“Compared with those who did not eat nuts, individuals who consumed nuts (serving size of one ounce) seven or more times per week had a 20 per cent lower death rate and this association was dose dependent,” stated lead author, Ying Bao, MD, ScD, from the Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. “Those who consumed more nuts were also leaner, and tended to have a healthy lifestyle, such as smoking less and exercising more,” added Dr. Bao.

Researchers looked at the association of nut consumption with total and cause-specific mortality among 76,464 women in the Nurses’ Health Study and 42,498 men in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study over three decades.

They found there were significant inverse associations for deaths due to cancer, heart disease and respiratory disease.

This is the largest study to date to examine the relation between nut consumption and total mortality, and the results are consistent with previous studies, according to senior author, Charles Fuchs, MD, MPH, from the Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA. “The findings from our study and others suggest a potential benefit of nut consumption for promoting health and longevity,” reported Dr. Fuchs.

Nuts contain important nutrients such as unsaturated fats, high-quality protein, vitamins (i.e., vitamin E, folate and niacin) minerals (i.e., magnesium, calcium and potassium) and phytochemicals — all of which may offer cardioprotective, anticarcinogenic, anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties.

“With current nut consumption well below the recommended 1.5 ounces of nuts per day (in the FDA qualified health claim for nuts and heart disease) we need to continue to encourage people to have a handful of nuts every day,” said Maureen Ternus, M.S., R.D., executive director of the International Tree Nut Council Nutrition Research & Education Foundation (INC NREF).

The International Tree Nut Council funded the study.

The post Squirrels know best: nuts make you live longer appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Young children and older adults may also be at nutritional risk. Strict vegetarians, people who smoke and those who drink more than two alcoholic beverages per day often are advised to take a supplement.

When choosing a dietary supplement, always talk to your doctor or other health-care provider before taking, as some can interfere with prescription or over-the-counter medications.

If you decide to take a supplement, do your homework. Choose one that provides no more than 100 per cent of the daily value (DV) for vitamins A, C, D, E, folic acid, thiamin, riboflavin, niacin, B12 and at least 11 minerals.

Remember that you are getting vitamins and minerals from the foods you eat. Foods, such as cereals and beverages, often are fortified with vitamins and/or minerals. You may be getting more of these nutrients than you realize, so read the labels.

Always carefully read the label before buying a supplement. Look for:

• Directions for use — Take the supplement in the recommended dosage. Do not take a second dose when you have missed a meal.
• Ingredient list — Check for added fillers, especially if you have allergies.
• Expiration date — Vitamins can lose their potency through time.
• A childproof cap — Certain vitamins and minerals can be especially toxic to children. Keep them out of the reach of young children.
• Name of the manufacturer — Choose a known manufacturer with a good reputation.
• Certification seal of approval — Look for supplements with the USP label. This indicates that the manufacturer of the product chose to be evaluated for quality standards of identity, purity, strength and composition of the product.

The post Do you need a supplement? appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Health Canada officials spent the last 15 years trying to develop a comprehensive new policy to allow food companies greater scope for adding vitamins and minerals to their food products. But last year the health minister stopped the proposed new policy from going ahead, primarily because of an intense lobby effort by Canadian dietitians who were concerned that the proposed new rules would allow food companies to fortify “junk food.”

This is a good example of what policy theorists call “harsh policy space.” On the one hand, the food industry sees the business and health advantages of enhancing the nutritional intake of their consumers, without any food safety concerns because fortification levels would be strictly regulated. For food companies anxious to sell more nutritious products, this is a win-win.

At the same time, all provincial governments are terrified by the rapid increase in healthcare costs caused in part by bad eating by Canadians. Moreover, it is the publicly funded healthcare system that is burdened with the serious increase in the cost of drugs to combat many diet-related diseases.

Provincial governments want more of us to go to our kitchen cupboards, not our medicine cabinets, to deal with problems such as high cholesterol. Various mandatory fortification rules, such as the addition of folates to bakery products, have demonstrated significant health benefits.

On the other hand, dietitians and some physicians are adamantly opposed to discretionary fortification, arguing that consumers will end up eating more junk food in the belief that fortified junk food is a healthy food choice.

This position seems to get strong support from a study released recently by University of Toronto researchers Sacco and Tarasuk that was published inEuropean Journal of Clinical Nutrition.Using the 2004 Canadian Community Health Survey data, the authors found an inverse relationship between consumption of fortified foods and the number of servings of foods such as fruit and vegetables, dairy products and meat. Their data raised particular concerns relating to younger age groups.

HARSH POLICY SPACE

The authors also noted that there have been very few studies looking at the effect of discretionary fortification on food selection dietary patterns. They say that Health Canada’s proposed policy is “at odds with national dietary recommendations,” and that before we change the rules “it is important that we understand the broader public health implications of discretionary fortification policies on food consumption patterns, particularly in the context of a growing prevalence of obesity.”

I’m told that these conflicting positions also exist within the department, so it’s not surprising that we have continuing policy drift. The inability to develop a new fortification policy also has real implications for another significant regulatory issue.

It was the ongoing failure to modernize the food fortification policy – and Canada’s more restrictive health claims policy – that drove many food companies to dress up their food products as natural health products (NHPs), which are not subject to food fortification laws.

That’s how we got energy drinks or vitamin-enriched waters being sold as NHPs. The currently confusing “case-by-case” non-policy for food-like NHPs must be clarified, but it cannot be until there is clarification of the food fortification rules.

The root of the harsh policy space is the difficulty in defining “junk food.” From a nutritional science point of view, why would it be acceptable to fortify a nutrition bar but not a chocolate bar, an energy drink but not a soft drink, bread but not a cookie? And harsh policy space makes for difficult politics. Without what policy theorists call a sweet spot – a place that satisfies most interests – the best political option is to do nothing. Don’t count on new food fortification regulations any time soon.

Ronald L. Doering, a past president of the Canadian Food

Inspection Agency, practises food law in the Ottawa offices of Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP. He also chairs the federal

agriculture minister’s advisory board on food safety. Contact

him at ronald. doering@gowlings.com.

———

“Dietitiansandsomephysiciansargueconsumers willendupeatingmorejunkfoodinthebelief thatfortifiedjunkfoodisahealthyfoodchoice.”

The post Food Fortification: Still Looking For The Sweet Spot appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

I read about a homemade cleaner and preservative for teeth, which included borax, myrrh and camphor. To cure headaches, the book recommended heating a bag of oats and using it as a pillow.

Equipped with instructions in the book, I could make my own soap from lye and grease. If a family member experienced hair loss, a potion consisting of “your best brandy” and black tea was recommended. You were to apply it to the scalp and not drink it.

As I looked through the old cookbook, I came upon something interesting about dry edible beans. According to the book, “Beans, while an excellent food for the robust and healthy and for persons leading an active life, are considered unsuitable for persons of sedentary habits and for the invalid and convalescent.”

As with home remedies, nutrition recommendations change regularly as scientific knowledge moves forward. Beans, in fact, still are noted for their health benefits, but they are OK for people of all ages. We need to drink plenty of liquids and get some physical activity to maintain digestive function and avoid constipation when adding fibrerich foods to our diet.

Beans are an economical source of protein with great versatility on the menu. They can count either as a protein or as a vegetable. Cooked dry edible beans are naturally low in fat and contain no saturated fats, trans fats or cholesterol. They also have an abundance of antioxidants and phytochemicals (natural plant chemicals), which have been shown to reduce the risk of some types of cancer.

Beans contain complex carbohydrates that the body digests slowly. This makes them a good choice for diabetics to help control their blood sugar levels.

For people trying to manage their weight, beans are low in fat and an excellent source of fibre and protein. Fibre and protein will help the body feel full faster and longer.

Beans are a good source of the B vitamin folate, the natural form of folic acid. Folic acid is used to build cells and is especially important for women of child-bearing age. Consuming adequate amounts of folic acid can reduce the risk of having a baby with neural tube birth defects.

Beans are gluten free, so they provide a source of fibre, protein, vitamins and minerals for people who cannot consume wheat or other gluten-containing foods. They come in a variety of colours and forms and can be used as main dishes, side dishes, salads, pasta, dips and spreads and even in baked goods. Dry beans require a soaking process to soften them and, therefore, take some planning when they are to be used.

Canned beans, such as kidney or black beans, are convenient additions to recipes. However, canned beans are higher in sodium, so be sure to drain the liquid and rinse them with water to remove some of the sodium. Try using sodium-free spices, such as onion or garlic powder, to reduce the sodium content of your recipes.

So enjoy those old cookbooks. Just keep in mind that scientific knowledge changes over the years.

– Julie Garden-Robinson, PhD, L.R.D., is a North Dakota State

University Extension Service food and nutrition specialist

and associate professor in the department of health, nutrition and exercise sciences.

The post Old Cookbooks Interesting, Not Always Accurate appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Unfortunately, bread sometimes has been viewed as a villain in the world of weight management and weight loss. Some fad diets completely cut out grains and lots of nutrients in the process.

Can we gain weight by regularly eating more calories from bread than we burn through our body’s basic needs, plus our physical activity? Yes, of course. We gain weight by eating food or drinking beverages with more calories than our body burns.

Most of us underestimate the amount of food we eat. Theoretically, just 100 extra calories per day from any food can add 10 pounds to our frame in a year. However, we can adjust the consequences of eating too much by adding physical activity to our lifestyle.

Grains play a major role in a healthful diet. They provide complex carbohydrates, which fuel our body for physical activity and they provide fuel for our brain. Grains provide B vitamins such as thiamin, riboflavin, niacin and folic acid, along with minerals including iron, magnesium and selenium.

Think about your grain food choices. Do you consume a wide variety of grain foods, such as oatmeal, barley, brown rice and whole wheat pasta? Are half of your grain choices whole grain foods? Whole grains provide fibre and a wide array of phytochemicals (plant chemicals) with health benefits.

On average, sedentary women and older adults need about five ounces of grain foods daily. Children, teenage girls, active women and sedentary men need about seven ounces daily. Teenage boys and physically active men need about 10 ounces of grain foods daily.

One ounce of grain may be less than you think. One ounce from the grain group equals one slice of bread, one-half English muffin, one-half bun, five to seven crackers, one pancake about 4.5 inches in diameter, one-half cup cooked pasta or rice or one-half cup cooked cereal.

Try this exercise. How many ounces of grain did you eat yesterday? Did you have cereal or toast for breakfast, a sandwich for lunch or crackers for a snack? Compare your grain food choices to the recommended amount for your gender and level of physical activity. How did you do?

– Julie Garden-Robinson, PhD, L.R.D., is a North

Dakota State University Extension Service food and

nutrition specialist and associate professor in the department of health, nutrition and exercise sciences.

The post As Usual Moderation Is The Key appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Like the traditional English peas, edible pod peas are cool-weather plants and so should be planted early in the spring – I plant mine around the first of May in our Zone 2 region. I like to plant the seeds fairly thickly– about three centimetres apart. Edible pod peas do not become particularly bushy but instead tend to send up one central stem, so they can be planted quite close together. They like a rich soil that has been well worked and may not perform as well if the soil is compacted. The soil should have good drainage.

Edible pod peas, like other types of peas, are quite tolerant of early-spring frosts, so they can be planted before the danger of late frost has passed. I cover the seeds with about four cm of soil and make sure that the soil is kept moist during the germination period to ensure successful germination. About the time the pea plants are emerging from the ground, cutworms also emerge, so keep a watchful eye and if you see small plants cut off at ground level dig around in the soil, catch the culprits and kill them.

Growing peas is also great for your garden soil as the plants fixate nitrogen into the soil so that future crops can take advantage of it. Although there are bush-type edible pod peas, most of the more popular varieties are vines which require some kind of trellis or fence on which to grow. I used 2x2s and stucco wire to create a fence for my edible pod peas and it has served me well. I find that the variety Super Sugar Snap performs best in my garden but there are several good varieties of edible pod peas available. Most have “sugar” in their names, whether it is Sugar Snap, Dwarf Sugar Snap, Sugar Lace, or Sugar Sprint. Some require no support and are bush types, while others, such as the last two are almost leafless. Besides the “snap” varieties, some edible pod peas are called Chinese peas or snow peas. These varieties produce flat pods that are harvested before the peas inside the pods develop at all. The peas in the pods of snap peas can be allowed to develop somewhat before harvest and the developing peas will create small bulges in the pods.

Edible pod peas are harvested starting from the bottom of the plants since the bottom pods are the first to form. Be sure to only harvest the pods right before you are going to use them as they are best used when fresh – they begin to lose their vitamin content when stored. Take each pod and snap off the stem and pull it down the length of the pod to remove the string (unless you have grown a stringless variety). Remove the remains of the blossom from the blossom end of each pod as well. Edible pod peas are packed with nutrients: vitamins A, K, B1, B2, B3, B6, manganese, magnesium, copper, zinc, iron, phosphorus, potassium, and folic acid among them. They are also a good source of dietary fibre.

Edible pod peas can, of course, be eaten raw – that’s the way we eat most of ours, but they can be steamed to use as a side dish, used in soups and stir-fries, served with dip or tossed into a salad. During the winter, edible pod peas are often available in grocery stores but they are expensive and if they have been picked for a long time they will have lost some of their nutrients. You can freeze your own edible pod peas and use those in the winter instead, although not in salads or for fresh eating. Pick the pods and remove the stem, string and blossom, then blanch them in boiling water for about 90 seconds before plunging them into ice water to cool. Allow the blanched pods to cool and dry before placing them into airtight freezer bags. As you use the frozen pods during the winter you will be reminded of your wonderful crop of edible pod peas that you enjoyed eating fresh during the summer!

– Albert Parsons writes from Minnedosa, Manitoba

The post Edible Pod Peas — A Midsummer Treat – for Jul. 29, 2010 appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Early on in the scientific revolution of the 18th century it was understood that carbon dioxide is a “greenhouse gas,” i. e. that while it lets sunlight in, it also acts as an insulator keeping in heat. It was, and is understood by science that if there is enough CO2 in the atmosphere, the planet’s surface temperature will be changed. Change is not a singular event, change produces change. Long story short, it has always been known that our actions here on earth have been altering the climate in a foreseeable manner.

Science by definition implies an understanding of the processes involved. It is for this reason that science cannot say that GMO technology is safe, as we do not have the data to support this statement. All that science does know is that the practice of using inter-species genetic transfer will produce change.

Regarding our use of folic acid, it was noted that changes in food policies were made “for trade and political reasons.”

I would interpret this to mean for monetary/financial reasons. The same reason we have global warming, polluted waters, food and air. We risk much to gain little.

If the precautionary principle is not the answer, how about “common sense” – that hard-to-define virtue so seldom seen.

Wayne James Beausejour, Man.

Please forward letters to Manitoba Co-operator, 1666 Dublin Ave., Winnipeg, R3H 0H1 or Fax: 204-954-1422 or e-mail: news@fbcpublishing.com(subject: To the editor)

The post Quantifying risk through science appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

In recent years, the precautionary principle has emerged as a recommended approach to deal with uncertain science in a range of public health areas, including food safety.

The Gage Canadian Dictionary defines precaution as “taking care beforehand.” This sounds like the simple common sense aphorism of “better safe than sorry.” But the concept has proven to be more complicated than that: the Swedish philosopher Sandin has recently documented no less than 19 definitions of the precautionary principle in various treaties, laws and academic writings.

Beyond the definitional difficulties, the precautionary principle has another fundamental flaw: it can be used to support any side of an issue because it is all in how you define the hazard. If the hazard of DDT, for example, were a possible threat to the environment, then the application of the precautionary principle would be to ban the product until the science is clearer. If the hazard is malaria-causing mosquitoes and the million persons killed (and the 300 million made seriously ill) by malaria each year, then wouldn’t the principle support taking action to continue to use the product until the science is more certain? A principle that is this malleable cannot be a reliable guide to decision-making, but it is still often used as a justification for a decision taken for other reasons.

I was reminded of this when reading recent articles reporting an Irish study that reviewed the growing body of research showing a link between high intakes of folic acid and a possible increased risk for colon cancer.

I was a food regulator in the mid-1990s when research began to show that neural tube defects (NTDs), such as spina bifida and anencephaly, could be significantly reduced if pregnant women took folic acid supplements.

Before resorting to mandatory food fortification, Health Canada, concerned about the health hazard to the general population, applied the precautionary principle and sensibly began a pilot project to determine if there were any adverse effects associated with food fortification, especially for the vast majority of Canadians who would receive no benefit.

Concerned about the children with NTDs, the U. S. decided they could not wait, applied the precautionary principle and made fortification of white flour with folates mandatory. For trade and political reasons, Health Canada rushed through a similar regulation, effective Nov. 1, 1998. This is our law today.

The purpose of regulations is to establish tolerability and acceptability for technological risk, but it’s a risky business setting standards and enforcing them when the science is uncertain. Society needs to take a precautionary approach to adopting the precautionary principle, or we run the risk of being more sorry than safe. It poses useful questions, but does not provide answers.

– Ronald L. Doering, a past president of the Canadian Food

Inspection Agency, practises food law in the Ottawa offices of Gowling Lafleur Henderson

LLP and can be reached at Ronald.doering@gowlings.com

The post The Precautionary Principle Is Not The Answer – for Oct. 8, 2009 appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Anita Chung and Evelyn Yeh, winners of this year’s Project Soy competition among students at the University of Guelph, have developed a maple syrup knockoff product from a blend of soybean protein and fibre.

Peter Hannam, who started the competition in 1996 when he headed First Line Seeds, says this is one of the few products he’s seen that could be exported to Japan.

Canadians export plenty of edible soybeans to Japan, but the Japanese are far ahead of Canadians in developing food products from soybeans across the entire spectrum of markets – from mass markets to niche markets and exotic products.

But a maple syrup knockoff is distinctly Canadian and likely to appeal to the Japanese who are fond of maple syrup.

Chung and Yeh also note that their product is healthy food, especially for those concerned about heart disease.

The U. S. Food and Drug Administration “has identified soy protein as a functional food due to the high content of protein,” Chung and Yeh write in a brochure that accompanied their entry.

“Soy protein has been authorized to aid in reducing the risk of coronary heart disease by lowering blood cholesterol levels,” they wrote.

In addition to unsaturated fats, carbohydrates, protein and fibre, they pointed to micronutrients such as calcium, iron, niacin, zinc, magnesium, copper, folic acid, essential amino acids and vitamins such as B12 and B6 in their product.

Carolynn Seaton was the winner in the diploma-program section of the competition with drink containers made from soybean stalks and pods. Her display set Tim Hortons roll-up-the-rim coffee cups beside her more environmentally friendly soybean cups.

Hannam was joined by the Ontario Soybean Growers Marketing Board in 1997 as joint sponsors with the University of Guelph. Their competition has given rise to hundreds of products, but so far no smashing market successes.

Hannam said part of the reason is the difficulties in patenting anything related to the food industry.

He said a student who made candles has managed to develop and maintain a niche market for his product and said truffles that were in the competition last year elicited interest from a Quebec-based manufacturer, which has its eye on developing the product for marketing in France.

The post Project Soy Creates New Products appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.