You probably don’t remember it, but there was a time when everyone was lactose intolerant – you just have to think back about 10,000 years.
First, let's start with a simple Latin and Chemistry lesson:
• ‘lacte’ is Latin for ‘milk'.
• in Latin, ‘ose’ means ‘sugar’.
• Lactose is a basic sugar, mostly found in milk. (lacte + ose. Get it?)
o Glucose is the simplest sugar. It is the sugar your body uses for energy. (Maybe you’ve heard the term monosaccharide? That's usually a glucose.)
o Sucrose (plain table sugar) is a Glucose hooked to a Fructose (Maybe you’ve heard the term disaccharide?)
o Lactose is a Glucose hooked to a Galactose (Which makes lactose a disaccharide too.)
o A lot of ‘ose’s’, but you get the idea.
• Milk can be up to 8% lactose. Egg whites are up to about 1% lactose.
• In making cheese, most of the lactose is in the whey - and cheese is made from the curd. (Little Miss Muffit-style.) As a result, cheese contains very little lactose.
• In ‘cultured’ dairy products, like Yogurt, the lactose gets used up as the culture (bacteria) grows. That’s why you’re supposed to look for lactobacillus on the label (milk + bacteria). As a result, yogurt contains very little lactose.
• In Latin, ‘ace’ means ‘cleave’ or ‘cut’.
• Lactase (milk + cut) is an enzyme excreted in your intestines that cuts lactose in half, turning it into glucose that your blood can deliver to the rest of your body for energy.
Once upon a time, only babies drank milk. The evolutionary process is a great economizer: Since adults didn’t need to digest lactose, those who didn’t spend resources making an enzyme (lactase) they didn’t need, reproduced more successfully. The result: EVERYONE before the Neolithic Period was Lactose Intolerant after infancy.
Once we migrated out of Africa, we began to concentrated more on agriculture, including the domestication of animals. Initially we used the milk from those animals to make cheese – it was easier to transport and store. (We can probably thank the Italians for figuring that one out.) As we progressed north, we became dairy farmers who used the milk as a primary food source. (The Germanic people figured out that you can extract a LOT more calories from an animal if you milk it for a while before you eat it.) Those whose intestines could excrete lactase (i.e. were lactose tollerant), had more food available (milk), reproduced more succesfully and became a bigger percentage of the population.
Today, the results of that evolutionary process are evident in how people from different geographic areas tolerate lactose:
• Nearly ALL Africans and Asians never had milk beyond infancy – and today nearly ALL (over 90%) are lactose intolerant.
• 70% of the people from near the Mediterranean (like Italians - the original cheese-heads) are still lactose intolerant.
• Those descendent from northern Europe have predominantly developed an ability to use milk into adulthood. Only 5% are lactose intolerant.
So, from a historical perspective, we didn’t develop an intolerance for lactose – we developed a tolerance.
(Claim on Technorati RF7S8X5PPN79 C75ZS8AQP6H9)
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Thursday, November 26, 2009
FDA warns about false claims made regarding turkey.
24 November 2009-U.S.
FDA Watch: Warning Letter Issued to Food Producers
In surprise move today, the The US Food and Drug Administration has written warning letters to United States turkey producers, the growers and processors of the popular Thanksgiving element, explaining that they have reviewed the general labeling of the industries’ frozen, uncooked turkey products and found that most labels contain "serious violations" of federal regulations.
The details of the FDA findings are in a letter dated earlier this week, from the Midwest director for the FDA to turkey producers who are purveyors of the central dish of America’s one true National holiday.
According to the FDA, turkey producers are breaking federal regulations on three counts: they are growing, processing turkey as an "unapproved new drug" and misbranding the product by making "unauthorized health claims" and “failing to inform the public” about health risks and dangers of consuming the product.”
The FDA letter to the food companies states:
"FDA's review found serious violations of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act) and the applicable regulations in Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations (21 CFR)."
The FDA said that the frozen and unfrozen turkey product labels promotes it like a drug intended for use in the "prevention, mitigation, and treatment of disease". The letter drew particular attention to phrases that say the product claims pertaining to cholesterol, and the other “healthy white meat.” Claims pertaining to the ability to lower cholesterol by "4 per cent in 6 weeks", that it can also reduce bad cholesterol by 4 per cent, and that it is "clinical proven" to lower cholesterol. The FDA went on to address that such claims are spurious at best when considered that turkey is rarely made without seasoning and never served as a stand alone dish.
The letter does not address the veracity of the claims, instead it addresses the point that by making such claims then the product is really a drug and should go through the proper channels for obtaining drug approval.
For example, as the letter explains, the claims indicate that producers have claimed that turkey is: "Intended for use in lowering cholesterol, and therefore in preventing, mitigating, and treating the disease hypercholesterolemia." And by claiming that the product lowers total and bad cholesterol, then it is also claiming to treat heart disease, for which total and bad (LDL) cholesterol are known risk factors. This is what puts the product in the "new drug" category, and the letter quotes several sections of "the Act" to support their case. The FDA said another reason that turkey is considered to be a "new drug" was because under another section of "the Act", it is "not generally recognized as safe and effective for use in preventing or treating hypercholesterolemia or coronary heart disease".
The letter’s second claim was the equivalent of a bombshell when the FDA took an aggressive tact on the known levels of tryptophan contained within the natural chemistry of turkey, both uncooked and frozen. Tryptophan is an essential amino acid, meaning that the body can't manufacture it. The body has to get tryptophan and other essential amino acids from food. Tryptophan helps the body produce the B-vitamin niacin, which, in turn, helps the body produce serotonin, a remarkable chemical that acts as a calming agent in the brainand plays a key role in sleep.
The FDA acknowledged that they had no evidence that turkey producers were artificially enhancing higher levels of tryptophan during the typical 20 week growing season, but the FDA made no bones about their view that turkey producers were not discouraging turkeys from engaging in eating habits and activities that may enhance the ability of young turkeys to produce dangerous levels of tryptophan, which in turn would be passed on to ultimate consumers of turkey.
The FDA said that the dangers of high levels of tryptophan are well-known, particularly around the Thanksgiving holiday season when excessive amounts of turkey are consumed by vast portions of the American public. Turkey producers “turn a negligent eye” from the glut of turkey consumption, according to one unnamed source close to the FDA. “Turkey producers are no different than pushers on the street” (sic) referring the lack of conscience in distributing a “laced” product. Further parallels were made to a turkey being the equivalent of “a massive syringe, willingly being placed in the mouths of ravenous Americans by their own hand…” Ironically, sociologists point out that postprandial Thanksgiving day sedation (and its dangers) likely has more to do with what else is consumed along with the turkey, in particular massive doses of carbohydrates in deceptive forms and excessive alcohol consumption. This observation correlates with the FDA’s third claim.
On the issue of misbranding, the FDA said that turkey producers bear "unauthorized health claims in its labeling" and cites text on the various producers' websites, which under the Act is considered to be part of the product labeling, as being faulty in this respect. The labeling should include disclaimers and warnings akin to "WARNING: eating large quantities of this product can produce drowsiness, feelings of lethargy, excessive bloating and gas." While the FDA has not elaborated, FDA precedence would likely also lead to similar warnings of “WARNING: do not operate or use heavy machinery or operate a vehicle after consuming this product” or “ WARNING: consumption of this product mixed with alcohol and carbohydrates could result in adverse health and social consequences.”
The letter also refers to another labeling omission about the excessive trimmings and ancillary dishes typically served with turkey. Dressing with high levels of gluten and salt, yams with sugary marshmallows and brown sugar, green beans with mushroom base and salty dried onion toppings, cranberries laced with high concentrations of pectin, sugar and red dye #40, potatoes with copious amounts of starch and preservatives (although garlic and chives do have certain health benefits) and the kiss of death, turkey gravy which has highly concentrated levels of tryptophan itself, cleverly disguised in turkey drippings and fat. Space does not allow for a detailed description of potential life-ending versions of desserts that quickly follow the ritual gluttony or the fluids used to “chase down” the collective meal or the desire to forget the conversation with the participants that you are dining with.
The FDA said the lack of adequate warnings about consumption, use, side effects and use of the product while being consumed with ancillary products fails to meet the authorized format because, for example, like the other claim, it does not mention the obvious warnings, nor does it address the overall context of the healthy (or lack thereof) diet.
In what could otherwise be categorized as an unprecedented coda, the agency also took issue with the added phrase "Have a Happy” before the seasonal references to Thanksgiving on most packaging without actually citing a violation or potential violation as a basis. As the FDA letter explains:
"The claim authorized through the notification procedure of “Have a Happy” does not emphasize the relationship between perceived happiness that one may have prior to consuming the food and stark contrast to how one feels within a half hour after consuming it, not to mention how they feel about it a week later when consuming leftovers." Thinly veiled references to "mislabeling" appear to be the motivation as the "claim" of "happy" is an intended outcome as opposed to a seasonal greeting. Third party sources have commented that anything relative to “Have a Happy…” and the FDA in the same sentence clearly has no idea of what they are talking about.
Turkey Producer spokesperson, Jonathon J. Johnson, Jr. provided some confusing commentary at a press conference this morning stating that “as far as we know, the turkeys are in good health and generally happy until two weeks before Thanksgiving.” “We cannot comment on the use of drugs by any of our turkeys.” “We have nothing further to add... (unintelligible) ...we’re happy...(unintelligible)… bender; I have to go now.”
PETA spokesperson, Drew Laney released a statement applauding the FDA for its criticism of the turkey producers, but attempted to draw blood on the FDA by demanding that they immediately enact a “Cease & Desist” on the entire industry to avoid further loss of life, health risks and obvious dangers. Laney's release elaborated that this would have a benefit to humans as well.
Turkey producers have 15 days to reply with an explanation of how they intend to "correct the violations" and to ensure that "similar violations do not occur". While the FDA has written off this years’ Thanksgiving holiday as having too much momentum to provide a meaningful impact on changing labeling practices, the FDA is aiming to bring sweeping changes to the turkey industry prior to the upcoming Christmas/New Year’s holiday consumption season.
- submitted anonymously (Think I could get a job writing for the Onion?)
FDA Watch: Warning Letter Issued to Food Producers
In surprise move today, the The US Food and Drug Administration has written warning letters to United States turkey producers, the growers and processors of the popular Thanksgiving element, explaining that they have reviewed the general labeling of the industries’ frozen, uncooked turkey products and found that most labels contain "serious violations" of federal regulations.
The details of the FDA findings are in a letter dated earlier this week, from the Midwest director for the FDA to turkey producers who are purveyors of the central dish of America’s one true National holiday.
According to the FDA, turkey producers are breaking federal regulations on three counts: they are growing, processing turkey as an "unapproved new drug" and misbranding the product by making "unauthorized health claims" and “failing to inform the public” about health risks and dangers of consuming the product.”
The FDA letter to the food companies states:
"FDA's review found serious violations of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act) and the applicable regulations in Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations (21 CFR)."
The FDA said that the frozen and unfrozen turkey product labels promotes it like a drug intended for use in the "prevention, mitigation, and treatment of disease". The letter drew particular attention to phrases that say the product claims pertaining to cholesterol, and the other “healthy white meat.” Claims pertaining to the ability to lower cholesterol by "4 per cent in 6 weeks", that it can also reduce bad cholesterol by 4 per cent, and that it is "clinical proven" to lower cholesterol. The FDA went on to address that such claims are spurious at best when considered that turkey is rarely made without seasoning and never served as a stand alone dish.
The letter does not address the veracity of the claims, instead it addresses the point that by making such claims then the product is really a drug and should go through the proper channels for obtaining drug approval.
For example, as the letter explains, the claims indicate that producers have claimed that turkey is: "Intended for use in lowering cholesterol, and therefore in preventing, mitigating, and treating the disease hypercholesterolemia." And by claiming that the product lowers total and bad cholesterol, then it is also claiming to treat heart disease, for which total and bad (LDL) cholesterol are known risk factors. This is what puts the product in the "new drug" category, and the letter quotes several sections of "the Act" to support their case. The FDA said another reason that turkey is considered to be a "new drug" was because under another section of "the Act", it is "not generally recognized as safe and effective for use in preventing or treating hypercholesterolemia or coronary heart disease".
The letter’s second claim was the equivalent of a bombshell when the FDA took an aggressive tact on the known levels of tryptophan contained within the natural chemistry of turkey, both uncooked and frozen. Tryptophan is an essential amino acid, meaning that the body can't manufacture it. The body has to get tryptophan and other essential amino acids from food. Tryptophan helps the body produce the B-vitamin niacin, which, in turn, helps the body produce serotonin, a remarkable chemical that acts as a calming agent in the brainand plays a key role in sleep.
The FDA acknowledged that they had no evidence that turkey producers were artificially enhancing higher levels of tryptophan during the typical 20 week growing season, but the FDA made no bones about their view that turkey producers were not discouraging turkeys from engaging in eating habits and activities that may enhance the ability of young turkeys to produce dangerous levels of tryptophan, which in turn would be passed on to ultimate consumers of turkey.
The FDA said that the dangers of high levels of tryptophan are well-known, particularly around the Thanksgiving holiday season when excessive amounts of turkey are consumed by vast portions of the American public. Turkey producers “turn a negligent eye” from the glut of turkey consumption, according to one unnamed source close to the FDA. “Turkey producers are no different than pushers on the street” (sic) referring the lack of conscience in distributing a “laced” product. Further parallels were made to a turkey being the equivalent of “a massive syringe, willingly being placed in the mouths of ravenous Americans by their own hand…” Ironically, sociologists point out that postprandial Thanksgiving day sedation (and its dangers) likely has more to do with what else is consumed along with the turkey, in particular massive doses of carbohydrates in deceptive forms and excessive alcohol consumption. This observation correlates with the FDA’s third claim.
On the issue of misbranding, the FDA said that turkey producers bear "unauthorized health claims in its labeling" and cites text on the various producers' websites, which under the Act is considered to be part of the product labeling, as being faulty in this respect. The labeling should include disclaimers and warnings akin to "WARNING: eating large quantities of this product can produce drowsiness, feelings of lethargy, excessive bloating and gas." While the FDA has not elaborated, FDA precedence would likely also lead to similar warnings of “WARNING: do not operate or use heavy machinery or operate a vehicle after consuming this product” or “ WARNING: consumption of this product mixed with alcohol and carbohydrates could result in adverse health and social consequences.”
The letter also refers to another labeling omission about the excessive trimmings and ancillary dishes typically served with turkey. Dressing with high levels of gluten and salt, yams with sugary marshmallows and brown sugar, green beans with mushroom base and salty dried onion toppings, cranberries laced with high concentrations of pectin, sugar and red dye #40, potatoes with copious amounts of starch and preservatives (although garlic and chives do have certain health benefits) and the kiss of death, turkey gravy which has highly concentrated levels of tryptophan itself, cleverly disguised in turkey drippings and fat. Space does not allow for a detailed description of potential life-ending versions of desserts that quickly follow the ritual gluttony or the fluids used to “chase down” the collective meal or the desire to forget the conversation with the participants that you are dining with.
The FDA said the lack of adequate warnings about consumption, use, side effects and use of the product while being consumed with ancillary products fails to meet the authorized format because, for example, like the other claim, it does not mention the obvious warnings, nor does it address the overall context of the healthy (or lack thereof) diet.
In what could otherwise be categorized as an unprecedented coda, the agency also took issue with the added phrase "Have a Happy” before the seasonal references to Thanksgiving on most packaging without actually citing a violation or potential violation as a basis. As the FDA letter explains:
"The claim authorized through the notification procedure of “Have a Happy” does not emphasize the relationship between perceived happiness that one may have prior to consuming the food and stark contrast to how one feels within a half hour after consuming it, not to mention how they feel about it a week later when consuming leftovers." Thinly veiled references to "mislabeling" appear to be the motivation as the "claim" of "happy" is an intended outcome as opposed to a seasonal greeting. Third party sources have commented that anything relative to “Have a Happy…” and the FDA in the same sentence clearly has no idea of what they are talking about.
Turkey Producer spokesperson, Jonathon J. Johnson, Jr. provided some confusing commentary at a press conference this morning stating that “as far as we know, the turkeys are in good health and generally happy until two weeks before Thanksgiving.” “We cannot comment on the use of drugs by any of our turkeys.” “We have nothing further to add... (unintelligible) ...we’re happy...(unintelligible)… bender; I have to go now.”
PETA spokesperson, Drew Laney released a statement applauding the FDA for its criticism of the turkey producers, but attempted to draw blood on the FDA by demanding that they immediately enact a “Cease & Desist” on the entire industry to avoid further loss of life, health risks and obvious dangers. Laney's release elaborated that this would have a benefit to humans as well.
Turkey producers have 15 days to reply with an explanation of how they intend to "correct the violations" and to ensure that "similar violations do not occur". While the FDA has written off this years’ Thanksgiving holiday as having too much momentum to provide a meaningful impact on changing labeling practices, the FDA is aiming to bring sweeping changes to the turkey industry prior to the upcoming Christmas/New Year’s holiday consumption season.
- submitted anonymously (Think I could get a job writing for the Onion?)
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Get low to the ground – and start listening!
I believe eating ‘low to the ground’* is something our bodies naturally want – and, perhaps, even need. Given our busy lifestyles, it’s nearly impossible to hear (or even listen to) a body all cranked up on drive-thru food and over processed foods that need to be loaded with colorings, added flavors, preservatives and fillers just to make them palatable. I know, through personal experience, that the longer I went without eating manufactured foods, the more I began to hear my body. Sounds a bit extreme - but it actually happens. I didn’t set out expecting or looking for this either. I did it as a health plan – as a way to eat more naturally. However, as a by-product of doing so, my body started talking to me. Kind of like a car telling you to change its oil, get new brake pads or get more gas. (I love the expression “I run like a well oiled machine”. I think that’s true.)
I listen to my body on other subjects all the time: When I’m tired, I rest. When my knee hurts, I walk instead of run. When I’m stressed, I try to exercise. Why wouldn’t eating, one of the most basic things we do for our bodies, be exactly the same? One way our bodies talk is through the language of cravings. I crave certain foods when I am tired or stressed – or energetic. If we teach our bodies - by giving them nutritious food for a while – and then listen – they will start to tell us what we need. A body hyped up on fast food and preservatives will probably crave more of the same – it just doesn’t know any better. But given 3-4 weeks ‘low to the ground’, the body will start to crave nutritious foods.
I know, with schedules and families to feed, it’s hard to stick to such a pure regimen, but just starting to think in these terms can make a huge difference. You can be as extreme as you like: how far you go is up to you. Simply being conscious of what you put in your mouth is a healthy start…
…it’s all just food for thought!
*Think of ‘low to the ground’ as foods locally grown, minimally processed and probably eaten by your ancestors.
Ann Sullivan is a self-proclaimed “Food Anthropologist” and an avid health and fitness activist. After 20 years as a wife and stay-at-home-mom, preparing meals to satisfy the masses instead of her inner voice, she has started listening – and is discovering an entirely new level of nutritional health and personal satisfaction.
I listen to my body on other subjects all the time: When I’m tired, I rest. When my knee hurts, I walk instead of run. When I’m stressed, I try to exercise. Why wouldn’t eating, one of the most basic things we do for our bodies, be exactly the same? One way our bodies talk is through the language of cravings. I crave certain foods when I am tired or stressed – or energetic. If we teach our bodies - by giving them nutritious food for a while – and then listen – they will start to tell us what we need. A body hyped up on fast food and preservatives will probably crave more of the same – it just doesn’t know any better. But given 3-4 weeks ‘low to the ground’, the body will start to crave nutritious foods.
I know, with schedules and families to feed, it’s hard to stick to such a pure regimen, but just starting to think in these terms can make a huge difference. You can be as extreme as you like: how far you go is up to you. Simply being conscious of what you put in your mouth is a healthy start…
…it’s all just food for thought!
*Think of ‘low to the ground’ as foods locally grown, minimally processed and probably eaten by your ancestors.
Ann Sullivan is a self-proclaimed “Food Anthropologist” and an avid health and fitness activist. After 20 years as a wife and stay-at-home-mom, preparing meals to satisfy the masses instead of her inner voice, she has started listening – and is discovering an entirely new level of nutritional health and personal satisfaction.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
My Thoughts on Umami - by Tilak Nagodawithana, Ph.D.
I once met an elderly lady in the grocery store who was looking for the “no MSG” printed on the soup label to make sure she was not buying the product which everyone tells her is nutritionally unhealthy. I inquired if she had any reaction to consuming MSG-containing foods such as tomato, cheese, mushroom, meat, fish or Chinese food and the answer was negative. If this compound is facing so much negative publicity, let us see why it is so, considering the fact that this organic compound is present in almost all foods we consume.
MSG is the sodium salt of glutamic acid which is the most abundant amino acid in all proteins. Japanese found early on (Ikeda in 1908) that the active ingredient in sea tangle, which they used extensively to enhance the savoriness in soup is the sodium salt of glutamic acid. In the 1960s, Kuninaka found that in human taste sensation, there exist a remarkable synergy between glutamate (MSG) and 5’-nucleotides (5’-IMP and 5’-GMP) present in mushroom and bonito. Today, these three products which enhance the flavor and brothiness of less savory products are referred to as umami compounds. Although there has been great deal of studies conducted on the properties of these three compounds, the mechanism by which it enhances savory flavor is not worked out yet.
However, extensive studies have revealed that the receptor sites for these three umami compounds are different from the receptor sites related to primary taste stimuli, namely, sweet, sour, salty and bitter. Because of this unique nature, it is now considered as the fifth basic taste.
During evolution, why did living forms develop specific receptors for sweet, sour, salty, bitter, and umami in the oral cavity? A simple explanation is to address nutritional problems and promote sustenance. For example, sweet receptors can detect much needed calorie foods; Salt receptors can provide Na ions to maintain sodium balance; Bitter perception can help avoid poisonous material; avoidance of excess sour compound to prevent tissue damage; and Umami receptors for living things to get attracted to the much needed proteins and amino acids for synthesis of enzymes and other nitrogenous compounds to maintain the biological functions. If Glutamate (MSG), which is a key Umami compound, is totally avoided from our food, which in essence is a way to completely avoid consumption of the much needed protein, the consequences can be disastrous. If that had been the case in evolution, the elderly lady I met in the grocery store may not have been there to read the label, in the first place.
MSG is the sodium salt of glutamic acid which is the most abundant amino acid in all proteins. Japanese found early on (Ikeda in 1908) that the active ingredient in sea tangle, which they used extensively to enhance the savoriness in soup is the sodium salt of glutamic acid. In the 1960s, Kuninaka found that in human taste sensation, there exist a remarkable synergy between glutamate (MSG) and 5’-nucleotides (5’-IMP and 5’-GMP) present in mushroom and bonito. Today, these three products which enhance the flavor and brothiness of less savory products are referred to as umami compounds. Although there has been great deal of studies conducted on the properties of these three compounds, the mechanism by which it enhances savory flavor is not worked out yet.
However, extensive studies have revealed that the receptor sites for these three umami compounds are different from the receptor sites related to primary taste stimuli, namely, sweet, sour, salty and bitter. Because of this unique nature, it is now considered as the fifth basic taste.
During evolution, why did living forms develop specific receptors for sweet, sour, salty, bitter, and umami in the oral cavity? A simple explanation is to address nutritional problems and promote sustenance. For example, sweet receptors can detect much needed calorie foods; Salt receptors can provide Na ions to maintain sodium balance; Bitter perception can help avoid poisonous material; avoidance of excess sour compound to prevent tissue damage; and Umami receptors for living things to get attracted to the much needed proteins and amino acids for synthesis of enzymes and other nitrogenous compounds to maintain the biological functions. If Glutamate (MSG), which is a key Umami compound, is totally avoided from our food, which in essence is a way to completely avoid consumption of the much needed protein, the consequences can be disastrous. If that had been the case in evolution, the elderly lady I met in the grocery store may not have been there to read the label, in the first place.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
How To Get Enough Calcium
Everybody needs Calcium, right? If you aren’t getting enough in your diet, just drink some milk or take a supplement, right? Wrong!
First off: If you are eating even close to a balanced diet, you’re getting plenty of calcium. It’s everywhere and in all kinds of foods – dairy, of course – but also in green vegetables, fish, nuts and fruit.
Here’s the gem: Calcium uptake isn’t a function of how much extra calcium you ingest. It is a function of how much muscle mass you have. It makes perfect sense: When you build muscle mass, your body says “I’d better strengthen my bones to support these muscles”. You release chemicals that signal for the absorption of more calcium.
The lesson: Take all the supplements you want. Unless you start moving around – or, better yet, lift some weights, they’ll do you no good at all. Stop mega-dosing. The best way to avoid osteoporosis is a diet rich in calcium and regular light weight lifting.
First off: If you are eating even close to a balanced diet, you’re getting plenty of calcium. It’s everywhere and in all kinds of foods – dairy, of course – but also in green vegetables, fish, nuts and fruit.
Here’s the gem: Calcium uptake isn’t a function of how much extra calcium you ingest. It is a function of how much muscle mass you have. It makes perfect sense: When you build muscle mass, your body says “I’d better strengthen my bones to support these muscles”. You release chemicals that signal for the absorption of more calcium.
The lesson: Take all the supplements you want. Unless you start moving around – or, better yet, lift some weights, they’ll do you no good at all. Stop mega-dosing. The best way to avoid osteoporosis is a diet rich in calcium and regular light weight lifting.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Calories in. Calories out.
Like Scotty says on Star Trek, “I can’t change the laws of physics!” He’s right, and you can’t either.
A ‘calorie’ is a measure of the ‘work’ done. In physics, Work = Force x Distance. Here on earth (because of gravity), you can pretty much equate “Force” with “Weight”. So a calorie will move a certain amount of weight (like your body, or a dumbbell) a certain distance (like a mile, or from the floor to over your head).
All foods provide calories that we use to perform work (i.e. move weight over a distance). Carbohydrates and Proteins provide about the same amount: 4 calories per gram. Fats provide more: 9 calories/gram. (An easy way to calculate the calories in a food is to remember “PFC 494”. To calculate calories, add the grams of Protein x 4, Fat x 9 and Carbs x 4.)
Even though all foods can be used for calories, they can be used for other things too - and they get converted into calories in different ways.
· Carbs are only used to generate calories.
· Proteins provide the building blocks for life: to create muscle, tissue, organs, bones, nerves, etc. Your body will also burn proteins (to make calories) if there aren’t any carbs around or if it has extra proteins, but that’s kind of like burning the furniture to heat the house. It’s your body’s last choice.
· Fat stores calories. Your body can get calories directly from the fats you eat – or from the fat you have saved up all around your body.
Calories in = Calories out. Always. That’s just the way it is (back to the laws of physics.) A calorie, is a calorie, is a calorie: Calories are all the same – regardless of where they come from or when you eat them – and there is only one way to get rid of them: by doing work! If you eat too many, your body stores them as fat. If you don’t eat enough, your body will get the calories it needs from stored fat.
Dieting, although not easy, is simple: If you use more calories (by moving weight over a distance) than you take in as food, you lose weight. Period. Simple.
Myths about calories:
· Myth #1: Eating before bed-time will make you fat. It won’t - any more than eating at any other time of the day. The laws of physics on this (Work=Force x Distance) make no mention of “time of day”.
· Myth #2: It matters how fast I run or how long I work out. Actually, it doesn’t matter. There is no mention of ‘time’ or ‘speed’ in the calorie equation either – so, interestingly, the number of calories your burn has nothing to do with how long or how fast exercise. It’s all about the weight and distance. In other words, running a mile burns as many calories as walking a mile. Or, when burning calories with weights, the amount of weight matters and the number of reps matter – but how fast you do it doesn’t matter. Of course, you cover more distance if you run fast, but it takes less time – so they cancel each other out.
· Myth #3: Calories from fat are bad. No, they are the same as all other calories. Fat just has a lot of them in it.
Fun Facts:
A ‘calorie’ is a measure of the ‘work’ done. In physics, Work = Force x Distance. Here on earth (because of gravity), you can pretty much equate “Force” with “Weight”. So a calorie will move a certain amount of weight (like your body, or a dumbbell) a certain distance (like a mile, or from the floor to over your head).
All foods provide calories that we use to perform work (i.e. move weight over a distance). Carbohydrates and Proteins provide about the same amount: 4 calories per gram. Fats provide more: 9 calories/gram. (An easy way to calculate the calories in a food is to remember “PFC 494”. To calculate calories, add the grams of Protein x 4, Fat x 9 and Carbs x 4.)
Even though all foods can be used for calories, they can be used for other things too - and they get converted into calories in different ways.
· Carbs are only used to generate calories.
· Proteins provide the building blocks for life: to create muscle, tissue, organs, bones, nerves, etc. Your body will also burn proteins (to make calories) if there aren’t any carbs around or if it has extra proteins, but that’s kind of like burning the furniture to heat the house. It’s your body’s last choice.
· Fat stores calories. Your body can get calories directly from the fats you eat – or from the fat you have saved up all around your body.
Calories in = Calories out. Always. That’s just the way it is (back to the laws of physics.) A calorie, is a calorie, is a calorie: Calories are all the same – regardless of where they come from or when you eat them – and there is only one way to get rid of them: by doing work! If you eat too many, your body stores them as fat. If you don’t eat enough, your body will get the calories it needs from stored fat.
Dieting, although not easy, is simple: If you use more calories (by moving weight over a distance) than you take in as food, you lose weight. Period. Simple.
Myths about calories:
· Myth #1: Eating before bed-time will make you fat. It won’t - any more than eating at any other time of the day. The laws of physics on this (Work=Force x Distance) make no mention of “time of day”.
· Myth #2: It matters how fast I run or how long I work out. Actually, it doesn’t matter. There is no mention of ‘time’ or ‘speed’ in the calorie equation either – so, interestingly, the number of calories your burn has nothing to do with how long or how fast exercise. It’s all about the weight and distance. In other words, running a mile burns as many calories as walking a mile. Or, when burning calories with weights, the amount of weight matters and the number of reps matter – but how fast you do it doesn’t matter. Of course, you cover more distance if you run fast, but it takes less time – so they cancel each other out.
· Myth #3: Calories from fat are bad. No, they are the same as all other calories. Fat just has a lot of them in it.
Fun Facts:
- Other familiar terms that measure “calories” include Watts, B.T.U’s, Horse Power, Joules, Foot-lbs, etc.
- There is ONE other way to burn calories: By creating HEAT. So - do you burn more calories in the winter? Yes! But, compared to the calories you expend doing work (part of which creates heat too), they are nearly insignificant - and pretty constant except when you are moving.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
