A Flavor ‘full’ Alternative to Whole Wheat

A satisfying alternative to whole wheat is rye, study confirms.

As any sandwich connoisseur will tell you, the bread is the real meat of the meal.  A submarine sandwich with sub-par bread turns a tasty treat into a dining disaster.

For instance, a six-inch hoagie filled with lean meats and organic vegetables sounds healthy, but not if it’s wrapped in a cocoon of refined flour (i.e. white bread).

Yet wrap that same sandwich in a 100 percent whole wheat sub roll, and a nutritional lightweight becomes a nutritional heavyweight, as all three parts of the grain are used (the bran, the germ and the endosperm).  Wheat bread made from 100 percent whole wheat has loads of fiber, a nutrient that’s vital to heart health, digestive health and weight management.

But truth be told, as great as whole wheat is for the body, it can become old hat after awhile.  Pardon the pun, but wheat bread can become, well, white-bread (i.e. bland, lacking in taste).

Of course there are many other types of bread to choose from, but virtually none of them stacks up to whole wheat from a health perspective.  Ciabatta rolls are made from refined flour, so are sourdough rolls, and don’t even get me started on French rolls.

According to recent study, however, whole wheat may have met its match in rye.

Health aside, the appeal to whole wheat bread is that it leaves its noshers feeling full, thanks to richness in fiber (two slices of wheat bread has about five grams of fiber).  But rye bread has that same effect – and then some, according to findings by some Swedish researchers.

These researchers from the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences recruited 16 volunteers and assigned them specific breakfast meals.  About one-quarter of the 16 consumed bagels and toasts made from whole wheat flour, and the remaining 12 consumed toasts and bagels made from rye flour.  The only variable in the study was the fiber content among the rye breads (some were made from sifted rye flour, so they had lower fiber concentrations than full rye bran and 100 percent whole wheat flour); the caloric content of all the breads was the same.

Based on the responses from the volunteers, the researchers found that those who had the rye breakfasts felt full the longest.  What’s more, this high degree of satiety was amongst every rye eater, which is to say that all the rye eaters felt fuller longer than the whole wheat eaters (i.e. people with bread from sifted rye flour consumed lesser amounts of fiber than those with 100 percent whole wheat, yet felt fuller longer).  The bread with the highest “fullness factor,” though, was the rye bran.

This study was published in the journal Nutrition Journal.

So there you have it, rye beats whole wheat in the “fullness factor.”

So, if you’re worn out with whole wheat, give rye a try!  Crumb for crumb, it’s every bit as nutritious and delicious!

Sources:
nutraingredients.com
vegetariantimes.com

Average Video Gamer in America Is 32 Years Old, According to CDC

According to the CDC, the average age of a video gamer in America is 32 years old!

Here’s a question:  If I were to ask you what the average age is for people who play video games on a regular basis, what age would you guess?

Twelve years old?  19 years old?  Maybe even 25 years old?

Try 35 years old!

In a word, yikes!

In my youth – the days where having the latest gaming system was on the list of 12 and 13-year-olds, not 30somethings – video gaming was the kid’s domain.  Moms prepared dinner and took care of the kids, dads labored in the fields or toiled in the office, and the kids played in the great outdoors, occasionally playing Nintendo games indoors when it rained.

Today, if the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s study is to be taken at face value, the average Mom and Dad have replaced the average kid at the joystick controls.

After performing a study of approximately 500 people in the Seattle, Wash. area (apparently the part of the country where internet traffic is highest) 45 percent of those polled said they played video games regularly.  What’s more, the average age of those gamers was 35 (the 500 participants polled were between the ages of 19 and 90).

Now, it would be one thing if more video gaming translated into healthier adults, be it mental health, physical health or emotional health.  But that’s not how the results turned out.  Truth be told, how often someone played video games translated into poorer health in all three health aspects.

For instance, women who played video games regularly were more depressed than female non-gamers.  Among men, the gamers had a higher BMI on average than male non-gamers.  And for both men and women, gamers were more likely to rely on the internet for what the study calls “social support” than male and female non-gamers.

Writing in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, the study’s lead author said, “The data illustrate the need for further research among adults to clarify how to use digital opportunities more effectively to promote health and prevent disease.”

As I wrote in a previous Mangano Minute posting, the video gaming industry recognizes the health concerns associated with gaming. Nintendo, for example, has tried to mix in physical activity through a program that allows people to play Nintendo and exercise all at the same time (a program that’s sold separately called Wii Fit).  And the joystick that comes with the Nintendo Wii requires actual movement, rather than simply pressing buttons.  So that’s one clear way technology is “more effectively promoting health.”

But as I said at the time, not even a Wii Fit replaces exercise in the great outdoors.

As with any study, this one may not be truly representative of the country at large.  But given the boom in video game sales since I was young, not to mention the boom in obesity levels in the country (there are more obese Americans than there are overweight Americans, according to the National Health Center for Statistics), this is probably an entirely accurate representation of where Americans stand today.  Or should I say “sit” today?

Sources:
sciencedaily.com
news.bbc.co.uk
reuters.com

Ground Beef More Likely to Contain Salmonella than Whole Cuts

Ground beef is more likely to be infected with food-borne illnesses than whole cuts of beef, research indicates.

While the food on our dinner plates tonight may all have the same destination – our stomachs – how it was packaged before hitting our plates may affect whether or not it arrives to that destination without incident.

As most of you know, I’m not a big meat eater, but I do on occasion eat whole beef products, mainly bison meat and the occasional cut of sirloin or flank steak.  I seldom eat ground beef.

And for good reason, as it turns out.

I say this because according to a recent study released by researchers from Michigan State University, ground beef is more likely to be infected with food-borne illnesses than whole cuts of beef.

They discovered this after intentionally infecting slabs of beef with the same strand of salmonella.  Before doing that, though, the Michigan State researchers took off their collegiate caps and played the role of “butcher,” cutting the beef in one of several ways:  whole muscle, coarsely ground, finely ground, or beef puree.

They then took each cut of beef and lathered them up with a smorgasbord of salmonella toxin, enclosing each piece in tightly sealed containers for 30 second intervals at 140 degrees Fahrenheit (60 degrees Celsius).

As aforementioned, the whole cuts of beef fared best in resisting salmonella poison, but interestingly, there was no statistically significant degree of difference in the ground cuts of beef resistance to salmonella poisoning.  They all fared poorly.

The researchers really aren’t sure why there’s such a difference between ground beef and whole cuts (in fact they say that the aim of the study was not to explain the difference, only to test to see if there was a difference).  They speculate that it might have something to do with ground beef’s predilection to absorb water more readily than whole cuts.

The study is published in the Journal of Food Science.

Salmonella is one of the more common food-borne diseases.  Approximately 400 people die a year from it (about one percent of the number infected every year), a majority of whom are infected in the summer months.  Symptoms of salmonella poisoning are mainly gastrointestinal, like stomach cramping, bloating, and diarrhea, typically lasting for no more than seven days.

Now, am I calling for a moratorium on ground beef consumption as a result of this study?  No.  That said, the results do jibe with what we typically see when beef products are recalled:  more often than not, it tends to be ground beef than whole cuts.

Just something to keep in mind when next you feel the urge to splurge for a slab of steak, instead of a much safer – and a whole lot healthier – bit of bison.

Sources:
foodproductiondaily.com
innovations-report.de
chicagoreporter.com

British Study Says Obesity May Be Influenced By Daylight

According to the latest study on brown fat, daylight plays a significant role in brown fat production and regulation.

The last time brown fat was news, I predicted it’d be back in the health headlines when the sleigh bells were a jingling, ring-ting-a-tingling.

Consider it an early Christmas gift.

Back in April, the last time I talked about brown fat, a study was published in the American Journal of Medicine that cleared up some formerly long held beliefs about how much brown fat the average adult has.  Prior to the study, it was largely held that brown fat deposits dissipate as we age (brown fat deposits have more capillaries than white fat, thus are able to burn calories more quickly and more efficiently than white fat deposits).  The study didn’t negate that finding, but did find that brown fat deposits were in greater supply in the average adult than once thought.

And that’s a good thing.

But as I said at the time, it doesn’t mean a whole heck of a lot if there’s no real way to increase brown fat deposits.  And outside of pill-popping (and no pill has been developed to increase brown fat, just in case you’re wondering), the next best bet is to move to a consistently cold climate (researchers found that exposing people to freezing cold temperatures activated brown fat deposits).

But before you board the next plane bound for Juneau, Alaska, consistently cold climates are often dark (or nearly dark) 24 hours a day.  And darkness is the antithesis of brown fat boosting.

That’s right.  According to the latest study on brown fat, daylight plays a significant role in brown fat production and regulation.

Researchers came to this conclusion after analyzing the fat deposits of over 3,000 men and women over several months.  According to Michael Symonds, the study’s lead author and professor from the University of Nottingham’s School of Clinical Sciences, the amount of brown fat in a person’s body was “significantly correlated” to the amount of daylight they were exposed to.

For example, in the winter, a time in which there is less daylight, brown fat deposits were lower and less active.  But as each day passed – and with each day an extra minute of sunlight (up until the summer solstice) – brown fat deposits became more active.

In a statement released by the University of Nottingham, Symonds said this finding could “potentially lead to new treatments for the prevention or reversal of obesity.”

The study is published in the journal Diabetes.

The study didn’t nix the idea of moving to Alaska altogether, as it confirmed that cold temperatures do, indeed, stimulate brown fat deposits.  However, daylight seems to play a more significant role in brown fat stimulation.

This finding offers additional reasons why people tend to gain weight in the winter months.  Not only do people move less and eat more (lest we forget the two big eating holidays:  Thanksgiving and Christmas), but their exposure to daylight is diminished.

Hopefully, this finding will “shine a new light” on how we can naturally combat obesity.  And that new way may be found in the sun’s rays.

Source:
sciencedaily.com

Study Says the Seeded Apple May Help Prevent Obesity, Diabetes

Pomegranates may reduce obesity and diabetes risk.

For me, the month of August is one of the more sad times of the year.  It’s a month of endings:  The summer’s last hurrah, the end of balmy weather, and final reminiscences at the family get-together.

On the other hand, August can be a happy time of year.  It signals new beginnings:  Teams returning to the gridiron, students returning to school (granted, some students happier than others), and farmers returning to fields, hoping to reap a successful harvest from their prized possessions.

The yummy pomegranate is one such prized possession, as August signals harvest time for pome-growers across the country (though pomegranates grow throughout the country, 3/4ths of the pomegranates sold in America grow in California).

Pomegranates are prized for their seeds.  A rare breed indeed is the pomegranate, for its one of the few fruits heralded almost exclusively for its seeds.  In fact, the literal translation of the word “pomegranate” is “apple with many seeds” or “seeded apple.”

Nutritionally, the pomegranate’s hailed for its antioxidant prowess.  In a past article I wrote about the pomegranate, I cited a UCLA study that showed how pomegranate juice is the most antioxidant-filled juice on the planet.  It’s also a rich source for vitamin C.

A more recent study gives even more gravitas to the great ‘granate, for it may reduce weight gain and the prevalence of diabetes.

Researchers from the University of Houston discovered this after providing 60 rats with varying amounts of fat.  Twenty of the rats were fed high doses of fat, another 20 were fed the same amount of fat and supplemented with pomegranate seed oil, and the final 20 were fed a typical rat diet (whatever that is).

The end of the study revealed some surprising findings.  Because not only did the group of rats fed the pomegranate oil gain less weight (10 grams less) despite eating the same amount of fat as the first group, but they also had a greater sensitivity to insulin.  Insulin is what allows the body to convert the things we eat into glucose for energy expenditure.  When the body resists insulin (people who are insulin resistant are typically those with type II diabetes), it results in a greater storage of fat.  This is part of the reason why obesity and diabetes are so closely linked.

The study is published in the British Journal of Nutrition.

Now, I grant you, this study was performed on rats, so it can’t be applied to humans at this point.  Further, 10 grams is not a whole heck of a lot when there are 453 grams in a pound.

I make these points only because the cynics are bound to make them, not to downplay the study’s findings.  After all, even if the rats fed the pomegranate seed oil had lost 30 or 40 grams, you can bet the cynics would find something to criticize the findings.  After all, with the cynics, their gripe is with natural health in general; they’ll search for anything to downplay what they see as “non-sense science.”

But they can’t escape the fact that pomegranates improved weight levels and insulin resistance.  As small as it may have been, it happened.  And just as the month of August signals the beginning of the pomegranate season, this study signals the beginning of future discoveries tying pomegranates to disease prevention (it’s already been tied to cancer prevention, not to mention Alzheimer’s disease and heart disease).

Sources:
nutraingredients.com
diabetes.org
pomegranates.org

Refueling Your Body…and Your Car?

Watermelons can be used a renewable resource, study confirms.

So we know that watermelon can fuel your own personal sex engine, but could it also fuel your car’s engine engine?

It may sound far-fetched, the notion of using a food to serve as automobile fuel, but it’s at the very least plausible, especially when one considers the amount of ethanol used for fuel.  And where does ethanol come from?  Corn, of course!

Corn ethanol has been around for many years, but it’s become increasingly popular only recently, due mainly to sky high energy costs and attempts to decrease the country’s reliance on foreign oil suppliers.

In 2007, for example, 6.5 billion gallons of ethanol were burned, twice the amount burned in 2004.  And in 2008, 330,000 fewer barrels of oil were imported because of our increased reliance on ethanol.

Now, even though the United States is not exactly running low on corn (despite billions of gallons of ethanol being burned every year, a mere 20 percent of the corn crop is used for ethanol), it doesn’t hurt to have other renewable resources at the ready.

And watermelon may be just be that renewable resource.

Researchers discovered watermelon’s fueling capabilities after analyzing the juice of reject watermelons – melons left in farmers’ fields due to blemishes or rot spots.

After analyzing the viability of watermelon’s more nutritive nutrients – cetrulline and lycopene, to be specific – they found that, indeed, watermelons contain the necessary ingredients to create bioethanol (watermelons have enough sugars to be fermented for ethanol production, and they also have enough amino nitrogen, a critical component of ethanol production).

Writing in the journal Biotechnology for Biofuels, the study’s authors conclude that watermelon “could easily” be used for bioethanol production.  However, the researchers note that other fuel sources would have to be combined with watermelon juice for it to work as a truly effective fuel (its nutrient concentration would have to be at least three times higher than it is for it to serve as a stand alone bioethanol fuel producer).

This study was conducted by a team of researchers from Lane, Oklahoma, where the USDA’s Agricultural Research Service and Research Laboratory is located.
Is it getting through to you just how amazing the wonders of nature are?  This site is devoted to solving your health problems with natural sources of food, vitamins and minerals.  Little did we know that our energy problems could be solved with all-natural sources as well.

Sources:
sciencedaily.com
usnews.com
ethanolfacts.com
biotechnologyforbiofuels.com

Researchers Say Lycopene Stimulates Greater Blood Flow

Lycopene, which is an antioxidant found abundantly in tomatoe sauce, has been shown to increase blood flow.

Every rule has its exceptions.

For example, nine times out of 10, I’d recommend your eating vegetables raw rather than cooked.  That’s because cooked vegetables lack the nutritional might that raw vegetables do, as the heating process knocks out a fair amount of fiber and a vast amount of vitamins (in broccoli for instance, vitamin C content drops 20 percent after boiling).

But one big exception to the cooked versus raw rule is with tomatoes .  Because tomatoes are one of the few vegetables that produces more of a certain antioxidant when it’s cooked rather than left in raw form.

The antioxidant I speak of is lycopene.  Lycopene isn’t exclusive to tomatoes (it’s also found in grapefruits and watermelon) but it’s definitely the first source you want to go to for a high dose of it, specifically cooked tomatoes (i.e. tomato sauce or paste).  While you’ll get a good dose of lycopene from a raw tomato, you’ll get four times more from its offshoots, like tomato paste or tomato sauce.

Like other antioxidants , lycopene is known for its disease and free radical fighting.  It’s heralded for being great for the skin, protecting the heart , and fighting off cancer-causing tumors.

And based on the results from a South Korea study, lycopene can add a new function to its already impressive repertoire:  improving blood flow.

After testing the blood samples of approximately 265 women between the ages of 31 and 75, researchers found that those women who had the highest levels of lycopene also had the lowest brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity, or baPWV.

BaPWV is a new measurement doctors use to assess someone’s risk for atherosclerosis.  The higher the measurement, the stiffer the blood vessels are.  The lower the number, the more free-flowing blood travels.

The study was conducted by Korean researchers from Yonsei University in South Korea.  It’s published in the appropriately titled journal Atherosclerosis .

This is an exciting find for anyone who enjoys a heaping helping of marinara sauce on a bed of whole wheat pasta, or a smear of organic tomato paste on a toasted English muffin.

How great it is to know that foods we associate with guilty indulgences are actually great for our bodies

As the French say, Bon appetite!

Sources:
nutraingredients.com
lycopene.com

Latest “Pro Artificial” Study Naturally Misses the Mark

Are artificial sweeteners like Splenda and Sweet & Low safe to consume? Study says yes. I say no!

A new study says that artificial sweeteners like Splenda and Sweet & Low don’t pose the health risks that people like me and others suggest.

Could natural health advocates like me have been wrong all along?  Let’s investigate, shall we?

An Italian study recently published in the journal Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention concludes that saccharin and aspartame – the two most widely used artificial sweeteners in the world today – pose no cancer risk to the people that consume them.

They discovered this after analyzing previous studies done on the issue (data collected was between 1991 and 2004) and comparing and contrasting control subjects’ diets with those who were diagnosed with stomach cancer, pancreatic cancer, and endometrial cancer.  Ultimately, they found saccharin and aspartame use to have no statistically significant impact on the subjects’ cancer diagnoses.

On its face, this looks like a win for the artificial sweetener industry.  It certainly flies in the face of a 2007 study done on artificial sweeteners and cancer, where European researchers found that rats consuming the sweet stuff were stricken by cancer after prolonged consumption.

Or does it?

In fact, it doesn’t, because the Italian researchers found that it didn’t contribute to only three kinds of cancer:  stomach, pancreatic, and endometrial.  Meanwhile, the 2007 European study found that it contributed to leukemia, lymphoma and breast cancer!

In other words, the Italian study’s only meaningful conclusion is that artificial sweeteners don’t contribute to specific cancers, not cancer in general.

But let’s pretend that artificial sweeteners in no way contributed to cancer.  That still doesn’t negate why you shouldn’t consume them, because health advocates like me and others don’t decry their usage for being cancer-causing.  We decry them for their contribution to a multitude of health risks, like weight gain, obesity and disrupting the body’s digestive function.

In fact, weight gain is the chief reason why health advocates like me oppose their use, as sugar-free varieties of sweets and other desserts trick the brain into thinking the body isn’t full, when in fact it is.  You can read more about this phenomenon here, as I’ve talked about this in the past and, as always, back up my assertions with studies.

So, is this study a win for the artificial sweetener industry?  No, indeed.  People like me have never targeted artificial sweeteners for being cancer-causing.  They may indirectly cause cancer – obesity is the contributing factor in 90,000 cancer deaths every year, according to the American Cancer Society (in the U.S. alone) – but the main bone of contention with artificial sweeteners is how they contribute to weight gain.

Sources:
foodnavigator.com
cancer.org

Unfortunately, my friends and I lost someone close to us on August 6th, 2009. His name was Anthony Rizzo. He was just 30 years old. Here’s my message to Anthony:

Riz, we had many good times together and we had many laughs. I will never forget this and your memory will continue to live on. You were a good friend and I’m going to miss you brother. Love you Riz. May you rest in peace.

Study:  Green Tea Compounds Build Bones AND Prevents Bone Loss

Study shows that green tea may be help prevent bone loss.

I’m no Wall Street tycoon or stockbroker, but if you have any money in the stock market, you might want to diversify your portfolio by investing in green tea.

Every week there seems to be a new study out about its array of health benefits, whether its improving brain power, battling Parkinson’s disease, healing an ailing heart (not a broken heart, mind you, but a heart burdened by poor circulation due to high cholesterol levels), or easing the painful side effects of arthritis.

And a new study from the University of Hong Kong adds to green tea’s catalog of curative powers, as green tea may help prevent bone loss.

Osteoporosis is one of the more common health problems in the world today.  To give you an idea of just how common, it’s second only to heart disease in overall healthcare costs for the estimated 200 million people affected by it.

Researchers discovered its bone-building benefits when they fed lab rats EGC – not to be confused with EGCG – a tea compound and polyphenol that runneth over in green tea (EGC is in other teas as well, like black tea, but in small amounts compared to green tea).  Approximately 30 to 40 percent of green tea is made up of EGC, short for epigallocatechin.

Their analysis indicated that not only did the rats’ bones form more osteoblasts, but fewer osteoclasts formed.  Similar to the variation between stalagmites and stalactites – where one letter makes all the difference – osteoblasts build up bones, while osteoclasts bore away at bones, rendering them more brittle and frail .

The study, published in the online addition of the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, is the first of its kind to link green tea consumption to bone building.  And as per usual, more studies on green tea and bone building are scheduled.

As aforementioned, osteoporosis is a huge problem for millions of people, aging women, especially.  And while osteoporosis is a condition almost exclusive to men and women 50 years of age and over (one in three 50 y/o women and one in five 50 y/o men will experience a fracture due to osteoporosis in their lifetime, according to the International Osteoporosis Foundation), young people can and should take action now to prevent future fractures.

Besides “boning” up on green tea, other nutritional prevention measures include keeping alcohol consumption to a minimum (excessive drinking leads to bone loss), supplementing with quality dairy calcium sources (like organic yogurt and raw milk) and quality vegetable sources.  Some of the best sources for calcium include kale, cabbage, watercress, and broccoli.

In addition to vegetables, studies have shown that diets high in protein are associated with a low risk for osteoporosis development.

Finally, exercise is a huge factor in preventing bone loss.  And it doesn’t necessarily have to be weight training or walking.  A 1995 study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that people who practice tai chi have nearly 50 percent fewer falls than those who don’t and also have greater bone density.  Who knew?

Sources:
iofbonehealth.org
nutraingredients.com