blairmacg | Entries tagged with organics

Here's a fun article:

How the Mid-Victorians Worked, Ate and Died

Analysis of the mid-Victorian period in the U.K. reveals that life expectancy at age 5 was as good or better than exists today, and the incidence of degenerative disease was 10% of ours.

That's a pretty bold statement, yes?

It's a very interesting analysis that draws from a wide variety of data sources.

The basics: A diet high in non-processed foods, supported by new agricultural innovations that hadn't yet slipped into industrialization, combined with a high level of physical activity/challenge resulted in a life expectancy equal to today's--and arguably of better physical quality in later years. Infection caused most deaths, particularly in the young years, before immunity would have a chance to strengthen from exposure to daily pathogens. Infection during childbirth also resulted in a woman's life expectancy being slightly lower than a man's during the era. (Handwashing was an incredible innovation.)

A couple points related to the article:

Canadian research found the seven minutes of vigorous exercise daily was the minimum needed for a child to remain healthy. They also found most children didn't get that seven minutes a day. Not even a freaking seven minutes? Really??

The American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology published new research again correlating a high incidence of peanut allergy among the affluent. Many allergists consider it another arrow pointing to over-sanitation as the trigger for the national spike in autoimmune disorders.

A recent article in New Yorker gives a decent overview of current and ongoing research regarding how important bacteria is to our health and longevity, and how our quest to kill bacteria may be a primary cause of our current rise in degenerative disease and autoimmune disorders. For example: the presence of H. pylori bacteria, vigorously attacked by antibiotics in an effort to avoid ulcers, is actually protection against allergies and asthma. Folks without the bacteria are prone to allergy-induced asthma.

Lastly, American Journal of Medicine has published research indicating that women who eat a high amount of antioxidant-rich foods have a far greater chance of avoiding a heart attack than women who eat small amounts. The correlation between antioxidant intake and health was independent of weight/BMI and exercise frequency. The article is titled, "Rethinking the Way We Eat."

Because I'm in a touchy mood tonight, I'll go ahead and point out how often I've been called an ignorant, uneducated, and a quack for saying nutrition has a profound impact on disease, and degenerative diseases don't need to be accepted as "normal."

The latest silliness in research and reporting: Organic foods aren't any better for you than industrially-grown foods.

That's the big headline most folks will use to guide their decisions.

In truth, this study is an analysis of numerous other studies--a study of studies--and admits some of its own shortcomings while ignoring others. Some of those shortcomings will be, of course, buried in the reporting. And I doubt any reporter reading the press release will recognize the others.

Shortcoming the first is its treatment of nutrient-content studies. That's always been a piece of silliness regarding organic research, and leads me to wonder why so many researchers of organics seem disconnected from basic agricultural knowledge. To research nutrient content, you must take into account five things: soil quality, water availability, ripeness at time of harvest, length of time between harvest and testing, and variety grown. Soil quality and water availability determine, among other things, the food's mineral content. Ripeness and lag time determine vitamin and antioxidant levels. And this is just one example of how different varieties have different nutritional values.

Shortcoming the second is the length of time the study's studies spans. Not a single one exceeds two years. That such limited information was deemed adequate for even qualified conclusions highlights the fundamental failing of most health research: short term studies are used to make a lifetime's worth of choices.

Let's say a set of 20-somethings are given ten million dollars each. Researchers follow their spending habits for six months. At the study's end, researchers conclude there is no evidence unbridled spending leads to financial problems. After all, each study participant still has money in the bank. But if those study participants take that conclusion to heart, a two-decade study would out the short-term study's fallacy.

Healthy eating doesn't work like surgery or aspirin. It's a long term investment. Our favored research methods aren't structured for longterm studies. Really, how do you judge the impact of eating organics over a lifespan when you can't control for environmental factors? And if we do, should we wait for the results--results that will come out in time for kids born in 2080 to utilize?

Shortcoming the third is the type of medical issues the study's studies looked at. One example given is a study finding no link between a pregnant woman's intake of organics and the incidence of "allergic conditions" among their children. Umm, yeah, I'd expect that study to show little, if any link. A few more dead-end studies like that, and it would certainly look like organics have no health benefits whatsoever.

What we do know is this:
Organic proteins sources (meat, eggs, dairy) have higher levels of Omega-3, essential fatty acids we need for basic cellular health. Populations found to be deficient in Omega-3 include children with ADHD, adults suffering from chronic depression, and elderly adults with Alzheimer's. Increasing Omega-3 intake has been linked to reversal of many chronic conditions as well.

Organic produce has a lower chemical load, both on the food and in the growing process, leading to lower chemical exposure for the entire population. That's a positive thing since longterm research does indeed connect certain pesticides to ADHD, birth defects, and developmental delays. We also know industrial farmers, and backyard gardeners who use chemicals, have a higher risk of Parkinson's. I don't find this surprising, since many farming chemicals were originally derived from weaponized nerve gas.

So the study's actual conclusions are more along the lines of, "faulty research demonstrates the need for longterm studies with better parameters."

Sure, we could argue a long time about whether this study or that supports the benefits of organics, and whether or not the research showing longterm damage from chemical exposure is really-o truly-o as frightening as it seems. But I haven't seen any controversy over exposure to agricultural chemicals improving my health; it's pretty well established those chemicals aren't curative. Avoiding them is, then, the least controversial choice.

Everyone knows homegrown tomatoes taste better than store-bought ones. That's a situation caused accidentally-on-purpose by commercial seed suppliers. Breeding for the traits that make tomatoes easy to mass produce and transport--uniform ripening, consistent coloring, rigid flesh--resulted in breeding out traits that make tomatoes desirable--rich taste, high nutritional value, and non-grainy texture.

The same thing has happened with apples, avocados, cauliflower, peaches, melons, and you-name-it. The majority of the world's food supply has been bred for easy harvest, packaging, shipping, storage, and display. Taste, texture, and nutritional value fall below all those other priorities. It's no wonder so many folks consider eating fruits and vegetables an unpleasant chore. And it's no wonder the majority of folks wander about with symptoms of subclinical deficiencies that medications don't seem to address.

Forex, vitamin C levels are known to be lower in foods that are processed, and in fruits that are picked before ripeness (as most fruits are). Subclinical vitamin C deficiency results in higher levels of cortisol during times of stress, poor cell membrane structure, poor adrenaline production. Those things lead to fat gain, fatigue, lowered immunity, damaged skin, weak capillaries, poor wound healing, and so forth.

And then there is the research showing organic tomatoes have higher levels of antioxidants than industrially grown tomatoes. Why? Because organic growing doesn't use nitrogenous fertilizers, and thus the plants are under increased stress. The stress of pest and pathogens adds to antioxidant production. The plant grows stronger under natural amounts of stress, and that strength is channeled into regenerating itself via its fruits.

I know organic costs more. Organic farming is far more labor intensive, and still lacks widespread infrastructure support. And the costs of organic fruits and vegetables--and, to a lesser extent, industrially grown ones as well--more accurately reflect the true cost of food because they receive little if any government subsidies. Grains aren't cheap because they're inherently cheap; those crops are heavily subsidized by the USDA. (Oddly enough, it's the USDA that says we should eat lots and lots of grains.)

When finances are an issue, choose those organics that will bring you the most taste enjoyment. Smaller portions of richer tastes are more satisfying in terms of taste and nutrition. It also helps to eat seasonally, because prices are lower when there is a surplus. Canning is great, but if you don't have the time or equipment, blanching and freezing are a great alternative.

This post brought to you by a gardener who keeps staring at her green tomatoes and willing them to ripen. Links are via ScienceDaily since all source materials are behind subscription walls.

Since I dare not allow myself to peek at my writing projects lest I immediately lose interest in all the things I must do this week, y'all have to put up with me writing more posts. It's a coping mechanism. ;-)

Following a tweet from @KristineRusch, I watched this video of Neil Gaiman giving a commencement speech for the University of the Arts. Loved it. I was especially amused by the body language of some faculty when Neil discussed lying to get his first job. I was extremely happy to hear his words about the future of art's distribution.

From a posting by jaylake, here's an article highlighting the correlation between organic food and asshole behavior. Actually, what the study concludes is that when one participates in behavior seen as morally superior, one takes that virtuousness as an excuse to act like a jerk in another setting. I see this often in the natural health field. I also see it in the field of fitness, nursing, writing, martial arts, mainstream medicine, education, political activism, and any other endeavor that aligns itself with moral determinations.

Choosing to eat organically doesn't mean a person has joined the cult of Organic-ism and is now above being touched by the Dorito-stained fingers of others. If one really wants to do something that might actually make a difference, quit giving cheap canned goods, white rice, and processed foods to the local food pantry. Supply them with those organic foods of yours instead. Folks frequenting food pantries have a far higher need for those vitamins, minerals, and chemical-free foods.

Lastly, in connection with mention of organic foods, here's a summary of research finding higher intake of saturated fats versus monounsaturated fats correlates with a decline in memory and cognition. As always, researchers point to red meat as a main culprit. In truth, that should commercially-raised red meat. Grass-fed beef has only about 10% of its fat as saturated fat; it is instead high in omega-3 fatty acids. But as long as such researchers and health writers consider food to be fuel rather than construction materials, the composition of most foods won't be considered, alas.

(Aside: The more saturated fat--aka marbling--in a cut of meat, the higher the USDA will rate its quality.)

S	M	T	W	T	F	S
	1	2	3	4	5	6
7	8	9	10	11	12	13
14	15	16	17	18	19	20
21	22	23	24	25	26	27
28	29	30	31

These Certain Musings

Actively Wondering Every Day

Entries tagged with organics

Navigation

Perspective on Victorian Nutrition and Disease

More Organic Debate Silliness

The Science of Why Homegrown Tomatoes Are Tastier

A trio of Links

Profile

May 2017

Syndicate

Most Popular Tags

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags