Posts Tagged ‘food’

I totally fell for this click bait, 30 Foods Under 40 Calories, from Health Magazine and guess what? Every one of them, except tea, is a vegetable or fruit. 

I knew this ahead of time, I really did, but I wanted to believe otherwise because, as much as I love eating fruits and vegetables, I love processed food. But alas, time over time, I learn why vegetables and fruits should be the main thing I eat all day long.

Further reading: The concept of Crowding Out to lose weight and be healthy.

Read Full Post »

A pink pig made of marzipan sweet almond paste in a plastic bag that reads "Good luck". Net weight 1.41 oz, 40 grams

Marzipan pig to celebrate the new year. (ignore the mess, we’d just moved in to our new house!)

This is my New Years piggy. If you’re not familiar with this tradition, Germans consume a pig on New Years Eve to bring good luck in the New Year. You can do this either by actually eating pork or by eating a marzipan pig  (Marzipanschweine).

Admittedly, it’d be a lot better for me as a hypoglycemic, or pretty much anyone, to eat the pork vs. marzipan, but a little indulgence now and then isn’t a terrible thing. Also, I’m not superstitious in any way, but it’s fun to keep some of these traditions alive.

But that doesn’t mean I have to eat the whole thing in one sitting.

In fact, I ate this little piggy over 4 days, and always immediately after a high protein meal (because that’s when it will impact my blood sugar the least). I also bought the smallest piggy I could find.

And that’s the trick with food traditions. You don’t have to give them up, but it’s not a blank check to stuff your face and trash your blood sugar & diet. Take a bit or two, savor the hell out of it, and walk away. It’s hard, but you’ll feel so much better overall when you do it.

Read Full Post »

A grocery check out line with my groceries of fruit, vegetables, eggs, and Beanitos chips

Read Full Post »

Nice try, Starbucks. Considering that 2.3g sugar = 1 sugar cube, there are the equivalent of almost 9 sugar cubes in this damn can of coffee. That cancels-out any benefits of the 20 grams of protein in my book.

Definitely not hypoglycemic-friendly or anyone-friendly.

Read Full Post »


Turkey Tacos for Thanksgiving


Never one for convention, I decided to make a Tex-Mex Thanksgiving dinner for my boyfriend and I.  I got this recipe from a comment on Lifehacker’s What’s Your Go To Date Recipe and made one modification. They taste so good and they are very hypoglycemic-friendly (high protein, low carb).

Serves 3


  • 2 packages of Sauzon (not included in the nutrition info, it wasn’t an option on the calculator).
  • 1 lb package of 97% lean turkey
  • 9 corn (not blended, fully corn) tortillas
  • 3/4 cup Mexican-style shredded cheese
  • 1 red onion, chopped (I only use a small portion on each)
  • 1 5.3 oz cup of Fage Greek Yogurt plain (this is a healthy sour cream substitute)
  • Fresh cilantro
  • Wing sauce


  • Toast the corn tortillas on both sides
  • Cook the turkey, add both packets of Sauzon about half way through, cook until brown
  • Sprinkle some of the cheese on the tortillas
  • Add on the turkey
  • Sprinkle on a bit more cheese
  • From original directions: If you need to keep this warm, place in oven on lowest setting until ready to serve
  • Top with 1 Tbsp of Greek Yogurt, some red onion, and however much cilantro you want on each taco
  • Drizzle hot sauce on top
  • Enjoy the deliciousness

Nutrition information (from SparkPeople Recipe Calculator):

Recipe makes 3 servings
Nutritional information is amount Per Serving
  • Calories 440.9
  • Total Fat 11.2 g
  • Saturated Fat 4.8 g
  • Polyunsaturated Fat 0.0 g
  • Monounsaturated Fat 0.0 g
  • Cholesterol 101.6 mg
  • Sodium 724.2 mg
  • Potassium 85.0 mg
  • Total Carbohydrate 31.8 g
  • Dietary Fiber 4.0 g
  • Sugars 3.2 g
  • Protein 53.0 g
*Percent Daily Values are based on a 2,000 calorie diet. Your daily values may be higher or lower depending on your calorie needs.



Read Full Post »

A cricket on a leaf

“Cricket – Grillo” by Hugo A. Quintero G. is licensed under CC BY 2.0 via Flickr

As we continue to grow as a human population, we need to find sustainable sources of protein to feed everyone (or reduce the population, but I won’t go there). One highly-touted option is incorporate bugs into human diets to increase the protein count. Humans already do this, but it’s not popular in a lot of developing countries, especially the United States.

Proponents of eating insects for protein say that “farming” bugs for protein is low-cost, low-space (bugs, such as crickets prefer to be in small spaces and highly concentrated), and environmentally friendly (they consume the waste during our current food production methods creates, such as whey when making cheese).

Would I eat insects for protein? Absolutely. Would it completely replace my love of hamburgers? Nope, but I might eat beef less often.

Cricket flour

One current option for eating insects is cricket flour that is used in baked-goods, batters, etc. Cricket flour is ground-up crickets mixed with other starches to make flour (that apparently has a slightly nutty taste). Bitty is one company that offers this flour in raw format and in cookies.

But Bitty’s cricket flour really isn’t that high in protein. As I find with other high-protein claims (cough…hummus), when you really look at the metrics, technically Bitty’s cricket flour is 3 or 4 x the amount of traditional flour, but it’s still only 4 g per ¼ cup and 4 g per cookie. As a hypoglycemic, I try to eat a minimum of 20 g of protein in each setting, so 4 g doesn’t excite me. Incrementally it could help me reach my protein goals, but it’s not a complete replacement option.

Further reading:

New Higher Protein Diet Works!

Startups Pitch Cricket Flour As The Best Protein You Could Eat via NPR

Read Full Post »

3 small plastic cups with small plants growing in each one

From Flickr Creative Commons: Plants are coming along by Tim Patterson

This is a favorite trick of not-so-honest representatives in the public relations industry (my day job, but I’m the honest kind); you ask one question, they answer with something that doesn’t really address what you are really asking.

So I watch with varying levels of frustration the debate on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO’s). The public is asking, “Are they safe?” and the response is, “They are safe for human consumption.

See what they did there? They defined what “safe” meant for us. How nice of them. But is that what we are asking? It’s not what I’m asking.

When I ask, “Are they safe?” I’m asking:

  • Are they safe for human consumption?
  • Are they safe for the environment?
  • Are there going to be long-term ecological consequences from GMO’s?
  • Are they safe for the animals living around them?

My question is much broader, they are only responding to part of it.

Two examples:

Why Do Many Reasonable People Doubt Science, National Geographic

For many of us this new world is wondrous, comfortable, and rich in rewards—but also more complicated and sometimes unnerving. We now face risks we can’t easily analyze.

We’re asked to accept, for example, that it’s safe to eat food containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs) because, the experts point out, there’s no evidence that it isn’t and no reason to believe that altering genes precisely in a lab is more dangerous than altering them wholesale through traditional breeding. But to some people the very idea of transferring genes between species conjures up mad scientists running amok—and so, two centuries after Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein, they talk about Frankenfood.

The Debate About GMO Safety is Over, Thanks to a Trillion-Meal Study, Forbes

The authors also found no evidence to suggest any health affect on humans who eat those animals. No study has revealed any differences in the nutritional profile of animal products derived from GE-fed animals.

In other words, the debate over the risks associated with GMO food is effectively over. As Novella writes:

We now have a large set of data, both experimental and observational, showing that genetically modified feed is safe and nutritionally equivalent to non-GMO feed. There does not appear to be any health risk to the animals, and it is even less likely that there could be any health effect on humans who eat those animals.

In order to maintain the position that GMOs are not adequately tested, or that they are harmful or risky, you have to either highly selectively cherry pick a few outliers of low scientific quality, or you have to simply deny the science.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »