People for Ethical Relationships with Vegetables

Holy crap.

The other day, I found myself agreeing with something Bill O'Reilly said.

In case you don't know him, Bill O'Reilly is a guy on American television. Talks a lot, in a loud angry voice. I'm not sure what he actually talks about, because as soon as he starts yelling (i.e. whenever his mouth is open) I switch channels. I think he participates in stirring intellectual debates yells about political subjects.

In case you don't know me, I (Merry) am neither male, loud, nor given to appearing on television.

What brought the two of us into agreement was an ad that PETA had tried to get played during the Super Bowl. (And how weird is it that some people now watch this sports contest solely for the ads?)


The ad features scantily clad models posing suggestively with vegetables and no, I don't mean people in a coma. NSFW, but might be useful at home if you want to turn your own cheeseburger-munching Homer Simpson into a veggie-lovin' Hugh Jackman.

NBC rejected the ad, called "Veggie Love," because it "depicts a level of sexuality exceeding our standards."

I hope posting this video hasn't caused a horde of Cranky Fitness readers to storm off in a Huffington post. The video strikes me as more silly than salacious, but it's certainly gotten a lot of coverage. (More coverage than those poor models had; really, the thermal-insulation properties of black lace have been seriously overestimated.)

If you'd prefer a PG-version, this is Whoopi Goldberg's safe-for-television re-enactment.

I've decided that I should start a movement, and invite Mr. O'Reilly to join. All I can think of to call it is People for Ethical Relationships with Vegetables. (Yes, I realize the abbreviation of the name might cause some people to look askance, but I figure most of the askance-looking people already stormed off in the previous paragraph.)

What Bill O'Reilly actually said that struck me as profound was the following comment: "I'm not touching that vegetable! I don't know where it's been!"

Whether you fall into the Liberal, Conservative, or Confused category politically, I think you should listen to the man on this one.

If a vegetable is labeled organic, that means (according to the USDA) that it's been grown with the minimal amount of pesticides.

The good news is, not all organic vegetables were created equal. Some vegetables, it doesn't matter so much if they were raised around pesticides, because they don't absorb them (the pesticides) as much and therefore you don't ingest them either.

This chart lists the vegetables that you really want to buy organic and the ones that it's okay to buy from a regular source.

Since organic vegetables = more $$ than your average vegetables, following this chart is a way to save money while staying healthy.

And what you choose to do with those vegetables, in the privacy of your own home, is none of my business. Frankly, I'd rather not know. No, really.

P.S. Here are the commercials that actually made it to the Super Bowl.

P.P.S. I don't suppose you can think up a better name for my new vegetable-respecting movement?

Berry Good News

Remember how last week I was bummed because a new study said cooked broccoli delivers only one tenth the awesome antioxidant goodness that raw broccoli does? And I was all mopey because I hate raw broccoli?

Well, the Nutrition Gods must have heard my whining and felt sorry for me, because shortly thereafter they sent me new research saying: stuff I'm already eating is good for me in ways I didn't know about! Hooray! That's my very favorite kind of research.


So what was the good news about berries?

Whoops! Broccoli Digression

But wait--before I get to the berries, here's an update on the raw broccoli situation. As it happened, there was a happy ending.

Those of you who read the blog regularly know that I am Certified Crackpot when it comes to antioxidants and other micronutrients. I harbor the delusion that if I eat a large variety of these things I will never, ever die. So after hearing that the kind of broccoli I liked was lame and would not make me live forever, I was distraught.

But help arrived!

In the comment section to the raw broccoli post, DragonMama (who also goes by Naomi) suggested that I try "broccoli slaw." I hadn't even heard of it, but sure enough, I went to the "we're going to charge you up the wazoo 'cause it's already washed and chopped" section of the produce department, and there was a big 'ol bag of the stuff.

I confess I was skeptical. Broccoli slaw is presumably made from broccoli. How could it not taste vile?

But it doesn't!

Sure, it took a little dressing to make it tasty (which could have theoretically been a healthy home-made dressing with no sugar and only good fats; let's just pretend it was, shall we?) Anyway, I mixed a little dressing in and it worked! Now if I can remember to keep a package of this stuff handy, I can live to be 1,000 without having to choke down any nasty little raw broccoli florets. Thanks, Dragonmama!

All right, that's enough about the damn broccoli.


Berries Don't Have to Be Blue


So we already know berries are good for us in general sorts of ways, but it's always nice to hear the specifics. And the New York Times has great things to say recently about berries as cancer-fighters.

Now I always thought blueberries were supposed to be cancer-fighters, but it turns out while they may be awesome for your memory, other berries are more potent cancer-fighters. In particular, black raspberries seem to be where it's at. And the kinds of cancers they seem good at preventing are oral, esophageal and colon cancers.

One problem: what the hell is a black raspberry? I like raspberries; I like blackberries; I'm guessing I'd like a black raspberries too but I can't say I've ever met one. There's nothing like reading a study that says: oh you must eat this wonderful fruit that is so good for you and isn't available anywhere you shop!

However, there are other berries that scientists seem to think are promising in the anti-cancer department, like red raspberries, blackberries, strawberries, and elderberries. And it appears from rat studies that "a concentrated powder of black raspberry anthocyanins" worked just as well for slowing tumor growth in rodents as the real berries did. Rats who got whole berries or anthocyanin powder developed 50 percent fewer esophageal tumors compared to untreated rats.

The article conceded that berries can be expensive. It's rare that an article in the New York Times ever goes to the grocery store and finds out the price of things it tells you to eat, so kudos to this one for admitting that berries are pricey. Oh, and apparently you also need to eat a hundred thousand tons a pound of berries a day to get as much as the rats did in the study.

However, a cheerful cancer prevention researcher named Gary D. Stoner, (and I won't make fun of his name, that would be so immature),

(Ok, so I lied)

suggested buying frozen berries, because they are available year round and often are cheaper than fresh berries. Which is great, because as it happens, frozen berries are a key ingredient in Crabby McSlacker's Easiest Smoothie Recipe ever! Also, for you supplement-buying sorts (I rarely go this route, because I'm cheap) there are apparently concentrated berry powders available in health food stores.

"We think for the average American, probably the consumption of three to four helpings of berries every week is a good thing," said Stoner. "We know berries have so many effects on processes related to cancer development. They are one of the food stuffs you probably should consider consuming every day, or at least a few times a week."

And unlike raw broccoli, berries of any color actually taste good!

Don't have any strong feelings about broccoli slaw or berries? Well, how was your weekend? Did you watch the Superbowl?

Raw Broccoli: Crabby Draws the Line

Cartoon by Natalie Dee

I may have mentioned before that I'm one of those crackpots who will often heed the results of the health studies I read.

For example, years ago I read that red bell peppers have more nutrients than green ones, and blue potatoes have more than white ones. So I will actually go out of my way to buy blue potatoes and red bell peppers.

I know full well that often these studies are followed up by newer studies that say the opposite. But when I'm not tearing my hair out cursing all the conflicting studies, I tend to remember the last thing I read, and if possible, I do what it says.

On the other hand, sometimes when I don't like the results, I pretend I never even read the study.

Like when I read that you shouldn't put milk in your tea or you won't get any of the antioxidant benefits. I tried tea without milk, didn't like it, and so I said "Feh! I'll drink it the way I like it!" (Actually, I'm guessing I used a different word than "feh," but I bet it also started with an "f".) And while the jury is still out on the whole issue, at least one tea with milk study came along and said--nah, it's ok--go ahead and add milk if you like.


So what's the latest study I plan to ignore?

One that says raw broccoli delivers ten times more of the anti-carcinogen sulforaphane than cooked broccoli.

Which is great news for all you folks who like it raw!

But I hate raw broccoli and don't mind it cooked. More specifically, I like it best if it's overcooked, and combined with other tasty ingredients like olive oil or garlic or cheese.

(And yes, there was indeed an earlier study that said the opposite: that cooking broccoli increased antioxidants. But alas, there's a difference between how much of the good stuff is in the food, and how much actually ends up in your bloodstream, so that's part of the reason the studies go back and forth. Am I ridiculously obsessed with stupid unpredictable antioxidants that keep changing their minds? Yep, apparently so!)

Anyway, as much as I like the idea of all that virtuous sulforaphane being ready and available in raw broccoli, I'm still going to cook the hell out of it. Of course, I could just eat TEN TIMES AS MUCH broccoli as I used to in order to make up for the fact that I cook it, but I think I'd rather say "screw it" and croak a decade or so earlier.

Oh wait. Wasn't I just saying the other day about how I'm feeling all inspired to be more positive on the blog from now on, and not quite so Cranky?

Whoops!

Well, um...

Hang on, I'm thinking...

Got it!!

(If this blog had a soundtrack, harp music would now be playing...)

Broccoli may have been the vegetable they studied, but it isn't the only one that has sulforaphane in it, right? There's cabbage and cauliflower and some other ones too. I bet they're also pretty powerful cancer fighters if eaten raw.

Raw cabbage... that's coleslaw! And raw cauliflower.... that's not so bad! Especially if you dip it in something yummy. (At the moment, let's ignore the fact that most yummy dips are full of saturated fats or the wrong omega's or whatever.)

So until the scientists change their minds again, I'll skip the raw broccoli, but please pass the raw cauliflower and dip. And I'll take a side order of coleslaw!

(Anyone placing bets on how long this whole "have a more positive attitude" thing is gonna last?)


Does anyone else read about health research only to ignore the findings they don't like? Anything in particular you're ignoring at the moment?