Discover Yahoo! With Your Friends

Explore news, videos and much more based on what your friends are reading and watching. Publish your own activity and retain full control.

To get started, first

YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

    6 biggest lies about food busted

    The other day while I was making zucchini bread, I cracked an egg and dumped it right down the drain. Total mistake. (With a baby who still wakes up multiple times a night, I'm still a little sleep deprived.) There was a time, however, when I intentionally washed egg yolks down the drain-and used only the whites-because I thought that egg yolks were bad for my heart. Joyce Hendley tackles this food myth and 12 others in the September/October issue of EatingWell Magazine.

    Here are the details of why you should go ahead and eat the yolks, plus highlights of other food myths that just won't die.

    Myth 1: Eggs are bad for your heart.
    The Truth: Eggs do contain a substantial amount of cholesterol in their yolks-about 211 mg per large egg. And yes, cholesterol is the fatty stuff in our blood that contributes to clogged arteries and heart attacks. But labeling eggs as "bad for your heart" is connecting the wrong dots, experts say. "Epidemiologic studies show that most healthy people can eat an egg a day without problems," says Penny Kris-Etherton, Ph.D., R.D., distinguished professor of nutrition at Penn State University. For most of us the cholesterol we eat doesn't have a huge impact on raising our blood cholesterol; the body simply compensates by manufacturing less cholesterol itself. Saturated and trans fats have much greater impact on raising blood cholesterol. And a large egg contains only 2 grams of saturated fat and no trans fats. The American Heart Association recommends limiting cholesterol intake to less than 300 mg daily-less than 200 mg if you have a history of heart problems or diabetes or are over 55 (women) or 45 (men). "That works out to less than an egg a day for this population-more like two eggs over the course of the week," notes Kris-Etherton.

    Related: Two Dozen Easy, Healthy Egg Recipes

    Myth 2: High-Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) is worse for you than sugar.
    The Truth: The idea that high-fructose corn syrup is any more harmful to your health than sugar is "one of those urban myths that sounds right but is basically wrong," according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a health advocacy group. The composition of high-fructose corn syrup is almost identical to table sugar or sucrose (55 percent fructose, 45 percent glucose and 50:50, respectively). Calorie-wise, HFCS is a dead ringer for sucrose. Studies show that HFCS and sucrose have very similar effects on blood levels of insulin, glucose, triglycerides and satiety hormones. In short, it seems to be no worse-but also no better-than sucrose, or table sugar. This controversy, say researchers, is distracting us from the more important issue: we're eating too much of all sorts of sugars, from HFCS and sucrose to honey and molasses. The American Heart Association recently recommended that women consume no more than 100 calories a day in added sugars [6 teaspoons]; men, 150 calories [9 teaspoons].

    Related: Delicious Desserts with Surprisingly Low Added Sugars

    Myth 3: A raw-food diet provides enzymes that are essential to healthy digestion.
    The Truth: "Raw foods are unprocessed so nothing's taken away; you don't get the nutrient losses that come with cooking," says Brenda Davis, R.D., co-author of Becoming Raw: The Essential Guide to Raw Vegan Diets (Book Publishing, 2010). But the claim by some raw-food advocates that eating raw boosts digestion by preserving "vital" plant enzymes, Davis explains, just doesn't hold water. "Those enzymes are made for the survival of plants; for human health, they are not essential." What about the claim by some raw-foodistas that our bodies have a limited lifetime supply of enzymes-and that by eating more foods with their enzymes intact, we'll be able to spare our bodies from using up their supply? "The reality is that you don't really have a finite number of enzymes; you'll continue to make enzymes as long as you live," says Davis. Enzymes are so vital to life, she adds, "the human body is actually quite efficient at producing them."

    Myth 4: Your body can't use the protein from beans unless you eat them with rice.
    The Truth: Proteins-which our bodies need to make everything from new muscle to hormones-are made up of different combinations of 20 amino acids. Thing is, our bodies can make only 11 of these amino acids; we must get the other nine from food. Animal-based protein-rich foods like eggs and meat provide all nine of these "essential" amino acids, but nearly all plant foods are low in at least one. Experts used to say that to get what your body needs to make proteins, you should pair plant-based foods with complementary sets of amino acids-like rice and beans. Now they know that you don't have to eat those foods at the same meal. "If you get a variety of foods throughout the day, they all go into the 'basket' of amino acids that are available for the body to use," says Winston J. Craig, Ph.D., R.D., nutrition department chair at Andrews University in Berrien Springs, Michigan.

    Related: Cheap, Quick Dinners Using Canned Beans

    Myth 5: Microwaving zaps nutrients.
    The Truth: This is misguided thinking, says Carol Byrd-Bredbenner, Ph.D., R.D., professor of nutrition at Rutgers University in New Brunswick, New Jersey. Whether you're using a microwave, a charcoal grill or a solar-heated stove, "it's the heat and the amount of time you're cooking that affect nutrient losses, not the cooking method," she says. "The longer and hotter you cook a food, the more you'll lose certain heat- and water-sensitive nutrients, especially vitamin C and thiamin [a B vitamin]." Because microwave cooking often cooks foods more quickly, it can actually help to minimize nutrient losses.

    Related: How to Cook 20 Vegetables

    Myth 6: Radiation from microwaves creates dangerous compounds in your food.
    The Truth: "Radiation" might connote images of nuclear plants, but it simply refers to energy that travels in waves and spreads out as it goes. Microwaves, radio waves and the energy waves that we perceive as visual light all are forms of radiation. So, too, are X-rays and gamma rays-which do pose health concerns. But the microwaves used to cook foods are many, many times weaker than X-rays and gamma rays, says Robert Brackett, Ph.D., director of the National Center for Food Safety and Technology at the Illinois Institute of Technology. And the types of changes that occur in microwaved food as it cooks are "from heat generated inside the food, not the microwaves themselves," says Brackett. "Microwave cooking is really no different from any other cooking method that applies heat to food." That said, microwaving in some plastics may leach compounds into your food, so take care to use only microwave-safe containers.


    What food myth are you sick of hearing people defend?


    By Nicci Micco

    Nicci Micco

    Nicci Micco is deputy editor of features and nutrition at EatingWell and co-author of EatingWell 500-Calorie Dinners. She has a master's degree in nutrition and food sciences, with a focus in weight management.



    Related Links from EatingWell:

    Loading...
     

    2,047 comments

    • Emily Yawa  •  7 months ago
      did tilapia fresh one increase cholestrol
    • pretty much amazing  •  1 year 5 months ago
      Myth 2: High Fructose Corn Syrup
      It is insulin resistant which means it is a good thing to eat if you want diabetes. It's a fact that it's insulin resistant and that the childhood obesity rates have significantly increased. Why hasn't anyone stood up to say that that's a pretty big coincidence. Also, HFCS causes you to become hungry and crave more sugar sooner after eating.
      Myth 5:
      You should be more worried about what you're microwaving your veggies in (plastic!?)
      Myth 6:
      Who uses microwaves all that often anymore unless they have no knowledge of a healthy diet in the first place?
    • HM.Hou  •  1 year 5 months ago
      "pretty much amazing" is absolutely right regarding HFCS. The fact that is DOES make you crave more sugar makes it addictive, which would only be beneficial for food companies. It's also cheaper to produce than real sugar, which is why companies use it over real sugar.
    • David  •  1 year 4 months ago
      To the author:
      Obviously you are being paid by the corn industry, ignorant of the facts, or just plain stupid.

      High fructose corn syrup IS bad for you and is so far-removed from common table sugar that you have to be a complete moron to even make that suggestion. It's idiotic! And, just for grins and such...your liver cannot break it down and thus IS bad for you!
    • Paper Aeroplane  •  1 year 5 months ago
      Pretty Much Amazing: I understand what your trying to say about HFCS but diabetics do not get their disease from eating too much sugar. I've been a diabetic for 15 years and that's completely false.
    • rondad  •  1 year 4 months ago
      As for HFCS read Michael Pollans book the Omnivores Dilemma--it will shock the pants off of you, well documented science against HFCS-then follow up with his book in defense of food.
    • HM.Hou  •  1 year 5 months ago
      Thank you "Fabulous" for the link!
    • Lil Bear  •  1 year 5 months ago
      I saw a show about food and energy and the science proved that cooked food gives you more energy than raw foods because the cooking process breaks the food down for you and your stomach breaks it down the rest of the way. You get more nutrients out of cooked food than you do raw foods.
    • RichardW  •  1 year 5 months ago
      How about you people who know all these "facts" quote your sources.
    • JacquelineR  •  1 year 5 months ago
      Great comments on this post about HFCS, but I will add to HM.Hou's comments that the reason it's cheaper to produce than sugar is because the US government subsidizes corn production.
    • Jess  •  1 year 5 months ago
      It does concern me that someone with a degree in nutrition would be so pro HFCS. I'm currently taking a nutrition class and my instructor (Also a well educated woman with a Master's in nutrition) is vehemently opposed to the stuff for the reasons already posted here by other readers. I'm thinking maybe since nutrition is a relatively new science we just don't know a lot yet. At least, I hope it's that and not some creepy gov't conspiracy.
    • Runa  •  1 year 5 months ago
      Honest, the author is right about HFCS. It IS almost identical to sugar. The big problem is that we put it in EVERYTHING, so we're used to a certain amount of sweetness in our food. Eat something without sweet stuff (usually HFCS) and it tastes bitter or sour or bland by comparison. I pretty much guarantee that at some point people are going to start making a fuss about sugar coming from sugar beets vs. sugar coming from sugar cane. Really, people. A molecule is a molecule is a molecule. Where it comes from doesn't matter.
    • HelenP  •  1 year 4 months ago
      To everyone that thinks that the author says that HFCS is good for you - reread the article. She says it is no worse than, but also no better than, sugar. That is a far cry from saying that it is good for you.
    • Cheryl  •  1 year 4 months ago
      Microwave rays spin molecules in your food to create heat, changing the molecular structure and lessening the nutritional value...and worse. Do your research - there's plenty out there. HFCS is so bad, for so many reasons. Refined sugar is not much better - there are many heathier choices out there!
    • Betty L  •  1 year 4 months ago
      I won't buy anything that has HFCS on the label. One bread maker puts "no High Fructose" on their label and I appreciate it.
    • billy  •  1 year 5 months ago
      Myth 2: High-Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) is worse for you than sugar.

      "The composition of high-fructose corn syrup is almost identical to table sugar or sucrose"

      Carbon monoxide kills humans (CO)
      Carbon dioxide is used in soda pop and is consumed by humans (CO2)

      They have the same ingredients, just in slightly different proportions, but you don't see me writing articles saying you can swap the two.
    • Jay  •  1 year 5 months ago
      Gee I wonder how much money she received to produce these "truths"

      The fact is, if you want the "truth" you have to do your own research.
    • Kris N  •  1 year 5 months ago
      I have to laugh at everyone here claimign the author is pro HFCS. I read the article and she's clearly anti-sugar in my view.
    • funchy crunchy  •  1 year 5 months ago
      Not sure I agree with all these "facts". Pro saturated fat? Pro HFCS? Pro meat (anti vegetable proteins - there are plenty of good veg sources of the 9 'essential' amino acids)? I feel like I am reading reconstituted press releases from Big Ag interests. :-(
    • Lisa  •  1 year 5 months ago
      "What food myth are you sick of hearing people defend?"
      These "Most of the popular animal products sold don't have additions in flavore, or chemicles to help them last longer."
      "The drugs animals take in won't affect the humans who eat it after it dies."