Food & Nutrition

Michelle Obama’s memoir, Becoming, sold 10 million copies in just six months.  Random House Chief Executive said, “It could be the biggest selling autobiography ever.”  In addition to people buying her book, they are shelling out big bucks to see her speak about it. If Let’s Move Childcare had that success rate, childhood obesity would be eradicated like the bubonic plague. But that didn't happen. Here's why.
Everyone is perpetually confused about how often nutrition experts change their minds about the health impact of consuming eggs. In the past several weeks alone, two powerful studies -- of course, contradicting each other -- were published in major medical journals. One states that eggs will prevent heart attacks; the other that they will lead to heart attacks and death. What's the real message? ACSH advisor Dr. David Seres explains.
Certain foods, due to their effect on blood sugar levels, precipitate the release of molecules which are associated with inflammation. Excessive consumption of refined carbohydrates, french fries or soda isn't going to trigger that response. While those who eat this way may have significant negative health issues, it won't be due to so-called “inflammatory” foods. To suggest so is junk-science and a lack of common sense.
Are Giant pandas closer to bears or raccoons? It turns out that based on their eating habits, they share qualities of both. Perhaps pandas are not the vegetarians they seem to be.
A group of researchers studying drinks seeks a genetic source of our taste. And one important questions emerges: Are some people genetically wired to drink bitter or sweet beverages more often?
Who better to tell us what drives our choice in foods than marketers? We pay more attention to those front-of-the-package claims than to the nutritional information hidden on the back. What a surprise.
Because most of society is between two and six generations removed from farming, that subject is largely terra incognita, literally and figuratively.  This lack of knowledge makes the public very susceptible to fear-based marketing of food. Humans have been modifying the DNA of our food for thousands of years.  We call it agriculture. 
A 2018 Washington Post article addressed the methods we use to breed food crops. But it suffered from a common shortcoming -- “pseudo-balance” -- or the seeking out of clueless commentators to contradict advocates of superior modern genetic modification techniques.  We hate to break it to the author, but in spite of what they teach you in journalism classes, not every issue benefits from point-counterpoint.
Chances are, on the back of many an ice cream tub, you will see something that reads “modified milk ingredients” in addition to any "cream" or "milk" you expect to see. So what are these?
A study of the health effects of alcohol separates the population by a genetic difference: the ability to metabolize alcohol. Researchers found no benefit to drinking, moderate or not. Is it true? Maybe if you're Chinese.
The New York Times recently swallowed whole a study which concluded that those who eat meat die 23% more quickly than those who don't. But the meat study sounded fishy. And it was. ACSH advisor and expert biostatistician Dr. Stan Young turns the meat study into hamburger.
A new study links propionate, a food preservative, to alterations in our metabolism, increasing the production of glucose, at least in one mammal: mice. The evidence of an effect on humans is based on 14 lean humans and two meals.