jdorama.com Forum Index
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   RegisterRegister  Log inLog in 
Top 100
Top 100
Spring 2019   Summer 2019   Fall 2019   Winter 2020  
Health Advice/Discussion
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 47, 48, 49 ... 52, 53, 54  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    jdorama.com Forum Index -> General Discussions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Tu_triky



Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 46182
Location: Los Skandolous, California
Country: United States

PostPosted: Tue Apr 12, 2011 6:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

bmwracer wrote:

Me too, since both of my older brothers have gout.

And another source for potassium! Victory! Peace!


Sweet, man. Not a bad piece of information to relate to your family. Smile

Yeah, fruits and veggies are probably your healthiest sources of potassium among other things.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bmwracer



Joined: 07 Jul 2003
Posts: 125541
Location: Juri-chan's speed dial
Country: United States

PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 2:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

Cell Phone Radiation 'Possibly Carcinogenic,' Experts Say

05/31/11 02:00 PM ET

A group of experts from the World Health Organization has classified the radiation emitted from cell phones as a possible cancer-causing agent, concluding that cell phones could be associated with an increased risk for glioma, a type of brain tumor.

The World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) convened a group of 31 scientists from 14 countries to look at the health risks associated with radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. They spent a week in Lyon, France, reviewing hundreds of peer-reviewed scientific studies on the issue.

"The evidence, while still accumulating, is strong enough to support a conclusion and the 2B classification," Dr. Jonathan Samet, a University of Southern California scientist who chaired the working group, said in a statement.

The IARC classifies carcinogenic agents according to different degrees, from "carcinogenic to humans" to "probably not carcinogenic." Group 2B -- the group that will now include radiofrequency electromagnetic fields -- is defined as "possibly carcinogenic to humans." It also contains lead, DDT, engine exhaust, and chloroform, among other substances.

Dr. Samet explained that the classification means that there could be some risk -- a risk that warrants continued study. The IARC group did not quantify the radiation risk of cell phone use, but did consider a study that showed the highest risk of brain tumors among the heaviest users.

"Given the potential consequences for public health on this classification and fidings, it is important that additional research be conducted into the long-term, heavy use of mobile phones," IARC Director Christopher Wild said.

Until then, measures should be taken to reduce exposure, including use of hands-free devices or texting, Wild added. Many cell phone manufacturers put out safety manuals that encourage users to keep the devices several millimeters from their body.

The IARC isn't the only group looking at cell phone use and cancer risk. As CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta reported last week, several ongoing studies are looking at both long-term effects and exposure amounts. The issue has widespread implications, with the WHO estimating that some 5 billion people use cell phones around the globe.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tu_triky



Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 46182
Location: Los Skandolous, California
Country: United States

PostPosted: Sat Jun 04, 2011 10:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

I thought this was pretty fascinating.

==============


New process may remineralize teeth in minutes, not days

By Rob Goszkowski, Assistant Editor

June 2, 2011 -- A method of using calcium phosphate solutions to remineralize carious lesions in dentin has had promising results in a recent study, dramatically decreasing the time needed for remineralization.

In the study performed at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) and presented at the International Association for Dental Research (IADR) conference in March, researchers performed a pretreatment with fluoride solutions on dehydrated and demineralized dentin and found that the process may significantly alter the remineralization process from several days down to just minutes.

The acceptance of remineralization as a treatment approach has been hampered by the length of time needed to get significant results. "We were thinking about how to accelerate the process, and that's where the fluoride treatment comes in," explained Stefan Habelitz, PhD, an associate professor in the department of preventive and restorative dental sciences at the UCSF School of Dentistry who designed the study and supervised Paul Hsaio, a dental student leading the project.

But the team also sought to functionally remineralize dentin -- "to restore the mechanical properties of the tissue by reintroducing the minerals," Habelitz said. "Because in dentin, if you don't follow certain procedures, you can incorporate minerals into the lesion but it doesn't recover the properties, it only recovers it to a small degree."

The PILP system

To achieve this, the team employed the polymer-induced liquid precursor (PILP) system created by Laurie Gower, PhD, an associate professor in the department of materials science and engineering at the University of Florida in Gainesville.
gIt could affect the philosophy of how much of the carious lesion needs to be removed.h
\ Stefan Habelitz, PhD, University of
California, San Francisco

"In a carious lesion where the bacteria attack enamel and dentin, the mineral is dissolved surrounding the fibril but also inside it," Habelitz said. "When you expose the demineralized tissue to a calcium and phosphate solution, mineral formations only occur around the fibril. The solution usually does not enter the fibril."

Remineralization takes place, but the dentin does not have as much strength as it would if minerals were forming in the fibrils. However, in the PILP system, polyaspartic acid delivers calcium phosphate to the fibrils and releases it inside the collagen fibril so minerals form within them.

"Having that PILP system gave us an opportunity to fully recover the tissue, and then we looked at what it would do to a carious lesion," Habelitz said. The drawback was that it remineralizes too slowly. "Basically, it would almost take a year to remineralize a natural lesion with that method as it is right now," he said.

For the IADR study, the team used a low-speed Buehler saw and a diamond blade to cut extracted human molars. Next, the teeth were polished with a strip grinder, adhesive polishing disks, and diamond polishing slurries. The triple-polished surface provided a flat, even reference.

Next, the dentin disks were cut into 3 x 6-mm2 dentin and covered with nail varnish -- "Revlon cherry color red, I believe," Habelitz quipped -- leaving a 3 x 3-mm2 window on the occlusal surface.

"It's a very nice reference layer for comparing the mechanical properties in the natural tissue versus the demineralized and study also how quickly the mineral recovers," Habelitz said.

To make artificial caries in the samples, the researchers applied 0.5 molar (M) acetic acid with calcium and phosphate at pH 5 for 66 hours, resulting in a lesion depth of 100 µm. The lesions were completely dehydrated, then immersed into different sodium fluoride solutions for one to two minutes and dried in an incubator at 37‹ C for one hour.

They then immersed the specimens into pH 7 metastable remineralization of 6 mM of calcium chloride (CaCl2) and 3.8 mM of monopotassium phosphate (KH2PO4) or 8 mM CaCl2 and 5.0 mM KH2PO4 for one hour at room temperature. The control group did not receive fluoride treatment. The samples were then sliced, air dried, polished down to 0.25 microns, ground down to a thickness of 100 microns, and analyzed using micro-x-ray CT (micro-XCT) and polarized light microscopy.

The microscopy measurements, which were corroborated by micro-XCT analysis, showed lesion depths reduced by about 25 microns when they were remineralized after fluoride exposure. From this the researchers concluded that fluoride pretreatment "may significantly accelerate the remineralization process" and that the treatment's effectiveness is dependent on the fluoride concentration.

Conserving tooth structure

These findings could lead to a new component of restoration placement procedures, according to Habelitz.

"For dentistry, I think the major relevance is that you would be able to conserve tooth structure," he said. "It would affect the philosophy of how much of the carious lesion needs to be removed because some of it could be remineralized."

While current methods only partially remineralize a carious lesion, the PILP system could remineralize the bottom of a lesion, increasing the layer of dentin protecting the pulp.

"A remineralization treatment is very conservative and could lower the risk of pulp exposure, and that would definitely be a major advantage," Habelitz said.

The next step, he added, is to learn more about how robust the remineralized dentin is. Toward that end, he and his team are currently conducting nanomechanical testing to get property information in the submicron range.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bmwracer



Joined: 07 Jul 2003
Posts: 125541
Location: Juri-chan's speed dial
Country: United States

PostPosted: Sat Jun 04, 2011 12:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

^ Very interesting.

As stated in the last line, the key is how durable the remineralization is. Sweat
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tu_triky



Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 46182
Location: Los Skandolous, California
Country: United States

PostPosted: Sat Jun 04, 2011 12:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

bmwracer wrote:
^ Very interesting.

As stated in the last line, the key is how durable the remineralization is. Sweat


To be sure. Very promising research though....minutes instead of days...sounds like science fiction.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bmwracer



Joined: 07 Jul 2003
Posts: 125541
Location: Juri-chan's speed dial
Country: United States

PostPosted: Fri Jun 10, 2011 3:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

High Coffee Intake May Cause Auditory Hallucinations



If you've just downed your fifth cup of coffee and you seem to be hearing things that aren't actually there, well, you might want to blame the caffeine in your cup of Joe.

Australian researchers found that drinking five regular cups of caffeinated coffee may raise the risk of auditory hallucinations, according to a small study published in the journal Personality and Individual Differences.

LaTrobe University researchers asked 92 people with varying levels of caffeine intake and stress listen to three minutes of white noise via headphones. The study participants were told that Bing Crosby's "White Christmas" would be playing in the headphones, and when they heard it, to hit a buzzer.

While the song never actually played, the people who were hopped up on five or more cups of coffee buzzed three times on average, while the low-caffeinated people buzzed just once on average, the Herald Sun in Australia reported.

Though this particular study size was small, it's worth noting that the findings match up with that of a study published in 2009 in the same journal. That study showed that highly caffeinated people -- those who had consumed the equivalent of three brewed cups of coffee -- were three times more likely to hear or see things that aren't there, LiveScience reported.

The theory is that caffeine may worsen the effects of stress on the body. The body naturally releases a hormone called cortisol when it is under stress, but caffeine seems to increase the amount of cortisol that is released.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tu_triky



Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 46182
Location: Los Skandolous, California
Country: United States

PostPosted: Fri Jun 10, 2011 3:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

Did you just hear that?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bmwracer



Joined: 07 Jul 2003
Posts: 125541
Location: Juri-chan's speed dial
Country: United States

PostPosted: Fri Jun 10, 2011 3:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

Tu_triky wrote:
Did you just hear that?

LOL. hehe
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tu_triky



Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 46182
Location: Los Skandolous, California
Country: United States

PostPosted: Fri Jun 10, 2011 3:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

bmwracer wrote:

LOL. hehe


Bleah I'm trippin' out man!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Itazura ichiban



Joined: 25 Mar 2004
Posts: 916
Location: SF Bay Area
Country: United States

PostPosted: Tue Jun 14, 2011 1:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

I'd say that if you're sleep-deprived, you're likely to become highly suggestable. That's proably all that study can prove. Smile

Here's a fun one:
http://coolinginflammation.blogspot.com/2010/04/lateral-gene-transfer-in-gut-flora.html

Japanese Gain Ability to Digest Algal Polysaccharides from Marine Bacteria
Gut flora adapt to the food nutrients that are prevalent in different parts of the world. Bacteria able to digest unusual nutrients, such as the sulfated porphyrans found in seaweed eaten in Japanese cuisine, are also consumed along with algae. Formation of bacterial biofilms triggers the exchange of genes among gut bacteria and the acquisition of new polysaccharide-degrading enzyme activities.

Gut Flora Adapts to Diet
The million or so genes of the thousands of bacterial species found in the guts of humans around the world are adapted to the diet of each of those individuals. Each individual gut harbors a couple of hundred different bacterial species and those different types of bacteria increase or decrease in number in response to the composition of each meal.

...

Gut Bacteria of Algae Eaters Have Algae-Degrading Enzymes
A recent report (see ref.) traced genes from marine bacteria that digest marine algae/seaweed, to gut bacteria of people who routinely eat seaweed. Researchers studying marine bacteria identified genes coding for new enzymes, porphyranases, that hydrolyzed porphyrans. When they checked gene databases for other porphyranase genes, they found that some gut bacteria had previously unassigned genes that were apparently, based on their nucleotide sequences, porphyranases. Curiously, these genes were only present in gut bacteria isolated from Japanese sources, i.e. from people who traditionally ate seaweed. In some of these bacteria there were more than 260 genes for degrading a huge variety of different plant polysaccharides.

Marine Bacteria on Seaweed Release DNA Incorporated into Gut Bacteria
Bacteria recognize that other bacteria are around by a process called quorum sensing. This signaling system triggers the production of matrix polysaccharides produced by the bacteria to hold the bacteria together in complex communities. Quorum sensing also mobilizes the release of copies of the bacteriumfs genes, which is coordinated with uptake of DNA from the surrounding environment. [Note that the proteins that take in foreign DNA have basic amino acids arranged in the same heparin-binding domains that are also used by growth factors and their receptors or the numerous proteins that bind to nucleic acids in the nucleus or in ribosomes.] Thus, biofilm formation is accompanied by enhanced lateral gene exchange that would also enhance the incorporation of porphyranase genes from ingested marine bacteria.

....
_________________
- Douglas
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tu_triky



Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 46182
Location: Los Skandolous, California
Country: United States

PostPosted: Sat Jun 18, 2011 1:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

Itazura ichiban wrote:
I'd say that if you're sleep-deprived, you're likely to become highly suggestable. That's proably all that study can prove. Smile

Here's a fun one:
http://coolinginflammation.blogspot.com/2010/04/lateral-gene-transfer-in-gut-flora.html

Japanese Gain Ability to Digest Algal Polysaccharides from Marine Bacteria
Gut flora adapt to the food nutrients that are prevalent in different parts of the world. Bacteria able to digest unusual nutrients, such as the sulfated porphyrans found in seaweed eaten in Japanese cuisine, are also consumed along with algae. Formation of bacterial biofilms triggers the exchange of genes among gut bacteria and the acquisition of new polysaccharide-degrading enzyme activities.

Gut Flora Adapts to Diet
The million or so genes of the thousands of bacterial species found in the guts of humans around the world are adapted to the diet of each of those individuals. Each individual gut harbors a couple of hundred different bacterial species and those different types of bacteria increase or decrease in number in response to the composition of each meal.

...

Gut Bacteria of Algae Eaters Have Algae-Degrading Enzymes
A recent report (see ref.) traced genes from marine bacteria that digest marine algae/seaweed, to gut bacteria of people who routinely eat seaweed. Researchers studying marine bacteria identified genes coding for new enzymes, porphyranases, that hydrolyzed porphyrans. When they checked gene databases for other porphyranase genes, they found that some gut bacteria had previously unassigned genes that were apparently, based on their nucleotide sequences, porphyranases. Curiously, these genes were only present in gut bacteria isolated from Japanese sources, i.e. from people who traditionally ate seaweed. In some of these bacteria there were more than 260 genes for degrading a huge variety of different plant polysaccharides.

Marine Bacteria on Seaweed Release DNA Incorporated into Gut Bacteria
Bacteria recognize that other bacteria are around by a process called quorum sensing. This signaling system triggers the production of matrix polysaccharides produced by the bacteria to hold the bacteria together in complex communities. Quorum sensing also mobilizes the release of copies of the bacteriumfs genes, which is coordinated with uptake of DNA from the surrounding environment. [Note that the proteins that take in foreign DNA have basic amino acids arranged in the same heparin-binding domains that are also used by growth factors and their receptors or the numerous proteins that bind to nucleic acids in the nucleus or in ribosomes.] Thus, biofilm formation is accompanied by enhanced lateral gene exchange that would also enhance the incorporation of porphyranase genes from ingested marine bacteria.

....


Wow, that's pretty interesting re: the marine bacteria and its adaptation in the human GI tract.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tu_triky



Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 46182
Location: Los Skandolous, California
Country: United States

PostPosted: Sat Jun 18, 2011 1:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

Memory Implant Gives Rats Sharper Recollection

2011-06-17 11:50:18.142


By BENEDICT CAREY
(New York Times) -- Scientists have designed a brain implant
that restored lost memory function and strengthened recall of new
information in laboratory rats \ a crucial first step in the
development of so-called neuroprosthetic devices to repair
deficits from dementia, stroke and other brain injuries in
humans.
Though still a long way from being tested in humans, the
implant demonstrates for the first time that a cognitive function
can be improved with a device that mimics the firing patterns of
neurons. In recent years neuroscientists have developed implants
that allow paralyzed people to move prosthetic limbs or a
computer cursor, using their thoughts to activate the machines.
In the new work, being published Friday, researchers at Wake
Forest University and the University of Southern California used
some of the same techniques to read neural activity. But they
translated those signals internally, to improve brain function
rather than to activate outside appendages.
gItfs technically very impressive to pull something like
this off, given our current level of technology,h said Daryl
Kipke, a professor of bioengineering at the University of
Michigan who was not involved in the experiment. gWe are just
scratching the surface when it comes to interacting with the
brain, but this experiment shows whatfs possible and the great
potential of interacting with the brain in this way.h
In a series of experiments, scientists at Wake Forest led by
Sam A. Deadwyler trained rats to remember which of two identical
levers to press to receive water; the animals first saw one of
the two levers appear and then (after being distracted) had to
remember to press the other lever to be rewarded. Repeated
training on this task teaches rats the general rule, but in each
trial the animal has to remember which lever appeared first, to
inform the later choice.
The rats were implanted with a tiny array of electrodes,
which threaded from the top of the head down into two neighboring
pieces of the hippocampus, a structure that is crucial for
forming these new memories, in rats as in humans. The two slivers
of tissue, called CA1 and CA3, communicate with each other as the
brain learns and stores new information. The device transmits
these exchanges to a computer.
To test the effect of the implant, the researchers used a
drug to shut down the activity of CA1. Without CA1 online, the
rats could not remember which lever to push to get water. They
remembered the rule \ push the opposite lever of the one that
first appeared \ but not which they had seen first.
The researchers, having recorded the appropriate signal from
CA1, simply replayed it, like a melody on a player piano \ and
the animals remembered. The implant acted as if it were CA1, at
least for this one task.
gTurn the switch on, the animal has the memory; turn it off
and they donft: thatfs exactly how it worked,h said Theodore W.
Berger, a professor of engineering at U.S.C. and the lead author
of the study, being published in The Journal of Neuroengineering
and Rehabilitation. His co-authors were Robert E. Hampson and
Anushka Goonawardena, along with Dr. Deadwyler, of Wake Forest,
and Dong Song and Vasilis Z. Marmarelis of U.S.C.
In rats that did not receive the drug, new memories faded by
about 40 percent after a long distraction period. But if the
researchers amplified the corresponding CA1 signals using the
implant, the memories eroded only about 10 percent in that time.
The authors said that with wireless technology and computer
chips, the system could be easily fitted for human use. But there
are a number of technical and theoretical obstacles. For one, the
implant must first record a memory trace before playing it back
or amplifying it; in patients with significant memory problems,
those signals may be too weak. In addition, human memory is a
rich, diverse neural process that involves many other brain
areas, not just CA3 and CA1; implants in this area will be
limited.
Still, some restored memories \ Where is the bathroom? Where
are the pots and pans stored? \ could make a big difference in
the lives of someone with dementia. gIf youfre caring for someone
in the house, for example,h Dr. Berger said, git might be enough
to keep the person out of the nursing home.h
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Itazura ichiban



Joined: 25 Mar 2004
Posts: 916
Location: SF Bay Area
Country: United States

PostPosted: Sat Jun 18, 2011 1:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

There are probably more than one mechanism for memory loss, but it's still an interesting development.

I didn't know this, but apparently the "unused" portions of our DNA are actually encoded to produce bacteria that function as gut flora. The things you learn sometimes. Smile
_________________
- Douglas
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tu_triky



Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 46182
Location: Los Skandolous, California
Country: United States

PostPosted: Sat Jun 18, 2011 1:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

Itazura ichiban wrote:


I didn't know this, but apparently the "unused" portions of our DNA are actually encoded to produce bacteria that function as gut flora. The things you learn sometimes. Smile


I didn't know that either. Interesting.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bmwracer



Joined: 07 Jul 2003
Posts: 125541
Location: Juri-chan's speed dial
Country: United States

PostPosted: Thu Jul 21, 2011 3:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

The #1 Best Protein for Your Health and the Environment (and the Worst to Avoid)



5 Worst Protein Choices for the Environment

1. Lamb
Lambfs carbon footprint comes mostly from the methane the animals produce through digestion and manure and from the crops grown to feed them. The same is true of cattle (which is why beef ranks second in the list of top 5 carbon offenders), but since lambs produce less meat, the carbon footprint is greater per ounce. In fact, eating 4 ounces of lamb is equivalent to driving 13 miles, in terms of your carbon footprint.

What you can do: Lamb isnft widely eaten in the U.S. and in terms of carbon emissions thatfs a good thing. Keep eating it sparingly, according to the EWG.

2. Beef
Like lambs, beef cattle are ruminants and produce the same greenhouse gases while digesting their food. Conventionally grown beef cattle are also shipped during different stages of production, adding to their environmental toll.

What you can do: When you do choose beef, look for grass-fed and organic. While pricier than conventional, itfs a healthier choice for you and the environment. Grass-fed beef is richer in heart-healthy omega-3 fats. Plus, organic, grass-fed cattle are raised in a way that minimizes the carbon emissions from manure. The EWG also recommends avoiding processed beef products, such as sausage, since more processing means a bigger carbon footprint and the processed products are less healthy than unprocessed.

3. Cheese
I adore good cheese, so I was deeply saddened to see cheese come in at number 3. I was momentarily heartened, though, when I noticed that EWG had compared all the proteinsf carbon emissions per 4 ounces. That ends up being a little less than 3 servings of cheese! Which means that if you stick to a serving, itfs more equivalent to eating 2 eggs, in terms of environmental impact.

What can you do: Stick to a single serving (1.5 ounces for hard cheese)\plus using a sharply flavored cheese can help you get the maximum impact for less. The EWG also recommends choosing organic and low-fat cheese, when possible.

4. Pork
Pigs donft produce methane while digesting their food, but their manure contributes greenhouse gases. Processing and cooking pork adds to its carbon footprint.

What you can do: The EWG recommends choosing pastured pork, when you can, and avoiding processed pork (yes, that means bacon).

5. Farmed Salmon
Fish feed and electricity on fish farms adds to the carbon footprint of the fish. So does shipping, which means that wild salmon also has a higher carbon footprint when itfs shipped by air to your market. But donft forget that salmon also delivers heart-healthy omega-3s, so still aim to eat fish a few times a week.

What you can do: Look for wild salmon over farmed, when possible. And donft snub light tuna and sardines\other sources of omega-3s that have lower carbon footprints.



5 Best Protein Choices for the Environment

1. Milk
On the abbreviated top 10 list, milk came in with the lowest carbon footprint (lentils were lowest on the list of 20). However, the EWG looked at the carbon footprint of 4 ounces of milk\thatfs only half a serving. So a full cup would be twice as high.

What you can do: Look for milk from local dairies, which should cut some of the carbon footprint caused by shipping. Milk from organic and grass-fed cows will also cut down on some of the carbon emissions caused by raising cattle, suggests the EWG, while delivering the added bonus of extra omega-3s and no growth hormones.

2. Beans
Beans are a smart protein choice. They give you fiber and healthy nutrients, such as folate and iron, and are very low in saturated fat. Theyfre also one of the best choices for the planet. Unlike animal-based proteins, beans have fewer carbon inputs and outputs (with animal proteins, growing crops just to feed the animals significantly adds to their carbon footprint).
Recipes to Try: Quick and Budget-Friendly Bean Recipes

What you can do: Eat beans more often! If you want beans with the lowest carbon footprint, buy them dried, which skips the extra step of processing them.

3. Tofu
Tofufs carbon footprint (roughly one-third that of beef) largely comes from growing the soybeans and then processing it into tofu.

What you can do: Tofu is a great choice, but keep in mind that if the label doesnft say it is 100% USDA Certified Organic or non-GMO, there is a good chance it was made from genetically modified soybeans.

4. Eggs
Feeding chickens, and the energy used on poultry farms, adds to the carbon footprint of eggs. But as far as animal proteins go, eggsf carbon footprint is relatively low. In addition to protein, eggs give you some vitamin D and lutein and zeaxanthin, which are good for eye health. Although eggs contain some saturated fat and cholesterol, eating one a day shouldnft raise your cholesterol levels.

What you can do: For the lowest carbon footprint, the EWG recommends opting for organic and pastured eggs, from chickens that are given organic feed and are allowed to run around.

5. Chicken
Chicken is the best meat choice, but on the full list of 20 foods, chicken ranks 6th meaning that its carbon footprint is still higher than plant foods and tuna. From an environmental and health perspective, though, eating chicken is better than eating beef.

What you can do: Choose chicken more often than beef, pork or lamb. As with eggs, the EWG recommends choosing chicken that is organic and/or pastured.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tu_triky



Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 46182
Location: Los Skandolous, California
Country: United States

PostPosted: Thu Jul 21, 2011 6:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

bmwracer wrote:
The #1 Best Protein for Your Health and the Environment (and the Worst to Avoid)



5 Worst Protein Choices for the Environment

1. Lamb
Lambfs carbon footprint comes mostly from the methane the animals produce through digestion and manure and from the crops grown to feed them. The same is true of cattle (which is why beef ranks second in the list of top 5 carbon offenders), but since lambs produce less meat, the carbon footprint is greater per ounce. In fact, eating 4 ounces of lamb is equivalent to driving 13 miles, in terms of your carbon footprint.

What you can do: Lamb isnft widely eaten in the U.S. and in terms of carbon emissions thatfs a good thing. Keep eating it sparingly, according to the EWG.

2. Beef
Like lambs, beef cattle are ruminants and produce the same greenhouse gases while digesting their food. Conventionally grown beef cattle are also shipped during different stages of production, adding to their environmental toll.

What you can do: When you do choose beef, look for grass-fed and organic. While pricier than conventional, itfs a healthier choice for you and the environment. Grass-fed beef is richer in heart-healthy omega-3 fats. Plus, organic, grass-fed cattle are raised in a way that minimizes the carbon emissions from manure. The EWG also recommends avoiding processed beef products, such as sausage, since more processing means a bigger carbon footprint and the processed products are less healthy than unprocessed.

3. Cheese
I adore good cheese, so I was deeply saddened to see cheese come in at number 3. I was momentarily heartened, though, when I noticed that EWG had compared all the proteinsf carbon emissions per 4 ounces. That ends up being a little less than 3 servings of cheese! Which means that if you stick to a serving, itfs more equivalent to eating 2 eggs, in terms of environmental impact.

What can you do: Stick to a single serving (1.5 ounces for hard cheese)\plus using a sharply flavored cheese can help you get the maximum impact for less. The EWG also recommends choosing organic and low-fat cheese, when possible.

4. Pork
Pigs donft produce methane while digesting their food, but their manure contributes greenhouse gases. Processing and cooking pork adds to its carbon footprint.

What you can do: The EWG recommends choosing pastured pork, when you can, and avoiding processed pork (yes, that means bacon).

5. Farmed Salmon
Fish feed and electricity on fish farms adds to the carbon footprint of the fish. So does shipping, which means that wild salmon also has a higher carbon footprint when itfs shipped by air to your market. But donft forget that salmon also delivers heart-healthy omega-3s, so still aim to eat fish a few times a week.

What you can do: Look for wild salmon over farmed, when possible. And donft snub light tuna and sardines\other sources of omega-3s that have lower carbon footprints.



5 Best Protein Choices for the Environment

1. Milk
On the abbreviated top 10 list, milk came in with the lowest carbon footprint (lentils were lowest on the list of 20). However, the EWG looked at the carbon footprint of 4 ounces of milk\thatfs only half a serving. So a full cup would be twice as high.

What you can do: Look for milk from local dairies, which should cut some of the carbon footprint caused by shipping. Milk from organic and grass-fed cows will also cut down on some of the carbon emissions caused by raising cattle, suggests the EWG, while delivering the added bonus of extra omega-3s and no growth hormones.

2. Beans
Beans are a smart protein choice. They give you fiber and healthy nutrients, such as folate and iron, and are very low in saturated fat. Theyfre also one of the best choices for the planet. Unlike animal-based proteins, beans have fewer carbon inputs and outputs (with animal proteins, growing crops just to feed the animals significantly adds to their carbon footprint).
Recipes to Try: Quick and Budget-Friendly Bean Recipes

What you can do: Eat beans more often! If you want beans with the lowest carbon footprint, buy them dried, which skips the extra step of processing them.

3. Tofu
Tofufs carbon footprint (roughly one-third that of beef) largely comes from growing the soybeans and then processing it into tofu.

What you can do: Tofu is a great choice, but keep in mind that if the label doesnft say it is 100% USDA Certified Organic or non-GMO, there is a good chance it was made from genetically modified soybeans.

4. Eggs
Feeding chickens, and the energy used on poultry farms, adds to the carbon footprint of eggs. But as far as animal proteins go, eggsf carbon footprint is relatively low. In addition to protein, eggs give you some vitamin D and lutein and zeaxanthin, which are good for eye health. Although eggs contain some saturated fat and cholesterol, eating one a day shouldnft raise your cholesterol levels.

What you can do: For the lowest carbon footprint, the EWG recommends opting for organic and pastured eggs, from chickens that are given organic feed and are allowed to run around.

5. Chicken
Chicken is the best meat choice, but on the full list of 20 foods, chicken ranks 6th meaning that its carbon footprint is still higher than plant foods and tuna. From an environmental and health perspective, though, eating chicken is better than eating beef.

What you can do: Choose chicken more often than beef, pork or lamb. As with eggs, the EWG recommends choosing chicken that is organic and/or pastured.


I guess I did my part because I ate organic tofu this afternoon for lunch in the form of Korean Soon tofu. hehe
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bmwracer



Joined: 07 Jul 2003
Posts: 125541
Location: Juri-chan's speed dial
Country: United States

PostPosted: Thu Jul 21, 2011 7:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

Tu_triky wrote:
I guess I did my part because I ate organic tofu this afternoon for lunch in the form of Korean Soon tofu. hehe

Will that offset the Iberico de Bellota? rofl
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tu_triky



Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 46182
Location: Los Skandolous, California
Country: United States

PostPosted: Thu Jul 21, 2011 7:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

bmwracer wrote:

Will that offset the Iberico de Bellota? rofl


hehe Dood, just sucking on the bits of meat stuck to thrown out spareribs wouldn't be offset by a tofu meal.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bmwracer



Joined: 07 Jul 2003
Posts: 125541
Location: Juri-chan's speed dial
Country: United States

PostPosted: Thu Jul 21, 2011 8:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

Tu_triky wrote:
hehe Dood, just sucking on the bits of meat stuck to thrown out spareribs wouldn't be offset by a tofu meal.

I'm afraid you are correct, sir. Mr Green
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tu_triky



Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 46182
Location: Los Skandolous, California
Country: United States

PostPosted: Thu Jul 21, 2011 8:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

bmwracer wrote:

I'm afraid you are correct, sir. Mr Green


All kidding aside, it could be worse...at least some of the fat from the spareribs is rendered into the fire.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    jdorama.com Forum Index -> General Discussions All times are GMT + 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 47, 48, 49 ... 52, 53, 54  Next
Page 48 of 54

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum