Last year we stopped using our 10 year old set of scratched, Teflon coated T-Fal cookware and switched to stainless steel. In hindsight, after learning the risks, we should have done that 8 years earlier (Teflon cookware should be replaced every 2 to 3 years). I also pulled out a cast iron skillet that I'd never used, and for Christmas this year I got a new 5 quart porcelain covered casserole that I can put on the stove top or in the oven. I loved it!
Cookware is expensive. There are also so many types and brands that it's almost over-whelming to shop for it. And, how do you pick the safest? Here's are a few reasons as to why I selected the types that I did.
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Friday, January 15, 2010
Healthy Change #4: Chicken Safety 101
Maybe I should title this "Chicken Safety 102" because cooks everywhere understand the importance of storing and handling chicken. But that's after we get it home to our own kitchens. What about while it's at the store?
Consumer Reports tested hundreds of chickens at stores across the nation and found that two-thirds of the chickens harbored either one or both of the bacterias that cause campylobacter and salmonella. The cleanest chicken they found was "air-chilled" organic chicken (about 60% tested were clean). Just another reason to purchase organic! Here's something I learned in the report. "Air-chilled" is a process where carcasses are refrigerated and misted rather than dunked in cold, chlorinated water. Chlorinated water? Did you know that chicken was bathed in chlorinated water? I didn't!
Here's another scary fact. Out of those hundreds of chickens tested, 68% percent of the salmonella and 60% of the campylobacter bacteria was resistant to one or more antibiotics. My 2 1/2 year old son is prone to upper respiratory infections. He's been on more antibiotics in his 2 1/2 years than I've taken my entire life. Tubes helped with the ear infections and now we battle sinus infections. The last one took 3 different antibiotics and almost 2 months to clear up. He definitely does not need more antibiotics in the foods he eats!
According to the CDC, approximately 3.4 million Americans suffer from eating chicken and other foods infected with salmonella and campylobacter, 25,500 end up in hospitals and 500 die. The USDA requires chicken to be tested for salmonella, but not campylobacter.
If you are interested in reading how individual chicken brands scored in the test as well as more tips on what you can do to until chicken becomes "cleaner", check out the GreenerChoices.org article on chicken safety.
Don't forget to enter my give-away for a free blender. No strings attached...promise!
Consumer Reports tested hundreds of chickens at stores across the nation and found that two-thirds of the chickens harbored either one or both of the bacterias that cause campylobacter and salmonella. The cleanest chicken they found was "air-chilled" organic chicken (about 60% tested were clean). Just another reason to purchase organic! Here's something I learned in the report. "Air-chilled" is a process where carcasses are refrigerated and misted rather than dunked in cold, chlorinated water. Chlorinated water? Did you know that chicken was bathed in chlorinated water? I didn't!
Here's another scary fact. Out of those hundreds of chickens tested, 68% percent of the salmonella and 60% of the campylobacter bacteria was resistant to one or more antibiotics. My 2 1/2 year old son is prone to upper respiratory infections. He's been on more antibiotics in his 2 1/2 years than I've taken my entire life. Tubes helped with the ear infections and now we battle sinus infections. The last one took 3 different antibiotics and almost 2 months to clear up. He definitely does not need more antibiotics in the foods he eats!
According to the CDC, approximately 3.4 million Americans suffer from eating chicken and other foods infected with salmonella and campylobacter, 25,500 end up in hospitals and 500 die. The USDA requires chicken to be tested for salmonella, but not campylobacter.
If you are interested in reading how individual chicken brands scored in the test as well as more tips on what you can do to until chicken becomes "cleaner", check out the GreenerChoices.org article on chicken safety.
Don't forget to enter my give-away for a free blender. No strings attached...promise!
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Healthy Change #3: Understand the "Natural" Label
True or False?
1. "Organic" foods are better for me?
2. Foods labeled "Organic" are usually more expensive?
3. "Natural" products are better for me than conventional products?
4. "Natural" products are just as good as "Organic" products?
Answers: 1. T, 2. T, 3. T, 4. F
I would expect that everyone got the first two answers correct. We've all heard about the benefits of eating organic foods. It's a huge and growing trend and even Wal-mart now has a good selection. Organic foods are usually more expensive, but the big box stores are helping drive the prices down. I imagine that you got question three correct, but what about the 4th question? Did you answer true or false?
In order for a product to be certified "Organic", it has to be produced under a strict set of guidelines and is regulated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The USDA only defines "Natural" for meat and poultry indicating that it has been "minimally processed", i.e., not injected to make it juicier/plumper and color has not been added. There is no regulation for the rest of the food industry leaving it up to the interpretation of the food producer.
"Natural" products aren't all that bad. They usually do not contain added hormones, artificial sweeteners, artificial colors, flavors, preservatives or high fructose corn syrup. So, yes, they are better for you than conventional products. However, if you want a food that is not produced with pesticides, herbicides, antibiotics or other drugs or genetically modified feed crops or from cows that are confined to factory farm feedlots, then you better stick to "organic."
So, the answer to number four is false. "Natural" is usually cheaper, but it's not better than "organic." My recommendation though is to find a good balance. I personally purchase quite a few "natural" products especially when an organic version is not available. Bottom line is take the time to read the back of the label and understand what you are eating.
Don't forget to enter the give-away!!
For more reading:
'Natural' On The Label Can Be Misleading
Looking Behind the 'Natural' Label
Manufacturers and consumers lose faith in natural label claims
1. "Organic" foods are better for me?
2. Foods labeled "Organic" are usually more expensive?
3. "Natural" products are better for me than conventional products?
4. "Natural" products are just as good as "Organic" products?
Answers: 1. T, 2. T, 3. T, 4. F
I would expect that everyone got the first two answers correct. We've all heard about the benefits of eating organic foods. It's a huge and growing trend and even Wal-mart now has a good selection. Organic foods are usually more expensive, but the big box stores are helping drive the prices down. I imagine that you got question three correct, but what about the 4th question? Did you answer true or false?
In order for a product to be certified "Organic", it has to be produced under a strict set of guidelines and is regulated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The USDA only defines "Natural" for meat and poultry indicating that it has been "minimally processed", i.e., not injected to make it juicier/plumper and color has not been added. There is no regulation for the rest of the food industry leaving it up to the interpretation of the food producer."Natural" products aren't all that bad. They usually do not contain added hormones, artificial sweeteners, artificial colors, flavors, preservatives or high fructose corn syrup. So, yes, they are better for you than conventional products. However, if you want a food that is not produced with pesticides, herbicides, antibiotics or other drugs or genetically modified feed crops or from cows that are confined to factory farm feedlots, then you better stick to "organic."
So, the answer to number four is false. "Natural" is usually cheaper, but it's not better than "organic." My recommendation though is to find a good balance. I personally purchase quite a few "natural" products especially when an organic version is not available. Bottom line is take the time to read the back of the label and understand what you are eating.
Don't forget to enter the give-away!!
For more reading:
'Natural' On The Label Can Be Misleading
Looking Behind the 'Natural' Label
Manufacturers and consumers lose faith in natural label claims
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Healthy Change #2: Don't Eat Microwave Popcorn
The smell of popcorn can fill a room. It's been touted as a healthy snack for years. It's a favorite of kids and adults alike and often a safe snack alternative for many allergy kids. Or is it??
In my recent research, I'm finding that the risk of eating microwave popcorn isn't exactly new news; however, it hasn't exactly been a top news story at my house. Maybe not at your house either. My husband recently forwarded me a link to an article written the end of last year on the Top 7 Foods that Should Never Cross Your Lips. One of those was microwave popcorn. We very rarely eat popcorn at our house. I don't like the smell or taste unless it's coated with caramel and comes in a decorative tin (which means I don't eat much of it, it's not safe for Abigail or good for me). However, my husband and daughter enjoy it so when we make it, we use kernels out of a jar and microwave them in a special microwave popping bowl. But there are lots of you out there that throw in a bag for a quick snack. Here's why you shouldn't.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Healthy Change #1: Buy rBST/rBGH-free
As I mentioned in previous posts, one huge and very positive side effect of Abigail's peanut allergy is that I've started reading food labels and researching the food our family consumes. It's a task that feels quite over-whelming at times! I'm learning so much about how the quality of food we eat impacts us day to day from allergies/asthma and ADHD to long term diagnosis of diseases and cancer. I'm also finding that big business and our government aren't doing much, if anything to protect us.
There is no way I can cover in a couple of posts all of the information out there that should make us all consider every bite of food we put in our mouths. I can however try to summarize briefly a few of the top changes you can make for yourself and your family that will have the biggest impact on your overall health.
Change #1: Buy rBST/rBGH free dairy products.
What is rBST/rBGH? In the 90's Monsanto derived an artificial growth hormone using DNA technology. This hormone (rBST/rBGH, hereafter referred to as simply rBGH) is given to cows to increase their milk production by about 10% (I've also seen it as high as 20%). According to GreenerChoices.org, as of 2007, approximately 17% of dairy cows are given this hormone. The FDA has ruled this hormone safe, but it has not been approved for use in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan and all 25 members of the European Union.
What are the affects? I turned to the Cancer Prevention Coalition for an explanation on the impact of rBGH on IGF-1 which is a normal growth factor in both cows and humans. However, excess levels of IGF-1 are linked to cancer, specifically breast, colon and prostate cancer. The rBGH hormone causes cows to produce more IGF-1 which is then further increased by the pasteurization process. IGF-1 is easily passed through the human intestines into the bloodstream where it can promote transformation of, for example, normal breast cells to breast cancers. Personally, that's enough for me, but there's more and it's just gross. The rBGH hormone increases the rate of mastitis, an udder infection. According to the Cancer Prevention Coalition, "industry data shows up to an 80 percent incidence of mastitis in hormone-treated cattle, resulting in the contamination of milk with significant levels of pus." Yuck...pus! Guess what is then given to cows to treat the mastitis. Yep...antibiotics. Guess who then consumes the antibiotics. Yep...us. Cancer, pus and harmful antibiotics....
What can you do? Buy rBST/rBGH free products. Organic milk is rBGH-free, free of pesticides or antibiotics and is more expensive than conventional rBGH-free milk. You can expect to pay $1.00 to $3.00 more for organic and $.50 to $1.00 more a gallon for rBGH-free conventional. On average, that's anywhere from $25 to $150 more per year depending on the product you choose and your market. I waiver back and forth between organic and conventional rBGH-free milk. A lot depends on where I'm shopping and what's on sale. Yes, we're paying more now for milk, cheese, yogurt and other dairy products, but we see it as an investment in our health.
Lastly, manufacturers are prohibited from completely labeling the benefits of rBGH-free. We can thank Monsanto and their influence with our government for that. A manufacturer may label a product rBGH-free if they also include a statement that there is no significant difference found between milk produced with rBGH and milk not produced with it. Some states have even stricter laws and many brands don't include anything about being rBGH-free. For a long time, I didn't purchase any of Trader Joe's cheeses because their label just had the statement that there is no significant difference. I assumed that meant it was not rBGH-free. It's very confusing especially now that more and more brands are switching to rBGH-free. I've attached a link at the bottom for a NC rGBH-free buying guide. You can find a state specific guide by doing a Google search.
So, drink a big glass of rBST/rBGH-free milk and think about how much healthier you already feel!
Don't forget to enter my blender give-away!
For more resources:
There is no way I can cover in a couple of posts all of the information out there that should make us all consider every bite of food we put in our mouths. I can however try to summarize briefly a few of the top changes you can make for yourself and your family that will have the biggest impact on your overall health.
Change #1: Buy rBST/rBGH free dairy products.
What is rBST/rBGH? In the 90's Monsanto derived an artificial growth hormone using DNA technology. This hormone (rBST/rBGH, hereafter referred to as simply rBGH) is given to cows to increase their milk production by about 10% (I've also seen it as high as 20%). According to GreenerChoices.org, as of 2007, approximately 17% of dairy cows are given this hormone. The FDA has ruled this hormone safe, but it has not been approved for use in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan and all 25 members of the European Union. What are the affects? I turned to the Cancer Prevention Coalition for an explanation on the impact of rBGH on IGF-1 which is a normal growth factor in both cows and humans. However, excess levels of IGF-1 are linked to cancer, specifically breast, colon and prostate cancer. The rBGH hormone causes cows to produce more IGF-1 which is then further increased by the pasteurization process. IGF-1 is easily passed through the human intestines into the bloodstream where it can promote transformation of, for example, normal breast cells to breast cancers. Personally, that's enough for me, but there's more and it's just gross. The rBGH hormone increases the rate of mastitis, an udder infection. According to the Cancer Prevention Coalition, "industry data shows up to an 80 percent incidence of mastitis in hormone-treated cattle, resulting in the contamination of milk with significant levels of pus." Yuck...pus! Guess what is then given to cows to treat the mastitis. Yep...antibiotics. Guess who then consumes the antibiotics. Yep...us. Cancer, pus and harmful antibiotics....
What can you do? Buy rBST/rBGH free products. Organic milk is rBGH-free, free of pesticides or antibiotics and is more expensive than conventional rBGH-free milk. You can expect to pay $1.00 to $3.00 more for organic and $.50 to $1.00 more a gallon for rBGH-free conventional. On average, that's anywhere from $25 to $150 more per year depending on the product you choose and your market. I waiver back and forth between organic and conventional rBGH-free milk. A lot depends on where I'm shopping and what's on sale. Yes, we're paying more now for milk, cheese, yogurt and other dairy products, but we see it as an investment in our health.
Lastly, manufacturers are prohibited from completely labeling the benefits of rBGH-free. We can thank Monsanto and their influence with our government for that. A manufacturer may label a product rBGH-free if they also include a statement that there is no significant difference found between milk produced with rBGH and milk not produced with it. Some states have even stricter laws and many brands don't include anything about being rBGH-free. For a long time, I didn't purchase any of Trader Joe's cheeses because their label just had the statement that there is no significant difference. I assumed that meant it was not rBGH-free. It's very confusing especially now that more and more brands are switching to rBGH-free. I've attached a link at the bottom for a NC rGBH-free buying guide. You can find a state specific guide by doing a Google search.
So, drink a big glass of rBST/rBGH-free milk and think about how much healthier you already feel!
Don't forget to enter my blender give-away!
For more resources:
Sunday, January 10, 2010
First Ever Product Give-away!!
Well, it's finally here, my first ever product give-away! I'm so excited to be able to team up with Cookware.com and offer one of their fabulous products to one of my fabulous readers! I've been browsing their extensive online selection for days now looking for the perfect give-away item. They carry a ton of name brands including Rachel Ray Cookware (I'm loving the colorful cast iron collection), Cuisinart, LeCreuset, Paula Deen, All-Clad and J.A. Henckels to name just a few. I should say that I'm not receiving anything from Cookware.com. This is all about you!
In celebration of the New Year and a new you, I've selected this great multi-purpose blender from Back to Basics. With 2 interchangeable blade bases, 2 blending containers and 2 drinking tumblers, this is the perfect kitchen tool for a nutritious breakfast, fun and healthy snack, or quick and easy dinner.
Starting Monday, January, 11th, simply leave a comment sharing your favorite blender concoction. Think shakes, smoothies, salsa, soups, dips, cocktails, pie fillings, sauces, etc. I'm looking forward to getting a bunch of great ideas to try. You can can enter once a day for ten days.
Want extra give-away entries? For 5 additional entries, copy this text (www.peanutclinicaltrial.blogspot.com is giving away a Blender Express Plus from Cookware.com. Post a comment with your favorite blender concoction for a chance to win. Last day to enter is January 20th.) and link to my blog from your blog, website, Facebook page, etc. Make sure you post back with your site link so I can check it out. For 2 additional entries, become a Follower of my blog.
All entries will go into a hat and one lucky reader will be randomly selected. I'll announce the winner on January 21st so make sure you check back then. The blender will be shipped to the winner directly from the great folks at Cookware.com.
Also, during that ten days, I will be doing my own Top 10 list of changes to make this year for a better, healthier family. So, look for that post after you leave your daily comment.
Good luck!
The fine print:
There is no purchase necessary. Shipping is included in the give-away. Due to international shipping fees, the give-away is limited to U.S. and Canadian residents only. Cut-off for entry is 12:00 a.m. EST, January 20th. The winner will have 48 hours to respond to the notification e-mail or a new winner will be selected.
In celebration of the New Year and a new you, I've selected this great multi-purpose blender from Back to Basics. With 2 interchangeable blade bases, 2 blending containers and 2 drinking tumblers, this is the perfect kitchen tool for a nutritious breakfast, fun and healthy snack, or quick and easy dinner.Here's how to enter for a chance to win this great kitchen tool:
Starting Monday, January, 11th, simply leave a comment sharing your favorite blender concoction. Think shakes, smoothies, salsa, soups, dips, cocktails, pie fillings, sauces, etc. I'm looking forward to getting a bunch of great ideas to try. You can can enter once a day for ten days.
Want extra give-away entries? For 5 additional entries, copy this text (www.peanutclinicaltrial.blogspot.com is giving away a Blender Express Plus from Cookware.com. Post a comment with your favorite blender concoction for a chance to win. Last day to enter is January 20th.) and link to my blog from your blog, website, Facebook page, etc. Make sure you post back with your site link so I can check it out. For 2 additional entries, become a Follower of my blog.
All entries will go into a hat and one lucky reader will be randomly selected. I'll announce the winner on January 21st so make sure you check back then. The blender will be shipped to the winner directly from the great folks at Cookware.com.
Also, during that ten days, I will be doing my own Top 10 list of changes to make this year for a better, healthier family. So, look for that post after you leave your daily comment.
Good luck!
The fine print:
There is no purchase necessary. Shipping is included in the give-away. Due to international shipping fees, the give-away is limited to U.S. and Canadian residents only. Cut-off for entry is 12:00 a.m. EST, January 20th. The winner will have 48 hours to respond to the notification e-mail or a new winner will be selected.
Friday, January 8, 2010
Girl Scout Cookies
It's that time of year. I both dread it and look forward to it at the same time. Probably because I can single-handedly consume a box of Thin Mint cookies in just a few days. They are so good, but really...a whole box good?
This year, Abigail is in Daisy Scouts and will be selling cookies. I admit that in the past, I've let her eat a few Thin Mint cookies. And, it's not what you are thinking. It wasn't because I didn't want to share, well maybe a little of that, but because according to the box label it is only one of two cookies that are safe for people with peanut/tree nut allergies.
Here's what Little Brownie Bakers, the manufacturer of the Girl Scout Cookies in our region, says about food allergens:
On each of our cookie packages, we label for the top 8 allergens directly below the ingredient statement on the Nutrition Facts side panel. For peanuts and tree nuts, we have chosen to include cautionary labeling in the form of a "may contain" statement. This indicates that the product shares processing equipment with another product that contains peanuts or tree nuts.
If the allergen in concern is not listed below the ingredient statement, we are confident that the product is safe for consumption.
Since cookie time last year though, I've learned a lot. While the FDA has Allergen Advisory Labeling guidelines in place, a good portion of it is voluntary. And according to a 2008 report by the FDA, cross-contamination can occur at almost any step of the manufacturing process. "Cross-contact can occur due to allergens in raw ingredients or in processing aids, allergens in reworked product and allergen carry-over from the use of shared equipment. Such potential sources of unintentional allergen cross-contact exist regardless of the manufacturer's size or food product."
While a lot of food manufacturers do not have proper controls in place, a good many do. By using dedicated facilities or production lines, they can prevent cross-contamination. However, when I read a vague statement like the one above that "they are confident that the product is safe for consumption", I still question the product's safety. Is it because they have a dedicated line or do they feel like they just do a good job cleaning the production line? Part of me thinks that if Little Brownie Bakery is willing to go on record and make a statement like that then it must be okay. Can you imagine what Legal would say if there was any question of safety at all? I've contacted the company, and hopefully they will quantify their statement.
There's a whole other issue here though, and that's why does an organization like Girl Scouts not recognize the seriousness of food allergies and address the fact that out of 8 types of cookies, only 2 are safe for peanut/tree nut allergies when only 2 of them actually contain peanuts and none of them contain tree nuts. Wouldn't you think that an organization the size of the Girl Scouts could require their cookie manufacturer to use dedicated lines so that there was no risk of cross-contamination for those cookies not containing peanuts/tree nuts?
I'm just thankful that Abigail is such a good sport. She's willing to go out and sell cookies that she can't eat. And, if it turns out that it's not safe for her to eat Thin Mints and Samoas, then she'll be okay eating a cookie that she can have. Unfortunately, it happens all the time.
As for me, I've really got to show some restraint this year especially now that I'm advocating a healthier diet. Luckily it's just one time a year....and besides....it's for a good cause!
Click to read follow up and reply from Little Brownie Bakers:
This year, Abigail is in Daisy Scouts and will be selling cookies. I admit that in the past, I've let her eat a few Thin Mint cookies. And, it's not what you are thinking. It wasn't because I didn't want to share, well maybe a little of that, but because according to the box label it is only one of two cookies that are safe for people with peanut/tree nut allergies. Here's what Little Brownie Bakers, the manufacturer of the Girl Scout Cookies in our region, says about food allergens:
On each of our cookie packages, we label for the top 8 allergens directly below the ingredient statement on the Nutrition Facts side panel. For peanuts and tree nuts, we have chosen to include cautionary labeling in the form of a "may contain" statement. This indicates that the product shares processing equipment with another product that contains peanuts or tree nuts.
If the allergen in concern is not listed below the ingredient statement, we are confident that the product is safe for consumption.
Since cookie time last year though, I've learned a lot. While the FDA has Allergen Advisory Labeling guidelines in place, a good portion of it is voluntary. And according to a 2008 report by the FDA, cross-contamination can occur at almost any step of the manufacturing process. "Cross-contact can occur due to allergens in raw ingredients or in processing aids, allergens in reworked product and allergen carry-over from the use of shared equipment. Such potential sources of unintentional allergen cross-contact exist regardless of the manufacturer's size or food product."
While a lot of food manufacturers do not have proper controls in place, a good many do. By using dedicated facilities or production lines, they can prevent cross-contamination. However, when I read a vague statement like the one above that "they are confident that the product is safe for consumption", I still question the product's safety. Is it because they have a dedicated line or do they feel like they just do a good job cleaning the production line? Part of me thinks that if Little Brownie Bakery is willing to go on record and make a statement like that then it must be okay. Can you imagine what Legal would say if there was any question of safety at all? I've contacted the company, and hopefully they will quantify their statement.
There's a whole other issue here though, and that's why does an organization like Girl Scouts not recognize the seriousness of food allergies and address the fact that out of 8 types of cookies, only 2 are safe for peanut/tree nut allergies when only 2 of them actually contain peanuts and none of them contain tree nuts. Wouldn't you think that an organization the size of the Girl Scouts could require their cookie manufacturer to use dedicated lines so that there was no risk of cross-contamination for those cookies not containing peanuts/tree nuts?
I'm just thankful that Abigail is such a good sport. She's willing to go out and sell cookies that she can't eat. And, if it turns out that it's not safe for her to eat Thin Mints and Samoas, then she'll be okay eating a cookie that she can have. Unfortunately, it happens all the time.
As for me, I've really got to show some restraint this year especially now that I'm advocating a healthier diet. Luckily it's just one time a year....and besides....it's for a good cause!
Click to read follow up and reply from Little Brownie Bakers:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)