Buy Gamma-O Get PTF or G-Fuel Free

http://www.gammalabs.net/

Tomatoes Raise HDL

From Ergo Log

If you eat 300g raw tomatoes every day for a month, the concentration of HDL – the 'good cholesterol' – in your blood rises by 14 percent. Researchers at the Mexican Instituto Nacionalde Ciencias Medicas y Nutricion Salvador Zubiran discovered this when they did a controlledmedical trial.

It's more difficult to raise your HDL than it is to reduce your LDL. Stopping smoking, losing weight and intensive physical exercise all boost your HDL, but not necessarily by much. That's why the Mexicans' interest was piqued by scientific literature studies which showed that eating tomatoes boosted HDL levels. A healthy cholesterol balance is still the most important form of protection against cardiovascular disease known.

In 2003 epidemiologists at Harvard University discovered that women who ate tomato products more than seven times a week had thirty percent less chance of developing cardiovascular disease. [J Nutr. 2003 Jul;133(7):2336-41.]

When, nine years later, the same researchers re-examined the effects of a high tomato intake oncardiovascular health they discovered that tomatoes lowered the concentration of triglycerides, LDL and Haemoglobin A1c [glycated haemoglobin – higher concentrations of this can be an indication of disease] in the blood, but did not affect the HDL level. [J Nutr. 2012 Feb;142(2):326-33.]

The cardiovascular effects that the epidemiologists found were modest to say the least. This may be because many products that contain tomatoes – like pizzas and ketchup – are often part of an unhealthy lifestyle. Israeli researchers once performed an experiment in which subjects were given 300 g fresh – i.e. definitely not unhealthy – tomatoes to eat for a month. At the end of the experiment the amount of HDL in the subjects' blood had risen by 15.2 percent. [Clin Invest Med. 2006 Oct;29(5):298-300.]

The drawback was that the Israeli study did not have a control group. The Mexicans therefore decided to repeat the Israeli study, but with more methodological bells and whistles attached. They got together a group of about fifty subjects with low HDL cholesterol levels, but normal triglyceride concentration in their blood. They gave half of the subjects 300g Roma tomatoes every day; the other half were given 300g cucumber. Cucumber is not well endowed with bioactive substances.

At the end of the four weeks, the HDL level in the tomato group had risen by 14 percent, as the figure below shows. In the cucumber group there was no change.





The effect on the HDL level increased as the experiment progressed, as shown in the figure above.

According to doctors, for men a healthy blood HDL level is at least 40 mg per decilitre; for women the figure is at least 50 mg per decilitre. At the start of the experiment the subjects all had lower levels than these figures. Only two subjects achieved a healthy HDL level as a result of the tomato supplementation. This gives an indication of the size of the effect.

The researchers don't commit themselves to statements on the mechanism through which raw tomatoes might improve cholesterol levels. They suspect that lycopene [structural formula shown above], a carotenoid found in tomatoes, plays a role, but believe that other factors are also involved.

Source:
Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes. 2013 Jul 26;6:263-73.

Source: http://www.ergo-log.com/raw-tomatoes-boost-hdl.html

Protein Doesn't Make You Fat

by Dylan Klein T-Nation

Here's what you need to know...

• While it's biochemically possible for protein to turn into fat by ingesting extremely high numbers of calories or extremely large amounts of protein, it's unlikely you'll ever be in that situation.

• You can pretty much eat as much protein as you want and it won't turn to fat.

• That old chestnut about only being able to absorb 30 grams of protein in one sitting is bunk.

Aside from building muscle, protein provides essential amino acids that serve as the building blocks for other proteins, enzymes, and hormones within the body that are vital for normal functioning. Without this steady supply of amino acids, the body resorts to breaking down its own proteins – typically from muscle – in order to meet this demand.

Protein has its share of misconceptions. It's not uncommon to hear claims that dietary protein eaten in excess of some arbitrary number will be stored as body fat. Even those who are supposed to be reputable sources for nutrition information propagate this untenable dogma. While paging through a nutrition textbook I came across a section in the protein chapter regarding amino acids and energy metabolism (1). To quote the book directly:

"Eating extra protein during times of glucose and energy sufficiency generally contributes to more fat storage, not muscle growth. This is because, during times of glucose and energy excess, your body redirects the flow of amino acids away from gluconeogenesis and ATP-producing pathways and instead converts them to lipids. The resulting lipids can subsequently be stored as body fat for later use."

This is, more or less, supported by another textbook I own (2):

"In times of excess energy and protein intakes coupled with adequate carbohydrate intake, the carbon skeleton of amino acids may be used to synthesize fatty acids."

While these passages do take into account the metabolic state of the person, I still find these explanations to be lacking. Indeed, more recent evidence is needed when talking about amino acid conversion to fatty acids. While the metabolic pathways to convert amino acids to fatty acids do in fact exist in the human body, the fact of the matter is that under almost no circumstance will this ever happen.

Protein Digestion Begins in the Stomach and Ends in the Small Intestine
While the physical breakdown of proteins does take place in the mouth, it's not until the protein reaches the stomach that any appreciable chemical breakdown occurs. This breakdown is facilitated by hydrochloric acid (HCl) and the enzyme pepsin (converted from its inactive form, pepsinogen). Once the initial protein denaturing and peptide cleaving is complete, the product polypeptides pass through the pyloric sphincter of the stomach and into the proximal small intestine (i.e., duodenum).

The proximal small intestine is where most of the digestion of proteins and virtually all of the absorption of amino acids occurs (~90% is absorbed with a very small amount excreted in the feces). Here even more digestive enzymes are present to break down the remaining polypeptides into their individual amino acids along with some trace amounts of di- and tri-peptides. Once broken down completely, the free amino acids and di-/tri-peptides can then enter the cells of the small intestine where some (like glutamine) are used for energy within the intestinal cells, while the remaining pass through into circulation and head for the liver.

Protein Absorption Claims

Before we head on over to the liver and discuss amino acid metabolism with regards to the initial claims, I'd first like to touch upon another related claim that you may have heard in the lay media or from your local gym guru. It usually reads:

"The average person can only absorb 30 grams of protein at one sitting. Anything above that will be stored as fat."

Unlike the previous claims, this one offers no context whatsoever. Moreover, it's downright moronic. While this claim looks like a straw man argument readily poised for the takedown, it actually comes from an online article written by a Registered Dietitian.

Protein Absorption Claims

Let's, for example, take someone who eats 40 grams of protein in one sitting. If we're to assume only 30 grams can be absorbed at a time, then it's safe to say that the extra 10 grams will be excreted in the feces. If this were the case, most people would be egesting tiny sirloin steaks on a daily basis. Moreover, based on the initial argument, how are you supposed to convert and store 10 grams of excess dietary protein as body fat if you can't even absorb it in the first place? Nevertheless, while I agree that most processes in the human body don't proceed with 100% efficiency, excreting 25% of one's ingested protein content is far from the 90% efficiency supported in the literature (3).

Theoretically, it could be possible for intestinal absorption of amino acids to be drastically impaired, resulting in excess amino acids passing through into the colon. In reality, this process does occur but only to an extremely limited extent. More severe malabsorption would require the absorptive capacity of the small intestine to be greatly surpassed.

However, in the face of larger protein and caloric boluses, the stomach just reduces its rate of gastric emptying in order to more slowly supply the gut with incoming amino acids (larger meals take longer to digest). Moreover, the gut itself will slow motility as to increase the time nutrients are available to be absorbed (4).

The bottom line is that the stomach will take its sweet time to release amino acids into the gut where they can be further detained and subsequently absorbed into the body/circulation. Without this tightly orchestrated process, we as a species would have died off long ago. Having to consume intricately planned out 30g protein meals, multiple times per day in order to effectively derive the nutrients from our food just wouldn't have cut it.

Liver, the Primary Site for Amino Acid Metabolism

Let's circle back to the initial claims that excess protein, during times of adequate energy and carbohydrate intake, is converted to fatty acids and stored as body fat.

The amino acids absorbed and released from the small intestine are destined for the liver. Over half of all the amino acids ingested (in the form of protein) are bound for and taken up by the liver. The liver acts almost as a monitor for absorbed amino acids and adjusts their metabolism (breakdown, synthesis, catabolism, anabolism, etc.) according to the body's metabolic state and needs (2).

It's here the initial claim comes into play. While the pathways for fatty acid synthesis from amino acids do exist – no argument there – the statement that all excess protein, under specified conditions, will be stored as fat ignores recent evidence.

Enter One of the Most Tightly Controlled Studies of our Time
In 2012, George Bray and colleagues (5) sought to examine whether the level of dietary protein affected body composition, weight gain, and/or energy expenditure in subjects randomized to one of three hypercaloric diets: low protein (5%), normal protein (15%), or high protein (25%).

Once randomized, subjects were admitted to a metabolic ward and were force fed 140% (+1,000kcals/day) of their maintenance calorie needs for 8 weeks straight. Protein intakes averaged ~47g (0.68g/kg) for the low protein group and 140g (1.79g/kg) and 230g (3.0g/kg) for the normal and high protein groups, respectively.

Carbohydrate was kept constant between the groups (41-42%), with dietary fat ranging from 33% in the high protein group to 44% and 52% in the normal and low protein groups, respectively. Lastly, during the course of the 8-week overfeeding period, subjects' body composition was measured bi-weekly using dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA, the "gold standard" for measuring body composition).

Results
At the end of the study, all subjects gained weight with near identical increases in body fat between the three groups. (In actuality, the higher protein groups actually gained slightly less body fat than the lower protein group. This, however, wasn't significant). The group eating the low protein diet gained the least amount of weight (3.16 kg) with the normal and high protein groups gaining about twice as much weight (6.05 and 6.51 kg, respectively).

As you can see, the additional ~3 kg of body weight gained in the higher protein groups (15% and 25%) was shown to be due to an increase in lean body mass and not body fat. To quote the conclusions of the authors:

"Calories alone contributed to the increase in body fat. In contrast, protein contributed to changes in lean body mass, but not to the increase in body fat."

While we can't say for sure the exact composition of the lean mass that was gained, we can assuredly say that the extra protein was not primarily used for fat storage. My hunch is that the protein was converted to glucose (via gluconeogenesis) and stored subsequently as glycogen along with some accompanying water weight. Either way, it wasn't body fat.

Regroup

Let's take a second for this to sink in. These subjects were literally forced to eat ~1,000kcals more than what they needed to maintain their body weight for 8 full weeks, and even then it was seen that the protein contributed to increases in lean body mass rather than body fat.

Given the initial claim – that once energy, glucose and protein requirements are met, all excess amino acids will get converted to fatty acids and stored as body fat – it's clear that those in the higher protein groups didn't succumb to any of those dire predictions. In reality, compared to the lower protein group, they gained very little (if any) additional body fat. This is in stark contrast to what is thought.

In the end, however, we're still left with the quintessential question underlying the whole concept: what's the maximal amount of protein (amino acids) that the body can effectively utilize before being converted to fatty acids and stored as body fat?

Given the results of this study, it appears that this number is either way higher than three times the current RDA with concomitant hypercaloric intakes for weeks on end, or, it requires a similar overfeeding protocol drawn out over a longer time period at which point lean mass gains would plateau and fat mass would accrue.

Either way, both situations are highly unlikely for the general public and even those consciously trying to gain weight with higher intakes of protein and calories. Moreover, this upper extreme is likely to be highly individual and contingent upon other factors such as genetics, lifestyle, training status, etc. Unfortunately, we just don't have the answers to these questions right now.

Final Thoughts

So, while we do biochemically possess the pathways needed to convert amino acids to fatty acids, the chances of that ever happening to a significant degree during slightly higher protein intakes, even in the face of adequate energy and carbohydrates, are irrelevant given what we know about the extreme measures that need to be surpassed in order for any appreciable fat gain from protein to take place.

Indeed, overeating by ~1,000kcals/day for 8 weeks in combination with higher protein intakes didn't amount to any additional gains in body fat compared to a lower protein, hypercaloric diet. Rather, excess protein in the face of overfeeding actually contributed to gains in lean body mass. Quite the contrary to what textbooks and gurus might preach.

In reality, the chances that excess protein contributes to body fat stores are insignificant, and arguably physically impossible under normal or even slightly hypercaloric conditions that most athletes face on a daily basis. Only until theoretical extremes – either for protein intakes or calories or both – are achieved will there be any significant contributions to body fat from excess protein intake.

References

1. McGuire M, Beerman, KA.: Nutritional Sciences: From Fundamentals to Food. 2nd edn. Belmont, CA.: Wadsworth Cengage Learning; 2011.

2. Gropper S, Smith, JL., Groff, JL.: Advanced Nutrition and Human Metabolism. 5th edn. Belmont, CA.: Wadsworth Cengage Learning; 2009.

3. Ten Have GA, Engelen MP, Luiking YC, Deutz NE: Absorption kinetics of amino acids, peptides, and intact proteins. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab 2007, 17 Suppl:S23-36.

4. Maljaars PW, Peters HP, Mela DJ, Masclee AA: Ileal brake: a sensible food target for appetite control. A review. Physiol Behav 2008, 95:271-281.

5. Bray GA, Smith SR, de Jonge L, Xie H, Rood J, Martin CK, Most M, Brock C, Mancuso S, Redman LM: Effect of dietary protein content on weight gain, energy expenditure, and body composition during overeating: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2012, 307:47-55.

Source: http://www.t-nation.com/diet-fat-los...t-make-you-fat

Get Big on a Budget

One of the biggest challenges of bodybuilding is eating enough to grow like an out-of-control weed. I get asked all the time, "How do you afford to eat? How do you do it?" I may be a pro now, but I've been there. I had to make do.

One of the biggest reasons people fail with their diets is because they think they have to eat plain crap or chicken seven times every day. I can't do that. I'll go crazy, and I won't want to eat. I have to mix it up and have different tastes every meal. Sure, I'm not pounding cheeseburgers, but I have to have some flavor.

But, could I eat like that a on a tight budget? We'll see. In the first Big on a Budget challenge, my Animal brother Evan "The Ox" Centopani had the assignment to buy a week's worth of food for less than $50. He came in at $49.45.

There was a whole lot of chicken and broccoli in that week, though. That's not my diet. So I headed over to Marazzo's Thriftway outside of Trenton, New Jersey, to see if I could eat the way I want for even less.

BIG ON A BUDGET WITH FRANK "WRATH" MCGRATH"
WATCH THE VIDEO - 20:11

NOT A CHICKEN IN SIGHT

I grabbed a cart and stopped in front of the chocolate cakes. I could … but no. I passed up the bacon, too. I picked up some mayo, then put it back on the shelf. Protein was the main priority, so I headed straight to the butcher.

I was a skinny guy when I started, and I needed beef to grow. Today, I'm still a beef guy. I eat a little bit of chicken, but I've always eaten a lot of red meat. It has higher calories than chicken for when you're in the off-season, or if you're just trying to get bigger. Anyway, I'd just rather eat it.

Steak is great, but it can get pretty expensive. Instead, I went for 80/20 ground beef—afamily pack for a family of one. The whole week's worth, about 7 pounds, cost less than $20. Try doing that with steak.

Something else that is really cheap, but I don't think a lot of people use enough, is canned tuna. I bought seven cans of chunk light for about a buck apiece. A can has about 30 grams of protein, and no cooking is necessary, just open it up and eat. Or if you're doing the tuna-and-rice thing like I am, here's a good trick: Add mustard. I didn't buy any today, but everybody's got some mustard, or ketchup, or whatever. It adds flavor, but it also just makes it a little wet so it goes down easier.

When you need to get another protein meal in there, think eggs. How many have I peeled in my life? I'm pretty sure it's a million. But just do the math: A carton of 18 eggs costs about $3, at 6 grams of protein per egg. Two cartons, five eggs per meal—30 grams of protein per meal—get you a week's worth of eggs for $6. Not bad. I was about 30 bucks in, taking care of my protein for the week.

MAKE CENTS OF CARBS

Carbs were next, and the good thing is that carbs are cheap. Pasta cost 99 cents per pound—perfect.

A POUND OF PASTA WILL SUPPLY YOUR CARBS FOR ABOUT EIGHT MEALS.

A pound will last about eight meals, adding about 40 grams of carbs and about 200 calories per 2-ounce serving. It doesn't matter what kind you buy; they're all the same. I picked linguine just because I like the shape of it.

You can't go wrong with rice. I eat a lot of it, probably almost every meal, a cup and a half or two cups a meal—I don't do the brown shit. Five pounds of white rice was $3.29; you can't beat that. It'll probably last two weeks. So I'm ahead of the game. Good savings right there.

Pro tip: Bagels taste great, they're pretty cheap, and they've got a lot of carbs. That's what we want. So I got a bag o' bagels out of the freezer. There's 30 g of carbs per bagel, two bagels per day at breakfast, for $4 total. Not too shabby.

SAY YES TO SAUCE

I've seen all you guys looking in magazines at bodybuilders who eat their plain chicken breasts, plain rice, plain everything. Not this guy. I need a little bit of flavor in my life. That means sauce. You can put it on anything, but I was thinking of mixing the beef, the sauce, and the pasta.

Pasta sauce is pretty cheap. Glass containers are nice, but the canned ones are like a buck cheaper, and you get some nice forearm work as a bonus.

The only thing is that you can't store leftover sauce in the can, obviously, so when I open it up, I pour it in a plastic container. There you go. Two cans for $3 total is definitely enough for a week, depending on how much you use. I chose the meat flavor—gotta have meat flavor!—and the four cheese.

REMEMBER, YOU'VE GOT TO ENJOY THIS, TOO. IT'S NOT ALL ABOUT SUFFERING 24 HOURS A DAY. SPICE IT UP.

I know what you're thinking, but sauce isn't a big deal. You've got to have salt in your food, or pepper, or whatever spices you want. You don't need to choke down that super-plain, dry chicken breast. Put some flavor on it!

Remember, you've got to enjoy this, too. It's not all about suffering 24 hours a day. Spice it up.

ALERT THE TREAT POLICE

I was coming down to the wire with about 8 bucks to spare, so it was time for a treat. I know we're eating clean here, but I've got to have a little something-something. For me, that means something sweet.

I was thinking cola. I don't drink it much, but maybe once a day I like to have a glass of Diet Coke. Gotta live.

Then I saw these Tastykake Butterscotch Krimpets. I hear they're the shit. Twelve of them for $3.99? Yup. This is for taste, not for nutritional value. So guess what: These are in my diet. It's the off-season.

Still, walking to the checkout I was feeling guilty about the Krimpets. So, even though we were getting tight, I headed over to the fruits.

Everybody loves bananas, right? They were 49 cents per pound, and seven bananas weighed just over two pounds; I got an extra 105 calories and 27 grams of carbs for a buck.

THE BALANCE IS DUE

I was pretty sure we were going to make it right under 50 bucks, but I was still nervous. It was looking good, but the last item on the conveyor belt was the most expensive: the ground beef. Even with that $16, I came in at $48.21. Money to burn! We're going out tonight.

I got a lot of grub for under $49. Everything you need for a good bodybuilder diet is here, and cheap. It can be done. Don't let them tell you it can't.

EATING BIG ON A BUDGET

Meal 1

• Eggs
  5
• Bagels
  2
• Banana
  1

Meal 2

• Ground Beef
  8 oz
• Pasta
  2 oz
• Pasta Sauce

Meal 3

• Universal Ultra Whey Pro Whey
  2 scoops

Meal 4

• Tuna
  1 can
• White Rice
  1/5 cups

Meal 5

• Ground Beef
  8 oz
• Pasta
  2 oz
• Pasta Sauce

Meal 6

• Universal Ultra Whey Pro Whey
  2 scoops

The total for the day, not including the Krimpets, is 235 grams of protein and 3,430 calories. All that for 50 American bucks and a few scoops of protein powder. This is definitely an off-season diet, but it's still pretty clean. Add one or two shakes each day on top of this, and you're at six meals per. You don't need any more than that.

A new budget bar has been set! Sorry, Evan. And I have tasty cakes.

True Blue Ice

Step 1. Fill ice cube tray with Blue Ice G-Fuel. Step 2. Freeze ice tray for 4 to 6 hours. Step 3. Fill glass with True Blue Ice cubes. Step 4. Pour Blue Ice G-Fuel of True Blue Ice cubes. Step 5. Enjoy

http://www.gammalabs.net/product-grid/gfuel-tub.html

The Ultimate Anti Aging Vitamin

From Science Daily

Who would not want to live a long and healthy life? A freely available food supplement could help in this respect, scientists from ETH Zurich have demonstrated in roundworms. Vitamin B3 -- also known as niacin -- and its metabolite nicotinamide in the worms' diet caused them to live for about one tenth longer than usual.

As an international team of researchers headed by Michael Ristow, a professor of energy metabolism, has now experimentally demonstrated, niacin and nicotinamide take effect by promoting formation of so-called free radicals. "In roundworms, these reactive oxygen species prolong life," says Ristow.

"No scientific evidence for usefulness of antioxidants"
This might seem surprising as reactive oxygen species are generally considered to be unhealthy. Ristow's view also contradicts the textbook opinion championed by many other scientists. Reactive oxygen species are known to damage somatic cells, a condition referred to as oxidative stress. Particular substances, so-called antioxidants, which are also found in fruit, vegetables and certain vegetable oils, are capable of neutralising these free radicals. Many scientists believe that antioxidants are beneficial to health.

"The claim that intake of antioxidants, especially in tablet form, promotes any aspect of human health lacks scientific support," says Ristow. He does not dispute that fruit and vegetables are healthy. However, this may rather be caused by other compounds contained therein, such as so-called polyphenols. "Fruit and vegetables are healthy, despite the fact that they contain antioxidants," says the ETH-Zurich professor. Based on the current and many previous findings he is convinced that small amounts of reactive oxygen species and the oxidative stress they trigger have a health-promoting impact. "Cells can cope well with oxidative stress and neutralise it," says Ristow.

Substance mimics endurance sport
In earlier studies on humans, Ristow demonstrated that the health-enhancing effect of endurance sports is mediated via an increased formation of reactive oxygen species -- and that antioxidants abolish this effect. Based on the present study, he concludes that niacin brings about a similar metabolic condition to exercise. "Niacin tricks the body into believing that it is exercising -- even when this is not the case," says Ristow. Such compounds are known as "exercise mimetics."

The researchers conducted their experiments on the model organism Caenorhabditis elegans. This worm, which is merely one millimetre in length, can be easily maintained and has a lifespan of only a month, making it the ideal model organism for ageing research.

Also relevant for humans
The results of the study may also be of relevance for humans, says Ristow. After all, the metabolic pathway initiated by niacin is very similar in roundworms and higher organisms. Whether niacin has similar effects on the life expectancy of mice is the subject of Ristow's current research. Previous studies also suggest a health-enhancing effect of niacin in humans with elevated blood cholesterol levels.

Niacin and nicotinamide have been approved as dietary supplements for decades. Ristow could easily envisage the substances being used broadly for therapeutic purposes in the future. A whole series of foods naturally contain niacin, including meat, liver, fish, peanuts, mushrooms, rice and wheat bran. Whether nutritional uptake is sufficient for a health-enhancing or lifespan-extending effect, however, remains to be demonstrated, says Ristow.

Disputed impact of enzymes
The latest study on the effects of niacin and nicotinamide is based on a particular class of enzymes, the sirtuins, which convert niacin into nicotinamide. Moreover, they are also involved in gene regulation, helping to down regulate the activity of certain genes. Until today, scientists have been disputing whether sirtuins have a life-prolonging impact.

Ristow and his team's work now suggests that the activity of sirtuins actually prolongs life in roundworms. According to the study, however, the life-prolonging effect is not down to gene regulation, as has often been supposed in the past. Instead, the effect is due to the conversion of niacin into nicotinamide. Studying genetically modified roundworms that were unable to convert nicotinamide into certain other metabolic products, the scientists did not observe any lifespan extension, even after overexpression of sirtuins, which otherwise lead to an increased life expectancy.

Story Source:
The above story is based on materials provided by ETH Zurich.
Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.

Journal Reference:
Kathrin Schmeisser, Johannes Mansfeld, Doreen Kuhlow, Sandra Weimer, Steffen Priebe, Ines Heiland, Marc Birringer, Marco Groth, Alexandra Segref, Yariv Kanfi, Nathan L Price, Sebastian Schmeisser, Stefan Schuster, Andreas F H Pfeiffer, Reinhard Guthke, Matthias Platzer, Thorsten Hoppe, Haim Y Cohen, Kim Zarse, David A Sinclair, Michael Ristow. Role of sirtuins in lifespan regulation is linked to methylation of nicotinamide. Nature Chemical Biology, 2013; DOI: 10.1038/nchembio.1352

Source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0930101836.htm

Funny Fruit Facts

by Rebecca Stokes on CafeMom's blog, The Stir.

Whenever I'm down, I know full-well that eating fruits and veggies will improve my mood almost immediately. This isn't just because of how fruit nourishes your brain, but also because fruit is just plain delicious!

When I'm not eating fruit, I don't give it a lot of thought. This does nature's dessert a major disservice. Because -- excuse me while I geek out over here -- fruit is fascinating! Don't believe me? Read on for five facts about your favorite fruits that will absolutely surprise you. They also double as great dinner-party small talk. Yay, social skills!

Bananas: Not only delicious, filling, and the bane of all carb-avoiding dieters, this "fruit" is hiding something. It's actually an herb! The world's largest, in fact. It is in the same family as lilies. Only people seldom comically slip and fall on lilies. That we know of, anyway.

Apples: Yes, yes, they'll keep the doctor away -- but did you know apples also have enoughnatural sugar in them to keep you awake? It could be as or more effective as your morning cup of joe. I'd say this changes everything, but my caffeine addiction can't hear you.

Grapefruit: Sure, fruit is excellent for you, but be wary of grapefruit if you're on certainprescription drugs -- otherwise, this gentle citrus could become your deadly nemesis. This is because grapefruit shuts down the enzymes in your tum that control your body's ability to properly absorb what you put in it. This means, that one pill can have the power of three.

Cranberries: This tart and scrumptious berry has a secret -- not only is it good to eat, it's also fun to play with. Thanks to a natural air pocket in each berry, cranberries BOUNCE!

Strawberries: You guys. Prepare to have your world rocked. Strawberries? Arguably the most delicious of all the berries? Is. Not. A. Berry. Technically, it's not even a fruit! It's like we're in the Matrix or something. Strawberries are actually flowering plants and members of the rose family. The fruit we eat is actually just incidental. A berry is characterized by carrying its seeds internally. Whatever, they are still delicious.

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/the-st...b_3996014.html