Diabetes Self-Management Blog

Last week, we examined some unusual facts about food. Because food is so fascinating, there’s never a shortage of things to say about it. And while some foods may seem downright “weird,” other foods may be a little deceptive — for example, a healthy food that actually isn’t so healthy. As I can attest, that’s the beauty and the frustration of being a dietitian! Let’s look at some more food “weirdness” this week.

Durian — the world’s smelliest fruit
“Hell on the outside and heaven on the inside” is the saying in Southeast Asia that aptly describes this fruit. Durian is a spiny, football-sized fruit weighing about 7 pounds that is custard-like on the inside, but that has a rather revolting, pungent smell that would give dirty gym socks a run for their money. The odor of this fruit is so offensive to many that it’s banned in certain parts of Asia.

Durian trees are pollinated by bats and the fruit has a very short shelf life, making it a rare, exotic treat. When purchasing durian, should you ever find yourself in that position, choose one that is mildly fragrant — that way, you can be sure you’re getting a ripe one. If you can get past the spiny exterior and rotten cheese-like smell, you apparently will be in for a treat, as some describe the inner flesh as tasting like crème brulee. Nutrition-wise, be prepared for the high calories and its effect on your blood glucose levels: One cup of durian fruit has 357 calories, 13 grams of fat, and 66 grams of carbohydrate. It’s also an excellent source of vitamin C.

Sodium — cutting back is harmful
An article written by Gary Taubes in The New York Times last year raised yet another nutrition controversy, this time about sodium. In this piece, Taubes stated that studies have not proven that eating too much sodium is harmful (in other words, that it leads to high blood pressure and stroke). He went further to point out that slashing sodium may actually do more harm than good. Does that mean that the CDC, the National Institutes of Health, the Institute of Medicine, and the American Heart Association have been wrong all along? Hardly.

Taubes based his statement on two studies that were meta-analyses (which look at several studies to derive hypotheses or conclusions). The meta-analyses were somewhat flawed in that one of them reviewed studies that only lasted a few weeks, while the other included a study of people with heart failure who were salt- and fluid-depleted to begin with.

Taubes’ argument that eating less salt can be dangerous was based, in part, on a study that reported that people who ate less salt had a higher risk of heart disease. But why did they eat less salt? Were they ill to begin with? Was sodium intake underestimated in the subjects? And what about all the other studies that have been previously done showing that a high sodium intake leads to higher rates of high blood pressure, stroke, heart failure, and kidney disease? Should those studies be discounted? In my opinion, no.

Mercury — something fishy is up!
For many years now, pregnant and nursing women and young children have been advised to limit their intake of certain types of fish due to their mercury content. Mercury can harm the nervous system of an unborn child and young children. High-mercury fish include shark, swordfish, king mackerel, and tilefish, and the advice has been to avoid these fish altogether. As far as tuna goes, albacore has more mercury than other types of tuna, so that should be limited to 6 ounces per week.

However, last week, a study published in Environmental Health Perspectives revealed that fish only accounts for 7% of the mercury in the body. The researchers found that, after fish, the foods (or beverages, actually) that are highest in mercury are herbal teas and alcohol (specifically, wine). They concluded that eating fish during pregnancy is unlikely to contribute much to the body’s mercury levels, and that eating fish has so many nutrient and health benefits for both the mother and the child that it doesn’t really make sense to limit fish. Drinking herbal teas and wine during pregnancy, on the other hand, may not be such a good idea. However, this is just one study, so if you’re pregnant or planning a pregnancy, it’s important to discuss your intake of fish and other foods with your obstetrician or dietitian.

Saturated fat — a help or a harm?
No doubt it’s been drilled into your brain that a diet high in saturated fat can raise your risk of heart disease. This premise is based on data from the Seven Countries Study conducted in the 1950’s, which stated that a diet high in saturated fat is linked to higher rates of heart disease. Saturated fat is found in solid fats at room temperature, such as vegetable shortening, butter, cheese, and the fat around a piece of steak. But not everyone has jumped on the “saturated fat is bad” bandwagon, and some researchers are challenging the notion that all saturated fat is harmful.

Other factors may play a role, such as the quality of the saturated fat (grass-fed beef, for example) and lifestyle factors. Some studies have failed to establish a connection between a high saturated fat intake and heart disease. And we also know that some saturated fatty acids, like stearic acid (found in beef and chocolate) aren’t so bad, while trans fats are pretty nasty (they raise LDL ["bad"] cholesterol and lower HDL ["good"] cholesterol; they also make blood “stickier” and seem to induce inflammation).

So herein lies the danger of assuming that all fats are bad. We know they’re not but we also need more information, particularly about saturated fat, to make wise decisions about what we choose to eat. Stay tuned.

POST A COMMENT       
  

Comments
  1. Very intriguing Amy. Especially the part about the mercury, saturated fats and salt. Great feedback.

    I remember the part about margarine and the cartoon
    of the store refrigerator margarine section and here was the caption - Margarine replacement and the cooler is full with Butter!

    Thank you for keeping us all educated!

    Posted by jim snell |
  2. I presume it’s a waste of time pointing out that on May 14, 2013, the Institute of Medicine released its review of recent salt research and confirmed everything that Gary Taubes said. I also presume it’s a waste of time to point out that Harvard researcher R. Garg recently published a paper showing that salt reduction in young healthy people results in insulin resistance within 7 days! It’s a waste of time because your article said it all, “Does that mean that the CDC, the National Institutes of Health, the Institute of Medicine, and the American Heart Association have been wrong all along? Hardly.”

    You ask readers to put faith in institutions rather than actual peer-reviewed evidence. Even Prof. Ronald Bayer - the health policy geek at Columbia recently published a paper saying that the government’s exaggeration of the benefits and minimization the risks of salt reduction has not served the goals of science, public policy or consumers. But, go on believing the myth. The science passed you by a long time ago.

    Posted by Morton Satin |

Post a Comment

Note: All comments are moderated and there may be a delay in the publication of your comment. Please be on-topic and appropriate. Do not disclose personal information. Be respectful of other posters. Only post information that is correct and true to your knowledge. When referencing information that is not based on personal experience, please provide links to your sources. All commenters are considered to be nonmedical professionals unless explicitly stated otherwise. Promotion of your own or someone else's business or competing site is not allowed: Sharing links to sites that are relevant to the topic at hand is permitted, but advertising is not. Once submitted, comments cannot be modified or deleted by their authors. Comments that don't follow the guidelines above may be deleted without warning. Such actions are at the sole discretion of DiabetesSelfManagement.com. Comments are moderated Monday through Friday by the editors of DiabetesSelfManagement.com. The moderators are employees of R.A. Rapaport Publishing, Inc., and do not report any conflicts of interest. A privacy policy setting forth our policies regarding the collection, use, and disclosure of certain information relating to you and your use of this Web site can be found here. For more information, please read our Terms and Conditions.


Nutrition & Meal Planning
Google Nutrition Comparison Tool (04/01/14)
Six Fish Facts to Know Now (03/11/14)
Eating Disorders and Diabetes: What's the Connection? (02/24/14)
Soy and Diabetes: Good, Bad, or What? (02/12/14)

 

 

Disclaimer of Medical Advice: You understand that the blog posts and comments to such blog posts (whether posted by us, our agents or bloggers, or by users) do not constitute medical advice or recommendation of any kind, and you should not rely on any information contained in such posts or comments to replace consultations with your qualified health care professionals to meet your individual needs. The opinions and other information contained in the blog posts and comments do not reflect the opinions or positions of the Site Proprietor.


Carbohydrate Restriction: An Option for Diabetes Management
Some people find that decreasing the amount of carbohydrate they eat can help with blood glucose control. Here’s what to know about this approach.

Insulin Patch Pumps: A New Tool for Type 2
Patch pumps are simpler to operate than traditional insulin pumps and may be a good option for some people with Type 2 diabetes who need insulin.

How Much Do You Know About Vitamins?
Learn what these micronutrients can and can’t do for you.

Complete table of contents
Get a FREE ISSUE
Subscription questions