There are many motivating reasons to slim down. Maybe you have a family history of weight-related health conditions, like diabetes or high blood pressure. Maybe you're tired of feeling short of breath. Maybe you want to ease back or joint pain, or nighttime problems like snoring or sleep apnea. Maybe you want to guarantee you're around to walk a daughter down the aisle or hold a grandchild. Or maybe you just want to be able to fit into your favorite pair of jeans again.
For Stacy Phillips, that motivation came one day when, walking across a parking lot at 268 pounds, she tripped and rolled her ankle.
Watch the video above to see why her life changed forever in that moment -- and why she has lost over 125 pounds since. "Anybody can do this," she says, "but you need to do it."
Sunday, March 25, 2012
Saturday, March 17, 2012
'Pink Slime' For Lunch: Schools Can Opt Out Of Ammonia-Treated Ground Beef Filler
"Pink slime" might soon have a leaner presence in public schools than many might have initially anticipated.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture announced today that it will offer schools an option between two types of ground meat to purchase for student meals. The move is in response to requests from districts amid a weeks-long firestorm of public outcry against the ammonia-treated cow product.
The controversy was spurred by a report earlier this month by The Daily revealing that the USDA planned to purchase 7 million pounds of ground beef for schools that is mixed with "lean finely textured beef," or what has been nicknamed "pink slime." Two microbiologists, Carl Custer and Gerald Zernstein, said they warned the USDA against the "high risk" product years ago, but federal officials did not heed their advice.
The lean finely textured beef is a low-cost product rendered from the mostly fatty outside trim of cow carcasses or leftovers from other cuts. To salvage every bit of meat, the trimmings, combined with connective tissues and cartilage, are heated at a low temperature to remove about 95 percent of the fat. The resulting product is then compressed into blocks to be mixed into ground beef and treated with ammonium hydroxide (essentially ammonia and water) to kill pathogens like E. coli and salmonella that could have emerged during the rendering process.
Discovery of the USDA's purchase prompted Houston mother of two Bettina Siegel to start an online petition on Change.org asking Secretary of Agriculure Tom Vilsack to "please put an immediate end to the use of 'pink slime' in our children's school food." The petition had more than 225,000 signatures as of Thursday morning.
The USDA contracted to buy more than 111.5 million pounds of ground beef for the National School Lunch Program, with 7 million pounds of it coming from Beef Products: This South Dakota-based company produces lean finely textured beef. No more than 15 percent of Beef Products' ground beef mix for schools may be composed of lean finely textured beef, according to the USDA.
The announcement grants schools the option to purchase either 95 percent lean beef patties made with Beef Products' mixed product or fattier bulk ground beef without the controversial mix. The change will not affect schools until the fall as a result of existing contracts.
But districts may have always had that choice. Administered by the USDA, the National School Lunch Program's purchases account for 20 percent of the food used in U.S. schools. The rest is bought by schools or districts directly through USDA-approved private vendors. The distribution of USDA and private vendor products varies by school.
But districts may have always had that choice. Administered by the USDA, the National School Lunch Program's purchases account for 20 percent of the food used in U.S. schools. The rest is bought by schools or districts directly through USDA-approved private vendors. The distribution of USDA and private vendor products varies by school.
The Chicago Public Schools elect not to purchase ground beef from the USDA and instead buy ground beef from two USDA-approved private vendors, schools spokesman Frank Shufton told The Huffington Post. "It's not even a part of the picture," Shufton said.
The Chicago district is one among several that have issued statements assuring concerned parents that it does not use the ammonia-treated lean beef mix. When schools use that product, it shaves about $0.03 off the cost of ground beef, according to a 2009 New York Times report. But other school districts say they still can't afford not to purchase from the USDA.
Schools that participate in the National School Lunch Program receive cash subsidies for meals in compliance with USDA's nutritional standards.
'IS IT STILL SAFE?'
"I have people asking me, 'So is it still a safe product?'" Zernstein, the retired USDA microbiologist, told HuffPost. "And I say, 'Well, hopefully they add enough ammonia. Hopefully. Hopefully."
Questions about ground beef's safety have become more frequent after the 2009 New York Times report revealing that despite the added ammonia, tests of lean beef mix in schools across the country revealed dozens of instances of E. coli and salmonella pathogens. From 2005 to 2009, E. coli was found three times and salmonella 48 times; this includes two contaminated batches of 27,000 pounds of meat, according to the Times.
When treated properly, the "filler" is absolutely safe for consumption, Zernstein says; it could even be safer than the raw beef muscle it is added to. Problems arise only when the trimmings aren't sufficiently to eliminate the heightened rancidity levels and bacteria that emerge during processing -- and when testing is lax or regulations aren't strictly enforced.
Still, the USDA contends that the products it purchases adhere to safety guidelines. Ammonium hydroxide is also "generally recognized as safe" by the USDA and the Food Safety and Inspection Service.
"All USDA ground beef purchases must meet the highest standards for food safety," USDA spokesperson Aaron Lavalles said. "USDA has strengthened ground beef food safety standards in recent years and only allows products into commerce that we have confidence are safe."
'BEEF' ISN'T EXACTLY BEEF
Schools aren't the only ones affected. According to an ABC News investigation, lean finely textured beef is mixed into 70 percent of ground beef sold in supermarkets across the country -- but meat-packers and grocery stores aren't required by law to include "lean finely textured beef" on package labels because the USDA categorizes it as meat.
Beef Products and other industry players have sought to debunk "myths of 'pink slime,'" asserting that beef trimmings are 100 percent USDA-inspected beef and edible.
"Our lean beef is 100 percent beef," Beef Products spokesman Rich Jochum told HuffPost. "No other part of the animal or any other product is in our lean beef."
Even so, consumers and parents want to know just what they're consuming, says Siegel, the Lunch Tray blogger who started the Change.org petition.
People don't feel it's quite right to refer to both lean finely textured beef and ground beef as "beef," Siegel said. "It's about the overall issue of disclosure."
The controversial mix does have some useful qualities. Adding the product to otherwise very lean beef patties makes the texture of the cooked meat softer and more appealing. Its production could be termed a sustainable practice in that it salvages protein that may otherwise be wasted and it makes ground beef cheaper: Fresh 50 percent lean trimmings -- the raw product that Beef Products renders -- sold at an average of $.95 a pound last week, compared with 80 percent lean ground beef chuck for $1.84 a pound and 93 percent lean ground beef for $2.50 a pound.
Beef Products maintains its product is a nutritiously equivalent or superior substitute for ground beef muscle, and a side-by-side comparison of nutrition labels for the two would yield the same conclusion.
But what the labels don't tell consumers, experts say, is the ultimate nutritional value behind the numbers on those labels. A 1996 Journal of Food Science report revealed that ground beef muscle is 69.2 percent soluble protein while lean finely textured beef is only 22.8 percent soluble protein -- the protein most easily digestible by children. (See a visual comparison in the graphic below.)
Additionally, ground beef muscle is about 18.3 percent collagen -- the predominant ingredient of connective tissue -- while lean finely textured beef is about 36.8 percent collagen. Collagen is what's considered an incomplete protein; its amino acid composition is different from that of a complete protein like muscle meat, eggs and fish. Complete proteins are used by the body for growth and repair, but people burn up the calories in incomplete proteins in about the way that they process sugar unless they are consumed with specific foods to result in a complete protein during digestion.
Treating the lean beef product with ammonia might also change the amino acids in proteins, further reducing the nutritional value, according to a 1980 University of California study.
But when it comes to consumer nutrition labels, complete and incomplete proteins are the same thing, making the two indistinguishable to those seeking information on what they're actually buying.
"They're calling this a meat; it's not. It's connective tissue and it is a much poorer quality protein even if they treat it, however they may treat it, to make it more digestible or more integrated," Sharon Akabas, associate director of Columbia University's Institute of Human Nutrition, told HuffPost.
Although the USDA's announcement might mark a step forward for "pink slime" critics, Siegel isn't ready to claim her victory, yet. She wrote on her blog Thursday morning that she's "still digging" for answers to questions like "Is there an even larger cost differential for schools who must shoulder labor charge to convert bulk beef to patties if they opt not to purchase the LFBT patties?" or "Does this create an even higher bar for districts wanting to avoid pink slime?"
"It's economic disclosure; it's an economic fraud issue," Zernstein said. "It's really not so much food safety. Put as much ammonia in it as you want. I don't care. Kill it. It still ends up being low quality, but you at least need to label it so much percent lean finely textured beef ... so I can say, 'I'm broke; it's low quality, but I'll buy it because I'm hungry.' The USDA knows better. Their labeling people blew it."
Although the USDA's announcement might mark a step forward for "pink slime" critics, Siegel isn't ready to claim her victory, yet. She wrote on her blog Thursday morning that she's "still digging" for answers to questions like "Is there an even larger cost differential for schools who must shoulder labor charge to convert bulk beef to patties if they opt not to purchase the LFBT patties?" or "Does this create an even higher bar for districts wanting to avoid pink slime?"
"It's economic disclosure; it's an economic fraud issue," Zernstein said. "It's really not so much food safety. Put as much ammonia in it as you want. I don't care. Kill it. It still ends up being low quality, but you at least need to label it so much percent lean finely textured beef ... so I can say, 'I'm broke; it's low quality, but I'll buy it because I'm hungry.' The USDA knows better. Their labeling people blew it."
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Red Meat Can Be Unhealthy, Study Suggests.
I haven't eaten meat or chicken in over a month. Yes I miss it and it's hard. But the study below reinforces why I stopped.
Eating a lot of red meat may shorten your life, while consuming more fish and poultry may extend it, a new study suggests.
Red meat is associated with a higher risk of dying from heart disease, cancer and any other cause, the researchers reported.
For many people, red meat is a primary source of protein and fat. But meat has been associated with increased risk for diabetes, cardiovascular disease and some cancers in other studies, the researchers noted.
"We should move to a more plant-based diet," said lead researcher Dr. Frank Hu, a professor of nutrition and epidemiology at the Harvard School of Public Health. "This can substantially reduce the risk of chronic disease and the risk of premature death."
For the study, Hu's team collected data on more than 37,600 men who took part in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study and more than 83,600 women in the Nurses' Health Study.
Over 28 years, almost 24,000 of the study participants died. Nearly 6,000 of the deaths were from cardiovascular disease and more than 9,000 were from cancer, the researchers found.
Hu's group calculated that for every daily serving of red meat, the risk of dying increased 12 percent. Broken down further, the researchers found the risk was 13 percent for a serving of unprocessed red meat and 20 percent for processed red meat.
A single serving is about the size of a deck of cards, Hu noted.
By replacing a daily serving of red meat with a serving of fish, poultry, nuts, legumes, low-fat dairy products or whole grains, however, the risk of dying was lowered, the researchers said.
The risk of death decreased by 7 percent for fish, 14 percent for poultry, 19 percent for nuts, 10 percent for legumes, 10 percent for low-fat dairy products and 14 percent for whole grains, the researchers found.
If people ate less than half a serving of red meat a day, deaths during the 28 years of follow-up could have been reduced by 9.3 percent for men and 7.6 percent for women, the researchers noted.
The report was published online March 12 in the Archives of Internal Medicine.
A representative from the beef industry took issue with the findings.
"The scientific evidence to support the role of lean beef in a healthy, balanced diet is strong and there is nothing in this study that changes that fact," said Shalene McNeill, a registered dietitian and executive director of nutrition research at the National Cattlemen's Beef Association.
"Research clearly shows that choosing lean beef as part of a healthful diet is associated with improved overall nutrient intake, overall diet quality and positive health outcomes," she added. "Overall, lifestyle patterns including a healthy diet and physical activity, not consumption of any individual food, have been shown to affect mortality."
"This was an observational study," McNeill also noted. "Observational studies cannot be used to determine cause and effect."
Another dietary expert said cutting back on red meat might not be a bad idea.
Samantha Heller, a dietitian, nutritionist, exercise physiologist and clinical nutrition coordinator at the Center for Cancer Care at Griffin Hospital in Derby, Conn., took issue with the notion that meat is somehow intrinsic to the human diet.
"'But we are born carnivores,' is the cry I hear when I suggest that my patients and students reduce their intake of red and processed meat," Heller said. What most people do not realize, Heller said, is that humans are not designed to handle the huge amount of saturated fat, iron and other compounds in red and processed meats that they consume.
"A diet high in red and processed meats deluges the body with inflammatory compounds like saturated fat and nitrites," she said. Over time, the body's best efforts to cope with the influx of unhealthy compounds are overwhelmed.
"We get heart disease, cancer, diabetes and other chronic diseases," Heller said. "There are numerous studies showing a link between eating red and processed meat and chronic diseases and death."
Research suggests that going meatless even a few days a week can significantly reduce the risk of these devastating diseases, she said.
"Cut back to eating red or processed meat once or twice a week to start," Heller said. "On other days, substitute chicken, fish, beans, soy, nuts, whole grains like quinoa, and low or nonfat organic dairy for your protein sources."
Eating a lot of red meat may shorten your life, while consuming more fish and poultry may extend it, a new study suggests.
Red meat is associated with a higher risk of dying from heart disease, cancer and any other cause, the researchers reported.
For many people, red meat is a primary source of protein and fat. But meat has been associated with increased risk for diabetes, cardiovascular disease and some cancers in other studies, the researchers noted.
"We should move to a more plant-based diet," said lead researcher Dr. Frank Hu, a professor of nutrition and epidemiology at the Harvard School of Public Health. "This can substantially reduce the risk of chronic disease and the risk of premature death."
For the study, Hu's team collected data on more than 37,600 men who took part in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study and more than 83,600 women in the Nurses' Health Study.
Over 28 years, almost 24,000 of the study participants died. Nearly 6,000 of the deaths were from cardiovascular disease and more than 9,000 were from cancer, the researchers found.
Hu's group calculated that for every daily serving of red meat, the risk of dying increased 12 percent. Broken down further, the researchers found the risk was 13 percent for a serving of unprocessed red meat and 20 percent for processed red meat.
A single serving is about the size of a deck of cards, Hu noted.
By replacing a daily serving of red meat with a serving of fish, poultry, nuts, legumes, low-fat dairy products or whole grains, however, the risk of dying was lowered, the researchers said.
The risk of death decreased by 7 percent for fish, 14 percent for poultry, 19 percent for nuts, 10 percent for legumes, 10 percent for low-fat dairy products and 14 percent for whole grains, the researchers found.
If people ate less than half a serving of red meat a day, deaths during the 28 years of follow-up could have been reduced by 9.3 percent for men and 7.6 percent for women, the researchers noted.
The report was published online March 12 in the Archives of Internal Medicine.
A representative from the beef industry took issue with the findings.
"The scientific evidence to support the role of lean beef in a healthy, balanced diet is strong and there is nothing in this study that changes that fact," said Shalene McNeill, a registered dietitian and executive director of nutrition research at the National Cattlemen's Beef Association.
"Research clearly shows that choosing lean beef as part of a healthful diet is associated with improved overall nutrient intake, overall diet quality and positive health outcomes," she added. "Overall, lifestyle patterns including a healthy diet and physical activity, not consumption of any individual food, have been shown to affect mortality."
"This was an observational study," McNeill also noted. "Observational studies cannot be used to determine cause and effect."
Another dietary expert said cutting back on red meat might not be a bad idea.
Samantha Heller, a dietitian, nutritionist, exercise physiologist and clinical nutrition coordinator at the Center for Cancer Care at Griffin Hospital in Derby, Conn., took issue with the notion that meat is somehow intrinsic to the human diet.
"'But we are born carnivores,' is the cry I hear when I suggest that my patients and students reduce their intake of red and processed meat," Heller said. What most people do not realize, Heller said, is that humans are not designed to handle the huge amount of saturated fat, iron and other compounds in red and processed meats that they consume.
"A diet high in red and processed meats deluges the body with inflammatory compounds like saturated fat and nitrites," she said. Over time, the body's best efforts to cope with the influx of unhealthy compounds are overwhelmed.
"We get heart disease, cancer, diabetes and other chronic diseases," Heller said. "There are numerous studies showing a link between eating red and processed meat and chronic diseases and death."
Research suggests that going meatless even a few days a week can significantly reduce the risk of these devastating diseases, she said.
"Cut back to eating red or processed meat once or twice a week to start," Heller said. "On other days, substitute chicken, fish, beans, soy, nuts, whole grains like quinoa, and low or nonfat organic dairy for your protein sources."
Sunday, March 11, 2012
THE WORST DRINKS IN AMERICA
THE WORST DRINKS IN AMERICA
15. Worst Light Beer: Sam Adams Light
124 calories, 9.7 g carbs
Light beers generally range from 95 to 110 calories, but the Sam Adams Light contains 124. Kind of defeats the purpose of a light beer, especially when you can choose a regular Guinness Draught for just one more calorie. Choose a true light beer: Beck's contains 60 fewer calories than the Sam Adams (that's almost as little as one-half the caloric impact!).
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Beck's Light
64 calories, 3.9 g carbs, 3.8% alcohol by volume
14. Worst Lemonade: Minute Maid Lemonade (20-ounce bottle)
250 calories, 67 g sugars
This classic lemonade favorite has the sugar equivalent of 5 Good Humor Vanilla Ice Cream Sandwiches, and you’d need to do a full hour of vigorous housecleaning to burn off all the calories. Switch to the much-less-caloric (and equally refreshing) Crystal Light option.
Click here for today's nutrition, health, and fitness news!
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Crystal Light Pink Lemonade On-the-Go Packet (16 ounces prepared)
10 calories, 0 g sugars
13. Worst Energy Drink: Rockstar Original (16-ounce can)
280 calories, 0 g fat, 62 g sugars
Americans spent $4.2 billion on high-octane elixirs in 2008. Even with dozens of brands found in the cooler, Rockstar stands out as the most sugar-loaded of the various and sundry energy drinks. Compared with its closest competitor, it has 20 extra calories, which is just enough to make it the worst possible choice for instant energy. And with research on the long-term effects of taurine and guarana still cloudy, you're better off getting your buzz from coffee, a proven source of antioxidants and other beneficial nutrients. But if you must grab a can, you can't get better than the low-carb concoction below.
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Monster Lo-Carb Energy (16-ounce can)
20 calories, 0 g fat, 6 g sugars
12. Worst Bottled Coffee: Starbucks Vanilla Frappuccino (9.5-ounce bottle)
200 calories, 3 g fat (N/A g saturated), 31 g sugars
Most people don't associate coffee with milk shake-like loads of sugar, but that's exactly what's happening inside this bottle. Add one of these to your diet every morning and you'll add about 21 pounds of flab to your body in a year.
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Java Monster Vanilla Light Coffee + Energy (15-ounce can)
100 calories, 3 g fat (2 g saturated), 10 g sugars
11. Worst Beer: Sierra Nevada Bigfoot Ale (12-ounce bottle)
304 calories, 32 g carbohydrates, 9.6% alcohol
You know a beer is in trouble when it needs to invoke the image of an oversize mythical beast just to describe itself. Perhaps a better name would have been Jabba the Hut Ale. Beer gets most of its calories from the booze itself, and with nearly 10 percent alcohol in each bottle, this brew is likely to create a beer belly nearly as quickly as it creates a buzz.
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Guinness Draught (12-ounce bottle)
126 calories, 10 g carbohydrates, 4% alcohol
10. Worst Bottled Beverage: Sobe Liz Blizz (20-ounce bottle)
310 calories, 1 g fat (0.5 g saturated), 77 g sugars
Don't be fooled by the natural motifs that adorn Sobe's bottles. Spin this one around and you'll see that it's made from water, sugar, skim milk, and cream. We've said it before and we'll say it again: Don't buy products with cartoon animals on the front. This repugnant reptile will shatter your weight loss dreams. In fact, this one bottle contains more sugar than 11 Rainbow Popsicles.
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Sobe Cherimoya Punch Lean Machine Lifewater (20-ounce bottle)
0 calories, 0 g fat, 0 g sugars
9. Worst Soda: Sunkist (20-ounce bottle)
320 calories, 84 g sugars
All full-sugar sodas are evil, but they weren't all created equal. A 12-ounce can of Coke-the tooth-rotting standard-contains 140 calories and 39 grams of sugar. That same size can from Sunkist packs 190 calories and a staggering 52 grams of sugar. Tack on the extra 8 ounces in this orange monster and you begin to understand why soft drinks are often cited as one of the top contributors to obesity and diabetes in this country.
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Honest Ade Orange Mango (16.9-ounce bottle)
100 calories, 24 g sugars
8. Worst Juice Imposter: Arizona Kiwi Strawberry (23.5-ounce can)
360 calories, 0 g fat, 84 g sugars
If kiwi and strawberry are both fruits (and they are, we fact-checked it), then why does this can contain only 5 percent juice? Because it's made from watered-down high-fructose corn syrup-enough of it, in fact, to give this drink the sugar equivalent of 7 bowls of Froot Loops cereal. The most disturbing part of this beverage is that it normally costs just $.99, making it the cheapest source of empty calories we've ever uncovered.
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Diet Snapple Noni Berry Juice (17.5-ounce bottle)
33 calories, 0 g fat, 2 g sugars
7. Worst Slush: Sonic Route Large Lemon-Berry Cream Slush (20 ounces)
600 calories, 24 g fat (17 g saturated), 88 g sugars
To be fair, this belly blaster is more of a shake-slush hybrid: half sugar-saturated ice and half high-fat ice cream. Think it sounds tasty alongside a Sonic Cheeseburger and fries? Maybe so, but that's a meal that will cost you more than 1,500 calories.
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Small Lemonberry Real Fruit Slush (14 ounces)
190 calories, 0 g fat, 50 g sugars
6. Worst Holiday Coffee Drink: Starbucks Venti 2% Peppermint White Chocolate Mocha (20 ounces)
640 calories, 21 g fat (13 g saturated), 94 g sugars
Between the candies and the casseroles, we already have plenty of temptations to deal with during the holidays. We certainly don't need Starbucks' surreptitious sugar overload thrown into the mix. The name implies indulgence, sure, but the fact that this cup holds more sugar than 9 Krispy Kreme doughnuts is pretty appalling. Settle for a candy cane in your coffee or find a different drink.
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Grande Skinny Cinnamon Dolce Latte (16 ounces)
120 calories, 0 g fat, 16 g sugars
5. Worst Hot Chocolate: Starbucks Venti 2% White Hot Chocolate (20 ounces)
600 calories, 23 g fat (14 g saturated), 78 g sugars, 360 mg sodium
Thanks to Starbucks' monstrous creation, this classic winter comfort beverage is now sullied with more than a full day's worth of saturated fat and as much sugar as nearly 4 Hershey's chocolate bars.
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Grande Nonfat Vanilla Crème (16 ounces)
270 calories, 7 g fat (4.5 g saturated), 38 g sugars
4. Worst Cocktail: Red Lobster Traditional Lobsterita
890 calories, 0 g fat, 183 g carbohydrates
Lobsterita means a lobster tank-size glass filled with booze and high-fructose corn syrup. You'd have to drink 4 regular on-the-rocks margaritas to outdo the massive calorie load. Pair that with a dinner and you might be pushing a full day's calories in one meal. If you want to get drunk, take a shot. If you want to enjoy a cocktail, make sure it doesn't start with a bottle of mix-your body and your taste buds will thank you.
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Malibu Hurricane
200 calories, 0 g fat, 35 g carbohydrates
3. Worst Float: Baskin-Robbins Large Ice Cream Soda with Vanilla Ice Cream Float (32 ounces)
960 calories, 40 g fat (25 g saturated, 1.5 g trans), 136 g sugars
If you're going to have a float, it's best to limit yourself to one small scoop of ice cream and a reasonable pour of soda, yet Baskin-Robbins' smallest portion is 32 ounces! Unfortunately, if the ice cream mogul doesn't begin offering smaller sizes, your options are limited. Either split a small float or cut the soda out of the equation.
EAT THIS INSTEAD!
Vanilla Ice Cream Scoop (4 ounces)
260 calories, 16 g fat (10 g saturated, 0.5 g trans), 26 g sugars
2. Worst Smoothie: Smoothie King's The Hulk, Strawberry (40 ounces)
2,070 calories, 64 g fat (26 g saturated), 250 g sugars
To be fair, this smoothie is designed to help people gain weight—and for that reason alone, it isn’t our Worst Drink in America. The problem is that we live in a nation in which two-thirds of us are overweight, and the number of professional body builders doesn't constitute a significant demographic. Plus, if you really want to put on some pounds, just eat 9 Odwalla Super Protein bars. That's how many it would take to match this caloric load.
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
The Shredder, Strawberry (20 ounces)
356 calories, 1 g fat, 41 g sugars
1. Worst Drink in America: Cold Stone Creamery PB&C Shake Gotta Have It Size
1,750 calories, 118 g fat (64 g saturated, 2 g trans), 140 g sugars
The PB&C is intended to denote peanut butter and chocolate, but the more accurate translation might be potbellies and cardiovascular disease. After all, this one drink does pack more calories than a dozen ice cream sandwiches and more saturated fat than nearly 20 large orders of McDonald's French fries. And what's even more depressing is that no shake on Cold Stone's menu, not even the small sizes, falls below 900 calories. Choose a small ice cream and use the 1,380 calories for something with at least a trace of nutritional value.
Monday, March 5, 2012
2nd place winner "8 Week Weight Loss Challenge"!
It became a family affair, my sister came in 3rd, me in 2nd and my brother-in-law 1st! I lost a total of 15.5 ibs. Due to me taking January off for my birthday, I was surprised to be that close. Great fun!
Thursday, March 1, 2012
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
One whole month no MEAT!
This past month, I didn't eat any meat and this last week did have some fish. No chicken, beef or pork. It was hard, but was able to do it.
Too graphic for weak stomachs!
The advantages to eating meat:
FLAVOR
-The flavor of a dead animal in your mouth for a few minutes.
---
---
The advantages to not eating meat:
THE ANIMALS
-When you eat meat, you are very likely to support the suffering
of animals. The vast majority of all animals for food production is
kept in extremely small, dark quarters and rarely gets to walk, fly or
swim freely. The killing process is in many cases lengthy and involves
a lot of suffering.
of animals. The vast majority of all animals for food production is
kept in extremely small, dark quarters and rarely gets to walk, fly or
swim freely. The killing process is in many cases lengthy and involves
a lot of suffering.
-Animals feel pain, remember pain, and have long-lasting behavioral changes due to pain and discomfort.
-Animals are not worth any "less" than a human. Animals are
different than humans. Humans can do things that animals can't do,
animals can do things that humans can't do. Just because an animal can
not scream, cry, talk or have facial expressions does not mean that the
animal does not have pain or discomfort or is not aware of its
surroundings.
different than humans. Humans can do things that animals can't do,
animals can do things that humans can't do. Just because an animal can
not scream, cry, talk or have facial expressions does not mean that the
animal does not have pain or discomfort or is not aware of its
surroundings.
OTHER HUMANS
-Many people in the world are starving due to grain shortages
(also soy and others). among other factors of course. Producing one
pound of red meat requires appr. 17 pounds of grain. If people quit
eating meat, there would be more than enough grain to feed everyone.
(See "ENVIRONMENT" section)
(also soy and others). among other factors of course. Producing one
pound of red meat requires appr. 17 pounds of grain. If people quit
eating meat, there would be more than enough grain to feed everyone.
(See "ENVIRONMENT" section)
-Thousands of people work in the meat industry, most of them are
paid extremely low wages and work under physically and psychologically
unhealthy conditions. The jobs are very dangerous in many cases. Read
the book "Fast Food Nation" for a lot of information about those
jobs.
paid extremely low wages and work under physically and psychologically
unhealthy conditions. The jobs are very dangerous in many cases. Read
the book "Fast Food Nation" for a lot of information about those
jobs.
ENVIRONMENT
-According to a 2006 United Nations initiative, the livestock
industry is one of the largest contributors to environmental
degradation worldwide, and modern practices of raising animals for food
contributes on a "massive scale" to air and water pollution, land
degradation, climate change, and loss of biodiversity. The initiative
concluded that "the livestock sector emerges as one of the top two or
three most significant contributors to the most serious environmental
problems, at every scale from local to global." (LEAD digital library:
Livestock's long shadow - Environmental issues and options)
industry is one of the largest contributors to environmental
degradation worldwide, and modern practices of raising animals for food
contributes on a "massive scale" to air and water pollution, land
degradation, climate change, and loss of biodiversity. The initiative
concluded that "the livestock sector emerges as one of the top two or
three most significant contributors to the most serious environmental
problems, at every scale from local to global." (LEAD digital library:
Livestock's long shadow - Environmental issues and options)
-Animal farming greatly increases the greenhouse effect. Animal
farming produces 65 percent of human-related nitrous oxide (which has
296 times the global warming potential of CO2) and 37 percent of all human-induced methane (which is 23 times as warming as CO2).
It is also accused of generating 64 percent of the ammonia, which
contributes to acid rain and acidification of ecosystems. (LEAD digital
library: Livestock's long shadow - Environmental issues and options)
farming produces 65 percent of human-related nitrous oxide (which has
296 times the global warming potential of CO2) and 37 percent of all human-induced methane (which is 23 times as warming as CO2).
It is also accused of generating 64 percent of the ammonia, which
contributes to acid rain and acidification of ecosystems. (LEAD digital
library: Livestock's long shadow - Environmental issues and options)
-It takes appr. 17 pounds of grain to produce one pound of red
meat. To grow, transport and clean the grain and to wash, transport,
slaughter and process the animals, hundreds of liters of fresh water
are needed, as well as lots of oil (mainly to transport the grain and
animals and to get the water from one place to another). Lots of
electrical energy is needed to keep meat cold to keep it from rotting
fast (it still rots) between the killing of an animal and the
consumption of its meat. In other words, it is a huge waste of energy
and resources.
meat. To grow, transport and clean the grain and to wash, transport,
slaughter and process the animals, hundreds of liters of fresh water
are needed, as well as lots of oil (mainly to transport the grain and
animals and to get the water from one place to another). Lots of
electrical energy is needed to keep meat cold to keep it from rotting
fast (it still rots) between the killing of an animal and the
consumption of its meat. In other words, it is a huge waste of energy
and resources.
HEALTH
-Many large-scale studies have shown vegetarianism to
significantly lower risks of cancer, ischemic heart disease, and other
fatal diseases. (Key, Timothy J, et al., 1999 "Mortality in
vegetarians and nonvegetarians: detailed findings from a collaborative
analysis of 5 prospective studies" American Journal of Clinical
Nutrition, Vol. 70, No. 3, 516S-524S, September 1999) and others
significantly lower risks of cancer, ischemic heart disease, and other
fatal diseases. (Key, Timothy J, et al., 1999 "Mortality in
vegetarians and nonvegetarians: detailed findings from a collaborative
analysis of 5 prospective studies" American Journal of Clinical
Nutrition, Vol. 70, No. 3, 516S-524S, September 1999) and others
-Non-lean red meat, in particular, has been found to be a direct
cause of cancers of the lung, esophagus, liver, and colon, among
others. (Meat can raise your lung cancer risk, too", MSNBC, 2007-12-11)
and others
cause of cancers of the lung, esophagus, liver, and colon, among
others. (Meat can raise your lung cancer risk, too", MSNBC, 2007-12-11)
and others
-American vegetarians tend to have lower body mass index, lower
levels of cholesterol, lower blood pressure, and less incidence of
heart disease, hypertension, type 2 diabetes, renal disease,
osteoporosis, dementias such as Alzheimer's disease and other
disorders. (Mattson, Mark P. (2002). Diet-Brain Connection: Impact on Memory, Mood, Aging and Disease. Kluwer Academic Publishers.)
levels of cholesterol, lower blood pressure, and less incidence of
heart disease, hypertension, type 2 diabetes, renal disease,
osteoporosis, dementias such as Alzheimer's disease and other
disorders. (Mattson, Mark P. (2002). Diet-Brain Connection: Impact on Memory, Mood, Aging and Disease. Kluwer Academic Publishers.)
-Eating of red meat has been linked to earlier manifestations of impotence in men, due to the high saturated fat content.
-Studies by
Harvard University as well as other studies conducted in the United
States, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and various
European countries, have confirmed that vegetarian diets provide more
than sufficient protein intake as long as a variety of plant sources
are available and consumed.
Harvard University as well as other studies conducted in the United
States, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and various
European countries, have confirmed that vegetarian diets provide more
than sufficient protein intake as long as a variety of plant sources
are available and consumed.
---
There are a lot more advantages to not eating meat. If you want to
find out more, please do an online search for "vegetarianism".
find out more, please do an online search for "vegetarianism".
How do I become a vegetarian?
-You quit eating meat. It's probably easiest to quit "cold
turkey". After about two weeks, you will likely have completely lost
the desire to consume animals and you will wonder how you were ever
able to chew on a dead animal.
turkey". After about two weeks, you will likely have completely lost
the desire to consume animals and you will wonder how you were ever
able to chew on a dead animal.
-When you quit eating meat, try to also reduce eating junk food,
sodas, and eat as little refined sugar as possible. That way, you will
likely automatically eat more of those foods that will give you all the
nutrients you need.
sodas, and eat as little refined sugar as possible. That way, you will
likely automatically eat more of those foods that will give you all the
nutrients you need.
-To avoid protein deficiencies, try to eat plenty of beans, nuts, grain-based products and soy-based products.
-To avoid iron and vitamin B-deficiencies, try to eat plenty of green leafy vegetables.
Remarks
I decided to only post a few references. I have researched all
above points thoroughly. If you want more specific information or look
at studies, please do an online search and you will likely easily find
tons of information.
above points thoroughly. If you want more specific information or look
at studies, please do an online search and you will likely easily find
tons of information.
I realize that the very first statement on this website is not
correct at all times. In extremely rare cases, you may be able to eat
meat and not contribute to suffering, terrible working conditions and
all the other things shown in the pictures. If I were put in a forest
with nothing else to eat, I would probably go ahead and try to catch,
kill and eat an animal. I would still not feel good about it, but my
will to survive will most likely drive me to do such thing. It is
natural. Please keep in mind that "natural" does not necessarily mean
"good" or "right".
correct at all times. In extremely rare cases, you may be able to eat
meat and not contribute to suffering, terrible working conditions and
all the other things shown in the pictures. If I were put in a forest
with nothing else to eat, I would probably go ahead and try to catch,
kill and eat an animal. I would still not feel good about it, but my
will to survive will most likely drive me to do such thing. It is
natural. Please keep in mind that "natural" does not necessarily mean
"good" or "right".
Animals who are killed by predators in their natural environment
have the huge advantage that they got to live a life in freedom and got
to do the things that likely made them happy. I am aware that some
animals suffer in nature as well, but that is probably very different
and a lot less the case in nature than when being part of the food
production industry.
have the huge advantage that they got to live a life in freedom and got
to do the things that likely made them happy. I am aware that some
animals suffer in nature as well, but that is probably very different
and a lot less the case in nature than when being part of the food
production industry.
About this website
You probably got to this website because you saw "NOMEAT.NET" on a
t-shirt. The person who wore that shirt was most likely me, the guy who
put this website together. Feel free to ask me any questions about
vegetarianism or whatever you want to ask me. I have 27 t-shirts with
"NOMEAT.NET" on them in all kinds of different material colors and
print colors. A while ago, I realized that I was almost always wearing
t-shirts that had random stuff printed on them, mostly names of big
companies. I decided that instead of supporting those big companies, I
might as well support something that I consider worthwhile -
vegetarianism. If just one person eats one piece of meat less, it was
worth it. Thank you for reading!
t-shirt. The person who wore that shirt was most likely me, the guy who
put this website together. Feel free to ask me any questions about
vegetarianism or whatever you want to ask me. I have 27 t-shirts with
"NOMEAT.NET" on them in all kinds of different material colors and
print colors. A while ago, I realized that I was almost always wearing
t-shirts that had random stuff printed on them, mostly names of big
companies. I decided that instead of supporting those big companies, I
might as well support something that I consider worthwhile -
vegetarianism. If just one person eats one piece of meat less, it was
worth it. Thank you for reading!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)