Mediterranean Diet
Replies
-
nationalvillage3215 wrote: »Anyone else on this diet? it was rated the No. 1 healthiest diet and I don't see much discussion on it.
The Med diet isn't really a named diet, but one version of a generally healthy eating pattern that lots of us try to follow. I don't eat in an especially Med way in terms of dishes chosen (I'm as likely to be inspired by some other part of the world) and I probably eat too much meat (although a good bit of it is fish) to be really within the parameters of what people mean by Med diet, but I try to eat in many ways that are similar. (I also am not a huge fan of the name, since the Med is a big place and there are some diverse styles of eating.)
But lots of veg (ideally in season, but not now, nothing is in season where I live), some fruit (I tend to eat a lot more in the summer, when it is in season, since I adore local fruit), basically whole foods based. Variety of other healthy plant foods like oats and other whole grains, tubers, legumes. I largely use olive oil and sometimes avocado oil for cooking and in salad dressings. Stuff like that.
Speaking of the Med being a big place, thought I'd drop this in in case anyone else was interested:
2 -
Do any of you instant-pot users know whether they get kidney beans hot enough long enough to avoid concerns about toxicity? This seems, from the kinds of sources that talk about it, to be a real thing (not life-threatening typically, but potentially very unpleasant in some cases). Reputedly, just slow cooking (crockpot) is a bad plan.
What I have read from sources I personally trust: the high temperature in a pressure cooker is sufficient to avoid this risk. The issue with slow cooking is that it never gets hot enough.3 -
French_Peasant wrote: »Ya'll sound like gourmets compared to me - what's the healthiest, easiest, way to eat other than raw or frozen veggies, nuts, canned lentils, beans (can't stand canned foods but need to get over it), wholegrain cereals, the healthy Irish/Scottish oats (not the easiest to make), and the Trader Joe's frozen oatmeal is all flavored/sugared up I'd love to be able to eat strictly vegetarian but need more straight protein (unfortunately) like from meat. Any suggestions other than tofu and eggs? Chicken seems to be a staple but I try not to eat too much.
Would love to be able to eat the Okinawa diet or the Loma Linda, California (7th Day Adventists) diet. It's tough.
Raw and frozen veg: cooked veg are just as healthy. I eat a variety of cooked and raw.
Beans/lentils -- if you don't like canned, buy dried. I do use both because canned are so much more efficient but an instapot or pre-planning makes dried easier. Some legumes (like lentils!) take much less time. I always do lentils from dry.
You can cook oats (I prefer steel cut, but that's just my texture preference) in a rice cooker or crock pot or do overnight. It's not hard to do even in a pot, though, and there are instant options (John McCann does one), and also instant rolled unflavored (Quaker's plan, among others). Pretty sure you can find plain instant at TJs.
I'm not vegetarian and particularly value fish, but my suggestions for veg protein (beyond tofu and eggs) is cottage cheese, plain greek yogurt, tempeh, seitan, and -- the one I eat most -- beans and lentils and pulses. When doing veg, lower sources of protein are important, like having nuts and seeds, that lots of veg have protein, that whole grains have some protein.
Interestingly, Irish and Scottish oats have a worse nutritional profile than your basic Quaker Rolled Oats. Less fiber and protein per 100 grams. I wonder how that could be; I was under the impression that the less processed oats would be slightly better. I just looked this up because I have ***GEEK ALERT*** gone down the rabbit hole of calculating the fiber/KCal ratio for an assortment of foods. .022 for Scottish vs. .026 for Quaker Rolled. To put this in perspective, apples are .05, black beans are .07, and raspberries are .13.
Depends on the brand, but for me it's just a taste preference, they all seem about the same.
Bob's Red Mill rolled oats (55 g) -- 210 cal, 6 g of fiber, 7 g protein.
Bob's Red Mill steel cut (44 g) -- 170 cal, 4 g fiber, 6 g protein -- I assume this is just that there are more grams in the serving (because fewer steel cuts fit in a particular volume) plus rounding, as the ingredients are the same.
Quaker (40 g) -- 150 cal, 4 g of fiber, 5 g protein.
IMO, none of them are really more processed, including instant, they are all just cut differently.
According the Bob's Red Mill blog I linked above, the rolled ones are steamed so they hold together while being rolled, and the instant are pre-cooked. I'd call that "more processed" . . . which is not particularly a criticism, in my book. I don't see why I should care if they pre-cook them, or I cook them, they're cooked.
(That said, just to inject some crankiness, I think the flavored packets of instant oats are mostly kind of icky, not a great texture/too sweet/odd flavors, though I'll eat them if they're the best option at a motel "continental breakfast". I also don't think they're appreciably more convenient than scooping some rolled oats into a deep bowl, dumping in water, and sticking them in the microwave.)
I should have checked. I've definitely seen instant that are just cut more fine. (I didn't like the texture for that reason, but eh.) I agree with you that I wouldn't be bothered about the steaming or pre-cooking. I know French Peasant wasn't saying this, but lots of people seem to think instant inherently have lots of other ingredients added besides oats, and that's not always the case, so I wanted to make the point.
I also don't care for the packages for taste reasons.1 -
I feel like once again we're getting into territory (pun intended) where we're mixing up words and meanings, at the expense of understanding and communication.
AFAIK, the genesis of the Mediterranean Diet idea was noting certain kinds of relative health in that region (not necessarily uniquely), then looking for the nutritional factors that might be causative, and pulling those out as an eating pattern. It's then a shorthand to call it "the Mediterranean Diet", and that has some mnemonic value, but it's not a 100% definitive geographical thing.
I don't think the implication is that anything anyone ever ate anywhere on a beach or cliff of the Mediterranean Sea is automatically super healthy (deep-fried calamari diet, anyone?
), nor is it that you should never eat Indian food or sub-Saharan African food or Mexican food on the "Mediterranean Diet" because it has some particular nutritious green veggie that isn't grown in the Mediterranean region, or has a different kind of bean, or different spices, or something. I think that misses the point.
I think lemurcat is spot-on here:This is actually why I don't like the term "Med diet" for the healthy eating pattern described above. My cooking isn't particularly Mediterranean in style. If I cook in any style on a regular basis, it's something of a farm-to-table American style, pretty simple on a day to day basis, but with various dishes I've adopted/adapted from a variety of cultures (I like reading regionally-based cookbooks and experimenting with different ideas).
But it still fits the Mayo Clinic list in most respects.4 -
Am trying that with pomegranate syrup. Have turkish recipe for stuffed peppers that used in as a finishing sauce and trying to find other ways to use the bottle up. LolGottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Whenever I'm Googling recipes, I zero in on a particular ingredient plus cuisine type and go from there. So something like "Italian chickpea recipes" or "Greek fish recipes" might yield you results.
Local place makes fried brussels sprouts with pomegranate seeds and soft goat cheese: Delicious. Maybe roasted brussels sprouts (if you like them) would be good dressed with the syrup & also goat cheese (if you like that, too)?2 -
I feel like once again we're getting into territory (pun intended) where we're mixing up words and meanings, at the expense of understanding and communication.
AFAIK, the genesis of the Mediterranean Diet idea was noting certain kinds of relative health in that region (not necessarily uniquely), then looking for the nutritional factors that might be causative, and pulling those out as an eating pattern. It's then a shorthand to call it "the Mediterranean Diet", and that has some mnemonic value, but it's not a 100% definitive geographical thing.
I don't think the implication is that anything anyone ever ate anywhere on a beach or cliff of the Mediterranean Sea is automatically super healthy (deep-fried calamari diet, anyone? ), nor is it that you should never eat Indian food or sub-Saharan African food or Mexican food on the "Mediterranean Diet" because it has some particular nutritious green veggie that isn't grown in the Mediterranean region, or has a different kind of bean, or different spices, or something. I think that misses the point.
Wait just a second here... are you trying to suggest that deep fried calamari is not super healthy?
To your point:
My lunch today consisted of a ridiculously large salad topped with chia seeds and dressed with an olive oil and vinegar style dressing, 8 ounces of asparagus, almost a pound of catfish cooked with my sous vide setup, and a snack of dried seaweed in between courses. Not that I am attempting to only eat a Med diet my lunch may not qualify as strictly adhering but it is in the vein of that style of eating.
3 -
I feel like once again we're getting into territory (pun intended) where we're mixing up words and meanings, at the expense of understanding and communication.
AFAIK, the genesis of the Mediterranean Diet idea was noting certain kinds of relative health in that region (not necessarily uniquely), then looking for the nutritional factors that might be causative, and pulling those out as an eating pattern. It's then a shorthand to call it "the Mediterranean Diet", and that has some mnemonic value, but it's not a 100% definitive geographical thing.
I don't think the implication is that anything anyone ever ate anywhere on a beach or cliff of the Mediterranean Sea is automatically super healthy (deep-fried calamari diet, anyone? ), nor is it that you should never eat Indian food or sub-Saharan African food or Mexican food on the "Mediterranean Diet" because it has some particular nutritious green veggie that isn't grown in the Mediterranean region, or has a different kind of bean, or different spices, or something. I think that misses the point.
Wait just a second here... are you trying to suggest that deep fried calamari is not super healthy?
To your point:
My lunch today consisted of a ridiculously large salad topped with chia seeds and dressed with an olive oil and vinegar style dressing, 8 ounces of asparagus, almost a pound of catfish cooked with my sous vide setup, and a snack of dried seaweed in between courses. Not that I am attempting to only eat a Med diet my lunch may not qualify as strictly adhering but it is in the vein of that style of eating.
Mississippi Diet meets Mediterranean Diet.
5 -
I feel like once again we're getting into territory (pun intended) where we're mixing up words and meanings, at the expense of understanding and communication.
AFAIK, the genesis of the Mediterranean Diet idea was noting certain kinds of relative health in that region (not necessarily uniquely), then looking for the nutritional factors that might be causative, and pulling those out as an eating pattern. It's then a shorthand to call it "the Mediterranean Diet", and that has some mnemonic value, but it's not a 100% definitive geographical thing.
I don't think the implication is that anything anyone ever ate anywhere on a beach or cliff of the Mediterranean Sea is automatically super healthy (deep-fried calamari diet, anyone? ), nor is it that you should never eat Indian food or sub-Saharan African food or Mexican food on the "Mediterranean Diet" because it has some particular nutritious green veggie that isn't grown in the Mediterranean region, or has a different kind of bean, or different spices, or something. I think that misses the point.
I think lemurcat is spot-on here:This is actually why I don't like the term "Med diet" for the healthy eating pattern described above. My cooking isn't particularly Mediterranean in style. If I cook in any style on a regular basis, it's something of a farm-to-table American style, pretty simple on a day to day basis, but with various dishes I've adopted/adapted from a variety of cultures (I like reading regionally-based cookbooks and experimenting with different ideas).
But it still fits the Mayo Clinic list in most respects.
Well, with all respects to the Mayo--from my home state of Minnesota--I think they should call their list the "Mayo diet". The Mediterranean Diet is listed as UNESCO Cultural Patrimony of Humanity as of 16 Nov 2010. Yes, it is a thing. It's foods and values are Mediterranean based (hence the name). The name is being bandied around as a fad and, being American, I know they have no idea what it really entails. You can eat pickles and peanut butter and call it vegetables and healthy fat so it must be part of the Med diet--right? Neither come from a Mediterranean country. I see so many silly things on here. Am I a purist--no, but talking about Indian or Asian food (both wonderful) as being part of a Med diet is strange.0 -
snowflake954 wrote: »I feel like once again we're getting into territory (pun intended) where we're mixing up words and meanings, at the expense of understanding and communication.
AFAIK, the genesis of the Mediterranean Diet idea was noting certain kinds of relative health in that region (not necessarily uniquely), then looking for the nutritional factors that might be causative, and pulling those out as an eating pattern. It's then a shorthand to call it "the Mediterranean Diet", and that has some mnemonic value, but it's not a 100% definitive geographical thing.
I don't think the implication is that anything anyone ever ate anywhere on a beach or cliff of the Mediterranean Sea is automatically super healthy (deep-fried calamari diet, anyone? ), nor is it that you should never eat Indian food or sub-Saharan African food or Mexican food on the "Mediterranean Diet" because it has some particular nutritious green veggie that isn't grown in the Mediterranean region, or has a different kind of bean, or different spices, or something. I think that misses the point.
I think lemurcat is spot-on here:This is actually why I don't like the term "Med diet" for the healthy eating pattern described above. My cooking isn't particularly Mediterranean in style. If I cook in any style on a regular basis, it's something of a farm-to-table American style, pretty simple on a day to day basis, but with various dishes I've adopted/adapted from a variety of cultures (I like reading regionally-based cookbooks and experimenting with different ideas).
But it still fits the Mayo Clinic list in most respects.
Well, with all respects to the Mayo--from my home state of Minnesota--I think they should call their list the "Mayo diet". The Mediterranean Diet is listed as UNESCO Cultural Patrimony of Humanity as of 16 Nov 2010. Yes, it is a thing. It's foods and values are Mediterranean based (hence the name). The name is being bandied around as a fad and, being American, I know they have no idea what it really entails. You can eat pickles and peanut butter and call it vegetables and healthy fat so it must be part of the Med diet--right? Neither come from a Mediterranean country. I see so many silly things on here. Am I a purist--no, but talking about Indian or Asian food (both wonderful) as being part of a Med diet is strange.
Um...interesting that France isn't included on that list, especially since the UNESCO description is so vague.
https://ich.unesco.org/en/RL/mediterranean-diet-00884
2 -
Or Turkey, or Lebanon, etc.
I think they ought to call the Mayo Clinic list the blue zones diet or something like that. And, OP, to go back to your original question, that does get discussed here.3 -
snowflake954 wrote: »I feel like once again we're getting into territory (pun intended) where we're mixing up words and meanings, at the expense of understanding and communication.
AFAIK, the genesis of the Mediterranean Diet idea was noting certain kinds of relative health in that region (not necessarily uniquely), then looking for the nutritional factors that might be causative, and pulling those out as an eating pattern. It's then a shorthand to call it "the Mediterranean Diet", and that has some mnemonic value, but it's not a 100% definitive geographical thing.
I don't think the implication is that anything anyone ever ate anywhere on a beach or cliff of the Mediterranean Sea is automatically super healthy (deep-fried calamari diet, anyone? ), nor is it that you should never eat Indian food or sub-Saharan African food or Mexican food on the "Mediterranean Diet" because it has some particular nutritious green veggie that isn't grown in the Mediterranean region, or has a different kind of bean, or different spices, or something. I think that misses the point.
I think lemurcat is spot-on here:This is actually why I don't like the term "Med diet" for the healthy eating pattern described above. My cooking isn't particularly Mediterranean in style. If I cook in any style on a regular basis, it's something of a farm-to-table American style, pretty simple on a day to day basis, but with various dishes I've adopted/adapted from a variety of cultures (I like reading regionally-based cookbooks and experimenting with different ideas).
But it still fits the Mayo Clinic list in most respects.
Well, with all respects to the Mayo--from my home state of Minnesota--I think they should call their list the "Mayo diet". The Mediterranean Diet is listed as UNESCO Cultural Patrimony of Humanity as of 16 Nov 2010. Yes, it is a thing. It's foods and values are Mediterranean based (hence the name). The name is being bandied around as a fad and, being American, I know they have no idea what it really entails. You can eat pickles and peanut butter and call it vegetables and healthy fat so it must be part of the Med diet--right? Neither come from a Mediterranean country. I see so many silly things on here. Am I a purist--no, but talking about Indian or Asian food (both wonderful) as being part of a Med diet is strange.
So, if I make Moroccan-style Eggplant Zaalouk (eggplant, tomatoes, spices/seasonings including garlic, cumin, paprika, cayenne), that's legit Mediterranean Diet since Morocco is on the Mediterranean Sea, and very healthy.
But if I make Indian-style Baingan Bharta (eggplant, tomatoes, spices/seasonings including garlic, coriander, paprika, chiles), using very similar cooking methods (roast the eggplant, toast some of the spices, cook the tomatoes in a pan with the spices, etc.) that's not legit Mediterranean Diet, since it's on the Indian Ocean instead, so will not be as healthy as if it were the Eggplant Zaalouk.
Got it.
ETA: If I were speaking to someone in a comparative cultures kind of context, where the UNESCO designation was an important factor, I'd be careful to use the appropriate definitions. But I'm talking to someone on a weight loss site, about nutrition and eating patterns, in the context of recent popular press stories. It's two different "Mediterranean Diets": Same name, different meaning in a different context.7 -
zeejane03 - just spotted your reply - thanks, I appreciate. Interesting re/SDA's -- I just read somewhere that the SDAs who eat no meat/no fish outlive the other Blue Zones. I'll try to find and list the source. They also eat dairy and eggs.
0 -
Thank you, lemurcat2, for the informative post. Pulses - need to check into but assumed those were lentils. I use to cook dry beans the old fashioned way but time to figure out the pressure type method since I'm without working stove cooktop and oven and house under re-construction. I need to learn to prepare some of the other items you referred to above. I can't see but think they're grains.
What a helpful board this is -- appreciate!
1 -
snowflake954 wrote: »I feel like once again we're getting into territory (pun intended) where we're mixing up words and meanings, at the expense of understanding and communication.
AFAIK, the genesis of the Mediterranean Diet idea was noting certain kinds of relative health in that region (not necessarily uniquely), then looking for the nutritional factors that might be causative, and pulling those out as an eating pattern. It's then a shorthand to call it "the Mediterranean Diet", and that has some mnemonic value, but it's not a 100% definitive geographical thing.
I don't think the implication is that anything anyone ever ate anywhere on a beach or cliff of the Mediterranean Sea is automatically super healthy (deep-fried calamari diet, anyone? ), nor is it that you should never eat Indian food or sub-Saharan African food or Mexican food on the "Mediterranean Diet" because it has some particular nutritious green veggie that isn't grown in the Mediterranean region, or has a different kind of bean, or different spices, or something. I think that misses the point.
I think lemurcat is spot-on here:This is actually why I don't like the term "Med diet" for the healthy eating pattern described above. My cooking isn't particularly Mediterranean in style. If I cook in any style on a regular basis, it's something of a farm-to-table American style, pretty simple on a day to day basis, but with various dishes I've adopted/adapted from a variety of cultures (I like reading regionally-based cookbooks and experimenting with different ideas).
But it still fits the Mayo Clinic list in most respects.
Well, with all respects to the Mayo--from my home state of Minnesota--I think they should call their list the "Mayo diet". The Mediterranean Diet is listed as UNESCO Cultural Patrimony of Humanity as of 16 Nov 2010. Yes, it is a thing. It's foods and values are Mediterranean based (hence the name). The name is being bandied around as a fad and, being American, I know they have no idea what it really entails. You can eat pickles and peanut butter and call it vegetables and healthy fat so it must be part of the Med diet--right? Neither come from a Mediterranean country. I see so many silly things on here. Am I a purist--no, but talking about Indian or Asian food (both wonderful) as being part of a Med diet is strange.
So, if I make Moroccan-style Eggplant Zaalouk (eggplant, tomatoes, spices/seasonings including garlic, cumin, paprika, cayenne), that's legit Mediterranean Diet since Morocco is on the Mediterranean Sea, and very healthy.
But if I make Indian-style Baingan Bharta (eggplant, tomatoes, spices/seasonings including garlic, coriander, paprika, chiles), using very similar cooking methods (roast the eggplant, toast some of the spices, cook the tomatoes in a pan with the spices, etc.) that's not legit Mediterranean Diet, since it's on the Indian Ocean instead, so will not be as healthy as if it were the Eggplant Zaalouk.
Got it.
ETA: If I were speaking to someone in a comparative cultures kind of context, where the UNESCO designation was an important factor, I'd be careful to use the appropriate definitions. But I'm talking to someone on a weight loss site, about nutrition and eating patterns, in the context of recent popular press stories. It's two different "Mediterranean Diets": Same name, different meaning in a different context.
But----as noted, it's not one dinner that makes your diet. I eat "foreign" foods, but eat Med 95% of the time. That is what I'm saying. People don't know what the Med diet is or where it came from. I thought we were here to educate. There are many foods I can buy in Minnesota that I can buy in my supermarket in Rome. I would try to base the majority of my "Med" diet around that. Buy lentils, beans, tomatoes, apples, potatoes, celery, carrots, califlour, broccoli, onions, oranges, walnuts, almonds, hazelnuts, pasta-durum grain, rice, pears, barley, strawberries, cherries, zucchini, etc... Other foods are healthy and many people eat healthy diets all over the world, but the Med diet is a specific thing.0 -
As for the above, it's not a question of one being healthier because it was cooked in the Mediterranean. If the Indian woman presented the dish to her family saying "Look what I made today, a Mediterranean specialty!" Her family would think she was nuts. Indians are proud of their dishes and should be. As the Moroccan wife would not present her dish as an Indian specialty. Ingredients can be similar in different parts of the world, but they are cooked differently--especially different fats. The Med dish would have surely used olive oil, would the Indian dish have done the same?0
-
The thing is one can eat in a Med-style and cook Indian inspired dishes using olive oil instead of ghee.
We're not aiming to be purists here.
I like lemurcat's idea of calling this all blue zone eating rather than Med.5 -
snowflake954 wrote: »As for the above, it's not a question of one being healthier because it was cooked in the Mediterranean. If the Indian woman presented the dish to her family saying "Look what I made today, a Mediterranean specialty!" Her family would think she was nuts. Indians are proud of their dishes and should be. As the Moroccan wife would not present her dish as an Indian specialty. Ingredients can be similar in different parts of the world, but they are cooked differently--especially different fats. The Med dish would have surely used olive oil, would the Indian dish have done the same?
And most importantly.... where are the cooking husbands??3 -
zeejane03 - just spotted your reply - thanks, I appreciate. Interesting re/SDA's -- I just read somewhere that the SDAs who eat no meat/no fish outlive the other Blue Zones. I'll try to find and list the source. They also eat dairy and eggs.
Now I'm curious, I know I read about this somewhere that the pescetarians in the group lived longer-going to see if I can find what I read and I'll post it here (or if I can't I'll correct what I said ). 0 -
Ok found it- in reference to the SDA Blue Zone in CA-
They also follow a "biblical" diet focused on grains, fruits, nuts and vegetables, and drink only water. (Some of them eat small amounts of meat and fish.) Sugar is taboo, too. As one Loma Linda centenarian tells Buettner: "I'm very much against sugar except natural sources like fruit, dates or figs. I never eat refined sugar or drink sodas."
Gary Fraser, a cardiologist and epidemiologist at Loma Linda University and an Adventist himself, has found in studies that Adventists who follow the religion's teachings lived about 10 years longer than people who didn't. Another key insight? Pesco-vegetarians in the community, who ate a plant-based diet with up to one serving of fish a day, lived longer than vegan Adventists.
Their top foods include avocados, salmon, nuts, beans, oatmeal, whole wheat bread and soy milk.
https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2015/04/11/398325030/eating-to-break-100-longevity-diet-tips-from-the-blue-zones
0 -
I'm confused -- did read if SDAs prefer to eat meat it's kosher w/no pork or shellfish (is this a new concept from the hardliner SDA?) and the SDA men (possibly old data?) outlive the Okinawa men but the Okinawan women about the same as SDA men. The Loma Linda community (so cal) was #1 for world longevity few yrs. ago and I read they aren't Vegan. My friend in Redlands (Loma Linda area) has quite a few SDA friends and eating meat (even fish) was shunned - nothing with a face. They are big on soy products - own the frozen food line, Morning Star. The Loma Linda area is quite interesting - lots of grains, vegetables and fruit and some SDAs eat dairy and eggs.
They also rest one day a week (their Sabbath) and this might be a healthy factor but it's their day of church/worship and social dinner afterward (or for some) so how is that a day of rest!
0 -
I'm confused -- did read if SDAs prefer to eat meat it's kosher w/no pork or shellfish (is this a new concept from the hardliner SDA?) and the SDA men (possibly old data?) outlive the Okinawa men but the Okinawan women about the same as SDA men. The Loma Linda community (so cal) was #1 for world longevity few yrs. ago and I read they aren't Vegan. My friend in Redlands (Loma Linda area) has quite a few SDA friends and eating meat (even fish) was shunned - nothing with a face. They are big on soy products - own the frozen food line, Morning Star. The Loma Linda area is quite interesting - lots of grains, vegetables and fruit and some SDAs eat dairy and eggs.
They also rest one day a week (their Sabbath) and this might be a healthy factor but it's their day of church/worship and social dinner afterward (or for some) so how is that a day of rest!
I'm Orthodox Jewish, not SDA, but when we talk about our day of rest, it's a day to refrain from creative activity and just enjoy the fruits of what was made during the week. So, we don't cook on the Sabbath, but we enjoy foods cooked in advance. We don't plow or plant (or do anything reminiscent, so moving a heavy bench over terrain in a way that it gouges up the earth is considered plowing, even if we wanted to move it from Point A to Point B and not actually plow to prepare for planting) because that's demonstrating Humanity's mastery over the world and Sabbath is a day to disconnect from that. No internet; no phones period, no TV. It's a chance to reconnect spiritually without the day-to-day noise.
(I'm probably over-simplifying, but honestly, when I talk about what we "don't" do, it feels less of a restriction and more of a "for one day of the week, I don't HAVE to deal with all that stuff." It's true that it's not by choice, but not having that choice sort of takes it out of my hands so I don't have to worry over 'should I X, should I Y?' One day a week, I'm just... beyond all that.)
7 -
Am trying that with pomegranate syrup. Have turkish recipe for stuffed peppers that used in as a finishing sauce and trying to find other ways to use the bottle up. LolGottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Whenever I'm Googling recipes, I zero in on a particular ingredient plus cuisine type and go from there. So something like "Italian chickpea recipes" or "Greek fish recipes" might yield you results.
Local place makes fried brussels sprouts with pomegranate seeds and soft goat cheese: Delicious. Maybe roasted brussels sprouts (if you like them) would be good dressed with the syrup & also goat cheese (if you like that, too)?
Omg. YES!!! That sounds amazing!!!1 -
I think it's also important to note that Buettner is very clear that it is doubtful that the specifics of the diet each individual BZ is eating is the deciding factor. The general dynamics of their diets, along with their activity levels and social lifestyles all combine to influence their longevity. While it's fascinating to pick apart each food in a community's diet, doing so to determine what specifically YOU should eat is kind of missing the point
Otherwise you just end up in the same weeds every other "diet plan" ends up in.
It's quite possible that the SDA live longer due to some other lifestyle aspect that ties into their religious beliefs, rather than the dietary differences. Or maybe it's something about the geographic aspects of the place in the world they sit on. Heck, maybe it's their religious beliefs themselves.
I'm glad this thread headed in the BZ direction, because the beauty of the "Mediterranean Diet" whichever form you look at, and of the Blue Zones info, is that they are just a general guideline you can make your own. And I think if you tried to follow one, you would probably be at least pretty close to following the other as well. But the BZ also brings in other aspects of life, not just diet, which IMHO is probably just as (if not more) important!4 -
I'm confused -- did read if SDAs prefer to eat meat it's kosher w/no pork or shellfish (is this a new concept from the hardliner SDA?) and the SDA men (possibly old data?) outlive the Okinawa men but the Okinawan women about the same as SDA men. The Loma Linda community (so cal) was #1 for world longevity few yrs. ago and I read they aren't Vegan. My friend in Redlands (Loma Linda area) has quite a few SDA friends and eating meat (even fish) was shunned - nothing with a face. They are big on soy products - own the frozen food line, Morning Star. The Loma Linda area is quite interesting - lots of grains, vegetables and fruit and some SDAs eat dairy and eggs.
They also rest one day a week (their Sabbath) and this might be a healthy factor but it's their day of church/worship and social dinner afterward (or for some) so how is that a day of rest!
We're very involved in our faith community (not SDA), we also do a Sabbath/'Day of Rest', but that means something a bit different for each family in our congregation. We do gather in the morning (Sunday school for all ages) and then service, with times of fellowship mixed in (and potlucks quarterly).
For my family the rest of the day is spent eating dinner with extended family, nap time for us 'old' people with kids reading, doing puzzles, board games etc, and then we try and do something as a family at night (summertime we usually go to the beach or park for walks, wintertime we play games, watch movies etc). The dinner is with extended family but the evening is usually just me/husband and the kids. For us it's a day to slow down a bit and refocus and it's my favorite day of the week 1 -
"Rated #1" by current popular ooh shiny!
Any varied diet that meets your nutritional requirements and hopefully makes you feel well having eaten it is the #1 diet.1 -
snowflake954 wrote: »As for the above, it's not a question of one being healthier because it was cooked in the Mediterranean. If the Indian woman presented the dish to her family saying "Look what I made today, a Mediterranean specialty!" Her family would think she was nuts. Indians are proud of their dishes and should be. As the Moroccan wife would not present her dish as an Indian specialty. Ingredients can be similar in different parts of the world, but they are cooked differently--especially different fats. The Med dish would have surely used olive oil, would the Indian dish have done the same?
And most importantly.... where are the cooking husbands??
We're around. I probably cook 95% of the meals eaten in my home - and have for a long while.3 -
MelanieCN77 wrote: »"Rated #1" by current popular ooh shiny!
Any varied diet that meets your nutritional requirements and hopefully makes you feel well having eaten it is the #1 diet.
You're making the assumption the people know how to eat in a way that meets their nutritional needs/requirements though. There's so much diet/food/nutrition nonsense being thrown at us and it's very hard to work through it all. Even on these forums, which has a large group of people who dedicate the time to research, there's still misinformation/woo being presented.
When a plan, like the Mediterranean, gets publicity/main stream attention I think it's a good thing, because it showcases a way of eating that's nutritionally sound and may get some people to take a closer look at what they're doing (as this thread demonstrates).
2 -
zj3 -- sounds like a beautiful, family, day. I do think some religions are beneficial to health and it can't hurt to slow down and appreciate life.
There are so many nutritional/eating plans it's confusing. Clearly, some well-founded evidence to help us today. I try to eat healthy but must OD on carbos/starches - can't follow the Dr. John McDougal or Dean Ornish but I'm trying to figure out a modified plan. Unfortunately, I have to eat chicken breast and the low fat ham (not a good choice) to balance my healthy grains/beans, etc. Old age and strange happens. It's so hard to find protein replacements that will take their place. Greek yogurt has some carbos and tofu low in carbos but doesn't help the sugar sickness like meat does. I obviously can't deal with that much sugar anymore - even steel-cut oatmeal, nuts, etc., in excess throw me over the edge. I'm determined to kick this meat issue. Have issues with milk product (itching/small bumps) but I'm going to try cottage cheese today - it is what it is.
Appreciate all the great advice and research on this site - incredible.0 -
Esther's day of rest sounds good, too. Faith probably a contributing factor unless it's one of the toxic, dangerous, ones.0
-
zj3 -- sounds like a beautiful, family, day. I do think some religions are beneficial to health and it can't hurt to slow down and appreciate life.
There are so many nutritional/eating plans it's confusing. Clearly, some well-founded evidence to help us today. I try to eat healthy but must OD on carbos/starches - can't follow the Dr. John McDougal or Dean Ornish but I'm trying to figure out a modified plan. Unfortunately, I have to eat chicken breast and the low fat ham (not a good choice) to balance my healthy grains/beans, etc. Old age and strange happens. It's so hard to find protein replacements that will take their place. Greek yogurt has some carbos and tofu low in carbos but doesn't help the sugar sickness like meat does. I obviously can't deal with that much sugar anymore - even steel-cut oatmeal, nuts, etc., in excess throw me over the edge. I'm determined to kick this meat issue. Have issues with milk product (itching/small bumps) but I'm going to try cottage cheese today - it is what it is.
Appreciate all the great advice and research on this site - incredible.
I've played around with them all-from Nutritarian (Dr Fuhrman) all the way to 'primal' and then back again
Where I've landed is a mostly whole foods woe that focuses heavily on plants, with 3 servings of fish a week (pretty much cut out other meat at this point). It's a mesh between DASH/Blue Zones/the newer '10 a Day' recommendations/my own eating preferences, which have evolved quite a bit over the past few years. I do eat a high carb woe (usually 200+ grams a day), but that hasn't hindered my weight goals-I manage my weight by my calorie intake 0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions