ReportWire

Tag: salt

  • Kick Up the Flavor With This Savory Seasoning

    [ad_1]

    Seasoned Salt combines salt with a perfectly flavorful blend of herbs and spices. It is a quick and convenient way to season meats, vegetables, eggs, and everyday dishes with one quick shake.

    jar of Homemade Seasoned Salt with measuring spoon full

    What is Seasoned Salt?

    Seasoned salt (sometimes called seasoning salt) typically includes salt, garlic powder, and onion powder. From there, you can add other ingredients to suit your taste.

    • Flavor: This salt is my go-to and has the perfect combination of savory, slightly sweet, and smoky flavors 
    • Skill Level: No special tools or skills are needed for this DIY seasoned salt.
    • Serving Suggestions: This salt can be used in a variety of recipes. Sprinkle seasoned salt on eggs, grilled zucchini, salad dressings, chicken breasts (or baked chicken thighs), or any savory dish that needs salt and seasoning. You can add it before cooking or after (or both)!
    garlic powder , paprika , sugar , onion powder , salt , pepper with labels to make Homemade Seasoned Salt

    How to Make Seasoned Salt

    This couldn’t be easier; simply combine all of the ingredients in a bowl until well mixed.

    • Salt: For the best results, use a finer sized grains of salt. It will season more evenly and mix better with the spice additions. Make sure to use a thinner-grain pepper so it mixes in well!
    • Seasonings: Use sweet paprika for added warmth and color. Be sure to use garlic powder and not garlic salt, since the salt has already been added. Don’t forget the sugar, as this rounds out the flavor of the spices.

    Favorite Variations

    Whatever you are adding, just ensure the size of each ingredient is roughly the same for even distribution. To achieve this, use a spice grinder or a mortar and pestle before adding.

    • For Tex-Mex Seasoned Salt: Salt, garlic powder, onion powder, oregano, cumin, ground red pepper
    • For Mediterranean Seasoned Salt: Combine salt, garlic, and onion powders with ground rosemary and basil.
    • For an Italian seasoned salt recipe: Add in basil and oregano. I love adding this to Italian dressing!

    Storing Your Seasoning Salt

    Store seasoned salt in a labeled spice jar in a cool, dry cupboard for up to 6 months. Keep it away from moisture so it stays loose and fresh. If it clumps, give it a shake or break it up with a spoon.

    Pantry Spice Mix Favorites

    Did you enjoy this Homemade Seasoned Salt Recipe? Leave a comment and rating below.

    image of Everyday Comfort cookbook by Holly Nilsson of Spend With Pennies plus text

    Prep Time 5 minutes

    Total Time 5 minutes

    Keep seasoned salt in an airtight container in the cupboard for up to 6 months. 

    Calories: 7 | Carbohydrates: 1g | Sodium: 4651mg | Vitamin A: 165IU | Iron: 0.1mg

    Nutrition information provided is an estimate and will vary based on cooking methods and brands of ingredients used.

    Course Seasonings
    Cuisine American

    [ad_2]

    Holly Nilsson

    Source link

  • Plant-Based Hospital Menus | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    The American Medical Association passed a resolution encouraging hospitals to offer healthy plant-based food options.

    “Globally, 11 million deaths annually are attributable to dietary factors, placing poor diet ahead of any other risk factor for death in the world.” Given that diet is our leading killer, you’d think that nutrition education would be emphasized during medical school and training, but there is a deficiency. A systematic review found that, “despite the centrality of nutrition to a healthy lifestyle, graduating medical students are not supported through their education to provide high-quality, effective nutrition care to patients…”

    It could start in undergrad. What’s more important? Learning about humanity’s leading killer or organic chemistry?

    In medical school, students may average only 19 hours of nutrition out of thousands of hours of instruction, and they aren’t even being taught what’s most useful. How many cases of scurvy and beriberi, diseases of dietary deficiency, will they encounter in clinical practice? In contrast, how many of their future patients will be suffering from dietary excesses—obesity, diabetes, hypertension, and heart disease? Those are probably a little more common than scurvy or beriberi. “Nevertheless, fully 95% of cardiologists [surveyed] believe that their role includes personally providing patients with at least basic nutrition information,” yet not even one in ten feels they have an “expert” grasp on the subject.

    If you look at the clinical guidelines for what we should do for our patients with regard to our number one killer, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, all treatment begins with a healthy lifestyle, as shown below and at 1:50 in my video Hospitals with 100-Percent Plant-Based Menus.

    “Yet, how can clinicians put these guidelines into practice without adequate training in nutrition?”

    Less than half of medical schools report teaching any nutrition in clinical practice. In fact, they may be effectively teaching anti-nutrition, as “students typically begin medical school with a greater appreciation for the role of nutrition in health than when they leave.” Below and at 2:36 in my video is a figure entitled “Percentage of Medical Students Indicating that Nutrition is Important to Their Careers.” Upon entry to different medical schools, about three-quarters on average felt that nutrition is important to their careers. Smart bunch. Then, after two years of instruction, they were asked the same question, and the numbers plummeted. In fact, at most schools, it fell to 0%. Instead of being educated, they got de-educated. They had the notion that nutrition is important washed right out of their brains. “Thus, preclinical teaching”— the first two years of medical school—“engenders a loss of a sense of the relevance of the applied discipline of nutrition.”

    Following medical school, during residency, nutrition education is “minimal or, more typically, absent.” “Major updates” were released in 2018 for residency and fellowship training requirements, and there were zero requirements for nutrition. “So you could have an internal medicine graduate who comes out of a terrific program and has learned nothing—literally nothing—about nutrition.”

    “Why is diet not routinely addressed in both medical education and practice already, and what should be done about that?” One of the “reasons for the medical silence in nutrition” is that, “sadly…nutrition takes a back seat…because there are few financial incentives to support it.” What can we do about that? The Food Law and Policy Clinic at Harvard Law School identified a dozen different policy levers at all stages of medical education and the kinds of policy recommendations there could be for the decision-makers, as you can see here and at 3:48 in my video.

    For instance, the government could require doctors working for Veterans Affairs (VA) to get at least some courses in nutrition, or we could put questions about nutrition on the board exams so schools would be pressured to teach it. As we are now, even patients who have just had a heart attack aren’t changing their diet. Doctors may not be telling them to do so, and hospitals may be actively undermining their future with the food they serve.

    The good news is that the American Medical Association (AMA) has passed a resolution encouraging hospitals to offer healthy food options. What a concept! “Our AMA hereby calls on [U.S.] Health Care Facilities to improve the health of patients, staff, and visitors by: (a) providing a variety of healthy food, including plant-based meals, and meals that are low in saturated and trans fat, sodium, and added sugars; (b) eliminating processed meats from menus; and (c) providing and promoting healthy beverages.” Nice!

    “Similarly, in 2018, the State of California mandated the availability of plant-based meals for hospital patients,” and there are hospitals in Gainesville (FL), the Bronx, Manhattan, Denver, and Tampa (FL) that “all provide 100% plant-based meals to their patients on a separate menu and provide educational materials to inpatients to improve education on the role of diet, especially plant-based diets, in chronic illness.”

    Let’s check out some of their menu offerings: How about some lentil Bolognese? Or a cauliflower scramble with baked hash browns for breakfast, mushroom ragu for lunch, and, for supper, white bean stew, salad, and fruit for dessert. (This is the first time a hospital menu has ever made me hungry!)

    The key to these transformations was “having a physician advocate and increasing education of staff and patients on the benefits of eating more plant-based foods.” A single clinician can spark change in a whole system, because science is on their side. “Doctors have a unique position in society” to influence policy at all levels; it’s about time we used it.

    For more on the ingrained ignorance of basic clinical nutrition in medicine, see the related posts below.

    [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

  • Pork Chop Brine

    [ad_1]

    Pork chops are marinated in a simple brine made with salt, brown sugar, bay leaf, rosemary, salt, and pepper for tasty, tenderized, flavor-infused chops.

    Pork Chop Brine in a dish before cooking
    • Flavor: Salty, a little sweet, and full of fresh herbs and warm spices.
    • Skill Level: Whisk, simmer, and brine. It’s that easy!
    • Recommended Tools: A meat thermometer is the perfect tool for gauging how cooked your meat is. Pork should register at 145°F when inserted into the thickest part of the pork chop. Be careful not to touch the bone as it will skew your reading.
    pork chops , bay leaf , pepper , salt , brown sugar , rosemary and water with labels to make Pork Chop Brine

    Ingredient Tips for Pork Chop Brine

    • Brine: Water, salt, brown sugar, peppercorns, a bay leaf, and some fresh rosemary tenderize and season the chops.
    • Pork: Pork chops vary in thickness from ½-inch to 1 ½-inches. Look for chops of the same size so they cook evenly. Use bone-in or boneless chops that aren’t previously soaked in brine.

    Make It Your Own!

    • Apple juice, apple cider, vegetable stock, or white wine are great additions to the water.
    • Use your favorite brown sugar substitute if desired.
    • Experiment with seasoning blends like Italian or a simple seasoned salt to match the menu.

    How to Brine Pork Chops

    1. Simmer the brine ingredients until the sugar and salt are dissolved (full recipe below).
    2. Refrigerate brine until fully chilled.
    3. Add chops and brine to a zippered bag and marinate up to 2 hours.
    4. Rinse and pat the pork chops dry before cooking on the stove or the grill.
    • Be sure that the sugar and salt are fully dissolved in Step 2.
    • Two hours is the limit for brining pork chops; too long and they will become mushy.
    • Rinsing the chops and patting them dry before cooking removes excess salt and seasonings, so the chops aren’t overly salty.
    • You can make this pork chop brine a couple of days ahead and keep it in the refrigerator, but the flavor is best if used within two weeks. Always discard the leftover used brine to prevent the risk of any foodborne illness.
    cooked Pork Chop Brine in a pan with rosemary

    Storing Leftovers

    Store leftover cooked pork chops in an airtight container for up to 4 days. Enjoy them cold, sliced on a simple green salad, or reheat them in the microwave. Leftovers can be added to a pork stir-fry or some quick and easy pork fajitas.

    Freeze chops in a zippered bag for up to one month. Thaw overnight in the refrigerator before reheating.

    Delicious Pork Chop Recipes

    Have you tried this Pork Chop Brine? Leave a rating and comment below.

    image of Everyday Comfort cookbook by Holly Nilsson of Spend With Pennies plus text
    Pork Chop Brine in a dish before cooking

    5 from 128 votes↑ Click stars to rate now!
    Or to leave a comment, click here!

    Pork Chop Brine

    Make this pork chop brine for chops that are always juicy, tender, and full of flavor.

    Prep Time 5 minutes

    Cook Time 10 minutes

    Cooling Time 30 minutes

    Total Time 45 minutes

    • In a medium-sized saucepan, add water, kosher salt, sugar, peppercorns, bay leaf, and rosemary.

    • Bring to a simmer over high heat. You do not need the water to rapidly boil but you need to make sure the salt and sugar have dissolved in the water.

    • Remove the pot from the heat and cool completely.

    • Once the brine is cool add the pork chops to a large ziptop bag and pour in the brine.

    • Let the pork brine in the refrigerator for up to 2 hours.

    • Rinse and pat dry before cooking.

    • Purchase pork that has not been pre-brined. A lot of pork in grocery stores has a saline solution, so using brine on that will make it too salty.
    • Ensure sugar and salt are completely dissolved in the brine.
    • Brine must be completely cool before adding the pork.
    • Don’t brine them too long (up to 2 hours is enough).
    • To season pork before cooking, use herbs and spices without salt.
    • Do not store ‘used’ brine. Once your pork has been brined, discard the remaining brine.

    Serving: 1pork chop | Calories: 233 | Carbohydrates: 7g | Protein: 29g | Fat: 9g | Saturated Fat: 3g | Polyunsaturated Fat: 1g | Monounsaturated Fat: 4g | Trans Fat: 0.1g | Cholesterol: 90mg | Sodium: 7151mg | Potassium: 524mg | Fiber: 0.3g | Sugar: 6g | Vitamin A: 14IU | Vitamin C: 0.02mg | Calcium: 31mg | Iron: 1mg

    Nutrition information provided is an estimate and will vary based on cooking methods and brands of ingredients used.

    Course Dinner, Entree, Main Course
    Cuisine American
    close up of Pork Chop Brine with a title
    sweet and salty Pork Chop Brine with writing
    Pork Chop Brine with rosemary in a pan with a title
    Pork Chop Brine in a pan and close up photo with a title

    [ad_2]

    Holly Nilsson

    Source link

  • There may soon be a new approach to treat hard-to-control high blood pressure

    [ad_1]

    Doctors may soon have a new way to treat high blood pressure, even among people for whom medicines haven’t worked well in the past.Baxdrostat, an experimental medicine made by AstraZeneca, showed promise in treating people with uncontrolled or resistant high blood pressure in a recent trial. If the medicine gets approved by regulatory authorities, it will be one of the first new approaches to treating high blood pressure in decades, researchers say.Scientists presented the trial results Saturday at the European Society of Cardiology Congress 2025 in Madrid and simultaneously published them in the New England Journal of Medicine.For the study, researchers enrolled 800 adults who still had high blood pressure after taking two or more medications for at least four weeks. To qualify for the study, patients’ systolic blood pressure had to be between 140 and 170.Blood pressure is measured in millimeters of mercury, which is abbreviated as mm Hg. The measurement has an upper number, or systolic reading, and a lower number, a diastolic reading. Systolic pressure measures the force of blood as it pumps out of the heart into the arteries; diastolic is the pressure created as the heart rests between beats.Normal blood pressure is less than 120/80 mm Hg, and elevated blood pressure is considered to be from 120 to 129/80 mm Hg. At 130/80 mmHg or higher, according to new U.S. guidelines, a person’s medical provider will want them to take a blood pressure medication if lifestyle changes — including eating healthier, reducing salt in the diet and exercising more — don’t work first.The researchers on the new trial placed the participants into three groups. One received 1 milligram of baxdrostat, another got 2 mg, and another got a placebo, which does nothing. Participants took their dose in addition to medicines they were already taking.At 12 weeks, about 4 in 10 patients taking baxdrostat reached healthy blood pressure levels, compared with less than 2 in 10 who got a placebo.Specifically, participants who got 1 or 2 mg of baxdrostat daily saw their systolic blood pressure – the upper number in the reading – fall around 9 to 10 mm Hg more than those taking a placebo. This reduction, studies show, is large enough to cut cardiovascular risk.When blood pressure is high, the force of the blood pushes against the walls of their blood vessels, making the heart less efficient: Both the vessels and the heart must work harder, and it’s more difficult to get blood to essential organs and cells. Without treatment, high blood pressure will eventually damage the arteries, raising the risk of conditions like a heart attack, stroke, coronary disease, vascular dementia and cognitive problems.Heart disease is the No. 1 killer in the world. Lowering blood pressure is the most modifiable way to avoid such a death.Nearly half of all adults in the U.S. have higher than normal blood pressure, and 1 in 10 people have what doctors call resistant hypertension: Despite being on three or more medications, they are not meeting the goal for blood pressure control.When a patient has high blood pressure, doctors may need to try a variety of medications to see what works best.Adding baxdrostat to the list of options could be a big help for patients, according to Dr. Stacey E. Rosen, volunteer president of the American Heart Association, who was not involved with the new research.“What’s interesting about this medication is that they can really be a wonderful partner, so to speak, with some of the more classically recommended anti-hypertensive medications,” said Rosen, who is also a senior vice president of women’s health and executive director of the Katz Institute for Women’s Health of Northwell Health in New York City.Medication options now on the market control blood pressure in a variety of ways. Some, such as vasodilators, relax and widen arteries and veins to allow blood to get through easier and increase flow. Diuretics primarily work by removing excess fluid and salt from the body by increasing urine production. Centrally acting alpha agonists help prevent the nervous system from responding to stress. ACE inhibitors keep the body from producing angiotensin II, a hormone that makes blood vessels constrict. ARBs, or angiotensin II receptor blockers, help reduce the production of aldosterone, a hormone that promotes salt and water retention. Calcium channel blockers can keep calcium away from the cells of the heart and arteries so they don’t have to work as hard.Each can have different side effects, including dizziness, rapid or slower heart rate, exhaustion, upset stomach and swelling in the legs.Baxdrostat’s side effects, the study showed, were mild overall. The most common problem was abnormalities in potassium and sodium levels, but this was rare.Baxdrostat takes a new approach to managing high blood pressure. It focuses on blocking aldosterone, a hormone created by the adrenal glands that helps kidneys regulate salt and maintain the body’s water balance. Some people produce too much aldosterone, leading their body to retain too much water and salt, pushing up blood pressure.“We’ve also known for a while now that most of us eat too much salt and in doing that, it raises blood pressure. But we’re also increasingly recognizing that aldosterone may have a direct impact on causing damage to the blood vessels, to the heart, to the kidneys,” said Dr. Jenifer Brown, one of the lead investigators and co-author of the published study.Brown said she often sees cardiology patients at Brigham and Women’s who may have had a heart event, so she needs to be aggressive in getting their blood pressure under control to prevent another. Some patients may have trouble tolerating other blood pressure medications. For others, the standard medicines just don’t work well. Baxdrostat could be a good complement, she said.“We really have had the same tools as clinicians for many years,” Brown said. “I would be excited to have an option like this.”In an editorial accompanying the publication, Dr. Tomasz Guzik, a cardiovascular scientist at the University of Edinburgh, and Dr. Maciej Tomaszewski, a cardiovascular expert at the University of Manchester, write that next steps should be to figure out which patients would best respond to this new medicine and provide longer-term data. If the medication works long-term, they wrote, it could become a “central piller of therapy for difficult-to-control hypertension.”AstraZeneca said it plans to submit its data to regulatory agencies before the end of 2025.

    Doctors may soon have a new way to treat high blood pressure, even among people for whom medicines haven’t worked well in the past.

    Baxdrostat, an experimental medicine made by AstraZeneca, showed promise in treating people with uncontrolled or resistant high blood pressure in a recent trial. If the medicine gets approved by regulatory authorities, it will be one of the first new approaches to treating high blood pressure in decades, researchers say.

    Scientists presented the trial results Saturday at the European Society of Cardiology Congress 2025 in Madrid and simultaneously published them in the New England Journal of Medicine.

    For the study, researchers enrolled 800 adults who still had high blood pressure after taking two or more medications for at least four weeks. To qualify for the study, patients’ systolic blood pressure had to be between 140 and 170.

    Blood pressure is measured in millimeters of mercury, which is abbreviated as mm Hg. The measurement has an upper number, or systolic reading, and a lower number, a diastolic reading. Systolic pressure measures the force of blood as it pumps out of the heart into the arteries; diastolic is the pressure created as the heart rests between beats.

    Normal blood pressure is less than 120/80 mm Hg, and elevated blood pressure is considered to be from 120 to 129/80 mm Hg. At 130/80 mmHg or higher, according to new U.S. guidelines, a person’s medical provider will want them to take a blood pressure medication if lifestyle changes — including eating healthier, reducing salt in the diet and exercising more — don’t work first.

    The researchers on the new trial placed the participants into three groups. One received 1 milligram of baxdrostat, another got 2 mg, and another got a placebo, which does nothing. Participants took their dose in addition to medicines they were already taking.

    At 12 weeks, about 4 in 10 patients taking baxdrostat reached healthy blood pressure levels, compared with less than 2 in 10 who got a placebo.

    Specifically, participants who got 1 or 2 mg of baxdrostat daily saw their systolic blood pressure – the upper number in the reading – fall around 9 to 10 mm Hg more than those taking a placebo. This reduction, studies show, is large enough to cut cardiovascular risk.

    When blood pressure is high, the force of the blood pushes against the walls of their blood vessels, making the heart less efficient: Both the vessels and the heart must work harder, and it’s more difficult to get blood to essential organs and cells. Without treatment, high blood pressure will eventually damage the arteries, raising the risk of conditions like a heart attack, stroke, coronary disease, vascular dementia and cognitive problems.

    Heart disease is the No. 1 killer in the world. Lowering blood pressure is the most modifiable way to avoid such a death.

    Nearly half of all adults in the U.S. have higher than normal blood pressure, and 1 in 10 people have what doctors call resistant hypertension: Despite being on three or more medications, they are not meeting the goal for blood pressure control.

    When a patient has high blood pressure, doctors may need to try a variety of medications to see what works best.

    Adding baxdrostat to the list of options could be a big help for patients, according to Dr. Stacey E. Rosen, volunteer president of the American Heart Association, who was not involved with the new research.

    “What’s interesting about this medication is that they can really be a wonderful partner, so to speak, with some of the more classically recommended anti-hypertensive medications,” said Rosen, who is also a senior vice president of women’s health and executive director of the Katz Institute for Women’s Health of Northwell Health in New York City.

    Medication options now on the market control blood pressure in a variety of ways. Some, such as vasodilators, relax and widen arteries and veins to allow blood to get through easier and increase flow. Diuretics primarily work by removing excess fluid and salt from the body by increasing urine production. Centrally acting alpha agonists help prevent the nervous system from responding to stress. ACE inhibitors keep the body from producing angiotensin II, a hormone that makes blood vessels constrict. ARBs, or angiotensin II receptor blockers, help reduce the production of aldosterone, a hormone that promotes salt and water retention. Calcium channel blockers can keep calcium away from the cells of the heart and arteries so they don’t have to work as hard.

    Each can have different side effects, including dizziness, rapid or slower heart rate, exhaustion, upset stomach and swelling in the legs.

    Baxdrostat’s side effects, the study showed, were mild overall. The most common problem was abnormalities in potassium and sodium levels, but this was rare.

    Baxdrostat takes a new approach to managing high blood pressure. It focuses on blocking aldosterone, a hormone created by the adrenal glands that helps kidneys regulate salt and maintain the body’s water balance. Some people produce too much aldosterone, leading their body to retain too much water and salt, pushing up blood pressure.

    “We’ve also known for a while now that most of us eat too much salt and in doing that, it raises blood pressure. But we’re also increasingly recognizing that aldosterone may have a direct impact on causing damage to the blood vessels, to the heart, to the kidneys,” said Dr. Jenifer Brown, one of the lead investigators and co-author of the published study.

    Brown said she often sees cardiology patients at Brigham and Women’s who may have had a heart event, so she needs to be aggressive in getting their blood pressure under control to prevent another. Some patients may have trouble tolerating other blood pressure medications. For others, the standard medicines just don’t work well. Baxdrostat could be a good complement, she said.

    “We really have had the same tools as clinicians for many years,” Brown said. “I would be excited to have an option like this.”

    In an editorial accompanying the publication, Dr. Tomasz Guzik, a cardiovascular scientist at the University of Edinburgh, and Dr. Maciej Tomaszewski, a cardiovascular expert at the University of Manchester, write that next steps should be to figure out which patients would best respond to this new medicine and provide longer-term data. If the medication works long-term, they wrote, it could become a “central piller of therapy for difficult-to-control hypertension.”

    AstraZeneca said it plans to submit its data to regulatory agencies before the end of 2025.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • A Healthy, Natural Source of Iodine?  | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    How much nori, dulse, or arame approximates the recommended daily allowance for iodine?

    Dairy milk supplies between a quarter and a half of the daily iodine requirement in the United States, though milk itself has “little native iodine.” The iodine content in cow’s milk is mainly determined by factors like “the application of iodine-containing teat disinfectants,” and the “iodine residues in milk originate mainly from the contamination of the teat surface…” Indeed, the teats of dairy cows are typically sprayed or dipped with betadine-type disinfectants, and the iodine just kind of leaches into their milk, as you can see at 0:35 in my video Friday Favorites: The Healthiest Natural Source of Iodine

    Too bad most of the plant-based milks on the market aren’t enriched with iodine, too. Fortified soy milk is probably the healthiest of the plant milks, but even if it were enriched with iodine, what about the effects soy may have on thyroid function? When I searched the medical literature on soy and thyroid, this study popped up: “A Cost-Effective, Easily Available Tofu Model for Training Residents in Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Thyroid Nodule Targeting Punctures”—an economical way to train residents to do thyroid biopsies by sticking the ultrasound probe right on top a block of tofu and get to business, as you can see below and at 1:10 in my video. It turns out that our thyroid gland looks a lot like tofu on ultrasound.

    Anyway, “the idea that soya may influence thyroid function originated over eight decades ago when marked thyroid enlargement was seen in rats fed raw soybeans.” (People living in Asian countries have consumed soy foods for centuries, though, “with no perceptible thyrotoxic effects,” which certainly suggests their safety.) The bottom line is that there does not seem to be a problem for people who have normal thyroid function. However, soy foods may inhibit the oral absorption of Synthroid and other thyroid hormone replacement drugs, but so do all foods. That’s why we tell patients to take it on an empty stomach. But you also have to be getting enough iodine, so it may be particularly “important for soy food consumers to make sure their intake of iodine is adequate.”

    What’s the best way to get iodine? For those who use table salt, make sure it’s iodized. “Currently, only 53% of salt sold for use in homes contains iodine, and salt used in processed foods typically is not iodized.” Ideally, we shouldn’t add any salt at all, of course, since it is “a public health hazard.” A paper was titled: “Salt, the Neglected Silent Killer.” Think it’s a little over the top? Dietary salt is the number one dietary risk factor for death on planet Earth, wiping out more than three million people a year, twice as bad as not eating your vegetables, as you can see here and at 2:38 in my video

    In that case, what’s the best source of iodine then? Sea vegetables, as you can see below and at 2:50. We can get a little iodine here and there from a whole variety of foods, but the most concentrated source by far is seaweed. We can get up to nearly 2,000 percent of our daily allowance in just a single gram, about the weight of a paperclip. 

    “Given that iodine is extensively stored in the thyroid, it can safely be consumed intermittently,” meaning we don’t have to get it every day, “which makes seaweed use in a range of foods attractive and occasional seaweed intake enough to ensure iodine sufficiency.” However, some seaweed has overly high iodine content, like kelp, and should be used with caution. Too much iodine can cause hyperthyroidism, a hyperactive thyroid gland. A woman presented with a racing heartbeat, insomnia, anxiety, and weight loss, thanks to taking just two tablets containing kelp a day.

    In my last video, I noted how the average urinary iodine level of vegans was less than the ideal levels, but there was one kelp-eating vegan with a urinary concentration over 9,000 mcg/liter. Adequate intake is when you’re peeing out 100 to 199 mcg/liter, and excessive iodine intake is when you break 300 mcg/liter. Clearly, 9,437 mcg/liter is way too much. 
     
    As you can see below and at 3:57 in my video, the recommended average daily intake is 150 mcg per day for non-pregnant, non-breastfeeding adults, and we may want to stay below 600 mcg a day on a day-to-day basis, but a tablespoon of kelp may contain about 2,000 mcg. So, I’d stay away from kelp because it has too much iodine, and I’d also stay away from hijiki because it contains too much arsenic. 

    This can give you an approximate daily allowance of iodine from some common seaweed preparations: two nori sheets, which you can just nibble on them as snacks like I do; one teaspoon of dulse flakes, which you can just sprinkle on anything; one teaspoon of dried arame, which is great to add to soups; or one tablespoon of seaweed salad.

    If iodine is concentrated in marine foods, “this raises the question of how early hominins living in continental areas could have met their iodine requirements.” What do bonobos do? They’re perhaps our closest relatives. During swamp visits, they all forage for aquatic herbs.  

    Doctor’s Note:

    This is the second in a four-video series on thyroid function. If you missed the previous one, check out Are Vegans at Risk for Iodine Deficiency?.

    Coming up are The Best Diet for Hypothyroidism and Hyperthyroidism and Diet for Hypothyroidism: A Natural Treatment for Hashimoto’s Disease.

    What else can seaweed do? See the related posts below.

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Vegans and Iodine Deficiency Risk  | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    Most plant-based milks are not fortified with iodine.

    “Adequate dietary iodine is required for normal thyroid function.” In fact, the two thyroid hormones are named after how many iodine atoms they contain: T3 and T4. “Given that iodine is extensively stored in the thyroid gland itself, it can safely be consumed intermittently,” so we don’t need to consume it every day. However, our overall diet does need a good source of it. Unfortunately, the common sources aren’t particularly health-promoting: iodized salt and dairy foods. (Iodine-based cleansers like betadine are used on cows “to sanitize the udders, resulting in leaching of iodine in the milk.”) Iodine may also be added to cattle feed, and some commercially produced breads contain food additives with iodine.

    If you put people on a paleo-type diet and cut out their dairy and table salt, they can develop an iodine deficiency, even though they double their intake of seafood, which can also be a source of iodine. What about those switching to diets centered around whole plant foods? They also cut down on ice cream and Wonder Bread, and if they aren’t eating anything from the sea, like seaweed or other sea vegetables, they can run into the same problem.

    A three-year-old’s parents reported striving to feed her only the healthiest foods, and her diet included only plant-based, unsalted, and unseasoned foods. She got no unprocessed foods, but she also got no vitamin supplementation, which could be deadly. Without vitamin B12, those on strictly plant-based diets can develop irreversible nerve damage, but in this case, a goiter arose first, due to inadequate iodine intake.

    In another case of “veganism as a cause of iodine-deficient hypothyroidism,” a toddler became ill after weaning. Before weaning, he was fine because his mother kept taking her prenatal vitamins, which fortunately contained iodine.

    Most vegetarians and vegans are apparently unaware of the importance of iodine intake during pregnancy, “for the neurodevelopment of the unborn child, similar to their omnivorous counterparts.” The American Thyroid Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics have recommended that women, even just planning on getting pregnant, should take a daily supplement containing 150 micrograms (mcg) of iodine, yet only 60 percent of prenatal vitamins marketed in the United States contain this essential mineral. So, despite the recommendations, about 40 percent of prenatal vitamins don’t contain it. “Therefore, it is extremely important that women, especially when pregnant, breastfeeding, or planning a pregnancy, read the labels of their multivitamin supplements to ensure that they are receiving an adequate amount of iodine.”

    Women of reproductive age have an average iodine level of 110 mcg/liter, which is fine for nonpregnant individuals, but we’d really like women to get at least 150 mcg/liter during pregnancy. (It’s basically a 24-hour urine test, in which iodine sufficiency is defined as 100 mcg/liter of urine in nonpregnant adults; the average vegan failed to reach this in the largest study done to date, one out of Boston.)

    The recommended average daily intake is 150 mcg per day for most people, which we can get in about a cup and a half of cow’s milk. Regrettably, plant-based milks aren’t typically fortified with iodine and average only about 3 mcg per cup. Although many plant-based milks are fortified with calcium, researchers found in the largest systematic study to date that only 3 out of 47 were fortified with iodine. Those that were fortified had as much as cow’s milk, but those that weren’t fell short, as you can see at 3:30 in my video Are Vegans at Risk for Iodine Deficiency?

    Plant-based milk companies brag about enriching their milks with calcium and often vitamins B12, D, and A, but only rarely are attempts made to match iodine content. The only reason cow’s milk has so much is that producers enrich the animals’ feed or it comes dripping off their udders. So, why don’t plant-milk companies add iodine, too? I was told by a food scientist at Silk that my carrageenan video played a role in the company switching to another thickener. Hopefully, Silk will see this video, too, and consider adding iodine, or maybe another company will snatch the opportunity for a market advantage.  

    The researchers conclude that individuals who consume plant-based milks not fortified with iodine may be at risk for iodine deficiency, unless they consume alternative dietary iodine sources, the healthiest of which are sea vegetables, which we’ll cover next.

    Doctor’s Note:

    This is the first in a four-video series on thyroid function. The next three are: 

    For more on iodine, see the related posts below.

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Skip the Salt and Shake on Potassium Chloride? | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    Worldwide, physical inactivity accounts for more than 10 million years of healthy life lost, but what we eat accounts for nearly 20 times that. As I discuss in my video Fewer Than 1 in 5,000 Meet Sodium and Potassium Recommended Intakes, unhealthy diets shave hundreds of millions of disability-free years off people’s lives every year. What are the worst aspects of our diets? Four out of the five of the deadliest dietary traps involve not eating enough of certain foods—not eating enough whole grains, fruits, nuts, seeds, and vegetables—but our most fatal flaw is getting too much salt. To put things into perspective, our overconsumption of salt is on the order of 15 times deadlier than diets too high in soda.

    Our bodies are meant to have a certain balance of sodium and potassium intake, yet many people, including the majority in the United States, get vastly more sodium and far less potassium than the recommended amounts. Indeed, sodium and potassium goals are currently met by less than 0.015 percent of the U.S. population—close to 99.99 percent noncompliance, with only 1 in 6,000 Americans hitting the recommended guidelines.

     

    What’s So Bad About Salt?

    Of all the terrible things about our diets, high dietary sodium intake—that is, high salt intake—is the leading risk, estimated to be causing millions of deaths every year mainly through adverse effects on blood pressure and increased risks of stroke, heart attack, and kidney damage. Hypertension, known commonly as high blood pressure, is called the “silent and invisible killer” because it rarely causes symptoms but is one of the most powerful independent predictors of some of our leading causes of death. I discuss this in my video Are Potassium Chloride Salt Substitutes Effective?.

     

    How Much Sodium Is Healthy in a Day?

    Our bodies evolved to handle only about 750 milligrams of sodium a day. Nevertheless, the American Heart Association calls for us to stay under 1,500 milligrams, twice that amount. However, we’re consuming more than four times what’s natural, and it’s only getting worse, having increased over the last couple of decades. An eye-opening 98.8 percent of Americans exceed even that elevated 1,500 milligrams threshold.

     

    Daily Potassium Intake

    While many of us are consuming too much sodium, we may also be getting too little potassium, a mineral that lowers blood pressure. Less than 2 percent of U.S. adults, for instance, consume the recommended daily minimum intake of potassium based on chronic disease prevention. So, more than 98 percent of Americans may eat potassium-deficient diets. 

    This deficiency is even more striking when comparing our current intake with that of our ancestors, who consumed large amounts of dietary potassium. We evolved probably getting more than 10,000 milligrams of potassium a day. The recommendation was to get about half that amount, yet most of us don’t come anywhere close.

     

    Why Are So Many of Us Lacking in Potassium?

    We evolved consuming a diet very rich in potassium and low in sodium, but, today, this pattern has been reversed. The flip reflects a shift away from traditional plant-based diets high in potassium and low in sodium towards the standard American diet. I’m talking about a shift away from fruits, greens, roots, and tubers to an eating pattern filled with salty, processed foods stripped of potassium.

     

    Why Do We Need Potassium?

    Low potassium intake has been implicated in high blood pressure and cardiovascular disease, and several meta-analyses have confirmed that high potassium intake appears to reduce the risk of stroke. It follows that potassium is now considered a “nutrient of public health concern” because most Americans don’t reach the recommended minimum daily intake.

     

    What Is the Best Substitute for Salt?

    Potassium chloride, which is often found in zero-sodium salt substitutes. We know from randomized controlled trials that sodium reduction leads to blood pressure reduction and increasing potassium intake can also lower blood pressure. So should we be “salting” our food with potassium chloride instead of sodium chloride?

     

    What Is Potassium Chloride? Is It a Viable (and Tasty) Salt Substitute?

    Potassium chloride is a naturally occurring mineral salt, which is obtained the same way we get regular sodium salt. Since we get too much sodium and not enough potassium, this would seem to make potassium chloride a win-win solution. Consider these examples:

    • In a randomized controlled trial, households had just 25 percent of the sodium chloride salt replaced with potassium chloride. At that level, most people either can’t tell the difference or even prefer the salt with the potassium mixed in. The findings? The use of the salt substitute with one-quarter potassium chloride was associated with cutting the risk of developing hypertension in half.
    • In another study, five kitchens in a veterans’ retirement home were randomized into two groups for about two and a half years. They either salted their meals with regular salt or, unbeknownst to the cooks and the diners alike, a 50/50 blend of potassium chloride. Those in the half-potassium group cut their risk of dying from cardiovascular disease by about 40 percent and lived up to nearly one year longer. The life expectancy difference at age 70 was equivalent to that which would have naturally occurred in 14 years––meaning that just switching to half potassium salt appeared to effectively make people more than a decade younger when it came to risk of death.

     

    Side Effects of Potassium Chloride?

    As I discuss in my video Potassium Chloride Salt Substitute Side Effects, potassium chloride is “generally regarded as safe” by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Healthy individuals don’t have to worry about getting too much potassium because their kidneys excrete any excess in urine, but that’s with potassium in food. What about supplements? No adverse effects have been shown for long-term intakes of potassium supplements as high as 3,000 milligrams a day, and blood levels of potassium are maintained in the normal range by healthy kidneys, even when potassium intake is increased to approximately 15,000 milligrams a day. This isn’t surprising, given that we evolved eating so many healthy plant foods, so many fruits and vegetables, rich in potassium.

    The normal range for potassium levels in the blood is between 3.5 and 5.0. There are a small number of individuals who may run into problems, primarily those with severely impaired kidney function. That’s why there’s been such a reluctance to push potassiumbased salt substitutes on a population level. Serious issues may arise if your kidneys can’t regulate your potassium. There may be concern if you have known kidney disease, diabetes (diabetes can lead to kidney damage), severe heart failure, or adrenal insufficiency, or if you’re an older adult or on medications that impair potassium excretion. If you aren’t sure if you’re at risk, ask your doctor about getting your kidney function tested.

     

    Conclusion

    National and international health organizations have called for warning labels on salt packets and salt shakers, with messages like “too much sodium in the diet causes high blood pressure and increases risk of stomach cancer, stroke, heart disease, and kidney disease. Limit your use.” So, pass (on) the salt shaker and try some potassium chloride instead.

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Celebrating Housewives Costumes Through the Years! Plus ‘Orange County,’ ’Potomac,’ and ‘Salt Lake City.’

    Celebrating Housewives Costumes Through the Years! Plus ‘Orange County,’ ’Potomac,’ and ‘Salt Lake City.’

    [ad_1]

    Rachel Lindsay and Chelsea Stark-Jones begin today’s podcast with a trip down memory lane in honor of Halloween, during which they chat about their favorite housewives costume moments (3:25). Then, they dive into the Ryan and Jenn drama in The Real Housewives of Orange County Season 18 finale (13:33). Rachel is later joined by Callie Curry to discuss Mia’s chaotic girls trip to Lake Norman in Season 9, Episode 4 of The Real Housewives of Potomac (34:51). Finally, Jodi Walker hops on to break down Season 5, Episode 7 of The Real Housewives of Salt Lake City and where they stand on Heather vs. Bronwyn (54:12).

    Host: Rachel Lindsay
    Guests: Chelsea Stark-Jones, Callie Curry, and Jodi Walker
    Producer: Devon Baroldi
    Theme Song: Devon Renaldo

    Subscribe: Spotify

    [ad_2]

    Rachel Lindsay

    Source link

  • Bacon Salt – Wicked Gadgetry

    Bacon Salt – Wicked Gadgetry

    [ad_1]











    For those who can’t get enough of succulent bacon, now you can enjoy your favorite foods with a sprinkle of bacon salt. This one-of-a-kind condiment captures the sweet and salty taste of bacon with a hint of heat at the end for a truly unique taste experience.

    [ad_2]

    Kyle

    Source link

  • Shannon Called Out! Plus ‘New York,’ ‘Salt Lake City,’ and ‘Orange County.’

    Shannon Called Out! Plus ‘New York,’ ‘Salt Lake City,’ and ‘Orange County.’

    [ad_1]

    Rachel Lindsay and Jodi Walker kick of this week’s Morally Corrupt with an update on Jax Taylor and Brittany Cartwright’s divorce (4:09), then dive into the Season 15 premiere of The Real Housewives of New York (9:17). Later, Rachel and Jodi recap Season 5, Episode 3 of The Real Housewives of Salt Lake City (36:15). Finally, Rachel is joined by Chelsea Stark-Jones to discuss Joel Kim Booster’s recent rant about Shannon Storms Beador on Instagram and Season 18, Episode 13 of The Real Housewives of Orange County (53:26).

    Host: Rachel Lindsay
    Guests: Jodi Walker and Chelsea Stark-Jones
    Producer: Devon Baroldi
    Theme: Devon Renaldo

    Subscribe: Spotify

    [ad_2]

    Rachel Lindsay

    Source link

  • ’Salt Lake City’ Season 5 Premiere! Plus, ‘Orange County’ and ‘Dubai.’

    ’Salt Lake City’ Season 5 Premiere! Plus, ‘Orange County’ and ‘Dubai.’

    [ad_1]

    Rachel Lindsay and Callie Curry begin this week’s episode by sharing their opinions on the recent Bachelorette drama, before moving on to recap Season 18, Episode 11 of The Real Housewives of Orange County (19:41). Then, after giving their final thoughts on The Real Housewives of Dubai Season 2 reunion (37:07), Jodi Walker makes her triumphant return to break down The Real Housewives of Salt Lake City Season 5 premiere (51:28).

    Host: Rachel Lindsay
    Guests: Callie Curry and Jodi Walker
    Producer: Devon Baroldi
    Theme: Devon Renaldo

    Subscribe: Spotify

    [ad_2]

    Rachel Lindsay

    Source link

  • What About Saturated Fat and Vegetarians’ Stroke Risk?  | NutritionFacts.org

    What About Saturated Fat and Vegetarians’ Stroke Risk?  | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    How can we explain the drop in stroke risk as the Japanese diet became westernized with more meat and dairy?

    As Japan westernized, the country’s stroke rate plummeted, as you can see in the graph below and at 0:15 in my video Vegetarians and Stroke Risk Factors: Saturated Fat?

    Stroke had been a leading cause of death in Japan, but the mortality rate decreased sharply as they moved away from their traditional diets and started eating more like those in the West. Did the consumption of all that extra meat and dairy have a protective effect? After all, their intake of animal fat and animal protein was going up at the same time their stroke rates were going down, as shown below and at 0:35 in my video

    Commented a noted Loma Linda cardiology professor, “Protection from stroke by eating animal foods? Surely not!…Many vegetarians, like myself, have almost come to expect the data to indicate that they have an advantage, whatever the disease that is being considered. Thus, it is disquieting to find evidence in a quite different direction for at least one subtype of stroke.” 

    Can dietary saturated fat, like that found in meat and dairy, be beneficial in preventing stroke risk? There appeared to be a protective association—but only in East Asian populations, as you can see below and at 1:11 in my video

    High dietary saturated fat was found to be associated with a lower risk of stroke in Japanese but not in non-Japanese. So, what was it about the traditional Japanese diet that the westernization of their eating habits made things better when it came to stroke risk? Well, at the same time, their meat and dairy intake was going up, and their salt intake was going down, as you can see below and at 1:40. 

    The traditional Japanese diet was packed with salt. They had some of the highest salt intakes in the world, about a dozen spoonsful of salt a day. Before refrigeration became widely available, they ate all sorts of salted, pickled, and fermented foods from soy sauce to salted fish. In the areas with twice the salt intake, they had twice the stroke mortality, but when the salt intake dropped, so did the stroke death rates, because when the salt consumption went down, their blood pressure went down, too. High blood pressure is perhaps “the single most important potentially modifiable risk factor for stroke,” so it’s no big mystery why the westernization of the Japanese diet led to a drop in stroke risk.  

    When they abandoned their more traditional diets, their obesity rates went up and so did their diabetes and coronary artery disease, but, as they gave up the insanely high salt intake, their insanely high stroke rates correspondingly fell. 

    Stomach cancer is closely associated with excess salt intake. When you look at their stomach cancer rates, they came down beautifully as they westernized their diets away from salt-preserved foods, as you can see in the graph below and at 2:50 in my video

    But, of course, as they started eating more animal foods like dairy, their rates of fatal prostate cancer, for example, shot through the roof. Compared to Japan, the United States has 7 times more deaths from prostate cancer, 5 times more deadly breast cancer, 3 times more colon cancer and lymphoma mortality, and 6 to 12 times the death rate from heart disease, as you can see in the graph below and at 3:15 in my video. Yes, Japanese stroke and stomach cancer rates were higher, but they were also eating up to a quarter cup of salt a day. 

    That would seem to be the most likely explanation, rather than some protective role of animal fat. And, indeed, it was eventually acknowledged in the official Japanese guidelines for the prevention of cardiovascular disease: “Refrain from the consumption of large amounts of fatty meat, animal fat, eggs, and processed foods…”

    Now, one of the Harvard cohorts found a protective association between hemorrhagic strokes and both saturated fat and trans fat, prompting a “sigh of relief…heard throughout the cattle-producing Midwestern states,” even though the researchers concluded that, of course, we all have to cut down on animal fat and trans fat for the heart disease benefit. Looking at another major Harvard cohort, however, they found no such protective association for any kind of stroke, and when they put all the studies together, zero protection was found across the board, as you can see below and at 4:07 in my video

    Observational studies have found that higher LDL cholesterol seems to be associated with a lower risk of hemorrhagic stroke, raising the possibility that cholesterol may be “a double-edged sword,” by decreasing the risk of ischemic stroke but increasing the risk of hemorrhagic stroke. But low cholesterol levels in the aged “may be a surrogate for nutritional deficiencies…or a sign of debilitating diseases,” or perhaps the individuals were on a combination of cholesterol-lowering drugs and blood thinners, and that’s why we tend to see more brain bleeds in those with low cholesterol. You don’t know until you put it to the test.

    Researchers put together about two dozen randomized controlled trials and found that the lower your cholesterol, the better when it comes to overall stroke risk, with “no significant increase in hemorrhagic stroke risk with lower achieved low-density lipoprotein [LDL] cholesterol levels.”

    The genetic data appear mixed, with some suggesting a lifetime of elevated LDL would give you a higher hemorrhagic stroke risk, while other data suggest more of that double-edged sword effect. However, with lower cholesterol, “any possible excess of hemorrhagic [bleeding] stroke is greatly outweighed by the protective effect against ischaemic stroke,” the much more common clotting type of stroke, not to mention heart disease. It may be on the order of 18 fewer clotting strokes for every 1 extra bleeding stroke with cholesterol-lowering. 

    Does this explain the increased stroke risk found among vegetarians? Hemorrhagic stroke is the type of stroke that appeared higher in vegetarians, but the cholesterol levels in vegans were even lower, and, if anything, vegans trended towards a higher clotting stroke risk, so it doesn’t make sense. If there is some protective factor in animal foods, it is to be hoped that a diet can be found that still protects against the killer number one, heart disease, without increasing the risk of the killer number five, stroke. But, first, we have to figure out what that factor is, and the hunt continues. 

    Aren’t there studies suggesting that saturated fat isn’t as bad as we used to think? Check out: 

    Just like the traditional Japanese diet had a lot going for it despite having high sodium as the fatal flaw, what might be the Achilles’ heel of plant-based diets when it comes to stroke risk? 

    This is the seventh video in this stroke series. See the related posts below for the others.

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • What About Vegan Junk Food and Vegetarians’ Stroke Risk?  | NutritionFacts.org

    What About Vegan Junk Food and Vegetarians’ Stroke Risk?  | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    Just because you’re eating a vegetarian or vegan diet doesn’t mean you’re eating healthfully.

    “Plant-Based Diets Are Associated with a Lower Risk of Incident Cardiovascular Disease, Cardiovascular Disease Mortality, and All-Cause Mortality in a General Population of Middle-Aged Adults”: This study of a diverse sample of 12,000 Americans found that “progressively increasing the intake of plant foods by reducing the intake of animal foods is associated with benefits on cardiovascular health and mortality.” Still, regarding plant-based diets for cardiovascular disease prevention, “all plant foods are not created equal.” As you can see in the graph below and at 0:40 in my video Vegetarians and Stroke Risk Factors: Vegan Junk Food?, a British study found higher stroke risk in vegetarians. Were they just eating a lot of vegan junk food? 

    “Any diet devoid of animal food sources can be claimed to be a vegetarian [or vegan] diet; thus, it is important to determine” what is being eaten. One of the first things I look at when I’m trying to see how serious a population is about healthy eating is something that is undeniably, uncontroversially bad: soda, aka liquid candy. Anyone drinking straight sugar water doesn’t have health on top of mind.

    A large study was conducted of plant-based eaters in the United States, where people tend to cut down on meat for health reasons far more than for ethics, as you can see in the graph below and at 1:20 in my video.

    Researchers found that flexitarians drink fewer sugary beverages than regular meat eaters, as do pescatarians, vegetarians, and vegans, as you can see below and at 1:30.

    However, in the study from the United Kingdom where the increased stroke risk in vegetarians was found and where people are more likely to go veg or vegan for ethical reasons, researchers found that pescatarians drink less soda, but the vegetarians and vegans drink more, as shown in the graph below and at 1:44. 

    I’m not saying that’s why they had more strokes; it might just give us an idea of how healthfully they were eating. In the UK study, the vegetarian and vegan men and women ate about the same amounts of desserts, cookies, and chocolate, as you can see in the graph below and at 1:53. 

    They also consumed about the same total sugar, as shown below and at 2:02. 

    In the U.S. study, the average non-vegetarian is nearly obese, the vegetarians are a little overweight, and the vegans were the only ideal weight group. In this analysis of the UK study, however, everyone was about the same weight. The meat eaters were lighter than the vegans, as you can see below, and at 2:19 in my video. The EPIC-Oxford study seems to have attracted a particularly “health-conscious” group of meat eaters weighing substantially less than the general population. 

    Let’s look at some specific stroke-related nutrients. Dietary fiber appears to be beneficial for the prevention of cardiovascular disease, including stroke, and it seems the more, the better, as you can see in the graph below and at 2:43 in my video

    Based on studies of nearly half a million men and women, there doesn’t seem to be any upper threshold of benefit—so, again, “the more, the better.” At more than 25 grams of soluble fiber and 47 grams of insoluble dietary fiber, you can start seeing a significant drop in associated stroke risk. So, one could consider these values “as the minimal recommendable daily intake of soluble and insoluble fiber…to prevent stroke at a population level.” That’s what you see in people eating diets centered around minimally processed plant foods. Dean Ornish, M.D., got up around there with his whole food, plant-based diet. It might not be as much as we were designed to eat, based on the analyses of fossilized feces, but that’s about where we might expect significantly lower stroke risk, as shown below and at 3:25 in my video

    How much were the UK vegetarians getting? 22.1 grams. Now, in the UK, they measure fiber a little differently, so it may be closer to 30 grams, but that’s still not the optimal level for stroke prevention. It’s so little fiber that the vegetarians and vegans only beat out the meat eaters by about one or two bowel movements a week, as you can see below and at 3:48 in my video, suggesting the non-meat eaters were eating lots of processed foods. 

    The vegetarians were only eating about half a serving more of fruits and vegetables. Intake is thought to reduce stroke risk in part because of their potassium content, but the UK vegetarians at higher stroke risk were eating so few greens and beans that they couldn’t even match the meat eaters. The vegetarians (and the meat eaters) weren’t even reaching the recommended minimum daily potassium intake of 4,700 mg a day.

    What about sodium? “The vast majority of the available evidence indicates that elevated salt intake is associated with higher stroke risk…” There is practically a straight-line increase in the risk of dying from a stroke, the more salt you eat, as you can see in the graph below and at 4:29 in my video

    Even just lowering sodium intake by a tiny fraction every year could prevent tens of thousands of fatal strokes. “Reducing Sodium Intake to Prevent Stroke: Time for Action, Not Hesitation” was the title of the paper, but the UK vegetarians and vegans appeared to be hesitating, as did the other dietary groups. “All groups exceeded the advised less than 2400 mg daily sodium intake”—and that didn’t even account for salt added to the table! The American Heart Association recommends less than 1,500 mg a day. So, they were all eating a lot of processed foods. It’s no wonder the vegetarians’ blood pressures were only one or two points lower. High blood pressure is perhaps “the single most important potentially modifiable risk factor for stroke.” 

    What evidence do I have that the vegetarians’ and vegans’ stroke risk would go down if they ate more healthfully? Well, in rural Africa, where they were able to nail the fiber intake that our bodies were designed to get by eating so many whole, healthy plant foods—including fruits, vegetables, grains, greens, beans, and protein almost entirely from plant sources—not only was heart disease, our number one killer, “almost non-existent,” but so was stroke. It only surged up from nowhere “with the introduction of salt and refined foods” to their diet. 

    “It is notable that stroke and senile dementia appear to be virtually absent in Kitava, an Oceanic culture [near Australia] whose quasi-vegan traditional diet is very low in salt and very rich in potassium.” They ate fish a few times a week, but the other 95 percent or so of their diet was made up of vegetables, fruits, corn, and beans. They had an apparent absence of stroke, even despite their ridiculously high rates of smoking, 76 percent of men and 80 percent of women. We evolved by eating as little as less than an eighth of a teaspoon of salt a day, and our daily potassium consumption is thought to have been as high as 10,000 mg or so. We went from an unsalted, whole-food diet to eating salty, processed foods depleted of potassium whether we eat meat or not. 

    Caldwell Esselstyn at the Cleveland Clinic tried putting about 200 patients with established cardiovascular disease on a whole food, plant-based diet. Of the 177 who stuck with the diet, only a single patient went on to have a stroke in the subsequent few years, compared to a hundred-fold greater rate of adverse events, including multiple strokes and deaths in those who strayed from the diet. “This is not vegetarianism,” Esselstyn explains. Vegetarians can eat a lot of less-than-ideal foods, “such as milk, cream, butter, cheese, ice cream, and eggs. This new paradigm is exclusively plant-based nutrition.” 

    This entire train of thought—that the reason typical vegetarians don’t have better stroke statistics is because they’re not eating particularly stellar diets—may explain why they don’t have significantly lower stroke rates. However, it still doesn’t explain why they may have higher stroke rates. Even if they’re eating similarly crappy, salty, processed diets, at least they aren’t eating meat, which we know increases stroke risk. There must be something about vegetarian diets that so increases stroke risk that it offsets their inherent advantages. We’ll continue our hunt for the answer next. 

    From a medical standpoint, labels like vegan and vegetarian just tell me what you don’t eat. It’s like identifying yourself as a “No-Twinkie-tarian.” You don’t eat Twinkies? Great, but what’s the rest of your diet like? 

    What are the healthiest foods? Check out my Daily Dozen.

    To catch up on the rest of this series, see related posts below. 

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • The Stroke Risk of Vegetarians  | NutritionFacts.org

    The Stroke Risk of Vegetarians  | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    The first study in history on the incidence of stroke in vegetarians and vegans suggests they may be at higher risk.

    “When ranked in order of importance, among the interventions available to prevent stroke, the three most important are probably diet, smoking cessation, and blood pressure control.” Most of us these days are doing pretty good about not smoking, but less than half of us exercise enough. And, according to the American Heart Association, only 1 in 1,000 Americans is eating a healthy diet and less than 1 in 10 is even eating a moderately healthy diet, as you can see in the graph below and at 0:41 in my video Do Vegetarians Really Have Higher Stroke Risk?. Why does it matter? It matters because “diet is an important part of stroke prevention. Reducing sodium intake, avoiding egg yolks, limiting the intake of animal flesh (particularly red meat), and increasing the intake of whole grains, fruits, vegetables, and lentils….Like the sugar industry, the meat and egg industries spend hundreds of millions of dollars on propaganda, unfortunately with great success.” 

    The paper goes on to say, “Box 1 provides links to information about the issue.” I was excited to click on the hyperlink for “Box 1” and was so honored to see four links to my videos on egg industry propaganda, as you can see below and at 1:08 in my video

    The strongest evidence for stroke protection lies in increasing fruit and vegetable intake, with more uncertainty regarding “the role of whole grains, animal products, and dietary patterns,” such as vegetarian diets. One would expect meat-free diets would do great. Meta-analyses have found that vegetarian diets lower cholesterol and blood pressure, as well as enhance weight loss and blood sugar control, and vegan diets may work even better. All the key biomarkers are going in the right direction. Given this, you may be surprised to learn that there hadn’t been any studies on the incidence of stroke in vegetarians and vegans until now. And if you think that is surprising, wait until you hear the results. 

    “Risks of Ischaemic Heart Disease and Stroke in Meat Eaters, Fish Eaters, and Vegetarians Over 18 Years of Follow-Up: Results from the Prospective EPIC-Oxford Study”: There was less heart disease among vegetarians (by which the researchers meant vegetarians and vegans combined). No surprise. Been there, done that. But there was more stroke, as you can see below, and at 2:14 in my video

    An understandable knee-jerk reaction might be: Wait a second, who did this study? Was there a conflict of interest? This is EPIC-Oxford, world-class researchers whose conflicts of interest may be more likely to read: “I am a member of the Vegan Society.”

    What about overadjustment? When the numbers over ten years were crunched, the researchers found 15 strokes for every 1,000 meat eaters, compared to only 9 strokes for every 1,000 vegetarians and vegans, as you can see below and at 2:41 in my video. In that case, how can they say there were more strokes in the vegetarians? This was after adjusting for a variety of factors. The vegetarians were less likely to smoke, for example, so you’d want to cancel that out by adjusting for smoking to effectively compare the stroke risk of nonsmoking vegetarians to nonsmoking meat eaters. If you want to know how a vegetarian diet itself affects stroke rates, you want to cancel out these non-diet-related factors. Sometimes, though, you can overadjust

    The sugar industry does this all the time. This is how it works: Imagine you just got a grant from the soda industry to study the effect of soda on the childhood obesity epidemic. What could you possibly do after putting all the studies together to conclude that there was a “near zero” effect of sugary beverage consumption on body weight? Well, since you know that drinking liquid candy can lead to excess calories that can lead to obesity, if you control for calories, if you control for a factor that’s in the causal chain, effectively only comparing soda drinkers who take in the same number of calories as non-soda-drinkers, then you could undermine the soda-to-obesity effect, and that’s exactly what they did. That introduces “over adjustment bias.” Instead of just controlling for some unrelated factor, you control for an intermediate variable on the cause-and-effect pathway between exposure and outcome.

    Overadjustment is how meat and dairy industry-funded researchers have been accused of “obscuring true associations” between saturated fat and cardiovascular disease. We know that saturated fat increases cholesterol, which increases heart disease risk. Therefore, if you control for cholesterol, effectively only comparing saturated fat eaters with the same cholesterol levels as non-saturated-fat eaters, that could undermine the saturated fat-to-heart disease effect.

    Let’s get back to the EPIC-Oxford study. Since vegetarian eating lowers blood pressure and a lowered blood pressure leads to less stroke, controlling for blood pressure would be an overadjustment, effectively only comparing vegetarians to meat eaters with the same low blood pressure. That’s not fair, since lower blood pressure is one of the benefits of vegetarian eating, not some unrelated factor like smoking. So, that would undermine the afforded protection. Did the researchers do that? No. They only adjusted for unrelated factors, like education, socioeconomic class, smoking, exercise, and alcohol. That’s what you want. You want to tease out the effects of a vegetarian diet on stroke risk. You want to try to equalize everything else to tease out the effects of just the dietary choice. And, since the meat eaters in the study were an average of ten years older than the vegetarians, you can see how vegetarians could come out worse after adjusting for that. Since stroke risk can increase exponentially with age, you can see how 9 strokes among 1,000 vegetarians in their 40s could be worse than 15 strokes among 1,000 meat-eaters in their 50s. 

    The fact that vegetarians had greater stroke risk despite their lower blood pressure suggests there’s something about meat-free diets that so increases stroke risk it’s enough to cancel out the blood pressure benefits. But, even if that’s true, you would still want to eat that way. As you can see in the graph below and at 6:16 in my video, stroke is our fifth leading cause of death, whereas heart disease is number one. 

    So, yes, in the study, there were more cases of stroke in vegetarians, but there were fewer cases of heart disease, as you can see below and at 6:29. If there is something increasing stroke risk in vegetarians, it would be nice to know what it is in hopes of figuring out how to get the best of both worlds. This is the question we will turn to next. 

    I called it 21 years ago. There’s an old video of me on YouTube where I air my concerns about stroke risk in vegetarians and vegans. (You can tell it’s from 2003 by my cutting-edge use of advanced whiteboard technology and the fact that I still had hair.) The good news is that I think there’s an easy fix.

    This is the third in a 12-video series on stroke risk. Links to the others are in the related posts below.

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Salt in Lakewood Will Permanently Close in Late August

    Salt in Lakewood Will Permanently Close in Late August

    [ad_1]

    click to enlarge

    Courtesy photo

    Jill Vedaa (left) and Jessica Parkison

    Few could have predicted the success that Jill Vedaa and Jessica Parkison would have with Salt, which opened in 2016 on Detroit Ave. in Lakewood. Vedaa’s meticulously crafted and ever-changing small-plates menus have garnered praise, accolades and even a few James Beard semifinalist nominations. The restaurant tastefully challenged long-held assumptions that small plates have no place in Cleveland.

    But shockingly, all that ends on August 31. In an announcement that astounded local diners, the owners have announced they will be winding down operations in a month.

    “It sucks,” says chef-owner Jill Vedaa, “but I’d rather go out gracefully, on a high note, and with our heads held high.”

    After 20 years of cooking professionally for other owners (at top-flight places like Lola, Flying Fig, Rockefeller’s and Black Pig), Vedaa finally struck out on her own with Salt. She and Parkison forged a different and challenging path by going exclusively with small plates. What’s more, the menus would almost completely change multiple times per year. More than three dozen menus later, it was time for a change.

    Despite consistent success at Salt, Vedaa alludes to a tectonic shift in the dining landscape, one that puts small, independent restaurants like hers at a disadvantage.

    “This business is changing a lot; it’s something we’ve noticed the past couple years,” she explains. “It’s pretty incredible, even during Covid people were more about supporting local and getting out there. The landscape – how people are eating and drinking – has completely changed.”

    And Vedaa and Parkison, to their credit, helped to change that landscape as well. They pushed back — at least for the past eight years in their small patch of Northeast Ohio — on the notion that small plates and Cleveland diners are like oil and water.

    “I feel like we’ve left a mark and we’ve hopefully changed the landscape a little bit,” she adds. “But as much as I’d like to think that you can change the way people eat, it comes down to the mass majority, who want a simple menu with meat and potatoes.”

    Vedaa says that nothing changes at Poppy, the restaurant she and Parkison opened on Larchmere last year. And for now, she is content to look back on the great work she and her partners have produced at Salt rather than dwell on what could have been.

    “Salt is my baby; I’m very, very, very proud of what we’ve done,” Vedaa says. “Could we have gone longer, yeah, but where we are and where everything is in the world, I think it’s the right time.”

    Subscribe to Cleveland Scene newsletters.

    Follow us: Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter

    [ad_2]

    Douglas Trattner

    Source link

  • Obesity and a Toxic Food Environment  | NutritionFacts.org

    Obesity and a Toxic Food Environment  | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    Implausible explanations for the obesity epidemic serve the needs of food manufacturers and marketers more than public health and an interest in truth. 

    When it comes to uncovering the root causes of the obesity epidemic, there appears to be manufactured confusion, “with major studies reasserting that the causes of obesity are ‘extremely complex’ and ‘fiendishly hard to untangle,’” but having just reviewed the literature, it doesn’t seem like much of a mystery to me.

    It’s the food.

    Attempts at obfuscation—rolling out hosts of “implausible explanations,” like sedentary lifestyles or lack of self-discipline—cater to food manufacturers and marketers more than the public’s health and our interest in the truth. “When asked about the role of restaurants in contributing to the obesity problem, Steven Anderson, president of the National Restaurant Association stated, “Just because we have electricity doesn’t mean you have to electrocute yourself.” Yes, but Big Food is effectively attaching electrodes to shock and awe the reward centers in our brains to undermine our self-control.

    It is hard to eat healthfully against the headwind of such strong evolutionary forces. No matter what our level of nutrition knowledge, in the face of pepperoni pizza, “our genes scream, ‘Eat it now!’” Anyone who doubts the power of basic biological drives should see how long they can go without blinking or breathing. Any conscious decision to hold your breath is soon overcome by the compulsion to breathe. In medicine, shortness of breath is sometimes even referred to as “air hunger.” The battle of the bulge is a battle against biology, so obesity is not some moral failing. It’s not gluttony or sloth. It is a natural, “normal response, by normal people, to an abnormal situation”—the unnatural ubiquity of calorie-dense, sugary, and fatty foods.

    The sea of excess calories we are now floating in (and some of us are drowning in) has been referred to as a “toxic food environment.” This helps direct focus away from the individual and towards the societal forces at work, such as the fact that the average child is blasted with 10,000 commercials for food a year. Or maybe I should say ads for pseudo food, as 95 percent are for “candy, fast food, soft drinks [aka liquid candy], and sugared cereals [aka breakfast candy].”

    Wait a second, though. If weight gain is just a natural reaction to the easy availability of mountains of cheap, yummy calories, then why isn’t everyone fat? As you can see below and at 2:41 in my video The Role of the Toxic Food Environment in the Obesity Epidemic, in a certain sense, most everyone is. It’s been estimated that more than 90 percent of American adults are “overfat,” defined as having “excess body fat sufficient to impair health.” This can occur even “in those who are normal-weight and non-obese, often due to excess abdominal fat.

    However, even if you look just at the numbers on the scale, being overweight is the norm. If you look at the bell curve and input the latest data, more than 70 percent of us are overweight. A little less than one-third of us is normal weight, on one side of the curve, and more than a third is on the other side, so overweight that we’re obese. You can see in the graph below and at 3:20 in my video.

    If the food is to blame, though, why doesn’t everyone get fat? That’s like asking if cigarettes are really to blame, why don’t all smokers get lung cancer? This is where genetic predispositions and other exposures can weigh in to tip the scales. Different people are born with a different susceptibility to cancer, but that doesn’t mean smoking doesn’t play a critical role in exploding whatever inherent risk you have. It’s the same with obesity and our toxic food environment. It’s like the firearm analogy: Genes may load the gun, but diet pulls the trigger. We can try to switch the safety back on with smoking cessation and a healthier diet.

    What happened when two dozen study participants were given the same number of excess calories? They all gained weight, but some gained more than others. Overfeeding the same 1,000 calories a day, 6 days a week for 100 days, caused weight gains ranging from about 9 pounds up to 29 pounds. The same 84,000 extra calories caused different amounts of weight gain. Some people are just more genetically susceptible. The reason we suspect genetics is that the 24 people in the study were 12 sets of identical twins, and the variation in weight gain between each of them was about a third less. As you can see in the graph below and at 4:41 in my video, a similar study with weight loss from exercise found a similar result. So, yes, genetics play a role, but that just means some people have to work harder than others. Ideally, inheriting a predisposition for extra weight gain shouldn’t give a reason for resignation, but rather motivation to put in the extra effort to unseal your fate. 

    Advances in processing and packaging, combined with government policies and food subsidy handouts that fostered cheap inputs for the “food industrial complex,” led to a glut of ready-to-eat, ready-to-heat, ready-to-drink hyperpalatable, hyperprofitable products. To help assuage impatient investors, marketing became even more pervasive and persuasive. All these factors conspired to create unfettered access to copious, convenient, low-cost, high-calorie foods often willfully engineered with chemical additives to make them hyperstimulatingly sweet or savory, yet only weakly satiating. 

    As we all sink deeper into a quicksand of calories, more and more mental energy is required to swim upstream against the constant “bombardment of advertising” and 24/7 panopticons of tempting treats. There’s so much food flooding the market now that much of it ends up in the trash. Food waste has progressively increased by about 50 percent since the 1970s. Perhaps better in the landfills, though, than filling up our stomachs. Too many of these cheap, fattening foods prioritize shelf life over human life.

    But dead people don’t eat. Don’t food companies have a vested interest in keeping their consumers healthy? Such naiveté reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of the system. A public company’s primary responsibility is to reap returns for its investors. “How else could we have tobacco companies, who are consummate marketers, continuing to produce products that kill one in two of their most loyal customers?” It’s not about customer satisfaction, but shareholder satisfaction. The customer always comes second.

    Just as weight gain may be a perfectly natural reaction to an obesogenic food environment, governments and businesses are simply responding normally to the political and economic realities of our system. Can you think of a single major industry that would benefit from people eating more healthfully? “Certainly not the agriculture, food product, grocery, restaurant, diet, or drug industries,” wrote emeritus professor Marion Nestle in a Science editorial when she was chair of nutrition at New York University. “All flourish when people eat more, and all employ armies of lobbyists to discourage governments from doing anything to inhibit overeating.”

    If part of the problem is cheap tasty convenience, is hard-to-find food that’s gross and expensive the solution? Or might there be a way to get the best of all worlds—easy, healthy, delicious, satisfying meals that help you lose weight? That’s the central question of my book How Not to Diet. Check it out for free at your local library.

    This is it—the final video in this 11-part series. If you missed any of the others, see the related posts below. 

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Corporate Influence and Our Epidemic of Obesity  | NutritionFacts.org

    Corporate Influence and Our Epidemic of Obesity  | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    Like the tobacco industry adding extra nicotine to cigarettes, the food industry employs taste engineers to accomplish a similar goal of maximizing the irresistibility of its products. 

    The plague of tobacco deaths wasn’t due just to the mass manufacturing and marketing of cheap cigarettes. Tobacco companies actively sought to make their products even more crave-able by spraying sheets of tobacco with nicotine and additives like ammonia to provide “a bigger nicotine ‘kick.’” Similarly, taste engineers are hired by the food industry to maximize product irresistibility.

    Taste is the leading factor in food choice. “Sugar, fat, and salt have been called the three points of the compass” to produce “superstimulating” and “hyper palatability” to tempt people into impulsive buys and compulsive consumption. Foods are intentionally designed to hook into our evolutionary triggers and breach whatever biological barriers help “keep consumption within reasonable limits.”

    Big Food is big business. The processed food industry alone brings in more than $2 trillion a year. That affords them the economic might to manipulate not only taste profiles, but public policy and scientific inquiry, too. The food, alcohol, and tobacco industries have all used similar unsavory tactics: blocking health regulations, co-opting professional organizations, creating front groups, and distorting the science. The common “corporate playbook” shouldn’t be surprising, given the common corporate threads. At one time, for example, tobacco giant Philip Morris owned both Kraft and Miller Brewing.

    As you can see below and at 1:45 in my video The Role of Corporate Influence in the Obesity Epidemic, in a single year, the food industry spent more than $50 million to hire hundreds of lobbyists to influence legislation. Most of these lobbyists were “revolvers,” former federal employees in the revolving door between industry and its regulators, who could push corporate interests from the inside, only to be rewarded with cushy lobbying jobs after their “public service.” In the following year, the industry acquired a new weapon—a stick to go along with all those carrots. On January 21, 2010, the Supreme Court’s five-to-four Citizen’s United ruling permitted corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money on campaign ads to trash anyone who dared stand against them. No wonder our elected officials have so thoroughly shrunk from the fight, leaving us largely with a government of Big Food, by Big Food, and for Big Food. 

    Globally, a similar dynamic exists. Weak tea calls from the public health community for voluntary standards are met not only with vicious fights against meaningful change but also massive transnational trade and foreign investment deals that “cement the protection of their [food industry] profits” into the laws of the lands.

    The corrupting commercial influence extends to medical associations. Reminiscent of the “just what the doctor ordered” cigarette ads of yesteryear, as you can see below and at 3:05 in my video, the American Academy of Family Physicians accepted millions from The Coca-Cola Company to “develop consumer education content on beverages and sweeteners.” 

    On the front line, fake grassroots “Astroturf” groups are used to mask the corporate message. RJ Reynolds created Get Government Off Our Back (memorably acronymed GGOOB), “a front group created by the tobacco industry to fight regulation,” for instance. Americans Against Food Taxes may as just as well be called “Food Industry Against Food Taxes.” The power of front group formation is enough to bind bitter corporate rivals; the Sugar Association and the Corn Refiners Association linked arms with the National Confectioners Association to partner with Americans for Food and Beverage Choice.

    Using another tried-and-true tobacco tactic, research front groups can be used to subvert the scientific process by shaping or suppressing the science that deviates from the corporate agenda. Take the trans fat story. Food manufacturers have not only “long denied that trans fats were associated with disease,” but actively “worked to limit research on trans fats” and “discredit potentially damaging findings.”

    At what cost? The global death toll from foods high in trans fat, saturated fat, salt, and sugar is at 14 million lost lives every year. The inability of countries around the world to turn the tide on obesity “is not a failure of individual will-power. This is a failure of political will to take on big business,” said the Director-General of the World Health Organization. “It is a failure of political will to take on the powerful food and soda industries.” She ended her keynote address before the National Academy of Medicine entitled “Obesity and Diabetes: The Slow-Motion Disaster” with these words: “The interests of the public must be prioritized over those of corporations.”

    Are you mad yet? To sum up my answer to the question underlying my What Triggered the Obesity Epidemic? webinar, it’s the food. I close next with my wrap-up video: The Role of the Toxic Food Environment in the Obesity Epidemic

    This was part of an 11-part series. See the related posts below.

    If the political angle interests you, check out: 

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Chicken Fried Chicken

    Chicken Fried Chicken

    [ad_1]

    Chicken fried chicken is made from crispy fried chicken breasts topped with a savory country-style gravy!

    Chicken Fried Chicken with mashed potatoes and gravy
    • It’s the ultimate comfort food. Crispy, savory, and delicious!
    • The chicken comes out tender and juicy with a crunchy coating.
    • This recipe uses ingredients you likely have on hand.
    • Chicken fried chicken is loved by the whole family – I mean, what’s not to love.

    Chicken Fried Chicken vs. Fried Chicken

    Fried chicken is made with bone-in chicken pieces coated in flour and fried (or oven-fried).

    Chicken fried chicken is made from boneless pieces that are flattened and double-dipped in flour, eggs, and flour again before being cooked, so it’s extra crunchy!

    milk , salt and pepper , cayenne pepper , paprika , garlic powder , flour , eggs , chicken with labels to make Chicken Fried Chickenmilk , salt and pepper , cayenne pepper , paprika , garlic powder , flour , eggs , chicken with labels to make Chicken Fried Chicken

    Ingredients for Chicken Fried Chicken

    • Chicken: Chicken fried chicken is made with boneless and skinless chicken breasts or chicken breast cutlets. It’s also great with chicken thighs.
    • Seasoned Coating: I use all-purpose flour as the base of the coating, and, while it’s not traditional, I add a bit of cornstarch to make it extra crispy—this comes from my crispy chicken sandwiches, which has one of my favorite crispy coatings.
    • White Gravy: The gravy is simple with flour and milk. The flavor comes from the brown bits in the pan from frying the chicken and lots of black pepper.

    We love chicken fried chicken with gravy over waffles or homemade buttermilk biscuits.

    How to Make Chicken Fried Chicken

    1. Prepare bowls of seasoned flour, whisked eggs, and milk (recipe below).
    2. Dredge chicken pieces in seasoned flour, the wet batter, and back into the flour again.
    3. Cook chicken in hot oil in a skillet until golden brown on both sides.
    4. Transfer pieces to a paper plate to drain. Season if desired.

    Heat the oil a little hotter than 350°F (I heat to 375°F) and use a thermometer to ensure it stays at 350°F while cooking the chicken.

    How to Make the Gravy

    Chicken fried chicken wouldn’t be the same without a delicious peppery white gravy!

    1. Drain most of the oil from frying the chicken, leaving 1/4 cup and the brown bits and in the pan.
    2. Add the flour and cook for a few minutes. Gradually whisk in the milk and cook until the gravy is thickened. Season with salt and pepper and serve over chicken.

    Our Fave Fried Chicken

    Did your family love this Chicken Fried Chicken? Leave us a rating and a comment below!

    Chicken Fried Chicken with mashed potatoes and gravyChicken Fried Chicken with mashed potatoes and gravy

    5 from 2 votes↑ Click stars to rate now!
    Or to leave a comment, click here!

    Chicken Fried Chicken

    This Southern-inspired recipe creates perfectly crispy chicken fried chicken with savory and creamy gravy.

    Prep Time 20 minutes

    Cook Time 30 minutes

    Total Time 50 minutes

    buy hollys bookbuy hollys book

    Prevent your screen from going dark

    • If using chicken breasts, cut the breasts in half horizontally. Pound the chicken breasts or cutlets to ¼ inch thickness. Marinate for 1 hour (per the notes) if desired. Remove from the marinade and pat the chicken dry with a paper towel. Discard the marinade.

    • Combine 1 cup flour, corn starch, pepper, salt, garlic powder, paprika, and cayenne pepper in a bowl.

    • Whisk eggs, ½ cup milk, and 1 tablespoon of the dry mixture in a small bowl.

    • Dredge the chicken breasts in the dry mix. Shake off any excess mixture and dip the chicken into the wet batter. Dip back into the dry mixture and gently press to coat the chicken. Let the coated chicken rest for 10 minutes.

    • Pour ½-inch of vegetable oil into a deep pan and heat the oil to 375°F (the temperature will drop a bit as you add the chicken, you want to cook the chicken at 350°F).

    • Gently place the chicken into the hot oil, 2 at a time. Cook until golden brown on one side, about 3-4 minutes. Flip the chicken and continue cooking until the second side is browned and the internal temperature is 165°F, about 2 to 4 minutes more. Ensure the oil temperature remains at 350°F between batches of chicken.

    • Transfer fried chicken to a clean baking rack and season with additional salt if desired.

    Gravy

    • Drain the oil from the pan, leaving the brown bits and ¼ cup of oil in the bottom. Heat over medium heat.

    • Add ¼ cup flour and cook for 2 to 3 minutes.

    • Add in milk a little at a time, stirring after each addition. Continue adding milk to reach the desired consistency – you may not need all of it.

    • Bring to a boil and let simmer 2 minutes. Taste and season generously with salt & pepper.

    • Serve the gravy over the chicken.

    Marinade (optional)
    1 cup buttermilk
    1 teaspoon hot sauce such as Frank’s
    ½ teaspoon garlic powder
    ½ teaspoon salt

    To keep cooked chicken warm if frying in batches, preheat oven to 200°F. Place fried chicken on a wire rack over a baking sheet and keep warm for up to one hour to maintain crispness without drying. 
    For a smooth gravy, add a little bit of the milk at a time and stir after each addition. It will initially seem thick and pasty, but it will thin out with each addition. Be sure to season generously.
    Leftovers can be stored in an airtight container in the fridge for up to 4 days. Reheat under the broiler or in an air fryer to keep it crispy. 

    Calories: 715 | Carbohydrates: 54g | Protein: 42g | Fat: 36g | Saturated Fat: 11g | Polyunsaturated Fat: 7g | Monounsaturated Fat: 13g | Trans Fat: 0.1g | Cholesterol: 234mg | Sodium: 1373mg | Potassium: 695mg | Fiber: 2g | Sugar: 8g | Vitamin A: 756IU | Vitamin C: 0.1mg | Calcium: 225mg | Iron: 2mg

    Nutrition information provided is an estimate and will vary based on cooking methods and brands of ingredients used.

    Course Chicken, Dinner, Entree
    Cuisine American
    Chicken Fried Chicken with a titleChicken Fried Chicken with a title
    Chicken Fried Chicken with country style gravy and writingChicken Fried Chicken with country style gravy and writing
    Chicken Fried Chicken on a sheet pan and plated with a titleChicken Fried Chicken on a sheet pan and plated with a title
    Chicken Fried Chicken on a sheet pan with a titleChicken Fried Chicken on a sheet pan with a title

    [ad_2]

    Holly Nilsson

    Source link

  • How Healthy Are Ancient Grains?  | NutritionFacts.org

    How Healthy Are Ancient Grains?  | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    Ancient types of wheat, like kamut, are put to the test for inflammation, blood sugar, and cholesterol control. 

    The number one killer in the United States and around the world is what we eat. As you can see in the graph below and at 0:15 in my video Friday Favorites: Are Ancient Grains Healthier?, our diet kills millions more than tobacco. What are the five most important things we can do to improve our diets, based on the single most comprehensive global study of the health impact of nutrition? Eat less salt, eat more nuts, eat more non-starchy vegetables, eat more fruit, and, finally, eat more whole grains. 
    Any particular type of whole grains? What about so-called ancient grains? Are they any better than modern varieties? For instance, what about kamut, described as “mummy wheat” and supposedly unearthed from an Egyptian tomb?

    After WWII, the wheat industry selected particularly high-yielding varieties for pasta and bread. Over the past few years, though, some of the more ancient grains—“defined as those species that have remained unchanged over the last hundred years” despite agricultural revolutions—have been reintroduced to the market.

    As you can see below and at 1:13 in my video, nutritionally, kamut and einkorn wheat, which is the oldest wheat, have more eyesight-improving yellow carotenoid pigments, such as lutein and zeaxanthin, compared to modern bread and pastry wheat, because the pigments have been bred out of the bread intentionally. People want their white bread white, but modern pasta flour (durum wheat) maintains much of that yellow nutritional hue. 

    As you can see in the graph below and at 1:41 in my video, modern wheat may have less lutein, but it tends to have more vitamin E, as seen in the graph below and at 1:45. Based on straight vitamin and mineral concentrations, it’s pretty much a wash. Both modern and primitive kinds of wheat have a lot of each, but primitive wheats do have more antioxidant capacity, likely due to their greater polyphenol content, as you can see in the graph below and at 2:00 in my video. To know if that makes any difference, though, we have to put it to the test. 

    If you expose human liver cells to digested bread made out of ancient grains (kamut and spelt), heritage kinds of wheat, or modern strains, then expose the cells to an inflammatory stimulus, the modern wheat strains seem less able to suppress the inflammation, as you can see in the graphs below and at 2:09 in my video. The investigators conclude that even though these different grains seem to be very similar nutritionally, they appear to exert different effects on human cells, “confirming the potential health benefits of ancient grains.” 
    That was in a petri dish, though. What about people? If ancient kinds of wheat are better at suppressing inflammation, what if you took people with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and randomized them to receive six weeks of wheat products made out of modern wheat or ancient wheat—in this case, kamut? Same amount of wheat, just different types. If there is no difference between the wheats, there’d be no difference in people’s symptoms, right? But, when study participants in the control group were switched to the ancient wheat kamut, they experienced less abdominal pain, less frequent pain, less bloating, more satisfaction with stool consistency, and less interference with their quality of life, compared to the modern wheat. So, after switching to the ancient wheat, they had “a significant global improvement in the extent and severity of symptoms related to IBS…”

    What about liver inflammation? The liver function of those with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease randomized to eat kamut improved, compared to those eating the same amount of regular wheat, suggesting kamut is superior, as you can see below and at 3:47 in my video.

    People with diabetes, had better cholesterol and better insulin sensitivity on the same ancient grain, as shown below and at 3:57.

    And those with heart disease? They had better blood sugar control and better cholesterol, as shown below and at 4:03. 

    And, people without overt heart disease had better artery function, as you can see below and at 4:06 in my video.

    The bottom line is that findings derived from human studies suggest that ancient wheat products are more anti-inflammatory and may improve things like blood sugar control and cholesterol. “Given that the overall number of human interventional trials conducted to date are numerically insufficient, it is not possible to definitively conclude that ancient wheat varieties are superior to all commercial, modern wheat counterparts in reducing chronic disease risk.” However, the best available data do suggest they’re better for us.  

    Regardless of what type of wheat you may eat, a word to the wise: Don’t eat the plastic bread-bag clip. A 45-year-old man presented with bloody stools, and his CT scan showed the offending piece of plastic from his bag of bread, as you can see below and at 4:53 in my video. When the patient was questioned, he “admitted to habitually eating quickly without chewing properly.” 

    Whole grains—ideally intact ones and ancient and modern varieties alike—are an integral part of my Daily Dozen checklist, the healthiest of healthy things I encourage everyone to try to fit into their daily routines.  

    Whole grains are especially good for our microbiome. Learn more in the related posts below.  What about gluten? Also, see the related posts below. 

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link