” – than a quart of milk”

Posted on by
3

picture of cooked quinoa

The content below was published a little over 2 years ago on 2010 March 08.

Today, I ran across the same factual error, with the exact same phrase, on a new cookbook author’s site. I Googled on “more calcium than a quart of milk” and found at least 5 other sites making this error. All these years later.

The USDA Nutrition Database is the standard for nutrition information. Almost all of the nutrition software out there, on and offline uses it. Now, in 2012, they have searches that can be bookmarked. Here you go, in case you are curious to see for yourself that quinoa does not have more calcium than a quart of milk:

http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/6430

It is just AMAZING that one person posting a factual error on the web, can spread that error for over 5 years and even have it published in hard copy books.

At least five years ago a cookbook author wrote on her web site that one cup of cooked quinoa has as much calcium as one quart of cow’s milk.

Well, quinoa has about 32 mg per cooked cup. Cows milk has about 300 mg per cup. My guess is that somebody jumbled a zero somewhere.

That website, which shall remain nameless ( I’m not out to bust on anyone ) is still up, uncorrected, years later. I have heard people claim to have contacted this author with information about her mistake.

Today, years later, I was reading a cookbook I’ve been into for the last month and the author wrote the exact same mistake. Somebody made a mistake somewhere and cookbook authors have been perpetuating this misinformation down the line.

Bottom line: do not not trust cookbook authors for nutrition information.

BTW, if you want calcium without the digestive discomfort of lactose intolerance, allergies and sex organ cancers of cow’s milk you can find plenty of calcium in these foods

The Gender Bender Nobody Saw

Posted on by
1

I was reading on another blog that some people believe that in 40% of American marriages wives now earn more than their husbands, they expect this trend to continue and that this trend will bring more gender role changes. I have no idea how that statistic coexists in reality with the often quoted stat about women only earning ___ cents for every dollar earned by a man.

Looking back to old movies, books, etc I agree that gender roles in the US have changed a lot.

What I find really fascinating about these changes is how extreme they are and how unnoticed they seem to be.

As an example, I recently joined the huddled masses in watching “The Hunger Games”. In the movie, a teenage couple struggle to live in a “survival of the fittest” situation. A plot where the role of the hero is usually reserved for a man. Yet, it is the “macho” hunting skills of the lead female who saves the couple, several times. She even rescues her love interest who shows his gratitude for her protection with physical affection.

Journalists and other commentators will often pick up on the smallest things to have something to write about. Yet, I haven’t seen this aspect of the movie mentioned anywhere.  A gender bender like that even a short time ago would have seriously freaked people out.

Are things like this going unnoticed because the changes are slow, subtle or is it a generational thing? A new generation is born into what things have changed into, to them it is normal, so it isn’t a big deal to be noticed?

Interesting…..

Stop Using Cavemen as an Excuse for Your Fad Diet

Posted on by
4

The ladies over at Jezebel said what I did in Cooked Meals For A Million Years?, but in a much more satisfying way:

Anthropologists have uncovered “unambiguous evidence” in South Africa that our Homo erectus grandpas were cooking their food as far back as one million years ago. Previous to this discovery, the earliest conclusive evidence of deliberate, human-controlled fires dated back only about 400,000 years. Now, I know what you’re thinking: How do I know it wasn’t just spontaneously-combusted bat guano?

Don’t worry, they covered that.

snip …

On principle, I 100% do not care what anyone else eats. But I do care about judgmental condescension shrouded in pseudo-science—the idea that certain behaviors are “healthier” or “more natural” because “that’s how the cavemen did it.” That’s some bullshit that you hear all the time, from raw- and/or paleo-foodists and those barefoot people and the strident anti-monogamists. And I really honestly don’t give a shit what any of those groups want to eat/wear/fuck, but can we just PLEASE leave the “cavemen” out of it?

Full article.