Balance of Food

Temptation of the Week: Authentic Mexican Coca-Cola

Mexican Coca-Cola is supposed to be the cat's meow, the great alternative to those frustrated by the American version with high-fructose corn syrup. Used to be that you could travel to neighboring countries Canada and Mexico and you'd be guaranteed an experience free of high-fructose corn syrup.

Then, glucose-fructose sneaked its way into Canada; no one really explaining that glucose-fructose is high-fructose corn syrup. Lately, we've been hearing stories about Mexicans having to deal with American coke, er, Coca-Cola. And I've seen "Mexican Coca-Cola" that says on the label "high-fructose corn syrup and/or sugar."

NAFTA is the reason why high-fructose corn syrup has invaded Canada and Mexico. Free trade agreements do have some advantages, but the loss of sovereignty is always a bad side effect. The United States has a lot of power to force something into another country; that power is not as reciprocal in reality.

We live in a society where we can't find out whether the milk we drink has been treated with growth hormones. For consumers who want to avoid high-fructose corn syrup for any number of reasons (time will tell if the autism connection has much validity), they deserve to know whether they are consuming high-fructose corn syrup.

For those looking to cut down on high-fructose corn syrup, Mexican Coca-Cola has been a wonderful option while occasionally having a soft drink. The treat of Mexican Coca-Cola only works if you are drinking "the real thing" (yes, an old company slogan).

If your drink is from a glass bottle and says Coca-Cola and comes from Mexico, it's only real if the label doesn't say high-fructose corn syrup. Anything else isn't "the real thing."

Still wondering why regular U.S. Coca-Cola products are allowed to have the words "Original Formula," when no one knows that to be true.

The popularity of Mexican Coca-Cola should prove to the corporate folks in Atlanta that there is an audience for what Coca-Cola produced before the company switched to high-fructose corn syrup. I have two 2-liter bottles of Kosher for Passover Coca-Cola, another popular choice where available. The switch back to sugar would be the opposite publicity the company received for switching to New Coke.

The best rule of thumb is if the label doesn't mention high-fructose corn syrup, you should be fine. If you see the words "high-fructose corn syrup and/or sugar," place the bottle gently down and run.

"The customer is always right" and "give the people what they want" haven't applied when it comes to Coca-Cola.

This is a painful reminder that we keep needing to bring up: read labels. Seriously. You never know what food manufacturers are going to do.

Wendy's trying to make poutine Canada's national dish

Couldn't help but pass on the word in our unofficial poutine coverage that Wendy's is launching a petition — a "Poutition" — to make poutine Canada's national dish.

Wendy's is using this as an excuse to launch poutine on its menu in Canada. For all the poutine I have eaten, none of them has come from a major fast food chain. The better question for the American audience is whether Wendy's or McDonald's or Burger King would ever bring this across the border.

Canada is a rather large country and poutine is mostly a Quebec thing.

Then again, what is the United States' national dish? Mac & cheese? Hot dogs? High-fructose corn syrup?

The idea of one national dish seems unfair to the rest. If nothing else, we should vote on the national dish … for both countries.

For the whole take, check out this story from out sister blog, CanadianCrossing.com.

photo credit: Wendy's

Even prisoners deserve a good breakfast

Breakfast is the most important meal of the day … unless it's the weekend or a holiday and you're an Illinois state prisoner.

In a budget-cutting move, the Illinois Department of Corrections will only serve offer brunch to prison inmates on Sundays and stop serving breakfast. The move will reportedly save about $2.5 million over a year's time.

Instead of getting 21 meals per week, prisoners will only get 19 meals.

Illinois isn't the only state making these types of budget cuts. Ohio and Georgia are among a few states that have made this move.

For those who complain about the government being in the food business, think about the two classes of people fed by the government are school children and prisoners. Based on the track record, no one would voluntarily submit to having government choose their food options.

The quality of the food you get and how much you get is at the whim of bureaucrats who are more concerned about the bottom line than what you eat.

You don't read too many articles that are sympathetic to prisoners, but the advantages to feeding school children well (paying more attention, less acting out) would also make for a better prison experience for all parties concerned. And if prisoners are trying to get a better life, such as studying for a GED or for a trade position, then they need to start their day with a good breakfast.

These government policies seem like a good idea now, but are more harmful in the long run, just like skipping breakfast and then eating more later on in the day.

We teach our children that breakfast is really important. We try to incorporate breakfast into our lives, even if we aren't successful. Yes, prisoners lose many of their rights in jail, but even prisoners deserve a good daily breakfast.

Kraft can use Oreos commercial leak to promote breastfeeding

News outlets reporting on Kraft's controversial Oreo breastfeeding ad felt the need to censor the photograph to protect sensitive readers. The outlets chose to blur out the 20% of the exposed nipple of a breastfeeding woman doing what comes naturally.

They should have blurred out the cookie.

The United States is the one major country that freaks out over female nipples, yet high-fructose corn syrup was created in that country and its food policy works terribly hard to export high-fructose corn syrup to other countries. And yes, while a baby holding a processed cookie is offensive enough, holding a cookie tied into Kraft's insistence on using high-fructose corn syrup in Oreos is that much more disturbing.

BalanceofFood.com strongly encourages adults to make proper nutrition choices, but recognizes that free will allows us true freedom to choose good vs. not-so-good. Babies haven't earned that right.

Kraft tells us the ad "was never intended for public distribution or use with consumers" though the possible South Korean audience are much more confident in their ability to handle a partial female nipple. Taking them at their word, someone still set up a photo shoot, put the cookie in the baby's hands, and took the picture. And that picture sends a terrible message about babies and food marketing.

Advocates against marketing food to children who are tougher on that subject than I am point out that children can't process the ability to make good food decisions. True, babies aren't pressuring their parents to buy Oreos or other cookies, but "Milk's favorite cookie" in that context putting unnecessary pressure on newborn mothers and fathers.

The growth that babies experience between 0-3 years old requires extra care about their nutrition, not less. We have also gone on the record as saying breastfeeding is the best choice for young babies whenever and wherever possible.

If Kraft and Oreos wanted to do it right, the tagline on the ad would read something like:

"Someday, this child will enjoy an Oreo cookie for the very first time. But until then, this child should settle for milk … without the cookie."

Food companies pour millions into advertising while fruits and vegetables and breastfeeding get a tiny fraction of the ad time and space. Having a major food marketer push a pro-breastfeeding agenda with a sly nod to one of its products would be a win-win situation in the marketplace — provided that Americans get over their phobia of the female nipple.

photo credit

Temptation of the Week: Ranch dressing instead of ketchup

Even if you don't like to eat in bars, you have to love the box of condiments you often see in bars. Ketchup, mustard, and hot sauce dominate those boxes. Hidden Valley wants you to add another bottle to the box: ranch dressing.

The company has come out with what it says is pourable ranch dressing with the idea that you would dip your French fries, onion rings, and mozzarella sticks in ranch dressing.

Ranch dressing went from obscurity to dominance in the salad dressing field. Way too often in my life, I have been at a restaurant where I could get ranch but not blue cheese dressing.

Full disclosure: I hate ranch dressing. I find it extremely boring. I like buttermilk. Okay, I love buttermilk. Too often, buttermilk ranch dressing has very little buttermilk. I like buttermilk dressing with a lot of buttermilk. But that isn't ranch dressing.

My favorite Buffalo wings place in the whole world only serves ranch dressing. I end up getting the wings to go or sneaking in blue cheese dressing.

So the idea of adding more ranch dressing to restaurant tables is depressing enough. But as sales and preferences go, I'm in the minority.

My ideal condiments box would be ketchup (without high-fructose corn syrup), mustard (yellow and brown), malt vinegar, Miracle Whip (until Kraft brought back the high-fructose corn syrup version), and hot sauce (red and green).

The two things Americans love are dips and things to dip. Condiments are supposed to enhance the flavor, what you see often in Canada and England where vinegars are lightly sprinkled on fries. A fresh aioli could be served but isn't likely to be sitting out in a condiments box. Unfortunately, you often see patrons drown their food in their condiment of choice.

The condiment manufacturers, like most food manufacturers, want you to use as much of their product as possible and then buy more. That is their desire. Your desire should be to enhance the flavor of whatever you are eating, but still be able to tell the difference between what you are eating and the condiment in question.

photo by me

Colbert Report pokes at Prozac in poultry

Usually, the fun of Thought for Food on the Colbert Report is that most of the crazy food happenings can be avoided by making easy choices. We've known about bugs in a Starbucks drink for some time, and we've tweeted the joys of Pizza Hut's hot dog stuffed pizza (though sadly only in the UK).

Prozac in our poultry? That's depressing, and not the kind of depressing that can be cured with Prozac. Colbert also reported on caffeine, banned antibiotics and arsenic.

This is a new low for what we apparently can't know what is in our food.

Colbert had a little bit of fun with the chicken and drugs theme with Xanax nuggets, blazin' buffalo Benadryl dipped into Hidden Valley Robitussin, Lipitor frittata, and KFCialis.

For the Starbucks story, Colbert's suggestions of spraying your food with bug spray doesn't seem far off, given the spraying of crops by factory farms. Amazing how a hot dog trapped inside a pizza crust and dangerous drugs in our poultry makes drinking bugs really not that bad.

If/when Pizza Hut brings the hot dog inside the pizza craze to the States, we know we can avoid it. Eating chicken wings at a bar shouldn't give us a drug such as Prozac unless we want it and with a prescription.

Canada focuses sharpest budget cuts on those who protect food safety

The good news is that Canada has a department devoted to food inspection. The bad news is that there will be fewer inspectors as a result of federal budget cuts.

The Globe and Mail reported that the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and Agriculture Canada will suffer among the worst hits in federal budget cuts by the Harper government.

In the 2011 election campaign, the Conservative budget promised $100 million over five years to increase capacity in the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. Politicians do break promises on occasion. When you offer to raise the stakes to protect citizens from tainted food, and you make the department that helps prevent tainted food a high priority for a deep cut, well that decision makes a significant impact on average Canadians.

Under the Harper government, a listeriosis outbreak in 2008 led to 22 deaths and 35 serious illnesses from tainted deli meat.

Canada has an advantage over the United States since it has a government agency devoted to food inspection. The USDA runs marketing and inspection of the same food, and as we've seen lately, the FDA begging for voluntary help in cutting down on antibiotics in the food supply is really sad and pathetic.

But if that agency can't be effective, especially given the increasing number of food problems in recent years, Canada's advantage isn't nearly as large as it should be.

Crossing your fingers that your food is safe isn't a smart government policy.

Previous coverage:

What a Stephen Harper government means for Canada's national food strategy

Canada's political parties have stronger food policies in their platforms for the upcoming election

Bacon goes well on everything, even a veggie burger

"What is the point of eating a veggie burger if you are going to put bacon on it?"

Good question if you are a pure vegetarian. The vegetarians with bacon benefits are asking "Why didn't I think of putting bacon on a veggie burger?"

For the majority of us omnivores, the question is worth pondering. Are you better off eating a veggie burger with bacon on top than eating a regular burger or a regular burger with bacon on it?

If we are talking about health, a bacon burger made with a veggie burger reduces your red meat intake, increases your vegetable output, and gives you substantial protein. Though if health is really your goal, maybe we can come up with something other than bacon to top the burger.

If we are talking about taste, the bacon can overcome any issues you would have with consistency or taste of the veggie burger, encouraging you to eat more veggie burgers. And bacon tastes good.

This alleged hypothetical actually happened. I needed to use up some precooked bacon from Trader Joe's and I was in the mood for a veggie burger. These are not the soy-dominant kind in the frozen section. The mushroom farm people up in Wisconsin have a mushroom-based veggie patty that is rather good. The only problem is that the patty isn't very filling.

This is the hidden trap with eating well. If dinner isn't filling enough, your stomach is stirring for a snack far too early in the evening. Then again, if your stomach is set to eat a lot, any alternative will seem "less filling."

Spices can add flavor, but don't add bulk. Adding vegetables normally found on a sandwich (roasted red peppers, sliced mushrooms) can help, but they don't add much bulk to a regular burger.

Bacon adds flavor and bulk, but has its obvious drawbacks. Cheese adds flavor and some bulk, but is usually high in fat, and needs to be free of animal rennet for vegetarians.

The precooked bacon added some nice flavor, though the TJ slices were rather thin. And I was pretty hungry a few hours later, a drawback that still needs to be corrected.

This latest experiment is a way for me to find alternatives for omnivores to eat a little healthier while not feeling too deprived. I might try this with thicker slices of bacon, or I could try it vegetarian Whopper style by adding lettuce, tomato (in season), and onions to give it more bulk.

Temptation of the Week: eating insects

We are drawn to eating food based on color, and so in a lot of processed foods, we get to eat dyes to satisfy our visual nature. In a bag of Wheat Thins Veggie Toasted Chips, you can consume 4 dyes: Blue 2, Red 40, Yellow 6, and Yellow 5.

The chips also have dehydrated vegetables, which you would think would be a good source of color. We are told, after all, to eat color through vegetables. But in chips that contain sugar, malt syrup, high-fructose corn syrup AND MSG, at least the dyes are the last ingredient listed.

Still, the idea of eating something horrible to satisfy a visual makes you want to eat your food with your eyes closed.

Starbucks customers found out recently they were eating something horrible to satisfy a visual: insects are used to achieve the red color in a Strawberries & Creme Frappuccino.

Eating insects, even dipped in chocolate, won't appeal to many, other than your Anthony Bourdain types or adolescent boys on a dare. Somehow, crushed up insects might be more plausible, but if you're a vegetarian, you would prefer that nothing die for your overpriced coffee drinks.

Grist weighs in with a very good point: eating insects is still better than consuming coal tar or petroleum. Jess Zimmerman notes that the alternative to cochineal (bugs) is Red 40 (coal tar/petroleum).

Where did we hear about Red 40? That's right: the Wheat Thins chips.

Put me down for those insects. Mmmmmm. Protein.

The other issue is why a drink that contains strawberries wouldn't provide enough red for you to love its color. After all, strawberries and milk in a blender will turn pink.

The strawberries come from strawberry puree concentrate. The white grape juice concentrate dominates the sauce, so perhaps the sauce doesn't have enough strawberries, or red ones at least.

If you see the ingredients on the sauce (see link above) and you know that cochineal extract means dried female cochineal insects, then you are aware. If you mindlessly order the drink, you would have no idea whether the red color came from strawberries, petroleum, or crushed dead insects.

Plant-based foods can supply needed color in foods so companies don't have to resort to insects or petroleum, but those probably cost more.

The insects are natural, even more natural than good ol' castoreum (beaver anal gland). The idea of drinking petroleum is gross, especially if it's only to get a product that should be red, more red.

You might upset people if you hold up a line in Starbucks asking them if their drinks have dead insects or petroleum, but you do have a right to know what is in your food and drink. Then you can decide is eating insects is right for you.

Michelle Obama uses 'Biggest Loser' to push 'Let's Move'

"I will make a complete fool out of myself if it means that more children and families get excited about the idea of incorporating nutrition and fitness into their lives." -- First Lady Michelle Obama

You could argue that the First Lady being on "The Biggest Loser," a reality TV show, qualifies her as making a complete fool of herself. It's a whole lot better than Nancy Reagan and "Diff'rent Strokes." However, Mrs. Obama recognizes that this is a way to get her message out to eat better and exercise more, especially to families.

It wasn't a coincidence that the families were with the contestants as they met the First Lady in the White House. "1 in 3 children in this nation are overweight or obese. And ⅓ of our children are at risk of developing diabetes at some point in their lifetimes. So this is a major issue," said Mrs. Obama.

Michelle Obama was worried about making a fool of herself in working out with the contestants. But among the group, she was in the best shape of everyone.

"Michelle Obama is what No Excuses is all about. I mean, think about it. Who is busier than the First Lady, other than the president of the United States. This woman finds time to work out practically every single day. We all should be doing this." -- Bob Harper, senior trainer on "The Biggest Loser."

Clearly, the First Lady has time to watch the show since she knew quite a bit about the contestants. Then again, she pointed out that she works out harder after having seen the show.

Her ⅓ numbers gave us an unintentional parallel — get to be overweight or obese and you are heading for diabetes. The idea is to avoid that happening.

Mrs. Obama brought up the Presidential Active Lifestyle Award, where they get families for 6 consecutive weeks to "eat healthy and get active" with adults doing 30 minutes and children do 60 minutes of exercise per day.

The First Lady mentioned nutrition twice overall. Like "The Biggest Loser," this was much more about "Let's Move" than "Let's eat better."

Too bad Michelle Obama didn't stay for the next segment. Chris is 42 and she is a contestant on the show. We see her in a hotel room surrounded by food. We see her spreading mayonnaise from a jar on a cheeseburger, putting mayonnaise on a grilled cheese sandwich, chocolate and peanut butter on a banana, and peanut butter and mayonnaise on that burger.

"Literally these foods were calling my name. You know, all the stuff that I know I shouldn't be eating. But I'm just angry and disgusted. And because of that, I'm doing all the things that a person would do to somebody that they didn't like, except I'm just doing it to myself."

I was hoping Mrs. Obama would come out from the shadows and talk to Chris. After all, we didn't hear much about food and nutrition. Yes, children are heavier than they should be and not moving around enough. But this is all about what children are eating … and their parents, too.

Yes, her husband is the one running for re-election. But Michelle Obama is also running to remind people what she has done as First Lady, and to show a different side of the Obamas. After all, some may not like her husband, but some of those people might like Michelle more.

So it's no surprise to see more of the First Lady in media appearances not just because of the re-election campaign, but so Michelle Obama can get the word out more about eating better and "Let's Move."

Unfortunately, Mrs. Obama wasn't on the Colbert Report to talk childhood obesity. The theme was helping military families, which as Colbert noted that Mrs. Obama's two main themes are helping military families and childhood obesity.

This was Michelle Obama's first appearance on the program as First Lady. Given Colbert's emphasis on the ridiculousness of food and food marketing, she should find a way to go back on the show just to talk childhood obesity. That conversation would be more about nutrition rather than fitness.

photo credit: NBC