Looking for help finding a good book on healthy eating

[Rdskn4Lyf21]

Never heard of it. I thought for sure it would contain Sucralose. Sounds interesting - thanks.

It's basically a protein shake in ice cream form. It's a slightly different texture, but it's pretty good. My problem is I have GERD or something. Certain flavors give me bad indigestion just like if I had a banana that's not ripe

Baked Kale chips are the bomb

Looks good KB...I'll be giving those a shot.

[ixcuincle]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/food/the-state-of-the-sit-down-breakfast-in-washington/2012/04/09/gIQAFtCO8S_story.html?wprss=rss_food

So what has happened to the so-called “most important meal of the day”?

Perhaps, as Marion Nestle suggests, we’re finally listening to our bodies and not American marketing gurus. The nutritionist, author and New York University professor thinks the breakfast-is-important message was drummed up by cereal companies hoping to manufacture a need for their products. The truth is, breakfast is more important to children than adults simply because the former do not have the same capacity to store glycogen, which Nestle describes as “what keeps you going when you’re not eating.”

Nestle knows from experience that breakfast is eminently skippable. She rarely eats it — and makes no apologies about it. “I truly believe that people should eat when you’re hungry, and if you’re not hungry in the morning, the world is not going to end,” she says.

A general lack of interest in food in the morning may explain why relatively few restaurants cater to those early weekday risers. (For the better breakfast spots in and around Washington, see our list and gallery.) But there are other factors as well.

Interesting article about decline of breakfast in the DC area.

[Koolblue13]

That makes sense. I personally feel better if I eat something light.

Eating pancakes or bacon or syrup and ketchup is what makes no sense to me, from a nutritional point.

[dfitzo53]

Looks good KB...I'll be giving those a shot.

They really are good, and super easy.

Toss kale leaves with a little oil and the seasoning of your choice (salt and cayenne pepper is great) and then pop them in a hot oven (450 or so) until they're cripsy and delicious. Let them cool just slightly and they'll crisp up even more.

[Destino]

Protein shake is my favorite breakfast on work days. It wakes you up and gets you going. Bacon and all that heavy **** slows me down and sits like a brick in my stomach. That's the stuff I have for "breakfast" at around 2pm while wearing sunglasses and wincing at loud noises.

[pointyfootball]

There have been many studies that show kids who eat breakfast perform much better in school, so I would imagine it would be similar for adults.

[Brotherz]

Count me as another who doesn't believe timing of eating matters. Starvation will slow metabolism, but delaying a meal by a few hours isn't starvation.

What's most important is total calorie intake over a 24 hour period. Whether you get that in two or three decent sized meals, or six or seven smaller ones, doesn't really matter.

The strongest argument for having a hearty breakfast is that it makes you far less likely to gorge on empty calories such as doughnuts or snacks when you get to the office.

Isn't that a benefit though? I am not saying that eating breakfast every morning is a panacea in and of itself. I am saying that after an 8 hour fast (minimally - it could be far more if you don't eat carbs after 6pm etc) your blood sugar is understandably low. Maintaining level glucose levels throughout the day is good for you. I understand there are "twinky" diets out there that show you can just count calories and still lose weight eating just twinkies - that's not what the OP is looking for. My understanding was he was looking for some positive life changes in the area of nutrition. Eating breakfast stabilizes blood sugar levels throughout the day, activates the thermic effect of food earlier in the day, supplies amino acids to muscles which have hopefully been working out regularly and need them, etc. There are a million variables at play of course and I am making certain assumptions about the providence of eating breakfast, spacing out meals etc.

If we were talking about someone who was training with weights regularly would you agree that eating breakfast still doesn't have any influence on protein synthesis? Do you believe the body absorbs and uses 75 grams of protein for example in one sitting the same way it uses 25 grams at 3 meals separated by 3 hours each? What about insulin resistance and pancreatic concerns? Are you saying that 300 grams of carbs is physiologically the same whether you eat them in a whole pizza at one sitting or spread out as 60 grams per meal over 5 meals? You can't possibly believe that eating one 2000 calorie meal a day is identical from a health perspective as eating 2000 calories over 12 hours do you?

---------- Post added April-11th-2012 at 01:48 PM ----------

QUOTE]Eating every three to four hours is a matter of personal preference, there are no tangible benefits to it beyond that.[

None? Is your position that there is NO benefit?

Basically, if you eat one or two BIG meals in the middle of the day you'll be no worse off than someone who eats 5-7 smaller meals every few hours provided that the total intake is the same.

Is this regardless of physical activity? Bodybuilder, athlete? How about for diabetes risk? Are you saying blood sugar levels being level throughout the day have no physiologic benefit over a lifetime of eating? If so, please attach the literature on that position if you have it. (seriously, I am not trying to be a smartass I would really be interested in that). If you don't believe that stable glucose levels in the body are irrelevant to health then is it your position that blood sugar levels will remain just as level with one or two mid-day meals as they would on a diet spaced throughout the day? Insulin response would be the same, ultimately insulin resistance would be the same? I don't understand how you can say that. I have to admit I do not have a specific medical journal on this issue but I have always kind of taken it as common sense based on my understanding of metabolism and insulin etc that 450 grams of carbs in one sitting has a profoundly different biochemistry within the body that the same carbs spaced out over several meals. I would be absolutely SHOCKED to learn otherwise.

[PeterMP]

Isn't that a benefit though? I am not saying that eating breakfast every morning is a panacea in and of itself. I am saying that after an 8 hour fast (minimally - it could be far more if you don't eat carbs after 6pm etc) your blood sugar is understandably low. Maintaining level glucose levels throughout the day is good for you. I understand there are "twinky" diets out there that show you can just count calories and still lose weight eating just twinkies - that's not what the OP is looking for. My understanding was he was looking for some positive life changes in the area of nutrition. Eating breakfast stabilizes blood sugar levels throughout the day, activates the thermic effect of food earlier in the day, supplies amino acids to muscles which have hopefully been working out regularly and need them, etc. There are a million variables at play of course and I am making certain assumptions about the providence of eating breakfast, spacing out meals etc.

1. Your assuming people are sleeping 8 hours at a time. There are people out there that have abnormal circadian rythyms that don't actually sleep well/comfortably 8 hours straight.

2. As the piece above indicates that in an adult with reasonable glycogen storage capabilities and gluconeogenic function that blood sugar really does not need to be low after 8 hours of fasting with little physical activity. Now, functionally, blood sugar levels MIGHT be low if you have trained your body that it doesn't have to mobilize the energy resources that it has stored because you are going to give it a kick start every morning with a nice supply of sugars.

3. It is only a benefit if you are going to go to the office being hungry and so likely to snag the dounut.

Is this regardless of physical activity? Bodybuilder, athlete? How about for diabetes risk? Are you saying blood sugar levels being level throughout the day have no physiologic benefit over a lifetime of eating? If so, please attach the literature on that position if you have it. (seriously, I am not trying to be a smartass I would really be interested in that). If you don't believe that stable glucose levels in the body are irrelevant to health then is it your position that blood sugar levels will remain just as level with one or two mid-day meals as they would on a diet spaced throughout the day? Insulin response would be the same, ultimately insulin resistance would be the same? I don't understand how you can say that. I have to admit I do not have a specific medical journal on this issue but I have always kind of taken it as common sense based on my understanding of metabolism and insulin etc that 450 grams of carbs in one sitting has a profoundly different biochemistry within the body that the same carbs spaced out over several meals. I would be absolutely SHOCKED to learn otherwise.

I didn't take that to mean he was eating everything in a single meal and so taking it his total alotment of carbs in one sitting. I took that to mean rather than eating "meals" throughout the day in several hourly spaced events, he was eating one relatively large meal in the middle of the day and picking up other calories other ways through out the day.

I think trying to eat all of your food for one day in a single sitting would likely be an issue for the vast majority of people.

[Enter Apotheosis]

Most of what I say about eating and foods, is made up from years of personal reading, conversation and experience as it's always been a hobby, being that I was a chef for years and a vegetarian off and on for most of my life.

If I was to post links, they'd be from highly opinionated sites that I enjoy and if people want to question them, they would be easy to do so.

The only way you'd be able to understand is to go get a good Whole Foods/ Macrobiotic cook book, that explains how to set your kitchen up and how to cook and try it for one month and see how you feel and look. It's pretty cheap after the initial investment and completely worth it.

That's how most people gather the majority of their information (myself included). It's mostly a matter of necessity as getting it through more reliable, proven, and thoroughly tested means often requires being a professional in the field itself. However, you have to recognize that your sources of information are most certainly fallible in any number of ways. If you're a reasonably smart human being you'll tend to choose sources that are close enough tp representing an accurate model for their failings to be so minute as to not be worth worrying about. That is very likely the case with your sources... but you still have to tread lightly when certain things come into question. Dismissing ideas that run contrary to yours out of hand is almost always a bad idea, especially if you're not willing or able to roll out the big guns to back your own beliefs up.

Here's a selection of interesting stuff that runs contrary to the conventional wisdom you hear so much (no talking heads or secondhand garbage, just abstracts mostly via PubMed):

Meal frequency and energy balance. (Meal frequency irrelevant to energy level)

The influence of higher protein intake and greater eating frequency on appetite control in overweight and obese men. (Low meal frequency + high protein = better for satiety)

Greater weight loss and hormonal changes after 6 months diet with carbohydrates eaten mostly at dinner. (Carbs later at night not so bad)

A double-blind, placebo-controlled test of 2 d of calorie deprivation: effects on cognition, activity, sleep, and interstitial glucose concentrations. (48 hour fast has no effect on cognitive performance, mood, sleep, etc.)

Augmented growth hormone (GH) secretory burst frequency and amplitude mediate enhanced GH secretion during a two-day fast in normal men. (Fasting periods actually increase HGH)

Is it all dead-on and certain science? No. However, their bringing of the conventional wisdom into question is valuable nonetheless. My personal take is that when an idea is strongly contested in the scientific community with studies showing different things, said idea isn't worth worrying too much over for the average Joe. The effects are often either somewhat negligible or predicated on other variables at play that no one is entirely aware of yet and, thus, cannot effectively be acted upon anyway.

The fasting stuff is only really tangentially related to the whole breakfast argument but I had to include it anyway because I find it absolutely fascinating (probably because it runs completely contrary to common sense).

There have been many studies that show kids who eat breakfast perform much better in school, so I would imagine it would be similar for adults.

The problem with those studies (and many health/nutrition studies) is that they are almost purely correlational. Consistently eating breakfast in the morning likely doesn't cause increased performance on its own so much as it is a behavior that is likely to coincide with other behaviors that may.

They really are good, and super easy.

Toss kale leaves with a little oil and the seasoning of your choice (salt and cayenne pepper is great) and then pop them in a hot oven (450 or so) until they're cripsy and delicious. Let them cool just slightly and they'll crisp up even more.

Thirding the Kale Chips. When done right it's great stuff.

[Koolblue13]

EA, my first quote came of way to harsh and frankly dickish and I apologize. I was wrong. As for on topic, I just know the incredibly tangible difference I feel and I know many others who do the same.

This is a side off topicish post I copied from Fork Over Knifes FB page- I highly suggest this movie!

We wanted to share this post from Robert Pruzinsky: "My son has congenital heart disease. He's 8. Seven months ago after seeing FOK we decided to give it a shot and go completely vegan and no oil for 2 weeks. We haven't looked back and we're still going strong. Today we were at Children's National Medical Center in DC to see my son's cardiologist. The results are in. He is now healthier than before, but not by a little by a lot. He's gone from being in critical stages for is Mitral Valve Stenosis to moderate. This might not seem like a big deal, but it means the difference from having another surgery in 6 months vs. 6 years. The longer we can put it off the better off he is. His doctor was in disbelief with the results, but extremely happy. I told her about FOK but she's never heard of it. I'll be sending her a copy when I get one. Thanks so much for sharing all this information."

[PeterMP]

That's how most people gather the majority of their information (myself included). It's mostly a matter of necessity as getting it through more reliable, proven, and thoroughly tested means often requires being a professional in the field itself. However, you have to recognize that your sources of information are most certainly fallible in any number of ways. If you're a reasonably smart human being you'll tend to choose sources that are close enough tp representing an accurate model for their failings to be so minute as to not be worth worrying about. That is very likely the case with your sources... but you still have to tread lightly when certain things come into question. Dismissing ideas that run contrary to yours out of hand is almost always a bad idea, especially if you're not willing or able to roll out the big guns to back your own beliefs up.

Here's a selection of interesting stuff that runs contrary to the conventional wisdom you hear so much (no talking heads or secondhand garbage, just abstracts mostly via PubMed):

Meal frequency and energy balance. (Meal frequency irrelevant to energy level)

The influence of higher protein intake and greater eating frequency on appetite control in overweight and obese men. (Low meal frequency + high protein = better for satiety)

Greater weight loss and hormonal changes after 6 months diet with carbohydrates eaten mostly at dinner. (Carbs later at night not so bad)

A double-blind, placebo-controlled test of 2 d of calorie deprivation: effects on cognition, activity, sleep, and interstitial glucose concentrations. (48 hour fast has no effect on cognitive performance, mood, sleep, etc.)

Augmented growth hormone (GH) secretory burst frequency and amplitude mediate enhanced GH secretion during a two-day fast in normal men. (Fasting periods actually increase HGH)

Is it all dead-on and certain science? No. However, their bringing of the conventional wisdom into question is valuable nonetheless. My personal take is that when an idea is strongly contested in the scientific community with studies showing different things, said idea isn't worth worrying too much over for the average Joe. The effects are often either somewhat negligible or predicated on other variables at play that no one is entirely aware of yet and, thus, cannot effectively be acted upon anyway.

The fasting stuff is only really tangentially related to the whole breakfast argument but I had to include it anyway because I find it absolutely fascinating (probably because it runs completely contrary to common sense).

The problem with those studies (and many health/nutrition studies) is that they are almost purely correlational. Consistently eating breakfast in the morning likely doesn't cause increased performance on its own so much as it is a behavior that is likely to coincide with other behaviors that may.

Thirding the Kale Chips. When done right it's great stuff.

It is important to distinguish between kids and adults. There are studies that are pretty well controlled that go to the role of breakfast on learning for kids, and in most cases the results show a significant result.

http://www.ajcn.org/content/67/4/779S.long

Though as the NYT piece points out. Adults are much better suited in terms of energy storage as compared to energy needs than children.

[Enter Apotheosis]

EA, my first quote came of way to harsh and frankly dickish and I apologize. I was wrong. As for on topic, I just know the incredibly tangible difference I feel and I know many others who do the same.

All good by me. My personal experience says that both high frequency and low frequency eating works and both have their pluses and minuses. I would suggest playing around with it a little bit yourself if you're at all curious or skeptical but there's really nothing to gain from it.

This is a side off topicish post I copied from Fork Over Knifes FB page- I highly suggest this movie!

We wanted to share this post from Robert Pruzinsky: "My son has congenital heart disease. He's 8. Seven months ago after seeing FOK we decided to give it a shot and go completely vegan and no oil for 2 weeks. We haven't looked back and we're still going strong. Today we were at Children's National Medical Center in DC to see my son's cardiologist. The results are in. He is now healthier than before, but not by a little by a lot. He's gone from being in critical stages for is Mitral Valve Stenosis to moderate. This might not seem like a big deal, but it means the difference from having another surgery in 6 months vs. 6 years. The longer we can put it off the better off he is. His doctor was in disbelief with the results, but extremely happy. I told her about FOK but she's never heard of it. I'll be sending her a copy when I get one. Thanks so much for sharing all this information."

I'm thrilled that the Prizinsky family is having so much success with their son on that diet. However...

For the sake of being neutral and technically correct (the best kind of correct), all dietary camps have their overwhelming success stories. Even meat-gorging low-carbers have their fair share of tales of vastly improved heart health with an improved diet and exercise, counter-intuitive to some though that may be.

I've heard FOK is well put together. However, the fact that it's also said to have a vegan slant greatly hinders my desire to ever watch it, let alone be willing to take it seriously (and so neutrality goes out the window ).

It is important to distinguish between kids and adults. There are studies that are pretty well controlled that go to the role of breakfast on learning for kids, and in most cases the results show a significant result.

http://www.ajcn.org/content/67/4/779S.long

Though as the NYT piece points out. Adults are much better suited in terms of energy storage as compared to energy needs than children.

That's a very good point and I'll be the first to admit I know nothing about children beyond how to bull**** ones between the ages of 5 and 14. The study linked raises a few questions, though. It looks like they only controlled for a grand total of two meals during the test period and I'm not sure if they gave the unbreakfasted kids calories in compensation for the fast at any point. Given how the body tends to adapt to habit, I'd have to imagine that they didn't have enough controls in place to level the playing field between the test groups.

[Koolblue13]

Off topic kind of yet interesting

[pointyfootball]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/422642_10150746069161204_393107861203_11451492_113274033_n.jpg

Off topic kind of yet interesting

So you're saying conventional is better for you because it's "low-sodium"?

Problem I have with organic is the trust factor. Unless you grow it yourself, you don't truly know that it is organic, yet your're paying 2-3x more for same. Additionally, would there be enough fruits/vegetables available if everyone ate organic? That being said, local fresh is the way to go, even though I'm not 100% sure they're growing the way I'd prefer.

[Koolblue13]

So you're saying conventional is better for you because it's "low-sodium"?

Problem I have with organic is the trust factor. Unless you grow it yourself, you don't truly know that it is organic, yet your're paying 2-3x more for same. Additionally, would there be enough fruits/vegetables available if everyone ate organic? That being said, local fresh is the way to go, even though I'm not 100% sure they're growing the way I'd prefer.

If you can, grow yourself (much easier than folks realize, even with no yard)

second, buy local and seasonal (it's cheaper and the healthiest)

third buy certified organic.

I can't say this enough, local coops and farmers markets sell food cheaper than the grocery store and its grown by neighbors.

[pointyfootball]

If you can, grow yourself (much easier than folks realize, even with no yard)

second, buy local and seasonal (it's cheaper and the healthiest)

third buy certified organic.

We do (some). Herbs, tomatoes, peppers, cucumbers and some lettuce/onions.

I can't say this enough, local coops and farmers markets sell food cheaper than the grocery store and its grown by neighbors.

In my experience it's not necessarily cheaper, especially the co-ops.. And, I think one has to be careful/selective with farmer's markets, as some aren't really farmers, they just buy the produce from same places stores do and sell it. But, overall I agree with you. And, even if it is 10-30% more cost-wise, the difference in taste is significantly different.

[Koolblue13]

We do (some). Herbs, tomatoes, peppers, cucumbers and some lettuce/onions.

In my experience it's not necessarily cheaper, especially the co-ops.. And, I think one has to be careful/selective with farmer's markets, as some aren't really farmers, they just buy the produce from same places stores do and sell it. But, overall I agree with you. And, even if it is 10-30% more cost-wise, the difference in taste is significantly different.

I love growing food. A local farm on island told me that I can work for pay and food if I want. Produce is super expensive on island and I think we all know how I like to eat.

I'm going to build a huge garden at work, so next year we can try and be totally sustainable.

I guess I've just had much better luck than you on finding small local farms and markets. I usually get to know the people and visit their farms, because it fascinates me.

[Koolblue13]

https://www.facebook.com/nourishedkitchen

That's a great FB page that's not vegetarian that I follow

[Rdskn4Lyf21]

Thanks KB for info on FOK...gonna "find" the book