Photo by Telephone Melts

A strange thing happens to some people after their first few experiences with perfectly cooked farmers market vegetables. It is not always easy to admit, but after awhile you might find yourself thinking that the veggies you grew up eating were, ahem, pretty horrible.

It is common for people of both my generation and my parents’ generation to have been raised on frozen spinach, canned beets, over-steamed carrots and boiled broccoli–foods that would make anyone with taste buds pick up their fork and run to the nearest steakhouse.

Is it any wonder that vegetables rarely rank on anyone’s favorite foods list?

Unfortunately, sometimes these negative early experiences can create life long food aversions that could have been avoided with a little extra TLC in the kitchen. They also help propagate the unhealthy eating habits that are now so common in America.

But our exposure to bad vegetables isn’t really Mom’s fault. Over the past 50 years America has been seduced by the allure of convenience. We’ve come to believe that meals come in packages and cooking is too hard and time consuming to bother with. We rely on supermarkets for our fruits and vegetables, which we expect to be the same year round.

The watering down of our food culture is directly responsible for our vegetables losing flavor (they are bred for shelf life, not taste) and us losing our ability to make them palatable. As a result vegetables have become an afterthought, something we eat from guilt and obligation, not from love.

But the good news is that this trend is reversing. People are starting to understand that where food comes from is important and has a tremendous impact on how it tastes. We are learning that it is worth it to go out of our way and spend a little extra money (at least occasionally) for the best ingredients. Restaurants are beginning to pride themselves on serving locally sourced foods–it is no longer uncommon to see farm names printed next to ingredients on menus here in San Francisco.

Focusing on quality ingredients and real foods is forcing us to reexamine cooking as well. I remember how surprised I was the first time I realized that instant oatmeal only saves about 3 minutes compared to real oatmeal and that sautéing fresh spinach is easier than making a bag of the soggy frozen kind. Not only are we starting to understand that taste is worth sacrificing a little convenience for here and there, but also that the inconvenience we feared isn’t as big a deal as we might have guessed.

But not everyone has been converted quite yet.

Learning to shop for and cook seasonal foods does involve a learning curve, and the first steps are always the most difficult and intimidating. (These aren’t exactly skills we pick up in school or learn in our daily lives.) To get and cook real food requires finding local farmers markets and knowing how to work a stove, for starters. Since farmers markets don’t usually run daily, a bit of foresight and planning are necessary if you hope to make it a part of your weekly routine. Working a stove demands some basic understanding of how food reacts when heated.

Luckily, neither of these things are actually as difficult as they may seem at first. And once you acquire just a few basic cooking skills–stir fry in olive oil, oven roasting, basic grain and legume preparation–expanding your culinary repertoire to include dozens of your favorite dishes isn’t much of a stretch.

One of the perks of starting with great ingredients is that messing up a meal is much more difficult than it is when you start with low-quality ingredients and rely on additional hacks and seasonings to mask the lack of flavor. Bad vegetables are almost always either over-cooked or under-salted, so if you can get these right you are most of the way there. Just a few extra seasoning tricks like garlic, chili flakes or lemon zest can elevate almost any green vegetable into something worth building a meal around.

Cooking vegetables well is neither an art nor a science. Learn to prepare a few of your favorites well, then branch out from there. Then next time you visit your parents, maybe you can volunteer to cook dinner and show them how broccoli is supposed to taste.

Have bad childhood memories turned you off to any foods?

Tags: canned vegetables, frozen vegetables, real food, seasonal, vegetables

Photo by Lord Jim

“What do you think of the Paleo diet which advocates zero grain consumption?”

The Paleolithic diet is one of the most rapidly growing diet trends of the past several years. Followers of the Paleo diet argue that humans have not evolved to eat agriculture-based foods and can only achieve optimal health by consuming a hunter-gatherer style diet. Thus the Paleo diet is completely devoid of grains and legumes, and also shuns dairy, salt, refined sugar and processed oils. The diet is composed primarily of meats, fish, vegetables, fruits, roots, nuts and seeds.

(The Wikipedia article on the Paleo diet is actually pretty good if you’d like to read up on the details. I particularly like the Opposing views section.)

Like most diets the Paleo diet has a little bit of good science behind it, but also a lot of logical leaps and baseless assumptions. The evolutionary argument that humans are somehow maladapted to agriculture-based diets is particularly unconvincing (resting on many unproven assumptions), yet is the fundamental premise on which the Paleo diet bases its recommendations.

The reasoning behind the Paleo diet is less interesting to me, however, than the impact of the diet itself. Will “eating like a caveman” really help you be healthier?

Possibly, but not necessarily.

The most obvious advantage of the Paleo diet is the lack of processed foods. There is ample evidence that societies on traditional diets boast far better health than those on modern, Western diets–and the hallmark of modern diets is food processing. Paleo diets therefore are low in sugar, refined carbohydrates, trans fats, excess salt and pretty much everything else that leads to “diseases of civilization.”

Paleo diets are also abundant in healthy, nutrient-rich foods such as vegetables, fruits, nuts, fish and meats. I have no doubt that anyone willing to stick to a Paleo eating plan will have a healthy weight and remain virtually free of heart disease, diabetes, hypertension and may even have lower rates of cancer.

But the question still remains, is it necessary to eat Paleo to be healthy?

This is where I take issue with the Paleo philosophy. While the promise of a diet free of processed foods is substantial, the Paleo diet goes beyond this and demands considerable sacrifice.

Paleo diets do not allow for any grains or legumes. This pretty much eliminates every traditional cuisine on earth including Japanese, Italian, Indian and Greek. Not only is this a culinary tragedy, it ignores the fact that these cuisines feed some of the world’s healthiest and longest-lived individuals.

Traditional, global diets that include grains and legumes but exclude highly processed foods have been some of the most successful for health. Diseases of civilization are only problematic in Western cultures where highly processed foods make up a large proportion of the calories consumed.

Proponents of the Paleo diet argue that it is necessary to eliminate grains and legumes because they contain “antinutrients,” substances that can interfere with the body’s absorption of other important vitamins, minerals and proteins. However, well-nourished individuals who eat a varied diet of unprocessed foods (including grains and legumes) are not nutrient deficient and are generally healthy.

Given that it is possible to thrive on a diet that includes some grains, legumes and even small amounts of processed foods, one must question if giving up the culinary joys of travel and global cuisine are really worth the sacrifice. In my experience, food substitutions and modified recipes designed to mimic traditional meals can sometimes be tasty but can never replace true authenticity.

Another contention I have with the Paleo diet is the assumption that the same eating patterns will work for everyone. People’s lives differ in countless ways. We each have different levels of daily activity, demands on our time and food preferences. We also have slightly different genetic backgrounds, which can result in significant differences in metabolism and hormone levels. These individual variations can make dietary needs different for each of us.

Scientific reports on health and diet almost always rely on data pooled over many people (sometimes hundreds of thousands), since this is the only way to measure statistical significance. As a result these studies only inform us about dietary health trends on a population level and tell us little about what will work for us individually. Differences among people may be part of the reason large nutrition studies so often fail to show meaningful results.

Thus, there may be a percentage of the population that has great success on the Paleo diet and finds it easy to stick to and achieve results. This is wonderful. However there may also be a segment of the population (myself included) that finds living without grains and legumes to be chronically unsatisfying and unsustainable.

Try telling a foodie they can never use salt, eat cheese or drink wine again and see how far you get pitching a Paleo diet.

If you currently eat a typical Western diet with little variety and many processed foods, tend to have better success following rigid diet plans, and have no qualms about giving up or modifying traditional meals to meet your dietary demands, then you might have luck following the Paleo diet. However there is no reason to believe it is the only path to good health.

The best diet is the one that works for you. Finding a healthstyle you can embrace and enjoy is essential if you want to build a lifetime of healthy habits.

Do you follow a Paleo diet? What do you think?

Tags: antinutrients, beans, diseases of civilization, intact grains, legumes, paleo diet, processed foods, trans fat

Photo by Werwin15

The science of aging is among the most dynamic and provocative in modern biology. Over the past two decades we have seen a virtual explosion in research investigating the molecular and behavioral systems that control the aging process. But the more researchers uncover about the science of aging, the more questions emerge.

Dietary restriction has long been considered the most potent regulator of aging. Restricting food intake by any means induces a series of metabolic changes in organisms from yeast to primates that serve to extend life. Studies are currently underway to investigate the ability of dietary restriction to extend life in humans.

Several biological changes are known to occur upon the onset of dietary restriction including a decline in reproductive ability, increased stress resistance and a slowdown of some metabolic processes.

Insulin signaling was among the first molecular pathways to be identified in the regulation of aging, and offered a direct tie between diet and the aging process.  In 1998 UCSF scientist Cynthia Kenyon showed that removing an insulin receptor gene (daf-2) in worms could double their lifespan. Her lab later showed that removing another insulin signaling gene (daf-16) could extend life even longer. I spoke to Kenyon about the relationship between diet and aging for this article.

Blocking insulin signaling in these worms did not just prevent the worms from dying and allow them to age longer. Instead the aging process actually slows so that older worms continue to behave like young worms. Also, as these experiments were repeated in different animals, it was shown that lowering insulin signaling also helps protect animals from stress and diseases such as cancer and heart disease.

Insulin is released as a direct response to glucose in the blood. This means that any time you eat a meal with carbohydrates, you are increasing your insulin signaling and likely accelerating aging. But this does not mean that you will live forever if you stop eating carbohydrates.

Interestingly, protein metabolism also contributes to accelerated aging, but through a different mechanism. Even more intriguing is that restricting protein increases lifespan to a greater extent than restricting sugar.

So is it simply calories that promote aging?

Probably not. For one thing, the effect of a calorie from protein is greater than a calorie from carbohydrate, making it unlikely that a calorie is the basic unit of impact. Second, there is evidence that calories are not required to accelerate aging.

Recent studies have shown that the mere act of smelling food can reduce lifespan. The mechanism for this effect is still unknown, but seems to be tied to respiration.

According to Kenyon it is clear that “sensory perception influences lifespan,” at least in worms and flies.

Thus it is likely that aging is controlled by the interaction of several pathways, including metabolism, respiration and stress. Importantly, however, lifespan seems to be dependent on a handful of specific pathways rather than global changes in cellular function or breakdown. The idea that aging is an inevitable function of time must be put aside given the evidence that it is controlled at a genetic and environmental level.

This makes sense when you think about it. Different organisms exhibit vastly different lifespans and rates of aging that are too great to be explained by some kind of universal cellular breakdown. A more parsimonious hypothesis is that organisms differ in specific genetic factors that, combined with environmental influences, regulate lifespan.

So how should we mortal humans react to these findings?

The genes linking diet and aging are highly conserved through evolution, indicating that there is a great chance human aging is sensitive to diet. Indeed, insulin-related genes have been found to be important in long-lived human populations. This suggests that the pathways discovered in worms and other organisms have similar functions in humans.

What is not clear is how much influence diet has on lifespan and to what extent we are able to manipulate it. It is already known that abnormal insulin activity in humans is linked to higher disease rates, especially “diseases of civilization” such as heart disease, hypertension, type 2 diabetes and cancer. And these diseases are clearly associated with diets rich in processed foods, especially refined carbohydrates.

The effect of protein consumption on lifespan in humans has yet to be investigated. Envisioning an experiment that would test the influence of smelling food on human aging is difficult to even imagine.

Although direct evidence is not available, there is good reason to suspect that a diet with low glycemic load may extend human lifespan. In November 2009, Kenyon’s lab reported that adding glucose to a worm’s normal diet shortens lifespan, but has no effect on the long-lived worms that lack insulin signaling genes daf-2 and daf-16. This discovery prompted Kenyon herself to adopt a low-carbohydrate diet.

Despite this there is still not sufficient evidence to recommend a calorie restricted diet for humans to extend life, largely because optimal nutrition levels for a given individual are unknown. However, most people would benefit vastly by eliminating processed foods and refined carbohydrates from their diets as much as possible.

Focusing on fresh, whole foods, enjoying an occasional glass of wine, avoiding smoking and getting regular exercise can add 14 years to the life of an average person. Maintain a healthy weight as well and your outlook gets even better.

Would you change your diet to be healthier and live longer?

Tags: aging, calorie restriction, carbs, Cynthia Kenyon, diseases of civilization, glycemic load, insulin, low-carb, protein, refined carbohydrates

Dr. Andrew Weil is the father of integrative medicine and has one of the most sane and straightforward healthy eating programs available. Here he sat down with Kevin Rose and answered an extensive range of geek health questions asked by Twitter users.

The question I was most curious about is the role of dairy in health. I have done countless hours of research on potential links between dairy and prostate cancer, type 1 diabetes, osteoporosis, asthma and other problems, and was happy to see Dr. Weil’s interpretation of the data is very similar to mine (very little is conclusive). He also adds an interesting aside on the importance of Mongolian cows that you shouldn’t miss.

Other topics covered include the potential dangers of soda and energy drinks, the risks and benefits of soy, which supplements are worthwhile, the best sources of antioxidants, how much vitamin D is necessary, the importance of fish oil, the deal with cellphone radiation, screen time and eye problems, tea, chocolate, low-carb diets, depression and those “fancy detox kits.”

It’s an incredibly informative video and definitely worth a half hour of your time.

And don’t forget to follow @drweil and @kevinrose on Twitter.

Enjoy!

Tags: dairy, Dr. Weil, integrative medicine, Kevin Rose, Twitter

Photo by joe.oconnell

“I eat way too much sugar and have constant cravings for it that make me feel like I am addicted … do you have any suggestions for cutting back?”

There is still a debate over whether or not sugar is an addictive substance. From the data I’ve seen and people I’ve talked to, I’d guess it probably is.

But whatever the answer, the important question for most of us is how to kill the cravings that have us eating so much sugar in the first place.

Cravings exist in both the body and the mind, and you will have the best luck overcoming them if you address both simultaneously.

The first step is good nutrition. A nourished body is a happy body, and permanently kicking a sugar habit requires healthy food.

Eating balanced meals is essential for getting real satisfaction from what you eat and leaving cravings behind. For most people this means approximately 50% of your meal being vegetables and the rest split between protein (beans, meat or dairy), intact grains and a bit of oil or other fat. However, everyone is a little different and you should experiment to find what works best for you.

Healthy eating will not squelch cravings overnight, but it is essential for permanently cutting sugar because it ensures your body has everything it needs. Once your muscles and organs are taken care of, you can address the cravings in your brain.

The first step in breaking a sugar addiction is making the decision to stop eating it completely for at least 4 days (the longer the better), and sticking to it. While I usually recommend making dietary changes gradually, sugar has the unique ability to inspire cravings which are refueled every time you give into them.

The only way to break the cycle is to stop feeding the fire.

Once your sugar tolerance has normalized you can reintroduce it in small amounts, so long as you are sure you are eating for pleasure and not from habit.

Quitting sugar cold turkey is not entirely easy, however, even if you know the break is temporary. Cravings can be incredibly intense and make sticking to your resolution very difficult. If you hope to get through it, you must have a strategy for diverting yourself from temptation.

Start by removing all sweets (especially your weakness) from the house. Do a full sweep, no secret stashes can stay. If you do not want to throw things out, try giving them away at work or even sealing them up and putting them somewhere you can’t get to them. Making it impossible to cheat will greatly increase your probability of success. Don’t rely on willpower.

Once you have removed your most likely pitfalls you need a strategy for dealing with cravings. For this it is important to understand clearly why you want to avoid sugar, what you are making the effort for.

If you aren’t sure why limiting sugar is necessary I recommend spending some time educating yourself on the subject. If you’re a visual learner, check out this video about the evils of fructose by Dr. Lustig. If you’d like all the gory scientific details, check out Good Calories, Bad Calories by Gary Taubes.

Being completely convinced you want to change your habits makes following through on your resolution much easier.

The next step is deciding on alternative behaviors to divert yourself from cravings–they will pass eventually so all you need to do is distract yourself for a bit while they are strongest.

What works for you will depend a lot on your own personality and needs. For many people, sugar snacking is triggered by certain environmental cues such as location or time of day. In these situations, diversions should be planned in advance to avoid slipping into habitual behavior.

Planned distractions from habitual eating can include taking different routes between locations (to avoid walking by that bakery), substituting behaviors (there are no cookies at the gym) or choosing different foods or beverages during certain activities (mint tea instead of ice cream?).

Experiment with different alternatives and figure out what works best for you. Foods with oil and protein tend to be satisfying and quench cravings, if hunger is a problem for you. Exercise is the golden ticket for others. For me personally, sugar cravings are best satisfied by fresh fruit, especially those with a lot of fiber like apples and oranges.

Make sure your alternative foods and activities are things you enjoy. If they aren’t you will eventually abandon them for your old habits. Ideally these avoidance behaviors will completely replace your sugar habit and become your new healthstyle.

As you cut sugar out of your diet, also be sure to avoid hidden sources. Stay away from sauces and condiments that are really desserts in disguise, e.g. honey mustard, teriyaki, etc. Added sugar is very common in restaurant sauces (especially mid-range chain restaurants), so you might want to avoid eating out all together for a few days if you can swing it.

When you have completed your 4 day sugar fast, your cravings should have subsided substantially (the first 2 days are the worst). Continue to keep sugar minimal and actively avoid situations that cue you to eat sweets. Integrate your new behaviors into your healthstyle until the new habits replace the old ones. This process takes 6-8 weeks.

During this time get in the practice of asking yourself why you are eating sugar before you put it into your mouth. Are you eating from habit? Because of circumstance? For a special occasion? Because everyone else is?

The purpose of this exericse is not necessarily to stop yourself from eating, but to understand the reasons behind your behavior. The goal is to find a way to allow sugar into your life as a treat and not a necessity.

As you ween yourself off sugar, your tastes can change dramatically. All my life I had a sweet tooth, but over the past several years my taste for sugar has diminished and most desserts are now far too sweet for me. Consequently limiting sugar is not something I need to think much about, except during holidays and special occasions. Even then I don’t give it much thought, it happens naturally.

Besides eating more vegetables, cutting your sugar intake way down is probably the single best thing you can do to improve your health. If sugar is a problem for you, eating less of it should be one of your highest priorities.

Have you had success cutting back on sugar?

Tags: addiction, brain, Dr. Lustig, fructose, Good Calories Bad Calories, restaurants, sugar, The End of Overeating