Death in the Desert

    

     When visiting Tucson and southern Arizona, it doesn't take long to experience the harshness of the desert climate.  Often referred to as the Devil's Highway, this region just south of the Cabeza Prieta Wilderness is named for its lethal nature and affinity to kill those brazen enough to enter its inferno.  Even in November, the arid landscape and penetrating sun offer no forgiveness even to the humblest amongst us  with a wrong turn or a short supply of water, a two-hour hike can quickly turn into an act of survival.  It becomes increasingly clear that anyone attempting to make the journey across the Sonoran desert into the United States must be doing so out of desperation.

     In Luis Alberto Urrea's national bestseller entitled, The Devil's Highway, he describes a detailed account of the journey made in 2001 by a group of nearly 30 migrants who risked their lives to cross the deadliest region of the continent from Mexico into the United States.  Based on actual testimony, interviews, and data collection, the book goes on to illustrate the exorbitant loans migrants are forced to take to pay a "coyote" to help smuggle them over the border.  Many times they've sold everything and gone into enormous debt, risking both their lives and livelihoods for a chance at a better life.  And despite their determination to survive, nearly the entire group perished after their coyote abandoned them, some of the bodies of whom were never identified.  The following is an excerpt from the book:

     By Monday we were all dead.  I was hiding under that tree.  Out there I saw people in despair.  I saw them without water.  I don't know why I survived.  Maybe it's a miracle.  Some of them just died of desperation.  Some of them lost their minds.  You could hear them screaming.  Some fell all alone.  I heard one guy screaming, daring Border Patrol to come find him. He was desperate.  He started singing.  We were drinking urine.  We were ripping open cactus. The majority of them died that day.  I was going to die this morning. 

     While dozens of migrants die in the desert every year, the discovery of the Yuma 14 on May 24, 2001 in Yuma, Arizona remains one of the most devastating fatalities to date.  In response to the mounting deaths of migrants at the border, a group known as the Tucson Samaritans established themselves in July of 2002 to provide water, food, and emergency medical aid directly to people crossing the Sonoran Desert.  Since their beginning, the Tucson Samaritans have helped thousands of migrants.  But despite their best efforts, a database that tracks migrant mortality recorded 123 deaths in 2018 and 137 year to date (http://www.tucsonsamaritans.org/).  The database lists the sex, age, name of the deceased (if known), where the body was found, and the cause of death, the majority of which are exposure.  From a period of 2002 to 2016, there were 1,164 migrant deaths attributed to exposure in the desert.  

     Scrolling through the staggering list of the deceased is a haunting task.  Many of those who died were young, some were even teenagers with arguably their whole lives ahead of them.  While the dead are strangers unknown to us, there is an obligation to acknowledge each and every death, a vain attempt to recognize the loss of human life.  And perhaps that is the single most important fact of immigration at the US-Mexico border  that regardless of legal status, human beings are suffering and risking certain death to cross the desert into America.  It becomes increasingly difficult to believe that 1,164 migrants, many of whom were of Mexican descent, would be willing to die a miserable death in order to come to the US to simply sponge off the government.  It is time for the immigration debate in the US to divest from partisan politics and center on the humanitarian crisis affecting the lives of thousands of people at the hands of our government. 

   

Overeating in America: Controlling Our Appetites by Controlling Our Brains

      New York Times writer, Michael Moss, recently compiled an article entitled, "The Extraordinary Science of Addictive Junk Food," a case study of sorts that examines the role scientists play in the obesity crisis in America.  As he uncovers, food scientists, experts in a field that often uses physical and biological sciences to improve food for the consuming public, are hired kingpins in an industry driven by deception, delusion and duplicity.  Big food companies like Coca-Cola, General Mills and Frito-Lay spend millions of dollars in not just getting consumers to buy their products, but in keeping them hooked. 

     As the article notes, in America today, one in three adults and one in five children are considered clinically obese.  Among the top causes of death--cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes and stroke--our diets are critically at play.  Heart disease is number one and as the Mayo Clinic recently announced, is 80-percent preventable with exercise and proper nutrition.  Yet Americans continue to cash in on convenience and sell out on their health; our diets consist more heavily of food items that have been processed and refined to include excessive amounts of added sugar, salt and saturated fat, to which we have fallen victims.

     As Moss outlines in his article, the food industry hires scientists to review, analyze and prescribe variables in food that promote "sensory specific satiety," an effect that causes consumers to not just consume a product, but to continue consuming it to the point of overeating.  He describes a common term in the food industry dubbed "bliss point," an interval of sensory experience that is reached when a food's palatability (i.e its crunch, flavor, texture) culminates in a pinnacle of enjoyment that depresses the brain's ability to tell you to stop eating.  

     He goes on to divulge that sugar and salt are addictive substances and that by regularly consuming items such as packaged cookies and potato chips, our taste buds develop a sweet-and-salty sensory-dependency. Moss describes a study conducted by an expert in cravings who found that people could beat their additions to salt by simply refraining from salty foods long enough for their taste buds to return to a level of normal sensitivity.  

     In other words, if we open our eyes and our minds to become active and critical consumers, we can overcome the sabotage the food industry has set for us.  We can scrutinize food labels and avoid products containing high amounts of sugar and sodium by simply not buying them.  Choose water and lower calorie beverages with meals.  Snack on plain roasted almonds as opposed to the salted variety.  Eat fresh, whole fruit over that which has been canned in a sugar-loaded syrup.  Bake your own cookies and desserts and control the amount of sugar that is used.  Eat in moderation. America is a country of surplus, excess and overabundance and food is no exception--the choices are endless, but it is time the American consumer makes the right choices.

Here is a link to the original article: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/24/magazine/the-extraordinary-science-of-junk-food.html?hpw&_r=2&pagewanted=all&

High Fructose Corn Syrup: Calories V. Content

     While I once vehemently believed that table sugar was nutritionally superior to high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS), my opinion is begrudgingly evolving.  As my Food Science instructor recently informed me, as a registered and licensed dietitian (credentials I plan to achieve), we must base our food and nutrition understanding on science.  And much to my surprise, the science supporting the claim that our bodies do not readily digest HFCS in the same way as table sugar is simply not there.
     Between the 1970's and early 2000s, the prevalence of the use of HFCS as a cheaper alternative to table sugar in sweetening our food, rose dramatically.  In fact, during that time, the US saw a 25-percent increase in added sugars overall (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-fructose_corn_syrup)  Derived from the conversion of glucose into fructose using enzymes, it has been believed that this trend correlates to the rise in obesity in America that occurred during the same time period.  However, the American Council on Science and Health asserts that because sucrose (table sugar) and HFCS "have essentially the same composition, [it would] thus be highly unlikely for them to have different effects on body weight or metabolism" (http://www.acsh.org/publications/high-fructose-corn-syrup-separating-myths-from-facts/).  If the link between the rise of the use of HFCS and the increase in obesity were scientifically conclusive, a difference in chemical composition of HFCS and sucrose would be present.
    While the science supporting HFCS as a deviant form of sugar is inconclusive, the focus should shift from the source of added sugar to the additional calories that come with the consumption of added sugar.  As consumers, our attention to food labels should examine not necessarily the type of sweetener present in a food item, but the amount of sugar contained in each serving.  It is the added sugars in our diet (regardless of the HFCS or sucrose variety) that have been proven to play a direct role in obesity, type-II diabetes and high triglycerides leading to cardiovascular disease.

Say No to Chick-fil-A: Your Body Will Thank You

     Fox News commentator and Evangelical, Mike Huckabee, recently rallied for a Chick-fil-A "Customer Appreciation Day" in support of CEO Dan Cathy's outspoken views on the so-called "preservation of the sanctity of marriage." While this political propagation of bigotry for a minority group suffices to sour my appetite for nuclear chicken patties, my real distaste for Chick-fil-A are its horrible standards of nutrition.  As a student of nutrition science and someone who generally avoids eating garbage, I haven't exactly found a reason to grace the inside of a Chick-fil-A.  The kitschy name in itself has done little to persuade me that its menu might possibly offer anything outside of the "pink slime" variety.  

     Just glancing at some of the items on its online menu, I mourn for the bodies of Americans who recently showed up to Huckabee's event.  Sales increased by the millions as customers cashed-in to chow-down on chicken-byproducts all the while masquerading in some moral fight for marriage.  For example, the Chargrilled Chicken Cool Wrap--which may sound like a reasonable selection--contains 410 calories, 10 grams of fat, 32 grams of protein, and 1070 milligrams of sodium.  Dietary guidelines established by the American Dietetic Association have set the maximum limit of adequate intake of sodium for adults under the age of 51 at 1500 mg/day, so the fact that one of these wraps comes close to this number is unsettling.  Furthermore, the EER (estimated energy requirement) for protein is 0.8 grams per kilogram of body weight, so depending on the weight of the individual ordering a Chargrilled Chicken Cool Wrap, 32 grams of protein may very well be close to their dietary needs for an entire day.  

     When looking at classic items, such as the Chicken Sandwich, what is most alarming is the amount of sodium it contains: 1400 milligrams--100 milligrams shy of the 1500 mg/day maximum.  According to the results of numerous studies, high sodium intakes are associated with increased risk of hypertension, or high blood pressure.  An estimated 27-percent of adult Americans have hypertension, known as the "silent killer," because high blood pressure generally does not produce symptoms until organs and other vital systems are drastically damaged.

     In conclusion, I strongly discourage supporting any establishment that funds legislation for the execution of  any minority group, be it sexual orientation/race/religion/creed.   (http://thetruthpursuit.com/society/society-blogs/chick-fil-may-have-more-just-chicken-blood-its-hands/11304).  But if that's not enough to dissuade the typical American consumer, I can only hope that preservation of the sanctity of one's health will prevail.  After all, our bodies are our temple.

Food as Fuel: Reevaluating American Eating Habits

     Americans are in the midst of a food crisis.  With 4 of the 10 leading causes of death linked to diet (heart disease, stroke, diabetes 2, and some types of cancer), the eating habits of Americans are in fatal need of change.  The problem with which Americans are faced is an overwhelming abundance of convenient food choices--the culture behind eating in America is not of the mindset "what will best provide me with the nutrients my body needs," but rather, "what can I eat that is easy and satisfying to my taste buds."  If Americans began to more carefully contemplate food as optimal fuel and not a mere absolver of hunger, the less prevalent diseases such as obesity, hypertension, and type 2 diabetes would become.  

     The cells in our bodies rely on carbohydrates as a major source of vital energy.  Carbohydrates aid in breathing, muscle contraction, and circulation.  Americans predominantly consume refined carbohydrates containing added sugars that are quickly used up by the body, leaving us feeling hungry soon after we've eaten.  Because simple carbohydrate sources contain added sugars and are unable to sustain energy for long periods of time, their consumption often leads to over-eating and excessive caloric intake.
       White bread and white rice are two of the most common refined/processed grains and simple carbohydrates.  When a grain is whole, it remains intact and serves as a source of dietary fiber--fiber takes longer to be digested by the body and is slowly converted into energy that can be steadily used over a period of time.  Sources of dietary fiber are low in calories and can contribute to lower weight and lower cholesterol levels.  By opting for brown rice over white rice, whole wheat bread over white bread, and by avoiding refined grains that contain added sugars and little or no dietary fiber, Americans can significantly curb hunger and the onset of diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease.  Americans must alter their energy sources and replace simple carbohydrates with complex carbohydrates.  By doing so, they will achieve satiety and be less inclined to consume more calories than needed and more likely to maintain a healthy waistline.

Tip: When looking for whole grain/high fiber products, don't be fooled by claims.  Always check the Nutrition Facts Label: a product should contain 6 grams of fiber in order to be low in sugar.  Also look at the ingredients--if the word "whole" is not listed before "wheat flour," that product has undergone some amount of processing.

American food and all things evil

It all began last night about four hours after consuming what I originally deemed a healthy, nutritious meal.  You've got to understand that as an aspiring dietitian, I do my best to seek out holistic food options (i.e. of the non-high fructose/soy lecithin/xanthum gum variety; please read The Omnivore's Dilemma).  So you can imagine the guilt and dismay I felt after learning from my mom of all people, (and then a news article) that the tilapia I had for four months (and just hours earlier) religiously consumed had been imported from the "friendly" waters of where else but China.  China!  A country whose government does little to regulate anything let alone its food, where only months back its own infants were killed by ingesting melamine, a toxic chemical put in baby formula to cut costs by giving it a milky color with half the milk.  This is a country that abuses human rights and fails to abide by any universal codes of decency.  Yet somehow the U.S. sees no problem in importing fish that is reared to prime in filthy water and fortified to withstand its own toxicity through injections of antibiotics and other banned chemical compounds.  Thanks a lot, FDA.  Which brings me to a larger point here--the Food and Drug Administration.  An institution supposedly derived to ensure that the food in this country is safe.  However, currently while the U.S. imports 80% of its seafood from overseas countries such as China and Vietnam, the FDA inspects only 2% of the fish that is imported and sold to our restaurants and grocery stores.  It claims it doesn't have the necessary authority and funding to do so.  Right now the Senate has been given the opportunity to vote on the so-called Food Safety bill (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-510&tab=summary) that, if passed, would give the FDA the funds (nearly $1.4 billion dollars over the next 4 years) it needs to regulate the industry, but it probably won't be passed because Republicans don't want to spend the money.  They'd rather extend the Bush tax cuts to the wealthiest 2% of Americans, than have safe and nontoxic food to eat.  Please, tell me how a tax cut is going to bolster the economy?  I'd personally like to have the trillions of dollars back that were spent on the Iraq war and then maybe I wouldn't have to be sitting here right now contemplating the contents of my contaminated insides (and I realize this is a huge understatement).  Obviously in light of the larger picture, a few tainted tilapia don't signal a significant crisis, but as the old adage goes, "the devil is in the details."  Here's an idea, FDA, if a country still puts lead in its toys, it's probably best to steer clear of its fish too.