Sweets for my sweet, sugar for my honey

There is not a single person I know who doesn't sometimes have cravings- usually it's a non-descript "I want something sweet" or "I want something salty". I find people tend to lean more to one rather than the other. Though I've had moments of craving a crunchy bag of chips, I almost always lean towards something sweet. My drug of choice? Chocolate.

Ever since I can remember, I always wanted something sweet after a meal. A little piece of chocolate to finish off the experience. A handful of chocolate chips..an After Eight...a square of Bakers' chocolate. Really it didn't matter which, what mattered was leaving the table with a sweet taste on my tongue (occasionally of course, that "little taste" turned into much more though...).

As I've talked about, last spring I decided to see a naturopath about my life-long digestive issues. I discussed those issues in a previous post. One of the things I had to stop, was eating processed and fake sugar. Now, sugar has many names: glucose, fructose, dextrose, lactose, and the fake ones like aspartame, malitol, sucralose, etc.  I don't think I need to go into detail on the dangers of "fake" sugars. This is food created in a lab by chemists. I do occasionally indulge in a sugar free cola, because it's really the only way I will drink a pop, however I fully recognize that this is NOT good for me.  It is a treat. Period. And it is tempered by lots of good-for-me foods to try and make up for those indulgences. This all goes back to me not being perfect...I know...it's a total surprise, right?

So, back to sugar in its various forms. If you look at the regular-calorie-having sugars, they all end in "ose". That's your key to figuring out where the sugar is in a food label. You may not see a single one high on the ingredient list, but if you see several of these lower down, the sum total may still mean a high sugar content in the recipe. Now, here's the thing about sugar: that sweetness that you put on your cereal, or in your cookie recipe, brings nothing with it. Keep in mind the same goes for brown sugar- it's just white sugar with molasses in it. Brown sugar is not "healthier". Period.  So the sugar in the recipe has been stripped of any goodness it once contained. Sanitized...bleached away... it is nothing but empty calories. So, when you eat something that comes with no nutrients, your body actually must reach into its nutrient stores, to find the nutrients it needs to process the sugar. So, in effect, by eating sugar you are now at a deficit, health-wise. It's not just that you didn't contribute to your health, you are actually at a deficit. Let's look at 24g of white sugar. There are over 100 calories in 24g of white sugar and in it you will find...drumroll please....NOTHING. Bupkiss. Zilch. Nada. No nutrients, no fiber, no protein, no nothing. Just straight sugar to cause a quick rush to the bloodstream, only to be squashed by insulin and then you feel the big CRASH... There is litterally nothing helpful in this stuff. So when you need the nutrients to produce stomach acids, etc., you must suck those out of your stores in order to break down and process your sugar-rich foods.

So if sugar is so bad for you how do you get that sweet craving satisfied? There are TONS of lovely, healthy options. Medjool dates are one of my favourites. Keep them in the fridge for an even bigger delight. They are like candy- chewy and sweet- and one date, with its 66 calories (for approx 24g) is full of natural sugars, but also brings fibre, iron, calcium, magnesium, potassium...

Honey is another option. Though it is similar in sugar content to refined sugar (in terms of grams) it also brings with it pollen, enzymes and micronutrients. I wouldn't advise drinking it by the boatload, but it appears to have a less severe effect on the body and on insulin levels than processed sugar.

Agave is a plant found in the desert, and the nectar is used as a sugar substitute, as is good old Canadian maple syrup. See, here's the thing: sometimes it doesn't even boil down to what you can read on a nutritional label. Sometimes, if you choose a more "natural" less processed option, Mother Nature might surprise you and tuck in a few extras. Check out this article for some information on the antioxidants found in maple syrup.

Coconut sap, or coconut sugar, is another low glycemic index sweetner. It's really mild, and actually looks like brown sugar (in the organic brand that I buy) and from the bits and pieces I can find on comparisons, it is the most nutritionally dense of all the sweeteners.  I use this in coffee, recipes, everything. It rocks.

So here are some options for when you get those sweet cravings. Try substituting a little of one of these in place of refined cane sugar. Remember that most of these are waaaayyy sweeter than cane sugar so you need a lot less. I typically half the sweeteners in my recipes and adjust as necessary.

Hope this gives you some ammo in the fight against nutritionless food. May you use this information to find treats that are both good for the palate and good for the soul.

G'night all!

Sweets for my sweet, sugar for my honey

Gluten-free dark chocolate cake (with gluten free, casein free icing)

For those of you longing for a moist, sweet and heavy dark chocolate cake, hold on to your hats.

For this cake, because there was just too much riding on it, I decided not to experiment and I went with a mix. I bought Bob's Red Mill Gluten-Free Chocolate Cake Mix a while ago, and had been "saving" it for a special occasion. Being Easter, I didn't want to miss out on the dessert fest, so I busted this bad boy out. Wow. It turned out GREAT. I made it according to the directions, including cutting out a circle of parchment paper for the bottom of the cake pans (which made it MUCH easier to release from the pans). It was light but dense and chocolatey at the same time.

Now...for the piece de résistance... the icing. I usually find icing just tastes like fat and sugar...because, well, that's what it is. So recently I had icing that was made using avocado instead. Now THAT is a dream come true!!! I am always looking for that which is both nutritious and delicious, and this is such a great way to add nutrition while still upping the delicious factor. After scanning various recipes, here's what I came up with for mine:

Divine dark chocolate avocado icing (gluten free, casein free)

2 ripe avocados
1/2c cocoa (organic if you've got it!)
1/2 c agave sweetener (you could totally adapt this and use honey, maple syrup or coconut sugar)
2 tsp lemon juice

Scoop out all the ingredients and mix with an electric mixer (or with some SERIOUS elbow grease). Then, scoop out bit by bit and using a spatula, you just press it over a wire mesh sieve and the last of the green bits in the icing are smushed away. :)

Note: This "icing" could totally be used as a quasi-chocolate fondue, or as a chocolate spread on bread (what a treat!!).

You'll also notice in this photo that I cut the top off of that tier of cake. I find it better for putting the cake together if I slice off any "risen" portion in the cake so I can lay the next tier flatly on top.

Once that's done- you ice the bottom tier, then put the top one on, then ice the top tier and the sides. I might also suggest that you could put a few other things between the layers if you're so inclined. Here are a few ideas:

• 
  
  chopped up, or mini chocolate chips
• 
  
  melted peanut butter drizzle
• 
  
  crushed candy canes
• 
  
  sliced strawberries
• 
  
  etc.

So, unfortunately I didn't get a final picture of how this looked once I'd drawn the bunny on it in white icing (hee) but here is the semi-final product:

YUM!!!!!

I'd also like to point out the carnage in my kitchen, when Miss Dropsie has finished a "masterpiece"... This is why Mr. Pick It Up has a hard time with me being in the kitchen..."inventing".

Let me know how yours turns out!

Gluten-free dark chocolate cake (with gluten free, casein free icing)

What to expect at the Gastroenterologist

As many of you know, after suspecting I had a gluten intolerance I stopped eating gluten-containing foods last spring. We're coming up on a year now since I had a slice of baguette, or a real beer. Sigh. I digress.  So I finally made an appointment and saw my family doctor in ...December...yeah, that's right. My family doctor was hesitant to do any testing on his own and instead referred me to a gastroenterologist. My appointment was finally made, and I would have to wait until March 24.

The magic day came (and believe me, this is apparently not a long waiting list in comparison to most- long live "free" healthcare) so I totally prepared myself. I jotted down a history, what I had done since childhood to reduce my stomach pain (a constant in my life) and described the feelings that had intensified in recent years, my severe iron deficiency, etc. He interrupted me and asked if I'd been tested for Celiac; I said "just hang on- I'm getting to that". So I described having seen the naturopath and thinking after my strict elimination diet (which, I've gotta tell you, I'm due for again) that I may also have a gluten intolerance. As soon as I told him I'd gone off gluten, he sighed. This was expected. Let me give you one piece of advice: no matter how much it hurts, have the blood test and biopsy before you stop eating gluten. So he told me there was not that much we could do, given that I'd stopped eating gluten, but I told him I thought I'd probably contaminated my food so many times, there should be some residual tTG, IgA antibodies left- hopefully they'll be high enough to indicate a problem. In addition, I asked him to perform the genetic test for Celiac- just so I could rule it out as a possibility. Not that I still couldn't have an intolerance, but at least I would know that there is likely something else causing me problems- like milk.

I also asked him if he could test me for food allergies to milk, corn, wheat...some of the things I think I've isolated as being reactive to. He said no. He said they don't do that....that maybe I could see an allergist, maybe I could get a skin prick test done...but it wouldn't help me figure out intolerances. I showed him the IgG antibody test I had done. He told me this was not of any value- that the presence of an IgG antibody, did not actually indicate a correlation to any food intolerances. I suspected he would say that. He said "people come in here all the time with stuff like that, and it's meaningless". Well no s*&t Sherlock- if you offer no alternative, when people think they're eating something that makes them sick, they'll look to other methods to discover if it really IS x, y or z that is making them react. What's a girl to do?

I suppose (as much as it pains me to admit it) the only true way to figure out food intolerances is slowly, steadily, one food at a time, in an elimination diet. I have pretty much eliminated corn from my diet but every now and again if I have nachos or just a handful of corn chips, I don't feel well the next day. Do I really need a blood test of some kind to tell me that I'm reacting to corn? Probably not. I went away and had three cheese omelettes in 24 hours. I felt like death for a week. I don't really know if it was the cheese, the eggs or both, but do I now know that I can't eat cheese omelettes? Clearly.

Anyways, I should get my results back soon, come to think of it. The next day though, I actually went and saw "the boy's" doctor to figure out if we need to do anything for him. His doctor asked me what my heritage is- I told him I was 1/2 Scandinavian. He smiled and said "and what do we know about Scandinavians"? Aside from us being tall, blonde and exquisite conversationalists? Dunno. He said 80% of Scandinavian adults are lactose intolerant. Which is kind of funny because apparently some of the countries in that region have the highest dairy use. Hmmm...  Anyways, he suggested that we do a generalized blood draw on the boy, as we had never done one, and he would check for some indicator of allergenic activity. If it was positive (or high) it would be worthwhile sending him to an allergist. But I was to wait until my own tests came back, because if I were positive for IgA or Celiac, I should actually do the IgA test as well on the boy. The boy was growing increasingly freaked out at the possibility of a blood draw. That won't be a fun day. But we will wait until I know first.

The plan for the boy involved the use of Lactaid pills for a week (but still no dairy) then the reintroduction of dairy with doses of Lactaid. He is hopeful this will stem the tide of stomach pain complaints from my poor little boy. I hope so too...  I also bought the adult version of the enzyme for myself, and have used it a few times when I've had something with dairy. Let's just say, so far I'm not too impressed.

Last night I ate a whack load of those mini eggs from Cadbury at a friend's place. I discovered (after shovelling them in my gob of course) that of course there is milk in them (I only eat dark chocolate which does not have dairy in it now and had forgotten) and that there is some element, though not printed on the package, that is apparently not safe for Celiacs. I don't know this to be 100% accurate, but I was experiencing some wicked gut cramps about an hour after leaving their house so it of course seemed a great time to do a wee Google search and check on the safety of the food I had ALREADY consumed en masse. D'oh.

Okay, that's enough for today! I hope everyone is enjoying a lovely long weekend. It's summer-like here and we're going on a bike ride today.

Keep reading those labels. :)

What to expect at the Gastroenterologist

The Health Check program, for the Heart and Stroke Foundation

*Warning- rant ahead!*

I continue to be amazed and awe-inspired by the ridiculousness involved when Joe Q. Public tries to make healthy food choices. Case in point: The Health Check program run by an offshoot of the Heart and Stoke Foundation.

Take, for example, this can of Homestyle Chicken Noodle soup by Campbell's (in French it's called "Poulet et nouilles grand-mère"...grandmother...how warm and fuzzy is that?):

Doesn't this just say "Sunday afternoons, after a long hard play outside in the snow, sitting at mom's table"? Makes you think back to sitting at the table next to your siblings, slurping those noodles up so fast that they hit you in the nose and splashed broth on your face? Then you pass the aisle, see the can and think "Hey, the Heart and Stoke foundation calls this a healthy choice- I can't wait to share this with my own kids". Sigh.

Let's check the ingredient list, shall we?

Chicken broth (water, chicken stock), egg noodles (enriched wheat flour, whole egg), seasoned chicken (contains soy), carrots, chicken fat, salt, yeast extract and hydrolyzed wheat gluten, celery, monosodium glutamate, potato starch, dehydrated onions, chicken flavour, sea salt, dehydrated garlic, beta carotene and parsley.

Um, is it just me, or are there like...1, 2, 3, 4, 5 mentions of chicken in this recipe. It's like they're trying to reconstruct what should have been a really simple ingredient: CHICKEN. It's like putting a leg, a wing a breast and some feet together with some duct tape, hoping to create a whole chicken. Then we see my favourite nutritionless noodles, made with enriched wheat flour. Remember that one? It's the one where they take the grain, strip out everything nutritious to make it light and fluffy, then put a tiny bit back in, just for good measure.

A little further down, we find "yeast extract and hydrolyzed wheat gluten". I couldn't find a lot specifically on those two in combination, but it is my belief that they combine to form MSG. Plus then there's good old fashioned MSG. Feel the goodness...There's also a big banner across the can that says this has 25% less sodium than its predecessor, yet HALF of this can still has 27% of your allowance for the day.

So, you see the Health Check symbol, which the commercials tell us to look for ("It's like shopping with the Heart and Stroke foundation's dieticians!"), in order to find good-for-us food. Awesome. So you find it on this soup (I use that term loosely) and on the side of the label, you find the following explanation. "This soup is low in fat. Choosing foods prepared with little or no fat is part of healthy eating. Campbell company of Canada financially supports the Health Check education program. This is not an endorsement. See www.healthcheck.org"

Could this possibly be a more blatant example of a simple financial arrangement between organizations? This is big business, baby, nothing more, nothing less, and really is in no way surprising when your food comes from a factory and not a farm.

I just had a peek through the criteria for being able to list your product with the Health Check symbol. There is no mention whatsoever of preservatives (like sodium benzoate), chemicals (like MSG, or things that are known to combine and form MSG), simple v. complex carbohydrates and almost no mention of sugar levels.  Forget actually scoring something like the presence of actual VITAMINS or MINERALS.. Things like yogurt and yogurt drinks which are notorious for being LOADED with sugar, have no sugar-based criteria to adhere to. Who do you think writes these guidelines? I'm quite certain they are written in conjunction with, and to please, the companies like Campbell's, Dempster's, Maple Leaf, etc. who financially support the organization.

This arms-length faction of the Heart and Stroke foundation is actually operated as a not-for-profit organization, which to the average person, looks like a government-run program to help people make healthy choices. In a nation with "free" healthcare, it would seem beneficial to help people eat well, no? Well what this is, is a program whereby companies can purchase the right (so long as they meet these "criteria") to use the Health Check logo, and this results in the Heart and Stroke charity being front of mind when Canadians go to spend those precious dollars and make their charitable contributions. "Oh yes, the Heart and Stroke foundation, they're those nice people who help me buy my daily serving of monosodium glutamate. Such nice folks. I'll donate to them."

You know, this has been bugging me for a while. So I thought I would just get on here and rant. But a quick Google search and I discovered a "CBC Marketplace" episode that ran in January of 2008 where they questioned whether or not this program really does what it claims to do. They studied the various products "certified" by the Health Check and of course, the majority fell far short of actually being healthy choices—you know, the ones with vitamins, minerals, whole grains...that old shpeel again. The episode is maybe 25 minutes or so, but let's just say it's got me SO ANGRY I'm not sure I'm even going to sleep tonight. I've gone from thinking that this program is a complete joke, to seeing how destructive it can truly be for folks who are more or less uneducated about nutrition and rely on stuff like that check mark to guide them in the right direction.

One particular expert, a doctor specializing in obesity by the name of Yoni Freedhoff, has been talking about this for years. http://www.bmimedical.ca/ Check out his Web site, and on the bottom left, you can listen to a call-in show where he talks about how on one hand, the Heart and Stroke foundation has come out to say that Ontario children will live shorter lives than their parents because of metabolic syndrome diseases like high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes, etc. However, on the other hand, their own organization is encouraging folks to eat things like this that are void of nutrition and seek to satisfy big food business- not the health of our nation.

I'm going to go cool off. For now I'll just say keep your eyes open. Keep reading those labels.

Oh, and check your cupboards... We do not have much here in the way of processed food, so this was the only thing I found. What ludicrous things did you discover in looking at your "Health Check" food?

The Health Check program, for the Heart and Stroke Foundation