The Hudson Institute just released a report titled “Better-For –You Foods… It’s Just Good Business:”

Well it is business… “good” is  relative term, good for profits and shareholders… yes!  Good for consumers… not so much.

My view is this is just one more angle food companies have discovered to profit by selling junk / processed food to parents and children.

Unfortunately the public is falling for the scam spending more on foods the make “healthy” claims.

The overview reports:

However, until now, there has been little evidence for how companies can do well by doing good. In this landmark study, researchers examined Nielsen sales data from grocery stores, drug stores, and mass merchandisers; financial metrics, such as operating income, share price appreciation, and return to shareholders; and company reputation and favorability rankings to analyze whether or not sales of better-for-you (BFY) foods affect key business performance measures. For the purposes of this report, the term “foods” includes both foods and beverages.

The study concluded that food and beverage companies that have a higher percentage of product sales in the BFY category perform better financially. In short, sound strategic planning with a commitment to growing sales of better-for-you foods is just good business.

Consumer packaged goods (CPG) companies with a higher proportion of their sales in BFY foods demonstrate superior:

• Sales growth

• Operating profits

• Returns to shareholders

• Company reputation

The so –called “better for you” (BFY) foods are foods and beverages that contain no, low or reduced calories and products that generally are considered wholesome.

According to the report these products account for 40% of company sales but more than 70% of the growth in sales.

So… in case this isn’t clear to you. These products improve profits and returns to shareholders and the company reputation…

Question: What about the obesity rate?

Answer: No need to mention that in the report because that is still climbing.

The “lite”, “low fat” and “whole grain foods” messaging in my opinion continue to be the greatest contributing and anti-nutritious factor to obesity epidemic.

Ironically, the report was subtitled: The Obesity Solutions Initiative, but no reference was made whether the highly profitable BFY products actually reduced obesity rates.

Consumer, don’t be fooled, forget health promoting labels, icons and paid endorsements from organizations, instead look for foods that don’t come in a box or even have labels for that matter. Single ingredient real foods like meats, fruits, vegetables and nuts don’t need claims to inform consumers they are a natural healthy choice.

My greatest concern in the report, is the thinly veiled threat:

Public health officials and policymakers need to be aware of food and beverage companies’ core business goals in order to work effectively with them to address the obesity epidemic.

As though the USDA does not gratify, pander and stroke industry enough?  It would be refreshing if the USDA actually took a stand on anything that was actually in the publics’ interest when it came to advising healthy food choices based on “real” science.

© 2011 – Copyrights Grant Roberts, All Rights Reserved

“Omega God This is Good”: Healthy Chocolate Orange Parfait is layered with healthfully fortified yogurt and fruit, it tastes great, is packed with protein, omega 3, antioxidants and health promoting live active cultures.

Try Grant’s healthy dessert, a perfect end to any meal or a meal in itself… A delicious chocolate orange snack, packed with protein and omega 3 any time of the day.

Ingredients – Serves 4

4 cups Full Fat Plain Yogurt

2 scoops of Chocolate Protein Powder

2 Tablespoons of Orange Flavored Omega 3 Fish Oil

4 Tablespoons Ground Flax Seeds (optional)

1 Cup Frozen Blackberries

Instructions:

1. Combine yogurt, protein powder and orange flavored omega 3 oil in a mixing bowl.

2. Gently whisk the ingredients together until fully blended.

3. Chill ingredients before serving

4. Separate into individual servings

5. Top with frozen blackberries and serve

6. ENJOY!

© 2011 Copyrights Grant Roberts, All Rights Reserved

Grain fed beef is a completely different story.

We have all heard the commercials advertising “grain –fed” beef using a soothing voice with just the right amount of inflection to make the term “grain fed” sound natural and healthful. The problem is… it isn’t.

Cows were biologically designed to eat grass.

Grass for cows is a natural carbohydrate that provides the essential nutrients.

Grass is rich and balanced in omega-3 and 6 fatty acids.

Grass is also a good source of Conjugated Linoleic Acid (CLA) a rich antioxidant that may have anti-cancerous properties.

Nutritionally, there is no comparison between grass fed beef and grain fed beef.

Grass-fed meat is the ONLY food type you can eat exclusively and still have optimal body function

Grass-fed meats will supply 100% of your body’s nutrient requirements in perfect balance.

A point scientifically proven in the early 1900’s by an intrepid Arctic explorer, anthropologist / ethnologist Vilhjalmur Stefansson who lived with the Eskimo from 1906 – 1918. Stefansson observed the Eskimo diet consisted almost exclusively of meat and fish with virtually no carbohydrates was vibrantly healthful. Stefansson and his fellow European descendant explorers who followed the diet reported they too were in perfect health.

Stefansson’s conclusion that an all meat diet was healthful was doubted by academia back in the United States. Upon his return to the US Stefansson agreed to recreate the experiment under direct medical supervision admitting himself and a fellow subject to Bellevue Hospital in New York consuming exclusively meat for one full year.

Summary and Conclusions

1. Two men lived on an exclusive meat diet for 1 year and a third man for 10 days. The relative amounts of lean and fat, meat ingested were left to the instinctive choice of the individuals.

2. The protein content varied from 100 to 140 gm., the fat from

200 to 300 gm., the carbohydrate,  derived entirely from the meat, from 7 to 12 gm., and the fuel value from 2000 to 3100 calories.

3. At the end of the year, the subjects were mentally alert, physically active, and showed no specific physical changes in any system of the body.

4. During the 1st week, all three men lost weight, due to a shift in the water content of the body while adjusting itself to the low     carbohydrate diet.  Thereafter, their weights  remained practically constant.

5. In the prolonged test, the blood pressure of one man remained constant; the systolic pressure of the other decreased 20 mm. and the diastolic pressure remained uniform.

6. The control of the bowels was not disturbed while the subjects were on prescribed meat diet. In one instance, when the proportion of protein calories in the diet exceeded 40 per cent, a diarrhea developed.

7. Vitamin deficiencies did not appear.

8. The total acidity of the urine during the meat diet was in- creased to 2 or 3 times that of the acidity on mixed diets and acetonuria was present throughout the periods of exclusive meat.

9.    Urine examinations, determinations of the nitrogenous constituents of the blood, and kidney function tests revealed no evidence of kidney damage.

10. While on the meat diet, the men metabolized foodstuffs with FA: G ratios between 1.9 and 3.0 and excreted from 0.4 to 7.2 gm. of acetone bodies per day.

11. In these trained subjects, the clinical observations and laboratory studies gave no evidence that any ill effects had occurred from the prolonged use of the exclusive meat diet.

All Meat Study – Click here to View.

Adventures in Diet – Vilhjalmur Stefansson, 3-part article Harpers Magazine 1935  – Click here to View.

Ironically much of the scientific research today addresses the symptoms of a grain based food system instead of advising to avoid or limit grain. No species (including humans) evolved by consuming a diet high in grain products.

Due to nutrient deficiencies and imbalance in grain-based diets, supplementation of omega 3, vitamins and minerals has become a necessity.

Science continues to report that some of America’s leading health problems are related to an imbalance of the essential fatty acid Omega 6 which is found mainly in grains and a deficient in Omega 3.

After isolating omega 3 & 6 fatty acids, scientific experiments demonstrate if the ratios of Omega-6 fatty acids to Omega-3 fatty acids in cell membranes exceed 4:1, people develop more health problems.

Grain-fed beef can exceed 15:1 whereby grass-fed beef is the optimum ratio of approximately 1:1.

Demand change and vote with your fork! Support farmers markets; buy organic fruits vegetables and grass fed beef.

What if the greatest advancement in nutritional science was actually a regression to a time not that long ago… when we ate “real” food.

© 2011 Copyrights Grant Roberts, All Rights Reserved

Do we have a right to know when our food is genetically modified?

Four score and zero years ago (20 years) an international Food Label battle commenced over a consumers right to know if they are consuming Genetically Modified (GM) foods aka. Bio-engineered or “Franken-foods”.

The long debated argument involving more than 100 countries that comprise the Codex Alimentarius Commission ended on July 5^th 2011 in Geneva when the United States surprisingly withdrew its formerly steadfast objection to listing Genetically Modified (GM) Ingredients on Food Labels.

If you think this means that US food packaging is about to provide consumers with full disclosure of genetically modified ingredients… think again.

The US capitulation that ended the stalemate was conditional. The new Codex agreement allows any country to use food labeling that advises consumers a product contains genetically modified ingredients, however this disclosure is not the law…it is completely voluntary, at the discretion of the country.

Since the US is the largest producer of Genetically Modified foods in the world, it remains more than likely consumers in North America will remain in the dark about exactly what they are eating.

(That is of course is unless bio-engineers decide to splice firefly or glow worm genes into corn).

What is Genetic Modification?

Genetic modification of crops involves transferring genes from a plant or animal into a plant. Nearly all GM changes so far are to boost yields and deter insects and viruses, cutting the use of pesticides, thus making farming more productive and affordable — a high priority goal and mandate of the USDA (the same people that tell us what we should eat)

Currently Genetic Modifications is mostly prevalent in plants we consume… however the age of bio-engineered animal foods is upon us and will be on grocery store shelves very soon.

Human Breast milk from a cow is a reality:   Moo-mmy I’m Thirsty

Disembodied meat grown in Petri dishes is also now being perfected. Where exactly should we consumers draw the line and say… I have a right to know what I’m eating?

If we allow Genetically Modified grains without notice, why should we expect the Government to tell us when our meats are the product of a lab or a new chemically created super species.

Question: Do you believe you have the right to know if you are eating genetically modified foods?

If you answered yes – than you are precisely the kind of troublemaker the government food regulators wish to avoid.

A 2000 pole conducted by Angus Reid group shows that the majority of consumers have a negative view of Genetically Modified Foods

So both the US and Canadian Governments have adopted the highly scientific policy: what a consumer doesn’t know – won’t hurt them.

Scientists and industry (the people that benefit financially from patents and profits of GM foods) suggest that no direct evidence exists that genetically modified foods pose any additional health risks… and until risks are proven – then there is no need to inform the consumer.

The fact that the modifications are potentially harmful or deter other living organisms (insects), or that scientists do not know the long-term effects, or can imagine the butterfly effect of pesticide resistance or gene transfer to non-targeted species.

The reason why labeling that discloses GM ingredients will not be introduced any time soon… is because it would already encompass most packaged foods that exist today.

What the vast majority of U.S. consumers do not know is that approximately 75 percent of all U.S. processed and packaged foods containing cereals and other grain products, vegetable oils or even frozen dinners have been genetically modified according to the Grocery Manufacturers of America.

Virtually every product that contains corn, soy, or the processed vegetable oils canola or cottonseed has been genetically modified. Couple that with the ubiquity of highly subsidized corn and soy in foods and the subsequent blending of raw ingredients being pooled into one processing stream from all different sources, it would be impossible not to claim that most packaged foods did not have some amount of GM ingredients.

At least one intrepid company has defiantly… or unwittingly disobeyed the Government direct order NOT to disclose GM ingredients with the introduction of a subtly inconspicuous underground GM icon. Way to go General Mills

Currently, companies developing GM foods voluntarily send their data to the FDA, there’s no official approval needed before products go on sale… What could possibly go wrong with that?

Surely allowing self-regulation of highly reputable, environmentally conscious and consumer minded mom and pop companies like Monsanto and DuPont, that potentially stand to profit by controlling the gene pool of a resource as insignificant as food… that should turn out perfectly fine… shouldn’t it?

Need another reason why the USDA and FDA should be restricted from advising Americans how to eat.

USDA Food Plate

Consumers deserve the right of transparency when it comes making a decision about what to eat.

New Food Label…For Your Consideration

Please join the Grant Roberts’ Unified Revolution… It’s time the people had a voice and told government and manufacturers what we want to eat… not the other way around.

Demand change and vote with your fork! Support farmers markets; buy organic fruits vegetables and grass fed beef.

What if the greatest advancement in nutritional science was actually a regression to a time not that long ago… when we ate real food.

© 2011 Copyrights Grant Roberts, All Rights Reserved

I couldn’t resist the temptation to submit my own “new” Nutrition Facts label… below is a link to the detailed version of my entry.

Grant Roberts – New Nutrition Facts Label Submission

Obviously the purpose of a Nutrition Facts label should be to help consumers make healthier choices providing an informative icon to make a quick, intelligible decision when comparing one food product to another.

If a label is truly informative, it shouldn’t take any more than a few seconds to spot the obvious differences and choose the healthier option.

Sounds easy enough… but until now the old FDA Nutrition Facts label was only reiterating the same ambiguous USDA dribble that is purposefully confusing to consumers (see Who Do We Trust below).

The “new” Nutrition Facts label that I have submitted for consideration changes all of that. I have maintained the familiar look – but the information represents a revolutionary new way of thinking and important illuminating considerations when it comes to identifying what really matters when buying food.

Synopsis of the Revolutionary Change

Standard Serving Sizes for all categories of food shall be realistic and uniform.

The focus on calories (an nondescript unit of measure) will shift to delivering the “essential” nutrients.

The label must “add up” and be easily accountable in both Calories and Grams

The three (3) macronutrients Protein, Fat and Carbohydrate will be displayed prominently in percentage per serving totaling 100% (e.g. 30%protein, 30% fat, 40% carbohydrate)

The three (3) macronutrients Protein, Fat and Carbohydrate will be defined categorically:

Protein will be listed as a complete or incomplete source of the essential amino acids – listing the missing amino acids to aid all consumers (particularly vegetarians who generally must eat foods in combination to acquire all of the essential amino acids).

Fat will be divided into source: Saturated, Monounsaturated and Polyunsaturated

Any amount of Man Made Trans Fat will be disclosed – no more less than .5g per serving = zero

Carbohydrates will be listed as:

Natural Sugar / Starch

Added Sugar

Artificial Sweetener

Fiber

The Glycemic Load of the serving will be prominently listed and described as either a high, medium or low glycemic food

Total number of ingredients will be listed and divided into natural source and artificial

Deletions:

Cholesterol will no longer be listed due to the lack of scientific evidence of ANY negative impact

Reference to a 2000-calorie diet since it is not representative of the average populations goal and is purposefully confusing.

Daily values likewise as they are based on the same fictitious 2000-calorie goal

Who Do We Trust?

Nutrition Facts                     V                       Nutrition Fiction

It is simply inexplicable that the USDA is charged with advising Americans what constitutes a healthful diet while simultaneously supporting the food industry through the provision of subsidies and devising the strategies to improve farm income and expand agriculture markets. It is impossible for the USDA to serve two masters without bias… especially since the USDA serves the Food Industry – a $500 billion enterprise, laden with capital and lobbyists to protect and influence their interests.

Until the public revolts and demands change, the USDA will remain the greatest obstruction to providing consumers with pertinent information that will allow an individual to make an informed decision to achieve / maintain a desired level of fitness (maintaining a healthful body composition through the delivery of the essential nutrients needed to support and sustain life in a disease free state)

The USDA guidelines are purposefully vague so that no food product or manufacturer is omitted or disparaged – the USDA never says “don’t eat something” instead uses a less industry offensive term: use sparingly,  allowing even the junkiest of junk food to fit neatly into the ambiguous daily caloric availability.

Literally a Legal… Case and Point

THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff,

V.

THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (USDA), FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION (FDA)

Defendants

Following the release of the USDA’s Guidelines in the year 2000, the USDA was charged with what amounts to acts of duplicity, purposeful vagueness of information and bias to the benefit of the food industry in the creation of the nations nutritional advice USDA Dietary Guidelines for Americans.

The USDA was found GUILTY of conspiracy when the court ruled the USDA had violated the federal law that prohibits bias to special interest groups that revealed a full 6 or the 11 Guideline creation advisory board were food industry representatives / spokespersons.

Despite the verdict, the USDA dietary then and to date remains ambiguous at best. The USDA’s imprecise and influenced recommendations are used to reward industry with the lucrative government food services contracts for the nations schools, military, prisons, public employees and hospitals worth billions of dollars. This is ill informed cycle is perpetuated with the egregious use of the weak and indefinable advice that forms the unsound foundation of our educational institutions curriculum for future nutritionists, dietitians and health-care providers.

Please join the Revolution…Vote with your Fork.

© 2011 Copyrights Grant Roberts, All Rights Reserved

Effective July 1, 2011, chocolate and strawberry flavored milk will no longer be available to 680,000 students enrolled in the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD).

Kudos to my friend Jamie Oliver who is making great strides in educating the students and their families regarding the dangers of over-consuming sugar which is a leading contributor to obesity, heart disease and type 2 diabetes (formerly known as adult-onset diabetes but changed due to an overwhelming number of children now afflicted with “diet onset” diabetes)
Removing flavored milk is another more positive step towards improving the long-term health and habits of our youth. In January 2004, the LAUSD banned soda pop from being sold in school stores, cafeterias and vending machines. The soda ban came about as a result of a concerted effort by parents, teachers and healthy food advocates. An influential factor was delivering board members of the LAUSD a full size mason jar of sugar each week that represented the needless amount of sugar a teenage student consumed each week if they drank only two sodas a day.

Sugar clearly is problematic, despite the sugar industries audaciously irrational claim that there is “no evidence whatsoever” that sugar is related to diseases like obesity or diabetes.
To make sugar sound healthful industry uses healthful sounding words like “energy” when the reality is sugar provides no nutritive value or satiety and plays havoc with insulin production that ultimately lead to more cravings and a vicious cycle of empty “energy rich” calories that convert to fat being consumed as we idly watch the nations obesity rates, and incidence of diabetes and metabolic syndrome steadily climb.

60% of the milk consumed in the five year $100 million dollar dairy contract with the LAUSD was either chocolate or strawberry flavored milk
So it should come as no surprise that the dairy industry is attempting to justify their sugar laden product, stating that the sugar is an acceptable trade off because it gets kids to drink milk?

Due to decades of brainwashing consumers coupled with the Dairy Producers lobbyist influence over the USDA’s heavily biased and liberal dairy consumption recommendations, some organizations and individuals are questioning the LAUSD’s decision to ban of flavored milk, citing references contained in studies funded by the Milk Processor Education Board that suggests children may stop drinking milk altogether because they only liked the flavored kind.

In fact the Milk Processors funded study actually proved it. In a study of 58 elementary and secondary schools on days when only white milk was offered, milk consumption dropped an average of 35% with some schools experiencing more than a 50% decline in milk consumption.

I for one hope that that kids actually receive a fact based education regarding foods and beverages and are not coaxed into drinking sugar just to sell more milk products, instead decide on their own and chose to drink the one beverage that is historically and unquestionably beneficial and essential to life – water!

In studies not funded by the Milk Industry we see evidence that milk is not the miracle product the industry professes it to be. These studies show a direct link to milk and diabetes (This is plain white milk without the added sugar of flavored milk). Milk contains lactose a large sugar molecule that is made up of two smaller sugar molecules, glucose and galactose.

First of all Vitamin D is added to milk, because milk is a relatively low natural source. So why not just add vitamin D and calcium in supplement form to your children’s diet instead of drinking milk.

Vitamin D is readily available in the American diet or can be obtained from being outdoors with casual exposure to sunlight. As for calcium, there are plenty of natural, rich and nutritious sources of calcium. The Harvard School of Public Health agrees, “ Calcium is important, but milk isn’t the only, or even best, source.” And list some of the best sources:

See article: Harvard School of Public Health

I remind you as far as nature goes… milk is not part of it. At least not cow’s milk, has a humans have survived since the beginning of our time as a species with the aid of mothers’ milk and shifted to water once solid food was introduced.

Got Milk? Got Diabetes? Got Cancer?

What could possibly go wrong from consuming milk from a cow? Dairy cattle are a creation of selective breeding, domesticated, artificially inseminated and pumped full of growth hormones, rBGH and estrogen, to amplify milk production (ever wonder why young human girls seem to be maturing faster), to ward of infection and reduce stress from the incessant suction of milking cattle are administered penicillin and other powerful antibiotics and pain killers along with what the USDA terms “acceptable levels” of blood and pus that all is a part of milk fed to humans.

Harvard University Gazette Hormones in Milk Can be Dangerous

What’s in Your Milk

I remind you as far as nature goes… milk is not part of it, at least not cow’s milk. 60% of the world’s population is lactose intolerant experiencing mild to severe symptoms following the consumption of dairy products. In fact scientists suggest that we shouldn’t presume that lactose intolerance is a disease because it is normal for humans not to digest milk after weening because humans stop producing lactase the enzyme that allows babies to digest milk. It is instead a genetic mutation for the minority of adults who are not afflicted negatively after consuming milk ( the problem is many with mild symptoms are unaware of the damage until it is too late). Humans have survived since the beginning of our time with the aid of mothers’ milk and shifted to water once solid food was introduced.

Cow’s milk has only been consumed by humans over the last 10,000 years, a mere blink of time in the scope of human history. How did we ever survive without cow’s milk?

The answer: just fine… in fact better than fine.

© 2011 Copyrights Grant Roberts, All Rights Reserved

Plenty of bad news exists about coffee for instance its ability to deplete nutrients, the active ingredient caffeine has also been shown to cause nervousness, insomnia, heartburn, ulcers, infertility, miscarriage, anxiety, arrhythmia… the list goes on. While it’s true coffee can upset a stomach and keep you awake, the majority of the other adverse effects are likely a result of excessive consumption. Excessive consumption of caffeine is prevalent in today’s society. It is estimated that 90% of all North Americans ingest caffeine daily in one form or another, many habitually.

Now for the good news, as a professional trainer my job is to exploit foods for their positive effects.

I do recommend the use of caffeine within specific parameters as it relates to timing and the amount consumed. Caffeine clearly is an ergogenic aid to athletic performance; so much so that it is a banned substance by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) in elevated amounts. The irony is that high consumption of caffeine in my experience is not beneficial at all. I view all foods as a drug and prescribe the use of all supplements and foods to my clients with appropriate dosages generally considering the individuals body weight and lean muscle mass. Coffee however is somewhat unique in that the response in consumption I recommend in both male and female regardless of weight and density shows little disparity.

Drinking 1 cup of hot black coffee 15 to 45 minutes prior to training has shown very positive results. Do not add sugar to your coffee if your goal is to burn body fat, the ingestion of carbohydrates block your body’s ability to access stored body fat as a fuel. Regarding quantity, I further suggest using the typical small, medium or large servings to determine your consumption comparative to your own relative size and drink the equivalent. For all you Olympic hopefuls this moderate dose of one cup of coffee contains between 100 to 150 milligrams per cup of caffeine on average falling many times short of the IOC’s restricted amount of 12ug/ml of urinary concentration or the equivalent of approximately 1200 milligrams within a three to four hour period. Caffeine in my opinion like many other substances supports the theory that if a little is good, more is not necessarily better. Over consumption of caffeine or ingestion other than immediately before training in my experience is ineffective and potentially detrimental.

Black coffee acts as a thermogenic, increasing the body’s temperature, this is beneficial as increased body temperature burns more calories. Caffeine increases your metabolic rate causing your systolic blood pressure and heart rate to increase. Additionally, caffeine has been shown to spare glycogen, by releasing fatty acids in to the blood stream. Muscle cells absorb the free fatty acids and use them for energy production, which not only delays fatigue, but positively affects fat mobilization and the use of stored body fat as a fuel during exercise.

Caffeine further stimulates the central nervous system, specifically the brain and skeletal muscles. This provides enhanced neuromuscular transmission and improved muscle contractibility, partly because of the natural release of epinephrine (adrenaline) and the additional release of calcium into the muscle cells. What is termed your perceived rate of exertion (PRE) is lowered meaning you will feel stronger through the workout which, can lead to the recruitment of more muscle fibres and an ultimately a more effective workout session.

While caffeine does not improve your actual volume of oxygen capacity (V02max), it does enable you do become much more efficient in the utilization of oxygen uptake on the cellular level. This is beneficial two-fold in the delaying the onset of fatigue but more importantly if your goal is creating a defined physique, fat requires oxygen when being used as a fuel source.

This limited consumption of coffee prior to training as outlined in my experience has provided excellent results. It is however important to remember that caffeine does elicit a diuretic effect, this coupled with the dehydration involved in the raising of body temperature especially when combined with the natural loss of fluid associated with rigorous exercise warrants that you should stay well hydrated during and following your workout session by drinking plenty of water.

For those of you who really can’t stand the taste of coffee then caffeine is also available in pill form and a dosage of 100 –200 mg per workout should suffice or alternatively you can try tea or green tea however the caffeine content is much lower so you may have to drink a little more. Black tea is approximately half as potent as coffee and green tea contains only about one quarter the amount of caffeine.

If you are wondering about the use of sports /energy drinks that contain caffeine, these products do not play the same role as the carbohydrate /electrolyte drinks which do not contain stimulants. The non-caffienated sports drinks are designed for hydration during an endurance type event and typically contain only carbohydrates and salts to act as a fuel and replace what is lost in sweat. Generally speaking the word “energy” is used to make sugar sound more healthful. Would you pay $3.00 for a can for something called sugar water?

Energy drinks containing caffeine generally have higher sugar content than sports drinks. Higher sugar concentrations from an endurance point of view actually slow absorption of water making these drinks less suitable for endurance purposes. In either case if your goal is to access stored body fat as a fuel during your workout then any drink containing sugar will be detrimental to your goal of utilizing and burning stored body fat.

© 2011 Copyrights Grant Roberts, All Rights Reserved

Nitric Oxide (NO) is not a laughing matter and should not to be confused with Nitrous Oxide (N2O).

Nitrous Oxide is commonly referred to as “laughing gas” when administered at dental offices as an inhaled anesthetic it is also known as NOS or Nitrous in the automobile racing world that boosts horsepower when the gas is injected into internal combustion motor as a powerful oxidizer.

To be perfectly clear the only laugh about buying a liquid, powder or pill form supplement that says Nitric Oxide on the label is to the benefit of the seller… because the joke is on you.

To quote the rolling stones – jumping jack flash… “It’s a gas-gas-gas”. Nitric or Nitrous oxide have one thing in common, in order to have any effect on a human is that they must be administered as “gas” through inhalation.

So what is Nitric oxide, and why are supplement manufacturers promoting it:

Probably because it sounds somewhat performance enhancing for anyone who watched the Fast and the Furious movie(s). So if you are dumb enough to be entertained by that display of acting – you will likely buy anything. Well one thing humans and automobiles have in common is that technically we both run via an internal combustion engine which produce an exhaust. Humans expel Nitric Oxide that when exposed to oxygen immediately converts into Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) – a toxic air pollutant aka smog. So it should come as no surprise that when we exercise we produce and expel more Nitric Oxide.
But lets talk about inhaling the “gas” Nitric Oxide. This is an interesting field of clinical study that is under evaluation and of particular interest for patients afflicted with pulmonary disease – acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). A life threatening lack of oxygen in the blood causing low blood pressure, shortness of breath and rapid breathing.

One common trait of pulmonary hypertension (high blood pressure in the vessels around the lungs.) The air sacs (alveoli) do not receive enough air or are collapsed – causing the blood vessels to constrict and become shorter and narrower causing a severe restriction of oxygen in the blood stream. Nitroglycerin, which is available in a spray and tablets, is commonly used to prevent angina resulting from high blood pressure due to narrowing of blood vessels. The Nitroglycerin reacts with a sulfhydryl (a sulphur atom bonded to hydrogen) such as B-1 or cysteine to produce Nitric oxide that causes vasodilation.

Enter, Nitric Oxide – When administered or the gas is formed Nitric Oxide promotes vasodilation, increasing blood flow and causes blood vessels to become wider and larger… but site specific. Once passing through the lungs Nitric oxide is quickly deactivated or expelled as a byproduct so it does not cause vasodilation beyond the lung area.

Back to Supplementation:

So basically supplement companies are lying to you about Nitric Oxide. They are implying that their Nitric Oxide laden or promoting product causes muscle growth and or increased stamina / endurance. Remember Nitric Oxide only works as a gas and only site specific to the blood vessels immediately surrounding heart and lungs. The only supplement additive that I am aware of to date that has performed any formal clinical studies that infer Nitric Oxide as a byproduct is Glycocarn- a glycine propionyl L-carnitine Hydrochloride that purports to increase resting levels of plasma nitrite – a surrogate marker of nitric oxide – using the tern surrogate marker means “no guarantee” or no proof that the product does what the manufacturer says it does. An inexplicable loophole the FDA allows as accepted evidence from clinical trials.

One thing that most of the Nitric Oxide labeled products will have in common is the ingredient caffeine. Any of the performance enhancing benefits you may experience are likely directly related to caffeine – a wonder drug when it comes to delaying fatigue, improving alertness, energy and increasing perceived strength through stimulating muscles contractile properties.

In the meantime when it comes to Nitric Oxide supplements – save your money or spend it on a pre-workout coffee instead. When buying supplements always look for the clinically proven ingredients and laugh all the way to the bank.

© 2011 Copyrights Grant Roberts, All Rights Reserved

Have you ever attempted to compare similar packaged foods in the grocery store only to find nutrition fact labeling discrepancies between products that require a secret decoder ring and a calculator?

There is just no uniformity, serving sizes differ, the grams to calories don’t add up, the nutrition facts says it contains 0 trans fats … but the ingredients section lists hydrogenated vegetable oil… and who exactly is the % Daily Value recommended for anyway?

Well here is your chance to submit a label exactly the way you want to see it.

Contest entry details can be found at Rethink the Food Label . The challenge sponsored by Good magazine and UC Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism’s News21 program is open to anyone who wishes to provide a design that makes Nutrition Facts more informative and user friendly.

The skies the limit, you can include any information that is relevant to you such as integrating your own nutrition rating system, quality of ingredients,  geographic origins, carbon footprint, questionably safe ingredient warnings etc.

Check out the FDA Nutrition Facts website to review the existing logic or lack there of and get started on your own design.

[tentblogger-vimeo 23182930]

The Contest Deadline for submission is July 1, 2011.

© 2011 Copyrights Grant Roberts, All Rights Reserved

2010 Report -Dietary Guidelines For Americans: http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/DGAs2010-PolicyDocument.htm

The new /old propaganda released from the USDA is the same old same old… which begs the question – why was it late?  Allegedly “based on the most recent scientific evidence” not much has changed… until today.

Today the USDA released the new symbol – A circle divided in quarters accompanied by a secondary circle that pays homage to the Dairy Board and their lobbyists. While the iconic triangle shape is no more, the advice and the influencing minds behind the advice remain as obtuse as ever.

It’s not the shape of the icon that concerns me as much as the shape of the nation. The erroneous information the USDA refuses to re-do opting instead to reuse and recycle the same ambiguous and inept information … doing little good for our collective internal environments.

The new MyPlate icon sans protein and milk looks an awful lot like the pre-existing MyPowerPlate.org icon…coincidence?

NEW USDA - MyPlate

PCRM - MyPowerPlate

Interestingly enough, just two weeks after the tardy release of the 2010 Guidelines, the creators and promoters behind the curiously similar MyPowerPlate – the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) filed a lawsuit (again) against the federal government accusing the USDA of using “deliberately obscure language regarding foods Americans should avoid”, the PCRM’s legal filing also cites the USDA with conflicts of interest and arbitrary and capricious behavior.

Interestingly enough the PCRM also requested in its legal filings that the USDA and HHS withdraw and replace the confusing mypyramid. http://www.pcrm.org/magazine/gm11sprsum/usda.html

Hmmm that solves the mystery of where the “new” USDA Myplate icon came from if you were wondering.

This is not the first time the PCRM has sued the USDA. The prior suit alleged the federal government met secretly and conspired with meat, dairy and egg industries when compiling the 2000 Guidelines.  The PCRM won the case when the court ruled the USDA and HHS had violated federal law failing to comprise the committee of different, fair and balanced points of view that prohibit special interests. Ooops… Evidence revealed that 6 of the 11 committee members had financial interests to the food industries.

The obvious similarities of MyPlate and MyPowerPlate appear to be just another case of the USDA pandering to any group with money or influence.

The PCRM which collectively favors a vegan lifestyle is right about one thing – The current guidelines continue to perpetuate confusion and appear to be designed to keep Americans eating unhealthy foods.

The USDA’s nutritional recommendations have remained virtually unchanged in over 100 years – something the USDA proudly exclaims? http://www.choosemyplate.gov/downloads/MyPlate/ABriefHistoryOfUSDAFoodGuides.pdf .Perhaps they are unaware of the current obesity crisis that has coincidentally risen at unprecedented rates since they started dispensing nutritional advice and policy.

The heavily industry and lobbyist influenced USDA Pyramid icons (1992 – 2011) we’ve all seen in schools, doctors offices and adorned on packaged foods promoting the consumption of more grains and less low fat, and somehow trying to convince us that milk is actually good for us?  Forms the basis of the lucrative government food program contracts.

Like a true pyramid scheme it fails on many levels punishing the “masses” and creating profit only for those who initiated the scheme itself – the food manufacturers.

The question we should really be asking is… Should the USDA be telling us how to eat, or is the USDA myplate just another propaganda piece for the agriculture industry?

The myplate advice is purposefully vague and subject to gross speculation and interpretation. Here is what the Dairy Industry is already saying about the new myplate icon:

“Dairy foods are rightfully being recognized — from the school house to the White House — as an important part of everyone’s diet,” says Jerry Kozak, NMPF’s president and CEO. “USDA’s new icon, with a simple visual metaphor of a serving of dairy products alongside a plate, says it’s vital to consume three servings of low-fat and fat-free dairy foods every day.”

Wow! All that from a single little blue circle?

The evidence seems clear to me, the pyramids of the past and plate of today continue to endorse and conduct the worst experiment in history of nutritional advice…  maintaining a virtual a blanket demonization of all fats? Fat is nowhere to be found on the plate.

The overly simplified erroneous message that we are fat because we are eating too much fat remains the erroneous mainstream mantra despite all of evidence to the contrary, and the essential healthful benefits of fats like omega 3.

Unwittingly, over the past 30 years Americans have collectively followed the low fat – high carbohydrate advice endorsed by the USDA  only to find obesity, diabetes and heart disease become epidemic.

Slideshow and State-by-State statistics: http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.html

Perhaps instead of changing icons and renaming diseases like Adult Onset Diabetes to Type 2 Diabetes -since children are now equally plagued… we might actually want to make some real changes to the nutritional advice. http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/projects/cda2.htm

© 2011 Copyrights Grant Roberts, All Rights Reserved