2013-05-24T03:48:19-04:00 Dara Moskowitz Grumdahl http://www.livebetteramerica.aol.com/author/index.php?author=dara-moskowitz-grumdahl Copyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for Dara Moskowitz Grumdahl Good old fashioned elbow grease. tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.3285469 2013-05-16T10:10:51-04:00 2013-05-21T16:31:24-04:00

Dara Moskowitz Grumdahl http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dara-moskowitz-grumdahl/
Until I read this absolutely fascinating new book called "Paleofantasy: What Evolution Really Tells Us about Sex, Diet, and How We Live" by evolutionary biologist Marlene Zuk. The book, at a glance (thank heavens), addresses what people should or should not eat. But it is exceptionally enlightening when it comes to the rosy notions so many of us carry about how things were 10,000 or 100,000 years ago, when humans were hunting, or gathering, or living in caves or desert tents or whatever it was we were doing back then.

For instance, are we "meant" to drink milk? No other mammal, after all, drinks milk after infancy, and certainly not another species' milk. Are we "meant" to eat cake? Bonobos and chimpanzees don't eat cake, and they're our nearest living relatives. But we are not bonobos nor, for that matter, any other mammal, and there are actually many astonishing adaptations in human evolution that have allowed humans to digest milk, and starch, in ways no other species can. Fascinating.

The main thing I took away from the book was that there was no "caveman diet" any more than there was one caveman. It's something we food writers talk about: There's no "Chinese food" any more than there's a Chinese phone number. It's a big country, with people eating very specific regional diets all over. So it was with caves, but a million times more so. The people of Spain ate wildly differently than the people of Peru, who ate differently from the people of sub-Saharan Africa. That said, there's no evidence, evolutionary or otherwise, that people can thrive on any sort of single-item diet, whether it's bamboo or frozen pizza.

So, should you eat cheeseburgers? The herding Maasai people of Africa seem to do quite nicely on a diet of milk and meat, and so did those inland people of Northern Europe who had no other way of getting food in the winter.

That said, reading "Paleofantasy" left me remembering again that people are, above all, adaptable omnivores. So why not vary the cheeseburgers of summer with goat burgers, mushroom burgers, lamb burgers, falafel burgers, tuna burgers, bean burgers and everything else our gigantic human brains allow us to dream up? After all, it's a lot more interesting to explore the world than to argue about it.

What do you think is fantasy versus fact about the Paleo diet? Of the burger alternatives above, which sound worth the flame?]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog// 2013-03-08T16:03:57-05:00 2013-03-18T13:06:59-04:00

Dara Moskowitz Grumdahl http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dara-moskowitz-grumdahl/
Is there really enough news about wine and health to justify a whole conference? Boy howdy, yes! Avid newshounds will have noticed that studies about red wine and its various health benefits come out nearly every day, the purported advantages ranging from red wine lowering the risk of depression and dementia, to cardiovascular benefits the likes of boosting good cholesterol and lowering bad.

Overall, the health message seems pretty clear: Have a glass of red wine now and then, why don'cha! Not dozens of glasses at a sitting, of course. Not while you're driving. Not to replace exercise. But a glass of wine with dinner may just be the thing for a general tilt toward better living.

But why? Researchers are hard at work trying to figure that out; hence, the third international convention on resveratrol. Science may, in our lifetimes, untangle why red wine is so good for you. Or it may not, because red wine is pretty complicated stuff.

Historically, red wine is made by growing small, very thick-skinned grapes, pressing them, letting the grape juice and grape skins stew around together for a while, and then letting that thick blend of stuff be acted on by wild yeast, which produces other natural compounds. The resulting liquid then ages in contact with material from another plant, namely oak in the form of an oak barrel. What comes out at the end of a natural winemaking process is a heady combination of super-concentrated plant material: grape material plus yeast material plus oak material.

Much of what ends up in a bottle of wine happens to be the very stuff that plants use to defend themselves from disease. To a grape vine, resveratrol is a way to defend itself against pathogens or attackers. Oak is prized in winemaking because of a compound called tannin, which contributes to wine's ability to age; you know it as that prickly feeling a very dry red wine can leave on your tongue. To the oak tree, however, tannin is something it uses to defend itself against bugs and disease.

Europeans have been making wine for thousands of years but, until recently, most people seem to have assumed wine was made for its obvious tipsy pleasures. I've got a hunch that what we're really drinking when we pour a glass of Cabernet Sauvignon is an ancient European folk medicine, recently elevated to a gourmet commodity. Will science come to agree with me? Maybe I'll book a trip to Hawaii in 2014 to find out.

Until then, I'd encourage you to think about red wine like I do: a whole lot of plants and mystery in a glass, adding up to something wonderful.

To what degree do the possible health benefits play into your decision to have a glass of red wine?

]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog// 2013-02-06T14:56:18-05:00 2013-02-06T17:10:45-05:00

Dara Moskowitz Grumdahl http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dara-moskowitz-grumdahl/
Yes, it was a "health-food" place of the 1970s get-your-wheat-germ-here variety. There was wheat germ on the salads, plus raisins, sunflower seeds and unseasoned shredded cabbage, too, the latter for added crunch. Oh, and there was a lot of crunch -- too much crunch, actually. Beneath the upper layer of crunch, there were squares of iceberg lettuce chopped by one of those industrial kitchen appliances that takes a whole head and guillotines it into squares. Oh, oh, oh, the crunch! Halfway through the bowl you'd set down your fork and start looking around for a talented masseuse to come rub your jaw.

But that wasn't the worst of it!

Next came the tofu stroganoff. A plump pound of tofu, warmed some way or other, covered by an soy-cream sauce loaded with mushrooms: a blob, sauced. Three bites in, you switched to merely eating the mushrooms, and whatever thoughts you had at the outset about eating healthy were replaced by a stark craving for a cheeseburger. But that wasn't the worst of it!

The worst of it, the absolute worst, was that it made such a travesty of healthy eating. A well-meaning travesty, but a travesty nonetheless. Who would ever leave there excited about legitimate healthy eating? Who would feel enthusiastic about little jewels of cherry tomatoes, plump leaves of fresh spinach softened in a pan with a bit of olive oil, or slightly charred slices of squash, smelling of fall bounty? No one.

The world is overflowing with great, healthy food, and unappetizing hippie gruel just makes convincing people to try it unnecessarily difficult. My advice? The next time you find yourself faced with something that's supposed to be healthy but that makes you sad, listen to that instinct and search out something that's really delicious - and leave the hippie gruel in the past.

What hippie gruel has crossed your plate and palate? What healthy food makes you excited about eating?]]>