane Brody, with a story titled "Dispelling Pregnancy Myths: Eating for 1.5."
Brody, using the March of Dimes as her Chief of the Pregnancy Nutrition and Safety Police Battering Ram, seems to be spouting just the kind of stuff Shaw and Meg decry. Her basic thesis: "The March of Dimes is making a new push to dispel nutritional misinformation and replace it with advice based on solid scientific evidence. Some of the advice may come as a distressing surprise to women, who may be fond of foods or drinks that could endanger their pregnancy."
Continue reading »
Posted by Ed Levine, July 17, 2007 at 12:20 PM
Would calorie labels make me order differently in restaurants?
Absolutely. Wouldn't you?
There is no doubt in my mind that if I knew how many calories were in every dish I was thinking about ordering, it would affect my decision-making. That doesn't mean I'm going to opt for the lowest calorie option for every course. That would require me being denied the great pleasure I derive from food. What it might mean is that, if I order the lasagna, I might eat half of it and give the rest to my dining companions and then opt for the steamed fish with ginger and black beans.
Posted by Robyn Lee, June 15, 2007 at 6:30 PM
The New York Times investigates whether brown sugar is healthier than white sugar. Conclusion: in the category of sugar, brown-ness doesn't entail health benefits. The main differences between brown and white sugar are the taste and effect on baked goods; nutritionally, they're similar.
Posted by Lia Bulaong, March 15, 2007 at 11:54 AM
Janet Helms of the Seattle Times wrote a seven item quiz on nutrition and diet myths, to point out that much of what we probably think is true is actually anything but. My favorite item:
2. Low-fat always means low calories.
Myth. If you see the word "low" on the label, that's your clue to look a little further, suggested dietitian Susan Moores, of Minneapolis. Check for serving size and the number of calories on the Nutrition Facts label. Low-fat foods often contain the same amount or even more calories than regular versions.
That's particularly true for fat-free foods. If fat is taken out, something else is put back in — and that's often sugar. Some studies suggest that snacks with low-fat labels simply entice you to indulge, so you end up eating more calories than if you selected the regular version.
Previously: Can You Tell Food Fact From Food Myth?
Posted by Lia Bulaong, March 12, 2007 at 2:56 PM
Alan Richman of GQ says the ten foods nutrition experts say should put you in a good mood, like spinach and and low-fat yogurt, actually put him in a bad mood; and then he lists ten foods that do make him happy, like chocolate milk and an after-dinner cheese course. Does cottage cheese put you in a better mood than french fries? I know which one puts a smile on my face.
Posted by Lia Bulaong, March 7, 2007 at 8:53 AM
"Myths about nutrition seem to linger for years just like urban legends. Remember the one about grapefruit burning fat? What about coffee stunting your growth? Maybe you're still holding on to the belief that gelatin will make your nails stronger. No doubt, you've fallen for a few weight-loss myths too. It's easy to do with the continual crop of fad diets promising a quick fix. Who can forget the cider vinegar and cabbage soup diets?" March is National Nutrition Month and so Janet Helm of the Chicago Tribune has put together an eleven point quiz you can take to see if you can tell food fact from food myth.
Posted by Lia Bulaong, February 27, 2007 at 6:37 PM
Krispy Kreme introduced their newest doughnuts yesterday: they're glazed, caramel flavored... and made of whole wheat: "The company called the new doughnut an alternative for health-conscious consumers, with 180 calories. The original glazed has 200 calories, according to the company's Web site."
Seriously, a saving of just 20 calories? Sorry, but that's the same vein of ridiculous as people who order gallon-size Diet Cokes along with their buttered popcorn at the movie theater because they think it's going to help them lose weight. Have the real thing occasionally as a treat—you won't feel deprived, and perhaps even more important, you won't be fooling yourself about your nutrition.
[via yumsugar]
Posted by Lia Bulaong, February 26, 2007 at 6:28 PM
According to a new study, it turns out you're more likely to absorb nutrients from food you like than food you either dislike or just don't feel passionately about. You know what this means—no one's ever going to be able to force me to eat asparagus or broccoli ever again!
[via rebecca blood]
Posted by Lia Bulaong, February 23, 2007 at 3:25 PM
The English Food Pyramid is pretty hilarious to me—but then I'm not an English nutritionist. The very tip of the pyramid is labeled "Fats, Oils and Sweets", contains lard, suet, bacon, shortbread, heavy cream and castor sugar, and has the notation "eat sparingly".
[via malaclyps del.icio.us]
Posted by Adam Roberts, February 6, 2007 at 7:00 AM
On the subway from Brooklyn to Manhattan I consider my lunch options. I could have a hot dog, but I had sausage for dinner last night. I could get pasta, but isn't it likely that I'll make pasta tonight? Maybe a Cuban sandwich, but that's too much meat. I know—I'll have a Caesar salad.
"But what about protein?"
That's my grandmother's voice in my head. My grandmother works for the National Protein Association of America, which proselytizes that for any meal to be a meal there must be protein.
And by protein, of course, she means meat.
Continue reading »
Posted by Lia Bulaong, February 1, 2007 at 10:57 AM
The Ultimate Chain Restaurant Nutrition Guide: Who Is Hiding Information About The Food, And Who Isn't. Fantastic spot of research from the crack team over at Consumerist, who checked out 51 of the largest chain restaurant websites and rated them on the availability of their nutritional information (or lack thereof).
