Tag: vegetarian

  • How Much We Eat In A Lifetime

    I was curious to know how much does one eat during a Lifetime?

    There could  be variations between Vegetarians and Non Vegetarians.

    And here could be differences between Races and cultural practices.

    Some of the answers I found are.

    Food Nutritional Value.
    Nutrition Value of Food.

    The answer is 25 tonnes of food in a lifetime of 80 years:We eat about 30,600 lbs. of food in a lifetime-.wikianswers

     

    The average person eats 35 tons of food in a lifetime

    That’s equal to 1500 pounds or 680.4 kilograms a year! In addition to the weight of the food, Americans jointly eat 900 billion calories every day!

    900 billion calories, if you can imagine, is equivalent to 76,726,342.711 slices of cheese pizza! Since it takes 3500 calories to create one pound, consuming 900 billion calories would cause someone to gain 257142857.14 pounds or 116,638,038 kilograms!
    http://www.omg-facts.com/Animals/The-Average-Person-Eats-35-Tons-Of-Food/46325#7J7200TpgfdXeQiJ.99

    Some one may calculate for vegetarians and Non Vegetarians in the Indian Context and let me know.

  • High Protein Food Triggers Cancer

    Cover of "The China Study: The Most Compr...
    Cover via Amazon

    I chanced to read the The China Study by Dr,Campbell co-authored with his son.

    Dr.Campbell is reputed to be one of the authorities on Dieting.

    I came across the following critique by his detractors, who also advance their views.

    My observation is that these detractors of Dr.Campbell have nothing to say about the evidence submitted by Dr.Campbell on the behavior of rats which were given low as well high protein Diet.

    Te result was the rats that were fed low protein were more active, exercised more and were healthier than the ones that were given high protein Diet.

    Again Dr.Campbell submits  a study where he proves that meat-eating triggers the chemicals that set Cancer going.

    There is no comment on this by the critics of Dr.Campbell.

    My observation based on people, though I did not do a study, is that people who eat vegetarian  food are less prone to Cancer and other debilitating diseases .

    And recent Studies have proved that Cholesterol  is in no way connected to Heart attack!(read my blog on this in Health)

    I suggest  reading Dr.Campbell’s Book The China Study, which is very informative.

    “Read Dr. Campbell’s response to this review and my response to Dr. Campbell. See also Denise Minger’s excellent critique of The China Study and my my critical review of Dr. Campbell’s animal research.

    “Eating foods that contain any cholesterol above 0 mg is unhealthy.” — T. Colin Campbell, The China Study

    It was growing up on one of the many dairy farms of the rural American landscape, long before the China Study had taken place, and yet longer before the book was written, that the young T. Colin Campbell formed the views that would shape the early portion of his career.

    Cow’s milk, “Nature’s most perfect food,” was central to the existence of his family and community. Most of the food that Campbell’s family ate they produced themselves. Campbell milked cows from the age of five through his college years. He studied animal nutrition at Cornell, and did his PhD research on ways to make cows and sheep grow faster so the American food supply could be pumped up with more and more protein.1

    Fast forward to the present. Campbell is now on the advisory board of the Physician’s Committee for Responsible Medicine,2 which describes itself as “a nonprofit organization that promotes preventive medicine, conducts clinical research, and encourages higher standards for ethics and effectiveness in research,”3 but whose opposition to the use of animal foods reflects its ties to People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and other animal rights groups.4

    Campbell’s new book The China Study: Startling Implications for Diet, Weight Loss, and Long-Term Health hit shelves in January 2005 and details the turning points in his post-graduate research that led him to become a famed opponent of animal foods and an advocate of the vegan diet.

    It takes the reader on a tour through Campbell’s early animal experiments, which he interpreted to implicate animal protein as a primary cause of cancer, through the massive epidemiological study after which the book was named.

    Only 39 of 350 pages are actually devoted to the China Study. The bold statement on page 132 that “eating foods that contain any cholesterol above 0 mg is unhealthy,”5 is drawn from a broad — and highly selective — pool of research. Yet chapter after chapter reveals a heavy bias and selectivity with which Campbell conducted, interpreted, and presents his research.

    Dietary protein and Cancer.

    The first strike against the pro-protein mantra Campbell had inherited from his nutritional forbears came while he was studying the relationship between aflatoxin (AF), a mold-related contaminant often found in peanut butter, and cancer in the Philippines.

    Campbell was informed by a colleague that, although the areas with the highest consumption of peanut butter had the highest incidence of liver cancer, it was the children of the “best-fed families,” who consumed the most protein, who were getting liver cancer.

    Whether the best-fed Pilipino families ate the many staples of modern affluent diets like refined breads and sugars isn’t mentioned.6

    This observation was corroborated by a study published in “an obscure medical journal,” that fed AF to two groups of rats, one consuming a 5% protein diet, one consuming a 20% protein diet, in which every rat in the latter group got liver cancer or its precursor lesions, and none in the former group got liver cancer or precursor lesions.7 Campbell went on to investigate the possible relationship between nutritional factors, including protein, and cancer, a study that proceeded for 19 years with NIH funding.8His conclusion was revolutionary and provocative: while chemical carcinogens may initiate the cancer process, dietary promoters and anti-promoters control the promotion of cancer foci,9 and it is nutritional factors, not chemical carcinogens, that are the ultimate deciding factors in the development of cancer.10″

    http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com/China-Study.html

  • Macrobiotic Diet for Health.

    Very true.Note that non vegetarian food is excluded.
    Indian Philosophical treatises stress the fact that natural food is to be consumed.
    Human Nature is broadly divided into three categories.
    Contented,self reliant and calm
    Highly energetic,active and passionate .
    Inactive,dull and depressed.
    These three characteristics are present in every human being and the combination of these factors vary depending on predisposition, and habit.Also these characteristics vary from one moment to another.
    The first mentioned is ideal when you become healthy, strong both physically and mentally.You shall be in control of your mind and emotions and you shall be self reliant and self contented.
    This can be achieved by diet;for your thinking is determined by what you eat and you become what you think.
    For instance if you take pungent, spicy food you become hyperactive , easily swayed by emotions.On the other hand if you take mainly dairy food and vegetables you not only become healthy but you can manage your emotions.
    Therefore Diet is given pride of place in Indian Philosophy.
    There are foods to avoid.
    -Spicy,pungent,stale,food that is too hot or that is too cold;
    that is not cleaned,that is over cooked/under cooked;non vegetarian food including egg.
    Suggested food.
    Grains, Vegetables,roots,Milk products
    Also it is necessary that the food be prepared by people who love you.In fact Sanskrit texts say ‘That food is best that is prepared by self; next that is prepared by one’s Mother,Sister,Daughter and Wife in that order.Any thing other than this is equivalent to poison’
    Mental vibrations do play an important part in preparing the food.
    .

    http://www.medindia.net/patients/patientinfo/macrobiotic-diet.htm

    Story:
    Macrobiotics is an Oriental theory that lays down guidelines for promoting wellbeing and longevity through systematic diet consisting mainly of whole grains and beans. Macrobiotics is made up of two Greek words, Macro meaning the bigger picture and Bios meaning life. It is basically more a way of life than a specific diet that was followed in Japan.

    The macrobiotic diet probably originated with the teachings of a nineteenth century Japanese natural healer, Sagen Ishizuka. It was introduced to the West by George Ohsawa, a teacher in Japan who studied the eating habits of ancestors, followed the dietary principles of Sagen Ishizuka and claimed to have been cured of a life threatening disease—tuberculosis.

    Macrobiotic Diet

    Chinese philosophy describes the Yin and the Yang as the two opposite, but complementary cosmic forces that operate in all areas of life. Macrobiotics extends the principles of the Yin and the Yang to the realm of food and cooking. The main tenets of the macrobiotic diet are Yin and Yang, meaning Expansive and Contractive forces that are inherent in any food we intake. Ohsawa said if we balance the contractive and expansive forces we will stay away from diseases and live a healthy, happy life. Ohsawa’s original macrobiotic diet was considered too restrictive by many dieticians and the Kushi diet popularized in North America by Michio Kushi in 1978 is seen as a popular alternative to Ohsawa’s macrobiotic diet.

    The nutritional aspect of the macrobiotic diet holds to the principle that the body can exist in harmony with Nature and recover its natural good health. It is important to note here that the diet should be based on foods native to ones’ own climate, as this helps in achieving that “natural balance”. The diet should constitute of the following components:-

  • Eat Fruits and Vegetables for Better Vision

    ScienceDaily (Dec. 19, 2009) — Carotenoids, found in green leafy vegetables and colored fruits, have been found to increase visual performance and may prevent age-related eye diseases, according to a study in the Journal of Food Science, published by the Institute of Food Technologists.

    ,
    Authors from the University of Georgia compiled the results of multiple studies on the effects of the carotenoids lutein and zeaxanthin on visual performance. These carotenoids play an important role in human vision, including a positive impact on the retina.
    After reviewing the various studies, the authors concluded that macular pigments, such as lutein and zeaxanthin do have an effect on visual performance. Lutein and zeaxanthin can reduce disability and discomfort from glare, enhance contrast, and reduce photostress recovery times. They can also reduce glare from light absorption and increase the visual range.
    Lead author Dr. Billy R. Hammond Jr. noted that the research of the effects of lutein and zeazanthin are important because “it is clear that they could potentially improve vision through biological means. For example, a study conducted in 2008 suggests that the pigments protect the retina and lens and perhaps even help prevent age-related eye diseases such as macular degeneration and cataract.”

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091218125804.htm

  • How Safe Is Your Chicken Dinner?-NYT.

    A new study by Consumer Reports has found that two out of three whole broiler chickens are contaminated with illness-inducing bacteria, while certain types of organic chicken posed the lowest risk.

    The researchers studied 382 whole broilers bought from more than 100 stores in 22 states and found salmonella or campylobacter bacteria on two-thirds of the birds tested. The research suggests that current safety and hygiene practices among poultry producers and handlers are inadequate and that consumers need to be vigilant at both the grocery store and at home to cook chicken well and prevent cross-contamination of countertops, hands and other foods.

    Both types of bacteria are among the leading causes of food-borne illness in the United States, infecting at least 3.4 million Americans annually and sending 25,500 to hospitals. Every year about 550 people die from food-borne salmonella infections, and about 100 die after contracting campylobacter from food, according to estimates from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Although a few products, including Perdue-brand broilers and organic air-chilled chickens, were the safest, the magazine called chicken suppliers “a very dirty industry that needs better practices and tighter government oversight.”

    Over all, campylobacter was detected in 62 percent of the chickens, while salmonella was in 14 percent. Nine percent of the birds contained both pathogens. Based on the study, a consumer has a one in three chance of buying a broiler free of both pathogens.

    The cleanest birds were organic “air-chilled” broilers — 60 percent of these broilers were free of both pathogens. Typically, chickens are dunked in cold chlorinated water. In the air-chilling process, the carcasses are refrigerated and may be misted, rather than dunked, according to the magazine.

    Store-brand organic chickens were entirely free of salmonella, but only 43 percent were also free of campylobacter.

    Among the branded chickens, Perdue was the cleanest, with 56 percent of those testing free of both pathogens.

    While both salmonella and campylobacter are known to cause intestinal distress, campylobacter can lead to meningitis, arthritis and Guillain-Barré syndrome, a severe neurological condition.

    The magazine noted that its findings are a “snapshot” and no guarantee that a particular type or brand of chicken would be bacteria-free or contaminated. The magazine had the following recommendations for cleaning and preparing chicken:

    At the store, place chicken in a plastic bag like those found in the produce department to keep juices from leaking on other items or your hands.
    Choose chicken that is well wrapped and at the bottom of the case, where the temperature is coolest
    Buy chicken last before heading to the checkout line.
    Store chicken at 40 degrees or below, or freeze it if you don’t plan to cook it for two days.
    Thaw frozen chicken in a refrigerator, inside its packaging and on a plate, or on a plate in a microwave oven. Never thaw it on a counter.
    Cook chicken to at least 165 degrees, and use a meat thermometer to check
    it.


    —–
    Detailed Report.(Consumer Reports)
    One would think that after years of alarms about food safety—outbreaks of illness followed by renewed efforts at cleanup—a staple like chicken would be a lot safer to eat. But in our latest analysis of fresh, whole broilers bought at stores nationwide, two-thirds harbored salmonella and/or campylobacter, the leading bacterial causes of foodborne disease. That’s a modest improvement since January 2007, when we found that eight of 10 broilers harbored those pathogens. But the numbers are still far too high, especially for campylobacter. Though the government has been talking about regulating it for years, it has yet to do so. (See Lax rules, risky food.)

    The message is clear: Consumers still can’t let down their guard. They must cook chicken to at least 165º F and prevent raw chicken or its juices from touching any other food.

    Each year, salmonella and campylobacter from chicken and other food sources infect 3.4 million Americans, send 25,500 to hospitals, and kill about 500, according to estimates by the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But the problem might be even more widespread: Many people who get sick don’t seek medical care, and many of those who do aren’t screened for foodborne infections, says Donna Rosenbaum, executive director of Safe Tables Our Priority, a national nonprofit food-safety organization. What’s more, the CDC reports that in about 20 percent of salmonella cases and 55 percent of campylobacter cases, the bugs have proved resistant to at least one antibiotic. For that reason, victims who are sick enough to need antibiotics might have to try two or more before finding one that helps.

    Consumer Reports has been measuring contamination in store-bought chickens since 1998. For our latest analysis, we had an outside lab test 382 chickens bought last spring from more than 100 supermarkets, gourmet- and natural-food stores, and mass merchandisers in 22 states. We tested three top brands—Foster Farms, Perdue, and Tyson—as well as 30 nonorganic store brands, nine organic store brands, and nine organic name brands. Five of the organic brands were labeled “air-chilled” (a slaughterhouse process in which carcasses are refrigerated and may be misted, rather than dunked in cold chlorinated water).

    Among our findings:

    Campylobacter was in 62 percent of the chickens, salmonella was in 14 percent, and both bacteria were in 9 percent. Only 34 percent of the birds were clear of both pathogens. That’s double the percentage of clean birds we found in our 2007 report but far less than the 51 percent in our 2003 report.
    Among the cleanest overall were air-chilled broilers. About 40 percent harbored one or both pathogens. Eight Bell & Evans organic broilers, which are air chilled, were free of both, but our sample was too small to determine that all Bell & Evans broilers would be.
    Store-brand organic chickens had no salmonella at all, showing that it’s possible for chicken to arrive in stores without that bacterium riding along. But as our tests showed, banishing one bug doesn’t mean banishing both: 57 percent of those birds harbored campylobacter.
    The cleanest name-brand chickens were Perdue’s: 56 percent were free of both pathogens. This is the first time since we began testing chicken that one major brand has fared significantly better than others across the board.
    Most contaminated were Tyson and Foster Farms chickens. More than 80 percent tested positive for one or both pathogens.
    Among all brands and types of broilers tested, 68 percent of the salmonella and 60 percent of the campylobacter organisms we analyzed showed resistance to one or more antibiotics.
    http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine-archive/2010/january/food/chicken-safety/overview/chicken-safety-ov.htm