Thursday, May 28, 2009

Four Feet? Two Feet? No Feet?


This article was sent from Adrienne Norris who sends out info to hockey players and other athletes that participate in Mike Boyle's training camps. Her info is very informative. I thought i would share her take on Meat and Protein. Very interesting.
________________________________________________
What in the world does this title mean? The question really is, what meat is best to eat? This idea was given to me by one of my clients: the less feet your protein has, the better it is for you to consume. At first when I heard this it sounded right. Fish have no feet and are high in the best fats for you (omega-3's). Poultry has two feet, has few if any omega-3's, and has a higher amount saturated fats (bad fats) than fish. Meats such as beef and pork with 4 feet have more saturated fats than fish and poultry; some forms of beef have even been associated with cancer. Check out this TIME Magazine article (see below for article) for more details. In most cases, I would recommend going by this guideline: the less feet the better. But unfortunately, just as in life, the answer is not that simple. I would like to breakdown the good, the bad, and the ugly of the meat we choose to eat. In this Tip of the Week, I will run through the important information that should affect your daily dietary decisions. Stay tuned for next week's tip, which will give you some new and surprising insights on the food you are choosing, and some tools to make better decisions.

The Ugly
What is the worst meat for you to be eating? The absolute worst meat for anyone is processed deli meat of any kind. And yes, this does include going to the deli counter to get fresh sliced meat. If it is wrapped in plastic it has been processed. Processed meat contains a large amount of preservatives, salt, and other "natural" ingredients that are less than ideal nutrient sources. In addition, any type of altered meat, such as sausage and hot dogs, no matter what the packaging says, should still be avoided. Also, beef that is corn-fed lands on the list of ugly; if you took just a few minutes to read the TIME article above, you will understand why. If you choose to eat beef, you should only be having one to two servings of 6-8oz a week; but basically try to keep red meat intake to a minimum.

Why are these meats considered ugly? The problem with processed and preserved meats is that they increase oxidation in the body. Think of oxidation as rust inside your body. When you eat these foods you cause build up of rust in all of your body's cells. Eventually, rust will eat away whatever it touches and destroy the structure. On top of that, the additives used to preserve meat increase the bad (LDL) cholesterol in the body, decrease the good (HDL) cholesterol, cause inflammation of the arteries, and increase blood pressure. All of these factors require your heart to work harder to perform its daily functions. The bottom line is that these processed meats cause damage within the body and should be avoided at all costs.

What to do?
So as previously stated, an easy way to choose nutrient-dense food is to avoid processed meats. Next, as described in the TIME article, you can cut your chances of cancer significantly by cutting the amount of beef you eat each week. Even if you start with one to two ounces less than last week, you can start to improve your health. The best thing to do is to increase your intake of fruits and vegetables. These are loaded with natural antioxidants that can help reverse or slow the affects of processed meats. In addition, add fish to your weekly meal menu. Fish contain omega-3 fats, which help reduce inflammation of the arteries, increase HDL and decrease LDL cholesterol, and boost fat metabolism (helping to burn fat). Ultimately, the more fish you eat the better health you will have. When I am asked what supplements people should take, I keep it simple. If you are not eating enough fish, ideally two to three times per week, or are not eating enough fruits and veggies you should supplement with fish oil pills or a Greens Plus supplement. For the fish oil, you should be looking to get between 4-6 grams of EPA and DHA fish oil each day, this is the equivalent of 4-6 Flameout fish oil pills. The Greens Plus powder is excellent and mixes easily into a 12oz bottle of water. Other supplements can be overkill unless you have very specific goals.

Remember that it only takes small steps to change your ways. Start by decreasing your intake of deli meats, beef, or both, once a week. Add in fish or a fish oil supplement if you are not getting enough; some is better than none. And, as always, eat more fruits and veggies. As these habits become more ingrained you can continually make better choices.


TIME MAGAZINE ARTICLE
The Growing Case Against Red Meat
In more news that has steak lovers feeling deflated, a study published in this week's issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine finds that people who indulge in high amounts of red meat and processed meats, including steak, bacon, sausage and cold cuts, have an increased risk of death from cancer and heart disease. The findings add power to the growing push — by health officials, environmentalists and even some chefs — to cool America's love affair with meat.

The analysis of more than half a million Americans between the ages of 50 and 71 found that men in the highest quintile of red-meat consumption — those who ate about 5 oz. of red meat a day, roughly the equivalent of a small steak, according to lead author Rashmi Sinha — had a 31% higher risk of death over a 10-year period than men in the lowest-consumption quintile, who ate less than 1 oz. of red meat per day, or approximately three slices of corned beef. Men in the top fifth also had a 22% higher risk of dying of cancer and a 27% higher risk of dying of heart disease. In women, the figures were starker: women in the highest quintile of consumption had a 36% increase in death over a 10-year period compared with women who ate little red meat; eating lots of meat was associated with a 20% higher risk of dying of cancer and a 50% higher risk of dying of heart disease. (Read "A History of Beef, Times Two.")
The data for one of the largest analyses of meat consumption and mortality to date were first gathered for the National Institutes of Health and AARP Diet and Health Study in 1995. Researchers then tracked deaths for 10 years, until 2005, using the Social Security Administration Death Master File and the National Death Index, controlling for factors such as age, race, education, body-mass index and alcohol intake.

"Basically, the consumption of red and processed meat was associated with modest increases in mortality," says Sinha, a senior investigator at the National Cancer Institute's Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, who is careful to emphasize that the institute is a research organization and does not make health recommendations. She suggests, however, that the fat content of and heavy iron concentration in red and processed meats, along with high-temperature cooking methods that can lead to the development of carcinogens, may increase the risk for disease and death. In contrast, the study found that higher white-meat consumption was associated with a lower risk of death. (Read "Meat: Making Global Warming Worse.")

Dr. Barry Popkin, a nutrition epidemiologist and economist who directs the interdisciplinary obesity program at the University of North Carolina, would use a term other than Sinha's "modest." "You're talking about a lot of deaths that would be prevented by cutting your processed meat or cutting your red meat," he says. He suggests framing the issue in real terms. A McDonald's Big Mac contains 7.5 oz. of red meat, Popkin points out. So if your diet consists of a Big Mac every other day — roughly equivalent to the highest quintile of meat consumption in the study; in other words, the typical American diet — you could cut back to one Big Mac a week and see dramatic health benefits.

The impact would be dramatic for the planet as well, Popkin writes in an editorial that accompanies the study. Popkin, whose recently published book The World Is Fat examines the global trends driving the obesity epidemic, joins a growing cohort of researchers, environmentalists and foodies clamoring for an overhaul of the American diet. Currently, the average American consumes more than 200 lb. of meat a year, a habit that comes at considerable environmental cost, Popkin says. He cites a recent United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization finding that livestock account for 18% of global greenhouse-gas emissions — more than transportation — and underscores the fact that the livestock industry uses up to five times the water necessary to cultivate crops. (See the top 10 food trends of 2008.)

What's more, the developing world seems to be falling in step, Popkin says. In India, meat and dairy intake more than doubled between 2000 and 2005. In 2006, the average diet of 67% of the Chinese population comprised at least 10% meat and dairy products, up from about 39% of the population in 1989. "We truly did this to the globe — changed the way the world eats," says Popkin.
But our diet can be changed back, says Mark Bittman, a cookbook author, New York Times contributor and deity in the world of foodies. He started by cutting back on meat and dairy and says he now consumes roughly one-third the animal products he used to, adhering to what's become known as the Vegan Before Six (or VB6) diet: vegan foods for the first two meals of the day, then anything you want for dinner.

In his new book Food Matters: A Guide to Conscious Eating, Bittman makes the case for limiting meat, eggs and dairy; increasing fruits and vegetables in our diet; and making small steps to eat healthier, rather than obsessing over terms like sustainable and organic. He advocates an incremental approach to tapering the whopping 600 lb. of animal products the average American eats each year. "I'm not looking to encourage people to do something that they're going to do for two weeks and then say, 'To hell with that!' and go back to eating their regular diet," Bittman says. That would be like trying to jump immediately to an all-bicycle transportation model. "Let's move toward eating less meat," he says, "and then in five years we can re-evaluate."

No comments: