It’s been quite a day for the beverage industry here at the MDA. Is an Annoying Drink Award in the works? Who can say?
scam trend is Borba, the alleged wrinkle-preventing, skin-clarifying, change-your-life drink. Aside from the fact that I’m not about to drink something that’s actually pastel in color, the science is really questionable.
The better bet for good skin is a daily moisturizer, a good supplement routine, nutritious foods high in good fats, and judicious sun exposure. Of course, cigarettes, excessive drinking, high levels of stress and junk food are obvious things to avoid.
Borba may be really pretty, but there must be a reason I keep calling it Bogus by mistake. You can read up on the questionable science here.
Borba comes in pastel blue and pink, too. What, no mauve?
The crafty folks at Coke have invented yet another canned liquid. We’re a little disappointed that it doesn’t come in lime, vanilla, cherry, cherry vanilla, cherry lime vanilla, or even blue. Oh, well.
The soft drink, Enviga, does play into the new craze for “healthy” soda alternatives full of energizing ingredients and enough caffeine to deplete the Costa Rican coffee fields for the next decade. Calorie Lab has a hilarious and thought-provoking analysis of this new drink. (That sounds a lot like a natural enhancement drug. Ahem.)
Calorie Lab is right: if Coke really cares about our health by offering a supposedly negative calorie beverage, why continue to sell regular old Coke in all its candy-machine varieties at all?
Here’s why: by offering (snicker) Enviga, Coke is admitting they’re aware of the terrible health consequences of drinking Coke. They’re worried and they’re scrambling to offer an alternative for all the customers they know they’re going to lose in 2007. Sugar is going to be the health issue this year. In fact, you can check out Mark’s excellent article on sugar over at model/volleyball pro Gabrielle Reece’s site. Here’s the clickativity.
We’ll be the first to say it: sugar is the new trans fat.
The Fuming Fuji is outraged at the marketing of toxic food, especially when it’s aimed at the small fry. This week, the Fuming Fuji has decided to have a serious problem with pita chips.
But Fuming Fuji, you ask, aren’t pita chips healthy?
The Fuming Fuji says no!
The claim: The Fuming Fuji was blinded by “natural” and “wholesome” and “whole-grain”. Also, by a lovely Granny Smith strolling past.
The catch: Lies, all lies. Pita chips are not healthy because they are greasy, salty, and fried. It does not matter that pita is a nice word which is very fun to spell.
The comeback: That’s it? That’s your best? Come on, Fuji – pita chips have to be healthier than nachos.
The conclusion: People, for the last time: A chip is a chip is a chip, except Pentium, which is admittedly low-fat. The Fuming Fuji does not care to comment. EVEN if a chip is not made with trans fat and EVEN if a chip is made from nice grains and EVEN if a chip is baked instead of fried, the chip is still a chip! It is still a processed food made with the use of a stamp.
The catchphrase: For pita’s sake!
Disclaimer: Mark Sisson and the Worker Bees do not necessarily endorse the views of the Fuming Fuji.
A doctor weighs in on the HRT-cancer connection. The controversy isn’t going anywhere, anytime soon.
I recommend reading the whole interview if this is an area of interest for you. What caught my attention is the subtle pro-drug stance the interview appears to take, while simultaneously bringing out revealing facts like the following:
Q. Was it a surprise to learn that estrogen and progestins can cause breast cancer?
A. We’ve known there is a cause and effect with hormones and breast cancer since 1896.
On the plus side, the article effectively details the pathology of breast cancer, explaining the difference between estrogen and progesterine’s effects in lay terms. If you’ve found the issue confusing, give this article 10 minutes of your time. The article also fairly points out that the “entire epidemiology” of breast cancer shifted when HRT was introduced and again when it was found to be dangerous.
My concerns regarding current HRT therapies, however, remain:
1) The cancer-hormone connection has long been known.
2) The body was not designed to handle artificial hormone interference with the natural regulatory processes that come with aging. That’s not my opinion; that’s fact. Start tinkering with the body and all kinds of things can happen. Of course, I recommend other, natural therapies to combat aging-related issues (including menopause): exercise, sensible supplementation, and sound dietary choices. We’ll get into those in detail soon.
3) The entire tone of the interview is what I find so offensive about the medical industry: if one drug doesn’t work, hey, take another! Subtle though it is – again, the article does promote plenty of helpful information – it’s clear that mainstream medical practitioners are loathe to “call out” even the most pressing health scandals, evidently preferring to tread lightly lest they offend the pharmaceutical suits. Of course, five or ten years from now, everyone will be talking about the dangers of HRT without hesitation, but for now, it’s a politically-correct parade.
The icing on the cake: after discussing the various issues surrounding HRT, the interview brings up the issue of osteoporosis (since many women took HRT to address this health condition) and suggests alternative drugs as the solution. It’s par for the course for Big Pharma.
© 2014 Mark's Daily Apple