Navigator
Facebook
Search
Ads & Recent Photos
Recent Images
Random images
Welcome To Roj Bash Kurdistan 

Food and Health Room

a place for talking about food, specially Kurdish food recipes

Re: Food Room

PostAuthor: Piling » Fri Nov 30, 2018 6:01 pm

Stone Age food was haute cuisine


Analysis of cooking gunk from six millennia ago reveals a surprisingly sophisticated palate. Andrew Masterson reports.

The meal – or, more likely, the dish, one element of a more varied repast – was simple, but elegantly so. It comprised freshwater carp eggs, cooked in a fish broth.

The top of the earthenware bowl in which it was prepared was sealed with leaves of some sort – the eggs perhaps fried off before the stock was added, the leaves holding in steam and perhaps also adding a note or two of their own.

All up, then, the dish – a fish roe soup a little like a Korean altang, perhaps, or a Thai tom yam khai pla – likely had a pleasing and rounded depth of flavour, a certain delicacy and a beguiling aroma. It would not have been out of place on a menu in any posh restaurant from New York to Tokyo.

Except that this particular meal was cooked almost 6000 years ago, not far from what is these days Berlin.

The ingredients were identified by scientists led by Anna Shevchenko from the Max Planck Institute for Molecular Cell Biology in Dresden, Germany.

They did so by analysing the proteins contained in a thin crust of ancient food gunk found clinging to a small coarse ceramic bowl unearthed at an archaeological site called Friesack 4, in the Brandenburg region. The bowl had previously been radio-carbon dated to around 4300 BCE.

…/ https://cosmosmagazine.com/archaeology/ ... c_4SYSwr-s
User avatar
Piling
Shaswar
Shaswar
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 8375
Images: 80
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 11:57 am
Location: France
Highscores: 2
Arcade winning challenges: 3
Has thanked: 280 times
Been thanked: 3047 times
Nationality: European

Re: Food Room

Sponsor

Sponsor
 

Re: Food Room

PostAuthor: Anthea » Fri Nov 30, 2018 11:51 pm

I am surprised that people had such cultured taste buds all those years ago

I fin it utterly fascinating :ymhug:
Good Thoughts Good Words Good Deeds
User avatar
Anthea
Shaswar
Shaswar
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 28352
Images: 1155
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 2:13 pm
Location: Sitting in front of computer
Highscores: 3
Arcade winning challenges: 6
Has thanked: 6019 times
Been thanked: 729 times
Nationality: Kurd by heart

Re: Food Room

PostAuthor: Piling » Sat Dec 01, 2018 9:50 am

For the Advent fast, I try a new formula : no meat no fish (for I don't see why eating fish is more virtuous than eating meat), but I keep dairy and eggs.

I will post my meals every day from tomorrow.

(- 7 kg, btw).
User avatar
Piling
Shaswar
Shaswar
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 8375
Images: 80
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 11:57 am
Location: France
Highscores: 2
Arcade winning challenges: 3
Has thanked: 280 times
Been thanked: 3047 times
Nationality: European

Re: Food Room

PostAuthor: Anthea » Sat Dec 01, 2018 11:41 am

Piling wrote:...I don't see why eating fish is more virtuous than eating meat


Cows are caring sensitive animals :ymhug:

When their babies are taken away they cry real tears just as humans do at the loss of a child

Sometimes they cry for weeks :((

Other cows gather round them to comfort them

Imagine the fear in those babies

https://youtu.be/jQi72EhJTug

https://youtu.be/wV92bw6Np24
Good Thoughts Good Words Good Deeds
User avatar
Anthea
Shaswar
Shaswar
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 28352
Images: 1155
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 2:13 pm
Location: Sitting in front of computer
Highscores: 3
Arcade winning challenges: 6
Has thanked: 6019 times
Been thanked: 729 times
Nationality: Kurd by heart

Re: Food Room

PostAuthor: Piling » Sat Dec 01, 2018 1:38 pm

In wild nature, lions, wolves and panthers are eating crying cows also and their babies.
User avatar
Piling
Shaswar
Shaswar
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 8375
Images: 80
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 11:57 am
Location: France
Highscores: 2
Arcade winning challenges: 3
Has thanked: 280 times
Been thanked: 3047 times
Nationality: European

Re: Food Room

PostAuthor: Anthea » Sat Dec 01, 2018 11:14 pm

Piling wrote:In wild nature, lions, wolves and panthers are eating crying cows also and their babies.


Very true but in wild nature animals kill to survive

Humans kill unnecessary and about a staggering half of animals killed to provide food for our overfed population, is actually thrown away uneaten

To me ALL life is sacred =((
Good Thoughts Good Words Good Deeds
User avatar
Anthea
Shaswar
Shaswar
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 28352
Images: 1155
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 2:13 pm
Location: Sitting in front of computer
Highscores: 3
Arcade winning challenges: 6
Has thanked: 6019 times
Been thanked: 729 times
Nationality: Kurd by heart

Re: Food Room

PostAuthor: Anthea » Sun Dec 02, 2018 1:05 am

'If I relied on the NHS, I'd already be dead': Mother battling stage four cancer is symptom-free after finding her own trial online to blast 25 brain tumours when doctors said she could die within six months

    Heidi Spencer, 45, was offered palliative care from the NHS

    She went against doctors and found a genetic test online, FoundationOne,

    It offered the mother, from Cheshire, drugs which rid her of 25 tumours
A mother-of-two has two has defied the odds and survived stage-four cancer after finding a drug trial online.

Heidi Spencer, 45, now claims to be symptom-free, despite being told by the NHS she had six to 12 months to live.

The NHS offered her palliative chemotherapy to give her extra time with her family, who live in Burland, Cheshire.

But she went online and found US company FoundationOne, who offered a test which revealed the drugs she needed to get rid of her 25 tumours in three months.

FoundationOne's test looks at the genetic profile of a patient with a tumour, and then notifies them of the correct drug-targeted treatment.

Mrs Spencer, a business analyst, told The Sun: 'If I'd relied on NHS advice and their standard of care I would be dead now.

'I owe my life to those tests and to not always listening to the doctors.'

Mrs Spencer began experiencing numbness in her right leg last year. What was to come on Mother's Day was devastating news.

She had stage-four lung cancer, which had already spread to her bone and brains, where 25 tumours had grown.

To her horror, the NHS told Mrs Spencer she had limited time left, six to 12 months, with her husband, David, 39, and their two boys, William, seven, and Lewis, four.

She took matters into her own hands by searching the internet for a treatment that would save her life.

Mrs Spencer came across FoundationOne, a US company that offers a test that costs £3,000. It would analyse all the relevant genes for tumours which would reveal the exact targeted therapy she would need.

The company, which only launched in 2012, has tested 200,000 patients already, matching them to targeted therapies and clinical trials.

The revolutionary test found five of Mrs Spencer's genes had mutated. Of these, two have treatments available, to the families relief.

Mrs Spencer only needed to travel 40 minutes away to Withington, Manchester, home to the UK's leading cancer treatment clinic, The Christie.

Within three months her brain tumours had vanished — and the tumours in her bones and lung are in remission or have shrunk.

She was given life-saving drugs - it is unclear which ones - as well as targeted radiotherapy.

Now, she has no symptoms of her cancer, although she is not cured, according to reports.

Consultant at The Christie, Matthew Krebs, said: 'We have to be reserved when delivering advice to patients — as not everyone will benefit.'

What is the FoundationOne test?

The FoundationOne tests look at which genes have mutated to cause a patient’s cancer.

A blood sample or tumour biopsy is sent to a lab in the US which examines 324 genes in the cells.

By identifying the ones driving the disease, it can advise medics which therapies are most likely to kill the cancer in any given case.

Each cancer is unique and each tumor can vary at the molecular level. The test can reveal what alterations in a persons' DNA is driving cancer growth.

It's partnered with Patient Advocacy Groups, world-leading medical centers and researchers to 'transform cancer care'.
What is the FoundationOne test?

The FoundationOne tests look at which genes have mutated to cause a patient’s cancer.

A blood sample or tumour biopsy is sent to a lab in the US which examines 324 genes in the cells.

By identifying the ones driving the disease, it can advise medics which therapies are most likely to kill the cancer in any given case.

Each cancer is unique and each tumor can vary at the molecular level. The test can reveal what alterations in a persons' DNA is driving cancer growth.

It's partnered with Patient Advocacy Groups, world-leading medical centers and researchers to 'transform cancer care'.

What is the FoundationOne test?

The FoundationOne tests look at which genes have mutated to cause a patient’s cancer.

A blood sample or tumour biopsy is sent to a lab in the US which examines 324 genes in the cells.

By identifying the ones driving the disease, it can advise medics which therapies are most likely to kill the cancer in any given case.

Each cancer is unique and each tumor can vary at the molecular level. The test can reveal what alterations in a persons' DNA is driving cancer growth.

It's partnered with Patient Advocacy Groups, world-leading medical centers and researchers to 'transform cancer care'.

There are three tests which can assess tumours including, but not limited to:

FoundationOne CDx: Solid tumors, including Non-Small Cell Lung (NSCLC), Colorectal, Breast, Ovarian, and Melanoma.

FoundationOne® Heme: Leukemias, Myelodysplastic Syndrome, Myeloproliferative Neoplasm, Acute Myeloid Leukaemia, Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia, and Sarcomas.

FoundationOne®Liquid: Solid tumors, including Lung, Breast, Prostate, Gastro-Intestinal, Melanoma, and Brain.

There are three tests which can assess tumours including, but not limited to:

FoundationOne CDx: Solid tumors, including Non-Small Cell Lung (NSCLC), Colorectal, Breast, Ovarian, and Melanoma.

FoundationOne® Heme: Leukemias, Myelodysplastic Syndrome, Myeloproliferative Neoplasm, Acute Myeloid Leukaemia, Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia, and Sarcomas.

FoundationOne®Liquid: Solid tumors, including Lung, Breast, Prostate, Gastro-Intestinal, Melanoma, and Brain.

There are three tests which can assess tumours including, but not limited to:

FoundationOne CDx: Solid tumors, including Non-Small Cell Lung (NSCLC), Colorectal, Breast, Ovarian, and Melanoma.

FoundationOne® Heme: Leukemias, Myelodysplastic Syndrome, Myeloproliferative Neoplasm, Acute Myeloid Leukaemia, Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia, and Sarcomas.

FoundationOne®Liquid: Solid tumors, including Lung, Breast, Prostate, Gastro-Intestinal, Melanoma, and Brain.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/arti ... nline.html
Good Thoughts Good Words Good Deeds
User avatar
Anthea
Shaswar
Shaswar
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 28352
Images: 1155
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 2:13 pm
Location: Sitting in front of computer
Highscores: 3
Arcade winning challenges: 6
Has thanked: 6019 times
Been thanked: 729 times
Nationality: Kurd by heart

Re: Food Room

PostAuthor: Anthea » Mon Dec 03, 2018 12:18 am

Healthy portion of fries should only contain SIX, Harvard professor declares

    Dr Eric Rimm described fries as 'starch bombs' that give us heart conditions

    A serving is meant to contain fewer than 15 fries, according to national guidelines

    But most places serve 55 - and Dr Rimm says that is dangerous for all of us

    His comments sparked predictable outrage online
A portion of fries should only contain six, a Harvard professor has declared - sparking veritable outrage.

Both crunchy and soft, coated in salty oil, little fried sticks of potato have been a source of joy for humankind since the 1700s, when (it's believed) they were first invented.

For most, six fries is just the beginning.

But Professor Eric Rimm, of Harvard University's nutrition department, says they are 'starch bombs' and half a dozen should be our limit. After that we should sate our appetite with salad if we want to avoid life-threatening heart conditions.

Dr Rimm's comments, in an article for the New York Times this week, prompted predictable furor online, but the medical community warns he has a good point.

Heart disease rates are rising, and progress to prevent heart disease deaths has slowed.

Why? Our penchant for fatty, greasy, salty, sugary food - in monumentally vast proportions - and distaste for exercise.

In the last 25 years, the average serving size in any given establishment has doubled or tripled. Bagels are now six inches wide, not three; a medium bag of popcorn is 11 cups, not five; and a soda is 20 ounces not 6.5.

A serving of fries is meant to be capped at around 15. These days, most restaurants serve around 55.

Dr Rimm's advice is partly based on a recent study in The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition by Italian researchers, who found people who avoided fries altogether lived six months longer than those who indulged.

People who ate fries two or three times a week had (unsurprisingly) higher risks of diabetes, obesity and cardiovascular disease.

For most Americans, Dr Rimm laments, taking away their fries is no easy feat. The general perspective, he says, is: 'you'll pry them from my cold dead hand.'

And true to form, the reaction to the New York Times article was lively.

'What kind of MAD MAN would want six french [sic] fries? I get it, they are bad for you, but eating SIX sounds like torture,' one person tweeted, adding: 'I'd rather not have them at all. But we all know that's not going to happen.'

Another said: 'This person is a monster.'

To that, another responded: 'How does one eat only six french [sic] fries and feel satisfied?!'

Lisa Moskovitz, RD, who runs the NY Nutrition Group, said that is the typical reaction she'd expect from clients - 'they'd say, "six French fries?! That's not even worth it' - but she insists it may not be as tough as it sounds.

'For a lot of people, taste is all they need,' Moskovitz told DailyMail.com.

'Six French fries is basically similar to the three-bite rule. We always want the first bite and the last bite - the first is the best, and the last you savor. Six French fries gives you more bit it would be a similar concept.'

However, she concedes that, for most of us 'that's not realistic' - mainly because it's so hard to resist lingering food - especially when you're leaving behind 90 percent of a serving. It feels wasteful, tempting, and amplifies the feeling that you've barely had any.

Instead she recommends sharing a plate of fries with friends, alongside healthier foods like a salad and grilled chicken.

Alternatively, order from the kids menu.

'It might not feel so little if you feel you can have it all,' she says.

At the end of the day, if you're sticking to a healthy diet and exercise regime in general, having some fries here and there shouldn't be too concerning, she says.

Tammy Lakatos Shames, RDN, one half of the Nutrition Twins, concurs.

'If the rest of your diet is healthy and you're really not splurging on things like desserts, then you really could have fries as your indulgence,' she says.

'The problem is,' she adds, 'most people aren't doing that.'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/arti ... lares.html
Good Thoughts Good Words Good Deeds
User avatar
Anthea
Shaswar
Shaswar
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 28352
Images: 1155
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 2:13 pm
Location: Sitting in front of computer
Highscores: 3
Arcade winning challenges: 6
Has thanked: 6019 times
Been thanked: 729 times
Nationality: Kurd by heart

Re: Food Room

PostAuthor: Piling » Mon Dec 03, 2018 11:37 am

Only SIX ? this man is crazy :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: =)) =)) =))

Especially genuine homemade French fries, not the fake serving in restaurant or sold in frozen bag.
User avatar
Piling
Shaswar
Shaswar
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 8375
Images: 80
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 11:57 am
Location: France
Highscores: 2
Arcade winning challenges: 3
Has thanked: 280 times
Been thanked: 3047 times
Nationality: European

Re: Food Room

PostAuthor: Anthea » Mon Dec 03, 2018 1:48 pm

6 is a mouthful :D
Good Thoughts Good Words Good Deeds
User avatar
Anthea
Shaswar
Shaswar
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 28352
Images: 1155
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 2:13 pm
Location: Sitting in front of computer
Highscores: 3
Arcade winning challenges: 6
Has thanked: 6019 times
Been thanked: 729 times
Nationality: Kurd by heart

Re: Food Room

PostAuthor: Anthea » Wed Jan 02, 2019 2:49 am

Chemotherapy may cause breast cancer to SPREAD

Chemotherapy may cause breast cancer to SPREAD: Two commonly used drugs encourage the disease to develop in the lungs

    Paclitaxel and doxorubicin cause breast tumours to release fluid-filled sacs

    These sacs contain proteins that then circulate in the blood to the lungs

    Proteins then trigger the release of other proteins and immune cells

    These immune cells are linked to the survival and growth of lung tumours

Chemotherapy may cause breast cancer to spread, alarming research suggests.

The commonly prescribed chemo drugs paclitaxel and doxorubicin cause breast tumours to release proteins that then circulate in the blood until they reach the lungs, triggering the disease's onset in a new part of the body.

When scientists blocked this protein in a lab model, the cancer did not spread. They hope their findings will help make chemotherapy more effective.

Doxorubicin is one of two commonly prescribed breast-cancer chemo drugs the scientists analysed. When put in an experimental tumour model, doxorubicin caused breast tumours to release sacs containing a protein that was then circulated to the lungs

The study was carried out by the Swiss Institute for Experimental Cancer Research and led by Professor Michele De Palma, head of the lab.

Chemotherapy is often given to breast-cancer patients before surgery to shrink their tumours and make them easier to remove.

Known as 'neoadjuvant therapy', this also helps to save healthy breast tissue.

In some cases, chemotherapy can even eradicate the tumour entirely, with such patients being highly likely to remain cancer-free for life.

But the treatment does not always shrink tumours. If the growth resists neoadjuvant therapy, it is more likely to spread to other parts of the body.

Breast cancer affects one in eight women at some point in their lives in both the UK and US, statistics show.

It is unclear how many cases of the disease spread, with the lungs, bones, liver and brain being the most commonly affected secondary areas.

Working with experimental tumour models, the researchers found both paclitaxel - more commonly known by the brand name Taxol - and doxorubicin - or Adriamycin - cause breast cancer tumours to release small fluid-filled sacs called exosomes.

Chemo makes exosomes containing the protein annexin-A6, which is not found in sacs released from untreated tumours.

Paclitaxel - the other chemo drug - causes the same sac to be released from breast tumours, which can then trigger secondary cancer when they reach the lungs. A pharmacy technician is pictured preparing a dose of paclitaxel for a breast-cancer patient on May 8

What side effects come alongside chemotherapy treatment?

'It seems that loading of annexin-A6 into exosomes is significantly enhanced in response to chemotherapy,' study author and postdoctoral researcher Professor Ioanna Keklikoglou said.

Once released from tumours, exosomes circulate in the blood until they reach the lungs.

They then give out annexin-A6, which stimulates lung cells to release another protein called CCL2.

CCL2 then attracts immune cells called monocytes, which fight certain infections and help other cells remove dead or damaged tissue.

However, monocytes can also be dangerous, with previous studies showing they fuel the survival and growth of cancerous cells in the lungs.

'In short, our study has identified a new link between chemotherapy and breast cancer metastasis,' Professor De Palma said.

When the researchers neutralised annexin-A6 or blocked the monocytes, the experimental breast tumour no longer spread to the lungs.

They hope this will improve the effectiveness of neoadjuvant therapy.

'Various monocyte inhibitors have been developed for clinical use, so they may be tested in combination with neoadjuvant chemotherapy to potentially limit unwanted side effects mediated by exosomes,' Professor De Palma said.

Although the results are concerning, he urges people not to jump too conclusions.

'While this observation supports the significance of our findings, at the moment we don't know if annexin-A6 has any pro-metastatic activity in human breast cancer,' Professor De Palma added.

The authors also stress their findings should not discourage people from receiving neoadjuvant chemo when it is needed.

'It remains an essential and potentially curative treatment for many invasive breast cancers, as shown by multiple clinical trials,' they wrote.

WHAT IS BREAST CANCER, HOW MANY PEOPLE
DOES IT STRIKE AND WHAT ARE THE SYMPTOMS?


Breast cancer is one of the most common cancers in the world. Each year in the UK there are more than 55,000 new cases, and the disease claims the lives of 11,500 women. In the US, it strikes 266,000 each year and kills 40,000. But what causes it and how can it be treated?

What is breast cancer?

Breast cancer develops from a cancerous cell which develops in the lining of a duct or lobule in one of the breasts.

When the breast cancer has spread into surrounding breast tissue it is called an 'invasive' breast cancer. Some people are diagnosed with 'carcinoma in situ', where no cancer cells have grown beyond the duct or lobule.

Most cases develop in women over the age of 50 but younger women are sometimes affected. Breast cancer can develop in men though this is rare.

The cancerous cells are graded from stage one, which means a slow growth, up to stage four, which is the most aggressive.

What causes breast cancer?

A cancerous tumour starts from one abnormal cell. The exact reason why a cell becomes cancerous is unclear. It is thought that something damages or alters certain genes in the cell. This makes the cell abnormal and multiply 'out of control'.

Although breast cancer can develop for no apparent reason, there are some risk factors that can increase the chance of developing breast cancer, such as genetics.

What are the symptoms of breast cancer?

The usual first symptom is a painless lump in the breast, although most breast lumps are not cancerous and are fluid filled cysts, which are benign.

The first place that breast cancer usually spreads to is the lymph nodes in the armpit. If this occurs you will develop a swelling or lump in an armpit.

How is breast cancer diagnosed?

    Initial assessment: A doctor examines the breasts and armpits. They may do tests such as a mammography, a special x-ray of the breast tissue which can indicate the possibility of tumours.

    Biopsy: A biopsy is when a small sample of tissue is removed from a part of the body. The sample is then examined under the microscope to look for abnormal cells. The sample can confirm or rule out cancer.
If you are confirmed to have breast cancer, further tests may be needed to assess if it has spread. For example, blood tests, an ultrasound scan of the liver or a chest x-ray.

How is breast cancer treated?

Treatment options which may be considered include surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy and hormone treatment. Often a combination of two or more of these treatments are used.

    Surgery: Breast-conserving surgery or the removal of the affected breast depending on the size of the tumour.

    Radiotherapy: A treatment which uses high energy beams of radiation focussed on cancerous tissue. This kills cancer cells, or stops cancer cells from multiplying. It is mainly used in addition to surgery.

    Chemotherapy: A treatment of cancer by using anti-cancer drugs which kill cancer cells, or stop them from multiplying

    Hormone treatments: Some types of breast cancer are affected by the 'female' hormone oestrogen, which can stimulate the cancer cells to divide and multiply. Treatments which reduce the level of these hormones, or prevent them from working, are commonly used in people with breast cancer.
How successful is treatment?

The outlook is best in those who are diagnosed when the cancer is still small, and has not spread. Surgical removal of a tumour in an early stage may then give a good chance of cure.

The routine mammography offered to women between the ages of 50 and 70 mean more breast cancers are being diagnosed and treated at an early stage.

For more information visit breastcancercare.org.uk or www.cancerhelp.org.uk

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/arti ... PREAD.html
Good Thoughts Good Words Good Deeds
User avatar
Anthea
Shaswar
Shaswar
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 28352
Images: 1155
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 2:13 pm
Location: Sitting in front of computer
Highscores: 3
Arcade winning challenges: 6
Has thanked: 6019 times
Been thanked: 729 times
Nationality: Kurd by heart

Re: Food Room

PostAuthor: Anthea » Wed Jan 02, 2019 2:52 am

Vegan 'fishless fingers' hit UK supermarket shelves for the first time, as more young people are expected to give up meat than alcohol for 'Veganuary'

    Waitrose's new product is made from seaweed tofu and covered in breadcrumbs

    It suggests pairing the £3.19 'fishless' fingers with vegan-friendly tartare sauce

    More young people are giving up meat than alcohol for 'dry or Veganuary'
The first vegan fish finger is being launched in the high street as supermarkets tap into a radical shift in eating habits –away from meat, dairy and fish.

It is claimed more young people will give up meat in January – as part of the Veganuary campaign – than will turn away from booze in a post-Christmas health kick.

Waitrose is launching its Fishless Fingers, made from breaded seaweed tofu with a crispy coating and said to have a subtle fish flavour.

It suggests these should be paired with its vegan-friendly tartare sauce and sourdough bread for the perfect sandwich.

A pack of six Waitrose Fishless Fingers is on offer at £3.19 this month, before rising to a standard price of £3.99.

By comparison, a pack of six Waitrose chunky breaded cod fingers is £3.25, while its cheapest 'essential' brand cod fish fingers are £1.75 for ten.

The Waitrose offerings are the latest in a rising number of plant-based foods and ready meals – with many of them claimed by makers to be virtually indistinguishable from animal-based products.

Looking at all age groups, a survey of New Year resolutions found that some 2.6million people will try to go vegetarian or vegan in January – around 5 per cent of the population.

This is roughly on a par with the 6 per cent saying they plan to give up drink for a month.

Young adults – aged 16-24 – are particularly drawn to the veganism trend. Some 8 per cent aim to go vegan for at least January, compared with the 7 per cent planning to go without alcohol.

Meanwhile Tesco has doubled its plant-based Wicked Kitchen range, which now includes a red velvet brownie and pineapple cheesecake.

Sainsbury's is launching a large number of fish alternatives as part of its vegan and vegetarian range, which includes 29 new products and takes the total to over 100.

The survey was commissioned by VoucherCodes.co.uk. Its lifestyle editor Anita Naik said: 'With people more environmentally aware than ever before, we've seen a real surge in people going vegan.'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... nuary.html
Good Thoughts Good Words Good Deeds
User avatar
Anthea
Shaswar
Shaswar
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 28352
Images: 1155
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 2:13 pm
Location: Sitting in front of computer
Highscores: 3
Arcade winning challenges: 6
Has thanked: 6019 times
Been thanked: 729 times
Nationality: Kurd by heart

Re: Food Room

PostAuthor: Piling » Wed Jan 02, 2019 8:16 am

When we look carefully the composition of these false-meat vegan food, we often read a lot of garbage unnatural stuff instead of meat. Not really healthy.
User avatar
Piling
Shaswar
Shaswar
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 8375
Images: 80
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 11:57 am
Location: France
Highscores: 2
Arcade winning challenges: 3
Has thanked: 280 times
Been thanked: 3047 times
Nationality: European

Re: Food Room

PostAuthor: Anthea » Fri Jan 18, 2019 3:58 am

Human diet is causing 'catastrophic' damage to the planet:
Scientists says we should eat half a rasher of bacon a day


    Scientists say the adoption of a 'planetary health diet' is vital for the environment
    The radical proposal would mean just mere morsels of meat each day
    Experts claim this would prevent millions of deaths by slashing obesity
    But critics have slammed the campaign as 'nanny-state madness'
Our meat-heavy, vegetable-poor diet is causing 'catastrophic' damage to the environment and kills 11 million people a year, a major new study declares.

If we all adopted a so-called 'Planetary Diet' - halving our intake of meat and doubling our intake of vegetables, nuts and pulses - fewer people would die of both starvation and diet-related heart disease, cancers, obesity and more, experts say.

It would also slash greenhouse gas emissions and protect the fresh water supply, which is gobbled up by the agriculture industry.

The radical diet plan would mean people eating just 7g of pork a day, 7g of beef or lamb and 28g of fish – the equivalent of a quarter of a rasher of bacon, a 16th of a burger and two-thirds of a fish finger.

This alone, experts say, would prevent around 11 million early deaths by 2050.

Click to enlarge
1043

'We are in a catastrophic situation,' co-author Tim Lang, a professor at the University of London and policy lead for the EAT-Lancet Commission that compiled the 50-page study, told AFP.

Lang told the Daily Mail: ‘The food we eat and how we produce it determines the health of people and the planet, and we are currently getting this seriously wrong.

'We need a significant overhaul, changing the global food system on a scale not seen before.

‘While this is uncharted territory and these problems are not easily fixed, this goal is within reach.’

The report was drawn up by 37 experts from 16 countries in a three-year project.

Its authors stress that the world population is expected to reach ten billion by 2050, and Earth has finite resources for food production.

They say a billion people are already malnourished, and another two billion are eating too many of the wrong foods.

Previous studies have shown meat uses 83 per cent of the world’s farmland while providing only 18 per cent of calories.

The diet, details of which were published in the Lancet medical journal, would mean a radical shift away from meat and dairy to vegetables, beans, nuts and pulses.

Average consumption of red meat in Britain would have to drop by 77 per cent from its current 62g a day.

Dairy and butter intake would be cut by 40 per cent to just 250g – the equivalent of half a glass of milk, a slice of cheese and a small knob of butter.

The consumption of eggs would fall by more than a half to a fifth of an egg a day, or one and a half a week.

Sugar intake would be cut by half to just 31g a day and potato intake by three-quarters to 50g.

But people would have to eat three times as much vegetables, beans, nuts and soya to make up the calories.

Scientists are launching a campaign to promote the diet by calling for extra taxes on meat and for the worst foods to be taken off supermarket shelves.

Dr Walter Willett, of Harvard Medical School, one of the lead authors of the report funded by the Wellcome Trust, said the diet is achievable.

He added: ‘We are not talking about deprivation to do this. We are talking about a way of eating which can be enjoyable and flavorful.’

He said people would have to start viewing meat as a treat.

‘These numbers for red meat may seem small to people in the US and UK but they will not seem small to people in a very large part of the world who are already eating about that much meat, or even somewhat less.

‘This doesn’t mean giving people a tablespoon of meat a day, but it means having a hamburger about once a week or, if you really like big steaks, have one once a month.’

He said those who ate the Mediterranean diet, commonly viewed as among the world’s healthiest, saw red meat as something for special occasions.

‘For me, I love lobster,’ he said. ‘But I don’t have it every day, I have it about three times a year. We need to change the way we view some foods, to make them special.’

Critics dismissed the campaign being launched today as ‘nanny-state madness’.

Christopher Snowdon, head of lifestyle economics at the free market Institute of Economic Affairs, said: ‘They say “You are what you eat” and that must be true because this is nuts.

‘Most people will look at these demands and laugh, but I welcome this report because it reveals the full agenda of nanny-state campaigners.

'They are making no secret of their desire to tax and ban their way towards a near-vegan diet for the world’s population.

‘Their desire to limit people to eating one tenth of a sausage a day leaves us in no doubt that we are dealing with fanatics.’

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/arti ... lanet.html
Last edited by Anthea on Fri Jan 18, 2019 2:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Good Thoughts Good Words Good Deeds
User avatar
Anthea
Shaswar
Shaswar
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 28352
Images: 1155
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 2:13 pm
Location: Sitting in front of computer
Highscores: 3
Arcade winning challenges: 6
Has thanked: 6019 times
Been thanked: 729 times
Nationality: Kurd by heart

Re: Food Room

PostAuthor: Piling » Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:09 am

I see no wine nor cheese. Not for French.
User avatar
Piling
Shaswar
Shaswar
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 8375
Images: 80
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 11:57 am
Location: France
Highscores: 2
Arcade winning challenges: 3
Has thanked: 280 times
Been thanked: 3047 times
Nationality: European

PreviousNext

Return to Food

Who is online

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot]

x

#{title}

#{text}