The Cleaner Plate Club

There’s an interesting article, Got Osteoporosis?, by Emily Yoffe, on Slate magazine. It’s about our bones, and all the things we might be doing to ruin them. You probably think you already know the article’s conclusion, but you would be wrong.

I’ll cut to the chase: the article suggests that perhaps drinking milk isn’t the best path to healthy bones.

Yoffe highlights smarty-pants researchers like Mark Hegsted, retired Harvard professor of nutrition and T. Colin Campbell, professor of nutritional biochemistry at Cornell University, who believe that the standard calcium recommendations may be…well…wrong.

(even if these recommendations do lead to bare-chested photos of David Beckham.)

Here are two of the ideas at work among the dairy-doubters:

1. Our high rate of osteoporosis and bone fracture are not the result of insufficient calcium. They are instead, the result of too much animal protein. There are plenty of population studies to suggest that as consumption of animal protein increases, osteoporosis and bone fracture also increase. Which may explain why in America — where a whoppin’ 70% of our diet comes from animal sources — 8 million women and 2 million men have osteoporosis, and we suffer 1.5 million fractures annually.

The basic idea is that the animal protein, which is high in sulfur-containing amino acids, requires the body to buffer the effects of those amino acids. Which it does by leaching calcium from the bones. So, while we may consume large amounts of calcium, we piss that calcium away. Literally.

Says Campbell:

The correlation between animal protein [intake] and fracture rates in different societies is as strong as that between lung cancer and smoking.

Yowza.

2. Getting too much calcium at a young age may permanently damage our ability to absorb calcium efficiently as we age. In other words, we absorb the calcium early on, and develop nice, dense bones. But then, as we age, all that early calcium harms our ability to absorb and keep calcium. It seems perverse, but it appears to be supported by a number of population studies. Says Hegsted:

[H]ip fractures are more frequent in populations where dairy products are commonly consumed and calcium intakes are relatively high. Is there any possibility that this is a causal relationship? …It will be embarrassing enough if the current calcium hype is simply useless; it will be immeasurably worse if the recommendations are actually detrimental to health.

Campbell points to the Chinese, who consume less than half the calcium we’re told is necessary, most from plant sources like leafy green vegetables. Only 10% of their diet comes from animal sources, although they consume more calories. Yet the Chinese have only one-fifth the incidence of hip fractures than Americans.

(Cambell also notes that rural Chinese girls begin menstruating much later than Americans — typical age is 15 —that Chinese women have only two-thirds of the estrogen circulating through their bodies compared with Americans, and they have far lower rates of breast cancer. Connection? He thinks so).

But in the end, Yoffe notes, this whole argument — Drink Milk! No, Don’t! — might be like shouting into the wind. With all the sodas we Americans are guzzling, and with all the sodium with which we’re smothering our foods, and with all of the exercise we’re just not getting, this whole darn dairy-no dairy argument is like opera companies and symphony orchestras fighting over teen audiences.

“While they’re fighting,” quips Yoffe, “they forgot to notice the audience is at American Pie.”

Which means we’ve got plenty more weakened, fractured bones to look forward to.

Now if you will excuse me, I’m going to go eat some yogurt and cheese. No I’m not. Yes I am. No, I’m not. Yes I am…

And so on.

1. Escarole Soup No-Go. That escarole soup that I have made several times with chicken broth? I tried it with vegetable broth. You would think that the two would be similar. You would think, “ah, no difference whatsoever!” or at least “any difference is miniscule! Tiny! Insignificant!”

You would be wrong. Do not make this recipe with vegetable broth. The chicken broth mellows the bitter flavor of the escarole; the vegetable broth enhances it. If someone could explain to me the scientific reason for this, I would be impressed.

Vegetarians, I’d do No-Chicken broth before vegetable stock. Consider yourself warned.

2. I’ll Take the Poop, But Not the Inflammation. The Dirty Jobs episode where they show tilapia eating fish poop wasn’t enough to scare me off of the mild, white, ubiquitous fish, but this might be. It’s long been known that farm-raised tilapia had low levels of omega-3s. But it apparently also has very high levels of long-chain omega-6 fatty acids. This combination (low omega 3s, high omega 6s) promotes inflammation, making the fish potentially dangerous for anyone at risk of heart disease, arthritis, asthma, or other health problems that are vulnerable to inflammation. Inflammation damages the blood vessels, heart, lung and joint tissues, skin, and the digestive tract. According to Floyd Chilton, professor of physiology at Wake Forest University, tilapia is even worse for your health than a big ol’ hamburger or bacon.

So what can you eat safely? Not much, says Chilton, thanks to a large-scale corruption of the American food chain with cheap corn feed. It’s the cornification of our diets that has altered the fats in beef, chicken, eggs and farmed fish. Good thing the government doesn’t pay farmers to grow even more of this crappy cheap feed. Oh, wait.

3. Apparently, God Didn’t Smite Nebraska Beef the Last Time. Are you all following the most recent e. Coli outbreak? 5.3 million pounds recalled? People sickened in five states? All because there was dirty, tainted poop in their meat? I just realized that it all came from Nebraska Beef. Now, how do I know that name? Nebraska Beef, Nebraska Beef, Nebraska Beef…oh, that’s right! They’re the group that sued the church last year, after a bunch of church-goers were sickened, and one killed, after eating dirty meat from Nebraska Beef! The company actually had the balls to sue the church for not cooking the meat to a high enough temperature. They should have known our product is filthy! said Nebraska Beef in so many words. Those stupid Jesus-lovers should have acted with more caution around our nasty product! Apparently, having avoided being turned into a pillar of salt after that incident, Nebraska Beef found no reason to clean up their act.

4. Oh, Just Lighten Up, Ali, Won’t You? Me? I can make salad people. Saxton Freymann, on the other hand, can make art. Check out his slide show, from the New York Times, for a little antidote to news about icky food. His food isn’t icky. It might even make you smile.

5. I never found my underwear. For those who are wondering.

It’s rare that I walk away from a post and think, “what have I done?” However, yesterday afternoon, while zipping in to pick up Charlotte from day care, I stopped short in my tracks and thought “Did I really talk about sex lubes while trying to explain a food additive????” My only defense, friends: spend a few hours looking up carrageenan, and you’re going to repeatedly find your way onto sites promoting the stuff for good lovin’.

Moving on: we’ve talked before about the insanity that is our mad cow policy. Not only that we test fewer than 1% of cows for mad cow disease, but also that our government has actively prevented a private company, Creekstone Farms, from testing its own product at its own expense. Michael Hansen, a senior scientist at Consumer’s Union, has written a great op-ed on the subject, Stop the Madness, in the New York Times. Noting that 71 percent of adults who eat beef would pay more to support mad cow testing, Hansen writes:

In the Creekstone case, the Agriculture Department argued that the tests should be prohibited because if one company started using them, consumer demand would drive all companies to use them, and that would add to the price of beef. But…isn’t this how the laws of supply and demand are supposed to work?

While you’re there, you might want to check out another op-ed, Yes, We Will Have No Bananas (thanks, Jack, for the link) penned by Dan Koeppel, about a fungus that threatens to make bananas far more rare. He notes:

That bananas have long been the cheapest fruit at the grocery store is astonishing. They’re grown thousands of miles away, they must be transported in cooled containers and even then they survive no more than two weeks after they’re cut off the tree.

They are cheap, of course, because of monocropping (the near-ubiquitous variety of banana is the Cavendish, which Koeppel compares to a Big Mac: “efficient to produce, uniform in quality and universally affordable”), and because bananas are grown in countries where wages are low, and workers are denied health care or the right to congregate. That they are monocropped, and produced by rock-bottom growers, enhances their vulnerability. Koeppel encourages us to look some years in the future, after the Panama virus likely wipes out much of the existing supply. He says it’s time “we recognize bananas for what they are: an exotic fruit that, some day soon, may slip beyond our reach.”

That seems impossible — of course there will always be bananas — but then again, sometimes entire crops are simply wiped out. Poof. Gone. NPR recently did a story, A Not-So-Sweet Lesson From Brazil’s Cocoa Farms, about a once-wealthy Brazilian cocoa producer who lost everything, his whole plantation, when a fungus ravaged Brazil’s cocoa industry (cocoa production across the entire region plunged nearly 75 percent). I’m sure that idea — poof, gone — once would have seemed impossible to him.

We forget sometimes that we live as a part of an ecosystem. That ecosystem — even when all we see of it is the end of the line, the fluorescent-lit, Muzak-filled grocery stores — is so fragile. It may not seem fragile to us as we push our shopping carts past aisles of cereal boxes, but it is. It always is. That’s yet another reason I love my CSA, or a trip to farmers’ markets. It helps me to really get that, to understand my small place on this fragile planet.

And speaking of fragility: My buddy, Matt, at Fat Guy on a Little Bike, wrote a heartbreaking post about driving through his home town in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, after the flood. It’s so hard to imagine. He’s got some links to photos, though I know that photos don’t begin to capture the three-dimensional reality of it all. He’s also got some information about how to make a matched donation to support the good people of Iowa.

The Ethicurean has done some reporting on the flood, too, examining what might be leaking into the environment, including Iowans’ drinking water, as a result of agrichemicals leaching with the flood water into drinking sources. It’s a grim picture. I spent years in Iowa. I love the place. Please keep them all in your prayers.

News days like this make me feel blown like an old flag by forces so much bigger than myself.

Yes, now I see I talk about sex lubes:

In the face of floods,
Disease, life’s fragility,
Sex lubes cheer, distract.

Maybe it’s time for a recipe or two.

Sure, you’re a sex lube.
(That’s out of the way. Phew.
Let’s move on to food).

Derived from seaweed,
(what could be more natural?)
You thicken. Bind. Gel.

You’re found in puddings,
Ice cream, jams, processed cheeses,
Toothpaste, icing, fro-yo…

And Silk soy creamer,
My preferred coffee creamer.
I sure hope you’re safe.

You come in two forms:
Degraded, Undegraded.
One food-grade, one not.

Most food experts claim
Undegraded’s safe to eat.
No problem, say they!

Degraded? Not so.
Degraded is evil stuff.
Brings GI problems.

Like..say… IBS.
Cancers of the GI tract.
Ulcers, colitis.

It seems simple, then:
“Undegraded is safe!” …But ‘natch,
There’s controversy;

Dr. Tobacman
Points out this sticky wicket:
WE might degrade it.*

Sheesh…our own tummies
Might just turn undegraded
Into degraded.

If this is true…Yikes!
Then the difference means nothing.
Avoid it, she says!

And others’ advice?
Dr. Weil , nature’s M.D.,
Says “best to avoid.”**

Dr. Weil, I must ask:
Would you smother your love bits
In the stuff? (I might.)***

Fit Sugar says “Eat!”
Eden Foods, Toms of Maine: “Fine!”
Dr. Minich: “Sure.”

Eat. Don’t. Eat. Eat. Don’t.
Who can keep up? As for me,
I’m cautious, not freaked.****

For daily Java, though,
I might switch to half-and-half.
I mean…just in case.

(As for the love juice,
it’s “soft, silky, not sticky!“
Beats Astro-Glide, too!

Awww, what can I say?
As I hurtle toward forty,
I’ll keep that in mind).

* Says Dr. Tobacman: “exposure to undegraded as well as to degraded carrageenan was associated with the occurrence of intestinal ulcerations and neoplasms. This association may be attributed to contamination of undegraded carrageenan by components of low molecular weight, spontaneous metabolism of undegraded carrageenan by acid hydrolysis under conditions of normal digestion, or the interactions with intestinal bacteria.

**From Dr. Weil: “Given this new information on carrageenan, I would recommend avoiding regular consumption of products containing it. While some brands of soy milk do contain the additive, others do not. With a little research you should be able to find a product that suits your taste and doesn’t contain carrageenan.”

***Mine, I mean, not his.

****Truthfully, I fell down the Google hole on this one and left feeling no wiser than when I started. All of the “don’t eat it” advice came down to Tobacman’s one (admittedly troubling) literature review. Which is persuasive. But then again, so are the letters in response. In the end, I’m deciding not to swear it off completely, but to try to keep it limited — mostly by trying to stay as unprocessed as possible. Which I was trying to do anyway. Even though it’s hard.

Thank goodness someone was watching for that Rachael-Ray-Wears-a-Scarf thing. I mean, seriously.

(Oh, you live under a rock? One more impermeable than my own? Here’s the deal: Rachael Ray wore a paisley scarf in a Dunkin’ Donuts ad. I mean…jeesh.)

Fortunately, some bloggers were all over that sh*t. They were like, she can’t wear a paisley scarf! No way, man! What is she, some kind of jihadist apologist? A cigar may sometimes just be a cigar, but a scarf? That’s, like, totally terrorism, man. Dunkin’ Donuts no likey-likey the pressure from these bloggers. They pulled the ad.

Now, we can all be grateful that we are that much safer…from paisley scarves.

There’s certainly nothing else worth discussing. It’s not, for example, worth discussing that a Vanilla Bean Coolata contains sodium benzoate, which is linked with ADHD, cirrhosis of the liver, and Parkinson’s disease. Or that a Dunkin’ Donuts jelly donut contains not simply sodium benzoate, but also TBHQ, a likely carcinogen that’s a major ingredient in varnish and laquer; Red 40, which researchers link with ADHD and behavioral problems and is banned in many other countries; and trans-fats, which the New England Journal of Medicine estimates are responsible for between 30,000 and 100,000 cardiac deaths per year in the United States. Or even the fact that Dunkin’ Donuts annual advertising budget alone is nearly eight times more than the annual 5-a-Day budget — used to promote food that doesn’t kill us — ever was.

And yeah, I know that Dunkin’ Donuts has done some good things recently, like going with Fair Trade espresso beans. But that’s not relevant either. None of these things are.

What matters is Rachael Ray’s paisley scarf. Because if we don’t talk about paisley, the terrorists will win. So we shall fight perky bosoms terrorism and henley T-shirts all who wish us harm and words like Yum-O, you. Yeah, you, too!  Just ’cause!

And we shall do it by talking about absolutely nothing paisley!

Seriously. I’m SO gonna’ go suck down some TBHQ and sodium benzoate now. And I’m gonna’ do it happily, knowing that, at last, I’m safe from paisley scarves.

Do you like stories? Because I’m in the mood for a story.

Once upon a time, there was a little chemical called bisphenol A, or BPA. BPA was small and lumpy. It looked kinda’ like this:

Oh, sure, you know this story, right? We’ve talked about BPA before (here and here). Oh, but listen to this story, won’t you? It’s a good one.

Well, BPA may have been small, but it had a big impact. It was a boon to the multi-billion dollar plastics industry, for example. It was used in polycarbonate plastic — the hard, clear, shatterproof plastics that comprise water bottles, food packaging, and many infant bottles. It was also found in epoxy resins — the stuff that lines the tops of bottles, and many food cans and infant formula cans.

(Gosh, it sounds like it’s found everywhere! Why, yes, indeed! In fact a study suggests that it’s in the urine of 93% of the American population!).

This little ol’ chemical had a big impact in another way. Because it mimicked human hormones, it appeared to cause a whole host of health problems, including developmental toxicity, neurological damage, early onset of puberty, cancer, obesity, diabetes, fertility problems, and other nasty things.

Fortunately for BPA, it had friends in very important places. And I’m not just talking about the American Chemistry Council, who assured for years, despite a wealth of evidence to the contrary, that BPA makes our lives “healthier and safer, each and every day.” I’m not just talking about the manufacturers, either. Let’s meet some other friends of BPA — also known as The Villains of Tonight’s Story.

Enter Villain #1

This is the Washington DC home of the Weinberg Group (boo! hiss!) which was hired by Sunoco, a BPA manufacturer, to help defend the product against all those loonies who don’t like carcinogenic, fat-boosting, fertility-messing, brain-damaging chemicals. The Weinberg Group is a self-declared “international scientific and regulatory consulting firm.” The company’s clients include such winning products as Agent Orange, tobacco, and highly toxic pesticides.

The Weinberg Group knows all about public relations science. For example, they know that good public relations science isn’t about whether the product you sell is actually hurting anybody. Rather, good public relations science is about convincing people that the product you sell isn’t hurting anybody. That’s why, in a letter to another client, they said “[W]e will harness, focus and involve the scientific and intellectual capital of our company with one goal in mind—creating the outcome our client desires.”

(Science: it’s whatever our clients want it to be.)

They once even bragged on their web site about how they kept a harmful pharmaceutical product on the market for an additional 10 whole years after the FDA proposed cancellation (they’re that good). Apparently you can know good public relations science and still not be smart enough to keep that kind of thing off your web site. (more on that here, including the original page, if you want to see for yourself).

Enter Villain #2:

This would be the home of Sciences International (boo! hiss!), a contractor hired by the National Institutes of Health’s Center for the Evaluation of Risk to Human Reproduction. In 2003, the NIH hired Sciences International to evaluate BPA as a reproductive and developmental toxin. Sciences International performed a literature review for BPA toxicity. They chose and summarized studies for an expert advisory panel, who — based on this work — said, “No problem! BPA is safe! So safe!”

Unfortunately, it was later revealed that Sciences International had also been hired to work for Dow Chemical and BASF — both of which manufacture BPA! This called their findings into question. Just a little bit.

Oh, but come on. What’s a little BPA among friends? After all, scientists are most concerned about BPA’s impact on children! And the world has so many children! Besides, I believe children are the future. But the plastics and chemical companies are the now! Why don’t you get that?

Just to put this little story in context: there’s not much controversy about BPA’s health impact, even at low levels. Unless, say, you work for the plastics industry. As Grist reports, independent science tips heavily to the “not-safe” category. A survey reported in Environmental Health Perspectives reviewed 115 studies of BPA; of those, 94 (82%) show harmful effects. Yet another survey shows that while all 11 plastic industry-funded studies on BPA conclude that it poses no danger; 90% of 104 government- or university-funded studies say “Uh huh! Oh, yes, it does!”

Enter a Hero

If you’re like me, you’re looking for a hero right about now. I like to imagine him. I picture that he works for one of the chemical companies, or perhaps one of the Science-for-Sale contractors hired by the chemical companies. Our hero stands up at one of the strategy meetings — the one where they’re talking about how many more years they can suck out of this nightmare of a product — and says something dramatic, like “But the children! We must think about the children!”

He’s handsome in a skinny sort of way, our hero is. Glasses, dark brooding look to him. He’s an unlikely hero, speaks in a British accent perhaps. Maybe he looks a little like this:

Unfortunately, despite any resemblances to anyone else, this lone voice of reason has no special powers, and he totally sucks at quidditch — so much so that their company has lost the annual Really Bad Dudes quidditch tournament (to Monsanto, of course) three years running. So instead of letting him wage battle on behalf of consumers everywhere, his colleagues decide to poison him and he’s never, ever heard from again.

(Joke! That part of the story is totally made up! Lighten up, people! This is an industry that poisons people slowly, not quickly! Everyone knows that!!).

Enter Hero #2

Oh! Here’s an idea! The FDA can be our hero! Isn’t that part of their job, to make sure that products on the shelves aren’t hurting American consumers?

Wait. What? You’re telling me that when the FDA considered whether BPA was safe in infant formula cans, they ignored 100 published studies by government scientists and university laboratories? And they based their position on just two studies? And that both of these studies had been funded by the American Plastics Council? And one of them wasn’t even peer-reviewed? So now the agency is being investigated by Congress???

Okay. Forget the FDA. They totally suck at the hero thing.

Enter Hero #3

Don’t worry, folks! We do have a hero, and he looks like this:

Stop laughing. This is Tony Clement, Health Minister of Canada. Tony! My Man! My Main Maple Leaf Man! He’s the guy that announced that BPA would be officially listed as a toxic substance in Canada, a step that would allow Canada eventually to ban the manufacture, import or sale of baby bottles made with polycarbonate. That was a shot heard ’round the world. Within days, Wal-Mart announced they would pull baby products that contained BPA. So did Toys R Us. And Nalgene. And Playtex. among others.

(which is great, but just for the record, I do not put these companies in the “hero” category. Not like my unlikely stud-muffin of a conservative politician, Tony Clement!!! The reason? This issue started getting coverage five freakin’ years ago — five years during which my kids drank from BPA-leaching bottles, sucked on BPA-leaching pacifiers and consumed foods that had been in BPA-lined cans. Patagonia phased out BPA three whole years ago. These companies? Nope. They just kept making toxic products for me to put in my kids’ mouths, until my studerooni Tony told them it was time to cut the crap).

Now, thanks in part to my cute-n-cuddly lover-not-a-fighter brand new boyfriend Tony Clement, this whole BPA thing is finally getting mainstream coverage — like here and here and here and here. Even the U.S. government, our shamed Un-hero, is paying attention. The U.S. government’s National Toxicology Program (of the National Health Institutes) has officially declared that there is “some concern” about BPA, and the FDA is at last reviewing the chemical again. (hey, guys, here’s a tip: this time don’t just rely on 2 industry studies. Take a look at the other hundreds of studies, too, ‘kay?)

For all of us parents, there’s now a whole web site dedicated to BPA free kids products — bottles, dishes, sippy cups, pacifiers, spoons, you name it.

For your food storage needs, check out Culinate’s nice, simple overview of food storage options that won’t kill you or the planet.

Some other tips: wherever possible, buy foodstuffs that are packaged in glass instead of plastic (or better yet, buy fresh). Don’t drink anything hot from plastic. Avoid #7 plastics like the Plague. And for your own drinking needs, go for one of these water bottles.

And they lived happily ever after…

Tony and I did, that is. In our BPA-free little world. Now how long does it take for that stuff to leave our pee?!!

I felt well enough today to avoid a $25 fee and keep a dentist’s appointment that I’d scheduled back in January. Not so pleasant (I love my dentist, lurve him, but still). Today was exciting, though. I lay there in the chair, getting my semi-annual dose of morning TV. And I’m lying there, stretched back, watching Kathy Lee Gifford, lights on me, and fingers (not mine) in my mouth. And I’m wondering, “how old is that woman? Why has she nary a wrinkle?”

But then who should I see before me but my cyber-buddy Mir, from Woulda Coulda Shoulda, who was featured in a Today Show program about blogging moms. Which was fun and quite exciting, because I got to say, “hey, I know her!”

Which came out sounding like, “huh uh eugh uh!”

Then my dentist and his assistant both said that they do not ‘get’ the blogging thing and they definitely don’t approve of people putting their kids’ photos online, not in this crazy society, and I must agree with them, right? And I had to kind of shrug and say sheepishly (fingers no longer in my mouth). “I blog. Sometimes I post the kids’ pictures.” And they looked at me, totally silent, and I tried to fill the awkward silence by talking about how there are like, tens of millions of blogs, and how Flickr hosts, like, two and a half billion photos and really what are the chances of something happening to one of my kids from this, and how I don’t want to live my life in fear and so on and so forth and my voice got higher and higher and I started talking fasterandfasterandfaster.

And my dentist said simply, “you don’t watch Dateline.”

But that’s an aside, and it’s not even what I came here to talk about. I actually came here to talk about potatoes.

I’m eating again, mostly. I’m getting ’scoped — one of those tests where they stick a camera down your throat and into your tum-tum to see what they can see (like part of my stomach lining eroded due to some virus that I never noticed having in the first place?) — tomorrow morning. Which sounds like not so much fun, although I did get to wake up this morning singing twenny twenny twenny-four hours to go…I wanna’ be sedated, and the truth is I’m curious to see the pictures.

At this point, I must note that all this being sick stuff makes me feel so much more connected to this body of mine. It’s easy to take it for granted when you’re well. And then you get sick, and it’s like — whammo! — look how well this all works most of the time! For 37 years, this body of mine has been pumping blood and digesting food and filtering toxins and making glycoproteins and producing cells (100 billion red blood cells an hour? Seriously?) non-stop. It’s remarkable, really. It’s more than remarkable; excuse my French, but the whole thing is a frickin’ miracle.

But again, that’s not what I’m here to talk about. I’m a little rusty on the blog posting, so forgive me my meandering style. I really am here to talk about the potato.

I’ve been eating plenty of potatoes lately — it’s an easy first food back — and am grateful not only to have a body that works well most of the time, but also to have potatoes that I can feed to this body of mine.

I know, some of you (hi, Anna!) can’t do potatoes. And I apologize for talking about foods that not everyone can have. I’ll get back to general-interest vegetables soon. But this is, in fact, the Year of the Potato as declared by the UN, and these tubers have paved my way back toward other foods, like split pea soup and miso soup and bananas and non-dairy ice cream. (and it’s all workin’ for me, knock wood. All of it). I just had to take a moment to celebrate them.

If you can eat them, you should. Yes, they’ve got carbs, which makes them a pariah food among South Beach types. But they’re no Wonder bread; they actually rival broccoli and Brussels sprouts in health-boosting phytochemicals. From World’s Healthiest Foods (with my emphasis):

Roy Navarre has identified 60 different kinds of phytochemicals and vitamins in the skins and flesh of 100 wild and commercially grown potatoes. Analysis of Red and Norkotah potatoes revealed that these spuds’ phenolic content rivals that of broccoli, spinach and Brussels sprouts, and includes flavonoids with protective activity against cardiovascular disease, respiratory problems and certain cancers. These last compounds, which have blood pressure lowering potential, have only been found in one other plant, Lycium chinense (a.k.a., wolfberry/gogi berry).

(and have you seen the price of gogi berries, friends? They’re about 15-20 times the cost of a potato).

Yeah, potatoes are super-cheap, even with all their vitamin C and B-vitamins and potassium and copper and fiber, and even as the prices for wheat and rice skyrocket. They are a low-cost, high-fiber, free-radical-destroyin’, heart-helpin’, amino acid-synthesizin’ wonder-food.

And? My microwave has a baked potato setting.

I think that baked potatoes are simple little packages of perfection. But if you’re looking to do more, they are also wildly versatile.

Try some rustic potato chowder from the truly fabulous Heidi Swanson. Oh, heck - let’s stay with Heidi for a moment (she’s that good) and try her kale and olive oil mashed Potatoes, or her potato croutons.

Even though we’re no longer in the holiday season, you can still whip up some lattkes (think tater-tots, but larger and with more of a tradition around them). There’s the traditional route, or the Asian kind with soy dipping sauce (by way of Velveteen Rabbi — hi, Rachel!). B’teavon.

Or try some potato-parsnip puree. Or three-ingredient mustard roasted potatoes. Or gourmet potatoes with white wine, thyme, and olives. Really, the possibilities go on and on. I’ve even see people make healthy nachos, using potato wedges instead of chips.

See? You know I’m feeling a little better if I can even think about these recipes.

As for types of potatoes. I prefer russet for baking, Yukon gold for soups or pancakes or other cooking. If I’m roasting, I always love red new potatoes or little fingerlings, otherwise I’ll use Yukon gold. If I’m mashing, I’ll use any or all of the above.

Just a few tips: Cut away the eyes (they’re toxic), store potatoes in the dark, always unrefrigerated, and don’t eat any part of the potato that’s turned green. This is one food where green does not equal healthier.

Me? I’m just grateful for them. This week more than most.

So I’m still not cooking, still not eating. But soon? Hopefully soon. Yes. Hopefully soon. For the time being, my abdomen has stumped the experts. For that I would feel proud if only I felt better.

Reading, though? Yes. I can do that. So I must steer you toward this excellent series on the food crisis from the Washington Post. They’ve done a great job connecting the dots between malnourished toddlers in Mauritania, riots in Bangladesh, the move toward biofuels, and recent uptick in coupon clipping in the U.S., a reverse of a 7 year downward trend. The series is absolutely worth a read.

Three things stood out while I read this. First was simply an awareness of how connected we all are, every one of us, all across the globe. It’s like the old butterfly-flaps-its-wings-and-causes-a-tsunami story. We think we are so far away, here in the U.S. We think we are far away from a desperate goat farmer in Nouakchott, or a grain producer in the Ukraine. We hear about a prolonged drought in Australia, or hungry Haitians, and we think, “that’s elsewhere. That’s some other land, some other place, some other issue.” But then you pull on a single string, just one, and find that we are all connected. That string is food, or perhaps at its most basic level, it is the planet that we all live on.

The second thing that struck me is the thing that strikes me always, whenever I read this stuff: how fortunate I am. Even as I cringe as my own groceries ring up, I must remember that over a billion people — a billion. Like, take every person of every age in every town and city everywhere in America, and then triple that number — live on less than a dollar a day. Those people are already spending 70% or more of their income on food. Not to eat lavishly, but simply to get enough sustenance to stay alive. Here, we spend 10%. Not even. So, yes, it hurts when the prices of eggs rise by 35%. I don’t want to minimize that for anyone. But my God…what happens to those people who are already giving everything they have toward basic survival?

The last thing to strike me is how commoditized food has become. The article series opens with financial traders in big cities watching the computer screens at America’s great grain exchanges. These people in suits, watching up-to-the-instant tickers about rice, wheat, corn. Same as the folks who are watching tickers about GE, or about Yahoo, or Pfizer. And yet these commodities, these grains, are so much more than what they seem on the big boards. It’s not like watching Microsoft, really, even though in so many ways, it is. It’s food.

As Jeff Voge, chairman of the Kansas City Board of Trade, is quoted in the article: “We have never seen anything like this before. Prices are going up more in one day than they have during entire years in the past. But no matter the price, there always seems to be a buyer. . . . This isn’t just any commodity. It is food, and people need to eat.”

The whole thing is sobering, and it will really make you stop and savor whatever it is you’re about to eat, or just ate. (yes, even if that thing is simply some dry toast, as it’s been in my house for a week).

Once you’re done with that serious reading, you might be in the mood for something to make you laugh. Not ha-ha laugh, mind you, more like WTF? kind of laughter. Like, say, some $3,000 tours of Whole Foods? Sounds crazy, but this New York Times article highlights the work of Nancy Weiser, a lifestyle coach to those wishing to adopt a more wholesome approach to eating. Nancy promises to permanently change clients’ relationship to the food supply, and I’m sure she does; as a society, we have gotten so far away from any kind of healthful relationship to food that any informed discussion about food choices is bound to open eyes. Weiser’s goal is to teach people how to return to a simpler set of food choices, like not eating anything that “wouldn’t grow in the ground.” Along the way, she teaches people how to make stuff with, say, kale.

And bless her for that. Really. But just a word to those folks who are paying $3,000 for 12 classes? Pssst. There’s plenty of good information online, and you can get lots of it for free.

Like cooking with kale? A brief visit to Nancy’s web site shows that she’s got a great recipe for krispy kale. And the recipe seems…somehow…familiar. Because, oh, that’s right! You saw it here. And here. And here. And elsewhere, with poetry.

Anyhow, it makes me laugh, because Nancy’s would be kind of a dream job if I lived in a neighborhood where people actually had $3,000 to spare, instead of where, say, the guy who owns the property next door once lived inside a school bus. And it makes me cry, because, well, the job is hers. Not mine.

I promise I’ll be back in the weather (as opposed to under it) soon, with more recipes and more fun. And I won’t even charge you three-grand for it.

Every winter, it feels the same. I hit a certain point — it starts in February most years — when I cease to believe that it will ever be warm again. I just stop believing in summer. My faith gets shattered. The endless gray, the sleet, the wind…I reach a point where that’s all I expect. Ever.

And then. And then. Suddenly my magnolia tree bursts into bloom:

It always seems like some kind of miracle. I suppose it is, really. This year, I’ve got another, more practical, reason to welcome spring: my grocery bill.

Man, those food prices hurt, don’t they? Of course, even as I say this, I feel guilty for whining. Truth is, I’m damned fortunate not to live in any of the dozens of countries who are at risk of upheaval because of rising food prices. But, yeah, sometimes it makes me cringe. Particularly when the cost of organic milk nears $7 a gallon.

(You might wonder who’s doing well amid all of this? It’s probably no surprise: big farm special interests, who are continuing to receive subsidies even though their net income — that’s net, not gross — is at an all-time high).

But back to your grocery bill. Alanna Kellogg over at Blogher has posted a long article filled with worthwhile tips save on food. I really love so many of her ideas — think food, not “groceries;” get the most out of everything you buy; cook more; limit packaging; pay for nutrition, not snacks; eat seasonally.

So many of her points feel so right — common-sense, frugal, humble, on target. Funny, too, how her tips for frugality are the same ones that promote better health.

There’s just one point with which I take issue: she says that most locally produced foods remain more expensive than their grocery-store counterparts. It’s not true — it’s just not true at all — if you’re shopping at farmer’s markets.

For proof, check out Leftover Queen’s analysis on farmers’ market costs vs. grocery store costs. She compares an array of items, and the farmers’ market prices are either less than, or on par with, grocery store costs. Get Rich Slowly did a similar analysis, concluding that “during the peak of the harvest, at least, the produce stand offers the best balance of quality and cost.” Becks and Posh came to the same conclusion. As have others.

There are other advantages to the farmers’ market, too. You get to meet the people who grew your food. You’re not tempted to plunk down your hard-earned cash on what Michael Pollan calls “edible food-like substances” and non-essentials. Plus, you get more of a community; sociologists have found that people have ten times more conversations at farmers’ markets than they do at grocery stores.

Plus, you’ll be helping your local economy, as well; in an era where less then 10 cents of every dollar you spend on food goes to the grower — the rest goes toward corporations involved with distribution, packaging, and reselling — this is a way to give 100% of the cash to the nearby farmers who grew the food.

We’re still a month away from farmers markets in the Northeast. But they’re coming, I know now that they’re really coming, and I can’t wait. Since spring greens are some of the first items that I’ll find, I’ll go armed with this roundup of great recipes from Apartment Therapy. They all feature spring greens, and they look phenomenal.

Perhaps your farmers’ market is in swing? If so, head over. While you’re there, do your own cost-analysis. Let me know what you find out.

Set up the DVR; King Corn is on PBS this week. Might even be tonight on your local station; check here to find out when it’s showing in your neck of the woods.

The short story behind this film: a couple of cutie-pie Yale grads move to Iowa to plant an acre of corn. As they watch it grow, they learn about American food — what it is, and why it is what it is. The film is more fun than shrill, even if it did tick off the National Corn Growers Association.

Here’s my review, haiku-style:

The story? Not new,
But these fellas make it fresh;
Corn’s king. They’re dumplings.

photo credit: Curt Ellis.