Showing posts with label health. Show all posts
Showing posts with label health. Show all posts

Thursday, February 27, 2014

Weight watching and healthy eating

There has been some discussion on the Guardian about weight and health issues lately, with two articles posted yesterday.

The first by Juliette Jowitt sought to uncover why more than half the UK is overweight, even though official figures from the Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC) suggests that UK adults consume less than the recommended calories per day and most meet the suggested activity levels. The second, a commentary by Alexandra Jones, described Jones' experience as the fat kid at school and how it took a visit to the GP to teach her about food discipline.

Weight and health issues seem to be popular topics, going by the number of comments (more than 500 each) on the articles. Among many other comments, it was pretty much establised that the respondents in the HSCIC's survey probably under-estimated their caloric intake while overreporting the amount of physical activity they received in the 4-week period of observation.

The recommended daily intake for an average female is 2000 calories - pictures of its equivalent that I found online suggest that I consume more than that on a daily basis, and many have commented that those are generous caloric estimates as well.

As for the 150min of moderate physical activity per week (or 75min of vigorous activity) - I used to hit that with 2 x 90min of ballet a week back home, but even then I was gaining weight due to lots of eating out with friends and several-course working lunches and dinners. Now, due to my injured ankle, I clock about 105min of brisk walking a week, 25min of beginner's swimming lessons and another 60min or so of gentle yoga and ballet exercises. I've lost weight since coming here, but I owe that to eating out less as much as I do to getting more exercise.

Reading the articles and comments brought forth some thoughts about food and eating habits here.

The first is the amount of bad food on sale, namely sweets, chocolates, cakes and crisps. The variety and amount of such food in shops and supermarkets in the UK and Ireland is simply staggering - I was stunned the first time I walked into an Apple Green service station and still gawk at the rows and rows of tasty cakes and chocolates each time I'm at Tesco. The past week has mostly involved me walking into a store, staring at cakes and treats on sale and thinking, and thinking, and thinking about whether or not I should buy a packet of something - I finally caved in yesterday with a packet of mini lemon cakes.

Which brings me to the next thought about how thin people also think about their weight and how much they're eating. Some of the commentors who've since lost weight identified with how Jones treds the fine "line between willpower and obssession" - while I perhaps don't obssess over my weight as much as they do, I'm constantly thinking about it, despite having always been about a size 8. I really love food, talk about it all the time and make such an event out of eating - but I spend a lot more time resisting temptation than giving in. There're always thoughts about whether or not to have one more piece of chocolate, wehther I should buy some cake, whether to have KFC or make my own dinner, whether I should have sugar with my tea, whether I should eat this now that it's after 10pm, etc.

I think it helps to know how much is too much and stop before, for example, you finish the entire tub of ice cream. Which brings me to thoughts on portion sizes. Chocolates here come in massive bars - a regular Snickers is twice as much chocolate as what I'd eat in one sitting. I probably have my mum to thank for having always cut down Cadbury bars into two-square blocks and putting them in a container, as a portion of chocolate has always remained around that size to me. Even today, my practice is to pop one portion of chocolate into my mouth, enjoy that, then pause to think whether I want another (yes, always), and whether I can or should have another. It definitely helps in controlling the amount I eat, compared to if the habit was to wolf down one huge Mars Bar and, still feeling dissatisfied, reach for another sweet treat. Let's not forget either that starters here can come in main-sized portions, while the large mains are accompanied as well by half a plate of chips or mash - too much food even for a big eater like me!

In addition, the ingredients used in food require examination too. While consuming fat doesn't neccessarily make you fat (see the Business Insider's excellent piece on nutrition myths), the consumption of cream, cheese, and butter on top of all the sugar, carbohydrates and oil that we eat adds up - I can't bring myself to use many recipes as they call for cream and double cream or lots of butter. The teaspoons of sugar in the cups of coffee and tea we drink throughout the day can accumulate to a fair bit too.

Even supposedly healthier alternatives to snacks can be more unhealthy than we'd think, as evidenced by the below packet of Tesco dried fruit. One serving contains a whopping 22% of our daily intake of sugar due to the cranberries and blueberries having been sweetened with syrup and concentrated apple juice! Fruit juices also seem to be consumed in place of water a lot more over here, and reports have illustrated just how loaded with sugar they are.


Half a packet of this would almost max out your daily intake of sugar 
How can I not mention alcohol consumption as well? It's common knowledge that beer and wine are loaded with calories and sugar. Spirits are also mixed with sugary bases like Coca Cola and a night out almost always ends with a fourth meal of extremely unhealthy but oh so delicious things like a kebab, pizza, fish and chips, deep fried goujons, a Chinese stir fry (have you actually noticed the amount of oil and MSG in a packet of fried noodles??).

Moreover, lunch choices don't seem to help much either. Many people opt for smaller meals like salads or sandwiches for their mid-day meal, perhaps to avoid the post-lunch slump, when in fact dinner should be the smallest meal of the day as you'll have less time - as well as do a lot less - to burn off those calories. Also, salads are only healthy when they're not laden with high-caloric dressing, and a quick look at the nutrition guide on a packed sandwich should be enough to make you reconsider picking up that sandwich for lunch - really, something that leaves you hungry in less than 3hrs but with the caloric content of more than a third of your daily intake is not worth having.

There we are - just some thoughts that have been churning about from those discussions. Happy eating and healthy living! (Or at least try...)

Sunday, February 10, 2013

Relax! You’ll Be More Productive

Article from here.

The New York Times

 

February 9, 2013

By TONY SCHWARTZ

THINK for a moment about your typical workday. Do you wake up tired? Check your e-mail before you get out of bed? Skip breakfast or grab something on the run that’s not particularly nutritious? Rarely get away from your desk for lunch? Run from meeting to meeting with no time in between? Find it nearly impossible to keep up with the volume of e-mail you receive? Leave work later than you’d like, and still feel compelled to check e-mail in the evenings?

More and more of us find ourselves unable to juggle overwhelming demands and maintain a seemingly unsustainable pace. Paradoxically, the best way to get more done may be to spend more time doing less. A new and growing body of multidisciplinary research shows that strategic renewal — including daytime workouts, short afternoon naps, longer sleep hours, more time away from the office and longer, more frequent vacations — boosts productivity, job performance and, of course, health.

“More, bigger, faster.” This, the ethos of the market economies since the Industrial Revolution, is grounded in a mythical and misguided assumption — that our resources are infinite.

Time is the resource on which we’ve relied to get more accomplished. When there’s more to do, we invest more hours. But time is finite, and many of us feel we’re running out, that we’re investing as many hours as we can while trying to retain some semblance of a life outside work.

Although many of us can’t increase the working hours in the day, we can measurably increase our energy. Science supplies a useful way to understand the forces at play here. Physicists understand energy as the capacity to do work. Like time, energy is finite; but unlike time, it is renewable. Taking more time off is counterintuitive for most of us. The idea is also at odds with the prevailing work ethic in most companies, where downtime is typically viewed as time wasted. More than one-third of employees, for example, eat lunch at their desks on a regular basis. More than 50 percent assume they’ll work during their vacations.

In most workplaces, rewards still accrue to those who push the hardest and most continuously over time. But that doesn’t mean they’re the most productive.

Spending more hours at work often leads to less time for sleep and insufficient sleep takes a substantial toll on performance. In a study of nearly 400 employees, published last year, researchers found that sleeping too little — defined as less than six hours each night — was one of the best predictors of on-the-job burn-out. A recent Harvard study estimated that sleep deprivation costs American companies $63.2 billion a year in lost productivity.

The Stanford researcher Cheri D. Mah found that when she got male basketball players to sleep 10 hours a night, their performances in practice dramatically improved: free-throw and three-point shooting each increased by an average of 9 percent.

Daytime naps have a similar effect on performance. When night shift air traffic controllers were given 40 minutes to nap — and slept an average of 19 minutes — they performed much better on tests that measured vigilance and reaction time.

Longer naps have an even more profound impact than shorter ones. Sara C. Mednick, a sleep researcher at the University of California, Riverside, found that a 60- to 90-minute napimproved memory test results as fully as did eight hours of sleep.

MORE vacations are similarly beneficial. In 2006, the accounting firm Ernst & Young did an internal study of its employees and found that for each additional 10 hours of vacation employees took, their year-end performance ratings from supervisors (on a scale of one to five) improved by 8 percent. Frequent vacationers were also significantly less likely to leave the firm.

As athletes understand especially well, the greater the performance demand, the greater the need for renewal. When we’re under pressure, however, most of us experience the opposite impulse: to push harder rather than rest. This may explain why a recent survey by Harris Interactive found that Americans left an average of 9.2 vacation days unused in 2012 — up from 6.2 days in 2011.

The importance of restoration is rooted in our physiology. Human beings aren’t designed to expend energy continuously. Rather, we’re meant to pulse between spending and recovering energy.

In the 1950s, the researchers William Dement and Nathaniel Kleitman discovered that we sleep in cycles of roughly 90 minutes, moving from light to deep sleep and back out again. They named this pattern the Basic-Rest Activity Cycle or BRAC. A decade later, Professor Kleitman discovered that this cycle recapitulates itself during our waking lives.

The difference is that during the day we move from a state of alertness progressively into physiological fatigue approximately every 90 minutes. Our bodies regularly tell us to take a break, but we often override these signals and instead stoke ourselves up with caffeine, sugar and our own emergency reserves — the stress hormones adrenaline, noradrenaline and cortisol.

Working in 90-minute intervals turns out to be a prescription for maximizing productivity. Professor K. Anders Ericsson and his colleagues at Florida State University have studied elite performers, including musicians, athletes, actors and chess players. In each of these fields, Dr. Ericsson found that the best performers typically practice in uninterrupted sessions that last no more than 90 minutes. They begin in the morning, take a break between sessions, and rarely work for more than four and a half hours in any given day.

“To maximize gains from long-term practice,” Dr. Ericsson concluded, “individuals must avoid exhaustion and must limit practice to an amount from which they can completely recover on a daily or weekly basis.”

I’ve systematically built these principles into the way I write. For my first three books, I sat at my desk for up 10 hours a day. Each of the books took me at least a year to write. For my two most recent books, I wrote in three uninterrupted 90-minute sessions — beginning first thing in the morning, when my energy was highest — and took a break after each one.

Along the way, I learned that it’s not how long, but how well, you renew that matters most in terms of performance. Even renewal requires practice. The more rapidly and deeply I learned to quiet my mind and relax my body, the more restored I felt afterward. For one of the breaks, I ran. This generated mental and emotional renewal, but also turned out to be a time in which some of my best ideas came to me, unbidden. Writing just four and half hours a day, I completed both books in less than six months and spent my afternoons on less demanding work.

The power of renewal was so compelling to me that I’ve created a business around it that helps a range of companies including Google, Coca-Cola, Green Mountain Coffee, the Los Angeles Police Department, Cleveland Clinic and Genentech.

Our own offices are a laboratory for the principles we teach. Renewal is central to how we work. We dedicated space to a “renewal” room in which employees can nap, meditate or relax. We have a spacious lounge where employees hang out together and snack on healthy foods we provide. We encourage workers to take renewal breaks throughout the day, and to leave the office for lunch, which we often do together. We allow people to work from home several days a week, in part so they can avoid debilitating rush-hour commutes. Our workdays end at 6 p.m. and we don’t expect anyone to answer e-mail in the evenings or on the weekends. Employees receive four weeks of vacation from their first year.

Our basic idea is that the energy employees bring to their jobs is far more important in terms of the value of their work than is the number of hours they work. By managing energy more skillfully, it’s possible to get more done, in less time, more sustainably. In a decade, no one has ever chosen to leave the company. Our secret is simple — and generally applicable. When we’re renewing, we’re truly renewing, so when we’re working, we can really work.

Tony Schwartz is the chief executive officer of The Energy Project and the author, most recently, of “Be Excellent at Anything.”

Tuesday, December 18, 2012

On Onions

Got this from Facebook:
 

In 1919 when the flu killed 40 million people there was this Doctor that visited the many farmers to see if he could help them combat the flu...
Many of the farmers and their families had contracted it and many died.

The doctor came upon this one farmer and to his surprise, everyone was very healthy. When the doctor asked what the farmer was doing that was different the wife replied that she had placed an unpeeled onion in a dish in the rooms of the home, (probably only two rooms back then). The doctor couldn't believe it and asked if he could have one of the onions and place it under the microscope. She gave him one and when he did this, he did find the flu virus in the onion. It obviously absorbed the bacteria, therefore, keeping the family healthy.

Now, I heard this story from my hairdresser. She said that several years ago, many of her employees were coming down with the flu, and so were many of her customers. The next year she placed several bowls with onions around in her shop. To her surprise, none of her staff got sick. It must work. Try it and see what happens. We did it last year and we never got the flu.

Now there is a P. S. to this for I sent it to a friend in Oregon who regularly contributes material to me on health issues. She replied with this most interesting experience about onions:

Thanks for the reminder. I don't know about the farmer's story...but, I do know that I contacted pneumonia, and, needless to say, I was very ill... I came across an article that said to cut both ends off an onion put it into an empty jar, and place the jar next to the sick patient at night. It said the onion would be black in the morning from the germs...sure enough it happened just like that...the onion was a mess and I began to feel better.

Another thing I read in the article was that onions and garlic placed around the room saved many from the black plague years ago. They have powerful antibacterial, antiseptic properties.

This is the other note. Lots of times when we have stomach problems we don't know what to blame. Maybe it's the onions that are to blame. Onions absorb bacteria is the reason they are so good at preventing us from getting colds and flu and is the very reason we shouldn't eat an onion that has been sitting for a time after it has been cut open.

LEFT OVER ONIONS ARE POISONOUS

I had the wonderful privilege of touring Mullins Food Products, Makers of mayonnaise. Questions about food poisoning came up, and I wanted to share what I learned from a chemist.

Ed, who was our tour guide, is a food chemistry whiz. During the tour, someone asked if we really needed to worry about mayonnaise. People are always worried that mayonnaise will spoil. Ed's answer will surprise you. Ed said that all commercially-made mayo is completely safe.

"It doesn't even have to be refrigerated. No harm in refrigerating it, but it's not really necessary." He explained that the pH in mayonnaise is set at a point that bacteria could not survive in that environment. He then talked about the summer picnic, with the bowl of potato salad sitting on the table, and how everyone blames the mayonnaise when someone gets sick.

Ed says that, when food poisoning is reported, the first thing the officials look for is when the 'victim' last ate ONIONS and where those onions came from (in the potato salad?). Ed says it's not the mayonnaise (as long as it's not homemade mayo) that spoils in the outdoors. It's probably the ONIONS, and if not the onions, it's the POTATOES.

He explained onions are a huge magnet for bacteria, especially uncooked onions. You should never plan to keep a portion of a sliced onion.. He says it's not even safe if you put it in a zip-lock bag and put it in your refrigerator.

It's already contaminated enough just by being cut open and out for a bit, that it can be a danger to you (and doubly watch out for those onions you put in your hotdogs at the baseball park!). Ed says if you take the leftover onion and cook it like crazy you'll probably be okay, but if you slice that leftover onion and put on your sandwich, you're asking for trouble. Both the onions and the moist potato in a potato salad, will attract and grow bacteria faster than any commercial mayonnaise will even begin to break down.

Also, dogs should never eat onions. Their stomachs cannot metabolize onions.

Please remember it is dangerous to cut an onion and try to use it to cook the next day, it becomes highly poisonous for even a single night and creates toxic bacteria which may cause adverse stomach infections because of excess bile secretions and even food poisoning.

Please pass this on to all you love and care about.
— with Adonain Danny Rivera.

Monday, December 17, 2012

Giving frozen carrots a chance (as I don't like peas)

A very good article from TIME magazine, which takes  a look at what constitutes healthy eating based on everyday choices at a regular supermarket. It's a timely reminder that eating healthily need not mean eating expensively, particularly amidst the organic food craze.
 
While I'd take some of the content with a pinch of salt - for example, I don't think guacamole from the supermarket would be that healthy given the amount of fat - it does give a different take on sauces and canned/frozen produce. Given that we all like - and perhaps need - our indulgences, the article provides some perspective on what to look out for and consider when giving in to our tastebuds.
 
I'll still probably drain my canned tuna of the brine and oil before adding it to a salad, and purchase fresh carrots over frozen ones as they're so easy to get hold of. That said, I remember having a packet of frozen vegetables in my freezer in Japan on standby for when I needed vegetables in a pinch - quick and easy.
 
Monday, Dec. 03, 2012

Give (Frozen) Peas a Chance — and Carrots Too

There's nothing like a block of frozen spinach to make you feel bad about your family dinner. There's good food and bad food and pretty food and ugly food--and then there's the frozen-spinach block. By any rights, this is not something you should want to eat. The picture on the box looks lovely, and the very idea of eating spinach is healthy. But what you find inside is a frosty, slightly slimy, algae-colored slab.

Somewhere out there--maybe just a five-minute drive from your house--a farmer's market is selling fresh, organic leaf spinach that might have been sprouting from the soil an hour ago. This, as we're told by any number of glossy cookbooks, TV cooking shows, food snobs and long-winded restaurant menus, is how we're supposed to eat now. It may be more expensive than that frozen block of spinach. And more perishable. And more complicated to prepare. But it's all worth it because it's so much healthier than the green ice from the supermarket. Right?

Wrong. Nutritionally speaking, there is little difference between the farmer's-market bounty and the humble brick from the freezer case. It's true for many other supermarket foods too. And in my view, dispelling these myths--that boutique foods are good, supermarket foods are suspect and you have to spend a lot to eat well--is critical to improving our nation's health. Organic food is great, it's just not very democratic. As a food lover, I enjoy truffle oil, European cheeses and heirloom tomatoes as much as the next person. But as a doctor, I know that patients don't always have the time, energy or budget to shop for artisanal ingredients and whip them into a meal.

The rise of foodie culture over the past decade has venerated all things small-batch, local-farm and organic--all with premium price tags. But let's be clear: you don't need to eat like the 1% to eat healthily. After several years of research and experience, I have come to an encouraging conclusion: the American food supply is abundant, nutritionally sound, affordable and, with a few simple considerations, comparable to the most elite organic diets. Save the cash; the 99% diet can be good for you.

This advice will be a serious buzz kill for specialty brands and high-end food companies marketing the exclusive hyperhealthy nature of their more expensive products. But I consider it a public-health service to the consumer who has to feed a family of five or the person who wants to make all the right choices and instead is alienated and dejected because the marketing of healthy foods too often blurs into elitism, with all the expense and culinary affectation that implies. The fact is, a lot of the stuff we ate in childhood can be good for you and good to eat--if you know how to shop.

Of course, there's a lot to steer clear of in the supermarket. Food technologists know what we like and make sure we always have our favorites. So alongside meat and fruits and veggies, there's also pasta, jelly, chips, pizza, candy, soda and more. Is it any wonder two-thirds of us are overweight or obese? Is it any wonder heart disease still kills so many of us?

So let's take a tour of the supermarket in search of everyday foods we can reclaim as stalwarts of a healthy diet. We'll pick up some meat and some snacks too, and we'll do a fair amount of label reading as we go. We'll even make a stop at the ice cream section. (I promise.) But let's start in the most underrated aisle of all: frozen foods.

Frozen, Canned--and Good?

It was in the 1920s that the idea of freezing fresh vegetables into preserved, edible rectangles first caught hold, when inventor Clarence Birdseye developed a high-pressure, flash-freezing technique that operated at especially low temperatures. The key to his innovation was the flash part: comparatively slow freezing at slightly higher temperatures causes large ice crystals to form in food, damaging its fibrous and cellular structure and robbing it of taste and texture. Birdseye's supercold, superfast method allowed only small crystals to form and preserved much more of the vitamins and freshness.

In the 90 years since, food manufacturers have added a few additional tricks to improve quality. Some fruits and vegetables are peeled or blanched before freezing, for example, which can cause a bit of oxidation--the phenomenon that makes a peeled apple or banana turn brown. But blanching also deactivates enzymes in fruit that would more dramatically degrade color as well as flavor and nutrient content. What's more, the blanching process can actually increase the fibrous content of food by concentrating it, which is very good for human digestion.

Vitamin content is a bit more complex. Water-soluble vitamins--C and the various B's--degrade somewhat during blanching but not when vegetables are steamed instead. Steaming is preferable but it takes longer, and many manufacturers thus don't do it. The package will tell you how the brand you're considering was prepared. Other vitamins and nutrients, including carotenoids, thiamin and riboflavin, are not at all affected by freezing, which means you can eat frozen and never feel that you are shortchanging yourself.

Canning is an even older type of preservation; it's also quite possibly the single most significant technological leap in food storage ever conceived. Developed in the early 19th century by an inventor working for the French navy, canning is a two-step process: first, heat foods to a temperature sufficient to kill all bacteria, and then seal them in airtight containers that prevent oxidation. Not all food comes out of the can as appetizing as it was before it went in. Some fruits and vegetables do not survive the 250F heating that is needed to sterilize food and can become soft and unappetizing. And in decades past, food manufacturers had way too free a hand with the salt shaker. That is not the case any longer for all brands of canned foods. A simple glance at the nutrition label (which itself didn't exist in the salty old days) can confirm which brands are best.

As with frozen vegetables, fiber and nutrient content usually stay high in canned foods. Some research indicates that carotenes, which can reduce cancer rates and eye problems, may be more available to the body following the routine heat treatment. What's more, canned foods are bargain foods. In an April study led by dietitian Cathy Kapica of Tufts University, nutritionists crunched the cost-per-serving numbers of some canned foods vs. their fresh counterparts, factoring in the time needed to prepare and the amount of waste generated (the husks and cobs of fresh corn, for example). Again and again, canned foods came up the winner, with protein-rich canned pinto beans costing $1 less per serving than dried, for example, and canned spinach a full 85% cheaper than fresh.

Food on the Hoof, Fin and Wing

I live in a vegetarian household, so I simply don't have the opportunity to eat a lot of meat at family meals. But I am not opposed to meats that are served in an appropriate portion size and are well prepared. Your first step is deciding what kind of meat you want and how you want to cook it.
There's no question that free-range chickens and grass-fed, pasture-dwelling cows lead happier--if not appreciably longer--lives than animals raised on factory farms. They are also kept free of hormones and antibiotics and are less likely to carry communicable bacteria like E. coli, which are common on crowded feedlots. If these things are important to you and you have the money to spend, then by all means opt for pricier organic meats.

But for the most part, it's O.K. to skip the meat boutiques and the high-end butchers. Nutritionally, there is not much difference between, say, grass-fed beef and the feedlot variety. The calories, sodium and protein content are all very close. Any lean meats are generally fine as long as the serving size is correct--and that means 4 to 6 oz., roughly the size of your palm. A modest serving like that can be difficult in a country with as deep a meat tradition as ours, where steak houses serve up 24-oz. portions and the term meat and potatoes is a synonym for good eating. But good eating isn't always healthy eating, and we're not even built to handle so much animal protein, since early humans simply did not have meat available at every meal. Sticking with reasonable portions two or three times a week will keep you in step with evolution.

Preparation is another matter, and here there are no secrets. Those burgers your kids (and probably you) love can be fine if they're lean and grilled, the fat is drained and you're not burying them under cheese, bacon and high-fructose ketchup and then packing them into a bun the size of a catcher's mitt.
Chicken is a separate issue. In my mind, there is nothing that better captures where we have gone wrong as a food culture than the countless fried-chicken fast-food outlets that dot highways. Fried chicken is consumed literally in buckets--and that's got to be a bad sign. What's more, even at home, frying chicken wrecks the nutritional quality of the meat.

Indeed, chicken is so lean and tasty it can actually redeem a lot of foods that are otherwise dietary bad news. I don't have a problem with tacos, for example, if you do them right. A chicken taco is a better option than beef, and a fish taco is the best choice of all. All the raw ingredients are available in supermarkets, and what you make at home will be much healthier than what you get when you go out.

There's even goodness to be found in some of the supermarket's seemingly most down-market fish and meats: those sold in cans. One great advantage to canning is that it does not affect protein content, making such foods as canned tuna, salmon and chicken excellent sources of nutrition. Canned salmon in particular is as nourishing as if you caught a fresh salmon that afternoon. It's also easy to prepare: you can put it on a salad or serve it with vegetables and have dinner ready in minutes.

Let's also take a moment to celebrate the tuna-salad sandwich, which is to lunch what the '57 Chevy is to cars--basic and brilliant. Sure, there are ways to mess it up, with heaping mounds of mayonnaise and foot-long hoagie rolls. But tuna is loaded with niacin, selenium, vitamin B12 and omega-3 fatty acids, and a sandwich done lean and right, on whole-wheat bread with lettuce and tomatoes, is comfort food at its finest with little nutritional blowback.

Still, some of these cans are land mines. Plenty of products include flavor enhancers such as sugar, salt and MSG. And there are canned meats that really are nothing but bad news. Vienna sausage is the type of food that keeps us heart surgeons in business. As for hot dogs and luncheon meats like salami and bologna, just don't go there. They're way too high in nitrites and sodium to do you even a bit of good.

Guilty Pleasures

To me, ice cream is a sacred food. When I was a boy, my father would drive me to the local ice cream store on Sundays. We would spend the half-hour car ride talking, and I got to know my dad better through these conversations. It wasn't really about the ice cream; it was about time spent together. I even made the decision to become a doctor in that very ice cream store--something, perhaps, about the sense of well-being I was experiencing. I have used ice cream as a family focal point with my own children, and to this day it is an indicator of an occasion. Ice cream should be in your life too. What's more, it's not even a bad or unhealthy food.

For starters, the protein and calcium in ice cream are great. And some of the ingredients in better ice creams are good for you too, including eggs (yes, eggs, a terrific source of protein and B vitamins and perfectly O.K. if your cholesterol is in check) and tree nuts such as walnuts, almonds, cashews and pistachios. As with most other foods, the problem is often the amount consumed. A serving size is typically half a cup, but that's a rule that's almost always flouted, which is a shame. Overdoing ice cream not only takes its toll on your health but also makes the special commonplace. I often say that no food is so bad for you that you can't have it once--or occasionally.

Peanut butter has none of the enchanted power of ice cream. It's a workaday food, a lunch-box food--and an irresistibly delicious food. The allegedly pedestrian nature of the supermarket is perfectly captured in the mainstream, brand-name, decidedly nongourmet peanut butters lining the shelves. But here again, what you're often seeing is a source of quality nutrition disguised as indulgent junk.

Peanut butter does have saturated fat, but 80% of its total fats are unsaturated. That's as good as olive oil. It's also high in fiber and potassium. But many brands stuff in salt and sweeteners as flavoring agents, so read the labels. Sometimes supermarket brands turn out to be the best.

And guess what? Preserves and jams without added sugar can be great sources of dietary fiber, vitamin A, vitamin C and potassium, and whole-wheat bread is high in fiber, selenium, manganese and more. So by shopping right and being careful with portions, we have fully redeemed that great, guilty American staple: the PB&J.

Snack foods are a different kind of peril, but if there's one thing Americans have gotten right, it's our surpassing love of salsa. Year after year it ranks near the top of our favorite snack foods, especially during football season. I think salsa is a spectacular food because it's almost always made of nothing more than tomatoes, onions and cilantro and usually has no preservatives. And remember, those tomatoes contain lycopene, a powerful antioxidant that helps battle disease and inflammation.

Another great south-of-the-border staple is guacamole. Its principal ingredient is, of course, avocados, which are loaded with the happiest of fats: the unsaturated kind that help prevent heart disease. They are also rich in vitamin K (over 50% of your recommended daily intake from just half an avocado) and vitamin C. But keep portions in check to hold the line on both calories and sodium.
Finding something to scoop up those dips is a problem. Tortilla chips fried in lard and covered with salt are simply not a good idea. Baked pita chips (ideally unsalted) are great, but there's no way around the fact that they're pricier than tortilla, potato and corn chips.

The Beauty of Simplicity

Pretty much any aisle in any supermarket has foods that you might think mark you as a culinary primitive but are worth considering. Pickles? Sure, they're loaded with salt, so read labels and exercise care, but they're high in vitamin K and low in calories, and the vinegar in them can improve insulin sensitivity. Baked beans? Pass up the ones cooked with bacon or excessive sweetening, but otherwise, they're a great source of protein and fiber.

Meanwhile, the condiments section has mustard--extremely low in calories, high in selenium and available in a zillion different varieties, so you'll never get bored. Popcorn? Absolutely, but go for the air-popped, stove-top variety instead of the microwavable kind covered in oils and artificial butter flavorings. And chocolate! Ah, chocolate. Stick with dark--65% cocoa--and don't overdo the portions. I know, that's not easy, but do it right and you'll get all the antioxidant benefits of flavonols without all the calories and fat.

Throughout the developed world, we are at a point in our evolution at which famine, which essentially governed the rise and fall of civilizations throughout history, is no longer an acute threat. And we know more about the connection between food and health than ever before--down to the molecular level, actually.

This has provided us the curious luxury of being fussy, even snooty, about what we eat, considering some foods, well, below our station. That's silly. Food isn't about cachet. It's about nourishment, pleasure and the profound well-being that comes from the way meals draw us together.

Even foods that I have described as no-go items are really O.K. in the right situations. I recently enjoyed some fantastic barbecue after a long project in Kansas City, Mo., and I certainly ate the cake and more at my daughter's wedding. As with any relationship that flourishes, respect is at the core of how you get along with food--respect and keeping things simple.

Mehmet Oz is a vice chairman and professor of surgery at Columbia University, a best-selling author and the Emmy Award--winning host of The Dr. Oz Show

Friday, September 21, 2012

Charge up your life, and meditate


Charge up with just 5 minutes:

http://www.5-minutes.net/supercharge-your-health/
 
Or meditate - for beginners:

http://www.5-minutes.net/meditation-for-beginners/

Posted via Blogaway

 
design by suckmylolly.com