Coffee Reduces Risk of Death?

Coffee has always been quite the controversial drink.

Some of you may remember the myth about coffee sapping the calcium out of you.

While the caffeine in coffee can slightly decrease calcium absorption efficiency, if the daily recommended calcium intake of 2-3 servings of milk or alternatives (or 1000mg of calcium) is met, there should be no problem [2, 4].

If you’re still concerned, adding as little as 1-2 tablespoons of milk to your coffee should compensate [7].

You might encounter a four-time-per-day double-shot expresso drinking workaholic or someone who won’t even try tiramisu because they fear osteoporosis, the degenerative bone disease. Personally, I’m not a fan of tiramisu, but I do enjoy a cup or two of Joe: not only for the boost in can-do attitude but also because it may support long-term health.

Joe and Longevity

 “Coffee drinking was associated with reduced risk for death from various causes” according to data from 10 European countries [6].

While this sounds like a bold statement, we must keep in mind it is an association and not causation. This means that coffee drinking on its own does not cause a reduced risk for death of various causes; It is one lifestyle habit, of many, that is more prevalent in people who have a decreased risk of death for various causes.

However, when looking at coffee drinkers and their health as a general trend, there seems to be more than just a jitter to the juice.

There is probable evidence for decreased risk of the following chronic conditions in coffee drinkers (about 4 cups/day) [5]:

-       Some cancers (breast, colorectal, colon, endometrial, and prostate cancer)

-       Cardiovascular disease

-       Metabolic-related conditions (type-2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome)

-       Neurological conditions (Parkinson’s Disease, Alzheimer’s disease, and depression)

What’s in the dirt?

While coffee is 99% water, about one cup of this ‘dirty water’ has the potassium content of ¼ of a banana [11] and is rich in antioxidants.

In fact, just 2 cups of coffee per day accounted for about 66% of the total antioxidant intake of a weekly Norwegian diet, when fruits and berries only accounted for about 11% [10]. This may not be surprising if you are aware of the statistics behind global fruit and vegetable intake.

Beans and a cup of Joe.

Chlorogenic acids are the main antioxidants, which have the bonus of increasing insulin sensitivity and slowing glucose circulation after a meal (great for diabetics), but various other coffee components have demonstrated antioxidant and anti-inflammatory activity [5].

Coffee may even alter your gut microbiota in favor of anti-obese and anti-inflammatory species [5].

And of course, the primary reason coffee is one of the most consumed beverages in the world: Caffeine. Being a very powerful stimulant, caffeine keeps people awake and can improve strength and endurance during exercise, but it may not work the same for everyone [8].

Genetics and Caffeine Metabolism

CYP1A2 is a drug processing gene that accounts for 95% of caffeine processing in your body [1].

Depending on your genetic variant of CYP1A2, your caffeine metabolism can be faster or slower. This might explain why some people can have coffee all day and fall asleep fine, while others can have trouble sleeping if they have a cup after 2 pm.

With the slower CYP1A2 variant, less is more. The caffeine from one coffee might circulate through your body further than it would in someone without the slow variant, increasing the intensity and/or duration of the stimulants’ influence on your fatigue level and athletic performance [12].

That’s great for athletes with the slow variant, as it increases strength and endurance, but there are two sides to this coin.

Individuals with the slower CYP1A2 variant may have an increased risk of stroke [1] or hypertension [9] possibly due to caffeine’s capacity to prevent your stress hormone, cortisol, from dropping [3].

The genetic aspect is relatively new, but it has potential to tailor nutrition advice to an individual level through Nutrigenomix.

To Sum It Up

There seems to be no definitive negative long-term health influence of coffee, but there may be some positives. Coffee intake of about four cups/day has been associated with reduced risk of death from various causes.

Coffee can serve as a great source of antioxidants and anti-inflammatory compounds in the diet, but the caffeine content could increase the risk of cardiovascular conditions depending on an individuals’ genetic variant of caffeine metabolism.

- Lucas Roldos

---

Lucas Roldos

is currently completing his MSc in Human Nutrition at McGill University, where he received his BSc in Nutrition Science with a sports concentration and a minor in Neuroscience. His research examines motivation for healthy behavior.

---

Disclaimer: The information provided is meant to spread knowledge and induce interest for educational purposes. It is based on limited research. We try to pull the overall message of the literature, but further research may be necessary.  What is done with the information or suggestions is solely the consumer's decision. The information provided is not meant to treat or diagnose any medical condition. References are provided for informational purposes only and do not constitute the endorsement of any website or other sources.

Reference:

[1] Cornelis, MC. et al. Coffee, CYP1A2 genotype, and risk of myocardial infarction. Journal of the American Medical Association. (2006). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16522833

[2] Dieticians of Canada. Food Sources of Calcium. (2016) https://www.dietitians.ca/Your-Health/Nutrition-A-Z/Calcium/Food-Sources-of-Calcium.aspx

[3] Gavrieli, A. et al. Caffeinated coffee does not acutely affect energy intake, appetite, or inflammation but prevents serum cortisol concentrations from falling in healthy men. The Journal of Nutrition. (2011). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21346100

[4] George SE, et al. A perception on Health Benefits of Coffee. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition. (2008).  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28693038

[5] Grosso G. et al. Coffee, Caffeine, and Health Outcomes: An Umbrella Review. Annual Review of Nutrition (2017). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28826374

[6] Gunter MJ. Et al. Coffee Drinking and Mortality in 10 European Countries. Annals of Internal Medicine (2017). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28693038

[7] Heaney, RP. et al. Effects of caffeine on bone and the calcium economy. Food and Chemical toxicology. (2002). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12204390

[8] Naderi A. et al. Timing, Optimal Dose and Intake Duration of Dietary Supplements with Evidence-Based Use in Sports Nutrition. Journal of Exercise Nutrition & Biochemistry. (2016). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28150472

[9] Palatini, P. et al. CYP1A2 genotype modifies the association between coffee intake and the risk of hypertension. Journal of Hypertension. (2009). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19451835

[10] Svilaas, A. et al. Intakes of antioxidants in coffee, wine, and vegetables are correlated with plasma carotenoids in humans. The Journal of Nutrition (2004). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14988447

[11] USDA National Nutrient Database. Basic Report:  09040, Bananas, raw. (2016). https://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/2159?fgcd=&manu=&lfacet=&format=&count=&max=50&offset=&sort=default&order=asc&qlookup=banana&ds=Standard+Reference&qt=&qp=&qa=&qn=&q=&ing=

[12] Womack, CJ. et al. The influence of a CYP1A2 polymorphism on the ergogenic effects of caffeine. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition (2012). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22420682

TRADITIONAL DIETS AND GUT BACTERIA: Contemporary Teachings for a Modern Age (PART 1)

          The diets and lifestyles of modern, Western societies are contributing to a global pandemic of obesity, and metabolic syndrome, which is the fancy term for having either high blood-pressure, uncontrolled blood sugar, lots of abdominal fat, or even too much dissolved fat in the blood. These factors of metabolic syndrome are major risks of getting cardiovascular disease, kidney disease, gallstones, sexual impotence or dysfunction, and/or type 2 diabetes.

Were cavemen OBESE?

       Early humans from pre-industrial, Paleolithic societies were much less likely to become obese or have metabolic syndrome than us today, even when accounting for their reduced lifespans (either from infection, violence, parasites, or predators like saber-toothed tigers) [1]. This insight has led to the development of diets trying to mimic so called Paleo “caveman” diets, which have been critiqued within the medical community as carrying too many unknown assumptions and lacking in scientific rigor [2]. Regardless, there’s a good amount of preliminary research showing that these paleo diets have the potential to improve elements of metabolic syndrome, while reducing hunger levels, and decreasing body fat (always a plus).

         We don’t know exactly the full details of how these Paleolithic humans lived and ate, but we can make educated guesses based on how traditional, modern-day hunter-gatherers (societies that live strictly on what the land provides, plant and animal-wise) and agrarians (peoples that practice at least some agriculture) currently live today… along with evidence from the fossil record, such as how teeth are worn away through eating either fiber-rich plants or soft cooked meat.

What is a PRE-BIOTIC ?

        Compared to our Western diets, the traditional diets of pre-industrial societies can be characterized as having: increased consumption of fish and lean game meats (like caribou or other venison), avoidance of refined sugars, and arguably the most important difference, a much greater consumption of fruits and vegetables—especially those containing high levels of prebiotics. Prebiotics are the parts of plants that when eaten, can escape digestion in the stomach to feed and support the gut microbiota¸ a complex community of bacteria numbering in the trillions of cells. The gut microbiota has been called the “forgotten organ” in the medical science literature,[3]due to its known influence on our overall health…or lack thereof (much like our liver and kidneys, we need our gut bacteria to be happy and well-adjusted for us to live well).

The secret lies within poop fossils... 

          The most interesting piece of research I have read regarding the sheer degree of prebiotic content in the Paleolithic diet comes from ancient, human, coprolite fossils (aka, poop fossils) found by researchers in a Mexican desert[4]. These fossils were dated to belong to an era over ten-thousand years ago, when we believed humankind was still living like hunter-gatherers live today. The poop was then analyzed for DNA fragments, which were found to belong to onion, agave (such as that found in agave syrup and tequila), and a plant called desert spoon. What these plants have in common is that they contain high levels of a prebiotic called inulin-type fructans. From the poop fossils, it was determined that hunter-gatherers of this region ate around 135 grams of prebiotics per day. In contrast, us Westerners eat maybe 11 grams of prebiotics per day (so about ten times less). Plant fiber also acts to feed human gut bacteria, and hunter-gathers still have us beat. They ate well over 200 grams of fiber a day, compared to our diet, which contains 20 grams per day (and that’s on the high end!).

Did cavemen have a better balance of gut bacteria ?

          Societies eating pre-industrial, traditional diets in general have more bacteria in their guts, more types of unique species in their guts, and most strikingly, a greater number of a species of bacteria called Prevotella, while Westerners have much more of the species Bacteroides. How might these gut microbiota differences influence our health? That topic will be the focus of Part 2, so be sure to check in with our website regularly to hear the end…

- Tyler Feeney-

M.Sci (c) in Dietetics

Disclaimer: The information provided is meant to spread knowledge and induce interest for educational purposes. It is based on limited research. We try to pull the overall message of the literature, but further research may be necessary.  What is done with the information or suggestions is solely the consumer's decision. The information provided is not meant to treat or diagnose any medical condition. References are provided for informational purposes only and do not constitute the endorsement of any website or other sources.

References

1. Eaton, S.B., & Konner, M. (1985). Paleolithic nutrition: A consideration of its nature and current implications. New England Journal of Medicine, 312, 283-289.
2. Pitt, C. E. (2016). Cutting through the Paleo hype: The evidence for the Palaeolithic diet. Australian Family Physician, 45(1), 35-38.
3. O'Hara, A. M., & Shanahan, F. (2006). The gut flora as a forgotten organ. EMBO Reports, 7(7), 688-693.
4. Leach, J. D., & Sobolik, K. D. (2010). High dietary intake of prebiotic inulin-type fructans in the prehistoric Chihuahuan Desert. British Journal of Nutrition, 103(11), 1558-1561.

An apple a day will NOT keep the doctor away...

Governments have been pushing for increased fruit and vegetable (F&V) consumption for years because of their potential for prevention of various health conditions and diseases [1, 2].

The lack of F&V consumption and disregard for government guidelines may be contributing to the rise of non-communicable disease as the leading cause for global mortality [7]. A suboptimal diet is currently the leading risk factor for non-communicable disease [4].

Simply knowing what a serving of fruit and/or vegetables (F&Vs) looks like may put you ahead of the curve.

Hint: a grape from the cheeseboard is not quite a serving…

What is a F&V serving?

Generally, half a cup of chopped vegetables or berries, a medium sized fruit, or one cup of leafy greens constitute one serving of F&Vs. Health Canada makes it real easy here.

While it may sound easy in principle, only one in five people worldwide consumed the World Health Organization’s (WHO’s) recommendation of five F&V servings (400g) per day in 2003 [5].

On top of that, the WHO’s recommendation of five servings/day can be considered quite low.

The United States Department of Agriculture recommends about 9 servings/day, while Health Canada recommends 7-10 servings/day for adults; Less than one percent of the global population meets these recommendations [7].

In Canada, it is estimated that almost 70% of the population doesn’t eat enough F&Vs [10]. Adolescents are worse, with about 90% of Canadian adolescents (ages 11-17) not eating enough F&Vs [8].  And this is during stages of development of great need!

F&V access and budget

Without having F&Vs as freely available as we do in our supermarkets, developing countries struggle to meet guidelines most, but you may be surprised to learn the reason may not always be financial [5].

Individuals from underprivileged neighborhoods have reported poorer access to affordable healthy foods and said they would consume more F&Vs were they more easily attainable [6].

Whether living in a poorer neighborhood or not, staying away from Tim Hortons or the fancy tapas restaurant everyone is raving about will allow more room in your budget for healthier choices.

For instance, when adolescents in Texas were monitored for their food spending, those eating at restaurants or fast food joints had higher food costs than those who did not eat out, while high or low F&V consumption did not differ in cost [11].

Learn to cook, include your family, and don’t be afraid to experiment!

A focus group of low-income women in the Montreal area said they mainly cooked pasta and rice with prepackaged sauces for fear of experimenting with new recipes [3]. Some simply said they were bad at budgeting or weren’t in the habit of choosing ‘expensive’ foods.

Research has shown that the home environment and what one study dubbed the “dietary gatekeeper” (whoever does groceries and prepares meals) has a large influence on the whole family’s health [9]. Even more reason to learn how to cook!

In fact, parental monitoring and engagement have been shown to influence F&V intake [12]. Try taking a cooking workshop with your kids!

Striking a Balance

When nutrition knowledge and cooking confidence are at a low, the risk of ruining a meal to try new recipes that include more F&Vs may seem too high.

But the possible benefits are too great to pass up: antioxidants, fibers, vitamins and minerals, the list goes on along with various health benefits such as the possible prevention of non-communicable diseases including:

• Cardiovascular Disease (Coronary heart disease, stroke, hypertension) [1, 2]
• Cancer [1]
• Obesity [2]
• Diabetes [2]

And maybe even prevention of:

• Dementia [2]
• Osteoporosis [2]
• Asthma [2]
• COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) [2]
• Rheumatoid Arthritis [2]
• Eye Diseases (cataracts, macular degeneration, etc.) [2]

Here are some neat resources if you want to read further:

-          https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/what-should-you-eat/vegetables-and-fruits/

-          https://www.choosemyplate.gov/vegetables-nutrients-health

To Sum It Up

Try to eat at least five servings of F&V per day. As an easy reference measure, think of your fist as about one cup of F&V.

Limit restaurant meals and use the savings to experiment with new recipes and F&Vs at home.

Greater F&V consumption will help ward off non-communicable disease and foster a better food environment for adolescents to positively influence their F&V intake and health.

---

LUCAS ROLDOS

is currently completing his MSc in Human Nutrition at McGill University, where he received his BSc in Nutrition Science with a sports concentration and a minor in Neuroscience. His research examines motivation for healthy behavior. 

---

Disclaimer: The information provided is meant to spread knowledge and induce interest for educational purposes. It is based on limited research. We try to pull the overall message of the literature, but further research may be necessary.  What is done with the information or suggestions is solely the consumer's decision. The information provided is not meant to treat or diagnose any medical condition. References are provided for informational purposes only and do not constitute the endorsement of any website or other sources.

Reference:

1)      Aune, D. et al. Fruit and vegetable intake and the risk of cardiovascular disease, total cancer and all- cause mortality—a systematic review and dose- response meta-analysis of prospective studies. International Journal of Epidemiology. (2017)

2)      Boeing, H. et al. Critical review: vegetables and fruit in the prevention of chronic diseases. Eur J Nutr. (2012) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3419346/

3)      Engler-Stringer, R. Food selection and preparation practices in a group of young low-income women in Montreal. Appetite (2011). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21145934

4)      Forouzanfar, MH. et al. Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 79 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks, 1990-2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. The Lancet. (2016) http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(15)00128-2/abstract

5)      Hall, JN et al. Global variability in fruit and vegetable consumption. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. (2009) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19362694

6)      Jennings, A. et al. Positive effect of a targeted intervention to improve access and availability of fruit and vegetables in an area of deprivation. Health & Place (2012). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22705164

7)      Micha, R. et al. Global, regional and national consumption of major food groups in 1990 and 2010: a systematic analysis including 266 country-specific nutrition surveys worldwide. British Medical Journal. (2015) http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/9/e008705

8)      Minaker, L., & Hammond, D. Low Frequency of Fruit and Vegetable Consumption Among Canadian Youth: Findings From the 2012/2013 Youth Smoking Survey. Journal of School Health. (2016) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26762825

9)      Reid, M. et al. The Obesogenic Household: Factors Influencing Dietary Gatekeeper Satisfaction with Family Diet. Psychology & Marketing (2015). http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mar.20799/abstract

10)  Statistics Canada. Health Fact Sheets: Fruit and vegetable consumption, 2015. (2017) http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/82-625-x/2017001/article/14764-eng.htm

11)  Vega, M et al. Food Cost Analysis Associated with Fruit and Vegetable Consumption. Journal of the American Dietetic Association (2008). http://jandonline.org/article/S0002-8223(08)01195-4/pdf

12)  Ward, WL et al. Low Fruit/Vegetable Consumption in the Home: Cumulative Risk Factors in Early Childhood. Early Childhood Education Journal (2015). https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10643-014-0661-6

 

 

 

Bucks and Butterflies: Is it Worth Buying Non-GMO Foods? (Part 1)

Take a stroll down the organic or health-food section in your grocery store, and you will likely see plastered on various products a ubiquitous, innocuous butterfly logo with the words “Non GMO Project Verified”—usually entailing a premium cost.

What are GMOs?

GMO stands for “genetically modified organism”, insinuating that specific genes have been incorporated into or removed from foods using modern day DNA engineering techniques; such techniques have been denounced by armchair nutritionists, bloggers, naturopaths, and their ilk (such as the “Food Babe”, Vani Hari) as being toxic to overall health and as a causative factor in the pandemic of chronic diseases plaguing Western societies (such as cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes, etc.).

It’s tempting to put the blame on the archetypal Mad Scientist, deviously splicing Franken-genes into the genetic make-up of food crops while concocting carcinogenic monstrosities *cue maniacal laughter*. But is this true?

The non-GMO butterfly    https://livingnongmo.org/learn/take-action/

 

Is it worth paying extra for that butterfly logo?

For starters, many food products that claim to be non-GMO contain no ingredients that could realistically be genetically modified in the first place (for instance, there is a product on the market called “Blk Premium Alkaline Water” claiming to be GMO free. Last time I checked, water does not contain any DNA. Ditto for “Himalayan Fine Pink Salt”).

Here in Canada, there really aren’t that many foods being sold that are genetically modified. They currently include: canola, corn, soy, sugar beet (used to produce sugar), alfalfa (used as animal feed), papaya, tomato, some varieties of squash (such as yellow crookneck squash), specific strains of wheat, potato, and cottonseed oil. [1] 

So if you’re being tempted into buying kiwis, oranges, cucumbers, (or anything not on the above list for that matter), with the non-GMO label, quite frankly you are being manipulated into buying snake-oil.

Genetically modified organisms are altered in a controlled fashion, targeting only specific genes.

Health Canada requires strict scientific testing and assessment of new GMO foods before permitting them onto the market (a lengthy seven to ten-year process), which tests for their potential to produce toxins or allergens, to adversely affect nutrient composition, or to negatively impact the environment. [2]

Technically, even conventionally bred crops are considered genetically modified by Health Canada. But I digress.

Most critics of GMO foods are only going after genetically engineered foods (a method called “transgenesis”). In contrast, conventionally bred crops and animals have been genetically modified through these three processes:

1. Selective breeding (practiced for the past 10,000 years): involves crossing similar or dissimilar plants or animals of the same species, with the goal of improving certain characteristics (examples: broccoli, cabbage, shih tzus). This method affects hundreds of thousands of genes, many of which are unknown.
2.  Interspecies crosses (practiced since the 1800s): involves culturing techniques, such as grafting, that permit genetics to cross between different species (examples: tangelos, some types of apple, Ligers). Again, this method affects hundreds of thousands of genes, many of which are unknown.
3.  Mutagenesis (practiced since the 1930s); involves the use of chemicals or radiation to change DNA and hopefully induce favourable traits (examples: pears, rice, mint, the Incredible Hulk). This process is completely random and the number of genes affected in this manner is indeterminate but likely is in the thousands (which genes are affected? It’s unknown).

Crops developed using selective breeding, interspecies crosses, and mutagenesis can qualify for the “Non GMO Project Verified” label. The scientific research pertaining to the safety of transgenic crops, however (compiled from over 10 years worth of analysed data) has yet to find any evidence of harm in humans—with the scientific consensus being that they are safe to eat. [3] 

Since the controversies and subtleties surrounding the GMO debate are so fascinating given my article word-limit, ‘Part 2’ will address the following topics surrounding GMOs—"Round-Up”, Bt/Terminator genes, and Monsanto.

- Tyler Feeney-

---

Tyler Feeney

is currently pursuing his Master’s degree in Dietetics from McGill University (finishing in 2018). His first degree was in Biology with a concentration in plants from his home province of New Brunswick. His research focuses on how plant-based diets can shape our gut bacteria, food systems issues in the context of developing countries, and how different diets can impact odds of getting obesity and other chronic diseases of the Western world. 

---

Disclaimer: The information provided is meant to spread knowledge and induce interest for educational purposes. It is based on limited research. We try to pull the overall message of the literature, but further research may be necessary.  What is done with the information or suggestions is solely the consumer's decision. The information provided is not meant to treat or diagnose any medical condition. References are provided for informational purposes only and do not constitute the endorsement of any website or other sources.

References

 1.    Government of Canada. Genetically Modified (GM) Foods and Other Novel Foods. Retrieved from https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/food-nutrition/genetically-modified-foods-other-novel-foods/approved-products.html. Accessed October 1st, 2017.

2.    Government of Canada. The Regulation of Genetically Modified Food. Retrieved from https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/science-research/reports-publications/biotechnology/regulation-genetically-modified-foods.html. Accessed October 1st, 2017.

3.    Nicolia, A., Manzo, A., Veronesi, F., & Rosellini, D. (2014). An overview of the last 10 years of genetically engineered crop safety research. Critical Reviews in Biotechnology, 34(1), 77-88.

Nutrition: An Investment in your Health

Before eating that melt-in-your-mouth brownie bonanza, and refusing to share it with your significant other, do you stop and think about how the deliciously decadent dessert can influence your health?

I know I don’t, because even with a full stomach, ‘there’s always room for dessert’!

But did you know that the simple act of prioritizing nutrition can improve diet quality [1], and as a result, improve your health [10]?

Taking the time to think about the food you eat is like warming up before a workout.

To prevent injury, you may stretch, think through muscle groups you will activate, or slowly mimic movements you will do under greater exertion later.

To prevent disease, why not take time to think about how the food you eat fits into your diet and how it will affect your body after a meal?

It’s a bit of a stretch, but I wanted to warm up your mind before diving in.

Is nutrition knowledge worth the time and money?

Nutrition has been referred to as a preventive medicine because of how food and food components interact with our biological systems to impact our health.

Food not only fuels the body, but also serves to support development, growth, and recovery [13]. It is essential to maintain balance in the body for disease prevention [12], and it even promotes social interaction [5].

There’s a reason the ‘Father of Early Medicine’ once said:

“Let food be thy medicine and thy medicine be thy food”

— Hippocrates

With proper nutrition, the quality of your diet will improve, along with the quality of your life.

Nutrition counseling has demonstrated improved physical and mental health status from increased fruit and vegetable consumption [10]. On top of that, self-rated health improved, meaning that not only will you look and function healthier, you will feel healthier too.

Aren’t fruits and vegetables more expensive?

Poor fruit and vegetable consumption can cost you more money in the long run.

Canada spends $1 billion in direct health care costs and $2.3 billion in indirect productivity losses per year because of poor fruit and vegetable intake [4].

Contrary to popular belief, diet quality and fruit and vegetable consumption may be influenced more by access to healthy foods rather than education and/or income [6]. Income itself may not be a good measure of food spending [2].

Poorer regions tend to have reduced infrastructure that can limit transport and processing of fresh produce [11], reducing accessibility and increasing costs.

Availability, proximity, cost, and appeal of quality health foods seem to have more of an impact on consumption than income or education level [3].

Seasonality of produce is a great example of this.

Greater quality and lower costs

Throughout the summer, tiny juicy Quebec strawberries are everywhere. Farmers' markets fill parking lots. Fruits and vegetables are basically walking to you from the farms of neighboring towns.

Prices are reasonable because produce is plenty.

At the market near me, I can get a large brown paper bag overflowing with fruits and vegetables for about 20 dollars. And it lasts me up to two weeks!

Farmers Market Veggie Basket

During the winter months, it’s a different story.

With little produce in season, most must be transported over long distances to reach supermarkets. This causes prices to increase and, if you’re on a student budget like me, may limit financial flexibility [9].

One way to mediate this is by getting frozen fruits and vegetables, as the nutritional quality is generally comparable to fresh produce [7, 8] and can be cheaper.

The closer the sale of produce is to its production, and the easier it is to transport it there, the greater the quality will increase and the lower the costs will decrease.

To Sum It Up

The time and money spent learning, cooking, and purchasing the proper foods might make nutrition seem like a costly investment but the quality of your life will improve and you will save money in the long run.

Regardless of your income or education, your diet quality can improve by simply understanding how nutrients and other food components interact with your body.

Be smart about groceries, considering seasonality, availability, and proximity to improve the costs and quality of your diet.

As long as you get your information from credible sources, your future self will thank you!

- Lucas Roldos

---

Lucas Roldos

is currently completing his MSc in Human Nutrition at McGill University, where he received his BSc in Nutrition Science with a sports concentration and a minor in Neuroscience. His research examines motivation for healthy behavior. 

---

Disclaimer: The information provided is meant to spread knowledge and induce interest for educational purposes. It is based on limited research. We try to pull the overall message of the literature, but further research may be necessary.  What is done with the information or suggestions is solely the consumer's decision. The information provided is not meant to treat or diagnose any medical condition. References are provided for informational purposes only and do not constitute the endorsement of any website or other sources.

References:

[1] Aggarwal A, et al. Importance of taste, nutrition, cost and convenience in relation to diet quality: Evidence of nutrition resilience among US adults using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2007-2010. Preventive Medicine (2016). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27374943

[2] Drewnowski A, et al. Geographic disparities in Healthy Eating Index scores (HEI–2005 and 2010) by residential property values: Findings from Seattle Obesity Study (SOS). Preventive Medicine (2016). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26657348

[3] Dubé L, et al. A nutrition/health mindset on commercial Big Data and drivers of food demand in modern and traditional systems. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences (2014). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25514866

[4] Ekwaru J, et al. The economic burden of inadequate consumption of vegetables and fruit in Canada. Public Health Nutrition (2017). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27819197

[5] Fieldhouse, P. (1995). Social Functions of Food. In Food and nutrition: Customs and culture. London: Chapman & Hall.

[6] Mentz G, et al. Neighbourhood socioeconomic disadvantage and fruit and vegetable consumption: a seven countries comparison. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity (2015). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25997451

[7] Rickman, JC et al. Nutritional comparison of fresh, frozen and canned fruits and vegetables. Part 1. Vitamins C and B and phenolic compounds. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture. (2007). http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jsfa.2825/abstract

[8] Rickman, JC et al. Nutritional comparison of fresh, frozen, and canned fruits and vegetables II. Vitamin A and carotenoids, vitamin E, minerals and fiber. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture. (2007). http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jsfa.2824/abstract

[9] Rogus, S. Do the Poor Pay More for Food? A Review of Food Price Disparities in Urban Environments. Journal of Hunger & Environmental Nutrition. (2015). http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19320248.2014.962775

[10] Steptoe A, et al. Quality of life and self-rated health in relation to changes in fruit and vegetable intake and in plasma vitamins C and E in a randomised trial of behavioural and nutritional education counselling. The British Journal of Nutrition (2004). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15231001

[11] Thow, AM, Priyadarshi, S. Aid for Trade: an opportunity to increase fruit and vegetable supply. Bulletin of the World Health Organization (2013). http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/91/1/12-106955/en/ 

[12] Tsai AG. A quality-adjusted life year of prevention: the cost-effectiveness of nutrition counseling. Journal of the American Dietetic Association (2011). http://jandonline.org/article/S0002-8223(10)01650-0/fulltext

[13] Wardlaw, GM, & Hampl, J. S. (2007). Perspectives in nutrition. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.