Dietary Enigmas
asking questions about our diet
-
Archive of "food" Category
Roundup Ready Sugar Beet - What is next
This article hit my desk today and being a keen gardener, but amateur, I know what the effect on my plants that roundup or Glyphosphate has on them. To think that they are now genetically modifying sugar beet to be resistant to this chemical horrifies me. I remember talking to a lady quite recently who ended up in hospital from Glyphosphate poisoning from just spraying the paths in her farm. has anyone analysed the harvested sugar been for traces of glyphosphate or its derivatives - i guess not. My prediction is that these beet will contain high levels of this dangerous chemical - but thats OK because the governments and chemical companies say it is safe. Yeah right. Anyway make up your own mind.
alzhiemers chemicals childbirth monsanto pharmaceutical companies pharmaceutical industry pharmaceutical lobby roundup ready sugar beet alzhiemers chemicals childbirth monsanto pharmaceutical companies pharmaceutical industry pharmaceutical lobby roundup ready sugar beetUnderstanding About Diabetes
The Glycemic Index
Your health is the most important part of your life. With out your health you can not take care of family or yourself. You can start by fixing your diet. Once you get your diet under control then you can move on from there with exercise and other personal health care activities. Lets look into diet and the glycemic index.
The Glycemic Index is a common food ranking system that is used to determine the overall effect that particular foods play when it comes to the issue of the glucose level in the blood. It has been discovered that food types that are carbohydrate based and break down in a quick manner in the process of digestion have the highest index when it comes to the Glycemic Index. This means that the overall response from the sugar levels in the blood is relatively fast and occurs at a very high rate. If the same type of foods breakdown at a slow rate, then it is said that those foods have a low Glycemic Index.
There should be an emphasis on the Glycemic Index when it comes to the foods that we consume and our diet in general. The following groups of people should be especially concerned about this:
1. Individuals who have diabetes, or those who are at high risk for developing this medical condition
2. Those who are engaging in a diet program
3. Individuals who are involved in athletics
4. Individuals who suffer from medical conditions like a resistance to insulin, and even Syndrome X
5. Those who suffer from the effects of hypoglycemia
If foods that are consumed have a high index as far as glycemics is concerned, there are many complications that can arise. The following outlines the many problems that may develop when it comes to the foods that break down the fastest when it comes to digestion:
1. Individuals who experience foods with a Glycemic Index that is really high often experience small bursts of hyperactivity and long periods of fatigue immediately thereafter.
2. Those who consume these foods often find that their physical performance is hindered a great deal.
3. Those who consume these types of foods are most likely to gain weight more quickly than individuals who consume foods that have a low Glycemic Index.
If you are concerned about your weight, your blood glucose level, and your health in general, it is absolutely imperative to ensure that you learn as much as you are able when it comes to the Glycemic Index.
carbohydrate diabetes diet exercise fatigue food types glucose level health care activities high risk hyperactivity insulin long periods low glycemic index medical conditions personal health care physical performance resistance sugar levels carbohydrate diabetes diet exercise fatigue food types glucose level health care activities high risk hyperactivity insulin long periods low glycemic index medical conditions personal health care physical performance resistance sugar levels
1000 Calorie Low Glycemic Index DietCholesterol Theory - Fatally Cracked
As many of you may know I have a particular interest in the Cholesterol Theory of heart disease and this article came across my desk today and i thought it so important that i just had to post it. The unerlying premise that Cholesterol and coronary heart disease are linked is clearly coming under increasing scrutiny and may well be not only disproved but blown out of the water - where does that leave the pharmaceutical companies????
September 8, 2008
Egg Study Puts Cracks in Anti-Cholesterol Claims
Results undermine the never-proven hypothesis that diets high in cholesterol and saturated fat promote cardiovascular disease
A new study from Britain further undermines a decades-old medical myth regarding the role of dietary cholesterol in cardiovascular disease.
And these findings add to fast-deepening doubts surrounding the broader, near century-old “lipid hypothesis” of heart disease, which is reflected in public health policies, including the USDA Food Guide Pyramid.
This increasingly discredited hypothesis holds that “excess” dietary saturated fat and cholesterol – and resulting rises in blood cholesterol and lipid (fat) levels – are major contributing factors to cardiovascular disease (atherosclerosis) and resulting coronary heart disease.Key Points
- UK study finds that two eggs a day did not raise cholesterol levels in overweight dieters.
- Study affirms prior findings that dietary cholesterol does not cause cardiovascular disease.
- The idea that saturated fat and cholesterol cause heart disease is increasingly discredited by the evidence.
Atherosclerosis – which is the chief defining characteristic of cardiovascular disease – is the medical term for arteries lined with inflamed, unstable, plaque.
This inflammatory condition is the leading cause of heart attacks, stroke, congestive heart failure and the arrhythmias that induce sudden cardiac death.
(For a summary of the relationships and distinctions between inflammation, cardiovascular disease, atherosclerosis, and coronary heart disease, see our accompanying article, “What is Heart Disease, Exactly?”.)
Incredibly, given the decades-old public health advice to avoid saturated fat and cholesterol – and the several billion dollars spent annually on cholesterol-lowering drugs – the evidence supporting the lipid hypothesis of heart disease is astonishingly weak.
We covered the declining credibility of the lipid hypothesis of cardiovascular disease earlier this year: see “Cholesterol Fiasco Undermines Accepted Theory”, which contains links to several eye-opening articles in The New York Times and The Boston Globe.
Eggs and heart disease: The overdue exoneration of a scapegoatHealthy people and heart patients alike have routinely been advised to strictly limit intake of eggs … or avoid egg yolks, where most of their fat and cholesterol reside (along with their valuable vitamin A and D).
Omega-3-enriched eggs:
Making a good food betterAdvice to avoid eggs is misguided, given their blamelessness with regard to heart disease, and the fact that each egg provides about 10 percent of the recommended daily intake of protein and vitamin A.
And anti-egg advice is especially wrong-headed now that most supermarkets offer eggs high in omega-3 fatty acids, which are proven to enhance heart health.
Eggs high in omega-3s were the norm before competitive pressures caused most farmers to confine their hens in cages and feed them grains such as corn, which are low in omega-3s and high in pro-inflammatory omega-6s.
Today, it’s easy to find omega-3-enriched eggs, which come either from “free-range” hens raised on pasture or, more commonly, from hens raised on grain-based feed fortified with fish meal.
This advice flowed from the lipid hypothesis of heart disease, which holds that foods high in cholesterol and saturated fat – such as egg yolks – promote cardiovascular disease, atherosclerosis, and resulting coronary heart disease.
Yet, misguided medical advice was never supported by a persuasive preponderance of evidence.
Indeed, with the exception of people diagnosed with diabetes – among whom high egg intake is associated with increased heart risks – none of the large epidemiological studies that looked for links between eggs and coronary heart disease or stroke have found any.
As early as 1982, researchers who examined data from the famous Framingham Heart Study found no association between eggs and heart disease: “It is concluded that … differences in egg consumption were unrelated to blood cholesterol level or to coronary heart disease incidence.” (Kritchevsky SB et al. 1982)
Then, researchers from Harvard School of Public health analyzed diet and health data from two of the largest, best-controlled epidemiological studies ever conducted: the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (1986-1994) and the Nurses’ Health Study (1980-1994), which together involved 37,851 male physicians and 80,082 female nurses.
The Harvard team found no evidence that eggs were risky: “These findings suggest that consumption of up to 1 egg per day is unlikely to have substantial overall impact on the risk of CHD [coronary heart disease] or stroke among healthy men and women.” (Hu FB et al. 1999)(The only exception was diagnosed diabetics, among whom a higher intake of eggs was associated with greater risk of developing heart disease. This could simply reflect the facts that diabetics are more prone to developing coronary heart disease, and that diets high in fat are associated with higher risk of CHD.)
And a study in Japan yielded more evidence exonerating eggs as risk factors for developing coronary heart disease: “In conclusion, eating eggs more frequently, up to almost daily, was not associated with an increase in CHD [coronary heart disease] incidence for middle-aged Japanese men and women.” (Nakamura Y et al. 2006)
Last year, researchers at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey came to similar conclusions after analyzing diet and health data from 9,734 adults aged 25 to 74. The title of their publication summarized their exculpatory findings: “Regular egg consumption does not increase the risk of stroke and cardiovascular diseases.” (Qureshi AI et al. 2007)
Die-hard defenders of the lipid hypothesis of heart disease might say that while epidemiological studies like these reveal associations, they cannot provide final proof of a hypothesis regarding diet and disease.However, the results of a British clinical trial should help end the debate over heart health and eggs.
British study exonerates eggsA research team from the University of Surrey recruited 45 overweight but otherwise healthy volunteers, and divided them into two groups (Harman NL et al. 2008).
- Group A (egg group) followed a low-calorie diet that included two eggs per day for 12 weeks.
- Group B (control group) followed the same low-calorie diet for 12 weeks, but ate no eggs.
The people in both groups lost 7- 9 lbs (3 to 4 kg) and their average levels of blood cholesterol fell.
Their blood cholesterol levels were measured at six weeks and 12 weeks, and both groups showed either unchanged or reduced cholesterol levels … particularly in their LDL (bad) cholesterol levels.
This finding came despite the egg group increasing their dietary cholesterol intake to around four times that of the control group.
As the authors concluded, “An increased intake of dietary cholesterol from two eggs a day does not increase total … or LDL cholesterol when accompanied by moderate weight loss. These findings suggest that cholesterol-rich foods should not be excluded from dietary advice to lose weight on account of an unfavorable influence on … LDL cholesterol.” (Harman NL et al. 2008)
Team leader Bruce Griffin, Ph.D., RPHNutr summarized their findings in a press release: “We have shown that when two eggs a day are eaten by people who are actively losing weight on a calorie-restricted diet, blood cholesterol can still be reduced.”
And Dr. Griffin’s companion comment focused on the heart of the matter: “There is no convincing evidence to link an increased intake of dietary cholesterol or eggs with coronary heart disease through raised blood cholesterol.”
In fact, saturated fat – whose primary dietary sources among Americans are red meats, butter, and foods made with butter – is more responsible for raising blood cholesterol than cholesterol-rich foods, such as eggs.
However, this does not mean that saturated fat is a significant villain, either.
The available evidence shows that diets high in saturated fat are not linked much more closely to risk of heart disease than are diets high in total fat, polyunsaturated fats, or monounsaturated fats. The main exception is that younger people’s risk is exacerbated more by high fat intake. (Artaud-Wild SM et al. 1993; Esrey KL et al. 1996; Jakobsen MU et al. 2004; Xu J et al. 2006; Volk MG 2007)
Sadly, many doctors remain unaware that the lipid hypothesis of heart disease rests on a foundation of sand, with numerous studies proving that diets high saturated fat and cholesterol are not inherently unhealthful.
Instead, it is a lack of plant foods and exercise and an excess of refined carbohydrates (i.e., white flour products) that can make fatty diets dangerous. These contextual differences explain why people in Finland and France have widely divergent rates of heart disease despite having similar intakes of saturated fat and cholesterol (Volk MG 2007).
In other words, it appears safe to eat reasonable amounts of saturated fat and cholesterol as long as your diet meets the basic criteria outlined in our accompanying article, “What is Heart Disease, Exactly?”
Sources
- Artaud-Wild SM, Connor SL, Sexton G, Connor WE. Differences in coronary mortality can be explained by differences in cholesterol and saturated fat intakes in 40 countries but not in France and Finland. A paradox. Circulation. 1993 Dec;88(6):2771-9.
- Dawber TR, Nickerson RJ, Brand FN, Pool J. Eggs, serum cholesterol, and coronary heart disease. Am J Clin Nutr 1982;36:617-25.
- Dawber TR, Nickerson RJ, Brand FN, Pool J. Eggs, serum cholesterol, and coronary heart disease. Am J Clin Nutr. 1982 Oct;36(4):617-25.
- Esrey KL, Joseph L, Grover SA. Relationship between dietary intake and coronary heart disease mortality: lipid research clinics prevalence follow-up study. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996 Feb;49(2):211-6.
- Gramenzi A, Gentile A, Fasoli M, Negri E, Parazzini F, La Vecchia C. Association between certain foods and risk of acute myocardial infarction in women. BMJ 1990;300:771-3.
- Harman NL, Leeds AR, Griffin BA. Increased dietary cholesterol does not increase plasma low density lipoprotein when accompanied by an energy-restricted diet and weight loss. Eur J Nutr. 2008 Sep;47(6):287-93. Epub 2008 Aug 26.
- Hu FB, Stampfer MJ, Rimm EB, Manson JE, Ascherio A, Colditz GA, Rosner BA, Spiegelman D, Speizer FE, Sacks FM, Hennekens CH, Willett WC. A prospective study of egg consumption and risk of cardiovascular disease in men and women. JAMA. 1999 Apr 21;281(15):1387-94.
- Jakobsen MU, Overvad K, Dyerberg J, Schroll M, Heitmann BL. Dietary fat and risk of coronary heart disease: possible effect modification by gender and age. Am J Epidemiol. 2004 Jul 15;160(2):141-9.
- Kritchevsky SB, Kritchevsky D. Egg consumption and coronary heart disease: an epidemiologic overview. J Am Coll Nutr. 2000 Oct;19(5 Suppl):549S-555S. Review.
- Lacombe CR, Corraze GR, Nibbelink MM, Boulze D, Douste-Blazy P, Camare R. Effects of a low-energy diet associated with egg supplementation on plasma cholesterol and lipoprotein levels in normal subjects: results of a cross-over study. Br J Nutr. 1986 Nov;56(3):561-75.
- Nakamura Y, Iso H, Kita Y, Ueshima H, Okada K, Konishi M, Inoue M, Tsugane S. Egg consumption, serum total cholesterol concentrations and coronary heart disease incidence: Japan Public Health Center-based prospective study. Br J Nutr. 2006 Nov;96(5):921-8.
- Qureshi AI, Suri FK, Ahmed S, Nasar A, Divani AA, Kirmani JF. Regular egg consumption does not increase the risk of stroke and cardiovascular diseases. Med Sci Monit. 2007 Jan;13(1):CR1-8. Epub 2006 Dec 18.
- Volk MG. An examination of the evidence supporting the association of dietary cholesterol and saturated fats with serum cholesterol and development of coronary heart disease. Altern Med Rev. 2007 Sep;12(3):228-45. Review.
Xu J, Eilat-Adar S, Loria C, Goldbourt U, Howard BV, Fabsitz RR, Zephier EM, Mattil C, Lee ET. Dietary fat intake and risk of coronary heart disease: the Strong Heart Study. Am J Clin Nutr. 2006 Oct;84(4):894-902.
alternative and complementary medicine alternative and complementary medicineTrehalose is here in EU/UK
We are delighted that Trehalose has been made available in the UK to end user customers. The prices are quite reasonable and the quality is excellent. Click herealzhiemers artificial sweeteners artificial sweetener artificial sweeteners artificial sweetener saccharin aspartame blood sugar levels carbohydrates complex carbohydrates control diabetes diabetes diabetics diet food food companies fructose corn syrup nutrasweet splenda sucralose sugar Trehalose type 2 diabetes alzhiemers artificial sweeteners artificial sweetener artificial sweeteners artificial sweetener saccharin aspartame blood sugar levels carbohydrates complex carbohydrates control diabetes diabetes diabetics diet food food companies fructose corn syrup nutrasweet splenda sucralose sugar Trehalose type 2 diabetesTrehalose - Update - Available Late July 2008
We are really pleased that almost 2 years of work has resulted in establishing a long term supply of the worlds finest trehalose for the UK and Europe.Trehalose has many benefits:
- natural alternative to sucrose - look and taste identical
- does not trigger rapid rise in blood sugar levels
- suitable for those with neurological issues:
- Multiple Sclerosis
- Parkinsons
- Huntingtons
- Alzhiemers
- Motor Neurone Disease
- easy to use - the family probably won’t even notice the switch
- safe for everyone to use
- comparatively great value
To pre order your supply e mail me
alzhiemers blood sugar levels blood vessel disease diabetes diabetics diet europe health benefits huntingtons motor neurone disease multiple sclerosis neurological issues nutrasweet nutrient dense food nutrition parkinsons rapid rise Trehalose type 2 diabetes alzhiemers blood sugar levels blood vessel disease diabetes diabetics diet europe health benefits huntingtons motor neurone disease multiple sclerosis neurological issues nutrasweet nutrient dense food nutrition parkinsons rapid rise Trehalose type 2 diabetes
Sugar and Refined Carbohydrates - make us infertile?
OK - the headline may be a bit extreme but in reading the article below i realised that the truth about sucrose and refined carbohydrate being nutritionally empty is a little short of the mark. It seems that everywhere i turn there are growing bodies of opinion that sucrose or refined carbohydrates are actively damaging our health. One of the areas i have specialised in for 8 years is the nutritional relationship between being able to conceive and being infertile.
Healthy Mentors - here to help you
Trehalose - the safe sugar
Xylitol and Insulin Resistance, Diabetes Hypertension and Hormonal ImbalancesConsuming sugar and other refined carbohydrates results in the rapid release of glucose, or blood sugar. In response, the pancreas secretes insulin to usher glucose into the cells, where it is burned for energy. Excess glucose stresses the system, and over time the cells become less responsive to insulin. This condition, known as insulin resistance, is a huge health problem and it is estimated to affect half the American population. Insulin resistance is associated with abnormalities in cholesterol and triglyceride levels, hypertension, increased risk of heart disease and diabetes (and much more - read on)
(more…)The Greatest Tragedy of All Time
This film was a personal response to our over reliance on the established medical treatments and it expresses some of my personal views. If you want to see more please go to website www.squidoo.com/greatesttragedye mail me
Healthy Mentors - here to help you
Trehalose - the safe sugarToo fat - not fat enough - where is the truth
OK - i am going crazy with this whole thing of overweight/obesity - lets get one thing straight - well several actually.
- Carrying too much fat around our middle puts us at far greater risk of developing cancer, diabetes, heart disease and more.
- being undernourished also damages our health.
- eat the right food, supplement the nutrients that are missing, combat the chemical toxins with antioxidants, exercise
Now Doctors Say Its Good to be Overweight
By David Usborne, The Independent
November 13, 2007
A startling new study by medical researchers in the
The study, published yesterday in the respected Journal of the American Medical Association, runs counter to almost all other advice to consumers by saying that carrying a little extra flab — though not too much — might help people to live longer.
Struggling dieters, used to being told that staying thin is the best prescription for longevity, are likely to be confused this morning if not heartily relieved. While being a bit overweight may indeed increase your chances of dying from diabetes and kidney disease — conditions that are often linked with one another — the same is not true for a host of other ailments including cancer and heart disease, the report suggests.
In fact, scanning the whole gamut of diseases that could curtail your life, being over weight is, on balance, a good thing. The bottom line, the scientists say, is that modestly overweight people demonstrate a lower death rate than their peers who are underweight, obese or — most surprisingly — normal weight.
The findings will be hard to dismiss. They are the result of analysis of decades of data by federal researchers at the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in
Being overweight, the report asserts in its conclusions, “was associated with significantly decreased all-cause mortality overall”.
“The take-home message is that the relationship between fat and mortality is more complicated than we tend to think,” said Katherine Flegal, the lead researcher. “It’s not a cookie-cutter, one-size-fits-all situation where excess weight just increases your mortality risk for any and all causes of death.”
That the CDC has even published the report and thus threatened to muffle years of propaganda as to the health benefits of staying slender has enraged some medical experts.
“It’s just rubbish,” fumed Walter Willett, the professor of epidemiology and nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health. “It’s just ludicrous to say there is no increased risk of mortality from being overweight.”
Not that the CDC results are an invitation to throw caution to the winds and take cream with everything. The scientists are careful to stress that the benefits they are describing are limited to those people who are merely overweight — which generally means being no more than 30 pounds heavier than is recommended for your height — and certainly do not carry over to those who fall into the category of obese.
Obesity has been declared one of the main threats to health in the
The scientists at the CDC first hinted at the upside of being overweight a few years ago. Since then, however, they have expanded the base of their analysis, with data that includes mortality figures from 2004, the last year for which numbers were available, for no fewer than 2.3 million American adults.
Highlighting how a bit of bulge might help you, the scientists said that in 2004 there were 100,000 fewer deaths among the overweight in the
Aside from escaping diseases, tipping the scales a little further may also help people recover from serious surgery, injuries and infections, Dr Flegal suggested. Such patients may simply have deeper bodily reserves to draw on in times of medical crisis.
Not everyone in the medical profession was surprised or angry about the study. “What this tells us is the hazards have been very much exaggerated,” said Steven Blair, a professor of exercise science and biostatistics at the
“I believe the data,” added Elizabeth Barrett-Connor, a professor of family and preventive medicine at the University of California, San Diego, who believes that a BMI of 25 to 30 — roughly the the so-called overweight range — “may be optimal”.
Critics, however, were quick to point out that the study was concerned with mortality data only and did not take account of the quality of life benefits of keeping your weight down. The study “is not about health and sickness”, noted the obesity researcher Barry Popkin of the
The report “definitely won’t be the last word”, said Dr Michael Thun of the American Cancer Society, who pointed out, in a report released last week by the World Cancer Research Fund and the American Institute for Cancer Research, that staying slim was the main recommendation for avoiding cancer.
Others in the American medical community, while a little bemused, were withholding judgement. “This is a very puzzling disconnect,” said Dr JoAnn Manson, the chief of preventive medicine at Harvard’s Brigham and Women’s Hospital.
The suggestion that a bit of extra weight may assist patients recovering from an infection or surgery was of no surprise to Dr Flegal. “You may also have more lean mass — more bone and muscle,” she said. “If you are in an adverse situation, that could be good for you.”
In their conclusions, the authors of the study note: “Overweight … may be associated with improved survival during recovery from adverse conditions, such as infections or medical procedures, and with improved prognosis for some diseases. Such findings may be due to greater nutritional reserves or higher lean body mass associated with overweight.”
Those of us mostly likely to benefit from a little bulge beneath the belt, the study adds, are between 25 and 59 years old, although there were also some advantages for people over 60.
Strontium: An Alternative Treatment For Osteoporosis
This article caught my eye the other day and as i know several people who are potentially at risk from Osteoprosis I thought that it would be a worthy post.
Paul Barton
by Teri Lee Gruss
(NewsTarget) Research spanning a century has shown that strontium, a naturally occurring trace mineral, is an important component of healthy bone tissue. Researchers from around the world have found that, in pharmaceutical doses, it dramatically increases bone density and reduces risk for fractures in women with osteoporosis.
National Osteoporosis Foundation statistics indicate that “osteoporosis causes more than 1.5 million fractures annually: 700,000 vertebral, 300,000 hip, 250,000 wrist and 300,000 fractures at other sites”. [1] Sadly, “an average of 24% of hip fracture patients aged 50 and over dies in the year following their fracture.” [2]
As our population ages in huge numbers, finding a safe and effective treatment for osteoporosis is more important than ever before. Dr. Susan Brown, director of the Osteoporosis Education Project (OEP) in East Syracuse, N.Y., says “Our bone crisis worsens each year, despite intensive public health and disease treatment efforts”. [3]
(more…)Meat can Kill you - but Vegetariansim may not be the full answer either
Meat can kill you.
That’s one of the key points that came out of a major review of 7,000 studies.
The World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) spent six years preparing this research. Too bad they went to all that trouble and then produced advice that wasn’t quite on the mark.
Fortunately, HSI Panelist Allan Spreen, M.D., is here to help them fine-tune their results for some truly useful advice (especially for vegetarians).
——————————————–
Apples & oranges
——————————————–This headline from FoodNavigator-USA caught my eye: “Red and Processed Meats Increase Cancer Risk, Says Study.”
Of the 10 recommendations offered by the WCRF in this report, FoodNavigator decided to feature this one: “Limit intake of red meat and avoid processed meat.”
Researchers found that high intake of red meat and processed meat was linked to a 30 percent increase in colorectal cancer risk. But lumping red meat with processed meat is like lumping “Citizen Kane” with “Honey, I Shrunk the Kids.” So much of processed meat is pure junk: binders, fillers, and a host of chemicals that preserve, color, and flavor. There’s really no comparison to the quality nutrition found in meat from an animal that’s been properly fed and cared for (i.e.; not raised on a factory farm).
Unfortunately, very few of us consume such high quality meat, which is rarely available in the average grocery store. Here’s how Dr. Spreen put it when I asked him for his thoughts on the WCRF report: “The studies on the meat and colon effects do not take into account the presence of herbicides, pesticides, synthetic fertilizers, and the use of antibiotics and hormones given to the animals that produce most of our meat. So, the problem may very well be toxic chemical exposure, not ingestion of meat, per se.”
——————————————–
Filling in the Blanks
——————————————–I can easily imagine someone reading the FoodNavigator-USA article and deciding: That’s it! I’m going vegetarian! What they may not take into consideration is the essential nutrition they get from high quality meat.
In previous e-Alerts, Dr. Spreen has noted how important it is for vegetarians to include vitamin B-12 in their supplement regimen. He states flatly that vegetarians cannot ingest this important B in adequate amounts unless they take a B-12 supplement. The irony here is that the WCRF report also offers this recommendation: “Aim to meet nutritional needs through diet alone.”
Good luck with that.
I wondered what other supplements Dr. Spreen might recommend for a strict vegetarian.
Dr. Spreen: “Besides the B-12, I’d add some conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), as that form only comes from being processed within an animal. Getting enough of the omega-3 oils in general is a problem, as the ratio tends to be more omega-6 in vegetarians (no fish). I’d also add some saturated fat – since butter and lard (animal fat) are out, vegetarians (especially young ones) are missing the type of fat that’s needed for cell membrane production (kind of important, as you might imagine). In that case I’d be pushing for the use of coconut oil and palm kernel oil (neither one being popular these days).
“Iron is a problem (especially since only animal sources provide iron in a form that ‘insulates’ its oxidative effects from the body within a heme ring), so I’d add an iron supplement.
“Vitamin D is no problem if the individual gets enough whole-body solar exposure daily. That’s kind of rare, unfortunately, so I’d be adding that.
“High quality protein (egg highest, milk next) is an issue. You’re only left with soy, a sad substitute (especially in young boys), but I’d have to add that.
“Vegetarianism is a wonderful cleanse in the short term – I definitely recommend it. In the long term…a total disaster.”
Ouch. I know a lot of our members won’t enjoy hearing their diet described as a “disaster.” But when a wide spectrum of nutrition is missing, a disaster is in the making without some supplementary help.
Talk to your doctor or an experienced dietician before adding any of these supplements to your daily regimen.