Balance of Food

You shouldn't eat enough dark chocolate to care whether milk hinders antioxidants

"Separating out the help from the hype" isn't just a mantra from BalanceofFood.com; that is also on our business cards. So when we ran across a food conflict that went against everything we had been taught, red flags and sirens were the least of the troubles.

"In fact, dark chocolate has more flavonoids than any other antioxidant-rich food such as red wine, green and black tea, and blueberries. However, consuming milk chocolate or white chocolate, or drinking milk with dark chocolate appears to largely negate the health benefits." -- ChemistryDaily.com.

This isn't the only link to this advice.

The concept of combining carbohydrates with protein into a snack has been pounded into my head by thoughtful dietitian friends and acquaintances. Most often, this gets accomplished by adding milk to a carbohydrate on my list.

I turned to one of my trusted sources: dietitian Melissa Joy Dobbins. She asked a Hershey corporate scientist. This is what she told me:

"No, that is not true. There were a few studies earlier that indicated this but newer studies are looking at better science (they didn't know what to look for before and now they do) and they are not seeing this. However, there was a lot of talk about the science emerging to say that the flavonoids in chocolate really don't have antioxidant properties once they are ingested. They are still good for us, but it appears 'antioxidant' is not the best/correct term. Stay tuned as more science emerges."

You could argue that getting that news from a Hershey employee via a dietitian isn't separating out the help from the hype. But this doesn't mean that ChemistryDaily.com is correct either.

Science is an ongoing field where new and better discoveries are made. Some scientific conclusions are more obvious than others; always has been there, always will be there. Mankind clinged incessantly to the idea that the Sun revolved around the Earth; we know now (thanks Galileo) that the Earth and the other planets revolve around the Sun.

It would be nice to declare the effects of chocolate to be as absolute as the Earth's rotation, but we can't. We are a lot more sure that dark chocolate is better for you than milk chocolate, because of flavonoids and the reduced sugar. We also know that huge amounts of dark chocolate can be troublesome not because of health issues but the grams of fat involved at that high level.

That little square of dark chocolate can also soothe tension, which, if otherwise not treated, could lead to excessive late-night snacking. Unintended consequences, but useful nonetheless.

We have milk chocolate and chocolate milk on our shelves, but no one is pushing either as a strong source of antioxidants and flavonoids.

Some of this research says milk and chocolate don't mix, but we don't know how long to separate the two. Should we wait 30 minutes after drinking milk to then eat dark chocolate? This is part of why science can be incomplete.

Dark chocolate definitely has carbohydrates and some protein. If you are greatly concerned, you could substitute almonds or peanut butter in your snack to give you protein with the carbohydrates.

The question also in the Internet spectrum is that even if the science changes, you can always find older information telling you something is true, which could have been true at the time. Notice the date on what you are reading, and if no date is listed, be a little more suspicious.

The ultimate answer to the question is that if you are doing it properly, you aren't eating that much chocolate to make much of a difference. Given most Americans eating habits, the chocolate they are eating wouldn't qualify as antioxidant rich. If you are greatly concerned, and eating chocolate solely for the antioxidants, experiment. If you eat chocolate while drinking milk, try a different option. Eat it by itself. Try it with another non-dairy source of protein.

Most of what we write about and talk about is clear cut. This is one of those few instances where the research isn't clear. That's life. This teaches us to not fall in love with something as the end all, cure all. Blueberries are high in antioxidants and don't have these issues. Red wine in moderation also doesn't have issues. Dark chocolate without milk is also a very good source of antioxidants. If you worry that your glass of milk with your dark chocolate is killing those benefits, then try an alternative solution.

Boston Market looking to reduce salt, but shakers should stay

I used to love Boston Market. So I was a tiny bit addicted to its gravy. Sure, the chicken was healthy and the apples were rather good. But I really loved that gravy.

Boston Market made changes some time back to its gravy to make it healthier, and my interest in the restaurant dropped about 90%.

So when I heard that Boston Market was going to lower its sodium levels in its food, I wondered what they would do to the other 10% of my interest.

The salt in the food isn't the only concern. Boston Market is getting rid of the salt shakers on the tables. I haven't used a regular salt shaker at a chain restaurant since I was a child — seasoned salt has been an exception, but only on rare occasions.

Gravy has been on my mind this year between poutine and fries/gravy in my Canadian trips. Gravy combines flour (carbohydrates) and butter (fat), and who knows what else was in Boston Market's old gravy recipe to make it taste marvelous.

Gravy is completely unnecessary yet on occasion, the sauce adds to a dish. Or dominates a dish — does anybody know what the mashed potatoes at Boston Market taste like without the gravy. Maybe slightly above the quality of the potatoes at KFC.

While I can't prove that the taste difference in the gravy had anything to do with reduced salt, my taste buds would swear it's true. While not a completely reliable source, my taste buds have had a lot of experience.

Chain restaurant food is generally too salty by my taste. So the idea of reducing salt in the food is an overall good thing. Of course, you could eliminate the salt in the food and add gravy to make up for the lost salt.

The few times I indulge in McDonald's fries involves me knocking off chunks of excess salt off my fingers. My blood pressure literally goes up when I watch the employee oversalt the fries.

The company will remove salt shakers immediately, but stretch out the reduction in sodium — at least 15% by the end of 2014, and a 20% cut in signature items such as mashed potatoes, macaroni and cheese, and rotisserie chicken over the next 6 months. Seems like that should be the other way around. Reduce the sodium, then get rid of the salt shakers.

Getting rid of the salt shakers will just provoke people to bring in their own salt. And they will. Guaranteed. Maybe the small flat to-go containers. Maybe an actual salt shaker. That will happen.

We need to get used to have reduced sodium in our food. We don't live in an era where salt is required to keep food fresh. We also need to balance that with individual choice. Instead of salt shakers, those miniature containers would demonstrate the impact of salt (even if they are terribly wasteful). But restaurants need to supply salt as an option for consumers. Pepper, too.

Salt for flavor is a wonderful thing. Salt as a way to encourage people to eat more and drink more leads down a dangerous path, not just from a health standpoint. Tricking people into consuming more is bad food preparation. Just enough salt for flavor makes food taste better, and taste should be ultimately what you are trying to accomplish.

The Boston Market gravy has less sodium but at a price. The irony is that the gravy still has salt, but not enough to taste good and too much to eat otherwise. Finding the Balance of Food requires figuring out the balance of salt.

Temptation of the Week takes a summer holiday

Temptations lurk 365 days a year, 366 days this year. Fighting off temptations is exhausting, so Temptation of the Week will take a 2-week break.

Don't worry, we'll have other stories on the blog as we approach the end of a very hot summer. Keep eating light and fresh, at least until Labor Day.

In the meantime, please enjoy the previous episodes of Temptation of the Week here at BalanceofFood.com.

Sad corn just the start of rising food prices thanks to 2012 drought

The sad, sad corn — we've all seen the pictures of the drought of 2012. In a normal world of food, this would be bad only for those who like corn. However, since corn is such a dominant force from chips to soft drinks to meat to ethanol, American consumers will be paying more for food that can be tied back to corn.

The stories we have read in the last few months can only warn us what the food world might look like. The impact of the drought will stretch to 2013 and beyond, unless next year is significantly better.

This might seem a boon for grass-fed animals. The drought affects grass but not in the same way corn is affected. And the price of corn is tied into subsidies, crop insurance, and the monoculture that corn has become in the food growing landscape. Even if meat goes up in price, grass-fed beef will still be more expensive. The price difference likely won't be close enough for those on the fence to make the jump to grass-fed beef. Some might try out grass-fed beef when they otherwise wouldn't go for it.

Relying on local farmers and growing your own food can protect against the effects of the drought. Yes, your local farmer has been suffering as well — e.g., the Michigan fruit crop — but by growing a number of different products, some produce will do better than others. Those who rely on corn — a lot of farmers — will be hurting.

Even if we spin some good news from this farm disaster, food prices going up puts pressure on families and individuals in times where a lot of people are still struggling to eat. People might be healthier by eating less meat and corn-related products, but chances are food consumption habits won't drop too dramatically. People still have to eat, and will likely pay more for food, finding some other way to make ends, er, meet.

Americans love to complain about the cost of food, even if they pay very low amounts compared to the rest of the world. Soon, they'll be forlorn, wishing back to the good ol' days … of 2008.

If the climate change is producing this type of weather pattern, this is only the beginning of what will be more sad pictures of corn. Even as we hate the dominance of corn in the food supply, this will make a significant impact on how people view the food supply for years to come.

Photo credit

Temptation of the Week: Sweets for a cause

Even if you are good at resisting sweets, you will find times where saying "no" becomes more difficult. You can handle the temptations of store-bought treats, but would have trouble turning down a homemade treat from a friend at work or your next door neighbor.

My strength at work was tested in a paradoxical path that life sometimes throws your way. Sweets were available for sale to raise money to try to end childhood hunger. The cruel irony.

Homemade treats for a great cause: the strongest of people can't resist.

You can save the treats for later. You can indulge in one or two. Give them away to co-workers and friends. Let your kids have some fun by eating the baked goods. Of course, if you are stronger than Superman, you can donate money without grabbing a treat.

The sale that day raised $1,000. Two different departments (neither of them mine) competed against each other to see which team would raise the most money. The winning team raised $550 while the runner-up had $450.

The calories consumed by a homemade treat for a good cause would be the same if no charity was at issue. Depending on the corporate-made cookie, you are better off with a homemade version, but you are still consuming calories.

If you are someone who has trouble resisting the allure of a treat at work, you can feel more assured when eating something that will help others. Perhaps the association with a kind act can dissuade the temptation in a moment where nothing is at stake. Or you can appreciate more a treat tied into a good cause.

Jos. Louis snack cakes, ketchup chips spotted in Southwestern MI grocery store

The Meijer's in Stevensville, MI will never be mistaken for a Canadian outlet post. Stevensville rests along Lake Michigan and a couple hundred miles from the Canadian border. Yet on a recent trip, I once again found the Jos. Louis snack cakes and a new surprise: ketchup chips.

The Quebec import snack cakes found their way to Jewel stores in and around Chicago last fall. That turned out to be a limited run of about 3 months. I brought some May West cupcakes back from Montreal in late May, but didn't note that the Canadian version had glucose-fructose until I unpacked my suitcase in the States. The Jos. Louis snack cakes in the States do not have high-fructose corn syrup.

The ketchup potato chips come from the Herr company and have a Heinz tie-in (both companies are from Pennsylvania). Ketchup chips are more Canadian than poutine is, and even harder to find in the States so far. "Ketchup flavored" is the tricky part since we are talking salt and sugar along with the tomato taste; the chips do not contain high-fructose corn syrup.

The Kerr ketchup chips aren't that hard to find, just a surprise that a mainstream Canadian food product has crossed over into the States, and it isn't poutine.

Meijer's carries more unusual brands than most stores. I discovered the ketchup cities on accident, but I scoured the store to find the snack cake aisles on the off chance that Meijer's would carry Jos. Louis. I had no reason to think the cakes would be there, but they were.

Unlike the traditional snack cakes in the States, the freshness date comes pretty quickly for the Canadian snack cakes, a sign of goodness in themselves. I really like the Canadian versions of the Hostess products. Unfortunately, I may not get to those until November, unless Alberta stores carry them.

The good news is if you are traveling on I-94 and you get to Exit 23, the store is right near the highway. If you see them or other Canadian food products in your American supermarket, let us know in the comments section below.

Bon appetite.

Temptation of the Week: Grocery shopping by gender

"Ally McBeal" has been off the air for 10 years, yet its trend of unisex bathrooms hasn't taken off elsewhere. Most areas of the world belong to people of different genders — even the grocery store.

True, women might spend more time in the produce area while men stare at the meat counter until they can figure out what to buy. But women shop for men and men shop for women, so at some point, they should end up in all the parts of the grocery store.

In most animal species, male and female versions eat the same things. Whatever the male members of the species eat, the female species eats the same thing, and there aren't philosophical discussions about gender roles and what you eat. Women eat meat and men eat salads, just not as often as the opposite gender.

Marketers feel the need to gear specific products as if the other gender couldn't possibly bother with the product. We've seen this with Dr. Pepper Ten and Trop 50. Dr. Pepper Ten is for men and only men because it's a diet drink with more than 9 calories of high-fructose corn syrup. Trop 50 is orange juice with Stevia thrown in; it's for women and only for women.

Women might go for Dr. Pepper Ten -- still low in calories, but with a bit more flavor. Men might like Trop 50 -- still has orange juice. But the advertising is so targeted that you would feel uncomfortable drinking the "other" drink.

A press release for Ruffles Ultimate Potato Chips and Dips describes the chips as "an unapologetic bro-centric snack with deeper ridges and real pieces of meat." "Ultimate" and "bro-centric" = girls not allowed.

Another difference: women targeted advertising is usually smart to its target audience. Men targeted advertising tears down its target audience.

The "man aisle" at the Westside Market at 110th Street and Broadway in Manhattan feeds into this gender isolation that is a part of advertising toward men. When you break down the "man aisle," you find that this is more of a "party central."

cereal -- Wheaties pretty healthy
Ramen noodles -- young people regardless of gender
Chips Ahoy -- more females than males buying cookies
two mainstream light beers -- not targeted at men

Condiments are universal. Condoms are worn by men, but are often bought by women (in case the man forgets).

The other consideration is that women easily walk into men's worlds much easier than men can walk into women's worlds. Women can wear a man's shirt and it can be really sexy. A man wearing a women's blouse has its place, but it's not the same.

The "man cave" only works if only men will shop in that area, along the lines of treehouses with 10-year-olds. Uh, women like to party, drink beer, grill out, and eat chips. The grocery store, like food, is unisex.

Politics can interfere in finding our Balance of Food

"So dictator Bloomberg now wants all baby formula locked up in NYC hospitals to impose, not promote but to impose,breast feeding only! I am afraid the crazies have this country too far to fix! What happened to a womans choice?"

I see this in my Facebook news feed. "Womans choice" is not language this friend normally uses. And as much as we have heralded breastfeeding at BalanceofFood.com, we certainly don't require it.

Turns out that New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has taken his quirky look at life and is trying to make sure formula is only used when needed.

Even as Bloomberg has his heart in the right place, his style can annoy people, such as me. So I have sympathy for my Facebook friend. "Nanny State" really does describe Bloomberg's thought process.

The problem for me is that I like the overall message, and those who have trouble breastfeeding can still get access to formula.

Health care costs go down with breastfeeding. Costs for the mother go down with breastfeeding. Kids turn out better.

Bloomberg's proposal comes as almost half of all babies born in the United States (47.2%) are still breastfeeding at 6 months, and the initiation rate for mothers had its highest jump in a decade, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Thanks to the Affordable Care Act as of August 1, insurers have to cover comprehensive lactation support, new mothers counseling, and the rental of breast pumps.

Do I wish Bloomberg could tone down his approach? Absolutely. Is he being a dictator with forced breastfeeding? Uh, no.

---

"Quit Digging Your Grave with a Knife and Fork" is one of the few books written by a politician that I have read cover to cover. Mike Huckabee's struggle with losing weight is a really nice look at the battle over eating better.

Watching Huckabee lead the charge last week in favor of Chick-Fil-A and against gay marriage produced a few chuckles in the press since he has become an advocate for eating better, yet was promoting fried chicken sandwiches.

I can sympathize with the reaction to his pro-fried-chicken stance. Suddenly deciding to eat Chick-Fil-A because they give money to groups that fight against gay marriage is pretty mean, and definitely not very Christian. Those who have access to the chain and eat the food and support what they support — well, I don't agree with them, but they are consistent.

If Huckabee does occasionally eat there — as part of his Balance of Food — and ate there on August 1, then he is somewhat consistent. If he hasn't eaten there in years, and picked August 1 to suddenly get a sandwich, he deserves more criticism than he has received.

John Goodman takes the opposite point to an extreme as a very pro-gay Col. Sanders in this Funny or Die video. The idea that someone from the South who died in 1980, someone who was friends with Billy Graham and Jerry Falwell, being that pro-gay is more ironic than funny. But the point that Goodman as Sanders makes at the end of the video: we're all a bunch of "big ol' moneymouths." The point of the video: Food isn't about politics; it's about food.

People who are large and those who used to be large (like all people) deserve the right to eat wherever they choose. The one element that I agree with in the Wednesday protest is that people have a right to choose where they spend their money. Thanks to people such as Huckabee, we know where they stand not so much about fried chicken sandwiches, but on gay marriage. Maybe we'll find out at some point where Huckabee and the other conservatives stand on fried chicken.

---

Think the San Francisco ban on toys with regular Happy Meals was harsh? Kids meals are banned in all of Chile with no nutritional exceptions. Toys and food is a no-go in the South American country.

The ban kicked in June 7, and also applies to other food manufacturers, including cereal companies, that use toys, crayons, or stickers to entice children to buy the product.

Fast food chains are being sued in Chile for not following the law; McDonald's, Burger King, and KFC were singled out; KFC is a surprise by U.S. standards in that the chain doesn't usually give away toys in the States.

Sen. Giudo Girardi, who wrote the law, noted that he wanted to get this law passed because nearly 25% of Chile's 6-year-olds are obese.

See conspiracy theorists: this is the kind of behavior you accuse Bloomberg and others of doing, and Chile is actually doing it.

The funny part is that a number of these people who rail against the nanny state would love to have a similar law to the Chilean legislation. Imagine how much easier it would be to grocery shop if your kids weren't screaming or whining for a food product based purely on the toy inside.

---

The point to all three of these food-related political stories is that consistency is really difficult in life. You support gay marriage, but you want to eat Chick-Fil-A food. You support breastfeeding but wish people would make that choice rather than pressure to do so. You think toys shouldn't be tied in with food, yet an actual nationwide ban is pretty creepy.

Most of the struggles to find a Balance of Food involve whether a food tastes good versus being good for you. Sometimes, the taste or nutrition isn't the main issue. Food being wrapped up in politics is still very sad, but as long as this is a part of our lives, finding that true Balance of Food becomes that much more difficult.

'Colbert Report' riffs on the 'sensitivity' of vegetables

You've seen the T-shirts about how meat is murder: tasty, tasty murder. Well, the Colbert Report took off on a British study that perhaps eating vegetables also constitutes murder.

The British study took note on how plants can react based on situations, emitting unique sounds when stressed.

Colbert took the study one step further with a parody of the Sarah McLachlan suffering animals commercials, showing carrots being pulled from the ground and cut up for dinner.

The parody video was for People for the Ethical Treatment of Produce (PETOP).

The segment started off on the USDA memo about participating in Meatless Mondays. Colbert "suggests" people eat as much meat as they can to avoid the suffering of vegetables.

Temptation of the Week: Smartly cutting the fat

Quick-fix recipes reduce calories mostly by cutting fat since, as we've been told 10 million times, fat contains 9 calories per gram while carbohydrates and protein has 4 calories per gram. Reduce the fat gets you down quicker to a specific calorie mark.

The easy way out can work for a specific meal, but doesn't really help you try and be smarter about reducing fat over the long haul.

I noticed this as I saw a family from Oklahoma City take on the mayor's challenge of eating better. The recipe on the Web site called for fat-free mayonnaise. I groaned audibly at the TV even though I was the only one in the room. This was a family in need of nutrition information.

Fat-free can be an unsettling term if you are relying on those products to improve your way to eating better. When food companies take things out, other things go in.

More often, sugar or sweet replaces fat in fat-free products so the slight savings in calories aren't worth the hassle. Fat-free mayonnaise shouldn't even be allowed to be called mayonnaise, since mayonnaise, by definition, contains fat.

Fat-free ice cream is another misnomer. Cream has fat; ice cream has fat. Fat-free ice cream isn't ice cream.

There are a few dairy-only exceptions — fat-free milk, yogurt, sour cream, cheese — as long as nothing is added to replace the fat, you should be in good shape.

As for reduced fat, this would depend on what is added to replace the fat. If you find a potentially appealing reduced-fat product, look at the label of the regular version side-by-side with the reduced fat version. Chances are if you use less of the regular version, you'll do just fine.

Then there is the need for fat so that fat-soluble vegetables can keep their health benefits. Even if you like the taste of vegetables, you want the vitamins.

The recent study from Purdue University shows that carotenoid levels are higher with dressings made from canola oil as opposed to butter or vegetable oil.

Just because a product is reduced-fat or fat-free, that is not a license to go nuts (except with nuts, which have fat). Learn from those who stuffed their face with fat-free Snackwells.

Fat is supposed to equal flavor. So don't eat fat unless it adds to your enjoyment. Eat a decent amount of good fats and a moderate amount of bad fats. No need to buy "reduced" products. Enjoy the real stuff in a reasonable fashion.