data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/03d5d/03d5dd3a22856cf63c3b2336f7768e701dedd8e7" alt=""
while freshwater fish will do the opposite, urine the excess water out.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/99d4e/99d4ec0121dbd65342dc0a18d58f6d5aec6c7c40" alt=""
Flavonoid is found to be a healthy ingredients found in chocolate. It can be found in both processed chocolate and cocoa, raw and evern dairy products.
This flavonoid contained in dark chocolate,similar to those of green tea, has long been used by traditional healers as a medicine and healing remedy.
base on the results of these some research studies into the possible health benefits of flavonoid, the antioxidants contained in dark chocolate may have the following important health benefits:
Surprising, this antioxidants found in most dark chocolate can be used to treat patients suffering from anemia, kidney stones and poor appetite, adding even more to the health benefits of this delicious food.
At the same time, while considering the possible health benefits, it is important to keep in mind that it contains two different kinds of flavonoids – catechin and epicatechins.
Catechins are known to be present in abundant quantities in cocoa, and in minimally processed chocolates as well. Dark chocolate in particular has been found to contain more than three times the number of catechins as green tea, making it a even more healthier that we are least expecting it to be. The catechins contained in dark chocolate are said to be able to boost the immune system and help prevent heart disease and other chronic problems.
On top of these benefits, it is also known to be a good source of magnesium and copper, which are known to help regulate the blood pressure and heartbeat.
It is also important to keep in mind that the vast majority of the health benefits attributed are limited mainly to dark chocolate, which is quite different than milk chocolate and other varieties. Those people wishing to enjoy the many health benefits of chocolate would do well to limit their consumption of light and white chocolate, and to focus instead on the delicious and slightly bitter treat we know as dark chocolate.
Fortunately for lovers of dark chocolate, the major manufacturers and wholesalers are responding to these well publicized studies by offering more and more to their customers. In addition to existing Special Dark bars, for instance, Hershey has introduced a special line of dark Hershey Kisses, as well as varieties of many of its most popular candy bars. In the future dark chocolate lovers should not have to look too hard for the delicious taste and possible health benefits of their favorite sweet treat.
Readers, please take note : Stuffing yourself with chocolates is not a healthy habit. In particular, sweetened chocolates produce a lot of calories that can increase the fat retention in your body. The healthiest chocolates are those which contain plenty of flavonoids. Commercially sold chocolate bars, besides being sweetened, have varying contents of these substances.
Bizarrely, it could lead to therapies which turn off the immune response to HIV rather than try to boost it.
Sooty mangabey monkeys do not become ill when infected, but until now researchers did not have much idea why.
However, a team of experts from the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, and Emory University believe they have found two key differences in the way that the monkeys' immune systems deal with the virus.
The monkeys appear able to generate only a low-level immune system response when confronted with an infection of simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV).
They can also keep their ability to make T cells - the kind of immune cells depleted in humans with HIV.
Whether it's food or sex, pleasurable activity provides more than just pleasure, University of Cincinnati (UC) researchers say. It actually reduces stress by inhibiting anxiety responses in the brain.
Experiments designed by Yvonne Ulrich-Lai, PhD, research assistant professor, James Herman, PhD, director of the Laboratory of Stress Neurobiology and professor of psychiatry and behavioral neuroscience at UC, and colleagues also indicated that the reduced-stress effects continued for at least seven days, suggesting a long-term benefit.The findings were published online Nov. 8, 2010, ahead of print in theProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
"These findings give us a clearer understanding of the motivation for consuming 'comfort food' during times of stress," says Ulrich-Lai. "But it's important to note that, based on our findings, even small amounts of pleasurable foods can reduce the effects of stress."
The researchers provided rats twice daily access to a sugar solution for two weeks, then tested the rats' physiological and behavioral responses to stress. Compared with controls, rats with access to sugar exhibited reduced heart rate and stress hormone levels while placed in ventilated restraint tubes and were more willing to explore an unfamiliar environment and socially interact with other rats.
Rats who were fed a solution artificially sweetened with saccharin (instead of being fed sucrose) showed similar reductions in stress responses, the researchers say, as did rats who were given access to sexually responsive partners. But sucrose supplied directly to the stomach did not blunt the rats' stress response, the researchers say.
"This indicates that the pleasurable properties of tasty foods, not the caloric properties, were sufficient for stress reduction," says Ulrich-Lai.
Physiological responses to stress include activation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenocortical (HPA) axis, regulated by the brain structure known as the basolateral amygdale (BLA). Rats exposed to pleasurable activities, such as tasty foods and sex, experienced weakened HPA axis responses to stress, the researchers found. Lesions of the BLA prevented stress reduction by sucrose, suggesting that neural activity in the BLA is necessary for the effect.
"Our research identifies key neural circuits underlying the comfort food effect," notes Ulrich-Lai. "Further research is needed, but identification of these circuits could provide potential strategies for intervening to prevent or curtail increasing rates of obesity and other metabolic disorders."
Funding for the research was provided by grants from the National Institutes of Health. The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Editor's Note: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Over the past few decades, portion sizes of everything from muffins to sandwiches have grown considerably. Unfortunately, America’s waistbands have reacted accordingly. In the 1970s, around 47 percent of Americans were overweight or obese; now 66 percent of us are. In addition, the number of just obese people has doubled, from 15 percent of our population to 30 percent.
While increased sizes haven’t been the sole contributor to our obesity epidemic, large quantities of cheap food have distorted our perceptions of what a typical meal is supposed to look like. These portion comparisons, adapted from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute’s (NHLBI) Portion Distortion Quiz, give a visual representation of what sizes used to be compared to what they are today.
Two Slices of Pizza
Twenty years ago Today
500 calories 850 calories
Those extra 350 calories, if eaten a two times a month, would put on two extra pounds a year, or forty pounds in the next two decades.
Cup of Coffee
Twenty years ago Today
Coffee with milk and sugar Grande café mocha with whip, 2% milk
8 ounces 16 ounces
45 calories 330 calories
When our parents ordered a coffee two decades ago, they weren’t given as many size options—a standard cup of joe was eight ounces, the size of a small coffee cup. Nowadays, most of us feel like we don’t get our money’s worth unless the cup is at least twelve ounces; it’s not unusual to see thirty-two ounce coffee cups, four times the size they used to be. When made into a mocha, the morning coffee has as many calories as a full meal.
Movie Popcorn
Twenty Years Ago Today
5 cups Tub
270 calories 630 calories
We don’t have to eat those extra 360 calories in the tub of popcorn, but that’s easier said than (not) done. Studies indicate that when given food in larger containers, people will consume more. In a 1996 Cornell University study, people in a movie theater ate from either medium (120g) or large (240g) buckets of popcorn, then divided into two groups based on whether they liked the taste of the popcorn. The results: people with the large size ate more than those with the medium size, regardless of how participants rated the taste of the popcorn.
Bagel
Twenty Years Ago Today—Noah’s Plain Bagel
3-inch diameter 5-6-inch diameter
140 calories 350 calories
Because portions are now so large, it’s hard to understand what a “serving size” is supposed to be. Today’s bagel counts for three servings of bread, but many of us would consider it one serving. Larger sizes at restaurants have also contributed to larger sizes when eating at home. A study comparing eating habits today with twenty years ago found that participants poured themselves about 20 percent more cornflakes and 30 percent more milk than twenty years ago.
Cheeseburgers
Twenty years ago Today’s Burger
333 calories 590 calories
According to a 2007 paper published in the Journal of Public Health Policy, portion sizes offered by fast food chains are two to five times larger than when first introduced. When McDonald’s first started in 1955, its only hamburger weighed around 1.6 ounces; now, the largest hamburger patty weighs 8 ounces, an increase of 500 percent. And while a Big Mac used to be considered big, it’s on the smaller side of many burger options. At Burger King, you can get the Triple Whopper; at Ruby Tuesday’s there’s the Colossal Burger; and Carl’s Junior has the Western Bacon Six Dollar Burger.
Soda
Original 8-ounce bottle 12 ounce can 20-ounce bottle
97 calories 145 calories 242 calories
While the 12-ounce can used to be the most common soda option, many stores now carry only the 20-ounce plastic bottle, which contains 2.5 servings of soda. When presented with these larger sizes, humans have a hard time regulating our intake or figuring out what a serving size is supposed to be. A 2004 study, published in Appetite, gave people potato chips packaged in bags that looked the same, but increased in size. As package size increased, so did consumption; subjects ate up to 37 percent more with the bigger bags. Furthermore, when they ate dinner later that day, they did not reduce their food consumption to compensate for increased snack calories—a recipe for weight gain.
Plates
It’s not just food portions that have increased; plate, bowl, and cup sizes have as well. In the early 1990s, the standard size of a dinner plate increased from 10 to 12 inches; cup and bowl sizes also increased. Larger eating containers can influence how much people eat. A study published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine found that when people were given larger bowls and spoons they served themselves larger portions of ice cream and tended to eat the whole portion.
Prices
32 ounces 44 ounces 64 ounces
388 calories 533 calories 776 calories
$0.99 $1.09 $1.19
We Americans love to get the most bang for our buck. When confronted with a 32-ounce drink for 99 cents versus a 44-ounce drink for ten cents more, the decision is easy. You’d have to be a sucker not to go big. But our ability to get the most out of our dollar doesn’t always serve us well. Value pricing, which gets us a lot more food or drink for just a little increase in price, makes sense from an economic standpoint, but is sabotage from a health standpoint. A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that Americans consume around 10 percent more calories than they did in the 1970s. Given no change in physical activity, this equates to around 200 extra calories per day, or 20 pounds a year.
What is normal?
Increased portion sizes give us more calories, encourage us to eat more, distort perceptions of appropriate food quantities, and along with sedentary lifestyles, have contributed to our national bulge. Unless you’re trying to gain weight, it might help to reacquaint yourself with serving sizes. The NHLBI tells us that a serving of meat should be the size of a deck of cards while one pancake should be the size of a CD. It’s unlikely that we’ll see a scaling down of food to these sizes anytime soon, so perhaps we should all become familiar with another image: the doggy bag.