Part 11

Of all really valuable foodstuffs nuts are the least used and the least appreciated. In fact, nuts can hardly be said to constitute a part of the national bill of fare for the reason that when eaten at all they are taken as luxuries or deserts and not as staple foods. But the nut possesses special properties which entitle it to first consideration as a foodstuff, and the writer has no doubt that some time in the future nuts will become a leading constituent of the national bill of fare, and in so doing, will displace certain foodstuffs which today are held in high esteem, but which in the broader light of the next century will be regarded as objectionable and inferior foods and will give place to the products of the various varieties of nut trees which will then be estimated at their true worth, the very choicest of all substances capable of sustaining human life. Botanically, a nut is a fruit, but nuts differ so widely both in composition and appearance from the foods commonly called fruits that they are properly placed in a class by themselves.

In nutritive value the nut far exceeds all other food substances; for example, the average number of food units per pound furnished by half a dozen of the more common varieties of nuts is 3231 calories, while the average of the same number of varieties of cereals is 1654 calories, half the value of nuts. The average food value of the best vegetables is 300 calories per pound and of the best fresh fruits grown in this country is 278 calories. The average food value of the six principal flesh foods is 810 calories per pound, or one-fourth that of nuts.

The superior nutritive value of nuts is clearly shown by the accompanying tables based upon the analyses of Atwater and other authorities.

TABLE I.

COMPOSITION OF NUTS (C. F. LANGWORTHY).

Composition and Fuel Value of the Edible Portion. Food Edible Carbohy- Value Refuse. Portion. Water. Protein. Fats. drates. Ash. per lb. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Cal.

Almonds 64.8 35.2 4.8 21.0 54.9 17.3 2.0 3,030 Brazil nuts 49.6 50.4 5.3 17.0 66.8 7.0 3.9 3,328 Filberts 52.1 47.9 3.7 15.6 65.3 13.0 2.4 3,432 Hickory nuts 62.2 37.8 3.7 15.4 67.4 11.4 2.1 3,495 Pecan nuts 53.2 46.8 3.0 11.0 71.2 13.3 1.5 3,633 English walnuts. 58.0 42.0 2.8 16.7 64.4 14.8 1.3 3,305 Chestnuts, fresh. 16.0 84.0 45.0 6.2 5.4 42.1 1.3 1,125 Chestnuts, dried. 24.0 76.0 5.9 10.7 7.0 74.2 2.2 1,875 Acorns 35.6 64.4 4.1 8.1 37.4 48.0 2.4 2,718 Beechnuts 40.8 59.2 4.0 21.9 57.4 13.2 3.5 3,263 Butternuts 86.4 13.6 4.5 27.9 61.2 3.4 3.0 3,371 Walnuts 74.1 25.9 2.5 27.6 56.3 11.7 1.9 3,105 Cocoanuts 48.8 51.2 14.1 5.7 50.6 27.9 1.7 2,986 Cocoanuts, shredded, ... 100.0 3.5 6.3 57.3 31.6 1.3 3,125 Pistachios, kernels ... 100.0 4.2 22.6 54.5 15.6 3.1 3,010 Pine nuts or pinons 40.6 59.4 3.4 14.6 61.9 17.3 2.8 3,364 Peanuts, raw 24.5 75.5 9.2 25.8 38.6 24.4 2.0 2,560 Peanuts, roasted 32.6 67.4 1.6 30.5 49.2 16.2 2.5 3,177 Litchi nuts 41.6 58.4 17.9 2.9 .2 77.5 1.5 1,453

TABLE II.

COMPOSITION OF MEATS (ATWATER AND LANGWORTHY).

Calories Water. Protein. Fat. per lb. Beef ribs 43.8 13.9 21.2 1,135 Porterhourse steak 52.4 19.1 16.1 975 Veal cutlet 68.3 20.1 7.5 695 Mutton 51.2 15.1 14.7 890 Mutton chops 42. 13.5 28.3 1,415 Lamb 52.9 15.9 13.6 860 Pork chops 41.8 13.4 24.2 1,245 Ham, smoked 34.8 14.2 33.4 1,635 Bacon, smoked 17.4 9.1 62.2 2,715 Sausage, Frankfort 57.2 19.6 18.9 1,155 Beef soup 92.9 4.4 0.4 120 Chicken (fowl) 47.1 13.7 12.3 765 Goose 38.5 13.4 29.8 1,475 Turkey 42.4 16.1 18.4 1,060 Duck 51.7 14.3 33.4 1,805 Squab 58. 18.6 22.1 1,480 Guinea hen 69.1 23.1 6.5 870 Quail 65.9 25. 6.8 935

TABLE III.

COMPOSITION OF CEREAL FOOD (LANGWORTHY).

Carbohy- Food Protein. Fat. drates. Ash. Value Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. per lb. Flour, meal, etc.: Entire wheat flour 13.8 1.9 71.9 1.0 1,650 Graham flour 13.3 2.2 71.4 1.8 1,645 Wheat Flour, patent roller process --high grade and medium 11.4 1.0 75.1 .5 1,635 Macaroni, vermicelli, etc. 13.4 .9 74.1 1.3 1,645 Wheat breakfast food 12.1 1.8 75.2 1.3 1,680 Buckwheat flour 6.4 1.2 77.9 .9 1,605 Rye flour 6.8 0.9 78.7 .7 1,620 Corn meal 9.2 1.9 75.4 1.0 1,635 Oat breakfast food 16.7 7.3 66.2 2.1 1,800 Rice 8.0 .3 79.0 .4 1,620 Tapioca .4 .1 88.0 .1 1,650 Starch .. .. 90.0 .. 1,675

TABLE IV.

COMPOSITION OF VEGETABLES (EDIBLE PORTION).

Carbohy- Water. Protein. Fat. drates. Calories Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. per lb. Beans, dried 12.6 22.5 1.8 59.6 1,520 Beans, lima ... ... .. ... .... Beans, string 83.0 2.1 .3 6.9 170 Beets 70.0 1.3 .1 7.7 160 Cabbage 77.7 1.4 .2 4.8 115 Celery 75.6 .9 .1 2.6 65 Corn, green (sweet), edible portion 75.4 3.1 1.1 19.7 440 Cucumbers 81.1 .7 .2 2.6 65 Lettuce 80.5 1.0 .2 2.5 65 Mushrooms 88.1 3.5 .4 6.8 185 Onions 78.9 1.4 .3 8.9 190 Parsnips 66.4 1.3 .4 10.8 230 Peas 74.6 7.0 0.5 16.9 440 Potatoes 62.6 1.8 .1 14.7 295 Rhubarb 56.6 .4 .4 2.2 60 Sweet potatoes 55.2 1.4 .6 21.9 440 Spinach 92.3 2.1 .3 3.2 95 Squash 44.2 .7 .2 4.5 100 Tomatoes 94.3 .9 .4 3.9 100

TABLE V.

COMPOSITION OF FRUITS, YEARBOOK OF DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE, 1915.

(C. J. LANGWORTHY).

Kind of Fruit. Nitrogen- Carbo- Fuel Ether free hy- Crude value Water. Protein. extract extract. drates. fiber. Ash. per lb. Fresh Fruits. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Cal.

Apples 84.6 0.4 0.5 13.0 ... 1.2 0.3 290 Apricots 85.0 1.1 ... ... 13.4 ... .5 270 Avocado 81.1 1.0 10.2 ... 6.8 ... .9 512 Bananas 75.3 1.3 .6 21.0 ... 1.0 .8 460 Blackberries 86.3 1.8 1.0 8.4 ... 2.5 .5 270 Cactus fruit 79.2 1.4 1.3 11.7 ... 3.7 2.7 375 Cherries 80.9 1.0 .8 16.5 ... .2 .6 365 Cranberries 88.9 .4 .6 8.4 ... 1.5 .2 215 Currants 85.0 1.5 ... ... 12.8 ... .7 265 Figs 79.1 1.5 ... ... 18.8 ... .6 380 Gooseberries 85.6 1.0 ... ... 13.1 ... .3 255 Grapes 77.4 1.3 1.6 14.9 ... 4.3 .5 450 Guava 82.9 1.3 .7 8.0 ... 6.6 .5 315 Huckleberries 81.9 .6 .6 ... 16.6 ... .3 345 Lemons 89.3 1.0 .7 7.4 ... 1.1 .5 205 Mango 87.4 .6 .4 9.9 ... 1.2 .5 220 Muskmelons 89.5 .6 ... 7.2 ... 2.1 .6 185 Nectarines 82.9 .6 ... ... 15.9 ... .6 305 Olives 67.0 2.5 17.1 5.7 ... 3.3 4.4 407 Oranges 86.9 .8 .2 ... 11.6 ... .5 240 Peaches 89.4 .7 .1 5.8 ... 3.6 .4 190 Pears 80.9 1.0 .5 15.7 ... 1.5 .4 163 Persimmons (Japanese) 80.2 1.4 .6 15.1 ... 2.1 .6 174 Pineapples 89.3 .4 .3 9.3 ... .4 .3 200 Plums 78.4 1.0 ... ... 20.1 ... .5 395 Pomegranates 76.8 1.5 1.6 16.8 ... 2.7 .6 461 Prunes 79.6 .9 ... ... 18.9 ... .6 370 Raspberries (red) 85.8 1.0 ... 9.7 ... 2.9 .6 255 Rhubarb stalks 94.4 .6 .7 2.5 ... 1.1 .7 105 Strawberries 90.4 1.0 .6 6.0 ... 1.4 .6 180 Watermelons 92.4 .4 .2 ... 6.7 ... .3 140

With the exception of smoked bacon, there is no flesh food which even approaches the nut in nutritive value, and bacon owes its high value to the fact that it consists almost exclusively of fat.

That the nut is appreciated as a dainty is attested by the frequency with which it appears as a desert and the extensive use of various nuts as confections. That nuts do not hold a more prominent place in the national bill of fare is due chiefly to two causes; first, the popular idea that nuts are highly indigestible, and second, their comparatively high price.

The notion that nuts are difficult of digestion has really no foundation in fact. The idea is probably the natural outgrowth of the custom of eating nuts at the close of a meal when an abundance, more likely a superabundance, of highly nutritious foods has already been eaten and the equally injurious custom of eating nuts between meals. Neglect of thorough mastication must also be mentioned as a possible cause of indigestion following the use of nuts. Nuts are generally eaten dry and have a firm hard flesh which requires thorough use of the organs of mastication to prepare them for the action of the several digestive juices. Experiments made in Germany showed that nuts are not digested at all but pass through the alimentary canal like foreign bodies unless reduced to a smooth paste in the mouth. Particles of nuts the size of small seeds wholly escaped digestion.

Having been for more than fifty years actively interested in promoting the use of nuts as a staple food, I have given considerable thought and study to their dietetic value and have made many experiments. About twenty-five years ago it occurred to me that one of the above objections to the extensive dietetic use of nuts might be overcome by mechanical preparation of the nut before serving so as to reduce it to a smooth paste and thus insure the preparation for digestion which the average eater is prone to neglect. The result was a product which I called peanut butter. I was much surprised at the readiness with which the product sprang into public favor. Several years ago I was informed by a wholesale grocer of Chicago that the firm's sales of peanut butter amounted on an average to a carload a week. I think it is safe to estimate that not less than one thousand carloads of this product are annually consumed in this country. The increased demand for peanuts for making peanut butter led to the development of "corners" in the peanut market and more than doubled the price and must have had an equally marked influence upon the annual production.

I am citing my experience with the peanut not for the purpose of recommending this product, for I am obliged to confess that I was soon compelled to abandon the use of peanut butter prepared from roasted nuts, for the reason that the process of roasting renders the nut indigestible to such a degree that it was not adapted to the use of invalids, but simply as an illustration of the readiness with which the public accepts a new dietetic idea when it happens to strike the popular fancy. Ways must be found to render the use of nuts practical by adapting them to our culinary and dietetic customs and to overcome the popular objections to their use by a widespread and efficient campaign of education.

Attention has already been called to the superior nutritive value of the nut. It has other excellencies well worthy of consideration; for example, the protein of nuts is of the very choicest character. Recent investigations by Rubner, Osborne, Mendel, and others have shown that every plant produces its own special varieties of proteins. There is indeed a wide difference even between the proteins of various cereals and the proteins of many vegetables differ so widely in character from those of the human body that it is doubtful whether to any extent they can be utilized for human nutrition. Fortunately the potato is in this regard an exception and furnishes a very excellent type of protein. This objection does not apply to nuts. The proteins of nuts are in fact so very closely allied to those of the animal body that food chemists of a generation ago referred to the protein of nuts as vegetable casein because of its exceedingly close resemblance to the protein of milk.

The fats of nuts, their leading food principle, are the most digestible of all forms of fat. Having a high melting point, they are far more digestible than animal fats of any sort. The indigestibility of beef and mutton fat has long been recognized. The fat of nuts much more closely resembles human fat than do fats of the sort mentioned. The importance of this will be appreciated when attention is called to the fact that fats entering the body do not undergo the transformation changes which take place in other foodstuffs; for example, protein in the process of digestion is broken into its ultimate molecular units. Starch is transformed into sugar, which serves as fuel to the body, but fats are so slightly modified in the process of digestion and absorption that after reaching the blood and the tissues they are reconstructed into the original form in which they are eaten; that is, beef fat is deposited in the tissues as beef fat without undergoing any chemical change whatever; mutton fat is deposited as mutton fat; lard as pig fat, etc. When the body makes its own fat from starch and sugar, the natural source of this tissue element, the product formed is _sui generis_ and must be better adapted to the body uses than the animal fat which was _sui generis_ to a pig, a sheep, or a goat. It is certainly a pleasant thought that one who rounds out his figure with the luscious fatness of nuts may felicitate himself upon the fact that his tissues are participating in the sweetness of the nut rather than the relics of the sty and the shambles. It is true that nuts are poor in carbohydrates; that is, they contain no starch and little sugar, but this deficiency can be easily supplied by fruits, as will be readily seen by reference to Table V.

Of the three great food principles required for human nutrition, protein, fats, and carbohydrates, the nut supplies two--protein and fats in rich abundance, and of very finest quality. The amount of protein found in fruits with very few exceptions is so small as to be insignificant; fats are practically wholly absent from fruits, while sugar and dextrine are abundant. Fruits are thus the natural complement of nuts.

The amount of protein contained in nuts is, with two or three exceptions, small as compared with meats, and even some of the cereals; but the studies of nutrition which have been made within the last score of years by Chittenden and numerous other investigators have clearly established the fact that protein which is chiefly represented in the ordinary bill of fare by lean meat, is needed only in very small amount. If the amount of protein eaten equals ten per cent of the total ration the body will receive an abundant supply of material for repairing its nitrogenous tissues, the only function for which protein is essential. Some nuts, as the pine nut and the peanut, are rich in protein. A pound of pine nuts contains as much protein as a pound and a half of lean meat, besides furnishing the equivalent to two-thirds of a pound of butter. The almond is also rich in protein.

But nuts have another special excellence which is worthy of consideration. Recent researches have shown the paramount importance of vitamines--certain subtle elements which are needed to activate or set in operation various processes within the body which are essential to complete nutrition. The vitamines of rice and other cereals are removed with the bran; hence an exclusive diet of polished rice gives rise to _beriberi_. Meat contains vitamines in very small amounts, for vitamines are produced only by plants. The vitamines found in flesh foods represent only the small residue of the supplies which the animal gathered from the grass, corn and other vegetable products which constitute its food.

Twenty years ago, when the diet of sailors consisted chiefly of salt pork, _scurvy_ was a dread scourge which often disabled whole ship crews and sent many a poor seaman into "Davy Jones' locker." The cooking of animal foods destroys the vitamines which they contain. Infants suffer from scurvy when fed on sterilized or pasteurized milk. There is good reason for believing that _pellagra_ is due to a deficiency of vitamines, which are conspicuously absent from a dietary consisting of "sow belly," molasses, tea, coffee, lard, cornmeal, fine flour and polished rice.

Nuts are rich in vitamines. In fact, the nut consists of the choicest aggregation of all the materials essential for the building of sound human tissues, done up in a hermetically sealed package ready to be delivered by the gracious hand of Nature to those who are fortunate enough to appreciate the value of this choicest of all earth's bounties.

As already noted, nuts consist almost wholly of the two principles, fat and protein. The same is true of meats. Nuts contain more fat and less protein and in this particular as well as others which have been mentioned are better prepared to serve as nutrients to the body than are meats. Besides, nuts have the advantage of being clean, free from the products of disease and putrefaction. Meats of all sorts, as found in the market, with the exception of canned meats, abound with putrefactive bacteria to an astonishing degree. This is true of dried, smoked and salted meats as well as of the fresh meats and game which are displayed upon the walls of the meat shop. An examination of various meats made some time ago by A. W. Nelson, bacteriologist of the Battle Creek Sanitarium, showed the presence of putrefactive bacteria in almost unbelievable numbers, as will be seen by an inspection of the following table:

TABLE VI.

No. Putrefactive Specimen. Bacteria per ounce.

1. Large sausage 12,600,000,000 2. Small sausage 19,890,000,000 3. Round steak 16,800,000,000 4. Roast beef 16,800,000,000 5. Smoked ham 1,293,600,000 6. Hamburger steak 3,870,000,000 7. Pork 3,781,200,000 8. Porterhouse steak 900,000,000 9. Sirloin steak 11,340,000,000 10. Tenderloin (well done) 756,000,000 11. Tenderloin (rare) 5,040,000,000

Repeated subsequent examinations have given similar results. These results also agree with observations made by various other German and American bacteriologists. Decomposition of animal flesh begins immediately after the animal dies. Within twenty-four hours after killing, even though the carcass is kept in an ice box or refrigerater, the whole mass is permeated with putrefactive bacteria. Refrigeration even to a point close to freezing delays but does not prevent the growth of putrefactive organisms although at lower temperatures the usual volatile products which give notice of the presence of putrefaction by an odor of decay are not produced. Persons whose stomachs manufacture a liberal amount of hydrochloric acid, an essential constituent of healthy gastric juice, are able to disinfect even highly putrescent meat, so that they apparently do not suffer any immediate injury when such meat enters the stomach. In a stomach which produces little or no hydrochloric acid, the process of putrefaction continues all the way through the alimentary canal, giving rise to the same poisonous substances which are present in the putrefying carcass of a dead rat or any other dead animal, and produces intestinal or alimentary toxemia with the multitude of mischiefs which grow out of this condition, among which may be mentioned all sorts of skin troubles, high blood-pressure, apoplexy, premature senility, Bright's disease, heart failure, gallstones--a list which might be increased by the addition of scores of other common, chronic maladies.

When one recalls the statement made before the congressional committee by the chief of the United States meat inspection service that if all animals, any part of which was diseased, were rejected by inspectors, not more than one in a hundred would pass muster; and when one also reflects upon the wide prevalence of tuberculosis in animals,--at least ten per cent of all the cows in the country are known to be tuberculous,--and the growing prevalence of tapeworm and trichinae, diseases which are exclusively derived from the eating of flesh, and then contemplates the purity and perfection of the choice little food packets which we call nuts, it is easy to be persuaded that a substitution of nuts for flesh foods, even on a very large scale, would be not only a perfectly safe procedure, but one which would be followed by the most desirable results.

The use of nuts as a staple article of food is not an experiment. All the higher apes, man's nearest relatives in the animal world, thrive on nuts. Many savage tribes live almost entirely on nuts. The Indians of the foothills of California gather every fall large quantities of nuts which they store for winter use. The early settlers of California reported also that many tribes of Indians in that part of the United States lived almost wholly upon acorns. Before the great oak forests of this country were cut down for lumber, millions of hogs were fattened on mast, and the price of pork depended more upon the acorn crop than on the corn crop. The peasantry of southern France and northern Italy during half the year make two meals a day on chestnuts.

The objection commonly urged, that nuts are too expensive to enter largely into the ordinary bill of fare, at first sight appears to be valid, but upon examination this objection almost, if not wholly, disappears. For example, a pound of pine nuts which is more than the equivalent in nutritive value to two and a half pounds of the best beefsteak and two-thirds of a pound of butter, can be bought wholesale for twenty-five cents. The cost of the equivalent food value in meat and butter would be at least sixty to seventy cents, or more than double the cost of the nuts. A pound of almonds can be bought at wholesale for forty cents, and has food value equal to that of meat which would cost a dollar or more. A pound of peanuts can be bought at wholesale for seven or eight cents, and furnishes nutritive value equivalent to more than a pound of beefsteak and a half a pound of butter, which would cost forty-five to fifty cents, or seven times as much. No objection can be offered to the fact that we are comparing wholesale with retail prices, for the reason that nuts do not readily spoil as do meat and butter, but will keep in perfect condition for months. Further it is entirely reasonable to suppose that the price of nuts may sometime in the future be considerably reduced when the cultivation of nuts becomes more general, and especially when the United States Forestry Department becomes convinced that it would be a sensible thing to cover with nut trees some of the large areas which have in the last fifty years been laid waste by deforestation. The planting of nut trees along all the public highways of the country would in less than twenty years result in a crop, the food value of which would be greater than that at present produced by the entire livestock industry of the country.