interesting article about gluten-free.
Fri, 07/31/2009 - 03:56
http://www.slate.com/id/2223745/
__________________
infant blogger with major writer's block.
http://msmflo.wordpress.com/
What perfect timing for this article. I'm about to make a flourless dairy-free chocolate cake. I, personally, do not have gluten intolerance but my soon-to-be brother-in-law can't process gluten and he's lactose intolerant. Poor boy.
Beneath the sun of summer a sea of flowers won't bloom without the rain.
www.atrayubrandy.blogspot.com
Interesting. I seemed to be seeing a lot of gluten-free stuff lately and wondered if this was because, obviously, the voices saying "I have celiac" are going to be louder than the voices saying "I don't have celiac", or because gluten-free is trendy.
Interesting. I seemed to be seeing a lot of gluten-free stuff lately and wondered if this was because, obviously, the voices saying "I have celiac" are going to be louder than the voices saying "I don't have celiac", or because gluten-free is trendy.
honestly, i am wondering the same thing myself. More and more people are saying they are intolerant to gluten, lactose, etc etc.
I am lactose intolerant, but that has not stopped me from having cheeses etc,
Sometimes, gluten can just cause a side effect of bloating but unless the doctor said you are celiac, alot of people are being self prescribing and be their own doctor and goes oh, i am feeling like this like that, there fore i must be allergic to gluten. I have seen friends like these first hand, and no amount of scientific persuasion can get them to have a proper diagnosis. It's like an epidemic. I really think its more of a trend than anything else. like how "organic" used to be the rage.
Its also the same for not using gelatin. But people can accept certain gums like xanthan gum as a replacement? Does you not know where xanthan gum came from? same as gelatin is a animal byproduct, xanthan gum is a byproduct from the synthesis/fermentation of bacteria xanthamonus.
Is bacteria not an animal cell? Does the bacteria not die for it? Remember the life cycle of bacteria (lag phase, active phase, death phase, etc). is it because its bacteria so its ok to use it? I think i will get flak for this. but its not logical to me. both are animals and both do die for it. just that one is smaller and reproduce faster than the other.
infant blogger with major writer's block.
http://msmflo.wordpress.com/
I agree with you completely. I know so many people who have just joined the new fad and are trying to tell me the health benefits of it. It reminds me a lot of the low carb diet. An unfortunate thing I think is that a lot of foods are no longer safe to eat or at the very least the labels are misleading. For example, a natural flavor is not necessarily healthier than an artificial one. When benzaldehyde (almond flavor) is derived naturally they use peach and apricot pits that contain trace amounts of hydrogen cyanide. When the same flavor is made artificially by mixing oil of clove and banana flavor, there is no cyanide present.
But on another more positive note some fads are very good. No trans fat and the newer no high fructose corn syrup. Both of these things have been proven to cause bodily harm to everyone who eats them.
I agree with you completely. I know so many people who have just joined the new fad and are trying to tell me the health benefits of it. It reminds me a lot of the low carb diet. An unfortunate thing I think is that a lot of foods are no longer safe to eat or at the very least the labels are misleading. For example, a natural flavor is not necessarily healthier than an artificial one. When benzaldehyde (almond flavor) is derived naturally they use peach and apricot pits that contain trace amounts of hydrogen cyanide. When the same flavor is made artificially by mixing oil of clove and banana flavor, there is no cyanide present.
But on another more positive note some fads are very good. No trans fat and the newer no high fructose corn syrup. Both of these things have been proven to cause bodily harm to everyone who eats them.
true. alot of time just because it is supposely "healthier" does not necessarily meant it is really healthy and vice versa. I am doing alot of written papers on this subject (of additives) this year and I have to say, as refer to what you had said above, some additives is there because it is good, not all additives are bad just because they are a few "dangerous" (and i am using it mildly) amongst that long list.
additives needed to be eaten in a really large amount for human to be able to be sick from it with the exception of a few like msg which is known to cause reaction in even a small volume because it is so concentrated. A's kid getting sick on potassium benzoate does not meant your kid will be too. Alot of time, the more you tried to protect yourself from not eating those "dangerous" food, you are actually harming yourself more than helping it, because you are not teaching your body to build up resistance and immunity from it.
with the exception of celiac sufferers, how many of these so called "gluten-free" that you know really had went through the rigorous amount of testing to determine if one really does suffer gluten intolerance, or worse, like crohn's etc?
I have seen first hand my friend going through various test to see what is it that he is allergic too, and its not a short process, its a long process.
dont follow fad, eat wise and moderate. sometimes some processed food is good. hey, give chemists like me a job in the future ok?
infant blogger with major writer's block.
http://msmflo.wordpress.com/
But on another more positive note some fads are very good. No trans fat and the newer no high fructose corn syrup. Both of these things have been proven to cause bodily harm to everyone who eats them.
Neither trans fat nor high fructose corn syrup should be eaten in large amounts. However, for almost everything, the dose makes the poison, so I doubt that high fructose corn syrup, in particular, causes bodily harm to everyone who eats it. High fructose corn syrup is, chemically, very similar to table sugar:
http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4157
Regular table sugar is a disaccharide of glucose and fructose, which means that the two monosaccharides are chemically bound into a larger, more complex disaccharide molecule called sucrose. That's sugar. HFCS consists of the same two monosaccharides, only they're just mixed in together, the molecules are not bound. This means that HFCS can come in different blends. The more fructose relative to glucose, the sweeter it is. HFCS 55, which is 55% fructose, has a sweetness comparable to sugar and is used mainly in soft drinks. HFCS 42 is 42% fructose, and is a little less sweet than sugar and is used in most other foods.
Like table sugar, high fructose corn syrup is just empty calories. However, there's no reason to believe that it's worse for you than table sugar and, like table sugar, should probably be enjoyed in moderation.
As for trans fats...I think that the jury is still out on how they compare to other saturated fats. I certainly haven't seen any evidence to suggest that they cause bodily harm to everyone who consumes them (especially in moderate quantities). There is (I believe) a pretty good chain of evidence linking diets high in saturated fat to heart disease, and trans fats are chemically similar to saturated fats (just...with the side-chains on the opposite sides of the main chain--trans--as opposed to on the same side--cis...I think).
It IS definitely good that more people are now aware that rice cakes and margarine are not health food, and olive oil (in moderation) is not junk food.