Blog

Is saturated fat back on the hook?

by Monica Reinagel, MS, LDN

That pain in your neck? It might be a case of nutrition-advice whiplash.

Saturated fat, long blamed for heart disease, seemed to be exonerated last month by a large study which found no connection between saturated fat intake and heart disease. People who ate less saturated fat were just as likely to have heart disease as people who ate more. Conclusion: Saturated fat does not cause heart disease. Cue rejoicing (not to mention “I told you so’s”) from Atkins and Paleo dieters.

But now the Harvard School of Public Health is throwing a bucket of ice-water on the whole party. They did their own analysis of the relationship between fat and heart disease and found that it all depends on what you replace the saturated fat with.

The Harvard authors note that previous clinical trials aimed at reducing saturated fat had “very mixed” results, “with most showing no significant effect.”   But, they note, when health authorities started to recommend reducing saturated fat, they didn’t offer much guidance in terms of what to replace it with. Some replaced those calories with hydrogenated fats.Others replaced them with refined carbohydrates. In both cases, the benefits of reducing saturated fat may have been canceled out by the negative impact of trans fats and refined carbs.

But when saturated fats were replaced with polyunsaturated fats (yes, the much maligned PUFAs), heart disease risk declined 20%.  (Read summary of research and interview with lead authors.)

This story isn’t over yet. Those who never let go of the notion that saturated fat contributes to heart disease will now get their chance at the “I told you so’s.” Those who are wedded to the idea that saturated fat is the ideal fat or that PUFAs are the source of all evil will find grounds to question this latest analysis. (Post them below–but not before reading the rest of the post.)

Where does this leave the non-ideologue who is just trying to figure out what to eat today?  Let me try to save you some neck pain.  These ground rules are unlikely to change:

1. I think everyone can agree that too many refined carbohydrates is a big problem. Limit them.

2. Trans fats (from hydrogenated oils) are bad news. Avoid them.

3. In the context of a typical Western diet, shifting some of your fat intake from saturated fats (from animals) to polyunsaturated fats (from vegetable oils) appears to have some advantages in terms of heart health. But I would argue that monounsaturated fats (olive oil) and omega-3 fat (fish and flax) are even better replacements.

For my Paleo and Weston Price folks who are about to pop a vein (but NOT from atherosclerosis!!) let me add:

For those who have made a more radical departure from the typical Western diet, by (say) eliminating all or most grains, sugars, processed foods, etc., it may be that reducing saturated fat offers no further benefits in terms of protecting your heart. Party on.

Fresh vegetables? Think again

by Monica Reinagel, MS, LDN

frozen veggiesWhat could be more nutritious than fresh vegetables? Frozen ones, quite possibly.

A new study finds that frozen vegetables, which are usually processed within hours of being harvested, may contain more of certain nutrients than “fresh” vegetables, which may be weeks old by the time they’re consumed. This latest study was funded by Birds-eye, but it’s actually nothing we didn’t already know. According to the USDA, fresh vegetables can lose up to 50% of their nutritional value after just one or two days of room temperature storage or one to two weeks of cold storage.

This is not a nutritional emergency. Even at half strength, vegetables are still among the most nutritious foods you can choose. And many valuable nutrients, such as fiber, minerals, and fat-soluble vitamins like E and K, are fairly stable in storage. In other words, the kale that’s been sitting in my fridge since last weekend’s shopping trip is still going to make a great, nutritious side dish for tonight’s dinner.

But the study is a good reminder. Scoring extra-fresh produce from the garden or farmer’s market is a good way to maximize the nutritional value–but eating it promptly is just as important. And if you are stocking up for more than a week or so at a time, frozen veggies may be the best bet for long storage.

See also: Is all processed food bad?

 

How safe is imported fish?

by Monica Reinagel, MS, LDN

Q. Is imported frozen fish from countries like India and Vietnam safe? I avoid buying any food imported from China but I bought frozen Swai Basa Fish (farmed) from Vietnam and frozen Squid (caught wild) from India. They tasted really good and they were cheap, but I’m wondering if we can trust those imports or they may be full of some toxic stuff.

A.  Theoretically, the safety of fish being sold in U.S. markets is monitored by federal agencies such as the FDA, whose job it is to be sure that the fish sold for human consumption in the U.S is “safe, wholesome, and not misbranded or deceptively packaged.”  (Institute of Medicine on Seafood Safety)

But as we’ve seen lately, the ability of the FDA to effectively police the food supply and enforce its regulations is in serious doubt. Just a few years ago, for example, there was a scandal in which salmon being sold for a premium as “wild-caught” in both wholesale and retail markets turned out to be cheap farmed salmon. ( Story from New York Times)

To make things even more challenging, fishing and farming practices are changing rapidly around the globe as demand for seafood increases.  New restrictions and best practices are being implemented. But loopholes and work-arounds are also constantly being discovered and exploited. It’s a moving target!

The best resource I’ve found to keep up with these issues is Seafood Watch. These guys are working hard to stay on top of all of these issues and to provide up-to-date resources for consumers trying to make safe and responsible choices.

I scanned Seafood Watch’s reports on both the fish you mentioned.  In terms of toxins or contaminants, I didn’t see too much to worry about with the wild-caught squid, but these comments on farmed swai basa got my attention:

“Commercial aquaculture for finfish in Viet Nam continues to use relatively low technology and many operations continue to use homemade feeds…[with] little or no management of aquaculture operations…”

The safety of these fish as food obviously depends primarily on the water they’re raised in and the food they are fed. They might be perfectly fine, but it doesn’t look as if anyone is paying too much attention.

From a sustainability perspective, which is more about the long-term health of the oceans than the safety of the food, both wild-caught squid and farmed swai basa are considered “good alternatives” but not “best choices.”

How healthy is 100% fruit juice, really?

by Monica Reinagel, MS, LDN

Q. What should I look for when buying fruit juice? For example the “100% pure and natural orange juice” says it contains 0% Vitamin C. How is that possible? Another one provides 100% Vitamin C but from the list of ingredients we see that Vitamin C is actually added.

A. The USDA considers a half cup of fruit juice equivalent to a serving of fruit but I have my doubts.  Processed fruit juice–even 100% juice–is a distant second to fresh whole fruit in terms of its nutritional value.

For one thing, fruit juice is a very concentrated source of sugar and calories. All the fiber, which slows the absorption of the sugars in whole fruit, has been removed.

Secondly, many (most?) of the naturally-occurring nutrients are lost during processing, pasteurization, and storage.  As you found, manufacturers may compensate for this by adding nutrients back to the juice after the fact.  You could get the same benefit from taking a vitamin C capsule.

Nutritionally, I’d rank processed fruit juice only slightly higher than soda and other sweetened beverages.

If you choose to drink fruit juice, consume it in moderation. Freshly-prepared juice (made from whole fruit with a juicer and consumed immediately) preserves more of the antioxidants. But for the full nutritional benefits of fruit, I think you’d be far better off consuming whole fresh fruit–and drinking water!

Michelle’s Tofu Salad with Nutritional Yeast

by Monica Reinagel, MS, LDN

 

If a recipe calls for tofu, it’s important to note whether regular or “silken” tofu is called for. They are not interchangeable. Silken tofu is softer and more fragile. It’s used in miso soup, and it’s often used to impart a creamy texture in dairy-free recipes for salad dressings, puddings, pies, and other desserts. Regular tofu has a slightly coarser texture and holds its shape better. You’ll find it used in stir-fries and grilled and baked dishes.

Michelle’s Tofu Salad with Nutritional Yeast

I used to think of this as a mock egg salad until I realized that I like it much better than regular egg salad!  It’s great on crackers or as a sandwich or wrap filling.

Ingredients

1 package extra-firm regular (not silken) tofu

1 medium carrot, grated

3 tablespoons reduced fat mayonnaise

3 tablespoons nutritional yeast flakes (or more to taste)

Garlic salt, to taste

Instructions

  1. Wrap tofu in several thicknesses of paper towels and squeeze to remove excess moisture.
  2. Mash tofu with fork in medium bowl.
  3. Add rest of ingredients and combine. Adjust seasoning to taste.

Makes 4 servings. Per serving: 164 calories, 9 g fat, 8 g carbohydrate, 4g fiber, 14 g protein.

Originally published at QuickandDirtyTips.com

BPA: Which foods are safe?

by Monica Reinagel, MS, LDN

Q. I’ve heard that BPA can be in the lining of many canned foods and in the lids of jarred food. I am planning to get pregnant in the next couple of months so I’m trying to avoid BPA. Should I avoid all jarred and canned food? How can I find out which foods are bpa free and safe to eat?

A. The FDA sent out a confusing mixed message this week. On the one hand, the FDA officials admit they have concerns over the safety of BPA in food products such as canned goods and baby formula.

The agency says it supports “reasonable steps to reduce human exposure to BPA” and advises consumers not to fill containers made with BPA with hot liquids. On the other hand, the FDA has decided that BPA can remain in use while further study is conducted and tells parents to continue to use infant formula and baby foods because the benefit of “stable nutrition” outweighs the risk of BPA exposure.

Consumer watchdogs charge that the FDA is soft-pedaling the danger to consumers because they are not yet prepared to upset the plastics and food manufacturing industry by banning BPA.  My own review of the evidence makes me uncomfortable with the FDA’s laissez-faire stance–especially for pregnant women and small children who are probably at greatest risk from BPA exposure.

I’m also unconvinced by the industry’s reassurance that the level of consumer exposure is well below the government’s safety standards. Current research by independent scientists suggests that the safe exposure level may be as much as 20,000 times lower than these outdated standards permit.

Consumers who are unconvinced by the FDA’s reassurances have limited options for safer canned foods. One manufacturer (Eden Foods) offers some BPA-free canned goods and more BPA-free brands may emerge in response to consumer demand. Short of that, those wishing to avoid BPA should avoid all canned goods.    Fresh and frozen foods are good alternatives.

Tips on avoiding BPA exposure from foods and containers.

Interview with Technical Policy Director of Consumer Union

 

Why we overeat

by Monica Reinagel, MS, LDN

This article is also available as a podcast. Click to listen

One of the main arguments for a low-carb diet is that reducing carbohydrates theoretically reduces your appetite. You’re not as hungry and therefore you eat less and you lose weight. But that assumes that we only eat when we’re hungry and that we stop when we’re full.

Most Eating Is Not About Hunger

In fact, there’s a growing body of evidence showing that that environmental cues may have a much bigger impact on how much we eat than physiological hunger—factors such as how much food is on the table or in the package, how much the people around us are eating, and even how big our plates are have a huge effect on how much we eat.

Does the Size of Your Dinner Plate Matter?

For example, researchers have observed that the average size of a dinner plate in the 1950s was 9 inches across. By the 80’s it had grown to 11 inches and today the average dinner plate is a whopping 13 inches.  The increase in obesity rates parallels the increase in dinner plate size almost exactly. Coincidence? Some people don’t think so.

A popular new diet book, called The 9-Inch Diet, by Alex Bogusky, starts by having you replace your over-sized dinner plate with 9-inch plates. Bogusky claimed that shaving three inches off his dinner plate helped him whittle three inches off of his waist.

We Eat With Our Eyes, Not Our Stomachs

So, can weight loss really be as simple as that? No rigid eating plans? No forbidden foods or special recipes? Well, environmental cues are extremely powerful. That old joke about someone’s eyes being bigger than their stomachs turns out to be truer than you might have thought.

A now-famous experiment involving trick soup bowls proved that your stomach doesn’t tell you when you’re full; your eyes do. Researcher Brian Wansink describes the soup bowl experiment in his book Mindless Eating. The subjects were asked to eat a bowl of soup and then to rate how full they felt. But some of the bowls were secretly refilled from the bottom as diners ate the soup The people with the bottomless soup bowl ate 73% more soup but rated their level of satisfaction exactly the same as the others—after all, they’d only had a single bowl of soup!

We Decide How Much to Eat Based on Visual Cues

It seems that we decide how much to eat based not on how hungry we are or how filling the food is, but according to visual cues, which can be misleading.

Another experiment by Wansink’s group shows that you’ll eat more from a large container, even if you don’t like the food! They replaced the popcorn at a movie theater with stale, 2-week old popcorn.  People complained about how terrible the popcorn was. Nonetheless, people who were given a large bucket ate about 35% more popcorn than those who were given a smaller container.

Apparently, the only ones who can be trusted to eat according to their actual physical appetites are babies and small children. Research by Barbara Rolls suggests that three-year-olds are not influenced by serving size; they eat according to their appetite. By the time they are five, however, they’ll eat more if they are served more.

You Can Overeat Without Being Overweight

Just because you’re not overweight doesn’t mean you’re not over-eating.

If supersized portions seduce you into over-eating unhealthy foods, you may cut back on more nutritious foods to compensate. You may be maintaining your weight, but at the expense of good nutrition.

So, this week, I’d like to experiment with the behavioral side of your diet. Unlike the metabolic diet concepts we discussed last week, which focused almost entirely on which foods you can eat, we’re going to focus instead on changing the environmental cues and behavioral patterns that lead to over-eating.

How to Trick Yourself Into Eating Less

So this week, you can eat whatever you like (as long as you promise to eat your vegetables, of course). Plus, I want you to follow the following rules.

  1. Use smaller dishes: Use smaller plates, bowls, and glasses. If your dinner plates are bigger than 9 inches across, use the sandwich plates instead.
  2. Don’t use serving bowls: No serving bowls or containers on the table.  Put your food on the plate and then go to a separate area to eat it.  If you are still hungry when your plate is empty, wait at least 15 minutes before serving yourself seconds.
  3. Prepare only what you need: When cooking, try to prepare only as much as is needed. Overcooking leads to overeating. That doesn’t mean you can’t cook enough for two meals. But when you’re done cooking, package up the second meal and put it away before serving yourself from the remainder.
  4. Don’t eat while distracted: Do nothing else while eating. Being distracted by television, the computer, or reading material can lead you to eat far more than you otherwise would. If you’re watching a movie or surfing the web and you decide to have a snack, pause the movie or shut down the computer until you’re done eating.
  5. Hide tempting food: Keep tempting but unhealthy foods out of sight.  When we see food we like, it actually makes us feel hungry.  The obvious corollary to this is to keep healthy foods readily available. In other words, line all the vegetables up at the front of the fridge. Bury the fudge in the back of the drawer.  And remember: chewing gum can help you avoid snacking.

Obviously, these rules all by themselves don’t ensure a balanced diet. But right now, we’re just experimenting with the environmental aspects of hunger and eating.

It might be best to minimize your time in restaurants this week, just for the sake of the experiment. You have very little control over portion sizes and other environmental cues in restaurants. At the very least, I suggest you avoid buffets, all-you-can-eat anything, and any restaurants that describe menu items with words like “jumbo” or “belly-buster.”

Questions to Ask Yourself

During your experiment with these behavioral strategies, here are some things to ask yourself:

  1. Do you feel more or less hungry than you usually do?
  2. Do you find yourself eating more or less at meals?
  3. Do you find yourself eating more or less often?
  4. Do you find it difficult or inconvenient to stick to the rules?
  5. Do you notice any differences in your energy levels or mood?
  6. Could you imagine continuing the experiment for more than a week?
  7. How would you rate the overall quality and balance of your diet? Better or worse than usual?

 

Originally published at QuickandDirtyTips.com

Lard vs shortening?

by Monica Reinagel, MS, LDN

Q. I am attempting to cook this recipe I found on the internet. It calls for 1/4 cup of lard OR vegetable shortening. I am health-conscious and I was wondering which option is healthier?

A.   If the vegetable shortening contains hydrogenated or inter-esterified oils, I’d say go with the lard–unless you’re a vegan, of course.

Lard has a bad reputation that I’m not sure it deserves. Like most animal fats, lard contains a mixture of saturated, monounsaturated, and polyunsaturated fats.  In fact, it contains more monounsaturated fats (13mg per ounce) than saturated fats (11g per ounce).   It also provides 280mg of omega-3 fatty acids per ounce.

If you’re looking for a vegetarian option, see if you can find a shortening that combines coconut or palm-kernel oil with unhydrogenated vegetable oil.  Both coconut and palm-kernel oil contain saturated fats, which allow them to stay solid at room temperature. In baked goods, that is often key to getting the right texture.

But straight coconut or palm kernel oil might not produce the best results. Unlike lard, coconut and palm kernel oil are almost 100% saturated fat. At room temperature, they are the consistency of candle wax! To produce something similar to shortening, manufacturers blend them with liquid (unsaturated) oil.

See also: On lard, pie crusts, and whether all saturated fats are the same