A new documentary, Got the facts on Milk?, now available on DVD,  answers the question unequivocally: Milk is BAD for everyone.

Got the facts on Milk? is the work of filmaker Shira Lane whose dairy allergy prompted her to examine the scientific research on the subject. Apparently she did not find satisfactory answers to her questions. So she made a movie:

On her month-long, 4600-mile journey from Los Angeles to Washington DC through the American Southwest and Bible Belt, she interviewed top doctors and researchers, dietitians, dairy farmers, veterinarians, parents, teachers, and plenty of “ordinary Americans” who provide both comic relief and food for thought.

The movie contends that the political and financial power of the dairy industry have done a great disservice to millions of Americans. She brings research on the connection between dairy consumption and cancer, osteoporosis, weight gain, asthma, acne, hormones, early menstruation, as well as the prevalence of lactose intolerance in African Americans, Asian Americans and Indigenous Americans.

According to Lane:

“Having a lifelong dairy allergy has forced me to learn how to read food labels and ask questions in restaurants, and the more research I did, the more passionate I became,” said Lane. “I would have wanted my parents to watch this film when I was growing up and I hope the information helps others.”

We asked Dr. Greg Miller, executive vice president of science and research for the National Dairy Council, to address the claim that most people’s bodies can’t cope with milk and that the dairy industry is doing more harm than good to a millions of people not of North European descent. His response:

The “Got the Facts on Milk” film has been on our radar for a while. The filmmakers contacted USDA and National Dairy Council (NDC) during the process of making the film in 2007. The National Dairy Council’s Isabel Maples, M.Ed., R.D., conducted an hour-long interview and found that the filmmakers were not interested in a balanced portrayal of the subjects at hand.

While the dairy critics in the film are entitled to their theories, they are clearly more focused on advancing their vegan agenda than the full scope of scientific research that supports dairy’s role in a healthy diet. (See recent studies here and here on low-fat dairy’s role in preventing type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, respectively.

Government and public health organizations around the globe encourage daily consumption of dairy foods to promote good health and help prevent disease.  This includes the National Osteoporosis Foundation, the Surgeon General, the National Institutes of Health and many other leading health organizations.

People should look to their personal physician and health care providers for science-based guidance on preventing and treating any type of disease.

According to the filmmakers, Miller refused to be interviewed for the documentary.

Clearly there are two camps here, each citing research and science to suit their needs. So what are as consumers supposed to decide? Should we consume dairy or stay away?

Here are a few things to think about:

There is a huge surplus of milk being manufactured in the US today. The surplus has been around for 90 years! This has lead to some of the most creative (and expensive) promotional campaigns ever to get people to consume more milk and dairy.

The movie claims that 75% of the world’s population is lactose intolerant and therefore should not consume milk. If you are lactose intolerant, your body cannot breakdown the lactose in the milk. It may cause a whole slew of side effects from bloating to diarrhea, nausea, cramps, headaches, or worse.

Portraying milk as causing disease and not nourishing for an entire population is taking it too far. Humans in Northern Europe mutated to enable milk consumption after weaning several millennia ago and have thrived ever since. Their offspring can thrive with milk today. Milk is not the cause of all this country’s ailments and obesity.

Aside from milk, there are other ways to build strong bones. Other sources of calcium are vegetables. Entire countries in Asia consume little to no dairy and yet have no more issues with osteoporosis than dairy consuming countries.

Maybe some of the reported problems with dairy are not because of milk, but due to milk processing today compared to 50 years ago? What are the cows eating today compared to what they ate several generations ago? What hormones and antibiotics are they getting injected with? How do factory farm conditions affect what goes into the milk?

What is your experience with milk? What do you think?

Get Fooducated: iPhone App Android App RSS Subscription or Email Subscription

Follow us on twitter: twitter.com/fooducate on facebook: facebook.com/fooducate

Dieting is hard. Anyone who has tried to lose weight will tell you that. And it seems to be harder to shed the pounds the further into the diet you are.

Through the basic laws of thermodynamics and energy (which is what a calorie is) we know that a decrease of 3500 calories will result in a one pound weight loss. If we eat 500 calories less per day, over the course of seven days we will lose 1 lb. of body weight.

But does this hold true even after we have lost 10 pounds? Or 20?

According to research by Kevin Hall, PhD, from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK), weight loss does not continue down a linear path. The reason is that our body metabolism changes as we lose weight. The body becomes more effective at utilizing the lower calorie diet and thus expends less energy the skinnier we get. These interesting findings were published in the Lancet last week.

Dr. Hall and his colleagues suggest an alternative model for forecasting weight reduction in dieters:

It predicts that for a typical overweight adult, every reduction of 10 calories per day will lead to a weight loss not of about a pound a year, but only about half a pound. The next half-pound will take about two more years to lose. Cutting 250 calories a day produces a weight loss of about 25 pounds in three years. (Exact weight loss will vary by individual, depending on age, sex, weight and other factors.) Read more from WSJ…

What are the implications for million of dieters?

Mostly this explains why it gets harder and harder to lose weight as your diet progresses, and why many people hit a frustrating plateau from which large percentages rebound to weight gain. By knowing what to expect, perhaps more dieters will be able to create more realistic expectations and emotionally prepare for the challenges of much slower weight loss progress.

And for those of us who are seeing the pounds slowly creep on year over year, this is yet another reminder that the best way to lose weight is to never put it on in the first place.

Get Fooducated: iPhone App Android App RSS Subscription or Email Subscription

Follow us on twitter: twitter.com/fooducate on facebook: facebook.com/fooducate

Clementines, if you are not familiar with them, are type of orange. They are slightly smaller, seedless, easy to peel, and very sweet. You can find them in supermarkets produce section, usually in netted bags such as above.

Being the label readers that we are, the following information from the back of the package caught our eye:

Coated with food grade vegetable, beeswax and/or

lac based wax or resin to maintain freshness.  May be

treated with one or more of the following: thiabendazole,

orthophenyl phenol and/or imazalil

What are all these funny sounding chemicals doing on fruit you may ask?

What you need to know:

This bag of clementines made it all the way from Chile to America. That’s quite a journey for citrus fruit, who are susceptible to a variety of molds. That’s why they are lightly waxed and treated with antifungal chemicals.

thiabendazole – a fungicide used in the wax covering fruit. In high doses it may cause nausea, vomiting, loss of appetite, diarrhea, dizziness, drowsiness, or headaches, but since we don’t eat orange peels, there should be no problem.

orthophenyl phenol (E231)) – this is another fungicide applied post harvest to citrus fruits. It may cause a burning sensation in the eyes upon contact, but is considered safe.

imazalil – another fungicide, considered safe.

Why would citrus fruit need so much protection? Well, these babies come a long way to our supermarkets. All the way from Chile in South America. Keeping mold away is a big challenge and that’s where all these fungicides come into play.

What to do at the supermarket:

If you buy your fruit in season, there is a much lower need to spray them with fungicides.

In any case, it is a good idea to wash your oranges and citrus fruit before peeling. Wash extra careful if you plan to use the zest or make candy out of the peel.

Get Fooducated: iPhone App Android App RSS Subscription or Email Subscription

Follow us on twitter: twitter.com/fooducate on facebook: facebook.com/fooducate

We often see or hear claims about a food product being “low in carbs”, “high in protein” or “fat free”. We thought it would be a good idea to get back to the basics and do a post on these 3 macronutrients. They are the source of practically all calories in food. They are called macro-nutrients because we need these in large quantities to function properly.

Foods generally contain different proportions of fats, protein, carbs and water. However, some foods are made up of only one macronutrient such as oil (pure fat) or sugar (pure carbohydrate). Let’s review each one of these macronutrients:

1. Carbohydrates (Carbs)

Contrary to many fad diets out there – Carbs are the main source of energy for our bodies. The most simple form of carbohydrate is glucose, the only substance our brains use for energy. Our kidneys, heart and nervous system also use glucose to function properly. Out of our total energy intake for the day, it is recommended to get around 45-65% of energy from carbs.  So in a 2000 calorie diet this is 900 to 1,300 calories a day, or 225 – 325 grams (One gram of carbohydrate provides 4 calories). Our body can use the energy from carbs immediately, or store it for later use. Common sources of carbohydrates include breads, cereals, pasta, rice, potatoes, fruits and vegetables.

What are some good sources of carbs?

When choosing a carbohydrate it is important to select something that is high in fiber, low glycemic index and as least processed as possible. Examples include wholegrain bread, apples, sweet potatoes, brown rice and oats.

2. Proteins

We only need about 10-35% of our diets to come from protein – most Americans get more than ample protein every day. Proteins are important for repair and growth of tissues, building muscle, enzymes, hormones, amino acids and our immune system. Protein isn’t used immediately for energy – it’s more of a backup for our body. One gram of protein, like carbs, also provides 4 calories.

Choose foods that have high quality protein: lean meats, fish, poultry, low fat cheese, milk, yoghurt, eggs, legumes, soy, nuts and seeds.

3. Fats

Fats should make up about 20-35% of our diet. Unfortunately, they’ve been getting a bad reputation for decades. Nonetheless, fats are essential in our diet. Fats are important for protecting our organs, maintaining cell membranes, promoting growth and development and absorbing essential vitamins. One gram of fat contains about 9 calories (more than double a gram of carb or protein, hence the vilification).

Which fats are good for you? Choose foods that contain unsaturated fats over saturated fats, such as oily fish, nuts and seeds, olive oil, avocado and canola oil instead of full cream milk, deep fried foods, cream, butter and animal fat.

So there you have it – the big three.

For those of you that are wondering where alcohol fits into the picture, it isn’t technically considered a “macronutrient” because our body doesn’t need it to function. However, if it is contained in foods or drink it adds quite a chunk of energy, almost the same amount as fat! One gram of alcohol has 7 calories!

There are many mixed messages out there regarding low carb, high protein diets. Most health professionals will not recommend these extreme diets as a way of obtaining enough nutrition for an active, healthy life.  Following a balanced diet that contains carbs, protein and fat in the right proportions should give you all the nutrients you need!

Get Fooducated: iPhone App Android App RSS Subscription or Email Subscription

Follow us on twitter: twitter.com/fooducate on facebook: facebook.com/fooducate

A quick one today.

Studies have shown that serving raw vegetables or vegetable soup as an appetizer increases children’s veggie consumption.

Raw carrots, tomato soup, cherry tomatos, edamame…

Read the full story on Dr. Dina Rose’s blog It’s Not About Nutrition.

Get Fooducated: iPhone App Android App RSS Subscription or Email Subscription

Follow us on twitter: twitter.com/fooducate on facebook: facebook.com/fooducate

Despite New York’s well intentioned efforts, the Federal government has rejected Mayor Bloomberg’s efforts to combat obesity through limitations on soft drink purchases with “food stamps”.

Almost a year ago, New York suggested that the city’s participants in the SNAP program (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program – the new name fro food stamps) would not be able to purchase soft drinks with the funds.

Why would the land fo the free have any say over what people buy and eat you may ask?

Simple: Taxpayer money goes to helping poor people buy food. That food should not be making them sick and fat.

But in reality that’s exactly what’s happening. Over 41 million Americans receive food assistance annually, which is a staggering number ( 13% of our population). Just in New York, we’re talking about 1.7 million people. In 2009, approximately $100 million dollars of SNAP money was spent by New Yorkers on soft drinks. That’s $100 million dollars in taxpayer money that went to pay for obesity and diabetes inducing beverages. Simply ridiculous.

So why doesn’t the USDA welcome New York’s initiative with open arms?

If you go back and read the history of the food aid assistance program, it was set up during the great depression to help needy families buy surplus food manufactured on US farms. The list of foods would change based on what farms were outputting – eggs, milk, apples, potatoes, etc…

Of course back in the day there was barely any processed food in grocery stores. And poor people were skinny and malnourished.

Unfortunately the original goals of the Food Stamp – now SNAP – program have been bastardized to mostly consider industry interests, not those of the citizens it was supposed to help. Even the name SNAP stands for Nutrition Assistance, not gorge-yourself-on-junk-food assistance.

Some people may opine that limiting choices with SNAP is discrimination against the poor. Or that the government has no right to tell people what to eat and what not. True, except for the fact that it is the government doling out the money in the first place.

Think about it, taxpayers are subsidizing high fructose corn syrup twice – once at the field paying farmers to grow monoculture corn, and the second time at the supermarket aiding SNAP recipients get their fizzy pop.

Lastly, Secretary Vilsack’s comment about the problem being too complex to solve may have been true in the 1950′s. But today? To paraphrase a 70′s TV series “We have the technology…”

Please chime in with your thoughts.

Get Fooducated: iPhone App Android App RSS Subscription or Email Subscription

Follow us on twitter: twitter.com/fooducate on facebook: facebook.com/fooducate

Are you familiar with the Paleo diet? It’s a relatively new phenomenon that embraces the presumed diet of the Paleolithic era which lasted over 2.5 million years and ended about 10,000 years ago as humanity switched from hunter-gatherer foods to agriculture. The foods consumed by people on Paleo diet are mostly grass-fed and pasture raised meats, fish, wild vegetables, wild fruit, roots, and nuts. The big non-nos are grains, legumes, dairy products, salt, refined sugar, and any processed oils.

You may wonder if such diets are able to provide the full nutritional needs of  modern humans. Arguments on this matter abound. But there is certainly some merit to diets that call for minimal or no processed foods. On the other hand, humanity has had over 10,000 years of great experience advancing itself into an agrarian society, increasing lifespans by 300% and learning to enjoy baguettes, cheese, and fine wine. All of these were not available to the caveman.

What’s interesting to note is that once a certain type of diet becomes trendy, food companies look to innovate around it. So even though cookies are not something that comes to mind when you think of early homo sapiens, one small manufacturer has brought forth the Caveman Cookie.

From the website:

Caveman Cookies are a Paleolithic take on the traditional oatmeal-raisin cookie.  Sweet, but satisfying with a high protein content, these cookies are for cavemen in need of a quick pick-me-up… before hunting tigers.

OK – nice pitch. But what’s really inside?

What you need to know:

Caveman comes in three flavors: Original, Tropical, and Alpine. although their website does not include nutrition information, we asked them to send us the data, expecting a gobbledygook of processed ingredients. We were pleasantly surprised. Here are the ingredients for the 3 different flavors:

Original: honey, almond meal, walnuts, raisins, ginger, nutmeg & cinnamon

Tropical:  Almond meal, honey, coconut, macadamia nuts, ginger

Alpine: honey, hazelnut meal, almond meal, toasted carob

This is about as unprocessed as you can get, unless the almonds and hazelnuts would be left whole. Also, did cavemen toast carob? But in all seriousness,

Nutritionally, these are cookies. As such, they are obviously high in sugar (about 1.5 tsp per cookie) with 50 calories per cookie. We don’t think cavemen would have eaten this every single day, and you shouldn’t either.

But compared to many other cookies ou there, Caveman does offer a simple easy to understand value proposition and a reassuringly simple to understand ingredient list.

Bottom line: Give them a try.

Get Fooducated: iPhone App Android App RSS Subscription or Email Subscription

Follow us on twitter: twitter.com/fooducate on facebook: facebook.com/fooducate

(image source: Serious Eats)

Yogurt is a health food mega trend that’s few decades years old. But within the yogurt category, there’s a breakaway subcategory that is simply on fire: Greek yogurt sales have been doubling every single year for the past five!

Hungry yogurt eaters are now voting with their spoons, as more consumers make the switch from conventional to Greek yogurt. Five years ago, annual sales of the dairy product totaled just $60 million. But this year, food industry analysts predict Greek yogurt will almost double last year’s sales to $1.5 billion. read more from NPR…

So what exactly is Greek yogurt?

Basically, it’s yogurt that has been strained. The loss of water leads to a thicker yogurt. More yogurt and less water means more nutrients. All the Greek yogurt brands boast the high protein value of yogurt which can keep you satisfied longer before you get the munchies. And just like the conventional yogurts, Greek also come with different varieties of live and active cultures that play nice with your gut.

It’s interesting to note is that the leading yogurt brands failed to identify the trend early on and are now playing catch up to Chobani and Fage, who pretty much came out of nowhere to lead the segment. What’s truly amazing is that Greek yogurt is priced double the that of conventional yogurt.

What to do at the supermarket:

Just as with traditional yogurt, you need to watch out for nutrition pitfalls. Always opt for the low fat or nonfat yogurt options.

Flavored Greek yogurts may be adding more sugar to your diet than you expected. So best to stick with plain Greek and add your won flavorings.

If you’ve never had Greek yogurt, you’re in for a treat. But it’s an acquired taste, so don’t give up if you don’t enjoy it on the first try. Buy a plain yogurt and add some honey to see how it goes.

Get Fooducated: iPhone App Android App RSS Subscription or Email Subscription

Follow us on twitter: twitter.com/fooducate on facebook: facebook.com/fooducate

In tune with the season, we’re writing about school related topics in the last few weeks. Today, some promising news on the chocolate milk front. AS you know, chocolate milk is a very contentious issue in this country. The lines have been drawn by the dairy industry – either kids drink “flavored milk” or they won’t drink milk at all. Countless press releases and industry sponsored studies point to the fact that plain milk simply does not work for kids.

What drove us bonkers here at Fooducate is the binary nature of the argument. Either chocolate milk with 3 tsp of added sugar, or plain milk with no added sugar at all. (Note: plain milk has 3 tsp of naturally occurring sugar , lactose, per cup).

What about flavored milk that has just 1 added tsp of sugar instead of 3? We asked USDA secretary Tom Vilsack, we asked the National Dairy Council, but never got a good answer. At best the mumbled reply was “kids prefer flavored milk”.

That’s why yesterday’s press release by the Milk Processor Education Program (MilkPEP) gave us a glimmer of hope:

Milk companies across the U.S. are reformulating flavored milk to lower total calories and decrease added sugars and fat, while preserving its nutritional value and taste appeal.  These new products aim for 150 calories and fewer than 22 grams of total sugar (or 10 grams of added sugars) per 8-ounce serving. read more…

OK, so the change is not dramatic. They are lowering added sugars from 3 tsp (12 grams) to 2.5 tsp (10 grams).

But hey, it’s a start. If every school year we go down another half a teaspoon, in just a few more years we’ll be down to our suggested 1 tsp of added sugar. And kids wil love it.

Wishful thinking?

Get Fooducated: iPhone App Android App RSS Subscription or Email Subscription

Follow us on twitter: twitter.com/fooducate on facebook: facebook.com/fooducate

Ritz has a new cracker on the market and it’s made with Whole Wheat!

The reason we want whole wheat and whole grains in our diet is:

1. the whole grain contains many more nutrients than a refined grain

2. the celebrity nutrient in whole grains is fiber, something most of us are lacking in our diet.

3. whole grains in a food are an indicator of a less processed product.

So this new Ritz cracker with 5 grams of whole grains sounds healthy right? Let’s take a look…

What you need to know:

We are kind of disappointed to read the nutriton label and discover that the 5 grams of whole grains are translated to less than 1 gram of fiber per serving!

But our disappointment did not end there.

Here is the ingredient list:

unbleached enriched flour (wheat flour, niacin, reduced iron, thamine mononitrate, riboflavin, folic acid), whole grain wheat flour, soybean oil, sugar, partially hydrogenated cottonseed oil, leavening (calcium phosphate, and/or baking soda), salt, high fructose corn syrup, soy lecithin.

As you can see, the first ingredient in this cracker is refined flour, stripped of its nutrients, only to have some of them added back (hence “enriched”). The whole wheat, referred to boldly in the front of package, is listed only as the second ingredient.

Additionally, this product contains trans-fats – just look at the partially hydrogenated oil listed as an ingredient.

Last but not least, high fructose corn syrup is used here. This usually indicates a low quality, high profit margin processed food.

Bottom line – stay away.

What to do at the supermarket:

If crackers are your thing – choose those with 100% whole wheat, or close to that. Look for 2, 3, or more grams of fiber per serving. And no partially hydrogenated anything.

Please note that the serving size designated on cracker packs is usually very small. For example here, 5 crackers seems like a very small portion. You may need to do some multiplying to figure out the true calorie count you are consuming.

One more thing. Aside from the cracker itself, the toppings count too. Our favorite healthy recommendations include, hummus, avocado, sardines, and low-fat cheese.

What’s your favorite Cracker?

We’re running a short cracker survey to learn what’s important for you when choosing crackers. Please take a minute to answer 3 questions. One lucky respondent will win a $25 gift card of her / his choice. (Expires August 28). Click here for the survey.

UPDATE: Survey is closed. Winner has been notified.

You can also tell us what your favorite cracker is by scanning you favorite cracker and liking it on your Fooducate Android App or iPhone App.

Get Fooducated: iPhone App Android App RSS Subscription or Email Subscription

Follow us on twitter: twitter.com/fooducate on facebook: facebook.com/fooducate