Comments on: The latest on acrylamide

By: parisbreakfast

parisbreakfast — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 11:55:07 +0000

FYI: cocoa powder/beans are roasted.

By: parisbreakfast

parisbreakfast — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 13:31:49 +0000

Well now I’m agonizing…I have been eating sooo many roasted vegetables this winter- organic sweets and carrots, squash – and all loaded with natural sugars and carmelized in the process.
Golly!
What to do.
Steaming is not the same at all

By: Jim Purdy

Jim Purdy — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 05:58:12 +0000

FoodFitnessFreshair said:
Skip charred meat, and choose steamed veggies.

That sounds reasonable. But I hate most steamed veggies.

The 50 Best Health Blogs

By: manuel

manuel — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 02:11:13 +0000

far 2 many of us seem 2 b spendin a great deal of time agonizing over the most obscure of nutritional information prior 2 havin applied the very basic concepts of truly healthy eatin-fruits, veggies, no added salt or sugar, no transfats & NO junk food-not even in moderation. master that 1st,then u can go off explorin the finer points of nutrition. ur workin backwards.

By: DennisP

DennisP — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 21:11:57 +0000

Eat things with acrylamide or not, that is the question, no? And so we agonize over whether to eat meat or toast or whatever. All this is what Michael Pollan writes about as our continuing angst. Far better, I think, not to worry about nutrients and “food science (scientism?)” and think about simple rules that will keep us healthy and out of harm’s way.

Pollan’s little book Food Rules is an excellent little guide. I finished reading it (in an hour or two) a couple days ago. Reading it is probably a much more productive use of your time than worrying about nutrients. Some very good guide rules, all of which try to elucidate what he means by his fundamental rule “Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.” Perhaps my favorite rule is “The whiter the bread, the sooner you’ll be dead”.

By: William J. Waddell, M.D.

William J. Waddell, M.D. — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 18:25:46 +0000

Thank you for providing a balanced view on this issue. In particular, I appreciate your reference to the study on upper intake levels – too often, people forget that in toxicology, the dose is everything. Something that may indeed cause cancer at very high doses can easily be harmless at low doses. That probably explains why epidemiological studies always fail to link cancer risk to eating foods that contain acrylamide.
I believe the reason the European Expert Panel wants to add acrylamide to its list of substances of high concern is that they are actually thinking about industrially manufactured acrylamide. Acrylamide is widely used as an industrial chemical – and almost everything we know about its toxicity to human at high doses comes from industrial accidents. In the official announcement by the ECHA (http://echa.europa.eu/doc/press/pr_09_15_msc_svhc_20091207.pdf) , there is no reference to food at all.
I think you may have misunderstood the relevance of anti-oxidants in the Italian study you cited: when certain cooking oils are heated repeatedly to high temperatures, they oxidize, which results in the formation of carbonyl compounds. The study showed that carbonyl compounds can react with asparagine (a common plant amino acid) in foods and form acrylamide. The authors suggest that if oil contains anti-oxidants, it does not form carbonyl compounds as easily and this reduces the acrylamide levels in the cooked food.
Of course, eating a balanced diet with lots of fruits and vegetables is a very good idea regardless.

William J. Waddell, M.D.
Professor and Chair, Emeritus
Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology
School of Medicine University of Louisville
Louisville, Kentucky

By: Food For Thought – Friday, January 29th « Save Your Fork… There's Pie

Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:39:30 +0000

[...] the chips – I knew all that fuss about acrylamides was [...]

By: TMI

TMI — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 02:23:51 +0000

Screw it. Acrylamides taste good.

At some point you just have to take a step back and realize that it all goes back to “everything in moderation.” There’s simply too much analysis about what’s in food and whether or not it’s good for you coming from so many different directions that it’s too much for anyone to reasonably take in and adhere to without going absolutely crazy.

By: Mordy

Mordy — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 00:12:18 +0000

Hi Marion, speaking of foods cooked at high temperatures…is an oil at its “smoke point” dangerous to eat or breathe in? It’s confusing as well because all the oils seem to have different smoking points, and even within one particular oil, e.g. olive oil, there are different points depending upon how refined it is.
If it is dangerous, should a food made with oil (say, fish with some olive oil rubbed on) be roasted or baked at an oven temperature that is below that of that oil’s smoke point so that it doesn’t heat to that temperature?

By: Emma J

Emma J — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 22:37:37 +0000

Why in cocoa and not in chocolate? (Yes, I know this question may reveal a personal preoccupation.)

Should almonds and dried pears be avoided – surely not? And does the method of drying make a difference?