Credits: Canva
Leafy greens, we all know are one of the healthiest foods on the earth. It offers so much, the benefits are countless, whether it is brain health, heart health or to control your blood sugar levels. But there is always a debate between which one is better. Spinach or kale?
So let's get into it!
Kale, we often must have heard its name listed as a "superfood". The reason is because of the rich nutrients it has to offer. However, both, spinach and kale are powerhouse leafy greens, rich in various nutrients.
If one must break down its nutrients, then we can broadly divide it between the fiber content, vitamin K, vitamin C, vitamin A, calcium, and folate.
All leafy greens are rich in dietary fiber and thus is essential for feeding your gut microbiome. This is the community of good bacteria that lives in your gut and supports your digestive health. The recommended daily amount or the RDA of fiber is 25 grams per day. So, if you go for a cup of raw spinach, this gives you around .7 grams of dietary fiber, whereas one cup of raw kale gives you a bit more. It has .9 grams of fiber.
A study published in M J Lifestyle Med titled . Closing America's fiber intake gap: Communication strategies from a food and fiber summit, found that most Americans actually do not get their RDA for fiber met. So, adding spinach and kale could be a great way to give your RDA fiber a start!
Vitamin K is necessary for blood clotting or lowering blood flow following an injury so that the wound can heal. In addition to calcium and vitamin D, it also supports healthy bones. While some animal products and fermented foods include vitamin K2, a 2020 study titled Vitamin K2 needs an RDI separate from vitamin K1, notes that lush greens like spinach and kale have vitamin K1.
The recommended daily intake of vitamin K is 120 microgrammes (mcg). A cup of raw kale has 82 microgrammes of vitamin K, while a cup of raw spinach contains 145 microgrammes.
It is a water-soluble vitamin and antioxidant that protect cells from damage and supports immune health. While it is often attributed to citrus fruits like oranges, vitamin C can also be found in leafy greens and both kale and spinach could be a great source. US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommends around 80 milligram of daily vitamin C. In one cup of raw spinach, you can get 8.5 milligrams, while kale provides 20 milligrams of daily vitamin C.
As per the FDA, vitamin A is important not only for your immune system, but also for your eye health. One must have at least 3,000 international units daily. The Office of Dietary Supplements notes that spinach and kale contain compounds called carotenoids, which our bodies convert to a usable form of vitamin A. This way you can have these leafy greens in your diet to fulfill your requirement of vitamin A. In one cup of spinach, you can get 2,810 international units of vitamin A, whereas in one cup of kale, you will find 1,010 international units of vitamin A.
Leafy greens are a rich source of calcium, an important nutrient which supports healthy bones and teeth, nerve communication, and muscle movement. The RDA for calcium in adults is 1,300 milligrams and one cup of raw spinach contains 30 milligrams of calcium, whereas in kale, it has 53 milligrams.
It is a B vitamin which is best known for its important in pregnancy and that provides neural tube defects like spina bifida in fetuses. The RDA for folate is 400 micrograms in pregnant mothers and 600 for those who are lactating. In one cup of spinach, one can get 58.2 micrograms of folate, whereas kale contains 13 micrograms of folate.
Now that you know the nutrients that kale and spinach contain, you make your own decision. This could be decided based on your requirement. The best way to do this is by talking to a healthcare expert, or a nutritionist who can recommend you better based on your body's need.
Credit: AI
High-protein diets have become increasingly popular among fitness enthusiasts and health-conscious masses.
However, a new scientific review suggests that many adults, particularly those who are sedentary, maybe consuming more protein than they actually need.
The study also shows that eating less protein rather than more may support healthier ageing by improving metabolism and reducing age-related biological changes.
The review, published by Cell Press, studied data from more than 350 studies investigating how dietary protein affects ageing and metabolic health.
Researchers concluded that reducing overall protein intake, or restricting certain amino acids like methionine, isoleucine, and valine, activates biological pathways linked to better metabolic function, cellular maintenance, and lower inflammation.
According to the researchers, several of these benefits appear to be driven by fibroblast growth factor 21 (FGF21), a hormone that rises when protein intake falls.
Higher FGF21 levels have been associated with better insulin sensitivity, better blood sugar regulation, increased energy expenditure, and healthier ageing in experimental models.
Lead author Dr Dudley Lamming, professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, said the growing popularity of protein-enriched foods may not benefit everyone.
"Our review suggests that reducing protein intake, rather than calories, may provide many of the same metabolic benefits while being easier for people to follow," the research team noted, adding that protein recommendations may need to be tailored according to an individual's age and physical activity rather than using a one-size-fits-all approach.
Also read: Do Most Adults Eat More Protein Than They Need? New Review Challenges The 'High-Protein' Trend
HealthandMe spoke to Dr. Mukesh Thakur, Director - Internal Medicine, Acute Medicine & Clinical Transformation, Sir H. N. Reliance Foundation Hospital, to find out who should and should not cut back on protein to improve longevity.
The doctor says that protein is essential for maintaining muscle mass, supporting immune function, and promoting overall health.
Dr Thakur says, "The optimal amount of protein varies depending on factors such as age, overall health status, and, most importantly, an individual's level of physical activity. For people who are largely sedentary, consuming very high amounts of protein may not offer additional health benefits."
He added that if the excess protein consumed is not utilized to build or maintain muscle through regular physical activity, it may contribute to excess calorie intake and increase metabolic stress.
He also explains, "Emerging research also suggests that chronically high protein intake, particularly from animal sources, may overstimulate biological pathways such as IGF-1 and mTOR, which have been linked to accelerated ageing in experimental studies."
To sum up, for individuals with obesity or diabetes, excessively high-protein diets can be particularly concerning, as they may increase the metabolic burden and are not necessarily associated with better health outcomes.
The researchers caution that the findings should not be interpreted as a recommendation for everyone to reduce protein intake.
While sedentary adults consuming excessive protein may benefit from moderation, adequate protein remains essential for older adults, athletes, pregnant women, children, and people recovering from illness or surgery to maintain muscle mass and overall health.
Credit: AI
Today, protein has found its way into everything from coffee and cereal to chips and even water. But a new scientific review suggests that for many adults, especially those who are not physically active, consuming more protein than needed may offer little benefit and could even have pose unintended health consequences.
Published in Cell Press Blue, the review analyzed more than 350 studies on restriction of protein, aging, metabolism, and longevity across humans and animal models.
Researchers concluded that while protein remains essential in one's diet, most sedentary adults are likely consuming more than they need. It also found that bringing down excess protein intake may support healthier aging.
“It’s absolutely crystal clear that there are benefits of protein to muscle growth and exercise response of active individuals,” said Dr. Dudley Lamming, aging researcher at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the review’s corresponding author.
“But because most people are relatively sedentary, many people are likely consuming more protein than they actually need, which probably has negative health consequences,” he added.
The researchers explain that eating less protein appears to activate several biological pathways that are associated to healthy aging.
One key player is fibroblast growth factor 21 (FGF21), a hormone that rises when protein intake is reduced.
Higher FGF21 levels have been associated with increased energy expenditure, better blood sugar control, lower inflammation, and healthier metabolism. Animal studies have also linked elevated FGF21 to longer lifespan.
The review also highlights specific amino acids, including methionine, isoleucine, and valine, which may influence aging-related processes when consumed in excess. Restricting these amino acids appears to alleviate cellular stress and improve metabolic health in experimental studies.
Also read: No Junk Food Near Schools! Maharashtra FDA Bans Sale Of Foods & Drinks High In Fat, Salt & Sugar
Researchers caution that the findings do not mean everyone should start eating a low-protein diet.
Protein requirements vary depending on age, activity level, health status, and life stage. Athletes, pregnant women, people recovering from illness or surgery, and many older adults often require more protein for muscle maintenance and recovery.
“Recent recommendations have encouraged people to eat more protein, but they’ve also encouraged people to exercise more,” Lamming said. “We probably need to personalize protein recommendations based not just on age, but also on how physically active people are.”
For healthy adults, the recommended dietary allowance is 0.8 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight daily. Although individual needs increase with regular exercise, aging, pregnancy, or certain medical conditions.
Many adults already exceed these recommendations through regular meals alone, even before adding protein supplements.
The researchers acknowledge that much of the evidence comes from animal studies, and long-term human trials are still limited. They say future research should determine exactly who benefits from lower protein intake and who needs more.
As protein-fortified products continue to flood supermarket shelves, the researchers argue that dietary advice should become more personalized rather than assuming higher protein intake benefits everyone.
Credit: iStock
Ultra-processed foods (UPFs), typically high in salt, sugar, and unhealthy fats, have long been associated with obesity, diabetes, hypertension, and other chronic diseases.
Now, new research suggests that the vast majority of foods marketed for toddlers in the US fall into this category. A study led by the University of Texas at Austin found that more than 80% of toddler foods sold in US grocery stores are ultra-processed, while nearly half fail to meet at least one nutrient standard set by the World Health Organization (WHO) for commercial foods intended for children aged 6 to 36 months.
Researchers analyzed 2,783 toddler food products sold across 21 grocery stores in Texas. Using the Nova classification system, they found that 81% of products were ultra-processed, while 49% failed to meet at least one WHO nutrient standard.
Among the products analyzed:
Products that exceeded WHO recommendations included:
“Many parents may assume that products sold on the baby/toddler food aisles of their grocery stores have to meet certain nutrient standards. Our findings highlight that half of the toddler foods available in local grocery stores do not,” said Erin A. Hudson, a University of Texas at Austin graduate student and science policy fellow with the American Society for Nutrition.
Hudson urged parents "to be vigilant in checking labels and ingredients to determine the nutrient content and processing level of products for their toddlers".
Read More: 'Let's Fix Our Food': India Launches New Policy To Fight Childhood Obesity, Boost Nutrition
The toddler years are a crucial period for developing lifelong eating habits and taste preferences. Diets high in added sugars and ultra-processed foods during early childhood may increase the risk of obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and other chronic illnesses later in life.
The researchers found that ultra-processed toddler foods were significantly more likely to be high in sugar than less-processed alternatives. Excess sugar intake in young children has been consistently linked to poor health outcomes, including obesity and metabolic disorders.
The findings come as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is considering new guidelines for front-of-package nutrition labels, healthy claims and marketing of food products to children. The US currently does not require warning labels on any food products that are high in sugar, sodium or calories.
Ultra-processed foods (UPFs) are industrially manufactured products made with ingredients and additives rarely used in home cooking, including preservatives, emulsifiers, artificial sweeteners, colorants, flavor enhancers, and hydrogenated oils. They are generally high in refined carbohydrates, added sugars, unhealthy fats, and sodium, while being low in fiber and other essential nutrients.
Research suggests that diets high in UPFs may promote chronic inflammation, disrupt the gut microbiome, and impair insulin regulation over time, potentially increasing the risk of obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and other chronic illnesses from an early age.
© 2024 Bennett, Coleman & Company Limited