Saturday, April 24, 2010
Raymond Francis, www.beyondhealth.com
While researching my new book on cancer, I've come to an even greater appreciation of a spice that's been a staple of oriental medicine for centuries -- turmeric, and its principle active ingredient, curcumin.
Cells with damaged DNA go through several different stages over a period of many, many years to become cancer cells. It turns out that curcumin inhibits this entire process! Imagine that. Even if some of your cells manage to make it through one stage towards becoming cancer cells, with curcumin you have many more chances to arrest their progression. And even if you do develop cancer cells, curcumin will thwart metastasis -- the spreading of cancer cells to distant sites.
Curcumin also appears to interfere with the production of proteins in the cancer cells that protect them from normal cell death. All doses of curcumin decreased cancer cell growth and triggered cell death, but the higher the dose the more cancer cells died. All of this explains why cancer rates are much lower in India, where turmeric in curry plays a major role in traditional cuisine.
For cancer prevention alone, it would be worthwhile to include curcumin in your daily supplement program, but the good news doesn't stop there.
I've written elsewhere about inflammation as a common denominator of disease. All chronic diseases are inflammatory, including cancer; chronic disease ages and destroys the body. Curcumin is a powerful anti-inflammatory, comparable in effectiveness to steroid drugs without all the dangers and side effects.
But the good news about curcumin doesn't even stop there! What makes curcumin so truly special is that it affects numerous genetic and biochemical pathways at the same time, resulting in all kinds of very beneficial biochemistry. There is hardly a disease that isn't benefited by taking curcumin.
Turmeric has been known traditionally as "the spice of life." As a powerful anti-oxidant, anti-inflammatory and more, curcumin supports almost every body system -- and life itself.
The Cell Membrane. You've probably heard me say "if all of your cells are healthy, then you can't help but be healthy." That's why my focus is always on normalizing cell chemistry and building healthy cells. Curcumin acts as a cell membrane stabilizer, organizing the membrane so that information that flows through it can be controlled. This improves the cell's resistance to infection and malignancy.
Arthritis and any other "itis." If you've got any of the "itis" diseases, it means your symptoms are caused by chronic inflammation. Curcumin is as effective an anti-inflammatory as ibuprofen and, for acute inflammation, cortisone. It is half as effective as cortisone for chronic inflammation.
The Brain. Curcumin reduces amyloid plaques in Alzheimer's and has been helpful in other brain diseases like Parkinson's. In Indian villages, the elderly have the lowest rates of Alzheimer's in the world.
Chronic Fatigue and Pain Syndromes. Curcumin reduces the inflammation and oxidative stress that characterizes these syndromes leading to increased stamina and reduced sensitivity to pain.
Cardiovascular. Curcumin prevents atherosclerosis by decreasing the susceptibility of low density lipoprotein (LDL) to lipid peroxidation. Curcumin also lowers cholesterol and triglycerides and prevents blood clots by inhibiting platelet aggregation. (Warning: If you're taking toxic prescription drugs to thin your blood, adding curcumin may increase your risk of bleeding.)
Cystic Fibrosis. Curcumin may correct a cellular malformation that causes this disease. In animal experiments, curcumin corrected the cystic fibrosis defect and significantly increased survival.
Diabetes. Large doses of curcumin can improve glucose tolerance, decrease insulin resistance and even reduce body fat.
Gallstones. Curcumin helps prevent infections and inflammation in the gallbladder, increasing the flow of bile and preventing gallstones. However if you already have gallstones, there is some risk that taking curcumin will flush them into the bile duct and block it.
Gastrointestinal. Curcumin is extraordinarily healing to the colon lining and greatly reduces ulcer formation caused by stress or toxins. Crohn's Disease, irritable bowel syndrome and ulcerative colitis have all been helped with curcumin.
Immunity. Curcumin has antibiotic properties and inhibits the growth of a variety of bacteria, parasites and pathogenic fungi. Topical applications of curcumin extract are effective for skin infections.
The Liver. Curcumin protects the liver in the same way silymarin does, especially against toxins like chemicals and drugs.
The Lungs. Curcumin protects the lungs from toxic insults like mineral dusts, airborne pollutants, cigarette smoke, chemotherapy and other causes of inflammatory lung disease. Corticosteroids, often used for chronic respiratory diseases like asthma, are ineffective because they don't address oxidation. Curcumin does.
Musculoskeletal. Curcumin repairs muscle better than anything presently known. It also reduces muscle wasting in disease and aging. It may offer a solution for postmenopausal osteoporosis. In female rats whose ovaries had been removed, curcumin increased bone density and strength.
Skin. Curcumin heals acne and dermatitis and some psoriasis.
How much should you take? Most studies have been done at dosages of 400 to 1200 mg a day, depending on the need. Two 250 mg capsules would be about right for most people. People with special problems need more.
Reported side effects are uncommon and are generally limited to mild stomach distress, but taking it with food usually solves this problem.
However, be careful what curcumin you take! Remember the most expensive supplements you can buy are supplements that don't work!
ConsumerLab found one popular brand was contaminated with 18.7 mcg of lead in a daily serving, another with 8.3 mcg. These amounts are well above what is safe.
More than half of America now takes nutritional supplements.
Here's some of what the vitamin-taking public had to say to Reader's Digest about their anti-vitamin scaremongering:
"The more your readers digest the lies presented in "5 Vitamin Truths and Lies", the sicker they will become. But no need to fear because your sponsors, the pharmaceutical companies, provide the remedy: drugs and lots of them, which are readily available within the pages of your magazine. Seems to me a good return on their investment."
"I'm very disappointed to find out that a reputable publication such as yours would put out such a slanted and biased article about nutritional supplements. I grew up reading Reader's Digest, and used to enjoy it tremendously before it was apparently taken over by pharmaceutical ads. Then, the articles were pure and touched the heart. Now, it seems that they are biased and are only written to support Big Pharma."
"Antioxidants did not cause death from cancer among smokers that you attributed to vitamins. Smoking did."
"So what are you going to follow this with in your next issue Reader's Digest? 'Bacon and Hot Dogs are Actually Good For You' or '10 Ways to Serve Gravy as a Beverage'? I mean, could you BE any more of a disservice to humanity?"
"Can't wait for Reader's Digest's next '5 Truths and Lies' article. Laughter is the best medicine."
"The research demonstrating that vitamin supplements are beneficial in thwarting and healing heart disease, inflammatory disease, Alzheimer's disease, mental illness, diabetes, and more is solid and growing. If the article were accurate, the author might have stated the astonishing discrepancy between the number of deaths per year related to the pharmaceutical industry vs that of the nutraceutical and vitamin industry. ( http://www.doctoryourself.com/deathmed.html ) But then, those facts do not support the ad on the back cover of the magazine."
"The Reader's Digest article 'Vitamin Truths and Lies' is simply an outright lie. The only part missing is the TRUTHS."
"I have personally witnessed the healing effects of therapeutic doses of cheap and common vitamin supplements, such as vitamin C, niacin, and others. I think you will find many other readers who echo this sentiment."
"Reader's Digest insults its readership with this type of propaganda. Add another check to the growing list of people who won't be reading any longer."
"If supplement companies advertised in your magazine instead of Big Pharma, the article might have read differently. Needless to say, this was the last Reader's Digest I'll ever read."
"I've been taking vitamins successfully to cure colds and prevent them for the past year. I also feel much better, lost 30lbs, and have more energy than ever. My wife used to have seasonal allergies that are no longer an issue. Vitamins do work when taken in proper doses, with virtually zero side affects, I might add."
"The pharmaceutical companies are trying to protect their monopoly on healthcare by bashing supplements. The alternative to boosting your nutritional intake is to live your life on a large number of prescription drugs and poor food, while 'enjoying' a debilitated existence."
"The Reader's Digest has joined the Flat Earth Society. Shame on you!"
"For seven years I was a regular clinic/hospital visitor due to either severe colds or inflamed tonsils. For my tonsillitis, two EENT specialists had recommended surgical removal. Three years ago, while browsing the internet I came across websites and articles about orthomolecular medicine where I have learned the importance of supplements. In my desperation, I megadoses of vitamin C up to 23,000mg, vitamin E 800 IU, B-complex 300mg, and niacin 600mg. My tonsil inflammation was gone in 5 days."
"How do sleep well at night after these awful lies, misleading the people again? Maybe with some pills from the pharmaceutical industry?"
"When health issues are at stake, I would much rather put my trust in vitamin supplements than have to rely on pharmaceuticals. How many people have died from vitamins? ( http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v06n04.shtml ) How many have died from drug complications?"
( http://www.doctoryourself.com/deathmed.html )
"As I read their amazingly biased information regarding vitamins, I realized Reader's Digest does publish some nice fiction stories."
"Basic biochemistry and a review of the literature support the benefits of supplementation. Not all supplementation helps. Much supplementation does. Reader's Digest discussed only science that it chose to discuss. Cherry-picking science is bad science. "
"Why did you miss reporting on large studies showing vitamin supplements improve IQ scores in children?" ( http://www.doctoryourself.com/downs.html and http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v04n15.shtml )
"Having made mistakes in my own health column years ago when a reporter for a Los Angeles newspaper, I know how easy it is to disseminate false information. However, with fact checkers and common sense use of the Internet and PubMed I believe your reporter could have discovered many thousands of scientific studies on the health benefits of vitamins and minerals."
"I challenge Reader's Digest to contact the doctors on the Editorial Review Board of the Orthomolecular Medicine News Service, and submit 'Vitamin Truths and Lies' for its critical review, and publish their response in its entirety. "
"I sent a message to the Reader's Digest, lambasting them for the misinformation they had the gall to publish about vitamins. Their reply said that the author is a prize-winning writer who is known for thorough research prior to publication. I asked the Digest for references and citations. I received none."
"Please see ( http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v06n12.shtml ) to read the statements from doctors refuting your article on vitamins. At the very least I hope to see Reader's Digest interview some of these researchers and physicians that have been studying and using vitamins/supplements in their practice for years, and write another article with both sides represented. You can also go to http://www.clinicalpearls.com/ witch is a website that summarizes current research in nutrition and integrative medicine."
"It works for Prevention magazine, so why not Reader's Digest? I once opened a Prevention magazine and counted 18 drug ads and articles before I came to one on nutrition. Should we expect more from Reader's Digest?"
"You have got to be kidding. You have ignored a flotilla of articles, peer reviewed as well, on the benefits of vitamins for a variety of conditions including macular degeneration. I know this field well as I am an ophthalmologist. The only explanation I can think of is that you have been unduly influenced by your pharmaceutical advertisers."
"I am a registered nurse and read many articles on health. I feel that your recent article on vitamins was very misleading. Please ask the author to research more thoroughly and write a new article."
"Ignorance may be bliss, but when ignorance is reported as if it were a truth in this case it is not bliss but close to a crime. Ignorance accompanied by 15 pages of drug advertisements is closer to a racket."
"For a full and comprehensive research on what vitamins can do you need to go to http://www.orthomolecular.org and http://www.doctoryourself.com where you can find real research, not the kindergarten stuff reported in your April 2010 issue. I have been following the impeccable reporting of the orthomolecular people for years now and will give them an A+ on their content, and you a flat F."
"Your slamming of vitamins and minerals is truly tragic. For those who look to Reader's Digest as a valued resource, you have let them down. You neglect of the thousands of therapeutic nutritional research studies and articles from universities and from other research teams worldwide that you can find easily in Medline, and the Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine. Bad journalism (telling half the story) can result in poor health for millions. I hope your own families weren't reading this article."
To post your comments at the Reader's Digest website, or to read their original biased article if you missed it: http://www.rd.com/living-healthy/5-vitamin-truths-and-lies/article175625.html
To send your thoughts directly to the Reader's Digest editors: RDEditorial_RDW@ReadersDigest.com
To learn more about how vitamins safely and effectively fight disease: http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/index.shtml
-->For Further Reading:
-->For more information:
Nutritional Medicine is Orthomolecular Medicine
Orthomolecular medicine uses safe, effective nutritional therapy to fight illness. For more information: http://www.orthomolecular.org
The peer-reviewed Orthomolecular Medicine News Service is a non-profit and non-commercial informational resource.
Editorial Review Board:
Carolyn Dean, M.D., N.D. (Canada) Damien Downing, M.D. (United Kingdom) Michael Gonzalez, D.Sc., Ph.D. (Puerto Rico) Steve Hickey, Ph.D. (United Kingdom) James A. Jackson, PhD (USA) Bo H. Jonsson, MD, Ph.D (Sweden) Thomas Levy, M.D., J.D. (USA) Jorge R. Miranda-Massari, Pharm.D. (Puerto Rico) Erik Paterson, M.D. (Canada) Gert E. Shuitemaker, Ph.D. (Netherlands)
Andrew W. Saul, Ph.D. (USA), Editor and contact person. Email: email@example.com
Friday, April 23, 2010
It was recognized as early as 1875 that the waste sulfite liquor contained some vanillin. The problem was concentration and purification of the crude vanillin in the paper millwaste liquors.
Natural "vanilla extract" is a mixture of several hundred different compounds in addition to vanillin.
Artificial vanilla flavoring is a solution of pure vanillin, usually of synthetic origin.
Because of the scarcity and expense of natural vanilla extract, there has long been interest in the synthetic preparation of its predominant component. The first commercial synthesis of vanillin began with the more readily available natural compound eugenol.
Myths & Truths About Soy
Written by Weston A. Price Foundation
Myth: Use of soy as a food dates back many thousands of years.
Truth: Soy was first used as a food during the late Chou dynasty (1134-246 BC), only after the Chinese learned to ferment soy beans to make foods like tempeh, natto and tamari.
Truth: Average consumption of soy foods in Japan and China is 10 grams (about 2 teaspoons) per day. Asians consume soy foods in small amounts as a condiment, and not as a replacement for animal foods.
Truth: Most modern soy foods are not fermented to neutralize toxins in soybeans, and are processed in a way that denatures proteins and increases levels of carcinogens.
Truth: Like all legumes, soy beans are deficient in sulfur-containing amino acids methionine and cystine. In addition, modern processing denatures fragile lysine.
Truth: The compound that resembles vitamin B12 in soy cannot be used by the human body; in fact, soy foods cause the body to require more B12
Truth: Soy foods contain trypsin inhibitors that inhibit protein digestion and affect pancreatic function. In test animals, diets high in trypsin inhibitors led to stunted growth and pancreatic disorders.
- Soy foods increase the body's requirement for vitamin D, needed for strong bones and normal growth.
- Phytic acid in soy foods results in reduced bioavailabilty of iron and zinc which are required for the health and development of the brain and nervous system.
- Soy also lacks cholesterol, likewise essential for the development of the brain and nervous system.
- Megadoses of phytoestrogens in soy formula have been implicated in the current trend toward increasingly premature sexual development in girls and delayed or retarded sexual development in boys.
Truth: Soy foods can cause deficiencies in calcium and vitamin D, both needed for healthy bones. Calcium from bone broths and vitamin D from seafood, lard and organ meats prevent osteoporosis in Asian countries—not soy foods.
Truth: A British government report concluded that there is little evidence that soy foods protect against breast cancer or any other forms of cancer. In fact, soy foods may result in an increased risk of cancer.
Truth: In some people, consumption of soy foods will lower cholesterol, but there is no evidence that lowering cholesterol with soy protein improves one's risk of having heart disease.
Truth: Soy isoflavones are phyto-endocrine disrupters. At dietary levels, they can prevent ovulation and stimulate the growth of cancer cells. Eating as little as 30 grams (about 4 tablespoons) of soy per day can result in hypothyroidism with symptoms of lethargy, constipation, weight gain and fatigue.
Truth: Soy foods can stimulate the growth of estrogen-dependent tumors and cause thyroid problems. Low thyroid function is associated with difficulties in menopause.
Truth: A recent study found that women with the highest levels of estrogen in their blood had the lowest levels of cognitive function; In Japanese Americans tofu consumption in mid-life is associated with the occurrence of Alzheimer's disease in later life.
Truth: Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) recently withdrew its application to the FDA for GRAS status for soy isoflavones following an outpouring of protest from the scientific community. The FDA never approved GRAS status for soy protein isolate because of concern regarding the presence of toxins and carcinogens in processed soy.
Truth: Numerous animal studies show that soy foods cause infertility in animals. Soy consumption enhances hair growth in middle-aged men, indicating lowered testosterone levels. Japanese housewives feed tofu to their husbands frequently when they want to reduce his virility.
Truth: Most soy beans grown in the US are genetically engineered to allow farmers to use large amounts of herbicides.
Truth: In third world countries, soybeans replace traditional crops and transfer the value-added of processing from the local population to multinational corporations.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Posted by Lauren Snyder Grosz on April 13, 2010
Tryptophan is vital to getting a good night’s sleep and waking up in a pleasant mood. The process begins when tryptophan is converted to serotonin, which is a precursor to melatonin, the sleep hormone. Serotonin is responsible for mood maintenance and when levels are low depression, anxiety, panic attacks, or insomnia may rear their ugly heads. That being said, it takes adequate amounts of serotonin to manufacture melatonin. These processes all hinge on each other, but without the essential amino acid tryptophan and plenty of it, there will be a serotonin shortage.
The body can’t make it, so it must be obtained from the food we eat.
Good sources of tryptophan include
When seeking these out, it is best to find grass fed products because when animals eat grasses and plants rather than grains, they are much higher in tryptophan. Vegetarians take note non animal sources of tryptophan generally have about 50% less than animal sources.
In terms of supplementing with melatonin there appears to be a lot of disagreement re what the proper dosage should be. This is even more pronounced when it comes to children who are having trouble getting to sleep. The benefits of increasing your tryptophan through food are many fold.
- Real dairy, pastured eggs and chicken, grass fed beef, and wild caught seafood are exactly what a body needs to be vibrantly healthy and free of the diseases of civilization.
To think that a good night’s sleep happens to be a side benefit of opting out of industrialized food couldn’t be better news. It makes one wonder, how many ailments would mostly disappear once real food was introduced and take seriously.
Lauren Snyder Grosz is a Certified Nutrition and Wellness Educator. As a student on a lifelong quest for exceptional health and happiness, her mission is to empower people to take complete responsibility for their own health by rethinking everything we’ve assumed to be true and rediscovering what truly works based on accurate science.
Monday, April 19, 2010
Eat These to Lift Your Spirits and Your Energy Levels
May 31, 2008
The feel-good chemical, serotonin, cannot be produced by the body without tryptophan. Without serotonin, people feel low. Ten foods are natural sources of tryptophan.
The body cannot produce tryptophan, an amino acid which is converted by the body into serotonin, so unless we get enough through our diets, we may suffer a deficiency, leading to low serotonin levels.
Low serotonin levels are associated with mood disorders, anxiety, cravings and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).
In her e-book The Serotonin Secret, Dr Caroline Longmore says the best way to get optimum tryptophan levels is through a carefully devised eating plan. She rates dozens of foods for their levels of tryptophan. Written with Australian-trained medical scientist and naturopath Katrin Hempel, the book has 50 recipes designed to solve serotonin imbalance without drugs.
A French-trained pediatrician who later worked with Medecins Sans Frontieres, travelling to areas in need such as Africa, Cambodia and Vietnam amongst others, Dr Longmore worked for many years in major children’s hospitals in Paris and London.
She has long been interested in nutrition and complementary medicine, and operates a naturopathic and nutrition clinic in Britain.
Dr Longmore says the concept works on the same principle as selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors (SSRIs), such as popular antidepressant Prozac.
Her top ten good mood foods are mung beans, lobster, turkey, asparagus, sunflower seeds, cottage cheese, pineapple, tofu, spinach and bananas - the foods containing the highest levels of tryptophan.
Britain's Food and Mood Project also recommends eating chicken, sardines, turkey, salmon, fresh tuna, oats, nuts and seeds to boost serotonin levels.
Complex Carbohydrates Help Absorb Tryptophan
The Food and Mood project website explains that including carbohydrates in the diet is important to help absorb tryptophan.
“The absorption of tryptophan into the brain is thought to be greatly enhanced by eating carbohydrate-containing foods and carbohydrate cravings have been explained as a subconscious drive to increase serotonin levels,” it says.
“Carbohydrates that are slow releasing can help the absorption of the tryptophan across the blood-brain barrier without creating a rebound hypoglycemic dip. Oats are particularly important because they have a low Glycemic Index.”
Avoid Tryptophan Supplements
Australian mental health experts say the use of tryptophan supplements in Australia has had a checkered history, and should be avoided.
They say that while the theory behind tryptophan for improving mood is solid, its use by depressed patients has not always been successful, and contaminated batches of tryptophan supplements had caused serious side-effects in many patients.
Professor Gordon Parker, of the Black Dog Institute said while some patients strongly believed such supplements were beneficial, scientific evidence was lacking.
"I would say it's something that can be useful for some people but the quality control varies enormously," he said.
Top Ten Good Mood Foods
• mung beans
• sunflower seeds
• cottage cheese
Other Mood Foods
Sunday, April 18, 2010
Yes, you read that right. Sugar-aches. I don’t mean the sugar lust that comes from the aroma of fresh brownies or the blizzard of the month sign at the Dairy Queen™. I mean what happens after you consume high-sugar foods that create inflammation, aches and pain. In other words, sugar-aches.
How do you know if sugar-aches are a problem? Your sugar-aches may appear as stiff joints, achy muscles, migraines, more asthma or PMS symptoms. Chronic sugar-aches can lead to giving up golf, gardening or other favorite pastimes.
Where do your sugar-aches originate? From a mocha and muffin at the coffee shop? Generous servings of pasta at lunch? The candy stash in your desk?
Sugar is hiding in plain sight in high amounts in many beverages and foods. The truth is, although we wouldn’t consume spoon after spoon of plain sugar, many people drink soda and eat popular foods without realizing how high the sugar contents are. Here’s a simple equation to see how much sugar you are consuming.
Four grams of carbohydrates = one teaspoon of sugar in your body.
(When you check labels, be sure to verify the serving size.)
Dots: One box of movie-theatre sized Dots contains 5.5 servings. If you consume the whole box, you have eaten the equivalent of 48 teaspoons of sugar! (Maybe that’s the reason you are so stiff when you leave your seat at the end of the movie.)
Blizzards: A small Blizzard has 530 calories and 83 grams of carbohydrates, which equals 21 teaspoons of sugar.
Potato chips: A nine ounce bag of chips breaks down into 32 teaspoons of sugar, and most people can’t stop after four or five chips. If you wash down the chips with a soda, that’s another 16 or more teaspoons of sugar.
A nutritional solution to sugar-aches
Instead of relying on pain relievers to manage aches and pains, Nutritional Weight & Wellness has a better suggestion: Start eating real foods and see how much better you feel. Research and clinical experience have shown that food choices directly affect levels of pain and inflammation.
Research reported in the American Journal of Cancer Nutrition in March of 2002 found that foods high in sugar resulted in inflammation. When researchers measured inflammation with a blood test called C-reactive protein (CRP), they discovered that a high concentration of sugar in foods increased the CRP numbers.
As a nutritionist, I see clients’ lives change dramatically when they eliminate processed, high-sugar foods and switch to real foods. Clients that could barely climb the stairs to our office on their first visit returned to biking after following an anti-inflammatory eating plan for a few months.
The key to avoiding sugar-aches lies in eating real foods instead of processed foods. Real foods such as meat, eggs, vegetables, and healthy fats decrease inflammation and support the body. (Healthy fats include butter, olive oil, avocados, olives and nuts.) Vegetables are the best carbohydrate choices by far. Three additional servings of vegetables per day have been shown to reduce your risk of stroke by 22 percent. Real foods protect you from the inflammation you feel, as well as that which is hidden, such as the low-grade chronic inflammation associated with Alzheimer’s disease, cancer, heart disease and stroke.
Remember that highly processed foods, especially those containing sugar and trans fats (damaged fats and oils that are hydrogenated or partially hydrogenated, such as margarine and refined vegetable oils) increase inflammation and pain.
Do your own experiment. Stop eating processed carbohydrates for three weeks. Avoid soda, candy, chips, cereal and bagels, and I am willing to bet that you will experience less pain and inflammation. Nutrition is your best line of defense against sugar-aches!
View Article here
Darlene Kvist, M.S., C.N.S., L.N.
Darlene Kvist, a licensed nutritionist and Certified Nutrition Specialist, co-founded Nutritional Weight & Wellness, based in St. Paul, Minnesota. Darlene has over twenty-five years of experience as an educator, counselor, and psycho-nutritional consultant. She currently serves on the Board of Dietetics and Nutrition Practice for the State of Minnesota. Dar also hosts “Dishing up Nutrition,” a popular weekly radio show that she developed, Saturday afternoons on FM 107. She consults with the media on nutrition regularly and has been quoted in Time. For more information about Nutritional Weight & Wellness, go to www.weightandwellness.com.
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Michael Eades, MD
Whenever I give a talk and make the statement that a normal blood sugar represents less than one teaspoon of sugar dissolved in the blood, I’m often met with scepticism. It really is true, however.
Let’s go through the calculations so we can see exactly how this plays out.
First, we need some basic measures.
one liter (l)= 10 deciliters (dl)
one gram (gm) = 1000 milligrams (mg)
one teaspoon = 5 grams
According to the American Diabetes Association the line between a healthy fasting blood sugar and a pre-diabetic fasting blood sugar is set at 100 mg/dl (pronounced 100 milligrams per deci-liter). A fasting blood sugar of between 100 mg/dl and 125 mg/dl earns a diagnosis of pre-diabetes, and a fasting blood sugar of over 125 mg/dl is diabetic.
So how much sugar is 99 mg/dl, the highest fasting blood sugar you can have and not be diagnosed as pre-diabetic? Let’s figure it out.
We know that a typical human has about 5 liters of blood, so we need to figure out how much sugar dissolved into this 5 liters of blood will give us a reading of 99 mg/dl.
Since one liter contains 10 deciliters we multiply 99 mg/dl by 10, which gives us 990 mg, the amount of sugar in one liter. Multiply the 990 mg in one liter times 5, the number of liters of blood in the human body, and we have 4950 mg of sugar. If we divide the 4950 by 1000, the number of mg in a gram, we get 4.95 grams of sugar.
Since one teaspoon contains 5 grams, the 4.95 grams of sugar in the blood of a person just short of being pre-diabetic equals a little less than one teaspoon.
If you run all these calculations for a blood sugar of 80 mg/dl, which is a much healthier blood sugar than the 99 mg/dl one that is knocking on the door of pre-diabetes, it turns out to be about 4/5 of a teaspoon.
If you run the calculations for 126 mg/dl, the amount of sugar in the blood of someone just over the line into the diagnosis of diabetes, you find out that it is 6.25 grams, or 1 1/4 teaspoon. So, the difference between having a normal blood sugar and a diabetic blood sugar is about a quarter of a teaspoon of sugar.
What really gets kind of scary is when you look at the amount of carbohydrate in, say, a medium order of McDonald’s fries compared to the sugar in your blood. Remember, it is the job of your digestive tract to breakdown the starch and other complex carbohydrates, which are nothing more than chains of sugar molecules, into their component sugars so that they can be absorbed into the blood. An order of medium fries at McDonald’s contains 47 grams of carbohydrate. 47 grams of carbohydrate converts to about 47 grams of sugar, which is almost 10 teaspoons. So, when you eat these fries you put 10 times more sugar into your blood than that required to maintain a normal blood sugar level. If you figure, as we did above, that one quarter of a teaspoon is all the difference between a normal blood sugar and a diabetic blood sugar, the 10 full teaspoons would be 40 times that amount.
Since your metabolic system has to work very hard indeed to deal with the sugar load from an order of fries, imagine what it has to do when you add a large soft drink, a hamburger bun, and maybe an apple turnover for dessert.
When you see the long lines of cars in the at the drive-through window and the long lines of customers at the counter inside, you can see why the incidence of type II diabetes is skyrocketing?
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Tell The FDA That Cherries—And Now Walnuts—Are NOT Illegal Drugs!
Posted By ANH-USA On April 13, 2010 @ 12:22 pm
Has the FDA lost its mind–again?
In the latest volley of the US Food and Drug Administration’s bizarre war on scientific freedom of speech, the FDA has sent a Warning Letter  to the president and CEO of Diamond Foods stating that the firm’s packages of shelled walnuts are “in violation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.”
As Bill Faloon, co-founder of the Life Extension Foundation, explains in a powerful new investigative article , Diamond Foods, a processor and distributor of nuts, dared to list some of the health benefits of walnuts on its website.
The FDA says that the walnuts are being “promoted for conditions that cause them to be drugs because these products are intended for use in the prevention, mitigation, and treatment of disease.”
In other words, if you say that a food is healthy and may help protect against heart disease, or ease arthritis or inflammation, your words have magically changed that food into a drug, and that’s illegal.
Life Extension magazine has published no fewer than fifty-seven articles that describe the health benefits of walnuts, each article supported with copious scientific references.
Yet the FDA says the walnuts “are not generally recognized as safe and effective,” that the manufacturer’s “unauthorized health claims” have caused the walnuts to become “misbranded,” which makes them subject to government “seizure or injunction”!
What Science Says about Walnuts
As Bill Faloon notes (with every statement carefully supported by scientific journals and publications):
There is a sharply reduced incidence of heart disease in those who consume walnuts.
Walnuts provide a unique blend of polyunsaturated fatty acids (including omega-3s), along with nutrients like gamma tocopherol that have demonstrated heart health benefits.
Even moderate consumption of walnuts offers significant reductions in dangerous LDL cholesterol and improvement in the lipoprotein profile.
Walnuts protect against coronary artery disease and atherosclerosis because they contain key nutrients like arginine, polyphenols, and omega-3 fatty acids.
The National Library of Medicine database contains no fewer than thirty-five peer-reviewed published papers supporting a claim that ingesting walnuts improves vascular health and may reduce heart attack risk—yet the FDA, the federal agency responsible for protecting the health of the American public, would apparently rather support pharmaceutical manufacturers’ rights. Imagine what would happen to drug profits if everyone ate walnuts for heart health instead of taking expensive medications!
As Bill Faloon says, the verbiage in the FDA’s Warning Letter to the walnut manufacturer “makes it clear that the FDA does not even consider the underlying science when censoring truthful non-misleading health claims.”
Moreover, Faloon continues, “FDA has issued waves of warning letters to companies making foods (pomegranate juice, green tea, and walnuts) that protect against atherosclerosis. The FDA is blatantly demanding that these companies stop informing the public about the scientifically validated health benefits these foods provide.”
These latest FDA outrages are on top of an earlier attack on cherry growers. In that case, the cherry growers cited excellent scientific research from places like Harvard indicating that cherries reduce inflammation and pain. The FDA sent an injunction letter threatening the usual legal penalties—including jail—if this truthful dissemination of scientific research did not stop immediately.
What is the FDA thinking?
Why is it blatantly disregarding its own mission of educating the public and promoting health? Why is it acting like an ignorant bully?
Potato Chips . . . as Health Food?
Faloon points to Frito-Lay, a subsidiary of the food and softdrink giant PepsiCo, makers of Pepsi-Cola®, as an example of the strange double standard the FDA seems to be applying. Frito-Lay sells $12 billion a year of products that include Lays® Potato Chips, Doritos®, Tostitos®, Cheetos®, and Fritos®.
You might not associate these mostly deep fried snack foods as being good for you, but as Faloon mentions, the FDA has no problem allowing the Frito-Lay website  to state the following:
Frito-Lay snacks start with real farm-grown ingredients. You might be surprised at how much good stuff goes into your favorite snack. Good stuff like potatoes, which naturally contain vitamin C and essential minerals. Or corn, one of the world’s most popular grains, packed with Thiamin, vitamin B6, and Phosphorous—all necessary for healthy bones, teeth, nerves and muscles.
And it’s not just the obvious ingredients. Our all-natural sunflower, corn and soybean oils contain good polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fats, which help lower total and LDL “bad” cholesterol and maintain HDL “good” cholesterol levels, which can support a healthy heart. Even salt, when eaten in moderation as part of a balanced diet, is essential for the body.
As Faloon notes:
“For the FDA to allow Frito-Lay to pretend there are heart benefits to ingesting their high-calorie snack products, while censoring the ability of walnut companies to make scientifically substantiated claims, is tantamount to treason against the health of the American public. The simple fact is that walnuts are healthy to eat, while carbohydrates fried in fat are not. FDA permits companies selling disease-promoting foods to deceive the public, while it suppresses the dissemination of peer-reviewed published scientific information.”
Two Things You Can Do
As our regular newsletter readers are aware, on March 23 a bipartisan bill was introduced into the House of Representatives called the Free Speech about Science Act (HR 4913).
This landmark legislation, promoted by ANH-USA, protects basic free speech rights, ends censorship of science, and enables the natural health products community to share peer-reviewed scientific findings with the public.
The Free Speech about Science bill has the potential to transform medical practice by educating the public about the real science behind natural health.
For this very reason, the bill will have opposition. It will be opposed by the FDA since it restricts their ability to censor the dissemination of published scientific data. It will be opposed by drug companies fearing competition from natural health approaches based on diet, dietary supplements, and lifestyle.
The public, on the other hand, wants access to credible information they can use to make wise dietary choices.
Please don’t let special interests stop this bill.
Take action now and ask your Representative to cosponsor the Free Speech About Science Act (HR 4913). 
We also have a new Action Alert  for you.
This one will let you contact Congress to express your outrage about the FDA’s censorship of the scientific evidence supporting the health claims surrounding walnuts (and green tea, and pomegranates, and cherries!).
It will also let you tell the FDA what you think about their hypocritical support of deep fried potatoes and corn chips as being “heart-healthy,” while denouncing the scientific evidence of walnuts’ health benefits.
Please take action today and write to the FDA and your members of Congress! 
If possible please send in both letters, one supporting the Free Speech About Science Act and the other expressing your opposition to the FDA’s outrageous attack on walnuts (not to mention cherries, green tea, and other natural products). We need to hammer home our message in defense of free speech, common sense, health freedom, and natural health.
Article printed from Alliance for Natural Health – US: http://www.anh-usa.org
URL to article: http://www.anh-usa.org/tell-the-fda-that-cherries%e2%80%94and-now-walnuts%e2%80%94are-not-illegal-drugs/
URLs in this post:
 FDA has sent a Warning Letter: http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/ucm202825.htm
 powerful new investigative article: http://www.anh-usa.org/tell-the-fda-that-cherries%e2%80%94and-now-walnuts%e2%80%94are-not-illegal-drugs/walnut-lef-article-by-bill-faloon/
 Frito-Lay website: http://www.fritolay.com/your-health/whats-in-our-snacks.html
 Take action now and ask your Representative to cosponsor the Free Speech About Science Act (HR 4913).: https://secure3.convio.net/aahf/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=529
 new Action Alert: https://secure3.convio.net/aahf/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=535
Friday, April 9, 2010
by Dr. Susan Brown, PhD
It’s long been held that menopause is a time of rapid bone loss. This oft-cited generalization has now been carefully researched, and it appears that on average, women in the US and Canada lose about 8-9% of their bone mass in the few years just before and just after their last period. Some women, however, lose up to 20% of their bone mass, as I have seen at the Center for Better Bones.
I find that the trick to avoiding osteoporosis is to limit this “menopause transition bone loss” as much as possible. Let me tell you of Lynn’s case and why I think she did a good job halting this transitional bone loss.
Lynn is an athletic, weight-conscious, and very busy executive. She experienced her last period in 2005, and we began working on her bone health in 2007.
By that time, she was two years into menopause and her bone density tests showed she’d already lost 4.3% of bone in her hip and nearly 7% in her spine during the two years before her last period and the first two years after it.
Even though she had exercised regularly and taken calcium, she still experienced typical menopausal bone loss.
Yet, you could say she was doing better than many other women, as she is petite and thin, and as a rule, women under around 125 lbs lose more bone during menopause than their heavier counterparts.
In 2007, two years into menopause, Lynn began the full Better Bones, Better Body® Program. She used the 20 key bone nutrients, reduced her anti-nutrients, stress, and toxic burden, kept up the strength training, and started incorporating our Alkaline for Life® diet into her routine.
She also asked her doctor for several tests to make sure there were no hidden medical causes of her bone loss.
Three years later, in early 2010, her new bone density shows slight gains in hip bone density and a stabilization of spinal bone density.
Lynn is now five years post menopause; she feels good, is strong, and has stable bone density. Furthermore, even though she began her Better Bones Program two years after menopause, and even though she is petite, Lynn was able to significantly limit her potential menopausal transition bone loss.
I often tell clients that it’s never too late to rebuild bone that you’ve already lost.
Lynn is in one of the highest-risk groups for osteoporosis — a menopausal woman of thin build who has a high stress load — but if she could do it, so can you. You don’t have to do it all at once — even a few changes can help. The way to start is to learn about what your bones need to be healthy — and then give it to them!
I discuss this more in my article on capturing the innate healing process.
Susan Brown, PhD
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Don't be Confused by MSNBC.com's info on Trans Fats and coconut oil. Here is their report
"Don't be tricked into eating the "lesser" of two evils. As "trans fats" gained a bad rap over the last few years, food manufacturers responded by replacing hydrogenated vegetable oils with tropical oils. The problem? Oils made from palm, coconut, and palm kernel might not be manipulated with hydrogen as trans fats are, but they are still astronomically high in saturated fat, another artery clogger."
We NEED saturated fats in our diet - fats from animal products and coconut or palm oil are essential. We need them for energy, cell membranes, to make hormones, and pad organs. http://www.westonaprice.org/The-Importance-of-Saturated-Fats-for-Biological-Functions.html
The "dangers" of saturated fats were first pointed out by the vegetable industry (follow the money). By hydrogenating oils this industry promoted margarine etc. as a healthy replacement for "dangerous" butter and saturated fat. Now we know that these hydrogenated oils are trans fats and they are deadly. When we study traditional cultures that have never consumed the man-made oils that we consume, we find them eating the traditional oils like coconut oil and palm oil - and heart disease and cancer are virtually unknown in this population.
I eat beef, butter and coconut oil to get saturated fats in my diet. coconut oil makes you lean because it creates energy and is not stored as fat.
Saturated fats are necessary to absorb the Fat-soluble vitamins such as vitamins A, D, E, K, and B12.
The real things to consider is what "food" are they substituting coconut oil for trans fats anyway. It is the processed junk that we don't want to eat - the cookies etc.
So if you are asking me if it is ok to eat coconut oil - the answer is absolutely yes!
If you are asking me if it is ok to eat processed foods that contain coconut oil, the answer is probably not.
Coconut oil is commonly found in stores and on the internet for household use, palm oil isn't otherwise I would probably eat that too.
I'll attach more to read (from my blog mostly) and you can click on the link below too.
Taking the fear out of eating fat.
Purchase Unrefined Organic coconut oil
Brands I use:
Nutiva, $21 for 54 oz at Vitacost http://www.vitacost.com/productResults.aspx?ss=1&Ntk=products&Ntt=nutiva
Mountain Rose Herbs, $37 for 1 gallon at
I have written many blog posts about coconut oil because it is so misunderstood.http://choosetotransform.blogspot.com/search?q=coconut+oil
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
News from Research:
You may not have an interest in Asthma, but please read the information below about magnesium and Vitamin D because they have so many other applications.
There is a TV commercial for an asthma drug that lists as one of its side effects an “increased risk of asthma-related death.” In what upside-down world does that sound like a good deal? And why don't we hear about magnesium for asthma?
I'll answer my own question: magnesium is quite cheap.
No magnesium supplier can afford to send a rep to your doctor's office with lunch for the staff like the drug companies do. Magnesium sellers certainly can't pay for TV ads. Even if they could, the FDA will not let them hint at a connection between magnesium and asthma no matter how valid the claim. (Didn't there used to be some constitutional amendment about freedom of speech?…)
#1: Vitamin D appears to benefit patients with Asthma.
In a study of non-smoking adults it was found that those with the lowest vitamin D levels had the weakest lung function, more excitable airways and a reduced response to medication.
The reverse was true of those with higher vitamin D levels. Uncharacteristically, researchers hinted that supplements might be a good idea. 1
MY 2 CENTS: Vitamin D is in the news for many reasons—everything from prevention of cancer, colds and MS to relief of depression, diabetes and tooth decay. Sales of Vitamin D are way up nationwide. The fact that more people experienced its immune-stimulating effect this year might just have been responsible for the reduced incidence of flu.
D is very safe (see Q & A below). So, it isn't a big risk for someone with asthma to try it—maybe they'll see fringe benefits as well.
#2: Magnesium may benefit mild to moderate asthma.
This randomized placebo-controlled study showed good results (both lab measures and quality of life) with only 340 mg of magnesium (170 mg twice a day). 2
My 2 cents: Magnesium functions in hundreds of reactions in the body and is insufficient in the diet. Based on previous science and the experience of naturopaths, I've recommended magnesium for asthma for probably 25 years. But it often takes hundreds of studies on a nutrient to get it incorporated into mainstream medicine's recommendations.
(Meanwhile, a single study may be enough to roll the bandwagon for a new-to-the-planet relatively toxic chemical drug—even if it's only slightly better than placebo. It's a crazy situation because with magnesium we're giving the body something it actually needs. )
Reader / Listener Question:
Q: Michelle in NC found that her vitamin D blood level was 16. Her doctor prescribed large doses to get the level to “normal” and suggested she afterward take 1,000 IU daily. She asked what the optimum test result is and can she safely take 5,000 IU?
A: Egad, 16 is scary low. The non-profit Vitamin D Council is a good source of information. The Executive Director, Dr. John Cannell has been a guest on my show several times and I base my recommendations on his advice. He said that a test level between 60 and 100 is the goal. (Often “32” is listed as “normal” on test reports.) Most nutrition experts suggest a daily dose of 4,000 IU but it does depend on how much sun a person gets and their ability to convert that sunshine into D. It is apparently safe for most people at daily doses of up to 10,000 IU.
Personally, I take 5,000 daily as a sublingual instant-dissolving micro tablet (but a lot more if I think I'm coming down with something).
1Vitamin D Levels, Lung Function and Steroid Response in Adult Asthma. Sutherland ER, Goleva E, Jackson LP, Stevens AD, Leung DY. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2010 Jan 14.
2Effect of oral magnesium supplementation on measures of airway resistance and subjective assessment of asthma control and quality of life in men and women with mild to moderate asthma: a randomized placebo controlled trial," Kazaks AG, Stern JS, et al, J Asthma, 2010; 47(1): 83-92.
Don't suddenly stop medications. Consult a health practitioner that knows nutrition as well as conventional medicine. This email is educational only and not a substitute for professional advice.
Stay well and spread the word that prevention is the best health care reform.
Please forward this email to family and friends and encourage them to subscribe to Health e-Notes .
Healthy by Nature Radio Show .
Listen live nationwide and call in with your questions
My books: Natural Alternatives to Nexium, Maalox, Tagamet, Prilosec & Other Acid Blockers. Subtitle: What to Use to Relieve Acid Reflux, Heartburn, and Gastric Ailments.
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Dr. Mats Humble and his colleagues – at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm – measured vitamin D levels on 117 adult psychiatric outpatients. They found that the 10 adult patients with autism had the lowest 25(OH)D levels of any of the other groups, including the patients with schizophrenia and depression, an average of about 12 ng/ml, a level known to cause rickets in children and osteomalacia in adults. Even more interesting, they reported that some of the patients with depression and schizophrenia seemed to improve when treated with an average of about 4,000 IU of vitamin D per day. They did not say if they treated any of the vitamin D deficient autism patients.
Humble MB et al. Low serum levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25-OHD) among psychiatric out-patients in Sweden: Relations with season, age, ethnic origin and psychiatric diagnosis. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2010 Mar 7. [Epub ahead of print]
Mothers of autistic children have very low 25(OH)D levels
The second paper, by Dr. Elisbeth Fernell and colleagues – from various institutions in Sweden – measured vitamin D levels in mothers about six years after they had given birth to a child now diagnosed with autism. The Somali mothers had very low vitamin D levels, less than 10 ng/ml. The trend was in the direction of lower vitamin D levels for Somali mothers with autistic children, compared to Somali mothers without an autistic child.
Fernell E et al. Serum levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D in mothers of Swedish and of Somali origin who have children with and without autism. Acta Paediatr. 2010 Mar 5. [Epub ahead of print]
Cannell JJ. The Tuskegee Experiment. Vitamin D Newsletter 7/17/05
Anyway, this month Dr. Eyles said, “Low maternal vitamin D remains a highly parsimonious explanation for certain prominent features of autism,” explaining how well their animal data fits with human data on autism. Perfect parsimony is when one theory explains all the known facts, and if there is one major autism fact the vitamin D theory of autism cannot explain, I have yet to locate it.
Eyles DW. Vitamin D and Autism, Does skin colour modify risk? Acta Paediatr. 2010 Mar 8. [Epub ahead of print]
Pregnant women need 5,000 IU/day
John Cannell MD
Vitamin D Council
This newsletter may be reproduced as long as you properly and prominently attribute it source. Please reproduce it, post it on Internet sites, and forward it to your friends.
Remember, we are a non-profit and rely on your donations to publish our newsletter, maintain our website, and pursue our objectives.
The Vitamin D Council
1241 Johnson Ave., #134
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401