Filed under Stop Press …

Nov 02 2010
1 Comment
From the Source, Over the Counter, Stop Press

Update on High Fructose Corn Syrup

High-fructose corn syrup, a disaccharide (sugar) derivative from the mountains of corn produced in the mid-west has been used extensively in thousands of food products as a cheap and effective sweetener.

It has been the topic of much debate and ridicule, taking the blame for everything from cavities to obesity.  I touched on HFCS a few months ago, and came to the conclusion that it’s not appreciably different from other sugars typically used:

The assertion that high fructose corn syrup is single-handedly responsible for the negative health impacts we are seeing appears to be ill-founded.  It is very clear, however, that with increasing intake of calories in the form of added sweeteners like HFCS, particularly in beverages, there is an increase in weight gain.

Now, I’m all for eating my words, and a recent study, covered by Marion Nestle (no relation to the food conglomerate) over at Food Politics notes that what’s on the package might not be what is inside the package.

A recent analysis tested the sugar content of a number of soft drinks to assess the levels of various individual components.  Bottles of twenty-three soft drinks (like Coke, Pepsi, Sprite etc.) and four syrups were included in the analysis.

Quick summary of results from the publication Fact Sheet:

- There is 18 percent more fructose in the HFCS used by soda companies than estimated.

- Several major brands appear to be produced with HFCS that is 65 percent fructose.

- The mean fructose content in the HFCS used was 59 percent.

What this means is that these beverages contain way more fructose than: 1) they advertise; and 2) they are allowed.  More fructose = more “lipogenic” or “fat producing” sugars being consumed that one may realize.

However, the study had a number of major flaws, outlined in Marion Nestle’s post, and deserves caution. It will be interesting to see how this gets whipped up and whether other labs will reproduce the results.

Regardless of whether a Coke has 55% fructose (what is typically in HFCS) or 59% fructose, it’s not a health beverage!

Tagged , , ,
Aug 05 2010
Leave a comment
Stop Press

Potatoes fuel your body…

…potatoes fuel light-bulbs!

From al-Jazeera:

Tagged , ,
Aug 03 2010
Leave a comment
Stop Press

Health claims sell

Health claims for plant sterols and stanols just got the go-ahead in Canada, as reported earlier on the Fodder File.

These claims, that plant sterols and stanols can help to reduce cholesterol, are already appearing on European processed foods, like Danone’s yogurt “Danacol”.

Dr. Yoni Freedhoff over at Weighty Matters just covered the results of a recent study (funded by Danone), exploring the affect of health claims on purchasing behaviour:

“Ultimately this article served to prove, at least in the case of yogurt, that health claims sell and more importantly, that the little bits of fine print that describe how there’s scientific uncertainty and even risks associated with the products, don’t discourage their consumption.”

I’m an advocate for functional foods (foods with added health benefits).  They have the potential to play an important role in the prevention of many contributors to chronic disease, including hypercholesterolemia.  However, they are part of a larger strategy of moving consumers towards making healthier food choices.

Of course, because of the massive economic potential in functional food products, there will always be concern about separating fact from fiction, particularly on food labels.  Luckily, Health Canada has good intentions as far as keeping the food and supplement industry honest.  Having the person-power to monitor and enforce it, though, is a whole ‘nother story!

Continue reading →

Tagged , , , ,
Jul 27 2010
4 Comments
From the Source, Stop Press

Sifting the salt

Yes!  British Medical Journal blogger and physician, Richard Smith, (indirectly) endorses the Fodder File!

“Like most medical students I spent hundreds of hours learning about drugs but almost nothing about nutrition—and what I did learn was mostly about scurvy and other vitamin deficiencies. Sadly, I don’t think that it’s any better now.”

Of course, it’s not a true endorsement, but rather an endorsement for the Cause: our doctors need more training in nutrition.

Why?

Well, Smith’s recent post speaks to a topic covered a number of times on the Fodder File: sodium reduction as a coordinated strategy with drug options for cardiovascular health.

Smith notes:

“…the same or greater benefit [as drug treatment] could be achieved by a “gold plated” salt reduction scheme, which would cost about $10-20m, 1-2% of the spend on treatment. Plus the benefit would be additional to that from drug treatment.”

This post comes just a couple of months after a major publication in the New England Journal of Medicine, the most respected medical journal in the world, which analyses the no-brainer of government regulated salt reduction strategies: healthcare savings of $10-24 billion annually and approximately a quarter of a million deaths prevented each year by a modest reduction in dietary salt intake.

The recommendation for maximum sodium intake is 2300 mg/day (2.3 grams or 1 teaspoon of salt), but really, most people should be consuming about 1500mg.  (Just a chemistry note: table salt is sodium-chloride (NaCl), which roughly doubles the molecular weight.  2.5 grams salt = 1 gram sodium).

The truth is, only 5.5% of North Americans are consuming the recommended amount of 1500mg/day.  An additional 13% fall below the maximum, with 82% of the population shattering that salty ceiling (~10.5 g salt/day!), and thus putting themselves at increased risk of stroke, hypertension and other cardiovascular complications.

The issue is complicated by the fact that the majority of salt (and therefore sodium) is consumed in the form of processed foods; not salt added at the table.  But this also provides a target for regulatory bodies.

Work with food companies to reduce sodium (and potentially other health-concerning ingredients like trans- and saturated fats), and the population will reap the benefits.

The problem is that salty food tastes good.  It seems as though we’re programmed to migrate to the salt lick, not unlike cattle or sheep.  So it’s a tough road to break the habit.  But a number of countries have successfully managed to reduce intake on a population level, including the UK (by 10% in just 4 years!), Japan, Finland and Portugal.  So it can be done.

Health Canada has put together this free (but not terribly visually attractive) fact sheet with some practical considerations for you when making food choices.

This will be great for your health, but realistically, if we are going to see major changes that translate into dollars and cents saved (which we need to be counting pennies with our current health-care spending concerns), the food industry needs to be engaged in the process of reducing sodium in processed foods.  Some companies (e.g. Campbell’s, Kraft) have been responsive, but we need across the board participation for real effects to be seen.

See here and here for other Fodder File posts on sodium.

References after the jump.

Continue reading →

Tagged , , ,
Jul 21 2010
1 Comment
Stop Press

A Few Good Viruses

What is one of the most unexplored places on earth?

Despite what you’re proctologist might tell you, it’s the human intestinal tract.

We don't typically think of viruses in our intestinal tract. Get used to the idea!

Our understanding of our intestines is still in its very infancy.  We’re just starting to get a grip on the concept of probiotics, or beneficial bacteria, and their role in keeping us healthy.  But recent research is showing that those bacteria have company: friendly viruses.

NatureNews reports:

“In the latest exploration into the universe of organisms inhabiting our bodies, microbiologists have discovered new viral genes in faeces. They find that the composition of virus populations inhabiting the tail ends of healthy intestines (as represented in our stools) is unique to each individual and stable over time. Even identical twins — who share many of the same intestinal bacteria — differed in their gut’s viral make-up.”

This comes after recent research, featured on the Fodder File, explained how human intestinal bacteria can integrate functional genes from dietary bacteria.

There’s a tenuous and theoretical link with the present research:

“The team found genes encoding proteins never detected before in bacterial viruses. When in bacteria, these proteins are part of pathways responsible for carbohydrate metabolism and amino-acid synthesis. Viruses carrying such genes might alter them and insert them into gut bacteria, potentially changing a person’s metabolism.”

There must be some reason for the virus’ presence here, but I’m not sure how much of a difference it would make to our “carbohydrate metabolism”, since they abide in the “tail end” of the intestinal tract. That part of the intestines doesn’t really have much nutrient absorption (besides the odd short-chain fat), but is rather better equipped for desiccation of faeces (water absorption).

However, this new research may open up a whole new realm of exploratory opportunities. But  I might just leave that exploration to the professionals.

Tagged , ,
← Older posts
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 33 other followers