Our wild Alaskan Sockeye Salmon offers special appeal to those—like many of us here at Vital Choice—who like their wild salmon firm and flavorful.

These sustainably harvested fish are a super-healthy source of protein, rich in long-chain omega-3 essential fatty acids, and potent natural antioxidants.

And sockeye is a nearly unrivalled food source of bone-saving, cancer-curbing vitamin D, with a whopping 1,100 IU per 6-oz serving, or nearly triple the US RDA.

Our flash-frozen portions come vacuum-sealed for superior quality and convenience. Certified Kosher by EarthK

Vital Choice fresh-frozen organic blueberries, strawberries and red raspberries are rich in anti-aging antioxidants, and draw customer comments like this:
“OH MY GOODNESS! I cannot believe the flavor ... the taste reminds me of something from my childhood. Thanks for a great product!

Berries are incredibly healthful foods, and it's smart to seek out organic berries, grown without synthetic pesticides.

Our organic berries come in convenient one pound bags, each yielding about 3-1/2 cups. They freeze well, so you can keep plenty on hand!

If you haven't tried our Wild Red Sockeye Salmon you're in for a treat, because it tastes much fresher and firmer than standard supermarket brands.

The rich, red color of the meat and oil is unlike any you're likely to have had before. And minimal processing ensures that you'll get the maximum amount of nutrients naturally abundant in Sockeye Salmon: omega-3s, vitamin D, and astaxanthin (a potent orange-red antioxidant pigment).

Choose Skinless-Boneless Wild Red, or Traditional Style with skin and soft edible bones for extra flavor and ample calcium.

Both kinds are available with or without added salt ... and several varieties come in EZ-Open pull-tab tops.

“You are providing a wonderful health-giving service to the planet with your business. And it is a pleasure to bring this information to my audience. It is also a pleasure to snap open these little cans of salmon and have an instant healthy meal!”

-- Dr. Christiane Northrup

Research into the health effects of foods has tended to focus on isolated constituents: primarily vitamins, minerals, and food factors such as fiber, omega-3s, and antioxidants.

But studies have produced disappointing results with regard to the supposed health effects of supplements like beta carotene, calcium, vitamin E, and lycopene

In clinical trials, individual nutrients and food factors such as antioxidants and fiber sometimes fail to produce the big disease-prevention benefits observed in people whose diets are high in foods containing the compounds being tested.

Trials testing the effect of vitamin supplements and low fat diets have failed to show reduced rates of chronic diseases, and in some cases have even shown increased risk.

Key Points Evidence review highlights the superiority of whole foods versus isolated constituents. Food factors interact with each other to produce benefits greater than any single one can deliver. Omega-3 fish oil supplements remain wise choices for most people, due to America’s extreme “omega-imbalance”.

For example, numerous epidemiological studies that prompted the trial show that people who eat foods high in beta-carotene have a reduced risk of lung cancer.

But when beta-carotene was put to a controlled clinical test among thousand of male smokers in Finland, those who took beta-carotene supplements actually developed higher rates of lung cancer, compared with smokers who did not take the vitamin A precursor.

Prompted by puzzling failures like this, scientists who study the effects of foods on health are beginning to challenge the reductionist, “magic bullet” approach toward nutrition research, which mimics methods used to test and make drugs.

Instead, it’s looking more and more as though many whole foods offer much more than the sum of their parts.

Researchers’ “foods first” essay challenges conventional research

What about fish oil and omega-3s? If whole foods are better than isolated nutrients, does it make sense to take fish oil for its omega-3s?   Any individual’s need for fish oil depends on how much fish they eat, how fatty that fish is (more fat = higher omega-3 content), and how much omega-6 fat they ingest from conventional meats and from common vegetable oils (corn, soy, sunflower, safflower, canola) and the prepared and processed foods made with those oils.   The benefits that omega-3s produce in many studies likely stem from the fact that most participants eat standard Western diets, which are low in omega-3s and extremely high in omega-6 fats, which compete with essential omega-3s for space in our cell membranes.   Diets with this American-style “omega-imbalance” are associated with higher risk of degenerative conditions like heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and dementia.   In this sense, supplemental omega-3s address a common nutritional deficiency: one that is not acute enough to produce obvious symptoms, but which raises the risk of disease.   As we’ve reported, studies show that omega-3s may be absorbed better from Salmon than from standard fish oil capsules.   This may be because ocean fish offer many other fatty compounds in addition to omega-3s. Accordingly, we offer unrefined Sockeye Salmon Oil, which reflects as closely as possible the fat profile found in whole wild Salmon.   Ocean fish also offer ample protein, the antioxidant mineral selenium, and, in the case of wild Salmon, copious amounts of vitamin D.   It makes sense to obtain as much of your omega-3s from fish as possible ... and to get additional omega-3s from Salmon Oil ... the next best source.

The authors of a recent evidence review fired a shot across the bow of conventional biomedical wisdom, and argue that the synergies among food constituents can no longer be ignored.

The review was penned by University of Minnesota Professor David R. Jacobs, PhD and Linda C. Tapsell, PhD of Australia’s University of Wollongong, and appeared in the October, 2007 issue of the journal Nutrition Reviews (Jacobs DR Jr, Tapsell LC 2007).

Jacobs and Tapsell noted that the habits of researchers who approach food factors like drugs will be hard to break, because, as he wrote, “… the temptation to study larger doses of apparently valuable food components in clinical trials seems to be irresistible.”

They cite the example of cereal fiber, intake of which has been associated with reduced risk of colon cancer.

As the duo wrote, “… the phytochemicals [antioxidants] that distinguish whole grain from refined grain food are apparently more healthful than the cereal fiber.”

They relate the example of two groups of participants in the Iowa Women’s Health Study.

Both groups were eating about 6 grams of cereal fiber per day, but one group consumed about 75 percent of that fiber from whole grain sources, while the other consumed it from refined grain sources.

And, as they point out, “The women who ate cereal fiber from whole grain sources had significantly reduced total and non-cancer, non-cardiovascular mortality, compared to the women with equal intakes of cereal fiber, but mostly derived from refined grain sources.” (Jacobs DR Jr, Tapsell LC 2007)

They also point to three other recent examples in which whole foods proved more effective than specific anti-tumor, antioxidant constituents within them.

These included lab studies that compared the health benefits of broccoli versus its glucosinolates, pomegranate juice versus its various polyphenols, and tomato sauce versus its red lycopene pigment.

In every case, the whole food outperformed the isolated constituents.

The team also presented evidence that healthful synergies can increase further when people enjoy combinations of whole foods, instead of ...

Surprisingly, before researchers at the University of Alabama decided to examine the possibility, no one had ever tested the brain effects of adding sugary liquid to the diet of mice.

As the scientists said, there is compelling evidence that drinking lots of sugar-sweetened drinks promotes obesity, which is a major risk factor for adult diabetes, which in turn is associated with greater risk of Alzheimer’s disease. In addition, high-fat diets promote underlying signs of Alzheimer’s in mice.

The Alabama team divided mice bred to develop an Alzheimer's-like condition in to two groups.

One group got sugar-sweetened water – containing 10 percent sucrose (cane sugar) – and the sugar-swilling rodents suffered greater losses in learning skills and memory compared with mice that drank plain water.

 

What about fruit juice ... and root beer? Clearly, sugar in liquid form is not great for weight control.   Fruit juices contain just as much sugar as sodas do, so they may also be guilty on that score, though likely somewhat less so, thanks to the known metabolic effects of their antioxidants.   The question is, do fruit juices also contain enough beneficial antioxidants to cancel out the negative effects of their high amounts of sugar?   The answer, based on preliminary evidence, is “probably”. As we reported, the participants in a large American study who drank juices at least three times per week enjoyed 76 percent less risk of Alzheimer’s disease, compared with those who drank juice less than once a week.   Participants who drank juices one to two times a week experienced only a 12 percent risk reduction, compared with those who drank juice less than once per week. The risk reduction was strongest among the study participants who possessed the gene linked to the most common (late-onset) form of Alzheimer’s disease, and in the most sedentary subjects. See “Alzheimer’s Risk Curbed by Antioxidants in Fruit and Vegetable Juice”. We wonder whether enough of the antioxidants in the herbs and roots with which real, natural root beer is made remain would render it less harmful than other sodas. If you know, drop us a line!

The “soda” group also underwent a two- to three-fold increase in the amount of beta-amyloid protein in their brains, which forms the “plaque” associated with Alzheimer’s.

The Alabamans also found a 2.5-fold increase in brain levels of apoE: a compound associated with higher levels of amyloid protein and plaque, which suggests that sugar promotes Alzheimer's-related plaque by increasing production of this undesirable chemical.

The authors came to an obvious conclusion: “These data underscore the potential role of dietary sugar in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease, and suggest that controlling the consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages may be an effective way to curtail the risk of developing Alzheimer's disease.”

And as lead author Dongfeng Cao told Reuters Health, “Our findings are of tremendous importance given that the consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages has increased dramatically over the past decades and will most likely remain high in modern societies.”

Sugary water also made mice fat and diabetic, despite eating less food

After four months, the animals given sugar water weighed 17 percent more than the mice that drank plain water, despite being given the same amount of food to eat.

The sugar-drinking mice ate less food than those given plain water, they consumed 15 percent more daily calorie, and they got 43 percent of their ...

From the start, it was a given that Vital Choice would offer only sustainably produced foods, whether from land or sea.

The oceanic part of our promise means that we select only seafood from fisheries that are certified sustainable.

On the landward side, our pledge means that we only sell organic foods, grown by sustainable methods, without agrichemicals.

Modern farming’s petrochemical pesticides are modeled on long-banned chemical weapons. In the lab, they harm animals and human cells, while human exposure is associated with higher rates of neurological damage, Parkinson's disease, birth defects, respiratory illness, abnormal immune system function, and various cancers.

Key Points Studies link common, persistent pesticides to diabetes and disease-promoting free radicals. Congress fails to implement an already-signed treaty to ban the worst industrial and agricultural toxins. The “precautionary principle” can and should be the lode star for sensible legislation.

Most agrichemicals – fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides – persist in people, wildlife, and the environment for decades.

This is why pesticides and certain other chemical compounds – such as PCBs and dioxins – are called persistent organic pollutants (POPs).

One way in which consumers can help eliminate toxic, persistent pollutants is to pick organic foods, thereby increasing demand and, eventually, supply.

Once a majority of farms go organic, the premium we pay for organic foods will diminish to insignificance. But that shift will take decades to occur.

In the meantime, Americans run uncertain risks – and suffer increasingly well documented health consequences – because industrial and agricultural chemicals persist for decades in the environment, and accumulate in our bodies.

The precautionary principal The United Nations' Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Convention of Biological Diversity both refer to “the precautionary principle”.   It is the basis for many scientists’ calls to place the burden of proof on chemical manufacturers to demonstrate that new products are safe, and that old ones with evidence of harm should not be banned.   This common sense principle is often expressed as follows: “When an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically. The proponent of an activity, rather than the public, should bear the burden of proof.”   The principle does not support unscientific prejudice, as is often claimed, usually by companies whose freedom to act irresponsibly could be constrained by public health considerations.   To say that potential hazards do not have to be fully established scientifically makes it clear that the principle is about cases where significant scientific evidence exists.   Application of the precautionary principle does not demand absolute proof, and would no more stop technological progress than the principle of the burden of proof makes it impossible to obtain convictions in the criminal courts.

In truth, the amounts of pesticide residues on food are minuscule, so the risk from eating conventional crops is probably not large and may be partly offset by the protective antioxidant phytonutrients in fruits and vegetables. (See “Human ‘coalmine canaries’”, below.)

(Organic foods often offer more of these protective compounds: see “Organic Produce and Milk Offer Abundant Antioxidants”.)

Compared with the average consumer, farm and farm-worker families run far greater risks, because they work with pesticides daily.

Instead, the real threat comes from the combined, cumulative effects of the thousands of persistent industrial and agricultural chemicals in our food, water, and air. This woefully under-studied combination threat is the one we should fear most, rather than any one chemical or source.

We’re writing about this topic to urge you to consider a New Year’s resolution.

At the start of his first term, President George W. Bush signed the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, and then stood with Secretary of State Colin Powell and EPA Administer Christie Whitman to urge quick Senate ratification.

More than six years later, the United States remains outside the POP treaty, and no closer to banning the world’s worst toxins, with the blame belonging to Congressional allies of agricultural and chemical giants.

One 2008 resolution could be to contact your Congresspersons and press them to enact long-delayed legislation to implement the Stockholm Convention.

To learn more, see “Push Congress to implement POP treaty”, at the end ...

Our lead recipe comes from Diane Morgan’s visually stunning cookbook and compendium of Salmon lore.  It came highly recommend by The New York Times, and we agree!

We also offer Diane's book as part of our popular Wild Salmon + Cookbook combo pack.
 

Salmon Farfalle with Parsley and Olive-Mustard Butter

Adapted from "Salmon" by Diane Morgan.

Makes 4 to 6 servings.

1 pound farfalle (bow-tie) pasta

3 tablespoons unsalted butter

3 tablespoons organic macadamia nut or extra virgin olive oil

3 shallots, thinly sliced

2/3 cup pitted and halved kalamata olives

2 teaspoons Dijon-style mustard

3 (6 oz each) wild Alaskan Salmon fillets cut into bite-size pieces

2/3 cup chopped flat-leaf parsley

• Boil a large pot of salted water over high heat. Add pasta and boil until ...