Bacteria | Bonnie Modugno, MS, RD

Farm to Table: Visiting Organic Pastures

January 5, 2013 by Bonnie

It is not often that I get a chance to walk through a ranch or farm. I relish every opportunity. Mark McAfee of Organic Pastures invited me and my family to tour their land and operations in Fresno last week. It was a privilege and a pleasure.

I grew up with with a garden– a different kind of privilege that I didn’t appreciate at the time. After the wonder of picking my first cucumber and tomato wore off, I spent my time grousing about all the weeds to be pulled and watering to be done. Dad planted at least half of the available land on our 3/4 of an acre lot which meant there was enough zucchini for the entire neighborhood come August. I didn’t inherent dad’s green thumb which probably contributed to a disenchantment with growing anything until I read Michael Pollan’s, The Omnivore’s Dilemma many years ago. During the last five years I have developed a deeper and more insightful appreciation for our precious food supply, from farm to table. I have become a far more conscientious consumer.

When we arrived at Organic Pastures, I was immediately taken by the efficiency of the operation. Mark is positively brilliant, blending the art, science and business of producing and distributing raw milk products despite a challenging regulatory environment. We visited the trailers where milk is bottled, kefir and cheese are fermented, and butter is churned. The site was immaculate and foot washes protected each individual space, a critical factor when your product viability is all about managing bacteria.

MANAGING THE MICROBES

Raw milk products are legal in California, but receive great scrutiny. Louie Pasteur developed pasteurization in 1864 to improve the keeping qualities of wine. Commercial pasteurization of milk began in the late 1800s in Europe and in the early 1900s in the United States. Pasteurization has been the primary means of managing bacteria in commercial dairies for almost 90 years–not really all that long ago considering that man has consumed milk products from mammals for thousands of years. I suppose the early European farmers were observant enough to see that milk provides a calorie- and protein-rich food source, comes in a relatively constant supply compared to the boom-and-bust of seasonal crops, and would have been less contaminated than water supplies.

Today the raw milk controversy has become intensely polarized and has involved the FDA, FBI, USDA, CDC, and the NIH, just to name a few scientific bodies, regulatory bodies, and law enforcement agencies. In the press and in the scientific literature raw milk is mostly demonized as a severe potential health threat. Interestingly these same agencies have never considered potential benefits. The advent of mapping the human microbiome may change all that.

When it comes to the benefits of drinking raw milk and eating foods made from raw milk other scientists, clinicians, and consumers are already connecting the dots. The Weston Price Foundation is an ardent supporter of raw milk consumption. The pros and cons of consuming raw milk products are readily discussed. I starting buying raw milk over four years ago and continue to value all the benefits for everyone in my family.

The challenge has always been managing the microbes. For thousands of years, raw milk was mostly fermented into yogurt, cheese and churned into butter on a small scale for family farms and local neighbors. Drinking liquid milk came later. Not until the dawn of industrialization did communities intensely struggle with the challenge of keeping milk fresh. As more people moved to the city and the population exploded, disease from contaminated and spoiled milk was rampant. At that time up to 25% of food born illness was linked to contaminated milk. By 1924 the U.S. Public Health Service developed the Standard Milk Ordinance to assist states with voluntary pasteurization programs. In 1987 the USDA banned raw milk from being sold across state lines. Basically we are using 17th century science to minimize risk today. Raw milk proponents say science can and should do better. I agree.

Organic Pastures Creamery

Organic Alfalfa fields at Organic Pastures

This week I walked through the creamery, through the fields of organic alfalfa, past other fields ready for planting, and gazed upon the happy cows feeding on organic dried grasses in the dead of winter. I appreciate the care and attention given to the animals, the land, even the manure–a liquid gold that is used to fertilize the organic almond trees. In thirteen years Mark has created an incredibly efficient, sustainable and dynamic system where all resources are valued and utilized. There is no waste. And I saw all of this on December 31. I can’t wait to go back and pitch my tent in the vibrant growth of spring to see all those animals reveling in splendor of their grass.

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: bacteria, CDC, farm to table, FBI, FDA, grass fed, Mark McAfee, Michael Pollan, microbes, microbiome, NIH, Omnivore's Dilemma, organic, organic pastures, raw milk, sustainability, USDA, Weston Price Foundation

Do Overweight Kids Really Eat Less Than Thin Kids?

September 13, 2012 by Bonnie

Are obese children under reporting what they eat? Yoni Freedhoff, MD blasts a recently published study suggesting that obese children may even eat less than leaner peers. Is it really so preposterous that thinner kids may eat more than their obese counterparts?

To be fair, asking 7 and 10 year old children to report what they eat is probably even more unreliable than asking adults. The data isn’t good. But data I see shows that everyone under reports, at all points of the BMI spectrum.

My real concern here is that there is no consideration of other factors that influence what the body does with those calories. The scientific community should consider calorie intake, but needs to also look beyond calories. They need to consider the wider scope of factors that influence obesity in our children and everyone else.

A ROLE FOR INSULIN RESISTANCE

One of those issues is something we call “nutrient partitioning.” People who are more insulin resistant tend to preferentially store calories as fat.

Insulin resistant people secret more insulin in response to the same load of carbohydrate compared to insulin sensitive folks. This insulin surge drives fat accumulation, as if the body was taking advantage of the “harvest” and storing for winter. In one study published in 2011, it was the children with a lower BMI (and presumably the more insulin sensitive children) who reported eating more candy, more sugar, and more calories.

Another study published in 2009 showed a very different interesting response to the composition of the diet. Some kids (typically those with a lower BMI with much greater insulin sensitivity) ate a high carbohydrate breakfast and felt satisfied for hours. Kids with the higher BMI and higher insulin levels–eating the same breakfast– felt hungry in 30-60 minutes. Only when the heavier kids ate more protein in the morning, did they feel satisfied as long as their thinner counterparts.

When energy from breakfast preferentially gets stored as fat, blood sugar dives. That someone is going to feel hungry again–sometimes in as little as 30-60 minutes after eating a meal. At the same time, the elevated insulin levels literally block fat from being mobilized for fuel. No wonder insulin resistant types feel like it takes a herculean effort to lose a pound.

A ROLE FOR GUT MICROBES

Another explanation could be the role of the bacteria in our gut. Scientific reports suggest that thin people tend to house a different a ratio of beneficial bacteria in their gut compared to their heavier counterparts. Researchers suggest that the relative proportion of Bacteroidetes is decreased in obese people by comparison with lean people. Firmacutes are in higher proportion in heavier people.

In addition studies suggest that diet plays a significant role in which bacteria strain thrives. At one symposium, a researcher representing Hi Maize Resistant Starch pointed to refined carbohydrate in the American diet as a significant influence. With more resistant starch, the heavier individuals lost more weight.

A ROLE FOR ENDOCRINE DISRUPTORS

The topic getting the least attention is also probably the one that is the most overwhelming. We are polluting our environment with substances that interfere with normal metabolism. These agents are known as obesogens, endocrine disruptors (ED) and persistent organic pollutants (POPs) They disrupt thyroid function, compromise glucose tolerance and are linked to higher incidence of all kinds of metabolic disease, including diabetes, obesity, heart disease and even cancer.

As the the entire global population becomes more obese, it seems less and less likely that just calories and a refined Western diet is to blame. I have a hard time believing that even the extremely poor are eating “too much” fast food and junk, especially as leaner counterparts are eating the same thing.

TEASING OUT THE TRUTH

The tricky part is that not all people gain weight on refined carbohydrate intake. Not everyone feels hungrier after eating refined carbohydrate. And not all insulin resistant people are heavy.

All of these observations lead me to believe that relying on calorie counts to explain why some are fat and and some are thin is simplistic at best. I wonder when scientists and clinicians will openly appreciate how much we still don’t know and look beyond the calorie balance equation. It seems more blinded than ever to believe the answer to obesity is simply eat less, exercise more.

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: bacteria, BMI, calories, child obesity, endocrine disruptors, energy, fat, insulin resistance, microbes, persistent organic pollutants, thin

Welcome to the “Post Pasteurian” Era

June 16, 2012 by Bonnie

It is all becoming clear: Eating less carbohydrate, more whole foods, a stronger intake of protein and fat, less carbohydrate, the magic of raw milk, the benefits of eating close to the earth.

Mark McAfee, owner of Organic Pastures, Fresno, CA

What we eat feeds the bacteria in out gut. They have a profound influence on our immune system, inflammation, how our body perceives hunger and satiety–and we can only guess how much more.

Research regarding the human microbiome hit scientific journals this week in what could be described as swarm tactics. This insight will trigger an explosion of new theories. It is a game changer.

THE MORE WE LEARN, THE LESS WE KNOW

Dr. David Relman, a microbiologist from Stanford says, “The whole business is humbling. It seems like the more we learn, the less we know.”

Ironically, I have been searching for this piece of the puzzle for years. The clues have been accumulating, first from observing myself, and then my clients.

Back in the early 90′s I started counseling clients to eat less carbohydrate (especially less refined sugar and starch), more protein, and more healthy fats. I thought I was helping them manage their insulin response to food. I still do. But now I realize we were also feeding the bacteria flora in their gut.

EXPLORING INSULIN RESISTANCE

It seems I have always struggled with food. I remember blowing up like a balloon when I overate. I could lose weight readily when I stopped eating, leading to a nasty eating disorder in my teens. Much later on I realized a higher protein diet with far less carbohydrate was better for me. In the late ’80s this behavior was blasphemy. High carbohydrate, low fat eating was the diet of the day, but it didn’t work for me.

After regaining my health and my sanity, I started digging into the research and published my first paper regarding insulin resistance. (SCAN PULSE, Fall/1995) For over 20 years it has given me great satisfaction to share my insight.

Most of the time people benefit when they shifted to more whole foods, less refined sugars and starches, more protein and healthy fats. Good enough. But there were always curiosities that I couldn’t explain.

CONNECTING THE GI DOTS

After shifting his diet, one client came in complaining that he had just bought a case of Prilosec to treat his GERD (What used to be called heartburn), and he didn’t need it anymore.

Other clients would surrepticiously tell me about their bowel function improving. They enjoyed more regularity and no longer complained about constipation or diarrhea.

I remember one client with severe colitis. He was horribly depressed as he couldn’t leave his home and was in danger of losing his business. He slowly regained his health. We knew we had identified the culprit when he went to the movies one night and ate a bag of candy. The next 48 hours were miserable.

I had one young client see me for weight loss. She also had Crohn’s disease. She lost weight and her symptoms improved. Little did we know that an approach to food to improve her metabolism was also influencing the microbiota in her gut.

A 17 y/o male came in complaining about severe vomiting, especially in the morning. Doctors had no clue. We cleaned up his diet, added enough protein and the vomiting stopped.

LESS INFECTION, LESS INFLAMMATION

Other clues started to stack up. One client with interstitial cystitis struggled with repeated bouts of antibiotics, but no sustained benefit. She got better eating close to the earth. Another client reported incessant urinary tract infections, but they subsided eating more protein and fat, less carbohydrate.

I watch my own son. His body reacts intensely to what he eats. I know when he is eating more carbohydrate than he can handle. His body swells. His demeanor changes. He is ravenous and can’t get satisfied. Eating fewer grains and less refined sugar is critical for his well-being–despite the addiction-like attraction to just these foods.

EATING FOR THE MASSES (of bacteria in our gut)

What we eat influences how our body uses fuel. I am beginning to fully appreciate how our food influences the billions of bacteria residing in our body. This is especially true of bacteria in our gut.

I introduced raw milk into my family’s diet a couple of years ago. I needed to try something. My son’s GI tract distress was intolerable–for me. I could hardly enter his room. I thought about pro-biotics and prebiotics, but was turned off by the high prices. I wanted to try something more organic. Was there something we could be eating?

INTRODUCING GOOD BACTERIA TO OUR GUT

Raw milk entered our food supply. The impact was immediate. Less gas, less bloating, less stench. I often wonder if we are more like cows than we think. Feeding cows too much grain causes them to bloat as well.

I became a devotee of Organic Pastures raw milk. I appreciate the fact that the cows graze on pasture and the cows and the milk are regularly tested. Mark McAfee is the owner and trained as a microbiologist. It seems Mark spends every waking moment heralding the benefits of healthy bacteria in our gut.

A POST PASTEURIAN WORLD

In the Pasteurian world, all bacteria is destroyed. We sterilize, pasteurize, and sanitize our food supply to our own detriment. We need to embrace a post-Pasteurian world view, especially in regards to our food supply. We can’t continue to rely on a seek and destroy orientation to the bacterial world.

Industry needs to rethink how we grow and manage our food. Assaulting the sins of mass production with massive doses of antibiotics is a mistake

Regulatory agencies need to trust science to monitor microbes, not just seek to eradicate them. Zero tolerance needs to be a thing of the past.

We all need to learn to work with the body–and the billions of bacteria that live symbiotically with us.

What we eat has a huge influence on our health and well being. The quick fix experts will redouble their efforts touting the benefits of probiotic and prebiotic supplements. They are probably a useful Band Aid, but my guess is that our overall diet counts more.

We are inundated with an obscenely processed and adulterated food supply. We need to figure out how to survive abundance. A good starting place is consuming more whole foods like beans and legumes, fresh fruits and vegetables; maybe some whole grains, but not too much; adequate protein, and enough healthy fat. We need to embrace healthy bacteria from the right kind of raw milk and fermented foods. We all need to eat closer to the earth.

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: addiction, antibiotics, appetite, bacteria, bloating, colitis, constipation, crohn's, diarrhea, fermented food, gas, GERD, gut, hunger, immune function, inflammation, insulin resistance, microbiome, organic pastures, pasteurization, prebiotics, probiotics, raw milk, reflux, resistant starch, sugar, weight

Losing Weight Is Not a Math Problem

May 7, 2012 by Bonnie

How many times have you read “a calorie is a calorie?” Countless weight loss studies test different diets and everyone loses weight. Calories are drastically limited in most of the diets. At a deficit of 500-1000 fewer calories a day, the diets typically allow people 50-75% of recommended intake.

Of course everyone loses weight. The researchers conclude that it doesn’t matter what diet you use, all of them will work equally well. So the mantra lives on, “Eat Less, Exercise More.” But losing weight is not merely a math problem.

In more sophisticated studies, some diets works better for specific individuals. In 2007 research by Chris Gardner (a nutrition researcher at Stanford University) found that a higher carbohydrate diet helped insulin sensitive people to lose fat weight more effectively. The higher protein diet worked better for people who were insulin resistant.

Researchers with David Ludwig at Harvard University studied a group of overweight adolescents. The teens eating lower glycemic carbohydrates (more whole grains, fruits and vegetables, beans and legumes) lost more fat weight than those eating a calorie restricted low fat diet with all the usual fare.

The test subjects ate whole grains, not refined. They ate oatmeal, not sugared refined cereals. They ate more fruits and vegetables. Not chips, pretzels and other refined snacks foods. They drank water, not sodas.

The teens eating more whole foods also sustained a lower BMI even six months after the research ended. The calorie restricted subjects regained the weight lost—and more. That’s a familiar scenario for too many people.

DIETING AND DISORDERED EATING

The endless struggle to lose weight has cultivated a population of yo-yo dieters, chronic dieters, and many people with disordered eating and diagnosable eating disorders. What’s missing is an approach to food that works with the body, mind and soul of the person who is trying to lose weight. Each person needs an approach to food that works for them.

Ironically weight is not a good measure of success. Many in the medical and public health community want to believe weight is a useful way to measure health. It isn’t. Thin people develop heart disease, hypertension, diabetes, digestive disorders, and cancer. The idea that body fat drives the disease state is one of the great distortions of modern medicine.

WHAT’S DRIVING WEIGHT GAIN? WHAT’S DRIVING DISEASE?

What we eat influences our body in ways not anticipated by people who think obesity is a math problem. For most of my clients, poor metabolic health precedes the diagnosis of disease regardless of their weight.

When people eat poorly, the body adapts—and not in a good way. A diet rich in refined starches and sugar can increase insulin resistance—an underlying condition linked to diabetes, heart disease, cancer, and more.

In addition, eating refined sugar and starch promotes a different bacteria flora to reside in our digestive tract. Eating excessive refined sugar and starch promotes the secretion of gut peptides that influence appetite. Certain gut peptides, like ghrelin, signal the brain and compel us to eat more. It is even thought that the gut microbes linked with refined sugars and starches can promote fat gain.

THERE IS NO ONE RIGHT WAY TO EAT

Ideally your food plan allows your body to metabolize both fat and glucose effectively for fuel. It allows you to feel satisfied after eating. It provides you with energy needed to complete the tasks of your day—both work and play.

A successful approach includes foods you enjoy, foods that are readily available, and foods that you can afford. The actual mix of food that works for you may be very different than the mix of food that works for someone else.

WHICH DIET?

Too many people ask me what kind of diet I support. Is it Paleo? Raw Foods? Vegan? Do I promote Weight Watchers? The Zone? Pritikin?

This question reveals a distorted understanding of the process. Decades of dieting has cultivated a belief that there is one right way to eat. You just have to find it. People spend too much of their lives trying one diet after another Sometimes they get stuck trying the same one over and over and hoping for a different result.

Ironically the medical world also needs to abandon the idea that there is a single dietary approach to treat any one disease. It is critical that we start treating the patient, not the diagnosis.

There should be is no such thing as a diabetic diet, as if every diabetic will benefit by the same exact food plan. The same goes for diets promoted for any single disease, as well as weight loss itself.

AN APPROACH TO FOOD THAT WORKS

Magical thinking distracts people from the real task at hand: cultivating an approach to food that works. Too many people try and eat like a thin friend, a thin sister or the biggest loser. That food intake may actually make everything worse. It may be so unsustainable that you soon abandon the effort.

We can do better. Anyone who struggles with their weight or their health deserves to figure out an approach to food that works for them.

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: appetite, bacteria, cancer, diabetes, diet, exercise, fat, ghrelin, glycemic index, gut peptides, heart disease, obesity, Paleo, Pritikin, resistant starch, sugar, Vegan, weight loss

Resistant Starch–How much is in your diet?

April 30, 2012 by Bonnie

Resistant starch is known to impact digestion, metabolism and appetite regulation. I have been intrigued for years and signed up to hear a presentation at the California Dietetic Association meeting last week. National Starch Food Innovation sponsored the talk. They are selling a product (which I am currently testing in my own kitchen), so I knew to be aware of the slant. Yet, the science was compelling and mirrors much of what I observe in my own practice–and my own kitchen.

SOURCES OF RESISTANT STARCH IN THE FOOD SUPPLY

Resistant starch in found in whole plants foods, especially beans and legumes and whole grains. But whole grain really means the whole grain. As soon as you grind a grain into flour much of the resistant quality is lost. A 2008 article by Mary Murphy, MS, RD, in the Journal of the American Dietetic Association provides a good review of food sources of resistant starch.

Cooking can significantly alter the resistant quality of starch. A cup of whole oats contain s 17.6 grams of resistant starch. A cup of cooked oats contains only 0.5 grams. Intact whole wheat berries contain 13.6% resistant starch. Whole grain flours contain only 1.7%.

Studies estimate that Americans consume about 5 grams of resistant starch a day. Recommendations range from 15-20 grams a day. Click on the link below to identify common foods that are rich sources of resistant starch.

Resistant starch chart

WHAT WE THINK WE UNDERSTAND ABOUT RESISTANT STARCH AND METABOLISM

Resistant starch seems to impact our health in key and fundamental ways. Our diet determines the kind of microbes that live in our gut. There are about 10x more bacteria than human cells and anywhere from 500-2000 different species.

The type of microbes that reside in our gut changes in response to our diet. Scientists now believe that these microbes have a lot to do with energy metabolism and how the body signals hunger and satiety.

When we eat mostly refined sugars and starches, we cultivate gut microbes that promote fat storage. Studies show that a different microbial flora probably helps people more effectively manage their weight. The changes in metabolism stimulate a different signaling to the brain. The body is satisfied longer and less hungry–even the next day.

TRANSLATING KNOWLEDGE INTO BEHAVIOR

As you look at the list, keep in mind that even though some foods may be a relatively rich source of resistant starch,there are other factors that influence how the body metabolizes energy. Weave together an approach to food that works by including the factors that work for you.

1. Pay attention to hunger cues and how much is enough. No amount of resistant starch will protect you from over eating or eating for entertainment.

2. The relative amount of carbohydrate, protein and fat still matters for those of us who are insulin resistant. (HINT: Despite 2.8 grams of resistant starch found in pizza, I doubt anyone in my family would enjoy greater metabolic health living on it!) Continue to enjoy mostly protein and produce and then test to see how much starch you can manage. Some people handle large servings of starch, others not so much. The starch we eat is modest–about 20-30 percent of the plate and sometimes none at all.

3. Keep moving. Physical movement improves how the body uses fat for fuel. Physical activity increases insulin sensitivity up to 60%. The bulk occurs in the first 20 minutes of movement and you can enhance your metabolic health even when activity is broken up throughout the day.

4. Start planning what resistant starchy foods fit into your diet. My son is using mashed pinto beans and cheese for a quick breakfast in the morning. I am throwing more beans and legumes into soups and salads. My husband is using homemade granola in the morning and experimenting with resistant starch in our homemade bread recipe. What are you willing to try?

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: bacteria, cancer, diabetes, digestion, fat, glucose tolerance, heart disease, Hi-Maize, incretins, insulin sensitivity, metabolism, microbiota, resistant starch, weight loss

Questioning 5 Nutrition Myths on Huffington Post

October 18, 2011 by

Nutrition misinformation is ubiquitous. Sometimes the misinformation is lack of deeper thinking. A recent Huffington Post entry by Kristin Kirkpatrick, MS, RD, LD, caught my eye for just that reason.

Ms. Kirkpatrick addresses 5 dissonant myths probably tied together since it’s Thanksgiving week. She addresses myths about carbohydrates, eating late at night, weight gain during the holidays, the nutrient value of fresh vs. frozen food and the five second rule about eating food after it has been dropped on the floor. Each of the discussions left me wanting. Here’s my take on each of them.

1. THE CARBOHYDRATE MYTH

In 2002, researchers analyzed the diets of over 10,000 Americans by categorizing them by their carbohydrate intake. They found that those who had the highest intake of carbohydrates had the lowest overall intake of calories and were more likely to be at a normal weight.

My first thought is, “How nice it is to be insulin sensitive.” People who enjoy insulin sensitivity can eat a higher carbohydrate diet, they don’t get sugar and carbohydrate cravings, and they don’t gain water or fat weight readily. Of course they are leaner and eat less.

One third of Americans are born relatively insulin resistant. Lifestyle factors can make this worse. There are many studies that show many people thrive on a lower carbohydrate intake, some showing remarkable differences in weight management depending on genetic predisposition. (See work by Chris Gardner)

Continuing to insist that carbohydrates aren’t bad is missing the point. The question for each of us is how much and what kind of carbohydrates work best to give us the energy and sense of well being we seek.

2. THE MYTH ABOUT EATING LATE AT NIGHT

A calorie is still a calorie whether it is 6:00 p.m. or 10:00 p.m. The main importance is how many calories you consume throughout the day.

A calorie is a calorie. But not all calories are treated the same in our body. Nutrient partitioning is a phenomena that determines if your food will be used for energy or stored as fat. People who are insulin resistant secrete more insulin in response to their food intake. Excessive insulin drives energy into fat stores. This often causes a rebound hypoglycemia, increasing hunger and cravings for carbohydrate.

In addition, sleep and food intake influence hormonal responses that impact your appetite. As explained by Susan Dopart, MS, RD, a higher carbohydrate diet without adequate protein tends to increase ghrelin levels and “grows the appetite.”

Calories count, but hormones are potent factors determining what happens after you eat those calories. Weight management is not merely a math problem. If it was, we would have solved it by now.

3. THE WEIGHT GAIN DURING THE HOLIDAYS MYTH

They found that the average weight gain from Thanksgiving to New Year’s was less than 1 pound (0.8lb)

One of the biggest mistakes science makes is reporting findings that lead people to believe that the average experience is everyone’s experience. This data would be much more useful if the researchers or the author discussed the range of weight gain.

On the same diet people have very different experiences. Dr. Gardner’s research shows just that. My guess is that the insulin sensitive people experience far less weight gain, if any, as they enjoy the treats of the season.

Insulin resistant folks enjoy a few sweets, start to gain, experience even more carbohydrate cravings, and are soon slipping and sliding through the rest of the holidays. These are the folks who bring up the average. They can readily gain 5, 10 pounds and more between Halloween and the New Year.

It works in reverse as well. Weight loss is almost always easier for insulin sensitive folks.

My husband and friend once rode over 500 miles in a fund raising bike ride. Both riders ate the same food for the entire week. Both ate mountains of pasta, bowls of rice and handfuls of cookies to fuel themselves over the miles. The insulin sensitive guy lost 2.5% body fat over the 7 days. My husband lost 0.5%.

In private practice for over 25 years, I continue to observe people with a ride range of metabolic responses to food. Each person is their own puzzle and deserves to develop an approach to food that works for them. The person who gains 5-10 pounds over the holidays needs different support and guidance than the person who gains little or nothing.

4. THE FRESH VS. FROZEN FOOD MYTH

In the winter, however, eating fresh means not only paying more, but perhaps getting fewer nutrients. That’s because during the winter months, many fresh produce options have to travel hundreds and sometimes even thousands of miles to reach the grocery store.

I mostly don’t have a problem with this content, except I live in Southern California and the Huffington Post is a national, if not global publication. It is curious to me that the writer would limit her comments to her experience in the Northeast.

I appreciate the challenge of fresh fruit and vegetables in the Northeast. I remember a favorite aunt who lived in the Hudson River Valley. She would often chatter excitedly about the opening of farmer’s markets in early June. It would give me pause. In Southern California, my farmer’s markets are open all year long.

The disconnect for me is the assumption that produce traveling thousands of miles has fewer nutrients. I don’t think the issues is miles as much as time since harvesting. I’ve spoken to supermarket produce workers in Los Angeles. Too many people don’t know that produce in supermarkets is often sold 7-10 days post harvest–even with the San Jouquin Valley just a few hundred miles away.

The nutrition issue is freshness, not distance. It is important to not confuse the issue of nutrients with other significant discussions like sustainability. In the end, I agree that frozen produce may be the best nutritional bet during winter months for many people.

5. THE MYTH OF THE FIVE SECOND RULE

They found that when a piece of bologna was picked up off the tile floor that over 99 percent of the bacterial cells from the floor were transferred to the bologna.

People hear the word bacteria and get scared. We are a bacteria phobic people. For decades science and medical thinking has hinged on the premise that bacteria is bad. I’m not so sure.

We need healthy bacteria to keep us protected from opportunistic pathological strains. There is much discussion in the health care community that what we are lacking is enough healthy bacteria in our soils, in our food, in our guts. Lack of healthy bacteria has been linked to increasing incidence of gastro-intestinal diseases, asthma and allergies, as well as poor immune systems.

Today pro-biotic and pre-biotic supplements are sold everywhere. We pay extra for these bacteria to be added to our food. Why not let ourselves eat food that is a little less sterile? The real issue isn’t whether there is or is not more bacteria on our food. We need to ask better questions. Is it harmful? Is it helpful?

We need to be honest about what bacteria to be concerned about. Most of the pathogenic bacteria linked to our food supply is associated with animal and human feces, open wounds, and spoiled food. I don’t know if the bacteria found on the floor matches this risk.

My guess is that the researches know and probably reported this data in their findings. I would find the discussion more significant if Ms. Kirkpatrick could have addressed what kind of bacteria they found and it’s relative risk profile.

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: bacteria, calories, holiday eating, late night eating, myths, nutrients, nutrition, Susan Dopart, weight, weight gain

THE FOOD CHAIN: Human Nutrition Gets It Backwards

October 18, 2011 by

My degree is in Food and Nutrition, Human nutrition that is. When I read research studies the emphasis is on what happens to humans. There is all kind of debate whether animal models are a good surrogate for the human experience. Mostly nutrition science agrees that studies with human subjects are best to determine what is important for humans. Maybe. But we need to look far beyond the human experience to address many of the nutrition and health concerns of our day.

Last Sunday I spoke at the Good Food Fest celebrating 30 years of the Santa Monica’s Farmer’s Market.

As I prepared my talk I looked for a picture of a food chain to insert into my Power point presentation. Many show humans, or at least a carnivore, at the top of the chain. I started to wonder how much these graphics reflect and influence our thinking.

BACTERIA FRONT, CENTER, EVERYWHERE

I chose one of the graphics, copied it and then adulterated the second picture with the missing component. Bacteria.

My graphic was more of a circle of life than a chain. I plopped a picture of bacteria in between “the degraders” (vultures, worms, insects) and soil. Then and cut and pasted a picture of the bacteria at every stage of the chain. I think bacteria is at the top of the food chain, at the beginning, and at every incremental stage in the circle of life.

WHAT ABOUT THE FOOD

On Sunday afternoon I spoke on a panel with Keith Eichenauer, the dairy/deli assistant manager at the Santa Monica Coop and Nate Pietso, owner of Maggie’s Farm. Keith defined organic, cage free, free range, grass fed and other notions of sustainably grown food. Nate discussed how this plays out on a farm and defined what it means to the farmer to grow food sustainably.

I followed. My first quip was something about humans not being the center of the universe. Bacteria probably is. It was the first time I had spoken these words and they resonated. I was struck by how this simple concept had eluded me until that very moment.

I spoke of the nutritional benefits of sustainably, organically grown food. More often than not organically grown food is more nutrient dense. More vitamins, more minerals and especially more antioxidants. In this day of inflammation involved with everything from diabetes to cancer and heart disease, more antioxidants in food is a good thing.

TROUBLING CONSEQUENCES OF CONVENTIONAL FARMING

I spoke of the very troubling consequences of conventional farming. I showed pictures depicting the extent of pesticide contamination and the impact of persistent organic pollutants. Many are known endocrine disruptors and are linked to major metabolic disease.

I discussed the impact of fertilizer run off and dead zones in the Gulf of Mexico come every spring. Excessive nitrogen in the run off drives algae overgrowth. The growth and death of algae sucks the oxygen from the waters. The entire ecosystem suffers, and a “dead zone” is created.

I spoke of antibiotic resistant bacteria from overuse and abuse of antibiotics in animal feed. Seventy percent of antibiotics used in this country are used in animals, mostly in feed to enhance their growth and minimize infection as they live in disease inducing conditions. I spoke of growth hormones used in animals being measured in ground water and the oceans.

REDEFINING THE STUDY OF HUMAN NUTRITION

I basically redefined human nutrition. My guess is that this awareness has been percolating for years. Now it feels obvious. Nutrition encompasses more than the study of nutrients in food. I can no longer be preoccupied by such a limited definition. Preparing for this presentation allowed me to formalize the notion that the entire food chain and all of the challenges of growing food are encompassed in the study of nutrition. They all influence the nutritional status and health of humans.

Today I am more curious than ever about the role of bacteria in nutrition and health. Research is poking at links with health and disease. All kinds of gastrointestinal (GI) tract and metabolic disorders are linked with bacteria. Our bodies host 10 times more bacteria cells than our own human cells. There are estimates of 500-1000 different types of bacteria in our guts and another 500-1000 species on our skin. We live symbiotically with these organisms, whether we pay attention to them or not.

BACTERIA AND RAW MILK

I showed a slide depicting a grass fed cow and the words “raw milk”. In the words of the moderator, the subject struck like a lightning bolt in the room.

Raw milk is a contentious topic, especially on the West side. Recent raids on Rawsome in Venice, CA, and confiscation of raw milk all over the country have raw milk afficcionados up in arms. Statements by the FDA claiming grave danger from raw milk seem out of proportion to documented risks.

My position is simple. We don’t live in the same world as Louis Pasteur. Science should be able to ensure adequate safety standards so that raw milk can be sold and consumed without undue risk to consumers who want their milk and milk products raw. After all, breast milk is “raw” and we don’t find too much trouble with collecting. storing and feeding that to our babies.

Maybe we need to rethink our position on food, period. Our food supply is safe, often too sanitary, and lack of adequate healthy bacteria is linked to many disease states. People now spend money for supplemental bacteria in the form of probiotics. They pay extra to feed bacteria in the form of prebiotics. Maybe we all could benefit from consuming healthy bacteria from carefully chosen raw, fermented and fresh-from-the-farm foods.

What is your take? Is there a need to get enough healthy bacteria from our food supply? Is raw milk the health risk that the FDA claims– or a vital living source of good bacteria?

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: animal feed, antibiotic resistant bacteria, antibiotics, bacteria, dairy, dead zone, ecosystem, farming, FBI, FDA, food chain, gastrointestinal disease, Good Food Fest, grass fed, growth hormones, Gulf of Mexico, human nutrition, Maggie's Farm, nitrogen, nutrition, organic, pasteurization, pesticides, prebiotics, probiotics, raw milk, rawsome, santa monica farmer's market, Santa Monica Food Coop, smfms, sustainability

Farm to Table: Visiting Organic Pastures

Do Overweight Kids Really Eat Less Than Thin Kids?

Welcome to the “Post Pasteurian” Era

Losing Weight Is Not a Math Problem

Resistant Starch–How much is in your diet?

Questioning 5 Nutrition Myths on Huffington Post

THE FOOD CHAIN: Human Nutrition Gets It Backwards

Search

Follow Bonnie

Farm to Table: Visiting Organic Pastures

Do Overweight Kids Really Eat Less Than Thin Kids?

Welcome to the “Post Pasteurian” Era

Losing Weight Is Not a Math Problem

Resistant Starch–How much is in your diet?

Questioning 5 Nutrition Myths on Huffington Post

THE FOOD CHAIN: Human Nutrition Gets It Backwards

Search

Follow Bonnie

Topics