Vegetarian Diet Could Make You Happier And Less Stressed, Study Shows

Vegetarian Diet Could Make You Happier And Less Stressed, Study Shows By Elizabeth Nolan Brown, for Blisstree.com Omnivores, take note: Embracing a vegetarian diet could make you happier and less stressed, according to new research published in Nutrition Journal. The reason comes down to fatty acids: Diets that include meat and fish are higher in arachidonic acid (AA), an animal source of omega-6 fatty acids. Much of the meat Americans eat today is quite high in AA: The average omega-6 to omega-3 fatty acid profile of modern grain-fed meat is 5 times higher than grass-fed meat, like our ancestors ate. And previous research has shown high levels of AA can cause mood-disturbing brain changes.

More from Blisstree.com: Meatless Monday: 10 Vegetarian Comfort Food Recipes Does Going Vegan Change Your Metabolism? 6 Ways to Sneak More Omega-3s Into Your Diet (Even If You're Vegan) High-fish diets also mean higher levels of long-chain, or omega-3 fatty acids, like eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA). Both EPA and DHA combat the negative effects of AA. High dietary levels of omega-3 fatty acids are linked to better brain health, better mood and a host of other health benefits. Most health experts recommend an omega-6/omega-3 ratio of about 4:1. http://videos.huffingtonpost.com/healthy-living/meat-vs-vegetarian-diet-face-off-517243938 In theory, then, frequent fish eaters should have be protected against the damaging effects of AA because of their higher intake of omega-3 acids. But an earlier study found omnivores reported significantly worse moods than vegetarians, despite higher intakes of EPA and DHA. In this follow-up study, 39 meat-eating participants were assigned to one of three diets. A control group ate meat, fish or poultry daily; a second group ate fish 3-4 times weekly but no meat; and a third group ate strictly vegetarian. After two weeks, mood scores were unchanged for the fish- and meat-eating groups, but vegetarians reported significantly better moods and less stress. “Restricting meat, fish, and poultry improved … short-term mood state in modern omnivores,” the researchers concluded.

After two weeks on a vegetarian diet, participants had “negligible amounts” of EPA, DHA and AA in their bodies. Fatty acid levels in the control group were unchanged. Participants in the fish eating group showed 95 to 100% higher levels of EPA and DHA fatty acids—but their omega-6 to omega-3 ratios were still heavily skewed toward omega-6′s. To work plant sources of omega-3 fatty acids (called ALA) into your diet, try chia seeds, hemp seed, cauliflower and purslane.

7 Foods You Should Never Eat Written by Lacy Boggs Renner

Sometimes, even foods that seem healthy can harbor hidden problems that can affect our health and our planet. Here are seven foods you should never eat—and easy swaps to help eliminate them from your kitchen. Conventional Apples

Right at the top of the "dirty dozen" list, conventional apples are sprayed with the most pesticides of almost any fruit because their growing method means they don't develop natural pest resistance. Farm workers exposed to these pesticides have documented higher incidents of cancer, and more and more studies are linking pesticides in the body to Parkinson's disease. Make the switch: Buy organic apples! If you can't afford organic, be sure to wash and peel apples before eating (although that won't rid the fruit of all pesticides). Conventionally Grown Potatoes Think about it: A potato is a root vegetable, and plants absorb nutrients—and other junk—from the soil through their roots. That means that potatoes take up and store more of the chemical fertilizers, fungicides and pesticides that conventional farmers spray on their crops. Plus, after they are harvested, conventional potatoes are treated with another chemical to prevent them from sprouting on the shelf. Because the potato stores these toxins in its flesh, just scrubbing (or even peeling) won't remove the pesticides and other chemicals. Make the swap: Buy organic potatoes—even frozen ones. Corn-Fed Beef The biggest problems with corn-fed beef start with the corn, because cows evolved to eat grasses, not grains. Eating corn actually makes the cattle sick, requiring that farmers dose them with high levels of antibiotics. But feeding corn to cows isn't just bad for the cows; it's bad for the environment, too, as conventionally grown corn requires tons of fertilizers and pesticides that pollute the environment. Make the swap: Buy grass-fed beef instead of corn-fed and enjoy higher levels of good nutrients like omega-3s and vitamin E, and lower levels of bad stuff like inflammatory omega-6s and saturated fat. Look for cheaper cuts on the bone to help offset the premium price for grass-fed beef. Canned Tomatoes

Tomatoes are a great source of lycopene, which can help guard against agressive cancers like prostate cancer. But the resin used to line tin cans to protect from corrosion by the acid in tomatoes contains bisphenol-A, or BPA, which acts as a synthetic estrogen in the body. It can disrupt the endocrine system and cause a variety of problems, like chromosomal and reproductive system abnormalities, impaired brain and neurological functions, cancer, cardiovascular system damage, adult-onset diabetes, early puberty, obesity and resistance to chemotherapy. Unfortunately, the acidity of tomatoes helps break down the BPA which leaches into the food, making canned tomatoes one of the biggest culprits when it comes to ingesting BPA. Scientists with the National Institutes of Health have concluded that pregnant women, infants and children are at highest risk from exposure to BPA. Make the swap: The best solution is to look for brands sold in glass jars or Tetra Pak boxes. Microwave Popcorn

Did you hear about the guy who got popcorn lung from eating more than two bags of microwave popcorn a day? It turns out that even if your popcorn habit isn't quite as extreme, chemicals like perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) found in the lining of the bag and diacetyl, which is used in the butter flavoring, could cause major health problems. Microwaving these chemicals causes them to vaporize, and then the miniature particles can make their way into your popcorn and your lungs if you inhale the steam from the bag. Make the swap: Pop your own kernels the old fashioned way. You'll be able to add your own natural seasonings, and as a bonus, unpopped popcorn kernels are dirt cheap. Milk With rBGH rBGH stands for recombinant bovine growth hormone, and it's given to dairy cows to boost their milk production. But, it's been shown to increase udder infections and even lead to pus in the milk! It also increases a hormone called insulin-like growth factor, which is thought to be linked to an increased risk for breast cancer, prostate cancer, colon cancer and early puberty. Make the switch: Look for milk that says rBGH-free or rBST-free, or buy organic milk. You can also make the switch to a non-dairy milk. Farmed Salmon When we think of factory farming, cows or maybe chickens tend to come to mind. But, it turns out farmed salmon live in similarly horrible conditions. In addition to overcrowding, farm salmon are fed a diet of soy, poultry litter (which means chicken poop) and hydrolyzed chicken feathers. They also have been found to be contaminated with all kinds of chemicals—which probably are run off into the pools where they are farmed. Plus, waste from the salmon pens is released directly into the open ocean. The Environmental Defense Fund lists farmed salmon as an eco-worst choice. Make the swap: Look for wild-caught Alaskan salmon. The brand Wild Catch is almost the only brand which sells canned wild salmon. Eat ONLY Organic !!!

ALL RED MEAT IS IS BAD FOR YOU !

All red meat is bad for you, new study says

A long-term study finds that eating any amount and any type increases the risk of premature death. By Eryn Brown, Los Angeles Times March 12, 2012, 4:28 p.m. Eating red meat — any amount and any type — appears to significantly increase the risk of premature death, according to a long-range study that examined the eating habits and health of more than 110,000 adults for more than 20 years. For instance, adding just one 3-ounce serving of unprocessed red meat — picture a piece of steak no bigger than a deck of cards — to one's daily diet was associated with a 13% greater chance of dying during the course of the study. Even worse, adding an extra daily serving of processed red meat, such as a hot dog or two slices of bacon, was linked to a 20% higher risk of death during the study. "Any red meat you eat contributes to the risk," said An Pan, a postdoctoral fellow at the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston and lead author of the study, published online Monday in the Archives of Internal Medicine.

Crunching data from thousands of questionnaires that asked people how frequently they ate a variety of foods, the researchers also discovered that replacing red meat with other foods seemed to reduce mortality risk for study participants. Eating a serving of nuts instead of beef or pork was associated with a 19% lower risk of dying during the study. The team said choosing poultry or whole grains as a substitute was linked with a 14% reduction in mortality risk; low-fat dairy or legumes, 10%; and fish, 7%. Previous studies had associated red meat consumption with diabetes, heart disease and cancer, all of which can be fatal. Scientists aren't sure exactly what makes red meat so dangerous, but the suspects include the iron and saturated fat in beef, pork and lamb, the nitrates used to preserve them, and the chemicals created by high-temperature cooking.

The Harvard researchers hypothesized that eating red meat would also be linked to an overall risk of death from any cause, Pan said. And the results suggest they were right: Among the 37,698 men and 83,644 women who were tracked, as meat consumption increased, so did mortality risk. In separate analyses of processed and unprocessed meats, the group found that both types appear to hasten death. Pan said that at the outset, he and his colleagues had thought it likely that only processed meat posed a health danger.

Carol Koprowski, a professor of preventive medicine at USC's Keck School of Medicine who wasn't involved in the research, cautioned that it can be hard to draw specific conclusions from a study like this because there can be a lot of error in the way diet information is recorded in food frequency questionnaires, which ask subjects to remember past meals in sometimes grueling detail. But Pan said the bottom line was that there was no amount of red meat that's good for you. "If you want to eat red meat, eat the unprocessed products, and reduce it to two or three servings a week," he said. "That would have a huge impact on public health." A majority of people in the study reported that they ate an average of at least one serving of meat per day. Pan said that he eats one or two servings of red meat per week, and that he doesn't eat bacon or other processed meats.

Cancer researcher Lawrence H. Kushi of the Kaiser Permanente Division of Research in Oakland said that groups putting together dietary guidelines were likely to pay attention to the findings in the study. "There's a pretty strong supposition that eating red meat is important — that it should be part of a healthful diet," said Kushi, who was not involved in the study. "These data basically demonstrate that the less you eat, the better." UC San Francisco researcher and vegetarian diet advocate Dr. Dean Ornish said he gleaned a hopeful message from the study. "Something as simple as a meatless Monday can help," he said. "Even small changes can make a difference." Additionally, Ornish said, "What's good for you is also good for the planet."

In an editorial that accompanied the study, Ornish wrote that a plant-based diet could help cut annual healthcare costs from chronic diseases in the U.S., which exceed $1 trillion. Shrinking the livestock industry could also reduce greenhouse gas emissions and halt the destruction of forests to create pastures, he wrote. eryn.brown@latimes.com

What is dead food, & how much are you eating daily?

Health Basics: What is dead food, & how much are you eating daily? Jan 24, 2012 by: S. D. Wells Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/034770_dead_food_diet_nutrition.html#ixzz1kgp2wjJ8 (NaturalNews) You can eat food that is organic every day, but if most of it is cooked on high heat then it is void of nutrition. Just about everyone has heard of the benefits of eating raw "live" food, but what ratio of your total food intake is actually raw (or not heated over 120 degrees)? When you add up everything you put in your mouth, from baked, boiled, broiled, and fried, you may find you're eating a majority of "dead food." If you have a "cooked food" profile above 70%, you need to flip that ratio and become at least 70% raw, and it may take awhile to adjust. Cooking food chemically changes additives into acid-forming toxins, free radicals and poisons that make you lethargic, depressed, tired, inflamed, achy, weak, sick and in need of relief from a general numb feeling that keeps you performing at your best. Baking, boiling, broiling and frying, destroys essential nutrients. Vitamins, minerals, anti-oxidants, probiotics and enzymes are the foundation of good health. (http://www.rawfoodlife.com/)

Flash frying is a good compromise if you're missing that "heat" in the kitchen. Also, try heating soups, stews, and casseroles at 120 degrees or lower. This will retain many more of the nutrients your body needs. Use avocado to substitute for deli meats, you won't even notice the difference after a few sandwiches. Say goodbye to nitrates, hormones, antibiotics and MSG in meats. Make sprouted grain sandwiches with fresh spinach and some olive oil, and always avoid the cooked, processed wheat bread, white bread and buns. Dispelling the protein myth and more. Most "raw foodists" are not as extreme as they are often labeled, and they usually consume about 75% organic, uncooked, unprocessed foods and live spring water. If you want to morph yourself into this highly beneficial and intelligent regimen, the best way to begin is to only shop around the edges of a store, where there are fresh fruits and vegetables, especially greens like kale, lettuce, parsley and cilantro.

Remember, your body is like an alkaline battery, running on the electrons. Cooking and processing food eliminates these electrons, the exact source of energy your body requires to perform at top notch. Too much acid causing food (more than 30% daily) makes your body break down and decay. Alcohol, prescription drugs, meat, dairy, starch foods, cooked food, salt, and sugar all produce acid. (http://www.alissacohen.com/) In other words, just as fish needs certain pH levels in water to flourish, if the pH of your blood becomes more acidic than alkaline, it quickly reduces the oxygen levels in your blood, so you simply lose energy, immunity, and brain power!

Let's dispel the three most common myths about eating raw: • Raw food doesn't deliver enough protein. Wrong! Fresh vegetables deliver amino acids, your direct link to protein. Meat and eggs are only the "middle man" that requires too much energy to digest. • Eating raw is too expensive. Wrong. Many local farmers markets and co-ops have amazing prices, especially if you watch out for what's in season for your region. Find the closest ones to you and go visit or take advantage of fresh local food, even in the winter. • Raw food takes too long to prepare (not convenient). Wrong again. Organic vegetables and fruits are more accessible than ever, and so are simple recipes for making it tasty every time. Put the following on your next list: Green leafy vegetables, wild dandelion, fresh herbs, garlic, basil, sprouts, sea veggies, and don't forget avocado for your chocolate mousse! The best part is that these alkalizing foods are all around you, just like the junk food, so there's really no excuse. Make sure you're prepared for each meal, so when you get hungry, you always choose the right balance of alkalizing foods and drinks

(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ae-dlHOmwk4). Sources for this article include: http://www.natural-cancer-cures.com/cooked-versus-raw.html http://www.rawfoodlife.com/ http://www.thebestofrawfood.com/alkaline-food-list.html http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ae-dlHOmwk4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYO4dfwhzvQ&feature=relmfu http://www.alissacohen.com/ Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/034770_dead_food_diet_nutrition.html#ixzz1kgovFX3B

DRUGMAKERS have paid $8 billion in FRAUD FINES

DRUGMAKERS have paid $8 billion in FRAUD FINES By Kelly Kennedy, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON–The nation's largest drugmakers have paid at least $8 billion in fines for repeatedly defrauding Medicare and Medicaid over the past decade, but they remain in business with the federal government because they are often the sole suppliers of critical products, records show. Pfizer spent $12 million lobbying Congress in 2011. Pfizer, the maker of drugs that help alleviate arthritis and other ailments, has paid almost $3 billion in fines since 2002 and entered into three corporate integrity agreements with the Dept of Health and Human Services aimed at preventing future fraud. It and other cos are fighting attempts by Congress to exclude them from government business because of their history of fraud. Merck, another pharmaceutical giant, paid $1.6 billion in fines since 2008, Medicare and Justice Department records show, to resolve claims it was not paying proper rebates to the government. • STORY: Whistle-blowers key in health care fraud fight • STORY: Experts seek alternatives to excluding drug cos Pfizer's 2009 settlement was for improperly promoting the use of drugs for purposes other than those for which they were approved by the government. Merck's 2008 settlement involved claims the co paid illegal kickbacks to health care providers in exchange for prescribing its drugs. Government investigators say their hands are tied with the tools they have. They can exclude Pfizer and other pharmaceutical cos from providing medications to Medicaid and Medicare beneficiaries as punishment for bad behavior, but that would leave beneficiaries without drugs patented through a particular company.

Or they can fine the companies and force them to enter corporate integrity agreements that require government oversight and a promise not to defraud the government again — a promise that often goes unkept. "We're seeing some of the big companies a second and third time," said Gregory Demske, assistant inspector general for legal affairs for Health and Human Services. "The corporate integrity agreement is not sufficient to deter further misconduct." In addition, the cases are labor- and cost-intensive as the companies fight often for years to avoid an exclusion, Demske said.

To try to change that trend, the government announced in 2010 that, rather than exclude an entire company, investigators would go after individuals within a company. Demske said his organization, the Justice Department and the Food and Drug Administration have come up with some ideas to use within the scope of the rules — such as taking away a company's patent rights as a condition of a settlement. That could begin with cases being investigated now, he said. Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, introduced a bipartisan bill that would make it easier for the government to find a middle ground, saying the law now forces "the inspector general to use all-or-nothing, mandatory exclusion penalties against corporations that have committed fraud." The bill would allow the exclusion of individuals from working with the government even after they've left the co where the fraud occurred. Pharmaceutical cos altogether spent more than $200 million lobbying Congress in 2011, including $12 million spent by Pfizer. At least 12 pharmaceutical and medical device cos are lobbying specifically against a House bill, HR 675, that complements Grassley's. None of the pharmaceutical companies —Abbott Laboratories, Pfizer or Bristol-Myers Squibb— contacted by USA TODAY responded to questions about their response to the government's proposed enforcement actions.

The industry's trade group, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, says excluding an individual should occur only when there is "significant wrongdoing" that the individual knew about and did nothing to stop, said Matthew Bennett, the group's senior vice president.