If “authentic” makes as extensive use of coconut milk as I’ve seen (and loved) in every Thai restaurant I’ve ever been to, I would tend to agree. I used to eat Thai curries for lunch several times a week, and picked up a can of coconut milk at the supermarket once. Something like 200% your RDA of fat per serving; serving size…2 tbsp. Maybe a *bit *of an exaggeration, but it was then that I realized those bowls of coconut milk curry must have been giving me somewhere around 2000% of my recommended daily fat intake. Even the numbers for the low fat coconut milk were horrific. I don’t even know what else they put in there that tastes so good.
What about the Maasai tribe of East Africa? I’ve heard that their diet is just meat, fermented milk, and cattle’s blood and yet they’re exceptionally healthy. Checking up on this I was disappointed to find that this diet was their traditional diet and now they eat a more varied menu. But it is true that a study found no instance of heart disease among them and an average cholesterol level just 50% as high as the American average.
Europe is not a nation.
I pick Japan.
The coconut-based curries can be very high in fat. I have the book “Thai Cooking” by David Thompson, which is regarded by many as the definitive English language exploration of Thai cooking (over 600 pages of history and recipes) and I was astounded at how much coconut milk and cream the authentic coconut-based curries contained. A typical recipe for 4-6 would have something like 2 cans of coconut cream and 2 cans of coconut milk. Now, granted, you don’t need to spoon all or most of that gravy onto your plate, but that was a real eye-opener. Then again, coconut is supposed to be one of these “healthy” fats, but in moderation.
Something like larb, on the other hand, can be fairly healthy. And the rest of the dishes fall somewhere in between. With the mix of seafoods, emphasis on vegetables (traditional Thai food is not quite as meaty as Western counterparts, from my understanding), etc., I’d guess Thai is probably one of the healthier cuisines out there.
For unhealthiest cuisine? God, I love it, but I’d guess traditional Southern cooking would have to be up there somewhere, especially if you’re eating a Southern diet but living in an urban environment (in other words, not expending all those extra calories you’re taking in.)
I went to a Dominican restaurant once in NYC - everything on the menu was fried. I wouldn’t have been surprised if the drinks were fried.
Weston Price was a nutritionist (or health nut, some would say) who toured all the primitive-ish tribes he could find. He (claimed/found) that the Masai and the Dinka were the healthiest, and he noted by contrast that the Bantu tribes, who used some degree of processed food/flour and sugar (one of his obsessions, so take it with a grain of salt), as opposed to the Masai milk/blood/dairy diet, were significantly less healthy (and, he claimed, the white colonials, who had the 1930s (??) version of a (relatively) highly-processed, starch-centric, diet, had some of the worst health in Africa.
The term “Mediterranean” needs to be clarified a bit. Spain has a higher consumption of red meat than any other country in Europe. Also I doubt that their vegetable consumption is particularly high.
“Mediterranean” usually means Italy, Greece, the Near East, and maybe Egypt and southern France.
Quoth pulykamell:
Really? I thought it was supposed to be a pretty bad one, with a lot of saturated fats. And the only oil I’ve ever heard described as actually “healthy”, rather than just “less unhealthy”, is olive.
As for the Masai, I’d be curious to hear about their total life expectancy, and what the other typical causes of death are. It’s possible that they have little or no heart disease just because they all get trampled by megafauna, or killed in warfare, or whatever, first.
Interesting… Looking through Google seems to say that coconut fat (or at least coconut oil) is indeed the subject of much debate. Here’s one rundown that appears to be neutral and comes down to “neutral, at best.” Other cites seem to say it’s good. Others say it’s still not good. What I was remembering is that coconut fat was considered bad in the past, but now is good again. (Like that recent thread about how some people are viewing animal fats like lard as not being bad for you.)
So, I thought it was back on the “good” side, but it apparently is still on the “much debate” side.
As for “healthy fats,” I’ve heard many described as such. The kind in avocado, peanuts, fatty fish, etc. Fat is not unhealthy.
I’m thinking the Eastern Europeans have them beat: They eat salo, which is nothing but chunks of salted hog lard. You can even get it chocolate-covered.
If you factor in adequate exercise any cuisine on the planet becomes healthy. If you eat salted lard on fried bread washed down with canned coconut milk (I have actually known someone who did this whenever possible) and then go work in the fields (or march several miles), you’ll end it thinner than the person eating nothing but green vegetables and skim milk.
Hey! I eat salo (slonina/szalonna) from time to time! But I am of Eastern European decent. It’s really no different than eating lard, and not that far removed from bacon. It’s just fatback. It’s not like you eat an entire meal composed of salo. Most normally, you use it for cooking, just as you would lard or salt pork. You can also slice it thinly and eat it with rye bread. Some people like to fatten their bread with butter. Some with salo.