what’s good around the web!

The snow arrived just a few days ago! I’ve honestly never been so happy to see snow in my life. The darkness had been getting overwhelming, and the bright sparkly snow is a great contrast. Plus it feels good for it to be properly cold and wintery if it’s going to be that dark. Ask me about this in a couple of days when the temperature is supposed to drop to around -20 (we’re at -10 right now), but for now I’m pretty pumped that winter is here.

What’s good around the web is a weekly series where I share some of what I’ve been reading around the web. Each week I’ll be posting links to five nutrition related articles, good recipes, and just general good reads. I hope you enjoy it! If you’ve got at article or recipe you’d like to see featured, please email me.


1. The Danish government has just reversed an experimental ‘fat tax’. What do you think, should foods high in saturated or trans fats or sugar be subjected to this kind of taxing?

2. Are artificial sweeteners making us fat? This new study on rats says yes.

3. Do fad diets do a disservice to nutrition? Interesting read.

4. Is there a link between high fructose corn syrup and diabetes? 

5. All about yeast! This is particularly interesting for me since fresh yeast is the most readily available in Sweden, and I often struggle to convert recipes from active dried or instant yeast to fresh. Good information!

Also! My friend Christa asked me to share this link to the curvy hoopers video contest on hooping.org. Check it out!

All text and photos © The Muffin Myth 2012



  1. erika says

    Your what’s good around the web posts are quickly becoming one of my favorite weekly posts! I really enjoyed the yeast article (I have had many trials with yeast) and the article about fad diets–my mom has always preached moderation instead of dieting and moms always seem to know best, don’t they?

  2. Leanne says

    Come to Virginia, friend! It’ll be 70 and sunny here on Tuesday : )

    I was interested in Denmark’s fat tax, from a policy (more so than from a foodie) perspective, but there is no way a measure like that would ever pass or work here in the U.S., on a national level, for too many reasons (bad and good) to enumerate here. BUT I’m rather piqued by Nestle’s proposal to tax sugary foods or processed foods. NYC Mayor Bloomberg has had an interesting battle with the tax on big, sugary sodas, but proposing a tax on processed *snack* foods would be another, different approach. The biggest policy concern about any kind of a food tax is, will it make it harder for people (eg, the very poor, who tend not to have as much food choice, quality food available, time to prepare healthy meals, or the knowledge to discern, or a combination of the above) to eat simply to survive? (This is why groceries aren’t taxed here, but booze is) After all, the very poor don’t have the luxuries of choice that we do when it comes to what’s for dinner. And one might be able to argue that a tax on snack foods rather than, say junk dinners, should qualify for that kind of a sin tax, because they’re intended to be snacks, not a meal, and therefore not necessary for survival. However, I do think this kind of legislation would actually work, or work best, at a local level. (For starters, look at how good our congress is at dealing with urgent national business.) But in doing that, you’d create Denmark’s open border problem, just on a state level (I could drive to D.C. or North Carolina for my ding-dongs); fewer people would be able or willing to schlep to Mexico or Canada for such things, if such a provision were enacted on a national level. But then, I suppose, you would have to declare these things at the border and pay the tax there. I have overthought this, but I chuckle at the idea of contraband ding-dongs.

    • themuffinmyth says

      Yeah, it’s a complicated issue. I’m in favour of taxing sugary drinks in the same way as alcohol and cigarettes are taxed – in developed countries they have no nutritive value whatsoever and are strongly associated with increased obesity and obesity related illnesses. I’ve been following what’s happening with Bloomburg in NY – he’s not just taxing them, he’s outright banning the large sizes. Then it becomes an issue of choice – do people have the right to choose to eat and drink unhealthy foods, how involved should the state become? You’re right about taxing snack foods being a slippery slope. I think soda taxes are going to become common place in the coming years, it’ll be interesting to see how it develops and whether a fat tax or junkfood tax gets implemented as well.

      • Leanne says

        D’oh– I had taxes on the brain and used the wrong word– yes, following Bloomburg’s soda ban. Anyway, yes, I suppose that was my main point, that this is a very complicated issue.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *