Unhealthy Eating Habits: What's Going Wrong?

[WhoWee]

The only way we can attempt healthy eating in my house is to NEVER take 3 of our 4 kids (and definitely not their friends) or their grandfather to the store. My definition/goal of healthy here is a mix of fruit, vegetables, meat and bread...balanced.

Our 16 year old twins would live on (boy peanut butter and jelly sandwiches and girl white stuff like pasta, potatoes, popcorn, rice and bread). Our 14 year old girl loves to cook and prefers balanced meals (and she's a pretty good shopper overall). Unfortunately, our 10 year old girl has spent far too much time shopping and eating with her diabetic grandfather...her idea of a balanced meal is popsicles, fruit-roll ups, ANYTHING from Dairy Queen, all of the extra sweet cereals and pickles.

If we could somehow coordinate preparation of 2-3 balanced meals per day and sit down together as a family...it might be possible to eat properly. But the reality is we're fortunate to have 1 family meal per week...usually Sunday.

Last Spring, I traveled on average 4 days per week. While on the road I stuck to an all you can eat system of (lots of water and NO CARBS) but equal amounts of fruit, vegetables and protein. This included opting for apples, oranges and hard boiled eggs at the hotel, celery, carrots and shrimp or turkey (buy a pound of either at a time at the grocery/deli) chocolate flavor soy milk. At dinner time, I either took food back to the hotel or visited an all you can eat buffet with lots of choices and stuck to my program.

When I returned home on Friday (through Sunday) I ate normal...the net result was a loss of 41 pounds.

I find that if your choices are limited to good choices only...you ca only make the right choice. If all you have to choose from is junk...you'll eat the junk.

Good eating habits start at the grocery store.

 

[The Dagda]

My diet isn't too bad usually, but our kitchen was out of action so we're eating take out lots. Thursday: Curry for dinner, Large Indian meal for 3; next day left overs and side dishes we couldn't eat for dinner; yesterday Pizza; today, pastie and chips and beans. Now that's what I call unhealthy eating.

Oh I forgot I had leftover leftover curry for lunch on pizza day too.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I don't know anyone who is on a raw-food diet, but the first thing I would tell them is they are not absorbing the majority of their nutrients, that diet makes no sense to me (a cow has multiple stomachs to digest their food and regurgitates its food to re-chew it, we're not cows).

What are your thoughts on "juicing"? Some people swear by it.

 

[Monique]

In the field of nutrition, we should beware of making broad generalizations. Por ejemplo, here's what this study finds about raw vs. cooked broccoli.

I agree, and stating that you should only eat raw foods is a broad generalization. Variety and moderation are key to a balanced diet. You should always look at the individual product and see how you can get the most out of it (for instance, lycopene in tomatoes is much more readily available in processed tomato products).

What are your thoughts on "juicing"? Some people swear by it.

I think it is an excellent way to boost your intake of fruits and vegetables, I wouldn't base a diet on it. To be fair, I tried to find studies on the long-term effect of a raw food diet, but there are very few studies on them. If you're juicing you should also eat the pulp, otherwise you are throwing away all the fibers that are beneficial for your digestive system.

 

[Red Rum]

If you want to lose weight I can highly recommend a dose of the current influenza virus that appears to have been first described in Brisbane. I lost 4 kg (that's 9 pounds to non metric people) in as many days. It's not a route I would choose to take however. I think I've regained about 2 kg by now.

As for food groups, eat everything in moderation and don't be afraid of comfort food when your body needs it (e.g. fatty bacon and bucketloads of buttered potatoes in winter), but if your body clearly doesn't respond well to a particular food, stay away from it. I eat less dairy than I used to (and I did all of my postgraduate work on fermented dairy products and worked on a dairy farm and in dairy processing for a few years) because I noticed that I had what amounted to mild allergic reactions to certain cheeses (the nicest ones, of course) and was more prone to annoying respitratory tract infections when I consumed a lot of cheese and yoghurt. I don't drink a lot of acidic fruit juices because I notice they corrode my teeth. But try as I might, I find it difficult to reduce my consumption of alcoholic beverages. I reckon my body just needs them too much in these recessionary times.

 

[Evo]

In the field of nutrition, we should beware of making broad generalizations. Por ejemplo, here's what this study finds about raw vs. cooked broccoli.

Many vegetables need to be cooked to release the vitamins so they can be used by humans. Collard greens is a good example, it has very little nutritional value raw, the cell walls cannot be broken down to release the vitamins unless it is cooked.

 

[mcknia07]

What are your thoughts on "juicing"? Some people swear by it.

Oh, as for juicing, it is really good. Take carrots, for example, ( we used to buy 50 lbs. at a time), they are awesome, and suprisingly sweet, too. Juicing is defantly a good way to get kids to eats their fruits and veggies and make them sweet, like a dessert, too.

I have just recently found out that our local grocery store carries a chain of health food products that are 100% organic and natural. Ohhh soooo goooood!

 

[NeoDevin]

I have just recently found out that our local grocery store carries a chain of health food products that are 100% organic and natural. Ohhh soooo goooood!

One health food myth that I've never been able to understand is people who think that "organic" or "natural" products are somehow better for you.

 

[cristo]

One health food myth that I've never been able to understand is people who think that "organic" or "natural" products are somehow better for you.

How is this a myth?

 

[runner]

If you're juicing you should also eat the pulp, otherwise you are throwing away all the fibers that are beneficial for your digestive system.

Within the fibers, commonly called the pulp, are the flavonoids. These are metabolites that perform antioxidant functions.

 

[NeoDevin]

How is this a myth?

How is it not?

 

[The Dagda]

I must say, I don't see how fruit grown with pesticides is going to magically absorb more nutrients either, surely this is just down to soil quality and weather? Weird the things even educated people will buy. Sounds like the crap face care products come out with about magically revitalising your skin and reducing the 23432 signs of ageing.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/08/080807082954.htm

Organic Food Has No More Nutritional Value Than Food Grown With Pesticides, Study Shows

ScienceDaily (Aug. 9, 2008) — New research in the latest issue of the Society of Chemical Industry’s (SCI) Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture shows there is no evidence to support the argument that organic food is better than food grown with the use of pesticides and chemicals.

Many people pay more than a third more for organic food in the belief that it has more nutritional content than food grown with pesticides and chemicals.

But the research by Dr Susanne Bügel and colleagues from the Department of Human Nutrition, University of Copenhagen, shows there is no clear evidence to back this up.

In the first study ever to look at retention of minerals and trace elements, animals were fed a diet consisting of crops grown using three different cultivation methods in two seasons.

The study looked at the following crops – carrots, kale, mature peas, apples and potatoes – staple ingredients that can be found in most families’ shopping list.

The first cultivation method consisted of growing the vegetables on soil which had a low input of nutrients using animal manure and no pesticides except for one organically approved product on kale only.

The second method involved applying a low input of nutrients using animal manure, combined with use of pesticides, as much as allowed by regulation.

Finally, the third method comprised a combination of a high input of nutrients through mineral fertilisers and pesticides as legally allowed.

The crops were grown on the same or similar soil on adjacent fields at the same time and so experienced the same weather conditions. All were harvested and treated at the same time. In the case of the organically grown vegetables, all were grown on established organic soil.

After harvest, results showed that there were no differences in the levels of major and trace contents in the fruit and vegetables grown using the three different methods.

Produce from the organically and conventionally grown crops were then fed to animals over a two year period and intake and excretion of various minerals and trace elements were measured. Once again, the results showed there was no difference in retention of the elements regardless of how the crops were grown.

Dr Bügel says: ‘No systematic differences between cultivation systems representing organic and conventional production methods were found across the five crops so the study does not support the belief that organically grown foodstuffs generally contain more major and trace elements than conventionally grown foodstuffs.’

Can anyone suggest a mechanism as to why the same varieties grown in the same areas with or without pesticides might effect yield?

Not that I have anything against it, but people should be buying the stuff for the right reasons.

 

[JasonRox]

My grandmother lived to be 94 years old, most women in my family live to be 100 or older. They ate normal food.

Don't put your hopes up. Normal food 50 years ago is nowhere near normal food today.

 

[cristo]

How is it not?

Put it this way, I'd rather ingest food that has never had pesticides or other chemicals on it, than food that has had such products washed off.

 

[turbo]

Put it this way, I'd rather ingest food that has never had pesticides or other chemicals on it, than food that has had such products washed off.

You have to have a lot of faith in agri-businesses... faith that the chemical companies who make pesticides, fungicides, etc have actually done relevant safety testing, faith that their "safe application" guidelines are actually reasonable, faith that the producer is applying the chemicals judiciously, faith that the processors are washing off residues thoroughly...

Given recent outbreaks of e coli and questions about sanitation in handling and processing, it's tough to have faith that these agri-businesses are not cutting corners here and there.

Every bit of non-organic produce that comes into this house (and you have no choice sometimes) is washed and washed before we even start food-prep. We also have to make other decisions. For instance, we always prepare our home-grown carrots with the skins on, but we wash and peel non-organic carrots just to reduce the chance of ingesting fungicides.

 

[Evo]

You have to have a lot of faith in agri-businesses... faith that the chemical companies who make pesticides, fungicides, etc have actually done relevant safety testing, faith that their "safe application" guidelines are actually reasonable, faith that the producer is applying the chemicals judiciously, faith that the processors are washing off residues thoroughly...

Given recent outbreaks of e coli and questions about sanitation in handling and processing, it's tough to have faith that these agri-businesses are not cutting corners here and there.

Every bit of non-organic produce that comes into this house (and you have no choice sometimes) is washed and washed before we even start food-prep. We also have to make other decisions. For instance, we always prepare our home-grown carrots with the skins on, but we wash and peel non-organic carrots just to reduce the chance of ingesting fungicides.

The significant outbreaks of e-coli last year were from organic farms due to feces contamination.

 

[runner]

Many vegetables need to be cooked to release the vitamins so they can be used by humans. Collard greens is a good example, it has very little nutritional value raw, the cell walls cannot be broken down to release the vitamins unless it is cooked.

True, and when cooking veggies, I've read that the best method for retention of micronutrients is steaming, next is boiling, and the worst is frying.

 

[runner]

I'm watching a show on people that have decided to make serious changes to their diet, thinking it's healthy. Instead it's so extreme, it's likely to be unhealthy. One guy is 6 feet tall and weighs 118 pounds. He looks terrible. He's on a "calorie restricted" diet for longevity.

This just out on caloric restriction and anti-aging.

ScienceDaily (Jan. 26, 2009) — If you are a mouse on the chubby side, then eating less may help you live longer.


For lean mice – and possibly for lean humans, the authors of a new study predict – the anti-aging strategy known as caloric restriction may be a pointless, frustrating and even dangerous exercise.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090123101224.htm"

 

[mcknia07]

One health food myth that I've never been able to understand is people who think that "organic" or "natural" products are somehow better for you.

They're better for you because, there are no harmful chemicals used in the process to grow them.

 

[turbo]

The significant outbreaks of e-coli last year were from organic farms due to feces contamination.

I'd like to see your sources, because many of the infections were linked to Dole brand packaged spinach - a company not known for close cooperation with organic producers. Please provide links to relevant references - the FDA back-tracks that I have found show no such connections.

Starting point:

http://www.cdc.gov/ecoli/2006/september/consumeradvice.htm

 

[NeoDevin]

They're better for you because, there are no harmful chemicals used in the process to grow them.

You mean like fertilizers to ensure that the plants have an optimum balance of nutrients to produce the best quality fruit?

 

[turbo]

You mean like fertilizers to ensure that the plants have an optimum balance of nutrients to produce the best quality fruit?

For many thousands of years, fertilizers have been rotted organic matter, with complex organics and lots of trace elements. I'm not so radical as to think that chemical fertilizers can harm us, but they CAN harm our environment, since they can easily be washed away and lost into our watershed as run-off - more so than complex organic amendments. The more serious problem (in terms of contamination of food) is posed by insecticides, fungicides, herbicides that agri-businesses use to boost their yields. What's good for Con-Agra, Monsanto and ADM is not necessarily what's good for you or your kids or grand-kids, and it is short-sighted and personally irresponsible to think that these huge businesses have food-safety uppermost in their agendas. They do not.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

The loss of trace elements is an interesting point. I have heard this from the fringe crowd and it would seem to make sense.

Are there critical trace elements that we once got from food but no longer do because they are not replenished with fertilizers.

 

[turbo]

The loss of trace elements is an interesting point. I have heard this from the fringe crowd and it would seem to make sense.

Are there critical trace elements that we once got from food but no longer do because they are not replenished with fertilizers.

I do not know this for certain. Nor is there anybody likely to have pockets deep enough (with some hope of repayment) to fund long-term studies that could track the concentration of trace elements in soils and produce and the long-term health effects of sufficiency/deficiency. It ain't going to happen. The money is behind consolidation, monolithic production, mass-processing ... Nothing for small growers with sustainable methods and personal accountability for the quality and safety of their produce.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

A few references that came up on a first pass:

Essential trace elements are required by man in amounts ranging from 50 micrograms to 18 milligrams per day. Acting as catalytic or structural components of larger molecules, they have specific functions and are indispensable for life. Research during the past quarter of a century has identified as essential six trace elements whose functions were previously unknown. In addition to the long-known deficiencies of iron and iodine, signs of deficiency for chromium, copper, zinc, and selenium have been identified in free-living populations. Four trace elements were proved to be essential for two or more animal species during the past decade alone. Marginal or severe trace element imbalances can be considered risk factors for several diseases of public health importance, but proof of cause and effect relationships will depend on a more complete understanding of basic mechanisms of action and on better analytical procedures and functional tests to determine marginal trace element status in man.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/213/4514/1332

This review compares the content and major food sources of copper, manganese, selenium, and zinc in vegetarian and omnivorous diets. Interactions affecting trace element bioavailability and their impact on the trace element status of vegetarians are discussed. Adult vegetarian diets often have a lower zinc and selenium content but a higher copper and manganese content compared with omnivorous diets. Cereals are the primary sources of copper, manganese, and selenium in most diets and the major source of zinc in many vegetarian diets; flesh floods are the primary source of zinc and secondary source of selenium in omnivorous diets. Despite the apparent lower bioavailability of zinc, copper, manganese, and selenium in vegetarian diets because of the high contents of phytic acid and/or dietary fiber and the low content of flesh foods in the diet, the trace element status of most adult vegetarians appears to be adequate. Children, however, appear to be more vulnerable to suboptimal zinc status, presumably because of their high zinc requirements for growth and their bodies' failure to adapt to a vegetarian diet by increased absorption of dietary zinc.

http://grande.nal.usda.gov/ibids/index.php?mode2=detail&origin=ibids_references&therow=91385

... The purpose of this report is to identi1r reliable baseline
data for the concentrations of As, Cd, Cr, Cu, F, Fe, Hg, I,
Mn, Mo, Ni, Pb, Se, and Zn in commonly encountered
clinical specimens such as whole blood and its components
and in hair, liver, milk, and urine from adult human
subjects. In addition, results for Al, B, Br, Cs, Li, Rb, V, and
U in selected specimens are also covered. The discussion will
be restricted to “total concentrations” only, and does not
extend to the aspects of speciation.
The expression “normal values” for trace elements has
been deliberately omitted in this report. In practice, it is
difficult to meet all the physiological criteria needed for
defining “normalcy”; such a task requires considerations of,
and compensation for, a number of possible concurrent
phenomena, and correlations are very complex. Thus, baseline
values can be deceptive and the question as to what is
normal may not be easy to answer (5, 6).

http://www.clinchem.org/cgi/reprint/34/3/474

 

[NeoDevin]

turbo-1, if we're going to talk about environmental impact, you must take into account that organic/natural farming takes more land than "scientific" farming, and takes more water and land than hydroponics. The most environmentally friendly, and healthy food most likely comes from hydroponics (I would guess), since they have the best control over all environmental concerns. Generally the more control we can take over the growth/environment (including nutrients, pests, temperature, sunlight) the more efficiently we can use the land, and the better quality produce we can get.

 

[runner]

I like many of the products sold in natural health foods stores, but here's an example of why we should be careful about the assumptions we sometimes make based on marketing and other non-scientific criteria.

Here's an interesting study from Consumer Reports:

Think premium brands are safer? Overall, chickens labeled as organic or raised without antibiotics and costing $3 to $5 per pound were more likely to harbor salmonella than were conventionally produced broilers that cost more like $1 per pound.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/food/food-safety/chicken-safety/chicken-safety-1-07/overview/0107_chick_ov.htm"

 

[The Dagda]

They're better for you because, there are no harmful chemicals used in the process to grow them.

See even this is an assertion based on advertising? Can you show me any scientific studies that conclude people who wash their veg particularly and sometimes fruit before consumption, which is probably most are at extra risk? For example as well how on Earth does a potato get exposed to pesticides? Does it get absorbed into the potato by osmosis? Genuinely like to see some evidence here that doesn't come from the Organic Marketing board. Some fruits come with an outer skin you discard so who cares if it's got pesticides on it anyway?

I can see why chickens have less salmonella, but this is irrelevant to me, as I know how to cook properly and to store food safely. If I was going to buy organic, it would be to encourage framers to make the switch as an environmental and business concern, not because of some imagined health benefits.

For many thousands of years, fertilizers have been rotted organic matter, with complex organics and lots of trace elements. I'm not so radical as to think that chemical fertilizers can harm us, but they CAN harm our environment, since they can easily be washed away and lost into our watershed as run-off - more so than complex organic amendments. The more serious problem (in terms of contamination of food) is posed by insecticides, fungicides, herbicides that agri-businesses use to boost their yields. What's good for Con-Agra, Monsanto and ADM is not necessarily what's good for you or your kids or grand-kids, and it is short-sighted and personally irresponsible to think that these huge businesses have food-safety uppermost in their agendas. They do not.

This is what I think, it's not necessarily the direct benefit or adverse effects that are the problem, it is the use of pesticides on the general populaces health. In England we have ridiculously strict European laws that make our waterways and countryside some of the cleanest in the world. Not all countries are so anal about the environment though.

 

[runner]

Now there's a new study out on memory improvement and coloric restriction. I think anyone doing this should make sure that they are meeting all their nutritional needs in their reduced portions through high quality foods and possibly supplementation.

Low-calorie diets improve memory in old age

Category: Medicine & health • Memory
Posted on: January 26, 2009 5:00 PM, by Ed Yong

People diet for many reasons - to fit into clothes, to look more attractive, or for the sake of their health. But to improve their memory? It's an interesting idea, and one that's been given fresh support by Veronica Witte and colleagues from the University of Munster in Germany.

Witte found that elderly people who slash the calories in their diet by 30% were better able to remember lists of words than people who stuck to their normal routine. It's the first experiment to show that cutting calories can improve human memory at an age when declining memory is par for the course.

Link

 

[Evo]

I'd like to see your sources, because many of the infections were linked to Dole brand packaged spinach - a company not known for close cooperation with organic producers. Please provide links to relevant references - the FDA back-tracks that I have found show no such connections.

Starting point:

http://www.cdc.gov/ecoli/2006/september/consumeradvice.htm

Turbo, your OWN source shows it was an organic farm, they supply Dole.

Consumers should not eat, retailers should not sell, and restaurants should not serve spinach implicated in the E. coli O1577 outbreak. Products implicated in the outbreak include fresh spinach and spinach-containing products from brands processed by [v]Natural Selection Foods[/b]. The October 4 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) press release lists the brand names that have been the subject of recalls.

Here you go

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=1085881&postcount=15

Organic carrot juice paralyzes Canadians.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/10/09/botulism.html