Antioxidants: What are they? What do they do? Why does that matter?

First, The Chemistry Lesson: Oxidation is one of, if not the most common chemical processes. Things like fire (turning carbon into carbon dioxide), rust (turning iron into iron oxide) and metabolism (the oxidation of sugar into CO2 and water) are all ‘oxidation’. The easiest way to stop oxidation is to keep the oxygen away: In the case of fire, smother it or, in the case of rust, paint it. In the case of metabolism, it becomes a little tougher and more complex.

Antioxidants all share an ability to ‘block’ oxygen. Most of what we think of as antioxidants in food (which we used to call preservatives, by they way) actually become the sacrificial lamb by using up the oxygen themselves.

Rancidity, staling, dull colors, ‘warmed-over’ flavor and ‘cardboard-ish’ flavor are all examples of oxidation problems in food. However, the one that is currently getting everyone all whipped up is a very specific reaction that produces free radicals as a byproduct of oxidation.

Free radicals are just ‘unpaired’ molecules (and molecules really don’t like to be unpaired) so they run around looking for something to hook onto – and they’re totally compulsive about it until they do. (It’s like teenagers in love: they can’t stand to be out-and-about not holding hands.)

Free radicals are problematic because this “need to hold hands” makes them ‘super-oxidizers’. What we think of as ‘nutritional’ antioxidants (vitamins C, A, E and others with long names, which are usually enzymes) are just compounds that do a good job of holding hands with free radicals – thereby rendering them harmless. (Much like the sense of relief I feel if that nipple-pierced freak at the mall is holding hands with someone other than my daughter.)

We worry about free radicals because their super oxidizing capability is linked with cell degeneration (aging) and other screwy cell behavior (cancer) caused by the rapid oxidation of sensitive biological molecules. This incredibly complex chemistry is, at best, only barely understood - which is the best argument I can think of for staying away from antioxidant supplements. In fact, there is a growing body of evidence that some enzyme-type antioxidant supplements (superoxide dismutases) may actually cause the problems they are claiming to prevent.

On the other hand, there is a solution: Plants do a great job of producing antioxidants that are effective against free radicals. They evolved to this for good reason: Their cells often have only one season to survive drought, pests, disease and other stresses – so they protect them by producing great antioxidants. Coincidentally, these same antioxidants also act to protect the pigments in bright, richly colored plants.

Bottom line: The most effective way to combat free radical cell damage is to consume the antioxidants obtained from eating bright, richly colored fruits and vegetables. According to the USDA, the 10 foods with the greatest antioxidant content are Red Beans, Blue/Cran/Black/Straw/Raspberries, Apples, Cherries, Plums, and Black Beans. You can be sure that other colorful plants (beets, carrots, pomegranate …) are great sources of antioxidants too!

Ann and Den's Restaurant List

We've been ask for our 'list' so often, we thought it'd be a good idea to start publishing it on Chons CaFe. Here are the current "Top Five". Look for the "Top Ten/Next Five", and so on, as well as updates and highlights, in the future! 

Top Five

112 Eatery (Downtown Mpls)
Chef’s Chef, Isaac Becker and his wife Nancy St. Pierre’s firstborn (and a great example of the talent that the D’Amico system cranks into the Twin Cities restaurant scene). A sincerely personal and well disciplined staff serves not-very-expensive culinary creations. Easily the best food in town for the last half-dozen years.

Personal favorites: Tagliatelle w/ Foie Gras Meatballs, Scallops – and, if you’re hungry (or on an expense account): Nori Encrusted Sirloin w/ Ponzu. Ann goes almost exclusively for the Sweet & Sour Crab Salad.

Lucia’s (Uptown)
Lucia Watson is the 25 yr reigning queen of the 'local-vores' - she does an absolutely great job of proving that 'locally grown' doesn't mean 'plain'. If you are lucky enough to spot Lucia, she can tell you the 'people' story behind every menu item. Or - ask Steph the bartender, Robert the server - or anyone there - they'll give you the low-down. The bread alone (from Lucia's bakery, next door) is worth the trip!

Personal favorites: We recommend you start with the Rosemary Spiced Nuts, whatever else you do. I can make a meal of the bread and soup. Ann doesn't even order - they just bring her a Cheese Plate, honey and some greens.

Bar La Grassa (Warehouse District)
Isaac and Nancy (see 112 Eatery) took a big risk about a year ago - and it's a big hit! A great selection of both fresh and dried pasta creations - from traditional to very interesting (like urchin on torcio). I particularly like that you can order nearly every item in half-size. (Not that I eat half as much - I just get twice as much variety.) Currently, the place-to-be-seen, La Grassa is packed even on Mondays - and for good reason.

Personal favorites: The Lobster and Egg Bruchetta followed by Spagetti Carbonara - but, play around - there's lots to choose from, the items change often, and I've never been disappointed.

Biella (Excelsior)
Whoever thinks you can't find great Italian in a romantic setting outside the 494/694 loop, hasn't been to Biella! A romantic neighborhood feel, in a quaint Main Street setting. (The space housed the town bike store for years: high cielings with nice brick-and-plaster ambiance.) The menu isn't extensive, but has some real winners. Chef Raul Templanuevo really works miracles - especially given the stingy nature of the amiable-crumudgian owner, Mark Nazigian. We always sit at the bar because Dave "takes care of us" - but, if you are making a reservation for two, which I highly reccomend Thursday-thru-Saturday, request the window seats.

Personal favorites: The Scallops are the best anywhere. After that, I go for the Mussels and Chorizo in White Wine and Chimichiri or the Seafood Fettuccini. Ann is hooked on the Sauted Calimari in Harrissa.


Cafe 28 (Linden Hills)
Take a nice walk around Lake Harriet and then stroll a couple more blocks up Linden Hills Blvd to the old fire station on 43rd. Simple fare, locally grown with emphasis on sustainable and organic. Pretty kid friendly too. (Not sure that is always a plus.) Todd Haug, of Surly Brewery fame, is co-owner - so the beer list, while not the most extensive, is the best I've seen/tried. If you can locate the manager, Cory, ask him for an aria - he's a very accomplished Pavarotti-wanna-be - who's not shy about belting one out as you have a belt.

Personal favorites: Tofu Tacos in Salsa Verde make the top of my head glow. Gotta love'm! The Pork in Adobo is also a killer. Ann: Champagne Pear Salad.

Calories In, Calories Out - One More Time for the Slow Learners

About a year ago, we blogged:

"Calories in = Calories out. Always. That's just the way it is. A calorie, is a calorie, is a calorie: Calories are all the same - regardless of where the come from or when you eat them..."

Many of you took great exception to that statement, arguing about "eating before bed" and "fruits and vegetables" and "what about Atkins!". However you can't argue that all calories don't provide the same amount of energy - because they do - by definition.

Enter Mark Haub, Kansas State University, professor of Human Nutrition. His premise: That in weight loss, pure calorie counting is what matters most -- not the nutritional value of the food or when it is eaten.

The proof is in the pudding (or, in this case, Prof is in the Twinkies): CNN: Twinkie Diet Professor

Commodity Recalls: A Reversal of Fortune.

The standard (and far too familiar) Scenario #1: I learn that the infant car seat I just bought has a safety defect. I return my defective unit to the store and get a brand new, safer version. The consumer wins and the manufacturer loses. Fair-mindedness prevails.

Now think about what happens when a commodity food item is recalled.

• Products like hamburger, spinach, eggs, chicken, fish, produce, fruit, etc. are undifferentiated – i.e., consumers don’t necessarily associate them with a brand or particular company.
• On top of being ubiquitous, they are also perishable.
• And - they don’t cost much.

This combination of perishability, interchangability and low cost creates quite a different equation for the consumer.

Scenario #2: I learn about a hamburger recall. I don’t bother to find out whose hamburger, or which retailer, or what dates, I just toss my hamburger in the trash and buy more next time I go to the grocery store.

Here’s the micro-economics of what just happened: My demand for hamburger just doubled. (I bought twice as much this week as I normally would because I tossed the first round last week.) At the same time, the supply of hamburger can’t increase quickly. (Commodity food supplies react slowly because they have to be grown, which takes time.) In addition, in some cases, whole producers are taken out of the market, reducing the supply even further.

The Law of Supply and Demand says “Increased demand in the face of reduced supply causes prices to rise.” (This assumes price elasticity, of which commodities are a classic example.)

This is, in fact, exactly what often happens with commodity markets: prices can take an unprecedented rise right after a major recall. We saw this recently as a result of the egg recall for salmonella contamination: The recall was first announced on August 13th. By September 1st, egg prices had risen 40% and prices eventually almost doubled by November.

Unlike the first scenario this causes a reversal of fortune - one not in the consumer’s favor. You buy more and pay more while the manufacturer enjoys a period of windfall profits.

Just food for thought…

I See Sea Salt...

I’m starting to see sea salt everywhere – and am starting to wonder why. As a ‘gourmet’ ingredient, it definitely has some interesting flavor attributes and, in some instances, provides nice color and texture characteristics. But, is it actually GOOD for you?

In reality, sea salt and table salt are basically the same thing: Sodium Chloride. Sea salt is made by evaporating sea water. Table salt is mined from the earth – which ended up there when the ancient seas evaporated. From that perspective, they are identical. Both are even excavated using the same equipment: front-end loaders and dump trucks. The big difference comes from what happens after they are scooped up.

Traditional table salt is purified to remove trace minerals and impurities that occur in seawater. Some of these impurities are, arguably, good for you: iron, sulfur, magnesium. Some impurities are definitely not: lead and mercury, for example. In addition, table salt manufacturers add iodine, an essential nutrient which isn’t found in sea salt. Products marketed as sea salt are often sold ‘as is’. Whatever was in the water, ends up in the salt.

All things considered, I tend to fall back on the ‘evolutionary’ argument to make the decision: The salt we evolved on looked more like the sea than it did Morton’s. Therefore, sea salt probably has some nuances that better provide for our nutritional needs.

On the other hand, the idea that sea salt has lower sodium is pure bunk.

Sea salt and table salt have exactly the same sodium content. But, because they have no agreed upon regulatory identity, products labeled ‘sea salt’ can contain just about anything. Claims like “100% Sea Salt”, “100% Natural”, “Organic” and “Pure” are all fair game and are used with impunity. For example, the popular ‘low sodium’ sea salts achieve that claim by cutting them with other, non-sodium, salts – mainly potassium chloride. This is exactly how low sodium table salt is made. Because potassium chloride can be found in sea water (but at very low levels), the manufacturers argue that adding large quantities of it to ‘regular’ sea salt, means it can still be labeled “100% sea salt”.

Bottom line:
Sea salt is pretty neat stuff and a great addition to any pantry – as a seasoning.
Sea salt is NOT a particularly healthy alternative to table salt – especially in terms of sodium reduction.

Tuna: What's better - 'Oil' or 'Water'?

Oil by a long shot.

So I’ve been told emphatically by a colleague who oughta know – he has a BS in Meat Science and was Manager of Process Development for “Big Tuna”. (Tell ‘em Charlie sent you?). With over 500 tuna product tasting panels under his belt (literally), he claims that “No one in the [tuna] industry eats the water pack unless forced to. More water is sold, but oil is way better.”

So, what makes the water packed product so inferior? When the precooked tuna meat is retorted (cooked in the can) with water, the water moves into the fish, which makes the fish mushy and changes the flavor. The water also contains high levels of salt as well as a vegetable broth containing soy fiber. In effect, you’re getting watered down fish – and less actual tuna meat in the can.

With oil packed tuna, none of this happens. The oil surrounds the tuna meat, but doesn’t migrate into it. Much less broth is used or, in some cases, no broth at all – which means you taste the superior tuna flavor, not the veggies and soy.

The vegetable broth is added solely to create water retention in the fish cake – which increases the “press weight” (amount of “fish” in the can), which determines the weight claimed on the can label. With oil pack, you get more actual fish; around 3 ounces of tuna meat in a 6 ounce can.

Ok, but we all buy the water packed product because it’s a LOT better for you, right?

Wrong.

Once you drain the can, both the ‘oil’ version and the ‘water’ version are remarkably the same, nutritionally. In fact, the calorie and fat content are equal. The water pack actually has slightly more sodium and the oil pack has slightly more protein.

Then, why is the water packed product the big seller?

In the early 1970's the big 3 tuna companies started moving tuna operations off shore. (At that time, well over 95% of all canned tuna was packed in oil.) The US Government decided to get involved (surprise) and fix the off shore ‘problem’ by imposing a special tariff on incoming tuna. In true bureaucratic fashion, the regulation referred to “canned in oil”. The tuna industry decided to beat the tariff by promoting the health benefits of water pack… and over the years have managed to convince us of exactly that. The public now ‘knows’ that water packed tuna is the best!

By the way...according to my friend (who is no longer in the tuna industry - and, therefore, unbiased), the best tuna on the market is Genova's Tonno in olive oil. You can find it in the ethnic section of most large grocery stores....

Remember when EVERYONE was Lactose Intolerant?

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)