Passing Thought

Organic food makes up less than 3% of food in this country.

There are times I think it would be best to gather up that premium food - the best, cleanest, organic food our country can make - and feed it to those who need it most - the sick, those in nursing homes, very young children. Whatever is left over, all the hormone- and antibiotic-fed CAFO meat, pesticide-ridden produce, mercury and PCB-laden seafood, and all the boxed processed junk, would be fed to the healthiest and wealthiest among us, those whose bodies and situations could handle it better.

You can bet your bootstraps there would be a sea change in how food is produced in this country then.
________

Should Small Food Producers Be Exempt From Regulation?

Over on Marler's Blog is a guest post by the Cornucopia Institute:

Guest Blog - Cornucopia Institute - Supporting Viable Federal Oversight over Corporate Agribusiness - Local/Organic Farming: Part of the Solution, Not Part of the Problem!

... which addresses the proposed legislation intended to improve the food safety system.

There was a part I found unsettling:

"Some small-scale farmers, including members of the Amish community, will find mandatory electronic record keeping requirements onerous and should be able to access alternatives, or be exempted due to scale."

Some small-scale farmers "should be exempted due to scale?"

My comment:

In the popular Reading Terminal Market (shown) in downtown Philadelphia is a stall run by Amish (to use your example). As a consumer, how do I know, and should I care, that a tomato or a carton of eggs from a bin at the Amish stall was exempted from meeting requirements that a tomato or carton of eggs from a bin at the stall 50 feet away had to meet?

I think ... When you choose to sell a product, you agree to the terms that selling entails. And there should be basic* terms that apply to everyone who chooses to sell food.

When you choose to drive a car, you agree to get a license and to demonstrate knowledge of driving and basic traffic laws. We don't exempt someone from licensure if they say they don't drive very much.

* As you pointed out, minimum food safety standards could include "manure use, water quality, employee hygiene, sanitation and animal control, temperature controls, and nutrients on the farm."

What do you think? Do you think small food producers should be exempt from regulation?
________Photo of Philadelphia's Reading Terminal Market by talula815 at Panoramio.

Is Biotechnology The Best Path To Food Security?

Regarding the poll in the side bar: Even if genetically engineered crops result in higher yields, is biotechnology really the path we want to take to improve food security?

Below is another selection from Paul Robert's book, The End of Food. Here he discusses the mechanism by which gene transfer can result in unwanted, and potentially dangerous, traits:

"Because genes influence cellular behavior in such biochemically complex ways, there are concerns that the effect of engineering a single gene could in fact spread beyond the targeted trait.

One such concern centers on the proteins that transplanted genes create in their new cell hosts.

Proteins are the gene's physical expression; the gene's DNA code "tells" the cell to assemble the protein from various building blocks in the cell. This "expressed" protein then initiates a cascade of molecular events within the cell that result in some trait, such as growth, which engineers hope to influence. The complication here is that this expression-and-cascade process is governed by many factors -- by the protein's DNA structure, to be sure, but also by the sugars, fats, and other chemical compounds that are present in the cell when the protein arrives -- a chemical soup that varies from cell to cell.

Because different kinds of cells contain different chemical compounds, the same protein may produce substantially different results when expressed in different cells. Thus, by transferring a gene from one species to another and by causing proteins normally expressed in a completely different cellular environment, transgenic modification may raise the risk of unanticipated, and potentially unwanted, effects that weren't observed in the donor organism.

The potential for such surprises was underlined in 2005, when researcher Vanessa Prescott and her colleagues found that when a gene from a pinto bean was transplanted to a pea, the pea acquired an allergenic effect that hadn't been present or even expected, in the bean."

But the government tests these plants before they land on our tables, right? The FDA is responsible for the safety of our foods, of course they test them...

"The FDA does not test transgenic foods prior to their release. ... This weakness was highlighted in 1998 when the US government approved a Bt corn variety known as Starlink for sale as animal feed but not as human food. Despite this stipulation, the Starlink Bt toxins turned up in more than three hundred consumer products. The Starlink debacle led to a massive program of mill closures, export bans, and product recalls that cost Starlink's maker, Aventis, an estimated $1 billion."

If the companies producing these plants don't know everything there is to know about their safety; and the agencies regulating these plants are leaving testing up to the companies; I suppose the consumer is left to fend for himself...

"Even today, consumers wishing to avoid transgenic foods cannot, because the [biotech] industry has successfully blocked any requirement that transgenic foods be labeled -- despite surveys showing that nine out of ten consumers want such labels."

Do you feel like we're part of a giant biology experiment? I do, for crying out loud, I do.
________

Barley, Broccoli Rabe, and Black Bean Casserole

Prep time: 30 minutes (If everything is leftover).

Prep time: 6 hours (If you're starting from scratch, longer if you soak your beans).

Ingredients:

• 1 cup precooked barley (pearled, hulled, whatever you have. You can even use leftover brown rice.)
  
• 1/2 small onion, diced
  
• Few teaspoons olive oil
  
• Few teaspoons tamari
  
• Few teaspoons gomasio
  
• 1/2 cup blanched broccoli rabe, chopped (or other precooked green)
  
• Salt & pepper to taste
  
• 1/2 cup (or more) precooked (and preseasoned, if just with salt) black beans, with sauce (See note below.)
  
• 1/2 cup tomato sauce
  
• 1 tablespoon olive oil into which you've minced 1 clove garlic
  
• Grated cheeses for topping (I used cheddar and mozzarella)

1   Sauté onion in olive oil until golden. Toss in the barley and mix until heated through, 1 or 2 minutes. Toss in the rapini and mix. Season with tamari, gomasio, salt, pepper (and/or other seasoning).

Note: I like the onion to cook slowly so I add it to the pan with the oil at the same time, instead of heating the oil first. I also add a few sprinkles of salt at the beginning. The salt draws fluid from the onion, softening it as it cooks. If you like your onion with a little more tooth, hold off on the salt until later. I also add a few teaspoons of water as the onion cooks. It's a trick I learned during my low-fat days. It allows you to brown without adding too much oil. It's a good idea regardless of your fat restrictions because it distributes the oil better, and cooks the vegetables more uniformly (the water evaporates).

2   Pile the sautéed barley into a small baking dish. Layer the black beans over it. Layer the tomato sauce over the beans. Drizzle a teaspoon or two of the garlic oil over everything. Layer cheese on top. Broil on the lowest setting until browned. Cover and hold for a few minutes, about 10, to allow flavors to meld and all items to become evenly warmed. Serve.
________
A Note About Cooking Beans

I've gotten into the habit of cooking all my beans from those hard, desiccated little pebbles available in bags or bulk just about everywhere except gas stations. Once I stopped being intimidated by dried beans and started cooking my own, I was surprised at how stale was the stuff in cans.

Intimidated ... by all the instructions to:

• Presoak overnight ... Or 5 hours, or 8 hours, or 2 days
  
• Change water
  
• Don't change water
  
• Add salt to soaking water
  
• Don't add salt to soaking water
  
• Discard water before cooking
  
• Cook in soaking water
  
• No presoaking needed

There's only one indispensible instruction you need for beans, which I learned from Diana Kennedy about 5 years ago ... don't undercook: "Never serve the beans al dente; they will be gassy and indigestible." Many beans that come from cans are undercooked.

You don't need to presoak dried beans. Doing so will cut down on cooking time, but it's not necessary. (Antinutrient proteins are denatured upon heating.) That 6 hours Prep Time above for non-leftovers? It's mostly for the beans. You haven't had really good black beans unless you've cooked them from scratch very slowly for a long time.

Try it ... put some rinsed dried black beans into a heavy pot, cover with lots of water and simmer for about 6 hours*, adding hot water as it gets low. (Never add cold water.) Let the water boil down towards the end until you're left with a muddy black bean mash. This is delicious, easier to digest than canned, and infinitely seasonable and mixable. Do it on the weekend and refrigerate for weeknight meals - like this one!

* I should clarify. Since I can't be pot-vigilant for 6 hours (who can?), I use a slow cooker or crock pot and forget about it ... for the most part.
________Photo: Bix
Post script: Melted cheese is the only way I can get FRE to eat barley and beans. Well, one way.

Impending Water Deficits

Paul Robert's book, The End of Food, has been a real eye opener for me. I'm reading a part right now that discusses problems with water, not having enough of it:

"... this emerging scarcity poses a constraint on food supplies that in some ways is more final than that of oil or climate."

He gave an example of China:

"According to the World Bank, even if China adopts a rigorous water-management system -- with higher price incentives, better system efficiency, recycling of waste water, and massive water transfers (as much as 270 million tons a year) from the wetter southern part of the country to the drier north -- the 3-H region will still face a water deficit of about 600 million tons (11 trillion gallons) or about two-thirds of the total yearly flow of the Huang River. And China is only one of a growing number of countries that will soon be slipping into severe water deficits."

How does the "local" argument work when you don't have enough water to grow crops? Local food systems are, by definition, self-contained - they do not use imported seed, fertilizers, water, or fuel. The local movement is, to use Ronald's word, an "insular" movement, one that can only take off where resources are concentrated; one that makes no sense in many regions of the world.
________Photo of an irrigation canal off China's Huang River from Walking the Wall.

HR 875 Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009: Factcheck

Here is the full text of:
HR 875: Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009

I see nothing here that would "make it criminal to grow your own garden." Maybe I missed it. Well, if it's in there, and it becomes law, and the White House goes through with their plans to plant a garden on the South Lawn, Obama will have to take to the airwaves, a la Nixon, and affirm:

"People have got to know whether or not their President is a crook. Well, I'm not a crook."
- Pres. Richard M. Nixon, November 17, 1973, During a televised press conference in which he insisted he did not break any laws.

Here are some facts put together by the nonprofit consumer group Food and Water Watch. (The author is given as Elissar Khalek. Nice job Elissar!)

Here are a few things that HR 875 DOES do:

• It addresses the most critical flaw in the structure of FDA by splitting it into 2 new agencies –one devoted to food safety and the other devoted to drugs and medical devices.
  
• It increases inspection of food processing plants, basing the frequency of inspection on the risk of the product being produced – but it does NOT make plants pay any registration fees or user fees.
  
• It does extend food safety agency authority to food production on farms, requiring farms to write a food safety plan and consider the critical points on that farm where food safety problems are likely to occur.
  
• It requires imported food to meet the same standards as food produced in the U.S.

Here are a few things that HR 875 does NOT do:

• It does not cover foods regulated by the USDA (beef, pork, poultry, lamb, catfish.)
  
• It does not establish a mandatory animal identification system.
  
• It does not regulate backyard gardens.
  
• It does not regulate seed.
  
• It does not call for new regulations for farmers markets or direct marketing arrangements.
  
• It does not apply to food that does not enter interstate commerce (food that is sold across state lines).
  
• It does not mandate any specific type of traceability for FDA-regulated foods (the bill does instruct a new food safety agency to improve traceability of foods, but specifically says that recordkeeping can be done electronically or on paper.)

More on Food and Water Watch's site:
Background on H.R. 875
________Photo of Backyard Vegetable Garden via Laura (& Garrett)'s Flickr photostream

How Will We Produce Our Food Tomorrow?

I've been reading Paul Robert's recent book, The End of Food. It's a relief to find someone writing about food production who is not just intelligent and informed, but balanced.¹

One answer for how our food will be produced in the future is reflected in the agribusiness model - a model that promotes intensive, industrial ranching and farming, i.e. the status quo, at least in the US.

Another answer is reflected in the organic, sustainable, eat-local model - a model that's attractive on the micro scale, but one I've begun to see as idealistic and unattainable, raising more questions than it answers.²

Roberts presents these sides and lays groundwork for a system that uses the best from both, a system that remains efficient and profitable but still sustainable.

Here's a taste of his writing. It's an article he wrote for Mother Jones a few weeks ago. (It's provoking some passionate comments.)

Spoiled: Organic And Local Is So 2008
________¹ If I have any criticism, it's Roberts' decision not to address the biotech controversies, even if it was to say that the issues surrounding GMOs were beyond the scope of his book. I just reached Part III. He addresses it.

² For an organic model to serve as the foundation for future food production, it must be, by definition, sustainable. Roberts: "truly sustainable food must be not just ecologically benign, but also nutritious, produced without injustice, and affordable."

Some of my questions:

• How can you call your output "organic" when soils are fertilized by manure, urine, and animal byproducts produced off-site, often on intensively-run livestock, poultry, and fish operations, and carted in? (Is anyone factoring in these "poop miles?")
  
• As more crops are converted to organic, using natural in lieu of synthetic fertilizer, where will that extra manure come from? Where will the extra food and cropland come from to feed the extra animals to make the extra manure to fertilize the new organic crops?
  
• How can you call your output "organic" when it's flown in from halfway across the world? (Organic raspberries from China?)
  
• How can you call your output "organic" or "local" when it's being harvested by non-local, under-compensated, migrant workers?
  
• Where is the truly local food system in the US? - A system that shuns not just food imports, but food exports too (and the revenue they provide)? Local food producers don't seek markets for wheat, corn, pears, or eggs beyond a few local miles, no matter how much surplus they produce. Thus a local food system does away with monoculture quantity production. All processing and distribution is also done locally. In theory, a local food system is self-contained, e.g. it would not use imported seed, fertilizers, water, or fuel. The local food movement has much to recommend it, but I'm having difficulty envisioning local food systems feeding 300,000,000 US residents.

________

Tomorrow's Breakfast: Cereal? Or Wood-Fired Egg With Fresh Local Tomatoes Marinated in Tuscan Olive Oil Over Organic Toast? (Alice Waters Speaks)

Here's Lesley Stahl speaking with Alice Waters on "60 Minutes" this weekend. CBS describes Waters as "a world-renowned chef, restaurateur, and sometimes controversial California food activist."

60 Minutes' Article

Excerpts:

"We make decisions everyday about what we're going to eat," Waters said. "And some people want to buy Nike shoes - two pairs, and other people want to eat [$4.00-a-pound] Bronx grapes, and nourish themselves."

When asked how she lives without [a microwave], Waters replied, "I don’t know how you can sort of live with one."

Waters told Stahl she rarely goes into a regular supermarket. "I'm looking for food that's just been picked. And so, I know when I go to the farmer's market that, you know, they just brought it in that day."

I think Alice Waters sets a great example, regarding food. But to suggest that anyone who doesn't adopt her lifestyle (buying food from "local ranchers, fishermen, and farmers" instead of at a supermarket, spending hours preparing meals in an open wood-burning fireplace stove) is not "nourishing themselves" seems out of touch.

There's a difference between living your life a certain way and being admired for it, and saying that others should live the same way. The latter comes across as self-centered and unrealistic, especially considering most Americans do not have access (financially, logistically) to fresh, organic, locally-grown foods. (The organic market is less than 3% of the total US food market.)
________

Cabbage Sandwich

Could you? Would you? Do you?

Michael Ruhlman does, regularly.

I tried it. Once will be sufficient. How about you? What do you eat for lunch?

I would not, could not, in a box.
I could not, would not, with a fox.
I will not eat them with a mouse.
I will not eat them in a house.
I will not eat them here or there.
I will not eat them anywhere.
I do not eat green eggs and ham.
I do not like them, Sam-I-am.
-- Dr. Seuss, "Green Eggs And Ham"

________Thanks to shaun!

Elephant Foot

________Photo: Bix

Obama Nominates FDA Commissioner In His Weekly Address

Speaking of New York City and Baltimore, here's Obama putting those cities in the limelight as he nominates Margaret Hamburg (New York City) and Joshua Sharfstein (Baltimore) for FDA Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner, respectively.


Transcript

The address this week highlighted food safety. Regarding the paltry number of current inspections, he said:

"That is a hazard to public health. It is unacceptable."

He also announced the creation of a new Food Safety Working Group:

"This Working Group will bring together cabinet secretaries [HHS and USDA] and senior officials to advise me on how we can upgrade our food safety laws for the 21st century; foster coordination throughout government; and ensure that we are not just designing laws that will keep the American people safe, but enforcing them."

This sounds like we're moving closer to having one Food Safety Agency, to realizing the intent of the Safe Food Act. They may be just words right now, but I loved hearing them.

(I'm not familiar with Hamburg or Sharfstein, except from what I've read. If you are, please share. Melinda linked to this post on Hamburg by NPR's Joanne Silberner.)
________

Cottontail

Sans rabbit. Maybe a hawk got to him. Maybe a fox. Poor thing.
________Photo: Bix

Fruits And Vegetables: The Dirty Dozen

The Environmental Working Group (EWG) just released their latest Shoppers' Guide To Pesticides.

They tested and ranked 47 fruits and vegetables.¹ You can see their full list here. ("Nearly all the studies used to create the list test produce after it has been rinsed or peeled.")

I'm hoping the benefits to people of eating apples, peppers, and greens outweigh the costs of using so many chemicals to produce them. What's the alternative? The best we can hope for is that the world (over 60% of our produce is imported) chooses to wean itself from them - the pesticides, not the apples.

Speaking of weaning, Paul Roberts, in his book The End of Food, says:

"Breaking this expensive and ultimately unsustainable cycle of chemical dependence is, at this late date, extraordinarily difficult.

Just as the industrialization of meat production made antibiotics a virtual necessity, our commercial crops and farming methods have reached a point where we are essentially unable to farm without massive and continuous chemical interventions.

Giving up organophosphates* for example, would cut wheat farmers' revenues by 10% and cost the California produce industry half a billion dollars a year."

* Roberts describes organophosphates as "complex molecules" that form the foundation of "modern insecticides and fungicides." They "disrupt pests' central nervous systems by causing nerve cells to fire nonstop" (and cause serious neural disorders in humans). They, along with carbamates, "account for roughly 1/3 of global insecticide sales and are heavily relied on by growers of alfalfa, almonds, carrots, grapes, apples, strawberries, peaches, walnuts, and above all, corn and cotton [cottonseed oil]." (Compare this list to the EWG's Dirty Dozen.)________¹ Muscle, fat, organ tissue, and milk from livestock fed grass or crops that were exposed to pesticides also contain pesticide residues.

FDA Approves Salmonella

Last year, the FDA said melamine in food "does not raise concerns":

"In food products other than infant formula, the FDA concludes that levels of melamine and melamine-related compounds below 2.5 parts per million (ppm) do not raise concerns."
- FDA Issues Interim Safety and Risk Assessment of Melamine and Melamine-related Compounds in Food, FDA 2008

This year the FDA said Bisphenol-A in food packaging doesn't pose a health risk:

"Based on all available evidence, the consensus of regulatory agencies in the United States, Canada, Europe, and Japan is that the current levels of exposure to BPA through food packaging do not pose an immediate health risk to the general population, including infants and young children."
- Regulatory Meeting with Manufacturers and Users of Bisphenol A-containing Materials, FDA 2009

Days before Bush left office the FDA was drafting documents saying that mercury in fish wasn't enough of a problem to warrant health warnings.

How long will it be before the FDA okays salmonella in food?

"Calling it "perfectly safe for the most part," and "not nearly as destructive or fatal as previously thought," the Food and Drug Administration approved the enterobacteria salmonella for human consumption this week."

"Following the announcement, the FDA released a 20-page report, which included evidence that salmonella is barely more dangerous than other live-culture products such as yogurt, and results from a clinical trial which found that participants who ingested salmonella were totally fine for up to three minutes."
- FDA Approves Salmonella, The Onion 2009

Okay, the last one isn't real. But it sure does reflect the behavior of the FDA - especially when you consider what happened last November:

On October 3, 2008, the FDA said no level of melamine in infant formula was safe. Then, on November 28, 2008, after small amounts of melamine and cyanuric acid (which, when they occur together, accelerate creation of kidney crystals) were detected in popular, brand name formula, the FDA said that anything below 1.0 ppm was safe.

________Thanks to Seinberg for passing on the Onion story.

Grocery Shopping By Bus

I found this photo essay from the Oregonian, from last November I think:
Grocery Shopping By Bus

Here are a few:



It reminded me of this quote from Michael Pollan's recent interview in Mother Jones:¹

Mother Jones: The food activism community is criticized as being elitist, blind to the issues of cost. How do we democratize better quality?

Michael Pollan: It is the important question. (Pollan's emphasis.)

________¹ Michael Pollan Fixes Dinner, Mother Jones, March/April 2009

What Food Rules Do You Live By?

Michael Pollan is asking for your food rules:

Michael Pollan Wants Your Food Rules, NYTs Well Blog, March 9, 2009

Specifically:

"Will you send me a food rule you try to live by? Something perhaps passed down by your parents or grandparents? Or something you’ve come up with to tell your children – or yourself?

I will post your suggestions on my Web site and plan to include the best in a collection of food rules I’m now compiling. Thanks in advance for your contribution."

Over 500 comments there and it was only posted a few hours ago.
(My grandmother always said: "Eat your roughage!")
________

Comparison Of Weight-Loss Diets, Low-Fat Or Low-Carb?

According to this recent study, it doesn't matter:

Comparison of Weight-Loss Diets with Different Compositions of Fat, Protein, and Carbohydrates, New England Journal of Medicine, February 26, 2009

I did learn something though: Weight loss - no matter how you get there - improves markers for health.

The study ran for 2 years, a little longer than other studies of its kind. Here were their goals:

Click for larger.
I don't see anything extreme, except for the last one, Diet 4, which held carbs to 35%. That would be unusual for the Average American unless they were making a concerted effort. Even then, it doesn't cut carbs as low as today's popular low-carb diets do.

By the same token, those 2 low-fat diets (Diet 1 and Diet 2) don't cut fat as low as popular low-fat diets do. Still, I would expect that if the participants really ate their chosen diet, and if macronutrients really play a role in weight loss, some trend would emerge. No trend did, not that reached significance.

The authors concluded:

"Reduced-calorie diets result in clinically meaningful weight loss regardless of which macronutrients they emphasize."

They claimed that social support was more important than what people ate:

"Attendance [at group and individual counseling sessions] had a strong association with weight loss, and the association was similar across diet groups."

"These findings together point to behavioral factors rather than macronutrient metabolism as the main influences on weight loss."

Other Findings

Participants, on average, began to regain lost weight after a year, regardless of diet. (And they were getting a lot of reinforcement! See below.)

Participants had a tough time adhering to their protein/fat/carb prescription:

• The low-fat people ate more than 20% fat (more like 27%).
  
• The high-fat people ate less than 40% fat (more like 34%).
  
• The high-carb people ate less than 65% carb (more like 58%).
  
• The low-carb people ate more than 35% carb (more like 43%).

All participants:

• Received group and individual counseling sessions at least 2x/month for 2 years.
  
• Received a diet that was 750 calories less than that needed to maintain their current weight (goal). Actual decrease was less, from 200 to 500 calories.
  
• Exercised 90 minutes/week (goal).
  
• Kept daily food records.
  
• Almost 70% of participants were college graduates.

When you look beyond weight loss, at 2 years all of the following markers for health improved, regardless of diet, with trends noted:

• LDL: Diets 1 and 2 decreased LDL more than Diets 3 and 4.
  
• HDL: Increased most in Diet 4.
  
• Fasting Insulin: Decreased most in Diet 2.
  
• Urinary nitrogen: Decrease in urinary nitrogen was least for high-protein groups. Decreased most in Diet 1.
  
• Triglycerides decreased similarly.
  
• Blood pressure decreased similarly.

Here's something I thought was strange - everyone's fasting glucose went up, regardless of diet. It increased the most in the high-fat groups, with the high-fat/high-protein group (Diet 4) rising the most. I wouldn't say the rise was clinically significant, but the direction, given weight loss, was unexpected for me.

I liked this quote:

"When nonnutritional influences are minimized, as they were in our study, the specific macronutrient content is of minor importance, as was suggested many years ago."

________

Food, Inc.

Oh, this should be a good movie. Michael Pollan, Eric Schlosser ("Fast Food Nation"), and others narrate the 3-minute trailer:



Excerpts:

"A notional tomato. The idea of a tomato."
"The reality is a factory. It's not a farm, it's a factory."

The trailer for Food, Inc. resides at Robert Kenner Films, where you can read reviews by Variety, Entertainment Weekly, and the Los Angeles Times.
________

Unscheduled Downtime

I'm finally emerging from virus purgatory, actually trojan purgatory. McAfee Antivirus, ComboFix, Windows Defender, SpySweeper - even manually deleting files - nothing was getting rid of this. Every time I rebooted, my virus scan was deleting and quarantining even more files than it had the last time I ran it ... when it told me I was clean!

I was infected by reading a food blog.¹ No downloading (that I knew), no opening attachments. These things are getting insidious.

The nasty culprit was: NTOSKRNL-HOOK. ComboFix (not the others) was successful in getting rid of that, but it left UAC files that multiplied each time I restarted.

Now I'm clean, if lean. I had to reformat my hard drive (first learn how to change boot priority), reinstall the operating system (Windows), and load programs back - individually, from original installation discs. Still updating them with years of Automatic Updates. What an amazingly unjustified sense of security I had.

I'll leave you with a photo of what I've been looking at the last several days:

________¹ My blog is clean.
Photo: Bix

What Are We Adapted To Eat?

Dr. Richard Wrangham, from Harvard University, says we're adapted to eat food that has been cooked. And, well, I'll let you work your way down to that last sentence.

Here are a few excerpts from The Economist's review of Dr. Wrangham's presentation at the annual meeting of the AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science) two weeks ago:¹

"Without cooking, the human brain (which consumes 20-25% of the body's energy) could not keep running."

"In fact, [Dr. Wrangham] thinks that cooking and other forms of preparing food are humanity's 'killer app': the evolutionary change that underpins all of the other -- and subsequent -- changes that have made people such unusual animals."

Some hypothesize that increased meat-eating was the dietary change that led to the emergence 1.8 million years ago of a species called Home erectus, which:

"... had a skeleton much like modern man's -- a big, brain-filled skull and a narrow pelvis and ribcage, which imply a smaller abdomen and thus a small gut."

Dr. Wrangham disagrees with the meat-eating charge:

"When you do the sums, he argues, raw meat is still insufficient to bridge the gap. ... Pre-agricultural man confined to raw food would have starved."

The Lower Cost of Digestion

"Cooking increases the share of food digested in the stomach and small intestine, where it can be absorbed, from 50% to 95%."

On a study in rats ...

"Experimenters ground up food pellets and then recompacted them to make them softer. Rats fed on the softer pellets weighed 30% more after 26 weeks than those fed the same weight of standard pellets."

The "Killer App" That Grew Our Brains Now Threatens Our Health

"Dr. Wrangham suspects the main cause of the modern epidemic of obesity is not overeating, but the rise of processed foods."

________¹ The Economist, "What's Cooking?," February 2009.