CK Links--Friday July 18, 2014

Links from around the internet. As always, I welcome your thoughts.

PS: Follow me on Twitter!

Is our sugar paranoia getting out of control? (The Telegraph, via Addicted to Canning)

The only guarantee about diet trends is that they're eventually debunked. (LA Times)

Marion Nestle is surprisingly lukewarm on the nutritional value of organics. (Food Politics)

The latest issue of The Scientist magazine discusses GMO and biotech foods. (The Scientist)

Why are beef and pork prices so high? (Jayson Lusk)

Chef Jacques Pepin explains how "reality" cooking shows get it all wrong. (Daily Meal, via Alosha's Kitchen)

"Many leap to the conclusion that the Dalai Lama is hypocritical in his actions of eating meat, but looking a bit deeper you will find that is not the case." (Samvid Beauty via Rachelle Fordyce)

Still more doctors are getting off the statin bandwagon. (Dr. John M.)

On breakthrough workouts. (Mark’s Daily Apple)

There's a good case against regularly monitoring your portfolio's performance. (Monevator)

Bump up the taste with Grilled Lemon Terragon Tuna. (Food and Fire)

Pollo Pibil. (Mexico in My Kitchen)

Shrimp with Mint Pesto. (Meta Mint)

Got an interesting article or recipe to share? Want some extra traffic at your blog? Send me an email!

How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.


Sally said...

I liked the articles this week, especially the one about sugar and the one about the various diets.

Several years ago I read a lot about various traditional diets around the world. All the groups of people following them enjoyed good health and didn't suffer from the chronic diseases that we do.

I realized that they were eating all the foods we're told not to eat - meat, grains (some refined), potatoes, sugar, eggs, dairy and fats (including lard as a primary cooking fat). The quantities varied from place to place depending on what was abundant locally.

While exactly what the various groups of people ate was very different, they did have some things in common.

Most of the food they ate was locally grown and organic. The foods that were imported tended to be rice, sugar, coffee, tea and spices. "Organic" foods weren't a big deal, but the way their food had always been grown.

They ate less than we do and, in some cases, less often. Snacking isn't common everywhere.

The most obvious difference was the absence or minimal use of highly processed foods and "junk food." In most cases it didn't mean that sweets and treats were absent from their diets, but that they were made with care from the same high quality ingredients as the rest of their diets.

Sally said...

Michael Pollan wrote that when you eliminate one thing from your diet, you automatically increase another thing. If you make a dietary change it's difficult to say if health benefits come from what was eliminated or what was added. Additionally when people follow one of these diet trends, they also often give up processed foods.of all kinds, adding another variable to the equation.

Daniel said...

Great thoughts Sally, thank you... and thank you for the feedback!