Currently viewing the category: "real food"

Good Nutrition Leads to Bigger Bucks

By On · Add Comment · In childhood, childhood feeding programs, earning power, feeding, growth, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), nutrient, nutrition, nutritious foods, poverty, real food

There’s a popular belief that earning power leads to better nutrition. Seems like a simple cause and effect. I personally don’t buy it, as I know that fast-food restaurants do quite well in poorer neighborhoods; and fast-food isn’t cheap. Nutritious foods can be purchased for the same amount of money–or less!

But now we know for sure that the reverse is true; that better nutrition, especially in early childhood, can lead to greater earning power later in life. So says a long-term study conducted in Guatemala, which researchers point out could lead to less poverty through childhood feeding programs. Hallelujah! Now that’s science that makes sense. Finally a study that doesn’t try to squeeze the data to fit a particular (and often political when it comes to poverty) viewpoint. Just plain ol’ data collection, analysis and final conclusions. Crazy thing that science.

The study looked at 1,500 people that had been involved in a nutrition study between 1969 and 1977 with some receiving a nutrient-rich protein porridge-like drink and others receiving a less nutritious placebo. They found that men who had received the nutritious porridge before the age of three earned 46% more per hour than those who did not. Children over three years old receiving the nutritious porridge showed no increase in earning power. These results show that early childhood nutrition through feeding is crucial, especially since many well-known programs–like the United Nation’s World Food Program–focus on early childhood nutrition through supplementation and save the feeding programs for older kids.

I always say that there is no substitute for real food–regardless of age. Supplements are good to supplement real food, not substitute for them. And real food should be the focus for all children, especially at the early age. So much development happens in the first few years of life, and young children need basic building blocks for proper growth and tissue formation; and this can only be gotten from real food. Bravo to the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) for conducting this study–it should help developing nations, and it should help us here at home.

A Welcomed–If Not Temporary–Victory

By On · Add Comment · In calorie content, calories, fast-food, nutrition, real food

Yay! A judges ruling last week has allowed New York’s fast food restaurants to ignore posting calorie and fat counts on their menus. Basically, a pre-existing federal law takes restaurants that voluntarily provide this information off the hook. As long as they provide nutritional information somewhere–on tray papers or Web sites, for instance–they cannot be restricted in how they comply with city law.

Thank goodness. As I’ve said in earlier posts (here, and here), nothing is dumber than the government stepping in where individual discretion is warranted. Do we really need the government to tell us what’s junk and what’s real food? Please. All that would do is hurt businesses that provide a product the public wants–junk food. And it takes the responsibility away from the individual. We’ll never see an increase in national health until people become responsible for theirs, plain and simple.

Interestingly, this is being proved by yet another recent study. Researchers have found that people consistently underestimate the calorie content of foods served at restaurants they consider healthier, like Subway, for example. In the study, researchers asked people who had just finished eating at Subway or McDonalds to estimate how many calories they had just consumed. On average, Subway diners underestimated their calorie intake by 151 calories–that is, they mistakenly believed they were eating less calories by eating a 12-inch turkey sandwich than by eating a Big Mac, although both have exactly the same amount of calories. What this then led to was the Subway diners ordering more sodas and cookies than the McDonalds diners, giving them actually more calories overall. This meant that, on average, Subway diners wound up consuming 1,011 calories, compared to 648 calories for the people eating McDonalds. Whoa. Get it? People make assumptions about food, and these assumptions lead to poor food decisions.

But wait, if calorie and fat content is posted won’t it lead to people making better decisions? Not necessarily, because only fast food restaurants would be required to post such information (more on this concept here). So, in my opinion, people will go to the local Whole Foods and pig out because they assume it’s healthier. Should Whole Foods then post calorie content? How about Spago? I’ve got a better idea: How about understanding two basic principles instead:

  1. Fast food is junk that should only be eaten periodically
  2. How much one eats is as important as what one eats

Got it? Eating too many carrots, falafel, or soy veggie burgers is just as detrimental to the health as an occasional Big Mac. True, carrots have a greater vitamin and nutrient content, but people aren’t using this as their criteria yet.

I just don’t see calorie reporting at fast food restaurants as being the answer, and worse, I think it will lead people down the wrong road. Just understand the basics about food, and practice prudent principles. Don’t know what they are? Get yourself a copy of The Six Keys To Optimal Health–it’s all in there–and you’ll be sure to make the right decisions.

Copyright © 2013 Dr. Nick Campos - All Rights Reserved.