Low Sugar Coconut Ice Cream

So I'm not up on the relative health benefits of coconut milk[1*,2*]and coconut oil though there are those out there going gaga for it (and those out there who have other ideas) It seems that there might be an association between a certain constituent molecule in coconut oil, lauric acid [1,2*], and health benefits.

Despite those statements, coconut milk is very high in saturated fat so I would still not say that the following recipe is a healthy one. Maybe this will get some further research. But one thing I do know is that the modern diet contains far too much sugar.

Low Sugar Coconut Ice Cream

1 Cup Whipping Cream
1 Can (~14oz.) Coconut Milk
2 Table Spoons Honey
1-2 teaspoons Vanilla Extract

I know, I know. But I said low sugar, not low fat.
Empty can of coconut milk into bowl, whisk in honey until fully mixed (if granulated sugar, until fully dissolved). Add cream, mix. Add vanilla,mix. Put in ice cream maker. Takes about 25 minutes (about 10minutes less than usual) in our machine.

I'd recommend organic ingredients since there is an indication that they are higher in omega-3s and raw honey.
If you have not been doing the low sugar thing up to this point this is not necessarily the recipe to go cold turkey with. The original recipe that this is lightly based on called for 3/4 cup of granulated sugar. I'd recommend then that you start out with about 1/2 cup of granulated sugar (or equivalent honey) and work your way down. Sugar is like salt in that the more you consume the higher the threshold you have for tasting it. Today, when I have a cookie or pastry not made with reduced sugar it is basically repellingly sweet.
And remember, moderation in everything (within moderation).

* The sites linked are to groups or individuals advocating a position. These sites can look and feel very much like scientific sites with scientific authority and backing. Yet science is based on the concept of inquiry and advocacy is generally the opposite of inquiry. This is not to say that the information provided is not true or unhelpful. One way to view this is that advocacy tries to paints things in black and white and it is my take home understanding that this particular issue has an a lot of gray in it. What are the shades of gray is what it is all about.

Technorati Tags: recipe
Technorati Tags: coconut
Technorati Tags: coconut milk
Technorati Tags: ice cream
Technorati Tags: low sugar

Omega-3s: More on ALA:EPA:DHA

This is a reply to this comment left by Maikeru on the post Omega-3 Fats: The Right Ratio.

Hi Maikeru,

The ALA/DHA/EPA question is an important one for those interested in improving their omega-3 intake. ALA is found primarily in plants such as greens and some seeds while the other two are derived primarily from fish and land animals.

There is an interesting book on the subject called The Queen of Fats by Susan Allport that is well written and engaging. There she describes a competitive reaction with an 18 carbon omega-6 fatty acid for the enzyme involved with carbon addition to make the 20 carbon chain acids. Thus what she is saying is with too high an intake of the omega-6 acids the body will favor the production of the omega-6 20 carbon acid over the conversion of ALA to EPA. This conflict between the two fatty acid families is not well known and thus not accounted for in studies of ALA conversion in the body.

While it might seem logical to just bypass the problem all together by only eating fish and meats there are of course some complications. Fish higher up in the food chain tend to concentrate the pollutants that humans have been adding to the oceans and lakes of the world (another socialized cost of "cheap" electricity. Coal contains a lot of mercury which winds up in the worlds waters and in fish.) In addition the worlds fish populations are in serious jeopardy of being over fished with some reporting fishery degradation in every spot on Earth and around 80% fishery collapse. Getting omega-3s from fish (the highest concentration) is not sustainable. There are a few companies that are going right to the source and gathering DHA from algae.

As for meats, though grass fed animals are higher in omega-3s than are grain fed animals they are not near the 1:1 ratio of omega-3 to omega-6 that is thought to represent our evolutionary diet. Meats are also high in saturated fats which are still widely seen as unhealthful. Lastly, though the omega-3 content is likely playing some role in this, every study of health and diet points to the importance of green (or better yet, colorful) plants (fruits and vegetables) in the diet.

So considering the we could potentially get a lot of our omega-3s form the plants we eat if we 1) cut back on the amount of omega-6s and 2) increased our consumption of fruits and vegetables we should try to get most of our omega-3s that way but I would still supplement with pharmaceutical grade fish oils or something like that (particularly after a fat laden meal out) since our understanding is still rudimentary.

It should be mentioned again that anyone that wants to radically change their diet should consult their physician and their own body. High omega-3 diets are known to increase bleeding. There may be other complications that are not well known.

Technorati Tags: health, diet, omega-3, omega-3s, fat

School education fails to improve condom use

An interesting study based in Scotland that showed no increase in condom use even when students knowledge of condoms was improved. There persisted, despite education efforts, a sense that illness would not occur and thus condoms were thought not useful.

clipped from www.sciencedirect.com School-based education programmes may not be the answer to spiralling rates of sexually transmitted infections, analysis of a scheme in Scotland suggests. Healthy Respect, a classroom-based education programme delivered by trained teachers and nurses, produced no change in attitudes or intention to use condoms and no reduction in sexual intercourse in those under 16 years of age. The lack of behaviour change was clearly apparent despite teenagers having more knowledge of where to access condoms and how to use them effectively. A second phase of the project, running until 2008, is focusing on areas where the team feel more progress will be made, such as increasing access to drop-in centres. “Sexual health programmes at school alone will not substantially mitigate against the factors that are shaping young people's risky behaviour”, Tucker continued. She added that governments should stop funding unsustainable efforts and projects that are poorly thought-out.

Response to Dave's comment @ CP blog

This is in response to Dave over at the "Complete Patient Blog" on a recent posted entitled "Chewing on a Mother's Real Message About Raw Milk, and the Risks of Dramatic Stories"

First, the notion that 1/3 of milk-related illness is due to raw milk...

Those of you wishing to believe that statistic probably cannot be dissuaded, but the first time I saw it in print, I tried to track it down to root data, and was simply unable to do it. The raw data does not support the claim. Nevertheless it is gradually, maddeningly, becoming true by repitition! Ken. please look into this. You will find that most of the claims of illness from raw milk come from government investigators who have a nasty habit of making assumptions that fall into line with their job descriptions. You do not have to take my word on that---do the due diligence and look at the claims.

Fair enough. I actually picked up that statistic reading your site. I saw it being bantered about by raw milk supporters so I thought it accurate enough. Unfortunately to have to rely on non-government reports of raw milk illnesses for raw milk illness statistics is untenable. The people who investigate, gather and publish such statistics are these government people. I take it from your post that you view these people as having a conflict of interest. In what way? And if these numbers cannot be trusted (since I generally do not believe in conspiracies, let's assume that they subconsciously err on the side of blaming raw milk) how could one make any decision on raw milk?

Let us say that, due to socialization and what not, that these investigators unfairly accuse raw milk for illnesses 5 out of 10 times. Personally I think that such an error rate is extremely unlikely. But if true this means is that only half of the illness that are being ascribed to raw milk are real. To make it simple (and even reduce the illness rate ascribed to raw milk some more) let's say that raw milk accounts for only 15% of all cases. Even if that where true that would mean that something, if we are being really generous, that accounts for less than 0.1% (I'd guess 0.001% or less) of all milk sales accounts for 15% of all milk related illness. This does not speak well for the risk profile of raw milk.

And also on that same subject: If raw milk is so dangerous, or even deadly as some say, why are indiginous cultures with very heavy reliance on raw dairy able to survive so healthfully? The Masai in Africa (our contemporaries) live largely on milk and blood. They are sturdy, healthy, tall, and smart. (I'm told by someone who lives near the Masai that they look down their noses at everybody, for good reason!) They are not buying processed, pasteurized milk or even testing their milk or collection processes! How can that be?

The Masai have a life expectancy in the mid to late 40s. Not exactly the poster child of health. A lot of kids die in these cultures that have not yet fully embraced modern medical and health practices. That said they also drink fresh raw milk from one cow. They do not mix the contents of several or tens of cows, bottle, and in some states ship the contents.

Second, please bear with me as I relate a comment from a judge I met in Ohio. Over dinner conversation about law and regulation, he told me that the worst laws are the ones with names attached,[...]

A bit of a tangent but in general I agree. Yes these laws take the thinking out of the legal system (what little there is). But we Americans constantly confuse our legal system for a justice system, which it is not.

Last, regarding Ken's comment that raw milk is the perfect medium for infectious agents [to grow and multiply], I am compelled to say this: Milk, in its raw state, is loaded with friendly bacteria that actually destroy pathogens. You can inoculate raw milk with a pathogen, and see that pathogen neutralized by friendly resident microbes. Inoculate pasteurized milk, and you get no inherent protection.

I have yet to read anything in my research about these good bacteria. Can you direct me to where I should read up about them? Do you know their name or how they function? I'm wondering if they attack the bad bacteria or if they out compete the bad bacteria. I guess in general a citation for the inoculation experiment you describe above would also be in order.

No matter, I suppose, since pasteurization is such an effective pathogen-killer. But where then, do the presumed 2/3 of pasteurized milk illnesses come from? The answer of course, is the same for pasteurized milk as it is for raw milk: Individual consumer factors aside (like immune strength), it's about the processing.

Pasteurization does not completely destroy all pathogens (or other beneficial bacteria) but merely knocks back the numbers to a large degree (kills off many e-folds) Thus that the 99.9% to 99.999% of milk that is pasteurized could still contain and sustain dangerous bacteria is a probability.

I want to remind raw milk proponents that I am not saying they are wrong. I am finding new information as I read everyday that shows raw milk to have wonderful , healthful properties many of which are knocked-back or lost in pasteurization. The question is whether the risk is worth the benefit. Whether some of the benefits could be found in other, safer foods or be retained in raw milk with newer processing methods. I realize that part of the appeal of raw milk is that it is a living system and that consuming it is like drinking in life and health. I also realize that pasteurization knocks-out a lot of that life turning milk into a largely dead liquid. The question is once again what, if any benefit is there in raw milk that is unique (i.e. cannot be found in other, safer foods) and is it worth the risk? I'm still trying to figure that one out.

Ken


Technorati Tags: raw milk

Raw Milk - Waiting

Summary

• Raw milk contains compounds that fight infectious agents.

• There is also a class of compounds that seem to promote positive immunity response.
• The benefit to humans is not established.
• One should avoid using one study to draw broad conclusions.
  
• There is not enough information to make a proper risk analysis
  

Objective
The objective of this investigation is to research the findings of the power point presentation (PPT) of Dexter and Fallon with the ultimate goal of deciding on the scientific validity of health claims of raw milk. This article will look at the first few slides of the PPT.

Findings
While waiting for the delivery of the book The Untold Story of Milk from Amazon, I have decided to look at what information I can from the web sites recommended in the thread of at The Complete Patient web blog post entitled "The Nuances of Educating People About Raw Milk and Other Real Foods". In visiting the web site for the Weston A. Price Foundation I found the following PPT and will start to look into the claims it makes. As I have said before, I do not take the Weston A. Price Foundation as a non-biased source. Though some have questioned how anyone might benefit from advocating or misleading a concept that is not financially profitable, human nature being what it is there are many reasons why someone might take up advocacy for an idea or belief that does not pan out "in reality".

My intention with respect to the PPT is to go over, slide by slide, the claims and details. I am not a health professional (a bonus point no doubt among many...) so please feel free to correct me or direct me to areas you think I either missed or did not cover adequately. My goal is two fold. To find out details about the science or pseudo-science of raw milk claims and to show respect for people. Showing respect for people of course is a two way street so please let's try to avoid what happens so often on net.

We are told:

• Consider the calf, born in the muck, which then suckles on its mother’s manure-covered teat. How can that calf survive?

• Because raw milk contains multiple, redundant systems of bioactive components that can reduce or eliminate populations of pathogenic bacteria.

This is followed by the next slide:

• Built-In Protective Systems in Raw Milk Lactoperoxidase

• Uses small amounts of H2O2 and free radicals to seek out and destroy bad bacteria

• In all mammalian secretions—breast milk, tears, etc.

• Lactoperoxidase levels 10 times higher in goat milk than in breast milk

• Other countries are looking into using lactoperoxidase instead to pasteurization to ensure safety of commercial milk

British Journal of Nutrition (2000), 84, Suppl. 1. S19-S25.

Indian Journal Exp Biology Vol. 36, August 1998, pp 808-810. 1991

J Dairy Sci 74:783-787

Life Sciences, Vol 66, No 23, pp 2433-2439, 2000

An investigation into the sources is in order. I checked the more easily accessible (for me) ones The British Journal of Nutrition and Life Sciences (side note, the reference for Life Sciences had a typo, the issue number should read 25 not 23.) These references pan out and confirm that raw milk does indeed have bacteriological fighting chemicals. In fact these compounds are now actively being mined (from raw milk no less) for potential use in preserving other food products.

This research lead to further reading why I found this interesting article:

Biodefense Properties of Milk: The Role of Antimicrobial Proteins and Peptides

Authors: Clare, D.A.; Catignani, G.L.; Swaisgood, H.E.

Source: Current Pharmaceutical Design, Volume 9, Number 16, June 2003, pp. 1239-1255(17)

Publisher: Bentham Science Publishers

Abstract:

Mammary fluids, colostrum and milk, deliver nature's first host defense systems upon birth, and these essential liquids are critical for survival of the neonate. The identification and characterization of anti-infectious proteins were among the early scientific discoveries and this group of proteins has long been recognized for promoting health benefits in both newborns and adults. Among the more widely studied are the immunoglobulins, lactoperoxidase, lysozyme, and lactoferrin. Recently, it was shown that -lactalbumin may also function in a protective capacity dependent upon its folding state. Some of these, especially lactoferrin, also display an immunomodulatory role in which case a totally separate cascade of host defense responses is initiated. It was noted that the mechanism of action for this cluster of sentry proteins does vary; thus, this protective strategy provides for a broad range of responsive reactions to infection. Presently, there is a major focus on the discovery of novel peptides that can be generated from existing milk proteins via proteolytic reactions. To date, this substrate list includes -lactalbumin, -lactoglobulin, all casein fractions, and lactoferrin. Again, the immunoregulatory effects prompted as a result of the appearance of these peptides are currently being defined. Herein, we review the principal biological properties associated with each of these contributing milk components with a special emphasis on the role of biodefensive milk peptides. We envision future contributions emerging from this research field as an opportunity to develop effective new therapies to be used in treating infectious diseases and promoting health benefits in vivo.

This looks like a great deal of scientific gobbledygook no doubt, but in essence it not only affirms the findings stated in the PPT but also confirms statements made elsewhere that there is a potential immuno-benefit derived from some proteins that are "dependent upon its folding state" or tertiary structure. Such protein structures are easily lost when they are heated, such as when milk is pasteurized. The authors note, and we should too, that the exact immunoregulatory effects are not known. This is undergoing further research.

Discussion
The findings form the papers mentioned above confirm the statements made in the first few slides of the PPT. The inference made by the PPT authors, Dexter and Fallon, that raw milk is thus fundamentally safe is given some credence. The problem for this understanding is that raw milk is traced to out brakes of illness so any understanding that raw milk is fundamentally safe needs to include an explanation for these out breaks. I will muse on some possibilities that might suggest areas that need further research. In addition the idea that some bacteria, which are useful or benign to the calf but potentially infectious to a human, exist is not addressed.

Many of the compounds mentioned in the articles referenced are peroxides, these compounds are known for their short lifetimes (they decompose readily) which is part of the basis of their effectiveness. This is not a surprise since milk, by its nature, is not meant to be stored at all. Thus pathogen out breaks linked to raw milk would suggest that many of the bacteriological fighting compounds in raw milk are short lived. The research question here is what is this period of time for a given bacteriological load? Other questions include does diet affect the production of these compounds and to what degree.

The other interesting finding is the possible immuno-benefit of some of these proteins. I must confess that due to time restrictions I am basing my discussion on the reading of the abstract rather than the article itself. I hope that by my next post (middle of next week) I will have read this article and have more to say. That said, questions that must be addressed at some point are, if these compounds provide immuno-benefit then why is the incidence of illness from raw milk so great? Is it an immediate, linear benefit or is it a benefit that is acquired over time? Do these compounds provide any benefit at all? Are compounds beneficial to cows beneficial to humans at all?

Conclusions
There is evidence that raw milk contains compounds that fight infectious agents as stated in the PPT of Dexter and Fallon. Such agents are sensitive to heating and thus are likely to be largely lost in the pasteurization process. It is unknown if these compounds have beneficial health impacts on the human body. There is also a class of compounds that seem to promote positive immunity response. To what degree, over what time frame, and if beneficial to humans is not known. Once again, the tertiary structure of these proteins is sensitive to heating and thus would be expected to degrade with pasteurization.

As with any health study one should use caution in applying one study too broadly. The human body is complex as is the interaction of the cow with her environment. Further research is needed as stated above to provide a better understanding of how these compounds work, what benefit they might have, and why raw milk is linked to higher incidence of illness. Such information is needed to make a proper risk analysis with respect to raw milk consumption.

Technorati Tags: raw milk

Raw Milk - The Investigation Starts

My wife has started to consider buying raw milk from a local dairy and of course the first thing I felt was concern. Raw milk is milk that has not been pasteurized so that any pathogen that might make it into the milk then makes it on into the consumer of the milk. So why go for raw milk then? Well there is a movement of people who believe that pasteurization destroys the beneficial aspects of milk and even can make people ill. This effort over the next few weeks will be to investigate from as scientifically sound a direction as possible the reality of the raw milk "debate" for lack of a better term. The goal is to lead to a decision as to whether I will support bringing raw milk into the family menu or not.

Looking at what governments and mainstream researchers have to say, there is no issue. Raw milk is dangerous. But as a scientist myself and with the knowledge that there is a lot to the universe that we do not understand I will try to approach the subject with as open a mind as I can. But what bias I carry will favor caution against raw milk.

Technorati Tags: raw milk

Asthma & the Elite Athlete

In an interesting article that was recently published in the scientific journal Sports Medicine entitled "Do Inhaled [beta]2-Agonists have an Ergogenic Potential in Non-Asthmatic Competitive Athletes?" I learned a few interesting tidbits.

• Asthma is more common among elite athletes than the general population

• Asthma is more common among endurance athletes (like long distance runners) and swimmers

• Asthma is more common among those who participate in winter sports (I guess the intersection of this and the previous point would be long distance cross country skiers).

The point of the article was to show that the ban on a certain inhaled drug, [beta]2-agonists, was not needed due to there being no physical enhancement (ergogenic effect) on performance, even at super high dose. But an interesting side point is made that I'm not sure needed to be made, that:

• oral administration of salbutamol seems to be able to improve the muscle strength and the endurance performance

I'm not sure it needed to be made because this method of administering this drug, orally, is already banned. But it might lead to some competitive virtually elite athletes* (Boulder is full of them) to consider using this substance.

clipped from pt.wkhealth.com

The prevalence of asthma is higher in elite athletes than in the general population. The risk of developing asthmatic symptoms is the highest in endurance athletes and swimmers. Asthma seems particularly widespread in winter-sport athletes such as cross-country skiers. Asthmatic athletes commonly use inhaled [beta]2-agonists to prevent and treat asthmatic symptoms. However, [beta]2-agonists are prohibited according to the Prohibited List of the World Anti-Doping Agency.

In three of four studies, even supratherapeutic doses of salbutamol (800-1200[mu]g) had no ergogenic effect. In contrast to inhaled [beta]2-agonists, oral administration of salbutamol seems to be able to improve the muscle strength and the endurance performance. There appears to be no justification to prohibit inhaled [beta]2-agonists from the point of view of the ergogenic effects.

* virtually elite athletes: athletes that are highly trained and in the top percentages of their field in sports or competitions that are not judged or regulated by international or national organizations.

Technorati Tags: asthma