cacao buono; Cioccolato cattivo

I nuovi iscritti alla nostra e-newsletter ricevono sempre un omaggio. Prendi il tuo qui: https://nutritionfacts.org/subscribe/

DESCRIZIONE: Il ruolo emergente dei solidi di cacao nella prevenzione delle malattie. Hai una domanda su questo video? Lascialo nella sezione commenti su http://nutritionfacts.org/videos/cocoa-good-chocolate-bad/ e ci proverò per rispondere! Non esitare a pubblicare qualsiasi domanda di tipo chieda al dottore qui nella sezione commenti e sarei felice di provare a rispondere. E guarda gli altri video sul cacao (http://nutritionfacts.org/topics/cocoa/). Inoltre, ci sono 1,380 altri soggetti (http://nutritionfacts.org /topics/) trattati nel resto dei miei video–sentiti libero di esplorarli anche tu!

https://NutritionFacts.org
• Iscriviti:
https://nutritionfacts.org/subscribe
• Dona:
https://nutritionfacts.org/donate
• Podcast : https://nutritionfacts.org/audio
• Facebook: www.facebook.com/NutritionFacts.org
• Twitter: www.twitter.com/nutrition_facts
• Instagram: www.instagram.com/nutrition_facts_org
• Libri: https://nutritionfacts.org/books
• Negozio: 580https://drgreger.org

24 Risposte a “cacao buono; Cioccolato cattivo”

  1. Cool however cacao is getting a bad rep now amongst 811ers because of its stimulant nature which is pretty powerful. Also the neurotoxicity reports.

  2. The cacao powder I have here has per 100g 357kcals, 20.7g of fat (12.5g saturated), 19.8g protein, 8.8g carbs (0.5g sugar), 27.9g fiber. Dark chocolate has more fat, though, with around 30g per 100g.

  3. I buy dark chocolate and always inspect the ingredients list because so many manufacturers add milk or dairy butter and non cocoa fats to make it softer at room temperature. Even with that ingredients list 70% cocoa, cocoa butter, sugar 100g has around 2200kj which isn't much different than a sandwich. Also interesting is that Lindt 70% constipates me yet Whitaker's 72% does not. I'm presuming the difference is in how much the beans were roasted. BTW even with maybe 30% sugar (I'm guessing that cocoa butter is included in the 70& cocoa solids) the GI is around 20-30 which is quite low.

    Observations:
    I find that if have 100g of 70% dark chocolate instead of a sandwich with my lunchtime apple my blood pressure drops from it's usual 145/95 (with medication) to 128/85 (chocolate & meds).

    This article suggested that cocoa butter raises cholesterol and I have read an article that agrees with it but adds that it seems to prevent adhesion of LDL to the artery walls. Maybe this is because it was funded by M&M's but I've had high blood pressure for at least 25 years and a recent echocardiogram suggests that I have zero plaque on all inspected arteries which is interesting considering I medium to high cholesterol. This was one of the reasons my doctor did the ECG.

    So am I a freak of nature or is the story about cocoa butter being beneficial true?

    I do generally have a good diet with unsweetened unprocessed nuts and grains with light milk (30ml) for breakfast, 2 slices of high fibre multi-grain bread with a slice of lean roast turkey or ham with the fat sliced off and a a light spread of olive oil based spread and evening meals are green salad or steamed greens and cauliferous vegies and carrots/parsnips or lentils/chickpeas/quinoa or sweet potato and topped off with around 120g of turkey/chicken, lean lamb, lean beef or fresh Salmon. The lamb and beef is all grain fed and the poultry is all real free range breast or thigh without skin. If I have snack it's usually a few almonds, walnuts or brasil nuts or macadamias (and of course chocolate usually 20g per day). I drink decaffeinated tea/decaffeinated green tea and decaffeinated coffee or water and no alcohol.

    I don't know if any studies cover these sorts of details, but my diet is fairly consistent for content and quantity, except for an occasional French style lamb roast or other traditional restaurant quality meal (home cooked of course)

    On the usual stats (blood pressure/cholesterol) I have a 10% greater risk of a heart attack compared to the control group of 120/80 and <4.8 but I have none of the precursors to heart attack like blockages, Diabetes II, left ventricle enlargement or palpitations & fluid retention, so who knows.

    Maybe the answer is try to do no harm (to your body) and do as much good as possible that is the answer. Anybody have an idea?

  4. Sorry Doc, you sounded seriously under the weather when you recorded this. Perhaps a nice, warm, uplifting hot cup of cocoa would do the trick?

  5. Huge fan Dr. Greger, and have to make one correction.  The cacao fruit/seed is not a bean, as the plant Theobroma cacao is not in the family Fabaceae (the bean family), and its fruit is not a legume.  It is therefore inaccurate to compare it to "other beans."  I have seen you make similar mistakes before, in contrasting different "berries."  The botanical fruit type of a plant is not necessarily an indication of taxonomy or of nutrition, and furthermore the common names given to fruits, as far as fruit type, are often inaccurate.  Berries exist across plant families, and not all berries are similar in nutrition.  Many things we refer to as berries, or nuts, or as any fruit type, for that matter, are not necessarily, botanically speaking, berries, or nuts, etc.  For example, a blackberry or raspberry is an aggregate of drupelets, not a berry, and an almond is a drupe, not a nut.  I think you would find botanical fruit types fascinating to learn about and somewhat relevant.  The cacao tree, from which we derive cocoa, and ultimately chocolate (from the seeds of its fruits, usually fermented first, I believe, and then dried and roasted), is in the family Malvaceae; the mallow family.  Okra and cotton are also members, as well as the very useful medicinal plant marshmallow (Althaea officinalis), rich in anti-inflammatory mucopolysaccharides. The fruit type of cacao seems most commonly classified as a (pepo-like) berry,  though I think there has been some confusion on the subject as I have also seen it listed as a pepo or a capsule.

  6. Hello there! What about cocoa vs cacao? Is there any research out there comparing the two? I find conflicting information online with some people calling cacao, which is less processed, healthier (nutrition dense) while others call it acidic or support that its nutrition is not actually getting absorbed.

  7. That explains why I'm not dead. I've put a tsp full of 100% cocoa in my coffee twice a day. No sweetners at all. Just need to rid the cream… one thing at a time!

  8. These terms, "cacao" and "cocoa" are confusing. There's a good you tube video explaining the difference. Cocoa powder can be processed thus reducing the beneficial aspects. Apparently cacao "nibs" (pieces of the bean) are the best. Anyway, notice the different spellings.

  9. I buy "Pure Natural Miracles" raw organic 100% cacao powder. The nutrition facts label states: 30% (6g) saturated fat in a 1 ounce serving size. I am not sure one can get non fat cacao powder, or at least I have not searched for it. So I would appreciate Dr. Greger commenting on the intrinsic saturated fat in the cacao bean, and whether a small amount of this fat is harmful in an otherwise vegan diet.

  10. Raw cacao is healthy but some people say that it has lots of bacteria also. It contaminated with lots of different bacteria while harvesting and preparing.

  11. Cacao vs Cocoa:
    Cocoa powder is processed with alkaline and heated, most of the antioxidants have been destroyed. Cocoa powder is also called Dutch Processed, it's used to make brownies and hot cocoa because it has a sweeter taste.

    Cacao powder is ground nibs but has the cocoa butter removed, most of the antioxidants have been preserved. Dark chocolate uses cacao powder.

  12. No animal in nature will eat cacao beans without milk and/or sugar. It's super toxic to the liver and has complex fatty acid chains that are hard to break down. Dr Greger you gotta dive into this and update people. There is new research.

I commenti sono chiusi.