# CDC study finds kale 15th on the list of most nutrient-dense foods



## Cooking Goddess (Jun 21, 2019)

I've always been confused by the love kale has been given recently. If you look up the nutritional benefits of greens, each variety has something valuable that they can bring to the table. The CDC recently tested 47 vegetables and fruits to find out where they rank when tested for at least 17 different nutrients. #1? Watercress.  The article below has a nice chart (color classified, too) that is easy to read, but if you want to see the CDC report it has a link embedded in the article.

*The Top 41 Powerhouse Fruits and Vegetables by Nutrient Density*


----------



## Aunt Bea (Jun 21, 2019)

Interesting!

It looks like I need to toss the broccoli and replace it with spinach.

Also surprised to see red peppers so high on the list.

Usually, the healthiest fruits and vegetables for me are the ones that are on sale each week!


----------



## skilletlicker (Jun 21, 2019)

It is interesting but I don't think it will change anything for me.  At first, I thought about adding chard to the staples list but it is $2.99/lb and collard greens are 88¢/bunch, so probably not. Like Aunt Bea, I have to take price into account. I'm surprised iceberg lettuce made the list at all though.

Something to keep in mind, this list ranks nutrients per 100 calories which is fine as long as you realize that it compares less than 1 cup of sweet potato to 27 cups, near two gallons, of watercress. My corner Kroger doesn't sell it but if it did, imagine it would be in a little bunch, not a wheelbarrow load.


----------



## dragnlaw (Jun 21, 2019)

Aunt Bea said:


> Interesting!
> 
> It looks like I need to toss the broccoli and replace it with spinach.
> I like'em both.
> ...


*
Absolutely!*


----------



## pepperhead212 (Jun 21, 2019)

skilletlicker said:


> It is interesting but I don't think it will change anything for me.  At first, I thought about adding chard to the staples list but it is $2.99/lb and collard greens are 88¢/bunch, so probably not. Like Aunt Bea, I have to take price into account. I'm surprised iceberg lettuce made the list at all though.
> 
> Something to keep in mind, this list ranks nutrients per 100 calories which is fine as long as you realize that it compares less than 1 cup of sweet potato to 27 cups, near two gallons, of watercress. My corner Kroger doesn't sell it but if it did, imagine it would be in a little bunch, not a wheelbarrow load.


I remember reading this back when it was first published, and I was surprised at some of the veggies that were way up on the list, or, as you noted, that iceberg lettuce made the list at all, and that leaf and romaine lettuces were way up near the top!  But then I saw that this list wasn't based on average serving sizes, but on the amount in 100 calories!  Charts with nutrients in average serving sizes are more useful, IMO, even though I eat larger serving sizes with all those greens.


----------



## blissful (Jun 21, 2019)

We have been trying to get more greens in our food lately.


As a practical matter, of the foods we usually eat, I did a comparison of 1 cup of 'greens' (all of which are considered greens though not actually green). (for instance red cabbage is considered a green) I used the free app chronometer to get calorie and nutrition data.



For comparison:
1 cup of cooked:
cauliflower calories 29
cabbage 34 calories
kale 36 calories
beet greens 39 calories

asparagus 39 calories
broccoli 54 calories


Now calories aren't that important compared to the nutrition these all bring to the table. And if I ate 6 cups of these greens I'd only get 233 calories, so you can see, they won't add much to your diet. In 6 cups of greens you almost meet the minimum recommended amount of fiber of 25 g (for women.)



In fact, I tried to eat lots of greens, and I found that they filled me up and crowded out a lot of other less nutrient rich foods, and I was at a big calorie deficit. Then, my skin turned green.  Yeah, kidding. My limit right now is 3 cups of greens a day, I can't seem to find a way to eat more.



I just cooked up 2 bunches of kale, 99 cents a bunch, full 4 qt kettle, and it melts down to 3 cups at best.
Nutritionally, calorie wise, I can eat these to my hearts content.


----------



## taxlady (Jun 21, 2019)

I just spent some time having a really good look at that study mentioned in the linked page. There's a link to the study there: https://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2014/13_0390.htm

These are not necessarily the top foods for nutrient density. *They are the top 41 foods out of 47 fruits and vegetables tested.* The density is nutrients per 100 kcal. Nutrient density could be measured in nutrients per 100 grams. It could be measured in nutrients per dollar.

The purpose of this study was to come up with a classification scheme for "powerhouse fruits and vegetables" based on nutrient and phytochemical constituents.

"This article describes a classification scheme defining PFV on the basis of 17 nutrients of public health importance per the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and Institute of Medicine (ie, potassium, fiber, protein, calcium, iron, thiamin, riboflavin, niacin, folate, zinc, and vitamins A, B6, B12, C, D, E, and K)"

There are loads of foods and nutrients that were not in this study.


----------



## Linda0818 (Jul 17, 2019)

Where are my onions?!?!?! 

PS - I hate kale.


----------



## Linda0818 (Jul 17, 2019)

taxlady said:


> I just spent some time having a really good look at that study mentioned in the linked page. There's a link to the study there: https://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2014/13_0390.htm
> 
> These are not necessarily the top foods for nutrient density. *They are the top 41 foods out of 47 fruits and vegetables tested.* The density is nutrients per 100 kcal. Nutrient density could be measured in nutrients per 100 grams. It could be measured in nutrients per dollar.
> 
> ...



Was surprised to not see avocado.


----------



## caseydog (Jul 17, 2019)

pepperhead212 said:


> I remember reading this back when it was first published, and I was surprised at some of the veggies that were way up on the list, or, as you noted, that iceberg lettuce made the list at all, and that leaf and romaine lettuces were way up near the top!  *But then I saw that this list wasn't based on average serving sizes, but on the amount in 100 calories! * Charts with nutrients in average serving sizes are more useful, IMO, even though I eat larger serving sizes with all those greens.



It seems like the ratings at 100 calories should scale by portion size. You can see from the ratings that Kale is 15th, relevant to Watercress at the top of the list. Cut the standard to 50 calories, and these foods should come out the same, relevant to each other. 

CD


----------



## caseydog (Jul 17, 2019)

Along the same lines as the OP, here is a list of meats by nutritional value. 

https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/every-popular-kind-of-meat-ranked-by-how-healthy-they-are

So, eat some fish with a side of watercress. 

CD


----------



## dragnlaw (Jul 17, 2019)

Linda0818 said:


> Where are my onions?!?!?!
> 
> PS - I hate kale.



+ 1  

I like spinach (#1) Romaine (#2) everything else in the bitter family rates an emphatic   .

Although my last head of romaine was really on the bitter side


----------



## Linda0818 (Jul 17, 2019)

dragnlaw said:


> + 1
> 
> I like spinach (#1) Romaine (#2) everything else in the bitter family rates an emphatic   .
> 
> Although my last head of romaine was really on the bitter side



I love spinach and romaine. Can't say I've ever had bitter romaine, but I suppose that could happen once in a while. I've heard some lettuces can become bitter when they're exposed to heat for too long. How long is too long, I don't know.


----------



## GotGarlic (Jul 17, 2019)

caseydog said:


> It seems like the ratings at 100 calories should scale by portion size. You can see from the ratings that Kale is 15th, relevant to Watercress at the top of the list. Cut the standard to 50 calories, and these foods should come out the same, relevant to each other.
> 
> CD


All lettuces have about the same number of calories per ounce, and lettuces are mostly water. 100 calories of lettuce is almost seven cups while 100 calories of strawberries is two cups. No one eats that much lettuce at a single sitting, so serving size would give a better comparison.

The other problem with this study is that all the items were tested raw, but in many cases, the bioavailability of nutrients is greatly improved by cooking. For example, cooking tomatoes with garlic and olive oil increases the lycopene available for absorption and cooking spinach changes the iron to a form that's more easily absorbed.

I don't think the study is all that useful.


----------



## Linda0818 (Jul 17, 2019)

GotGarlic said:


> All lettuces have about the same number of calories per ounce, and lettuces are mostly water. 100 calories of lettuce is almost seven cups while 100 calories of strawberries is two cups. No one eats that much lettuce at a single sitting, so serving size would give a better comparison.
> 
> The other problem with this study is that all the items were tested raw, but in many cases, the bioavailability of nutrients is greatly improved by cooking. For example, cooking tomatoes with garlic and olive oil increases the lycopene available for absorption and cooking spinach changes the iron to a form that's more easily absorbed.
> 
> I don't think the study is all that useful.



Excellent points.


----------



## caseydog (Jul 17, 2019)

GotGarlic said:


> All lettuces have about the same number of calories per ounce, and lettuces are mostly water. 100 calories of lettuce is almost seven cups while 100 calories of strawberries is two cups. No one eats that much lettuce at a single sitting, so serving size would give a better comparison.
> 
> The other problem with this study is that all the items were tested raw, but in many cases, the bioavailability of nutrients is greatly improved by cooking. For example, cooking tomatoes with garlic and olive oil increases the lycopene available for absorption and cooking spinach changes the iron to a form that's more easily absorbed.
> 
> I don't think the study is all that useful.



Good points, but since I only eat what I like eating, it is all irrelevant. I try to eat a balanced diet, but if something doesn't taste good, to me, I don't eat it. 

CD


----------



## GotGarlic (Jul 17, 2019)

Linda0818 said:


> I love spinach and romaine. Can't say I've ever had bitter romaine, but I suppose that could happen once in a while. I've heard some lettuces can become bitter when they're exposed to heat for too long. How long is too long, I don't know.


All the lettuces I've grown become bitter when they start to flower. It doesn't happen once they're picked, so if you buy them, you don't have to worry about it.


----------



## GotGarlic (Jul 17, 2019)

caseydog said:


> Good points, but since I only eat what I like eating, it is all irrelevant. I try to eat a balanced diet, but if something doesn't taste good, to me, I don't eat it.
> 
> CD


Everyone does that (except I suppose some people who for some reason think they have to force themselves to eat kale!). It's just a discussion about the study. No one is telling you what you should eat.


----------



## GotGarlic (Jul 17, 2019)

blissful said:


> We have been trying to get more greens in our food lately.
> 
> As a practical matter, of the foods we usually eat, I did a comparison of 1 cup of 'greens' (all of which are considered greens though not actually green). (for instance red cabbage is considered a green) I used the free app chronometer to get calorie and nutrition data.
> 
> ...



I don't know of anyone who considers brassicas and stems, like asparagus, to be greens. Greens by definition are leaves.


----------



## caseydog (Jul 17, 2019)

GotGarlic said:


> Everyone does that (except I suppose some people who for some reason think they have to force themselves to eat kale!). It's just a discussion about the study. *No one is telling you what you should eat.*



Chill out, GG. I was just making a comment, not issuing a challenge. Your first sentence echoed what I posted -- some people eat things they don't like because they feel like they "should." This study is somewhat helpful, but I wouldn't eat something I don't like, just to be "healthy." 

Relevant to this study, I think it is pretty well known that we should eat more vegetables and fruits than meats. That is a lot easier if you like the vegetables you put on your plate. The vegetable you eat is better for you than the one you don't eat. 

CD


----------



## Linda0818 (Jul 17, 2019)

GotGarlic said:


> All the lettuces I've grown become bitter when they start to flower. It doesn't happen once they're picked, so if you buy them, you don't have to worry about it.



I've never grown lettuce, but if I ever do, I'll keep that in mind. 

While I like romaine lettuce, I'm still an iceberg junkie. I know, I know, everybody says "Why do eat that? There's no nutritional value."

No, not a lot, but it's not completely void. And anyway, I LOVE iceberg lettuce. The smell, the taste, etc.


----------



## caseydog (Jul 17, 2019)

Linda0818 said:


> I've never grown lettuce, but if I ever do, I'll keep that in mind.
> 
> While I like romaine lettuce, I'm still an iceberg junkie. I know, I know, everybody says "Why do eat that? There's no nutritional value."
> 
> No, not a lot, but it's not completely void. And anyway, I LOVE iceberg lettuce. The smell, the taste, etc.



I love both romaine and iceberg. Iceberg is very refreshing. It is a good hot summer day lettuce. I really like to toss romaine on a hot grill for a very fast char. It is still crunchy, but that char gives it a new depth of flavor. 

CD


----------



## Linda0818 (Jul 17, 2019)

caseydog said:


> I love both romaine and iceberg. Iceberg is very refreshing. It is a good hot summer day lettuce. I really like to toss romaine on a hot grill for a very fast char. It is still crunchy, but that char gives it a new depth of flavor.
> 
> CD



It's definitely refreshing.

Your comment about grilling romaine reminds me of a Kitchen Nightmares episode where Gordon Ramsay sees "Grilled Caesar Salad" on the menu and said "You actually grill romaine lettuce?" He'd never heard of that before 

I love grilled romaine.


----------



## caseydog (Jul 17, 2019)

Linda0818 said:


> It's definitely refreshing.
> 
> Your comment about grilling romaine reminds me of a Kitchen Nightmares episode where Gordon Ramsay sees "Grilled Caesar Salad" on the menu and said "You actually grill romaine lettuce?" He'd never heard of that before
> 
> I love grilled romaine.



Gordon Ramsey needs to tend to his own restaurants, instead of his gigantic ego. I ate at one of his restaurants, and the food sucked. 

CD


----------



## Cooking Goddess (Jul 17, 2019)

Iceberg fan here, too. It's a nice summer green.



GotGarlic said:


> ...100 calories of lettuce is almost seven cups...No one eats that much lettuce at a single sitting, so serving size would give a better comparison...


Have you not noticed how large some of our salads are?  OK, maybe not SEVEN cups, but there are times I think that there are probably three.



GotGarlic said:


> ...I don't think the study is all that useful.


I didn't think it was really useful, but I thought it was funny that the revered kale checked in so low. In our house, the expression "kale no" is used like swear words.


----------



## GotGarlic (Jul 17, 2019)

Cooking Goddess said:


> Have you not noticed how large some of our salads are?  OK, maybe not SEVEN cups, but there are times I think that there are probably three.



Oh yeah! [emoji16] Y'all eat well, for sure! 



Cooking Goddess said:


> I didn't think it was really useful, but I thought it was funny that the revered kale checked in so low. In our house, the expression "kale no" is used like swear words. [emoji38]



It makes for an interesting discussion. I'm not a fan of kale, either, and I don't get the fascination people have with it. Apparently you have to "massage" it to make it palatable raw and sorry but I ain't massaging my food 

No bitter greens in my house.


----------



## caseydog (Jul 17, 2019)

Cooking Goddess said:


> Have you not noticed how large some of our salads are?  OK, maybe not SEVEN cups, but there are times I think that there are probably three.



I travel a lot, and restaurants that put calorie counts on their menus show most salads to be well over 1,000 calories. 1,300 to 1,500 calories is not unusual. 

CD


----------



## Linda0818 (Jul 17, 2019)

caseydog said:


> Gordon Ramsey needs to tend to his own restaurants, instead of his gigantic ego. I ate at one of his restaurants, and the food sucked.
> 
> CD



Awww, haha, that's a bummer. I love Gordon. Been a big fan of his for a good while, but I don't like his cooking shows. I just like Kitchen Nightmares and Hotel Hell.


----------



## GotGarlic (Jul 17, 2019)

caseydog said:


> I travel a lot, and restaurants that put calorie counts on their menus show most salads to be well over 1,000 calories. 1,300 to 1,500 calories is not unusual.
> 
> CD


That's because of fatty toppings and usually creamy dressings - fats have almost twice the calories of protein and carbs. Homemade salads may or may not include that stuff.


----------



## caseydog (Jul 17, 2019)

GotGarlic said:


> That's because of fatty toppings and usually creamy dressings - fats have almost twice the calories of protein and carbs. Homemade salads may or may not include that stuff.



I'm guessing it is not just fats, but also sugars. Restaurants know the almost addictive power of sugars, and use them. Fats, salt and sugars are staples of the restaurant industry. 

CD


----------



## GotGarlic (Jul 17, 2019)

caseydog said:


> I'm guessing it is not just fats, but also sugars. Restaurants know the almost addictive power of sugars, and use them. Fats, salt and sugars are staples of the restaurant industry.
> 
> CD


Sugars are carbs and salt has no calories. Yes, they're part of the equation, but not the primary source of calories, which is what you were talking about.


----------



## Cooking Goddess (Jul 17, 2019)

caseydog said:


> I travel a lot, and restaurants that put calorie counts on their menus show most salads to be well over 1,000 calories. 1,300 to 1,500 calories is not unusual.
> 
> CD


And I make my salad at home. Trust me, our salads don't approach 1000 calories. I'd have to add tons of cheese, bacon, and dressing, but I don't like it when my lettuce can do the backstroke.


----------



## Linda0818 (Jul 17, 2019)

Cooking Goddess said:


> And I make my salad at home. Trust me, our salads don't approach 1000 calories. I'd have to add tons of cheese, bacon, and dressing, but I don't like it when my lettuce can do the backstroke.



I do the same. In fact I just put together a salad to take for lunch tomorrow. Chopped iceberg, thin-sliced red onion, salad shrimp, a sliced hard-boiled egg and it will also have diced fresh tomato from the local farm market and diced avocado. But not until I go to actually eat it. I don't like cold tomatoes and I can't slice the avocado now because it will be brown by tomorrow. So I take the tomato and the avocado with me to work and add it when I'm ready to eat.

I don't like my salads swimming in dressing either. I like just enough to taste. Sometimes I like a small amount of bacon, but I never add cheese to my salads. All it does it add more fat and calories and I never miss it, so I don't use it.


----------



## Linda0818 (Jul 17, 2019)

Oh yeah, and peas. I love peas on salad. Must go thaw some and throw them on there. I almost forgot!


----------



## caseydog (Jul 17, 2019)

GotGarlic said:


> Sugars are carbs and salt has no calories. Yes, they're part of the equation, but not the primary source of calories, which is what you were talking about.



The calories in sugars (simple carbs) are stored as fat, instead of being used for nutrition like complex carbohydrates, like you find in vegetables and whole grains.

As for salt, forget the calories, excessive amounts of salt is bad for you. Salt also makes you want to eat more. That effects your calorie intake. 

CD


----------



## GotGarlic (Jul 17, 2019)

Linda0818 said:


> Sometimes I like a small amount of bacon, but I never add cheese to my salads. All it does it add more fat and calories and I never miss it, so I don't use it.



Don't forget that cheese contains a lot of protein and calcium in an easily absorbable form. It's not just fat and a couple tablespoons is not a ton of calories.


----------



## caseydog (Jul 17, 2019)

Cooking Goddess said:


> And I make my salad at home. Trust me, our salads don't approach 1000 calories. I'd have to add tons of cheese, bacon, and dressing, but I don't like it when my lettuce can do the backstroke.



When I make a salad at home, I am happy with a dressing of EVOO, vinegar, and some black pepper. 

CD


----------



## Linda0818 (Jul 17, 2019)

GotGarlic said:


> Don't forget that cheese contains a lot of protein and calcium in an easily absorbable form. It's not just fat and a couple tablespoons is not a ton of calories.



I know 

But truth be told, I'm not a huge fan of cheese. So I don't find it necessary to add it to... well, pretty much anything. I like Swiss cheese in pita sandwiches and that sort of thing, but even when I order tacos from a restaurant, I tell them "no cheese." Pizza included, I don't add a lot of cheese. 

So yeah


----------



## GotGarlic (Jul 17, 2019)

Linda0818 said:


> I know [emoji2]
> 
> But truth be told, I'm not a huge fan of cheese. So I don't find it necessary to add it to... well, pretty much anything. I like Swiss cheese in pita sandwiches and that sort of thing, but even when I order tacos from a restaurant, I tell them "no cheese." Pizza included, I don't add a lot of cheese.
> 
> So yeah


Well, that's a different story [emoji38]


----------



## Linda0818 (Jul 17, 2019)

GotGarlic said:


> Well, that's a different story [emoji38]



Right? 

People look at me like I've got two heads when I tell them I'm not fond of cheese and that I hate pepperoni.


----------



## taxlady (Jul 17, 2019)

This study wasn't to figure out what fruits and veg are best for you. That's why it isn't useful to consumers, as is. It's for nutrition scientists. They were working out a classification scheme for foods.

As I wrote before:



> The purpose of this study was to come up with a classification scheme for "powerhouse fruits and vegetables" based on nutrient and phytochemical constituents.
> 
> "This article describes a classification scheme defining PFV on the basis of 17 nutrients of public health importance per the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and Institute of Medicine (ie, potassium, fiber, protein, calcium, iron, thiamin, riboflavin, niacin, folate, zinc, and vitamins A, B6, B12, C, D, E, and K)"


----------



## Katie H (Jul 17, 2019)

My normal belief is that the more vibrant and darker the fruit/vegetable, the better they are for our bodies.


I'm on it.


We've recently been feasting on dark cherries and gobble them up like candy.


----------



## taxlady (Jul 17, 2019)

Katie H said:


> *My normal belief is that the more vibrant and darker the fruit/vegetable, the better they are for our bodies.*
> 
> 
> I'm on it.
> ...



I tend to think the same.


----------



## GotGarlic (Jul 17, 2019)

Linda0818 said:


> Right? [emoji38]
> 
> People look at me like I've got two heads when I tell them I'm not fond of cheese and that I hate pepperoni.


You hate pepperoni?!  And you're not fond of cheese. I'm not sure we can be friends.


----------



## Linda0818 (Jul 17, 2019)

Katie H said:


> My normal belief is that the more vibrant and darker the fruit/vegetable, the better they are for our bodies.
> 
> 
> I'm on it.
> ...



Why does this remind me of The Witches of Eastwick? 

But yeah, I love those things. I bought a bag of Rainier cherries last week and took them into work and we sat there munching on them all day. But the dark ones, I'm assuming, are probably more nutrient-packed. I'd have to look that up.

Another fruit I can pop like candy is blackberries. I enjoy blueberries as well, but blackberries are a favorite of mine. In fact, I'm enjoying a glass of blackberry wine right now.


----------



## Katie H (Jul 17, 2019)

GotGarlic said:


> You hate pepperoni?!  And you're not fond of cheese. I'm not sure we can be friends.






What....NO pizza?  That's just not right!


----------



## taxlady (Jul 17, 2019)

GotGarlic said:


> You hate pepperoni?!  And you're not fond of cheese. I'm not sure we can be friends.



I used to hate pepperoni. Then I tried some that was better quality - pretty good stuff. I guess a lot of pizza places use cheap pepperoni.


----------



## Linda0818 (Jul 17, 2019)

GotGarlic said:


> You hate pepperoni?!  And you're not fond of cheese. I'm not sure we can be friends.



I'm so sorry!


----------



## Linda0818 (Jul 17, 2019)

taxlady said:


> I used to hate pepperoni. Then I tried some that was better quality - pretty good stuff. I guess a lot of pizza places use cheap pepperoni.



Blech. All pepperoni is gross to me. Can't stand the flavor.


----------



## Linda0818 (Jul 17, 2019)

Katie H said:


> What....NO pizza?  That's just not right!



No, I like pizza. I just like veggie pizzas. Rarely do I ever get meat on a pizza, unless it's ham on a Hawaiian. 

Speaking of pizza and vegetables and all that, I've discovered cauliflower pizza crusts. I buy the plain crusts and make my own pizza and they're so amazing.


----------



## blissful (Jul 17, 2019)

If you are interested in vitamins, minerals, actual types of proteins, types of fats, carbs, sugars, fiber, in your food, the chronometer is a free app and will estimate those for each food for you.
It won't measure the antioxidants or flavinols or any number of the other good things food has. It's a shame that it doesn't. Considering there are thousands of those types of things in food, it's not really practical.


If you are interested in boosting your antioxidants, you already know to eat all the colors of the rainbow in your vegetables and fruit. Spices and teas are full of them too. At the top of the list is dried ground gooseberries, also called amla, for the most antioxidants anywhere. 



https://cronometer.com/


----------



## Cooking Goddess (Jul 18, 2019)

Katie H said: "My normal belief is that the more vibrant and darker the fruit/vegetable, the better they are for our bodies."


Us, too. And so we ate the rainbow tonight.


----------



## Linda0818 (Jul 18, 2019)

blissful said:


> If you are interested in vitamins, minerals, actual types of proteins, types of fats, carbs, sugars, fiber, in your food, the chronometer is a free app and will estimate those for each food for you.
> It won't measure the antioxidants or flavinols or any number of the other good things food has. It's a shame that it doesn't. Considering there are thousands of those types of things in food, it's not really practical.
> 
> 
> ...



Yes, very interested in this. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## Linda0818 (Jul 18, 2019)

Cooking Goddess said:


> Katie H said: "My normal belief is that the more vibrant and darker the fruit/vegetable, the better they are for our bodies."
> 
> 
> Us, too. And so we ate the rainbow tonight.
> View attachment 35657



Very beautiful. I love eating like that. It makes you feel good, from the inside out. I'm looking forward to my salad today for lunch.

Seafood also makes me feel good eating it. Think I'll have some salmon over the weekend.


----------



## msmofet (Jul 18, 2019)

I like iceberg on sandwiches (for the crunch) and for tacos. I like mixed baby greens, escarole and arugala for salads (I like the sweet and bitter combo of the mix) and if I have any iceberg I sometimes add to the other greens also for the crunch.


----------



## GotGarlic (Jul 18, 2019)

blissful said:


> If you are interested in vitamins, minerals, actual types of proteins, types of fats, carbs, sugars, fiber, in your food, the chronometer is a free app and will estimate those for each food for you.
> It won't measure the antioxidants or flavinols or any number of the other good things food has. It's a shame that it doesn't. Considering there are thousands of those types of things in food, it's not really practical.
> 
> 
> ...


Trackers like this are helpful hints, but they track what's in the food you eat and not how much of each nutrient is absorbed.


----------



## skilletlicker (Jul 18, 2019)

GotGarlic said:


> Trackers like this are helpful hints, but they track what's in the food you eat and not how much of each nutrient is absorbed.



GG, What system, application, or program are you using to track exactly how much of each nutrient is absorbed?

If been using Cronometer for a couple of years and it is the most effective tool of its type that I've come across so far but would be open to a better way if you have one.


----------



## GotGarlic (Jul 18, 2019)

skilletlicker said:


> GG, What system, application, or program are you using to track exactly how much of each nutrient is absorbed?
> 
> If been using Cronometer for a couple of years and it is the most effective tool of its type that I've come across so far but would be open to a better way if you have one.


For medical reasons, I have my blood tested every two weeks for a variety of nutrients. There is no other way. It doesn't tell you exactly how much is absorbed - I don't know of any way to do that - but it tells you whether you're deficient and if so, by how much. 

Also for medical reasons, I can't eat a lot of fiber due to an increased risk of intestinal blockage, so what I eat is not relevant to what most other people can eat. Along the way, though, I've made it a priority to learn as much as I can about nutrition and how digestion works, and the chemistry of making nutrients more bioavailable. That's more for my husband's benefit than mine. 

Most people in Western countries who are relatively healthy and don't eat a lot of junk food get all the nutrients they need, and more. If you have a documented deficiency, and you need to supplement it, you need to know how to release as much as possible from your food, like cooking spinach to absorb more iron and to eat it with something that contains vitamin C.


----------



## dragnlaw (Jul 18, 2019)

GotGarlic said:


> how to release as much as possible from your food, like cooking spinach to absorb more iron and to eat it with something that contains vitamin C.



I knew tomatoes were often more nutritionally better when cooked but I did not know about spinach!  Thanks *GG*!

I eat a fair amount of spinach.  During the summer it is often in salads or as a replacement for lettuce type stuff in sandwiches. Winter I cook it more often. 
LOL - and as much as I like it (include asparagus) I'm supposed to limit it - good ol'gout and arthritis rear their ugly heads.

Does "wilting" it between something and hot eggs count as "cooking"?


----------



## skilletlicker (Jul 18, 2019)

GG, I had to learn a little about the ability or lack of ability of plants to access "available" nutrients under certain conditions and it is a complicated question when focused on basil. How much more so it must be for a human. So I satisfy myself with making sure I'm eating sufficient quantities of a wide enough variety to get to 95% or so. It's interesting and rewarding to be able to see those numbers and the specific sources of particular nutrients on a given day.


----------



## GotGarlic (Jul 18, 2019)

skilletlicker said:


> GG, I had to learn a little about the ability or lack of ability of plants to access "available" nutrients under certain conditions and it is a complicated question when focused on basil. How much more so it must be for a human. So I satisfy myself with making sure I'm eating sufficient quantities of a wide enough variety to get to 95% or so. It's interesting and rewarding to be able to see those numbers and the specific sources of particular nutrients on a given day.


It is, I agree; I used to do that with another tracker before my absorption issues became so serious. If you don't have those issues, it's probably pretty accurate.


----------



## GotGarlic (Jul 18, 2019)

dragnlaw said:


> I knew tomatoes were often more nutritionally better when cooked but I did not know about spinach!  Thanks *GG*!
> 
> I eat a fair amount of spinach.  During the summer it is often in salads or as a replacement for lettuce type stuff in sandwiches. Winter I cook it more often.
> LOL - and as much as I like it (include asparagus) I'm supposed to limit it - good ol'gout and arthritis rear their ugly heads.
> ...


Yes. Lightly steaming or wilting is enough to break down the oxalic acid that binds iron and calcium in the spinach. And add strawberries or colored bell peppers for the vitamin C! [emoji2]


----------



## taxlady (Jul 18, 2019)

A lot of Danish recipes for spinach or rhubarb or sorrel include something called "nonoxal". It neutralizes the oxalic acid. It's calcium chloride and combines with the oxalic acid, so the oxalic acid won't combine with iron. A Danish food scientist says that you don't need to use nonoxal with most rhubarb dishes, because in Denmark, they are almost always served with milk or cream and the calcium in the dairy product will neutralize the oxalic acid. Danes make a lot of rhubarb desserts.


----------



## blissful (Jul 18, 2019)

Cooking Goddess said:


> Katie H said: "My normal belief is that the more vibrant and darker the fruit/vegetable, the better they are for our bodies."
> 
> 
> Us, too. And so we ate the rainbow tonight.
> View attachment 35657




Very pretty bowl of food/salad. I like eating like this too. Lots of color.


----------



## GotGarlic (Jul 18, 2019)

taxlady said:


> A lot of Danish recipes for spinach or rhubarb or sorrel include something called "nonoxal". It neutralizes the oxalic acid. It's calcium chloride and combines with the oxalic acid, so the oxalic acid won't combine with iron. A Danish food scientist says that you don't need to use nonoxal with most rhubarb dishes, because in Denmark, they are almost always served with milk or cream and the calcium in the dairy product will neutralize the oxalic acid. Danes make a lot of rhubarb desserts.


Interesting. It seems odd that calcium in the spinach is bound with oxalic acid but calcium not in the spinach neutralizes the oxalic acid? I wonder how that works.


----------



## Linda0818 (Jul 18, 2019)

msmofet said:


> I like iceberg on sandwiches (for the crunch) and for tacos. I like mixed baby greens, escarole and arugala for salads (I like the sweet and bitter combo of the mix) and if I have any iceberg I sometimes add to the other greens also for the crunch.



Ditto on most of this, with the exception of the baby greens. Don't like those.


----------



## taxlady (Jul 18, 2019)

GotGarlic said:


> Interesting. It seems odd that calcium in the spinach is bound with oxalic acid but calcium not in the spinach neutralizes the oxalic acid? I wonder how that works.



When I used the word "neutralizes", I didn't necessarily mean in the sense of making it less acidic. I was mentally translating from the Danish article. I don't know if it neutralizes the pH.

The calcium that is added neutralizes the rest of the oxalic acid by binding to it. The calcium in the spinach is already bound as calcium oxalate, so it isn't available to bind the rest of the oxalic acid. When more Ca is added, it binds to any available oxalic acid, thereby making the oxalic acid unable to bind with anything else.


----------



## GotGarlic (Jul 18, 2019)

taxlady said:


> When I used the word "neutralizes", I didn't necessarily mean in the sense of making it less acidic. I was mentally translating from the Danish article. I don't know if it neutralizes the pH.
> 
> The calcium that is added neutralizes the rest of the oxalic acid by binding to it. The calcium in the spinach is already bound as calcium oxalate, so it isn't available to bind the rest of the oxalic acid. When more Ca is added, it binds to any available oxalic acid, thereby making the oxalic acid unable to bind with anything else.


I didn't mean pH, either. The oxalic acid in spinach is bound to iron as well as calcium. I have no idea how much unbound oxalic acid is in spinach, but it doesn't sound like adding calcium in the form of dairy releases the already bound elements. Some of the calcium in the dairy ends up bound by any free oxalic acid, so you lose the bioavailability of that without releasing what was already bound. 

Does that make sense? Do we have a chemist here who could help us out? Skilletlicker, what was your investigation into basil about?


----------



## taxlady (Jul 18, 2019)

GotGarlic said:


> I didn't mean pH, either. The oxalic acid in spinach is bound to iron as well as calcium. I have no idea how much unbound oxalic acid is in spinach, but it doesn't sound like adding calcium in the form of dairy releases the already bound elements. Some of the calcium in the dairy ends up bound by any free oxalic acid, so you lose the bioavailability of that without releasing what was already bound.
> 
> Does that make sense? Do we have a chemist here who could help us out? Skilletlicker, what was your investigation into basil about?


Adding calcium might protect teeth. Have you ever eaten raw rhubarb? It makes your teeth feel funny because of the oxalic acid.  Also, the oxalic acid could steal calcium availability from other food. Adding a bunch of Ca would make up for that.


----------



## bbqcoder (Jul 18, 2019)

Linda0818 said:


> People look at me like I've got two heads when I tell them I'm not fond of cheese and that I hate pepperoni.



I think the only cheese I would put on a salad would be good grated parmesan or real imported sheep-milk feta.  I do like all other cheeses like cheddar but not in a salad.



GotGarlic said:


> I'm not a fan of kale, either, and I don't get the fascination people have with it. Apparently you have to "massage" it to make it palatable raw and sorry but I ain't massaging my food



Have you had roasted kale?  That's the way I usually cook it.  A bit of oil/salt/pepper on the kale in a roasting pan.  Quick and easy.


----------



## GotGarlic (Jul 18, 2019)

taxlady said:


> Adding calcium might protect teeth. Have you ever eaten raw rhubarb? It makes your teeth feel funny because of the oxalic acid.  Also, the oxalic acid could steal calcium availability from other food. Adding a bunch of Ca would make up for that.


I'm not saying not to eat dairy. I love it and I know it has a lot of nutrition. I'm just trying to figure out how eating dairy with spinach could increase the bioavailability of the calcium in the spinach.

My dad grew rhubarb when I was growing up. I loved eating it right out of the garden with him. Yum


----------



## GotGarlic (Jul 18, 2019)

bbqcoder said:


> Have you had roasted kale?  That's the way I usually cook it.  A bit of oil/salt/pepper on the kale in a roasting pan.  Quick and easy.



I can't eat things like kale because of the high fiber content, as I explained earlier.


----------



## taxlady (Jul 18, 2019)

GotGarlic said:


> I'm not saying not to eat dairy. I love it and I know it has a lot of nutrition. I'm just trying to figure out how eating dairy with spinach could increase the bioavailability of the calcium in the spinach.
> 
> My dad grew rhubarb when I was growing up. I loved eating it right out of the garden with him. Yum



It's not that adding calcium increases the bioavailability of the Ca in the spinach. It's that the oxalic acid in the spinach or rhubarb won't steal Ca from something else.


----------

