东部箱乌龟采购信息大全养殖方法
时间:2020年02月26日 01:25:51

Divorcees are more likely to have a heart attack than their peers who stay married, US research suggests.美国一项研究显示,离婚人士比其他婚姻关系正常的同龄人更易患心脏病。An analysis of 15,827 people showed women were worst affected, and barely reduced the risk if they remarried.该研究分析了15827人后发现,女人的心脏状况更易受到离婚的影响,并且再婚也几乎不会减少患病几率。The study, published in the journal Circulation, argued that chronic stress, linked to divorce, had a long-term impact on the body.发表于美国《循环》杂志上的这项研究认为,由离婚引起的长期焦虑对身体健康有持久的不良影响。The British Heart Foundation called for more research before divorce is classed as a major heart risk.英国心脏基金会呼吁,在离婚被视为心脏病主要风险因素之前应进行更多研究。We aly know that the death of a close loved one can greatly increase the risk of a heart attack.我们知道,亲密爱人的死亡会增加患心脏病的风险。Now a team at Duke University has shown a similar effect after divorce.现在美国杜克大学的研究小组发现,离婚也有类似的不良结果。During the course of the study, between 1992 and 2010, roughly one in three people divorced at least once.研究从1992开始进行到2010年,过程中发现,每三人中就有一人至少离婚一次。Women who divorced once were 24% more likely to have had a heart attack in the study than women who were continuously married. The figure was 77% for those having multiple divorces.离过一次婚的女性比持续在婚姻状态中的女性患心脏病的几率高出24%。如果离婚多次,心脏病发率将增加77%。In men, there was a modest 10% extra risk for one divorce and 30% increase after multiple divorces.对于男性,离婚一次增加10%的心脏病发率。多次离婚将增加30%病发率。One of the researchers Prof Linda George said: ;This risk is comparable to that of high blood pressure or if you have diabetes, so it#39;s right up there, it is pretty big.;其中的一位研究人员琳达·乔治教授说:“这跟高血压或糖尿病的风险接近,所以就此而言,风险还是相当高的。”When it came to remarriage, the risk was only marginally reduced for women while men bounced back.而如果再婚,对女人来说风险只是稍微降低了一点,对男人来说却如获新生。;I think this is the most interesting bit in the paper,; Prof George added.乔治教授补充道:“我认为这是研究报告中最有意思的一点。”She told the B News website: ;We joke around here and call it the #39;any-women-will-do orientation#39; for men.她告诉B新闻网站的记者:“我们就这一点打趣说,任何女人都能拯救男人。”;They#39;re more comfortable being married than not married and cope with different women being their spouses.“男性觉得结婚比不结婚更舒,而且任何类型的女性做配偶,他们都能应付。”;First marriages are protective for women and it#39;s a little dicey after that.;“对于女性来说,第一次婚姻是为了寻求保护,之后的婚姻更具一点冒险精神。”But why?为什么呢?The researchers found that changes in lifestyle, such as loss of income, could not explain the heightened risk.研究人员发现,生活方式的改变,例如收入的减少,并不能解释这种风险的增加。Prof George told the B News website: ;My educated speculation is that we know that psychological distress is a constant stress on the immune system, higher levels of inflammation and stress hormones increase.乔治教授表示:“我的推测是,精神的苦闷会给免疫系统带来持久的压力,导致各种炎症发生的几率更高,压力激素增加。”;Immune function is altered for the worse and if that continues for many years it does take a physiological toll.;“免疫功能遭到破坏,如果这种状况一直持续多年,就会导致健康出现问题。”She argues the sex-difference is also found in depression and that divorce is a greater ;psychological burden; for women although ;we don#39;t know exactly what#39;s going on;.乔治认为,抑郁症还存在性别差异,离婚对女人来说“心理负担”更重,尽管“我们并不知道到底发生了什么”。While tablets can reduce the risks caused by high blood pressure, there is no easy solution for the pain of divorce.尽管吃药可以减少由高血压所带来的患病风险,但要想治愈离婚所带来的伤痛却并不容易。The researchers recommend close, supportive friends.专家建议从亲密的朋友关系中寻求持和安慰。Prof Jeremy Pearson, from the British Heart Foundation, commented: ;We have known for some time that our mental health can affect our heart health.英国心脏基金会的杰里米·皮尔森教授道:“我们知道,精神健康有时会影响心脏健康。;This study suggests that divorce might increase a person#39;s risk of a heart attack.“这个研究指出,离婚会增加一个人患心脏病的风险。”;But the results are not definitive so further evidence would be needed before divorce could be considered a significant risk factor for causing a heart attack.;但结果尚未定论,所以在离婚被作为引起心脏病的一个重要风险因素之前,还需要获得进一步的据。” /201506/378457

A new class of experimental cholesterol drugs might sharply reduce the risk of heart attacks and strokes, researchers reported on Sunday, citing what they described as preliminary evidence.周日,研究人员援引“初步据”称,一类新的实验性降胆固醇药物可能会大幅降低心肌梗死和中风风险。The drugs, one being developed by Amgen and the other by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, are aly known to sharply reduce so-called bad cholesterol, sometimes to levels lower than those achieved by statins like Lipitor, the mainstay lipid-lowering medicines.上述报告中的药物是指由美国安进公司(Amgen)以及赛诺菲(Sanofi)和瑞泽恩制药公司(Regeneron Pharmaceuticals)研发的。目前已经确知它们可以大幅减少所谓的“坏胆固醇”(即LDL胆固醇[低密度脂蛋白胆固醇]——译注),有时其效力甚至会超过主流降脂药物,如立普妥(Lipitor)等他汀类药物。What has not been known, however, is whether the drugs do what patients and doctors really care about: protect against heart attacks, strokes and other cardiovascular problems or “events.”然而,对于医生和患者真正关心的问题——预防心肌梗死、中风和其他心血管疾病或“事件”——这些药物的效果如何,目前尚不十分清楚。The early results suggest that there might be such a benefit, maybe even a big one. In small studies sponsored by the manufacturers, both drugs reduced the rate of such cardiovascular problems by about half.早期的研究结果表明,它们非但有益,甚至还可能是大有益处。在由药品制造商赞助的两项小型研究中,这两种药物分别将此类心血管问题的发生率减少了一半左右。“To see a reduction in cardiovascular events aly is very encouraging that we’re on the right track,” Dr. Jennifer G. Robinson, the lead investigator in the trial of the Sanofi drug, said in an interview.赛诺菲药物试验的研究负责人,珍妮弗·G·鲁宾逊(Jennifer G. Robinson)士在接受采访时说:“看到心血管事件的减少真是非常令人鼓舞,这说明我们是走在正确的道路上。”The studies were published in The New England Journal of Medicine and were being presented at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology taking place through Monday in San Diego.该研究发表在《新英格兰医学杂志》(The New England Journal of Medicine)上。从周一起在圣地亚哥举行的美国心脏病学会(American College of Cardiology)年会上,也对其进行了介绍。Researchers cautioned, however, that the studies were small and intended to assess whether the drugs lowered the bad cholesterol and were safe, not whether they staved off heart attacks. That could make the conclusions about heart attack and stroke risk less trustworthy. Judging those effects will require larger trials involving tens of thousands of people; such studies are underway and are expected to be completed by 2017.但是,研究人员警告说,上述研究规模较小,且研究目的是评估这些药物的安全性以及它们能否降低“坏胆固醇”,而不是它们能否避免心肌梗死。因此,据此得出心肌梗死和中风风险降低的结论,可能并不足信。要对上述效果做出可信的判断,需要进行涉及数万人的大规模试验。目前这些研究还在进行当中,预计将于2017年完成。“I do not think that either study answers the question definitively of cardiovascular benefit,” said Dr. Steven E. Nissen, chairman of cardiovascular medicine at the Cleveland Clinic, referring to the drug makers’ research. He was not involved in either study.未参与上述任何一项研究的科学家,克利夫兰诊所(Cleveland Clinic)心血管医学部主任史蒂文·E·尼森(Steven E. Nissen)表示:“我认为(药品制造商的)这两项研究都未能明确回答这些药物是否对心血管有益。”Researchers said long-term safety still must be assessed, especially since these drugs are reducing LDL cholesterol to levels never achieved by medicines before. While the drugs appeared generally safe, there was evidence that they could cause memory problems.研究人员表示仍须对这些药物的长期安全性进行评估,鉴于它们可将LDL胆固醇降低到此前通过药物从未达到的水平,尤其应当如此。虽然大体上应该是安全的,但也有据表明,它们可能会导致记忆问题。Still, the findings could help smooth the way for regulatory approval, wider use of the drugs by doctors and possibly reimbursement by insurers.尽管如此,上述研究结果很可能有助于为这些药物获得监管部门的批准,被医生广泛应用,并纳入保险公司的报销范围铺平道路。The drugs, evolocumab from Amgen and alirocumab from Sanofi and Regeneron, inhibit a protein in the body called PCSK9 that helps regulate cholesterol. In the studies detailed on Sunday, both drugs reduced the bad cholesterol by about 60 percent, to about 50 milligrams per deciliter from about 120 at the start of the studies. In many cases such big reductions were achieved even though the patients were aly taking statins.这两种新药分别是安进公司(Amgen)研发的evolocumab,以及赛诺菲和瑞泽恩(Sanofi and Regeneron)制药公司的alirocumab,它们的作用机理都是抑制PCSK9——体内的一种协助调节胆固醇的蛋白质。周日发表的文章对两项研究都进行了详细的介绍:这两种药物将“坏胆固醇”从研究开始时的每分升约120毫克降到了约50毫克,降幅达60%左右。在许多病例中,甚至在患者已在用他汀类药物的情况下,仍然实现了如此大的降幅。Both drugs could win approval from the Food and Drug Administration by this summer. Analysts say the drugs will have billions of dollars in annual sales and will be taken by millions of people who cannot lower their cholesterol enough using statins alone or cannot tolerate statins. (However, the PCSK9 drugs are taken by injection every two weeks or four weeks, which could deter some users.)这两种药物有望在今年夏天赢得美国食品和药品监督(Food and Drug Administration)的批准。分析人士预计其年销售额将达到数十亿美元,数以百万计单靠他汀类药物无法将胆固醇降低至满意水平或不能耐受他汀类药物的患者都可能选用这些药物(然而,每两周或四周一次注射给药的方式,却也会令某些用户对这些PCSK9药物望而却步)。Statins reduce cardiovascular risk and scientists believe it is because they decrease low-density lipoprotein, or LDL, the so-called bad cholesterol. But merely looking at cholesterol levels can be misleading. The drug niacin did not protect against heart attacks and strokes even though it raised so-called good cholesterol and modestly lowered bad cholesterol.科学家们认为,他汀类药物之所以可以降低心血管问题的风险,是因为它们可降低“坏胆固醇”,既即LDL低密度脂蛋白胆固醇的水平。然而,单以胆固醇水平论事可能会造成误导。例如,烟酸这种药物可以提高“好胆固醇”的水平,并可适度降低“坏胆固醇”水平,但它对心肌梗死和中风就没有预防作用。Insurers in particular might demand proof that the PCSK9 drugs stave off heart attacks, strokes, deaths from coronary disease and procedures to open arteries before agreeing to pay for them for many patients. Executives at CVS Health, a leading pharmacy benefits manager, recently said that PCSK9 inhibitors might cost ,000 to ,000 a year and would strain health care budgets because so many people might use them.保险公司对此尤其关注。在同意替患者为这些药物埋单之前,他们将要求研究提供明确的据,实PCSK9药物确实可以预防心肌梗死、中风、因冠心病死亡以及动脉扩张手术等。CVS健康公司(CVS Health)是美国名列前茅的一家医药福利管理公司,其高管最近表示,在PCSK9抑制剂上的年花费预计达7000美元至12000美元,由于使用者人数众多,它将给医疗预算带来沉重的压力。“Managed care pharmacy, indeed the health care system, has never seen a challenge like this to our resilience in absorbing costs,” they wrote in the Health Affairs blog.他们在健康事务(Health Affairs)网站的客中写道:“保健药学管理,实际上,整个卫生系统都未曾面临过像这样的对吸纳成本适应能力的严峻挑战。”Whether the results from these two small studies will be persuasive enough remains to be seen.至于这两项小型研究的结果是否具有足够的说力,还有待观察。The study of Amgen’s evolocumab involved 4,465 patients with various degrees of risk, two-thirds of whom were randomly chosen to get the drug in addition to the medication they were aly taking. After one year, 0.95 percent of those in the group that received the drug had suffered a heart attack, stroke or other cardiovascular problem, compared with 2.18 percent in the group that did not take the drug. By a measure known as the hazard ratio, the risk of cardiovascular events was reduced by 53 percent.安进公司的evolocumab研究纳入了4465名风险程度不一的患者,从中随机选择了三分之二在已用药物的基础上使用新药。一年后,接受新药的那组患者中只有0.95%发生过心肌梗死、中风或其他心血管问题,相比之下,未用此药的那组患者中该比例为2.18%。以风险比(hazard ratio)这一指标衡量时,心血管事件的风险降低了53%。The alirocumab study involved 2,341 patients. After one and a half years, the rate of cardiovascular events was 1.7 percent in those who received the drug, versus 3.3 percent in those who received a placebo, a risk reduction of 48 percent.关于alirocumab的研究入组了2341名患者。一年半之后,在接受该药的患者中心血管事件的发生率为1.7%,而在接受安慰剂的患者中为3.3%,风险降低了48%。Dr. Sanjay Kaul, a cardiologist at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, said analyses of one measure from trials meant to assess other things were “notorious for not being reliable.” He said the results would not be sufficient to support widesp use of and reimbursement for the drugs.希德斯-西奈医疗中心(Cedars-Sinai Medical Center,位于美国洛杉矶)的心脏病专家桑贾伊·考尔(Sanjay Kaul)士表示,拿一项对旨在评估其他问题的试验中的指标来说事儿“实在不靠谱”。他认为这些结果不足以持广泛使用这些药物并将其纳入报销范围。He noted, for instance, that the alirocumab trial used a narrower definition of cardiovascular events than the evolocumab trial used. Using a broader definition, alirocumab did not provide a statistically significant reduction in cardiovascular problems.例如,他指出,alirocumab试验中使用的心血管事件定义要比evolocumab试验中的窄。如果使用更宽泛的定义,那么alirocumab减少心血管问题的效果就失去了统计学显著意义。The evolocumab study, for its part, did not use a placebo, so patients and doctors knew who was getting the drug, which could have affected the outcome.至于evolocumab研究,由于它没有使用安慰剂,患者和医生们都知道哪些人接受了新药而哪些人没有,这也可能对患者的预后造成影响。But Dr. Marc S. Sabatine, a cardiologist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and the lead investigator of the evolocumab study, said the fact that both trials had similar results was reassuring, suggesting the effect was real. The results were also plausible, he said, because people who have genetic mutations that reduce their PCSK9 levels have very low rates of heart attacks.但evolocumab研究的负责人,布莱根妇女医院(Brigham and Women’s Hospital)的马克·S·萨巴蒂尼(Marc S. Sabatine)士称,这两项试验得到了类似的结果,这项事实本身就说明结果可靠,那些效果是真实存在的。他还说,会发生这些结果也尤其合理性,因为带有基因突变,致使PCSK9水平偏低的人心肌梗死的发生率就很低。Dr. Sabatine and Dr. Robinson have been paid consultants to the companies sponsoring the trials they led.萨巴蒂尼士和鲁宾逊士均在资助他们负责的研究的那些公司中担任有酬顾问。 /201504/370010

Though I#39;m a woman with children, I should confess that I#39;m not the target mom-er for the latest avalanche of family cookbooks, which bear titles like ;Dinner: A Love Story; or ;The Family Cooks.; This is my shortcoming: Where I ought to have a lively intellectual curiosity about food preparation, I generally have a despairing blank.虽然我是个母亲,但我必须承认自己并非《晚餐:一个爱的故事》(Dinner: A Love Story)或《家庭厨师》(The Family Cooks)最近这一大堆家庭烹饪书的目标读者。这是我的缺点:我本该对烹制食物产生强烈的求知欲,但通常我只感到绝望的木然。;Have you figured out dinner yet?; my daughter Susannah, who#39;s 5, asks me. Figure out. Not ;fix; dinner; not ;make; it. She gets that phrase from me. A vague neural itch sets in around 5 p.m. when I recognize that something must happen, and soon, involving plates and macronutrients. I do not move. Dinner preparation is all mental around these parts: I figure out who#39;s had enough protein or carbs for the day, who can bear eating the other#39;s favorite food, or whether I must figure out two meals; figure out which is more endocrinologically devastating, highly processed soy milk or not-entirely-organic lactose-free cow#39;s milk.“你想好晚饭做什么了吗?”5岁的女儿苏珊娜(Susannah)问我。“想好”。不是去“弄”也不是去“做”晚饭。她是从我这儿学会这个说法的。下午5点左右,我隐隐感到不安,觉得需要赶紧做点什么,这事跟盘子和大量营养素有关,但我没有行动。这个阶段的准备工作都是在头脑中进行:我要想清楚今天谁摄入的蛋白质或碳水化合物已经足够了,谁能忍受吃另一个人最喜欢的食物,还是说我需要搞出两道菜;我还要想清楚,从内分泌角度讲,深加工的豆浆和不完全有机的无乳糖牛奶哪个危害更大。Then comes the real intellectual heavy lifting, revisited like a private, pointless Fermat#39;s Theorem: Why is food such a big part of rearing children? Why me? And why can#39;t I just crack open a half-dozen Clif bars and keep playing with my children?然后才是真正的精神折磨,它像毫无意义的私人费马大定理一样不断纠缠我:为什么养孩子过程中要花这么多时间做吃的?为什么非得我做饭?为什么我就不能撕开几个克利夫能量棒(Clif bar)充饥,然后继续跟孩子们玩呢?Cooking! Aren#39;t we past that? In 1982, Jessica Lange as Julie, the glamorous single working mother in ;Tootsie,” became my ego-ideal when she sexily told Dustin Hoffman#39;s character that she was a ;born defroster.; Lord, how I loved that expression. Women of the #39;80s did not sweat meal prep for their little Amys and Scotts. They defrosted. They took children to diners and bars. They ordered pizza.做饭!我们不是已经不用做饭了吗?1982年,杰西卡·兰格(Jessica Lange)在《窈窕淑男》(Tootsie)中饰演的迷人单身职业母亲朱莉(Julie)成了我的偶像,她性感地对达斯汀·霍夫曼(Dustin Hoffman)饰演的角色说,自己“天生就只用解冻食物就行了”。天哪,我爱死这句话了!80年代的女性不用大汗淋漓地给小孩子做饭。她们只要解冻就行了。她们可以带孩子去小餐馆和酒吧吃饭。她们也可以点披萨外卖。That was ages ago. And I imagined that matters would only improve from there. By the time my son arrived, I vainly believed that I should be able to not just defrost food but conjure it — by means of the web or a 3-D printer or at least a game male, close at hand, whose ego had been serendipitously formed by Emeril or ;Top Chef.” But instead, to my horror, home cooking had made a hideous comeback. Noble food philosophers preached the retro virtues of slow, real food instead of the quickie, frozen stuff that had once spelled liberation to me.那都是很多年前的事了。我以为从那以后情况只会变得更好。到我儿子出生时,我还以为自己应该不仅能解冻食物,还能召唤食物——通过互联网、3D打印机,或至少通过一个尽在咫尺、心甘情愿下厨房的丈夫——艾梅里尔(Emeril)或真人秀节目“顶级大厨”(Top Chef)意外地让他以当奶爸为荣。但可怕的是,家庭烹饪卷土重来。高尚的美食哲学家们鼓吹慢慢做成的真正的食物的好处,把能快速做好的、原本让我看到解放希望的冷冻食物打入了冷宫。And worst of all, as the mother-cookbooks make painfully clear, the daily work of feeding children doesn#39;t fall to the sages. Neither does it, notably, fall to the dads, whom the cookbooks commend for having signature dishes or being grill-masters, but not for punching the clock at breakfast, lunch and dinner. No, cooking belongs, inevitably, to the moms. I#39;ve tried to find outrage among my sister mothers about this reactionary development. But here#39;s the unkindest cut: It turns out that other women — traitorously — now like to cook. They find cooking expressive and fascinating. No one but me wants to be a born defroster anymore. ;I hear you, but I like to cook,; said one feminist the last time I tried my bold association of foodism with rank misogyny.最糟糕的是,就像母亲烹饪书所明示的那样,喂养孩子的日常工作不是圣人们的责任。显然也不是爸爸们的责任,那些烹饪书鼓励爸爸们有几样拿手菜或者擅长烧烤,但是没让他们定点做早餐、午餐和晚餐。做饭必然是妈妈们的事。我想从其他妈妈那里也听到对这种后退的愤怒。但是我被非常不友好地打断了:现在其他女人居然喜欢做饭!她们觉得做饭有意义,也很有趣。只有我还想做“天生的解冻者”。上一次和一位女权主义者交谈时,我大胆尝试把食物嗜好症与可恶的厌女症联系在一起,结果她说,“我明白你的意思了,但我喜欢做饭。”;I like to cook;? What about ;I like not working and having no opinions and being everyone#39;s handmaiden;? Hasn#39;t women#39;s false consciousness about their ;preferences; always been a part of the sexist equation? Or is theirs the true 2014 consciousness — the liking to cook — and I just would have fared better in the heyday of Salisbury steak? (Dr. J. H. Salisbury, wouldn#39;t you know: Civil War-era food faddist and earliest known carb-hater.) Among my newly foodie friends, I couldn#39;t get a witness to my bewilderment. At the same time no MakerBot is going to roll in and cook for my family. I#39;m going to have to find an apron and make real food happen daily for my children, lest they be poisoned by phthalates, dextrose and heavy metals while I#39;m pretending to be Jessica Lange.“我喜欢做饭”?你怎么不说“我喜欢不工作,没有思想,当所有人的女仆”?女人对自己“偏好”的虚假意识不一直是性别歧视者理念的一部分吗?还是说喜欢做饭是她们在2014年的真实感受,而我更适合生活在索尔斯伯利牛肉饼盛行的时代(你不知道J·H·索尔斯伯利士[Dr. J. H. Salisbury]吗?他是内战时期的食疗信徒,是已知的最早憎恨碳水化合物的人)?在我新结识的美食家朋友中,没一个人理解我的困惑。与此同时,也没有3D打印机来为我的家人做饭。我必须去找个围裙,每天给孩子们烹制真正的食物,以免在我把自己假想成杰西卡·兰格时,孩子们被邻苯二甲酸盐、葡萄糖和重金属毒害。Thus we get the mother cookbooks, stuffed like Cornish hens with their whimsical anecdotes and their photos of stylish children helping to cook like cheerfully indentured galley slaves. These books do much more than prep you to opine grandly on nutritional fallacies. They bark out actual marching orders for making meals. The lively food seminar, which only demanded that I and talk, is over; the d hard labor of cooking has begun. Not only are these women (or their trusty co-authors) ace home cooks, they have also figured out dinner once and for all and are extraordinarily self-assured about their axioms. They heard the clarion call of real food a decade ago and resolved (for Empire?) to work tirelessly over hot stoves to save our sons and daughters from the packaged and the processed and the highly destructive myth of low-fat.所以我们就有了这些母亲烹饪书,里面除了康沃尔菜鸡,还有很多奇闻轶事和时髦孩子的照片,那些孩子像苦力一样快乐地帮厨。这些书不仅让你能对营养谬论侃侃而谈,它们还大声发出做饭号令。只要求我阅读和发言的活跃的美食研讨会结束了;可怕的烹饪苦役开始了。这些女人(或者她们值得信任的联合作者们)不仅是一流的家庭厨师,而且已经一劳永逸地想好了晚餐做什么,并且对自己的理念很有信心。她们在十年前听到关于真正食物的感人号召,下定决心(为了帝国?)在热炉灶旁不懈努力,使孩子们免受打包或加工食物以及非常有害的低脂神话的毒害。I find discouragement, typically, on Page 1. In the introduction to “100 Days of Real Food,” Lisa Leake calls my hasty, anxious, food-delivery way of figuring out dinner ;fall[ing] prey to; the lure of convenience. That is indeed what I feel like at dinnertime: prey. Instead of hunting down healthful, real, inconvenient food, dinner-shirkers like myself are menaced, in Leake#39;s dark vision, by such predators as restaurants, takeout, ;cans of cream of mushroom soup; and what she calls ;even the occasional frozen dinner.; That includes virtuous-enough-seeming Amy#39;s Kitchen burritos and Health Is Wealth chicken nuggets. (Die, born defrosters. Your glory days are over.)我往往是看完第一页就读不下去了。在《100天真正的食物》(100 Days of Real Food)的引言中,丽莎·利克(Lisa Leake)说我以匆忙、焦虑以及配送食物式的想法思考晚餐是在图省事。那的确是我在晚餐时间的感受:像个猎物。利克阴暗地认为,像我这样图省事的人不是在追逐健康的、不省事的、真正的食物,而是被餐馆、外卖、“罐装奶油蘑菇汤”以及她所说的“偶尔的冷冻食物晚餐”这样的猎食者吓倒了。还包括貌似健康的艾米厨房(Amy#39;s Kitchen)的墨西哥玉米卷饼以及“健康就是财富”(Health Is Wealth)的鸡块(天生解冻者,你完蛋了,你辉煌的日子结束了)。Leake outlines her own Puritan conversion narrative in which she progressed from a bleak existence, blinded and hobbled by the Standard American Diet (SAD, so sad); through faith healing at the hands of the real-food evangelist Michael Pollan; to a wholehearted embrace of organic living and her own blog-and-cookbook ministry. A version of this conversion informs several of the family cookbooks, and the story never fails to move me. I want to eat these women#39;s dinners, sure. But more than that, I covet their confidence.利克概述了自己改变美食信仰的经历:最初她被标准美国饮食(Standard American Diet,真是悲哀)蒙蔽,活得凄凄惨惨;后来在真正食物传播者迈克尔·波伦(Michael Pollan)的引导下改变了信仰;最后全心全意投入到有机生活和自己的“客加烹饪书”的事业中。有好几本家庭烹饪书都讲述了这样的转变,但这样的故事从未打动过我。我当然想吃这些女人做的晚餐,但我更多的是羡慕她们的信心。;I don#39;t think there is ONE THING MORE IMPORTANT you can do FOR YOUR KIDS THAN HAVE FAMILY DINNER,; is how Ruth Reichl, of Gourmet, is ed (italics and caps not mine) in ;The Family Dinner,; by Laurie David, with recipes by Kirstin Uhrenholdt. Pomposity of this kind abounds in Laurie David books, and ultimately the books#39; apotheosizing of home cooking is more memorable in its aggression than the somewhat meeker recipes (Easy Cheesy Dinner Frittata, Turkey Meat Loaf, Your Favorite Grilled Cheese). No one thing more important for children than family dinner? I might have put ;send them to school; or “hug them occasionally; at the top of that list.“我觉得你能给孩子们做的事情中,最重要的莫过于做一顿家庭晚餐,”劳丽·大卫(Laurie David)在《家庭晚餐》(The Family Dinner,书中的菜谱是希尔斯廷·乌伦豪尔特[Kirstin Uhrenholdt]写的)一书中这样引用《美食家》(Gourmet)的露丝·雷切尔(Ruth Reichl)的话。这样的炫耀在劳丽·大卫的书中随处可见,结果这本书对家庭烹饪的神化比其中略显平庸的菜谱(简易晚餐菜肉馅煎蛋饼、土耳其肉糕和你最喜欢的烤奶酪)更令人难忘。对孩子来说没什么比家庭晚餐更重要吗?我倒是可能会把“送孩子上学”或“偶尔拥抱他们”排在前面。Such bunk continues in ;The Family Cooks,; another production by David and Uhrenholdt, who turns out to be David#39;s private chef. (Aha, the secret to ;The Family Cooks; is . . . the family cook.) This time the book has Katie Couric laying down the law: ;The single most powerful thing anyone can do to protect their health, to live a healthy life and to have a healthy future is to go into their own kitchen and cook food themselves.; As if to blow all these superlatives away, David eventually brings in the master stylist and vegetarian-food thinker Jonathan Safran Foer for the coda to ;The Family Dinner.; Foer#39;s own ;food is everything; aria does not disappoint: ;Every meal,; he writes, ;is a chance to get it right or get it wrong, to approach or withdraw from our ideals. Does anything in our lives matter more than how we set our tables?; I tried hard to connect this question to the Easy Cheesy Dinner Frittata but couldn#39;t. I#39;m telling you: I#39;m not cut out for this.乌伦豪尔特后来成了大卫的私人厨师,她们后来又合著了《家庭厨师》(The Family Cooks,啊哈,《家庭厨师》的秘密是……家庭厨师)。这一次,大卫引用凯蒂·柯丽克(Katie Couric)的话来动员读者:“要想保持健康,过上健康的生活,拥有健康的未来,任何人能做的最有用的事就是走进厨房,自己做饭。”好像是为了避免这些极端的说法,大卫在《家庭晚餐》的结尾部分请来了文体大师、素食思想家乔纳森·萨弗兰·福尔(Jonathan Safran Foer)。福尔“食物即一切”的咏叹调没有令人失望:他写道,“每一餐都可能做好,也可能做砸;有可能更接近或更远离我们的理想。生活中还有比布置餐桌更重要的事吗?”我努力把这个问题与简易菜肉馅煎蛋饼联系在一起,但是没有成功。我告诉你吧:我不是这块料。As the high priestess of family cooking, Jenny Rosenstrach, author of ;Dinner: A Love Story; and “Dinner: The Playbook,; aims to bring about conversions in her ers and not just chronicle her own. In the opening to ;Dinner: A Love Story,; Rosenstrach recounts how a friend broke down in tears admitting that she never once cooked for her children. This is evidently not the first such overwrought disclosure with which Rosenstrach has been entrusted.《晚餐:一个爱的故事》和《晚餐:游戏手册》(Dinner: The Playbook)的作者、家庭烹饪的女祭司珍妮·罗森施特拉赫(Jenny Rosenstrach)不仅记录自己的转变,还想让她的读者们也发生转变。在《晚餐:一个爱的故事》的开头,罗森施特拉赫提到一个朋友承认自己从未给孩子们做过饭时流下了眼泪。这显然不是罗森施特拉赫听到的第一个过于伤感的倾诉故事。;No one has it all together,; Rosenstrach observes, with gentle condescension. The typical mom, she believes, too often sees dinner as ;a referendum on her own self-worth.; Alas, for me, Rosenstrach#39;s path out of guilt is not to drop the guilt but to drop the no-cooking. You must start, as her sobbing friend did, with Rosenstrach#39;s introductory absolution. Don#39;t ;put so much pressure; on yourself, she writes, elsewhere assuring the er, only slightly facetiously, that mothers who don#39;t dine nightly with their children won#39;t necessarily make them ;meth addicts.; So that possibility is out there, too.“谁都不是一下子学会的,”罗森施特拉赫带着几分优越感写道。她认为,有太多母亲视晚餐为“自我价值的全民公决”。天哪,对我来说,罗森施特拉赫的方法非但没能让我不再愧疚,反倒让我再不想做饭了。像那位哭泣的朋友一样,你得先获得罗森施特拉赫的宽恕。她写道,不要给自己“太大压力”,她还在其他地方半开玩笑地安慰读者,就算你不是每天跟孩子们共进晚餐,他们也不一定会变成“瘾君子”。也就是说,他们还是有可能变成瘾君子的。After that thin buck-up speech, you#39;re encouraged to embrace Rosenstrach#39;s strategies for cutting up onions and enlightening picky eaters, along with her recipes for Sweet Barbecue Salmon and Beluga Lentil Soup With Anchovies. That is the way out of wretchedness and into grace. Dinner: Go and Sin No More.在难以令人信的动员讲话之后,罗森施特拉赫鼓励你用她的方法切洋葱,满足挑剔的食客,尝试她的菜谱——甜味烤三文鱼和白鲟凤尾鱼扁豆汤。那就是从悲惨走向恩惠的方式。晚餐:做吧,不要再愧疚了。Figuring I wasn#39;t going to experience a spiritual revelation about the sanctity of family dinners at this late stage, I dropped the conversion-narrative books in favor of some that sound like brass-tacks science. ;Super Nutrition for Babies: The Right Way to Feed Your Baby for Optimal Health,; by Katherine Erlich, M.D., and Kelly Genzlinger, C.N.C., C.M.T.A., with a foreword by David Brownstein, M.D., author of ;Overcoming Thyroid Disorders,; seemed with all those enigmatic letters to fit the bill. As did ;Super Baby Food: Your Complete Guide to What, When and How to Feed Your Baby and Toddler,” by Ruth Yaron. (Dr. Alan Greene calls the original ;Super Baby Food; a ;monumental breakthrough.”)我知道自己不会在这么大年纪对家庭晚餐的神圣产生顿悟,所以我放弃了这些描述思想转变的书,转向一些听起来像基本科学事实的书。《婴儿超级营养:为实现婴儿最佳健康的正确喂养方法》(Super Nutrition for Babies: The Right Way to Feed Your Baby for Optimal Health)似乎具有符合条件的所有神秘字眼。这本书是医学士凯瑟琳·埃尔利赫(Katherine Erlich)和注册营养顾问、注册代谢类型顾问凯利·金兹利杰(Kelly Genzlinger)编著的,《战胜甲状腺功能紊乱》(Overcoming Thyroid Disorders)一书的作者、医学士大卫·布朗斯坦(David Brownstein)为该书撰写了前言。另外还有露丝·亚龙(Ruth Yaron)的《超级婴儿食物:喂养婴幼儿的完全指南》(Super Baby Food: Your Complete Guide to What, When and How to Feed Your Baby and Toddler,艾伦·格林[Alan Greene]士称具有原创性的《超级婴儿食物》是“不朽的突破”)。These books remind me of the extruded foodstuffs in packages festooned with the names of medical doctors that real-food ideologues now counsel against. You can really taste the research. But the books, unlike Clif bars, didn#39;t help me skip any steps. In fact, they introduced many, many new steps, including making yogurt.这些书让我想起了那些遭到排挤的盒装食品,它们上面提到的医学士如今遭到真正食物理论家的批判。但是那些研究结果你真的可以细细l你攻略。但是这些书,不像克利夫能量棒,不能帮我省去任何步骤。实际上,它们还介绍了很多很多新步骤,包括做酸奶。D.I.Y. is Ruth Yaron#39;s way. ;After years of trying to find the easiest, most effective and #39;least dishes to wash#39; method of making yogurt,; Yaron came up with a regime that involves organic soy milk enriched with calcium and vitamin D, dry milk powder, a yogurt thermometer, a ;homemade yogurt towel bag,; yogurt starter, a small sterilized glass baby-food jar, sterilized utensils and about six hours from start to finish. Another hot tip for the new mom making yogurt in her down time: Make sure you don#39;t bake b on the same day, lest the yogurt is invaded by airborne yeast particles. That#39;s interesting. When I discovered my own easy, effective and ;least dishes to wash; method of procuring yogurt — buy it — it took me only 15 minutes, with no worry about yeast invasion. Maybe I#39;m doing something right after all.露丝·亚龙的方法是自己动手做。“多年来,我一直努力寻找最简单、最有效、占用厨具最少的做酸奶的方法”,后来她想出了一个方法,需要用到有机豆奶、钙、维生素D、干奶粉、酸奶温度计、“自制酸奶毛巾袋”、酸奶发酵剂、无菌玻璃婴儿小食品罐和无菌餐具,从头到尾约需六个小时。新妈妈在休息时间做酸奶的另一个可靠小贴士是:一定不要在同一天烤面包,否则酸奶会被空气中的酵母微粒入侵。有意思。我在寻找简便、有效、占用厨具最少的获取酸奶的方法时想到的是购买,只用花15分钟时间,而且完全不用担心酵母入侵。也许我终于有一点做对了。In ;Super Nutrition for Babies,; D.I.Y. is not celebrated for its own sake. Rather it is a paranoid strategy for those who live in terror of the Toxins. The book argues that there is a war on children#39;s health going on, and that the enemy army includes pesticides, pollution, heavy metals, medications, industrial waste, chemicals, bad tap water, dyes, artificial ingredients, preservatives, sugar, refined grains, antibiotics and wrong ratios of macronutrients. As budding foot soldiers for health, mothers are taught to fear food that is Chemical, Removes body#39;s nutrients, is Addictive and Processed. CRAP, in the book#39;s scheme. Everywhere.在《婴儿超级营养》中,自己动手制作是因为考虑到其他因素。那些生活在毒素恐惧中的疑神疑鬼者用它来作为对策。那本书认为儿童健康保卫战正在进行,敌军包括杀虫剂、污染、重金属、药物、工业废料、化学制品、劣质自来水、色素、人工制剂、防腐剂、糖、细粮、抗生素以及大量营养素的错误比例。作为初出茅庐的健康卫士,母亲们被教育要小心含有化学制剂或添加剂、破坏身体营养以及经过深加工的食物。它们无处不在。;Super Nutrition; instructs ers on avoiding diabetes, optimizing immunity and reducing inflammation. There are not too many recipes here, although there are incoherent juxtapositions: Blueberry Breakfast Crepes With Raspberry Syrup, with coconut and ghee, runs up against Yorkshire Marrow Custard, which uses marrow bones and heavy cream. This is for babies, remember. Bone marrow and heavy cream for infants. It doesn#39;t ring right. But I#39;m learning to distrust my intuition. And yours, too.《婴儿超级营养》指导读者们预防糖尿病、增强免疫力、减少炎症。关于这一点书中给出的食谱不是很多,不过有些食谱与此相矛盾,比如,法式蓝莓早餐薄饼,含树莓糖浆、椰汁和酥油;约克郡骨髓蛋奶冻,里面含有骨髓和浓奶油。别忘了这是给婴儿们吃的。让婴儿吃骨髓和浓奶油。这听起来可不怎么对。但是我正学着怀疑自己的直觉以及你们的直觉。Trust no one, least of all yourself — that#39;s the takeaway from these new family cookbooks. These books don#39;t expand on Benjamin Spock#39;s great 1946 injunction to mothers to trust themselves; instead, they#39;re a brisk, homemade, garden-fresh antidote to it. Don#39;t trust hot dogs, don#39;t trust children#39;s preferences. Don#39;t trust the carb-poisoned food pyramid. Don#39;t trust vegetable-fruit mixes, because they#39;re mostly apples, and don#39;t trust apples because they#39;re the dirtiest of the ;Dirty Dozen; fruits. Everything, especially the apples, is trying to sabotage you.不要相信任何人,尤其是你自己——这就是这些新家庭烹饪书的理念。这些书没有详述本杰明·斯波克(Benjamin Spock)1946年给母亲们的伟大忠告:相信自己。相反,这些书简直像是这一忠告的解药——一剂家庭自制的、新鲜采摘的清新解药。不要相信热,不要相信小孩子喜欢吃的东西。不要相信碳水化合物含量太高的食物金字塔。不要相信蔬菜水果混合物,因为里面大多是苹果;不要相信苹果,因为它是“十二种肮脏的”水果中最肮脏的。所有这一切,特别是苹果,正在谋害你的性命。Nothing in these latest family cookbooks, with their conversion narratives, their personal-chef lifestyles, their nervous science and their strained insistence on the supremacy of family dinner has done anything to quiet my brain on the subject of why it#39;s my problem — and that of the world#39;s mothers — to make nightly sense of this ideological convulsion over food. If anything, they fuel the panic; they are the panic.这些最新家庭烹饪书——对思想转变的描述,私人大厨的生活方式,神经兮兮的科学,对家庭晚餐崇高地位的捍卫——一点也没让我的大脑平静下来,它们没有回答我的问题:为什么每天晚上为食物感到精神紧张是我的责任,是全世界母亲们的责任。它们只是让我更恐慌;它们是我的恐慌之源。The silver lining is that when they (and I) stop perseverating on food anxiety, the cookbooks — especially the ones by Rosenstrach, and also ;Bébé Gourmet,; by Jenny Carenco — feature dozens of extraordinary-sounding recipes. Carenco#39;s Baby Beef Bourguignon, with its dry ham and caramelized chestnuts, looks like a dream. And Rosenstrach, especially, never seems to go wrong: Her Buttermilk Oven-Fried Chicken lets you use highly processed, shelf-stable Kellogg#39;s Corn Flake Crumbs along with cayenne and four cups of buttermilk. Also glorious-sounding is her Pork Shoulder Ragu With Pappardelle.庆幸的是,当她们(和我)不再纠结于食物焦虑时,这些烹饪书——尤其是罗森施特拉赫的书以及珍妮·卡伦科(Jenny Carenco)的《贝贝美食家》(Bébé Gourmet)——还是提供了几十个听起来很棒的菜谱。卡伦科的婴儿勃艮第红酒炖牛肉——里面还有干火腿和焦糖栗子——看起来诱人极了。罗森施特拉赫似乎从来都不会出错:她的脱脂牛奶烤鸡肉允许你使用深加工、耐储存的氏(Kellogg#39;s)玉米片以及辣椒和四杯脱脂牛奶。她的猪肘酱宽面听起来也很好。For a time, I stopped trying to figure out dinner and just stared at the recipes, with their line breaks like poetry and the unpretentious photographs, most of which do not seem styled. Just braised pork, being pulled off the bone with a fork on a wooden cutting board. Wow, it looks so delicious. I sure wish some mother would make it for me.有一段时间,我不再努力思考做什么晚餐好,就只是盯着那些食谱,它们的换行符看起来像诗歌,里面的照片也很朴素,大多看起来不是很艺术化。我炖猪肉,在木案板上用叉子把肉从骨头上弄下来。哇唔,它看起来很美味。我当然希望有个妈妈给我做这个吃。 /201411/341288


文章编辑: 健新闻
>>图片新闻
搜索