In case you're feeling guilty about the pecan pie...
The Nut Case
Sure, They're High in Calories But They're Better for You Than You Think
(Renee Comet - for The Washington Post)
By Carole Sugarman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 17, 2001; Page F01
Scientists are studying them, health experts are convening about them and even weight-loss specialists are recommending them. Joining olive oil, nuts are the latest food to fall into the "healthy fat" category.
The simple advice of the last two decades "to eat less fat" demonized all fats, without respect to their differences. With a growing consensus that some fats are actually good for your heart, these previously sinful snacks are being reconsidered by some.
Researchers have long known that too much saturated fat -- the kind found in marbled meats and high-fat dairy products -- is bad for your heart. But there is convincing evidence that unsaturated fats -- found in foods such as nuts, vegetable oils and fish -- can lower cholesterol levels and reduce the risk of heart disease.
Some studies have found that people who eat nuts frequently have lower rates of heart disease than those who eat nuts rarely or never. An analysis of 84,000 women participating in the Harvard Nurses' Health Study, for example, showed that those who ate a small amount of nuts five times a week decreased their risk by 35 percent. (Though peanuts are technically not a nut but a legume and grow underground, they share the same nutritional and compositional makeup of tree nuts.)
Nuts may have other components besides their mono- and polyunsaturated fats that help the heart. These nutrients include Vitamin E, protein, magnesium, potassium and fiber. And, while the evidence for heart disease reduction is the strongest, research is also being conducted on the effect of nuts on cancer, blood pressure and diabetes.
But while some nuts have specific nutritional attributes (walnuts are high in beneficial Omega-3 fatty acids, a type of polyunsaturated fat; almonds are rich in a highly absorbable form of Vitamin E, for example), researchers aren't ready to recommend one nut over another.
There's also a lot of interest in nuts with respect to satiety. Baltimore dietitian Colleen Pierre reports that weight-loss patients find a small amount of nuts very satisfying. An ounce of nuts at 160 calories will "stick with you much longer" than 160 calories worth of pretzels, says Pierre.
But when Pierre tells her clients to eat nuts, "People's initial reaction is that the nutrition community has 'gone and done it again -- changed your minds.' " Pierre tells them that science is constantly evolving and reminds them that while nuts may be good for the heart, they're still high in calories. Her word of caution: "Eat a handful, not a canful."
Not all nutritionists will make a case for nuts. Bonnie Liebman, director of nutrition for the consumer group Center for Science in the Public Interest says studies in which dietitians design the diets probably do not resemble the real world. If you tell the general population to eat more nuts, fears Liebman, "they'll munch to the end." Given the obesity epidemic in this country, and the strong possibility that people will misinterpret the message, "any advice to eat more nuts has to be tempered," says Liebman.
In fact, CSPI already objected to an advertisement run by the Almond Board of California in April 2000, which said to "just add three ounces of almonds a day to your diet for 30 days and watch for a positive result in your cholesterol level." CSPI petitioned the Federal Trade Commission, asking that the ad be prohibited and arguing that three ounces of almonds contain 500 calories. Unless a person makes an equivalent reduction in caloric intake, "he or she will gain weight, and being overweight increases the risk of coronary heart disease," the petition states.
The ad, which ran only once, has been discontinued. "We learned our lesson from that," says Karen Lapsley, director of scientific affairs for the Almond Board. "At three ounces . . . you really had to make serious substitutions in your diet."
The nut industry is working hard to reposition its products as healthful. "Our primary objective is to help consumers overcome the fear of fat," says Sue Heaney, marketing director for the California Walnut Commission. The commission and similar groups have funded a number of clinical studies on the health effects of nuts; more are in the works. This year, for example, the Almond Board of California will spend $1 million on research.
The fact that those with a vested interest are sponsoring the studies "comes up again and again," says Maureen Ternus, nutrition coordinator for the International Tree Nut Council. "But who do you think is going to pay for them, the Ford Motor Company? If we don't fund them, I can't imagine anyone else doing it."
In a study conducted at Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston and jointly funded by the Peanut Institute, the International Tree Nut Council and the International Olive Oil Council, 101 overweight men and women were put on two types of diets. Each had the same amount of calories but was very different in terms of fat content. One group's diet derived a much higher percentage of its calories from unsaturated fats and included nuts as snacks. The result? The higher-fat dieters lost more weight than the lower-fat dieters and were far less likely to drop out of the study.
In addition to funding research, the industry tries to get across its message in national forums. The Peanut Institute, created five years ago to raise money for nutrition studies on the health benefits of the legume, funds a yearly conference at the Culinary Institute of America in California's Napa Valley. The California Pistachio Commission is targeting family physicians' conventions, since when people with heart-health problems go to their doctors, they're invariably told "to stay away from nuts," says commission president Karen Reinecke.
It's not just the industry that nuts about nuts. In July, Harvard University professor Walter Willett made a splash with his new book "Eat, Drink and Be Healthy: The Harvard Medical School Guide to Healthy Eating" (Simon & Schuster, $25), which criticizes the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Guide Pyramid for not giving enough emphasis to healthful fats such as nuts, among other foods. And St. Martin's Press released "The Peanut Butter Diet" ($6.50), by Holly McCord, the nutrition editor of Prevention magazine. In March, Prevention published an article called the "Amazing Peanut Butter Diet." It received such a positive reader response that Prevention decided to turn it into a book. The result, which includes 50 recipes and 28 days of calorie-controlled menus, calls for four tablespoons of peanut butter a day for women and six for men. To compensate for those calories, meat portions are tiny and meals are rounded out with low-calorie fruits and vegetables.
While the industry obviously has a financial incentive to get people to eat more nuts, some nut groups are cautious. Peanuts and peanut butter can be substituted for other foods in the diet, not simply added, says Peanut Institute spokeswoman and nutritionist Pat Carney, who stresses portion control. Unfortunately, Americans tend to think that "if a little of a food is good for you, a lot must be better," says Carney. "Especially if they like it." |
