Blue cheese – breaking the mould?

When I think of the word ‘mould’, the first image that jumps to my mind is that of an unidentifiable vegetable that we once found in the form of a blue fuzzy mess at the back of our fridge. I think it was once a pepper, but in the festering state it was in, my guess is as good as yours.

However, ask me what I think of blue cheese, and I’ll happily tell you my top list of recipes that are infinitely boosted by the addition of a delicious sprinkling of blue cheese (seriously, add some to the top of your beans on toast. You can thank me later).

So, why is it that it’s OK to eat mould on blue cheese, but not on other foods?

From a young age, I was taught that ‘if food has mould on it, it’s not fresh and shouldn’t be eaten.’ In fact, my Mum took it one step further, advising me not to eat any foods past their sell-by date, whether or not they were mouldy.

However, while many moulds do change the taste of foods, they’re often not dangerous to eat and wouldn’t cause any problems to our health. To understand why this is the case, we need to know what mould actually is (no, not what I saw myself thinking about on a Wednesday afternoon either…).

What is mould?

Moulds are microscopic fungi that live on plants or animals. With the naked eye it may look like they just sit on the top of your food, but moulds are actually made up of three layers – roots that invade deep into the food, a stalk that rises out of the food, and spores that form at the end of the stalks (these are what appear as the fluffy, coloured parts if you leave food long enough – *gag*).

Moulds that can actually do some serious damage to you are those which produce what are known as ‘mycotoxins’ and ‘aflatoxins’. These are poisonous substances produced by certain moulds found primarily in grain and nut crops, but are also known to be on celery, grape juice, apples, and other produce. Extensive exposure to mycotoxins and aflatoxins can result in allergic reactions, or even respiratory problems.

I’ve been eating blue cheese without problems for years though?

The moulds used to produce blue cheese are called Penicillium Roqueforti (this name made me happier than it probably should’ve) and Penicillium Glaucum. Thankfully, the combination of acidity, salinity, moisture, density, temperature and oxygen flow creates an environment that is far outside the range of toxin production for these moulds, so they don’t produce mycotoxins or aflatoxins.

The mould actually acts as a harmless flavour in blue cheeses – without it, they’d taste completely different.

In fact, people have been enjoying blue cheese since 79 A.D!

Not only is blue cheese safe to eat, but it can actually also be good for your health. Research has found that some components of blue cheese have anti-inflammatory properties, which could help with heart problems, and even slow the ageing process! Maybe Christie Brinkley is a fan…

If that’s the case, it looks like I’m having cheese and crackers tonight for dinner!

(Quite possibly my favourite ever Photoshop!)

 

 

Annoying things I wish my body wouldn’t do – Part 2

With temperatures in the UK plummeting this week, my body has gone into overdrive. Streaming tears outside, overheating on the tube and sore ears when running are just a few of the annoying things it’s done to compensate for the Arctic (I swear I’m not exaggerating…) conditions.

Here’s Part 2 of Annoying things I wish my body wouldn’t do.

Foot cramps when swimming

I can’t be the only person who’s dived into a pool, only to have the most intense cramp in my toe to the point where I have to haul myself out the pool and roll around on the edge to try to save the little piggy. It’s almost as if my foot is trying to do the Vulcan salute – a feat which is not so easy with your foot (seriously, try it).

So why does this happen to my toes and not other parts of the body?

Well, because the toes are the so far away from the heart, the amount of blood your toes receive is limited, in comparison to the amount other muscles get. This results in a lack of oxygen and important salts and ions, making toes more prone to fatigue and dehydration. This is when cramp in the toes usually develops.

But why in water? 

While it may not seem like your muscles are exerting much energy, the resistance underwater makes every movement more difficult, and muscles are forced to exert more energy. For example, if you try walking through a pool, it’s surprisingly difficult and will leave you more tired than you’d expect.

Out of the water, our little toes aren’t used to exerting this much energy, and so rarely cramp.

Eyes crying in the cold

While I’ve definitely used the “I swear I’m not crying, I’ve just got something in my eye” excuse in many a soppy film, in winter, there’s absolutely no hiding the fact that my eyes are constantly streaming. When an icy blast of wind hits, I may not be best pleased about it, but I don’t think I’m upset enough to start crying – so why does this happen?

When our eyes get too dry, they produce tears in a response to protect the layer at the front of the eye, known as the cornea. In cold wind, the moisture in your eyes quickly evaporates, and to compensate, your eyes produce excess tears.

If you see someone out and about in London wearing ski goggles, you’ll know it’s me.

Let me know if your body does any more annoying things, and I’ll do my best to help you work out why!

Annoying things I wish my body wouldn’t do – Part 1

Your body is weird.

Now, that’s not me taking a personal jab at you and that secret mole no-one knows about, but instead, a simple observation about the strange ways each and every one of our bodies functions.

Some of these strange functions are simple, but vital things that we often overlook – such as blinking or coughing.

Others are just simply annoying.

Here’s Part 1 on the most annoying things my body does, along with a bit o’ science on why these things occur.

Hair frizzing in humidity

Last December, I went on holiday to Dubai with my family. On New Year’s Eve, I spent a good two hours preening myself, taking time to perfect my makeup, pick a gorgeous dress, and even straighten my hair.

What a waste of two hours.

Within three minutes of stepping outside into 40 degree heat, my makeup had pretty much melted off my face, and even more annoyingly, my head now resembled a feather duster, complete with rather more ‘voluminous’ hair than I’d bargained for.

An extremely accurate depiction of my holiday hair

So why does hair go frizzy in humidity?

Well, high humidity essentially means that there is lots of water vapour present in the air. Water, or H₂O, is made up of 1 oxygen atom, bonded to 2 hydrogen atoms – which hair is extremely sensitive to.

Hair contains coiled bundles of proteins known as keratin (you’ll probably recognise this term from fancy shampoo branding such as “An exclusive blend of antioxidant rich coconut oil along with lush keratin proteins”).

Bonds between these keratin proteins happen to be hydrogen bonds, which give hair its temporary shape.

When there is lots of moisture in the air, hair absorbs water in and the number of hydrogen bonds between keratin proteins in each hair strand increases.

To allow the increased amount of hydrogen to bond to something, the hair essentially doubles back in on itself, absorbing water and therefore swelling

Multiply that by 100,000 (the average number of hairs on your head) and you have yourself one swollen, or frizzy head of hair.

Sleep talking

Although I like to imagine I am, my boyfriend, Sam, reassures me that I’m not a peaceful sleeper.

Instead of tranquilly resting with a dewy glow, making no noise (which is how I picture myself), I put Sam through regular sleep talking, alongside dribbling, lying diagonally, and of course my bedhead – reaaaaaal attractive.

However, the phenomenon isn’t all that uncommon and around 5% of adults sleep talk. 

What causes sleep talking?

When we sleep, our bodies go through 2 main phases – REM (rapid eye movement) and non-REM.

The first 90 minutes are known as the non-REM phase, when you’ve just dozed off and it would be fairly easy to wake you. The REM phase follows this, usually lasting around 10 minutes, in which you are in a deep sleep (the time when you dream). The whole cycle then repeats, with each later REM stage getting longer.

Sleep talking can happen during both phases, but for slightly different reasons.

In non-REM sleep, talking can happen when you become half-awake while transitioning from one stage to another. The sleep talker speaks as though awake, and can even have conversations with other people (my boyfriend thinks this is a great time to ask me embarrassing questions until I realise I’m speaking and wake up…)

When it happens during REM sleep it’s caused by a phenomenon known as ‘motor breakthrough‘. While most people’s mouths and vocal cords are switched off in REM sleep, it seems that in some people, they can temporarily be switched on, allowing us to speak for short periods of time despite being fast asleep.

Thankfully I haven’t said anything too embarrassing…yet.

That’s the end of Part 1 – look out for Part 2, including weird toe spasms in the swimming pool (you know what I mean…)

“You’re vegetarian? But what about bacon?”

1 in 5 people in the UK aged 16-24 are now vegetarians, so really you would expect people to have got their heads round the concept. However, as one of the 20%, I still find myself being asked questions about this lifestyle choice:

“Would you eat meat for £1 million?”

“But, have you tried bacon?”

“Where do you get your protein from?”

I normally turn the questions back to them, asking

“So, why do you eat meat?”

A new study from Lancaster University has suggested  that the vast majority of meat eaters defend eating animals by rationalizing their behavior using one of four rationalizations – the 4Ns:

Natural – “Humans are natural carnivores, it’s what we’re meant to eat”

Necessary – “I get essential nutrients from eating meat that I wouldn’t get with a vegetarian diet”

Normal – “My parents raised me to eat meat, it’s all I know”

Nice – “HAVE YOU TRIED BACON?!”

The relationships people have with animals are complicated.

There seems to be a contradiction between the attitude and behaviour of people towards animals they view as meat, and animals they view as pets. In 2012 it was estimated that the UK spent £6billion on pets, including grooming, pet food, and even the cost to take pets on holiday.

While I personally don’t have a problem with people eating meat and also having pets, this could be seen as a moral contradiction.

Dr Jared Piazza, who led the study, said “Morally motivated vegetarians may serve as a source of implicit moral reproach for many omnivores, eliciting behaviors designed to defend against moral condemnation.”

This seems like quite an extreme view to me. What people choose to eat is up to them, and whether you decide to be a vegetarian, meat-eater, vegan or have your own personalized diet, it shouldn’t need to be justified to anyone else.

5 things I’ve learned since training for the marathon

Back in April last year, I went to watch a friend running the London Marathon. Standing by Tower Bridge at mile 22, I watched runners hobbling along with jelly legs, spectators crying, people shouting out “only 4 miles to go!” and thought to myself – you know what? I could do that.

With 10 weeks to go until I run the marathon, I’m having some serious doubts and somewhat wishing I could rewind the clock back 10 months and re-think that decision.

Here’s what I’ve learnt since training for the marathon:

1) Training in winter is HARD

You wake up, and it’s dark. You leave work, and it’s dark. And on top of the constant darkness is the fact that it is freezing, and there’s around an 80% chance it’s raining, if not snowing.

Last weekend I did a 10 mile run along the Thames from Kennington to North Greenwich. What should have been a beautiful, scenic run was, in reality, an hour and a half of battling gale-force winds, being unable to tell if I was crying or just had sleet in my eye, all while getting lost due to misleading signs to the non-existent ‘Thames Path’.

2) Running in central London on a weekend is not a good idea

Having recently moved to Kennington, I was super excited to learn I was only a mile from some of London’s most iconic spots including the Houses of Parliament and London Eye.

I eagerly grabbed my trainers and planned a run to take in the sights. This was not the most practical plan.

A run along the Southbank on a Saturday afternoon will take you at least half an hour longer than it should, most of which is spent shouting “COMING THROUGH” which goes completely ignored by the throngs of tourists taking selfies.

While you will see some amazing views and have a great photo to Instagram, if you’re seriously trying to get a good run in, it’s probably a better idea to run away from central London.

3) I’m too competitive to join a running club

Running can be a great time to do some thinking, but occasionally I get a bit bored of my own company.

A few weeks ago I joined a Wednesday night running club in the hopes of meeting some running buddies. The club offered a 5km, 7km or 10km run, and considering I’m going to have to do 42km come April, I joined the 10km group.

The group leader announced that there would be 3 pace setters for the run – ‘fast’, ‘medium’ and ‘slow’. Feeling ambitious (stupid) I took my place at the front of the ‘medium’ group.

It turns out ‘medium’ is REALLY FAST in Nike Running terms. I normally do a steady 8:45 minute mile, but instead found myself legging it at 8:00. Instead of being sensible and slowing down to the ‘slow’ group, my pride got the better of me and I finished the 10km with a pulled bum muscle resulting in 2 weeks of rest.

Lesson learnt = don’t run with a professional club if you hate losing.

4) Owning nice running clothes makes a big difference

Pre-marathon training, I was pretty happy to grab a pair of shorts and an old T-shirt for the odd run.

Now that I’m running up to 3 times a week however, my workout wardrobe is fast evolving. As sad as it is, a new pair of leggings can serve as a form of motivation for me to actually get out, which can be difficult after a long day and the lure of a night on the sofa, catching up on trash-TV.

I’m not condoning the girls you see in the gym wearing false eyelashes, lipgloss and a crop top here. But when you see a fellow running admiring your outfit, believe me, it feels pretty good. And as my Mum says, ‘it’s all about self-respect’.

5) My perspective of distance has changed

This change hasn’t come naturally – it’s more a case of willing myself to perceive distance differently. With the final goal of 26.2 miles constantly in the back of my head, I now hear myself saying things like “I’m only doing 10 miles this weekend”.

They say that running a marathon is as much a mental struggle as it is physical, and I’m starting to see why.

I find myself breaking up the distance I’m doing to make it sound more manageable. For example, 10 miles can now be thought of as ‘only 5 miles and then you have less than an hour to go.’ Here’s hoping that tactic works after 4 hours when my legs are no longer functioning…

Any support would be much appreciated, whether it’s £1, £10 or even just a cheering face at the marathon on April 26th. I’m raising money for MACS charity, if you would like more information or would like to donate, please visit my page here: https://www.justgiving.com/Shivali-Best

 

A pint a day could keep male infertility away

When you think of possible factors that could boost fertility, what jumps to mind?

Fruit? Vegetables? A healthy lifestyle? Potentially.

But what about a pint of beer? I must admit, this wasn’t on my list.

However, recent studies have suggested that to improve chances of conception, men should drink a pint of beer daily.

The first study, conducted at the Massachusetts General Hospital, looked at the effects of drinking a pint of beer a day on the success of IVF (success = pregnancy).

Their results showed that participants who had drunk just under three units of alcohol a day (about a pint of beer) boosted their chance of success from 28 per cent to 57 per cent – almost 30 per cent more.

While this is a surprising finding, it is important to note that these results were based on a study of just 105 men over 214 IVF cycles. Further studies on a larger scale may be needed to prove whether there is a direct link.

In a separate study, researchers from the University of Rochester Medical Center found that infertile men who drank alcohol were less likely to report sexual or erectile problems than teetotalers.

This is an interesting correlation that contradicts previous studies which suggest drinking alcohol inhibits sexual performance.

However, no mechanism has been suggested yet to account for these positive impacts of alcohol, and until one is, this could simply be an interesting correlation.

Dr Rebecca Sokol, President of The American Society for Reproductive Medicine said “The human organism is complex and substances we inhale and imbibe have systemic effects beyond the stimulation the user is seeking. These studies provide new information that can help men make healthy choices for themselves, their partners, and their future children.”

Further studies are needed to investigate this strange finding further. It could be that a pint or two simply reduces male inhibitions, preventing sexual problems that may be more mental than physical.

If ‘breast is best’, why are young women reluctant to breastfeed?

In November last year, new mothers in the Yorkshire area were offered up to £200 in vouchers by the NHS, to encourage them to breastfeed their babies.

But why was this financial incentive necessary?

Recent results from the UK National Statistics showed that only 35.2% of new mothers in the year 2012/13 exclusively breastfed their babies.

This is a reduction of almost five percent of new mothers breastfeeding in the UK nine years ago.

Why breastfeed?

Breastfeeding is beneficial for both baby and mother. According to the patient.co.uk website, ‘breastfed babies have fewer infections in their early life. The main reason for this is that antibodies are passed in the breast milk from mother to baby.’

Maternal age appears to play a strong role in whether a new mother decides to breastfeed. This year, 10.3% of new mothers under the age of 20 chose to breastfeed, whereas 43.4% of new mothers age 30-34 breastfed.

Breastfeeding mothers not only save money on formula, but a study in 2002 published in the Journal of Obstetrics also showed that breastfeeding can lower the mother’s risk of breast and ovarian cancer.

While many mothers rely on infant formula instead of breast milk, the NHS website wrote ‘breast milk adapts to meet your baby’s changing needs. Infant formula doesn’t give your baby the same ingredients or provide the same protection.’

So what’s putting off young mothers?

Amanda Hutcherson, a Midwifery lecturer at City University, said “there are several different issues as to why more mothers aren’t breastfeeding, such as culture, age-related to education, and social issues.”

A study published in the BMJ in 2000 looked at the media’s representation of breastfeeding in newspapers and TV.

The results indicated that bottle-feeding was shown more often than breastfeeding. The portrayal of bottle-feeding tended to be associated with ‘ordinary families’ whereas breastfeeding was associated with middle class or celebrity women.

Additionally, the health benefits of breastfeeding and risks of infant formula were rarely mentioned.

This media coverage may imitate the reality of what is publicly visible.

Many women do not breastfeed in public, yet most are happy to bottle-feed and this may influence women to not breastfeed for social reasons.

Liann McGarrity is 24 years old and has one-year old twin boys. She said “I was desperate to breastfeed, but my body just wasn’t producing enough milk for two babies, so I had no choice but to switch to bottle.”

While Miss McGarrity was eager to breastfeed, she spoke about fellow new young mothers’ decisions not to.

“I think it might be more down to lifestyle. Breastfeeding stops you having a drink and I also think younger girls are shyer about it and might not feel comfortable doing it in public, so a bottle is more accessible.”

The duration spent in hospital after birth could also influence a mother’s decision to breastfeed. Most women who have natural births are sent home the day after and therefore have little support from experienced nurses on breastfeeding.

Miss McGarrity spoke of the initial difficulties with breastfeeding. “It’s not easy. It took four days to get the boys to latch on, and I was lucky that after a Caesarean-section I was in hospital for a week so had nurses to help me all day.”

Cultural issues may also play a role in women’s decisions to breastfeed. A 2006 study published in Paediatrics showed that in the UK, the highest breastfeeding rates are among black and Asian mothers. Breastfeeding may be more culturally accepted by certain races, in which public breastfeeding is normal practice.

As well as race, social demographics can have a strong influence.

Research published in Community Practitioner highlights that young women from low income areas are the least likely to breastfeed. The researchers suggest that this could be due to a number of reasons, such as a lack of role models to portray positive circumstances, or a lack of education on the benefits of breastfeeding.

How can we encourage more mothers to breastfeed?

Ms Hutcherson added “there are schemes to encourage women to breastfeed, such as The Baby Friendly Initiative which is run by UNICEF.”

The website for this initiative described it as “A course for infant feeding [that] aims to provide guidance to support anyone involved with implementing Baby Friendly standards.”

The course is aimed at both local councils, and individuals who require support for breastfeeding.

However, as an individual, the course costs £500 which may isolate some women who cannot afford it. There is currently no comparable scheme run by the NHS.

Personal choice

A woman’s choice to breastfeed is hers alone.

Breastfeeding affects women in different ways. Some women find the practice uncomfortable and painful, and therefore bottle-feeding offers them a convenient alternative.

Women may also find that breastfeeding restricts their diet and lifestyle. Things they consume – whether it is food, alcohol or cigarettes – will pass through the milk to the baby.

Bottle-feeding allows mothers to be less restricted in their diet, which they may be eager to do after nine months of pregnancy.

Comparable schemes 

The vouchers for breastfeeding are not the first financial incentives offered to patients by the NHS.

In 2007, the local NHS board in Tayside started offering weekly grocery vouchers for pregnant women in exchange for stopping smoking. These vouchers doubled the rate of women quitting smoking compared to standard stop-smoking services.

While this is encouraging, and suggests that women may start breastfeeding more when incentivised with vouchers, perhaps the NHS should consider improving their breastfeeding education and support in conjunction with this.

How does running a marathon really impact the body?

In a rash ‘must-get-fit’ moment last year, I entered the ballot for the London Marathon 2015.

Yeah I’m pretty fit, and play a lot of sport, but I wondered how running the race could really impact my body in the long run (pun definitely intended).

Many of my findings came as a surprise to me, particularly the risks of drinking too much water. Listen to find out more…

Can we train our brains to pick quinoa over cake?

After a somewhat heavy Saturday night, on Sunday all I wanted to eat was delicious, greasy, junk food to ease the hangover.

The comfort that comes from devouring a pizza dripping in cheese is on a completely different level to the feeling of nibbling my way through a quinoa salad.

However, new research from Tufts University suggests that we may be able to train our brains to actually prefer healthy, low-calorie foods.

The study involved participants who were overweight or obese, who underwent a weight-loss programme for six months.

Brain scans were taken before and after the programme. These revealed changes in areas of the brain reward center associated with learning and addiction.

The ‘after’ scans showed that this area had increased sensitivity to healthy, lower-calorie foods, indicating an increased reward and enjoyment of healthier food cues.

The area also showed decreased sensitivity to the unhealthy higher-calorie foods.

Dr Susan Roberts, who co-authored the study, said “We don’t start out in life loving French fries and hating, for example, whole wheat pasta. This conditioning happens over time in response to eating – repeatedly! – what is out there in the toxic food environment.”

So, what was in this seemingly magical weight-loss programme?

The authors highlight the importance of the integrated approach of the programme. This included a high-fibre, low glycemic food plan, as well as providing education in behaviour changes.

This approach differs to other weight-loss schemes, such as gastric bypass surgery – a process to re-route your digestive system past most of your stomach. The nature of the surgery means that it takes a lot less food to make you feel full, decreasing the pleasure from eating food.

The ‘brain-training’ appears to combat this problem, by increasing your pleasure in eating healthy foods, rather than taking away the pleasure in eating entirely.

My concern, is over the validity of the study. It is important to note that the study only involved 13 participants. A much larger-scale study would be needed to confirm the reliability of the results.

It would also be important to do follow-up studies with the participants months after the programme ended. One of the main problems with diets, is the difficulty in maintaining them.

A 2007 study into the effects of diets suggested that dieters ultimately revert to their old eating habits, but with the added emotional effects of failing to lose weight by restrictive diet.

The researchers proposed that this emotional state actually leads people to eat more than they would have before starting the diet – causing them to rapidly regain weight.

Follow-up studies would allow us to see if this ‘brain-training’ was a permanent change, or a temporary adaptation that would be reverted in time.

Either way, despite enjoying healthy low-calorie foods myself, I’ll be sticking with pizza as my hangover cure for the time being.

 

 

‘Based on a true story’ – does it affect our enjoyment of a film?

Jack: Step up on the railing. Hold on, hold on, Keep your eyes close. Do you trust me?

Rose: I trust you.

[Jack opens Rose’s arms]

Jack: All right. Open your eyes.

Rose: [gasp] I’m flying, Jack!

Titanic – an absolute classic. The story of Rose and Jack, lovers on the famous ship that sank in 1912 after hitting an iceberg. But, does the fact that the film is ‘based on a true story’ affect our enjoyment of watching it?

I expected the answer to be yes.

If you think about your expectations of a film before you watch it, they’re very different depending on whether you know the film is based on a true story or not.

I can take, for example, how I felt before watching The Blind Side, compared to how I felt before watching Spiderman.

While these two films are completely different in genre, knowing that The Blind Side was based on a true story gave me the anticipation of feeling emotional, whereas a completely fictional film, like Spiderman, did not come with this feeling.

However, a recent study, published in the Journal of Consumer Research has suggested that we do not have stronger emotional reactions to films if they are based on true events.

In fact, they go one step further, to suggest that watching a fictional film can actually leave us “more emotionally distraught” than if we watched a true story film.

The lack of anticipation of emotion when watching a fictional film means that when we do feel emotional, it comes as a shock.

In this study, people watching a film were told beforehand that it was fictional. Half the participants were given breaks throughout the film, while the other half watched it continuously.

The results showed that the group who were given breaks felt less sad after watching the film than those who watched it continuously.

The breaks throughout the viewing may have given the group time to think about the fact this it was fictional, affecting the emotional impact.

This suggests that in the midst of emotional experiences, consumers are so absorbed by the actual experience that they might be unable to take into account the fictional nature of the story.

My opinion? It depends on the viewer.

When I think about films that have had an emotional impact on me, it’s normally films with an element that I can relate, regardless of whether it’s based on a true story or not.

For example, I went to see Juno with my Mum when it came out in 2007. Both of us were blubbering wrecks by the end, and were surprised to hear that not everyone found the film as emotional as us.

However, discussing it after, I pointed out that I probably found it upsetting due to the fact that I was 16 at the time – the same age as the main character. In the same way, my Mum could relate to the main character from the perspective of the mother.

I don’t think the film would have had more of an emotional impact on us if it was based on a true story.

What do the results of the study mean in practice? That there’s a LOT of money to be made from films if you use the phrase ‘based on a true story’.

Underestimating the emotional impact of fictional stories may lead consumers to choose less enjoyable films just because they are based on a true story.

“Emphasizing realism may indeed make consumers more likely to choose these options, as consumers tend to believe that true stories will have a greater emotional impact than fictional stories.”

However, while highlighting that a film is based on true events may increase sales, it won’t necessarily increase your fulfillment from watching it.