#ZeroHunger is the motto for the World Food Day that is celebrated on October 16 leaded by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) worldwide. #ZeroHunger is also part of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) of the World Health Organization (WHO).
Achieving #ZeroHunger is not only about feeding hungry people, but also about doing it in a healthy and sustainable way. Food safety in our times is not only a matter of quantity, but also of quality. Unhealthy diets have become the first risk factor for disease and death worldwide and that is why we need to reach the entire population a sufficient variety of safe, nutritious and affordable foods, while caring for the health of the planet on which we all depend. World Food Day asks us to take action in all sectors to reach #ZeroHunger, 100% nutrition.
But what is a healthy and sustainable diet? FAO itself determines that a healthy diet is one that provides nutritional needs to maintain an active life and reduce the risk of contracting diseases through the consumption of safe, nutritious and diverse foods. And a sustainable diet supports entrenched solutions to food production with a low level of greenhouse gas emissions and a moderate use of natural resources such as soil and water, while increasing food diversity for the future.
What is the current situation?
The high consumption of dishes rich in sugars, refined starches, fats and salt have become the basis of food for developed countries, limiting the consumption of traditional dishes made with vegetables, legumes, whole grains, etc. We cook less, move less and consume more prepared dishes. The result is that we are malnourished. Do you find it alarming? Don’t you think it’s for so much? Let’s see some figures:
Currently, there are already more people with obesity and overweight in the world than those who are hungry: almost 800 million people (672 adults and 124 children) in the world suffer from obesity and another 40 million children are overweight. However, it is estimated that there are about 820 million people who suffer from hunger (approximately one in nine).
Unhealthy diets along with sedentary lifestyles have overcome smoking as the main risk factor for disability and death in the world.
Approximately 2 billion euros are spent each year to treat health problems related to obesity.
These are some of the conclusions reached by FAO related to hunger and malnutrition but they are not the only ones. Our way of feeding ourselves is also having environmental consequences:
The environmental damage caused by the food system could increase from 50 to 90%, due to the higher consumption of processed foods, meat and other products of animal origin in low and middle income countries.
Of some 6,000 species of plants grown for food throughout the history of mankind, today only three species (wheat, corn and rice) supply almost 50 percent of our daily calories. We need to consume a wide variety of nutritious foods.
Climate change threatens to reduce both the quality and quantity of crops, reducing crops. Rising temperatures are also exacerbating water scarcity, changing the relationship between pests, plants and pathogens, and reducing marine resources.
The current food system – which includes farming, animal husbandry, processing, packaging and transportation – is responsible for 37% of the total greenhouse gas (GHG)emissions generated annually, and losses and food waste also collaborates with 8-10% of the total sum. Belén Blanco tells us in more detail in the post “Tell me what you eat… and I’ll tell you if it’s good for the planet”.
For all this, because they are realities, all together we must raise awareness of the problem of hunger, malnutrition, food waste, climate change, etc. FAO calls on all people to get involved in implementing some measure to achieve the #ZeroHunger.
Who are the actors involved in this change taking place? The answer is all. Modify the way of producing, supplying and consuming food. The involvement of the industry in limiting saturated and trans fats, added sugars and salt. Eliminate advertising and promotion in unhealthy foods and especially those aimed at children and adolescents. Implement educational programs on nutrition and health. Actions from all levels are necessary.
And I, as a consumer, what can I do? As a consumer, as a citizen, as a human being on this planet, you can. Think about how you consume, how you eat and act on your own, individual level and with the people around you. Here are a series of measures that can guide you:
World Food Day is not the only forum in which it strives to improve food security, but FAO also participates with WHO and other agencies in the implementation of the United Nations Decade of Nutrition Action (2016-2025). It aims to strengthen joint action to reduce hunger and improve nutrition worldwide and assist all countries in their specific commitments. The SOFI report is published annually to provide information on the progress made to eradicate hunger, achieve food security and improve nutrition. The last one was published on July 15, 2019.
On World Food Day, FAO launches a strong message: we can end hunger and all forms of malnutrition to become the #ZeroHunger generation. But this will entail the joint action of all, from the commitment of each one of us in the change in the way we feed ourselves, to the cooperation between countries for an efficient transfer of technology, for example, through the correct decision-making of governments or by the involvement of private companies and the media.
The end of Game of Thrones has left many of us an existential vacuum and an unprecedented duel. Precisely when we entered the acceptance phase, a new series of creators of “The Wall”, “Tension with North Korea” and “The crisis of Venezuela” comes to our screens: ‘Game of Trump’.
The recent veto of the Trump administration, the immediate suspension imposed on the Huawei company and the reactions of the companies Google (USA), ARM (UK), Vodafone (UK) Panasonic (Japan) and Toshiba (Japan), generate many doubts about what is happening in the world of technology due to the geopolitical dimension that this field is acquiring. And now, we ask ourselves: how can it affect us in the short and medium term as Spanish citizens and members of the European Union?
In this sense, from the CARTIF Health and Welfare Area we try to reflect and assess the scope of this new edition of the Game of Trump series and analyse the implications that these technologies can have on the socio – sanitary services and the effects of this new war on our quality of life.
Season I: Huawei and Google mobile phones
When we think about improving the quality of life of people with some new technological development, we always keep in mind that people seek to receive services on site, without the need to go physically to a specific place. That is why we believe that it is indisputable that the present and the future of the technological services that we receive go through mobility. In this respect, Huawei is one of the most important actors, being the second manufacturer of phones in the world in terms of sales and popularity among a public that praises especially the duration of their batteries and the quality of their cameras.
The owners of the company’s mobile phones, which number in the millions, are bewildered by the news that Google has broken relations with Huawei, ceasing to provide its software to the Chinese company, which uses Google’s Android operating system. As a result, Google’s decision deprives Huawei of the user interface and widely used applications such as Google Play, Google Maps and Google Mail.
Season II: The supremacy for the domain of 5G
At this point, analysts indicate that the mobile battle, although it is very important from the economic and commercial points of view, is not the most significant point of the confrontation. What is at stake is the supremacy in 5G technology and in this respect Europe has something to say. Since, although the leader in 5G is Huawei, there are two companies belonging to member countries of the European community which are in second and fourth place for their contributions to 5G technology, Ericcson and Nokia, while the first company in the US is in fifth place. This seems to be the reason for the apparent tantrum that everyone thinks will end up resolving with a negotiation, because the future is unstoppable. The Trump administration seems to prefer to slow the deployment of 5G to be dependent on Chinese and European technologies. Meanwhile, those who believe in conspiracies think that they are only pressing to access the keys and thus be able to spy on us.
It is estimated that Huawei will possess in the future up to 30-35% of the global standards of 5G and behind these standards we find the international specifications designed to boost the interoperability of the technology. But what is this about 5G and interoperability? And, above all, what applications can this have in the health field? ‘What are you gay? What are you running?’
Season III: What is 5G and how does it affect us?
The future of the social-health field is “promised” to us in pink thanks to the relationship between 5G and interoperability. For this reason, we have to talk about several lines of technological development in which we are working in CARTIF. An example is the ‘internet of things’ (IoT), which is nothing more than a network of physical objects, machines, people and other devices that allow connectivity and communications to exchange data for smart applications and services. These devices are made up of smartphones, tablets, consumer electronics, vehicles, social robots, companion robots and sensors that allow them to be controlled remotely through the existing network infrastructure, creating opportunities for direct integration between the physical and digital worlds, which improves efficiency, accuracy and economic benefits.
5G technology is the one designed to optimize and improve internet connection speeds, considerably reducing the response time of the network and, therefore, capable of generating a range of opportunities in all digital sectors.
Technologies such as mobile, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth will enable IoT communications through use cases and the 5G is the network that will connect these things. The IoT devices will have different capacities and data demands and 5G network will be necessary to be able to support all of them. With the ‘internet of things’, we will see services that only need a small amount of data and a long battery life, as well as devices that require high speeds and reliable connectivity. (1) (2)
Similarly, from our scientific skepticism regarding technology, it is necessary to note that, as is common in our lives, not everything is in pink and we are aware that there are going to be aspects to take into account to develop a technology humanized designed only to significantly improve the quality of life of people. For example, the increase in speed and volume of information imply higher powers at higher frequencies, and the consequences of the bio-compatibility of these new electromagnetic emissions is a field of study really important. On the other hand, there is the aspect, not less important, of the privacy of the data. Currently, thanks to Big Data and AI there are many companies that have more information about the determinants of our health than the socio-health systems to which we attend (and we all know that the scope of the data ‘is dark and full of terrors’). Some think that this is the true Iron Throne, and there are interests so that, as some cluster us as potential consumers. They want to cluster us to manipulate us.
Final season IV: Making virtue of necessity
The socio-health system is in a critical state from the point of view of sustainability, given the aging of the population and the cuts in budgets. To make the system sustainable as a whole, it is necessary to optimize the connection between necessary resources and available services. We really believe that this can only be solved by an adequate, intelligent and person-centered use of technology.
At the international level, the aging of the population is affecting all the regions and countries of the world that have reached a certain level of development. There is no doubt that the extension of life is one of the main achievements of our society, although it is true that this achievement also poses important challenges and opportunities for our economy, health system and social protection.
In Spain, demographic aging is very marked and this is especially evident in the larger regions, characterized by a rural population whose young people tend to migrate to cities. In these areas, providing social and health services is more expensive and difficult due to the lack of resources. The social commitment has allowed to transform this unfavorable situation into a virtue. Therefore, the social-health system of Spain is considered as one of the best in the world, due to the good results it presents, combining high levels of efficiency and quality with a comparatively lower cost.
In this respect, Castilla y León, according to the State Observatory for Dependency carried out by the National Association of Directors and Managers of Social Services corresponding to the management of the year 2018, is recognized again (twelfth consecutive year) as the autonomous community that manage better the Dependency in Spain. The corresponding mark of Castilla y León is 9.3 out of 10. The average score of the Spanish communities stands at 5.04 points. Therefore, we are talking about an unprecedented success.
The ecosystem of our region, embodied in the SIVI and BIOTECYL Clusters, formed by a large number of organizations, both public and private: health systems, public social agencies, patient associations, groups that provide services, service companies, geriatric, Universities and Technology Centers, structures the development and provide the services so that we can develop our lives and those of our loved ones in a comfortable way taking into account parameters of quality, efficiency and independence.
For all this, we have to be aware of our responsibility and, from this privileged vision, take advantage of new opportunities to carry out scientific research and humanized technological development with the sole aim of improving the quality of life of people. In CARTIF we believe that this is the meeting point and there we will be contributing our experience.
From the creators of “What doesn´t kill you makes you fatter or is a sin” and “You don´t know what to eat” appears “Take care if you like overcooking!” and “Nightmare in the kitchen, there is acrylamide in your food“.
For years it was known that acrylamide was a toxic substance present in tobacco smoke and in industrial processes such as paper manufacturing, metal extraction, textile industry, colorants and other processes such as cosmetic additives or in water treatment. What nobody could imagine was that it also appears naturally when we are cooking foods such as potato crisps, French fries, biscuits and coffee.
It was first detected in foods in 2002 in Sweden when this chemical was found in starchy foods. According to experts, acrylamide is converted in the body into a chemical compound called glycidamide, which causes mutations and DNA damage that could initiate a cancerous process. The main chemical process that causes this is known as the Maillard Reaction; between sugars and amino acids (mainly one called asparagine) that are naturally present in many foods. It is the same reaction that ‘browns’ food (consequence of some pigments called melanoidins) and affects its taste and smell (due to substances such as furans). For this reason, the color could be a very practical guide for detecting acrylamide in foods.
Following, there is a summary of the evolution of the acrylamide topic according to the opinion of experts and different authorities in food safety:
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC): classifies it as probable carcinogens in humans (group 2A). This designation is applied when there is limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans as well as sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals. For this reason, the authorities recommend that exposure to acrylamide should be as minimal as possible.
World Health Organization and Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO/WHO): admits that there are many doubts about the mechanism of action of acrylamide and also about the estimation of the maximum recommended intakes or how the data obtained in animals have been extrapolated to humans. They insist especially on the need for more research on topics such as the associated risks in humans, quantification of acrylamide in diets other than European ones and identify the speed of the human body to neutralize acrylamide. In 2009 FAO/WHO published a code of practice for the reduction of acrylamide in food. A large amount of information on acrylamide is located on the FAO/WHO portal ‘Acrylamide Information Network’.
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA): it is still not clear whether the consumption of this component has an effect on the risk of developing cancer in humans. In the following link you can find all the information published by the EFSA related to acrylamide since 2002. Industry (Food and Drink Europe) has developed a document called ‘toolbox’ containing measures that can be applied by the different sectors of food industry to bring its levels down.
European Commission: in November 20th, 2017 the Reglament (UE) 2017/2158 is published containing mitigation measures and benchmark levels for the reduction of the presence of acrylamide in food. The Regulation establishes mandatory mitigation measures for food companies (industry, catering and restoration). At the moment, there are only levels of reference but everything indicates that in the future they will become maximum limits.
Spanish Agency of consumption, food security and nutrition (AECOSAN): is in full campaign of information to diminish the exhibition of acrylamide among consumers and to sensitize the population on the health risks of it. The motto of the campaign: ‘Choose dorado, choose health’. In the following video and link you can find simple recommendations to control the formation of acrylamide when cooking at home.
Undoubtedly, the issue of acrylamide will continue to give much to talk about over the next few years. In CARTIF we have just launched the COLOR Project: “Acrylamide reduction in processed foods” approved in the FEDER INTERCONECTA 2018 call. In this Project, the companies GALLETAS GULLÓN, CYL IBERSNACKS and COOPERATIVA AGRÍCOLA SANTA MARTA will join efforts to achieve the following objectives:
To reduce acrylamide in biscuit products and chips.
To obtain olive oils capable of counteracting the formation of acrylamide in processed foods.
To develop an indirect analytical method to quantify acrylamide more quickly, easily and economically than conventional analytical methods by measuring the COLOR of foods. In the Project we have the collaboration of the Institute of Science and Technology of Food and Nutrition (ICTAN-CSIC) and the Research Group, Food Quality and Microbiology (GRUPO CAMIALI) of the University of Extremadura.
Entomophagy, or insect consumption by humans, is not a novelty to anyone. Diets based on insects and arthropods are fully accepted in many countries and cultures, especially in South America, Asia or Africa. Even they are a real delicacy for some gourmets experts, for which they pay very high prices. There are markets for edible insects, at prohibitive prices, in cities such as New York, Tokyo, Mexico or Los Angeles, and some of the most famous international chefs include them in their famous recipes.
They do not have a single fault, nutritionally speaking. They are a balanced and healthy food, with high protein content, rich in essential amino acids. They are an important source of unsaturated fatty acids and chitin, besides of having vitamins and minerals beneficial for our body.
However, it is true that these ‘bugs’ have attracted the attention of the media, research institutions and members of food industry in recent months. Why now?
Experts say insects can provide a part of the necessary calories in countries where the consumption of some foods is limited. The Food and Agricultural Organization of United Nations (FAO) expects the world population will increase by 2050 in 9700 million people, about 24% people more than now, so there will be a greater need to supply food. Therefore, it could be a solution to help reducing the levels of hunger in the world.
On the other hand, agriculture and livestock, as we know them today, are primary activities that emit greenhouse gases. In comparison, insect could be produced with lower levels of greenhouse gas emissions and water consumption. Therefore, the incorporation of these new ingredients to our market list can also improve the situation of the planet in the climate change’s fight, as well as contributing to the circular economy process due to insects can feed with agrifood waste.
In addition to these reasons, on January 1st, Regulation (EU) 2215/2283 come into force, which includes insects within the category of ‘novel foods’, which is a big step to simplify the authorization process.
And, if eating insects have so many advantages, why are they not consumed regularly in Spain and in many other Western countries?
Because, in spite of legislation, there is an emotional and cultural rejection to include them in our plates. In other words, they make us feel sick!
This argument has been demonstrated by a pioneering experiment through blind tasting of different foods prepared with insects and monitored with neuroscientific tools, carried out in the context of GO_INSECT and ECIPA projects. These are two innovative initiatives related to the breeding of insects for food as an alternative and sustainable source of proteins. CARTIF takes part in the first one, a Supra-autonomic Operative Group, which has the financial support of the Spanish Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Food Supply.
This blind tasting has served to demonstrate that taste is not the reason why we do not choose insects for eating. The main reason is the appearance of them, knowing what they are, being aware that we are going to eat something disgusting for us.
How did the experiment carry out?
28 people participated in the tasting, which took place at the Veterinary School of the University of Zaragoza, while the electrodermal activity of us was recorded. Previously, we were warned products of the tasting could contain lactose, gluten, nuts, crustaceans and insects.
Participants tasted four dishes with insects in their composition, and a fifth dish without them, which served as base of comparison. In three of those that contained insects, they were processed and were not visible directly to the eye. In the fourth, insects were easily recognizable.
All these options were carefully elaborated and tested in advance in order to avoid mistakes in the evaluation. Bitbrain Company’s technology measured sensory responses, both when visualizing the food and when eating it. At the end, they evaluated with and individual survey the satisfaction to each elaboration.
And the results?
The non-conscious emotional response to the three first dishes, which have insects in their composition in a non-visible way, fell within the normal parameters to the tasting of the rest. That is, the fact that a plate contains insects does not influence negatively in the taste and is not detected at the physiological level either.
On the other hand, the emotional impact of the participants when we tasted the whole insect (small dry larvae of Tenebrio molitor or flour worm) was much higher than in the resto of the dishes. Even, the emotional impact was greater during the visualization than during the intake. That is to say, what produces that impact is the knowledge of knowing that what we have before us is an insect, not so much the consumption.
At a conscious level, the average score given to the dishes in which the insects were incorporated as flour was 7’6. Only one participant did not agree to taste the plate of the whole insect. Those who taste it marked a 5’9 of average grade.
After knowing that all the products we had tested contained insects, secured we would eat them again. Only one of the participants confirmed in the survey will not buy products that had been fed with insects.
So, at least, we should give them a chance, even if they are masked. More than 2 billion people already incorporate them into their diet, so a quarter of the world’s population cannot be wrong.
Last July, EFSA published a protocol that sets out the strategy to follow for the collection of data that will be used for the development of a Scientific Opinion that establishes the maximum tolerable level of sugar intake. I know it could seem confusing, let me explain…
Tons of tweets and images often appear on social networks that show the amount of sugar that certain processed foods have. Associations such as sinazucar.org have been actively promoting it for some time. Thus, this topic is not new at all. The novelty is related to the publication by EFSA of a protocol that sets the strategy to follow in the collection of scientific data that will be carried out prior to the publication of the Scientific Opinion on the reference dietary level of intake of sugarsfor the European population that EFSA plans to publish.
This document will represent an update of the Scientific Opinion published in 2010 regarding reference dietary values for sugars, carbohydrates and fiber (EFSA NDA Panel, 2010a). With the data available up to 2010, there was no conclusive evidence linking an effect of sugars on micronutrient density, insulin response to glucose, body weight, type 2 diabetes or dental caries significant enough to establish limits of maximum tolerated intake, adequate intake or reference intake of sugars. After 2010, several organizations have published recommendations on the recommended intake of sugars; however, quite disparate among them. For example, the World Health Organization recommends reducing the consumption of free sugars in life. For both adults and children, the consumption of free sugars should be reduced to less than 10% of the total caloric intake. A reduction below 5% of the total caloric intake would produce additional health benefits. Now, EFSA intends to evaluate the scientific basis that has emerged from 2010 to the present and to check if there is enough new evidence to establish a reference dietary level.
This request to EFSA, which comes from the competent authorities in the field of nutrition and health of 5 European countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Switzerland), will not only respond to the need to update the existing evidence but also will constitute an act of consensus of terms referring to the sugars present in food. Currently, each one calls, labels and understands the sugar content of food at free will, which makes it difficult to study the literature, label food and establish conclusions about the cause-effect relationship and recommendations for the population. Some companies only express the total sugar content in the nutritional labeling of their food, others consider that what is really important is to know the content in “added” sugars, while others demand consensus to label and make recommendations about “free” sugars. Do you know the difference between the three terms?
Total sugars: all mono and disaccharides that are part of a food, whatever its origin.
Added sugars: all mono and disaccharides that are not part of the food naturally but have been added during processing, whether by the manufacturer, the cook or consumers.
Free sugars: all mono and disaccharides except those that naturally form part of whole fruits or vegetables (whether intact, dried or cooked).
That is to say, all the added sugars are free sugars but not vice versa. The key difference between added sugars and free sugars is that the free sugars also contemplate the sugars that are naturally present in honey, syrups, fruit juices and fruit juice concentrates; while the added sugars do not contemplate them. Sugars naturally occurring in whole fruits and vegetables are not included as free sugars since there is no evidence that they have an adverse effect on health. In other words, free sugars would be synonymous with total sugars in all foods except fruits and whole vegetables.
A practical case to help us clear up this mess, please! For example, the sugars naturally present in a carrot juice in brick would be considered as free sugars; while the sugars naturally present in baby carrots packed in a modified atmosphere ready to eat, would not be considered.
Currently in Europe, most companies label their sugars in the form of total sugars. The USA was the first country in 2016 to establish regulations to force the declaration of all added sugars in the labeling of all foods. On the other hand, the Canadian health agency recently published a document in which it proposes to label foods rich in sugars, saturated fats and sodium as “high food in …” In the case of sugars, Canadians propose this declaration to be included in all foods that contain free sugars (not only added), so that this rule also affects fruit and vegetable juices and purées; while only dairy and whole fruits and vegetables stay out of this mandatory declaration.
Needless to say that if this lack of consensus affects the good understanding among professionals and experts in nutrition, even more it will confuse consumers. So in addition to this task of matching key terms to establish recommendations for intake and common labeling standards, education and consumer communication campaigns on the interpretation of nutritional labeling of foods are also necessary.
From CARTIF, we are committed to the dissemination of consumer education on nutrition and food issues, so we will remain aware to the publication of the Scientific Opinion of EFSA and of course, we will inform you of its conclusions in a clear and understandable way.
The macrobiotic diet, dissociated, pineapple, onion soup, detox … are infinite diets that have become fashionable since the issues of food and nutrition began to interest me. And it’s not to start in a destructive way but none of them has convinced me from the point of view of a Dietitian-Nutritionist who has always believed in moderation and a balanced diet.
However, there is currently a movement in motion (notice that I say movement and not diet) that is changing my mind: the movement “Realfooding“. Of course, with some nuance.
According to Carlos Ríos, creator of the initiative, “Realfooding” is a lifestyle based on eating real food and avoiding ultra-processed ones. It aims to improve the health of the population through food.
And what is “Realfooding”? By real food is known all those minimally processed foods or whose industrial or artisanal processing has not worsened the quality of the composition or negatively interfered with their naturally occurring healthy properties. Specifically they are vegetables, fruits, nuts and seeds, tubers and roots, vegetables, fish and seafood, eggs, meat, whole grains, virgin oils, quality dairy products, coffee, cocoa and infusions, herbs and spices. Also considered as real food is the “good processed” which are those with an industrial or artisanal processing beneficial or innocuous for the quality of the food with respect to its healthful properties. The “good processed” are the second-range foods (real foods in canned and semi-preserved), third range (real frozen / deep-frozen foods), fourth range (real foods packed in modified atmospheres), fifth range (real cooked food dishes and vacuum packed).
The movement “Realfooding” is also based on avoiding ultra-processed foods, which include: soft drinks, energy drinks, packaged juices, sugary milk, pastries, white bread, processed meats, commercial and pre-cooked pizzas, cookies, refined grains and bars , chips and snacks, sweets and ice cream, diet products and commercial sauces.
The pillars on which the movement “Realfooding” is based are:
The excess of overweight and obesity in the population
To be healthy: Eat real food
Real food does not focus on calories or nutrients, but on food
Real food is cooked
More market and less supermarket
Real food does not have conflicts of interest
Ultra-processed products are bad for your health
The “Realfooding” initiative encourages people to participate in #challengeamonthwithrealfood, which consists of being a month eating only real food and no ultra-processed food. In this way, the initiative aims to challenge the population to test how they feel by maintaining a healthy eating style. “Realfooding” makes available to the “Realfooders” a series of tools that help them meet the challenge, such as support teams in social networks where they can ask questions, tell their experiences, difficulties and achievements; publication of recipes with real food, etc. You can find all the information on its web.
“Realfooding” could mean the beginning of the change of eating habits that population needs to reduce the high rates of overweight and obesity that currently exist; for that reason it should not be left only in a temporary fad diet but in a practice that lasts over time; a fashion that has come to stay.
Obviously, this initiative does not mean that all lesson learned so far in terms of education campaigns in food and nutrition is useless, but is another tool. Therefore, if you intend to do the “Realfooding” challenge, remember the following keywords:
Variety: In addition to choosing foods within the group of real food, these must be varied, that is, we can not always and only eat meat or rice or natural yogurt, however much it is real food.
Balance: Our body needs nutrients in greater quantity than others and those nutrients are found in different amounts in food. This is the reason why some foods should be consumed more frequently than others. This reminds us of the famous balance diet pyramid of which we spoke in the previous post “malnutrition by excess”.
Culinary technology: It is important to process the chosen foods correctly; for example, the potato is a vegetable considered real food, but better roasted or cooked than fried.
Moderation: beware of the quantities! the fact that the eggs are real food, does not mean that it is beneficial to eat 3 eggs a day.
With respect to the food industry and the regulatory bodies in terms of food, nutrition and health, we must highlight the effort and investment made dailyin the improvement of food safety, in the diversity of packaging, presentations and formats to maintain quality of these foods, more adapted to current society, in the creation of culinary alternatives for people with food intolerances and allergies, etc. However, there is still a long way to go in terms of improving the nutritional profile of food, the regulation of labeling, etc.
From CARTIF we congratulate the creators of “Realfooding” for the initiative and we support real food as the basis of a healthy, varied, balanced and moderate diet but always in the hands of the food industry and the regulatory bodies, who every day work and invest to give food products of higher quality and safety to all population groups.
