Goddess Living

Lies The TV Tells Us: Cholesterol, Fat, and Animal Protein

I like documentaries. I find them interesting, and often as informative as reading a book. I also appreciate them as a form of entertainment, and am always willing to view them as critically as any other thing I might read or listen to. That being said, two fascinating documentaries to watch back to back are "Super Size Me" and "Fat Head." One is a very well known documentary on the evils of fast food, and the other is an in-depth response to many of the claims of that documentary, as well as underlying superstitions that people hold in regards to nutrition.

I say "superstitions" because that's what they are--mass held beliefs unsupported (and, in fact, often disproved) by any scientific study. One of those is very well debunked in "Fat Head," where the documenter goes into great detail about cholesterol, as well as "good" and "bad" fat/cholesterol, as well as it's relationship with heart disease and health.

Most of what's in there is very well supported by true scientific fact, including the MOST IMPORTANT fact of all: high cholesterol in women is HEALTHY. In fact, low cholesterol in women leads to earlier deaths, and often very poor mental health. This is something my mom has known for years, particularly because she's had many different odd health problems that have caused her to do a lot of research into the commonly held beliefs about women's health.

My only true concern with the documentary's claims about fat and saturated fat, is that the way to get this fat is through the consumption of animal protein, which is "healthy" for us. This is where I unfortunately part ways with the documentary, as other in-depth studies that are notably unsupported by the government because they disprove nearly everything that the government supports (high grains, dairy products, and meat). Plant protein is much better for human kind, and that there are plenty of available fats in nuts that do a body very good.

One of the core arguments for "Fat Head" AND "Super Size Me" is the claim that we need to return to our "roots" as humans. That in our recent times, we've changed our diets radically from what we used to eat, and this is what is causing much of our problems. This is, at the basic level, extremely true.

We now eat a lot of chemicals, through pesticides, and even more importantly through genetically modified foods. We now eat mass produced food farmed using artificial fertilizers. We now have a diet that focuses on the regular consumption of easily accessible meat. We use dairy products of all sorts as a regular addition to nearly every single meal we eat. We now bake, cook, and fry a vast majority of our foods. We consume an incredible amount of artificially processed and created sugars in almost every type of food we consume.

What both of these documentaries ignore, however, is that animal proteins did not use to be a massively huge part of our diets as humans. In fact, when "Fat Head" claims that when we ate a high saturated fat diet of animal proteins that we were taller and more muscular, they're neglecting to mention that this was one of our early ancestors who were bred into EXTINCTION by the homo sapiens. Not a particularly compelling argument to be like them.

Human beings are omnivores only in the sense that we have developed an ability to consume animal proteins and meat out of a strong desire to survive. We are not developed in any way to eat meat daily, or even weekly. It was meant to be used as a last ditch effort to eat, and something that we could eat IF WE HAD NEED. We are not equipped with ANYTHING meant to take down another animal, and even the old argument of our teeth is bogus. We're meant to eat plants, fruits, nuts, roots, and other such things. We're not even meant to cook most of our food--other animals don't cook their food! This is something we learned to do that has, in fact, reduced the amount of nutrition we receive from our foods.

So, while most of the information present is good, and very helpful in debunking major lies that the TV and government tell us, it can be misleading. Drinking another animal's breast milk isn't a good source of anything meant for us. Eating another animal on a regular basis in not an appropriate diet. Eating food that we cook (or HAVE to cook in order to eat) are being consumed in a way that was not intended. Our bodies are not equipped with flame throwers--our stomachs were not created to only accept food that has been cooked.

Saying that we figured these things out with our brains, and that they are therefore "meant" to be is a faulty logic of epic proportions. In fact, even some of our biggest advancements of society through our brains (our "medicine" for example) are all things we developed to counter act the problems we created through our "development" of our diet and exercise beliefs. For example, rather than inventing an incredible system of dental care and oral hygiene...we could just stop eating an incredibly high diet of sugar, corn syrup, and carbohydrates from grains. But, unfortunately, we are too smart for that.

Getting Off The Meat, One Step At A Time

We've heard the old standbys several times already about red meat vs poultry vs fish. Red meat is sin; poultry is okay; fish is best. But, the thing that this supposes is that meat, in terms of animal protein, is inherently good for us.

Is it?

A lot of the recent efforts behind the pushes towards veganism and vegetarianism have been to not only say that eating less meat is better for you, but that eating any meat at all is not good for you. This has been an attempt to show that the non-meat eating ways isn't just about saving the chickens and the cows, or making a political statement, but about eating better.

I, personally, once again fall on the fence of this. On one hand, I've seen some information that's made some very convincing arguments against the consumption of meat, even underscoring that our "omnivore" status has been greatly exaggerated over the years. On the other, I won't deny the tastiness of meat. I want to enjoy my life, as well as live for as long as possible. So, there needs to be a balance.

The most important change of our lifestyle has come from a movement away from thinking of ourselves as Meat Eaters Who Can Also Eat Vegetables, but as Plant Eaters Who Can Also If Necessary Eat Some Meat Too. One of the best ways to do this is to change the fundamental construction of the meal. American culture has the focus on the meat, with vegetables and grains serving as sides.

My suggestion is to simply move that around. Have instead a meal where you put vegetables as the "meat"¹ and use the meat as a side dish. I won't get into grains here and now, so let's say that if you have them, you should keep them as a side dish. That's pretty good. Even better is cutting out the meat altogether, and replacing it with something like cashews/almonds/sunflower seeds/etc. Stay away from beans as an option, even though you've been taught that they are a good source of protein--they have other factors that make them very difficult to digest for a human, which is why they are frequently a source of gas.

Give it a try. It's a good way to get started on making meat no longer a focal point of all your meals, and helping to teach your brain to eat meat in smaller portions.

----

FOOTNOTES:

1. Some great ways to help with the visualization of this shift is to get a vegetable that is big. Sometimes a bunch of small vegetables just doesn't do it for your eyes. I've found things like rounds of American eggplants, or wide slices of squash, or thick slices of grilled zucchini, help to visually make you feel like you have something big on your plate. You can serve this on top of a bed of smaller vegetables, or even some greens like spinach or green leaf. Try to get the presentation of the vegetables as close to what you'd expect with a good cut of meat at a restaurant, without spending too much time on it. Remember, you're trying to trick your mind into thinking that meals revolve around VEGETABLES and not meat. It'll take some time.

Lies The TV Tells Us: Milk

This post has been a long time coming, mostly because this is my “baby.” This is The Issue which I will fight for hours on, until I have finally driven my point home so hard that no one can refute it. It bothers me more than any other nutritional lie ever made by man:

“Human beings need to drink cow’s milk.”

Maybe, maybe, I could work with it as a problem of “human beings can drink cow’s milk.” But, no, it is not the assertion that we are capable of consuming it, but that we should drink, no, need to drink it. This is the lie that the TV tells us. Who has not encountered the “Got Milk?” advertising campaign in their lifetime? Make no mistake, it is as much of an advertising campaign as Sprite’s “Quench your thirst” is.

My favorite fallacy is that it’s needed for calcium. When I ask people, “If you were low on calcium, what should you do?” They all respond: “Drink milk.”

Let’s look at some facts, shall we?

Several sources list the amount of calcium in a single cup of milk as being approximately 300mg¹, so let’s take that as the “absolute” in calcium that a cup of milk has to offer. Let’s not forget that other substances can have just that same amount of calcium added to it (like orange juice and soy milk), because let’s pretend for a moment that we don’t agree with drinking processed juice, and don’t agree with ingesting too much soy.

So, milk is the best, is it?

Except that 1oz of sesame seeds is around the same amount of a cup of milk. That is, it comes in at 277mg of calcium, or rounded up, 300mg. Now, sesame seeds have other things that may affect whether or not one wants to replace milk with them. For around an ounce of seeds, they come in near around the same amount of calories as a cup of milk (158), and they do have 12 grams of (good) fat. This essentially comes to a point of coming with the same vices and virtues of this cup of milk. Sesame seeds have other benefits as well, but it may be that even being able to knock out the entire need for calcium per day without a single dairy product won’t be enough. (Even in the form of things like Tahini, in addition to sprinkled sesame seeds.) Note: These figures are for whole toasted sesame seeds, and do not necessarily apply to untoasted sesame seeds, or black sesame seeds/white sesame seeds. These are just general figures, meant to illustrate a point.²

There are other leafy green vegetable options for calcium intake, though perhaps not quite as so obviously comparable with milk. (Raw) Kale comes in at around 33 calories and 91mg of calcium for every 1 cup (67 grams) (kale has many, many good features, but it not necessarily the most tasty of vegetables). A cup of (raw) broccoli (91 grams) is around 31 calories and 43 mg of calcium. A cup of (raw) cabbage (89 grams) is 22 calories, with 36 mg of calcium.³

What I seek to prove by throwing out some of these numbers is that calcium is in more than just milk. And unlike milk, which is a drink, these are food products. You can have a meal with broccoli and cabbage as part of vegetable dishes, with an ounce of sesame seeds, and feel full, without the “need” of including a glass of milk. Milk, and milk products, are not necessary to get sufficient amounts of calcium on a daily basis.

This brings me to my less number-driven point of contention: why does a grown human being “need” to drink another animal’s breast milk?

If I said to another human being that at 23-years-old, I drank three glasses of fortified human breast milk, I would get looks ranging from deep disgust to sincere concern. No one would think to say, “Well, I guess that makes more sense than drinking the breast milk of a cow!” The fact is, it is strange to drink breast milk past a certain age. It is even more strange to drink the breast of milk of another animal, one with which we share very few things in common. It is not as if we drink the breast milk of chimpanzees, who share at the least a good deal of our DNA. No, we drink the milk meant to bring up a baby cow, and we tell ourselves that it’s for our own good.

There is no way that this can make sense. There is no argument that can undo this basic principal of wrongness. We are not cows--we have never been cows, and never will be cows. To even drink milk requires many steps of processing, especially adding in things like calcium, Vitamin A, Vitamin D, and so on.

But, this is once again the beauty of advertising. If you inundate the populace for a long enough period of time, back it with enough money, you can convince people of anything. You can convince them that grown human beings need breast milk from a bovine. You can convince them that this is the best--maybe even only--way to get calcium.

Even the fact that we milk cows is something bizarre. We keep them in a permanent state of lactation, to the point where it becomes painful to them if they are not milked. When we hear that “cows have to be milked or it’s painful” we accept this as fact, without ever considering, what did cows do before humans began milking them? We didn’t always do this. In fact, in some parts of the world, this did not become a part of the culture until Western influences infiltrated.

By now, most people are familiar with the term “lactose intolerance.” Once again, the beauty of advertising. Because truly, it is not that some people are lactose “intolerant;” it is that some people have become lactose tolerant. They have learned to adjust, over the thousands of years they’ve subjected themselves to milk, to the consumption of milk. It doesn’t mean that milk is good for them, just that it isn’t as painful to consume it, as it is for others.

Ultimately, many of the claims of milk are not unlike the claims of other food products with a government based advertising system in place. Is drinking milk better than not consuming any food, in terms of delivering calcium? Yes. But, when a regular meal with good, leafy vegetables does the trick, why add in all the other aspects of milk and dairy? Is drinking milk helpful for certain conditions, like sleep deprivation? Perhaps, from a control of doing nothing at all. But, can you find other ways that don’t involve milk that are, in fact, better? Absolutely.⁴

Being “better” does not always mean “best.” And when it comes to milk, cow milk, a lot of the facts get trapped in misleading jargon.

The bottom line is this folks: milk isn’t necessary. Milk isn’t even good for you. Milk is not the way to get the calcium you need.

Milk may make some things taste good, and it makes delicious things like cheese, and butter. And I will be the first to say, even if it’ll make you live until you’re over 120 if you never touch another dairy product again, there’s something to be said about not taking all the fun out of eating. However, it should be noted that these things should be limited. Even if you’ve already constricted things like butter and cheese, aware of the high fat/calorie content of these, you should still think further. Milk, yogurt, frozen yogurt, ice cream, and so forth, are all things that should be put on the “use with caution” list. If possible, eliminate them altogether. Should you go through a period of time when these things aren’t necessary to your enjoyment of food, try to avoid them as absolutely as possible. Even if you eventually incorporate an amount later, use as sparingly as you can.

Do not be mislead by the lies the TV tells you. It’s trying to sell you something, not look out for your bodily needs. Always keep this in mind, even when it’s telling you that something is “good for you.”⁶

Additional Reading:

1. Excerpt on milk and milk related products in relationship to the body; contains information on what calcium is good for, and why Americans require more calcium than other nationalities: http://www.freedomyou.com/nutrition_book/milk%20and%20cookies.htm

2. More information on what milk is, why it isn’t the same across the board (species differences, milk vs. human milk), and further information on the actual business of standard milk (versus organic, local milk): http://www.notmilk.com/kradjian.html

3. Another author breaking down the myths of milk in a systematic way: http://www.ultrawellness.com/blog/why-you-should-avoid-milk

There are others, but these area few I think that offer up a pretty focused argument. Others that are more comprehensive attacks are usually on more than just milk (including grains, legumes, and meat), and this is a topic I wish to focus on especially. You may notice that most of these dissenters are what are known as “fringe” scientists, that is, they fall into the minority opinion. I hope that no one is so naïve as to believe that money does not influence greatly scientific studies, or language, or advertisement. There isn’t a lot of money backing sesame seeds, for instance, so there won’t be a long running series of commercials saying “Got sesame seeds?” complete with dozens of studies about how sesame seeds can save you from cancer, osteoporosis, cavities, insomnia, etc, etc.

SOURCES:

[1] http://www.nichd.nih.gov/milk/prob/milk_cal.cfm

 

http://www.fitsugar.com/How-Much-Calcium-182622

http://www.calciuminfo.com/about/foodsources.aspx

[2] http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/nut-and-seed-products/3071/2

[3] http://nutritiondata.self.com/

[4] http://www.gotmilk.com/#/benefits/sleep/info/ [Note the use of language here, meant to lead you into believing that if you drink milk, you will sleep better. The reality is that these studies are based on very skewed results, and don’t examine this affect in relationship to other natural sleep aids such as melatonin, valerian root, or chamomile. This also did not address magnesium’s relationship to sleep, which is found in abundance again in dark leafy green vegetables (such as kale) and seeds (like sesame seeds). These would provide the exact same functions of milk on two levels, which is, of course, why they were not compared with milk in these studies.]

[5] http://www.gotmilk.com/#/benefits/teeth/info/ [Again note language and misleading information. Please, for your own benefit, look into this. You have the internet at your disposal, utilize it. Milk does not help prevent cavities.]

Smoothie, Dip, and Environmentalism

Today is a good day. It's started off well, primarily because I started it with a great smoothie. We've advanced from just a big quantity of fruit with either greens or nuts. I've utilised more and more of my own ideas from concepts I got from Raw Foods books.

This morning's smoothie was a great Winter smoothie. For those of you in colder places, even colder than here, is sometimes a challenge. All you want is something hot. For that, in my own case, I drink a cup of tea or hot lemon+honey water. But, if it's not enough, don't force yourself to be uncomfortable. Still, there are those who still have warm weather even in the winter, and I think sometimes a smoothie would actually taste very nice for the added fact that it's chilled.

By now, I'm sure some people are starting to crave the neat pastries that get put out around now. They're all pretty much using the same flavors: cinnamon, nutmeg, clove, vanilla, etc. One of the ways to get yourself in that mood, without eating those things, is to add the ingredients to something you CAN eat. For example:

"Eggnog" Smoothie:
2 cups (vanilla) almond milk
1 cup frozen mango
1 cup frozen strawberries
1/2 tsp of vanilla extract
A good shake of nutmeg (maybe 1/4 tsp to 1/2 tsp)
(Add in water if you're having trouble with the smoothie not processing, or if you don't have enough for at least two servings)

This created a smooth, relatively thin drink with a distinctive vanilla and nutmeg taste. It makes it taste surprisingly like a fruity eggnog. I've mentioned it before--I'm not going to tell you something tastes like another thing if it doesn't really. This really does remind me strongly of eggnog. It has a really neat color; it's a sort of orange sorbet look. I wish I had a working camera so I could snap a shot of it, but alas, that will be some other time.

Additionally today, for lunch, there's another go at our "Ranch" dip made of cashews, olive oil, lemon juice, miso, water, dry mustard, onion granules, basil and tarragon. I may be missing an ingredient or two, but since I'm not really giving the recipe so much as a list of what it is in general, it should be fine.

To round out this entry is a brief commentary on Toyota's latest attempt at establishing a better image for itself (particular after the recall fiasco): "Toyota Ideas For Good." From their website:

Big ideas are bigger than cars. Toyota has proved this time and time again by sharing our big inventions with the world outside of cars. Everybody has a few good ideas, and Toyota wants to help make some of them a reality. So we’re sharing some of our most innovative technologies with you in the hope that you’ll share your good ideas to improve the world.

One winner in each of the five technology categories could have their idea become a reality. Winners will be determined by a formula based on input from our panel of gurus and the general public. The winners will get their pick of a new 2011 Prius, 2011 Venza or 2011 Highlander Hybrid. See the Official Rules. Together we can do some real good and make a difference we couldn’t have made alone.

1) Pick from one of five technologies
2) Share your creative way to use them to improve our lives beyond cars
3) Check out and support other submissions

 

Boyfriend went in and read many of them, and his reaction was rather extreme. Apparently, some are really, really awful. I'm not sure (as I was only interested enough to go through about 12 or so, and the ideas were often shoved in alongside things like "SAVE TEH KITTENS!!!!" or "PPL LYKE DON'T HAVE CLEAN WATER!!!!" that made me go, uh...you have a limited amount of space to write this idea, and you're shoving in propaganda instead of a better plan for how these things could be adapted for these circumstances? Seriously? Do you know anything about technology or are you just guessing?) if it was the ideas being engineering/structurally unsound, or if he was as annoyed at the presentation of many of the ideas as I was.

He submitted three ideas himself, one for three different technologies. One that takes a small solar array and applies it to the concept used in southern humid states to have continual circulating air on a slow moving fan belt. A second that suggests using the new "touch tracer" to be applied to firefighters, military, or other professions where voice communication is often not practical. And a third that suggests applying what Toyota has learned about the foot to footwear. If you're interested, you can check it out. Simply go to Toyota's website, and look for "IDEAS FOR GOOD" and follow the rabbit hole.

Smoothies And Portion Control

It's been two months, as we end November, since I started to include more Raw Food in my diet. It's also been now seven months since I began to make daily bento for both Boyfriend and myself.

I've been doing a lot of talking about weight with my friends lately. I suppose it's just the natural course of things in America, with this time of year being the absolute worst food consumption days combined with the most pressure and despair. The end of the year is coming, and with it, my own personal goal of reaching 120lbs again.

Anyone who has known me for any real length of time where I was at some point or another under pressure or stress knows that I maintain that I will gain weight during this time, even if I'm not eating much at all. My body just doesn't process the food properly, and I think it misinterprets the mental stress as physical distress. In any case, I put on the pounds weekly.

I've never been under as much pressure as I have put on myself these past few months studying for the JLPT 3, a level that is almost beyond my reach if only because of how far behind I am in reading and writing. I take the test this Sunday, and I can tell you right now that the thought of it makes me get dizzy. This is stress and panic at its worst.

I'm not gaining weight. For the first time in my entire life, I'm not gaining weight. I'm not exactly losing weight either, but I'm not gaining. It's the holidays and I'm stressed out to the max, and I'm not putting on weight.

There are two combined explanations for this "miracle" of mine: smoothies and portion control. With the increase in time I've spent doing other things, I've been completely unable to do more than the minimum with Raw Food. I did get an exciting new book, and that's given me some great new ideas for changing things, but I just haven't been able to do much at all. All I've been able to keep doing is the smoothies in the morning, and of course, the bentos for lunch. Dinner has been made on the fly, with about 95% of it cooked, if not 100%.

The latest in smoothies for me is trying out these nut+fruit smoothies. These recipes came from the new book, though I haven't actually done any one of the recipes exactly. I used the fruit I had and of course didn't add in the things I didn't have. This morning was a fantastic smoothie, and very filling. I like these better because of the smooth and creamy texture that gives a nice fulfilling feeling. Todays was my own creation:

2 cups raw organic Almond Milk
1 tbsp carob powder
1 mango
2 cups of sliced frozen organic peaches

That's it. I blended it very well, in stages so as not to overheat it, and it came out very rich and thick, like a milkshake. The carob powder makes it look like chocolate, and kind of smell like chocolate, but it doesn't taste like chocolate. This is okay--the taste of the carob powder is, at least to us, a pleasant taste. But, as I've mentioned before, I don't follow that believe that I should be telling you that it's a substitute for chocolate that tastes just like it. It doesn't. This doesn't mean it doesn't taste GOOD. But, if you're expecting "chocolate" and you get "not chocolate" your brain can say, "Then this is bad/gross/etc." Don't go into it thinking that it'll be exactly the same. Almond milk plus carob powder is not going to be like milk plus cacao powder. Period, end of story. It doesn't mean that you won't like the almond milk and carob powder just as much if not better though. Personally, I don't like chocolate flavored things because I feel it comes out tasting more like chalk dust than chocolate truffles. So, I'm happy with the carob powder. If you don't like it, you don't have to use it.

The second part of this "miracle" diet is that I provide a bento. For those who have never heard of bento, I suggest typing it into a search engine and checking out the results. In Japanese culture, it's as well known as the phrase "brown bag" or "lunch box" or such, and it means pretty much that. It's a type of packed food (often lunch) wherein food is packed closely together into a container. That's all there is to it. Some people go out of their way to make it ornate, or pretty, like http://www.mybentolicious.com/ but others focus on the more practical bento, like the kind that I usually make, such as from the http://justbento.com/handbook/lists archives.

The most significant point of the bentos is that it controls your portion. In our world, where portions are exceedingly large, this is even more important in many ways that what you eat. Just getting yourself to eat about 600ml of food for lunch and finding this to be a satisfying portion is a challenge at first. When I first started bento in the summer, 14lbs ago, I was basically hungry after every single bento. I wanted more food, even if I'd had filling food, because my stomach was used to much larger portions.

People talk about "shrinking their stomach" or even the very dramatic surgery of "stapling" the stomach to physically reduce the size of food they consume. You can think of bentos as a way of "stapling" your stomach in a non-invasive surgery way. There comes a point when it doesn't matter that you're eating healthier food. In fact, even in Raw Foods you can go wrong by eating too much of the wrong things, or too many high calorie foods that aren't filling enough. "Too much of a good thing" goes very far in both healthy and Raw Food philosophy.

You shouldn't be hungry all of the time. Most people who have gone on a diet like that know that eventually you get tired of being hungry all the time and gorge yourself on food. But, sometimes, if you keep eating until you feel full, you just can't lose weight. Sometimes, you can't even maintain weight. Doing something like packing a lunch, or packing a dinner, or even packing a breakfast--even if you never leave the home--makes it a lot easier to start making sure you're eating a reasonable amount of food. You also pay a lot more attention to what kind of variety of food you're getting in something like a bento. The focus of bento is on small portions with regards to color, texture, and nutrition.

Also, different people have different needs. I, who spend a lot more of my time on the computer or at a table working on something, just don't need as much food for lunch as someone who is doing a lot more activity. For me, a 550ml to 650ml container is enough. For Boyfriend, who is bigger and a male, he eats anywhere from 800ml to 900ml. With bentos, if you pack it in the exact ratio of carbs to vegetables to protein, you get around the same amount of calories per ml in the container. Sometimes we hit around that, other times it's less, and sometimes it's more. It's a rough estimate, but it's not just calories that concern me, but how much food goes in.

These days, I am full after every bento, and after every smoothie. I know I'm in a good place when I just can't finish something like a Carl's Jr "combo meal" or a 2-item combo from Panda Express because it's just too much food.

These are the two guiding principles of my "miracle" diet that is making it so I don't gain weight, and so I can get closer and closer to my goals. Like all the best "diets" this isn't a "diet" like what you go on to get in shape for a wedding and then go off; this is a lifestyle, a way of living that has nothing to do with stopping and starting things. This is how I live.

Raw Smoothies, Raw Dips, Raw Books, And...Fast Food?

I've noticed that within a lot of these Raw Food Recipe Books (calling them "cookbooks" seems somehow like an oxymoron), the author talks about how after eating raw foods for long enough, they completely stopped craving or wanting the Evil Foods. Often, the author has experienced a disease or health problem that set them on the path of Raw Foods, though this is not always the case. Some began as vegetarians and transistioned from there to vegans to raw food vegans.

But, one thing is consistent: they maintain that eating a raw food diet makes it easier to quit ingesting Evil Food.

Well, that's not true in this particular case at least. If anything, it's like being on a rollercoaster with extreme climbs and extreme drops. It seems that more we introduce raw foods into our diet, the more we want Evil Food. The cravings for things that are bad for us, that make us feel uncomfortable usually immediately after, are stronger than any aversion created by horrible sensations after consumption.

Why? All the other books would lead you to believe that once you start going raw, there's no turning back. But, not only have I decided to take a stand in the middle between raw and cooked, but I'm also not doing it for any compulsion reason. I have no health problem; I have never been a vegetarian; I don't need to lose more than 5lbs. So, the drive behind going raw comes only from an acknowledgment that raw food has more nutrients and more benefits than cooked. It arises from a realization that the TV and the government have been lying to me for my entire life about what I should and should not put into my body. Why have a cow's breast milk when I could have sesame seeds--an excellent source of natural calcium?

But, without the driving need to convert to raw foods, it becomes more of an exercise in will power. I have to compel myself to put in the extra effort to make raw foods. They're not complicated, and believe me, given some of the insanely time consuming recipes out there for the cooked foods, raw foods just can't really compete. Most of the time, it's you, vegetables, and a blender. Bzzzzzzzz. Ta-da--food's ready.

The effort it takes to have the ingredients, and the prep-work, and the careful planning is what begins to take it's toll. Trying to have both cooked and raw food is like juggling. And eventually, I start feeling more and more like I don't want to put the effort or time in, for either. So, I think of what I can get right now; I think of what kind of "fast" food I can get.

I think part of it is the mind game. You feel you're eating healthy, so you assume that must mean you are depriving yourself. And, no matter what the raw food gurus will say about the deliciousness of fresh fruit and veggies, the fact is that we've been conditioned to value the taste of fat, oil, and sugar. Getting away from that is more than a simple process of just eating more and more vegetables and fruits and telling yourself that it's yummy--especially if you keep the option of cooked food on the proverbial table.

The bottom line comes down to being able to control yourself. Sometimes, you won't be able to. In fact, sometimes, you probably shouldn't. It's been my personal experience that sometimes it's better to let yourself hit rock bottom and climb out of the hole, rather than use up all your energy fighting the fall, only to land near the bottom, and have no energy left to climb back up. So, I've let it happen. I've let the fast food--the Panda Express, the Burgerville, the Siam Village, the Taco Bell, etc--come. I was dumb about it mind you--still counted my calories, and watched what I ate, and when it was possible to order a veggie burger in place of beef I took it, but I didn't avoid the fries. I didn't avoid the taco shells, or the tortillas.

Now, here we are, getting to the end of November, and I've craved myself out. I don't need any more. I didn't gain any weight, and I didn't lose all of my health benefits--no acne, no dull hair, no fatigue. Because I've still be keeping the other things coming--still drinking the smoothies, still eating the dips and pates filled with vegetables, still eating less meat and more vegetables at dinner times.

But, I've reached a balance again. I can keep up with the raw foods again, paired with my regular diet (which still has no milk or butter, and very rarely any cheese), and keep on. I know that I might end up once again with the problem of the cravings, and I'll have to decide again if I'm going to indulge it and let it run its course or try and fight it.

The one thing that is certain though is that I won't lie about it. I won't tell you that I'm magically cured of all desire for a hamburger and French fries; pizza with creamy white sauce, feta cheese, and roasted red peppers; Kobari beef, Mandarin chicken, and steamed vegetables. Because I'm not. And I don't expect that everyone who gets into raw foods will be either.

Falling Off The Wagon

I don't know how many times I can say it before it becomes old, but the basic tenet of my philosophy is that I'm not going to go completely raw. I'm not even going to go mostly raw, at least not any time soon. And for the past two weeks, I've been eating less raw food than before.

The reason is that it just hasn't been fitting into my schedule. I haven't been able to get up the energy and enthusiasm to make something. I haven't been interested in making cooked food either.

But, there are certain things I have not changed, and not given up: morning green and fruit smoothies. This is the one thing that even when I'm really not doing anything else, it's what I keep on the eating schedule.

Today, I finally returned to my proposed schedule. Lunch was raw veggies and a raw pate/dip, with a side of short grain rice (prepared Japanese style, which involves rinsing and soaking the rice prior to cooking). Breakfast was an apple, orange, raspberry, romaine smoothie. Tonight, I'm going to make some more smoothies that involve mangos and bananas. I have noticed that smoothies that don't include something substantial like a mango (or papaya or banana) are not as filling. It makes it hard to go through the day without snacking.

So, a reminder to myself and to all others trying to get into Raw Foods--you don't need to go 100% raw on even the second month. You don't even have to stay super healthy. You can eat a Chicken burger on sprouted grains bread with tomato, lettuce, ketchup, and mayo with a side of beans and Mexican rice (like we did last night). You can have curry vegetables with udon noodles (like we did the night before). You can have tuna with chopped celery, short grain white rice, steamed broccoli, stir fried carrots and water chestnuts, and raisins (like we did for lunch the other day). And, yes, you can even have Basil chicken with phad noodles, medium grain rice, and a side of fries (like we'll be having this evening at our local Viet Thai bistro we try to visit once a month).

But, tomorrow we'll be having our standard morning smoothie. Lunch will involve a raw pate and dipping vegetables. It'll also involve meat, and rice. And that's okay.

Smoothies: How To Begin

I live in Oregon, where I have access to the great and wonderful Powell's Bookstore, which is by far the most awesome bookstore I have ever been in. I've been to Barnes and Noble so many times, I know just about every possible orientation that the bookstore can take. I know books. I know where to go when I want a lot of variety, the newest and greatest, or the cheapest deal.

That being said, one of the biggest challenges I have come to encounter is the real lack of the Raw Food book that I need. So far, the only one I have found that I would have bought even if my mother had not purchased it for me is Rene Oswald's "Transistioning To Living Cuisine." I have looked through about 15 other Raw Food books (which, if you're of the initiated you will recognize is near miraculous, given have few there really are available in a standard bookstore), and not a one of them does what I need.

I am not going to go all raw. It's just not going to happen. I love hot food. It's just not something that I can give up, anymore than if someone forbade me from taking hot showers. So, I need something that doesn't just have a list of recipes, ranging from advanced to intermediate--not in terms of difficulty, because seriously, putting vegetables/fruits/nuts/etc into a blender is something a seven-year-old can handle.

No, it's how "raw" it is that I am concerned with. I don't want to just start throwing it into my diet and "seeing what happens." I know what happens. You spend most of the time alternating between feeling slightly sick and slightly healthier. Mostly though, you're just uncomfortable. I know this from bitter, bitter experience when I had to change my diet from the worst unhealthy American inspired diet to one that included green things that weren't on a pizza. I spent about four days in absolute shock. It was not pretty.

And that is where the idea of "transitioning" appeals to me like nothing else. I've seen the breakfast suggestions of other Raw Food recipe books, and I can tell you right now that if you're just an average person, neither vegan nor vegetarian, let alone raw, you will have problems with them. They're so unfamiliar, and filled with things your body hasn't had to deal with in a long time, possibly your entire life.

But, who hasn't thought about how much healthier it would be to eat fruit in the morning? It's very easy to our Western minds. In other countries, such as Japan, vegetables and fish are breakfast foods and fruit is considered a dessert food before anything else (though pickled plum is lunch food). It's hard for us to think about eating a salad for breakfast, or anything that involves green things. Fruit--okay. Lettuce--not so okay.

That is where I have begun. I told myself that I would do Oswald's "Level I" for all of October. I knew that this would actually be a challenge not to stick with it (I have no trouble with the idea of adding in something like fruit in place of Grains and Milk to my diet), but to not go any further. The excitement of wanting to try new things, add in MORE, would be strong. And it was. But, I know that letting my body adjust would make it so much easier to feel better.

The smoothies in Level I are a combination of fruit with a leafy green or celery. I know--vegetables. Tricky. Oswald coaches the beginner to "start with fewer greens and more fruit and slowly increase the greens as desired"¹. This is important to remember: the green vegetables will alter the color of the smoothie. If you're used to Jamba Juice, with it's pretty oranges and reds and pinks and such, you're going to be initially repulsed by your smoothie. The first one I made was an awful color that I practically had to triple-dog-dare myself to drink. It tasted fantastic. But, taste alone will not get you through a smoothie. It has to look okay as well.

So, recommend several things for your first three or four smoothies. First is that using something like celery, mango, orange, and raspberries will create a mostly red smoothie. Celery doesn't dye the smoothie as much as say spinach, and the berries will dye the smoothie. It'll still be a vaguely foggy color--not bright, but it may be easier on the eyes than other things. For your fifth or sixth smoothie, I'd say that it's time to get your eyes used to green in the morning. Do something like spinach/romaine/Bibb lettuce with pineapple, apple, and peach. It'll be a brilliant lime green.

I prefer to combine Romaine/Spinach/Celery with my fruits. Those are my prefered leafy greens. I'm still shaky on Kale, which is my least favorite of all time (yes, even more than wheat grass). I think it tastes, smells, chews like grass. And many recipes call for Kale. But, I don't use it. Yes, it's very healthy, and yes, it really is good for you. But, I don't enjoy it. I don't even want to waste the meals to get used to it. And you know what--I don't have to.

That's the thing I want to impress on anyone who ever starts going more raw. Keep in mind that you should try to adjust to some things (adding in 1/4 lb of spinach to a smoothie, for instance), but there are lines you are allowed to draw. You hate wheat grass with the passion of a thousand suns? Bye bye wheat grass. Don't get so caught up in the idea that you aren't allowed to have preferences anymore. If someone told you that part of the American diet was stewed cabbage, and you hate stewed cabbage, you wouldn't say that you can't do the American diet. You'd say that you hate and don't eat stewed cabbage. It's the same with Raw Foods. Just because it's healthy and good for you, or included in a recipe, it doesn't mean you have to do it. Pick and choose your battles.

I also prefer several fruits to my smoothie. I usually pick three, for a variety of flavor. I tried a five fruit one, and I found that the flavors of the fruit were completely lost in each other. Sticking to two or three means that I taste them more. It also means I can add in more leafy greens, and a little more water. I prefer my smoothies very easy to drink. I also prefer them to fill up a glass. This comes from a lifetime of eating food on a plate. To my mind, drinking something is not food. It's a drink. So, I help this mental block by making sure that I fill about 3/4 of a big glass with a smoothie. The more I have to eat (even though really, it's the same amount of nutrients as a thicker smoothie), the more I'm convinced that I have eaten a meal. I fill up my stomach with the smoothie so it doesn't say, "That was nice. Now where's breakfast?"

It's also easier than breakfast was because with two people drinking 3/4 of a big tall glass (about 3/4 of a pint actually), each time I make a smoothie it lasts two days. That's about how long it lasts in the fridge regardless, and it really is just a ridiculously easy breakfast: pour and drink. I put mine in canning jars because I was thinking ahead for when I'd need to soak/sprout things. It helps with the airtight seal, and it gives us a good idea of how much we're drinking each day (since each one is a pint).

Making and drinking a smoothie in the morning isn't so huge a change. Neither of us noticed a change in energy from carbohydrates initially--which is itself a good thing. It can be tempting to think, "But, I need my toast in the morning or I get too hungry by lunch" and "I need to have my eggs and sausage, or I don't have enough energy." The truth is, you will sometimes get hungry quick, about on the same timeline as if you ate a bowl of cereal or oatmeal. It's okay. If it's unbearable, or you work a 9-5 type job, then bring a snack. Or, heck, bring more of the smoothie in one of those coffee/tea stainless steel containers.

The really imporant thing to remember isn't to include the smoothie, to replace the typical breakfast with something different. The important thing is to just change this one thing. About halfway through the month, I'd recommend that you start with the "soups" (essentially vegetable smoothies, but it's so much harder for our American trained minds to drink pureed vegetables from a cup, and easier to put it in a bowl and call it a soup). They're a little trickier to get around, because they're cold or room temperature. But, that's another day.

Keep everything else the same. Transition. Buy the fruits and green leafy vegetables in place of your milk, cereal, bread, bacon, etc.

I leave you with an example of the smoothie I've had recently, adapted for the complete newcomer:

-2 cups of water
-1 stalk of fairly good size celery
-1 mango, cut into pieces
-1 cup of frozen peach slices
-1 cup of frozen raspberries

Add in the water and celery first, and blend it until it's a green water. Then add the fruit, taking care to adjust for your blender's capacity. If you don't have at least a 600 watt motor, make sure you cut up the pieces quite small, or it'll have trouble blending it to a smooth consistency. The smoothie should come out as a vaguely red/pink color. My personal suggestion is to adjust adding more fruit/water/etc if it's not enough for you, too thick, too thin, etc. If you like to have bits to chew on, don't blend it as smooth. Keep in mind that any smoothie with raspberries/blackberries/marion berries/etc will have seeds, and will not usually be as smooth.

Footnotes

[1] Oswald pg. 5 of Transitioning To Living Cuisine

Sources

Oswald, Rene, and Allan Oswald. Transitioning To Living Cuisine. Palm Beach Gardens: Rene Oswald, 2010. Print.

The Transition To Raw Foods: Why It Seems Harder Than It Is

 One of the purposes of this blog is to help bridge a gap that I have perceived over the past two months, as well as my adult life. Vegetarianism, Veganism, and Raw Food-ism have all become linked with a certain type of lifestyle, a certain type of person. That person is a source of mocking in our eyes--a strange person who wears weird clothes and talks strange, refers to foods that don't sound like foods at all (mung beans! MUNG?!), and can't seem to talk about anything other than their diet or how they helped saved the planet today.

That’s not me. It’s not even someone I want to be. Yet, I want to incorporate Raw Foods and even Veganism into my diet. Can there ever be a separation between The Raw Food Vegan and raw food veganism?

The Boyfriend and I were talking the other day about what my plan is with Raw Foods, and it came up that he's been getting a certain reputation at work for being The Healthy Guy.^[1] We both found this very amusing, since he's most attached to his meat and cheese--and that's not to speak of his love affair with bread. Yet, he's been getting this reputation simply on the fact that he's mentioned his breakfast^[2], and they see his lunches (packed by me, called "bento" which I'll discuss another time). They assume that he's "that kind of person."

The reality is that though he is very conscious of the environment, as both of us are, diet is not his main concern. Sustainable living is his passion, and green technology is his chosen career. However, people have come to link certain things together as inevitable connections. And perhaps they have reason to, because people who are drawn to things like the environment tend to be people who are willing to look into different ways of living. They are more willing to wonder if there is Another Way Of Doing Things.

This brings me to my own experience with Raw Foods. I recently visited the Family in Florida. My mom has recently discovered Raw Foods for her own purposes, and has been transitioning to living food with the same passion that she pursues everything. I was a little wary until I heard her declare that she just really doesn't think she could ever go fully vegan, or even fully raw. It was the first time my mom has ever said that she wasn't going to really do something 110%. So, I wondered about this newest diet turn of hers. Was it only partially good? Or was it just that it was extreme, and she didn’t want to turn into an extremist? This from the woman who banned all grains and dairy from her life—the basic tenets of American living—how extreme could this diet possibly be?

Naturally, as I was curious about this alternative diet I just didn’t know a lot about, when I was there, I agreed to all sorts of things to explore this diet. I'd only heard of Raw Foods diets in scorn or condescension, and I know better than make a judgment of a diet when I've never heard it spoken of highly. After all, if you only hear one side of an argument, it makes it very difficult to disagree with it. Still, armed with the knowledge that even standard nutritionists admit that cooking food decreases its nutrients, and comforted by my mom’s insistence that she wasn’t just going to bombard me with raw food, I approached it with an open mind.

The main thing I found was that I hadn't really known just how much effort has been put into making raw foods more than just a bunch of uncooked raw vegetables on a plate. I know that when most people think of Raw Foods, they think of a thing of broccoli, just a head of it, that they're expected to eat. And they think, "I need to have variety. I need to be able to do more than just eat raw vegetables!"

That's where these new "cook" books come into play. I'm not the kind of person who usually enjoys it when people try to make one food resemble another--my least favorite dinner in the history of dinners my mom makes is spaghetti squash with cauliflower "mashed potatoes." But, there is an extent to which this becomes necessary in Raw Foods, so that you don't feel like you're eliminating all options from your life.

The most brilliant thing is that time and effort has been spent in recreating "ethnic" cooking--such as Mexican, French, Italian, and so on. When people think Raw Food, they eliminate all sorts of things, mistakenly, such as sauces, pates, flat breads, and soft tortillas, because they think that these can only be created by cooking. But, the fact is that you can do these things in Raw Food--you can make creamy desserts, you can make pie, you can make bread, you can make lasagna. It's just with different foods than you're used to thinking makes up these things.

I've decided to go more raw, to get away from the American way of living. Several things factored into this decision. First off, as a girl who has had to struggle with her weight, I know full well that if you eat a single slice of pizza, it doesn’t matter that it’s 600 calories, and that’s how much your meal should be. You can’t just eat one slice. You’ll be hungry. Eating a Raw Foods meal that’s 600 calories that leaves you feeling stuffed is a much better purchase of your calories. That alone would be a reason to convert. However, I have more. A second reason why I want to go increasingly raw is that I don’t really enjoy cooking. I’m good at it, but I don’t have a good time in the kitchen. The less time I spend cooking, the better. There are things with Raw Foods that require time, but the actual time that I spend cooking—standing over something actively participating in it—is significantly less. And a third reason is that I simply want to be able to eat more interesting foods. I’ve had to stay away from the heavy sauces and breads and desserts for so long now, knowing that eating too much of them will kill me in the long run, always rationing it out, that the idea that I could have more of those types of things every day is just too good to be true. It is true.

I'd already been away from American cooking for a while now, following more closely to Asian principles of cooking. But, I am not one of those people who have ever been vegetarian, let alone vegan, nor have I ever not cooked most of my food.

However, it feels to me like most people don't really start from zero when it comes to approaching Raw Foods. They come at it from already having gone healthier--maybe it's as simple as starting to go more organic, or maybe they've always been raised to be more health conscious. Or maybe it's just that they're a girl/woman who has struggled with her weight, and she's used to looking at the nutritional information for everything and keeping a running tally of her calories for the day. Whatever it is, these people don't come into Raw Food living completely unaware that the American diet is screwed up.

That's part of the problem. It's almost as if Raw Foods is some sort of high level in a video game that you can only get to having gone through the lower levels first. It's the Big Bad at the end--the Final Boss. And of course, that means it has to be the most difficult to beat.

That's making this unnecessarily complicated.

Whatever you're used to, wherever you may come from when it comes to nutrition, the important thing is to learn how to question what you've been taught. That's the first step--to use your sense of logical reasoning to untangle the arguments you've been presented. Everything that I say here should be subject to your own scrutiny. You should wonder. When you watch something on TV, or see it in a magazine, or any other source, you should ask yourself about it. Ask yourself if there might be something else they aren't saying. I know that it's easier to not have to worry constantly if they are lying to you one way or another, but the fact is that you're waging a war against misinformation for your own life.

You don't want to die from cancer; you don't want to be obese; you don't want to have a heart attack. But, the idea of having to be a "new age hippie" who only eats raw vegetables, who everyone will make fun of, is equally repulsive in a strange way.

This is my point, my own challenge: how to straddle that fence between health and the perceived idea of normal. I want to live my life without being consumed by the society of Raw Foods or Vegans or even just Health Conscious People. I don't want to fall into that black hole of "weird" or "strange" or such, not because I care what people think to label me, but because I know that there are people out there who really do fear that level of social disapproval. And I want to prove to them that they don't have to go that far. I know it'll be hard to straddle that fence. It really will be like trying to be half an atheist and half a Christian. You either believe in Raw Foods or you don't; you either are a New Age Hippie type or you're an American; you either live green or you don't. But, it doesn't have to be that way.

It's possible. And I'm going to prove it.

Footnotes

1. Boyfriend works at Nike as a Materials Researcher, trying to find a way to recycle composite material into continually making new products, so that recycling can be a real option. More on recycling in another post, possibly by the Boyfriend, who has had to research it.

2. We’ve been starting the transition to living food through morning fruit smoothies, and green soups. Today’s is a pineapple-mango-peach-romaine, which is a brilliant lime green color, and tastes Jamba Juice delicious.

Lies The Television Tells Us: Eat This Fiber Rich Cereal

One of the most amazing things in this American world of ours is the absolute power of advertisers. It was what finally has moved me over the edge that I've been hovering on about starting up a blog entirely dedicated to what I affectionately refer to as my "new age hippie beginnings." I've held the arguments before in private contexts, but whenever I think about the ease in which Americans can be mislead by the advertisements they see, I feel that perhaps by putting out another blog that tries to advocate for a different side it can at least present a method to undo what is done everyday.

People have already done things like publish books, articles, and so on. To an extent, the average person probably feels like they "know" what is healthy. They think, "I know to drink only 1% or 2% milk. I know to eat whole grains. I know that I need fiber and to stay away from cholesterol and I shouldn't eat too much red meat."

And the most ridiculous thing is that these statements are rooted in a lie. I'll discuss those particular lies another time--my favorite is the argument for milk which apparently "does a body good" according to the TV--but today, I have been moved to talk about a particular advertisement that I encountered.

It is an ad by Kellog advertising that "9 out of 10 children don't get enough fiber. Fruit Loops, Corn Pops, and Apple Jacks have 3 grams of fiber in every bowl which is what your child needs."^[1] I was blown away by this, caught equally between amusement and horror. I was both amused and horrified for the same reasons:

1. They toss out the facts like 9/10 children not getting enough fiber, and that 3 grams is significant, as if everyone should just agree. No data, no backing, nothing. As if it's a secret club that a responsible parent should know that a child needs "3 grams of fiber."

2. They completely bypass everything else the cereal contains, like say, massive amounts of sugar, chemicals, and so on.

One of the things that is so difficult in dealing with something like this is that there is a complete monopoly on what gets spread around as "common knowledge" in terms of  nutrition. There is no other side advertising why it's important to eat something like fruits in the morning, instead of any of these other options.

I won't, as I said, get into my fun rant about milk, which is used in cereal. Not today. But, instead I want to just deconstruct Kellog's argument from the same angle that they're approaching it: the idea of increasing fiber. Let us, for the moment, pretend that grains don't clog up the works and contain enzymes that can prevent regular bowel movements (I have always wanted to be able to say the words "bowel movements" on a blog--yay). Let's just check out the facts of what a parent is putting inside their child:

1 Cup (28 grams) of Apple Jacks^[2]

100 Calories

130mg of Sodium

12g of Sugar

3g of Fiber

--

1oz (28 grams) of a Peach

68 Calories

0mg of Sodium

15g of Sugar

3g of Fiber

--

1oz (28g) of Banana

25 Calories

0mg of Sodium

3g of Sugars

1g of Fiber

--

1 oz (28 grams) of Blueberries

16 Calories

0mg of Sodium

3g of Sugars

1g of Fiber

--

1 oz (28g) of Raspberries

15 Calories

0mg of Sodium

1g of Sugars

2g of Fiber

----

Now, remind yourself that these are just "nutritional facts" and have nothing to do with examining ingredients or aspects of the microbiology behind our digestive system. And understand the fiber listed in these fruits are natural--it exists by virtue of the fruit itself. The fiber in Apple Jacks is added to it--it's as valid as taking fiber and dusting it over McDonald's Big Western with extra bacon and cheese and saying that it's good for you because it has fiber!

But, no one presents this on television. No one advertises fruit as a way to eat more food for your calories, and get nutrients without artificially adding it. You can't just live on pizza and french fries, drinking milkshakes, and take multi-vitamins and say that you're getting the nutrients you need.

This is where the misinformation of media amazes me. You're told, "Your kid needs more fiber. Our cereal now has fiber!" and so you go, and you buy it, because you've heard about "fiber" and how it's important and you need it. You don't know how much you need, or what it is, or why you even need it, but you "know" that you need it. And this cereal has it. You assume that they would let you know if you need more than 3 grams, because they care about your kid, they said so.

And there's no voice at the end, no disclaimer, that adds, "Eating fresh fruit, particularly organic, non-genetically modified (non-GMO) raw fruit can provide your child with a better balance of nutrients without all the additives added to cereal, and give their body what it needs to function." Or even "Consult your physician about how much fiber you need, and how much you are already getting from your current diet." Nothing like that--nothing that might make someone question if they NEED something with more fiber, or if just adding in 3 to 6 grams of fiber is going to make any difference, or what else might need to change.

Question the TV America. You know that people can say whatever they want, and that there is an ulterior motive behind every advertisement, including those sponsored by our government. Stop pretending that you know about nutrition. It's okay to admit that you don't really know. It's not okay to just puppet what the TV has told you. It's not even okay to puppet what your high school textbook told you. Remember, Christopher Columbus discovered America, not the people we call Native Americans who were living here before we committed genocide for their space, so say our textbooks, so says the TV.

Do your research. The internet takes away excuses not to look into things. And the more you see that there are so many conflicting ideas about nutrition, the more you'll understand that maybe, just maybe, you could be operating under false information.

"Contradictions do not exist. Whenever you think you are facing a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong." -Ayn Rand "Atlas Shrugged"

Footnotes

¹Advertisment on Internet, accessed 22 October 2010

²1 cup is 28 grams. If you've ever been on a diet that included calorie counting and really measured this out, you know that 1 cup of cereal is anywhere from 1/2 to 1/3 of what an average person considers to be a "bowl of cereal." So, keep in mind that you need to at least double this for an average consumer. When you consider this, you'll realize you will quickly go from "100 calories" to "200 calories" plus the milk you'll have to add to eat it, you'll find that you only get around 65 grams of food for around 250-300 calories. For that same amount of just calories, you could eat a lot of fruit. And you can already see that it would be significantly more fiber, not to mention more food which would make you feel more full.

Examples:

A. 10oz of Blueberries with 10oz of Raspberries (283.5 grams) is 310 calories, with 45 grams of sugars, and 30 grams of fiber

B. 5oz of Banana with 3oz of Peach (226.8 grams) is 329 calories, with 60 grams of sugars, and 14 grams of fiber

Note the different in amount of food (grams) and fiber. And please keep in mind that the scary sugar levels of this is in part because these are fruits with natural sugars, not refined sugar or sugar from high fructose corn syrup. Additionally, look into the way that grains become sugar, for an even more accurate look into the idea of "sugar" as a factor in nutrition. As I said, for the moment, this post is entirely about Fiber as something that this cereal now contains.

------------
SOURCES

"Kellogg's Nutrition - Learn about Labels - Kellogg Cereal GDAs." Kellogg's Nutrition - Get a Taste for the Healthy Life™. Web. 22 Oct. 2010. http://www.kelloggsnutrition.com/learn-about-labels/kellogg-gdas.html.

Nutrition Facts, Calories in Food, Labels, Nutritional Information and Analysis – NutritionData.com. Web. 22 Oct. 2010. http://nutritiondata.self.com/.