It's Cherry Good To See You

Cherries are back! Cherries are back!!!

And some other things:
1 lb. shelling peas
1 lb. sugar snap peas
2 bunches carrots
3 lbs. zucchini
1 bunch collards
1 bunch red Russian kale
1 bunch Swiss chard
1 head French crisp lettuce
1 bunch Italian parsley
1 bunch scallions
1 bunch "garlic balls" (immature heads of Rocambole garlic)
1 qt. strawberries
1 lb. cherries!!!!!!
Total spent: $43

Unfortunately Terhune Orchards doesn't have cherries yet this season. I hope they will; they didn't have any asparagus at all, and theirs was my favorite last year. The ones I got from Locust Grove are delicious, but slightly short of spectacular. (Though it is early for cherries, and I'm sure all this rain hasn't helped anything.)

While I waited for the subway today, laden with bags of vegetables, I looked at the mass of various green leaves sticking out of my market bag, and I mentally compared my leaf-eating self to the brontosaurus from an elementary-school textbook, craning my long neck up to munch green bites out of trees. This is by no means the first time I've had this train of thought.

But then I started thinking, inevitably, about the brontosaurus, who now, we all know, was not real. When I was a dinosaur-loving kid (as so many bookish types are), I remember feeling very confused and a bit betrayed by scientists for making us believe in a dinosaur that turned out to have been constructed erroneously, using bones from more than one creature. It wasn't as though brontosaurus was some peripheral dino that was easily dispensed with - this was one of the canon, along with stegosaurus, triceratops, and pterodactyl, featured on those plastic mugs we all had. And all of a sudden, we're supposed to start rooting for this tiny-headed "apatosaurus" character? Worst of all, everyone pronounced "apatosaurus" differently.

Apparently the subway was taking its time to arrive, because I considered further that perhaps this was the seed of my now fully-blooming mistrust of science, which, of course, was nourished abundantly during my year at The Natural Gourmet. And I imagine today's generation of young bookish kids will have a similar reason for scorn because of the whole "Pluto isn't a planet" situation. Part of the reason I was thinking about this was a recent discussion one of the food sites I read about unsafe/scary foods, and the ongoing debate about margarine - with about half the posters concluding that because scientists say it's alright for you, then it is. It's really unbelievable to me that given the history of scientific mistakes threatening the public health (I mean, come on, DDT? Trans fats?), folks are still so willing to believe whatever today's scientific "wisdom" happens to be, when it comes to food.

Don't get me wrong, I totally believe in evolution and quantum physics and stuff. But when it comes to personal health, I am much more likely to trust, say, farmers, or traditional cultures - even to a fault. It seems like science has had more trouble figuring out the human body and how it responds to nutrition, stimuli, etc., than they have had charting distant galaxies. (Though I suppose mistakes about human health confront us in a way that mistakes about neutron stars don't.) And I won't even get into the seemingly insurmountable conflicts of interest that exist in today's largely food-industry-funded nutrition research community.

In conclusion, re: almost entirely irrelevant subject matter - I am going to be eating a lot of vegetables this week, like every week, because eating vegetables is scientifically and non-scientifically proven to make you healthy. Not to mention: I love 'em. No big plans for this week's haul, though now that berries have started in earnest, I think I'll have to do my first jams of the year next week. I'll begin with strawberry-rhubarb if there's still rhubarb around.

Most nutritious fruits and vegetables

My most faithful reader, Katherine, asked me to investigate the most nutritious fruits and vegetables, recalling that she'd read an article on the subject years ago.

A simple Google search turns up multiple articles on the subject, but while sources agree, generally, that the most popular fruits and vegetables in the American diet (iceberg lettuce, potatoes, apples, bananas) aren't the most nutritionally dense, they don't agree on which specific fruits and vegetables are the very best.

That stands to reason, given that no fruit or vegetable is an island: they all provide part of the vitamins, nutrients, and fiber we require every day - and everyone has different standards as to what aspect of "nutritious" is most important. Most sources agreed that an easy way to get balanced nutrition from fruits and vegetables is to eat a variety of different colors, since color generally indicates what nutrient a certain fruit or vegetable contains.

However, most sources agree on the following:
dark green leafy vegetables (spinach, collards, kale, chard, mustard greens, etc.)
broccoli
Brussels sprouts
cauliflower
carrots
squash
sweet potatoes
red peppers
tomatoes
oranges
grapefruit
canteloupe
berries (all kinds)

While lots of lists include at least one tropical fruit, they're evenly split between papaya, guava, and mango. Since these lovelies have similar taste profiles, perhaps they are similar nutritionally. Similarly, several sources credit asparagus and artichokes as being "nutritional powerhouses," but there wasn't enough consensus for me to include them. And perhaps the biggest surprise for me is that avocadoes, while they made a few lists, weren't universally listed - I bet they're a victim of bias because they're so fatty and nobody wants to believe healthy vegetables can taste like butter and still be good for you.

Bananas and apples get harsh treatment here, since they're so common and not as nutritionally rich as the selections from this list - but apples are great for their fiber, and my muscles get all twitchy when I don't have my potassium-rich banana smoothie in the morning. So to avoid being overly diplomatic, I've got to say that I think a "most nutritious" list is unnecessary for folks who eat a variety of fruits and vegetables every day, which is exactly what nutrition experts recommend. Though it would be easier if we could eat the same one or two plant foods every day and get the maximum possible nutrition, that's just not possible, and this type of list could lead folks to limit themselves.

Except spinach. I'm pretty sure spinach is the greatest food known to humanity.

What To Eat

I know I mentioned this book in a previous post, but I've since finished it, and I highly recommend it to anyone interested in corporate marketing strategies, the politics of food, eating healthfully, organics, locally-grown produce, or anything in between. But instead of taking a hard-line "eat vegan" or "go organic" approach, author Marion Nestle simply outlines the facts, assesses the situation, and makes her recommendations, most of which are quite centrist. She explains, in detail, the facts about methylmercury/PCBs and fish, and the huge potential for harm, but recognizes that some fish consumption can still be safe.

And throughout the book Nestle articulates and decries the multi-billion-dollar food industry's often-successful attempts to shift responsibility for food safety and healthful eating onto the consumer. Yes, she realizes, we are ultimately responsible for what we eat, but we should have waterways clean enough that eating fish more than once a week isn't dangerous; food-labeling should be clear and concise, not nearly impossible to decipher amidst non-standard serving sizes, outlandish health claims on packaging, and difficult-to-understand daily requirements; and the production and transportation process for foods like eggs or beef should be clean and heavily monitored to avoid outbreaks of E. coli and other harmful bacteria (and she supports her claim that this is possible with lots of evidence), rather than focusing on consumer cooking practices.

Even the most skeptical food consumer will find this book eye-opening. The chapter on whole grains was especially edifying - the tales of how cereal manufacturers earned the right to put "heart healthy" on even the sugariest, most calorie-laden children's breakfast cereals are quite sordid. I realized that I've been trusting food labels subconsciously, even while professing skepticism; when it comes to claims about omega-3 fatty acids and antioxidants, I'm especially gullible. Also, the chapter on fats is as a handy reference for levels of nutrients and fatty acids in different cooking/salad oils - and now I understand why monounsaturated fats are the best, rather than just knowing that they are.

Most importantly, though, especially for summer readers - Nestle's style is conversational (but not condescending) and quite engaging, so it's a fun read, and the toughest concepts to grasp are outlined and explained with tables, as well as friendly analogy. The bad news is that it just came out, so it's still only available in hardcover.

Several hours later...

I love it when my dinner looks like it should be in a magazine! And I think baby bok choy might be my new favorite vegetable. That's brown rice - I used to think it made stir-fry too earthy, but lately I've decided that eating white rice is like eating Wonder bread.