Photo by star5112

It’s never fun to find an unwelcome critter in your food, but if you spend much time shopping at farmers markets or buying organic produce it is something you need to get used to. Without pesticides, sometimes there are pests.

But… usually not.

Before you get too grossed out and dash to your kitchen to throw away your organic apples, I want to make it clear that the vast majority of the food I buy (~90% purchased direct from farms) is perfectly clean and insect free. But unlike sprayed and irradiated conventional produce, occasionally there will be a bug. And sometimes there will be many bugs.

But as scary as this can be the first time it happens, bugs really aren’t so bad. Most critters can be easily rinsed off under the sink. Some of the smaller, more persistent little buggers can be coaxed out with a short bath in water spiked with a splash of vinegar.

Herbivorous insects pose no real threat to humans beyond mild annoyance. Yes, they can add an unpleasant crunch to your food if you don’t find them in time, but generally they contribute no flavor and–as many of my Twitter followers pointed out–they may add a little protein to your diet.

I somehow doubt that insects really provide a significant protein source, though I’ve heard they can contribute substantial vitamin B12 for vegetarians who ingest them accidentally in rural societies (couldn’t find a credible reference). But the point is that whatever insects do add to your diet probably doesn’t impact your health in a negative way.

That is, if you even notice them. Chances are you have never actually tasted an unwanted creature in your food (I know I haven’t), but they are probably there sometimes and you’ve probably eaten them.

Let’s be honest, the problem with finding bugs in your food isn’t how they taste. The real obstacle is our perception of bugs. In our society bugs are considered gross, so we don’t want to eat anything they have touched.

But not all cultures consider bug eating repulsive (see photo). And after you’ve dealt with a few insects yourself, eaten your food anyway and come out unscathed, you realize there isn’t really anything to worry about.

Only once have I encountered a situation where a vegetable was infested beyond salvation. These were some baby cabbage I had left for too long in the fridge. Over the course of a week the insects multiplied and completely took over. It wasn’t pretty.

But instances like these are rare and, in my case, it was self-inflicted.

True insectophobes, however, will not be comforted by this argument. I am entirely sympathetic to this viewpoint–at one time in my life I used to joke that I was afraid of butterflies (OK, live ones still creep me out when they get too close).

But what scares me even more than eating bugs is the alternative.

We don’t yet know the extent of the damage done to our health by pesticides, but the history (dioxins, malathion, etc.) hasn’t been encouraging. The environment we live in is also significantly impacted by pesticide use.

Even if cancer and polluted lakes are a bit too abstract for you, there is still the bland, one-dimensional flavor of food produced on factory farms to consider. Taste is what really won me over when I first changed my eating habits.

I don’t mean to imply that it is never okay to eat conventional produce, just that there are serious issues to consider regarding where your food comes from.

Pests and pesticides can both be a little scary (I forgot to mention the live wasp that once crawled out of my spinach), but at this point it seems we do have to choose one or the other.

Which scares you the most? Vote now!

 Loading ...

Tags: cancer, environment, food culture, pesticides, pests

For The Love of Food

Welcome to Friday’s For The Love of Food, Summer Tomato’s weekly link roundup.

Lots of great food and health science this week in my top 10, along with the death of the evil Smart Choices food labeling campaign (woohoo!). Also be sure to check out the wonderful Anti-Fast Food article from Zen Habits. And what week would be complete without a lame celebrity gaffe endorsed by the always misguided Diets In Review? Oh right, any week.

Happy reading

I’m still collecting votes for the People’s HealthBlogger Award by Wellsphere and would greatly appreciate your support. Wellsphere is a fantastic resource for anyone interested in healthy living. To vote for me you have to create an account with them, but you can delete it when you’re done (I have yet to get any spam from them). I’m really terrible at asking people for things, but hope you can find a minute to show your support. Much thanks to those who have already voted.

for Darya http://summertomato.com/

I read many more wonderful articles than I post here each week. If you’d like to see more or just don’t want to wait until Friday, be sure to follow me on Twitter (@summertomato) or the Summer Tomato Facebook fan page. For complete reading lists join me on the social bookmarking sites StumbleUpon and Delicious. I’m very active on all these sites and would love to connect with you there. (Note: If you want a follow back on Twitter introduce yourself with an @ message).

For The Love of Food

• Scientists claim junk food is as addictive as heroin <<This study adds a lot of validity to David Kessler’s argument about the role of the brain’s reward and addiction circuits in overeating. Apparently sugar and salt make you crazy. Be careful this weekend. (Grist)
• Smart Choices suspended! May it rest in peace. <<Nuf said. (Food Politics)
• Moderate amounts of protein, rather than a lot, might be best for muscle <<Low-carb acolytes seem to treat high-protein as the new low-fat–something we’re all free to eat in unlimited quantities so long as there is no evil carbohydrate around. Probably the story is a little more complex than that. (Los Angeles Times)
• Gwyneth Paltrow’s Controversial Fitness Comment <<B.S. of the week Rumor has it that wannabe fitness guru Gwyneth Paltrow was overheard saying, “When you’re 35, you either starve yourself, or you do serious cardio.” GP herself gets some B.S points because neither starving yourself nor “serious cardio” will help keep you slim (they’re pretty much the same). And double B.S. points go to Diets In Review (worst online diet info ever) for friggin’ agreeing with her! *slaps forehead in disbelief*
• The Anti-Fast Food Diet <<Superb article on the benefits of Slow Food over at Zen Habits. One of the most simple and beautiful descriptions I’ve read on quality eating. (Seriously great job, Leo).
• Why You Don’t Have to Soak Your Nuts ~ Plus: Chai Almonds! <<Funny and brilliant article about nuts by a blogger I just discovered. Holly does a great job of debunking diet lore with amusing prose and a fabulous recipe to boot! (Sustainable Suppers)
• The Life Span of a Rodent May Aid Human Health <<Think cancer is random and inevitable? Wrong. There is abundant evidence in nature that specific, regulated biological processes are responsible for cancer. Isn’t science cool? (New York Times)
• Statin drugs might slightly boost diabetes risk <<There is a downside to every drug, even statins. Do you know what actually prevents diabetes? You guessed it, diet and exercise. (Medline)
• Knowing about calories causes people to eat more <<I love this. Although it is still not clear what this data means, it does suggest that knowledge of calories (all dietary numbers?) doesn’t help much. I prefer to focus on eating good, healthy food. (Weighty Matters)
• Jerusalem Artichoke Soup with Bacon <<This recipe for sunchoke soup not only looks delicious, there are also some tips to prevent the less-than-desirable aspects of eating this delicious root. (Chocolate and Zucchini)

You read anything awesome this week?

Tags: B.S. of the week, brain, calories, cancer, diabetes, high-protein, nuts, recipe, Slow Food, statins

For The Love of Food

Welcome to Friday’s For The Love of Food, Summer Tomato’s weekly link roundup.

The highlight this week (for me anyway) was the first Summer Tomato appearance over at my favorite blog, Lifehacker. Apparently they thought my tip on getting soft fruits and veggies home from the market without smashing them was pretty awesome. This week’s link love features a ton of cool food-related science tidbits, including a podcast from NPR’s Science Friday and a video “Baloney Detection Kit.”

I read many more wonderful articles than I post here each week. If you’d like to see more or just don’t want to wait until Friday, be sure to follow me on Twitter (@summertomato) or the Summer Tomato Facebook fan page. For complete reading lists join me on the social bookmarking sites StumbleUpon and Delicious. I’m very active on all these sites and would love to connect with you there.

I also invite you to submit your own best food and health articles for next week’s For The Love of Food, just drop me an email using the contact form. I am also accepting guest posts at Summer Tomato for any awesome healthstyle tips you’d like to share.

This post is an open thread. Share your thoughts, writing (links welcome!) and delicious meals of the week in the comments below.

For The Love of Food

• Getting Real About the High Price of Cheap Food <<Read this. If you’re still not convinced our industrial food system needs a change, I hope this article changes your mind. (Time Magazine)
• Of car crashes and Snickers bars <<Really cool article putting calorie counts into perspective. (Grist)
• More evidence that saturated fat has been falsely accused? <<Seems more and more like the real culprits in cancer and heart disease are processed foods and insulin, not so much saturated fat. (Nutrition Data)
• Tests Begin on Drugs That May Slow Aging <<This is a fantastic article, but I’m calling it B.S. of the week to prevent myself from getting into politics and healthcare (grrr). Though the story is well-researched and the science of anti-aging drugs is fascinating, I’m not holding my breath for the fountain of youth pill. (New York Times)
• Exercise won’t make you thin, or so concludes misguided TIME magazine article <<My friends over at Obesity Panacea did a great analysis of the Time Magazine article from last week about exercise and weight loss.
• Phys Ed: Does Exercise Reduce Your Cancer Risk? <<Whether exercise makes you thin or not, it is still likely to have other benefits such as lowering your risk of cancer. (New York Times)
• When good tongues go bad <<The best ever reason to quit smoking. It kills your taste buds!! (Los Angeles Times)
• Thai cucumber salad (Yum Tang Gwa) <<Speaking of taste, check out this amazing Thai shrimp and cucumber salad recipe. Yum! (Chez Pim)
• The Cheese Chronicles <<Science Friday on NPR did an awesome piece last week on the science of cheese making–the real stuff, not that orange goop. The listen button is in the upper left corner when you go to the page. (National Public Radio)
• Are you getting sold snake oil? <<One of the most difficult things about science is sorting out the good from the bad. This Baloney Detection Kit gives you the intellectual tools you need to hone in on the facts. Thanks to Yoni (@yonifreedhoff) and Esther (@estherar) for the tip!

Tags: B.S. of the week, calories, cancer, cheese, Exercise, home cooks, industrial food, saturated fat, Science, smoking

Collards, Carrots and Lentils

There is much debate among nutrition scientists over whether meat eating is healthy. On one side there are the hardcore low-fat vegetarian advocates like Dr. Colin Campbell, author of The China Study, who believe all animal fat and protein is dangerous. On the other side are those who point to refined carbohydrates as the biggest threat to public health, citing studies that suggest meat alone is harmless or even helpful (for more information read Good Calories, Bad Calories, by Gary Taubes).

I tend to agree somewhat with both.

For heart disease, the evidence certainly seems to indicate that refined carbohydrates are the worst culprit. Though health advocates once pointed to saturated fat as the cause, this suggestion has not stood up to rigorous scientific testing. In fact, dietary fat (particularly from plants) seems to be protective against heart disease.

Refined carbohydrates are also the cause of type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome (a combination of insulin resistance, high blood pressure, heart disease and obesity), which is arguably the biggest health threat of our time.

For these reasons and many others, I avoid refined sugar and flour as much as possible in my daily life.

Heart disease and metabolic syndrome are not the only diseases that concern me, however. Cancer is another modern ailment that has been linked to diets high in both carbohydrates and meat. Though the studies are not perfectly consistent in showing harm or no harm regarding meat consumption and cancer, rarely does anything suggest meat eating is actually beneficial.

For these reasons I am cautious about eating meat and make a moderate effort to limit my intake, in both portion size and frequency.

Fish is another story entirely. Although fish is technically a meat, its properties are very different from land animals. For one thing, fish eating has consistently proven beneficial in scientific studies of heart disease and metabolic syndrome. It also seems to play a role in protecting the brain against degenerative diseases.

I am an avid fish eater and try to include seafood in my diet several times per week.

Until now, however, I have not read much about the role of fish in cancer. A new meta-analysis published in the British Journal of Cancer (part of the Nature publishing group) suggests that vegetarians have significantly less cancer than meat eaters, and that cancer rates are even lower in fish eaters.

The researchers analyzed data from two British studies of vegetarians from the early 80s and early 90s that includes over 60,000 individuals, mostly women but some men. The participants were followed until the end of 2006.

Incidence of malignant tumors was compiled for all the subjects and the relative risks were calculated. Vegetarians and fish eaters had significantly lower risk for stomach cancer, ovarian cancer, lymphatic and bone marrow cancers, and bladder cancer. Vegetarians had a higher risk of cervical cancer than meat eaters. Fish eaters had a lower risk of prostate cancer than meat eaters.

Overall vegetarians had 8% fewer cancers than meat eaters and fish eaters had 20% fewer.

Interestingly, no difference was found in breast cancer or colorectal cancer incidence, which have both been tied to meat consumption. The authors speculate that this study could be lacking in statistical power to observe a difference. However, the current data is inconsistent and no conclusions can be drawn.

While the results of this study are very compelling, there are several caveats that must be addressed. First, the number of cancers at individual sites were relatively few, meaning that findings may be exaggerated or due to chance. For me the most convincing numbers are of the overall cancer rates (the largest numbers and strongest statistics), but this leaves many questions about the causes of the different cancers.

Another issue is that vegetarians and fish eaters in the study tended to be younger and get more exercise than the meat eaters, so there may be important confounding factors that could influence the results. Likewise, studies that rely on self-reported dietary patterns have well-documented flaws (basically everyone believes they eat healthier than they really do).

It is not clear what is causing the differences in cancer incidence among vegetarians, fish eaters and meat eaters. Vegetables and fruits have been suspected of actively protecting against cancers, but so far the mechanisms are only speculative and not concrete. Recent studies have suggested vitamin D can be protective against certain cancers. Since some fish can be very high in vitamin D, this may explain some of the benefit seen in fish eaters.

The higher incidence of cervical cancer among vegetarians is also compelling and warrants further research.

Despite the flaws in this study it is mostly consistent with other research suggesting that an optimal diet is primarily fresh, unprocessed plants, some fish and little meat.

Moderation is usually the best policy.

What is your take on this study? How do you feel about health vs the ethics of fish consumption?

Tags: cancer, fish, vegetarian

For The Love of Food

Welcome to Friday’s For The Love of Food, Summer Tomato’s weekly link roundup.

Thanks to everyone who voted for me for A Really Goode Job! I ended up with over 100 votes in just a couple days, which is very flattering. The top 50 were announced this morning and I was not among them. I guess my other two jobs will have to suffice for now.

This week around the internet I found several reminders of why heart disease is not the only reason to worry about excess body weight and how industrial food is a threat to your health. I also discovered a fantastic article about how psychological barriers prevent us from being healthy.

B.S. of the week, once again, goes to Diets in Review for promoting a new “tomato pill.” Because eating real tomatoes for health is SO 1909!

If you would like to see more of my favorite articles each week or just don’t want to wait until Friday, be sure to follow me on Twitter (@summertomato) or the Summer Tomato Facebook fan page. I am also experimenting with the social bookmarking sites StumbleUpon and Delicious, and would love to share articles with you there.

Submissions of your own best food and health articles are also welcome, just drop me an email using the contact form. I am currently accepting guest posts at Summer Tomato for any healthy eating and exercise tips.

For The Love of Food

• Obesity Greatly Raises Endometrial Cancer Risk <<In case you thought heart disease was the only problem with excess weight, don’t forget about cancer and all the other fun diseases out there. (HealthDay)
• Pancreatic cancer and obesity linked <<Got that? Most cancers are related to diet and body weight. (Los Angeles Times)
• Excess Pounds, but Not Too Many, May Lead to Longer Life <<In light of the last two articles, I’m a bit frustrated with the New York Times for spreading misleading information about the dangers of excess body weight. Correlations do not prove cause and effect, and this is a dangerous message.
• Tomato Pill for Heart Health <<This horrific article by Diets in Review beat out the New York Times for B.S. of the week. As you probably know, this defies all the logic of the Summer Tomato philosophy, especially the role of supplements in health.
• Fast Food: Would You Like 1,000 Calories with That? <<Interesting discussion of the value of food labels at restaurants. Would more information stop you from over-indulging? (Time)
• What makes the Mediterranean diet work? <<According to this study, alcohol is the only significant contributor to increased health from the Mediterranean diet. Not sure I believe this one quite yet, but it is an interesting study. (Los Angeles Times)
• A Food Safety Update: 41,000 Lbs of Ground Beef Recalled <<Have you had your E. coli today? Another reason to go see Food, Inc. (La Vida Locavore)
• How could E. coli O157:H7 get into cookie dough? <<Fascinating look at the flaws in industrial food. These outbreaks are particularly baffling to me because packaged foods don’t even taste good compared to real foods. Are we really that lazy? (Food Politics via @marionnestle)
• The Psychology of Passive Barriers: Why Your Friends Don’t Save Money, Eat Healthier, or Clean Their Garages <<This is an older article, but it completely fascinated me. What psychological barriers are preventing you from having good habits? (Get Rich Slowly)
• Summer Squash Gratin Recipe <<The perfect solution for my abundance of summer squash from the farmers market. (101 Cookbooks)

What great articles did you read or write this week? Leave your links in the comments.

Tags: alcohol, B.S. of the week, barriers, Body Weight, cancer, E. coli, industrial food, Ramit Sethi, restaurants, summer squash