Nutrition Advice Is Rife With Misinformation − A Medical Education Specialist Explains How To Tell Valid Health Information From Pseudoscience

To parse pseudoscientific claims from sound advice about health and nutrition, it’s crucial to evaluate the information’s source. tadamichi/Getty Images

BY AIMEE PUGH BERNARD

ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF 

IMMUNOLOGY AND MICROBIOLOGY,

UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO ANSCHUTZ

MEDICAL CAMPUS

The COVID-19 pandemic illuminated a vast landscape of misinformation about many topics, science and health chief among them.

Since then, information overload continues unabated, and many people are rightfully confused by an onslaught of conflicting health information. Even expert advice is often contradictory.

On top of that, people sometimes deliberately distort research findings to promote a certain agenda. For example, trisodium phosphate is a common food additive in cakes and cookies that is used to improve texture and prevent spoilage, but wellness influencers exploit the fact that a similarly named substance is used in paint and cleaning products to suggest it’s dangerous to your health.

Such claims can proliferate quickly, creating widespread misconceptions and undermining trust in legitimate scientific research and medical advice. Social media’s rise as a news and information source further fuels the spread of pseudoscientific views.

Misinformation is rampant in the realm of health and nutrition. Findings from nutrition research is rarely clear-cut because diet is just one of many behaviors and lifestyle factors affecting health, but the simplicity of using food and supplements as a cure-all is especially seductive.

I am an assistant professor specializing in medical education and science communication. I also train scientists and future health care professionals how to communicate their science to the general public.

In my view, countering the voices of social media influencers and health activists promoting pseudoscientific health claims requires leaning into the science of disease prevention. Extensive research has produced a body of evidence-based practices and public health measures that have consistently been shown to improve the health of millions of people around the world. Evaluating popular health claims against the yardstick of this work can help distinguish which ones are based on sound science.

Navigating the terrain of tangled information

Conflicting information can be found on just about everything we eat and drink.

That’s because a food or beverage is rarely just good or bad. Instead, its health effects can depend on everything from the quantity a person consumes to their genetic makeup. Hundreds of scientific studies describe coffee’s health benefits and, on the flip side, its health risks. A bird’s-eye view can point in one direction or another, but news articles and social media posts often make claims based on a single study.

Things can get even more confusing with dietary supplements because people who promote them often make big claims about their health benefits. Take apple cider vinegar, for example – or ACV, if you’re in the know.

Apple cider vinegar has been touted as an all-natural remedy for a variety of ailments, including digestive issues, urinary health and weight management. Indeed, some studies have shown that it might help lower cholesterol, in addition to having other health benefits, but overall those studies have small sample sizes and are inconclusive.

Advocates of this substance often claim that one particular component of it – the cloudy sediment at the bottom of the bottle termed “the mother” – is especially beneficial because of the bacteria and yeast it contains. But there is no research that backs the claim that it offers any health benefits.

One good rule of thumb is that health hacks that promise quick fixes are almost always too good to be true. And even when supplements do offer some health benefits under specific circumstances, it’s important to remember that they are largely exempt from Food and Drug Administration regulations. That means the ingredients on their labels might contain more or less of the ingredients promised or other ingredients not listed, which can potentially cause harms such as liver toxicity.

It’s also important to keep in mind that the global dietary supplements industry is worth more than US$150 billion per year, so companies – and wellness influencers – selling supplements have a financial stake in convincing the public of their value.

How nutrition science gets twisted

There’s no doubt that good nutrition is fundamental for your health. Studies consistently show that a balanced diet containing a variety of essential nutrients can help prevent chronic diseases and promote overall well-being.

For instance, minerals such as calcium and iron support bone health and oxygen circulation in the blood, respectively. Proteins are essential for muscle repair and growth, and healthy fats, like those found in avocados and nuts, are vital for brain health.

However, pseudoscientific claims often twist such basic facts to promote the idea that specific diets or supplements can prevent or treat illness. For example, vitamin C is known to play a role in supporting the immune system and can help reduce the duration and severity of colds.

But despite assertions to the contrary, consuming large quantities of vitamin C does not prevent colds. In fact, the body needs only a certain amount of vitamin C to function properly, and any excess is simply excreted.

Companies sometimes claim their supplement is “scientifically proven” to cure illness or boost brain function, with no credible research to back it up.

Some companies overstate the benefits while underplaying the hazards.

For example, wellness influencers have promoted raw milk over pasteurized milk as a more natural and nutritious choice, but consuming it is risky. Unpasteurized milk can contain harmful bacteria that leads to gastrointestinal illness and, in some cases, much more serious and potentially life-threatening diseases such as avian influenza, or bird flu.

Such dietary myths aren’t harmless. Reliance on nutrition alone can lead to neglecting other critical aspects of health, such as regular medical checkups and lifesaving vaccinations.

The lure of dietary myths has led people with cancer to replace proven science-backed treatments, such as chemotherapy or radiation, with unproven and misleading nutrition programs.

How to spot less-than-solid science

Pseudoscience exploits your insecurities and emotions, taking advantage of your desire to live the healthiest life possible.

While the world around you may be uncertain and out of your control, you want to believe that at the very least, you have control over your own health. This is where the wellness industry steps in.

What makes pseudoscientific claims so confusing is that they use just enough scientific jargon to sound believable. Supplements or powders that claim to “boost immunity” often list ingredients such as adaptogens and superfoods. While these words sound real and convincing, they actually don’t mean anything in science. They are terms created by the wellness industry to sell products.

I’ve researched and written about reliable ways to distinguish science facts from false health claims. To stay alert and find credible information, I’d suggest you follow a few key steps.

First, check your emotions – strong emotional reactions, such as fear and anger, can be a red flag.

Next, check that the author has experience or expertise in the field of the topic. If they’re not an expert, they might not know what they are talking about. It’s always a good idea to make sure the source is reputable – ask yourself, would this source be trusted by scientists?

Finally, search for references that back up the information. If very little or nothing else exists in the science world to back up the claims, you may want to put your trust in a different source.

Following these steps will separate the facts from fake news and empower you to make evidence-based decisions.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

Salty Foods Are Making People Sick − In Part By Poisoning Their Microbiomes

BY CHRISTOPHER DAMMAN

ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF GASTROENTEROLOGY

SCHOOL OF MEDICINE, UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON

People have been using salt since the dawn of civilization to process, preserve and enhance foods. In ancient Rome, salt was so central to commerce that soldiers were paid their “salarium,” or salaries, in salt, for instance.

Salt’s value was in part as a food preservative, keeping unwanted microbes at bay while allowing desired ones to grow. It was this remarkable ability to regulate bacterial growth that likely helped spark the development of fermented foods ranging from sauerkraut to salami, olives to bread, cheese to kimchi.

Today, salt has become ubiquitous and highly concentrated in increasingly processed diets. The evidence has mounted that too much salt – specifically the sodium chloride added to preserve and enhance the flavor of many highly processed foods – is making people sick. It can cause high blood pressure and contribute to heart attacks and stroke. It is also associated with an increased risk of developing stomach and colon cancer, Ménière’s disease, osteoporosis and obesity.

How might a substance previously thought worth its weight in gold have transformed into something many medical institutions consider a key predictor of disease?

Salt lobbyists may be one answer to this question. And as a gastroenterologist and research scientist at the University of Washington, I want to share the mounting evidence that microbes from the shadows of your gut might also shed some light on how salt contributes to disease.

Blood pressure cookers

Sodium’s role in blood pressure and heart disease results largely from its regulating the amount of water inside your blood vessels. In simple terms, the more sodium in your blood, the more water it pulls into your blood vessels. This leads to higher blood pressure and subsequently an increased risk for heart attack and stroke. Some people may be more or less sensitive to the effects salt has on blood pressure.

Recent research suggests an additional way salt may raise blood pressure – by altering your gut microbiome. Salt leads to a decrease in healthy microbes and the key metabolites they produce from fiber. These metabolites decrease inflammation in blood vessels and keep them relaxed, contributing to reduced blood pressure.

With the exception of certain organisms that thrive in salt called halophiles, high levels of salt can poison just about any microbe, even ones your body wants to keep around. This is why people have been using salt for a long time to preserve food and keep unwanted bacteria away.

But modern diets often have too much sodium. According to the World Health Organization, healthy consumption amounts to less than 2,000 milligrams per day for the average adult. The global mean intake of 4,310 milligrams of sodium has likely increased the amount of salt in the gut over healthy levels.

Salt of the girth

Sodium is connected to health outcomes other than blood pressure, and your microbiome may be playing a role here, too.

High sodium diets and higher sodium levels in stool are significantly linked to metabolic disorders, including elevated blood sugar, fatty liver disease and weight gain. In fact, one study estimated that for every one gram per day increase in dietary sodium, there is a 15% increased risk of obesity.

A gold-standard dietary study from the National Institutes of Health found that those on a diet of ultraprocessed foods over two weeks ate about 500 more calories and weighed about 2 pounds more compared with those on a minimally processed diet. One of the biggest differences between the two diets was the extra 1.2 grams of sodium consumed with the ultraprocessed diets.

A leading explanation for why increased salt may lead to weight gain despite having no calories is that sodium increases cravings. When sodium is combined with simple sugars and unhealthy fats, these so-called hyperpalatable foods may be linked to fat gain, as they are particularly good at stimulating the reward centers in the brain and addictionlike eating behaviors.

Salt may also connect to cravings via a short circuit in the gut microbiome. Microbiome metabolites stimulate the release of a natural version of weight loss drugs Wegovy and Ozempic, the gut hormone GLP-1. Through GLP-1, a healthy microbiome can control your appetite, blood sugar levels and your body’s decision to burn or store energy as fat. Too much salt may interfere with its release.

Other explanations for salt’s effect on metabolic disease, with varying amounts of evidence, include increased sugar absorption, increased gut-derived corticosteroids and a sugar called fructose that can lead to fat accumulation and decreases in energy use for heat production.

Desalin-nations

While many countries are implementing national salt reduction initiatives, sodium consumption in most parts of the world remains on the rise. Dietary salt reduction in the United States in particular remains behind the curve, while many European countries have started to see benefits such as lower blood pressure and fewer deaths from heart disease through initiatives like improved package labeling of salt content, reformulating foods to limit salt and even salt taxes.

Comparing the nutrition facts of fast-food items between countries reveals considerable variability. For instance, McDonald’s chicken nuggets are saltiest in the U.S. and even American Coke contains salt, an ingredient it lacks in other countries.

The salt industry in the U.S may have a role here. It lobbied to prevent government regulations on salt in the 2010s, not dissimilar from what the tobacco industry did with cigarettes in the 1980s. Salty foods sell well. One of the key voices of the salt industry for many years, the now-defunct Salt Institute, may have confused public health messaging around the importance of salt reduction by emphasizing the less common instances where restriction can be dangerous.

But the evidence for reducing salt in the general diet is mounting, and institutions are responding. In 2021, the U.S. Department of Agriculture issued new industry guidance calling for a voluntary gradual reduction of salt in commercially processed and prepared foods. The Salt Institute dissolved in 2019. Other organizations such as the American Frozen Food Institute and major ingredient suppliers such as Cargill are on board with lowering dietary salt.

From add-vice to advice

How can you feed your gut microbiome well while being mindful of your salt intake?

Start with limiting your consumption of highly processed foods: salty meats (such as fast food and cured meat), salty treats (such as crackers and chips) and salty sneaks (such as soft drinks, condiments and breads). Up to 70% of dietary salt in the U.S. is currently consumed from packaged and processed foods.

Instead, focus on foods low in added sodium and sugar and high in potassium and fiber, such as unprocessed, plant-based foods: beans, nuts, seeds, whole grains, fruits and vegetables. Fermented foods, though often high in sodium, may also be a healthier option due to high levels of short-chain fatty acids, fiber, polyphenols and potassium.

Finally, consider the balance of dietary sodium and potassium. While sodium helps keep fluid in your blood vessels, potassium helps keep fluid in your cells. Dietary sodium and potassium are best consumed in balanced ratios.

While all advice is best taken with a grain of salt, your microbiome gently asks that it just not be large.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

‘Naked Carbs’ And ‘Net Carbs’ – What Are They And Should You Count Them?

BY SAMAN KHALESI, ANNA BALZA AND CHARLOTTE GUPTA

According to social media, carbs come in various guises: naked carbs, net carbs, complex carbs and more.

You might be wondering what these terms mean or if all carbs are really the same. If you are into “carb counting” or “cutting carbs”, it’s important to make informed decisions about what you eat.

What are carbs?

Carbohydrates, or “carbs” for short, are one of the main sources of energy we need for brain function, muscle movement, digestion and pretty much everything our bodies do.

There are two classifications of carbs, simple and complex. Simple carbs have one or two sugar molecules, while complex carbs are three or more sugar molecules joined together. For example, table sugar is a simple carb, but starch in potatoes is a complex carb.

All carbs need to be broken down into individual molecules by our digestive enzymes to be absorbed. Digestion of complex carbs is a much slower process than simple carbs, leading to a more gradual blood sugar increase.

Fibre is also considered a complex carb, but it has a structure our body is not capable of digesting. This means we don’t absorb it, but it helps with the movement of our stool and prevents constipation. Our good gut bacteria also love fibre as they can digest it and use it for energy – important for a healthy gut.

What about ‘naked carbs’?

“Naked carbs” is a popular term usually used to refer to foods that are mostly simple carbs, without fibre or accompanying protein or fat. White bread, sugary drinks, jams, sweets, white rice, white flour, crackers and fruit juice are examples of these foods. Ultra-processed foods, where the grains are stripped of their outer layers (including fibre and most nutrients) leaving “refined carbs”, also fall into this category.

One of the problems with naked carbs or refined carbs is they digest and absorb quickly, causing an immediate rise in blood sugar. This is followed by a rapid spike in insulin (a hormone that signals cells to remove sugar from blood) and then a drop in blood sugar. This can lead to hunger and cravings – a vicious cycle that only gets worse with eating more of the same foods.

What about ‘net carbs’?

This is another popular term tossed around in dieting discussions. Net carbs refer to the part of the carb food that we actually absorb.

Again, fibre is not easily digestible. And some carb-rich foods contain sugar alcohols, such as sweeteners (like xylitol and sorbitol) that have limited absorption and little to no effect on blood sugar. Deducting the value of fibre and sugar alcohols from the total carbohydrate content of a food gives what’s considered its net carb value.

For example, canned pear in juice has around 12.3g of “total carbohydrates” per 100g, including 1.7g carb + 1.7g fibre + 1.9g sugar alcohol. So its net carb is 12.3g – 1.7g – 1.9g = 8.7g. This means 8.7g of the 12.3g total carbs impacts blood sugar.

Does it matter though?

Whether or not you should care about net or naked carbs depends on your dietary preferences, health goals, food accessibility and overall nutritional needs. Generally speaking, we should try to limit our consumption of simple and refined carbs.

The latest World Health Organization guidelines recommend our carbohydrate intake should ideally come primarily from whole grains, vegetables, fruits and pulses, which are rich in complex carbs and fibre. This can have significant health benefits (to regulate hunger, improve cholesterol or help with weight management) and reduce the risk of conditions such as heart disease, obesity and colon cancer.

In moderation, naked carbs aren’t necessarily bad. But pairing them with fats, protein or fibre can slow down the digestion and absorption of sugar. This can help to stabilise blood sugar levels, prevent spikes and crashes and support personal weight management goals. If you’re managing diabetes or insulin resistance, paying attention to the composition of your meals, and the quality of your carbohydrate sources is essential.

A ketogenic (high fat, low carb) diet typically restricts carb intake to between 20 and 50g each day. But this carb amount refers to net carbs – so it is possible to eat more carbs from high-fibre sources.

Some tips to try

Some simple strategies can help you get the most out of your carb intake:

reduce your intake of naked carbs and foods high in sugar and white flour, such as white bread, table sugar, honey, lollies, maple syrup, jam, and fruit juice

opt for protein- and fibre-rich carbs. These include oats, sweet potatoes, nuts, avocados, beans, whole grains and broccoli

if you are eating naked carbs, dress them up with some protein, fat and fibre. For example, top white bread with a nut butter rather than jam

if you are trying to reduce the carb content in your diet, be wary of any symptoms of low blood glucose, including headaches, nausea, and dizziness

working with a health-care professional such as an accredited practising dietitian or your GP can help develop an individualised diet plan that meets your specific needs and goals.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

Omega-3 Fatty Acids Are Linked To Better Lung Health, Particularly In Patients With Pulmonary Fibrosis

BY JOHN KIM

ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF MEDICINE

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Omega-3 fatty acids have garnered significant interest among patients and clinicians for their potential protective health effects, including lung health. In our recently published research, my colleagues and I found that higher dietary intake of omega-3 fatty acids is linked to better lung function and longer survival in patients with pulmonary fibrosis, a chronic respiratory disease.

Found in foods such as fish and nuts and in some supplements, omega-3 fatty acids are polyunsaturated fats that are essential nutrients for people. They serve several important functions in the body, such as providing structure to cells and regulating inflammation.

Researchers believe two omega-3 fatty acids, docosahexaenoic and eicosapentaenoic acids, or DHA and EPA, are the most beneficial to overall health. When the body breaks them down, their byproducts have anti-inflammatory effects.

I am a pulmonologist at the University of Virginia School of Medicine, and my research team and I are working to identify risk factors that may contribute to the development of pulmonary fibrosis. In this disease, scarred lung tissue can lead to respiratory failure and death.

We examined whether higher levels of DHA and EPA in the blood of patients with pulmonary fibrosis in different groups of research participants in the U.S. were linked to disease progression. We found that patients with higher levels of omega-3 fatty acids in their blood had a slower decline in lung function and longer survival. Notably, these findings persisted even after we accounted for other factors such as age and co-occurring diseases.

Why it matters

Currently, there are very few treatments available for pulmonary fibrosis. Those that do exist have significant side effects. Our findings suggest that increasing omega-3 fatty acids in a patient’s diet may slow the progression of this devastating disease.

Researchers have investigated the role of nutrition in many other diseases, but it remains understudied in chronic lung diseases, including pulmonary fibrosis. Our study, along with other published research, suggests dietary modifications may influence the trajectory of this disease and improve a patient’s ability to tolerate treatment.

Furthermore, other studies using mice have shed light on how omega-3 fatty acids may protect against pulmonary fibrosis by regulating the activity of inflammatory cells and slowing buildup of scar tissue in the lungs.

What still isn’t known

Since we were able to measure omega-3 fatty acid levels in the blood at only one point in time, we could not determine whether changing levels over time correlates with changes in pulmonary fibrosis.

Crucially, it remains unknown whether increasing omega-3 fatty acid levels in the blood will have a meaningful effect on the lives of patients with pulmonary fibrosis. Omega-3 fatty acids in the blood might not directly affect pulmonary fibrosis and may simply reflect healthier lifestyles and diets.

Clinical trials are necessary to actually determine whether omega-3 fatty acids are beneficial for patients with respiratory diseases.

What’s next

We plan to continue researching whether omega-3 fatty acids have a protective effect against pulmonary fibrosis.

Specifically, we hope to determine the mechanism by which omega-3-enriched interventions affect the lungs of patients with pulmonary fibrosis.

These will be important steps to identify patients who may be particularly responsive to omega-3 therapies and move these treatments toward clinical testing.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

If You’re Worried About Inflammation, Stop Stressing About Seed Oils And Focus On The Basics

BY LAUREN BALL AND EMILY BURCH

You’ve probably seen recent claims online seed oils are “toxic” and cause inflammation, cancer, diabetes and heart disease. But what does the research say?

Overall, if you’re worried about inflammation, cancer, diabetes and heart disease there are probably more important things to worry about than seed oils.

They may or may not play a role in inflammation (the research picture is mixed). What we do know, however, is that a high-quality diet rich in unprocessed whole foods (fruits, vegetables, nuts, seeds, grains and lean meats) is the number one thing you can to do reduce inflammation and your risk of developing diseases.

Rather than focusing on seed oils specifically, reduce your intake of processed foods more broadly and focus on eating fresh foods. So don’t stress out too much about using a bit of seed oils in your cooking if you are generally focused on all the right things.

What are seed oils?

Seed oils are made from whole seeds, such as sunflower seeds, flax seeds, chia seeds and sesame seeds. These seeds are processed to extract oil.

The most common seed oils found at grocery stores include sesame oil, canola oil, sunflower oil, flaxseed oil, corn oil, grapeseed oil and soybean oil.

Seed oils are generally affordable, easy to find and suitable for many dishes and cuisines as they often have a high smoke point.

However, most people consume seed oils in larger amounts through processed foods such as biscuits, cakes, chips, muesli bars, muffins, dipping sauces, deep-fried foods, salad dressings and margarines.

These processed foods are “discretionary”, meaning they’re OK to have occasionally. But they are not considered necessary for a healthy diet, nor recommended in our national dietary guidelines, the Australian Guide for Healthy Eating.

I’ve heard people say seed oils ‘promote inflammation’. Is that true?

There are two essential types of omega fatty acids: omega-3 and omega-6. These are crucial for bodily functions, and we must get them through our diet since our bodies cannot produce them.

While all oils contain varying levels of fatty acids, some argue an excessive intake of a specific omega-6 fatty acid in seed oils called “linoleic acid” may contribute to inflammation in the body.

There is some evidence linoleic acid can be converted to arachidonic acid in the body and this may play a role in inflammation. However, other research doesn’t support the idea reducing dietary linoleic acid affects the amount of arachidonic acid in your body. The research picture is not clear cut.

But if you’re keen to reduce inflammation, the best thing you can do is aim for a healthy diet that is:

high in antioxidants (found in fruits and vegetables)

high in “healthy”, unsaturated fatty acids (found in fatty fish, some nuts and olive oil, for example)

high in fibre (found in carrots, cauliflower, broccoli and leafy greens) and prebiotics (found in onions, leeks, asparagus, garlic and legumes)

low in processed foods.

If reducing inflammation is your goal, it’s probably more meaningful to focus on these basics than on occasional use of seed oils.

What about seed oils and heart disease, cancer or diabetes risk?

Some popular arguments against seed oils come from data from single studies on this topic. Often these are observational studies where researchers do not make changes to people’s diet or lifestyle.

To get a clearer picture, we should look at meta-analyses, where scientists combine all the data available on a topic. This helps us get a better overall view of what’s going on.

A 2022 meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials investigated the relationship between supplementation with omega-6 fatty acid (often found in seed oils) and cardiovascular disease risk (meaning disease relating to the heart and blood vessels).

The researchers found omega-6 intake did not affect the risk for cardiovascular disease or death but that further research is needed for firm conclusions. Similar findings were observed in a 2019 review on this topic.

The World Health Organization published a review and meta-analysis in 2022 of observational studies (considered lower quality evidence compared to randomised controlled trials) on this topic.

They looked at omega-6 intake and risk of death, cardiovascular disease, breast cancer, mental health conditions and type 2 diabetes. The findings show both advantages and disadvantages of consuming omega-6.

The findings reported that, overall, higher intakes of omega-6 were associated with a 9% reduced risk of dying (data from nine studies) but a 31% increased risk of postmenopausal breast cancer (data from six studies).

One of the key findings from this review was about the ratio of omega-3 fatty acids to omega-6 fatty acids. A higher omega 6:3 ratio was associated with a greater risk of cognitive decline and ulcerative colitis (an inflammatory bowel condition).

A higher omega 3:6 ratio was linked to a 26% reduced risk of depression. These mixed outcomes may be a cause of confusion among health-conscious consumers about the health impact of seed oils.

Overall, the evidence suggests that a high intake of omega-6 fatty acids from seed oils is unlikely to increase your risk of death and disease.

However, more high-quality intervention research is needed.

The importance of increasing your omega-3 fatty acids

On top of the mixed outcomes, there is clear evidence increasing the intake of omega-3 fatty acids (often found in foods such as fatty fish and walnuts) is beneficial for health.

While some seed oils contain small amounts of omega-3s, they are not typically considered rich sources.

Flaxseed oil is an exception and is one of the few seed oils that is notably high in alpha-linolenic acid (sometimes shortened to ALA), an omega-3 fatty acid.

If you are looking to increase your omega-3 intake, it’s better to focus on other sources such as fatty fish (salmon, mackerel, sardines), chia seeds, hemp seeds, walnuts, and algae-based supplements. These foods are known for their higher omega-3 content compared to seed oils.

The bottom line

At the end of the day, it’s probably OK to include small quantities of seed oils in your diet, as long as you are mostly focused on eating fresh, unprocessed foods.

The best way to reduce your risk of inflammation, heart disease, cancer or diabetes is not to focus so much on seed oils but rather on doing your best to follow the Australian Guide for Healthy Eating.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

‘The Warmest Food’: West African Restaurants Emerging In South Carolina’s Lowcountry

BY HANNAH RASKIN

Over the last 10 years or so, a caboose-sized clapboard box in downtown Charleston’s otherwise residential Eastside neighborhood has housed a jerk chicken shop, bagel counter and breakfast burrito joint. But a few weeks after school let out in 2023, up-tempo tunes animated by steel strings and accordions started wafting through the little building’s screened windows.

Maybe passers-by who heard the music from the quadrant of Africa formerly colonized by France guessed that the chef now in charge of the kitchen was working with peanuts and palm oil. Perhaps the lyrics in Arabic and French made them think of slow-cooked lamb nestled in couscous, or fried fish abreast tomato-stained rice.

So far, so good. But if neighbors assumed the chef and her music came straight from Senegal, they were mistaken. Bintou N’Daw was born in Dakar to a family with roots in Saint-Louis, the one-time capital farther up the Atlantic coast, but spent childhood summers with a grandmother in Normandy, France. In her late teens, N’Daw studied baking there for a couple of years, then in 2000 moved to New York City, where she eventually carved out a career as a personal chef for artists.

But first, she worked as an account manager for Putumayo World Music, which is how albums such as “North African Groove” and “Congo to Cuba” entered her music-to-cook-by rotation.

N’Daw’s tiny restaurant, Bintu Atelier, is emblematic of the new wave of West African restaurants emerging in the Lowcountry and along the Gulf Coast, places where the acidic soil and muggy summers mirror West African conditions so closely that the same crops thrive. “Cassava flour, I had to find, but I can go to Joseph Fields Farms and get my okra,” N’Daw said of her buying trips to Black-owned land on Johns Island, 30 minutes from the Charleston peninsula.

Created by longtime culinary professionals with experience in all kinds of kitchens, restaurants such as Bintu Atelier in Charleston, Okàn in Bluffton, S.C., and Dakar NOLA in New Orleans aren’t designed to make guests feel as though they’ve suddenly surfaced on another continent. Instead, they emphasize dishes that draw on native African and French colonial traditions, events that promote community, and open-hearted service.

It’s the format, more than the flavors, that qualifies as a revelation. Bistros passed out of fashion some time ago, as cardiac concerns and qualms over Eurocentrism mounted. But just as a banh mi demonstrates the potential of baguettes, these West African-inspired restaurants show there’s life yet in the French restaurant genre. The homey, welcoming Bintu Atelier could well serve as a model for quality dining as Southern hospitality continues to find its footing in the 21st century.

FRENCH BISTRO MEETS DIASPORIC CUISINE

Money may not buy happiness, but it clearly buys the right to complain. Seated at Okàn’s lively bar, I was astounded by patrons more than once announcing loudly, “I don’t like this,” and pushing aside roasted okra dusted with harissa or a coconut-inflected cocktail.

To be clear, as measured by online reviews and table bookings, Okàn has been a certifiable hit since its July opening, but some wealthy white residents of Bluffton have no compunctions about warning chef Bernard Bennett — a frequent presence on the floor — that his food has “too many flavors.”

“You want boiled potatoes?” Bennett remembers thinking when a guest admonished him to tone down his menu. “I’ve never heard ‘too many flavors.’ But we do have complaints about the sound in the restaurant, and I’ve never been in a quiet restaurant, so that wasn’t expected either.”

To Bennett’s mind, the decibel level is a reflection of diners getting comfortable and going about their lives, just as he intended it.

“We want to be a place where people can have fun and enjoy themselves and not feel stuffy or anything of that nature, and have good food while doing it,” he told me in a phone call after my second visit. “Maybe you want to work on a project at the bar on your laptop.”

It’s a vision remarkably close in detail to the platonic French bistro as conjured by one of its greatest champions. Travel writer Pierre Josse, who served as spokesman for a group that lobbied Unesco to add “traditional French bistro” to its List of Intangible Cultural Heritage, told The Irish Times in 2019 that “the bistro is a ritual, a tradition, the pleasure of being together, of existing.”

He continued, “In a bistro you can be left alone to think, read, write memoirs, poems or love letters.”

That said, Bennett — who was born in Chicago but describes his heritage as “specifically Senegalese” — doesn’t want his audience to disengage from the restaurant’s West African-rooted cooking. Nor does he want them to tune out the history of enslavement embedded in a menu whose influences roam from Portugal to the Dominion Republic to South Carolina and back again. Part of his aim with Okàn is to school customers in the diasporic cuisine’s idioms, so locals can order peanut stew and jollof rice as offhandedly as they might ask for steak frites.

“If I told you I made Italian food, you would have a pretty solid foundation of what I make,” said Bennett, who’s been a chef in Italian, French and New American restaurants. “If I tell you I make African food, you have no clue, or you’re going to go straight to a stereotypical thought like soul food.”

FILLING A VOID

N’Daw has confronted the same confusion about West African cookery, as well as objections lodged against older West African restaurants in the U.S. that she can’t entirely dismiss, given her affection for structure and background in classical technique: “Too oily, or bad service, not open when you think it’s going to be open,” she said.

Yet she never heard those gripes in Charleston, where she relocated during the pandemic in part because of the city’s resemblance to Saint-Louis. In Charleston, where Gullah-Geechee staples such as red rice and stewed shrimp are almost interchangeable with their African antecedents, there simply weren’t any West African restaurants, unless you included the Nigerian woman who sold prepared food out of her home in the next county north.

“There is none?” N’Daw asked her colleagues at Chez Nous, a French restaurant in downtown Charleston where N’Daw worked briefly as a chef.

“None,” they confirmed.

“Nothing?”

When the kitchen on Line Street was offered for rent, N’Daw told her husband that she was going to open Charleston’s first West African restaurant, even if she had to empty their savings account to do it.

Bintu Atelier opened in June as a takeout window. N’Daw instructed her husband, a Fayetteville, N.C., native who gave up his archivist job in New York to help start the restaurant, “I’m going to cook. You’re going to put stuff in bags.” N’Daw was certain of that, just as she was certain that she’d picked a failsafe lineup of opening dishes—ndambe, a black-eyed pea spread; mafe, or peanut stew, and red shrimp with rice—and the right site for her venture: The Eastside reminded her of Bed-Stuy, the intimate Brooklyn neighborhood which she’d long called home.

What she wasn’t sure about was whether she needed to sign up with DoorDash. The food delivery service would keep 30% of her sales, but she worried about running a business without much drive-by traffic. Finally, she registered for an account.

“One day, we tried it, and we had to turn it off,” N’Daw said. The aromas of N’Daw’s cooking, drifting down the street, were a better advertisement for Bintu Atelier than any app listing: She raced to keep up with demand. And once customers received their takeout boxes, they didn’t want to leave. They persuaded her to put patio tables outside her front door so they could stay and eat and talk.

Basically, they’d found their bistro. A place where the food was scratch-made, service was friendly instead of formal, and a chef-owner was keeping an eye on everything, to borrow descriptors from bistro backer Pierre Josse. Of course, this panoramic take on the template was willed into existence by a woman who as a girl would carry baobab to her French grandmother, who craved the Senegalese fruit, and return to Dakar with her Senegalese grandmother’s favorite Dijon mustard.

’THE WARMEST FOOD’

Elaina Ruth, who met N’Daw in March at a small Charleston Wine + Food afterparty organized and attended by Black women chefs, recently had the chance to sit at one of those Ikea patio tables.

“You look up and see it’s just her in the kitchen cooking: Everything that comes out is directly from her hands,” said Ruth, who feasted on fried snapper, crab rice and goat egusi, a ground melon seed stew. “Outside of my grandmother, it’s some of the warmest food I’ve ever had.”

In a city where N’Daw found herself perpetually frustrated by being the only Black woman in restaurant dining rooms — “C’mon! This city is so mixed!” — Bintu Atelier has attracted a diverse clientele. Former Peace Corps volunteers and retirees who’ve had the opportunity to tour an African country still outnumber Black people born in Charleston, but the restaurant’s visited regularly by families who live nearby, women who want to know if palm oil is as healthy as Instagram claims, and kids who want to try fufu like the pounded starch they saw on TikTok.

“I’m happy to see everyone sit together,” N’Daw said. “It’s not about being a Black-owned business, but if you’re Black, you feel safe here. It’s just that simplicity and honesty of feeding and nurturing people.”

Although N’Daw and her restaurant share a given name, N’Daw wanted to clarify that ego didn’t influence her choice. Instead, she was following a family custom in which every eldest daughter, such as herself, is called Bintu.

In other words, Bintu Atelier is designated as the first West African restaurant in the area.

N’Daw’s greatest hope is that it won’t be the last.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

Meat And Dairy Industry Giants Hold The Plant Power Behind Many Vegan Brands

BY BENJAMIN SELWYN

“Cast a vote for a greener planet, lower food bills, better health and kindness to animals. And you don’t even have to wait for a general election,” states the global Veganuary campaign that encourages people to eat plant-based throughout January.

Transforming the world’s food system through large-scale reduction in meat production is essential if we are to preserve the planet’s natural ecosystems. But I don’t believe Veganuary’s solution is the way to do that.

While the switch to eating vegan food may seem empowering, it places an unrealistic pressure upon consumers to drive the shift to plant-based foods. By failing to highlight the state-backed corporate power at the heart of the food system, Veganuary arguably disempowers its followers.

In collaboration with Charis Davis, MA student in development studies at SOAS University of London, I researched the ownership structure and marketing strategies of several plant-based food companies. We found that many brands that are celebrated for sustainable plant-based food production are owned by giant meat and dairy companies implicated in allegations of large-scale environmental destruction.

Take Vivera, a pioneer in plant-based food. The Dutch company produces a wide range of vegetarian and vegan food, such as vegan hot dogs, plant salmon fillets, Tex Mex strips and vegan steak. The Vivera website suggests that consumers should buy vegan products to “make a huge difference for human health and the wellbeing of the planet” and states that “you can improve the world with every bite you take by eating plant-based foods”.

However, Vivera’s online marketing and product packaging do not highlight to consumers that it is owned by JBS, the world’s largest meat producer. Every day JBS’s global operations slaughter 8.7 million birds, 92,600 hogs and 42,700 head of cattle, according to the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, a US-based thinktank.

JBS’s purchase of Vivera in 2021 does not signify a move away from meat. Shortly after acquiring the plant-based food company, it announced plans to invest US$130 million in two of its US beef processing plants, to increase cattle slaughtering capacity by around 300,000 a year. JBS is the biggest purchaser of cattle from the Amazon, and therefore a major contributor to deforestation.

Another case in point is Alpro. The well-known manufacturer of vegan dairy products was bought by Danone in 2017 in response to the growing popularity of milk alternatives. But the language on Alpro’s website, for example “doing your bit with every bite or sip”, seems at odds with Danone’s claims to be the number one leading brand worldwide for fresh dairy products.

Cow’s milk creates three times more greenhouse gas emissions, uses ten times as much land and twice as much freshwater than plant-based alternatives, according to calculations by the website Our World in Data.

While Danone is expanding into the plant-based market, this does not imply a retreat from its core dairy product lines. As one food industry newsletter put it: “The company … is looking to cross-promote its plant-based and traditional dairy beverages to households where individuals dabble in both categories.”

Both cases exemplify a broader trend where giant meat and dairy-based conglomerates, including JBS and Danone, are buying up smaller plant-based food companies as part of their corporate expansion strategies, according to a 2022 report by IPES-Food, a coalition of food system experts.

At present, meat and dairy producers are supported by mega state subsidies. In the EU and US, livestock farmers receive about 1,000 times more subsidies than plant-based and cultivated meat producers.

Yet Veganuary’s apolitical stance ignores the support the meat and dairy industries receive from rich-country governments. While the planet desperately needs a major shift away from meat production and consumption, mega food corporations probably won’t be the ones to lead the transition to a greener planet.

How to support plant-based food production

A significant step change would require governments to do at least three things. First, they should impose hefty fines upon and potentially confiscate the land of corporations that damage the environment through meat and dairy production.

Second, governments should reorient subsidies into plant-based food production instead of supporting agro-industrial meat production. Third, they should expand public welfare to help cash-strapped consumers to buy plant-based products.

Such moves may seem farfetched, but in the context of the existential threat of climate breakdown, they are arguably quite moderate. However, success requires strong political leadership, something that has been sidelined by Veganuary’s celebration of consumer power.

We urgently need to channel the growing public awareness of the environmental damage wrought by the current food system, through voting and large-scale social movements, into a political force that paves a way forward for genuinely climate-friendly diets.

In response to the issues raised by this article, a spokesperson for Danone said: “At Danone, we stand by the fact that both dairy and plant-based foods can contribute to a healthy sustainable diet. With many more people choosing to diversify their food choices, our portfolio allows us to provide a wide range of dairy and plant-based options to best meet their different needs and inspire healthy and sustainable choices in both categories.”

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

Dietary Fibre Affects More Than Your Colon: How The Immune System, Brain And Overall Health Benefit Too

BY MARK WULCZYNSKI

There’s no shortage of advice about what to eat, including hype about the latest superfoods that will help you live to 100, or about the newest restrictive diets that claim to help you lose weight and look beautiful. As a researcher from the Farncombe Family Digestive Health Research Institute, I’m well aware that there is no universal “healthy diet” that will work for everyone.

However, most professionals would agree that a diet should be well balanced between the food groups, and it’s better to include more things like vegetables and fermented foods in your diet than restrict yourself unnecessarily. Eating foods that promote gut health improves your overall health too.

Why is everyone so concerned about fibre?

The importance of fibre has been known for decades. The late great surgeon and fibre researcher Denis Burkitt once said, “If you pass small stools, you have to have large hospitals.” But dietary fibre does more than just help move your bowels. Fibre can be considered a prebiotic nutrient.

Prebiotics aren’t actively digested and absorbed, rather they are selectively used to promote the growth of a beneficial species of microbes in our gut. These microbes then help digest foods for us so we can obtain more nutrients, promote gut barrier integrity and prevent the growth of harmful bacteria.

Fibres can also have microbe-independent effects on our immune system when they interact directly with receptors expressed by our cells. These beneficial effects may even help teach the immune system to be more tolerant and reduce inflammation.

Getting enough dietary fibre?

Probably not. The so-called western diet is low in fibre and filled with ultra-processed foods. The recommendation for daily fibre is between 25-38 grams depending on factors like age, sex and activity level. Most people consume about half of the recommendation, and it can negatively affect overall health.

Good sources of dietary fibre include whole grains, fruits and vegetables, beans and legumes, and nuts and seeds. There is a lot of emphasis on soluble fibres and less on insoluble fibres, but in reality, most foods will contain a mixture of both, and they each have their merits.

High fibre snacks are also gaining popularity. With an estimated global value of US$7 billion in 2022, the value of the prebiotic ingredient market is expected to triple by 2032.

The benefits of dietary fibre

There’s plenty of evidence supporting the benefits of dietary fibre. Fibre isn’t just associated with colon health; it’s associated with overall health and brain health through the gut-brain axis. Diets low in fibre have been associated with gastrointestinal disorders such as irritable bowel syndrome or inflammatory bowel disease.

On the other hand, consuming adequate fibre also reduces the risk and mortality associated with cardiovascular diseases and obesity. There are studies that show improvements of cognitive function with certain types of fibre.

There are some gastrointestinal diseases, like Celiac disease, which are not typically associated with the benefits of dietary fibre. However, there isn’t a consensus to the specific type of fibre and dose that would be beneficial in treating most diseases.

Not all fibre is good fibre

Shockingly, not all fibre is good for you. Fibre is used as an umbrella term for indigestible plant polysaccharides, so there are many different types with varying fermentability, solubility and viscosity in the gut.

To make things more complex, the source matters too. Fibre from one plant isn’t the same as fibre from another plant. Additionally, the old proverb, “too much good is not good” rings true, where overconsumption of fibre supplements can cause symptoms such as constipation, bloating and gas. This is partly due to the differences in gut microbiomes that affect the ability to metabolize fibre to produce beneficial molecules like short-chain fatty acids.

In some cases, such as irritable bowel syndrome patients, lack of microbes with the capacity to digest fibre may allow intact fibres to interact with intestinal cells directly and exert pro-inflammatory effects. Recent evidence has even shown that excessively high consumption of soluble fibres, such as inulin, a common supplement, can increase the risk of colon cancer development in an experimental animal model.

Part of a healthy diet

Dietary fibre is an important part of a healthy diet that can promote both gut and overall health. Fibre helps you feel more satisfied after meals and helps to regulate your blood sugar and cholesterol. Do your best to consume fibre as part of your diet, and when needed, take only the dose of supplements as recommended.

Prebiotics promote the growth of gut microbes that can affect gut health and immunity in the context of many different diseases, although not all fibres are created equal. While fibre won’t cure illness, diet is a great addition to medicines and treatment strategies that can improve their efficacy.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

A Bottle Of Scotch Recently Sold For $2.7 Million – What’s Behind Such Outrageous Prices?

BY HOVIG TCHALIAN

ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP

UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA

When a rare bottle of Scotch whisky sold for US$2.7 million in November 2023, I was stunned, but I wasn’t surprised.

The whiskey market has been booming for some time.

Bourbon brands like Pappy Van Winkle from Buffalo Trace distillery are selling for astronomical prices in the secondary market. Japanese whiskies, which have become popular over the past decade, now fetch prices up to 50 times higher what they did a decade ago.

And in July 2022, a single Ardbeg whisky barrel, aged since 1975, with enough liquid for about 500 bottles, sold at auction for around $19 million. In 1997, the entire Ardbeg distillery had been purchased by Glenmorangie Distillery for roughly $11 million.

How could a single cask of Scotch whisky sell for nearly twice the value of an entire distillery purchased just over two decades earlier?

I’ve been studying specialty markets for a decade, and I see at least two stories to unpack.

One is economic, where items in low supply, like rare bottles or barrels, sell for high prices. And prices in the whiskey market have been rising rapidly over the last two decades, fueled in part by investors. Some investors see luxury collectibles, such as high-end whiskey bottles or casks, as an alternative to other assets like stocks and bonds. (There are, however, signs that the luxury market is softening due to oversupply.)

But a second, overlooked – and arguably more interesting – explanation is social. It revolves around the increasing focus on the purported authenticity of craft products – especially ones like Scotch whisky, which trade on their heritage as much as their flavor.

A ‘brown spirit’ boom

The history of whiskey is one of booms and busts.

Whiskey has been produced in Scotland and Ireland since at least the late 1400s. The spirit spread to the rest of Europe in the mid-to-late 1700s. The late 1800s and early 1900s were boom years, especially for Irish whiskey. The period also witnessed innovations such as aging the spirit in oak barrels, which enhances its flavor. (Scotch, Japanese, Canadian and Indian whisky is spelled without the “e,” and Irish and American whiskey is spelled with the “e.” Whiskey is the general category label.)

In the U.S., Prohibition moved distilling underground until it made a midcentury comeback. Famously, the advent of “white spirits” like vodka and gin pushed down prices of “brown spirits” like whiskey starting in the 1970s. This led to what Scotch distillers call the “whisky loch,” or “lake” – the accumulation of large stores of matured whisky and the resulting shuttering of many whisky producers.

But whiskey has made a comeback since 2000. Prices of some bottles, including highly prized single-malt whiskies produced at a single distillery, have risen by almost 600% over the last decade. American bourbon has also seen a spike in interest – and prices – since at least 2016.

Long perceived as an inferior knockoff of Scotch whisky, Japanese whiskies have also experienced price surges. The House of Suntory, the oldest Japanese distiller, recently announced its own substantial price increases in the primary market, in some cases by as much as 100%. And India, long the largest consumer of Scotch whisky, is also seeing its distilleries produce their own single-malt whiskies and gradually move up-market [https://www.theiwsr.com/the-volatility-of-indian-whisky-markets/].

While these increases have largely been confined to the higher end of the market, prices of affordable bottles have gone up, too.

Craving real connections

Not long after the sale of the 1926 Macallan for $2.7 million, Merriam-Webster named “authentic” its 2023 word of the year.

The term’s popularity can be attributed to advances in artificial intelligence – and, with it, misinformation. But much of the focus on authenticity is also the result of the longing for more in-person connections in an increasingly virtual world. People want authentic experiences – or what look like authentic experiences. And that includes the products that they buy.

Authenticity is a notoriously difficult concept to define. But it tends to revolve around following a set of internal or external standards. That might mean following your values or your heart in order to cultivate your best, most real or most authentic self. When it comes to products – think vintage cars, artisanal foods or craft beer – it could mean those products must meet certain criteria to be considered authentic. For example, according to standards defined by the microbrewery movement, in order for craft beer to be considered authentic, it must be produced in-house in small batches.

These sorts of distinctions can be difficult for the average consumer to grasp, and authenticity can be easy to fake. The beer brand Samuel Adams, for instance, attempts to signal its authenticity by associating itself with the people, places and events of the American Revolution. But the brewery also got in trouble for marketing itself as a craft beer without making its beer in-house.

Putting a price on authenticity

Intangible qualities make whiskey special – aspects such as the aroma, or “nose”; its complexity; and its lingering flavor, or “finish.”

But to boost whiskey’s value, purveyors of high-end whiskey convey the product’s heritage.

A whiskey’s unique locale – what wine enthusiasts call “terroir” – matters greatly to its perceived authenticity.

During and after the whisky loch, scotch producers realized they were sitting on large stocks of unsold whisky. Much of that whisky was produced and aged starting in the 1960s, before the advent of automation, faster distilling and new ingredients. The desire to return to those more authentic, simpler times allowed distillers to rewrite the stories of those stores.

Scotch whisky has a long-standing reputation as more historically significant – and, therefore, more authentic. Despite research suggesting that even most expert judges can’t distinguish different categories of whisky, a Scotch whisky bottle can sell for as much as 100 times the price of a similarly aged – and similarly complex – Canadian whisky.

One recent study of Canadian whisky showed how distilleries can even use their physical features and local character to enhance perceptions of their spirits’ authenticity. Bottles from older distilleries were deemed more authentic – and could sell for more. Those from newer, factorylike buildings had less appeal to consumers.

There’s a miragelike nature to all of this. A product can be considered authentic if everyone believes and acts like it is.

It should come as no surprise, then, that the history of whiskey is one of perception, not necessarily quality. And this perception helps drive its economic fortunes.

So the next time you search for a nice bottle of whiskey for yourself or as a gift, consider the story and history that’s amplifying its price.

How Cinnamon, Nutmeg And Ginger Became The Scents Of Winter Holidays, Far From Their Tropical Origins

BY SERIBA DESALVIO

PH.D CANDIDATE IN GENETICS AND GENOMICS

TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY

Regardless of how you celebrate end-of-year holidays, food is probably central to your winter festivities. And a trio of spices – cinnamon, nutmeg and ginger – feature in many dishes and drinks and are an unmistakable part of the scent profile we associate with the holiday season.

As a plant scientist, I was curious to know how these spices, grown in the tropics, became so closely associated with the Northern Hemisphere’s winter holidays. Just as cranberries’ fall harvest makes them a natural choice for Thanksgiving, I thought that perhaps the seasonality of spice harvest had something to do with their use during the winter months.

However, this doesn’t appear to be the case. When it comes to growing spices, producers are playing the long game.

Growing holiday spices

Take ginger, which features in both sweet and savory recipes in many cuisines worldwide. Ginger roots take between eight and 10 months to fully mature. The plants can be harvested at any time of year if they are mature and haven’t been exposed to cold or wind.

That timing is important because harvesting ginger means uprooting the whole plant to get to the rhizomes growing underground. Rhizomes function like underground stems, storing nutrients for the plant to help it survive the winter. Once cold weather signals to the plant to dip into its underground supply of nutrients, the quality of the harvested ginger will decline significantly.

Nutmeg comes from grinding seeds of the Myristica fragrans tree, an evergreen that’s native to Indonesia. The trees start flowering in their sixth year, but peak production comes when they are closer to 20 years old.

Workers harvest fruit from the trees, which typically grow to heights of 10 to 30 feet (3 to 10 meters), using long poles to knock the fruits down. For spice production, the fruits then are dried in the sun.

Nutmeg comes from grinding the inner seed kernels; its sister spice, mace, comes from grinding the tissue that envelopes the seeds. Since this plant yields two spices, the long wait for the trees to mature is worthwhile for producers.

Cinnamon is made from the bark of two trees: Cinnamomum verum for cinnamon sticks, and Cinnamomum cassia for ground cinnamon. The two types have different textures and flavor profiles, but both are made from the outermost layer of the trees’ bark. Production typically starts after a tree is 2 years old.

Peeling bark from cinnamon tree branches is easiest after heavy rainfalls, which soften the bark, so harvests typically happen after monsoon seasons. The same effect can be achieved outside of monsoon season by soaking branches in buckets of water.

What makes a spice ‘warm’?

Cinnamon, ginger and nutmeg all are widely described as “warm” spices, which probably has less to do with where they come from and more with how they affect our bodies.

In the same way that mint can “taste” cold due to its menthol content, cinnamon’s warm taste is attributed to a compound called cinnamaldehyde, which gives the spice its distinctive taste and smell. This chemical tricks our nervous system when we eat it by triggering the same pathway that perceives warmth, much as capsaicin in peppers triggers feelings of pain.

Cinnamaldehyde also helps decrease blood glucose levels, so enjoying some cinnamon tea after a big Christmas dinner can help stop your blood sugar from spiking. Cinnamon has been used for thousands of years in traditional medicine across Asia for its antibacterial properties and as a digestive aid.

Christopher Columbus’ first voyage west across the Atlantic sought to find a direct route to Asia to purchase cinnamon and other spices directly where they were grown.
Indeed, the spice trade can be seen as a microcosm for the story of globalization, with all of its associated benefits and harms.

Spicing up our health and digestive systems

Ginger and nutmeg don’t trick our nervous systems into feeling warm, but they both contain a myriad of compounds that aid in digestion and can fend off viral and bacterial infections. Ginger is an excellent anti-nausea agent because of a compound called gingerol, which increases gut mobility. This means food doesn’t linger in the gut as long, which cuts down on gas production and keeps us from feeling bloated and sick.

Ginger was first used for food purposes in the Middle Ages as a way of masking the taste of preserved meats, which were mainly consumed in the winter months surrounding holidays. Unlike most spices, it can be used for cooking in many forms – fresh, dried and ground, candied or pickled. Each version offers a different level of ginger’s signature bite.

Like cinnamon, nutmeg is another anti-diabetic. It has been shown to both decrease blood glucose levels and increase serum insulin. Insulin helps regulate how sugars are stored in our bodies by moving glucose out of our bloodstream and into cells, where it can be accessed later when we need an energy boost. So cinnamon can help ensure that all those holiday baked goods are put to use energetically, whether that’s right now or later.

Nutmeg seeds produce many natural compounds, some of which have the potential to fight pathogenic bacteria. During the 1600s, doctors believed nutmeg could be effective at warding off the bubonic plague, and many people wore it tied around their necks. This belief likely came from nutmeg’s insecticidal qualities, which would have helped keep fleas carrying the plague off people sporting a nutmeg necklace.

The sights and sounds of the winter holidays are distinctive, but nothing is as all-encompassing and nostalgic as the smells and tastes. Understanding how we have evolved traditions surrounding food, and the science behind those foods, can help us further appreciate their role in the season of celebrations.

Spicy Food Might Burn In The Moment, But It Likely Won’t Harm Your Health In The Long Term

BY PAUL D. TERRY

Everyone has a different tolerance for spicy food — some love the burn, while others can’t take the heat. But the scientific consensus on whether spicy food can have an effect — positive or negative — on your health is pretty mixed.

In September 2023, a 14-year-old boy died after consuming a spicy pepper as part of the viral “one chip challenge.” The Paqui One Chip Challenge uses Carolina Reaper and Naga Viper peppers, which are among the hottest peppers in the world.

While the boy’s death is still under examination by health officials, it has gotten some of the spicy chips being used in these challenges removed from stores.

As an epidemiologist, I’m interested in how spicy food can affect people’s health and potentially worsen symptoms associated with chronic diseases like inflammatory bowel disease. I am also interested in how diet, including spicy foods, can increase or decrease a person’s lifespan.

The allure of spicy food

Spicy food can refer to food with plenty of flavor from spices, such as Asian curries, Tex-Mex dishes or Hungarian paprikash. It can also refer to foods with noticeable heat from capsaicin, a chemical compound found to varying degrees in hot peppers.

As the capsaicin content of a pepper increases, so does its ranking on the Scoville scale, which quantifies the sensation of being hot.

Capsaicin tastes hot because it activates certain biological pathways in mammals – the same pathways activated by hot temperatures. The pain produced by spicy food can provoke the body to release endorphins and dopamine. This release can prompt a sense of relief or even a degree of euphoria.

In the U.S., the U.K. and elsewhere, more people than ever are consuming spicy foods, including extreme pepper varieties.

Hot-pepper-eating contests and similar “spicy food challenges” aren’t new, although spicy food challenges have gotten hotter – in terms of spice level and popularity on social media.

Short-term health effects

The short-term effects of consuming extremely spicy foods range from a pleasurable sensation of heat to an unpleasant burning sensation across the lips, tongue and mouth. These foods can also cause various forms of digestive tract discomfort, headaches and vomiting.

If spicy foods are uncomfortable to eat, or cause unpleasant symptoms like migraines, abdominal pain and diarrhea, then it’s probably best to avoid those foods. Spicy food may cause these symptoms in people with inflammatory bowel diseases, for example.

Spicy food challenges notwithstanding, for many people across the world, consumption of spicy food is part of a long-term lifestyle influenced by geography and culture.

For example, hot peppers grow in hot climates, which may explain why many cultures in these climates use spicy foods in their cooking. Some research suggests that spicy foods help control foodborne illnesses, which may also explain cultural preferences for spicy foods.

Lack of consensus

Nutritional epidemiologists have been studying the potential risks and benefits of long-term spicy food consumption for many years. Some of the outcomes examined in relation to spicy food consumption include obesity, cardiovascular disease, cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, heartburn and ulcers, psychological health, pain sensitivity and death from any cause – also called all-cause mortality.

These studies report mixed results, with some outcomes like heartburn more strongly linked to spicy food consumption. As can be expected with an evolving science, some experts are more certain about some of these health effects than others.

For example, some experts state with confidence that spicy food does not cause stomach ulcers, whereas the association with stomach cancer isn’t as clear.

When taking heart disease, cancer and all other causes of death in a study population into consideration, does eating spicy food increase or decrease the risk of early death?

Right now, the evidence from large population-based studies suggests that spicy food does not increase the risk of all-cause mortality among a population and may actually decrease the risk.

However, when considering the results of these studies, keep in mind that what people eat is one part of a larger set of lifestyle factors – such as physical activity, relative body weight and consumption of tobacco and alcohol – that also have health consequences.

It’s not easy for researchers to measure diet and lifestyle factors accurately in a population-based study, at least in part because people don’t always remember or report their exposure accurately. It often takes numerous studies conducted over many years to reach a firm conclusion about how a dietary factor affects a certain aspect of health.

Scientists still don’t entirely know why so many people enjoy spicy foods while others do not, although there is plenty of speculation regarding evolutionary, cultural and geographic factors, as well as medical, biological and psychological ones.

One thing experts do know, however, is that humans are one of the only animals that will intentionally eat something spicy enough to cause them pain, all for the sake of pleasure.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE