Danger, step away from the olive oil!

Today's Wall Street Journal has an article about potentially adverse reactions between medications and food with "health-improving" qualities. When I read this article, my first assumption was the article was funded by the pharmaceutical industry. It is in the best interests of their bottom-line, and hence their shareholders, for the American public to eat unhealthy food and need a multitude of prescription drugs to stay alive.

Disclaimer: I am not a physician. Do not stop taking any prescription medication without the advice and support of your physician. The article has a link that lists some common foods and potential drug interactions. If you are taking any prescription drugs, the information is worth reading.

Now for my opinion: This article is not surprising. Many of the foods listed are considered detoxifying. And, after all, what is a prescription drug other than a pile of chemical toxins formed into a pill?

I, for one, would rather explore (with the advice, counsel and support of a qualified professional) what natural food choices I could make to avoid taking toxins in pill form. Perhaps that is just me...

The Problem with Headlines

The advent of the Internet has brought with it a significant hunger for news. There are millions of people on the world wide web at any given moment and many of them are surfing for something that catches their eye. Sometimes, the speed of surfing stops people from reading full articles and blogs and, instead, they only take with them the headlines. This is a problem.

A headline today read "Too much exercise can cause problems for some women." When you take the time to read the article, only 3 paragraphs long, it goes on to say "inexperienced female endurance athletes can damage their health." I would contend this statement applies to men as well. I'd further contend that doing near anything without experience, or doing so blindly without some training or education, could result in damage to one's health.

The near insatiable need for content to satisfy the thirst for "something new on the web" has resulted in an environment where nearly everything is news. Worse yet, in the absence of actual news we just make things up. This blog is a great example. I sit here and make things up all for the sake of brand recognition. Each writer thinks, of course, their voice and their writing is meaningful. The web gives all writers a platform for sharing their words, good or bad. Some percentage of what is put on the web probably it is helpful. My question is what responsibility does each of us have to be cautious with the snippets we put out there? The headline reading too much exercise can cause problems for women only applies to a minuscule number of women out there exercising. We know most people don't exercise so why would this headline appear at all. More accurately written as, "Are you a new endurance athlete? Read this.

The other women that read it? Perhaps they will skip their workout this afternoon. Perhaps they feel justified in continuing to avoid exercise. Perhaps they'll share the headline with their friends and perpetuate the myth that exercise can be harmful.

I think we need a glut of positive reinforcement out here. After all, some daily exercise is only good for everything in your life.

Salt. The New Evil.

The USDA's draft dietary guidelines include a reduction in salt intake. According to this article in the Los Angeles Times, Americans consume an average of 3,400 milligrams of salt on a daily basis. The new dietary guidelines recommend no more than 1,500 milligrams per day (the current guidelines published in 2005 says 2,300 milligrams).

While I agree we could all likely do with a little less salt in our diet, I fear the consequences of labeling salt the new evil. Let us simply recall what happened when we named fat evil in the 80s. A huge influx of low-fat food hit the grocery store shelves. Most of it fake food, almost none of it food for you. But we were sold a story that low-fat meant you could eat it and it wouldn't make you fat. And we bought it. By the billions and billions. And, obesity trends track right along with the influx of low-fat foods. If you want to read more about that coincidence, click here.

I promise you there are people sitting in conference rooms right now deciding on which "Low Salt" label will appear on the front of food boxes. I give it 30 days before we see such labels on grocery store shelves.

Our bodies need some salt. Don't believe me, believe The Mayo Clinic. Because the creation of our dietary guidelines is a political process (yes, I'm sorry, too) and because salt doesn't have a hugely powerful and wealthy lobby, we could very well end up in a place where salt is blacklisted. Worse yet, we'll end up with a whole new industry of fake salts which are marketed as "much better" for us (I would wager there are food manufacturers also sitting around in conference rooms making up new snazzy names for the "Anti-Salt" products they are about to create).

Don't get me wrong, I think we should all reduce the salt in our diet. The best way to do so? Stop eating processed foods. The vast majority of salt in the American diet comes from fake foods sold in boxes and at fast food places. If the new dietary guidelines came out and said "Processed Foods: Used Sparingly" I suspect the salt problem would take care of itself.

Redefining Meals

When I was little, one of the best surprises was breakfast for dinner. It always felt like a special occasion though I now suspect it was an invention of necessity... nothing else to make for dinner. Nonetheless, in a little girl's eyes, doing something as crazy as having eggs, pancakes and bacon at 6 PM was a reason to celebrate.

I am increasingly aware that many people struggle with what to make for dinner and, for that matter, breakfast and lunch. This small post, written with fond little girl memories, is here to suggest you redefine your meals. Breakfast for dinner? Sure! Dinner food for breakfast? Why not?

I think the better idea is to listen to your body, hear what nutrition it needs and give it the very best food you can find. If you find yourself eating something unconventional, congratulations!

3 Questions

What is considered "processed" food? While seemingly a simple question, the suggestion yesterday that white rice is considered a processed food caught some by surprise. Here is a helpful list of 3 simple questions. If any of these questions are true, the food is most likely processed and, for optimal health, should be avoided or eaten only sparingly.

1. Is it in a cardboard box?

2. Does it contain ingredients that don't grow on the earth?

3. Are there more than 5 ingredients?

Avoiding processed food could be the best thing you do for your health. Very easy!

What To Eat?

On a daily basis, we receive thousands of messages about what we should eat. Television and radio commercials, billboards, what our family, friends and co-workers are eating, news on the web and the latest research in the daily paper. Wisely, many of us have learned to be skeptical about some of these messages but it does leave us with the question of what to eat.

The best advice is the most simple:

1. Eat only whole, natural foods
2. Eat less than you think you need
3. Drink more water
4. Eat more fruit and many more vegetables
5. Eat organic as much as possible

To be really clear, to eat only whole, natural foods means you eliminate processed food and many things which have been marketed as healthy. Bread, even "whole wheat" bread is a processed food. White rice is a processed food. Whole, natural foods means to eat things that haven't been changed by humans. Another way to look at it... if it comes in a box, it is processed.

If you want one piece of direct, clear advice? Eat kale. Sauteed in a little olive oil, with chopped onions and garlic? Delicious!

2010 Dietary Guidelines

Stay tuned! The US Government, via the USDA and HHS, is working on the 2010 dietary guidelines. The new guidelines are scheduled to be published this fall. In the meantime, if you'd like to keep up with the progress click here for the website.

On the website, there is a link to the comments submitted by individuals and industry. Suspecting some of the comments would be interesting, I scrolled through the list and downloaded the comments submitted by the Corn Refiners Association (who knew such an association existed?). You might be surprised to learn the Corn Refiners Association submitted a great deal of research in support of High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS). Much of the information they submitted was Government and association research reports which suggests HFCS is not harmful and should remain Generally Regarded as Safe (GRAS). The FDA created the GRAS list in 1958 as a tool to help consumers and manufacturers determine what additives can be used in food. We could spend a very long time examining the process and the validity of the GRAS list. Here is a small peek...

The list of things on the GRAS list is frightening. One example: Propylene Gycol (PG). On the Dow Chemical webpage describing PG, they say it is "not acutely toxic" and is "essentially non-irritating to the skin." Excuse me? And this means it can be added to my food, cosmetics and pharmaceuticals? Yes, quite so. If you'd like to know what else can be added to your food, here you go, but be prepared. Things removed from the GRAS list: saccharin (though Congress granted a special exception and it is still being used), cyclamates (now completely banned) and Red Dye No. 2 (also banned).

Are we supposed to feel good that our dietary guidelines include things on the GRAS list? Given all of this, I am a bit skeptical the 2010 Dietary Guidelines will be good for us.