ReportWire

Tag: OILS

  • Keeping Better Score of Your Diet | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    How can you get a perfect diet score?

    How do you rate the quality of people’s diets? Well, “what could be more nutrient-dense than a vegetarian diet?” Indeed, if you compare the quality of vegetarian diets with non-vegetarian diets, the more plant-based diets do tend to win out, and the higher diet quality in vegetarian diets may help explain greater improvements in health outcomes. However, vegetarians appear to have a higher intake of refined grains, eating more foods like white rice and white bread that have been stripped of much of their nutrition. So, just because you’re eating a vegetarian diet doesn’t mean you’re necessarily eating as healthfully as possible.

    Those familiar with the science know the primary health importance of eating whole plant foods. So, how about a scoring system that simply adds up how many cups of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, beans, chickpeas, split peas, and lentils, and how many ounces of nuts and seeds per 1,000 calories (with or without counting white potatoes)? Looking only at the total intake of whole plant foods doesn’t mean you aren’t also stuffing donuts into your mouth. So, you could imagine proportional intake measures, based on calories or weight, to determine the proportion of your diet that’s whole plant foods. In that case, you’d get docked points if you eat things like animal-derived foods—meat, dairy, or eggs—or added sugars and fats.

    My favorite proportional intake measure is McCarty’s “phytochemical index,” which I’ve profiled previously. I love it because of its sheer simplicity, “defined as the percent of dietary calories derived from foods rich in phytochemicals.” It assigns a score from 0 to 100, based on the percentage of your calories that are derived from foods rich in phytochemicals, which are biologically active substances naturally found in plants that may be contributing to many of the health benefits obtained from eating whole plant foods. “Monitoring phytochemical intake in the clinical setting could have great utility” in helping people optimize their diet for optimal health and disease prevention. However, quantifying phytochemicals in foods or tissue samples is impractical, laborious, and expensive. But this concept of a phytochemical index score could be a simple alternative method to monitor phytochemical intake.

    Theoretically, a whole food, plant-based or vegan diet that excluded refined grains, white potatoes, hard liquors, added oils, and added sugars could achieve a perfect score of 100. Lamentably, most Americans’ diets today might be lucky to score just 20. What’s going on? In 1998, our shopping baskets were filled with about 20% whole plant foods; more recently, that has actually shrunk, as you can see below and at 2:49 in my video Plant-Based Eating Score Put to the Test.

    Wouldn’t it be interesting if researchers used this phytochemical index to try to correlate it with health outcomes? That’s exactly what they did. We know that studies have demonstrated that vegetarian diets have a protective association with weight and body mass index. For instance, a meta-analysis of five dozen studies has shown that vegetarians had significantly lower weight and BMI compared with non-vegetarians. And even more studies show that high intakes of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and legumes may be protective regardless of meat consumption. So, researchers wanted to use an index that gave points for whole plant foods. They used the phytochemical index and, as you may recall from an earlier video, tracked people’s weight over a few years, using a scale of 0 to 100 to simply reflect what percentage of a person’s diet is whole plant foods. And even though the healthiest-eating tier only averaged a score of about 40, which meant the bulk of their diet was still made up of processed foods and animal products, just making whole plant foods a substantial portion of the diet may help prevent weight gain and decrease body fat. So, it’s not all or nothing. Any steps we can take to increase our whole plant food intake may be beneficial.

    Many more studies have since been performed, with most pointing in the same direction for a variety of health outcomes—indicating, for instance, higher healthy plant intake is associated with about a third of the odds of abdominal obesity and significantly lower odds of high triglycerides. So, the index may be “a useful dietary target for weight loss,” where there is less focus on calorie intake and more on increasing consumption of these high-nutrient, lower-calorie foods over time. Other studies also suggest the same is true for childhood obesity.

    Even at the same weight, with the same amount of belly fat, those eating plant-based diets tend to have higher insulin sensitivity, meaning the insulin they make works better in their body, perhaps thanks to the compounds in plants that alleviate inflammation and quench free radicals. Indeed, the odds of hyperinsulinemia—an indicator of insulin resistance—were progressively lower with greater plant consumption. No wonder researchers found 91% lower odds of prediabetes for people getting more than half their calories from healthy plant foods.

    They also found significantly lower odds of metabolic syndrome and high blood pressure. There were only about half the odds of being diagnosed with hypertension over a three-year period among those eating more healthy plants. Even mental health may be impacted—about 80% less depression, 2/3 less anxiety, and 70% less psychological distress, as you can see below and at 5:15 in my video.

    Is there a link between the dietary phytochemical index and benign breast diseases, such as fibrocystic diseases, fatty necrosis, ductal ectasia, and all sorts of benign tumors? Yes—70% lower odds were observed in those with the highest scores. But what about breast cancer? A higher intake of healthy plant foods was indeed associated with a lower risk of breast cancer, even after controlling for a long list of other factors. And not just by a little bit. Eating twice the proportion of plants compared to the standard American diet was linked to more than 90% lower odds of breast cancer.

    Doctor’s Note

    You can learn more about the phytochemical index in Calculate Your Healthy Eating Score.

    If you’re worried about protein, check out Flashback Friday: Do Vegetarians Get Enough Protein?

    It doesn’t have to be all or nothing, though. Do Flexitarians Live Longer?

    For more on plant-based junk, check out Friday Favorites: Is Vegan Food Always Healthy?.

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Can Olive Oil Compete with Arthritis Drugs? | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    What happened when topical olive oil was pitted against an ibuprofen-type drug for osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis?

    Fifty million Americans suffer from arthritis, and osteoarthritis of the knee is the most common form, making it a leading cause of disability. There are several inflammatory pathways that underlie the disease’s onset and progression, so various anti-inflammatory foods have been put to the test. Strawberries can decrease circulating blood levels of an inflammatory mediator known as tumor necrosis factor, but that doesn’t necessarily translate into clinical improvement. For example, drinking cherry juice may lower a marker of inflammation known as C-reactive protein, but it failed to help treat pain and other symptoms of knee osteoarthritis. However, researchers claimed it “provided symptom relief.” Yes, it did when comparing symptoms before and after six weeks of drinking cherry juice, but not any better than a placebo, meaning drinking it was essentially no better than doing nothing. Cherries may help with another kind of arthritis called gout, but they failed when it came to osteoarthritis.

    However, strawberries did decrease inflammation. In fact, in a randomized, double-blind, crossover trial, dietary strawberries were indeed found to have a significant analgesic effect, causing a significant decrease in pain. There are tumor necrosis factor inhibitor drugs on the market now available for the low, low cost of only about $40,000 a year. For that kind of money, you’d want some really juicy side effects, and they do not disappoint—like an especially fatal lymphoma. I think I’ll stick with the strawberries.

    One reason we suspected berries might be helpful is that when people consumed the equivalent of a cup of blueberries or two cups of strawberries daily, and their blood was then applied to cells in a petri dish, it significantly reduced inflammation compared to blood from those who consumed placebo berries, as you can see below and at 2:02 in my video Extra Virgin Olive Oil for Arthritis.

    Interestingly, the anti-inflammatory effect increased over time, suggesting that the longer you eat berries, the better. Are there any other foods that have been tested in this way?

    Researchers in France collected cartilage from knee replacement surgeries and then exposed it to blood samples from volunteers who had taken a whopping dose of a grapeseed and olive extract. They saw a significant drop in inflammation, as shown below and at 2:30 in my video.

    There haven’t been any human studies putting grapeseeds to the test for arthritis, but an olive extract was shown to decrease pain and improve daily activities in osteoarthritis sufferers. So, does this mean adding olive oil to one’s diet may help? No, because the researchers used freeze-dried olive vegetation water. That’s basically what’s left over after you extract the oil from olives; it’s all the water-soluble components. In other words, it’s all the stuff that’s in an olive that‘s missing from olive oil.

    If you give people actual olives, a dozen large green olives a day, you may see a drop in an inflammatory mediator. But according to a systematic review and meta-analysis, olive oil—on its own—does not appear to offer any anti-inflammatory benefits. What about papers that ascribe “remarkable anti-inflammatory activity” to extra virgin olive oil? Their evidence is from rodents. In people, extra virgin olive oil may be no better than butter when it comes to inflammation and worse than even coconut oil.

    So, should we just stick to olives? Sadly, a dozen olives could take up nearly half your sodium limit for the entire day, as you can see below and at 3:47 in my video.

    When put to the test, extra virgin olive oil did not appear to help with fibromyalgia symptoms either, but it did work better than canola oil in alleviating symptoms of inflammatory bowel disease. Unfortunately, I couldn’t find any studies putting olive oil intake to the test for arthritis. But why then is this blog entitled “Can Olive Oil Compete with Arthritis Drugs?” Because—are you ready for this?—it appears to work topically.

    Topical virgin olive oil went up against a gel containing an ibuprofen-type drug for osteoarthritis of the knee in a double-blind, randomized, clinical trial. Just a gram of oil, which is less than a quarter teaspoon, three times a day, costing less than three cents a day, worked! Topical olive oil was significantly better than the drug in reducing pain, as you can see below and at 4:37 in my video.

    The study only lasted a month, so is it possible that the olive oil would have continued to work better and better over time?

    Is olive oil effective in controlling morning inflammatory pain in the fingers and knees among women with rheumatoid arthritis? The researchers went all out, comparing the use of extra virgin olive oil to rubbing on nothing and also to rubbing on that ibuprofen-type gel, and, evidently, the decrease in the disease activity score in the olive oil group beat out the others.

    Doctor’s Note

    For more on joint health, see related posts below.

    What about eating olive oil? See Olive Oil and Artery Function.

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • 3-MCPD in Refined Cooking Oils | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    There is another reason to avoid palm oil and question the authenticity of extra-virgin olive oil.

    The most commonly used vegetable oil in the world today is palm oil. Pick up any package of processed food in a box, bag, bottle, or jar, and the odds are it will have palm oil. Palm oil not only contains the primary cholesterol-raising saturated fat found mostly in meat and dairy, but concerns have been raised about its safety, given the finding that it may contain a potentially toxic chemical contaminant known as 3-monochloropropane-1,2-diol, otherwise known as 3-MCPD, which is formed during the heat treatment involved in the refining of vegetable oils. So, these contaminants end up being “widespread in refined vegetable oils and fats and have been detected in vegetable fat-containing products, including infant formulas.”

    Although 3-MCPD has been found in all refined vegetable oils, some are worse than others. The lowest levels of the toxic contaminants were found in canola oil, and the highest levels were in palm oil. Based on the available data, this may result in “a significant amount of human exposure,” especially when used to deep-fry salty foods, like french fries. In fact, just five fries could blow through the tolerable daily intake set by the European Food Safety Authority. If you only eat such foods once in a while, it shouldn’t be a problem, but if you’re eating fries every day or so, this could definitely be a health concern.

    Because the daily upper limit is based on body weight, particularly high exposure values were calculated for infants who were on formula rather than breast milk, since formula is made from refined oils, which—according to the European Food Safety Authority—may present a health risk. Estimated U.S. infant exposures may be three to four times worse.

    If infants don’t get breast milk, “there is basically no alternative to industrially produced infant formula.” As such, the vegetable oil industry needs to find a way to reduce the levels of these contaminants. This is yet another reason that breastfeeding is best whenever possible.

    What can adults do to avoid exposure? Since these chemicals are created in the refining process of oils, what about sticking to unrefined oils? Refined oils have up to 32 times the 3-MCPD compared to their unrefined counterparts, but there is an exception: toasted sesame oil. Sesame oil is unrefined; manufacturers just squeeze the sesame seeds. But, because they are squeezing toasted sesame seeds, the 3-MCPD may have come pre-formed.

    Virgin oils are, by definition, unrefined. They haven’t been deodorized, the process by which most of the 3-MCPD is formed. In fact, that’s how you can discriminate between the various processing grades of olive oil. If your so-called extra virgin olive oil contains MCPD, then it must have been diluted with some refined olive oil. The ease of adulterating extra virgin olive oil, the difficulty of detection, the economic drivers, and the lack of control measures all contribute to extra virgin olive oil’s susceptibility to fraud. How widespread a problem is it?

    Researchers tested 88 bottles labeled as extra virgin olive oil and found that only 33 were found to be authentic. Does it help to stick to the top-selling imported brands of extra virgin olive oil? In that case, 73% of those samples failed. Only about one in four appeared to be genuine, and not a single brand had even half its samples pass the test, as you can see here and at 3:32 in my video 3-MCPD in Refined Cooking Oils.

    Doctor’s Note

    If you missed the previous post where I introduced 3-MCPD, see The Side Effects of 3-MCPD in Bragg’s Liquid Aminos.

    There is no substitute for human breast milk. We understand this may not be possible for adoptive families or those who use surrogates, though. In those cases, look for a nearby milk bank.

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Chlorohydrin 3-MCPD in Bragg’s Liquid Aminos | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    Chlorohydrin contaminates hydrolyzed vegetable protein products and refined oils.

    In 1978, chlorohydrins were found in protein hydrolysates. What does that mean? Proteins can be broken down into amino acids using a chemical process called hydrolysis, and free amino acids (like glutamate) can have taste-enhancing qualities. That’s how inexpensive soy sauce and seasonings like Bragg’s Liquid Aminos are made. This process requires high heat, high pressure, and hydrochloric acid to break apart the protein. The problem is that when any residual fat is exposed to these conditions, it can form toxic compounds called chlorohydrins, which are toxic at least to mice and rats.

    Chlorohydrins like 3-MCPD are considered “a worldwide problem of food chemistry,” but no long-term clinical studies on people have been reported to date. The concern is about the detrimental effects on the kidneys and fertility. In fact, there was a time 3-MCPD was considered as a potential male contraceptive because it could so affect sperm production, but research funding was withdrawn after “unacceptable side effects [were] observed in primates.” Researchers found flaccid testes in rats, which is what they were going for, but it caused neurological scars in monkeys.

    What do you do when there are no studies in humans? How do you set some kind of safety factor? It isn’t easy, but you can take the lowest observed adverse effect level (LOAEL) in animal studies, which, in this case, was kidney damage, add in some kind of fudge factor, and then arrive at an estimated tolerable daily intake (TDI). For 3-MCPD, this means that high-level consumers of soy sauce may exceed the limit. This was based on extraordinarily high contamination levels, though. Since that study, Europe introduced a regulatory limit of 20 parts per billion (ppb) of 3-MCPD in hydrolyzed vegetable protein products like liquid aminos and soy sauce. The U.S. standards are much laxer, though, setting a “guidance level” of up to 50 times more, 1,000 parts per billion.

    I called Bragg’s to see where it fell, and the good news is that it is doing an independent, third-party analysis of its liquid aminos for 3-MCPD. The bad news is that, despite my pleas that it be fully transparent, Bragg’s wouldn’t let me share the results with you. I have seen them, though, but I’m only allowed to confirm they comfortably meet the U.S. standards but fail to meet the European standards.

    This is just the start of the 3-MCPD story, though. A study in Italy tested individuals’ urine for 3-MCPD or its metabolites, and 100% of the people turned up positive, confirming that it’s “a widespread food contaminant.” But 100% of people aren’t consuming soy sauce or liquid aminos every day. Remember, the chemical results from a reaction with residual vegetable oil. When vegetable oil itself is refined, when it’s deodorized and bleached, those conditions also lead to the formation of 3-MCPD.

    Indeed, we’ve known for years that various foods are contaminated. In what kinds of foods have these kinds of chemicals been detected? Well, if they’re in oils and fats, then they’re in greasy foods made from them: margarine, baked goods, pastries, deep-fried foods, fatty snacks like potato and corn chips, as well as infant formula.

    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s limit for soy sauce is 1,000 ppb, but donuts can have more than 1,200 ppb, salami more than 1,500 ppb, ham nearly 3,000 ppb, and French fries in excess of 6,000 ppb, as seen here and at 4:03 in my video The Side Effects of 3-MCPD in Bragg’s Liquid Aminos.

    Most of us don’t have to worry about this problem, unless we’re consumers of fried food. Someone weighing about 150 pounds, for example, who eats 116 grams of donuts, would exceed the European Food Safety Authority’s TDI, even if those donuts were the person’s only source of exposure. That’s about two donuts, but the same limit-blowing amount of 3-MCPD could be found in only five French fries.

    Doctor’s Note

    Believe me, I pleaded with the Bragg’s folks over and over. It’s curious to me that Bragg’s allowed me to talk about where its level of 3-MCPD fell compared to the standards but not say the number itself. At least it’s doing third-party testing.

    Learn more about this topic in my video 3-MCPD in Refined Cooking Oils.

    You can also check out Friday Favorites: The Side Effects of 3-MCPD in Bragg’s Liquid Aminos and Refined Cooking Oils.

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • My Homemade Pumpkin Bread Recipe Is Way Better than Starbucks’

    [ad_1]

    Place 2 cups granulated sugar, 1 (15-ounce) can pumpkin purée, 1/2 cup vegetable or canola oil, and 3 large eggs in a large bowl and whisk until smooth and combined. Add 1 tablespoon pumpkin pie spice, 1 1/2 teaspoons baking powder, 3/4 teaspoon baking soda, and 1/2 teaspoon kosher salt, and whisk to combine. Add 2 1/4 cups all-purpose flour and fold it in with a rubber spatula until just combined. Pour the batter into the prepared pan and spread into an even layer. Sprinkle with 1/4 cup roasted pumpkin seeds, then gently press them into the batter to ensure they stick.

    [ad_2]

    Grace Elkus

    Source link

  • Is Stainless Steel or Cast Iron Cookware Best? Is Teflon Safe? | NutritionFacts.org

    Is Stainless Steel or Cast Iron Cookware Best? Is Teflon Safe? | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    What is the best type of pots and pans to use?

    In my last video, I expressed concerns about the use of aluminum cookware. So, what’s the best type of pots and pans to use? As I discuss in my video Stainless Steel or Cast Iron: Which Cookware Is Best? Is Teflon Safe?, stainless steel is an excellent option. It’s the metal chosen for use “in applications where safety and hygiene are considered to be of the utmost importance, such as kitchenware.” But what about studies showing that the nickel and chromium in stainless steel, which keeps the iron in stainless unstained by rust, can leach into foods during cooking? The leaching only seems to occur when the cookware is brand new. “Metal leaching decreases with sequential cooking cycles and stabilizes after the sixth cooking cycle,” after the sixth time you cook with it. Under more common day-to-day conditions, the use of stainless steel pots is considered to be safe even for most people who are acutely sensitive to those metals. 

    A little leaching metal can even be a good thing in the case of straight iron, like a cast iron skillet, which can have the “beneficial effect” of helping to improve iron status and potentially reduce the incidence of iron deficiency anemia among children and women of reproductive age. The only caveat is that you don’t want to fry in cast iron. Frying isn’t healthy regardless of cookware type, but, at hot temperatures, vegetable oil can react with the iron to create trans fats. 

    What about using nonstick pans? Teflon, also known as polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), “is used as an inner coating material in nonstick cookware.” Teflon’s dark history was the subject of a 2019 movie called Dark Waters, starring Mark Ruffalo and Anne Hathaway. Employees in DuPont’s Teflon division started giving birth to babies with deformities before “DuPont removed all female staff” from the unit. Of course, the corporation buried it all, hiding it from regulators and the public. “Despite this significant history of industry knowledge” about how toxic some of the chemicals used to make Teflon were, it was able to keep it hidden until, eventually, it was forced to settle for more than half a billion dollars after one of the chemicals was linked to “kidney and testicular cancers, pregnancy-induced hypertension, ulcerative colitis, and high cholesterol.”

    “At normal cooking temperatures, PTFE-coated cookware releases various gases and chemicals that present mild to severe toxicity.” As you can see below and at 2:38 in my video, different gases are released at different temperatures, and their toxic effects have been documented. 

    You’ve heard of “canaries in the coal mine”? This is more like “canaries in the kitchen, as cooking with Teflon cookware is well known to kill pet birds,” and Teflon-coated heat lamp bulbs can wipe out half a flock of chickens. 

    “Apart from the gases released during heating the cooking pans, the coating itself starts damaging after a certain period. It is normally advised to use slow heating when cooking in Teflon-coated pans,” but you can imagine how consumers might ignore that. And, if you aren’t careful, some of the Teflon can start chipping off and make its way into the food, though the effects of ingestion are unknown.

    I could find only one study that looks at the potential human health effects of cooking with nonstick pots and pans. Researchers found that the use of nonstick cookware was associated with about a 50 percent increased risk of colorectal cancer, but that may be because of what they were cooking. “Non-stick cookware is used in hazardous cooking methods (i.e. broiling, frying, grilling or barbecuing) at high temperatures mainly for meat, poultry or fish,” in which carcinogenic heterocyclic amines (HCA) are formed from the animal protein. Then, the animal fat can produce another class of carcinogens called polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH). Though it’s possible it was the Teflon itself, which contains suspected carcinogens like that C8 compound from the movie Dark Waters, also known as PFOA, perfluorooctanoic acid.

    “Due to toxicity concerns, PFOA has been replaced with other chemicals such as GenX, but these new alternatives are also suspected to have similar toxicity.” We’ve already so contaminated the Earth with it, though, that we can get it prepackaged in food before it’s even cooked, particularly in dairy products, fish, and other meat; now, “meat is the main source of human exposure” to these toxic pollutants. Of those, seafood is the worst. In a study of diets from around the world, fish and other seafood were “major contributors” of the perfluoroalkyl substances, as expected, given that everything eventually flows into the sea. Though the aquatic food chain is the “primary transfer mechanism” for these toxins into the human diet, “food stored or prepared in greaseproof packaging materials,” like microwave popcorn, may also be a source. 

    In 2019, Oral-B Glide dental floss was tested. Six out of 18 dental floss products researchers tested showed evidence of Teflon-type compounds. Did those who used those kinds of floss end up with higher levels in their bloodstream? Yes, apparently so. Higher levels of perfluorohexanesulfonic acid were found in Oral-B Glide flossers, as you can see below and at 5:28 in my video.

    There are a lot of environmental exposures in the modern world we can’t avoid, but we shouldn’t make things worse by adding them to consumer products. At least we have some power to “lower [our] personal exposure to these harmful chemicals.”

    This is the second in a three-video series on cookware. The first was Are Aluminum Pots, Bottles, and Foil Safe?, and the next is Are Melamine Dishes and Polyamide Plastic Utensils Safe?.

    What about pressure cooking? I covered that in Does Pressure Cooking Preserve Nutrients?.

    So, what is the safest way to prepare meat? See Carcinogens in Meat. 

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Eating to Lower Lp(a)  | NutritionFacts.org

    Eating to Lower Lp(a)  | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    What should we eat—and not eat—to lower the cardiovascular disease risk factor lipoprotein(a)?

    Lipoprotein A, also known as Lp(a), is an independent, genetic, and causal factor for cardiovascular disease and heart attacks. At any level of LDL cholesterol, our risk of heart attack and stroke is two- to three-fold higher when our Lp(a) is elevated. With a high enough Lp(a) level, atherosclerosis continues to progress even if we get our LDL cholesterol way down, which may help explain why so many people continue to have heart attacks and strokes even under treatment for high cholesterol. It’s been suggested that “it would be worthwhile to check Lp(a) levels in a patient who has suffered an event but has no traditional risk factors to explain it.” What’s the point of checking it, though, if there isn’t much we can do about it? “To date, no drug to reduce circulating Lp(a) levels has been approved for clinical use.”

    Some researchers blame our lack of knowledge on the fact that Lp(a) is not found in typical lab animals, like rats and mice. It’s only found in two places in nature: primates and hedgehogs. Hedgehogs? How strange is that? No wonder Lp(a) is “an enigmatic protein that has mystified medical scientists ever since” it was first discovered more than half a century ago. But who needs mice when you have men? The level in our bloodstream is “primarily determined” by genetics. For the longest time, Lp(a) was not thought to be significantly influenced by factors such as diet. Given its similarity to LDL, though, one might assume lifestyle changes, “such as increased physical activity or the adoption of a healthy diet,” would help. “However, the effects of these interventions on Lp(a) concentrations are so far either only marginal or lacking in evidence,” but might that be because they have not tried a plant-based diet yet?

    As I discuss in my video How to Lower Lp(a) with Diet, when it comes to raising LDL cholesterol, we’ve known for years that the trans fats found in meat and dairy are just as bad as the industrially produced trans fats found in partially hydrogenated oil and junk food. But, when it comes to Lp(a), as you can see below and at 2:05 in my video, trans fats from meat and dairy appear to be even worse. 

    Just cutting out meat and following a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet did not appear to help, but, as you can see below and at 2:19 in my video, when study participants were put on a whole food, plant-based diet packed with a dozen servings of fruits and vegetables a day, their Lp(a) levels dropped by 16 percent within four weeks. 

    Of course, in those 30 days, the study subjects also lost about 15 pounds, as you can see below and at 2:28, but weight loss does not appear to affect Lp(a) levels, so you figure that it must have been due to the diet. 

    If you’re already eating a healthy plant-based diet and your Lp(a) levels are still too high, are there any particular foods that can help? As with cholesterol, even if the average total cholesterol of those eating strictly plant-based may be right on target at less than 150, with an LDL under 70, there’s a bell curve with plus or minus 30 points that fall on either side, as you can see below and at 2:45 in my video. 

    Enter the “Portfolio Diet,” which is not only plant-based, but also adds specific cholesterol-lowing foods—so, think nuts, beans, oatmeal, and berries to drag cholesterol down even further. The infographic is below and at 3:11 in my video.  

    What about Lp(a)? Nuts have been put to the test. Two and a half ounces of almonds every day dropped levels, but only by about 8 percent. That is better than another nut study, though, that found no effect at all, as you can see below and at 3:29 in my video. An additional study found “no significant changes,” and researchers reported that subjects in their study “did not experience a change in Lp(a).” Ah, nuts.  

    There is one plant that appears to drop Lp(a) levels by 20 percent, which is enough to take people exceeding the U.S. cut-off down to a more optimum level. And that plant is a fruit: Emblica officinalis, otherwise known as amla or Indian gooseberry. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study asked smokers before and after the trial about their “mouth hygiene, cough with expectoration, shortness of breath on exertion, loss of appetite, feelings of impending doom, palpitation, sleep deprivation, irritability, heartburn and tiredness,” as well as such objective measurements as their blood count, cholesterol, DNA damage, antioxidant status, and lung function. The amla extract used “showed a significant improvement compared to the placebo group in all the subjective and objective parameters tested with no reports of adverse events.” No side effects at all. That’s unbelievable! No, that’s unbelievable. And indeed, it’s completely not true.  

    Yes, subjective complaints got better in the amla group, but they got better in the placebo group, too, with arbitrary scoring systems and no statistical analysis whatsoever. And, of the two dozen objective measures, only half could be said to reach any kind of before-and-after statistical significance and only three were significant enough to account for the fact that if you measure two dozen things, a few might pop up as positive if only by chance. Any time you see this kind of spin in the abstract, which is sometimes the only part of a study people read, you should suspect some kind of conflict of interest. However, no conflicts of interest were declared by the researchers, but that’s bullsh*t, as the study was funded by the very company selling those amla supplements! Sigh.

    Anyway, one of those three significant findings was the Lp(a), so it might be worth a try in the context of a plant-based diet, which, in addition to helping with weight loss, can dramatically improve blood pressure (even after cutting down on blood pressure medications) and contribute to a 25-point drop in LDL cholesterol. Also, it may contribute to a 30 percent drop in C-reactive protein and significant reductions in other inflammatory markers for “a systemic, cardio-protective effect”—all thanks to this single dietary approach.

    You may be interested in my video on Trans Fat in Meat and Dairy. Did you know that animal products are exempted from the ban? See Banning Trans Fat in Processed Foods but Not Animal Fat.

    For more on amla and what else it can do, check out the related posts below.

    If you missed my previous video on Lp(a), watch Treating High Lp(a)—A Risk Factor for Atherosclerosis. 

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Do Taxpayer Subsidies Play a Role in the Obesity Epidemic?  | NutritionFacts.org

    Do Taxpayer Subsidies Play a Role in the Obesity Epidemic?  | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    Why are U.S. taxpayers giving billions of dollars to support the likes of the sugar and meat industries?

    The rise in calorie surplus sufficient to explain the obesity epidemic was less a change in food quantity than in food quality. Access to cheap, high-calorie, low-quality convenience foods exploded, and the federal government very much played a role in making this happen. U.S. taxpayers give billions of dollars in subsidies to prop up the likes of the sugar industry, the corn industry and its high-fructose syrup, and the production of soybeans, about half of which is processed into vegetable oil and the other half is used as cheap feed to help make dollar-menu meat. You can see a table of subsidy recipients below and at 0:49 in my video The Role of Taxpayer Subsidies in the Obesity Epidemic. Why do taxpayers give nearly a quarter of a billion dollars a year to the sorghum industry? When was the last time you sat down to some sorghum? It’s almost all fed to cattle and other livestock. “We have created a food price structure that favors relatively animal source foods, sweets, and fats”—animal products, sugars, and oils.

    The Farm Bill started out as an emergency measure during the Great Depression of the 1930s to protect small farmers but was weaponized by Big Ag into a cash cow with pork barrel politics—including said producers of beef and pork. From 1970 to 1994, global beef prices dropped by more than 60 percent. And, if it weren’t for taxpayers “sweetening the pot” with billions of dollars a year, high-fructose corn syrup would cost the soda industry about 12 percent more. Then we hand Big Soda billions more through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as the Food Stamps Program, to give sugary drinks to low-income individuals. Why is chicken so cheap? After one Farm Bill, corn and soy were subsidized below the cost of production for cheap animal fodder. We effectively handed the poultry and pork industries about $10 billion each. That’s not chicken feed—or rather, it is! 

    This is changing what we eat. 

    As you can see below and at 2:03 in my video, thanks in part to subsidies, dairy, meats, sweets, eggs, oils, and soda were all getting relatively cheaper compared to the overall consumer food price index as the obesity epidemic took off, whereas the relative cost of fresh fruits and vegetables doubled. This may help explain why, during about the same period, the percentage of Americans getting five servings of fruits and vegetables a day dropped from 42 percent to 26 percent. Why not just subsidize produce instead? Because that’s not where the money is. 

    “To understand what is shaping our foodscape today, it is important to understand the significance of differential profit.” Whole foods or minimally processed foods, such as canned beans or tomato paste, are what the food business refers to as “commodities.” They have such slim profit margins that “some are typically sold at or below cost, as ‘loss leaders,’ to attract customers to the store” in the hopes that they’ll also buy the “value-added” products. Some of the most profitable products for producers and vendors alike are the ultra-processed, fatty, sugary, and salty concoctions of artificially flavored, artificially colored, and artificially cheap ingredients—thanks to taxpayer subsidies. 

    Different foods reap different returns. Measured in “profit per square foot of selling space” in the supermarket, confectionaries like candy bars consistently rank among the most lucrative. The markups are the only healthy thing about them. Fried snacks like potato chips and corn chips are also highly profitable. PepsiCo’s subsidiary Frito-Lay brags that while its products represented only about 1 percent of total supermarket sales, they may account for more than 10 percent of operating profits for supermarkets and 40 percent of profit growth. 

    It’s no surprise, then, that the entire system is geared towards garbage. The rise in the calorie supply wasn’t just more food but a different kind of food. There’s a dumb dichotomy about the drivers of the obesity epidemic: Is it the sugar or the fat? They’re both highly subsidized, and they both took off. As you can see below and at 4:29 and 4:35 in my video, along with a significant rise in refined grain products that is difficult to quantify, the rise in obesity was accompanied by about a 20 percent increase in per capita pounds of added sugars and a 38 percent increase in added fats. 

     

    More than half of all calories consumed by most adults in the United States were found to originate from these subsidized foods, and they appear to be worse off for it. Those eating the most had significantly higher levels of chronic disease risk factors, including elevated cholesterol, inflammation, and body weight. 

    If it really were a government of, by, and for the people, we’d be subsidizing healthy foods, if anything, to make fruits and vegetables cheap or even free. Instead, our tax dollars are shoveled to the likes of the sugar industry or to livestock feed to make cheap, fast-food meat. 

    Speaking of sorghum, I had never had it before and it’s delicious! In fact, I wish I had discovered it before How Not to Diet was published. I now add sorghum and finger millet to my BROL bowl which used to just include purple barley groats, rye groats, oat groats, and black lentils, so the acronym has become an unpronounceable BROLMS. Anyway, sorghum is a great rice substitute for those who saw my rice and arsenic video series and were as convinced as I am that we need to diversify our grains. 

    We now turn to marketing. After all of the taxpayer-subsidized glut of calories in the market, the food industry had to find a way to get it into people’s mouths. So, next: The Role of Marketing in the Obesity Epidemic. 

    We’re about halfway through this series on the obesity epidemic. If you missed any so far, check out the related videos below.

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • 5 Key Things To Know About Cannabis Concentrates

    5 Key Things To Know About Cannabis Concentrates

    [ad_1]

    When you are young, you can experiment, but as you age – you want to minimize after effects…we got you when it comes to the next step with marijuana

    High school and college were the days of experimenting. Lessons leads to stories about crazy things and some unfortunate times. But as you age and move to a more sophisticated self, it is important to have the knowledge regarding having fun.  Marijuana has become mainstream and some are moving into a connoisseur phase.  This encompasses flavor, impact, and potency.  In this journey, here are 5 key things to know about cannabis concentrates.

    It is not for beginners

    Concentrates are extremely potent. This is helpful for cannabis enthusiasts who have built up a high tolerance and know how marijuana affects them. However, it can overwhelm people who are still new in consuming.  Don’t rush into the max and until you have gotten your weed legs steady. Dabbing is the way to consume concentrates, and is a bit more of a process.

    Concentrates may or may not be better flower

    Photo by Darrin Harris Frisby/Drug Policy Alliance

    RELATED: Marijuana 101: Dabbing Wax Vs. Vaping Wax

    There is a myth concentrates are better than flower, but it depends on the person who’s consuming it and the effect that they’re looking for. If by “better” you mean “stronger,” then yes, concentrates are stronger than cannabis flower. There’s a higher THC potency in concentrates than the one a joint or a bong hit could provide, but there’s also plenty of differences between the two. While you’ll likely have a stronger high when consuming concentrates, smoking flower is more flavorful and easier to manage, which is why some people prefer that method, just like other people prefer to consume edibles. Like most things cannabis, it all depends on personal taste.

    You can have a bit of a longer high

    High-Potency Marijuana Doubles Risk Of Anxiety Issues, Study FInds
    Photo by Keenan Constance via Pexels

    RELATED: Differences In Marijuana Highs: Flowers, Edibles and Concentrates

    Similar to smoking/vaping, the effects of dabbing usually last 1 to 3 hours. If using a high THC concentrate, you could feel the effects for 10-12 hours. If you are feeling uncomfortable or worried, the best thing to do is take a nap and sleep it off.

    Concentrates are to be respected

    Photo by rgbspace/Getty Images

    RELATED: Dabbing Is On The Rise Among Teens — Here’s What Parents Should Know 

    You can find a ton misinformation surrounding the dabbing process, some reports claim overdoses have been influenced by the recent popularity of concentrates. While there might be an existing relationship, marijuana advocates claim concentrates are safe and produce the same positive results as cannabis flower. Even if you get too high from ingesting the wrong dose, no one has ever died from consuming them.

    Concentrates are like other products

    marijuana dabbing
    Photo by bartystewart/Getty Images

    While the process of making concentrates is one involving the use of complex chemicals, facilities are equipped to handle these solvents and are very strict when it comes to how they’re produced. All the information should be clearly stated on the product’s label, and concentrates should be made by professionals who are working responsibly. In short, dangerous concentrates are rarely found in a regulated, legal market.

    [ad_2]

    Terry Hacienda

    Source link

  • Taiwan or China? Paraguay’s dilemma puts election race in the spotlight

    Taiwan or China? Paraguay’s dilemma puts election race in the spotlight

    [ad_1]

    ASUNCION, April 24 (Reuters) – From Paraguayan capital Asuncion to Taipei and Washington, diplomats, officials – and farmers – are closely watching a tight election race that could determine Paraguay’s future ties with Taiwan.

    Paraguay will vote for its next president on April 30, choosing between a ruling party candidate pledging to extend decades-long diplomatic relations with Taiwan and an opposition rival who favors switching ties to China to boost the landlocked country’s farm-driven economy.

    Pressure inside the South American nation has been rising, especially from its powerful agricultural lobby, to flip ties to China and open up the Asian country’s lucrative markets to Paraguay’s soybeans and beef, its main exports.

    “We’re a food-producing nation that is not selling to the world’s biggest buyer of food,” Pedro Galli, the head of the Paraguayan Rural Association (ARP), told Reuters. His organization represents some 3,000 local farmers.

    Were Paraguay to recognize China it would be a blow to Taiwan, which is facing an uphill battle against Beijing’s economic muscle to keep its remaining 13 allies worldwide, and a fresh sign of China’s growing clout in an area Washington has long regarded as its backyard.

    Galli cited the recognition of China by other countries in the region, which in recent years have included Panama, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador and Nicaragua. Honduras was the latest to switch sides in March.

    “We’re watching the party from the balcony,” Galli said, referring to the loss the farming sector felt in terms of exports. “It’s just us and the Guatemalans left.” 

    Opposition candidate Efrain Alegre, who represents a center-left coalition, told Reuters in January and again in April that he would favor relations with China, the world’s largest beef and soybean importer, if elected president.

    “We are going to be where it is convenient, otherwise it would be a betrayal of the country,” Alegre told Reuters in the April 17 interview. “How can I deny a relationship that is beneficial for all Paraguayans, a people that need development, need investment, need industry?”

    The ruling conservative Colorado Party candidate, Santiago Peña, has vowed to stick with Taiwan. A cross-party delegation visited the island in February, seeking to calm Taiwanese jitters.

    Taipei, which argues that it provides economic support to its allies, said last week it was “perplexed” by the position taken by Paraguay’s opposition and it would do its utmost to maintain its diplomatic ties with the country.

    China has long argued that democratically-ruled Taiwan is part of its own territory with no right to state-to-state ties, a position Taipei strongly rejects. China demands that countries with which it has ties recognize its position.

    ‘WHEN, NOT IF’

    Among diplomatic circles in Asuncion there is a sense a switch is inevitable – regardless of the election outcome.

    “With Paraguay it is a matter of when, not if,” a senior European diplomat told Reuters, adding that given the pressures from the local business community and the fragile global economy, Paraguay could switch “within the next two years.”

    Even if the ruling Colorado party were to win the election, its leaders may not have the same staunch support for Taiwan as incumbent President Mario Abdo, whose father helped forge relations with Taiwan as a political aide over six decades ago.

    “We are brotherly peoples, and we have a destiny together,” Abdo said during February’s visit.

    “Current president Abdo had a strong personal commitment to Taiwan that goes back to his father,” said Evan Ellis, who specializes in China-Latin America relations at the U.S. Army War College Institute.

    “It is not clear that the same personal depth of ties is there with whoever takes over.”

    Opinion polls in April differed widely, with Atlas ranking pro-China Alegre narrowly ahead of Peña and Grau & Associated predicting a 16-point lead for Peña.

    Paraguayan rancher Fernando Serrati, who farms corn, soybeans and cattle, said the country was “trapped” in a diplomatic conflict hurting producers and exports, while the closed door to China meant it often lost a price premium.

    A severe drought that has hit regional farm production, poorer economic prospects globally, and war in Ukraine that has affected shipments of beef to sanctioned Russia have all further dented local sentiment, spurring more Paraguayans to favor new ties with China.

    “We need to consider the real interests of our country and open up to the world,” Serrati said.

    Reporting by Lucinda Elliott and Daniela Desantis; Editing by Adam Jourdan and Rosalba O’Brien

    Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

    [ad_2]

    Source link