Earlier this week, The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) published an open letter to the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) asking the government organization to stop its affiliation with The Coca Cola Company. From CSPI’s press release:

The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute should not partner with Coca-Cola to raise awareness of heart disease among women…overweight and obesity are prime risk factors for heart disease, and the agency shouldn’t be bolstering the dismal reputation of the Coca-Cola Company, the world’s biggest manufacturer of obesigenic soft drinks

…Supermodel Heidi Klum is described on the government web site as the “Diet Coke heart health ambassador.”

…”Coke has long sought to affiliate with or co-opt health groups, and associate its brand with athletes and models. I fervently hope that NHLBI officials understand that letting Coke bask in their agency’s good reputation does American hearts far more harm than good.” read more…

What you need to know:

This is not the first nor last sponsorship of health organizations by the Coca Cola company. Just a few months ago we wrote about the $600,000 contribution to the American Association of Family Physicians, to be used “to  educate consumers about the role their products can play in a healthy, active lifestyle.” Yeah, right.

If you’re thinking, this is OK, Diet Coke does not contribute to obesity and heart disease, you may want to reconsider:

1. Our body gets confused by artificial sweeteners that may actually promote weight gain.
2. We’re “Infantilizing” our taste sense and as a result natural sweets like fruit aren’t as appetizing.
3. The long term health effects of artificial sweeteners are unclear.

While Coke is just one example, what we’re seeing is a generally accepted norm. Non-profit organizations, and even government bodies, have to accept money from the very corporations that contribute to the maladies they are trying to prevent. Crazy no?

You may argue and say that unlike cigarettes, no one food can kill you, and what about fun factor. Sure thing, but a company that deals in good vibes and lifestyle should stick to sponsoring music events and beach parties, not health and diet related associations.

Consider that even this country’s ultimate food and nutrition advisor – the American Dietetic Association – is sponsored by the likes of Coke and Mars. When I asked dietitians about this, some were agnostic while others pragmatically explained that there is no other way to fund research and educational activities that will ultimately benefit consumers.

Such is the state of affairs in America,  2010.

What to do at the supermarket:

It’s hard to quantify the compound effect of all these sponsorships, but you certainly can do your share to show you know better. Ignore the marketing messages on cans and boxes. Stick to the nutrition facts panel and ingredient lists of products you are considering. And specifically referring to soft drinks, whether sugary or non-caloric, did you know that you can save $500 for a family of four, just by switching to tap water?

Get Fooducated: RSS Subscription or Email Subscription

Follow us on twitter: twitter.com/fooducate

New! Choose a better breakfast with CerealScan™ by Fooducate

Remember the proposed soda tax? The added penny per fluid ounce, generating $50 billion in funds to combat obesity in the next 10 years?

Well, forget about it.

Never mind obesity. To hell with diabetes.

The beverage industry needs to grow its bottom line, and no one is going to to tax its products. Certainly not a bunch of do gooders on behalf of the “nanny-state”.

You see, in this great democracy called America, money votes. And through a series of contributions and investments of the American Beverage Association, the proposed tax has been all but buried.

In a saddening-as-much-as-it-is-enlightening article in the Los Angeles Times, the money trail is revealed. A series of well planned moves by beverage industry lobbyists included:

1. Discrediting researchers from Yale and UCLA who linked soft drink consumption with obesity.

2. Funding of research that showed no relationship between soft drink consumption and obesity. The researchers are or have been on the payroll of the beverage industry at one time.

3. Contribution to Hispanic organizations. Reasoning: the soda tax will hit the poor the most. Hispanic groups are now against the tax, despite diabetes hitting Latino youths especially hard.

4. A $10 million Ad campaign aired on prime time and playing on chords of hard working moms not needing to pay extra in these tough times.

5. Enlisting the aid of other industries in order to thwart the tax:

“The industries in our coalition realized that this is a slippery slope, that once government reaches into the grocery cart, your business could be next,” said Kevin Keane, senior vice president, public affairs, for the American Beverage Assn.

6. A big bribe (north of $600,000) to the American Academy of Family Physicians, to be used to underwrite “educational materials to help consumers make informed decisions.”

What you need to know:

Make no mistake, soda pop and sweetened beverages are a major contributing factor to obesity. The price poor people are paying for their soda now is minuscule compared to their health expenses 10 or 20 years down the road.  Unfortunately, there is no ANTI-Beverage-Association with deep pockets to coordinate a counter offensive.

As long as companies externalize the true cost of their products, gullible consumers will choose cheap and sweet satisfaction now, with heart disease and heartache down the road. This must end, but as you can see, there are no effective mechanisms, even at government levels, to stave off the power of corporate lobbies.

And with the recent supreme court decision to allow unlimited campaign contribution by companies to our politicians, you can rest assured Washington DC will NOT make an effort to change things.

What to do at the supermarket:

If you want to impact change, stop buying liquid calories. Switch to tap water. Switch your whole family. Switch as many of your friends and neighbors as you can to do the same. You’ll save money, you’ll save your health.

Get Fooducated: RSS Subscription or Email Subscription

Follow us on twitter: twitter.com/fooducate

New! Choose a better breakfast with CerealScan™ by Fooducate

A great article called The Vita Myth appeared earlier this week in online magazine Slate. Science writer Emily Anthes tears apart the $25B-a-year-and-growing supplement industry.

Half of Americans pop a multivitamin or other supplement regularly. But substantial studies in the past few years have shown that for the most part, these supplements did not provide any health benefits, aside from those of the supplement companies:

1. A study of more than 160,000 post-menopausal women, published in the Archives of Internal Medicine, found that multi-vitamins supplements did not prevent cancer, heart attacks, or strokes and did not reduce overall mortality. [see here]

2. A 2006 National Institutes of Health panel of experts evaluated evidence that vitamin pills could prevent chronic disease. The scientists that there is no “strong evidence for beneficial health-related effects of supplements taken singly, in pairs, or in combinations.”

3. Antioxidant supplements (vitamins A, C, and E, selenium, beta carotene, and folate) fail to protect against heart disease, stroke, and cancer. But, get this, they actually increase the risk of death, according to a 2007 analysis of research on more than 232,000 people, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).

Wow – this boggles the mind.

What you need to know:

The American Dietetic Association just recently reminded us that people should get their nutrients from real food, not supplements. The science of nutrition is relatively young, and for every known nutrient, there are hundreds that scientists have yet to figure out. Interactions between various nutrients in a certain vegetable or fruit contribute differently to your health than if you just take a pill with one or two vitamins.

Some people argue that we must take a daily multi-vitamin because the produce in this nation has been depleted of it nutritional value over the past few decades. This, due to the depletion of nutrient from soil as a result of industrialized agriculture, pesticide use, and monocultures.

Hogwash, according to Joanne Larsen, RD, of Ask the Dietitian: There is no proof that soil is losing its mineral content.  Minerals in soil are pretty stable and don’t migrate unless there is erosion or flooding that washes minerals away.  Soils are replenished with fertilizers (organic or chemical) periodically.

Individual vitamins are created by fruits and vegetables through the oxidative process determined by each plant’s genetics.  Some plants are naturally high in particular nutrients than others. We are not seeing mutations in plant genetics that affect vitamin content. If soils were becoming depleted of nutrients, we would see widespread nutrient deficiencies in the American population.  We are not.

So if real food has all the vitamins and minerals we need, and supplements could actually be detrimental, how is it that we are paying  twenty five billion dollars a year for what amounts to smoke and mirrors?

Note: There are people that require specific boosts in certain nutrients. We’re not referring to those needs here.

What to do at the supermarket:

If you are a healthy person, get your nutrition from real food. Plenty of vegetables, fruits, whole grains, legumes, dairy and meat. The less processed the better. You never know what “benefits” the presence of industrial additives and artificial chemicals will amount to once inside your body.

And foods that are fortified with lots of vitamins and minerals, for example breakfast cereals? A secondary consideration compared to the importance of whole grains and low sugar content.

Says Emily Anthes – we should stop treating supplements like health candy and more like prescription meds, to be used only when there’s a demonstrated need.

(hat tip to Dan Mitchell of The Daily Bread for the story)

Get Fooducated: RSS Subscription or Email Subscription

Follow us on twitter: twitter.com/fooducate

Help us test our new food comparison tool: alpha.fooducate.com

If you are wary of consuming products with high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), your suspicions may prove right. A new study, for the first time conducted on humans, not lab rats, confirms what many have suspected for a long time – the fructose in HFCS contributes to obesity.

The study, published in the Journal of Clinical Investigation earlier this year, was carried out by a team of scientists at the University of California, Davis. It is entitled Consuming fructose-sweetened, not glucose-sweetened, beverages increases visceral adiposity and lipids and decreases insulin sensitivity in overweight/obese humans.

Here’s what the experiment looked like:

Over 10 weeks, 16 volunteers on a strictly controlled diet, including high levels of fructose, produced new fat cells around their heart, liver and other digestive organs. They also showed signs of food-processing abnormalities linked to diabetes and heart disease. Another group of volunteers on the same diet, but with glucose sugar replacing fructose, did not have these problems. read more…

Kimber L. Stanhope, the study leader, said “This is the first evidence we have that fructose increases diabetes and heart disease independently from causing simple weight gain. We didn’t see any of these changes in the people eating glucose.”

While fructose is found in fruits, honey and table sugar, it’s highest percentage is in HFCS, hence the name “High Fructose” corn syrup.

What you need to know:

Consumption of sweetened food and beverage has grown significantly in the US over the past decades. Those who blame HFCS for the country’s obesity epidemic and related maladies have shown that the alarming rise in obesity rates is in tandem with the introduction and rapid adoption of HFCS by food and beverage manufacturers since the early 1980’s.

Why did manufacturers switch to high fructose corn syrup to begin with? They certainly did not plan to make America fat. Our obesity epidemic is simply a side effect of the quest for efficiency and lower cost of production. In the 1970’s, huge surpluses of corn in the US, prompted the creation of a new sweetener, HFCS, half the price of sugar, which has become the sweetener of choice in almost all soft drinks today.

Please note that the study was conducted on 100% fructose, not HFCS, which is 45% sucrose 55% fructose.  Many scientists still maintain that there is no difference between sugar (50/50) and HFCS. As more studies are carried out in humans in coming years, the truth will become clearer. But in the meantime, most everyone agrees that we should all reduce the amount of sweet we consume daily, be it sugar, HFCS, or others.

What to do at the supermarket:

The easiest way to drastically reduce high fructose corn syrup from your diet is to stop visiting the drinks aisles at the supermarket. Switching to tap water is healthier for you, your wallet, and the environment.

HFCS appears in the ingredient list just like sugar, dextrose, and corn syrup. Watch out for it in snacks, sauces, prepared meals, and other products.

[thanks Robyn for the hat tip]

Get Fooducated: RSS Subscription or Email Subscription

Follow us on twitter: twitter.com/fooducate

Help us test our new food comparison tool: alpha.fooducate.com

Here’s an interesting story. Cardiologists from the US decided to check 3500 year old mummies for heart disease. They headed off to Cairo, Egypt and what they found was quite surprising. Although no fast food or trans-fat were peddled in ancient Egypt, the majority of the mummies showed evidence of clogged arteries and heart disease. One may even have died of a heart attack.

Does this mean we’re all going to get sick hearts, regardless of our diet?

Don’t rush out to McDonald’s just yet.

According to the researcher, those mummified…

… were of high social status, and many served in the court of the Pharaoh or as priests or priestesses.

Rich people ate meat, and they did salt meat, so maybe they had hypertension (high blood pressure)…

With modern diets, “we all sort of live in the Pharaoh’s court,” said another of the researchers…

read more from Seattle PI…

What to do at the supermarket:

Please don’t let this amusing piece cause you to adopt a more tolerant approach to fast foods and over consumption of saturated fats. The average prehistoric Egyptian barely reached 45 years of age. Enjoy the abundance of our modern “court of Pharaoh” a.k.a supermarket to focus on plenty of fresh produce, lean dairy and meat products and 100% whole grains.

Get Fooducated: RSS Subscription or Email Subscription

Follow us on twitter: twitter.com/fooducate

Help us test our new food comparison tool: alpha.fooducate.com

The FDA has been more assertive this year with regards to health claims on food products. Here’s an example – the heavyweight bout with cereal giant General Mills:

Round 1: In May, the FDA asked General Mills to explain why its Cheerios packages carried a claim “Lower your cholesterol 4% in 6 weeks” which is more appropriate for a drug, not a food product.

Round 2: In June, the FDA received copies of 4 studies from General Mills substantiating the percentage reduction claims.

Round 3: It took several months to review, but in October the FDA sent its response to those studies. The bottom line – One study was OK, but that’s not enough for a health claim to be approved. Three studies  were not conclusive enough. This is the FDA’s summary:

In conclusion, in determining whether … to authorize the soluble fiber/coronary heart disease claim to include a statement about a specific percentage reduction in LDL cholesterol, FDA would need to consider the totality of the publicly available scientific evidence to support such a statement and also how to convey information in a way that is not misleading.

Round 4: On November 3rd, General Mills responded [PDF] with further clarifications.We won’t go into the details, although we’re sure the company firmly stands behind the research.

Round 5: Yesterday, the FDA published the letter it has sent in October. General Mills decided to respond immediately – a good PR tactic – by publishing its response and a press release:

“discussions with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regarding the cholesterol-lowering benefits of the soluble oat fiber in Cheerios continue.”

Ironically, as these discussions are going on, Cheerios is running a new promotion, with an even bolder claim of 10% reduction in cholesterol in just one month.

What you need to know:

The argument between the FDA and General Mills over what wording is to be allowed may seem like nit-picking to some, but you need to understand that a lot of money is at stake.

Manufacturers use health claims as a marketing tool to increase sales, and have been doing so since for ages. Up until 1991, it was pretty much a wild west when it came to health claims. Manufacturers would claim almost anything they liked. When the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act was passed in the early 1990’s, it seemed as though the claims would go away. The law provided the framework for the FDA to require standardized nutrition facts labels and ingredient list for virtually all packaged foods.

But pressure by food industry lobbies on Congress allowed the manufacturers to add health claims to packages as well. Thankfully though, the claims had to be thoroughly substantiated by scientific research and consensus. The language of the claims was also addressed in the law. There are certain things that can be said, while other can’t. And there’s a way to say it. In the Cheerios example, the FDA warned that the cholesterol reduction wording is more like that of a statin drug than of a food, and therefore out-of-bounds.

Nobody is arguing that Cheerios (the plain unsweetened version) is one of the better cereals out there, with a relatively low sugar count, and high fiber content. But the studies, funded by General Mills, showed that the control groups who ate other cereal products also reduced their cholesterol intake when both groups ate the cereals instead of some other non-fibrous meal. Hey, eating even Sugar Smacks daily, as “part of a healthy, balanced diet including regular exercise” will lead to better heart health.

Incidentally, just a few weeks ago Kellogg’s retracted it’s “Immunity” claims from packages of Cocoa Krispies.

What to do at the supermarket:

While the scientists on both sides of regulation battle it out, here’s the deal when it comes to breakfast cereals - best to ignore health claims. The information you need is on the nutrition facts panel and ingredient list. Look for:

- fiber at more than 3 grams per serving

- sugar at less than 6 grams per serving

- no artificial colors (Yellow 5, Red 40, etc…)

- no partially hydrogenated oils

All the other fortifications (B vitamins, etc..) are nice to have but very similar across the board.

Get Fooducated: RSS Subscription or Email Subscription

Follow us on twitter: twitter.com/fooducate

Help us test our new food comparison tool: alpha.fooducate.com

An encouraging development in the world of food manufacturing. Food giant Cargill has shut a production line in  Wichita, Kansas that has been manufacturing hydrogenated oils:

President of Cargill’s dressings, sauces and oils division Mike Venker said in a statement: “The demand for hydrogenated oils has decreased significantly as a result of trans fat reduction in foods, therefore leaving the plant underutilized. We made every effort to keep the production at the plant, but ultimately could not achieve acceptable production efficiencies.” [See Progressive Grocer]

And thank goodness for that. Despite the loss of jobs.

What you need to know:

Trans Fat is just plain EVIL.

It has been unequivocally shown to increase the chances of heart disease because it raises the levels of LDL, the bad cholesterol, in our bloodstream. This leads to clogged arteries and other precursors of coronary ailments.

Trans fat is mostly man-made, and found in hydrogenated oils. These are vegetable oils that are “bombed” with hydrogen atoms in a process that makes them solid at room temperature (think margarine).

Since 2006, the FDA has mandated that the amount of trans fat in foods be labeled on product packages. In addition, several states and municipalities have banned the use of trans fat in restaurants.

Trans fat in the form of partially hydrogenated oil is most common in baked and fried foods, in which it can count for up to 45 percent of total fat content. It is cheaper to produce than healthier oils like canola or olive oil, provides food manufacturers with greater processing stability and gives foods a longer shelf life. Therefore, commercially produced shortenings in the US have traditionally contained high levels of hydrogenated fats.

But guess what, pressure from the FDA and local lawmakers had a positive effect. The food industry figured out a way to make the same foods without trans fat. In fact, over the last 5 years, demand for trans fat laden hydrogenated oils has declined by  75% percent in the US.

By the way, Cargill is one of the largest private companies in the US, dealing mostly in agricultural products such as grains, livestock, and eggs. If it were public, it would be in the top 10 companies of the Fortune 100 list. It has 160,000 employees worldwide and sold 120 BILLION dollars worth globally last year.

What to do at the supermarket:

We’re not safe yet. There are still plenty of foods out there with trans fat. Always check the nutrition panel for 0 trans fat, as well as the ingredient list to make sure there are no “partially hydrogenated vegetable oils“.

Get Fooducated: RSS Subscription or Email Subscription

Follow us on twitter: twitter.com/fooducate

Help us test our new food comparison tool: alpha.fooducate.com

In this blog, we often focus on the negative aspects of  processed foods. We take pleasure in warning you of seemingly innocent products that contain exorbitant amounts of salt, sugar and fat. However, we always try to wrap up a post with recommended alternatives for healthier eating.

Today we’ll start positive from the get go. Well, almost.

Let’s take a look at what we should be eating by learning about the nutrients we don’t get enough of.  Based on the USDA’s “What We Eat in America” report, there are quite a few. Here are the “subconsumed seven”:
1. calcium
2. potassium
3. fiber
4. magnesium
5. vitamin A
6. vitamin C
7. vitamin E

Below the fold we’ll provide explanations and suggestions for each…
Read more…

Image via Wikipedia

The Center for Disease Control (CDC) has just published the results of a sodium survey conducted in 2005-2006. Sodium (40%) and Chlorine (60%) are the two elements making up table salt.

High consumption of sodium can increase the risk for hypertension, which in turn increases the risk for heart disease and stroke, the first and third leading causes of death in the United States.

According to the CDC,  29% of U.S. adults have hypertension, and another 28% have prehypertension. That’s over half of us with high blood pressure!

Our average sodium intake is 3,436 mg/day(1.5 teaspoons), a whopping 50% higher than the USDA’s recommended 2,300 mg (1 teaspoon) daily allowance for healthy adults.

The recommendation for those in specific groups (people with hypertension, middle-aged and older adults, and all blacks) is to consume no more than 1,500 mg/day of sodium (about 2 thirds of a teaspoon).

Turns out that the special groups are not a small minority, but in fact the majority of consumers -  the lower sodium recommendation was applicable to 69.2% of U.S. adults.

What to do at the supermarket:

70% of the sodium in a Western diet comes from processed food (restaurants and prepared supermarket food). The rest is added while cooking, at the table, or is found naturally in foods. So if you really want to cut down on your sodium, start reducing processed foods from your diet.

Buying basic ingredients and cooking at home, lets you control the amount of salt added to a dish. If you find home cooking to be too difficult, look at the nutrition panel of prepared foods you buy and opt for low sodium versions (less than 400mg per serving).

If you are over 40 or suffer from high blood pressure or African American, you need to be extra careful.

Here is a list of 9 tips for reducing your sodium intake.

Get Fooducated: RSS Subscription or Email Subscription

Follow us on twitter: twitter.com/fooducate

Help us test our new food comparison tool: alpha.fooducate.com

A study led by the National Cancer Institute clearly shows an association between red meat/processed meat and an increased risk of mortality.

From the Washington Post:

The study of more than 500,000 middle-aged and elderly Americans found that those who consumed about four ounces of red meat a day (the equivalent of about a small hamburger) were more than 30 percent more likely to die during the 10 years they were followed, mostly from heart disease and cancer. Sausage, cold cuts and other processed meats also increased the risk.

Previous research had found a link between red meat and an increased risk of heart disease and cancer, particularly colorectal cancer, but the new study is the first large examination of the relationship between eating meat and overall risk of death, and is by far the most detailed.

Read the article…

What you need to know:

Red meat includes beef and pork, and all their processed variants such as bacon, sausages, steaks, burgers, etc…

Research has shown for years that high rates of red meat consumption lead to heart disease and may lead to certain types of cancer. High levels of saturated fat lead to increase in bad cholesterol in the bloodstream.

The importance of this study,  published yesterday in the Archives of Internal Medicine [here, subscription required],  is its sheer magnitude and its length of time – 10 years.

What to do at the supermarket:

Cut back on red meats by opting for fish or poultry instead. Steaks and burgers are a great treat, but not daily. When you do choose meat, go for lean cuts. Try to stay away from processed meats which on top of the fats, add lots of salt and nitrites.

Get Fooducated: RSS Subscription or Email Subscription

Help us test our new food comparison tool: alpha.fooducate.com