TheSabins.com

It’s hard not to dwell on food safety these days. Salmonella and E. coli have made numerous appearances in strange foods such as pistachios, spinach, peanut butter, and cookies as of late. Many Americans have lost confidence in the safety of their food supply as a result of these seemingly unusual outbreaks. But before you join the ranks of suspicious consumers let me give you a few things to consider.

Concerns about food safety are certainly nothing new. In fact, thousands of years ago Roman law prohibited the sale of adulterated food and punished offenders with mine duty or exile. Even in the unrefined atmosphere of the 13^th century trade guilds for butchers and bakers had authority to monitor and confiscated unwholesome goods. These guilds were not necessarily looking out for the public’s wellbeing; rather they were looking out for their own best interests. The guildsmen knew that there was a direct correlation between product quality and marketplace profits. They understood that when customers have confidence in the safety of their food supply business booms.

Here's yet another awesome visualization courtesy of Jason. Does he look terrified of that peanut butter wannabee?

It would seem logical to assume that as human knowledge has increased over the centuries that food safety has inevitably improved as well. Unfortunately that is not the case. Spidey’s Uncle had it right when he said, “With great power comes great responsibility.” During the last half of the nineteenth century significant advances in chemistry made possible an abundance of new food additives and colorants – countless novel ways to adulterate and basically poison food. It took some time, and many unfortunate events, for food regulations to catch up to science. Here are some of the stranger things you may not know about food’s shadier recent past.

Since food regulations were lagging behind scientific progress near the turn of the century, citizens starting taking matters into their own hands. In 1883 a man named Dr. Harvey Wiley, the head chemist at the U.S. Bureau of Chemistry, started documenting the extensiveness of food adulteration in the United States. He formed a “poison squad” made up individuals who willingly consumed suspicious food additives that were commonly used at the time, such as formaldehyde, and documented the ill effects on their health. Yes, just like lab rats. The atrocious symptoms of these volunteers helped fuel public outrage and awareness. But, despite growing public concern, questionable preservatives and colorants continued to make their way into food without any evidence of their safety. Regulatory change was on the way however; the last straw was the publication of Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle, which vividly depicted the unsanitary conditions in the meat-packing industry. Having read this book myself I can attest to the disgusting images it conveys. (Workers accidentally falling into vats = extra lard.) The Pure Food and Drug Act soon followed in 1906: the beginnings of modern federal food regulation.

Is that where our story ends? Was everything happy ever after? Ah…no. The Pure Food and Drug Act was crude by today’s standards and certainly not all encompassing, so more tragedy naturally followed.

In 1937 a drug company decided to make sulfanilamide, a new drug used to treat strep throat, more appealing to children by mixing it with diethylene glycol, a sweet tasting liquid. The drug company performed no safety testing on their new mixture. Within weeks of this product, Elixir of Sulfanilamide, hitting the market over a hundred deaths were reported to the FDA. But these weren’t just any fatalities; most of the unfortunate victims were children who died excruciatingly. The public was incensed. As a result of this horrible affair, in 1938 the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act was passed. Not surprisingly, this new law required drugs to undergo premarketing safety testing.

But that’s the end of it, right? After 1938 all foods were safe and wholesome? Not so. Despite the potential danger of food colorants, the Color Additive Amendment to the FD&C Act was not passed into law until 1960. This amendment finally required safety testing on color additives. In 1973 a large number of botulism outbreaks from canned foods resulted in low-acid food processing regulations. In 1982, after cyanide placed in Tylenol capsules caused multiple deaths, tamper-resistant packaging regulations emerged. And lastly, in 1990 the Nutritional Labeling and Education Act was passed and those nutrition labels we all depend on came into being; yes, those lovely things that have made it possible for me to determine that if I consume more than 0.0034% of a scoop of Haagen-Dazs ice cream I will morph into something that resembles the Stay Puffed marshmallow man.

What I hope you gleamed from this brief history is that the safety of our food supply has increased enormously over the last century. You don’t have to worry about the dye from your lollypop turning you into a tumor reservoir or getting served a slice of tubercular beef – both legitimate concerns for consumers a hundred years ago.

I also hope my synopsis has led to the realization that outbreaks of food borne illness are regrettably nothing new. You don’t have to glimpse far into the past to grasp this. What we have been experiencing lately is not that out of the norm. But don’t let that discourage you. Science is always progressing and regulations are always changing as they adapt to the current concerns of society. We learn. Perhaps you have concluded, in view of recent events, that food producers in general don’t take safety concerns seriously. That is definitely not the case. Food producers aren’t dumb, with a few exceptions, and just like the guildsmen of the 13^th century they know that it is to their advantage to keep the food supply safe. Outbreaks and recalls are expensive and often have long-term economic consequences for companies. So they look out for your interests because it’s in their best interest – let the warm fuzzies begin.

I have worked for several food companies and all of them have been very diligent about insuring only safe and wholesome food is released into the marketplace. So don’t let the rare instance of an imbecilic CEO knowingly distributing tainted food alter your opinion of the food supply in general. Although change may be on the horizon and reform may be needed to make our food regulatory system less cumbersome and more capable of impeding the few morons out there, you don’t need to be afraid of your food.

I was recently asked to serve as the secretary of my chapter of the SCC. So what is the SCC? Society for Claustrophobic Clowns? No, it’s the Society of Cosmetic Chemists. I know that name sounds nearly as fictitious, but the SCC is a legitimate scientific organization.

The Society of Cosmetic Chemists is composed of professionals that formulate cosmetics, sell ingredients with which to formulate cosmetics, or are involved in the processing of cosmetics. We aren’t nerds, we are just eccentric scientists – and no, the two aren’t synonymous.

The society meets every month or two for lunch and a lecture. You might hear some of these comedic gems at one of our get-togethers:

Why did the bear dissolve when he jumped into the water? He was a polar bear.

What weapon can you make from the elements potassium, iron, and nickel? A KNiFe.

Why does hamburger have lower energy than steak? Because it’s in the ground state.

I know at least a few of you out there are tempted to laugh right now. It’s okay, go ahead. And yes, that does mean that you are a geek - just accept it.

This is me and my fellow chemist Thao. She was on the photo brigade with me, which unfortunately meant that she had to tolerate my inability to drive a golf cart. We had a great time laughing together though.

Every August the SCC has a golf outing. I usually skip this event because I have absolutely no golf skills. (Sorry Dad, I know you tried.) However, since I am now a SCC officer, and needed to assist in the preparations for this gathering, this year I came as a non-participant. I was more than happy to perform random tasks rather than golf. Amongst other things, my secretarial duties included driving a golf cart around to take pictures of all the teams. Sounds grueling doesn’t it? It turns out that my golf cart driving skills are a little subpar. (Pun intended.) But the sunshine was divine and I didn’t run anyone over – the day was a success!

Will being the SCC secretary promote my nerdyness to the next energy level? One can certainly dream.

And my wise advice to all you non-geeks? Remember the SCC next time you hear about some bizarre sounding group. Don’t simply dismiss them as fantasy. If we exist, they probably do too.

A recent conversation with some of my family members made me realize that the general public is quite confused about oils, fats, and fatty acids. What’s good for you? What should you be avoiding? Why? What’s with that trans and saturated stuff?

Since the subject of fats is way too broad to cover in entirety here, I will focus on a small, but still complex, portion of it: omega-3 fatty acids.

When I was a child my mom regularly required me and my siblings to take cod liver oil. I didn’t exactly enjoy this routine but, since I wasn’t given a choice, I forced this nasty, supposedly healthful, substance down the hatch. It has taken a couple decades for the masses to grasp what my mom already understood back in those days: fish oil, high in omega-3 fatty acids, is good for you and perhaps worthy of forced feeding. Although the public has finally accepted the healthfulness of omega-3s, they still don’t seem to grasp the why and how much, those details continue to baffle. With the recent interest in fish oil there appears to be a lot of conflicting information out there regarding this substance, even among the experts, so it’s no surprise that consumers remain a bit mystified about omega-3s.

Although the jury is still out regarding many of the possible benefits of omega-3s, I will divulge here what everyone does agree on.

Let’s start with the basics. Lipids are a broad class of chemical compounds. Put most simply, lipids do not readily dissolve in water. Fatty acids are the most common form of lipids; they are found extensively in our bodies and in our food. “Fat” is a term often used incorrectly to encompass a wide range of lipids, but for the simplicity of this discussion I will use it here synonymously with fatty acids.

Fat has gained an undeserved bad reputation in the recent past. We associate it erroneously with obesity and heart disease. While the consumption of some types of fat certainly increases the risk of cardiovascular disease, eating other types actually lessens that risk. Besides, no matter how fats alter the risk of this or that, we should be mindful of the fact that we really do need them. That’s right- in order to be healthy we require certain fats in our diet.

So before you decide to live off carrots and fat free cookies consider this: our bodies lack the ability to produce certain types of fatty acids. These fatty acids are needed for immune response, vision, blood clotting, stomach secretions, and blood pressure regulation. Since we can’t make them, we must obtain them from our diet; hence they are called “essential” fatty acids.

There are two different essential fatty acids: omega-3 and omega-6. Chances are, if you’ve heard anything about either of those, omega-3 is the one you’ve heard about. So why, if we need both, does omega-3 get the spotlight while omega-6 is forced into the background like an ugly stepchild?

Omega-6 fatty acids are found in many plant oils so they are in a lot of the foods Americans commonly consume, such as mayonnaise and salad dressing. This means that deficiencies of this fatty acid are rare. Omega-3s, on the other hand, are found in foods not eaten as frequently by westerners. Good sources of omega-3 fatty acids include: canola oil, flaxseed oil, soybean oil, and fish of course. What, you didn’t have a salmon burger today? Or drizzle canola oil over your pancakes this morning? Shame on you! In all seriousness though, Americans tend to not get adequate amounts of omega-3 fatty acids in their diet, especially those that don’t regularly consume fish.

Jason decided that the best way to illustrate this post was to pretend to be a fish while wearing a latex glove on his head with an omega symbol written on it, which basically just resulted in him looking like an idiot yet again.

So why should you care? I guess you shouldn’t if you don’t value your heart, skin, mental wellbeing, or the brain development of your unborn children. If having blood the consistency of toothpaste doesn’t bother you then you needn’t worry about getting enough omega-3s. An inadequate intake of omega-3 fatty acids has detrimental effects on many systems in your body and, in pregnant women, even on the body of your baby.

Why are omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids so vital for optimal health? Our bodies use these essential fatty acids to synthesize hormone like compounds called eicosanoids. Although eicosanoids resemble hormones, unlike hormones they remain at their production site, instead of traveling via the bloodstream to a place of action. Eicosanoids are involved in regulating everything from childbirth to inflammatory responses.

So, if both essential fatty acids form eicosanoids, can’t we just eat a lot of omega-6s and call it good? No. Different starting materials result in distinct eicosanoids. Omega-6 fatty acids form different eicosanoids than omega-3s. For example: eicosanoids made from omega-6s increase blood clotting while those made from omega-3s decrease it.

Therefore, if your intake ratio of omega-3 to omega-6 fatty acids is out of whack, due to you avoiding fish like it was your mother-in-law, then your eicosanoids will also be out of whack.

Many studies have been done on omega-3s and their treatment of all sorts of conditions from depression to rheumatoid arthritis, and everything in between. While most of these studies have been conflicting and less than conclusive, some things are certain:

You need omega-3s and you probably aren’t getting enough, most Americans consume less than 50% of the RDA. Omega-3s are good for your heart. They can decrease your blood pressure, improve your triglyceride status, and slow the buildup of atherosclerotic plaque- especially in those that already have heart disease.

So does that mean you should start popping omega-3 pills from a PEZ dispenser? No, unless of course you fancy your blood being about as thin as the hair on your head. Remember, as with anything diet related, balance is the key here. There can be too much of a good thing. How much isn’t too much then?

While the optimal intake level of omega-3s is still in debate, here are some basic guidelines: If you eat fish, two servings a week should be adequate. If you don’t eat fish, and would rather swallow your own vomit than ingest some salmon, you may want to consider omega-3 supplementation; fish oil capsules are the most common form. I wouldn’t recommend taking more than 1 gram of fish oil a day though, unless you have been instructed to do so by your doctor, since there isn’t a consensus yet on the most advantageous amount.

So there you have it folks, a brief overview of omega-3 fatty acids and all their fabulousness. Now go eat some delicious healthy fish! It will make your heart happy.

Calcium is an essential mineral and it’s one of the most commonly under-consumed nutrients. While everyone seems to know that calcium is needed to establish and maintain strong bones, its other vital roles in the body are often overlooked.

So here’s the run down on our dear friend calcium, what it does for you, and how you can insure you’re getting enough of it.

The calcium in an average adult body weighs about 2.5 pounds. Although 99% of this calcium is found in bones and teeth, the remaining 1%, which circulates through the rest of the cells, is critical.

That small 1% is essential for blood clotting, transmitting nerve impulses, and contracting muscles. These functions are so crucial that if your calcium intake is not adequate, your body will do all that it can to maintain blood calcium levels, at the expense of your bones. This essentially means that your body will borrow what calcium it needs from your bones in order to insure all your other cells have enough. Over time, habitual low calcium consumption takes its toll, your bones slowly become depleted as their calcium is continually removed to keep blood levels constant, and eventually fragile, brittle bones and osteoporosis result.

Since your bones would really appreciate you not racking up a calcium debt with them, here’s what you can eat to increase your calcium intake.

Jason modeling with some calcium rich foods.

Good source of calcium include:

Dairy products (except for cottage cheese)

Leafy greens (such as kale, collard, turnip and mustard greens)

Canned salmon and sardines (the bones contain calcium)

Calcium fortified orange juice

Calcium supplements

Although it is very important to make sure you are eating enough calcium containing foods or supplementing your diet, your calcium absorption, unfortunately, depends on more than just how much calcium you consume.

Our bodies only absorb roughly 20-40% of the calcium we intake. This amount varies from person to person and is affected by factors such as age. Postmenopausal women typically absorb less.

Your calcium absorption will decrease if:

You have a vitamin D deficiency. Vitamin D is required for calcium absorption.

You drink excessive amounts of soft drinks. Most soft drinks contain high levels of phosphorus. Phosphorus reduces calcium absorption.

Your body produces inadequate amounts of stomach acid. Calcium requires a slightly acidic pH to be absorbed by your body; low stomach acid production can decrease its availability.

You consume large amounts of fiber in your diet, especially wheat bran. Fiber binds to calcium and prevents it from being absorbed.

If you aren’t regularly eating foods high in calcium I recommend supplementation. Here are some guidelines to follow with calcium supplements:

Don’t take more than 500 mg of calcium at once; your body won’t absorb any more than that at a given time. Supplementing your calcium intake with 1000 mg of calcium, taken in two (500 mg) doses daily, is safe and typically adequate.

Not all calcium supplements are created equal. If a supplement doesn’t dissolve in your gastrointestinal tract, it can’t be absorbed. To test how well a calcium supplement will dissolve place a tablet in 6 oz of cider vinegar for 30 minutes, stirring every 5 minutes. If it hasn’t dissolved within the 30 minutes, it’s no good.

As long as your stomach produces normal amounts of gastric acid it’s best to take your calcium supplement between meals. Calcium competes with iron for absorption, so this will limit the negative impact supplementation has on iron absorption. If you have low gastric acid production, take your calcium supplement with meals, when stomach acid levels are at their highest, or take calcium in the form of calcium citrate. Calcium citrate is an acidic form of calcium, so it doesn’t require as much stomach acid to be absorbed.

It is important to remember that although your body absolutely needs calcium, you can get too much of a good thing. I don’t recommend supplementing with more than 1000 mg of calcium/day. Calcium intakes above 2000 mg/day can cause kidney stones, kidney failure, and soft tissue calcification, so don’t overdo it.

Make your bones smile-eat some calcium!

Most people seem a little confused about vitamin and mineral supplements. I get a lot questions about the “if” and “what” of these supplements. And it has been my experience that many of the people that think they aren’t confused about supplements have actually been given a lot of misinformation and are basing their purchasing decisions on that information from less than credible sources. So here is my attempt to clear up some of the common vitamin supplement misconceptions.

With many vitamin/mineral supplements on the market have you ever wondered how to choose the best one? Or have you ever wondered if you even need to take a vitamin/mineral supplement at all? If you answered “yes” to either of those questions then this entry is for you. Even if you think you are making good decisions when it comes to supplements, you may not be choosing as wisely as you think.

Question: Daily dosed vitamin/mineral supplements such as Centrum® and One a Day® are very popular, but are they necessary for good health?

The answer to that question is unfortunately not a straight “yes” or “no”. If you are eating a varied and healthy diet that includes lots of fruits, vegetables, and whole grains it is unlikely that you are deficient in necessary nutrients and most likely do not need to take a supplement, however, as I will discuss later, there are exceptions to this.

If you are not eating a healthy diet then taking a vitamin/mineral supplement may be a good idea to insure that you have an adequate intake of all essential nutrients. However, it is important to remember that supplementation will not make up for consuming an unhealthy diet. Fruits and vegetables contain phytonutrients that promote health. Although these phytonutrients are not necessary for your body to survive; they will improve your quality of life and decrease the risk of chronic diseases. So, even if you are taking a supplement, eat those peas and carrots.

Question: If I decide to take a daily vitamin/mineral supplement how do I choose which one to buy?

This is a more complicated question to answer than one might thing. There are many forms of each vitamin and mineral and all forms are not equal in terms of bioavailability and toxicity.

Some supplements use the cheapest forms of nutrients possible. For example, some contain forms of minerals that are basically just metal shavings. These benefit your body little since they are difficult to absorb.

But it would be impossible for me to go over every form of every vitamin and mineral in this entry so I am only going to go over some general things to look for when purchasing a supplement.

We tend to have mentality that more is always better. Have you ever looked at the supplement facts box on a supplement label and been excited when you saw that it contained 2000% of the daily intake of vitamin C, thinking that if vitamin C is good for you then more vitamin C has to be better? Though this chain of thought may seem logical, it is unfortunately incorrect.

Consumers commonly make the “more is better” mistake when choosing which supplement to purchase. Some nutraceutical companies take advantage of this erroneous logic and give their products headway in the market by loading them with much higher quantities of nutrients than necessary.

So why is more not better? The effects of overdosing on vitamins and minerals can range in seriousness from wasting your money on nutrients that will just end up in your urine to death. These effects vary greatly depending on the nutrient and its form.

For example, at levels only 3 times the Recommended Dietary Allowance, preformed vitamin A (not to be confused with beta-carotene) can cause birth defects and each year children die from iron poisoning caused by eating iron supplements.
The best advice, to avoid overdosing or wasting your money, is to look for supplements with nutrient amounts around 100% of the DV.

Question: Who is more likely to require vitamin supplementation, and what nutrients are they likely to be lacking?

As I already mentioned, there are certain situations where supplementation is highly advisable. Here are a few of them.

Folic acid supplementation is a must for all women of child bearing age. Folic acid deficiency can lead to neural tube birth defects; 400 micrograms of this vitamin daily are needed to decrease the risk of these defects and the average American woman only consumes 240 micrograms. Because the neural tube closes within the first 28 days of pregnancy, before most women even know they are pregnant, it is generally too late to start folic acid supplementation once you find out you are pregnant. If you are deficient in folic acid, the damage to your child has already been done. That’s why it is absolutely critical for women to take a supplement containing folic acid if there is any chance, no matter how remote, that they may become pregnant. 2500-3000 infants are born in the U.S. each year with neural tube defects, 75% of these defects could have been avoided if the mothers had supplemented with folic acid.

Most women, and many men, do not get enough calcium. Most women get 600-800 mg of calcium daily, well below the Daily Recommended Intake. The effects of calcium deficiency usually take years to manifest, but when they do they can be devastating. Twenty-five million Americans have osteoporosis, and 25% of women over 50 develop osteoporosis. Don’t become one of these statistics, take a calcium supplement. Your body will only absorb about 500 mg of calcium at a time, so I recommend taking 1000 mg a day separated into 2 (500 mg) doses.

Some groups are especially prone to deficiencies including the elderly, alcoholics, vegans, and expecting mothers.

The elderly often do not eat as healthy as they should due to difficulty preparing meals. They also don’t absorb all their nutrients as well as when they were younger. So supplementation is usually a good idea for this group.

There are a few nutrients that are primarily found in animal products. Without careful planning, it is very easy for vegans to become deficient in vitamin B12, riboflavin, and zinc. Vegans should be mindful of this and if nothing else, take a B12 supplement.

Alcoholics are likely to be deficient in many vitamins, but if you are an alcoholic, supplementation usually isn’t your top concern.

Expecting mothers are another group that should take a supplement. If you are pregnant or trying to become pregnant, prenatal vitamins are a must.

Although the supplement topic is one that I could discuss endlessly, since it is near and dear to my heart, I will end on this entry before I reach new levels of long-windedness.

Just remember to do a little research before choosing what supplement to buy and don’t get stuck in the “more is better” trap. And if you still have questions, you can ask your friendly neighborhood food scientist. We would be happy to give you an extraordinarily lengthy answer to what you thought was a simple question.