You are here: Nature's Prime Organic Foods, Inc. »

Category : News

7 Foods That Should Never Cross Your Lips

By Anne Underwood

* Which foods should you avoid?
* 1. Canned Tomatoes
* 2. Corn-Fed Beef
* 3. Microwave Popcorn
* 4. Nonorganic Potatoes
* 5. Farmed Salmon
* 6. Milk Produced with Artificial Hormones
* 7. Conventional Apples

Which foods should you avoid?
Clean eating means choosing fruits, vegetables
, and meats that are raised, grown, and sold with minimal processing.
Often they’re organic, and rarely (if ever) should they contain additives. But in some cases, the methods of today’s food producers are neither clean nor sustainable. The result is damage to our health, the environment, or both. So we decided to take a fresh look at food through the eyes of the people who spend their lives uncovering what’s safe—or not—to eat. We asked them a simple question: “What foods do you avoid?” Their answers don’t necessarily make up a “banned foods” list. But reaching for the suggested alternatives might bring you better health—and peace of mind.

1. Canned Tomatoes
Fredrick Vom Saal, PhD, an endocrinologist at the University of Missouri who studies bisphenol-A, gives us the scoop:

The problem: The resin linings of tin cans contain bisphenol-A, a synthetic estrogen that has been linked to ailments ranging from reproductive problems to heart disease, diabetes, and obesity. Unfortunately, acidity (a prominent characteristic of tomatoes) causes BPA to leach into your food. Studies show that the BPA in most people’s body exceeds the amount that suppresses sperm production or causes chromosomal damage to the eggs of animals. “You can get 50 mcg of BPA per liter out of a tomato can, and that’s a level that is going to impact people, particularly the young,” says vom Saal. “I won’t go near canned tomatoes.”

The solution: Choose tomatoes in glass bottles (which do not need resin linings), such as the brands Bionaturae and Coluccio. You can also get several types in Tetra Pak boxes, like Trader Joe’s and Pomi.

Budget tip: If your recipe allows, substitute bottled pasta sauce for canned tomatoes. Look for pasta sauces with low sodium and few added ingredients, or you may have to adjust the recipe.

. Corn-Fed Beef
Joel Salatin, co-owner of Polyface Farms and author of half a dozen books on sustainable farming, gives us the scoop:

The problem: Cattle evolved to eat grass, not grains. But farmers today feed their animals corn and soybeans, which fatten up the animals faster for slaughter. But more money for cattle farmers (and lower prices at the grocery store) means a lot less nutrition for us. A recent comprehensive study conducted by the USDA and researchers from Clemson University found that compared with corn-fed beef, grass-fed beef is higher in beta-carotene, vitamin E, omega-3s, conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), calcium, magnesium, and potassium; lower in inflammatory omega-6s; and lower in saturated fats that have been linked to heart disease. “We need to respect the fact that cows are herbivores, and that does not mean feeding them corn and chicken manure,” says Salatin.

The solution: Buy grass-fed beef, which can be found at specialty grocers, farmers’ markets, and nationally at Whole Foods. It’s usually labeled because it demands a premium, but if you don’t see it, ask your butcher.

3. Microwave Popcorn
Olga Naidenko, PhD, a senior scientist for the Environmental Working Group, gives us the scoop:

The problem: Chemicals, including perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), in the lining of the bag, are part of a class of compounds that may be linked to infertility in humans, according to a recent study from UCLA. In animal testing, the chemicals cause liver, testicular, and pancreatic cancer. Studies show that microwaving causes the chemicals to vaporize—and migrate into your popcorn. “They stay in your body for years and accumulate there,” says Naidenko, which is why researchers worry that levels in humans could approach the amounts causing cancers in laboratory animals. DuPont and other manufacturers have promised to phase out PFOA by 2015 under a voluntary EPA plan, but millions of bags of popcorn will be sold between now and then.

The solution: Pop natural kernels the old-fashioned way: in a skillet. For flavorings, you can add real butter or dried seasonings, such as dillweed, vegetable flakes, or soup mix.

Budget tip: Popping your own popcorn is dirt cheap.

4. Nonorganic Potatoes
Jeffrey Moyer, chair of the National Organic Standards Board, gives us the scoop:

The problem: Root vegetables absorb herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides that wind up in soil. In the case of potatoes—the nation’s most popular vegetable—they’re treated with fungicides during the growing season, then sprayed with herbicides to kill off the fibrous vines before harvesting. After they’re dug up, the potatoes are treated yet again to prevent them from sprouting. “Try this experiment: Buy a conventional potato in a store, and try to get it to sprout. It won’t,” says Moyer, who is also farm director of the Rodale Institute (also owned by Rodale Inc., the publisher of Prevention). “I’ve talked with potato growers who say point-blank they would never eat the potatoes they sell. They have separate plots where they grow potatoes for themselves without all the chemicals.”

The solution: Buy organic potatoes. Washing isn’t good enough if you’re trying to remove chemicals that have been absorbed into the flesh.

Budget tip: Organic potatoes are only $1 to $2 a pound, slightly more expensive than conventional spuds.

5. Farmed Salmon
David Carpenter, MD, director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University at Albany and publisher of a major study in the journal Science on contamination in fish, gives us the scoop:

The problem: Nature didn’t intend for salmon to be crammed into pens and fed soy
, poultry litter, and hydrolyzed chicken feathers. As a result, farmed salmon is lower in vitamin D and higher in contaminants, including carcinogens, PCBs, brominated flame retardants, and pesticides such as dioxin and DDT. According to Carpenter, the most contaminated fish come from Northern Europe, which can be found on American menus. “You could eat one of these salmon dinners every 5 months without increasing your risk of cancer,” says Carpenter, whose 2004 fish contamination study got broad media attention. “It’s that bad.” Preliminary science has also linked DDT to diabetes and obesity, but some nutritionists believe the benefits of omega-3s outweigh the risks. There is also concern about the high level of antibiotics and pesticides used to treat these fish. When you eat farmed salmon, you get dosed with the same drugs and chemicals.

The solution: Switch to wild-caught Alaska salmon. If the package says fresh Atlantic, it’s farmed. There are no commercial fisheries left for wild Atlantic salmon.

Budget tip: Canned salmon, almost exclusively from wild catch, can be found for as little as $3 a can.

6. Milk Produced with Artificial Hormones
Rick North, project director of the Campaign for Safe Food at the Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility and former CEO of the Oregon division of the American Cancer Society, gives us the scoop:

The problem: Milk producers treat their dairy cattle with recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH or rBST, as it is also known) to boost milk production. But rBGH also increases udder infections and even pus in the milk. It also leads to higher levels of a hormone called insulin-like growth factor in milk. In people, high levels of IGF-1 may contribute to breast, prostate, and colon cancers. “When the government approved rBGH, it was thought that IGF-1 from milk would be broken down in the human digestive tract,” says North. As it turns out, the casein in milk protects most of it, according to several independent studies. “There’s not 100% proof that this is increasing cancer in humans,” admits North. “However, it’s banned in most industrialized countries.”

The solution: Check labels for rBGH-free, rBST-free, produced without artificial hormones, or organic milk. These phrases indicate rBGH-free products.

Budget tip: Try Wal-Mart’s Great Value label, which does not use rBGH.

7. Conventional Apples
Mark Kastel, former executive for agribusiness and codirector of the Cornucopia Institute, a farm-policy research group that supports organic foods, gives us the scoop:

The problem: If fall fruits held a “most doused in pesticides contest,” apples would win. Why? They are individually grafted (descended from a single tree) so that each variety maintains its distinctive flavor. As such, apples don’t develop resistance to pests and are sprayed frequently. The industry maintains that these residues are not harmful. But Kastel counters that it’s just common sense to minimize exposure by avoiding the most doused produce, like apples. “Farm workers have higher rates of many cancers,” he says. And increasing numbers of studies are starting to link a higher body burden of pesticides (from all sources) with Parkinson’s disease.

The solution: Buy organic apples.

Budget tip: If you can’t afford organic, be sure to wash and peel them. But Kastel personally refuses to compromise. “I would rather see the trade-off being that I don’t buy that expensive electronic gadget,” he says. “Just a few of these decisions will accommodate an organic diet for a family.”

Are You Buying Junk Food Disguised as Health Food?

Written by Whitney Lauritsen from Organic Authority. www.organicauthority.com

Everyone wants to be healthy – you probably wouldn’t be reading this if you didn’t aspire to good health. As a result, health is extremely marketable and companies will do just about anything to convince us their product will make us feel and look good.

Unfortunately, many food items are not as healthy as they appear at first glance. Thus, it often takes a careful inspection of an ingredients list to determine authenticity of packaging claims. But to many, deciphering an ingredient list can be daunting. Here’s a quick breakdown of how to read food labels and what to avoid.

Do a quick scan of the ingredient list

* Always read the first three ingredients – these make up the majority of the food content.
* If a product has a long list of ingredients it’s probably highly processed and swimming in artificial additives, especially if you don’t recognize the majority of the words.
* Fat and calorie content don’t mean much on the health front, so check out the vitamins, sugar, and sodium content instead. However, pay attention to the serving sizes and do the math – you don’t want to eat a whole box of crackers in one sitting and realize it was meant to feed 8 people!

Beware of label padding

* Companies will often put buzz-words on their packaging to draw you in, so be skeptical of popular phrases like: “cancer fighting,” “sugar free,” “trans fat free,” “whole grain,” “gluten free,” and “free range.”
* Just because a food contains one healthy ingredient doesn’t mean the entire product is good for you. Current trendy ingredients include: green tea, flaxseed, ginseng, and stevia.
* Organic does not necessarily mean a product is nutritious. Be aware of organic foods loaded with sugar, salt, and/or oil.
* Don’t be fooled by the words “natural” or “no artificial ingredients” – there are no regulations on these phrases, so they don’t mean much on the health front.
* Find brands that you can trust and stick to their line of products – when they say they’re “all natural” you’ll know they mean it.

The cheap stuff is cheap for a reason

If some foods are significantly less expensive than others, the companies behind them are probably cutting corners somehow. Take a moment to compare ingredient lists between two products or brands and you’ll find the difference – a nutritious ingredient may be left out, or it may be loaded with artificial junk. Food that is organic, made/grown locally, preservative-free, unprocessed (or raw), and/or fair-trade will often have a premium price, but it’s worth it.

Choose where you shop wisely

Get to know the staff at a market and ask questions about their products. Co-Ops are a great place to find high quality and truly healthy food.

Buy the basics

If a product can sit on a shelf for weeks, that’s a great sign that it is probably full of preservatives, additives and more to give it an eternal shelf life. Fresh produce in its natural, raw form is always the best choice. Instead of buying something pre-made, try to find some time to make it from scratch – your body will thank you.

Could your seafood contain toxic chemicals?

Investigation reveals substances that could cause serious health issues.

>> reporter: i know you love seafood , but most of it doesn’t even come from here. in fact 80% of fish and 90% of the shrimp actually come from overseas. this morning our “today” investigation has found some of your seafood may have toxic chemicals, causing serious health issues. sauteed, fried or fresh, we love seafood , appetizing for sure, until you see where some of it comes from. this video shot by a u.s. advocacy group shows dirty sewage water used to raise seafood in vietnam. the fish pumped with toxic antibiotics and drugs just to keep them alive, boosting production and driving down costs.

>> would you consider this a public health threat?

>> absolutely.

>> reporter: ron smith is with the department of — there’s several chemicals that are added to seafood . chemicals so toxic to humans, they’re banned in all foods.

>> in some cases, 40% to 50% of our tests will come out positive.

>> that’s a disturbing number.

>> it is to me that’s high we continue to test.

>> reporter: similar results all targeting seafood with the worst record of contamination, shrimp, catfish, crab meat . in many cases officials say ending up in our country’s restaurants and grocery stores .

>> unfortunately, consumers can’t tell if any of these compounds are in their seafood . you can’t smell it, you can’t taste it, you can’t cook it out.

>> reporter: so how dangerous are these chemicals? scientists say overtime eating this tainted seafood could cause cancer, even birth defects. the risks are long-term and not fully understood. while the fda is responsible for keeping the nation’s food supply safe, our “today” investigation found it tests less than 2% of imported seafood .

>> they’re not going to get caught. i mean they’re sending tons of seafood to this country and if you only catch a small percentage of it, why would they stop?

>> reporter: does the fda need to do more?

>> i would certainly suggest that the fda do more.

>> reporter: while government tests show u.s. seafood is three of these contaminants, even back in 2007 , this congressional seafood report said that seafood imports remain problematic. the fda declined to speak with us on camera but says it’s doing the best it can targeting countries that are repeat offenders and rejecting their products until they’re proven safe. yet it keeps happening. according to fda test results, this year alone, 8% of seafood tested from china was tainted and from taiwan, 16% of seafood tested was tainted as well. is that acceptable to you?

>> any use of antibiotics is unacceptable. it’s been a problem for years and it’s not stopping. so what are the importers doing to stop it, to say any unauthorized use of antibiotics is inappropriate.

>> the vast majority of seafood coming in does not exhibit any kind of problems.

>> reporter: you’re claiming no kind of seafood is making it from overseas on to our dinner table.

>> any use of unauthorized antibiotics is appropriate.

>> reporter: he says most follow the rules and the problem is being overblown as a trade issue. he says this video of polluted fish ponds and rotting sewage is misleading. it keeps happening year after year after year. while federal law requires grocery stores to publish its country of origin . in restaurants where most of us eat our seafood , it’s a different story, most states don’t require you to tell you where it’s from at all.

>> that’s awful, i’m totally in shock.

>> we label everything, why wouldn’t we label or fish?

>> reporter: would you support legislation where we would know no matter where we go where our seafood is coming from?

>> studies do not indicate that americans are deeply interested in the source of their fish or other protein.

>> reporter: as a consumer, don’t i have a right to know where my seafood is coming from, especially knowing what we know now?

>> i think that consumers should feel comfortable that fda does a good job.

>> reporter: but until more seafood is tested, consumers are at risk.

>> it is a cat and mouse game, they quite honestly don’t care about the health of united states citizens .

>> reporter: some officials say this just isn’t a health issue, americans say they’re losing jobs because they can’t compete with competitors who are selling their seafood much cheaper in the u.s. most of the seafood coming in two overseas is safe, the problem is in restaurants you don’t know unless you ask your server. and even then, they don’t have to tell you.

When you think of tainted seafood, you may think of the Gulf oil spill. But 80 percent of the fish and shrimp Americans eat actually comes from overseas — and a TODAY investigation that aired Tuesday found that some of that seafood may contain toxic chemicals that can cause serious health problems.

Footage taken by a U.S. advocacy group of seafood being raised in Vietnam, for example, showed fish in dirty sewage water, pumped with toxic antibiotics and banned drugs just to keep them alive, boosting production and driving down costs.

‘Disturbing number’
Ron Sparks is commissioner of the state Department of Agriculture in Alabama — one of the few states that tests imported seafood for drugs like chloramphenicol, nitrofurans and malachite green, chemicals so toxic to humans that they’re banned in all food. “In some cases, between 40 and 50 percent of our tests will come out positive,” Sparks said. “That’s a disturbing number.”

State tests in Oklahoma, Mississippi and Georgia show similar results, all targeting seafood with the worst record of contamination: shrimp, catfish, crabmeat and tilapia imported to the U.S. from China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Malaysia and Indonesia — ending up in American restaurants and grocery stores in many cases, officials say.

“Unfortunately, consumers can’t tell if any of these compounds are in their seafood,” said Joe Basile, a seafood chemist for the Alabama Department of Agriculture. “You can’t smell it, can’t taste it, you can’t cook it out.”

Scientists say that over time, eating seafood contaminated with such chemicals could cause anemia, cancer and even birth defects.

The Food and Drug Administration says that the risks are long-term and not fully understood. While the FDA is responsible for keeping the nation’s food supply safe, TODAY’s investigation found that the FDA tests less than 2 percent of imported seafood.

“I would certainly suggest that the FDA do more,” Sparks said.

‘Cat-and-mouse game’
Government tests show that U.S. seafood is free of these contaminants, but as far back as 2007, a congressional report found that “seafood imports remain especially problematic” and that the “FDA lacks sufficient resources and authority to ensure food safety.”

The FDA declined to speak with TODAY on camera, but said it is doing the best it can, targeting its testing on companies and countries that are repeat offenders and rejecting their products until they are proven safe. Yet the problem keeps happening: In fact, according to test results obtained by NBC News, this year alone 8 percent of the seafood the FDA tested from China was tainted, and 16 percent of seafood tested from Taiwan was tainted.

John Connelly, who runs a trade group representing the imported seafood industry, said, “Any unauthorized use of an antibiotic is inappropriate. The vast majority of seafood coming in does not exhibit any kind of problems.”

Connelly said most importers follow the rules, and that the problem is being overblown as a trade issue. “Unfortunately, there are bad actors in every industry,” he said.

Federal law requires grocery stores to identify the country of origin of the seafood they sell, but in restaurants, it’s a different story: Most states do not require them to tell patrons where the seafood they serve comes from.

Connelly said that “studies do not indicate that Americans are deeply interested in the source of their fish or other proteins.

“I think that consumers should feel comfortable that the FDA does a good job,” he added.

But some officials say that until more seafood is tested, consumers are at risk. “It is a cat-and-mouse game,” Joe Basile said. “They quite honestly don’t care about the health of United States citizens.”

And officials say it is not just a health issue. American fishermen who play by the rules say they’re losing their jobs because they can’t compete with importers who cut corners and sell their tainted fish much cheaper in the U.S.

To read a statement from the FDA in response to TODAY’s investigation, click here .

Check out Natural Shrimp. Exclusively from Nature’s Prime Organic Foods, Inc.
Watch the video about Natural Shrimp\'s Facilities here!

48% Feces Sodas

Thursday, 07 January 2010 GreenMuze Staff

Soda glass.

iStockphotos.

Next time you are feeling thirsty, you might want to reach for something other than fast food soda. A recent study found that a whooping 48% of soda fountains at fast food restaurants contain a bacteria that grows in feces – coliform bacteria.

The Hollins University study, published in the International Journal of Food Microbiology, also found that 11% of soda fountains contain the E.Coli bacteria as well. The team tested 90 beverages from 30 different fountains in the USA and also found:

“Other opportunistic pathogenic microorganisms isolated from the beverages included species of Klebsiella, Staphylococcus, Stenotrophomonas, Candida, and Serratia. Most of the identified bacteria showed resistance to one or more of the 11 antibiotics tested.”

Read Full Report Here: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T7K-4XMKB25-3&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=fad2689b4ff8662fa61c671d86a562d9

Sustainable Futuristic Tractor

Tuesday, 26 October 2010 GreenMuze Staff

E-mail Print

Deuterium by Prithu Paul and Ankit Kumar.

Deuterium by Prithu Paul and Ankit Kumar.

Designer Prithu Paul, in conjunction with Ankit Kumar, has created a futuristic sustainable tractor concept that utilizes body mounted nano-solar cells and hydrogen fuel cells for power. Dubbed Deuterium, the tractor is specifically designed for a world where the effects of climate change are more prevalent.

Deuterium by Prithu Paul and Ankit Kumar.

Deuterium by Prithu Paul and Ankit Kumar.

With sensor controlled motion path determination and adjustable suspension, the Deuterium also allows for 24-hour usability via 360-degree lights and night vision cameras. Featuring the ability to pull heavy farm equipment and other farming attachments, the Deuterium can also assess topographic conditions and collect data for use in sustainable farming activities.

Ben & Jerry’s No Longer “All Natural”

Friday, 01 October 2010 GreenMuze Staff
E-mail Print

Ben & Jerry’s ice cream.

Ben & Jerry’s ice cream.

The freewheeling hippie image of Ben & Jerry’s ice cream received another blow with the recent decision by Ben & Jerry’s corporate owner, Unilever, to remove the “all natural” label from its ice cream and frozen yoghurt line.

The decision came after the American-based advocacy group the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) sent a letter to Unilever stating that ingredients like alkalized cocoa, corn syrup and partially hydrogenated soybean oil are not natural.

Ben & Jerry’s is doing the right thing by taking the phrase ‘all natural’ off its labels if the products have factory-made ingredients,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “The Food and Drug Administration could do consumers and food manufacturers a great service by actually defining when the word ‘natural’ can and cannot be used to characterize a given ingredient.”

4 Simple Ways to Prepare Winter Squash

November 5th, 2010 – Barbara Feiner

Roasted Butternut Squash

’Tis the season to buy winter squash at your local natural and organic food store or farmers’ market.

Whether you select the acorn, buttercup, butternut (above) or Hubbard variety, you’ll enjoy numerous health benefits, as well as a tasty entree or side dish.

Let’s review the four basic ways to get cooking.

1. Bake/Roast

This method is super-delicious because it caramelizes a squash’s natural sugars:

  1. Cut squash in half (lengthwise), and  remove seeds and strings.
  2. Place squash, flesh-side up, in a baking pan lined with foil. Season with salt and pepper. (For a sweeter version, sprinkle with brown sugar and cinnamon.)
  3. Bake at 350°F for 40 to 45 minutes, or until tender.

Recipe Suggestion: Robin Miller’s Roasted Butternut Squash

2. Sauté

Want to go a little crunchy? Try this method:

  1. Peel squash. Grate, cube or dice it.
  2. Sauté in vegetable broth for 8 to 10 minutes, or until tender. 

Recipe Suggestion: Candied Butternut Squash

3. Steam

If you want pure squash flavor (not roasted) and plan to mash the flesh with some butter:

  1. Halve squash lengthwise, and remove seeds and strings.
  2. Place cut-side down in a vegetable steamer.
  3. Cook over boiling water for 15 to 20 minutes, or until flesh becomes tender.
  4. Note: Squash can also be peeled and cut into chunks or slices for steaming.

Recipe Suggestion: Steamed Butternut Squash with Red Chili Sauce

4. Boil

I’m not a fan of this technique, as squash becomes waterlogged and its flavor is diluted. If, however, you insist on boiling:

  1. Peel squash, and cut it into pieces.
  2. Place in a small amount of boiling water, and cook approximately 5 minutes, or until tender. Drain well. 

Recipe Suggestion: Don’t do it!

Bonus Recipe

Chef Michael Chiarello of Bottega Napa Valley shares his recipe for Roasted Butternut Squash tomorrow. And check back next week, when he turns his recipe into a gorgeous soup that’s perfect for Thanksgiving dinner.

For Your Organic Bookshelf: A Harvest of Pumpkins and Squash

Photo: Karen and Brad Emerson

Can Omega-3s Help Banish the “Winter Blues”?

Can Omega-3s Help Banish the “Winter Blues”?

by Craig Weatherby


Are you feeling sad, anxious, or listless? Are you oversleeping? Do you have unusual cravings for sweets or heavy starches? You may be suffering the effects of “SAD”.

An estimated 35 million Americans—including children—suffer from seasonal affective disorder (SAD).  After months of short, dark days, the “winter blues” can be very depressing and debilitating.

Even Eskimos get SAD, absent omega-3s

The indigenous peoples of the far north depend on fatty, omega-3-rich fish, seals, and whales to maintain the high caloric intake and ample body fat needed to survive long, brutal Artic winters.

Recently, researchers at the University of Alaska at Fairbanks concluded that these native peoples also depend on omega-3-rich foods to avoid the depressing effects of SAD.

As the researchers concluded in their 2003 study, “The change … from traditional foods to the processed groceries … has already led to … increased rates of depression, seasonal affective disorder, anxiety, and suicide … we hypothesize that diet is an important risk factor for mental health in circumpolar peoples.” (McGrath-Hanna MK et al 2004)

SAD is usually treated with antidepressants such as Prozac or Zoloft—whose effectiveness remains unclear—and with light therapy, in which sufferers sit in front of a strong light for 30-120 minutes every day.

Omega-3 seen as mood supporter

Given the preponderance of evidence indicating that omega-3s can elevate mood, reduce depression, and reduce the risk of suicide, fatty fish and fish oil supplements should be part of any anti-SAD strategy.

In fact, a recent study from Belgium found seasonal declines in people’s blood levels of EPA and DHA: declines that correlated with lower levels of the neurotransmitter serotonin and increased rates of suicide (de Vriese SR et al 2004).  Like modern antidepressants such as Prozac, omega-3s appear to alleviate depression in part by modulating serotonin levels.

Researchers at the Harvard University Medical School described the promising state of scientific knowledge concerning the preventive/therapeutic promise of fish-derived or organic grass fed derived omega-3s (especially DHA) in a 2000 review article (Mischoulon D, Fava M 2000):

  • “Geographic areas where consumption of DHA is high are associated with decreased rates of depression.”
  • “DHA deficiency states, such as alcoholism and the postpartum period, also are linked with depression. Individuals with major depression have marked depletions in omega-3 FAs (especially DHA) …”
  • “These data suggest that DHA may be associated with depression, and the limited data available on supplementation with DHA or other omega-3 FAs seem to support the hypothesis that DHA may have psychotropic [brain-changing] effects.”

If you live north of the Mason–Dixon line, it certainly seems a good idea to favor USDA Certified Organic Grass Fed meats and fatty fish like salmon, sardines, tuna, and sablefish during those long months of short, dark days.

Note: It takes time—several weeks at least—to benefit from dietary omega-3s, so get started now, be a bit patient, and look forward to feeling better and having more energy!

It’s also helpful to get outdoor as often as possible for fresh air and exercise, which will help lift your mood.  And if possible, time spent in a greenhouse can help restore your spirits.

Sources

  • K, Hamazaki T. Suicide attempt and n-3 fatty acid levels in red blood cells: a case control study in China. Biol Psychiatry. 2004 Oct 1;56(7):490-6.
  • Hakkarainen R, Partonen T, Haukka J, Virtamo J, Albanes D, Lonnqvist J. Is low dietary intake of omega-3 fatty acids associated with depression? Am J Psychiatry. 2004 Mar;161(3):567-9.
  • Yao JK, Magan S, Sonel AF, Gurklis JA, Sanders R, Reddy RD. Effects of omega-3 fatty acid on platelet serotonin responsivity in patients with schizophrenia. Prostaglandins Leukot Essent Fatty Acids. 2004 Sep;71(3):171-6.
  • De Vriese SR, Christophe AB, Maes M. In humans, the seasonal variation in poly-unsaturated fatty acids is related to the seasonal variation in violent suicide and serotonergic markers of violent suicide. Prostaglandins Leukot Essent Fatty Acids. 2004 Jul;71(1):13-8.
  • McGrath-Hanna NK, Greene DM, Tavernier RJ, Bult-Ito A. Diet and mental health in the Arctic: is diet an important risk factor for mental health in circumpolar peoples?–a review. Int J Circumpolar Health. 2003 Sep;62(3):228-41. Review.
  • Peet M. Eicosapentaenoic acid in the treatment of schizophrenia and depression: rationale and preliminary double-blind clinical trial results. Prostaglandins Leukot Essent Fatty Acids. 2003 Dec;69(6):477-85.
  • Magnusson A, Boivin D. Seasonal affective disorder: an overview. Chronobiol Int. 2003 Mar;20(2):189-207. Review.
  • Su KP, Huang SY, Chiu CC, Shen WW. Omega-3 fatty acids in major depressive disorder. A preliminary double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol. 2003 Aug;13(4):267-71.
  • Colin A, Reggers J, Castronovo V, Ansseau M. [Lipids, depression and suicide] Encephale. 2003 Jan-Feb;29(1):49-58. Review. French.
  • Brunner J, Parhofer KG, Schwandt P, Bronisch T. Cholesterol, essential fatty acids, and suicide. Pharmacopsychiatry. 2002 Jan;35(1):1-5. Review.
  • Brunner J, Parhofer KG, Schwandt P, Bronisch T. [Cholesterol, omega-3 fatty acids, and suicide risk: empirical evidence and pathophysiological hypotheses] Fortschr Neurol Psychiatr. 2001 Oct;69(10):460-7. Review. German.
  • Mischoulon D, Fava M. Docosahexanoic acid and omega-3 fatty acids in depression. Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2000 Dec;23(4):785-94. Review.
  • Bruinsma KA, Taren DL. Dieting, essential fatty acid intake, and depression. Nutr Rev. 2000 Apr;58(4):98-108. Review.
  • Maes M, Christophe A, Delanghe J, Altamura C, Neels H, Meltzer HY. Lowered omega3 polyunsaturated fatty acids in serum phospholipids and cholesteryl esters of depressed patients. Psychiatry Res. 1999 Mar 22;85(3):275-91.
  • Edwards R, Peet M, Shay J, Horrobin D. Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid levels in the diet and in red blood cell membranes of depressed patients. J Affect Disord. 1998 Mar;48(2-3):149-55.

San Francisco First Major U.S. City to Ban Happy Meals

Written by Jill Ettinger

McDonald's Happy Meal banned in San Francisco

San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors voted on Tuesday to support banning toy giveaways with food lacking nutritional value. Yes, they’re talking about Happy Meals. Supervisor Eric Mar introduced the legislation saying, “This is a challenge to the restaurant industry to think about children’s health first and join the wide range of local restaurants that have already made this commitment.”

The opposition to this ordinance, mainly McDonald’s, defended their product by suggesting “it’s what our customers want,” which posits the question about where responsibility lies. Is it appropriate for a city to decide what children can or cannot eat or should that burden be on the parents alone? Do corporations have any responsibility to the community or just to shareholders?

For children, nutrition is a significant factor in development. Obesity and diabetes are affecting nearly two-thirds of the population, with “adult onset” diabetes (type II) attacking children as young as age four. Some girls have begun menstruation not much later than that, a condition largely connected to the growth hormones and other drugs fed to factory farmed animals, of which McDonald’s is the largest manufacturer of including cows, pigs and chickens, that affect the human body’s hormonal balance, among other critical health risks.

The moral discussion of where responsibility lies is nothing short of complicated. Alcohol is regulated, yet many persistent minors regularly find easy access. Also voted on yesterday in California was Prop 19, the ballot measure to legalize marijuana, which also easily finds its way into the lungs of many children, legal or not. That the quality of nourishment, including school lunches, is virtually unregulated despite heart-stopping lack-of-nutrition-profiles such as those found in Happy Meals is eye opening.

A typical Happy Meal has more than 600 calories, more than 640 milligrams of chemically produced bad-for-you salt and more than 35 per cent of calories derived from saturated fat. That does not include the sugary trough of soda that most often accompanies these kid’s meals.The ban would also not allow toys to be given out if the meal does not include fresh fruit or vegetables. Ketchup no longer qualifies.

It’s possible that if most people weren’t in denial about their own health and lifestyle, food addictions and dependence on corporations to feed them and their families, a move towards making kid’s meals safer might not cause such a stir. It would probably go unnoticed. Just ask the kids in love with their Edible Schoolyards courtesy of Chef Alice Waters, how much planting, growing and eating their own fruits and vegetables has changed their pallets, diets, health, concentration and happiness; and they might also be the first to tell you those Happy Meal toys are pretty lame anyway.

Follow Jill on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jillettinger

Photo by Stefan, courtesy of Creative Commons

How Pure & Natural is Your Orange Juice?

How Pure and Natural is your Orange Juice?

Featuring Recent Posts Wordpress Widget development by YD