A glass of red wine may pair well with a turkey dinner, but drinking even a small amount can cause headaches in some people. The dreaded “red wine headache” can occur between 30 minutes to three hours after consuming as little as a small glass’ worth. In a study published November 20 in the journal Scientific Reports, a team from the University of California, Davis and the University of California, San Francisco reports that they may have found the culprit.

[Related: Red wine is a trifecta of chemicals that can make some people feel terrible.]

Questioning the quercetin

The team believes that a flavanol found naturally in red wines can interfere with the body’s usual metabolism of alcohol, which may lead to a headache. This flavanol is called quercetin and it is found in multiple types of fruits and vegetables, including grapes. Quercetin is considered a healthy antioxidant and can even be taken as a supplement, but it can become a problem when metabolized alongside alcohol.

“When it gets in your bloodstream, your body converts it to a different form called quercetin glucuronide,” study co-author and UC Davis wine chemist Andrew Waterhouse said in a statement. “In that form, it blocks the metabolism of alcohol.”

The end result is an accumulation of a toxin called acetaldehyde.

“Acetaldehyde is a well-known toxin, irritant and inflammatory substance,” study co-author and UC Davis microbiologist Apramita Devi said in a statement. “Researchers know that high levels of acetaldehyde can cause facial flushing, headache and nausea.”

A medication called disulfiram that is prescribed to patients to help treat alcohol dependence to discourage drinking is known to cause these same symptoms if alcohol is consumed. Disulfiram also makes acetaldehyde from drinking alcohol build up when an enzyme in the body would usually break it down. Roughly 40 percent of the East Asian population also has alcohol metabolizing enzymes that allows for acetaldehyde to build up in their system.

“We postulate that when susceptible people consume wine with even modest amounts of quercetin, they develop headaches, particularly if they have a preexisting migraine or another primary headache condition,” study co-author and University of California, San Francisco neurologist Morris Levin said in a statement. “We think we are finally on the right track toward explaining this millennia-old mystery. The next step is to test it scientifically on people who develop these headaches, so stay tuned.”

Turn the lights down

According to the team, sunlight increases the headache-causing flavanol in the grapes grown to make wine. 

[Related: Can I be allergic to alcohol?]

“If you grow grapes with the clusters exposed, such as they do in the Napa Valley for their cabernets, you get much higher levels of quercetin. In some cases, it can be four to five times higher,” said Waterhouse.

Levels of quercetin can differ depending on how the wine is made, including skin contact during fermentation, the fining processes, and even aging.

The study cautions that there are still many unknowns about the causes of red wine headaches. While we have a better understanding of the biological processes behind red wine headaches, it is still a mystery why some people remain more susceptible to them than others. The team is working on comparing red wines that have a lot of quercetin like shiraz with those that do not have as much to test their theory that quercetin is truly behind red wine headaches on people. They are also curious if the enzymes of people who get red wine headaches often are more easily inhibited by the flavanol or if this group is more easily affected by the buildup of the toxin acetaldehyde.

“If our hypothesis pans out, then we will have the tools to start addressing these important questions,” Waterhouse said.

The post Why does red wine cause headaches? It may be flavanol’s fault appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Americans consume billions of pounds of meat each year. And yet, there’s a plethora of research showing that copious amounts of meat can be unhealthy, both for the Earth and our bodies.  

The question of how to steer consumers toward healthier and more sustainable plant-based foods is a tricky one. Warning labels, similar to the ones found on cigarette packs, could be one way to raise awareness about the negative impacts of meat and perhaps sway consumer choices. But they’re still completely experimental.

In a new study published in the journal Appetite, psychologists in the UK created an online food-selection task where about 1,000 participants—all of whom ate meat—had to choose between a meat-based, fish-based, vegetarian, or vegan meal 20 times. A quarter of these participants based their decisions on images of each of the dishes. The remaining participants were randomly assigned to also see a warning label about the impact of meat on health, climate change, or the risk of future pandemics (researchers and organizations like the United Nations have linked high meat consumption with risk of infectious diseases). The team found that each warning label type reduced the subjects’ desire to eat meat: by 9 percent with health labels, 7 percent with climate labels, and 10 percent with pandemic labels. The individuals also viewed the climate label as the most credible of the three and the pandemic label the least, but potentially had a stronger emotional response to the latter.

One reason these warnings might work is because people see a negative outcome attached to meat, so they have a gut reaction and opt for a different food, says Jack Hughes, a psychology researcher at Durham University in England and lead author on the new paper. Another explanation could just be that the extra information gets people to think more consciously about their decisions, he explains. 

[Related: How to enjoy fake meat in a way that actually helps the planet]

The results of the study are “very in line with what we’ve seen with regards to labeling efforts and their effect on consumer behavior,” says Lindsey Smith Taillie. “They have a small to moderate effect on consumer choices.” Taillie, a nutrition epidemiologist at the University of North Carolina who studies how policies affect food choices, notes that the inclusion of pandemic-related labels is a first for this kind of research, at least to her knowledge. She would be especially interested to see how consumers in the US would react to that kind of messaging given the different political and cultural climate.

There are many factors that could influence the effectiveness of a warning label on a product. For example, as basic as it sounds, pictures make a difference. “We do know for tobacco in the UK that when images became mandatory alongside the text, labels got more effective,” Hughes explains. In two prior studies, Taillie and her collaborators found that text-only labels cautioning of health and environmental impacts of meat consumption only mildly reduced people’s carnivorous intentions, if at all. 

But not all images are the same. Take the case of high sugar content: A photo of teaspoons full of sugar is more factual and informative than a visual of a diseased heart, Taillie says. Regardless, “graphic labels are generally considered to be the most effective type,” she adds.

With warning labels, the goal is to grab people’s attention and get them thinking about their food’s footprint. But it ends up being counterproductive if the message makes the consumer feel angry or restricted, Taillie adds. One 2022 study out of Europe found that eliciting disgust by adding graphic images to packaging can both increase and decrease the likelihood of individuals choosing meat products, depending on whether they felt manipulated. Another recent European study found that meat-shaming messages on products can have paradoxical effects on buying habits.

The next step for this sort of research, says Taillie, would be to see how such labels affect choices in real-world settings—when factors like smells, prices, and peer pressure might influence consumer decisions. It’s also probably easier to choose the plant-based option when it’s a hypothetical online task and you don’t actually have to eat the food, she adds.

[Related: When faced with tough choices, your brain secretly tips the scales]

But choosing a meat-free diet can be an incredibly impactful way for individuals to reduce their carbon footprint, and this research can help nudge people in that direction. “In the UK, the Climate Change Committee says that meat consumption in the country needs to be reduced by 20 percent by 2030 [to meet carbon emission goals],” Hughes says. His team’s work shows that one simple and cheap action could change minds in a portion of the population. 

Would that be in the case in the US as well? Taillie sees a parallel with graphic tobacco warnings, which were adopted by European countries but have stalled in the state due to lawsuits. With meat labels, she says, “I think we’re looking at a timespan of decades.”

The post Graphic warning labels might convince people to eat less meat appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Among domestic cats, feline obesity is the most frequent nutritional disorder veterinarians in the United States see. Defined as a body weight that is 20 percent or more above a normal weight of eight to 12 pounds, it can impact a cat’s longevity and lead to diabetes and chronic inflammation among other health problems. A study published in the Journal of Animal Science in September found that overeating has some observable effects on feline gut microbiota and digestive system. 

[Related: A new shot can be a safe and effective alternative to surgical spaying.]

According to study co-author and University of Illinois nutritional scientist Kelly Swanson, about 60 percent of cats in the US are considered overweight. 

“While many studies have investigated feline weight loss, there has been little focus on the opposite process, which is also important. In this study, we wanted to learn more about the metabolic and gastrointestinal changes that occur as a result of overeating and weight gain in cats,” Swanson said in a statement. 

Complex changes

In the study, 11 adult spayed female cats were fed a standard dry cat food for two weeks. Baseline body measurements were taken and they were then allowed to eat as much as they wanted. The researchers also collected blood and poop samples at regular intervals and monitored their physical activity. Weight gain was assessed using a body condition score (BCS), which is similar to the controversial body mass index (BMI) in humans. BCS is measured on a 9-point scale where anything 6 or above is considered overweight. Like in humans, BCS is a quantitative, but also subjective, method for evaluating body fat in pets.

The cats immediately increased their food intake when they were allowed to overeat and they began to gain weight. When the study began, their average BCS was 5.41. Their BCS increased to 8.27 after 18 weeks of overfeeding. This corresponds to the cats being about 30 percent overweight by body mass. 

The researchers also analyzed changes in how much the felines pooped, their gastrointestinal transit time, how well nutrients were being digested, and changes in the build up of their gut microbiome over the 20-week study.

“We found that as cats ate more and gained weight, gastrointestinal transit time was reduced, and so was digestive efficiency. When the body gets less food, it will be more efficient in extracting nutrients. But when the amount of food increases, it passes through the digestive system faster and fewer nutrients are extracted in the process,” Swanson explained.  

A cat-specific bacteria shift 

During the 18 weeks of weight gain, the composition of the cats’ gut microbiome also changed. An anti-microbial bacteria that helps stimulate the immune system and inhibits pathogens called Bifidobacterium increased. At the same time, a bacteria that degrades fiber and has been linked to pro-inflammatory disease called Collinsella decreased. According to Swanson, these results are the opposite of what has been measured in overweight humans and suggests that their association to weight gain is complicated.  

[Related: Your cat probably knows when you’re talking to it.]

“The change in the gastrointestinal transit time was a novel finding and a potential reason for the change in fecal microbiota. Future studies should consider measuring transit time to better explain modifications to the microbiome of pets,” Swanson added. 

The more the cats ate, the more they pooped. At the same time that the cats were putting on pounds, fecal pH decreased, meaning that their poop became more acidic. A low fecal pH in humans indicates that the body isn’t absorbing fat or carbohydrates well. It appears that a lower fecal pH with higher food intake also reduced digestibility for cats. 

To measure activity level, the team used special collars. The cats were kept in a group setting where they could interact with one another and play with toys, except on the days when stool samples were collected.

“We expected that weight gain might lead to decreased physical activity, but we did not observe any consistent changes in activity level. However, this could vary with individual cats and their environment, and how much their owners interact with them,” said Swanson.

At the end of the study, the cats were put on a restricted-feeding diet that helped them return to their previous weights. A better understanding of the gastrointestinal and metabolic changes that occur with obesity in domestic pets could help with future prevention and treatment plans. Another new study co-authored by Swanson, demonstrated that restricted feeding can promote safe weight and fat loss in cats. 

The team also suggests that pet parents encourage regular physical activity with their cats. They can make it fun for the cats by stimulating foraging by placing food around the house, or using food puzzles during mealtime. Both of these strategies promote engagement and mental enrichment, according to Swanson. 

The post Overfeeding cats will mess with their guts and poop appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

“It’s been forever considered a garbage fish, but it’s probably the most delicious fish that we serve,” David Standridge says about the bottom-dwelling sea robin. Standridge is the executive chef of a farm-to-sea-to-fork restaurant The Shipwright’s Daughter in Mystic, Connecticut. For him, the historically maligned but mild tasting sea robin is the “poster child” for a fish that should be eaten more because it is so abundant.

“Part of supporting local and supporting small business is really building a more resilient food system,” says Standridge. “So that’s the first thing that we look at when we look at abundance, and what species we are choosing.”

Seared sea robin, smoked swordfish tater tots, and locally caught whiting wrapped in sugar kelp (tempura fried) are just some of the potentially sustainable dishes diners can find on the menu here. While using ingredients sourced by local farmers is difficult to scale up to more mainstream restaurants and grocery chains, The Shipwright’s Daughter’s creative work with both supply chains and flavor profiles make for a delicious starting point. 

[Related: Why seaweed is a natural fit for replacing certain plastics.]

The Shipwright’s Daughter is a 2023 James Beard Foundation Smart Catch leader, working with other restaurants and chefs to evaluate the environmental impact of the fish served. Standridge uses the Monterey Bay Aquarium Seafood Watch–an assessment tool that helps consumers and chefs alike gauge the sustainability of their seafood–to evaluate every fish on the menu. This year, 97.3 percent of the fish served is certified sustainable, according to Standridge. 

While the menu adjusts to the seasons and what’s readily available, one of its popular items is a delightful soup with a subtly flavored local white fish called scup, served with kelp vinegar and smoked sea beans. The seared sea robin is surprisingly light. A member of the distinct Triglidae family of fish, sea robins are covered in spines. They use “walking rays” to crawl along the bottom of the ocean and help them sense the mollusks and crustaceans that they eat. Yet, the dish is approachable–for the more selective eaters.

These fish live along coastal Connecticut and Rhode Island, which cuts down on shipping costs and reduces the amount of fossil fuels used to bring fish from the water to the dinner plate. The entrees on the menu range from about $25 to $60, which is on par with smart casual restaurants in Mystic. The seaside town is an emerging New England food destination with everything from artisanal doughnuts to fusion cuisine from Bangladeshi chef Sheuli Solaiman. 

Standridge also works closely with nearby Stonington Kelp Co. co-owner and sugar kelp farmer Suzie Flores to incorporate this giant seaweed into many of their signature dishes. Alongside her husband, Flores farms three acres of kelp on sturdy mooring lines about a mile from shore in Fishers Island Sound. She sells it fresh from the docks of a local marina in season and at multiple farmers markets in Connecticut. From there, consumers have a wide range of ways to eat it, from fresh salads, pickled, or even powdered and sprinkled on pasta and pizza for a little kick of extra nutrients.

[Related: Eating sustainably may mean skipping the lobster for now.]

Standridge and Flores share a similar approach to both sustainability and food and Flores devotes a great deal of time promoting kelp and growing this viable market so people of all incomes can eventually benefit from it. 

“Sustainability is kind of a multi-faceted approach,” Flores tells PopSci. “It’s something that is grown while doing as little harm as you can. It’s also possibly about negating harm and can be restorative in some ways and can help support an economy and community. It’s not just about growing something using no fertilizer, not using any freshwater, or putting pressure on resources, but it also is about developing an economy around it as well.”

Flores cultivates sugar kelp which is a native seaweed that grows along the Northeastern United States and up into Canada. Farmed sugar kelp grows over the winter months and is harvested every spring. It absorbs excess nitrogen from the water, while also producing oxygen. Sugar kelp also grows as quickly as six and a half feet from the time it is planted to harvest, according to Flores. 

[Related: Why seaweed farming could be the next big thing in sustainability.]

Nutritionally, sugar kelp is an excellent source of fiber, vitamins C and K, calcium, and more. “I feel like it’s kind of common knowledge that fish is good for you, and the reason fish is good for you is because of all of the things that are present in seaweed,” says Flores.

Seaweeds like kelp could be major components of building a more sustainable food system. They can be used in cow feed to reduce methane emissions and research from Tufts University found that it could help tackle food insecurity. The plants with a reputation for being a messy nuisance can even be used in tasty desserts including the restaurant’s sea salt caramels and its light and sweet kelp cake. 

“We pickle as much as we can and then it’s just really a delicious kind of condiment for anything. In that form, you can mix it into soups and sauces, you can put it into salads,” says Standridge. “We can do a lot of things where you just kind of want a little bit of ocean flavor in something that’s not going to be overpowering. It’s a great product.”

One of the biggest challenges of sustainable agriculture is bringing it up to scale so healthy foods like kelp are more affordable. Standridge says that his restaurant and others that use seaweed can help encourage people to try to incorporate more of it into their diets because diners there are typically more open to trying something new. It can pique interest in kelp and other ingredients that consumers may be less familiar with.

Financial support from organizations like NOAA Sea Grant and the National Science foundation can help fund the next steps of scaling seaweed production up and using existing fishing infrastructure to keep seaweed sustainable and economical. Educational events like Kelp Harvest Week or maintaining a presence at farmer’s markets has also helped the public become more open to eating seaweed. 

“If you go to an apple orchard, there’s usually apples that are down on the bottom and rotting. You wouldn’t pick those up and have that be your representation of an apple,” says Flores. “We harvest our kelp fresh from a line out in the ocean, so it’s not the same seaweed that you find washed up on the shore. And that makes a huge difference.”

Bringing sustainable ingredients up to scale requires time, investment, and faces the tug of war of maintaining its low environmental impact without generating more waste or burning unnecessary fossil fuels. Despite the challenge, supporting smaller farms and fisheries could prove to be a tool in working towards a more sustainable food system for more of us, perhaps with a side of pickled kelp. 

The post This sea-to-farm-to-table restaurant wants kelp to catch on appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

This article was originally featured in KFF Health News.

Halloween candy could be in for a California makeover.

Asserting that the Food and Drug Administration has not moved quickly enough on dangerous food additives, state lawmakers last month passed the California Food Safety Act, which bans four ingredients found in popular snacks and packaged foods—including candy corn and other Halloween treats.

Consumer health advocates hope the ban, signed into law by Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom on Oct. 7 and set to take effect in 2027, will lead confectioners and food producers to modify their recipes for products sold both in California and elsewhere around the country.

The law prohibits the manufacture and distribution of brominated vegetable oil, potassium bromate, propylparaben, and red dye No. 3, which are used in processed foods including variations of instant potatoes and store-brand sodas, as well as candies. The additives have been linked to increased risks of cancer and nervous system problems, according to the Environmental Working Group, which sponsored the legislation, and are already banned in many other countries.

Melanie Benesh, vice president of government affairs for the Environmental Working Group, celebrated the new law as “a very big deal” and the first of its type in the country.

Food manufacturers and their lobbyists opposed the legislation, rejecting the idea that the four additives are unhealthy and arguing that such assessments should be made by the FDA.

“We should rely on the scientific rigor of the FDA in terms of evaluating the safety of food ingredients and additives,” said Christopher Gindlesperger, a spokesperson for the National Confectioners Association.

But food safety advocates say the FDA has moved far too slowly in regulating food chemicals.

“It’s unacceptable that the U.S. is so far behind the rest of the world when it comes to food safety,” said state Assembly member Jesse Gabriel (D-Woodland Hills), who introduced the bill along with Assembly member Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland), in a statement.

A letter sent to lawmakers from the sponsors of AB 418 this year noted that many new additives put in food products are not reviewed by the FDA before reaching the market. A provision in federal law called “generally recognized as safe” allows the industry to designate the chemicals as safe enough to include in food, even without notifying the agency.

FDA spokesperson Enrico Dinges, referencing the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, noted in an email that “food and color additives must be approved for their intended conditions of use, and safety information must be available to establish a reasonable certainty of no harm before they are used in products on the market.”

He added that the agency regularly reviews new data on food chemicals, and it is working on a proposed rule to ban the use of brominated vegetable oil—one of the ingredients included in the new California law—as a food ingredient. Dinges said it was “not uncommon for a substance to be approved in one jurisdiction but not in another.” He noted some color additives are authorized for use in Europe and elsewhere but not allowed in the U.S.

California’s initiative made headlines this year as a “Skittles ban” that would wipe popular candies off California shelves. But Gabriel and other proponents of the bill said the intention is simply to require modifications in the ingredients, as has already happened in Europe.

One additive included in an original version of the bill—titanium dioxide, which is in Skittles and other candy—was removed from those products before the bill reached its final version. It has been labeled a carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer.

“I admire the California legislature for doing this,” said Joan Ifland, a researcher who studies food addiction and a fellow at the American College of Nutrition. She hopes state lawmakers go further in addressing food safety issues and the chemicals in processed food. “It should give courage to other legislators.”

Perhaps the most prominent ingredient on California’s banned list is red dye No. 3. It is allowed only in candied and cocktail cherries in the European Union but is widely used in the U.S.

A search of Food Scores, an online database maintained by the Environmental Working Group, generated more than 3,000 products that contain the chemical. The list includes items like frosted pretzels and scores of brand-name candies such as Peeps and Pez. It also includes items like fruit cocktail cups, protein drinks, and yogurts.

Peeps is already phasing out the ingredient—products will no longer contain red dye No. 3 after the 2024 Easter season, according to Keith Domalewski, director of marketing for its parent company, Just Born Quality Confections.

“Just Born has always evolved with new developments and consumer preferences,” Domalewski said in an emailed statement. “We have worked hard to develop new formulations to bring fans the colorful PEEPS they know and love.”

Pez representatives did not respond to a request for comment. The two major manufacturers of candy corn also did not comment.

The FDA banned some uses of the color additive in 1990, confirming it had been linked to increased risks of cancer, and prohibited its use in cosmetics and as a pigment in various foods. It said at the time it was taking steps to restrict the chemical—but never did.

Another of the newly banned ingredients, potassium bromate, has also been linked to cancer and is on California’s Proposition 65 list of ingredients that may pose increased cancer risks. It also has not been banned.

Food manufacturers and distribution groups did not indicate whether they would challenge California’s new law.

This article was produced by KFF Health News, which publishes California Healthline, an editorially independent service of the California Health Care Foundation. 

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.

The post Some popular Halloween candies will have to change their recipes soon appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

This article was originally feature do The Conversation.

Preparing a bowl of chicken soup for a loved one when they’re sick has been a common practice throughout the world for centuries. Today, generations from virtually every culture swear to the benefits of chicken soup. In the U.S., the dish is typically made with noodles, but different cultures prepare the soothing remedy their own way.

Chicken soup as a therapy can be traced back to 60 A.D. and Pedanius Dioscorides, an army surgeon who served under the Roman emperor Nero, and whose five-volume medical encyclopedia was consulted by early healers for more than a millennium. But the origins of chicken soup go back thousands of years earlier, to ancient China.

So, with cold and flu season in full swing, it’s worth asking: Is there any science to back the belief that it helps? Or does chicken soup serve as just a comforting placebo, that is, providing psychological benefit while we’re sick, without an actual therapeutic benefit?

As a registered dietitian and professor of dietetics and nutrition, I’m well aware of the appeal of chicken soup: the warmth of the broth and the rich, savory flavors of the chicken, vegetables and noodles. What gives the soup that distinctive taste is “umami”—the fifth category of taste sensations, along with sweet, salty, sour and bitter. It is often described as having a “meaty” taste.

Improved appetite, better digestion

All that makes sense, because amino acids are the building blocks of proteins, and the amino acid glutamate is found in foods with the umami taste. Not all umami foods are meat or poultry, however; cheese, mushrooms, miso and soy sauce have it too.

Studies show that taste, it turns out, is critical to the healing properties of chicken soup. When I see patients with upper respiratory illnesses, I notice many of them are suddenly eating less or not eating at all. This is because acute illnesses ignite an inflammatory response that can decrease your appetite. Not feeling like eating means you’re unlikely to get the nutrition you need, which is hardly an optimal recipe for immune health and recovery from illness.

But evidence suggests that the umami taste in chicken soup may help spur a bigger appetite. Participants in one study said they felt hungrier after their first taste of a soup with umami flavor added in by researchers.

Other studies say umami may also improve nutrient digestion. Once our brains sense umami through the taste receptors on our tongues, our bodies prime our digestive tracts to absorb protein more easily.

This can reduce gastrointestinal symptoms, which many people experience when they’re under the weather. Although most people don’t associate upper respiratory infections with gastrointestinal symptoms, research in children has found that the flu virus increased abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting and diarrhea symptoms.

May reduce inflammation and stuffy nose

Inflammation is part of the body’s natural response to injury or illness; inflammation occurs when white blood cells migrate to inflamed tissue to assist with healing. When this inflammatory process occurs in the upper airway, it results in common cold and flu symptoms, such as a stuffy or runny nose, sneezing, coughing and thickened mucus.

Conversely, lower white blood cell activity in the nasal passages can reduce inflammation. And interestingly, research shows that chicken soup can in fact lower the number of white blood cells traveling to inflamed tissues. It does this by directly inhibiting the ability of neutrophils, a type of white blood cell, to travel to the inflamed tissue.

Key ingredients

To truly understand the soothing and healing effects of chicken soup, it’s important to consider the soup’s ingredients. Not all chicken soups are packed with nutritious healing properties. For instance, the ultraprocessed canned versions of chicken soup, both with and without noodles, lack many of the antioxidants found in homemade versions. Most canned versions of chicken soup are nearly devoid of hearty vegetables.

The core nutrients in homemade versions of the soup are what set these varieties apart from canned versions. Chicken provides the body with a complete source of protein to combat infection. Vegetables supply a wide array of vitamins, minerals and antioxidants. If prepared the American way, noodles provide an easily digestible source of carbohydrate that your body uses for energy and recovery.

Even the warmth of chicken soup can help. Drinking the liquid and inhaling the vapors increase the temperature of nasal and respiratory passages, which loosens the thick mucus that often accompanies respiratory illnesses. Compared with hot water alone, studies show chicken soup is more effective at loosening mucus.

The herbs and spices sometimes used in chicken soup, such as pepper and garlic, also loosen mucus. The broth, which contains water and electrolytes, helps with rehydration.

So, to maximize the health benefits of chicken soup, I recommend a homemade variety, which can be prepared with carrots, celery, fresh garlic, herbs and spices, to name a few ingredients. But if you need a more convenient option, look at the ingredients and nutrition facts label, and choose soups with a variety of vegetables over an ultraprocessed, nutrient-depleted kind.

In short, the latest science suggests that chicken soup—though not an out-and-out cure for colds and flu—really helps with healing. Looks like Grandma was right again.

The post Does chicken soup really help when you’re sick? appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

The Guinness World Records officially dubbed Pepper X the world’s hottest chili pepper earlier this year, going public with the announcement on October 9. Pepper X has a rating of an average of 2.69 million Scoville Heat Units (SHU). On the SHU scale, zero is considered bland, while a regular jalapeño pepper registers at about 5,000 SHU. For a non-food comparison, pepper spray used in self-defense is about 1.6 million SHUs and bear spray is about 2.2 million.

[Related: Spiciness isn’t a taste, and more burning facts about the mysterious sensation.]

Winthrop University in South Carolina calculated this off-the-charts Scobille score with specimens collected over the past four years. Pepper X has a greenish-yellow color with grooves and ridges. According to the five brave souls who have eaten it, Pepper X has an earthy flavor once the heat begins to subside.  

It dethroned the 10-year reign of the 1.64 million SHU Carolina Reaper, but both peppers were created by the same chili pepper expert to be extra spicy. Ed Currie is the founder of Puckerbutt Pepper Company and has been working on Pepper X since the bright red Carolina Reaper first took the title in 2013.

When creating a new breed of pepper, it can take several years for the desired traits to emerge through selective breeding. It takes about 10 generations for hybrid peppers to stabilize with predictable traits and consistent fruit.

Pepper X was a crossbreed with Carolina Reaper and a mystery pepper that Currie did not disclose. His goal was to create an extremely hot pepper that also had some sweetness. The spice of Pepper X even made an expert like Currie wince in pain.

“I was feeling the heat for three-and-a-half hours. Then the cramps came,” Currie told the Associated Press. “Those cramps are horrible. I was laid out flat on a marble wall for approximately an hour in the rain, groaning in pain.”

A chemical in peppers called capsaicin is what causes the burning sensation when eating a spicy pepper like the Carolina Reaper or Pepper X. Humans and other mammals will perceive capsaicin as a threat when eaten, which sends the strong burning signal throughout the body. 

According to University of Tennessee epidemiologist Paul D. Terry, the short-term effects of eating extremely spicy foods range from enjoying the sensation of heat to a more unpleasant burning sensation on the lips, tongue, and mouth. Spicy foods can also cause various forms of digestive tract discomfort, headaches, and vomiting, so it is best to avoid eating them if you experience these effects. 

[Related: Leftovers of a 2,000-year-old curry discovered on stone cooking tools.]

Capsaicin is painless except when eaten in large quantities and is likely not harmful over a long period of time. Some experts generally agree that spicy food does not cause stomach ulcers, but the association with stomach cancer isn’t as clear.

The burning sensation also releases endorphins and dopamine. Currie began growing peppers after overcoming addiction to drug and alcohol and says that kick is a natural high for him. He shares the peppers he creates with medical researchers, in hopes that they can be used to explore new cures for disease or help those with chronic pain or discomfort.

Correction (October 21, 2023): An earlier version of the story mistakenly said that capsaicin is harmful except when eaten in large quantities. It should have said that capsaicin is not harmful.

The post The world’s hottest chili pepper is worse than bear spray appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

While sourdough starter is not the social media star it was in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, sourdough bread is still deliciously easy to make at home. It’s also a prime canvas for studying microbes. A study published October 4 in the open-access journal PeerJ found that using different types of flour creates different bacterial communities. These variations contribute to sourdough’s unique flavors and aromas. 

[Related: How to make a sourdough starter—and keep it alive.]

Professional and at-home bakers alike can influence the aroma of their loaves of sourdough bread simply by using different flours, according to study co-author and North Carolina State University microbial ecologist Erin McKenney.

“Our new work focuses on the role that different types of flour play in shaping those microbial ecosystems,” McKenney said in a statement. “As it turns out, the flour bakers use to ‘feed’ their starters plays a significant role in determining which types of bacteria thrive. And that, in turn, strongly influences the aroma that these sourdoughs produce.”

In this new study, McKenney and a team of researchers developed a protocol designed to reproduce what bakers actually do in their kitchens. They created four sourdough starters using 10 different flours, creating 40 starters in total. A sourdough starter is an active colony of wild yeast and good bacteria. It is cultivated by combining water and flour and then allowing the two to ferment. When it is continually fed, it forms a reliable “natural yeast” culture that can be used to raise or leaven breads and other pastries. 

The team used five flours that contain gluten: unbleached all-purpose flour, red turkey wheat, emmer, rye, and einkorn. They also used five gluten-free flours: teff, millet, sorghum, buckwheat, and amaranth. 

For 14 days, all 40 starters were kept in the same growing environment and were fed once a day. They collected data from each starter, measuring the pH and height all while recording the different scents each start was producing. The team also sampled the starters for DNA sequencing to determine the diversity and abundance of bacteria in each of the samples.

“We found that the starters started out being fairly similar to each other, but that changed substantially over time,” McKenney said. “Over the course of the 14 days, we found that each type of flour formed increasingly distinct microbial communities. Essentially, it appears that different types of bacteria are able to make the most of the nutritional compounds found in different types of flour.”

[Related: A new kind of quinoa flour may be coming to a sugar cookie near you.]

A variety of bacterial communities thriving on different nutritional inputs can yield a wide variety of metabolic outputs, as different bacteria produce different smells.

“The bacterial community in amaranth sourdough produces an aroma that smells almost exactly like ham,” McKenney says. “I’ve never smelled a sourdough that had such a meaty aroma. Rye produces a fruity aroma, buckwheat has an earthy smell, and so on. There’s a tremendous amount of variation.”

The study came with a few surprises. The rye flour created a much wider diversity of bacteria than any other type of flour the team studied with over 30 types of bacteria at maturity. Buckwheat came in second place for most diverse bacteria with 22 types. All of the other flours had between three and 14.

They also found that seven out of the 10 flours produced starters that had high levels of bacteria which produce acetic acid, making up between 12.6 and 45.8 percent of the bacteria from the flours. This acid often acts as a leavening agent when it is combined with baking soda. Starters made using teff, amaranth, and buckwheat were all lacking the acetic acid bacteria. 

“So it’s [the acetic acid] playing a significant role in those microbial ecosystems. This is surprising because we didn’t even know this type of bacteria was found in sourdough until 2020. Our previous work found that it was not uncommon, but to see it at such high levels, across so many types of flour, was definitely interesting,” said McKenney.

While McKenney and her team were working with bread under a microscope and in a lab, this kind of research also has more practical insights for sourdough enthusiasts. It shows how home bakers can modify the flour in starters to get the exact flavors and smells they are looking for. Starters take 10 days to become “functionally mature,” which is also helpful for bakers looking to time their next sourdough loaf. 

The post Why no two sourdoughs are exactly the same appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

This article is republished from The Conversation.

Everyone has a different tolerance for spicy food—some love the burn, while others can’t take the heat. But the scientific consensus on whether spicy food can have an effect—positive or negative—on your health is pretty mixed.

In September 2023, a 14-year-old boy died after consuming a spicy pepper as part of the viral “one chip challenge.” The Paqui One Chip Challenge uses Carolina Reaper and Naga Viper peppers, which are among the hottest peppers in the world.

While the boy’s death is still under examination by health officials, it has gotten some of the spicy chips being used in these challenges removed from stores.

As an epidemiologist, I’m interested in how spicy food can affect people’s health and potentially worsen symptoms associated with chronic diseases like inflammatory bowel disease. I am also interested in how diet, including spicy foods, can increase or decrease a person’s lifespan.

The allure of spicy food

Spicy food can refer to food with plenty of flavor from spices, such as Asian curries, Tex-Mex dishes or Hungarian paprikash. It can also refer to foods with noticeable heat from capsaicin, a chemical compound found to varying degrees in hot peppers.

As the capsaicin content of a pepper increases, so does its ranking on the Scoville scale, which quantifies the sensation of being hot.

Capsaicin tastes hot because it activates certain biological pathways in mammals—the same pathways activated by hot temperatures. The pain produced by spicy food can provoke the body to release endorphins and dopamine. This release can prompt a sense of relief or even a degree of euphoria.

In the U.S., the U.K. and elsewhere, more people than ever are consuming spicy foods, including extreme pepper varieties.

Hot-pepper-eating contests and similar “spicy food challenges” aren’t new, although spicy food challenges have gotten hotter—in terms of spice level and popularity on social media.

Short-term health effects

The short-term effects of consuming extremely spicy foods range from a pleasurable sensation of heat to an unpleasant burning sensation across the lips, tongue and mouth. These foods can also cause various forms of digestive tract discomfort, headaches and vomiting.

If spicy foods are uncomfortable to eat, or cause unpleasant symptoms like migraines, abdominal pain and diarrhea, then it’s probably best to avoid those foods. Spicy food may cause these symptoms in people with inflammatory bowel diseases, for example.

Spicy food challenges notwithstanding, for many people across the world, consumption of spicy food is part of a long-term lifestyle influenced by geography and culture.

For example, hot peppers grow in hot climates, which may explain why many cultures in these climates use spicy foods in their cooking. Some research suggests that spicy foods help control foodborne illnesses, which may also explain cultural preferences for spicy foods.

Lack of consensus

Nutritional epidemiologists have been studying the potential risks and benefits of long-term spicy food consumption for many years. Some of the outcomes examined in relation to spicy food consumption include obesity, cardiovascular disease, cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, heartburn and ulcers, psychological health, pain sensitivity and death from any cause—also called all-cause mortality.

These studies report mixed results, with some outcomes like heartburn more strongly linked to spicy food consumption. As can be expected with an evolving science, some experts are more certain about some of these health effects than others.

For example, some experts state with confidence that spicy food does not cause stomach ulcers, whereas the association with stomach cancer isn’t as clear.

When taking heart disease, cancer and all other causes of death in a study population into consideration, does eating spicy food increase or decrease the risk of early death?

Right now, the evidence from large population-based studies suggests that spicy food does not increase the risk of all-cause mortality among a population and may actually decrease the risk.

However, when considering the results of these studies, keep in mind that what people eat is one part of a larger set of lifestyle factors—such as physical activity, relative body weight and consumption of tobacco and alcohol—that also have health consequences.

It’s not easy for researchers to measure diet and lifestyle factors accurately in a population-based study, at least in part because people don’t always remember or report their exposure accurately. It often takes numerous studies conducted over many years to reach a firm conclusion about how a dietary factor affects a certain aspect of health.

Scientists still don’t entirely know why so many people enjoy spicy foods while others do not, although there is plenty of speculation regarding evolutionary, cultural and geographic factors, as well as medical, biological and psychological ones.

One thing experts do know, however, is that humans are one of the only animals that will intentionally eat something spicy enough to cause them pain, all for the sake of pleasure.

Paul D. Terry is a professor of epidemiology at the University of Tennessee.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The post Eating spicy food probably won’t hurt you in the long run appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

The world of mummified poop, or coprolites, offers a fascinating look into the parasites and snacks that pass through people and animals’s digestive systems. Seeing what foods were around can give archeologists an idea of the landscape hundreds of years ago. A new DNA analysis of mummified poop from two pre-Columbian Caribbean cultures reveals that they ate a wide variety of plants, tobacco, and even cotton. The findings are described in a study published October 11 in the open-access journal PLOS ONE.

[Related: Ancient poop proves that humans have always loved beer and cheese.]

The study looked at the coprolites from two pre-Columbian cultures called the Huecoid and Saladoid. An earlier study of centuries old fecal matter supports a hypothesis that the Huecoid likely originated in the Andes Mountains in present-day Bolivia and Peru before migrating among different islands in the Caribbean around the third century CE. The Saladoid people likely originated in modern day Venezuela and traveled to the Puerto Rican island of Vieques by the sixth century CE.

“Archeologists at the University of Puerto Rico dedicated over 30 years to digs on the Island of Vieques, finding the coprolites along with many other priceless artifacts,” Gary A. Toranzos, study co-author and environmental microbiologist/paleo microbiologist at the University of Puerto Rico, tells PopSci. “One would consider finding coprolites easy [since] they are deposited every day. However, most people will not recognize them and the conditions for coprolite formation need to be very specific.”

Coprolites need dryness to preserve the DNA and it was believed that this preservation was impossible due to the Carribbean’s humid climate.  

“Narganes and Chanlate proved them wrong,” Toranzos says. 

In the study, Toranzos and microbiologist Jelissa Reynoso-García carefully extracted and analyzed plant DNA from ten coprolite samples from the La Hueca archaeological site in Puerto Rico. They then compared the extracted plant DNA against a database of diverse coprolite samples and contemporary plant DNA sequences.

They found that the Huecoid and Saladoid peoples enjoyed a diverse and sophisticated food system, including sweet potato, wild and domesticated peanut, chili peppers, a domesticated strain of tomatoes, papaya, and maize. Their analysis also detected tobacco, potentially due to chewing tobacco, pulverized tobacco inhalation, or tobacco as a food additive for medicinal and/or hallucinogenic purposes. 

[Related: What prehistoric poop reveals about extinct giant animals.]

Surprisingly, cotton was also detected in the samples. This could have been from ground cotton seeds used in oil or because women wet the cotton strands with their saliva leaving strands in the mouth while weaving. 

Additionally, they did not not find evidence of cassava consumption. Cassava is a root vegetable also called yucca and manioc. The authors were surprised that there weren’t any traces of it in these samples, as this plant was often reported as a staple food in the pre-Columbian Caribbean in sources from the time. 

“Cassava DNA was not found, likely because of the extensive preparation of the cassava powder to get rid of toxins in the plant,” says Toranzos.

Different food preparation techniques means that each coprolite sample is only a snapshot of what one specific person had been recently eating. The authors were only able to identify plants that are in current DNA sequence databases and plants that are now-extinct, rare, and in non-commercial crops were not detected. While it’s likely that the Huecoid and Saladoid people ate other plants or fungi than the study notes. The authors hope this analysis gives further insight into the lives of pre-Columbian people of the Americas.

“Even poop is a great resource for agriculture, and many other things,” Toranzos says. “Now we see they are a great way of obtaining information from those who lived thousands of years before us.”

The post Mummified poop reveals a diverse ancient Caribbean diet appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

The next time you’re at the grocery store, make sure to grab an entire pumpkin or two on the way out. Like the changing leaves and weather, this is the perfect opportunity to add some variety to your diet. And what’s more in season now than pumpkins?

“Seasonal eating is really powerful in that the earth controls the type of foods our bodies need at specific seasons of the year,” says Melanie Murphy Richter, a registered dietitian nutritionist and nutrition physiology instructor at the University of California, Irvine. “Pumpkin is one of the top foods with essential minerals and nutrients to support our mental health and immune system as we shift from summer to fall.”

Not only does pumpkin spice up your diet, but the vibrant flavors can turn a bland meal into a festive one for you and the family. But it all depends on how you’re using pumpkin in your meals.

A nutrient-rich food

As fall and winter approach, the cold weather and lack of sunlight can weaken our immune system. It’s also the time when flu, RSV, and other seasonal viruses come into circulation. Even COVID cases seem to increase in the winter with everyone huddled indoors. As part of the gourd family, pumpkins are chock-full of nutrients that support immune function, including maintaining the cells used as your body’s natural defenses. 

Take the iconic orange color of the fruit—it isn’t just for show. The hue is evidence of high amounts of beta-carotene, a precursor to vitamin A. Vitamin A is important for vision, immunity, and keeping organs working properly. As a fat-soluble vitamin, Murphy Richter says it also helps the body better absorb other nutrients we eat from food. 

Fits with many diets

The end-of-the-year holidays can be a tough time for people who are on specialized diets to manage their health. Fortunately, pumpkin is a great option to add to any meal without worrying about excess cholesterol or blood sugar spikes.

For people with diabetes, Murphy Richter says the main macronutrient to be careful of are carbohydrates. Not only are pumpkins low in carbs, “they’re a great source of dietary fiber, which aids in digestion and helps maintain a healthy weight,” explains Ferreira. “Fiber also helps regulate blood sugar levels and promotes a feeling of fullness, which can prevent overeating.”

Pumpkin is also considered a heart-healthy food for its high potassium content, Murphy Richter says. Potassium is important in regulating blood pressure and keeping a steady heart rhythm.

Think outside the pie box

Not all pumpkin products are created equal. Just because it has the word pumpkin in it, doesn’t mean it carries the same benefits. (I’m looking at you, pumpkin spice latte). Unfortunately, pumpkin pies fall into this category. It’s not so much the pumpkin content, but all the delicious additions for baking purposes. “While pumpkin puree itself is nutritious, the addition of sweeteners and a pastry crust increases the calorie and sugar content. Moderation is key when enjoying pumpkin pie,” advises Ferreira.

Pumpkin candy corn might be an even worse worst offender. Despite the name, these bite-sized sweets have no actual fruit and are instead filled with artificial flavoring and sugars. 

If you’re in a time crunch or don’t want to deal with a lot leftovers and scraps, Murphy Richter says there’s nothing wrong with using canned pumpkin puree. It’s a cheaper and more  shelf-stable alternative for when you want to add pumpkin to a meal. 

The only caveat, warns Murphy Richter, is that canned pumpkin is not going to be as nutritious as a fresh one. That’s because purees usually come from sugar pumpkins, which are smaller and less fibrous alternatives to the big ones you pick at a farm. They’re bred to be denser and sweeter, which makes them easier to use when making baked goods. That said, “the general nutrient profile is still quite good in canned pumpkin,” explains Murphy Richter.

Easy ways to add pumpkin to your diet

The great thing about pumpkin is that it doesn’t take much to incorporate it into your fall diet. Ferreira recommends whipping up a pumpkin soup by blending roasted pumpkin with vegetable broth. For added richness and flavor, try adding cinnamon, nutmeg, and a touch of coconut milk.

Finally, when you’re carving out a pumpkin, don’t throw out the seeds. Pumpkin seeds have a host of nutrients with high amounts of zinc and phosphorus. “I’m a huge pumpkin seed fan and I always roast several batches of them throughout the season,” says Murphy Richter. If you’re going for a savory taste, she recommends adding garlic, olive oil, and rosemary. For people with a sweet tooth, a dash of cinnamon and sugar can make for a healthy snack to eat throughout the day. A traditional salsa recipe could be fun to try too.

The options are endless. So whether you’re roasting pumpkin seeds or turning a jack-o’-lantern into the centerpiece of your dinner, make this season a delicious one.  

The post Why you should be eating more pumpkin this fall appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

This article originally appeared in Knowable Magazine.

From breakfast cereals and protein bars to flavored yogurt and frozen pizzas, ultraprocessed foods are everywhere, filling aisle upon aisle at the supermarket. Fully 58 percent of the calories consumed by adults and 67 percent of those consumed by children in the United States are made up of these highly palatable foodstuffs with their highly manipulated ingredients.

And ultraprocessed foods are not just filling our plates; they’re also taking up more and more space in global conversations about public health and nutrition. In the last decade or so, researchers have ramped up efforts to define ultraprocessed foods and to probe how their consumption correlates to health: A wave of recent studies have linked the foods to heightened risk for conditions ranging from cardiovascular disease and cancer to obesity and depression.

Still, some researchers — and perhaps unsurprisingly, industry representatives — question the strength of the evidence against ultraprocessed foods. The category is too poorly defined and the studies too circumstantial, they say. Plus, labeling such a large portion of our grocery carts as unhealthy ignores the benefits of industrial food processing in making food affordable, safe from foodborne pathogens, easy to prepare and in some cases more sustainable — such as through the development of plant-derived products designed to replace meat and milk.

“You cannot throw the baby out with the bathwater and decide that you’re going to just dump everything” that’s ultraprocessed, says Ciarán Forde, a sensory science and eating behavior researcher at Wageningen University in the Netherlands and coauthor of a 2022 look at food processing and diets in the Annual Review of Nutrition.

As the debate about ultraprocessed foods roils on, one path forward is to invest in understanding the mechanisms by which ultraprocessed foods affect health. If the foods are indeed harmful, what about them — what features? — makes them so, and why? Through feeding volunteers carefully formulated diets and watching their consumption behavior, researchers can identify the qualities that make these foods both so appealing and so unhealthful, they say. Such studies could help to pinpoint the most harmful types of ultraprocessed foods — ones that might be targeted with warning labels and other policies — and guide companies in tweaking their recipes to produce more healthful options.

“I think the biological mechanisms are really important both to strengthen the evidence, but also to find solutions,” says Filippa Juul, a nutritional epidemiologist at New York University. That said, Juul adds, she thinks there’s already enough evidence about the harms of ultraprocessed foods to recommend that people eat less of them.

Sifting the evidence on ultraprocessed foods

To study ultraprocessed foods, researchers must be able to define them, and even this is contentious. Food preparation involves processes like grinding, cooking, fermenting and pasteurizing — methods that have long been used to make foods safer and more digestible, palatable and storable. But according to the most widely used classification system, called NOVA, ultraprocessed foods are distinguished by additional industrial techniques, like hydrolysis, hydrogenation and extrusion, and with ingredients like emulsifiers, thickeners, flavors and other additives that are rarely found in home kitchens.

Most of the evidence that ultraprocessed foods are harmful comes from observational studies in which participants are asked about the foods they eat and have their health tracked over time. These studies have consistently found that people who ate more ultraprocessed foods were more likely to develop cardiovascular disease, high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes, some types of cancer, obesity, depression and inflammatory diseases of the gastrointestinal tract such as Crohn’s disease, as well as to die during the course of the studies.

Such observational studies can’t prove that ultraprocessed foods caused these health problems, in part because other factors in people’s lives could account for their greater risk of illness and death, Juul says. In the United States, for example, people who eat more ultraprocessed foods also tend to have lower incomes and education levels and to live in poorer neighborhoods; and unmeasured factors such as stress, sleep and exposure to racism and weight bias could confound the correlation between food processing and health.

However, Juul adds, the association between ultraprocessed foods and poor health is remarkably consistent in research from around the world. And though ultraprocessed foods often have poor nutritional profiles — containing more sugar, sodium and saturated fat than their minimally processed counterparts — that’s not the whole story: Studies that have adjusted for differences in nutritional quality have found an association of similar magnitude remains. “There seems to be something else about these foods; it’s not just about the nutrients,” Juul says.

Unlike observational studies, randomized controlled trials can provide direct evidence that a particular diet causes health issues, but so far, only one short-term trial of this type has been published. In the tightly controlled study, led by National Institutes of Health nutrition and metabolism scientist Kevin Hall and published in 2019, 20 participants lived at a clinical center for one month and were offered either minimally processed foods or ultraprocessed foods for two weeks, then the other for two weeks. The meals were matched for overall calories, carbohydrates, sugar, fiber, fat, protein and salt, and participants were told they could eat as much or as little as they liked.

During two weeks on the ultraprocessed diet, participants ate an average of 508 more calories per day and gained about two pounds, the study found; during two weeks on the minimally processed diet, they lost about the same amount.

That result was surprising to Hall, who had predicted that the level of processing wouldn’t matter since the two diets had similar nutrient levels. It also raised new questions: What is it about ultraprocessed foods that makes us eat more? And do all ultraprocessed foods have similar effects on us? The answer to the second question is probably not, Hall says. For example, in a 2023 study, overall intake of ultraprocessed food correlated with a greater risk of type 2 diabetes, but some food types — including cereals, whole grain breads, yogurt and dairy-based desserts like ice cream — were linked with a lower risk.

Hall says it will take a lot more research to figure out which subcategories of ultraprocessed foods are unhealthy and why; different mechanisms may underlie different maladies. A long list of mechanisms could contribute, adds Juul — such as food additives that affect the microbiome; the foods’ rapid and easy digestibility; chemicals absorbed from packaging; or the displacement of healthy foods from the diet. “It’s likely a combination of all of these things,” she says.

Why do we eat more ultraprocessed foods?

If people outside of lab settings eat about 500 extra calories per day on an ultraprocessed diet, as they did in Hall’s 2019 study, it could help to explain why obesity rates have grown in recent decades, he believes. Hall is now focused on understanding why ultraprocessed foods would drive us to do this.

One possible explanation is energy density, or the number of calories per gram of food. In Hall’s 2019 NIH trial, for example, energy density was higher for the ultraprocessed foods, primarily because they contained less water, than for the minimally processed foods. Previous research has shown that people tend to consume more calories when they eat energy-dense foods, perhaps because the foods are less physically filling to the gastrointestinal tract and allow for more calories to be consumed in a shorter amount of time, interfering with normal satiety signaling. When Hall and colleagues looked back at 2,733 meals served in two NIH trials comparing different types of diets, they found that energy density was one of the most important determinants of calorie intake within a given meal.

Hall and colleagues also saw in the study that participants ate more when they were offered foods containing greater amounts of certain pairs of nutrients — fat and sugar, fat and sodium, or carbohydrates and sodium — than are found in nature, or in whole foods. Such foods are “hyperpalatable,” explains Tera Fazzino, a behavioral psychologist at the University of Kansas who defined the term. Hyperpalatable foods have been shown in animal and human studies to excessively activate reward-sensing circuits in the brain, and it’s more difficult to stop eating them, she says.

That’s different from the way we enjoy other foods, Fazzino adds. An apple, for example, contains naturally occurring sugars that make it pleasant to eat, but it’s not hyperpalatable because it doesn’t also contain lots of fat. In a similar manner, many of the foods that Fazzino enjoys when she visits family in Italy, such as fish lightly seasoned with olive oil and salt, and biscotti made with butter and a touch of sugar, leave her feeling perfectly satisfied, she says.

In contrast, it can feel like an act of resistance to stop eating hyperpalatable foods, such as the many packaged snack foods formulated with tasty combinations of carbohydrate, fat and salt, Fazzino says. And that’s a worry, because Fazzino’s research indicates that the prevalence of hyperpalatable foods in the US increased from 49 percent in 1988 to 69 percent in 2018.

At the NIH, Hall is currently running another clinical trial to try to tease apart the contributions of energy density and hyperpalatability to how much food people eat. In this study, participants will try four different diets, all matched for nutrient levels, for one week each. One is minimally processed. The other three are ultraprocessed, and either dense in calories or hyperpalatable, or both.

In the Netherlands, meanwhile, eating behavior researcher Forde is focused on yet another food characteristic to explain greater calorie intake of ultraprocessed foods: texture. Many ultraprocessed foods are “effectively prechewed when they arrive on your plate because they’re softly textured,” Forde says — and that makes them easier to eat more quickly.

Research by Forde and others has found that people eat meals with harder textures more slowly. And in a recent trial, participants consumed 26 percent fewer calories from hard-textured lunches than they did from softly textured ones. Calorie intake was lowest of all when people ate a meal that was both hard-textured and also minimally processed.

Forde’s group is now planning a randomized controlled trial, funded in part by food companies, that will test participants’ intake of two different ultraprocessed diets for two weeks. Forde predicts that people will eat more of the “fast diet” that is soft in texture than the “slow diet,” which has been designed to have harder textures.

Other researchers are looking at ultraprocessed foods from the perspective of addiction biology. Because we can eat these foods quickly, and they often lack much structure or fiber to slow their digestion, they deliver a quick dose of calories and a rewarding spike in the neurotransmitter dopamine to the brain, says Alexandra DiFeliceantonio, a neuroscientist who studies eating behavior at the Fralin Biomedical Research Institute at Virginia Tech Carilion.

In an ongoing study, she and colleagues are giving people calorie-matched, rapidly digested sugar (“fast calories”) or slowly digested sugars with added fiber (“slow calories”) along with previously unfamiliar flavors. DiFeliceantonio hypothesizes that people will develop a stronger preference for the flavors paired with the fast calories. And this, she adds, could help explain why we might struggle to stop eating certain ultraprocessed foods that were “literally engineered to be delicious,” she says.

Regulate? Or reformulate?

DiFeliceantonio hopes that studies like hers will help disentangle what it is about ultraprocessed foods that cause overeating, and support new regulations that lead to more healthful choices. “Then,” she says, “you have a really strong scientific foundation for making changes in the environment, and not just asking people to make changes on an individual level.” Regulations might include limiting how the foods are advertised (for example, not during television shows for children) or requiring neighborhood markets to carry fresh foods in addition to packaged ones.

Some public health experts say that regardless of the mechanisms, we know enough that we should be taking steps to reduce the consumption of ultraprocessed foods right now. “Whether they’re hyperpalatable, whether they’re energy-dense, whatever the cause is, the effect has been huge,” says Barry Popkin, an economist and nutrition epidemiologist at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Popkin points to countries that have already imposed regulations and restrictions on certain ultraprocessed foods. Chile, for example, has added warning labels on the front of food packages and taxed sugary drinks; the country has also banned certain foods in schools and restricted their marketing to children — policies associated with a drop in sugary beverage purchases and improved nutritional quality of packaged foods. More than 50 countries, covering about 20 percent of the world’s population, now tax sugary drinks because of their effects on health, and many other countries, including Israel, Canada, Brazil and Mexico, are adding warning labels to unhealthy foods, Popkin says.

Forde worries that such policies will only make food more expensive and slow progress in developing more sustainable foods. It would be more productive, he says, to encourage food companies to leverage their processing technologies to make healthier products. (Forde sits on an advisory council of Kerry Group, a food and ingredient company.) They could use food-processing techniques to reduce the caloric density of foods or incorporate more texture so that people eat a bit slower, he says. “If processing is the problem, processing is also by far the best solution we currently have,” he adds.

Hall would also like to see food scientists work with nutrition scientists to take on this challenge. Take a chicken nugget, for example. By adding a bit of fiber and tweaking the salt and fat content, skilled food scientists might be able to make it less energy-dense and remove its hyperpalatable qualities, he says. Whether people will still want to eat such a nugget remains to be seen.

This article originally appeared in Knowable Magazine, an independent journalistic endeavor from Annual Reviews. Sign up for the newsletter.

The post What can we do about ultraprocessed foods? appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Best overall		Vega Sport Chocolate		SEE IT	This high-performance protein tastes good and comes at a reasonable price-per-serving.
Best tasting		Garden of Life: Creamy Oat Chocolate Brownie		SEE IT	If you have trouble choking down regular protein, this pleasant powder may be what you’re looking for.
Best for sensitive stomachs		Promix Vegan Raw Chocolate		SEE IT	If you want simple ingredients and immaculate macros, then this is a great choice.

The plant-based bandwagon has been picking up a lot of passengers these last few years, which has led to an abundance of vegan protein powders on the market. But, the workout supplement landscape can be tricky to navigate. It’s full of expensive scams and misinformation. Plus, the rise of well-meaning, but unqualified foodies and fitness influencers across the Internet has made it difficult to discern fact from fiction. We’re here to help you sort it out. Whether you’re throwing haymakers on the heavy bag or trying to PR on your deadlift, we found five vegan protein powders that will support your every workout. 

• Best overall: Vega Sport Chocolate
• Best tasting: Garden of Life: Creamy Oat Chocolate Brownie
• Best meal replacement: Gnarly Vegan Chocolate
• Best for sensitive stomachs: Promix Vegan Raw Chocolate
• Best after an interval workout: Ladder Chocolate

How we chose the best vegan protein powder

PopSci has multiple staff members who are vegetarian and explore animal protein alternatives, while I’ve been an active athlete since childhood and have been vegan most of my adult life. I filtered my search to performance supplements that are purely plant-based. I’m also a Columbia-educated registered dietician. I focused my search on products with ingredients that are accurately labeled, which can be tricky since the FDA doesn’t regulate protein powder in the same way it regulates regular food. Therefore, I relied on supplements certified by NSFSport, trusted by USADA (United States Anti-Doping Agency) and most major league sports associations, to verify product authenticity and suitability for athletes. You’ll notice I chose the chocolate flavors of each brand because that’s what I find best fits the most common peanut butter and banana “recipe” many of us use for protein smoothies (most brands only carry a chocolate and vanilla flavor in their vegan selection, anyway). Finally, as I reviewed the available options, I made sure to account for differences in things like packaging, allergens, and price.

Here’s that easy, delicious smoothie recipe:

• 12 oz Britta water
• 1 large banana
• 2 ice cubes
• Teaspoon of peanut butter
• Dash of vanilla extract
• Shake of cinnamon
• Shake of cloves

The best vegan protein: Reviews & Recommendations

While we make specific recommendations, it’s important to consider your needs and tastes. Be sure to check out all the options on the list before ordering.

Best overall: Vega Sport Chocolate

SEE IT

Specs

• Protein per serving: 30g
• Carbs per serving: 6g
• Fat per serving: 3g
• Calories per serving: 160
• Cost per serving: $1.92

Pros

• High absolute and relative protein content (second highest of all reviewed)
• Has 2.5 g of leucine, which is important for stimulating MPS (muscle protein synthesis)
• Simple ingredients make it less likely to upset your stomach
• Tart cherry, a powerful antioxidant, can help aid in recovery

Cons

• Not personally a huge fan of the stevia taste, but it’s not bad

The Vega brand carries a lot of weight in the world of vegan athletics because of its co-founder, Brendan Brazier—a former ultra-endurance athlete who helped prove the competitive viability of a plant-based lifestyle. This protein powder looks like it’s formulated to help you maintain that competitive edge. It got top billing on this list because of its high protein content, GI-safe ingredients, and adequate leucine content—important traits for any protein supplement. It comes stacked with 30 grams of protein per 44 gram serving (a ratio of 0.682 per gram) and 2.5 grams of leucine, which is important for stimulating muscle protein synthesis. It’s also free of the pro- and prebiotics, often the cause of GI disturbances, found in the more expensive “Premium” version. It doesn’t skimp on vitamins with 7 milligrams of iron and 20% of your daily calcium needs. I remember the early Vega protein powders in the mid-2000s and, I’ll be honest, they weren’t great. This has come a long way in taste and texture with a subtle, chocolatey flavor not overly affected by that distinct stevia taste. It blended well with the rest of my smoothie ingredients without getting too frothy. I’m not a fan of “froth” because it just puts my air in your stomach, causing most people to feel bloated. Finally, at only $29.99 for the standard tub, Vega’s Sport Protein – Plant-Based Protein Powder Chocolate does all I need it to do as a vegan athlete.

Best tasting: Garden of Life: Creamy Oat Chocolate Brownie

SEE IT

Specs

• Protein per serving: 20g
• Carbs per serving: 16g
• Fat per serving: 4.5g
• Calories per serving: 170
• Cost per serving: $2

Pros

• Oat milk does just what it says—gives it a creamy taste
• Fully organic, non-GMO product
• Trusted brand that has been around a long time

Cons

• The protein-to-powder ratio is a little low compared to competitors
• Pro- and prebiotic blend can upset the stomach of a person with a normal GI tract or IBS

Taste is a huge factor when considering a supplement because, let’s be honest, if it tastes bad, you’re probably not going to take it. The Garden of Life Creamy Organic Vegan Protein Powder + OatMilk is not that chalky protein powder of old. The coconut and oat milk powders give it a silky and creamy flavor that tastes pretty close to an actual milkshake. And, I’m not a chef, but there’s this nutty character of the chocolate that I’m guessing comes from the gluten-free grains they use for extra protein—brown rice, amaranth, quinoa, buckwheat, millet, and chia. Now, as someone who tries to get a pretty high amount of protein in his body every day, I do wish it had a bit more than 20 grams per serving (a ratio of 0.435 per gram), especially since vegan athletes have a slightly less access to bioavailable proteins. It also has a number of ingredients like erythritol (sugar alcohol), inulin, acacia gum, and a probiotic blend that can cause bloating or GI irritation for some people. Still, Garden of Life has been around a long time and makes a host of products that are independently verified to be as authentic, organic, and generally good for you as they try to be. If you get a good amount of protein in your diet and just want a bit extra through a delicious, organic shake, this is a good bet.

Best meal replacement: Gnarly Vegan Chocolate

SEE IT

Specs

• Protein per serving: 20g
• Carbs per serving: 16g
• Fat per serving: 7g
• Calories per serving: 200
• Cost per serving: $3.69

Pros

• Higher overall calories and a broad macronutrient profile 
• Contains widest array of micronutrients, including biotin, vitamin D, and iron
• Includes more than 30% of daily fiber needs (9 grams)

Cons

• Larger serving size means you’ve got a lot of powder to chug
• Higher fat content than the others on the list

Gnarly Vegan’s Chocolate Meal Replacement protein is great for exactly that—a meal replacement. It’s got the highest calorie count (200 kilocals) and the widest array of micronutrients (i.e., vitamins and minerals) of all the brands reviewed. At 20 grams of protein per serving (a ratio of 0.400 per gram), 7 grams of net carbohydrates, and an impressive 9 grams of dietary fiber (one of the most chronically insufficient nutrients in American diets) it has a macronutrient distribution atypical for a protein powder but worthy of a meal replacement if you add a few more sources of carbohydrates. On their website, Gnarly owns up to the fact that this supplement is just barely a meal replacement, claiming that the higher calorie count (as compared to most protein supplements) puts them in that category.

As a sports dietitian, I agree, and added a few more bananas, berries, and applesauce to my shake in order to make it meet a full meal’s worth of nutrients. I would have added more powder, but the large serving size (50 grams) might have made it a more chalky smoothie than I was looking to drink. Be that as it may, if you’re looking to pack on muscle, which nutritionally relies on caloric surplus and protein intake, Gnarly Vegan’s Chocolate Meal Replacement is a safe bet. 

Best for sensitive stomachs: Promix Vegan Raw Chocolate

SEE IT

Specs

• Protein per serving: 25g
• Carbs per serving: 3g
• Fat per serving: 2g
• Calories per serving: 130
• Cost per serving: $1.32

Pros

• Highest relative protein content of all reviewed (more than 3/4s of the product weight is protein at 0.781 per gram) 
• Fewest ingredients make it pretty easy on the stomach
• Made mostly in America (94%)

Cons

• Packaging is inconvenient and easily punctured

Promix’s Vegan Raw Chocolate protein powder is my kind of straight-to-the-point, no-frills workout supplement. It doesn’t try to be everything to everyone and just packs a lot of protein in as few ingredients as possible. For that reason, it gets the nod as the easiest on your stomach, free of bubbly-guts culprits like prebiotics, probiotics, gums, sugar-alcohols, and all nine major food allergens. It actually has more protein per gram of product (0.781) than any of the others I reviewed, which means you get a lot of muscle-building macronutrients without too much powder. I found this to help with taste since I tasted more of the banana and cinnamon I added than the powder itself, which was more of a generic, neutral chocolate flavor than anything else. It’s not overly delightful, but it’s not at all offensive like some supplements can be. Finally, for those who like to shop with a bit of environmental responsibility, Promix’s manufacturing processes ensure 67% less carbon emissions compared to most competitors, and it sources 94% of its ingredients in North America.

Best after an interval workout: Ladder Chocolate

SEE IT

Specs

• Protein per serving: 21g
• Carbs per serving: 7g
• Fat per serving: 2g
• Calories per serving: TK
• Cost per serving: $1.80

Pros

• High in electrolytes (sodium and potassium), making it a good option for someone who sweats a lot 
• Tart cherry contents help with recovery after a tough workout
• Chocolatiest of the chocolate protein powders

Cons

• Pro- and prebiotic blend can upset the stomach of a person with a normal GI tract or IBS

Ladder’s Premium Chocolate Protein was close to getting the award for best tasting because of its rich chocolatey flavor while providing 21 grams of protein per serving. I actually tasted it by itself (mixing it with just water) and it legit tasted like a cooled-down hot chocolate. What makes it stand out, though, is its high concentration of electrolytes (650 mg of sodium, 620 mg of potassium), which are essential in rehydrating after an intense workout, and it’s inclusion of 480 mg of tart cherry extract—a powerful antioxidant which has been shown to reduce muscle soreness and inflammation. It isn’t specific about its leucine content, but it does boast 1000 mg of BCAAs (valine, leucine, isoleucine) and methionine. I could also do without the probiotic blends, but some people may find that useful. Overall, it tasted great and didn’t bother my stomach much, if at all. It’s definitely something I’ll consider taking after a bunch of rounds on the heavy bag. 

Things to consider when shopping for vegan protein powder

Here are some essential variables to consider when shopping for a vegan protein supplement.

Protein content

The first thing I consider when looking for a vegan protein supplement is how much protein it contains. As plant-based athletes, it can be challenging to get high-bioavailability protein into our systems without eating a massive amount of food. Vegan protein sources are usually found in foods containing a lot of fiber, so some of the protein gets passed through us. Therefore, I’m usually trying to get the biggest bang for my buck, with a minimum of 20 grams of protein per serving, but preferably 30.

Ingredients and your ability to digest them

I’m also looking out for unnecessary ingredients (like probiotics) because I don’t need my protein shake to solve any GI issues I have. I just need it to give me protein without making me feel bloated or giving me the runs (we’ve all been there). This includes being aware of the protein source—soy, pea, brown rice, etc.—though most these days come from peas. Pea protein tends to be easy on the gut and peas have a high protein content compared to other legumes. Also worth thinking about is a supplement’s overall macronutrient content. Most protein powders will have a good ratio that is high in protein and low in fat and carbohydrates, but most of us don’t need to be overly concerned with that. The truth is, muscle building mostly happens in energy surplus, meaning we need sufficient overall calories for the protein we ingest to be put to proper use. Having adequate calories from carbohydrates and fats is an important part of that equation.

Other beneficial ingredients

Finally, where possible, I try to find a supplement with about 3 grams of leucine, an essential amino acid that stimulates muscle protein synthesis. Some powders will advertise their BCAAs (branched chain amino acids) but aren’t specific about how much leucine is present, even though it’s the most important of the three (leucine, isoleucine, and valine). If you can’t get it in your protein powder, soy, legumes, and whole wheats are usually a good bet. You know your body and your goals, so make the choices that best suit you, but keep the above in mind. Whenever possible, talk to an accredited dietitian to better understand what dietary adjustments best suit you. 

FAQs

Final thoughts on the best vegan protein powder

• Best overall: Vega Sport Chocolate
• Best tasting: Garden of Life: Creamy Oat Chocolate Brownie
• Best meal replacement: Gnarly Vegan Chocolate
• Best for sensitive stomachs: Promix Vegan Raw Chocolate
• Best after an interval workout: Ladder Chocolate

At the end of the day, our goals are individual, and our tastes are subjective. You’ve got to figure out what your body needs and how best to get there. Find a protein powder that you’re going to use consistently, maybe because of its taste, because it helps you recover after a workout, or because it doesn’t bother your stomach. You find what works for you. When in doubt, find a registered dietitian to help you sort through the details.

Why trust us

Popular Science started writing about technology more than 150 years ago. There was no such thing as “gadget writing” when we published our first issue in 1872, but if there was, our mission to demystify the world of innovation for everyday readers means we would have been all over it. Here in the present, PopSci is fully committed to helping readers navigate the increasingly intimidating array of devices on the market right now.

Our writers and editors have combined decades of experience covering and reviewing consumer electronics. We each have our own obsessive specialties—from high-end audio to video games to cameras and beyond—but when we’re reviewing devices outside of our immediate wheelhouses, we do our best to seek out trustworthy voices and opinions to help guide people to the very best recommendations. We know we don’t know everything, but we’re excited to live through the analysis paralysis that internet shopping can spur so readers don’t have to.

The post The best vegan protein powder for 2023, tested and reviewed by experts appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Most nutritionists advise people to “eat the rainbow” to balance their diet—think greens like kale, purples like eggplant, reds like tomatoes.  Consuming nutritious and naturally occuring orange foods like carrots packed with vitamin A, fiber, antioxidants, and pigments called carotenoids is a must to get a full and healthy spectrum. Carotenoids even got their name because they were first isolated from carrots.  But what is exactly behind the bright hue of some of our favorite carrots? Only three specific genes are required to give orange carrots their signature color, according to a study published September 28 in the journal Nature Plants.

[Related: Carrots were once a crucial tool in anti-Nazi propaganda.]

In the study, a team from North Carolina State University and the University of Wisconsin-Madison looked at the genetic blueprints of more than 600 varieties of carrots. Surprisingly, they found that these three required genes all need to be recessive, or turned off.

“Normally, to make some function, you need genes to be turned on,” study co-author and North Carolina State University horticultural scientist Massimo Iorizzo said in a statement.  “In the case of the orange carrot, the genes that regulate orange carotenoids—the precursor of vitamin A that have been shown to provide health benefits—need to be turned off,” Iorizzo said. 

In 2016, this team sequenced the carrot genome for the first time and also uncovered the gene involved in the pigmentation of yellow carrot. For this new study, they sequenced 630 carrot genomes as part of a continuing study on the history and domestication of the crunchy root veggie.

The team performed selective sweeps, or structural analyses among five different carrot groups. During these sweeps, they looked for areas of the genome that are heavily selected in certain groups. They found that many of the genes involved in flowering were under selection, primarily to delay the flowering process. This event causes the edible root that we eat called the taproot to turn woody and inedible. 

“We found many genes involved in flowering regulation that were selected in multiple populations in orange carrot[s], likely to adapt to different geographic regions,” said Iorizzo. 

Additionally, the study created a general timeline of carrot domestication and found more evidence that carrots were domesticated in the 9th or 10th century CE in western and central Asia. 

“Purple carrots were common in central Asia along with yellow carrots. Both were brought to Europe, but yellow carrots were more popular, likely due to their taste,” said Iorizzo.

[Related: WTF are purple carrots and where did they come from?]

In about the 15th or 16th century, orange carrots made their appearance in western Europe, potentially as the result of crossing a yellow carrot with a white one. The bright color and sweet flavor of orange carrots likely made it more popular than other varieties, so farmers continued selecting for them. In northern Europe, different types of orange carrots were developed in the 16th and 17th centuries and orange carrots of various shades can be seen in paintings from that area. They continued to grow in popularity as more understanding about the importance of alpha- and beta-carotenes and vitamin A in the diet for eye health progressed in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. 

The findings in this study shed more light on the traits that are important to improving carrots and could lead to better health benefits from the nutritious vegetable.

The post How carrots get their trademark orange color appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Best overall		WYZE Smart Scale X		SEE IT	Measure all metrics without counting the cost.
Best apps		Withings Body Cardio Smart Scale		SEE IT	Track your progress and sync with a variety of fitness apps and watches.
Best budget		Renpho Body Fat Scale		SEE IT	Keep track of 13 essential body metrics with the help of an easy-to-use app.

Any scale can measure your weight, but the best smart scales do much more. Most measure various other metrics, including muscle mass, body fat, and heart rate. Although the number on the scale is just a number, keeping these metrics in mind can help you make healthy changes—if your heart rate is a little low, you can get it pumping by taking the steps when coming back from your coffee run, for example. They can also help you and others in your home monitor changes and track your progress over time. The best smart scales are a step up from what you find in your grandma’s bathroom with valuable info to live a more active life.

• Best overall: WYZE Smart Scale X
• Best for fitness: Withings Body Smart
• Best apps: Withings Body Cardio Smart Scale
• Best high-capacity/pregnancy mode: Etekcity Apex Smart Scale
• Best for multiple users: Eufy by Anker Smart Scale P1
• Best budget: Renpho Body Fat Scale

How we chose the best smart scales

As a freelance journalist for over 10 years, I’ve reviewed technology for publications including CNN Underscored, Popular Mechanics, Tom’s Guide, The Daily Beast, Architectural Digest, Apartment Therapy, The Spruce, and Bob Vila. I tested every scale save one on this list, and the rest of the selections are based on extensive research, recommendations from fellow tech colleagues, and reviews from other users.

The best smart scales: Reviews & Recommendations

Some of these smart scales are Bluetooth-compatible and sync with an app. Some are packed with profiles and metrics for ultra-customizability for everyone in the family. Some connect to your WiFi and integrate into a connected smart-home system, communicating wirelessly with other devices. One of our choices should be a welcome addition to your bathroom.

Best overall: WYZE Smart Scale X

SEE IT

Why it made the cut: Weigh in on weight, BMI, muscle percentage, body fat percentage, and so much more, with a scale that easily syncs with the WYZE app on your smartphone; we think that’s pretty powerful stuff.

Specs

• Connectivity: Bluetooth
• Individual profiles: 8
• Weight capacity: 400 pounds
• Metrics: 13

Pros

• Measures lots of different health metrics
• Attractive tempered glass design
• Easily syncs with some smartphone apps

Cons

• Somewhat invasive software wants to track your location
• Doesn’t actually pair with all 3rd party apps

What if your scale and smartphone actually talked to each other? Well, with the WYZE Smart Scale X, they do. This attractive bathroom scale uses ITO electrode coatings with tempered glass to read all sorts of health metrics and then pairs with your health app on your smartphone app to ensure you keep abreast of the updates. 

The Smart Scale X is no simple scale; it tracks weight, muscle mass, body-fat percentage, BMI, heart rate, body water percentage, and so much more. This info is then updated in the Wyze app or other health apps like Apple Health, Google Fit, and Fitbit. This ensures you can keep accurate tabs on your health as you run marathons and measure the progress on your Scale X when you get home. 

This device capitalizes on connectivity; however, this connectivity is also its only real downside. After connecting to your phone, WYZE asks for constant access to your location data, which we think is a slight overreach. You can opt out, but it will keep asking. This may or may not be an issue for you and likely doesn’t go far beyond the health data your phone is already tracking.

Otherwise, we think the WYZE Smart Scale X is indeed a smart purchase, giving most users a ton of useful info to help them track their health.

Best for fitness: Withings Body Smart

SEE IT

Specs

• Connectivity: Bluetooth or WiFi
• Individual profiles: 8 users
• Weight capacity: 440 pounds
• Metrics: 10

Pros

• Eyes Closed mode hides your weight to prevent obsessing while still tracking progress
• Accurate to 0.1 pounds
• Tracks key metrics
• Advanced app features
• App goes beyond data tracking and makes recommendations
• Attractive

Cons

• A bit pricey
• Glass surface attracts grime

Daily weigh-ins can provide a looming sense of dread when trying to improve your overall health. Withings equipped this smart scale with an Eyes Closed mode, which tracks your weight but replaces the number on the screen with a motivational message. You can, of course, still access that information thorough the Withings app, which will track your progress as you go. But, you’re not confronted with that number every day, which can be a big bonus for some people. I was skeptical myself before I tried it, but I actually appreciate the option. It helps encourage through tracking without having to face the music for spending a night out enjoying yourself.

Whether you keep your eyes open or closed, this scale is a full-featured model that justifies its somewhat high price. It’s accurate to 0.1 pounds, provides a ton of useful metrics, and is attractive to look at (as long as you wipe the grime off of the shiny surface fairly regularly).

You can track body fat, water percentage, muscle mass, bone mass and lean mass, as well as more complicated compound numbers like Visceral Fat Index, and BMR (Basal Metabolic Rate). I like Withing’s ability to tweak your specific tracking preferences so you can be as granular or laid back as you want. Overall, this is a solid option that will let you dive into your health metrics without stressing you out.

Best with app: Withings Body Cardio Smart Scale

SEE IT

Why it made the cut: The Withings Body Cardio Smart Scale is compatible with over 100 apps.

Specs

• Connectivity: Bluetooth or WiFi
• Individual profiles: 8 users
• Weight capacity: 396 pounds
• Metrics: 10

Pros

• USB charging cable
• Can be used with babies
• Shows vascular age
• Includes weather forecast
• Can be used on hard floors and carpet

Cons

• Really expensive
• Can’t turn off BIA

The Withings Body Cardio is by far the most expensive smart scale on the list, which is the only reason it isn’t our overall best pick. However, it’s jam-packed with features. The scale shows stats on your phone, but you can also see them on the scale’s display. Most scales only show a few stats on the actual screen and send you to the app on your phone to see the others. The scale shows your weight, BMI, heart rate, vascular age, muscle mass, percentage of body fat, percentage of body water, bone mass … even your baby’s weight, and the current and daily high temperature in case you plan on going outside. The vascular age measurement can help you see how your cardiovascular health compares to the norm for your age bracket.

Withings invented the first smart scale and has a lot of experience in this category. The Withing Body Cardio is also compatible with over 100 health apps, including Fitbit, Apple Health, and Google Fit. Since it uses a USB charging cable, you won’t have to worry about swapping in fresh batteries. If price is a barrier, check out the company’s Withings Body+ scale, which is less than $100.

If standing heart rate and vascular age aren’t metrics you’re looking for in a smart scale, the Body+ scale is for you. It includes all other metrics—including BMI, fat mass, and water percentage—along with the same modes and number of user profiles as the Body Cardio scale.

Best high-capacity/pregnancy mode: Etekcity Apex Smart Scale

SEE IT

Why it made the cut: The Etekcity Smart Scale has a high weight capacity and also includes separate modes for both pregnant mothers and newborn babies.

Specs

• Connectivity: WiFi
• Individual Profiles: Unlimited
• Weight capacity: 400 pounds
• Metrics: 14

Pros

• Pregnancy mode
• Baby mode
• 400-pound weight limit
• USB charging cable

Cons

• Expensive

The Etekcity Apex Smart Wi-Fi Body Fat Scale is the best smart scale for pregnant women since it has a Zero-Current Mode. In addition, the scale has a Baby mode for measuring babies. Its 400-pound capacity is also as high as you’ll find on the list.

There are no batteries needed—the scale uses a USB charging cable. It tracks 14 measurements, including weight, BMI, body fat, protein, muscle mass, visceral fat, BMR, heart rate, subcutaneous fat, bone mass, body water, metabolic age, skeletal muscle, and fat-free body weight. The smart scale uses the VeSync app, and can also use Apple Health, Google Fit, Fitbit, MyFitness Pal, and Samsung Health.

Best for multiple users: Eufy by Anker Smart Scale P1

SEE IT

Why it made the cut: The Eufy by Anker Smart Scale P1 is easy to use, making it ideal for everyone to use.

Specs

• Connectivity: Bluetooth
• Individual profiles: 16
• Weight capacity: 396 pounds
• Metrics: 14

Pros

• Excellent value for price
• Auto-calibrating sensors
• 14 measurements
• Easy to connect

Cons

• Can’t use if pregnant or wearing a pacemaker

The Eufy by Anker Smart Scale P1 can be used to create up to 16 individual profiles. Although there are smart scales that allow for an unlimited number of users, we think this is best for multiple users for other reasons. For example, the scale uses G-shaped auto-calibrating sensors, which can help to increase accuracy. The only thing worse than your measurements being off is the entire group’s measurements being off—and it’s hard to motivate a group to continue making progress when it’s not even clear that they are making progress.

The scale draws power from 3 AAA batteries, and it’s easy to connect the scale to the Eufy app. Also, 14 different measurements are provided: weight, body fat percentage, BMI, body fat mass, lean body mass, protein, BMR, visceral fat, muscle, muscle mass, bone, body age, bone mass, and water. The scale can be integrated with various third-party apps, including Google Fit, Fitbit, and Apple Health.

Best budget: Renpho Body Fat Smart Scale

SEE IT

Why it made the cut: The Renpho Body Fat Smart Scale measures a variety of body fat indicators and can be seamlessly integrated with other apps—all for less than $30.

Specs

• Connectivity: Bluetooth
• Individual profiles: Unlimited
• Weight capacity: 396 pounds
• Metrics: 13

Pros

• Excellent price
• Accurate measurements
• Plenty of metrics
• Works with numerous apps

Cons

• Should not be used on carpet

The Renpho Body Fat Smart Scale can detect 13 body composition stats: weight, BMI, body fat, subcutaneous fat, visceral fat, body water, skeletal muscle, muscle mass, bone mass, protein, metabolic age, BMR, and fat-free body weight. It’s easy to use and track the various metrics, and there’s also an athlete mode. The scale can be used with various fitness apps, including Samsung Health, Fitbit, Apple Health, and Google Fit.

This is one of the most popular smart scales due to its combination of price and features. It accommodates unlimited users, so everyone in your family or group can use the same Renpho App to track and share progress. The scale is quite accurate and uses batteries instead of a USB charging cable.

What to consider when buying the best smart scales

It’s important to weigh your options when deciding between the smart scales on the market. There are several factors to consider:

Metrics measured

Smart scales measure various metrics, including bone mass and body fat percentage, but some measure more indicators than others. For example, one smart scale on our list measures 10 metrics, while another offers 14. We list all of these for each smart scale so you can determine which metrics are important to you and avoid paying for features you’ll never use.

Bluetooth or WiFi

All smart scales use Bluetooth or WiFi for wireless connectivity, and some use both. WiFi is much more convenient since Bluetooth has a specific range and is more likely to drop periodically. However, solely Bluetooth-enabled scales are likely to cost less.

Syncing

Some smart scales can sync with fitness apps and trackers to provide even more functionality, including the ability to review all of the results from both the scale and app in one place. However, some people may consider that information overload and decide that syncing with the smart scale’s app is sufficient.

Multiple users

If there’s more than one person in your household—or if you’re in a fitness group sharing the same scale—you’ll want a smart scale that can track individual results for multiple people. Some scales allow for eight or even 16 individual users, whereas other smart scales allow unlimited users to create personal profiles. If you’re using the scale in a group setting, unlimited users will probably be more important to you. However, be advised that multiple users will all use the same account, so they can view your personal information.

Pregnancy mode

Smart scales use bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) technology to provide biometric measurements. However, for expecting mothers, this can be problematic. So, if you’re pregnant, you’ll want a smart scale that will allow you to turn this feature off in the smart scale’s app, instead of opting for Zero-Current Mode. Also, if you’re wearing a pacemaker, you’ll want a smart scale that can turn it off.

Batteries vs. USB

Some smart scales run on batteries, while others can be charged with a USB cable. And some can do both. On one hand, avoiding disposable batteries is good for the environment, but on the other hand, batteries don’t use electricity. This decision will come down to personal preference (so perhaps consider rechargeable batteries and/or recycling used batteries properly).

FAQs

Final thoughts on the best smart scales

• Best overall: WYZE Smart Scale X
• Best for fitness: Withings Body Smart
• Best apps: Withings Body Cardio Smart Scale
• Best high-capacity/pregnancy mode: Etekcity Apex Smart Scale
• Best for multiple users: Eufy by Anker Smart Scale P1
• Best budget: Renpho Body Fat Scale

A smart scale can help you take control of your fitness routine by allowing you to track various measurements. Historical records allow you to gauge your progress toward reaching fitness goals. Also, adding multiple users lets everyone have an individual profile containing their own data.

When weighing both price and features, the Wyze Smart Scale is the best overall choice. However, if you’re willing to splurge, the Withings Body Cardio Smart Scale displays its 10 metrics without needing to view your phone. It also measures the most popular indicators—such as BMI, heart rate, muscle mass, body water, and bone mass—and even measures vascular age and includes the weather forecast. However, the best smart scale for you will be determined by your individual needs and budget.

Why trust us

Popular Science started writing about technology more than 150 years ago. There was no such thing as “gadget writing” when we published our first issue in 1872, but if there was, our mission to demystify the world of innovation for everyday readers means we would have been all over it. Here in the present, PopSci is fully committed to helping readers navigate the increasingly intimidating array of devices on the market right now.

Our writers and editors have combined decades of experience covering and reviewing consumer electronics. We each have our own obsessive specialties—from high-end audio to video games to cameras and beyond—but when we’re reviewing devices outside of our immediate wheelhouses, we do our best to seek out trustworthy voices and opinions to help guide people to the very best recommendations. We know we don’t know everything, but we’re excited to live through the analysis paralysis that internet shopping can spur so readers don’t have to.

The post The best smart scales of 2023 appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

The best workout apps will save you time and (often) money, and many include social features that allow you to get some of the in-person benefits that you’d find at the gym. These apps vary in the quality and variety of instruction, but you might be surprised by the caliber of some free exercise apps—some feature top-notch fitness pros. 

As a personal trainer, I’ve used some of these apps myself and have recommended them for clients and friends. Some apps sync with devices or equipment like heart rate monitors, fitness watches, or exercise bikes. Some offer live instruction along with a wide selection of on-demand classes. They often provide expert guidance on form and let you work out whenever you want, without having to schedule a class or wonder if the gym is open.

Before you sign up for a subscription for one of the many fitness apps available, consider your workout preferences. Do you like to kickbox or strength train? Do you want the option to do both with some yoga or pilates on recovery days? Your goals, lifestyle, and budget play a big role in the best workout app for you. We’ve rounded up our favorites below.

• Best overall: Peloton
• Best free: Nike Training Club
• Best for yoga: Asana Rebel
• Best weightlifting: Fitbod

1. Best overall: Peloton App

First things first: You don’t need a Peloton bike or treadmill to use the Peloton app. Peloton offers different subscription levels to fit a range of budgets and fitness goals, including a free subscription that provides access to 50 classes. 

You can get by on the free subscription if you don’t rely on the app for all of your workouts, and it will give you a good sense of what to expect from the paid tiers. But you can also take advantage of a 30-day trial period for the paid subscriptions to see how the app fits into your workout style. I personally don’t think you need to pay for more than the $12.99 per month subscription unless you’ve got a Peloton bike or treadmill, which requires a $44 per month, all-access subscription.

The Peloton app offers a wide range of exercise modalities, like rowing, strength training, kickboxing, and pilates. The quality of Peloton’s instructors sets them apart from other apps, and in some cases, can feel like a virtual personal trainer. Plus, the fitness coach app features training programs if you’d like to focus on a specific area for a few weeks. Peloton also offers an excellent selection of live leaderboards and social motivation that creates a sense of community for users.

Peloton App is available on Android and iOS for $12.99 per month.

[Related: A beginner’s guide to Google Fit and Apple Health]

2. Best free: Nike Training Club

The Nike Training Club (NTC) is the best free workout app, hands down. Nike removed the subscription fee during the COVID-19 pandemic, and they haven’t reinstated it. This app offers 190 free workouts in a wide range of modalities, from dance and pilates to bodyweight strength training and running warm-ups. It also includes pre-designed programs that run from one to six weeks, helping you build strength and endurance over time. 

NTC also lets you easily build a customized workout. I love good filters because they minimize scrolling through an endless list of workouts. You can filter based upon:

• Available equipment
• Muscle group
• Workout focus
• Trainer-led classes
• Workout length

The app also includes a workout history so you can see your progress. Plus, it offers suggestions based on your past workouts and your preferences. Lasting fitness requires a planned approach, and NTC gives you that option. While instruction isn’t as dynamic as the Peloton app, the classes are led by Nike Master Trainers and the app includes excellent tips on form to maximize your workout time. And you can’t beat the price.

Nike Training Club is free on iOS and Android.

3. Best for yoga: Asana Rebel

As a trainer and a yoga practitioner, I love Asana Rebel. I recommend it to anyone who prefers yoga as their main form of exercise. 

When you sign up, you fill out a survey and the app tailors your options based on your preferences. Strong filter features help you find workouts by length, muscle group, experience level, and workout goals. Plus, there are meditations if you feel like you need something quieter than yoga. For the desk-bound, this app includes yoga for the office to give you a stretch and rejuvenation from your chair. But don’t let the ease of use fool you. Most yoga practitioners can find challenging workouts. 

One of my favorite features is the add-on option at the end of each workout. You can start with a five-minute focus on flexibility and finish your session with a routine that targets the upper body, followed by some meditation. Plus, the app offers nutrition and meditation guidance, providing a holistic approach to physical and mental health. 

Asana Rebel offers a yearly subscription that costs around $6 per month. However, the subscription frequently goes on sale for 50 percent off, so you can snag yourself a good deal.

Asana Rebel is available for Android and iOS for about $6 a month.

[Related: The best fitness trackers]

4. Best for weightlifting: Fitbod

Building muscle safely requires a plan, and the Fitbod app helps you develop a tailored regimen and record your progress for long-term success. The app guides you through a strength training plan, offering suggestions as you progress. You get three workouts for free before you have to pay for the $12.99-per-month subscription. 

The app customizes exercises based on your fitness level and access to equipment. When you sign up, you put in your fitness level, goals, and add a checkmark next to the equipment available to you. If you’re limited to dumbbells and body weight, the app provides suggestions based on your answers. Fitbod can help you create workouts whether you have access to a full gym or not. 

You can also create your own workout programs or customize suggestions made by the app. Selection starts with choosing a muscle group or two, and Fitbod provides suggestions that include circuits and supersets to give you options to choose from. The app also provides instructions for strength moves ranging from bench presses to mountain climbers. And instructors demonstrate proper form in included videos.

While this app may not be robust enough for pro lifters, Fitbod is an excellent choice for people designing their lifting programs on their own, as it combines instruction and a workout planner. Even those with more experience can use it as an exercise plan, tallying sessions and sets to monitor progress.

Fitbod is available for Android and iOS for $12.99 per month after three free workouts.

The post The best workout apps for all kinds of exercise appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

The jury may still be out on plant-based meat alternatives’ economic and environmental viability, but experts largely agree that the seafood industry in its current form is untenable. Overfishing presents countless ecological problems, including plastic pollution and the potential for a wholesale collapse of marine biodiversity. Researchers have been experimenting with seafood alternatives for years, but one company is finally ready to bring its offering to market—and it represents a major moment within the industry.

Austrian-based food-tech startup Revo Foods announced this week that its 3D-printed vegan fish filet “inspired by salmon” is heading to European grocery store shelves—a first for 3D-printed food. According to the company’s September 12 press release, the arrival of “The Filet” represents a pivotal moment in sustainable food, with 3D-printed consumables ready to scale at industrial volumes. Revo Foods’ Filet is likely to be just the first of many other such 3D-printed edible products to soon hit the market.

[Related: Scientists cooked up a 3D printed cheesecake.]

“Despite dramatic losses of coral reefs and increasing levels of toxins and micro plastic contaminating fish, consumer demand for seafood has paradoxically skyrocketed in recent decades,” the company announcement explains. “One promising solution to provide consumers with sustainable alternatives that do not contribute to overfishing is vegan seafood. The key to success of these products lies in recreating an authentic taste that appeals to [consumers].”

The Filet relies on mycoprotein made from nutrition-heavy filamentous fungi, and naturally offers a meat-like texture. Only another 12 ingredients compose Revo’s Filet, such as pea proteins, plant oils, and algae extracts. With its high protein and Omega-3 contents, eating a Revo Filet is still very much like eating regular salmon—of course, without all the standard industrial issues. And thanks to its plant-based ingredients, the Filet also boasts a three-week shelf life, a sizable boost from regular salmon products.

“With the milestone of industrial-scale 3D food printing, we are entering a creative food revolution, an era where food is being crafted exactly according to the customer’s needs,” Revo Foods CEO Robin Simsa said via this week’s announcement.

While Revo’s products are currently only available for European markets, the company says it is actively working to expand its availability “across the globe,” with Simsa telling PopSci the company hopes to enter US markets around 2025. Until then, hungry stateside diners will have to settle for the Revo Salmon dancehall theme song… yes, it’s a real thing.

The post The world’s first 3D-printed salmon is hitting store shelves, and it looks kind of good appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Turmeric seems to be everywhere these days—on spice shelves, sprinkled on lattes, in beauty products. While the beloved golden spice has long been touted for health benefits, albeit not always backed up by extensive research, a new study in BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine found that turmeric shows signs of being just as or more effective for indigestion than some conventional over-the-counter drug options.

The study, led by Krit Pongpruil, an associate professor of preventative and social medicine at Thailand’s Chulalongkorn University, randomly assigned 206 patients between the ages of 18 and 70 with recurrent upset stomachs into three treatment groups. One group got two large capsules of curcumin, a naturally active component to turmeric and a dummy capsule, another got a small omeprazole capsule and two summy capsules four times a day, and the last group got omeprazole and turmeric capsules. 

Omeprazole is a common treatment for stomach problems such as acid reflux and ulcers. It works as a proton pump inhibitor, which reduces the amount of acid made by stomach glands, but can also cause health concerns after long term use, like micronutrient deficiencies and fracture risks, according to the study authors. 

[Related: For decades, turmeric’s ultra-golden glow had a deadly secret.]

Assessments were taken after days 28 and 56, and the researchers found that the results between the three groups were similar, which points to the efficacy of turmeric, according to the authors. “The strength of the study lies in its relevance to daily clinical practice, providing additional drug options in addition to PPIs alone, without added side effects,” they wrote in their findings. 

Of course, this study should be taken with a grain of salt, especially since the group of patients was so small. “I don’t think this one study alone is enough for me to say, ‘I recommend this,’” Yuying Luo, a gastroenterologist and assistant professor of gastroenterology at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, told CNN. “Proceed with caution.” It’s crucial to also check with your doctor to make sure that turmeric doesn’t interact poorly with any other medicines before taking it—some case studies have linked curcumin and liver injury, Luo told CNN.

Further studies are needed to see if a taste of turmeric could replace or supplement medicines to help with gastrointestinal issues and more (and if you need to take it in pill form for the effects to kick in). Until then, enjoy your favorite heartily-spiced, turmeric-filled foods, but don’t expect them to make your stomach problems vanish.

The post Turmeric may help stomach aches, study shows appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Best sports drink		Liquid I.V.		SEE IT	A super-efficient solution for a variety of uses
Best for hangovers		Pedialyte		SEE IT	The same stuff you had as a kid is also great for adults
Best for runners		Nuun		SEE IT	Dissolvable tablets are easy to take on the run

Whether it’s recharging after an intense workout or hydrating the day after drinking, electrolytes can help your body recover faster and feel refreshed in no time. Consuming the best electrolyte drinks helps keep your body hydrated. Electrolytes aid your body in regulating muscle cramping and nerve signaling and even go as far as balancing your pH and keeping you hydrated—which is important for everyone from professional athletes to people who work from home. The problem? Every time you break a sweat, your body loses some of those minerals, leading to dehydration. This can result in fatigue, nausea, abdominal and muscle cramping, and much worse. The safest bet is to stock up on the best electrolyte drinks so you’re prepared for any situation—whether it’s post-cardio or when recovering from the flu.

• Best overall: Tailwind Nutrition Endurance Fuel
• Best sports drink: Liquid I.V.
• Best for hangovers: Pedialyte
• Best for runners: Nuun
• Best system: Gatorade Gx Hydration System and Gx Sports Drink Concentrate Pods
• Best for breastfeeding: Vita Coco
• Best sugar-free: Hi-Lyte
• Best pre-workout drink: Hydralyte + Energy Boost
• Best budget: DripDrop Hydration Electrolyte Powder Packets

How we chose the best electrolyte drinks

We aimed to support electrolyte drinks that are allergy-friendly and are free of most artificial ingredients such as colors, preservatives, and sweeteners. There are plenty of sports drinks out there on the market that are basically salty soda with no bubbles. That said, we also considered taste as an essential part of the equation. You’re not going to drink something that tastes bad, and that’s counterproductive to staying hydrated.

The FDA does not review dietary supplements for safety and effectiveness before they are placed on the market; therefore, this was not a determining factor in our selections. The PopSci staff and writers have years of experience in competitive sports and other dehydrating activities. To find the best electrolyte drinks, we surveyed and considered dozens of different options to find those that meet these standards. 

The best electrolyte drinks: Reviews & Recommendations 

While sweating from working out or playing sports may be the first thing you think about in terms of dehydration, there are, in reality, many ways to deplete these precious resources. These can include food poisoning, travel, heat, stomach flu, and even alcohol consumption. The best electrolyte drinks—which we’ve listed below—are sure to help you recover and rehydrate. Simply chuck the powder into your water bottle, sip, and feel healed.

Best overall: Tailwind Nutrition Endurance Fuel

SEE IT

Why it made the cut: This drink mix has a light, clean taste and dissolves clear in water. It’s also easy on the stomach—no more gut-wrenching runs.

Specs

• Diet type: Non-GMO, Free of soy, dairy, and gluten, vegan
• Servings: 30 per container
• Flavors: Comes in 8 flavors
• Form: Powder

Pros

• Easy on the stomach
• Tasty
• Caffeinated options available

Cons

• Expensive compared to others on the list

You tend to get three options with sports drinks: taste, hydration, and easy on the stomach. However, you can only pick two. The one that hydrates the most and tastes the best may not be easy on your stomach, and so on. You get the complete triangle with Tailwind Nutrition’s Endurance Fuel. It’s, according to one of our staff writers here on the gear team, “freakin’ delicious,” and it includes electrolytes to replenish what you sweat out. Best of all, it won’t irritate your stomach while working out. It comes in eight flavors, including caffeinated options, but our favorite is mandarin orange.

Best sports drink: Liquid I.V.

SEE IT

Why it made the cut: This electrolyte drink mix delivers an optimal ratio of nutrients that delivers hydration quickly via single-serving tubes. 

Specs

• Diet type: Gluten-, soy-, and dairy-free
• Servings: 16 single-serving packets
• Flavors: Comes in four flavors
• Form: Powder

Pros

• Non-GMO and no artificial ingredients
• Provides the same hydration as 2-3 bottles of water
• With each purchase, they donate a serving to someone in need around the world. 

Cons

• Expensive compared to others on this list

Liquid I.V. is one of the best sports drinks with electrolytes on the market, especially for athletes, which makes perfect sense since it was developed while the founder was working with a professional baseball team. After realizing there is a need for natural and effective electrolyte drinks, he partnered with nutrition scientists to create what it calls a Hydration Multiplier.

Through the science of Cellular Transport Technology (CTT) water, other key ingredients are rapidly absorbed into the bloodstream. Liquid I.V. is available in four flavors: lemon-lime, passion fruit, tangerine, and acai berry. It also boasts five essential vitamins: B3, B5, B6, B12, and Vitamin C. 

With each purchase consumers make, Liquid I.V. provides hydration in disaster zones, hospitals, impoverished communities, and more in need around the world. 

Best for hangovers: Pedialyte

SEE IT

Why it made the cut: This electrolyte drink is medically formulated and highly recommended by medical professionals for both children and adults. 

Specs

• Diet types: Non-GMO, vegan, gluten-, calorie-, sugar-free
• Servings: One bottle = 3 servings
• Flavors: Comes in 17 flavors
• Form: Liquid

Pros

• Inexpensive
• Good for both kids and adults
• Well-earned reputation
• Lots of options, including freeze pops

Cons

• “Unflavored” doesn’t mean no taste

Pedialyte is an advanced, medical-grade hydration formula that contains potassium, sodium, and chloride. These key electrolytes are designed to restore your body’s sugar and electrolyte balance which is why it’s the best electrolyte drink for hangovers. You’ve probably had it multiple times in your life already since it’s typically suggested for sick children who are running fevers or are having trouble keeping down regular liquids.

You can get Pedialyte via liters (liquid), powder packs, and freezer pops that come in 17 flavors. However, the unflavored version is a great choice, free of artificial colors and dyes. Some people have reported that the flavorless option still has a taste, but if you drink it cold, it tastes much better. 

Best for runners: Nuun Sport + Caffeine

SEE IT

Why it made the cut: Easily portable tablets quickly dissolve in a water bottle, so there’s no need to lug around pre-mixed liquid. They also taste excellent.

Specs

• Diet type: Dairy-, soy-, and gluten-free, kosher, vegan
• Servings: 1 tube holds 10 tablets
• Flavors: Four
• Form: Tablet

Pros

• No artificial flavoring or sweeteners
• Only 1 gram of sugar
• Good for travel

Cons

• Contains caffeine (could be a pro or con)

Nuun has been the best electrolyte drink for runners and athletes for years. Nuun tablets contain only one gram of sugar derived from high-quality stevia. It also contains only 15 calories and zero artificial sweeteners or flavoring. There’s a wide variety of flavors to choose from, and it’s easy to carry them practically anywhere since they’re in tablet form. All you have to do is dissolve one tablet in 16oz of water. 

While caffeine could be a con for some, studies have shown that caffeine may boost athletic performance, which could help runners during training and competition. Additionally, the caffeine is derived from green tea extract. Nuun also has tablets focused on energy and immunity, as well as electrolyte powder mix. 

Best system: Gatorade Gx Hydration System and Gx Sports Drink Concentrate Pods

SEE IT

Why it made the cut: If Gatorade is your go-to, consider this system that makes it easier to drink your favorite flavors.

Specs

• Diet type: Fat- and gluten-free, non-GMO, vegan
• Servings: 1 pod per serving
• Flavors: Comes in 8 flavors
• Form: Liquid

Pros

• Less clutter than purchasing packs
• Can customize flavor with water levels
• Easy to use

Cons

• Proprietary recycling program
• Not Earth-friendly

Gatorade is one of the most well-known electrolyte drinks out there. Between hazy Saturday morning afters to middle school sports team practices, few people in this world haven’t sipped on the colorful sports drink. If you’re sick of hauling packs upon packs into your home, consider Gatorade’s Gx system, which uses a special bottle and pods to quench your thirst and replenish your electrolytes. Simply fill the bottle up to the water line, pop the pod on top of the bottle, press down, and wham: Gatorade. If it’s good enough for a college football team in the 60s, it’s good enough for you. You can also purchase a 64-ounce jug if 30 ounces isn’t enough liquid to drink before, during, and after your workout.

Best for breastfeeding: Vita Coco

SEE IT

Why it made the cut: While many electrolyte drinks are healthier than sports drinks, coconut water is the only one on the list with one ingredient. 

Specs

• Diet type: Fat- and gluten-free, non-GMO, vegan
• Servings: 1 bottle = 11.1 fluid oz, 1 case = 12 bottles
• Flavors: Three
• Form: Liquid

Pros

• Naturally occurring electrolyte source
• Contains only 1 ingredient 
• Delicious

Cons

• Expensive
• High sugar content 

There’s not an electrolyte drink that’s more natural than coconut water. As a new mother breastfeeding, you want to pay attention to what you put in your body just as you did while you were pregnant. For that reason, coconut water is the best electrolyte drink for breastfeeding mothers. 

Vita Coco is never made from concentrate. The coconuts are picked, cracked, and packed directly at the source.

Vita Coco also has coconut water options available in pineapple and peach & mango flavors if you don’t love the taste of plain coconut water. The bottles are handy and easy to keep around, so you don’t have to worry about mixing up a drink to replenish when you’re already spent. 

Best sugar-free: Hi-Lyte

SEE IT

Why it made the cut: Most electrolyte drinks have sugar, added or natural, but Hi-Lyte is one of the few with absolutely no sugar, making it the best sugar-free electrolyte drink and great for diabetics or anyone watching their sugar intake. 

Specs

• Diet types: Non-GMO, vegan, gluten-, calorie-, sugar-free
• Servings: 48
• Flavors: N/A
• Form: Concentrate

Pros

• Inexpensive
• No sugar, carbs, or calories
• No artificial ingredients

Cons

• Natural salty taste
• Contains zinc (important if you have zinc sensitivity)

Hi-Lyte is a liquid electrolyte drink that claims to have the highest potassium, zinc, and magnesium content amongst electrolyte concentrates on the market. This product is made with all-natural, ionic sea minerals and no maltodextrin. Ionic minerals are smaller than cell pathways, allowing them to be absorbed more easily. 

Hi-Lyte notes that their product is not focused on taste and has a naturally salty, mineral taste. If you’re sensitive to the taste, add a squeeze of lemon or lime and a pinch of stevia. You can also add it to juice or a smoothie. 

Hi-Lyte also claims that the liquid form has four times the absorption rate versus powders and tablets. However, if you prefer powder form, Hi-Lyte does produce an electrolyte powder as well, which is ideal for traveling.

Best pre-workout drink: Hydralyte + Energy Boost Electrolyte Powder

SEE IT

Why it made the cut: In addition to hydrating, Hydralyte + Energy Boost is formulated with vitamins and caffeine to give you a boost of energy. And with a vegan, non-GMO, and gluten-free formula, this tasty addition could just replace your morning brew.

Specs

• Diet type: Non-GMO, vegan, gluten-, dairy-free
• Servings: 20
• Flavors: Lemon-lime
• Form: Powder

Pros

• Includes caffeine
• Only 10 calories per serving
• Added benefit of vitamins

Cons

• More expensive than some options

While many electrolyte drinks might be designed for rehydration post-workout, Hydralyte + Energy Boost has the added benefit of 100mg of caffeine sourced from green tea, making it the perfect pre-workout beverage. This pick is also formulated with vitamins that assist with energy metabolism (like B12 and B6), plus 225 mg of Vitamin C, 9mg of Zinc, magnesium, and potassium.

Whether you need to kickstart your morning after a night out or want a healthy burst of energy before you hit the gym, this powder formula from Hydralyte is uber-portable—just toss it in your gym bag or backpack to later mix with water for hydration on the go.

Best budget: DripDrop Hydration Electrolyte Powder Packets

SEE IT

Why it made the cut: Get a quality dose of electrolytes for less than $20.

Specs

• Diet type: non-GMO, gluten-free, vegan 
• Servings: 16 single-serve packets
• Flavors: Four
• Form: Powder

Pros

• Contains almost as many electrolytes as more expensive options on this list
• Tasty
• Made with natural flavors and sweeteners

Cons

• On the sweeter side

If you’re broke, hungover, and need something to fill the empty vessel of your spirit, look no further than this electrolyte mix from DripDrop. Each packet is just over a buck—that’s pretty cheap. Plus, it has just as many—if not more, in some cases—electrolytes as some of the more expensive options on this list. Even better, it comes in packets, so you can take it on the go so you don’t throw up in public.

What to consider when buying the best electrolyte drinks

You could grab whatever you see at the store. Or, you could snag something tailored to your lifestyle. Before placing that drink mix in your cart, here’s what you should know:

Ingredients

Possibly the most important is the ingredients. Check the label to see exactly what you’re getting in your electrolyte drink. There are a lot of different options, and the one you choose could vary depending on what you’re looking for, such as a way to help get over being sick or a way to fuel your exercise. 

Different electrolytes include sodium, magnesium, calcium, phosphorous, and chloride.

The non-active ingredients are important to check, too. Some sports drinks have the electrolytes you need, but pair them with tons of added sugar, which isn’t ideal. 

Form

There are different forms in which electrolyte drinks come in. These include premixed liquid form, like Pedialyte, powder form, like Liquid I.V., and dissolvable tablets, like Nuun. Then there are also naturally occurring electrolyte drinks like coconut water. 

The type of electrolyte drinks you decide on may depend on if you need to travel with it, how much you need to carry with you easily, and also just downright preference.

Other additives

Some electrolyte drinks include extra ingredients like caffeine or Vitamin C. There are reasons why some of these extra additives may be beneficial and other reasons why some people may want to avoid them. It is generally best to keep clear of any drink high in sugar content. Consulting your doctor can’t hurt before starting any supplement, especially if it’s part of a new or particularly rigorous exercise program. 

FAQs

Final thoughts on the best electrolyte drinks

• Best overall: Tailwind Nutrition Endurance Fuel
• Best sports drink: Liquid I.V.
• Best for hangovers: Pedialyte
• Best for runners: Nuun
• Best system: Gatorade Gx Hydration System and Gx Sports Drink Concentrate Pods
• Best for breastfeeding: Vita Coco
• Best sugar-free: Hi-Lyte
• Best pre-workout drink: Hydralyte + Energy Boost
• Best budget: DripDrop Hydration Electrolyte Powder Packets

Electrolyte drinks can do your body good, but not everyone needs added electrolytes since your body naturally replenishes them. Generally, electrolyte drinks are great for those working out for a long time at high intensities, professional and competitive athletes, long-distance hikers, and so on. They are also great for when you have the stomach flu, are breastfeeding, or need to rehydrate after a long night of drinking. 

If you’re looking for the best electrolyte drinks, there are a few things to consider before making that final purchase. What ingredients do you want, and which ones do you want to avoid? Do you want liquid, tablets, or powder? Do you need something easy to carry or travel with? Once you answer these questions, one of these best electrolyte drinks should work great for you.

Why trust us

Popular Science started writing about technology more than 150 years ago. There was no such thing as “gadget writing” when we published our first issue in 1872, but if there was, our mission to demystify the world of innovation for everyday readers means we would have been all over it. Here in the present, PopSci is fully committed to helping readers navigate the increasingly intimidating array of devices on the market right now.

Our writers and editors have combined decades of experience covering and reviewing consumer electronics. We each have our own obsessive specialties—from high-end audio to video games to cameras and beyond—but when we’re reviewing devices outside of our immediate wheelhouses, we do our best to seek out trustworthy voices and opinions to help guide people to the very best recommendations. We know we don’t know everything, but we’re excited to live through the analysis paralysis that internet shopping can spur so readers don’t have to.

The post The best electrolyte drinks of 2023 appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

The dietary supplement market in the US is valued at more than $50 million dollars. One slice of that—fish oil supplements—has been growing in popularity in recent years, thanks to the many health benefits touted on their labels. However, medical research has not been able to confirm that consuming the omega-3 fatty acids in them offer many cardiovascular benefits. Despite this lack of hard evidence, fish oil marketers continue to make outsized claims about the supplement’s benefits, according to a study published on August 23 in the journal JAMA Cardiology.

[Related: Do you need a daily multivitamin? Probably not, says national health task force.]

Fish oil contains two omega-3 fatty acids, EPA and DHA, which are found in flax seeds, walnuts, and fatty fish such as salmon. Higher levels of EPA and DHA have been associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular disease; however, these observational findings are based on patients getting them naturally from their diet and not supplemental use. A 2021 study from the National Institutes of Health also showed that general over-the-counter fish oil supplements do not actually improve cardiovascular outcomes. Additionally, a randomized trial of more than 15,000 patients with diabetes found that the risk of a serious cardiovascular event was not significantly different between participants who were and weren’t taking an omega-3 supplement.

In this new paper, a team from the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas analyzed health claims on the labels of 2,819 fish oil supplements taken from the National Institutes of Health Dietary Supplement Label Database. 

More than 80 percent of the supplements in the study used a structure and function claim. These types of claims vaguely describe the role that omega-3 fatty acids play in the body, like “supports heart, mind, and mood” or “promotes heart health.” 

The study also reviewed qualified health claims and found them on only 19 percent (399) of the labels: 394 relating to coronary heart disease, three for blood pressure, and two relating to both. These claims are related to the supplement’s potential to help in the treatment or prevention of a disease and are made by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), but only following an evidence review.

Currently, there are only two cardiovascular-related qualified health claims for fish oil, one that relates to coronary heart disease and the other to blood pressure. In 2019, the FDA wrote, “Supportive but not conclusive research shows that consumptions of EPA and DHA omega-3 fatty acids may reduce the risk of coronary heart disease.”

However, the agency also states that structure and function claims cannot say that a supplement has the power to prevent, treat, or cure any illness or disease. They simply “describes the role of a nutrient or dietary ingredient intended to affect the structure or function in humans.’’

In response to Popular Science’s request to comment on fish oil supplement labels, an FDA spokesperson wrote: “In general, the FDA does not comment on specific studies, but evaluates them as part of the body of evidence to further our understanding about a particular issue and assist in our mission to protect public health. The FDA is reviewing the findings of the paper.”

[Related: Viagra shows promise in extending men’s lives, among other areas.]

“It is true that omega-3 fatty acids are present in the brain and are important for all sorts of brain functions,” study co-author and cardiology professor Ann Marie Navar told The Washington Post. “What has not been consistently shown with high-quality trials is that taking more of it in the form of a fish oil supplement leads to improved performance or prevention of disease.” Navar also added that she was “alarmed” to learn that fish oil supplement labels often include claims that imply health benefits for a wide range of organ systems (brain, heart, and eyes) while conducting the study.

The team did recognize several limitations in their analysis. Companies submit label information to the NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database on a volunteer basis, so the paper was not all-inclusive. What’s more, the authors only assessed supplements from the 16 largest fish oil brands and the health claims on their labels, not promotional materials.

“Nutrition studies are notoriously difficult to conduct in the right way,” certified clinical nutritionist and board-certified holistic nutritionist Megan Lyons told Healthline. “Humans have so many variables at play: different health conditions, diverse dietary intake, varying movement patterns, and distinct sleep and stress patterns—all contributing to our overall health.”

The post Fish oil supplements might still not be as good as the real thing appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

In 2015, a viral image of a sea turtle with a plastic straw up its nose made the single-use plastic item environmental public enemy number one, ushering in the era of the polarizing paper straw. Now, some new research found that paper straws might have some downsides, and not just because they tend to crumble under pressure. 

[Related: Did plastic straw bans work? Yes, but not in the way you’d think.]

A small European study that tested 39 brands of straws published August 25 in the journal Food Additives and Contaminants found that some brands of paper straws contain a harmful group of synthetic chemicals known as poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). These ‘forever chemicals’ were found in the majority of the straws tested in the study and were most commonly detected in straws made from paper and bamboo. The plastic straws used in this paper also contained a high number of PFAS and the authors recommended using reusable steel straws instead.

PFAS are found in a wide range of products from non-stick pans to clothing and help make materials resistant to water and stains. They may be harmful to people, wildlife, and the environment, since they break down very slowly and can potentially persist over thousands of years. Multiple studies link the chemicals to various cancers and many vital water sources are contaminated with them. It is estimated that PFAS are in more than 97 percent of Americans’ bodies. Researchers have even found them in breast milk.

A separate 2021 study found PFAS in plant-based drinking straws in the United StatesThe study co-author and University of Antwerp environmental scientist Thimo Groffen and his team wanted to see if the same was true in Belgium. 

“Straws made from plant-based materials, such as paper and bamboo, are often advertised as being more sustainable and eco-friendly than those made from plastic,” Groffen said in a statement. “However, the presence of PFAS in these straws means that’s not necessarily true.” 

In the study, the team tested 39 brands of drinking straws made from five materials– paper, bamboo, glass, stainless steel, and plastic. A growing number of countries have banned single-use plastic products and plant-based versions are popular alternatives. 

The straws were primarily obtained from shops, supermarkets, and fast-food restaurants and underwent two rounds of testing for PFAS. About 69 percent of brands tested in the study (27 brands out of the 39) contained PFAS, with 18 different PFAS detected in total. 

Paper straws were the most likely to contain PFAS, with chemicals detected in 90 percent (18 out of 20 brands) of paper straws tested. They were also detected in 80 percent (four out of five brands) of bamboo straws brands, 75 percent (three out of four brands) of plastic straw brands, and 40 percent (two out of five brands) of glass straws. The team did not detect any PFAS in the five brands of steel straws tested. 

Perfluorooctanoic acid was the most commonly found forever chemical in the study, however, this PFAS has been banned globally since 2020. They also detected trifluoroacetic acid and trifluoromethanesulfonic acid. These “ultra-short chain” PFAS are highly water soluble which means they could potentially leach out of straws and into drinks. 

According to the team, the concentrations of PFAS were low, and since people tend to only use straws occasionally, they pose a limited risk to health. However, PFAS can remain in the body for several years and their concentrations can build up.

[Related: 3M announces it will cease making ‘forever chemical’ PFAS by 2026.]

“Small amounts of PFAS, while not harmful in themselves, can add to the chemical load already present in the body,” said Groffen. 

It is not known if the PFAS were added to the straws for waterproofing when they were being manufactured or if it was a result of contamination from a different source. Some sources of contamination could be the soil that the plant-based materials were grown in and the water used during the manufacturing process. 

However, since PFAS were present in almost every brand of paper straw that the team tested it is likely that it was used as a water-repellent coating in some cases, according to the authors. The team says that some of the study’s other limitations include not looking at if the PFAS would leach out of the straws and into liquids. 

“The presence of PFAS in paper and bamboo straws shows they are not necessarily biodegradable,” Groffen said. “We did not detect any PFAS in stainless steel straws, so I would advise consumers to use this type of straw–or just avoid using straws at all.” 

The post ‘Forever chemicals’ detected in paper and plastic straws appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

What if you could walk into a grocery store, scan the barcode on a Rice Krispie treat, and find out how it would affect your blood sugar before buying it? That’s the promise of January, a virtual continuous glucose monitor (CGM) system that the company describes as a “24/7 AI health coach to change the way you live.”

As a middle-aged woman with a family history of diabetes and a pizza weakness, I’ve wanted to try a CGM. After more than a week of testing the January AI system, I found it to be an effective tool that gave me more insight into my metabolic health and actually helped me lose a few pounds. It’s a sizeable investment but can return equally valuable insights if you sign up for a subscription and keep a few things in mind.

SEE IT

Overview

• After filling out your health history in an online telehealth session, if you’re approved, January will send you a CGM
• Once you attach the CGM to your arm, you log the food you’ve eaten, scan the sensor with your phone, and the January app shows your glucose levels in real-time
• You must also sync with an Apple Watch or an Oura Ring to record your activity levels
• After five days, January will provide detailed recommendations for foods to eat and activities, taking your preferences into account
• A one-month subscription costs $288, and an annual subscription is $380

Pros

• Provides feedback in real-time on how various foods will affect your glucose levels
• Includes a comprehensive database of foods. You can also enter using a QR code on-site in a store
• Fun to use
• Recommends activity to counteract high glucose levels
• Provides meal plans and activity recommendations based on your nutritional needs and preferences

Cons

• Somewhat expensive
• Might not be good for someone with a history of disordered eating around calorie restriction
• Sensor came out somewhat easily

Verdict: If you’re concerned about your risk of diabetes because of family history, physical health, or age, or you just want personalized recommendations on how to live healthier, the January AI system is a useful and fun tool.

What is a continuous glucose monitor (CGM)?

Continuous glucose monitors were originally developed in the 1980s to help diabetics keep tabs on their blood glucose, or blood sugar, levels. People with diabetes have trouble making insulin, a hormone secreted by the pancreas that allows glucose to be used by cells for energy. Glucose then remains in the bloodstream, keeping blood sugar levels high over time. Chronic high blood sugar can also damage the kidneys, heart, and nervous system.

While CGMs used to require users to prick their fingers to test their blood sugar, newer CGMs include a small sensor that goes under the skin. The sensor will then transmit readings of your glucose levels to a device that will analyze them. Pioneering CGM makers include Dexcom, which made the first CGM that didn’t require a finger pricking and got FDA approval for diabetics in 2016.

Increasingly, people who aren’t diabetic, including elite athletes, are using CGMs to get a more granular sense of their metabolic health. Other popular CGMs that keep popping up in my Instagram feed include Nutrisense and Levels. Tech sites have speculated for years about Apple’s possible plan to build a CGM into the Apple Watch. However, CGMs still require a medical prescription, and their use by people who haven’t been diagnosed with diabetes has generated debate in the medical community. One perspective published in the journal JAMA described CGMs for non-diabetics as a “waste of time and money.” 

Other doctors point to the more than 120 million Americans who either already have diabetes or are prediabetic. Peter Attia, M.D., who co-authored the bestselling book, Outlive: The Science and Art of Longevity, makes the case that the typical blood sugar tests that patients get annually don’t reveal daily spikes that can signal a brewing problem.

“In the vast majority of cases, today’s normal individual is tomorrow’s diabetic patient if something isn’t done to detect and prevent this slide,” Attia writes. Fluctuating glucose levels have also been associated with an increased risk of heart disease, cancer, and Alzheimer’s disease, he notes.

While I’m generally healthy, I was interested in learning more about my blood sugar levels and how they might affect my life. My parents had been diagnosed with Type II diabetes in their 40s, so I checked the family history box. After losing weight early in the pandemic, I put on some pounds last year. And despite training for my first marathon, I found that all the exercise wasn’t helping get me into better shape as easily as running did when I was younger. 

True, the lab results from the last time I was tested after a visit to my primary care doctor in September 2022 passed muster. My glucose level of 87 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL) was in the middle of the normal range, but my hemoglobin A1C—the standard test that measures the average of blood glucose over 90 days—was 5.5%, on the high side of normal.

According to the CDC,  a reading of 99 mg/dL or lower is normal for fasting blood sugar, while 100 to 125 mg/dL signals that you’re prediabetic, and 126 mg/dL or higher indicates you have diabetes. Would seeing those spikes on my phone just after eating help me make better decisions?

The background

Monitoring daily fluctuations in blood sugar can provide a much better window into your metabolic health, says Noosheen Hashemi, January’s co-founder and CEO. She became passionate about a more holistic approach to health care after learning the truth about her parents’ medical conditions. Doctors failed to diagnose her father with prostate cancer while he was being treated for another cancer. And her mother’s heart failure was misdiagnosed as asthma.

“Once you fall into that sick journey, all sorts of things can happen to you,” Hashemi says. “So I became obsessed with: ‘How can we know sooner, what can we know, and why do we know so little?’”

She teamed up with Michael Snyder, Ph.D., chair of Genetics and Director of Genomics and Personalized Medicine at Stanford School of Medicine. Snyder was conducting research that revealed a population of people who looked to have healthy blood sugar levels actually frequently had spikes in which their glucose reached diabetic levels.

“He believed this was a ticking time bomb and that we should look into it,” Hashemi says. “That’s how we got started.”

That was more than five years ago. They’ve since used machine learning to develop a library of foods complete with nutritional information and incorporated data from their clinical studies and thousands of users to develop and refine models for predicting glucose spikes.

They also realized that most of the their users were not diabetics, but instead what Hashemi describes as “optimizers and discoverers”: fit people looking to optimize their health or people who had potential risk factors, such as a family history, like me. Hashemi is optimistic that the FDA will approve CGMs for non-diabetics next year.

The setup

People interested in using January have to complete a telehealth evaluation online. The process involves filling out an online form, not a virtual interaction with a live healthcare professional.

For $288 ($260 for the gear and $28 for the membership), you get a Freestyle Libre CGM, access to January AI’s glycemic food database and recommendations through its app, and $40 off an Oura Ring (Gen 2 or Gen 3) to track your activity. (You can also use an Apple Watch, which I did.) If you’re approved, the Freestyle Libre will arrive in the mail shortly. 

Easy-to-follow videos on the Freestyle LibreLink app showed me how to apply the CGM sensor. I felt a slight pin prick and mild soreness when I installed the sensor on my left upper arm. The app is connected to a medical practice based in California. After agreeing to use of my health data, I was up and running. 

Then using the January app, I was instructed how to scan the sensor with my phone and sync my Apple Watch. Once the sensor is active, it’s ready to deliver real-time glucose readings after each scan. Over the next five days, January’s AI would analyze my glucose levels, activity, and what I was eating and compare it to its thousands of users to predict my body’s response to various foods and exercise. “It takes inputs from your heart rate monitor and your food log and your CGM to build a digital twin for you,” Hashemi says. 

The performance

I began using January at the end of June, logging my meals and scanning the CGM. I found the food database reasonably comprehensive, although sometimes it took some scrolling down to find the exact food.

I was warned that the initial glucose levels could be either high or very low within the first 24 to 48 hours as the CGM calibrated to my system. My first blood sugar reading was very low—58 mg/dL—which got me googling hypoglycemia. 

Then I ate a small bowl of vegetable ramen leftover from a night out at a restaurant the night before. I scanned the CGM with my phone about 5 minutes after eating and found my glucose was in the normal range: 90 mg/dL.

The January app provides reports on the previous day in three categories: Nourish (calories, fiber intake, and macros); Move (post-meal activity, time exercised, and calories burned); and Recharge (fasting period, last-meal sleep gap, and sleep duration). After the five initial days of analysis, January’s AI notified me that it had created my digital twin and began making recommendations for food choices and activity.

I’ve never stuck with food logs in the past, but the ability to quickly see how specific items affected my blood sugar became something I looked forward to testing. I also discovered that requirement to log what I was eating provided additional incentive to eat better. I had been prioritizing protein over refined carbs over the past few months and was glad to see that eating Greek yogurt, flax seeds, and blueberries for breakfast got me a shoutout for protein and fiber goals. I also dialed back on the snacking that’s too easy to do when working from home about six feet from the fridge.

I felt compelled in the name of science to see how a slice of pesto pizza and a Rice Krispie treat would affect my readings. As expected, these foods spiked my blood sugar more than my virtuous breakfast. When I had a high reading, the app recommended a walk after the meal. The January app also provided alternatives based on your preferences (although I was wasn’t excited to replace chia seeds with dried spirulina).

You can also reach out through the app to a virtual health coach named Jan, who provides chatbot answers on everything from what you should eat for lunch to creating a new exercise plan. The company is also in the process of adding more FAQs, such as what is a normal glucose level. Hashemi is quick to point out, however, that January is not a healthcare provider, but it does provide lifestyle recommendations based on their (and your) data. 

In fact, January has explicit behaviors that it’s leading users toward, including adopting intermittent fasting, increasing fiber consumption, aligning calorie intake with activity level, getting post-meal movement, and reducing glucose-spiking foods.

I was doing reasonably well with all of these, but unfortunately, after eight days of testing, I accidentally dislodged my sensor while getting dressed. But January’s AI still provided plenty of valuable insights during the time I used it. My blood sugar was mostly low to normal, but I did see a few spikes that took me out of my normal range. And I did lose a few pounds and came to appreciate the importance of better discipline and regular meals. I did wish there was more information for people with readings on the low side.

But while the nudge toward intermittent fasting might be helpful for many (myself included), I saw how it could also cause problems for people with a propensity for disordered eating around calorie restriction. It concerned me that after I stopped logging meals, the app indicated on days when I didn’t enter food that the number of calories I consumed was “excellent.”

So, who should buy the January system?

Yes, $288 for a month’s subscription sounds expensive. But if you generally eat the same things, 30 days will give you plenty of time to analyze your health data and see how different foods affect you. I’m hopeful that glucose level monitoring will become more accessible and affordable, bearing in mind the estimated 96 million Americans over age 18 characterized as prediabetic.

Technological advances have made it possible for us to see our heart rate with a quick glance at our wrist, a luxury many of our parents didn’t have. Now, the ability to test our blood sugar is now almost as frictionless as posting on Instagram. If you’re concerned about your glucose levels due to family history or just want to fine-tune your health, January’s AI can help with daily insights and personalized recommendations. Just remember that it’s a tool and doesn’t replace regular visits to your healthcare provider. 

The post January AI glucose monitor review: A pricey but effective approach to fine-tune your diet appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

The global commercial fishing industry is a major contributor to Earth’s environmental crises and ecological destruction, but you’re unlikely to find many sustainable or vegan seafood alternatives next to the synthetic beef and chicken in grocery stores. That lack of options may soon change, however, thanks to 3D printers, mung beans, and microalgae.

At the American Chemical Society’s fall meeting this week, a team from the National University of Singapore presented the results of a newly synthesized mock seafood that could one day find its way into restaurants. After designing an ink composed of legume and microalgae proteins, alongside plant-based oils containing omega-3 fatty acids, researchers loaded their paste into a food-grade 3D printer, which then churned out small, calamari-shaped rings. The team then tossed their faux-seafood into an air fryer, and taste-tested their results. According to researchers, the end product is showing incredible promise for a new, healthy alternative to commercial seafood options.

[Related: Scientists cooked up a 3D printed cheesecake.]

Although some fishy plant-based alternatives are available to consumers right now, they frequently do not boast the same nutritional content as seafood. “Plant-based seafood mimics are out there, but the ingredients don’t usually include protein,” explains principal investigator and professor of food science and technology, Dejian Huang. “We wanted to make protein-based products that are nutritionally equivalent to or better than real seafood and address food sustainability.”

To improve their imitations, Huang’s team programmed their 3D printer to assemble their imitation calamari rings in concentric layers, thus allowing for a combination of different textures ranging from fatty and smooth, to chewy. This layered approach results in a more accurate mouth feel to their squid source material.

But calamari alternatives are only as good as they are sustainable, of course. Luckily, Huang’s new mock seafood is designed specifically with that in mind: Microalgae is nutritious, often “fishy” in taste, and extremely sustainable to farm. Mung bean protein, meanwhile, can easily be harvested from the waste product of starch noodle manufacturing. Although Huang’s team still wants to improve their creation before they begin consumer taste tests, they believe the results are already a promising step towards green seafood alternatives.

For Poornima Vijayan, a graduate student involved in the project, it’s a vital end goal. “I think it’s imminent that the seafood supply could be very limited in the future,” she says. “We need to be prepared from an alternative protein point of view, especially here in Singapore, where over 90 percent of the fish is imported.”

The post 3D-printed vegan calamari rings could be next on the menu appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

The next time you go grocery shopping, don’t forget to pick up a case of kombucha. Tea lovers have long hailed the funky, fermented drink for keeping the gut healthy and running smoothly, and now we can tack on diabetes management to the list of potential benefits.

A small study published on August 1 in the journal Frontiers in Nutrition found kombucha stopped spikes in blood sugar levels for adults with Type 2 diabetes. With the number of Americans with diabetes tripling in the last three decades, the beverage could potentially help lower blood sugar levels and prevent the condition from worsening in pre-diabetics. While the authors have several ideas on how this works, they haven’t found a clear answer or connection just yet.

Kombucha, which is cultured with bacteria and yeast, has been around for centuries but has grown in popularity around the world in the last two decades. “Consuming one to two 8-ounce servings of kombucha daily offers health benefits while keeping sugar and calorie intake in check,” explains Kelsey Costa, a registered dietitian nutritionist at the National Coalition on Healthcare who was not involved in the study. Most brands sold in stores are typically packaged in 16-ounce bottles, making up two servings.

A first-of-its-kind human trial 

Chagai Mendelson, a medical resident at MedStar Georgetown University Hospital and lead author of the new research, came up with the trial idea after speaking with diabetic patients on ways to cut sugar from their diet. His standard medical advice would involve drinking more water and less sugary beverages, but after noticing that more people were drinking kombucha, he was unsure whether the slightly sweet tea was safe to drink. When diving into the research, he noticed several animal studies where kombucha improved glycemic function or helped regenerate beta cells (cells in the pancreas that produce insulin, but can be overworked to the point of death in people with diabetes) Yet he could not find any clinical trials looking at how kombucha affected diabetic individuals in a real-world setting. 

So, Mendelson and his team recruited 12 diabetic patients for a four-month-long pilot study. Finding volunteers was challenging, he says, because there was no funding to pay the subjects for their time and the criteria was highly selective—they had to have Type 2 diabetes and zero history of drinking kombucha. There was also attrition, where people dropped out in the middle of the study or did not respond during follow-up attempts. Ultimately, only seven participants completed the experiment.

[Related: 2 easy homemade electrolyte drinks that actually work]

To compensate for the small numbers, the authors took a crossover-trial approach. Each participant served as their own control to allow the team to look at the difference in sugar levels when they drank kombucha versus when they didn’t. Half of the volunteers drank one daily cup of kombucha for four weeks, while the other six drank fizzy non-fermented ginger water that acted as the placebo. They then went through a two-month “wash-out period” where the effects of kombucha would go away, allowing people’s metabolisms to reset. Afterward, the group switched roles; neither half knew which drink they were receiving at any point in the trial. “Even though there’s fewer participants, we get two data points from each one. And it also allows us to make sure that some of that variability is accounted for,” Mendelson explains.

How kombucha might affect blood sugar

After four weeks of drinking kombucha, people went from an average blood sugar level of 164 milligrams per deciliter to 116, which falls well within the American Diabetes Association’s healthy range recommendations. Some individuals were also taking insulin when their blood sugar levels were measured, and could have been on restricted diets.

Mendelson has several thoughts about why regular kombucha intake might make a difference. The first is the substitution theory, where the tea is simply replacing sugary drinks like soda and fruit juice that people typically pair with their meals. The second is the microbiome theory. Kombucha is a great source of probiotics and drinking it helps build a diverse and healthier gut bacteria that aid in processing nutrients and food. “As you’re taking more probiotics, your gut is able to digest carbohydrates in a way where they are released to the blood in a more steady flow,” Mendelson says. “That helps to avoid having high blood sugar after a meal.”

[Related: Kombucha may have a surprising new use in tech]

The third but less popular explanation is that the ingredients in kombucha are helping to create new beta cells. Studies on diabetic rats have shown beta cells can be regenerated by potentially blocking certain enzyme activity in the pancreas that would normally promote carbohydrate digestion, but it’s less clear whether that would translate in humans. The final hypothesis is that when patients have more acetic acid—the chemical compound responsible for kombucha’s acidic taste and smell—in their gut, it causes their digestive system to slow down. That leads to slower absorption of carbohydrates and a gradual, not rapid, increase in blood sugar.

The tea is not a cure

While kombucha is a healthy alternative to sweeter drinks, Mendelson cautions people not to think of it as some magic cure-all. The trial does not provide enough evidence to definitively say it will work better than medication and other healthy dietary habits for reducing blood sugar. 

It’s also possible that kombucha may not help at all. Jorge Moreno, an obesity medicine specialist at Yale Medicine who was not involved in the study, notes two major concerns with the trial. First, the small sample size increases the margin of error and inflates the chances of a false connection between kombucha and blood sugar levels. Second, nine of the 12 participants were using insulin, and their doses could have fluctuated. (Mendelson says people were asked to self-report any changes with their insulin use.) “If the dosage of insulin increased for these participants, that would also lower the glucose blood level and affect their results. More research is needed,” Moreno notes.

[Related: FDA approves first drug that can delay onset of Type 1 diabetes]

Kombucha may not help everyone with Type 2 diabetes, but the trial shows it’s one of the better drinks they can choose from. If you do want to test the benefits out yourself, Mendelson suggests pairing your diabetes medication with the tea to avoid dangerous blood sugar spikes and lulls.

The post Kombucha’s health benefits may go beyond our guts appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

More people in the United States are dying from causes related to excessive alcohol consumption since 1999. Surprisingly, this is particularly true for American women, according to a study published July 28 in the journal JAMA Network Open. While men are roughly three times more likely than women to die from alcohol use, the gap has narrowed and the risk to women has grown recently.  

[Related: COVID lockdown drinking habits led to a rise in deaths from alcoholic liver disease.]

The study looked at Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data on more than 600,000 deaths linked to alcohol between 1999 and 2020. The data included deaths from alcoholic liver disease, alcohol poisoning, acute intoxication, alcoholic cardiomyopathy, and mental and behavioral disorders that can be linked to alcohol consumption, and other causes.

It found that alcohol-related deaths steadily increased in the United States in that period. However, from 2018 to 2020, the rate increased by 14.7 percent for women compared to 12.5 percent for men. The study also found rising rates among older women in particular. Alcohol-related deaths rose in women over 65 and older by 6.7 percent from 2012 to 2020, compared with a 5.2 percent increase per year in men 65 and older. 

According to the authors, this shift does not necessarily mean that women in this age group are drinking more, but could point to “the larger burden of accumulating harms of chronic alcohol use among female individuals.”

While this study did not point to the reasons behind this increase, co-author and assistant professor of population health at Hofstra University Ibraheem Karaye offered a few potential theories to The New York Times. Karaye said that alcohol consumption is likely increasing among women and that alcohol affects women’s bodies differently. Women’s bodies typically have less fluid to dilute alcohol, which can result in higher blood-alcohol concentrations, which may make women more vulnerable to health complications, according to Karaye.

Stress is also a major factor in alcohol misuse among both men and women. The narrowing gap could reflect an increase in both stress and stress-related disorders among women, according to the team. 

[Related: A powerful combo of psilocybin and therapy might help people overcome alcohol use disorder.]

Excessive drinking during the COVID-19 pandemic has also increased alcoholic liver disease deaths, with a recent report from KFF Health News finding that the condition killed more Californians than car accidents or breast cancer. The lockdowns made people feel isolated, depressed, stressed, and anxious, says KFF’s Philip Reese, which led to some increases in drinking and an increase in alcohol sales.

Additionally, shifting attitudes towards heavy drinking by women may be a factor.  Associate professor in the division of gastroenterology and liver disease at NYU Langone Health Lisa Ganjhu told NBC News that she regularly sees women who are not aware of how physically toxic it can be. 

“The article didn’t surprise me. Women are overusing alcohol with more frequency now. I’ve had to talk to a fair number of women about their alcohol use,” said Ganjhu, who was not affiliated with the new study. “I had one patient who developed pancreatitis from drinking ask me when she could start drinking again. She said it wasn’t acceptable to not drink with clients. It’s mind-boggling.”

Regardless of gender, Karaye agrees with most physicians that “reducing or eliminating exposure [to alcohol] at any point would be valuable.” The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism’s Rethinking Drinking program can help people evaluate alcohol usage and create plans to scale down or quit drinking. 

The post Deaths related to excessive alcohol consumption rise in recent years—especially for women appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

The global spice trade has been linking global economies and shaping the world for at least 4,000 years. Seasonings and herbs we completely take for granted today were once so valuable that a long held theory believes that Roman soldiers were sometimes paid in salt, even giving rise to the word “salary.”

[Related: For decades, turmeric’s ultra-golden glow had a deadly secret.]

Now, scientists have uncovered the remnants of Southeast Asia’s earliest evidence of curry–a dish of meat or vegetables seasoned with a mixture of spices– in Vietnam dating back almost 2,000 years. The findings are detailed in a study published July 21 in the journal Science Advances. 

The team from Australian National University analyzed the micro-remains from the surface of stone grinding tools recovered at the Oc Eo archaeological site in southern Vietnam. South Asia has played a vital role in the spice trade since the Bronze Age. Southeast Asia especially played a vital role due to its tropical climate and geographical location between the Indian subcontinent and China—perfect for growing and transporting the seeds, fruits, and other crops used to make spices.

Most of the tools studied for this paper were excavated between 2017 and 2019, while others had been stored at a local museum. The team initially set out to understand and learn more about the function of a set of stone grinding tools called “pesani,” that people of the ancient Funan kingdom possibly used to powder their spices. What they found, however, was delicious clues about ancient curry. 

The tools bore the remains of a wide range of spices still stored in cabinets today, including sand ginger, galangal, clove, nutmeg, cinnamon, ginger, fingerroot, and tumeric. 

“Our study suggests that curries were most likely introduced to Southeast Asia by migrants during the period of early trade contact via the Indian Ocean,” study co-author and Australian National University PhD candidate Weiwei Wang said in a statement. “Given these spices originated from various different locations, it’s clear people were undertaking long-distance journeys for trade purposes. 

The study also shows that the port city of Oc Eo played an important role in a trade that linked the economies and cultures of Asia, Africa, and Europe and sheds more light on how significant and coveted spices were as commodities in ancient civilizations. 

In addition to the microscopic remains on the stone tools at the site, the team also excavated some well-preserved seeds. 

“The preservation of plant remains in Oc Eo is exceptional – the seeds were so fresh it was hard to believe they were 2,000 years old,” co-author and Australian National University archeologist Hsiao-chun Hung said in a statement. “We believe further analysis could identify more spices and possibly even uncover unique plant species, adding to our understanding of the history of the region.”  

[Related: What would possess someone to eat a Carolina Reaper pepper? This writer tried to find out.]

Despite today’s curry powder being readily available stored in plastic containers at a local grocery store, the key ingredients haven’t really changed since ancient times. 

“The spices used today have not deviated significantly from the Oc Eo period,” co-author and archaeologist at Vietnam’s Southern Institute for Social Sciences Khanh Trung Kien Nguyen, said in a statement. “The key components are all still there, such as turmeric, cloves and cinnamon.” 

The team hopes to analyze the seeds found at the site in future studies and could identify more spices or even some unique plant species that will add to the understanding of this region’s history. Completing more dating at the site could also fill in some gaps on when and how each type or plant or spice was traded around the world. 

The post Leftovers of a 2,000-year-old curry discovered on stone cooking tools appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

This article was originally published on Undark. Read the original article.

Before the heat of the day set in, dozens of people were already gathered under a large banyan tree at the twice-weekly turmeric market in Ataikula, Bangladesh. The season for harvesting turmeric was quickly coming to an end. Those who had arrived watched from the shade as other farmers brought their haul on motorbikes and auto rickshaws on the dirt road, their harvests to be combined in large piles atop orange and blue tarpaulin mats. Traders would buy however much they wanted in bulk.

Mohammad Abdullah Sheikh wandered around the market helping farmers weigh their sacks and traders make their purchases. Over the last 30 years, he’s become well acquainted with the space, as his turmeric processing business and trading facilities are headquartered next door. He buys most of his turmeric from this market and processes it to sell to larger food manufacturers and wholesalers across the country.

For most of his turmeric trading career, Sheikh engaged in an open secret: While processing raw turmeric to powder, he added a chemical called lead chromate to get the tubers to glow yellow. Sheikh and the locals refer to the compound as peuri — and nearly all the farmers and traders at the market are familiar with it. Lead chromate is a chemical used in paints to, for instance, make school buses yellow, and it can enhance the radiance of turmeric roots, making them more attractive to buyers.

For decades, Sheikh didn’t know the exact harm that peuri could cause. That changed in the fall of 2019, when researchers from the nonprofit International Center for Diarrheal Disease Research, Bangladesh, or ICDDR,B, traveled to Ataikula and adjacent districts in the northwest to meet with Sheikh and others in the turmeric business. The researchers warned them that consuming lead chromate could lead to kidney and brain damage or cause developmental delays in children. By that point, the spice had made its way out of the country: The problem had already gone global.

That outreach was the culmination of years of work conducted by an international group of researchers, including a research scientist at Stanford University. They worked together with the ICDDR,B and Bangladesh’s Food Safety Authority to protect the country’s food supply from further lead exposure. The impacts of this intervention were significant, and summarized in a study published recently in the science journal Environmental Research. When researchers sampled and tested turmeric across the country before and after the intervention, the level of adulteration in this one study dropped from 47 percent to 0 percent.

The use of peuri in turmeric renders the food fraudulent, as it is done purposefully to alter the commodity for economic gain. Instances of food fraud are notoriously difficult to resolve, said Michael Roberts, expert on the regulation of food fraud, and executive director of the Resnick Center for Food Law and Policy at the University of California, Los Angeles School of Law. Often, the economic incentives just aren’t there for authentically made food. Processors are likely to increase their margins if they cheat.

Fighting food fraud isn’t easy, and experts have a range of ideas on how to do it. Some approaches rely heavily on scientific testing while others work through undercover investigations. Regardless of the method, rooting out food fraud requires constant surveillance across long and complex supply chains. In this sense, Bangladesh’s success is noteworthy, said Roberts, who was not involved in the project to eliminate lead chromate from turmeric. “It’s unusual that this kind of campaign takes place, whether in developed or developing countries,” he said, and there are lessons from this case study that could be applied to other commodities.

Native to South Asia, turmeric has been used for thousands of years as both a culinary and a medicinal ingredient. In Bangladesh, it is often planted in the middle of the year, and requires nine to 10 months to mature before it’s harvested. Precipitation during the monsoon season is critical: A generous amount of rain will allow for the root to bloom, shooting off additional roots, known as “fingers,” from the bulb.

Eskandar Molla, a farmer from northwest Bangladesh, has been growing turmeric for over 50 years. He sells his fresh turmeric fingers at nearby Hazir Hat, an open air market. There, he gets paid a market rate for what he sells: In March of this year, it was around 1,400 taka (about $13 USD) for a 88-pound satchel. Middlemen, who have the facilities to boil and dry the root, buy it from him and other farmers.

Getting the moisture out is critical for the root to be pulsed into powder. Traders lay out a single layer of turmeric fingers in vast, sunny, open fields for a month. Workers manually go through and inspect for roots that are either too long, too fat, or too skinny.

Once dried, the turmeric fingers are polished. Here, they are dumped into large “drums,” which are turned by hand or motorized. This continual physical agitation removes the outer skin of the turmeric to reveal the true color of the root. It’s in this step that lead chromate would be used to enhance color. Once polished, the roots are then ground to a fine golden powder.

In the northwest districts around Ataikula, farmers often talk about a large flood in 1988 that damaged the crop and darkened the color of the roots. To cope with a bad turmeric growing season, Bangladeshi businesses began importing the spice from India. Meanwhile, to remain competitive, Bangladeshi processors started using peuri to disguise the color of the water-damaged crop. The practice of adulteration became more common after the flood.

Sheikh, the trader from Ataikula, recalls being enthralled by the golden glow of the turmeric that he saw at a market in the early 1990s. When he asked the traders about it, they told him to go to India to learn to add peuri during processing. Sheikh followed their advice. When he returned home and brought his haul to the market, he earned more when selling turmeric polished with peuri. “Sometimes,” he said, “wholesalers were not willing to buy if there was no chemical in it.”

Over the past decade, turmeric’s popularity has expanded widely, becoming something of a global trend. Actress Gwyneth Paltrow helped boost turmeric’s stardom by popularizing the spice-infused golden latte on Instagram. The supplement industry sells an array of turmeric products used to curb inflammation and purportedly protect against high cholesterol and heart disease. And scientists are studying the plant for chemicals that might help treat cancer and other challenging medical conditions.

But hundreds of millions of consumers worldwide may have unknowingly purchased a contaminated product.

Lead chromate is comprised of two heavy metals, lead and chromium. The risks of lead consumption are well documented. Continual exposure can cause developmental and neurological issues in children, who absorb four to five times as much lead as adults. In adults, repeated lead exposure is linked to high blood pressure, as well as kidney and reproductive issues. Over time, lead can get integrated into bones because the body mistakes it for calcium, owing to similar chemical properties. There is no known safe level of lead consumption.

The chromium in lead chromate poses a health risk, too. It exists in a chemical form that’s known to be cancerous. It can also cause allergic reactions, respiratory issues, and kidney damage.

The use of peuri in turmeric is just one of many examples of food fraud. According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, food fraud affects at least 1 percent of the global food industry and costs as much as $40 billion a year. Cheaper oils have been blended into products labeled 100 percent extra virgin olive oil, and some companies have added low-cost cellulose to grated cheese. Sometimes the fraud poses a safety issue. Baby formula and pet food manufacturers have had to recall products containing melamine that caused kidney failure. And spice producers have sold cumin with peanut powder as filler, putting individuals with peanut allergies at risk of anaphylactic shock.

The FDA began sounding the alarm about turmeric around 2011. In April of that year, Archer Farms recalled its turmeric, which was sold nationwide at Target and Top Food stores, for having high levels of lead. In 2013, continued surveillance and testing by food safety inspectors at the New York State Department of Health identified lead in turmeric sold by Pran, a Bangladeshi company. Since then, the FDA has issued more than a dozen alerts for turmeric products from South Asia for high lead content.

These recalls notwithstanding, turmeric purchased in the United States tends to have lower levels of lead, said Paromita Hore, the director of environmental exposure assessment and education in New York City’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. She coauthored a study that tested nearly 1,500 samples of spice products. The turmeric purchased abroad — in Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan, and Morocco — had the highest lead concentrations, meaning that people all over the world could have been affected. This disparity, the study explained, may have been due to the adulteration of spices in countries with poor regulatory control.

Families in the U.S. were affected, too, through the informal movement of spices that happens when they visit their home countries and bring products back to the U.S. This practice circumvents the regulations in place for commercially imported foods.

Studies conducted in Boston, New York City, North Carolina, Colorado, and Washington have all found a connection between consumption of lead-tainted turmeric (mostly procured from markets overseas) and elevated blood-lead levels. Still, it’s challenging to calculate exactly how much lead in spices is problematic for human consumption.

For years, the only food in which the FDA had established a maximum level of lead was candy: 0.1 parts per million for small children. It took the agency about 16 years to announce another update, outlining guidelines for other foods commonly consumed by babies and young children. Fruits, the agency said, should not exceed 10 parts per billion in lead, and root vegetables and dried cereals should not exceed 20 parts per billion. This guideline did not discuss spices, and no maximum limits for lead are noted for adults.

Many of the lead levels detected in turmeric have ranged from 28 to 146 parts per million, magnitudes more than the FDA’s established acceptable levels for other foods. (The FDA said in a statement that even though it monitors levels of lead in food, and knows about the turmeric recalls owing to high lead levels, it has not yet set a limit for lead in spices.)

Tom Tarantelli, the New York Department of Agriculture and Market’s former senior food chemist, has estimated that children in families that use turmeric regularly could be consuming 10g a day of that spice alone, suggesting that these kids are consuming far more spice than, say, candy. Public health surveys in Colorado have detected blood lead levels of over 24 mcg/dL — equivalent to about 630 grains of sand in a filled bathtub — in children of families who regularly consumed spices high in lead.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services requires that children on Medicaid get tested for lead at ages one and two. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends the same for those not on the government program but who are at risk for exposure, but this doesn’t always happen, and turmeric-induced lead poisoning might be under-diagnosed, said Jessica Ivers, a general pediatrician at The Polyclinic in Seattle, Washington. She recently tested a patient who had immigrated to the U.S. in 2019 and was exhibiting developmental delays. “Lo and behold,” the lead level was high, she said. And the culprit? The turmeric powder that the family had brought back to the U.S. from India.

In a period of 18 months, in her small practice of at most 2,000 kids, Ivers said she had three cases of elevated lead, all in families from India and all related to the consumption of spices. “If the prevalence is three in 2,000,” she added, physicians are missing a lot of cases.

Jenna Forsyth knew nothing about the practice of adding lead chromate to turmeric in 2014, when she started her Ph.D. in environment and resources at Stanford University. Excited to continue her masters research on water and sanitation, she sought out working with Stephen Luby, a world expert on the subject. When she arrived, Luby instead pointed Forsyth to a conundrum he was encountering in his work in Bangladesh: In a rural part of the country, pregnant women and children had high levels of lead in their blood. There were none of the usual suspects of lead exposure. There were no nearby battery recycling plants and families didn’t paint their homes. How could this be?

Forsyth and her Bangladeshi colleagues had a slew of hypotheses. Maybe the lead was coming from jewelry or food storage containers. Or perhaps it came from clay, soil, or ash that the mothers were exposed to during pregnancy. Rice was another possibility, as the staple crop could have absorbed lead from the soil. Forsyth and her colleagues sampled and tested all of these. She vividly remembers the first summer of her Ph.D., as she baked and ground rice into a pulp to test for lead in a sweltering laboratory in rural Bangladesh. But there was no obvious red flag.

Forsyth also scoured the literature and eventually discovered a study published in 2014. A team that included researchers from Harvard’s School of Public Health had reported that contaminated turmeric was contributing to elevated lead levels in children in rural Bangladesh. This was intriguing, Forsyth thought, as the families she was working with were growing their own food, but not their own spices. She went back to the homes she had sampled from earlier. Seventeen out of 20 gave her samples of turmeric — and that’s when Forsyth found the culprit.

When she showed Luby her results, he was skeptical and encouraged her to gather more data. So Forsyth and her colleagues used a method called isotopic analysis, which uses chemical clues to definitively determine the source of lead. When they compared the isotopes of lead in the blood to those from other possible contaminants, the isotopes most closely matched that of turmeric.

In 2017, on the heels of this discovery, Forsyth and her Bangladeshi collaborators at the International Center for Diarrheal Disease Research, Bangladesh, met with government officials from Bangladesh’s Department of Agricultural Authority to understand how turmeric was produced and distributed. From these conversations, and from conversations with others in the industry, they identified nine regions of Bangladesh, eight of which contribute almost half of the nation’s turmeric for domestic use and export.

The research team then interviewed turmeric producers and food safety inspectors in each district. They also collected samples of pigments and turmeric — powdered, polished, unpolished, labeled, unlabeled. In 140 turmeric samples collected nationwide, Forsyth and her colleagues found that lead concentrations were highest for polished bulbs and for some turmeric powders, with two samples of powdered turmeric exceeding the country’s limit for lead in turmeric powder, at 8.4 ppm and 26.6 ppm. (At the time of the study, the limit was 2.5 ppm; it has since been raised to 5 ppm.)

They visited mills, and sometimes found sacks of the pigment on-site. They sampled dust from the polishing machine and from the floors of the mill. If there was about one part of lead to chromium, it was a dead giveaway that the adulterant was being used. From interviews, they also understood the motive: Brighter roots led to more profit, and adulterating with a consistently bright paint agent could disguise poorer-quality roots. The findings from this study were published in 2019.

The team held a meeting with the Bangladesh Food Safety Authority. The agency’s chairman at the time, Syeda Sarwar Jahan, was immediately concerned. She decided to spearhead a massive public information campaign.

Local and international news outlets disseminated the findings from Forsyth’s new studies to create public awareness. The researchers met with businesses to make them aware of the risks of lead in turmeric. BFSA posted notices in the nation’s largest wholesale spice market, Shyambazar. The flyers warned people of the dangers of lead and that anyone caught selling turmeric adulterated with lead would be subject to legal action.

Authorities also raided Shyambazar using a machine called an X-ray fluorescence analyzer which can quickly detect lead in spices. Nearly 2,000 pounds of turmeric was seized in the raid and two wholesalers were fined 800,000 taka, more than $9,000 USD.

A few months later, the team went back again to collect samples to see how their intervention had fared. Only about 5 percent of 157 samples were found to be adulterated with lead chromate, down from nearly 50 percent before. When the researchers conducted a sampling spree again in 2021, they found that the use of lead chromate had practically disappeared.

On a rainy Sunday morning in March, Shyambazar was already bustling. Vendors selling eggplant, garlic, onion, greens, and fruits lined the side of the market facing the Buriganga River, which connects the capital city to the rest of the country by an intricate path of waterways. Other vendors were offloading truckloads of pineapple, as rickshaws, motorbikes, and cars drove neck-to-neck, negotiating for space along the road.

Narrow passageways connect the bustling vegetable market to its interior, where dried goods, including spices, are found. The fragrant, sharp scents of chili, cumin, and turmeric travel down the slick, narrow walkways as wholesalers and buyers maneuver about with large burlap sacks atop their heads.

Many of the turmeric wholesalers selling in Shyambazar have been at it for more than 30 years. Law enforcement, they said, had only showed up for the turmeric. No other spices, they noted, have ever come under scrutiny.

In late 2019, as part of the intervention against lead chromate use in turmeric, the Bangladesh Food Safety Authority printed and distributed an estimated 50,000 copies of green flyers, that they shared with traders and plastered around the market. Be skeptical of fingers that appear too bright and yellow, it advised, and if the yellow dusting from turmeric doesn’t come off easily, it’s likely you’ve been played.

Most of those flyers are now gone. One trader, Mohammad Mosharof Khokon, who has been selling turmeric for over 30 years, kept a copy under the glass top of his desk. At the time of the raid, he was compliant, albeit nervous for the researchers to scan his satchels of spice. “The machine could show some error,” he said about the XRF, “and then I would lose my business.” Despite the uncertainty of when authorities could show up again, Khokon said that the enforcement is a good thing: “It ensures the quality and purity of the product.”

Shoraf Ali Biswash was one of the traders who had turmeric from his warehouse seized during the raid and paid a fine of 400,000 taka (approximately $3,700). For him, selling turmeric is a family affair: His brother has a polishing mill near Pabna and for years, used peuri to polish the roots that Biswash then sold. Despite the fine, Biswash believes the increased surveillance is also for the best. “It’s 100 percent good because the chemical was bad for our health,” he said. At home, he was feeding his family turmeric polished with lead chromate and immediately stopped once he learned the health effects.

The crackdown on turmeric in 2019 may, in part, explain why the use of lead chromate in polishing turmeric has since decreased. It was a punishable crime, and although there was only one raid, people now know there’s a risk of getting caught. This spring, Undark collected three samples of polished turmeric fingers from Shyambazar and brought them back to get tested at NVL Labs, a Seattle-based company that tests for environmental contaminants including lead. In this admittedly small sample, none of the turmeric had lead levels of concern.

But government officials and researchers say that enforcement and surveillance must be maintained. “A one-time conviction is not sufficient,” wrote Jahan, who has since moved on from the Bangladesh Food Safety Authority. Follow-up is required as she has “seen such criminals go back to doing what they did even after facing consequences.”

Monzur Morshed Ahmed, a member of BFSA, says that the agency is in the process of procuring handheld X-ray fluorescence analyzers to distribute to districts around Bangladesh so local authorities can continue monitoring the use of lead chromate themselves. And on top of that, he said, BFSA aims to inspect over 7,000 markets and food establishments for violations of food safety, with turmeric being one of the products that will be investigated.

Forsyth is heartened by the impact that she and her colleagues have had in Bangladesh, and she wants to replicate these methods — studying the supply chain, understanding the incentives for adulteration, and creating interventions to dissuade the use of lead chromate — in India and Pakistan.

But reproducing this success is already posing challenges. “It’s easy, obviously, to collect data of spices and analyze them and understand the patterns and where the high levels of lead are. That’s been straightforward,” said Forsyth. Identifying government officials who can advocate for and run an intervention has been harder.

Ending food fraud entirely for any commodity is a huge challenge, said Roberts, the food fraud expert from UCLA. Regulatory agencies in different countries need to set clear standards, enable constant testing and surveillance, and be willing to enforce penalties when someone has committed fraud.

This constant vigilance can be expensive, he continued, and the economic incentive to cheat is going to remain. As such, “it will be interesting to see if this problem pops up again.” Still, many of the interventions used in Bangladesh can be applied to other food communities that have a history of fraud, Roberts added.

“You have to have good science,” said Roberts. “In this case, that turned out to be a blessing for Bangladesh.” And, importantly, he added, “consumers have to care. And in this case, it’s pretty clear that consumers should care because of the health and safety issues.”

In Bangladesh, even those who have committed a crime see this crackdown on lead chromate use as a net good.

Sheikh said he had felt helpless to change direction before the crackdown. Although he didn’t know the precise health impacts of the lead chromate, he said, “it’s common sense that chemicals are harmful.” In fact, he never used peuri-laced turmeric at home.

“I have to answer to Allah that I used it in food,” he recalled. “It hurt me, sometimes, to do that.”

When Shyambazar was raided, Sheikh knew he had to stop. Now, he can rest easy: There’s no economic incentive to adulterate his product.

Outside his polishing mill, Sheikh held up a basket of polished turmeric, ready to be shuttled along to the next set of hands in the supply chain. The roots were a light gold, not as aggressively bright as they used to be. “I’m happy with this color,” he said. “Everyone in Bangladesh is happier with it.”

Wudan Yan is an award-winning independent journalist in Seattle covering science and society.

This story was supported in part by grants from the Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting and the UC Berkeley Food & Farming Fellowship.

Note: Ali Ahsan, a Bangladesh-based producer, translated interviews and coordinated logistics for meetings with farmers and traders.

This article was originally published on Undark. Read the original article.

The post For decades, turmeric’s ultra-golden glow had a deadly secret appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Chronic constipation may be linked to cognitive decline, according to research presented at the  Alzheimer’s Association International Conference in the Netherlands on July 19. Roughly 16 percent of the world’s population struggles with constipation, with older adults particularly prone to have irregular bowel movements.

[Related: Why your poop gets weird on vacation—and what to do about it.]

In this ongoing study, chronic constipation was defined as only having a bowel movement every three or more days. Chronic constipation correlated with a 73 percent higher risk of subjective cognitive decline and showed changes in gut microbiome. Cognitive function is an umbrella term for individual mental capacity for thinking, reasoning, learning, decision-making, problem-solving, paying attention, and remembering.

While chronic constipation has been linked with anxiety, depression, and inflammation, the Alzheimer’s Association says that there are still several unanswered questions about the connections between digestive health and cognitive function. 

The team on this new study looked at over 112,000 adults who participated in the Nurses’ Health Study, Nurses’ Health Study II, and Health Professionals Follow-Up Study. The two Nurses’ studies are complete, and looked at the risk factors for major chronic diseases in North American women. The third study is ongoing and investigating this same topic in men.  

This latest research on constipation used data on the frequency of participants’ bowel movements from 2012 to 2013, their self-assessments of cognitive function between 2014 to 2017, and some of the participants’ objectively measured cognitive function between 2014 and 2018.

The researchers found that constipated participants had significantly worse cognition compared with those who pooped once a day. The impairment was equivalent to three years or more of chronological cognitive aging. The authors also found an increased risk among those who pooped more than twice per day, but the higher odds were small.

“These results stress the importance of clinicians discussing gut health, especially constipation, with their older patients,” senior investigator Dong Wang from Harvard Medical School, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health said in a statement. “Interventions for preventing constipation and improving gut health include adopting healthy diets enriched with high-fiber and high-polyphenol foods such as fruits, vegetables and whole grains; taking fiber supplementation; drinking plenty of water every day; and having regular physical activity.”

[Related: Baboon poop shows how chronic stress shortens lives.]

An unrelated study published in February in the journal Neurology found that those who regularly use laxatives may have an increased risk of developing dementia compared to those who don’t use laxatives. 

“Finding ways to reduce a person’s risk of dementia by identifying risk factors that can be modified is crucial,” co-author Feng Sha from the Shenzhen Institute of Advanced Technology at the Chinese Academy of Sciences said in a statement in February. “More research is needed to further investigate the link our research found between laxatives and dementia. If our findings are confirmed, medical professionals could encourage people to treat constipation by making lifestyle changes such as drinking more water, increasing dietary fiber and adding more activity into their daily lives.”

Eating enough fiber from vegetables, fruits, whole grains and nuts can prevent constipation. The Food and Drug Administration recommends that total fiber intake should be at least 25 grams per day. Proper hydration can also soften stools, and exercising a few times per week can also help.

It is also important to understand the challenges and individual nature of understanding gut bacteria and the microbiome at large, 

“Each person seems to have a unique microbiome, almost like a fingerprint,” gastroenterologist Monia Werlang from the University of South Carolina Greenville Medical School told NBC News. “Scientists are still learning how to manipulate it to promote health and to modify disease. Targeting the microbiome is promising, but there are many unknowns, especially considering the variability from person to person.”

The post Chronic constipation could be a sign of a worsening health condition appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

On July 13, the World Health Organization’s (WHO) International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) announced that it is categorizing aspartame as a possible carcinogen. The sugar substitute is found in diet sodas, gums, and other foods and drinks labeled sugar-free. 

However, the organization stressed that the new classification of the substance is based on a review of “limited evidence,” and doesn’t change the recommended limits on the daily consumption of aspartame.

[Related: Sugar substitutes won’t help you lose weight.]

The artificial sweetener is also sold under the brand names Nutrasweet, Sugar Twin, and Equal. It is about 200 times sweeter than sugar and was approved for use by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1974.

“Our results do not indicate that occasional consumption should pose a risk to most consumers,” director of the Department of Nutrition and Food Safety at the WHO Francesco Branca, said during a press conference, according to NPR. 

Branca added that the problems arise in “high consumers” of diet sodas and other foods that have the artificial sweetener. The WHO also called for more research on the health impacts of the popular substance. 

The WHO’s daily acceptable intake (ADI) of aspartame has long been set at a maximum of 40 milligrams per kilogram of bodyweight per day. If a person weighs 70 kilograms (about 154 pounds), they could consume up to 2,800 milligrams per day—or roughly equivalent to nine to 14 cans of diet soda. 

The FDA has an even higher ADI of 50 milligrams per kilogram a day, or 50 milligrams per 2.2 pounds of body weight.

However, the WHO’s separate food safety group, the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives, said that the evidence was not convincing enough to call for a new categorization, arguing aspartame can still be consumed safely.

IARC focuses on identifying possible cancer-causing agents, while the food additives committee assesses if ingredients or substances are risky for consumers. Both groups undertook this review in 2019, after an advisory panel marked aspartame as a “high priority” for review.

At the same time, the FDA did not agree that aspartame should be listed as a possible cause of cancer. 

[Related: High-fructose corn syrup vs. sugar: Which is actually worse?]

“Aspartame is one of the most studied food additives in the human food supply. FDA scientists do not have safety concerns when aspartame is used under the approved conditions,” the FDA said in a statement, according to NBC.

Aspartame now joins a list of over 300 WHO-listed possible carcinogens, including carpentry work and aloe vera extract. 

“We’re not advising consumers to stop consuming [aspartame] altogether,”  Branca added, according to the Associated Press. “We’re just advising a bit of moderation.”

The nonprofit advocacy organization Environmental Working Group has created a Food Scores database that can help consumers find out what foods have aspartame. It rates the safety and nutrition of grocery items and contains nearly 1,000 foods and beverages and is a tool in assessing various products. 

The American Beverage Association praised the WHO’s guidance as a confirmation of aspartame’s safety. “With more than 40 years of science and this definitive conclusion from the WHO, consumers can move forward with confidence that aspartame is a safe choice, especially for people looking to reduce sugar and calories in their diets,” it said in a statement yesterday. The American Beverage Association is a lobbying group for companies such as Coca-Cola, Pepsi, and Keurig Dr. Pepper.

The post WHO categorizes aspartame as a possible carcinogen—but don’t panic appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

You’ve probably been told you should up your daily fiber intake by eating hearty foods like wheat bread and black beans. But despite a broad-spectrum recommendation for the roughage, researchers can’t say for certain why it’s so good for our microbiomes, what diseases it actually helps prevent, or how exactly we should consume it. Here’s what we do know.

First, what is fiber and how much of it do we need?

Broadly speaking, fiber is any carbohydrate that our bodies can’t digest. When we eat food, our digestive systems use various enzymes to break down the fat, carbohydrates, and protein therein. The resulting energy keeps our bodies running. Much of what’s left over consists of carbohydrates that we lack the enzymes necessary to digest. We divide that up into soluble and insoluble fibers, depending on which ones are dissolvable in water. Most unprocessed non-meat products like fresh fruits, mixed vegetables, and whole grains contain a combination of both forms.

The Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommends 22 to 34 grams of fiber per day for adults and 10 to 15 grams for kids, depending on age. This chart for standard portions of fiber will help you figure out what that means for different kinds of foods.

Cool, so what does fiber do for us?

That’s the big question. Why is something that we don’t even digest so important to our health?

[Related: 5 nutrition goals that are better than weight loss]

Some nutritionists used to think fiber was the catch-all good-for-you ingredient in food, but we now understand that it manages blood glucose levels and reduces the risk of heart disease. Most importantly, some studies have shown that it reduces our overall mortality risk. In other words, the people that eat more fiber and make other healthy life choices have a general lower risk of death from all causes.

So scientists are pretty dang confident that fiber is good for you, but aren’t entirely sure why. However, we now understand that the biggest benefit that fiber has for us is indirect: It feeds our microbes, which in turn keep us running smoothly.

We have microbes, and that’s a good thing?

It’s true. Our bodies are teeming with bacteria and other microbes that live mostly on our skin and in our guts. In fact, each person contains trillions of these microorganisms. All together, they make up anywhere between 1 and 3 percent of a human’s body weight. (For an average 175-pound person, that’s as much as 5 pounds of bacteria.)

[Related: Probiotics are more hype than science]

The more fiber we eat, the more food our microbes have, and the more food our microbes have, the more likely they are to thrive and reproduce. That’s why a low-fiber diet—one paltry in apples, citruses, leafy greens, and whole grains, and high in meat, starches, and processed foods—can lead to problems. While we may get the calories we need, our microbes don’t. They start to die off and become less diverse over time.

But how exactly does that translate into good health?

While we still don’t understand all the mechanisms through which our microbes work to prevent disease, a few standout studies are pointing us in the right direction.

First, we know that when our bacteria consume the fiber we eat, they produce nutrients for the body, including short chain fatty acids. Those molecules help our body thrive. In particular, scientists have found that butyrate helps to promote cell differentiation in the colon. This keeps the mucus in our colons healthy, which helps prevent colorectal cancer.

Two studies published in 2017 gave mice an extremely low-fiber diet. Researchers found that after just three days, diversity of the bacteria living in the gut had shrunk by ten-fold. That protective layer of lower-gut mucus had decreased, too. On the other end of the fiber intake spectrum, in a study out in 2017, researchers took poop samples from the Hadza people in Tanzania, who eat an impressive 100 grams of fiber a day. The hunter-gatherer community tends to live long and healthy lives, and many researchers believe their high intake of unprocessed foods, which results in a high intake of fiber, may have something to do with it.

But, let’s face it, eating a completely unprocessed diet isn’t exactly easy, fun, or feasible. So, there are a few tricks of the trade you can use to get more fiber. First, get out of the habit of peeling fruit. If there’s skin on there—apple or pear-type skin, not thick and inedible peels—you want to eat it. That’s where a lot of the fiber is hiding.

[Related: Feed a family for a week with a single bag of beans]

Next, add beans to your diet. Beans have sooooo much fiber. They are also low in fat and high in nutrients. Yes, beans do cause gas. That is very annoying and is, for many, a valid reason to skip the legumes. Unfortunately, it’s the fiber itself that’s partly to blame for all that farting. To alleviate this, try adding beans slowly into your diet, which has been shown to help get your body—and your microbes—used to that delicious increase in fiber.

While it might be hard at first, it won’t take very long to see an effect from these changes. As studies have shown, just three days of more or less fiber can influence the diversity of your gut microbes.

And while there is still more work to be done to understand the relationship and mechanisms through which our microbes work to keep us healthy, it’s clear that they’re important—and that they need our help getting plenty of fiber.

This story has been updated. It was originally published on April 4, 2018.

The post Up your daily fiber intake for a happy microbiome appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Ice cream is America’s favorite dessert—and for good reason. From homestyle vanilla to matcha green tea, there seems to be no end to the combinations you can add to your cone. And while a double scoop of chocolate chip cookie dough ice cream with hot fudge syrup sounds absolutely mouthwatering, this guilty pleasure is something you might regret the next day. 

This doesn’t mean that eating ice cream automatically makes you unhealthy. The trick is being smart in knowing what kind to choose—certain ice cream-making methods use less sugar, fat, and dairy. It all boils down to the texture and ingredients of this delicious frozen dessert.

When people think of ice cream, three types come to mind: soft serve, hard ice cream, and gelato. Gelato (also the Italian word for ice cream) is usually considered a healthier option than soft serve and hard ice cream. The refreshing dessert is specifically made with a higher proportion of milk to cream, creating less fat than traditional ice cream, says Mary Sabat, a nutritionist and owner of BodyDesigns by Mary. It also has a higher protein content than soft serve and hard ice cream.

While still high in sugar and calories, gelato typically comes in a smaller serving size than soft serve and regular ice cream. “Portion control plays a significant role in the overall healthiness of ice cream consumption,” explains Sabat. Since gelato is made with a denser texture, she says it is typically served in smaller scoops than the other frozen desserts, which helps manage caloric intake. 

[Related: The best ice cream makers of 2023]

Next comes soft serve and hard ice cream. Though there isn’t a major nutritional difference between the two, soft serve ranks a little better. Sabat says it often has a high amount of air, which reduces the fat content per serving. But ice cream can also vary wildly in its fat and sugar content depending on the brand. One example is Halo Top, which is known for its low-calorie, high-protein, and low-sugar products, says Dan Gallagher, a registered dietitian at Aegle Nutrition.

While technically not ice cream, we would be remiss not to mention sherbet and sorbet, two other popular summer options. These frozen treats are made of fruit puree, sugar, and other flavorings, with sherbet containing some dairy. A cup of sherbet or sorbet ranges from 160 to 200 calories and typically comes with natural fruit. But they can also pack other additives like artificial flavors and high fructose corn syrup. The high sugar content might even make them equivalent in calories to some store-bought ice cream.

When in doubt, experts say to check the nutritional label when choosing between different desserts at the grocery store. Most ice cream shops will let you see the list of ingredients on request, too.

Instead, Baker says people should choose these kinds of ice creams based on their dietary preferences and needs. Vegan ice cream is made without animal-derived ingredients and would be a good choice for those following a more restricted lifestyle. Vegan ice creams may also benefit people with allergies to lactose and eggs.

“Many ice cream varieties contain added sugars, which can lead to increased calorie intake and potential health issues like weight gain, diabetes, and tooth decay,” Sabat says. Avoid ice creams with added preservatives, including high-fructose corn syrup and hydrogenated oils. You’ll also want to stay away from the popular keto ice creams, which substitute sugar for artificial sweeteners like Splenda, NutraSweet, or sugar alcohols like erythritol. These types of sugar additives pose several health risks, such as disrupting the balance in your gut microbiome and exacerbating heart conditions. Instead, Baker suggests looking for low-sugar ice creams or those sweetened with natural alternatives such as stevia or fruit extracts.

[Related: Is high-fructose corn syrup worse than sugar?]

Compare the nutritional labels of different brands and pay extra attention to the fat content, sugar content, and total calories. “Traditional ice cream often contains significant amounts of saturated fat, which can contribute to elevated cholesterol levels and increase the risk of heart disease,” explains Sabat. Opt for ice creams with lower amounts of all three components and be wise about picking candies, syrups, and other high-calorie toppings, as they can significantly up the calorie count and sugar content.

All in all, you don’t have to sacrifice your wellbeing to enjoy America’s favorite dessert. A frozen treat every once in a while will not jeopardize a balanced diet, especially if you choose a healthier option. Baker says that “moderation and mindful choices can help balance the enjoyment of ice cream with a health-conscious approach.”

The post Here’s the scoop on how to choose a healthy ice cream appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

The Fourth of July holiday might be primetime for eating, drinking, and hanging out, but every summer weekend has the potential to reach legendary levels of chill. All those good vibes can melt away in an instant, though, if the person in charge of food and beverages doesn’t know how to pack a cooler. Don’t let that be you.

As tempting as it may be to just toss your sausages and frosty beverages into an insulated box with some ice, a little planning and the right stacking strategy will help your food and drink stay cold longer. You’ll also stymie bacterial growth, which the Department of Agriculture says occurs rapidly between 40 and 140 degrees Fahrenheit (4 to 60 Celsius). And a weekend marked by legendary levels of bacteria is one you’ll remember for all the wrong reasons.

Anyone who’s attended a summertime party knows guests dip into the drink supply far more frequently than they poke around in the refrigerated food. It might only be the cook who touches that. Every time you open a cooler, warm air gets in, so storing sodas with steaks means your meat could go bad a lot faster than it would in a designated portable meat locker. A warm Coke is one thing—uncooked room-temperature chicken is another.

Make sure you have the right cooler

The best cooler (or cooler bag) for your trip is the one you can stuff to its limit, leaving as little empty space as possible. You want as much heat transfer as possible inside your cooler to happen between the ice and your goodies—you don’t want precious ice chilling random air. Your main consideration will be size: use one you can fill to at least two-thirds of its capacity with ice, with the remainder reserved for food or drink.

We say two-third of your cooler’s contents should be ice because many major retailers (like Yeti and Canyon) recommend a 2-to-1 ratio of ice to food or drink. The easiest way to visualize this is to divide your cooler into thirds and ensure your provisions fill one of them. Just don’t pack it like that—we’ll get to the proper packing plan shortly.

Beyond that, you can use whatever cooler you please. Naturally, newer coolers will feature the latest insulation innovations, and our reviews team has weighed in on what they consider to be the best coolers available, if you’re into that. And maybe consider a white one because it’s likely to absorb the least amount of heat. But if you like the one you’ve had for years, who are we to tell you to throw it out? We will note that if you have two coolers with different insulating qualities, use the better one for food and the worse one for drinks—as usual, this choice comes down to food safety.

Freeze your own ice or buy the coldest you can

If you have enough lead time, it’s best to freeze your own ice. As long as you have water, you won’t have to worry about running out, and you can make the cold stuff work for you in ways you might not be able to if you buy a sack of ice from the store.

Understandably, not everybody has the time or desire to start an industrial ice-making operation in their home. Instead, try to find the place near you that sells the coldest ice. Sure, water turns into a solid at 32 degrees (0 Celsius), but ice can get colder than that. A commercial freezer is likely to crank out cubes chillier than anything you can craft in your kitchen. A final note about dry ice: we don’t recommend it because it’s not as easy to come by and can be dangerous. If you do get your hands on some, follow all the proper precautions, the most basic of which include wearing gloves and sticking it at the bottom of the cooler so it’s unlikely to contaminate any food or drink.

On top of this cold foundation, you’ll want an insulator of some kind, at least in your food cooler. While you’re discarding packaging, save some cardboard—it’s lightweight and fairly good at resisting heat. You could even consider a thin piece of wood, which is less likely to get soggy and is a relatively good insulator that’s easy to find. If you have something better that’s food-safe, by all means, use it. For bonus cooling, chill this material with your cooler beforehand. Not only will this unmeltable layer ensure a solid base and an extra barrier for heat to break through, it will keep food from slipping into the icy meltwater depths to be ruined forever.

[Related: The best coolers for camping this year]

From there, think about what food or drinks you’ll want to access last and put them at the bottom. The primary exception to this rule is uncooked meat. You should store it in watertight containers so it can’t leak everywhere, but if you don’t have those, stash it at the bottom so its juices can’t contaminate other food. Another exception is delicate food—even if you’re going to cook the hot dogs last, don’t bury the buns under pounds of ice and other stuff. They’ll be crushed.

As you go, try to pack everything in layers and fill all empty space with ice. Remember what we said above: the less air there is in your cooler, the longer everything will stay cold. And if you want to get really intense about cooler packing, separate everything by category and create a map of what you’ve got going on inside your portable icebox. If it’s clear where everything is, you and your guests won’t have to rootle around with the lid open as much.

Finish with a cold cap

Once your cooler is stuffed to the brim with ice and goodies, fill the last bit of space under the lid with something cold. We think the best choice here is a reusable freezer sheet, because these ice packs are flat and thin, easily serving as a second lid. If you don’t have some of those, reusable ice packs are a good secondary option because they also tend to be uniformly flat and are larger than ice cubes (surface area always matters). Regular ice will do the trick too, but it won’t last as long as our preferred options.

The post The scientifically best way to pack a cooler appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

To say that it’s impossible to function before that first cup of coffee in the morning is borderline clichè, but are those beans really doing the work we think it is to perk us up? A study published June 28 in the journal Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience by a team based in Portugal found that the experience of consuming coffee may act a bit like the placebo when it comes to making coffee drinkers feel ready to tackle the day. 

[Related: Forget black coffee—a hormone shot helped tipsy rodents sober up.]

Most coffee drinkers say their morning cup of joe makes them feel more alert and efficient due to its caffeine. This study looked at coffee drinkers to better understand if this wakefulness depends on the properties of the caffeine itself, or if it has to do with the experience of that first deliciously brewed sip. 

“There is a common expectation that coffee increases alertness and psychomotor functioning,” study co-author and University of Minho neuroscientist Nuno Sousa said in a statement. “When you get to understand better the mechanisms underlying a biological phenomenon, you open pathways for exploring the factors that may modulate it and even the potential benefits of that mechanism.”

In the study, the team recruited participants who drank at least one cup of coffee per day and asked them to not eat or drink caffeinated beverages for at least three hours before the study. They then interviewed the participants and performed two brief functional MRI (fMRI) scans. One can was before taking caffeine, or consuming a standardized cup of coffee, and the other scan was 30 minutes after. The participants were asked to relax and let their minds wander during the fMRI scans. These scans are similar to traditional MRI’s, but they examine how the brain functions and its activities.

Initially, the team expected that the fMRI scans would show that those who drank coffee had a higher integration in two parts of the brain because of coffee’s known neurochemical events. They thought they’d see it in the networks of the brain linked to the prefrontal cortex–where executive memory happens–and the default mode network, which is involved in introspection and self-reflection. 

The connectivity in the default mode network decreased after drinking coffee and after taking caffeine. This indicates that consuming either substance made more people prepared to transition from the restful nature of sleep and waking up to working on the tasks of the day. 

[Related: How to enjoy a more sustainable cup of coffee.]

However, drinking coffee increased the connectivity in the higher visual network and the right executive control network. These parts of the brain are involved in working memory, cognitive control, and goal-directed behavior. This increase did not occur when the participants only took caffeine, which the researchers say that this means if you want to feel not just alert, but also ready to go, caffeine alone won’t do it. You need that mug of java. 

“In simple words, the subjects were more ready for action and alert to external stimuli after having coffee,” co-author and neuroscientist at Jaume I University Maria Picó-Pérez said in a statement. “Taking into account that some of the effects that we found were reproduced by caffeine, we could expect other caffeinated drinks to share some of the effects. However, others were specific for coffee drinking, driven by factors such as the particular smell and taste of the drink, or the psychological expectation associated with consuming that drink.”

The team points out that it is possible that this experience around drinking decaffeinated coffee could be behind the neurological benefits. The study was unable to differentiate the effects of the drinking experience alone from the experience combined with the caffeine. 

“The changes in connectivity were studied during a resting-state sequence. Any association with psychological and cognitive processes is interpreted based on the common function ascribed to the regions and networks found, but it was not directly tested,” cautioned Sousa. “Moreover, there could be individual differences in the metabolism of caffeine among participants that would be interesting to explore in the future.”

The post The ‘experience’ of a cup of coffee may be just as stimulating as its caffeine appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Best hydrolyzed		Dymatize ISO100 Hydrolyzed Whey Protein Powder		SEE IT	Formulated with fewer sugars and fats, this sensitive-stomach-approved option will help you maintain muscle without any issues digesting.
Best caesin		Kaged Muscle Kasein Protein Powder		SEE IT	This pick goes through a high-level filtration process to maintain the structure of the protein. Designed to help you recover and rebuild muscle while you sleep.
Best flavored		KOS Chocolate Peanut Butter Plant-Based Protein Powder		SEE IT	Get all your gains without sacrificing flavor with this delicious pick that has a five plant-powered protein blend for complete nutrition.

Whether you’re a frequent gym-goer or just trying to improve your diet, a great protein powder can leave you looking good and feeling better with minimal effort involved. Protein is a necessary part of the human diet and most commonly found in fish or meat dishes, though it’s also a primary part of some nuts and legumes. Protein helps us gain healthy muscle, can bolster our metabolism, and strengthen the immune system. While one should get protein naturally through specific dietary decisions, many people have turned to powders and supplements to get a little extra protein when their diet isn’t cutting it. These proteins are especially suitable for established athletes or people who work out frequently, but many can benefit. Maybe you’ve just decided to start a new training program; you’re working up to a marathon or increasing the amount of strength training or cardio. If so, a protein powder can help you stay on track and feel good while doing so. If you have recently decided to go vegan, but you’re having a little bit of trouble getting enough protein in your diet, several powders might be right for you. Recovering from an injury can also be a great time to try getting a little extra protein into your diet to speed up muscle recovery.

So whether you’re looking for a boost when bulking or just a way to stay a little healthier, the best protein powder can be a great place to start. There are many options out there, so we’ve put together a short guide to help you find the best protein powder for your lifestyle.

• Best for beginners: Optimum Nutrition Gold Standard Whey Protein Powder
• Best casein: Kaged Muscle Kasein Protein Powder
• Best vegan: Garden of Life Raw Organic Protein
• Best with caffeine: PB2 Performance
• Best hydrolyzed: Dymatize ISO100 Hydrolyzed Whey Protein Powder
• Best flavored: KOS Chocolate Peanut Butter Plant-Based Protein Powder
• Best budget: Muscle Milk

The best protein powders: Reviews & Recommendations

Best for beginners: Optimum Nutrition Gold Standard Whey Protein Powder

SEE IT

Perhaps the most common reason people start incorporating protein powder into their routines is to gain muscle or recover after a workout. This whey protein powder from Optimum Nutrition is made from a combination of whey isolates, concentrates, and peptides to deliver the best of the best when it comes to building lean muscles. There are 24 grams of protein, 3-4 carbs, and 5.5 grams of BCAAs in each serving. Simply mix the powder with cold water or milk, shake for about 30 seconds, and drink up before or after a workout.

Best casein: Kaged Muscle Kasein Protein Powder

SEE IT

We listed one of our favorite whey proteins above, so we’ll take this opportunity to recommend our favorite casein powder. Kaged Muscle’s “Kasein” is made from 100% micellar casein isolate with 25 grams of protein and 4.75 grams of BCAAs per serving. It’s manufactured using a state-of-the-art microfiltration process designed to preserve the protein’s structural integrity and is designed to protect and build muscle as you sleep for enhanced recovery. It’s best to consume this powder in a shake before hitting the sack, but you can also use this protein in your baking or mixed with a drop or two of milk to create more of a pudding-like “dessert.”

Best with caffeine: PB2 Performance

SEE IT

This plant-based protein includes as much caffeine as a cup of coffee—95 milligrams, to be exact. It comes in a tart cherry flavor to shake up the usual vanilla and chocolate choosings, and is vegan and gluten-free. It also contains no GMOs, added sugars, or artificial flavorings. Each serving contains 10 milligrams of protein derived from brown rice and peanuts. The caffeine makes it more suitable as a pre-workout or post-morning workout treat.

Best vegan: Garden of Life Raw Organic Protein

SEE IT

This vegan protein powder from Garden of Life is an excellent option for those who are avoiding animal byproducts in their diet. A combination of pea and brown rice proteins, plus grains like buckwheat and quinoa, this powder has 22 grams of protein, 4 grams of BCAAs, and 2 grams of carbohydrates per serving. There are zero added sugars and only 110 calories per serving. This is a great powder for muscle recovery and overall nutrition. Garden of Life makes various vegan protein options, so we encourage you to check them to find the right supplement for your needs.

Best hydrolyzed: Dymatize ISO100 Hydrolyzed Whey Protein Powder

SEE IT

The ISO100 protein powder from Dymatize is made from 100% hydrolyzed whey protein isolates. It contains 25 grams of protein, 5.5 grams of BCAAs, 2.7 grams of Leucine, and less than 1 gram of fat and sugar per serving. Easily digestible and fast-absorbing, this powder is particularly well suited for weight loss or athletes with sensitive stomachs. It comes in various flavors and sizes, plus you can consume it at any time of day.

Best flavored: KOS Chocolate Peanut Butter Plant-Based Protein Powder

SEE IT

KOS has some of the best tasting organic, plant-based protein powders out there. Flavors include classics like vanilla, chocolate, and chocolate chip mint or chocolate peanut butter (our favorite). This complete protein powder is made from pea, flaxseed, quinoa, pumpkin seed, and chia seed proteins and flavored with ingredients like cacao, coconut milk, and monk fruit. Each serving has 20 grams of protein with the inclusion of a helpful digestive enzyme. You can use this powder in shakes or consider it a substitute for flour the next time you want to bake a sweet treat, like cookies. KOS has various other dietary supplements and enhancements in ridiculously fun flavors, so check those out too.

Best budget: What you get for under $30

Thankfully, there are a ton of budget-friendly protein powders to choose from today. While most of them are concentrates, be on the look-out for specials, deals, and sales to get an isolate or hydrolyzed protein for under $30. Similarly, it can be challenging to find bone broth or collagen options at this price point. While these powders may not include any unique ingredients or add-ons, they’ll do the trick when it comes to supplementary proteins. Check out the powders from Muscle Milk, Orgain, and Quest to get you started. Once you know what works for you, consider saving up and trying something new or higher end.

Things to consider when shopping for the best protein powders

There are a few things to keep in mind before trying out a new protein powder. First things first, what are your goals when it comes to supplementary protein? Do you know how much protein you need in a day? Next, think about what kind of protein your body needs (especially if you’re vegan, since many protein powders contain animal or dairy products); the type of processing method used to create your selected protein; and finally, what flavor profile you’re after. There are many different proteins available, so we have created a guide to help you choose the one that’s right for you.

What are your overall goals with a protein supplement?

There are so many reasons you might be considering a protein supplement, and those specific goals will help determine what kind of protein you’ll want to try. If you’re looking for something to help with weight loss alongside a healthy diet and exercise, pay close attention to the ratio of protein to calories. You want something higher in protein and lower in calories, carbs, and fats because your diet should already provide those nutrients. Think about a powder that you can mix with water or include with your regular meals instead of filling single shakes. If you’re an athlete and need some extra protein to assist with recovery, look for a powder with a 2:1 or 3:1 carb-to-protein ratio. If you are hoping to gain weight, or you have a youngster who needs help gaining weight, look for a powder that is high in carbs and fat, especially if you aren’t getting a ton of nutrients from whole foods and typical meals. Take a look at available protein shakes, or make your own by including vegetables and healthy fats. Think about including unsweetened milk, nuts, and leafy greens like spinach or kale. You can also add in some fruit, like half a banana, but keep in mind that fruits can also be high in sugars. If you are using protein shakes as a meal supplement, many doctors recommend looking for one with at least 20 grams of protein. Most importantly, keep in mind that, no matter your goal, protein powders are meant to be supplementary and not your body’s primary source of protein. Think carefully about how you will incorporate a powder into your daily meals.

Which protein source is best for you?

One of the most important things to consider when it comes to protein powder is the protein source, or where the protein comes from. One of the most popular sources is whey. Whey is the watery part of milk that separates during the cheese-making process. The liquidy residue at the top of your yogurt cup is an excellent example of whey. It typically includes an array of amino acids called branch-chained amino acids (BCAAs) and other nutrients. Whey proteins are super well-researched and found in many post-workout shakes and powders. They are a good protein for muscle building and workout recovery. It should be noted that whey doesn’t taste very good on its own, so flavoring is often added to increase its palatability. Whey can be derived using various processing methods, which we will discuss later in this guide.

Another popular protein type is casein. Casein also comes from milk and is created during the cheese-making process. When enzymes are added to heated milk, they cause existing caseins to coagulate and separate from the liquid substance or whey. Remember Little Miss Muffet, who sat on a tuffet, eating her curds and whey? Those curds are casein in solid form. These solids can be washed and dried to create casein protein powders. Casein digests significantly slower than whey protein, making it suitable to take before sleep or other fasting incidents. Casein is an excellent way to get extra protein and boost your immune system; it’s also a good way to inspire growth and speed up your metabolism.

Then there are blends of casein and whey, usually listed as “milk protein concentrate.” These blends deliver a fast and slow-digesting protein. They can be cost-effective and are useful for those who want to increase their protein intake without getting too specific when it comes to digestion rate. Finally, for those who are lactose intolerant or merely avoiding milk, you might also consider other animal product alternatives like egg white protein or bone broth powder. There is also collagen powder derived from fish or cowhide, which can increase skin, joint, bone, and gut health. Oh, and don’t worry—we’ve got vegan alternatives coming up soon.

What about vegan protein powder?

There are many vegan options out there for those of you who want to stay away from animal products or byproducts. Soy protein is super popular. It is a “complete” protein, which means it contains all nine essential amino acids. It’s very similar to whey in terms of its compound makeup and overall effectiveness. A soy protein powder will be good for building muscle and lean body mass. However, soy has been the topic of much debate when it comes to hormonal side effects (though these claims seem to have been refuted with recent studies). That being said, we encourage you to do a little of your own research and make an informed decision about if soy is right for you.

Many other vegan protein powders are incomplete, meaning they lack one or more of the nine amino acids found in complete proteins. Incomplete proteins don’t need to be avoided, however, especially if you maintain a robust, healthy diet. Remember, these powders are meant to supplement, not replace all the protein in your meals. Pea protein powders are hypoallergenic and easily digestible. They are rich in glutamine, lysine, and arginine, though low in EAA methionine. You might also consider a rice protein or hemp protein-based powder. Though incomplete, hemp is high in fiber and an excellent way to get healthy omega-3s into your system. Perhaps the most common types of vegan protein powders are blends. Similar to the labeling of casein and whey blends, these are often simply listed as “plant protein.” A blend can create a more enhanced amino acid profile, but make sure you check the grams of protein per scoop. Some blends may be lower in protein than other plant-based options.

How is your protein processed?

Protein powders are created using a variety of different methods that yield different makeups. The processing method of a powder can sometimes be veiled when it comes to online product descriptions, but we want you to know the wording to look for and what it all means. There are three primary forms protein powders can come in: concentrates, isolates, and hydrolysates. Concentrates are extracted from plants or animal products using enzymes and high heat. They are the least processed form of protein, which means they can have a very high pure protein percentage (35 to 80 percent protein by weight).However, less processing does mean more fat and carbohydrates.

Isolates go through an additional filtration step after being extracted. This creates roughly 90 percent of protein by weight, meaning fewer carbs and fats. They are typically quick to digest and can improve fat loss, recovery, and muscle growth. Isolates are generally more expensive than concentrates.

Hydrolyzed proteins are often labeled as hydrolyzed protein isolates, which just means the isolates have gone through those extra steps. Hydrolysates are highly processed and involve further efforts to break apart the proteins into smaller peptide chains removing fats, carbohydrates, and other protein non-essentials. This means they are theoretically easier to digest and absorb, making them great for recovery and sensitive stomachs. This processing level can even remove lactose in the protein, which means they can be the right solution for lactose-sensitive protein seekers who aren’t as interested in vegan or dairy-free options. Hydrolysates can also reach up to 90% protein by weight and are considered very useful for building lean muscle. However, hydrolysates have a particularly bitter taste that requires more sugars or flavor to mask, which can, in turn, tamper the health benefits. We recommend trying a sample first to make sure you can handle the taste without adding too much. One final fact to keep in mind: the more a protein powder has been processed, the more expensive the protein powder will be.

Think about the flavor of your nutritional supplements

We have to be honest with you—plain protein powder, though healthy, does not taste very good. Even nutritional supplements that profess to be tasteless can still be an uncomfortable experience for your taste buds. This is why many powders come flavored. Luckily, there are many options for healthy flavoring, including strawberry, snickerdoodle, cookies and cream, caramel, birthday cake, and more. Flavored protein powders are incredibly convenient because you don’t have to do very much to mask the taste. Simply combine a flavored powder with water or milk, and you might be good to go. The options are practically endless; however, before you reach for the chocolatiest of protein powders, think about your overall goals. Make sure the flavored powder you’re looking at isn’t adding a ton of extra artificial flavoring or calories just to make it taste like vanilla. It isn’t worth losing the added benefits of protein powder to synthetic ingredients. If you have a little more time and energy, plan out some delicious, healthy smoothie or shake recipes to mask that powdery taste and deliver maximum nutrition. You’ll still need to think carefully about what you are adding to maintain the protein powder’s effects and see results when it comes to your goals. A smoothie composed entirely of fruit isn’t going to pair well with the amino acids in your powder if weight loss is the goal. Though the additional protein will still be delivered to your system, so will a ton of extra calories and sugars. We suggest hitting up the internet to find some smoothie options that will work for you and your protein powder. In the meantime, check out our favorite flavored protein powder for those early mornings or late nights when smoothie making just isn’t an option.

Final thoughts on the best protein powders

• Best for beginners: Optimum Nutrition Gold Standard Whey Protein Powder
• Best casein: Kaged Muscle Kasein Protein Powder
• Best vegan: Garden of Life Raw Organic Protein
• Best with caffeine: PB2 Performance
• Best hydrolyzed: Dymatize ISO100 Hydrolyzed Whey Protein Powder
• Best flavored: KOS Chocolate Peanut Butter Plant-Based Protein Powder
• Best budget: Muscle Milk

You should now feel equipped to start your protein powder journey. Always keep your goals in mind and make sure you find the protein source that best fits your dietary needs. Feel free to experiment with everything else. Make sure you remember that these powders are additional, and they will only be effective when paired with whole foods and a healthy diet. So get on your way to muscle gains and more with a combo of the best protein powder products!

Why trust us

Popular Science started writing about technology more than 150 years ago. There was no such thing as “gadget writing” when we published our first issue in 1872, but if there was, our mission to demystify the world of innovation for everyday readers means we would have been all over it. Here in the present, PopSci is fully committed to helping readers navigate the increasingly intimidating array of devices on the market right now.

Our writers and editors have combined decades of experience covering and reviewing consumer electronics. We each have our own obsessive specialties—from high-end audio to video games to cameras and beyond—but when we’re reviewing devices outside of our immediate wheelhouses, we do our best to seek out trustworthy voices and opinions to help guide people to the very best recommendations. We know we don’t know everything, but we’re excited to live through the analysis paralysis that internet shopping can spur so readers don’t have to.

The post The best protein powders of 2023 appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

The US Department of Agriculture granted two startup companies permission to begin selling cell-cultivated chicken to American consumers, marking a major moment for the global lab-grown meat industry. According to CNBC on Wednesday, GOOD Meat and UPSIDE Foods have already received their first customer orders, with regulators planning to begin inspecting cultured meat facilities according to the same health codes and standards they apply to standard slaughterhouses and meat processing plants.

In a statement released on Wednesday, Eat Just and GOOD Meat CEO and co-founder Josh Tetrick called the approval “a major moment for our company, the industry and the food system,” and thanked the FDA and USDA for their “rigor and thoughtfulness.” UPSIDE Foods CEO and founder Uma Valenti, meanwhile, described the decision in a separate announcement as “a giant step forward towards a more sustainable future—one that preserves choice and life.”

[Related: We’re one key step closer to buying lab-grown burgers.]

Unlike plant-based meat alternatives, cultured meat is created by injecting animal fat or muscle stem cells into a culture medium, then stimulating the cell growth via a bioreactor. After the process is complete, the final result is a product developers contend is little different from naturally grown and harvested meat. In 2020, GOOD Meat obtained approval to sell cultured meat to consumers in Singapore.

Although the USDA’s approval was all-but-certain after regulators’ cleared UPSIDE Foods’ cultured poultry as safe for human consumption last November, the actual go-ahead marks a symbolic moment for the industry as consumers’ interest in plant-based meat products appears to wane. In the years’ since the commercial introduction of plant-based meat alternatives, critics have increasingly highlighted plant-based products’ own environmental pitfalls and health concerns.

[Related: How to enjoy fake meat in a way that actually helps the planet.]

As CNBC notes, however, cultured meat faces its own challenges to widespread adoption, including scalability issues such as from financing and building large enough bioreactors to meet demand. And then there’s the question of whether or not even lab-grown meat will prove more sustainable than existing industries—multiple studies in recent years indicate such alternatives may even be worse for the environment thanks to overall energy requirements and greenhouse gas emissions.

Additionally, production costs indicate early prices will remain extremely high. Both UPSIDE and GOOD Meat’s first announced customers have been a three-Michelin-star chef, as well as an international restaurateur.

In spite of all this, however, there’s no word on when those mammoth meatballs will hit grocery stores.

The post Lab-grown chicken is now USDA approved—if you can afford it appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

This article originally published on KFF Health News.

For more than 20 years, the National Eating Disorders Association has operated a phone line and online platform for people seeking help for anorexia, bulimia, and other eating disorders. Last year, nearly 70,000 individuals used the help line.

NEDA shuttered that service in May, saying that, in its place, a chatbot called Tessa, designed by eating disorder experts with funding from NEDA, would be deployed.

When NPR aired a report about this last month, Tessa was up and running online. Since then, both the chatbot’s page and a NEDA article about Tessa have been taken down. When asked why, NEDA said the bot is being “updated,” and the latest “version of the current program [will be] available soon.”

Then NEDA announced on May 30 that it was indefinitely disabling Tessa. Patients, families, doctors, and other experts on eating disorders were stunned. The episode has set off a fresh wave of debate as companies turn to artificial intelligence as a possible solution for a mental health crisis and treatment shortage.

Paid staffers and volunteers for the NEDA help line said that replacing the service with a chatbot could further isolate the thousands of people who use it when they feel they have nowhere else to turn.

“These young kids … don’t feel comfortable coming to their friends or their family or anybody about this,” said Katy Meta, a 20-year-old college student who has volunteered for the help line. “A lot of these individuals come on multiple times because they have no other outlet to talk with anybody. … That’s all they have, is the chat line.”

The decision is part of a larger trend: Many mental health organizations and companies are struggling to provide services and care in response to a sharp escalation in demand, and some are turning to chatbots and AI, even though clinicians are still trying to figure out how to effectively deploy them, and for what conditions.

The help line’s five staffers formally notified their employer they had formed a union in March. Just a few days later, on a March 31 call, NEDA informed them that they would be laid off in June. NPR and KFF Health News obtained audio of the call. “We will, subject to the terms of our legal responsibilities, [be] beginning to wind down the help line as currently operating,” NEDA board chair Geoff Craddock told them, “with a transition to Tessa, the AI-assisted technology, expected around June 1.”

NEDA’s leadership denies the decision had anything to do with the unionization but told NPR and KFF Health News it became necessary because of the covid-19 pandemic, when eating disorders surged and the number of calls, texts, and messages to the help line more than doubled.

The increase in crisis-level calls also raises NEDA’s legal liability, managers explained in an email sent March 31 to current and former volunteers, informing them that the help line was ending and that NEDA would “begin to pivot to the expanded use of AI-assisted technology.”

“What has really changed in the landscape are the federal and state requirements for mandated reporting for mental and physical health issues (self-harm, suicidality, child abuse),” according to the email, which NPR and KFF Health News obtained. “NEDA is now considered a mandated reporter and that hits our risk profile — changing our training and daily work processes and driving up our insurance premiums. We are not a crisis line; we are a referral center and information provider.”

Pandemic created a ‘perfect storm’ for eating disorders

When it was time for a volunteer shift on the help line, Meta usually logged in from her dorm room at Dickinson College in Pennsylvania.

Meta recalled a recent conversation on the help line’s messaging platform with a girl who said she was 11. The girl said she had just confessed to her parents that she was struggling with an eating disorder, but the conversation had gone badly.

“The parents said that they ‘didn’t believe in eating disorders’ and [told their daughter], ‘You just need to eat more. You need to stop doing this,’” Meta recalled. “This individual was also suicidal and exhibited traits of self-harm as well. … It was just really heartbreaking to see.”

Eating disorders are common, serious, and sometimes fatal illnesses. An estimated 9 percent of Americans experience an eating disorder during their lifetimes. Eating disorders also have some of the highest mortality rates among mental illnesses, with an estimated death toll of more than 10,000 Americans each year.

But after covid hit, closing schools and forcing people into prolonged isolation, crisis calls and messages like the one Meta describes became far more frequent on the help line.

In the U.S., the rate of pediatric hospitalizations and ER visits surged. On the NEDA help line, client volume increased by more than 100 percent compared with pre-pandemic levels.

“Eating disorders thrive in isolation, so covid and shelter-in-place was a tough time for a lot of folks struggling,” explained Abbie Harper, who has worked as a help line associate.

Until a few weeks ago, the help line was run by just five to six paid staffers and two supervisors, and it depended on a rotating roster of 90-165 volunteers at any given time, according to NEDA.

Yet even after lockdowns ended, NEDA’s help line volume remained elevated above pre-pandemic levels, and the cases continued to be clinically severe. Staffers felt overwhelmed, undersupported, and increasingly burned out, and turnover increased, according to multiple interviews.

The help line staff formally notified NEDA that their unionization vote had been certified on March 27. Four days later, they learned their positions were being eliminated.

“Our volunteers are volunteers,” said Lauren Smolar, NEDA’s vice president of mission and education. “They’re not professionals. They don’t have crisis training. And we really can’t accept that kind of responsibility.” Instead, she said, people seeking crisis help should be reaching out to resources like 988, a 24/7 suicide and crisis hotline that connects people with trained counselors.

The surge in volume also meant the help line was unable to respond immediately to 46 percent of initial contacts, and it could take six to 11 days to respond to messages.

“And that’s frankly unacceptable in 2023, for people to have to wait a week or more to receive the information that they need, the specialized treatment options that they need,” Smolar said.

After learning in the March 31 email that the helpline would be phased out, volunteer Faith Fischetti, 22, tried out the chatbot on her own, asking it some of the more frequent questions she gets from users. But her interactions with Tessa were not reassuring: “[The bot] gave links and resources that were completely unrelated” to her questions, she said.

Fischetti’s biggest worry is that someone coming to the NEDA site for help will leave because they “feel that they’re not understood, and feel that no one is there for them. And that’s the most terrifying thing to me.”

A chatbot can miss red flags

Tessa the chatbot was created to help a specific cohort: people with eating disorders who never receive treatment.

Only 20 percent of people with eating disorders get formal help, according to Ellen Fitzsimmons-Craft, a psychologist and associate professor at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis. Her team created Tessa after receiving funding from NEDA in 2018, with the goal of looking for ways technology could help fill the treatment gap.

NEDA said Tessa was supposed to be a “rule-based” chatbot, meaning one that is programmed with a limited set of possible responses. It is not ChatGPT and cannot generate unique answers in response to specific queries. “So she can’t go off the rails, so to speak,” Fitzsimmons-Craft said.

The plan was for Tessa to guide users through an interactive, weeks-long course about body positivity, based on cognitive behavioral therapy tools. Additional content about bingeing, weight concerns, and regular eating was under development but not yet available to users.

There’s evidence the AI approach can help. Fitzsimmons-Craft’s team did a small study that found college students who interacted with Tessa had significantly greater reductions in “weight/shape concerns” than a control group at three- and six-month follow-ups.

But even the best-intentioned technology can carry risks. Fitzsimmons-Craft’s team published a different study looking at ways the chatbot “unexpectedly reinforced harmful behaviors at times.” For example, the chatbot would give users a prompt: “Please take a moment to write about when you felt best about your body?”

Responses included: “When I was underweight and could see my bones.” “I feel best about my body when I ignore it and don’t think about it at all.”

The chatbot seemed to ignore the troubling aspects of such responses — and even to affirm negative thinking — when it would reply: “It is awesome that you can recognize a moment when you felt confident in your skin, let’s keep working on making you feel this good more often.”

Researchers were able to troubleshoot some of those issues. But the chatbot still missed red flags, the study found, such as when it asked: “What is a small healthy eating habit goal you would like to set up before you start your next conversation?”

One user replied, “Don’t eat.”

“Take a moment to pat yourself on the back for doing this hard work, <>!” the chatbot responded.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology assistant professor Marzyeh Ghassemi has seen issues like this crop up in her own research developing machine learning to improve health.

Large language models and chatbots will inevitably make mistakes, but “sometimes they tend to be wrong more often for certain groups, like women and minorities,” she said.

If people receive bad advice or instructions from a bot, “people sometimes have a difficulty not listening to it,” Ghassemi added. “I think it sets you up for this really negative outcome … especially for a mental health crisis situation, where people may be at a point where they’re not thinking with absolute clarity. It’s very important that the information that you give them is correct and is helpful to them.”

And if the value of the live help line was the ability to connect with a real person who deeply understands eating disorders, Ghassemi said, a chatbot can’t do that.

“If people are experiencing a majority of the positive impact of these interactions because the person on the other side understands fundamentally the experience they’re going through, and what a struggle it’s been, I struggle to understand how a chatbot could be part of that.”

Tessa goes ‘off the rails’

When Sharon Maxwell heard NEDA was promoting Tessa as “a meaningful prevention resource” for those struggling with eating disorders, she wanted to try it out.

Maxwell, based in San Diego, had struggled for years with an eating disorder that began in childhood. She now works as a consultant in the eating disorder field. “Hi, Tessa,” she typed into the online text box. “How do you support folks with eating disorders?”

Tessa rattled off a list of ideas, including resources for “healthy eating habits.” Alarm bells immediately went off in Maxwell’s head. She asked Tessa for details. Before long, the chatbot was giving her tips on losing weight — ones that sounded an awful lot like what she’d been told when she was put on Weight Watchers at age 10.

“The recommendations that Tessa gave me were that I could lose 1 to 2 pounds per week, that I should eat no more than 2,000 calories in a day, that I should have a calorie deficit of 500-1,000 calories per day,” Maxwell said. “All of which might sound benign to the general listener. However, to an individual with an eating disorder, the focus of weight loss really fuels the eating disorder.”

NEDA blamed the chatbot’s issues on Cass, the mental health chatbot company that operated Tessa as a free service. Cass had changed Tessa without NEDA’s awareness or approval, said NEDA CEO Liz Thompson, enabling the chatbot to generate new answers beyond what Tessa’s creators had intended.

Cass’ founder and CEO, Michiel Rauws, said the changes to Tessa were made last year as part of a “systems upgrade,” including an “enhanced question-and-answer feature.” That feature uses generative artificial intelligence — meaning it gives the chatbot the ability to use new data and create new responses.

That change was part of NEDA’s contract, Rauws said.

But Thompson disagrees. She told NPR and KFF Health News that “NEDA was never advised of these changes and did not and would not have approved them.”

“The content some testers received relative to diet culture and weight management, [which] can be harmful to those with eating disorders, is against NEDA policy, and would never have been scripted into the chatbot by eating disorders experts,” she said.

Complaints about Tessa started last year

NEDA was aware of issues with the chatbot months before Maxwell’s interactions with Tessa in late May.

In October 2022, NEDA passed along screenshots from Monika Ostroff, executive director of the Multi-Service Eating Disorders Association in Massachusetts. They showed Tessa telling Ostroff to avoid “unhealthy” foods and eat only “healthy” snacks, like fruit.

“It’s really important that you find what healthy snacks you like the most, so if it’s not a fruit, try something else!” Tessa told Ostroff. “So the next time you’re hungry between meals, try to go for that instead of an unhealthy snack like a bag of chips. Think you can do that?”

Ostroff said this was a clear example of the chatbot encouraging “diet culture” mentality. “That meant that they [NEDA] either wrote these scripts themselves, they got the chatbot and didn’t bother to make sure it was safe and didn’t test it, or released it and didn’t test it,” she said.

The healthy-snack language was quickly removed after Ostroff reported it. But Rauws said that language was part of Tessa’s “pre-scripted language, and not related to generative AI.”

Fitzsimmons-Craft said her team didn’t write it, that it “was not something our team designed Tessa to offer and that it was not part of the rule-based program we originally designed.”

Then, earlier this year, “a similar event happened as another example,” Rauws said.

“This time it was around our enhanced question-and-answer feature, which leverages a generative model. When we got notified by NEDA that an answer text it provided fell outside their guidelines,” it was addressed right away, he said.

Rauws said he can’t provide more details about what this event entailed.

“This is another earlier instance, and not the same instance as over the Memorial Day weekend,” he said via email, referring to Maxwell’s interactions with Tessa. “According to our privacy policy, this is related to user data tied to a question posed by a person, so we would have to get approval from that individual first.”

When asked about this event, Thompson said she doesn’t know what instance Rauws is referring to.

Both NEDA and Cass have issued apologies.

Ostroff said that regardless of what went wrong, the impact on someone with an eating disorder is the same. “It doesn’t matter if it’s rule-based or generative, it’s all fat-phobic,” she said. “We have huge populations of people who are harmed by this kind of language every day.”

She also worries about what this might mean for the tens of thousands of people turning to NEDA’s help line each year.

Thompson said NEDA still offers numerous resources for people seeking help, including a screening tool and resource map, and is developing new online and in-person programs.

“We recognize and regret that certain decisions taken by NEDA have disappointed members of the eating disorders community,” she wrote in an emailed statement. “Like all other organizations focused on eating disorders, NEDA’s resources are limited and this requires us to make difficult choices. … We always wish we could do more and we remain dedicated to doing better.”

This article is from a partnership that includes Michigan Radio, NPR, and KFF Health News.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.

The post An eating disorder chatbot that gave harmful advice was taken offline. Now it’s coming back. appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

This article was originally featured on Hakai Magazine, an online publication about science and society in coastal ecosystems. Read more stories like this at hakaimagazine.com.

Chinese mitten crabs are a delicacy among some seafood lovers: deeply savory, with a distinctive tinge of sweetness. Diners crack the shells open and eat the meat piping hot, dipped in rice vinegar and soy sauce with sliced ginger. The unique flavor of the crabs, most of which are grown in farms on China’s Yangtze River, is crucial to their popularity. When it comes to seafood, research shows that consumers prioritize taste above all else—including health benefits and environmental sustainability.

“All other things sort of fall by the wayside,” says Grant Murray, a marine policy researcher at Duke University in North Carolina who studies consumer seafood choices. “If it doesn’t look good and smell good and taste good, nobody’s going to buy it.”

Now, new research by biochemists at China’s Soochow University and Kunshan Yangcheng Lake Crab Industrial Research Institute suggests that when coveted mitten crabs are fed black soldier fly larvae, they can be made even tastier.

The researchers swapped out the regular diet of farmed mitten crabs—mostly ground-up fish caught as by-catch—for the lab-grown black soldier fly larvae, which have become a promising alternative aquaculture feed for species from Atlantic salmon to tilapia, carp, and catfish. The larvae are high in protein and fat, and they’re quick, easy, and safe to produce, says Murray, who was not involved in the study.

After feeding 12 captive crabs black soldier fly larvae for two months, the scientists measured the meat for important taste-enhancing amino acids including glutamic acid, which can intensify a food’s umami or savory taste, and glycine and arginine, which determine sweetness and bitterness. These molecules, which are present in the larvae, are deposited in the crustaceans’ tissues as they grow. After eating the larvae, the crabs’ muscles contained higher levels of sweet amino acids and lower levels of bitter amino acids. Male crabs also had more amino acids associated with umami flavor in their gonads, which diners eat with the rest of the crab.

Not everyone is convinced that the shift in amino acids will amount to a tastier crustacean though. It’s plausible, says Charles Spence, a sensory researcher at the University of Oxford in England who was not involved in the study. But taste relies on many factors beyond chemistry, including scent, temperature, texture, cooking method, and what the food is paired with, says Spence. Since a taste test was not part of the study, “who knows what things are going to taste like?” And simply adding flavor enhancers, such as umami-elevating MSG, doesn’t always produce the desired effect, he says, otherwise chefs would be adding salt, sugar, or MSG to every single dish.

In the long run, producing a tastier mitten crab by feeding it a more environmentally friendly feed could be a win-win—driving consumers to eat more sustainably, even when it’s not their primary priority. Yet even if mitten crabs were 10 or 20 percent more delicious, says Murray, that doesn’t mean they’re going to become more popular.

Still, as part of the greater push to green our diets, this may be one way to eat more insects without actually having to eat them yourself.

This article first appeared in Hakai Magazine and is republished here with permission.

The post The sustainable secret to raising tastier crabs appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

This article was originally published on Undark.

For Taylor Arnold, a registered dietitian nutritionist, feeding her second baby was not easy. At eight weeks old, he screamed when he ate and wouldn’t gain much weight. Arnold brought him to a gastroenterologist, who diagnosed him with allergic proctocolitis — an immune response to the proteins found in certain foods, which she narrowed down to cow’s milk.

Cow’s milk protein allergies, or CMPA, appear to be on the rise — following a similar trend to other children’s food allergies — and they can upend a caregiver’s feeding plans: A breastfeeding parent is often told to eliminate dairy from their diet, or switch to a specialized hypoallergenic formula, which can be expensive.

But while the evidence suggests that CMPA rates are climbing, the source of that increase remains unclear. Some experts say part of the reason is that doctors are getting better at recognizing symptoms. Others claim the condition is overdiagnosed, which could have health consequences, such as an increased risk of developing additional allergies later in life. And among those who believe that milk allergy rates are inflated, some suspect the global formula industry, valued at $55 billion according to a 2022 report from the World Health Organization and UNICEF, may have an undue influence.

Meanwhile, “no one has ever studied these kids in a systematic way,” said Victoria Martin, a pediatric gastroenterologist and allergy researcher at Massachusetts General Hospital. “It’s pretty unusual in disease that is this common, that has been going on for this long, that there hasn’t been more careful, controlled study.”

This lack of clarity can leave doctors in the dark about how to diagnose the condition and leave parents with more questions than answers about how best to treat it.

When Arnold’s son became sick with CMPA symptoms, it was “really, really stressful,” she told Undark. Plus, “I didn’t get a lot of support from the doctors, and that was frustrating.”

Though the gastroenterologist recommended she switch to formula, Arnold ultimately used a lactation consultant and gave up dairy so she could continue breastfeeding. But she said she can understand why others might not make the same choice: “A lot of moms go to formula because there’s not a lot of support for how to manage the diet.”

Food allergies primarily come in two forms: One, called an IgE-mediated allergy, has symptoms that appear soon after ingesting a food — such as swelling, hives, or difficulty breathing — and may be confirmed by a skin prick test. The second, which Arnold’s son was diagnosed with, is a non-IgE-mediated allergy or food protein-induced allergic proctocolitis, and is much harder to diagnose.

With non-IgE allergies, symptom onset often doesn’t happen immediately after a person eats a triggering food and there is no test to confirm a diagnosis. (Some specialists don’t like to call the condition an allergy because it doesn’t present with classic allergy symptoms.) Instead, physicians often rely on past training, online resources, or published guidelines written by experts in the field, which list symptoms and help doctors make a treatment plan.

Numerous such guidelines exist to help providers diagnose milk allergies, but the process is not always straightforward. “It’s a perfect storm” of vague and common symptoms and no diagnostic test, said Adam Fox, a pediatric allergist and a professor at King’s College London, noting that commercial interests such as formula company marketing can also be misleading. “It’s not really a surprise that you’ve got confused patients and, frankly, a lot of very confused doctors.”

Fox is the lead author of the International Milk Allergy in Primary Care, or iMAP, guidelines, one of many similar documents intended to help physicians diagnose CMPA. But some guidelines, including iMAP — which was known as the Milk Allergy in Primary Care Guideline until 2017 — have been criticized for listing a broad range of symptoms, like colic, non-specific rashes, diarrhea, and constipation, which can be common in healthy infants during the first year of their life.

“Lots of babies cry, or they posset, or they get a little minor rash or something,” said Michael Perkin, a pediatric allergist based in the U.K. “But that doesn’t mean they’ve got a pathological process going on.”

In a paper published online in December 2021, Perkin and colleagues found that in a food allergy trial, nearly three-quarters of the infants’ parents reported at least two symptoms that matched iMAP guideline’s “mild-moderate” non-IgE-mediated cow’s milk allergy symptoms, such as vomiting or reflux. But another study led by Perkin and Robert Boyle, a children’s allergy specialist at Imperial College London, reviewed available evidence and found that only about 1 percent of babies have a milk allergy proven by what’s called a “food challenge,” in which a person is exposed to the allergen and their reactions are monitored.

That same study found that up to 14 percent of families believe their babies have a milk allergy. Meanwhile, another study by Boyle and colleagues showed that milk allergy formula prescriptions increased 2.8-fold in England from 2007 to 2018. Researchers at the University of Rochester found similar trends stateside: Between 2017 and 2019, hypoallergenic formula sales rose from 4.9 percent to 7.6 percent of all formula sold in the U.S.

Perkin and Boyle suspect the formula industry has influenced diagnosis guidelines. In their 2020 report, which was published in JAMA Pediatrics, they found that 81 percent of authors who wrote nine physicians’ guidelines for the condition — including the 2013 version of the iMAP guidelines — reported a conflict of interest with formula manufacturers, such as research funding, consulting fees, or paid lectures.

Additionally, the formula industry sends representatives and promotional materials to some pediatric clinics. One recent study found that around 85 percent of pediatricians surveyed reported a representative visit, sometimes sponsoring meals.

Formula companies “like people getting the idea that whenever a baby cries, or does a runny poo, or anything,” that it might be a milk allergy, Boyle said.

In response to criticism that the guidelines have influenced the increase in specialized formula sales, Fox noted that the rise began in the early 2000s. One of the first diagnosis guidelines, meanwhile, was published in 2007. He also said that the symptoms listed in the iMAP guidelines were taken from the U.K.’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and the U.S.’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

As for the conflicts of interest, Fox said: “We never made any money from this, there was never any money for the development of it. We’ve done this with best intentions, we absolutely recognize where that may not have turned out the way that we intended it, we’d have tried our best to address that.”

Following backlash over close ties between the formula industry and healthcare professionals, including author conflicts of interest, iMAP updated their guidelines in 2019. The new version responded directly to criticism and said the guidelines received no direct industry funding, but acknowledged “a potential risk of unconscious bias” related to research funding, educational grants, and consultant fees. The authors noted that the new guidelines tried to mitigate such influence through independent patient input.

Fox also said he ceased all formula ties in 2018, and led the British Society for Allergy & Clinical Immunology to do the same when he was president.

Undark reached out to the Infant Nutrition Council of America, an association of the largest U.S. manufacturers of infant formula, multiple times, but did not receive any comment in response.

Though the guidelines have issues, said Nigel Rollins, a pediatrician and researcher at the World Health Organization, he sees the rise in diagnoses as driven by formula industry marketing to parents, which can fuel the idea that fussiness or colic might be signs of a milk allergy. Parents then go to their pediatrician to talk about milk allergy, Rollins said, and “the family doctor isn’t actually well-positioned to argue otherwise.”

Rollins led much of the research in the 2022 report from WHO and UNICEF, which surveyed more than 8,500 pregnant and postpartum people in eight countries (not including the U.S.). Of those participants, 51 percent were exposed to aggressive formula milk marketing, which the report states “represents one of the most underappreciated risks to infants and young children’s health.”

Meanwhile, Amy Burris, a pediatric allergist and immunologist at the University of Rochester Medical Center, said there are many likely causes of overdiagnosis. “I don’t know that there’s one particular thing that stands out in my head as the reason it’s overdiagnosed,” she added.

Some physicians rely on their own criteria for diagnosing non-IgE milk allergy, rather than the guidelines — for instance, conducting a test that detects microscopic blood in stool. But Burris and Rollins both pointed out that healthy infants, or infants who have recently had a virus or stomach bug, can have traces of blood in their stool, too.

Martin, the allergy researcher at Massachusetts General Hospital, said the better way to confirm an infant dairy allergy is to reintroduce milk around a month after it has been eliminated: If the symptoms reappear, then the baby most likely has the allergy. The guidelines say to do this, but both Martin and Perkin told Undark that this almost never happens; parents can be reluctant to reintroduce a food if their baby seems better without it.

“I wish every physician followed the guidelines right now until we write better guidelines, because, unequivocally, what folks are doing not following the guidelines is worse,” Martin said, adding that kids are on a restricted diet for a longer time than they should be.

Giving up potentially allergenic foods, including dairy, isn’t without consequences. “I think there’s a lot of potential risk in having moms unnecessarily avoid cow’s milk or other foods,” Burris said. “Also, you’re putting the breastfeeding relationship at risk.”

By the time Burris sees a baby, she said, their mother has often already given up breastfeeding after a primary care provider suggested a food allergy, but “at that point, it’s too late to restimulate the supply.” It also remains an open question whether allergens in breast milk actually trigger infant allergies. According to Perkin, the amount of cow’s milk protein that enters breast milk is “tiny.”

For babies, Martin said, dietary elimination may affect sensitivity to other foods. She pointed to research indicating that early introduction of food allergens such as peanuts can reduce the likelihood of developing allergies.

Martin also said some babies with a CMPA diagnosis may not have to give up milk entirely. She led a 2020 study suggesting that even when parents don’t elect to make any dietary changes for babies with a non-IgE-mediated food allergy diagnosis, they later report an improvement in their babies’ symptoms. But when parents do make changes to their baby’s diet, in Martin’s experience, if they later reintroduce milk, “the vast majority of them do fine,” she said. “I think some people would argue that maybe you had the wrong diagnosis initially. But I think the other possibility is that it’s the right diagnosis, it just turns around pretty fast.”

Still, many parents who give up dairy, or switch to a hypoallergenic formula, report an improvement in their baby’s symptoms. Arnold said her son’s symptoms improved when they eliminated dairy. But when he was about eight months old, they reintroduced the food group to his diet, and he had no issues.

Whether that’s because the cow’s milk protein allergy was short-lived or because his symptoms were due to something else, it’s unclear. But she sees moms self-diagnosing their baby with food allergies on social media and believes many are experiencing a placebo effect when they say their baby improves. “Nobody’s immune to that. Even me,” she said. “There’s absolutely a chance that that was the case with my baby.”

Christina Szalinski is a freelance science writer with a Ph.D. in cell biology based near Philadelphia.

This article was originally published on Undark. Read the original article.

The post More infants seem to be allergic to cow’s milk—but nobody really knows why appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

This article originally appeared in Knowable Magazine.

Maybe it starts with a low-energy feeling, or maybe you’re getting a little cranky. You might have a headache or difficulty concentrating. Your brain is sending you a message: You’re hungry. Find food.

Studies in mice have pinpointed a cluster of cells called AgRP neurons near the underside of the brain that may create this unpleasant hungry, even “hangry,” feeling. They sit near the brain’s blood supply, giving them access to hormones arriving from the stomach and fat tissue that indicate energy levels. When energy is low, they act on a variety of other brain areas to promote feeding.

By eavesdropping on AgRP neurons in mice, scientists have begun to untangle how these cells switch on and encourage animals to seek food when they’re low on nutrients, and how they sense food landing in the gut to turn back off. Researchers have also found that the activity of AgRP neurons goes awry in mice with symptoms akin to those of anorexia, and that activating these neurons can help to restore normal eating patterns in those animals.

Understanding and manipulating AgRP neurons might lead to new treatments for both anorexia and overeating. “If we could control this hangry feeling, we might be better able to control our diets,” says Amber Alhadeff, a neuroscientist at the Monell Chemical Senses Center in Philadelphia.

To eat or not to eat

AgRP neurons appear to be key players in appetite: Deactivating them in adult mice causes the animals to stop eating — they may even die of starvation. Conversely, if researchers activate the neurons, mice hop into their food dishes and gorge themselves.

Experiments at several labs in 2015 helped to illustrate what AgRP neurons do. Researchers found that when mice hadn’t had enough to eat, AgRP neurons fired more frequently. But just the sight or smell of food — especially something yummy like peanut butter or a Hershey’s Kiss — was enough to dampen this activity, within seconds. From this, the scientists concluded that AgRP neurons cause animals to seek out food. Once food has been found, they stop firing as robustly.

One research team, led by neuroscientist Scott Sternson at the Janelia Research Campus in Ashburn, Virginia, also showed that AgRP neuron activity appears to make mice feel bad. To demonstrate this, the scientists engineered mice so that the AgRP neurons would start firing when light was shone into the brain with an optical fiber (the fiber still allowed the mice to move around freely). They placed these engineered mice in a box with two distinct areas: one colored black with a plastic grid floor, the other white with a soft, tissue paper floor. If the researchers activated AgRP neurons whenever the mice went into one of the two areas, the mice started avoiding that region.

Sternson, now at the University of California San Diego, concluded that AgRP activation felt “mildly unpleasant.” That makes sense in nature, he says: Any time a mouse leaves its nest, it’s at risk from predators, but it must overcome this fear in order to forage and eat. “These AgRP neurons are kind of the push that, in a dangerous environment, you’re going to go out and seek food to stay alive.”

Sternson’s 2015 study had shown that while the sight or smell of food quiets AgRP neurons, it’s only temporary: Activity goes right back up if the mouse can’t follow through and eat the snack. Through additional experiments, Alhadeff and colleagues discovered that what turns the AgRP neurons off more reliably is calories landing in the gut.

First, Alhadeff’s team fed mice a calorie-free treat: a gel with artificial sweetener. When mice ate the gel, AgRP neuron activity dropped, as expected — but only temporarily. As the mice learned there were no nutrients to be gained from this snack, their AgRP neurons responded less and less to each bite. Thus, as animals learn whether a treat really nourishes them, the neurons adjust the hunger dial accordingly.

Next, the team used a catheter implanted through the abdomen to deliver calories, in the form of the nutritional drink Ensure, directly to the stomach. This bypassed any sensory cues that food was coming. And it resulted in a longer dip in AgRP activity. In other words, it’s the nutrients in food that shut off AgRP neurons for an extended time after a meal, Alhadeff concluded.

Alhadeff has since begun to decode the messages that the stomach sends to the AgRP neurons, and found that it depends on the nutrient. Fat in the gut triggers a signal via the vagus nerve, which reaches from the digestive tract to the brain. The simple sugar glucose signals the brain via nerves in the spinal cord.

Her team is now investigating why these multiple paths exist. She hopes that by better understanding how AgRP neurons drive food-seeking, scientists can eventually come up with ways to help people keep off unhealthy pounds. Though scientists and dieters have been seeking such treatments for more than a century, it’s been difficult to identify easy, safe and effective treatments. The latest class of weight-loss medications, such as Wegovy, act in part on AgRP neurons but have unpleasant side effects such as nausea and diarrhea.

Therapies targeting AgRP neurons alone would likely fail to fully solve the weight problem, because food-seeking is only one component of appetite control, says Sternson, who reviewed the main controllers of appetite in the Annual Review of Physiology in 2017. Other brain areas that sense satiety and make high-calorie food pleasurable also play important roles, he says. That’s why, for example, you eat that slice of pumpkin pie at the end of the Thanksgiving meal, even though you’re already full of turkey and mashed potatoes.

Outflanking anorexia

The flip side of overeating is anorexia, and there, too, researchers think that investigating AgRP neurons could lead to new treatment strategies. People with anorexia avoid food, to the point of dangerous weight loss. “Eating food is actually aversive,” says Ames Sutton Hickey, a neuroscientist at Temple University in Philadelphia. There is no medication specific for anorexia; treatment may include psychotherapy, general medications such as antidepressants and, in the most severe cases, force-feeding via a tube threaded through the nose. People with anorexia are also often restless or hyperactive and may exercise excessively.

Researchers can study the condition using a mouse model of the disease known as activity-based anorexia, or ABA. When scientists limit the food available to the mice and provide them with a wheel to run on, some mice enter an anorexia-like state, eating less than they’re offered, and running on the wheel even during daylight, when mice are normally inactive. “It’s a remarkable addictive thing that happens to these animals,” says Tamas Horvath, a neuroscientist at the Yale School of Medicine. “They basically get a kick out of not eating and exercising.”

It’s not a perfect model for anorexia. Mice, presumably, face none of the social pressures to stay thin that humans do; conversely, people with anorexia usually don’t have limits on their access to food. But it’s one of the best anorexia mimics out there, says Alhadeff: “I think it’s as good as we get.”

To find out how AgRP neurons might be involved in anorexia, Sutton Hickey carefully monitored the food intake of ABA mice. She compared them to mice that were given a restricted diet, but had a locked exercise wheel and didn’t develop ABA. The ABA mice, she found, ate fewer meals than the other mice. And when they did eat, their AgRP activity didn’t decrease like it should have after they filled their tummies. Something was wrong with the way the neurons responded to hunger and food cues.

Sutton Hickey also found that she could fix the problem when she engineered ABA mice so that AgRP neurons would spring into action when researchers injected a certain chemical. These mice, when treated with the chemical, ate more meals and gained weight. “That speaks very much to the importance of these neurons,” says Horvath, who wasn’t involved in the work. “It shows that these neurons are good guys, not the bad guys.”

Sutton Hickey says the next step is to figure out why the AgRP neurons respond abnormally in ABA mice. She hopes there might be some key molecule she could target with a drug to help people with anorexia.

All in all, the work on AgRP neurons is giving scientists a much better picture of why we eat when we do — as well as new leads, perhaps, to medications that might help people change disordered eating, be it consuming too much or too little, into healthy habits.

10.1146/knowable-052423-1

This article originally appeared in Knowable Magazine, an independent journalistic endeavor from Annual Reviews. Sign up for the newsletter.

The post The science behind being hangry appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

This article was originally published on Undark.

Rice cereal is a staple in many American babies’ diets, and is often the first solid food an infant eats. In recent years, however, it has also become one of many baby foods that has been raising alarm among lawmakers and parents.

Most cultivated rice grows submerged in paddy fields, primarily in South and Southeast Asia, although it is also grown in the United States and many other countries. These flooded fields provide a cool, fertile environment for a healthy crop, but that same environment also allows contamination from toxic heavy metals, including arsenic, cadmium, lead, and mercury.

At least some heavy metals appear to harm brain development and cognition; and have also been linked to ailments including lung disease, kidney disease, skin lesions, and cancer. Heavy metal exposure is especially dangerous for infants because, compared to adults, they eat more food relative to their body weight and their diet is less varied. Babies are also particularly sensitive to the toxic effects of heavy metals because their bodies are still developing.

In February 2021, the U.S. House Oversight and Reform Subcommittee on Economic and Consumer Policy released a report on heavy metals in baby food produced by several of the country’s largest manufacturers. The 59-page document ended with a call for immediate action from the Food and Drug Administration. Two months later, the FDA announced the Closer to Zero initiative, which uses an iterative approach to reduce heavy metal exposure among babies and children. The FDA issued draft guidance on lead in fruit and vegetable juice in April 2022 and in baby food more broadly in January 2023. Action plans for arsenic, cadmium, and mercury aren’t scheduled to be completed until 2024 at the earliest.

In the meantime, botanists, soil chemists, and plant geneticists — who have long worked to reduce heavy metals in the food supply — continue to look for potential solutions, from new land management practices to nano-sized fertilizers to genetic engineering. Not all of these technologies are available yet; however, even when they are, eliminating heavy metals entirely won’t be easy.

Still, some experts are optimistic about the possibilities. While “there is no single magic bullet that can address this problem,” said Om Parkash Dhankher, a professor of crop biotechnology at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, “there are lots of technologies and practices that farmers can use.”

Heavy metals are naturally present in the Earth’s crust and make their way into aquifers and rivers when water travels through underground rock formations and dissolves the toxic elements. Arsenic, for example, exists in high levels in the groundwater of the U.S., China, and India. Agricultural practices have also contributed to heavy metal contamination. The U.S. has led the world in the use of arsenic for agriculture and industry, and while insecticides with lead and arsenic were banned in the 1980s, soil, paddy water, and rice grains still have detectable levels of the toxins.

These contaminants get sucked up by the roots of a rice plant, which absorb nutrients through proteins in their cell walls. According to Parkash, arsenic essentially “hijacks” these pathways. As the plant grows, arsenic travels from the roots into the leaves and grains.

Scientists including Parkash are looking for ways to stop arsenic from hijacking the plants to begin with. One approach is to apply more sulfur to paddy soils, which can bind to toxic metals and make them more difficult to absorb.

Heavy metal exposure is especially dangerous for infants because, compared to adults, they eat more food relative to their body weight and their diet is less varied.

In recent years, Parkash and Jason White, who directs the ​​Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, have been researching this process at a very small scale. Given how sulfur binds to toxic metals, Parkash and White have looked into ways that nanotechnology — which involves manipulating materials at the scale of billionths of a meter — could be used for soil remediation. In a recent paper, they found that rice plants treated with both inorganic arsenic, the element’s more toxic form, and nanosulfur accumulated nearly a third less of the toxin in root tissue than plants exposed to inorganic arsenic alone.

Other alterations to a field can help, too. Wild plants like water spinach and water celery also slurp up nutrients and toxins, and scientists have studied intercropping rice paddies to help remove contaminants. When these aquatic vegetables are grown alongside rice, overall concentrations of arsenic in the soil decrease and the wild plants absorb the arsenic. Certain species of bacteria can tolerate high levels of arsenic, lead, mercury, and cadmium, and some bacteria have been found to mitigate the toxic effects these heavy metals have on plants. Other microorganisms can reduce arsenic concentrations in crops. Scientists have also genetically engineered bacteria to produce a specific protein that boosts their ability to break down arsenic.

Some of these approaches have yet to be applied in large-scale interventions beyond the lab. “Scientists don’t even think about extension,” said Ganga Hettiarachchi, a soil and environmental chemistry scientist at Kansas State University, referring to a century-old partnership with the U.S. Department of Agriculture and land-grant universities to translate science for practical application in farms and food production. When it comes to the newest research on soil and land management, Hettiarachchi worries that farmers might not be aware of how to apply the latest research. But she is optimistic: “I do see that it’s changing.”

Some research on heavy metals in rice can’t yet be applied in the field though. Genetic engineering of rice itself, to help the plant block heavy metals, has proven difficult, Shannon Pinson, a plant geneticist at the USDA’s Agricultural Research Service, told Undark. There is no genetically modified rice in commercial production in the U.S., although Pinson said that the technology has been a useful research tool for understanding how plants take up heavy metals. For example, her research suggests arsenic accumulation is not controlled by a single gene, but rather many genes with individually small effects.

Not all rice varieties are the same, though, and some take up more arsenic and heavy metals than others. In a 2015 article, Pinson’s team examined 1,763 rice cultivars from around the world and compared concentrations of both organic and inorganic arsenic at different stages in the growing cycle. The good news, according to Pinson, is that the genes responsible for limiting the uptake of both forms of arsenic are already present in U.S. cultivars. But that means that the plants are likely already reducing the arsenic as much as they can, she added, and it “will not be easy to find additional genes that would further reduce arsenic in U.S. rice varieties through traditional breeding.”

One challenge in tinkering with soil chemistry and plant genetics is blocking arsenic can affect the way a plant takes up other nutrients. “There is a balance between this, a tradeoff between the required nutrients and these toxic elements,” Parkash said. “It’s a very complex system.”

The tradeoff between nutrients and heavy metals plays out beyond the paddy field, and when it comes to setting rules around food, exposure to toxins is not the only consideration.

In recent guidance for arsenic in infant rice cereal, and for lead in baby food more broadly, the FDA notes that strict limits may not be possible for manufacturers. Pinson told Undark that although it is possible to produce rice with relatively low levels of arsenic, supply chain realities make it difficult to achieve low levels in rice-based baby foods, in part because sellers merge grains from multiple truckloads from different farms into single bins, making low-arsenic rice difficult to trace.

The manufacturing process can also increase concentrations in baby food products that make it on the shelf. The February 2021 Economic and Consumer Policy Subcommittee report found that, at least in tests from of one company’s products, inorganic arsenic levels were 28 to 93 percent higher in the finished products compared to ingredients. The report points to high levels of arsenic in additives — like vitamin mixes and spices — as the cause of the spike pre- and post-manufacturing.

If food companies can’t meet limits on heavy metals in their products, Elisabeth Davis, a spokesperson for the FDA, told Undark that there could be unintended economic consequences for consumers. This includes, she continued, “limiting access to foods that have significant nutritional benefits by making them unavailable or unaffordable for many families, or unintentionally increasing the presence of one environmental contaminant when foods are reformulated to reduce the presence of another.”

In March 2016, the FDA released a risk assessment that compared economic impacts and the lifetime risk of cancer at various potential guidance levels for arsenic. The risk assessment compared the effect of different parts per billion (ppb) limits — which is not a unit of mass, but a description of a ratio. For example, adding about half of a teaspoon of salt to an Olympic-size swimming pool would make it 1 ppb salt. While a 100-ppb limit could lead to anywhere from a 4 to 93 percent loss of rice in the food supply, the FDA calculated that a 75-ppb limit could lead to a 14 to 99 percent loss.

The FDA’s risk assessment estimated the average lifetime risk of cancer at different levels of infant rice consumption at various limits of inorganic arsenic. For white rice infant cereal, a limit of 100 parts per billion would reduce the risk of cancer by almost 19 percent, whereas limits of 75 and 50 ppb were calculated to reduce risk by 41 and 79 percent, respectively.

The hazard models the report’s authors used are a standard approach, but experts told Undark that the science of calculating health risks around heavy metal contamination is complex. While it is quite straightforward to calculate exposure from water, when it comes to food, White, from the ​​Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station said: “There isn’t a formula right now that could be used to actually calculate something like that.”

In the end, the FDA recommended inorganic arsenic limits at 100 parts per billion, which it first proposed in draft guidance in April 2016 and finalized in August 2020. This is more lenient than the 10 ppb proposed by national lawmakers in the Baby Food Safety Act, a bill that has stalled in Congress since March 2021. The act would align the inorganic arsenic limits in food with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s standard for drinking water, though the 100-ppb limit in food is below the voluntary standards set by the leading international food standards body, the Codex Alimentarius.

Like all of the FDA’s guidelines on food limits, 100 parts per billion of arsenic in infant rice cereal is just a recommendation, not a legal requirement. But some evidence suggests the change might be working. The FDA points to a slight downward trend in average concentrations of arsenic in infant rice cereal since it first issued the draft guidance.

However, recent investigations by Consumer Reports and the advocacy group Healthy Babies Bright Futures suggest that at least some baby food in stores across the U.S. contains more than 100 ppb of arsenic — four of seven infant rice cereals that were tested exceeded the FDA’s limit. The February 2021 report, along with a follow-up report issued that September, showed that several companies set internal limits on arsenic above the FDA’s guidance. And some companies found that arsenic levels in infant cereal still surpassed their higher limits.

“Baby food manufacturers hold a special position of public trust. Consumers believe that they would not sell unsafe products. Consumers also believe that the federal government would not knowingly permit the sale of unsafe baby food,” the report read. Baby food manufacturers and federal regulators had “broken the faith.”

Despite evidence of arsenic in infant rice cereal above 100 ppb, there was no FDA-mandated recall. Instead, some companies voluntarily pulled products from the shelves. In June 2021, Beech-Nut announced it was leaving the market for rice cereal entirely.

Potential sources of exposure to heavy metals go far beyond the products covered by Closer to Zero. The FDA has no standards for heavy metals in foods beyond the action level for arsenic in infant rice cereal and two draft guidance levels for lead in juice and baby food more broadly. And while processed foods can be systematically tested for heavy metals, Hettiarachchi’s research has shown that even individual and community gardens can also be contaminated, meaning that the risk of exposure remains even with homemade food.

As for the FDA efforts on reducing heavy metal exposure so far, “it’s good, and I fully support getting closer to zero,” Hettiarachchi said. “But at the same time, I think we have to do much better.”

Colleen Wood is a writer and educator based in New York City. Her work has appeared in The Diplomat, Foreign Policy, New Lines Magazine, and The Washington Post, among other outlets. Find her on Twitter @colleenwood_.

This article was originally published on Undark. Read the original article.

The post Eliminating heavy metals from baby food is frustratingly complicated appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

New guidance from the World Health Organization (WHO) says to avoid using sugar substitutes if you are trying to lose weight. Some common non-sugar sweeteners (NSS) include aspartame, saccharin, sucralose, stevia, among others. These substances are found in a wide range of products including diet sodas and most items labeled “sugar free.” They’re often used to replace full sugar drinks and snacks during diets.

[Related: Popular artificial sweetener associated with risk of heart attack and stroke.]

Consuming non-sugar sweeteners, “does not confer any long-term benefit in reducing body fat in adults or children,” according to systematic review of available literature by the WHO. 

Additionally, there may be “potential undesirable effects” from long-term use of sugar substitutes, including an increased risk of cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes. 

“Replacing free sugars with NSS does not help with weight control in the long term. People need to consider other ways to reduce free sugars intake, such as consuming food with naturally occurring sugars, like fruit, or unsweetened food and beverages,” WHO Director for Nutrition and Food Safety Francesco Branca said in a statement. “NSS are not essential dietary factors and have no nutritional value. People should reduce the sweetness of the diet altogether, starting early in life, to improve their health.”

The new recommendation applies to all people except those with pre-existing diabetes. It does not apply to products like toothpaste, skin cream, and medications that contain some non-sugar substitutes or to low-calorie sugars called polyols. 

The WHO reviewed 283 studies and two randomized controlled trials that are considered the gold standard of research into the subjects. 

The randomized trials found non-sugar sweeteners had a low impact on reducing both calorie intake and body weight compared to sugar. They also didn’t see any change in glucose and insulin levels which are  intermediate markers of diabetes.

While observational studies show associations, but not cause and effect, the reviewed research found a low impact on fat tissue and body weight and no change in calorie intake. They did find a low increase in the risk of high blood pressure, strokee, type-2 diabetes, heart disease, and death from heart disease, according to the WHO.  A very low risk for bladder cancer and early death was also found. 

[Related: High-fructose corn syrup vs. sugar: Which is actually worse?]

Stevia products are often considered to be a more natural artificial sweetener since they are derived from the stevia plant, but bulking sugars are often added to artificial sweeteners. One sugar agent called erythritol is used to add bulk or sweetened stevia, monk fruit and keto reduced-sugar products. In February, a study published in the journal Nature found that erythritol has been linked to blood clotting, heart attack, stroke, and death.

“Sweeteners like erythritol have rapidly increased in popularity in recent years but there needs to be more in-depth research into their long-term effects,” said senior author Stanley Hazen, chairman for the Department of Cardiovascular & Metabolic Sciences in Lerner Research Institute and co-section head of Preventive Cardiology at Cleveland Clinic, in a statement. “Cardiovascular disease builds over time, and heart disease is the leading cause of death globally. We need to make sure the foods we eat aren’t hidden contributors.”

According to the WHO, this new recommendation was “conditional” since this identified link between sweeteners and disease outcomes might be influenced by more complex patterns of sweetener use and other patterns by the study participants.

In response, an industry group representing makers of non-sugar substitutes called the  International Sweeteners Association told CNN, “it is a disservice to not recognise the public health benefits of low/no calorie sweeteners and is disappointed that the WHO’s conclusions are largely based on low certainty evidence from observational studies, which are at high risk of reverse causality.”

The post Sugar substitutes won’t help you lose weight appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

An experimental “peanut patch” is showing some promise for toddlers who are highly allergic to peanuts. The patch, called Viaskin, was tested on children ages one to three for a late-stage trial, and the results show that the patch helped children whose bodies could not tolerate even a small piece of peanuts safely eat a few. The findings were published May 10 in The New England Journal of Medicine.

[Related: Feeding Peanuts To High-Risk Infants Could Prevent Allergy Development.]

Peanut allergies are a common and dangerous food allergy that affects about 2.5 percent of children in the United States. In children with allergies, their immune system overreacts to peanut-containing foods, which triggers everything from hives, to wheezing, to airway obstruction that can lead children hospitalized or worse. About 20 percent of these children will outgrow the allergy over time, but the majority must avoid peanuts for the rest of their lives. Additionally, they must carry rescue medication in the form of an injectable epinephrine divide like an EpiPen to prevent a severe allergic reaction if peanuts are accidentally eaten.

Peanut products and traces of peanuts can be found in a surprising number of foods: from candies to dipping sauces to ice cream. There is currently no cure for such an allergy. The only treatment is a peanut powder that protects against a severe reaction in children over 4 years-old. First approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2020, the “oral immunotherapy” called Palforzia is consumed daily by children ages four to 17 to keep up their protection. It is now being tested in children under age four. 

France’s DBV Technologies, makers of the new patch, is pursuing this skin-based immunotherapy treatment as an alternative way to desensitize the body and on younger children. 

The trial of this new patch included 362 toddlers from eight countries. 244 of them were randomly assigned to receive the Viaskin patch. The patch contains 250 micrograms of peanut protein which is the equivalent of roughly 1/1000th of one peanut. 118 children received a placebo patch. They wore the patches every day for a year before undergoing screening.

After one year, two-thirds of the children who used the patch and one-third of the placebo group met the trial’s primary endpoint. The participants with a less sensitive peanut allergy could safely tolerate the peanut protein equivalent of eating three or four peanuts. Children who were more sensitive to peanut proteins could tolerate the equivalent of consuming one peanut.

If more patch testing works out, “this would fill a huge unmet need,” Matthew Greenhawt, an allergist at Children’s Hospital Colorado who helped lead the study told the Associated Press. 

[Related: I hardly ever use my Nima allergen sensor. I’m still glad I bought it.]

Almost all of the participants did have some adverse events, most commonly reactions at the application site like swelling, itching, and redness. Serious events were reported in 21 children who had the Viaskin patch and three that were in the placebo group. Anaphylaxis–a very dangerous allergic reaction–was reported in 7.8 percent of the patch recipients and 3.4 percent of the placebo group. The parents of eight participants pulled their children from the study due to the adverse events. 

The study does have several limitations including that young children with a history of severe allergic reactions were excluded due to safety concerns. Additionally, there was a lack of racial diversity among the study’s participants.

“Peanut allergy can be very substantially reduced if peanut is introduced into the diet as early as 4 to 6 months of age,” Alkis Togias of the Division of Allergy, Immunology and Transplantation at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases wrote in an editorial published alongside the study. “Toddlers are of particular interest since their immune systems have plasticity that can theoretically allow for higher efficacy and longer-lasting benefits from allergen immunotherapy after therapy is discontinued.”

Togias also cited that skin patches may be less protective, but have a better safety profile compared to an oral medication, but still said that the findings, “are very good news for toddlers and their families as the next step toward a future with more treatments for food allergies.”

The post A peanut allergy patch is making headway in trials with toddlers appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Behold the microscopic power of cheese. The dairy product has been a dietary staple for generations, but it is also helping microbiologists better understand nature’s microbiomes. In a study published May 10 in the journal mBio, a team of researchers used cheese rinds to demonstrate how fungal antibiotics can influence how microbiomes develop. 

[Related: Beehives are the honeypot for a city’s microbial secrets.]

Metabolites produced by fungi can improve human health. Some secrete penicillin, which is then purified and used as an antibiotic. For this study, scientists set out to better understand how fungi interact with the microbes living alongside them in microbial communities, with a particular focus on how fungi and bacteria’s relationship.

“My lab is interested in how fungi shape the diversity of microbial communities where they live. Fungi are widespread in many microbial ecosystems, from soils to our own bodies, but we know much less about their diversity and roles in microbiomes compared to more widely studied bacteria,” co-author and Tufts University microbiologist Benjamin Wolfe said in a statement. “To study the ecology of fungi and their interactions with bacteria, we use cheese rinds as a model microbial ecosystem to understand these basic biology questions.

Cheese rinds themselves are microbial communities that form on the surfaces of naturally aged cheeses like brie, taleggio, and some types of cheddar. As the cheeses age, fuzzy and sometimes sticky layers of microbes form on the surfaces of the cheese. The microbes slowly decompose as the cheeses curd and they grow on the surface to create the aromas and colors that give the cheese in the fancy part of the grocery store their more unique properties. 

Wolfe and his team began by investigating a cheesemaker’s problem with mold spreading on the surface of the cheeses and disrupting the normal development of the rind. This causes the cheese to look like the rinds were disappearing as the mold invaded their cheese cave. They collaborated with microbiologist Nancy Keller’s lab at the University of Wisconsin to find out what this mold was doing to the rind microbes and what chemicals the mold may be producing that disrupted the rind. 

They researchers first deleted a gene (laeA) in the Penicillium mold that can control the expression of chemicals that fungi can secrete into their environment. These compounds are called specialized or secondary metabolites. 

“We know that many fungi can produce metabolites that are antibiotics because we have used these as drugs for humans, but we know surprisingly little about how fungal antibiotics work in nature,” said Wolfe. “Do fungi actually use these compounds to kill other microbes? How do these antibiotics produced by fungi affect the development of bacterial communities? We added our normal and our laeA-deleted Penicillium to a community of cheese rind bacteria to see whether deleting laeA caused changes in how the community of bacteria developed.” 

[Related: You might be overusing hand sanitizer.]

When laeA was deleted, most of the antibacterial activity of the Penicillium mold was lost. This discovery helped the team narrow down specific regions of the fungal genome that could produce antibacterial compounds. They narrowed it down to one class of compounds called pseurotins. The metabolites are produced by multiple types of fungi and that can modulate the immune system, kill insects, and inhibit bacteria. 

The study showed that pseurotins can also control how bacterial communities living with that fungi grow and develop. The pseurotins are strongly antibacterial, which means they inhibit some of the bacteria found in artisanal cheeses including Staphylococcus, Brevibacterium, Brachybacterium, and Psychrobacter. This process caused a shift in the cheese rind microbiome’s composition.

It also shows that the antibiotics secreted by fungi can control how microbiomes develop, since the metabolites are in other ecosystems, including the human human microbiome and soil ecosystems. The team expects that these mechanisms of fungal-bacterial interactions are likely very widespread. 

“Our results suggest that some pesky mold species in artisan cheeses may disrupt normal cheese development by deploying antibiotics,” said Wolfe. “These findings allow us to work with cheesemakers to identify which molds are the bad ones and how to manage them in their cheese caves. It also helps us appreciate that every time we eat artisan cheese, we are consuming the metabolites that microbes use to compete and cooperate in communities.”

The post A hunk of cheese is a perfect playground for fungal antibiotics appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

There’s been a real uptick in gluten-free labels at the grocery store, including on drinks and snacks you know shouldn’t have any gluten to begin with. But if you’ve made fun of gluten-free oats, you might want to take back that joke.

Oats are naturally gluten-free, but research suggests the vast majority of the bags you see in supermarket aisles have high enough levels to poison someone with celiac disease. Not many people have any idea why this is, but now that we’re squeezing milk out of our oats, it might pay to know a little more about this mysterious association between oats and gluten.

1. Grains that naturally have it (i.e. wheat, barley, and rye), plus anything derived from those grains that’s not specifically processed to remove the gluten (some food in Europe is sold with gluten-free wheat starch, for instance, which has the gluten taken out).
2. Foods that shouldn’t have gluten, but end up contaminated at some point in their production.

[Related: Is corn a fruit, vegetable, or grain?]

Oats fall into the second category, mostly because they’re often grown alongside or in rotation with wheat, then processed on machinery shared with gluten-containing grains. For the vast majority of farmers, this isn’t a problem. If a few wheat seeds (or rye or barley seeds) get into your oats, they won’t have a huge impact on the final product’s taste or texture, especially if that lot is destined to become flour. This can occur with oat-derived food items as well, including rolled oats, instant oatmeal, and oat milk, meaning they aren’t always gluten-free.

Can gluten in oats trigger an allergy?

It’s easy to feel like people are just being overly dramatic about gluten contamination. What’s one bit of barley in a whole field of oats?

But if you have celiac disease, that one little gluten-containing seed matters a lot. The limit to call something “gluten-free” in the US is 20 parts per million (ppm) of gluten to total product. That means for every million oat granules, you have to have less than 20 gluten-containing grains.

That’s why studies analyzing the gluten in standard commercial oats have consistently found they’re not safe for celiacs. One 2022 study focused on oat flour, rolled oats, and instant oats with gluten-free labels found contamination in up to 40 percent of the samples. Another looking specifically at unlabeled Canadian oats (many of which make their way to the US), found gluten in 88 percent of the 133 samples tested. That means if you’re really sensitive to gluten or you have celiac disease, you can’t trust any oats, even if it has the “gluten-free” branding.

Are there any real gluten-free oats?

To eliminate those gluten-containing seeds, producers either have to sort them out or grow the oats in their own separate field, and in both cases, the rest of the oat processing has to be done on dedicated machines in buildings that never see any glutinous grains. That means most of the oats produced in America have some gluten in them—it’s just too time-consuming and expensive for most growers to bother.

More manufacturers have started producing gluten-free oats, but there’s a lot of discussion within the celiac community about just how safe each of the two methods are. Most of the large manufacturers, like Bob’s Red Mill and General Mills, use a mechanical (also called optical) sorting method to physically remove contaminants from the oat supply. Some people with celiac argue that’s not good enough because the sorting simply isn’t sufficiently thorough.

[Related: These are the most common allergies (and the deadliest)]

You’ve probably never seen a wheat seed—it’s almost always processed into flour first—but they look a lot like oats, as do rye and barley seeds. That makes them very challenging to sift out using a machine. Manufacturers get their gluten-free certification by analyzing roughly 20 samples, then averaging the results together, but that can mean that some lots have gluten above the 20 ppm mark. As long as the average is low enough, the manufacturer still passes the test.

That said, lots of manufacturers may not have that issue—all of their samples may be under the limit. You just can’t know that for sure. Many celiacs eat gluten-free oats with no problems, but if you’re worried about it, you can choose to only eat oats that have been produced under the purity protocol, which involves growing them entirely separately from any grains containing gluten (you can see a list of those manufacturers on the independent, consumer-focused Gluten Free Watchdog website). It’s all a matter of just how safe you want to play it.

Oats are a surprisingly complicated issue, but if you can work them into your diet they’re an excellent source of whole grain fiber—and everyone could use a little more of that.

This post has been updated. It was originally published on December 10, 2019.

The post How to tell if your oats really are gluten-free appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

General Mills has voluntarily recalled select bags of Gold Medal flour due to possible salmonella contamination. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced the recall on April 28 and covers two, five, and 10 pound bags of Gold Medal bleached and unbleached all-purpose flour with a “better if used by” date of March 27, 2024, or March 28, 2024. 

[Related: How do you track a salmonella outbreak? A data journalist followed the DNA trail to slaughterhouses.]

Other types of Gold Medal flour are not affected by the recall. Still, General Mills advised consumers to check their pantries and throw out any flour covered in the recall. The current recall did not link the flour to any reports of illness, but salmonella was detected in a sample from the five pound product.  

“We are continuing to educate consumers that flour is not a ‘ready to eat’ ingredient. Anything made with flour must be cooked or baked before eating,” General Mills spokesperson Mollie Wulff said in a statement to CNN. 

While the recall has not linked General Mills flour to any reports of illness, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has been investigating an 11-state salmonella outbreak. The majority of the 13 individuals sickened had reported eating raw batter or dough made with flour before getting sick. While most people infected recover, the most recent outbreak has resulted in three hospitalizations.

Salmonella is a bacterium that is found in the intestinal tracts of animals, and can be transferred to humans if animal feces enters into the food supply. It affects 1.35 million people each year, according to the CDC. Some symptoms of a salmonella infection include fever, stomach cramps, and diarrhea that can start within days of consuming the bacteria. Most people will recover with proper treatment, but consumers should seek medical treatment immediately if severe and persistent symptoms occur or there are signs of dehydration. Children under the age of five, those with weakened immune systems, and the elderly are more likely to have severe infections.

[Related: A salmonella outbreak has hit 37 states, and onions are to blame.]

According to both the FDA and CDC, consumers should not eat any raw products made with flour. Salmonella bacteria is killed by heat through baking, frying, sautéing, or boiling products that are made with flour, and people can get sick when eating food that constrain raw flour. Raw dough used in crafts homemade modeling dough can also pose the same risk. 

To prevent illness, both agencies recommend thoroughly cleaning all surfaces, hands, and utensils with warm soapy water after contact with uncooked flour or dough. People with pets should be particularly mindful of avoiding cross contamination by cleaning out bowls and feeders frequently. 

The post Check your pantry for two kinds of potentially contaminated flour appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Beer is more than one of humanity’s most beloved beverages—it’s also one of its oldest. Recent archaeological discoveries date it back 13,000 years ago in the eastern Mediterranean. It was once considered so sacred that only women could brew it–until witchcraft accusations stopped that in its tracks. 

[Related: Ancient poop proves that humans have always loved beer and cheese.]

The origins of our favorite types of beers are also starting to come into focus with a fun combination of history and science. A study published April 27 in the journal FEMS Yeast Research reveals a possible origin story for lager beer, a light type of beer produced by bottom-fermenting yeast. It can be pale, dark, or amber in color and pairs well with shellfish, grilled pork, and spicy foods among others.

The research team used historical records, in tandem with evolution and genomics research, and believe that lager likely originated at the court brewery–or Hofbräuhaus–of Maximilian I, the elector of Bavaria.

Lager surpassed ale as the most common beer produced around the turn of the 20th century and over 150 billion liters of lager beer are sold annually around the world. However, the shift from ale to lager started centuries before when a new yeast species Saccharomyces pastorianus or “lager yeast,” popped up in Germany around the end of the Middle Ages. The new yeast was a hybrid species that was the product of mating of top-fermenting ale yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae and the cold-tolerant Saccharomyces eubayanus around the beginning of the 17th century. 

“Lager is a beer brewed at low temperatures using yeast that are described as bottom-fermenting,” study author and University of Cork microbiologist John Morrissey wrote in The Conversation. “Yeast are single-celled fungi used in brewing to convert maltose to alcohol and carbon dioxide, giving beer its booziness and fizz. They are either top- or bottom-fermenting.”

S. pastorianus is a bottom-fermenting lager yeast, and its origins have been “shrouded in mystery and controversy,” according to Morrissey. The assumption was that the hybrid yeast arose when traditional ale fermentation became contaminated with wild yeasts. However, the team on this study doubted this historic assumption, and used detailed analysis of Central European historical brewing records to dig in more. They discovered that “lager-style” bottom fermentation was actually happening in Bavaria 200 years before the hybrid S. pastorianus yeast was born.

The team believes that it was actually the top-fermenting ale yeast S. cerevisiae that contaminated a batch of beer brewed with the cold-tolerant S. eubayanus. They believe that the source of the contaminating yeast was a wheat brewery in the small Bavarian town of Schwarzach.

[Related: The key to tastier beer might be mutant yeast—with notes of banana.]

“Bottom fermentation originated in northern Bavaria. Not only was it common practice in this part of Germany, but the Bavarian Reinheitsgebot brewing regulations of 1516 only permitted bottom fermentation. Thus, from at least the 16th century onwards, Bavarian brown beer was produced by mixtures of different bottom-fermenting yeast species known as stellhefen,” wrote Morrissey.

However, in neighboring Bohemia, excellent wheat beer made with S. cerevisiae was made in huge quantities and imported into Bavaria. To limit the blow to the economy from these imports, Bavarian ruler Wilhelm IV gave Baron Hans VI von Degenberg a special privilege to brew and sell wheat beer in the border regions to Bohemia in 1548.

Maximilian I eventually took power in 1602, and he seized the wheat beer privilege himself and took over the von Degenbergs’ Schwarzach breweries. The team believes that it was in October 1602 that the yeast from the wheat brewery was brought to the court brewery in Munich where the hybridization took place and lager yeast S. pastorianus was born.

“This theory is consistent with published genetic evidence showing that the S. cerevisiae parent of S. pastorianus was closer to ones used to brew wheat beer than strains used for barley-based ale,” wrote Morrissey.

The post Inventing lager was a huge mistake appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Roughly 55,000 adult consumers in the United States  take popular chewy melatonin gummies to promote better sleep. But they may be getting a little more of the hormone than the label indicates. A study published April 25 as a letter in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) found that 88 percent of tested supplements were mislabeled.

The study follows a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) report from last year about an alarming surge of excessive pediatric infestations of melatonin over the past 10 years.

[Related: Yes, you can overdose on melatonin. Here’s how to use the sleep supplements safely.]

Melatonin is a hormone naturally produced deep within the brain in the pineal gland. It  is released into the bloodstream to regulate the body’s natural sleep cycles. Melatonin is considered a drug in some countries in the European Union, Japan, Canada, and the United Kingdom, making it only available through a prescription. The US Food and Drug Administration considers melatonin a dietary supplement, but manufacturers are not required to receive FDA approval or provide safety data on melatonin products.

For this study, a team of researchers from Cambridge Health Alliance in Massachusetts and the University of Mississippi tested 25 different supplements. According to the authors, the team selected the first 25 gummy melatonin products that displayed on the National Institutes of Health database for this study. The team dissolved the gummies and then measured the quantity of melatonin, cannabidiol (CBD), and other components in the supplements.

Most of the products tested had 20, 30, or 50 percent more melatonin than the quantity listed on the label. Four has less amounts of the hormone than promised, including one without any detectable levels of melatonin. 

Twenty-two were “inaccurately labeled,” meaning they contained 10 percent more or less than the amount of melatonin on the label. 

Five products listed CBD as an ingredient, but they all had slightly higher levels of CBD than indicated on the label. According to the FDA, “it is currently illegal to market CBD by adding it to a food or labeling it as a dietary supplement.”

[Related: The science behind our circadian rhythms, and why time changes mess them up.]

“One product contained 347 percent more melatonin than what was actually listed on the label of the gummies,” study co-author and professor of medicine at the Cambridge Health Alliance Pieter Cohen told CNN.

In response to the JAMA letter, Steve Mister, the president and chief executive of the Council for Responsible Nutrition, told The Washington Post that supplement companies are required to have “at least 100 percent of labeled dosage” in their products. “It’s not uncommon for companies to put in a little extra,” he added. “So, for instance, a melatonin product that’s labeled as 3 milligrams might put in 4 milligrams.” 

Melatonin was the most cited substance in calls about children to US poison control centers in 2020. Drowsiness, headaches, agitation, and increased bed-wetting or urination in the evening hours are all potential side effects of melatonin use in children. 

“It’s important, especially in kids, not to use melatonin until you’ve spoken with your pediatrician or your sleep doctor,” M. Adeel Rishi, a pulmonology, sleep medicine, and critical care specialist in Indiana and vice chair of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine Public Safety Committee, told PopSci last July. “The dose recommended in children is significantly lower than what is recommended in adults, and if you take too much of anything you have an overdose. Although it’s come to attention really in the last couple of years, we know that cases of melatonin among children have been on an upswing even before the pandemic.”

Other pediatric sleep experts stress the importance of good sleep hygiene and habits before starting melatonin. The new study’s letter also included a warning to parents that giving the gummies to children could result “in ingestion of unpredictable quantities” of melatonin.

The post That melatonin gummy might be stronger than you need appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Today is a very special holiday where a skunky smell permeates the air. If you’re celebrating 4/20, Popular Science has the perfect lineup of dope science stories to make you everyone’s favorite bud. Don’t puff puff pass on this one!

Essential cannabis accessories

First things first, everyone needs some cannabis supplies before lighting up. But with so many twists on glassware and other options, how do you decide? From vaporizers to grinders to pen batteries, PopSci’s roundup of essential cannabis accessories will walk you through the choices.

A step-by-step guide to rolling a joint

Rolling a joint can’t be that hard, right? Wrong. Thankfully, in honor of 4/20, our DIY step-by-step guide will explain both the art and the science of rolling a joint, with advice straight from some of New York City’s expert budtenders. It’s the perfect refresher for veterans and crash course for newbies, complete with photos, detailed instructions, and material recommendations.

Can CBD help you chill? Here’s what we know so far.

CBD, THC’s sister molecule, has been working its way into various products as part of a budding industry. CBD is legal in more US states than cannabis, and can be added to almost any product as long as it has less than 0.3 percent THC. It’s a great alternative for those looking for stress relief, or don’t want the psychoactive effects of cannabis itself. Still have some questions about CBD? It’s not a panacea, but it may be worth trying out.

Is growing weed sustainable? The answer is complicated.

Using cannabis products to ease climate anxiety might be a Catch-22. Researchers say it’s hard to measure the environmental impact of today’s celebrated plant: Grow operations across the US take up a lot of water, land, and energy. Here’s what we know about the sustainability of cannabis.

Can you overdose on weed?

All substances have their risks, what about weed? Well, thankfully its not possible to overdose in the traditional sense, but overdoing it does pose some safety threats. Before you celebrate 4/20, listen to this Ask Us Anything podcast on the side effects of weed to gain some insights on responsible consumption.

The tasty chemicals flavoring the edible cannabis boom

Cannabis may have a distinctive smell, but a little-known aspect to users and non-users alike is that each strain has a special chemical composition. Like wine with its various aromas (such as floral, fruity, or earthy) different strains of cannabis possess a signature scent and taste. What makes them unique? Terpenes, or “terps,” are aromatic compounds found in many herbs and flowers. There are hundreds of known kinds that yield diverse flavors and effects. PopSci reported a comprehensive overview on the science of terpenes, ending with a list of the most buyable varieties.

Is marijuana a performance-enhancing drug? The best evidence says no.

Unfortunately for many athletes, cannabis use still falls on the list of prohibited substances. These regulations are in place to prevent the use of performance-enhancing drugs and ensure fair competition, but does cannabis really belong on the same list as steroids? Learn why the scientific reasoning behind cannabis regulations in sports might be lacking.

Cannabis gets its high-inducing power from ancient viruses

The next time a friend thanks a higher power for cannabis, remind them to appreciate viruses for their genetic contributions. (At the very least, it was a joint effort.) The psychoactive and medicinal effects of cannabis probably evolved from ancient viruses Mapping the genome of the plant posed a challenge to researchers as an illicit substance, but as it slowly became legal in different states over the past two decades, they dove deep into its background. What better time than 4/20 to learn the evolutionary history of cannabis.

Why German scientists got cows stoned

Nobody wants animals to get high on our supply, but these German scientists did it on purpose with cows. Not to laugh at the animals’ “pronounced tongue play,” as researchers described: They wanted to test if leftover organic matter from the hemp industry could be fed to livestock, reducing waste and curbing methane emissions from regular hay and soy. The German study led to some especially silly bovine behavior and THC-spiked milk.

Does CBD show up on a drug test?

Using cannabis products might lead to a positive drug test that could cost you a job or other opportunities. For those that want the stress-reducing effects of cannabis, but have to keep off the grass, consider quality products with this CBD drug test and product guide.

The post On 420, learn more about weed with these carefully cultivated science stories appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

In the United States, there are over 6,500 rural and urban areas where residents have limited access to stores that sell affordable, nutritious food. Living in these places, sometimes dubbed “food deserts”, can lead to poor diet and associated health risks. However, unlike deserts, the lack of access to healthy food in communities does not occur naturally. They developed over time as a result of racially discriminatory policies and systematic disinvestment.

Given the increase in food insecurity in urban areas, some cities have begun experiments with edible landscapes to address food insecurity. By working together to grow a “food forest,” community members can increase their access to local food sources.

Food forests, or edible forest gardens, are a type of agroforestry system that “mimic the structure and function of a natural forest ecosystem, but are designed to produce food, medicine, fiber, and other products for human use,” says Mikaela Schmitt-Harsh, an associate professor at James Madison University whose research focuses on the social-ecological dynamics of urban forests. 

[Related: How to eat sustainably without sacrificing your favorite foods.]

The first public food forest in the US—the Dr. George Washington Carver Edible Park in North Carolina—opened in 1997. As of 2018, there are more than 70 food forests in public spaces across the country.

Schmitt-Harsh says different layers of vegetation—like trees, shrubs, herbs, and ground covers—all work together to “create a sustainable and diverse food production system.” For example, a food forest could be composed of tall trees like chestnut or walnut as the canopy layer and apple or persimmon trees as the sub-canopy layer. Beneath them can lie currant bushes like elderberry or spicebush, along with edible herbs and mushrooms. Ground cover, medical roots, and climbing plants are also included. “You can swap out any of these selections for your favorite nut trees, fruit crops, and herbs to make your own system,” says Schmitt-Harsh.

Food forests may be grown on private properties, vacant lots, parks, or other open spaces in otherwise urban environments. This helps residents by forming a food production system within the community. The forests, which are typically at least 1/8 of an acre, can be critical in areas where local, fresh foods are inaccessible or unaffordable, says Sheila K. Schueller, ecosystem science and management lecturer at the University of Michigan.

Schueller says food forests don’t just give people access to fresh and nutritious fruits, nuts, and produce, but also empower neighborhoods by increasing food security and sovereignty and the sense of community. Moreover, connecting people with the source of their food may raise awareness about “the benefits of sustainable forms of agriculture and the value of local in-season foods over distantly-sourced or unsustainably-grown foods,” she adds.

Climate change mitigation and adaptation

The ecologically diverse system of food forests benefits the environment in so many ways, says Schueller. For instance, the structural complexity of the different layers can attract perching and nesting birds, while the variety of blooms expands the habitat of pollinators. Deeper root systems also improve water retention. Lastly, the vegetation provides shade and improves temperature regulation, which is ideal in hot cities or arid climates. All of these improve resilience in the face of changing climates and extreme weather events, says Schueller.

[Related: Paleo and keto diets aren’t great for you or the planet, study says.]

Food forests also help mitigate climate change by sequestering carbon from the atmosphere.

Since they have trees, shrubs, and perennial plants, Schueller says food forests can store more carbon in their biomass and the soil compared to other food systems or land use such as annually tilled crops or lawns.

“This increased vertical layering of plants means that more carbon is sequestered per area, and especially the woody vegetation stores more carbon long term,” she adds. “Food forests are not annually tilled like most crops and have deep root systems, so they can store a lot of carbon in the soil and below-ground vegetation.”

Having an abundance of locally-sourced foods in the community minimizes greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as well, particularly those caused by transportation across the food chain. A 2021 Nature Food study previously estimated that food transportation contributed around 4.8 percent of the GHG emissions of the global food system, but newer research suggests it accounts for about 19 percent instead. In general, Schmitt-Harsh says food forests can reduce the food miles traveled, or the distance from where the food was grown to where it’s eaten.

The interest and advocacy for food forests have grown alongside other local food movements, like farmers’ markets and community-supported agriculture (CSA) programs. They are all experiencing an upward trend in urban and suburban landscapes as communities explore ways to bring food production closer to home, says Schmitt-Harsh. 

A 2017 Public Health Nutrition study on low-income adults’ perceptions of farmers’ markets and CSA programs found that residents of urban, affordable housing communities are motivated to eat healthily, but they cannot afford them. Accepting benefits like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) would increase their access to healthy foods and reduce health risks.

“Some of the most successful community food forests are those that embrace a grassroots approach and engage multiple stakeholders in promoting community building and food literacy,” says Schmitt-Harsh. 
If you want to grow a food forest in your area, try getting in touch with potential stakeholders like local governments, community-based groups, academic institutions, and non-profit organizations that can mobilize community members to participate in civic activities. Who knows, there might be an organization near you already.

The post Food forests can bring climate resilience, better health, and tasty produce to city residents appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

One of the perks of living in a semi-rural area is the availability of fresh eggs. At least four people I know have hens roaming their yards, so my wife and I get all the eggs we can use, and then some. They end up in a wooden egg holder that sits right out on the counter.

That’s right, freshly-laid eggs don’t have to be refrigerated and can be kept at room temperature for weeks. Indeed, in many places around the world, eggs typically aren’t refrigerated at all. In the US, though, both the Federal Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend always refrigerating eggs. However, that’s not directly because of the eggs themselves—it’s to prevent bacterial illnesses, specifically salmonella.

Freshly laid eggs have a natural defense against bacteria: a protective protein coating called the cuticle, or “bloom,” says Jacob R. Tuell, assistant professor of animal science and food science at Northwest Missouri State University. The bloom seals up those pores, preventing bacteria from sneaking inside. Research has shown that the cuticle is effective at keeping salmonella at bay for about three to four days after laying, he explains. After that, its effectiveness begins to deteriorate. In the US, commercially produced eggs are washed to eliminate any possible salmonella, but that washing process also removes the protective bloom. This, in turn, speeds up the spoiling process and necessitates refrigeration. Elsewhere, eggs often aren’t washed before being sold, so the bloom remains in place, sealing out any bacteria. In short: if you bought your eggs at a store, are unsure how fresh they are, or don’t know if they’ve been washed, put them in the fridge.

However, flocks raised in US backyards don’t have the same washing requirements, Trager says. “If you keep the coop clean and have good bedding, there’s really no reason to refrigerate or wash the eggs.” As long as the bloom remains intact, eggs can last for weeks at room temperature without spoiling, he explains.

And of course, there’s no reason you can’t store fresh eggs in the refrigerator if that makes you more comfortable, washed or unwashed. Once they go in, though, they have to stay there. However, Trager cautions against storing washed eggs on a wooden tray. Wood is too porous to be properly sterilized and may transfer contaminants through the pores of the bloom-less eggs, he explains. So if you’re planning to make this wooden egg tray, only use it for fresh, unwashed eggs.

Warning: DIY projects can be dangerous, even for the most experienced makers. Before proceeding with this or any other project on our site, ensure you have all necessary safety gear and know how to use it properly. At minimum, that may include safety glasses, a face mask, and/or ear protection. If you’re using power tools, you must know how to use them safely and correctly. If you do not, or are otherwise uncomfortable with anything described here, don’t attempt this project.

How to build a wooden egg holder

Stats

• Time: 1 to 2 hours
• Material cost: $5 to $20
• Difficulty: easy

Materials

• A 2-foot-long, 1-by-4-inch board (any kind of wood you like)
• Wood glue
• (Optional) ¼-inch dowel

Tools

• Miter saw
• Table saw
• Jointer
• Planer
• Speed square
• Tape measure
• Orbital sander
• Sanding discs (120-, 150-, and 220-grit)
• Drill press (or drill)
• Clamps
• ⅛-inch drill bit
• 1 ¼-inch Forstner bit
• (Optional) router
• (Optional) chamfer router bit
• (Optional) ¼-inch drill bit
• (Optional) chisel

Instructions

1. Mill your lumber to size. This is one of those projects where having flat, square boards will make your life easier. We have a comprehensive guide to milling lumber, but it’s a straightforward process. Start by cutting the pieces of the egg holder to rough length on your miter saw: one board of 13 inches and two of about 5 inches each. Then run them over your jointer to flatten one face, and again to flatten and square one edge. 

Next, take them to your planer to flatten the remaining face, and trim them down to final width and length on your table saw. When you’re done, you should have three boards, all between ½ and ¾ inches thick: 

• 1 (12½-by-4-inch) board
• 2 (5–by-4-inch) boards

If you purchased pre-milled, square wood, you may be able to skip this step. But double-check that everything actually is flat and square.

2. Measure and mark the egg hole locations on the longest board. Before measuring the centers of the 12 holes on this board, use a square to draw a line across what will be the top of your egg holder, parallel to the end of the board and a quarter-inch in. This represents the depth of the dado where this piece of wood will sit inside the two shorter boards—we’ll worry about cutting that slot in Step 6. The distance between those two lines should be exactly 12 inches.  

Using your square and a tape measure or ruler, draw lines 1 inch, 3 inches, and 5 inches from those dado lines, moving toward the center of the board. Then make two marks on each of these new lines, 1 inch in from the long edges of the board. Those 12 intersections are where the centers of the egg holes belong.

3. Drill pilot holes in the board. Anytime you use a Forstner bit to drill all the way through a board, start with some pilot holes. Forstner bits are known to blow out or chip wood as they exit, so the best practice is to drill halfway through from the top, then turn the board over and drill the rest from the bottom to prevent tear-out. The easiest way to line those two cuts up is with a pilot hole.

If you have a drill press, drill the 12 small holes with that, using a ⅛-inch bit, or whatever size in that range you have. If you use a hand drill, make sure it’s straight up and down. You can use a speed square as a visual reference, or you can make a quick drill guide to keep the hole perpendicular to the face. If the drill bit wanders or leans, the two Forstner holes may not line up properly, and you’ll have to do a lot of sanding to fix it. No one wants to do any more sanding than they need to.

4. Drill the full holes. Change the ⅛-inch bit out for the 1 ¼-inch Forstner bit. Again, a drill press is best for this cut, but a handheld drill can do the job if you’re careful and use a jig for alignment. Center the bit in a pilot hole, and start to drill. Stop when you get just past halfway. Drill all the holes halfway through on one face of the board, then flip it over and drill from the other side.

5. (Optional) Chamfer the edges of the holes. To help the eggs sit better and reduce the chances that they’ll crack on sharp edges, chamfer the top edges of each hole. The easiest way to do this is with a router and a chamfering bit. I used a router table to make this cut, but if you don’t have access to one, you can use a palm router. Make sure to clamp your board securely to the work bench if you do. 

• Note: If you don’t chamfer the hole edges, at least thoroughly round them over with sandpaper.

6. Cut dado slots into the legs. There are many ways to cut dado slots. My preferred method, and the one accessible to most people, is on the table saw with a crosscut sled. If you have a flat-cut table saw blade, like one that comes with a dado stack, use that, but it’s fine if you just have a normal blade. You can use a full dado stack to make this cut faster, but I wasn’t comfortable using mine on such a small board so I made multiple passes with a single blade.

[Related: How to refinish a scratched wooden cutting board]

Mark a line ¾ of an inch from the bottom of the leg, then make another line above it so the distance between the two is the thickness of the tray board. Set the height of your blade to a quarter-inch, and start removing the material between those lines by making one cut on your crosscut sled. Keep moving the leg over about ⅛-inch to make additional cuts. Repeat this as many times as you need to in order for the tray to fit in the slot. 

If you use a standard blade for this, you’ll probably wind up with little wedges on the bottom of the slot. Trim those flat with a chisel.

7. (Optional) Cut curves on the corners of the legs. This is purely for aesthetics, but I love the way it looks. Draw a small arc at each corner of every leg board. You can use any cylindrical object to trace these—I used a spray paint bottle cap. Then remove the wood outside of that arc. I cut mine first with a band saw, then rounded it over with a sander, but a jig saw or coping saw will work as well. You can even just jump right to the sander, though that will take a bit longer.

8. (Optional) Add dowels for stacking. If you’re planning to make more than one tray, you may want to consider stacking them. Of course, you can place one on top of the other, but there’s always the risk that it will slide off and splatter your eggs. To give it some support, drill a ¼-inch hole in the top and bottom centers of the legs. Insert a dowel in the top of the bottom tray legs, and then you can slide the top tray onto that dowel, locking it into place. Round over the ends of the dowels with 120-grit sandpaper to make them easier to slide in and out. 

9. Sand everything to 220-grit. You’ve heard me say it before—sanding is the difference between a good product and a great product. Sand all of the pieces with an orbital sander, working through the grits—start with 120 and finish with 220. The hard part of this build is sanding the holes and chamfers, if you made them. You can use your fingers to get inside everything, or you can use a piece of sandpaper wrapped around a dowel. Of course, if you have a spindle sander, use that and save your fingers.

• Pro tip: If you use a dowel, you can open the chuck of your power drill all the way, stick the dowel in, and tighten it up. Then you can wrap the dowel in sandpaper and use the drill to spin it quickly inside the holes.

Before you finish sanding, slightly round over all sharp edges with 220-grit sandpaper to keep them from splintering or breaking later. 

The post Go ahead, leave your fresh eggs on the counter in this handmade wooden tray appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Best vegan taco meat		Gardein Gluten-Free Ultimate Plant-Based Beefless Ground Crumbles		SEE IT	This vegan and kosher ground meat substitute has all of the flavor and texture, with none of the meat.
Best McNuggets stand-in		SIMULATE chicken NUGGS		SEE IT	These chicken nugget alternatives have even more protein than their meat-based rival.
Best vegetarian meat		MorningStar Farms Veggie Breakfast Meatless Bacon Strips		SEE IT	Your BLT and morning breakfast spread can have all the flavor, with none of the meat.

Whether you’re working hard to stick with your first Veganuary or decades into a conscious, conscientious lifestyle journey, varying up the menu is equally important. Eating a diet higher in fruits, vegetables, and other meat alternatives is healthier for your body and can also be healthier for the planet. However, adapting your diet and exciting the palate can be challenging if you just dump some tofu or tempeh out of the package and into an otherwise familiar dish thinking it will be anything but bland. So, whether you are trying out Meatless Mondays, replacing several meals a week, or prepping to make a total shift to vegetarianism or veganism, plant-based “meats” will help ease the transition. You can often follow the same recipes you enjoy; just swap out the beef, pork, or chicken for better-than-you-would-think fake meats and/or better-for-you protein sources. Our picks for the best meat alternatives will help you navigate and appreciate the options, allowing you to replicate comfort foods quickly and easily.

• Best McNuggets stand-in: SIMULATE chicken NUGGS
• Best “chicken” sandwich: VFC Chick*n Fillets
• Best vegan taco meat: Gardein Beefless Ground Crumbles
• Best for stir-frying and salads: Hodo Tofu
• Best “steak” and “cutlets”: Meati
• Best meatless meat burger: Beyond Burger
• Best for wraps and grain bowls: Afia Falafel
• Best vegetarian meat: MorningStar Farms Veggie Bacon Strips
• Best vegan meat substitutes: Upton’s Naturals Jackfruit  
• Best plant-based sauce/dressing/marinade: Haven’s Kitchen

How we chose the best meat alternatives

To get to the meat of this matter, we relied primarily on personal experience. There are multiple vegetarians on the PopSci staff, but also grillmasters, so we gathered opinions from those who both do and do not eat meat regularly to learn what they considered most satisfying as a 1:1 swap and what stood out as its own thing. After polling peers, we looked at real-world impressions and considered critical takes to narrow our list of the most satisfying, least challenging meat alternatives.

The best meat alternatives: Reviews & Recommendations

Meat alternatives use advances in nutritional science to offer great taste and texture that takes familiar forms. While different brands use various ingredients, common ways to make fake meat are wheat protein, soy protein, wheat gluten, pea proteins, grains, potato starch, and beans reformed to resemble and taste “similar” to meat. You can buy a bag of texturized vegetable protein chunks, which are meant to be used in recipes in place of diced chicken breast. Very popular fake meat items include chicken tenders, chicken nuggets, chicken patties, as well as vegan taco meats, burgers, and breakfast patties/links. These alternatives are delicious and ensure you don’t miss the meat when made well.

When you go meatless, however, you will run across two types of non-meat proteins: vegan or vegetarian. Vegans omit all animal products, including eggs and dairy (as well as enzymes and additives from animal sources, think gelatin or insect-derived dyes, for example). Vegetarians, on the other hand, typically only omit the meat (though, based on personal preference, they may adopt stricter but not quite vegan rules). Keep this in mind when looking at non-meat proteins because vegetarian meats may still contain ingredients unsuited for vegans. Whether you are trying to improve your cholesterol and general well-being by eating a plant-based diet or trying to help reduce the reliance on factory farms and that industry’s stress on the planet, there are plenty of reasons to skip meat these days. Here is a list of the best meat alternatives for you to chew on:  

Best McNuggets stand-in: SIMULATE chicken NUGGS

SEE IT

Americans like chicken. Lots of chicken. A favorite of children and adults alike, breaded chicken nuggets, tenders, and patties are a satisfying food for even the most finicky eater. Luckily, the pleasingly chewy texture of that ground-up, blended, seasoned, and breaded chunk of comfort is not hard to replicate with meat alternatives. You’ll find a huge variety of brands to choose from, with both vegan and vegetarian options. These have become so popular because they are tasty and a way to feel better about your eating. 

The SIMULATE company has created a vegan chicken nugget and vegan chicken patty using wheat and soy proteins. Like a software company, SIMULATE listens to feedback and tweaks its product to perfect the yummy, chewy chicken goodness. Available in regular, spicy (our favorite), or dino (a close second favorite)—and particularly great when made in one of the best air fryers—NUGGS let you experience the joy of a McDonald’s 10-piece with a modicum less guilt.

Best “chicken” sandwich: VFC Chick*n Fillets

SEE IT

If you’re a Year One vegetarian, you’ll come upon The Craving eventually. Whether it’s for BBQ or a burger or bacon, most former meat-eaters pass through this gauntlet of temptation, this inability to recapture a specific umami that threatens your resolve. For some, including this guy, it was a chicken sandwich that almost fueled the backslide. While delicious, no amount of southern-fried mushrooms truly hit the spot, and the freezer-aisle selections continuously fell short. I’ve been a vegetarian for years, but would still reminisce sometimes about the sensation of those fast-food fillets … until I tried VFC (Vegan Fried Chicken), a British brand that managed to capture more of the crisp-and-juicy, properly seasoned nature of sandwiches from below the Mason-Dixon (looking at you, Chick-fil-A). Maybe it comes as little surprise that the company’s co-founder, Matthew Glover, also co-founded the Veganuary movement.

Wheat, soy, and pea proteins wrapped in a light cornflake coating with a pop of garlic, mustard seed, and black pepper, the VFC Chick*n Fillets are “meaty” without being offputting. A lot of striated plant-based meats are chewy in an unpleasant way, but not VFC. (Of course, part of the secret is dialing down the air fryer temperature by 25 degrees and always sticking to the bottom of the time range, or even a minute under.) Looking to eat less bread? You can also get VFC Chick*n Tenders (the sauce-friendly bar-menu classic), Chick*n Bites (chonkier nuggets), or Popcorn Chick*n (particularly good to throw on greens). All three provided a similar sense of satisfaction, replacing the last lingerings of The Craving with a new desire.

Best vegan taco meat: Gardein Beefless Ground Crumbles

SEE IT

Taco night is a crowd-pleaser. Ground beef sauteed and loaded into warm tortillas with heaps of flavorful toppings … we’re getting hungry just writing this. So much of what goes into creating a great taco is the combination of spices and hot-cold soft-crunchy sensations that one could argue that the meat is not the star, but it’s undoubtedly important to create the overall balance.

The best vegan taco meat replicates the flavor and texture of beef, and because you will be simmering it in your favorite spices or sauce, it is an easy substitution. Like other plant-based meat alternatives, most vegan taco meat is made using a blend of ingredients with texturized soy protein. Unlike beef, however, many of these beefless crumbles are already seasoned and salted, so you may need to adjust your recipe to accommodate for this.

While the texture won’t allow you to ball up and turn this into meatballs or meatloaf like some ground beef alternatives, these crumbles can also easily be added to your Sloppy Joe, lasagna, or bolognese sauces. 

A seasoned bag of frozen crumbles ready to add to all your favorite ground beef recipes, this plant-based protein offers 18 grams per serving, with no dairy or gluten. Tailor your seasoning and salt, however, as these are already seasoned.

Best for stir-fry and salads: Hodo Tofu

SEE IT

Don’t get us wrong, when it comes to “meat” alternatives, plenty of thrillers come from fillers. You can get a great-tasting slab from a lab. But one of the best plant-based proteins remains arguably the first: toothsome ole tofu. Water, soybeans, natural coagulant. You can cook with it fresh or frozen; the texture can be jiggly as jello or chewy as shredded chicken—minus the gelatin or muscle tissue, of course. Zero collagens, etc. Toss some cold onto greens for something silken and satiating or dump it into an air fryer if you prefer warm, plump, pillowy. And it takes to every manner of flavor just as readily as skinless breast meat—the blank canvas of cooking.

Launched from a San Francisco Bay Area farmers market over 20 years ago, Hodo pre-marinated cubes and crumbles can be found at Whole Foods, Target, etc., as well as in dishes from Chipotle and more. Gluten-free, egg-free, tree nut-free, Kosher … these good beans pack in protein, calcium, and fiber. Infused with spice blends such as Thai curry, Harissa, Moroccan Chermoula, Chinese 5 Spice, and more, these ready-to-eat nuggets let you skip the pressing and other prep and get right to putting the finishing touches on your stir-fry or salad.

Fantasizing about another flavor profile? The hodo Mexican Crumbles (shown above) form the foundation of your customized version of Chipotle’s sofritas bowl. Or grab some hodo traditional extra-firm tofu and a bowl, then keep reading because we’ve got a recommendation for condiments that will swiftly add savoriness.

Best “steak” and “cutlets”: Meati

SEE IT

Whereas many plant-based “meats” occupy themselves primarily with replicating taste, Eat Meati’s products aim for the texture territory. Harvesting whole mushroom root, then pressing it to remove the water, Meati achieves a fibrous, nutrient-rich protein that can sit in for steak or chicken breast to grill, sauté, or air fry—just season as desired and add mashed potatoes, creamed spinach, an iceberg lettuce wedge in bleu cheese dressing, or whatever other classic sides or salads you crave. Maybe assemble a hot “chicken” sandwich with the crispy cutlet, a bahn meati with savory slices of fish sauce/soy sauce/rice vinegar/garlic-marinated “steak,” or carne asada tacos. I grilled a simple salt-and-pepper steak and found it offered a familiar but also distinctive umami—it might actually be too, well, meaty for some hardcore vegans. A crispy cutlet on quinoa and roast broccoli (shown above) wasn’t as striated as the steak but also wasn’t the uniformly ground filling of a chicken patty, etc. They’re juicy and toothsome enough to have been adopted in the upgraded Chik’N sandwich for the PLNT Burger chain. With a clear ingredients list compared to many highly processed meat alternatives, Meati can satisfy vegetarians wanting clean eating but also offers a great transition for flexitarians.

Best meatless meat burger: Beyond Burger

SEE IT

One of the things standing in the way of people (especially burger lovers) cutting down on meat has been the lack of a satisfying alternative to ground beef-based foods. Veggie burgers had a bad rep for a long time for being dry or crumbly and never quite the right texture to feel like more than a chunky disc. But advances have been made, so much so that major restaurants and even fast-food chains have adopted the Impossible and Beyond Meat brands—which recreate the feel and taste of actual beef burgers. With an eye for the details down to the “blood” and an iron-rich flavor, they offer the best way yet for fans to make the transition to fake meat without feeling like they are missing out on the joy of a juicy burger.

These burgers from Beyond Meat—a brand that also makes a killer spicy sausage patty, add biscuit for the perfect Southern breakfast—are so “real” it’s like magic, but it’s just science. This is a real burger experience, so you can feel good about eating a plant-based diet that is better for the Earth. Just don’t overdo it, as the sodium content is high.

Best for wraps and grain bowls: Afia Falafel

SEE IT

Oh chickpeas, did it hurt when you falafel from heaven? When it comes to legumes, the mighty chickpea might be, no is the best. And there’s no better way to enjoy this high-protein, high-fiber “pea” than as part of a meal that’s well-rounded in more than one way. Deep-fried balls of chickpea flour, particularly delicious with tahini (such as the Haven’s Kitchen sauce a couple of entries below), falafel is a perfect street food that can be just as poppin’ from your kitchen. (Plus, it’s gluten-free.)

Afia Falafel offers you access to these small tasty things from the convenience of your freezer. Good from the oven, toaster, or air fryer—crisp on the outside, fluffy and moist on the inside—this versatile blend of garbanzo beans, onion, parsley, cumin, coriander, and other Mediterranean spices can fill a perfect pita or top a compelling grain bowl. Add hummus (more chickpeas!) and harissa for a harmonious medley. You don’t have to search externally for more flavor, however, as Afia offers varieties including garlic & herb, turmeric, za’atar, and sun-dried tomato.

Best vegetarian meat: MorningStar Farms Veggie Bacon Strips

SEE IT

What’s a big American-style breakfast without some bacon or sausages? These rich, fatty, salty indulgences are hardly healthy, but sure do taste good with eggs, pancakes, or just by themselves. Non-meat protein options offer a great-tasting solution, as manufacturers have mastered the seasoning so well that you’ll hardly notice or miss the real thing. 

Unlike vegan meats, vegetarian meat will include some animal products. For example, vegetarian bacon uses egg whites for texture and protein. Other vegetarian meats might also use milk. With some animal products, vegetarian meats won’t always be cholesterol-free, but they will have a lot less than real bacon and real sausages. A reduced fat and cholesterol content is a health advantage, but these products are often highly processed and can contain a lot of sodium. Eating these non-meat proteins sparingly is important, however, as they are healthier but far from health food. 

Packed with flavor, this faux bacon uses egg whites, wheat gluten, and vegetable protein to provide a tasty alternative for your vegetarian breakfast, breakfast for dinner, brunch, midnight snack, even afternoon tea, and elevenses … you get it. This brand is very popular and widely available—and the flavor is so good you’ll want to pig out, minus the pig—but note they use food coloring and artificial flavors.

Best vegan meat substitutes: Upton’s Naturals Jackfruit  

SEE IT

Here’s a fruitful idea for vegan meat substitutes. One additional step beyond “meatless meat” is jackfruit, long popular in Southeast Asia and gaining popularity as more people switch to plant-based diets. It is now possible to buy fresh jackfruit in many domestic supermarkets, and a wide variety of preseasoned jackfruit foods and canned jackfruit are also available for purchase. Jackfruit can be made into burgers or thrown into recipes where you’d add chicken strips, though it is best known as one of the vegan meat substitutes with a texture perfect for a well-sauced pulled pork sandwich. Filled with nutrition, jackfruit is a great source of fiber, plus it offers magnesium, vitamin B6, and antioxidants. Unlike many vegan types of meat, jackfruit products are minimally processed, and the fruit can be eaten raw or cooked. However, because jackfruit is, well, a fruit, it is low in protein, so nutrition experts suggest mixing jackfruit with beans or nuts to create a balanced meal. 

One of the quick and easy vegan meat substitutes, just heat and serve. Jackfruit is cooked and seasoned to replace the meat in your favorite pulled pork recipes, and it’s also great in a wrap or salad. There are also chili-lime carnitas and Thai curry varieties. Just remember to add other plant proteins for a complete meal.

Best plant-based sauce/dressing/marinade: Haven’s Kitchen

SEE IT

A great sauce is the instant upgrade meat alternatives need—particularly tofu, if it’s not already zestily marinated like hodo’s options above. However, ample seasoning is also wonderful for protein-rich, rounded-nutrition greens and/or grains. But sauces, dressings, and what have you can actually take up the majority of your prep time with all the chopping, blending, reducing, adding pinches of this and punching things up, etc.

Founded in New York City in 2012, Haven’s Kitchen makes ready-to-eat palate-pleasers packaged in 100% recyclable squeeze pouches for a lighter impact on the Earth. Herby chimichurri, red pepper romesco, gingery miso—these are just some of the many vegan, vibrant concoctions that add tangy versatility to your meals. If you’re looking for a bright boost with minimal fuss, any of the Haven’s Kitchen pre-packaged international odes are an effortless elevator. Able to save you time without unidentifiable additives, these fresh dressings will quickly become a pantry—well, refrigerator—staple.

FAQs

Final thoughts on the best meat alternatives

• Best McNuggets stand-in: SIMULATE chicken NUGGS
• Best “chicken” sandwich: VFC Chick*n Fillets
• Best vegan taco meat: Gardein Beefless Ground Crumbles
• Best for stir-frying and salads: Hodo Tofu
• Best “steak” and “cutlets”: Meati
• Best meatless meat burger: Beyond Burger
• Best for wraps and grain bowls: Afia Falafel
• Best vegetarian meat: MorningStar Farms Veggie Bacon Strips
• Best vegan meat substitutes: Upton’s Naturals Jackfruit  
• Best plant-based sauce/dressing/marinade: Haven’s Kitchen

The best meat alternatives will taste great and be easy to add to all your favorite recipes. Meatless meats can be vegan or vegetarian and use various ingredients to offer a protein-packed alternative to meat. Created to imitate the flavor, look, and texture of your favorite meats, the delicious meat alternatives available on the market are increasing daily.

Why trust us

Popular Science started writing about technology more than 150 years ago. There was no such thing as “gadget writing” when we published our first issue in 1872, but if there was, our mission to demystify the world of innovation for everyday readers means we would have been all over it. Here in the present, PopSci is fully committed to helping readers navigate the increasingly intimidating array of devices on the market right now.

Our writers and editors have combined decades of experience covering and reviewing consumer electronics. We each have our own obsessive specialties—from high-end audio to video games to cameras and beyond—but when we’re reviewing devices outside of our immediate wheelhouses, we do our best to seek out trustworthy voices and opinions to help guide people to the very best recommendations. We know we don’t know everything, but we’re excited to live through the analysis paralysis that internet shopping can spur so readers don’t have to.

The post The best meat alternatives of 2023 appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

In Head Trip, PopSci explores the relationship between our brains, our senses, and the strange things that happen in between.

THE FIRST TIME I had cilantro, I sat in the car with my mother, eating tacos from her favorite spot. As I settled in and took my first bite, I was immediately disgusted and spit it out. After repeated insistence that her food tasted fine and a quick Google search, we deduced that the problem was the cilantro and that I was, sadly, someone to whom it tasted like soap—Dove Sensitive Skin Beauty Bar, to be specific.

“You must get that from yo’ daddy,” she said, laughing. 

The dislike of cilantro is a commonly known food aversion, though it affects only a small section of the population. A 2012 study on young adults in Canada found that, generally, dislike of cilantro ranges between 3 and 21 percent of the population, with varying ethnocultural specificities. Nevertheless, my mama isn’t wrong. There’s a strong chance that I did inherit this distaste for cilantro from my father or someone else in my direct lineage. But before we get into the genetic variations, it’s essential to understand the difference between literal taste and the perception of flavor. 

Taste, scientifically, covers only salt, sweet, sour, bitter, and umami, which are chemical cues picked up by the tongue, explains James N. Palmer, the director of the division of rhinology at the University of Pennsylvania’s School of Medicine. “Flavor is the combination of taste and smell,” he says. “So what people will call taste isn’t really taste: It’s flavor.” 

Our food is broken down with our teeth and the enzymes in our saliva when we eat. Next, the chomped-up bits glide over our papillae, the thousands of little bumps on the tongue, the roof of the mouth, and the throat. Those bumps contain taste buds, which each have between 50 to 100 chemical receptors that identify the five tastes. 

“We use our taste system simply to identify specific chemicals in our food,” says Kathryn Medler, a professor in the University of Buffalo’s biological sciences department. “There are things that we need in our diet, so we prefer them. We eat things that are sweet, salty, or umami [because] those are [nutrients] that we need in our diet in order to be healthy. And we innately avoid sour things, which are going to potentially identify spoiled foods, as well as bitter, which are going to identify potential toxins.” (The cool thing about your taste buds, however, is that you can train them to acquire a taste for sour and bitter flavors.) 

The chewing process also releases odorants. These smells travel up the back of the nasopharynx and into the back part of the nose, resulting in retronasal olfaction, which is how we process odors while consuming food. As we chew, our brains combine these signals to determine the flavor of a food or drink. (Our brains also pick up on mouthfeel–like stringiness or crispiness–as we chew, but that is a separate sensory process.) For instance, Palmer says that steak sauce and chocolate have the same levels of bitterness, sour, and sweet, and that it’s our sense of smell that makes us perceive them as different flavors.

Once the distinction between taste and flavor is clear, it’s easier to understand how DNA affects how we enjoy—or don’t enjoy—certain foods. Our genes influence how we experience flavor, not taste itself. Cilantro will always have a fresh, citrusy smell. But due to a variation in a cluster of olfactory receptor genes that makes them more sensitive to the scents of aldehyde chemicals—found in cilantro and used in soap making—eating cilantro can feel like chewing on a sudsy washrag to some people because the scent of aldehyde is released during chewing.

There are other factors—such as the foods we grew up eating—at play when it comes to why we love or hate certain tastes and flavors. 

Most taste preferences and differences are not necessarily related to genes, says Medler; some can also be related to the cultures or regions we were raised or live in. Take okra, for instance. Medler and I both grew up eating fried okra because we’re Southerners, and we remain very fond of it because it reminds us of home. However, her husband, who grew up in New England, could take it or leave it. “It’s not that he inherently tasted something different than I tasted, but he doesn’t have the positive associations with it,” she explains. 

But both Medler and I lose our affection for okra when it’s cooked in a way that makes it become slimy. The vegetable’s texture is crispier when it’s fried, because frying eliminates most of the gumminess. When it’s included in gumbo or the Nigerian soup obe ila, though, the slippery nature is more pronounced. Enjoying that mouthfeel is typically learned: A friend who grew up eating obe ila loves okra as a stew or fried—in part because it has positive associations for him and because he’s familiar with its textures.

Still, some food experiences, like my soapy-taco debacle, are genetically set in stone. “Everybody’s genetics are slightly different, which means their taste receptors are slightly different, which means [everyone is] going to have different powers in terms of tasting things,” says Palmer. 

“I smile when my patients say, ‘Well, why do things taste different to me than they do to somebody else?’” he continues. “You’re a different height than everybody else. … You have all sorts of other genetic characteristics that differ. So you would expect taste genetics and smell genetics, and therefore flavor genetics, to be different for every person.”

Read more PopSci+ stories. 

The post Why food tastes wildly different to different people appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

In the United States, almost 32 percent of the average household’s purchased food goes to waste, a total annual loss of around $240 billion. All that squandered sustenance is hard on a household budget, as the moment spoiled food hits the trash can or compost heap, your money goes with it. But if you want to, you know, get what you paid for and eat your groceries instead, consider dehydrating them before they go bad.

How to make dehydrated food

Safely dehydrating food is fairly straightforward, according to Bryan Mayer, a butchery educator based in Kailua, Hawaii. He points out that safe dehydration techniques predate the Industrial Revolution by centuries.

“This has been a part of how we’ve made food safe to eat pre-refrigeration and certainly pre-canning, so it’s something that’s totally within reach for most people,” he explains. “It’s certainly something fun to do and something that I think we can use on an individual basis to reduce waste, keep things out of compost.”

Dehydrating meat, poultry, and fish

Mayer says the main thing to know about drying raw meat, poultry, and fish is that you’ll need to first cook it to a food-safe temperature specific to that protein before reducing the heat to a level more appropriate for dehydrating. If you need a reference, the US Department of Agriculture has a list of safe minimum internal temperatures for various foods.

Beyond that, start with the best-quality cut you can get, Mayer says. He recommends leaner cuts because you’ll have less overall work to do, since you’ll want to remove the fat if there is any.

“You’ll want to slice it however thick or thin you want, and then you’ll want to marinate it, usually up to 24 hours,” he says. The longer you marinate, the more any salt within your spice mix will seep into the meat, which means more time for the salt to penetrate cells and break things down.

[Related: Your food could be better if you salt it at the right time]

Any other spices will just sit on the surface of the meat, not making molecular changes like salt will, Mayer adds. There are no rules for what spices or other flavorings you can add to your meat jerky; you can go for tried-and-true options like barbecue sauce or mustard, or add something less likely to be in store-bought varieties, like Dr. Pepper or red wine and fish sauce. The People’s Choice Beef Jerky, a jerky purveyor, has a long list of possible meat jerky flavor combos.

Once you’ve decided the meat has marinated for long enough, line up the strips on a dehydrator rack or on a pan rack in your oven. Experiment with different lengths of time and temperatures, adding more time for lower temperatures (but always make sure as much moisture has been sucked from the meat as possible before you stop).

Dehydrating fruits, vegetables, herbs, and mushrooms

If you’re dehydrating fruits, vegetables, herbs, or mushrooms, it’s important to wash or brush them to remove any dirt, dust, or other contaminants, and prevent new ones, like insects, from getting into your newly dehydrated goods. That will help prevent the food from spoiling.

You’ll then want to cut everything into same-size pieces to ensure dehydration occurs evenly across your rack; a mandoline will help keep your cuts consistent.

Colorado State University recommends choosing one of several fruit pretreatment methods, using pure ascorbic acid crystals, citric acid, or other similar substances to help break down tough skins, prevent discoloration and kill off unhealthy bacteria. 

Because home-dried produce may not dehydrate evenly, you should mitigate mold growth by “conditioning”—loosely packing it in a shakeable container every day for a week—to help distribute any remaining moisture, according to the National Center for Home Food Preservation at the University of Georgia.

For vegetables, cut off any inedible parts, like stems or rot, before washing and thoroughly drying. Different vegetables dehydrate more easily after blanching, or briefly boiling then dunking in an ice bath, according to the Food Network. 

Herbs get a similar treatment: trim off any bruised, discolored, or inedible bits, as well as thicker stems, before you arrange them on the dehydrating rack. But you’ll have less room for temperature and time experimentation with the herbs, so set your dehydrator or countertop oven to the lowest possible setting and let them bake until they’re crumbly. You can also microwave smaller amounts sandwiched between paper towels for two or three minutes, then 30-second intervals until they’re dry.

[Related: Grow long and healthy hair with this DIY rosemary water]

If you don’t want to mechanically dry your herbs, sage, thyme, rosemary and other sturdy herbs can be bundled and air-dried indoors, according to the Oregon State University Master Food Preserver Program. Tender herbs, like basil and mint, can also be bundled and air dried, but OSU recommends hanging them inside a paper bag with vent holes cut in the top and side, closing the top, and placing it somewhere warm with good air circulation.

Dehydrating mushrooms is similar to other types of food dehydration, except you won’t need to think about pretreatment. You’ll want to clean them thoroughly, ensure no bugs are present, and trim off any inedible or tough bits before cutting them into even-size pieces. Different mushrooms will have different dehydrating times based on how moist they are, so a dryer mushroom won’t need as much time in the heat. Like fruits and vegetables, you’ll want to condition your mushrooms by storing them loosely in a sealed container and shaking them daily for a week.

How much food can I dehydrate at once?

At the height of mushroom season, Rob Rubba, a plant-based chef and co-owner of Oyster Oyster in Washington, D.C., says his restaurant “easily” receives deliveries of 100 pounds of local mushrooms each week. Not all of that will look pretty enough to be plated, so the less-attractive items end up dehydrated for use in future recipes.

That’s to say, there’s no maximum amount to how much food you can dehydrate—as long as you have enough space, heat, and time. But best practice is to lay everything out in an even layer with nothing overlapping on a rack on a sheet pan to maximize heat and air flow. Reasonably speaking, you can dehydrate as much as you can fit in your oven or on your dehydrator racks. You can also dehydrate different types of foods at once, but Rubba recommends considering flavor pairings in case of contamination. Apples and garlic, for example, wouldn’t taste great together.

That being said, while a dehydrator will cost money and take up space, having one means you can multitask in the kitchen by dehydrating while you use the oven for other tasks. A food dehydrator is also purpose-built, so you’ll be able to fine-tune your temperature settings, keep the heat and dryness consistent, and use levels of racks to dehydrate more than you could inside a single-rack countertop oven. In a pinch, you may also be able to build your own dehydrator.

But if you’re really low on space for a new kitchen appliance and feel like using a full oven would be a waste, Rubba suggests using the waning heat from cooking or baking in the oven to dehydrate food.

“As the oven cools, there’ll be a declining temperature that will be slowly drying it out,” he explains, adding that this is also a great way to make breadcrumbs. “The next day, you could pull [the food] out and have something dehydrated—and that’s a good way of just utilizing leftover energy.”

Dehydrated mushrooms can become vegan jerky, but they can also be remoistened and used in stocks, stews, or anywhere you would use a regular mushroom. Harvard University’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health recommends rehydrating mushrooms for 15 to 20 minutes in boiling water.

[Related: 4 benefits of eating mushrooms]

Other dried produce can be rehydrated too. Generally, you’ll need to soak 1 cup of dried food in 1 to 3 cups of water for 30 to 90 minutes, and the University of Georgia has a handy chart you can refer to when rehydrating fruits and vegetables (page 7 of the linked PDF).

Slices or pieces of dried pineapple, oranges, kiwis, or other fruits can be used to garnish drinks and meals, or be eaten as a snack. Veggies can be dried into chips that can be eaten as-is or crushed into other things, like pasta dough and salads, or as a topping. Herbs can be dehydrated and ground into homemade spice mixes.

For bread service at Oyster Oyster, Rubba’s team makes a vegan marigold butter with “an abundance of marigold flowers that we dehydrate to garnish that and give it these pops of lemony, fragrant flavor on the butter,” he explains.

Another benefit of dehydrating foods is the flavor concentration that occurs when the water is stripped out, which Rubba, a 2023 James Beard award finalist, says can lead to “amazing” complexity.

“We’ve boiled and smoked whole pumpkins and then dehydrated those for a week to get this solid, giant piece that we can grate onto dishes, kind of reminiscent of a bonito [flake],” he explains. Rubba’s restaurant has also “reduced cucumber juice slowly in the dehydrator, and it takes on these wild, spicy flavors that you wouldn’t expect from a cucumber.”

How long you can keep dehydrated food

Proper storage is key to making dehydrated foods last. Rubba recommends using an airtight container to loosely pack anything you dehydrate and popping a silica packet inside to wick away any remaining moisture. Just make sure the packet isn’t broken and that you clean or thoroughly check the food when you use it again—silica beads are generally nontoxic but can be a choking hazard.

That’s going to give anything dehydrated a longer life, especially if you live in a humid climate, he explains, adding that dried fruits, veg, and ‘shrooms are shelf-stable but shouldn’t be exposed to moisture, so they’re better stored in the pantry than in the fridge.

Dried herbs, fruits, and vegetables should last up to a year but will not keep as long under hotter conditions; the National Center for Home Food Preservation says most dried fruits can be stored for one year at 60 degrees Fahrenheit, six months at 80 degrees, and that vegetables will last about half as long as fruits.

Properly dried meat won’t last nearly as long, according to the center—only about two weeks in a sealed container at room temperature, although you can refrigerate or freeze it to increase its shelf life. But odds are you’ll eat it long before two weeks pass.

The post Dehydrating food can save you money and reduce waste appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Food allergies were scarcely reported during the first half of the 20th century. Nowadays, sensitivity to foods like nuts and eggs affect an estimated eight percent of children in the United States. That’s one in 13 children or two students per classroom, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  

More than one in 10 children are diagnosed every year across some high income countries, and earlier research has suggested a possible link between animal exposure during pregnancy and early childhood may reduce food allergies. 

Now, an analysis over more than 65,000 infants in Japan found that children exposed to pet cats or indoor dogs during fetal development or early infancy tended to have fewer food allergies compared to other children. The findings were modest (13 to 16 percent less likely to developing food allergies), but had statistical significance and were published March 29 in the open-access journal PLOS ONE.

[Related from PopSci+: Children are grimy, and that’s (mostly) ok.]

The study did not determine if the link between pet exposure and food allergies is causative, since another factor associated with pet ownership could be causing the association.

Hisao Okabe from the Fukushima Regional Center for the Japan Environment and Children’s Study, Japan and team used data from a nationwide prospective birth cohort study called the Japan Environment and Children’s Study. They used the available data on 66,215 children who had exposure to various pets and food allergies.

During the fetal period, about 22 percent were exposed to pets, most commonly indoor dogs and cats. Among the children exposed to these family pets, the chance of developing a food allergy was lowered by about 14 percent. However, the team did not find a significant difference for children in households with outdoor dogs—the results were more robust with indoor dogs. 

The children exposed to indoor dogs were less likely to develop egg, milk, and nut allergies. Children exposed to cats were less likely to have egg, wheat, and soybean allergies. 

Somewhat surprisingly, the children exposed to hamsters (0.9 percent of the total group studied) showed a 93 percent greater incidence of nut allergies. Since the group that had hamsters was so small, it could be a statistical fluke, but it still jumped out at the team.

Some of the limitations of this study include self reported data (usually from medical records obtained at doctor’s visits), which relies on accurate recall from participants. 

The authors suggest that their results could help guide more research into what is causing childhood food allergies and the hygiene hypothesis. Dating back to 1989, with even deeper theoretical roots in the nineteenth century, this hypothesis proposes that exposure to germs and some infections during childhood helps the immune system develop. The exposure teaches the body to tell the difference between harmless substances from the ones that might trigger a reaction like asthma. In theory, exposure to certain germs teaches the immune system not to overreact, according to the Mayo Clinic. 

[Related: This pseudoscience movement wants to wipe germs from existence.]

“Whatever it is that’s happening in the modern world, it’s causing the immune system to be active when it doesn’t need to be,” microbiologist Graham Rook of University College London told PopSci in an interview last year.

Rook noted that the hygiene hypothesis has its flaws—some viral infections, such as RSV, can trigger asthma, not prevent it. Additionally, a large body of research now blames changes in the human microbiome, not a dearth of childhood infection, for at least some of the sharp rise in chronic diseases. 

The post Babies who grow up around pets may be less likely to develop food allergies appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Update 3/31/23: Another food-tech company, Paleo, alleges that they first developed patent pending meat with mammoth myoglobin in 2021, and are now considering legal action against Vow. This post has been updated with their comments, along with a response from Vow

Researchers and ethicists have argued over the how’s, if’s, and should’s of reviving woolly mammoths for years—in the meantime, one startup just reportedly went ahead and cooked up their own version. As first highlighted by The Guardian, an Australian company called Vow has unveiled what it claims to be the first hybrid mammoth meatball made from fragments of the species’ DNA sequence spliced together alongside elephant cells. In doing so, the startup hopes to promote a speedier cultural transition to what could be environmentally friendly, sustainable lab-grown meats while highlighting humans’ impact on species die-off. But another startup is claiming to have developed mammoth myoglobin tech first, and are now considering legal action against Vow.

Industrial animal farming and consumption are widely considered to be some of the largest contributors to greenhouse emissions and water usage. Climate experts have repeatedly urged the importance of transitioning away from this carnivorous mindset towards healthier, sustainable options, but it can often feel like a steep ask for populations so used to their preferred, culturally reinforced diets. While lab-grown meat alternatives are increasingly gaining attention, Vow hoped to draw attention to cutting edge possibilities via resurrecting the iconic Ice Age giant in miniature, meatball form.

[Related: FDA says this lab-grown chicken is safe for human consumption.]

Despite the wild conceit, concocting the mammoth meatball apparently proved to be “ridiculously easy and fast,” said Ernst Wolvetang, a professor at the University of Queensland’s Australian Institute for Bioengineering who worked alongside the cultivated meatmakers. What’s more, it only took a “couple weeks” for Wolvetang’s team to harvest the approximately 20 billion mammoth-elephant meat cells grown within sheep myoblast stem cells.

For author Lincoln Michel, the news came as surprise. “It’s maybe a cliché at this point, but it’s very hard these days for satire to keep up with reality,” he told PopSci. Michel’s 2021 sci-fi novel, The Body Scout, cheekily mentions lab grown cuisine derived from long-extinct animal species against a dystopian, cyberpunk backdrop. “When I wrote The Body Scout, I thought adding mammoth burgers and teriyaki tyrannosaur wings would be a funny comment on the banality of modern capitalism’s vision,” he said. “I didn’t expect to see mammoth snacks a mere two years after publication.”

[Related: How to enjoy fake meat in a way that actually helps the planet.]

Vow already has plans to supply Singapore restaurants by the end of the year with lab-cultivated Japanese quail grown using similar methods. Additionally, the company has reportedly researched over 50 other species to add to their menu, including buffalo, crocodile, kangaroo, and various fish species. Dodo apparently was researchers’ first choice, but didn’t make the cut because they lacked the necessary DNA sequences.

But don’t expect to take part in mammoth taste tests for the conceivable future. As Wolvetang told The Guardian, humans haven’t ingested mammoth protein for thousands of years, so there’s no telling how immune systems would handle such a dish. Instead, the meatball is meant more as a representation of what the cultivated animal protein industry hopes to achieve. If the same methods continue to be applied to commonly eaten animals, then entirely new avenues for nutrition may become available to consumers. As one researcher explained to The Guardian, “By cultivating beef, pork, chicken and seafood we can have the most impact in terms of reducing emissions from conventional animal agriculture.”

Meanwhile, Paleo—a “precision fermentation company” based in Belgium—alleges Vow’s claims as the first to develop meat with mammoth myoglobin is false. “When we learned about [Vow’s announcement], we were surprised,” Hermes Sanctorum, CEO of Paleo, said in a statement provided to PopSci. “We sent out a press release nine months ago to announce that we developed the exact same mammoth protein (myoglobin), based on our fundamental research and innovation.”

Paleo representatives claim to have reached out to Vow prior to their product announcement. Vow allegedly responded by saying its mammoth meatball “was not food,” and dismissed Paleo’s concerns. “When Vow claim that no one has tasted mammoth myoglobin, this is simply not true,” said Sanctorum, adding that, “We developed the mammoth myoglobin and we tasted it in our lab.”

Sanctorum describes the mammoth protein’s “aromatic profile” as “stronger” than other species, meaning it both “smells and tastes meatier” with a “more vibrant” red coloring. Paleo claims it submitted patent applications that have been under review and available publicly for competitors nearly a year ago. In an email to PopSci, a representative for Vow denied the accusations, stating their mammoth meatball was “conceived, developed and created entirely by the hard work and ingenuity of Vow’s own scientists [and collaborators] and using a combination of publicly available genetic data and Vow’s own proprietary production processes,” and stated it will take “appropriate” responses to maintain “its reputation, its innovations, and its people.”

The post Scientists made a woolly mammoth meatball, but don’t grab your fork yet appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Bottled water is one of the most popular beverages in the world. In the United States, bottled water has outsold carbonated soft drinks every year since 2016. Currently, the global bottled water market is worth $270 billion, and it’s projected to exceed $500 billion by the end of the decade. Only three countries combined make up almost half of the global market: the USA, China, and Indonesia.

Despite its widespread consumption, bottled water might actually slow the progress of providing universal access to safe drinking water, according to a recent report from the United Nations University Institute for Water, Environment, and Health (UNU-INWEH).

Bottled water can foster distrust of and distract attention from clean tap water

The report argues that the rapidly-growing bottled water industry may have an adverse impact on the investments in long-term public water supply infrastructure development and improvement. The expansion of the bottled water market may distract governmental efforts to provide safe drinking water for all, says Zeineb Bouhlel, study author and research and communication associate at the UNU-INWEH.

“In certain countries such as Mexico and Indonesia, the industry is somehow reducing the role of the state in providing safe water for the population,” says Bouhlel. “When bottled water is popular, the government may spend less effort and less financial resources to make the public water supply available for all and of better quality.”

According to the report, the drivers of the bottled water market aren’t the same around the world. In the Global North, people drink bottled water because they don’t trust tap water and believe the former is healthier. However, individuals in the Global South are primarily motivated by the lack or absence of a reliable public water supply.

[Related: Sorting and recycling plastic is notoriously hard—but this AI could help.]

“In many places, bottled water is an important source of safe drinking water absent adequate public water supply systems,” says Sara Hughes, water policy expert and associate professor of environment and sustainability at the University of Michigan. “But the bottled water industry actively encourages distrust of tap water, which does erode public support and investment in public drinking water systems even where the water is available and safe to drink.”

The idea that bottled water is unquestionably safer than tap water must be challenged. The quality of bottled water can be compromised by the origin of the water or the industrial processes it goes through, the report says. For example, commercially-bottled water labeled “mineral water” or “spring water” isn’t guaranteed to be free of Cryptosporidium (Crypto) parasites, the second highest cause of reported waterborne disease outbreaks in 2015.

Globally, tap water is much more regulated and monitored than bottled water, with the latter having less sampling and no obligation to disclose information on the content or the process for some types and in certain countries, says Bouhlel.

The growing bottled water industry may distract attention and resources from the development of public water supply systems, when, in reality, less than half of what the world pays for bottled water every year is enough to ensure clean tap water access for millions of people without it for years to come.

The bottled water industry’s impact on the environment

The bottled water industry may have negative effects on the environment through the whole supply chain, from water extraction to packaging disposal, says Bouhlel. For instance, it contributes to the pressure on water resources and may increase water scarcity at a local level, he adds.

“Bottled water can place additional burden on aquifers, rivers, and streams, unless withdrawals are properly accounted for,” says Hughes. “In most parts of the U.S., and globally, we lack tools to accurately track and measure how an additional withdrawal—such as for bottled water—affects aquatic ecosystems, and the ability to regulate withdrawals from shared aquifers in particular.”

The production of plastics and the logistics of delivering the product to the consumer also come at the price of greenhouse gas emissions, says Bouhlel. The manufacturing of bottled water is very fossil-fuel intensive. A 2009 Environmental Research Letters study estimated the energy footprint of the various phases of bottled water production and found that it requires about 5.6 and 10.2 million joules of energy per liter, about 2000 times the energy cost of producing tap water.

[Related: Groundwater is an incredible resource. It’s time to treat it like one.]

“Environmental impacts may also be seen at the stage of disposal, where more than 80 percent of bottled water is packaged in plastic and PET containers, and where the recycling rate so far is very low at a global level,” he adds. Plastic bottles often end up in landfills and bodies of water, harming natural ecosystems and biodiversity.

Improving access to drinking water supply in the US

The United States has one of the safest public water supplies in the world. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for ensuring that public water systems meet the standards for drinking water quality. “[T]he majority of Americans do not need to purchase more expensive and environmentally harmful bottled water to meet their needs,” says Hughes. “That said, there are communities in the U.S. that do lack safe and reliable drinking water and that is completely unacceptable.”

A 2021 Nature Communications study reported that over a thousand community water systems are considered “serious violators” of the Safe Drinking Water Act. Moreover, about 48 percent of households on Indian reservations don’t have access to clean water. Residents of Jackson, Mississippi and Flint, Michigan have all been affected by a major water supply crisis in recent years as well.

According to Hughes, there are three significant drinking water supply challenges in the US, and they can all be addressed with federal investment: ensuring the old drinking water systems are maintained and kept in compliance, providing safe drinking water access in Tribal communities, and addressing drinking water quality and access problems facing rural communities.

“Communities need resources to upgrade and repair aging systems and replace lead service lines, and increasing water rates to cover these costs will not be feasible in all places,” says Hughes. “Tribal communities are in need of significant and long-overdue infrastructure investment.”

Rural communities, which face challenges related to declining water supplies and contaminated water sources, might require a mix of funding and regulatory solutions. This can include restricting agricultural runoff, exploring regionalization opportunities for rural water systems, and investing in technical capacities in these systems and their personnel, says Hughes.

In 2018, the EPA published its Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey and Assessment and reported that the country needs about $472.6 billion to maintain and improve drinking water infrastructure over the next 20 years. It would be used to replace or improve deteriorating pipelines, expand infrastructure to reduce water contamination, and construct water storage reservoirs.

“Some of the most important policy changes could have more to do with how drinking water systems are funded and organized,” says Hughes, “rather than only ramping up regulatory requirements.”

The post Our bottled water habit stands in the way of universal clean drinking water appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

The sci-fi concept is so ubiquitous it’s practically its own trope: walk into the kitchen, press a button on a futuristic machine, and poof, dinner is instantaneously laser-assembled for your family. While (incredibly simple) 3D-printed food has actually been a reality for nearly two decades, the same group that first showcased its potential has recently taken one of its largest steps forward to date—cheesecake.

As detailed in an article published on Tuesday in npj Science of Food, researchers at Columbia University’s Creative Machines Lab pulled off printing and laser-cooking a tasty-looking, seven ingredient slice of cake made from edible “food inks” including peanut butter, nutella, and strawberry jam. Although still in its very early stages, the novel technique could prove extremely helpful for improving meals’ nutritional contents, as well as raising the bar for food safety.

[Related: How to enjoy fake meat in a way that actually helps the planet.]

Prior iterations of 3D-printed food have been comparatively rudimentary, and combined only a couple ingredients. The researchers’ cheesecake recipe—which also features a graham cracker crust, cherry jam, and even frosting—represents a sizable leap forward in what can be created in a cutting-edge kitchen. But unlike traditional cooking, 3D-printed and laser-cooked concoctions may often require “novel ingredient compositions and structures, due to the different way by which the food is ‘assembled,’” said Hod Lipson, one of the paper’s co-authors and a roboticist focused on AI and digital manufacturing.

The culinary experimenters tested their 3D-printing methods by literally constructing various iterations of cheesecake with different layer structures and compositions. After trial and error, the group found that graham cracker bases for each layer proved to be the sturdiest, on which the Nutella and peanut butter “pools” hosted the jam and frosting.

[Related: Best 3D printers of 2023.]

As difficult as this may sound compared to simply throwing ingredients in a mixer, the team thinks this artificial avenue could be practical for researchers in the plant-based meat industry tinkering on chemical and molecular levels to accurately mimic the real thing. For those with swallowing issues stemming from neurological maladies and other conditions, food-shaped pureed dishes could offer an extremely beneficial new option. Given that the printing relies on high-energy targeted laser light for heating, the actual cooking process could soon be both sustainable and economical.

Still, a lot still needs to be in place for a 3D-printed food industry to truly take shape, such as recipe files and food cartridge manufacturers, not to mention a consumer base who finds the enterprise appetizing. Coming out the gate with a peanut butter-Nutella cheesecake is a pretty great way to pique interests—as well as hunger levels.

The post Scientists cooked up a 3D printed cheesecake appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

This article was originally published on Saveur.

Eating disorders run in my family. Recently, a cousin died of one. It wasn’t just how much he ate but what: cola, chips, and candy round the clock. He basically snacked himself to death on a diet that led to heart disease, diabetes, and other complications. One reason he might have made unhealthy food choices is counterintuitive: He couldn’t stay full. “Food that is mainly carbohydrates or high in sugar is palatable. It goes down easily. It’s lower in volume, or water content, so you can eat a lot before your stomach expands,” explains Cara Harbstreet, a dietitian and the founder of Street Smart Nutrition. “But it doesn’t carry the fiber or other things that contribute to fullness and slow down eating.” 

You know that stuffed feeling after polishing off a steak or a bowl of pea soup? Experts call it satiety. In 1995, Australian nutritionists devised a satiety index to track which foods made us feel fullest. Feeding subjects different foods and monitoring their hunger afterward, the researchers found foods with the lowest satiety were carb-and-sugar bombs. These are delicious, but their dopamine rewards amount to empty calories. 

Foods with high satiety—those that keep you fullest the longest—are “high-thermic,” says food scientist Dr. Taylor C. Wallace, meaning that “muscles in the stomach and intestines take a lot of energy to break them down.” Chief among high-thermic foods is protein. “The body spends almost 30 percent of the calories it takes in from a protein trying to digest it.” 

After protein on the high-thermic scale, there’s fat, which slows the body’s absorption of carbohydrates. Anyone who loves toast slathered in butter knows how fat carries flavor, which begets satiety and satisfaction. Then comes fiber—the roughage that makes whole grains, fruit, vegetables, and legumes harder (in a good way) to digest. High-fiber foods often contain lots of water, which further fills your belly. 

That’s the gist of satiety: There are foods that take their time in your gut, and foods that don’t. “Generally, whole foods make you feel full longer than processed ones,” says dietitian nutritionist Kylene Bogden, a dietitian and functional sports nutrition expert who works with professional athletes. 

But every expert I spoke with cautioned against using the satiety index as a diet plan. Diets, they say, don’t work. “Clinical studies show minimal, if any, effect,” Wallace notes. And the satiety index has only been used in a limited way in labs; it hasn’t been applied to a broad study of actual, everyday behavior, where its efficacy can really be tested.

Still, the concept of satiety is useful. “If you eat a doughnut, and your brain’s happy, you can understand why your stomach still wants a meal. If you eat fish and vegetables, and your body is happy, you know why your brain still wants the doughnut,” says Ariane Resnick, a special-diet chef and nutritionist whose clients have included Gwyneth Paltrow and P!nk. 

Makes sense to me. In a world where celebrities are clamoring for weight-loss short-cuts like taking Ozempic and other diabetes drugs to suppress their appetites, and where others, like my cousin, refuse to take care of their diabetes and go for broke on unhealthful foods, paying attention to fullness seems like a sober and balanced approach to eating. The pros I spoke with have pointers for thinking about the satiety index. 

Don’t mistake satiety for healthfulness

“You could eat a Wendy’s triple cheeseburger without the bun, and that’s high satiety, but it’s not healthy,” says Wallace. “You’ll see weight loss, but did you raise your bad cholesterol or give yourself hypertension?” Satiety can, however, help avoid the pitfalls of calorie counting. “You could starve yourself slamming low-cal Ritz Cracker packs that spike your blood sugar level. Then you’re hungry, can’t lose weight, and have no energy,” says Bogden. “Foods that are slower to digest keep blood sugar more stable.”

Go for satisfaction

Resnick isn’t a fan of steamed vegetables. “Roasted under a chicken or stir fried, vegetables are more appealing,” she says. If you agree with her, then you’re more inclined to eat your veggies with some fat on them. As it turns out, some vitamins are fat soluble; your body can’t access them unless the veggies are glistening in chicken drippings. “So think about what gives you satisfaction as well as nutrition. We do better listening to our bodies than to ideology.”

Diversify your plate

Protein, fat, and fiber: Satiety requires all three. “If one is missing, that leads to hunger,” Harbstreet explains. “You end up dissatisfied and might rummage around for something else to munch on.” That means combining colors, textures, and flavors at every meal as much as possible. 

Resist dogma

“You’ll probably need more than fish and vegetables because, typically, those foods don’t give you the most joy and satisfaction, as they’re not full of sugar, salt, or fat, which are emotional triggers,” says Resnick. “So add a carbohydrate if you like.” If refined carbs (like white bread or pasta) make you happy, start there, then give less-refined carbs (like brown rice and pulses) a try. 

Be proactive

Fully eliminating low-satiety foods is impossible. We aren’t robots, after all. Rather than abstinence, Harbstreet recommends a measured, mindful approach: “If you’re going to a birthday party, be strategic. Have a balanced meal beforehand, then go ahead and eat some cake.” It’s not about hard rights and wrongs. Make your choices on a “cake-by-cake” basis.

Write your own story

Get to know yourself through your eating. “Start with what you normally eat and keep a journal of how you’re feeling, and how full you are, 30 minutes, one hour, and two hours from eating,” suggests Bogden. Did your energy dip? Do you want to eat more? “Then gravitate to higher satiety foods, and journal again.” If journaling is dredging up bad feelings, go see a professional who can help you use satiety and other tools in a way that works for your mind and body. “None are the be-all, end-all,” says Resnick. “Every tool is something to consider to find what’s best for you.”

The post How to feel full just by eating good food appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

People often adjust their diets to keep themselves healthy—but what about changing what we eat for the health of the planet? It appears that some popular meal plans, such as ketogenic and Paleolithic diets, aren’t very good for Earth or for your wellness, according to a recent study in The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition  looked into the environmental impact and nutrition quality of food commodities.

Our food choices can have major consequences: What we eat contributes about a third of all greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions globally, when accounting for agriculture and land use, supply chain, and our dietary habits. Given food’s huge impact on climate change, it’s important that dietary patterns become more sustainable. This begins with identifying the food choices that are environmentally friendly, which is exactly what the study sought to find out.

“Given that many people are experimenting with different diets, it’s helpful to have a sense of the differences in their impacts,” says Diego Rose, study author and director of nutrition at Tulane University. “What individuals choose to eat sends signals to producers about what to produce, so individual behaviors can affect what gets produced and thus the impacts from our overall food production.”

Going vegan benefits the environment

The new research assessed the carbon footprint and quality of six popular diets, namely: vegan, vegetarian, pescatarian, Paleolithic, ketogenic, and omnivore (which, basically, is the diet of everyone else). Vegans, as defined by the study, ate very little meat and dairy: less than 0.5 ounces of the former and less than 0.25 cups of the latter each day. Meanwhile, vegetarians ate less than 0.5 ounces of meat, poultry, and seafood combined; a pescatarian diet was similar to a vegetarian one, but included seafood.

[Related: How to eat sustainably without sacrificing your favorite foods.]

Those who consumed meat but ate less than 0.5 ounces of grains and legumes per day, and less than 0.25 cups of dairy, followed the Paleo diet. People who have a keto diet eat less than 50 grams of net carbohydrates. The authors allowed minimal amounts of some typically excluded foods to account for any minor deviations or accidental consumption of ingredients that the respondent might not have known.

The findings showed that Paleo and keto are among the highest in carbon emissions and lowest in nutrition quality. The researchers estimated these diets produce about 2.6 and almost 3 kilograms of carbon dioxide for every 1,000 calories consumed, respectively. Meanwhile, a vegan diet was the best for the environment, which generates about 0.7 kg of carbon dioxide for the same number of calories. The amount of dietary GHG emissions significantly decreased when meats are replaced with plant proteins.

A vegetarian diet produces the second lowest emissions at 1.16 kilograms of carbon dioxide for every 1,000 calories consumed, the study authors found. Pescatarian and omnivore diets fared in the middle, generating about 1.66 and 2.23 kilograms of carbon dioxide for the same number of calories, respectively.

The scientists reviewed the diets of more than 16,000 adults, collected by the National Center for Health Statistics’ nationally representative National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Rose and his co-authors’ also created their own database of environmental impacts of food commodities, which they linked to the national dataset to calculate the impact of each food item consumed. This allowed the authors to compute an average carbon footprint for each diet type.

[Related: Why seaweed farming could be the next big thing in sustainability.]

The study shows, in line with previous research, that eating less animal-based food is best for the planet. Consumers have the greatest influence in reducing carbon emissions from the food system by shifting their diets to lower carbon-intensive foods, says Gregory A. Keoleian, director of the Center for Sustainable Systems at the University of Michigan who was not involved in the study. For example, a change away from meat altogether could reduce food-related emissions by up to 73 percent. Additionally, if global food production shifted to plant-based diets by 2050, there could also be sequestration of 366 to 603 gigatons of carbon dioxide from native vegetation regrowth in areas currently occupied by animal agriculture.

“All animal-based foods combined—red meat, poultry, fish or seafood, eggs, dairy, and animal-based fats—represent 82 percent of the baseline diet carbon footprint,” says Keoleian. “Plant-based proteins such as legumes, soy products, and nuts and seeds will dramatically reduce impacts.”

Considering foods’ environmental impact

As of 2018, about 5 percent of Americans are vegetarian, and only 2 percent have a vegan diet. “Taste and price, along with cultural and social backgrounds, are more important for most consumers’ decision-making about food, [rather] than health or the environment,” says Rose.

To encourage consumers to shift to environmentally friendly diets, he says policymakers could start by educating the public about the environmental impacts of food, either through dietary recommendations or food labels. One recent study found that around 16 percent of a nationally representative sample might be receptive to changing their diet to follow environmentally sustainable guidelines.

[Related: Eating seafood can be more sustainable and healthy than red meat.]

The Agriculture Department’s Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2020-2025 that provides recommendations on what to consume to support good health, reduce the risk of chronic disease, and meet nutrient needs may play a role. Keoleian says these guidelines can be expanded to include information about the environmental impact of diets, which is relevant because climate change influences human health, too. Reducing diet-related emissions by making better food choices may lead to improved health, mostly by helping reduce air pollution. 

Applying a carbon tax that raises the price of carbon-intensive foods may encourage consumers to opt for lower-impact foods, says Keoleian. But if this were to happen, programs that assist lower-income households—like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)—would be critical since the access and affordability of nutritious food is “particularly problematic,” he adds.

They could also enact programs that subsidize greener food production, promote more sustainable versions of livestock, and offer alternatives to animal-based foods, says Rose. Furthermore, restaurants can place more sustainable foods higher up on the menu and develop new recipes with less meat but more flavor,  he adds.

To make it easier for consumers to shift to environmentally sustainable diets, a whole-of-society approach is needed, Rose says—one that includes policymakers, restaurants, food producers, and eaters, too.

The post Paleo and keto diets aren’t great for you or the planet, study says appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

If you’ve ever been to a fancy tequila bar, you may have hear of an alcoholic drink distilled from agave called mezcal. The smoky-tasting dram is surging in popularity around the world— it’s estimated that the global sales for the beverage will jump from $338 million in 2022 to $2115 million by 2031. Around 70 percent of all mezcal is distilled in the southwestern state of Oaxaca, Mexico. One thing that separates mezcal from the other bottles of hard liquor on the shelf are the worms commonly found inside them. 

[Related: City lights could trigger a baby boom for some moths and butterflies.]

There are some theories as to why the worm is there, especially since they appear to be a relatively recent addition to the drink that dates back to the 17th century. Indigenous Mexicans have been adding larvae to food for ages, but one theory posits that Jacobo Lozano Páez, a distiller who found that adding the creature changed the taste of the agave and began adding it to his spirits in 1940. Some other popular theories center around the belief that the larva brings good luck to the person who finds it in a glass, and a study from 2013 found that adding larvae to is mostly driven by the belief that the larva are healthy and are aphrodisiacs.

In a small study published March 8 in the journal PeerJ Life & Environment, a team of researchers from the United States, Canada, and Switzerland looked to identify what species of larva are found in  bottles of mezcal. They wanted to see if drinkers were consuming the larvae of the aptly nicknamed tequila giant skipper butterfly (Aegiale hesperiaris), the moth Comadia redtenbacheri, a weevil, or a completely unidentified insect species. 

The results were somewhat surprising. All of the larvae in the specimens obtained from 21 commercially available mezcals purchased between 2018 and 2022 were from the moth C. redtenbacheri, despite about 63 species of larvae being widely consumed in Mexico. 

The team used DNA analysis of larvae to determine their identity. Additionally, all of the larvae appeared very similar on the surface, with prolegs and a distinct head capsule. They also variety from pinkish red to white in color.

[Related: Five burning questions about tequila, answered.]

In response to a declining number of larvae available to add to mezcal, the team in this study believes that new cultivation methods for larvae in captivity are needed. researchers have begun to develop methods to cultivate these larvae in captivity, but that can be a challenge. 

“There is still very little known about how best to rear mezcal larvae and additional scientific research is needed to understand how captive insect breeding can become a central part of the agricultural industry in Mexico,” the team writes in the study. 

The post What kind of worm is in your mezcal? appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

YOU’RE WALKING through a forest. The soil is soft beneath your feet, and the sun is shining brightly through the dark green treetops. To your left, you see rotten logs with dense clusters of oyster mushrooms. On your right, a thick bundle of chanterelles sprouts from the leaf-littered floor. Farther off the beaten path are stout-looking porcinis, frequently with a colony of poisonous fly agarics nearby, and, maybe, a bunch of magic blue gyms—those might ruin your nature walk, though. 

The mushroom kingdom holds many shapes and secrets beyond those of the little white buttons and baby bellas found at the grocery store. Ethical foraging is one of the easiest and most valuable ways to incorporate an array of mushrooms into your life; to get started, you can join a mycology group or contact a local guide to learn how to harvest edible fungi safely and sustainably. 

But there are more creative ways to incorporate the power of mushrooms into your days. Fungi are a versatile and adaptable group, which is why they offer a range of benefits to a variety of people. They’re a multifaceted food source, providing fiber, protein, and other nutrients. They can be used to create dyes, build structures, or breed new strains of mushrooms. In essence, they’re really cool, and they’re inspiring biologists, artists, and engineers to develop practices that can make the world prosper. Here’s a mini-tour of what the flourishing field of mushrooming has to offer.

Shopping for mushrooms 

Head to the supplement aisle in any health food store, and you’re bound to find shelf space dedicated to the medicinal wonder of mushrooms. Research on fruit flies and mice shows that cordyceps, popular among consumers (and apocalyptic TV shows), has anti-cancer properties and possibly anti-aging effects, too. Reishi and turkey tail are coveted for their potential immune-stimulating effects, while lion’s mane may help soften dementia, according to a small pilot study.  

Most of these benefits have been investigated on animals or in test tubes, making it challenging to draw conclusions on human health. If you’re looking for guaranteed results, it’s better to grab fresh, whole mushrooms from the produce section than spend all your money on pills and potions. 

“Eating food is always safer and less expensive than using its supplemental form,” says Lori Chong, a registered dietitian at the Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center. With fungi, you should know which edible varieties are good to cook with. Reishi and turkey tail are not commonly used for culinary purposes because their tough texture and bitter taste make them unpalatable. On the other hand, lion’s mane, shiitake, enoki, and maitake make fine ingredients for a meal, each with its distinct flavors and properties. 

A steady intake of mushrooms can work wonders for our bodies. Eating 18 grams daily could reduce someone’s cancer risk by 45 percent, according to a scientific review of 17 observational studies. Using mushrooms to lessen meat consumption can also help reduce the risk of heart disease by lowering saturated fat in a diet—you can do this by mixing chewy stems and caps with ground meat. And they’re one of a few sources of ergothioneine, an amino acid with anti-inflammatory effects, according to several international medical papers. 

Getting them into your diet isn’t too difficult, says Chong. “Mushrooms make a great addition to any combination of stir-fried vegetables,” she explains. “They are easy to prep and quick to cook. Consider sautéing a package of mushrooms and keeping them in the refrigerator to add to an omelet, spaghetti sauce, sandwich, or salad.” 

Oh, and don’t eat them raw: Farmed mushrooms may contain agaritine, a toxic compound destroyed by heat during the cooking process. Research has found that certain store-bought varieties have less agaritine than freshly picked ones, but questions remain.

When shopping for whole mushrooms, make sure they’re firm to the touch, smooth, and dry on the surface. You don’t want any that look dried out, feel slimy, have big spots of discoloration, or show wet spots. Once you get home, store them in the fridge in a loose bag or a glass container with the lid cracked to prevent moisture buildup and fast spoilage.   

Dyeing with mushrooms 

Though they’re certainly delicious, there’s much more you can do with mushrooms than eat them, including making pigments for fabric dyes, ink, and all varieties of paint. In fact, the vastness of the fungus kingdom covers every color of the rainbow, says Julie Beeler, a naturalist, teacher, and artist. “Mushrooms contain a variety of different chemical compounds that create colors ranging from red to yellow to blue and colors in between,” says Beeler. “These pigments can be found throughout the mushroom, but for certain species like Cortinarius semisanguineus [the surprise webcap], the color is concentrated in the caps. For Hydnellum caeruleum [the blue and orange hydnellum], the color is throughout the mushroom. And for Hypomyces lactifluorum [the lobster mushroom], it is only the parasitized outer layer.”

Beeler created the website Mushroom Color Atlas as an educational resource for people who want to use mushrooms to make hues. She walks beginners through the process of extracting dyes from 28 fungal varieties that are common in the wild, and she intends to add another 13 in the coming months. Those few dozen specimens can produce more than 800 colors, she notes.

While the practice is growing in popularity, it has centuries of history. Fungi, particularly lichens—complex organisms created by a symbiotic relationship between a fungus and an alga—have been used in cultural practices across North America, North Africa, Asia, and Europe. Prior to the Industrial Revolution, all pigments were processed naturally. Since then, pretty much every dyed item we encounter has been colored using synthetic dyes. “Mushrooms allow you to get back to natural practices that are more regenerative and sustainable for the environment and the planet as a whole,” says Beeler. 

To stain fabrics, she explains, you need a pot, similar to one for making tea. Beeler suggests cutting the fungi into smaller pieces and steeping them for about an hour in hot, but not boiling, water. (A temperature of about 160 degrees Fahrenheit will prevent the compounds from degrading.) When the color of the water has changed, you can dip natural fibers in to dye them. 

The look of your final product will depend on the mushrooms you use and your material. Wool tends to absorb more vibrant, bolder shades from the organisms than other textiles. Cotton, the world’s most widely used fiber, is surprisingly more complicated because it’s cellulose-based and requires a lengthier mordanting process to fix the chemicals to the threads. “You’ll need to be a lot more advanced to get really great colors on cotton,” says Beeler, “but you can get some incredible colors with wool.” 

If you’re not getting the look you want, you can alter the pH of the dye bath depending on what the mushroom you’re working with responds to best. Certain species prefer more acidic environments, so you can add vinegar to produce an orange tinge. Or for greater alkalinity, add a sprinkle of sodium carbonate to get a vibrant blue or green. The hues might fade over time with repeated washing or exposure to sunlight, unless you use a mordant like alum to bind them to the fibers.

The best part is that you can find your main materials almost anywhere: while moving dead limbs around your yard, during a walk through the park, or perched upon a strip of grass in a parking lot after a good rain. Some will look like the mushrooms you get from the grocery store, with the expected gills underneath; others will have more novel structures. Boletes, such as the spring king, have a spongy cap and produce a range of beautiful earth tones. Some false gill mushrooms deliver a spectrum of blues, greens, and yellows, depending on which you grab. Tooth fungi have fanglike spines and often produce blues or greens. Another excellent clue to the dyeing potential of a mushroom is whether it’s colorful inside and out. The lobster mushroom, for example, makes a variety of pinks and reds, true to its name. 

“I just love that as I’m walking in different environments, every step I’m taking, I’m thinking about that fungal underground in the soil and the mycelium, this web of connections creating a rainbow beneath my feet,” Beeler says. 

Building on mushrooms

Creating structures with mycelium—the network of fungal filaments that allows mushrooms to grow aboveground—is an exercise in simulating the layers in natural ecosystems. The practice is a chance to think of the presence of trash as an opportunity to create something new. “In the living world, there isn’t really such a thing as waste,” says Merlin Sheldrake, the author of Entangled Life, a bestselling book on mycology. Scraps are always used to create something else, like a scavenger breaking down a carcass. “Are there ways that we can learn from those cyclical processes to behave more like other living organisms do?” Sheldrake continues. “Or will we continue just to produce stuff and then put it in landfills?” 

Building with fungi is a relatively new field that’s in a state of expansion. Mycelium can be used to create packaging, clothing, and even buildings; researchers are working on making the materials more robust and streamlining production. BioHAB, an architectural project in Namibia, for instance, is salvaging the remains of cleared encroacher bush, an indigenous species that drastically reduces usable land and resources, to create a substrate for farming mushrooms. The waste from cultivating the fungi is then compacted into eco-friendly bricks. The end product is strong, flexible, insulative, and soundproof, and can be used to reinforce structures in local villages, BioHAB’s website states. 

Similarly, NASA is looking into mycelium-based construction materials for astronaut dwellings on the moon and Mars. These composites are light and transportable, protect better against radiation, could self-replicate in their new environments for an endless resource, and, at the end of their life spans, can be turned into fertilizer.

Working with mushroom structures encourages builders to think about the whole cycle of production. “If you’re growing composite material using mycelium and hemp, for example, then you think about where the hemp is coming from,” Sheldrake explains. “Then you start thinking about the fact that you are harnessing a waste stream from another industry to produce the feedstock to grow the fungus.” 

Accessing mycotecture at the consumer level is a bit more complicated, but more opportunities are sprouting up. If you want to wear your mushrooms, luxury fashion houses like Stella McCartney, Balenciaga, and Hermès are experimenting with mycelium leather. In 2021 Hermès introduced a bag in partnership with MycoWorks, a company that develops leatherlike materials in a variety of colors from reishi. 

Pivoting to mushrooms could, in part, help buffer the effect industrialization has on the planet. Manufacturing is a major cause of environmental degradation, pollution, carbon emissions, and waste. Mushroom-sourced components can offer a break from petrochemicals and plastics if they can be produced sustainably enough and brought to scale. But the field, which is still in its infancy, has a ways to go before it can make an earnest contribution to the use of sustainable goods. 

“These fungal materials are exciting when you step back and look at how all these different industries go together and the possibilities that exist between them,” says Sheldrake. “Unless we rethink the way that we build and produce, then we are going to be in even bigger trouble than we already are.” 

Growing your own mushrooms

When Tavis Lynch started raising mushrooms in the early 1990s, he approached it as a hobby before expanding into more complicated projects, eventually becoming a professional mycologist and commercial cultivator. He currently grows 20 indoor and outdoor mushroom varieties employing genetic pairing—creating new strains of mushrooms by mating spores from two existing varieties. 

Lynch has made a fruitful career out of something people can do at home. A DIY venture doesn’t have to be complicated. “There are a lot of different ways to grow mushrooms,” Lynch explains. “We can grow them on wheat or oat straw. We can grow them on natural logs. We can grow them on compost. We can even grow them on blended substrates that we create, typically an enriched sawdust or coffee grounds.” 

Most varieties of mushrooms bred at home are used for cooking or medicine. But the first thing to assess is the resources available where you live. Coffee grounds, compost, or sawdust will be the best substrates for anyone living in a major metropolitan area where green space is limited or tightly regulated. For those budding hobbyists, going the kitchen counter route with a tabletop kit, rearing specimens in a basement, or even hanging them somewhere in your shower will be your best bet. (Choosing a shaded, humid spot is the most important element.)

Once you’ve figured out the logistics, including what type of mushroom you want to farm, Lynch suggests finding a spawn supplier—a step that, like growing the fungi, won’t be too hard. “They’re popping up left and right every day because the trend toward home cultivation of mushrooms is massive right now,” he says. Companies such as Tavis’s Mushrooms, North Spore, Field & Forest Products, Earth Angel Mushrooms, and Mushroom Queens offer online ordering and quick shipping across the US.

I ordered a pink oyster mushroom kit online from Forest Origins. Starting the growth process was as simple as Lynch had said it would be: All I had to do was cut into the substrate bag, disturb some of the top layer with a fork, dampen it, and place it on my counter to get indirect sunlight. Then, twice a day, I came by and spritzed it with a water bottle. I started seeing fruiting bodies develop about a week into this daily ritual. Sadly, I accidentally sprayed it with bleach while cleaning and had to order another kit. 

Bleaching aside, checking on my baby mushrooms felt as good as tending to my other plants. Ensuring they had enough sun and moisture gave me a few minutes of grounding amid chaotic days. It was a reminder that nearly everything provided to us by this Earth is beautiful and useful.

“Getting out, working with your hands, having a distraction from your digital devices and from the noise of others and the city—that’s the real medicine,” says Lynch. “I’m looking out my window right now at my mushroom farm, and I wish I was out there working on it.” 

Read more PopSci+ stories.

The post How to use the power of mushrooms to improve your life appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

This article was originally featured on The Conversation.

The U.S. Defense Department issued a memo on Feb. 17, 2023, warning service members to avoid eating poppy seeds because doing so may result in a positive urine test for the opiate codeine. Addiction and pain medicine specialist Gary Reisfield explains what affects the opiate content of poppy seeds and how they could influence drug tests.

What are poppy seeds?

Poppy seeds come from a species of poppy plant called Papaver somniferum. “Somniferum” is Latin for “sleep-bringing,” which hints that it might contain opiates – powerful compounds that depress the central nervous system and can induce drowsiness and sleep.

There are two main uses for the opium poppy. It is a source of the opiates used in painkillers, the most biologically active of which are morphine and codeine. Its seeds are also used for cooking and baking.

Poppy seeds themselves don’t contain opiates. But during harvesting, the seeds can become contaminated with opiates contained in the milky latex of the seed pod covering them.

What affects opiate content in poppy seeds?

Many factors determine the opiate concentrations and ratios of poppies. As with wine grapes, the opiate profile of the poppy plant – and thus its seeds – is affected by its terroir: climate, soil, amount of sunshine, topography and time of harvest.

Another factor is the variety or cultivar of the plant. For example, there are genetically engineered opium poppies that produce no morphine or codeine and others that produce no opium latex at all.

Can you get high from eating poppy seeds?

Practically speaking, you cannot eat enough poppy seeds to get you high. Furthermore, processing dramatically decreases opiate content – for example, by washing or cooking or baking the seeds.

Do poppy seeds affect drug tests?

Poppy seeds don’t have nearly enough opiates to intoxicate you. But because drug tests are exquisitely sensitive, consuming certain poppy seed food products can lead to positive urine drug test results for opiates – specifically for morphine, codeine or both.

Under most circumstances, opiate concentrations in the urine are too low to produce a positive test result. But certain food products – and it’s generally impossible to know which ones, because opiate content does not appear on food labels – contain enough opiates to produce positive test results. Moreover, because of overlap in opiate concentrations and morphine-to-codeine ratios, it can sometimes be challenging to distinguish test results that are due to the consumption of poppy seeds from those that are due to the use of opiate drugs.

This is not a problem with most workplace drug testing. Test results are reviewed by a specially trained physician called a medical review officer. Unless the physician finds evidence of unauthorized opiate use, such as needle marks or signs of opiate intoxication or withdrawal, even relatively high concentrations of opiates in the urine that produce positive test results are generally ruled to be negative.

It turns out, though, that drug testing in the military is different, and poppy seeds pose potential problems. One such problem, as highlighted in recent news reports, concerns service members who test positive for codeine and assert a “poppy seed defense.” They are still regarded as having taken codeine, sometimes with serious consequences, such as a disciplinary action or discharge from the service.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The post Poppy seeds can skew drug test results, but they won’t actually intoxicate you appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Animal feed plays a major role in the environmental impact of your diet. In dairy and beef production, it accounts for about 36 and 55 percent of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, respectively. The raw materials for animal feed typically consist of crops like soybean and wheat and animal-based products like fish meal and fish oil. But the production of these ingredients could be detrimental to the environment. 

About 33 percent of croplands are dedicated to livestock feed production, which may result in nutrient and pesticide runoff. Crops for animal feed also make up about six percent of the GHG emissions from global food production. Meanwhile, increasing demand for feed made from marine byproducts may be unsustainable for ocean ecosystems.

“When we feed these ingredients to animals that have their own environmental impact from production, the overall impact is much higher than if we just ate the ingredients themselves, “ says Caitlin D. Kuempel, conservation scientist and lecturer at the Griffith University School of Environment and Science in Australia. “The more feed required to grow an animal, the higher this overall pressure can become.” 

Global food production, including plant and animal agriculture, is estimated to make up 26 percent of the total GHG emissions around the world. Therefore, to reduce the environmental impact of animal products, it may be beneficial to look at their diets and work on making them more sustainable as well.

Animal feed production has a significant environmental impact

For many types of farmed animals, feed typically accounts for 50 to 70 percent of production costs, says Kurt A. Rosentrater, food engineer and associate professor at Iowa State University whose research focuses on improving the sustainability of agricultural-based systems. 

“Ironically, the production of feed and the ingredients that go into these feeds can often result in up to about 70 percent of the environmental impacts from eating products from these animals,” says Rosentrater. That’s not the case for all species, especially since ruminants produce significant GHG emissions during digestion. But for most animal-based products, the most significant portion of environmental impacts happen on the farm before they are even processed into food products, he adds.

[Related: Smarter fertilizer use could shrink our agricultural carbon footprint.]

For instance, animal feed given to farmed broiler chickens and farmed salmonids (including salmon, marine trout, and Arctic char) account for more than half of their respective industries’ environmental impact, according to a recent Current Biology study. Feed production accounts for at least 78 percent of the environmental pressures of farmed chicken, and over 67 percent for that of salmon.

Chicken and salmon are the largest animal-sourced food sectors on land and the sea, which makes them a fitting focus for research. “We combined data on four pressures—greenhouse gas emissions, freshwater use, nutrient pollution, and land and sea disturbance—into a single metric to get a more holistic view of the environmental footprint of these two production systems,” says Kuempel, who was involved in the study.

The findings revealed that 95 percent of the environmental footprints of chicken and salmon are concentrated in just five percent of the world, which includes some of the largest producers like the US and Chile. Knowing the spatial distribution helps give more local context. This could help identify areas that may have resource competition, and focus on location-specific policies to reduce environmental impact, says Kuempel.

Moreover, the study found that more than 85 percent of farmed chicken and salmon’s environmental footprints overlap primarily due to their shared feed ingredients. Commercial poultry feed often consists of crops like corn and wheat, but they also contain fish meal and fish oils. At the same time, salmon aquaculture requires 2.5 million tons of crops like soybean and wheat for feed, but they still eat fish meal.

“Since feed contributes such a high percentage of their environmental footprint, this is an obvious area where changes could potentially be made to lower their environmental pressures overall,” says Kuempel.

Improve the sustainability of feed production

Some actions can improve the sustainability of feed production, including changing the dietary composition of feed ingredients to include more environmentally friendly options, says Kuempel. This can be effective since the environmental impacts of feeds are primarily influenced by their ingredients.

In a 2021 study, the authors found that reducing the proportion of high-impact ingredients, like cereals and oils, while increasing the proportion of low-impact ones, like peas or fava beans, may result in eco-friendlier pig production without harming animal performance.

[Related: What the ‘B’ label on your favorite drinks and snacks means.]

The fast-growing aquaculture industry has also influenced a shift to crop-based feed ingredients to maintain sustainability in ocean ecosystems. However, for carnivorous farmed fish, plant-based diets would affect their nutritional profile, and subsequently, human nutrition. More studies are needed to understand the impact of different feed formulations on various farmed fish.

A 2020 Scientific Reports study found that reducing the fish meal component from 35 to 15 percent in the feed for the Atlantic salmon parr reduced their growth. However, partially replacing it with fish protein hydrolysate (FPH) supplementation in a high plant protein diet might result in a similar growth performance with the fish fed with a 35 percent fish meal.

Kuempel also suggests introducing novel feeds like microalgae and insects to potentially reduce environmental pressure. Microalgae could successfully replace fish meal and fish oil in aquaculture diets while also improving growth and meat quality in poultry and pigs. Feeding trials conducted on chickens, several fish species, and pigs concluded that insect meal could replace over 25 percent of soy meal or fish meal in animal feed with no adverse effects.

Overall, animal feed production has the capacity to become more sustainable. “Many researchers are hard at work trying to improve the efficiency of ingredient growth and processing, as well as improved digestibility and reduced GHG emissions during digestion,” says Rosentrater. “Many promising developments are underway that will soon reduce the impacts of feed and ingredient production, processing, and digestion.”

The post To lower food emissions, consider what your dinner ate appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

A popular artificial sweetener, erythritol, has been linked to blood clotting, heart attack, stroke, and death, according to a study published February 27 in the journal Nature Medicine. Individuals with elevated factors for heart disease–such as diabetes–were twice as likely to have a heart attack or stroke if their blood contained high levels of erythritol in their blood.

Erythritol and other artificial sweeteners like aspartame and saccharin are common replacements for table sugar in low-calorie, low-carbohydrate, and “keto” branded products. “Sugar-free” products like those containing erythritol are often recommended for individuals with diabetes, metabolic syndrome, or obesity and are looking for options to help manage their sugar or calorie intake. 

The product, which can be called a “natural” sweetener because it is made in very small amounts by the human body and in fruits and vegetables, has increased in popularity in recent years. A 2022 report from research firm NielsenIQ found that sales growth for products with erythritol grew by 43 percent over two years and products that claim to have “natural sweeteners” in them grew by 91 percent.

[Related: What we know about diet soda’s connection to heart disease, stroke, and early death.]

“Sweeteners like erythritol have rapidly increased in popularity in recent years but there needs to be more in-depth research into their long-term effects,” said senior author Stanley Hazen, chairman for the Department of Cardiovascular & Metabolic Sciences in Lerner Research Institute and co-section head of Preventive Cardiology at Cleveland Clinic, in a statement. “Cardiovascular disease builds over time, and heart disease is the leading cause of death globally. We need to make sure the foods we eat aren’t hidden contributors.”

In the study, the researchers looked at over 4,000 people in the United States and Europe who were undergoing cardiac evaluation. They found that subjects with higher blood erythritol levels were at elevated risk of experiencing a heart attack, stroke, or death. 

In preclinical studies, they also found some evidence erythritol increased the formation of blood clots. To do this, the team looked at the effects of adding erythritol to either whole blood or isolated platelets. These are the cell fragments that clump together to stop bleeding and contribute to blood clots. They found that erythritol made platelets easier to activate and form a clot.

“The degree of risk was not modest,” Hazen told CNN. “If your blood level of erythritol was in the top 25 percent compared to the bottom 25 percent, there was about a two-fold higher risk for heart attack and stroke. It’s on par with the strongest of cardiac risk factors, like diabetes.”

Erythritol is produced by fermenting corn and is about 70 percent as sweet as sugar. After it is eaten, it is poorly metabolized by the body and goes into the bloodstream instead. It leaves the body naturally through urine and the human body does create low amounts of erythritol naturally, so any additional consumption through diet can accumulate in the body.

[Related: Sorry, but artificial sweeteners won’t help you lose weight.]

The study’s authors note that follow-up studies are needed to confirm their findings in the general population. Additionally, the point to several limitations in the study, including that clinical observation studies demonstrate association and not causation.

“Our study shows that when participants consumed an artificially sweetened beverage with an amount of erythritol found in many processed foods, markedly elevated levels in the blood are observed for days – levels well above those observed to enhance clotting risks,” said Hazen. “It is important that further safety studies are conducted to examine the long-term effects of artificial sweeteners in general, and erythritol specifically, on risks for heart attack and stroke, particularly in people at higher risk for cardiovascular disease.”

The post Popular artificial sweetener associated with risk of heart attack and stroke appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

These days, it seems like you can make milk out of anything. But should companies be able to call the liquid made from oats, coconuts and soy beans “milk”? The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has released draft guidance on how food and beverage companies should label and identify plant-based milk products marketed as milk alternatives. 

The draft guidance proposes that companies can continue to use the word milk to market these dairy alternatives, but they also should include a statement that explains how the product compares nutritionally with dairy milk. One possibility is that culture alt-milk labels state that the product “contains lower amounts of vitamin D and calcium than milk” or “contains less protein than milk.”

[Related: Magnetic microrobots could zap the bacteria out of your cold glass of milk.]

The FDA writes that consumers “understand that plant-based milk alternatives do not contain milk.” The draft cites a survey of consumer comments gathered by the agency where roughly 75 percent of participants reported knowing that the products were not made with dairy. Focus group research also indicated that calling these products “milk” is “strongly rooted in consumers’ vocabulary.”

“Getting enough of the nutrients in milk and fortified soy beverages is especially important to help children grow and develop, and parents and caregivers should know that many plant-based alternatives do not have the same nutrients as milk,” said Susan T. Mayne, director of the FDA’s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, in a statement. “Food labels are an important way to help support consumer behavior, so we encourage the use of the voluntary nutritional statements to better help customers make informed decisions.”

The Good Food Institute, which advocates for plant-based products, objected to the extra labeling writing “the guidance misguidedly admonishes companies to make a direct comparison” with cow’s milk, even though key nutrients are already required to be listed. Meanwhile, chief executive of animal-free meat company BetterMeat Paul Shapiro praised the move on Twitter. 

In response, Sen. James E. Risch (R-Idaho) and Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) issued a joint statement saying that the “misguided rule will hurt America’s dairy farmers and our rural communities.” Idaho and Wisconsin, both states with large dairy industries with a vested interest in selling cow’s milk, have been pushing for better labeling of alternative milk products. In 2017, Baldwin introduced the DAIRY PRIDE Act which would require the FDA to enforce the federal definition of milk as the “lacteal secretion … obtained by the complete milking of one or more healthy cows.” The bill has yet to pass, despite being reintroduced in 2021.

According to the FDA, 1 in 3 households in the United States reported purchasing alternative milk products in 2016, and sales of plant-based milk products rose from $1.5 billion to $2.4 billion from 2016 to 2020. 

Consumption of cow milk has decreased by nearly half in the past 50 years, according to the Department of Agriculture. As non dairy milks have surged in popularity, the cattle milk industry has been challenging the right of the plant based milk industry to call their projects milk. 

The FDA oversees “standards of identity”, legally binding definitions of products so that consumers know what they are getting when they purchase something. Another example is how some cheeses, like Kraft Singles, are labeled “cheese product” depending on pasteurization and production processes. 

In 2018, the FDA began a strategy to update these standards “in light of marketing trends and the latest nutritional science,” but milk has already had a complicated history with standards of identity. The FDA previously said that milk can generally be described as “the lacteal secretion, practically free from colostrum, obtained by the complete milking of one or more healthy cows.” 

The dairy industry has raised concerns for two decades regarding the FDA’s policing the definition of milk amidst the rise of plant based dairy milk alternatives. Dairy producers have argued that plant-based milk companies are playing “fast and loose using standardized dairy terms,” arguing that this language use is inaccurate since the plant-based alternatives don’t have the same taste or nutritional profile as dairy milk. 

[Related: The almond milk craze could be bad news for bees.]

In response to the new draft guidelines, Jim Mulhern, head of the National Milk Producers Federation, told The Washington Post that the proposal is a “step toward labeling integrity” that acknowledges the “utter lack of nutritional standards prevalent in plant-based beverages.” He criticized the suggested guidance on terminology, emphasizing that “dairy terms are for true dairy products, not plant-based impostors.”

The debate is likely to continue as some nutritional studies are challenging dairy milk’s superiority over plant-based alternatives. A 2020 review by The New England Journal of Medicine on how milk and human health found that dairy milk did not prevent bone fractures, a common reason for suggesting milk as a healthy beverage. The study found higher rates of hip fractures in countries that consumed the highest amounts of milk and calcium.

“In reality, some plant milks are likely to be superior to cow milk,”  Walter Willett, a professor of epidemiology and nutrition at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and author of the study told CNN. He added that soy milk has more healthy essential fatty acids than cow’s milk and that eating soy phytoestrogens in adolescence may reduce the risk of breast cancer.

The FDA is currently accepting comments on the new draft guidance and, in a statement, FDA Commissioner Robert Carliff said, “The draft recommendations issued today should lead to providing consumers with clear labeling to give them the information they need to make informed nutrition and purchasing decisions on the products they buy for themselves and their families.”

The post The FDA says it’s ok to call almond milk ‘milk’ (for now) appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

While killer fungi might be on top of your nightmare list thanks to HBO’s The Last of Us, some mushrooms are really not all that bad—and maybe even beneficial. In fact, lion’s mane mushrooms (Hericium erinaceus) have been used to treat ailments and maintain health in traditional Chinese medicine since antiquity, according to Dae Hee Lee, a researcher at South Korean medical equipment company CNGBio Co.

In Europe, the use of mushrooms like lion’s mane mushroom (Hericium erinaceus) dates back to 450 BCE. Hippocrates (a Greek physician) found that it held potential anti-inflammatory properties and could cauterize wounds. 

But how exactly this fungi acts as medicine is pretty unknown. Recently, a team of researchers from Australia and South Korea have discovered an active compound from the edible lion’s mane mushroom that enhances memory and boosts nerve growth. The study published earlier this year in the Journal of Neurochemistry found that in preclinical trials, the mushrooms improve brain cell growth and memory. CNGBio Co supported and collaborated with the team on this study.

[Related: Oyster mushrooms release nerve gas to kill worms before eviscerating them.]

Previous studies have found that its compounds could be used to help regulate blood sugar and reduce high blood pressure, as well as other mental and brain health applications including treating depression, promoting recovery in brain injuries.

“Extracts from these so-called ‘lion’s mane’ mushrooms have been used in traditional medicine in Asian countries for centuries, but we wanted to scientifically determine their potential effect on brain cells,” said study co-author Frederic Meunier from the Queensland Brain Institute, in a statement. “Pre-clinical testing found the lion’s mane mushroom had a significant impact on the growth of brain cells and improving memory.”

Lion’s mane mushrooms grow on old or dead broadleaf tree trunks. Like many fungi, they’re composed of a visible fruiting body (the mushroom itself) and the mycelium–the bottom structure that looks like roots. Both the fruiting body and mycelium have compounds with potential health benefits.

The team studied how compounds in the mushrooms affected brain cells and found that it promoted the neurons to extend and connect to one another. “Using super-resolution microscopy, we found the mushroom extract and its active components largely increase the size of growth cones, which are particularly important for brain cells to sense their environment and establish new connections with other neurons in the brain,” said Meunier.

[Related: We may finally know how magic mushrooms help fight depression.]

According to the team, a future application of this compound could be protecting against neurodegenerative cognitive disorders such as Alzheimer’s disease.

“Our idea was to identify bioactive compounds from natural sources that could reach the brain and regulate the growth of neurons, resulting in improved memory formation,” said co-author Ramon Martinez-Marmol from the University of Queensland, in a statement.

The post Lion’s mane mushroom shows promise in boosting brain cell growth appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

The British staple beans on toast is in for a makeover. A group of researchers plan to slip faba beans inside white bread to make it more nutritious and sustainable. The product, which they’ve dubbed “beans in toast,” could hit UK shelves in the next few years if a company decides to manufacture it. 

About 96 percent of the British public eat bread, and of those, 90 percent choose white bread, according to Kantar Group, a data analytics company. Putting faba beans, also commonly called fava beans and broad beans, where the recipe calls for soy could provide Britons with a source of easily digested protein, fiber and iron, which are often low in UK diets. “We’ve chosen faba beans because they’re very particularly nutrient-rich,” says Julie Lovegrove, the leading researcher of the project and a professor of human nutrition at the University of Reading in England. She says that only 11 percent of the UK population consumes the recommended fiber intake of 30 grams a day. 

According to Lovegrove, early testing of the faba bean product resembles normal white bread. “It tastes very similar; it looks very similar,” she says. “It’s slightly darker in color, and doesn’t rise slightly as much as the white bread. But we are at the beginning of this project, so those are the challenges that we’re going to overcome. We want to make it as identical to the commercial white bread as we can.”

The researchers say that faba beans, native to northern Africa and southwestern Asia, can be grown sustainably and at low cost in the UK. “For the UK, the most sustainable plant-based protein source is the one that requires the least input for the maximum output [of protein yield],” Donal O’Sullivan, a crop science professor at the University of Reading and another one of the researchers, wrote in an email to PopSci. “It is faba bean that has the most favorable footprint.” 

[Related: To save water, Arizona farmers are growing guayule for sustainable tires]

White bread is typically made using 1 to 3 percent soya flour, grown from soybeans, which is used to whiten the bread, according to Yael Vodovotz, a food scientist and professor at the Ohio State University. Researchers would replace the soya flour and 25 percent of the wheat with faba bean flour, which they say could reduce carbon dioxide emissions from the production process by 11 percent compared to a wheat-only loaf. 

The project is an exercise in sustainable local food growth, which Lovegrove says the UK government has encouraged through funding. Most of the country’s soybeans are imported across oceans, and a sizable portion of the supply comes from the US. In fact, soybeans make up the second largest cash crop in the states behind corn, with farmers sending $27 billion worth of the commodity abroad in 2021. The bean’s prominence has led the crop to become the subject of trade politics, with China, the biggest US soy importer, instituting tit-for-tat tariffs in 2018.

US soybean production has a relatively low carbon footprint and most are grown using just precipitation, according to Jeremy Ross, a soybean agronomist and professor at the University of Arkansas. “Less than 10 percent of the total US acreage of soybean is irrigated. So a majority of the soybean acres in the US are dependent on rainfall during the growing season,” he wrote in an email to PopSci. 

[Related: Which veggie oil is most sustainable?]

But soybeans aren’t native to the UK and don’t grow well there. Faba beans, on the other hand, sprout nicely in the country. “We’re using homegrown pulses,” or dried legumes, Lovegrove says. (Only about 55 percent of food that Britons eat are grown in the country—the rest are imported.) “There’s a big drive to increase the growth of food within the UK to reduce miles traveled of the foods themselves,” she explains.

The group of researchers won £2 million in government funding to develop their beans in toast product. The project is led by a large coalition: 25 researchers from the University of Reading will work with retailers, farmers, and policymakers. There are several steps to get it started. First, the researchers will grow the faba beans and produce the flour for the substitute. Then, they will test their product and survey consumers for their opinions on it. Finally, they will model the impact of increasing dried-legume consumption on human and environmental health.

The post A new ingredient could revolutionize white bread appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

For many of us, coffee is an essential. But the research on its role in a healthy diet is still pretty confusing. It wakes most of us up so we’re ready to face the day, can lower the risk of dementia, and may increase longevity. However, too much can lead to headaches, stomach aches, an increased heart rate, and more. 

One key to balancing this out may lie in what goes into the caffeinated beverage: milk. A study published January 30 in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, finds that a milk and coffee combo might have an anti-inflammatory effect. 

[Related: Coffee and tea could lower your risk of dementia.]

Inflammation occurs when foreign substances, bacteria, or viruses enter the body and inflammatory cells are released as a defense. It also happens when tendons or muscles are overloaded, like after a workout. Chronic inflammation is a  symptom of diseases like Alzheimer’s disease and rheumatoid arthritis, which can cause pain, fever, and damaged joints.

In a new study, a team of researchers from the University of Copenhagen in Denmark investigated how antioxidants called polyphenols behave when combined with amino acids, the building blocks of proteins. 

Polyphenols are naturally found antioxidants in lots of fruits and vegetables, tea, coffee, red wine and beer, but there are still many unknowns about the substance. 

“In the study, we show that as a polyphenol reacts with an amino acid, its inhibitory effect on inflammation in immune cells is enhanced,” said study co-author Marianne Nissen Lund from the University of Copehahagen’s Department of Food Science, in a statement. “As such, it is clearly imaginable that this cocktail could also have a beneficial effect on inflammation in humans. We will now investigate further, initially in animals. After that, we hope to receive research funding which will allow us to study the effect in humans.”

The team applied artificial inflammation to immune cells to investigate what kind of anti-inflammatory effect occurs when polyphenols and proteins are combined. One group of cells received various doses of polyphenols that had reacted with an amino acid. Another group only received polyphenols in the same doses and a control group didn’t get anything.

They found that the immune cells that were treated with the combination of polyphenols and amino acids were actually twice as effective at fighting inflammation as the cells to which only polyphenols were added.

[Related: Should pregnant people not drink coffee? The answer is complicated.]

“It is interesting to have now observed the anti-inflammatory effect in cell experiments. And obviously, this has only made us more interested in understanding these health effects in greater detail. So, the next step will be to study the effects in animals,” said co-author Andrew Williams of the university’s Department of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, in a statement.

Previous research has found that polyphenols bind to proteins in beer, meat products, and milk, and beer. In a separate new study Nissen Lund tested whether the molecules also bind to each other in a coffee drink with milk. 

“Our result demonstrates that the reaction between polyphenols and proteins also happens in some of the coffee drinks with milk that we studied. In fact, the reaction happens so quickly that it has been difficult to avoid in any of the foods that we’ve studied so far,” said Nissen Lund.

More work is needed on the major advantages of polyphenols and the team’s next steps include figuring out how to add the right quantities of polyphenols to foods to achieve the best quality.

“Because humans do not absorb that much polyphenol, many researchers are studying how to encapsulate polyphenols in protein structures which improve their absorption in the body,” said Nissen Lund. “This strategy has the added advantage of enhancing the anti-inflammatory effects of polyphenols.”

The post Taking milk with your coffee could be good for your health appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Adapted from the book WHAT’S GOTTEN INTO YOU by Dan Levitt. Copyright © 2023 by Dan Levitt. Courtesy of Harper, an imprint of HarperCollins Publishers.

By the late 1800s, scientists had identified four of the basic substances that make up our bodies: protein, fat, carbohydrates and minerals. These four kinds of molecules form the scientific basis of the ingredient list in the first baby food: Liebig’s Soluble Food for Babies, “the most perfect substitute for mother’s milk.” Unfortunately, no one suspected that Liebig’s list was incomplete, which would explain why babies raised solely on his formula did not thrive. It turns out that we have to eat one more type of molecule to assemble ourselves.

   Unhappily, a lack of this last kind of substance was responsible for four exceptionally gruesome diseases. In the seafaring age between 1500 and 1800, scurvy killed about two million sailors, many more than the who died in battle. Throughout Asia, a pernicious disease called beriberi sporadically paralyzed and killed millions. Pellagra, memorably known for its four “D”s—dementia, dermatitis, diarrhea, and death—afflicted the poor in Europe and America, particularly many in the American South who primarily ate bacon, cornbread, and molasses. Rickets deformed the bones of the children of rich and poor alike. Growing up in Arkansas during the Great Depression, my own mother-in-law’s sisters were stricken by it. Until scientists could discover the reason for these inexplicable ailments, countless victims would suffer and die hideous deaths.

Some clues, however, had long been visible, including a particularly promising one that appeared half a century before Liebig was even born. In 1747, a 31-year-old British naval surgeon named James Lind stood one day on the rolling deck of the HMS Salisbury, a three-masted ship of war outfitted with fifty cannon. As they patrolled the Bay of Biscay, off the coast of France, Lind relished the fresh air, a welcome relief from the stagnant hold below and the vexing mystery he faced there.

It had been only eight weeks since they’d left port, and already forty of the three hundred sailors on board had contracted scurvy. The men limping to Lind’s sick bay had putrid gums and red, blue, or black spots resembling bruises on their skin. They were lethargic and losing the strength to walk. He knew that, if the disease grew too advanced, he would have to cut away their grossly swollen gums just so that they could swallow their food.

In the British navy, this was hardly unusual. Scurvy was common on longer voyages. Lind was all too aware of the single worst incident, as it had happened just seven years earlier. The navy had dispatched a squadron of eight ships under the command of Sir George Anson to attack Spanish galleons in South America. Three and a half years later, Anson returned with a treasure so vast, he needed thirty-two wagons to haul it to the Tower of London. But only about 400 of his 1,900 men returned with him. Most had died of scurvy.

It was not that the navy completely ignored the disease. The problem was, there was no agreement on how to cure it.

Yet, this knowledge had once been known, at least by some. Two hundred years before, many ship captains could have told you that scurvy breaks out on long voyages that deprive sailors of fresh fruit and vegetables. The writer Stephen Bown observes that in the seventeenth century, captains made mad dashes from port to port in an attempt to outrun the disease. It was also known that lemon juice could prevent or cure it. In his 1617 textbook, The Surgeon’s Mate, John Woodall recommended lemon juice daily. The Dutch East India Company even established plantations in the Cape of Good Hope and Mauritius to provide lemons for their crews.

Over time, unfortunately, the knowledge of lemon juice’s beneficial properties somehow vanished. The reasons were many, including simple complacency. When the incidence of scurvy grew worse again, there was resistance to citrus. Lemon juice was expensive and some shipowners suspected that merchants touted the imaginary medicinal powers of lemons just to drive up the price. At the same time, physicians were peddling a confusing variety of many other supposed cures. As author David Harvie observes, there were even “anti-fruiters,” who claimed that lemons hurt rather than helped sailors on some expeditions.

Lind had seen relatively little scurvy himself until, on their tenweek voyage the previous summer, eighty of his crew had been laid low. As he cast about for an explanation, he noted that the rainy cold weather they encountered had made it hard for the crew to dry out and fostered stale air in the hold. Lind wondered if this bad air was the culprit. He also contemplated the possibility that the lack of a proper diet was to blame. Yet that seemed unlikely. “They had been afflicted by scurvy,” he would write, “even though the captain supplied the crew with mutton-broth fowls and meat from his own table.” On Lord Anson’s ships, Lind noted, scurvy had broken out in spite of a plentiful supply of what he believed to be adequate provisions and good water.

Despite Anson’s staggering loss, the brass in the British Admiralty displayed a disastrous lack of urgency. There was a great difference of opinion about its cause. Was it overcrowding? An excess of salt? Bad air? Some believed that only sluggish and lazy sailors succumbed to it. Moreover, even if they were to accept that for some strange reason lemons helped prevent it, carrying large crates of lemons on long voyages would entail great expense and was impractical besides, because lemons and lemon juice spoil. Perhaps most important, scurvy usually passed over the officers and higher-ranking seamen. So it simply seemed more expedient to replace casualties by pressing more unwitting men into service (often through trickery or kidnapping) than it was to shoulder the burden and expense of trying to prevent the disease.

Lind, newly promoted to ship’s surgeon, was horrified by scurvy. Having a sound scientific mind, he requested permission from his captain to search for a remedy by conducting an experiment that is considered by some to be the first clinical trial in all of medicine. Lind divided twelve sailors suffering from scurvy into six pairs and lodged them in hammocks in the ship’s forehold. He doled out a different remedy to each: either cider, sulfuric acid, vinegar, seawater, or oranges and lemons. The unfortunate sixth pair received a formulation that one of Lind’s colleagues recommended: an unappetizing paste of garlic, mustard seed, dried radish root, a tree resin known as balsam of Peru, gum myrrh, and for good measure, an occasional dose of barley water with tamarind along with cream of tartar to purge the system. After a week, he ran out of fruit and had to end his trial. It was by now evident that only two of the remedies had any effect. The cider appeared to help a little bit, while, incredible as it seemed, the citrus largely cured the disease—so much so that one sailor returned to duty, and Lind put the other to work nursing his companions.

You might think that Lind would immediately jump up and down yelling “Eureka,” because he had just proven, for all time, that something in citrus fruit cured scurvy. Not a chance. The unfortunate Lind was mired up to his hips in intellectual quicksand—the confusing medical theories of his day.

Lind gave himself time to make sense of his work. He retired from the navy, earned a medical degree in Edinburgh, and established a practice as a physician. Then he settled down to review many accounts of scurvy by others, before finally and conclusively explaining it.

In 1753, six years after his landmark experiment, Lind published a 456-page opus. Although the results of his experiment may seem clear-cut, his conclusions could have been, well, more conclusive. This is the point in our story where one wants to say, “Wait, wait! Can’t you see?” After perceptively reviewing fifty-four other works on scurvy, he only gets around to his own trial a third of the way through the book—and devotes just five paragraphs to it. He was confident he had shown that citrus could cure scurvy, yet he struggled to explain the malady’s cause. Concepts of disease at the time were a complete mess.

They were dominated by Galen’s idea that sickness resulted from an imbalance of bodily humors. So Lind concluded that on ships, a combination of poor diet and moist cold air blocked perspiration, and this trapped putrid unwholesome humors inside the body. He explained that citrus could open up the skin’s pores, but in a later edition he conceded that other medicines could also do the same. “I do not mean to say,” he opined, “that lemon juice and wine are the only remedy for the scurvy. This disease, like many others, may be cured by Medicines of very different and opposite qualities to each other, and to that of lemons.” As the author Frances Frankenburg observed, “If there was ever a researcher who doubted his own findings, it was James Lind.”

On the bright side, Lind did recommend that sailors use lemon juice to prevent the disease. But he followed that sound suggestion with an uncharacteristically sloppy error. To prevent the juice from rotting, he suggested it should be heated to make a syrup—little suspecting that heat destroys the juice’s curative powers. To add to the confusion, many distinguished physicians championed other cures that were entirely ineffective. One sea surgeon wrote sourly, “Dr. Lind reckons the want of fresh vegetables and greens a very powerful cause of the Scurvy; he might with equal reason, have added fresh animal food, wine, punch, spruce beer, or whatever else is capable of preventing this disease.” Lind’s critic went on to recommend rice as a remedy, or a mixture of one-fourth brandy and three-fourths water. Scurvy rampaged on, unabated.

In 1756, three years after Lind published his treatise, the Seven Years’ War broke out between Britain and France. Of the 184,899 sailors who enlisted or were pressed into the Royal Navy, only 1,512 were killed in action. Another 133,708 expired from disease—primarily scurvy. Scurvy continued to hamstring the British navy during the American Revolution that followed soon after. If the Admiralty had provided lemons to their crews, some argue, the British might have prevailed against the colonies, or at least held off France’s navy and negotiated a more favorable settlement.

It wasn’t until 1795, a year after Lind’s death, that the Royal Navy began issuing lemon juice to sailors. For a time, scurvy actually ceased to be a problem. But after taking one fruitful step forward, the navy leaped two steps back. Eighty years later, they switched to limes, which they could buy more cheaply from plantations in the British West Indies. Henceforth, British sailors were, of course, known as limeys. But regrettably, limes were much less effective at preventing scurvy, and this cast doubt on the value of any citrus juice as a cure. Even in the early twentieth century, when doctors agreed that fresh fruit and vegetables could treat scurvy, they still could not agree on the disease’s cause, which is why, in 1912, scurvy plagued the British explorer Robert Scott’s meticulously planned expedition to the South Pole. His conviction that bacterial food poisoning was to blame likely hastened his own demise. After hundreds of years, scurvy’s cause still remained a mystery.

Buy What’s Gotten Into You by Dan Levitt here.

The post It took centuries (and vitamins) for doctors to finally stop scurvy appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

While eating locally grown produce is great for the environment, eating locally caught freshwater fish might be more dangerous for human health than we realized. A study from the Environmental Working Group (EWG) finds that freshwater fish in the United States contain dangerous levels of “forever chemicals” including one called PFOS (Perfluorooctane sulfonic acid). PFOS is part of a group of manufactured additives known as perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS.

“PFAS are called forever chemicals because they do not break down in the environment and often bioaccumulate in people and species, like fish,” said David Andrews, a senior scientist at EWG senior scientist and one of the study’s lead authors, in an email to PopSci. “PFOS was the primary ingredient in 3M’s ScotchGard. It was also used in other products, like aqueous film forming foam used for fighting fires. PFOS is one of thousands of per- and polyfluorinated alkyl substances.”

PFOS is just one of the PFAS that have since seeped into drinking water and accumulated in the bodies of fish, livestock, dairy, and game animals. The team in this study found that eating one fish in a year is equal to drinking water with PFOS at 48 parts per trillion (ppt) for one month.

[Related: 3M announces it will cease making ‘forever chemical’ PFAS by 2026.]

“People who consume freshwater fish, especially those who catch and eat fish regularly, are at risk of alarming levels of PFAS in their bodies,” Andrews said in a statement. “Growing up, I went fishing every week and ate those fish. But now when I see fish, all I think about is PFAS contamination.”

According to the team, the research bolsters calls for stronger regulations of these chemicals, more testing on fish, and raises environmental justice concerns for the communities who depend on eating freshwater fish, including local Native American tribes.

The study found that the median amounts of PFAS in freshwater fish were 280 times greater than the forever chemicals detected in some commercially caught and sold fish. Eating a single meal of freshwater fish could lead to similar PFAS exposure as eating store-bought fish every day for a year, according to testing data.

“These test results are breathtaking,” said Scott Faber, EWG’s senior vice president for government affairs, in a statement. “Eating one bass is equivalent to drinking PFOS-tainted water for a month.”

The team analyzed data from more than 500 samples of fish fillets collected from 2013 to 2015 under monitoring programs by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Rivers and Streams Assessment, and the Great Lakes Human Health Fish Fillet Tissue Study.

“PFAS contaminated fish across the U.S., with higher levels in the Great Lakes and fish caught in urban areas,” said Tasha Stoiber, an EWG senior scientist and study co-author, in a statement. “PFAS do not disappear when products are thrown or flushed away. Our research shows that the most common disposal methods may end up leading to further environmental pollution.”

PFOS-contaminated fish can raise blood serum levels of PFOS in people and even infrequent consumption of freshwater fish can raise PFOS levels in the body. A report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine found that the chemicals in the PFAS family are linked to cancer, high cholesterol, various chronic diseases, and a limited antibody response to vaccines in children and adults.

[Related: Certain PFAS were destroyed with a common soap ingredient in lab tests.]

“The extent that PFAS has contaminated fish is staggering”, said Nadia Barbo, a graduate student at Duke University and lead researcher on this project, in a statement. “There should be a single health protective fish consumption advisory for freshwater fish across the country.”

In the early 2000s, manufacturers agreed to voluntarily stop using long-chain PFAS in the US, but they can still be found in some imported items. The FDA phased out the use of PFOS in food packaging in 2016. Still, there could be more than 40,000 industrial polluters of PFAS in the US, according to EWG estimates.

“For decades, polluters have dumped as much PFAS as they wanted into our rivers, streams, lakes and bays with impunity. We must turn off the tap of PFAS pollution from industrial discharges, which affect more and more Americans every day,” added Faber.

Along with perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), PFOS is a “long-chain” PFAS, made from an 8-carbon chain. According to the CDC, over 9,000 different PFAS exist and the chemicals have been reworked to be 4- and 6-carbon chains. Some experts say that these newer versions could have many of the same dangerous health effects as the 8-chain PFAS, continuing the risk to consumers and the environment.

Avoiding PFAS is nearly impossible, with the chemicals in everything from cookware to clothing to carpeting. They were found in 52 percent of tested cosmetics in a 2021 study. The coating used on nonstick pans (polytetrafluoroethylene) has been found to be the most common additive.

The post Freshwater fish are loaded with ‘forever chemicals’ appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

The new year may already be here, but it can be hard to imagine reinventing yourself when you’re still coming out of a ham- and egg-nog-induced lethargy. After weeks of inundating our bodies with treats and drinks, nothing is more enticing that the hope of a quick fix, the promise that you’ll be back to your best with a little activated charcoal, green juice, herbal tea, or apple cider vinegar. All you need, the internet says, is to quickly detox your body.

The detox industry is on the rise—and the profits are rolling in. But cleansing our bodies of impurities is anything but a new idea. Ayurvedic medicine, one of the oldest forms of traditional medicine, has employed a five-part detoxification method—including medicated enemas and drug-induced vomiting—since the 2nd century BCE. But here in modern times, we have a much better understanding of our supposed detox needs.

“If your body already has a working liver, working kidneys and working lungs, your body already has the balance it needs,” says Katherine Zeratsky, a registered dietician at the Mayo Clinic. Alluring detox tools really aren’t necessary. More to the point, there’s really no evidence that detoxes flush toxins from your body in the first place.

[Related: The truth about oil pulling, apple cider vinegar, and other trendy cleanses]

While arguably ineffective, most detox methods are not directly harmful. But they do come with their risks. Consuming nothing but green juice for a few days is an unbalanced approach, but it probably won’t hurt your body, Zeratsky says. However, every case is different. Last year, due to a history of gastric bypass and recent antibiotic exposure, a woman developed a severe kidney condition after starting a green juice diet. So, if you do decide you still want to jump on the detox bandwagon, definitely check with your doctor first. And don’t expect to feel better soon. Days spent fasting or running to the bathroom will likely make you feel fatigued and uncomfortable.

There’s also evidence that detoxing might not serve your mental health. In one Hungarian study, researchers interviewed people staying in juice cleanse camps, a sort of health retreat. They found that detoxing was the number one reason cited for the juice cleanse, which was commonly paired with laxatives. Participants’ reasons for detoxing commonly overlapped with indicators of purging disorder and orthorexia nervosa, an unhealthy obsession with healthy eating. The risks to long-term mental health may therefore be worse than any immediate physiological risks.

Most of the time, when people say they are looking to detox, what Zeratsky actually hears is “that they want to hit the reset button,” she says. “You can do that with good nutrition.” Cleanses and charcoal aren’t really worth the investment.

So if you do want to ditch the drowsiness and rejuvenate, you don’t need to buy teas and tinctures. Use these simple tips instead to keep your body’s natural detox system in optimal shape.

Without adequate sleep your brain is slower to process information. Even one less hour of recommended sleep per night can throw off your metabolism and increase your risk of pre-diabetes. Insufficient rest overall has been linked to diseases like obesity and hypertension, and seems to damage your immune system and lower your life expectancy. Nothing seems to go untouched when you skip out on the shut-eye.

2. Drink plenty of water

Water is critical for more than feeling hydrated. It keeps your bodily fluids flowing so that the lungs, kidneys, and liver can do their jobs. All bodily processes release some kind of waste, and having enough water is critical to keep blood vessels open and those byproducts flowing to the liver and kidneys where they can be filtered out. (In the kidneys, you need enough water so that extra ions, sugars, and waste products can diffuse from the blood into the kidney and eventually leave your body as urine.) But when you’re not sufficiently hydrated, your kidneys try to conserve water by concentrating your urine. In the short run, the higher concentration of waste products in your urine means you lose less water; but in the long term, it increases your risk of kidney stones and urinary tract infection.

[Related: Hydration seems to be the key to aging better and living longer]

Ironically, some detox methods—like colon cleansing, which can cause cramping, vomiting, and diarrhea—can actually work against your efforts to stay hydrated. Getting rid of fluids via excessive urination or defecation just makes it harder for your liver and kidneys to function.

So grab your pillow and a water bottle, and make your first purchase of the year something more fun—and effective—than a detox.

3. Find an exercise routine

There’s not much evidence that sweating actually helps detox body toxins. But what it does do, when combined with exercise, is keep your liver in good shape so that the organ can cover your body’s janitorial duties. A mix of cardio, weight lifting, and general regular movement could reduce fat stores and a risk of liver disease. Even if it means taking a short yoga break during work, versus carving out time for a whole hot yoga class, your body will be stronger for it.

Is your head constantly spinning with outlandish, mind-burning questions? If you’ve ever wondered what the universe is made of, what would happen if you fell into a black hole, or even why not everyone can touch their toes, then you should be sure to listen and subscribe to Ask Us Anything, a podcast from the editors of Popular Science. Ask Us Anything hits Apple, Anchor, Spotify, and everywhere else you listen to podcasts every Tuesday and Thursday. Each episode takes a deep dive into a single query we know you’ll want to stick around for.

This post has been updated. It was originally published on January 1, 2020.

The post The only real way to detox your body appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

It’s not a secret that diets high in sodium come with huge health risks, including high blood pressure, increased risk of stroke, heart disease, stomach cancer, and chronic kidney disease. The American Heart Association estimates that processed, packaged, and restaurant meals make up 75 percent of daily sodium intake in the United States.

In an effort to combat this, World Health Organization (WHO) recommends reducing the population-wide average sodium intake by 30 percent by 2025 in order to combat negative health outcomes. This limits total daily sodium intake to about per person to about 2,000 milligrams a day per person, compared to the estimated 3,400 mg of sodium consumed by the average American every day. The WHO also released guidance for sodium levels in food categories that are the biggest contributors to sodium intake such as processed meats, bread, and sauces in 2021.

[Related: Ancient poop proves that humans have always loved beer and cheese.]

Now, a study published January 10 in the journal Hypertension offers even more evidence of the positive health outcomes that sodium reduction could have. The paper details a voluntary effort by the Australian government to reformulate 27 packaged food categories across the continent. It found that removing some of the sodium from packaged foods could save about 1,700 lives per year and prevent nearly 7,000 annual diagnoses of heart disease, kidney disease, and stomach cancer in Australia.

“We had previously modeled the potential impact of the Australian program,” said the study’s co-lead author Kathy Trieu, lead author of the study and a research fellow in food policy at The George Institute for Global Health, and a lecturer at the University of New South Wales, in a statement. “In this study, we wanted to estimate the potential number of additional premature deaths, new cases of disease and years lived with disability that may be averted with the WHO sodium benchmarks, which are above and beyond the Australian government’s sodium reformulation targets.”

[Related: What happens if you eat too much salt?]

The team applied the same statistical model used in their previous study to estimate the potential impact of extending the Australian plan to include all of the 58 packaged food categories in the WHO’s benchmarks. They used national data from 2011 to 2012 on the amount of sodium in the food, how much was eaten nationwide, and sales data. Next, the team used published statistics about the relationship between sodium intake and high blood pressure, to calculate the potential effects of sodium reduction on rates of cardiovascular disease and chronic kidney disease. High blood pressure is a major risk factor for both conditions.

“Our findings indicate that compliance with WHO benchmarks compared with Australia’s current sodium targets may result in substantial health gains and prevent more than three times as many deaths and new cases of disease each year,” said Trieu. Trieu added that including more packaged food products and stricter sodium targets may have had a greater impact.

The team says that some of the limitations of this study include needing more recent data and that estimates of disease burden may be less accurate than estimates of more easily measured outcomes such as death.

According to the CDC, some ways to reduce sodium intake include buying fresh, frozen, or canned vegetables with no salt or sauce added, comparing the amount of sodium in different products by reading Nutrition Facts labels, and limiting sauces, mixes, and instant product.

The post Reducing sodium in packaged foods could reduce disease and save lives appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

When you first start working out consistently, it’s not unusual to go through a period of noticeable changes followed by a sudden plateau where progress seems to slam to a halt. It’s very common, but if you want to get over that frustrating phase, taking note of your calorie and nutritional intake can help.

When I hit my plateau, I spent a week monitoring what I ate and discovered that, regardless of how healthy my diet was, I was eating enough to sustain two men. Tracking provided the data I needed to make better decisions, which allowed me to enjoy steady progress.

Whether your fitness goal is fat loss or muscle gain, nutrition tracking is easy, and you can count on several tools to make the best of your journey. 

How the body burns fat and gains muscle

You require a specific number of calories to function and if you hit it every day, your body will remain exactly the same in terms of muscle and fat. This number is known as your maintenance caloric intake, and it depends on parameters like your height, weight, genetics, and daily activity levels. Adult men will typically fall somewhere between 2,000 and 3,000 calories, says the US Department of Agriculture, while women commonly require between 1,600 and 2,400.

[Related: There are only two supplements proven to help you build muscle]

Keep in mind that no matter the app or method you use, the numbers you see in these tools are only approximations. The formulas these platforms use to calculate numbers like your maintenance rate, for example, are based on general statistics that leave little room for individuality, and may not consider factors that make your body different from the norm. This also applies to the apps’ massive database of food data, as the caloric value you see on labels and packaging can be up to 20 percent inaccurate, says the US Food and Drug Administration, so be careful not to get too attached to the exact number. 

And then there’s the body’s ability to absorb only a fraction of the available calories, which may be anything between 20 and 90 percent, says Michael S. Parker, a certified fitness nutrition specialist and founder of Forge Fitness. This is because our bodies just don’t digest the calories of some foods as well as others.

Instead of trying to make these numbers fit perfectly, Parker recommends using calorie tracking as a rough set of guidelines to help you learn about the energy value in various foods and how much you’re actually eating. From there you can stop tracking and make wise eating decisions when you’re hungry. 

How much of each macro you should eat depends on factors like your basal metabolic rate, sex, age, and weight. But for muscle building, the International Society of Sports Nutrition recommends consuming 1.4 to 2 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight per day. They also recommend 4 to 7 grams per kilo per day of carbs for weight training athletes to optimize strength performance and muscle building. You should devote the rest of your daily calorie budget to dietary fat. Nutrition tracking apps can monitor your macros and do all the math for you, so you can tackle multiple goals at the same time. For example, you’ll be able to prioritize protein to maintain muscle mass while leaving enough of a deficit in your calorie budget to enable fat burning. 

Health and safety are more important than any fitness goal

You should never use overuse caloric deficit in an attempt to lose weight faster. Losing fat—and keeping it off—is safest and most effective when you do it gradually. A deficit of around 500 calories a day will burn fat at a rate of up to one pound per week, which research shows is a safe and sustainable pace.

But counting calories is a slippery slope and people who hyper-fixate on recording everything they eat run the risk of developing eating disorders.

“Tracking nutrition can easily turn into something that is unhealthy,” says Katherine Metzelaar, a registered dietitian and founder of Bravespace Nutrition, an organization that helps patients recover from eating disorders and challenges relating to body image. “I would not recommend someone track [their food] if they have a history of dieting, disordered eating, or an eating disorder.” 

She explains that having food tracking take up a lot of headspace is a clear warning sign, especially if that prevents you from going to restaurants or eating at your friends or family’s house. Other red flags include feelings of anxiety when you can’t track your food, guilt around what you’ve eaten, restricting food because you’ve met your calorie budget, and not being able to be spontaneous with meals.

[Related: Anorexia may be more complicated than we thought]

Keep in mind that in your fitness journey, you’re not going to see changes overnight. Building muscle and losing fat is the result of introducing healthy eating and exercise habits into your lifestyle on a sustainable basis. Tracking your nutrition is definitely not a silver bullet solution, but it can help set you on the path to that sustainability.

The post Nutrition tracking can put you on the path to meet your fitness goals appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

It’s that time of year again, when millions make a New Year’s resolution to eat healthier. This decision can feel daunting, especially when you consider all of the popular diets that trend on social media. However, there is one that might be best to avoid—the raw-food diet.

That diet was the lowest-ranked of 24 food plans evaluated by a panel of 30 experts in US News & World Report’s annual diet ranking for 2023. The experts looked at multiple factors to make their decision, including how easy it is to follow a diet, the potential for disease prevention when on a plan, and the presence of all food groups. Each diet was given a score best on 11 sets of rankings, including best overall, best diabetes diet, best heart healthy diet, and best plant based diet. New to the 2023 list are the best family-friendly diets, ranked partially based on adaptability, and the best diets for joint and bone health.

[Related: An archeologist’s quest to find seafood’s place on the ancient Mediterranean menu.]

The raw-food diet scored the worst. True to its name, this diet calls for only eating foods that haven’t been cooked. This includes fruits, vegetables, beans, sprouted grains, and sometimes animal products such as raw fish or unprocessed dairy.

“The safest and healthiest way to enjoy raw foods is as part of a whole foods, plant-based diet that is rich in raw fruits and vegetables, and cooked lentils, beans, grains and vegetables,” says Vanita Rahman, an internal medicine physician and clinic director of the Barnard Medical Center in Washington, D.C., in the report.

There is no evidence that cutting out cooked foods offers health benefits, according to the report, and eating only raw-food is extremely limiting. This diet may also make users more hungry, since raw foods are often lower in protein and calories than prepared food. This makes the diet more difficult to maintain over time, even though there may be the temporary weight loss. Sticking to an easy-to-maintain diet over a longer period of time, studies have found, are usually the best strategies are at any age.

Other diets toward the bottom of the list include those that are too strict or too difficult for users to follow in the long term, or they cut out food groups that could potentially be nutritious. These include the low-carb Atkins and Keto diets, and SlimFast and Optavia, both of which use processed shakes, bars, and supplements to replace whole foods.

[Related: Do you need a daily multivitamin? Probably not, says national health task force.]

Coming out on top for the sixth year in a row is the Mediterranean diet. This diet includes primarily plant-based foods, such as fruits and vegetables, in addition to bean, nuts, whole grains, seafood, lean poultry and unsaturated fat from extra-virgin olive oil. The diet is effective and simple, the report says, and studies have shown that it reduces the risk of cardiovascular disease and Type 2 diabetes while promoting higher quality of life and longer lifespans.

“What’s nice is Mediterranean is relatively user friendly. How it’s structured is similar to the (U.S. Department of Agriculture) healthy eating plan,” Camila Martin, a nutritionist at University of Wisconsin Health in Madison, who wasn’t involved in the rankings, tells TODAY.com. “It’s very modifiable based off what people have access to even with limited resources.”

Other diets that that perform well, according to the report, are dietary approaches to stop hypertension (DASH), Therapeutic Lifestyle Changes (TLC), and flexitarian, which features primarily plant-based foods with occasional meat. All three are intuitive, accessible, and encourage regular exercise.

But before you shake up what you eat, consult an expert: It is important to discuss any potential diet changes with a trusted healthcare provider.

The post Experts rank the raw food diet as the worst of 2023 appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Drinking more water and staying hydrated is a good way to achieve that New Year’s resolution of living a more healthy lifestyle. According to the Cleveland Clinic, water is essential for multiple functions in your body, including digestion, creating hormones and neurotransmitters, and delivering oxygen, and up to 60 percent of the adult human body is made of water. 

It can also help with healthy aging, according to a study published Monday in the journal eBioMedicine. The research from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) found that well-hydrated adults appear to develop fewer chronic health conditions (heart diseases, lung disease, etc.), have a decreased risk of dying early, and are generally more healthy. 

[Related: The truth about hydration hacks like IV therapies, alkaline water, and more.]

The study looked at health data gathered from 11,255 adults over 30 years and looked at links between serum sodium levels and other indicators of health. Typically, serum sodium levels increase when fluid intake decreases.

The researchers assessed information shared during five medical visits for each participant—the first two when patients were in their 50s and the last when they were between 70 and 90 years-old. Adults who had high levels of serum sodium at their baseline check-in or those who had underlying conditions that can affect serum sodium levels, such as obesity, were excluded to allow for a better comparison of how hydration is correlated with health outcomes.

Then, the team evaluated how serum sodium levels correlated with biological aging, using 15 health markers, including systolic blood pressure, blood sugar, and cholesterol.  The study also adjusted for demographic and health factors, including age, race, biological sex, smoking status, and hypertension. 

The results found that adults on the higher end of normal level of serum sodium had a 10 to 15 percent greater chance of being biologically older than their chronological age, when compared with participants in the mid-normal range. Additionally, participants at greater risk of aging more quickly also had a 64 percent higher risk for developing chronic diseases such as stroke, heart failure, atrial fibrillation, chronic lung disease, peripheral artery disease, dementia, and diabetes.

The study did not have information on how much water participants drank and does not prove a causal effect, according to the researchers.

“The results suggest that proper hydration may slow down aging and prolong a disease-free life,” said Natalia Dmitrieva, a study author and researcher at the NIH’s Laboratory of Cardiovascular Regenerative Medicine at the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), in a statement.

This new study expands on research this team of scientists published in March 2022, which linked higher ranges of normal serum sodium with an increased risk of heart failure. Both studies also used data from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study. 

“This study adds observational evidence that reinforces the potential long-term benefits of improved hydration on reductions in long-term health outcomes, including mortality,” Howard Sesso, an associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and associate epidemiologist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston who was not involved in the study, told CNN. He added, “it would have been nice to combine their definition of hydration, based on serum sodium levels only, with actual fluid intake data from the ARIC cohort.”

[Related: This device will allow the marines to make drinking water from thin air.]

The National Academies of Medicine suggests that most women consume around 6 to 9 cups of fluids per day and men drink 8 to 12 cups.  Some ways to add more fluids beyond drinking water include drinking juice or eating fruits and vegetables with higher water content, according to the researchers.
“On the global level, this can have a big impact,” said Dmitrieva. “Decreased body water content is the most common factor that increases serum sodium, which is why the results suggest that staying well hydrated may slow down the aging process and prevent or delay chronic disease.” 

The post Hydration seems to be the key to aging better and living longer appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

‘Tis the season for cookies. A poll from YouGovAmerica finds that chocolate chips are the favorite Christmas cookie, with 78 percent of those polled picking these gooey goodness as number one, followed by sugar cookies with 64 percent, and fudge cookies at 63 percent. 

While sugar cookies, gingerbread, and chocolate chips get most of the hype as the year draws to a close, a tiny “super grain” might have the potential to  make a super cookie.

[Related: The quinoa genome could help scientists get it out of the health food aisle.]

In a recent study published in the Journal of Food Science researchers from Washington State University (WSU) show how two types of quinoa that are bred to specifically grow in Washington state can be a high-fiber, high-protein additive to the flour used to bake cookies. The study finds that when baked the cookies had what bakers call “spreadability” and texture.

“It’s the Holy Grail for food scientists: we want to develop something that people love to eat and want to go buy and buy again—and now we’re adding some fiber in without them even knowing it,” said Girish Ganjyal, a WSU food scientist and the study’s corresponding author, in a statement.

Popular with health food enthusiasts, quinoa has slowly increased in popularity and the global quinoa industry is expected to reach almost $91 billion this year. The grain originated in South America and it has a ton of nutritional benefits. It’s high in protein, fiber, vitamins like B1 and B2, and minerals like zinc and phosphorus. 

WSU plant breeder and study co-author Kevin Murphy estimates that quinoa is currently grown on more than 5,000 acres in the Pacific Northwest, however no official counts are currently available.

Murphy has been breeding quinoa lines specifically to grow well in the Pacific Northwest climate while maintaining, and even enhancing, the crop’s nutritional benefits. The new study also identifies one type of quinoa that works well for “pre-cooked grain salad” (a more familiar use for quinoa) and picking varieties that work well in baking cookies.

[Related: The best substitutions for milk, eggs, and other baking essentials.]

The team looked at 10 different quinoa breeding lines and tested them as a cookie flour made up of 25 to 100 percent quinoa. While many of the breeding lines held up at lower quinoa levels, the cookies crumbled more as they got closer to 100 percent quinoa flour. 

These official taste tests are still underway, but the early results show that using up to 25 percent quinoa flour tended to have better results. People also preferred sugar cookies with 10 percent of the quinoa flour over those that use a traditional all-wheat flour.

According to study first author Elizabeth Nalbandian, a WSU Ph.D. student, the team purposely chose sugar cookies for the taste test since chocolate chip cookies might mask any flavor from the quinoa. 

“I think at 10 percent, quinoa added a type of nutty flavor that people really liked,” Nalbandian said, in a statement. Nalbandian noted that the testers liked the quinoa cookies even more than the control whole flour cookie.

The team plans to continue developing and testing new quinoa food products, noting that the team has a great combination of culinary arts and science. “This is a chef’s art as well as a science,” Ganjyal said.

The post A new kind of quinoa flour may be coming to a sugar cookie near you appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

Chestnuts roasting on an open fire and the smell of cookies wafting through the air can only mean one thing—the holidays are here. For many, this is a time to see family and get some much needed R&R. But for people with diabetes, the food-filled celebrations can be a bittersweet reminder of what you can and can’t eat.

Having Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes doesn’t mean you have to miss out on all the goodies, however. Popular Science spoke with diabetes experts who agree that you can treat yourself this season—as long as you do it in moderation. “It’s okay to indulge on the holidays. They’re special,” says Carolyn Maxwell, an endocrinologist at Stony Brook Medicine in New York.

[Related: FDA approves first drug that can delay onset of Type I diabetes]

Read on for the diabetes do’s and don’ts of navigating merry feasts and festivities. 

Do plan ahead

If you’re going over to a friend’s or family’s holiday dinner, there are several ways to prepare. For example, you can snack throughout the day so you’re not starving when it comes time for the big meal: Having something in your system makes you less likely to binge eat unhealthy foods, says Melissa Gaynor, a dietitian at the Pediatric Diabetes Center at NYU Langone’s Hassenfeld Children’s Hospital. You’ll also want to avoid an excess amount of carbohydrates in your main course. Holiday dinners often have turkey, stuffing, and mashed potatoes in their lineups—all of which are high in glucose-producing molecules. Gaynor says that eating a large amount of these savory dishes at one time can make it tricky to control blood sugar levels, even if you’re regularly taking insulin. 

While a few carb-loaded bites won’t severely harm your health, says Gaynor, you might want to ask the host for the recipes in advance so you can keep track of what you’re eating. “There are so many websites and apps where you can type in the ingredients of a recipe and it will tell you the nutritional content and the carbs so you don’t have to guess,” she adds. Foods with a low glycemic index—a measure of how quickly they affect your blood glucose levels—are typically healthy for diabetes.

If you want more options at a communal meal, Gaynor recommends making your own dish. Not only would you have something you can definitely eat, but you’ll also know the nutritional contents without extra research. Consider bringing a veggie platter or a side such as roasted cauliflower to the party. 

Don’t drink sugary cocktails

For those who want to fully get into the holiday spirit, having two or three glasses of alcohol at a party is not too bad for your diabetes, says Maxwell. Imbibing too much, however, can lower your inhibitions and make you more likely to indulge in food.

[Related: The best non-alcoholic drinks to sip soberly this holiday]

If you do decide to stir up a drink, skip the cocktails: They’re chock-full of liquid carbs from added juice and syrup, which can spike your blood sugar. Instead, Gaynor recommends making a mixed drink using diet or zero-calorie soda, ginger ale, or seltzer. Be sure to stay hydrated in between drinks—water and other unsweetened beverages can dilute the amount of sugar circulating in your bloodstream, keeping your glucose levels in a healthy range. 

Do eat protein and fiber-rich foods

While both experts say it’s okay to have some carbs, you’ll want most of your plate made up of protein, vegetables, and high-fiber foods that “are going to have less of an effect on blood sugar,” explains Gaynor.

Fibrous fare like artichoke hearts and beans will satisfy your hunger faster, and slow down any spikes in blood sugar because the body can’t break the plant-based nutrients down. Proteins are also super filling and have a minimal effect on raising blood sugar. You can find tasty protein-rich foods in the cheeses of a charcuterie board, olives, and deviled eggs, to name a few. 

Don’t go overboard with dessert

When it comes to sweet treats, it’s all about portion control. If you’re going to gift yourself a small slice of cake, Maxwell recommends pairing it with fresh fruit. “There is sugar in fruit, but it’s almost always going to be better for you than everything else on the dessert table,” she notes.

[Related: How to avoid added sugars]

For heavy dishes like pie, it’s tricky to know how many carbs you’ll end up consuming. Gaynor says this is when it’s important to talk to the host about nutritional details. Even if you cut yourself a piece, be mindful of the serving size, she adds. And remember, you can bring your own dessert, too. Opt for something made with ingredients that have a low glycemic index, like almond or whole grain flour. “You’ll know exactly what ingredients went into that dish,” Gaynor says, “and you can pre-slice it so the portions are set.”

Do take a walk after dinner

Both experts recommend getting some light exercise after a meal at the end of the day. Not only would it help with digesting a big feast, but being active helps with lowering glucose spikes. That doesn’t mean you have to leave the party to hit up the gym: Research shows just a two- to five-minute walk around the block can make a noticeable difference in your blood sugar levels.

The post A diabetes-friendly guide to holiday parties appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

This article was originally featured on Hakai Magazine, an online publication about science and society in coastal ecosystems. Read more stories like this at hakaimagazine.com.

On the eastern end of the Greek island of Crete, archaeologist Dimitra Mylona steps out onto the dun-colored remains of the 3,500-year-old Minoan settlement of Palaikastro and considers the past. Not just the big-P past that is the fundament of her career but also the small-p past of her own route to truth through a discipline burdened by myth and speculation. For the past 30 years, Mylona has been testing and refining her methodology, sifting through sites to ever-finer degrees. And if there’s anything the past few decades have taught her, it’s that the closer you look at ancient Mediterranean civilizations, the more the fish rise to the surface.

Mylona is a zooarchaeologist—a specialist in the study of animal remains of ancient societies. Through the close observation of bones, shells, and other finds, zooarchaeologists try to re-create a picture of the way humans hunted, husbanded, ate, and more generally interacted with the animals around them. Traditionally, zooarchaeologists in the Mediterranean have focused on goat and sheep and other forms of terrestrial protein as the go-to meat sources for Greece and other Mediterranean countries. Back in 1991, as a new graduate student, Mylona thought no differently, imagining herself picking through the remains of livestock. But during one of her first digs, in the same Palaikastro she now surveys, the presence of an entirely different find captivated her—fish bones.

Working by the sea, Mylona and other students were excavating the dirt floors of Minoan houses more than 3,000 years old. To retrieve minuscule finds—carbonized seeds of plants, bits of wood charcoal, bones of birds, lizards, and fish—they sifted the soil by using water to float the smallest of objects to visibility. “One of the senior archaeologists called me over to look into the microscope,” she says. “I imagine she was hoping to find someone that would take an interest in something others had ignored.” In the scope was one of the many tiny fish bones that were found that day, probably belonging to a small comber or a wrasse. The senior archaeologist was right. Mylona gazed at the folds and crenulations of those fish vertebrae and mused: a story lurked. She learned during those early digs that archaeologists in Greece were just beginning to employ the much more fine-scale water flotation method to the soils of ancient sites, and as a result more and more fish remains were coming to light. The search for a fishier ancient world, Mylona thought, might be the way forward for her academic career.

Setting out to the University of Sheffield in England in the early 1990s for graduate work, Mylona immediately felt resistance to her newfound focus. Her graduate supervisor advised her against committing to a fish bone master’s degree, instead urging her to specialize in the analysis of mammal bones. Fish bones were a dead end, he maintained. To prove his point, he gave her a book published in 1985 by the historian Thomas Gallant, A Fisherman’s Tale: An Analysis of the Potential Productivity of Fishing in the Ancient World. The book claimed ancient Greek seas were too poor to support fisheries of significance. For decades, that perceived poorness became the accepted defining characteristic of the Mediterranean in academic circles. Because few rivers flow into the Mediterranean, the sea is considered nutrient-starved and described as containing little phytoplanktonic life—oligotrophic in scientific parlance. Without sufficient terrestrial nitrogen and phosphorous, phytoplankton—the very base of the marine food web—are sparse. Indeed, one of the reasons the Med, as researchers affectionately call the sea, shows its clear sapphire face to modern humanity is this paucity of plankton. This “containing little life” framework may be a case of what historical ecologists often refer to as presentism—the tendency to view the past through a present-day lens. Presentism or not, the acceptance of the narrative left Mylona perplexed: an entire theory was based on a narrow selection of evidence.

Back in the 1980s, Gallant and others were focused on ancient economies and building models to predict people’s dietary behaviors in the past. To Gallant, for example, the evidence suggested that given the relatively high population of the Greek coastlines, there was not enough fish to go around. Goat and sheep obviously filled the caloric deficit. “So any calculation based on the few fish bones that were handpicked in Greek excavations at the time made [fish] a very insufficient source of nutrition,” Mylona says.

Having come from a region in northern Greece where fish is an integral part of modern diets, Mylona felt something was askew with this methodology. Over the course of the next 10 years—while earning a master’s and a PhD at the universities of Sheffield, York, and Southampton, and shuttling back to a growing family on Crete—Mylona started assembling the tools she would need to prove the hypothesis of a fishier Mediterranean.

While field excavation is often the most iconic part of archaeology, the real decoding of the evidence usually comes to light in laboratories and offices far away from the site. And so, after we look over Palaikastro, Mylona takes me up along winding roads into the hills of the Lasithi region and eventually brings us to the headquarters of the organization that has supported Mylona’s fish investigations—the Institute for Aegean Prehistory. The institute’s Study Center for East Crete (SCEC), funded by the American philanthropist and archaeologist Malcolm Wiener, is perched atop a site with a sweeping view of the Dikti Mountains and has an architecture designed to recall the airy halls of the Minoan palaces. Once inside, Mylona leads me first past archaeologists and conservators patiently piecing together vast jigsaw puzzles of pottery, then past an illustrator pen-and-inking renderings of sculpture, and finally to her office.

“In order to know what you are looking at, you need first to establish a reference collection,” she says as she pulls out box after box of bones lining her office shelves. A reference collection is a kind of archive of skeletons that allows zooarchaeologists to compare excavated remains with the bones of present-day creatures. “In Greece in 1993, there was not a single reference collection for fish bones—none whatsoever,” Mylona says. “Zooarchaeology is not taught in Greek universities, so there are no university collections of fish skeletons.”

During what was the busiest decade of her life, she made regular trips to the central fish market in Crete’s second-largest city, Chania on the northwest coast, and to moored fishing boats wherever she found them. She bought all the species of fish she could locate. Then she buried them around her home in the north-central Cretan coastal town of Rethymno. After digging them up months later once bugs and microorganisms had eaten away skin and flesh, Mylona scoured, cleaned, and filed away the fish bones like books in a library. When she deemed her collection big enough, she returned to the bones gathered during her first digs and got down to the serious business of seeing what was what.

Counting ancient fish to establish a baseline for classical fisheries may seem like a rather arcane, academic thing to do during a time of climate crisis and profound environmental disruption. But baselines are important. You cannot restore what you cannot remember. That said, the historical baseline that Mylona is heroically unearthing is elusive. Even gathering data on the modern baseline—what is in the sea today—is a neglected science. Ringed by 22 nations that have fished with ever-increasing relentlessness, the contemporary picture the scientific literature paints of the Med is grim indeed. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, in 2019, only 36.7 percent of the assessed stocks in the Mediterranean and Black Seas were fished within biologically sustainable levels. After the Aswan High Dam near the mouth of the Nile in Egypt was completed in 1970, nutrient flow into the Mediterranean Sea from the Nile Delta has been curtailed, shifting the nature of plankton blooms and perhaps the entirety of the marine food web. Many other dams throughout the region have done similar damage.

Invasive species have further plundered the sea. Since the Mediterranean and the Red Seas were connected by the Suez Canal in 1869 to eliminate an expensive shipping detour around the Horn of Africa, hundreds of alien species have flooded the Med, and the sea is now considered the most invaded on the planet. On top of alien species eating their way through the Med’s forage fish, some species, such as Lagocephalus sceleratus, are dangerously toxic, too.

All of these degradations to a once-productive marine food system are happening in part because, with the exception of small coastal communities, the rest of modern Europe no longer relies on the Med for its survival. If you were to believe the earlier work of other archaeologists, you could be persuaded that this was always the case. The sea may have birthed multiple civilizations, but that’s not how early archaeologists and historians, like Gallant, imagined the past; imagined being the operative word.

As we continue on our odyssey of eastern Crete, Mylona and I eventually find our way down to Mochlos, a one-time fishing village now turned tourist resort an hour’s drive west of Palaikastro—a place that inevitably leads one to compare past and present. We are looking down a steep escarpment out on the bluer-than-blue Aegean, an embayment of the Mediterranean running between Europe and Asia. Before us is a pair of massive stone fish tanks that have been lying at the seafront for more than 2,000 years. Romans created the pens during their occupation of Greece to support a fishing industry that brought in catches live and stored the most precious fish until they could be sold fresh to highly discerning, and rich, customers. Yet even with the investment in infrastructure made for the sake of seafood, Mylona told me, the fish were important to ancient societies even beyond their role on the plate.

“Fish are different,” she says. “Cattle, sheep, goats—these were all animals used for sacrifice in religious rituals. There was a methodology in how you approached their slaughter and treatment. In classical Greece of the fourth and fifth centuries BCE, and probably also earlier, they were ceremonially slaughtered and eaten. You find their remains on altars, on places of sacrifice, and everywhere within settlements.” But fish, she says, occupied a place in society more closely linked to the day-to-day, something that is only realized when archaeological evidence is put in context of “softer” remains like ancient literature.

“Fish were more secular,” Mylona explains. “Because fish participated in the vignettes of daily life, we find them a lot in the classical theatrical comedies. The fishmonger who is a cheater. Or the ignorant customer. Or the glutton who wants to buy all the fish in the market—a symbol of someone who is totally undemocratic. In comedy, fish are used to convey what is proper social behavior. Fish are the vehicle that transmits this idea.” Yet, as much as fish were relegated to the comedies, Mylona and her reference collection show fish were a very serious part of society.

To prove her point, Mylona takes me back to her laboratory at SCEC to show me how something as simple as using water to wash and sift through archaeological deposits reveals a different world. Once the large pieces are extracted and cataloged in a first pass, the “fines” are put into the water flotation separator. A series of meshes allows researchers to extract the tiniest of bones from dirt and rock. Finally, Mylona lays out these bits of bones and tweezes them apart, comparing them flake by flake to the bones in her reference collection.

“The thing is that most fish bones are small, especially in this part of the world. Small fish predominate,” she says. But even the larger fish, a grouper of seven kilograms, for instance, leave bones that may be no larger than two centimeters. “You can’t easily see them in the course of an excavation. If you do it out in the open, if the light is not right, and if you are really hot and tired, you may not see it.”

Despite the difficulty, Mylona has been persistent. And the result of all this tedious work was revelatory. At Palaikastro, where fish bones first entered her vision, the four large fish bones that were handpicked in one of SCEC’s buildings were complemented by 4,000 more when water flotation took place. When Greek archaeologists applied the same methodology to coastal sites in the Aegean and even in many inland locations, fish bones were uncovered by the hundreds or thousands in nearly every location. Fish were clearly an important part of the ancient Greek diet: a vast underestimation of the importance of the sea as a source of food had taken place.

Does this persistent and pernicious misapprehension of the importance of fish in the Mediterranean’s past have ramifications for the modern inheritors of the Mediterranean Sea thousands of years later? To probe this question, Mylona turns to her friend Manos Koutrakis who also went down a fishy career path. But where Mylona’s fish are in the past, Koutrakis’s are rooted in the present.

Koutrakis makes his home in Kavala, in northern Greece, near the villages where both he and Mylona grew up. Kavala sits on the Thracian Sea, a region nourished by three large rivers and the outflow of the Black Sea. All this makes it the most productive body of water in the eastern Mediterranean. Koutrakis is the child of a fisherman who worked those waters for 60 years. He feels the pulse of fishing he did as a child, though today Koutrakis does so as a researcher, collecting Kavala data with his team in the Fisheries Research Institute for all the fisheries of northern Greece. Koutrakis routinely interacts with commercial fishermen, parsing through fish auctions and diving the Med regularly in his quest to keep tabs on the national fishery.

Koutrakis is the first to acknowledge there has been a decline in fish populations in the past 50 years. Whereas pre–Second World War small-scale local fishermen, similar to their ancient counterparts, mainly worked the Mediterranean, the post-war era has seen a superstructure of much larger vessels on top of the preexisting locals. This pressure has squeezed the artisanal sector to an ever-greater degree. The problem is that scientists—much like archaeologists pre-Mylona—lack baseline data on modern fisheries in Greece.

“The Hellenic Statistical Authority was not considering the catches of vessels under 20 horsepower until 2015,” Koutrakis says. “But most of the Greek artisanal vessels were probably exactly in this category.” Yes, larger vessels have also impinged on the artisanal sector, but that sector is still there and in business. Furthermore, it was only in 2016 when Greece created an online database to collect data with self-reporting of landings from vessels more than 12 meters in length.

The discounting of data from small-scale fishers means that managers in charge of placing limits in areas and during specific seasons for the most sensitive stocks are in part blinded. In fact, this is all part of what is often called the Mediterranean Exception. Whereas fisheries around the world are increasingly moving toward quota management systems that try to allocate the exact tonnage each fisher may take, management in the Med still relies on much less precise methods. Seasonal openings and closures and mesh sizes of nets are the main tools that managers have to work with. Koutrakis needs the equivalent of Mylona’s water flotation method for sifting the small bones of modern Greek fisheries, and he works toward that.

“The solution is to have good scientific data,” Koutrakis concludes. And slowly that data is being amassed. “Since 2017, EU regulations require more effort on the quality of data collected. Scientific working groups are putting in more effort in assessing more stocks in order to know where the problem is,” Koutrakis tells me. But is this enough? Will the gaps be filled too late? Will Mediterraneans lose what remains of their biological heritage before we have anything that resembles what they’re now only starting to understand is the historical baseline?

Any talk of baselines in fisheries inevitably leads to the work of the fisheries scientist Daniel Pauly, a marine biologist at the University of British Columbia. Pauly famously coined the term shifting baselines back in 1995. The essential premise of the shifting baselines hypothesis is that each successive generation has a diminished view of what constitutes abundance. The memories of the Greek fisherman who might have caught 100 sea bream in an hour are lost to his great-grandson who thinks a 10-fish day is a great success. To understand the actual condition of the sea with respect to the historical baseline, I contact Pauly.

“I don’t accept this idea that the Mediterranean is a poor sea,” Pauly tells me. “This is what people always say—few rivers going into the sea to deliver the nutrients. But we know from Roman records that there was probably a significant population of gray whales in the sea. That these whales brought in nutrients from the wider Atlantic, and through their feces fertilized the sea,” Pauly says. What happened to these whales? “The Romans likely killed them all. Everywhere you look, we have evidence of a more abundant sea.” Sharks are not abundant in the Med, but that’s today. “We just did an analysis of film taken by the Austrian cinematographer Hans Hass in 1942. There are sharks everywhere.”

And what will happen if we never refine our understanding of the historical baseline and use it to set recovery goals for fish abundance and diversity?

“The thing is, you don’t need to have the fish to satisfy most people who visit the Mediterranean. You will have the clear, blue empty water. You will have the seaside developments, this ugly mess of concrete from which people will emerge to swim. You’ll have postcards and souvenirs,” Pauly says. “But you will have no fish. And no one will remember that they were ever there.”

This is, of course, the last thing Mylona wants to see in her home waters. And so, she will keep on cataloging and counting, making a bone-by-bone argument for the legacy of a more abundant Mediterranean. “The interest coming from the European Union is more and more focused on environmental issues,” she tells me. “This is our main problem and that’s where our funding will go. More and more we have to ask questions that are relevant for today. The biggest challenge for archaeologists today is to build bridges with marine biology and conservation, to find ways to use the archaeological and historical fisheries data in meaningful and useful ways.”

The hope and dream is a better memory of the past that will influence our behavior in the future—a baseline shifted back to something closer to the abundance we’ve lost.

This article first appeared in Hakai Magazine, and is republished here with permission.

The post An archeologist’s quest to find seafood’s place on the ancient Mediterranean menu appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

The cost of putting food on the table keeps going up in the United States, especially for vegetables. According to the US Labor Department’s most recent producer price index data, vegetable prices saw a 38 percent jump in November from October’s prices. The cost of veggies is more than 80 percent higher compared to November 2021 prices.

Climate change has played a prominent role in the shortages, according to scientists. The western United States is in the grips of a historic 23 year-long mega drought that has drastically lowered water levels in the Colorado River, which is shrinking. According to NOAA, as of October 2022, there have been more than a dozen weather or climate disaster events that have resulted $1 billion in losses in each instance.

[Related: The numbers show just how devastatingly dry the Western US is right now.]

According to reporting from Bloomberg, the state of Arizona produces 90 percent of the country’s leafy greens annually from November through March, and this year’s crop production was hit hard by the drought. Arizona will also lose one-fifth of its share of water from the Colorado River next year.

California is the US’ top agricultural producer and has lost about $3 billion due to the drought. “There’s just not enough water to grow everything that we normally grow,” Don Cameron, president of the State Board of Food and Agriculture, told the Times of San Diego.

Climate change was front and center at this year’s Colorado River Water Users Association conference, which is normally a largely academic three-day event. “The Colorado River system is in a very dire condition,” declared Dan Bunk, a U.S. Bureau of Reclamation water manager. “Flows during the past 23-year period are the lowest in the past 120 years and (among) the lowest in more than 1,200 years,” Bunk told the webinar audience.

According to Bunk, two of the largest reservoirs on the Colorado River are at historically low levels. Lake Mead, located behind the Hoover Dam on the Nevada-Arizona state line is at 28 percent capacity, compared to 100 percent in mid-1999. Lake Powell, which is formed by the Glen Canyon Dam on the Arizona-Utah border was last full in June 1980, and is at 25 percent capacity today.

Stormy weather has also affected this year’s crop yields. In Florida, the devastating Hurricane Ian and late-season Hurricane Nicole cost the state almost $2 billion.

“Every year the farmers who feed our nation get smarter and more resilient, but it’s increasingly stressful to adapt to the extreme variability they face,” Erica Kistner-Thomas from US Department of Agriculture’s National Institute of Food and Agriculture, told USA Today. “One year they’ll have the best year ever and then the next year they’ll be hit with a major flooding event or drought.”

[Related: Rain storms have gotten more intense across most of the US.]

Additionally, University of Wisconsin, Madison agriculture and applied economics professor Paul Mitchell told USA Today, “crops are more resilient to dry weather than they were 20 years ago.” He added that as these extreme events devastating crops happen more and more frequently, the crops won’t be able to adapt quickly enough.

“US agricultural productivity is rising, but it’s not becoming more resilient to extremes,” Mitchell said. “When bad years start to line up, are we doing things to prepare for the unusual as it becomes more usual?”

Some ways to help save money as produce and grocery prices continue to rise are to stock up on staple items (flour, canned goods, sugar, etc.) in bulk if possible, always go to the grocery store with a list and ideas of what’s on the menu for the week, comparing prices via a supermarket’s website or app, and trying to alter your menu and use expensive items like meat more sparingly.

The post Why US vegetable prices have skyrocketed in the past year appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

If you are an avocado toast or guacamole enthusiast, there’s a good chance to tasty green goodness you’re eating was grown in Mexico. In 2019, the United States imported $28 billion worth of agricultural products from Mexico, with fresh fruit and vegetables leading the pack.

It turns out that Mexican agricultural dominance goes back centuries, long before Spanish colonization began in 1519. Before the arrival of the Spanish, the agricultural system in the Basin of Mexico, a 3,700 square mile highlands plateau in central Mexico, fed a huge population for the time. Mexico City (called Tenochtitlan) was home to as many as 3 million people, compared with 50,000 in Seville, Spain’s largest urban center.

A study published today in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) details how the Mexica, or Aztecs, were able to achieve such an accurate agricultural calendar.

[Related: Scientists still are figuring out how to age the ancient footprints in White Sands National Park.]

An accurate calendar was crucial to growing the food that fed so many people in a region with a dry spring and summer monsoons. Farmers needed advanced understanding of when these seasonal variations in the weather would arrive, since planting crops too early or too late could have been disastrous. They also needed a calendar that could adjust to leap year.

Colonial chroniclers documented the use of a calendar, but this new research shows that the Mexica used the mountains of the Basin as a solar observatory, and kept track of the sunrise against the peaks of the Sierra Nevada mountains. 

“We concluded they must have stood at a single spot, looking eastwards from one day to another, to tell the time of year by watching the rising sun,” Exequiel Ezcurra, the study’s lead author and an ecology professor from the University of California, Riverside, said in a statement.

To find the spot, the team analyzed Mexica manuscripts, particularly the ones that referred to Mount Tlaloc. The mountain at the east of the Basin had a temple at its summit. Using astronomical computer models, the team confirmed that a long causeway-like structure at the temple aligns with the rising sun on February 24. Depending upon which calendar (Gregorian or Julian) is used as a comparision, February 23 or 24 is the first day of the Aztec new year.

“Our hypothesis is that they used the whole Valley of Mexico. Their working instrument was the Basin itself. When the sun rose at a landmark point behind the Sierras, they knew it was time to start planting,” added Ezcurra.

When viewed from a fixed point on Earth, the sun doesn’t follow the same trajectory every day. During the winter, the sun runs south of the celestial equator and rises toward the southeast. As the longer days of summer approach, the sunrise moves northeast due to the Earth’s tilt. This process is called solar declination. 

This study is potentially the first to demonstrate how the Mexica were able to keep time using this principle with the sun, and the mountains as guiding landmarks. Learning about these Aztec methods offers a lesson about the importance of using a variety of techniques to solve questions about the natural world.

[Related: Severe droughts are bringing archaeological wonders and historic horrors to the surface.]

“The Aztecs were just as good or better as the Europeans at keeping time, using their own methods,” said Ezcurra.

The observatory could also have a modern function today. Historical images show that the forest is slowly climbing up Mount Tlaloc, possibly due to an increase in average temperatures at lower elevation. 

“In the 1940s the tree line was way below the summit. Now there are trees growing in the summit itself,” Ezcurra said. “What was an observatory for the ancients could also be an observatory for the 21st century, to understand global climate changes.”

The post The Aztecs’ solar calendar helped grow food for millions of people appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.

This article was originally featured on The Conversation.

A longstanding medical myth suggests that taking vitamin B1, also known as thiamine, can make your body repel mosquitoes.

A “systemic repellent” that makes your whole body unappealing to biting insects certainly sounds good. Even if you correctly reject the misinformation questioning safe and effective repellents like DEET, oral repellents would still have the benefit that you wouldn’t need to worry about covering every inch of exposed skin or carrying containers of bug spray whenever you venture into the great outdoors.

Along with thiamine, other alleged oral mosquito repellents include brewer’s yeast, which contains thiamine, and garlic, the legendary vampire repellent. If oral repellents sound too good to be true, it’s because they are.

As a professor of entomology in Taiwan, where the mosquito-transmitted Dengue virus is endemic, I was curious what science really says about food-based repellents. After a very deep dive into the literature and reading practically every paper ever written on the subject, I compiled this knowledge into the first systematic review of the subject.

The scientific consensus is, unequivocally, that oral repellents don’t exist. Despite extensive searches, no food, supplement, medication, or condition has ever been proven to make people repellent. People with vitamin B1 deficiency don’t attract more mosquitoes, either.

So where did the myth that mosquitoes hate vitamins come from, and why is it so hard to exterminate?

Making of a myth

In 1943, Minnesota pediatrician W. Ray Shannon gave 10 patients varying doses of thiamine, which had only first been synthesized seven years prior. They reported back that it relieved itching and prevented further mosquito bites. In 1945, California pediatrician Howard Eder claimed 10 milligram doses could protect people from fleas. In Europe in the 1950s, physician Dieter Müting claimed that daily 200 milligram doses kept him bite-free while vacationing in Finland, and hypothesized a breakdown product of thiamine was expelled through the skin.

These findings drew rapid attention, and almost immediate repudiation. The U.S. Naval Medical Research Institute tried to replicate Shannon’s findings, but failed. By 1949, Californians using thiamine to repel fleas from dogs were reporting it as “completely worthless.” Controlled studies from Switzerland to Liberia repeatedly failed to find any effects at any dose. The first clinical trial in 1969 concluded definitively that “vitamin B1 is not a systemic mosquito repellent in man,” and all controlled studies since suggest the same for thiamine, brewer’s yeast, garlic, and other alternatives.

The evidence was so overwhelming that, in 1985, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration declared all oral insect repellents are “not generally recognized as safe and effective and are misbranded,” making labeling supplements as repellents technically fraud.

Medical mechanisms aren’t there

Scientists know much more about both mosquitoes and vitamins today than ever before.

Vitamin B1 does not break down in the body and has no known effect on skin. The body strongly regulates it, absorbing little ingested thiamine after the first 5 milligrams and quickly excreting any excess via urine, so it does not build up. Overdose is almost impossible.

As in humans, thiamine is an essential nutrient for mosquitoes. There is no reason they would fear it or try to avoid it. Nor is there evidence that they can smell it.

The best sources of thiamine are whole grains, beans, pork, poultry and eggs. If eating a carnitas burrito won’t make you repel mosquitoes, then neither should a pill.

What explains the early reports, then? Along with shoddy experimental design, many used anecdotal patient reports of fewer bite symptoms as a proxy for reduced biting, which is not a good way to get an accurate picture of what’s going on.

Mosquito bites are followed by two reactions: an immediate reaction that starts fast and lasts hours and a delayed reaction lasting days. The presence and intensity of these reactions depends not on the mosquito, but on your own immune system’s familiarity with that particular species’ saliva. With age and continued exposure, the body goes from no reaction, to delayed reaction only, to both, to immediate reaction only, and eventually no reaction.

What Shannon and others thought was repellency could have been desensitization: The patients were still getting bitten, they just stopped showing symptoms.

So, what’s the problem?

Despite the scientific consensus, a 2020 survey of pharmacists in Australia found that 27% were still recommending thiamine as a repellent to patients traveling abroad: an unacceptable recommendation. Besides wasting money, people relying on vitamins as protection against mosquitoes can still get bitten, potentially putting them at risk of diseases like West Nile and malaria.

To get around the American ban and widely agreed-upon scientific consensus on oral repellents, some unscrupulous dealers are making thiamine patches or even injections. Unfortunately, while thiamine is safe if swallowed, it can cause severe allergic reactions when taken by other routes. These products are thus not only worthless, but also potentially dangerous.

Not every problem can be solved with food. Long sleeves and bug spray containing DEET, picaridin or other proven repellents are still your best defense against biting pests.

The post Debunked: Vitamins and supplements won’t keep mosquitos from biting you appeared first on Popular Science.

Articles may contain affiliate links which enable us to share in the revenue of any purchases made.