Dispelling nutrition myths, ranting, and occasionally, raving


Leave a comment

What bothered me about Lizzo’s red bikini

Screen Shot 2020-02-09 at 7.04.58 PM

An article I kept seeing popping up in my Twitter feed over the past few days was titled “Lizzo rocks tiny red bikini while on vacation in Brazil” and was accompanied by a couple of photos of Lizzo on a beach wearing a red bikini. And while part of me was like, “good for her” and was pleasantly surprised to see a positive headline there was another part of me that felt really uncomfortable about the whole thing. I spent altogether too much time trying to figure out exactly what about it made me uncomfortable. No, it wasn’t that she was wearing a bikini, I wear a bikini when I go to the beach and I have no problem with other people wearing bikinis, I’m not a total prude.

My problem with it is, that I don’t think it’s cool for us to be publicly judging people’s bodies, regardless of their size, and regardless of whether or not that judgement is positive or negative. I hate seeing those magazines at the grocery store checkouts that are plastered with paparazzi shots of famous people on beaches and are either commenting on their cellulite or their hotness. Just because someone is famous that doesn’t mean their bodies belong to the public domain. It doesn’t mean that they’ve granted us permission to share photos of them during their personal time and pass judgement on them. And just because those judgements happen to be fat-positive it doesn’t make them any more acceptable. Yes, it’s great that Lizzo is confident and is a positive role model but that doesn’t make it okay for us to intrude on her personal vacation and it doesn’t make it okay for us to comment on her body. Frankly, other people’s bodies are none of our business.


2 Comments

How much do you weigh?

d6dd70e1d39b98ef75f9c38453333be1

How much do you weigh? That question seems to be asked of us all too often. It’s something that I never really gave all that much thought to as someone who had maintained relatively the same weight since university. However, as I’ve learned more about taking a weight-neutral approach to healthcare, and experienced the changes that my body went through during pregnancy and postnatally, it’s something that I find myself thinking about a lot.

So many of us tie our identities up in our size and part of that is our weight. We think of ourselves as being a certain height and weight and we talk about those things as if they’re static numbers but for many of us, that’s not the case. When we gain or lose weight unintentionally it’s as if suddenly our identities are called into question. We’re not the person that others are meeting for the first time; the real me is someone who’s 20 pounds lighter, or 10 pounds heavier.

The thing is though, our bodies change, and that’s normal and okay. Many of us gain a few pounds in the winter (there’s even a word for it in German: winterspeck) only to shed them again in the warmer months. Most people will weigh more in middle age than we did as young adults. And yet, we think that we need to be the same weight as our youthful selves. We talk about losing those “last 10 pounds” as if some weight on a BMI chart is our “true” weight. As if once we attain that weight we will have reached our final destination and our weight will never change again.

We are all changing all the time. Our bodies are always changing and it’s foolish of us to think that our weight is a magically unchanging fact about ourselves. It’s okay not to be the same size that you were 20 years ago, or two months ago. You are no more or less worthy of love and acceptance if your body is larger or smaller than it was in the past or will be in the future. You are no more or less yourself if you gain or lose weight. Your identity does not hinge on numbers on a scale.


3 Comments

Will the Impossible Burger give you boobs?

A13usaonutL._CLa_2140,2000_71q5brCxSVL.png_0,0,2140,2000+0.0,0.0,2140.0,2000.0._UL1500_

I saw this article making the rounds on Twitter and I couldn’t resist blogging about it. For those who haven’t seen it, and can’t be bothered to click the link (honestly, it’s not worthy of your clicks) it’s some sort of “Big Meat” propaganda. The headline reads: DOCTOR: Burger King’s ‘Impossible Burger’ has 18 Million Times More Estrogen Than Regular Whopper: Burger King’s Impossible Burger may cause men to grow breasts. Total clickbait and I, for one, could not resist it.

According to the article, the Impossible Burger has 44 mg of estrogen while the Whopper has a mere 2.5 ng. Allegedly this means that if a hypothetical man were to eat four Impossible Burgers a day (for some indeterminate number of days which I feel is a pretty huge omission) he would grow breasts.  Apparently, eating four Impossible Burgers a day is the same as drinking six glasses of soy milk a day which is well known to be the magic number of glasses of soy milk at which men will spontaneously grow breasts. Except, I can find absolutely no evidence that this is true. According to Harvard, there are a number of reasons why men may grow breasts including certain medications and medical conditions but there is no mention of soy (which is the source of the phytoestrogens in the Impossible Burger). Fellow RD, Andy has also dispelled many of the myths around soy consumption including claims that it can have a detrimental effect on men’s health in this article.

You may also have noticed that the doctor who wrote the original smear piece on the Impossible Burger refers to estrogen while I’m talking about phytoestrogens. Despite what you may have heard, these are not the same things. Estrogen is the hormone found in humans and other animals while phytoestrogens are the plant-based forms of estrogen. Phytoestrogens do not have the same effect on us as estrogen does. I think it’s also worth pointing out that all of these men who are now afraid to eat the Impossible Burger because they might get boobs that there is already a LOT of soy in many foods that you’re probably eating every day. There is soy in many processed meats (yep, your good old manly hot dogs, deli meats, and many beef burgers) contain TVP (textured vegetable protein, aka soy, as a cheap filler); many of your sports supplements like bars, shakes, and protein powders contain soy; breakfast cereals, etc.

The article I referenced above was from a publication called National File which purports to be “America’s newest conservative news source”. This automatically raises red flags for me. As it’s pretty much proclaiming to be fake news. The original article by Dr Stangle was published in Tri-State Livestock News. Hmm…. could such a publication possibly have any bias? Surely they would never want to paint beef burgers in a more favourable light than plant-based burgers. And not that this means that he’s not knowledgeable about human nutrition but the doctor who wrote the article is a Doctor of Veterinary Medicine. This doesn’t instil great confidence in me that he’s an authority on human nutrition. I also wonder about where he gets his money from; certainly not soybean farmers but perhaps cattle ranchers? I can’t find much about him online but I did find an article that mentions he’s a member of the American Association of Bovine Practitioners.

All this to say: sorry everyone who’s been scarfing down four Impossible Burgers daily in the hopes of growing breasts, you’re going to be sorely disappointed. I still wouldn’t recommend eating that many burgers a day (Impossible or otherwise) but they’re not going to give you breasts.


Leave a comment

Scientific illiteracy will be the death of us

Maybe it’s nothing new but it seems to me that there’s an ever increasing lack of scientific literacy in government and I worry about the impact that this will have on all of us. Just a few recent examples of this illiteracy include a relatively innocuous twitter post by the Ministry of Health in Ontario touting the supposed benefits of consuming dark chocolate. This despite the fact that research does not support this assertion, nor did the article that the post was linked to.

IMG-1823

Another more worrisome example was a recent op ed by Thomas Mulcair (former leader of the federal NDP) in support of naturopaths because:

In today’s world, people are more informed than ever and you need a compelling reason to remove their right to make decisions for themselves. There are many alternative medical practices, old and new, that are providing treatment, comfort and relief to patients but that cannot be fully explained by science. They now need to be regulated in the public interest, not prosecuted on the pretense of protecting the public.

*Major cringe*. Sorry, but protecting the public is not a pretence. Given the misleading use of the title “doctor” among professions such as naturopathy and chiropractice (is that a word?) it is increasingly important that the public be protected from charlatans offering pseudoscience disguised as medical treatments. Yes, there are certainly problems with modern medicine but that doesn’t mean that the government (who is to blame for most of these problems through lack of doctors, short appointments, and long wait times) should ease the way for Canadians to access unproven treatments.

Democratic candidate Andrew Yang tweeted out his excitement about appearing on the Doctor Oz Show saying that he had “made a lot of people smarter about their health”. Even though Oz has done more harm than good at this point with his enthusiastic promotion of countless “miracle cures” and other quackery.

IMG-1825

The most alarming example I can think of is the recent bill in the States forcing women to have ectopic pregnancies reimplanted in the uterus. Something that is impossible. Rep John Becker who was responsible for the anti-abortion bill, upon facing huge backlash from the public and the medical community, admitted that he hadn’t consulted with doctors on the matter and “how was he supposed to know” that such a procedure was impossible. Which I think pretty much sums up the whole problem. How are our government officials, representatives, departments, etc supposed to have knowledge about topics on which they have no education or experience? Well, this is why they have staff who they should be using to do research before they go drafting harmful and impossible laws, writing dangerous op eds, and shooting off inaccurate social media posts. If somehow by some miracle anyone working at any level of government is reading this post, I implore you, have your staff (or even reach out yourself) consult with experts in whatever field you are hoping to legislate or promote before you do anything public. And please know that registered dietitians are the professionals you want to consult when you are doing anything related to nutrition. Federally in Canada you have access to dietitians through Health Canada or Dietitians of Canada. In Ontario you have public health dietitians who would be more than happy to be consulted through ODPH (Ontario Dietitians in Public Health).

 


Leave a comment

Does removing gluten make foods healthy?

dvmxh

Based on some suggestions I’ve seen recently for “healthy” muffins and recipe searches for various baked goods I feel that a refresher on gluten is in order. I’m just going to put it right out there: the absence of gluten in a recipe has absolutely no bearing on how healthy it is.

For those who are unaware, gluten is a protein found in certain grains, the most common of which is wheat. Gluten helps to provide structure and texture in baked goods such as breads. Gluten is neither inherently healthy or unhealthy. Now, some people do have to avoid gluten in their diets if they have celiac disease, an allergy, or an intolerance, for that small percentage of the population, eating food containing gluten can make them sick. For the other 90-something percent of us though, gluten is perfectly healthy and safe for us to consume. In fact, some research has shown that a gluten-free diet may actually be less healthy than a glutenous diet. A gluten free diet may be low in fibre and some vitamins and minerals.

In addition, gluten free flours and packaged foods aren’t cheap. You’ll spend considerably more for gluten free products than you will for their gluten-full or potentially gluten contaminated counterparts. And while gluten free options have come a long way over the past few years, many of them are still inferior in taste and texture to regular gluten containing versions.

So, unless you have a medical condition which precludes you from eating gluten there is no health (or flavour, or financial) benefit to avoiding it. Be grateful that you don’t have to live your life in fear of being “glutened” and enjoy your gluten-filled baked goods.