<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: beverage</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'beverage'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22beverage%22&t=%22beverage%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 02:58:36 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>Nutrition Labels For Alcoholic Beverages?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4507285&amp;cid=t_116620_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fnutrition-labels-for-alcoholic-beverages%2F2011.02.21</link>
            <description>Virtually all bottled beverages you can buy have handy-dandy nutrition labels from which you can access information about calories, carbs, and so forth. All beverages except the ones containing alcohol, that is. Why is that?
Maybe it’s because alcoholic beverages contain little to no protein, sodium, cholesterol, Vitamin A, Vitamin C, calcium and iron (remember that alcohol is metabolized as a fat, not a carbohydrate) &amp;#8212; so why bother? Then again, alcohol does contain calories &amp;#8212; a lot of them. Would people drink less if they knew how many calories they were consuming? Would they drink less if they knew how many “servings” of alcohol were contained in the bottle they just purchased?
Maybe it’s because of the cost of performing nutritional analyses on each vintage of wine,...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4507285</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 2011 22:00:49 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4507285</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Too Drunk to Drive? Your Car Will Tell You If So</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4436750&amp;cid=t_116620_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Ftoo-drunk-to-drive-your-car-will-tell-you-if-s%2F2011.02.04</link>
            <description>Drunk driving continues to be a serious problem. In 2009 for example, alcohol was a factor in more than 10,000 highway deaths. The same year, a stunning 10 percent of respondents to a survey of U.S. adults said they had operated an automobile while drunk during the previous year. Nearly 6 percent said they had done it more than once.
So how would you feel about a car that can instantly detect whether a driver is drunk and prevent that person from starting the car? You better make up your mind quickly, because scientists are close to perfecting this technology.
“We’re five to seven years away from being able to integrate this into cars,” Robert Strassburger, the VP for safety at the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (AAM) told the Washington Post. The AAM, an automotive trade...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4436750</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 04 Feb 2011 16:00:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4436750</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Bootleggers &amp; Baptists, Sugary Soda Edition</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4118892&amp;cid=t_116620_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FCjXKzstA1Yk%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonHere&amp;#8217;s a poor, unsuccessful letter that impressed the relevant New York Times reporters, but not their editorial overlords:
It may seem counter-intuitive that bleeding-heart anti-hunger groups and “Big Food and Big Beverage” would ally to oppose Mayor Bloomberg’s request to prevent New Yorkers from using food stamps to purchase sugary sodas [“Unlikely Allies in Food Stamp Debate,” October 16].  Yet the “bootleggers and Baptists” theory of regulation explains that this “strange bedfellows” phenomenon is actually the norm, rather than the exception.
Most laws have two types of supporters: the true believers and those who benefit financially.  Baptists don’t want you drinking on the Lord ’s Day, for example, while bootleggers profit from the a...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4118892</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 28 Oct 2010 13:52:24 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4118892</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Cleveland Park Embraces Free Markets</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2364922&amp;cid=t_116620_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FkfDZ8RxMauE%2F</link>
            <description>Cleveland Park, an upscale neighborhood here in the District of Columbia, might be the last place you would expect appeals to the principles of the free market.  It is, after all, the home of what David Brooks once called &amp;#8221;Ward Three Morality,&amp;#8221; an outlook that celebrates government control of the economy. But not always.
Recently an entrepreneur proposed opening a new wine store in Cleveland Park. He sought the support of the advisory neighborhood commission, a local government board, before making his case for a liquor license to DC&amp;#8217;s Alcohol Beverage Control Board.  The most serious opposition to the entrepreneur&amp;#8217;s plans seems to have come from an existing wine store nearby. According to its attorney, the existing wine store was &amp;#8220;a beloved extension of t...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2364922</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2009 23:09:53 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2364922</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Thought for the Day: Another round of coffee, cancer</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=587877&amp;cid=t_116620_87_f&amp;fid=34865&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thecancerblog.com%2F2007%2F05%2F03%2Fthought-for-the-day-another-round-of-coffee-cancer%2F</link>
            <description>Filed under: Leukemia, Colon and Rectal Cancer, Prevention, Liver Cancer, Stomach Cancer, Research, Daily newsMore on coffee -- a topic of panel discussion at the recent Experimental Biology 2007 meeting in Washington, DC, and subject of nearly 400 studies investigating consumption and cancer risk.Think about this:No one claims coffee is the new health food. And non-coffee drinkers are not encouraged to drink the beverage for their health. Yet the beverage is certainly losing some of its negative health image. But is it enough?Some say coffee protects against colon, rectal, and liver cancers (diabetes too). These same people recognize it also can increase the risk of leukemia and stomach cancer. Those at risk, like pregnant women and children, should limit their consumption.Like many conne...</description>
            <author>The Cancer Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=587877</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 03 May 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">587877</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

