Carbs Still Don't Make You Fat. But Taubes' Words May Make You Crazy

Don’t do it! Don’t dump your carb-rich foods because of yet another Gary Taubes’ article, which hand picks research to make for sensational headlines that successfully get propagated in the NY Times (albeit just in the Opinion section, not the Science one, thank God!) Yes, yet another news piece inappropriately attacks carbohydrate, failing to note the study’s limitations and the risks of jumping to irrational conclusions.  I’m no researcher but I’m a critical reader of research. And I find Taubes’ (and other such articles drawing false conclusions) simply appalling.

Serve with a Greek yogurt and include the nuts and the
glycemic load is lowered. Better than given this favorite up!

Taubes pulls from a recent study by Ludwig and colleagues at two well-respected Boston hospitals. The objective was to examine the effects of 3 diets with different composition of protein, fat, and carbohydrate and glycemic load, on metabolism. This was done on overweight and obese 18-40 year olds following a weight loss of 10-15%. Glycemic load refers to how much a food will raise blood sugar compared with a standard. It takes into account the amount of carbohydrate in a food, as well as the impact of that food on blood sugar.

Here are a few facts to consider. Taubes' carb-bashing article ignores some critical points, many highlighted by the study authors themselves:

• Total sample size of this ground-breaking study? 21—an embarrassingly small size to be drawing such global conclusions! Perhaps even more striking is that the study began with 32 participants--that's a 34% drop out, in spite of a $2500 financial reward for full participation. I am left wondering why such a high drop out rate? These were self-selected participants, in response to an ad. Were the results not as satisfactory in those that dropped out? We'll never know, but I could only guess that if they were satisfied with the weight loss and maintenance results they might have been inclined to stick with the study. If we had all 32 starting participants perhaps the results would be quite different.

Carb-rich wheatberry salad--a summer favorite!
One of 25 recipes at food-2-eat.com

• The study looked at the impact of three different diets after weight loss, which might be quite different than the impact on those whose weight has been stable. The body does act differently after being starved!

• 1 month per diet type only! That’s how long the study evaluated these various diets.

• Even if this were all valid, would the subjects actually gain weight? It is unclear, given these were not free-living conditions and resulting weight changes were apparently not explored. In fact, we have no evidence of how closely these diets were actually followed, given this was an outpatient setting. The study mentions likely predictors of future weight change (such as changes in metabolic rate), but no actual weight change data on each of the diets is described. Yet Taubes certain jumps to this conclusion.

• Even if they did gain more on a higher carbohydrate diet, there were 2 very negative effects of the lowest carb diet, that may result in long term serious consequences.  Both urinary cortisol levels (a hormonal measure of stress) and C-reactive protein (a marker for chronic inflammation) increased. And both of these are associated with increase risk of cardiovascular disease.

• With the most minimal effort on Pub Med, I found another study on the pediatric population exploring high and low glycemic load meals on energy intake, satiety and hunger. Guess what this study concluded? That there is no evidence for this population (of Hispanic youth) that changing the glycemic load effects short term hunger, fullness, satiety or energy intake. BTW, this one was also by Ludwig and colleagues. In fact, even in the study Taubes reports on, there is no advantage in terms of subjects sense of hunger on the three different diets.

• The authors of the study (not Taubes) state: 

Low carb? absolutely! But not without its risks.

"These findings suggest that a strategy to reduce glycemic load rather than dietary fat may be advantageous for weight-loss maintenance and cardiovascular disease prevention."  

Yes, reducing your intake of fat to very low levels is quite senseless. But no one is advocating for a diet rich in saturated fats, like those found in the meat above. Yes, fats are a welcome addition to diets, even for those watching their weight! And key words to note here are "glycemic load". In other words, think balance. Meals with a combination of protein, fat and carbohydrate will have only a moderate glycemic load, and that is what may be key--both for metabolic health, psychological well-being (think avoiding deprivation) and long term adherence. Yes, the study authors have the wisdom to add:

"Ultimately, successful weight-loss maintenance will require behavioral and environmental interventions to facilitate long-term dietary adherence." And they acknowledge that the study diets were not designed for long-term practicality, and that the very low carb plan would be difficult to follow long term.

Having worked with many thousands of individuals to manage their weight, I stand 100% behind including carbohydrate to do so. Carbohydrate-rich foods are a necessary, satisfying, and energizing part of a healthy diet. I urge caution to the public, which may be less experienced at reading such strong-stated opinions as Taubes' as if they were fact.

Which One Really Needs Help? Call the Doctor!

Even Mica was disturbed by this!

I know, I know—I’ve got another 5 days before my expected post is due, but I just can’t wait. I can’t let Laura’s painful experience go unaddressed. If you haven’t read it, please do so now. But brace yourself—you’re gonna get angry.

It’s not unusual for me to hear and read about inappropriate statements and suggestions that medical providers make. Actually, we all can manage to say stupid things—I know I’m no exception.  (Really, no need for those that know me personally to comment on this statement!) But today I heard two doozies—Laura’s tale and a patient’s story.

I don’t know Laura—except, that is, from her blog comments. What I do know about her is that she has made extraordinary progress in her recovery from anorexia. That she can now enjoy pizza! That she gets it—and she follows through with healthy, normal, eating behaviors. That’s she’s worked hard to put all the disordered thoughts aside and use her wise mind to justify doing the right thing. That she, like many others, have needed to use self-talk to move from the myths, the misinformation, about nutrients and foods and weight. Ahh, she’s done so well. I don’t even know her, but I am so proud of the work she’s done, of how far she’s come!

And then someone she respects, her MD, albeit inexperienced with eating disorder, totally sideswipes her. The respectable doctor projects, I suspect, her own mishugaas—about weight control, about carbs, about fats. Our wise Laura knows better—but of course when the white coat-clad MD begins her critique of Laura’s intake it’s simply devastating.

Yes, you can eat the whole panini if you're hungry!

What I read in this comment is not that it triggered her eating disorder; she concludes by stating that this doctor just didn’t work out. (Hooray for Laura! Time to change doctors—or get her to close her mouth and withhold absurd and inaccurate assessments of Laura’s intake!) 

But, I suspect, it’s the profound sense of disappointment in her doctor, and perhaps in our crazy food-and-weight obsessed society, as a whole. Laura appropriately acknowledges that there are absolutely no grounds for this doctor’s comments—she has zero evidence to conclude that Laura is struggling with her weight, or unhappy with her intake or struggling with eating disorder behaviors. 

Perhaps if she had asked more open ended questions—you know, like “How’ve you been feeling about your eating these past weeks?” or “What concerns would you like to address about your recovery?”, she could have prevented this damage. It would make a lot more sense than projecting that there’s a problem, simply because Dr. Dieter has perhaps struggled with her own weight and her eating!

Hats off to you, Laura, for having the sense to air your feelings and get support—and for sharing your reaction with the doctor. Hopefully, she’ll learn from her mistakes. And hopefully, you’ll find an MD that really gets it!

As for the patient story? Nothing too unusual that you haven’t heard before. It’s a case of an MD who looks at a 20-ish patient and tells her that her weight should be about 50 pounds less than it is—which would bring her to a place she has never seen on her growth curve. It would bring her BMI to a percentile lower than ever before, even since grade school! Fortunately, this young woman appeared to have a good sense of self, knowing darn well that this MD’s goal was crazy.

If she is appropriately nourished and growing
along her curve, must we make her weight
an issue?

But what if she took the doctor’s orders to heart and began to fight her body on what was normal? To push activity to an obsessive level and to restrict her intake to a point that was neither healthy nor maintainable? What if she had the genetic predisposition for an eating disorder and all it took was the encouragement of a doctor to set the ball rolling—given her own frustration with her recent weight increase and being told her BMI was in the obese category? This woman was more fit than most people I know and had no health issues. She ate healthily and exercised. And there likely was an underlying medical explanation for her recent unexplained weight gain, yet to be determined.

See the problem? Do they even realize the power of their words?

Do you even realize the power of yours? If you are on the receiving end of poor advice, do share your concerns. Consider another opinion from someone you trust. Or do like Laura did—contact the MD and respond. And if you need to, move on—and reach out for support.

Feel free to share your own horror stories, or simply to express your opinions.

Thanks for reading.

Protein: The New Black

There’s a halo hanging around all things high protein, these days. In fact, even foods not high in protein are labeled as if they are—simply to convince you to buy them! Case in point: which is lowest in protein— Starbuck’s Protein Bistro Box, Chicken and Hummus Bistro Box or their Turkey and Swiss on wheat bread? 

The winner is? Their Protein Bistro Box! Yes, in spite of containing egg, cheddar cheese and peanut butter—a rather disgusting combination, I might add—it comes out the lowest at 13 grams, compared to its competitors at 16 grams and 34 grams of protein, respectively. 

If you are selecting the Protein Bistro because you think all that protein (which doesn’t exist anyway) is going to help with weight management, let me break the news—it’s among their higher calorie meals! And for the record, it's the calories that make the difference. Personally, I’d rather have the lower cal sandwich and add on a mini whoopee pie or cupcake. Maybe that’s just me.

I could have kept this secret to myself. I mean, if you are underweight and struggling to eat more, and protein feels safe, what’s it to me? But here’s the thing. I believe you need to be well informed, that if you are striving to eat better you should have the facts. That goes for those of you who are trying to increase your intake and gain some weight, and it applies to everyone else too. If you are overweight and struggling to lose weight, it’s only fair that you, too, be well-informed. Being well-informed, well-equipped to handle misinformation, allows you to be in control.

So let me set the record straight—there’s nothing magical about protein, about any one nutrient, in fact, that’s going to resolve your weight struggle. And we don’t eat protein. Rather, we eat foods, not nutrients. In those foods there may be protein, but there will also be other macro (large) nutrients, such as fats or carbohydrate. If you assume that protein is good, or safe, it implies that carbs and fats are bad. And you know what I think about these descriptions of good and bad! We need all three macronutrients for health. And no one nutrient will cause weight gain—or weight loss. If only it were that simple.

Adequate protein intake without adequate total calories will still result in loss of muscle mass. Not a good thing! Loss of muscle mass decreases metabolic rate, necessitating fewer calories to maintain your weight.

Excess calories over and above your need for maintenance, regardless of their source—protein, fat, or carbohydrate—will help contribute to an increase in weight.

Yes, it really is about energy balance.

Take it from Harriet

Harriet, an overweight woman, came to see me last week for guidance on weight loss. She’d been working with a trainer recently, at her gym. And given his extensive training in nutritional science (you know, men’s work out magazines and the like) he guided her to do the following: eat virtually no carbs, but push protein—you know, to build muscle and increase metabolism. She was eating as he instructed, whole avocados without the crackers, and limiting her fruit to only grapefruits (3 times per day). Reminds me of the Scarsdale Diet I followed in my teens for no good reason and with no good outcome!

Her energy level plummeted, making her workouts quite the challenge. She reported feeling deprived following her current regimen, and she spent a great deal of time thinking about food, preoccupied with when and what she’d get to eat next. And so she wisely sought out more sensible guidance.

When she presented at her initial session with me, she left with a grin from ear to ear. “Now I can have starches? And other fruits?” She was so excited. At her one week follow up visit, she reported feeling great—greater energy, and so much happier, being able to enjoy foods she badly missed. And, her weight was down. In fact, I had to recommend she further increase her intake to slow the rate of weight loss. It certainly proved the point that carbs weren’t harmful, and large amounts of protein are hardly helpful!

Regardless of your eating struggles, trust that all nutrients are necessary, and safe to eat. Be flexible, to avoid deprivation, allowing you to sustain healthy dietary changes. And please don’t be misled by poorly trained trainers, or misleading food packaging! 

Healthy Food = A Healthy Diet? Not Necessarily.

My lunch on a hike in Switzerland

Organic, whole grain, natural, unprocessed. These words carry visions of ideal diets, of pure and clean eating, of good health.  US News and World Report’s recent article  summarized the healthiest diets, from The DASH diet at the top of the list to The Paleo near the bottom. A panel of experts reviewed each plan for safety and nutritional value—then ranked the best down to the worst plans for health and weight control.

Here’s a brief summary of a few of their findings—with my interpretation added. You didn’t think I’d let this pass without putting in my two cents, did you?

DASH diet

Never heard of it? Not surprising, unless you, like me, have high blood pressure. DASH, an acronym for Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension is shown to be as effective against hypertension as medication, when compared side by side in studies. Its key elements are large quantities of fruits and vegetables, and inclusion of three low fat dairy products daily. It also includes lots of grains, and adequate amounts of lean protein sources. It recommends limiting sodium intake and being physically active as well.

What does this expert think? While it hasn’t normalized my blood pressure, the studies on DASH are quite impressive in demonstrating an improvement in blood pressure. And that’s what it was designed for. And it’s one step you can take to be healthier, if you have high blood pressure. I like its positive focus—on eating more fruits and more vegetables than most individuals consume, and on inclusion of three low fat dairy servings daily. Watching sodium generally necessitates eating less processed foods, which may lead to greater fullness—think apple versus juice.

Paleo diet

The theory, according to US News, is as follows:

Our highly processed, carb-obsessed eating pattern is the culprit behind many of our biggest health ills, so why not go back—way back—to the Paleolithic period of more than 10,000 years ago, when our diet wasn’t full of junk food and pasta? Paleo advocates say we should eat the way we ate when we were hunting and gathering: animal protein and plants.

The diet includes meat, fish, and other protein sources, as well as fruits and veggies, but omits dairy, grains and starchy vegetables, and several oils. Yes, even protein-rich, high fiber, satisfying legumes (think beans and lentils) are out of the question. As are root vegetables, such as sweet potato. (Imagine Thanksgiving at the Paleo family’s home!) Apparently these are omitted because they needed to be cooked. And say goodbye not only to milk, but also to those gut-beneficial probiotics we consume from yogurts with active culture. Never mind the lack of evidence that supports eliminating these foods.

If I have to give something up, there darn well better be a good reason for it. Unless there were some life altering evidence in favor of a Paleo, I say let’s be thankful we’ve evolved since then. And how fortunate we are to be able to consume legumes and grains—those carbohydrate rich foods, full of minerals and energy, as well as rich in fiber—given that we can cook them. Most of you, I suspect have a stovetop?

If you are not living in a year-round warm climate—rich in sunshine used to produce vitamin D, or you choose to prevent skin cancer by using sunscreen—you’ll be missing out on the foods necessary to obtain all the Vitamin D that you need following the Paleo diet. By the way, why use a Paleolithic period diet as some ideal, anyway? Their lifestyle was a bit different, I believe (I haven’t had to chase my dinner), and our lifespan has only increased over the years.

As for Atkins?

The lack of carbohydrate through many stages of this diet, and the saturated fat-rich intake flies in the face of all that we know about disease prevention. Review the 2010 Dietary Guidelines For Americans for an evidence-based review of these recommendations. Is anyone really taking this diet seriously anymore?

And Ornish?

Generally pretty extreme in it’s limitation of fats, which research confirms is not the cause of us getting fat; weight loss at the 12-month mark was no greater with a low fat diet, compared with many other popular diets. And any differences in weight loss between various diets (containing the same calorie level) was obliterated at the later follow up date. No, fats don’t make you fat. And a super low fat diet does not appear to be necessary to improve your lipid profile; very low fat diets may increase triglyceride level, an independent risk factor for heart disease. In the Ornish diet, meat, poultry and fish are not recommended, as well as all oils, nuts, seeds, and refined carbohydrate. It has its merits for reversing heart disease, but his studies showing this reversal focused not solely on dietary changes, but included a comprehensive stress reduction and exercise component.

Mediterranean Diet

My only beef with it is not its lack of meat, but its limited dairy. There’s no support for restricting dairy, particularly low fat varieties, for good health and weight management. I do like their inclusion of moderate amounts of wine, with meals, for those who are able to limit their alcohol. This diet is much higher in fats and carbohydrate than most, but includes, for the most part, less processed varieties. That said, they do not urge extremes, such as no bread or white potatoes.

The U Diet: The best diet you've never heard of

What was unfortunately left off the list of healthy diets was the U diet. Missing is consideration for the individual, because what’s healthy for one person is not necessarily healthy for another. Eating healthy, for many of you, should mean not trying to beat the system and eat less (like the Volumetrics Diet, for instance). Even those 2010 Guidelines for Americans act as if we are all obese and unhealthy and needing to eat less. It’s a challenge, for sure, when the rest of the universe is struggling to drop a few pounds or kilos and you are working, somewhat reluctantly, to gain them, or even to maintain them!

The U diet is truly the answer. It means, first and foremost, including an appropriate intake of calories. Ideally, if you are healthy enough to do so, this is done through better self-regulating (read the 100 or so posts in which I’ve addressed this already. Then re-read them!). It involves more mindful eating, and distinguishing hunger from other eating triggers. You know what I mean. 


But it also means releasing yourself from the rules which prevent you from eating when you are hungry, regardless of whether its only been two hours, or if it’s after 8 PM.

As I’ve mentioned previously, for many of my readers it requires the “just do it approach”—eating in spite of not thinking or feeling you need to eat.  It may defy all the healthy recommendations you’ve read above. Yes, you may be among those that need to decrease your vegetable intake, if they are displacing the calories and nutrients your body desperately needs to function.

Let's take Brian, whose diet was chock full of such wholesome ingredients, as recommended by DASH, Volumetrics, Mediterranean, and some dieticians' model diet.

Breakfast

Old Fashioned rolled oats with soy milk

Snacks

Fresh fruits and vegetables, both orange and green ones

Lunch

Brown rice and veggies

Dinner

Beans and a vegetable soup

Pretty good? Not at all. At 6'1" Brian struggles to function. His determination to select what he considers healthy foods has made him anything but healthy. His energy level is low, as is his testosterone level, impacting a range of quality of life activities. Let's just say, it impacts more than just the frequency of his shaving. His weight, while I will omit mention of numbers, is unhealthily low.

Or let me tell you about Sarah's recent diet. Her move away from "junk" food to a more wholesome diet landed her with a low heart rate and a plummeting weight, now below the 5th percentile. Never one to struggle with her weight in either direction, she now teeters on the need for a hospitalization. Her diet is low sodium, making it more challenging to keep her blood pressure in a healthy range given her unhealthy weight, contributing to her lightheadedness with posture change, from lying, to sitting, to standing.

And then there was Amy, who never intended to lose weight. Really. She gradually moved toward less processed foods, leaving her favorite items behind. Who needs Pop Tarts anyway? Her biggest concern, besides her hair loss, is that she is constantly freezing, even with the record warm temperatures we have had this fall in New England. This is what is motivating her to break from her "healthy" diet.

Diane was also concerned that her daughter wasn't eating healthy enough. Review of her intake revealed the following—she consumed a variety of foods, but would benefit from additional sources of dairy or an alternative. She included meals, but was somewhat picky about what she liked to eat -- pasta was high on her list, as well as several other choices. And for snacks, she responded to her hunger with what appeared to be reasonable quantities of items like Chips Ahoy cookies -- or fruit, or cereal.  She certainly could use to increase her intake of fruit or vegetables, for the variety of nutrients they provide, and for the fiber. But she eats enough to maintain a healthy weight with healthy body function. Her diet supports her need for energy, for fuel, to engage in the activities she enjoys.

Ahh, all butter pump cookies!

The Chips Ahoy? Those processed, refined carbohydrate and sugar containing cookies fit just fine, in the context of her diet. As long as she is getting all the nutrients she needs from a variety of foods, and she needed the calories from the amount of food she consumed, if Chips Ahoy was here snack of choice, why should I try to make it "healthier"?

Healthy eating, to me, is not just about healthy foods. It is about getting enough of what you need--enough calories--from protein, fat and carbohydrate to fuel your body and allow for repair and normal function. It includes a range of vitamins and minerals, as well as all the nutrients, such as phytochemicals, that we are learning contribute to disease prevention (think about selecting colors -- deep orange and yellows as well as deep green, and reds and blues in vegetables and fruits). It includes whole grains, and refined, low fiber foods as well (think French bread or my much photographed challah—white flour and delicious!)—because in our world we also need to balance our need for convenience with our busy lives. And, our interest in eating foods we enjoy.

Follow the U diet, and you, too will rest
peacefully!

Besides needing to meet our physical need, we cannot dismiss food's other benefits. There's the pleasure factor, the enjoyment of the taste and texture, the sensory experience of eating. I'm not saying we should simply eat for pleasure. Rather, that we need to consider these aspects of eating when we are hungry and seeking food. What do we feel like eating? What would we enjoy eating? Not simply what should we be choosing.

Consider the U diet. It may not be a best seller, but it’s a sensible, and healthy diet for your body and your mind.

Healthy AND Great Tasting? Try My Favorite Barley Black Bean Salad!

I love crock-pot cooking—just not in the spring and summer. I used to love pasta salad, but the vinaigrette and mayo based versions lost their appeal in the 1980's. (Thai peanut noodles, however, I could eat any day of the week!) So when I'm looking for a wholesome, convenient meal or side dish, this whole grain, satisfying summer salad does the trick. If you’re looking to step out of your comfort zone and try something new, give this a try. It’s delicious and won’t disappoint.

You can't go wrong with this recipe for barley black bean salad, and it's many variations. (Okay, maybe you think you don't like beans. But I promise, in this recipe, you're sure to enjoy them.) 

First, there's the nutritional merit. It's high in soluble fiber—the same type of fiber found in oatmeal. Soluble fiber causes a slower rise in blood sugar, compared to the same amount of other carbohydrate containing foods. As a result, it tends to satisfy longer. This fiber also has been shown to assist in lowering blood cholesterol levels and help with blood sugar management.  It provides a simple way to combine a range of nutrients into one easy plate, including valuable complex carbohydrate, protein, vegetables, and heart healthy fats. (3 grains, 1 protein and 1/2 a fat serving based on the simple version).

The base recipe is rather light on the fats, but they could be boosted for those in need with additions such as avocado, feta or goat cheese, added afterwards. Extra protein, in addition to the protein supplied by the beans, could be added from diced, leftover chicken or turkey, or from added cheese.

Besides being easy to prepare, it's a convenient way to plan ahead and have a balanced meal waiting for you.

Oh, and did I mention it tastes great?

Barley Black Bean Salad

(serves ~10, 1 ½ cup servings--perfect for a family, but cut in half if you are cooking for 1 or 2)

Ingredients

Pearl barley (not the quick cook)

Black beans, 2 cans, low salt, rinsed thoroughly (if you prefer, you can use dried beans, cooked instead of canned)

scallion, 3-4 large

red pepper, 1 large (more can't hurt!)

cilantro, chopped, ¾ - 1 cup

olive oil, 2 Tbsp.

lime juice, 4 Tbsp.

salt, ¾ tsp

Cook barley. Place 6 cups water in large saucepan and bring to boil.  Add 2 cups pearl barley. Return to boil.  Reduce heat to low, cover 45 minutes or until barley is tender and liquid is absorbed.  Makes about 6 to 7 cups. Rinse cooked barley.

Add rinsed beans and all other ingredients. Mix well.

Refrigerate then serve.

Want to vary the leftover? Consider the following additions:

Diced, fresh tomatoes

corn, fresh or frozen (microwave, then drain first if adding frozen)

green pepper

red onion instead of scallion

crumbled goat cheese or feta

diced chicken

hot pepper flakes

Still Struggling to Trust the Carbs? Step out with this lentil soup!

Another soup recipe?!

Struggling to step out of your comfort zone and try new foods? Carbs still not safe? Selecting foods you can justify by their nutritional value can be quite helpful to get you started. Take lentil soup, for instance. Knowing that lentils are good for you—a great source of protein, oh-so-satisfying fiber, as well as carbohydrate—may get you through. And remembering that carbohydrate is a necessary nutrient, which fuels our active (and sedentary) bodies.

Lentils are also a valuable  source of iron, thiamin, and folate. Being inexpensive, easy to prepare, tasty and versatile places them high on my list of ingredients to keep on hand.

And once you try this soup, I’m sure you’ll be hooked, even if you’ve never liked lentils before. Lentils come in all colors and sizes, (the so-called red ones which really look orange are a lot lower in fiber) and are interchangeable in lentil recipes. By the way, this soup, by itself, is not an adequate meal. But serve with a salad (with nuts and dried fruit, perhaps) and some bread for a healthy, balanced, and delicious dinner! This one is sure to please.

Grilling just isn't an option these days!

Lentil Soup (adapted from Jane Brody’s Good Food Book)
Serves 8

2 Tbsps. olive or vegetable oil

2 large onion, chopped

3 carrots, sliced

¾ tsp. oregano

¾ tsp. thyme leaves

1 28 oz. can tomatoes with their juice, coarsely chopped

7 cups broth/stock (chicken, beef or vegetable, regular or reduced sodium)

1 ½ (or 2*) cups dried lentils ( brown or yellow)

½ tsp. salt (omit if using prepared commercial broth/stock)

6 oz. dry white wine

1/3 cup chopped fresh parsley

• In a large stockpot heat oil and sauté the onions, carrots, oregano and thyme, stirring, for about 5 mins.

• Add tomatoes, broth and lentils and bring to a boil.

• Reduce heat and cover, simmering for an hour. Lentils should be tender.

• Add the salt (optional), wine, and parsley, and simmer the soup for a few more minutes.

• Serve and enjoy!

PS: Looking for another chance to try out lentils? Visit my old post http://dropitandeat.blogspot.com/2010/11/lemony-lentil-stew.html for a delectable lemony lentil stew.

 *(use 2 cups to count as a protein, if following an exchange plan.)

Why Carbs Got a Bad Rep. And What you Can Do About It.

My home-baked, white flour challah from last night.
(Today's french toast!)

 It’s all fat’s fault. It started with fatphobia, a fear of fat. Yes, back in the 80’s when Michael Jackson’s Thriller and Sinatra’s New York, New York were hits, Americans were instilled with a near fatal fear of fat-containing foods.  Meanwhile, carbohydrate was deemed safe and free to consume, without restraint. Ah, the good old days.

Heart disease became linked to saturated fat, and the message got oversimplified. Instead of saturated fats, the true culprit, all fats were grouped together as unacceptable.

And so food companies, ever interested in meeting consumer demand, supported our desire to eliminate the fat from most food products. Welcome Snackwell fat free cookies, fat free ice cream, reduced fat peanut butter—you name it.  Clients would declare, so proudly, that they had eaten 5 or 6 fat free sandwich cookies, clinging to the “free” part of the description. That they had consumed as much from these ”safe” cookies as they would from regular Oreos, never crossed their minds. They simply homed in on the fat content.

As fats were vilified, intake of carbohydrate-rich foods expanded, as did our waistlines. As you eliminate one of the three main building blocks of foods (fat) you are left with only two others (protein and carbohydrate) to fill the void. And we were given incentive to increase our intake of these items—they were “free” (of fats) and seemingly good for us. And their portions increased as well, as our guilt for eating them bottomed out.

So obscenely large I had to dig out my food scale and see what it weighed. Yes, 7 oz!

Unless you grew up in Brooklyn (which I happen to) a bagel was something Lenders made. It weighed about 2 ounces, the equivalent of two slices of pre-sliced bread. But even commercially baked bagels bulked up to 4 and 5 ounces, as in Dunkin Donuts, Finagle a Bagel, and Einstein.

No, not all bagels weight this much!

The thought of energy balance, of eating to meet your need, was absent, as larger amounts of carbs were eaten, regardless of hunger or need.

Finally the reality hit. Americans’ weight was climbing. In spite of having cut the fat, our weight, as a population, was increasing. (By the way, for those of you still fat phobic, this only further supports the fact that fats don't link with weight gain.) The culprit? Well, according to such authorities as Barry Sears (The Zone Diet) and Dr. Atkins (of restrict-carbs-to-make- ketones fame), the obvious conclusion was that carbs were bad. 


And boy did that message take off! They reinforced their messages with a distortion of a truth about carbs—that they increase insulin levels in the blood stream. They pathologized this situation, making it seem like a bad thing. Yes, insulin levels increase upon eating carbs. But a healthy body handles carbohydrate quite well, thank you. Yes, even diabetics can and should include carbohydrate as a chunk of their intake. (I say this as both an RD and a Certified Diabetes Educator.)

When panicked, we tend to not trust ourselves, instead latching on to information, even illogical and incorrect information.

Carbs don’t increase your weight. Period. 

Excess calories do. And the way we were eating carb-rich foods clearly resulted in taking in too many calories. And by choosing more processed, less filling carbohydrate-rich foods, it was quite easy to over consume them. For instance, eating a 5 oz. bagel was a breeze. But could you easily eat 2 ½ cups of cooked oatmeal? Because they’re the same, calorically.  And a 12 oz. can of apple juice? That’s about 3 ½ whole apples. Which would fill you up more? See the point. And the bagel pictured on this page (purchased from local bagel shop)? That’s like having 7 (yes, seven) slices of bread! But we tend to see foods as units—a sandwich, for instance, or a bagel, failing to recognize just how large the portion really is.

That isn’t to say that you should only eat high fiber grains, though. Truly, it’s simply about the portion. They eat white, processed pasta in Italy, and white baguettes in France, as part of their healthy Mediterranean diet. And the record shows it doesn’t cause weight gain. But they also include legumes, and fruits and vegetables on a regular basis. And they rarely eat in their cars, or on the train. And they tend to take time to eat. And I suspect they really enjoy those crusty baguettes and croissants. Get the picture?

Still struggling to trust the carbs? Make a substitution for a protein source, not an addition, just to prove it’s okay. Take baby steps. Once your worst fears don’t come true, do it more frequently. Start with foods you might see as healthier, to get started.

This one was too cute to cook. The rest got tossed with olive oil and baked!

Go ahead. Give it a try. You’ll see that bad things don’t happen. I promise!