The Issue

There is an increasing concern around the world that certain organisms such as bacteria, viruses, fungi and parasites are becoming resistant to the drugs used to fight them. An example of this is the increasing resistance in antibiotics to treat bacterial infections. This could make treatment more difficult, resulting in fewer effective antibiotics to prevent and treat infections and infectious diseases.
Background

Antibiotic resistance occurs when an antimicrobial drug is no longer effective in killing or stopping the growth of particular microorganisms, such as bacteria. The term antimicrobial refers to both natural and synthetic substances like antibiotics and disinfectants which can kill or block the reproduction of microorganisms.

Until the 1940s, when antibiotic drugs were discovered, people with infections such as tuberculosis, pneumonia and sexually transmitted diseases often died because the available treatments were not very effective. With the discovery of new drugs, the ability to fight diseases improved dramatically. However, since then, some germs have become resistant to these drugs.
The Causes of Antibiotic Resistance

A major cause of resistance is believed to be overuse or inappropriate use of drugs such as antibiotics, in preventing or treating infections in people, animals and plants. Germs constantly adapt to their environment and have the ability to take on the characteristics of other germs. When antibiotics are used inappropriately, the weak bacteria are killed, while the stronger, more resistant ones survive and multiply. Germs that develop resistance to one antibiotic have the ability to develop resistance to another antibiotic. This is called cross-resistance.

Links have also been made between giving drugs to animals and the development of resistance in humans. Drugs are often given to food-producing animals to treat and prevent infections in the agri-food industry and to promote growth. Products are also sprayed on fruit trees to prevent or control disease. These can then be transferred to humans in meat, milk, fruit or drinking water, adding to the resistance problem. An example of this is drug-resistant Salmonella, which can be transferred from animals to humans through the food chain.

Other factors that cause resistance include an incorrect diagnosis that results in an inappropriate drug being prescribed, or not taking an antibiotic prescription according to the instructions; for example, not taking all of a prescription.

You can be exposed to drug-resistant germs in the same way you get other infections, through:

* contaminated food, water or soil;
* unsafe sexual practices;
* contact with infected people or animals; and
* during treatment in a clinic or hospital.

Drug-resistant germs can also enter Canada through imported food or international travel.
Safe Use of Antibiotics

Proper diagnosis is the first step in the effective treatment of any infection. Visit your doctor for a proper assessment. Be aware that antibiotics are not effective for everything. For example, antibiotics are not effective against viruses, such as colds and flu. Also, specific germs can be treated more effectively with drugs that are targeted to them. This often requires a lab test.

* Take medication as directed by your doctor or pharmacist. Do not stop taking a prescription part way through the course of treatment (unless you are having a serious adverse reaction) without first discussing it with your doctor. Even if you feel better, use the entire prescription as directed to make sure that all of the germs are destroyed.
* Do not share prescriptions with anyone else. Taking an inappropriate drug makes the resistance problem worse.
* Do not flush out-of-date or unused medication down the toilet, or pour it down the sink, or put it in the garbage. If you do, this medication will end up in the water table which could increase the drug resistance problem. Instead, check to see if your pharmacy has a drug recycling program that disposes of unused drugs in an environmentally safe manner. If your area does not have such a program, take the drugs to your municipal waste disposal depot for proper disposal.

Minimizing Your Risk

You can help prevent and reduce drug resistance by taking the following steps:

* Avoid the use of antibacterial soap and “bacteria-fighting” cleaning products. These products kill ‘good’ bacteria which fight bad germs. Cleaning with soap and water, or disinfecting surfaces with a solution of water and vinegar or household bleach is adequate.
* Wash your hands regularly with soap and water for at least 20 seconds. It is the most effective way of preventing any type of infection.
* Have your doctor vaccinate you and your children and keep vaccinations up to date.
* Store, handle and prepare food safely. When preparing food, be sure to wash cutting boards and knives with detergent and water. Use bleach on surfaces where you have handled raw poultry. Thoroughly wash all fruits and vegetables that will be eaten raw.
* If you use well water, have it tested regularly.
* Encourage farmers to give antibiotics to their animals only when needed.

By Canada Health

A “Stick-to-It” Diet Is More Important Than a Popular One

With over 1,000 diet books available on bookstore shelves, popular diets clearly have become increasingly prevalent. At the same time, they have also become increasingly controversial, because some depart substantially from mainstream medical advice or have been criticized by various medical authorities.

A comparison of several popular diets by ARS-funded researchers showed that at the end of the day, or in this case at the end of the year, sticking with a diet—more than the type of a diet—is the key to losing weight.

The study was conducted by Michael L. Dansinger, Ernst J. Schaefer, and Joi A. Gleason of the Lipid Metabolism Laboratory at the Jean Mayer USDA Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging at Tufts University and Tufts-New England Medical Center in Boston.

Published last year in the Journal of the American Medical Association, the study compared the relative merits of four of the most popular weight-loss diets. These included the Atkins (carbohydrate restriction), Ornish (fat restriction), Weight Watchers (calorie and portion size restriction), and Zone (high-glycemic-load carbohydrate restriction and increased protein) diets.

The researchers randomly assigned 160 overweight or obese volunteers to use 1 of the 4 diets. All participants were provided with the diet book and four 1-hour instructional classes to help them assimilate the rules of their assigned diets. The 40 participants in each of the 4 diet groups were representative—in terms of age, race, sex, body mass index, and metabolic characteristics—of the overweight population in the United States.

The results in terms of both weight loss and reduction in heart disease risk factors were compared among “completers,” or those who stayed with the study for an entire year.

Only about half the volunteers completed the program while on what the authors considered to be more extreme diet plans: Atkins and Ornish diets. In contrast, 65 percent were able to complete the more moderate diet plans: Weight Watchers and Zone. Still, those that stayed in the program tended to loosen their resolve by about 6 months, as determined by their self-reported food records.

“The bottom line was that it wasn’t so much the type of diet followed that led to successful weight loss, but the ability of participants to stick with the program for the entire year’s time,” says Schaefer.

“The study showed that whether volunteers restricted carbohydrate calories or fat calories—whether they lowered intake overall, or balanced intake overall—everybody lost weight,” says Schaefer. “Ultimately, it comes down to calorie restriction. The strongest predictor of weight loss was not the type of diet, but compliance with the diet plan that subjects were given.”

The finding lends credence to the importance of adopting a caloric-restriction diet that doesn’t conflict with one’s natural affinities for specific allowable foods.

“Implementing a dietary regimen that can transition an individual into a healthful eating pattern after the diet ends is also very important,” says ARS Human Nutrition National Program Leader Molly Kretsch. “Lifestyle practices that help people maintain a healthy body weight, incorporate the right balance of foods and appropriate portion sizes, and increase their physical activity are the keys to long-term weight management.”

Among those who stayed in the program for the entire 12-month period, all four diet plans promoted a 10-percent improvement in the balance of “good” (HDL) and “bad” (LDL) cholesterol levels. “The particular diet plan the long-term dieter followed did not seem to matter that much,” says Dansinger. “The long-term dieters reduced their ratio of good to bad cholesterol according to how much weight they lost.”

Those who improved their cholesterol ratios by 10 percent improved their heart disease risk factors by 20 percent. “For every 1 percent of weight loss a dieter achieves, there will be a 2-percent, or twice as much, reduction in heart disease risk factors,” says Dansinger.

In addition, all four diet plans promoted lower blood insulin levels as well as lower levels of C reactive protein (CRP). High levels of CRP in the blood have been linked to heart disease.

Future studies will focus on identifying practical techniques to increase dietary adherence—including ways to match individuals with the diets best suited to their food preferences and lifestyles. “We also plan to test different versions of the new USDA diet and look specifically at the results from a diet with higher and lower glycemic index values,” says Schaefer.
— By Rosalie Marion Bliss, Agricultural Research Service Information Staff.

Organic food: Buy or bypass?

Many factors may influence your decision to buy — or not buy — organic food. Consider these factors:

• Nutrition. No conclusive evidence shows that organic food is more nutritious than is conventionally grown food. And the USDA — even though it certifies organic food — doesn’t claim that these products are safer or more nutritious.
• Quality and appearance. Organic foods meet the same quality and safety standards as conventional foods. The difference lies in how the food is produced, processed and handled. You may find that organic fruits and vegetables spoil faster because they aren’t treated with waxes or preservatives. Also, expect less-than-perfect appearances in some organic produce — odd shapes, varying colors and perhaps smaller sizes. In most cases, however, organic foods look identical to their conventional counterparts.
• Pesticides. Conventional growers use pesticides to protect their crops from molds, insects and diseases. When farmers spray pesticides, this can leave residue on produce. Some people buy organic food to limit their exposure to these residues. Most experts agree, however, that the amount of pesticides found on fruits and vegetables poses a very small health risk.
• Environment. Some people buy organic food for environmental reasons. Organic farming practices are designed to benefit the environment by reducing pollution and conserving water and soil.
• Cost. Most organic food costs more than conventional food products. Higher prices are due to more expensive farming practices, tighter government regulations and lower crop yields. Because organic farmers don’t use herbicides or pesticides, many management tools that control weeds and pests are labor intensive. For example, organic growers may hand weed vegetables to control weeds, and you may end up paying more for these vegetables.
• Taste. Some people say they can taste the difference between organic and nonorganic food. Others say they find no difference. Taste is a subjective and personal consideration, so decide for yourself. But whether you buy organic or not, finding the freshest foods available may have the biggest impact on taste.

Buying tips

Whether you’re already a fan of organic foods or you just want to shop wisely and handle your food safely, consider these tips:

• Buy fruits and vegetables in season to ensure the highest quality. Also, try to buy your produce the day it’s delivered to market to ensure that you’re buying the freshest food possible. Ask your grocer what day new produce arrives.
• Read food labels carefully. Just because a product says it’s organic or contains organic ingredients doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a healthier alternative. Some organic products may still be high in sugar, salt, fat or calories.
• Don’t confuse natural foods with organic foods. Only those products with the “USDA Organic” label have met USDA standards.
• Wash all fresh fruits and vegetables thoroughly with running water to reduce the amount of dirt and bacteria. If appropriate, use a small scrub brush — for example, before eating apples, potatoes, cucumbers or other produce in which you eat the outer skin.
• If you’re concerned about pesticides, peel your fruits and vegetables and trim outer leaves of leafy vegetables in addition to washing them thoroughly. Keep in mind that peeling your fruits and vegetables may also reduce the amount of nutrients and fiber. Some pesticide residue also collects in fat, so remove fat from meat and the skin from poultry and fish.

Learn the difference between organic foods and their traditionally grown counterparts. Decide which is best for you, considering nutrition, quality, taste, cost and other factors.

By Mayo Clinic staff

You’re in a bit of a dilemma standing in front of the produce section of your local supermarket. In one hand, you’re holding a conventionally grown Granny Smith apple. In your other hand, you have one that’s labeled organically grown. Both apples are firm, shiny and green. Both provide vitamins and fiber, and both are free of fat, sodium and cholesterol.

The conventionally grown apple costs less and is a proven family favorite. But the organic apple has a label that says “USDA Organic.” Does that mean it’s better? Safer? More nutritious? Several differences between organic and nonorganic foods exist. Become a better informed consumer for your next trip to the supermarket.

Conventional vs. organic farming

The word “organic” refers to the way farmers grow and process agricultural products, such as fruits, vegetables, grains, dairy products and meat. Organic farming practices are designed to encourage soil and water conservation and reduce pollution. Farmers who grow organic produce and meat don’t use conventional methods to fertilize, control weeds or prevent livestock disease. For example, rather than using chemical weedkillers, organic farmers may conduct sophisticated crop rotations and spread mulch or manure to keep weeds at bay.

Here are other differences between conventional farming and organic farming:

Organic or not? Check the label

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has established an organic certification program that requires all organic foods to meet strict government standards. These standards regulate how such foods are grown, handled and processed. Any farmer or food manufacturer who labels and sells a product as organic must be USDA certified as meeting these standards. Only producers who sell less than $5,000 a year in organic foods are exempt from this certification; however, they must follow the same government standards to label their foods as organic.

If a food bears a USDA Organic label, it means it’s produced and processed according to the USDA standards and that at least 95 percent of the food’s ingredients are organically produced. The seal is voluntary, but many organic producers use it.

Products certified 95 percent or more organic display this USDA seal.

---

Products that are completely organic — such as fruits, vegetables, eggs or other single-ingredient foods — are labeled 100 percent organic and can carry a small USDA seal. Foods that have more than one ingredient, such as breakfast cereal, can use the USDA organic seal or the following wording on their package labels, depending on the number of organic ingredients:

• 100 percent organic. Products that are completely organic or made of all organic ingredients.
• Organic. Products that are at least 95 percent organic.
• Made with organic ingredients. These are products that contain at least 70 percent organic ingredients. The organic seal can’t be used on these packages.

Foods containing less than 70 percent organic ingredients can’t use the organic seal or the word “organic” on their product label. They can include the organic items in their ingredient list, however.

You may see other terms on food labels, such as “all-natural,” “free-range” or “hormone-free.” These descriptions may be important to you, but don’t confuse them with the term “organic.” Only those foods that are grown and processed according to USDA organic standards can be labeled organic.

Life-threatening, severe allergic reactions (anaphylaxis) to foods, insect bites and other triggers are on the rise in Canada. Fortunately, they can largely be avoided or treated.
Background

Severe allergic reactions (e.g. anaphylactic shock) occur when the body’s immune system reacts to a particular allergen or irritant. These reactions can be triggered by certain foods or food ingredients, insect stings and medications.

The most common food products that cause reactions are peanuts, tree nuts, sesame, soy, fish, wheat, eggs, milk and seafood. Foods account for most of the cases in children, while drugs and antibiotics like penicillin are more likely to cause a reaction in adults. Stings from yellow jackets, hornets, wasps and bees are the most common cause of insect reactions. Some individuals also experience severe allergic reactions to natural latex rubber.

Severe allergic reactions affect primarily the skin, the upper and lower respiratory systems, the gastrointestinal system and the cardiovascular system. It is estimated that 600,000 Canadians (two percent of the population) may be affected by life-threatening allergies, and the numbers are increasing, especially among children.
Health Effects of Severe Allergic Reactions

When a reaction is triggered, the symptoms of anaphylactic shock may develop quickly. The victim can become faint, weak, anxious, distressed and flushed in the face, and develop a rapid heartbeat. The skin may become red and itchy, the eyes, face, lips, tongue and throat may swell, and there may be difficulty breathing. Vomiting, cramps, diarrhea and a sense of doom may also occur. In its most severe form the allergic reaction can include a complete loss of cardiovascular tone, resulting in blood pressure drop and shock (anaphylaxis) and can cause death very quickly. In milder reactions, symptoms may not appear for several hours. Severe allergic reactions are not predictable. You may have a mild reaction one time and a severe one the next time, or vice versa. Suspected allergies that trigger anaphylaxis should be confirmed by an allergy specialist four to six weeks after the initial reaction.

Severe reactions are usually treated with an injection of epinephrine (adrenalin), antihistamines and/or steroids. Those known to have reactions should carry an EpiPen®, a device that allows you to give yourself an injection of adrenalin quickly. Even if the symptoms go away after an adrenalin injection with the EpiPen®, the victim should always be taken to hospital to be observed for several hours, since the reaction may recur.
Minimizing Your Risk

While there is research being conducted to develop vaccines against severe allergic reactions, there is currently no means of prevention.

If you or any member of your family has had a severe allergic reaction, there are steps you should follow to prevent or minimize your risks of another reaction.

* Know what foods or other factors trigger a reaction and avoid them. When eating away from home, ask what is in the food you are to be served. When in doubt, do not eat the food. In Canada, more than 1800 restaurants, including 9 chains, participate in Allergy Aware, a new program to help prevent severe allergic attacks. These restaurants provide information about common food allergens in menu items, and can be identified by a posted Allergy Aware symbol.
* Learn to read the nutritional/ingredient labels on foods to avoid even trace amounts of foods to which you are allergic. Contact food manufacturers if you have doubts about a particular food.
* If your family members are subject to severe allergic reactions, train them to read labels and ask questions before eating foods. Anaphylaxis Canada can help you teach and reassure your children (contact information under “Need More Info?”).
* Always carry an EpiPen® and know how to use it. If it is your family members who are affected, teach them how to use it and stress the importance of always having it with them. At the cottage or on a trip, be sure to keep one or more EpiPens® on hand.
* Use the EpiPen® at the earliest sign of a reaction. Practice using the EpiPen® every few months and teach other family members as well.
* Always wear a Medic Alert identifier, so that in case of an accident, others know about your allergies and reactions.
* If you or your child are having a serious allergic reaction, go to your nearest Emergency Department, or dial 911 for instructions.

One of North America’s only native fruits is being recognized for its versatility, convenience and powerful nutritional benefits as Agriculture Secretary Ann M. Veneman officially proclaims October National Cranberry Month.

“The tart and tangy flavor of cranberries really makes them a unique treat, and they are fun to pair with lots of our usual favorites,” said Jackie Newgent, New York-based chef and registered dietitian. “With all of the research supporting the positive health benefits of cranberries, people should be seeking ways to enjoy them all year round – not just at Thanksgiving.”

Drawing national attention to cranberries might help people gain a new appreciation for the most misunderstood berry. “We have found that many people – including health professionals – know that cranberries can help ward off bladder and urinary tract infections (UTIs). Cranberries have so much more to offer in the way of health benefits, and October is our chance to kick start the education process,” said Martin Starr, PhD, Science Advisor to the Cranberry Institute.

Dr. Amy Howell, research scientist with Rutgers University agrees. “Most people think that the cranberry’s UTI-fighting abilities come from the fruit’s acidity. Our studies show that cranberries actually contain ‘bacteria-blockers’, which prevent bad bacteria from sticking to cells and organs where they can multiply and cause infections,” said Howell.

Dr. Howell’s landmark study into this bacteria-blocking action was published in The New England Journal of Medicine in 1998. This and other recent work has led scientists to other compelling areas of research:

* Antibiotic resistance: Recently, another major Howell-led study published in The Journal of the American Medical Association focused on the ability of cranberry juice cocktail to disable E. coli bacteria responsible for UTIs – even some types known to be resistant to antibiotics.

* Ulcer Prevention: New studies suggest that cranberries keep some strains of ulcer-causing bacteria from sticking to the stomach cells, which is the first step in the formation of certain ulcers.

* Gum Disease: The same bacteria-blocking mechanism that helps prevent UTIs appears to keep certain bacteria from gathering on the surface of the tooth, which could reduce the formation of harmful plaque that leads to gum disease.

* Federally funded studies: The National Institutes of Health has also approved funding for additional research on cranberries and health. The National Center of Complementary and Alternative Medicine, a division of the NIH, will undertake this multi-year program.

Cranberries rank as one of the best sources of valuable antioxidants, such as flavonoids, that can also aid in the prevention of heart disease and certain types of cancer.

“Cranberries are a nutritional powerhouse,” said Jackie Newgent, RD. “They should be on everyone’s A-list for foods that are delicious, nutritious, and easy to prepare.”

The Cranberry Institute, a non-profit organization founded in 1951 to promote education and research, funds exploration into health and medical benefits of cranberry as well as topics related to environmental stewardship.
Visit www.cranberryinstitute.org

The Philip E. Marucci Center for Blueberry and Cranberry Research Center, located in Chatsworth, NJ, maintains research programs on the identification of natural products in cranberry with health benefits.

Jackie Newgent, RD, CDN–Chef & Registered Dietitian

The health craze that began sweeping America decades ago is clearly not a passing fad.  It has woven its way into the fabric of our society and a principal part of that cultural upholstery is our dietary regime.  Individuals swept up in its fervor are betting that gastronomic sacrifice will pay off with better health and more specifically, longer life.  But you should always know the rules, the odds, and especially your limits before rolling the dice.

People frequently ask me if certain foods are healthy.  What does “healthy” exactly mean?  Are they referring to reducing their cholesterol or blood pressure?  Are they asking if the food will inhibit cancer or other dreadful diseases?  Do they think it might boost their energy level or revitalize their sex life?  Are they talking about their vitamin and mineral requirements?  Losing weight? Living longer?  Building muscle?  And for that matter, what exactly does “unhealthy” mean?  Depending on your definition of healthy, the answers to those questions can be yes, no, maybe, or who knows.

The idea of healthy and unhealthy foods assumes that such a clean dichotomy exists.  This vantage point ignores the fact that many foods may contain substances that are both healthy and unhealthy.  The vilifiers of red meat are quick to point out its potential dangers but they omit the benefits of its ample protein, B vitamins, iron, zinc, and substances (like conjugated linoleic acid), that have shown to reduce cancer in laboratory animals.  Conversely, the glorifiers of fish don’t mention the alarming mercury levels found in many species due to pollution.  Intellectually it’s easier to wrap one’s head around a black and white concept than a complicated matrix of positive and negative attributes.  Another good example is fat, probably the most condemned substance in America.  Amongst the nutritional knee-jerkers, fat is bad.  Yet this fails to consider that there are “good” fats, (e.g., monounsaturated fats and omega-3 fatty acids), that actually reduce cholesterol and might also have anti-hypertensive and anticancer properties, and in the case of Omega-3, enhance brain functioning.  But omega-3 fatty acids can be harmful to individuals with congestive heart failure.  So are they good or bad?  The answer of course is it depends, and my point of course, is that none of this is that simple, or black and white.

But let’s continue to make things more complicated.  A huge problem with discerning what is healthy and what isn’t is wading through the incomprehensible mass of misleading information.  For starters, many health claims are in the infancy of their research.  A few studies does not a conclusion make.  Solid research must be repeatedly duplicated with consistent results, involve large numbers of subjects, and rule out innumerable confounding variables.  To make matters worse, many health claims have conflicting findings.  It seems that just about every month there’s a new study touting coffee as either good or bad for you.  How do you know what is true?  How do you know what to believe?  Do you know for a fact that the wheat germ you sprinkle on your cereal every day is going to make any actual difference in your life?

Moreover, there’s a wealth of outright misinformation out there.  There’s no shortage of pundits or scaremongers, especially when there’s money to be made.  Spurious health fads, alternative medicine charlatans, vitamin hucksters, the media, and the billions-a-year weight loss industry are all quick to jump on the latest health-scare bandwagon and capitalize on individuals’ fears.  Sales of organic foods are surging thanks to scaremongering tactics and American food neurosis and paranoia.  The facts are these:  the residue of pesticides on produce is negligible, there has never been conclusive evidence of a link between pesticide use and cancer, and the incidence rate of most cancers has not increased in the US.  Doesn’t matter.  People will shell out big bucks for “organic” produce and delude themselves that they’re a future octogenarian.  Oh and by the way, you’ve heard that shady producers and supermarkets have been known to sell non-organic produce at organic prices right?

Moving on, even if all the health claims are true, how can anyone be certain that “healthy” eating will result in a difference in their future?  How do you know you won’t get hit by a bus and could have had more chocolate cake in your life?  How do you know you won’t die from a non-diet related disease or an inept surgeon?  How do you know whether pushing the longevity envelope will only result in your final years being spent in a diaper forgetting your children’s names?  More time doesn’t automatically mean quality time.

And how do we know that diet, in and of itself, is that efficacious?  There are a plethora of factors that influence our health, some of which are uncontrollable, namely genes.  Most physicians would argue that your genetics is the best predictor of your medical future.  This is not to say that diet has zero influence.  But those little strands of DNA have much more say-so than your steamed broccoli.  We can’t control genetics but we can control our diet.  Dread of our own immortality coupled with our immanent need for control, intensifies the impression that what is controllable has more impact than it actually does.  In other words, if the dice are loaded, all bets are off.

At this point you may think I’m arguing that all of our health information is nonsense.  I’m not.  My point is to highlight the multiple layers of assumptions that must all come true for the healthy-food-equals-better-life premise to bare fruit.

But I’m going to simplify all of this right here and now.  Let’s assume that all of the assumptions are true:  That there are indeed “healthy” and “unhealthy” foods, that all of our information about which foods are good and which ones are bad are correct, that diet can make an appreciable difference, that you won’t die of a non diet-related disease or accident, and your unbuttered bran muffins will prevent you from, shall we say, crapping out.  Doesn’t matter.  That’s still not the ultimate issue.  The ultimate issue is the subjective conflict between quantity vs. quality of life

Food is one of our most basic pleasures.  In countries devoid of issues with food, it’s an integral part of their culture, a bond that brings people together, and a celebration of life.  Food is not grappled over.  People don’t feel guilty about eating it.  It nourishes their soul as well as their body.  In America, depending on the extent to which you’ve “drank the Kool Aid*,” healthy eating means following a course of routine deprivation.  That’s three times a day, every day, one must struggle between satisfaction on one hand and frustration and temptation on the other.  Quantity people are willing to make this sacrifice.  They hedge their bets.  Quality people do not.  They want to suck the marrow out of the bone of life and enjoy it as much as possible.  They’re willing to risk losing their stake sooner for more action in the short run.

The bottom line is there’s no correct answer to this dilemma. This is not a math problem, it’s a value judgment.  Each person has to decide for themselves what is right or wrong for their life.  Interestingly though, our culture has imbibed health with an air of morality.  There is a palpable sentiment that healthy eating is the “right” choice with a concomitant disdain for those who choose indulgence or nutritional indifference.  And of course, like countless groups in the history of mankind, many who feel they are “right,” also believe they are entitled to force their values on others.  Laws banning foie gras, outlawing trans-fats, enforcing certain school lunch parameters, eliminating vending machines, attacks on meat producers and fast food restaurants, attempts to convert others to vegetarianism, and indoctrination of health-craze dogma are all testaments to the “morally correct” imposing their will on others.  It’s this moral subjectivism that I find even more distasteful than the unbuttered bran muffins.

Years ago I quit smoking.  When I tell people they congratulate me like I’ve joined the faith; like I’ve just emerged from the baptismal waters onto the path of righteousness.  I’m not totally convinced of my rebirth.  Relinquishing smoking was a terrible conflict for me.  I’m obviously hedonistic by nature but there’s no debate that smoking is a huge risk; a greater risk than potato chips.  Nevertheless, if I ever do get hit by that proverbial bus, in the split second before I perish I’ll regret all of the cigarettes I could have smoked.  We’ll see if the gamble pays off.

*”Drinking the Kool-aid” refers to the mass suicide of the members of the Jim Jones cult in Guyana in 1978.  Over 900 people drank cyanide in a Kool-aid type drink at the behest of Jones.  Today the phrase refers to any group of people who mindlessly follow the dogma or policy, of a government, corporation, institution, etc. without question.

There are many energy drink products currently for sale in Canada. They are available in corner stores, gas stations and bars, often displayed alongside soft drinks, juices and sports drinks

Energy drinks are meant to supply mental and physical stimulation for a short period of time. They usually contain caffeine, taurine (an amino acid, one of the building blocks of protein), vitamins and glucuronolactone, a carbohydrate.

Energy drinks should not be confused with sports drinks such as Gatorade® or Powerade®. Sports drinks re-hydrate the body and provide sugars, which the body burns to create energy and replenish electrolytes. Electrolytes maintain salt and potassium balances in the body. Energy drinks, on the other hand, should not be used as a fluid replacement.

Problems may arise with energy drinks when too many are consumed or when mixed with alcohol. For example, they have become popular at all-night dance parties, bars and clubs. People drink them to keep up their energy during periods of intense physical activity or drink them after exercise to quench their thirst. Rather than re-hydrating their bodies, these drinks may actually lead to dehydration.

Woman with water bottleDue to their ingredients (such as caffeine, taurine and vitamins), and the claims they make, energy drinks are regulated as natural health products under the Natural Health Product (NHP) Regulations. Like all natural health products, energy drinks are reviewed by Health Canada for their quality and safety. They must display recommended conditions for use and cautions on their labels. Consumers can identify energy drinks authorized for sale by Health Canada by looking for the Natural Product Number (NPN) on the label.

Health Canada has received a number of reports of suspected adverse reactions to energy drinks. Symptoms have included cardiac irregularities and neurological effects.
Minimizing Your Risk

If you drink energy drinks, be aware of the following.

* Carefully read the labels of all health products you consume, including energy drinks, and follow label instructions. Authorized energy drinks will have an eight-digit Natural Product Number (NPN) on the label.
* Energy drinks should be consumed in moderation. Energy drinks should not be taken on an empty stomach and should not replace food.
* Do not mix energy drinks with alcohol.
* If you engage in intense physical activity or exercise, drink water to help re-hydrate your system.
* If you have an adverse reaction to an energy drink, report it to Health Canada as outlined in the Need More Info? section.

By Canada Health

This article was produced in collaboration with the Public Health Agency of Canada.
On this page:

The Issue

Woman cutting vegetables in wheelchairIt can be more difficult for immunocompromised patients (people with weakened immune systems) to fight off infections. This means they are more likely to become ill and suffer from serious health effects if they eat contaminated food.
If your immune system is weakened, you should take extra care when handling, storing, preparing, and shopping for food. In addition, consumption of certain high-risk foods should be avoided.
Increased Risks for People with Weakened Immune Systems

Your ability to fight disease is decreased when your immune system is weakened. As a result, people with weakened immune systems are at greater risk than the general population of becoming ill after eating contaminated food. In addition, the health effects caused by Next link will take you to another Web site foodborne illness may be more serious for people with weakened immune systems. Some examples of conditions that can affect your immune system are:

Woman feeding child

* alcoholism
* Next link will take you to another Web site cancer (especially for people receiving chemotherapy)
* diabetes
* HIV/AIDS
* organ transplantation

Treatments for Next link will take you to another Web site cancer, such as chemotherapy and radiation, can leave the immune system severely weakened. Your levels of immunity will also be lower than usual if you are taking high doses of drugs, such as steroids or immune suppressants.
Foodborne Illnesses that Pose Higher Risks to People with Weakened Immune Systems

The following types of Next link will take you to another Web site foodborne illnesses are particularly dangerous for people with weakened immune systems:

Listeria infection – caused by bacteria that may be found in a wide variety of refrigerated, ready-to-eat foods such as dairy products, cold cuts and hot dogs.

Next link will take you to another Web site E. coli O157:H7 infection – caused by bacteria that may be found in foods such as raw and undercooked ground beef, unpasteurized fruit juice/cider, sprouts, and unpasteurized dairy products.

Next link will take you to another Web site Vibrio infection – caused by bacteria that may be found in raw and undercooked shellfish, such as oysters, clams, and mussels.

Salmonella infection – caused by bacteria that may be found in a wide variety of foods but especially in raw and undercooked chicken, raw eggs and raw milk.
Minimizing Your Risk

Man washing with walkerSome food can be a higher risk for people who have a weakened immune system because of the way they are produced and the conditions and length of time they are stored. If you are faced with such a condition, you can minimize your chances of contracting Next link will take you to another Web site foodborne illness by avoiding some types of food. The following chart can help you make alternative choices when selecting food.
Select the Safer Alternative

(Always refer to the Internal Cooking Temperatures Chart)
Type of Food     Food to Avoid     Safer Alternative
Hot dogs     Hot dogs straight from the package without further heating.     Hot dogs thoroughly cooked to a safe internal temperature. The middle of the hot dog should be steaming hot or 74°C (165°F)
Tip: To help prevent foodborne illness, avoid spreading fluid from packages onto other food, cutting boards, utensils, dishes and food preparation surfaces. Wash your hands after handling hot dogs.
Deli meats     Non-dried deli meats, such as bologna, roast beef and turkey breast.     Dried and salted deli meats such as salami and pepperoni.

Non-dried deli meats heated throughout to steaming hot.
Egg and egg products     Raw or lightly cooked egg or egg products, including salad dressings, cookie dough or cake batter sauces, and drinks such as homemade eggnog.     Egg dishes thoroughly cooked to a safe internal temperature. Eggs should be cooked until the yolk is firm.

Homemade eggnog must be heated to 71°C (160°F).
Tip: Pasteurized egg products can be used when making uncooked food that calls for raw eggs.
Meat and poultry     Raw or undercooked meat or poultry, such as steak tartare.     Meat and poultry cooked to a safe internal temperature. (refer to the Internal Cooking Temperatures Chart)
Tip: To help prevent foodborne illness, remember to use a digital food thermometer to check the internal temperature.
Seafood     Raw seafood, such as sushi.

Raw oysters, clams, and mussels.

Refrigerated, smoked seafood.     Seafood cooked to a safe internal temperature of 74°C (165°F).

Cook until the shell has opened.

Smoked seafood in cans that do not require refrigeration until after opening.
Tip: Refrigerated smoked seafood can be eaten safely when fully cooked to a safe internal temperature, such as in a casserole.
Dairy products     Raw or unpasteurized dairy products, including soft and semi-soft cheese, such as Brie, Camembert and blue-veined cheese.     Pasteurized dairy products, hard cheeses such as Colby, Cheddar, Swiss, and Parmesan.
Sprouts     Raw sprouts such as alfalfa, clover, radish, and mung beans.     Thoroughly cooked sprouts.
Pâtés and meat spreads     Refrigerated pâtés and meat spreads.     Pâtés and meat spreads sold in cans or those that do not require refrigeration until after opening.
Fruit juice and cider     Unpasteurized fruit juice and cider.     Unpasteurized fruit juice and cider brought to a rolling boil and cooled.

Pasteurized fruit juice and cider.

In addition, there are four basic safety steps you should always follow when handling, storing, preparing, and shopping for food:

Separate: Make sure to always separate your raw foods, such as meat and eggs, from cooked foods, fruits, and vegetables to avoid cross-contamination.

Clean: Wash your hands, kitchen surfaces, utensils, and reusable shopping bags often with warm, soapy water to eliminate bacteria and reduce your risk of foodborne illness.

Hands washing vegetablesChill: Always refrigerate food and leftovers promptly at 4°C or below.

Cook: Always cook food to the safe internal temperatures. Health Canada recommends that you check this by using a digital food thermometer. Cooked foods are safe to eat at certain internal temperatures:

* 71°C (160°F) for ground meat (beef, veal, lamb and pork)
* 74°C (165°F) for leftover food and boned and deboned poultry parts
* 85°C (185°F) for whole poultry

Also, it is strongly suggested to pay attention to Next link will take you to another Web site food recalls and learn more about food safety. The Need More Info? section below lists resources with many more tips on safe food practices. For example, there is a link to charts on the proper internal temperatures for cooked meats, poultry and seafood, and the length of time you can store various food items safely in your fridge and freezer.
Background

It is estimated that there are approximately 11 million cases of Next link will take you to another Web site foodborne illnesses in Canada every year. Foodborne illness, often called food poisoning, occurs when you eat food contaminated with disease-causing organisms, including bacteria, viruses, and parasites.

The most common symptoms of Next link will take you to another Web site foodborne illness include stomach cramps, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, headache, and fever. Depending on the type of bacteria, virus or parasite these symptoms can begin a few hours after eating contaminated food, or can be delayed by several days or even weeks. Most people affected by foodborne illnesses recover completely; some, however, suffer more serious health effects, including such conditions as brain infections and blood poisoning, which, in rare cases, could be fatal.

The risk of serious health effects after eating contaminated food depends on a number of factors:

* your age, general health status, and ability to fight disease; and
* the type and amount of bacteria, viruses, or parasites in the food you eat.

It’s hard to believe these chocolate chip cookies are low fat. By using half the normal amount of butter, and substituting an egg white for a whole egg, these make a wonderful and almost guilt-free indulgence. The chocolate flavor is enhanced by using cocoa powder as well as the chocolate chips. And by using mini chocolate chips, we’re making a smaller quantity go a long way.
Cook Time: 9 minutes
Total Time: 9 minutes
Ingredients:

* 1/4 cup butter, softened
* 1/2 cup sugar
* 1/4 cup brown sugar
* 1 egg white
* 1 tsp vanilla extract
* 1 cup all-purpose flour
* 1/2 tsp baking soda
* 1/4 tsp salt
* 1/4 cup cocoa powder
* 1/3 cup miniature chocolate chips

Preparation:
Preheat oven to 375 degrees.

In a large bowl, beat butter and sugars together with an electric mixer until creamy. Add egg white and vanilla and mix until well blended.

In a medium bowl, combine flour, baking soda, salt and cocoa powder. Gradually add flour mixture to egg and sugar. Use a wooden spoon to work the dough together. Don’t worry if the dough seems a little crumbly at first. Stir in chocolate chips.

Drop cookie dough by the teaspoonful on to a cookie sheet lined with parchment paper or a silicone mat if you have one.

Bake for 8-10 minutes. Cool on cookie sheet for 1 minute, then transfer to wire rack to cool completely.

Makes 30 cookies

Per Serving: Calories 65, Calories from Fat 21, Total Fat 2.3g (sat 1.8g), Cholesterol 5mg, Sodium 44mg, Carbohydrate 10.3g, Fiber 0.5g, Protein 0.7g

By Fiona Haynes,